Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science

ISSN: 0365-0340 (Print) 1476-3567 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gags20

Response of wheat genotypes to zinc fertilization

for improving productivity and quality

Prakash Chand Ghasal, Yashbir Singh Shivay, Vijay Pooniya, Mukesh

Choudhary & Rakesh Kumar Verma

To cite this article: Prakash Chand Ghasal, Yashbir Singh Shivay, Vijay Pooniya, Mukesh
Choudhary & Rakesh Kumar Verma (2017): Response of wheat genotypes to zinc fertilization
for improving productivity and quality, Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, DOI:
10.1080/03650340.2017.1289515

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2017.1289515

Accepted author version posted online: 02

Feb 2017.
Published online: 13 Feb 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 4

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gags20

Download by: [FU Berlin] Date: 14 February 2017, At: 06:44

ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE, 2017
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2017.1289515

ARTICLE

Response of wheat genotypes to zinc fertilization for improving

productivity and quality
Prakash Chand Ghasal, Yashbir Singh Shivay, Vijay Pooniya, Mukesh Choudhary
and Rakesh Kumar Verma
Division of Agronomy, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Field experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of zinc (Zn) Received 3 November 2016
fertilization on yield potentiality and quality of promising wheat varieties Accepted 29 January 2017
during winter seasons of 2013–14 and 2014–15 at the research farm of KEYWORDS
the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi. Among genotypes, Grain quality; productivity;
HD 2967 genotype proved as best in realizing the highest grain yield profitability; wheat; Zn
(4.89 Mg ha−1), net returns and benefit–cost ratio besides increased concentration; Zn-EDTA;
protein (13.4%) and wet gluten (29.4%) content in grain. Highest grain ZnSO4·7H2O
Zn concentration and recovery efficiency (RE) recorded in HD 2851 and
HD 2687, respectively. HD 2932 registered lowest grain hardiness index
(GHI) followed by PBW 343, indicating their better bread-making quality.
With respect to Zn fertilization, application of 1.25 kg Zn Zn–ethylene
diamine tetra acetic acid (Zn–EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum
tillering and booting stages resulted in the highest yields, grain Zn
concentration and RE followed by 2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) + 0.5% foliar
spray at both stages. These treatments are also superior most with
respect to grain quality parameters such as protein, wet gluten and
starch content. From profitability viewpoint, 2.5 kg Zn
(ZnSO4·7H2O) + 0.5% two foliar sprays were most remunerative with
maximum net returns and benefit–cost ratio.

Introduction
Wheat (Triticum aestivum) is the leading cereal crop; in many of the developing countries, it is
responsible for ~50% of the daily calorie intake (Cakmak 2008). In China, wheat-based food items
supplies ~20% of dietary Zn (Ma et al. 2008). Monotonous consumption of wheat products lead to
Zn malnutrition due to low Zn content in their grains while rich in phytate which limits bioavail-
ability of Zn (Cakmak 2008). More than half of the wheat was grown under low Zn conditions,
which reduce the Zn content in their grain. As wheat varieties differed in their input-use efficiency
due to inter- and intra-specific variation, thus, it may be possible to screen wheat cultivars that are
capable of using nutrients more efficiently. It is also important to mention here that there are many
promising wheat cultivars having wider adoption in IGP region but they may have differential
response to applied micro-nutrients, especially Zn and Fe. Thus, diversification of existing wheat
cultivars through their selection can be a viable option for improving productivity and grain
quality. Similarly, replacement of low-yielder old/local wheat genotypes with recently developed
promising cultivars is direly needed. The productivity and quality of wheat depends on several
factors like climate, agronomic management practices, varietal response, soil type etc. The

CONTACT Vijay Pooniya vijaypoonia@iari.res.in Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New
Delhi, India
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

response of different wheat genotypes to Zn fertilization can support the expression of Zn-efficient
and Zn-inefficient genotypes. Generally, wheat genotypes no or small response to Zn fertilization
are considered Zn-efficient genotypes while Zn-inefficient genotypes have large yield responses to
Zn fertilization (Khoshgoftar et al. 2006).
Zn deficiency is prevalent in wheat growing areas both in temperate and tropical climate
(Shivay et al. 2008). Takkar (1996) reported that ~47% Indian soils are not having enough Zn
content. The major factors, that is, high pH and CaCO3 and low organic matter content, are
responsible for widespread Zn deficiency rather than Zn content. Available reports advocated
that decline in wheat production due to Zn stress has been delineated in India, Australia and
Turkey. Similarly, Zn deficiency also leads to decrease nutritional quality of wheat grain (Welch &
Graham 1999). Compared to other cereals, wheat cultivars possess high sensitivity to Zn deficiency
and thus, application of Zn fertilizers is an important strategy for enhancing productivity and
quality. Moreover, Zn can improve the thermo-tolerance of the photosynthetic apparatus of wheat
at later growth stages (Graham & McDonald 2001). Among Zn sources, Zn sulfate, Zn oxides and
chelated forms are commonly used in developing countries. Zn-EDTA supplies substantial amount
of Zn to the plants without interacting with soil components, because the central metal Zn2+ is
surrounded by chelate ligands (Karak et al. 2005). Malakouti (2011) reported that the application of
Zn fertilizer to wheat grown in Zn-deficient soils improved the dough quality and resulted in
significantly improved the bread-making quality than control. Foliar fertilization either through Zn
sulfate or Zn-EDTA is an alternative strategy to fortify seed with Zn and also helps in improving
productivity of cereals (Pooniya & Shivay 2013). Soil Zn application and foliar spray is a simple and
effective solution to combat Zn deficiency in rice (Pooniya et al. 2012). It is reported that lower Zn
supply in human diet (7.1 mg capita−1 day−1) leads to widespread deficiency of zinc (66%) in
Zambia. Soil Zn application increased Zn concentration in rice, wheat and maize grains by ~7%,
19% and 23%, while on contrary, foliar spray leads to enhance its concentration in grains ~30%,
25% and 63% (Wei et al. 2012; Yerokun & Chirwa 2014). Ferti-fortification through Zn offers a rapid
cost-effective approach to improve bioavailable Zn in polished rice. Keeping above mentioned
issues in view, the present investigation was therefore taken up to assess the effects of Zn
fertilization irrespective of sources and methods on productivity, grain Zn concentration and
quality of wheat.

Materials and methods

Experimental location and soil characteristics
Experiments were carried out during rabi/winter (November–April) seasons of 2013–14 and
2014–15 at Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India situated at latitude of 28°40′N
and longitude of 77°12′E, altitude of 228.6 m above mean sea level (Arabian sea). Soils are alluvium-
derived sandy clay loam (typic ustochrept) in texture with 50.2% sand, 23.2% silt and 26.6% clay.
The soil (0–30 cm layer) had pH 7.8 (1:2.5 soil and water ratio), Walkley–Black C (oxidizable SOC)
0.51%, alkaline KMnO4 oxidizable N 252.8 kg ha−1, 0.5 M NaHCO3 extractable P 13.1 kg ha−1 and 1 N
NH4OAc extractable K 291.2 kg ha−1. The soil contained diethylene-triamine-penta-acetate (DTPA)-
extractable Zn was 0.63 mg kg−1 of soil. The critical limit of DTPA-extractable Zn varies from 0.38 to
0.90 mg kg−1.

Layout and treatments details

The experiment was initiated in split-plot design with three replications for 2 years. Six promising
wheat varieties viz. HD 2851, HD 2687, HD 2967, PBW 343, HD 2894, HD 2932 were taken in main
plots. Five Zn fertilization treatments viz. control (Zn0), soil application of Zn at 5 kg ha−1 through
ZnSO4·7H2O (ZSHH), soil application of Zn at 2.5 kg ha−1 through ZnSO4·7H2O + 0.5% foliar spray of
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 3

ZnSO4·7H2O at maximum tillering and booting stages, soil application of Zn at 2.5 kg ha−1 through
Zn-EDTA, soil application of Zn at 1.25 kg ha−1 through Zn-EDTA + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum
tillering and booting stages, respectively. Foliar spray supplied 1.05 kg Zn ha−1. The allocation of
the treatments was done by the randomization following Fisher and Yates random number tables.
Field was ploughed twice following planking. Phosphorus and potassium at 26.2 kg P ha−1 as single
super phosphate and 50 kg K ha−1 as muriate of potash were broadcasted at final ploughing.
Nitrogen (N) at 120 kg ha−1 as prilled urea (46% N) was applied in all the treatments in three equal
splits, at the time of sowing, at maximum tillering and at booting stage. Soil application of Zn
through Zn-EDTA and ZnSO4·7H2O was applied as per the treatment at final ploughing except in
control. The crop was sown at 22.5 cm row spacing in November. The plot size kept 4.0 m × 3.0 m
for each treatment. Wheat crop was grown as per the standard recommended package of practices
and harvested in April.

Growth, yield parameters and yields

For total dry matter accumulation at harvesting stage, plant from 1 m2 area was harvested, then air-
dried and further oven-dried at 60°± 2°C till constant weight was obtained. Dry weight was
recorded and expressed in g m−2. Leaf area (cm2) measured using ‘Leaf Area Meter’ (LI-COR
Model L1-3000, Lambda Instrument Corporation, Nebraska, USA) from the plants selected for
recording the dry matter accumulation. The leaves were separated from the stem and cleaned
with tap water and with de-ionized water and then dried with tissue paper. The leaf area was
expressed in cm2. Leaf area index (LAI) was calculated at 90 days of sowing using the formula as
suggested by Evans (1972). LAI is expressed as the ratio of leaf surface (one side only) to the
ground area occupied by the plant.

Total leaf areaðcm2 Þ

LAI ¼
Ground areaðcm2 Þ
Relative growth rate (RGR) expresses the dry weight increase in a time interval in relation to
initial weight. It is calculated from the measurements taken at times T1 and T2. In fact, RGR value is
the slope of the line when log W is plotted against T. RGR was calculated using following equation:
Loge W2  loge W1

Mean RGR ¼ mg g1 day1
T2  T1
where W1 and W2 are the dry weight values at time T1 and T2, respectively. T1 and T2 are time in
days.
The crop growth rate (CGR) is calculated using following formula:
W 2  W1

Mean CGR ¼ g m2 day1
T2  T1
Net assimilation rate is the net gain of assimilate per unit leaf area time. It represents the
photosynthetic efficiency of leaves. The following formula was used to calculate the NAR.
ðW2  W1 ÞðIn LA2  In LA1 Þ

Mean NAR ¼ g m2 day1
ðT2  T1 ÞðLA2  LA1 Þ
where W2 and W1 are dry weights recorded at time T2 and T1, respectively. LA2 and LA1 are the leaf
area values recorded at time T2 and T1.
Ten spikes were randomly selected at the time of harvest and their weight was taken and
threshed manually. The grains so obtained were cleaned and counted manually. The mean value of
grains per spike was calculated and expressed as number of grains per spike. The 1000 grains taken
from sampled spikes were first counted by a seed counter and then weighed to compute the test
4 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

weight. After harvesting, threshing, cleaning and drying, the grain yield of wheat estimated at 14%
moisture content. Likewise, straw yield was recorded by subtracting grain yield from the total
biomass yield. Gross and net returns were calculated based on the grain and straw yield and the
prevailing market prices of wheat in respective seasons. The benefit-to-cost (B:C) ratio was calcu-
lated by using following expression: net returns (US$ ha−1)/cost of cultivation (US$ ha−1).

Chemical analysis of plant samples and RE

Plant samples were collected at 10 days before of harvesting and dried in oven at 60 ± 2°C for 6 h.
The oven-dried samples were sieved by passing through 40 mesh sieve in a Macro–Wiley Mill. From
each replication, 0.5 g dry matter samples of straw, spike straw and grain were taken for chemical
analysis to determine the Zn concentration in wheat varieties. The Zn content in dry matter of
wheat in straw, spike straw and grain was determined by wet-digestion (di-acid digestion) proce-
dure described by Prasad et al. (2006) using Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry. The Zn uptake
was computed by multiplying with respective Zn concentration with different parts of plant and
expressed as Zn uptake in g ha−1. The estimated values of RE of applied Zn were computed using
the following expressions as suggested by Fageria and Baligar (2003).
 
ðUZn  UAc Þ
RE ¼  100
Zna

wherein UZn refers to the total Zn uptake (g ha−1) of different wheat varieties in Zn applied plots,
UAC refers to the total Zn uptake (g ha−1) of wheat in control (Zn0) plots, Zna refers to the Zn
applied (kg ha−1).

Grain quality parameters

Grain hardness index was determined by using ‘Single Kernel Characterization System 4100’ from
Perten Instruments, Australia. All dockage was removed from the sample using seed cleaner and
200 g seed was used for analysis. Using sample scoop, seed was placed in the inlet scooper and
sample holder knob was turned clockwise to the hopper door. The force (kg) applied to break the
grains was measured. The values of kernel hardness, moisture and grain weight were recorded for
the 100 seeds of each sample. The grain hardness index was expressed in kg. The protein content in
wheat grain was obtained by multiplying N concentration with a coefficient factor 5.85. This factor is
based on the N content of the major wheat grain protein. Gluten and starch content was analyzed
with the help of grain analyzer (1241 FOSS Infratec grain analyzer) and expressed in percentage.

Statistical analysis
The data obtained from study for 2 years were analyzed statistically using the F-test, as per the
procedure given by Gomez and Gomez (1984). LSD values at p = 0.05 were used to determine the
significance of difference between treatment means. Interactions if found significant were discussed.

Results
Mean crop growth rate, RGR and net assimilation rate
Wheat varieties were significantly differed in CGR, RGR and NAR (Tables 1 and 2). HD 2932 had the
highest CGR at 30–60 DAS. As regard to RGR, the highest exhibited with HD 2932 closely followed
by HD 2894 at 30–60 DAS. HD 2894 also had maximum NAR, which was similar to HD 2932 and
PBW 343, which were significantly superior over HD 2851, HD 2687 and HD 2967 at both 30–60 and
60–90 DAS stages. Zn fertilization treatment irrespective of sources and methods of application
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 5

Table 1. Mean CGR and RGR of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
Mean CGR (g m−2 day−1) Mean RGR (mg g−1 day−1)
30–60 DAS 30–60 DAS
HD HD HD PBW HD HD HD HD HD PBW HD HD
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 6.57 6.71 6.75 6.08 7.43 8.66 7.03 65.33 67.57 69.14 63.84 71.97 79.15 69.50
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 6.31 6.75 6.67 8.00 8.09 8.42 7.37 57.92 67.44 62.70 69.80 71.73 74.09 67.28
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 7.98 6.89 7.36 7.15 8.63 8.64 7.77 70.79 66.65 71.63 68.06 75.33 70.84 70.55
+ 0.5% FS at MT and
BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 6.53 7.42 7.65 7.09 8.05 8.41 7.52 62.34 65.44 67.98 64.75 71.78 71.98 67.38
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 7.60 7.53 7.04 7.63 9.31 8.59 7.95 66.02 70.68 67.14 68.27 72.52 70.99 69.27
0.5% FS at MT and
BS
Mean 7.00 7.06 7.10 7.19 8.30 8.54 64.48 67.56 67.72 66.95 72.66 73.41
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 0.59 2.96
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 0.56 NS
Zn × V NS NS
CGR: Crop growth rate; V: varieties; RGR: relative growth rate; FS: foliar spray; SA: soil application; MT: maximum tillering;
BS: booting stage; DAS: days after sowing.

Table 2. Mean NAR of wheat at different crop growth stages as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over
2 years).
Mean NAR (g m−2 day−1)
30–60 DAS 60–90 DAS
HD HD HD PBW HD HD HD HD HD PBW HD HD
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 9.90 9.91 8.36 11.16 11.07 12.19 10.43 6.01 6.62 4.49 8.98 6.99 6.97 6.68
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 9.73 10.10 7.89 13.50 11.87 11.22 10.72 5.90 6.17 5.44 6.66 7.37 6.98 6.42
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 11.19 9.44 8.31 11.34 13.50 12.03 10.97 5.64 6.25 5.32 6.70 7.35 6.93 6.36
+ 0.5% FS at MT and
BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 8.66 10.47 10.27 10.46 12.68 11.68 10.70 5.68 5.98 4.84 6.99 8.10 7.62 6.53
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 10.23 10.71 8.37 10.88 14.29 12.15 11.11 5.70 6.29 5.25 7.87 6.65 6.81 6.43
0.5% FS at MT and
BS
Mean 9.94 10.13 8.64 11.47 12.68 11.85 5.79 6.26 5.07 7.44 7.29 7.06
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 0.89 0.63
Zinc fertilization (Zn) NS NS
Zn × V 1.74 NS
NAR: Net assimilation rate; V: varieties; FS: foliar spray; SA: soil application; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage; DAS: days
after sowing.

were not differed significantly with respect CGR, RGR and NAR. Application of 1.25 kg Zn ha−1
(EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray and 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum tillering and
booting stages were superior with respect to CGR, RGR and NAR. Nevertheless, control proved
inferior most with respect to mean CGR, RGR and NAR. Combined application of Zn, that is,
soil + foliar, showed superiority owing to better nutrition that greatly influenced the productivity
of wheat. Slow release pattern of Zn in Zn-EDTA might be responsible for better growth besides
improving higher foliage biomass in different wheat cultivars.

Growth and yield parameters

Of the six promising wheat varieties studied, HD 2967 had the longest and heaviest spike which
was remained very close to HD 2687. At maturity, HD 2894 produced significantly more dry matter
6 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

Table 3. LAI and DMA of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
LAI at 90 DAS DMA (g m−2) at harvest
HD HD HD PBW HD HD HD HD HD PBW HD HD
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 3.76 3.85 4.70 3.54 3.93 3.39 3.86 1459 1557 1419 1448 1667 1532 1514
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 4.13 4.10 4.89 4.32 3.98 3.51 4.15 1591 1485 1468 1909 1717 1556 1621
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 4.43 4.01 4.75 4.31 4.22 3.83 4.26 1543 1706 1875 1585 1714 1885 1718
+ 0.5% FS at MT and BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 4.42 4.32 5.20 4.34 3.58 3.33 4.20 1589 1649 1604 1555 1771 1736 1651
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA)+ 4.67 4.26 4.95 3.96 3.89 4.00 4.29 1469 1641 1662 1756 2087 1850 1744
0.5% FS at MT and BS
Mean 4.28 4.11 4.90 4.09 3.92 3.61 1530 1608 1606 1651 1791 1712
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 0.34 61.72
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 0.24 92.81
Zn × V NS 227.33
LAI: Leaf area index; V: varieties; DMA: dry matter accumulation; FS: foliar spray; SA: soil application; MT: maximum tillering;
BS: booting stage; DAS: days after sowing.

Table 4. Yield attributes of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
Spike weight (g) Spike length (cm)
HD HD HD PBW HD HD HD HD HD PBW HD HD
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 2.34 3.51 3.64 3.40 3.16 2.77 3.14 8.88 9.40 9.80 9.27 9.15 9.70 9.37
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 2.57 3.65 3.90 3.44 3.42 3.03 3.33 8.98 9.31 10.11 9.49 9.01 9.86 9.46
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) + 2.56 3.77 3.77 3.41 3.84 3.02 3.40 8.97 9.70 9.90 9.30 9.50 9.79 9.53
0.5% FS at MT and BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 2.55 3.75 3.87 3.42 3.63 2.95 3.36 8.89 9.69 10.03 9.21 9.29 9.73 9.47
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 2.63 3.82 3.84 3.45 3.74 3.26 3.46 9.28 9.70 9.98 9.16 9.48 9.60 9.54
0.5% FS at MT and BS
Mean 2.53 3.70 3.81 3.42 3.56 3.01 9.00 9.56 9.96 9.29 9.29 9.73
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 0.16 0.15
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 0.11 NS
Zn × V NS NS
FS: Foliar spray; SA: soil application; V: varieties; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage.

than the HD 2851, HD 2687 and HD 2967. However, HD 2687 had the highest and HD 2851 lowest
grains spike−1 (Tables 3–5). HD 2894 had highest 1000 grain weight, which was similar to HD 2851,
HD 2967 and HD 2932 varieties. With respect to sources and methods of Zn fertilization, application
of 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 through EDTA + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum tillering and booting stages
registered highest LAI, DMA and yield attributes, that is,, spike weight and their length and grains
spike−1. However, 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum tillering and booting
stages was the next best treatment with respect to yield parameters, indicating foliar fertilization
imparting better role for improving growth and yield characteristics. Nonsignificant variation was
observed among Zn fertilization treatments with respect to 1000 grain weight.

Yields
Among six wheat varieties, HD 2967 produced significantly highest grain yield (5.20 Mg ha−1);
nevertheless, it was remained at par to PBW 343 (Table 6). The lowest grain yield was recorded in
HD 2687 variety. Among Zn fertilization treatments, application of 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 through
EDTA + 0.5% foliar spray was superior most and produced maximum grain and straw yield,
which was at par to that rest of treatments except control. Increase in grain yield due to Zn
fertilization varied substantially between 9.4% and 12.1%. As regard to HI, HD 2851 registered
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 7

Table 5. Yield attributes of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
Grains spike−1 1000 grain weight (g)
HD HD HD PBW HD HD HD HD HD PBW HD HD
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 42.54 53.86 53.89 50.45 48.24 43.57 48.76 42.62 38.59 42.59 42.20 44.93 46.17 42.85
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 44.39 58.45 53.57 52.19 48.56 50.40 51.26 45.48 40.55 44.05 42.05 45.28 43.92 43.55
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 47.43 62.75 55.53 51.88 61.02 55.64 55.71 46.26 41.03 44.57 39.93 45.05 44.63 43.58
+ 0.5% FS at MT and
BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 45.40 61.66 55.82 49.16 54.70 49.08 52.64 43.71 38.81 44.31 42.99 44.58 45.09 43.25
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 51.29 64.39 60.77 52.64 62.09 58.77 58.33 45.37 40.35 45.67 40.87 46.00 45.46 43.95
0.5% FS at MT and
BS
Mean 46.21 60.22 55.92 51.27 54.92 51.49 44.69 39.87 44.24 41.61 45.17 45.05
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 3.42 1.16
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 2.36 NS
Zn × V NS NS
FS: Foliar spray; SA: soil application; V: varieties; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage.

Table 6. Grain and straw yield of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
Grain yield (Mg ha−1) Straw yield (Mg ha−1)
HD HD HD PBW HD HD HD HD HD PBW HD HD
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 4.21 3.94 4.46 4.25 4.30 4.17 4.22 6.42 6.31 7.32 7.27 7.48 7.95 7.13
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 4.68 4.32 4.94 4.75 4.46 4.58 4.62 6.46 6.98 6.75 8.47 7.13 7.50 7.21
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) + 4.71 4.61 5.20 4.59 4.61 4.48 4.70 5.98 7.75 8.05 8.31 7.40 7.88 7.56
0.5% FS at MT and BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 4.66 4.30 4.90 4.56 4.73 4.66 4.63 6.92 7.56 7.23 7.02 8.20 7.49 7.40
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 4.67 4.41 4.93 4.97 4.79 4.60 4.73 6.58 7.73 7.14 8.28 8.17 8.21 7.69
0.5% FS at MT and BS
Mean 4.59 4.31 4.89 4.62 4.58 4.50 6.47 7.26 7.30 7.87 7.68 7.81
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 0.30 0.50
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 0.11 0.34
Zn × V NS 0.84
FS: Foliar spray; SA: soil application; V: varieties; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage.

highest values (41.5%) followed by HD 2967 (40.2%), while nonsignificant variation was recorded in
Zn fertilization treatments (Table 7). A significant relationship (r2 = 0.71–0.93) exhibited between
grain yields and yield parameters, that is,, effective tillers m−2, grains spike−1 and grain weight
spike−1 (Figure 1) which ultimately reflected in higher grain yield.

Cultivation cost, returns and B:C ratio

Among varieties, HD 2967 was most remunerative and recorded the highest gross and net returns
as well as B:C ratio, which was similar to PBW 343, HD 2894 and HD 2932 but significantly higher
than HD 2851 and HD 2687. Zn fertilization treatments were also significantly influenced the
economics of wheat (Tables 7–9). Application of 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA) was the costliest treatment
with 574.2 $ ha−1 and it was 5.2% and 26.3% higher than 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray
and 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum tillering and booting stages, respec-
tively. However, the maximum gross return was accrued with 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA) + 0.5% foliar
spray while net returns with 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray which was 7.2% and 14.7%
higher, respectively, than 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray and 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA)
applied plots. Almost similar trend was also observed with B:C ratio.
8 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

Table 7. Harvest index and cultivation cost of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
Harvest index (%)
HD HD HD PBW HD HD Cultivation cost
Treatment 2851 2687 2967 343 2894 2932 Mean (US$ ha−1)
Control (no Zn) 39.7 38.9 38.3 37.1 36.6 34.5 37.5 440.1
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 42.1 38.3 42.4 36.1 38.8 38.0 39.3 452.2
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) + 44.1 37.6 39.3 35.7 38.5 36.3 38.6 454.8
0.5% FS at MT and BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 40.2 36.3 40.4 39.5 36.7 38.6 38.6 574.2
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 0.5% 41.5 36.4 40.8 38.0 37.1 36.0 38.3 545.7
FS at MT and BS
Mean 41.5 37.5 40.2 37.3 37.5 36.7
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 2.5
Zinc fertilization (Zn) NS
Zn × V NS
FS: Foliar spray; SA: soil application; V: varieties; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage.

Zinc concentration, uptake and RE

Higher concentration of Zn was observed during initial stage of crop growth and decreased subse-
quently with increase in the crop growth stages. Zn concentrations in different parts of wheat was in
order of grain > spike straw > straw. Among tested varieties, 60–78% higher Zn concentration was
found in grain as compared to straw. The Zn concentrations were highest and lowest in grain of HD
2851 and HD 2932 variety, respectively (Figure 2). Uptake of Zn was highest in HD 2967 which was
statistically at par with HD 2851, PBW 343 and HD 2894 varieties. Significant difference was registered
regarding RE among tested varieties and highest RE was reported in HD 2687. Zn fertilization
significantly increased Zn concentration at different crop growth stages and in different parts of
wheat. Both the tested source of Zn found statistically identical but numerically higher Zn concentra-
tion was reported in Zn-EDTA (Figure 3). Soil + foliar application of Zn was found superior over soil
application alone. The highest Zn concentration in grain as well as straw was found with application of
1.25 kg Zn ha−1 (Zn-EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray followed by with 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar
spray. Application of Zn in wheat crop increased grain Zn concentration by 8–10%. Uptake of Zn was
increased 4–7% in soil + foliar application in comparison to soil application alone. The highest uptake
of Zn was registered with application of 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 (Zn-EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray which was
20–23% higher over control (no Zn). On an average, Zn application in wheat increased grain Zn
concentration by 8–10%. However, RE was nearly doubled in soil + foliar application of Zn as
compared to soil application alone from either source.

Grain quality parameters

Grain protein and wet gluten content was significantly varied in different varieties; these were
greater in HD 2967 followed by HD 2894, it might be due to genetic properties of a particular
variety and Zn fertilization. There was 24.6%, 15.3%, 14%, 13.5% and 3.8% increase in wet gluten
content with HD 2967 over HD 2851, HD 2687, PBW 343, HD 2932 and HD 2894, respectively
(Figure 4). Wheat varieties also had a significant effect on starch content. PBW 343 had highest
starch content (67%), which was almost similar to HD 2932 (66.7%), which were significantly
superior to rest of the varieties. As regard to GHI, HD 2932 had lowest values (64.3), which was
remained at par to PBW 343, which were recorded significantly lower values than other varieties
(Figure 4). The higher protein and wet gluten content were obtained when wheat was grown in Zn-
EDTA treated plots, compared to other Zn sources, but statistically, the variation was nonsignifi-
cant. The performance of Zn treatments in improving these parameters was in the order:
1.25 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray > 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 9

4.8

4.7
y = 0.0056x + 2.064
Grain yield (Mg ha-1)
4.6 R² = 0.9321
4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2

4.1
350 370 390 410 430 450 470 490
-2
Effective tillers m
4.8

4.7 y = 0.0489x + 1.7984

R² = 0.711
Grain yield (Mg ha-1)

4.6

4.5

4.4

4.3

4.2

4.1
50 52 54 56 58 60 62
-1
Grains spike
5
4.9
y = 2.8245x - 2.3253
Grain yield (Mg ha -1)

4.8
R² = 0.876
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
2.35 2.4 2.45 2.5 2.55 2.6
-1
Grains weight spike

Figure 1. Relationships between grain yield and yield parameters – effective tillers (m−2), grains spike−1 and grain weight
spike−1 in present study.

spray > 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (EDTA) > 5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH), while lowest was recorded in control plots
(Figure 5). Higher starch content was recorded with Zn-EDTA-applied plots compared to control
(Figure 5), while nonsignificant variation was recorded among Zn fertilization treatments with
respect to GHI. Among the Zn sources, effect of ZSHH was comparatively lower than Zn-EDTA in
hardness index of wheat grains but produced harder grains compared to control.
 10
P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

Table 8. Gross and net returns of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
Gross returns (US$ ha−1) Net returns (US$ 103 ha−1)
Treatment HD 2851 HD 2687 HD 2967 PBW 343 HD 2894 HD 2932 Mean HD 2851 HD 2687 HD 2967 PBW 343 HD 2894 HD 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 1396.4 1328.5 1517.3 1469.5 1495.7 1503.3 1451.8 956.4 888.5 1077.3 1029.4 1055.7 1063.2 1011.7
5.0 kg Zn 1501.5 1460.7 1577.9 1668.2 1503.7 1557.9 1545.0 1049.3 1008.6 1125.8 1216.0 1051.5 1105.8 1092.8
(ZnSO4·7H2O)
2.5 kg Zn 1470.8 1582.8 1731.6 1621.5 1556.6 1566.1 1588.2 1016.0 1128.1 1276.8 1166.8 1101.8 1111.4 1133.5
(ZnSO4·7H2O) +
0.5% FS at MT and
BS
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 1530.1 1500.5 1605.8 1517.0 1643.1 1574.0 1561.7 955.9 926.2 1031.6 942.8 1068.9 999.8 987.5
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 1506.4 1536.2 1604.5 1701.3 1654.1 1615.6 1603.0 960.7 990.4 1058.8 1155.6 1108.4 1069.8 1057.3
+ 0.5% FS at MT
and BS
Mean 1481.0 1481.7 1607.4 1595.5 1570.7 1563.4 987.6 988.4 1114.1 1102.1 1077.3 1070.0
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 85.64 85.64
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 28.50 28.50
Zn × V 69.82 69.82
FS: foliar spray; SA: soil application; V: varieties; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage.
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 11

Table 9. Benefit-to-cost ratio of wheat as influenced by varieties and Zn fertilization (average over 2 years).
B:C ratio
Treatment HD 2851 HD 2687 HD 2967 PBW 343 HD 2894 HD 2932 Mean
Control (no Zn) 2.18 2.02 2.45 2.34 2.40 2.42 2.30
5.0 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) 2.32 2.23 2.49 2.68 2.33 2.45 2.42
2.5 kg Zn (ZnSO4·7H2O) + 0.5% FS at MT and BS 2.24 2.48 2.81 2.57 2.43 2.44 2.49
2.5 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) 1.66 1.61 1.80 1.64 1.86 1.74 1.72
1.25 kg Zn (Zn-EDTA) + 0.5% FS at MT and BS 1.76 1.82 1.95 2.12 2.03 1.96 1.94
Mean 2.03 2.03 2.30 2.27 2.21 2.20
LSD (P = 0.05)
V 0.17
Zinc fertilization (Zn) 0.06
Zn × V 0.14
FS: Foliar spray; SA: soil application; V: varieties; MT: maximum tillering; BS: booting stage.

50 3
Straw Grain Spike straw Recovery efficiency
45
Zn concentration (mg kg-1 dry matter)

2.5
40

Recovery efficiency (%)

2
35

30 1.5

25
1
20
0.5
15

10 0
HD 2851 HD 2687 HD 2967 PBW 343 HD 2894 HD 2932
Wheat varieties

Figure 2. Zn concentration in different parts and recovery efficiency as influenced by wheat varieties (average over 2 years).
The vertical bars represent LSD0.05 values.

Discussion
Significant variation was reported among wheat varieties with respect to mean CGR, RGR, NAR,
growth and yield parameters. Difference in growth and yield attributes is mainly because of
difference in the genetic material of the variety. Of the six promising wheat varieties studied, HD
2967 had the longest and heaviest spike, which was remained very close to HD 2687. With respect
to sources and methods of Zn fertilization, application of 1.25 kg Zn ha−1 through EDTA + 0.5%
foliar spray at maximum tillering and booting stages registered highest LAI, DMA and yield
attributes, that is, spike weight and their length and grains spike−1. However, 2.5 kg Zn ha−1
(ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum tillering and booting stages was the next best treatment
with respect to yield parameters, indicating foliar fertilization imparting better role for improving
growth and yield characteristics. This study shows that the effect of chelated Zn-EDTA was more
pronounced than ZSHH, which has more capacity to transport Zn to plant roots. Zn exerts an effect
on carbohydrate metabolism, which influences photosynthesis, sugar transformations and seed
development. Thus, increased Zn content and their uptake resulted in bolder grains, finally
improving test weight (Alloway 2008). Nawaz et al. (2015) reported that Zn application improved
the yield-related traits of all wheat cultivars as over control.
12 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

45 4
Straw Grain Spike straw Recovery efficiency

40 3.5
Zn concentration (mg kg-1 dry matter)

Recovery efficiency (%)

35
2.5
30
2
25
1.5
20
1

15 0.5

10 0

Zn fertilization

Figure 3. Zn concentration in different parts of wheat and its recovery efficiency as influenced by Zn fertilization (average over
2 years). The vertical bars represent LSD0.05 values.

80 90
Protein (%) Wet gluten (%) Starch (%) Grain hardiness
80
Protein, Wet gluten and Starch content (%)

70

70
60

Grain Hardiness Index

60
50
50
40
40
30
30
20
20

10 10

0 0
HD 2851 HD 2687 HD 2967 PBW 343 HD 2894 HD 2932
Wheat varieties

Figure 4. Grain quality parameters of wheat as influenced by promising varieties (average over 2 years). The vertical bars
represent LSD0.05 values.

Among six wheat varieties, HD 2967 produced significantly highest grain yield than rest of the
varieties; nevertheless, it was remained at par to PBW 343 (Table 6). The lowest values of 1000 grain
weight led to the lowest grain yield of HD 2687. Likewise, the higher DMA at maturity led to the
produce more straw yield of PBW 343 and HD 2932 than other wheat varieties studied. Similarly,
HD 2851 had short plant stature and produced lower dry matter at harvesting stage, which
ultimately led to lowest straw yield. The present study showed that different wheat varieties had
considerable variation in response to Zn fertilization. Majd et al. (2015) reported significant yield
differences in different irrigated wheat cultivars; among these, Chamran variety resulted in highest
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 13

Protein (%) Wet gluten (%) Starch (%) Grain hardiness

Protein, Wet gluten and Starch content (%) 70.0 70.6
69.6
60.0

Grain Hardiness Index (GHI)

68.6
50.0 67.6
66.6
40.0
65.6
30.0
64.6

20.0 63.6
62.6
10.0
61.6
0.0 60.6

Zn fertilization

Figure 5. Grain quality parameters of wheat as influenced by different Zn fertilized plots (average over 2 years). Treatments
were statistically nonsignificant and vertical bars represent standard deviation.

grain yield, while least in Star variety. Kalayci et al. (1999) tested 37 bread wheat and 3 durum
wheat cultivars grown under Zn-deficient conditions and observed that the Zn fertilization in
different wheat cultivars improved yield by ~30% than control plots. Increases in yield due to Zn
fertilization varied substantially between 8% and 76%. Zn applied through EDTA-chelated Zn
remained available to plants for longer time than that with other Zn sources due to lesser
transformation of applied Zn through EDTA chelates into unavailable forms. In Turkey, wheat
seeds coating with Zn registered higher yield (Cakmak 2008); thus, seed coating with Zn along
with foliar fertilization resulted in improve grain yields. Results of a study advocated that four foliar
fertilizations at the rate of 0.5% through ZSHH solution at various growth stages improved wheat
grain yield significantly, which was 8.2% (PBW 550) and 4.3% (PBW 343) higher than control plots,
respectively (Dhaliwal et al. 2009). Moreover, greater role of Zn-EDTA than other sources might be
due to lesser retention and more transport of chelated Zn to plant roots (Karak et al. 2005; Naik &
Das 2008; Shivay et al. 2008). Alvarez et al. (2001) also submitted that Zn application through EDTA,
the amounts of water-soluble, exchangeable and organically complexes Zn, improved in the soil
profile. Mixed Zn fertilization methods, that is, soil + foliar application, were found superior than a
single fertilization approach. It might be due to higher auxin formation, which have important role
in cell division and elongation of internode in plants (Khan et al. 2007). Thus, combined application
of Zn (soil + foliar) might be more promising in improving plant growth and yield compared to
other fertilization approaches (Imran & Rehim 2016).
Net returns and B:C ratio are important indicators for selection of remunerative variety and Zn
fertilization treatment; both of which have shown a wide variation among all the tested cultivars.
Because of higher grain yield, HD 2967 was most remunerative and recorded highest gross and net
returns as well as B:C ratio. Due to higher cost of EDTA chelates, the net returns and B:C ratio
obtained even lower than control (no Zn) plots. Thus, 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray or
5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) were better choice to realize maximum benefits to the farmers. The
concentration of nutrients among different parts shows mobilization behavior of nutrient from
source to sink. The Zn concentrations in different parts of wheat were in order of grain > spike
straw > straw. Among the tested varieties of wheat, 60–78% higher Zn concentration was found in
grain as compared to straw. The higher Zn concentration in wheat grain than straw showed that Zn
14 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

is easily mobilized to sink, that is, grain. Similar results were also reported by Shaheen et al. (2007),
Maqsood et al. (2009) and Prasad et al. (2012). Uptake of Zn was the highest in HD 2967 because of
it higher grain yield and Zn concentration in grain. Differences in Zn concentration and RE of tested
varieties might be due to variation in genetic makeup of different varieties which resulted in
differential capacity of wheat varieties to absorb, assimilate and translocation of nutrients from soil.
Significant differences in micronutrient concentrations in different varieties were also reported by
Maqsood et al. (2009), Narwal et al. (2012), Mathpal et al. (2015) and Nawaz et al. (2015).
Application of Zn in wheat crop increased Zn concentration in grain by 8–10%. Increase in Zn
concentration in grain might also be due to its remobilization from leaves to grain (Xue et al. 2012).
Increase in Zn concentration in different parts of wheat was also reported by Hussain et al. (2013)
and Amiri et al. (2015). Application of EDTA-chelated Zn remained available to crop plants for
longer time than ZSHH, owing to less transformation of EDTA-chelated Zn into unavailable forms
and application of Zn as foliar spray was efficiently absorbed by leaves and translocated to
reproductive parts; hence, accumulation and RE were more over soil application alone. Similar
results were also reported by Pooniya and Shivay (2012) and Singh (2013).
Protein and gluten content in different wheat varieties significantly improved with foliar
fertilization either through Zn-EDTA and Zn sulfate sources. Protein content is an important quality
parameter of wheat, as it imparts major parameter in deciding premium market prices. Grain
protein and wet gluten content significantly influenced with different varieties; these were greater
in HD 2967 closely followed by HD 2894, it might be due to genetic properties of a particular
variety and Zn fertilization. Kharub and Gupta (2003) described that Zn application improve β-
carotene content of aestivum wheat varieties and this played pivotal role in several Zn containing
enzymes which ultimately improve other grain quality parameters. Zn fertilization led to increase in
Zn uptake which resulted in increased protein content in durum wheat grains. During maturity, Zn
is translocated to grain and N play as stimulating factor for the translocation of Zn (Barunawati
et al. 2013). A positive strong correlation in grain protein and Zn content in wheat grain indicate
that grain proteins represent a sink for Zn (Gao et al. 2012). Earlier studies investigated that the
highest Zn accumulation in wheat seed materialize in early stage of seed formation, highest protein
synthesis also takes place at same stage (Ozturk et al. 2006; Kutman et al. 2011). Proteins are highly
dependent on Zn-ions to maintain their activities. Significantly higher starch content was recorded
with Zn-EDTA-applied plots compared to control. Among Zn sources, effect of ZSHH was compara-
tively lower than Zn-EDTA in hardness index of wheat grains but produced harder grains compared
to control. Foliar fertilization of Zn doubled their concentration in grain and reduced the propor-
tion of gliadin and SDS-un-extractable polymeric protein and increased the proportion of SDS-
extractable polymeric protein in wheat grains (Peck et al. 2008). Finally, this leads to improve
nutritional quality enhancement of wheat and enhance processing and their bread making
performance.

Conclusions
This study clearly demonstrated that HD 2967 in conjunction with 1.25 kg Zn ha−1
(EDTA) + 0.5% foliar spray or 2.5 kg Zn ha−1 (ZSHH) + 0.5% foliar spray at maximum tillering
and booting stages proved as an alternate viable option in realizing higher productivity,
profitability, grain Zn concentration and grain quality. HD 2851 was superior most from grain
Zn concentration point of view. PBW 343 was found second better alternative cultivar with
respect to above production parameters and benefit earned. Overall, varietal selection coupled
with Zn fertilization may prove as best for enhancing productivity, profitability and quality of
wheat in irrigated plain zone of northern India.
 ARCHIVES OF AGRONOMY AND SOIL SCIENCE 15

Acknowledgments
The senior author gratefully acknowledges the assistance received in the form of Senior Research Fellowship from the
Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, during his Doctor of Philosophy degree program. Thanks also go
to the Heads of Divisions of Agronomy and Agricultural Physics for providing the necessary field and laboratory
facilities during the course of the investigation.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Alloway BJ. 2008. Zinc in soils and crop nutrition, second ed. International Zinc association publication. Brussels,
Belgium: International Zinc Association.
Alvarez JM, Novillo J, Obrador A, Lopez–Valdivia LM. 2001. Mobility and leachability of Zn in two soils treated with six
organic Zn complexes. J Agric Food Chem. 49:3833–3840.
Amiri R, Bahraminejad S, Sasani S, Saeid J, Fakhari R. 2015. Bread wheat genetic variation for grain’s protein, iron and
zinc concentrations as uptake by their genetic ability. Eur J Agron. 67:20–26.
Barunawati N, Giehl RFH, Bauer B, Von Wirén N. 2013. The influence of inorganic nitrogen fertilizer forms on
micronutrient re-translocation and accumulation in grains of winter wheat. Front Plant Sci. 4:1–11.
Cakmak I. 2008. Enrichment of cereal grains with zinc: agronomic or genetic biofortification? Plant Soil. 302:1–17.
Dhaliwal SS, Sadana US, Manchanda JS, Dhadli HS. 2009. Biofortification of wheat grains with zinc and iron in Typic
Ustochrept soils of Punjab. Ind J Fertil. 5:13–20.
Evans GC. 1972. Quantitative analysis of growth. Oxford (UK): Blackwell Scientific.
Fageria NK, Baligar VC. 2003. Methodology for evaluation of lowland rice genotypes for nitrogen use efficiency. J Plant
Nutr. 26:1315–1333.
Gao X, Lukow OM, Grant CA. 2012. Grain concentrations of protein, iron and zinc and bread making quality in spring
wheat as affected by seeding date and nitrogen fertilizer management. J Geochem Explor. 121:36–44.
Gomez KA, Gomez AA. 1984. Statistical procedures for agricultural research. 2nd Edition, an international rice research
institute book. Wiley–Inter–Science Publication. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Graham AW, McDonald GK 2001. Effect of zinc on photosynthesis and yield of wheat under heat stress. In:
Proceedings of the 10th Australian Agronomy Conference 2001, Australian Society of Agronomy. Hobart,
Tasmania, Australia. pp. 4–25. http:/www.regional. org.au/au/asa/2001/2/c/graham.htm.
Hussain S, Maqsood MA, Aziz T, Basra SMA. 2013. Zinc bioavailability response curvature in wheat grains under
incremental zinc applications. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 59:1001–1016.
Imran M, Rehim A. 2016. Zinc fertilization approaches for agronomic biofortification and estimated human bioavail-
ability of zinc in maize grain. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 63:106–116.
Kalayci M, Torun B, Eker S, Aydin M, Ozturk L, Cakmak I. 1999. Grain yield, zinc efficiency and zinc concentration of
wheat cultivars grown in a zinc–deficient calcareous soil in field and greenhouse. Field Crops Res. 63:87–98.
Karak T, Singh UK, Das S, Das DK, Kuzyakov Y. 2005. Comparative efficacy of ZnSO4 and Zn–EDTA application for
fertilization of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Arch Agron Soil Sci. 51:253–264.
Khan MU, Qasim M, Khan I. 2007. Effect of Zn fertilizer on rice grown in different soils of Dera Ismail Khan. Sarhad J
Agric. 23:1033–1040.
Kharub AS, Gupta SP. 2003. Quality traits in durum and aestivum wheat genotypes as influenced by Zn application.
Ind J Agril Res. 37:48–51.
Khoshgoftar AH, Shariatmadari H, Karimian N, Khajehpour MR. 2006. Responses of wheat genotypes to zinc fertiliza-
tion under saline soil conditions. J Plant Nutr. 29:1543–1556.
Kutman UB, Yildiz B, Cakmak I. 2011. Improved nitrogen status enhances zinc and iron concentrations both in the
whole grain and the endosperm fraction of wheat. J Cereal Sci. 53:118–125.
Ma GS, Jin Y, Li YP, Zhai FY, Kok F, Jacobsen E, Yang XG. 2008. Iron and zinc deficiencies in China: what is a feasible
and cost–effective strategy? Public Health Nutr. 11:632–638.
Majd AN, Fazel MA, Lak S. 2015. The effect of foliar application of zinc (Zn) on yield and yield components of irrigated
wheat cultivars in Ahvaz weather conditions. Int J Biosci. 6:370–377.
Malakouti MJ 2011. The role of zinc in improving the quality of consumed bread. In: Third International Zinc
Symposium: ‘Improving crop production and human health’, October 10–14, Hyderabad, A.P., India.
Maqsood M, Rahmatullah A, Kanwal S, Aziz T, Ashraf M. 2009. Evaluation of Zn distribution among grain and straw of
twelve indigenous wheat (Triticum aestivum) genotypes. Pakistan J Bot. 41:225–231.
16 P. C. GHASAL ET AL.

Mathpal B, Srivastava PC, Shankhdhar D, Shankhdhar SC. 2015. Zinc enrichment in wheat genotypes under various
methods of zinc application. Plant Soil Environ. 61:171–175.
Naik SK, Das DK. 2008. Relative performance of chelated zinc and zinc sulphate for lowland rice (Oryza sativa L.). Nutr
Cycl Agroecosys. 81:219–227.
Narwal RP, Dahiya RR, Malik RS, Kala R. 2012. Influence of genetic variability on zinc, iron and manganese responses in
wheat. J Geochem Explor. 121:45–48.
Nawaz H, Hussain N, Yasmeen A, Arif M, Hussain M, Rehmani MIA, Chatta MB, Ahmad A. 2015. Soil applied zinc
ensures high production and net returns of divergent wheat cultivars. J Environ Agril Sci. 2:1–4.
Ozturk L, Yazici MA, Yucel C, Torun A, Cekic C, Bagci A, Ozkan H, Braun HJ, Sayers Z, Cakmak I. 2006. Concentration and
localization of zinc during seed development and germination in wheat. Plant Physiol. 128:144–152.
Peck AW, McDonald GK, Graham RD. 2008. Zinc nutrition influences the protein composition of flour in bread wheat
(Triticum aestivum L.). J Cereal Sci. 47:266–274.
Pooniya V, Shivay YS. 2012. Summer green-manuring crops and zinc fertilization on productivity and economics of
Basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.). Arch Agron Soil Sci. 58:593–616.
Pooniya V, Shivay YS. 2013. Enrichment of Basmati rice grain and straw with zinc and nitrogen through ferti–
fortification and summer green manuring crops under Indo–Gangetic Plains of India. J Plant Nutr. 36:91–117.
Pooniya V, Shivay YS, Rana A, Nain L, Prasanna R. 2012. Enhancing soil nutrient dynamics and productivity of Basmati
rice through residue incorporation and zinc fertilization. Eur J Agron. 41:28–37.
Prasad R, Shivay YS, Kumar D. 2012. Biofortification/ferti-fortification of rice (Oryza sativa) and wheat (Triticum
aestivum) for ameliorating zinc malnutrition for humans and animals in India. Ind J Agron. 57 (3s):195–198.
Prasad R, Shivay YS, Kumar D, Sharma SN. 2006. Learning by doing exercise in soil fertility– A practical manual for soil
fertility. New Delhi: Division of Agronomy, IARI.
Shaheen R, Samim MK, Mahmud R. 2007. Effect of zinc on yield and zinc uptake by wheat on some soils of
Bangladesh. J Soil Nat. 1:07–14.
Shivay YS, Kumar D, Prasad R. 2008. Relative efficiency of zinc sulfate and zinc oxide–coated urea in rice–wheat
cropping system. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal. 39:1154–1167.
Singh A 2013. Effect of summer green manuring crops and zinc fertilizer sources on productivity and quality of
aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L.)-durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) cropping system. Ph.D. Thesis, Indian
Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India.
Takkar PN. 1996. Micronutrient research and sustainable agricultural productivity in India. J Ind Soc Soil Sci. 44:562–
581.
Wei Y, Shohag MJI, Yang X. 2012. Biofortification and bioavailability of rice grain zinc as affected by different forms of
foliar zinc fertilization. Plos One. 7:e45428.
Welch RM, Graham RD. 1999. A new paradigm for world agriculture: meeting human needs, productive, sustainable
and nutritious. Field Crops Res. 60:1–10.
Xue YF, Yue SC, Zhang YQ, Cui ZL, Chen XP, Yang FC, Cakmak I, McGrath SP, Zhang FS, Zou CQ. 2012. Grain and shoot
Zn accumulation in winter wheat as affected by nitrogen management. Plant Soil. 261:153–163.
Yerokun OA, Chirwa M. 2014. Soil and foliar application of zinc to maize and wheat grown on a Zambian soil. Afr J
Agril Res. 9:963–970.