Abstract: Background and Objective: Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) is one of the most important food legumes in Egypt. The acreage’s and seed yields vary from one season and location to another. This study aimed to investigate the effect of calcium sulphate application and humic acid on the growth, yield and yield components of faba bean under sandy soil conditions. Materials and Methods: Two field experiments were carried out to study the effect of calcium sulphate (gypsum) rates (0, 0.75 and1.5 t fed–1), foliar spraying with three levels of humic acid (0, 1.5 and 3 g L–1) and their interactions on yield and yield components of three cultivars of faba bean (Giza-843, Sakha-1 and Sakha-4). Results: The differences between the two calcium sulphate rates for agronomic traits and seed chemical composition were significant in the two seasons. Application of 1.5 ton CaSo4 fed–1 gave the utmost values for most attributes studied traits in both seasons. Also, results showed that the differences between humic substance concentrations for all studied traits were significant in both seasons except HI. Foliar faba bean plants with 3 g L–1 humic acid fad–1 gave the highest values for all studied traits in the two seasons. Also, results showed that the differences between cultivars for all studied traits were significant in both seasons. G-843 faba bean cultivar gave the highest values for all studied traits within the two seasons. Conclusion: The most favourable effects for growth parameters and chemical composition traits resulted in the highest levels of CaSo4 or humic acid for the Giza-843 cultivar.
INTRODUCTION
Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) is considered popular legume food consumed worldwide for use in both human consumption and animal nutrition in many parts of the world. Seeds have 26-35% protein, 55-61% total carbohydrate and 6.4-8.4% fibers1,2. It is one of the most important food legumes in Egypt. It is one of the promising crops which can play an important role in increasing legume production in Egypt3. Drought and salinity are the main factors that limit the productivity of faba beans as abiotic stresses. Exposure of plants to water-limiting or salt stresses during various developmental plant stages appears to activate various physiological and developmental changes4,5. Salinity stress has special importance in Egypt for both newly reclaimed lands and old cultivated areas6.
As well, saline water was previously considered unusable for irrigation, however; this water needs now and in the future need to use successfully to grow crops under certain conditions7,8. Application of calcium sulphate and foliar spraying with humic acids may be an easy technique to overcome salinity problems, which because calcium sulphate has an important role in alleviates the adverse effects of salinity on many crop plants. Also, humic acid improves the plant tolerance to salinity stress or adverse conditions9-11.
Several researchers studied the effect of calcium sulphate applications and foliar spraying with humic acids on field crops. The application of 800 kg in the form of CaSo4 fed–1 significantly increased the yield and yield components of faba bean under sandy soil conditions7. Also, the application of 1200 kg ha–1 as CaSo4 increased growth and yield traits12.
Humic Acid (HA) is one of the used organic mineral fertilizers, HA has been shown to stimulate plant growth and increase yield by acting on mechanisms involved in water and nutrient uptake, cell respiration, photosynthesis, protein synthesis and enzyme activities13. Humic acid is one of the main components of humic substances. The humic matter is produced by the chemical and biological decomposition of organic material14. Under soil and water stress, foliar fertilization with humic acid had positive impacts on pods no. plant–1, seed index and nitrogen content in seed and straw of faba bean plants15.
This study aimed to investigate the effect of different calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations on growth, yield and its components of three faba bean cultivars under newly reclaimed sandy soil conditions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study area: Two field experiments were conducted under drip irrigation in the Desert Experimental Station, Fac. of Agriculture Cairo University in Wadi El-Natroon, El-Beheira Governorate, Egypt (located between 30°32'30'' and 30° 33'0'' N and between 29° 57'15'' and 29°58'15'' E with an altitude of 45 m) during 2017/18 and 2018/19 seasons. To study the effect of calcium sulphate application, foliar spraying with humic acids and their interaction on yield and its components of three faba bean (Vicia faba L.) cultivars. Soil and irrigation water properties are presented in Table 1. The soil of the experimental site was sandy, saline and poor in nutrients, as well as, organic matter. Irrigation water was saline. There were few differences in the soil properties between the two years of the study.
| Table 1: Soil and irrigation water properties at the experimental site in 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons | ||
| Soil analysis | 2017/2018 |
2018/2019 |
| Physical properties | ||
| Sand (%) | 94.85 |
92.5 |
| Silt (%) | 4 |
4.78 |
| Clay (%) | 1.15 |
2.72 |
| Texture | Sandy |
Sandy |
| Chemical properties | ||
| Soil (pH) | 7.89 |
7.53 |
| Ec (ds m–1) | 5.23 |
5.36 |
| Organic matter (%) | 0.3 |
0.25 |
| Total CaCO3 (%) | 2.55 |
5.96 |
| Available N (mg kg–1) | 0.63 |
8.6 |
| Available P (mg kg–1) | 1.45 |
2.24 |
| Available K (mg kg–1) | 150 |
180 |
| EC | Ions concentration (meq L–1) | |||||||||
| Season | pH | ds m–1 | PPM | HCO3– | Cl– | So4= | Ca++ | Mg++ | Na+ | K+ |
| Chemical properties of irrigation water | ||||||||||
| 2017-18 | 7.6 | 4.1 | 2624 | 2.9 | 30.1 | 9.0 | 3.9 | 4.3 | 33.3 | 0.64 |
| 2018-19 | 7.8 | 4.2 | 2688 | 3.5 | 28.8 | 7.7 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 31.6 | 0.54 |
Experimental design: The experimental design was a spilt-spilt plot design in randomized complete blocks (RCBD) arrangement, with three replications. Gypsum (Calcium sulphate) rates were devoted to main plots (0.0 and 1.5 t fed–1), sub-plots were allocated to the humic acid concentrations (0.0, 1.5, 3.0 g L–1) while, sub-sub plots to three Egyptian cultivars of faba bean (Sakha-1, Sakha-4 and Giza-843) that planted on 15th November in both seasons. Each sub-sub plot consisted of three rows of 3 m in length and 50 cm in width with an area of 4.5 m2. Plant density was 26 plant m–2 were obtained by seeding two seeds/hill, spaced 30 cm apart on both sides of the ridge (50 cm width). All cultural practices were conducted according to the recommendations of ARC, Ministry of Agriculture concerning faba bean production.
Gypsum (calcium sulphate 97.28%): (22.6% Ca++, 54.36% So4–, 18.12% S, Cl 0.67% and P 13.15 mL g–1), were applied during soil preparation. The drip irrigation system is utilized in application irrigation water every five days from the sowing until maturity stage. Stopping irrigation was after 120 days from sowing in the two seasons. All other cultural practices were followed as recommended in faba bean production.
The samples were dried at 105°C in preparation for chemical analysis and ground through a 1 mm screen. The chemical compositions (Ash, Crude protein, Crude fibre and Carbohydrate) percentage of the faba bean seeds were determined.
Studied characters: At harvest, ten guarded plants were randomly taken from each sub-sub plot to estimate the following traits: branches pl–1, pods pl–1, seed yield pl–1 (g), seed index (100 seed weight (g)), biological yield ha–1 (t). In addition and seed yield ha–1 (t) was weighed from the whole area of each sub-sub plot and adjusted to yield per hectare. And the chemical composition of faba bean plants: Ash, crude protein, ether extract, crude fibre, carbohydrate, humic acids and mineral contents.
Data obtained from each season were statistically analyzed according to procedures outlined by Snedecor and Cochran16 using the computer software, SPSS17. The differences between treatment means were compared by the least significant differences test (LSD) at a 0.05 level of significance.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Significance of variances: The significance of variances due to the effects of two calcium sulphate rates and three humic acid concentrations on the performance of three faba bean cultivars for some traits are presented in Table 2. Both calcium sulphate rates (C) varied highly significantly (or significantly) for all studied traits under both seasons. Humic acid concentrations (H) affected highly significantly or significantly for all studied traits except HI (11.95 and 7.12 ns) under the two seasons, respectively. Cultivars (CVS) affected highly significant for all studied traits in both seasons.
| Table 2: | Significance of mean squares due to different sources of variation of evaluation the 3 faba bean cultivars under calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations |
| Trait | Season | Calcium sulphate (C) |
Humic (H) |
C×H |
Cultivars (CVS) |
C×CVS |
H×CVS |
C×H×CVS |
| Pl height | 017/018 | 374.99** |
2508.49* |
9.59* |
1305.43* |
30.68* |
46.74* |
10.69* |
| 018/019 | 1008.81** |
932.14** |
11.43* |
354.23** |
43.24** |
13.86** |
9.38* |
|
| Branches Pl–1 | 017/018 | 5.17* |
1.82* |
0.35* |
7.3* |
0.27* |
0.03ns |
0.09ns |
| 018/019 | 3.28** |
4.12** |
0.27** |
7.91** |
0.02ns |
0.12ns |
0.05ns |
|
| Pods Pl–1 | 017/018 | 27.31* |
29.07** |
2.24* |
1.08* |
0.89* |
0.70* |
0.31* |
| 018/019 | 80.67** |
26.75** |
1.49* |
94.14** |
8.11** |
0.55* |
0.20* |
|
| Seeds Pl–1 | 017/018 | 538.97** |
653.88** |
6.24* |
311.31** |
27.17** |
3.34** |
1.76* |
| 018/019 | 152.34** |
1018.78** |
10.68** |
203.78** |
25.83** |
9.28** |
4.92** |
|
| SY Pl–1 | 017/018 | 559.06** |
659.73** |
9.43* |
1131.36** |
35.91** |
20.42** |
1.03* |
| 018/019 | 211.62** |
901.76** |
23.81** |
939.82** |
25.31** |
33.36** |
7.79** |
|
| SI | 017/018 | 138.84* |
184.58** |
30.45* |
4729.34** |
5.21ns |
12.36* |
8.72ns |
| 018/019 | 130.51* |
172.98** |
27.56* |
4421.98** |
4.81ns |
11.37* |
8.58ns |
|
| HI | 017/018 | 7.22* |
11.95ns |
2.58ns |
211.97** |
4.09ns |
7.35* |
5.40* |
| 018/019 | 49.94** |
7.12ns |
0.82ns |
585.82** |
8.62ns |
1.17ns |
8.56** |
|
| Biological yield | 017/018 | 6.33** |
36.49** |
0.30* |
41.06** |
0.23ns |
1.47** |
0.09ns |
| 018/019 | 4.51** |
7.54** |
0.80* |
28.15** |
0.14ns |
0.15ns |
0.16ns |
|
| Yield ha–1 | 017/018 | 0.83** |
3.24** |
0.27* |
7.37** |
0.07** |
0.14** |
0.03* |
| 018/019 | 1.31** |
1.96** |
0.21* |
8.77** |
0.03** |
0.04** |
0.04** |
|
ns, * and ** indicate insignificant, significant at 0.05 and significant at 0.01, SY Pl–1: Seed yield plant–1, SI: Seed index, HI: Harvest index |
||||||||
| Fig. 1: | Contribution of variance components to total variation for studied traits PIH: Plant height, Br/Pl: Number of branches plant–1, P/Pl: Number of pods plant–1, S/Pl: Number of seeds plant–1, SY/Pl: Seed yield plant–1, SI: Seed index, HI: Harvest index, BiloY: Biological yield, Y/ha: Seed yield ha–1 |
Calcium sulphate rates performed differently from humic acid concentrations to another for Pl. height, pods pl–1, seeds pl–1, Sy pl–1, SI and yield ha–1 (9.59*, 2.24*, 6.24*, 9.43*, 30.45* and 0.27*) and (11.43*, 1.49*, 10.68**, 23.81**, 27.56* and 0.21*) in the two seasons, respectively. This is proved by the high significance of C×H interaction for all mentioned traits and non-significant interaction for HI (2.58 and 0.82 ns) in the two seasons, respectively. Similarly, significant variations due to C×CVS were recorded for all traits in both seasons, except SI, HI and biological yield (5.21, 4.09 and 0.23 ns) and (4.81, 8.62 and 0.14 ns) under both seasons, respectively. Thus, faba bean cultivars responded variably from the Calcium sulphate rate to another of the two investigated rates. However, humic acid concentrations×CVS interaction was significant and highly significant for all traits in both seasons except branches pl–1 (0.03 and 0.12 ns) in the two seasons, respectively and non-significant for HI and biological yield (1.17 and 0.15 ns) in 2018/2019 season. The second-order interaction, C x H x CVS, is significant for all traits under both seasons except, branches pl–1, SI and biological yield. Therefore, it could be concluded that each faba bean cultivar is affected differently by various calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations. In other words, the effects of calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations on different faba bean cultivars varied according to different rates and concentrations.
For all studied traits, the contribution of cultivars to observed variation was the largest except for HI (1.75%) in the 1st season in Fig.1. For yield ha–1, the effects of cultivars, Humic and Calcium sulphate were accounted for 70.95, 61.67, 15.86, 27.11, 10.60 and 6.95% of the total variability in the 2nd and 1st seasons, respectively. The contributions of two-way and three-way interactions (C×H, C×CVS, H×CVS and C×H ×CVS) effect to total variation were low (Fig. 1).
Growth, yield and yield components: Results indicated that the differences between calcium sulphate rates significantly differed for all studied traits in 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons. Application of 1.5 t CaSo4 fed–1 showed the maximum and significant values for all studied traits in both seasons (60.01, 2.73, 11.31, 33.60, 28.58, 80.85, 28.74, 6.89 and 2.01) and (54.11, 2.81, 11.95, 32.66, 26.84, 78.01, 34.96, 5.74 and 2.05), respectively in Table 3 and 4. Positive effects of CaSo4 application with 1.5 ton fed–1 on yield and its components may be due to CaSo4 important role in alleviates the adverse effects of salinity on faba bean plants from through substitution Na+ with Ca++ cation, consequently, dimensions Na+ and Cl– out the cell or relegation on root system range, also, the important role of SO4 in formation H2SO4, which, led to increasing soil acidity, removal of the calcareous problem, which, in relation with salinity, with addition to, sulphur role in mineralization process from through chemotrophic sulphur bacteria and an important as an element to form some of the humic acids such as cysteine, biotin and thiamine, sulphur is essential element information of glycosides such as chloroplasts, which, contain on chlorophyll. Consequently, the components of CaSo4 led to alleviates high salt concentrations in the soil solution and low soil water potential (drought stress), also, removal toxic ions such as Na+ and Cl– and nutrient balance, consequently increased elements uptake and shoot transport of minerals, that, led to enhanced yield character and its yield component of faba bean under irrigation conditions with saline water. These results are completely in agreement with some investigations7,18-21.
Regarding humic acid foliar application, resulted in Table 3 and 4 showed the significant effects of humic acid concentrations for all studied traits in both seasons except HI (28.45, 27.52 and 29.14) for (0.0, 1.5 and 3.0) humic acid concentrations, respectively. Foliar faba bean plants with concentrates 1.5 or 3.0 g L–1 humic acid, two times after 45 and 60 days from sowing date gave the maximum values for all studied traits, while the minimum values were obtained from the control in the two seasons (45.33, 2.08, 9.18, 24.91, 19.80, 76.12, 28.45, 4.95 and 1.43) and (42.51, 2.10, 9.39, 23.71, 18.13, 73.43, 33.37, 4.84 and 1.65) for all studied traits, respectively. Positive effects of the high concentration of humic acid on these traits may be due to its action on different physiological and metabolic processes. Humic acid increased photosynthetic rate and nutrient uptake from the soil to leaves and translocation of these nutrients from the leaves to seeds, thereby enhancing seed yield without spending any energy as well as without any loss in transit22, respiration, biosynthesis of nucleic acid, enzyme and overall, plant dry weight23,24. Moreover, the application of humic acid to foliage and soil increased auxin, cytokinin and Gibberellin levels in plants and improved plant growth. As well, humic acid is a hormone-like substance; its auxin-like activity stimulated cell division and cell elongation25. Furthermore, the humic acid was able to produce positive effects in improving the fresh and dry biomass of faba bean plants14,26. Humic acid treatment enhanced the overall metabolism of crop plants and overall photosynthetic rate and hence the yield in general27. Many researchers concluded the enhancing effect of humic acid on growth, yield and nutrient uptake by many crops28,29. The interaction between calcium sulphate rates and foliar spraying with humic acid concentrations was significant for all studied traits in both seasons except HI.
Results in Table 3 and 4 indicated that the differences between cultivars were significant for all studied traits in two seasons. G-843 cultivar showed the maximum values for all studied traits in both seasons and Sakha-1 showed the minimum values for all studied traits in both seasons except no. of seeds pl–1 in the 1st season Sakha-4 showed the minimum value (27.92). Positive effects of the G-843 cultivar on yield and its components may be due to the adaptability of the cultivar under salinity conditions.
Regarding the interaction of calcium sulphate and humic acid factors data in Table 3 and 4 indicated that vegetative, yield and yield components characters of faba bean plants were significant in both seasons. The obtained data showed that the highest values of studied characters were recorded when used 1.5 t fed–1 of calcium sulphate with the highest level of humic acid (3 g L–1) as compared to the other interaction treatments. These results were in harmony with those reported by many researchers7,25. And it is evident from Table 3 and 4, that variety G-843 recorded the greatest values for all traits with 0 and 1.5 t ha–1 in both seasons.
It is evident from the records in Table 3 and 4 that the interaction of calcium sulphate and cultivars was significant for all studied traits in both seasons and G-843 showed the highest values for all traits with 0.0 and 1.5 t ha–1 in both seasons. Also, data listed in the same tables showed significant differences were recorded for the interaction of humic and cultivars and G. 843 was superior with all concentrations of humic. On the other hand, the lowest values were recorded for Sakha-1 for all studied traits in both seasons. These results are in agreement with many researchers, that they indicated that foliar field crops with humic acids increased growth, yield and yield components, especially, under salinity conditions7,30,31.
Chemical composition: The significance of variances due to the effects of calcium sulphate and humic acid on the performance of three faba bean cultivars for some chemical compositions are presented in Table 5. Both calcium sulphate rates (C) varied highly significantly (or significantly) for all studied traits. Humic acid concentrations (H) and cultivars (CVS) were affected highly significantly for all studied traits. Calcium sulphate rates performed differently from humic acid concentrations to another for all studied traits. This is proved by the significance and highly significant of C×H interaction for all mentioned traits. Similarly, significant variations due to C×CVS were recorded for crude protein and carbohydrate and non-significance foe ash and fibre. However, humic acid concentrations x CVS interaction was significant and highly significant for all studied traits. The second-order interaction, C x H x CVS, is insignificant for all traits. Therefore, it could be concluded that each faba bean cultivar is not affected differently by various calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations. In other words, the effects of calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations on different faba bean cultivars not varied according to different rates and concentrations.
The chemical properties of three faba bean genotypes that are affected by calcium sulphate rates (C) and foliar spraying with humic acid concentrations (H) under irrigation conditions with saline water in the 2018/2019 season are presented in Table 6.
| Table 3: | Significance of mean squares due to different sources of variation of evaluation faba bean seeds chemical composition (%) under calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations in 2018/2019 season |
| Calcium sulphate rates (t fed–1) | Humic acid conc. (g L–1) | Varieties | Plant height (cm) | Number of branches Pl–1 | Pods Pl–1 | Number of seeds pl–1 | Seed yield Pl–1(g) | Seed index (SI) (g) | Harvest index (HI) | Biological yield (t ha–1) | Seed yield (t ha–1) |
| Mean effects of calcium sulphate rates | |||||||||||
| 0 | 54.74 | 2.11 | 9.89 | 27.29 | 22.15 | 77.64 | 28.01 | 6.22 | 1.77 | ||
| 1.5 | 60.01 | 2.73 | 11.31 | 33.6 | 28.58 | 80.85 | 28.74 | 6.89 | 2.01 | ||
| Significance | ** | * | * | ** | ** | * | * | ** | ** | ||
| Mean effects of humic acid concentrations | |||||||||||
| 0 | 45.33 | 2.08 | 9.18 | 24.91 | 19.8 | 76.12 | 28.45 | 4.95 | 1.43 | ||
| 1.5 | 57.88 | 2.45 | 11.02 | 29.56 | 24.49 | 79.08 | 27.52 | 7.03 | 1.96 | ||
| 3 | 68.93 | 2.72 | 11.62 | 36.87 | 31.81 | 82.52 | 29.14 | 7.68 | 2.27 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.584 | 0.114 | 0.323 | 0.791 | 0.839 | 1.598 | ns | 0.253 | 0.069 | ||
| Sakha-1 | 48.98 | 1.73 | 7.91 | 28.17 | 17.86 | 61.02 | 25.08 | 4.88 | 1.22 | ||
| Sakha-4 | 57.16 | 2.53 | 10.74 | 27.92 | 24.58 | 84.63 | 28.1 | 6.97 | 1.96 | ||
| Giza-843 | 66.01 | 2.99 | 13.16 | 35.24 | 33.66 | 92.07 | 31.93 | 7.81 | 2.5 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 2 | 0.129 | 0.384 | 0.513 | 0.557 | 1.243 | 1.074 | 0.204 | 0.0576 | ||
| Calcium sulphate×humic acid | |||||||||||
| 0 | 0 | 43.49 | 1.74 | 8.12 | 22.01 | 17.39 | 75.91 | 28.52 | 4.48 | 1.3 | |
| 1.5 | 55.1 | 2.11 | 10.67 | 25.72 | 20.71 | 77.26 | 26.97 | 6.81 | 1.87 | ||
| 3 | 65.64 | 2.47 | 10.89 | 34.12 | 28.34 | 79.74 | 28.52 | 7.37 | 2.13 | ||
| 1.5 | 0 | 47.18 | 2.42 | 10.23 | 27.81 | 22.2 | 76.33 | 28.38 | 5.42 | 1.57 | |
| 1.5 | 60.66 | 2.79 | 11.37 | 33.39 | 28.28 | 80.9 | 28.07 | 7.25 | 2.06 | ||
| 3 | 43.49 | 1.74 | 8.12 | 22.01 | 17.39 | 75.91 | 28.52 | 4.48 | 1.3 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 2.436 | 0.261 | 0.4573 | 1.119 | 1.186 | 1.186 | ns | 0.93 | 0.84 | ||
| Calcium sulphate×varieties | |||||||||||
| 0 | Sakha-1 | 47.3 | 1.56 | 7.2 | 25.72 | 15.77 | 59.27 | 25.09 | 4.67 | 1.16 | |
| Sakha-4 | 53.03 | 2.19 | 9.79 | 25.47 | 21.82 | 82.58 | 27.2 | 6.53 | 1.77 | ||
| Giza-843 | 63.9 | 2.58 | 12.69 | 30.67 | 28.86 | 91.06 | 31.73 | 7.45 | 2.37 | ||
| 1.5 | Sakha-1 | 50.66 | 1.9 | 8.62 | 30.61 | 19.95 | 62.78 | 25.07 | 5.09 | 1.28 | |
| Sakha-4 | 61.28 | 2.88 | 11.7 | 30.38 | 27.35 | 86.68 | 29 | 7.4 | 2.14 | ||
| Giza-843 | 68.11 | 3.4 | 13.62 | 39.82 | 38.46 | 93.08 | 32.13 | 8.17 | 2.62 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 2.829 | 0.182 | 0.543 | 0.726 | 0.787 | ns | ns | ns | 0.0814 | ||
| Humic acid×varieties | |||||||||||
| 0 | Sakha-1 | 40.25 | 1.45 | 6.7 | 23.2 | 14.25 | 59.35 | 24.71 | 3.79 | 0.93 | |
| Sakha-4 | 44.68 | 2.17 | 9.57 | 22.75 | 18.76 | 79.85 | 28.94 | 4.79 | 1.39 | ||
| Giza-843 | 51.07 | 2.63 | 11.27 | 28.78 | 26.38 | 89.17 | 31.71 | 6.27 | 1.99 | ||
| 1.5 | Sakha-1 | 48.08 | 1.78 | 8.4 | 27.08 | 16.83 | 60.12 | 24.63 | 5.27 | 1.29 | |
| Sakha-4 | 57.1 | 2.58 | 10.9 | 27.05 | 24.02 | 85.79 | 25.85 | 7.68 | 1.98 | ||
| Giza-843 | 68.45 | 2.98 | 13.75 | 34.53 | 32.63 | 91.34 | 32.08 | 8.14 | 2.62 | ||
| 3 | Sakha-1 | 58.6 | 1.95 | 8.63 | 34.22 | 22.51 | 63.61 | 25.91 | 5.58 | 1.45 | |
| Sakha-4 | 69.68 | 2.85 | 11.77 | 33.97 | 30.96 | 88.25 | 29.52 | 8.43 | 2.49 | ||
| Giza-843 | 78.5 | 3.35 | 14.45 | 42.42 | 41.96 | 95.71 | 32 | 9.02 | 2.89 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 3.465 | ns | 0.665 | 0.889 | 0.964 | 2.153 | 1.861 | 1.118 | 0.100 | ||
| C×H×V | * | ns | * | * | * | ns | * | ns | * |
| Table 4: | Yield and its components as affected by calcium sulphate application and foliar spraying with humic acid concentrations under irrigation conditions with saline water in the 2018/2019 season |
| Calcium sulphate rates (t fed–1) | Humic acid conc. (g L–1) | Varieties | Plant height (cm) | Number of branches Pl–1 | Pods Pl–1 | Number of seeds pl–1 | Seed yield Pl–1(g) | Seed index (SI) (g) | Harvest index (HI) | Biological yield (t ha–1) | Seed yield (t ha–1) |
| Mean effects of calcium sulphate rates | |||||||||||
| 0 | 45.47 | 2.32 | 9.51 | 29.3 | 22.88 | 74.9 | 33.04 | 5.16 | 1.74 | ||
| 1.5 | 54.11 | 2.81 | 11.95 | 32.66 | 26.84 | 78.01 | 34.96 | 5.74 | 2.05 | ||
| Significance | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | * | ** | ** | ** | ||
| Mean effects of humic acid concentrations | |||||||||||
| 0 | 42.51 | 2.1 | 9.39 | 23.71 | 18.13 | 73.43 | 33.37 | 4.84 | 1.65 | ||
| 1.5 | 49.98 | 2.54 | 11.01 | 30.48 | 24.21 | 76.31 | 34 | 5.39 | 1.88 | ||
| 3 | 56.89 | 3.06 | 11.78 | 38.73 | 32.24 | 79.62 | 34.63 | 6.13 | 2.16 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.379 | 0.081 | 0.389 | 0.82 | 0.763 | 1.558 | ns | 0.217 | 0.769 | ||
| Sakha-1 | 45.35 | 1.86 | 8.22 | 29.05 | 17.73 | 58.83 | 27.47 | 4.32 | 1.19 | ||
| Sakha-4 | 49.81 | 2.66 | 11.28 | 29.02 | 24.67 | 81.68 | 36.56 | 5.23 | 1.91 | ||
| Giza-843 | 54.22 | 3.18 | 12.69 | 34.86 | 32.18 | 88.85 | 37.98 | 6.8 | 2.58 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.199 | 0.187 | 0.392 | 0.706 | 0.71 | 1.214 | 1.734 | 0.21 | 0.044 | ||
| Calcium sulphate×humic acid | |||||||||||
| 0 | 0 | 38.78 | 1.77 | 7.87 | 22.14 | 16.88 | 73.2 | 32.61 | 4.5 | 1.49 | |
| 1.5 | 45.97 | 2.43 | 10.06 | 29.51 | 22.83 | 74.55 | 33.06 | 5.07 | 1.72 | ||
| 3 | 51.67 | 2.76 | 10.6 | 36.23 | 28.94 | 76.94 | 33.45 | 5.91 | 2.01 | ||
| 1.5 | 0 | 46.23 | 2.43 | 10.92 | 25.28 | 19.39 | 73.65 | 34.13 | 5.17 | 1.81 | |
| 1.5 | 53.99 | 2.64 | 11.97 | 31.46 | 25.59 | 78.06 | 34.94 | 5.71 | 2.04 | ||
| 3 | 62.12 | 3.36 | 12.97 | 41.23 | 35.55 | 82.3 | 35.81 | 6.34 | 2.31 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.037 | 0.114 | 0.55 | 1.16 | 1.079 | 2.204 | ns | 1.019 | 0.057 | ||
| Calcium sulphate×varieties | |||||||||||
| 0 | Sakha-1 | 42.44 | 1.61 | 7.72 | 28.12 | 16.62 | 57.16 | 27.02 | 3.96 | 1.07 | |
| Sakha-4 | 45.72 | 2.44 | 9.47 | 27.97 | 23.17 | 79.67 | 35.87 | 4.92 | 1.76 | ||
| Giza-843 | 48.24 | 2.9 | 11.33 | 31.8 | 28.85 | 87.86 | 36.23 | 6.6 | 2.39 | ||
| 1.5 | Sakha-1 | 48.26 | 2.11 | 8.71 | 29.98 | 18.84 | 60.51 | 27.91 | 4.69 | 1.31 | |
| Sakha-4 | 53.89 | 2.87 | 13.1 | 30.07 | 26.17 | 83.68 | 37.25 | 5.54 | 2.07 | ||
| Giza-843 | 60.2 | 3.46 | 14.04 | 37.92 | 35.51 | 89.83 | 39.73 | 6.99 | 2.78 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 1.696 | ns | 0.555 | 0.999 | 1.004 | ns | ns | ns | 0.062 | ||
| Humic acid×varieties | |||||||||||
| 0 | Sakha-1 | 39.3 | 1.45 | 6.62 | 22.32 | 13.18 | 57.19 | 26.87 | 3.87 | 1.03 | |
| Sakha-4 | 42.15 | 2.07 | 10.28 | 22.5 | 17.91 | 77.07 | 36.27 | 4.48 | 1.62 | ||
| Giza-843 | 46.07 | 2.78 | 11.28 | 26.32 | 23.31 | 86.02 | 36.99 | 6.16 | 2.28 | ||
| 1.5 | Sakha-1 | 46.28 | 1.85 | 8.8 | 28.93 | 17.29 | 57.96 | 27.08 | 4.22 | 1.14 | |
| Sakha-4 | 49.53 | 2.77 | 11.33 | 28.38 | 24.28 | 82.82 | 36.58 | 5.15 | 1.89 | ||
| Giza-843 | 54.12 | 3 | 12.9 | 34.13 | 31.05 | 88.15 | 38.34 | 6.81 | 2.61 | ||
| 3 | Sakha-1 | 50.47 | 2.28 | 9.23 | 35.9 | 22.73 | 61.35 | 28.45 | 4.88 | 1.39 | |
| Sakha-4 | 57.73 | 3.13 | 12.23 | 36.17 | 31.81 | 85.14 | 36.83 | 6.07 | 2.23 | ||
| Giza-843 | 62.48 | 3.75 | 13.88 | 44.13 | 42.18 | 92.38 | 38.61 | 7.42 | 2.86 | ||
| LSD0.05 | 2.077 | ns | 0.598 | 1.223 | 1.230 | 2.103 | ns | ns | 0.075 | ||
| C×H×V | * | ns | * | ** | ** | ns | ** | ns | ** | ||
ns, * and ** indicate insignificant, significant at 0.05 and significant at 0.01, respectively |
|||||||||||
| Table 5: | Significance of mean squares due to different sources of variation of evaluation faba bean seeds chemical composition (%) under calcium sulphate rates and humic acid concentrations in 2018/2019 season |
| Trait | Calcium sulphate (C) |
Humic (H) |
C×H |
Cultivars (CVS) |
C×CVS |
H×CVS |
C×H×CVS |
Ash | 2.386** |
6.939** |
0.441** |
0.202** |
0.001ns |
0.052** |
0.008ns |
| Crude protein | 27.421* |
120.144** |
3.232* |
4.043** |
0.769* |
1.211** |
0.103ns |
| Crude fiber | 9.383** |
9.635** |
1.415** |
0.189** |
0.014ns |
0.047* |
0.026ns |
| Carbohydrate | 235.418** |
164.954** |
19.155** |
5.978** |
1.080* |
2.351* |
1.326ns |
ns, * and ** indicate insignificant, significant at 0.05 and significant at 0.01, respectively |
|||||||
| Table 6: |
Effect of calcium sulphate application and foliar spraying with humic acid concentrations on chemical compositions (%) in faba bean seeds under irrigation conditions with saline water during 2018/2019 season |
Humic acid conc. (g L–1) |
Varieties |
Ash |
Crude protein |
Crude fiber |
Carbohydrate |
|
| Calcium sulphate rates (t fed–1) | ||||||
| 0 | 3.45 |
26.37 |
5.06 |
60.11 |
||
| 1.5 | 3.87 |
27.8 |
5.89 |
64.29 |
||
| Significance | ** |
* |
** |
** |
||
0 |
3.12 |
24.85 |
4.72 |
59.17 |
||
1.5 |
3.52 |
26.5 |
5.51 |
62.19 |
||
3 |
4.34 |
29.91 |
6.18 |
65.23 |
||
| LSD0.05 | 0.256 |
0.852 |
0.253 |
1.182 |
||
Sakha-1 |
3.56 |
26.61 |
5.38 |
61.66 |
||
Sakha-4 |
3.65 |
27.09 |
5.46 |
62.13 |
||
Giza-843 |
3.77 |
27.56 |
5.58 |
62.81 |
||
| LSD0.05 | 0.146 |
0.269 |
0.141 |
0.898 |
||
| Calcium sulphate×humic acid | ||||||
| 0 | 0 |
2.84 |
24.35 |
4.42 |
55.9 |
|
1.5 |
3.2 |
26.06 |
5.3 |
60.75 |
||
3 |
4.31 |
28.71 |
5.45 |
63.68 |
||
| 1.5 | 0 |
3.4 |
25.35 |
5.02 |
62.45 |
|
1.5 |
3.84 |
26.94 |
5.73 |
63.62 |
||
3 |
4.37 |
31.11 |
6.92 |
66.78 |
||
| LSD0.05 | 0.26 |
0.852 |
0.253 |
0.98 |
||
| Calcium sulphate×varieties | ||||||
| 0 | Sakha-1 |
3.34 |
25.95 |
4.96 |
59.65 |
|
Sakha-4 |
3.44 |
26.39 |
5.01 |
60.01 |
||
Giza-843 |
3.57 |
26.78 |
5.2 |
60.67 |
||
| 1.5 | Sakha-1 |
3.77 |
27.27 |
5.8 |
63.67 |
|
Sakha-4 |
3.87 |
27.79 |
5.9 |
64.24 |
||
Giza-843 |
3.97 |
28.34 |
5.97 |
64.94 |
||
| LSD0.055 | ns |
0.923 |
ns |
0.837 |
||
| Humic acid×varieties | ||||||
0 |
Sakha-1 |
2.91 |
24.74 |
4.54 |
58.85 |
|
Sakha-4 |
3.19 |
24.9 |
4.81 |
58.76 |
||
Giza-843 |
3.26 |
24.9 |
4.82 |
59.91 |
||
1.5 |
Sakha-1 |
3.52 |
26.15 |
5.47 |
61.87 |
|
Sakha-4 |
3.46 |
26.42 |
5.43 |
62.63 |
||
Giza-843 |
3.58 |
26.93 |
5.64 |
62.08 |
||
3 |
Sakha-1 |
4.24 |
28.93 |
6.14 |
64.27 |
|
Sakha-4 |
4.31 |
29.96 |
6.13 |
64.99 |
||
Giza-843 |
4.47 |
30.85 |
6.29 |
66.43 |
||
| LSD0.05 | 0.226 |
0.466 |
0.244 |
1.56 |
||
| C×H×V | ns |
ns |
ns |
ns |
||
ns, * and ** indicate insignificant, significant at 0.05 and significant at 0.01, respectively |
||||||
Results revealed that cultivars differed significantly in ash and value ranged from3.56-3.77%. The results demonstrate the considerable genetic variation for ash, protein, fibre and carbohydrate. The range in protein content extended from 26.61-27.56%, for Sakha-1 and Giza-843, respectively. The fibre contents ranged from 5.38-5.58%with significant differences among genotypes. This is in agreement with values obtained by many researchers7,32. Carbohydrate ranged from 61.66-62.81% which is in harmony with the mean carbohydrate content for raw legumes30. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences within the genotypes. Variations in these traits among different genotypes can be attributed to genetic and environmental factors33.
Calcium sulphate rates (C) performed significantly different from humic acid concentrations (H) to another for all studied traits. G-843 showed highly significant performance under 1.5 t calcium sulphate rate and Sakha-1 showed the lowest significant values for crude protein and carbohydrate content. Thus, significant differences due to H×CVS were recorded for all studied chemical composition traits.
This study which was carried out during two sowing seasons in Wadi El-Natroon, El-Beheira Governorate, Egypt to assess the effect of calcium sulphate and humic acid concentrations on three faba bean cultivars has shown that G. 843 can serve as a good resource for protein, fibre and carbohydrate and support any program to alleviate protein malnutrition and recommended for commercial and extensive faba bean farming in the new reclaimed sandy soils as a result of its capacity to give high yield and protein content under saline soil conditions.
CONCLUSION
G-843 Cultivar gave high yield and yield components of faba bean due to its adaptation to Wadi El-Natron environment. Consequently, the supply of calcium sulphate and humic acid increased the growth, yield, yield components and seed chemical compositions and markedly alleviated the negative effects of abiotic stresses on faba bean plants and is considered as a promising soil amendment to overcome adverse effects of salinity stress.
SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT
This study has discovered findings that there are differences in the interaction of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) varieties and application of calcium sulphate and humic acid under sandy slain conditions on growth, yield, yield components and seeds chemical composition. This investigation will assist researchers and farmers to use varieties and application calcium sulphate and humic acid on faba bean varieties under sandy and slain soil conditions. Based on this study a new theory has been obtained that, the use of the application of 1.5 t calcium sulphate, 3 g L–1. humic acid on the G-843 variety can increase the yield, yield components and seeds chemical compositions.