Effect of Iron Fertilizers and Tuber Size on the Quality of Potato Tuber (Solanum tubersum L.)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• M. Pourahmadi ¹
• R. Zargami ²
• M. Diyanat ¹
• A. Mohammadi Torkashvand ¹

¹ Department of Agricultural Science and Engineering, SR. C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

² Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute, Karaj, Iran

10.22067/jhs.2025.87850.1340

Abstract

Introduction
Iron is an essential element for plants, playing a crucial role in the structure of many oxidation and reduction enzymes and in the synthesis of chlorophyll. Its importance in nitrogen fixation and enzyme activity has been well-documented. However, in calcareous soils, such as those in Iran, non-chelated forms of iron are not effective in providing iron to plants and soil microorganisms. The use of iron chelates is considered the best solution to address iron chlorosis, particularly in alkaline soils. Excessive use of chemical fertilizers has led to the alkalinization of large agricultural areas, causing challenges such as reduced absorption of micronutrients, including iron. This experiment was designed to evaluate the effects of different particle sizes of micronutrients, including iron oxide and iron chelate nanofertilizers, on tuber quality. The potatoes used in this study were cultivated from seedlings produced through tissue culture.
 
Materials and Methods
A factorial experiment was conducted using a completely randomized design with three replications at the greenhouse of the Agricultural Research Institute of Hamadan during 2018–2019 and 2019–2020. The experimental factors included: microtuber weight at three levels of 1-3, 3-5 and 5-10 g and different iron fertilizers at seven levels of Zero, 20 µmol iron chelate in the form of soil consumption, 20 µmol nano iron oxide in the form of soil consumption, foliar spraying of 1% iron chelate, foliar spraying of 2% iron chelate, foliar spraying of 1% nano iron oxide and foliar spraying of 2% nano iron oxide. The iron chelate fertilizer (Fe-EDDHA 7%) was sourced from Khadra Company and is water-soluble, with plant absorption at pH levels of 3–11. Nano iron oxide with a purity of 98% was obtained from Pishgaman Nano Materials, an Iranian company. Data analysis was performed using SAS statistical software. Bartlett's test was used to check data normality, and means were compared using Duncan’s Multi-Range Test at a 5% probability level.
 
Results and discussion
The results of the comparison of the mean number of eyes in the microtuber under the influence of the size of the tuber and iron fertilizer showed that the lowest number of eyes per tuber (3.18 eyes) was in the absence of application of iron fertilizer in the tuber 1-3 g and the highest number of eyes in the tuber (4.24 eyes) was in the application of 20 µmol iron chelate was obtained in microtuber 10-5 g. The results indicated that the number of tuber eyes, as well as iron, protein, and amino acid contents (alanine, glycine, methionine, and lysine), increased with the weight of the microtubers. Iron fertilizers had no significant effect on protein levels in microtubers weighing 1–3 g or 3–5 g. However, in 5–10 g microtubers, the highest protein contents (4.67%, 4.81%, 5.16%, 5.4%, and 5.67%) were observed with treatments of 2% iron chelate, 1% iron chelate, 2% nano iron oxide, 20 µmol nano iron oxide, and 20 µmol iron chelate, respectively. There was no significant effect of iron fertilizers on alanine in 5–10 g microtubers. In 1–3 g microtubers, treatments with 20 µmol iron chelate, 20 µmol nano iron oxide, 1% iron chelate, and 2% nano iron oxide resulted in the greatest increases in alanine levels. In 1–3 g microtubers, iron application did not significantly differ from the control. In 3–5 g microtubers, foliar spraying with 2% iron chelate increased methionine by 17.92%. For 5–10 g microtubers, the highest methionine levels (1.32 and 1.36 µmol.g^-1 FW) were observed with treatments of 20 µmol iron chelate and 2% iron chelate. The maximum lysine levels (2.19, 2.43, and 2.49 µmol.g^-1 FW) were achieved with treatments of 20 µmol iron chelate, 1% nano iron oxide (foliar spray), and 20 µmol nano iron oxide, respectively, in 5–10 g microtubers.
 
