Interactive effect of potash and organic manures on growth and nutrient uptake of sugarcane grown under saline conditions

  • Muhammad Y. Ashraf
  • Faqir Hussain
  • Muhammad M. Iqbal
  • Wolfgang Maibaum
  • Marcus Ross

Abstract

Soil salinity poses severe problems to crop production in many countries and this problem is very severe in arid and semi-arid regions of the world which occupy one third of the area of the earth (4.3 billion ha). Salinity is among the serious problems of irrigated agriculture of Pakistan. Millions of hectares of potentially productive land is uncultivatable due to excess of salt. The population of Pakistan is increasing at 2.61% and the gap between the supply and demand of agricultural products is widening day by day. In order to meet the future demand of food, fiber, fuel and industrial raw material, the extension of agriculture would require the use of marginal lands [1]. Most of Pakistan is arid to semi-arid and has a low annual precipitation. Of the 20.36 mha of the total cultivated land, 6.3 mha are salt-affected [1]. A major part of the salt affected soils (about 3.5 mha) are presently cultivated to rice, wheat, cotton and sugarcane, but the output is very low. According to an estimate, the reductions in the yield of rice, wheat, cotton, sugarcane cultivated on such moderately salt-affected soils are, 64, 62, 59 and 68 %, respectively [2].

Keywords

Biomass Sugar Clay Permeability Phosphorus 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Anonymous (2004) Economic Survey 2003–04. Government of Pakistan, Finance Division, Economic Advisor Wing, IslamabadGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anonymous (2002) Economic Survey 2001–02. Government of Pakistan, Finance Division, Economic Advisor Wing, IslamabadGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kemmler G (1985) Soil fertility, fertilizer efficiency and crop production — A long-term view. Presented at 1st National Congress of Soil Science, Lahore, PakistanGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gorham I (1990) Salt tolerance in the triticeae. Ion discrimination in rye and Triticales. J Expt Bot 41: 609–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shah S, Gorham I, Forster BP, WynJones RG (1987) Salt tolerance in the triticeae: the contribution of the D genome to cation selectivity in hexaploid wheat. J Expt Bot 38: 254–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davis J, Daniel J (2002) Organic farming research project report submitted to the Organic Farming Research Foundation. Dept. of Soil and Crop Sciences Colorado State University, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Iqbal Z, Ashraf MY, Kashif M, Yamin M (2002) Use of industrial effluent (CaCl2) for reclaiming salt-affected land and enhancing wheat yield. Pakistan J Soil Sci 21: 63–66Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nasir MN, Qureshi RH, Aslam M, Khtar J (2000) Screening of sugarcane lines selected through hydroponic studies in naturally salt-affected field. Pak Sugar J XV: 2–9Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dewis J, Freitas F (1970) Physical methods of soil and water analysis. FAO. Soil Bull. No.10, Rome, 39–51Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jackson ML (ed.) (1962) Soil Chemical Analysis. Constable and Company Ltd, UKGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Watanabe FS, Olsen SR (1965) Test of an ascorbic acid method determining phosphorous in water extracts from soil. Soil Sci Amer Proc 29: 677–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ashraf MY, Wahed RA, Bhatti AS, Sarwar G, Aslam Z (1999) Salt tolerance potential in different Brassica species, Growth studies. In: H Hamdy, H Lieth, M Todorovic, M Moschenko (eds) In: Halophytes Uses in Different Climates — II. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands, 119–125Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khan AH, Ashraf MY, Azmi AR (1992) Osmotic adjustment in sorghum under sodium chloride stress. Act Physiol Plant 14: 159–162Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Munns R, Greenway HH, Kirst GO (1983) Halo-tolerant. In: OL Lang, PS Nobel, CB Osmond, H Ziegler (eds) In: Physiological Plant Ecology III. Response to the Chemical and Biological Environment. Encycl Plant Physiol New Ser, 12C: 59–135Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ashraf MY, Sarwar G (2002) Salt tolerance potential in some members of Brassicaceae. Physiological studies on water relations and mineral contents. In: R Ahmad, KA Malik (eds) In: Prospects for Saline Agriculture. Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 237–245Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ashraf MY, Khan AH, Azmi AR (1992) Cell membrane stability and its relation with some physiological process in wheat. Acta Agron Hung 41: 183–191Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Khan AH, Ashraf MY, Naqvi SSM, Khanzada B, Ali M (1995) Growth, ion and solute contents of sorghum grown under NaCl and Na2SO4 salinity stress. Acta Physiol Plant 17: 261–268Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Khan AH, Ashraf MY, Azmi AR (1993) Osmotic adjustment in wheat: A response to water stress. Pak J Sci Ind Res 36: 151–155Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ashraf M, Shabaz M, Ashraf MY (2001) Influence of nitrogen supply and water stress on growth and nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and calcium content in pearlmillet. Biologia Plantarum 44: 459–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gorham I, McDonnell E, Budrewics E, Wyn Jones RG (1985) Salt tolerance in the Triticeae: Growth and solute accumulation in leaves of Thinopyrum hessarabicum. J Expt Bot 36: 1021–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gorham I, Hardy C, WynJones RG, Joppa LR, Law CN (1987) Chromosomal location of a KINa discrimination character in the D genome of wheat. Theoretical and Appl Gen 74: 584–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Birkhäuser Verlag/Switzerland 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhammad Y. Ashraf
    • 1
  • Faqir Hussain
    • 1
  • Muhammad M. Iqbal
    • 1
  • Wolfgang Maibaum
    • 2
  • Marcus Ross
    • 2
  1. 1.Stress Physiology and Plant Biochemistry LabNuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology (NIAB)FaisalabadPakistan
  2. 2.Agricultural Advisory DepartmentK+S Kali GmbHKasselGermany

Personalised recommendations