CC BY
14
U krainian Journal of Ecology
Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 2022, 12(2), 1-7, doi: 10.15421/2022_338
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Growing table beets with the use of biological preparations in co nditions of the right-bank forest-steppe of Ukraine
I. Palamarchuk*, O. Tsyhanska, M. Matusiak, V. Tsyhanskyi
Vinnytsia National Agrarian University, 21008,3 Soniachna Str., Vinnytsia, Ukraine Corresponding author E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Received: 24-Jan-2022, Manuscript No. UJE-22-52342; , Pre QC No. P-52342; Editor assigned: 28-Jan-2022, Pre QC No. P-52342; Reviewed: 08-Feb-2022, QC No. Q-52342; Revised: 14-Feb-2022,
Manuscript No. R-52342; Published: 21-Feb-2022.
Research data of the influence of biological preparations on cultivation of table beets are highlighted. Priority related studies were phenological observations, yield and biometric measurements of beet roots. It is proved that biological preparations and varietal features influence the phenological phases of growth and development of table beets. In the initial stages of table beet plants growth and development there were no significant changes between phases. Further study of the phenological phases of growth and development of table beet plants showed the effect of biological preparations on their occurrence. The molting phase was previously observed using Organic Balance+Azotophyte+Liposam, which is 2 days earlier for the control variant. The phase of intensive root growth and the phase of technical maturity were also noted earlier with the use of Organic Balance+Nitrogen+Liposam: in the Red Ball variety-09.06 and 17.07, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-07.06 and 15.07, which was 2-3 previously obtained by control variants. The interphase period "mass germination-the end of the growing season", also shorter, was the option for the application of Organic Balance+Nitrogen Fitness+Liposam-66 days. Whereas on the options without treatment, it was 69 days. The highest yields were recorded with application of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam: in the Chervona Kulia variety the increase was 7.1 t/ha, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-10.3 t/ha relative to the control. The use of the Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam complex provided a 45 g root mass increase in the Chervona Kulia variety, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-30 g compared to the control. With the use of the Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam complex, the increase made up 30 g in the Chervona Kulia variety and 25 g in Pablo F1 hybrid. Indicator of root diameter was in the range of 8.4 and 9.0 cm. The use of the Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam biological preparations complex contributed to the increase in this indicator, in particular in the Chervona Kulia variety-by 0.4 cm, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-by 0.5 cm. The increase in root diameter with the use of Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam was slightly smaller and amounted to 0.1-0.3 cm. Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam contributed to the increase of this indicator relative to control by 0.3-0.2 cm.
Keywords: Cultivation technology, Roots, Biometric indicators, Phenological phases, Yield.
Introduction
Today, the issue of increasing the yield of agricultural plants, including table beets, is quite relevant. Given climate change, scientists are looking for the ways to create more favorable conditions for growing crops. Besides, the growth of the world's population, which leads to the increase in production of high quality products, is another important factor. Therefore, a significant role in cultivation of vegetable plants is given to biological preparations, which allow obtaining organic vegetable products (Babych, 1996; Balian, 2013; Bazalii, et al., 2016; Chernikova, et al., 2021).
In recent years, the use of intensive technologies for growing crops, for which application of high doses of fertilizers and chemical plant protection preparations were characteristic, often in inappropriate quantities, led to deterioration of soil fertility (Evstigneeva, et al., 2020; Vdovenko, 2019). Under such conditions, the plants became weakened, and therefore more susceptible to disease and pest damage. But it is possible to increase the resistance of plants through the use of biological preparations (Karpenko, et al., 2020; Vdovenko, 2019). Therefore, studies on table beets cultivation with the use of biological products come at an opportune time. Along with other root crops, table beet occupies one of the leading positions and is grown in all soil and climatic zones. It is considered to be one of the most valuable vegetable crops, which is characterized by high yields, precocity, long shelf life, as well as rich chemical composition, including biologically and physiologically active substances, mineral salts and quite valuable betanin pigment (Olifirovych, 2016). It promotes metabolism, improves liver function. Varieties of table beets grown in Ukraine differ in shape, color, yield, precocity, but have the same positive effect on the human body (Kolesnikov, et al., 2020; Palamarchuk, 2019). Table beet (Beta vulgaris L) is one of the most widespread and valuable vegetable crops due to its high plasticity to growing conditions. Beet belongs to the Goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae). It has a high nutritive value due to carbohydrates, mineral salts, organic acids, biologically active substances and vitamins availability. Fruits of table beet are rich in vitamins Bi, B2, B6, amino acids (lysine, valine, arginine), folic acid, carotenoids, salts of iron, calcium, potassium, manganese. As to the iodine content, beet roots rank first among all vegetable crops (Stefaniuk, et al., 2014; Yakovenko, et al., 2001).
Products of table beets are used in food throughout the year, in particular, in spring young leaves can be consumed, in summer-leaves and roots, in autumn and winter-roots (Ketskalo, 2015).
In Ukraine, among all vegetable crops, root crops account for 18% of the cropping area, and table beets occupy 44.1 thousand hectares. The average yield of root crops is 20.3 t/ha, while potential yield of table beets is much higher. Perspective plans for the development of vegetable production provide for the production volumes increase, what will meet the need of the population in food products and the industry-in raw materials (Ulianych, et al., 2018; Vdovenko, et al., 2018).
In order to meet those needs it is necessary to apply new agricultural measures or methods, namely, to use drop irrigation, water-retaining granules, modern high-yielding and resistant to growing conditions, diseases and pests varieties and hybrids. A number of studies show that the use of biological preparations also provides yield growth and better product characteristics (Pantsyreva, 2019; Pashkevich, 2009; Petrychenko, 2011).
In recent years, scientists are paying more and more attention to the biologization of agriculture, the basis of which is the abandonment of chemical plant protection products or the maximum restriction of their use in crop growing technologies. The use of microbial preparations to replace nitrogen fertilizers, chemical plant protection means helps to reduce the chemicalization of agriculture, decrease costs and obtain environmentally friendly crop products (Grekhova, 2014; Suja, 2018; Tarariko, 2014). Introduction of the elements of agriculture biologization is an important step towards strengthening the ecological balance of agroecosystems and increasing the pace of further production of agricultural products (Ivanina, 2011; Zabolotnyi, et al., 2020; Zabolotnyi, et al., 2018).
Literature Review
According to the scientific researches, there is a need for the introduction of biological products in the agricultural plants growing technology, including vegetable production. A number of studies show the much greater importance and effectiveness of biological products against chemical plant protection agents. Thus, it is possible to replace chemical fungicides, to which pathogens have become tolerant, with biological products that have fungicidal effect (Dubka, 2011; Minin, et al., 2020; Prokopchuk, et al., 2018). According to V.M. Prokopchuk et al. growth stimulants have a positive effect on the rooting of the boxwood cuttings (Wolfgang, 2013). The importance of growth stimulants is confirmed by their presence in the growing technology of all crops. Germany, the USA, Italy, Spain, France and Great Britain are the leading producers in the market of organic products (Zaika, 2013). The main world segments of organic products are vegetables and fruits, milk and dairy products, baby food, raw materials for further processing. Specialized markets for organic products in North America and Europe account for most of the world's revenues from the sale of organic products (about 96%). At the same time, the total segment of organic food covers only 1-2% of the world food market, but the market for organic products is constantly growing (Zavalyn, 2005; Pashkevich, 2009). On gray forest soils application of biological fertilizer Groundfix at the dose of 8 l/ha improves conditions for mineral nutrients assimilation and ensures maximum realization of the genetic potential of plants, thus contributing to the formation of high yields of corn.
As reported by V.I. Tsyhanskyi, O.I. Tsyhanska, the use of pre-sowing treatment of seeds with Rhizobofit in combination with Emistim C with full rate liming the soil for hydrolytic acidity and growing coverless alfalfa with introduction of herbicide in the year of sowing, caused an increase in the main feed productivity indicators based on increasing the yield of alfalfa and improving its biochemical composition.
Biostimulants are materials, other than fertilizers, that promote plant growth when applied in low quantities (Bhattacharyya, et al., 2012). Many biostimulant products have been classified into completely divergent groups and categories of function, use, and type of activity. For example, humate-based products are often described as soil health amendments while plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPRs) could be categorized as biofertilizers, phytostimulators, and biopesticides (Martínez-Viveros, et al., 2010; Somova, et al., 2017).
An interesting solution was proposed by researchers from the Russian Federation, who used natural microbial cenosis from koumiss for developing a biological product Microbiovit. The microbiocenosis promoted an increase in yield capacity of wheat, vegetables and potatoes by 26-56% (Ketskalo, et al., 2016).
The plants of the glucose salad react quite actively to external factors, in particular, for the treatment of seeds and extra-root nutrition with preparations of biological origin. In the course of the research, it was establish that the best merchandise quality was the products obtained for the use of Biolan and Gumysol. Calculations of economic efficiency have confirmed the expediency of the use of growth regulators in the cultivation of salad in the head crop seedlings. Thus, the level of profitability for the use of biopreparations in the experiment increased, compared with control, 44-67% and more cost-effective were Biolan and Gumysol (Ovcharuk, 2019; Kisel, 2000; El-Mansy, et al., 1973).
According to research A.A. El-Mansy, M. El-Beheidi, M.M. El-Fouly, (1973) the use of CCC significantly increased root yields. Number of leaves and their dry weight per plant were increased. The increases in leaves dry weight per plant was found not to be a result of the increase of leaves number per plant only, but the leaves dry weight percentage was also increased. Root length showed insignificant increases due to CCC treatment. In the same time, significant increments in its diameter as well as in dry weight per plant were recorded in both seasons, which might be the cause of increasing yield (Kalmykova, 2021). The plant growth regulators application will increase the stimulating effect on the plant, its growth activity, physiological functions and organism protective reactions involved with metabolism increasing, stress resistance to unfavorable conditions (diseases, pests, freezing, dry period and others). It was proved that the studied preparations stimulated the plants growth and development, increased the productivity of tomato in hyperarid conditions of the southern Russia (Jeong, et al., 2021).
Research results reveal that the application of plant growth regulators such as diniconazole (Din) and prohydrojasmon (PDJ) significantly impact on potato plants growth and yield, including that of tubers. Plants treated with Din and PDJ effectively showed stunted growth and reduced development but enhance the tuber formation and its weight. Plants treated with Din and PDJ significantly reduced the GAs and ABA accumulation and increase the sucrose level and cause significant increase in tuber development. In conclusion, a higher gibberellin content in potatoes may inhibit tuberization (Chernetskyi, et al., 2017). According to V.M. Chernetskyi (2017) growth stimulators influence the formation of the leaf surface of zucchini plants, which has a direct correlation with plant yields and contributes to its increase (Cherenkov, 2017).
The modern direction of increasing the productivity of crops, including table beets, is the introduction of energy-saving technologies with the use of plant growth regulators and biological preparations. The effectiveness of biologicals depends on many factors, namely: growing conditions, variety, methods and timing of the preparation introduction. Today, the range of various biological products on the Ukrainian market is very large, and most of them have not yet passed production testing and are used according to the advertising characteristics of distributors. Among those drugs are world-famous brands and some technological developments of well-known companies. In Ukraine and in the world practice in general there is a large number of biological products for vegetable plants, which are insufficiently studied, in particular in the specific growing conditions, what makes relevant the study of this issue. The study consisted in studying the production of table beets for the use of biological products in the right-bank forest-steppe of Ukraine.
Materials and Methods
Studies of the effect of biological products on the growth, development and yield of table beets were conducted in 2018-2020 in open ground at the research sites of Vinnytsia National Agrarian University. The type of soil of the experimental field is forest gray, medium loam. Soil conditions were characterized by the following indicators: humus content-2.4%, P2O5-21.2 mg/100 g of soil (estimated as high), K2O-9.2 mg/100 g of soil (estimated as low). Acidity of the soil solution was neutral. The experiment consisted of 6 variants in four repetitions. Variant without treating was a control one. Experimental studies were performed with the Chervona Kulia variety and the Pablo Fi hybrid. The following biological preparations were the variants of the experiment: Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam, Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam. In the experiment, the plants were sprayed with the solutions of biologicals: Organic Balance (0.5 l/ha), Humifrend (0.5 l/ha), Azotofit (0.3 l/ha); Liposam (0.3 l/ha) was used as an adhesive substance. The treatment was carried out in phase of 3 true leaves (Bondarenko, et al., 2001). Table beets were grown according to the technology typical for the Forest-Steppe natural zone (DSTU, 2010). Field, statistical and laboratory research methods were used in the experimental research.
According to the methodology, phenological observations of plant growth and development, biometric measurements and accounting were provided. Phenological phases were observed visually for each repetition. During the phenological research, the onset of the development phase of table beet plants was carried out, namely: the beginning and mass appearance of seedlings, the appearance of pairs of true leaves, the molting phase and the phase of intensive root growth; and biometric observations, which determined the height of plants, diameter, length and weight of the food organ depending on the effects of biological products. The phenological stage of plant growth and development began with the method of observations of researchers, and the laboratory method was used to establish biometric indicators.
Field and laboratory-field methods were used to observe the processes of growth, development and formation of products, the method of synthesis-to form conclusions, statistical analysis and economic-mathematical, to determine the effectiveness of cultivation technology.
The average weight of the fruit was determined by weighing the total number of roots on laboratory scales and dividing the value obtained by the number of roots. The total yield consisted of the yield of one variant. The product body was assembled in technical maturity, according to the requirements of the current standard. Harvesting was carried out in the period of technical maturity of roots in accordance with the requirements of the current standard-"Fresh table beets. Technical conditions-SSTU 7033:2009" (DSTU, 2010).
Results and Discussion
Analysis of the research results confirms that biological preparations and varietal characteristics have certain effect on the phenological phases of growth and development of beets. In the initial stages of growth and development of the table beet plants there were no significant changes between phases. However, in the Pablo F1 hybrid the phases occurred somewhat earlier than the calendar terms. Sporadic seedlings were observed in the Chervona Kulia variety on April 27 in all variants of the experiment. In the Pablo F1 hybrid emergence of single seedlings was recorded on April 25 in all variants, which was 2 days earlier than the studied variety (Table 1).
Table 1. Dates of phenological phases of table beets depending on the variety and biological preparation (average for 2018-2020).
The emergence of true leaves pairs 1th 3th 5th
15.05 23.05 03.06
15.05 23.05 01.06
Variety, „-...„ Seedlings
Biological Preparation
Hybrid Sporadic Mass
Without treatment (control) 27.04 12.05
Chervona Kulia
Organik balance+Azotofit+Liposam 27.04 12.05
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 27.04 12.05 15.05 23.05 01.06
Without treatment (control) 25.04 10.05 13.05 21.05 01.06
Pablo Fi Organik balance+Azotofit+Liposam 25.04 10.05 13.05 21.05 31.05
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 25.04 10.05 13.05 21.05 31.05
Accordingly, mass standing was also registered 2 days earlier. The same pattern was observed with the appearance of the 1st and 3rd pairs of true leaves. In particular, the appearance of the 1st pair of true leaves was noticed on 15.05 and 13.05, depending on the studied variety and hybrid. The appearance of the 3rd pair of true leaves was observed on the 11th day after the mass appearance of seedlings. Emergence of the 5th pair of true leaves in table beet plants was noted earlier in the Pablo F1 hybrid on the variant with Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam and Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam treatment-31.05, what is 1 day sooner than control, and 1 and 3 days earlier for the studied variants of the Chervona Kulia variety. Thus, in the initial phases of growth and development of table beet plants, the variety and the hybrid, but not biological preparations, influenced the passage of phenological phases.
Further study of the phenological phases of growth and development of table beet plants showed the effect of biological products on their occurrence (Table 2).
Table 2. Dates of the next phenological phases of table beets depending on the variety and biological preparation (average for 2018-2020).