Conclusion
Nano iron oxide fertilizers were more effective than iron chelates in enhancing tuber quality. The nanoscale size of iron particles increases the number of reactive atoms, resulting in higher reactivity and efficiency. Consequently, the application of nano iron fertilizers requires less material while achieving superior results. The highest quality improvement of potato tuber was observed in microtubers of 5-10 g and foliar application of nano iron oxide fertilizer.

Keywords

• Amino acid
• Micro nutrient
• Protein

Main Subjects

• Growing vegetables

©2025 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

References

1. Ahmed, H.U., Ali, M.S. & Dey, T.K. )2000(. Tuber crop disease management. Poster presented in the International Conference on Integrated Plant Disease Management for Sustainable Agriculture. D. K. Mitra (ed), Indian Phytopathological Society, New Delhi, India. 3, 1281 p.
2. Ali, E.A. (2012). Effect of iron nutrient care sprayed on foliage at different physiological growth stages on yield and quality of some durum wheat (Triticum durum) varieties in sandy soil. Asian Journal of Crop Science, 4(4), 139-149. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajcs.2012.139.149
3. Aqiqi Shahvardi-Kandi, M., Tobe, A., Qalipouri, A., Hasanpanah, D., & Cefalian, A. (2018). Checking the amount of protein potato cultivars with an emphasis on the amino acid allicin under the influence of different levels of fertilizers. MSc. Thesis, Faculty Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Mohagheg Ardabili University, Ardabil, Iran. (In Persian)
4. Ardashiri, T., & Jahanbin. Sh. (2018). Effect of foliar application of nano-iron and zinc chelated on yield, yield components and harvest index of canola under drought stress conditions. Crop Improvments, 20, 31-43. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2018.220873.1582
5. Asghari, R., & Fathi, M. (2010). Prebasic potato seed production. Principles and Procedures. 103 pp. (In Persian).
6. Bakhtiari, M., Moaveni, P., & Saani, B. (2015). Effect of iron nanoparticles spray on some morpho-physiological traits of wheat in Ghods region. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 7(2), 104-119. (In Persian)
7. Birch, P.R., Bryan, G., Fenton, B., Gilroy, E. M., Hein, I., Jones, J.T.A., Prashar, M. A., Taylor, L., Torrance I., & Toth, K. (2012). Crops that feed the world 8, potato, are the trends of increased global production sustainable? Food Security, 4(4), 477-508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-012-0220-1
8. Barghi, A., Gholopouri, A., Tobe, A., Jahanbakhsh, S., & Jamaati-Samarin, Sh. (2017). Effect of iron nano oxide concentration and application time on tuber yield and quality of potato. Journal of Plant Ecophysiology, 9, 145-155.
9. Bradford, M.M. (1976). A rapid sensitive metod for the question of microprogram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein – dye binding. Annual of Biochemistry, 72, 248-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3
10. De Souza, A., Govea-Alcaide, E., Masunaga, S.H., Fajardo-Rosabal, L., Effenberger, F., Rossi, L.M., & Jardim, R.F. (2019). Impact of Fe₃O₄ nanoparticle on nutrient accumulation in common bean plants grown in soil. SN Applied Science, 1, 308- https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0321-y
11. Fathi, A., Amini-Dehghi, M., & Heshmati, S. (2015). Effect of iron application methods on grain yield, yield components, oil content and fatty acids profile of spring safflower cv. Goldasht under deficit irrigation conditions. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 16, 308-321. (In Persian), https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.15625540.1393.16.4.4.5
12. Feng, Y., Kreslavski, V.D., Shmarev, A.N., Ivanov, A.A., Zharmukhamedov, S.K., Kosobryukhov, A., & Shabala, S. (2022). Effects of iron oxide nanoparticles (Fe₃O₄) on growth, photosynthesis, antioxidant activity and distribution of mineral elements in wheat (Triticum aestivum) plants. Plants, 11(14), 1894-1909. https://doi.org/3390/plants11141894
13. Gao, D., Ran, C., Zhang, Y., Wang, X., Lu, S., Geng, Y., Guo, L., & Shao, X. (2022). Effect of different concentrations of foliar iron fertilizer on chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of iron-deficient rice seedlings under saline sodic conditions. Plant Physiology Biochemistry, 185, 112-122. https://doi.org/1016/j.plaphy.2022.05.021
14. Gomaa, M.A., Kandil, E.E., & Ibrahim, A.M.M. (2020). Response of maize to organic fertilization and some nano-micronutrients. Egyptian Academic Journal of Biological Sciences, 11(1), 13- https://doi.org/10.21608/eajbsh.2020.81409
15. Grillet, L., Mari, S., & Schmidt, W. (2014). Iron in seeds loading pathways and subcellular localization. Frontiers in Plant Science, 4, 535-547. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00535
16. Hamzapour, G.R., Tobeh, A., Jamalpour, S., & Al-Ebrahim, M.T. (2014). Investigating the increase in nutritional quality of apple tuber ground (amino acid lysine) with the use of bio-fertilizer (biozer) in comparison with the use of nitrogen and phosphorus chemical fertilizers. The first National Specialized Conference of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences of Iran, Ardabil, Zemin Kav Research Center, Iran. January. 5 pp. (In Persian).
17. Havlin, J. (2016). Soil Fertility and Fertilizers, An Introduction to Nutrient Management. 8th Edition. Pearson India. 536 p.
18. Jalali, M., Ghanati, F., Modarres-Sanavi, A.M., & Khoshgoftarmanesh, A.H. (2017). Physiological effects of repeated foliar application of magnetite nanoparticles on maize plants. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 203, 593-602. https://doi.org/10.1111/jac.12208
19. Jam, A., Ebadi, A., & Parmoon, Gh. (2015). The role of iron and zinc on tuber yield and yield components of potato. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 9, 177-190. (In Persian)
20. Jeong, J., & Guerinot, M.L. (2009). Homing in on iron homeostasis in plants. Trends in Plant Science, 14(5), 280–285. https://doi.org/1016/j.tplants.2009.02.006
21. Khodadadi-Karooki, A., Yavarzadeh, M.R., Akbarian, M.M., & Askari, A. (2020). Effect of iron and magnesium nanoparticles and planting date on yield and nitrate content in potato tubers. Journal of Plant Production Science, 10, 41-54.
22. Lafmejani, Z.N., Jafari, A.A., Moradi, P., & Moghadam, A.L. (2018). Impact of foliar application of iron-chelate and iron nano particles on some morpho-physiological traits and essential oil composition of peppermint (Mentha piperita). Journal of Essential Oil Bear Plants, 21, 1374-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/0972060X.2018.1556122
23. Liu, X., Feng, Z., Zhang, S., Zhang, J., Xiao, Q., & Wang, Y. (2006). Preparation and testing of cementing nano-subnano composites of slower controlled release of fertilizers. Scientia Agriculture Sinica, 39, 1598-1604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1671-2927(06)60113-2
24. Liu, X., Chen, Q., Hy, Q., Xue, N., & Seung, L.K. (2008). Evaluation of the role of mixed amino acids in nitrate uptake and assimilation in leafy radish by using 15 N labeled nitrate. Agricultural Sciences in China, 7(10), 1196-1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1671-2927(08)60164-9
25. Mahil, E.I.T., & Kumar, B.N.A. (2019). Foliar application of nanofertilizers in agricultural crops. A review. Journal of Farm Science, 32(3), 239-249.
26. Manivannan, P., Jaleel, C.A., Somasundaram, R., & Panneerselvam, R. (2008). Osmoregu-lation and antioxidant metabolism in drought-stressed Helianthus anuus undertriadimefon drenching. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 331, 418-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crvi.2008.03.003
27. Mazaherinia, S., Astaraei, A.R., Fotovat, A., & Monshi, A. (2010). Studying effect of iron oxide (ordinary and nano) together with sulfur granular compost on iron concentration and growth of Atyla cultivar of wheat. Iranian Journal of Crop Research, 8, 855-861. (In Persian)
28. Mirzashahi, K., Nourgholipour, F., & Samavat, S. (2017). Effects of two fe-fertilizers on yield and yield components of soybean grown in the north of Khuzestan. Land Management Journal, 4, 191-201. https://doi.org/22092/lmj.2017.109490
29. Monsef-Afshar, R., Hadi, H., & Pirzad, A. (2012). Effect of spraying nano-iron on characteristics qualitative and quantitative of cowpea, under drought stress end of season. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 3(8), 1709-1717.
30. Naderi, M.R., & Danesh-Shahraki, A. (2013). Nanofertilizers and their roles in sustainable agriculture. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences, 5(19), 2229-2232.
31. Paech, K., & Tracey, M.V. (2013). Modern Methods of Plant Analysis. Springer Science and Business Media. 766 pp.
32. Parvizi, K., & Navaei, A. (2019). Evaluation of potato growth traits by inoculation of mycorrhiza under drought stress conditions. Journla of Plant Research, 32, 328-340. (In Persian). https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.23832592.1398.32.2.6.1
33. Pirzad, A., Zardashti, M., & Mazloumi, M. (2012). The effect of foliar iron nanoparticles in different growth stages on some physiological Characteristics and yield of sugar beet root. 12^th Iranian Congress of Agronomy and Plant Breeding. Islamic Azad University of Karaj, June 13. p. 576. (In Persian).
34. Prasad, T.N.V., Sreeprasad, T.S., Sajanlal, P.R., & Pradeep, T. (2012). Effect of nanoscales zinc oxide on the germination, groeth and yield of peanut. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 35(6), 905-927. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2012.663443
35. Ranjbar, M., & Shams, G.A. (2009). Using of nanotechnology. Journal of Environment Green, 3, 29-34. (In Persian).
36. Rawashdeh, H.M., & Florin, S. (2015). Foliar application with iron as a vital factor of wheat crop growth, yield quantity and quality, A review. International Journal of Agricultural Policy and Research, 3(9), 368-376.
37. Sheykhbaglou, R., Sedghi, M., Tajbakhsh shishevan, M., & Sharifi, R. (2010). Effects of nano-iron oxide particles on agronomic traits of soybean. Notulae Scientia Biologicae, 2(2), 112-113. https://doi.org/10.15835/nsb224667
38. Solanki, P., Bhargava, A., Chhipa, H., Jain, N., & Panwar, J. (2015). Nano-fertilizers and their smart delivery system. In M. Rai., C. Ribeiro, L. Mattoso & N. Dura (Eds.), Nanotechnologies in Food and Agriculture. pp. 81-101. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland
39. Struik, P.C. (2007). The canon of potato science, Minitubers. Potato Research, 50, 305-308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-008-9051-z
40. Timsina, Y.N. (2013). Effect of nitrogen fertilization on zinc and iron uptake and yield components of wheat. Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, (IPM). Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB), pp. 94.
41. Taiz, L., & Zeiger, E. (2002). Plant Physiology, Sinauer Associates. 3th edition. Hardcover. 690 pp.
42. Wang, L., Liu, B, Wang, Y., Qin, Y., Zhou, Y., & Qian, H. (2020). Influence and interaction of iron and lead on seed germination in upland rice. Plant Soil, 455, 187-202. https://doi.org/1007/s11104-020-04680-4
43. Zhang, R., Zhang, W., Kang, Y., Shi, M., Yang, X., Li, H., Yu, H., Wang, Y., & Qin, S. (2022). Application of different foliar iron fertilizers for improving the photosynthesis and tuber quality of potato (Solanum tuberosum) and enhancing iron biofortification. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 9(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-022-00346-8

44. Zhao, J.H., Sun, J.H., & Li, W.Q. (2018). Effect of maize sowing date on yield and interspecific competition in soybean/maize intercropping system. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 26(11), 1634-1164. https://doi.org/10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.180132