International Journal of Plant & Soil Science

33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

ISSN: 2320-7035

Effect of IFFCO Nanofertilizer on Growth, Grain Yield

and Managing Turcicum Leaf Blight Disease in
Maize
K. Ajithkumar1*, Yogendra Kumar2, A. S. Savitha3, M. Y. Ajayakumar1,
C. Narayanaswamy4, Ramesh Raliya5, M. R. Krupashankar4 and S. N. Bhat6
1
Main Agricultural Research Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, India.
2
Indian Farmers Fertilizers Cooperative Limited I(FFCO), IFFCO Sadan, C-1, District Centre, Saket
Place, New Delhi, India.
3
Department of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur,
India.
4
IFFCO State Office, No. 8, KSCMF Building, 3rd Floor, Cunningham road, Bengaluru, India.
5
IFFCO Nano Biotechnology Research Centre, Kalol, Gujarat, India.
6
Organic Farming Resaerch Institute, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur, India.

Authors’ contributions

This work was carried out in collaboration among all authors. Author KA, YK, CN and MRK designed
the study, performed the statistical analysis, wrote the protocol and wrote the first draft of the
manuscript. Authors ASS and MYA managed the analyses of the study. Author RR and SNB
managed the literature searches. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Article Information

DOI: 10.9734/IJPSS/2021/v33i1630519
Editor(s):
(1) Prof. Junhong Bai, Beijing Normal University, China.
(2) Dr. Hakan Sevik, Kastamonu University, Turkey.
(3) Dr. Hon H. Ho, State University of New York, USA.
Reviewers:
(1) Shraddha Karcho, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, India.
(2) Srujani Behera, Odisha University of Agriculture and Technology, India.
Complete Peer review History: http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/69430

Received 20 April 2021

Original Research Article Accepted 26 June 2021
Published 01 July 2021

ABSTRACT

Nanoscience coupled with nanotechnology emerged as possible cost-cutting approach to prodigal

farming and environmental clean-up operations. Hence there is a need for a more innovative
fertilizer approach that can increase the productivity of agricultural systems and more
environmental friendly than synthetic fertilizers. The trial was laid out in randomized complete block
design with 11 treatments in three replications. The field experiment was carried out at Main
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected];

 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
Agricultural Research Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur during Kharif seasons of
2019 and 2020. In this research, we studied the recent development and potential benefits derived
from the use of nanofertilizers (NFs) in modern agriculture. Nanofertilizers facilitate slow and steady
release of nutrients, thereby reduce the loss of nutrients and enhance the nutrient use efficiency. In
the present study, the nanofertilizers such as IFFCO nanonitrogen (nano N), IFFCO nanocopper
(nano Cu), IFFCO nanozinc (nano Zn) and IFFCO sagarika were sprayed to the maize crop in
different combinations with recommended dose of fertilizers. Among the different combinations of
nanofertilizers with recommended dose of fertilizers the treatment T11 [50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc +
2 sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) mixed with IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)] showed significant effect on
the growth and yield parameters with maximum yield of 58.90 q/ha and highest B:C of 2.99.
Whereas, treatment T10 [50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) mixed with
nano Zn (2 ml/l) and IFFCO nano Cu (2ml/l)] was found superior with regard to management of
Turcicum leaf blight disease with minimum of 18.20 per cent severity.

Keywords: IFFCO nanofertilizers; growth and yield parameters; maize; turcicum leaf blight.

1. INTRODUCTION nitrogen which is inaccessible to plants and

ammonium ion and is released into the soil. It
Maize is botanically known as Zea mays, belong also enhanced the fertility of the soil.
to graminae family. It ranks 3rd among the
cereals in India after wheat and rice. The term Sustainable agriculture with a high productivity is
corn refers as “to sustain life” that provides crucial to alleviate the perils of hunger and
nutrients for human and animals worldwide [1]. It increase food security. Food production and
is cultivated throughout the year in all the distribution are under an increased and
seasons and grown around the globe. The continuous stress at a global scale due to climate
nutritional value of maize is high as it contains change, an increased human population,
72% starch, 10% protein, 8.5% fibre, 4.8% oil, decreased fertile lands and freshwater
3.0% sugar and 1.7% ash [2]. Comparatively resources. This challenge could be addressed
maize gives more yield than the other cereals with technological advancements coupled with
such as rice, wheat etc., hence it is known as the significant modifications to existing global food
“Queen of Cereals”. It is an important staple food production systems [4]. Currently, modern
and also used as a fodder crop in India. Starch, agriculture is heavily supported by the use of
cooking oil and gluten are also extracted from high rates of agrochemicals. Synthetic chemical
maize. The starch in maize can be hydrolysed fertilizers are used for the optimal growth and
and enzymatically treated to produce syrups, productivity of crops, but they are not successful
particularly high fructose corn syrup, a sweetener to enhance plant nutrient use efficiency (NUE)
and also as fermented and distilled to produce and crop productivity [5]. The NUE values of the
grain alcohol. Grain alcohol from maize is three most basic macronutrients i.e., nitrogen,
traditionally the source of Bourbon whiskey [3]. phosphorus and potassium are low at 30–35%,
18–20% and 35–40%, respectively [6], which
Maize is an exhaustible crop that demands high shows that more than half of the broadcasted
nutrition for their growth and development. The fertilizers in the fields are lost and do not reach
productivity of the crop depends on nutrient their targeted sites due to different factors such
management system. Inorganic fertilizers are as photolysis, hydrolysis, leaching and microbial
most widely used all over the world as it gives immobilization and degradation.
higher yield and the end result is also much
appreciable. Efficient use of nitrogen is important Nanoscience and Nanotechnology represent a
for maize production as it increases the yield and new frontier for the research community.
maximize economic return and minimize NO3 Nanofertilizer is working with the smallest
leaching to ground [3]. An organic fertilizer such possible particles which elevate hopes for
as poultry manure, FYM and vermicompost are improving agricultural productivity through
free from synthetic compounds and chemicals. encountering problems unsolved conventionally.
The best source of nutrients can be received Nanotechnology has its goal in realization of
from the organic manure. It is not harmful to the novel materials and devices with features on the
environment. Biofertilizers are also a good nanoscale, drawing from fields such as colloidal
source of nutrients as it binds the atmospheric science, device physics and supramolecular

20
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
chemistry. In the management aspects, efforts treatment and the dosage of the chemicals were
are made to increase the efficiency of applied followed as per the protocol. First foliar spray of
fertilizer with the help of nano clays and zeolites recommended nano-particles were given as per
and restoration of soil fertility by releasing fixed the respective treatments at 30 days after sowing
nutrients. It has found potential applications in and the second spray was given after initiation of
controlling nutrient release and availability, the tassel.
characterization of soil minerals, weathering of
soil minerals and development, nature of soil The observations on different growth parameters
rhizosphere and nutrient ion transport in soil such as height of the crop, leaf area and stem
plant system. girth were taken seven days after second spray,
whereas yield parameters such as weight of the
Direct application of fertilizers to the soil will cob, 100 kernel weight and kernel yield were
results in loss of nutrients in different ways such recorded after the harvest and the data was
as photolysis, hydrolysis, leaching and analyzed statistically by using randamized block
degradation. Hence the applied fertilizer may not design (RBD design). The severity of Turcicum
able to reach the targeted sites in the plant leaf blight in maize was recorded in all the
system and unable to enhance the optimal treatments seven days after the second spray
growth and productivity of crops. Hence an and the per cent disease severity was recorded
attempt was made to increase the efficiency of as per disease index by following 1 – 5 disease
applied fertilizer in the form of nanofertilizer scale [7] on the leaves as mentioned below
through foliar spray to the crop. (Table 1).

Therefore in the present investigation, the role of The data were computed to per cent
different nanofertilizers such as IFFCO nano N, disease index (PDI) using the following formula
IFFCO nano Cu, IFFCO nano Zn and IFFCO [8]
sagarika on the yield and yield components as
Sum of numerical ratings 100
well as in managing the Turcicum leaf blight of PDI
Total number of leaves observed Maximum grade
maize were studied.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The field experiment was carried out in the The experiment was laid out during Kharif, 2019
experimental block of Main Agricultural Research and Kharif, 2020 at Main Agricultural Research
Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Station, UAS, Raichur in order to assess the role
Raichur during Kharif seasons of 2019 and 2020. of IFFCO nanofertilizers on the growth, yield and
The trial was laid out in randomized complete yield attributes of maize as well as influence on
block design with 11 treatments replicated thrice the management of Turcicum leaf blight disease.
by using the popular hybrid N-6240 and The two seasons result has shown the similar
individual treatments were laid out with the plot inclination by all the treatments of IFFCO
size of 4 m X 5 m. The main field was prepared nanofertilizers and its different combinations with
by opening ridges and furrows with 60 cm recommended dose of fertilizers. The pooled
spacing and seeds were dibbled in the ridges result of the two seasons of field experiment has
with 20 cm between the plants. The details of the been presented in Table 2 and Fig. 2.
Table 1. Scale used to assess the severity of Turcicum leaf blight of maize
Disease scale Symptom descriptions Disease reaction
1 Very slight to slight infection, one or two to few scattered Highly Resistance
lesions on lower leaves (HR)
2 Light infection, moderate number of lesions on lower Resistance (R)
leaves only
3 Moderate infection, abundant lesions on lower leaves, few Moderately
on middle leaves Resistance (MR)
4 Heavy infection, lesions are abundant on lower and Susceptible (S)
middle leaves, extending to upper leaves
5 Very heavy infection, lesions abundant on almost all Highly Susceptible
leaves, plants prematurely dry or killed by the disease (HS)

21
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
Table 2. Effect of nanoparticles on growth, yield parameters and Turcicum leaf blight disease of maize (Pooled data of 2019and 2020)

Tr. Treatments detail Crop Leaf Girth of Weight of Weight Yield/plot Yield Severity of BC
No. height area stem 100 kernel of cob (kg) (q/ha) Turcicum leaf Ratio
(cm) (cm2) (cm) (g) (g) blight (%)
T1 Control (No nitrogen and zinc, 180.67 484.75 4.83 28.12 142.42 6.92 34.58 25.07 1.97
100% P & K fertilizers) (30.04)
T2 T1 + 2 sprays of nanonitrogen 211.00 634.25 5.83 31.38 144.96 7.65 38.27 41.50 2.04
(4ml/l) (40.11)
T3 T1 + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N 2X 213.00 666.62 5.90 32.84 147.40 7.63 38.15 43.57 1.91
(8ml/l) (41.30)
T4 T1 + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano Zn 186.33 490.04 4.97 29.50 143.83 7.35 36.75 24.17 1.96
(2ml/l) (29.45)
T5 T1 + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N 210.67 629.77 6.03 32.97 146.43 7.74 38.68 41.17 2.00
(4ml/l) mixed with IFFCO nano Zn (39.91)
(2 ml/l)
T6 RDF (100% NPK) + 100% zinc 207.00 616.57 5.97 34.91 164.52 9.48 47.40 35.10 (36.33) 2.55
T7 50% N, 100% PK + 2 sprays of 215.00 662.32 6.10 36.43 169.98 9.87 49.37 39.83 2.59
IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) (39.13)
T8 RDF (100% NPK) + 2 sprays of 207.67 623.24 5.93 35.21 164.24 9.77 48.85 32.80 2.60
IFFCO nano Zn (2ml/l) (34.94)
T9 50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 214.33 665.88 6.23 36.82 168.74 10.25 51.25 37.83 2.60
sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) (37.96)
mixed with IFFCO nano Zn(2 ml/l)
T10 50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 217.33 742.20 6.40 39.18 176.06 10.58 52.90 18.20 2.61
sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) (25.25)
mixed with IFFCO nano Zn (2 ml/l)
and IFFCO nano Cu (2ml/l)
T11 50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 226.00 801.16 6.97 40.71 182.68 11.78 58.90 38.60 2.99
sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) (38.41)
mixed with IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)
S. Em. ± 5.44 46.95 0.4 0.89 4.84 0.58 2.91 0.77
C. D. at 5% 16.05 138.49 1.19 2.65 14.27 1.72 8.58 2.28
*Figures in the parenthesis are Arcsine transformed values.

22
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
900
Crop  height (cm) Leaf area (cm2) Girth of stem (cm)
800

700
Growth Parameters

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11
Treatment Details

Fig. 1. Effect of IFFCO nanofertilizers and straight fertilizers on the growth parameters of maize

Fig. 2. Effect of IFFCO nanofertilizers and straight fertilizers on the yield and yield attributes of
maize

23
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
3.1 Growth Parameters remaining treatments (T7, T8, T6, T5, T2, T3 and T4)
and the control (T1 – 34.58 q/ha).
The results showed that among all the
treatments the maximum height of the maize was 3.3 B:C Ratio
recorded under treatment T11 [50% N, 100% PK,
0% Zinc + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) Among the 11 treatments, the maximum B:C
mixed with IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)] was 226 cm ratio was recorded in treatment T11 [50% N,
which was on par with T10, T7, T9, T3, T2 and T5 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N
and T11 treatment was significantly superior over (4ml/l) mixed with IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)]
rest treatments (T8 and T4) and the control (T1 – treatment with 2.99 which was followed by T10
180.67 cm). (2.61) and T9, T10 (2.60). The least BC ratio was
recorded by T3 [(No nitrogen and zinc, 100% P &
The maximum leaf area was recorded under T11 K fertilizers) + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N - 2X
[50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 sprays of IFFCO (8ml/l)] with 1.91 whereas T1 [control- (No
nano N (4ml/l) mixed with IFFCO Sagarika (2 nitrogen and zinc, 100% P & K fertilizers)] has
ml/l)] was 801.16 cm2. The T11 was on par with recorded BC ratio of 1.97 (Fig. 3).
T10, T3 and T9 and significantly superior over the
remaining treatments (T2, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8) 3.4 Turcicum leaf blight disease of maize
and the control (T1 – 484.75 cm2).
The effect of IFFCO nanoparticles was also
The results of the experiment demonstrated that, assessed on the severity of Turcicum leaf blight
the maximum girth of the stem was recorded by disease of maize (Table 2, Fig. 3, Plate 2).
treatment T11 [50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 Among all the treatments, the least mean percent
sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) mixed with disease severity was noticed in T10 [50% N,
IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)] with 6.97 cm and all the 100% P and K, 0% Zinc + 2 sprays of IFFCO
treatments (T10, T9, T7, T5, T6, T8,T3 and T2) were nano N (4ml/l) mixed with IFFCO nano Zn (2 ml/l)
on par with each other and T11 was significantly and IFFCO nano Cu (2ml/l)] was 18.20 and was
superior over the T10 and the control (T1 – 4.83 significantly lower than other treatments. The
cm). next best treatment was T4 [No nitrogen and
zinc, 100% P and K fertilizers + 2 sprays of
3.2 Yield Parameters IFFCO nano Zn (2ml/l)] with 24.17% Turcicum
leaf blight. However the treatment, T11 which was
The outcome of the experiment demonstrated recorded maximum growth and yield parameters
that, among all the treatments the maximum with maximum BC ratio has recorded 38.60%
weight of the 100 kernel was recorded under Turcicum leaf blight.
treatment T11 [50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2
sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) mixed with 3.5 Chemical Properties of Soil
IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)] was 40.71 g which was
at par with T10 whereas significantly superior over The chemical properties of the soil before start
rest of the treatments (T9, T7, T8, T6, T5, T3, and of the experiment and after the harvest of the
T4) and the control (T1 –28.12 cm). crop are presented in Table 3. The results
revealed that there was slight increase in the
The maximum weight of the cob was recorded soil chemical properties after the harvest of the
under treatment T11 [50% N, 100% PK, 0% Zinc crop. The soil pH was slightly decreased from
+ 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N (4ml/l) mixed with 8.12 to 8.05 and slight increase in EC, per cent
IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)] was 182.68 g and the organic Carbon, available N, P, K, Zn and Fe
treatments T10, T3 and T9 were at par with T11 were slightly increased (0.83 from 0.32, 0.37
and significantly superior over remaining from 0.31, 122.4 kg from 118.5 kg N, 22.1 kg
treatments (T6, T8, T3, T5, T2, and T4) and the from 12.4 kg P, 774.3 kg from 683.1 kg K, 0.88
control (T1 – 142.42 g). ppm from 0.81 ppm Zn and 1.31 ppm to 1.24
ppm Fe, respectively).
The maximum yield was recorded for T11 [50% N,
100% PK, 0% Zinc + 2 sprays of IFFCO nano N There was clear evidence that nitrogen nutrition
(4ml/l) mixed with IFFCO Sagarika (2 ml/l)] with was a major component to maize production.
58.90 q/ha and the treatments T10 and T9 (52.90 Application of nitrogen fertilization produced the
and 51.25 q/ha) were at par with treatment T11 highest yield irrespective of the rate. The results
where as T11 was found superior over the of the present investigation are supported by

24
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
Adeboye et al. [9] who reported 90 kg N ha-1 to therefore might affect the plant recover and
be optimum for maize in Minna and an productivity.
increased grain yield of maize with nitrogen
application [10]. The applied N has been found The application of zinc fertilizer judiciously has
as a key input for achieving the highest yield of been reported to increase crop production as
maize in the Savanna agroecological zones well as enrich the zinc content in plant organs
[11]. including grains [18]. The soil application of zinc
resulted in an increase in the grain weight of
The positive effect of IFFCO nano Cu found in maize [19,20] and the increased maize yield
enhancing plant biomass in maize and also was attributed to the foliar application of zinc
reduces the severity of Turcicum leaf blight. [21]. An increase in the maize grain yield due to
-1
These results were supported by previous the application of 5 kg zinc ha to the soil was
studies that copper plays an important role in also observed [22].
plant growth, development and plant
productivity as well as very effective in reducing The different fungicides including copper based
the Turcicum leaf blight disease [12,13,14]. The fungicides were tried under in vitro and in vivo
higher plant biomass found in nanocopper [23]. Among the different fungicides copper oxy
applied plants indicated the reduction of drought chloride was found effective in inhibiting the
effect on maize, which was associated with the mycelial growth of Helminthosporium maydis
higher water status of leaf in nano-Cuo group under in vitro as well as effective in managing
[15]. The higher leaf water status of nano-Cuo the leaf blight disease of maize under field
priming plants could result in maintaining of condition.
photosynthesis under drought [16,17],

Table 3. Estimation of chemico-nutritional properties of soil

Characters pH E.C. Organic Av. N Av. P Av. K Av. Zn Av. Fe

(dS/m) Carbon (%) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (ppm) (ppm)
Before Sowing 8.12 0.32 0.31 118.5 12.4 683.1 0.81 1.24
After Harvesting 8.05 0.83 0.37 122.4 22.1 774.3 0.88 1.31

Fig. 3. Effect of IFFCO nanofertilizers and straight fertilizers on the severity of Turcicum leaf
blight and economics of maize

25
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

A: T1-(No nitrogen and zinc, B:T5-RDF (100% NPK & 100% Zn) C: T6- (50 % N, 100 % PK),
100% P & K fertilizers) 2 sprays of nano-nitrogen

Plate 1. The different sizes of the cobs noticed in different treatments

A. T4: T1, 2 sprays of nano-co B: T6- (50 % N, 100 % PK), 2 sprays of nano-nitrogen

Plate 2. The effect of IFFCO nano-particles on Turcicum leaf blight disease of

maize in different treatments:

4. CONCLUSION 100 kg of urea, hence the use of nanofertilizer

will reduces the economic burden on the
Application of IFFCO nanofertilizers (IFFCO government investment for the production of
nano N, IFFCO nano Cu, IFFCO nano Zn) and direct fertilizers, enhances the socio-economic
IFFCO sagarika through foliar spray as an status of the farming community by reducing the
alternative to soil application of fertilizers in cost of production.
combination with synthetic fertilizers through soil
application for maize was very effective in DISCLAIMER
enhancing the yield and yield attributing
parameters as well as recorded maximum BC The products used for this research are
ratio. The soil chemical properties were also commonly and predominantly use products in
slightly increased in the soil. This study clearly our area of research and country. There is
suggests that, soil application of fertilizer can be absolutely no conflict of interest between the
replaced by nanofertilizer through foliar authors and producers of the products because
application which enhanced the growth and yield we do not intend to use these products as
attributes of the crop. In addition the foliar an avenue for any litigation but for the
application of nanofertilizer will also diminish the advancement of knowledge. Also, the research
soil pollution and enhances soil fertility by was not funded by the producing company
improving the physical and chemical properties rather it was funded by personal efforts of the
of the soil. One litre IFFCO Nano N will replaces authors.

26
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
COMPETING INTERESTS 10. Lawal BA, Adeboye MKA, Usman A,
Afolabi SG, Adekanmbi AA. Rotation effect
Authors have declared that no competing of Aeschynomene histrix on soil carbon
interests exist. and nitrogen and maize grain yield at
Minna in the southern Guinea Savanna of
REFERENCES Nigeria. J Agr Agricultural Technol.
2015;6(1):1-9.
1. Elamin AE, Elagib MA. Comparative study 11. Sajedi NA, Ardakani MR, Naderi A, Madani
of organic and inorganic fertilizers on H, Mashhadi A, Boojar M. Response of
forage corn (Zea mays L.) grown on two maize to nutrients foliar application under
soil types. Quatar Univ Sci J. 2001;21:47- water deficit stress condition. American J.
51. Agr Biol Sci. 2009;4(3):242-248.
2. Hokmalipour S, Shiri-e-Janagard M, 12. Karamanos RE, Pomarenski Q, Goh TB,
Hamele Darbandi M, Peyghami-e- Flore NA. The effect of foliar copper
Ashenaee F, Hasanzadeh M, Naser Seiedi application on grain yield and quality of
M, Shabani R. Comparison of agronomical wheat. Canadian J Plant Sci. 2004;84:47-
nitrogen use efficiency in three cultivars of 56.
corn as affected by nitrogen fertilizer Available: https://doi.org
levels. World Appld Sci J. 2010;8(10): 13. Ngo BQ, Dao TT, Nguyen CH, Tran XT,
1168-1174. Nguyen TV, Khuu TD, Huynh TH. Effects
3. Mohammadi GR, Ghobadi ME, Sheikheh- of nanocrystalline powders (Fe, Co and
Poor S. Phosphate biofertilizer, row Cu) on the germination, growth, crop yield
spacing and plant density effects on corn and product quality of soybean
(Zea mays L.) yield and weed growth. (Vietnamese species DT-51). Adv. Natural
American J Plant Sci. 2012;3:425-429. Sci. Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2013;5:015016.
4. Achiri D, Mbaatoh M, Njualem D. Available: https://iopscience.iop.org
Agronomic and yield parameters of 14. Tamez C, Morelius EW, Hernandez-
CHC202 maize (Zea mays L.) variety Viezcas JA, Peralta-Videa JR, Gardea-
infuenced by diferent doses of chemical Torresdey J. Biochemical and
fertilizer (NPK) in Bali Nyonga, North West physiological effects of copper
Region Cameroon. Asian J Soil Sci Plant compounds/nanoparticles on sugarcane
Nutrition. 2017;2(4):1–9. (Saccharum officinarum). Sci Total
5. Alemayehu Y, Shewarega M. Growth and Environ. 2019;649:554-562.
yield responses of maize (Zea mays L.) to 15. Nguyen DV, Nguyen HM, Le NT, Nguyen
different nitrogen rates under rain-fed KH, Le HM, Nguyen AT, Dinh NT, Hoang
condition in Dilla Area, Southern Ethiopia. SA, Ha CV. Copper nanoparticle
J Natural Sci Res. 2015;5(23). application enhances plant growth and
6. Zhang X, Wang Q, Xu J. In situ nitrogen grain yield in maize under drought stress
mineralization, nitrifcation and ammonia conditions; 2019.
volatilization in maize field fertilized with Available:https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.2
urea in Huanghuaihai region of Northern 4.963132
China. PLoS One. 2015;10(1). 16. Regier N, Cosio C, Moos VN, Slaveykova
7. Anonymous, Inoculation methods and VI. Effects of copper-oxide nanoparticles,
disease rating scales for maize diseases, dissolved copper and ultraviolet radiation
Editors: Meena Shekhar & Sangit on copper bioaccumulation,
Kumar, Directorate of maize research; photosynthesis and oxidative stress in the
2012. aquatic macrophyte Elodea nuttallii.
8. Wheeler BEJ. An introduction to plant Chemosphere. 2015;128:56-61.
diseases. John Wiley and Sons, London; 17. Utsumi Y, Utsumi C, Tanaka M, Ha
1969. CV, Takahashi S, Matsui A. Acetic acid
9. Adeboye MKA, Osunde AO, Tsado PA, treatment enhances drought avoidance in
Odofin JA, Bala A, Adeyemi RA. Response cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). Front
of maize grain yields to rates and split Plant Sci. 2019;10:521.
application of nitrogen and NPK Available:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.
combinations in the southern Guinea 00521
Savanna of Nigeria. J Agr Agricultural 18. Sudhalakshini C, Krishnasamy R,
Technol. 2009;2(1):108-118. Rajarajan R. Influence of zinc deficiency in

27
 Ajithkumar et al.; IJPSS, 33(16): 19-28, 2021; Article no.IJPSS.69430

 
shoot / root dry weight ratio of rice 21. Esmaeili M, Ayoub H, Gholipour M.
genotypes. Res J Agr Biol Sci. Response of maize to foliar application of
2007;3:295-298. zinc and azotobacter inoculation under
19. Afolabi SG, Adeboye MKA, Lawal BA, different levels of urea fertilizer. J Agr Sci.
Daniya E, Chinma CE. Effects of methods 2016;61(2):151-162.
and time of application of zinc on maize 22. Abunyewa AA, Mercer-Quarshie H.
(Zea mays L.) productivity in the Southern Response of maize to magnesium and
Guinea Savanna of Nigeria. Nigerian J Soil zinc application in the semi-arid zone of
Environ Res. 2016;14:92-99. West Africa. Asian J Plant Sci. 2004;3:1-5.
20. Hossain MA, Jahiruddin M, Islam MR, 23. Kumar C, Akhtar NS, Chand P, Choudhary
Mian MH. The requirement of zinc for CS. Efficacy of newer fungicides against
improvement of crop yield and mineral maydis leaf blight disease of maize caused
nutrition in the maize-mungbean- by Helminthosporium maydis. J
rice system. Plant and Soil. 2008;306:13- Pharmacognosy Phytochem. 2019;8(6):
22. 1553-1559.
________________________________________________________________________________
© 2021 Ajithkumar et al.; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
http://www.sdiarticle4.com/review-history/69430

28