The decline of soil nutrient status and productivity of crops, and restoration of soil health is a key global problem. Crop yields are reduced by soil degradation, which endangers the world's food supply. Crop yields and soil health are further decreased by improper fertilizers in conjunction with intense cropping. A wide variety of plants, particularly monocotyledonous crops that can collect significant levels of silicon in their organs, have shown the benefits of silicon in terms of growth, biomass, and yield. According to the results, silica solubilizer was applied to the soil at a rate of 12.5 kg, 50 kg FYM/ha, and setts were treated with 0.5% K2 SiO3 and 2.5% urea and potash foliar spray every 15 days between 60 and 150 days after planting (DAP) showed, leaf area, maximum tiller population, specific leaf area, leaf area index, macro, and micronutrients, specific leaf weight, quality parameters and commercial cane sugar percent both the ratoon crop and the plant are in drought condition.
Research Article
Potential Applications of Silicate Solubilizing Bacteria and Potassium Silicate on Sugarcane Crop under Drought Condition
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2855698/v1
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License
Journal Publication
published 15 Jun, 2023
You are reading this latest preprint version
Potassium silicate
silicate solubilizing bacteria
leaf nutrients
soil fertility
quality parameters
The second most prevalent element, silicon (Si), is typically found in silicates (SiO3) of Al, Mg, Ca, Na, K, or Fe, which are usually unavailable for crops. The chemical and biological reactions in soil are often to determine how easily they can reach the plant roots. Through a variety of methods, plants absorb silicon (Si) as soluble mono-silicic acid, which strengthens the cell wall [1, 2]. Numerous plant species, including Cucumber, rice, oats, barley, wheat, and sugarcane, are known to be more resistant to disease, insect attack, and unfavorable climatic conditions when their cell walls are fortified with silicon [3, 4, 5, 6].
The sugarcane (Saccharum spp. ), according to extensive research, is capable of removing up to 470 and 700 kg of silica per year from silica-rich soils [7]. According to [8] these cereal plants absorb > 1.0% of the dry Si content of the shoot. On the weathered tropical or subtropical soils on which rice and sugarcane are typically grown, such as Oxisols, Ultisols, and organic histosols, yield responses to soil Si additions in rice and sugarcane have been frequently reported [9]. Such soils have often lost their soluble Si sources due to high temperatures and rainfall [7]. These highly weathered soils lack essential nutrients and are acidic, which may cause them to be rich in soluble forms of aluminum (Al) when the soil pH is 5.5 [10]. As a result, soluble Si can be removed from the soil by a reaction that creates insoluble hydroxyl aluminosilicates (HASs) [11, 12].
Climate changes have reduced crop productivity due to extreme weather and unexpected temperature fluctuations [13, 14, 15]. Soil fertility management is critical to crop production because it contributes to greater, longer-lasting crop yields. Nutrient management and monitoring are fundamental for optimal crop production. Sugarcane yields best with a regular supply of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), as well as other macro and micronutrients. Despite this, Si is a nutrient that is rarely considered for long-term sugarcane cultivation. Sugarcane's active Si build-up reveals a physiological and morphological involvement in growth.
According to [16, 17], microorganisms are recognized to have a significant role in the dissolution of minerals such as silicates and phosphates. Through improved uptake of these minerals, several advantageous microorganisms have been shown to have good effects on plants under various stress circumstances [18, 17]. It is well known that microbe-produced organic acid dissolves both insoluble silicon and phosphate, increasing their availability to plants [19]. According to several studies, bacteria solubilize silicates to enhance the availability its plants [20].
Silicon is made available to plants by microorganisms and chemical reactions in the soil [21]. Silicon efficiency results in decreased photosynthesis and brix content, increased disease and insect attack increased sunburn and withering, and exacerbated post-harvest decline [22]. Biofertilizers, which are environmentally safe and cost-effective sources of plant nutrients compared to chemical fertilizers [23, 24] are one of the essential components of integrated nutrient management. Silicate solubilizing bacteria (SSB) are capable of solubilizing phosphates, potassium, and insoluble forms of silicates, thereby enhancing soil fertility and plant productivity [25, 26]. Numerous studies have demonstrated that Silica Solubilizing Bacteria have positive effects on crop development, photosynthesis, and nutrient absorption from the soil [27].
Drought is one of the most significant abiotic factors that harm crop growth and production worldwide [28]. Potassium silicate applied topically to leaves can increase leaf erectness, boost photosynthetic efficiency, and reduce the tendency of grasses to lodge [29, 30]. By maintaining plant water potential, photosynthetic activity, stomatal conductance, and leaf height under high transpiration rates, silicon makes plants less sensitive to multiple stresses [31, 32].
However, the amount of silica deposition in sugarcane leaves grown with silicon mobilizing bacteria, along with calcium silicate and potassium silicate has never been studied before. Therefore the objective of this study was to examine the effects of silicon on sugarcane yield contributing traits, as well as its relationship with other nutrients in leaf tissues and soil nutrients.
Location of Field Experiments
Field experiments were conducted at the Sugarcane Research Station in Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu, India, to evaluate the interaction effect of silicon integration as a basal dress, setts dipping in silicon solution, and foliar sprinkling of urea and potash on cane production under drought conditions. The clone CoC 25 was selected as a test variety and cultivated in sandy loam-textured experimental environments. Results from the initial experimental soil sample were presented in (Table 1).
|
S.No |
Parameters |
Experimental result |
|---|---|---|
|
Soil samples |
||
|
1. |
pH |
7.6 |
|
2. |
EC |
0.12 dSm-1 |
|
3. |
Available nitrogen |
73 kg/ac |
|
4. |
Available phosphorus |
11 kg/ac |
|
5. |
Available potassium |
120 kg/ ac |
|
6. |
Iron (Fe) |
18.35 ppm |
|
7. |
Manganese (Mn) |
10.46 ppm |
|
8. |
Zinc (Zn) |
0.78 ppm, |
|
9. |
Copper (Cu) |
1.72 ppm |
|
Water samples |
||
|
1. |
pH |
6.3 |
|
2. |
EC |
3.8 dSm-1 |
|
3. |
HCO3 |
13.4 meq/l |
|
4. |
Cl |
24.3 meq/l |
|
5. |
SO4 |
0.3 meq/l |
|
6. |
Ca |
6.0 meq/l |
|
7. |
Mg |
7.0 meq/l |
|
8. |
Na |
20.0 meq/l |
|
9. |
K |
5.0 meq/l |
|
10. |
SAR |
7.84 |
|
11. |
Mg:Ca |
1.17 |
Treatment Schedule
|
Tr.1 |
Control (Applying stress nine times, once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP) |
|---|---|
|
Tr.2 |
Tr.1+ Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP |
|
Tr.3 |
Tr.1 + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment |
|
Tr.4 |
Tr.1 + 0.5% K2SiO3 Sett treatment |
|
Tr.5 |
Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @ 12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM /ha |
|
Tr.6 |
Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment +2.5% urea and potash foliar spray on 15days interval from 60 to 150 DAP |
|
Tr.7 |
Tr.1 + Soil application of silica solubilizer @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + Sett treatment of 0.5% K2SiO3 alone + Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP |
After applying remedies to prevent stress, the setts were relocated to the primary field. Regarding NPK fertilization, the entire quantity of phosphorus was used as a base dose, and the phosphorus and potassium doses were applied in three equal portions thirty and sixty days after planting.
(Note: Water stress was imposed by withholding irrigation at a critical period of 60–150 DAP for scheduling of irrigations once in 15 days).
Tiller population
On the 100th day following planting, tillers were counted from the net plot area and reported as the number of tillers per germinated bud (including mother shoots) or tillering capacity (per row basis).
Leaf Area
Leaf area was calculated for each plant using the leaf length, leaf breadth, and K constant value and expressed as cm2 per plant.
Leaf area index (LAI)
The [ 33 ] formula was used to calculate the leaf area index.
