Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttps://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lpla20

Journal of Plant Nutrition

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpla20

Black bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) response topotassium fertilization in two different soils inHaiti

Franky Celestin , Rao S. Mylavarapu , George J. Hochmuth , Yuncong Li ,Wesly Jeune & van Santen Edzard

To cite this article: Franky Celestin , Rao S. Mylavarapu , George J. Hochmuth , YuncongLi , Wesly Jeune & van Santen Edzard (2020) Black bean (Phaseolus�vulgaris L.) response topotassium fertilization in two different soils in Haiti, Journal of Plant Nutrition, 43:17, 2601-2609,DOI: 10.1080/01904167.2020.1783309

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1783309

Published online: 26 Jun 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 82

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Black bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) response to potassiumfertilization in two different soils in Haiti

Franky Celestina, Rao S. Mylavarapua, George J. Hochmutha, Yuncong Lib , WeslyJeunec, and van Santen Edzardd

aSoil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA; bTropical Research andEducation Center, University of Florida, Homestead, FL, USA; cDepartment of Agronomy, University ofQuisqueya, Port-Au-Prince, Haiti; dDepartment of Agronomy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

ABSTRACTIn the absence of calibrated soil test and proper nutrient recommendationsfor crop growth, Haitian farmers suffer from suppressed and uneconomicalyields. Thus, decisions made by farmers are mostly ineffective not only eco-nomically but also resulted on negative impacts on the soils. This misman-agement is also observed in the low level of crop yield in Haiti, especiallyblack bean, where it recorded the lowest yield among the Caribbeannation in 2016, 660 kg ha�1. Other than the inappropriate nutrient man-agement, smallholders also face a lack of resources (technical, human, andfinancial inputs) needed to increase crop production. Furthermore, soils intropical and subtropical regions are known to be deficient in exchangeablepotassium (K) due to fixation on clay and poor water management.Supplying sufficient K is vital for crop growth and quality characteristicsand K deficiency typically becomes a limiting factor in crop production. Tounderstand how black beans respond to K fertilization, a pot study wasconducted with two different soils (Kenscoff, acidic and Cabaret, alkaline)in Haiti using a completely randomized block design, replicated four timeswith four K (0, 20, 40, and 60 kg K ha�1) rates. All treatments received55 kg ha�1 of phosphorus (P). As a result, black beans in the alkaline soilrecorded highest yield of 3053 kg ha�1, when no K was applied, Additionalamount of K, when the soil already tested high, in fact, reduced K uptakeby the plants. However, the acidic soil recorded optimum yield at 20 kgK ha�1.

ARTICLE HISTORYReceived 9 April 2020Accepted 10 May 2020

KEYWORDSBlack beans; fertilization;Haiti; manage-ment; potassium

Introduction

The lack of knowledge on adequate agricultural practices leads Haitian farmers to make ineffect-ive decisions regarding fertilization and soil management. The mostly smallholder farmers inHaiti, averaging 0.54 ha per capita (MARNDR 2016), are uninformed about proper managementof fertilizers, application rates, timing, placement, and sources, and therefore, soil is not properlyreplenished to fulfill the nutrient requirement of the crop being cultivated. Haitian researchersand state agencies do not investigate soil fertility issues primarily due to the lack of humanresources, technical capacity, and investment in this field. Consequently, soil fertility research isstill seriously lacking for most of the agricultural regions in Haiti and farmers are at a loss foreven the most basic information.

