Table 5.
Analysis of nutrient profile of shoots of tomato and sweet pepper treated with AS and SV extracts.
| Tomato | S. pepper | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nutrient element | AS | SV | Control | AS | SV | Control |
| Calcium (%) | 3.80 ± 0.030c | 2.50 ± 0.010b | 1.65 ± 0.050a | 4.10 ± 0.901c | 3.33 ± 0.901b | 1.33 ± 0.113a |
| Magnesium (%) | 0.53 ± 0.001a | 0.63 ± 0.001b | 0.67 ± 0.004b | 0.37 ± 0.002ns | 0.34 ± 0.021ns | 0.35 ± 0.004ns |
| Potassium (%) | 2.19 ± 0.010ns | 2.22 ± 0.020ns | 2.20 ± 0.030ns | 3.22 ± 0.991c | 2.76 ± 0.121b | 2.11 ± 0.098a |
| Sodium (%) | 0.07 ± 0.001ns | 0.05 ± 0.001ns | 0.05 ± 0.005ns | 0.04 ± 0.002ns | 0.03 ± 0.002ns | 0.03 ± 0.004ns |
| Nitrogen (%) | 6.22 ± 0.070b | 4.59 ± 0.072a | 4.55 ± 0.065a | 5.66 ± 1.021c | 5.12 ± 0.111b | 3.55 ± 0.005a |
| Phosphorus (%) | 0.25 ± 0.004a | 0.39 ± 0.002b | 0.21 ± 0.001a | 0.12 ± 0.002a | 0.43 ± 0.014b | 0.11 ± 0.132a |
| Sulphur (%) | 0.09 ± 0.003b | 0.09 ± 0.004b | 0.04 ± 0.004a | 0.04 ± 0.001ns | 0.03 ± 0.001ns | 0.02 ± 0.001ns |
| Boron (ppm) | 38.0 ± 0.340c | 32.0 ± 0.440b | 27.0 ± 0.670a | 26.12 ± 1.102b | 23.34 ± 0.032a | 22.12 ± 0.322a |
| Copper (ppm) | 81.9 ± 1.230c | 78.9 ± 0.450b | 62.7 ± 0.550a | 99.12 ± 1.112c | 76.22 ± 1.021b | 55.43 ± 1.221a |
| Iron (ppm) | 810 ± 1.003c | 703 ± 1.012b | 237 ± 1.050a | 777.34 ± 1.212c | 712.22 ± 1.421b | 201.21 ± 1.092a |
| Manganese (ppm) | 88 ± 0.201c | 36 ± 0.111b | 30 ± 0.431a | 76.45 ± 1.032c | 55.43 ± 1.121b | 23.23 ± 1.112a |
| Zinc (ppm) | 57 ± 0.053c | 51 ± 1.021b | 31 ± 1.112a | 45.32 ± 1.218c | 40.21 ± 1.081b | 22.23 ± 0.443a |
The data represent the mean ± SD of n = 3 plants. Significance was tested by one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc analysis (P < 0.05). Different letters denote a significant difference between groups where P < 0.05 and ns denotes no significant difference. Statistical tests were done on crops separately.