Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Research (IJAAR)

ISSN: 2223-7054 (Print) 2225-3610 (Online)
http://www.innspub.net
Vol. 18, No. 3, p. 1-10, 2021
RESEARCH PAPER OPEN ACCESS

Effect of bio and mineral nitrogen fertilization on growth and

quality of some sugar beet cultivars
AA Kandil*, AEM Sharief, AMA Abdullah

Agronomy Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Mansoura University, Egypt

Article published on March 23, 2021

Key words: sugar beet, cultivars, varieties, biofertilization, nitrogen fertilizer levels, growth, root quality.

Abstract

Two field experiments were carried out at a private farm in Sharkia Governorate, Egypt, during 2017/2018 and
2018/2019 seasons to study the effect of bio and mineral nitrogen fertilization on growth and quality of some
sugar beet cultivars. Each field experiment was carried out in split split-plot design with four replicates. The
main-plots were occupied with cultivars (Hossam, Asus poly and Glorious). The sub-plots were allocated with
biofertilization treatments i.e. treated Phosphorin, Cerealine and Potassiumag (450 g/fed of each) and control
treatment. The sub sub-plots were devoted with nitrogen levels (70, 90 and 110kg N/fed). The results showed that
Hossam cultivar significantly surpassed other cultivars in root fresh weight at 120 and 150 DFS, CGR, RGR and
quality parameters. However, Asus poly cultivar registered the highest values of foliage fresh weight and LAI at
120 and 150 DFS. Treated soil with Cerealine produced the highest values of all studied growth attributes and
quality characters. Fertilizing with 110kg N/fed resulted in the highest values of growth characters, followed by
90kg/fed and lastly 70kg N/fed. Whereas, fertilizing 90kg N/fed produced the best results of quality characters. It
can be concluded that in order to maintain high growth and root quality of sugar beet at the same time reduce
production costs and environmental pollution, it can be recommended that fertilizing Hossam cultivar with 90kg
N/fed and treating soil with Cerealine under the environmental conditions similar to study region.
* Corresponding Author: AA Kandil  [email protected]

Kandil et al. Page 1

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

Introduction cultivars (Heba, Sirana and Peti) in most studied

Sugar beet (Beta valgaris var. saccharifera L.) is one characters, but cultivar Heba surpassed the other two
of main sugar crops in Egypt as well as many cultivars in TSS, sucrose and purity percentages.
countries all over the world beside sugar cane
(Sacchurum officinarum L.). Recently, sugar beet Biological nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium
crop has an important position in Egyptian crop fixation of sugar beet with non-symbiotic fixers play
rotation as winter crop not only in the fertile soils, but an important role in increasing growth and yield as
also in poor, saline alkaline and calcareous soils. well as decreasing chemical nitrogen fertilizer
Thus, in Egypt, sugar beet has becomes an important requirements and consequently minimizing
crop for sugar production, hence the total cultivated environmental pollution by mineral fertilizers and to
area in 2018 season reached about 521427 faddan and save its costs. Abdelaal and Tawfik (2015) showed
the total production exceeded 11.223 million ton roots that application the mixture of Microbeen +
with an average of 21.523t/fed (FAO, 2020). The total Rhizobacterin + Phosphorien produced the highest
amount of sugar produced is not adequate enough to values of growth and quality parameters as compared
our consumption. So, increasing the cultivated area with using each bio-fertilizer alone. It was followed by
and sugar production per unit area is considered one application the mixture of Microbeen + Rhizobacterin
of the important national targets to minimize the gap then application the mixture of Rhizobacterin +
between sugar consumption and production. Phosphorien. Marajan et al. (2017) revealed that
Developing high yielding cultivars and improving inoculation with Azotobacter spp. and Mycorrhizal
agricultural practices such as; bio and mineral fungi in two seasons had effect on sugar beet shoot
nitrogen fertilization are essential to enhance sugar and root fresh weight without significant differences
beet growth and quality. between the treatments. Zaki et al. (2018) revealed
that inoculation sugar beet seeds with ntrobin
Chosen the high yielding ability cultivars undoubtedly resulted the highest values of LAI and CGR in the first
is very important to raise sugar beet growth per unit season. Inoculation with phosphorin + ntrobin
area and quality parameters. Aly et al. (2015) found obtained the highest NAR in the first season.
that sugar beet cultivars (Top, Sultan and Kawemira) Inoculation with phosphorin obtained the highest
significantly differed in growth characters, sucrose%, RGR in the first season. Mohamed and El-Sebai
quality index%. Ahmed et al. (2017) showed that (2019) stated that bacteria treatments inoculation i.e.
sugar beet cultivars differed significantly in sucrose, Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria and Fungi (control
purity, impurities percentages. El-Emary (2017) untreated, PSB, PSF and PSB+PSF) improved quality
indicated that root and leaves fresh weight at growth parameters of sugar beet when compared with the
stages showed highest values with Charlston, Lamiaa, untreated controls.
Nefertitis, Salma and Beta 398 varieties. Mohamed
and El-Sebai (2019) stated that all studied cultivars Nitrogen is the most important element of those
(Sara, Dina and Oscar poly) significantly differed in supplied to sugar beet in fertilization. Application
quality traits (sugar extraction, sucrose, purity and mineral nitrogen fertilizer to the plant increase the
extractability percentages). Mohamed et al. (2019) amount of protein, protoplasm and chlorophyll
indicated that all studied cultivars i.e. Raspoly, formed, building up metabolites and activation of
Kawemira and Montibianco significantly differed in enzymes that associate with accumulation of
all quality parameters, i.e. sucrose, purity%, sugar carbohydrates, which translated from leaves to

extraction, Na, K, alpha amino N, and extractability increasing division and elongation of cells

percentages. The highest mean values of sugar beet (Marschner, 1995). So that, nitrogen causes desirable

quality were recording by Montbianco cv., except effect on sugar beet growth and quality characters. In
this concern, Hussein et al. (2016), Nemeata Alla
impurities percentages. Thalooth et al. (2019) showed
(2016), Sayed-Ahmed et al. (2016), Abido and
that significant differences among tested sugar beet

Kandil et al. Page 2

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

Ibrahim (2017), Leilah et al. (2017), Makhlouf and The sub sub-plots were devoted at random with
Abd El-All (2017), Nemeata Alla et al. (2018) and mineral nitrogen fertilizer levels (70, 90 and 110kg
Mohamed et al. (2019) concluded that increasing N/fed). Nitrogen in forms of ammonium nitrate
nitrogen mineral fertilizer levels up to 100 or 110kg (33.5% N) was applied in two equal doses, the first
N/fed significantly increased root length, root was applied after thinning sugar beet plants (30 days
diameter, top yield/fed, root yield/fed and sugar after sowing) and the second was done before the
yield/fed. Whereas, TSS, sucrose and purity third irrigation (60 day after sowing).
percentages were decreased.
Each experimental basic unit (sub sub-plot) included
Therefore, this investigation was established to five ridges, each 60cm apart and 3.5m length,

determine the effect of bio and mineral nitrogen resulted an area of 10.5m2 (1/400 fed). The preceding
summer crop was rice (Oryza sativa L.) in the first
fertilization as well as their interactions on growth
and second seasons.
and quality of some sugar beet cultivars under the
environmental conditions of Awlad-Saqr Center, Soil samples were taken at random from the
Sharkia Governorate, Egypt. experimental field area at a depth of 0-30cm from soil
surface and prepared for both mechanical and
Materials and methods chemical analyses, according to Jackson (1973). The
Two series field experiments were carried out at a results of mechanical and chemical analyses are
private farm in Al-Arab Manor, Bani-Hassan Village, presented in Table 1.
Awlad-Saqr Center, Sharkia Governorate, Egypt,
during seasons of 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 to study Table 1. Physical and chemical soil properties of the

the response of growth and root quality of some sugar experimental site during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019

beet cultivars to bio and mineral fertilization. seasons.

First Second
Each field experiment was carried out in split split- Soil analysis season season
2017/2018 2018/2019
plot design with four replicates. The main-plots were A: Mechanical analysis:
occupied with three imported sugar beet cultivars Sand (%) 23.81 23.51
Silt (%) 29.74 29.95
(Hossam, Asus poly and Glorious). The three studied Clay (%) 46.45 46.54
cultivars are multigerm cultivars, and annually Texture Clay Clay
B: Chemical analysis
imported from Germany (Hossam and Glorious) and Soil reaction pH 7.86 7.95
Holland (Asus poly) by Sugar Crop Research EC ds m-2 1.40 1.35
Organic matter (%) 1.09 1.12
Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, Egypt. Available N (ppm) 46.63 47.8
Available P (ppm) 1.36 1.15
Exchangeable K (ppm) 160.12 151.26
The sub-plots were allocated with biofertilization
treatments i.e. treated soil with Phosphorin, Cerealine Sugar beet seeds (balls) were hand sown on the first
and Potassiumag at the rate of 450g/fed of each them week of October at the rate of 3-5 balls/hill using dry
in addition without biofertilization (control treatment). sowing method on one side of the ridge in hills 20cm
Phosphorin, Cerealine and Potassiumag as commercial apart in both seasons. The plots were irrigated
products were produced by Biofertilizer Unit, immediately after sowing directly. Plants were
thinned at the age of 30 days from planting to obtain
Agriculture Research Center (ARC), Giza, Egypt, which
one plant/hill (35000 plants/fed). Potassium
included free-living bacteria able to fix phosphorus,
sulphate (48% K2O) at the rate of 50kg/fed was
atmospheric nitrogen and potassium, respectively in
applied before the third irrigation. Other cultural
the rhizosphere of soil. The biofertilizer treatments
practices for growing sugar beet were performed as
were done before first irrigation directly by mixing the
recommendations of Ministry of Agriculture, except
recommended dose of each biofertilizer with fine clay the factors understudy. Sugar beet plants harvesting
as side-dress near each hill. at 210 days after planting in both seasons.

Kandil et al. Page 3

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

Studied characters outer ridges of each sub sub-plot to determine quality

A. Growth attributes characters as follows:
Two samples were taken during the growth period 1. Total soluble solids percentages (TSS%). It was
(120 and 150 days from sowing), i.e. five guarded measured in juice of fresh roots by using Hand
plants were chosen at random from outer ridges of Refractometer.
each sub sub-plot. Each sample was separated into
2. Sucrose percentage (%). It was determined
foliages and roots, then the roots and foliages were
Polarimetrically on lead acetate extract of fresh
cut to small pieces. The following growth attributes
macerated roots according to the method of
was determined:
Carruthers and Old Field (1960).
1. Root fresh weight (g/plant).
2. Foliage fresh weight (g/plant). 3. Apparent purity percentage (%). It was determined

3. Leaf area index (LAI). Leaf area measurement as a ratio between sucrose% and TSS% of roots as the

determined by the disk method using 10 disks of method outlined by Carruthers and Old Field (1960).

1.0cm diameter according to Watson (1958) and then

following equation was used: All obtained data were statistically analyzed according
to the technique of analysis of variance (ANOVA) for
split split-plot design as published by Gomez and
Leaves area per plant (cm2)
LAI = Plant ground area (cm2) Gomez (1984). Least significant of difference (LSD)
method was used to test the differences among

4. Crop growth rate (CGR) in g/day: Determined treatment means at 5% level of probability as

according to Radford`s (1967), where: W1 and W2 described by Snedecor and Cochran (1980). All
statistical analyses were performed using analysis of
refer to dry weight of plant at sampling time T1 (120
variance technique (ANOVA) by means of "MSTAT-
DFS) and T2 (150 DFS), respectively.
C"computer software package.

W2-W1
CGR = T -T Results and discussion
2 1
Cultivars performance
To determine root and foliage dry weight, all plant As shown from the obtained data in Tables 2 and 3 in
fractions were air-dried, then oven dried at 70 ºC till this study, there were significant differences among

constant weight obtained. studied sugar beet cultivars (Hossam, Asus poly and
Glorious) in root fresh weight/plant at 120 and 150
days from sowing (DFS), leaf area index (LAI) at 120
5. Relative growth rate (RGR) in g/g/day: Determined
and 150 (DFS), crop growth rate (CGR), relative
according to Watson (1958).
growth rate (RGR) and net assimilation rate (NAR) at
growth stages during the two growing seasons.
loge W2 - loge W1
RGR = T2 - T1 Whereas, foliage fresh weight/plant at 120 and 150
(DFS), total soluble solids (TSS), sucrose and
6. Net assimilation rate (NAR) in g/cm2/day: apparent purity percentages of fresh juice of roots at
Determined according to Radford`s (1967), where: W1, harvest did not significantly differed due to the
A1 and W2, A2, respectively refer to dry weight and leaf studied cultivars in both seasons. Hossam cultivar
area of plant at sampling time T1 and T2, respectively. significantly surpassed other studied cultivars (Asus
(W2 - W1) (loge A2 - loge A1) poly and Glorious) in root fresh weight/plant at 120
NAR = (T2 - T1) (A2 - A1) and 150 DFS, crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth
rate (RGR) and net assimilation rate (NAR) at growth
B. Quality characters stages, total soluble solids (TSS), sucrose and
At maturity (after approximately 210 days from apparent purity percentages of fresh juice of roots at
planting) five plants were chosen at random from the harvest, which recorded the highest values of these

Kandil et al. Page 4

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

characters in the two growing seasons. However, Asus the soil pH especially in the rhizosphere which led to
poly cultivar registered the highest values of foliage increase the availability of most essential macro and
fresh weight/plant at 120 and 150 (DFS) and leaf area micro-nutrients, consequently increase growth and
index (LAI) at 120 and 150 (DFS) in both seasons. root quality. These findings were proportionately with
Whereas, Glorious cultivar recorded the lowest values those reported by Abdelaal and Tawfik (2015),
of root and foliage fresh weights/plant at 120 and 150 Marajan et al. (2017), Zaki et al. (2018) and
(DFS), leaf area index (LAI) at 120 and 150 (DFS), crop Mohamed and El-Sebai (2019).
growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate (RGR) and net
assimilation rate (NAR) at growth stages, total soluble
Effect of nitrogen fertilizer levels
solids (TSS), sucrose and apparent purity percentages of
With indication to the effect of nitrogen fertilizer
fresh juice of roots at harvest in both seasons of this
levels on growth attributes (root and foliage fresh
study. The variation among sugar beet cultivars in
weights/plant at 120 and 150 (DFS), leaf area index
growth and quality characters may be due to the
(LAI) at 120 and 150 (DFS), crop growth rate (CGR),
genetical variation among them. These results are in
relative growth rate (RGR) and net assimilation rate
good harmony with those obtained by Ahmed et al.
(2017), El-Emary (2017), Mohamed and El-Sebai (2019), (NAR) at growth stages) and quality characters (total

Mohamed et al. (2019) and Thalooth et al. (2019). soluble solids (TSS), sucrose and apparent purity
percentages of fresh juice of roots at harvest), it is
Effect of biofertilization treatments apparent from obtained results that each increase in
Regarding the effect of biofertilization treatments i.e. nitrogen fertilizer levels from 70 to 90 and 110kg
treated soil with Phosphorin (450 g/fed), Cerealine N/fed was accompanied with significant effect in all
(450 g/fed) and Potassiumag (450 g/fed) in addition studied characters in both seasons (Tables 2 and 3).
without biofertilization (control treatment) on root
Fertilizing sugar beet with 110kg N/fed surpassed the
and foliage fresh weights/plant at 120 and 150 (DFS),
other two nitrogen levels and resulted in the highest
leaf area index (LAI) at 120 and 150 (DFS), crop
values of root and foliage fresh weights/plant at 120
growth rate (CGR) and net assimilation rate (NAR) at
and 150 (DFS), leaf area index (LAI) at 120 and 150
growth stages, total soluble solids (TSS), sucrose and
(DFS), crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate
apparent purity percentages of fresh juice of roots at
(RGR) and net assimilation rate (NAR) at growth
harvest, it was significant in the two seasons of study
stages, followed by fertilizing with 90kg/fed and lastly
(Tables 2 and 3). On the other hand, relative growth
70kg N/fed, which recorded the lowest means of these
rate (RGR) at growth stages insignificantly affected by
characters in the two growing seasons.
studied biofertilization treatments in the two seasons.
All studied growth attributes and quality characters
Whereas, fertilizing sugar beet with 90kg N/fed
were markedly increased and achieved maximum
produced the highest percentages of total soluble
values in treatment of treated soil with Cerealine
solids (TSS), sucrose and apparent purity of fresh
before first irrigation directly as compared with other
juice of roots at harvest, while the further incremental
biofertilization treatments in the first and second
level of 110kg N/fed significantly reduced these
seasons of this study. The arrangement of
quality parameters in the two growing seasons. These
biofertilization treatments after Cerealine treatment
results are attributed to the role of nitrogen in
was Potassiumag and Phosphorin treatment, then
increases the vegetative growth through enhancing
control treatment with respect their desirable effect
leaf initiation, increasing increment chlorophyll
on growth attributes, yield components, quality and
concentration in leaves and photosynthetic area per
yield characters during the two seasons. This increase
plant, which led to more photosynthesis production
in growth and quality characters by biofertilization
and therefore increasing dry matter accumulation and
treatments may be due to the role of biofertilization in
consequently raising growth and quality characters.
nitrogen fixation via free living bacteria which reduce

Kandil et al. Page 5

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

The previous results are in good agreement with Effect of interactions

those obtained by Abido and Ibrahim (2017), There are many significant interaction effects among

Leilah et al. (2017), Makhlouf and Abd El-All studied factors (cultivars, biofertilization treatments
and nitrogen fertilizer levels) on most of studied
(2017), Nemeata Alla et al. (2018) and Mohamed
growth and quality characters in both seasons as
et al. (2019).
shown in Tables 2 and 3. We present only the
significant interactions among the studied factors on
growth and quality characters in both seasons.

Table 2. Averages of root and foliage fresh weights/plant and leaf area index (LAI) of sugar beet at 120 and 150
days from sowing (DFS) as affected by cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen fertilizer levels as well as
their interaction during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons.
Characters Root fresh weight (g/plant) Foliage fresh weight (g/plant) Leaf area index (LAI)
120 DFS 150 DFS 120 DFS 150 DFS 120 DFS 150 DFS

2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018
/2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019
Treatments
A. Cultivars:
Hossam. 357.0 362.7 617.6 623.8 349.0 351.2 588.4 593.2 3.07 2.76 4.44 4.27
Asus poly. 355.5 356.1 616.0 614.5 350.8 354.3 591.5 596.7 3.51 3.14 4.67 4.58
Glorious. 349.6 355.1 609.9 613.0 345.0 349.9 577.2 582.3 2.89 2.63 4.22 4.01
LSD at 5% 6.1 6.2 8.4 9.3 NS NS NS NS 0.28 0.26 0.35 0.39
B. Biofertilization treatments:
Phosphorin. 358.6 361.1 655.3 656.4 358.3 360.9 637.4 633.1 3.39 3.06 4.66 4.50
Cerealine. 371.3 377.8 664.7 666.0 360.7 367.8 645.6 657.5 3.49 3.11 5.29 5.20
Potassiumag. 365.4 369.5 657.5 664.6 358.5 363.0 641.4 654.0 3.41 3.07 4.72 4.64
Without. 320.8 323.6 480.7 481.5 315.4 315.5 418.4 418.4 2.34 2.14 3.09 2.80
BLSD at 5% 8.2 7.1 9.5 9.0 4.8 4.2 13.2 12.9 0.25 0.22 0.44 0.42
C. Nitrogen fertilizer levels:
70kg N/fed. 334.7 338.4 545.8 556.4 318.2 321.1 521.6 521.1 2.71 2.44 3.92 3.77
90kg N/fed. 358.2 358.7 612.3 615.3 350.0 357.4 593.9 599.2 3.17 2.85 4.34 4.32
110kg N/fed. 369.1 376.9 685.5 679.8 376.6 376.9 641.6 651.9 3.59 3.24 5.07 4.77
BLSD at 5% 7.0 7.4 11.4 10.4 3.2 3.6 11.8 10.9 0.17 0.15 0.35 0.32
D. Interactions (F. test):
A ×B NS NS * * NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS
A ×C * * NS NS NS * * * NS NS NS *
B ×C NS * * * * * * * * * * *
A ×B ×C * NS NS * NS * NS * * * * NS

Root fresh weight/plant of sugar beet at 120 days N/fed and treating soil with Cerealine (Table 4).
from sowing (DFS) in 2017/2018 season and at 150
DFS in 2018/2019 season was significantly affected This treatment followed by fertilizing Hossam cultivar
by the interaction among cultivars, biofertilization plants with 110kg N/fed and treating soil with
treatments and nitrogen fertilizer levels. Potassiumag without significant differences between
them. On the other hand, the lowest values of root
From obtained results it could be observed that the
highest values of root fresh weight (395.6g/plant) at fresh weight (288.0g/plant) at 120 DFS in 2017/2018
120 DFS in 2017/2018 season and (751.0g/plant) at season and (417.3g/plant) at 150 DFS in 2018/2019
150 DFS in 2018/2019 season were obtained when season were resulted from fertilizing Glorious cultivar
mineral fertilizing Hossam cultivar plants with 110kg plants with 70kg N/fed without biofertilization.

Kandil et al. Page 6

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

Table 3. Averages of crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate (RGR), net assimilation rate (NAR) at growth
stages and total soluble solids (TSS), sucrose and apparent purity percentages of fresh juice of sugar beet roots at
harvest as affected by cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen fertilizer levels as well as their interaction
during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons.
CGR RGR NAR TSS Sucrose Apparent purity
Characters
(g/day) (g/g/day) (g/cm2/day) (%) (%) (%)
2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018
Treatments
/2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019 /2018 /2019
A. Cultivars:
Hossam. 2.439 2.358 0.061 0.061 0.874 0.811 22.00 22.00 18.13 18.38 83.12 83.80
Asus poly. 1.849 1.906 0.057 0.058 0.590 0.469 21.82 21.87 18.05 18.19 82.62 83.63
Glorious. 1.762 1.676 0.057 0.056 0.538 0.431 21.63 21.67 17.73 18.03 82.29 83.44
LSD at 5% 0.263 0.239 0.003 0.002 0.106 0.096 NS NS NS NS NS NS
B. Biofertilization treatments:
Phosphorin. 2.026 1.939 0.058 0.058 0.689 0.474 21.81 21.70 17.96 18.28 82.35 83.82
Cerealine. 2.128 2.122 0.059 0.060 0.887 0.946 22.15 22.23 18.35 18.59 85.24 85.61
Potassiumag. 2.043 1.953 0.059 0.058 0.726 0.575 22.15 21.81 18.20 18.48 83.07 84.72
Without. 1.870 1.907 0.058 0.058 0.369 0.287 21.16 21.66 17.38 17.44 80.04 80.34
BLSD at 5% 0.222 0.210 NS NS 0.126 0.112 0.51 0.46 0.58 0.56 2.49 2.62
C. Nitrogen fertilizer levels:
70kg N/fed. 1.746 1.833 0.056 0.057 0.431 0.501 21.19 21.49 17.79 18.53 84.27 84.43
90kg N/fed. 2.045 1.987 0.059 0.059 0.749 0.560 22.39 22.13 18.67 18.63 85.52 86.46
110kg N/fed. 2.258 2.120 0.060 0.060 0.822 0.651 21.88 21.92 17.45 17.44 78.23 79.98
BLSD at 5% 0.163 0.171 0.002 0.001 0.128 0.118 0.53 0.52 0.50 0.55 2.98 2.82
D. Interactions (F. test):
A ×B NS NS NS NS * * * NS NS NS NS NS
A ×C * * * * NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
B ×C * * * * NS * * * * * * *
A ×B ×C * * NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS NS NS

Table 4. Averages of root fresh weight/plant of sugar beet at 120 days from sowing (DFS) in 2017/2018 season
and at 150 DFS in 2018/2019 season as affected by the interaction among cultivars, biofertilization treatments
and nitrogen fertilizer levels.
Nitrogen fertilizer levels
Biofertilization 70kg 90kg 110kg 70kg 90kg 110kg
Cultivars
treatments N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed
120 DFS in 2017/2018 season 150 DFS in 2018/2019 season
Phosphorin 339.6 363.3 363.0 591.0 620.3 734.6
Cerealine 344.6 376.0 395.6 602.3 693.3 751.0
Hossam
Potassiumag 341.0 373.3 394.3 593.3 646.3 747.3
Without 311.0 308.3 351.6 468.3 496.6 542.0
Phosphorin 330.6 358.0 384.0 573.6 647.3 722.0
Cerealine 366.3 373.3 391.3 592.3 675.3 728.6
Asus poly
Potassiumag 349.6 367.3 387.0 588.0 672.0 734.3
Without 305.0 336.3 334.6 456.0 463.6 503.3
Phosphorin 342.0 366.0 346.0 595.0 642.3 720.0
Cerealine 351.0 380.0 391.0 604.3 689.0 724.0
Glorious
Potassiumag 348.3 360.6 375.0 595.3 677.6 723.0
Without 288.0 336.3 316.0 417.3 459.6 527.3
LSD at 5% 24.2

Foliage fresh weight/plant of sugar beet at 120 and mineral fertilizing Asus poly cultivar plants with
150 days from sowing (DFS) in 2018/2019 season was 110kg N/fed and treating soil with Cerealine (Table
significantly affected by the interaction among 5). This treatment followed by fertilizing Hossam
cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen cultivar plants with 110kg N/fed and treating soil with
fertilizer levels. From obtained results it could be Cerealine without significant differences between
observed that the highest values of foliage fresh them 150 DFS in 2018/2019 season. On the other
weight (416.3g/plant at 120 DFS and 748.6g/plant at hand, the lowest values of foliage fresh weight
150 DFS in 2018/2019 season) were obtained when (306.3g/plant at 120 DFS and 375.3g/plant at 150

Kandil et al. Page 7

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

DFS in 2018/2019 season) were resulted from From obtained results it could be observed that the
fertilizing Glorious cultivar plants with 70kg N/fed highest values of CGR (3.686 and 3.220g/day) were
without biofertilization treatment. obtained when mineral fertilizing Hossam cultivar
plants with 110kg N/fed and treating soil with
Leaf area index (LAI) of sugar beet at 120 days from Cerealine in the first and second seasons, respectively
sowing (DFS) during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 (Table 7). This treatment followed by fertilizing
seasons and at 150 DFS during 2017/2018 season was Hossam cultivar plants with 110kg N/fed and treating
significantly affected by the interaction among soil with Potassiumag without significant differences
cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen between them in both season. On the other hand, the
fertilizer levels. From obtained results it could be lowest values of CGR (0.924 and 1.446g/day) were
observed that the highest values of LAI (4.75 and 4.18 resulted from fertilizing Glorious cultivar plants with
at 120 DFS in 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons, 70kg N/fed without biofertilization treatment in the
respectively and 5.95 at 150 DFS in 2017/2018 first and second seasons, respectively.
season) were obtained when mineral fertilizing Asus
poly cultivar plants with 110kg N/fed and treating soil Total soluble solids (TSS) percentage of fresh juice of
with Cerealine (Table 6). This treatment followed by sugar beet roots at harvest during 2017/2018 season
fertilizing Asus poly cultivar plants with 110kg N/fed was significantly affected by the interaction among
and treating soil with Potassiumag without significant cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen
differences between them at 120 DFS in both seasons fertilizer levels. From obtained results it could be
and at 150 DFS in the first season. On the other hand, observed that the highest percentage of TSS (23.62%)
the lowest values of LAI (1.73 and 1.64 at 120 DFS in was obtained when mineral fertilizing Hossam
2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons, respectively and cultivar plants with 90kg N/fed and treating soil with
2.25 at 150 DFS in 2017/2018 season) were resulted Cerealine in the first season (Table 7). This treatment
from fertilizing Glorious cultivar plants with 70kg followed by fertilizing Hossam cultivar plants with
N/fed without biofertilization treatment. 90kg N/fed and treating soil with Potassiumag
without significant differences between them in the
Crop growth rate (CGR) of sugar beet plants was first season. On the other hand, the lowest percentage
significantly affected by the interaction among of TSS (19.04%) was resulted from fertilizing Glorious
cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen cultivar plants with 70kg N/fed without
fertilizer levels in both growing seasons. biofertilization treatment in the first season.

Table 5. Averages of foliage fresh weight/plant of sugar beet at 120 and 150 from sowing (DFS) as affected by the
interaction among cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen fertilizer levels during 2018/2019 season.
Nitrogen fertilizer levels
110kg 110kg
Biofertilization 70kg N/fed 90kg N/fed 70kg N/fed 90kg N/fed
Cultivars N/fed N/fed
treatments
120 DFS in 2018/2019 season 150 DFS in 2018/2019 season
Phosphorin 321.6 362.6 390.6 526.3 635.0 698.0
Cerealine 328.3 366.3 399.6 596.0 671.6 744.0
Hossam
Potassiumag 322.0 365.3 392.6 587.6 657.6 701.3
Without 307.6 316.3 326.0 416.3 428.6 456.6
Phosphorin 321.0 363.6 395.0 525.3 621.0 716.3
Cerealine 324.6 398.0 416.3 547.0 661.3 748.6
Asus poly
Potassiumag 321.0 367.3 397.0 537.3 635.6 741.0
Without 307.6 315.3 325.0 388.0 403.3 462.6
Phosphorin 331.0 359.3 387.6 546.0 668.0 676.6
Cerealine 335.0 373.6 395.3 616.6 699.0 736.3
Glorious
Potassiumag 328.0 369.0 394.0 591.6 688.3 728.0
Without 306.3 313.6 322.3 375.3 412.3 422.6
LSD at 5% 11.0 37.9

Kandil et al. Page 8

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

Table 6. Averages of leaf area index (LAI) of sugar beet at 120 days from sowing (DFS) during 2017/2018 and
2018/2019 seasons and at 150 DFS during 2017/2018 season as affected by the interaction among cultivars,
biofertilization treatments and nitrogen fertilizer levels.
Nitrogen fertilizer levels
70kg 90kg 110kg 70kg 90kg 110kg 70kg 90kg 110kg
Biofertilization
Cultivars N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed
treatments
120 DFS 150 DFS
2017/2018 season 2018/2019 season 2017/2018 season
Phosphorin 2.75 2.86 3.15 2.48 2.58 2.84 3.62 4.11 5.31
Cerealine 2.87 3.22 3.94 2.58 2.89 3.55 4.74 5.13 5.51
Hossam
Potassiumag 2.85 3.16 3.83 2.56 2.84 3.46 4.29 4.44 5.37
Without 2.05 2.33 2.62 1.84 2.10 2.36 3.01 3.02 3.56
Phosphorin 2.80 3.47 3.30 2.53 3.12 2.98 4.16 4.58 5.49
Cerealine 3.56 4.25 4.75 3.21 3.83 4.18 4.73 6.01 5.95
Asus poly
Potassiumag 3.25 4.15 4.65 2.62 3.75 4.29 4.33 4.89 5.59
Without 2.54 2.63 2.82 2.28 2.37 2.53 3.06 3.61 3.67
Phosphorin 2.70 2.79 3.48 2.43 2.51 3.15 3.06 4.56 5.30
Cerealine 2.79 3.84 4.09 2.51 3.46 3.69 5.46 5.19 5.86
Glorious
Potassiumag 2.70 3.45 3.96 2.43 3.12 3.57 3.86 4.72 5.84
Without 1.73 1.83 2.53 1.64 1.82 2.28 2.25 2.29 3.36
LSD at 5% 0.59 0.54 1.23

Table 7. Averages of crop growth rate (CGR) in g/day during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons and total
soluble solids (TSS) percentage (%) in roots at harvest during 2017/2018 season as affected by the interaction
among cultivars, biofertilization treatments and nitrogen fertilizer levels.
CGR (g/day) TSS (%)
Biofertilization 70kg 90kg 110kg 70kg 90kg 110kg 70kg 90kg 110kg
Cultivars
treatments N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed N/fed
2017/2018 season 2018/2019 season 2018/2019 season
Phosphorin 1.990 2.032 2.639 2.075 2.096 2.608 21.31 22.30 21.49
Cerealine 2.498 2.499 3.686 2.277 2.567 3.220 22.83 23.62 22.94
Hossam
Potassiumag 2.384 2.462 3.271 2.134 2.346 3.188 22.19 23.38 22.52
Without 1.904 1.943 1.958 1.698 1.974 2.118 20.89 21.86 20.97
Phosphorin 1.142 1.540 1.981 1.438 1.621 1.703 20.42 22.22 21.98
Cerealine 2.389 2.448 2.834 1.778 1.919 2.620 22.39 23.08 22.37
Asus poly
Potassiumag 1.146 2.041 2.339 1.575 1.634 1.704 21.88 22.48 22.25
Without 1.112 1.534 1.708 1.129 1.543 1.586 19.26 21.06 20.26
Phosphorin 1.430 1.841 2.047 1.713 1.854 1.860 20.89 22.49 21.90
Cerealine 1.977 2.114 2.383 2.196 2.242 2.384 21.86 23.06 22.46
Glorious
Potassiumag 1.569 1.880 2.108 1.851 1.865 2.188 21.30 23.03 22.37
Without 0.924 1.509 1.331 1.446 1.478 1.656 19.04 21.20 19.94
LSD at 5% 0.563 0.591 1.86

Conclusion References
It can be concluded that mineral fertilizing Hossam Abdelaal KAA, Tawfik SF. 2015. Response of
cultivar plants with 110kg N/fed and treating soil with sugar beet plant (Beta vulgaris L.) to mineral
nitrogen fertilization and bio-fertilizers. Intern. J.
Cerealine at the rate of 450g/fed before first irrigation
Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci 4(9), 677-688.
directly to achieve highest growth and root quality of
sugar beet. While, in order to maintain high growth
Abido WAE, Ibrahim MEM. 2017. Role of foliar
and root quality of sugar beet at the same time reduce spraying with biostimulants substances in decreasing
production costs and environmental pollution, it can mineral nitrogen fertilizer of sugar beet . J. Plant
be recommended that mineral fertilizing Hossam Production Mansoura Univ., Vol. 8(12), 1335-1343.
cultivar plants with 90kg N/fed and treating soil with
Ahmed AZ, Awadalla AO, Abazid SR. 2017.
Cerealine under the environmental conditions of
Possibility of sugar beet production in Toshka Region.
Bani-Hassan Village, Awlad-Saqr Center, Sharkia I-Assessment of the optimum harvesting age. J. Plant
Governorate, Egypt. Production, Mansoura Univ 8(12), 1409-1415.

Kandil et al. Page 9

 Int. J. Agron. Agri. R.

Aly EFA, Enan SAAM, Badr AI. 2015. Response Mekdad AAA. 2015. Sugar beet productivity as
of sugar beet varieties to soil drench of compost tea affected by nitrogen fertilizer and foliar spraying with
and nitrogen fertilization in sandy soil. J. Agric. Res. boron. Intern. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci 4(4), 181-196.
Kafr El-Sheikh Univ 41(4), 1322-1338.
Mohamed HY, El-Mansoub MMA, Ali AMK.
Carruthers A, Oldfield JFT. 1960. Methods for 2019. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization
the assessment of beet quality. Int. Sugar J 63, 72-74. levels on Cercospora leaf spot disease, yield and
quality of some sugar beet varieties. J. Biol. Chem.
El-Emary FAA. 2017. Botanical characteristics of Environ. Sci 14(2), 167-194.
some sugar beet varieties (Beta vulgaris L):
comparative study. J. Plant Production, Mansoura Mohamed HY, El-Sebai TN. 2019. Effect of bio-
Univ 8(3), 397-403. stimulant (phosphate solubilizing microorganisms)
on yield and quality of some sugar beet varieties.
FAO. 2020. Food and Agriculture Organization. Egypt. J. of App. Sci 34(7), 114-129.
Faostat, FAO Statistics Division, March, 2020.
Nemeata Alla HEA, Sasy AH, Helmy SAM. 2018.
http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data /QC.
Effect of potassium humate and nitrogen fertilization on
yield and quality of sugar beet in sandy soil. J. Plant
Gomez KA, Gomez AA. 1984. Statistical
Production, Mansoura Univ 9(4), 333-338.
Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Ed., Jhon
Wiley and Sons Inc., New York pp. 95-109.
Nemeata Alla HEA. 2016. Yield and quality of
sugar beet as affected by sowing date, nitrogen level
Hussein MM, Hanan MH, Siam S, Mahmoud
and foliar spraying with calcium. J. Agric. Res. Kafr
SA, Taalab AS. 2016. Mineral status, growth and
El-Sheikh Univ 42(1), 170-188.
yield response of sugar beet (Beta vulagaris L.) to
nitrogen fertilizer sources and water regime. Adv. in Radford`s PJ. 1967. Growth analysis formulae,
Environ. Bio 9(27), 1-11. their use and abuse. Crop Sci 7, 171-175.

Jackson ML. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentica Sayed-Ahmed IF, Abdel Aziz RM, Rashed SH.
Hall Inc, Engleweed Cliffs, N.J. 2016. Effect of bio and mineral fertilization on yield and
quality of sugar beet in newly reclaimed lands in Egypt.
Leilah AA, Abdel-Moneam MA, Shalaby GA, Intern. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci 5(10), 980-991.
Abdou MAE, AbdEl-Salam HM. 2017. Effect of
Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. 1980. Statistical
plant population and distribution and nitrogen levels
Methods. 7th Ed. The Iowa State Univ. Press, Iowa, USA.
on yield and quality of sugar beet. J. Plant
Production, Mansoura Univ 8(5), 591-597. Thalooth AT, Tawfik MM, Badre EA,
Mohamed MH. 2019. Yield and quality response of
Makhlouf BSI, Abd El-All AEA. 2017. Effect of some sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) varieties to humic
deficit irrigation, nitrogen and potassium fertilization acid and yeast application in newly reclaimed soil.
on sugar beet productivity in sandy soils. Menoufiya Middle East J. of Agric. Res 8(1), 56-65.
J. Plant Prod 2 (6), 325-346.
Watson DJ. 1958. The dependence of net assimilation
Marajan WA, Hadad MA, Gafer MO, Sulfab rate on leaf area index. Ann. Bot. Lond. NS 22, 37-54.
HA, Ali MA. 2017. Effect of mineral and bio-organic
fertilizers on sugar beet growth under semi-arid zone. Zaki MS, El-Sarag EI, Maamoun HA, Mubarak

Intern. J. of Sci. and Res., (IJSR) 6(9), 1020-1025. MH. 2018. Agronomic performance sugar beet (Beta

Marschner H. 1995. Mineral nutrition of higher vulgaris L.) in Egypt using inorganic, organic and

plants. Academic press San Diego, USA. biofertilizers. Egypt. J. Agron 40(1), 89-103.

Kandil et al. Page 10