Next Article in Journal
Combined Effects of Kaolin Particle Film and Training System on Sunburn Mitigation and Wine Aroma
Previous Article in Journal
Novel Insights into Sustainable Viticulture
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Horticulturae
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/horticulturae12050553
horticulturae-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Assessing Nutrient Accumulation in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Grown in Soils with Different Texture: Response to Application of P and Zn Fertilizers, and Rhizobial Inoculant

by
Sipho Thulane Maseko
1,2,*,
Phinias Malesele Nong
1 and
Puffy Soundy
1
1
Department of Crop Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, Private Bag X680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa
2
Indigenous Technological Knowledge Unit, Department of Agriculture and Animal Health, College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of South Africa, Private Bag X6, Florida 1710, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Horticulturae 2026, 12(5), 553; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae12050553
Submission received: 13 January 2026 / Revised: 17 February 2026 / Accepted: 19 February 2026 / Published: 30 April 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Plant Nutrition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Although adding phosphorus (P) and zinc (Zn) fertilizers to rhizobial inoculation improves nutrient accumulation in chickpeas, it is unclear which is most effective. This study evaluated whether inoculating chickpeas grown in silty-loam or silty-clay-loam soil with liquid- or peat-based rhizobial inoculants, in addition to P and/or Zn fertilizer, alters shoot nutrient concentration. The following genotypes were used: ICCV3110, ICCV8101, ICCV97024 and ICCV92944. The following levels of fertilizer were used: no addition of fertilizer, 10 kg/ha Zn, 40 kg/ha P, and Zn plus P. The following combinations of fertilizer and rhizobial inoculation were used: Zn plus P (peat-based inoculant), denoted as Zn + P + RP, and Zn plus P (liquid-based inoculant), denoted as Zn + P + RL. Our results showed that ICCV97024 exhibited increased shoot P, Ca, Mg, Fe and Zn concentrations when grown in silty-loam soil and increased shoot Ca, Zn, Mn and B concentrations when grown in silty-clay-loam soil. Adding P, or P plus Zn, increased shoot P, while adding Zn, or Zn plus P + RL, enhanced shoot P, Fe and B. Adding Zn increased shoot Zn, K and Ca, and adding Zn plus P + RP increased shoot Ca. Overall, chickpeas grown in silty-loam soil accumulated the most nutrients. Adding P, P plus Zn and Zn + P + RL improved shoot P, while adding Zn and Zn + P + RP enhanced shoot Zn and Ca, respectively.

1. Introduction

So far, the demand for shelled and/or canned grain of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in South Africa is met through imports from India, Turkey, and Australia, among other countries [1]. The country is making efforts to promote the adoption and cultivation of the food crop through research and pilot projects. The published information, particularly that based on research conducted in South Africa, shows that the grain exhibits low P and Zn levels when grown without adding P fertilizer [2]. This is to be expected because P and Zn are essential nutrient elements that normally limit growth and yield, as well as nutrient accumulation, in food crops and food plants. In contributing to bridging the knowledge gap on the potential of chickpea in South Africa, researchers have published studies on its germination, growth, yield, mineral nutrition, symbiotic N2-fixation, and its rhizospheric P-enzymes.
For example, the rhizobial inoculation of chickpea, apart from markedly improving the number and weight of root nodules, decreased yield and had no significant effect on biomass, grain yield, harvest index and total radiation and intercepted radiation [3]. A study conducted across agroecologies in the Mpumalanga Province of South Africa showed the increased performance of desi- and kabuli-type chickpea inoculated with Mesorhizobium strains [4]. Inoculating desi-type chickpea genotypes with rhizobium strains increased soil pH and nodulation when co-added with biochar in the Limpopo province of South Africa [5]. Also, inoculating desi-type chickpea genotypes with rhizobium strain markedly enhanced grain yield, while rhizobium plus biochar increased biomass, chlorophyll content, and intercepted radiation [6]. Recently, a study revealed that inoculating desi-type chickpea with Bradyrhizobium japonicum increased the concentration of K in the rhizosphere, while rhizobial inoculation plus P fertilizer enhanced the concentration of N, P, K, Ca, and Zn [7]. Notably, the studies conducted in South Africa involving seed inoculation used peat-based rhizobial inoculants.
Apart from the paucity of studies that involved seed inoculation of chickpea with different types of rhizobial inoculants, there are fewer studies that assessed the effect of soil with a contrasting cropping history. Among other properties, the study soils exhibited contrasting textures, rhizobial inoculation, concentrations of nitrate-N, P, and Zn, and CEC. The texture of a soil influences its ability to retain and release nutrients. For example, sandy- and silty-textured soils exhibit a lower retention of nutrients and therefore a poor uptake by roots, largely because of low organic matter content caused by a fast rate of decomposition and low buffer capacity, greater infiltration rates, and poor water holding capacity (weak cohesion between particles) [8]. By contrast, soil that has a percentage of clay-sized particles is less prone to leaching of nutrients, given higher soil moisture preservation capacity, exhibits low rates of organic matter decomposition, has a large specific surface area, and has high buffer capacity [9]. Combined, these properties contribute to higher retention or accumulation of nutrients and therefore greater uptake by the roots. On the effect of different inoculant carriers, published information reports that soil texture exerts a significant effect on bacteria, largely through particle size and aggregates. For example, soils that contain greater percentages of clay-sized particles (finer-textured) offer better protection of bacteria introduced to soils through inoculation, compared to sand- or silt-textured soils [10]. In fact, when liquid-based inoculants are used in clay-textured soils, they exhibit increased colonization, survival, and efficacy [11].
Studies conducted in other countries have shown varied growth, yield, and concentration of nutrients in the shoots of chickpea genotypes grown with the application of P, Zn, and rhizobial inoculation. For example, adding P + Zn + rhizobium inoculation markedly enhanced the growth and yield of chickpea [12]. Another study revealed that the application of 90 kg/ha P, as well as 6 kg/ha Zn, significantly increased shoot N, P, K, and Zn in chickpea [13]. Adding P plus Zn fertilizers to rhizobial inoculation resulted in greater accumulation of P and protein in the shoot of chickpea [14]. Our literature search shows that there is rarely a study on whether the co-addition of P, Zn, as well as peat- and liquid-based rhizobium, affects grain P and Zn in chickpea.
Most smallholder croplands across South Africa and other parts of the world exhibit low concentrations of essential nutrient elements, including Zn and P. In some areas, concentration ranks below that of uncultivated lands [15]. Non-replenishment of P removed during plant harvest is one of the most important factors limiting crop productivity [16]. Estimates show that about two-thirds of croplands across the world contain low or deficient levels of P [17]. Therefore, P-degraded croplands contribute to the widespread P deficiency in plant tissue across the world [18]. In part, the low concentrations of P, especially in cropping fields in inland South Africa, are because the soils are derived from granitic parent material [19]. While plants need all essential nutrients, they need P, among other main macronutrients, in higher concentrations and its deficiency has the most negative effect on their physiological, biochemical, and metabolic functioning [20]. It is for this reason that the deficiency of P, especially in cropping fields in inland South Africa, should be a concern to farmers who intend to adopt and cultivate crops such as chickpea that require irrigation. The application of P, with and without irrigation, increased nodulation, growth, yield-related parameters, water-use efficiency and overall performance of chickpea in areas located in the Northeast of South Africa [3,21,22,23,24].
Zn is a micronutrient that is crucial to soils, plants, humans, and livestock in relatively smaller quantities compared to those of P and other main macronutrients. There exists evidence of low concentration of Zn in commercial and smallholder croplands in South Africa [25,26]. The effects of low Zn in croplands are evidenced by the deficiency of Zn in humans, largely caused by continuous consumption of staple foods grown in croplands characterized by inadequate quantities of Zn. Indeed, South Africans exhibit deficiencies of Zn [27], which have negative effects on their health, wellbeing, and social and economic status. In order to address the deficiency of Zn in croplands, researchers and farmers in the country need to adopt cropping approaches that involve adding Zn fertilizer [28].
The most common rhizobial inoculants that have been produced in South Africa are peat-based. It is not surprising that most published studies involving the rhizobial inoculation of chickpea seeds conducted in South Africa have involved peat-based inoculants. For peat-based rhizobial inoculants, regulations in South Africa require that peat-based inoculants contain at least 5 × 108 cfu/g, and liquid-based inoculants ought to contain 2 × 109 cfu/mL [29]. Compared to peat-carrier-based inoculants, liquid-carrier-based inoculants exhibit various advantageous physicochemical properties and practical applications including: being cheaper and easy to process, handle, and apply; having a lengthy shelf life; comprising water, oil or polymer-based substances that markedly improve the survival of cells during storage and after application, enhance stickiness and stabilization, and have the ability to protect cells against adverse conditions; and exhibiting a rapid and controlled release of bacteria into soils [30]. Given these, among other differences, it was expected that the studied liquid-carrier-based inoculant would markedly improve the accumulation of nutrients in the shoots of chickpea grown in soil with contrasting texture and properties. The liquid inoculant used in this study was, to our knowledge, the first liquid-carrier-based inoculant to be sold in South Africa, as well as the first to bear claims including efficacy on growth, nodulation, and yield of chickpea. While researchers assess the most suitable rhizobial strain for chickpea under South African conditions, this study is intended to contribute new knowledge on the efficacy of widely sold peat-based rhizobial inoculants as well as the newly introduced liquid-based rhizobial inoculants.
Preliminary research conducted in South Africa shows that the co-addition of P and rhizobial inoculant increases rhizospheric P and Zn in desi-type chickpea grown in contrasting textures [7]. Therefore, there is a need for other studies to explore whether the co-addition of P and Zn fertilizers to the rhizobial inoculation of chickpea growing in contrasting textures affects nutrient accumulation in aboveground material. So far, most farmers outside Asia use shoot material of other grain legumes as feed and green manure; this study encourages farmers to consider including the shoots of chickpea as manure. This is because it exhibits greater nutritive value as feed to livestock and as green manure due to its markedly low C/N ratio and phytate levels [2]. This study intended to contribute new knowledge through showing that the concentration of nutrient elements of shoot material of chickpea is altered by addition of P + Zn + inoculant. While the growth, yield, and accumulation of nutrients in the aboveground organs of plants can be improved through the application of inorganic fertilizers, which can increase crop yields [31], these parameters are also enhanced by the co-application of inorganic fertilizers with biofertilizers [32,33,34]. Despite these benefits, interestingly, it is mainly commercial crop farmers who utilize rhizobial inoculants along with inorganic fertilizers in South Africa. The majority of smallholder crop farmers are either reluctant to buy or utilize biofertilizers, are not exposed to them, or are unwilling to buy them [35]. Whatever the case, the inoculation of chickpea with rhizobial inoculant has shown significant increases in nodulation, growth, N2 fixation, and nutrient accumulation.
Despite the fact that chickpea grain is sold across South Africa, there exist no published studies on nutrient accumulation, especially when grown with the addition of the most limited nutrient elements, P and Zn. Also, we know little about the benefits of different types of rhizobial inoculants on aboveground nutrient accumulation in chickpea. This research assessed the effects of P, Zn, plus biofertilizers because previous research has shown the response of the grain of chickpea to the application of P plus biostimulants [2]. Exploring the effect of adding P and/or Zn fertilizer to rhizobial inoculation with peat- or liquid-based inoculants could contribute new knowledge that could guide agronomic practices for improving soil fertility and the nutritious aboveground material of chickpea. Notably, some researchers suggest that the enhanced uptake and accumulation of nutrient elements by legumes co-supplied with some inorganic fertilizers containing rhizobial inoculants is achieved through the application of lower-than-recommended rates of the fertilizers [36]. Therefore, for this study, the rate of P used in this study (40 kg/ha) was less than half the rate of P (90 kg/ha) widely used for chickpea grown in South Africa [27]. At the time the study was designed, there was no recommended rate of Zn fertilizer for chickpea in South Africa. Therefore, the rate used was less than half the rate (25 kg/ha) [37] commonly used for chickpea. The objective of the study was to evaluate (i) differences in shoot nutrient accumulation between a liquid-carrier-based inoculant and a solid-carrier-based inoculant, and (ii) carrier x soil texture interactions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Soil Collection and Planting

