Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L) toRhizobium inoculation in the field: Problems and prospects

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
MIRCEN journal of applied microbiology and biotechnology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

A successfulRhizobium inoculant strain needs to be more competitive than native soil rhizobia in forming nodules and to be effective in fixing nitrogen. Persistence of the strain from one season to the next will be an added advantage, since it eliminates the need to inoculate every season. Earlier studies indicated that groundnut,Arachis hypogaea, seldom responds toRhizobium inoculation in soils already containing rhizobia which nodulate groundnut. However, the results of seven years of research at ICRISAT have opened up the prospect of inoculating groundnut in such soils. These experiments indicate that inoculating with sufficient numbers of an effectiveRhizobium strain, NC 92, applied as a liquid slurry below the seed, increased yields of certain groundnut cultivars. Similar results were reported from other research centres in India. Inoculation with NC 92 for two consecutive seasons increased the proportion of nodules formed by this strain, from 25–32% in the first season to 41–54% in the second season, indicating that this strain can persist in the field for the following season. This paper also discusses results of experiments relating to host cultivar specificity and some possible problems in applying this information to farmers' fields. Strain NC 92 also produces a siderophore, an iron chelating compound, which may help in the iron nutrition of the plant.

Résumé

Réponse de l'arachide (Arachis hypogeaL.)à l'inculation de Rhizobiumdans les champs. Problèmes et perspectives.

Pour être couronnée de succès, une souche deRhizobium inoculée doit supplanter les rhizobiums natifs du sol en ce qui concerne la formation de nodules et doit fixer l'azote efficacement. La persistance de la souche d'une saison à l'autre, rendant inutile la répétition saisonnière de l'inoculation, est un avantage supplémentaire. Des études antérieures ont montré que l'arachide (Arachis hypogea) ne répond que rarement à l'inoculation dans des sols contenant déjà des rhizobiums capables de noduler cette plante. Cependant, les résultats de sept années de recherches éffectuées à l'ICRISAT ont ouvert des possibilités quant à l'inoculation dans ce type de sols. Ces expériences montrent qu'une bouillie liquide d'une souche efficace deRhizobium (NC 92), répandue en quantité suffisante sous les graines, augmente le rendement de certains cultivars d'arachide. Des résultats similaires ont été rapportés par d'autres centres de recherches en Inde. L'inoculation de NC 92 pendant deux saisons consécutives a augmenté la proportion des nodules formés par cette souche de 25 à 32% pour la première saison, et de 41 à 54% pour la seconde, ce qui indique que cette souche peut persister dans le sol d'une saison à l'autre. Dans cet article sont également discutés les résultats d'expériences concernant la spécificité de l'hôte et quelques problèmes concernant l'utilisation de ces informations par les agriculteurs. La souche NC 92 produit aussi un sidérophore, agent complexant du fer pouvant jouer un rôle dans le métabolisme de ce métal chez la plante.

Resumen

Respuesta del maní (Arachis hypogaeaL.)a la inoculación con Rhizobiumen el campo. Problemas y perspectivas.

La inoculación conRhizobium para tener exito debe de realizarse con una cepa que sea competitivamente mejor que las cepas nativas del suelo en cuestión, en relación a la habilidad para formar nódulos y a la eficacia en la fijación de nitrógeno. La persistencia de la cepa de una temporada para otra es una caracteristica deseable ya que elimina la necesidad de reinocular cada temporada. Estudios previos indicaban que el maní (Arachis hypogaeae) raras veces responde a la inoculación conRhizobium en suelos que ya contienenRhizobium especificos. Sin embargo los resultados de siete años de investigaciones en ICRISAT han abierto nuevas perspectivas para la inoculación del maní en dichos suelos. Esta experiencias indican que la inoculación, en cantidades suficientes de una cepa deRhizobium eficaz (NC 92) aplicada en forma de liquido viscoso bajo la semilla incrementa el rendimiento de ciertos cultivars de mani. Resultados semejantes se han observado en otros centros de investigación en India.La inoculación de la cepa NC 92 durante dos años consecutivos incrementó la proporción de nódulos formados desde 25–32% en la primera temporada hasta 41–54% en la segunda indicando pues la persistencia de dicha cepa en el suelo de una a otra temporada. Este trabajo también evalua los resultados de investigaciones relacionando la especificidad del inóculo con la posible problemática que conlleva la aplicación de esta informacion por el agricultor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AICORPO (All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Oilseeds) 1983Annual Progress Report 1982–1983, Vol. 2. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Directorate of Oilseeds Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India, pp. 241–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, M. 1982 Research to enhance nitrogen fixation: misplaced emphasis? InPriorities in Biotechnology Research for International Development. pp. 208–229. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, O. N. &Allen, E. K. 1981Leguminosae. pp. xiii-xxix, 60–64. Wisconsin, U.S.A.: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anon. 1983 Peanut Research Program, Institute of Agronomic Research, Centre of Maroua, United Republic of Cameroon. Annual Report 1983. pp. 51–52.

  • App, A. &Eaglesham, A. 1982 Biological nitrogen fixation-problems and potential. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation Technology for Tropical Agriculture, ed. Graham, P. H. & Harris, S. C. pp. 1–7. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, S. K., Saini, J. S., Gandhi, R. C. &Sandhu, R. S. 1970 Study of chemical composition and yield of groundnut as affected byRhizobium inoculation.Oleagineux 25, 279–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonnier, C. 1960 SymbioseRhizobium-légamineuses: aspects particuliers aux régions tropicales.Annales de l'Institut Pasteur, Paris 98, 537–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. C. 1976 Pragmatic aspects ofRhizobium leguminous plant association. InProceedings of the First International Symposium on Nitrogen Fixation, Vol. 2, ed.Newton, W. E. &Nyman, C. J. pp. 429–446. Pullman: Washington State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. C. 1982 Modern concepts in legume inoculation. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation Technology for Tropical Agriculture, ed. Graham, P. H. & Harris, S. C. pp. 105–114. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney, A. D. 1975 Fertilizer studies with groundnuts on the brown sands of Guyana. 1. Effects of nitrogen, inoculum, magnesium, and fritted micronutrients.Agronomy Journal 67, 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Date, R. A. 1976 Principles ofRhizobium strain selection. InSymbiotic Nitrogen Fixation in Plants, ed. Nutman, P. S. pp. 137–150. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diatloff, A. &Langford, S. 1975 Effective natural nodulation in Queensland.Queensland Journal of Agricultural and Animal Sciences 32, 95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco, C. A. 1977 Contribution of the legume-Rhizobium symbiosis to the ecosystem and food production. InExploiting the Legume-RhizobiumSymbiosis in Tropical Agriculture, ed. Vincent, J. M., Witney, A. S. & Bose, J. pp. 237–252. University of Hawaii.