Variety, Hybrid Biological Preparation Molting Phase Phase of Intensive Root Growth Phase of Technical Maturity Harvesting
Without treatment (control) 07.06 11.06 20.07 15.09
Chervona Kulia Organik balance+Azotofit+Liposam 05.06 09.06 17.07 15.09
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 06.06 10.06 19.07 15.09
Без обробки (контроль) 05.06 10.06 18.07 15.09
Pablo Fi Organik balance+Azotofit+Liposam 03.06 07.06 15.07 15.09
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 04.06 09.06 17.07 15.09
The onset of the molting phase was observed sooner in the Chervona Kulia variety under the use of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam on 05.06, which is 2 days earlier than the control variant. In the Pablo F1 hybrid in the same variant, the molting phase was observed on 03.06, which is also 2 days earlier than on the variant without biological products treatment. Somewhat earlier, compared to the untreated variant, this phase was recorded in the Chervona Kulia variety and the Pablo F1 hybrid under the use of Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam.
The phase of intensive root growth and that of technical maturity were also noted earlier under the use of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam: in the variety Chervona Kulia it came on 09.06 and 17.07, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-on 07.06 and 15.07, which is 2-3 and 3 days earlier compared to the control. The phase of technical maturity in all variants of the experiment was recorded on different dates. Earlier, the phase of technical maturity was observed on the variant with the use of the Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam biological product-on 17.07 in the Chervona Kulia variety and 15.07 in the Pablo F1 hybrid. In the variant without treatment, this phase was observed later than all. Taking into account the varietal characteristics and weather conditions prevailing during the years of the research, harvesting was carried out on 15.09.
The influence of biological preparations on the duration of interphase periods of table beets was revealed as well (Table 3).
Table 3. Duration of the interphase periods of table beets growth depending on the variety and biological preparation, days
(average for 2018-2020)._
„ ... Mass seedlings-Mass seedlings-the
Variety, ........ Mass seedlings-the _ . the End of the
... Biological Preparation „ ... „ Beginning of Intensive _
Hybrid Molting Phase „ _ Growing
Root Formation
Season
Without treatment (control) 26 30 69
Chervona Kulia Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam 24 28 66
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 25 29 68
Pablo Fi Without treatment (control) 26 31 69
Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam
24
28
66
25
30
68
The studied period of the "mass seedlings-molting phase" was shorter than under the use of the Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam biologicals: in the Chervona Kulia variety and Pablo F1 hybrid-24 days, which is 2 days shorter than control. The "mass germination-the beginning of intensive root formation" interphase period was shorter with the application of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam, in the variety and the hybrid it lasted 28 days, which is 2 and 3 days less than the control variants. In the Pablo F1 hybrid without treatment this interphase period was the longest-31 day. The interphase period "mass seedlings-the end of the growing season" was also shorter on the variant with Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam application-66 days, whereas on the variant without treatment it was 69 days. It should be noted that duration of the interphase periods was influenced by the nature of the variety, hybrid, weather conditions of the research years and biological preparations used.
The final indicator, that shows the result of one or another research factor action, is the yield (Table 4). It depends on the studied factors, growing and weather conditions of the research years. Studies have shown a positive effect of biological preparations on the table beets yield formation. The highest yields were recorded under Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam application: in the Chervona Kulia variety the increase was 7.1 t/ha, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-10.3 t/ha relative to the control. Table 4. Yields of table beets depending on the variety and biological preparation (average for 2018-2020).
Variety, Hybrid Biological Preparation 2018 p. Yield, t/ha 2019 p. 2020 p. Average Gain ± to the Control,%
Without treatment (control) 62.3 58.6 62.0 61.0 -
Chervona Kulia Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam 69.6 65.4 69.1 68.0 7.1
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 67.4 63.2 67.0 65.9 4.9
Without treatment (control) 66.1 62.0 65.6 64.6 -
Pablo F1 Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam 76.8 72.5 75.3 74.9 10.3
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 74.7 70.4 73.8 73.0 8.4
A 0.9 0.8 0.9
HIP05 B 1.0 0.9 1.1 -
AB 1.6 1.4 1.6
A positive effect was also obtained with application of Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam preparation, where the increase was 4.9 and 8.4 t/ha, respectively. The significance of the obtained difference is confirmed by the results of analysis of variance over the years of the research.
Analyzing the years of the research, it should be noted that in addition to the studied factors, the yield was influenced by weather
conditions of the research years and morphobiological features of the studied table beet variety and hybrid.
The quality of the obtained product is an important characteristic when examining the influence of the studied factor.
The conducted biometric measurements of beet roots showed a positive effect of biological agents on biometric parameters (Table
5).
Table 5. Biometric indicators of table beet products depending on the variety and biological preparation (average for 2018-2020).
Root Length, cm
8.0 8.5 8.3 8.2
Variety
Biological Preparation Root Weight, g Root Diameter, cm
Hybrid
Without treatment (control) 275 8.4
Chervona Kulia Organic 320 8.8
Balance+Azotofit+Liposam Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 305 8.5
Pablo F1 Without treatment (control) 300 8.5
R, OT^r 330 9.0 8.7
Balance+Azotofit+Liposam
Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam 325 8.8 8.4
The use of the Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam complex provided the increase in root mass in the Chervona Kulia variety-45 g, in the Pablo Fi hybrid-30 g, respectively. Under the use of the Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam complex, the increase was 30 g-in the Red Ball variety and 25 g-in the Pablo F1 hybrid. A strong direct relationship between yield and weight of table beet root (r=0.94 ± 0.05) was proved. The diameter of the root crop indicator was in the range of 8.4 and 9.0 cm. The increase in root diameter under the use of Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam biological preparations was slightly smaller and made up 0.1-0.3 cm. Analysis revealed a strong direct relationship between yield and root diameter (r=0.93 ± 0.04).
The action of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam biologicals was detected when measuring the length of the root crop, where the gain relative to the control made up 0.5 cm. The use of Humifrend+Azotofit+Liposam increased this indicator relative to the control by 0.3-0.2 cm. A strong direct dependence between yield and root length was established (r=0.90 ± 0.13).
Conclusion
Thus, the research revealed the influence of biological preparations on the phases of growth and development of table beet plants, its yield and biometric parameters of products. The use of the Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam biological complex accelerated the passage of phenological phases of growth and development of table beet plants. The shortest period from mass germination to harvesting was recorded in the studied varieties and hybrids under the use of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam complex-66 days. The highest yield was obtained due to the use of Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam biological preparations, which gave a 7.1-10.3 t/ha increase relative to the control. The largest root weight was provided by the variant with using Organic Balance+Azotofit+Liposam combination: in the Chervona Kulia variety it was 320 g, in the Pablo F1 hybrid-330 g.
References
Babych, A.O. (1996). World land, food and feed resources. Kyiv, Agricultural Science, p:200.
Balian, A.V. (2013). Contribution of agricultural science to the development of organic production. Bulletin of Agricultural Science, 11:9-12.
Bazalii, V.V., Domaratskyi, Ye.O., Dobrovolskyi, A.V. (2016). Agrotechnical method of prolongation of photosynthetic activity of sunflower plants. Bulletin of Agrarian Science of the Black Sea Coast, 4:77-84.
Chernikova, O., Mazhaysky, Yu., Buryak, S., Seregina, T., Ampleeva, L. (2021). Comparative analysis of the use of biostimulants on the main types of soil. Agronomy Research, 19:711-720.
Evstigneeva, T., Iakovchenko, N., Kuzmicheva, N., Skvortsova, N. (2020). Applying beetroot as food ingredient in ice-cream production. Agronomy Research, 18:1662-1672.
Vdovenko, S.A. (2019). Complex system of growing vegetables in the open ground. Planter, 2:54-55.
Karpenko, V., Slobodyanyk, G., Ulianych, O., Schetyna, S., Mostoviak, A., Voitsekhovskyi, V. (2020). Combined application of microbial preparation, mineral fertilizer and bioadhesive in production of leek. Agronomy Research, 18:148-162. Vdovenko, S.A. (2019). Growing of table beets with the use different technologies in the Right-Bank Forest-Steppe of Ukraine. Growing Vegetables and Melons, 65:23-31.
Olifirovych, V.O. (2016). Influence of biologicals on soybean plant yield in the southern part of the Western Forest-Steppe. Feed and Feed Production, 82:138-140.
