Fertilizing effect of farmyard manure and undersown cover crops on sugar beet

Part I. Emergence, plant stand and sugar beet yield

Feliks Ceglarek

wr@uws.edu.pl
Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Akademia Podlaska w Siedlcach (Poland)

Danuta Buraczyńska


Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Akademia Podlaska w Siedlcach (Poland)

Abstract

The field experiment in split block design with three replications was carried out during 1993–1996 at the Agricultural Experimental Stations in Zawady on the soil of strong grain-pasture complex. The following traits were studied: mass of overploughed cover crop (after harvest residues or whole biomass) and the form of organic fertilization (control without organic fertilization, farmyard manure, undersown cover crops: red clover, back medic, Italian ryegrass and red clover + Italian ryegrass, back medic + Italian ryegrass). The amount of macrocomponents accumulated in applied organic mass as well as the effect of ploughed in biomass of cover crop and form of organic fertilizer on field emergence, final plant stand, yield of roots and leaves, biological and technological sugar yields were evaluated. Seed germination, plant stand and yield of sugar depended on the mass of overploughed cover crop and a form of organic fertilizer. Fertilization of sugar beet plants with whole biomass of cover crop, in comparison with after harvest residues, caused significant increase of roots, leaves and biological sugar yields, decreased field emergence and final plant stand but did not diversified technological sugar yield. After harvest residues of mixture of leguminous plants with ryegrass and a whole biomass of the studied cover crops, substituted farmyard manure without decrease of sugar beet roots yield.

Supporting Agencies

The work was carried out as part of research project no. 5 PO6B 014 09 financed by the State Committee for Scientific Research

Keywords:

farmyard manure, field emergence, final plant density, sugar beet, undersown cover crop, yield

Ceglarek F. 1982 a. Uprawa wsiewek poplonowych w zbożach. Cz. II. Wysokość plon wsiewek w zależności od rośliny ochronnej. Zesz. Nauk. WSRP Siedlce 1: 89 — 100.
Google Scholar

Ceglarek F. 1982 b. Uprawa wsiewek poplonowych w zbożach. Cz. III. Ocena resztek pożniwnych wsiewek poplonowych i ich wpływ na plon pszenicy jarej. Zesz. Nauk. WSRP Siedlce 1: 101 — 114.
Google Scholar

Ceglarek F., Płaza A., Buraczyńska D., Jabłońska-Ceglarek R. 1998. Alternatywne nawożenie organiczne ziemniaka jadalnego w makroregionie środkowo-wschodnim. Cz. I. Wartość nawozowa wsiewek poplonowych w zależności od ich sposobu użytkowania na tle obornika i nawożenia słomą. Rocz. Nauk. Rol., Ser. A, 113, 3/4: 173 — 188.
Google Scholar

Gromadziński A. 1980. Wartość nawozowa przyoranych wsiewek poplonowych pod buraki cukrowe. Nowe Rol. 4: 7 — 9.
Google Scholar

Gutmański I. 1991 a. Produkcja buraka cukrowego. Praca zbiorowa. PWRiL, Poznań.
Google Scholar

Gutmański I. 1991 b. Wpływ współdziałania nawożenia obornikiem i azotem oraz długości okresu wegetacji na wysokość i jakość plonu buraka cukrowego. Gazeta Cukrownicza 10: 195 — 198.
Google Scholar

Gutmański I., Kreft K., Nowakowski M., Szymczak-Nowak J. 1999. Nowe kierunki uprawy buraka cukrowego. ODR Minikowo.
Google Scholar

Knoch G., Meinsen Ch. 1986. Getreide als Deckfrucht für Futteralsaaten — Grenzen und Zweckmassigkeit. Feldwirtschaft 6: 281 — 283.
Google Scholar

Kopczyński J. 1986: Wpływ nawozu zielonego z poplonu żyta ozimego i rzepaku na plonowanie oraz zmiany niektórych cech jakości buraka cukrowego. Rozprawy 101, AR Szczecin.
Google Scholar

Malicki L., Podstawka E. 1989. Wybrane aspekty nawożenia buraka cukrowego w świetle doświadczeń na średnich i ciężkich glebach Lubelszczyzny. Post. Nauk Rol. 2: 63 — 75.
Google Scholar

Miczyński J., Siwicki S. 1959. Studia nad zielonym nawożeniem buraków cukrowych. Biul. IHAR 2: 39 — 60.
Google Scholar

Miczyński J., Siwicki S. 1960. Międzyplony nawozowe w uprawie buraków cukrowych. Cz. II. Wsiewki międzyplonowe. Rocz. Nauk Rol., Ser. A, 83, 2: 311 — 348.
Google Scholar

Nowakowski M., Gutmański I., Szymczak-Nowak J., Kostka-Gościniak D., Banaszak H. 1996. Wpływ nawożenia obornikiem, słomą oraz roślinami poplonowymi na plon i zdrowotność buraka cukrowego przy zróżnicowanej koncentracji jego uprawy w płodozmianie. Zesz. Nauk. AR Szczecin 172, Rol. 62: 429 — 435.
Google Scholar

Siwicki S. 1971. Wartość nawozowa międzyplonów i obornika w uprawie buraków cukrowych. Biul. IHAR 6: 59 — 71.
Google Scholar

Słowiński H., Prośba-Białczyk U., Pytlarz-Kozicka M. 1995. Wpływ nawożenia na plon buraka cukrowego. Zesz. Nauk. AR Wrocław 262, Rol. LXIII: 45 — 54.
Google Scholar


Published
2002-06-28

Cited by

Ceglarek, F. and Buraczyńska, D. (2002) “Fertilizing effect of farmyard manure and undersown cover crops on sugar beet: Part I. Emergence, plant stand and sugar beet yield”, Bulletin of Plant Breeding and Acclimatization Institute, (222), pp. 247–254. doi: 10.37317/biul-2002-0069.

Authors

Feliks Ceglarek 
wr@uws.edu.pl
Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Akademia Podlaska w Siedlcach Poland

Authors

Danuta Buraczyńska 

Katedra Szczegółowej Uprawy Roślin, Akademia Podlaska w Siedlcach Poland

Statistics

Abstract views: 6
PDF downloads: 3


License

Copyright (c) 2025 Feliks Ceglarek, Danuta Buraczyńska

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Upon submitting the article, the Authors grant the Publisher a non-exclusive and free license to use the article for an indefinite period of time throughout the world in the following fields of use:

  1. Production and reproduction of copies of the article using a specific technique, including printing and digital technology.
  2. Placing on the market, lending or renting the original or copies of the article.
  3. Public performance, exhibition, display, reproduction, broadcasting and re-broadcasting, as well as making the article publicly available in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice.
  4. Including the article in a collective work.
  5. Uploading an article in electronic form to electronic platforms or otherwise introducing an article in electronic form to the Internet or other network.
  6. Dissemination of the article in electronic form on the Internet or other network, in collective work as well as independently.
  7. Making the article available in an electronic version in such a way that everyone can access it at a place and time of their choice, in particular via the Internet.

Authors by sending a request for publication:

  1. They consent to the publication of the article in the journal,
  2. They agree to give the publication a DOI (Digital Object Identifier),
  3. They undertake to comply with the publishing house's code of ethics in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), (http://ihar.edu.pl/biblioteka_i_wydawnictwa.php),
  4. They consent to the articles being made available in electronic form under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, in open access,
  5. They agree to send article metadata to commercial and non-commercial journal indexing databases.

Most read articles by the same author(s)