IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v12y2022i6p788-d828297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Different Doses of Phosgreen Fertilization on Chlorophyll, K, and Ca Content in Butterhead Lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) Grown in Peat Substrate

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Jama-Rodzeńska

    (Institute of Agroecology and Plant Production, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Grunwaldzki Sq. 24 A, 50-363 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Piotr Chohura

    (Department of Horticulture, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Grunwaldzki Sq. 24 A, 50-363 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Bernard Gałka

    (Institute of Soil Science and Environmental Protection, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Grunwaldzki Sq. 24, 50-363 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Anna Szuba-Trznadel

    (Department of Animal Nutrition and Feed Management, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, J. Chełmonskiego 38d, 51-630 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Agnieszka Falkiewicz

    (Institute of Agroecology and Plant Production, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Grunwaldzki Sq. 24 A, 50-363 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Monika Białkowska

    (Institute of Agroecology and Plant Production, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Grunwaldzki Sq. 24 A, 50-363 Wroclaw, Poland)

Abstract

Struvite is regarded as a promising phosphorus (P) fertilizer compared to commercial pristine mineral phosphorus fertilizers. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of Phosgreen fertilizer, with struvite as its phosphorus source, on the chlorophyll, potassium (K), and calcium (Ca) contents in lettuce grown in peat compared to superphosphate. The study was carried out as a pot experiment with different doses of P fertilization. The study presents the chlorophyll a, b, total (a + b) chlorophyll, and carotenoid contents of the lettuce plants. Significant differences in the chlorophyll a and b contents were observed between the different phosphorus applications, and this can have a direct impact on the crop yields. Significantly higher contents of both chlorophyll contents were observed under Phosgreen fertilization as well as the chlorophyll a + b content *. The results of the study on lettuce indicate a dependence of vitamin C content on phosphorus fertilizer, but with no significant increase under Phosgreen fertilization; the contents of K and Ca were not significantly dependent on the type of phosphorus fertilizer. Due to the favorable composition of Phosgreen, it may be recommended for use as a phosphorus fertilizer in the agriculture and horticulture sectors.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Jama-Rodzeńska & Piotr Chohura & Bernard Gałka & Anna Szuba-Trznadel & Agnieszka Falkiewicz & Monika Białkowska, 2022. "Effect of Different Doses of Phosgreen Fertilization on Chlorophyll, K, and Ca Content in Butterhead Lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) Grown in Peat Substrate," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-11, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:6:p:788-:d:828297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/6/788/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/12/6/788/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anna Jama-Rodzeńska & Piotr Chochura & Bernard Gałka & Anna Szuba-Trznadel & Zlatko Svecnjak & Dragana Latkovic, 2021. "Effect of Various Rates of P from Alternative and Traditional Sources on Butterhead Lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) Grown on Peat Substrate," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, December.
    2. Dana Cordell & Stuart White, 2011. "Peak Phosphorus: Clarifying the Key Issues of a Vigorous Debate about Long-Term Phosphorus Security," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(10), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Egle, Lukas & Rechberger, Helmut & Zessner, Matthias, 2015. "Overview and description of technologies for recovering phosphorus from municipal wastewater," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 105(PB), pages 325-346.
    4. Magdalena Szymańska & Ewa Szara & Adam Wąs & Tomasz Sosulski & Gijs W.P. van Pruissen & René L. Cornelissen, 2019. "Struvite—An Innovative Fertilizer from Anaerobic Digestate Produced in a Bio-Refinery," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-9, January.
    5. Marissa A. De Boer & Anjelika G. Romeo-Hall & Tomas M. Rooimans & J. Chris Slootweg, 2018. "An Assessment of the Drivers and Barriers for the Deployment of Urban Phosphorus Recovery Technologies: A Case Study of The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maria Theresia Sri Budiastuti & Djoko Purnomo & Bambang Pujiasmanto & Desy Setyaningrum, 2023. "Response of Maize Yield and Nutrient Uptake to Indigenous Organic Fertilizer from Corn Cobs," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-11, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gerald Steiner & Bernhard Geissler, 2018. "Sustainable Mineral Resource Management—Insights into the Case of Phosphorus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-8, August.
    2. Viola Somogyi & Viktória Pitás & Kinga M. Berta & Róbert Kurdi, 2022. "Red Mud as Adsorbent to Recover Phosphorous from Wastewater Streams," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Kataki, Sampriti & West, Helen & Clarke, Michèle & Baruah, D.C., 2016. "Phosphorus recovery as struvite: Recent concerns for use of seed, alternative Mg source, nitrogen conservation and fertilizer potential," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 142-156.
    4. Marek Kopecký & Ladislav Kolář & Petr Konvalina & Otakar Strunecký & Florina Teodorescu & Petr Mráz & Jiří Peterka & Radka Váchalová & Jaroslav Bernas & Petr Bartoš & Feodor Filipov & Daniel Bucur, 2020. "Modified Biochar—A Tool for Wastewater Treatment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-13, October.
    5. Hai Bang Truong & Thi Cuc Phuong Tran & Thi Phuong Nguyen & Thi Thao Nguyen Nguyen & Doan Thi Oanh & Duong Thi Thuy & Xuan Cuong Nguyen, 2023. "Biochar-Based Phosphorus Recovery from Different Waste Streams: Sources, Mechanisms, and Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-21, October.
    6. Ming Tang & Huchang Liao & Zhengjun Wan & Enrique Herrera-Viedma & Marc A. Rosen, 2018. "Ten Years of Sustainability (2009 to 2018): A Bibliometric Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    7. Ashton W. Merck & Khara D. Grieger & Alison Deviney & Anna-Maria Marshall, 2023. "Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10, July.
    8. Daniel Reißmann & Daniela Thrän & Alberto Bezama, 2018. "Key Development Factors of Hydrothermal Processes in Germany by 2030: A Fuzzy Logic Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, December.
    9. Karel Mulder, 2019. "Future Options for Sewage and Drainage Systems Three Scenarios for Transitions and Continuity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Caroline Samberger & Sanaz Imen & Katerina Messologitis & Arthur Umble & Joseph G. Jacangelo, 2024. "Assessing circularity of wastewater treatment systems: A critical review of indicators," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 28(2), pages 262-276, April.
    11. Marissa A. De Boer & Anjelika G. Romeo-Hall & Tomas M. Rooimans & J. Chris Slootweg, 2018. "An Assessment of the Drivers and Barriers for the Deployment of Urban Phosphorus Recovery Technologies: A Case Study of The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    12. Maaß, Oliver & Grundmann, Philipp & von Bock und Polach, Carlotta, 2014. "Added-value from innovative value chains by establishing nutrient cycles via struvite," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 126-136.
    13. Magdalena Szymańska & Tomasz Sosulski & Ewa Szara & Adam Wąs & Piotr Sulewski & Gijs W.P. van Pruissen & René L. Cornelissen, 2019. "Ammonium Sulphate from a Bio-Refinery System as a Fertilizer—Agronomic and Economic Effectiveness on the Farm Scale," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-15, December.
    14. Heiner Brookman & Fabian Gievers & Volker Zelinski & Jan Ohlert & Achim Loewen, 2018. "Influence of Hydrothermal Carbonization on Composition, Formation and Elimination of Biphenyls, Dioxins and Furans in Sewage Sludge," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-13, June.
    15. Aftab Ali Kubar & Qing Huang & Kashif Ali Kubar & Muhammad Amjad Khan & Muhammad Sajjad & Sumaira Gul & Chen Yang & Qingqing Wang & Genmao Guo & Ghulam Mustafa Kubar & Muhammad Ibrahim Kubar & Niaz Ah, 2022. "Ammonium and Phosphate Recovery from Biogas Slurry: Multivariate Statistical Analysis Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.
    16. Simons, Andrew M. & Ahmed, Milkiyas & Blalock, Garrick & Nesin, Bourcard, 2023. "Indigenous bone fertilizer for growth and food security: A local solution to a global challenge," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    17. Alexandra Jurgilevich & Traci Birge & Johanna Kentala-Lehtonen & Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki & Janna Pietikäinen & Laura Saikku & Hanna Schösler, 2016. "Transition towards Circular Economy in the Food System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, January.
    18. Chowdhury, Rubel Biswas & Moore, Graham A. & Weatherley, Anthony J. & Arora, Meenakshi, 2014. "A review of recent substance flow analyses of phosphorus to identify priority management areas at different geographical scales," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 213-228.
    19. Benjamin C. McLellan & Eiji Yamasue & Tetsuo Tezuka & Glen Corder & Artem Golev & Damien Giurco, 2016. "Critical Minerals and Energy–Impacts and Limitations of Moving to Unconventional Resources," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-40, May.
    20. Baum, Seth D. & Handoh, Itsuki C., 2014. "Integrating the planetary boundaries and global catastrophic risk paradigms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 13-21.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:12:y:2022:i:6:p:788-:d:828297. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.