Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biofertilizers and Silicon Fertilization as a Sustainable Option for Maize Production

  • Research
  • Published:
Silicon Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Due to the rapid growth of human population and increasing living standards, there is a continuous increase in the gap between food productivity and demand. At the same time there is a global reduction in freshwater availability for agriculture. Several options have been proposed along the way to increase water use efficiency in the field. One promising possibility is the adoption of fertilization with silicon (Si) combined with biofertilizers (microorganisms). Si is estimated to impact on the root volume and distribution, while microorganisms added to the soil in the rhizosphere also impact directly on root growth. In this work we have tested the influence of Si fertilization (magnesium silicate + diatomaceous earth) combined with biofertilizers and 20% reduction in NPK fertilization in the growth of maize and the soil water balance on a field trial located in Companhia das Lezírias (Portugal). Data on soil water content was collected regularly and root analysis was performed at harvest. The water balance was calculated through the model HYDRUS, using root growth model calibrated for maize in the present conditions. Results showed that using an alternative source of fertilization (Si+microbes) while reducing NPK fertilization impacted on root growth development, with roots growing more horizontally, while conventional NPK fertilization resulted in deeper roots. As a consequence,, root water uptake increased and evaporation losses were lower in the treatment supplemented compared to the conventional, without compromising the yield obtained. Using biofertilizers combined with Si sources resulted in higher water use efficiency (2.64 kg m−3) than the NPK fertilization, normally applied for maize growth (2.56 kg m−3). The results imply that the supplementation+biofertilization allows a potential saving of 206 m3 ha−1 water and 157 kg NPK ha−1 fertilization in a growing season assuring the same yield as obtained with the conventional NPK fertilization (18.64 ton ha−1). Implications are important for Portuguese agriculture, where maize is one of the most important cereals cultivated, especially in Centre and Southern part of the country where water is a scarce resource.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. United Nations (2015) World population prospects - The 2015 Revision, Department of Economics and Social Affairs, Population Division. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

  2. Pimentel D, Berger B, Filiberto D, Newton M (2004) Water resources: agricultural and environmental issues. Bioscience 54:909–918. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0909:WRAAEI]2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rosenzweig C, Strzepek KM, Major DC, Iglesias A, Yates DN, McCluskey A, Hillel D (2004) Water resources for agriculture in a changing climate: international case studies. Glob Environ Chang 14:345–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Vargas-Amelin E, Pindado P (2014) The challenge of climate change in Spain: water resources, agriculture and land. J Hydrol 518:243–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.11.035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Adeyemi O, Grove I, Peets S, Norton T (2017) Advanced monitoring and management systems for improving sustainability in precision irrigation. Sustain 9:1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9030353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fernández García I, Rodríguez Díaz JA, Camacho Poyato E, Montesinos P (2013) Optimal operation of pressurized irrigation networks with several supply sources. Water Resour Manag 27:2855–2869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-013-0319-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barão L, Alaoui A, Ferreira C, Basch G, Schwilch G, Geissen V, Sukkel W, Lemesle J, Garcia-Orenes F, Morugán-Coronado A, Mataix-Solera J, Kosmas C, Glavan M, Pintar M, Tóth B, Hermann T, Vizitiu OP, Lipiec J, Reintam E, Xu M, Di J, Fan H, Wang F (2019) Assessment of promising agricultural management practices. Sci Total Environ 649:610–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cattivelli L, Rizza F, Badeck FW, Mazzucotelli E, Mastrangelo AM, Francia E, Marè C, Tondelli A, Stanca AM (2008) Drought tolerance improvement in crop plants: An integrated view from breeding to genomics. Field Crops Res 105:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2007.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Xiong W, Holman I, Lin E, Conway D, Jiang J, Xu Y, Li Y (2010) Climate change, water availability and future cereal production in China. Agric Ecosyst Environ 135:58–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2009.08.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tilman D, Balzer C, Hill J, Befort BL (2011) Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:20260–20264. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116437108

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Coskun D, Britto DT, Huynh WQ, Kronzucker HJ (2016) The role of silicon in higher plants under salinity and drought stress. Front Plant Sci 7:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01072

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Besharat S, Barão L, Cruz C (2020) New strategies to overcome water limitation in cultivated maize: results from sub-surface irrigation and silicon fertilization. J Environ Manag 263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110398

  13. Kothari SK, Marschner H, George E (1990) Effect of VA mycorrhizal fungi and rhizosphere microorganisms on root and shoot morphology, growth and water relations in maize. New Phytol 116:303–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1990.tb04718.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Coonan EC, Kirkby CA, Kirkegaard JA, Amidy MR, Strong CL, Richardson AE (2020) Microorganisms and nutrient stoichiometry as mediators of soil organic matter dynamics. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 117:273–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-020-10076-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Zheng W, Zeng S, Bais H, LaManna JM, Hussey DS, Jacobson DL, Jin Y (2018) Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) reduce evaporation and increase soil water retention. Water Resour Res 54:3673–3687. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR022656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Etesami H (2018) Can interaction between silicon and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria benefit in alleviating abiotic and biotic stresses in crop plants? Agric Ecosyst Environ 253:98–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.11.007

