Next Article in Journal
The Composition of Essential Oils and the Content of Saponins in Different Parts of Gilia capitata Sims
Previous Article in Journal
Can We Teach Machines to Select Like a Plant Breeder? A Recommender System Approach to Support Early Generation Selection Decisions Based on Breeders’ Preferences
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Crops
Volume 5
Issue 3
10.3390/crops5030032
crops-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

Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc Fertilization on Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Tigray Highlands of Northern Ethiopia

by
Mulugeta Sebhatleab
1,*,
Girmay Gebresamuel
1,
Gebreyohannes Girmay
1,
Yemane Tsehaye
2 and
Mitiku Haile
1
1
Land Resources Management and Environmental Protection, Mekelle University, Mekelle P.O. Box 231, Ethiopia
2
Dry land Crop and Horticulture Sciences, Mekelle University, Mekelle P.O.Box 231, Ethiopia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Crops 2025, 5(3), 32; https://doi.org/10.3390/crops5030032
Submission received: 23 December 2024 / Revised: 1 April 2025 / Accepted: 7 April 2025 / Published: 20 May 2025
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Wheat is a vital staple crop addressing significant nutritional needs. However, it faces micronutrient deficiencies in Ethiopia, prompting the use of balanced nutrient fertilizers to obtain better yields, nutrient concentration, and nutritional quality. This study investigated the effect of different P and Zn fertilizer combinations on wheat yield and nutrient use efficiency across three locations in Tigray, Ethiopia. A randomized complete block design (RCBD) was used with four P levels (0, 10, 20, and 30 kg P ha⁻1), and three Zn levels (0, 5, and 10 kg Zn ha⁻1) in three replications. A balanced application of P and Zn fertilizers significantly increased wheat grain and biomass yields, while applying higher rates of both nutrients (i.e., 30 kg P ha⁻1 and 10 kg Zn ha⁻1) reduced yields. The combined application of 20 kg P ha⁻1 and 5 kg Zn ha⁻1 achieved the best yield, which also improved Zn use efficiency. Increasing Zn application (from 5 to 10 kg Zn ha⁻1) while reducing P (from 20 to 10 kg P ha⁻1) enhanced Zn concentration in wheat grain. These findings highlight the importance of carefully managing P and Zn fertilization to optimize grain yield and Zn bioavailability, contributing to improved food security in diverse agro-climatic conditions.

1. Introduction

Wheat is one of the most dominant staple food crops in the world. It is one of the leading grain crops in coverage and production [1] and provides a major share of nutritional requirements for the world population [2]. Ethiopia has the largest area (1.87 million ha−1) of wheat production in Africa, but its yield (3.1 t ha−1) is low compared, for example, to that of 4.4 t ha−1 in South Africa [3].
Phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N) deficiencies are widespread in the global cereal production systems [4]. Similarly, P and N deficiencies are common [5] in Ethiopia, with 80–90% of soil samples from the highlands containing P levels below 10 mg kg−1 and N levels below 0.1% [6,7]. While the optimal use of N and P fertilizers significantly boosts wheat yield, continuous application can, however, lead to deficiencies in other essential nutrients such as zinc (Zn), iron (Fe), and sulfur (S) [8,9]. Phosphorus deficiency often occurs alongside deficiencies in N, S, Zn, boron(B), and molybdenum(Mo) [7,10], indicating a need to refine P application rates based on crop type, nutrient interactions, soil conditions, and agro-ecological zones [11].Zinc and Fe deficiencies are widespread in sub-Saharan Africa [12]. In Ethiopia, over 98% of soil samples in the highlands are Zn-deficient [13], posing significant challenges to crop productivity and human health [14,15].
The prevalence of Zn deficiency varies spatially, and above 30% of global soils, on average, were deficient in Zn, suggesting the need for targeted interventions [15,16]. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain Zn content commonly ranges between 20 and 35 mg kg−1 [17], while achieving Zn concentrations beyond 40 mg kg−1 in wheat [18] is an important global challenge. Zinc uptake by plants is adversely affected by factors like soil pH, organic matter content, and the amount of P applied to the soil [19,20].
Ethiopia has been promoting blended multi-nutrient fertilizers since 2015 [21] to address micronutrient depletion caused by the continuous use of only N and P fertilizers [22,23]. The country aims to increase crop productivity and the nutritional value of food, contributing to better food security and health outcomes.
Zinc content in the NPSZn blended fertilizer, about 2.5 to 3.3 kg Zn ha−1, is lower than the average application rate, ranging from 5 to 15 kg Zn ha−1, and effectively addresses soil Zn deficiencies and improves both the yield and Zn content of wheat [24,25]. Higher P application and utilization can affect Zn availability in soils [19] and hinders Zn uptake [26]. Considering P fertilizer rates while applying Zn-containing fertilizer is an effective way to reduce the problem [27].
A study on faba bean revealed that the combined application of inoculants, P, and Zn fertilizers significantly increased grain yield, nutrient uptake, and nodulation [28,29]. These findings highlight the importance of considering P and Zn interactions in crop nutrient management, especially in calcareous soils. However, there is a lack of information on the effects of P and Zn interaction on the yield and nutrient use efficiency of wheat in Ethiopia.
A balanced fertilization of macronutrients (N, P, and K) with micronutrients (Zn, Fe, Mn, and S) significantly improves wheat yield, nutrient uptake, and grain quality [30,31]. The growth, development, and yield of the crop are significantly influenced by its physiological and nutritional status. Effective monitoring of these parameters is crucial for optimizing crop health and improving productivity. Various methods have been developed to assess the physiological and nutritional status of wheat. Traditional approaches include field measurements, soil and plant tissue analysis, chlorophyll meter readings, leaf nitrogen concentration, and nutrient concentration analysis using laboratory procedures and instruments [32]. Grain yield is the most important indicator of wheat productivity and is accurately measured after harvesting through manual weighing with a balance [33]. Plant tissue and grain nutrient analysis involves standardized laboratory procedures using various instruments. Analytical techniques include atomic absorption spectrophotometry and emission spectrophotometry [34,35]. Plant analysis determines the total nutrient content in grain and in plant sap [36].
Thus, this study aims to establish optimum rates of Zn and P fertilizers for better yields and nutrient use efficiencies of wheat grown in selected locations of Tigray, northern Ethiopia. To achieve this, a field experiment was conducted in three sites for two consecutive years. Wheat plant physiological status and grain and biomass yield data were measured in the field directly, while grain Zn and P contents were analyzed in the laboratory. Obtaining a full understanding of the combined rates of P and Zn fertilizer application and their interactions on yield and nutrient uptake of staple cereals in specific geographical contexts will enhance the bioavailability of Zn for improved food and nutritional security in the highlands of Ethiopia.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of Experimental Sites

