Effect of Chemical Fertilization on Yield and Natural Pigments of Cactus
Pears Fruits
Fatma A. Ahmed1,4*, Fahmy Ibrahim Fahmy2,
Mohamed Ahmed Abd El-Wahab3 and Waleed Mohamed Abd El-Azim3
1Phytochemistry
Unit, Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Department, Desert Research Center, Cairo
11753, Egypt
2Plant Production
Department, Desert Research Center, Cairo
11753, Egypt
3Cultivation of
Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Unit, Medicinal
and Aromatic Plants Department, Desert Research Center, Cairo
11753, Egypt
4Regional Development Centers (RDC), Academy of Scientific Resaerch and
Technology (ASRT), Cairo 11694, Egypt
*For
correspondence: dr.fatmaahmed2022@yahoo.com
Received 23 February 2022;
Accepted 26 November 2022; Published 27 February 2023
Abstract
This study was carried out on a cactus pear
orchard grown in calcareous soil at El-Hammam region, Matrouh Governorate, over
two consecutive seasons in 2020 and 2021. This work aimed to find the best
mineral fertilization treatment for increasing the yield of plants, as it has
yet to be studied under the conditions of this region. The study was a
randomized complete block experiment. The fertilization treatments were as the following:
- (control, 100 g N + 40 g P + 70 g K/plant, 100 g N + 40 g P + 90 g K/plant,
100 g N + 60 g P + 70 g K/plant, 100 g N + 60 g P + 90 g K/plant, 120 g N + 40
g P + 70 g K/plant, 120 g N + 40 g P + 90 g K/plant, 120 g N + 60 g P + 70 g
K/plant and 120 g N + 60 g P + 90 g K/plant). Increasing nitrogen, phosphorus,
and potassium fertilization rates improved vegetative growth, fruit quantity,
and quality traits over control. The highest fertilization rate (120 g N + 60 g
P + 90 g K/plant) significantly recorded the best physical characteristics
(fruit weight, fruit length, fruit width, fruit volume, juice weight, peel
weight, peel thickness, pulp weight/fruit, number of seeds/fruit, and seeds
weight/fruit). Furthermore, fruits had suitable chemical parameters (total
soluble solids, total acidity content, total soluble solids/acid ratio, and
ascorbic acid content). The most useful chemical
fertilization amount was the basal dressing of 120 g N, 60 g P, and 90 g
K/plant in this area. © 2023 Friends Science Publishers
Keywords: Cactus pear; NPK fertilization; Fruit; Quantity;
Quality; Pigments
Cactus pear or Indian fig opuntia (Opuntia
ficus-indica L., Family: Cactaceae) is a cactus species that is a domestic
crop produced throughout arid and semiarid regions of the globe. The cactus
pear is the most commercially important cactus. It is grown chiefly as a fruit
crop and for other purposes, including food and medicinal industries,
cosmetics, fodder, and soil erosion prevention. Cacti are suitable crops for
dry zones because they convert water into biomass efficiently. The fruits are
commercialized in many parts of the world and consumed raw. They have one of
the highest concentrations of vitamin C. As fruits have vitamin C, they were
once utilized to mitigate scurvy. Jams are made from fruits. The red color of
the fruits and juice is owed to betalains; the fruits also contain flavonoids
and are very nutritious. They have 14% fructose, 1% protein, 20% solids,
glucose, ascorbic acid, fatty oil, and a resinous substance. The fruits are
used to treat diarrhea (Kuti 2004; Neffar et al. 2013; Zimmer 2013;
Miller 2015; Badr et al. 2019; Fattah et al. 2020; Ueckert 2020).
Until now, the cactus pear farms did not receive enough
attention in the fertilization programs, like other fruit plants in desert
areas. The shortage in mineral nutrients influences cactus pear plant
metabolism, negatively impacting fruit yield and quality. Cactus pear plants
differ physiologically and morphologically from most other crop plants. For
this reason, fertilizer recommendations applied to other crops are unsuitable.
The mineral nutrition studies on cactus pears show that chemical fertilizer application
is generally valuable for fruit production. Nutrient elements influence the
cactus pear's fruit yield and quality. Macroelements have the most significant
impact on fruit production. N, P, and K are the most limiting nutrients in
cacti and affect their yield (Claassens and Wessels 1997; Dubeux et al.
2006; Zegbe et al. 2014, 2015; Silva et al. 2016; Souza et al.
2017; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2018; Neto et
al. 2020).