CONTACT Rao S. Mylavarapu raom@ufl.edu Soil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA� 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION2020, VOL. 43, NO. 17, 2601–2609https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1783309

Beans along with rice form the primary ingredients of the daily food in Haiti (Celestin et al.2019). Among the different bean types, black beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) are considered themost consumed and preferred because of their higher iron content (EMMA 2010). In 2016, themajority of beans were produced in the western region of Haiti with 31% of total bean produc-tion (MARNDR 2016). Within the western corridor, black beans are predominantly produced atCabaret and Kenscoff locations. Located in a lowland area near the Cul-de-Sac plain, Cabaretsoils are inherently calcareous soils that represent approximately 80% of Haitian agricultural soils(Woodring, Brown, and Burbank 1924). The Cul-de-Sac plain was described by the U.S.Geological Survey as the most important agricultural area in Haiti due to its proximity and acces-sibility to Port-Au-Prince, the capital city of Haiti, which boasts a high population density(Taylor and Lemoine 1949). However, rainfall is not evenly distributed in this area, and as aresult, black beans are only grown once a year during the rainy season. Comparatively, Kenscoffsoils are located in an upland region of Haiti and represent acidic soils. In addition, black beanscan be planted two to three times a year in Kenscoff depending on the variety grownand weather.

In the absence of a calibrated soil test for Haiti, the nutrient availability of the soils needs tobe addressed carefully. Although determined to be the seventh most abundant element in theEarth’s crust, only 1–2% of the potassium (K) in the soil is available for the plants (Brady andWeil 2008). The role of K in plant nutrition is very defining though. Beringer, Haeder, andLindhauer (1983) and Lindhauer, (1989) concluded that K might mitigate water stress due to itsrole in controlling cell turgor and metabolic activity, especially in tropical regions such as Haiti,where water availability is one of the limiting factors in crop production (Wiersma and Christie1987). Soils in subtropical and tropical areas are typically deficient in exchangeable K due to fix-ation in different clay structures, and poor water management and replenishments. According toSchwartz and Pastor-Corrales (1989), about 15% of the beans growing areas in Latin Americaand about 20% in Africa may be subject to K deficiency. So, a study to determine whether or notK fertilization can improve black bean production in Haiti was conducted in the two predomin-ant soil types with the following specific objectives:

i. assessing the relationship between soil test K and black bean yield response to K fertiliza-tion, and

ii. evaluating the amount of K needed for optimum growth and yield in two major soilsin Haiti.

Materials and methods

Study site

The experiments were carried from August to December 2018 in Kenscoff, Haiti (Latitude18�26044.400N and Longitude 72�17039.200W). Kenscoff is part of the morphological unit of theMassif de la Selle, which culminates at Pic la Selle at 2680m (8792 ft) altitude. Both soils, Cabaret(alkaline) and Kenscoff (acidic), were brought to the study site to conduct this pot study.

Experimental design and treatments

Two experiments, one for each soil, were laid out in a completely randomized block design withfour replications. Prior to potting, soil samples were collected to assess K status of the soil. UsingM-3 extraction solution, soil from Cabaret was determined to be low in phosphorus (P) (1.34mgkg�1) and very high in K (247mg kg�1), and soil from Kenscoff was low in P (22.98mg kg�1)and high in K (65.41mg kg�1). Since there are no fertilizer recommendations for black beans in

2602 F. CELESTIN ET AL.

Haiti, due to the absence of a calibrated soil test, IFAS recommendation for lima beans (P. vulga-ris) at a high extractable (soil test) K, which is 0 kg K ha�1 (Mylavarapu and Liu 2017) was usedas a guidance. Therefore, a range of rates was used for K treatments. In both soils, four rates ofK were selected 0, 20 kg K ha�1 (25K2O ha�1), 40 and 60 kg K ha�1 (50 and 75K2O ha�1), and55 kg P ha�1 (125 kg of P2O5 ha�1) was applied in each treatment at a constant rate. All experi-ments received a consistent rate of 125 kg N ha�1. Sources of fertilizers were triple superphos-phate (TSP) [Ca(H2PO4)2] (0–46–0) for P, muriate of potash (MOP) [KCl] (0–0–60) for K, andurea [(NH2)2CO] (46–0–0) for N. Before planting, TSP was incorporated 10 cm deep in the pots,and MOP and urea were used as side dressing. At emergence, 30% of K and nitrogen (N) wereapplied and the remaining (40% and 30%) was applied 30–60 days after planting (DAP), respect-ively. Black bean (cv. Zenith) was used in this study and is adapted to grow in both lowland andupland regions in Haiti. One seed per pot (30 cm in diameter with a height 27 cm) was sown5 cm deep.

Data collection, soil and plant tissues analysis

Soil samples were collected in both soils prior to the experiment at a depth of 30 cm using astandard hand auger. The samples were shipped to the UF/IFAS-Analytical Services Laboratories(ANSERV Labs) and subsequently were analyzed to determine the nutrients (Mehlich-3 extract-able P, K, Ca, and Mg), soil pH level, and organic matter (OM) content of the soils. Soil sampleswere collected from each treatment at 0–15 cm depth at 30 DAP, 60 DAP (before the applicationof the fertilizers), and at harvest to measure pH, K, and OM content. Soil samples (before andduring the experiment) were air-dried by spreading the samples on a newspaper in a dry shadedarea during a week at 32 �C on average. Soil from Cabaret was pulverized to break up the clods;and both soils were sieved through a 2mm sieve. Mehlich-3 extractant solution was used toextract soil nutrients from both soils and K along with other macronutrients was determined onthe inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry machine (ICP-OES Spectro CIROS,NJ). The texture and OM content of the soils was determined by hydrometer method andWalkley Black method (WB), respectively. All soil analyses were conducted at the UF/IFASANSERV in Gainesville as per the standard procedures (Mylavarapu et al. 2014).

Plant height was measured every 2 weeks during the crop growth period starting from 2 weeksafter planting to harvest. At flowering, fully developed leaves from the top were collected, whichincluded the compound leaf (three leaves) from each replication. At physiological maturity, num-ber of grains per plant were collected and counted, and plant dry matter was separated into leafblades, petioles, roots, and stems. Plant tissues were dried in the oven at 65 �C for 24 h and finelyground using a 2mm sieve (Laboratory Model 3 Mill, Thomas Wiley, Swedesboro, NJ). Blackbean components (leaf blades, petioles, roots, stems, and grain yield) were analyzed to determineK concentration. At 550 �C, 0.20mg of each tissue component was placed in a muffle furnace for4 h. The resulted ashes were mixed with 25ml 0.5M HCl. After settling for 30min, each solutionwas poured into 25ml vials and K concentration was obtained using ICP-OES (Spectro modelCIROS, NJ). All tissue analyses were conducted at the ANSERV Labs in Gainesville as per thestandard procedures (Mylavarapu et al. 2014)

Statistical analysis

Mixed models methodology as implemented in SASVR PROC GLIMMIX (SAS/STAT 14.2 2017)was used to analyze the response. In the combined analysis involving both soil types, the soiltype, the treatment, and their interaction were considered fixed effects, whereas block within thesoil type was the sole random effect. Linear contrasts among soil type� treatment interactionmeans were the used to make the comparisons of interest.

JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION 2603

Results and discussion

Background analysis

Scientifically based nutrient fertilizer recommendations have not been made for any crops inHaiti. Since soil testing is not part of their current management practices, farmers are unable tostate whether or not the resulted yield is a product of fertilization. Prior to the experiment,important soil characteristics used in evaluating an agricultural field such as texture, pH, OMcontent, and extractable nutrients were measured in both soils. As presented in Table 1, Cabaretsoil was determined to be a clay loam soil with 43% sand, 28% silt, and 29% clay with a soil pHof 8.2 and OM of 1.3%. The soil from Kenscoff was determined to be a sandy clay loam soil with46% sand, 24% silt, and 30% clay with a soil pH of 6.02 and OM content of 5.40%. UsingMelhlich-3 solution, extractable K was High in both soils according to the standard procedures(Mylavarapu et al. 2014) with 247mg kg�1 at Cabaret and 65.41mg kg�1 in Kenscoff.Mylavarapu et al. (2017) stated that soil testing is specific to the inherent characteristics (chemicaland physical) and location on the landscape, along with other factors such as crops grown, priornutrient management on the site, etc. Additional multi-year field trials with crop rotations arerequired to further calibrate the soil test results with interpretations and recommendations andyield responses on different Haitian soils.

Biomass and potassium partitioning

With its high extractable K, no significant difference was found in black bean biomass (leafblades, petiole, stem, and root combined) among the treatments at Cabaret (Table 2). InKenscoff, however, the control resulted in the lowest biomass compared to the applied P rates. Inspite of the sufficient amount of K detected prior to the experiment, leaf concentrations in plantson Kenscoff showed a significance difference between the control and all K application rates. Inthe contrast involving the soils, the only significant difference was found between control wherethe lowest biomass, 330 kg ha�1, was observed in Kenscoff compared to 1575 kg ha�1 in Cabaret’ssoil (Table 2). Application of K in incremental doses through the growing season may be neces-sary to improve black beans growth in Kenscoff, however, further research is needed to determinehow to split K appropriately for enhanced uptake efficiency and yield response.

Potassium partitioning

In Cabaret soil, K concentration in the leaf blades was significantly lower, 2.08%, in control and20 kg K ha�1 rate at flowering, whereas no difference was seen in K concentration in the leaf tis-sue across the treatments at harvest (Table 3). In Kenscoff soil, K concentration in the leaf wassignificantly lower, 0.72%, in the control compared to the highest, 2.06%, recorded at 60 kg Kha�1 application rate, but K concentration at harvest was found to be similar across all

Table 1. Summary of the chemical and physical properties of the soils profile from 0 to 30 cm depth, prior to theexperiments.

Properties Cabaret Kenscoff Method of analysis

pH 8.20 6.02 1:2 (soil:water)Extractable P (mg kg�1) 1.34 22.98 Mehlich 3 Soil ExtractionExtractable K (mg kg�1) 247 65.41 Mehlich 3 Soil ExtractionOrganic matter (%) 1.31 5.40 Walkley BlackTexture Clay loam Sandy clay loam HydrometerSand 43% 46%Silt 28% 24%Clay 29% 30%

2604 F. CELESTIN ET AL.

treatments. However, in the contrast between the soils, significant differences were found amongeach treatment at flowering, but at harvest only the application of 60 kg K ha�1 where Kenscoffrecorded the lowest concentration of 1.90% compared to Cabaret which recorded 2.78%.

Potassium uptake

Potassium uptake based on applied rates of K are given in Table 4. Leaf concentrations weredetermined to be similar in leaf blades, stem, and roots across the four K application rates (0, 20,40, and 60 kg K ha�1), with the exception of the petiole and the grain in Cabaret soils (kg ha�1).Lowest K concentration in the grain was determined to be 17.80 kg K ha�1 (at 60 kg K ha�1

application rate) and 31.67 kg K ha�1 (at 40 kg K ha�1 application rate). On the other hand,higher uptake in the grain was recorded to be 50.04 and 39.53 kg K ha�1, when the lowest K ratesof 0 and 20 kg K ha�1 were applied, respectively. These results show that K fertilizer applicationsabove 0 and 20 kg K ha�1 negatively impacted K uptake, further emphasizing that when extract-able soil K is interpreted to be High based on the soil test, no yield responses to additional Kapplications can be obtained. In Kenscoff soil, K uptake in leaf blade was not significantly influ-enced by the K application rates. Among the remaining plant components, the control treatmentresulted in lowest K uptake compared to any applied K rates (20, 40, and 60 kg K ha�1).

Yield and yield parameters

Fertilizing black bean is common in Haiti, however its influence on the yields is not often wellunderstood. Data on yield responses to K rates is presented in Table 5 and Figure 1. In Cabaretsoil, compared to no K, fertilizing with K reduced the yield drastically from 3011 kg ha�1 in thecontrol to 1919 and 1099 kg ha�1 with the application of 40 and 60 kg K ha�1, respectively. Asdetermined by the M-3 extraction method, soil K concentration measured at preplant was 247mgkg�1, therefore, plant parameters were not expected to show improvement at any rate of K appli-cation (Viro 1974). The results showed that adding K fertilizers negatively impacted the yield. Asa matter of fact, Lucas (1968) stated that yield losses in vegetables can be a factor of excess in

Table 2. Plant biomass based on K rates and a standard level of 55 kg P ha�1, and contrast for both soils at 95% confi-dence level.

