Beta Fulltext view is in preview — article structure may vary. Browse all articles
Contents
Journal of Ecology & Natural Resources Research Article 14 min read

Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Affected by Organic Soil Amendment in Rainforest Agro-Ecology

Agboola K*, Lamidi K, Musa MA, Yusuf M and Evinemi TO
* Corresponding author
ISSN: 2578-4994  10.23880/jenr-16000402  Received: December 27, 2024  Published: January 01, 2025
 — views
 45 references
 6 tables
PDF
Keywords
Humic Acid Soil Structure Mineral Fertilizer Growth and Yield
Abstract

The field study was carried out to assess the Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Influenced by Soil Organic Amendment in Rainforest Agro-Ecology The aim was to study the effects of Soil Organic Amendment on maize growth and yield. The experiment had eight (8) treatments (control, 10kg of humic acid per hectare, 20kg of humic acid per hectare, 30kg of humic acid per hectare, the recommended rate of NPK (900kg: 60kg: 60kg) per hectare, 1/3 of RNPK + 30kg of humic acid, 1/2 of RNPK + 30kg of humic acid and 2/3 of RNPK + 30kg of humic acid) which were replicated three (3) times and the experimental design was randomized complete block design (RCBD). From the result obtained, the application of Humic Acid on maize had no significant (p>0.05) influence on the plant height, number of leaves and stem girth for most of the sampling periods in both cropping seasons. However there were significant difference (p>0.05) for all the yield parameter tested except the cob diameter. The total yield of maize gotten in this study showed that treatment 60kgNPK/ha and HA30+1/2RNPK had the highest yield were statistically at par in the first (6.13 and 5.74 t/ha) and Second (7.56 and 7.38 t/ha) cropping season respectively. Therefore, application of 1/2 fraction of the recommended mineral fertilizer rate in combination with HA (1/2 RNPK + HA30) can be considered for optimum maize yield in the Study location for agriculture to be sustainable.

Introduction

Land degradation and desertification have reduced soil productivity. To achieve sustainable agricultural development, various organic amendments have been proposed to improve soil quality and productivity [1].

Applying organic amendments provides a management strategy to offset the reduction of soil organic carbon and reduce land degradation [2].

The introduction of various organic amendments is also considered as a means to improve soil structure and fertility, microbial activity, crop yield, and carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change [3]. Therefore, understanding the performance of variable organic modifiers under different conditions is essential for their proper application [4]. Research on the application of organic amendments such as fertilizers, biosolids, green waste, compost and biochar to agricultural soil improves soil fertility and soil health, sequesters carbon in the soil and, due to its potential, and reduces carbon dioxide emissions. Reduces greenhouse gas emissions and regenerative agriculture [5]. Humic substances (HS) are composed of humic acids (HA), fulvic acids (FA) and humic matter (HM), and are derived from biochemical transformations of educts of soil organic matter. The application of HS is vital for improving soil conditions and increasing plant nutrient uptake and growth, especially in soils with low organic matter contents [6]. Several studies have reported the role of HS in enhancing P availability and as a bio stimulant for plant growth [7]. Although HS was applied and evaluated for use in the environment and agriculture from the earliest days, in our opinion, there is still no general understanding of how HS affects the level of bioavailable P in soil.

The reduction of land per capita and the deterioration of soil quality help to increase the use of synthetic fertilizers in agricultural lands. However, the fertilization intensification of the last decades aimed to increase yields has produced some new global environmental and geopolitical problems, such as nutrient imbalances, leaching of nutrients from crops to environment and the associated impacts and increasing cost of fertilizers with serious geopolitical and economic problems for the food security in poor countries [8]. However, the use of artificial fertilizers alone is not a sustainable solution to improve soil fertility and maintain crop yield. In addition, excessive use of mineral fertilizers can cause soil acidification (e.g., ammonium nitrogen fertilizers), eutrophication (e.g., phosphorus fertilizers) and other environmental problems [9]. Therefore, the efficient use of organic amendments can be a sustainable means of improving soil quality and supplying nutrients to Maize (Zea mays L.) production in Rainforest Agro-Ecology

Materials and Methods

Experimental Land Area and Design

This research work was conducted in 2021 and 2022 in Ado-Ekiti, a tropical rainforest region of Nigeria. It is located at latitude 7⁰37’23’’ north and longitude 5⁰13’15’’ east with a height of 439 meters above sea level. The general climate is humid, with rainy and dry seasons. The average annual temperature is 27 degrees Celsius and the amount of precipitation is 160 mm. The total area of the test plot was 357.75 square meters (27 meters by 13.25 meters). The experiment was conducted in the form of a randomized complete block design with eight treatments and three replications. The treatments included control, 10 kg humic acid/ha, 20 kg humic acid/ha, 30 kg humic acid/ ha, recommended rate of NPK (90 kg: 60 kg: 60 kg)/ha, 1/3 RNPK + 30 kg of it is It was composed of RNPK. Humic acid, RNPK 1/2 + humic acid 30 kg, and RNPK 2/3 + humic acid 30 kg. HA was used 2 weeks before planting to promote mineralization and mineral fertilizers were used 2 weeks after planting in a side-by-side method. Humic acid (brand name - Grand Hummus Plus) is imported and prepared by the personnel of this company in Nigeria.

Soil Analyses

Soil samples were collected before and after planting from a depth of 0 to 20 cm. Representative samples (25) were collected from the experimental fields and used together as a composite sample to represent the pre-planting sample, and at the end of the experiment, samples were taken from each sub-plot to represent the post-planting sample. To assess soil physical and chemical properties, samples were collected in labeled polyethylene bags using a soil auger, air-dried, ground, and sieved through a 2-mm mesh. Bulk density (BD) was obtained by kernel method [10]. The total porosity (TP) was obtained from the bulk density value and the particle density of 2.65 Mg-3 was taken as (TP) = [1-(bulk density/ particle density)] × 100 [10]. Particle size distribution was measured by hydrometer method. Soil texture class was determined using texture triangles. The particle density of a soil sample is determined by measuring its mass after drying to a temperature of 105 degrees Celsius and then dividing that mass by the volume of the particles, excluding the spaces between the particles. Soil pH was measured using a glass electrode in soil water 1:1. Exchangeable bases (calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium) were extracted using NH4OAC buffered to pH 7.0 [11]. Calcium and magnesium were measured using an atomic absorption spectrophotometer, and potassium and sodium were measured using a flame photometer. Exchangeable acidity (Al3 + and H+) in soil was extracted with Kcl and determined by titration with 0.05 M NaOH using phenolphthalein as indicator. Total nitrogen of soil samples was determined by Macrojjeldahl method. Available phosphorus was determined by Bray-2 extraction method. Organic carbon content was determined using wet baking method [12].

Data Collection and Statistical Analysis

Data related to the effects of humic acids on the growth and yield of corn for plant height, stem girth and number of leaves at 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks after planting for four plants were randomly selected. The height of the plant was measured by measuring the corn plant from the ground to the tip of the apical meristem of the main axis using the metric system. The number of leaves per plant was counted and averaged at 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks after planting (WAP). The circumference of the stem was measured with a caliper. The number of cobs per plant was obtained by counting the number of cobs per labeled plant produced and recorded for each plot. We averaged plants per plot to obtain per- plant estimates. Collected biomass weight of fresh biomass (g), dry biomass (g), fresh cob (g) and dry cob (g) and other yield parameters (cob length, size (cm), cob diameter (cm) , and 100-grain weight (g) was also obtained using Statistical Tools of Agricultural Research (STAR, STAR). All data collected were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the 2013 version, and treatment means were analyzed using Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) were separated.

Results and Discussion

Humic Acid Concentrates

The results related to the humic acid concentrate used in this study are shown in figure 1. HA concentrate has a high pH of 10.07 (alkaline), a high proportion of humic acids (92%), 4.79% organic carbon and 0.24% total nitrogen. This is essential for high product performance. It is important to note that micronutrients are essential for plant growth and development. The analysis showed that HA contains a sufficient concentration of micronutrients required by agricultural products. Some authors reported that materials often considered as organic soil amendments should not contain heavy metals [13]. The results show that the HA concentrate contains 0% of the specific heavy metals analyzed, which makes it suitable as an organic soil amendment. Higher nutrient components of the humic acid amendment used in this experiment may have obviously contributed to the higher performance of the crop in both years of the trials. Lguirati, et al. [14] had reported that humic substances of compost substrate contain higher N and H than other sources. This is due to the incorporation of Nitrogen groups and polysaccharides-like structures engaged in higher microbial activities. Rizk, et al. [15] opined that humic substance are the most chemically active in the soils. Sonmez, et al. [16] obtained decrease in Nickel content due to higher metal content in commercially available humic acids (Table 1).

Chemical and Physical Properties of the Experimental Site before Planting

Table 2 shows the results of soil analysis before planting, chemical and physical properties of the experimental site before planting. The layer of texture is sandy loam soil and the soil is also acidic. Also, the results show that the concentration of nitrogen, soil organic carbon and available phosphorus is very low and makes the soil suitable for evaluating the effects of applied treatments on the growth and yield of corn. Salman, et al. [17] emphasized that humic acids increase crop yield, improve drainage and increase nutrients in most crops where soil nutrients are very low. Salim, et al. [18] added that potato nutrient uptake is often high when soil nutrients are conversely low.

PropertiesValues
PH (H20)10.07
% Organic carbon4.79
% Total Nitrogen0.235
% Carbon36.48
% Oxygen43.77
% Hydrogen3.12
% Total Phosphorus0.036
% Na2
% K3.65
% Ca0.236
% Mg0.068
% Sulpur0.16
% Fulvic Acid6.56
% Humic Acid92
Mn (mg/kg)14.4
Fe (mg/kg)2,925.00
Cu (mg/kg)5.6
Zn (mg/kg)19.8
Chloride (mg/kg)3678
Hg (mg/kg)0
As (mg/kg)0
Cr (mg/kg)0
Pb (mg/kg)0
Cd (mg/kg)0
Surface area (g/cm2)1.567
Packed bulk density (g/m3)0.8635
Loose bulk density (g/m3)0.6752
C/N Ratio1.00.01
PH (H20)6.97
PH (Cacl)6.07
E.C713
% Organic Carbon2.46
% Total Nitrogen0.271
Available P (mg/kg)8.2
Exch. Acidity (cmol/kg)0.3
Exch. H+ (cmol/kg)0.28
Exch. A+++ (cmol/kg)0.02
Ca (cmol/kg)43.68
Mg (cmol/kg)4.37
K (cmol/kg)1.46
Na (cmol/kg)1.17
CEC (cmol/kg)50.98
Mn (mg/kg)54
Fe (mg/kg)61
Cu (mg/kg)0.68
Zn (mg/kg)1.12
Sand (%)72.4
Silt (%)16
Clay (%)11.6
Textural ClassSandy loam
Particle Density (g/cm3)2.65
Bulk Density (g/cm3)1.72
Porosity (%)35

Table 1: Humic Acid Concentrates.

As shown in Table 3, the results of the effect of HA on corn plant height showed that the application of HA on plant height in WAS2, 4 and 8 was not significant (p<0.05).

At 6 WAP treated with 20 kg/ha and 10 kg/ha, the control produced the shortest plants on average with 124.33 the tallest plants in 2021. 97.53 cm, but for the second year of 2022, HA application had no significant effect on plant height in WAP 2 and 4 (p>0.05), but it was significant in WAP 6 and 8 (p<0.05).

The sixth and eighth WAP treatments of 90 kg NPK/ ha produced the tallest plants with averages of 111.97 and 155.34, while the shortest control plants were with averages of 89.17 cm and 120.78 cm, and an increase in plants in all treatments. was observed And this increase was shown statistically. It doesn’t matter. The beneficial effects of humic acids on plant growth have been highlighted by several authors [19].

The increase in plant height obtained in both years is consistent with the report of Khan et al. (2019) obtained taller maize plants using 1.8 kg HA-1. Similarly, taller plants have been obtained using humic acids from the stimulating effect of nitrogen released from soil due to humic acid activity [20].

The increase in plant height is because humic acid plays an important role in storing more nutrients necessary for plant growth, maintaining the buffering capacity and improving the intensity of plant growth.

Treatments20212022
Weeks After Planting (WAP)Weeks After Planting (WAP)
24682468
Control12.850.897.53b136.5174689.17c120.78b
10kgHA/ha13.162.1124.33a175.220.451.697.00abc144.55ab
20kgHA/ha14.856.7124.33a168.519.746.5100.45abc146.69a
30kgHA/ha1358.2122.08ab166.819.452.899.51abc153.18a
90kgNPK/ha16.161.8120.33ab180.819.954111.97a155.34a
HA30+1/3RNPK15.760.3116.67ab171.61845.494.08bc141.88ab
HA30+1/2RNPK16.558.2112.08ab168.22151.6108.78ab153.51a
HA30+2/3RNPK16.654113.58ab175.119.454.4108.58ab148.89a
LSD (0.05%)NSNS*NSNSNS**
CV (%)12.713.17.3710.9410.36.385.686.04

Table 2: ** Effect of Humic Acid on Maize Height (cm) in Ado-Ekiti during the 2021 and 2022 cropping Season. From the results of

Means with the same letter(s) are not statistically significant at 5% level of test NS = not significant at 5% level of test * = significant at 5% level of test Table 3: Effect of Humic Acid on Maize Height (cm) in Ado-Ekiti during the 2021 and 2022 cropping Season. From the results of the effect of HA on the number of leaves shown in Table 4 below, the application of HA did not have a significant effect on the number of leaves at 2, 4 and 8 WAP (p>0.05), but there was a significant (p<0.05) 6 WAP with HA30+2/3RNPK treatment produced the most leaves. On the other hand, the control had the lowest number of leaves with an average of 7.92 in 2021. However, for the second year of 2022, HA application had no significant effect on leaf number at 2 and 4 WAP (p<0.05), but it was significant at 6 and 8 WAS (p<0.05). With six WAS treatments, HA30+2.3RNPK produced the most leaves with an average of 12.25, while the control had the least number of leaves with an average of 11.17. In the 8 WAS treatment, HA30+1.2RNPK had the most leaves with an average of 14.67 and the lowest number of leaves in the control treatment with an average of 13.33. Although an increase was observed in all plants in all treatments, this increase was not statistically significant. Our results are consistent reported that application of humic acid increased the number of leaves. Alfiati [21] noticed a significant reduction in the number of leaves produced in two maize cultivars as a result of a reduction in the photosynthetic activity of the plants, i.e. a reduction in humic acids. Seibel, et al. [22] showed that improving nutrient uptake, especially nitrogen, through the use of humic acids often affects leaf production, increases leaf chlorophyll concentration, and leads to overall shoot growth and development [23]. This issue has been confirmed by Rizvan et al. They emphasized that N, an essential component of plant chlorophyll tissue, promotes vegetative growth [24], leaf production and leaf area in maize crops [25].

Treatments20212022
Weeks After Planting (WAP)Weeks After Planting (WAP)
24682468
Control4.36.87.92b11.14.37.811.17b13.33b
10kgHA/ha4.37.19.25ab134.88.911.75ab13.92ab
20kgHA/ha4.37.19.25ab13.24.48.411.50ab14.00ab
30kgHA/ha4.86.88.83ab12.84.48.711.67ab14.42ab
90kgNPK/ha4.56.89.33ab13.64.78.912.17a14.50ab
HA30+1/3RNPK4.87.18.58ab12.84.48.111.50ab13.83ab
HA30+1/2RNPK4.57.38.83ab12.54.68.811.67ab14.67a
HA30+2/3RNPK4.67.29.80a134.89.112.25a14.58ab
LSD (0.05%)NSNS*NSNSNS**
CV (%)5.27.95.777.35.86.32.443.07

Table 3: ** Effect of Humic Acid on number of leaves per maize plant in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

Means with the same letter(s) are not statistically significant at 5% level of test. NS = not significant at 5% level of test * = significant at 5% level of test Table 4: Effect of Humic Acid on number of leaves per maize plant in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

As shown in Table 5 below, the results of the effect of HA on corn stalk environment show that the application of HA had a significant effect on the stalk environment in WAP 2, 4, 6 and 8 WAP in 2021. ). In the second year of 2022, HA application had no significant effect on plant height at 2 WAP (p<0.05), but it had a significant effect. (p<0.05) at 4, 6, and 8 WAP. With the four WAS treatments, acid HA30+1/2RNPK produced the most wild-type stems with an average value of 1.33, while the control produced the least with an average value of 1.12. Treatments 6 and 8 WAP 90 kg NPK/ha produced the most wild rounds with means of 2.33 and 2.53, while the smallest were in the control with means of 1.95 and 2.00, with all plants across treatments, but this increase was statistically It is not meaningful. Significant effects of humic acids on the stem environment have been reported by several authors. Fan, et al. [26] reported improved stem girth and stem growth in wheat. Eyheraguibel, et al. [27] also added that humic acids improved root, leaf and shoot growth. As reported by Mahmoud, et al. [28], branch and stem girth was increased in plots treated with HA both in soil and as foliar application compared to control plots. This improvement can be the result of fast absorption of nitrogen, optimal photosynthetic rate, longer duration of the leaf surface and intense accumulation of nitrogen in the shoot, which in turn was the result of this experiment, which was reflected in the maximum growth and development of the shoots during the period.

Treatments20212022
Weeks After Planting (WAP)Weeks After Planting (WAP)
24682468
Control0.41.061.41.80.51.12ab1.95b2.00b
10kgHA/ha0.51.231.62.10.51.27ab2.03ab2.22ab
20kgHA/ha0.41.151.720.51.14ab2.12ab2.22ab
30kgHA/ha0.51.161.72.10.51.17ab2.17ab2.19ab
90kgNPK/ha0.51.311.920.51.25ab2.33a2.53a
HA30+1/3RNPK0.51.221.620.51.06b2.04ab2.09b
HA30+1/2RNPK0.51.311.720.51.33a2.09ab2.19ab
HA30+2/3RNPK0.51.161.72.10.51.29a2.17ab2.33ab
LSD (0.05%)NSNSNSNSNS***
CV (%)7.412.18.1666.264.715.61

Table 4: ** Effect of Humic Acid on maize stem girth in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

Means with the same letter(s) are not statistically significant at 5% level of test NS = not significant at 5% level of test * = significant at 5% level of test Table 5: Effect of Humic Acid on maize stem girth in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

As shown in Table 6, HA amendment had a significant effect (p<0.05) on the performance characteristics of Ado- Ekiti Maze in both years of the experiment. Maximum fresh biomass weight (498.33 g), dry biomass weight (144.17 g), fresh cob weight (290.00 g) and dry cob weight (168.33 g) obtained from plots treated with 90 kg NPK/ha in 2021 came performance comparable to that obtained from HA30+2/3RNPK-treated slices. The lowest yields of these parameters (289.17 g, 75.83 g, 224.00 g, 115.50 g) were consistently obtained from the control plots. Other treatments were not significantly different in terms of performance. In 2022, fresh biomass yield was not significantly affected by HA amendment (p>0.05). However, the highest dry biomass weight (239.50 g), fresh cob weight (405.08 g) and dry cob weight (232.17 g) were obtained from HA30+1/2RNPK treated plots. Other treatments provided comparable yields. Similarly, the lowest yields (121.08 g, 267.58 g and 142.58 g) were consistently obtained in the control plots. The optimal yield for fresh biomass, dry biomass, fresh cob and dry cob obtained from the application of 90 kg of NPK per hectare is consistent with the report of Nasiral-Islami, et al. [29] reported that application of 150 kg/ha of urea significantly improved spike number, biomass and yield of wheat. Our results are also consistent with the results of Ahma, et al. [30]. Some other authors have obtained the best performance characteristics by using 100% NPK fertilizer in addition to humic acid. As reported by Sangeetha, et al.

[31] the highest yield was obtained with 100% NPK and 20 kg HA-1 as soil application. Mekuannet, et al. [32] improved maize biomass and grain yield by applying 130.5 kg N/ha in Haramaya, eastern Ethiopia. Similarly, our results for 2022 show that the application of 20 kg/ha HA + NPK at 100% of the recommended dose resulted in the highest grain yield and the highest uptake of N, P and K, which is consistent with the results of Sivkumar, et al. [34] rice Mekuannet, et al. [32] used a mixture of NPS and N fertilizer to increase above ground maize biomass. Nikbakht reported that the application of Leonardite-derived HA in a greenhouse experiment increased root and shoot biomass of gerbera and canola, respectively. The improved yield obtained in this study when using HA and NPK fertilizers in combination indicates that HA and mineral fertilizers form a complex complex and slowly release nutrients for effective crop uptake [34].

Treatment20212022
F. BD.BF.CD.CF. BD.BF.CD.C
Control289.17e75.83f224.00b115.50b443.1121.08c267.58b142.58b
10kgHA/ha320.90de95.00e255.83ab147.17a578.1182.67ab333.67ab174.58ab
20kgHA/ha369.17cd106.67de248.33ab153.67a632.7195.00ab330.42ab219.17a
30kgHA/ha384.17bcd112.50cd283.50ab161.33a608.4194.42ab340.75ab208.50a
90kgNPK/ha498.33a144.17a290.00a168.33a792.3229.08a394.83ab235.92a
HA30+1/3RNPK400.00bc118.33bcd260.83ab145.83a541.6150.50bc295.25ab174.17ab
HA30+1/2RNPK429.17bc121.67bc303.33a166.67a749.2239.50a405.08a232.17a
HA30+2/3RNPK445.00ab130.00b276.67ab165.33a633.3198.08ab385.25ab227.42a
LSD (0.05%)****ns***
CV (%)9.026.978.256.1514.8517.1213.5310.71

Table 5: ** Response of maize yield parameters to humic acid application in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

Means with the same letter(s) are not statistically significant at 5% level of test * = significant at 5% level of test F.B = fresh biomass (g), D.B = dry biomass (g), F.C = fresh cob (g), D.R = dry cob (g) Table 6: Response of maize yield parameters to humic acid application in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

As shown in Table 7, HA amendment had a significant effect (p<0.05) on maze performance characteristics and yield in Ado-Ekiti in both years of the study. Application of 90 kg NPK/ha resulted in maximum ear length (18.71 cm), ear diameter (4.36 cm), 100 seed weight (24.67 cm) and seed weight (yield)/ha of 6.13 tons in 2021. length 19.7 cm, ear diameter 4.79 cm, 100-seed weight 26.67 cm and seed yield 7.57 t/ha in 2022. This result is in agreement with the yield obtained from plots treated with HA30+1/2RNPK and HA30+2/3RNPK. It was comparable. Other treatments were comparable. However, the control plot consistently had the lowest results in both years of the experiment. Our results are consistent with several reports that characterize the overall response of maize to soil organic amendments and mineral fertilizers [35]. El Makser, et al. [36] reported that the use of humic acid increased the number of sinks produced and improved nutrient absorption, and thus improved biomass production, weight and length of spike. Khan, et al. [20] also showed that the incorporation of humic acid and nitrogen significantly increased the number of ears per square meter, 1000-grain weight, spike length, spike 1 plant, shoot yield and maximum grain yield in corn cultivars: Iqbal’s findings [37]. The significant increase in yield characteristics and seed yield from 2021 to 2022 obtained in this study indicates the sufficient supply of nitrogen during the reproductive stage of the crop [38], which may have accelerated the rate of photosynthesis [39] and the ability to label corn products [40]. Similarly, humic acids may better improve soil physical and chemical microclimate and allow increased yield and biomass production by improving plant biochemistry, physiology and productivity [41, 42, 43, 44, 45].

Treatment20212022
CLCD100SWYield (t/ha)CLCD100SWYield (t/ha)
Control14.98b3.88b20.33b2.66d15.77b4.25b23.00c4.43b
10kgHA/ha16.57ab4.05ab22.67ab3.52c18.01ab4.48ab26.00abc6.17a
20kgHA/ha16.90ab4.26ab24.00ab4.53b18.15ab4.51ab26.33abc6.25a
30kgHA/ha17.26ab4.30ab23.67ab4.61b16.97ab4.68a26.33abc6.64a
90kgNPK/ha18.71a4.36a24.67a6.13a19.70a4.79a26.67abc7.57a
HA30+1/3RNPK17.13ab4.24ab22.00ab5.06b17.20ab4.42ab24.33bc6.15a
HA30+1/2RNPK18.35a4.30ab24.00ab5.74a19.28a4.77a28.67a7.38a
HA30+2/3RNPK17.98a4.28ab25.00a5.64a17.39ab4.59ab27.33ab7.02a
LSD (0.05%)********
CV (%)4.993.755.86.996.213.195.4613.58

Table 6: ** Response of maize yield parameters (continued) to humic acid application in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

Means with the same letter(s) are not statistically significant at 5% level of test * = significant at 5% level of test C.L = cob length (cm), C.D = cob diameter (cm), 100SW = 100-seeds weight (g) Table 7: Response of maize yield parameters (continued) to humic acid application in Ado-Ekiti (2021 and 2022 Rainy Season).

Conclusion and Recommendation

The results of the experiment showed that maize responded well to treatment with 90 kg NPK/ha and HA30 + 1/2 RNPK in measured growth and yield parameters. Addition of 1/2 of recommended mineral fertilizer in addition to humic acid proved to be the best HA loading rate in terms of maize yield in both cropping seasons. This yield is statistically equivalent to the yield obtained when the recommended mineral fertilizer rate was applied at the study site. To reduce the problems associated with excessive mineral fertilizer application, treatment – HA30 + 1/2 RNPK can be recommended for best maize production in the study area. Further studies are needed to determine the optimum level of sole humic acid application rate for maize yield at the study location.

References

  1. Ullah N, Ditta A, Khalid A, Mehmood S, Rizwan MS, et al. (2021) Integrated effect of algal biochar and plant growth promoting Rhizobacteria on physiology and growth of maize under deficit irrigations. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 20: 346-356.
  2. Chand S, Anwar M, Patra DD (2006) Influence of long- term application of organic and inorganic fertilizer to build up soil fertility and nutrient uptake in mintmustard cropping sequence. Commun. Soil Sci Plant Anal 37: 63- 76.
  3. Leogrande R, Vitti C (2018) Use of organic amendments to reclaim saline and sodicsoils: a review. Arid Land Res. Manage.
  4. Mahmoud E, El-Kader NA, Robin P, Corfini NA, El-Rehman LA (2009) Effect of different organic and inorganic fertilizers on cucumber yield and some soil properties. World J Agric Sci 5: 408-414.
  5. Chen B, Chen M, Qian L (2012) Enhanced bioremediation of PAH-contaminated soil by immobilized bacteria with plant residue and biochar as carriers. J Soils Sediments 12: 1350-1359.
  6. Garcia AC (2016) Structure-property-function relationship in humic substances to explain the biological activity in plants. Sci Rep (4): 46.
  7. Liu  ML (2019) Maize (Zea mays) growth and nutrient uptake following integrated improvement of vermicompost and humic acid fertilizer on coastal saline soil. Appl Soil Ecol 142: 147-154.
  8. Bonilla-Cedrez C, Chamberlin J, Hijmans RJ (2021) Fertilizer and grain proces constrain food production in sub-Saharan Africa. Nature Food (2): 766-772.
  9. Hijbeek R, Ten Berge H, Whitmore A, Barkusky D, Schroder JJ, (2018) Nitrogen Fertilizer replacement values for organic amendments appear to increase with N application rates. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 110(1): 105-115.
  10. Obi ME (2000) Soil Physics: A Compendium of Lectures. In: 1st (Edn.), Nsukka. Atlanto publication pp: 83-125.
  11. Thomas GW (1982) Exchangeable Cations. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Agronomy Monography. Madison, Winconsin, USA, 9: 159-165.
  12. Walkley A (1947) A critical examination of a rapid method for determining organic carbon in soils: effect of variations in digestion conditions and inorganic soil constituents. Soil Science 63: 251-263.
  13. Pilanali N, Kaplan M (2002) Determination of relationship between some plant nutrient contents of soil and humic acid applied different forms with fruit colour of strawberry. Journal of Agricultural Science 12(1): 1-5.
  14. Lguirati A, Ait Baddi G, El-Mousadik A, Gilard V, Revel JC, et al. (2005) Analysis of humic acids from aerated and non-aerated urban landfill compost. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 56: 8-16.
  15. Rizk AH, Mashhour AMA, Abd-Elhadyand ESE, EI-Ashri KMA (2010) The role of some humic acid products in reducing of use mineral fertlizer and improving soil properties and nutrient uptake. J Soil Sci and Agri Engineering 1(8): 765-774.
  16. Sonmez F, Alp S (2019) The Effects of Applications Humic Acids on Macronutrient, Micronutrient, Heavy Metal and Soil Properties. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi Cilt 29(4): 809-816.
  17. Salman SR, Abou-hussein SD, Abdel-Mawgoud AMR, El- Nemr MA (2005) Fruit yield and quality of watermelon as affected by hybrids and humic acid application. Journal of Applied Sciences Research 1: 51-58.
  18. Selim EM, Mosa AA, El-Ghamry AM (2009) Evaluation of humic substances fertigation through surface and subsurface drip irrigation systems on potato grown under Egyptian sandy soil conditions. Agricultural Water Management 96: 1218-1222.
  19. Atiyeh RM, Lee S, Edwards CA, Arancon NQ, Metzger JD (2002) The influence of humic acids derived from earthworm. Bioresour Technol 84: 7-14.
  20. Khan SA, Khan SU, Qayyum A, Gurmani AR, Khan A, et al. (2019) Integration of humic acid with nitrogen wields an auxiliary impact on physiological traits, growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) varieties. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 17(3): 6783-6799.
  21. Elfiati D (2005) Peranan mikroba pelarut fosfat terhadap pertumbuhan tanaman. In: 1st (Edn.), Sumatera Utara: USU Press.
  22. Sible CN, Seebauer JR, Below FE (2021) Plant biostimulants: a categorical review, their implications for row crop production, and relation to soil health indicators. Agronomy 11: 1297.
  23. Chen Y, Magen H, Clapp CE (2004) Mechanisms of plant growth stimulation by humic substances: The role of organo-iron complexes. Soil Sci Plant Nutr 50: 1089- 1095.
  24. Gokmen SO, Sencar O, Sakin MA (2001) Response of popcorn (Zea mays L. everta) to nitrogen rates and plant densities. Turk J Agric For 25: 15-23.
  25. Jasemi M, Darab F, Naser R (2013) Effect of planting date and nitrogen fertilizer application on grain yield and yield components in maize. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci 13: 914-919.
  26. Fan H, Wang X, Sun X, Li Y, Sun X, et al. (2014) Effects of humic acid derived from sediments on growth, photosynthesis and chloroplast ultrastructure in chrysanthemum. Sci Hortic 177: 118-123.
  27. Eyheraguibel B, Silvestre J, Morard P (2008) Effect of humic subtances derived from organic waste enchancement on the growth and mineral nutrition of maize. J Bioresource Technologi 99: 4206-4212.
  28. Mahmoud SM, Paish EC, Powe DG, Macmillan RD, Grainge MJ, et al. (2011) Tumor-infiltrating CD lymphocytes predict clinical outcome in breast cancer. Journal of clinical oncology 29(15): 1949-1955.
  29. Nasiroleslami E, Mozafari H, Sadeghi-Shoae M, Habibi D, Sani B (2021) Changes in yield, protein, minerals, and fatty acid profile of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under fertilizer management involving application of nitrogen, humic acid, and seaweed extract. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 21: 2642-2651.
  30. Ahmad A, Usman M, Ullah E, Warraich EA (2003) Effects of different phosphorus levels on the growth and yield of two cultivars of maize (Zea mays L.). International Journal of Agriculture &biology 5(4): 632-634.
  31. Sangeetha M, Singaram P (2007) Effect of lignite Humic acid and inorganic fertilizers on growth and yield of onion. Asian Journal of Soil Science 2(1): 108-110.
  32. Belay M, Adare K (2020) Response of growth, yield components, and yield of hybrid maize (Zea mays L.) varieties to newly introduced blended NPS and N fertilizer rates at Haramaya, Eastern Ethiopia, Cogent Food & Agriculture 1: 1771115.
  33. Sivakumar K, Devarajan L (2005) Influence of K-humate on the yield and nutrient uptake of rice. Madras Agriculture Journal 92(10-12): 718-721.
  34. Rose MT, Patti AF, Little KR, Brown AL, Jackson WR, et al. (2014) A meta-analysis and review of plant-growth response to humic substances: Practical implications for agriculture. Adv Agron 124: 37-89.
  35. Daur I, Bakhashwain AA (2013) Effect of humic acid on growth and quality of maize fodder production. Pak J Bot 45: 21-25.
  36. El-Mekser H, Mohamed ZE, Ali MAM (2014) Influence of humic acid and some micronutrients on yellow corn yield and quality. World Appl Sci J 32: 1-11.
  37. Iqbal B (2016) Response of wheat crop to humic acid and nitrogen levels. EC Agric 3: 558-565.
  38. Shah STH, Zamir MSI, Waseem M, Ali A, Tahir M, et al. (2009) Growth and yield response of maize (Zea mays L.) to organic and inorganic sources of nitrogen. Pak J Life Soc Sci 7: 108-111.
  39. Kolari F, Bazregar A, Bakhtiari S (2014) Phenology, growth aspects and yield of maize affected by defoliation rate and applying nitrogen and vermicompost. Indian J Fundamental Appl Life Sci 4: 61-71.
  40. Bashir N, Malik SA, Mahmood S, Mahmood-ul-Hassan, Athar HR, et al. (2012) Influence of urea application on growth, yield and mineral uptake in two corn (Zea mays L.) cultivars. Afr J Biotechnol 11: 10494-10503.
  41. Canellas LP, Olivares FL (2014) Physiological responses to humic substances as plant growth promoter. Chem Biol Technol Agric 1: 3.
  42. Bray RH, Kurtz LH (2015) Determination of total, organic and available phosphorus in soil, soil science 59: 39-45.
  43. Onasanya RO, Aiyelari OP, Onasanya A, Oikeh S, Nwilene FE, et al. (2009) Growth and yield response of maize (Zea mays L.) to different rates of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers in southern Nigeria. World J Agric Sci 5: 400- 407.
  44. Rizwan M, Maqsood M, Rafiq M, Saeed M, Ali A (2003) Maize (Zea mays L.) response to split application of nitrogen. Int J Agric Biol 5: 19-21.
  45. Tan KH (2014) Humic Matter in Soil and the Environment: Principles and Controversies; CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA.
More from this journal

Cite this article

BibTeX
APA
RIS
@article{agboola2025,
  title   = {Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Affected by Organic
Soil Amendment in Rainforest Agro-Ecology},
  author  = {Agboola K, Lamidi K, Musa MA, Yusuf M and Evinemi TO},
  journal = {Journal of Ecology & Natural Resources},
  year    = {2025},
  volume  = {9},
  number  = {1},
  doi     = {10.23880/jenr-16000402}
}
Agboola K, Lamidi K, Musa MA, Yusuf M and Evinemi TO (2025). Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Affected by Organic
Soil Amendment in Rainforest Agro-Ecology. Journal of Ecology & Natural Resources, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.23880/jenr-16000402
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Growth and Yield of Maize (Zea mays L.) as Affected by Organic
Soil Amendment in Rainforest Agro-Ecology
AU  - Agboola K, Lamidi K, Musa MA, Yusuf M and Evinemi TO
JO  - Journal of Ecology & Natural Resources
PY  - 2025
VL  - 9
IS  - 1
DO  - 10.23880/jenr-16000402
ER  -