Productive and economic efficiency of beetroot fertilised with roostertree in a semi-arid environment

Freitas, Erivan A. da S.; Bezerra Neto, Francisco; Lima, Jailma S. S. de; Lino, Francisca K. K. da S.; Silva, Gerlani A. da; Guerra, Natan M.; Lino, Vitor A. da S.; Desravines, Rose P.

doi:10.1590/1983-21252024v3712349rc

Brasil

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Scientific Article • Rev. Caatinga 37 • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252024v3712349rc linkcopy

Productive and economic efficiency of beetroot fertilised with roostertree in a semi-arid environment

Eficiência produtiva e econômica de beterraba adubada com flor-de-seda em ambiente semiárido

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

The use of spontaneous species from the northeastern semi-arid region can be a viable alternative in the practice of fertilising tuberous vegetables. Therefore, the objective of this work was to evaluate the maximum physical and economic efficiencies of the agroeconomic characteristics of beetroot in monocropping as a function of different biomass amounts of roostertree (Calotropis procera) in two cultivations. The experimental design used was randomised blocks with five treatments and five replications. The treatments consisted of the amounts of roostertree biomass incorporated into the soil: 16, 29, 42, 55 and 68 t ha^-1 on a dry basis. In each block of the experiments, two additional treatments were added, one without fertilisation (control treatment) and the other with mineral fertilisation, for comparison purposes with the treatment of maximum physical or economic efficiency. The beetroot cultivar planted was Early Wonder. The fertilisation of beetroot to obtain the maximum optimised productive efficiency (36.14 t ha^-1) was possible with the incorporation of 61.29 t ha^-1 of dry C. procera biomass into the soil. The maximum optimised agroeconomic efficiency (based on a net income of 68,740.15 BRL ha^-1) of beetroot cultivation was obtained with an amount of 58.68 t ha^-1 of dry C. procera biomass added to the soil. The rate of return obtained was 2.91 BRL for each real invested, and the profit margin was 74.93%.

Keywords Beta vulgaris; Calotropis procera; Monocropping; Green manuring; Agro-economic optimisation

Cultivation	Minimum	Temperature (°C) Mean	Maximum	Relative humidity (%)	Solar radiation (MJ m^-2)	Wind speed (m s^-1)
2021	23.32	29.90	36.48	67.60	274.80	2.80
2022	22.53	29.38	36.23	62.87	256.41	1.71

Cultivation	C	OM	PH	CE	P	K⁺	Ca²⁺	Mg²⁺·	Na⁺ Cu Fe	Mn	Zn	B
Cultivation	g kg^-1		(H₂O)	dS m^-1	mg dm^-3			-	mmol_c dm^-3	-
2021	7.92	12.97	6.60	0.56	32.00	2.59	23.70	6.50	2.30 0.30 4.80	6.10	2.70	0.50
2022	7.20	12.41	7.10	0.19	7.00	1.16	20.10	6.10	0.43 0.20 6.80	12.70	1.70	0.48

Treatments (tha¹)	(VC) BRL ha^-1					(FC) BRL ha^-1			- (OC) BRL ha^-1 -
Treatments (tha¹)	I	L	E	OE	MC	D	TF	FHL	LR	RFC	TC (BRL ha^-1)
0	2520.00	3180.00	29.89	57.30	445.83	1864.73	10.00	1100.00	100.00	896.43	10,204.20
16	2520.00	6610.00	94.41	92.24	544.33	1866.19	10.00	1100.00	100.00	1014.63	13,951.81
29	2520.00	9480.00	151.26	121.51	544.33	1872.97	10.00	1100.00	100.00	1014.63	16,914.70
42	2520.00	12,220.00	208.11	149.48	544.33	1872.97	10.00	1100.00	100.00	1014.63	19,739.51
55	2520.00	15,090.00	264.96	178.75	544.33	1872.97	10.00	1100.00	100.00	1014.63	22,695.63
68	2520.00	17,830.00	321.81	206.72	544.33	1872.97	10.00	1100.00	100.00	1014.63	25,520.45
MF	11,503.32	3180.00	29.89	147.13	445.83	1864.73	10.00	1100.00	100.00	896.43	19,277.35

