20 ton fed-1 compost >20 ton fed-1 farmyard manure >10 ton fed-1 poultry manure > 10 ton fed-1 compost >10 ton fed-1 farmyard manure. Maize plant height, dry weight, 100-grain weight, grain yield, stover yield, N-uptake, P-uptake, K-uptake in both grains and stover of maize plant were increased at harvesting stage in seasons 2012&2013, due toN-P biofertilization. Azotobacter treatment gave superior than that of phosphorin inoculations.
Effect of interaction between different soil salinity levels, organic fertilizer treatments and N-P biofertilizer inoculations was a significant on maize plant height and dry weight at harvesting stage in 2012&2013 seasons. A significant effect at 5% were obtained on 100 grain weight in 2012&2013 seasons by this interaction. The highest results were obtained with ( low soil salinity levels + 20 ton fed-1 poultry manure + Azotobacter inoculation). Also, the effect of this interaction was not significant on maize grain yield but a significant at 5% in strover yield in 2012 season. During 2013 season a significant at 5% was obtained in both grain and strover yield. The highest results were obtained with ( low soil salinity levels +20 ton fed-1 poultry manure + Azotobacter inoculation).There was a non significant effect in N-uptake in maize grains and stover during 2012-2013 seasons. The highest results were obtained with ( low soil salinity levels + 20 ton fed-1 poultry manure + Azotobacter inoculation) . A significantly at 5% in (P-uptake & K-uptake) in maize grains and stover was obtained, respectively in both seasons. The highest results were obtained with ( low soil salinity levels + 20 ton fed-1 poultry manure + Azotobacter inoculation).]]>
p. 1585−1606
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1607−1622
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1623−1633
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1635−1644
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1647−1666
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1667−1673
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1675−1690
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
(I2) > (I3) > (I4) > (I5).
Concerning water application efficiency (WAE%) the mean values were slightly affected by irrigation intervals. The highest mean values were recorded under irrigation interval (I4) and the values are 94.92 and 94.47 %. The lowest mean values were recorded under irrigation interval (I1) and the values are 81.57 and 81.79% in the first and second growing seasons, respectively.
Regarding, water productivity (WP) and productivity of irrigation water (PIW), the highest overall mean values were recorded under irrigation interval (I5) and the values are 1.38 and 1.19 kg/ m3. Meanwhile, the lowest overall mean values were recorded under irrigation interval (I1) and the values are 1.29 and 0.92 kg/ m3 for (WP) and (PIW), respectively. Concerning water consumptive use efficiency (Ecu), the highest overall mean value was recorded under irrigation interval (I4) and the value is 86.18%, but the lowest one was recorded under irrigation interval (I1) 71.80%. Concerning the amount and percentage of water saving can be descended in order I5 > I4 > I3 > I2 > I1 in the two growing seasons.
Concerning the effect of irrigation intervals on faba bean seed yield, the highest mean values were achieved under irrigation interval, I1 and the values are 1357.19 and 1364.05 kg/fed., but the lowest mean values were recorded under irrigation interval I5 and the values are 1175.64 and 1170.16 kg/fed. in the first and second growing seasons, respectively. Generally, the mean values of faba bean seed yield can be descended in order I1> I2 > I3> I4> I5. Regarding, the effect of plant densities on faba bean seed yield, the highest mean values were recorded under D1 in the two growing seasons. The same trend was observed for straw yield, where the highest mean values were recorded under irrigation interval (I1) and the mean values are 2.79 and 2.80 ton/fed. On the other hand, the lowest mean values were recorded under irrigation interval (I5) and the mean values are 1.61 and 1.58 ton/fed. in the first and second growing seasons, respectively. Concerning the effect of plant densities on straw yield, the highest mean values were recorded under D1 in the two growing seasons.
Data also declared that some yield components such as plant height, number of branches / plant, number of pods /plant and weight of 100 seeds were affected by irrigation intervals where the highest mean values were recorded under irrigation interval I1. Generally, the mean values of the abovementioned studied parameters can be descended in order I1 > I2 > I3 > I4 > I5. Regarding, the effect of plant densities, the highest mean values were recorded under D1 comparing with other plant densities D2, D3, and D4 in the two growing seasons.
Concerning, the effect of irrigation intervals and plant densities on soil pH, soil salinity, soluble cations, anions, calculated SAR and ESP. The mean values of soil pH were increased under surface irrigation method comparing with using drip irrigation system. While the lowest mean value was recorded under irrigation interval (I1). Data also showed that, the highest mean value was recorded under plant density D4 under all irrigation intervals. Regarding, the soil salinity, the highest mean value was recorded under I5 and the value is 1.409 ds/ m, but the lowest mean value was recorded under I1 and the value is 1.075 ds/ m. The highest mean value for soil salinity was recorded under D4 for all irrigation intervals. Regarding, soluble cations, anions, calculated SAR and ESP, the highest mean value was recorded under irrigation interval (I1) but the lowest value was recorded under (I5). The effect of plant densities on the abovementioned studied parameters (Ca++, Mg++, Na+, K+, HCO-, CO3--, Cl-, SO4--, SAR and ESP) was not clear, however, some parameters increased under D1 but the others increased under D4.]]>
p. 1961−1716
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1717−1730
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1731−1745
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1747−1757
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1759−1782
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1783−1790
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1791−1807
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1809−1821
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1823−1836
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1839−1849
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1851−1862
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1863−1876
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1879−1890
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12
p. 1891−1905
2090-3766
Vol.5/No.12