Open Journal Systems

Embracing smart irrigation management techniques empowers growers to irrigate with greater efficiency, thereby promoting sustainable agricultural production. In this context, growers often rely on crop evapotranspiration (ETc) as a key factor in making informed irrigation decisions, underscoring the significance of accurately determining and spatially mapping crop water status. Technological progress, exemplified by the emergence of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), has brought about a revolutionary shift in agricultural monitoring. UAV platforms can capture high-resolution images with centimeter-level spatial accuracy and offer higher temporal coverage compared to satellite imagery. Considering these advancements, this study introduces a robust method for classifying water stress in cotton using a compact UAV platform and convolutional neural networks (CNN). The experiment was conducted at the USDA-ARS Cropping Systems Research Laboratory (CSRL) in Lubbock, Texas, where the cotton field was divided into 12 drip zones. The study included three replications to evaluate four irrigation treatments: “rainfed”, “full irrigation”, “percent deficit of full irrigation”, and “time delay of full irrigation”. The results demonstrated that the CNN model successfully classified the cotton water stress using the UAV-based RGB image, achieving an overall best prediction accuracy of approximately 91%. By segmenting the original cotton images into separate canopy and soil areas using morphological image processing methods, the authors also isolated and analyzed the individual contributions of these components to cotton water stress. Additionally, a random forest classifier revealed the relative importance of different image features in the classification process through feature importance analysis. These findings highlighted the state-of-the-art performance of the proposed system in cotton water stress classification and provided valuable insights into the key image features contributing to accurate classification. The authors concluded that integrating UAV-based RGB imagery and CNN models had great potential for assessing water stress in cotton.

A new approach to measure spatial variability of soil parameters and field technique to test-value specific fertilizer

Information on the distribution of soil properties is important to know the status of nutrients in the soils based on which fertilizer nutrients are recommended. Given the variability of nutrients in the soils, making a site-specific fertilizer recommendation seems to be a compelling work. To determine the spatial variability of soil nutrients and to make judicious and precise fertilizer recommendations, new measures are designed with this study. These measures are tested against the soil samples (n = 43) for total nitrogen (N), organic matter (OM), phosphorus (P2O5), and potassium (K2O) in the study area. The descriptive statistical analysis indicated an average of low nitrogen and organic matter, while phosphorus was found to be very high and the level of potassium was high. The spread of nutrients across the data sets, however, included low, medium, high, and very high levels of ratings. The Deviation Square Index was developed and applied for the variability measurement and found that the largest variation was with phosphorus distribution, followed by potassium, nitrogen, and organic matter. The coefficient of variation (CV%) analysis also exhibited similar trends in nutrient distributions. Nitrogen was the main determinant explaining the variations in rice yield, while phosphorus and potash were negatively related to the yield. An index of fertilizer nutrient recommendation called Test-Value Specific Dose (TVSD) was developed and used to calculate the nutrient recommendation for each sampled location. This new method gave easy and more accurate doses of fertilizer over the blanket recommendation to fit the variations across the soil samples.

Biostimulants: An innovation in agriculture for the cultivation of coffee (Coffea arabica L)

Valverde-Lucio Yhony, Moreno-Quinto Josselyn, Quijije-Quiroz Karen, Castro-Landín Alfredo, Merchán-García Williams, Gabriel-Ortega Julio

Article ID: 2094
Vol 4, Issue 1, 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/ama.v4i1.2094
VIEWS - 674 (Abstract)

Download PDF

Abstract

The research was conducted in Jipijapa, in the town of Andil. The objective was to evaluate the physiological and morphological behavior of arabica coffee in the nursery stage with the application of biostimulants: starlite, humega, micorriza, and evergreen, compared to urea. A completely randomized experimental design was applied, using a factorial arrangement of repetitions in time for the morphological variables, and Tukey’s test was applied based on the statistical differences found. The results obtained at the physiological level established a significant difference (p < 0.05) in the variables dry matter, moisture, and nitrogen (N), with starlite and evergreen biostimulants being the best in DM and humega and evergreen in N content. There was a better response to chlorophyll (Cl) assimilation by all biostimulants, surpassing urea in general, with micorriza and starlite being the best, establishing a high positive correlation between N and chlorophyll. In terms of morphological development, Urea showed a better response, and at the biostimulant level, humega and micorriza showed better results, all between 90 and 120 days.

Keywords

dry matter; physiology; morphology; chlorophyll; nitrogen; correlation; measured over time

References

1. Espinoza Alarcón WL, Mosquera Yépez D. Sectoral Analysis of Coffee and Processed Coffee and Its Importance in Ecuadorian Exports, Period 2012–2016 (Spanish) [Bachelor’s thesis]. Universidad de Guayaquil; 2017.

2. Alarcón López A. Productive Management Model for Coffee (Coffea arabica L.) Cultivation in Southern Ecuador (Spanish) [Bachelor’s thesis]. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid; 2011.

3. Aspiazu Villavicencio K, Navarro Moncayo J. Project for the Commercialization of Bean Coffee (Organic Coffee), Acting as an Intermediary, for Local Consumption in the City of Guayaquil and as an Export Option (Spanish) [Bachelor’s thesis]. Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral; 2009.

4. Monteros Guerrero A. Yields of dry coffee beans in Ecuador 2016 (Spanish). Available online: https://docplayer.es/29340888-Rendimientos-de-cafe-grano-secoen-el-ecuador-2016.html (accessed on 22 October 2018).

5. Venegas Sánchez S, Orellana Bueno D, Pérez Jara P. The Ecuadorian reality in coffee production (Spanish). RECIMUNDO 2018; 2(2): 72–91. doi: 10.26820/recimundo/2.(2).2018.72-91

6. Du Jardin P. Plant biostimulants: Definition, concept, main categories and regulation. Scientia Horticulturae 2015; 196: 3–14. doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2015.09.021

7. Díaz Medina A, Suárez Pérez C, Díaz Milanes D, et al. Influence of the biostimulant FitoMas-E on the production of coffee plant (Coffea arabica L.) seedlings. Centro Agrícola 2016; 43(4): 29–35.

8. González Vega M, Rosales Jenqui P, Castilla Valdés Y, et al. Effect of Bioenraiz® as a stimulant of germination and development of coffee tree (Coffea arabica L.) seedlings. Cultivos Tropicales 2015; 36(1): 73–79.

9. Ormeño MA, Ovalle A. Preparation and application of organic fertilizers. In: Plant Science and Production. INIA Divulga; 2007. pp. 29–31.

10. Aguilar Jiménez CE, Alvarado Cruz I, Martínez Aguilar FB, et al. Assessment of three organic fertilizers on coffee (Coffea Arabica L.) in nursery stage. Siembra 2016; 3(1): 11–20.

11. Parrales Marcillo G, Castro Piguave C. Determination of the morphological characteristics of 20 varieties of arabica coffee hybrids of high genetic value (Spanish). Available online: https://repositorio.unesum.edu.ec/handle/53000/1280 (accessed on 26 July 2019).

12. Provincial Government of Manabí. Canton Jipijapa. Provincial Government of Manabí; 2019.

13. De la Roza Delgado B, Martínez Fernández A, Argamentería Gutiérrez A. Determination of dry matter in pastures and forages from drying temperature for analysis (Spanish). Rev Pastures 2002; 32(1): 91–104.

14. Selecta JP. Barcelona: Laboratory apparatus factory. Available online: https://grupo-selecta.com/en/?avia_forced_reroute=1 (accessed on 10 October 2019).

15. Cofes. Chlorophyll a quantification. Buenos Aires: Federal council of health services entities. Available online: http://www.xn--cofs-dpa.org.ar/downloads/relas/5jomada/4CLO-ROFLA.pdf. (accessed on 1 October 2018).

16. Gabriel J, Indaco-chea Ganchozo B, Valverde A, Castro Piguave C. Experimental designs: Theory and practice for agricultural experiments (Spanish). Available online: http://142.93.18.15:8080/jspui/handle/123456789/116 (accessed on 22 October 2018).

17. Yakhin OI, Lubyanov AA, Yakhin IA, et al. Biostimulants in plant science: A global perspective. Frontiers in Plant Science 2017; 7: 2049. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.02049

18. Huang B. Plant growth regulators: What and why. Golf Course Management 2007; 75(1): 157–160. doi: 10.1007/s00572-010-0337-z

19. Basak A. Biostimulants: Definitions, classification and legislation. In: Gawroñska H (editor). Biostimulants in Modern Agriculture: General Aspects. Editorial House Wieú Jutra, Limited; 2008. pp. 7–17.

20. Bulgari R, Cocetta G, Trivellini A, et al. Biostimulants and crop responses: A review. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 2014; 31(1): 1–17. doi: 10.1080/01448765.2014.964649

21. Russo RO, Berlyn GP. The use of organic biostimulants to help low input sustainable agriculture. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 1991; 1(2): 19–42. doi: 10.1300/J064v01n02 04

22. Karnok KJ. Promises, promises: Can biostimulants deliver. Golf Course Management 2000; 68(8): 67–71.

23. Banks JM, Percival GC. Evaluation of biostimulants to control Guignardia leaf blotch (Guignardia aesculi) of horsechestnut and black spot (Diplocarpon rosae) of roses. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry 2012; 38(6): 258–261. doi: 10.13140/rg.2.1.2897.2883

24. Hamza B, Suggars A. Biostimulants: Myths and realities. TurfGrass Trends 2001; 10(8): 6–10.

25. Jardin PD. The science of plant biostimulants—A bibliographic analysis. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288264889_The_science_of_plant_biostimulants_-_a_bibliographic_analysis (accessed on 15 October 2019).

26. Torre LA, Battaglia V, Caradonia F. Legal aspects of the use of plant strengtheners (biostimulants) in Europe. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 2013; 19(6): 1183–1189.

27. La Torre A, Battaglia V, Caradonia F. An overview of the current plant biostimulant legislations in different European Member States. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 2016; 96(3): 727-734. doi: 10. 1002/jsfa.7358

28. Cenicafe. Physiological and nutritional disturbances of coffee. Available online: https://www.cenicafe.org/es%20/index.%20php/nuestras_publicaciones/cartillas (accessed on 10 October 2018).

29. Ramirez Builes VH, Moreno Berrocal AM, Lopez Ruia JC. Early evaluation of nitrogen deficiency in coffee and applications. Available online: http://www.biblioteca.cenicafe.org (accessed on 15 October 2018).

30. Tello Gómez E. Effect of the application of biostimulants, foliar fertilizers and kaolin, on the agronomic behavior and production of the rice variety (Oryza sativa) CR-4477 on La Vega farm, San Carlos, Alajuela, Costa Rica (Spainish). Available online: https:// repositoriotec.tec.ac.cr/handle/2238/3321 (accessed on 26 July 2019).

31. Sadeghian Khalajabadi S, Gonzales Osorio H. Technical advances: General fertilization alternatives for coffee plantations in the production stage. Available online: https://www. cenicafe.org › publications › avt04241 (accessed on 15 October 2018).

32. Aharoni A, Galili G. Metabolic engineering of the plant primary—Secondary metabolism interface. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2011; 22(2): 239–244. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2010.11.004

33. Rafiee H, Naghdi Badi HA, Mehrafarin A, et al. Application of plant biostimulants as new approach to improve the biological responses of medicinal plants—A critical review. Journal of Medicinal Plants 2016; 15(59): 6–39.

34. Sanclemente MA, Peña EJ. Growth and photosynthetic efficiency of Ludwigia decurrens walter (Onagraceae) under different concentrations of nitrogen. Acta Biológica Colombiana 2008; 13(1): 175–186.

35. De Lima Vasconcelos R, de Mello Prado R, Reyes Hernandez A, Caione G. Effect of measurement time, position and leaf portion on chlorophyll indices in potato (Spanish). Idesia 2014; 32(4): 23–28. doi: 10.4067/S0718-34292014000400004

36. Sadeghian Khalajabadi S, Salamanca Jimenez A. Micronutrients in coffee fruits and leaves. Ceni-Coffee 2015; 66(2): 73–87.

37. Utria Borges E, Rodríguez Oquendo V, Moisés Medina LG, et al. Response of coffee seedlings (Coffea arabica L.) to brassinosteroid application at different concentrations and stages of development (Spanish). Rev Chapingo Ser Hortic 2004; 10(1): 11–14. doi: 10.5154/r.rchsh.2000.12.084

38. Acuña P. Influence of foliar fertilizer application at nursery level of arabica coffee (Coffea arabica) in Cabo de Hacha site of Jipijapa canton 2013 (Spanish). Universidad Estatal del Sur de Manabí; 2013.

39. University of Lodz. Biostimulators in modern agriculture. Retrieved from: https://usosweb.uni.lodz.pl/kontroler.php?_action=actionx:katalog2/przedmioty/pokazPrzedmiot(prz_kod:0400-BE707D)〈=2 (accessed on 5 October 2019).

40. Przybysz A, Wrochna M, Slowinski A, Gawronska H. Stimulatory effect of Asahi SL on selected plant species. Acta Sci Pol Hortoru 2010; 9(2): 53–64.

41. Truba M, Jankowski K, Sosnowski J. The plants reaction on biological preparations treatment. Ochrona Środowiskai Zasobów Naturalnych 2012; 53: 41–52.

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

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

This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

Editor-in-Chief

Prof. Zhengjun Qiu

Zhejiang University, China

Honorary Editor-in-Chief

Cheng Sun

Academician of World Academy of Productivity Science; Executive Chairman, World Confederation of Productivity Science China Chapter, China

Processing Speed (2023)

- - - ＜7 days: submission to initial review decision;
  - - 56 days: received to online

News & Announcements

2024-09-11

Smart agriculture is becoming a reality!

Modern agricultural technology is evolving rapidly, with scientists collaborating with leading agricultural enterprises to develop intelligent management practices. These practices utilize advanced systems that provide tailored fertilization and treatment options for large-scale land management.

2024-05-01

Notice on the prohibition of using AI techniques to generate papers!

This journal values human initiative and intelligence, and the employment of AI technologies to write papers that replace the human mind is expressly prohibited. When there is a suspicious submission that uses AI tools to quickly piece together and generate research results, the editorial board of the journal will reject the article, and all journals under the publisher's umbrella will prohibit all authors from submitting their articles.

Readers and authors are asked to exercise caution and strictly adhere to the journal's policy regarding the usage of Artificial Intelligence Generated Content (AIGC) tools.

2024-01-14

We are recruiting Editorial Team Members

Advances in Modern Agriculture (AMA) is looking for members of the Editorial Board.

2023-12-28

Notice on the change of publication frequency

The publication frequency of Advances in Modern Agriculture is Quarterly since 2024, that means the journal will publish 4 issues per year from 2024 onwards.

More Announcements...

Journal Center

Asia Pacific Academy of Science Pte. Ltd. (APACSCI) specializes in international journal publishing. APACSCI adopts the open access publishing model and provides an important communication bridge for academic groups whose interest fields include engineering, technology, medicine, computer, mathematics, agriculture and forestry, and environment.

more

Article Tools

Indexing metadata

How to cite item

Review policy