Nathan’Astle* & Zia Aftab **

Berlin University Germany* & Young In University South Korea**

ABSTRACT

Water stress is considered as one of the major factors responsible for reducing sugar beet crop productivity. A field experiment was carried out at El-Emam Malek, El-Bostan district, El Behira governorate, Egypt, at 2022-2023, to study the effects of sprayed soil conditioner (glue: 0, 2, 4; 6 %/spraying solution) on some hydrophysical soil characteristics and yield, yield parameters, water use efficiency of sugar beet and some soil properties under different water regimes, WR (100, 85 and 70% from ETo).  

Key words: Sandy soil, sugar beet, drip irrigation, water regime, nutrients, plant growth, yield; yield characters.

 INTRODUCTION
Egypt is one of the most vulnerable countries to the potential impacts and risks of drought stress that reduced crops productivity that affecting on the food security. Water stress in Egypt is expected regarding to progressive increase population and their demand from food, fiber and increasing water consumption. Drought is one of the most important growth-restricting environmental factors for crop species in arid and semi-arid regions and crop losses resulting from abiotic stresses (10). Concerning the climate change effects, which can inhibit the growth and development of plants, mainly by decreasing photosynthesis, leaf turgor, and transpiration rates (30). Reduction in the production capacity of soils is attributed to its physical constraints, which envisages that maintaining soil’s physical properties allows substantial crop growth for better crop production (26).

The cultivation of sugar beets has become an extreme tax as an alternative to sugar cane, which consumes a large amount of water and continues in the land for several years, although the water needs are considered twice as much as beets consume in eight months, this is in addition to the possibility of growing another crop after beets, and this does not happen, of course, with sugar cane its decomposition or ability to hold soil grains and form a strong structure in the future.

Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) is considered the most important sugar crop in Egypt. It comes after sugar can as a source of sugar and plays a prominent role in sugar production ( 57.7% of the local sugar production), which amounted to 1.25 million tons (29). It is an important crop that helps in establishing integrated agricultural-industrial societies, especially in the newly reclaimed areas, and contributes to many industries such as the sugar industry, and highly-value animal feed (25).

So, the challenge facing the growers of sugar beet is to optimize irrigation water requirements with suitable irrigation methods and the water regime needed. Nowadays, limited irrigation water becomes a fact, agriculture practices are organized for optimal water use and maximum yield per water unit. Water scarcity conditions induced water management will have to be more efficient. The process of crop water use has two main components, evaporation losses from the soil and crop evapotranspiration (14). There is a potential for improving water productivity under scarce supplies, so deficit irrigation (application of water below full crop water requirements) is one of the tool to achieve the goal of reducing irrigation water use.

Soils contain a certain supply of mineral and organic nutrient sources, which often need to be supplemented with organic and inorganic soil conditioners and applied fertilizers to improve plant growth (13). Recently, the use of fertilizers and chemical inputs with less focus on soil conditioners and soil amendments be considered. Improvement of the soil’s physical conditions such as porosity permeability and soil ability to retain more water for agricultural applications is a must (22). Whereas, soil conditioners are materials that contain essential nutrients to improve the physical, chemical and/or biological properties of the soil, and remarkably plant growth. Also, it can benefit food production through the control of soil degradation, improvement of soil-air-water relations, amendment of soil drainage and soil aggregation to overcoming water repellence (26, 3, 4; 12)

In general, soil conditioners can be classified into three groups: organic, industrial waste-based, and synthetic soil conditioners such as glue, which is a disposed material from laser manufactured and consider as polysaccharides from side and as a polymer from other one (13). They reported that diverse natural and synthetic wastes may be recycled and reused as plant nutrient sources and can absorb nutrients too. Intensive agriculture is producing an enormous number of agricultural by-products, which could be considered as a great option in soil conditioning for sustainable agricultural productions. Not only plant origin wastes but also industrial by-products have been transformed into soil conditioners in agriculture, which can also be useful for sustainable agricultural productions (9). Apart from improving the soil physical properties, polymeric organic materials can act as buffers against short-term drought stress and improve crop establishment (5). Therefore, this experiment was carried out to study the effect of the sprayed glue, as soil conditioners, on the yield, yield parameters, and water use efficiency of sugar beet and some soil properties under different water regimes.   

