Impact of Different Fertilizer Forms on Yield Components and Macro–Micronutrient Contents of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.)
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Characteristics of the Trial Area Soils
2.2. Climatic Characteristics of the Trial Site
2.3. Method
2.3.1. Determination of Growth Parameters and Protein Ratio
2.3.2. Detection of Chlorophyll Contents
2.3.3. Detection of Macro and Microelements
2.4. Statistical Analysis of Data
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Effects of the Different Fertilizer Forms on Yield and Quality Components in Cowpea
3.2. Effects of the Different Fertilizer Forms on Macro and Micronutrient Contents of Cowpea
3.3. The Relationships among the Observed Characteristics
4. Conclusions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zhang, K.; Xu, H.; Zhuang, X.; Zang, Y.; Chen, J. First report of Vicia cryptic virus M infecting cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) in China. Plant Dis. 2021, 105, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong, H.; Shi, A.; Mou, B.; Qin, J.; Motes, D.; Lu, W.; Ma, J.; Weng, Y.; Yang, W.; Wu, D. Genetic diversity and population structure of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp). PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0160941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Özçelebi, H.; Erman, M. Determing adaptation of some cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp) local populations and registered cultivars to Siirt ecological conditions. ISPEC JAS 2021, 5, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Özkaya, E. Yemeklik tane baklagillerin türkiye ekonomisindeki önemi. (In Turkish). Ziraat Mühendisliği 2013, 22–31. Available online: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/zm/issue/52106/680882 (accessed on 1 January 2020).
- Gulshan, A.B.; Saeed, H.M.; Javid, S.; Meryem, T.; Atta, M.I.; Amin-ud-Din, M. Effects of animal manure on the growth and development of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.). J. Agr. Biol. Sci. 2013, 8, 213–219. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, X.; Zhang, Y.; Han, W.; Tang, A.; Shen, J.; Cui, Z.; Vitousek, P.; Erisman, J.W.; Goulding, K.; Christie, P. Enhanced nitrogen deposition over China. Nature 2013, 494, 459–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sánchez-Navarro, V.; Zornoza, R.; Faz, Á.; Fernández, J.A. Cowpea crop response to mineral and organic fertilization in SE Spain. Processes 2021, 9, 822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Wang, X.; Xu, M.; Huang, S.; Liu, H.; Peng, C. Soil organic carbon dynamics under long-term fertilizations in arable land of northern China. Biogeosciences 2010, 7, 409–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Badar, R.; Khan, M.; Batool, B.; Shabbir, S. Effects of organic amendments in comparison with chemical fertilizer on cowpea growth. Int. J. App. Res. 2015, 1, 24–29. [Google Scholar]
- Çirka, M.; Altuner, F.; Eryiğit, T.; Oral, E.; Bildirici, N. Effects of vermicompost applications on some yield and yield properties of wheat. MAS J. App. Sci. 2022, 7, 146–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaya, A.; Coşkun, N. Effect of organic fertilizer forms and doses on the seed germination and seedling development of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Appl. Ecol. Env. Res. 2020, 18, 6813–6828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madukwe, D.; Christo, I.; Onuh, M. Effects of organic manure and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (l.) Walp) varieties on the chemical properties of the soil and root nodulation. Sci. World J. 2008, 3, 43–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fatahi, E.; Mobasser, H.R.; Akbarian, M.M. Effect of organic fertilizer on wet weight, dry weight and number of leaves in cowpea. J. Appl. Sci. 2014, 3, 440–443. [Google Scholar]
- Mishra, D.; Rajvir, S.; Mishra, U.; Kumar, S.S. Role of bio-fertilizer in organic agriculture: A review. Res. J. Recent Sci. ISSN 2013, 2277, 2502. [Google Scholar]
- Kumari, M.S.; Ushakumari, K. Effect of vermicompost enriched with rock phosphate on the yield and uptake of nutrients in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata [L.] Walp). J. Trop. Agric. 2006, 40, 27–30. [Google Scholar]
- Uçar, Ö.; Soysal, S.; Erman, M. The effects of different leonardite doses on the yield and some yield properties of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). EJOSAT 2020, 20, 917–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pekcan, T.; Esetlİlİ, B.Ç.; Turan, H.S.; Aydoğdu, E. Determination of some physical and chemical properties of organic materials originated from leonardite. J. Agric. Fac. Uludag Unv. 2018, 32, 31–41. [Google Scholar]
- Engin, V.T.; Cöcen, E.İ. Leonardite and humic matters. J. Undergr. Resour. 2013, 2, 13–20. [Google Scholar]
- Didem, T.; Hüsnü, Ü. Determination of the effect of farm and green manure utilization on yield and quality in green and dry cowpea. SDU J. Nat. Appl. Sci. 2015, 10, 110–117. [Google Scholar]
- Kalkanci, N.; Şimşek, T.; Aslan, N.; Büyük, G. Providing sustainable management by mapping the productivity status of agricultural soils at thematic level: Case of Osmaniye. KSU J. Agric. Nat. 2021, 24, 859–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaya, A.R.; Erdönmez, H.K. Effect of different fertilizer forms and doses on seed germination and seedling development of soybean (Glycine Max. (L.) Merrill). Tr. J. Nat. Sci. 2020, 9, 73–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Çirka, M.; Tunçtürk, R.; Kulaz, H.; Tunçtürk, M.; Eryiğit, T.; Baran, İ. Investigation of the effects of rhizobacteria and algae applications on plant growth in broad bean (Vicia faba L.) plant grown under drought stress. J. Inst. Sci. Tech. (JIST) 2022, 12, 1124–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kılıç, R.; Korkmaz, K. Kimyasal gübrelerin tarım topraklarında artık etkileri (In Turkish). BİBAD 2012, 5, 87–90. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmed, M.; Elzaawely, A. Growth and yield of cowpea plants in response to organic fertilization. Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2010, 4, 3244–3249. [Google Scholar]
- Kebede, E.; Bekeko, Z. Expounding the production and importance of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) in Ethiopia. Cogent Food Agric. 2020, 6, 1769805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savvas, D.; Ntatsi, G.; Vlachou, M.; Vrontani, C.; Rizopoulou, E.; Fotiadis, C.; Ropokis, A.; Tampakaki, A. Impact of different rhizobial strains and reduced nitrogen supply on growth, yield and nutrient uptake in cowpea grown hydroponically. Acta Hortic. 2018, 1227, 417–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zekeriya, K.; Saltali, K.; Çokkizgin, A.; Girel, Ü.; Çölkesen, M.; Yürürdurmaz, C. The effect of different organic regulators on soil moisture constants and hydraulic conductivity. MAS J. Appl. Sci. 2022, 7, 348–356. [Google Scholar]
- Anonymous. Technical Instruction for Experiments in Measuring Agricultural Values (In Turkish: Tarımsal değerleri ölçme denemeleri teknik talimatı). In Nohut (Cicer arietinum L.), mercİmek (Lens culinaris Medik.), Kuru Fasulye (Phaselous vulgaris L.), Bakla (Vicia faba L.), Bezelye (Pisum sativum L.), and Börülce (Vigna sinensis (L.) Savi); Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Variety Registration and Seed Certification Center: Ankara, Turkey, 2022; pp. 42–46. [Google Scholar]
- Richardson, A.D.; Duigan, S.P.; Berlyn, G.P. An evaluation of noninvasive methods to estimate foliar chlorophyll content. New Phytol. 2002, 153, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ruiz-Espinoza, F.H.; Murillo-Amador, B.; Garcia-Hernandez, J.L.; Fenech-Larios, L.; Rueda-Puente, E.O.; Troyo-Dieguez, E.; Kaya, C.; Beltran-Morales, A. Field evaluation of the relationship between chlorophyll content in basil leaves and a portable chlorophyll meter (SPAD-502) readings. J. Plant Nutr. 2010, 33, 423–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boss, C.B.; Fredeen, K.J. Concepts, Instrumentation and Techniques in Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry, 3rd ed.; Perkin Elmer Corporation: Shelton, CT, USA, 1997; p. 120. [Google Scholar]
- de Jesus Benevides, C.M.; dos Santos, L.B.; Brito, C.V.L.; dos Santos, W.P.C.; Lopes, M.V.; de Souza Montes, S.; dos Santos Souza, A.C. Determination of mineral profiles in germinated legumes cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and broad bean (Vicia faba). Res. Soc. Dev. 2020, 9, e673991110262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandra, P.; Gill, S.C.; Prajapat, K.; Barman, A.; Chhokar, R.S.; Tripathi, S.C.; Singh, G.; Kumar, R.; Rai, A.K.; Khobra, R.; et al. Response of wheat cultivars to organic and inorganic nutrition: Effect on the yield and soil biological properties. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adediran, J.; Taiwo, L.; Akande, M.; Sobulo, R.; Idowu, O. Application of organic and inorganic fertilizer for sustainable maize and cowpea yields in Nigeria. J. Plant Nutr. 2005, 27, 1163–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuon, D. Effects of leonardite and nutrient management on growth and yield of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.). JSAT 2022, 3, 25–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nazli, R.I.; Inal, I.; Kusvuran, A.; Demirbas, A.; Tansi, V. Effects of different organic materials on forage yield and nutrient uptake of silage maize (Zea mays L.). J. Plant Nutr. 2016, 39, 912–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joshi, D.; Gediya, K.; Patel, J.; Birari, M.; Gupta, S. Effect of organic manures on growth and yield of summer cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp] under middle Gujarat conditions. Agric. Sci. Digest. 2016, 36, 134–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yadav, A.K.; Naleeni, R.; Dashrath, S. Effect of organic manures and biofertilizers on growth and yield parameters of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.). J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2019, 8, 271–274. [Google Scholar]