K (kg ha�1)Cabaret (Cab) Kenscoff (Ken)

Contrast K (Cab vs. Ken)Estimate Estimate

Plant biomass0 1575 ± 162 a 330 ± 162 b 0.00020 1418 ± 162 a 1359 ± 162 a 0.79740 1278 ± 162 a 1708 ± 162 a 0.07460 1141 ± 162 a 1397 ± 162 a 0.277

Note: The numbers in the column—Contrast K, Cab vs. Ken—the p-value in the corresponding row for both soils (a¼ 0.05).

Table 3. Leaf tissue concentration (%) at harvest based on K rates and a standard level of 55 kg P ha�1, and contrast for bothsoils at 95% confidence level.

K (kg ha�1)

Flowering Harvest

Cabaret KenscoffContrast K (Cab vs. Ken)

Cabaret KenscoffContrast K (Cab vs Ken)Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate

Leaf blades (%)0 2.08 ± 0.13 b 0.72 ± 0.13 c 0.000 2.37 ± 0.21 a 2.49 ± 0.43 a 0.80820 2.28 ± 0.13 ab 1.60 ± 0.13 b 0.001 2.22 ± 0.21 a 1.63 ± 0.21 a 0.06740 2.46 ± 0.13 a 1.73 ± 0.13 ab 0.001 2.33 ± 0.21 a 2.02 ± 0.21 a 0.30260 2.49 ± 0.13 a 2.06 ± 0.13 a 0.031 2.78 ± 0.21 a 1.90 ± 0.21 a 0.008

Note: The numbers in the column—Contrast K, Cab vs. Ken—the p-value in the corresponding row for both soils (a¼ 0.05).

JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION 2605

potassium, which usually due to too much salt in the soil. However, significantly positiveresponses to applied K were recorded at all rates in Kenscoff soil, where control yielded only227 kg ha�1 compared to 1866, 2613, and 1909 kg ha�1 with the application of 20, 40, and 60 kgK ha�1, respectively (Table 5 and Figure 1).

Table 4. Plant uptake (kg ha�1) based on K rates and a standard level of 55 kg P ha�1, and contrast for both soils at 95%confidence level.

K (kg ha�1)Cabaret (Cab) Kenscoff (Ken)

Contrast K (Cab vs. Ken)Estimate Estimate

Leaf K uptake (kg ha�1)0 5.64 ± 1.37 a 2.97 ± 2.88 a 0.41220 5.13 ± 1.37 a 3.58 ± 1.37 a 0.43340 5.32 ± 1.37 a 5.00 ± 1.37 a 0.87360 6.97 ± 1.37 a 4.38 ± 1.37 a 0.195Petiole K uptake (kg ha�1)0 8.51 ± 0.81 a 0.10 ± 0.94 b 0.00020 7.97 ± 0.81 a 2.87 ± 0.81 a 0.00040 5.78 ± 0.81 b 2.95 ± 0.81 a 0.02360 6.65 ± 0.81 ab 4.28 ± 0.81 a 0.052Roots K uptake (kg ha�1)0 2.69 ± 0.40 a 0.11 ± 0.40 b 0.00020 2.69 ± 0.40 a 0.83 ± 0.40 ab 0.00340 2.50 ± 0.40 a 1.14 ± 0.40 ab 0.02360 2.22 ± 0.40 a 1.98 ± 0.40 a 0.667Stem K uptake (kg ha�1)0 14.83 ± 1.43 a 0.92 ± 1.43 b 0.00020 13.39 ± 1.43 a 9.04 ± 1.43 a 0.04140 14.12 ± 1.43 a 8.68 ± 1.43 a 0.01360 12.17 ± 1.43 a 12.36 ± 1.43 a 0.925Grain K uptake (kg ha�1)0 50.04 ± 4.52 a 2.91 ± 4.52 c 0.00020 39.53 ± 4.52 ab 24.82 ± 4.52 b 0.03140 31.67 ± 4.52 b 38.50 ± 4.52 a 0.29660 17.8 ± 4.52 c 26.84 ± 4.52 ab 0.171Total K uptake (kg ha�1)0 81.71 ± 5.77 a 4.06 ± 5.77 b 0.00020 68.71 ± 5.77 ab 41.14 ± 5.77 a 0.00340 59.38 ± 5.77 bc 56.27 ± 5.77 a 0.70760 45.81 ± 5.77 c 49.83 ± 5.77 a 0.626

Note: The numbers in the column—Contrast K, Cab vs. Ken—the p-value in the corresponding row for both soils (a¼ 0.05).

Table 5. Yield and yield components based on K rates and a standard level of 55 kg P ha�1, and contrast for both soils at95% confidence level.

K (kg ha�1)Cabaret (Cab) Kenscoff (Ken)

Contrast K (Cab vs. Ken)Estimate Estimate

Dry yield (kg ha�1)0 3011 ± 311 a 227 ± 427 b 0.00020 2553 ± 295 ab 1866 ± 295 a 0.11440 1919 ± 311 bc 2613 ± 295 a 0.11960 1099 ± 295 c 1909 ± 311 a 0.071Number of grain per plant0 56 ± 6.13 a 4 ± 8.38 b 0.00020 49 ± 5.83 ab 39 ± 5.83 a 0.26840 38 ± 6.13 bc 56 ± 5.83 a 0.04560 26 ± 5.83 c 40 ± 6.13 a 0.109Number of pod per plant0 15 ± 1.66 a 2 ± 2.22 c 0.00020 13 ± 1.58 a 10 ± 1.58 ab 0.27640 10 ± 1.66 ab 15 ± 1.58 a 0.06560 7 ± 1.58 b 9 ± 1.58 b 0.510

Note: The numbers in the column—Contrast K, Cab vs. Ken—the p-value in the corresponding row for both soils (a¼ 0.05).

2606 F. CELESTIN ET AL.

Smaller increases in yields were recorded in some multi-locational trials on no-till corn inIowa in response to K applications even when the soil tests were determined to show Highextractable soil K (Mallarino, Bordoli, and Borges 1999). It was, however, concluded that suchfindings are misleading since the soils are High in soil test K. In order to tease out the effectsbetween K and Cl when KCl is used as the source in soils testing High in K but also showingyield responses to added K, Fixen et al. (1986) conducted field experiments using other Cl sourcesalong with KCl. It was determined clearly that any effects were only due to Cl and not due toadded K, where Cl could be helping indirectly through disease suppression. The only other pos-sible reason is stratification of K, which may result in keeping the K available to the crop for lon-ger periods, in certain soils. Some stratification in Kenscoff (sandy clay loam) may havehappened, however, since data was not collected to study subsoil status of K and other nutrients,the positive response to added K in this experiment is misleading. Additional field research isrequired to evaluate the other factors and to confirm the consistency of these results.

Contrast between the soils revealed that the yield was significantly lower in acidic soil(Kenscoff) with 227 kg ha�1 compared to 3011 kg ha�1 in the calcareous soil (Cabaret) when noK was applied. Statistically similar yield was found between soils with the remaining treatments(Table 5). The High extractable K recorded in the alkaline soil prior to the experiment wasadequate to fulfill the needs of the crop; however, acidic soil (Kenscoff), which was also deter-mined to be High in extractable K responded positively with the increments in K rates. Thisresult can be explained by the fact that the K extracted in the soil may not be readily availablefor the plants as stated by Kaddar, Russel, and Cooke (1984). Furthermore, Pettigrew (2008)reported that the response maybe a result of disease suppression due to the Cl� ion found in themuriate of potash. Overall, understanding soil testing results and nutrients requirements are cru-cially needed by Haitian farmers in their quest to improving crop production.

Soil characteristics at harvest

At harvest, soil pH and organic matter were statistically the same and extractable K was statistic-ally higher with 278mg K kg�1, where 60 kg K ha�1 was applied compared to 235mg K kg�1

extracted in control in Cabaret soil (Table 6). However, in Kenscoff, extractable K was statisticallylower with 45 and 79mg K kg�1 in control and where 40 kg K ha�1 was applied compared to117 and 138mg K kg�1 with the application of 20 and 60 kg K ha�1, respectively. Soil pH was

Figure 1. Black beans yield response to K fertilization at different rates (0, 20, 40, 60 kg K ha�1) in both soils at a standard levelof 55 kg P ha�1 in each treatment.

JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION 2607

statistically lower with 4.74 and 5.30 in control and at 40 kg K ha�1, respectively, compared to6.68 and 6.86 with the application of 20 and 60 kg K ha�1. Extractable K remained high in bothsoils, consistent with the initial soil data collected before the experiment. The amount of Kextracted in soil was able to fulfill black beans needs and therefore probably did not show anyresponse to added K in Cabaret soil. However, Kenscoff soil showed positive response to theincrease of K rates, probably because of stratification of K and other nutrients but any conclusionwill be misleading because our study did not measure any of those factors. However, addition ofa small dosage (20 kg ha�1) was enough to trigger the response. Hence, the soil test-crop responsestudies have to be made on based on long-term field-based studies.

Conclusions

This preliminary study revealed that increasing K fertilization negatively impacted the yield andyield attributing character in alkaline soils (Cabaret) as compared to acidic soil (Kenscoff).Further research is needed to properly establish the amount of K required for black beans pro-duction in Kenscoff, while results from this study clearly showed that adding K is unnecessary atCabaret. The use of single fertilizers in black bean production is greatly recommended instead ofmixed fertilizers blends (N-P-K) which will contribute in increasing the available K in the soiland mitigate the availability of other nutrients. Increasing and sustaining black bean yield produc-tion is, therefore, not only a matter of adequate land preparation, insect, disease, and weed con-trol, but also of proper nutrient management in maintaining adequate soil fertility.

ORCID

Yuncong Li http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6331-083X

References

Beringer, H., H. E. Haeder, and M. Lindhauer. 1983. Water relationships and incorporation of 14C assimilates intubers of potato plants differing in potassium nutrition. Plant Physiology 73 (4):956–0. doi: 10.1104/pp.73.4.956.

Brady, N. C., and R. R. Weil. 2008. The nature and properties of soils. 14th ed., 630–1.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.

Table 6. Soils characteristics based on K rates and a standard level of 55 kg P ha�1, and contrast for both soils at 95% confi-dence level.

K (kg ha�1)Cabaret (Cab) Kenscoff (Ken)

Contrast K (Cab vs. Ken)Estimate Estimate

Organic matter (%)0 2.27 ± 0.14 a 5.33 ± 0.14 a 0.00020 2.32 ± 0.14 a 5.17 ± 0.14 a 0.00040 2.23 ± 0.14 a 5.41 ± 0.14 a 0.00060 2.29 ± 0.14 a 5.12 ± 0.14 a 0.000pH0 8.39 ± 0.15 a 4.74 ± 0.15 c 0.00020 8.40 ± 0.15 a 6.68 ± 0.15 a 0.00040 8.35 ± 0.15 a 5.30 ± 0.15 b 0.00060 8.35 ± 0.15 a 6.86 ± 0.15 a 0.000Potassium (mg kg�1)0 235 ± 9.49 b 45 ± 9.49 c 0.00020 246 ± 9.49 b 117 ± 9.49 a 0.00040 256 ± 9.49 ab 79 ± 9.49 b 0.00060 278 ± 9.49 a 138 ± 9.49 a 0.000

Note: The numbers in the column—Contrast K, Cab vs. Ken—the p-value in the corresponding row for both soils (a¼ 0.05).

