الفهرس 
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 86 |  |  |
| | | from | 86 | | |
Abstract
This study was carried out during 2016 and 2017 seasons on twenty-four ten years-old uniform in vigour Superior grapevines. The selected vines are planted at 2 x 3 meters apart, trained by cane pruning system and supported by Gable shape supporting system. Vines were pruned to leave fixed vine load namely 84 eyes / vine (6 fruiting canes x 12 eyes plus 6 renewal spurs x two eyes). The vines are grown in a private vineyard located at El-Hawarta village, eastern side of Minia city, Minia Governorate. The texture of the soil is clay. The selected vines were irrigated with surface irrigation system using Nile water. All vines received the regular and common horticultural practices that already applied in the vineyard except those dealing with spraying micronutrients and application of humic acid and EM.
The goal of this study was examining the effect of spraying some micronutrients applied via lignosulfonate form as well as humic acid and EM on growth, vine nutritional status, yield and berries quality of Superior grapevines grown under Minia region conditions.
This experiment included the following eight treatments.
1- Control
2- Spraying Mn in lignosulfonate form at 0.05 %.
3- Spraying Zn in lignosulfonate form at 0.05 %.
4- Spraying Fe in lignosulfonate form at 0.05 %.
5- Soil addition of humic acid at 50 ml/vine/year.
6- Soil addition of EM at 50 ml/vine/year.
7- Spraying all nutrients in lingsulfonate form at 0.05 %.
8- Spraying all nutrients in lingsulfonate plus humic acid and EM each at 50 ml/vine/year.
Each treatment was replicated three times, one vine per each. The three micronutrients namely Mn, Zn and Fe were applied three times at growth start (2nd week of Mar.), just after berry setting (2nd week of Apr.) and three weeks later (1st week of May). Triton B as a wetting agent was added to all spraying solutions and spray was done till runoff. Both humic acid and EM applied at 50 ml/vine/year were added once at growth start (2nd week of Mar.) 25 cm apart from vine trunk. Randomized complete block design was followed.
During both seasons, the following parameters were recorded.
1- Some vegetative growth characteristics namely Main shoot length, No. of leaves/shoot, Leaf area, Wood ripening coefficient, Cane thickness and Pruning wood weight .
2- some photosynthetic pigments namely Chlorophylls a,b , Total Chlorophylls and Total carotenoids (mg/g F.W) and leaf content of N, P, K , Mg and Ca as % and Mn , Fe , Zn and Cu as (PPM)
3- Percentage of berry setting
4- Yield as well as cluster weight and dimension
5- Percentage of shot berries
6- Some Physical and chemical characteristics of the berries namely berry weight and dimensions T.S.S. %, Reducing sugars %, Total acidity and T.S.S./acid
The nearly same obtained data during both seasons could be summarized under the following main topics:
1- Some vegetative growth aspects:
The six growth aspects namely man shoot length, number of leaves/shoot, leaf area, wood ripening coefficient, cane thickness and pruning wood weight were rEMarkably improved in response to treating the vines singly or in combinations with the three micronutrients namely Mn, Zn and Fe applied via ligosulfonate at 0.05 %, humic acid and EM each at 50 ml/vine/year relative to the control. Using Fe was superior than using Mn and Zn in this respect. The best treatment was the application of all micronutrients, humic acid and EM together.
2- Leaf chemical components:
Single and combined applications of micronutrients applied via lignosulfonate at 0.05 %, humic acid and EM each at 50 ml/vine/year had an obvious promotion on chlorophylls a & b, total chlorophylls, total carotenoids, N, P, K, Mg, Ca, Mn, Zn and Fe compared to the control treatment. The leaf content of Cu unaffected by the present treatments. The promotion on these chemical components was clearly associated with using all materials together.
3- Percentage of berry setting, yield and cluster aspects:
Percentage of berry setting, yield expressed in number of clusters/vine and weight (kg.) as well as weight, length and shoulder of cluster were positively affected by single and combined applications of the three micronutrients namely Mn, Zn and Fe in lignodsulfonate form at 0.05 % as well as humic acid and EM each at 50 ml/vine/year relative to the control. Using humic acid or EM each at 50 ml/vine/year was obviously superior than using any one of micro nutrients. The maximum values were recorded on the vines that received all materials together. The present treatments had no material effect on the number of clusters in the first season of study.
4- Percentage of shot berries:
It was declined greatly with using micronutrients either alone or in combined with humic acid and EM and the reduction was appeared when all materials were applied together rather than the control. The lowest values were recorded on the vines that received all materials together.
5- Physical and chEMical characteristics of the berries:
Single and combined applications of micronutrients applied via lignosulfonate at 0.05 % as well as humic acid and EM each at 50 ml/vine/year was very effective in improving fruit quality in terms of increasing berry weight and dimensions, T.S.S., reducing sugars and T.S.S./acid and decreasing total acidity relative to the control. The best results were obtained due to using all materials together.
Conclusion:
The best results with regard to yield and berries characteristics of Superior grapevines grown under Minia region conditions were obtained due to spraying the vines three times with a mixture of three micronutrients namely Mn, Zn and Fe applied through lignosulfonate form at 0.05 % (growth start, just after berry setting and three weeks later) as well as humic acid and EM each at 50 ml/vine once at growth start.