Dergiler / Black Sea Journal of Agriculture / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 5

Soil-Water-Plant Relations and Growth Response of Curly Lettuce to Integrated Microbial and Reduced Chemical Fertilization

Zeynep Demir(Toprak, Gübre ve Su Kaynakları Merkez Araştırma Enstitüsü Müdürlüğü)0000-0002-7589-3216
Levent Değirmenci(BILECIK SEYH EDEBALI UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-6608-0398
Dilek Kaya Özdoğan(Soil, Fertilizer and Water Resources Central Research Institute, Ankara 06170, Türkiye)0000-0002-4371-2118
Sayfa
876–887
Yayın Tarihi
2026-09-15
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

This approach represents a promising and sustainable strategy to reduce chemical fertilizer dependency while maintaining productivity.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study evaluated whether microbial fertilizer combined with a 50% reduction in chemical fertilizers can maintain or improve growth performance of curly lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. crispa) under greenhouse conditions.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The study was arranged in a completely randomized design with seven treatments and four replications: control without fertilizer application (C), optimum chemical fertilization (OF), three combined treatments consisting of 50% reduced chemical fertilizer plus microbial fertilizer at 5 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF5), 10 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF10), and 20 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF20), and two sole microbial fertilizer treatments at 10 mL L⁻¹ (MF10) and 20 mL L⁻¹ (MF20).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:This approach represents a promising and sustainable strategy to reduce chemical fertilizer dependency while maintaining productivity.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Soil-water-plant relations · Sustainable agriculture · Curly lettuce

Özet

This study evaluated whether microbial fertilizer combined with a 50% reduction in chemical fertilizers can maintain or improve growth performance of curly lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. crispa) under greenhouse conditions. The study was arranged in a completely randomized design with seven treatments and four replications: control without fertilizer application (C), optimum chemical fertilization (OF), three combined treatments consisting of 50% reduced chemical fertilizer plus microbial fertilizer at 5 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF5), 10 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF10), and 20 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF20), and two sole microbial fertilizer treatments at 10 mL L⁻¹ (MF10) and 20 mL L⁻¹ (MF20). Irrigation was applied at approximately four-day intervals by restoring the depleted soil moisture to field capacity based on pot weight. Seasonal evapotranspiration during the experimental period was calculated based on the difference between pot weight at field capacity and pot weight before irrigation, and the seasonal evapotranspiration during the curly lettuce growing period was determined as 214.2 mm. The microbial fertilizer consisted of a consortium of Streptomyces species. Growth parameters, including fresh weight, dry weight, and head diameter, were measured at harvest. Treatment effects were highly significant (P<0.01) for all parameters. The highest values were obtained under OF (271.80 g plant⁻¹ fresh weight, 34.62 g plant⁻¹ dry weight, and 33.50 cm head diameter). However, the combined treatment RCF_MF20 produced comparable results (258.80 g plant⁻¹, 31.44 g plant⁻¹, and 31.00 cm, respectively). Compared with the control, OF and RCF_MF20 increased fresh weight by 103.9% and 94.1%, dry weight by 244.8% and 213.1%, and head diameter by 52.3% and 40.9%, respectively. Multivariate analyses confirmed strong associations between combined treatments and improved growth. The integration of microbial fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilization can sustain high growth performance in curly lettuce. This approach represents a promising and sustainable strategy to reduce chemical fertilizer dependency while maintaining productivity.

Abstract

This study evaluated whether microbial fertilizer combined with a 50% reduction in chemical fertilizers can maintain or improve growth performance of curly lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. crispa) under greenhouse conditions. The study was arranged in a completely randomized design with seven treatments and four replications: control without fertilizer application (C), optimum chemical fertilization (OF), three combined treatments consisting of 50% reduced chemical fertilizer plus microbial fertilizer at 5 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF5), 10 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF10), and 20 mL L⁻¹ (RCF_MF20), and two sole microbial fertilizer treatments at 10 mL L⁻¹ (MF10) and 20 mL L⁻¹ (MF20). Irrigation was applied at approximately four-day intervals by restoring the depleted soil moisture to field capacity based on pot weight. Seasonal evapotranspiration during the experimental period was calculated based on the difference between pot weight at field capacity and pot weight before irrigation, and the seasonal evapotranspiration during the curly lettuce growing period was determined as 214.2 mm. The microbial fertilizer consisted of a consortium of Streptomyces species. Growth parameters, including fresh weight, dry weight, and head diameter, were measured at harvest. Treatment effects were highly significant (P<0.01) for all parameters. The highest values were obtained under OF (271.80 g plant⁻¹ fresh weight, 34.62 g plant⁻¹ dry weight, and 33.50 cm head diameter). However, the combined treatment RCF_MF20 produced comparable results (258.80 g plant⁻¹, 31.44 g plant⁻¹, and 31.00 cm, respectively). Compared with the control, OF and RCF_MF20 increased fresh weight by 103.9% and 94.1%, dry weight by 244.8% and 213.1%, and head diameter by 52.3% and 40.9%, respectively. Multivariate analyses confirmed strong associations between combined treatments and improved growth. The integration of microbial fertilizer with reduced chemical fertilization can sustain high growth performance in curly lettuce. This approach represents a promising and sustainable strategy to reduce chemical fertilizer dependency while maintaining productivity.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Demir, Z., Değirmenci, L., Özdoğan, D. K. (2026). Soil-Water-Plant Relations and Growth Response of Curly Lettuce to Integrated Microbial and Reduced Chemical Fertilization. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 5, 876–887. https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1946779