This study was conducted on farmers’ plots at three locations in Tigray, northern Ethiopia, during the growing period (July to November) of two years, 2019 and 2020. These locations are Seret (13°34′49″ N and 39°7′58″ E), Adigolo (12°32′20″ N and 39°30′48″ E), and Mekelle (13°28′43″ N and 39°29′24″ E) (Figure 1). The Mekelle site is approximately 2100 m above sea level (asl) while the other two sites are about 2400 m asl (Figure 1). All study sites have mixed crop–livestock farming systems. Cereal crops such as wheat, barley, teff, and maize were dominantly cultivated in the sites. Pulses like faba beans, peas, and lentils are also grown.
Mekelle and Seret are dry from September to May and rainy and wet from July to August. Adigolo has bimodal rainfall with the main rainy season from July to September and short rains from February to April. Based on metrological data collected (2000–2020), the mean annual rainfall at the Mekelle site was about 618 mm, 760 mm at Seret, and 902 mm at Adigolo (Figure 2). The maximum and minimum temperatures range from 26 to 10 °C at the Mekelle site, 25 to 10 °C at Seret, and 23 to 8 °C at Adigolo. Rainfall distribution was not uniform in the growing season across sites. Before the experiment started in 2019, barley and teff were grown at the Mekelle and Seret sites, while maize and wheat were cultivated in Adigolo.
Adigolo is found in Jurassic sedimentary rocks topped by volcanic Traps of the Ashangi Group [37]. Seret is found in the Amba-Aradam formation, consisting of coarse-grained, compact, and altered fluviatile sandstone and shale [38], overlain by a fine-grained basalt layer. The Mekelle site is characterized by a widespread presence of dolerite dykes and sills at 2000 m asl [39]. The dominant soil types in Adigolo include Leptosols, Fluvisols, and Vertisols [40]. Cambisols, Fluvisols, and Vertisols dominate in Seret [41], and Cambisols are quite common at the Mekelle site.

2.2. Treatments and Experimental Design

A randomized complete block design (RCBD) was used with four P levels (0, 10, 20, and 30 kg P ha−1) and three Zn levels (0, 5, and 10 kg Zn ha−1) with three replications. Depending on the soil type, crop, and other factors, numerous researchers recommend 5 to 15 kg Zn ha−1 [42,43]. In Ethiopia, the general recommendation of P fertilizer application for wheat production is approximately 20–30 kg P ha−1(or 45–60 kg P2O5 ha−1). However, the optimal rate may vary depending on soil conditions and specific locations [44,45]. The treatment plot area was set at 3 × 4 m². The recommended rate of 46 kg N ha−1 was applied to all plots using split application. The P and Zn fertilizers were applied during sowing. Triple superphosphate (46% P2O5), urea (46% N), and zinc oxide (80% Zn) were used as sources of fertilizers. Potassium fertilization was not included in this experiment. The Ethiopian Agricultural Transformation Agency document on the Soil Fertility Status and Fertilizer Recommendation Atlas of Ethiopia [46] indicates that all study sites do not have K deficiency. Other workers also found no yield response to K fertilizers in various soil types of Ethiopia [47,48,49].
The wheat variety of ET-13-A2 (ENKOY/UQ105) was used at a rate of 150 kg ha−1. Planting was carried out at the beginning of July. Manual weeding was performed at all sites, and harvesting was conducted in November.

2.3. Data Collection and Measurements

2.3.1. Soil Sampling and Analysis

Composite soil samples were collected at a depth of 0–30 cm and prepared and analyzed following standard laboratory procedures in the Mekelle Soil Research Center and Mekelle University laboratories. The soil particle size was analyzed using the Bouyoucous hydrometer method [50]. Soil pH and EC were measured from a solution of a 1:2.5 soil-to-water ratio. Soil organic carbon (OC) was determined following the Walkley and Black procedure [51]. Total nitrogen (TN) was determined using the modified micro-Kjeldahl method [52]. Available Phosphorus was determined using the Olsen method [53]. The cation exchange capacity (CEC) and exchangeable bases (Ca, Mg, and K) were measured by the 1N NH4OAc method at pH 7 [54], and measurements were read from a flame photometer for exchangeable potassium (exchangeable K) and from an atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS) for exchangeable Ca and Mg [55]. The micronutrient content of soil extractable Zn was also determined using the DTPA extractable micronutrient solution, which was measured by the atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS) [56].
The soil analysis results indicate that the soils of both Adigolo and Seret have a clay texture, with the Mekelle site being clay loam (Table 1). Adigolo soil has a neutral pH, and the soil of Seret and Mekelle was slightly alkaline. The organic carbon (OC) and total N contents of the soils of all locations were low. The available P of all three sites is below the critical soil available P value (10 mg P kg−1) established for Ethiopian soils [57]. The Zn content was found to be below the critical value (1 mg Zn kg−1) required for the optimum production of wheat [58]. A cluster analysis of the three sites based on the physiographical and soil data using the Minitab 21 Software Application [59] showed 95% similarity in their topsoil characteristics.

2.3.2. Yield Data and Nutrient Uptake Efficiency

Dry biomass and grain yield were measured after harvesting from each 3 m×4 m plot treatment in a total area of 8.75.m2 (2.5 m × 3.5 m), excluding the border rows. The dry biomass is the total aboveground part of the plant, which is the sum of grain yield and the other parts (straw).
Plant samples were collected from each treatment plot at all sites at physiological maturity and thoroughly air-dried before being oven-dried at 65 °C for 72 h. Wheat grain samples were then ground to pass a 1 mm diameter sieve. These ground samples were digested with nitric and perchloric acids, and the extracted solution was used to measure the content of grain P and Zn. Phosphorus was analyzed using the Molybdenum Blue method with a spectrometer [60], while Zn was determined through atomic absorption spectroscopy [61].
The nutrient use efficiency (NUE) measures how effectively plants utilize available mineral nutrients. It is defined as the yield per unit of fertilizer applied or nutrient absorbed. The NUE also represents the fraction of fertilizer nutrients removed with the crop harvest and serves as an indicator for assessing nutrient fertilizer use efficiency [62,63]. Nutrient use efficiency (NUE) was calculated as the ratio of nutrient output (harvested crop) to nutrient input (amount of P or Zn fertilizer applied) [64] as follows:
N U E = Y f − Y c N A
where
NUE= nutrient use efficiency;
Yf= total yield with fertilizer application (P or Zn fertilizer);
Yc= total yield with control (Zn or P = 0);
NA = nutrient applied in Kg ha−1 (amount of P or Zn fertilizer).

2.4. Data Analysis

Following the Anderson–Darling approach for normality testing [65,66], all quantitative data collected from various sites were analyzed using the General Linear Model (GLM) procedure in Minitab software [59]. Prior to conducting the combined ANOVA, homoscedasticity was assessed with Levene’s test [67,68], which focuses on the distances of observed values from their sample median. To identify significant differences among the means, Fisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD) test was employed at a 5% significance level, utilizing GenStat 17 software [69].