The silty-clay-loam soil was collected from 0 to 20 cm of cropping fields of the Maduma village, 24°57′60″ S and 28°45′76″ E, at an altitude of 1022 m above sea level; the croplands had no history of rhizobial inoculation and had been used to cultivate maize, sorghum, sunflower, and grain legumes. The silty-loam soil was cored at the Klipplaatdrift Research Station, 25°11′91″ S and 29°00′63″ E, on 982 m above sea level, and the soil had been used to carry out experiments that involved rhizobial inoculation. The station had experiments including maize, grain legumes, and sweet potatoes. Soils from each location were processed separately: mixed thoroughly, subsampled, sieved, and the subsample analyzed for pH, cation exchange capacity (CEC), organic matter, N, P, K, Mg, Ca, S, Zn, Mn, and B. Soil pH was measured using 1:1.5 w/v of soil to CaCl2, organic C was measured as described in [38] while particle size distribution was determined using the method of [39]. Nitrate-N as well as ammonium-N were determined using the water extraction method by [40]. Available P was extracted using the Bray I method [41] while Na, K, Ca, and Mg were determined following the procedure involving ammonium acetate [42]. S was determined as described by [43]. Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, and B were extracted using a di-ammonium ethylene-diaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution [44].
The soil from Maduma had a texture made up of 19% sand, 52% silt and 29% clay; pH (7.17); 50.5 cmol/kg CEC; 1.5% organic carbon; 21.28 mg/kg nitrate-N; 11.71 mg/kg ammonium-N; 3 mg/kg P; 1816 mg/kg K; 28 mg/kg Na; 1149 mg/kg Mg; 7258 mg/kg Ca; 46.71 mg/kg S; 0.13 mg/kg Cu; 0.11 mg/kg Fe; 0.85 mg/kg Mn; 0.18 mg/kg Zn; and 0.22 mg/kg B. The soil from Klipplaatdrift had a texture made up of 6% sand, 87 silt, and 7% clay; pH (6.15); 7 cmol/kg CEC; 0.9% organic carbon; 11.99 mg/kg nitrate-N; 11.82 mg/kg ammonium-N; 18 mg/kg P; 230 mg/kg K; 9 mg/kg Na; 149 mg/kg Mg; 1037 mg/kg Ca; 11.01 mg/kg S; 0.34 mg/kg Cu; 2.99 mg/kg Fe; 14.72 mg/kg Mn; 9.19 mg/kg Zn; and 0.09 mg/kg B.
About 3 kg of each type of soil was thereafter weighed into clean and uncontaminated plastic pots, which were put on benches in a naturally ventilated glasshouse and laid out in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The position of the pots was changed, and these were rotated on a regular basis to minimize possible effects of within-glasshouse heterogeneity. The experiment included desi-type chickpea genotypes, namely, ICCV97024, ICCV92944, ICCV3110, and ICCV8101; levels of fertilizer, namely, no-fertilizer application, adding Zn (zinc sulphate heptahydrate) at 10 kg/ha, adding P (superphosphate) at 40 kg/ha, adding Zn and P; Zn plus P(P(peat-based inoculant)) denoted as [Zn + P + RP]; and Zn plus P(L(liquid-based inoculant)) denoted as [Zn + P + RL]. Inoculation of seeds with the Rp involved dissolving 200 g of inoculum along with about 1.5 g of STIMULYM (a sticker used with inoculant to ensure as many bacteria attach to seeds as possible) thoroughly dissolved in tap water, in a shaded area and under cool weather conditions. Seeds were immersed in the resulting liquid solution, planted, and covered with soil immediately. Inoculation of seeds using the RL involved putting the seeds into a clean container and covering them with the liquid inoculant. The container was thereafter shaken to ensure that the inoculant moistened every seed, and inoculated seeds were planted immediately. The peat-based inoculant contained 5 × 108 cfu/g while the liquid-based inoculant consisted of 2 × 109 cfu/mL. Both the peat-based and liquid-based inoculants had similar rhizobium species, namely, Bradyrhizobium japonicum. For each of the selected treatments (control Zn, P, Zn plus P, Zn + P + RL, and Zn + P + RP) and for each study genotype (ICCV97024, ICCV92944, ICCV3110, and ICCV8101), there were three replicates. Two seeds of each genotype were sown at a depth of 2.5 cm, and thinned to one seedling after germination. The soil was kept at field capacity throughout the experiment.

