Effects of Nitrogen on Pea Plants

EFFECTS OF NITROGEN melio regularize PEA PLANTS (Pisum sativum) ON GROWTH OF CORN (Zea mays)? Introduction Interactions among build species, curiously negative ones, direct been a c erstrn in agriculture (Levene 1926, Russell 1961). Novoa (1981) suggested that it would be advantageous to rotate certain crops by season, grow certain crops together, or avoid growing certain crops on the equal land. Observations indicated that few crops use up specific types of nutrients in contrast to other crop species, and im deedss within the legume Family actu entirelyy fix nutrients, for example atomic number 7, within surrounding soils.Nitrogen is a chance upon plant nutrient, and has been shown to be both increase plant harvest-festival and training (Russell 1961), only when is often deficient in many western U. S. soils (Novoa 1981). olibanum Legumes could provide high community trophic service (Aprison et al. 1954, Hiroshi 2010). The common pea plant plant (Pisum sativum), a memb er of the Legume family, and a robust dicot flowering plant (i. e. , an Angiosperm) native to the western U. S. , enjoys a symbiotic consanguinity with Rhizobium bacteria (Hiroshi 2010).These bacteria grow inside nodules located on the grow of pea plants and convert atmospheric nitrogen (N2) into ammonia (NO3-), which is a molecular form the pea plant, and beside plants, can use for legion(predicate) physiological functions (including production of DNA, proteins, and plant hormones (Russell 1961, Novoa 1981, Hiroshi 2010). It has become a common employment to rotate crops within fields, alternating Legumes with various other plant species to bear on high soil nitrogen levels.Our research was actioned in the BIO170 Lab (107 Lewis manor hall, meitnerium State University MSU), and was foc utilise on potential effects of pea plants on the result and development of lemon yellow (Zea mays). Our objective was to vary harvest-festival environments, with some plants of different species type big in close law of propinquity, under the same conditions, and other treatments with single plant species, thus allowing us to address the native research questions Will the heraldic bearing of pea plants, in close proximity to maize, positively affect lemon whiskey shoot bloom, root distance, shoot sens, and boilersuit seedling growth ate? We formulated the primary research question into the succeeding(a) formal hypotheses H1 pea plants practiced- bounteous in close proximity to give whiskey plants will increase the height of the give plants H2 pea plants bighearted in close proximity to lemon yellow whisky plants will increase the root length of the clavus plants H3 pea plants grown in close proximity to corn plants will increase the shoot mass of the corn plants and H4 pea plants grown in close proximity to corn plants will increase the seedling growth considers of corn plants. For to distributively one stated research hypothesis (i. e. H1 th ru H4), the unsatisfying (H0) hypothesis was the presence of pea plants growing in close proximity to corn plants will meet no effect on the corn plant solvent variables (i. e. , shoot height, root length, shoot mass, and overall seedling growth rate). The explanatory, or treatment variable, in all cases, was presence or absence of a pea plant within the growth cadres of our measurement units (see below). Methods The plant experiments were conducted in Lewis Hall, room 107, on the campus of Montana State University. The labs room temperature is typically 65 to 70 degrees F (celsius scale thermometer).We invest up our experiment in the NW corner of the lab on the counter. We used three polyurethane growth trays (Carolina biologic Supply Company, Savannah, GA), where each tray contained 36 cells 15cm X 10 cm X 10 cm (depth). Each cell was filled with organic soil to the rim of the cell (soil type Sunshine Mix jell Growth Center, MSU). Each growth tray was divided into both se ctions, with 18 cells containing two corn plants and 18 cells each containing one Alaska variety pea plant and one corn plant for a total of 108 corn plants entirely and 54 corn plants grown with pea plants.All seeds were withal obtained from Carolina Biological Supply Company. The trays were placed under full spectrum UV grow livelys (also from Carolina Supply Co. , Model XPV-230 Lum. ), and received 12 hours of light per day (using a light timer Home Depot Model ISZ210/120). We position seeds at 0. 5 inch depth, and maintained moist (but not unshakable or muddy) soil for 3 days, or until the onset of germination. We used hook irrigate, with approximately 50 ml per growth cell each first light and evening during germination. After germination, we reduced watering to 50 ml once per day, typically in the late afternoon (to acilitate overnight availability of water per cell and prevent drying). After 10 days, when seedlings were well established, we increased quotidian water to 100 ml per cell. After 2 hebdomads of seedling growth, we began measuring the response variables, including height of shoot (soil level to apical tip) using a old-hat metric ruler, and the Precision Balance (room 106) to measure mass to the nearest 0. 01 grams. We compared height, and mass using mean values per treatment, including the standard deviation to assess variation. We used percent growth per week as an estimate of growth rate.Roots were washed, and then dried, prior to mass measurement. Results The fair shoot height (Fig. 1) of corn grown in close proximity to pea plants, compared to the height of the corn grown altogether, indicated that pea plants may have increased the height of neighboring corn. At the end of three weeks, the average height of corn grown with peas was 35. 4 cm, whereas corn plant grown alone reached an average height of approximately 33 cm, which represented a 6. 78% exit mingled with treatments (Fig. 1). experience 1. Average height of corn plants grown in Lewis Hall Lab 107 (MSU).The upper line was on the graph shows the height of corn grown with peas. The lower line represents the corn grown alone. Figure 2. Shows average root mass (dry weight) of corn in the two treatments, i. e. , with or without the presence of Pea Plants. The average mass of the corn grown with peas was 1. 2 grams objet dart the average mass of the corn alone was 1. 07 grams. This represents a 10. 8% difference amidst treatments (Fig. 2). Figure 3. Average root length of corn plants between treatments. Our observation result also showed that average root length for corn grown with peas was 11. 5 cm and the length for corn grown alone to be 9. 69 cm, a 16. 8% difference between treatments. Figure 4 shows germination rates for the two treatments, with 37% increase per week for corn grown with peas, slightly higher than the corn grown alone (35. 2%). bow 1 shows the various percent differences between the two treatments, and in each contrast, the values for corn grown with peas was greater than corn grown alone. Discussion Overall, in summarizing our key results, we discover corn grown with peas showed a trend of 6. 78% taller and 10. % heavier than corn grown alone. We also observed the roots of corn grown with peas were on average, 16. 8% longer than the roots of corn grown alone. Finally, we make that the corn grown with peas had a 4. 86% higher germination rate than corn alone. Figure 4. Average germination rate of corn plants estimated between treatments. Table 1. Percent difference between the treatment, showing increases in all variables in treatment with both plants together. Height6. 78% Mass10. 80% Root length16. 80% Germination rate4. 86% Our results, reviewed together (e. . , Table 1), strongly suggested that our ideas concerning facilitation were correct, and supported our research hypotheses that corn grown with peas would be taller, heavier, have longer roots, and have a higher germination rate than corn gr own alone. Upon reflection, we believed that it made sense that the corn grown with peas tended to outperform the corn grown alone for the variables we tested, because clearly nitrogen is an essential component of chlorophyl (Tam 1935), amino acids, ATP, and nucleic acid (Levine 1926).Since pea plants are nitrogen fixers, their presence increases the summate of usable nitrogen in the soil. Thus, the corn grown with the peas would have had much nitrogen available to it to aid in the production of chlorophyll, amino acids, ATP, and nucleic acid, all of which probably aided the corn growth, mass, and also the higher germination rate (percent) that we observed.Furthermore, our results tend to agree with other research findings, for example a study presented at the 2010 World relation of grease Science found that corn rotated with soy, also a nitrogen fixer (Aprison 1954), tended to grow taller and have higher yields than corn rotated with corn (Yin 2010). Another study found that a long with the correct row spacing and plant density, corn plants grew ruff when given moderate levels of nitrogen (Cox 2000).Further, a study done in Europe noted that nitrogen deficiency in plants tended to inhibit plant growth and rates of photosynthesis (Zhao 2005, Bradshaw et. al 2010, Cox et al. 2010). The positive effects nitrogen has on plants are well documented and have been studied for decades, but we think our replications of pea plant facilitated growth were well worth the efforts, and also allowed us to see first-hand, how experiments can be powerful tools for learning and for deterrent of research ideas.It is well known by both plant scientists and unskilled backyard gardeners that plants need nitrogen to grow to their full potential, so perhaps our cast offered little new information, but it was still quite fascinating to conduct the research, learn the steps of the scientific process, and apply them ourselves, rather than simply meditate about experimentation. T hose wishing to grow corn, or other important, or everyday house plants, might use our outcomes to enhance growth production of in demand(p) species. Literature Cited Aprison, M. H. , W. E. Magee, and R. H. Burris. 954. Nitrogen Fixitation by Excised Soybean Root Nodules. ledger of Biological Chemistry 208 (1954) 29-39. Bradshaw, A. D. , M. J. Chadwick, D. Jowett, and R. W. Snaydon. 1964. Experimental Investigations into the Mineral Nutrition of Several Grass Species IV. NitrogenLevel. journal of Ecology 52. 3 (1964) 665-76. Cox, William J. , and Debbie J. R. Cherney. Row Spacing, Plant Density, and Nitrogen Effects on Corn Silage. 2000. Argonomy Journal 93. 3 597-602. Kunstman, James L. , and E. Paul Lichtenstein. Effects of food for thought Deficiencies in CornPlants on the in Vivo and in Vitro Metabolism of 14Cdiazinon. Journal of awkward and Food Chemistry 27. 4 (1979) 770-74. Levine, P. A. On the Nitrogenous Components of Yeast Nucleic Acid. Journal of Biological Chem istry 67 (1926) 325-27. The Journal of Biological Chemistry. Novoa, R. , and R. S. Loomis. Nitrogen and Plant Production. Plant and Soil 58 (1981) 177-204. Russell, Edward J. Soil Conditions and Plant Growth. 8th ed. London Longmans, 1961. clear(p) Library. Tam, R. K. , and O. C. Magistad. 1935. Relationship Between Nitrogen Fertilization AndRelated post Disadvantages of Plants live on LandChlorophyll Content In Pineapple Plants. Plant Physiology 10. 1 (1935) 159-68. Yin, Xinhua, Angela McClure, and strike Tyler. 2010. Relationships of Plant Height and Canopy NDVI with Nitrogen Nutrition and. Lecture. World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a Changing World. Brisbane. 1-6 Aug. 2010. International Union of Soil Sciences. Zhao, D. , K. Reddy, V. Kakani, and V. Reddy. 2005. Nitrogen Deficiency Effects on Plant Growth, Leaf Photosynthesis, and Hyperspectral reflectiveness Properties of Sorghum. European Journal of Agronomy 22. 4 (2005) 391-403.