3. Results

3.1. Effect of Zn and P on Biomass and Grain Yield of Wheat

The data on wheat grain and dry biomass yield, as influenced by Zn and P application rates and sites, are presented in Table 2. Statistical analysis indicates that Zn and P application significantly (p< 0.001) affected both grain and biomass yields across all three sites. The highest yields (grain and biomass) were recorded at the Adigolo site, followed by the Seret site, while the Mekelle site had the lowest production. The application of 10, 20, and 30 kg P ha−1 increased wheat grain yield by 24%, 70%, and 44%, while biomass yield increased by 20%, 56%, and 39%, respectively. Increasing phosphorus application from 10 to 20 kg P ha−1 resulted in a grain yield increase of approximately 37% and a biomass yield increase of 31%. Similarly, the application of 5 and 10 kg Zn ha−1 increased wheat grain yield by 23% and 19% and biomass yield by 23% and 18%.
Maximum yields were recorded by the combined application of 20 kg P ha−1 and 5 kg Zn ha−1 in all sites. A further increase in combined application rates showed a decreased grain yield. There was a reduction by about 18 % in grain yield in all sites when the combined application increased to 30 kg P ha−1 and 10 kg Zn ha−1.Similarly, maximum wheat biomass yields were achieved by the combined applications of 5 kg Zn and 20 kg P ha−1 (Table 3). Maximum wheat grain yields increased by 126%, 114%, and 145% compared to the control in the Seret, Adigolo, and Mekelle sites, respectively.
The combined application of 5 kg Zn ha−1 and 20 kg P ha−1 significantly increased the dry biomass yield by 129%, 102%, and 118% compared to the control (0 kg Zn ha−1 and 0 kg P ha−1) in the Seret, Adigolo, and Mekelle sites, respectively (Table 3). Wheat production was greatly impacted by increasing Zn treatment with an optimal P fertilizer rate at the different sites. However, further increases in P and Zn rates resulted in declining grain and biomass yields in all sites.

3.2. Effect of Zn and P Application on Grain Nutrient Concentration

Data concerning the grain Zn content of wheat grain as affected by P and Zn application rates are shown in Table 4. Statistical analysis of the data indicated that the straw yield of wheat showed a significant response to P x Zn interactions. The highest Zn concentration (55.5 mg kg−1) was recorded in Adigolo at 10 kg Zn ha−1 and 10 kg P ha−1. The interaction effect of P with Zn significantly increased grain Zn content, in combination with a lower P rate. When the P application increased, the concentration of Zn in the grain reduced. Wheat grain P was also significantly influenced by the combined application of Zn and P rates at these sites. In Adigolo, the highest grain P (5.7 g kg−1) was obtained by lowering grain Zn (34.99 mg kg−1) with the combined application of 30 kg P ha−1 and 5 kg Zn ha−1.

3.3. Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat

The nutrient use efficiency of wheat for Zn and P was significantly affected by the combined application of Zn and P fertilizers. At Seret and Adigolo, the highest P utilization efficiency was achieved when 10 kg P ha−1 with 10 kg Zn ha−1 was applied, followed by 20 kg P ha−1 with 5 kg Zn ha−1 (Table 5). However, the Mekelle site exhibited the highest P nutrient use efficiency when 10 kg P ha−1 with 5 kg Zn ha−1 was applied. The lowest P use efficiency was recorded when applying 30 kg P ha−1 without Zn in all sites.
Zinc use efficiency was highest when 5 kg Zn ha−1 combined with 20 kg P ha−1 was used in all sites (Table 5). The lowest Zn use efficiency was observed at the Adigolo and Mekelle sites with the combined application of 5 kg Zn ha⁻1 and 0 kg P ha⁻1. Increasing the P application rate to 10 and 20 kg P ha−1 increased Zn use efficiency, but further increasing P application (30 kg P ha⁻1) reduced it significantly.

3.4. Pearson Correlation Analysis: Yield, Nutrient Concentration, and Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat

The Pearson correlation matrix shows positive and significant correlations (p < 0.01) between yield and biomass with all measured or calculated parameters (Table 6). However, the grain Zn concentration did not exhibit a significant correlation with P concentration and uptake. Yield was positively correlated with all parameters, with a particularly strong correlation with biomass and P uptake, while grain P concentration and uptake exhibited strongly significant correlations.

4. Discussion

The findings of this study demonstrated that increasing the application of phosphorus to 20 kg P ha−1 increased grain yield by about 37% and biomass yield by 31% compared to the control. Very many studies have confirmed that phosphorus application improves wheat grain and biomass yields [70,71,72]. The application of P fertilizers has shown an increase in wheat grain yield by up to 30% [6]. Phosphorus nutrition supports root development and energy transfer. However, excessive P application can reduce grain yield [73], likely due to an induced reduction in the uptake of micronutrients such as Zn [74]. Therefore, determining the critical P requirements and optimal application levels is essential [75].
Several studies verified that the fertilization of Zn to deficient soils has significantly increased crop yields [76,77,78,79,80]. This study highlighted that Zn application consistently increased grain yield, with improvements ranging from 21% to 25% across locations. The observed yield enhancements with Zn fertilization are well supported by previous research studies [73,77] emphasizing that Zn plays a significant role in increasing grain and biomass production. Zinc plays a crucial role in enzyme activation, hormone regulation, protein synthesis, and stress resistance [81]. Ensuring optimal Zn availability through appropriate fertilization practices is essential for maximizing grain yield.
The accessibility of nutrients to crops is significantly impacted by interactions, as an excess of one nutrient might lead to a deficiency of another [82]. The interactions of nutrients within the soil influence the yields of annual crops [83,84,85]. The application of both P and Zn fertilizers plays crucial roles in various physiological processes affecting crop growth, development, and ultimately yield formation [26,79]. However, soils with higher phosphate levels, from the application of P fertilizers, can cause Zn deficiency in crops [26]. This occurs because high soil P levels interfere with Zn availability and uptake. Consequently, nutrient imbalances can hinder optimal growth and reduce yield potential.
In this study, the combined fertilization of P and Zn with 20 kg P ha−1 and 5 kg Zn ha−1 has shown a synergistic effect in increasing wheat grain and biomass yields. This positive interaction suggests balanced nutrient management, and ensuring the appropriate proportion is crucial for maximizing crop performance. Integrating P and Zn fertilization strategies can help mitigate nutrient deficiencies, improve nutrient use efficiency, and ultimately optimize wheat productivity. Similar studies [79,85] have reported that the combined application of P and Zn, even below the optimum level of either of these nutrients, increased wheat yield.
Our study also showed an antagonistic relationship at higher rates of P and Zn fertilizer beyond 20 kg P ha−1 and 5 kg Zn ha−1, resulting in reduced wheat yield. One report [43] indicated that higher rates of combined P and Zn fertilizer reduced wheat yield. Applying a higher rate of P to the soil hinders Zn mobilization and nutrient uptake [86].
The combined application of P and Zn influenced the nutrient content of grain, particularly Zn and P concentrations. Grain Zn concentration increased with increasing Zn application but reduced when the P application rate went beyond 10 kg P ha−1. This suggests a competitive interaction between these two nutrients at higher P levels. Lower application rates of P and Zn fertilizers have improved both grain Zn and P concentrations, highlighting the importance of balanced nutrient management [77]. A higher P rate beyond a threshold for wheat reduces grain Zn concentration [74,87,88]. Studies indicate that the average Zn content in wheat grains worldwide is approximately 20–35 mg kg⁻1 [17,89]. However, to meet human dietary requirements, the Zn content of wheat grains should ideally reach 45 mg kg⁻1 [90]. Our results showed that the grain Zn concentration required for human health was achieved by applying 10 kg Zn ha⁻1 along with 10 kg P ha⁻1 across all sites. Therefore, the careful calibration of P and Zn fertilization is essential to optimize both yield and grain nutrient content to meet the average human daily dietary intake.
Phosphorus also tends to form complexes with soil minerals, reducing the availability of free Zn ions for uptake by roots [9,26]. This process induces Zn deficiency by the formation of insoluble complexes between P and Zn in the soil. The efficiency of Zn utilization decreased as P application rates increased beyond 20 kg P ha−1, which was also associated with a decline in grain yield and dry matter production [91].
Furthermore, the use efficiency of P and Zn was significantly influenced by the combined applications of various levels of P and Zn fertilization, which is in line with the study conducted by Sánchez-Rodríguez [79]. Increasing P concentrations can lead to an increase in P use efficiency to a certain level [92,93], which is lowered again by further increasing the P application as it reduces the yield [71,94]. Similarly, Zn use efficiency significantly reduced with a higher rate of P application [95,96]. The nutrient use efficiency varies across locations, and this could be due to the variability in soil conditions and uptake levels of nutrients by plants [97]. Overall, the optimal combined application of P and Zn fertilizers improves the bioavailability and uptake of zinc [98]. Thus, ensuring optimal Zn utilization is crucial for achieving high crop yields and nutritional quality [26,99].