2.2. Plant Harvest, Processing, and Analysis of Macro- and Micronutrients

During the mid-flowering growth stage, the aboveground part of each plant stand was cut off at the crown level, put into a pre-labeled sample paper bag and oven-dried at 65 °C to constant weight. Determination of P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn, Mn, and B in shoots of chickpea was done by ashing 1 g of ground sample in a porcelain crucible at 500 °C overnight. This was followed by dissolving the ash in 5 mL of 6 M HCl and placing it in an oven at 50 °C for 30 min, and then 35 mL of deionized water was added. The mixture was filtered through Whatman no. 1 filter paper [45]. Mineral element concentration in plant extracts was determined using the inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometer (ICP-MS).

2.3. Statistical Analysis

The data generated from this study were analyzed using the STATISTICA software program version 10.0 (StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA). The concentrations of macro- and micro-nutrients were compared between the test genotypes using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Similarly, the shoot concentration of the mineral nutrients was compared between the fertilizer and inoculation treatments. Where treatment means showed significant differences, Fisher’s Least Significant Difference was used to separate the means at p ≤ 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Shoot Mineral Accumulation: Response to Genotype and Adding P, Zn, and Rhizobial Inoculation

When grown in the silty-loam soil, ICCV3110 exhibited greater shoot Mn and B, while ICCV8101 showed markedly increased shoot Ca and B (Table 1). ICCV97024 exhibited significantly enhanced shoot P, Ca, Mg, and Zn, while ICCV92944 had greater shoot P, Fe, Zn, Mn, and B. Chickpea grown without fertilization but with inoculation showed greater shoot K, Ca, Mg, Mn, and B. Application of Zn markedly increased shoot Zn and Mn while adding P fertilizer increased shoot P. Application of Zn plus P fertilizers enhanced shoot P.
When planted in the silty-clay-loam soil, ICCV8101 had greater shoot K, Ca, Mg, Fe, and Mn (Table 2). ICCV92944 revealed increased shoot Zn, Mn, and B, while ICCV97024 had greater shoot K, Ca, Zn, and B. Control plants had markedly greater shoot Mn and B. Adding P fertilizer increased shoot P, while application of Zn plus P fertilizers also markedly enhanced shoot P. The Zn + P + RP treatment increased shoot P and Ca, while the Zn + P + RL treatment had greater shoot Fe and Zn.
Of the study soil textures, chickpea grown in the silty-loam soil exhibited greater shoot P, Ca, Zn, and Mn (Table 3). Chickpea grown in the silty-clay-loam soil showed increased shoot K and Fe.

3.2. Interactions on Shoot Mineral Accumulation

The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture on shoot P shown in Figure 1A revealed that adding P fertilizer significantly increased the shoot P of ICCV3110, ICCV8101, and ICCV92944 grown in the silty-loam soil, as well as the shoot P of ICCV8101 and ICCV92944 planted in the silty-clay-loam soil. The application of Zn plus P enhanced shoot P in ICCV3110 and ICCV92944 established in the silty-loam soil, as well as the shoot P of ICCV8101 and ICCV92944 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil (Figure 1A). While adding Zn + P + RP increased shoot P in ICV8101 and ICCV92944 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil, the application of Zn + P + RL enhanced shoot P in ICCV97024 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil. The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture on shoot K in Figure 1B shows that adding Zn + P + RL markedly enhanced the nutrient in ICCV3110 established in the silty-clay-loam soil. Application of P fertilizer to ICCV92944 increased shoot K. The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture revealed that the control plants of ICCV97024 had greater shoot Ca (Figure 1C). Also, the application of Zn + P + RP markedly enhanced shoot Ca in ICCV97024. The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture revealed that the control plants of ICCV97024 had greater shoot Mg (Figure 1D).
The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture shown in Figure 2A revealed that control plants of ICCV8101 grown in the silty-loam soil, as well as plants of ICCV3110 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil, had greater shoot Fe. Adding Zn fertilizer to ICCV3110 increased shoot Fe, while application of Zn + P + RL to ICCV92944 increased shoot Fe. The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture on shoot Zn revealed that the micronutrient was increased by adding Zn fertilizer to ICCV3110, ICCV8101, and ICCV97024 grown in the silty-loam soil, as well as for ICCV8101, ICCV97024, and ICCV92944 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil (Figure 2B). Also, the application of Zn + P + RL to ICCV8101 and ICCV97024 planted in the silty-clay-loam soil enhanced shoot Zn. Control plants of ICCV3110, ICCV8101, and ICCV97024 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil improved shoot Zn. The interactive effect of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture shown in Figure 2C revealed that control plants of ICCVV3110, ICCV97024, and ICCV92944 grown in the silty-loam soil, as well as that of ICCV3110 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil, had greater shoot Mn. Also, shoot Mn was greater with the application of Zn fertilizer to ICCV8101 grown in the silty-loam soil. Shoot B was increased in control plants of ICCV3110 and ICCV92944 planted in the silty-clay-loam soil, as shown by the interactive effects of genotype x fertilizer x soil texture (Figure 2D). Adding Zn fertilizer enhanced the shoot B of ICCV97024 planted in the silty-clay-loam soil, while the application of Zn + P + RL improved the shoot B of ICCV8101 grown in the silty-clay-loam soil.

