POST DATA PESENTATIONON

THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT RATES OF SINGLE SUPERPHOSPHATE & FREQUENCY

OF MEGAGREEN ON NODULATION, NITROGEN FIXATIONAND YIELD OF COWPEA.

BY

KUSHIMO M.OMATRIC NO: 03/1390

DEPARTMENT OF SOIL SCIENCE AND LAND MANAGEMENTIN THE

COLLEGE OF PLANT SCIENCE AND CROP PRODUCTION

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE ABEOKUTA. MARCH 2010

INTRODUCTION Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L Walp) belong to the family leguminosae which

comprises approximately 850 genera and 18,000 species. It is the most important

grain legume crop throughout the tropical belt which covers Asia, far east , Africa,

Central and South America (Philip et. al. 2006).

Nutrient content of cowpea include; Protein 24.8 %, Fat 1.95 %, Fiber 6.3 %,

Carbohydrate 63.6 %.

Nutritionally, the protein in cowpea is rich in the amino acids, lysine, and

trytophan, compared to cereal grains. Which dictate it value as a nutritional

supplement to cereals and an extender of animal proteins.

Soil fertility management is a major factor to consider in improving the

sustainability of tropical soil. Leguminous crops has help to a greater extent to

achieve this through Nitrogen fixation.

Megagreen is a bio-stimulant, which consist majorly of calcite (about 82.3%

CaCO3 ). The particles act quickly on the vegetal metabolism via foliar surface.

(Technical study report, Tribo technology.)

Many tropical legumes can fix Nitrogen from the soil provided they can extract

calcium from the soil (Albercht 1942). Also, Delwiche (1961) noted that nodules

can only fix nitrogen actively if the plant is adequately supplied with all the

mineral elements essential for active growth.

JUSTIFICATION

• As a result of the importance of Cowpea, both economically

and nutritionally, this experiment is majorly aimed at

assessing the growth implication of the application of the bio-

stimulant (Megagreen) and phosphorus fertilizer (Single

supper phosphate) on the yield of Cowpea.

BROAD OBJECTIVE

• To evaluate whether cowpea plant will respond positively

to the foliar application of Mega green and Single super

phosphate.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

I. To determine the effect of Megagreen application on

Nitrogen fixation in Cowpea.

II. To measure the effect of Megagreen application on

growth and yield of Cowpea.

MATERIALS AND METHODExperimental site: The experiment was carried out at the green house of the College of plant science

and crop production, University of Agriculture Abeokuta.Soil Collection and preparation: Surface soils of 1-10cm depth, was collected at the upland part of FADAMA in the

research field of University of Agriculture Abeokuta. The soil was air dried for 72 hours and sieved with 4 mm sieve. 10kg of soil was weighed into each pot

Experimental Design: A complete randomized design (CRD) with split-plot design was used for the

experiment with four replicates.Treatments: Application of Megagreen at rates of 1.5kg & 3 kg/ha per 500 litters of water used. These were applied at two frequencies: Application at 2 and 3 weeks Application at 2, 3 and 4 weeks Application of single supper phosphate at zero (0 kg/ha P2O5) and recommended rate

(40kg/ha P2O5). Applied at planting.

PLANTING

Source of planting material:

Cowpea of the variety ‘Oloyin’ obtained from the Department of Plant Physiology and

Crop Production at the University of Agriculture Abeokuta.

Planting in pots: Each pot was labeled accordingly and seeds were sown.

Plants were thinned to six per pot after germination (2 weeks after planting).

This experiment was carried out from 14th July to 16th October 2009.

DATA COLLECTION

The following data were collected:

- Plant growth parameters which include, plant height, number of leaves, number of

seeds number of pod per pot.

-Reproductive parameters were also measured: days to flowering, and number of

pods per pot.

-And at harvest number of pods, number of seeds and weight per plant were

measured.

-Nodules were counted at 4 weeks and 7 weeks after planting.

SAMPLINGSap sampling: This was carried out at 7 weeks after planting. Plant sap sampling materials include: Vacutainer bottles, Syringe and needles, Rubber tubing, Ethanol (96%). The shoots were cut at 3 cm from the soil level and rubber tubes clamp around the shoot to gather the plant sap. These were collected using the syringe and stored in 50% ethanol in the vacutanier bottles.Plant sampling: The shoot samples were also collected at 7 weeks after planting, weighed and dried for the Tissue Extraction (or Hot water extraction). HOT WATER EXTRACTION (N-SOLUTE SAMPLING)Weighed and dried plant sample (0.5g) was placed in 100 ml Erlenmeyer flask and 25 ml distilled water added.The 100 ml Erlenmeyer flask was placed on a Hot plate. The content is allowed to boil for 1-3 minutes. The sample was filtered in to a 250 ml Eureka-end conical flask.The filtrate was poured into a 50 ml capacity glass volumetric flask. The left over washed with little distilled water into it.When the contents of the flask get cooled, it was filled to 50 ml with distilled water.The filtered extractant was transferred in to a plastic vial and kept in a freezer till analysis was carried out.

LABORATORY ANALYSIS

• Particle size analysis was determined by the Hydrometer methodusing Sodium

Hexametaphosphate as dispersing agent.

• The soil organic carbon was determined according to Walkley- Black procedure

(Walkley and Black, 1934).

• Percentage total Nitrogen was determined, using the macro Kjeldahl digestion

method, for all the treatments after the termination of the experiment.

• The Available Phosphorus (Mg/kg) was determined, using Brayl 1 method, for all

the various treatments after the termination of the experiment.

• The Exchangeable Ca, Mg, Na, K were extracted using Ammonium Acetate and read

with flame Photometer and Atomic absorption Spectrophotometer.

% Sand 7.2

% Silt 5.4

% Clay 1.8

Textural Class

PH ( H2O) 7.00

Organic Carbon% 3.39

Organic Matter % 5.90

Exchangeable Cation( Cmol Kg-1)

Ca (Cmol Kg-1) 0.83

Mg (Cmol Kg-1) 1.58

Na (Cmol Kg-1) 3.45

K ( Cmol Kg-1) 1.58

CEC (Cmol Kg-1) 7.44

Available Phosphorus(Mg/Kg) 0.9755

%Total Nitrogen 0.09807

TABLE 1

CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SOIL USED FOR

THE TRIALS.

SV DF PHT 2 WAP NO BR 2WAPNO OF LF AT 2 WAP

REP 10.146 0.38* 2.646*

SSP 22.65 0.289* 5.329*

ERROR (a) 3.68 0.03 0.068

RATE 5.08 0.107 1.1429

SSP*RATE 16.63 0.04 0.428

ERROR (b) 9.93 0.12 1.352

ANOVA OF GROWTH PARAMETERS AT 2 WAP

* Significant at F (Pr<0.05)

SV DF PL H(CM) AT 6 WAP

NO OF BRH AT 6 WAP

DAT FWT OF NOD

NO OF NOD AT 4WAP

NO OF NOD AT 7WAP

REP 3 1505.34 5.094 178.625 0.00200 22.292 186.88

SSP 1 789.430 10.816 133.225 0.00459 133.225 302.50

ERR(a) 3 181.460 3.3233 106.783 0.00143 91.625 106.78

RATE 4 1215.900* 3.529 83.634 0.000602 102.4 83.634

SSP*RATE 4 300.720 3.639 190.421 0.000913 54.85 190.421

ERR(b) 24 423.190 3.551 12.9833 0.00168 88.86 70.349

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

SV DF POD NO NO OF LEAF AT 7WAP

NO OF SEED

WT OF SEED

BIOMASS YIELD

REP 3 33.937 222.467 1783.67 55.927 850.623

SSP 1 2.0703 48.4 370.881 18.617 78.93

ERROR(a) 3 6.291 87.227 649.26 25.49 281.53

RATE 4 9.966 312.975 817.255 26.88 118.619

SSP*RATE 4 3.9608 175.275 246.709 8.027 150.264

ERROR(b) 24 7.0603 160.075 378.235 12.06 285.209

ANOVA TABLE ON YIELD PARAMETERS

SVAVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS % NITROGEN

REP 0.04196 0.00295

SSP 0.2401 0.001501

ERROR(a) 0.07219 0.000193

RATE 0.31839 0.000794

SSP*RATE 0.51912* 0.000197

ERROR(b) 0.16723 0.000337

ANOVA TABLE OF SOIL ANALYSIS

* Significant at F (Pr<0.05)

TREATMENTSPHT 6WAP

NO LF 6WAP

NO BR 6WAP

FW OF NOD

DAYS TO FLOWER

NO OF NOD AT 4WAP

NO OF NOD AT 7WAP

S0 M0 R0 61.2 22.05 0.1 0.076 42.75 4 10.5

S0 M1 R1 78.3 23.18 7.83 0.077 45.5 3.75 15.5

S0 M1 R2 61.55 20.3 6.9 0.088 50.75 1.25 13.75

S0 M3 R1 64.7 22.2 7.7 0.068 51.5 4.5 28.5

S0 M3 R2 43 20.48 6.68 0.086 51.75 2.5 11.25

S1 M3 R2 68.83 23.4 7.9 0.077 50.75 1.25 7.25

S1 M3 R1 89.55 28.4 10.23 0.092 49 2.5 9.13

S1 M1 R2 81.28 27.28 9.05 0.113 60.5 3.5 12

S1 M1 R1 53.38 18.55 7.15 0.085 49.5 1.25 7.25

S1 M0 R0 60.15 22.98 8.08 0.09 57.5 4.5 16.38LSD NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