5. Conclusions

Understanding the interactions among site characteristics and nutrient management practices is important in optimizing wheat production. Emphasizing the significance of P and Zn fertilization, this research offers valuable insights for enhancing crop yields, sustainability, and food security in diverse agroclimatic conditions. While Zn application can increase yield, there is a critical threshold beyond which further application may lead to diminishing yields. A combination of 20 kg P ha−1 and 5 kg Zn ha−1 has been identified as the best method to achieve maximum wheat grain yield. Grain Zn content was highest when a combination of 10 kg P ha−1 and 10 kg Znha−1 was applied. These combinations are found to be optimum for obtaining improved yield and maximizing the nutrient use of wheat for producers in the northern highlands of Ethiopia. Therefore, to achieve sustainable wheat production and maximize yield, it is essential for farmers to carefully manage P and Zn application rates to avoid both deficiency and excess.

Author Contributions

All authors made significant contributions to this article. M.S.: conceptualization, experimental implementation, data analysis and interpretation, and writing of the paper. Y.T.: statistical analysis and interpretation. G.G. (Gebreyohannes Girmay) and G.G. (Girmay Gebresamual): data analysis and interpretation, review and editing, and supervision. M.H.: editing and supervision. All authors reviewed and provided feedback on the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research work was supported by the MU-HU-NMBU project (phase IV), a cooperation between Mekelle University (Ethiopia) and the Norwegian University of Life Science (Norway).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author. Reviewers or interested parties who require access to the data can contact the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to give special thanks to the farmers and agricultural experts of the districts who participated in the experiment and data collection. The authors highly appreciate the technicians of soil and plant laboratories in Mekelle University and the Tigray Agricultural Research Centre who helped us in analyzing the samples collected.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Giraldo, P.; Benavente, E.; Manzano-Agugliaro, F.; Gimenez, E. Worldwide Research Trends on Wheat and Barley: A Bibliometric Comparative Analysis. Agronomy 2019, 9, 352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Erenstein, O.; Jaleta, M.; Mottaleb, K.A.; Sonder, K.; Donovan, J.; Braun, H.-J. Global Trends in Wheat Production, Consumption and Trade. In Wheat Improvement; Reynolds, M.P., Braun, H.-J., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 47–66. ISBN 978-3-030-90672-6. [Google Scholar]
  3. FAOSTAT Data: Production. Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL (accessed on 11 October 2024).
  4. Victor Roch, G.; Maharajan, T.; Ceasar, S.A.; Ignacimuthu, S. The Role of PHT1 Family Transporters in the Acquisition and Redistribution of Phosphorus in Plants. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2019, 38, 171–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gadisa, N. Soil Nutrient Status and Farmers’ Perception on Soil Fertility in Ethiopia: Review. J. Biol. Agric. Healthc. 2021, 11, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Agegnehu, G.; Nelson, P.N.; Bird, M.I.; Van Beek, C. Phosphorus Response and Fertilizer Recommendations for Wheat Grown on Nitisols in the Central Ethiopian Highlands. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2015, 46, 2411–2424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Hailu, H.; Mamo, T.; Keskinen, R.; Karltun, E.; Gebrekidan, H.; Bekele, T. Soil Fertility Status and Wheat Nutrient Content in Vertisol Cropping Systems of Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Agric. Food Secur. 2015, 4, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Habtegebrial, K.; Mersha, S.; Habtu, S. Nitrogen and Sulphur Fertilizers Effects on Yield, Nitrogen Uptake and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Upland Rice Variety on Irrigated Fulvisols of the Afar Region, Ethiopia. J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manag. 2013, 4, 62–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hui, X.; Wang, X.; Luo, L.; Wang, S.; Guo, Z.; Shi, M.; Wang, R.; Lyons, G.; Chen, Y.; Cakmak, I.; et al. Wheat Grain Zinc Concentration as Affected by Soil Nitrogen and Phosphorus Availability and Root Mycorrhizal Colonization. Eur. J. Agron. 2022, 134, 126469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Duga, R. Effect of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Sulfur Nutrients on Growth and Yield Attributes of Bread Wheat. J. Ecol. Nat. Res. 2021, 5, 355–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gebreslassie, H.B.; Demoz, H.A. A Review on: Effect of Phosphorus Fertilizer on Crop Production in Ethiopia. J. Biol. Agric. Healthc. 2016, 6, 117–120. [Google Scholar]
  12. Wessells, K.R.; Brown, K.H. Estimating the Global Prevalence of Zinc Deficiency: Results Based on Zinc Availability in National Food Supplies and the Prevalence of Stunting. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e50568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Abera, Y.; Kebede, M. Assessment on the Status of Some Micronutrients in Vertisols of the Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Int. Res. J. Agric. Sci. Soil Sci. 2013, 3, 169–173. [Google Scholar]
  14. Abera, Y.; Kassa, S. Status of Soil Micronutrients in Ethiopian Soils: A Review. J. Environ. Earth Sci. 2017, 7, 85–90. [Google Scholar]
  15. Belay, A.; Gashu, D.; Joy, E.J.M.; Lark, R.M.; Chagumaira, C.; Likoswe, B.H.; Zerfu, D.; Ander, E.L.; Young, S.D.; Bailey, E.H.; et al. Zinc Deficiency Is Highly Prevalent and Spatially Dependent over Short Distances in Ethiopia. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 6510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Alloway, B.J. Zinc in SoilS and Crop Nutrition, 2nd ed.; International Zinc Association; International Fertilizer Industry Association: Brussels, Belgium; Paris, France, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  17. Cakmak, I.; Kutman, U.B. Agronomic Biofortification of Cereals with Zinc: A Review. Eur. J Soil Sci. 2018, 69, 172–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cakmak, I.; Kalayci, M.; Kaya, Y.; Torun, A.A.; Aydin, N.; Wang, Y.; Arisoy, Z.; Erdem, H.; Yazici, A.; Gokmen, O.; et al. Biofortification and Localization of Zinc in Wheat Grain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 9092–9102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Moreno-Lora, A.; Delgado, A. Factors Determining Zn Availability and Uptake by Plants in Soils Developed under Mediterranean Climate. Geoderma 2020, 376, 114509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Recena, R.; García-López, A.M.; Delgado, A. Zinc Uptake by Plants as Affected by Fertilization with Zn Sulfate, Phosphorus Availability, and Soil Properties. Agronomy 2021, 11, 390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Simtow, F. An Assessment of National Fertiliser Policies, Regulations and Standards for Ethiopia; African Fertilizer and Agribusiness Partnership: Newark, NJ, USA, 2015; pp. 1–35. [Google Scholar]
  22. Elias, E.; Okoth, P.F.; Smaling, E.M.A. Explaining Bread Wheat (Triticum Aestivum) Yield Differences by Soil Properties and Fertilizer Rates in the Highlands of Ethiopia. Geoderma 2019, 339, 126–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Terfa, A.E.; Mellisse, B.T.; Kebede, M.M.; Elias, E.; Yadessa, G.B. Effect of Blended Fertilizer Application on Bread Wheat Yield and Profitability on Andosols of Southwestern Highlands of Ethiopian. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2022, 54, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Khattak, S.G.; Dominy, P.J.; Ahmad, W. Effect of Zn as Soil Addition and Foliar Application on Yield and Protein Content of Wheat in Alkaline Soil. J. Natl. Sci. Found. Sri Lanka 2015, 43, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Abay, K.A.; Abay, M.H.; Amare, M.; Berhane, G.; Aynekulu, E. Mismatch between Soil Nutrient Deficiencies and Fertilizer Applications: Implications for Yield Responses in Ethiopia. Agric. Econ. 2022, 53, 215–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mousavi, S.R. Zinc in Crop Production and Interaction with Phosphorus. Aust. J. Basic App. Sci. 2011, 5, 1503–1509. [Google Scholar]
  27. Singh, K.; Verma, G.; Manchanda, J.S. Soil and Foliar Zinc Application for Enhancing Grain Zinc Content of Aromatic Rice Genotypes Grown on Zinc Deficient and Sufficient Soil. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2020, 19, 223–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Weldu, Y.; Haile, M.; Habtegeriel, K. Effect of Zinc and Phosphorus Fertilizers Application on Yield and Yield Components of Faba Bean (Vicia Faba L.) Grown in Calcaric Cambisol of Semi-Arid Northern Ethiopia. J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manag. 2012, 3, 320–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yohannes, D.; Kiros, H.; Yirga, W. Inoculation, Phosphorous and Zinc Fertilization Effects on Nodulation, Yield and Nutrient Uptake of Faba Bean (Vicia Faba L.) Grown on Calcaric Cambisol of Semiarid Ethiopia. J. Soil Sci. Environ. Manag. 2015, 6, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Trivedi, V.K.; Raza, M.B.; Dimree, S.; Verma, A.K.; Pawar, A.B.; Upadhyay, D.P. Effect of Balanced Use of Nutrients on Yield Attributes, Yield and Protein Content of Wheat (Triticum Aestivum). Indian J. Agri. Sci. 2021, 90, 2369–2372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kumar, S.; Kumar, R.; Kumar, S.; Kumar, S.; Sharma, J. Impact of Application Methods and Doses of Micronutrients on Wheat’ Grain Yield, Nutrient Content and Their Uptake. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2023, 35, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ziadi, N.; Bélanger, G.; Claessens, A.; Lefebvre, L.; Tremblay, N.; Cambouris, A.N.; Nolin, M.C.; Parent, L. Plant-Based Diagnostic Tools for Evaluating Wheat Nitrogen Status. Crop. Sci. 2010, 50, 2580–2590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Saleem Kubar, M.; Feng, M.; Sayed, S.; Hussain Shar, A.; Ali Rind, N.; Ullah, H.; Ali Kalhoro, S.; Xie, Y.; Yang, C.; Yang, W.; et al. Agronomical Traits Associated with Yield and Yield Components of Winter Wheat as Affected by Nitrogen Managements. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 28, 4852–4858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Watson, M.E. Interlaboratory Comparison in the Determination of Nutrient Concentrations of Plant Tissue. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 1981, 12, 601–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Motsara, M.R.; Roy, R.N. Guide to Laboratory Establishment for Plant Nutrient Analysis; FAO fertilizer and plant nutrition bulletin; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2008; ISBN 978-92-5-105981-4. [Google Scholar]
  36. Esteves, E.; Locatelli, G.; Bou, N.A.; Ferrarezi, R.S. Sap Analysis: A Powerful Tool for Monitoring Plant Nutrition. Horticulture 2021, 7, 426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Tarekegn, T.; Shiferaw, L.; Sirak, T.; Shimelis, F.; Maarten, W.; Vince, U. Hydrogeological Mapping for Climate Resilient WASH in Ethiopia—LOT 1; Target Sites Ofla woreda, Tigray; ACACIAWATER: Gouda, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 1–59. [Google Scholar]
  38. Gebreyohannes, T.; Smedt, F.D.; Hagos, M.; Gebresilassie, S.; Amare, K.; Kabeto, K.; Hussein, A.; Nyssen, J.; Bauer, H.; Moeyersons, J.; et al. Large-Scale Geological Mapping of the Geba Basin, Northern Ethiopia. In Proceedings of the Tigray Livelihood Paper No 9; VLIR—Mekelle University IUC Program: Mekelle, Ethiopia, 2010; pp. 1–46. [Google Scholar]
  39. Andrea, S.; Paola, M.; Francesco, D.; Claudio, F.; Bekele, A. Erosion-Tectonics Feedbacks in Shaping the Landscape: An Example from the Mekele Outlier (Tigray, Ethiopia). J. Afr. Earth Sci. 2017, 129, 870–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Gebremeskel, Y.; Gebrehiwot, W.; Gebresamuel, G. CASCAPE Experiences in Integrated Soil Fertility and Nutrient Management in Southern; Mekelle University: Mekelle, Ethiopia, 2020; pp. 1–46. [Google Scholar]
  41. Nyssen, J.; Naudts, J.; De Geyndt, K.; Haile, M.; Poesen, J.; Moeyersons, J.; Deckers, J. Soils and Land Use in the Tigray Highlands (Northern Ethiopia). Land Degrad. Dev. 2008, 19, 257–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Keram, K.S.; Sharma, B.L.; Kewat, M.L.; Sharma, G.D. Effect of Zinc Fertilization on Growth, Yield and Quality of Wheat Grown Under Agro-Climatic Condition of Kymore Plateau of Madhya Pradesh, India. Bioscan 2014, 9, 1479–1483. [Google Scholar]
  43. Arshad, M.; Adnan, M.; Ahmed, S.; Khan, A.K.; Ali, I.; Ali, M.; Ali, A.; Khan, A.; Kamal, M.A.; Gul, F.; et al. Integrated Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc on Wheat Crop. Am. Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2016, 16, 455–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ute, G.; Shiferaw, B.; Addis, A. Optimization of Fertilizer Recommendation for Bread Wheat Production at Adiyo District of Kaffa Zone, Southwestern Ethiopia. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2021, 17, 1380–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Shewangizaw, B.; Kassie, K.; Assefa, S.; Feyisa, T. On Farm Verification of Soil Test-Based Phosphorus Fertilizer Recommendations for Bread Wheat (Triticum Aestivum L.) on the Vertisols of Central Highlands of Ethiopia. Cogent Food Agric. 2020, 6, 1807811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. ATA Soil Fertility Status and Fertilizer Recommendation Atlas for Tigray Regional State, Ethiopia 2014. Available online: https://data.ata.gov.et/dataset/4aaf6bc8-cec3-49f9-9071-2cb162a715f3/resource/80b268d3-20b9-4e43-b977-da0d62526bee/download/tigray-national-regional-state-soil-fertility-status-and-fertilizer-recommendation-atlas.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2024).
  47. Brhane, H.; Berhe, D. Potassium and Micronutrient Fertilization for Enhancement of Tef Yield in Vertisols of Hawzen and Enderta Districts, Tigray Region, Ethiopia. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2023, 35, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Haile, W.; Mamo, T. The Effect of Potassium on the Yields of Potato and Wheat Grown on the Acidic Soils of Chencha and Hagere Selam in Southern Ethiopia. e-ifc 2013, 35, 3–8. [Google Scholar]
  49. Selassie, G.Y.; Molla, E.; Muhabie, D.; Manaye, F.; Dessie, D. Response of Crops to Fertilizer Application in Volcanic Soils. Heliyon 2020, 6, e05629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bouyoucos, G.J. Hydrometer Method Improved for Making Particle Size Analyses of Soils. Agron. J. 1962, 54, 464–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Walkley, A.; Black, I.A. An Examination of the Degtjareff Method for Determining Soil Organic Matter and a Proposed Modification of Thechromic Acid Titration Method. Soil Sci. 1934, 37, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bremner, J.M.; Mulvaney, C.S. Nitrogen Total. In Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties; American Society of Agronomy, and Soil Science Society of America, Inc.: Madison, WI, USA, 1982; pp. 595–625. ISBN 9780891180722. [Google Scholar]
  53. Olsen, S.R.; Cole, C.V.; Watanabe, F.S.; Dean, L.A. Estimation of Available Phosphorus in Soils by Extraction with Sodium Bicarbonate; US Departmenet of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 1954. [Google Scholar]
  54. Chapman, H.D. Cation-Exchange Capacity! In Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties; Agronomy Monographs; American Society of Agronomy, Inc.: Madison, WI, USA, 1965; Volume 1, pp. 891–901. ISBN 978-0-89118-374-7. [Google Scholar]
  55. Jones, J. Laboratory Guide for Conducting Soil Tests and Plant Analysis, 1st ed.CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2001; ISBN 978-0-429-13211-7. [Google Scholar]
  56. Lindsay, W.L.; Norvell, W.A. Development of a DTPA Soil Test for Zinc, Iron, Manganese, and Copper. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 1978, 42, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Tadesse, K.; Abdulkadir, B.; Admasu, W.; Habte, D.; Admasu, A.; Tadesse, A.; Debebe, A. Soil Test-Based Phosphorus Fertilizer Recommendation for Malting Barley Production on Nitisols. Open Agric. 2022, 7, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gurjer, K.; Sharma, S.; Yadav, K. Establishment of Critical Limit of Zinc for Wheat Crop. Pharma. Innov. J. 2022, 11, 1457–1461. [Google Scholar]
  59. Minitab. Getting Started with Minitab Statistical Software, Minitab 2021, Version 21. Minitab: State College, PA, USA; pp. 4–63. Available online: www.minitab.com (accessed on 13 December 2024).
  60. Wieczorek, D.; Żyszka-Haberecht, B.; Kafka, A.; Lipok, J. Determination of Phosphorus Compounds in Plant Tissues: From Colourimetry to Advanced Instrumental Analytical Chemistry. Plant Methods 2022, 18, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Elango, D.; Kanatti, A.; Wang, W.; Devi, A.R.; Ramachandran, M.; Jabeen, A. Analytical Methods for Iron and Zinc Quantification in Plant Samples. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2021, 52, 1069–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Reich, M.; De Kok, L.J. Physiological Basis of Plant Nutrient Use Efficiency—Concepts, Opportunities and Challenges for Its Improvement. In Nutrient Use Efficiency in Plants Concepts and Approaches; Hawkesford, M.J., Kopriva, S., De Kok, L.J., Eds.; Plant Ecophysiology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; Volume 10, ISBN 978-3-319-10634-2. [Google Scholar]
  63. Fixen, P.; Brentrup, F.; Bruulsema, T.; Garcia, F.; Norton, R.; Zingore, S. Nutrient/Fertilizer Use Efficiency: Measurement, Current Situation and Trends. In Managing Water and Fertilizer for Sustainable Agricultural Intensification; International Potash Institute (IPI); International Plant Nutrition Institute (IPNI); International Water Management Institute (IWMI); International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA): Paris, France, 2015; pp. 8–38. ISBN 979-10-92366-02-0. [Google Scholar]
  64. Godebo, T.; Laekemariam, F.; Loha, G. Nutrient Uptake, Use Efficiency and Productivity of Bread Wheat (Triticum Aestivum L.) as Affected by Nitrogen and Potassium Fertilizer in Keddida Gamela Woreda, Southern Ethiopia. Environ. Syst. Res. 2021, 10, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Anderson, T.W.; Darling, D.A. A Test of Goodness of Fit. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1954, 49, 765–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Moraga-Díaz, R.; Leiva-Araos, A.; García, J. A Robust Statistical Methodology for Measuring Enterprise Agility. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 8445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Levene, H. Robust Tests for Equality of Variances. In Contributions to Probability and Statistics; Essays in Honor of Harold Hotelling; Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA, USA, 1960; pp. 278–292. [Google Scholar]
  68. Gastwirth, J.L.; Gel, Y.R.; Miao, W. The Impact of Levene’s Test of Equality of Variances on Statistical Theory and Practice. Stat. Sci. 2009, 24, 343–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Goedhart, P.W.; Thissen, T.N.M. Biometris GenStat Procedure Library Manual, 17th ed.; Wageningen UR: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 1–190. [Google Scholar]
  70. Noonari, S.; Kalhoro, S.A.; Ali, A.; Mahar, A.; Raza, S.; Ahmed, M.; Shah, S.F.A.; Baloch, S.U. Effect of Different Levels of Phosphorus and Method of Application on the Growth and Yield of Wheat. Nat. Sci. 2016, 8, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ghafoor, A.M.R. Effect of Phosphorus Fertilizer Application on Some Yield Components of Wheat and Phosphorus Use Efficiency in Calcareous Soil. J. Dyn. Agric. Res. 2016, 3, 46–52. [Google Scholar]
  72. Liu, L.; Miao, Q.; Wang, H.; Xue, Y.; Qi, S.; Zhang, J.; Li, J.; Meng, Q.; Cui, Z. Optimizing Phosphorus Application for Winter Wheat Production in the Coastal Saline Area. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Garcia-Oliveira, A.L.; Chander, S.; Ortiz, R.; Menkir, A.; Gedil, M. Genetic Basis and Breeding Perspectives of Grain Iron and Zinc Enrichment in Cereals. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. 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. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 1473–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Menna, A.; Semoka, J.; Amuri, N.; Mamo, T. Wheat Response to Applied Nitrogen, Sulfur, and Phosphorous in Three Representative Areas of the Central Highlands of Ethiopia -I. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2015, 8, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Haileselassie, B.; Bedadi, B.; Kidanu, S.; Mamo, T. Effect of Zinc Containing Fertilizers on Yield and Grain Quality of Tef [(Eragrostis Tef (Zucc.) Trotter] in Some Soils of Tigray Region, Ethiopia. Ethiop. J. Agric. Sci. 2018, 28, 23–35. [Google Scholar]
  77. Khan, F.U.; Khan, A.A.; Qu, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Adnan, M.; Fahad, S.; Gul, F.; Ismail, M.; Saud, S.; Hassan, S.; et al. Enhancing Wheat Production and Quality in Alkaline Soil: A Study on the Effectiveness of Foliar and Soil Applied Zinc. PeerJ 2023, 11, e16179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Firdous, S.; Agarwal, B.; Chhabra, V. Zinc-Fertilization Effects on Wheat Yield and Yield Components. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2018, 7, 3497–3499. [Google Scholar]
  79. Sánchez-Rodríguez, A.R.; Rey, M.-D.; Nechate-Drif, H.; Castillejo, M.Á.; Jorrín-Novo, J.V.; Torrent, J.; Del Campillo, M.C.; Sacristán, D. Combining P and Zn Fertilization to Enhance Yield and Grain Quality in Maize Grown on Mediterranean Soils. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 7427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. 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]
  81. Ayyar, S.; Appavoo, S.; N, M. Role of Zinc Nutrition for Increasing Zinc Availability, Uptake, Yield, and Quality of Maize ( Zea Mays L.) Grains: An Overview. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2020, 51, 2001–2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Aboyeji, C.M.; Dunsin, O.; Adekiya, A.O.; Suleiman, K.O.; Chinedum, C.; Okunlola, F.O.; Joseph, A.; Ejue, S.W.; Adesola, O.O.; Olofintoye, T.A.J.; et al. Synergistic and Antagonistic Effects of Soil Applied P and Zn Fertilizers on the Performance, Minerals and Heavy Metal Composition of Groundnut. Open Agric. 2020, 5, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Fageria, V.D. Nutrient Interactions in Crop Plants. J. Plant Nutr. 2001, 24, 1269–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Rietra, R.P.J.J.; Heinen, M.; Dimkpa, C.O.; Bindraban, P.S. Effects of Nutrient Antagonism and Synergism on Yield and Fertilizer Use Efficiency. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2017, 48, 1895–1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Dargie, S.; Girma, T.; Chibsa, T.; Kassa, S.; Boke, S.; Abera, A.; Haileselassie, B.; Addisie, S.; Amsalu, S.; Haileselassie, M.; et al. Balanced Fertilization Increases Wheat Yield Response on Different Soils and Agroecological Zones in Ethiopia. Exp. Agric. 2022, 58, e23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Soumya, S.; Verma, B.C.; Debarati, B.; Somnath, R. Management of Phosphorus-Zinc Antagonism to Improve Nutrient Use Efficiency. Food Sci. Rep. 2022, 3, 39–42. [Google Scholar]
  87. Ova, E.A.; Kutman, U.B.; Ozturk, L.; Cakmak, I. High Phosphorus Supply Reduced Zinc Concentration of Wheat in Native Soil but Not in Autoclaved Soil or Nutrient Solution. Plant Soil 2015, 393, 147–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Mohammed, S.B.; Dzidzienyo, D.K.; Yahaya, A.; Umar, M.L.; Ishiyaku, M.F.; Tongoona, P.B.; Gracen, V. High Soil Phosphorus Application Significantly Increased Grain Yield, Phosphorus Content but Not Zinc Content of Cowpea Grains. Agronomy 2021, 11, 802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Wang, M.; Kong, F.; Liu, R.; Fan, Q.; Zhang, X. Zinc in Wheat Grain, Processing, and Food. Front. Nutr. 2020, 7, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Liu, D.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, W.; Chen, X.; Zou, C. Agronomic Approach of Zinc Biofortification Can Increase Zinc Bioavailability in Wheat Flour and Thereby Reduce Zinc Deficiency in Humans. Nutrients 2017, 9, 465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Kumar, D.; Patel, K.C.; Ramani, V.P.; Shukla, A.K.; Behera, S.K.; Patel, R.A. Influence of Different Rates and Frequencies of Zn Application to Maize–Wheat Cropping on Crop Productivity and Zn Use Efficiency. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Luo, L.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, M.; Wei, P.; Chai, R.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, C.; Siddique, K.H.M. Improving Wheat Yield and Phosphorus Use Efficiency through the Optimization of Phosphorus Fertilizer Types Based on Soil P Pool Characteristics in Calcareous and Non-Calcareous Soil. Agronomy 2023, 13, 928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zhu, Y.; Smith, S.E.; Smith, F.A. Zinc (Zn)-Phosphorus (P) Interactions in Two Cultivars of Spring Wheat (Triticum Aestivum L.) Differing in P Uptake Efficiency. Ann. Bot. 2001, 88, 941–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Shabnam, R.; Iqbal, M.T. Phosphorus Use Efficiency by Wheat Plants That Grown in an Acidic Soil. Braz. J. Sci. Technol. 2016, 3, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Zhang, W.; Zhang, W.; Wang, X.; Liu, D.; Zou, C.; Chen, X. Quantitative Evaluation of the Grain Zinc in Cereal Crops Caused by Phosphorus Fertilization. A Meta-Analysis. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 41, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Yu, B.-G.; Chen, X.-X.; Cao, W.-Q.; Liu, Y.-M.; Zou, C.-Q. Responses in Zinc Uptake of Different Mycorrhizal and Non-Mycorrhizal Crops to Varied Levels of Phosphorus and Zinc Applications. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 606472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Jayara, A.S.; Kumar, R.; Pandey, P.; Singh, S.; Shukla, A.; Singh, A.P.; Pandey, S.; Meena, R.L.; Reddy, K.I. Boosting Nutrient Use Efficiency Through Fertilizer Use Management. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 2023, 21, 2931–2952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Amanullah; Inamullah; Alwahibi, M.S.; Elshikh, M.S.; Alkahtani, J.; Muhammad, A.; Khalid, S.; Imran; Ahmad, M.; Khan, N.; et al. Phosphorus and Zinc Fertilization Improve Zinc Biofortification in Grains and Straw of Coarse vs. Fine Rice Genotypes. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Hamzah Saleem, M.; Usman, K.; Rizwan, M.; Al Jabri, H.; Alsafran, M. Functions and Strategies for Enhancing Zinc Availability in Plants for Sustainable Agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 1033092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Crops 05 00032 g001
Figure 1. Location map of the study areas.
Figure 1. Location map of the study areas.
Crops 05 00032 g001
Crops 05 00032 g002
Figure 2. Average monthly rainfall and daily temperatures (source: computed based on raw data from 2000 to 2020 from the National Metrological Agency (ENMA) of Ethiopia). RF stands for rainfall, Min Temp for minimum temperature, and Max Temp for maximum temperature.
Figure 2. Average monthly rainfall and daily temperatures (source: computed based on raw data from 2000 to 2020 from the National Metrological Agency (ENMA) of Ethiopia). RF stands for rainfall, Min Temp for minimum temperature, and Max Temp for maximum temperature.
Crops 05 00032 g002
Table 1. Soil physical and chemical properties and cluster analysis.
Table 1. Soil physical and chemical properties and cluster analysis.
Parameters *Research Sites
SeretAdigoloMekelle
Sand (%)25.422.2134.50
Silt (%)30.232.2927.15
Clay (%)44.445.5038.35
Textural classCCCL
pH (H2O)7.847.257.92
SOC (%)0.951.030.71
SOM (%)1.641.781.22
TN (%)0.180.190.17
Av P (mg kg−1)6.556.915.46
Zn (mg kg−1)0.730.980.65
CEC (cmol(+) kg−1)45.542.2538.56
Exch K (cmol(+) kg−1)1.221.211.20
Exch Ca (cmol(+) kg−1)28.325.1633.25
Exch Mg (cmol(+) kg−1)10.18.7212.42
* C—clay; CL—clay loam; SOC—soil organic carbon; SOM—soil organic matter; Av P—available phosphorus; TN—total nitrogen; CEC—cation exchange capacity; Exch K, Ca, Mg—exchangeable potassium, calcium, and magnesium.
Table 2. Main plot effects of P and Zn application on grain and dry biomass yield of wheat.
Table 2. Main plot effects of P and Zn application on grain and dry biomass yield of wheat.
Site/TreatmentsBiomass Yield (t ha−1)Grain Yield (t ha−1)
Site
Adigolo12.95 a4.46 a
Mekelle9.54 c3.81 c
Seret11.36 b4.32 b
LSD (0.05)0.1010.03
Zinc
Zn 0 kg ha−19.95 c3.67 c
Zn 5 kg ha−112.19 a4.53 a
Zn 10 kg ha−111.71 b4.38 b
LSD (0.05)0.1010.03
Phosphorus
P 0 kg ha−18.76 d3.11 d
P 10 kg ha−110.47 c3.87 c
P 20 kg ha−113.68 a5.30 a
P 30 kg ha−112.22 b4.50 b
LSD (0.05)0.1170.034
Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at p < 0.05.
Table 3. Interaction effects of P and Zn application on wheat grain and dry biomass yield.
Table 3. Interaction effects of P and Zn application on wheat grain and dry biomass yield.
TreatmentGrain Yield (t ha−1)Biomass (t ha−1)
Zn (kg ha−1)P (kg ha−1)SeretAdigoloMekelleSeretAdigoloMekelle
002.57 j2.83 k2.18 k6.72 k8.47 k5.83 k
0103.37 i3.67 i3.05 i8.59 j10.90 i7.82 i
0204.88 d4.99 d4.35 d13.39 c15.04 c10.13 e
0304.16 g4.36 f3.61 g10.64 g12.71 f9.15 g
503.39 i3.29 j2.66 j9.11 i9.93 j6.90 j
5104.43 f4.61 e3.85 f9.76 h12.15 g10.76 d
5205.81 a6.05 a5.36 a15.38 a17.10 a12.69 a
5305.17 c5.19 c4.59 c14.45 b16.54 b11.47 c
1003.84 h3.91 h3.32 h11.95 e11.52 h8.43 h
10104.05 g4.11 g3.67 g11.46 f13.15 e9.61 f
10205.37 b5.79 b5.06 b12.55 d14.38 d12.45 b
10304.73 e4.69 e4.01 e12.35 d13.47 e9.19 g
LSD (0.05)0.1150.1210.0710.460.3350.239
Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at <0.05.
Table 4. Interaction effects of P and Zn application on wheat grain nutrient concentration.
Table 4. Interaction effects of P and Zn application on wheat grain nutrient concentration.
TreatmentGrain Zn (mg kg−1)Grain P (g kg−1)
Zn (kg ha−1)P (kg ha−1)AdigoloSeretMekelleAdigoloSeretMekelle
00 19.57 k17.55 l16.77 k2.95 k2.23 k2.18 l
5040.75 e35.68 f33.93 e3.20 j3.24 i2.94 j
10049.91 b43.78 b43.45 b3.64 i3.06 j2.54 k
01028.43 i26.58 j25.39 i4.13 g3.24 i3.51 g
51043.85 d38.83 d35.81 d3.98 h3.56 g3.47 h
101055.48 a48.14 a47.13 a3.72 i3.4 h3.2 i
02031.17 h29.26 i27.69 h4.65 d3.95 f4.35 c
52037.88 f33.51 g32.41 f4.5 e4.65 c3.86 e
102047.85 c41.61 c40.28 c4.3 f4.11 e3.69 f
03026.42 j24.27 k23.02 j5.18 b4.27 d5.05 a
53034.99 g31.20 h30.94 g5.70 a5.35 a4.81 b
103041.56 e37.16 e34.3 e5.09 c4.95 b4.17 d
LSD (0.05)1.8650.9281.3390.1020.1980.046
Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at <0.05.
Table 5. Phosphorus and zinc use efficiency of wheat.
Table 5. Phosphorus and zinc use efficiency of wheat.
TreatmentP Use Efficiency
(kg Wheat Yield P Applied in kg−1)		TreatmentZn Use Efficiency
(kg Wheat Yield Zn Applied in kg−1)
P
(kg ha−1)		Zn
(kg ha−1)		SeretAdigoloMekelleZn
(kg ha−1)		P
(kg ha−1)		SeretAdigoloMekelle
100187.6 f243.8 g198.9 e50478.4 e292.2 f213.3 f
105303.7 cd375.7 c492.6 a510607.4 c737.9 c985.1 c
1010474.1 a458.2 a377.3 b5201731.7 a1727.6 a1370.7 a
200334.1 c328.9 d214.6 d5301546.3 b1614.5 b1126.9 b
205432.9 b431.9 b342.7 c100523.5 de305.5 f259.4 f
2010291.6 d295.7 e330.6 c1010474.1 e468.0 e377.3 e
300130.8 g141.5 i110.4 f1020583.2 cd591.4 d661.1 d
305257.7 e273.7 f187.8 e1030563.6 cd500.0 e336.4 e
3010187.9 f166.7 h112.1 f
LSD (0.05)30.0526.1219.56LSD (0.05)127.1668.5458.17
Means within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at <0.05.
Table 6. Pearson correlation among measured parameters.
Table 6. Pearson correlation among measured parameters.
Yield t/haBiomass t/haZn mg/kgP g/kgUptake ZnUptake P
Yield t/ha1
Biomass t/ha0.9015 **1
Zn mg/kg0.344 **0.379 **1
P g/kg0.688 **0.702 **0.029 ns1
Uptake Zn0.786 **0.748 **0.833 **0.376 **1
Uptake P0.911 **0.879 **0.166 ns0.91 **0.613 **1
** indicates significance at the 0.05 and 0.01 probability levels, and ns denotes non-significant correlations.
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

Sebhatleab, M.; Gebresamuel, G.; Girmay, G.; Tsehaye, Y.; Haile, M. Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc Fertilization on Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Tigray Highlands of Northern Ethiopia. Crops 2025, 5, 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops5030032

AMA Style

Sebhatleab M, Gebresamuel G, Girmay G, Tsehaye Y, Haile M. Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc Fertilization on Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Tigray Highlands of Northern Ethiopia. Crops. 2025; 5(3):32. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops5030032

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sebhatleab, Mulugeta, Girmay Gebresamuel, Gebreyohannes Girmay, Yemane Tsehaye, and Mitiku Haile. 2025. "Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc Fertilization on Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Tigray Highlands of Northern Ethiopia" Crops 5, no. 3: 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops5030032

APA Style

Sebhatleab, M., Gebresamuel, G., Girmay, G., Tsehaye, Y., & Haile, M. (2025). Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc Fertilization on Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Tigray Highlands of Northern Ethiopia. Crops, 5(3), 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops5030032

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop