Non-Peer ReviewedThe effectiveness of the available commercial inoculants for lentil, Rhizogen, Enftx-L (Esso), Nitragin 'C', and Grip (Inotec) were compared with three inoculants which contained the rhizobia strains of 99A1, ICAR 20, and 92A3. Lentil inoculated with a sterile inoculant was used as the control. Total dry matter, total grain yield, percent total N and total N was determined At seven sites, an average grain yield for lentil was observed whereas for two sites yield was below average. Inoculant containing 99A1 and ICAR 20 an overall increase in grain yield by 14 % as compared with Nitragin 'C', strain 99A3 with 9 %, and Enftx-L with 7 %. The average grain yield of all nine sites for lentil inoculated with Grip and Rhizogen showed an insignificant decrease of 2 and 3 % as compared with lentil inoculated with Nitragin 'C'

Nelson, L.

van Kessel, C.

English

University of Saskatchewan Research Archive

IMPROVED INOCULANTS FOR LENTIL C. van Kessel and L. Nelson . . Department of Soil Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, and Plant Biotechnology Institute, Saskatoon ABSTRACT The effectiveness of the available commercial inoculants for lentil, Rhizogen, Enftx-L (Esso), Nitragin 'C', and Grip (Inotec) were compared with three inoculants which contained the rhizobia strains of 99A1, ICAR 20, and 92A3. Lentil inoculated with a sterile inoculant was used as the control. Total dry matter, total grain yield, percent total N and total N was determined At seven sites, an average grain yield for lentil was observed whereas for two sites yield was below average. Inoculant containing 99A1 and ICAR 20 an overall increase in grain yield by 14% as compared with Nitragin 'C', strain 99A3 with 9%, and Enftx-L with 7%. The average grain yield of all nine sites for lentil inoculated with Grip and Rhizogen showed an insignificant decrease of 2 and 3% as compared with lentil inoculated with Nitragin 'C'. INTRODUCTION Recently, various new inoculants for lentil have become commercial available for lentil in Saskatchewan. Whereas a few years ago only the Nitragin 'C' inoculant for lentil and pea was available, three new inoculant products have come on the market: Enftx-L, Rhizogen and Grip (Inotec). In addition, various new rhizobia strains have been selected and tested as an inoculant under fteld conditions (Bremer et al., 1989, 1990). A ftnal selection among the 167 rhizobia strains tested was made and the three strains selected, 99A1, ICAR 20, and 92A3, were further tested under fteld conditions in 1989. MATERIALS AND METHODS The comparison of the effectiveness of the inoculants was conducted at 14 sites: Marcelin, Medstead, Star City, Glenbain, Glenavon, Zealandia, Semans, Shaunavon, Outlook (irrigated), Gull Lake, Perdue, Mossbank, and Kindersley. Soil characteristics are presented in Table 1. Treatments were laid out in a randomized complete block design, replicated four times. Plots measured 7 x 1.2 m with a row spacing of 0.3 m. ~aird lentil (Lens culinaris Medik.) was used at all sites. Treatments consisted of lentil inoculated with Nitragin 'C', Enftx-L, Rhizogen, Grip (Inotec), strain 99Al, ICAR 20, 92A3, and a control which consisted of a sterile inoculant. Nitta-Coat (Nitragin) was mixed with water and used as sticker. Seeding rate of lentil was 100 kglha. All treatments received P, broadcasted at a rate of 50 kg P/ha applied as triple superphosphate. Seeding date for all sites was during the second and third week in May, 1989. Weed control was carried out chemically or by hand Plants were harvested at physiological maturity which occurred between August 10 and 16. The middle two rows for a length of 5 m were harvested Total dry matter was taken and, after threshing, total grain yield determined A subsample of the grain was taken and analyzed for total N (Bremner and Mulvaney, 1983). 484 Table 1. Soil characteristics of the various test sites. NOJ p J( 0-60cm 0-15 em 0-15 em ------------------ kg/ha ------------------Glenavon 40 34 372 Gull Lake 51 25 670 Kindersley 25 55 762 Semans 21 36 550 Outlook 82 14 614 Perdue 77 27 646 Shaunavon 41 23 829 Star City 43 27 510 Zealandia 90 29 560 Glenbain 23 38 900 Lucky Lake 82 50 718 Medstead 18 18 240 Moss bank 49 31 900 Marcelin 21 59 435 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Grain yield Drought (Marcelin), spring frost (Glenbain), uncontrolable weed infestations (Moss bank and Medstead) and residual effect of chemical pesticides (Lucky Lake) caused reduced and sporadic growth. Those sites were abandoned and eliminated from inoculant trial. Most of the remaining sites showed a grain yield below the long term Saskatchewan average of 860 kg/ha (Table 2). Of the dry land sites only the yield of lentil at Zealandia was above the long-term average. At Outlook, irrigation increased average grain yield by 250% as compared with the long term yield of dryland lentil. In that particular site, irrigation was carried out during the previous fall (1988) and once just before seeding in 1989. No additional water was supplied after seeding . . Inoculation increased significant (P <0.05) grain yield at Kindersley, Perdue and Shaunavon. At those sites significant differences among commercial available inoculant were found. The response to inoculation on grain yield was smaller as anticipated as all the sites selected contained indigenous Rhizobium leguminosarum and all uninoculated lentil became nodulated. At the two sites with the apparently lowest number of indigenous R.leguminosarum, i.e. Shaunavon and Gull Lake, inoculation increased grain yield up to 86 and 103%, respectively. 485 Table4. Relative grain yield (Nitragin 'C' = 100) of various inoculants. Strain l Nitragin 'C' x 100 Glenavon Gull Lake Kindersley Semans Outlook Perdue Shaunavon Star City Zealandia Overall KPSt Uninoculated 113 95 87 69 99 84 68 109 111 93 80 Nitragin 'C' 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Grip 88 113 114 80 104 104 121 83 98 100 113 Rhizogen 119 111 85 65 90 90 89 92 108 94 88 EnfJX-L 108 118 107 78 113 109 111 104 114 107 109 99Al 93 161 111 89 114 116 122 112 110 114 116 ICAR20 103 174 111 72 108 117 117 106 101 112 115 92A3 119 141 114 47 110 118 115 115 113 110 116 tKindersley. Perdue and Shaunavon only (sites with significant difference among commercial inoculants) ~ 00 0\ TableS. Relative grain yield (Uninoculated = 100) of various inoculants. Strain I Uninoculated x 100 Glenavon Gull Lake Kindersley Semans Outlook Perdue Shaunavon Star City Zealandia Overall Uninoculated 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Nitragin 'C' 96 137 118 145 107 121 153 98 93 119 Grip 77 145 133 116 105 124 186 73 89 116 Rhizogen 111 165 99 95 97 106 134 90 98 111 EofJX-L 100 141 125 112 118 131 169 98 104 122 99A1 89 203 132 130 112 138 186 105 100 133 ICAR20 94 197 131 104 115 141 175 98 92 127 92A3 106 197 133 69 109 142 171 106 102 126 Table 2. Grain yield of lentil at various locations as affected by inoculants. Grain (kg/ha) Glenavon Gull Lake Kindersle~ Semans Outlook Perdue Shaunavon Star Cit~ Zealandia Uninoculated 598 179 671 297 2154 898 801 780 1328 Nitragin 'C' 574 204 778 430 2308 1073 1202 738 1225 Grip 458 227 876 341 2251 1105 1433 583 1174 Rhizogen 651 236 661 278 2150 958 1043 686 1286 Enfix-L 598 230 826 340 2489 1161 1320 771 1359 99A1 526 320 863 389 2374 1237 1444 808 1305 ICAR20 563 336 863 304 2462 1256 1382 750 1206 92A3 628 292 880 203 2333 1267 1362 809 1333 LSD (<0.05) NS NS 150 NS NS 208 262 NS NS CV(%) 22 30 13 31 21 13 14 24 11 ~ 00 -...J Table 3. Total N of lentil at various locations as affected by inoculants. Total N (kg/ha) Glenavon Gull Lake Kindersle~ Semans Outlook Perdue Shaunavon Star Cit~ Zealandia Uninoculated 21.1 6.1 21.2 12.6 11.0 31.0 28.6 27.8 49.5 Nitragin 'C' 20.9 7.3 24.1 16.3 80.8 36.5 38.7 25.5 47.2 Grip 16.5 8.0 30.9 13.4 69.9 39.4 49.7 20.9 43.3 Rhizogen 22.6 8.2 22.2 10.9 72.0 31.1 36.3 23.8 46.4 Enfix-L 22.6 8.1 30.7 12.8 84.1 42.0 48.7 26.6 50.6 99A1 19.7 11.5 31.6 15.8 82.8 45.0 50.1 28.3 47.6 ICAR20 21.0 12.1 32.0 12.8 85.9 44.4 49.5 24.6 43.4 92A3 24.1 10.6 32.1 7.9 80.6 45.7 49.6 28.1 45.3 LSD (<0.05) NS NS 5.5 NS NS 8 9 NS NS CV(%) 22 30 13 31 25 14 14 24 13 Total N The effect of inoculation on total N in lentil-grain followed largely the same pattern as for grain (Table 3). At three sites iqoculation increased significantly total N in grain. At all these three sites significantly differences among commercial available inoculant in total N-grain were observed. Total N of less than 10 kg/ha were found at Gull Lake whereas at Outlook lentil inoculated with various commercial available inoculants yielded more than 80 kg N/ha. Comparison of inoculants All the available commercial inoculants plus three other rhizobia strains, 99A1, ICAR20, and 92A3, are further compared and whereby the performance of the commercial inoculant Nitragin 'C' (Table 4) or the uninoculated lentil is assumed to be 100 (Table 5). The best performing inoculants were 99A1, ICAR20 and 92A3, of which the first two inoculants were produced in our Saskatoon laboratory whereas inoculant 92A3 was produced in a laboratory in the USA. Enftx-L appears to be the best commercial inoculant on the market at present time although it should be pointed out that the increase in grain yield was not always significantly with every one of the other commercial available inoculants. By eliminating all the sites were no significantly increase in grain yield due to inoculation was observed (Table 2)~ Enftx-L increased grain yield by 9% as compared with lentil inoculated with Nitragin 'C'. Under those conditions, the three non-commercially produced inoculants increased grain yield each by 15 or 16%. In this study the performance of the inoculant which contains strain 99A1 was comparable as observed in previous studies (Bremer et al., 1989, 1990). Although all the sites contained indigenous rhizobia, every inoculant increased grain yield between 11 to 33% as compared with the uninoculated control (Table 5). It is apparent from this and other studies that re-inoculating is economically justifiable and should be advised. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Financial support was provided by Saskatchewan Agriculture Development Fund. The technical assistance of L. Cowell, G. Swerhone, K. Komarnicki and D. Gannon is greatly appreciated. We thank E. Farkas for her typing skills. LITERATURE CITED Bremer, E., C. van Kessel, and R. Karamanos. 1989. Inoculant, phosphorus and nitrogen responses of lentil. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:691-701. Bremer, E., C. van Kessel, L. Nelson, R. Rennie, and D. Rennie. 1990. Selection of Rhizobium leguminosarum strains for lentil (Lens culinaris) under growth room and field conditions. Plant Soil121:47-65. Bremner, J.M., and C.S. Mulvaney. 1982. Nitrogen-Total. In A.L.Page et al. (ed.) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. 2nd ed. Agronomy 9:595-624. 488 

Improved inoculants for lentil

https://harvest.usask.ca/bitstream/10388/10657/1/L.%20Nelson%20and%20C.%20van%20Kessel%2c%201990.pdf

Improved inoculants for lentil

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Saskatchewan Research Archive