Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 39 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index BIOMASS CHARACTERISTICS OF HENBANE Hyoscyamus albus L. UNDER WATER STRESS AS EFFECTED AMINO ACID (Ornithine) AND HUMIC ACIDS Ahmed Shaker Al-duhami 1,3 Kareem Meayan Rabie 2 1,2 Researcher and Assist. Prof., respectively, Depart. of Horticulture & Landscape, College of Agric., University of Baghdad, Iraq. 3 Corresponding author: alduhamiahmed@yahoo.com ABSTRACT A Plastic house experiment was conducted at College of Agriculture - University of Baghdad, and applied according to Randomized Complete Block Design (R.C.B.D) using split- split plot design. The experiment included three factors. The water stress factor represents the main plots (50% and 100% of the field capacity) and are symbolized by W1 and W2. The sub-plots include Humic Fertilizer (Disper Humic) with four levels (0, 40, 80, 120 kg.h -1 ), which is characterized by (H1, H2, H3, H4), and sub-sub-plots include the amino acid (Ornithine), with three concentrations (0, 200, 250 mg L -1 ) and are symbolized (O1, O2, O3). Results indicated the triple-interaction between the studied factors (250 mg L -1 Ornithine and 120 kg.h -1 humus fertilizer and irrigation level of 100%) significantly gave the highest main stem lenght, stem diameter, number of branches, leaf area, the percentage of relative water content in the leaves, total chlorophyll content of leaves, dry weight of vegetative growth and root at flowering and fruiting stage (43 cm, 121.3 dis 2 plant -1 , 193.7 mg 100g -1 , Fresh weight, 66.25 g plant -1 , and 29.79 g plant -1 , 86.98% respectively). Keywords: Hyoscyamus albus, biomass characteristics, water stress, humic acid. INTRODUCTION Solanaceae has passesses several of plants that have medical, agricultural and economic importance (Martin et al., 2013), One important medicinal plant belongs to this family is white henbane (Hyoscyamus albus L.), due to its medicinal importance, whether in folk medicine or constitutional medicine. Although it is considend as a toxic plants and drugs due to different plant parts (leaves, roots and floral tips) contain effective alkaloids such as hyoscyamine and Scopolamine (Sweta and Lakshmi, 2015), which is one of the most important drugs because of its high drug activity (Sobarzo, 2015), white henbane plant or its active ingredients are described as sedative, analgesic, antispasmodic, hypnotic, Wizard for insomnia and anesthetic (Frank and Rene, 2008) and a treatment for asthma and pertussis (Oksman, 2007). World Health https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 40 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Organization (WHO) estimates that about 80% of the world's population currently uses traditional herbal remedies for healing. For example, in some Latin American countries, 71% of the population of Chile uses traditional medicine. In China, 40% of the population uses medicinal plants in health care, and Africa. 80% of the population uses traditional medicinal plants and is the only source of medicines. The growth of vegetative, fruit crops and secondary metabolites is influenced by many factors including amino acid and bio-fertilization and organic fertilization (Dewick, 2009). Many studies have shown that the spray of amino acids to plants has a significant role in stimulating physiological and biochemical processes. Where they co-construct and promote the work of many enzymes and enzymatic compounds, which in turn stimulates better plant growth (Nobel, 2009). Some plant species exhibit tolerance to water stress (drought), but the intensity of this tolerance varies from one plant type to another within dry and semi-arid zones (Amrhein et al., 2012), Many studies indicated that water stress causes many physiological and chemical changes in the plant. Which reduce the growth of the plant, especially the reduction of the leaf size, stem elongation, roots expansion and low efficiency of water use and also inhibits the division and elongation of cells (Disante et al., 2011 and Hammad et al., 2014), leads to the closure of stoma, low rates of transpiration and causes a decrease in metabolic activities such as photosynthesis and respiration and absorption of ions, transportation, carbohydrates, nutrient metabolism and growth catalysts, and the discouraging events enzymatic, but it stimulates the plant for the production of secondary metabolic compounds (Aslan et al., 2017). Humic acids (Humic and Fulvic) are a part of humic substances that are biochemically active in soil and plants and which can