Background

A perusal of Mulder’s chart would reveal that interaction between major and micronutrients is a well established fact. Antagonism between Ca and Fe (Wallace et al., 1976; Bindra, 1980) and P and Zn (Saeed and Fox, 1979; Loneragan et al., 1982) are the classical examples. These interactions are based mostly on experiments in crop plants, often under controlled nutrient culture. Relative abundance of a nutrient with reference to other nutrients in the growth media is the basic reason for differential absorption of nutrients and interaction among them (Bergman et al., 1960; Epstein, 1972). Interactions could occur in the process of absorption or translocation. While the interaction among cations is predominantly at the absorption stage (Epstein, 1972), cation-anion interactions occur at both the membrane and in cellular processes after absorption (Hiatt and Leggett, 1974). Nutrient absorption of the plant tissue was found to vary with the variety, based on its physiological need (Jacobson and Ordin, 1954; Barbar and Russell, 1961) and the affinity of the roots on which it is grown (Cook and Lider, 1964; Downton, 1977). The knowledge of nutrient interactions is a tool in nutrient management, a more effective one in perennial fruit trees, in which the phenological stages are longer and are grown essentially on root stocks. Hence the present investigations were carried out to elucidate the variation in the relationship of major nutrient contents of soil/ petiole with micronutrient absorption by Thompson Seedless and its clone 2A on their own roots and Dog Ridge rootstock, and thereby evolve guidelines in adjusting major nutrient applications for efficient absorption of micronutrients.

1 Materials and Methods

Variation in the relationship of major nutrient contents of soil and petioles with micronutrient absorption in Thompson Seedless and its clone 2A on their own roots and Dog Ridge rootstock was assessed through vineyard surveys. Thirty eight vineyards under each category, namely Thompson Seedless on own root, Thompson Seedless on Dog Ridge rootstock, 2A clone on own root and 2A clone on Dog Ridge were included in the survey. All the vineyards were in the age group of 4-6 years and received varying levels of nutrients. The soils of the vineyards surveyed belonged to the order ‘Vertisols’ with pH in the range of 7.76 ± 0.52 and EC 0.604 ± 0.428 dSm^-1. All the vines selected for the study were planted at 2.7 x 1.8 m, trained to extended Y trellis and pruned to have 30±2 canes/vine. One hundred petioles of leaves opposite to flower clusters were collected at full bloom from each vineyard and soil samples from 15-30 cm depth at 60 cm away from the vine stem at back pruning before the application of fertilizers. Available contents of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Na, Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu in soil and their contents in petioles were determined by standard analytical methods suggested by the AOAC. Linear, quadratic and multiple regression equations were fitted to elucidate the relationship of soil and petiole contents with the absorption ratio (petiole content/ soil content) of Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu.

2 Results and Discussion

The range, mean and coefficient of variation in the major and micronutrient contents of soil and petioles of the vineyards surveyed are presented in Table 1. Variation, as assessed by the normal distribution of the coefficients of variation, was above normal range in soil P in Thompson Seedless (TS) vineyards on Dog Ridge rootstock (DR), petiole Fe of 2A on DR, and in soil S and petiole Cu in all the vineyards. Such variation could be due to variation in the soil application of sulphate of potash and foliar spray of copper fungicides.

2.1 Relationship with Fe absorption

Absorption of Fe was not influenced by any major nutrient content of either soil or petioles in TS on own root (OR), 2A on OR or DR but influenced negatively by N, P, K and S contents of soil, but positively by K content of  petioles in TS on DR (Table 2). The negative relationship of soil contents of P, K and S was linear, while that of soil N was quadratic. The positive relationship of petiole K was Quadratic (Figure 1). Fe absorption reduced with increasing levels of soil reaching the minimum of 11.9 corresponding to 400 ppm of N. Optimum level of petiole K was 2.83 per cent corresponding to the maximum absorption of 25.1 (Table 3).

Multiple regression analysis of the relation of Fe absorption with soil and petiole nutrient contents revealed that the soil contents of N, P, K and petiole K contents together determined Fe absorption by 34.6 per cent. The coefficient of petiole K alone was greater than its t-stat value (Table 4), indicating a strong synergism between petiole K and Fe absorption. Such relationship was also observed by Bolle-Jones (1955) and Barak and Chen (1984). Relationship of soil K with Fe absorption was quite opposite to the relationship of petiole K Figure 1). This could be attributed to lack of correlation between soil and petiole K in the same vineyards surveyed (Kalbhor et al., 2017) Antagonism of Ca (Wallace et al., 1976; Bindra, 1980; Fageria and Baligar, 1999) and P (Elliott and Lauchli, 1985; Sumner and Farina, 1986) with Fe is an established fact. K seems to have suppressed the antagonistic effect of Ca on Fe by its strong antagonism with Ca on DR (Shikhamany et al., 2017). Iso-ionic nature of HPO₄ and SO₄ could be the reason for the influence of S similar to P on Fe absorption. Acidifying effect of S resulting in higher absorption of P (Soliman et al., 1992) could be yet another reason. This analysis leads to an assumption that the antagonism between S and Fe is during translocation rather than absorption. Petiole K accounted for a positive variation of 13.8 per cent in Fe absorption in TS on DR. Among the nutrients influencing negatively the absorption of Fe, soil P ranked first followed by soil K in TS on DR respectively accounting for 26.6 and 26.3 per cent variation. The least variation was accounted for by soil N in TS on DR (Table 5).

2.2 Relationship with Mn absorption

Absorption of Mn was influenced negatively by soil and petiole N in TS but soil N alone in 2A on DR. While soil P in TS and 2A on DR and petiole P in the former on OR influenced Mn absorption negatively, petiole P in 2a on OR influenced positively. Mn absorption was influenced negatively by soil K in TS on DR, petiole K in 2A on OR and DR. It was influenced negatively by soil Ca in TS on OR but positively by soil and petiole Ca in 2A on DR. Petiole Mg contents influenced Mn absorption positively in 2A both on OR and DR, but soil S influenced negatively in TS on DR. While increasing levels of soil Na were associated with reduced absorption of Mn in TS on DR, petiole Na levels with increased absorption in TS and 2A on OR (Table 2). Variation in the correlations of major nutrient contents soil and petioles with Mn among stionic combinations could be due to the variation in their contents (Table 1) as also observed in apple (Kucukyumuk and Ferdal, 2011) and grape (Kalbhor et al., 2017). While the variation due to rootstock was attributed to its affinity for nutrients (Smith and Wallace, 1956; Cook and Lider, 1964; Downton, 1977), the variation among varieties to their physiological needs (Jacobson and Ordin, 1954; Barber and Russell, 1961). The negative relationship of soil contents of N, S and Na with Mn absorption in TS on DR and soil Na in 2A on OR was linear, while that of soil Ca, petiole P and Na in TS on OR; soil P, soil K and petiole N in TS on DR; petiole K in 2A on OR, and soil N, soil P and petiole K in 2A on DR was quadratic (Figure 2). The levels of soil Ca and Petiole P associated with minimum absorption of Mn in TS on OR respectively were 6458 ppm and 0.6 per cent. Such levels of soil P, soil K and petiole N in TS on DR were respectively 442 ppm, 2000 ppm and 2.37 per cent; petiole K in 2A on OR was 3.52 per cent and soil N, soil P, petiole P and petiole K respectively were 277.3 ppm, 217 ppm, 0.522 per cent and 2.57 per cent in 2A on DR (Table 3). The quadratic relationship of petiole Na in TS on OR; Petiole contents of P, Mg and Na in 2A on OR, and soil Ca, petiole Ca and petiole Mg in 2A on DR was positive (Figure2). The threshold levels for increased absorption of Mn were 0.57 for Na in TS on OR; 0.269 and 0.396 per cent respectively for petiole and petiole Mg in 2A on OR; and 3684 ppm, 0.382 and 0.443 per cent respectively for soil Ca, petiole Ca and petiole Mg in 2A on DR. Petiole Na level of 2.2 per cent was optimum corresponding to the maximum absorption of 35.3 in 2A on OR (Table 3)

Multiple linear regression function indicated that soil Ca, and petiole P and Na together accounted for 23.8 per cent variation in Mn absorption by TS on OR; while soil and petiole contents of N; and soil contents of P, K S and Na together for 60.4 per cent variation in TS on DR; soil and petiole Na together with petiole contents of P, K and Mg for 53.9 per cent in 2A on OR, and soil and petiole P and Ca contents together with soil N petiole K and Mg for 73.7 per cent in 2A on DR. Of which, the coefficients of petiole P and Na in TS on OR; petiole N in TS on DR; petiole P, K, Mg and Na in 2A on OR; and petiole P, K, Ca and Mg in 2A on DR were higher than their t-stat values (Table 4). Positive interaction between P and Mn has been reported in the literature (Smilde, 1973) and was attributed to the soil-acidifying effect of P, which increases the Mn uptake (Jackson and Carter, 1976).This variation could be due to less rate of absorption of Mn but more of P by TS on OR and 2A on DR. Since Mn absorption did not vary among these stionic combinations, but that of P was more in 2A on OR (Kalbhor et al., 2017), it appears that absorption of P played a positive role in the absorption of Mn. Negative effect of K but positive effect of Ca, Mg and Na on Mn absorption could be attributed to the antagonism of K with the latter three cations. The positive effect of Ca on Mn absorption could also be due to antagonism between Ca and Fe, and Fe and Mn. Negative interactions between Fe and Mn have been widely reported in crop plants (Moraghan, 1985; Zaharieva, 1986). Ramani and Kannan (1974) noted that K, Ca, and Mg promoted the absorption of Mn when it is present in low amounts but effectively decrease at high amounts. Petiole Ca accounted for the highest positive variation of 56.9 per cent in Mn absorption in 2A on DR followed by petiole Na (32.8 per cent) in 2A on OR, the least being 21.4 per cent by petiole Mg in 2A on OR. Negative contribution to the absorption of Mn by soil Na was the highest (50.6 per cent) in TS on DR, followed by petiole P (49.1 per cent) in 2A on DR, the least being 12.4 per cent by soil N in TS on DR (Table 5). Better relationship of nutrient contents of petioles than soil with Mn absorption points out that the interaction of nutrients is during translocation but not at absorption.

2.3 Relationship with Zn absorption

Zinc absorption was influenced negatively by soil P in TS on OR as well as on DR and by petiole P in TS on OR and 2A on DR. It was also influenced negatively by soil contents of K, Mg and Na and petiole content of Na in TS on DR. Petiole content of S in TS on DR; of P, Mg and Na in 2A on OR and soil content of Ca in 2A on DR influenced the absorption of Zn positively (Table 2). The negative relationship of soil contents of P, Mg and Na in TS on DR and the positive relationship of Ca in 2A on DR was linear. Whereas the negative relationship of soil and petiole P in TS on OR, petiole P in 2A on DR, soil K and petiole Na in TS on DR was quadratic. The positive relationship of petiole contents of S and Na in TS on DR, and of P, Mg and Na in 2A on OR was also quadratic (Figure 3). Soil P level of 110 ppm and petiole P of 0.703 per cent in TS on OR, and 1500 ppm of soil K and 1.31 per cent of petiole Na in TS on DR were associated with the minimum absorption of Zn. The threshold level, beyond which the Zn absorption increased was 0.029 per cent for petiole S in TS on DR, and 0.516 and 0.088 and  per cent respectively for petiole P and Mg contents in 2A on OR. Petiole P content of 0.22 per cent in 2A on DR and 1.169 per cent of petiole Na in 2A on OR were optimum respectively corresponding to the maximum absorption of 20.3 and 25.8 (Table 3).

2.4 Relationship with Cu absorption

Absorption of Cu was influenced positively by soil Na in TS on DR; soil contents of N, P, K and S, and petiole K in 2A on OR; and petiole contents of S and Na in 2A on DR, but negatively with soil Mg in 2A on DR and soil Na in TS on OR (Table 2). The positive relationship of soil Na in TS on DR and the negative relationship of soil Mg and soil Na respectively in 2A on DR and TS on OR with Cu absorption was linear, whereas the other relationships were quadratic (Table 3). The threshold level up to which the absorption decreased and beyond which increased was 162 ppm, 93.5 ppm, 521 ppm1.52 per cent respectively for soil N, soil P, soil K and petiole K in 2A on OR; and 0.274 for petiole Na in 2A on DR. The optimum level of soil S in 2A on OR and petiole S in 2A on DR respectively was 387 ppm and 0.246 per cent corresponding to the maximum absorption of 41.4 and 3.77 (Figure 4).

Multiple regression analysis revealed that soil contents of N, P, K and S, and petiole K together determined the Cu absorption by 48.8 per cent in 2A on OR; the major positive contribution being of petiole K. Positive effect of K on Cu absorption was also observed in Thompson Seedless grape (Shikhamany et al., 1988). This relationship could be due to the antagonism between K and Ca and negative relationship between Ca and Cu (Fageria and Baligar, (1999). In case of 2A on DR, soil Mg together with petiole contents of S and Na determined by 38.3 per cent. Major positive contribution was by petiole S. Negative effect of S on the absorption of other divalent micronutrients (Fe and Mn) observed in the present study and the possible antagonism between Cu and other divalent micro nutrients could be the reason for the enhancing effect of S on Cu absorption. Sulphur application was found to increase the Cu content in the foliage of forage crops (Gupta and Mehla, 1980; Suttle, 1991). Among the nutrients influencing the absorption positively, individual contribution of soil P (72 per cent) was greater than that of petiole K (29.1 per cent) towards the determination of Cu absorption in 2A on OR. Individual contribution of petiole S in 2A on DR was 17.2 per cent. The negative contribution was highest (29.2 per cent) by soil Mg in 2A on DR (Table 5).

Acknowldgements

The authors are grateful to the Office Bearers and the Chairman, Central Research Committee of The Maharashtra Grape Growers’ Association for facilitating the conduct of the Survey; and the members of the research Advisory Committee for their suggestions and guidance in conducting the research.

References

Barak P., and Chen Y., 1984, The effect of potassium on iron chlorosis in calcarious soils, J.Plant Nutr., 7: 125-133

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904168409363180

Barber D.A., and Russell R.S., 1961, The relationship between metabolism and exchangeability of ions in plant tissues. J. Expt. Bot., 12:252-260

https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/12.2.252

Bergman E.L., Ken worthy A.L., Bass S.T., and Benne E.J., 1960, Growth of Concord grapes in sand   culture as related to various levels of essential nutrient elements, Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci., 75: 329-340

Bindra A.S., 19809, Iron Chlorosis in Horticultural and Field Crops. Annu. Rev. Plant Sci., 2: 221-321

Bolle-Jones E.W., 1955, The Interactions of Iron and Potassium in the Potato Plant. Plant Soil, 6: 129-173

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01343445

Cook J.A., and Lider L.A., 1964, Mineral composition of blooming grape petiole in relation to rootstock- Scion variety behaviour. Proc. Amer., Soc. Hort. Sci., 84:243-254

Downton W.J., 1977, Influence of rootstock on the accumulation of chloride, sodium and potassium in grapevines. Austral. J. Agr. Res., 28:879b- 889

https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9770879

Elliott G.C., and Lauchli A., 1985, Phosphorus Efficiency and Phosphate Iron Interaction in Maize. Agron. J., 77: 399-403

https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1985.00021962007700030011x

Epstein E., 1972, Mineral Nutrition of Plants: Principles and Perspectives; John Wiley and Sons: New York

Fageria N.K., and Baligar V.C., 199, Growth and Nutrient Concentrations of Common Bean, Lowland Rice, Corn, Soybean, and Wheat at Different Soil pH on an Inceptisol. J. Plant Nutr., 22, 1495-1507

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904169909365730

Gupta V.K., and Mehla D.S., 1980, Influence of sulphur on the yield and concentration of copper, manganese, iron and molybdenum in berseem  (Trifolium alexandrinum) grown on two different soils., Plant and Soil, 56(2): 229-234

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02205851

Haldar M., and Mandal L.N., 1981, Effect of Phosphorus and Zinc on the Growth and Phosphorus, Zinc, Copper, Iron, and Manganese Nutrition of Rice., Plant  Soil, 59: 415-425

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02184546

Hiatt A.J., and Leggett J.E., 1974, Ionic Interactions and Antagonisms in Plants, In The plant Root and Its Environment; Carson, E.W., Ed.; University Press of Virginia: Charlottesville, VA, 101-143

Jackson T.L., and Carter G.E., 1976, Nutrient Uptake by Burbank Potatoes as Influenced by Fertilization, Agron J., 68: 9-12

https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1976.00021962006800010003x

Jacobson L., and Ordin L., 1954, Organic acid metabolism and ion absorption in roots, Plant Physiol., 29:70-75

https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.29.1.70

Kalbhor J.N., Shelke T.S., Mungare T.S., and Shikhamany S.D., 2017, An approach to determine the preferential absorption of nutrients by different varieties and rootstocks of grape through vineyard surveys, Green Farming, 8(4):901-906

Kucukyumuk Z., and Fedal I., 2011, Rootstock and cultivar effect on mineral nutrition, seasonal nutrient variation and correlation among leaf, flower and fruit nutrient concentration in apple trees, Bulgarian J. Agric. Sci., 17(5): 633-641

Loneragan J.F., Grove T.S., and Robson A.D., 1979, Snowball, K. Phosphorus Toxicity as a Factor in Zinc-Phosphorus Interactions in Plants, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 43: 966-972

https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1979.03615995004300050031x

Mandal L.N., and Haldar M., 1980, Influence of Phosphorus and Zinc Application on the Availability of Zinc, Copper, Iron, Manganese and Phosphorus in Waterlogged Rice Soils., Soil Sci., 130: 251-257

https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-198011000-00004

Mandal B., and Mandal, L.N., 1990, Effect of Phosphorus Application on Transformation of Zinc Fraction in Soil and on the Zinc Nutrition of Lowland Rice. Plant Soil, 121: 115-123

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00013104

Moraghan J.T., 1985, Manganese Nutrition of Flax as Affected by Fe-EDDHA and Soil Air Drying. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 49: 668-671

https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1985.03615995004900030028x

Ramani S., and Kannan S., 1974, Effects of Certain Cations on Manganese Absorption by Excised Rice Roots, Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 5: 435-439

https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627409366520

Saeed M., and Fox R.L., 1979, Influence of Phosphate Fertilization on Zinc Adsorption by Tropical Soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 43: 683-686

https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1979.03615995004300040011x

Shikhamany S.D., Chittirai Chelvan R., and Chadha K.L., 1988, Effect of varying levels of nitrogen and potash on petiole nutrient contents in Thompson Seedless grape (Vitis vinifera L.). Indian J. Hort., 45(3&4):180-188

Shikhamany S.D., Kalbhor J.N., Shelke T.S., and Mungare T.S., 2017, Variation in Nutrient Absorption by Thompson Seedless Grape (Vitis vinifera L.) on Different Rootstocks as Influenced by Soil Chemical Characteristics.International Journal of Horticulture, 7(31): 288-298

https://doi.org/10.5376/ijh.2017.07.0031

Shikhamany S.D., and Sharma J., 2008, Interaction of sodium and potassium and potassium use efficiency in Thompson Seedless grape, Acta Hort., 785: 373-377

https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2008.785.46

Smilde K.W., 1973, Phosphorus and Micronutrient Metal Uptake by Some Tree Species as Affected by Phosphate and Lime Applied to an Acid Sandy Soil. Plant Soil, 39: 131-149

https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018052

Soliman M.F., Kostandi S.F., and van Beusichem M.L., 1992, Influence of Sulfur and Nitrogen Fertilizer on the Uptake of Iron, Manganese, and Zinc by Corn  Plants Grown in Calcareous Soil. Commn. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 23: 1289-1300

https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629209368666

Sumner, M.E., Farina, M.P.W., 1986, Phosphorus Interactions with Other Nutrients and Lime in Field Cropping Systems. Adv. Soil Sci., 5: 201-236

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8660-5_5

Suttle N.F.,1991, The interactions between copper, molybdenum and sulphur in ruminant nutrition. Annu. Rev. Nutr., 11:121-140

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nu.11.070191.001005

Wallace A., Wood R.A., and Soufi S.M., 1976, Cation-Anion Balance in Lime Induced Chlorosis. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal., 7: 15-26

https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627609366607

Zaharieva T., 1986, Comprative Studies of Iron Inefficient Plant Species Plant Analysis. J. Plant Nutr., 9: 939-946

https://doi.org/10.1080/01904168609363494