Journal of Horticultural Science & Ornamental Plants 4 (2): 221-226, 2012 ISSN 2079-2158 IDOSI Publications, 2012 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.jhsop.2012.4.2.250 Effect of Some Soil Types a Some Commercial Foliar Fertilizers on Growth, Flowering, Bulb Productivity a Chemical Composition of Iris Plants Ragaa A. Taha Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Minia University, Minia, Egypt Abract: The present udy was designed to udy the effect of soil type (clay loam a sayy soils) a three commercial foliar fertilizers (namely, a, each at 0.00, 0.05, 0.1 a 0.2 %) a their combined effect on number of leaves / plant, flowering, bulbs productivity a percentages of N, P a K of leaves of iris plants. The udies was coucted during 2008 / 2009 a 2009 / 2010 growing seasons at the Nursery of Ornamental plants, Fac. Agric., El-Minia Univ., Egypt. Results iicated that clay soil type increased the flowering alk length, the alk diameter, alk fresh a dry weights/plant a fresh weight of inflorescence/plant as well as fresh weights of new mother bulb a bulblets, number of bulblets/plant a leaf content of N, P a K. The different concentrations of foliar fertilizers had significant positive effect on growth, flowering rate a bulbs production, as well as leaf chemical composition parameters (N, P a K %) in the two seasons. Be values were obtained from that treatment of using Manfret at 0.2 %.Applying Manfret at 0.2 % (as a foliar fertilizer) to iris plants grown in clay soil gave the maximum beneficial effect on the number of leaves/plant, flowering parameters a bulbs a bulblets production as well as the highe P percentage in the leaves. Key words: Iris Soil type Commercial foliar fertilizers Bulblets INTRODUCTION, a are commercial foliar fertilizers containing macro a microelements in Iris tingitana, L. plant is belonging to the family different concentrations. Application of micronutrients Iridaceae a is one of the mo important ornamental either alone or in combination with macronutrients plants of winter flowering bulbs in Egypt. considerably enhanced growth aspects of several Growing soil media as well as mineral fertilization ornamental plants (Mazroua et al. [6] on chrysanthemum; are among the important agricultural treatments that Mohamed [7] on Tagetes minuta plants; Al-Humaid [8] have proved to improve a augment the plant growth, on rose plants a Manoly [9] on Zinnia elegans. On iris flowering a bulb productivity of flowering bulb plants, Attia a Aly [10] fou that increasing NPK plants. Many inveigators udied the effect of soil fertilization rates delayed flowering while increased media on growth, flowering a bulb formation of diameter a length as well as the weight of flowering different ornamental bulbs. Van De Nes [1] fou that iris alk. In addition, increasing NPK levels increased weight bulbs (cv. Ideal) rose in a sayy soil rich in peat of single flower/plant, fresh weight of flowering alk/plot, produced more flowers than those raised in clay soil. number a weight of bulbs produced/plant or per plot. On the same plant, Nabih et al. [2] fou that say Also, fertilization treatments caused an increase in the medium produced the earlie bulb sprouting a N, P a K content in leaves. Similar results were reported increased the average number of leaves/plant, dry weight by Abou-Taleb a Kaeel [11] on Iris tingitana cv. of bulbs a fresh weight of bulblets compared to Wedgewood; Singh et al.[12] on Gladiolus graiflorus; that of the clay soil or clay / say soil. On the other Pal a Biswas [13] on Polianthes tuberosa a ha, Perry a Box [3] on Iris germanica cv. Pinnacle; El-Naggar a El-Nasharty [14] on Hippearum vittatum. Manoly [4] on iris a Khalafalla et al. [5] on This inveigation was carried out to te the effect ornithogalum reported that the number of flowering of two soil types a different concentrations of some alks a flowers/plant were markedly less in sayy commercial foliar fertilizers on the growth, flowering a soil type. bulb formation of iris bulbs cv. Wedgewood. Correspoing Author: Ragaa A. Taha, Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Minia University, Minia, Egypt. 221
MATERIALS AND METHODS This udy was carried out at the Nursery of ornamental plants, Fac. Agric. El-Minia University, Egypt during the two successive seasons of 2008/2009 a 2009/2010 to examine the effect of two soil media types (clay loam a say) a different concentrations of foliar fertilizers on iris vegetative growth, flowering rate, bulbs productivity a chemical composition. Bulbs of Iris tingitana cv. Wedgewood, 15-17 gm in weight a give pale blue color flowers, were chosen because it is commonly grown in Egypt. Bulbs were planted on November 1 of the two seasons in 25 cm diameter pots (1 bulb/ pot) filled with clay loam or say soil. The experiment focused on two factors, the fir factor is soil media type namely clay loam soil a say soil. The seco factor was the three commercial foliar fertilizers used, namely, a Manfret "B" (each at three concentrations i.e. 0.05, 0.1 a 0.2 %) as well as the control treatment (0.0 %). Table 1: Physical a chemical analysis of the used soil Clay loam soil Say soil Character Value Character Value Say % 28.11 Say % 85.00 Silt % 30.70 Silt % 5.50 Clay % 40.20 Clay % 9.50 Soil type Clay loam Soil type Sayy Organic matter % 1.57 Organic matter % 0.40 CaCO 3 % 2.08 CaCO 3 % 14.50 ph (1:2.5) 7.85 ph (1:2.5) 7.97 E.C. m mhos / cm 1.04 E.C. m mhos / cm 0.59 Total N % 0.07 Total N % 0.07 Available P (ppm) 16.12 Available P (ppm) 4.00 + Extr. K mg / 100 g 2.18 + Ext. K mg/100 g 2.10 Table 2: The chemical composition of the commercial foliar fertilizers Compou ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Elements % N 10.000 15.000 12.000 P2O5 4.000 0.000 6.000 K2O 7.000 0.000 6.000 Ca 0.000 22.500 0.000 Zn 0.090 0.030 0.020 Cu 0.075 0.060 0.500 Mn 0.214 0.150 1.000 Fe 0.154 0.075 0.050 B 0.097 0.075 0.080 Mo 0.021 0.002 0.007 Mg 0.000 3.000 1.500 S 0.000 0.000 1.000 The experiment was set in a split plot design with three replications (four pots /replicate) where the soil media types were the main plot a the foliar fertilizer concentrations were in the sub-plots. Physical a chemical analyses of the used soil are shown in Table 1. The chemical composition of the commercial foliar fertilizers is shown in Table 2. Iris plants were sprayed with the used commercial foliar fertilizers three times after 30, 60 a 90 days from planting in the two growing seasons. On the other ha, the control treatment was sprayed with diilled water. Misrol as a icking agent was used at the rate of 1 cm/l for all foliar fertilizers treatments. The following data were recorded each season: number of leaves/plant, alk length (cm) a alk diameter (mm), alk fresh a dry weights/plant (g), fresh weight of the inflorescence/plant (g) a fresh weight (g) of new mother bulbs as well as number a fresh weight of bulblets/plant. Chemical analysis were made to measure the levels of N, P a K in the leaves before flowering [15]. The obtained data were subjected to the analysis of variance a means were compared using the L.S.D. values at 0.05 using the MSTAT C program version 4 according to Gomez a Gomez [16]. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Vegetative Growth Characters Number of Leaves /Plant: Data in Table 3 show that there is no significant difference in the number of leaves/plant due to using the different soil types in the two growing seasons. While number of leaves/plant was significantly imulated in response to using the three commercial foliar fertilizers, namely, a Manfret at 0.05 to 2 %. The promotion was associated with increasing the concentrations of each compou. It could be ated that application of Manfret surpassed the application of the other two fertilizers in this connection. Untreated plants gave the minimum number of leaves/plant (6.75 in the fir season a 6.98 in the seco one). The maximum number of leaves/plant was detected on plants sprayed three times with 0.2 % of Manfret (7.98 a 8.10 in the fir a seco seasons, respectively). These results are in agreement with those obtained by Mohamed [7] on Tagetes minuta a Al-Humaid [8] on rose plants. The interaction between soil type a foliar fertilizers was significant. The highe number of leaves/plant (8.11 a 8.23 leaves in the fir a seco seasons, respectively) was obtained from iris plants grown in clay soil a sprayed with Manfret at 0.2 %. 222
Table 3: Effect of soil type a different concentrations of foliar fertilizers on number of leaves / plant, flowering alk length (cm) a flowering alk diameter (mm) of iris plants during 2008 / 2009 a 2009 / 2010 growing seasons ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Concentrations "B" No. of leaves / plant Flowering alk length (cm) Flowering alk diameter (mm) Control 6.81 6.69 6.75 7.05 7.90 6.98 19.23 15.27 17.25 21.37 18.40 19.89 9.06 7.80 8.43 9.70 8.30 9.00 0.05 % 7.24 7.11 7.18 7.45 7.29 7.37 21.40 17.70 19.55 24.57 20.70 22.64 9.40 8.20 8.80 10.34 8.92 9.63 0.10 % 7.51 7.37 7.44 7.70 7.53 7.62 25.30 20.30 22.80 26.57 25.27 25.92 10.06 8.58 9.32 11.10 9.56 10.33 0.20 % 7.72 7.55 7.64 7.92 7.71 7.82 27.23 22.23 24.73 32.57 27.70 30.14 10.40 9.54 9.97 11.70 10.40 11.05 0.05 % 7.35 7.17 7.26 7.59 7.34 7.47 23.76 20.70 22.23 27.20 23.03 25.12 10.06 8.80 9.43 11.32 9.60 10.46 0.10 % 7.67 7.43 7.55 7.88 7.63 7.76 25.73 23.77 24.75 30.53 26.37 28.45 10.58 9.10 9.84 12.14 10.16 11.15 0.20 % 7.92 7.68 7.80 8.09 7.89 7.99 28.33 25.27 26.80 34.80 28.17 31.49 11.14 10.04 10.59 13.00 10.70 11.85 0.05 % 7.49 7.25 7.37 7.62 7.46 7.54 25.57 22.00 23.79 30.67 27.03 28.85 10.90 9.56 10.23 11.56 10.50 11.03 0.10 % 7.82 7.51 7.67 7.90 7.70 7.80 28.33 25.27 26.80 33.57 30.00 31.79 11.74 10.24 10.99 12.16 11.50 11.83 0.20 % 8.11 7.84 7.98 8.23 7.97 8.10 32.43 27.20 29.82 37.37 33.23 35.30 12.38 10.96 11.67 13.50 12.46 12.98 Means (A) 7.56 7.36 7.74 7.54 25.73 21.97 29.92 25.99 10.57 9.28 11.65 10.21 L.S.D. at 0.05 A: N.S. A: N.S. A: 0.68 A: 0.60 A: 0.03 A: 0.10 B: 0.28 B: 0.21 B: 1.41 B: 1.41 B: 0.25 B: 0.27 AB: 0.40 AB: 0.30 AB: 1.99 AB: 1.99 AB: 0.35 AB: 0.38 Table 4: Effect of soil type a different concentrations of foliar fertilizers on flowering alk fresh weight / plant (g), flowering alk dry weight / plant (g) a fresh weight of the inflorescence / plant (g) of iris plants during 2008 / 2009 a 2009 / 2010 growing seasons ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Concentrations "B" Flowering alk fresh weight/plant (g) Flowering alk dry weight / plant (g) Fresh weight of the inflorescence / plant (g) Control 18.37 14.37 16.37 20.77 17.80 19.29 5.67 4.44 5.06 6.42 5.49 5.96 8.23 7.13 7.68 9.70 7.70 8.70 0.05 % 20.73 17.37 19.05 23.40 19.50 21.45 6.39 5.36 5.88 7.21 6.02 6.62 9.67 8.80 9.24 10.37 9.73 10.05 0.10 % 24.30 19.77 22.04 25.73 23.67 24.70 7.48 6.09 6.79 7.92 7.29 7.61 10.23 9.67 9.95 11.23 10.34 10.79 0.20 % 26.47 23.37 24.92 30.40 26.07 28.24 8.21 7.19 7.70 9.35 8.02 8.69 12.27 10.83 11.55 12.72 11.37 12.05 0.05 % 23.77 20.27 22.02 25.70 22.07 23.89 7.33 6.25 6.79 7.93 6.81 7.37 9.73 9.03 9.38 10.78 10.30 10.54 0.10 % 25.53 23.23 24.38 28.00 25.07 26.54 7.86 7.16 7.51 8.63 7.73 8.18 12.50 10.27 11.39 12.65 10.93 11.79 0.20 % 29.53 25.70 27.62 33.00 27.00 30.00 9.09 7.92 8.51 10.16 8.32 9.24 13.13 11.83 12.48 13.46 11.97 12.72 0.05 % 26.70 23.27 24.99 28.00 24.70 26.35 8.22 7.17 7.70 8.61 7.61 8.11 10.13 10.04 10.09 10.97 11.05 11.01 0.10 % 28.27 25.10 26.69 30.70 27.10 28.90 8.70 7.73 8.22 9.44 8.35 8.90 12.63 11.77 12.20 13.27 12.07 12.67 0.20 % 31.33 27.73 29.53 37.17 31.07 34.12 9.63 8.54 9.09 11.41 9.56 10.49 13.40 12.73 13.07 14.43 13.50 13.97 Means (A) 25.50 22.02 28.29 24.41 25.50 7.86 6.79 8.71 7.56 11.19 10.21 11.96 10.90 L.S.D. at 0.05 A: 0.87 A: 0.69 A: 0.22 A: 0.17 A: 0.17 A: 0.22 B: 2.07 B: 1.71 B: 0.57 B: 0.40 B: 0.33 B: 0.35 AB: 2.93 AB: 2.42 AB: 0.81 AB: 0.57 AB: 0.47 AB: 0.50 Flowering Characteriics: Data in Tables 3 a 4 shows Concerning the effect of foliar fertilizers the superiority of using clay soil in plantation in both concentrations, it is obvious from the tabulated data the growing seasons. It considerably increment flowering significant increase in flowering alk length, alk alk length, alk diameter, alk fresh a dry diameter, alk fresh a dry weights/plant a fresh weights/plant, as well as, fresh weight of the inflorescence weight of the inflorescence/plant compared to the control / plant comparing with that recorded from the say soil treatment was associated with the application of these type used in cultivation. Similar results were obtained by fertilizers in the two growing seasons. These five flower Manoly [4] on iris a Khalafalla et al., [5] on characters were greatly increased in the plants treated ornithogalum plants. with, a Manfret, in an asceing order. 223
Table 5: Effect of soil type a different concentrations of foliar fertilizers on fresh weight of new mother bulb (g), Number of bulblets/ plant a Fresh weight of bulblets/ plant (g) of iris plants during 2008 / 2009 a 2009 / 2010 growing seasons ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Concentrations "B" Fresh weight of new mother bulb (g) No. of bulblets / plant Fresh weight of bulblets / plant (g) Control 9.86 8.89 9.38 10.27 9.45 9.86 4.78 4.45 4.62 4.92 4.54 4.73 23.28 21.63 22.46 24.31 22.38 23.35 0.05 % 10.99 9.66 10.33 11.37 9.92 10.65 5.07 4.76 4.92 5.21 4.79 5.00 24.79 23.23 24.01 25.84 23.71 24.78 0.10 % 11.83 10.72 11.28 12.36 11.02 11.69 5.47 5.15 5.31 5.51 4.91 5.21 26.86 25.24 26.05 27.44 24.40 24.92 0.20 % 12.39 11.59 11.99 13.56 12.25 12.91 6.04 5.54 5.79 6.14 5.23 5.69 29.78 27.26 28.52 30.70 26.05 28.38 0.05 % 11.73 10.75 11.24 11.88 11.17 11.51 5.25 5.02 5.14 5.60 5.06 5.33 25.73 24.55 25.14 27.89 25.15 26.52 0.10 % 12.96 11.73 12.35 13.54 12.00 12.77 5.65 5.46 5.56 5.76 5.36 5.56 27.80 26.80 27.30 28.80 26.75 27.78 0.20 % 14.00 12.38 13.19 14.62 12.64 13.63 6.03 5.86 5.95 6.31 5.77 6.04 29.79 28.89 29.34 31.68 28.91 30.30 0.05 % 12.65 11.47 12.06 13.08 11.59 12.34 5.58 5.25 5.42 5.85 5.32 5.59 27.40 25.73 26.57 29.37 26.76 28.07 0.10 % 13.77 12.38 13.08 14.98 12.88 13.93 6.02 5.55 5.79 6.10 5.65 5.88 29.68 27.30 28.49 30.74 28.53 29.64 0.20 % 15.09 13.46 14.28 14.60 14.04 14.82 6.53 6.04 6.29 6.71 6.14 6.43 32.32 29.84 31.08 34.09 31.25 32.67 Means (A) 12.53 11.30 13.13 11.69 5.64 5.31 5.81 5.28 27.74 26.05 29.09 26.39 L.S.D. at 0.05 A: 0.09 A: 0.38 A: 0.20 A: 0.25 A: 0.10 A: 0.39 B: 0.54 B: 0.65 B: 0.35 B: 0.38 B: 0.63 B: 0.67 AB: 0.76 AB: 0.92 AB: 0.50 AB: 0.54 AB: 0.89 AB: 0.95 Table 6: Effect of soil type a different concentrations of foliar fertilizers on percentages of nitrogen, phosphorous a potassium of iris plants during 2008/2009 a 2009/2010 growing seasons ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Clay Sa Means (B) Concentrations "B" N % P % K % Control 1.44 1.38 1.41 1.45 1.40 1.43 0.18 0.12 0.15 0.19 0.14 0.17 1.17 1.12 1.15 1.18 1.12 1.15 0.05 % 1.70 1.60 1.65 1.72 1.57 1.65 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.18 0.20 1.19 1.16 1.18 1.24 1.21 1.23 0.10 % 1.71 1.65 1.68 1.74 1.58 1.66 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.23 0.19 0.21 1.21 1.16 1.19 1.25 1.22 1.24 0.20 % 1.72 1.66 1.69 1.75 1.60 1.68 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.23 0.20 0.22 1.23 1.17 1.20 1.26 1.22 1.24 0.05 % 1.52 1.47 1.50 1.55 1.44 1.50 0.33 0.29 0.31 0.36 0.33 0.35 1.47 1.42 1.45 1.49 1.43 1.46 0.10 % 1.53 1.49 1.51 1.58 1.46 1.52 0.35 0.30 0.33 0.38 0.33 0.36 1.48 1.43 1.46 1.50 1.44 1.47 0.20 % 1.54 1.51 1.53 1.59 1.48 1.54 0.36 0.32 0.34 0.39 0.36 0.38 1.49 1.44 1.47 1.51 1.45 1.48 0.05 % 1.60 1.54 1.57 1.65 1.55 1.60 0.38 0.33 0.36 0.41 0.34 0.38 1.43 1.39 1.41 1.46 1.40 1.43 0.10 % 1.62 1.56 1.59 1.67 1.57 1.62 0.39 0.34 0.37 0.42 0.35 0.39 1.45 1.40 1.43 1.48 1.40 1.44 0.20 % 1.63 1.57 1.60 1.68 1.59 1.64 0.40 0.35 0.38 0.43 0.37 0.40 1.47 1.42 1.45 1.50 1.41 1.46 Means (A) 1.60 1.54 1.64 1.52 0.30 0.26 0.33 0.28 1.36 1.31 1.39 1.33 L.S.D. at 0.05 A: 0.03 A: 0.06 A: 0.02 A: 0.03 A: 0.04 A: 0.05 B: 0.05 B: 0.05 B: 0.01 B: 0.02 B: 0.06 B: 0.06 AB: 0.07 AB: 0.07 AB: 0.014 AB: 0.028 AB: 0.09 AB: 0.09 Manfret gave the be results in this respect compared to later on improving flower characters. In addition, these the other two compous. Increasing the concentration fertilizers as compous containing mo of the of these commercial fertilizers was followed by a gradual imulating growth nutrients might be attributed to the imulation on such five flower characters. Significant effect of these nutrients in imulating both cell differences in flower characters were recorded among division a the biosynthesis of mo organic foods [17]. mo of the inveigated treatments. These commercial Foliar fertilization gives the possibility to achieve high foliar fertilizers primarily encouraged producing better productivity a good quality yields [18]. The results of vegetative growth (Table 3) which resulted in more Bhattacharjee [19] on gladiolus a Muthumanikan et al. available carbohydrates a proteins which may reflected [20] on gerbera support the present results. 224
The interaction was significant in the two seasons The interaction between soil type a foliar fertilizers for flowering alk length, alk diameter, alk fresh a was significant for N, P a K % in both seasons. dry weights/plant a the fresh weight of the Application of the highe foliar fertilizers concentration inflorescence/plant. Moreover, the maximum values in on plants grown in clay soil resulted in the highe values both seasons were obtained due to growing iris plants in of N, P a K % in the leaves due to sprays plants with clay soil a spraying plants with high concentration of, Manfret a, respectively. Manfret (0.2 %). REFERENCES Bulbs a Bulblets Characteriics: Data in Table 5 iicated that the fresh weight of new mother bulbs, number of bulblets/plant a fresh weight of bulblets/plant were significantly increased by using the clay soil type compared to using the say soil in both seasons. These results are in harmony with those obtained by Manoly [4] on iris, Khalafalla et al. [5] on ornithogalum plants. Foliar fertilizers namely, a Manfret each at three concentrations (0.05, 0.1 a 0.2 %) significantly increased these parameters compared with the control in the two seasons. The maximum values were obtained on iris plants received three sprays at 0.2 % Manfret. As a conclusion, three sprayers of foliar fertilizers, especially Manfret at 0.2 % were responsible for enhancing growth characters a growth of bulbs a bulblets [18, 21-23]. The great influence was obtained from plants grown in clay soil with the high concentration (0.2 %) of Manfret. The contrary action was detected because of growing the plants in say soil without foliar fertilization in both seasons. Chemical Composition of Leaves: Nitrogen, phosphorous a potassium percentages in leaves, as shown in Table 6 were significantly increased as a result of using the clay soil type as compared with that of the say soil type. The obtained data revealed that different concentrations of foliar fertilizers caused significant increases in N, P a K percentages in leaves as compared with the untreated plants. In this concern, an increase in the elements percentage was observed with increasing concentrations of the foliar fertilizers to reach their maximum values at 0.2 %. The maximum values of N were obtained from plants received three sprays at 0.2 % of. The maximum P % in leaves were obtained from plants received three sprays at 0.2 % of Manfret, also, spraying plants with at 0.2 % gave the maximum values of K % in the leaves of iris plants. Similar tres were observed in both seasons. These fiings are in harmony with those obtained by Attia a Aly [10] on iris plants. 1. Van De Ness, A.G.A., 1962. Early flowering of Wedgewood iris. Jversi. Proefat. Groent. Fruit. Glas. Naaldwijk, pp: 75-80, 192. 2. Nabih, A., A. El-Sayed a A. Aly, 1987. Effect of different soil media a fertilizer treatments on growth, flowering a bulb formation of iris bulbs cv. Ideal. J. Agric. Res. Tanta Univ., 13: 1053-1065. 3. Perry, J.H. a C.O. Box, 1972. Preparation of beds for bearded irises. Mississippi Farm Res., 35: 2-6. 4. Manoly, N.D., 1996. Effect of soil type, fertilization, bulb size a growth regulators on growth, flowering a chemical composition of iris plants. Ph.D. Thesis, Fac. Agric. Minia Univ. Egypt. 5. Khalafalla, M., E. Mahrouk, E. Nofal, A. Nabih a S. Goma, 2000. Effect of growing media a chemical fertilization on growth, flowering, bulb productivity a chemical conituents of Ornithogalum thyrsoides, Iacq. Ph.D. Thesis, Hort. Dept. Fac. Agric. Tanta Univ. Egypt. 6. Mazroua, M.M., M.M. Afify a M.A. Eraki, 1988. Effect of foliar X fertilizer on the growth a flowering characters of Chrysanthemum morifolium Ram. Plants. Menofiya J. Agric. Res., 13: 397-413. 7. Mohamed, M.A., 1992. The combined effect of foliar fertilizers a growth regulators on growth a volatile oil contents of Tagetes minuta, L. plants. M. Sc. Thesis, Fac. Agric. Minia Univ. Egypt. 8. Al-Humaid, A.I., 1998. The influence of foliar nutrition a gibberellic acid application on the growth a flower of rose plants. The Seco Conference of Ornamental Horticulture, Ismailia, Egypt. 9. Manoly, N.D., 2001. Effect of soil type a some microelements treatments on growth, flowering a chemical composition of Zinia elegans, L. plants. Proceeding of fifth Arabian Hort. Conf. Ismailia, th Egypt March, 24-28, pp: 193-204. 10. Attia, F.A. a M.K. Aly, 1994. Effect of NPK fertilization a planting density on flowering, bulb production a chemical composition of iris plants. Menofiya J. Agric. Res., 19: 401-419. 225
11. Abou-Taleb, N. a A. Kaeel, 2001. Effect of 17. Yagodin, B.A., 1984. Agricultural Chemiry. Mir fertilization level a GA 3 application on growth, Publishers, Part II, Moscow. flowering, bulb productivity a chemicals 18. Pawl, W., 2004. Uptake of mineral nutrients from composition of Iris tingitana cv. Wedgewood. foliar fertilization (Review). J. Fruit Omam. Plant Res., Arab Univ. J. Agric. Sci. Ain-Shams Univ. Cairo, 12: 201-218. 9: 803-824. 19. Bhattacharjee, S.K., 1981. Influence of nitrogen, 12. Singh, W., S. Sehrawat, D. Dahiya a K. Singh, phosphorus a potash fertilization on flowering a 2002. Leaf nutrient atus of gladiolus (Gladiolus corm production in gladiolus. Singapore J. Primary graiflorus, L.) cv. Sylvia as affected by NPK Iuries, 1: 23-27. application. Haryana J. Hort. Sci. Hort. Society of 20. Muthumanikam, D., K. Rajamani a M. Jawaharial, Haryana, Hisar, Iia, 31: 49-51. 2000. Effect of micronutrients on flower production in 13. Pal, A.K. a B. Biswas, 2005. Response of gerbera plants. J. Ornam. Hort., 2: 131-132. fertilizer on growth a yield of tuberose 21. Nabih, A., 1991. Effect of some potting media a (Polianthes tuberose, L.) cv. Calacutta Single in the chemical fertilization on growth, flowering a corm plains of Wa Bengle. J. Interacademicia, Nadia, productivity of Freesia refracta cv. Aurora. J. Agric. Iia, 9: 33-36. Res. Tanta Univ., 17: 713-733. 14. El-Naggar, A.H. a A.B. El-Nasharty, 2009. Effect of 22. Marschner, H., 1997. Mineral nutrition of higher growing media a mineral fertilization on growth, plants. Academic Press Inc., seco printing, San flowering, bulbs productivity a chemical Diego, pp: 889. conituents of Hippearum vittatum, Herb. 23. Mengel, K., 2002. Alternative or complementary role American-Eurasianj- Agric. A Environ. Sci., of foliar supply in mineral nutrition. Acta Hort., 6: 360-371. 594: 33-48. 15. A.O.A.C., 1980. Official Methods of Analysis of Association of Official. Analytical Chemis. Pub. A.O.A.C., Washington, pp: 56. 16. Gomez, K.A. a A.A. Gomez, 1984. Statiical producers for agricultural research John. Willey a Sons, Seco Ed., New York, pp: 680. 226