## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Treatment**} & **P** & **S** & **K** & **Ca** & **Mg** & **H+Al** & **BS** & **CEC** & **V** & **m** & **OM** & **pH** \\  & **mg** & **dm\({}^{-3}\)** & & & & **mmol\({}_{\text{c}}\)** & **dm\({}^{-3}\)** & & & **\%** & & **g dm\({}^{-3}\)** & **(CaCl\({}_{2}\))** \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{P\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{5}\) doses (kg ha\({}^{-1}\)) (P)} \\ \hline
0 & 5 & 6 & 3.8 & 28 & 20 & 36 & 51.3 & 86.9 & 59 & 2 & 26 & 4.7 \\
30 & 6 & 6 & 3.9 & 24 & 19 & 37 & 43.4 & 80.4 & 54 & 3 & 25 & 4.5 \\
60 & 7 & 6 & 4.7 & 28 & 17 & 33 & 50.0 & 83.5 & 60 & 2 & 27 & 4.9 \\
120 & 7 & 6 & 4.1 & 24 & 16 & 38 & 43.4 & 81.1 & 54 & 3 & 25 & 4.7 \\
240 & 7 & 6 & 3.7 & 25 & 17 & 37 & 46.1 & 83.7 & 55 & 3 & 25 & 4.5 \\ \hline \multicolumn{10}{c}{Inoculation (I)} \\ \hline Without & 7 a & 5 b & 3.9 & 28 a & 18 a & 34 b & 49.9 & 83.7 & 59 a & 2 & 25 & 4.7 \\ With & 6 b & 7 a & 4.1 & 24 b & 16 b & 39 a & 43.8 & 82.5 & 53 b & 3 & 26 & 4.6 \\ \hline Test—P & 0.002 \({}^{*}\) & 0.89 \({}^{\text{mg}}\) & 0.10 \({}^{\text{mg}}\) & 0.15 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.11 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.26 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.13 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.15 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.08 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.88 \({}^{\text{ms}}\) & 0.17 \({}^{\text{ms}}\)  
Significant differences were found for the inoculation factor in plant height (PIH) and the number of pods per plant (NPP), where the inoculated area had the highest PIH values, while the non-inoculated area showed the highest NVP values. No differences were observed for the inoculation factor in the other yield components. It can also be observed in Table 4 that in the plots where grasses were inoculated in the crop rotation, plant height (PIH) was 6.3% higher than in the non-inoculated plots. Conversely, the number of pods per plant (NPP) decreased by 10% in the inoculated areas. There was an interaction between the residual effect of P\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{5}\) doses and the inoculation of preceding grasses for NPP (Table 6). The breakdown of this interaction showed higher means in non-inoculated plots with P\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{5}\) doses of 30 and 60 kg ha\({}^{-1}\). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Treatment**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**PIH**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**HFPI**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**NGP**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**NPP**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**PP**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**SGY**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**M100**} \\  & & & & & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{c}{P\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{5}\) doses (kg ha\({}^{-1}\)) (P)} \\ \hline
0 & 112 & 25 & 198 & 108 & 117,284 & 3343 & 16 \\
30 & 105 & 23 & 256 & 127 & 114,815 & 3328 & 16 \\
60 & 107 & 26 & 279 & 139 & 118,518 & 3714 & 16 \\
120 & 107 & 25 & 252 & 124 & 101,543 & 3637 & 16 \\
240 & 109 & 25 & 230 & 114 & 117,901 & 3614 & 17 \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{c}{Inoculation (I)} \\ \hline Without & 112 a & 25 & 233 & 116 b & 122,222 & 3529 & 16 \\ With & 105 b & 25 & 253 & 129 a & 105,802 & 3526 & 17 \\ \hline Test—P & 0.654 ns & 0.535 ns & 0.0001 ** & 0.001 ** & 0.728 ns & 0.251 ns & 0.567 ns \\ \hline Test—I & 0.012 ** & 0.571 ns & 0.066 ns & 0.006 ** & 0.075 ns & 0.984 ns & 0.139 ns \\ \hline Test—P \(\times\) I & 0.963 ns & 0.516 ns & 0.011 * & 0.026 * & 0.9857 ns & 0.053 ns & 0.712 ns \\ \hline CV\% & 8.00 & 11.11 & 13.69 & 11.98 & 24.70 & 16.80 & 9.95 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Means followed by different letters in the column, for distinct treatments, differed from each other according to the LSD post-hoc test at the 5% probability level. ** and *: significant at 1% and 5% probability by the LSD post-hoc test, respectively. ns: not significant. CV: coefficient of variation; PIH: plant height; HPFI: height of first pod insertion; NGP: number of grains per plant; NPP: number of pods per plant; PP: plant population per hectare; SGY: grain yield; M100: 100-grain weight.  
\end{table}