WO2013120116A1

WO2013120116A1 - Methods of treating plants

Info

Publication number: WO2013120116A1
Application number: PCT/ZA2013/000004
Authority: WO
Inventors: Shane Gordon Sparg
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee: Individual
Priority date: 2012-02-12
Filing date: 2013-02-11
Publication date: 2013-08-15
Anticipated expiration: 2014-08-12

Description

METHODS OF TREATING PLANTS

[0001] This invention relates to methods of treating plants.

[0002] In this specification the term "nutrient inputs" includes fertilizers, composts, manures, organic or chemical synthetics.

[0003] In this specification "crop yield" includes but is not limited to fruit, shoot, bulb or root: size, quantity and or quality.

Background of the Invention:

[0004] For many years it was thought that germination of seeds in natural seed banks was stimulated by the heat associated wildfires, which, at least for some plants, was thought to be a precondition for the germination of their seeds. However, the pioneering discovery reported by De Lange and Boucher relating to the stimulation of seed germination by plant-derived smoke, rather than heat, changed this view. [J H De Lange and C Boucher, Autecological studies on Audouinia capitata (Bruniaceae). I. Plant-derived smoke as a seed germination cue, South African Journal of Botany 56: 700-703 (1990)]

[0006] The realisation that the smoke itself contains a potent water soluble seed germination cue, lead to this natural phenomenon being harnessed to stimulate the germination of seeds for various purposes. Thus plant material is slowly combusted, and the smoke is either directed into a polythene tent and allowed to settle on the soil in the wild or it is directed on to seed trays placed in the tent. [0005] The further finding by de Lange and Boucher (op cit) that an aqueous extract of smoke is equally as effective as smoke in promoting seed germination introduced the possibility of commercialization of the technique while at the same time making it possible to conduct more in-depth studies in the laboratory and to store the active germination stimulating principle(s) of plant-derived smoke. Aqueous smoke is produced by combusting plant material and exposing the smoke generated to water. The solution formed is collected and can be stored for prolonged periods without loosing its germination stimulating effect [NAC Brown and J van Staden, Smoke as a germination cue: a review, Plant Growth Regulation, 22: 1 15-124 (1997)]. It has also been found that the active compound(s) can also be produced by exposing the plant material to dry heat.

[0006] In 2004, the compound 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-2-one was found in smoke generated from burning plant material and identified as the major germination stimulatory compound [J van Staden, AK Jager, ME Light and BV Burger, Isolation of the major germination cue from plant-derived smoke, South African Journal of Botany, 70: 654-657 (2004); GR Flematti, EL Ghisalberti, KW Dixon, RD Trengove, A compound from smoke that promotes seed germination, Science 305: 977 (2004)].

[0007] In 2006, it was reported that the compound 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-

2-one also improve vigour of seedlings and plants [van Staden et al Patent, 2006] which resulted in research into post germination benefits of this compound.

[0008] The present invention provides for further and unexpected uses for this compound. Summary of the Invention:

[0009] The present invention discloses the use of 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-

2-one as a plant nutrient potentiator.

[0010] The 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-2-one may be in the form of a component of smoke derived from the burning or smouldering of cellulose based bio- mass, or an aqueous solution containing the gasses derived from burning or smouldering of cellulose based biomass held in suspension in an aqueous solution. A solution of 3- methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-2-one in water is hereinafter called "smoke water" .

[0011 ] Alternatively the 3-methyl-2H-furo[2 , 3-c]pyran-2-one may be synthetically produced. Thus the compound may be formed from an amino-carbonyl reaction between an amino containing compound and a sugar or may be synthetically produced.

[0012] According to one aspect of the present invention there is provided a method of treating plants comprising ascertaining the fertilizer protocol for an area containing the plants and then feeding the said area with the combination an amount of fertiliser which is reduced as compared to the fertiliser protocol plus an amount of smoke water. The fertilizer protocol is ascertained by the farmer's experience in fertilizing the area or if there is no such experience by making calculations based on the information provided by the fertilizer manufacturer.

[0013] The smoke water is preferably made according to the invention described and claimed in my International Patent Application No. PCT/ZA2012/00031. [0014] Preferably the solution contains the compound 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3- c]pyran-2-one or a derivative thereof in a concentration of the compound used in the range between 10^~10 M and 10^~2 M.

[0015] The amount of fertigation is reduced by up to 50 % . Indeed it may be greater depending on fertilizer protocols.

[0016] According to another aspect of the present invention there is provided a method of treating cut flowers comprising placing the cut flowers into hydrating liquid and adding smoke water to the hydrating fluid. This method I have found reduces senescence in cut flowers.

[0017] The smoke water is preferably added in an amount to constitute a concentration of 10² to 10^"10 M preferably 10^~7 in the hydrating fluid. The smoke water is preferably added to the hydrating fluid in an amount to of approximately 1 : 1600.

[0018] According to a further aspect of the present invention there is provided a method of treating the structure of soil on which grass is grown, the method comprising applying smoke water to the surface of the grass improving soil structure.

[0019] Smoke water may be applied by being injected into the fertilization fluid.

However it may be applied by means of spraying, soaking etc, or in combination with other additives, or by means of soil or growth substrate treatment.

[0020] Smoke water may be applied once every fourteen days and preferably in an amount of 60 ml/m². [0021] According to the third aspect of the invention there is provided a method for improving soil structure.

[0022] The compound may be applied directly to the soil by means of dusting, spraying, soaking etc, or in combination with other additive substrate treatments.

[0023] The compound may be included in a solvent such as water, and may be accompanied with a suitable surfactant or wetting agent.

[0024] Embodiment of the invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying examples. In the description reference will be made to the accompanying figures.

[0025] In the figures :-

Figure 1 is bar graph showing the yield of strawberries in grammes per plant for a control block and a block treated with smoke water;

Figure 2 is a bar graph showing average fruit weights in a test of strawberry plant with two control areas and one area treated with smoke water as described;

Figure 3 is a bar graph showing the brix in the control areas and the area treated with smoke water;

Figure 4 is graph showing a comparison of the tomato yields per harvest between three types of treatment, treated against untreated;

Figure 5 shows a rose hydrated in untreated water which has fully opened in 14 days; Figure 6 shows a rose hydrated in water with smoke water dilution;

Figure 7 shows a soil profile of the control area of a golf course green after six months with a pronounced hydrophobic 10mm thatch layer; and Figure 8 shows a soil profile of the treated area of the golf course green after six months treatment showing a narrow diffusing 3mm thatch layer.

[0026] Example 1

[0027] Fertilizer reduction results in increased yield in the presence of smoke water.

[0028] The trial was conducted as a pot trial in a net house of a commercial tomato producing farm. Four-week old tomato plants were transplanted into pots filled with compost and coco peat mixture. The tomato plants were allowed to grow for twenty four weeks. Plant nutrition, pest and disease control, irrigation and cultural practices followed the proprietary protocols used on the farm.

[0029] 12 young tomato plants in pots were divided in to four groups. Each tomato plant used in the experiment was labelled and was randomly placed within the control environment, being a shade cloth nursery.

[0030] Group 1 received smoke water plus the standard fertilizer dosage (100%) i.e. the fertilizer dosage in accordance with the protocol ascertained by the farmer's experience. Group 2 received smoke water plus half the standard fertilizer dosage (50%). Group 3 was the control group which received no smoke water plus the standard fertilizer dosage (100%). Group 4 received smoke water plus no standard fertilizer dosage (0%). [0031] The smoke water was diluted to constitute a 10^"7 M of the compound 3- methyl-hA-furo[2,3-c] pyran-2-one solution in water. Application of smoke water was included into the daily irrigation protocol of the test plants exposed to this product. Smoke water was applied daily with irrigation at I ml / 1600ml per irrigation. 500ml of irrigation containing 0.3125ml of smoke water product was given daily to each test plant for the duration of the trial.

[0032] The standard plant nutrition fertigation program used on the farm was based on the use of the premixed content of three tanks, namely:

[0033] Tank Fl : The content of Tank Fl consisted of: 0.25 kg Urea, 70L

Upgrow [a carrier of nutrients comprising 5 % fulvic acid and 95 % water], 10 kg Potassium nitrate, 1.6 kg calcium, 3.2 1 Iron Chelate 15 % .

[0034] Tank F2: The content of Tank F2 consisted of: 0.25 kg Urea, 4.3

Upgrow [ditto], 10kg Potassium nitrate, 50kg Potassium sulphate, 10kg Magnesium sulphate, 0.094 kg Zinc sulphate, 0.1kg copper sulphate, 20kg Mono potassium phosphate, 700ml Manganese, 0.012 kg Somo [A liquid sodium molybdate fertilizer (contains 15.5 % molybdenum)], 0.35 kg Solibar and 12L H2P04

[0035] Tank F3 The content of Tank F3 contained diluted Sulphuric, Nitric or

Hydrochloric acid. The acid was used for automatically adjusting the pH of the irrigation water to 6.0.

[0036] The contents from both tanks Fl and F2 were used in the standard plant nutrition fertigation (the addition of fertilizer to water used for irrigation) program. The content of tank Fl was used in conjunction with water to fertigate the tomatoes every day in the morning and the content of tank F2 was used in conjunction with water to fertigate the tomatoes every day in the afternoon. The respective mixtures were mixed with the irrigation water according to electronic conductivity (EC) to establish the concentration of nitrogen in parts per million, i.e. when the plants are young (pre flowering-) the EC -opted for was 1.5 PPM, once the plants start fruiting an EC of 2 PPM was used and when the fruits became large, the EC was adjusted to 2.5 PPM. F3 was only used if the pH needs regulating. Plants were fertigated daily with 500ml of irrigation.

[0037] For the test plants to which only a 50% of the mentioned usual fertilizer regime was provided for the purposes of the trial the aforementioned EC values were halved.

[0038] Tests were undertaken after end of trial period and plant height, stem diameter number of leaves, number of clusters, number of flowers and yield (in kilograms) was recorded. The results were analysed.

[0039] Results

Table 1. Effect of smoke water on fertilizer reduction and yield of tomatoes Treatment Plant Stem No. No. No. Yield height Diameter Leave Cluster Flow Kg mm mm s s ers

Group 1 129.50 a 10.51 a 32 b 11.16 a 31.5 6.54 b

Smoke water b

Potentiator +

100% fertiliser

Group 2 140.83 a 10.33 a 37 a 1 1.67 a 36.5 a 8.9 a

Smoke water

Potentiator +

100% fertiliser

Group 3 133.67 a 9.58 b 20 c 4.50 c 26.33 1.141

100% fertiliser c c No Smoke

water

Potentiator

Group 4 103.67 b 8.46 c 17.00 4.50 c 16.00 1.16 c

Additive + No d d

smoke water

Potentiator

Parameters with treatments with the same letter are not significantly different at a 5 % confidence level.

[0040] From the above Table 1 it will be seen that the application of smoke water on its own to the test plants (Group 4) has no significant effect on the measured paraMeters as compared to the plants which received the standard fertilizer regime (Group 3). It therefore cannot be considered to be a fertilizer on its own, at least not at the applied regime.

[0041] The measured parameters of the test plants which received the standard fertilizer regime plus smoke water showed significant improvements over the test plants which received only the standard fertilizer regime. [0042] The most surprising result is that the test plants which received only half the standard fertilizer -regime plus smoke water showed an even greater improvement of the measured parameters over the test plants which received the 100% standard fertilizer regime, i.e. an improvement over both the plants that received the standard regime on its own and the plants which received the standard regime plus smoke water.

[0043] From these results it is clear that the use of smoke water on tomato plants would allow a substantially reduced production cost in that the nutrient input cost can at least be halved and in addition a significantly increased yield which translates to a substantially improved profit margin.

[0044] Example 2

[0045] A trial was run in the Cape Province, South Africa at a tomato nursery which were conducted in a control environment with 6000 plants (per 1/4 hectare plot) per treatment.

[0046] The four quarter hectare plots were all in a predominantly identical controlled environment. Each quarter hectare plot was under shade cloth each having equivalent soil temperature and light conditions. It was recorded previously that the yields obtained in each of the quarter hectare plots was very similar; each six month crop yielding approximately 45 tonnes.

[0047] For testing purposes each quarter hectare was numbered. The first quarter hectare was numbered 1 , the second quarter hectare was numbered 2 and so on. [0048] Quarter hectares 1 , 2, 3 and 4 were fertilized normally i.e. with a fertilized protocol with the fertilizer comprising of 81t CaN03/day and 281t a mix of (NH4)3P04, K, Mg, trace elements and charcoal. The fertilizer was applied by means of fertigation in the usual manner.

[0049] Quarter hectare 4 was subject to a treatment of 6 litres of smoke water was added twice a week and was diluted to constitute a 10^~7 M solution in water. Application of smoke water was included at 1 part per 1600.

[0050] Results showed that the three quarter hectares fertilized in the standard manner yielded around 45 tonnes with the mean average being 45.28ton. Whilst the quarter hectare treated with the additional mixture of smoke water yielded a crop of 65.7 ton. Also noted were a longer harvest and more vigorous growth in the smoke water treated plants.

[0051] Example 3

[0052] The trial was conducted to test the yield of strawberries at Echo Berry

Ventures - Piesangkloof Production Farm, Brits, Northwest Province, South Africa during the 2011 production season. The trial would be run during the months of April to September. The trial was conducted and monitored by Echo Berry's fertilizer, irrigation and research management staff.

[0053] Trial Protocol

Yield Trial: Trial blocks comprise 4 hectares per block.

• The Control: Al - untreated under shade- netting The control block was exposed to the standard fertigation protocol used for commercial production. N 125 ppm; P39 ppm; K102ppm; CalOOppm; N0₃ 436 ppm at an EC of 1.78.

• Smoke water treated block A2 under shade-netting was exposed to a 30% reduction in the standard fertigation protocol.

All blocks are irrigated three times a week with 450001t fertigation. Smoke water was applied with two of the three, weekl irrigation applications. 251t of smoke water was injected into irrigation line to be diluted with the 450001t fertigation. Applications were done in the morning for the entire trial period.

Yield was recorded in the form of weight of fruit per plant. Records were taken on a weekly basis and tabulated monthly.

[0054] Fruit Quality Trial: Trial samples sizes of 100 plants were randomly selected for monitoring.

• Pots which were quality selected plants rooted into pots rather than plug trays prior to transplanting to the field. These plants were planted out within block Al .

• Trays which comprised of plants derived from high quality horticultural specimens planted out within block Al.

• Smoke water treated sample taken within block A2.

Fruit quality was recorded weekly measuring fruit size, weight and brix.

[0055] Trial Observations and Results

[0056] Plants treated with smoke water responded more vigorously after transplanting compared to untreated plants. Plants produced significantly better quality fruit and yielded more fruit when treated with smoke water. [0057] By the end of the fertigation season, the block treated with smoke water in combination with a 30% reduction in fertilizer produced on average 10.5 % more fruit when compared to the untreated block. This is illustrated in Figure 1 showing the yield in grammes per plant at various times. Furthermore fruit weight and quality (brix) taken for Blocks Al Pots and Trays and A2 shows that as shown in Figure 3 the treated block yielded 7.1 % better fruit weight as compared to the control block with fruit from trays and 15,4 % to the control block in pots. The brix for the treated block was 12.5 % higher than both the control blocks as is shown in Figure 3.

[0058] Conclusion

[0059] It can be seen that smoke water treatment effects a significant increase on yield in strawberries when subjected to a fertilizer reduction. This increase on yield does not reduce the fruit quality, instead it increases both fruit size and brix.

[0060] Example 4

[0061] A field trial was conducted on one of the Jagpaadt farms at ZZ2 in

Mooketsi, Limpopo Province during 2011. Four week old tomato seedlings (ZZX23 variety) were planted into the field in three blocks ranging from 0.6 - 1.1 hectares. Agronomic management practices followed ZZ2 standards procedure.

[0062] Treatment description

[0063] The trial was laid out assigning a block per treatment. Three blocks were allocated: control; smoke water plus 50% fertigation reduction; and smoke water with no fertigation. Smoke water was applied twice weekly as part of the fertigation cycle at a dilution ratio of 1ml smoke water per 1600ml irrigation. A minimum of 500ml of irrigation per plant was applied each daily cycle. [0064] Lug counts were recorded for each harvest for each of the block treatments. The collected data was subjected to statistics 9.0 for analysis of variance and the Least Significance Difference (LSD) was used to separate means at 5 % confidence level.

[0065] Table 2. Effect of smoke water on the yield of tomato.

The data illustrated in Figure 4 show a comparison of the yields per harvest between the treatments.

[0066] There was a significant difference in tomato yield when fertilizer is reduced. The results confirm that smoke water is not a substitute for fertilizer but instead allows for a significant reduction. Without any fertigation and only applying smoke water, one can achieve almost the same results as the control. Figure 4 illustrates that by applying smoke water and reducing fertilizer, crop yield is higher for each harvest across the season. These results emphasises that the practical significance of smoke water in reducing the amount of fertilizers applied to crops to achieve higher yields.

[0067] The findings of this trial indicate that the addition of smoke water in combination with a fertilizer reduction does significantly improve the yield of tomatoes. Not only does this have economic benefits but also positive environmental effects. [0068] Example 5

[0069] 20 freshly cut rose flower stalks were placed individually into 1000 ml vials each filled with 700 ml water.

[0070] The 0.437ml of smoke water to constitute at a concentration of 10^"7 M was added to each of ten vials and ten vials were maintained with only water free of the smoke water. The vials containing only water were used as the controls.

[0071] Each vial was numbered 1 through 20. The first 10 numbered vials numbered 1 through 10 contained the smoke water added to the water and vials numbered 11 through 20 contained only water.

[0072] The vials were placed randomly within a room exposed to natural light and maintained at room temperature until the controls had senesced.

[0073] After fourteen days all roses in the vials filled with only water , i.e. not containing smoke water, had fully opened and senesced.

[0074] At twenty-one days six of the 10 flowers in the vials treated with smoke water flowers had not fully opened. The remaining four were opened. None of the treated flowers had started senescing.

[0075] Figures 5 and 6 show respectively a fully open untreated rose flower after 14 days and a rose treated with smoke water solution, which has remained tight headed and retained form after twenty one days. [0076] Example 6

[0077] A golf course green was divided in half. Half the green was treated with a foliar spray application of Nitrosol being the fertilizer ascertained as comprising the fertilizer protocol and the other half of the green was treated with an aqueous foliar spray containing 1ml product smoke water in 1600ml water to constitute at a concentration of 10-7.

[0078] Both treatments were applied once every 14 days at a rate of 60 ml/m2.

[0079] Products were applied during the morning before 9 am while temperatures and the evaporation rate are still low. The trial was conducted for a period of 6 months. Playing surfaces were monitored for any turf patchiness or deterioration. Soil profile samples were taken monthly randomly from both halves of the green to examine the soil structures, thatch build-up and rooting.

[0080] Both treatments were applied once every 14 days at a rate of 60 ml per square meter of turf.

[0081] The trial was conducted for a period of 6 months. Soil profile samples were taken monthly randomly from both halves of the green.

[0082] The soil profiles taken from the half of the green treated with a composition of smoke water had a notably narrower thatch layer and higher soil oxygenation was observed due to organic coloration depletion compared to the control (Nitrosol treated). [0083] The soil profile for the control half of the green is shown in Figure 7.

The soil profile for the half of the green treated with smoke water is shown in Figure 8.

[0084] Results

[0085] The soil profiles taken from the smoke water treated half of the green had a notably narrower thatch layer (3mm) compared to the thatching layer from the control (10mm) half of the green (see attached Figure 7).

[0086] The organic layers showed evidence of diffusing as higher oxygen levels penetrate the soil. Plant rooting was noticeably deeper in the soil profile with roots appearing thicker and whiter in colour. Water penetration was also improved with the depletion of the thatching layer.

[0087] No noticeable differences were observed above ground with the playing surfaces as leaf and shoot growth was maintained even with the fertilizer reductions.

[0088] The invention is not limited to the precise details hereinbefore described and modifications as would be appreciated by those skilled in the art can be made. For example other plants - and in particular vegetables, crops, grain plants, horticultural plants and fruit trees and vines - may be treated by smoke water and a reduced amount of fertilizer as described above. The reduction in fertilizer may be up to 50% but in certain circumstances, there may be greater reductions. Cut flowers can be treated to delay senescence by adding smoke water to the hydrating fluid comprising all flora valued horticultural species, bulbous, single or multistemmed plants. Soil surfaces having a grass covering thereon including but not limited to sports fields, greens, lawns and parks, may be treated by the method described above.

Claims

1 A method of treating plants comprising ascertaining the fertilizer protocol for an area containing the plants and then feeding the area with the combination an amount of fertiliser which is reduced as compared to the fertiliser protocol plus an amount of smoke water.

2 A method as claimed in claim 1 wherein 1ml smoke water is added to 1600 ml fertigation.

3 A method of treating plants as claimed in claim 1 or claim 2 wherein the amount of fertigation is reduced by up to 50% .

4 A method as claimed in any one of the preceding claims wherein the smoke water is made according the invention described and claimed in my International Patent Application No PCT/ZA2012/00031.

5 A method as claimed in any one of the preceding claims wherein the smoke water contains the compound 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-2-one or a derivative thereof in a concentration of the compound used in the range between 10^"lu M and 10^"2 M.

6 A method of treating cut flowers comprising placing the cut flowers into hydrating liquid and adding smoke water to the hydrating fluid.

7 A method as claimed in claim 6 wherein the smoke water is added in an amount to constitute a concentration of 10^"2 to 10^"10 M in the hydrating fluid. 8 A method as claimed in claim 7 wherein the smoke water is added in an amount to constitute a concentration of 10^"7 M.

9 A method as claimed in claim 6 wherein the smoke water is added to the hydrating fluid in an amount of approximately 1 : 1600.

10 A method of treating the structure of soil on which grass is grown, the method comprising applying irrigation containing smoke water to the surface of the grass.

11 A method as claimed in claim 10 wherein the smoke water is applied once every 14 days.

12 A method as claimed in claim 10 or 11 wherein the smoke water is applied at about 60ml/m²

13 A method as claimed in claim 10, 11 or 12 wherein the smoke water contains the compound 3-methyl-2H-furo[2,3-c]pyran-2-one or a derivative thereof in a concentration of the compound used in the range between 10^"KI M and 10^~2 M.

14 A method as claimed in claim 10, 11 , 12 or 13 wherein the smoke water is added in an amount to constitute a concentration of 10^"7 M.