Paper · 2001

Comparison of the effect of EM and other bacterial and mineral products on bean yield.

A. C. Primavesi; Seira Kinjo; Y. D. A. Senanayake; et al.

7
claims
13
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Effective microorganisms (EM) have an effect on soil, seed and plant metabolism. Its effect is more effective in soils rich in nutrients and organic matter than in poor ones. Soil received limestone and Fosmag (P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Cu, B and Zn). The treatments were in 3 x 4m-plots in the midst of a bean plantation. Treatments were: 1) Diatom (petrified, grounded algae); 2) EM to seeds; 3) Biosol; 4) Cofermol (Co+Fe+Mo); 5) EM + diatom; 6) EM + MB-4 (rock meal); 7) Control, 8) MB-4. After the emergence of bean plants in 3 and 5 weeks, EM foliar application (0,1%) and Mo (0,04%) were made. Being a very rainy season, many farmers lost their yield in spite of frequent pesticide applications due to fungi diseases like anthracnose. Our beans were attacked by anthracnose and 1,5% grains were mottled. The best treatments were: (2) EM application to seeds (1620 g/plot); (6) EM + MB-4 with 1783 g/plot and (7) the test plot only with foliar EM + Mo application having 1925 g/plot. Experiments show that Mo increases the number of pods per plant and the number of grains per pod whilst EM increases grain weight (1000 grains = 300g to 380g and 1 liter from 844 to 920 g). This means that EM increases grain quality because proteins are heavier than amide. Introduction In previous experiments it was concluded that EM acts on soil and its life (Primavesi, 1997) as on plant metabolism (Primavesi, 1996, 97, 98). Its effect is more significant in soils rich in organic matter and nutrients than in poor ones. As new biological and mineral products appear every month it is interesting to know how they work relatively to EM and if there are favorable mixtures with them. The chosen crop was beans because they are not only the basic food of Brazilian people but also because they are greatly infested by pests and diseases. Besides, beans are one of the cultivated grain legumes which receive the highest amount of pesticide applications. One of the biggest aspirations of organic farmers is to maintain beans healthy and productive. The nutrient balance of crops seems one of the main problems, especially in soils cultivated for years, which could become poorer in trace elements which are difficult to control. Several mineral products appeared in the market like FTE (fritted trace elements), Cofermol, Skrill, MB-4 (a stone meal), Diatomea (a ground petrified algae) but especially bacterial products are offered like Biosol, Orgasol, Agroplus, Supermagro and others. The experiment was conducted in the spring which is somewhat cooler than summertime. Materials The experiment was located in the Southern part of the highland, at an altitude of and 700 m in the State of Sao Paulo, South East of Brazil having a tropical climate. The Methods soil was an Ultisol (red yellow podsolic). It was conducted from September to December as the beans have a 105 day cycle. During this season there is less disease and pest attacks. The characteristics of the soil are given in Table 1. Soil analysis was : (extractor DPTA for B, it was used water) Table 1. Chemical Constituents of the Soil PH CaC12 OM G/dm P resine H+A1 mmo/ dm K mmo/ dm Ca mmo/ dm Mg mmo/ dm B mg/ kg Cu mg/ kg Fe mg/ kg Mn mg/ kg Zn mg/ kg 60 17 13 13 14 29 11 0.16 0.9 13 12 27 The rainfall during the two years were variable (Table 2). This variation is attributed to the large scale deforestation in Brazil causing unpredictable rainfall patterns. The temperature was suitable being about 12° to 17°C at night and 20° – 25°C by day. Due to deforestation however, the day and night temperature differences have become bigger. Table 2. Rainfall (mm) During the Experimental Period Year September October November December 1997 1998 50 189 54 201 230 12 109 89 As the variety Carioquinha needs a nearly neutral pH (6.0 to 6.5) and a high level of calcium, the field received 1.000kg/ha limestone (33% CaO and 16%MgO) and 250kg/ha Fosmag (P2 05 18%, CaO 13%, MgO 2.9%, ZnO 0.5%, S 10% and B 0.1%). The following treatments were made on plots of 3 x 4m with 3 repelications. 1) Diatomea 5) EM + Diatomea 2) EM to the seeds 6) EM + MB-4 3) Biosol to the soil 7) Control 4) Cofermol to the seeds 8) MB-4 to the soil Three and five weeks after emergence EM (0.1%) and Mo (0.04%) were sprayed over the leaves. Two strips of 10 x 30m were used on the two sides of the experimental block with the same fertilizer. Beans were planted in these strips. One strip remained without any foliar application. The second received only EM, the third (on the other side) received only Mo and the fourth, EM+Mo. Samples were collected from the strips at three different places, from five rows 3m long, which corresponded to one experimental plot. Results It was a very rainy season and fungal diseases occurred very frequently. Therefore many farmers lost their yields due to Anthracnosis although they had applied 10 fungicides or more. In our soil, which had been organically treated for more than 15 years, beans had also some Anthracnosis and 15 percent seeds showed brown spots which somewhat lowered the price. But yield was relatively successful (1.620kg/ha) and the general health of crop was astonishing (Table 3A). Table 3. Bean Seed Yields (g/ha) for Different Treatments Treatments Block A Block B Block C Average A. Main Plots 1) Diatomea 2) EM 3) Biosol 4) Cofermol 5) EM+Diatomea 6) EM+MB-4 7) Control 8) MB-4

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 7

Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bean anthracnose was observed and 1.5% of grains were mottled.

Taxon
beanse0
Interactor
anthracnosee0pathogen
Outcome
grains were mottlede0
Value
1,5%e0

Verbatim

e0

“Our beans were attacked by anthracnose and 1,5% grains were mottled”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 733–800 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EM seed application yielded 1620 g per plot.

Taxon
beant0
Treatment
EM application to seedse0
Outcome
bean yieldt0
Value
1620 g/plote0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

t0

“bean yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–85 · show in text ↑
e0

“(2) EM application to seeds (1620 g/plot)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 828–869 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EM plus MB-4 yielded 1783 g per plot.

Taxon
beant0
Treatment
EM + MB-4e0
Outcome
bean yieldt0
Value
1783 g/plote0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

t0

“bean yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–85 · show in text ↑
e0

“(6) EM + MB-4 with 1783 g/plot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 871–901 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The test plot receiving foliar EM and Mo yielded 1925 g per plot.

Taxon
beant0
Treatment
foliar EM + Mo applicatione0
Outcome
bean yieldt0
Value
1925 g/plote0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

t0

“bean yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–85 · show in text ↑
e0

“(7) the test plot only with foliar EM + Mo application having 1925 g/plot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 906–979 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mo increased pods per plant and grains per pod in beans.

Taxon
beant0
Treatment
Moe0
Outcome
number of pods per plant and the number of grains per pode0
Direction
increasese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“bean yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–85 · show in text ↑
e0

“Mo increases the number of pods per plant and the number of grains per pod”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1003–1077 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EM increased bean grain weight from 300 to 380 g per 1000 grains.

Taxon
beant0
Treatment
EMe0
Outcome
grain weighte0
Direction
increasese0
Value
300g to 380ge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“bean yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–85 · show in text ↑
e0

“EM increases grain weight (1000 grains = 300g to 380g and 1 liter from 844 to 920 g)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1085–1169 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EM increased the weight of one liter of bean grain from 844 to 920 g.

Taxon
beant0
Treatment
EMe0
Outcome
1 litere0
Direction
increasese0
Value
844 to 920 ge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“bean yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 75–85 · show in text ↑
e0

“EM increases grain weight (1000 grains = 300g to 380g and 1 liter from 844 to 920 g)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1085–1169 · show in text ↑

molybdenum atom · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ

30 papers: 21 positive, 9 negative or no effect

20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

inoculation · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results

195 papers: 153 positive, 42 negative or no effect

152 papers in the same direction as this paper · 36 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

191 papers more in this group

See all 195 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.