Kolesnikov, L.E., Novikova, I.I., Popova, E.V., Priyatkin, N.S., Zuev, E.V., Kolesnikova, Yu.R., Solodyannikov, M.D. (2020). The effectiveness of biopreparations in soft wheat cultivation and the quality assessment of the grain by the digital x-ray imaging. Agronomy Research, 18:2436-2448.
Palamarchuk, I.I. (2019). Dynamics of formation of the area of leaves rosaliva of table beets depending on varietal characteristics and sowing date in the conditions of the right-bank Forest-steppe of Ukraine. Agriculture and Forestry, 4:173-182. Stefaniuk, S.V., Lishchak, L.P. (2014). The best varieties of table beets for the western region of Ukraine. Bulletin of the Lviv State Agrarian University, 8:196-199.
Yakovenko, K.L., Horova, T.K., Yashchuk, A.L. (2001). Modern technologies in vegetable growing. Institute of Vegetable and Melon Growing of UAAS, p:128.
Ketskalo, V.V. (2015). Yields of varieties and hybrids of table beets in conditions of the Right-Bank Forest-Steppe of Ukraine. Agrobiology, 11:129-133.
Ulianych, O.I., Schetyna, S.V., Slobodianyk, G.Ya., Ternavskyi, A.G., Kuhniuk, O.V., Didenko, I.A. (2018). Ecological status of soils and vegetable products in Cherkasy Region. Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 8:10-19.
Vdovenko, S.A., Palamarchuk, I.I., Pantsyreva, H.V., Alexeyev, O.O., Vdovenko, L.O. (2018). Energy efficient growing of red beet in the conditions of central Forest steppe of Ukraine. Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 8:34-40.
Pantsyreva, H.V. (2019). Functioning of the assimilation apparatus and productivity of white lupine plants. Scientific Reports of NUBN of Ukraine, 5:1-23.
Pashkevich, Ye.B. (2009). Biological substantiation of creation and features of application of the biological preparations containing Bacillius subtilis for protection of plants against phytopathogens. Problems of Agrochemistry and Ecology, 2:41-47.
Petrychenko, V.F. (2011). Agriculture with the basics of ecology, soil science and agrochemistry: textbook. Kyiv, Agricultural Science, p:492.
Grekhova, N.V., Matveieva, N.V. (2014). The use of humic drug in the tank mixture when protavlivanie seeds. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference of the Don Zonal Research Institute of Agriculture, pp:121-126.
Suja, S., Anusuya, N. (2018). Influence of Paclobutrazol (PP333) and Sridiamin (Human hair-derived aminoacid mixture) on growth and quality of Tomato PKM-1. International Conference on Green Agro-industry and Bioeconomy IOP Publishing IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, p:131.
Tarariko, Yu.O., Lychuk, H.I. (2014). Stimulators of plant growth in the system of organic farming. Bulletin of Agricultural Science, 5:11-15.
Ivanina, V.V. (2011). Balance of nutrients and its regulation in agroecosystems of the Forest-Steppe under conditions of biologization of agriculture. Agrobiology, 6:63-67.
Zabolotnyi, H.M., Mazur, V.A., Tsyhanska, O.I., Didur, I.M., Tsyhanskyi, V.I., Pantsyreva, H.V. (2020). Agrobiological bases of
soybean cultivation and ways of maximum realization of its productivity: monograph. Vinnytsia, VNAU, p:276.
Zabolotnyi, H.M., Tsyhanska, O.I., Tsyhanskyi, V.I. (2018). Photosynthetic productivity of soybeans depending on the level of
fertilizer and application of microelement complex. The NUBIP Scientific Reports.
Dubka, V. (2011). Foliar fertilization: basic misconceptions and mistakes. Grain, 6:40.
Minin, V.B., Popov, V.D., Maksimov, D.A., Ustroev, A.A., Melnikov, S.P., Papushin, E. (2020). Developing of modern cultivation technology of organic potatoes. Agronomy Research, 18:1359-1367.
Prokopchuk, V.M., Tsyhanska, O.I., Tsyhanskyi, V.I. (2018). Influence of growth stimulants on rooting of the boxwood cuttings
(Buxus sempervirens L.) in the in-door soil conditions. Scientific Bulletin of NLTU of Ukraine, 28:56-60.
Wolfgang, N. (2013). Organic farming in Germany. Organic production and food security. Zhytomyr, Polissia, p:492.
Zaika, S.O. (2013). Trends in the development of organic farming. Organic production and food security. Zhytomyr, Polissia, p:492.
Zavalyn, M.Y. (2005). Biologicals, fertilizer and crop. Moskow, VNIIA, p:302.
Pashkevich, Ye.B. (2009). Biological substantiation of creation and features of application of the biological preparations containing Bacillius subtilis for protection of plants against phytopathogens. Problems of Agrochemistry and Ecology, 2:41-47. Tsyhanskyi, V.I., Tsyhanska, O.I. (2020). Influence of elements of cultivation technology on activation of plant-microbial symbiosis and processes of nitrogen transformation in agrocenoses of alfalfa. Agriculture and Forestry, 16:61-72.
Du Jardin, P. (2015). Patrick du jardin plant biostimulants: Definition, concept, main categories andregulation. Scientia Horticulturae, 196:3-14.
Bhattacharyya, P.N., Jha, D.K. (2012). Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnolgy, 28:1327-1350.
Martínez-Viveros, O., Jorquera, M.A., Crowley, D.E., Gajardo, G., Mora, M.L. (2010). Mechanisms and practical considerations involved in plant growth promotion by rhizobacteria. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 10:293-319. Somova, L.A., Mikheeva, G.A., Pechurkin, N.S. (2017). Introduction of microbiocenosis in agroecosystem for increasing the plant productivity. Journal of Siberian Federal University Biology, 10:333-342.
Ketskalo, V.V., Shchetyna, S.V. (2016). The use of biologics to increase the yield of Head lettuce. Vegetable and Melon Growing, p:63.
Ovcharuk, O.V. (2019). Methods of analysis in agronomy and agroecology: a textbook. Kamianets-Podilskyi, Kharkiv, Machulyn, p:364.
Kisel, V.Y. (2000). Organic farming in Ukraine: problems and prospects. Kharkiv, Shtrikh, p:162.
El-Mansy, A.A., El-Beheidi, M., El-Fouly, M.M. (1973). Increases in root yield and changes in growth of table beet (Beta vulgaris L. ssp. vulgaris var. conditiva) after treatment with chlormequat (CCC). Qualitas Plantarum et Materiae Vegetabiles, 22:269-275. Kalmykova, E.V. (2021). The plant growth regulators influence on the growth, crop productivity and quality of tomato under a climate warming conditions in the south of Russia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 786:012004. Jeong, E.J., Imran, M., Kang, S.M., Khan, M.A., Lee, I.J. (2021). The application of diniconazole and prohydrojasmon as plant growth regulators to induce growth and tuberization of potato. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 94:36-46. Chernetskyi, V.M., Palamarchuk, I.I. (2017). Influence of variety and plant growth stimulator on the dynamics of the zucchini leaf apparatus area increase in the Right Bank Forest-Steppe. Agriculture and Forestry, 6:32-40.
Cherenkov, A.V. (2017). Strategy of production of legumes and soybeans in the Steppe of Ukraine. Bulletin of Agricultural Science, 1:13-18.
Bondarenko, H.L., Yakovenko, K.I. (2001). Methods of research in vegetable and melon growing. Kharkiv. Osnova, p:369. DSTU 6014:2008-2010. (2010). Table carrots and table beets. Growing technology. Kyiv, Derzhspozhyvstandart Ukrainy, p:18. DST Ukrainy 7033:2009-2010. (2010). Fresh table beets. Specifications. Kyiv, Ofitsiine vyd.
Citation:
Palamarchuk, I., Tsyhanska, O., Matusiak, M., Tsyhanskyi, V. (2022). Growing table beets with the use of biological preparations in conditions of the right-bank forest-steppe of Ukraine. Ukrainian Journal of Ecology. 12:1-7. LMJi^^l This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 40 License
