22
Absorption micro nutrient siginifcantly influenced by biofertilizer application. The improvement was higher in Fe, with the maximum was showed
by treatment of B3172.2. Cu and Zn also increased but not as high as Fe, and the maximam value showed by the treatment of B4 102.8 and 111.1
respectively Table 2. Biofertilizer improved total macro and micro nutrient uptake in tomato
plant. The highest increased of total macro nutrient absorption obtained by application with centrifuged biofertilizer without storage B4 by about 119.4
with mean 2.63 g per plant, and the highest increase of total micro nutrient absorption recorded by freezedried biofertilizer with storage 3 months B3
followed by B4 about of 124.4 and 116.6 respectevily Figure 4.
a.
Nutrient absorption macro b. Nutrient absorption micro
Figure 4 Nutrient absorption macro and micro as response to different biofertilizer application in tomato plant. B0: without biofertilizer,
B1: liquid biofertilizer, B2: freezedried biofertilizer without storage, B3: freezedried biofertilizer with 3 months storage, B4: centrifuged
biofertilizer without storage and B5: centrifuged biofertilizer with 3 months storage.
b.Effect of Biofertilizer on Nutrient Absorption in Potato Plant
Application of biofertilizer in potato plant not significant effect to nutrient absorption. There was atendency that application with liquid biofertilizer had the
maximum in macro nutrient absorption Table 3. On the other hand, the maximam absorption micro nutrient showed by application with B5.
2 4
6 8
10 12
14
B0 B1
B2 B3
B4 B5
n u
tr ie
n t
ab so
r p
ti o
n m
ac r
o g
p lan
t
biofertilizer Mg
Ca K
P N
10000 20000
30000 40000
50000 60000
70000 80000
B0 B1
B2 B3
B4 B5
n u
tr ie
n t
ab so
r p
ti o
n m
g p
la n
t
biofertilizer Zn
Cu Fe
Create PDF files without this message by purchasing novaPDF printer
http:www.novapdf.com
23
Table 3 Means of nutrient absorption by application of biofertilizer in potato.
treatment Macro
Micro Ng
Pg Kg
Cag Mgg
Femg Cumg
Znmg B0
2.5 a 0.4 a
4.4 a 0.4 a
0.4 a 39141.7 a
4170.8a 13520.8a
B1 3.7 a
0.6 a 6.9a
0.6 a 0.7 a
75025.7 b 5885.8ab
21457.2a B2
3.5 a 0.6 a
5.7a 0.6 a
0.5 a 61617.2ab
5287.1a 19777.6a
B3 2.9 a
0.5 a 4.4a
0.4 a 0.4 a
52558 ab 4215.3a
15047.1a B4
2.5 a 0.4 a
4.3a 0.4 a
0.4 a 53622.2 a
5865.7ab 15728.5a
B5 3.3 a
0.6 a 6.4a
0.4 a 0.6 a
78176.6 b 8774.9b
21756.0a
Where: B0: without biofertilizer, B1: liquid biofertilizer, B2: freezedried biofertilizerwithout storage, B3: freezedried biofertilizer with 3 months
storage, B4: centrifuged biofertilizer without storage and B5: centrifuged biofertilizer with 3 months storage. Means fowllowed by same litter in
column are not significantly different at level 0, 05 by Duncan.
Total macro nutrient absorption tended to increase by application of biofertilizer except in B3 and B4. The highest increased of total macro nutrient
were obtained by liquid biofertilizer B1 by about of 53.9 with mean 2.51 g per plant as compared to control as in figure 4. In the total micro nutrient absorption,
the highest increased was recorded by centrifuged biofertilizer with 3 months storage B5 by about of 91.3 with mean 36235.8 mg per plant as compared to
control Figure 5.
a. Nutreint absorption macro b. Nutreint absorption micro