			Cultivation			Cultivation
	2021		2022	2021-2022	2021	2022	2021-2022
Comparison betweenmean values	(S1)		(S2)	(S1/S2)	(S1)	(S2)	(S1/S2)
		Plant height (cm)			Number of leaves per plant
Control treatment mean, T_c	26.08dA	20.67dB		23.37	7.07bA	6.09bB^{^* * Means followed by the same lowercase letter in the column and uppercase in the row do not differ statistically by the F-test at the 5% probability level.}	6.58
MPE value	39.10aA	40.53aA		39.34⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	9.02aA	7.35aB	8.20⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	37.39bA	34.97bB		36.18⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	8.30aA	7.02aB	7.66⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	30.53cA	26.26cB		28.40⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	7.33bA	6.59bB	6.96⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	3.62	2.80		3.36	7.78	3.22	6.29
		Dry shoot mass (t ha^-1)			Dry root mass (t ha^-1)
Control treatment mean, T_c	1.11cA	0.77dB		0.94	1.42cA	1.23dA	1.33
MPE value	2.14aB	2.29aA		2.18⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	3.85aB	5.21aA	4.52⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	1.90bA	1.70bB		1.80⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	3.11aB	3.96bA	3.54⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	1.19cB	1.44cA		1.32⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	2.43bA	2.28cB	2.36⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	7.31	13.67		8.56	16.64	17.06	16.96

Comparison between mean values	Cultivation			Cultivation
	2021 (SI)	2022 (S2)	2021-2022 (S1/S2)	2021 (S1)	2022 (S2)	2021-2022 (S1/S2)
	Total pr	oductivity of root	s (t ha^-1)	Commercia	l productivity of r	roots (t ha^-1)
Control treatment mean, T_c	10.01dA	9.70dA	9.86	7.58dA	6.12dA	6.85
MPE value	30.62aB	46.84aA	37.38⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	29.98aB	44.27aA	36.44⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	26.43bB	35.48bA	30.96⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	25.27bB	31.34b A	28.31⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	21.19cB	24.09cA	22.64⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	19.44cA	20.68cA	20.06⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	7.36	5.71	6.33	7.05	4.67	5.68
	Productivity of large + extra AA roots (t ha^-1)			Productivity of extra A roots (t ha^-1)
Control treatment mean, T_c	2.10dA	1.41dA	1.76	2.51bA	1.68cB	2.10
MPE value	22.13aB	35.95aA	28.17⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	5.44aA	3.42bB	4.39⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	17.13bB	24.02bA	20.58⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	5.26a A	3.22bB	4.24⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	7.76cB	10.31cA	9.04⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	5.66aA	4.46aB	5.06⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	8.53	6.65	6.99	11.25	18.12	13.73
	Productivity of extra roots (t ha^-1)			Productivity of scrap roots (t ha^-1)
Control treatment mean, T_c	2.96bA	3.03cA^* * Means followed by the same lowercase letter in the column and uppercase letter in the row do not differ statistically by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	3.00	2.43aB	3.58aA	3.01
MPE value	2.94bB	4.23bA	3.58⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	2.00aB	3.74aA	2.88
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	2.88bB	4.09bA	3.49⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	1.12aB	3.25bA	2.18⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	6.02aA	5.91aA	11.93⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	1.75aB	3.02bA	2.39⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	16.17	15.80	16.06	35.32	20.51	25.35

		Cultivation			Cultivation
Comparison between mean values	2021	2022	2021-2022	2021	2022	2021-2022
	(E1)	(E2)	(E1/E2)	(E1)	(E2)	(E1/E2)
----------- Gross Income (RS ha^-1) ----------- ----------- Net Income (RS ha^-1) -----------
Control treatment mean, T_c	19,619.97dA	15,840.44dB^{^* * Means followed by the same lowercase letter in the column and uppercase in the row do not differ statistically by the F-test at the 5% probability level.}	17,730.00	9415.00dA	5636.00dB	7525.50
MEE value	78,271.77aB	111,343.61aA	92,702.39⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	55,561.73aB	86,214.76aA	68740.15⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	65,457.62bB	81,175.78bA	73,316.70⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	45,693.20bB	61,411.36bA	53552.28⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	50,357.75cA	53,550.84cA	51,954.50⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	31,080.00cA	34,273.00cA	32676.5⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	5.08	2.37	4.13	7.29	3.27	5.85
Rate of return Profit margin (%)
Control treatment mean, T_c	1.92dA	1.55dB	1.74	47.92dA	34.97dB	41.45
MEE value	3.65aB	4.57aA	4.04⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	72.73aB	78.58aA	74.93⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Green manured treatment mean, T_gm	3.35bB	4.02bA	3.68⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	69.74bB	74.75bA	72.25⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
Mineral treatment mean, T_mf	2.61cA	2.78cA	5.39⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.	61.62cA	63.96cA	62.79⁺ + Mean of green manure treatments, MPE or mineral treatment is significantly different from the control treatment mean by the F-test at the 5% probability level.
CV (%)	4.75	3.00	4.09	2.73	2.24	3.62

vertical_align_top file_download show_chart

more_horizclose
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido Avenida Francisco Mota, número 572, Bairro Presidente Costa e Silva, Cep: 5962-5900, Telefone: 55 (84) 3317-8297 - Mossoró - RN - Brazil
E-mail: caatinga@ufersa.edu.br

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro