Aedmaasika (Fragaria x ananassa Duch.) ‘Sonata’ ja ‘Sonsation’ toiteelementidega varustatus ja saagikus sõltuvalt istutuseelsest väetamisest
Laen...
Kuupäev
2020
Kättesaadav alates
28.08.2020
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Eesti Maaülikool
Abstrakt
Antud bakalaureusetöö eesmärgiks oli välja selgitada erinevate istutuseelselt antavate
väetiste ehk alusväetiste mõju esimese aasta maasikataimede saagile ja viljade suurusele.
Väetuskatse viidi läbi Lõuna-Eestis 2018. aastal. Katses kasutati kolme erinevat
alusväetist, millest kaks olid kontrollitud lahustuvusega (Mivena Field-Cote CRF 18-08-
12-7MgO+Te 8M, Ekote fruit strawberry 14-05-17+5CaO+2MgO) ja üks tavapärase
lahustuvusega kompleksväetis (YaraMila Complex 12-11-18(8)). Katsesortideks olid
’Sonata’ ja ’Sonsation’. Kõiki variante väetati lisaks tilkkastmissüsteemi ja ka lehtede
kaudu samades kogustes ja aegadel. Kontrollvariandile alusväetist ei antud. Tulemustest
selgus, et kontrollitud lahustuvusega väetised ei taganud üldiselt taimede paremat
toitainetega varustatust: sõltumata väetamisest oli taimelehtede N- ja P- sisaldus normi
piires, K- ja Mg- sisaldus normi alampiiril või kerges defitsiidis. Tavapärase
lahustuvusega Yara alusväetis tagas parema saagi kui kontrollitud lahustuvusega väetised.
Kontrollitud lahustuvusega väetised mõjusid erinevalt, Mivena alusväetise mõju saagile
oli suurem kui Ekompany väetisel. Kontrollitud lahustuvusega väetised ei suurendanud
antud katses statistiliselt oluliselt vilja massi. Erinevad maasikasordid reageerisid
väetamisele erinevalt, sordi ’Sonsation’ puhul oli alusväetiste kasutamine tulemuslikum
kui ’Sonata’ puhul. Majanduslikult oli tasuv Yara ja Mivena alusväetiste kasutamine.
This bachelor's thesis has been drawn up to investigate the effect of different preplanting fertilizers on the yield and fruit weight of the first year ’Sonata’ and ’Sonsation’ strawberries. Fertilization experiment was conducted in Southern Estonia in 2018. Three different preplanting fertilizers were used: controlled release fertilizer (CRF) Mivena Fieldcote 18-08-12-7MgO+Te 8M and CRF Ekompany 14-05-17+5CaO+2MgO; one of them was traditionally used complex fertilizer Yara 12-11-18(8). Additionally, all treatments were fertilized via drip irrigation and via leaves at the same amounts and times. Control treatment did not receive preplanting fertilizer. The results showed that controlled release fertilizers did not generally ensure better supply of nutrients to plants compared to the traditional one: regardless of fertilization the N and P content in the plant leaves was within recommended range, K and Mg content was either at the lowest level of the recommended range or in a slight deficit. In terms of yield, Yara plepanting fertilizer gave better results compared to CRF; however there was also difference between CRF fertilizers. Mivena FieldCote had better effect on yield compared to the Ekompany fertilizer. The use of CRF did not significantly increase the average weight of the fruit. The effect of the fertilizers also depended on the cultivar: ’Sonsation’ was more affected by the pre-planting fertilizers than ’Sonata’. Based on the first year results it can be concluded that, the use of preplanting fertilizers YaraMila Complex and Mivena Fieldcote was economically viable.
This bachelor's thesis has been drawn up to investigate the effect of different preplanting fertilizers on the yield and fruit weight of the first year ’Sonata’ and ’Sonsation’ strawberries. Fertilization experiment was conducted in Southern Estonia in 2018. Three different preplanting fertilizers were used: controlled release fertilizer (CRF) Mivena Fieldcote 18-08-12-7MgO+Te 8M and CRF Ekompany 14-05-17+5CaO+2MgO; one of them was traditionally used complex fertilizer Yara 12-11-18(8). Additionally, all treatments were fertilized via drip irrigation and via leaves at the same amounts and times. Control treatment did not receive preplanting fertilizer. The results showed that controlled release fertilizers did not generally ensure better supply of nutrients to plants compared to the traditional one: regardless of fertilization the N and P content in the plant leaves was within recommended range, K and Mg content was either at the lowest level of the recommended range or in a slight deficit. In terms of yield, Yara plepanting fertilizer gave better results compared to CRF; however there was also difference between CRF fertilizers. Mivena FieldCote had better effect on yield compared to the Ekompany fertilizer. The use of CRF did not significantly increase the average weight of the fruit. The effect of the fertilizers also depended on the cultivar: ’Sonsation’ was more affected by the pre-planting fertilizers than ’Sonata’. Based on the first year results it can be concluded that, the use of preplanting fertilizers YaraMila Complex and Mivena Fieldcote was economically viable.
Kirjeldus
Bakalaureusetöö
Põllumajandussaaduste tootmise ja turustamise õppekaval
Märksõnad
bakalaureusetööd, kontrollitud lahustuvusega väetis, alusväetised, vilja suurus, saak, väetised