Specific leaf area (SLA)
Specific leaf area was calculated by employing the following formula of [34] and expressed in cm− 2 g− 1.
Specific leaf weight (SLW)
The following formula from [35] was used to compute the specific leaf weight and is represented in mg cm− 2.
Cane weight
Six canes were selected at random from each plot, cut at the base, detopped at the mature inter-node level, and weighed. The average cane weight was determined and expressed as g plant− 1.
Cane dry weight
Six randomly selected canes from each plot were cut at the bottom, detopped at the mature inter-node level, and their weight was measured. The canes were then preserved for drying, and their weight after drying was computed and expressed as g plant− 1.
Nutrient uptake
For each plant, the generation of dry matter was noted at various stages. By multiplying the dry weight by the nutrient content, the amount of nutrition taken up by the plant was determined. The units are expressed as Kg/ha.
Soil Nutritional status
Soil samples were collected in different place and dried under shade for further nutrient analysis. Nitrogen in soil samples was analyzed by Micro kjeldhal method described by [36] and Vanado molybdate yellow colour method was adopted for Phosphorus estimation and Potassium was analyzed flame photometric method by using triacid extract described by [37].
Quality parameters
Brix (%), Pol (%) and Purity coefficient (%)
Six randomly chosen canes were used to analyze the juice quality parameters brix, pol, and purity during harvest. In an automatic sucrose analyzer system created by Electronic Automation of West Germany, the juice brix, sucrose percentage, and purity were measured. The juice was cleared using Horne's dry lead sub-acetate before being fed into the device [38]. The purity coefficient was calculated as the ratio of sucrose to all solids.
Commercial cane sugar
According to [38] commercial cane sugar (CCS) percent was calculated as follows and expressed as a percent.
CCS % = 1.022 pol in juice % − 0.292 brix % in juice
Scanning Electron Microscope
Harvest-stage leaves of each sugarcane crop were divided into sections and placed in Eppendorf tubes containing karnovsky fixative solution for 24 hours. The solutions were transferred promptly into a cryoprotective solution (30% glycerol) for 30 minutes. After being chilled in liquid nitrogen, the samples were cut into small pieces using a knife on a cooled metal plate. The fragments were first dried on paper towels and put in Petri dishes with distilled water. After that, they were attached to a stub specimen container formed of a brass disc that was 12–13 mm (0.5 in diameter) and covered with aluminium foil using double-sided carbon tape. Several fragments had the abaxial leaf surface set in the up position, while the abaxial side was fixed in the down position. The stub-mounted samples were put in a Balzers SCD 050 evaporator for plating after three days. The specimen-holding stubs were initially placed in a desiccators filled with silica gel. The same examination was done using a LEOEVO 40XVP scanning electron microscope.
Statistical analysis
Using the method outlined by [39], the data on numerous observations captured during the inquiry were statistically analyzed.
Growth parameters
The tiller population was maximum (148103/ ha) achieved by (T7) followed by (146200 tillers/ ha) (T6). The tiller population in (T4) was achieved by 1,44,570/ha (Table 2).