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Peera SKPG, Balasubramaniam P, Mahendran PP (2016) Effect of fly ash and silicate solubilizing bacteria on yield and silicon uptake of rice in Cauvery delta zone effect of fly ash and silicate solubilizing bacteria on yield and silicon uptake of rice in Cauvery delta zone. Environ Ecol 34:1966–1971. https://doi.org/10.31018/JANS.V8I1.746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ruíz-Sánchez M, Armada E, Muñoz E, García-de-Salamone IE, Aroca R, Ruíz-Lozano JM et al (2011) Azospirillum and arbuscular mycorrhizal colonization enhance rice growth and physiological traits under well-watered and drought conditions. J Plant Physiol 168:1031–1037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2010.12.019

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Torres N, Yu R, Kurtural SK (2021) Inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi and irrigation management shape the bacterial and fungal communities and networks in vineyard soils. Microorganisms 9(6):1273. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms9061273

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Quinteiro P, Rafael S, Vicente B, Marta-Almeida M, Rocha A, Arroja L, Dias AC (2019) Mapping green water scarcity under climate change: a case study of Portugal. Sci Total Environ 696:134024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134024

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Šimůnek J, Sejna M, Genuchten M Van (2012) The HYDRUS-2D software package for simulating water flow and solute the HYDRUS software package for simulating the two- and three-dimensional movement in variably-saturated porous media

  22. Mualem Y (1976) A new model for predicting the hydraulic conduc. Water Resour Res 12:513–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Feddes RA, Kowalik P, Kolinska-Malinka K, Zaradny H (1976) Simulation of field water uptake by plants using a soil water dependent root extraction function. J Hydrol 31:13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1694(76)90017-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Vrugt JA, Bouten W, Gupta HV, Sorooshian S (2002) Toward improved identifiability of hydrologic model parameters: The information content of experimental data. Water Resour Res 38:48-1–48–13. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001wr001118

  25. Vrugt JA, Hopmans JW, Simunek J (2001) Calibration of a two-dimensional root water uptake model. Soil Sci Soc Am 65:1027–1037

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Šimůnek J, Genuchten MT, Šejna M (2016) Recent developments and applications of the HYDRUS computer software packages. Vadose Zone J 15:1–25. https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2016.04.0033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bengough AG, Mackenzie CJ, Diggle AJ (1992) Relations between root length densities and root intersections with horizontal and vertical planes using root growth modelling in 3-dimensions. Plant Soil 145:245–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00010353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pedersen A, Zhang K, Thorup-Kristensen K, Jensen LS (2010) Modelling diverse root density dynamics and deep nitrogen uptake-a simple approach. Plant Soil 326:493–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0028-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Pellerin S, Pages L (1996) Evaluation in field conditions of a three-dimensional architectural model of the maize root system: comparison of simulated and observed horizontal root maps. Plant Soil 178:101–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00011168

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Chopart JL, Siband P (1999) Development and validation of a model to describe root length density of maize from root counts on soil profiles. Plant Soil 214:61–74. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1004658918388

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Grabarnik P, Pagès L, Bengough AG (1998) Geometrical properties of simulated maize root systems: consequences for length density and intersection density. Plant Soil 200:157–167. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004382531671

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Ball-Coelho BR, Roy RC, Swanton CJ (1998) Tillage alters corn root distribution in coarse-textured soil. Soil Tillage Res 45:237–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(97)00086-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Li H, Mollier A, Ziadi N, Shi Y, Parent LÉ, Morel C (2017) The long-term effects of tillage practice and phosphorus fertilization on the distribution and morphology of corn root. Plant Soil 412:97–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-016-2925-y

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Chaudhary MR, Prihar SS (1974) Root development and growth response of corn following mulching, cultivation, or interrow compaction 1. Agron J 66:350–355. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1974.00021962006600030004x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kuchenbuch RO, Gerke HH, Buczko U (2009) Spatial distribution of maize roots by complete 3D soil monolith sampling. Plant Soil 315:297–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-008-9752-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Chen G, Weil RR (2011) Root growth and yield of maize as affected by soil compaction and cover crops. Soil Tillage Res 117:17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2011.08.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Grieder C, Trachsel S, Hund A (2014) Early vertical distribution of roots and its association with drought tolerance in tropical maize. Plant Soil 377:295–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1997-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ma L, Li Y, Wu P, Zhao X, Chen X, Gao X (2019) Effects of varied water regimes on root development and its relations with soil water under wheat/maize intercropping system. Plant Soil 439:113–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-3800-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Mi G, Chen F, Yuan L, Zhang F (2016) Ideotype root system architecture for maize to achieve high yield and resource use efficiency in intensive cropping systems. Adv Agron 139:73–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron.2016.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sampathkumar T, Pandian BJ, Mahimairaja S (2012) Soil moisture distribution and root characters as influenced by deficit irrigation through drip system in cotton-maize cropping sequence. Agric Water Manag 103:43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2011.10.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Gao X, Zou C, Wang L, Zhang F (2006) Silicon improves water use efficiency in maize plants in maize plants 4167. https://doi.org/10.1081/PLN-200025865