4. Discussion

In this study, the selected desi-type chickpea genotypes revealed significant differences in the concentration of macro- and micro-nutrients in shoots (Table 1). Several studies have shown that ICCV97024 and ICCV92944 exhibit relatively larger seeds, as well as root and shoot dry weight, compared to other desi-type chickpea [46]. Also, ICCV92944 is reported to have larger aboveground and belowground biomass [27]. Genotypic variation on these attributes, especially the relatively larger seed size, contributes to enhanced uptake and accumulation of nutrients in aboveground plant organs. Also, this finding is not surprising because studies have shown significant variation in the concentration of mineral nutrients in the aboveground parts of chickpea [47,48]. In particular, when grown under South African conditions, ICCV92944, ICCV97024, ICCV3110 and ICCV8101 exhibited marked differences in their concentration of macro- and micro-nutrients in the grain [2]. In general, genotypes of the same plant species do show differences in the accumulation of mineral nutrients in organs. The literature shows that such variation is partly caused by differences in the uptake and translocation of nutrients, variation in genetic differences, different root architecture, as well as leaf photosynthetic activity [49,50,51].
When grown in the selected types of soil, ICCV97024 ranked among the genotypes that accumulated the highest concentration of the test mineral nutrients, including P, Ca, Mg, Fe, and Zn in the silty-loam soil and Ca, Zn, Mn, and B in the silty-clay-loam soil (Table 1). Although the grain of ICCV97024 had the least P, Zn and Fe, it contained the greatest Mg [2]. Genotype ICCV97024 recorded the lowest pH in the rhizosphere when grown under different agro-ecologies and exhibited a higher accumulation of rhizospheric P, Ca, Zn and Fe [52]. Given this ability, it is likely that the N2-fixing genotype exhibits an increased accumulation of mineral nutrients mainly through and due to this mechanism. Although not determined in this study, it is possible that the decreased rhizospheric pH increased the solubilization, uptake and accumulation of the selected mineral nutrients in both types of soil [53,54]. Genotype ICCV92944 mimicked the trend shown by ICCV97024 in that it also accumulated greater P, Fe, Zn, Mn, and B when grown in the silty-loam soil, as well as K, Ca, Zn, and B when planted in the silty-clay-loam soil (Table 1). The highest intracellular acid phosphatase (APase) activity of ICCV92944 was shown by chickpea grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soils, and showed significantly greater extracellular APase in the silty-loam soil [55]. Through the increased phosphatase activity, ICCV92944 could have likely increased the solubility, uptake and accumulation of P but also other nutrients, including Zn and Fe [56].
Chickpea grown in both the silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soils accumulated the highest P concentration in shoots out of all the tested genotypes planted with the application of P and those raised with the addition of Zn and P (Table 1; Figure 1; Figure 2). As expected, the application of P increased the concentration of P in shoots of the test chickpea genotypes in this study. Markedly enhanced tissue P concentrations after the application of P fertilizer is a common response by plants, including chickpea [2,57]. Globally speaking, cultivating plants in low-P soils with a supply of P fertilizer markedly enhances the exudation of organic acids by the roots and therefore increases the capacity of exudates to mobilize P, including improving the activity of microorganisms in the soil, all of which leads to an increase in P concentration in the rhizosphere soil [58]. Increased P concentration in the rhizosphere results in a marked increase in uptake and accumulation [59]. In addition, the application of P fertilizer is synergistic because it results in increased availability and uptake of other nutrients [60]. These factors, individually or in combination, could explain the increased accumulation of P in the shoots of the desi chickpea genotypes.
Also, when established in the silty-clay-loam soil, the supply of Zn and P promoted the highest accumulation of P in shoots. This is a significant finding because, in the past, these were applied with caution in order to avoid the reported antagonistic effect that was caused by the over-application of one of these nutrients over the other. For example, Zn bioavailability in the grain of cereals decreased as P application exceeded 50 kg/ha [61]. However, the application of Zn (16 kg/ha) + P (60 kg/ha) increased grain Zn and P content [62]. According to the literature, this antagonistic effect largely occurs when the concentrations of P and Zn are deficient in the growth medium [63]. In this study, however, their co-application enhanced the accumulation of P in shoots, an indication that perhaps the soil had sufficient Zn and P or that the rates that were supplied were optimal and balanced (none was toxic), resulting in a synergistic effect.
This study is the first to show that adding Zn and P to inoculation with liquid-based rhizobial inoculant increases the highest shoot concentrations of P, Fe and B in chickpea planted in silty-clay-loam soil. The better performance of the agricultural inputs, especially the liquid-based inoculant, could have been a result of it containing and maintaining greater rhizobial populations and densities that were most effective [64] and superior in solubilization of bound soil P, Fe, and B forms for increased uptake in the silty-clay-loam soil. Also, as reported [11], when liquid-based inoculants are used in finer-textured soils with improved soil organic carbon, such as the silty-clay-loam soil used in this study, they exhibit increased colonization, survival, and efficacy, which explains the results shown in this study.
Traditionally, rhizobium inoculants are produced to enhance N2-fixation; however, when co-applied with synthetic fertilizers, these increase the concentration of nutrients in the rhizosphere as well as in belowground and aboveground plant organs [65,66]. In addition to the mechanisms of P and Zn, the rhizobial inoculant can synthesize siderophores, phytohormones such as auxins, cytokinins and gibberelins, lumichrome, and riboflavin; combined, these increase the accumulation of P in aboveground plant organs [4]. Taken together, the combined application of Zn and P plus the liquid-based rhizobium inoculant increased the accumulation of P in the shoots of the test chickpea grown in the silty-clay-loam soil.
As also shown in other studies [67,68], the application of Zn increased the concentration of the micronutrient in shoots of Zn-fertilized chickpea (Table 1; Figure 2). The increase in Zn accumulation could have been caused by the fact that more than 90% of Zn in soil is largely bound to particles; therefore, the application and increase in Zn fertilizer alleviates this challenge and increases accumulation in plant organs [69]. Plants raised in the silty-loam soil with the application of Zn had markedly higher K and Ca in shoots compared to their counterparts, while in the silty-clay-loam soil, the application of Zn plus P coupled with inoculation with the peat-based rhizobial inoculant increased the concentration of Ca in the shoots of chickpea. Basically, the supply of Zn or Zn and P plus peat-based rhizobial inoculant increased shoot Ca in chickpea. The application of the optimum concentration of zinc or phosphorus, as well as the rhizobial inoculation of legumes, has been shown to increase the accumulation of calcium in plants [70,71,72]. This background, therefore, could explain the observed increase in shoot Ca promoted by the application of either Zn or Zn and P plus rhizobial inoculant to the test chickpea genotypes used in this study.
The results of this study showed that the plantation of desi chickpea in the silty-loam soil markedly increased the accumulation of P, Ca, Zn, and Mn (Table 1). The concentrations of P, Mn, and Zn were 6-, 17-, and 51-fold higher, respectively, in the silty-loam soil relative to those in the silty-clay-loam soil. Results have shown that the establishment of crops in relatively fertile soils, in particular cropping fields that exhibit greater concentrations of certain mineral nutrients, promotes their increased accumulation in aboveground plant organs [73,74]. It is therefore without a doubt that even in this study, chickpea grown in the silty-loam soil that contained higher concentrations of P, Mn and Zn accumulated markedly higher levels of these mineral nutrients.
This study revealed increased shoot P and Fe in chickpea grown in the silty-clay-loam soil, fertilized with P plus Zn plus the liquid-based rhizobial inoculant. Reasons for this increase could be that the studied silty-clay-loam soil had never received rhizobial inoculation, while the silty-loam soil had received largely peat-based rhizobial inoculants, as it was collected from a research station. Therefore, it is possible that the native rhizobia present in the silty-clay-loam soil were competent in the rhizosphere and compatible with the rhizobia contained in the liquid-based inoculant. Another reason could be that the rhizobia contained in the liquid-based inoculant effectively colonized roots of the chickpea and were able to proliferate, sustainably, on the roots of the studied chickpea grown in the silty-clay-loam soil [75]. Lastly, our findings revealed a significant interaction of genotype x nutrient x texture, suggesting that the study conditions and agronomic practices were ideal to select genotypes and soil types, as well as inputs, for improved chickpea quality. Also, the positive interaction suggests that the study desi-type chickpea genotypes responded differently to the experimental conditions. The superior performance of the genotypes ICCV97024 and ICCV92944 could be because they were more responsive to texture, supplied nutrients, and inoculant, partly due to their greater height, root and shoot biomass. A limitation of this study was the comparison of rhizobial inoculants that had different carriers. Other studies should address this by assessing inoculants with similar carriers.

5. Conclusions

Our findings are the first from the research conducted in South Africa to highlight the importance of soil texture, P and Zn fertilizers, and peat- and liquid-based rhizobial inoculants. The results record genotypic differences in shoot nutrient accumulation among the desi-type chickpea genotypes, grown in soils with different textures, and supplied with P, Zn, and liquid-based rhizobial inoculants. We recommend that other studies assess the effects of peat- and liquid-based inoculants on grain quality as well as assess the rhizosphere of chickpea under contrasting soils and agroecologies over multiple years. Also, there is a need for experiments that evaluate the mechanisms underlying the traits that explain genotypic variation, among others.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.T.M.; methodology, P.M.N. and S.T.M., software, S.T.M., validation, S.T.M. and P.S.; formal analysis, P.M.N. and S.T.M., investigation, P.M.N. and S.T.M., resources, P.S., data curation, S.T.M., writing—original draft preparation, S.T.M., writing—review and editing, S.T.M., visualization, S.T.M. and P.S., supervision, S.T.M. and P.S., project administration, S.T.M. and P.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the Tshwane University of Technology for financial support towards this research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. World Integrated Trade Solution. South Africa Dried Chickpea, Shelled Imports by Country in 2023. Available online: https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/ZAF/year/2023/tradeflow/imports/partner/ALL/product/071320 (accessed on 5 May 2024).
  2. Mpai, T.; Maseko, S.T. Possible benefits and challenges associated with production of chickpea in inland South Africa. Acta Agr. Scan. Sec. B Soil Plant Sci. 2018, 68, 479–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ogola, J.B.O. Growth and yield response of chickpea to rhizobium inoculation: Productivity in relation to interception of radiation. Leg. Res. Int. J. 2015, 38, 837–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Dakora, F.D.; Belane, A.K.; Mohale, K.C.; Makhubedu, T.I.; Makhura, P.; Pule-Meulenberg, F.; Mapope, N.; Mogkelhe, S.N.; Gyogluu, C.; Phatlane, G.P.; et al. Food grain legumes: Their contribution to soil fertility, food security, and human nutrition/health in Africa. In Biological Nitrogen Fixation, 1st ed.; de Bruijn, F.J., Ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015; pp. 1063–1070. [Google Scholar]
  5. Macil, P.J.; Ogola, J.B.O.; Odhiambo, J.J.O. Response of soil pH and nodulation of three chickpea genotypes to biochar and rhizobium inoculation. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2020, 51, 2377–2387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ogola, J.B.O.; Macil, P.J.; Odhiambo, J.J.O. Biochar application and rhizobium inoculation increased intercepted radiation and yield of chickpea in contrasting soil types. Int. J. Plant Prod. 2021, 15, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ogola, J.B.O.; Madzivhandila, V.; Maseko, S.T.; Leboho, T.M. P-fertiliser and rhizobial inoculation increased the concentration of mineral nutrients in the rhizosphere of two chickpea genotypes. Acta Agric. Scan. Sec. B-Soil Plant Sci. 2023, 73, 94–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ding, F.; Huang, Y.; Sun, W.; Jiang, G.; Chen, Y. Decomposition of organic carbon in fine soil particles is likely more sensitive to warming than in coarse particles: An incubation study with temperate grassland and forest soils in northern China. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e95348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Tahir, S.; Marschner, P. Clay addition to sandy soil reduces nutrient leaching–Effect of clay concentration and ped size. Comm. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2017, 48, 1813–1821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Marshall, K. Clay mineralogy in relation to survival of soil bacteria. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 1975, 13, 357–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Van Elsas, J.D.; Dijkstra, A.F.; Govaert, J.M.; van Veen, J.A. Survival of Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis introduced into two soils of different texture in field microplots. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 1986, 38, 151–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Yadav, A.; Singh, D.; Kumar, R.; Sachan, R.; Kumar, K.; Singh, A.; Tiwari, A.; Singh, K.K. Response of different level of phosphorus, zinc and rhizobium inoculation on growth yield attributes and yield of chickpea (Cicer aretinum L.). Int. J. Environ. Clim. Change 2022, 12, 1954–1964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kumar, D.; Kumar, N.; Tiwari, T.; Gautam, M.K.; Sachan, R.; Verma, A.; Mishra, T. Enhancing chickpea and nutrient profile through phosphorus and zinc application. Ecol. Environ. Cons. 2024, 7, S160–S165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Singh, D.; Singh, H. Effect of phosphorus and zinc nutrition on yield, nutrient uptake and quality of chickpea. Ann. Plant Soil. Res. 2012, 14, 71–74. [Google Scholar]
  15. Nezomba, H.; Mtambanengwe, F.; Tittonell, P.; Mapfumo, P. Practical assessment of soil degradation on smallholder farmers’ fields in Zimbabwe: Integrating local knowledge and scientific diagnostic indicators. Catena 2017, 156, 216–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lambers, H. Phosphorus acquisition and utilization in plants. Ann. Rev. Plant Biol. 2022, 73, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Schroder, J.J.; Smit, A.L.; Cordel, D. Improved phosphorus use efficiency in agriculture: A key requirement for its sustainable use. Chemosphere 2011, 84, 822–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hou, E.; Luo, Y.; Kuang, Y.; Chen, C.; Lu, X.; Jiang, L.; Luo, X.; Wen, D. Global meta-analysis shows pervasive phosphorus limitation of aboveground plant production in natural terrestrial ecosystems. Nat. Comm. 2020, 11, 637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Buhmann, C.; Beukes, D.J.; Turner, D.P. Plant nutrient status of soils of the Lusikisiki area, Eastern Cape Province. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 2006, 23, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kirkby, E. Introduction, definition, and classification of nutrients. In Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants, 2nd ed.; Marschner, P., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Madzivhandila, T.; Ogola, J.B.O.; Odhiambo, J.J.O. Growth and yield response of four chickpea cultivars to phosphorus fertilizer rates. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2012, 10, 451–555. [Google Scholar]
  22. Thangwana, N.M.; Ogola, J.B.O. Yield and yield components of chickpea (Cicer arietinum): Response to genotype and planting density in summer and winter sowings. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2012, 10, 710–715. [Google Scholar]