EFFECT OF TREATMENT ON GROWTH PARAMETERS

TRBATMENT PHT 2 WAP NO BR 2 WAPNO OF LEAF 2 WAP

S0 28.8 1.62b 6.85b

S1 30.31 1.82a 7.6a

LSD NS 0.06 0.26

28

28.5

29

29.5

30

30.5

S0 S1

TREATMENT (SSP)

PLANT HEIGHT AT 2WAP

PHT 2 WAP

EFFECT OF THE TREATMENT AT 2 WAP

28

28.5

29

29.5

30

30.5

S0 S1

TREATMENT (SSP)

NUMBER OF BRANCHES AT 2 WAP

PHT 2 WAP

012345678

TRATMENT S0 S1

SSP

NO OF LEAF AT 2 WAP

PLANT HEIGHT AT 6 WAP

0

20

40

60

80

100

S0 M0R0

S0 M1R1

S0 M1R2

S0 M3R1

S0 M3R2

S1 M3R2

S1 M3R1

S1 M1R2

S1 M1R1

S1 M0R0

TREATMENT

PHT 6WAP

TREATMENTS POD NO

NO LF 7WAP

NO OF SEED

WT OF SEED

BIOMASS YIELD

DRY MATTER

S0 M0 R0 2.875 59.75 15.38 2.27 47.96 5.01S0 M1 R1 5.125 49.5 34.75 5.99 32.38 4.32S0 M1 R2 2.85 45.25 19.58 3.52 34.69 3.77S0 M3 R1 5 50 35.53 6.08 40.94 5.32S0 M3 R2 2.125 51 14.13 2.64 47.51 5.18S1 M3 R2 2.95 61 25.2 4.34 48.77 5.36S1 M3 R1 5.725 47.5 51.38 9.67 44.67 4.83S1 M1 R2 5.075 57 31 5.76 44.7 4.87S1 M1 R1 3.375 39.25 22.33 4.3 41.25 4.29S1 M0 R0 3.125 61.75 20 3.76 38.13 5.15

LSD NS NS NS NS NS NS

EFFECTS OF TREATMENTS ON YIELD PARAMETERS

01234567

S0 M0 R0

S0 M1 R1

S0 M1 R2

S0 M3 R1

S0 M3 R2

S1 M3 R2

S1 M3 R1

S1 M1 R2

S1 M1 R1

S1 M0 R0

TREA

TMEN

ENT

NUMBER OF PODS

POD NO

0102030405060

S0 M0 R0

S0 M1 R1

S0 M1 R2

S0 M3 R1

S0 M3 R2

S1 M3 R2

S1 M3 R1

S1 M1 R2

S1 M1 R1

S1 M0 R0

TREATMENT

NUMBER OF SEEDS

NO OF SEED

TREATMENTS AVAILABLE P % NITROGENS0 M0 R0 1.10a 0.018S0 M1 R1 0.50de 0.009S0 M1 R2 1.23abc 0.007S0 M3 R1 1.09abc 0.019S0 M3 R2 1.20abc 0.01S1 M3 R2 0.78cd 0.031S1 M3 R1 1.44ab 0.016S1 M1 R2 1.60a 0.039S1 M1 R1 0.91bcd 0.0214S1 M0 R0 1.16e 0.064LSD 0.58 NS

EFFECTS OF TRATMENTS ON SOIL

AVAILABLE PHOPHORUS

012345678

S0M0R0

S0M1R1

S0M1R2

S0M3R1

S0M3R2

S1M3R2

S1M3R1

S1M1R2

S1M1R1

S1M0R0

TREA

TMEN

T

AVAILABLE P

REFRENCE

Albrecht, W.A., J. Am. Soc. Agron.,1933, 25; Albrecht, W.A. and Harston, C.B., Soil sci. Soc. Am.

Proc.,1942, 7, 247.

Delwiche C.C et.al.,pl. physiol.,1961.36,73; Hallsworth, E.G et. al., Nature, Lond.,1960, 187,79.

Nutman, P.S. In soil Microbiology (ed. N. Walker),Butterworths.1975.

Philip O. Adetiloye; Kehinde A. (2006) Principles and practices of crop production. pg 214.

Rachie, K.O. and Rawal, K. (1975) VITA , Cowpea Tropical grain legume. Bulletin 1:16-17.

Singh, B.B and Singh. S.R.(1983).Objectives and achievement of IITA research programme on

cowpea and soyabeans. In: Homes, J.C and Rahir, W.M, eds, more food from better

technology, Rome, Italy, FAO. 778-790.

Tribo technology, Technical study report. Field and laboratory research

THANK YOU FOR

LISTENING