Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
Response of Thompson Seedless Grapevines to Application of Organic Fertilizer Humic Acid and some Biofertilizers /
المؤلف
Mousa, Yehia Zakaria Abd El-Aziz.
هيئة الاعداد
باحث / Yehia Zakaria Abd El-Aziz Mousa
مشرف / Farouk H. Abd El-Aziz
مشرف / Mohamed A. El-Sayed
مشرف / Ali H. Ali
الموضوع
Indoor gardening. HyDROPonics.
تاريخ النشر
2011.
عدد الصفحات
171 P. :
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
الدكتوراه
التخصص
البساتين
تاريخ الإجازة
1/1/2011
مكان الإجازة
جامعة المنيا - كلية الزراعة - Horticulture
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 191

from 191

Abstract

This study was carried out during 2009 and 2010 seasons on 90 uniform in vigour 15- years old head trained Thompson seedless grapevines grown in a private vineyard located at EI- Faroukia Village, Samalout district, Minia Governorate. The texture of soil is silty clay. The soil was well drained and with a water table not less than two meters deep. Winter pruning during 2009 and 2010 seasons was carried out on the first week of Jan. by using head pruning system leaving ~ine load reached 72 eyes (10 long fruiting spurs x six eyes plus six replacement spurs x two eyes). The selected vines had the same vine load (72 eyes) as previously mentioned and planted at 2.0 x 2.0 m: apart. Surface irrigation system was followed.
The objective of this was throw some light on the effect of organic and biofertilization as a partial substitute for inorganic fertilizers as well as application of potassium humat on growth, vine nutritional status, yield as well as physical and chemical characters of Thompson seedless grapes. Selecting the best N management (including different N sources and potassium humat) that responsible for imp~oving yield quantitively and qualitatively of such grapevine cv is .considered another target.
This study included 30 treatments from different N proportions of N sources as well as potassium humat levels. Two factors were evolved. The· first factor (A) consisted from the following ten treatments from various proportions of inorganic, organic and bioforms ofN:-
al- Application of the recommended rate ofN (R.RN) namely 80 g.
N/ vine as 100 % inorganic form of N (239 g. ammonium nitrate/ vine/ season).
a2- Application of R.R.N as 75 % inorganic form of N (180 g. ammonium nitrate/ vine/ season) + 12.5 % organic form of N (3.3 kg F.Y.M/ vine/ season) + 12.5 % bioform of N (10 g. Minia Azotene/ vine/ season).
a3- Application of R.R.N as 75 % inorganic form of N (180 g. ammonium nitrate / vine) + 12.5 % organic form of N (3.3 kg. F.Y.M/ vine/ season) + 12.5 % bioform ofN (10 g. Microbene/ vine/ season).
a4- Application of R.R.N as 75 % inorganic form of N (180 g. aml~onium nitrate / vine/ season) + 12.5 % organic form of N (3.3 kg F.Y.M/ vine/ season) + 12.5 % bioform of N (10 g. Biogen/ vine/ season).
as- Application of R.RN as 50 % inorganic form of N (120 g. ammonium nitrate / vine/ season) + 25 % organic form ofN (6.6 kg F.Y.M/ vine/ season) + 25 % bioform of N (20 g. Minia Azotene/ vine/ season).
3.t;- Application of RR.N as 50 % inorganic form of N (120 g. ammonium nitrate / vine/ season) + 25 % organic form ofN (6.6 kg F.Y.M/ vine/ season) + 25 % bioform ofN (20 g. Microbene/ vine/ season).
a7- Application of R.R.N as 50 % inorganic form of N (120 g. ammonium nitrate / vine/ season) + 25 % organic form ofN (6.6 kg F,Y.M/ vine/ season) + 25 % bioform of N (20 g. BiogenJ vine/ season).