Effect of nano DAP on growth, yield and yield attributes of chickpea

Introduction

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is an essential annual pulse crop that belongs to the genus Cicer, Family Leguminosae or Fabaceae and also recognized as "Bengal gram". Chickpea are a vital food because of their high nutritional content, especially in regions of the world that are vulnerable to famine. While the dry seeds can be used to make a wide variety of cuisines, the green seeds are eaten raw, roasted, or boiled, the leaves are eaten as vegetables and drinks are made from the plant exudates. Chickpea is grown in India on 9.59 million ha and produces of 11.04 million tons with national average productivity of 1151 kg/ha during 2023-24. In Gujarat, during the year 2023-24, it was cultivated in an area of 0.62 million ha with production of 1.07 million tons of grains with the average productivity of 1714 kg/ha (Anon., 2024) [3] . Nano-fertilizers are products that help to boost nutrient efficiency on a nanometer scale in the form of nanoparticles. In comparison to conventional granular fertilizer, the particle size of liquid nano-fertilizer is smaller than 30 nanometers. It cuts the amount of conventional fertilizer needed by half or more (Panda et al., 2020) [12] . Foliar therapy comes into direct contact with the leaves and it absorbed by the target organs, it produces a more immediate and targeted response than standard fertilizers. Because of their increased reactivity and potential to penetrate the cuticle, nano fertilizers provide controlled release and delivery (El-Fouly et al., 2001) [5] . It has been demonstrated that foliar feeding is the most effective method of addressing introduction nutritional shortages and boosting crop quality and output. By using less fertilizer on the soil, it also enhances nutrient utilization and lowers pollution. Although gas exchange is possible in leaves, penetration is hindered by their cuticle (Schwab et al., 2016) [17] . Research on the effect of nano DAP on chickpea growth, yield and yield attributes has practical utility in terms of optimizing agricultural practices for increased crop productivity, resource use efficiency and environmental sustainability.

Materials and Methods

The experimental soil was clayey in texture and moderately alkaline in reaction with pH 2.5 8.1, EC 2.5 0.42 dS m -1 . The soil was found medium in organic carbon (0.60%), low in available N (210 kg/ha), medium in available P (30.65 kg/ha). The micro nutrient Fe, Cu, Zn and Mn content of initial soil was 4.09, 1.61, 1.90 and 6.79 mg kg -1 respectively. There were 12 treatments of T 1: Absolute control, T 2: 100% RDF i.e. 20-40-00 N-P 2 O 5 -K 2 O kg/ha, T 3: 75% RDF + Seed treatment with Nano DAP 5 ml/kg of seed, T 4: 50% RDF + Seed treatment with Nano DAP 5 ml/kg of seed, T 5: T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 DAS, T 6: T 4 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 DAS, T 7: T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS, T 8: T 4 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS, T 9: 75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS, T 10: 50% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS, T 11: 75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS and T 12: 50% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS replicated thrice in CRD. In this study, plant height, number of branches per plant, number of pod per plant, number of seed per pod, pod weight per plant, seed yield and straw yield were recorded at harvest.

Results and Discussion

Effect on growth parameters Plant height and no. of branches per plant is typical characters of crop which has erect growth habit. Plant height and no. of branches were significantly influenced by nano DAP as foliar spray. The data presented in (Table 1) showed that different treatments significantly influenced growth parameter at harvest. Significantly higher plant height (38.63) was observed by T 7 (T 3 + foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS), which was found at par with treatments T 11 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS), T 5 (T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 DAS) and T 9 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS). Significantly lower value observed in T 1 (32.43), which might be due to unavailability of nutrients which might lower the growth of plant and significantly higher number of branches per plant (6.45) was recorded under the treatment T 7 (T 3 + foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS) which was found at par with treatments T 11 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS), T 5 (T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 DAS) and T 9 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS). While the treatment T 1 recorded significantly lowest value (4.35). Similar results were observed by Adhikari et al. (2014) [1] that foliar application of nano rock phosphate recorded significant increase in plant height. Rane et al. (2015) [14] recorded application of nanoparticle increased the growth characters such as plant height and also increased the growth parameters in Zea mays. Similar outcomes observed by Sahithi et al. (2023) [15] in marigold increased Nitrogen and Phosphorus availability by foliar spray led to increased root mass, which in turn increased nutrient intake and photosynthetic activity, producing the maximum number of branches possible.

Effect on yield attributes

Application of nano DAP significantly influenced the yield attributes like number of pod per plant and pod weight per plant (Table 1). The highest number of pod per plant (26.83) and pod weight per plant (10.31 cm) were noted at T 7 (T 3 + foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS), which found statistically at par with T 11 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS), T 5 (T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 DAS) and T 9 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS) in respect to both, while the lowest number of pod per plant (18.55) and pod weight per plant (6.36 g) were noted in treatment T 1 . The data indicated that the different treatment of nano DAP could not manifest its significant effect on seed per pod at harvest. Even through, the maximum seed per pod (1.54) was observed in T 7 (T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS). Conversely lowest seed per pod at harvest (1.43) in pod observed in treatment T 1 . Similar results observed by Garud et al. (2015) [6] that the foliar application of BOOST-52 (0:52:34) at 35 and 50 DAS increasing number of pods per plant, by Subhamoy et al. (2010) [20] in green gram and Khemshetty et al. (2024) [8] in chickpea. Rady et al. (2020) [13] showed analogous results in Phaseolus vulgaris, where foliar application of nano phosphorus increased pod weight. Baglane (2023) [4] reported that application of 50% RDF of NPK + ST + Two foliar sprays of nano DAP @ 4 ml/lit at 35 & 55 DAS, recorded significantly higher number of pods per plant of soybean. Sebastian (2024) [18] revealed that significantly higher number of pods per plant, number of seed per pod, seed yield and stover yield in soybean were observed with application of 75% RDF + FS of nano DAP @ 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS.

Effect on seed and stover yield

Chickpea seed and stover yield were significantly influenced due to different treatments tried in the experiment significantly higher seed yield (9.39 g plant -1 ) and stover yield (11.95 g plant - 1 ) was obtained in treatment T 7 (T 3 + foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS), which was found at par with T 11 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS), T 9 (75% RDF + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 and 45 DAS) and T 5 (T 3 + Foliar sprays of Nano DAP 3 ml/lit at 30 DAS) in respect to both. However, significantly lowest seed yield (5.45 g plant -1 ) and stover yield (7.12 g plant -1 ) were observed in treatment T 1 . Similar results observed by Saleem et al., (2021) [16] in wheat crop and Singh (2017) [19] reported that the use of nano fertilizers resulted in the improved plant growth, dry matter accumulation, photosynthetic rate, phloem translocation as compared to noncoated traditional fertilizers. The similar results were quoted by Ali and Al Juthery, (2017) [2] . Liu and Lal, (2014) [9] experiment data showed that application of the nanoparticles increased the growth rate and seed yield by 32.6% and 20.4%, respectively, compared to those of soybeans treated with a regular P fertilizer. Adhikari et al. (2014) [1] speculated that the yield of grain and straw increment over 100 RDF due to better absorption, interception and utilization of P in the nano-P form as P is released slowly throughout the growth period, resulting in a higher photosynthetic rate and ultimately, a higher biomass yield accumulation. Similar outcomes observed by Girigoud et al., (2023) [9] in pigeon pea he observed that greatly enhanced stalk yield, most likely as a result of the best possible blend of traditional and nano fertilizers, which improve stalk productivity by supplying nutrients in a regulated and demand-driven way. Increased crop biomass is 59 results and discussion the outcome of this precise nutrient delivery, which also enhances target activity and controls plant development. Meena et al. (2020) [11] reported in increased grain and straw yield of wheat after the application of nano fertilizers which may be attributed to increased growth hormone, enhanced metabolic process and photosynthetic activities due to applications of nano fertilizers. Nano-fertilizers are considered as biological pumps of the plants to promote nutrients and water absorption in crop plants Ma et al. (2009) [10] .

Conclusion

From the forgoing results, it can be concluded that growth, yield and yield attributes of chickpea were adversely affected due to foliar spray of nano DAP. An application of 75% RDF + Seed treatment with Nano DAP 5 ml/kg of seed + foliar sprays of Nano DAP 6 ml/lit at 30 DAS gave better mitigating effect and resulted higher chickpea growth and yield.

References

1. Adhikari T, Kundu S, Rao AS. Microbial solubilization of phosphorus from nano rock phosphate. J Agric Sci Technol. 2014;4(6A).
2. Ali NS, Al-Juthery HWA. The application of nanotechnology for micronutrient in agricultural production. Iraqi J Agric Sci. 2017;48(4):984.
3. Anonymous. Agricultural statistics at a glance. Government of India. http://eands.desagri.gov.in. Accessed 2024 Sep 5.
4. Baglane RA. Effect of nano DAP on yield, nutrient uptake, availability and economics of soybean [PhD thesis]. Rahuri: Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth; 2023.
5. El-Fouly MM, Nofal OA, Mobarak ZM. Effects of soil treatment with iron, manganese and zinc on growth and micronutrient uptake of sunflower plants grown in high-pH soil. J Agron Crop Sci. 2001;186(4):245-51.
6. Garud HS, Awasarmal VB, Pawar SU, Bhusawar PV. Yield economics and quality of soybean as influenced by foliar and soil application of phosphatic fertilizer. Int J Trop Agric. 2015;33(2):709-12.
7. Girigoud A, Naik A, Bhat S, Bellakki MA, Siddaram. Effect of nano-DAP on growth and yield of pigeonpea under rainfed condition. Pharma Innov J. 2023;12(12):1536-9.
8. Khemshetty A, Patil DH, Rathod PS, Patil AS, Basavaraj K. Studies on nano DAP on growth, yield and quality of chickpeas under rainfed conditions of northeastern dry zone of Karnataka. J Exp Agric Int. 2024;46(3):139-45.
9. Liu R, Lal R. Synthetic apatite nanoparticles as a phosphorus fertilizer for soybean (Glycine max). Sci Rep. 2014;4(1):1-6.
10. Ma J, Liu J, Zhang ZM. Application study of carbon nanofertilizer on growth of winter wheat. Humic Acid. 2009;2:14-20.
11. Meena RH, Jat G, Jain D. Impact of foliar application of different nanofertilizers on soil microbial properties and yield of wheat. J Environ Biol. 2020;42:302-8.
12. Panda J, Nandi A, Pattnaik AK, Mahapatra P, Jena NK, Swain AA. Effects of nano fertilizer on vegetative growth of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum). Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9(3):1980-6.
13. Rady MM, El-Shewy AA, Seif El-Yazal MA, Abd ElGawwad IF. Integrative application of soil P-solubilizing bacteria and foliar nano P improves Phaseolus vulgaris plant performance and antioxidative defense system components under calcareous soil conditions. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2020;20:820-39.
14. Rane M, Bawskar M, Rathod D, Nagaonkar D, Rai M. Influence of calcium phosphate nanoparticles, Piriformospora indica and Glomus mosseae on growth of Zea mays. Adv Nat Sci Nanotechnol. 2015;6(4):045014.
15. Sahithi B, Babu KK, Prasanth P, Lakshminarayana D, Gouthami P. Studies on effect of nano urea and nano DAP alone and in combination with different levels of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and yield of marigold (Tagetes erecta L.) Cv. Superball. Pharma Innov J. 2023;12(11):9016.
16. Saleem I, Maqsood MA, Aziz T, Bhatti IA, Jabbar A. Potassium ferrite nano coated DAP fertilizer improves wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) growth and yield under alkaline calcareous soil conditions. Pak J Agric Sci. 2021;58:485-92.
17. Schwab F, Zhai G, Kern M, Turner A, Schnoor JL, Wiesner MR. Barriers, pathways and processes for uptake, translocation and accumulation of nanomaterials in plants - Critical review. Nanotoxicology. 2016;10(3):257-78.
18. Sebastian NM. Effect of Nano DAP on growth, yield and nutrient uptake by soybean [MSc thesis]. Junagadh: Junagadh Agricultural University; 2024.
19. Singh MD. Nano-fertilizers is a new way to increase nutrients use efficiency in crop production. Int J Agric Sci. 2017;9(7):0975-3710.
20. Subhamoy G, Sengupta K, Banarjee H. Effect of foliar application of nutrients and brassinolide on summer green gram (Vigna radiata) crop. Int J Trop Agric. 2010;28(1-2).