Using Different Types of Fertilization for Increasing Sugar Beet Growth under Sandy Soil Conditions

Four nitrogen forms and four biofertilizer were application as well as their interactions on growth analysis of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L). The important results could be summarized as follow. Urea treatment inclusion in seeds with ntrobin application resulted the highest values of leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR) and leaf area duration (LAD) and in the 1 season. A slight increase was 0.03 g/ week in this case was found due to urea treatments as compared with the others treatment at the period from Relative growth rate in the 1 season. The highest net assimilation rate was 0.66 g/dm.week achieved by ntrobin as compared the others treatment whereas, the lowest one 0.11 g.dm /week with the phosphorine application. Ammonium sulphate treatment with (phosphorin + ntrobin) obtained the highest net assimilation rate (NAR) in the 1 season. The highest values from leaf area duration were 0.11, 0.19 and 0.15 dm/week achieved with urea and ntrobin in the 1 season at (LAD2), (LAD3) and (LAD4). Ammonium nitrate treatment with phosphorin obtained the highest leaf area duration (LAD) in the 2 season. Generally, it could be recommended that fertilizing sugar beet plants variety Ymer with nitrogen forms inoculated with biofertilizer (ntrobin 600gm/fed) increased the growth of sugar beet plants under sandy soil conditions. DOI: 10.14302/issn.2641-9467.jgrc-18-1936 Corresponding author: M. H. Mubarak, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences – Plant production department (Agronomy breeding branch) Arish University, Email: mubarakmohamed712@gmail.com


Introduction
World sugar production depends upon two main crops sugar cane and sugar beet.The percentage of recovered sugar out of cane and beet amount is about 70% and 30% of total world production of sugar, respectively.Sugar is considering a strategic commodity in many countries over the world.It comes after wheat from the strategic view for many countries in Africa, Europe, America and Australia.Sugar beet crop occupies ranked second in the production of sugar in the world.Egypt suffers from a gap between the consumed and produced sugar which reaches nearly one million ton [1].
So, Researchers are pressing hard to narrowing the gap between production and consumption through increasing horizontal and vertical expansion.As, it is difficult to increase the horizontal expansion in the old valley, so, that it is promising to try to cultivate this strategic crop in the newly reclaimed lands.These lands are characterized as sandy saline soil and high salinity irrigation water [2].Also, the economic way of increasing sugar productivity could be achieved through developing appropriate new technology package for sugar beet crop that includes agronomic management to improve yield and quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) such as nitrogen fertilization, which are the most important factors that affect the quantity and type of crop [3].
The last three decades showed a gradual increase in sugar beet cultivation in Egypt.This is considered one of the important national targets to minimize the gap between production and consumption of sugar.
The importance of sugar beet crop to agriculture is not only confined to sugar production, but also to its wide adaptability to grown in poor, saline, alkaline and calcareous soils.The crop is annual planting during the winter season from September till mid-November, and is highly adapted to grow in moderate saline soils especially in newly reclaimed land which has water shortage.There is high potential for using sugar beet to reducing the imported sugar from abroad [4].

Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is growing in
North Sinai, because it is tolerant to high in the soil and water salinity.Around El Salam Canal (650.000fed) is promising for the new reclaimed land cultivated with strategic crops such as sugar beet.The demand of sugar beet is showed the gap between production and consumption.Nitrogen in many cases is a limiting factor because few soils contain sufficient nitrogen in an available form.So, nitrogen rate had become an important role for growers to obtained maximum yield and quality [5].Sugar beet growers cultivate sugar beet plants with unsuitable nitrogen levels.Biofertilizer can be generally defined as preparations containing live or latent cells of efficient strains of nitrogen fixation, phosphate solubility and silicate decomposers used for application to soil with the objective of acceleration certain microbial processes to augment the extent of the availability of nutrients in a form which can be easily assimilated by plants [5].
The aim of this investigation studies the effect of nitrogen fertilization, organic and biofertilizer on growth rate of sugar beet crop under conditions of North Sinai.Seeds were sown at rate of 4 kg fed -1 on the fifth October in the first and second seasons.After one month, the plants were thinned to two plants per hill, and then were singled to one plant per hill after 45 days from sowing.Organic fertilization (Olive pomace) treatment was added at a rate of 97.26 kg fed -1 after sowing.The chemical analysis of olive pomace was shown in Table 1.Biofertilization treatments were added for mixing with seeds.Nitrogen in four doses form of ammonium nitrate, urea and ammonium sulphate were added at a rate of 100 kg N fed -1 at 60,75,90,105 days from sowing.All used treatments were shown in Table 2.

Two
Drip irrigation system (4 L/hr) was used.The experiment site was irrigated immediately just after seeding and thereafter, irrigation every 3 days by underground saline water (3500 ppm) pumped from a well from sowing was applied.All The other cultural practices were practiced as recommended for sugar beet.Samples of the experimental soil mixture were taken before sowing of sugar beet for chemical and physical analysis of [8] in Table 3.Chemical analysis of irrigation water is showed in Tables 4 and 5 for both seasons.
Average monthly of some meteorological data for Sinai (El-Arish region) during sugar beet growth duration (October -April) in two growing seasons of 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 are shown in Table 6.
Random samples of five plants were taken from each sub plot after 120, 140, 160, 180 and 200 days from sowing which reflected the growth stages, i.e. initial, establishment, mid-season, late-season and ripening stages, respectively [12].Plants were separated into roots and tops to determine the following characters.
• Leaf area duration (LAD) = (LA 2 -LA 1 ) * (T 2 -T 1 ).Where .W 1 , A 1 and W 2 , A 2 refer to dry weight for top or root (g) and leaf area, respectively at time T 1 and T 2 (day or week).

Statistical Analysis
Experimental design was randomized complete block design.Data analyses using SAS [14] .Not statistically significant between the means followed by the same alphabetical letters at the 0.05 level of significance according to [15].

Results and Discussion
The main objective of this chapter in the study is to show and explain the obtained results and their responses to the effect of nitrogen fertilizer forms, biofertilization treatments and their interaction in term of growth of sugar beet at different growth stages at as a result of biofertilization treatments may be referred to their effect on nitrogen fixation and the uptake of nutrients hence increased sugar beet growth and development.These findings are in fully accordance with results of [20, 21, 22, and 23].
With regard to the effect of the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization treatments on were significant in the On the whole, there were insignificant differences in biofertilization treatments over planting dates in the two seasons except in both season, the highest value was 0.033, 0.091 g/week in at two seasons in (Table 14).
With regard to the effect of the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization treatments on relative growth rate (RGR) were insignificant except in relative growth rate were g/week achieved with ammonium sulphate and phosphorine bio fertilizer 0.17 g/ week with and ntrobin in (Table 15).
Net Assimilation Rate nitrogen in both seasons in (Table 16).These results are in stand with those confirmed by 35,36,37 and 38].
Net assimilation rate biofertilization treatments through both seasons except at in the 1 st season (Table 17).The highest net assimilation rate was 0.66 g/dm.weekachieved by ntrobin as compared the others treatment whereas, the lowest one 0.11 g.dm /week with the phosphorine application.This may be due to the role of nitrogen in fixing more nitrogen and producing some growth substances that encourage plant growth and dry matter accumulation.39 40].
With regard to the effect of the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization treatments on were significant 1 st season.interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization treatments on were insignificant 1 and (NAR 2 ) the 2 nd season.
1.34 g/dm.weekachieved with ammonium sulphate and (ntrobin + phosphorine) at the 1 st season.However, the interaction between the ammonium sulphate and ntrobin achieved the highest value 0.24 g/dm.weekfrom in the nd season (Table 18).
Leaf Area Duration (LAD dm 2 /week) Data in Tables 19 ,20 and 21 display the effect of nitrogen forms, biofertilization treatments and their interaction in (LAD 1 ), (LAD 2 ), (LAD 3 ) and (LAD 4 ) during 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 on Leaf Area Duration.leaf area duration was nitrogen forms treatments through both seasons except in (LAD 2 ), (LAD 3 ) in the 2 nd season.The highest leaf area duration was 0.37 and 0.40 dm 2 /week achieved due to urea as compared with the others treatment.However the lowest one was 0.24 and 0.26 dm 2 /week with the olive pomace treatment.Similar results were supported by 41 and 42].
Concerning the effect of biofertilization treatments on leaf area duration, it showed an insignificant role at both seasons except in (LAD 4 ) in the 1 st season.The highest leaf area duration was 0.66 dm 2 / week achieved with phosphorine treatment compared with the others treatment.However, the lowest one was 0.11 dm 2 /week with the control treatment (Table 20).These results are in stand with those confirmed by 43,44 and 45].
With regard to the effect of the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization treatments on leaf area duration (dm 2 /week) were significant except in (LAD 1 ). in the 2 nd season were insignificant except in (LAD 1 ) and (LAD 4 ).The highest values from leaf area duration were 0.11, 0.19 and 0.15 dm 2 /week achieved with urea and ntrobin in the 1 st season at (LAD 2 ), (LAD 3 ) and (LAD 4 ).However, in the 2 nd season the interaction between the ammonium sulphate and ntrobin achieved the highest value was 0.43 dm 2 /week from (LAD 4 ), the interaction between the Ammonium Nitrate and Phosphorine achieved the highest value was 0.44 dm 2 /week from (LAD 1 ) in ( field experiments were carried out at the Experimental Farm, Faculty of Environmental Agricultural Sciences (FEAS), EL-Arish, Arish University, North Sinai Governorate during two successive winter seasons of 2014-15 and 2015-16 sugar beet (Beta vulgaris c.v. Ymer).This cultivar was obtained from Sugar Crops Research Institute, Agric., Research Center, Ministry of Agriculture, Egypt.The experiment included 16 treatments were the combination between four forms of nitrogen (Olive pomace 1.54%N, ammonium nitrate 33.5% N, ammonium sulphate 20.6% N, urea 46.5% N) and four biofertilization treatments (Without, ntrobin 600gm/fed, Phosphorine 300 gm/fed and ntrobin + Phosphorine by rate 1:1).The previous crop was sugar beet and gaur in the first and second seasons, respectively, the experimental design was randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications.The main plots were devoted to source of nitrogen and biofertilizer treatments in sub-plots.Plot area was 8 m 2 (1/500 fed -1 ) containing 4 rows of 4 m length (50 cm between rows and 25 cm between plants).www.openaccesspub.org| JGRC CC-license DOI : 10.14302/issn.2641-9467.jgrc-18-1936Vol-1 Issue 1 Pg.no.-21

Table 1 .
[6]mical analysis of Olive pomace used in the study adopted from[6].

Table 7
. Effect of nitrogen forms on Leaf area index after 120, 140, 160 and 180 days from sowing in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan ' s multiple range test.where (NS= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).

Table 6 .
Maximum and minimum values of temperature and relative humidity and rain full in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.
Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan's multiple range test .where (Ntro + Phosph = Ntrobin + Phosphorine & NS= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).
Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan ' s multiple range test.where(NS= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).

Table 9 .
Effect of interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization on Leaf area index after 120, 140, 160 and 180 days from sowing in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.
Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan ' s multiple range test.where(NS=notsignificant & * = significant & ** =high significant).Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan's multiple range test.where (Ntro + Phosph = Ntrobin + Phosphorine & NS= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).

Table 12 .
Effect the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization on in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.

Table 13 .
Effect of nitrogen forms on relative growth rate (RGR g/week) in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.

Table 14 .
Effect of biofertilization on relative growth rate (RGR g/week) in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan ' s multiple range test.where (Ntro + Phosph = Ntrobin + Phosphorine & NS= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).

Table 15 .
Effect the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization on relative growth rate in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.

Table 16 .
Effect of nitrogen forms on net assimilation rate (NAR) in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan's multiple range test.where (NS= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).

Table 18 .
Effect of interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization on net assimilation rate in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.

Table 19 .
Effect of nitrogen forms on leaf area duration (dm 2 /week) in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan ' s multiple range test.where (NS= not significant & * = significant & ** = high significant).

Table 21 .
Effect the interaction between nitrogen forms and biofertilization on leaf area duration (dm 2 /week) in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.Means followed by the same letter within each column are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability according to Duncan ' s multiple range test.where(Ntro + Phosph = Ntrobin + Phosphorine & ns= not significant & * = significant & ** =high significant).