2608 F. CELESTIN ET AL.

Celestin, F., R. S. Mylavarapu, G. Hochmuth, Y. C. Li, and V. S. Edzard. 2019. Response of black bean (Phaseolusvulgaris L.) to phosphorus fertilization in acidic and alkaline soils in Haiti. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 43:1016–1024 doi: 10.1080/01904167.2019.1702208.

EMMA (Emergency Mapping Market and Analysis). 2010. The market system for beans in Haiti. Report. Port-Au-Prince, Haiti.

Fixen, P. E., R. H. Gelderman, J. Gerwing, and F. A. Cholick. 1986. Response of spring wheat, barley, and oats tochloride in potassium chloride fertilizers. Agronomy Journal 78 (4):664–8. doi: 10.2134/agronj1986.00021962007800040022x.

Kaddar, T., D. A. Russel, and G. W. Cooke. 1984. The vital role of potassium fertilizers in tropical agriculture: Thepresent position, future potential, and constraints to progress, ed. E.D. Frederick and E. N. Roth. Muscle Shoals,Al: International Fertilizer Development Center. 20 p.

Lindhauer, M. G. 1989. The role of Kþ in cell extension, growth and storage of assimilates. Proceedings of 21stColloquium Methods of K-Research in Plants, International Potash Institute, Berne, Switzerland, 161–187.

Lucas, R. E. 1968. Potassium nutrition of vegetable crops. In The role of potassium in agriculture, ed. V. J. Kilmer,S. E. Younts, and N. C. Brady, 489–8. Madison, WI: Lucas, R.E.

Mallarino, A. P., J. M. Bordoli, and R. Borges. 1999. Phosphorus and potassium placement effects on early growthand nutrient uptake of no-till corn and relationships with grain yield. Agronomy Journal 91 (1):37–45. doi: 10.2134/agronj1999.00021962009100010007x.

MARNDR (Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources and Rural Development). 2016. Results of the nationalsurvey of the agricultural production. Port-Au-Prince, Haiti, pp 14–5.

Mylavarapu, G. H., and G. Liu. 2017. UF/IFAS standardized nutrient recommendations for vegetable crop produc-tion in Florida. CIR1152. Soil & Water Sciences, IFAS Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida,Gainesville, FL. 9.

Mylavarapu, R. S., W. d’Angelo, N. Wilkinson, and D. Moon. 2014. UF/IFAS extension soil testing laboratory(ESTL) analytical procedures and training manual. Circular 1248. Soil & Water Sciences, IFAS Coop. ExtensionService, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Mylavarapu, R. S., T. A. Obreza, K. Morgan, G. Hochmuth, V. Nair, and A. Wright. 2017. Extraction of soilnutrients using Mehlich-3 reagent for acid-mineral soils of Florida. SL407, Soil & Water Sciences, IFAS Coop.Extension Service, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 7.

Pettigrew, W. T. 2008. Potassium influences on yield and quality production for maize, wheat, soybean and cotton.Physiologia Plantarum 133 (4):670–1. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2008.01073.x.

SAS 2017. SAS/STAT 14.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Schwartz, H. F. and Pastor-Corrales, M. A. (eds.). 1989. Bean production problems in the tropics. 2nd ed. Cali:

CIAT (International Center for Tropical Agriculture). 726. p.Taylor, G. C., and R. C. Lemoine. 1949. Ground water in the Cul-de-Sac Plain, Haiti. Washington, DC: The

Institute of American Affairs. 68.Viro, M. 1974. Influence of the K status on the mineral nutrient balance and the distribution of assimilates in

tomato plants. B€untehof Abs 4 (34–36):75.Wiersma, D., and B. R. Christie. 1987. Water and agricultural productivity. In Handbook of Plant Science in

Agriculture, ed. B. R. Christie, vol II, 3–55. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Woodring, W. P., J. S. Brown, and W. S. Burbank. 1924. Geology of the Republic of Haiti (No. 630.25/W893). Port-

au-Prince, Haiti: Lord Baltimore Press.

JOURNAL OF PLANT NUTRITION 2609