  23. Ogola, J.B.O.; Madzivhandila, T.; Odhiambo, J.J.O. Water use efficiency of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.): Response to genotype and phosphorus fertilizer rates in winter and summer sowings. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2013, 11, 1341–1347. [Google Scholar]
  24. Lusiba, S.; Odhiambo, J.; Ogola, J. Growth, yield and water use efficiency of chickpea (Cicer arietinum): Response to biochar and phosphorus fertilizer application. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2017, 63, 477–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Van Biljon, J.J.; Wright, C.A.; Fouche, D.S.; Botha, A.D.P. A new optimum value for zinc in the main maize producing sandy soils of South Africa. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 2010, 27, 252–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mohale, K.C.; Belane, A.K.; Dakora, F.D. Symbiotic N nutrition, C assimilation, and plant water use efficiency in Bambara groundnut (Vigna subterranean L. Verdc) grown in farmers’ fields in South Africa, measured using 15N and 13C natural abundance. Biol. Fert. Soils 2014, 50, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Shisana, O.; Labadarios, D.; Rehle, T. The South African National Health and Nutrition Examinations Survey (SANHANES-1); HSRC Press: Cape Town, South Africa, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  28. Thompson, B.; Cohen, M. Increased concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide and zinc deficiency. Lancet Glob. Health 2015, 3, e585–e586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  29. Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF). Guidelines on the Data Required for Registration of Biological/Biopesticides Remedies in South Africa. Act 36 of 1947. 2015. Available online: https://www.nda.gov.za/images/Branches/AgricProducHealthFoodSafety/agriculture-inputs-control/guidelines/new-guidelines/guideline-for-registration-process-for-agricultural-remedies-2015.pdf (accessed on 10 December 2025).
  30. Kumaresan, G.; Reetha, D. Survival of Azospirillum brasilense in liquid formulation amended with different chemical additives. J. Phytol. 2011, 3, 48–51. [Google Scholar]
  31. Stewart, W.M.; Dibb, D.W.; Johnson, A.E.; Smyth, T.J. The contribution of commercial fertilizer nutrients to food production. Agron. J. 2005, 97, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kyei-Boahen, S.; Savala, C.E.N.; Chikoye, D.; Abaidoo, R. Growth and yield responses of cowpea to inoculation and phosphorus fertilization in different environments. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ngoroyemoto, N.; Gupta, S.; Kulkarni, M.G.; Finnie, J.F.; Van Staden, J. Effect of organic biostimulants on the growth and biochemical composition of Amaranthus hybridus L. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2019, 124, 87–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Siwik-Ziomek, A.; Szczepanek, M. Soil enzyme activity and sulphur uptake by oilseed rape depending on fertilization and biostimulant application. Acta Agric. Scan. Sect. B–Soil Plant Sci. 2018, 68, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Banka, M.; Aidoo, R.; Abaidoo, R.C.; Fialor, S.C.; Masso, C. Willingness to pay for biofertilizers among grain legume farmers in Northern Ghana. J. Sci. Res. Rep. 2018, 19, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  36. Nyoki, D.; Ndakidemi, P.A. Rhizobium inoculation reduces P and K fertilization requirement in corn-soybean intercropping. Rhizosphere 2018, 5, 51–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Pal, V.; Singh, G.; Dhwaliwal, S.S. Symbiotic parameters, growth, productivity and profitability of chickpea as influenced by zinc sulphate and urea application. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2020, 20, 738–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Walkley, A.; Black, I.A. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934, 37, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Bouyoucos, G.J. Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analyses of soils. Agron. J. 1962, 54, 464–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Griffin, G.; Jokela, W.; Ross, D.; Pettinelli, D.; Morris, T.; Wolf, A. Recommended soil nitrate tests. Chapter 4. In Recommended Soil Testing Procedures for the Northeastern United States, 3rd ed.; Northeastern Regional Publication; University of Delaware: Newark, DE, USA, 2011; Volume 493, pp. 27–38. [Google Scholar]
  41. Bray, R.H.; Kurtz, L.T. Determination of total, organic, and available forms of phosphorus in soils. Soil Sci. 1945, 59, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Du Plessis, S.F.; Burger, R.D.T. A comparison of chemical extraction methods for the evaluation of phosphate availability to topsoil. S. Afr. J. Agric. Sci. 1964, 8, 11–13. [Google Scholar]
  43. Fertilizer Society of South Africa. Manual of Soil Analysis Methods No. 37, 1st ed.; Lynwood Ridge: Pretoria, South Africa, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  44. Trierweiler, J.F.; Lindsay, W.L. EDTA-Ammonium carbonate soil test for zinc. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1969, 33, 49–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Giron, H.C. Comparison between dry ashing and wet digestion in the preparation of plant materials for atomic absorption analysis. Atom. Abs. News. 1973, 12, 28–29. [Google Scholar]
  46. Meshram, K. Evaluation of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes for Late Sown High Temperature Conditions. Ph.D. Thesis, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, India, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  47. Khadari, A.; Mouradi, M.; Ghoulam, C. Growth and mineral nutrition of the chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) rhizobium symbiosis under water deficit. Braz. Arch. Biol. Tech. 2017, 60, e17160325. [Google Scholar]
  48. Siddiqui, S.N.; Umar, S.; Husen, A.; Iqbal, M. Effect of phosphorus on plant growth and nutrient accumulation in a high and low zinc accumulating chickpea genotypes. Ann. Phyt. 2015, 4, 102–105. [Google Scholar]
  49. Huang, G.; Hayes, P.E.; Ryan, M.H.; Pang, J.; Lambers, H. Peppermint trees shift their phosphorus-acquisition strategy along a strong gradient of plant-available phosphorus by increasing their transpiration at very low phosphorus availability. Oecologia 2017, 185, 387–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Iqbal, A.; Gui, H.; Zhang, H.; Wang, X.; Pang, N.; Dong, Q.; Song, M. Genotypic variation in cotton genotypes for phosphorus-use efficiency. Agronomy 2019, 9, 689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Duque, L.O.; Villordon, A. Root branching and nutrient efficiency: Status and way forward in root and tuber crops. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Motseo, N.M. Effect of Phosphorus and Biofertilizers on the Growth, Grain Yield and Rhizosphere Mineral Accumulation in Chickpea Genotypes Grown at Klipplaatdrift and Bon Accord, South Africa. Master’s Thesis, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  53. Neumann, G.; Römheld, V. Root excretion of carboxylic acids and protons in phosphorus-deficient plants. Plant Soil 1999, 211, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Maseko, S.T.; Maredi, M.P.; Mathews, C.; Dakora, F.D. Harnessing ecosystem services from biological nitrogen fixation. In The Role of Ecosystem Services in Sustainable Food Systems, 1st ed.; Rusinamhodzi, L., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  55. Moloto, R.M.; Dakora, F.D.; Soundy, P.; Maseko, S.T. Effects of biostimulants on tissue and rhizospheric acid phosphatase activity of chickpea genotypes. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 2021, 28, 180–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Maseko, S.T.; Dakora, F.D. Relationship between acid phosphatase activity and P concentration in organs of Cyclopia and Aspalathus species, and a non-legume of the Cape Floristic Region. J. Plant Ecol. 2019, 12, 387–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Balai, K.; Jajoria, M.; Verma, R.; Deewan, P.; Bairwa, S.K. Nutrient content, uptake, quality of chickpea and fertility status of soil as influenced by fertilization of phosphorus and zinc. J. Pharm. Phytochem. 2017, 6, 392–398. [Google Scholar]
  58. Nuruzzaman, M.; Lambers, H.; Bolland, M.D.A.; Veneklaas, E.J. Phosphorus benefits of different legume crops to subsequent wheat grown in different soils of Western Australia. Plant Soil 2005, 271, 175–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Maseko, S.T.; Dakora, F.D. Rhizosphere acid and alkaline phosphatase activity as a marker of P nutrition in nodulated Cyclopia and Aspalathus species in the Cape fynbos of South Africa. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2013, 89, 289–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhang, W.; Liu, D.; Li, C.; Cui, Z.; Chen, Y.; Russell, Y.; Zou, C. Zinc accumulation and remobilization in winter wheat as affected by phosphorus application. Field Crops Res 2015, 184, 155–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhang, W.; Liu, D.; Liu, Y.; Chen, X.; Zou, C. Overuse of phosphorus fertilizer reduces the grain and flour protein contents and zinc bioavailability of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J. Agr. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 1473–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Imran, M.; Rehim, A.; Hussain, S.; Zafar-ul-Hye, M.; Rehman, H. Efficiency of zinc and phosphorus applied to open-pollinated and hybrid cultivars of maize. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2016, 18, 1249–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Subba Rao, A.; Rupa, T.R. Importance of Zn x P interactions in crop production. Fert. News 2003, 48, 69–82. [Google Scholar]
  64. Allouzi, M.M.; Allouzi, S.M.A.; Keng, Z.X.; Supramaniam, C.V.; Singh, A.; Chong, S. Liquid biofertilizers as a sustainable solution for agriculture. Heliyon 2022, 8, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bargaz, A.; Lyamlouli, K.; Chtouki, M.; Zeroual, Y.; Dhiba, D. Soil microbial resources for improving fertilizers efficiency in an integrated plant nutrient management system. Front. Micro. 2018, 9, 1606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Nyoki, D.; Ndakidemi, P.A. Selected chemical properties of soybean rhizosphere soil as influenced by cropping systems, rhizobium inoculation, and the supply of phosphorus and potassium after two consecutive cropping seasons. Int. J. Agron. 2018, 3426571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Xia, H.; Xue, Y.; Liu, D.; Kong, W.; Xue, Y.; Tang, Y.; Li, J.; Li, D.; Mei, P. Rational application of fertilizer nitrogen to soil in combination with foliar Zn spraying improved Zn nutritional quality of wheat grain. Front Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Liu, D.Y.; Liu, Y.M.; Zhang, W.; Chen, X.P.; Zou, C.Q. Zinc uptake, translocation, and remobilization in winter wheat as affected by soil application of Zn fertilizer. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Cakmak, I.; Kalayci, M.; Ekiz, H.; Braun, H.J.; Kilinc, Y.; Yilmaz, A. Zinc deficiency as a practical problem in plant and human nutrition in Turkey: A NATO science for stability project. Field Crops Res. 1999, 60, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Dakora, F.D. Defining new roles for plant and rhizobial molecules in sole and mixed plant cultures involving symbiotic legumes. New Phytol. 2003, 158, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Cole, J.C.; Smith, M.W.; Penn, C.J.; Cheary, B.S.; Conaghan, K.J. Nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium, and magnesium applied individually or as a slow release or controlled release fertilizer increase growth and yield and affect macronutrient and micronutrient concentration and content of field-grown tomato plants. Sci. Hort. 2016, 211, 420–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Wafula, W.N.; Korir, N.K.; Ojulong, H.F.; Siambi, M.; Gweyi-Onyango, J.P. Protein, calcium, zinc, and iron contents of finger millet grain response to varietal differences and phosphorus application in Kenya. Agronomy 2018, 8, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Masood, S.; Zhao, X.Q.; Shen, R.F. Bacillus pumilus increases boron uptake and inhibits rapeseed growth under boron supply irrespective of phosphorus fertilization. Ann. Bot. 2019, 11, plz036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Irfan, M.; Abbas, M.; Shah, J.A.; Depar, N.; Memon, M.Y.; Sial, N.A. Interactive effect of phosphorus and boron on plant growth, nutrient accumulation and grain yield of wheat grown on calcareous soil. Eurasian J. Soil Sci. 2019, 8, 17–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Bunemann, E.K.; Schwenke, G.D.; Van Zwieten, L. Impact of agricultural inputs on soil organisms—A review. Soil Res. 2006, 44, 379–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Horticulturae 12 00553 g001
Figure 1. Accumulation of macronutrients: P (A), K (B), Ca (C), and Mg (D) in shoots of chickpea grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soils. Mean bars with dissimilar letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) for each genotype.
Figure 1. Accumulation of macronutrients: P (A), K (B), Ca (C), and Mg (D) in shoots of chickpea grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soils. Mean bars with dissimilar letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) for each genotype.
Horticulturae 12 00553 g001
Horticulturae 12 00553 g002
Figure 2. Accumulation of micronutrients: Fe (A), Zn (B), Mn (C), and B (D) in shoots of chickpea grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soils. Mean bars with dissimilar letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) for each genotype.
Figure 2. Accumulation of micronutrients: Fe (A), Zn (B), Mn (C), and B (D) in shoots of chickpea grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soils. Mean bars with dissimilar letters are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05) for each genotype.
Horticulturae 12 00553 g002
Table 1. Effect of fertilizer plus biofertilizer application on macronutrient accumulation in shoots of chickpea genotypes grown in silty-loam soil. Zn + P + RP represents Zinc plus P plus peat-based inoculant, while Zn + P + RL represents Zinc plus P plus liquid-based inoculant. Mean values with dissimilar letters in a column are significantly different at * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001, ns = not significant.
