Effect of foliar fertilizer (Mega green) and single supper phosphate on Nodulation and cowpea yield

1. POST DATA PESENTATION
ON
THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT RATES OF SINGLE SUPERPHOSPHATE &
FREQUENCY
OF MEGAGREEN ON NODULATION, NITROGEN FIXATION
AND YIELD OF COWPEA.
BY
KUSHIMO M.O
MATRIC NO: 03/1390
DEPARTMENT OF SOIL SCIENCE AND LAND MANAGEMENT
IN THE
COLLEGE OF PLANT SCIENCE AND CROP PRODUCTION
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE ABEOKUTA.
MARCH 2010

2. INTRODUCTION
Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L Walp) belong to the family leguminosae which
comprises approximately 850 genera and 18,000 species. It is the most important
grain legume crop throughout the tropical belt which covers Asia, far east , Africa,
Central and South America (Philip et. al. 2006).
Nutrient content of cowpea include; Protein 24.8 %, Fat 1.95 %, Fiber 6.3 %,
Carbohydrate 63.6 %.
Nutritionally, the protein in cowpea is rich in the amino acids, lysine, and
trytophan, compared to cereal grains. Which dictate it value as a nutritional
supplement to cereals and an extender of animal proteins.

3. Soil fertility management is a major factor to consider in improving the
sustainability of tropical soil. Leguminous crops has help to a greater extent to
achieve this through Nitrogen fixation.
Megagreen is a bio-stimulant, which consist majorly of calcite (about 82.3%
CaCO3 ). The particles act quickly on the vegetal metabolism via foliar surface.
(Technical study report, Tribo technology.)
Many tropical legumes can fix Nitrogen from the soil provided they can extract
calcium from the soil (Albercht 1942). Also, Delwiche (1961) noted that nodules
can only fix nitrogen actively if the plant is adequately supplied with all the
mineral elements essential for active growth.

4. JUSTIFICATION
• As a result of the importance of Cowpea, both economically
and nutritionally, this experiment is majorly aimed at
assessing the growth implication of the application of the bio-
stimulant (Megagreen) and phosphorus fertilizer (Single
supper phosphate) on the yield of Cowpea.

5. BROAD OBJECTIVE
• To evaluate whether cowpea plant will respond positively
to the foliar application of Mega green and Single super
phosphate.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
I. To determine the effect of Megagreen application on
Nitrogen fixation in Cowpea.
II. To measure the effect of Megagreen application on
growth and yield of Cowpea.

6. MATERIALS AND METHOD
Experimental site:
The experiment was carried out at the green house of the College of plant science
and crop production, University of Agriculture Abeokuta.
Soil Collection and preparation:
Surface soils of 1-10cm depth, was collected at the upland part of FADAMA in the
research field of University of Agriculture Abeokuta. The soil was air dried for 72 hours
and sieved with 4 mm sieve. 10kg of soil was weighed into each pot
Experimental Design:
A complete randomized design (CRD) with split-plot design was used for the
experiment with four replicates.
Treatments:
 Application of Megagreen at rates of 1.5kg & 3 kg/ha per 500 litters of water used.
 These were applied at two frequencies:
 Application at 2 and 3 weeks
 Application at 2, 3 and 4 weeks
 Application of single supper phosphate at zero (0 kg/ha P2O5) and recommended rate
(40kg/ha P2O5). Applied at planting.

7. PLANTING
Source of planting material:
Cowpea of the variety ‘Oloyin’ obtained from the Department of Plant Physiology and
Crop Production at the University of Agriculture Abeokuta.
Planting in pots: Each pot was labeled accordingly and seeds were sown.
Plants were thinned to six per pot after germination (2 weeks after planting).
This experiment was carried out from 14th July to 16th October 2009.
DATA COLLECTION
The following data were collected:
- Plant growth parameters which include, plant height, number of leaves, number of
seeds number of pod per pot.
-Reproductive parameters were also measured: days to flowering, and number of
pods per pot.
-And at harvest number of pods, number of seeds and weight per plant were
measured.

8. SAMPLING
Sap sampling: This was carried out at 7 weeks after planting.
Plant sap sampling materials include: Vacutainer bottles, Syringe and needles,
Rubber tubing, Ethanol (96%). The shoots were cut at 3 cm from the soil level and
rubber tubes clamp around the shoot to gather the plant sap. These were
collected using the syringe and stored in 50% ethanol in the vacutanier bottles.
Plant sampling:
The shoot samples were also collected at 7 weeks after planting, weighed and
dried for the Tissue Extraction (or Hot water extraction).
HOT WATER EXTRACTION (N-SOLUTE SAMPLING)
Weighed and dried plant sample (0.5g) was placed in 100 ml Erlenmeyer flask and
25 ml distilled water added.
The 100 ml Erlenmeyer flask was placed on a Hot plate. The content is allowed to
boil for 1-3 minutes.
The sample was filtered in to a 250 ml Eureka-end conical flask.
The filtrate was poured into a 50 ml capacity glass volumetric flask. The left over
washed with little distilled water into it.
When the contents of the flask get cooled, it was filled to 50 ml with distilled
water.
The filtered extractant was transferred in to a plastic vial and kept in a freezer till
analysis was carried out.

9. LABORATORY ANALYSIS
• Particle size analysis was determined by the Hydrometer methodusing Sodium
Hexametaphosphate as dispersing agent.
• The soil organic carbon was determined according to Walkley- Black procedure
(Walkley and Black, 1934).
• Percentage total Nitrogen was determined, using the macro Kjeldahl digestion
method, for all the treatments after the termination of the experiment.
• The Available Phosphorus (Mg/kg) was determined, using Brayl 1 method, for all
the various treatments after the termination of the experiment.
• The Exchangeable Ca, Mg, Na, K were extracted using Ammonium Acetate and read
with flame Photometer and Atomic absorption Spectrophotometer.

10. % Sand 7.2
% Silt 5.4
% Clay 1.8
Textural Class
PH ( H2O) 7.00
Organic Carbon% 3.39
Organic Matter % 5.90
Exchangeable Cation( Cmol Kg-1)
Ca (Cmol Kg-1) 0.83
Mg (Cmol Kg-1) 1.58
Na (Cmol Kg-1) 3.45
K ( Cmol Kg-1) 1.58
CEC (Cmol Kg-1)
7.44
Available Phosphorus(Mg/Kg) 0.9755
%Total Nitrogen 0.09807
TABLE 1
CHEMICALAND PHYSICALANALYSIS OF THE SOIL USED FOR
THE TRIALS.

11. SV DF PHT 2 WAP NO BR 2WAP
NO OF LF AT
2 WAP
REP 10.146 0.38* 2.646*
SSP 22.65 0.289* 5.329*
ERROR (a) 3.68 0.03 0.068
RATE 5.08 0.107 1.1429
SSP*RATE 16.63 0.04 0.428
ERROR (b) 9.93 0.12 1.352
ANOVA OF GROWTH PARAMETERS AT 2 WAP
* Significant at F (Pr<0.05)

12. SV DF PL H(CM) AT
6 WAP
NO OF
BRH AT 6
WAP
DAT FWT OF
NOD
NO OF
NOD AT
4WAP
NO OF
NOD AT
7WAP
REP 3 1505.34 5.094 178.625 0.00200 22.292 186.88
SSP 1 789.430 10.816 133.225 0.00459 133.225 302.50
ERR(a) 3 181.460 3.3233 106.783 0.00143 91.625 106.78
RATE 4 1215.900* 3.529 83.634 0.000602 102.4 83.634
SSP*RATE 4 300.720 3.639 190.421 0.000913 54.85 190.421
ERR(b) 24 423.190 3.551 12.9833 0.00168 88.86 70.349
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE TABLE

13. SV DF POD NO
NO OF LEAF AT
7WAP
NO OF
SEED
WT OF
SEED
BIOMASS
YIELD
REP 3 33.937 222.467 1783.67 55.927 850.623
SSP 1 2.0703 48.4 370.881 18.617 78.93
ERROR(a) 3 6.291 87.227 649.26 25.49 281.53
RATE 4 9.966 312.975 817.255 26.88 118.619
SSP*RATE 4 3.9608 175.275 246.709 8.027 150.264
ERROR(b) 24 7.0603 160.075 378.235 12.06 285.209
ANOVA TABLE ON YIELD PARAMETERS

14. SV
AVAILABLE
PHOSPHORUS % NITROGEN
REP 0.04196 0.00295
SSP 0.2401 0.001501
ERROR(a) 0.07219 0.000193
RATE 0.31839 0.000794
SSP*RATE 0.51912* 0.000197
ERROR(b) 0.16723 0.000337
ANOVA TABLE OF SOIL ANALYSIS
* Significant at F (Pr<0.05)

15. TREATMENTS
PHT
6WAP
NO LF
6WAP
NO BR
6WAP
FW OF
NOD
DAYS TO
FLOWER
NO OF
NOD AT
4WAP
NO OF
NOD AT
7WAP
S0 M0 R0 61.2 22.05 0.1 0.076 42.75 4 10.5
S0 M1 R1 78.3 23.18 7.83 0.077 45.5 3.75 15.5
S0 M1 R2 61.55 20.3 6.9 0.088 50.75 1.25 13.75
S0 M3 R1 64.7 22.2 7.7 0.068 51.5 4.5 28.5
S0 M3 R2 43 20.48 6.68 0.086 51.75 2.5 11.25
S1 M3 R2 68.83 23.4 7.9 0.077 50.75 1.25 7.25
S1 M3 R1 89.55 28.4 10.23 0.092 49 2.5 9.13
S1 M1 R2 81.28 27.28 9.05 0.113 60.5 3.5 12
S1 M1 R1 53.38 18.55 7.15 0.085 49.5 1.25 7.25
S1 M0 R0 60.15 22.98 8.08 0.09 57.5 4.5 16.38
LSD NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
EFFECT OF TREATMENT ON GROWTH PARAMETERS

