Application of liquid complex mineral fertilizers as a factor of optimization of crop production under the conditions of climate change
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53083/1996-4277-2024-233-3-33-40Keywords:
liquid complex fertilizers, fertilizer application system, agroecological group of lands, production experienceAbstract
This paper discusses the strategy of introducing a new type of liquid complex fertilizers of NPK 7:23:7 brand as a starter fertilizer and the developed mineral nutrition system that includes other types of liquid fertilizers as KAS-32 and NS 8:9. To evaluate the developed fertilizer system, a production experiment was established in the Krasnodar Region in grain maize grain maize growing on different agroecological groups of lands; the experimental results were compared with those of the control and conventional methods of mineral fertilizer application adopted on the farm. To obtain reliable results, agroecological evaluation of the territory was made including agrometeorological parameters, relief, soil cover, and soil agrochemical characteristics. Based on the agroecological evaluation, homogeneous plots were selected. Within one field, equal plots were established where for each variant the same forecrops, tillage, and plant protection agents were maintained; thus, grain maize growing technology between the variants differed by mineral nutrition only. A medium ripening simple maize hybrid DKS 4964 was used in the experiment. Statistical processing of the results showed the greatest effect of liquid complex fertilizer application on the upland group of lands as compared to other variants. As three-year average, the yield gains on the upland group of lands were as following: in the control variant - 0.74 t ha; conventional farm scheme - 0.92 t ha; with liquid complex fertilizer application - 1.41 t ha, or 11.8%, 13.3% and 18.6%, respectively. On the upland lands, the yield gain from liquid complex fertilizer application made on average 1.90 t ha as compared to the variant without fertilizers, and 1.08 t ha as compared to the farm scheme, or 27.1% and 13.8%, respectively.