|
|
| Bildiri Özetleri | |
| Ana Sayfaya Dönüş |
| ISD Ana Sayfası |
|
İlhan Kızılgöz 1 , Rıdvan Kızılkaya 2 , Saadettin Gürsöz 3 1 Harran University, Agriculture Faculty, Department of Soil Science Şanlıurfa/Turkey 2 Ondokuz Mayıs University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Soil Science Samsun/Turkey 3 Harran University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Horticulture Şanlıurfa/Turkey ABSTRACT This study was carried out in order to determine relationships between nutrition status of Vitis vinifera L. grown around Şanlıurfa and soil properties. Soil samples were taken from 0-20, 20-40 and 40-60 cm soil depths and 25 plant samples from 14 different Vitis vinifera L. were taken. According to the results obtained from this study the mineral contents of N, P, K, Cu, Zn, Fe and Mn of Vitis vinifera L. samples were determined 0.20 %, 0.47 %, 0.32 %, 7.96 ppm, 13.70 ppm, 53.12 ppm and 9.22 ppm respectively. N, K, Fe, Zn and Mn contents were low, P contents was high and Cu content was sufficient according to the results obtained from leava analysis. INTRODUCTION Turkey is situated in one of the most suitable climatic zones for Vitis vinifera L. and at the centre of the geography where Vitis vinifera L. was first cultured. Therefore, Turkey has a deep rooted tradition at producing Vitis vinifera L. and a rich Vitis vinifera L. gene potential (Çelik et all., 1998). In the GAP region, there are many varieties of grapes most of them with locally named. Tahannebi (sofralık), Hatunparmağı (sofralık), Hönüsü (sofralık), Muhammediye (sofralık), Kabarcık (şıralık and sofralık), Dökülgen (şıralık and sofralık), Besni (sofralık and kurutmalık), Rumi (şıralık and kurutmalık) ve Horozkarası (sofralık, şaraplık and şıralık) are considered standart varieties due to superior qualities (Kaplan, 1994). Most important vine growing centers of South East Turkey, their surface are and 1996 production data are given in Table 1. Total growth area and production for grape varieties in the GAP Region which are now below the desired level are predicted to rise potentially with improvements in irrigation.  Best way to determine nutrition status of plants is to establish The experiments is time consuming and needs extra expenses, thus, most researches use the survey method. In this method; soil, leaf and fruit samples collected from the selected area in the light of the criterion established, are analyzed (Bould, 1966). According to the physiological and biochemical functions, nutrients are, i) C, H and O (basic building blocks for organic molecules) and N, S (building blocks of enzymes, organic structure and albumin) ii) P and B (used in energy transmitting reactions) iii) K, Ca, Mg Cl and Mn (balances osmotic pressures within the plant and activates enzymes) iv) Fe, Zn, Mo, Cu (takes part in photosynthesis by causing electron carriage through charge exchange) (Mengel and Kirby, 1982; Mengel, 1984). The objective of this study is to investigate the nutrient statuse of vines (Vitis vinifera L.) growing around Şanlıurfa and to determine nutrition deficiency problems of vines by examining the state of nutrition levels before the initiation of irrigation practices in these areas. This was the first scientific study of its kind in the Şanlıurfa areas and it is intended to provide a data base for future studies concerning fertilization types, methods and doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS 25 plant samples were taken from 14 different types of vines for this investigation. Soil samples collected from vineyards located in villages around Şanlıurfa. Soil samples were taken from 0-20, 20-40 and 40-60 cm depths according to the methods by Jackson (1962) and were prepared for analysis. Texture of soil samples, was measured according to methods proposed by Bouyoucos (1951), pH and KDK as proposed by Richards (1954) and lime content was measured as proposed by Çağlar (1952). As for plant samples, 8-10 pieces of middle exile of kinds of healty Vitis vinifera L. are taken, labelled and prepared for analysis in the laboratories after routine operations. The nutrient contents of plants are determined according to Kacar (1972) reported. DISCUSSION Physical and chemical properties of soil samples are given in table 2.  The contents of clay, silt and sand were found 32.1-71.7 %, 17.5-34.3 %, 10.8-36.4 % repectively. These results shows that the clay content of soil samples are very high. It's determined that the lime content of soils are ranged between 9.5 % and 79.5 %. The soil samples are rich in lime. pH values of soil samples were determined between 7.59 and 7.93 and all the soil samples were found in alkaline characters. It's determined that CEC values of soils in the study are changing between 15.6-55.5 meq/100 gr. The data gathered from the chemical analysis of plant samples are shown in the Table 3.  According to Bergmann (1988)'s standart values (See Table 4), the kinds of Vitis vinifera L. growing around Şanlıurfa were low in N, K, Fe, Zn and Mn. Additionally, Cu contents of plant samples were found at high levels (See Table 3). This results are confirmed by the literature values with Şahin (1987); Bergmann, (1988); Aktaş, (1994) and Marschner (1997).  Also, Bergmann (1988) informed that the rate of P/Zn of balanced nutrished Vitis vinifera L. changes between 150 and 190. In this study, this ratio was found as 343. This is a very high ratio. This is becayuse of the low level of zinc content of Vitis vinifera L.growing around Şanlıurfa. The soil was only source of nutrient elements in this research area. So, implimentation of irrigation nutrient deficiency problems might be increased. Therefore, some measurements must be taken. These are: 1. Similar studies should be considered with other fruits (i.e. pistachia, almond and pomegranate). 2. Leave fertilization techniques should be considered to solve the nutritient deficiency problems. 3. Nonsensetive plants for nutrition deficiency can be considered . 4. Soil is main reason for impared plant growth. Therefore, increasing number of investigation on determining nutritient content of soils should be considered. REFERENCES Aktaş, M., (1994). Bitki Besleme ve Toprak Verimliliği (II. Baskı). AÜZF Ders Kitabı No: 395 Ankara Anonymous, (1998). Tarımsal Yapı (Üretim, Fiyat, Değer). T.C. Başbakanlık Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü Yayını No. 2097 Ankara. Bergmann, W., (1988). Ernahrungsstörungen bei Kulturpflanzen. Gustav Fischer Verlag- Stutgart- New York. Bould, C., (1966). Leaf Analysis of Decidious Fruits. Nutrition of Fruit Crops (Ed. N. F. Childers). Hort Publications. Rutger The State Uni. Nichola Ave. New Brunswick N. J. USA p. 655-681 Bouyoucos, G. J., (1951). A Recalibration of Hidrometer Method for Making Mechanical Analysis of Soils. Agronomy Journal Vol. 143. No: 9 Çağlar, (1958). Toprak İlmi.AÜZF Yayını No: 10 Ankara Çelik, H., Ağaoğlu, A. S., Fidan, Y., Marasalı, B., Söylemezoğlu, B., (1998). Genel Bağcılık. Sun Fidan A. Ş. Mesleki Kitaplar Serisi No: 1 ISBN: 975- 96656-0-3, 253 s. Jackson, M. L., (1962). Soil Chemical Anayses. Pretice-Hall. Inc. Eng. Cliffs. USA Kaplan, N., (1994). Diyarbakır ve Mardin İllerinde Yetiştirilen Üzüm Çeşitlerinin Ampelografik Özelliklerinin Saptanması Üzerinde Bir Araştırma. Ankara Üniv. FBE. (Doktora Tezi). 206 s. Ankara Marschner, H., (1997). Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. (2 nd. ed.). Academic Press. pp. 1-889. Harcout Brace and Company Publishers. ISBN: 0-12-473543-6 London, Great Britain. Mengel, K., Kirby, E. A., (1982). Principles of Plant Nutrition. Publ. Int. Potash Inst. Bern, Schweitz, 3 Aufl. Mengel, K., (1984). Ernahrung und Stoffwechsel der Pflance. 6. Aufl. VEB Gustav Fischer, Jena. Richards, L. A., (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alcali soils. Agricultural Handbook No: 6 USA Şahin, G., (1987). Bazı Asma Çeşitlerinin Değişik Dönem ve Konumlarından Alınan Yaprak Örneklerinde Besin Maddesi Düzeylerinin Araştırılması. Ç.Ü. FBE. Bahçe Bitkileri Anabilim Dalı Master Tezi. Kod No: 200 |