Nitrogen fertilizer recommendation for sugar beet according to the EUF soil testing system

2001 ◽  
pp. 746-747 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Horn ◽  
F. Fürstenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Soil Testing ◽  
Testing System ◽  
Fertilizer Recommendation

scholarly journals Determination of Nitrogen Fertilizer Recommendation Rates Estimated by Soil-Testing for Different Types of Paddy Soils

2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Young-Hun Moon ◽  
Young-Rip Kwon ◽  
Byung-Koo Ahn ◽  
Jin-Ho Lee ◽  
Dong-Chil Choi
Keyword(s):  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Paddy Soils ◽  
Soil Testing ◽  
Fertilizer Recommendation ◽  
Different Types

Influence of a BactoFil microbiological preparation on the intensity of infection by Rhizoctonia solani and the effects on sugar beet yield and quality

2012 ◽  
pp. 102-109
Author(s):  
Suzana Kristek ◽  
Andrija Kristek ◽  
Dragana Kocevski ◽  
Antonija K. Jankovi ◽  
Dražen Juriši
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Rhizoctonia Solani ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Soil Analysis ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Sugar Content ◽  
Pathogenic Fungi ◽  
Fertilizer Application ◽  
Beet Root ◽  
Set Up

The experiment was set up on two types of the soil: Mollic Gleysols (FAO, 1998) and Eutric Cambisols where the presence of pathogenic fungi – sugar beet root decay agent – Rhizoctonia solani has been detected since 2005. In a two year study (2008, 2009), the experiment was set up by completely randomized block design in 4 repetitions and 16 different variants. Two beet varieties, Belinda, sensitive to pathogenic fungi R. solani, and Laetitia, tolerant to pathogenic fungi R. solani), were grown. The microbiological preparation BactoFil was applied in different amounts in autumn and spring. In addition, the nitrogen fertilizer application, based on the results of soil analysis, was varied. The following parameters were tested: amount of infected and decayed plants, root yield, sugar content, sugar in molasses and sugar yield. The best results were obtained by applying the microbiological preparation BactoFil, and by 30% reduced nitrogen fertilizer application. Preparation dosage and time of application depended on soil properties.

scholarly journals Effects of Manure History and Nitrogen Fertilizer Rate on Sugar Beet Production in the Northwest US

cftm ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
David D. Tarkalson ◽  
David L. Bjorneberg ◽  
Rick D. Lentz
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Fertilizer Rate ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer Rate

Results from experiments measuring the residues of nitrogen fertilizer given for sugar beet, and of ploughed-in sugar beet tops, on the yield of following barley

1974 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. V. Widdowson
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Animal Feed ◽  
Maximum Yield ◽  
Not Given ◽  
Residual Value ◽  
Grain Yields

SummaryFive sugar beet experiments were made from 1964 to 1968 to measure yields of roots, of sugar and of tops from dressings of 0, 63, 126 or 188 kg N/ha. In 1964 and 1965 the sugar-beet tops were ploughed-in on all plots, but afterwards on only half of the total number of plots. Barley followed the sugar beet and was given 0, 41, 83 or 126 kg N/ha, in all combinations with the dressings of N to the sugar beet; grain was weighed and analysed for % N.The maximum yield of sugar (8·24 t/ha) was with 126 kg N/ha. The yield of barley was increased greatly by giving it 83 kg N/ha, but not with more. When the barley was not given N, the residues of 126 kg N/ha for sugar beet increased grain yields by 0·17 t/ha, where the tops were carted away, and by 0·77 t/ha, where the tops were ploughed-in, but when the barley was given 83 kg N/ha, the residues increased yield negligibly (by 0·07 t/ha). Together the two sources of residue were equivalent to giving about 30 kg N/ha to the barley. Percentage N to the grain was consistently increased by both kinds of residue, but the grain never recovered more than 10 kg N/ha from them. So, sugar-beet tops had little residual value for barley, but offer a largely unused source of animal feed, rich in N.