Cultivating the cactus pear crop is profitable for local
farms in the desert due to its low production costs, high-added value crop, and
tolerance to environmental conditions such as high temperatures, drought, and
poor soils (Mason 2015). Concerning the agriculture processes, many farmers
still depend on organic fertilizers only in production without chemical
fertilizers, which leads to a decrease in the yield and quality attributes.
Other farmers add very high nitrogen fertilizers, resulting in excessive
vegetative growth and reduced fruit yield.
Calcareous soils possess high levels of calcium carbonate (CaCO3)
that affect soil properties related to plant development. Cultivating
calcareous soils presents numerous difficulties, such as low water holding
capacity, high infiltration levels, shoddy construction, low organic matter,
and clay content. Moreover, low cation exchange
capacity (CEC), loss of fertilizers via
leaching, texture crusting and cracking, increased pH, losing nitrogen
fertilizers, and low availability of nutrients (Elgabaly 1973; El-Hady and
Abo-Sedera 2006; FAO 2016; Aboukila et al. 2018). Therefore, the crops
that can resist such poor soil conditions are like the cactus pear. So,
calcareous soils are suitable for the cultivation of this plant.
Farmers overlook the importance of chemical fertilization
for cactus pear farms, despite its importance in improving fruit crop
characteristics such as quantity and quality. This study investigates this
topic under calcareous soil conditions in newly reclaimed desert lands in
Egypt, as this topic has not previously been studied.
The objective of our research was to investigate the
effect of different nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium fertilizers on the
yield and quality of plants cultivated in calcareous soil to improve the
characteristics of the fruits by knowing the appropriate fertilizer rates. As a
result, the area of this crop on those lands has grown.
Materials and Methods
Experimental details and treatments
Experimental details: The experiment was set up in the cactus pear farm in the El-Hammam
region (30° 50′ N and 29° 23′ E), Matrouh Governorate, Egypt, over
two seasons in 2020 and 2021. Five-year-old cactus pear plants (Opuntia
ficus-indica L.) grown in sandy soil and spaced 2 × 5 m apart are
subjected to a drip irrigation system. The experimental soil's physical and
chemical analyses are shown in Table 1. The chemical analysis of the used water
for irrigation is recorded in Table 1. The
parameters of compost manure added to the farm are presented in Table 2.
Treatments: This work aimed to determine plants' best-added
nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium levels. Healthy vegetation, nearly in shape
and size and productivity were chosen for this experiment. The experiment was
designed as a randomized complete block design with four replicates for each
treatment. The applied nine fertilization treatments were as the following:
1-
Control
2-
100 g N + 40 g P + 70 g K / plant
3-
100 g N + 40 g P + 90 g K / plant
4-
100 g N + 60 g P + 70 g K / plant
5-
100 g N + 60 g P + 90 g K / plant
6-
120 g N + 40 g P + 70 g K / plant
7-
120 g N + 40 g P + 90 g K / plant
8-
120 g N + 60 g P + 70 g K / plant
9-
120 g N + 60 g P + 90 g K / plant
The used chemical fertilizers sources were ammonium
nitrate (33% N), calcium superphosphate (15.5% P2O5) and
potassium sulphate (48% K2O). Nitrogen fertilizer was divided into
two equal doses, the first 50% of nitrogen fertilizer was added at the end of
February and the second 50% of nitrogen fertilizer was added after three weeks
of full bloom, at the beginning of May, in both seasons. Potassium fertilizer
was divided into two equal doses and added as a soil application while adding
nitrogen fertilizer. Nitrogen and potassium fertilizers were added as soil
applications at a depth of 15 cm and 1 m from the trunk. The ordinary organic
fertilization program was 15 kg/plant of compost manure with phosphate added to
a trench in the first week of January. Fruits were taken from each treated
plant at harvest time to determine the quantity and physical and chemical
aspects. The response of cactus pear plants to fertilization treatments was
evaluated through the following determinations:
I) Vegetative growth and pigment measurements: Number of
cladodes, cladodes length (cm), cladodes width (cm), cladodes area (cm2),
chlorophyll a (mg/g), chlorophyll b (mg/g), total chlorophyll and carotenoids
(mg/g).
II) Fruiting measurements: Fruit set%,
number of fruits/plant, fruit yield (kg)/plant, fruit weight (g), fruit length
(cm), fruit width (cm), fruit volume (cm3), juice weight (g), peel
weight (g), peel thikness (cm), pulp weight/fruit (g), number of seeds/fruit,
seeds weight/fruit (g), fruit TSS (%), total acidity content (%), fruit TSS /
acid ratio, and ascorbic acid (mg/100 mL juice) according to the methods
described by (AOAC 1995; Barros et al. 2016).