- Alaboz, P.; Işıldar, A.A.; Müjdeci, M.; Şenol, H. Effects of different vermicompost and soil moisture levels on pepper (Capsicum annuum) grown and some soil properties. YYU J. Agr. Sci. 2017, 27, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jan, K.; Rather, A.M.; Boswal, M.V.; Ganie, A.H. Effect of biofertilizer and organic fertilizer on morpho-physiological parameters associated with grain yield with emphasis for further improvement in wheat yield production (Bread wheat=Triticum aestivum L.). Int. J. Agr. Crop Sci. 2014, 7, 178–184. [Google Scholar]
- Basker, A.; Macgregor, A.; Kirkman, J. Influence of soil ingestion by earthworms on the availability of potassium in soil: An incubation experiment. Biol. Fertil. Soils 1992, 14, 300–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaterjee, B.; Ghanti, P.; Thapa, U.; Tripathy, P. Effect of organic nutrition in sprouting broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. var. Italica Plenck). Veg. Sci. 2005, 33, 51–54. [Google Scholar]
- Jakobsen, S.T. Interaction between plant nutrients: III. Antagonism between potassium, magnesium and calcium. Acta Agr. Scand. B-S P 1993, 43, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, K.; Cakmak, I.; Wang, S.; Zhang, F.; Guo, S. Synergistic and antagonistic interactions between potassium and magnesium in higher plants. Crop J. 2021, 9, 249–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, S.; Bhandari, S.; Purohit, H. Effect of organic manure and mineral nutrients on nutrient uptake and yield of cowpea. J. Indian Soc. Soil. Sci. 2002, 50, 475–480. [Google Scholar]
- Yolcu, H. The effects of some organic and chemical fertilizer applications on yield, morphology, quality and mineral content of common vetch (Vicia sativa L.). Turk. J. Field Crops 2011, 16, 197–202. [Google Scholar]
Applications | Application Doses | Properties of Fertilizer Forms (*) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Organic Matter (%) | Total Nitrogen (%) | Total Phosphorus P2O5 (%) | EC (dS/m) | pH | |||
Control | Control | 0 kg ha−1 | - | - | - | - | - |
Chemical fertilization (CF) | CF | 60 kg ha−1 | - | 20 N | 20 P | - | - |
Farmyard manure (FM) | FM1 | 2500 kg ha−1 | 61.00 | 0.35 | 0.10 | 2.10 | 7.70 |
FM2 | 5000 kg ha−1 | ||||||
FM3 | 7500 kg ha−1 | ||||||
FM4 | 10,000 kg ha−1 | ||||||
Leonardite (L) | L1 | 5000 kg ha−1 | 55.00 | 1.40 | 0.17 | 1.30 | 6.00 |
L2 | 10,000 kg ha−1 | ||||||
Vermicompost (V) | V1 | 2500 kg ha−1 | 56.10 | 2.20 | 0.46 | 3.60 | 6.50 |
V2 | 5000 kg ha−1 | ||||||
V3 | 7500 kg ha−1 | ||||||
V4 | 10,000 kg ha−1 |
Depth (cm) | Soil Class | Observed Parameters | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Saturation (%) | pH | Salinity (%) | Lime CaCO3 (%) | Organic Matter (%) | K (mg kg−1) | P (mg kg−1) | ||
0–30 | Clay | 85.80 | 7.28 | 0.30 | 1.00 | 2.08 | 266.80 | 10.46 |
30–60 | Clay | 86.35 | 7.31 | 0.26 | 1.10 | 1.79 | 291.70 | 4.92 |
60–90 | Clay | 83.60 | 7.30 | 0.23 | 2.90 | 1.23. | 293.90 | 3.65 |
Treatments | Plant Height (cm) | Stem Diameter (mm) | First Pod Height (cm) | Number of Branches (Pieces/Plant) | Number of Pods (Pieces/Plant) | Number of Seeds (Pieces/Pod) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 111.8 | C–F | 6.97 | D | 37.27 | BC | 4.63 | BC | 7.11 | F | 8.22 | C | |
Chemical Fertilization | 139.3 | A | 8.27 | AB | 39.33 | AB | 4.86 | A | 7.98 | EF | 8.66 | BC | |
Vermicompost (V) | V1 | 106.4 | EF | 7.37 | CD | 33.81 | C | 4.37 | BC | 8.35 | DE | 8.80 | A–C |