  • Graham, P. H. 1981 Some problems on nodulation and symbiotic nitrogen fixation inPhaseolous vulgaris L: A Review.Field Crops Research 4, 92–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadad, M. A., Loynachan, T. E. &Musa, M. M. 1982 Inoculation trials on groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in Sudan. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation Technology for Tropical Agriculture, ed. Graham, P. H. & Harris, S. C. pp. 249–256. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde, S. V. 1982 Field responses toRhizobium inoculation inArachis hypogaea, Vigna spp. andDolichos spp. in India. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation Technology for Tropical Agriculture, ed. Graham, P. H. & Harris, S. C. pp. 257–264. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitbold, A. E., Hartzog, D. L., Harrison, R. B. &Adams, F. 1983 Inoculation of peanuts on farmers' fields in Alabama.Peanut Science 10, 79–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICRISAT 1983 International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. Annual Report for 1982. pp. 200. Patancheru, A. P., India: ICRISAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICRISAT 1984 Annual Report for 1983. pp. 205–207. Patancheru, A. P., India: ICRISAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, P. K. &Kulkarni, J. H. 1983 Response of groundnut to inoculation with single and mixedRhizobium strains.Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 53, 376–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, P. K. &Kulkarni, J. H. 1984 Inoculate groundnut to produce more.Indian Farming 34, 7–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar Rao, J. V. D. K., Dart, P. J. &Usha Kiran, M. 1982 Cowpea groupRhizobium in soils of the semiarid tropics. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation Technology for Tropical Agriculture, ed. Graham, P. H. &Harris, S. C. pp. 291–296. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopes, E. S. 1977 Ecology of legume-Rhizobium symbiosis. InLimitations and Potentials for Biological Nitrogen Fixation in the Tropics, ed. Döbereiner, J., Burris, R. H. & Hollaender, A. pp. 173–190. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzani, B. 1980 Peanut production, utilization, research, problems and further research in Venezuela. InProceedings — International Workshop on Groundnuts, ed. Gibbons, R. W. pp. 247–253. Patancheru, A. P., India: ICRISAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagaraja Rao, H. S. 1974 Response of groundnut variety TMV 2 toRhizobium inoculation.Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy 40(B), 650–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C. 1985 Nodulation and nitrogen fixation. InA Monograph on Groundnut, Arachis hypogaeaL. ed. Tata, S.N. New Delhi: Indian Council of Agricultural Research. (In press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C. &Anjaiah, V. 1985 Enumeration of rhizobia by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.Journal of Applied Bacteriology 58, 187–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C. &Dart, P. J. 1980 Studies on nitrogen fixation by groundnut at ICRISAT. InProceedings — International Workshop on Groundnuts, ed. Gibbons, R. W. pp. 110–124. Patancheru, A. P., India: ICRISAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C. &Dart, P. J. 1983 Factors influencing nitrogenase activity (acetylene reduction) by root nodules of groundnut,Arachis hypogaea L.Peanut Science 10, 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C., Dart, P. J., Nigam, S. N. &Gibbons, R. W. 1982a Genetic manipulation of nodulation in groundnut. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation Technology for Tropical Agriculture, ed. Graham, P. H. & Harris, S. C. pp. 49–56. Cali, Colombia: CIAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C., Dart, P. J., Srinivasa Rao, B. &Ravishankar, H. N. 1982b. Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) to inoculation,ibid. pp. 241–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C., Ravishankar, H. N. &Dart, P. J. 1983 Effect ofRhizobium numbers on nodulation and nitrogen fixation in groundnut.Experimental Agriculture 19, 243–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C., Dart, P. J., Srinivasa Rao, B. &Ravishankar, H. N. 1984a Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) toRhizobium inoculation.Oleagineux 39, 149–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambiar, P. T. C., Srinivasa Rao, B. &Anjaiah, V. 1984b Studies on competition, persistence and methods of application of a groundnutRhizobium strain, NC 92.Peanut Science 11, 83–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neilands, J. B. 1981 Microbial iron compounds.Annual Review of Biochemistry 50, 715–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, R. E., Weaver, R. W., Taber, R. A. &Strichler, C. R. 1975 Beneficial soil microorganisms. InPeanut Production in Texas, ed. Miller, J. E. pp. 26–33. Texas, U.S.A.: Texas Agricultural Experimental Station, Texas A & M University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratner, E. I., Lobel, R., Feldhay, H. &Hartzook, A. 1979 Some characteristics of symbiotic nitrogen fixation, yield, protein and oil accumulation in irrigated peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.).Plant and Soil 51, 373–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, V. M. &Tanner, J. W. 1980 The effects of irrigation inoculants and fertilizer nitrogen on peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) 1. Nitrogen fixation.Peanut Science 7, 114–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, P. H. &Cox, F. R. 1973 Soil properties, mineral nutrition and fertilization practices. InPeanuts: Culture and Uses. pp. 271–297. Oklahoma, U.S.A.: American Peanut Research and Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffmann, J. 1961 Field experiments on inoculation of peanuts in northern Negev soils.Israel Journal of Agricultural Research 11, 151–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffmann, J. &Alper, Y. 1968 Inoculation of peanuts by applicationof Rhizobium suspension into the planting furrows.Experimental Agriculture 4, 219–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seeger, J. R. 1961 Effets d'une fumure azotée sur la nodulation et le rendament de l'arachide.Bulletin de l'institut agronomique et des stations de recherches de Gembloux 29, 197–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senaratne, R. &Amarasekara, A. B. N. 1984 Effect of rhizobial inoculation on the nodulation, growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.).Beiträge zur tropischen Landwirtschaft und Veterinärmedizin 22, 63–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimshi, D., Schiffmann, J., Kost, Y., Bielorai, H. &Alper, Y. 1967 Effects of soil moisture regime on noduation of inoculated peanuts.Agronomy Journal 59, 397–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subba Rao, N. S. 1976 Field response of legumes in India to inoculation and fertilizer applications. InSymbiotic Nitrogen Fixation in Plants, ed. Nutman, P. S. pp. 255–268. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. A. 1982 A national strategy forRhizobium inoculum production technology. InBiological Nitrogen Fixation, Proceedings of a National Symposium held at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi. pp. 49–64. Trombay, Bombay: Bhaba Atomic Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Merwe, S. P., Strijdom, B. W. &Uys, C. 1974 Groundnut response to seed inoculation under extensive agriculture practices in South African soil.Phytophylactica 6, 295–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vincent, J. M. 1970A Manual for the Practical Study of Root-Nodule Bacteria. IBP Handbook No. 15. pp. 49–52. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. E., Minton, N. A. &Dowler, C. C. 1976 Effects of herbicides, a nematicide andRhizobium inoculant on yield, chemical composition and nodulation of Starr peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.)Peanut Science 3, 49–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, R. W. 1974 Effectiveness of rhizobia forming nodules on Texas grown peanuts.Peanut Science 1, 23–25.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Groundnut Improvement Program, ICRISAT, Patancheru, P.O. 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India

    P. T. C. Nambiar

Authors
  1. P. T. C. Nambiar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Submitted as ICRISAT J. A. No. 475.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nambiar, P.T.C. Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L) toRhizobium inoculation in the field: Problems and prospects. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 1, 293–309 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01553414

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01553414

Keywords

Search

Navigation