be applied to the soil in liquid or solid form and can be directly applied to the plant via foliar nutrition. Humic acids possess adsorbable growes that easily penetrate plant's cellular membranes due to containing two different types of components, one of which is hydrophobic and the other is hydrophilic part (Al-Shater et al., 2010 and Lyons and Genc, 2016), which affects plant growth directly and indirectly, Many studies have attracted the relationship of positive correlation between the application of humic acid and the biomass of the plant (Safai et al., 2017). In turn leads to extract the largest amount of Tropane alkaloids. The aim of the study was to determine the response of white henbane to the interaction effect of the spray of ornithine and humic acids on largest biomass of thewater- stress white henbane. https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 41 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index MATERIALS AND METHODS Experiment was carried out at one of the greenhouses of the Protection Department - College of Agriculture - University of Baghdad, and was applied according to Rondomized Complet Block Design (R.C.B.D) using split-split plot Design, with three replicates. The treatments and their replicates resulted in 72 experimental units. The soil of the greenhouses was prepared by tilling, smoothing and leveling. The soil was then divided into plots with a width of 0.50 m and a height of 0.30 cm and a length of 2.5 m, left a distance of 1 m between the plots and a distance of 1.5 m between experimental units within the single plot. The seeds of the white henbane plant were obtained from the Medicinal and Aromatic Plants Unit, College of Agriculture, University of Baghdad, where they were cultivated on 1/12/2016 in Cork dishes. After the seedlings became 8 cm high, they were cultivated in the greenhouse on 1/2/2017. With double lines so that the distance between the double lines is 0.20 m and the distance between one plant and another within a line of 0.50 m. Drip irrigation system was used with discharge rate of 4 liters hr -1 , and the fertilization process was conducted uniformly for all treatments. The experiment consisted of three factors: the water stress level was distibnted in main plots with two levels (50 and 100% field capacity) and is symbolized by W1 and W2 respectively. The sub-plots include Humic fertilizer (Disper Humic) produced by the Spanish company Eden containing humic acids (Humic and Fulvic acid), where used four levels (0, 40, 80 and 120 kg h -1 ) is symbolized by (H1, H2, H3, H4), the sub-sub-plots included the amino acid (Ornithine e) with three concentrations (0, 200 and 250 mg L -1 ) and are symbolized (O1, O2, O3). Ornithine was spray in three periods, taking into account the position of insulation to prevent the arrival of spray to neighboring units, and the period between addition and another was 15 days, the first addition after a month of seedlings cultivating in the greenhouse, while humic fertilizer was applied to the soil in four periods, the period between the addition and another is 15 days, according to the recommendation of the company producing fertilizer, and the first addition after 21 days of seedlings cultivating in the greenhouse. The results were statistically analyzed using the program Genstat and the averages for all indicators of the study were compared by the least significant difference (LSD) at the probability level of 0.05 (Al-Rawi and Abdullah, 2000). https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 42 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Measured Traits Five plants were selected randomly from the experimental unit for the purpose of conducting the required measurements at the fruiting stage (seed composition) on 1/6/2017. leaf area (dm 2 ): The leaf area was measured on the basis of the dry weight of the leaves, taking 25 pieces of leaves of the selected plants, with a known area 2 cm 2 plot -1 by leaf borer and then dried the leaves at a temperature (70) m until the stability of weight, and then weighed and calculated the leaf area Plant -1 using the equation. Leaf area plant -1 = The dry weight of the total vegetative and the root system: The same selected plants to measure the traits above were used from each experimental unit, where the total vegetative was separated from the root system. The root system was extracted by a cylinder (Boham, 1979), using a cylinder with a diameter of 20 cm and a height of 40 cm. It was cultivated in the soil to the depth of the cylinder previously referred after determining the