Andisol. (Ziway). Kale. (Brassica carinata L.) Hot Pepper. (Capsicum annuum L.) Maize. (Zea mays L.) A fertilizer trial was set-up in a greenhouse at Hawassa.
Comparison of Cyanobacterial Bio-fertilizer with Urea on Three Crops and Two Soils of Ethiopia S.
E.
1 Wolde-meskel ,
University, Ethiopia; 2Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
2.0
50 40
NH3 Organic N
CYANOBACTERIA
80
0.30 5.0
70 0.30
70
0.25 4.0
60 0.25
60
0.20 3.0 0.15
30 20
2.0 0.10
10 0 Kale
1.0 0.05
40 0.15 30 0.10 20
2. To evaluate the impacts of the fertilizer treatments on soil properties, plant growth, and plant nutrient concentrations on kale, hot pepper, and maize
Ka Kale le Ho t Pe PHeo pp ptp er er MMa ai iz zee
Ho
Zn
soil
pH
alkaline
Alfisol
Andisol (Ziway)
The dry cyanobacteria application resulted in the greatest plant height and shoot dry weight for all three plant species tested. The plant height and shoot dry weight in the urea treatment was equivalent to the dry cyanobacteria treatment in kale and maize, but the liquid cyanobacteria resulted in shorter plants with less mass (but still greater than the control).
Gine II 64 kg N/ha 20 kg P/ha 45 d
Mareko Fana 100 kg N/ha 40 kg P/ha 58 d
Yellow Dodolla 100 kg N/ha 30 kg P/ha 50 d
liquid cyano
30 20 10
30 20 10 0
10
Kale
5
10
LIQUID CYANO
CONTROL
Kale/Maize:
UREA
LIQUID CYANO
LIQUID CYANO
CONTROL
UREA
CONTROL
Impact on Plant Nutrient Concentrations All fertilizer treatments increased plant N concentrations compared to the control. The dry cyanobacterial biofertilizer resulted in the highest plant N concentrations for all crops, although not significantly higher than urea treatments in kale and maize. Both cyanobacterial treatments increased plant P, Zn, and Fe in all crops.
Plant
N
Plant
P
Plant
Zn
Plant
Fe
How does Cyanobacterial Bio-fertilizer Compare to Urea?
+ Increased soil OC
6
+ Potential reduction of CO2 emissions in fertilizer production and transport
4
Hot Pepper
Maize
Disadvantages
2
M ai ze
r pe ep
pe
CONTROL
Leaf Area For all crops, the dry cyano treatment had the greatest leaf area. In the trials with kale and maize, there was no significant difference between dry cyano and urea treatments. In hot pepper, the dry cyano was significantly higher than all other treatments.
8
0 r
0
12
tp
15
40
UREA
+ Dried cyanobacterial bio- − pH reduction of soils fertilizer performed as well as could cause Al toxicity and P urea in plant growth and deficiency nutrient concentrations
Ka le
20
50
UREA
Advantages
Ho
Soil Properties: • pH • OC • TKN • Available P, Zn, Fe
25
14
M ai ze
(Brassica carinata L.)
30
60
tp
Plant Growth Parameters: • Plant Height • Leaf Number • Leaf Area • Plant Biomass
35
16
Ho
(Capsicum annuum L.)
Kale
Liquid Cyano
40
70
Ka le
3 crops Variety N rate P rate Harvest age
(Zea mays L.)
dry cyano
shoot dry weight (g/plant)
45
Available P (mg/kg)
50
Hot Pepper
urea
80
plant height (cm)
4 treatments
×
Maize
DRY CYANO
in soil
Impact on Plant Height and Shoot Dry Weight
control
×
40
DRY CYANO
Fe
LIQUID CYANO
Hot Pepper/Maize:
Hot Pepper:
In general, the urea decreased soil OC (except for maize) and increased soil N. For all crops, there was no change in available P, Zn, or Fe in soils fertilized with urea.
ep
2 soils
acidic
Dried Cyano
50
Available
in soil
A fertilizer trial was set-up in a greenhouse at Hawassa University in a randomized complete block design with 3 replications:
Urea
DRY CYANO
DRY CYANO
1. To compare the impact of cyanobacterial fertilizer cultured from Ethiopian soils with urea applied to two soil types at the same N rate
No Fertilizer Control
Kale:
0
Cyanobacterial bio-fertilizer also reduced soil pH, thus increasing availability of soil Zn and Fe.
Available
(Yirga Alem)
Maize
0.00 0 HHo ott PPe epp ppe err M Ma aizi zee
r pe ep
50 0.20
0.05 10
Hot Pepper
0.00 0.0
0.0
Sugars Nitrogen Fixation
N2
0.35 80
tP
Photosynthesis
6.0 0.35
Ka le
3.0
Ka le
O2
liquid cyano
Available P (mg/kg)
4.0
60
1.0
CO2
dry cyano
Available P (mg/kg) % N in soil
Available P (mg/kg)
% OC in soil
Energy
70
5.0
Why Cyanobacteria?
urea
80
6.0 Anabaena sp was cultured from local Ethiopian soil samples using Allen and Arnon medium (N-free)
Leaf Number For all crops, the dry cyano treatment had the greatest leaf number. In the trials with kale, the cyano treatment was significantly higher than all other treatments. For hot pepper and maize, there was no significant difference between dry cyano and urea treatments.
When compared to the control for all crops, both cyanobacterial treatments significantly increased the % OC, % N, and available P (Olsen) in soil when compared to the control. control
2 Davis
Impact on Leaf Number and Area
KKa all ee
We are growing cyanobacteria in high-rate ponds (raceways) for use as a Nitrogen (N) biofertilizer. For more information, see poster 1319.
H2O
and J.G.
Impact on Soil Properties
Research Approach
Cyanobacteria are unique in that they can photosynthesize like plants and use energy from the Sun to drive the N fixation process.
A.
1 Chala ,
M ai ze
M.
1 Yigrem ,
Pe Ho pp t er
G.
1 Yohannes ,
% N in soil % OC in soil
1Hawassa
1 Wolde ,
M ai ze
M.
1 Asmamaw ,
The root dry weights showed a similar pattern to shoot dry weight in kale and pepper, but in maize, the urea and cyanobacterial treatments were not different in root dry weight.
Dried cyanobacterial bio-fertilizer could have great potential impact on crop yields and nutrient levels, thus enhancing food security in Ethiopia.
