Response of Maize To Seed Priming BY Ghazal Miraj

RESPONSE OF MAIZE TO SEED PRIMING
BY
GHAZAL MIRAJ
A dissertation submitted to The University of Agriculture, Peshawar in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN AGRICULTURAL

CHEMISTRY
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY

FACULTY OF NUTRITION SCIENCES
THE UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, PESHAWAR
KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA -PAKISTAN
APRIL, 2012
BY
GHAZAL MIRAJ
A dissertation submitted to The University of Agriculture, Peshawar in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN AGRICULTURAL

CHEMISTRY
Approved by:
Chairman Supervisory Committee

Prof. Dr. Hamid Ullah Shah
Member (Major)
Prof. Dr. Jehangir Khan Khalil
Member (Minor)
Prof. Dr. Muhammad Arif
Department of Agronomy
Chairman/Convener Board of Studies

Prof. Dr. Hamid Ullah Shah
Dean Faculty of Nutrition Sciences

Prof. Dr. Alam Zeb
Director Advanced Studies & Research

Prof. Dr. Farhatullah
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY

FACULTY OF NUTRITION SCIENCES
THE UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, PESHAWAR
KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA -PAKISTAN
APRIL, 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter No. Title Page No.
ABSTRACT.........................................................................................i-ii
VITA....................................................................................................iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...................................................................iv
LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................vii
LIST OF APPENDICES......................................................................viii
I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................1
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE...............................................................6
2.1. Seed Priming...........................................................................8
2.2. Halo Priming............................................................................9
2.3. Moringa Leaf Extract priming....................................................12
2.4. Hormonal priming.....................................................................14
III. MATERIAL AND METHODS..............................................................22
3.1. Laboratory Experiment.............................................................28
3.2. Statistical Analysis...................................................................35
IV. RESULTS...........................................................................................36
4.1. Laboratory Experiments..........................................................52
V. DISCUSSION.....................................................................................71
5.1. Germination.............................................................................71
5.2. Fresh/dry shoot weight of seedling.........................................72
5.3. Fresh/dry root weight of seedling............................................73
5.4. Length of seedling/plant..........................................................73
.....................................................
5.5. Number of secondary roots 75
VI. SUMMARAY......................................................................................78
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMMENDATIONS..............................80
7.1 Conclusions............................................................................80
7.2 Recommendations..............................................................80
VIII. LITERATURE CITED.........................................................................81
APPENDICES....................................................................................91
Ghazal Miraj and Hamid Ullah Shah
Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Faculty of Nutrition Sciences

The University of Agriculture, Peshawar Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-Pakistan
April, 2012
ABSTRACT
A series of laboratory experiments were conducted to study the effect of seed

priming on emergence, seedling growth of Maize (Zea mays L.) at the University
of Agriculture,Faisalabad. Different sources of Salts for Halopriming (1 % P)
including KH2PO4, MLE and DAP along with amended solutions of MLE (20 g l -1
KOH, 15 g l-1 NaOH and 12.5 g l-1 Na2CO3) were used as priming treatments.
Water primed and dry seed were used as control in the experiments. Seeds were
primed for 16 h and then air- dried were sown in the Germination trays for the
seedling growth parameters. Seedlings from trays were cut at 21 days old stage.
Laboratory tests were carried out on the primed seeds. Germination test of
primed and non-primed seed was carried out in Peat Moss 7 days after
emergence, 14 days after emergence and 21 days after emergence. Halo
priming of maize seed for 16 h reduced the time for germination. Primed seeds
showed higher vigor than unprimed seeds as reflected in fresh and dry shoot
weights, fresh shoot height and P shoot content as compared with non-primed
seedlings.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Praise be to Almighty Allah the cherisher and sustainer of the world and
the Holy Prophet Muhammad (may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him) the
Final Messenger sent by Allah to the Inhabitants of Earth.
I am thankful to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Hamid Ullah Shah, Department of
Agricultural Chemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar for his guidance
throughout the period to accomplish my dissertation.
I am thankful to Prof. Dr. Muhammad Arif, Department of Agronomy, The
University of Agriculture, Peshawar for his cooperation and timely guidance.
I consecrate my sincere thanks to my department staff specially Mr. Taj
Malook and Mr. Taj Muhammad for their worthy technical support my research
work.
Thanks are also extended to higher education commission, Islamabad
Pakistan for financial support and ECW, Bangor University, Wales UK, for
technical facilitation to successfully compete this study.
Last but not least, I sincerely and cordially pay humble and heartedly
thanks to my affectionate parents, brother and sister for their moral and financial
support and encouraging attitude throughout my studies.
Ghazal Miraj
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO.
4.1 Seedling growth parameters as affected by priming Solutions..............37
4.2 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming.............................37
4.3 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming...............................40
4.4 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by seed priming.......................41
4.5 Dry root weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming...................................43
4.6 Seedling height (cm) as affected by priming..........................................43
4.7 Number of secondary roots as affected by priming................................49

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE NO.
4.1 Fresh shoot weight of seedlings as affected by Priming.........................38
4.2 Fresh root weight of seedlings as affected by priming............................40
4.3 Dry shoot weight of seedling as affected by priming..............................41
4.4 Maize emergence (%) as affected by priming........................................54
4.5 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming.............................57
4.6 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming...............................59
4.7 Shoot height (cm) as affected by Seed priming .....................................60
4.8 Root length (cm) as affected by Seed priming........................................62
4.9 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming........................63
4.10 Dry root weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming..........................65

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX NO. TITLE PAGE NO.
1. Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) of halo priming 91
2. Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant-1) of halo priming...91
3. Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1) of halo priming. . .91
4. Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant-1) of halo priming......92
5. Analysis of variance of seedling height (cm) of halo priming.............92
6. Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) MLE Priming… 96
7. Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant-1) MLE Priming......96
8. Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1) MLE Priming......96
9. Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant-1) MLE Priming.........97
10. Analysis of variance of shoot height (cm) MLE Priming.....................97

11. Analysis of variance of Number of secondary roots MLE Priming.....99
12. Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) Hormonal

Priming..............................................................................................101
13. Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant-1) Hormonal Priming

101
14. Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1) Hormonal Priming
101
15. Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant-1) of two years

average data.....................................................................................102
16. Analysis of variance of shoot height (cm) Hormonal Priming102
17. Analysis of variance of P concentration (%) Hormonal Priming.......102
18. Analysis of variance of P uptake (g plant -1) Hormonal Priming103
19. Analysis of variance of cobs weight (kg plot-1) Hormonal Priming. . .103
20. Analysis of variance of plant height (cm) Hormonal Priming 103

21. Analysis of Variance of Fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) Combined
Effect of Priming................................................................................106
22. Analysis of Variance of Fresh root weight (g plant -1) Combined Effect
of Priming..........................................................................................106
23. Analysis of Variance of shoot height (cm) Combined Effect of

Priming……………………………………………………………………107
24. Analysis of Variance of root height (cm) Combined Effect of

Priming…………...............................................................................107
25. Analysis of Variance of Dry shoot weight (g plant -1) Combined Effect
of Priming..........................................................................................107
26. Analysis of Variance of Dry root weight (g plant-1) Combined Effect of

Priming..............................................................................................108
I. INTRODUCTION
Maize is one among the few highly cultivated cereal crops that were originated in the Western
Hemisphere. Studies informed that maize was originated in Guatemala the southern Mexico about
seven to ten millennium ago. Similar to other cereal crops, maize was aroused from a weedy, wild
species native to that location. Information collected about origin of maize and studies of past
sixty years suggests that parent of modern maize crop was teosinte (Zea mays L.: MLE.
Mexicana) (Wilkes, 2004). Despite the fact that the transition of maize from a wild species to a
modern cultivated species was similar to other crops in many aspects, however, has had some
different properties, other than its origin in the Western Hemisphere. Maize is a cross-pollinated
species with unique and separate male (tassel) and female (ear) organs. Today’s modern maize is
a C4 photosynthesis- explorative crop having high genetic potential.
In the list of cereal crops of world maize ranks second following wheat in terms of
production. However, in developing countries Africa and Latin America maize ranks first
in Asia maize is at third rank after wheat and rice in production. Maize is grown in more
than seventy countries of the world including 53 developing countries. More than eleven
billion tonnes of maize is produced in year 2017-18 with a total growing area of more
than 190 million hectares. Largest producer of maize is United States of America which
alone contributes 52.2 % share in total world production of maize with a production of
about 600 million tonnes after USA the second largest maize producing country in the
world is China. (FAO 2018-19).
Seed priming, in its simplest form, is a technology whereby seeds are
soaked in water or osmotic solutions (Parera and Cantliffe, 1994) immediately
before sowing. This allows seeds to imbibe water to proceed to the first stage of
germination which speeds up seedling emergence and improves crop
establishment in a range of crops. Priming-induced vigorous early growth, earlier
flowering and hastened maturity can also lead to increased yields (Bhati and
Rathore, 1986; Harris, 1996).
Priming is a viable technology to enhance rapid and uniform emergence,
high vigor, and better yields in field crops (Harris et al., 2002; Giri and Schillinger,
2003; Murungu et al., 2004). The soaking induces a range of bio-chemical

changes in the seed that are required to start the germination process (breaking
of dormancy, hydrolysis and/or metabolization of inhibitors, imbibition and
enzyme:activation).
Priming with water produces significant enhancements in plant growth and
yield; there is also evidence that seeds can be primed with dilute solutions of
nutrients to overcome deficiencies in specific situations. Treating or priming the
seeds with small amounts of nutrients has been shown to partially overcome
nutrient immobilization problem in soils and to increase nutrient use efficiency.
Seed dressing of limiting nutrients has been advocated as a low-cost and
highly effective approach since the 1970’s (Roberts, 1973), and still is an
attractive solution to overcome poor establishment and P & Zn deficiencies
(Asgedom and Becker, 2001; Ros et al., 2000). Seedling performance can be
enhanced by phosphorus priming, which is directly related to seed P content
(DeMarco, 1990; Derrick and Ryan, 1998).

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Seed priming
Nutrients must be supplied through proper crop management practices (Ali
et. al., 2008). Crop nutrient could be provided through different application methods
including soil and foliar application, farm yard manure etc. Each method has the
potential to affect plant nutrition both in the treated plant directly and in the
progeny plants through enrichment of the seeds by nutrient treatment (Johnson
et. al., 2005).
The other recently emerging technique is seed priming. The technique of
seed priming improves plant stands and provides benefits in terms of early
maturity, reduced disease and increased yields in a range of crops in rain-fed
areas as well as in irrigated crops grown (Rashid et al., 2002). Increased maize
emergence percentage, time and uniformity of emergence especially under
suboptimal temperatures are reported by Sung and Chang (1993). These

improvements may be due to the fact that priming causes quantitative changes in
biochemical content of the seeds.
Gallardo et al., (2001) observed an increase in polypeptides during the
priming treatment in Arabidopsis. Similar observations of storage protein
mobilization were made during the priming of sugar beet seed (Job et al., 1997).
2.2 Halo Priming
When a dry seed is kept in water, the uptake of water occurs in three
stages (Bewely and Black, 1997). Varier et al., (2010) reviewed that during
priming, imbibition takes place where there is a rapid initial water uptake due to
the seed’s low water potential. During this phase, proteins are synthesized using
existing mRNA and DNA and mitochondria are repaired. In second step, there is
a slow increase in seed water content, but physiological activities associated with
germination are initiated, including synthesis of proteins and new mitochondria.
At last there is a rapid uptake of water where the process of germination is
completed resulting in radical emergence. First and second stages are the
foundations of successful seed priming where the seed is brought to a seed
moisture content that is just short of radical protrusion (Akers and Holey, 1986;
Bray, 1995). The pattern of water uptake during priming is similar to that during
germination but the rate of uptake is slower and controlled.
Hydro primingis effective over a wide range of production environments
(non-primed yields ranged from 1.1 t h -1 to 6.3 t ha-1) including both rainfed and
irrigated conditions and salt-affected soils. The extra maize grain is produced
varying from 0.3 t ha-1 to about 1.4 t ha -1 and represents increases ranging from
17% to 76% (Harris et al., 2001).
Maize seed priming for 24 h with water by Harris et al., (2002) resulted in
increased total biomass, ear weight and grain yield under saline conditions. Direct
benefits of faster emergence, better and uniform stands, less need to re-sow,
more vigorous plants, better drought tolerance, earlier flowering, earlier stage
and higher grain yield in maize, upland rice, chickpea and maize and for sorghum
were observed.
Gerber and Caplan (1989) analyzed seed of the sh2 sweet corn cv. Xtra
Sweet 82 as they were soaked in aerated distilled water at 20 0C for 0, 1.5, 6, 12,
24 or 48 h and seed germination was assessed after surface drying. Priming
significantly reduced the percentage of un-germinated seeds at 10 d. Seedling
emergence increased in response to priming for up to 24 h but decreased
thereafter. It was suggested that soaking for 48 h could have proved detrimental
as a result of physical damage to the exposed radical or from excessive
metabolite leakage.
Hydro primingstudy was carried by Farooq et al., (2008) on late sown
wheat using treatments of tap water soaking for 14 h, soaking in aerated distilled
water for 24 h, soaking in tap water at 27 ± 3 0C for 12 h and re-drying to initial
moisture content. Dry seeds were used as control. Seed priming techniques
significantly enhanced seedling emergence, improved stand establishment, tiller
numbers, grain and straw yield and harvest index, while plant height, number of
spikelets, number of grains and 1000 grain weight remained statistically
unaffected.
Rashid et al., (2004) tested the effect of ‘on-farm’ seed Hydro primingof
mungbean (Vigna radiata). Seed priming was significantly better than non-
priming with a mean yield increase of 56 %. Benefits from priming were the result
of a combination of faster germination/emergence and more vigorous growth and
development, leading to better crop stands and bigger, more productive plants.
Rashid et al., (2006) carried out microplot, on-station and on-farm field
experiments and participatory trials in several environments, including saline,
saline–sodic and normal (non-saline, non-sodic) soils to assess the effect of
priming on barley yields. Grain yield increases due to priming were up to 53% in
the participatory trials. The response to priming was better in low potential
environments than under better conditions. Priming was also more advantageous
on saline-sodic than on saline soils, possibly as a result of the water content of
the soil.
Similarly Harris and Jones (1997) showed that germination time of rice
cultivars from West Africa was reduced to 50% after Hydro primingfor 12-24 h. In
agreement with these findings, several other reports showed improved and early
seedling emergence in different crops like sorghum, millet, cotton, beans, and
maize as a result of Hydro priming(Harris et al., 1999; Rashid et al., 2002;
Murungu et al., 2004;) and okra with different sources of P (Shah et al., 2011).
Several reasons have been proposed to explain the observed stimulation
in early and total germination. Many process that inhibit seed germination, are
triggered by priming and persist. When seeds imbibe, the water content reaches
a plateau and changes little until radical emergence (Bradford, 1986). The seed
priming technique is recommended by Harris et al., (2001) as a key technology, a
low cost, low risk intervention to make a significant impact on maize production in
a wide range of environments. Also primed seed stored at low temperature (5C)
show best germination performance and better seedling growth which may be
the reason for higher seedling dry weight of the primed seed stored at 5C for six
months (Kang et al., 1996).
2.3 Moringa Leaf Extract priming
Seed priming using micronutrient has been developed to address the
micronutrient deficiency in many parts of world. Ullah et al., (2002a) studied the
pre-sowing seed treatment with water and different micronutrient solutions i.e.
ZnSO4, MnSO4 and FeSO4 on field emergence of raya. The seedling emergence
and early growth, fresh and dry weight of roots and shoots were increased
significantly by these seed treatments except FeSO 4. Likewise Hong-FaShui et
al., (1996) observed that maize seed priming with the solutions of 0.3% CaCl2,
0.1% ZnSO4 or both (1:1) for 24 h. Ca 2+ or Zn2+ alone or in combination increased
the germination rate, seed vigor, seedling fresh weight and height, and root
length and numbers. The greatest effects were observed with Ca 2+ and Zn2+ in
combination. Johnson et al., (2005) documented that micronutrient (Zn, B and Mo)
seed priming of legumes i.e. chick pea, lentil and cowpea resulted in increased rate
of germination as compared to control. The seed micronutrient content was also
increased as in Zn ranging from 40-60 to 500-800 mg kg-1; B from 10 to 80-

100 mg kg-1; and Mo from 3 to 300 mg kg-1. This revealed that micronutrient seed
priming provides a simple, resourceful method for enhancing micronutrient uptake
for the plant.
Priming the maize seed with dilute aqueous solution of ZnSO 4 is reported
by Harris et al., (2007a). Results of the study reveal that 1% Zn solution
increased the amount of Zn in or on the seed from about 15–560 mg kg -1 through
priming. Zinc primed maize produced heavier seedlings as recorded at two
growth stages (14 DAS and 21 DAS) than those from seeds primed with water
alone. This might be due to fact that additional Zn stimulated seedling vigour as
noted by Slaton et al., (2001). Likewise Harris et al., (2007b) observed that wheat
seed primed with 0.3% Zn and chickpea in 0.05% Zn showed increased nutrient
concentration in wheat (27 to 470 mg Zn kg -1) and in chickpea (49 to 780 mg Zn
kg-1). Also wheat seeds primed with 0.3% Zn significantly increased shoot dry
mass, Zn concentration and uptake of 15-day-old seedlings as compared to non-
primed and water primed seeds. Mean grain yield of wheat was significantly
increased up to 6% by Hydro primingand to 14% by priming with 0.3% Zn. Mean
grain yield of chickpea in seven trials was increased significantly from 1.39 to
1.65 t ha-1 (19%) by priming seeds with 0.05% Zn.
Guo et al., (1992) carried out field trials in which, zinc sulfate was applied
to maize by soaking seed for 12 h in 0.02 or 0.05% solution, by mixing 2.5 kg
seed with 15 g zinc sulfate and a little water or by spraying seedlings with 0.1 or
0.2% zinc sulfate when 20 cm tall. Seed treatments hastened development and
mixing the seed with zinc sulfate increased yield components and ultimately
enhanced the crop yield. Seed treatments significantly increased yields from 2.2
to 165.2%. Likewise, Barsoom (1998) carried out pot experiments, in which
maize seeds were pretreated by soaking in single or mixed solutions of ZnSO 4,
CuSO4, MnSO4 or FeSO4, or the same solutions were applied to the soil, or as a
foliar spray. The effects of these treatments on growth and uptake of Mn and Zn
were significant.
The priming of wheat seed in water, 0.2% Zn, 0.3% P and 0.3% P+ 0.2%
Zn has also reported an increase in yield components including number of plants
m-2, number of tillers m-2, number of grains spike-1, thousand grain weight, grain
yield and biological yield as compared to control by Ali et al., (2008). Wheat
priming with water and 0.2% gypsum has also proven to improve crop
emergence, early maturity and hence yield per hectare by Rajpar et al., (2006).
2.5 Hormonal priming
Macronutrient priming especially phosphorus priming has also proven to
improve growth and yield of different crops including maize, wheat, barley,
sorghum, rice and mung bean. Results reported by Asgedom and Becker (2001)
indicated that seed priming (Water, P and Zn) on barley, sorghum, maize, millet
and rice raised the nutrient content of primed rice seeds by 2500 mg P and 10
mg Zn per seed. Nutrient amounts of primed sorghum seeds were only 0.14 mg
P and 2.1 mg Zn per seed. It was observed that 56-91% of P and 90% of Zinc
were absorbed into the seed; the remaining amount was adhering to the seed
coat. Two week old seedling grown from water, P or Zn primed seeds showed
more growth than unprimed seeds as reflected in plant height, leaf area and
biomass accumulation. P primed rice seeds accumulated up to 56% more
seedling biomass than unprimed seedlings. Whereas, seedlings grown from Zn
primed seeds accumulated only 6% more biomass than from unprimed
seedlings.
Similar results were attributed by Ajouri et al., (2004) who reported that
Barley seeds soaked in water, P, Zn, and P + Zn solutions, increased
germination rate from 65-95%. The germination also advanced up to 3 days as
compared to non-primed seeds. Nutrient priming solution enhanced growth by 4-
week-old seedlings. Phosphorus and zinc content and uptake of the seeds were
also increased.
The optimum level of P and Zn concentration for Maize seed germination
and growth is important. In order to evaluate the average level for P and Zn
concentration for maize seed, Arif et al., (2005) conducted a study using 1% P,
2% P, 1% P + 2% Zn and 2% P + 2% Zn priming treatments. Water primed and
dry seeds were also used in the experiment. Air dried primed maize seeds were
sown in pots (40 cm diameter and 30cm height) in silt medium. The priming had
significant effect on total emergence. Maximum emergence was observed in
water primed seed (100%) followed by seed primed in 2% P + 2% Zn (90%).
Seedling having 1% P + 2% Zn treatment showed more fresh and dry weights as
compared to control. Leguminous crop mung bean had also positive affect due
to Phosphorus priming as observed by Shah et al., (2012). Mung bean seed
primed with 0.01 % and 0.02% P resulted in increased seedling (14 and 21 days
old) fresh and dry biomass, shoot height, nutrient content and uptake as
compared to water primed and dry seed. The nutrient content of the seed primed
with 0.01% P was increased from 3.300 to 7.250 mg g -1 and up to 7.480 mg g-1
with 0.02% P. The P content was decreased by surface washing up to 5.76%
and 4.717% in 0.01% and 0.02 % P primed seed, respectively.
Khalil et al., (2010) reported that priming wheat for 10 hrs with different
P2O5 solutions (0.1, 0.2 and 0.3%) and water decreased time for emergence, and
increased dry matter (DM) production as compared to control. Maximum DM
yield (6051 kg ha-1) was obtained from seeds primed with 0.2% P2O5 solution.
III. MATERIAL AND METHODS
To study the effect of seed priming using different sources of Chemicals
on Germination and seedling growth of maize (cv. Azam), mini plot and field
experiments were conducted at Post Graduate Lab, PBG Department University
of Agriculture during 2019-20. Laboratory experiments were conducted in order
to assess the effect of selected P sources on emergence, seedling growth.
Table 3.1 Physico-Chemical Property of Peat Moss
Property Value
pH 1:1 8.1
EC x103 (dS m-1) 0.11
Organic Matter (%) 0.591
CaCO3 (%) 17.250
Textural Class Loam
P (mg kg-1) 8.706
K (mg kg-1) 181.28
N (%) 0.046
3.1 Solution Preparation
Experiments were conducted to compare the relative effectiveness of
priming maize seeds with a 1% P solution derived from (potassium di hydrogen
phosphate) KH2PO4, single superphosphate (MLE) and diammonium phosphate
(DAP). To prepare solutions containing 1% P, the calculated amount (Table 3.2)
each of MLE, DAP and KH 2PO4 was dissolved in one liter of distilled water. The
suspensions of MLE and DAP formed were shaken occasionally during 24 hours
and the supernatant liquid was decanted and used to prime seeds. Using MLE as
a source of P, the effect on pH, EC and osmotic potential of adding various
amounts of commonly available alkalis (NaOH, KOH and Na 2CO3) to the P
solution was tested. A 1% P solution was made using MLE and known amounts
of NaOH, KOH or Na2CO3 were added to it (Table 3.2). Solutions of 1% P using
MLE alone and KH2PO4 were included for comparison. The pH of the solutions
was measured as noted in Table 3.2 and electrical conductance (EC) was
measured using a Solubridge conductivity meter.

Table 3.3 S o m e properties of MLE solution (1% P) amended with
different alkalis
Solution Alkali Alkali added pH EC Osmotic potential
g l-1 dSm-1 MPa
MLE -- -- 2.80 16.22 -0.59
MLE KOH 10.0 5.20 21.08 -0.77
MLE KOH 15.0 7.14 28.40 -1.03
MLE KOH 20.0 8.32 37.70 -1.39
MLE NaOH 10.0 6.30 22.2 -0.81
MLE NaOH 15.0 8.0 37.90 -1.38
MLE NaOH 20.0 11.12 48.4 -1.76
MLE Na2CO3 10.0 3.89 11.49 -0.42
MLE Na2CO3 12.5 5.09 12.11 -0.44
MLE Na2CO3 15.0 5.57 12.96 -0.47
KH2PO4 -- -- 5.60 31.7 -1.16

3.1.1 Seedling Growth:
Five plants from each plot were harvested at 21 days after sowing (DAS)
along with the roots. Roots were cut and washed thoroughly with tap water. The
plant seedlings and roots were dried with tissue paper. Following growth
parameters were recorded from the seedlings collected.
1. Fresh shoot and root weight (g plant-1)
The seedlings harvested were separately washed with distilled water. The
roots were cut from the shoots at radical and thoroughly washed with distilled
water. The shoot and roots were then weighed in grams for fresh biomass.
2. Seedling height (cm)
The shoot and root length were measured separately of each seedling
from the radical to the tip of leaf.
3. Dry shoot and root weight (g plant-1)
Data on dry matter of seedling (root and shoot) were recorded by keeping
the fresh samples in oven at 80 0C for 48 hrs in paper bags and then weighed
after complete drying. The dried shoots were grinded for determination of P
content as described in section 3.6.
3.2 Laboratory Experiments
3.2.1 Laboratory experiments were conducted in order to assess the effect of

selected P sources on emergence, seedling growth and mobilization of P in
maize in low P soil. Seedling Growth:
Five plants from each plot were harvested at 21 days after sowing (DAS)
along with the roots. Roots were cut and washed thoroughly with tap water. The
plant seedlings and roots were dried with tissue paper. Following growth
parameters were recorded from the seedlings collected.
3.2.2 Fresh shoot and root weight (g plant-1)
roots were cut from the shoots at radical and thoroughly washed with distilled
water. The shoot and roots were then weighed in grams for fresh biomass.
3.2.3 Seedling height (cm)
The shoot and root length were measured separately of each seedling
from the radical to the tip of leaf.
3.2.4 Dry shoot and root weight (g plant-1)
the fresh samples in oven at 80 0C for 48 hrs in paper bags and then weighed
after complete drying. The dried shoots were grinded for determination of P
content as described in section 3.6.
3.4.1. Effect on emergence of priming seeds with solutions

On the basis of field experiments’ results, three treatments including
water, KH2PO4 (1 % P) and MLE (1% P + 20 g l -1 KOH) were selected to test the
maize response to priming at P deficient soil. Seeds were primed for 16hrs with
the given treatments and were than air dried for half hour. The seed (10 Nos.)
were sown in low P soil (1.005 mg P; 3.9% moisture) in tray pots in 3cm depth.
The trays were divided into 4 equal portions (A, B, C and D) and the treatments
were assigned randomly to each portion. Five trays were used each representing
one replication and they were kept in growth cabinet under 25 OC temperature
and 80% humidity conditions. Number of emerging seedlings was counted at 6 hr
time interval till maximum emergence and emergence percent was calculated
against control.
a. Fresh Weight (g plant-1):
roots were cut from the shoots at radical and thoroughly washed with
distilled water. The shoot and roots were then weighed in grams for fresh
biomass.
b. Height (cm):
The shoot and root heights were measured separately of each seedling from
the radical to the tip of leaf. Each leaf was then carefully removed from the
stalk and was kept in paper bags for drying.
c. Dry weight (g plant-1):
the fresh samples in oven at 80 0C for 48 hrs in paper bags and then
weighed after complete drying.

IV. RESULTS
i. Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1)
Mean seedling fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) data are presented in Table
4.2. Average data showed significant difference among treatment means. It could
be noted from the data that higher fresh shoot weight (7.286 g plant -1) was
observed in the seedlings primed with KH2PO4 1% P which was significantly at
par with MLE 1% P + 20g l-1 KOH (6.343 g plant-1).
Table 4.2 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming

Treatment 2008 2009 Average
Control 4.453 c 3.754 4.104 c
H2O 5.955 b 4.673 5.314 bc
KH2PO4 (1%P) 8.704 a 5.868 7.286 a
MLE (1% P) 6.604 b 2.189 4.397 c
MLE 1% P + 20g l-1 KOH 7.371 ab 5.314 6.343 ab
DAP (1 % P) 6.906 b 3.466 4.587 bc
LSD < 0.05 1.490 NS 1.506
Means of the same category followed by different letters are significantly different
from one another at p=0.05 using LSD test.
8.000
Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1)
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
NP
H20 KH2PO4 ML MLE+KO DAP
( E H
Treatments
Figure 4.1 Average Fresh shoot weight of seedlings as affected by

Seed priming
This was followed by fresh weight recorded from DAP 1% P (4.587 g plant -
1
) and water primed seedlings (5.314 g plant-1) which were significantly at
similar level with each other. Lower shoot weight (4.104 7.286 g plant -1) was
observed in non primed seedlings.
ii. Fresh Root weight (g plant-1)
Table 4.3 represents data of fresh seedling root weight (g plant -1).
Statistical analysis of the average data showed that higher root weight (1.021 g
plant-1) was noted from the seedlings primed with KH 2PO4 1% P that was
significantly at similar level with MLE 1% P + 20g l -1 KOH (0.999 g plant-1), DAP
1 % P (0.955 g plant-1) and water (0.838 g plant-1). Lower fresh root weight was
observed from the non primed seedlings (0.701 g plant -1) that was significantly at
similar level with seedling primed with MLE 1% P (0.583 g plant-1).
iii. Dry shoot weight (g plant-1)
Table 4.4 represents data regarding average dry shoot weight of
seedlings. Average data pertaining dry shoot weight revealed that priming
significantly increased the dry seedling weight. It was clear from the data that
higher dry shoot weight (1.267 g plant -1) was observed from seedlings primed
with KH2PO4 1% P which was significantly at similar level with MLE 1% P + 20g
L-1 KOH (0.807 g plant-1). This was followed by dry shoot weight recorded from
DAP 1 % P (0.744 g plant -1) and water (0.709 g plant -1). Lower dry weight was
noted from MLE 1 % P treated seedlings (0.541 %) and control plot seedlings
(0.521 g plant-1) which at similar significance level to each other.
Table 4.3 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming
Control 0.707 c 0.694 a 0.701 cd

H2O 0.887 abc 0.789 a 0.838 bc
KH2PO4 (1%P) 1.153 a 0.845 a 1.021 a
MLE (1% P) 0.814 bc 0.351 b 0.583 d
MLE 1% P + 20g l-1 KOH 1.191 a 0.807 a 0.999 ab
DAP (1 % P) 1.073 ab 0.836 ab 0.955 ab
LSD < 0.05 0.3254 0.2818 0.1627
1.200
1.000
Fresh root weight (g plant-1)
0.800
0.600
0.400
0.200
0.000
NP
H20 KH2PO4 ML MLE+KO DAP
E H
Treatments
Figure 4.2 Average Fresh root weight of seedlings as affected by

priming
Table 4.4 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by seed priming
Control 0.565 c 0.4763 0.521 c
H2O 0.819 bc 0.598 0.709 bc
KH2PO4 (1%P) 1.905 a 0.629 1.267 a
MLE (1% P) 0.879 bc 0.204 0.541 c
MLE 1% P + 20g l-1 KOH 1.022 b 0.592 0.807 a
DAP (1 % P) 0.996 b 0.491 0.744 bc
LSD < 0.05 0.4188 NS 0.2636
1.400
1.200
1.000
Dry shoot wt (g plant-1)
0.800
0.600
0.400
0.200
0.000
NP H20 KH2PO4 MLE MLE+KO DAP
H
Treatments
Figure 4.3 Average Dry shoot weight of seedling as affected by priming
iv. Dry root weight (g plant-1)
Data pertaining dry root weight (g plant -1) of seedling as affected by
priming is presented in Table 4.5. Statistical analysis of the data indicated that
priming had non-significantly affected the dry root weight of seedling during two
years. However, it can be seen from the data that higher dry root weight (0.248 g
plant-1) was observed from the seedlings primed with KH 2PO4 1% P while lower
dry root weight was observed from the seedlings primed with MLE 1% P (0.138 g
plant-1).
v. Seedling height (cm)
Table 4.6 represents data regarding seedling height as affected by
phosphorus priming. The data showed non-significant difference among the
mean values of seedling height. Longest seedlings (40.89 cm) were recorded in
plots primed with KH2PO4 (1% P) while shorter height (29.12 cm) was noted in
seedlings treated with MLE 1 % P.
vi. Shoot P concentration (%)
Statistical analysis of shoot P concentration (%) indicated that priming
significantly affected the P concentration of seedling (Table 4.7). Average shoot
P concentration data showed that higher P (0.107 %) was noted in KH 2PO4 1% P
that was significantly at same level with MLE 1% P + 20g L-1 KOH (0.092 %) and
MLE 1% P (0.084 %). Lower P concentration (0.039 %) was recorded in non-

primed seedling which was significantly at par with DAP 1 % P primed seedlings
(0.054 %).
Table 4.5 Dry root weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming

Control 0.145 0.215 0.180
H2O 0.158 0.232 0.195
KH2PO4 (1%P) 0.255 0.240 0.248
MLE (1% P) 0.175 0.100 0.138
MLE 1% P + 20g l-1 KOH 0.202 0.207 0.205
DAP (1 % P) 0.193 0.157 0.175
LSD < 0.05 NS NS NS
Table 4.6 Seedling height (cm) as affected by Seed priming