Table 1. Effect of fertilizer plus biofertilizer application on macronutrient accumulation in shoots of chickpea genotypes grown in silty-loam soil. Zn + P + RP represents Zinc plus P plus peat-based inoculant, while Zn + P + RL represents Zinc plus P plus liquid-based inoculant. Mean values with dissimilar letters in a column are significantly different at * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001, ns = not significant.
TreatmentsPKCaMgFeZnMnB
mg/g
Genotype
ICCV31103.59 ± 0.28 b19.65 ± 0.79 a19.33 ± 0.58 ab3.16 ± 0.13 bc0.24 ± 0.03 b0.11 ± 0.00 b0.34 ± 0.03 a0.05 ± 0.001 a
ICCV81012.30 ± 0.24 c19.89 ± 0.58 a20.58 ± 0.58 a3.51 ± 0.14 ab0.14 ± 0.00 c0.09 ± 0.01 b0.30 ± 0.02 ab0.05 ± 0.002 a
ICCV970244.79 ± 0.39 a20.44 ± 0.76 a20.76 ± 0.95 a3.57 ± 0.16 a0.21 ± 0.01 b0.20 ± 0.02 a0.24 ± 0.02 b0.04 ± 0.001 b
ICCV929444.94 ± 0.33 a19.53 ± 1.12 a17.75 ± 0.77 b3.07 ± 0.13 c0.31 ± 0.02 a0.23 ± 0.02 a0.35 ± 0.03 a0.06 ± 0.004 a
Fertilizer
Control3.01 ± 0.24 bc22.85 ± 1.30 a22.73 ± 0.14 a3.91 ± 0.19 a0.21 ± 0.02 a0.14 ± 0.01 cd0.45 ± 0.04 a0.06 ± 0.003 a
Zn2.61 ± 0.25 c21.22 ± 0.88 ab20.71 ± 0.63 ab3.53 ± 0.16 ab0.21 ± 0.01 a0.26 ± 0.02 a0.39 ± 0.02 a0.05 ± 0.002 ab
P5.34 ± 0.43 a18.12 ± 0.61 c18.58 ± 0.86 bc2.89 ± 0.12 c0.21 ± 0.01 a0.10 ± 0.02 d0.27 ± 0.02 b0.04 ± 0.002 b
Zn + P5.06 ± 0.42 a17.84 ± 0.79 c18.86 ± 0.65 bc3.27 ± 0.14 bc0.22 ± 0.02 a0.20 ± 0.01 b0.28 ± 0.03 b0.04 ± 0.002 b
Zn + P + RP3.50 ± 0.37 bc18.50 ± 0.79 c18.28 ± 0.88 c3.02 ± 0.12 bc0.21 ± 0.01 a0.15 ± 0.02 bc0.27 ± 0.03 b0.05 ± 0.002 b
Zn + P + RL3.68 ± 0.34 b19.08 ± 1.03 bc18.48 ± 0.87 bc3.44 ± 0.28 ab0.20 ± 0.01 a0.15 ± 002 bcd0.20 ± 0.02 b0.05 ± 0.003 ab
F-Statistics
Genotype12.92 ***0.24 ns3.58 *2.99 *5.50 **14.76 ***3.31 *5.65 ***
Fertilizer10.05 ***4.50 ***4.29 ***4.76 ***0.23 ns9.66 ***10.02 ***3.39 **
G × F8.81 ***1.40 ns5.23 **14.04 ***4.90 *8.12 ***3.87 *2.2 ns
Table 2. Effect of fertilizer plus biofertilizer application on macronutrient accumulation in shoots of chickpea genotypes grown in silty-clay-loam soil. Zn + P + RP represents Zinc plus P plus peat-based inoculant, while Zn + P + RL represents Zinc plus P plus liquid-based inoculant. Mean values with dissimilar letters in a column are significantly different at * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001, ns = not significant.
Table 2. Effect of fertilizer plus biofertilizer application on macronutrient accumulation in shoots of chickpea genotypes grown in silty-clay-loam soil. Zn + P + RP represents Zinc plus P plus peat-based inoculant, while Zn + P + RL represents Zinc plus P plus liquid-based inoculant. Mean values with dissimilar letters in a column are significantly different at * p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001, ns = not significant.
TreatmentsPKCaMgFeZnMnB
mg/g
Genotype
ICCV31102.09 ± 0.05 a22.65 ± 0.69 b14.62 ± 0.63 b3.12 ± 0.13 b0.46 ± 0.07 ab0.043 ± 0.002 b0.05 ± 0.002 b0.036 ± 0.002 b
ICCV81012.16 ± 0.08 a24.76 ± 0.61 a17.25 ± 0.68 a3.19 ± 0.15 a0.58 ± 0.11 a0.045 ± 0.002 ab0.06 ± 0.003 a0.038 ± 0.001 b
ICCV970241.99 ± 0.06 a22.16 ± 0.53 b15.26 ± 0.58 ab3.37 ± 0.10 b0.27 ± 0.04 b0.053 ± 0.002 a0.06 ± 0.003 a0.051 ± 0.003 a
ICCV929441.99 ± 0.06 a24.53 ± 0.55 a17.31 ± 1.13 a3.45 ± 0.09 b0.27 ± 0.02 b0.054 ± 0.005 a0.05 ± 0.002 b0.054 ± 0.006 a
Fertilizer
Control1.17 ± 0.13 c22.74 ± 0.72 a16.04 ± 0.81 ab3.79 ± 0.19 a0.21 ± 0.01 cd0.045 ± 0.002 b0.067 ± 0.003 a0.066 ± 0.005 a
Zn1.63 ± 0.17 b23.80 ± 0.88 a14.28 ± 0.73 b3.53 ± 0.18 a0.22 ± 0.01 c0.045 ± 0.003 b0.048 ± 0.002 b0.053 ± 0.005 b
P2.10 ± 0.06 a24.09 ± 0.75 a16.68 ± 0.92 ab3.55 ± 0.23 a0.46 ± 0.06 b0.019 ± 0.001 c0.056 ± 0.004 b0.039 ± 0.002 b
Zn + P2.09 ± 0.09 a23.58 ± 0.95 a15.23 ± 0.83 b3.34 ± 0.15 a0.34 ± 0.02 b0.041 ± 0.002 b0.048 ± 0.002 b0.037 ± 0.001 b
Zn + P + RP2.12 ± 0.24 a22.85 ± 0.69 a18.73 ± 1.83 a3.21 ± 0.09 a0.35 ± 0.03 bc0.043 ± 0.002 b0.051 ± 0.003 b0.038 ± 0.002 b
Zn + P + RL1.72 ± 0.16 ab24.08 ± 0.78 a14.69 ± 0.42 b3.45 ± 0.12 a0.69 ± 0.09 a0.055 ± 0.003 a0.053 ± 0.002 b0.046 ± 0.004 ab
F-Statistics
Genotype1.61 ns4.81 **3.53 *7.33 ***4.18 **3.01 *6.12 ***7.11 ***
Fertilizer6.01 ***0.55 ns2.72 *1.49 ns15.11 ***27.74 ***5.30 ***7.71 ***
G × F4.03 *3.59 *6.38 **1.64 ns3.64 ns4.29 **1.14 ns4.56 **
Table 3. Effect of fertilizer plus biofertilizer application on macronutrient accumulation in shoots of chickpea genotypes grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soil. Zn + P + RP represents Zinc plus P plus peat-based inoculant, while Zn + P + RL represents Zinc plus P plus liquid-based inoculant. Mean values with dissimilar letters in a column are significantly different at *** p ≤ 0.001, ns = not significant.
Table 3. Effect of fertilizer plus biofertilizer application on macronutrient accumulation in shoots of chickpea genotypes grown in silty-loam and silty-clay-loam soil. Zn + P + RP represents Zinc plus P plus peat-based inoculant, while Zn + P + RL represents Zinc plus P plus liquid-based inoculant. Mean values with dissimilar letters in a column are significantly different at *** p ≤ 0.001, ns = not significant.
TreatmentPKCaMgFeZnMnB
mg/g
Soil texture
Silty-loam3.87 ± 0.18 a19.80 ± 0.49 b19.61 ± 0.39 a3.33 ± 0.07 a0.21 ± 0.009 b0.17 ± 0.009 a0.31 ± 0.015 a0.05 ± 0.001 a
Silty-clay-loam1.80 ± 0.07 b23.53 ± 0.32 a15.98 ± 0.47 b3.46 ± 0.07 a0.40 ± 0.039 a0.05 ± 0.002 b0.06 ± 0.004 b0.05 ± 0.003 a
F-Statistics
Soil texture110.73 ***40.16 ***35.50 ***1.86 ns20.62 ***156.56 ***243.53 ***1.39 ns
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Maseko, S.T.; Nong, P.M.; Soundy, P. Assessing Nutrient Accumulation in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Grown in Soils with Different Texture: Response to Application of P and Zn Fertilizers, and Rhizobial Inoculant. Horticulturae 2026, 12, 553. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae12050553

AMA Style

Maseko ST, Nong PM, Soundy P. Assessing Nutrient Accumulation in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Grown in Soils with Different Texture: Response to Application of P and Zn Fertilizers, and Rhizobial Inoculant. Horticulturae. 2026; 12(5):553. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae12050553

Chicago/Turabian Style

Maseko, Sipho Thulane, Phinias Malesele Nong, and Puffy Soundy. 2026. "Assessing Nutrient Accumulation in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Grown in Soils with Different Texture: Response to Application of P and Zn Fertilizers, and Rhizobial Inoculant" Horticulturae 12, no. 5: 553. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae12050553

APA Style

Maseko, S. T., Nong, P. M., & Soundy, P. (2026). Assessing Nutrient Accumulation in Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Genotypes Grown in Soils with Different Texture: Response to Application of P and Zn Fertilizers, and Rhizobial Inoculant. Horticulturae, 12(5), 553. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae12050553

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop