research article response of nitrogen and...

Research ArticleResponse of Nitrogen and Potassium Fertigation tolsquolsquoWarisrsquorsquo Almond (Prunus dulcis) under NorthwesternHimalayan Region of India

Dinesh Kumar and N Ahmed

Central Institute of Temperate Horticulture Old Air Field Rangreth Srinagar Jammu and Kashmir 190007 India

Correspondence should be addressed to Dinesh Kumar dkchesrediffmailcom

Received 31 August 2013 Accepted 24 October 2013 Published 22 January 2014

Academic Editors A Gomez-Cadenas and T Takamizo

Copyright copy 2014 D Kumar and N Ahmed This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properlycited

A field experiment was conducted on almond (Prunus dulcis) to study the effect of NampK fertigation on growth yields and leafnutrient status over two seasons (2011 and 2012) in Srinagar Jammu and Kashmir India There were six treatments namely T

1mdash

100 recommended dose of fertilizers as soil application T2mdash100 RDF through fertigations T

3mdash75 RDF through fertigation

T4mdash75 RDF through fertigation (split application) T

5mdash50 RDF through fertigation and T

6mdash50 RDF through fertigation

(split application) with three replications under randomized block design The results indicated that the maximum tree height(321m and 356m) nut weight (273 g and 194 g) nut yield (241 kgtree and 598 kgtree 267 tha and 664 tha) and leaf nutrientcontent (234 and 238 N 014 and 017 P 137 and 141 K) were recorded in T

4treatment whereas the highest TCSA of main

trunk primary secondary and tertiary branches (7267 and 9028 cm2 1675 and 2426 cm2 383 and 749 cm2 047 and 123 cm2)canopy volume (715 and 811m3) and fruit number (990 and 3083tree) were recorded in T

2in almond variety Waris

1 Introduction

Almond (Prunus dulcis) that belongs to the family Rosaceaeis one of the important nut crops of temperate region of Indiamainly grown in Kashmir valley In India it is grown over anarea of 23200 hectares with an annual production of 16300tonnes and productivity of 07 tha as compared to otheralmond producing countries like Jordan (773 tha) Lebanon(516 tha) Afghanistan (499 tha) USA (485 tha) Turkey(323 tha) China (292 tha) Chile (289 tha) Uzbekistan(286 tha) Israel (275 tha) and world average (162 tha)respectively (FAO 2010) Almond kernels are concentratedsources of energy with a significant share of fat proteinand fibre Fats are primarily nonsaturated mostly oleinic andlinoleic fatty acids Nonsaturated fatty acid is important inmaintaining low cholesterol levels in the blood and significantamount of micronutrients [1] Commercial almond produc-tion in India is low considering the demand and economicalpotential

Irrigation and fertilizers are the most important inputswhich directly affect the plant growth fruit yield and qualityof production Application of fertilizers through drip irriga-tion is the most effective way for supplying nutrients to theplant and increases fertilizer-use efficiency In general mostof the farmers apply the fertilizers in single soil applicationduring dormant season and no fertilizer is applied duringvegetative flowering and fruit growth stages thus the effec-tiveness of the applied fertilizers is reduced considerablyDripirrigation plays a major role in productivity enhancementin almond [2] Reddy et al [3] recorded significantly higheryield fruit size weight and fertilizer-use efficiency in bananawith fertigation compared to soil application in bananaApplication of fertilizers through fertigation improves yieldand quality in different fruit crops as reported by Chauhanand Chandel [4] in kiwifruit Ahmad et al [5] in cherryRaina et al [6] in apricot Rao and Subramanyam [7] inpomegranate Kumar and Pandey [8] in banana and Singhet al [9] in apple

Hindawi Publishing Corporatione Scientific World JournalVolume 2014 Article ID 141328 6 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552014141328

2 The Scientific World Journal

Under drip irrigation only a portion of soil volumearound each plant is wetted and thus traditional methodsof fertilizers application are less effective The limited rootzone and reduced amount of mineralization in restrictedwetted zone are the main reason for the reduced nutrientavailability to the plants [10] One of the major advantagesof fertigation is that it permits timely application of nutrientsdirectly to root zone reduces leaching losses and increasesthe fertilizers use efficiency [11] The nutrient requirmentof almond crop through fertigation as per the crop growthstage for better crop production The systematic informationis not available in almond especially water and nutrientmanagement Therefore the present investigation was aimedto increase production and potential of almond by nitrogenand potassium fertigation in northwestern Himalayan regionof India

2 Materials and Methods

The experiment was conducted at the research farm ofthe Central Institute of Temperate Horticulture (ICAR)Srinagar Jammu and Kashmir India during 2011 and 2012The research farm at Srinagar is situated in a latitude of34∘ 051015840N and longitude of 74∘ 501015840 E and at an altitude of1640m above MSL The soils of this experimental field aresilty loam (3960 sand 240 silt and 3640 clay) withmedium-to-low soil fertility status The experimental farmfalls under temperate region having cold conditions fromNovember to February and two-year mean maximum andminimum temperature of Srinagar climate indicated that themaximum is 30∘C in August and the minimum is minus21∘Cin December The average annual precipitation was 620mmdistributed erratically throughout the year during the courseof investigation

The grafted almond plants were planted in prefilled pits of90 cmtimes 90 cmtimes 90 cm size duringNovember 2002 at a spac-ing of 3m times 3m in an experimental field The recommendeddose of fertilizers (RDF) was 330 gN 45 gP 455 gKtreeyearat the age of the 8th year The full quantity of phosphorusin plant basin has been applied 15 days before floweringin almond The nitrogen and potassium doses were appliedthrough fertigation as per treatment There were six treat-ments namely T

1mdash100 recommended Dose of Fertilizers

(Soil application) T2mdash100 RDF through fertigation T

3mdash

75 RDF through fertigation T4mdash75 RDF through ferti-

gation (split application of N K in the ratio of 23N 13K atnut set to nut development and 13N 23K at kernel fillingto maturation stage) T

5mdash50 RDF through fertigation and

T6mdash50 RDF through fertigation (split application of N K

in the ratio of 23N 13K at nut set to nut developmentand 13N 23K at kernel filling to maturation stage) Theexperiment was conducted under randomized block designwith four replications and two plants were taken in eachreplication

Water soluble fertilizers like urea as a source of nitrogenand muriate of potash as potassium were injected throughdrip irrigation system at weekly intervals as per crop nutrient

requirement in almond The concentration of nutrient solu-tion passing through irrigation water was around 10ndash15A separate laterals line (16mm) was laid for each treatmentand four emitters of 4 lph (Litre per hour) capacity withpressure compensated connected with 12mm lateral wereplaced equidistance in east-west north-south direction at50 distance of canopy radius The diameter of lateral pipewas 16mm connected with submain pipe The irrigation wasapplied throughout the growing season (till initiation of leaffall) based on pan evaporation (80) with the followingformula

WR = [DE times CF times AA times PC]IE

(1)

whereWR is water requirement of crop under drip irrigation(litreplantday) DE is daily pan evaporation from class-Apan (mm) CF is crop factor AA is area allotted to each plant(m2) PC is percentage of canopy (leaf coverage in relation toarea allowed to plant) and IE is irrigation efficiency (09)Theother cultural practices including weed pest and diseasesmanagement were followed uniformly as per recommendedpackage of practices

The observations on canopy volume (CV) were estimatedfor each individual tree using a geometrical model referred toas the ldquocontour methodrdquo CV = [((14)120587119886119887ℎ)(119898(119909) +119898(119910) +1)] The dimensions 119886 and 119887 were measured of the width ofthe tree at the base of the canopy perpendicular and parallelto the tree row orientation respectively The height of thecanopy (ℎ) was measured from the lowest branch to the apexThe functions119898(119909) and 119898(119910) were derived to accommodatethe contour of the tree [12] CV measurements were madeafter harvest in October 2011 and 2012 Tree trunk girth wasrecorded before the execution and at the end of experimentduring both years of study A ring was made with red paintat a height of 15 cm above the ground level in each selectedtree to record the trunk girth from the same point each yearThe trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) of tree was calculatedby using formula TCSA = Girth24120587 Fruit was harvested atmaturity hulled and dried and nut weight in gram and yieldper tree was recorded in kilogram

Leaf samples were collected for leaf nutrient analysis asper procedure outlined by Chapman [13] For macro nutrientexcept 119873 estimation well-ground leaf tissue was digestedin di-acid mixture containing HNO

3and HCIO

4in 9 4

ratio for 119875 119870 by using ammonium molybdate ammoniummetavanadate using double beamUV-Vis spectrophotometer(ECIL India) and the potassium was determined by usingflame photometer [14] For leaf 119873 estimation a knownweight of samples was digested with H

2SO4using 10 1

K2SO4and CuSO

4as digestion mixture and digested at

390∘C until clear digestion was obtained Digested sampleswere subjected to distillation with 40 NaOH and liberatedammoniawas collectedH

3BO3usingmixed indicator Finally

liberated ammonia was titrated against 01 N H2SO4and 119873

content in the leaves was expressed in percentage The datawere analyzed statistically as per Steel and Torrie [15] forinterpretation of results and drawing conclusions

The Scientific World Journal 3

Table 1 Vegetative growth as influenced by NampK fertigation in almond

Treatments Tree height (m) Canopy volume (m3) Shoot extension growth (cm)2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

T1

285 315 622 713 4225 4571T2

298 323 715 811 4946 5204T3

275 306 535 633 4214 4546T4

321 356 685 777 4712 5046T5

270 301 525 613 4021 4304T6

289 320 529 626 4175 4312LSD (119875 le 005) 039 028 072 063 421 446

Table 2 Effect of NampK fertigation on primary secondary and tertiary branches in almond

Treatments Main trunk (cm2) Primary branches (cm2) Secondary branches (cm2) Tertiary branches (cm2)2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

T1

5295 7718 1596 2331 363 687 042 109T2

7267 9028 1675 2426 383 749 065 128T3

6091 8202 1485 2131 323 655 042 111T4

6485 8504 1661 2409 376 746 047 123T5

4976 7393 1086 1653 206 514 040 086T6

5398 7653 1145 1697 243 593 044 089LSD (119875 le 005) 1212 823 224 313 075 105 012 021

3 Results and Discussion

31 Plant Growth Parameters The two-year data on growthparameters showed that the plant height canopy volume andannual shoot extension growth differed in various fertigationtreatments (Table 1) A perusal of data presented in Table 1revealed that the application of fertilizers showed significantvariations in vegetative growth of almond Maximum plantheight (321m and 356m) was recorded in T

4treatment

closely followed byT2 T6 andT

1and significantly superior to

T3and T

5treatments whereasmaximum canopy volume and

shoot extension growth were recorded with the applicationof recommended dose of fertilizers through fertigation andincreased by 1495 and 2374 in canopy volume and by1706 and 1384 in annual shoot extension growth over T

1

(check) The maximum plant height that was recorded inT4treatment might be due to split application of fertilizers

through fertigation that enhanced fertilizer-use efficiencyand saving of 33 fertilizers and the minimum that was inT5treatment might be due to the insufficient application of

fertilizers through fertigation (50 RDF) Shirgure et al [16]reported less plant height and canopy volume with lowerfertilizer dose in citrus The higher uptake and accumulationof nutrients in the leaf tissue of vine fertigated with recom-mended dose and 34 of RDF might have increased the rateof various physiological and metabolic processes in the plantsystem thus resulted in better growth of vines These resultsare in accordance with the findings of Shirgure et al [17] inacid lime Chauhan and Chandel [4] in kiwifruit and Ahmadet al [5] in sweet cherry The better growth of almond underfertigation might be due to continuous supply of nutrient

during growth and development of almond as the fertilizerswere applied in split doses Increase in growth and yield ofapple tree by fertigation was reported by Treder [18] andReynolds et al [19] in grapes

The main trunk cross-sectional and area were primarysecondary and tertiary branches cross-sectional area influ-enced by nitrogen and potassium fertigation in almond(Table 2) Maximum cross-sectional area (7267 cm2 and9028 cm2) primary branches (1675 cm2 and 2426 cm2)secondary branches (383 cm2 and 749 cm2) and tertiarybranches (065 cm2 and 128 cm2) were recorded in T

2treat-

ment and at par with T4treatment and significantly superior

to other treatments The maximum TCSA of main trunkand primary secondary and tertiary branches showed betterresults because of better availability of the macronutrientas well as their effective utilization by the plants Rao andSubramanyam [7] also observed that vegetative growth ofpomegranate was positively related to the amount of nitrogenapplied through drip and Ahmad et al [5] in sweet cherryunder karewa conditions of Kashmir valley

32 Nut Characters Nut number weight and yield wereinfluenced by nitrogen and potassium fertigation (Table 3)Application of recommended dose of fertilizers throughfertigation increases nut number in almond during 2011 and2012 The highest nut number (990 and 3083 numbertree)was recorded in T

2treatment closely flowed by T

4treatment

and significantly superior to recommended dose of fertilizersas basal application Maximum nut weight and nut yield wererecorded in T

4treatment which were enhanced by 1666


Table 3 Effect of NampK fertigation on nut number and yield of almond

Treatments Nut numbertree Nut wt (gnut) Yield (kgtree) Yield (tha)2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

T1

727 2120 234 191 170 407 189 452T2

990 3083 240 184 238 570 264 633T3

729 2566 250 173 182 444 202 493T4

882 3082 273 194 241 598 267 664T5

675 1741 258 175 174 306 193 339T6

735 2017 260 174 191 352 212 391LSD (119875 le 005) 152 450 012 010 032 112 035 097

and 718 in nut weight 4176 and 5613 in nut yield pertree and 4126 and 4690 in yield per hectare over T

1

(RDF through soil application) during 2011 and 2012 Here25 fertilizers could be saved with fertigation practices Theminimumnut yield (174 and 306 kgtree) was recorded in T

5

treatment The higher nut number with T2treatment might

be due to the fact that application of RDF through fertigationimproves the nut retention in almondThe higher nut weightand yield in T

4treatment might be due to the fact that split

application of 34 nitrogen and potassium as per requirementenhances the fertilizer-use efficiency The higher fruit yieldobtained under fertigation than soil fertilization may beexplained in light of the hypothesis formulated by Bussi et al[20] who suggest that fertigation results in higher yield dueto direct effect of nutrient fertilizing timing and reduction innutrient leaching that resulted in better fruit size and weightin peaches under fertigation compared with soil applicationFerrara et al [21] reported increased yield levelvine by 256with fertigation than the soil application The smaller sizeof fruits in vines fertigated with 13 of recommended doseof NPK in the present study may be accounted for loweryield in this treatment Dasberg and Erner [22] also observedgradual decline inmandarin fruit yield with fertigation at lownitrogen rate Shirgure et al [16] and Mahalakshmi et al [23]observed an increase in fruit size and the weight increasedwith fertigation than soil application Ahmad et al [5] alsoreported similar observations in sweet cherry while workingunder Kashmir conditions

Nut dry weight at different stages of growth was influ-enced by nitrogen and potassium fertigation in almond(Figure 1) The nut dry weight increases with increasing thenut weight continue till maturity of nut from May to Augustunder different fertigation treatment Maximum nut drymatter content was recorded in T

4treatment in May and

continued to be higher in subsequent nut growth and kernelfilling stage It was 521 635 1171 and 608 higher overcontrol treatmentThis might be due to continuous supply ofoptimum nutrients as per phenological stages of nut growthand kernel filling in almond

33 Leaf Nutrient Content Leaf nutrient content as influ-enced by nitrogen and potassium fertigation in almond(Figures 2 3 and 4) It is evident from the figure that almondtree fertigated with full and 34 of recommended doseof fertilizers had significantly higher leaf nutrient contents

05

101520253035

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6D

ry m

atte

r con

tent

()

Treatments

MayJune

JulyAugust

Figure 1 Nut dry matter accumulation under NampK fertigation inalmond

2205

21215

22225

23235

24

Leaf

nitr

ogen

()

20112012

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6Treatments

Figure 2 Leaf nitrogen content as influenced by NampK fertigation inalmond

during both yearsThe highest leaf nitrogen (234 and 238)phosphorus (014 and 017) and potassium (137 and 141)were estimated with T

4treatment closely followed by T

2

treatment during 2011 and 2012 The increase availability ofthese elements under fertigation might have accounted forhigher uptake of these nutrients Similar increase in leafnutrient content with application of higher dose of fertilizershas been reported byMurthy et al [24] andNeilsen et al [25]

This study suggests that 34 of recommended dose offertilizer through fertigation (split application of N K inthe ratio of 23N 13K at nut set to nut development and13N 23K at kernel filling to maturation stage) increases nut


0002004006008

01012014016018

Leaf

pho

spho

rus (

)

20112012


Figure 3 Leaf phosphorus as influenced by NampK fertigation inalmond

10511

11512

12513

13514

145

Leaf

pot

assiu

m (

)

20112012


Figure 4 Leaf potassium as influenced by NampK fertigation inalmond

yield in almond by improving fertilizer-use efficiency andsaving of 25 fertilizers as compared to 100 recommendeddose of fertilizers under north western Himalayan region ofIndia

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interestsregarding the publication of this paper

References

[1] R Aslanta M Guleryuz and M Tarun ldquoSome chemicalcontents of selected almond (Prunus amygdalus Batsch) typesrdquoin 11 GREMPA Seminar on Pistachios and Almonds B E AkEd vol 56 of Cahiers Options Mediterraneennes pp 347ndash3502001

[2] I A Khan M S Wani M A Mir N Ahmed K Mushtaq andG I Hassan ldquoResponse of almond (Prunus dulcis) to differentdrip irrigation levels vis-a-vis various phonological stages onflowering and yield of almond cv Shalimarrdquo Indian Journal ofAgricultural Sciences vol 82 pp 624ndash628 2012

[3] B M C Reddy K Srinivas P Padma and H B RaghupathildquoResponse of Robusta banana to N and K fertigationrdquo IndianJournal of Horticulture vol 59 pp 342ndash348 2002

[4] N Chauhan and J S Chandel ldquoEffect of fertigation on growthyield fruit quality and fertilizer-use efficiency of kiwifruit(Actinidia deliciosa)rdquo Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences vol78 no 5 pp 389ndash395 2008

[5] M F Ahmad A Samanta and A Jabeen ldquoResponse of sweetcherry (Prunus avium) to fertigation of nitrogen phosphorusand potassium under Kerawa land of Kashmir valleyrdquo IndianJournal of Agricultural Sciences vol 80 no 6 pp 512ndash516 2010

[6] J N Raina B C Thakur S Suman and R S Spehia ldquoEffect offetrigation through drip irrigation system on nitrogen dynam-ics growth yield and quality of apricotrdquo Acta Horticulture vol696 pp 227ndash229 2005

[7] K D Rao and K Subramanyam ldquoEffect of nitrogen fertigationon growth and yield of pomegranate var Murdula under lowrain fall zonerdquo Agriculture Science Digest vol 29 no 2 pp 1ndash32009

[8] D Kumar and V Pandey ldquoEffect of NPK fertigation on growthyield and quality of banana ldquoRasthalirdquo (AAB-Pathkapoora)in coastal agro-climatic conditions of eastern Indiardquo IndianJournal of Agricultural Sciences vol 78 no 9 pp 798ndash800 2008

[9] B P Singh D C Dimri and S C Singh ldquoEfficacy of NPKmanagement through fertigation on growth characteristics ofapple (Malus domestica Bork) plantrdquo Pantnagar Journal ofResearch vol 5 pp 50ndash53 2007

[10] H Magen ldquoFertigationmdashan overview of some practicalaspectsrdquo Fertilizer News vol 42 pp 97ndash100 1995

[11] D E Rolston R J Miller and H Schulbauch ldquoManagementprinciples-fertilizationrdquo in Trickle Irrigation for Crop Produc-tion Design Operation and Management F S Nakayama andD A Bucks Eds p 317 Elsevier Science Amsterdam TheNetherlands 1986

[12] HWright D Nichols and C Embree ldquoEvaluating the account-ability of trunk size and canopy volumemodels for determiningapple tree production potential across diverse managementregimesrdquo Acta Horticulturae vol 707 pp 237ndash243 2006

[13] H D Chapman ldquoSuggested foliar sampling and handlingtechniques for better determining the nutrient status of fieldand horticultural and plantation cropsrdquo Indian Journal ofHorticulture vol 21 pp 77ndash119 1964

[14] M L Jackon Soil Chemical Analysis Prentice Hall New DelhiIndia 1973

[15] R G T Steel and J H Torrie Principles and Procedures ofStatistics McGraw-Hill Singapore 1986

[16] P S Shirgure A K Srivastava and S Singh ldquoGrowth yieldand quality of Nagpur mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco)in relation to irrigation and fertigationrdquo Indian Journal ofAgricultural Sciences vol 71 no 8 pp 547ndash550 2001

[17] P S Shirgure L Ram R A Marathe and R P Yadav ldquoEffectof nitrogen fertigation on vegetative growth and leaf nutrientcontent of acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle) in CentralIndiardquo Indian Journal of Soil Conservation vol 27 pp 45ndash491999

[18] W Treder ldquoInfluence of fertigation with nitrogen and a com-plete fertilizer on growth and yielding of ldquoGalardquo apple treesrdquoJournal of Fruit and Ornamental Plant Research vol 5 pp 143ndash154 2007

[19] A G Reynolds W D Lowrey and C de Savigny ldquoInfluenceof irrigation and fertigation on fruit composition vine perfor-mance andwater relations ofConcord andNiagara grapevinesrdquoThe American Journal of Enology and Viticulture vol 56 no 2pp 110ndash128 2005


[20] C Bussi J G Huguet and H Defrance ldquoFertilization schedul-ing in peach orchard under trickle irrigationrdquo Journal ofHorticulture Science vol 69 pp 305ndash315 1991

[21] E Ferrara M Sorrenti and A Torricone ldquoFertigation of tablegrapes and assessment of quantity and qualityrdquo InformatoreAgrario vol 56 no 13 pp 49ndash51 2000

[22] S Dasberg and Y Erner ldquoThe effects of irrigation managementand nitrogen application on yield and quality of mincolamandarinsrdquo Acta Horticulturae vol 449 pp 125ndash131 1997

[23] MMahalakshmiNKumar P Jeyakumar andK Soorrianatha-sundaram ldquoFertigation studies in banana under normal systemof plantingrdquo South Indian Horticulture vol 49 pp 80ndash85 2001

[24] P V Murthy M M Khan V Nachegowda and W P Umama-hes ldquoEffect of fertigation on leaf area and leaf petiole nutrientcontents in Bangalore Blue grapesrdquoCurrent Research Universityof Agricultural Sciences Bangalore vol 30 pp 14ndash16 2001

[25] G H Neilsen D Neilsen L C Herbert and E J HogueldquoResponse of apple to fertigation of N and K under conditionssusceptible to the development of K deficiencyrdquo Journal of theAmerican Society for Horticultural Science vol 129 no 1 pp 26ndash31 2004

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

Nutrition and Metabolism

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Food ScienceInternational Journal of

Agronomy


International Journal of



Microbiology

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom

Applied ampEnvironmentalSoil Science

Volume 2014

AgricultureAdvances in


PsycheHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

BiodiversityInternational Journal of


ScientificaHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

GenomicsInternational Journal of


Plant GenomicsInternational Journal of


Biotechnology Research International


Forestry ResearchInternational Journal of


Journal of BotanyHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

EcologyInternational Journal of


Veterinary Medicine International


Cell BiologyInternational Journal of


Evolutionary BiologyInternational Journal of



Under drip irrigation only a portion of soil volumearound each plant is wetted and thus traditional methodsof fertilizers application are less effective The limited rootzone and reduced amount of mineralization in restrictedwetted zone are the main reason for the reduced nutrientavailability to the plants [10] One of the major advantagesof fertigation is that it permits timely application of nutrientsdirectly to root zone reduces leaching losses and increasesthe fertilizers use efficiency [11] The nutrient requirmentof almond crop through fertigation as per the crop growthstage for better crop production The systematic informationis not available in almond especially water and nutrientmanagement Therefore the present investigation was aimedto increase production and potential of almond by nitrogenand potassium fertigation in northwestern Himalayan regionof India

2 Materials and Methods

The experiment was conducted at the research farm ofthe Central Institute of Temperate Horticulture (ICAR)Srinagar Jammu and Kashmir India during 2011 and 2012The research farm at Srinagar is situated in a latitude of34∘ 051015840N and longitude of 74∘ 501015840 E and at an altitude of1640m above MSL The soils of this experimental field aresilty loam (3960 sand 240 silt and 3640 clay) withmedium-to-low soil fertility status The experimental farmfalls under temperate region having cold conditions fromNovember to February and two-year mean maximum andminimum temperature of Srinagar climate indicated that themaximum is 30∘C in August and the minimum is minus21∘Cin December The average annual precipitation was 620mmdistributed erratically throughout the year during the courseof investigation

The grafted almond plants were planted in prefilled pits of90 cmtimes 90 cmtimes 90 cm size duringNovember 2002 at a spac-ing of 3m times 3m in an experimental field The recommendeddose of fertilizers (RDF) was 330 gN 45 gP 455 gKtreeyearat the age of the 8th year The full quantity of phosphorusin plant basin has been applied 15 days before floweringin almond The nitrogen and potassium doses were appliedthrough fertigation as per treatment There were six treat-ments namely T

1mdash100 recommended Dose of Fertilizers

(Soil application) T2mdash100 RDF through fertigation T

3mdash

75 RDF through fertigation T4mdash75 RDF through ferti-

gation (split application of N K in the ratio of 23N 13K atnut set to nut development and 13N 23K at kernel fillingto maturation stage) T

5mdash50 RDF through fertigation and

T6mdash50 RDF through fertigation (split application of N K

in the ratio of 23N 13K at nut set to nut developmentand 13N 23K at kernel filling to maturation stage) Theexperiment was conducted under randomized block designwith four replications and two plants were taken in eachreplication

Water soluble fertilizers like urea as a source of nitrogenand muriate of potash as potassium were injected throughdrip irrigation system at weekly intervals as per crop nutrient

requirement in almond The concentration of nutrient solu-tion passing through irrigation water was around 10ndash15A separate laterals line (16mm) was laid for each treatmentand four emitters of 4 lph (Litre per hour) capacity withpressure compensated connected with 12mm lateral wereplaced equidistance in east-west north-south direction at50 distance of canopy radius The diameter of lateral pipewas 16mm connected with submain pipe The irrigation wasapplied throughout the growing season (till initiation of leaffall) based on pan evaporation (80) with the followingformula

WR = [DE times CF times AA times PC]IE

(1)

whereWR is water requirement of crop under drip irrigation(litreplantday) DE is daily pan evaporation from class-Apan (mm) CF is crop factor AA is area allotted to each plant(m2) PC is percentage of canopy (leaf coverage in relation toarea allowed to plant) and IE is irrigation efficiency (09)Theother cultural practices including weed pest and diseasesmanagement were followed uniformly as per recommendedpackage of practices

The observations on canopy volume (CV) were estimatedfor each individual tree using a geometrical model referred toas the ldquocontour methodrdquo CV = [((14)120587119886119887ℎ)(119898(119909) +119898(119910) +1)] The dimensions 119886 and 119887 were measured of the width ofthe tree at the base of the canopy perpendicular and parallelto the tree row orientation respectively The height of thecanopy (ℎ) was measured from the lowest branch to the apexThe functions119898(119909) and 119898(119910) were derived to accommodatethe contour of the tree [12] CV measurements were madeafter harvest in October 2011 and 2012 Tree trunk girth wasrecorded before the execution and at the end of experimentduring both years of study A ring was made with red paintat a height of 15 cm above the ground level in each selectedtree to record the trunk girth from the same point each yearThe trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) of tree was calculatedby using formula TCSA = Girth24120587 Fruit was harvested atmaturity hulled and dried and nut weight in gram and yieldper tree was recorded in kilogram

Leaf samples were collected for leaf nutrient analysis asper procedure outlined by Chapman [13] For macro nutrientexcept 119873 estimation well-ground leaf tissue was digestedin di-acid mixture containing HNO

3and HCIO

4in 9 4

ratio for 119875 119870 by using ammonium molybdate ammoniummetavanadate using double beamUV-Vis spectrophotometer(ECIL India) and the potassium was determined by usingflame photometer [14] For leaf 119873 estimation a knownweight of samples was digested with H

2SO4using 10 1

K2SO4and CuSO

4as digestion mixture and digested at

390∘C until clear digestion was obtained Digested sampleswere subjected to distillation with 40 NaOH and liberatedammoniawas collectedH

3BO3usingmixed indicator Finally

liberated ammonia was titrated against 01 N H2SO4and 119873

content in the leaves was expressed in percentage The datawere analyzed statistically as per Steel and Torrie [15] forinterpretation of results and drawing conclusions




T1

285 315 622 713 4225 4571T2

298 323 715 811 4946 5204T3

275 306 535 633 4214 4546T4

321 356 685 777 4712 5046T5

270 301 525 613 4021 4304T6

289 320 529 626 4175 4312LSD (119875 le 005) 039 028 072 063 421 446



T1

5295 7718 1596 2331 363 687 042 109T2

7267 9028 1675 2426 383 749 065 128T3

6091 8202 1485 2131 323 655 042 111T4

6485 8504 1661 2409 376 746 047 123T5

4976 7393 1086 1653 206 514 040 086T6

5398 7653 1145 1697 243 593 044 089LSD (119875 le 005) 1212 823 224 313 075 105 012 021



4treatment



T3and T



1






2treat-





4treatment






T1

727 2120 234 191 170 407 189 452T2

990 3083 240 184 238 570 264 633T3

729 2566 250 173 182 444 202 493T4

882 3082 273 194 241 598 267 664T5

675 1741 258 175 174 306 193 339T6

735 2017 260 174 191 352 212 391LSD (119875 le 005) 152 450 012 010 032 112 035 097


1


5









05

101520253035

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6D

ry m

atte

r con

tent

()

Treatments

MayJune

JulyAugust


2205

21215

22225

23235

24

Leaf

nitr

ogen

()

20112012





2




0002004006008

01012014016018

Leaf

pho

spho

rus (

)

20112012



10511

11512

12513

13514

145

Leaf

pot

assiu

m (

)

20112012






References





























Journal of




Agronomy





Microbiology




Volume 2014



























T1

285 315 622 713 4225 4571T2

298 323 715 811 4946 5204T3

275 306 535 633 4214 4546T4

321 356 685 777 4712 5046T5

270 301 525 613 4021 4304T6

289 320 529 626 4175 4312LSD (119875 le 005) 039 028 072 063 421 446



T1

5295 7718 1596 2331 363 687 042 109T2

7267 9028 1675 2426 383 749 065 128T3

6091 8202 1485 2131 323 655 042 111T4

6485 8504 1661 2409 376 746 047 123T5

4976 7393 1086 1653 206 514 040 086T6

5398 7653 1145 1697 243 593 044 089LSD (119875 le 005) 1212 823 224 313 075 105 012 021



4treatment



T3and T



1






2treat-





4treatment






T1

727 2120 234 191 170 407 189 452T2

990 3083 240 184 238 570 264 633T3

729 2566 250 173 182 444 202 493T4

882 3082 273 194 241 598 267 664T5

675 1741 258 175 174 306 193 339T6

735 2017 260 174 191 352 212 391LSD (119875 le 005) 152 450 012 010 032 112 035 097


1


5









05

101520253035

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6D

ry m

atte

r con

tent

()

Treatments

MayJune

JulyAugust


2205

21215

22225

23235

24

Leaf

nitr

ogen

()

20112012





2




0002004006008

01012014016018

Leaf

pho

spho

rus (

)

20112012



10511

11512

12513

13514

145

Leaf

pot

assiu

m (

)

20112012






References





























Journal of




Agronomy





Microbiology




Volume 2014



























T1

727 2120 234 191 170 407 189 452T2

990 3083 240 184 238 570 264 633T3

729 2566 250 173 182 444 202 493T4

882 3082 273 194 241 598 267 664T5

675 1741 258 175 174 306 193 339T6

735 2017 260 174 191 352 212 391LSD (119875 le 005) 152 450 012 010 032 112 035 097


1


5









05

101520253035

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6D

ry m

atte

r con

tent

()

Treatments

MayJune

JulyAugust


2205

21215

22225

23235

24

Leaf

nitr

ogen

()

20112012





2




0002004006008

01012014016018

Leaf

pho

spho

rus (

)

20112012



10511

11512

12513

13514

145

Leaf

pot

assiu

m (

)

20112012






References





























Journal of




Agronomy





Microbiology




Volume 2014

























0002004006008

01012014016018

Leaf

pho

spho

rus (

)

20112012



10511

11512

12513

13514

145

Leaf

pot

assiu

m (

)

20112012






References





























Journal of




Agronomy





Microbiology




Volume 2014

































Journal of




Agronomy





Microbiology




Volume 2014
























research article response of nitrogen and...

Documents