Efficacy of Magnetic Water and Methanol on Agronomic Traits of Soybean (Glycine max L.)

DOI: 10.18805/LR-562    | Article Id: LR-562 | Page : 549-555
Citation :- Efficacy of Magnetic Water and Methanol on Agronomic Traits of Soybean (Glycine max L.).Legume Research-An International Journal.2021.(44):549-555
A. Fatehi, B. Pasari, A. Rokhzadi  bpasary@yahoo.com
Address : Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran.
Submitted Date : 6-04-2020
Accepted Date : 5-12-2020


Background: The major part of the edible oil used in Iran is supplied through imports. It is important to increase the yield of oilseed crops, especially soybeans, in non-chemical and environmentally friendly ways, along with its easy availability and low cost. The use of magnetic water as a new method, increases the yield of plants by improving solubility and access the nutrients. On the other hand, in recent years, methanol spraying as a source of carbon dioxide, which increases the concentration of this gas around the plant, enhancing the photosynthesis and plant yield. This study was conducted to study the efficacy of different intensities of magnetic water and various concentrations of methanol foliar application on agronomic traits of soybean.  
Methods: This experiment was carried out as split plot in a randomized complete block design with 3 replications during two consecutive years 2016-17. The main plot was irrigated with magnetic water in 4 intensity (0: control, 4, 8, 12mTesla) and a subplot was methanol spraying in 4 volumetric percentage (distilled water: control, 10, 20 and 30% v/v).  
Result: Photosynthetic pigments viz. (Chlorophyll a, b, carotenoid), yield attributes, seed yield, biological yield, seed protein and soybean economics were significantly affected by the magnetic water and methanol spraying. Seed yield and net return, as the most important traits increased by magnetic irrigated with 8 and 12mTesla intensities, compared to control, by 70.05-72.19% and 122.37-126.05%, respectively. Furthermore the maximum biological, stover yields and protein obtained by 8mTesla magnetic irrigation, compared to control, it showed 59.54, 54.9 and 10.07% superiority, respectively. Also, methanol foliar application at 20% concentration increased seed yield, biological yield, seed protein and net return by 19.01, 13.73, 5.24 and 26.43%, respectively.


Magnetic water Methanol Soybean Yield


  1. Abedinpour, M. and Rohani, R. (2017). Effects of magnetized water application on soil and maize growth indices under different amounts of salt in the water. Journal of Water Reuse and Desalination. 7(3): 319-325. 
  2. Aliverdi, A., Parsa, M. and Hammami, H. (2015). Increased soyabean- rhizobium symbiosis by magnetically treated water, biological agriculture and horticulture. An International Journal for Sustainable Production Systems: 1-10. 
  3. Al Janaby. M.A.A. (2014). Effect of magnetized irrigation water and bio fertilizer spraying on growth and yields of maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of Genetic and Environmental Resources Conservation. 2(1): 10-15. 
  4. El Sayed, H.A.E.S. (2014). Impact of magnetic water irrigation for improve the growth, chemical composition and yield production of broad bean (Vicia faba L.) plant. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 4(4): 476-496.
  5. El-Yazied, A.A., El-Gizawy, A.M., Khalf, S.M., El-Satar, A. and Shalaby, O.A. (2012). Effect of magnetic field treatments for seeds and irrigation water as well as N, P and K levels on productivity of tomato plants. Journal of Applied Sciences Research. 8(4): 2088-2099.
  6. El-Yazied, A.A., Shalaby, O.A., El-Gizawy, A.M., Khalf, S.M. and El-Satar, A. (2011). Effect of magnetic field on seed germination and transplant growth of tomato. Journal of American Science. 7(12): 306-312. 
  7. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation. (2017). Production/yield quantities of soybeans in Iran. www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC/visalize.
  8. Gao, Y., Sun, Y., Zhang, R. and Chu, G. (2017). Effects of magnetic water irrigation on the growth, N uptake and antioxidant enzyme activities of cotton seedlings. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 7: 25-33. 
  9. Grewal, H.S. and Maheshwari, B.L. (2011). Magnetic treatment of irrigation water and snow pea and chickpea seeds enhances early growth and nutrient contents of seedlings. Bio-electromagnetic. 32: 58-65.
  10. Hasan, M.M., Alharby, H.F., Hajar, A.S., Hakeem, K.R. and Alzahrani, Y. (2018). Effects of magnetized water on phenolic compounds, lipid peroxidation and antioxidant activity of moringa species under drought stress. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences. 28(3): 1-6.
  11. Hozayn, M., Abd El-Wahed, M.S.A., Abd El-Monem, A.A., Abdelraouf, R.E. and Abd Elhamid, E.M. (2016a). Applications of magnetic technology in agriculture, a novel tool for improving water and crop productivity: 3. Faba Bean. Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences. 7(6): 1288-1296.
  12. Hozayn, M. and Abdul Qados, A.M.S. (2010). Magnetic water application for improving wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) crop production. Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America. 1(4): 677-682.
  13. Hozayn, M., Abdallha, M.M., Abd El-Monem, A.A., El-Saady, A.A. and Darwish, M.A. (2016b). Applications of magnetic technology in agriculture: A novel tool for improving crop productivity (1): Canola. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 11(5): 441-449. 
  14. Madhaiyan, M., Poonguzhali, S., Sundaram, S.P. and Tongmin, S. (2006). A new insight into foliar applied methanol influencing phylloplane methylotrophic dynamics and growth promotion of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.). Environmental and Experimental Botany. 57: 168-176.
  15. Moghadas, S.M.T., Sani, B. and Moaveni, P. (2013). Study of foliar application of methanol on drought stress resistance in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). International Journal of Farming and Allied Sciences. 2(2): 1307-1310.
  16. Nadali, I., Paknejad, F., Moradi, F., Vazan, S., Tookalo, M., Jami Al-Ahmadi, M. and Pazoki, A. (2010). Effects of methanol on sugar beet (Beta vulgaris). Australian Journal of Crop Science. 4 (6): 398-401.
  17. Nonomura, A.M. and Benson, A.A. (1992a). The path of carbon in photosynthesis: Improved crop yields with methanol. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 89: 9794-9798.
  18. Nonomura, A.M. and Benson, A.A. (1992b). The path of carbon in photosynthesis: Methanol and light. In: Research in photosynthesis. [N. Murata (ed.)]. Kluwer Academic Publ., Dordrecht, the Netherlands. p. 911-914.
  19. Sadeghipour. O. (2016). The Effect of magnetized water on physiological and agronomic traits of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.). International Journal of Research in Chemical, Metallurgical and Civil Engg. 3(2): 195-198.
  20. Safarzade Vishgahi M.N., Normohamadi, G.H., Majidi Haravan, E. and Rabiei, B. (2005). Effect of methanol on peanut growth and yield (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Agricultural Science. 103-188. 
  21. SAS Institute Inc. Statistical Analysis System. Cary, NC 27513-2414, USA.https://www.sas.com/en_us/software/stat.html.
  22. Silva, T.J.A. and Dobránszki, J. (2014). Impact of magnetic water on plant growth. Environmental and Experimental Biology. 12: 137-142.
  23. Tavassoli, A. and Galavi, M. (2011). Effect of foliar application of methanol on efficiency, production and yield of plants - a review. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 45(1): 1-10.
  24. Yuncong, L.I., Gupta, G., Joshi, J.M. and Siyumbano, A.K. (1995). Effect of methanol on soybean photosynthesis and chlorophyll. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 18: 1875-1880.
  25. Zbieć, I., Karczmarczyk, S. and Podsiadło, C. (2003). Response of some cultivated plants to methanol as compared to supplemental irrigation. Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural Universities. 6 (1): 1-7.
  26. Zlotopolski, V. (2017). Magnetic treatment reduces water usage in irrigation without negatively impacting yield, photosynthesis and nutrient uptake in lettuce. International Journal of Applied Agricultural Sciences. 3(5): 117-122.

Global Footprints