16. TRBATMENT PHT 2 WAP NO BR 2 WAP
NO OF LEAF 2
WAP
S0 28.8 1.62b 6.85b
S1 30.31 1.82a 7.6a
LSD NS 0.06 0.26
28
28.5
29
29.5
30
30.5
S0 S1
TREATMENT (SSP)
PLANT HEIGHT AT 2WAP
PHT2 WAP
EFFECT OF THE TREATMENT AT 2 WAP

17. 28
28.5
29
29.5
30
30.5
S0 S1
TREATMENT (SSP)
NUMBER OF BRANCHES AT 2 WAP
PHT 2 WAP
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
TRATMENT S0 S1
SSP
NO OF LEAF AT 2 WAP

18. PLANT HEIGHT AT 6 WAP
0
20
40
60
80
100
S0 M0
R0
S0 M1
R1
S0 M1
R2
S0 M3
R1
S0 M3
R2
S1 M3
R2
S1 M3
R1
S1 M1
R2
S1 M1
R1
S1 M0
R0
TREATMENT
PHT 6WAP

19. TREATMENT
S POD NO
NO LF
7WAP
NO OF
SEED
WT OF
SEED
BIOMASS
YIELD
DRY
MATTER
S0 M0 R0 2.875 59.75 15.38 2.27 47.96 5.01
S0 M1 R1 5.125 49.5 34.75 5.99 32.38 4.32
S0 M1 R2 2.85 45.25 19.58 3.52 34.69 3.77
S0 M3 R1 5 50 35.53 6.08 40.94 5.32
S0 M3 R2 2.125 51 14.13 2.64 47.51 5.18
S1 M3 R2 2.95 61 25.2 4.34 48.77 5.36
S1 M3 R1 5.725 47.5 51.38 9.67 44.67 4.83
S1 M1 R2 5.075 57 31 5.76 44.7 4.87
S1 M1 R1 3.375 39.25 22.33 4.3 41.25 4.29
S1 M0 R0 3.125 61.75 20 3.76 38.13 5.15
LSD NS NS NS NS NS NS
EFFECTS OF TREATMENTS ON YIELD PARAMETERS

20. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
S0
M0
R0
S0
M1
R1
S0
M1
R2
S0
M3
R1
S0
M3
R2
S1
M3
R2
S1
M3
R1
S1
M1
R2
S1
M1
R1
S1
M0
R0
TREATMENENT
NUMBER OF PODS
POD NO

21. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
S0
M0
R0
S0
M1
R1
S0
M1
R2
S0
M3
R1
S0
M3
R2
S1
M3
R2
S1
M3
R1
S1
M1
R2
S1
M1
R1
S1
M0
R0
TREATMENT
NUMBER OF SEEDS
NOOF SEED

22. TREATMENTS AVAILABLE P % NITROGEN
S0 M0 R0 1.10a 0.018
S0 M1 R1 0.50de 0.009
S0 M1 R2 1.23abc 0.007
S0 M3 R1 1.09abc 0.019
S0 M3 R2 1.20abc 0.01
S1 M3 R2 0.78cd 0.031
S1 M3 R1 1.44ab 0.016
S1 M1 R2 1.60a 0.039
S1 M1 R1 0.91bcd 0.0214
S1 M0 R0 1.16e 0.064
LSD 0.58 NS
EFFECTS OF TRATMENTS ON SOIL

23. AVAILABLE PHOPHORUS
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
S0
M0
R0
S0
M1
R1
S0
M1
R2
S0
M3
R1
S0
M3
R2
S1
M3
R2
S1
M3
R1
S1
M1
R2
S1
M1
R1
S1
M0
R0
TREATMENT
AVAILABLE P

24. REFRENCE
Albrecht, W.A., J. Am. Soc. Agron.,1933, 25; Albrecht, W.A. and Harston, C.B., Soil sci. Soc. Am.
Proc.,1942, 7, 247.
Delwiche C.C et.al.,pl. physiol.,1961.36,73; Hallsworth, E.G et. al., Nature, Lond.,1960, 187,79.
Nutman, P.S. In soil Microbiology (ed. N. Walker),Butterworths.1975.
Philip O. Adetiloye; Kehinde A. (2006) Principles and practices of crop production. pg 214.
Rachie, K.O. and Rawal, K. (1975) VITA , Cowpea Tropical grain legume. Bulletin 1:16-17.
Singh, B.B and Singh. S.R.(1983).Objectives and achievement of IITA research programme on
cowpea and soyabeans. In: Homes, J.C and Rahir, W.M, eds, more food from better
technology, Rome, Italy, FAO. 778-790.
Tribo technology, Technical study report. Field and laboratory research

25. THANK YOU FOR
LISTENING