Legume inoculant application methods: effects on nodulation patterns, nitrogen fixation, crop growth and yield in narrow-leaf lupin and faba bean
- 640 Downloads
Liquid and granular rhizobial inoculants have some practical advantages for delivering rhizobial inoculants to legume crops in terms of ease-of-use and in separating rhizobia from potentially harmful seed-applied pesticides. The aim of this research was to determine whether inoculant application methodologies altered the patterns of nodulation on roots, inputs of symbiotic nitrogen (N2) fixation, the accumulation of legume shoot dry matter (DM), grain yield, and grain nitrogen (N).
Eight field experiments were established at four different locations in south-eastern Australia to quantify the response of lupin (Lupinus angustifolius L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) to three inoculant application methods (on-seed application as a peat slurry, in-furrow peat inoculant delivered as a liquid suspension at seeding, in-furrow peat granules delivered at seeding) compared with uninoculated treatments. N2 fixation was assessed using the 15N natural abundance method and canola was included as a non-legume reference.
Inoculation significantly improved crown nodulation, from 0.05 to 13 nodules plant−1 in lupin at two sites and from 0.17 to 21.3 nodules plant−1 in faba bean at three sites. Nodulation responses were decreased for faba bean treatments at sites with low pH, and for both lupin and faba bean at sites where soils contained large populations of naturally-occurring rhizobia. Inoculation increased grain yield from 0.48 to 1.94 t ha−1 in faba bean relative to uninoculated treatments at two sites; N2 fixation increased by 175 kg N ha−1 in lupin at one site and by 46 to 280 kg N ha−1 in faba bean at two sites. The different inoculant application methods led to minor differences in crown and lateral root nodulation patterns but only impacted N2 fixation and grain yield at one site with faba bean, where peat slurry treatments had 186 to 195 kg N ha−1 more N2 fixation than other treatments and peat slurry and granules provided 0.8 to 1.0 t ha−1 more grain yield than liquid inoculants.
On-seed application of peat slurry always provided the best nodulation, grain yield and N2 fixation. Small changes in nodulation patterns using in-furrow inoculants only resulted in reduced N2 fixation in faba bean at one site. At that site faba bean grain yield was reduced by 1.0 t ha−1 in liquid inoculant treatments, compared with on-seed peat slurry treatments.
Keywords15N natural abundance Faba bean Inoculation Lupin Nodulation Rhizobia
This work was funded through the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC) as part of the National Rhizobium Program and Nitrogen Fixation Program (UMU00032 and UA000138) and crop sequencing project (CSP000146). We thank John and Jan Harris, Boorhaman North, and Andrew Godde, Culcairn, who generously provided land for the study sites. Bernadette Carmody (Agriculture Victoria) and Laura Goward (CSIRO) provided assistance with field work and 15N analyses and are gratefully acknowledged. Thang Lai provided assistance with Fig. 1.
- Brockwell J (1963) Accuracy of a plant-infection technique for counting populations of Rhizobium trifolii. Appl Microb 11:377–383Google Scholar
- Brockwell J, Herridge DF, Morthorpe LJ, Roughley RJ (1988b) Numerical effects of rhizobium population on legume symbiosis. In: Beck DP, Materon LA (eds) Nitrogen fixation by legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture. International Centre for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas, Netherlands, pp 179–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Drew E, Herridge D, Ballard R, O’Hara G, Deaker R, Denton M, Yates R, Gemell G, Hartley E, Phillips L, Seymour N, Howieson J, Balllard N (2014) Inoculating legumes: a practical guide. Grains Research and Development Corporation. Kingston, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electron 4:1–9Google Scholar
- Hardarson G, Golbs M, Danso SKA (1989) Nitrogen fixation in soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill) as affected by nodulation patterns. Soil Biol. Biochemist 21:783–787Google Scholar
- Herridge DF (2008) Inoculation technology for legumes. In ‘Leguminous nitrogen-fixing symbioses’. Nitrogen fixation: origins, applications and research progress, vol. 7. (Eds MJ Dilworth, EK James, JI Sprent, WE Newton.) pp. 77-115. (springer Netherlands — springer Verlag: Heidelberg)Google Scholar
- Isbell R (1996) The Australian soil classification. Australian soil and land survey handbook. CSIRO, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
- Peoples MB, Brockwell J, Herridge DF, Rochester IJ, Alves BJR, Urquiaga S, Boddey RM, Dakora FD, Bhattarai S, Maskey SL, Sampet C, Rerkasem B, Khan DF, Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Jensen ES (2009) The contributions of nitrogen-fixing crop legumes to the productivity of agricultural systems. Symbiosis 48:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Unkovich MJ, Herridge DF, Peoples MB, Cadisch G, Boddey RM, Giller KE, Alves B, Chalk PM (2008) Measuring plant-associated nitrogen fixation in agricultural systems. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR), Canberra. ACIAR Monograph No. 136 pp. 258.Google Scholar
- Wadisirisuk P, Danso SKA, Hardarson G, Bowen GD (1989) Influence of Bradyrhizobium japonicum location and movement on nodulation and nitrogen fixation in soybeans. Appl Environ Microb 55:1711–1716Google Scholar