Russian Agricultural Sciences

, Volume 44, Issue 6, pp 546–550 | Cite as

Influence of Fertilizers, Biomass of White Mustard, and Biopreparation Rhizoagrin on Yield and Grain Quality of Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and Sustainability of the Agroecosystem

  • A. A. AlferovEmail author
  • L. S. Chernova
Agrochemistry. Soil Science


The use of white mustard biomass as green manure for spring wheat increased the grain yield by 58%, and the introduction of nitrogen fertilizer in the dose of N45 increased it by 42%. Inoculation of seeds with rhizoagrin (RA) ensured an increase in grain yield by 15%. The maximum grain yield was obtained by introducing mustard biomass and ammonium nitrate and inoculating the seeds with RA (+120%). At the same time, the content of raw protein in the grain increased to a greater extent with the addition of mustard biomass (+0.8%) and nitrogen fertilizer (+0.7%). When treating seeds with RA, the protein content of the grain tended to increase. Sustainability of the agroecosystem is characterized by nitrogen flows. During the growing season of spring wheat, the amount of mineralized nitrogen, depending on the fertilizer, reached 17.7–30.2 g/m, while the amount of reimmobilized nitrogen was 4.4–15.1 g/m2. Inoculation of seeds with RA did not significantly affect the processes of mineralization and reimmobilization; only a tendency of increase in mineralization and reimmobilization of nitrogen in the soil was noted. Indicators of the integral evaluation of functioning of the agroecosystem in the sowing of spring wheat with the introduction of mustard biomass indicate that the system is in a sustainable state (homeostasis) (RI: M = 50%, N-M: RI = 1.0). The use of nitrogenous fertilizer brings the agroecosystem to the resistant state: the zone of maximum permissible exposure level (RI: M = 25%, N-M: RI = 3.1). On average, over the years of research, inoculation of seeds with RA did not change the resistance indicators of the agroecosystem during fertilizer application.


spring wheat rhizoagrin nitrogen fertilizer mustard biomass yield protein agroecosystem stability 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Sychev, V.G., Sokolov, O.A., Zavalin, A.A., and Shmyreva, A.Ya., Rol’ azota v intensifikatsii produktsionnogo protsessa sel’skokhozyaistvennykh kul’tur (The Role of Nitrogen in the Intensification of the Production Process of Crops), vol. 2: Ekologicheskie aspekty roli azota v produktsionnom protsesse (Environmental Aspects of the Role of Nitrogen in the Production Process), Moscow: Vseross. Nauchno-Issled. Inst. Agrokhim., 2012.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosstat. Official Statistics. Agriculture, Hunting, and Forestry, 2017. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tikhonovich, I.A. and Zavalin, A.A., Prospects for the use of nitrogen-fixing and phytostimulating microorganisms to increase the efficiency of the agro-industrial complex and improve the agro-ecological situation of the Russian Federation, Plodorodie, 2016, no. 5, pp. 28–32.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zavalin, A.A., Berdnikov, V.V., and Almetov, N.S., Efficiency of application of biological products and fertilizers for spring wheat, Vestn. Ross. S-kh. Akad., 2004, no. 5, pp. 76–78.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zavalin, A.A., Biopreparaty, udobreniya i urozhai (Biologicals, Fertilizers, and Harvest), Moscow: Vseross. Nauchno-Issled. Inst. Agrokhim., 2005.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Almetov, N.S. and Goryachkin, N.V., Yield and quality of spring wheat grain depending on its predecessors, fertilizers, and biological products, Vestn. Mariisk. Gos. Univ., 2013, no. 11, pp. 7–9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Umarov, M.M., Nitrogen fixation in associations of organisms, Probl. Agrokhim. Ekol., 2009, no. 2, pp. 22–26.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zavalin, A.A. and Sokolov, O.A., Potoki azota v agroekosisteme: Ot idei D.N. Pryanishnikova do nashikh dnei (Nitrogen Flows in the Agroecosystem: From the Ideas of D. N. Pryanishnikov to Our Days), Moscow: Vseross. Nauchno-Issled. Inst. Agrokhim., 2016.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pomazkina, L.V., A new integral approach to the assessment of the functioning modes of agro-ecosystems and the environmental regulation of anthropogenic load, including technogenic pollution of soil, Usp. Sovrem. Biol., 2004, vol. 124, no. 1, pp. 66–76.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tikhonovich, I.A., Kozhemyakov, A.P., Chebotar’, V.K., Kruglov, Yu.V., Kandybin, N.V., and Laptev, G.Yu., Biopreparaty v sel’skom khozyaistve (Metodologiya i praktika primeneniya mikroorganizmov v rastenievodstve i kormoproizvodstve) (Biological Products in Agriculture (Methodology and Practice of Using Microorganisms in Crop Production and Fodder Production)), Moscow, 2005.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chebotar', V.K., Laktionov, Yu.V., and Yakhno, V.V., Microbiological preparations in the system of ecological farming, Reg. Ekol., 2015, no. 6, pp. 41–47.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shmyreva, N.Ya., Sokolov, O.A., and Tsurikov, L.N., Participation of nitrogen of perennial grasses in the formation of organic matter of sod-podzolic soil, Plodorodie, 2012, no. 6, pp. 25–27.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shaposhnikov, A.I., Belimov, A.A., Kravchenko, L.V., and Vivanko, D.M., Interaction of rhizosphere bacteria with plants: Mechanisms of formation and factors of the effectiveness of associative symbiosis, S-kh. Biol., 2011, no. 3, pp. 16–22.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zavalin, A.A., Azotnoe pitanie i produktivnost' sortov yarovoi pshenitsy (Nitrogen Nutrition and Productivity of Spring Wheat Varieties), Moscow: Agrokonsalt, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Allerton Press, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pryanishnikov All-Russia Research Institute of AgrochemistryMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations