Gomaa, M., Radwan, F., Kandil, E., Abdul Mawla, N. (2016). Improving some Wheat Cultivars Productivity Using Hypertonic and Humic Acid in Saline Soils. Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 21(4), 558-569. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.195549
Mahmoud Gomaa; Fathy Ibrahim Radwan; Essam Esmael Kandil; Nasser Ali Saleh Abdul Mawla. "Improving some Wheat Cultivars Productivity Using Hypertonic and Humic Acid in Saline Soils". Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 21, 4, 2016, 558-569. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.195549
Gomaa, M., Radwan, F., Kandil, E., Abdul Mawla, N. (2016). 'Improving some Wheat Cultivars Productivity Using Hypertonic and Humic Acid in Saline Soils', Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 21(4), pp. 558-569. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.195549
Gomaa, M., Radwan, F., Kandil, E., Abdul Mawla, N. Improving some Wheat Cultivars Productivity Using Hypertonic and Humic Acid in Saline Soils. Journal of the Advances in Agricultural Researches, 2016; 21(4): 558-569. doi: 10.21608/jalexu.2016.195549
Improving some Wheat Cultivars Productivity Using Hypertonic and Humic Acid in Saline Soils
Plant Production Department, The Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University, Egypt
Abstract
In order to improve productivity of three wheat cultivars as affected by soil salinity conditions by using nano- technological compound (Hypertonic) and humic acid, two field experiments were conducted at the Abess Region, Alexandria Governorate, Egypt, during 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 growing seasons, in split plot design in three replications. The main plots included four salinity alleviated compounds namely; Hpertonic (nano-compound), Humic acid (HA), Hypertonic + HA, and control treatments, while three wheat cultivars (Sakha 93, Sids 12 and Giza 168) was allocated in the sub plot. The results revealed that significant increase was recorded on plant height (cm), spike number/m2, spikelets number/spike, grains number/spike, 1000- kernel weight, grain, straw, and biological yields (tons/ha.) as well as harvest index % by using Hypertonic + humic acid in both growing seasons. Sids cultivar recorded the highest mean values for the previous mentioned characters under study. Sowing Sids 12 cultivar under the application of nano- compound and humic acid recorded the highest mean values of yield and its components as compared with Sakha 93 and Giza 168 cultivars under Alexandria conditions.
Wheat (Triticum aestivum, L.) is the most widely grown crop in the world with its unique protein characteristics that serves as an important source of food and energy (Abedi et al., 2010). Mature wheat grains contain 8–14% protein, which are divided into two major categories: prolamins including gliadins and glutenins and non-prolamins consisting of water-soluble albumins and salt-soluble globulins (Singh and Skerritt, 2001).
Introduction of the first generation of technology to agriculture resulted in the green revolution and changed the traditional agriculture to modern intensive agriculture. Today, nanotechnology as a novel technology has solved many problems in different fields of science and industry and has found its position and functions in agriculture. Nanotechnology has various functions in all stages from production, processing, storage, packing and transportation of agricultural products (Scott and Chen, 2003).
The use of nano- compounds leads to reduce the toxicity of the soil and increased efficiency of the elements to at least reach the negative effects caused by the consumption of excessive consumption of fertilizers and reduce the frequency of application of fertilizers (Naderi and Danesh Shahraki, 2011).
The mechanism of humic acid activity in promoting plant growth is not completely known, but several explanations have been proposed by some researchers such as increasing cell membrane permeability, oxygen uptake, respiration and photosynthesis, phosphate uptake, and root cell elongation (Türkmen et al., 2004), Moreover addition of HA to soil increases the rate of absorption of ions on root surfaces and their penetration into the cells of the plant tissue. Humic acid (HA) application positively affected the plant parameters of plants grown in salinity condition (Türkmen et al., 2005). It also increases both mater and fertilizer retention and stimulate beneficial microbial activity.
Humic acid is an important constituent of soil organic matter which enhances the growth and yield of crops and improves soil physical and chemical characteristics, such as aeration, permeability, water holding capacity, aggregation, availability and transportation of ions through pH buffering (Khan et al., 2012).
This investigation aims to improve some wheat cultivars productivity using nano- technology compound (hypertonic) and humic acid in salt- affected soils.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two field experiments were conducted at the Experimental Station Farm of the Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University, Egypt, during 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 growing seasons, to investigate the effect of nanocompound and humic acid on some wheat cultivars under salinity conditions.
A split- plot design with three replicates was used. N and humic acid (HA) application) i.e. Hypertonic (Nano), Humic acid, Hypertonic + humic acid, and control treatment were arranged in main plots. Wheat cultivars (Sakha 93, Sids 12, and Giza 168) were allocated in sub-plots.
The size of each plot was 10.5 m2 (3.5 x 3.0 m) surrounded by ditches to avoid water movement into adjacent plots.
Humic acid (Table 1) was applied with sowing at rate of 5 kg/fed. While Nano- compound (Hypertonic which structured from 10% Ca, 15 % carbocyclic acids, 10 % Seaweed extract and 5 % Biosac) was applied at rate of 5.00 L/fed., with each irrigation every 25 days.
Table (1). Humic acid analysis
Product analysis
Product name
Techno Potas- Humic acid
Formula (W/W)
12% K2O – HA 75 %
Potassium K2O (on dry basis)
12 % (W/W)
Humic acid (on dry basis)
75 % (W/W)
Moisture
15 (Max.)
PH (1% solution)
9 -10 (Max.)
Water solubility
95 % (Min.)
The sowing method was broadcasting in both seasons. Sowing dates were 21th and 28th November in both seasons 2014/2015 and 2015/2016, respectively, while, seeding rate was 70 - 80 kg grains/fed., according to wheat cultivar. First irrigation was applied 25 days after sowing and then plants were irrigated every 25 days till the dough stage.
Nitrogen fertilizer at rate of 75 kg N/fed. In the form of urea (46.50 %N), was added in three doses. The first dose (20 kg N/fed.) was added at sowing time, the second dose (35 kg N/fed.) was added with the first irrigation (25 days after sowing) and the third dose (20 kg N/fed.) was added (25 days after the first irrigation). Calcium Super phosphate fertilizer (15.5 % P2O5) was applied before sowing at rate of 100 kg/fed., (the recommended dose). Potassium fertilizer was applied before sowing (during seedbed preparation) at rate of 50 kg/fed., in the form of potassium sulphate (48 % K2O) (the recommended dose).
The preceding crop was maize (Zea mays L.) in both cropping seasons. Soil samples of the experimental sites were taken at the depth of (0-30 cm). Physical and chemical analysis were done according to Chapman and Pratt (1978)are presented in Table (2)
Table (2). Some Physical and chemical properties of the experimental soil in 2014 / 2015 and 2015/2016 seasons.
Soil properties
Season
2014/2015
2015/2016
A) Mechanical analysis
Clay %
Sand %
Silt %
38
32
30
37
33
30
Soil texture
Clay loam soil
B) Chemical properties
PH ( 1 : 1)
EC (dS/m)
8.20
3.80
8.31
3.70
1) Soluble cations (1:2) (cmol/kg soil)
K+
Ca++
Mg++
Na++
1.52
9.4
18.3
13.50
1.54
8.7
18.5
13.8
2) Soluble anions (1 : 2) (cmol/kg soil)
CO3--+ HCO3-
Cl-
SO4—
Calcium carbonate (%)
Total nitrogen (%)
Available phosphorus (mg/kg)
Organic matter (%)
2.90
20.4
12.50
6.50
1.00
3.70
1.41
2.80
19.80
12.60
7.00
0.91
3.55
1.40
Plant height (cm), yield and its components were characterized as spike length (cm), spike number/m2, spikelets number /spike, grains number /spike, 1000-grains weight (g), grain yield, straw yield, biological yield (kg/fed) and harvest index (%).
All data collected were subjected to analysis of variance according to Gomez and Gomez (1984). All statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance technique by means of CoStat computer software package (CoStat, Ver. 6.311., 2005).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data presented in Table (3) reveal the effect of nano- compounds (hypertonic) and humic acid (HA) application on plant height (cm), spikes number/m2, spikelets number/spike, grains number/spike and 1000- kernel weight (gm) of Sakha 93, Sids 12 and Giza 168 wheat cultivars under salinity soil conditions in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons. Whereas nano- compounds (hypertonic) and humic acid, significantly, affected on these attributes during both cropping seasons. Whereas, the highest mean values of those characters were recorded with Hypertonic + humic acid as compared with other treatments in both seasons. The increase in these characters may be due to the role of hypertonic and humic acid decreasing salinity effect on wheat plants. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Tahir et al. (2009); Saruhan et al. (2011); Harsini et al. (2014); Akhtar et al. (2015)who concluded that humic acid and nano- compound increased growth and yield and its components.
Significant, differences among wheat cultivars for plant height (cm), spikes number/m2, spikelets number/spike, grains number/spike and 1000- kernel weight (gm) are shown in Table (3) during the two cropping seasons. The cultivar “Sids 12” recorded the highest mean values of above mentioned attributes, while “Giza 168” cultivar gave the lowest ones during the two growing seasons. These differences between wheat cultivars are mainly due to genetic differences between the three cultivars.Hafez (2007); Majer et al. (2008); Abo-Marzoka (2009); Jatoi et al. (2011); Raza et al. (2012); Al-Temimi et al. (2013) who found high significant differences between the wheat cultivars under their studies for plant height.
Salinity alleviated compounds interact, significantly, with wheat cultivars for plant height (cm), spikes number/m2, spikelets number/spike, grains number/spike and 1000- kernel weight (g) in both cropping seasons Table (3). Likewise, “Sids 12” cultivar treated with hypertonic + humic acid gave the highest values of these traits. Meanwhile the lowest ones were recorded by the untreated “Giza 168” cultivar (without hypertonic or humic acid) in the first and the second season, respectively.
Table (3). Average of plant attributes for three wheat cultivars (C) as affected by hypertonic, humic acid (S) and their interaction during 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons
Attributes
Salinity alleviated compounds (S)
Season 2014/2015
Season 2015/2016
Sakha 93
Sids 12
Giza 168
Average (S)
L.S.D (S) at 0.05
L.S.D (C) at 0.05
L.S.D (CxS) at 0.05
Sakha 93
Sids 12
Giza 168
Average (S)
L.S.D (S) at 0.05
L.S.D (C) at 0.05
L.S.D (CxS) at 0.05
Plant height (cm)
Hypertonic(Nano)
99.23
108.20
88.33
98.59b
3.53
3.78
7.55
97.93
107.67
87.13
97.58b
2.47
3.70
7.39
Humic
93.67
106.67
92.67
97.67b
88.63
108.57
91.23
96.14b
Hypertonic +humic
110.00
119.60
104.00
111.20a
108.70
118.90
103.47
110.36a
Control
98.83
111.17
84.33
98.11b
96.40
109.97
83.47
96.61b
Average (C)
100.43b
111.41a
92.33c
97.92b
111.28a
91.33c
Spikes number /m2
Hypertonic(Nano)
211.67
245.00
204.00
220.22ab
43.85
30.10
60.21
213.50
253.33
215.33
227.39ab
40.10
29.51
59.01
Humic
245.00
270.33
219.33
244.89ab
260.50
285.83
234.83
260.39a
Hypertonic +humic
231.67
281.33
266.00
259.67a
243.00
280.67
264.00
262.56a
Control
152.33
243.00
210.33
201.89b
153.17
260.00
217.17
210.11b
Average (C)
210.17b
259.92a
224.92b
217.54b
269.96a
232.83b
Spikelets number/spike
Hypertonic(Nano)
17.67
20.67
18.37
18.90bc
1.23
1.06
2.12
16.00
18.67
17.20
17.29c
0.741
1.08
2.15
Humic
17.17
22.83
17.67
19.22b
17.37
22.33
16.33
18.68b
Hypertonic +humic
20.83
22.13
22.83
21.93a
20.33
22.33
21.83
21.50a
Control
17.50
19.53
16.67
17.90c
16.17
18.50
15.33
16.67c
Average (C)
18.29b
21.29a
18.89b
17.47b
20.46a
17.67b
Grains number/spike
Hypertonic(Nano)
47.17
55.00
48.50
50.22c
2.06
1.41
2.82
47.17
55.00
48.50
50.22c
2.06
1.41
2.82
Humic
52.53
65.67
48.17
55.46b
52.53
65.67
48.17
55.46b
Hypertonic +humic
56.00
70.33
53.00
59.78a
56.00
70.33
53.00
59.78a
Control
47.27
52.37
43.67
47.77d
47.27
52.37
43.67
47.77d
Average (C)
50.74b
60.84a
48.34c
50.74b
60.84a
48.34c
1000- kernel weight (g)
Hypertonic(Nano)
46.20
50.17
42.83
46.40c
1.280
1.284
2.56
47.67
53.37
44.83
48.62c
1.81
1.34
2.67
Humic
46.90
53.50
48.57
49.66b
48.33
56.00
48.27
50.87b
Hypertonic +humic
48.43
59.00
52.87
53.43a
50.53
61.67
54.20
55.47a
Control
38.43
48.00
38.33
41.59d
38.00
44.67
38.93
40.53d
Average (C)
44.99b
52.67a
45.65b
46.13b
53.93a
46.56b
-Mean values in the same column/row marked with the same letters are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability.
The obtained data in Table (4) indicate the effect of nano- compounds (hypertonic) and humic acid (HA) application on grain, straw, and biological yields, and harvest index (H.I. %) of Sakha 93, Sids 12 and Giza 168 wheat cultivars under salinity soil conditions in 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons. Whereas salinity alleviated compounds (nano- compounds (hypertonic) and humic acid), significantly, affected on these characters in both cropping seasons. Whereas, the highest mean values of these character were recorded with the hypertonic + humic as compared with other treatments in both seasons. The increase in these characters may be due to the role of hypertonic and humic acid in decreasing salinity effect on wheat plants. These results are in harmony with those obtained by Saruhan et al. (2011); El-Bassiouny et al. (2014); Akhtar et al. (2015); Vafa et al. (2015)who reported that humic acid and nano- compound increased growth and yield and its components.
Significant, differences among wheat cultivars for grain, straw, and biological yields, and harvest index (H.I. %) are shown in Table (3) during the two cropping seasons. The cultivar “Sids 12” recorded the highest mean values of above mentioned attributes, while “Giza 168” cultivar gave the lowest ones during the two growing seasons. These differences between wheat are mainly due to genetic differences between the three cultivars.El-Esh (2007); Ganbalani et al., (2009); Buhedma (2011); Raza et al. (2012); Al-Temimi et al. (2013); Bakry et al. (2013) found high significant differences between the wheat cultivars under their studies for yield and its components.
Salinity alleviated compounds interact, significantly, with wheat cultivars for grain, straw, biological yields, and harvest index (H.I. %) in both cropping seasons Table (4). Likewise, “Sids 12” cultivar treated with hypertonic + humic acid achieved the highest mean values of these traits. Meanwhile the lowest ones were recorded by the untreated “Giza 168” cultivar (without hypertonic or humic acid) in the first and the second season, respectively.
Table (4). Average of plant attributes for three wheat cultivars (C) as affected by hypertonic, humic acid a(S) nd their interaction during 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons
Attributes
Salinity alleviated compounds
(S)
Season 2014/2015
Season 2015/2016
Sakha 93
Sids 12
Giza 168
Average (S)
L.S.D. (S) at 0.05
L.S.D. (C) at 0.05
L.S.D. (C x S) at 0.05
Sakha 93
Sids 12
Giza 168
Average (S)
L.S.D. (S) at 0.05
L.S.D. (C) at 0.05
L.S.D. (C x S) at 0.05
Grain yield (kg/fed.)
Hypertonic (Nano)
1975.00
2487.04
1591.00
2017.68c
84.79
60.01
120.02
1980.00
2320.00
1656.00
1985.33b
83.75
110.57
221.14
Humic
1949.67
2495.33
1966.89
2137.30b
1878.00
2141.67
1944.80
1988.16b
Hypertonic+humic
2357.27
3085.27
1955.13
2465.89a
2658.67
3226.60
1914.50
2599.92a
Control
1624.23
1986.53
1299.17
1636.64d
1662.23
1862.67
1316.50
1613.80c
Average (C)
1976.54b
2513.54a
1703.05c
2044.73b
2387.74a
1707.95c
Straw yield (kg/fed.)
