REAKTSIIA SORTIV PSHENYTSI OZYMOI NA POLIKOMPONENTNI PREPARATY
Abstract
Purpose. To evaluate the efficiency of multicomponent preparations combined with different mineral nutrition backgrounds and to identify cultivar-specific yield responses under drought-prone Northern Steppe conditions.
Methods. A field experiment (2024–2025) included 10 technological treatments: control without fertilization, basic P10 or N45P45K45 application, spring top-dressing N30 on thawed soil, and their combinations with VitaStar, Antistress, Polyamide, Defense and the NewPlant iQ line (NEO, Stymulin, UNI). Grain yield was recalculated to 14 % moisture; data were analyzed by year and as a two-year mean; differences were assessed using LSD05.
Results. The highest mean yield was obtained under complete mineral fertilization N45P45K45 + N30 combined with VitaStar + Antistress + Polyamide: 3.93 t/ha for Mudrist Odeska and 4.16 t/ha for Kaledon. High yields were also recorded for N45P45K45 + N30 without additional preparations (3.90 and 3.79 t/ha). Under reduced fertilization P10 + N30, yield reached 3.65 and 3.88 t/ha, while adding the preparation complex increased it to 3.68 and 3.98 t/ha. Treatments relying mainly on preparations without adequate mineral background (5–8) produced minor or unstable effects and, for Mudrist Odeska, some combinations decreased yield relative to the control. A pronounced yield reduction in 2025 compared with 2024 indicated stronger stress conditions. Findings. Multicomponent preparations are most effective within integrated nutrient management under adequate mineral background; they should complement, not replace, basic NPK fertilization. The results support the priority role of balanced mineral nutrition in realizing yield potential, whereas biostimulant/anti-stress components mainly improve stability and efficiency of the applied fertilization scheme during adverse hydrothermal periods.
References
2. Viniukov, O.O., Bondareva, O.B., & Chuhrii, H.A. (2018). Osoblyvosti realizatsii potentsialu produktyvnosti sortiv pshenytsi ozymoi v ahroklimatychnykh umovakh Donetskoi oblasti [Peculiarities of realization of winter wheat cultivar productivity potential under agroclimatic conditions of Donetsk region]. Tavriiskyi visnyk, no. 102, pp. 9–14. [in Ukrainian].
3. Zaiets, S.O., Onufran, L.I., Yuziuk, S.M., et al. (2024). Vplyv riznykh system biolohichnoho zakhystu roslyn na vrozhainist ta yakist zerna pshenytsi ozymoi v orhanichnomu zemlerobstvi [Influence of different biological plant protection systems on yield and grain quality of
winter wheat in organic farming]. Ahrarni innovatsii, no. 23, pp. 61–68. https://doi.org/10.32848/agrar.innov.2024.23.11 [in Ukrainian].
4. Pospielova, H.D., Kovalenko, N.P., Pospielov, S.V., et al. (2024). Efektyvnist zastosuvannia biopreparativ na pshenytsi ozymii [Efficiency of biopreparations application on winter wheat]. Scientific Progress & Innovations, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 37–42. https://doi.org/10.31210/spi2024.27.04.07 [in Ukrainian].
5. Cherenkov, A.V., et al. (2014). Suchasni tekhnolohii vyroshchuvannia pshenytsi ozymoi v zoni Stepu [Modern technologies of winter wheat cultivation in the Steppe zone]. Dnipropetrovsk: Instytut silskoho hospodarstva stepovoi zony NAAN Ukrainy, 115 p. [in Ukrainian].
6. Khomina, V.Ya., & Sheiko, D.V. (2023). Elementy biolohizatsii yak zasib polipshennia tekhnolohichnykh pokaznykiv ta yakisnoho skladu zerna pshenytsi ozymoi [Elements of biologization as a means of improving technological indicators and grain quality of winter wheat]. Podilskyi visnyk: silske hospodarstvo, tekhnika, ekonomika, no. 2, pp. 45–52. https://doi.org/10.37406/2706905220232.5 [in Ukrainian].
7. Sheiko, D.V. (2023). Fotosyntetychnyi potentsial sortiv pshenytsi ozymoi zalezhno vid sposobiv zastosuvannia biolohichno aktyvnykh preparativ v umovakh Zakhidnoho Lisostepu [Photosynthetic potential of winter wheat cultivars depending on application methods of biologically active preparations under Western Forest-Steppe conditions]. Ahrarni innovatsii, no. 19, pp. 96–102. https://doi.org/10.32848/agrar.innov.2023.19.18 [in Ukrainian].
8. Yurchenko, S.O., & Palaziuk, B.O. (2025). Vplyv mikoryznoho preparatu na formuvannia vrozhainosti zerna pshenytsi miakoi ozymoi (Triticum aestivum L.) [Influence of a mycorrhizal preparation on grain yield formation of soft winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)]. Tezy dop. I Mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. konf. [Abstracts of the 1st International Scientific and Practical Conference]. Poltava: PDAU, pp. 21–23. [in Ukrainian].
9. Lozowicka, B., Iwaniuk, P., Konecki, R., et al. (2022). Impact of diversified chemical and biostimulator protection on yield, health status, mycotoxin level, and economic profitability in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivation. Agronomy, vol. 12, no. 2, article 258. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12020258
10. Pathak, D., Suman, A., Dass, A., et al. (2024). Enhancing wheat growth and nutrient content through integrated microbial and non-microbial biostimulants. Physiologia Plantarum. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.14485
11. Sharma, S., Kandel, N., Chaudhary, P., & Rai, P. (2020). A review on integrated nutrient management on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Reviews in Food and Agriculture, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 32–37.
12. Vyshnevskyi, V.I. (2025). Climate Change in Ukraine and Its Consequences. Journal of Landscape Ecology, vol. 18, no. 4.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