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Experimental site

Field experiments was carried out in 2022/2023 season at El-Emam Malek, El-Bostan district, El- at Nubaria district (National Research Centre Experimental and Production Station), El-Behiera Governorate, Egypt to study the effect of the sprayed glue (0, 2, 4; 6 % glue in spraying solution), as soil conditioners, on the yield, yield parameters and water use efficiency of sugar beet and some soil properties under different water regime (100, 85; 70 % from ETo) in sandy soil (30^o.52 N, 30^o.32E longitude and the altitude is 28 m above the sea level).

Soil analysis

• Soil samples were collected from experimental area to determine the main soil physical and chemical properties (0-15 cm). The soil physical parameters (soil texture class) were determined after (15), soil-moisture constants (soil field capacity, wilting point and available water) after (18). The soil chemical properties, EC, pH, organic matter and total calcium carbonate were determined according to (28). The soil main physical and chemical properties are listed in Tables 1.

Table (1) Some physical and chemical properties of the experimental soil.

	Particle size distribution %						Soil water constant %wb
Properties	Sand	Silt		Clay		Texture	Saturation	FC	WP	AW
Value	78.2	14.6		8.2		Sandy loam	28.3	17.8	5.6	12.2
	Chemical properties							Macronutrient %
Properties	EC dS/m		pH		Organic matter %		CaCO3 %	N	P	K
Value	2.08		8.03		1.15		5.8	1.75	0.83	1.14

FC: field capacity, WP: wilting point, AW: available water, wb: weight basis

• Dry aggregate size distribution was determined by the standard dry-sieving method (15) and was carried out for collected soil samples after > 2mm and < 2mm .
• Hydraulic conductivity (HC) was measured in the laboratory under a constant head technique (19) using the following formula:      HC =     , where

HC: hydraulic conductivity (cm³/h), Q: volume of water (cm³), A: cross sectional flow area (cm²) L: length of the soil sample (cm) and ΔH: differences in hydraulic head across the sample (cm) and t: time (h).

• The chemical analysis of irrigation water is 645 ppm (EC), 7.26 (pH), and 2.14 (sodium adsorption ratio). Drip irrigation was installed with lateral length 30 m and 0.3 m among dripper (GR with discharge 4 liter/h) and 0.75 m between laterals. Also, uniformity coefficient of installed drip irrigation system was estimated (87.25%).

Experimental soil management and plantation

Soil treated by compost (10 m³/fed), calcium superphosphate (200 kg/fed) and granule potassium sulphate (50 kg/fed) well mixed during soil plowing and soil preparation. Seeds of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L. cv Gazelle) were planted on 12 October 2022 and harvested on 7 May 2023 on ridges 60 cm apart and 20 cm between hills. The sugar beet plants lasted 200 days. Glue at different concentration was mixed with lime at 1%/L (to recognize the treatments), after planting sugar beet.

Fertilization and irrigation

Ammonium sulphate (50 kg), ammonium nitrate (100 kg), phosphoric acid (25 liter) and potassium sulphate (150 kg) were applied during growing season. Glue solution at different concentration was sprayed on soil surface at germination completed (15 days after planting) by 5 liter/m².  After 50 days from planting, sugar beet plants were sprayed by micronutrients and amino acids twice and 2 weeks among. All agriculture processes were caried out according to (Egyptian Agriculture Ministry and soil Reclamation) included resistance of weeds, insects and fungi. The amounts of irrigation water were calculated 2480.40, 2108.24 and 1736.28 m³/fed for 100, 85 and 70 % water regime treatments, respectively.

Growth characters and pigments

At harvesting, a sample of ten plants was taken at random from each sub-sub plot and topped to determine the root length (cm), root width (cm), root weight (kg), leaf area (cm²), and root volume (cm³). The contents of photosynthetic pigments were determined according to the method described in (8). Determination of sucrose: Sucrose percentage was estimated in fresh samples of sugar beet root using “Saccharometer” according to the method described by AOAC (8).

