Abstract
A field study was undertaken to evaluate the response of sugarcane varieties to application ofAzotobacter,Azospirillum andGluconacetobacter under different levels of fertilizer nitrogen.Azospirillum significantly improved the cane and sugar yield compared toGluconacetobacter, Azotobacter and uninoculated control.Gluconacetobacter andAzotobacter were on par.Gluconacetobacter was better than uninoculated control. There was differential response of varieties to Biofertilizers for cane yield and CCS per cent. Co 8014, Co 8122, Co 8021 and Co 6304 responded in terms of cane yield toAzospirillum while Co 8021 responded toGluconacetobacter and Co 6304 responded toAzotobacter. The response toAzospirillum in terms of cane yield was more under lower nitrogen level (200 kg ha-1) compared to normal nitrogen level (300 kg ha-1). Co 8122 showed a significant improvement in CCS per cent forAzotobacter, Azospirillum andGluconacetobacter, while CoC 85061 only toAzospirillum. Varieties Co 8014, Co 8021 and Co 6304 did not show any improvement in CCS percent for biofertilizers. Biofertilizers significantly improved the nitrogen content of stem at 200 and 300 kg N ha-1 compared to control. Biofertilizers did not influence the soil available nitrogen status.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boddey, R.M. and Dobereiner, J. 1995. Nitrogen fixation associated with grasses and cereals: Recent progress and perspectives for the future.Fert. Res.,42: 241–250.
Cavalcante, V.A. and Dobereiner, J. 1988. A new acid tolerant nitrogen fixing bacterium associated with sugarcane.Plant soil,108: 23–31.
Dobbelaere, S., Vanderleyden, J. and Okon, Y. 2003. Plant growth- promoting effects of diazotrophs in the rhizosphere.Crit. Rev. Plant Sci.,22: 107–149.
Gaur, A.C. and Mathur, R.S. 1966. Stimulating influence of humic substances on nitrogen fixation byAzotobacter.Sci. Cult.,32: 319.
James, E.K., Reis, V.M., Olivares, F.L., Baldani, J.I. and Dobereiner, J. 1994. Infection of sugarcane by the nitrogen-fixing bacteriumA. diazotrophicus.J. Exp. Bot.,45: 757–766.
Lima, E., Boddey, R.M. and Doberiener, J. 1987. Quantification of biological nitrogen fixation associated with sugarcane using a15N aided nitrogen balance.Soil Biol. Biochem.,19: 165–170
Meade, G.P., Chen, J.C.P. 1977.Cane Sugar Hand Book (10 ed.). Wiley Inter Science, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 947.
Michaelraj, S., Srinivasan, T.R., and Naidu, K.M. 1984. Sugarcane nutrition through biofertilizers.Indian J. Pl. Nutrition,3: 183–189.
Misra, A. and Naidu, K. M. 1990. Effect of biofertilizers and their method of application on nitrogen economy in sugarcane.Indian J. Agron.,35: 120–125
Muthukumarasamy, R., Revathi, G. and Solayappan, A.R. 1994. Biofertilizers — A supplement or substitute for chemical nitrogen for sugarcane crop.Coop. Sugar,25: 287–290.
Muthukumarasamy, R and Revathi, G. 1999. Diazotrophic associations in sugarcane cultivation in South India.Trop. Agric.(Trinidad),76: 171–178.
Patil, P.G. and Hapase, D.G. 1981. Nitrogen economy in sugarcane (Adsali) by use ofAzotobacter.Maharashtra Sugar,6: 29–35.
Piper, C.S. 1950.Soil and Plant Analysis, Hans Publications, Bombay, India.
Ruschel, A.P. and Ruschel, R. 1977. Varietal differences affecting nitrogenase activity in rhizosphere of sugarcane.Proc. ISSCT,16: 141–147
Singh, V.P., Zaman, S. and Jha, K.C. 1985. Contribution ofAzotobacter chroococcum to the nitrogen needs of sugarcane in North Bihar.Maharashtra Sug.,10: 41–48.
Srinivasan, T.R. and Naidu, K.M. 1987. Response of sugarcane varieties to biofertilizers under different soil conditions.Sugarcane,3, 5–10
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hari, K., Srinivasan, T.R. Response of sugarcane varieties to application of nitrogen fixing bacteria under different nitrogen levels. Sugar Tech 7, 28–31 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02942525
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02942525