Influence of Nano urea and Nano DAP foliar Application on N, P and K uptake in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)

Introduction

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is one of the most important vegetable crops worldwide, valued for its nutritional and industrial significance. Farmers cultivate tomatoes on a commercial scale as a cash crop and on a small scale for domestic use in a variety of soil types. Because tomatoes are big yielders, they need enough fertilizer to thrive and produce [Pandey and Chandra (2013)] [6] . A plant's ability to grow and develop typically depends on how well it is fed to meet its nutrient needs. Continuous application of excessive and unbalanced nutrients has resulted in a deterioration in nutrient-use efficiency, making fertilizer consumption unfeasible and creating health risks due to negative impacts on groundwater and the atmosphere. Chemical fertilizer's detrimental impacts on the environment and soil restrict its use in sustainable agriculture systems. Chemical fertilizers are being overdosed due to conventional application methods. As a primary food source for plants, nitrogen is a necessary component of chlorophyll, which facilitates photosynthesis, and protein, which is made up of amino acids and is involved in the catalysis of chemical reactions and electron transport. In several physiological functions, nitrogen is essential. It gives plants a dark green hue and encourages the growth and development of stems, leaves, and other vegetative parts. It regulates the general growth of the plant and promotes the uptake and utilization of other nutrients like potassium and phosphorus. In 2016, Leghari et al. [5] Indian soils are severely depleted because crops continually supply 20 mt of nutrients while continuously removing 30 mt, leaving a gap of 10 mt. Crop responsiveness to fertilizer has drastically decreased. Agricultural scientists are under tremendous pressure to develop solutions that address the complex concerns facing Indian agriculture due to socioeconomic factors such laborers' inaccessibility, the departure of people from farming, and growing cultivation costs. In order to mitigate the challenges associated with soil-applied fertilizers, such as fixation, immobilization, volatilization, leaching, and runoff, we should consider using alternative technologies, like nanotechnology, to accurately detect and deliver the right amount of nutrients and other inputs needed by crops in a proportion that promotes productivity while maintaining environmental safety. Plant nutrients are encapsulated in nanomaterials, thinly coated with nanomaterials, and delivered as nano-sized emulsions to create nano fertilizers. Higher nutrient utilization efficiency (NUE) results from the uptake of nanomaterials and their deep penetration through stomatal apertures and nano-pores in plant leaves. Nanotechnology is gradually moving from the experimental stage to the operational and practical stage. This will lead to a more tangible presence of the technology in the agricultural sector (Baruah and Dutta, 2009) [1] . In this regard, using nano fertilizer to control release of nutrients can be an effective step towards achieving sustainable agriculture and environment (Cui et al., 2010) [2] . Farmers are using urea and DAP fertilizers for soil application to crops; however, the efficacy is lower. The present study was taken up to investigate the promotionary or inhibitory influence of nano urea and nano DAP on uptake of primary nutrients in tomato.

Materials and Method

During Rabi 2022-2023, a field study was carried out at New-Orchard, MARS, Department of Horticulture, UAS, Raichur, Karnataka (16˚15'N, 77˚21'E, altitude 389 m). The experimental site's soil had a red sandy loam texture with 55.1% sand, 13.3% silt, and 30.8% clay. Three replications of the experiment were set up in a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD). Ten treatments (Presented in Table 1.) were administered at 30 and 45 days after transplanting (DAT) with varying dosages of nano urea and nano DAP (2, 4, & 6 ml l -1 ) and RNP (three treatments with 25% RNP, three with 50% RNP, three with 75% RNP, and one with 100% RDF). On the other hand, every treatment received the recommended dosage of K. For the study, Arka Abhed was chosen. The healthy 30-day-old seedlings were placed in a paired row on raised beds at a distance of 90 cm by 45 cm.

Plant sample Collection and analysis

Plant samples were collected at the final harvesting stage. Ten plants from each treatment, which were randomly selected, were collected by pulling out the entire plant. The plant samples were washed with tap water and later with distilled water to remove the adhering soil and dusts. Then they were air dried and later kept in the hot air oven at 78 ℃ overnight. The oven-dried samples were powdered with willey milling machine and stored in polythene bags. The primary nutrient concentration in the plant sample was thoroughly examined using many well-established techniques, including the use of Kjeldahl's digestion and distillation method to measure the percentage of total nitrogen, the Vanado-molybdo phosphoric acid yellow color method to measure the percentage of total phosphorus, and the flame photometric method to measure the percentage of total potassium using a Systronics flame photometer (Model 128), precisely as Jackson (1973) for P uptake and expressed in kg ha -1 .

Results and Discussion

N uptake

The administration of graded amounts of nitrogen and different concentrations of nano urea and nano DAP in tomatoes was found to have a substantial impact on nitrogen uptake. At 30 and 45 DAT (T 8 ), foliar spraying 4 ml of nano urea and 4 ml of nano-DAP after applying 75% RNP resulted in considerably better nitrogen uptake (76.05 kg ha -1 ) compared to all other treatments. T 9 (75% RNP + 6 ml NUS & 6 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT) came next with 72.86 kg ha -1 , which was comparable to T 7 's 69.24 kg ha -1 (75% RNP + 2 ml NUS & 2 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT). Lowest nitrogen uptake (53.75 kg ha -1 ) was recorded in T 1 (25% RNP + 2 ml NUS & 2 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT) compared to all other treatments (Results are presented in Table 2.).

P uptake

Phosphorous uptake was significantly influenced by the application graded levels of phosphorous and varied concentrations of nano urea and nano DAP in tomato were recorded in the study. Application of 75% RNP followed by foliar spray of 4 ml nano urea and 4 ml nano -DAP at 30 and 45 DAT (T 8 ) recorded significantly higher (29.68 kg ha -1 ) phosphorous uptake over all other treatments. Followed by T 9 (75% RNP + 6 ml NUS & 6 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT) with 26.92 kg ha -1 , which was on par with T 7 (75% RNP + 2 ml NUS & 2 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT), with 24.85 kg ha -1 . Lowest phosphorous uptake (10.25 kg ha -1 ) was recorded in T 1 (25% RNP + 2 ml NUS & 2 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT) compared to all other treatments (Results are presented in Table 2.).

K uptake

Potassium uptake was significantly influenced by the application graded levels of nitrogen and phosphorous along with varied concentrations of nano urea and nano DAP in tomato were recorded in the study. Application of 75% RNP followed by foliar spray of 4 ml nano urea and 4 ml nano DAP at 30 and 45 DAT (T 8 ) recorded significantly higher (90.71 kg ha -1 ) potassium uptake over all other treatments. Followed by T 9 (75% RNP + 6 ml NUS & 6 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT) with 86.07 kg ha -1 , which was on par with T 7 (75% RNP + 2 ml NUS & 2 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT), with 83.18 kg ha -1 . Lowest potassium uptake (69.62 kg ha -1 ) was recorded in T 1 (25% RNP + 2 ml NUS & 2 ml NDS @ 30 & 45 DAT) compared to all other treatments (Results are presented in Table 2.). Improved availability, aided by a baseline fertilizer dosage, was linked to plants' maximum uptake of NPK content. N fixation, P solubilization, and K mobilization in the soil may be responsible for the rise in NPK reserve with increased nutrient availability. The enhanced absorption and utilization of nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus by nano-sized particles, which have a large surface area and a smart system for delivery that is, a controlled release pattern of nutrients may be the cause of the increased nutrient uptake in treatments with nano urea and nano DAP throughout the cropping period. As demonstrated in this study with increased nutrient uptake in tomatoes, nano urea and nano DAP enhanced fertilizer efficacy and soil nutrient consumption in addition to aiding in the correction of mineral fertilization. The decreased NPK application in T 1 that reduced absorption may be the cause of T 1 's lower yield. The results were consistent with those of wheat, Saitheja et al. (2022) [9] for green gram, Sahu et al. (2022) [8] for rice, and Raliya et al. (2016) [6] for watermelon.

Conclusion

The present study indicated that foliar application of Nano Urea and Nano DAP in combination with reduced amounts of prescribed nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization greatly altered N, P and K uptake in tomato. Among the treatments, 75% prescribed N and P fertilizer supplemented with 4 ml L⁻¹ each of Nano Urea and Nano DAP at 30 and 45 days after transplanting (T8) reported the maximum uptake of N (76.05 kg ha⁻¹), P (29.68 kg ha⁻¹) and K (90.71 kg ha⁻¹). Nutrient uptake did not improve further when the nano-fertilizer concentration was increased from 4 to 6 ml L⁻¹, suggesting that the 4 ml L⁻¹ concentration was more effective in the current study. According to the research, foliar Nano Urea and Nano DAP may enhance tomato nitrogen uptake by acting as complementary nutrient sources with lower basal N and P fertilization. To confirm the constancy of these reactions and evaluate their effects on yield, soil health, nutrient-use efficiency, and economic sustainability, more multi-season and multilocation research is necessary.

References

1. Baruah S, Dutta J. Nanotechnology applications in sensing and pollution degradation in agriculture. Env Chem Letters J. 2009;7:191-204.
2. Cui HX, Sun CJ, Liu Q, Jiang J, Gu W. Applications of nanotechnology in agrochemical formulation, perspectives, challenges and strategies. In: International Conference on Nanoagriculture; 2010; Sao Pedro, Brazil. p. 28-33.
3. Haggag WM, Hoballah MME, Ali RR. Applications of nano biotechnological microalgae product for improved wheat productivity in semi-arid areas. Int J Agril Tech. 2018;14(5):675-692.
4. Jackson ML. Soil Chemical Analysis. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd.; 1973.
5. Leghari M, Wahocho NA. Role of nitrogen for plant growth and development: a review. Adv Env Bio. 2016;10(9):209218.
6. Pandey SK, Chandra KK. Impact of integrated nutrient management on tomato. J Environ Biol. 2013;34(6):10471051.
7. Raliya R, Franke C, Chavalmane S, Nair R, Reed N, Biswas P. Quantitative understanding of nanoparticle uptake in watermelon plants. Frontiersin Plant Sci. 2016;7(1):1288.
8. Sahu TK, Kumar M, Kumar N, Chandrakar T, Singh DP. Effect of nano urea application on growth and productivity of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under mid land situation of Bastar region. Pharma Innov. 2022;11(6):185-187.
9. Saitheja V, Senthivelu M, Prabukumar G, Prasad V. Maximizing the productivity and profitability of summer irrigated greengram (Vigna radiata L.) by combining basal nitrogen dose and foliar nutrition of nano and normal urea. Int J Plant Soil Sci. 2022;34(22):109-116.