Statistical analysis
The obtained data were subjected to an analysis of
variance according to Clarke and Kempson (1997). The means were differentiated
using the range test at the 0.05 level (Duncan 1955).
Results
I- Vegetative growth and pigment
measurements: Data in Table 3 showed the effect of mineral
fertilization on vegetative growth parameters in both seasons. Generally, NPK
nutrient addition significantly enhanced growth Table 1: The soil and
irrigation water analyses
Characteristics |
Values |
|
Soil physical properties |
|
|
Sand |
93.10% |
|
Silt |
1.04% |
|
Clay |
5.86% |
|
Soil
texture |
Sandy |
|
Soil
chemical properties |
|
|
Organic
matter |
0.10% |
|
pH |
8.30 |
|
Electrical
conductivity |
294.40 mg.kg-1 |
|
HCO3- |
0.02 meq/100 g soil |
|
Cl- |
0.05 meq/100 g soil |
|
SO42
- |
0.35 meq/100 g soil |
|
Ca2+ |
0.06 meq/100 g soil |
|
Mg2+ |
0.05 meq/100 g soil |
|
Na+ |
0.3 meq/100 g soil |
|
K+ |
0.01 meq/100 g soil |
|
CaCO3 |
39% |
|
Irrigation
water chemical properties |
|
|
pH |
7.45 |
|
Electrical
conductivity |
485.00 mg.kg-1 |
|
HCO3- |
4.83 meq/L |
|
Cl- |
1.73 meq/L |
|
SO42
- |
1.04 meq/L |
|
Ca2+ |
2.04 meq/L |
|
Mg2+ |
1.38 meq/L |
|
Na+ |
2.41 meq/L |
|
K+ |
1.78 meq/L |
|
Table 2: The compost manure physico-chemical analysis
Characteristics |
Values |
Weight of m3 |
625 kg |
pH |
7.85 |
Electrical conductivity |
1760.00 mg.kg-1 |
N |
1.60% |
C/N ratio |
17:1 |
P |
0.70% |
K |
1.25% |
Fe2+ |
1587.50 mg.kg-1 |
Mn2+ |
162.50 mg.kg-1 |
Cu2+ |
65.00 mg.kg-1 |
Zn2+ |
21.50 mg.kg-1 |
Table 3: Effect of fertilization treatments (g/plant) on number
of cladodes, cladodes length, cladodes width, and cladodes area of cactus pear
during the two successive seasons
Treatments |
Number of cladodes |
Cladodes
length (cm) |
Cladodes
width (cm) |
Cladodes
area (cm2) |
||||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5.70 f |
6.70 i |
24.76 e |
24.51 f |
16.10 e |
17.57 d |
273.62 e |
300.14 g |
100 |
40 |
70 |
7.00 ef |
8.00 h |
32.60 d |
31.27 e |
17.35 d |
19.50 cd |
388.28 d |
417.41 f |
100 |
40 |
90 |
9.00 de |
11.00 f |
35.35 c |
33.46 d |
19.35 c |
19.49 bc |
370.21 c |
475.94 de |
100 |
60 |
70 |
7.70 ef |
9.00 g |
34.85 c |
35.25 cd |
17.85 d |
18.46 cd |
427.42 d |
444.55 ef |
100 |
60 |
90 |
10.70 cd |
13.00 d |
35.85 c |
35.75 c |
19.35 d |
19.83 b |
476.83 c |
491.53 cd |
120 |
40 |
70 |
12.30 cd |
14.70 c |
38.85 b |
38.75 b |
19.60 bc |
19.59 b |
524.00 b |
526.31 bc |
120 |
40 |
90 |
18.70 a |
19.70 a |
40.60 b |
42.25 a |
20.10 bc |
20.11 b |
561.91 b |
565.16 b |
120 |
60 |
70 |
11.00 cd |
11.70 e |
38.60 b |
38.75 b |
20.60 ab |
19.62 b |
547.30 b |
523.64 bc |
120 |
60 |
90 |
16.00 b |
17.00 b |
43.60 a |
41.25 a |
21.35 a |
21.89 a |
640.07 a |
659.28 a |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
probability
characteristics compared to the control treatment.
Adding the maximum rate of fertilizers of 120 g N + 60 g
P + 90 g K/plant significantly surpassed others in terms of the number of
cladodes, cladode length, cladode width and cladode area. These measurements
for the first season were 16.00 cladodes, 43.60 cm, 21.35 cm and 640.07 cm2,
respectively. In comparison, the records of the second season were 17.00
cladodes, 41.25 cm, 21.89 cm and 659.28 Table 4: Effect of fertilization
treatments (g/plant) on chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll, and
carotenoids of cactus pear during the two successive seasons
Treatments |
Chlorophyll a (mg/g) |
Chlorophyll b (mg/g) |
Total chlorophyll (mg/g) |
Carotenoids (mg/g) |
||||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3.75 i |
3.58 h |
9.27 i |
7.93 i |
13.02 h |
11.68 i |
1.21 f |
1.34 h |
100 |
40 |
70 |
4.41 h |
3.88 g |
11.50 h |
8.10 h |
15.93 g |
12.52 h |
1.91 e |
1.75 g |
100 |
40 |
90 |
4.86 d |
4.82 d |
12.08 f |
10.52 g |
16.95 ef |
15.39 g |
2.39 bcd |
2.22 e |
100 |
60 |
70 |
4.55 g |
4.69 f |
11.87 g |
11.55 f |
16.43 fg |
16.09 f |
2.06 de |
2.14 f |
100 |
60 |
90 |
4.92 d |
5.00 c |
12.30 d |
11.90 e |
17.23 de |
16.83 e |
2.56 b |
2.41 d |
120 |
40 |
70 |
4.71 f |
4.76 e |
13.14 c |
12.55 c |
17.86 bc |
17.27 d |
2.14 cde |
2.26 e |
120 |
40 |
90 |
4.90 c |
5.17 b |
13.22 b |
12.63 b |
18.13ab |
17.54 b |
2.72 ab |
2.69 c |
120 |
60 |
70 |
4.78 b |
4.78 de |
12.19 e |
12.51 d |
17.53 cd |
17.29 c |
2.44 bc |
3.08 b |
120 |
60 |
90 |
5.09 a |
5.28 a |
13.59 a |
12.96 a |
18.68 a |
18.05 a |
3.02 a |
3.23 a |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of probability
Table 5: Effect of fertilization treatments (g/plant) on fruit
set, number of fruits/plant and fruit yield (kg)/plant of cactus pear during
the two successive seasons
Treatments |
Fruit set (%) |
Number of fruits/plant |
Fruit yield/plant (kg) |
|||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
50.13 e |
49.07 f |
53.00 g |
51.67 i |
3.05 h |
2.95 g |
100 |
40 |
70 |
56.75 d |
55.56 e |
99.33 f |
97.00 h |
8.00 g |
8.22 f |
100 |
40 |
90 |
60.29 c |
61.86 cd |
110.00 f |
108.67 g |
10.79 f |
11.44 e |
100 |
60 |
70 |
61.49 c |
61.72 d |
136.33 e |
134.00 f |
15.42 e |
16.15 d |
100 |
60 |
90 |
62.45 bc |
63.57 bcd |
154.33 d |
155.67 e |
15.27 e |
16.11 d |
120 |
40 |
70 |
64.97 b |
65.95 b |
167.33 c |
166.00 d |
17.24 d |
18.31 c |
120 |
40 |
90 |
73.49 a |
72.33 a |
173.00 c |
172.67 c |
19.77 c |
18.96 c |
120 |
60 |
70 |
65.28 b |
64.77 bc |
195.00 b |
200.00 b |
24.18 b |
23.58 b |
120 |
60 |
90 |
73.53 a |
73.37 a |
210.00 a |
209.33 a |
32.18 a |
32.99 a |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
probability
Table 6: Effect of fertilization treatments (g/plant)) on fruit
weight, fruit length, fruit width, and fruit volume of cactus pear during the
two successive seasons
Treatments |
Fruit weight (g) |
Fruit length (cm) |
Fruit width (cm) |
Fruit volume (cm3) |
||||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
55.70 f |
57.76 f |
6.20 e |
6.59 h |
4.14 e |
4.70 i |
63.33 f |
65.33 f |
100 |
40 |
70 |
82.88 e |
80.38 e |
7.26 d |
6.61 g |
4.82 d |
5.37 h |
90.67 e |
91.00 e |
100 |
40 |
90 |
109.58 c |
113.03 c |
7.86 c |
8.19 d |
5.13 bc |
5.68 d |
110.33 d |
112.00 cd |
100 |
60 |
70 |
103.91 d |
98.17 d |
6.29 e |
7.57 f |
4.95 cd |
5.49 g |
104.67 d |
106.33 d |
100 |
60 |
90 |
118.59 b |
114.21 c |
7.93 bc |
8.29 c |
5.21 bc |
5.71 c |
120.00 c |
122.00 bc |
120 |
40 |
70 |
104.20 d |
98.85 d |
7.39 d |
7.57 f |
4.99 cd |
5.50 f |
107.33 d |
110.00 cd |
120 |
40 |
90 |
120.96 b |
124.01 b |
8.29 b |
8.62 b |
5.29 b |
5.76 b |
132.00 b |
135.67 b |
120 |
60 |
70 |
109.31 c |
103.10 d |
7.62 cd |
8.01 e |
5.11 bc |
5.67 e |
110.33 d |
110.67 cd |
120 |
60 |
90 |
157.09 a |
149.89 a |
9.23 a |
9.48 a |
6.03 a |
6.64 a |
156.67 a |
159.00 a |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
probability
cm2
concerning the number of cladodes, cladode length, cladode width, and cladode
area, respectively. For the content of the pigments (Table 4), the application
of NPK fertilization induced a high positive effect on chlorophyll and
carotenoid concentrations over the control of the investigation. The results
indicated that the top rate of chemical fertilizers produced the significant
maximum contents of chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll, and
carotenoids. These values for the first season were 5.09, 13.59, 18.68 and 3.02
mg/g and the readings for the second season were 5.28, 12.96, 18.05 and 3.23
mg/g about chlorophyll a, chlorophyll b, total chlorophyll and carotenoids, in
the same order.
II) Fruiting measurements: Data in Table
5 presented the effect of NPK fertilization on fruit yield attributes. Also,
its influence on fruit's physical properties was shown in Tables 6–8, while the
results of its impact on fruit's chemical parameters were exhibited in Table 9.
Compared to unfertilized plants, which recorded the lowest values, the added
NPK fertilization improved these traits. In most cases, the highest level of
NPK fertilizers significantly produced the maximum characters during both study
seasons. Concerning fruit yield attributes, values of the first season were
73.53%, 210.00 fruits and 32.18 kg; moreover, data of the second season were
73.37%, 209.33 fruits, and 32.99 kg for fruit set percentage, number of fruits
per plant, and fruit yield per plant (kg), respectively (Table 5). Relating to
the fruit's physical properties, the measurements for the same fertilization
treatment in the first season were 157.09 g, 9.23 cm, 6.03 cm, 156.67 cm3
(Table 6), 39.83 g, 74.82 g, 0.53 cm (Table 7), 82.27 g, and 187.00 seeds
(Table 8). Further, in the second year, there were 149.89 g, Table 7: Effect of fertilization treatments
(g/plant) on juice weight, peel weight and peel thikness of cactus pear during
the two successive seasons
Treatments |
Juice weight (g) |
Peel weight (g) |
Peel thickness (cm) |
|||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
11.53 f |
13.57 g |
33.80 e |
34.25 f |
0.32 e |
0.31 f |
100 |
40 |
70 |
16.10 e |
16.99 f |
40.56 d |
39.81 e |
0.32 e |
0.35 e |
100 |
40 |
90 |
27.73 bc |
27.89 c |
48.25 c |
48.16 c |
0.38 d |
0.40 c |
100 |
60 |
70 |
24.41 d |
25.29 e |
45.02 cd |
44.09 d |
0.36 d |
0.35 de |
100 |
60 |
90 |
28.39 b |
29.49 b |
57.70 b |
59.78 b |
0.40 c |
0.41 c |
120 |
40 |
70 |
25.14 d |
26.54 d |
47.51 c |
44.38 cd |
0.38 cd |
0.37 de |
120 |
40 |
90 |
28.62 b |
29.49 b |
60.27 b |
59.99 b |
0.49 b |
0.49 b |
120 |
60 |
70 |
26.13 cd |
26.72 d |
47.91 c |
47.62 cd |
0.38 d |
0.37 de |
120 |
60 |
90 |
39.83 a |
40.72 a |
74.82 a |
73.82 a |
0.53 a |
0.54 a |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of
probability
Table 8: Effect of fertilization treatments (g/plant) on pulp
weight/fruit, number of seeds/fruit, and seeds weight/fruit of cactus pear
during the two successive seasons
Treatments |
Pulp
weight/fruit (g) |
Number
of seeds/fruit |
Seeds
weight/fruit (g) |
|||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
21.91 d |
21.44 d |
108.00 g |
112.67 g |
2.44 d |
2.90 cd |
100 |
40 |
70 |
42.32 c |
43.07 c |
118.33 ef |
114.67 g |
2.61 cd |
2.86 cd |
100 |
40 |
90 |
61.32 b |
61.42 b |
132.00 cd |
138.67 d |
2.99 bcd |
3.157 cd |
100 |
60 |
70 |
58.89 b |
59.82 b |
116.33 f |
125.33 f |
2.35 d |
2.61 d |
100 |
60 |
90 |
60.88 b |
58.81 b |
138.33 c |
144.33 c |
3.63 ab |
3.88 ab |
120 |
40 |
70 |
56.69 b |
59.83 b |
124.67 de |
133.33 e |
2.82 cd |
2.903 cd |
120 |
40 |
90 |
60.68 b |
60.96 b |
146.33 b |
152.00 b |
3.74 a |
3.99 a |
120 |
60 |
70 |
61.40 b |
61.70 b |
126.33 d |
133.67 e |
2.92 bcd |
3.13 cd |
120 |
60 |
90 |
82.27 a |
83.27 a |
187.00 a |
191.33 a |
3.19 abc |
3.29 bc |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of probability
Table 9: Effect of fertilization treatments (g/plant) on fruit
T.S.S., total acidity content, fruit T.S.S. / acid ratio, and ascorbic acid of
cactus pear during the two successive seasons
Treatments |
Fruit T.S.S. (%) |
Total
acidity content (%) |
Fruit
T.S.S. / acid ratio |
Ascorbic acid (mg) |
||||||
N |
P |
K |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
2020 |
2021 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8.90 d |
9.03 f |
0.47 a |
0.50 a |
19.17 e |
18.16 e |
11.22 f |
11.26 g |
100 |
40 |
70 |
9.80 cd |
9.93 e |
0.40 b |
0.43 ab |
24.57 de |
23.00 d |
11.41 f |
11.67 f |
100 |
40 |
90 |
11.96 a |
12.23 ab |
0.30 d |
0.43 ab |
39.96 a |
28.03 c |
12.94 de |
13.73 d |
100 |
60 |
70 |
10.46 bc |
10.43 d |
0.40 b |
0.40 b |
26.23 cd |
26.23 cd |
12.94 de |
11.57 fg |
100 |
60 |
90 |
12.23 a |
12.03 b |
0.30 d |
0.30 c |
40.83 a |
40.83 ab |
13.61 cd |
14.31 c |
120 |
40 |
70 |
10.90 b |
10.63 d |
0.37 bc |
0.30 c |
30.43 bc |
36.36 b |
12.84 e |
13.30 e |
120 |
40 |
90 |
12.26 a |
12.03 b |
0.30 d |
0.30 c |
40.90 a |
40.90 ab |
14.72 b |
16.18 a |
120 |
60 |
70 |
10.90 b |
11.13 c |
0.33 cd |
0.30 c |
33.40 b |
36.36 b |
14.20 bc |
15.33 b |
120 |
60 |
90 |
12.63 a |
12.56 a |
0.30 d |
0.30 c |
42.10 a |
42.10 a |
15.41 a |
16.31 a |
Means with the same letter are not significantly different at 5% level of probability
9.48 cm, 6.64 cm, 159.00 cm3 (Table 6), 40.72
g, 73.82 g, 0.54 cm (Table 7), 83.27 g, and 191.33 seeds (Table 8) for fruit
weight, fruit length, fruit width, fruit volume, juice weight, peel weight,
peel thickness, pulp weight/fruit, and the number of seeds/fruit. The best
fruit's chemical parameters came from the treatments of applying 120 g N + 60 g
P + 90 g K/plant followed by 120 g N + 40 g P + 90 g K/plant and then 100 g N +
60 g P + 90 g K/plant (Table 9). These constituents of fruit T.S.S. (%), fruit
T.S.S. / acid ratio and ascorbic acid in the first season were 12.63, 12.26,
12.23%; 42.10, 40.90, 40.83 ratio; 15.41, 14.72, 13.61 mg and in the second
season were 12.56, 12.03, 12.03%; 42.10, 40.90, 40.83 ratio; 16.31, 16.18,
14.31 mg, respectively. On the other side, increasing NPK fertilization
decreased the total acidity content of fruits.
Discussion
It was evident that NPK fertilization improved the
quantity parameters (number of fruits per plant and yield per plant). Also, it
improved the quality characteristics (fruit length, fruit width, fruit volume,
juice weight, pulp weight/fruit, fruit TSS, total acidity content, fruit TSS /
acid ratio, and ascorbic acid content).
There are
several possible explanations for nitrogen fertilizer's role in increased
growth and fruit production. It is a component that is necessary for the amino
acids. Proteins and enzymes are built from amino acids. Nitrogen is also a
component of the chlorophyll molecule, which enables the plant to capture the
sun's energy through photosynthesis and thus increase the amount of total
chlorophyll it contains. Nitrogen may be a significant component of some
chemicals that play an essential physiological role in metabolism, resulting in
increased carbohydrate production and improved overall fruit quality. Consequently,
there was an increase in the amount and quality of fruits that could be
harvested (Nijjar 1985; Mengel et al. 2001).
Phosphorus is
a component of plants' complex nucleic acid structure, and it controls the
production of proteins. Phosphorus plays an essential role in the process of
cell division and is linked to the complex transformation of energy. Phosphorus
is an indispensable nutrient for producing ATP, which serves as the
"energy unit" in the cells of plants. Because of this, every plant
needs phosphorus to stay as healthy and robust as possible (Jain
2017).
Potassium
plays an essential role in the processes of enzyme activation, protein
synthesis, photosynthesis, and cell formation, which may explain why it has a
positive effect on crop growth and yield. Potassium is a vital component for
plant development. It plays a role in the activation of enzymes that are found
within the plant. Potassium regulates the frequency with which stomata open and
close, which controls the movement of water vapor, oxygen, and carbon dioxide
into and out of the plant. As a result, the fruit's quantity and quality were
enhanced (Erner et al. 2001; Ganeshamurthy et al. 2011).
According to the research published
by (Arba et al. 2002; Stewart et al. 2005; Dubeux et al. 2006;
Silva et al. 2012; Mimouni et al. 2013; Zegbe et al. 2014;
Souza et al. 2017), chemical fertilization had a positive effect on the
shoot development and fruit production of cactus pear plants. Our findings were
in agreement with their findings.
Conclusion
Cactus pear (Opuntia ficus-indica L.) plants
benefited from the application of NPK fertilizer because it led to enhanced
vegetative growth, higher fruit yield and improved fruit quality. At this
location in the El-Hammam region, the ideal level of chemical fertilization was
provided by a basal dressing consisting of 120 g of nitrogen, 60 g of
phosphorus, and 90 g of potassium applied to each plant.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof. Mahmoud Sakr for
his suggestions. The authors also extend their gratitude to the Academy of
Scientific Research and Technology (ASRT) for providing the opportunity to
pursue studies through the scientific project entitled "Maximizing the Use
of Succulent Plants for the Development of Populations in Matrouh
Governorate."
Author Contributions
All authors contributed equally. All authors read and
approved the final manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
All authors declare no
conflicts of interest.
Data Availability
Data presented in this study
will be available on a fair request to the corresponding author.
Ethics Approval
Not applicable in this
paper.
Funding Source
Project of Maximizing the
Use of Succulent Plants for the Development of Populations in Matrouh
Governorate, Regional Development Center, El-Hammam city, Academy of Scientific
Research and Technology (ASRT), Egypt.
References
AOAC
(1995). Association of Official
Agricultural Chemists, Official Methods of Analysis, 15th edn. AOAC,
Washington, DC, USA
Fattah MSA, SEA Badr, EM Khalil, AS Elsaid (2020). Feed
efficiency, some blood parameters and in-vitro chemoprevention of
prickly pear (Opuntia ficus indica L.) seeds oil growing in Egypt. Issues
Biol Sci Pharm Res 8:20‒28
Aboukila
EF, IN Nassar, M Rashad, M Hafez, JB Norton (2018). Reclamation of calcareous
soil and improvement of squash growth using brewers’ spent grain and compost. J
Saud Soc Agric Sci 17:390‒397
Arba
M, MC Benismail, M Mokhtari (2002). The cactus pear (Opuntia spp.) in
Morocco: Main species and cultivar characterization. Acta Hortic 581:103‒109
Badr
SEA, MSA Fattah, AS Elsaid (2019). Productive performance and meat quality of
commercial Cobb chicken fed diets containing different levels of prickly pear
fruits (Opuntia ficus indica) peel. Bull Nat Res Cent 43:1‒12
Barros JLD, SLR Donato, VM
Gomes, PER Donato, JAD Silva, MCP Junior (2016). Palma forrageira ‘gigante’
cultivada com adubação orgânica. Rev Agrotecnol 7:53‒65
Claassens
AS, AB Wessels (1997). The fertilizer requirements of cactus pear (Opuntia
ficus-indica) under summer rainfall conditions in South Africa. Acta
Hortic 438:83‒95
Clarke G, RE Kempson (1997). Introduction to the Design and Analysis of Experiments,
Arnold, 1St edn. A Member of the Holder Headline Group, London,
UK
Dubeux JJCB, MVF Santos, MA
Lira, DC Santos, I Farias, LE Lima, RLC Ferreira (2006). Productivity of Opuntia
ficus-indica (L.) Miller under different N and P fertilization and plant
population in northeast Brasil. J Arid Environ 67:357‒372
Duncan DB (1955). Multiple
range and multiple F test. Biometrics 11:1‒24
Elgabaly MM (1973). Reclamation and management of the calcareous soils
of Egypt. In: FAO Soils Bulletin 21,
Calcareous soils: Report of the FAO/UNDP Regional Seminar on Reclamation and
Management of Calcareous Soils, Vol. 21, pp:123–127, 27 Nov – 2 Dec 1972. Cairo,
Egypt
El-Hady
OA, SA Abo-Sedera (2006). Conditioning effect of composts and acrylamide
hydrogels on a sandy calcareous soil. II-Physico-bio-chemical properties of the
soil. Intl J Agric Biol 8:876‒884
Erner Y, Y Kaplan, B Artzi, M
Hamou (2001). Potassium affects citrus tree performance. The Volcani
Center, Institute of Horticulture, Department of Fruit Trees, Bet Dagan, Israel
FAO
(2016). FAO Soils Portal: Management of
Calcareous Soils. Available at: https://www.fao.org/soils-portal/soil-management/
management-of-some-problem-soils/calcareous-soils/ar/
Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2018). Crop Ecology, Cultivation and Uses of Cactus Pear. Rome, Italy
Ganeshamurthy
AN, GC Satisha, P Patil (2011). Potassium nutrition on yield and quality of
fruit crops special emphasis on banana and grapes. Karnat J Agric Sci 24:29‒38
Jain VK (2017). Fundamentals
of Plant Physiology. S Chand Publishing, New Delhi, India
Kuti
JO (2004). Antioxidant compounds from four Opuntia cactus pear fruit
varieties. Food Chem 85:527‒533
Mason
M (2015). Cactus cultivation as
adaptation method for women in Egypt. Available at: https://ccafs.cgiar.org/news/cactus-cultivation-adaptation-method-women-egypt
Mengel
KE, A Kirkbt, H Koesgarten, T Appel (2001). Principles
of Plant Nutrition, 5th Edition. El- Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht
Miller
L (2015). Opuntia Ficus-indica. Ecocrop, FAO, Rome, Italy
Mimouni
A, AA Lhaj, M Ghazi (2013). Mineral nutrition effect on cactus (Opuntia ficus
spp.) growth and development. Acta Hortic
995:213–220
Neffar
S, H Chenchouni, A Beddiar, N Redjel (2013). Rehabilitation of degraded
rangeland in drylands by prickly pear (Opuntia ficus-indica L.)
plantations: effect on soil and spontaneous vegetation. Ecol Balk 5:63‒76
Neto JD, RMD Matos, PFD Silva, ASD
Lima, CAVD Azevedo, LMF Saboya (2020). Growth and yield of cactus pear under
irrigation frequencies and nitrogen fertilization. Bras Engen Agríc Amb
10:664‒671
Nijjar GS (1985). Nutrition of Fruit Trees. Published by
MrsUsha Raj Kumar for Kalyani, New Delhi, India
Silva JAD, P Bonomo, SLR
Donato, AJV Pires, RCCD Rosa, ER Paulo (2012). Composição mineral em cladódios
de palma forrageira sob diferentes espaçamentos e adubações química. Rev
Bras Ciênc Agrár 7:866‒875
Silva JAD, SL Donato, PE
Donato, ED Souza, MCP Júnior, S Junior (2016). Yield and vegetative growth of
cactus pear at different spacings and under chemical fertilizations. Rev
Bras Engen Agríc Amb 20:564‒569
Souza TCD, MVFD Santos, JCBJ
Dubeux, MA Lira, DCD Santos, MVD Cunha, LED Lima, RRD Silva (2017).
Productivity and nutrient concentration in spineless cactus under different
fertilizations and plant densities. Rev Bras Cienc Agrar Recife 12:555‒560
Stewart WM, DW Dibb, AE
Johnston, TJ Smyth (2005). Contribution of commercial fertilizer nutrients to
food production. Agron J 97:1‒6
Ueckert DN (2020). Pricklypear Ecology. Texas Agricultural
Experiment Station, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA
Zegbe JA, A Serna-Perez, J Mena-Covarrubias (2014).
Mineral nutrition enhances yield and affects fruit quality of ‘Cristalina’ cactus pear. Sci Hortic 167:63‒70
Zegbe JA, A Serna-Pérez, J Mena-Covarrubias (2015). Soil
applications of NPK affect fruit quality and shelf-life of ‘Cristalina’ cactus
pear. Fruits 70:297‒302
Zimmer C (2013). Vitamins’
Old, Old Edge. The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/science/vitamins-old-old-edge.html