Effects of nitrogen fertilizer, plant population and irrigation on sugar beet: II. Nutrient concentration and uptake

1971 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. P. Draycott ◽  
M. J. Durrant
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Nutrient Concentration ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Nitrogen Concentration ◽  
Plant Size ◽  
Plant Population ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Phosphorus Concentration ◽  
Wide Range

SUMMARYThe concentration of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, calcium and magnesium was measured in the dry matter of sugar beet from four field experiments (1966–9). All combinations of four amounts of nitrogen fertilizer (0–1·8 cwt/acre), four plant populations (8800–54000 plants/acre) and irrigation were tested, which gave a wide range of plant size and yield. Nutrient concentration and uptake by the crop were also greatly affected by the treatments.Nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation increased uptake of nitrogen by the crop but increasing the plant population had little effect on uptake and decreased the concentration of nitrogen. Sugar yield was related to the total nitrogen concentration in tops and roots and to uptake. There were optimal values of nitrogen concentration for maximal sugar yield, but the optima were greatly affected by plant population. Leaf colour was a good guide to nitrogen concentration.Phosphorus concentration was affected little by the treatments but cation concentrations were greatly affected. In general, uptake of all the elements was increased by all treatments – the exception was sodium, which decreased as the plant population increased but this was balanced to somo extent by increased potassium uptake.

scholarly journals Investigating Key Factors Influencing Farming Decisions Based on Soil Testing and Fertilizer Recommendation Facilities (STFRF)—A Case Study on Rural Bangladesh

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 4331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faruque-As-Sunny ◽  
Zuhui Huang ◽  
Taonarufaro Karimanzira
Keyword(s):  
Crop Production ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Soil Condition ◽  
Soil Testing ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Soil Environment ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Fertilizer Recommendation ◽  
Small Scale Farmers

Proper nourishment is fundamental for satisfactory crop growth and production. However, for efficient crop production, it is important to understand the soil environment, to recognize the limitations of that environment, and to ameliorate them where possible without damaging the soil quality. Soil testing and fertilizer recommendation facilities (STFRF) can help farmers to achieve environmental and economic sustainability by assisting them in recognizing their soil condition, reducing agrochemicals usage, using an appropriate amount of fertilizer, minimizing input costs, and achieving higher yield. These facilities are not new in the context of Bangladesh, yet the adoption rate among farmers is low and its determinants have rarely been empirically tested based on microlevel data. Therefore, this study examined those factors underlying the adoption of soil testing and fertilizer recommendation facilities using field surveyed data of 176 individual farmers. Our evidence shows that young farmers with less farming experience are more likely to adopt these facilities. Additionally, being small-scale farmers, having higher education, having more farming income, and having more knowledge about these facilities and the fees of these facilities were found to have a significant effect on the adoption. On the other hand, gender, land ownership, and secondary income were found to be insignificant with regard to the adoption of soil testing and fertilizer recommendation facilities. Our results also revealed that most adopter farmers not only focused on profitability, but were additionally concerned with environmental well-being.

scholarly journals Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer and Plant Spacing on Vegetative Growth of Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris)

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-13
Author(s):  
Baha Eldin. M. Idris ◽  
Wael. A. Marajan ◽  
Abubaker Haroun Mohamed Adam
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Leaf Area Index ◽  
Leaf Area ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Dry Weight ◽  
Root Diameter ◽  
Plant Spacing ◽  
Fresh Weight ◽  
Area Index ◽  
Leaf Dry Weight

Despite the existing several Sugar manufacturing companies in Sudan, there is an acute shortage in sugar supply, therefore the government imports Sugar to bridge the gap. One of the strategies to be followed is the introduction of Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) crop, mainly for sugar production. This crop has several advantages over Sugarcane such as short duration, less water requirement, in addition to other uses like animal feed. Therefore it became necessary to have good understanding of agricultural operations, cultural practices and adaptation. However, the main objective of this study was to assess the effect of Nitrogen fertilizer and plant spacing on vegetative growth of Sugar beet. This study was conducted at the farm of the College of Agriculture, University of Bahri, Alkadro, Khartoum State-Sudan; during the season 2016/2017. The experiment was arranged in Split plot in Randomized Complete Block Design with six treatments and four replications. Two plant spacing (15 and 20 cm.) were used as main plot, referred as (S1, S2) along with three levels of Nitrogen fertilizer (40, 80 and 120 kg/ha.), as subplot; referred as (N1, N2 and N3) and the control (0). Data regarding leaf number, leaf area index (LAI), leaf dry weight (g) (LDW), root diameter (mm.) and root fresh weight were recorded and statistically analyzed. The results showed S2 (20 cm) increased all the studied plant characters, namely the leaf number (29.139), leaf area index by (7.54), leaf dry weight (g) to (89.870), root diameter (mm) (94,992), root fresh weight (g) (695.80) compared to S1(1015 cm). On the other hand; the application of N3 (120 kg/ha.) increased the lead number (30.956), leaf Area Index (8.841), Leaf dry weight (102.47), root diameter (97.955) and root fresh weight (851.77) compared to S2 and S1 as presented in (table 4, table 5 and table 6).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document