Control 32.67 34.97 33.82
H2O 38.11 37.20 37.66
KH2PO4 (1%P) 42.23 39.55 40.89
MLE (1% P) 36.04 22.20 29.12
MLE 1% P + 20g l-1 KOH 43.39 38.01 40.70
DAP (1 % P) 41.01 31.90 36.46
LSD < 0.05 NS NS NS

i. Number of secondary roots
Data regarding Number of secondary roots are presented in Table 4.11.
Statistical analysis of the data indicated that Number of secondary roots was
significantly affected by priming. Average data of two years revealed that more
grains (421 per cob) were observed in plots primed with KH 2PO4 1 % P. This was
followed by number of grains recorded from water primed plants (377) which was
significantly at similar level with DAP 1 % P treated plants (372). Lesser number
of grains per cob (325) were noted in plants primed with MLE 1% P and in control
plants (335) which significantly at par with each other.
ii. Grain weight cob-1 (gm)
Table 4.12 represents the data of grain weight cob -1 (gm) as affected by
different priming treatments. It was clear from the data that priming significantly
affected the grain weight cob-1. Average data showed that similar significance
level of highest grain weight cob -1 (133.09 gm) was noted in plants primed with
KH2PO4 1% P and water (123.76 gm). Lowest grain weight cob -1 (99.95 gm) was
noted in control plots which was significantly at par with MLE 1% P + 20g L-1
KOH (106.36 gm), DAP 1% P (105.66 gm) and MLE 1 % P (100.38 gm).
Table 4.11 Number of secondary roots as affected by Seed priming
T1 (Control) 422 bc 247 c 335 cd
T2 (H2O) 475 ab 279 bc 377 b
T3 (KH2PO4 1%P) 477 a 364 a 421 a
T4 (MLE 1% P) 381 c 269 c 325 d
T5 (MLE 1% P + 20g L-1 KOH) 410 c 327 bc 369 bc
T6 (DAP 1 % P) 469 ab 276 ab 372 b
LSD < 0.05 54.40 57.76 35.78
4.3 Laboratory Experiment
i. Emergence (%) of maize seed
Data pertaining to germination rate of maize seed primed with water and
different P sources are presented in Figure 4.1. Data clearly indicated early
germination of the seed primed with P solutions. Data showed that early
germination (3.33%) was noted from the seed primed with water after 48 hr of
sowing, which was followed by seed primed with KH 2PO4 1% P (3.33 %) after 54
hours of sowing.
Figure 4.6 Maize emergence (%) as affected by SEED priming
ii. P concentration (µg g-1 seed wt) of Imbibed (surface washed and non-
washed) seed
It was clear from the data (Figure 4.2) that maximum phosphorus content
(20.4288 ug g-1 seed wt) was noted from the seed in which KH 2PO4 1% P was
used. Similarly, minimum P content (0.01848 ug P g -1 seed wt) was noted from
NP seed. Table 2 also presents data regarding P concentration of imbibed
surface washed seed in which seed were primed with P treatments. It can be
seen from the data that more phosphorus concentration (14.4588 µg g -1 seed wt)
was recorded from the seeds for which KH 2PO4 1% P was used for priming,
while less (0.01848 µg P g-1 seed wt) was noted from the NP seeds.
iii. Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) after 3 growth stages
Data pertaining to fresh shoot weight primed with water and different P
treatments are presented in Table 4.17. Statistical analysis of the data revealed
that fresh shoot weight was significantly affected by priming. Mean values of the
1st stage data indicated that higher (1.69 g plant -1) fresh shoot weight was noted
in the plots whose seed were primed with MLE (1% P) + KOH solution, while
lower fresh shoot weight (1.13 g plant-1) was recorded in control plots. However
in 2nd stage, seedlings treated with KH2PO4 had highest fresh weight (2.67 g
plant-1) which was followed by the seedlings primed with water (2.30 g plant -1).
Similar results were observed in third stage with higher fresh weight (3.27 g plant-
1
) of seedlings primed with KH2PO4. Lower weight was observed in non primed
seedlings (2.88 g plant-1), which was significantly at similar level with water (2.90
g plant-1) and MLE + KOH (2.97 g plant-1) primed seeds.
Figure 4.7 Phosphorus content (µg g-1 seed wt) of washed and non-
washed seed
Table 4.17 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) of 3 growth stages as affected

by Seed priming
Treatments 1st Stage 2nd stage 3rd stage
Non primed 1.13 g 1.70 ef 2.88 ab
H2O 1.33 fg 2.30 cd 2.90 ab
KH2PO4 1.49 fg 2.67 bc 3.18 a
MLE + KOH 1.69 ef 2.12 de 2.97 ab
KH2PO4 1.22 fg 2.22 d 3.27 a
LSD < 0.05 0.4468
Figure 4.8 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming in low
P soil
iv. Fresh root weight (g plant-1) of three growth stages
Analysis of the data indicated that various P treatments used in seed
priming had significant effect on dry shoot weight after 1 st stage (Table 4.18). It is
clear from the data that higher fresh root weight (1.83 g plant -1) was noted from
the plots in which MLE + KOH was used. Similarly, low root weight (0.97 g plant -
1
) was noted from control plots, which was significantly at par with water primed
seedlings (1.04 g plant-1). Data regarding 2nd stage of the seedling indicated that
more fresh root weight (4.18 g plant-1) was noted from the plots primed with
water, while less fresh weight (1.11 g plant -1) were noted from control seedlings.
Statistical data regarding fresh root weight of 3 rd stage showed that higher root
weight (4.04 g plant-1) was recorded in seedlings primed with MLE + KOH. Lower
root weight (2.09 g plant-1) was noted in control seedlings.
v. Shoot height (cm) of 3 growth stages as affected by Seed priming
Data pertaining to shoot height of plants primed with water and different P
treatments of 1st stage is presented in Table 4.19. Statistical analysis of the data
revealed that shoot height was significantly affected by water and different Seed
priming solutions. The data revealed that higher shoot height (32.79 cm) was
noted from the seedlings primed with KH 2PO4 (1 % P) which was significantly at
similar level with MLE + KOH (28.53 cm). Lower dry weights (27.24 cm and
28.53 cm) were noted from non-primed and water primed seedlings, respectively
that were significantly at par with each other. Table 4.19 also presents data
regarding shoot height after 2nd stage. Statistical analysis of the data indicated
that shoot height after 2nd stage was significantly affected by priming.
Table 4.18 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) of three growth stages as affected
by Seed priming
Non primed 0.97 f 1.11 ef 2.09 c
H2O 1.04 f 4.18 a 2.89 ab
KH2PO4 1.30 def 3.24 b 3.08 b
MLE + KOH 1.83 cde 2.36 c 4.04 a
KH2PO4 1.07 f 1.88 cd 3.43 b
LSD < 0.05 0.7249
Figure 4.9 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming in

low P soil
Table 4.19 Shoot height (cm) at 3 growth stages as affected by Seed priming
Non primed 27.24 f 34.28 cd 38.74 ab
H2O 28.53 f 38.70 ab 39.11 a
KH2PO4 30.68 ef 38.79 ab 39.87 ab
MLE + KOH 28.53 ef 35.04 bcd 37.97 abc
KH2PO4 32.79 de 39.03 ab 40.94 a
LSD < 0.05 4.094
Figure 4.10 Shoot height (cm) as affected by Seed priming in low P soil
It can be seen from the data that taller (39.03 cm) seedlings were noted
from the plots in which seed was primed with KH 2PO4 (1 % P), while shorter
(34.28 cm) plants were noted from the non-primed seedling which was
significantly at similar level with seedlings height of MLE KOH primed seed
(35.04 cm). Same pattern was observed in 3 rd stage as taller plants (40.94 cm)
were observed of seedlings primed with KH 2PO4 (1 % P) and water primed
seedlings (39.11 cm) which were significantly at par with each other.
vi. Root height (cm) at three growth stages
Data pertaining to root height primed with water and different P treatments
of maize presented in Table 4.20. Statistical analysis of the data revealed non-
significant affect of seed priming with water and different Seed priming solutions
on root height in 1 st stage. Data regarding root height of 2 nd stage. It can be seen
from the data that longer (36.03 cm) roots were recorded from the seed primed
with KH2PO4 (1 % P) which was significantly at par with all other treatments,
while shorter (34.17 cm) plants were noted from the non-primed seedlings.
However in 3rd stage, longer roots (38.48 cm) were observed in seedlings primed
with MLE+KOH while shorter (32.17cm) roots were observed in non-primed and
water primed roots which were at similar level of significance to each other.
vii. Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) at three growth stages
Analysis of the data indicated that various P treatments and water used in
seed priming had significant effect on dry shoot weight after 1 st stage (Table
4.21). It is clear from the data that higher dry weight (0.24 g plant -1) was noted
from the seedlings in which P concentrations were used. However, lowest dry
weight (0.15 g plant-1) was noted from control plants, which was significantly at
par with all other treatments.
Table 4.20 Root length (cm) at three growth stages as affected by Seed
priming
Non primed 24.99 c 34.17 b 32.17 b
H2O 26.46 c 35.92 ab 36.1 b
KH2PO4 26.78 c 36.03 ab 36.11 ab
MLE + KOH 28.09 c 35.75 ab 38.48 a
KH2PO4 25.45 c 36.03 ab 35.71 ab
LSD < 0.05 3.633
Figure 4.11 Root length (cm) as affected by Seed priming
Table 4.21 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) at three growth stages as affected
by Seed priming
Non primed 0.15 e 0.41 ab 0.64 a
H2O 0.26 de 0.42 ab 0.63 a
KH2PO4 0.24 e 0.54 ab 0.72 a
MLE + KOH 0.24 e 0.36 cd 0.63 a
KH2PO4 0.23 e 0.55 ab 0.63 a
LSD < 0.05 0.163
Figure 4.12 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming

Statistical analysis of the 2nd stage data indicated that more dry weight
(0.55 g plant-1) was noted of the seedlings primed with KH 2PO4, while lower dry
weight (0.36 g plant-1) was noted from MLE + KOH primed seedlings.
viii. Dry root weight (g plant-1) at three growth stages
Data pertaining to dry root weight primed with water and different P
treatments is presented in Table 4.22. Statistical analysis of the data revealed
that dry root weight of three growth stages was significantly affected by priming.
Mean values of the 1st stage data showed higher (0.28 g plant -1) dry root weight
in seedling primed with MLE (1% P) + KOH solution, while lower dry root weight
(0.14 g plant-1) was recorded in control seedlings. However in 2 nd stage,
seedlings treated with water had highest dry weight (0.66 g plant -1) while lowest
(0.36 g plant-1) in non prime seedlings. Results regarding third stage showed
maximum dry weight (0.95 g plant-1) of seedlings primed with MLE (1% P) + KOH
which was significantly at similar level with KH 2PO4 (0.71 g plant-1) and water
(0.70 g plant-1) primed seedlings. Minimum (0.57 g plant -1) dry weight was
recorded from the non-prime seedlings.
ix. Leaf P content (µg P leaf-1) at three growth stages
Table 4.23 represents the data regarding leaf phosphorus content as
influenced by Seed priming. Data indicated gradual significant increase in leaf P
content in the three growth stages. In 1 st growth stage (7 DAE) third or youngest
leaf of each treatment showed maximum P content with highest P (1.13570 µg P
leaf-1) in the leaves primed with KH 2PO4 1% P while lowest P was observed in
non-primed leaves (0.20582 µg P leaf-1). Data regarding 2nd growth stage (14
DAE), presented increase in P content showing more P content in leaf 4 of each
treatment which slightly decreased in the leaf 5.
Table 4.22 Dry root weight (g plant-1) at three growth stages as affected
by Seed priming
Non primed 0.14 f 0.36 de 0.57 bcd
H2O 0.19 f 0.66 bc 0.70 ab
KH2PO4 0.19 f 0.58 cd 0.71 ab
MLE + KOH 0.28 ef 0.53 cd 0.95 a
KH2PO4 0.22 ef 0.49 cd 0.75 b
LSD < 0.05 0.2043
Figure 4.13 Dry root weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming

V. DISCUSSION
5.1 Germination
Accelerating and homogenizing the germination process is a prerequisite for
a good crop establishment, the efficient use of resources and eventually to
increase yields. Early germination (3.33%) was noted from the seed primed with
water after 48 hr of sowing in low P soil, which was followed by seed primed with
KH2PO4 1% P (3.33 %) after 54 hours of sowing as compared to non-primed
seed. The low increase in germination may be due to phosphorus deficient soil,
but the observed improvements were attributed to priming-induced quantitative
changes in biochemical content of the seeds and improved membrane integrity and
to the enhanced physiological activities at seed germination. Increased
germination percentage was also reported by Yari et al. (2010) in wheat primed
with 0.5 % KH2PO4. The results of present study are in line with the findings of
Ullah et al. (2002a) who reported beneficial effects on emergence rate of seed
treated with micronutrient. Kurdikeri et al. (1995) recorded similar results in maize
due to seed priming in 2.5% solution of KH2PO4. Fresh/dry shoot weight of
seedling
Viability and vigor of plants have profound influence on the establishment
and yield of crop. Healthy plants with well developed roots and shoots can more
effectively mobilize nutrients and can better withstand adverse conditions.
Increased dry shoot weight results in increased fodder production for livestock on
per unit area basis. Results of the present study indicated increased fresh shoot
and root weight of the seedling. Ullah et al., (2002a) reported maximum values of
shoot length and their fresh and dry weights with ZnSO 4 treatment. Hong Fa-Shui
et al., (1996) also observed similar increase in seedling fresh weight due to
maize seed treatment with 0.1 % ZnSO4. Similarly, Arif et al., (2005) recorded
high fresh shoot weights primed with 1 % P + 2 % Zn as compared to control. In
correspondence to these results shoot dry weights of seedlings treated with
micronutrient were recorded highly significant over control by Pakroo and
Kashirad (1991) and Shaban and Eid (1982). These results are in line with the
finding of Adiloglu et al., (2005). These results were also supported by Pill et al.
(1997) who observed higher seedling shoot fresh and dry masses of primed seed
than non-primed seed.

5.2 Fresh/ dry root weight of seedling
Root growth and development are critical for early phosphorus uptake by
plants since P is relatively unavailable and immobile in many soils. Root growth
depends on P status of the plant. Phosphorus priming had significantly affected
the root biomass. Better root fresh and dry weight in plants raised from primed
seeds might be due to earlier start of emergence as indicated by KH 2PO4 1 % P.
Similar increase in root weight due to priming was also reported by Afzal et al.,
(2006). Similarly Rychter and Randall (1994) observed higher root biomass for
bean plants grown on phosphate deficient medium.
5.3 Length of seedling/plant
Seed priming increased Length of seedling as compared to control. Such
tall seedlings with high competitiveness could be important in suppressing weeds
as these weeds compete with the crop plants for light, water and limiting
nutrients. In correspondence to the present results Ullah et al., (2002a) reported
that ZnSO4 treatment gave the maximum height while FeSO 4 treatments were
recorded low in the control due to late emergence and similar case was studied
in shoot length of seedling. These results are in agreement with the findings of
Farah et al., (1980) and Khan (1981). There was significant increase in seedling
height primed with 50 mM P solution (14.4 cm) over control 12.1 cm (Ajouri et al.,
2004). These results were also in agreement with Shah et al., (2011) who
revealed that priming of okra with different sources of P significantly affects the
plant height as compared to control.
5.4 Number of secondary roots
Number of secondary roots influences directly the final grain yield per
hectare. Number of secondary roots was increased (26 %) by the Seed priming
as compared to control. Arif et al., (2005) had reported similar increase in
Number of secondary roots of maize primed with 0.3 % P.

VI. SUMMARY
Priming of seeds has been shown to have beneficial effects on the
germination, seedling growth, yield and yield components of many species. This
study was therefore proposed to expand the traditional approach of seed priming
by soaking poorly germinating seed of maize in solution of phosphorus. Such
seed-specific fertilization enhances the maize seed quality and vigor.
To study the effects of seed priming on seedling growth and yield of maize
seed, field experiments were conducted at University of Agriculture Faisalabad
during, 2019 and 2020. Halo priming of maize seeds was carried out using
different sources of Salts as treatment. Priming of maize seed was done by
soaking known amount of maize seed in 1% Phosphorus solutions (KH 2PO4,
MLE and DAP) also in water for 16 hrs. Laboratory experiments were conducted
in low P soil under controlled environment in order to assess the affect of Seed
priming on emergence and seedling growth of maize. The time lag between
priming treatments and mobilization of P in the seedling was also studied in the
laboratory experiment by labeling the priming solutions with P33.
For measuring seedling growth, the primed (water and P) and non-prime
seed were sown in mini plot and field. Analysis of average data indicated that
there was significant effect of priming seed with P on fresh and dry shoot
weights, fresh shoot height and also they were richer in P concentration as
compared with seedlings of non-primed seed. Additionally the nutrient uptake of

the 3 week-old seedling, and matured plant seed was also increased due to 1%
Seed priming solution.
Laboratory experiment was carried out to determine the emergence test of
water, nutrient primed and non-primed seed. Germination test revealed early
emergence of radical due to water priming, which was followed by seed early
emergence due to Seed priming using KH 2PO4. The time lag between priming
treatments was also calculated by the emergence experiment.
The seeds primed with solutions (KH 2PO4, MLE, and MLE+20 g l-1 KOH) were
also used to study the the seedling on three different stages (7 DAE, 14 DAE and
21 DAE) using Germination Trays. Leaf and root P data showed that Phosphorus
is effectively mobilized in the plant

due to priming on low P soil and hence helps reduce the P deficiency in maize to
some extent.
VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 CONCLUSIONS
It has been concluded from the research work that:
1. Seed Seed priming resulted in early seed emergence and enhanced
growth and yield of maize.
2. Moringa Leaf Extract priming also increased the seed Vigour by maize.
3. Priming maize with MLE + 20 g l-1 KOH shown also same effects as of
KH2PO4.
4. Hormonal Priming of maize seeds increases Germination and also
lowers time required for germination of maize seeds.
7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
In the light of the conclusion, the following recommendations are made:
1. Seed priming may be used as a tool for boost in seedling growth, yield
and yield components of maize.
2. Seed priming using 1 % concentration of MLE solution may be used for
an early emergence, improved seedling growth and nutrient content of
maize seedling.
3. Priming maize with MLE + 20 g l-1 KOH would be effective alternative of
KH2PO4 as MLE is generally used fertilizer and KOH is also easily
available. This would be easier and cheaper source of priming for
resources poor farmers.

VIII. LITERATURE CITED
Abel, S., C.A. Ticconi and C.A. Delatorre. 2002. Phosphate sensing in higher
plants. Physiologia Plantrium. 115:1-8.
Adiloglu, A., Aydin, S. Adiloglu, E. Gonulsuz and N. Oner. 2005. Effect of zinc
application on cadmium uptake of maize grown in zinc deficient soil. Pak.
J. Biol. Sci. 8 (1): 10-12.
Afzal I, S.M.A. Basra, A. Hameed and M. Farooq. 2006. Physiological

enhancements for alleviation of salt tolerance in spring wheat. Pak. J.
Bot. 38:1649-1659
Ajouri, A., A. Haben and M. Becker. 2004. Seed priming enhances germination and
seedling growth of barley under conditions of P and Zn deficiency. J. Plant
Nutr. Soil Sci. 167, 630-636.
Akers, S.W. and K.E. Holley. 1986. SPS: a system for priming seeds using
aerated polyethylene glycol or salt solutions. Hortic. Sci. 21: 529–531.
Alam, S.M., A. Latif, Z. Iqbal and Z. Iqbal. 1995. Response of maize (Zea mays
L.) to zinc and phosphorus application. Pak J. Sci & Indus. Res. 38 (9-10):
371-74.
Ali, S., A.R. Khan, G. Mairaj, M. Arif, M. Fida and S. Bibi. 2008. Assessment of
different crop nutrient management practices for yield improvement. Aust.
J. Crop Sci. 2(3) 150-157.
A.O.A.C. Association of Official Analytical Chemists.1990. Official methods of

analysis. (Ed. Helvish, K.) 15th Edn. Avington Vergenia.USA.
Arif, M., S. Ali., A. Shah, N. Javed and A. Rashid. 2005. Seed priming maize for
improving emergence and seedling growth. Sarhad J. Agric. 21 (4): 539-
543.
Arif, M., S. Ali., A. Khan, T. Jan and M. Akbar. 2006. Influence of farm yard
manure application on various wheat cultivars. Sarhad J. Agric. 22:27-29.
Armstrong, R.D., K.R. Helyar and R. Prangnell. 1993. Direct assessment of

mineral phosphorus availability to tropical crops using 32P labelled
compounds. Plant Soil 150:279-287.
Asgedom, H. and M. Becker. 2001. Effects of seed priming with nutrient solutions
on germination, seedling growth and weed competitiveness of cereals in
Eritrea, in proc. Deutscher Tropentag, Univ. of Bonn & ATSAF, Margraf
Pub. Press, Weickersheim, pp: 282.
ASP. 2006-07. Agricultural Statistics of Pakistan. Govt. of Pakistan. Ministry of
Food and Agriculture Livestock.
Ayub, M., M.A. Nadeem, M.S. Sharar and N. Mahmood. 2002. Response of Maize
(Zea mays L.) fodder to different levels of nitrogen and phosphorus. Asian J.
Pl. Sci. 1 (4): 352-354.
Barry, D.A.J. and M.H. Miller. 1989. Phosphorus nutritional requirement of maize
seedlings for maximum yield. Agron. J. 81: 95-99.
Barsoom, S.W. 1998. Effect of micronutrients application on growth and nutrients

uptake by maize. Egypt J. Soil Sci. 38 (1-4): 173-84.
Batjes, N.H. 1997. A world data set of derived soil properties by FAO-UNESCO
soil unit for global modelling. Soil Use Manage. 13: 9-16.
Bernal-Lugo, I. and A.C. Leopold. 1998. The dynamics of seed mortality. J. Exp.
Bot. 49:1455-1461.
Bewley, J.D. and M. Black. 1997. Physiology and biochemistry of seeds. Vol. 2,
viability, dormancy and environmental control. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Bhati, D.S. and S.S. Rathore. 1986. Effect of seed soaking treatment with agro-
chemicals on germination and seedling attributes of wheat. Madras
Agricultural Journal 73 (7):378-380.
Bradford, K.J. 1986. Manipulation of seed water relations via osmotic priming to
improve germination under stress conditions. Hort. Sci. 21:1105-1112.
Bray, C.M. 1995. Biochemical processes during osmoconditioning of seeds. In

Seed Development and Germination (eds Kigel, J. and Galli, G.), Marcel
Dekker, New York. pp. 767–789.
Buhler, S. 2001. Application of P-isotope techniques to low P acid tropic soils.

P.hD. Dissertation. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich.
Cathcart, J.B. 1980. World phosphate reserves and resources., p. 1-18, In F.

E. Khasawneh, et al., eds. The role of phosphorus in agriculture. ASA,
CSSA, SSSA, Madison, WI.
Ciereszko, I., A. Gniazdowska, M. Mikulska and A.M. Rychter. 1996. Assimilate

translocation in bean plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) during phosphate
deficiency. J. Pl. Physiol. 149: 343-348.
Daniel, P.S., R.J. Reid and S.M. Ayling. 1998. Phosphorus Uptake by Plants:
From Soil to Cell. Plant Physiol. 116: 447–453.
Daroub, S.H., F.J. Pierce and B.G. Ellis. 2000. Phosphorus fractions and fate of
phosphorus-33 in soils under ploughing and no-tillage. Soil Sei. Soc. Am.
J. 64:170-176.
De Marco D.G. 1990. Effect of seed weight, and seed phosphorus and nitrogen
concentrations on the early growth of wheat seedlings. Aust. J. Expt.
Agric. 30:545-549.
Derrick, J.W. and M.H. Ryan. 1998. Influence of seed phosphorus content on
seedling growth in wheat: implications for organic and conventional farm
management in South East Australia. Biol. Agric. Hort. 16:223-237.
Duan H.Y., F.S. Xu and Y.H. Wang. 2002. Study on difference of phosphorus
allocation and accumulation among different cultivars of Brassica napus.
Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 24, 46-49.
Erdal, I., M.A. Bozkurt, K.M. Cimrin, S. Karaca and M. Saglam. 2000. Effects of
humic acid and phosphorus fertilizer application on growth and
phosphorus uptake of maize (Zea mays L.) grown on a calcareous soil.
Turk. J. Agric. & Forest. 24 (6): 663-68.
Farah, M.A., A.M. Daud, M.A. Barhat and H.K. Bakhati. 1980. Salt tolerance of
14 varieties of sunflower. Agric. Res. Rev. 58:99-111.
Farooq, M., S.M.A. Basra, H. Rehman and B.A. Saleem. 2008. Seed Priming
Enhances the Performance of Late Sown Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) by
Improving Chilling Tolerance. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 194:55-60.
Friesen, D.K. and G.J. Blair. 1988. A dual radiotracer study of transformation of
organic, inorganic and plant residue phosphorus in soil in presence and
absence of plants. Aust. J. Soil Res. 26:355-366.
Ghana, S.G. and F.S. William. 2003. Seed priming winter wheat for germination,
emergence and yield. Crop Sci. 43:2135-2141.
Gallardo, K., C. Job, S.P.C. Groot, M. Puype, H. Demol, J. Vandekerchove and D.

Job. 2001. Proteomic analysis of Agabidopsis seed germination and priming.
Plant Physiol. 126, 835-848.
Gerber, J.M. and L.A. Caplan. 1989. Priming sh2 sweet corn seed for improved
emergence. Hort. Sci. 24: 5, 854.
Giri, S.G. and W.F. Schillinger. 2003. Seed priming winter wheat for germination,
emergence and yield. Crop Sci. 43: 2135-2141.
Guo, Y.M., Y.Q. Li and C.L. Ren.1992. The effect of zinc fertilizer on maize.
Shaanxi J. of Agric. Sci. 1 (27): 30.
Hajabbasi, M.A. and T.E. Schumacher. 1994. Phosphorus effects on root growth
and development in two maize genotypes. Plant and Soil 158:39-46.
Harris, D. 1996. The effects of manure, genotype, seed priming, depth and date
of sowing on the emergence and early growth of Sorghum bicolor (L.)
Moench in semi-arid Botswana. Soil & Tillage Research. 40:73-88.
Harris, D. and M. Jones. 1997. On farm seed priming to accelerate germination in

rainfed, dry seed rice. Intern. Rice Res. Notes. p.22-30.
Harris, D., A. Joshi, P.A. Khan, P. Gothkar and P.S. Sodhi. 1999. On farm seed
priming in semi arid agriculture: development and evaluation in maize, rice
and chickpea in india using participatory methods. Exp. Agric. 35:15-29.
Harris, D., R.S. Tripathi and A. Joshi. 2000. On farm seed priming to improve crop
establishment and yield in direct-seeded rice, in IRRI: International
Workshop on Dry-seeded Rice Technology; held in Bangkok, 25-28 January
2000. The International Rice Research Institute, Manila, The Philippines,
p.164.
Harris, D., A.K. Pathan, P. Gothkar, A. Joshi, W. Chivasa and P. Nyamudeza.

2001. On-farm seed priming: using participatory methods to revive and
refine a key technology. Agric. Sys. 69:151-164.
Harris, D., A. Rashid, P.A. Hollington, L. Jasi and C. Riches. 2002. Prospects of
improving maize yields with ‘on-farm’ seed priming. In: Rajbhandari, N.P.,
Ransom, J.K., Adikhari, K., Palmer, A.F.E. (Eds.), Sustainable Maize
Production Systems for Nepal. Proceeding of a Maize Symposium,
December 3-5, 2001, Kathmandu, Nepal. Kathmandu: ICIMOD. pp 180-
185.
Harris, D., A. Rashid, M. Arif and M. Yunas. 2004. Alleviating micronutrient

deficiencies in alkaline soils of North West Frontier Province of Pakistan:
on-farm seed priming with zinc in wheat and chickpea. In ‘International
Workshop on Agricultural Strategies to Reduce Micronutrient Problems in
Mountains and Other Marginal Areas in South and S. E. Asia’.
Kathmandu, Nepal Agricultural Research Council.
Harris, D., A. Rashid, G. Miraj, M. Arif and H. Shah. 2007a. On-farm’ seed priming
with zinc sulphate solution-A cost-effective way to increase the maize
yields of resource-poor farmers. Field Crop Res. 102: 119-127.
Harris, D., A. Rashid, G. Miraj, M. Arif and M. Yunus. 2007b. On-farm seed priming
with zinc in chickpea and wheat in Pakistan. Plant & Soil. 306:3-10.
Holford, I.C.R. 1997. Soil phosphorus: its measurement, and its uptake by plants.
Aust J Soil Res 35: 227–239.
Hong, FaShui, M.A. ChengCang, Wang, XuMing, Ji, GuangMing, F.S. Hong,
C.C. Ma, X.M. Wang and G.M. Ji.1996. Effect of Ca 2+ and Zn2+ on seed
vigor and some enzyme activities during seed germination of maize.
Plant Physio. Comm. 32 (2): 110-12.
Hur, G. 1993. Effect of different levels of phosphorus application with constant

dose of nitrogen on the growth and yield of two maize genotypes. M.Sc.
Thesis, Univ. Agric. Faisalabad, Pak.
Hussain, M.A. 1991. Effects of different phosphorus application on growth and yield
behavior of maize. M.Sc. (Hons.) Agric. Thesis, Dept. of Agron. Univ. Agric.
Faisalabad, Pakistan.
Iqbal, R.M. and H.Q.I. Chauhan. 2003. Effect of Phosphorus levels on yield
components, grain yield and cutting index of two maize varieties. Asian J.
Pl. Sci. 2 (10): 800-03.
Jahiruddin, M., M.S. Ali, M.A. Hossain, M.U. Ahmad and M.M. Hoque. 1995. Effect
of Boron on grain set, yield and some others of wheat cultivars. Bangladesh
J. Agril. Sci. 22:179-184.
Jan, M.T., P. Shah, P.A. Hollington, M.J. Khan and Q. Sohail. 2009. Agriculture
Research: Design and Analysis, A Monograph. NWFP Agricultural
University Peshawar, Pakistan.
Job, C., A. Kersulec, L. Ravasio, S. Chareyre, R. Pepin and D. Job. 1997. The
solubilization of the basic subunits of sugarbeet seed 11-S globulin during
priming and early germination. Seed Sci. Res. 7:225-243.
Johnson, S.E., J.G. Lauren, R.M. Welch and J.M. Duxbury. 2005. A comparison of
the effects of micronutrient seed priming and soil fertilization on the mineral
nutrition of Chick pea (Cicer arietinum), Lentil (lens culinaris), Rice (Oryza
sativa) and Wheat (tirticum aestivum) in Nepal. Exp. Agric. 41:427-44.
Kang, J., Y.W. Choi, B.G. Son, C.K. Ahn and J.L. Cho. 1996. Effect of hydropriming
to enhance the germination of gourd seeds. J. Korean Soc. Hort. Sci.
41:559-564.
Kamh, M., M. Abdou, V, Chude, F. Wiesler and W.J. Horst. 2002. Mobilization of
Phosphorus contributes to positive rotational effects of leguminous cover
crops on maize grown on soils from northern Nigeria. J. Pl. Nutri. Soil Sci.
165: 566-572.
Khalil, S.K., S. Khan, A. Rahman, A.Z. Khan, I.H. Khalil, Amanullah, S. Wahab,
F. Mohammad, S. Nigar , M. Zubair , S. Parveen and A. Khan. 2010. Seed
priming and phosphorus application enhance phenology and dry matter
production of wheat. Pak. J. Bot., 42(3): 1849-1856.
Khan, N.A. 1981. Effect of different levels of fertilizer on growth, yield, oil
contents of sunflower varieties. M.Sc. Thesis, Univ. Agric. Faisalabad,
Pak.
Khan, M.A., N.U. Khan, K. Ahmad, M.S. Baloch and M. Sadiq. 1999. Yield of
maize hybrid-3335 as affected by NP levels. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2: 857-59.
Kurdikeri, M.B., B. Aswathaiah, M. Mahadevappa, K.P.R. Prasanna and S.R.
Prasad. 1995. Seed invigoration on yield performance of maize. Mysore J.
Agric. Sci., 29(3): 208-212.
Liu, X.B., Q. Yang, T.D. Chu, S.H. Wang, S.R. Li and X.F. Wu. 1993. Effect of
zinc application on maize. Acta-Pedologica-Sinica. 93(30): 153-63.
Liu, X.S., F.J. Chen, L. Chun, J.L. Song and G.H. Mi. 2003. Genotypic difference
of maize inbred lines in tolerance to phosphorus deficiency. J. Maize Sci.,
11:23-27.
Lunven, P. 1992. Maize in human nutrition. FAO, Food and Nutrition Series No. 25.
Published by Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, Italy.
Memon, K.S. 2005. Soil and Fertilizer Phosphorus. Soil Science Book. 3 rd Edn.
National Book foundation, Islamabad, Pakistan. Pp:291-311.
Morel, C. and J.C. Fardeau. 1989a. Native soil and fresh fertilizer phosphorus
uptake as affected by rate of application and P fertilizers. Plant Soil
115:123-128.
Murungu, F.S., C. Chiduza, P. Nyamugafata, L.J. Clark, W.R. Whalley and W.E.
Finch-Savage. 2004. Effects of On-farm seed priming on consective daily
sowing occassions on the emergence and growth of maize in semi arid
Zimbabwe. Field Crops Res. 89:49-57.
Pakroo, N. and A. Kashirad. 1981. The effect of salinity and iron application on
growth and mineral uptake of sunflower (Helianthus annus L.). J. Pl. Nut.
4: 45-46.
Parera, C.A. and D.J. Cantliffe.1994. Pre-sowing seed priming. Hort. Rev. 16:
109-41.
Patel, J.R., K.R.Thker, A.C.Patel and H.P. Parmar. 1997. Effects of seed rate and
nitrogen and phosphorus level on forage maize varieties. Gujrat Agric. Uni.
Res. J. 23: 1-8.
Paul, M.J. and M. Stitt. 1993. Effects of nitrogen and phosphorus deficiencies on
levels of carbohydrates, respiratory enzymes and metabolites in seedling
of tobacco and their response to exogenous sucrose. Plant, Cell and
Environment. 16: 1047-57.
Pill, W.G., J.J. Frett and I.H. Williams. 1997. Matric priming of Kentucky
bluegrass and tall fescue seeds benefits seedling emergence. Hort. Sci.
32:1061-63.
Rajpar, I., Y.M. Khanif and A. A. Menon. 2006. Effect of seed priming on Growth
and yield of Wheat (Triticum astivum L.) under non-saline conditions. Intl. J.
Agric. Res. 1(3): 259-264.
Ranjha, A.M. and S.M. Mehdi. 1990. Effect of source and method of application
of phosphorus on the growth of maize and wheat. Presented at
symposium on the role of phosphorus in crop production organized by
National fertilizer development center, Islamabad.
Rashid, A., D. Harris, P.A. Hollington and R.A. Khattak. 2002. On-farm seed
priming: a key technology for improving the livelihood of resource poor
farmers on saline lands. Centre for Arid Zone Studies, University of Wales,
UK.
Rashid, A., D. Harris, P.A. Hollington and M. Rafiq. 2004. Improving the yield of
mung bean (Vigna radiata) in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan
using on-farm seed priming. Expl. Agric. 40: 233-44.
Rashid, A., P.A. Hollington, D. Harris, and P. Khan. 2006. On -farm seed priming
for barley on normal, saline and saline–sodic soils in North West Frontier
Province, Pakistan. Europ. J. Agronomy 24: 276-281.
Rashid, A., D. Harris, G. Miraj, M. Arif and H. Shah. 2008. Priming maize (Zea
mays L.) seeds with dilute solutions of phosphate increases yield and
profitability of fertilizer use. I. Priming with potassium dihydrogen
phosphate (KH2PO4). Field Crops Res. Accepted.
Richardson, A.E. 1994. Soil microorganisms and phosphorus availability. Soil

Biota 50–62.
Roberts, W.O. 1973. Prevention of mineral deficiency by soaking seed in nutrient

solution. J. Agric. Sci. 38:458-468.
Ros, C., R.W. Belland and P.F. White. 2000. Phosphorus seed coating and
soaking for improving seedling growth of Oryza sativa (rice) cv IR66. Seed
Sci. Tech. 28: 391-401.
Rosolem, C.A., J.S. Assis and A.D. Santiago. 1994. Root growth and mineral
nutrition of corn hybrids as affected by phosphorus and lime.
Communications in Soil Science and Plant analysis. 25: 2491-99.
Runge-Metzger, A. 1995. Closing the cycle: obstacles to efficient P management

for improved global security. In: Tiessen H (ed), Phosphorus in the Global
Environment: Transfers, Cycles And Management. Wiley, Chichester, pp
27–42.
Rychter, A.M. and D.D. Randall. 1994. The effect of phosphate deficiency on
carbohydrate metabolism in bean roots. Physiologia Plantarum. 91: 383-
388.
Sanchez, C.A. 2007. Phosphorus. In: Barker AV, Pilbeam DJ (eds), Handbook of
Plant Nutrition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 51–90.
Shaban, S.A. and A. Eid. 1982. Effect of some micronutrient on seed germination
and seedling growth in maize and cotton. Research Bulletin, Faculty of
Agric., Aim, Shams Univ., 2047. pp:14.
Shah, A.R., M. Sajid, Abur-Rub, N. Ara., M. Ahmad, F. Wahid and G. Shafi.

2011. Response of germination, growth and yield of okra (Abelmoschus
esculentus) to seed priming duration and p-sources in Northwest Pakistan.
African J Pl. Sci. 5 (11): 663-670.
Shah, H.U., T. Jalwat, M. Arif and G. Miraj. 2012. Seed priming improves early
seedling growth and nutrient uptake in mung bean. J Plant Nutri. 35:1-12.
Shahzad, M.A. 1987. Response of spring maize to N, P 2O5 and K2O applications
from growth development and productivity aspects. M.Sc. (Hons) Thesis,
Dept. Agron., Univ. of Agric., Faisalabad, Pak.
Sharar, M.S., M. Ayub, M.A. Nadeem and N. Ahmad. 2003. Effect of different
rates of Nitrogen and Phosphorus on growth and grain yield of maize (Zea
mays L.). Asian J. Pl. Sci. 2 (3): 347-49.
Slaton, N.A., C.E. Wilson Jr., S. Ntamatungiro, R.J. Norman and D.L. Boothe.
2001. Evaluation of zinc seed treatments for rice. Agron. J. 96, 152–157.
Sung, J.M., and Y.H. Chang. 1993. Biochemical activities associated with priming
of sweet corn seeds to improve vigor. Seed Sci. and Tech. 21:97-105.
Theodorou, M.E. and W.C. Plaxton. 1993 Metabolic adaptations of plant

respiration to nutritional phosphate deprivation. Plant Physiol 101: 339–
344.
Ullah, M.A., M. Sarfraz, M. Sadiq, S.M. Mehdi and G. Hassan. 2002a. Effect of
pre-sowing seed treatment with micronutrients on growth parameters of
raya. Asian J. Pl. Sci. 1 (1): 22-23.
Ullah, M.A., M. Sarfraz, M. Sadiq, S.M. Mehdi and G. Hassan. 2002b. Effect of
pre-sowing seed treatment of raya with micronutrients on yield
parameters. Asian J. Pl. Sci. 1 (3): 277-78.
U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and
alkali soils. USDA Handbook 60, Washington D.C., USA.
Usuda H. and S. Kousuke. 1991. Phosphate deficiency in maize. V .Leaf

phosphate status, growth, photosynthesis and carbon partitioning. Plant
Cell Physiology. 32: 497-504.
Vance, C.P. 2001. Symbiotic nitrogen fixation and phosphorus acquisition. Plant
nutrition in a world of declining renewable resources. Plant Physiol. 127:
390–397.
Varier, A., A.K. Vari and M. Dadlani. 2010. The Subcellular Basis Of Seed
Priming. Current Sci., 99 (4).
von Uexküll H.R. and E. Muterts. 1995. Global extent, development and
economic impact of acid soils. Plant Soil 171: 1–15.
Yaq, Q.L., K.C. Yang, G.T. Pan and T.Z. Rong. 2007. The effect of low phosphorus
stress on morphological and physiological characteristics of maize (Zea
mays L.) landraces. Agric. Sci. China. 6(5):559-566.
Yari. L.,M. Aghaalikani and F. Khazaei. 2010. Effect of seed priming duration and
temperature on seed germination behavior of bread wheat (Triticum
Aestivum L.) J. Agric. & Biol. Sci. 5 (1).
Zapata, E. and R.N. Roy. 2004. Use of phosphate rock for sustainable
agriculture. FAO Fertilizer and Plant Nutrition Bulletin - 13. Pp:59.
Zhang, M., M. Nyborg and W.B. McGill. 1998. Phosphorus imbibed by barley
seeds: location within the seed and assimilation by seedlings. Seed Sci.
Techn. 26: 325-32.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) of

halo priming
K value Source D. O. F S. S M. S F Value Prob
1 Replication 2 0.201 0.101 0.1498
2 Treatment 5 30.438 6.088 9.0688 0.0018
-3 Error 10 6.713 0.671
Total 17 37.352
Appendix 2: Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant -1) of

halo priming
1 Replication 2 0.058 0.029 0.1498
2 Treatment 5 0.622 0.124 9.0688 0.0018
-3 Error 10 0.324 0.032
Total 17 1.004
Appendix 3: Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1) of

halo priming
Source D. O. F S. S M. S F Value Prob
1 Replication 2 0.035 0.018 0.3308
2 Treatment 5 3.152 0.630 11.8721 0.0006
-3 Error 10 0.531 0.053
Total 17 3.718
Appendix 4: Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant -1) of
halo priming
1 Replication 2 0.006 0.003 0.5771
2 Treatment 5 0.023 0.005 0.8240 NS
-3 Error 10 0.056 0.006
Total 17 0.086
Appendix 5: Analysis of variance of seedling height (cm) of halo priming
1 Replication 2 42.478 21.239 0.5993
2 Treatment 5 249.789 49.958 1.4097 0.3005
-3 Error 10 354.398 35.439
Total 17 646.660
Appendix 6: Analysis of variance of seedling P concentration (%) of halo

priming
1 Replication 2 0.001 0.0005 0.3867
2 Treatment 5 0.011 0.002 6.8230 0.0051
-3 Error 10 0.003 0.0015
Total 17 0.014
Appendix 7: Analysis of variance seedling P uptake (g plant -1) of
halo priming
1 Replication 2 0.001 0.0005 0.0284
2 Treatment 5 0.064 0.013 0.8896 0.000
-3 Error 10 0.003 0.0015
Total 17 0.068
Appendix 8: Analysis of variance of fresh cob weight (kg plot -1) of

halo priming
1 Replication 2 26.723 13.362 9.2596 0.0053
2 Treatment 5 101.207 20.241 14.0273 0.0003
-3 Error 10 14.430 1.443
Total 17 142.360
Appendix 9: Analysis of variance of Plant height (cm) of halo priming
1 Replication 2 10898.111 5449.056 4.0691 0.0509
2 Treatment 5 93796.944 18759.389 14.0087 0.0003
-3 Error 10 13391.22 1339.122
Total 17 118086.27
Appendix 10: Analysis of variance of grains cob-1 of halo priming
1 Replication 2 2529.333 1264.667 1.4146 0.2877
2 Treatment 5 24211.167 4842.233 5.4164 0.0114
-3 Error 10 8940.00 894.00
Total 17 35680.50
Appendix 11: Analysis of variance of grain wt cob-1 of halo priming
1 Replication 2 120.355 60.177 0.4419
2 Treatment 5 2687.195 537.439 3.9467 0.0309
-3 Error 10 1361.726 136.173
Total 17 4169.277
Appendix 12: Analysis of variance of 1000 grain wt of halo priming
1 Replication 2 659.642 347.821 0.7226
2 Treatment 5 5162.219 1032.444 2.1448 0.1425
-3 Error 10 4813.698 481.370
Total 17 10671.559
Appendix 13: Analysis of variance of grain yield (kg ha -1) of halo priming
K Source D. O. F S. S M. S F Value Prob
value
1 Replication 2 2426208.18 12131104.09 5.1318 0.0293
2 Treatment 5 14190773.8 2838154.76 12.006 0.0006
-3 Error 10 2363890.61 236389.062
Total 17 18980872.6
Appendix 14: Analysis of variance of straw yield (kg ha -1) of halo priming
1 Replication 2 88723.694 44361.847 0.0575
2 Treatment 5 25213756.06 5042751.2 6.5362 0.0060
-3 Error 10 7715064.139 771506.41
Total 17 33017543.90
Appendix 15: Analysis of variance of grain P (%) of halo priming
1 Replication 2 0.070 3.1010 0.0896
2 Treatment 5 0.289 5.1418 0.0136
-3 Error 10 0.112
Total 17 0.471
Appendix 16: Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1)
MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 1.643 0.821 0.3832
2 Treatment 5 27.085 5.417 2.5271 0.0995
-3 Error 10 21.085 2.144
Total 17 50.163
Appendix 17: Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant -1)

MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.063 0.032 1.3400
2 Treatment 5 0.513 0.103 4.3578 0.0229
-3 Error 10 0.236 0.024
Total 17 0.812
Appendix 18: Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1)

MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.012 0.006 0.1430
2 Treatment 5 0.370 0.074 1.8171 0.1971
-3 Error 10 0.407 0.041
Total 17 0.789
Appendix 19: Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant -1)
MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.014 0.007 1.0299 0.3920
2 Treatment 5 0.043 0.009 1.2650 0.3504
-3 Error 10 0.068 0.007
Total 17 0.125
Appendix 20: Analysis of variance of shoot height (cm) MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 65.213 32.607 0.7792
2 Treatment 5 603.255 120.651 2.8832 0.0725
-3 Error 10 418.461 41.846
Total 17 1086.929
Appendix 21: Analysis of variance of P concentration (%) MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.000 0.000 0.3959
2 Treatment 5 0.011 0.002 12.2945 0.0005
-3 Error 10 0.002 0.000
Total 17 0.013
Appendix 22: Analysis of variance of P uptake (g plant -1) MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.000 0.000 0.3910
2 Treatment 5 0.005 0.001 2.6027 0.0929
-3 Error 10 0.004 0.000
Total 17 0.009
Appendix 23: Analysis of variance of fresh cob weight (kg plot -1)
MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.521 0.261 0.4880
2 Treatment 5 38.284 7.657 14.341 0.003
-3 Error 10 5,339 0.534
Total 17 44.144
Appendix 24: Analysis of variance of plant height (cm) MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 348.778 174.389 0.9950
2 Treatment 5 3216.278 643.256 3.6537 0.0386
-3 Error 10 1760.556 176.056
Total 17 5352.611
Appendix 25: Analysis of variance of Number of secondary roots MLE
Priming
1 Replication 2 784.333 0.3891 0.3891
2 Treatment 5 28147.167 5.5853 5.5853 0.0103
-3 Error 10 10079.00
Total 17 39010.500
Appendix 26: Analysis of variance of grains weight cob -1 (g) MLE

Priming
1 Replication 2 142.604 71.302 1.3713 0.2977
2 Treatment 5 2669.456 533.891 10.2680 0.0011
-3 Error 10 519.957 51.996
Total 17 33332.017
Appendix 27: Analysis of variance of 1000 grains weight (g) MLE

