The effect of pretransplant inoculation with VA mycorrhizal fungi on the subsequent growth of leeks in the field


Leek plants were preinoculated with a mixed inoculum ofGlomus caledonium, Glomus fasciculatum andGlomus sp., and transplanted to Dazomet disinfected and untreated field plots of moderate P deficiency. Successive harvests were made until 99 days after transplanting. Preinoculated leeks attained marketable weights 25 days earlier than uninoculated leeks from untreated soil and their final dry matter yields were 5.7 and 1.5 times as high as those of uninoculated leeks from disinfected and untreated soil, respectively. Phosphorus concentration in preinoculated leeks remained highest for at least 22 and 75 days after transplanting in untreated and disinfected soil, respectively. Preinoculation had a similar, although smaller, influence on Cu and Zn concentrations. Infection levels produced by introduced and indigenous VA endophytes in leeks reached plateaus of 90% and 40%, respectively, 47 days after transplanting. It is concluded that VAM is essential to leeks grown in moderately P deficient soils, and the potential for inoculating seedlings in commercial leek production is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1

    Abbott L K and Robson A D 1981 Aust. J. Agric. Res. 32, 621–630.

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Allen S E 1974 Chemical Analysis of Ecological Materials. Blackwell Scientific Publications, London, 565 p.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    Bagyaraj D J and Sreermulu K R 1982 Plant and Soil 69, 375–381.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Bloss H E and Pfeiffer C M 1984 Ann. Appl. Biol. 104, 175–183.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Buwalda J Get al. 1982 New Phytol. 92, 391–399.

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Hewitt E J 1952 Commonwealth Bureau of Horticulture and Plantation Crops. Technical Communication 22.

  7. 7

    Jackson M L 1958 Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice-Hall Int., N.J. 498p.

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Kormanik P P and McGraw A C 1982In Methods and Principles of Mycorrhizal Research. Ed. N C Schenck, pp 37–46 The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, Minnesota.

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    McEwen Jet al. 1973 J. Agric. Sci., 80, 105–110.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Olsen S Ret al. 1954 US. Dept. Agric. Cir. No. 939, 19.

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Plenchette Cet al. 1983 Plant and Soil 70, 199–209.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Plenchette Cet al. 1981 Can. J. Bot. 59, 2003–2008.

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Powell C L 1984In VA Mycorrhiza Eds. C L Powell and D J Bagyaraj. pp 206–223. CRC Press Inc., Boca Katon, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Rao G Y Set al. 1983 Zbl. Mikrobiol. 138, 415–419.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Stribley D P and Snellgrove R C 1984 Rothamsted Report for 1983, Part I.

  16. 16

    Stribley D Pet al. 1980 J. Soil Sci. 31, 655–672.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Wornock A Jet al. 1981 New Phytol. 90, 285–292.

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Wilson J M. 1984 New Phytol. 97, 413–426.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sasa, M., Zahka, G. & Jakobsen, I. The effect of pretransplant inoculation with VA mycorrhizal fungi on the subsequent growth of leeks in the field. Plant Soil 97, 279–283 (1987).

Download citation

Key words

  • Copper
  • Dazomet
  • Field experiment
  • Leek
  • Phosphorus
  • Pretransplant inoculation
  • VA mycorrhiza
  • Zinc