Plant, grain, and soil response of irrigated malt barley as affected by cultivar, phosphorus, and sulfur applications on an alkaline soil

Figures & data

Table 1. Soil properties of pre-plant bulk samples from the experimental site during the 2015 and 2016 growing season for research conducted at the Aberdeen Research and Extension Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA.

Year	Depth (cm)	NH4-N (mg kg^−1)	NO3-N (mg kg^−1)	SO4-S (mg kg^−1)	CaCO3 (g kg^−1)
2015	0–30	4.1	8.1	16	112
	30–60	2.3	11.0	44	–
2016	0–30	3.6	7.1	24	152
	30–60	2.1	16.2	47	–

Note: NH₄-N, ammoniacal nitrogen; NO₃-N, nitrate nitrogen; SO₄-S, sulfate sulfur; CaCO₃, calcium carbonate. NH₄-N, NO₃-N, and CaCO₃ were measured only based on soil test recommendations for phosphorus (i.e. 0–30 cm) (Robertson and Stark 2003).

Figure 1. Relationship between phosphorus (P) application rate, Olsen P and grain yield at harvest for malt barley during the 2015 and 2016 growing seasons for research conducted at the Aberdeen Research and Extension Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA. Small letters indicate significant differences between pre-plant and post-harvest Olsen P at various P rates as compared using Tukey’s protected honest significant difference (HSD) test at p < 0.05. Capital letters indicate significant differences among grain yield at various P rates as compared using Tukey’s protected honest significant difference (HSD) test at p < 0.05.

Table 2. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) values for grain yield and yield attributes, grain quality, vegetative and spike P content of malt barley averaged over the 2015 and 2016 growing seasons for research conducted at the Aberdeen Research and Extension Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA.

Sources of variation	Grain yield	Biological yield^†	Harvest index^‡	Plant height	Protein	Plumps§	5.5/64^§	Thin^¶	Test weight	Vegetative P	Spike P
P	<0.001	0.001	0.001	0.64	0.24	0.01	0.01	0.01	0.11	0.03	0.009
S	0.20	0.16	0.43	0.91	0.11	0.94	0.75	0.92	0.33	0.11	0.36
Cultivar	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001	0.22	<0.001	<0.001
P × S	0.53	0.37	0.47	0.58	0.49	0.38	0.41	0.37	0.52	0.93	0.51
P × Cultivar	0.49	0.68	0.58	0.49	0.83	0.27	0.22	0.26	0.72	0.52	0.63
S × Cultivar	0.62	0.43	0.31	0.37	0.94	0.78	0.54	0.76	0.53	0.74	0.71
P × S × Cultivar	0.50	0.51	0.40	0.96	0.54	0.80	0.65	0.80	0.25	0.60	0.49

^† Biological yield is the total dry matter from plant (stems plus leaves) and spikes.

^‡ Harvest index is the ratio of harvested grain (grain yield) to total plant and spike dry matter (biological yield), and is presented as percentages (%).

^§ Plumps and 5.5/64 kernel content for two-row malt barley are defined as the percentages of seeds of barley that remains on top of a 6/64 × ¾ and 5.5/64 × ¾ slotted-hole sieve after sieving, whereas, thin kernel are the percentages of seeds which pass through a 5.5/64 × ¾ slotted hole sieve (USDA 2013).

^¶ Vegetative tissue includes P content in stems and leaves.

Table 3. Effects of cultivars and phosphorus (P) application rate on biological yield, harvest index (HI), and grain quality of malt barley during the 2015 and 2016 growing seasons for research conducted at the Aberdeen Research and Extension Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA.

Sources of variation	Biological yield (kg ha^−1)	Harvest index (%)	Protein (g kg^−1)	Plumps^† (g kg^−1)	5.5/64 (g kg^−1)	Thin (g kg^−1)
P rate
0	15,004^b‡	46^b	NS	957^b	29^a	15^a
37	15,963^a	48^a	NS	965^ab	24^ab	12^ab
73	16,091^a	48^a	NS	965^ab	23^ab	12^ab
110	16,240^a	48^a	NS	971^a	20^b	9^b
147	16,160^a	48^a	NS	973^a	18^b	9^b
Cultivar
ABI-Voyager	17,023^a	44^b	110^a	979^a	14^b	7^ab
Moravian 69	15,037^b	49^a	101b^‡	953^b	31^a	15^a

^† Plumps and 5.5/64 kernel content for two-row malt barley are defined as the percentages of seeds of barley that remains on top of a 6/64 × ¾ and 5.5/64 × ¾ slotted-hole sieve after sieving. Similarly, the thin kernel are the percentages of seeds which pass through a 5.5/64 × ¾ slotted hole sieve (USDA 2013).

^‡ Different letters for each parameter indicate significant differences between P-application rates and cultivars, as compared using Tukey’s Protected honest significant difference (HSD) and Fisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD) test at p < 0.05, respectively. NS, non-significant difference (p > 0.05).

Figure 2. Distribution of phosphorus (P) in vegetative tissues (stems plus leaves) and spike for cultivars and P application rates during the 2015 and 2016 growing seasons for research conducted at the Aberdeen Research and Extension Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA. Different letters between both cultivars indicate significant differences between two cultivars as compared using Fisher’s protected least significant difference (LSD) test at p < 0.05. Different letters among P-application rate indicate significant differences as compared using Tukey’s protected honest significant difference (HSD) test at p < 0.05.

Table 4. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) values for soil parameters averaged over the 2015 and 2016 growing seasons for research conducted at the Aberdeen Research and Extension Center, Aberdeen, ID, USA.

Sources of variation	Soil pH	Soil EC	Olsen P
P	0.57	0.75	<0.001
S	0.62	0.52	0.11
Cultivar	0.15	0.90	0.79
Sampling	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
P × S	0.12	0.16	0.35
P × Cultivar	0.47	0.41	0.96
P × Sampling	0.79	0.90	<0.001
S × Cultivar	0.99	0.13	0.55
S × Sampling	0.84	0.08	0.09
Cultivar × Sampling	0.30	0.77	0.87
P × S × Cultivar	033	0.95	0.75
P × S × Sampling	0.97	0.65	0.44
P × Cultivar × Sampling	0.66	0.63	0.93
S × Cultivar × Sampling	0.85	0.29	0.81
P × S × Cultivar × Sampling	0.16	0.93	0.81

Robertson, L. D., and J. C. Stark. 2003. Idaho spring barley production guide. Bul. 742. University of Idaho Extension, Moscow, ID.

 Google Scholar

Zhao, F. J., S. E. Salmon, P. J. A. Withers, E. J. Evans, J. M. Monaghan, P. R. Shewry, and S. P. McGrath. 1999. Responses of bread making quality to sulfur in three wheat varieties. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 79 (13):1865–74. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0010(199910)79:13 < 1865::AID-JSFA449 > 3.0.CO;2-R.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar