Plants is measured by the method Lindner and Harley (Setiawati, 1995), heavy wet, Severe dry trubus and

plant roots and wide leaves pertanaman.

Data Analysis In processing data will be done trial ANOVA and goes on trial go if In different ANOVA real, and trial that is used tests Duncan on stadium Trust 5% (Sastrosupadi, 1995).

RESULTS and DISCUSSION

Chemical property land sour Chemical analysis of land to the land that used in this research Served in table 1. Table 1. Chemical analysis of Land Samples pH organic matter (%) CNP Land 4.2 3.13 0 9.10 42.2 0.05 0.10 P available (Ppm)
2

P Total (Ppm)
2

O5 P

O5 H

Strong Cations can Changed (Me/100 g) + 3+ Al

Based on The table 1 shows that the land has a description of That is very sour (pH 4.2), it can be attributed the land have Exchange capacity cation, and have a saturation base and low React sour (Sanchez, 1976). Results of the analysis also shows that this land Had the following: C, N is very low, P available and P total that It is very low. Assessment was based on the criteria of the chemical land (Sarief, 1989).

Maize Crop growth Bacteria solvent phosphate (BPF) P putida. And P. aeruginosa That diinokulasikan In the land diinkubasi ahead of time in previous media compost during 7 Day ( P putida. ) And 6-day ( P. aeruginosa ), So known growth curve And can be determined number of isolates used. The treatment P putida. Both without fertilizer as well as with phosphate fertilizer

Real did not influence in the increase levels P trubus if compared with Control (in the picture 1), but from the results obtained show the value More than if it was compared to control. So also the parameters that other Like the height plants, heavy wet trubus, severe dry trubus, heavy and wet roots Heavy roots dry do not affect real if compared with control (in Table 2 and 3).

,
0 ) 3 0

,
0 ) 2 0

_ CHARACTER _ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

,
0 ) 1 0

_ CHARACTER _ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

,
_ CHARACTER ' ) 0 0

_ CHARACTER _ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

_ CHARACTER

,
PERCENT. ' ( '

_ CHARACTER _ CHARACTER

P
5

_ CHARACTER _ CHARACTER

P
6

,
# PERCENT. & PERCENT.

P
_ CHARACTER 7

,
! # $ #

,
! " !

, I
0

I
)

I
1

I
4

Treatment

Picture 1. The influence Fertilizer P SP-36 (P Putida (I 1 ), P. aeruginosa (I Trubus.

), Rock phosphate (P 2 ) And BPF 2 ) And combination to The level P

1

P.

Note: the value that followed by riotf which is not the same different real on a 5 percent according to trial DMRT

This is because P dissolved all is not to be absorbed by plants, but Some remain in the ground and cannot be used by plants to The growth. In addition, with low phosphate absorbed plants can also be

13 15 7

CONCLUSION

Based on research that has been done proved that the treatment bacteria Solvent phosphate (BPF) to boost growth maize crop in The sour, which seems to the parameter than plants 10 and 45 HST, weight Wet trubus, severe dry trubus, heavy wet roots, severe dry leaves and roots, the area The P trubus. The BPF P putida. Equally well with P. aeruginosa

Or should both in increasing crop was 10 and 45 HST. For Weight wet, heavy trubus dry and the roots at least it is better to use Putida . While isolates should is best for weight Wet roots and the P trubus. Treatment with fertilizer P turned out to be able to increase the growth Only to the parameters passed than plants 10 and 17 HST and concentration P trubus. Treatment Each SP-36 well Rock phosphate Equally well in order to increase than P.

Plants 10 and 17 HST and concentration P trubus. Combination treatment fertilizer P with BPF can increase the growth That seem to be the parameter weight was dry. All combination treatment of Fertilizer P with BPF equally well in increasing weight was dry. So that it will be concluded that type of BPF FromP. aeruginosa And combined in improving plant growth Corn, but there was no any type of fertilizer P as well as fertilizer P combination with BPF that Most good in increasing the growth maize crop land in sour. P putida. More effective