| Treatments | Tiller population / ha | Leaf Area Index | Specific Leaf Area (cm2g− 1) | Specific Leaf Weight (gcm− 2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tr.1- Control (Applying stress nine times, once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP) | 105563 | 2.60 | 8.27 | 0.12 |
| Tr.2- Tr.1+ Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP | 114832 | 2.91 | 7.32 | 0.15 |
| Tr.3-Tr.1 + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment | 127236 | 3.13 | 6.77 | 0.13 |
| Tr.4- Tr.1 + 0.5% K2SiO3 Sett treatment | 138141 | 3.10 | 6.57 | 0.15 |
| Tr.5-Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @ 12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM /ha | 144570 | 3.27 | 6.44 | 0.20 |
| Tr.6-Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment +2.5% urea and potash foliar spray on 15days interval from 60 to 150 DAP | 146200 | 3.45 | 5.49 | 0.21 |
| Tr.7-Tr.1 + Soil application of silica solubilizer @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + Sett treatment of 0.5% K2SiO3 alone + Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP | 148103 | 4.07 | 4.89 | 0.37 |
| C.D. (P = 0.05) | 25758 | 0.11 | 0.47 | 0.001 |
The data regarding the effects of treatments on leaf area index, specific leaf area and specific leaf weight are presented in (Table 2). The leaf area index was observed to be maximum (4.07) in (T7) followed by T6 (3.45) and T5 (3.27). The (T7) registered the minimum specific leaf area of 4.89 cm2g-1and the maximum was with the treatment T1 (control). Lower specific leaf area in T7 indicates higher thickness of leaf. The maximum specific leaf weight of 0.37g.cm2 was noticed in T7. Based on the analysis of plant tissue [40], plant cells need silicon in an optimum amount for development and differentiation. According to [41] silicon application resulted in an increase in leaf area in potato plants. Silicon regulates stomatal activity, photosynthesis and water use which ultimately results in improved vegetative growth.
Using SEM, seven representative plant samples were examined and studied outer surface structure. The Si concentration present in the sample was studied using EDAX it showed large differences in leaf Si concentrations between the treatments (Fig. 1) the highest concentration of Si recorded by the treatment of increased consecutive rates of (T7) significantly increased the sulphur, potassium and silicon content and control recorded the minimum S, K, O ,Si, Cl and Al content in leaves. As are the result of silicon, Cl is less likely to be taken up and translocated in leaves. According to a report of [42] explained the reduction in metal uptake occurs because reduced apoplasmic transportation of metals is caused by a decrease in free metal concentration in apoplasm.
Nutrients uptake
At 210 DAP, the maximum nitrogen uptake value of 259.87 kg/ha (Table 3) was accounted for with the integrated (T7). However, the values were comparable with the treatments (T6) and (T5). In this study, the silicon applied to the leaves gave the highest nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium content, because it prevented N loss through leaching and led to nitrogen being accumulated. This is in agreement with [43], who observed the highest nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium content in the leaves of plants after silicon application.
| Treatments | Nitrogen (kg ha− 1) | Phosphorus (kg ha− 1) | Potassium (kg ha− 1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tr.1- Control (Applying stress nine times, once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP) | 166.84 | 55.63 | 308.13 |
| Tr.2- Tr.1+ Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP | 209.54 | 65.85 | 324.13 |
| Tr.3-Tr.1 + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment | 216.76 | 68.68 | 352.11 |
| Tr.4- Tr.1 + 0.5% K2SiO3 Sett treatment | 223.15 | 78.67 | 368.39 |
| Tr.5-Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @ 12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM /ha | 244.58 | 90.39 | 353.79 |
| Tr.6-Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment +2.5% urea and potash foliar spray on 15days interval from 60 to 150 DAP | 251.51 | 91.97 | 359.62 |
| Tr.7-Tr.1 + Soil application of silica solubilizer @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + Sett treatment of 0.5% K2SiO3 alone + Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP | 259.87 | 103.19 | 415.35 |
| C. D (P = 0.05) | 21.27 | 14.28 | 21.36 |
Among the treatments, the (T7) registered the higher phosphorous uptake of 103.19 kg/ ha on 210 DAP. The integration of 2.5% urea and potash foliar spray on 15 days interval from 60–150 DAP registered the lowest values of 65.85 Kg ha-1.The importance of silica in phosphorus nutrition is also emphasized because it has a close relationship with phosphorus. In view of all these beneficial effects, earlier studies examined the effects of siliceous material exogenously applied to rice and sugarcane [44]. Silicium ions, removed from a low-pH soil by soluble silicate, increase available P by dislodging adsorbed P ions Among the treatments, the (T7) registered the higher potassium uptake of 415.35kg/ha on 210 DAP. Due to the existence of silicon and potassium in this treatment, the potassium concentration was higher than that of the control this is in line with [45] findings. The soil is highly silicate with particles of both primary and secondary minerals. The biological breakdown of silicates liberates silicon in a soluble form in addition to potassium and phosphorus from fixed minerals [46, 47, 48].
The results shown in (Table 4) demonstrated that all treatments that were rich in organic silicon nutrients significantly improved the cane fresh and dry weight (g/plant) of the sugarcane crop, which also altered the ratio of dry weight to fresh weight. These results demonstrated that, in comparison to the control treatment, silicon treatments improved water retention in sugarcane crop cells. greatest mean fresh weight, dry weight, and percentage of dry weight compared to fresh weight (1633, 1163 g/plant and 28.78%), respectively obtained from the treatment (T7) as compared with other treatments and control. Similar findings were made by [49] who demonstrated that the summer yield of maize fertilized with Si increased in comparison to the control treatment.
| Treatments | Cane fresh weight (g/plant) (FW) | Cane dry weight (g/plant) (DW) | DW vs FW (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tr.1- Control (Applying stress nine times, once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP) | 1166 | 940 | 19.38 |
| Tr.2- Tr.1+ Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP | 1383 | 1086 | 21.47 |
| Tr.3-Tr.1 + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment | 1416 | 1098 | 22.45 |
| Tr.4- Tr.1 + 0.5% K2SiO3 Sett treatment | 1466 | 1103 | 24.76 |
| Tr.5-Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @ 12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM /ha | 1500 | 1120 | 25.33 |
| Tr.6-Tr.1 + Silica solubilizer soil application @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + 0.5 mM CaSiO3 Sett treatment +2.5% urea and potash foliar spray on 15days interval from 60 to 150 DAP | 1516 | 1125 | 25.79 |
| Tr.7-Tr.1 + Soil application of silica solubilizer @12.5 kg + 50 kg FYM/ ha + Sett treatment of 0.5% K2SiO3 alone + Urea and potash 2.5% foliar spray once per fifteen days, between 60 to 150 DAP | 1633 | 1163 | 28.78 |
| C. D (P = 0.05) | 484.9 | 402.54 | 1.73 |
Quality parameters
Even though numerically the higher brix per cent of 19.96 (Fig. 2) was recorded with T7 significant variations among the varied organic and inorganic silicon nutrients practices were not observed. An insignificant variation in the value of Pol per cent was resulted with regard to the adopted varied organic and inorganic silicon nutrients packages. The maximum purity per cent of 94.92 was accounted with the (T7) which was followed by (T6) treatments in declining trend. Among the treatments, (T7) registered the highest CCS percent of 11.81. The continuous solubilization and supply of silica, phosphorus, and potassium might be there as on for yield. Our report coincided with [50].
Residual Soil Nutrient analysis
The resulting values of soil residual organic carbon content concerning different organic and inorganic silicon nutrients revealed significant variations which are furnished in (Fig. 3). Among the treatments, the highest residual soil nitrogen availability was resulted with regard (T7) with 227.90 kg ha-1, which was comparable with the T6 and T5. The (T7) registered the highest residual soil phosphorous availability of 27.36 kg ha-1 which was on par with the integrated (T6) and (T5) treatments. The maximum residual soil potassium availability of 264.22 kg/ha was accounted for with the (T7) followed by (T6) and (T5) treatments. Our study is similar to the report of [51, 52, 53].
The role of silicon as a valuable nutrient in sugarcane crops has attracted a lot of attention. According to the data discussed above, silicon application rates to the soil and leaves significantly improved sugarcane's macro and micronutrient status as well as its quality parameters when compared to the control. Si was added to the soil and leaves of the sugarcane crop through foliar and soil applications of silicate. The results of this study will be highly helpful in developing nutrient management strategies for Tamil Nadu, India's intense sugarcane farming soils.
Acknowledgements
Authors acknowledge the support of Sugarcane Research Station, Cuddalore for offering the research facilities during the course of investigation of this research.
Authors Contribution
Conceptualization: [R. Anitha, K. Vanitha, C. Tamil selvi, P. Jeyakumar, D. Vijayalakshmi] Methodology: [R. Anitha, R. Nageswari, V. Dhanushkodi, M. Yuvaraj] Formal analysis: [R. Anitha, R. Nageswari, V. Dhanushkodi] Investigation: [R. Anitha, C. Tamil selvi, P. Jeyakumar] Writing–original draft: [R. Anitha, C. Tamil selvi, P. Jeyakumar] Writing review and editing: [R. Anitha, C. Tamil selvi, P. Jeya kumar M. Yuvaraj, Jaiby cyriac, R. Nageswari]; Supervision:[R. Anitha, K.Vanitha, C.Tamilselvi].
Funding
As part of the first author's required research duties, there is no funding assistance for the research for this study.
Data Availability
All relevant data are within the research paper
Declarations Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that no prospective conflicts of interest exist.
Consent to Participate
Consent was obtained from every researcher who participated in the experiment.
Consent for Publication
The authors have given permission for this research paper to be published in the journal.
Competing Interest
There are no financial or other relationships that could cause a conflict of interest among the authors.
- Pilon-Smits EAH, Quinn CF, Tapken W, Malagoli M, Schiavon M (2009) Physiological functions of beneficial elements. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 12(3), 267–74.
- Chanchal Malhotra C, Kapoor R, Ganjewala D (2016) Alleviation of abiotic and biotic stresses in plants by silicon supplementation. Scientia 13(2), 59–73.
- Liang YC, Sun WC, Si J, Romheld V (2005) Effects of foliar-and root‐applied silicon on the enhancement of induced resistance to powdery mildew in Cucumis sativus. Plant Pathology 54(5), 678–685.
- Fauteux F, Remus-Borel W, Menzies JG, Belanger RR (2005) Silicon and plant disease resistance against pathogenic fungi. FEMS Microbiol. Lett 249, 1–6.
- Cai K, Gao D, Luo S, Zeng R, Yang J, Zhu X (2008) Physiological and cytological mechanisms of silicon-induced resistance in rice against blast disease. Physiol. Plantarum 134, 324–333.
- Yavaş I, Aydn UNAY (2017) The roles of silicon under biotic and abiotic stress Conditions. Turkiye Tarımsal Araştırmalar Dergisi 4, 204–209.
- Meena VD, Dotaniya ML, Coumar V, Rajendiran S, Kundu S, Rao AS (2014) A case for silicon fertilization to improve crop yields in tropical soils. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect B. Biol. Sci. 84, 505–518.
- Ma JF, Takahashi E (2002) Soil, Fertilizer, and Plant Silicon Research in Japan. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
- Tsujimoto Y, Muranaka S, Saito K, Asai H (2014) Limited Si-nutrient status of rice plants in relation to plant-available Si of soils, nitrogen fertilizer application, and rice-growing environments across Sub-Saharan Africa. Field Crops Research 155, 1–9.
- Fageria NK, Baligar VC, Wright RJ (1988) Aluminium toxicity in crop plants. Journal of Plant Nutrition 11:303–319
- Doucet FJ, Schneider C, Bones SJ, Kretchmer A, Moss I, Tekely P, Exley C (2001) The formation of hydroxyaluminosilicates of geochemical and biological significance. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 65(15), 2461–2467.
- Snyder GH, Jones, DB, Gascho GJ (1986) Silicon fertilization of rice on Everglades Histosols. Soil Science Society of America Journal 50(5), 1259–1263.
- Georgescu M, Lobell DB, Field CB (2011) Direct climate effects of perennial bioenergy crops in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(11), 4307–4312.
- Lobell DB, Schlenker W, Costa-Roberts J (2011) Climate trends and global crop production since 1980. Science 333(6042), 616–620.
- Camargo MS, Keeping MG (2021) Silicon in sugarcane: availability in soil, fertilization, and uptake. Silicon 1–11.
- Chen W, Yang F, Zhang L, Wang J (2016) Organic acid secretion and phosphate solubilizing efficiency of Pseudomonas sp. PSB12: effects of phosphorus forms and carbon sources. Geomicrobiol. J. 33, 870–877.
- Lee KE, Adhikari A, Kang SM, You YH, Joo GJ, Kim JH (2019) Isolation and Characterization of the High Silicate and Phosphate Solubilizing Novel Strain Enterobacter ludwigii GAK2 that Promotes Growth in Rice Plants. Agronomy 9, 144. 10.3390/agronomy 9030144.
- Rogers JR, Bennett PC (2004) Mineral stimulation of subsurface microorganisms: Release of limiting nutrients from silicates. Chem. Geol. 203, 91–108.
- Ameen F, Alyahya SA, Alnadhari S, Alasmari H, Alhoshani F, Wainwright M (2019) Phosphate solubilizing bacteria and fungi in desert soils: species, limitations and mechanisms. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci 65, 1446–1459.
- Chandrakala C, Voleti SR, Bandeppa S, Kumar NS, Latha PC (2019) Silicate solubilization and plant growth promoting potential of rhizobium Sp. isolated from rice rhizosphere. Silicon 11, 1–12.
- Sharma A, Singh RK, Singh P, Vaishnav A, Guo DJ, Verma KK, Li YR (2021) Insights into the bacterial and nitric oxide-induced salt tolerance in sugarcane and their growth-promoting abilities. Microorganisms 9(11), 2203.
- Schmidt RE, Zhang X, Chalmers DR (1999) Response of photosynthesis and superoxide dismutase to silica applied to creeping bentgrass grown under two fertility levels. Journal of Plant Nutrition 22(11), 1763–1773.
- Bhadha JH, Xu N, Khatiwada R, Swanson S, LaBorde C (2020) Bagasse: A Potential Organic Soil Amendment Used in Sugarcane Production: SL477/SS690, 8/2020. EDIS, 2020(5), 5–5.
- Andrews SS, Karlen DL, Cambardella CA (2004) The soil management assessment framework: A quantitative evaluation using case studies. Soil Science Society of America Journal 68(6), 1945–62.
- Han HS, Lee KD (2005) Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria effect on antioxidant status, photosynthesis, mineral uptake and growth of lettuce under soil salinity. Res J Agric Biol Sci 1(3), 210–215.
- Raturi G, Sharma Y, Rana V, Thakral V, Myaka B, Salvi P, Deshmukh R (2021) Exploration of silicate solubilizing bacteria for sustainable agriculture and silicon biogeochemical cycle. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 166, 827–838.
- Kumar A, Usmani Z, Kumar V (2017) Biochar and flyash inoculated with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria act as potential biofertilizer for luxuriant growth and yield of tomato plant. Journal of environmental management 190, 20–27.
- Khan A, Khan AL, Muneer S, Kim YH, Al-Rawahi A, Al-Harrasi A (2019) Silicon and salinity: Crosstalk in crop-mediated stress tolerance mechanisms. Frontiers in plant science 10, 1429.
- Ahmad, A., Afzal, M., Ahmad, A. U. H., & Tahir, M (2013) Effect of foliar application of silicon on yield and quality of rice (Oryza sativa L.) Cercetari Agronomice in Moldova10(3)-155-162.
- Salim BBM, Eisa SS, Ibrahim IS, Girgis MGZ and Abdel-Rassoul M., 2014. Effect of biofertilizers, soil characteristics, sugarcane nutrients and its yield parameters. J. South Agric.42:756–9
- Saud S, Li X, Chen Y, Zhang L, Fahad S, Hussain S, Chen Y (2014) Silicon application increases drought tolerance of Kentucky bluegrass by improving plant water relations and morphophysiological functions. The Scientific World Journal.
- Shaaban MM, Abou El-Nour EZA (2014) Macro and Micro-Nutrients Concentrations and Uptake by Maize Seedlings Irrigated with Fresh or Saline Water as Affected by. American Journal of Plant Physiology 9(3), 95–102.
- Williams RF (1946) The physiology of plant growth with special reference to the concept of net assimilation rate. Annals of Botany 10(37), 41–72.
- Kvet J, Ondok JP, Necas J, Jarvis PG (1971) Methods of growth analysis. In Plant Photosynthetic Production: Manual of Methods. Dr W. Junk, N. V. Publishers, The Hague
- Pearce RB, Carlson GE, Barnes DK, Hart R H, Hanson CH (1969) Specific leaf weight and photosynthesis in alfalfa. Crop Science 9(4), 423–426.
- Humphries, EC (1956) Mineral components and ash analysis. Moderne Methoden der Pflanzenanalyse/Modern Methods of Plant Analysis: Erster Band/, 468–502.
- Jackson MT, Faller A (1973) Structural analysis and dynamics of the plant communities of Wizard Island, Crater Lake National Park. Ecological Monographs 43(4), 441–461.
- Meade GP, Chen JGP (1977) Standard procedure for juice analysis. Cane Sugar Handbook.
- Gomez KA, Gomez AA (1984) Statistical procedures for agricultural research. John wiley & sons.
- Liang Y, Wong JWC, Wei L (2005) Silicon-mediated enhancement of cadmium tolerance in maize (Zea mays L.) grown in cadmium contaminated soil. Chemosphere 58(4), 475–483.
- Pilon C, Soratto RP, Moreno LA (2013) Effects of soil and foliar application of soluble silicon on mineral nutrition, gas exchange, and growth of potato plants. Crop Science 53(4), 1605–1614.
- Iwasaki K, Maier, P, Fecht M, Horst WJ (2002) Effects of silicon supply on apoplastic manganese concentrations in leaves and their relation to manganese tolerance in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) Plant and Soil 238, 281–288.
- Lalithya KA, Bhagya HP, Choudhary, R (2014) Response of silicon and micro nutrients on fruit character and nutrient content in leaf of sapota. Biolife, 2(2), 593–598.
- Shen J, Luo F, Lin Q (2019) Policosanol: Extraction and biological functions. Journal of Functional Foods 57, 351–360.
- Kamenidou S, Cavins, TJ, Marek S (2009) Evaluation of silicon as a nutritional supplement for greenhouse zinnia production. Scientia Horticulturae 119(3), 297–301.
- Zhu Y, Gong H (2014) Beneficial effects of silicon on salt and drought tolerance in plants. Agronomy for sustainable development 34, 455–472.
- Abd El-Gawad HG, El-Azm, NA, Hikal MS (2017). Effect of potassium silicate on tuber yield and biochemical constituents of potato plants grown under drought stress conditions. Middle East J. Agric. Res, 6(3), 718–731.
- Vasanthi N, Saleena LM, Raj, SA (2012) Silicon in day today life. World Appl Sci J 17(11), 1425–1440.
- Wang H, Li C, Liang Y (2001) Agricultural utilization of silicon in China. In Studies in plant science (Vol. 8, pp. 343–358). Elsevier.
- Pilon C, Soratto, RP, Moreno LA (2013) Effects of soil and foliar application of soluble silicon on mineral nutrition, gas exchange, and growth of potato plants. Crop Science 53(4), 1605–1614.
- Shedeed, S. I. (2018). Assessing effect of potassium silicate consecutive application on forage maize plants (Zea mays L.). Journal of Innovations in Pharmaceutical and Biological Sciences, 5(2), 119–127.
- Mahendran PP, Gowthamraj K, Balasubramaniam P, Chandramani P, Yuvaraj M (2021) Status and distribution of plant available silicon in relation to some soil properties and response of rice (Oryza sativa L.) to silicon nutrition in the intensively rice growing soils of Kanyakumari district, Tamil Nadu, India. Silicon, 1–11.
- Mahendran PP, Parvathi SU, Balasubramaniam P, Yuvaraj M, Chandramani P (2020) Identifying critical limit in soil and plant for determining response of rice (Oryza Sativa L.) to silicon application in periyar vaigai command area of Tamil Nadu, India. Phosphorus, Sulfur, and Silicon and the Related Elements 196(2), 146–154.
No competing interests reported.