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out after Snedecor and Cochran (27), in factorial analysis where the water regime treatments occupied the main plots while the sub plots were assigned for soil sprayed glue concentration and each treatment was triplicated. Treatment mean comparisons were done using least significant difference (LSD) at 5% level of probability. After homogeneity test, combined analysis was done to compare between the two irrigation systems.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Data in table 2 showed the effect of the sprayed glue with different concentration on some sugar beet plant characters (leaf area, root length, root width, root volume and root) under different water regime (100, 85; 70 %ETo).  The untreated plot gained the lowest values of leaf area, root length, root width, root volume and root weight while 6 g/liter scored the highest values. One can notice that the highest values of the previous studied sugar beet parameter were attained after 100 %WR followed by 85 % WR after sprayed 6 % glue in spraying solution, while the opposite was true in case of 0 g/liter glue. 

Regarding to the irrigation water regime, data in table 2 indicated that decreased applied irrigation water (WR treatments) led to reduction in of the studied sugar beet parameters that represented in percentage as follow17.2, 0.2, 0.0, 10.1; 9.9 %after 85 %WR. Meanwhile, after 70 %water regime values were 33.8, 6.9, 16.1; 29.4% for leaf area, root length, root width, root volume and root weight, respectively. With respect to the sprayed glue (on soil surface) effect on the leaf area, root length, root width, root volume and root weight, data pointed out that sprayed glue has positive effect on the previous parameters. The enhancement estimated in percentage as follows: 12.9, 0.3, 11.5, 8.3; 31.2, 8.7, 17.0, 14.0 and 64.0, 11.7, 21.6, 19.3, 24.4 % after sprayed soil surface by glue at 2, 4; 6 % glue in spraying solution compared with control treatment, in same sequences. 

The inter action effect of the studied two factors (glue and water regime treatments) on the sugar beet root yield and water use efficiency (WUE), total sugar and sugar yield /fed under different water regime were recorded in table 2. Water regime at 100 % and sprayed 6 % glue in spraying solution scored the highest yield (36.65 ton/fed) followed by 85 % WR at the same sprayed glue (33.84 ton/fed) with reduction 7.7 %.  Meanwhile, untreated plot recorded the lowest yield (21.30 ton/fed) under 70 %WR. According to the effect of the water regime on the sugar beet yield, data pointed out that decrease applied irrigation water from 100 % ETo to 85 and 75 % led to reduction by about 10.3, 28.3 %.  Whereas increased concentration of glue resulted increase was attained by 5.5, 15.7 and 22.1% after 2, 4, 6 % glue in spraying solution above untreated plot. Same trend was noticed in total sugar and sugar yield /fed with increase percentage 6.6, 10.7, 15.4 and 15.7, 34.7 and 50.5 % in same previous consequence.

Table (2) Effect of sprayed glue concentration on plant growth and yield characters under different water regime on sugar beet crop.

Water regime %	Glue % glue in spraying solution	Leaf area	Root					Water use efficiency	Total Sugar	Sugar yield
			length	width	volume	weight	yield
		cm2	cm	cm	cm3	Kg	ton/fed	kg/m3	%	ton/fed
100	0	15.40	35.30	28.65	563.25	2.05	31.25	12.60	10.77	3.37
	2	17.95	29.87	32.85	652.16	2.21	32.46	13.09	12.13	3.94
	4	23.45	33.23	33.32	678.25	2.31	34.82	14.04	12.60	4.39
	Mean	22.24	33.29	32.73	657.04	2.24	33.80	13.63	12.22	4.15
85	0	14.88	29.40	29.14	557.20	1.85	27.15	12.88	10.85	2.95
	2	17.25	31.23	31.58	556.85	1.97	28.95	13.73	11.64	3.37
	4	19.22	35.57	34.82	615.41	2.09	31.25	14.82	12.74	3.98
	Mean	18.42	33.21	32.75	590.67	2.02	30.30	14.37	12.17	3.71
70	0	13.25	28.02	24.80	442.31	1.24	21.30	12.27	10.88	2.32
	2	13.95	31.88	27.63	483.21	1.55	22.70	13.07	11.84	2.69
	4	14.42	32.01	28.50	489.34	1.68	26.13	15.05	12.45	3.25
	6	17.25	32.11	28.91	496.27	1.85	26.85	15.46	13.16	3.53
	Mean	14.72	31.01	27.46	477.78	1.58	24.25	13.96	12.08	2.95
	Water regime	2.34	0.18	3.41	63.24	1.12	3.14	1.58	1.55	1.65
LSD5%	Glue	2.11	0.15	2.45	42.11	0.94	2.56	1.47	1.37	1.41
	Interaction	1.97	ns	2.31	21.85	0.78	2.11	1.23	1.16	1.25

