IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/jasjnl/v9y2017i6p13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alkaloids in White Lupin and Their Effects on Symbiotic N Fixation

Author

Listed:
  • Kristina Staples
  • Anwar Hamama
  • Regina Knight-Mason
  • Harbans Bhardwaj

Abstract

Seeds of white lupin (Lupinus albus L.), known to potentially fix 150 to 200 kg/ha N via Symbiotic N Fixation (SNF), are classified as sweet or bitter based on their alkaloid contents- sweet lupins contain very low whereas bitter lupins contain high contents of alkaloids. However, precise information about effects of alkaloid content on SNF is not very well unknown. Experiments were conducted to determine if alkaloid content in the seed is related to that in other plant tissue such as leaves and pod shells, characterization of relationship between alkaloid concentration and SNF, and to study variation among 126 white lupin accessions for concentration of alkaloids. In the first experiment, the Dragendorff test, a colorimetric test, was used to categorize field-grown lupin lines into 6 categories- 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 with 0 representing sweet and 5 representing extreme bitterness with bitterness increasing from 0 to 5. In the second experiment, ten lupin lines differing in their Dragendorff score from 0 to four were inoculated with seven bradyrhizobial strains and studied for SNF in a greenhouse. A numerical scale from 0 to 4 with 1 representing absence of nodules and 4 representing many functional nodules was used as a measure of SNF. In the third experiment, concentrations of alkaloids (Dragendorff scores), oil, and protein were studied in 126 accessions.Results indicated that all progenies with Dragendorff score of 1 for the seeds also had the same score for leaves and pod shells. However, this was not true for other progenies. In the case of progenies with Dragendorff scores of 0, 2, 3, or 4 in the seed, the Dragendorff scores for leaves and pod shells were above and below the seed scores indicating existence of variation for alkaloids in various tissues of the lupin plant. Alkaloid content also had significant effects on root nodulation. The interaction between alkaloid categories and bradyrhizobial strains was non-significant. The root nodulation score for lupin lines in alkaloid categories 0, 3, and 4 were similar, indicating that the same bradyrhizobial strain could be used to effectively inoculate sweet and bitter white lupin lines. The root nodulation induced by the seven bradyrhizobial strains were statistically different. It was observed that S96-A15, S96-A19, and S96-B9 were more efficient bradyrhizobial strains whereas S96-A5 was observed to be less efficient for root nodulation. Significant variation existed among 126 white lupin accessions for Dragendorff score and concentrations of oil and protein. The alkaloid content did not affect oil content in the seed, however, alkaloid content significantly affected protein content. The results indicated that bitter seeds had higher protein content.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristina Staples & Anwar Hamama & Regina Knight-Mason & Harbans Bhardwaj, 2017. "Alkaloids in White Lupin and Their Effects on Symbiotic N Fixation," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(6), pages 1-13, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:9:y:2017:i:6:p:13
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/download/67195/37009
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jas/article/view/67195
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. L. E. Drinkwater & P. Wagoner & M. Sarrantonio, 1998. "Legume-based cropping systems have reduced carbon and nitrogen losses," Nature, Nature, vol. 396(6708), pages 262-265, November.
    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. Charles Salley & Harbans L. Bhardwaj, 2018. "A Preliminary Evaluation of Symbiotic N Fixation in Mungbean," Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 1-1, August.

    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. Jie Zhao & Ji Chen & Damien Beillouin & Hans Lambers & Yadong Yang & Pete Smith & Zhaohai Zeng & Jørgen E. Olesen & Huadong Zang, 2022. "Global systematic review with meta-analysis reveals yield advantage of legume-based rotations and its drivers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Muller, Adrian, 2006. "Sustainable Agriculture and the Production of Biomass for Energy Use," Working Papers in Economics 216, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 01 Aug 2008.
    3. Lucas Contarato Pilon & Jordano Vaz Ambus & Elena Blume & Rodrigo Josemar Seminoti Jacques & José Miguel Reichert, 2023. "Citrus Orchards in Agroforestry, Organic, and Conventional Systems: Soil Quality and Functioning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-28, August.
    4. Mousumi Ghosh & Waqar Ashiq & Hiteshkumar Bhogilal Vasava & Duminda N. Vidana Gamage & Prasanta K. Patra & Asim Biswas, 2021. "Short-Term Carbon Sequestration and Changes of Soil Organic Carbon Pools in Rice under Integrated Nutrient Management in India," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, April.
    5. Xiaolin Yang & Jinran Xiong & Taisheng Du & Xiaotang Ju & Yantai Gan & Sien Li & Longlong Xia & Yanjun Shen & Steven Pacenka & Tammo S. Steenhuis & Kadambot H. M. Siddique & Shaozhong Kang & Klaus But, 2024. "Diversifying crop rotation increases food production, reduces net greenhouse gas emissions and improves soil health," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    6. Rhonda R. Janke & Daniel Menezes-Blackburn & Asma Al Hamdi & Abdul Rehman, 2024. "Organic Management and Intercropping of Fruit Perennials Increase Soil Microbial Diversity and Activity in Arid Zone Orchard Cropping Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-15, October.
    7. Jouan, Julia & Heinrichs, Julia & Britz, Wolfgang & Pahmeyer, Christoph, 2019. "Legume production challenged by European policy coherence: a case-study approach from French and German dairy farms," 172nd EAAE Seminar, May 28-29, 2019, Brussels, Belgium 289765, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Sanna Lötjönen & Markku Ollikainen, 2017. "Does crop rotation with legumes provide an efficient means to reduce nutrient loads and GHG emissions?," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(4), pages 283-312, December.
    9. Argiles, Josep M. & Brown, Nestor Duch, 2011. "A comparison of the economic and environmental performances of conventional and organic farming: evidence from financial statements," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, January.
    10. Aravindakshan, Sreejith & Sherief, Aliyaru Kunju, 2010. "The wanted change against climate change: assessing the role of organic farming as an adaptation strategy," MPRA Paper 27205, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Susanne Wiesner & Alison J. Duff & Ankur R. Desai & Kevin Panke-Buisse, 2020. "Increasing Dairy Sustainability with Integrated Crop–Livestock Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Bartłomiej Bajan & Joanna Łukasiewicz & Aldona Mrówczyńska-Kamińska, 2021. "Energy Consumption and Its Structures in Food Production Systems of the Visegrad Group Countries Compared with EU-15 Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-24, July.
    13. Ribaudo, Marc & Hansen, LeRoy T. & Hellerstein, Daniel & Greene, Catherine R., 2008. "The Use of Markets To Increase Private Investment in Environmental Stewardship," Economic Research Report 56473, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Tiziano Gomiero, 2013. "Alternative Land Management Strategies and Their Impact on Soil Conservation," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, August.
    15. Greene, Catherine R. & Kremen, Amy, 2003. "U.S. Organic Farming In 2000-2001: Adoption Of Certified Systems," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33769, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Christian Thierfelder & Pauline Chivenge & Walter Mupangwa & Todd S. Rosenstock & Christine Lamanna & Joseph X. Eyre, 2017. "How climate-smart is conservation agriculture (CA)? – its potential to deliver on adaptation, mitigation and productivity on smallholder farms in southern Africa," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(3), pages 537-560, June.
    17. Aimee N. Hafla & Jennifer W. MacAdam & Kathy J. Soder, 2013. "Sustainability of US Organic Beef and Dairy Production Systems: Soil, Plant and Cattle Interactions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(7), pages 1-26, July.
    18. Jules Pretty & Rachel Hine, 2000. "The promising spread of sustainable agriculture in Asia," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 24(2), pages 107-121, May.
    19. Julia Jouan & Julia Heinrichs & Wolfgang Britz & Christoph Pahmeyer, 2019. "Integrated assessment of legume production challenged by European policy interaction: a case-study approach from French and German dairy farms," Working Papers hal-02501428, HAL.
    20. Mihai Buta & Gheorghe Blaga & Laura Paulette & Ioan Păcurar & Sanda Roșca & Orsolya Borsai & Florina Grecu & Pauliuc Ecaterina Sînziana & Cornel Negrușier, 2019. "Soil Reclamation of Abandoned Mine Lands by Revegetation in Northwestern Part of Transylvania: A 40-Year Retrospective Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ibn:jasjnl:v:9:y:2017:i:6:p:13. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.