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (43)

  1. Adesemoye, A. O., Torbert, H. A., & Kloepper, J. W. (2009). Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria allow reduced application rates of chemical fertilizers. Microbial Ecology, 58(4), 921–929. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-009-9531-y
  2. Alzate Zuluaga, M. Y., Fattorini, R., Cesco, S., & Pii, Y. (2024). Plant-microbe interactions in the rhizosphere for smarter and more sustainable crop fertilization: the case of PGPR-based biofertilizers. Frontiers in Microbiology, 15, 1440978. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1440978
  3. Argentel-Martínez, L., Peñuelas-Rubio, O., Herrera-Sepúlveda, A., González-Aguilera, J., Sudheer, S., Salim, L. M., Lal, S., Pradeep, C. K., Ortiz, A., Sansinenea, E., Hathurusinghe, S. H. K., Shin, J. H., Babalola, O. O., & Azizoglu, U. (2025). Biotechnological advances in plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria for sustainable agriculture. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 41, 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-024-04231-4
  4. Backer, R., Rokem, J. S., Ilangumaran, G., Lamont, J., Praslickova, D., Ricci, E., Subramanian, S., & Smith, D. L. (2018). Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria: context, mechanisms of action, and roadmap to commercialization of biostimulants for sustainable agriculture. Frontiers in Plant Science, 9, 1473. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01473
  5. Balouiri, M., Sadiki, M., & Ibnsouda, S. K. (2016). Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review. Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis, 6(2), 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2015.11.005
  6. Bargaz, A., Lyamlouli, K., Chtouki, M., Zeroual, Y., & Dhiba, D. (2018). Soil Microbial Resources for Improving Fertilizers Efficiency in an Integrated Plant Nutrient Management System. Front. Microbiol. 9, 1606. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01606
  7. Barka, E. A., Vatsa, P., Sanchez, L., Gaveau-Vaillant, N., Jacquard, C., Klenk, H., Clément, C., Ouhdouch, Y., & van Wezel, G. P. (2016). Taxonomy, physiology, and natural products of actinobacteria. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 80(1), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.00019-15
  8. Bhattacharyya, P. N., & Jha, D. K. (2012). Plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR): emergence in agriculture. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 28(4), 1327–1350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-011-0979-9
  9. Bouyoucos, G. J. (1951). A recalibration of the hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of soil 1. Agronomy Journal, 43, 434–438. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1951.00021962004300090005x
  10. Chouyia, F. E., Ventorino, V., & Pepe, O. (2022). Diversity, mechanisms and beneficial features of phosphate-solubilizing Streptomyces in sustainable agriculture: A review. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13, 1035358. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1035358
  11. Compant, S., Clément, C., & Sessitsch, A. (2010). Plant growth-promoting bacteria in the rhizo- and endosphere of plants: Their role, colonization, mechanisms involved and prospects for utilization. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 42(5), 669–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.11.024
  12. Compant, S., Samad, A., Faist, H., & Sessitsch, A. (2019). A review on the plant microbiome: Ecology, functions, and emerging trends in microbial application. Journal of Advanced Research, 19, 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jare.2019.03.004
  13. Değirmenci, L., Kaygusuz İzgördü, Ö., & Darcan, C. (2024). Isolation and characterization of microorganisms for use with manure and chemical fertilizers. Biological Diversity and Conservation, 17(1), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.46309/biodicon.2023.1226337
  14. Demir, Z. (2020). Effects of microbial bio-fertilizers on soil physicochemical properties under different soil water regimes in greenhouse grown eggplant (Solanum melongena L.). Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 51(14), 1888–1903. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1798983
  15. Fageria, N. K., Baligar, V. C., & Li, Y. C. (2008). The role of nutrient efficient plants in improving crop yields in the twenty-first century. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 31(6), 1121–1157. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904160802116068
  16. Glick, B. R. (2012). Plant growth-promoting bacteria: mechanisms and applications. Scientifica, 2012, 963401. https://doi.org/10.6064/2012/963401
  17. Gruda, N. S. (2009). Do soilless culture systems have an influence on product quality of vegetables?. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 82(2), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.5073/JABFQ.2008.082.023
  18. Hayat, R., Ali, S., Amara, U., Khalid, R., & Ahmed, I. (2010). Soil beneficial bacteria and their role in plant growth promotion: A review. Annals of Microbiology, 60(4), 579–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13213-010-0117-1
  19. Hillel, D. (1982). Introduction to soil physics. Academic Press.
  20. Jackson, M. L. (1958). Soil chemical analysis. Prentice Hall of India.
  21. Kacar, B., & İnal, A. (2008). Plant analysis. Nobel Academic Publishing.
  22. Kitir Sen, N., Kocaman, A., & Aydemir, Ö. E. (2025). The role of chemical fertilizer reduction and different microbial inoculants on yield increase in lettuce cultivation. BMC Plant Biology, 25, 981. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-025-06986-w
  23. Lindsay, W. L., & Norvell, W. A. (1969). Development of a DTPA soil test for zinc, iron, manganese, and copper. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 42(3), 421–428. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1978.03615995004200030009x
  24. Lugtenberg, B., & Kamilova, F. (2009). Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria. Annual Review of Microbiology, 63, 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.62.081307.162918
  25. Marschner, P. (2011). Marschner’s mineral nutrition of higher plants (3rd ed.). Elsevier.
  26. Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V., & Watanabe, F. S. (1954). Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. USDA Circular No. 939, US Government Printing Office.
  27. Özbay, N., Ergun, M., & Demirkıran, A. R. (2018). Ticari Mikrobiyal Gübre Sim Derma (Trichoderma harzianum, Kuen 1585) Uygulamasının Ispanakta Çimlenme, Gelişme ve Verim Üzerine Etkisi. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 5(4), 482-491. https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.471290
  28. Palaniyandi, S. A., Yang, S. H., Zhang, L., & Suh, J. W. (2013). Effects of actinobacteria on plant disease suppression and growth promotion. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 97(22), 9621–9636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-013-5206-1
  29. Pang, F., Solanki, M. K., & Wang, Z. (2022). Streptomyces can be an excellent plant growth manager. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 38, 193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-022-03380-8
  30. Richards, L. A. (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils (USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 60). U.S. Department of Agriculture.
  31. Richardson, A. E., Barea, J. M., McNeill, A. M., & Prigent-Combaret, C. (2009). Acquisition of phosphorus and nitrogen in the rhizosphere and plant growth promotion by microorganisms. Plant and Soil, 321(1–2), 305–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-9895-2
  32. Samantaray, A., Chattaraj, S., Mitra, D., Ganguly, A., Kumar, R., Gaur, A., Das Mohapatra, P.K., de los Santos-Villalobos, S., Rani, A., & Thatoi, H. (2024). Advances in microbial based bio-inoculum for amelioration of soil health and sustainable crop production. Current Research in Microbial Sciences, 7, 100251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crmicr.2024.100251
  33. Schlatter, D., Kinkel, L., Thomashow, L., Weller, D., & Paulitz, T. (2017). Disease Suppressive Soils: New Insights from the Soil Microbiome. Phytopathology, 107(11), 1284 –1297. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-03-17-0111-RVW
  34. Soil Survey Staff. (2014). Kellogg soil survey laboratory methods manual” (Soil Survey Investigations Report No. 42, Version 5.0). R. Burt et al. (Eds.). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
  35. Thomas, G. W. (1982). Exchangeable cations. In A. L. Page, R. H. Miller, & D. R. Keeney (Eds.), Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties (2nd ed., Agronomy Monograph No. 9, pp. 159–165). American Society of Agronomy.
  36. Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418(6898), 671–677. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01014
  37. Tüzüner, A. (1990). Soil and water analysis laboratory manual. General Directorate of Rural Services.
  38. U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff. (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils (USDA Agricultural Handbook No. 60). U.S. Government Printing Office.
  39. Uçar, G., Şimşek, M., Topçu, V., Öktüren Asri, F., Ertürk, M. E., & Çelik, İ. (2025). Synergistic effects of biofertilizers and chemical fertilizers on yield and nutritional quality of greenhouse-grown lettuce. Horticultural Studies, 42(2), 80–87. https://doi.org/10.16882/hortis.1716339
  40. van der Heijden, M. G., Bardgett, R. D., & van Straalen, N. M. (2008). The unseen majority: soil microbes as drivers of plant diversity and productivity in terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters, 11(3), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01139.x
  41. Vessey, J. K. (2003). Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizers. Plant and Soil, 255(2), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026037216893
  42. Viaene, T., Langendries, S., Beirinckx, S., Maes, M., & Goormachtig, S. (2016). Streptomyces as a plant’s best friend?. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 92(8), fiw119. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiw119
  43. Walkley, A., & Black, I. A. (1934). An examination of Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003