Priming
1 Replication 2 4303.182 2151.591 3.4978 0.0705
2 Treatment 5 14475.597 2895.119 4.7065 0.0180
-3 Error 10 6151.331 615.133
Total 17 24930.11
Appendix 28: Analysis of variance of grain yield (kg ha -1) MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 232087.528 116043.76 0.5611
2 Treatment 5 7672446.94 1534489.38 7.4201 0.0038
-3 Error 10 2068016.80 206801.681
Total 17 9972551.27
Appendix 29: Analysis of variance of straw yield (kg ha -1) MLE Priming
K value Source D. O. F S. S M. S F Prob
Value
1 Replication 2 977864.583 488932.292 0.6471
2 Treatment 5 26880208.33 5376041.667 7.1149 0.0044
-3 Error 10 7555989.583 755598.95
Total 17 35414062.50
Appendix 30: Analysis of variance of grain P (%) MLE Priming
1 Replication 2 0.078 0.039 5.9188 0.0201
2 Treatment 5 0.212 0.042 6.4503 0.0063
-3 Error 10 0.066 0.007
Total 17 0.356
Appendix 31: Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1)
Hormonal Priming
1 Replication 2 0.602 0.301 0.4393
2 Treatment 5 21.595 4.319 6.2984 0.0068
-3 Error 10 6.857 0.686
Total 17 29.055
Appendix 32: Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant -1)

Hormonal Priming
1 Replication 2 0.057 0.028 3.4237 0.0737
2 Treatment 5 0.467 0.093 11.2768 0.0007
-3 Error 10 0.083 0.008
Total 17 0.606
Appendix 33: Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1)

Hormonal Priming
1 Replication 2 0.022 0.011 0.5072
2 Treatment 5 1.101 0.220 10.3247 0.0011
-3 Error 10 0.213 0.021
Total 17 1.336
Appendix 34: Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant -1)
Hormonal Priming
1 Replication 2 0.007 0.003 1.5760 0.2541
2 Treatment 5 0.020 0.004 1.8000 0.2006
-3 Error 10 0.022 0.002
Total 17 0.049
Appendix 35: Analysis of variance of shoot height (cm) Hormonal

Priming
1 Replication 2 40.799 20.400 0.6692
2 Treatment 5 299.458 59.892 1.9648 0.1700
-3 Error 10 304.819 30.482
Total 17 645.077
Appendix 36: Analysis of variance of P concentration (%) Hormonal

Priming
1 Replication 2 0.000 0.000 0.5800
2 Treatment 5 0.010 0.002 11.0617 0.0008
-3 Error 10 0.002 0.000
Total 17 0..012
Appendix 37: Analysis of variance of P uptake (g plant -1) Hormonal
Priming
1 Replication 2 0.000 0.000 0.3079
2 Treatment 5 0.026 0.005 67.657 0.0000
-3 Error 10 0.001 0.000
Total 17 0..027
Appendix 38: Analysis of variance of cobs weight (kg plot -1) Hormonal
Priming
1 Replication 2 4.945 2.473 8.8370
2 Treatment 5 59.726 11.945 42.6912 0.0000
-3 Error 10 2.798 0.280
Total 17 67.469
Appendix 39: Analysis of variance of plant height (cm) Hormonal

Priming
1 Replication 2 3011.111 1505.556 2.2883 0.1520
2 Treatment 5 32784.069 6556.814 9.9657 0.0012
-3 Error 10 6579.389 657.939
Total 17 42374.569
Appendix 40: Analysis of variance of No. of grains cob -1 Hormonal
Priming
1 Replication 2 720.444 360.22 0.9314
2 Treatment 5 17534.278 3506.856 9.0674 0.0018
-3 Error 10 3867.556 386.756
Total 17 22122.27
Appendix 41: Analysis of variance of grains weight cob -1 (g) Hormonal

Priming
1 Replication 2 142.604 71.302 1.3713
2 Treatment 5 2669.456 533.891 10.2680 0.0011
-3 Error 10 519.957 51.996
Total 17 3332.017
Appendix 42: Analysis of variance of thousand grain weight (g)

Hormonal Priming
1 Replication 2 1810.835 905.417 1.9175 0.1973
2 Treatment 5 6734.726 1346.945 2.8526 0.0744
-3 Error 10 4721.804 472.180
Total 17 13267.364
Appendix 43: Analysis of variance of grain yield (kg ha -1) Hormonal
Priming
1 Replication 2 728443.008 36221.504 2.3171 0.1490
2 Treatment 5 9769734.57 1953946.91 12.4304 0.0005
-3 Error 10 1571911.75 157191.176
Total 17 12070089.33
Appendix 44: Analysis of variance of straw yield (kg ha -1) Hormonal

Priming
1 Replication 2 386671.444 93335.722 0.6892
2 Treatment 5 23933916.55 4786783.31 17.0646 0.0001
-3 Error 10 2805092.764 280509.276
Total 17 27125680.76
Appendix 45: Analysis of variance of grain P (%) Hormonal Priming

1 Replication 2 0.083 0.042 7.1933 0.0116
2 Treatment 5 0.225 0.045 7.7793 0.0032
-3 Error 10 0.058 0.006
Total 17 0.367
Appendix 46: Analysis of Variance of Fresh shoot weight (g plant -1)
Combined Effect of Priming
2 Treatment (T) 4 8.476 2.119 12.7104 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 26.944 13.472 80.8112 0.0000
6 TXG 8 6.611 0.826 4.9567 0.0000
-7 Error 90 15.004 0.167
Total 104 57.034
Appendix 47: Analysis of Variance of Fresh root weight (g plant -1)

2 Treatment (T) 4 49.735 12.434 27.0948 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 68.371 34.186 74.490 0.0000
6 TXG 8 34.170 4.271 9.3078 0.0000
-7 Error 90 41.300 0.459
Total 104 193.577

Appendix 48: Analysis of Variance of shoot height (cm) Combined Effect of
Priming
2 Treatment (T) 4 196.789 49.197 3.3495 0.0133
4 Growth stages (G) 2 1633.46 34.186 55.6055 0.0000
6 TXG 8 216.824 27.103 1.8453 0.0788
-7 Error 90 1321.91 14.688
Total 104 3368.98
Appendix 49: Analysis of Variance of root height (cm) Combined

Effect of Priming
2 Treatment (T) 4 107.457 26.864 2.2953 0.0653
4 Growth stages (G) 2 2124.592 1062.296 90.7654 0.0000
6 TXG 8 36.566 4.571 0.3905
-7 Error 90 1053.338 11.704
Total 104 1053.338

Appendix 50: Analysis of Variance of Dry shoot weight (g plant -1)
2 Treatment (T) 4 0.066 0.016 1.4871 0.2127
4 Growth stages (G) 2 1.819 0.910 82.1998 0.0000
6 TXG 8 0.366 0.046 4.1346 0.0003
-7 Error 90 0.996 0.011
Total 104 3.247
Appendix 51: Analysis of Variance of Dry root weight (g plant -1)

2 Treatment (T) 4 1.102 0.276 7.7011 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 4.047 2.023 56.5464 0.0000
6 TXG 8 0.705 0.088 2.4635 0.0184
-7 Error 90 3.221 0.036
Total 104 9.075

Appendix 52: Analysis of Variance of Dry root weight (g plant -1)
2 Treatment (T) 4 1.102 0.276 7.7011 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 4.047 2.023 56.5464 0.0000
6 TXG 8 0.705 0.088 2.4635 0.0184
-7 Error 90 3.221 0.036
Total 104 9.075
Appendix 53: Analysis of Variance of Leaf P (µg P leaf -1) First growth
stage seedling
2 Treatment (T) 4 7.418 1.855 16.7626 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 5.133 2.567 23.1989 0.0000
6 TXG 8 1.773 0.222 2.0028 0.0549
-7 Error 90 9.957 0.111
Total 104 24.282
Appendix 54: Analysis of Variance of Leaf P (µg P leaf -1) second growth
stage seedling
2 Treatment (T) 4 4.181 1.045 72.4338 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 4.339 1.085 75.1757 0.0000
6 TXG 8 0.905 0.057 3.9191 0.0000
-7 Error 90 2.165 0.014
Total 104 11.590

Appendix 55: Analysis of Variance of Leaf P (µg P leaf -1) third growth
stage seedling
2 Treatment (T) 4 3.928 0.982 23.3659 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 5.794 1.159 27.5734 0.0000
6 TXG 8 1.922 0.096 2.2863 0.0022
-7 Error 90 7.565 0.042
Total 104 19.210
Appendix 56: Analysis of Variance of root P (µg P g-1 root wt) of three
growth stage seedling
2 Treatment (T) 4 8.723 2.181 30.3403 0.0000
4 Growth stages (G) 2 9.148 4.574 63.6354 0.0000
6 TXG 8 3.852 0.482 6.6995 0.0000
-7 Error 90 6.469 0.072
Total 104 28.193

Seedlings in tube pots kept in growth chamber
Water primed seedling (T2 at right) as compared to non primed seedling (T1
at left) at second growth stage
Seedlings primed with KH2PO4 (left) as compared to non-prime seedling

(right) at third growth stage
Seedling primed with MLE + KOH (left) as compared to control (right) after 7
DAE in pots and after harvesting

Response of Maize To Seed Priming BY Ghazal Miraj

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Response of Maize To Seed Priming BY Ghazal Miraj

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Response of Maize To Seed Priming BY Ghazal Miraj

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RESPONSE OF MAIZE TO SEED PRIMING

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN AGRICULTURAL

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN AGRICULTURAL

Chairman Supervisory Committee

Chairman/Convener Board of Studies

Dean Faculty of Nutrition Sciences

Director Advanced Studies & Research

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY

Chapter No. Title Page No.

Ghazal Miraj and Hamid Ullah Shah

Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Faculty of Nutrition Sciences

A series of laboratory experiments were conducted to study the effect of seed

Final Messenger sent by Allah to the Inhabitants of Earth.

I am thankful to my supervisor Prof. Dr. Hamid Ullah Shah, Department of

Agricultural Chemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar for his guidance

throughout the period to accomplish my dissertation.

I am thankful to Prof. Dr. Muhammad Arif, Department of Agronomy, The

University of Agriculture, Peshawar for his cooperation and timely guidance.

I consecrate my sincere thanks to my department staff specially Mr. Taj

Thanks are also extended to higher education commission, Islamabad

technical facilitation to successfully compete this study.

support and encouraging attitude throughout my studies.

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO.

4.1 Seedling growth parameters as affected by priming Solutions..............37

4.2 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming.............................37

4.3 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming...............................40

4.4 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by seed priming.......................41

4.5 Dry root weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming...................................43

4.6 Seedling height (cm) as affected by priming..........................................43

4.7 Number of secondary roots as affected by priming................................49

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE NO.

4.1 Fresh shoot weight of seedlings as affected by Priming.........................38

4.2 Fresh root weight of seedlings as affected by priming............................40

4.3 Dry shoot weight of seedling as affected by priming..............................41

4.4 Maize emergence (%) as affected by priming........................................54

4.5 Fresh shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming.............................57

4.6 Fresh root weight (g plant-1) as affected by priming...............................59

4.7 Shoot height (cm) as affected by Seed priming .....................................60

4.8 Root length (cm) as affected by Seed priming........................................62

4.9 Dry shoot weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming........................63

4.10 Dry root weight (g plant-1) as affected by Seed priming..........................65

APPENDIX NO. TITLE PAGE NO.

1. Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) of halo priming 91

2. Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant-1) of halo priming...91

4. Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant-1) of halo priming......92

5. Analysis of variance of seedling height (cm) of halo priming.............92

6. Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) MLE Priming… 96

7. Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant-1) MLE Priming......96

8. Analysis of variance of dry shoot weight (g plant -1) MLE Priming......96

9. Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant-1) MLE Priming.........97

10. Analysis of variance of shoot height (cm) MLE Priming.....................97

12. Analysis of variance of fresh shoot weight (g plant -1) Hormonal

13. Analysis of variance of fresh root weight (g plant-1) Hormonal Priming

15. Analysis of variance of dry root weight (g plant-1) of two years

16. Analysis of variance of shoot height (cm) Hormonal Priming102

17. Analysis of variance of P concentration (%) Hormonal Priming.......102

18. Analysis of variance of P uptake (g plant -1) Hormonal Priming103