Managing the Humic Acid Fertilizing of Chickpea and Protein Status

Legumes are consumed for the nutrition of more than 2 billion people over the world. As a legume, chickpea presents valuable nutritional components especially welded by higher protein and dietary fiber that is resistant to enzymatic digestion in human body. Konya City is one of the most chickpea producers in Turkey. In recent years, application of humic acid based fertilizer is increased considerably. Aim of the study was determination of protein ratio and protein yield of the field released chickpea seeds. A total of 4 humic acid doses (from dose 1 to dose 4: 0, 6, 9 and 12 kg da-1 respectively) were applied by 2 equal part (pre-sowing and pre-flowering periods) to the “Çağatay” chickpea variety in Konya ecology. Field trial was set up by randomized blocks design with 3 replications. According to results, protein ratio was detected between 20.56% (dose 4) and 25.89% (dose 3) while protein yield (kg da-1) was ranged from 39.77 (dose 1) to 63.56 (dose 3) values. In the study, 9 kg da-1 humic acid application presented the highest values for protein ratio and protein yield. On the other hand, change in humic acid doses resulted from variable values. Deep and long terms studies should evaluate more stable and trustable results to decide optimum fertilizing for desired protein statues and sustainable agricultural systems.

PDF

___

Akçin A (1988). Yemeklik Dane Baklagiller. Selçuk Üniversitesi Yayınları No: 43, Konya (in Turkish).

Alam MZ, Haider SA (2006). Growth attributes of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars in relation to different doses of nitrogen fertilizer. Journal of Life and Earth Sciences 1 (2): 77-82.

Ali H, Khan MA, Randhawa SA (2004). Interactive effect of seed inoculation and phosphorus applicaon on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Agriculture & Biology 6 (1): 110-112.

Anoymous (2016). http://tr.climatedata.org/location/497828/ (Access date: 20.02.2016).

Anonymous (2019). Food and Agriculture Organisation, http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/ (Access date: 16.12.2019).

Attia RS, El-Tabey MA, Aman ME, Hamza MA (1994). Effect of cooking and decortication on the physical properties, the chemical composition, and nutritive value of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L. ). Food Chemistry 50: 125-131.

Bayrak H, Önder M, Gezgin S (2005). Effects on yield and some yield components of boron application in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L. ) varieties. Selcuk University Journal of Faculty of Agriculture 19 (35): 66-74.

Bayrak H, Önder M (2017). Determination of agricultural, technological and nutritional characteristics of local populations and varieties of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivated in Konya ecological region. Journal of Central Research Institute for Field Crops 26 (Special Issue): 52-61. DOI: 10.21566/tarbitderg.359119.

Bozoglu H, Ozcelik H, Mut Z, Peksen E (2007). Response of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to zinc and molybdenum fertilization. Bangladesh J Bot 36 (2): 145-149.

Brkic S, Milaković Z, Kristek A & Antunović M (2004). Pea yield and its quality depending on inoculation, nitrogen and molybdenum fertilization. Plant Soil Environ. 50 (1): 39–45.

Carillo JM, Reyes-Moreno C, Armeimta-Rodello E, Carabez-Trejo A, Mora-Escobedo R (2000). Physicochemical and nutritional characteristics of extruded flours from fresh and hardened chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L). LWT – Food Science and Technology 33: 117-123.

Ceran F & Önder M (2016). Determination of some agricultural characteristics on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars that are sown at different periods. MSc Thesis, Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Science, 3 (1): 25-29.

Doğan Y (2011). Effects of various plant densities and sowing methods on yield and some yield components of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars in Van ecological conditions. PhD Thesis, The Graduate School Of Natural And Applied Science, Yüzüncü Yıl University, Van, Turkey.

Encan G, Kaya M, Çiftçi CY (2005). Nohutun Dünya ve Türkiye ekonomisindeki yeri. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi 9 (1): 19-29 (in Turkish).

Erdin F, Kulaz H (2014). Van–Gevaş ekolojik koşullarında bazı nohut (Cicer arietinum L.) çeşitlerinin ikinci ürün olarak yetiştirilmesi. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences 1: 910-914 (in Turkish).

Jankowski KJ, Kijewski L, Krzebietke S, Budzynski WS (2015). The effect of sulphur fertilization on macronutrient concentrations in the post-harvest biomass of mustard. Plant Soil Environment 61 (6): 266-272.

Kafadar FN, Ozkan A, Can C, Kar Y, Mart D, Ceyhan C (2019). Genetic and biochemical properties of Cicer spp reveal distinction between wild and cultivated chickpea genotypes. Legume Research 42 (1): 1-9, doi: 10.18805/LR-395.

Kahraman A (2017). Effect of humic acid applications on the yield components in chickpea. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpasa University 34 (1): 218-222. ISSN: 1300-2910, E-ISSN: 2147- 8848.

Kara K (1996). Tarla Bitkileri Ders Kitabı. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları No:191, 214-216 s, Erzurum (in Turkish).

Kaur M, Singh N (2004). Studies on functional, thermal and pasting properties of flours from different chickpea (Cicer arietinum L) cultivars. Food Chemistry 10: 1-5.

Khourgamy A, Farnia A (2009). Effect of phosphorus and zinc fertilization on yield components of chickpea cultivars. African Crop Sci. Conference Proc. 9: 205-208.

Kıraç G (2016). Effects of different humic-fulvic acid doses applications on biological nitrogen fixation under peanut vegetation. MSc Thesis, Süleyman Demirel University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Isparta, Turkey.

Kopaç Kork A (2009). Investigation on the effects of different processing methods on physical and chemical properties of chickpeas. MSc Thesis, The Graduate School Of Natural And Applied Science,

Celal Bayar University, Manisa, Turkey. Lobartini JC, Orioli GA, Tan KH (1997). Characteristics of soil humic acid fractions seperated by ultrafıtration. Corn. SoiI Sci. Plant Anal. 28 (9 - 10): 787-796.

Mir H, Asilan KS, Daneshvar M, Mansorifar S (2014). The effects of chemical phosphorous and bio super phosphate bio fertilizer on qualitative and quantitaive of the chick pea varieties in the dryaud condition. Spectrum: a. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 3 (9): 235-248 (Special Issue on Multidisciplinary Studies).

Önder M, Üçer FB (1999). Konya ekolojik şartlarında bazı nohut çeşitlerinin ikinci ürün olarak yetiştirilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 13 (18): 1-8 (in Turkish).

Özbek N (1973). Toprak verimliliği ve gübreler 1. Toprak Verimliliği. Ankara Üniversitesi, Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları: 525, Ders Kitabı: 170 (in Turkish).

Sarı H, Sarı D, Adak A, Çancı H, İkten C, Erler F, Yıldırım T, Toker C, Kahraman A (2018). Assessment of leaf miner [Liriomyza cicerina Rond. (Diptera: Agromyzidae)] resistance in Cicer echinospermum P.H. Davis genotypes. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences 31 (1): 71-75, doi: 10.29136/mediterranean.363722.

Sıkılı ÖH (2003). Investigation of microbiological and flavour characteristics of chickpea sweet dough. PhD Thesis, Ege University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences İzmir, Turkey (in Turkish).

Tayyar S, Egesel CÖ, Gül KM, Turhan H (2008). The effect of autumn and spring planting time on seed yield and protein content of chickpea genotypes. African Journal of Biotechnology 7 (11): 1655- 1661.

Topalak C, Ceyhan E (2015). The effects of seed yield and some agricultural characters of different sowing dates on chickpea. Selcuk Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2 (2): 128-135.

Toklu F, Özkan H, Karaköy T, Coyne CJ (2017). Evaluation of advanced lentil lines for diversity in seed mineral concentration grain yield and yield components. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 23 (2017): 213–222.

Viola GCV, Bianchi F, Croce E, Ceretti E (2016). Are food labels effective as a means of health prevention? J Public Health Res 5 (3): 768. Doi: 10.4081/jphr.2016.768.