V2 | 109.5 | D–F | 7.72 | BC | 39.26 | AB | 4.14 | CD | 8.70 | DE | 8.49 | C | |
V3 | 118.3 | B–D | 8.05 | AB | 40.25 | AB | 4.42 | BC | 8.37 | DE | 8.64 | BC | |
V4 | 139.1 | A | 7.69 | BC | 36.99 | BC | 4.13 | CD | 9.92 | BC | 8.83 | A–C | |
Farmyard manure (FM) | FM1 | 115.3 | C–E | 7.37 | CD | 34.42 | C | 3.95 | D | 10.58 | AB | 8.36 | C |
FM2 | 102.5 | F | 7.62 | B–D | 36.81 | BC | 3.53 | E | 8.43 | DE | 8.37 | C | |
FM3 | 115.0 | C–E | 7.65 | BC | 40.26 | AB | 3.98 | D | 9.04 | CD | 8.21 | C | |
FM4 | 122.3 | BC | 7.68 | BC | 40.26 | AB | 4.33 | BC | 10.69 | AB | 9.39 | A | |
Leonardite (L) | L1 | 127.0 | B | 7.35 | CD | 42.03 | A | 3.98 | D | 8.52 | DE | 8.51 | C |
L2 | 119.8 | B–D | 8.41 | A | 37.63 | BC | 4.46 | BC | 11.48 | A | 9.25 | AB | |
CV | 5.583 | * | 5.122 | * | 6.637 | * | 4.765 | * | 5.909 | * | 4.687 | * |
Treatments | Total Chlorophyll before Flowering (SPAD) | Total Chlorophyll after Flowering (SPAD) | 1000 Seed Weight (g) | Protein Ratio (%) | Yield (kg ha−1) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 59.26 | A | 53.26 | DE | 17.70 | A–C | 23.92 | A–C | 3121.7 | EF | |
Chemical Fertilization | 51.09 | D | 56.45 | A–E | 18.12 | AB | 23.14 | DE | 3763.3 | A–C | |
Vermicompost (V) | V1 | 53.71 | B–D | 56.09 | B–E | 17.64 | A–C | 22.69 | E | 3442.5 | C–F |
V2 | 58.80 | A | 60.97 | AB | 17.34 | C | 23.42 | CD | 3575.0 | B–E | |
V3 | 56.30 | AB | 51.25 | EF | 18.12 | AB | 23.61 | B–D | 3573.3 | B–E | |
V4 | 55.53 | A–C | 47.10 | F | 18.00 | A–C | 23.42 | CD | 4126.7 | A | |
Farmyard manure (FM) | FM1 | 52.92 | B–D | 54.95 | C–E | 17.57 | BC | 24.21 | A | 3669.6 | A–D |
FM2 | 50.88 | D | 59.08 | A–C | 18.17 | AB | 23.65 | B–D | 3275.8 | D–F | |
FM3 | 55.89 | A–C | 61.90 | A | 18.01 | A–C | 23.51 | B–D | 4026.3 | AB | |
FM4 | 55.80 | A–C | 61.58 | AB | 17.74 | A–C | 23.45 | CD | 3043.3 | F | |
Leonardite (L) | L1 | 52.25 | CD | 60.05 | A–C | 17.30 | C | 23.29 | D | 3110.8 | EF |
L2 | 56.71 | AB | 58.70 | A–D | 18.35 | A | 24.00 | AB | 3867.1 | A–C | |
CV | 4.278 | * | 5.994 | * | 2.359 | * | 1.334 | * | 8.055 | * |
Treatments | P (g kg−1) | K (g kg−1) | Ca (g kg−1) | Mg (g kg−1) | Fe (mg kg−1) | Mn (mg kg−1) | Zn (mg kg−1) | Cu (mg kg−1) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 5.15 | AB | 13.58 | AB | 1.14 | AB | 1.90 | A | 49.22 | CD | 17.69 | A | 35.92 | A–C | 9.35 | B | |
Chemical Fertilization | 4.96 | A–D | 13.46 | BC | 1.02 | D | 1.84 | A–C | 46.21 | DE | 16.71 | CD | 34.76 | B–D | 9.47 | AB | |
Vermicompost (V) | V1 | 4.94 | B–D | 13.35 | B–D | 1.01 | D | 1.84 | A–C | 55.19 | A | 16.92 | B–D | 33.11 | D | 9.21 | B |
V2 | 5.15 | AB | 13.89 | A | 1.10 | A–C | 1.89 | AB | 53.33 | AB | 17.63 | A | 34.17 | CD | 9.66 | AB | |
V3 | 4.86 | DE | 13.14 | CD | 1.09 | A–C | 1.79 | BC | 46.47 | DE | 17.68 | A | 34.87 | B–D | 9.21 | B | |
V4 | 4.88 | C–E | 13.03 | D | 1.03 | CD | 1.74 | C | 44.54 | E | 16.30 | D | 34.80 | B–D | 8.67 | C | |
Farmyard manure (FM) | FM1 | 4.76 | DE | 13.32 | B–D | 1.08 | A–D | 1.78 | C | 48.34 | CD | 16.66 | CD | 34.25 | CD | 9.46 | AB |
FM2 | 4.71 | E | 13.34 | B–D | 1.15 | A | 1.81 | A–C | 51.32 | BC | 17.17 | A–C | 34.07 | CD | 9.31 | B | |
FM3 | 4.79 | DE | 13.22 | B–D | 1.11 | AB | 1.80 | A–C | 48.14 | CD | 17.43 | AB | 34.00 | CD | 9.29 | B | |
FM4 | 5.10 | A–C | 13.41 | BC | 1.07 | B–D | 1.82 | A–C | 50.62 | BC | 17.41 | AB | 37.48 | A | 9.21 | B | |
Leonardite (L) | L1 | 5.17 | A | 13.54 | AB | 1.11 | AB | 1.83 | A–C | 48.02 | C–E | 17.22 | A–C | 36.84 | AB | 9.84 | A |
L2 | 4.95 | A–D | 13.45 | BC | 1.08 | A–D | 1.80 | A–C | 47.90 | C–E | 17.16 | A–C | 34.77 | B–D | 9.31 | B | |
CV | 2.685 | * | 1.669 | * | 3.769 | * | 3.309 | * | 4.236 | * | 2.131 | * | 3.682 | * | 2.876 | * |
Observed Parameters | PH | SD | FPH | NB | NPP | NSP | TCBF | TCAF | TSW | PR | Y | P | K | Ca | Mg | Fe | Mn | Zn | Cu |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Plant height (PH) | 1 | 0.320 | 0.309 | 0.420 * | 0.190 | 0.120 | −0.120 | −0.330 | 0.090 | −0.100 | 0.305 | 0.073 | 0.316 | 0.308 | 0.384 * | 0.310 | 0.104 | −0.135 | 0.273 |
Stem diameter (SD) | 1 | 0.128 | 0.376 * | 0.410 * | 0.080 | −0.121 | −0.013 | 0.270 | −0.010 | 0.330 | 0.151 | 0.164 | −0.019 | 0.100 | −0.152 | −0.206 | 0.183 | 0.294 | |
First pod height (FPH) | 1 | 0.022 | −0.120 | 0.133 | 0.081 | 0.411 * | −0.078 | 0.053 | −0.021 | 0.251 | 0.305 | 0.132 | 0.265 | 0.072 | −0.187 | 0.010 | 0.207 | ||
Number of branches (NB) | 1 | −0.022 | 0.048 | 0.187 | −0.285 | 0.046 | −0.130 | 0.095 | 0.086 | 0.078 | −0.329 * | 0.151 | 0.333 * | −0.136 | −0.235 | 0.094 | |||
Number of pods per plant (NPP) | 1 | 0.340 * | −0.034 | 0.083 | 0.017 | 0.388 * | 0.282 | −0.080 | −0.074 | 0.054 | −0.079 | −0.401 | −0.139 | 0.149 | 0.107 | ||||
Number of seed per pod (NSP) | 1 | −0.040 | 0.067 | 0.336 * | −0.150 | −0.040 | −0.340 | 0.024 | −0.125 | −0.195 | −0.210 | −0.021 | −0.342 * | −0.051 | |||||
Total chlorophyll before flowering (TCBF) | 1 | −0.110 | −0.060 | 0.118 | −0.040 | −0.210 | −0.166 | −0.279 | −0.149 | −0.030 | −0.430 ** | −0.236 | −0.176 | ||||||
Total chlorophyll after flowering (TCAF) | 1 | −0.170 | 0.101 | −0.160 | 0.340 * | 0.186 | −0.035 | 0.109 | −0.460 | −0.012 | 0.175 | 0.017 | |||||||
1000 seed weight (TSW) | 1 | −0.030 | 0.247 | −0.070 | 0.124 | −0.152 | 0.016 | 0.211 | −0.060 | −0.046 | 0.200 | ||||||||
Protein ratio (PR) | 1 | 0.265 | −0.020 | −0.013 | −0.202 | −0.033 | 0.001 | −0.353 * | −0.041 | 0.079 | |||||||||
Yield (Y) | 1 | −0.040 | −0.012 | 0.106 | −0.072 | −0.103 | −0.141 | 0.112 | 0.235 | ||||||||||
Phosphorus (P) | 1 | 0.486 ** | 0.036 | 0.496 ** | 0.227 | 0.214 | 0.655 ** | 0.422 * | |||||||||||
Potassium (K) | 1 | 0.463 ** | 0.649 ** | 0.210 | 0.429 ** | −0.048 | 0.732 ** | ||||||||||||
Calcium (Ca) | 1 | 0.472 ** | −0.060 | 0.604 ** | 0.079 | 0.480 ** | |||||||||||||
Magnesium (Mg) | 1 | 0.314 | 0.547 ** | 0.191 | 0.478 ** | ||||||||||||||
Ferrium (Fe) | 1 | 0.185 | −0.071 | 0.159 | |||||||||||||||
Manganese (Mn) | 1 | 0.142 | 0.323 | ||||||||||||||||
Zinc (Zn) | 1 | 0.106 | |||||||||||||||||
Cupper (Cu) | 1 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yürürdurmaz, C. Impact of Different Fertilizer Forms on Yield Components and Macro–Micronutrient Contents of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.). Sustainability 2022, 14, 12753. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912753
Yürürdurmaz C. Impact of Different Fertilizer Forms on Yield Components and Macro–Micronutrient Contents of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.). Sustainability. 2022; 14(19):12753. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912753
Chicago/Turabian StyleYürürdurmaz, Cengiz. 2022. "Impact of Different Fertilizer Forms on Yield Components and Macro–Micronutrient Contents of Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.)" Sustainability 14, no. 19: 12753. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912753