1

Phosphorus-zinc interaction and its management in maize-wheat cropping system

Ramesh Kumar Singh10260

Division of AgronomyIndian Agricultural Research Institute

New Delhi – 110 012

2

Outline

Introduction

Maize-wheat system

P and Zn status

Significance of P and Zn in plant nutrition

P x Zn interaction

Management strategies

Research findings

Conclusion

3

Introduction Maize–wheat: Third

dominant cropping system of India covering 1.8 mha with 2.3% contribution in national foodgrain production (Jat et al., 2013)

Maize and wheat is third and second most important cereal crop of India, respectively

Area (mh) production (mt) Yield (q/ha)0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Maize (2011-12) DMR, 2012-13

Area (mh) production (mt) Yield (q/ha)0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Wheat (2012-13) http://www.indiastat.com/dacnet

4

Phosphorus in Indian soils Soil sample analysed- 3,650,004

(Motsara, 2002) 80% deficient soil sample (Tewatia,

2012) Category wise deficient sample

(Motsara, 2002)Low- 42%Medium- 38%High- 20%

Low- 98% of districts (Tiwari, 2001) Low-Maharashtra (86%), Haryana

(81%), Punjab (29%) Medium- Punjab (49%), Karnataka

(48%), Tamil Nadu (41%) High- Kerala (53%), West Bengal

(39%),Tamil Nadu (35%)

bnnnnnnnnnnbnbbnnbbbnbnnbbnnbnbnbnbnbnhjjhjhjhhgjhjjhjhhjjhjhjhjhjhjhjhjhjhnbnmmnhjjhjhhjjhjhhjjhjhhj

Source: http://www.rainfedfarming.org/documents/ETD_2011_7_12_17%20india's%20soil%20crisis.pdf

5

High & very high available

P: most part of farm

Low level available P:

Todapur block

Build up of P due to

continuous application

Use P solubilizer/mobilizer

to exploit the reserve

Division of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, IARI, New Delhi

Phosphorus in IARI farm

6

Zinc deficiency map of world soil

50% analysed soil sample deficient in Zn (Alloway, 2008)

Wide spread deficiency: cereal production areas

Average total Zn conc. cultivated soils is around 65 mg/kg (Alloway, 2009)

Most deficient: Iraq, Turkey, China, Pakistan, India, Korea, Syria and Italy

Alloway (2008) Micronutrient Deficiencies in Global Crop Production

7

Soil samples analysed-251660

(Singh, 2001)

49% deficient soil sample

86% Maharashtra

72.8% Karnataka

20% Delhi

8% Puducherry

According to Rattan (1999) in

Indian soil total Zn is 55 mg/kg

and available Zn is 0.54 mg/kg

Gupta et al. (2007)

Zinc in Indian soils

8Division of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, IARI, New Delhi

Zinc in IARI farm Farm adequate in

available Zn

Marginal deficiency:

WTC , some part of

NBPGR and Todapur

farm

High reserve of Zn

due to continuous

application

Use of Zn solubilizer

to exploit the reserve

9

Role of phosphorus in plants

Energy storage and transferPhotosynthesisTransformation of sugars and starchesIncreases water use efficiency- reduces water

stressHelps in seed formationPromotes early root formation and growthEarly crop maturity Transfer of genetic characteristics

10

Plants take up P as:

HPO4= (pH > 7.0)H2PO4

- (pH < 7.0)

equal at pH 7.2

P deficiency in maize

P deficiency in wheat

11

Causes of low availability of phosphorus

Causes of low availability of P

Nature and amount of soil

minerals

Soil pH

Ionic effects

Extent of P saturation

Organic matter

Temperature

Agricultural management

12

Role of zinc in plants

Diverse enzymatic activity

Protein synthesis

Structural and functional integrity of cell membranes

Detoxification of reactive oxygen species(ROS)

Carbohydrate metabolism

Synthesis and protection of IAA

Reduces heavy metal accumulation

13

Plants take up Zn as:

Zn2+

Zn deficiency in maize

Zn deficiency in wheat

14

Causes of low availability of zinc

Causes of low

availability of Zn

Soil pH

Soil with restricted root zones

Low zinc content in

soil

Low organic matter

Water logging/

flooding of soils

Zinc interaction with other nutrients

High P fertilization

Cool soil temperature

15

Nutrient interactionG

row

th

16

P-Zn Antagonism

Cellular level imbalance

Increased -ve surface charge on

soil

High P induced less mycorrhizal

root infectionSlower

translocation of Zn in plants

P-Zn interaction

in soil

Dilution effect

P-Zn interaction hypotheses This study first started by Barnette et al. (1936) in corn

17

Increased negative charge

i. Increased –ve surface charge on soil

Due to high P fertilization (Shivay, 2013)

Negatively charged phosphate ion attract by Al, Fe and Ca

ions (Morris et al., 1977)

18

ii. P-Zn interaction in soil (Ghanem

& Mikkelsen, 1988)<5 pH hydrated Fe and Al-oxidesCalcareous soil: formation of Zn3(PO4)2.4H2O, adsorption of Zn to clay or CaCO3, sparingly soluble Zn(OH)2 or ZnCO3 (Trehan and Sekhon, 1977)

Adapted from Kalendova , 1972

Solubility of Zn3(PO4)2 is depend on the pH value of aqueous H2SO4 solution

pH Solubility (ppm)

6.7 66

6.3 89

4.7 398

4.2 797

iii. Simple dilution effect (Loneragan

et al., 1979; Neilsen and Hogue,

1986)

P enhanced growth Bio

mas

s in

crea

sed

du

e to

P

Insolubility and dilution

5 10 15 20 25 30 350

5

10

15

20

25

30

Zn concentrationLinear (Zn concentration)

19

iv. Slower rate of Zn translocation

(Terman et al., 1972)

P reduces the Zn absorption by

roots (Safaya, 1976)

The high P increased the amount

of ethanol soluble and pectate

fractions of Zn in the root cell wall

(Youngdahl et al., 1977)

Complexed by low-molecular

weight organic solutes (Kochian,

1991)

Translocation

20

v. Cellular level nutrients imbalance

(Webb and Loneragan , 1988)

P toxicity is resembles as Zn

deficiency

vi. High P fertilization inhibit mycorrhizal growth (Singh et al., 1986)

Reduced the Zn absorption

In wheat, reduce root colonization

with AM by 33 to 75% (Ryan et al.,

2008)

Cellular level imbalance & Reduced uptake

21

P-Zn interaction management

Soil pH correction

Balance fertilization

Crop rotation

Organics

Bio-fertilizers

Other agronomic management

Physiological management

22

1. Soil pH correction

Gypsum Lime Organics

2. Balance fertilization

4R Principles

right source

at right ratio

at right time

at right place

23

3. Crop rotation Inclusion of legumes in rotation

More efficient in absorption divalent cationsLegumes roots secretes acid phosphatase

enzyme

(Yadav and Tarafdar, 2001) 4. Organics source of nutrients

Manures: FYMCompost: Vermicompost,

NADEPResidue recyclingGreen manuring

24

Pseudomonas, Bacillus and

Enterobacter along with Penicillium

and Aspergillus fungi are the most

powerful P solubilizers (Whitelaw,

2000)

Root colonization with AMF can

enhance the uptake of P & Zn by

plant roots (Shenoy and Kalagudi,

2005)

Dosages:Soil application formulation: 25-30 kg per acreLiquid formulations: Apply 3-4 mL per litre of water as foliar application

5. Bio-fertilizer

Solid formulation

Liquid formulation

25

Mechanism of PSB

Source: http://www.springerplus.com/content/download/figures/2193-1801-2-587-2.pdf

26

Zn-solubilizer- Bacillus sp. (ZSB-O-1), Pseudomonas sp. (ZSBS-2 and ZSB-S-4) (Saravanan et al., 2003)

Dosages:

Soil application formulation: Approximately 5 kg per acre

Liquid formulation: Apply 3-4 mL per litre of water as foliar application

Solid formulation

Liquid formulation

27

Use of efficient varieties

Genotype of Maize

Shoot dry wt. (g/pot)

P conc. In shoot (mg/pot)

Root length (cm)

P uptake in shoot (mg/pot)

Short growth duration

Kuwari 15.23 0.11 156 13.7

Agati-76 19.45 0.12 186 19.5

Vikram 22.50 0.11 192 24.8

Normal growth duration

Pragati 25.48 0.11 234 30.6

HQPM 1 16.87 0.12 182 18.9

MRM3845 16.87 0.11 194 25.1

MRM3842 22.15 0.11 194 24.3

MRM3838 22.46 0.11 194 24.7

Parewa et al. (2010)

The P uptake efficiency of

the varieties of wheat:

PBW 343 (26.25 kg/ha)

WH 711 (24.10 kg/ ha)

HD 2329 (23.06 kg/ha)

Hindi 62 (21.74 kg/ha)

WH 147 (19.31 kg/ha)

(Gill et al. (2004)

6. Other agronomic management

Sowing/planting method

Bed planting and FIRBS Zero till sowing Ridge sowing Dibbling

Application methodBand placementStarter or seed treatment-leads early

stimulation of crop growth is often termed “pop-up effect”

Foliar applicationFertigation

Better Crops 83 (1), 199928

29

Integrated nutrient management (INM):

Applying 0, 4, 8 and 16 t FYM /ha in conjunction of 100, 50, 25 and 0 % of zinc requirements were found optimum for soybean–wheat, rice-wheat, maize- wheat and other cropping systems (Singh, 2004)

Water managementUnder reduced condition Zn precipitate as franklinite

(ZnFe2O4) and ZnS (Sajwan and Lindsay, 1986)

7. Physiological management Spray of hormone: auxin, cytokinin (kinetin) Zn deficiency caused by the oxidative degradation of the auxin

growth hormone (Cakmak, 2000) Cytokinin-induced nutrient mobilization (Taiz and Zeiger, 2003)

30

Research findings

31

Effect of different planting methods on yield and P contents of maize

Planting methods

Grain yield (t/ha)

Biological yield (t/ha)

P content (%) in roots

P content (%) in leaves

P content (%) in grains

Flat sowing

5.77 28.92 0.09 0.71 0.12

Ridge sowing 7.01 36.05 0.13 0.91 0.23

Bed planting

5.86 31.76 0.10 0.78 0.22

LSD (P=0.05)

0.18 2.85 0.02 0.03 0.03

Khan et al. (2012) The J. of An. & Pl. Scs., 22(2): 309-317

32

Effect of balanced fertilization on yields of maize

100% NPK 100% NPKS 100% NPKSZn0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Grain yield (t/ha) Stover yield (t/ha)

Sharma and Jain (2014) Indian Journal of Agronomy 59 (1): 26-33

33

Effect of methods of Zn application on yield and Zn concentration in grains of wheat varieties

Source: www.zinccrops2011.org/presentations/2011_zinccrops2011_dhar.pdf

Shiva Dhar et al. (2011)

TreatmentsGrain yield

(t/ha)Straw yield

(t/ha)

Zn conc. in grain

(mg/kg)

Varieties

PBW 175 4.16 7.11 43.74

HD 2687 4.31 7.50 48.32HD 2733 3.85 6.95 43.95LSD (P=0.05) 0.096 0.23 -

Zn application

Control 3.94 6.66 41.09

Soil applied 25 kg ZnSO4 /ha 3.99 6.85 43.78

Soil applied 50 kg ZnSO4 /ha 4.09 7.13 44.50

Foliar 2.0 kg ZnSO4/ha at boot and after anthesis4.08 7.20 47.27

Soil applied 25 kg ZnSO4 /ha + 2 foliar spray at boot and other after anthesis @ 2.0 kg ZnSO4/ha each 4.21 7.55 47.54

2 foliar spray at boot and after anthesis @ 0.2 % ZnSO4 each until all leaves are totally wet 4.32 7.74 47.83

LSD (P=0.05) 0.06 0.19 -

Zn, P & lime interaction effect on wheat-maize system

Wheat grain yield (t/ha)

LSD (0.05) Lime = 0.044; Zn = 0.066; P = 0.066; Lime x Zn = 0.132; Lime x P = 0.132; Zn x P = 0.198

Verma & Minhas (1987) Fertilizer Research 13:77-86

Zn (kg/ha) No lime Lime @ 5 t /ha

P (kg/ha) P (kg/ha)

0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean

0 4.06 4.24 4.51 4.27 4.50 5.52 5.75 5.26

20 4.33 4.56 4.75 4.55 4.80 5.70 5.94 5.48

40 4.37 4.58 4.51 4.49 5.21 5.96 5.93 5.70

Mean 4.25 4.46 4.59 4.84 5.73 5.87

Maize grain yield (t/ha)

LSD (0.05) Lime = 0.066; Zn = 0.110; P = 0.110; Lime × Zn = 0.220; Lime × P = 0.220; Zn x P = 0.328

Zn (kg/ha) No lime Lime @ 5 t /ha

P (kg/ha) P (kg/ha)

0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean

0 1.02 1.95 2.23 1.73 1.19 2.05 2.65 1.96

20 1.03 1.98 2.31 1.78 1.35 2.23 2.80 2.13

40 0.85 1.86 2.21 1.64 1.36 2.29 2.99 2.22

Mean 0.97 1.93 2.25 1.30 2.19 2.82

34

35

LSD (0.05) Lime = 1.40; Zn = 2.10; P = 2.10; Lime x Zn = 4.20; Lime x P = 4.20; Zn x P = 6.40

Zn (kg /ha)

No lime Lime @ 5 t /ha

P (kg/ha) P (kg/ha)

0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean

0 41.2 32.0 26.5 33.2 36.1 30.7 22.4 29.7

20 52.5 46.1 38.4 45.6 47.5 39.8 31.3 39.5

40 62.2 56.3 49.6 56.0 55.2 48.2 41.0 48.1

Mean 52.0 44.8 38.2 46.2 39.5 31.5LSD (0.05) Lime = 1.66; Zn = 2.50; P = 2.50; Lime x Zn = 5.00; Lime x P = 5.00; Zn x P=7.10

Zn conc. in maize grain (ppm)

Zn conc. in wheat grain (ppm)

Zn, P & lime interaction effect on wheat-maize system

Zn (kg /ha)

No lime Lime @ 5 t /ha

P (kg/ha) P (kg/ha)

0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean

0 30.4 24.5 19.2 24.7 25.0 19.12 14.3 19.5

20 42.2 35.4 28.4 35.3 35.4 28.2 21.5 28.4

40 58.0 50.3 43.1 50.5 51.1 44.0 35.4 43.5

Mean 43.5 36.7 30.2 37.2 30.4 23.7

Verma & Minhas (1987) Fertilizer Research 13:77-86

36

Zn (kg /ha) No lime Lime @ 5 t /haP (kg/ha) P levels (kg/ha)

0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean

0 0.39 0.41 0.43 0.41 0.42 0.44 0.46 0.44

20 0.37 0.40 0.41 0.39 0.40 0.42 0.45 0.42

40 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.36 0.38 0.40 0.41 0.39

Mean 0.37 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.42 0.44

Zn (kg /ha) No lime Lime @ 5 t /ha

P (kg/ha) P levels (kg/ha)

0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean

0 0.44 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.46 0.49 0.53 0.49

20 0.42 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.49 0.46

40 0.39 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.41 0.41 0.42 0.41

Mean 0.41 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.48

LSD (0.05) Lime = 0.012; Zn = 0,018; P = 0,018; Limex Zn = 0,036; Lime x P = 0.036; Zn x P = 0,054

P conc. in wheat grain (ppm)

P conc. in maize grain (ppm)

Zn, P & lime interaction effect on wheat-maize system

LSD (0.05) Lime = 0.010; Zn = 0.015; P = 0,015; Lime × Zn = 0.030; Lime × P = 0.030; Zn x P = 0.045

Verma & Minhas (1987) Fertilizer Research 13:77-86

37

Effect of application methods P on P uptake, PUE, AEP and grain yield of wheat

Fertilizer application

P rate (kg/ha)

TimeGrain yield

(kg/ha)

P uptake (kg/ha)

PUE (%)

AEP

(kg/ha)

Source

Control - - 3966d 13.88c - -

DAP 441st

irrigation4882ab 19.78a 13.41 20.82

DAP 44 Basal 4516bc 17.05b 7.20 12.50

DAP 331st

irrigation4443c 17.38b 10.60 14.45

SSP 441st

irrigation5249a 19.70a 13.23 29.15

SSP 44 Basal 4665bc 19.00ab 11.64 15.88

SSP 331st

irrigation4854abc 18.99ab 15.48 26.91

Iqbal et al. (2003) Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 25(6) : 697-702

38

Plant part Yield (t/ha)P extraction

(kg/ha)

Zn extraction

(g/ha)

Traditional cultivars

Grain yield 1.0 25 23

Stover 1.5 15 40

Total 2.5 40 63

Improved cultivars

Grain yield 4.0 63 93

Stover 4.0 37 108

Total 8.0 100 201

Hybrids

Grain yield 7.0 128 163

Stover 7.0 72 189

Total 14.0 200 352

Comparison of different type of cultivars of maize

Jat et al. (2013) Indian J. Fert. 9(4): 80-94

Shift in cultivars

development took

place

The nutrient removal

increased 5 times with

hybrid compared to

local varieties

Residue recycling may

infuse 72 kg P and 189

g Zn/ha

39

Effects of different long-term fertilizer treatments on available P and DTPA extractable Zn in soil under maize-wheat system (1972-2008)

Initi

al

50%

NPK

100%

NPK

150%

NPK

100%

NPK+H

W

100%

NPK+Z

n

100%

NP

100%

N

100%

NPK+F

YM

100%

NPK-S

100%

NPK+L

ime

Control

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

0

1

2

3

4

5

6Available P (kg/ha) DTPA extractable Zn (mg/kg)

Av

ail

ab

le P

(k

g/h

a)

DT

PA

ex

trac

tab

le Z

n (m

g/k

g)

Verma et al. (2012) Plant Soil Environ. 58(12): 529–533

40

T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T120

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Maize yield (t/ha) Wheat yield (t/ha)

T0: Control T7: N @ 120 kg/ha + PSB

T1: N @120 kg/ha T8: N @ 120 kg/ha + VAMT2: N @ 120 kg/ha, SSP @ 60 kg/ha T9: N @ 120 kg/ha, SSP @ 30 kg P2O5/ha + PSB

T3: SSP @ 60 kg P2O5/ha T10: N @ 120 kg/ha, SSP @ 30 kg P2O5/ha + VAM

T4: RP @ 60 kg P2O5/ha T11: N @ 120 kg/ha, RP @ 30 kg P2O5/ha + PSB

T5: PSB T12: N @ 120 kg/ha,RP @ 30 kg P2O5/ha + VAM

T6:VAM

Grain yield of maize and wheat as influenced by inorganic and bio-fertilizers in sequence

Singhal et al. (2012) Indian J. Agric. Res. 46(2) :167-172

41

Growth response of wheat (panicle initiation stage) on inoculation with Bacillus aryabhattai strains

StrainsShoot dry

weight (g/plant)

Shoot Zn content

(µg/g)

Root dry weight

(g/plant)

Root Zn content (µg/g)

Un-inoculated

control6.4 ± 0.1d 14.0± 8d 1.0 ± 0.2d 19.5±0.7d

MDSR7 8.7 ± 0.2b 19.7 ± 0.9b 1.8 ± 0.1b 25.1 ± 1.3b

MDSR11 7.0 ± 0.1c 17.7 ± 0.5c 1.2 ± 0.1c 23.5 ± 0.9c

MDSR14 9.1 ± 0.1a 23.5± .6a 1.9 ± 0.1a 29.0±0.7a

Ramesh et al. (2014) Applied Soil Ecol. 73:87– 96

42

Conclusion

Zinc and P application has antagonistic effect on each other with respect to their concentration and absorption by wheat and maize

Modification of soil reaction, crop rotation and use of efficient varieties will increase the concentration and uptake of nutrients

Right source of nutrients, at right ratio, at right time and at right place is expected to increase nutrient use efficiency and productivity of crops

The application of inorganic P and Zn fertilizer in conjunction with bio-inoculants can increase the crop yield and efficiency of added fertilizers to save precious input

43

Thank you