root system of the plant in the middle of the cylinder. The total root system was extracted with soil and then washed with normal water to remove the soil residue, and then published on a plastic plates until the stability of weight (Al-Sahaf, 1989) and then calculated dry weight for it. Determination of total chlorophyll pigment: Chlorophyll from leaves was extracted (before harvesting) using acetone (80%), then reading the spectroscopy of the sample with the Spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 663 nm for chlorophyll A and 645 nm for chlorophyll B. The amount of chlorophyll (mg.g -1 ) (Goodwin, 1976) through the equation: )663(02.8)645(2.20 DDpigmentlchlorophylTotal  The relative water content of the leaves (%): A number of soft leaves were taken (the third leaf from the top of the plant) (Taiz and Zeiger, 2002), then took four tablets from the middle with a diameter of 2 cm placed in nylon bags to prevent loss of moisture and weighed after cutting directly, placed in distilled water (Gholami et al., 2014) hours under the lighting and room temperature, then dried the leaves using a filter paper and weighted to represent the full weight and then placed in the oven at a temperature (85 m) for three hours and then take the dry weight (Barnes and Woolley, 1969). It was estimated according to following equation. https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 43 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index 100..     DWTW DWFW CWR Where DW = Dry weight (g), TW = Total weight (g), FW = Fresh Weight (g) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Main stem height (cm): Table 1 shows that there was a significant effect when increasing the level of humic fertilizer on height of the main stem of the plant. The H4 treatment achieved the highest rate in the studied trait of 41.01 cm, an increase of 27% compared to the treatment of H1, while there was no significant effect between the concentrations of the amino acid (Ornithine) in this trait. Table 1 shows significant effect of the irrigation factor on plant height, the W1 treatment achieved the highest value of 38.96 cm with a significant increase of 8.1% compared to the treatment of W2. Results showed that the interaction between the concentrations of Ornithine with levels of humic fertilizer was significant, the highest rate was 41.48 cm for main stem height recorded at H4O3, while the lowest value of the H1O1 treatment was 28.16 cm. Table 1. Effect of Ornithine concentrations, humic fertilizer levels and irrigation level and their interactions on the main stem height (cm) of white henbane plant Irrigation level Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Irrigation level O1 O2 O3 W1 H1 32.26 38.09 37.06 35.80 H2 38.70 38.98 38.81 38.83 H3 39.88 40.98 36.47 39.11 H4 40.44 42.80 43.00 42.08 W2 H1 24.07 31.30 30.90 28.76 H2 35.00 28.37 34.60 32.66 H3 32.00 37.53 29.33 32.95 H4 40.03 40.17 39.63 39.94 L.S.D 3.082 3.257 Concentration of Ornithine acid Irrigation level Irrigation level Concentration of Ornithine acid Average level of irrigation W1 37.82 40.21 38.84 38.96 W2 32.78 34.34 33.62 33.58 L.S.D 2.719 4.419 Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Average of humic fertilizer H1 28.16 34.69 33.98 32.28 H2 36.85 33.67 36.70 35.74 H3 35.94 39.25 32.9 36.03 H4 40.23 41.48 41.31 41.01 L.S.D 4.095 2.452 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 44 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Concentration of Ornithine acid 35.29 37.27 36.22 L.S.D N.S The results of the same table showed the effect of bi-interaction between the Ornithine concentrations and the level of irrigation in this trait, where the treatment of W1O2 excelled by giving the highest value of 40.21 cm followed by W1O3 with 38.84 cm, while the lowest value of W2O1 was 32.78 cm. The results of the same table showed that the effect of the bi-interaction between the level of irrigation and the levels of humic fertilizer was significant in this trait. The W1H4 treatment was excelled by giving the highest rate of this trait was 42.08 cm, while the lowest stem height was 28.76 cm at the treatment of W2H1. The same table shows the effect of the triple interaction between the factors studied in the main stem height. The W1H4O3 treatment achieved the highest value of this trait reached of 43.00 cm. Increase rate was 33.2% compared to the treatment of W1H1O1 which gave 32.26 cm. Leaf area (dm 2 plant -1 ): Statistical analysis in Table 2 shows the moral effect the humic fertilizer on the leaf area of the plant. The H4 treatment achieved the largest leaf area of 85.83 dm 2 plant -1 with 36% increase compared with the H1 treatment, while Ornithine concentrations did not have any significant effect on this trait. It is noted from the results of the same table that the level of irrigation has a significant effect in this indicator, as the treatment of W1 gave the highest rate of 92.19 dm 2 Plant -1 with increase rate was 76.4% compared to the treatment of W2. The same table shows the binary effect between the concentrations of Ornithine with the humic compost levels on this trait. The interaction treatment (H4O3) gave the highest rate of this trait was 91.73dm 2 plant -1 compared with the treatment of H1O1, which gave the least leaf area of (58.04 dm 2 plant -1 ). The same table shows the highest value of this trait within the bi-interaction between the irrigation level and the concentrations of the Ornithine acid in the interaction treatment W1O3 was (93.91 dm 2 plant -1 ). While the lowest value for leaf area in the treatment of W2O2 which reached of (51.02 dm 2 plant -1 ). The same table indicates the significant interaction effect between the irrigation parameters and the humic compost levels in the studied trait. W1H4 treatment excelled on the rest of the treatments by giving it the largest leaf area of (111.92 dm 2 plant -1 ), with an increase ratio of 37.5% compared to the treatment of W1H1, which gave (81.35 dm 2 plant -1 ). The same table shows the triple effect of the studied factors in this trait. The two treatments (W1H4O3, W1H4O2) gave the largest leaf area of (121.33, 119.60 dm 2 plant -1 ) with an https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 45 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index increase of 61.6% and 59.2%, respectively compared to the treatment of comparison W1H1O1 which gave 75.08 dm 2 plant -1 . Table 2. Effect of Ornithine concentrations, humic fertilizer levels and irrigation level and their interactions on the leaf area (dm 2 plant -1 ) of white henbane plant Irrigation level Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Irrigation level O1 O2 O3 W1 H1 75.08 78.30 90.68 81.35 H2 91.14 73.47 89.99 84.87 H3 98.25 104.27 69.36 90.63 H4 94.82 119.60 121.33 111.92 W2 H1 41.00 45.28 48.18 44.82 H2 65.23 37.06 53.33 51.87 H3 54.59 60.81 42.30 52.57 H4 56.17 60.93 62.13 59.74 L.S.D 13.544 11.093 Concentration of Ornithine acid Irrigation level Irrigation level Concentration of Ornithine acid Average level of irrigation W1 89.82 93.91 92.84 92.19 W2 54.25 51.02 51.49 52.25 L.S.D 4.567 3.264 Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Average of humic fertilizer H1 58.04 61.79 69.43 63.09 H2 78.19 55.27 71.66 68.37 H3 76.42 82.54 55.83 71.60 H4 75.50 90.27 91.73 85.83 L.S.D 10.489 8.998 Concentration of Ornithine acid 72.04 72.47 72.16 L.S.D N.S Chlorophyll Content (mg g -1 ): Results indicated in Table 3 that the H4 treatment was excelled among the levels of humic fertilizer by giving the highest significant increase in chlorophyll content of 134.05 mg g -1 , with an increase of 51% compared with H1 treatment. The concentrations of Ornithine acid also a significantly influenced on the content of leaves of chlorophyll. The O3 treatment was significantly excelled in this trait by giving of 123.68 mg g -1 compared to the O1 treatment, which gave 104.06 mg g -1 . As shown in the same table, there is a significant effect of irrigation level in this indicator. Treatment https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 46 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index 100% field capacity (W1) achieved the highest chlorophyll value of 142.99 mg g -1 with an increase of 72.8% compared to irrigation level 50% field capacity. Table also showed the effect of positive interaction between the concentrations of Ornithine and humic fertilizer levels. The H4O3 treatment showed the highest increase in leaf content of chlorophyll (151.85 mg g fresh substance -1 ), while the lowest value of this trait to the H1O1 treatment of 82.93 mg g -1 . Table 3. Effect of Ornithine concentrations, humic fertilizer levels and irrigation level and their interactions on the Chlorophyll content (mg g fresh substance -1 ) of white henbane plant Irrigation level Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Irrigation level O1 O2 O3 W1 H1 105.60 111.20 115.50 110.77 H2 131.10 140.40 155.70 142.40 H3 137.10 148.90 166.60 150.87 H4 150.50 159.60 193.70 167.93 W2 H1 60.26 71.13 68.88 66.76 H2 70.82 66.50 77.93 71.75 H3 86.66 88.98 101.10 92.25 H4 90.47 100.00 110.00 100.16 L.S.D 30.551 26.011 Concentration of Ornithine acid Irrigation level Irrigation level Concentration of Ornithine acid Average level of irrigation W1 131.08 140.03 157.88 142.99 W2 77.05 81.65 89.48 82.73 L.S.D 19.815 41.527 Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Average of humic fertilizer H1 82.93 91.17 92.19 88.76 H2 100.96 103.45 116.82 107.08 H3 111.88 118.94 133.85 121.56 H4 120.49 129.80 151.85 134.05 L.S.D 25.055 15.729 Concentration of Ornithine acid 104.06 110.84 123.68 L.S.D 11.247 Table 3 shows positive interaction between the concentrations of Ornithine acid and the level of irrigation in leaf content of chlorophyll, Where the two treatments (W1O3, W1O2) excelled by giving it the highest rate of this trait of 157.88 and 140.03 mg g -1 , respectively, with an increase of 20.4% and 6.8% respectively compared to the treatment of W1O1. The same table indicates the https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 47 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index effect of the bi-interaction between the irrigation level and the humic fertilizer levels in leaf content of chlorophyll. The interaction treatment W1H4 achieved the highest value of this trait reached of 167.93 mg g -1 with an increase of 51.6% compared to the treatment of W1H1, which gave 110.77 mg g -1 . The statistical analysis showed the effect of the triple interaction between the studied factors in the measured trait. The two treatments (W1H4O3, W1H3O3) achieved significant superiority with the other three interaction factors by giving 193.7, 166.6 mg g -1 , with an increase of 83.4% and 57.7% respectively compared to the control treatment W1H1O1, which gave of 105.6 mg g -1 . Dry weight of the total vegetative (g plant -1 ): Table 4 shows the significant effect of the humic fertilizer levels in the dry weight of the total vegetative. The H4 treatment achieved the highest weight of the studied trait of (49.19 g plant -1 ) with a significant increase compared to the treatment of H1, which gave of (40.18 g plant -1 ). Table indicates the effect of Ornithine acid concentrations in this trait. Two treatments (O4 and O3) achieved the highest values reached 48.08, 46.74g plant -1 . Results showed that the irrigation factor had a significant effect on the dry weight of the total vegetative. The treatment W1 achieved the highest dry weight of 53.02 g plant -1 with an increase of 41.57% compared to the treatment of W2. From the same table, it observed significant effect of the interaction treatments between the concentrations of the Ornithine acid and the levels of the addition of the humic fertilizer. The H4O3 treatment achieved the highest rate of this trait of 54.76 g plant -1 with an increase of 47.56% compared to the control treatment H1O1. The effect of the interaction between the concentrations of the Ornithine acid and the level of irrigation in the studied trait was significant. The two treatments (W1O3, W1O2) achieved the highest value of this trait of 56.82, 54.96 g plant -1 respectively with an increase of 20.1% and 16.2% respectively compared to the W1O1 treatment. The same table also shows the significant effect of the bi-interaction between the level of irrigation and the concentration of humic fertilizer in the dry weight of the total vegetative. The two treatments (W1H4, W1H3) achieved the highest value of this trait reached of 58.89, 55.15 g plant -1 with an increase of 24.6% and 16.6% respectively compared to the treatment of W1H1 which gave of 47.26 g plant -1 . The effect of the triple interaction between the studied factors was significant in the dry weight of the total vegetative. The treatment W1H4O3 achieved the highest value of the trait (66.25 g plant -1 ) with an increase of 46.8% compared to the treatment of W1H1O1. https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 48 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Table 4. Effect of Ornithine concentrations, humic fertilizer levels and irrigation level and their interactions on the dry weight of the total vegetative (g Plant -1 ) of white henbane plant Irrigation level Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Irrigation level O1 O2 O3 W1 H1 45.13 46.73 49.92 47.26 H2 45.31 53.18 53.84 50.78 H3 51.15 57.05 57.25 55.15 H4 47.57 62.86 66.25 58.89 W2 H1 29.09 34.73 35.45 33.09 H2 36.33 39.62 38.48 38.14 H3 36.30 40.84 40.17 39.10 H4 36.35 38.88 43.27 39.50 L.S.D 11.480 6.462 Concentration of Ornithine acid Irrigation level Irrigation level Concentration of Ornithine acid Average level of irrigation W1 47.29 54.96 56.81 53.02 W2 34.52 38.52 39.34 37.46 L.S.D 5.121 2.937 Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Average of humic fertilizer H1 37.12 40.73 42.68 40.18 H2 40.82 46.40 46.16 44.46 H3 43.73 48.95 48.71 47.13 H4 41.96 50.87 54.76 49.20 L.S.D 8.117 5.186 Concentration of Ornithine acid 40.90 46.74 48.08 L.S.D 4.278 Dry weight of the root (g plant -1 ): Results in Table 5 show that increased levels of humic acid (humic fertilizer) significantly affected the dry weight of the root system. The H4 treatment achieved the highest increase of 20.44 g plant - 1 with an increase of 48.9% compared to H1, while there was no significant effect between the concentrations of Ornithine in this trait, while the irrigation level had a significant effect. The treatment W1 achieved the highest dry weight of the root reached of 20.21 g plant -1 . Which was significantly excelled compared to W2, which gave 12.98 g Plant -1 . Results of the same table showed the effect of positive interaction between levels of humic compost and Ornithine acid concentrations in the studied trait. The two treatments (H4O3, H4O2) achieved the highest rate of this trait of 22.59, 21.35 g plant -1 with a significant https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 49 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index increase of 64.4% and 55.3% compared to the treatment of H1O1. The same table indicates that the interaction between the level of irrigation and the concentration of Ornithine acid has a significant effect on the root weight of the plant. The two treatments (W1O3, W1O2) achieved the highest values of 21.07, 20.96 g plant -1 significantly excelled higher with the rest of the transactions except for W1O1. The effect of the interaction between the level of irrigation and the levels of humic fertilizer was significant. The treatment W1H4 achieved the highest dry weight of root reached of 25.79 g plant -1 with an increase of 54.2% compared to the treatment of W1H1 of (10.73 g plant -1 ). The effect of the interaction between the three factors studied in this trait was significant. The two treatments (W1H4O3, W1H4O2) achieved the highest increase in this trait of 29.79, 27.71 g plant -1 with a significant increase of 82.5% and 69.8% respectively, compared to the control treatment W1H1O1. Table 5. Effect of Ornithine concentrations, humic fertilizer levels and irrigation level and their interactions on the dry weight of the root (g plant -1 ) of white henbane plant Irrigation level Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Irrigation level O1 O2 O3 W1 H1 16.32 16.35 17.47 16.71 H2 18.58 17.44 18.56 18.19 H3 19.69 22.32 18.46 20.16 H4 19.86 27.71 29.79 25.79 W2 H1 11.17 10.10 10.91 10.73 H2 12.42 10.58 14.43 12.48 H3 13.86 14.70 12.28 13.61 H4 14.92 14.99 15.40 15.10 L.S.D 6.176 4.898 Concentration of Ornithine acid Irrigation level Irrigation level Concentration of Ornithine acid Average level of irrigation W1 18.61 20.96 21.07 20.21 W2 13.10 12.59 13.26 12.98 L.S.D 2.990 3.230 Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Average of humic fertilizer H1 13.74 13.23 14.19 13.72 H2 15.50 14.01 16.49 15.33 H3 16.77 18.51 15.37 16.88 H4 17.39 21.35 22.59 20.44 L.S.D 3.004 2.488 Concentration of Ornithine acid 15.85 16.77 17.16 L.S.D N.S https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 50 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Relative water content of the leaf (%): Results of the statistical analysis showed no significant effect of the levels of humic compost and Ornithine acid concentration separately in the relative water content in the leaves of the white henbane plant. While the results of Table 6 showed a significant difference in the relative water content of the leaves of the white henbane plant between the irrigation treatments, the irrigation treatment 100% achieved the highest rate of 84.33% with an increase of 33.4% compared to the irrigation treatment 50%. The same table also showed the effect of the bi-interaction between the humic compost levels and the Ornithine acid concentration in this trait, the two treatments (H4O3, H1O3) achieved the highest relative water content of the leaves reached of 79.54 and 74.96%, respectively. H2O2 treatment gave the lowest value of 71.78%. Table 6. Effect of Ornithine concentrations, humic fertilizer levels and irrigation level and their interactions on the relative water content of the leaf (%) of white henbane plant Irrigation level Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Irrigation level O1 O2 O3 W1 H1 83.12 83.43 83.48 83.34 H2 83.34 84.06 85.24 84.21 H3 83.21 84.11 86.39 84.57 H4 84.08 84.46 86.98 85.17 W2 H1 63.19 61.24 66.44 63.62 H2 64.37 59.50 61.55 61.81 H3 62.03 62.01 60.39 61.48 H4 64.27 60.92 72.10 65.76 L.S.D 2.539 1.771 Concentration of Ornithine acid Irrigation level Irrigation level Concentration of Ornithine acid Average level of irrigation W1 83.44 84.02 85.52 84.33 W2 63.47 60.92 65.12 63.17 L.S.D 2.733 4.281 Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Levels of humic fertilizer Concentration of Ornithine acid Average of humic fertilizer H1 73.16 72.34 74.96 73.48 H2 73.86 71.78 73.40 73.01 H3 72.62 73.06 73.39 73.02 H4 74.18 72.69 79.54 75.47 L.S.D 5.213 N.S Concentration of Ornithine acid 73.45 72.47 75.32 L.S.D N.S https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 51 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Table 6 showed the effect of the interaction between irrigation level and Ornithine concentrations in this trait. The interaction treatment (W1O3, W1O2, W1O1) were the highest values of 85.52, 84.02 and 83.44%, while the lowest value in treatment W2O2 was 60.92. The same table also showed the effect of the interaction between irrigation level and humic compost levels in this trait. The treatment W1H4 gave the highest values of measured trait of 85.17 with an increase of 2.2% compared to the treatment of W1H1 which gave 83.34% while the lowest relative water content in leaves in treatment W2H3 was 61.48%. The same table showed the effect of triple interaction between the studied factors. The highest relative water content in the interaction treatment W1H4O3 was 86.98% with an increase of 4.6% compared to the treatment W1H1O1 giving 83.12% while the lowest value in the treatment W2H1O2 was 61.24%. It is clearly from the above that the application of humic acid (humic fertilizer) with a level of 120 kg h -1 (H4) has affected studied traits of vegetative growth and may be due to increase the amount of nutrients absorbed by the roots by increasing the length and branched out of the root, which increases the efficiency of the use of fertilizer added (Zederi and Shamsi, 2015) as well as the role of humic acids in the effectiveness of many enzymes, especially the respiratory enzymes in addition to stimulating enzymes of phosphatase, transaminase, invertase and H + -ATPase and raise the level of protein metabolism and composition of DNA, suggesting that their physiological role is similar to the role of plant hormones (Zandonadi et al, 2013 and Canellas and Olivares, 2014). The results also showed a significant superiority of the irrigation level 100% field capacity in the studied traits compared to the level of irrigation 50% field capacity In the rate of growth and the final size reached by different tissues and organs, it affects carbon metabolism and is related to respiration and absorption of elements from the soil as well as its role in nitrogen and other transformation, cell division and elongation, and flowering and yield (Jaleel et al, 2009). REFERENCES Al-Rawi, khaashie Mahmoud and Abdul Aziz Khalaf Abdullah. 2000. Design and Analysis of Agricultural Experiments, i. 2. Dar Al Kutub for Printing and Publishing, Mosul University, Iraq. (In Arabic) Al-Shater, Mohammed Saeed and Akram Mohammed Al-Balkhi. 2010. Soil fertility and fertilization. Al Rawdah Press. University of Damascus Publications. College of Agriculture. Syria. Al-Sahaf, Fadel Hussein. 1989. Applied Plant Nutrition. University of Baghdad - Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research. (In Arabic) https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 52 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Amrhein, N., K. Apel, S. Baginsky, N. Buchmann, M. Geisler, F. Keller, C. Körner, E. Martinoia, L. Merbold, C. Müller, M. Paschke and B. Schmid. 2012. Plant Response to Stress. Zurich-Basel Plant Science Center. Zurich, Switzerland. Pp 156. Aslan, G. E, C. Karaca, Ahmet Kurunç and Harun Kaman. 2017. Effects on Water Stress on Daily Stomatal Conductivity of Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni. abstract proceeding book of ICAFOF conference, Turkey. pp. 1218. Barnes, D. L., and D. G. Woolley. 1969. Effect of moisture stress at different stages of growth. I. Comparison of a single-eared and a two-eared corn hybrid. Agro. J. 61: 788-790. Boham, W. 1979. Methods of Studying Roots Systems. Springer Veriang, Berlins Heidelberag, New Yourk. USA. Canellas, L. P and F. L. Olivares. 2014. Physiological responses to humic substances as plant growth promoter. Biological Technologies in Agriculture. 1: 3-11. Dewick, P. M. 2009. Medicinal Natural Products: A Biosynthetic Approach, 3rd Edition. University of Nottingham, UK. Pp 546. Disante, K. B., D. Fuentes and J. Cortina. 2011. Response to drought of Zn- stressed Quercus suber L. seedlings. Environ Exp. Bot. 70: 96–103. Frank, P. and A. Rene. 2008. Natural Compounds as Drugs. Volume1. Bikhäuser. 350 pp. Gholami, M., B. A. Boughton, A. R. Fakhari, F. Ghanati, H. H. Mirzaei, L.Y. Borojeni, Y. Zhang, Z. S. Breitbach, D. W. Armstrong and U. Roessner. 2014. Metabolomic study reveals a selective accumulation of l-arginine in the d-ornithine treated tobacco cell suspension culture. Process Biochemistry. 49: 140–147. Goodwin, T. W. 1976. Chemistry and Biochemistry of Plant Pigment. 2nd Academic. Press. London, New York. San Francisco: P. 373. Hammad, A. R. and A. M. A. Osama. 2014. Physiological and biochemical studies on drought tolerance of wheat plants by application of amino acids and yeast extract. Annals of Agricultural Science. 59(1): 133–145. Jaleel , C. A., P. Manivannan, A. Wahid, M. Farooq, H. J. Al-Juburi, R. Somasundram and R. Panneerselvam. 2009. Drought stress in plant: A review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition. Int. J. Bio. 11(1): 100-105. Lyons, G. and Y. Genc. 2016. Commercial humates in agriculture: Real substance or smoke and mirrors. J. Agronomy. 6(50): 1-8. Martin, C., Y. Zhang, C. Tonelli, K. Petroni. 2013. Plants, diet, and health. Ann. Rev. Plant Biol. 64: 19-46. Nobel, P. S. 2009. Physicochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology. 4 th edition. University of California, California. P: 604. https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Diyala Agricultural Sciences Journal (DASJ), 11(2): 39-53, 2019 Al-Duhami & Rabie 53 https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index Oksman, C. K. 2007. Tropane and nicotine alkaloid biosynthesis-novel approaches towards biotechnology production of plant-derived pharmaceutical. Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology. 8: 203-210. Safai, F., G. Gohari and F. Rasouli. 2017. The effects of humic acid foliar application on morphological characteristics and essential oil yield of hydroponically grown Ocimum basilicum. 6 th National Congress on Medicinal Plants. Iran. Pp: 44-45. Sobarzo, E. 2015. Alkaloids, Biosynthesis, Biological Roles and Health Benefits. Biochemistry Research Trends. Nova Science Publishers, New York. Pp.285. Sweta, V. R. and T. Lakshmi. 2015. Pharmacological profile of tropane alkaloids. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research. 7(5): 117- 119. Taiz, L. and E. Zeiger. 2002. Plant Physiology. 5 th (Ed.), Fifth Sianauer Associates, Sunderland, UK. 629 p. Zandonadi, D. B., M. P. Santos, J. G. Busato, L. E. Pereira and A. R. Façanha. 2013. Plant physiology as affected by humified organic matter. Theoretical and Experimental Plant Physiology. 25(1): 12-25. Zederi, R. and F. Shamsi. 2015. The effects of humic acid and organic manure on germination and growth of sage in greenhouse. 4th National Congress on Medicinal Plants. Iranian Journal of Pharmaceutical Research. 14(2): 22-30. جحث شد الماء بحاثير .Hyoscyamus albus L صفات الكحلة االحيائية لنبات السكران االبيض واالحماض الدبالية Ornithineالحامض االميني ياحمد شاكر محسه الدهام 1،3 كريم معيان ربيع 2 1,2 ُت انضساعت، جامعت بغذاد، انعشاقعهً انخىانٍ، لسم انبسخىت وهىذست انحذائك، كه سخار مساعذوا باحث 3 alduhamiahmed@yahoo.com انمسىؤل عه انىشش: المسحخلص وفك حصمُم انمطاعاث وطبمج ،جامعت بغذاد -كهُت انضساعت فٍوفزث انخجشبت فٍ أحذ انبُىث انبالسخُكُت حضمىج انخجشبت .(Split-split plot Design)انمىشمت -انمىشمت االنىاحبخشحُب (RCBD)انكامهت انمعشاة وَشمض نها مه انسعت انحمهُت( %100و 50ه )ُاالجهاد انمائٍ االنىاح انشئُست بمسخىََمثم عامم ،عىامم تثالث 80و 40و 0)اسبعت مسخىَاث ب Disper Humic) ) انسماد انذبانٍ خشممفاما االنىاح انثاوىَت ، (W2و W1بـ ) كغم هـ ( 120و -1 حامط االمُىٍ خشمم انفأما االنىاح ححج انثاوىَت ،(H4و H3و H2 و H1)انشمىص َشمض نها ب Ornithine ( مهغم نخش250و 200و 0حشاكُض ) تبثالث -1 اشاسث انىخائج انً ان .(O3و O2و O1َشمض نها بـ ) مهغم نخش Ornithine 250حامط )W1H3O3 نخذاخم انثالثٍ بُه انعىامم انمذسوستا 1- 120ذبانٍ انسماد انو كغم هـ -1 محخىي و ،انمساحت انىسلُتو ،فٍ اسحفاع انساق انشئُساعطج صَادة معىىَت ( %100ومسخىي انشٌ مه انماء وانىصن انجاف نهمجمىع انخضشٌ وانجزسٌ وانمحخىي انىسبٍ نألوساق ،األوساق مه انكهىسوفُم انكهٍ دسم 121.3 ،سم 43)%( ) 2 وباث 1- غم100 مهغم 193.7 ، 1- وباث غم 55.45 ،وصن سطب 1- وباث غم 66.25، 1 وباث غم 25.86 1- وباث غم29.79 ، 1- % بانخخابع(.86.98و انكخهت انحُىَت، اإلجهاد انمائٍ، انحامط األمُىٍ أوسوثُه، األحماض وباث انسكشان األبُط، الكلمات المفحاحية: انذبانُت. https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index https://journal.djas.uodiyala.edu.iq/index.php/dasj/index