  42. Lin H, Chen Y, Zhang H, Fu P, Fan Z (2017) Stronger cooling effects of transpiration and leaf physical traits of plants from a hot dry habitat than from a hot wet habitat. Funct Ecol 31:2202–2211

  43. Wang R, Zeng J, Chen K, Ding Q, Shen Q, Wang M, Guo S (2022) Nitrogen improves plant cooling capacity under increased environmental temperature. Plant Soil 472:329–344

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Alkahtani M, Hafez Y, Attia K, Al-Ateeq T, Ali MAM, Hasanuzzaman M, Abdelaal K (2021) Bacillus thuringiensis and silicon modulate antioxidant metabolism and improve the physiological traits to confer salt tolerance in lettuce. Plants 10:1025. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10051025

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Anitha R, Gayathry G, Thiruvarasan S, Nirmala Mary PC, Jayachandran M (2019) Study of potassium silicate and silica solubilizing bacteria and its impact on yield and quality of sugarcane under water stress condition. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci 8:1287–1301. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.811.152

  46. Lesueur D, Deaker R, Herrmann L, Bräu L, Jansa J (2016) The production and potential of biofertilizers to improve crop yields. In: Arora NK, Mehnaz S, Balestrini R (eds) Bioformulations: for sustainable agriculture. Springer, pp 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2779-3

  47. Masoero G, Sarasso G, Delmastro M, Delmastro R, Antonini M, Solaro S, Scapin I, Cugnetto A (2023) Soluble biobased substances in soil or salicylic acid on leaves affect the foliar pH and soil biovariability of grapes - as explained by the NIR spectroscopy of litterbags and teabags. J Agron Res 5(2):10–27. https://doi.org/10.14302/issn.2639-3166.jar-23-4648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Barão L (2023) The use of Si-based fertilization to improve agricultural performance. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 23(1):1096–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Ayoub AT (1999) Fertilizers and the environment. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 55:117–121. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009808118692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Obersteiner M, Peñuelas J, Ciais P, van der Velde M, Janssens IA (2013) The phosphorus trilemma. Nat Geosci 6:897–898. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1990

  51. Roy ED (2017) Phosphorus recovery and recycling with ecological engineering: a review. Ecol Eng 98:213–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.10.076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Barão L, Teixeira R (2016) The environmental impacts of silicon as an alternative to phosphorus fertilizers What is the environmental impact of replacing P fertilizers with Si fertilizers. Proceeding LCA Food 2016 Conf 1171–1178

  53. Motavalli PP, Goyne KW, Udawatta RP (2008) Environmental impacts of enhanced-efficiency nitrogen fertilizers. Crop Manag 7:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1094/cm-2008-0730-02-rv

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful for the assistance of ADP (adp-fertilizantes.pt) Company for helping with data collection.

Funding

This research was supported by funds from the Urmia University and University of Lisbon, Portugal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

    Sina Besharat

  2. Water Engineering Department of Urmia Lake Research Institute, Urmia, Iran

    Sina Besharat

  3. ADP-Fertilizantes, SA, Alverca do Ribatejo, Lisbon, Portugal

    João Castro Pinto, Manuela Fernandes & Andreia Miguel

  4. Center for Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Changes (cE3c) & CHANGE - Global Change and Sustainability Institute, Faculty of Sciences University of Lisbon, Campo Grande, 1749-016, Lisbon, Portugal

    Cristina Cruz & Lúcia Barão

Authors
  1. Sina Besharat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. João Castro Pinto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manuela Fernandes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andreia Miguel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cristina Cruz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lúcia Barão
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.B. Wrote the main manuscript, Methodology, Software Validation and helped in Field measurements, J.C.P., M.F. and A.M. collected Field data, Implementation of treatments in the field, C.C. helped in Visualization, Investigation, Supervision and L.B. worked on Writing—review & editing, Investigation, Validation of manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sina Besharat.

Ethics declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics Approval

Not applicable (The results of this study do not involve any human or animal).

Consent to Participate

Not applicable (The results of this study do not involve any human or animal).

Consent for Publication

Not applicable (The results of this study do not involve any human or animal).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Besharat, S., Pinto, J.C., Fernandes, M. et al. Biofertilizers and Silicon Fertilization as a Sustainable Option for Maize Production. Silicon 16, 877–889 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-023-02713-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-023-02713-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation