Foliar nutrition in Sorghum.pptx

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, DHARWAD
GIRISH R SATANNAVAR
PGS21AGR 8724
Master’s seminar - I
on
COLLEGE OFAGRICULTURE, DHARWAD
DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY
Foliar nutrition in sorghum

 Sorghum, the fifth most important cereal crop on the globe and native to
Sub-Saharan Africa, is traditionally grown for grain both as food and
animal feed and stalks as animal fodder, building material and fuel.
 Because of it’s drought adaptation capability, sorghum is a preferred
crop in tropical, warmer and semi-arid regions of the world with high
temperature and water stress (Paterson et al. 2009)
 With the threat of climate change looming large on the crop
productivity, sorghum being a drought hardy crop will play an
important role in food, feed and fodder security in dryland economy.
 Development of better adapted, high-yielding sorghum cultivars has
increased the yield potential and the amounts of plant nutrients required
by the crop. Consequently, the fertilizer application in sorghum has
increased substantially.
Introduction

Fig.1: India’s position in production (‘000 tonnes) of
sorghum in the world during 2020

 Foliar nutrition is a technique of feeding liquid fertilizer directly to leaves of
the plant
 An alternative approach to overcome the problem of ineffective fertilizer
nutrient supply is supplementary foliar nutrition
 It is an effective means to supply nutrients because the current status of nutrient
use efficiency is quite low in case of N (30-50%), P (15-20%), K (40-50%), S
(8- 12%) and micronutrients (<2%) due to deterioration in chemical, physical
and biological health of the soil and the conditions which restrict root growth in
soil for uptake of nutrients
 It enables quick and easy consumption of the nutrients through penetrating into
stomata or the cuticle then nutrients enter into cells (Latha and
Nadanassababady., 2003)
 Though soil application of nutrients can not be replaced by foliar application
completely, but it would definitely boost the plant growth
Foliar nutrition

Importance and scope
 Foliar nutrient uptake is means of rapid nutrient supply, when soil nutrient
availability or root activity is reduced
 Foliar spray is also the method of choice to correct deficiency of nutrients
quickly during critical requirement
 Nutrient sprays can be applied at any point of time during the growing season to
to stimulate the production process of crops for improving yield
 Promote crop growth under abiotic stress conditions and can improve nutrient
use efficiency
 Rapid absorption of nutrient by the leaf tissues and efficient movement to the
developing parts of plant
 Eliminating losses through leaching, fixation and helps in regulating the uptake
of nutrients by plants, efficient utilization of nutrients, increase plants mineral
status, yields and quality of field crops. (Elayaraja and Angayarkanni, 2005)
 Soil application of micro nutrients has some disadvantages like residual impacts
and consolidation which can be solved by foliar nutrition (Wang et al., 2004)

Need for foliar feeding
 During crop growth supplementary foliar fertilization increase plants mineral status
and improve crop yields (Kolota and Osinska, 2001)
 Most effective when roots are incapable of absorbing required amount of nutrients
from soil due to some reasons like high degree of fixation, lack of soil moisture,
losses from leaching and low soil temperature (Singh et al., 1970)
 Provides a means of quickly correcting plant nutrient deficiencies, when identified
on the plant
 Liew advocated that foliar application of micro-nutrients to be 6-20 time more
efficient than soil application, depending on soil type
 Foliar nutrition at proper and appropriate growth phases is crucial for their uptake
and for improving the crop performances (Anadhakrishnaveni et al., 2004)
 Present status of NUE is low in macronutrients like Nitrogen (NUE is 30 to 50%),
Phosphorous (NUE is 15 to 20%), Sulphur (NUE is 8 to 12%), whereas in
micronutrients NUE is less than 2% because of deterioration of physical, biological,
chemical health of soil as well as the situations which limits growth of roots in the
soil for nutrient uptake (Vision, 2013)

Mechanism of foliar feeding
 Nutrient must enter into leaf before entering into cytoplasm
of leaf cell
 Nutrient must effectively penetrate the outer cuticle and
wall of epidermal cell
 Once penetration has occurred, nutrient absorption by cells
is similar to the absorption by roots
 Among all the components the cuticle offers the greatest
resistance to the nutrients

Timing of Foliar Application
1. Proper growth stage
 Foliar applications should be timed to provide needed nutrients during the yield
potential determining time frame of plant development, which will in turn
favourably influence the post reproductive and development stages
 Multiple, low rate applications may show the most favourable responses within
these time frames whether a crop is nutritionally sound or not
2. Proper crop condition
 Generally crops that are nutritionally sound will be most likely to respond to
foliar feeding. This is due to better tissue quality (allowing for maximum
absorption of nutrients into leaf and stem) and better growth vigour (allowing
for translocatable nutrients to be rapidly moved to the rest of the plant)
 Crops under heat or moisture stress show less response to foliar applications
due to lower leaf and stem absorption rates and/or poor vigour

3. Proper meteorological conditions
 Environmental influences, such as time of day, temperature, humidity and
windspeed influence the physical and biological aspects of foliar applications
 Plant tissue permeability is an important factor in absorption of nutrients into
the plant: Calm, moist and warm conditions favour more tissue permeability
(Rajasekar et al., 2017)
 Day timing of the foliar feeding is crucial aspect for the effective absorption of
applied nutrients as well as for avoiding foliage injury
 During afternoon hours when temperature is less after 2 to 3 PM would be the
suitable time for foliar feeding
 Windy day is another major factor affecting the foliar feeding which would drift
the nutrient spray solutions. Therefore, for foliar applications windy days must
be avoided
 Minimum 3-4 hours are required for applied nutrients to get absorbed into the
plant leaves. Thus, there could not be any rains for minimum 3-4 hours after
foliar applications (Fageria et al., 2009)

Types of fertilizers
 Fertilizers:
1. Not all fertilizers are suitable for use as a foliar spray. The primary objective of
a foliar application is to allow for maximum absorption of nutrients into the
plant tissues; foliar fertilizer formulations should meet certain standards in
order to minimize foliar damage
2. Qualifications for fertilizer materials follow:
 High solubility
 Low salt index
 High purity
 Nitrogenous fertilizers :
1. Urea is the most suitable nitrogen source for foliar applications, due to its low
salt index and high solubility in comparison to other nitrogen sources
2. Urea utilized in foliar sprays should sprays be low in biuret content to lessen
urea foliage burn

 Phosphorus fertilizers:
 A combination of poly and ortho-phosphates shown to lessen leaf burn and
aid in leaf phosphate absorption.
 The polyphosphates advantage may also be due to supplying both ortho and
polyphosphate forms
 Potassium fertilizers:
 Depending on availability, potassium polyphosphates are an excellent source
of low salt index, highly soluble potassium
 Potassium sulphate- low salt index, but a rather low solubility
 Potassium hydroxide, potassium nitrate and potassium thiosulfate- low salt
index and high solubility characteristics
 Secondary and micronutrient materials:
 Foliar application of secondary nutrients can be highly effective, but because
of difficulties associated with leaf tissue absorption and translocation
choosing the correct fertilizer sources for these nutrients become very critical

Advantages of foliar nutrition
 If a deficiency exists, then foliar application would be one means of providing a
quick method to fix the problem
 When the absorption of plant nutrients is disturbed by weeds, poor aeration,
low soil temperature, frequent rainfall etc but the nutrients absorbed through the
foliage strengthen the plant and help recovering root uptake
 The purpose of foliar feeding is not to replace soil fertilization. It is usually a
supplement way to compensate nutrients deficiency
 It can be effectively used at varying topographical condition
 Effectively used in poor and marginal lands
 Efficient method for increasing efficiency of the fertilizer usage, enhancing the
yields and quality of crops during varying ranges of climate (Waisel et al.,
2002)

Limitations of foliar nutrition
• Possibility of foliage injury with high concentration
• Solubility problems especially with cold water
• Requirement of correct weather
• Incompatible with certain agrochemicals
• Nutrient absorption affected by plant factors

Effect of foliar nutrition on growth
parameters of sorghum

Table 1: Effect of zinc and iron on growth attributes of sorghum
S.No. Treatment combination
Plant
height (cm)
Plant dry
weight
(g/plant)
Crop growth
rate
(g/m2/day)
1. Control (80-40-40 kg N-P2O5-K2O/ha) 157.09 63.27 19.58
2. RDF + 20 kg Zinc (soil application) 155.16 64.17 20.86
3. RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 25 DAS 155.20 66.85 21.11
4. RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 45 DAS 155.79 68.65 21.88
5. RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 25 and 45 DAS 164.53 71.26 23.60
6. RDF + 10 kg Iron (soil application) 163.70 64.10 19.94
7. RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 20 DAS 162.28 65.94 20.72
8. RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 40 DAS 159.70 66.80 21.08
9. RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 20 and 40 DAS 157.97 68.56 21.85
S.Em. ± 2.48 1.19 0.55
C.D (P=0.05) - 3.55 1.63
Telangana Sandy loam soil Akhila et al. (2021)

Table 2: Effect of foliar spray on plant height and days to 50 per cent
flowering of rabi sorghum
S.No. Treatment Plant height (cm)
Days to 50%
flowering
1. Control (water spray) 156 66.33
2. KNO3 @ 2g in 100 ml of water 163 70.93
3. DAP @ 2g in 100 ml of water 159 70.47
4. Urea @ 2g in 100 ml of water 160 70.27
S.Em. ± 3.56 1.17
C.D (P=0.05) NS 2.29
Tandur Clay soil Satish and Sudharani (2021)

Table 3: Growth parameters of forage sorghum as influenced by
different foliar nutrients
Treatment
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
functional
leaves/plant
Leaf
area/plant
(dm2)
Leaf-stem
ratio
RDF (5 t/ha FYM + 100:50:40 kg/ha N, P2O5,
K2O)
264.20 11.00 33.11 0.17
RDF + 2% foliar spray of urea 285.27 14.00 35.50 0.25
RDF + 2% foliar spray of DAP 280.13 13.50 35.00 0.24
RDF + 0.5% foliar spray of 20:20:20 279.00 12.20 34.70 0.22
RDF + water spray 265.17 11.50 32.00 0.18
S.Em. ± 2.21 0.23 0.19 0.005
C. D (P=0.05) 6.62 0.70 0.58 0.01
Rahuri Clay loam soil Lagad et al. (2020)

Table 4: Effect of foliar nutrition on growth of forage sorghum
Treatments Plant height (cm) No. of leaves/plant
No spray (Control) 261.43 11.8
Water spray at 45-50 DAS 267.58 12.55
Water spray at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 273.98 13.30
Urea spray @ 2% at 45-50 DAS 280.65 14.13
Urea spray @ 2% at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 291.18 15.05
NPK spray (18-18-18) @ 2% at 45-50 DAS 282.03 14.28
NPK spray (18-18-18) @ 2% at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 294.25 15.22
C. D. (P=0.05) 4.77 0.72
Hisar Sandy loam soil Rafi et al. (2021)

Table 5: Effect of soil addition of potassium and leaf nutrition with
humic acid and their overlap in vegetative growth indicators of
sorghum
Potassium
concentration
(kg/ha)
Humic acid
concentration
(ml/l)
Plant height
(cm)
Stem diameter
(cm)
Number of
leaves per
plant
Leaf area
(dm2/plant)
0
0 180.20 2.82 15.00 57.15
1 190.53 2.89 15.22 57.60
2 200.60 2.90 15.91 57.89
100
0 206.20 2.71 16.47 61.05
1 209.00 2.65 16.50 62.07
2 211.30 3.00 16.73 68.96
120
0 213.90 2.66 16.75 67.43
1 215.60 2.62 17.08 67.74
2 218.70 3.07 17.65 72.44
L.S.D (0.01) 2.29 NS 0.89 7.29
Iraq Sandy clay loam Al-Bawee and Aziz (2019)

Table 6: Growth parameters of sorghum as influenced by foliar application of
phosphorus and potassium under irrigation with different salinity
water
Salinity (ppm)
Foliar P and K
(ppm)
Plant height (cm) No. of green leaves
Leaf area
(cm2/plant)
Tap water
0 115.0 7.0 171.6
50 123.0 7.7 188.3
100 134.6 8.7 203.6
2500
0 91.2 5.7 135.3
50 103.3 6.7 170.6
100 129.3 7.3 175.7
5000
0 85.0 5.7 122.0
50 93.6 5.7 149.0
100 112.9 6.7 166.3
L.S.D (0.05) 3.38 NS 4.75
Egypt Clay loam soil Hussein et al. (2010)

Table 7: Effect of foliar application of micronutrients (Zn and Fe) on growth
of forage sorghum
Treatment Plant height (cm)
No. of tillers/meter row
length
Control 214.0 18.6
RDF (80 kg N + 30 kg P2O5/ha 233.0 20.6
RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 35 DAS 245.0 22.3
RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 35 and 45 DAS 266.3 23.3
RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 35 DAS 238.3 21.6
RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 35 and 45 DAS 247.6 22.0
S. Em. ± 5.8 0.6
C. D (P=0.05) 18.0 1.9
Hisar Rana et al. (2013)

Effect of foliar nutrition on yield and its
components of sorghum

Table 8: Effect of zinc and iron on yield and yield attributes of sorghum
S.
No.
Treatment combination
No. of
effective
tillers/plant
No. of
ears/plant
Grain
yield
(kg/ha)
Stover yield
(kg/ha)
1. Control (80-40-40 kg N-P2O5-K2O/ha) 1.427 1.363 3720.6 6116.93
2. RDF + 20 kg Zinc (soil application) 1.469 1.404 3616.66 6336.53
3. RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 25 DAS 1.441 1.402 3610 6061.33
4. RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 45 DAS 1.567 1.494 4243.33 6544.66
5.
RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar spray at 25 and
45 DAS
1.611 1.575 4433.33 7054.66
6. RDF + 10 kg Iron (soil application) 1.489 1.381 3391.63 6475.69
7. RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 20 DAS 1.474 1.486 3230.79 6234.58
8. RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 40 DAS 1.493 1.464 3562.2 6274.66
9.
RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar spray at 20 and
40 DAS
1.526 1.526 4123.33 6784.66
S.Em. + 0.03 0.05 119.07 116.13
C.D (P=0.05) 0.10 - 353.77 345.04

Table 9: Effect of foliar spray on yield and yield attributes of rabi
sorghum
S.No. Treatment
100 seed
weight (g)
Grain yield
(t/ha)
Dry fodder
yield (t/ha)
Harvest
index (%)
1. Control (water spray) 3.31 2.17 4.84 30.96
2. KNO3 @ 2g in 100 ml of water 3.60 2.70 5.20 34.01
3. DAP @ 2g in 100 ml of water 3.62 2.75 5.40 33.74
4. Urea @ 2g in 100 ml of water 3.27 2.40 5.69 29.67
S.Em. ± 0.07 0.04 0.17 0.90
C.D (P=0.05) 0.15 0.12 0.50 1.70

Table 10: Effect of foliar spray on yield and yield attributing characters of rabi
sorghum.
S.No. Treatment
Panicle
length (cm)
Panicle
weight (g)
/panicle
Grain yield
(kg/ha)
Fodder yield
(kg/ha)
1. Control (water spray) 15.80 66.47 2248 4593
2. KNO3 @ 2 % 17.19 74.80 2559 5616
3. DAP @ 2 % 16.24 69.00 2391 4994
4. Urea @ 2 % 16.37 71.60 2414 5240
S.Em. ± 0.33 1.82 30 63
C.D (P=0.05) 0.94 5.20 85 181
Rahuri Kate et al. (2019)

Table 11: Effect of foliar nutrition on green forage and dry matter
yield of forage sorghum.
Treatment
Green forage yield
(q/ha)
Dry matter yield
(q/ha)
RDF (5 t/ha FYM + 100:50:40 kg/ha N, P2O5, K2O) 549.00 106.88
RDF + 2% foliar spray of urea 589.33 120.50
RDF + 2% foliar spray of DAP 580.00 117.97
RDF + 0.5% foliar spray of 20:20:20 571.00 115.63
RDF + water spray 550.57 108.02
S. Em. ± 8.44 1.78
C. D (P=0.05) 25.31 5.34

Table 12: Effect of foliar nutrition on yield of forage sorghum
Treatment
Green fodder yield
(q/ha)
Dry fodder yield
(q/ha)
No spray (Control) 371.8 79.3
Water spray at 45-50 DAS 383.3 86.2
Water spray at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 396.8 93.0
Urea spray at 45-50 DAS 408.5 99.8
Urea spray at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 424.2 108.3
NPK spray (18-18-18) @ 2% at 45-50 DAS 411.0 101.6
NPK spray (18-18-18) @ 2% at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 433.3 111.5
C. D. (P=0.05) 10.5 6.1

Fig. 2: Grain yield of sorghum as influenced by zinc levels
Z1: SA of 5 kg ZnSO4 ha-1, Z2: SA of 5 kg ZnSO4 ha-1 + Two FS of
ZnSO4 @ 0.5% at before flowering and dough stage
Akola Black soil Dambiwal et al. (2017)

Table 13: Effect of soil addition of potassium and leaf nutrition with
humic acid and their overlap on yield components of
Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench
Potassium
concentration
(kg/ha)
Humic acid
concentration
(ml/l)
Dry weight
(g/plant)
Weight of 1000
grains (g)
Total yield (t/ha)
0
0 170.07 25.87 11.38
1 183.33 27.40 12.53
2 211.35 30.44 14.58
100
0 186.15 29.97 13.98
1 187.08 31.22 14.54
2 193.75 31.95 16.14
120
0 169.96 32.65 14.16
1 175.08 33.57 15.72
2 235.83 35.65 18.56
L.S.D (0.01) NS 4.31 3.39
Iraq Sandy clay loam Al-Bawee and Aziz (2019)

Table 14: Effect of foliar application of Zn and Fe on yield of forage
sorghum
Treatment
Green fodder yield
(q/ha)
Dry matter yield (q/ha)
Control 391.6 111.6
RDF (80 kg N + 30 kg P2O5/ha) 560.0 160.0
S. Em. ± 13.9 4.5
C. D (P=0.05) 42.5 13.8

Table 15: Effect of foliar spray of boron on seed yield determinants of
sorghum varieties
Varieties
Number of seeds per
panicle
Number of spikes per
panicle
Seed yield (g plant -1)
B0 B B0 B B0 B
PC 23 367.7 413.7 76.8 72.7 6.30 6.64
PC 9 986.0 1041.3 74.0 70.6 18.93 20.16
PC 6 935.7 1123.3 85.7 74.3 18.28 22.90
HC 136 1041.0 1198.0 80.0 71.7 22.86 24.41
Mean 832.6 937.3 79.13 72.33 16.34 18.53
S.Em. ± LSD (P=0.05) S.Em. ± LSD (P=0.05) S.Em. ± LSD (P=0.05)
V 30.2 75.2 2.43 6.04 0.681 1.70
B 21.4 53.2 1.72 4.23 0.482 1.20
V x B 42.7 NS 3.43 NS 0.963 NS
Jhansi (UP) Red loamy soil Misra et al. (1991)

Table 16: Effect of soil and foliar application of iron on yield of
parching sorghum
Treatments Green hurda yield (q ha-1) Fodder yield (q ha-1)
Soil application
S0 – 0 kg FeSO4 ha-1 35.50 55.51
S1 – 10 kg FeSO4 ha-1 37.29 60.11
S2 – 20 kg FeSO4 ha-1 39.21 62.44
S3 – 30 kg FeSO4 ha-1 39.57 62.52
S.Em.± 0.75 0.42
C.D at 5 % 2.21 1.24
Foliar application
F0 – 0.0% FeSO4 at flowering stage 34.13 59.53
S.Em. ± 0.65 0.37
C.D (P=0.05) 1.91 1.07
Interaction NS NS
Akola Aage et al. (2020)

Effect of foliar nutrition on quality parameters
of sorghum

Table 17: Effect of various foliar spray on quality parameters of sorghum
Treatment
Crude protein
yield (q/ha)
Crude fibre
yield (q/ha)
IVDMD %
RDF (5 t/ha FYM + 100:50:40 kg/ha N, P2O5, K2O) 7.91 32.87 61.46
RDF + 2% foliar spray of urea 10.07 35.19 62.47
RDF + 2% foliar spray of DAP 9.87 35.11 62.20
RDF + 0.5% foliar spray of 20:20:20 9.58 34.52 62.11
RDF + water spray 8.12 32.86 61.58
S. Em. ± 0.45 0.51 0.32
C. D. (P=0.05) 1.37 1.55 NS

Table 18: Effect of foliar nutrition on quality of forage sorghum
Treatment
HCN
content
Crude
protein
content (%)
IVDMD
(%)
No spray (Control) 81.62 8.51 48.00
Water spray at 45-50 DAS 79.07 8.62 48.55
Water spray at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 66.91 8.62 50.32
Urea spray at 45-50 DAS 79.47 8.84 50.95
Urea spray at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 68.34 9.17 51.73
NPK spray (18-18-18) @ 2% at 45-50 DAS 78.93 8.84 51.30
NPK spray (18-18-18) @ 2% at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS 66.57 9.27 52.40
C. D (P=0.05) 0.53 2.37 3.02

Table 19: Effect of foliar application of Zn and Fe on forage quality of
sorghum
Treatment
Crude protein
content (%)
IVDMD (%)
Control 7.44 55.4
RDF (80 kg N + 30 kg P2O5/ha 8.31 52.2
S. Em. ± 0.28 0.88
C. D (P=0.05) NS 4.61

Table 20: Effect of varied levels of zinc application on grain protein
content of sorghum.
Treatment
Crude protein (%) in
grain
Control (No zinc) 5.70
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha 6.35
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 50 kg/ha 6.51
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha + foliar spray of ZnSO4 @ 0.2% at
knee high stage and at flowering
7.77
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 50 kg/ha + foliar spray of ZnSO4 @ 0.2% at
knee high stage and at flowering
8.09
Foliar spray of ZnSO4 @ 0.2% at knee high stage and at flowering 6.18
S. Em. ± 0.03
C. D (P=0.05) 0.07
Rajendranagar Sandy loam soil Markole et al. (2020)

Table 21: Effect of soil and foliar application of iron on crude fiber and
protein in parching sorghum grain.
Treatment Crude fiber content (%) Protein content (%)
Soil application
S0 – 0 kg FeSO4 ha-1 1.82 10.5
S1 – 10 kg FeSO4 ha-1 1.88 10.6
S2 – 20 kg FeSO4 ha-1 2.19 10.7
S3 – 30 kg FeSO4 ha-1 2.32 10.7
S.Em. ± 0.03 0.01
C.D at 5 % NS NS
Foliar application
S.Em. ± 0.02 0.01
C.D at 5% NS NS
Interaction NS NS
Akola Aage et al. (2020)

Table 22: Agronomic efficiency, apparent recovery of nitrogen,
phosphorus and potassium as influenced by zinc levels in
sorghum
Treatment Agronomic efficiency (kg/ha) Apparent recovery efficiency (%)
N P K N P K
Z0 – Control - - - - - -
Z1 – SA 1.5 3.01 3.01 23.06 11.09 46.7
Z2 – FS 2.77 5.54 5.54 41.75 12.35 80.53
Z1: SA of 5 kg ZnSO4 ha-1, Z2: SA of 5 kg ZnSO4 ha-1 + Two FS of ZnSO4 @ 0.5% at before
flowering and dough stage
Akola Black soil Dambiwal et al. (2017)

Fig. 3: Effect of urea concentration on forage sorghum protein
Iran Kheirabadi et al. (2012)
Urea conc. (g litre-1)

Effect of foliar nutrition on nutrient uptake of
sorghum

Table 23: Nutrient uptake of forage Sorghum as affected by different
foliar nutrient management treatments
Treatment
Total nutrient uptake (kg/ha)
N P K
RDF (5 t/ha FYM + 100:50:40 kg/ha N, P2O5, K2O) 126.64 16.83 134.50
RDF + 2% foliar spray of urea 161.22 22.03 143.87
RDF + 2% foliar spray of DAP 158.03 28.21 146.50
RDF + water spray 129.89 17.23 136.17
S. Em. ± 3.49 0.51 0.53
C. D (P=0.05) 10.47 1.54 1.61

Table 24: NPK uptake of sorghum as influenced by different
organic nutrient sources
Treatment
N uptake (kg/ha) P uptake (kg/ha) K uptake (kg/ha)
Stover Grain Stover Grain Stover Grain
Top dressing of vermicompost @ 2.5 t/ha 66.1 39.7 13.31 8.31 61.25 19.8
Top dressing of vermicompost @ 5 t/ha 76.9 45.8 14.03 9.20 71.49 22.3
Foliar spray of vermiwash @ 1 % 48.2 26.9 8.41 5.18 42.93 12.6
Foliar spray of vermiwash @ 2 % 54.6 32.2 9.46 6.32 48.93 15.9
Foliar spray of humic acid @ 0.5 % 54.7 37.8 11.65 7.20 52.80 17.5
Foliar spray of humic acid @ 1 % 68.0 41.0 11.44 8.53 62.88 21.0
Foliar spray of fulvic acid @ 0.5 % 73.1 44.9 14.16 9.65 67.22 22.2
Foliar spray of fulvic acid @ 1 % 81.5 60.3 17.77 13.92 78.68 33.2
Control (80:40:40 kg NPK/ha) 50.9 26.7 10.08 5.84 45.33 14.3
S. Em. ± 2.7 2.20 0.90 0.58 2.42 1.1
C.D (P=0.05) 8.2 6.7 2.73 1.76 7.32 3.32
Rajendranagar Sandy clay loam Bharath and Madhavi (2015)

Table 25: Concentration of various macronutrients in sorghum leaves
and grain as influenced by foliar application of P and K under
irrigation with different salinity water
Salinity
(ppm)
Foliar
P and
K
(ppm)
Concentration (%)
N P K Na
Leaves Grain Leaves Grain Leaves Grain Leaves Grain
Tap water
0 1.16 1.33 0.33 0.42 2.43 1.66 0.81 0.63
50 1.56 1.44 0.39 0.46 2.53 1.95 0.74 0.56
100 2.11 1.63 0.45 0.55 2.57 2.13 0.65 0.51
2500
0 1.08 1.13 0.25 0.36 2.14 1.38 0.93 0.67
50 1.27 1.25 0.29 0.37 2.18 1.49 0.86 0.55
100 1.52 1.34 0.32 0.38 2.39 1.53 0.85 0.57
5000
0 1.05 0.84 0.09 0.19 1.57 1.16 1.00 0.85
50 1.20 1.22 0.14 0.24 1.86 1.27 0.98 0.66
100 1.32 1.29 0.19 0.29 1.92 1.34 0.93 0.61
L.S.D (0.05) 0.159 0.092 NS 0.029 0.029 0.050 NS 0.029
Egypt Clay loam soil Hussein et al. (2010)

Table 26: Stover and grain zinc uptake of sorghum affected by different
zinc levels
Treatments
Stover Zn
uptake (kg/ha)
Grain Zn
uptake (kg/ha)
Control (No zinc) 64.73 50.73
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha 101.70 73.41
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 50 kg/ha 104.68 76.38
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha + foliar spray of ZnSO4 @
0.2% at knee high stage and at flowering
118.56 81.02
Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 50 kg/ha + foliar spray of ZnSO4 @
0.2% at knee high stage and at flowering
120.62 82.95
Foliar spray of ZnSO4 @ 0.2% at knee high stage and at flowering 95.78 62.10
S. Em. ± 1.59 1.04
C. D (P=0.05) 3.31 2.18
Rajendranagar Sandy loam soil Markole et al. (2020)

Table 27: Effect of zinc and iron on economics of Sorghum
S.
No.
Treatment combination
Grain
yield
(kg/ha)
Stover
yield
(kg/ha)
Total cost
of
cultivatio
n (₹/ha)
Gross
returns
(₹/ha)
Net
returns
(₹/ha)
B:C
ratio
1.
Control (80-40-40 kg N-P-
K/ha)
3720.6 6116.93 35682.70 94459.10 58776.50 1.65
2.
RDF + 20 kg Zinc (soil
application)
3616.66 6336.53 36722.70 92601.40 55878.70 1.52
3.
RDF + 0.5% ZnSO4 foliar
spray at 25 DAS
3610 6061.33 36032.70 91903.70 55871.00 1.55
4.
spray at 45 DAS
4243.33 6544.66 36032.70 106867.00 70834.40 1.97
5.
spray at 25 and 45 DAS
4433.33 7054.66 36382.70 112086.00 75703.40 2.08
6.
RDF + 10 kg Iron (soil
application)
3391.63 6475.69 36102.70 87906.50 51803.90 1.43
7.
RDF + 0.5% FeSO4 foliar
spray at 20 DAS
3230.79 6234.58 36222.70 83869.70 47647.00 1.32
8.
spray at 40 DAS
3562.2 6274.66 36222.70 91247.00 55051.30 1.52
9.
spray at 20 and 40 DAS
4123.33 6784.66 36762.70 104695.00 67932.40 1.85

Table 28: Effect of foliar spray on economics of rabi Sorghum
Sl.
No.
Treatment
Grain
yield
(t/ha)
Dry
fodder
yield
(t/ha)
Gross
returns
(₹/ha)
Net
returns
(₹/ha)
B-C ratio
1. Control (water spray) 2.17 4.84 78120 55820 2.50
2.
KNO3 @ 2g in 100 ml of
water
2.70 5.20 97200 74700 3.32
3. DAP @ 2g in 100 ml of water 2.75 5.40 99000 76500 3.40
4. Urea @ 2g in 100 ml of water 2.40 5.69 86400 63900 2.84

Table 29: Economics of forage sorghum as influenced by application of
various foliar nutrients.
Treatments
Green
forage
yield
(q/ha)
Dry
matter
yield
(q/ha)
Cost of
cultivati
on (₹/ha)
Gross
monetar
y
returns
(₹/ha)
Net
moneta
ry
returns
(₹/ha)
B:C
ratio
RDF (5 t/ha FYM + 100:50:40 kg/ha
N, P2O5, K2O)
549.00 106.88 40709 109800 69091 2.69
RDF + 2% foliar spray of urea 589.33 120.50 41346 117966 76620 2.85
RDF + 2% foliar spray of DAP 580.00 117.97 41577 116000 74423 2.79
RDF + 0.5% foliar spray of 20:20:20 571.00 115.63 41448 114200 72752 2.75
RDF + water spray 550.57 108.02 41098 110114 69016 2.67
S. Em± 8.44 1.78 - 1522 1522 -
C. D. (P=0.05) 25.31 5.34 - 4564 4564 -

Conclusion
 Foliar application of nutrients is a potential mean to improve crop
growth, production and quality of sorghum
 Foliar application of correct nutrients in relatively low concentration
at critical stages in crop development contributes significantly to
higher yields of sorghum
 It needs to be an integral part of the crop nutrient management
package for successful and sustainable sorghum production
 Foliar nutrients would fill the gap, which then complements the soil
applied fertilizers

Future line of work
 Impact of foliar nutrition on natural resistance to biotic stress may be
studied
 Impact of foliar nutrition on physiological traits of sorghum may be
studied
 Interaction between foliar fertilizers and pesticides and optimum timing
of foliar nutrient sprays can be studied

Foliar nutrition in Sorghum.pptx

Foliar nutrition in Sorghum.pptx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Foliar nutrition in Sorghum.pptx

Similar to Foliar nutrition in Sorghum.pptx (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Foliar nutrition in Sorghum.pptx