Hypertonic (Nano)
2424.47
2767.49
1835.63
2342.53c
114.27
202.43
404.86
2851.83
2959.63
1900.50
2570.65b
164.68
95.56
191.13
Humic
2421.00
2714.87
2340.87
2492.25b
2435.33
3214.67
2452.60
2700.87b
Hypertonic+humic
2846.67
3247.10
2206.13
2766.63a
2933.53
3839.13
2559.33
3110.66a
Control
2133.00
3220.53
1543.63
2299.05c
2196.60
3284.13
1679.22
2386.65c
Average (C)
2456.29b
2987.50a
1981.57c
2604.32b
3324.39a
2147.91c
Biological yield
Hypertonic(Nano)
4399.47
5254.53
3426.63
4360.21c
114.21
236.12
472.23
4831.83
5279.63
3556.50
4555.99b
189.83
128.58
257.16
Humic
4370.67
5210.20
4307.76
4629.54b
4313.33
5356.34
4397.40
4689.02b
Hypertonic+humic
5203.94
6332.37
4161.26
5232.52a
5592.20
7065.73
4473.83
5710.59a
Control
3757.23
5207.06
2842.80
3935.70d
3858.83
5146.80
2995.72
4000.45c
Average (C)
4432.83b
5501.04a
3684.61c
4649.05b
5712.13a
3855.86c
Harvest index(H.I. %)
Hypertonic(Nano)
44.89
47.33
46.43
46.22a
1.80
1.92
3.85
40.98
43.94
46.56
43.83ab
1.73
1.69
3.38
Humic
44.61
47.89
45.66
46.05a
43.54
39.98
44.23
42.58bc
Hypertonic+humic
45.30
48.72
46.98
47.00a
47.54
45.67
42.79
45.33a
Control
43.23
38.15
45.70
42.36b
43.08
36.19
43.95
41.07c
Average (C)
44.51a
45.52a
46.19a
43.78a
41.45b
44.38a
-Mean values in the same column/row marked with the same letters are not significantly different at 0.05 level of probability.
CONCLUSION
From the above results of this two growing seasons field’s study, it was concluded that nano compound and humic acid increased yield and its components of wheat crop by decreasing the effect of salinity and Sids 12 cultivar gave more response with this treatment under study conditions at Abess Region, Alexandria governorate, Egypt.
References
REFERENCES
Abedi, T., A. Alemzadeh and S. A. Kazemeini (2010). Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on grain yield and protein banding pattern of wheat. Aust. J. Crop. Sci., 4:384-389.
Abo-Marzoka, S. A. M. (2009). Response of somewheat cultivars to bio-fertilization. Ph. D . Thesis Fac. of Agric. Kafr El-Sheikh Univ., Egypt.
Akhtar, K., A. Khan, M. T. Jan, M.Z. Afridi, S. Ali and S. Zaheer (2015). Effect of humic acid and crop residue application on emergence and wheat phenology, Pure Appl. Bio., 4(1): 97-103.
Al-Temimi, H. N. Gh., I. S. Alsaadawi and A. W. Al-Shahwany (2013). Screening of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes for drought tolerance under field conditions. A Thesis Submitted to the Biology Department College of Science University of Baghdad.
Bakry, B. A., T. A. Elewa, M. F. El-Kramany and A. W. Wali (2013). Effect of humic and ascorbic acids foliar application on yield and yield components of two wheat cultivars grown under newly reclaimed sandy. Int. J. of Agron. & pl. prod. 4(6):1125-1133.
Buhedma, A.S. I. (2011). Response of some wheat varieties to nitrogenous fertilization biofertilization and seeding rates. Ph.D. thesis, Fac. of Agric. (Saba Basha) Univ. Alex.
Chapman, H.D. and R.T. Pratt (1978). Methods of Analysis for Soils, Plants and Water. Univ. California, Div.Agric Sci.169.
CoStat 6.311(2005). Cohort software798 light house Ave. PMB320, Monterey, CA93940,andUSA.email:info@cohort.com.http://www.cohort.com/DownloadCoStatPart2.html.
El-Bassiouny, H.S.M., A.B. Bakry, A. A. Abd El-Monem and M.M. Abd Allah (2014). Physiological Role of Humic Acid and Nicotinamide on Improving Plant Growth, Yield, and Mineral Nutrient of Wheat (Triticum durum) Grown under Newly Reclaimed Sandy Soil. Agric. Sci., 5: 687-700.
El-Esh, I. F. I. (2007). Effect of both mineral and biofertilization on yield and quality of wheat. Ph. D. Thesis, Fac. of Agric. (Saba Basha) Univ. Alex.
Ganbalani, A. N., G. N. Ganbalani and D. Hassanpanah (2009). Effects of drought stress condition on the yield and yield components of advanced wheat genotypes in Ardabil. IranJ. of Food, Agric. & Environ., 7: 228 - 234.
Gomez, W.K. and A. A.Gomez (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agric. Res., An international Rice Res. Institute Book, John Wiley and Sons. Inc. New York, USA.
Hafez, E. M. (2007). Effect of some agricultural practices on growth and productivity of wheat, M. Sc. Thesis, Kafr El-Sheikh Univ., Egypt.
Harsini, M.G., H. Habibib and G.H. Talaeic (2014). Study the effects of iron nano chelated fertilizers foliar application on yield and yield components of new line of wheat cold region of kermanshah provence. Agricultural Advances, 3(4): 95-102.
Jatoi, W. A., M. J. Baloch, M. B. Kumbhar, N. U. Khan and M. I. Kerio (2011). Effect of water stress on physiological and yield parameters at anthesis stage in elite spring wheat cultivars. Sarhad J. Agric., 27(1): 59-65.
Khan, A., A.L.I.R.Gurmani, M.Z. Khan, F. Hussain, M.E. Akhtar and S. Khan (2012). Effect of humic acid on the growth, yield, nutrient composition, photosynthetic pigment and total sugar contents of peas (Pisum sativum L.). Journal of the Chemical Society of Pakistan, 1: 1–7.
Majer, P., L. Sass, T. Lelley, L. Cseuz, I. Vass, D. Dudits and J. Pauk, (2008). Testing drought tolerance of wheat by a complex stress diagnostic system installed in greenhouse. Acta Biol. Szeged,52: 97-100.
Naderi, M. R. and A. R. DaneshShahraki (2011). The optimization of fertilizers formula using nanotechnology. J. of Nanotechno., l165(4):20-22.
Raza, M.A. S., M. F. Saleem,I. H. Khan,M. Jamil,M. IjazandM.A. Khan(2012). Evaluating the drought stress tolerance efficiency of wheat (triticum aestivum l.) cultivars. Russian J. of Agric. and Socio-Economic Sci., 12 (12):41- 46.
Saruhan, V., A. Kusvuran and S. Babat (2011). The effect of different humic acid fertilization on yield and yield components performances of common millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) Scientific Research and Essays, 6(3): 663-669.
Scott, N. and H. Chen (2003). Nanoscale science and engineering for agriculture and food systems. A Report Submitted to Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, the USDA. National.
Singh, J. and J.H. Skerritt (2001). Chromosomal control of albumins and globulins in wheat grain assessed using different fractionation procedures. J. Cereal. Sci., 33, 163–181.
Tahir, M., A. Tanveer, T.H. Shah, N. Fiaz and A. Wasaya (2009). Yield response of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) to boron application at different growth stages. Pak. J. Life Soc. Sci., 7:39-42.
Türkmen, O., A. Dursun, M. Turan and C. Erdinc (2004). 'Calcium and humic acid affect seed germination, growth, and nutrient content of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) seedlings under saline soil conditions', Acta Agric. Scandinavica, Section B- Plant Soil Sci., 54(3): 168- 174.
Türkmen, Ö., S. Demir, S. Ensoy and A. Dursun (2005). Effects of mycorrhizal fungus and humic acid on the seedling development and nutrient content of pepper grown under saline soil conditions. J. Biol. Sci., 5(5): 568-574.
Vafa, Zahra, N., A. R. Sirousmehr, A. Ghanbari, I. Khammari, and N. Falahi (2015). Effects of nano zinc and humic acid on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of savory (Satureja hortensis L.). International J. of Biosciences, 6(3):124-136.