 Same trend was attained in case of the sugar yield /fed.  Concerning the water use efficiency (WUE), total applied irrigation water during growing season were 2480.40, 2108.24 and 1736.28 m3/fed for 100, 85 and 70 % water regime, respectively. Results revealed that WR 70 + 0 % glue recorded the lowest value (12.27 kg/m³), while the highest value was recorded at WR 85 %+6 g/liter glue (16.05 kg/m³) followed by WR 70 %+6 g glue (15.46 kg/m³).  Also, data pointed out that it is easy to arrange WUE value in descending order as follows: 14.63>13.96> 13.63 kg/m³ for 85, 70; 100 % water regime, respectively.  Whereas, increase of glue concentration associated with increase in total sugar with percentage 9.6, 16.3; 23.0 % for 2, 4; 6 % glue in spraying solution compared with control.

Amr et al., (7) found that a drip irrigation system with 1322 m³/fed water, which represents about 60% of optimum requirements gives the best satisfy yield and good quality of sugar beet crop under sandy soil. Although, low irrigation, in which plant is sustain water stress in whole season, is one of methods to maximize WUE and to increase yield in face of a unit of used water. Also, there is harmony with those obtained by Hosseinpour et al. (17), who reported that the enhancement in beet leaf strongly influenced by soil ability to supply plant by enough water. Although Al-Barbari et al., (6) mentioned that deficit irrigation usually increases sucrose content in root.

Table (3) Effect of glue concentration on the macro and pigments content of sugar beet leaf content under different water regime.

Water regime	Glue %/L	N	P	K	Ca	Chlorophyll		Carotenoids
%		%				A	B	%
100	0	3.15	1.45	2.89	1.61	5.34	3.31	1.15
	2	3.27	1.51	3.01	1.69	5.45	3.36	1.26
	4	3.33	1.55	3.11	1.72	5.55	3.45	1.65
	6	3.37	1.62	3.25	1.84	5.80	3.52	2.08
	Mean	3.28	1.53	3.07	1.72	5.54	3.41	1.54
85	0	3.16	1.47	2.88	1.67	5.21	3.31	1.03
	2	3.31	1.53	2.98	1.71	5.34	3.42	1.08
	4	3.38	1.58	3.08	1.77	5.54	3.47	1.15
	6	3.45	1.60	3.21	1.79	5.76	3.48	1.34
		3.33	1.55	3.04	1.74	5.46	3.42	1.15
70	0	3.15	1.45	2.78	1.67	5.66	3.02	1.05
	2	3.22	1.51	2.85	1.68	5.68	3.14	1.08
	4	3.31	1.56	2.96	1.71	5.87	3.14	1.11
	6	3.33	1.57	3.06	1.77	5.88	3.23	1.28
	Mean	3.25	1.52	2.91	1.71	5.77	3.13	1.13
	Water regime	0.17	0.21	0.33	0.21	0.31	0.21	0.37
LSD5%	Glue	0.11	0.14	0.16	0.13	0.27	0.18	0.29
	Interaction	Ns	0.06	0.08	0.04	0.17	0.14	0.21

Results obtained by (31), who studied the effect of irrigation system on root and white sugar beet yields, they found that yield of drip- irrigated sugar beet with 70% of water requirement is nearly close to yield of sprinkler- irrigated sugar beet with 100% and they attributed that to highly efficient of drip irrigation than sprinkler system. Same results obtained by Hosseinpour et al. (17), who added that water stress affecting to a certain extent all growth and productivity traits.

Macronutrient (N. P, K and Ca), chlorophyll A, chlorophyll A and Carotenoids% as affected by sprayed glue as soil conditioners on soil surface under different water regime (Table 3). Water relation at 70 % + 6% glue in spraying solution gained the highest value and the lowest ones were observed at untreated plot. According to the WR treatments effect on the Macronutrient (N. P, K and Ca), chlorophyll A, chlorophyll B and Carotenoids% of the sugar beet, data noticed that the reduction in the irrigation treatments was a combined with increase in sugar beet leaf content from N, P, K and Ca content. So, the highest values were recorded at WR 70%+6 % glue in spraying solution (N, 3.50 %), P (1.70%) and 100 WR (K, 3.25% and Ca (1.84%).  Whereas, the lowest value was observed at WR 70 % +0% glue in same sequence.

Regarding to the effect of water regime treatments in sugar beet leaves, data pointed out that decrease amount of applied irrigation led to slightly increase (not significant) in the studied macronutrients, except at K and Ca which increase by 5 and 1.2 % .  With respect to the glue effect on the macronutrients content in leaf of the sugar beet (table 2), resulted data revealed that no clear trend was observed so, the changes was expressed in percentage as follows: 3.1, 2.1, 3.4, 1.6 – 5.2, 2.1, 7.0, 4.0 and 7.3, 2.1, 11.3, 8.0 % for N, P, K and Ca after spraying glue on the soil surface at concentration 2, 4; 6 % glue in spraying solution r compared with control.

These results were in accordance with those obtained by (5), who reported that glue is considered from poly ascarides and as they play an important role in bending between soil fine particles, it can absorb nutrients and decrease nutrient leaching from root zone. The interaction between water regimes and glue concentrations with the enhancer works to reduce the amount of water added to the earth with its high ability to conserve water and then supply the plant with its water needs in the irrigation intervals.

Results in table 2 cleared those mean values of the chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids as affected by concentration of glue sprayed on soil surface under different water regime as percentage from ETo, data pointed out that the highest values of the chlorophyll A were close correlated with irrigation water deficiency and increase concentration of sprayed glue, while the opposite was true in case of the chlorophyll B and carotenoids content. The highest values of the chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids were attained at 70%WR+6% glue (5.88), 100%WR+6 % glue in spraying solution (3.525, 2.08) for chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids, respectively. Whereas, the lowest ones were recorded at 85%WR+control (5.21), 70%WR+control (3.02, 1.05) in same previous sequence. Regarding to the effect of the water regime treatments on the sugar beet leaves from chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids, data cleared that water regime treatment 85% scored the highest values for chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids, while the lowest ones were recorded at 70 %WR.

Regardless WR effect, data in Table 2 pointed out increase sprayed glue concentration enhanced content of chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids after 6 % glue in spraying solution and the lowest ones were obtained at control (untreated plot).  The improvement in chlorophyll A, B and carotenoids were calculated in percentage as follow: 1.6, 2.9, 5.9; 4.6, 4.4, 21.1 and 7.6, 6.1, 45.5 % for 2, 4; 6 % glue in spraying solution comparing with control, respectively.  This increasing in root weight is mainly due to not only to balanced fertilizers, but also to the role of soil moisture content on growth activity. The negative effects of reduced applied irrigation water on sugar beet yield and yield quality dovetail with those reported by Mahmoud et al (20. 21). Additionally, Masri et al., (24) found that drip irrigated sugar beet plants with 75% of water requirements recorded the highest significant leaf area extractable sugar% and other plant growth characters in both studied seasons.

Soil physical properties

Data manifested in table 4 showed the effect of both studied factors on the hydraulic conductivity at saturated flow (HC) and aggregate percentage (dry sieving) at > 2 and < 2 mm. Data cleared that there is an enhancement in HC after spraying glue under different water regime treatment.  The lowest values of the HC (preferable) were highly negative correlated with decrease applied irrigation water and increase glue concentration that obtained after 70 %WR and 6 % glue in spraying solution.  Whereas, the highest values (highly drainable) were recorded at control treatment under 100 % WR followed by 85 % WR.  With respect to the effect of the treatments on the HC values, data noticed that decrease applied water associated with reduction in HC, which calculated in percentage with values 5.6 and 8.6 % after 85 and 70 %WR comparing with 100 %WR, respectively.  From the other side, glue concentration has a significant negative correlated with HC value and the reduction in HC was estimated in percentage with values 5.8, 12.9 and 18.9 % after 2, 4; 6 % glue in spraying solution.

Table (4) Effect of glue concentration on the hydraulic conductivity and aggregate percentage under different water regime after sugar beet crop.

Water regime %	Glue%/L	Hydraulic conductivity cm/h	Aggregate >2mm	Aggregate <2mm
100	0	20.20	11.17	88.83
	2	19.63	12.47	87.53
	4	18.37	13.40	86.60
	6	17.03	15.07	84.93
	Mean	18.81	13.03	86.98
85	0	19.40	12.32	87.68
	2	18.60	14.40	85.60
	4	17.17	15.53	84.47
	6	15.85	17.31	82.69
	Mean	17.75	14.89	85.11
70	0	19.73	12.85	87.15
	2	17.68	13.82	86.18
	4	16.12	13.94	86.06
	6	15.22	15.57	84.43
	Mean	17.19	14.05	85.96
LSD 5%	Water regime	1.02	1.24	0.97
	Glue	0.93	1.02	0.81
	Interaction	0.71	0.83	0.68

The mean values of the aggregate’s percentage for > 2mm and < 2mm as affected by the investigated two factors (water regime and glue concentration) were illustrated in table 4.  Data on hand revealed that increase glue concentration associated with decrease applied irrigation water (WR treatments) led to increase aggregates > 2mm and the opposite was true with aggregates < 2mm, where the highest aggregates > 2mm was recorded after 85 % WR followed by 100 with 6 % glue in spraying solution.  Also WR 85 % has a superior effect on the aggregates > 2mm with percentage values 14.3 and 12.11 % comparing with 100 and 70 % WR, respectively.  Additionally, data pointed out that increase glue concentration enhanced aggregates > 2mm with percentage value 2, 4 and 6 % glue in spraying solution, respectively.   Resulted data agreed with those obtained by Abd El-Hady and Ebtisam (2,3( they attributed the enhancement of the aggregates more than 2 mm to decrease soil evaporation and to dry-wet cycles that enhanced aggregates from side and soil ability to retain more water, especially under 70 and 85 WR treatments. They added that increasing the ratio of glue added to the soil works to form a strong structure that is stable in water, and this is what works to connect the fine grains to each other, which allows water to be trapped in the fine pores formed as a result of this strong construction

They mentioned also that there is a negative correlation between HC value and fine aggregates from side and soil ability to retain more water.  Another approach, the enhancement of soil pores and hence mean weight diameter mainly depends on soil particles size distribution, and glue act as a binding material that increase aggregates formation 1,2,3).

Also, results are in line with those obtained by (4) they found under coarse textured soils that application of natural conditioners greatly decreased the ability of soil to conduct water, such effect attributed to the modification of pore size distribution, decreasing the large pores (drainable pores), increasing the fine pores (water retention pores) and consequently reduced water flow rate. It could be summarized the some factors affecting the hydraulic conductivity of soil treated by protein and poly saccharides to the its role in binding soil particles, redistribution of soil pores towards fine one that improve hydrophysical properties of the coarse textured soils. Also, the decomposition of glue results in amino acids and proteins that work to retain the major elements and then supply them to the plant in a continuous manner, and this is what makes chlorophyll a in the leaves rise and also the major elements.  Finally, organic soil conditioners can improve not only the physical, chemical and biological properties of the soils due to its high contents of OM but also nutrients (e.g. N and P) for sustainable food production (26, 11). They added that microorganisms can break down the organic wastes and transform them into organic compounds more useful for plant.

Statistical analysis

The obtained results indicated that sprayed glue on soil surface has a strongly positive correlation with all studied sugar beet growth and yield parameters such leaf area (0.658**), root weight (0.421*), root yield (0.447*), WUE (0.907**), and total sugar (0.516**).  Also, data cleared that there is a positive significant relation between leaf area and root yield (0.845**) and total sugar (0.611*). Water regime positively correlated with both HC (0.433*) and aggregates >2mm (0.455**) and negatively with aggregates < 2mm (-0.454**). Whereas, glue negatively correlated with HC (-0.868**) and aggregates < 2mm (-0.823**) and positively with aggregates > 2mm (0.823**).

Also, glue has a highly significant positive correlation with chlorophyll A (0.700**), B (0.427**) and carotenoids (0.592**). The relation between sugar beet yield (ton/fed) and concentration of the sprayed glue to assess the close interaction (Fig. 1), regression equation was estimated and the equation is                Y = 1.0168x + 26.395           R² = 0.9876**

This result was supported with that obtained by ((Shinde et al., 2019).   The investigated macro nutrient was highly positive correlated yield of sugar beet with r values 0.923**, 0.847** and 0.819** for N, K and Ca, respectively except P. Also, highly significant correlation was attained between WUE from side and chlorophyll A (0.904**) and B (0.785**), N (0.881**), P (0.919**) K (0.815**) and Ca (8485**).

Fig. 1:  Relation between sugar beet yield and concentration of sprayed glue.

CONCLUSION

This experiment was carried out to assess water availability and maximize crop productivity from water use unit under water stress conditions. Water applied as a percentage of evapotranspiration (85 and 70 % of ET_o) as well as 100% as control one. Resulted data concluded that the soil physical properties (HC and aggregates) were improved due to water movement enhancement through redistribution of soil pores resulted after soil sprayed glue. Improving performance under 70 and 85% of e-commerce opportunities could represent the best solution in the future, even so, the relative decrease in yields was related to the availability of water.

Also, sugar beet yield of more than 20% under water stress represent the best result especially under glue treated soil. So, reduce the loss of irrigation water from evaporation especially under the expected upcoming climate change scenarios. Sugar beet yields indicated that 85% and/ or 70% irrigation treatments, plants received suitable amounts of irrigation water under experimental conditions. The results showed a significant increase in root yield and total sugar yield by reducing irrigation water from 100% 85 to 75% ETo.  Sprayed soil by glue at 6g/liter enhanced most studied yield and yield paymasters due to save soil moisture from side and decrease evaporation from soil surface and decrease weeds account from other side enhancement hydrophysical properties such as water content and soil water flow that supply plants by its requirements.

REFERENCES

Abd El-Hady M. and Ebtisam I. Eldardiry (2012).  Sustainable reclamation of newly reclaimed sandy soil through local marine deposits application: I- Improvement of hydro-physical characteristics. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 8(4): 2350-2355.

Abd El-Hady M. and Ebtisam I. Eldardiry (2016 a). Effect of different soil conditioners application on some soil characteristics and plant growth IV-Effect of bentonite rates on the some soil chemical properties. International Journal of ChemTech Research, 9 (10):38-44.

Abd El-Hady, M. and Ebtisam I. Eldardiry (2016 b). Effect of different soil conditioners application on some soil characteristics and plant growth. II-soil evaporation and dry-wet cycles. International Journal of ChemTech Research. 9(10):45-49

Abd El-Hady, M., Ebtisam I. Eldardiry (2016 c). Effect of different soil conditioners application on some soil characteristics and plant growth III- Effect on saturated and unsaturated water flow. International Journal of ChemTech Research. 9(5):135-143.

Abdallah, A.M., Mashaheet, A.M., and Burkey, K.O. (2021). Super absorbent polymers mitigate drought stress in corn (Zea mays L.) grown under rainfed conditions. Agric. Water Manage. 254, 106946.

Al-Barbari, F.S., Mohamed E.G.I., Abd El-Rahman M.A. And El Sayied SI. (2014). Quality of beet juice and its liquor during sugar beet processing. J. Food and Diary Sci. 5(6): 367-376.

Amr M.A EL-Darder, Mohsen A. Gamaa, Mahmoed. A. Sayed and Mohamed.Z. Kamel (2017). Water stress effects on yield and Quality of sugar beet crop in sandy soils. Alexandria Science Exchange Journal, 38(4): 828-836.

AOAC (2012). Official Methods of the Analysis of AOAC, International 19^th Edition, AOAC International., Maryland 20877-2417, USA

Bray A.W.,  Douglas I. Stewart, Ronan Courtney, Simon P. Rout, Paul N. Humphreys,William M. Mayes, and Ian T. Burke (2018). Sustained bauxite residue rehabilitation with gypsum and organic matter 16 years after initial treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52(1): 233-248.

Chaves M. M., Oliveira M. M. (2004). Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: prospects for water-saving agriculture. J. Exp. Bot. 55 2365–2384.

Daniyan, I.A., and Akhere, O.M. (2017). Development of a multi feed pelletizer for the production of organic fertilizer. Am. J. Mech. Mater. Eng. 1, 44-48.

Ebtisam I. Eldardiry and M. Abd El-Hady, (2015). Effect of different soil conditioners application on some soil characteristics and plant growth. I-Soil moisture distribution, barley yield and water use efficiency. Global Advanced Research Journal of Agricultural Science (ISSN: 2315-5094) 4(7):361-367.

EI-Dolify, M., Abdrabbo, M., EI-yazied, A.A., and Eldeeb, M. (2016). Effect of using soil conditioners on tomato yield and water use efficiency. Arab Univ. J. Agric. Sci. 24, 195-204.

Fereres, E., and Soriano, M. A. (2007). Deficit irrigation for reducing agricultural water use. Journal of Experimental Botany, 58(2), 147–159.

Gee, G.W. and J.W. Bauder, 1986. Particle-size analysis. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, 2^nd ed, Agronomy Monograph 9 (pp. 383-411). Madison, WI: ASA and SSSA

Hillel, D. (2004). Introduction to Environmental Soil Physics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 494 p.

Hosseinpour M, Sorooshzadeh A, Aghaalikhani M, Taleghani DF, Khoramian M (2006). The effect of irrigation in spring on water use efficiency and yield of autumn sown sugar beet. J. Sugar Beet, 22(2): 35-52.

Klute, A., (1986). Water retention: Laboratory methods. In A. Klute (ed.), Methods of Soil Analysi, Part1, Physical and mineralogical methods. 635-662, 9 ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI

Klute, A. and C. Dirksen, 1986. Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: Laboratory Methods. In A. Klute (Ed.), Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, 2^nd  ed, Agronomy Monograph 9 (pp. 687–734). Madison, WI: ASA and SSSA

Mahmoud E.A., Hassanin M.A., and Emara Eman I.R. (2012). Effect of organic and mineral nitrogenous fertilizers and plant density on yield and quality of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Egypt. J. Agron., 34(1): 89-103.

Mahmoud E.A., Ramadan B.S.H., El-Geddawy I.H., and Korany Samah F. (2014). Effect of mineral and bio-fertilization on productivity of sugar beet. J. Plant Production, Mansoura Univ., 5(4): 699-710.

Mukherjee, A., and Lal, R. (2013). Biochar Impacts on Soil Physical Properties and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Agronomy, 3, 313-339.

Mukherjee, A. and Zimmerman, A.R. (2013) Organic Carbon and Nutrient Release from a Range of Laboratory-Produced Biochars and Biochar-Soil Mixtures. Geoderma, 193, 122-130.

Masri, M.I., B.S.B. Ramadan, A.M.A. El-Shafai and M.S. El-Kady (2015). Effect of water stress and fertilization on yield and quality of sugar beet under drip and sprinkler irrigation systems in sandy soil. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences ISSN 2167-0447,5 (3):414-425.

Moliszewska, E., M. Nabrdalik and J. Piszczek, 2016 .Tubercle disease (Xanthomonas beticola ) and other gall malformed diseases of sugar beet roots: a review.J. Plant Dis Prot, 123: 197-203

Shinde R., P. K. Sarkar and N. Thombare (2019). Soil Conditioners. 1(10): 1-5.

Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. (1990). Statistical Methods 7^th. Ed. Iowa State Univ., press. Ames, Iowa, U.S.A

Soil Survey Staff (1999). Soil taxonomy- A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. USDA-SCS Agric. Handb.436. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC

Sugar Crops Council Report (2020). https://www.parliament.gov.fj/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Sugar-Cane-Growers-Council-Annual-Report-2020.pdf

Tahi H., S. Wahbi, R. Wakrim, B. Aganchich , R. Serraj and M. Centritto (2007).  Water relations, photosynthesis, growth and water-use efficiency in tomato plants subjected to partial rootzone drying and regulated deficit irrigation. Plant Biosystems 141 (2): 265-274.

Tognetti R., Palladino M., Minnocci A., Delfine S. and Alvino A. (2003). The response of sugar beet to drip and low-pressure sprinkler irrigation in southern Italy. Agric. Water. Management 60(2): 135-155.