Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
An alternative eco-friendly approach for sustainable crop productionwith the use of indigenous inputs under old alluvial soil zone of
Burdwan, West Bengal, India
Tanushree Mondal*, Jayanta Kumar Datta and Naba Kumar Mondal
Department of Environmental Science, University of Burdwan, Burdwan,West Bengal 713104, India
(Received 8 January 2014; accepted 23 April 2014)
Experiments were conducted on mustard (Brassica campestris cv.B9) in an old alluvialsoil zone of Crop Research and Seed Multiplication Farm, Burdwan University,Burdwan, West Bengal, India, during the winter seasons of 2011–2012 and 2012–2013. The aim was to evaluate the use of vermicompost prepared from municipalitywaste and Eichhornia mixture and its efficacy on crop growth and yield. Differentcombined doses of vermicompost, dried cow dung and chemical fertilizer along withAzotobacter and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria compared to full recommended doseof chemical NPK fertilizer (100:50:50) were used to develop an alternative farmingtechnology for sustainable crop production and conservation of natural resources. Thevariety B9 gave a significantly higher seed yield and oil content along with othergrowth and yield-contributing factors as well as being the most economically viableoption against treatment T4 (i.e. 75% NPK + vermicompost at 2.5 tons per hectare)among all the treatments applied for the experiment and was found to be superior toother treatments in old alluvial soil of Burdwan, India. In both the experimental years,seed yield and oil content were found to be the best for the treatment T4 and was betterthan using chemical fertilizer.
Keywords: vermicompost; biofertilizer; crop growth; crop yield; economic analysis
Introduction
Because of huge population explosion and rapid industrialization in India, there is amigration of people from rural to urban areas. As the world population is increasingalmost exponentially (Banerjee et al. 2011), there is an urgent need to consider other novelways of increasing food production that are compatible with sustainability along with theretention of environmental quality. About 50 million tons of municipal waste is beinggenerated every year in various cities of India. This annual generation of waste hasproduced challenging issues related to its disposal. At present, the management of organicwaste is a major concern worldwide, as unscientific disposal of waste can adversely affectthe environment by causing offensive odor, ground water contamination and soilpollution.
Continuous use of inorganic NPK fertilizers results in a deficiency of micronutrients,an imbalance in soil physico-chemical properties and unsustainable crop production(Banerjee et al. 2011). With increased costs of inorganic fertilizers, the application ofthe recommended dose is difficult to afford for small and marginal farmers. Therefore, the
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 2015Vol. 61, No. 1, 55–72, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2014.921807
© 2014 Taylor & Francis
current trend is to explore the possibility of supplementing chemical fertilizers withorganic ones that are eco-friendly and cost effective. In this context, integrated nutrientmanagement could be a viable strategy for advocating judicious and efficient use ofchemical fertilizers with matching addition of organic manures and biofertilizers.
Vermitechnology is the use of surface and subsurface local varieties of earthworm incomposting and management of soil (Ismail 1995). Vermicompost has a large particulatesurface area that provides many microsites for microbial activity and strong retention ofnutrients. Biological nitrogen fixation by living nitrogen fixers will help minimize theamounts of N fertilizer to be added, improve plant growth and decrease production costand environmental risks (El-Hawary et al. 1998; Aly et al. 1999). Garai et al. (2013)documented that the efficiency of Azotobacter and phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB)was improved when applied in conjunction with vermicompost. In our present investiga-tion, PSB and Azotobacter are used as biofertilizers. PSB secrete some organic acids thatcan solubilize P from insoluble and fixed forms to plant-available forms, whereasAzotobacter can convert atmospheric N2 into a plant-available form of N in soil.
India is the third largest producer of oil seeds in the world. The production of oil seedgroups, next to food crops, holds a sizable share of the countries’ gross cropped area(13%). It accounts for 19% of the world’s area and 9% of the global production (Sinha2003). Mustard (Brassica campestris cv. B9) is an important oil seed crop next tosunflower, with 30–45% protein content, high nutritive value and a fair supply of soilmoisture during the growing season and a dry harvest period. Research workers havereported differential responses of different genotypes to fertilizer application (Rashid &Khan 2008). The adverse impacts of chemical input based on conventional agriculturalpractices are being documented and recognized, not only by agricultural scientists andfarmers, but also by policymakers, including environmentalists and consumers.Simultaneously, the true character and potential of alternative systems are becoming farbetter and more widely understood (National Research Council 1989; Paarlberg 1990).The ultimate goal of sustainable agriculture is to develop farming systems that areproductive and profitable, conserve the natural resources, protect the environment andenhance health and safety and do so over the long term (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2013).
Hence, this investigation was undertaken to determine the effect of integrated nutrientmanagement with vermicompost, biofertilizer and inorganic fertilizers on productivity, soilfertility and health under a mustard cropping system and to screen the best treatmentcombination in terms of yield under the agro-climatic conditions of the old alluvial soilzone of Burdwan, West Bengal, India.
Material and methods
Experimental site
Field experiments were conducted at the Crop Research and Seed Multiplication Farm,Burdwan University, Burdwan, West Bengal, India. The latitude is 87°50′37.35″ E and long-itude is 23°15′7.29″Nwith an average altitude of 30 m above mean sea level during the winterseasons of 2011–2012 and 2012–2013 with rapeseed (Brassica campestris L. cv. B9).
Climatic condition
Weekly minimum and maximum temperature, total rainfall, sunshine hours, wind speedand relative humidity (RH) were recorded. Some climate factors were collected and
56 T. Mondal et al.
analyzed. Climate factors in both growing periods were similar but not the same. Both thegrowth periods started with moderate temperature where the maximum temperature wasaround 29°C and the minimum was around 16°C, and then it cooled and finished againwith similar maximum and minimum temperature conditions. Mean temperature andhigher RH (ranging between 75 and 90%) were similar for both growing cycles. Meanwind speed (1.3–8.1 km hr−1) and mean sunshine (4.23–7.15 hr per day) were almost thesame in both growing seasons. No rainfall was found in the first growing season (2011–2012), but in the second season 0–5 mm rainfall was found on average.
Treatment combination and design
The treatments used were as follows:T1 – Full recommended dose of chemical fertilizer (100:50:50, i.e. 100 kg ha−1
N:50 kg ha−1 P: 50 kg ha−1 K)T2 – 50% of recommended dose of chemical fertilizer (50 kg ha−1 N:25 kg ha−1
P:25 kg ha−1 K): vermicompost (2.5 t ha−1)T3 – 50% of recommended dose of chemical fertilizer (50 kg ha−1 N:25 kg ha−1
P:25 kg ha−1 K): dried cow dung (2.5 t ha−1)T4 – NPK (75% of full dose) + vermicompost (2.5 t ha−1)T5 – NPK (75% of full dose) + dried cow dung (2.5 t ha−1)T6 – NPK (75% of full dose) + vermicompost (2.5 t ha−1) + Azotobacter and PSB
(7.5 kg ha−1 each) andT7 – NPK (75% of full dose) + dried cow dung (2.5 t ha−1) + Azotobacter and PSB
(7.5 kg ha−1 each).The treatment combinations were replicated thrice and arranged in a randomized block
design (RBD). Individual plot sizes were 4 × 2.5 m2. Row-to-row and plant-to-plantspacing was 30 and 15 cm, respectively. Irrigation channels measuring 0.5 m wide were inbetween the replications to ensure easy and uninterrupted flow of irrigation for eachindividual plot. The same treatments were followed for two consecutive years. Chemicalfertilizers were applied at the recommended NPK dose (100:50:50) as per Directorate ofAgriculture, Government of West Bengal, for mustard (Bhattacharyya 1998). TreatmentT1 was treated as the control. Biofertilizer containing Azotobacter chrococcum andphosphate-solubilizing microorganism (Bacillus polymyxa) was applied at 7.5 kg ha−1
through seed inoculation. Biofertilizer was collected from Nitrofix Laboratories, 25,Bansdoroni Avenue, Kolkata-70. The colony-forming unit (cfu) of Azotobacter and PSBwere 2.3 × 109 and 2.1 × 108 cell per gram of carrier material, respectively.
Crop establishment
The seeds were soaked in distilled water for 24 hr. Seeds were sown separately in(4 × 2.5 m2) plots. Sowing dates were 6 December 2011 and 11 December 2012. Datesof harvesting were 11 March 2012 and 20 March 2013. Chemical fertilizers were used inthe form of urea, single super phosphate and muriate of potash. Vermicompost andbiofertilizers were used during the first field preparation and a gap of 15 days wasmaintained between the application of biofertilizer and chemical fertilizer. As per theguidelines of the Department of Agriculture, chemical fertilizers were used in two splitssuch as ½ N + Full P + Full K as basal and ½ N as top dressing. Two hand-weedings at15–18 DAS (days after sowing) and 38–40 DAS were carried out. The crops of each plot
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 57
were harvested separately when 90% of the plant with silique became golden yellow incolor.
Data collection
For the preparation of vermicompost, a pit of 1.5 × 2 m2 and 1.5 m deep was prepared.Then the pit was filled up with cow dung collected from the surrounding villages andEichchornia from local wetlands. Special types of earthworms such as Eisenia foetidawere used for the production of vermicompost. A final layer of soil was applied over thecompost pit and allowed to remain for three months for bacterial decomposition to takeplace. After three months, the compost was taken out from the pit and applied to theexperimental field. The physical, chemical and biological properties of the experimentalinitial soil and chemical and biological properties of vermicompost and cow dung arerepresented in the Tables 1, 2 and 3.
The first irrigation was applied after seed sowing and afterward the crop was irrigatedat regular intervals ranging from 15 days up to 55 days. The crop exhibited no sign ofinsect/pest attack and disease incidence; therefore, no crop protection measures wereadopted. The crop was kept free of weeds by providing intercultural and hand hoeing.Plant samples were collected at intervals of 15 DAS (days after sowing) from 5 to 6randomly selected locations in each plot from 30 DAS up to 60 DAS of crop growth andagain at harvest. Randomly distributed plant samples were cut at ground level. They werewashed initially with tap water, followed by dilute hydrochloric acid (0.05 N) and finallywith double-distilled water. Tap water and hydrochloric acid (0.05 N) could remove soilparticles attached to the sample and metallic contaminants, respectively, and double-distilled water washed away the previous two solutions.
Parameters studied
Plant morpho-physiological attributes like root length and plant height, leaf area per plant,dry weight of whole plant parts, silique length and diameter, fresh and dry weight of silique,
Table 1. Physical, chemical and biological characteristicsof the initial soil (0–15 cm depth).
Characteristics Value
Sand (0.02–0.2 mm) (%) 22.34 ± 2.05Silt (0.002–0.02 mm) (%) 38.35 ± 3.18Clay (<0.002) (%) 26.24 ± 3.08PH (1:2.5 soil:water) 5.89 ± 0.02CEC (cmol kg−1) 10.21 ± 0.98Organic carbon (%) 0.98 ± 0.09Available N (mg kg−1) 12.02 ± 0.007Available K (mg kg−1) 10.09 ± 2.22Available P (mg kg−1) 12.53 ± 1.10DTPA extractable Zn (mg kg−1) 1.24 ± 0.04DTPA extractable Fe (mg kg−1) 15.25 ± 1.08DTPA extractable Cu (mg kg−1) 3.28 ± 0.09DTPA extractable Mn (mg kg−1) 6.53 ± 0.03Total bacteria (cfu g−1) 28 × 106
58 T. Mondal et al.
1000 seeds weight (test weight) and seed yield were determined. The numbers of plantsfrom a one-meter row length were counted at several sites in each plot. From this data theaverage number of plants per meter was calculated. The heights of the 10 plants selected atrandom from each plot were measured. The total number of filled siliqua per plant wasrecorded from the ten randomly selected plants of each plot. The total number of seeds persiliqua was recorded from ten randomly selected siliqua from each plant. One thousandseeds were counted randomly from each plot, and after sun-drying their weight wasdetermined and expressed in grams (g). Plants from each plot were harvested, tied inbundles, dried and then taken to the threshing floor for threshing. After threshing, theseeds were cleaned, sun-dried and their weights were recorded. The yields in g m−2 wereconverted to kg ha−1. The weights of the harvested plants after sun-drying and beforethreshing were recorded. The percentage oil content of the mustard seeds was determinedusing Soxhlet’s Ether Extraction method (Association of Official Analytical Communities1975). Available N was measured by the alkaline permanganate method (Subbiah & Asija1956). Available P was determined by the Bray II method (Bray & Kurtz 1945). Available Kwas extracted by 1 M ammonium acetate (pH = 7.0) and determined by flame photometry(Rich 1965). Soil organic carbon was determined using the wet digestion method of Walkelyand Black (1934). Soil pH was measured by a pH meter. Pure cultures of Azotobacterchrococcum isolated from the rhizospheric soil of rice plants of local crop fields of Burdwandistrict, West Bengal, India, and of PSB (Bacillus polymyxa) isolated from the municipalgarbage of Burdwan town, West Bengal, India, were used. The strains A. chrococcum weregrown on selective Hi media (HiMedia Laboratories, Mumbai, India) for Azotobacter andthe PSB strain (Bacillus polymyxa) was grown on Pikovskias medium at 30°C on a shakerincubator at 2.5 Hz. After 48 hr, cells were harvested by centrifugation (6000 × g for10 min). Cell pellets were washed twice with sterile water. Washed cells were mixed withsterilized charcoal and used as inoculums for the seed treatments in the field trials.
Statistical analysis
All the experimental data were analyzed separately with two-way ANOVA analysis andvalues were expressed as the mean of three replicates. All the experimental data weresubjected to statistical analysis using MINITAB software (http://www.minitab.com). Thestatistical significance of differences between the different treatments was compared using
Table 2. Chemical and biological characteristics of vermicompost.
N P K Zn Fe Mn CuTotal bacteria
(%) (cfu g−1)
1.71 ± 0.08 1.18 ± 0.07 0.98 ± 0.02 0.0088 ± 0.001 0.094 ± 0.01 0.024 ± 0.008 0.012 ± 0.004 4.8 × 108
Table 3. Chemical and biological characteristics of cow dung.
N P K Zn Fe Mn CuTotal bacteria
(%) (cfu g−1)
0.98 ± 0.07 1.01 ± 0.02 0.54 ± 0.03 0.0056 ± 0.001 0.077 ± 0.01 0.016 ± 0.005 0.009 ± 0.001 2.4 × 108
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 59
DMRT (Duncan’s Multiple Range Test) at 5% confidence interval (Panse & Sukhatme1967; Gomez & Gomez 1984).
Economic analysis
Economic comparison among the treatments was done based on average cost of inputs aswell as average return over two years. Individual cost of all inputs as well as return wasrecorded in Indian currency (Rupees). Gross return was calculated by summing up thereturn from grain and straw. Net return was calculated by subtracting the total cost ofcultivation from gross return. Benefit cost ratio was calculated by dividing total return bytotal cost. Prices of urea, single super phosphate (SSP) and muriate of potash (MOP) wereRs. 450, 820 and 275 per 50 kg, respectively, Rs. 40 per 25 kg of cow dung, Rs. 6 per kgof vermicompost and Rs. 70 per kg of biofertilizer. The price of mustard seed was Rs.12,500 per ton.
Results and discussion
Crop growth attributes
Different growth attributes as influenced by chemical fertilizer, biofertilizer and vermi-compost are presented in Tables 4–7. All the growth attributes varied significantly in bothyears. In these years, 25% reduction of recommended chemical fertilizer with vermicom-post (T4) showed the highest results in maximum growth attributes. Results indicated thatreduced dose of chemical fertilizer combined with vermicompost and biofertilizersshowed maximum values in most of the growth attributes compared to the full recom-mended dose of NPK fertilizers.
From the experimental results, the significant variations in root length and plantheight of the seven treatments could be generated by different growth rates of mustarddue to the different capacity of photosynthetic carbon assimilation and variable translo-cation rates into different parts of plants in the experimental years. For the two experi-mental years, the application of biofertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB) and vermicompost,along with chemical fertilizers, might have increased the nutrient use efficiency of theplants as the organic fertilizer acted as an excellent source of macro- and micro-nutrients, and, therefore, increased the plant height and root length, according to thefindings of Asghar et al. (2006). The presence of bioactive substances associated withlow molecular weight fraction of humic acids, capable of inducing changes in plantmorphology and physiology, has also been reported in vermicompost, which enhancedroot elongation, lateral root emergence and plasma membrane H+-ATPase activity ofroots (Canellas et al. 2002). Some earlier reports (Ozer et al. 1999) revealed positive andsignificant correlations between plant height and grain yield in rapeseed. The datapresented in Table 7 assumed that greater leaf area (LA) value shown by treatment T4in both the years of experiment compared to other treatments reflects the greater lightinterception by the mustard plants of this treatment. Greater light interception by thevariety B9 might have led to the higher rate of photosynthesis, which contributedsignificantly toward the vegetative growth of the B9 variety, leading to higher LAvalue. These findings are in line with some earlier findings in case of soybean crop(Aduloju et al. 2009). On the other hand, the LA value increased with the stimulatingeffect of biofertilizer application, which could have improved the availability of nutri-ents and their uptake by crop plants (Saeed et al. 2002). The differences in the dry
60 T. Mondal et al.
Table4.
Growth
attributes
ofB9mustard
varietydepend
ingon
biofertilizer,v
ermicom
postandchem
icalfertilizertreatm
entsdu
ring
thewintercrop
ping
season
sof
2011–2
012and20
12–2
013.
Treatments
Roo
tleng
th(cm)
Plant
height
(cm)
2011–2
012
2012
–201
320
11–2
012
2012–2
013
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
T1
7.72
a9.42
a14
.25a
b9.41
ab12
.09a
15.33c
9.85
a31
.92a
76.83d
14.11a
38.60a
80.67a
b
T2
6.50
a9.85
a13
.52a
b9.04
ab12
.99a
15.14c
10.86a
30.75a
87.20b
c14
.15a
33.46a
78.29b
T3
5.95
a9.44
a12
.07b
8.69
ab12
.11a
12.48d
10.55a
32.18a
80.72c
d14
.34a
37.01a
79.77b
T4
4.81
a9.98
a16
.08a
9.94
a12
.73a
19.03a
10.63a
34.64a
102.08
a14
.74a
38.51a
77.44b
T5
5.52
a9.59
a14
.05a
b9.03
ab11.71a
15.48c
10.65a
29.75a
88.58b
c14
.80a
34.80a
78.90b
T6
5.86
a9.92
a13
.03a
b8.87
ab13
.00a
17.23b
11.60a
33.94a
94.83a
b14
.13a
38.47a
82.59a
b
T7
8.17
a9.32
a12
.17b
8.55
b13
.01a
16.10c
9.01
a31
.60a
93.30a
b15
.03a
35.20a
85.68a
SEM±
1.07
0.34
1.01
0.39
0.59
0.32
1.57
1.81
2.95
2.96
2.80
1.64
CV%
29.0
6.2
12.9
7.5
8.2
3.5
26.0
9.8
5.7
9.0
13.3
3.5
CD
(0.05)
4.32
2.45
4.21
0.53
1.01
2.36
5.24
5.63
7.19
7.21
7.01
5.37
LSD
(0.05)
3.29
1.06
3.12
1.22
1.82
0.98
4.83
5.58
9.09
2.31
8.63
5.06
Notes:Means
follo
wed
bythesameletterbetweentreatm
entsarenotsignificantly
differentatthe5%
levelusingDuncan’smultip
lerangetest(D
MRT).Means
ofthreereplicates
are
taken.
Where
T1–Fullrecommendeddose
ofchem
icalfertilizer,T2–50%
ofrecommendeddose
ofchem
icalfertilizer+verm
icom
post(2.5
tha
−1),T3–50%
ofrecommendeddose
ofchem
icalfertilizer+driedcowdu
ng(2.5
tha
−1),T4–NPK(75%
offulldose)+verm
icom
post(2.5
tha
−1),T5–NPK(75%
offulldo
se)+driedcowdu
ng(2.5
tha−
1),T6–NPK
(75%
offulldose)+verm
icom
post
(2.5
tha
−1)+Azotobacter
andPSB
(7.5
kgha
−1each),T7–NPK
(75%
offulldo
se)+driedcow
dung
(2.5
tha
−1)+Azotoba
cter
andPSB
(7.5
kgha
−1each).SEM,standard
errorof
themeans;CV,coefficientof
variation;
CD,criticaldifference;LSD,leastsignificantdifference.
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 61
Table5.
Growth
attributes
ofB9mustard
varietydepend
ingon
biofertilizer,v
ermicom
postandchem
icalfertilizertreatm
entsdu
ring
thewintercrop
ping
season
sof
2011–2
012and20
12–2
013. Fresh
weigh
tof
root
andshoo
tperplant(g)
Fresh
weigh
tof
leaves
perplant(g)
2011–2
012
2012
–201
320
11–201
220
12–2
013
Treatments
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
T1
1.01
b6.29
a13
.22a
0.91
ab6.45
a16
.16a
0.44
b2.95
abc
4.48
ab0.72
c3.27
ab4.85
a
T2
0.97
b5.02
a11.96a
b0.94
ab5.04
a11.55a
b1.03
a2.32
bc
3.54
ab1.03
abc
2.75
ab3.93
ab
T3
0.82
b6.07
a11.82a
b0.87
b6.15
a11.24a
b1.01
a2.66
abc
3.23
ab0.80
bc
3.47
a3.48
ab
T4
1.48
a6.03
a13
.56a
1.23
ab5.52
a12
.73a
b1.38
a3.51
a4.68
a1.19
ab2.81
ab4.57
ab
T5
1.21
ab4.65
a9.37
b1.18
ab6.30
a12
.43a
b0.86
ab3.29
ab3.23
ab1.10
abc
3.44
a4.28
ab
T6
0.99
b5.99
a10
.43a
b0.93
ab5.39
a10
.33b
1.06
a2.24
c3.03
b0.97
abc
2.52
b2.94
b
T7
1.03
b5.83
a11.85a
b1.27
a5.77
a12
.19a
b1.49
a3.31
ab3.24
ab1.30
a3.10
ab3.71
ab
SEM±
0.13
0.50
1.09
0.11
0.63
1.5
0.16
0.30
0.48
0.14
0.26
0.49
CV%
20.8
15.3
16.0
18.2
18.8
21.0
27.3
18.0
22.7
23.2
14.8
21.5
CD
(0.05)
1.50
2.97
4.37
1.39
3.32
5.12
0.53
2.30
2.89
1.55
2.13
2.93
LSD
(0.05)
0.40
1.55
3.35
0.34
1.94
4.61
0.50
0.93
1.47
0.42
0.80
1.51
Note:
For
abbreviatio
ns,seefootnote
Table4.
62 T. Mondal et al.
Table6.
Growth
attributes
ofB9mustard
varietydepend
ingon
biofertilizer,v
ermicom
postandchem
icalfertilizertreatm
entsdu
ring
thewintercrop
ping
season
sof
2011–2
012and20
12–2
013. Dry
weigh
tof
root
andshoo
tperplant(g)
Dry
weigh
tof
leaves
perplant(g)
2011–2
012
2012
–201
320
11–201
220
12–2
013
Treatments
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
T1
0.76
a3.49
b6.57
b0.09
a0.79
a3.53
a0.64
ab2.28
a4.48
c0.14
c0.48
ab0.87
c
T2
0.31
a4.00
ab8.87
ab0.09
a0.88
a2.67
ab0.62
ab2.28
a4.87
c0.14
c0.56
a0.67
c
T3
0.46
a4.11
ab7.63
b0.07
a0.85
a2.33
b0.48
b2.47
a3.23
c0.13
c0.61
a0.60
c
T4
0.36
a5.31
a17
.37a
0.07
a0.81
a2.61
b0.65
ab2.47
a9.35
a0.18
ab0.49
ab2.48
a
T5
0.47
a3.58
b11.75a
b0.11
a0.81
a2.78
ab0.85
ab1.88
a3.23
c0.16
bc
0.56
a1.12
bc
T6
0.41
a4.71
ab14
.54a
b0.09
a0.75
a2.45
b0.79
ab2.48
a6.70
a0.14
c0.42
b1.56
b
T7
0.64
a4.60
ab12
.81a
b0.12
a0.80
a2.73
ab1.10
a2.37
a3.24
0c0.19
a0.51
ab0.71
c
SEM±
0.18
0.48
2.73
0.01
0.09
0.27
0.15
0.26
0.54
0.01
0.04
0.18
CV%
63.0
19.4
14.53
28.9
20.1
17.0
35.6
19.3
18.6
11.1
13.0
26.9
CD
(0.05)
1.76
2.89
6.91
0.52
1.28
2.17
1.63
2.13
3.07
0.42
0.82
1.77
LSD
(0.05)
0.54
1.47
8.40
0.05
0.40
0.82
0.46
0.79
1.65
0.03
0.12
0.55
Note:
For
abbreviatio
nsseefootnote
Table4.
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 63
Table7.
Growth
attributes
ofB9mustard
varietydepend
ingon
biofertilizer,v
ermicom
postandchem
icalfertilizertreatm
entsdu
ring
thewintercrop
ping
season
sof
2011–2
012and20
12–2
013.
Treatments
Fresh
weigh
tof
siliq
ueper
plant(g)
Dry
weigh
tof
siliq
ueper
plant(g)
Leafarea
perplant(cm
2)
2011–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–2
012
2012
–201
3
2011–201
220
12–2
013
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
30DAS
45DAS
60DAS
T1
13.39a
12.07b
c10
.24a
9.18
b12
.49b
220.3a
b10
6.9c
43.15b
158.5f
132.6b
c
T2
11.69a
11.43b
c9.11
a7.28
b14
.95b
179.2b
115.8a
bc
47.06a
b18
2.7c
138.7b
c
T3
8.41
a9.49
c5.48
a6.96
b16
.58a
b20
7.2a
b10
6.1c
40.39b
173.0d
127.7b
c
T4
16.48a
19.93a
12.58a
14.09a
17.25a
b22
2.5a
b14
2.1a
49.00a
b21
6.1a
198.8a
T5
11.03a
11.95b
c8.03
a9.10
b16
.03b
196.9a
b113.9b
c48
.49a
b16
8.2d
e110.5c
T6
13.67a
12.83b
c10
.71a
10.68a
b22
.74a
252.9a
138.3a
b48
.48a
b19
4.1b
164.3a
b
T7
18.11a
14.27b
15.25a
8.72
b16
.74a
b23
6.5a
b12
0.6a
bc
56.74a
161.3e
f14
7.9b
c
SEM±
3.10
1.28
2.99
1.43
25.51
179.58
8.15
98.06
2.70
13.14
CV%
40.4
16.9
50.8
26.2
19.9
14.3
11.7
10.28
2.6
15.6
CD
(0.05)
7.37
4.74
7.24
5.00
21.15
56.11
11.96
41.46
6.88
15.18
LSD
(0.05)
9.55
3.95
9.22
4.40
5.90
552.6
25.12
9.13
8.32
40.48
Note:
For
abbreviatio
nsseefootnote
Table4.
64 T. Mondal et al.
weights were due to the treatment potentiality, which might contribute toward greaterfinal yields. These findings confirmed those reported by Bachman and Metzger (2008)that vermicompost increased root fresh and dry weight in French marigold, pepper,tomato and cornflower.
Joshi and Vig (2010) reported a significant increase in growth parameters withapplication of vermicompost in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). According to Fordeand Lorenzo (2001) root growth and branching are favored in a nutrient-rich environmentand in the presence of hormones such as auxins that enable the plant to optimize theexploitation of available resources, which are in turn transformed into photo-assimilatesand transported again to the root, consequently influencing plant growth and morphologyin a systemic manner. Vermicompost having hormone-like activity aids in greater rootinitiation, increased root biomass and enhanced plant growth (Bachman & Metzger 2008).Arancon et al. (2004) reported positive effects of vermicompost on the growth and yieldof strawberries, especially increases in LA, shoot dry weight and fruit weight under fieldconditions.
Crop yield attributes
Vermicompost has influenced the number of siliques per cluster, number of clusters perplant, mean fruit weight and total fruit yield per plant over control according to Aranconet al. (2006, 2008); Bachman and Metzger (2008) also reported growth and yieldimprovement in different crops with vermicompost application. The results clearly indi-cate that the plants receiving vermicompost had produced more seeds per silique, siliqueper plant and large-sized fruits siliques with higher total yield than those of the control.Vermicompost contains most nutrients in plant-available forms such as phosphates,exchangeable calcium, soluble potassium and other macro-nutrients with a huge quantityof beneficial microorganisms, vitamins and hormones, which influence the growth andyield of plants (Theunissen et al. 2010).
Seed yield and quality (oil content) are more important than total biological yield,which results from different combinations of many physiological processes based on theenvironment under which the crop is grown. Seed yield and quality depend upon theproduction of photosynthates and their distribution among various plant parts and trans-location of photosynthates are directly or indirectly dependent on seed production prac-tices. In the consecutive years of this trial, the highest and lowest seed yield and oilcontent were recorded in T4 (75% NPK + vermicompost 2.5 t ha−1) and T1 (fullrecommended dose of chemical fertilizer), respectively (Tables 8 and 9). In treatmentperformance, the highest and lowest straw yields were obtained in T4 and T1, respec-tively, for both consecutive years (Table 9). Both results are statistically significant. Theinoculation of mustard seeds with the biofertilizer Azotobacter and PSB along withchemical fertilizers and vermicompost contributed significantly toward the increase instraw yield, as was reported by El-Kased et al. (1996). During the second year (2012–2013), the increase in oil content of the crop plants might have been due to either theincreased vegetative growth or changes in leaf oil gland population and monoterpenesbiosynthesis under the influence of biofertilizers and vermicompost (Gharib et al. 2008).
In some earlier studies, Ali et al. (2003) observed a significant correlation betweensiliquae number and yield in rapeseed. In our study, seeds per siliquae increased in acombined dose of chemical fertilizer and vermicompost-treated plots due to the optimummoisture level of soil for B9 compared to the control treatment, which helped producelonger siliquae, thick silique and higher number of seeds (Sultana et al. 2009). The
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 65
Table8.
Yield
attributes
ofB9mustard
varietydepend
ingon
biofertilizer,v
ermicom
postandchem
icalfertilizertreatm
entsdu
ring
thewintercrop
ping
season
sof
2011–2
012and20
12–2
013.
Treatments
Siliqu
eleng
th(cm)
Siliqu
ediam
eter
(cm)
No.
ofseedspersiliq
ueNo.
ofsiliq
ueperplant
Oilcontent(%
)
2011–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–2
012
2012
–201
3
T1
4.1a
4.2b
1.2a
0.6a
20.10a
b19
.80b
c46
.56b
cd46
.44b
c32
.11e
37.20e
T2
4.4a
4.3a
b1.4a
0.6a
20.77a
b21
.03a
bc
51.11a
bc
51.00a
b33
.64d
39.00d
T3
4.3a
4.3a
b1.5a
0.6a
21.80a
b22
.13a
40.33d
40.78c
33.91d
37.34e
T4
4.5a
4.3a
b1.2a
0.6a
22.97a
22.77a
59.00a
57.11a
40.09a
46.70a
T5
4.4a
4.3a
b1.1a
0.6a
20.83a
b21
.00a
bc
42.89c
d43
.33b
c37
.86b
42.45c
T6
4.2a
4.4a
1.3a
0.6a
21.77a
b21
.77a
b54
.44a
b47
.89a
bc
35.79c
45.12b
T7
4.0a
4.2a
b1.3a
0.6a
19.33b
19.37c
45.78b
cd44
.44b
c34
.65c
d44
.45b
SEM±
0.25
0.05
0.20
0.02
0.85
0.63
3.12
2.99
0.42
0.29
CV%
10.0
2.2
27.3
7.0
6.9
5.1
11.1
11.0
2.1
1.2
CD
(0.05)
2.09
0.99
1.89
0.65
3.85
3.31
7.40
9.69
7.24
2.25
LSD
(0.05)
0.77
0.17
0.63
0.07
2.61
1.93
9.62
9.21
0.85
0.89
Note:
For
abbreviatio
nsseefootnote
Table4.
66 T. Mondal et al.
Table9.
Yield
attributes
ofB9mustard
varietydepend
ingon
biofertilizer,v
ermicom
postandchem
icalfertilizertreatm
entsdu
ring
thewintercrop
ping
season
sof
2011–201
2and20
12–2
013.
1000
seedsweigh
tper
plant(g)
Seedyield
(tha
−1)
Straw
yield
(tha
−1)
Soilbacteria
coun
tafter
harvestin
g(cfu
g−1drysoil)
Soilfung
alcoun
tafter
harvestin
g(cfu
g−1drysoil)
Treatments
2011–2
012
2012
–201
320
11–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–201
220
12–2
013
2011–2
012
2012–2
013
2011–201
220
12–2
013
T1
2.53
a2.64
bc
1.05
c1.03
d1.78
c1.65
b68
d58
d11
d9.33
c
T2
2.68
a2.76
ab1.08
c1.08
cd2.15
ab2.22
a90
c92
c13
.67c
d15
.67b
T3
2.57
a2.56
bc
1.28
ab1.47
ab2.08
abc
1.70
b82
.67c
83.33c
12.33c
d9.67
c
T4
2.56
a2.98
a1.42
a1.67
a2.28
a2.47
a12
4.33
a12
9a25
.67a
21.33a
T5
2.60
a2.61
bc
1.13
bc
1.12
cd1.92
bc
1.75
b97
bc
106b
17.67b
c15
.67b
T6
2.55
a2.53
bc
1.27
ab1.32
bc
2.38
a2.53
a13
0.67
a12
9.33
a19
.67b
21.33a
T7
2.43
a2.39
c1.10
c1.15
cd2.20
ab1.68
b10
4.67
b10
2b14
.33b
cd17
.33a
b
SEM±
0.08
0.10
51.63
80.14
101.44
153.87
7.71
5.36
3.01
2.45
CV%
5.2
6.4
7.5
11.0
8.3
13.5
7.7
5.4
18.4
15.5
CD
(0.05)
1.16
1.30
30.08
37.48
42.17
51.94
22.58
20.3
4.8
3.6
LSD
(0.05)
0.24
0.30
9.42
11.73
13.20
16.26
8.97
6.25
3.51
2.85
Note:
For
abbreviatio
nsseefootnote
Table4.
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 67
variation between the treatment results were generated by the relationship between thenumber of seeds per siliquae and plant potential for increasing siliquae or seed number, asreported by Miri (2007). Regarding test weight, there was little difference between thetreatments in the first year but in the second year T4 showed the highest yield among thetreatments. Evans (1993) mentioned that the seed size is dependent on environmentalconditions, genotype and the potential of the genotype in producing seed number. Theapplication of compost along with biofertilizer and chemical fertilizer provided an ade-quate and balanced supply of nutrients throughout their growth period, resulting in themaximum number of siliquae per plant. Our findings corroborated the findings of Khaliq(2004). The highest seed yield appeared in T4 in the second year of the experiment interms of the number of siliquae per plant, number of seeds per siliquae and test weight ofseeds. The increase in the test weight of seeds was probably due to the balanced supply ofnutrients both from chemical fertilizer and from compost throughout the grain filling anddevelopment period, which was in accordance with the findings of Rutanga et al. (1998)and Ma et al. (1999).
The biofertilizers significantly increased the yield of mustard, which then could haveenhanced the nutrient use efficiency by the crop plants in the presence of vermicompostand biofertilizer. This indicated that a reduced dose of N and P fertilizers in combinationwith biofertilizer + vermicompost had a remarkable effect on increasing seed yield andreducing environmental pollution. Therefore, such agrotechnology will boost the seedyield of mustard crop through these treatment combinations. Our findings confirmed theobservations of increased yield through the combined use of NPK fertilizer and vermi-compost by Garai et al. (2013) in rice and by Dwivedi and Singh (2007) in mustard oilcake and betel vine. A 25% reduced dose of chemical fertilizer along with vermicompostand PSB (T6) showed the highest bacterial population in both the years and treatment T4had results similar to T6, whereas the full recommended dose of chemical fertilizershowed the lowest bacterial and fungal populations (Table 9). In the case of fungal colonycount 75% NPK + vermicompost 2.5 t ha−1 (T4) showed the highest value in both theexperimental years (Table 9). Overall the decrease in the soil bacterial population count infull chemical dose-treated plots after harvesting indicated a deleterious effect of the soleapplication of the recommended dose of chemical fertilizer on the population of bacteriain natural soil. The increase in bacterial and fungal populations in biofertilizer- andvermicompost-treated plots could be due to the rapid multiplication of bacteria appliedthrough seed inoculation in a suitable soil medium. The vermicompost contributed towardthe increase in nutrients, growth hormones and vitamins and improving other physicalcharacters in soil, which might have a significant influence on microbial population(Ismail 1995). This therefore indicates that chemical fertilizer application at the recom-mended dose is not congenial for growth of bacteria whereas its reduced dose along withseed inoculated biofertilizer resulted in more growth of bacterial population under suchinvestigations.
Economic analysis
Table 10 shows that in the 1st and 2nd years the addition of low-cost biofertilizereffectively supplemented a portion of chemical fertilizer (25% NPK) in T4 to producethe maximum gross return (Rs. 56,667 and 66,667), net return (Rs. 25,233 and 26,233) aswell as the benefit cost ratio (1.80 and 2.12). With addition of gradually increasingamounts of low-cost organic manure along with biofertilizer and reduced dose of chemicalfertilizer, the cost of cultivation increased to some extent, but the accumulated impact was
68 T. Mondal et al.
Table
10.
Average
costof
prod
uctio
nandecon
omic
return
inRup
eesha
−1(years
2011–2
012and20
12–2
013).
Fixed
cost(except
chem
ical
fertilizer,
verm
icom
post,
biofertilizer)
Costof
chem
ical
fertilizer,
biofertilizer
and
verm
icom
post
Total
cost
Gross
Return
Net
Return
Benefit:costratio
Treatment
AB
C20
11–2
012D
2012–2
013E
2011–2
012F
2012
–201
3G20
11–2
012
I=D/C
2012–2
013
J=E/C
T1
20,780
7562
28,342
42,000
41,333
13,658
12,991
1.48
1.46
T2
20,780
11,344
32,124
43,333
43,333
11,210
11,201
1.35
1.35
T3
20,780
10,344
31,124
51,333
58,667
20,210
27,544
1.65
1.88
T4
20,780
10,654
31,434
56,667
66,667
25,233
35,233
1.80
2.12
T5
20,780
9654
30,434
45,333
44,667
14,900
14,233
1.49
1.47
T6
20,780
12,230
33,010
50,667
52,667
17,656
19,656
1.53
1.59
T7
20,780
11,230
32,010
44,000
46,000
11,990
13,990
1.37
1.44
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 69
more positive in the case of gross return, net return as well as in a benefit:cost ratio. Themaximum gross return, net return and benefit:cost ratio were recorded in T4 wherevermicompost was added at 2.5 t ha−1 with 25% reduced recommended chemical fertilizerdose. The comparative economic analysis shows that a reduction of chemical fertilizerapplication with a combination of biofertilizer and vermicompost proved extremelybeneficial and it reached its pinnacle in T4.
Conclusion
Results suggested that the introduction of a high-yielding crop variety with balancedapplication of NPK fertilizers could be recommended to the end users. Our presentinvestigation revealed that the best treatment out of the seven applied combinationtreatments under this old alluvial soil agro-climatic zone was treatment T4 based on theattributes of growth, morpho-physiology and in terms of yield and oil content in both fieldtrials. Therefore, the mustard cultivar B9 can be cultivated for a better yield of mustardwith 75% NPK dose of chemical fertilizers and vermicompost 2.5 t ha−1 (T4) in the oldalluvial soil zone. This means 25% NPK fertilizer dose can easily be supplemented bynatural resource-based and low-cost vermicompost to make mustard cultivation moreproductive and profitable over a long period and to step forward toward achieving theultimate goal of sustainability in mustard cultivation. Hence we suggest that renewableand low-cost sources of plant nutrients for supplementing and complementing chemicalfertilizers should be substituted for NPK fertilizer. This would be affordable for themajority of farming communities and the use of biofertilizers, vermicomposts and che-mical fertilizer could lead to an increase in yield in the old alluvial soil and under theagro-climatic conditions of Burdwan, West Bengal, India.
AcknowledgementWe acknowledge the help we received from the staff members of Rural Technology Centre, TheUniversity of Burdwan, West Bengal, India.
FundingThis work was supported by University Grants Commission (UGC) under UGC major researchproject having basic research grant from Government of India (Ref No. R.T.I/1249/55) dated 1 July2011) to Prof. J.K. Datta, the Principal Investigator of this project.
ReferencesAduloju MO, Mahmood J, Abayomi YA. 2009. Evaluation of soybean [Glycine max (L) Merrill]
genotypes for adaptability to a southern Guinnea Savanna environment with and without Pfertilizer application in north Central Nigeria. Afr J Agric Res. 4:556–563.
Ali N, Javidfar F, Jafarieh Yazdi E. 2003. Relationship among yield components and selectioncriteria for yield improvement in winter rapeseed. Pak J Bot. 35:167–174.
Aly SSS, Soliman SM, Elakel KA, Alinit ME. 1999. Significance of free nitrogen fixing bacteriaand nitrification inhibitors on saving the applied nitrogen to wheat plants. Biol Fert Soils.4:347–365.
Arancon NQ, Edwards CA, Babenko A, Cannon J, Galvis P, Metzger JD. 2008. Influences ofvermicomposts, produced by earthworms and microorganisms from cattle manure, food wasteand paper waste, on the germination, growth and flowering of petunias in the greenhouse. ApplSoil Ecol. 39:91–99.
70 T. Mondal et al.
Arancon NQ, Edwards CA, Bierman P. 2006. Influences of vermicomposts on field strawberries:effects on soil microbial and chemical properties. Bioresour Technol. 97:831–840.
Arancon NQ, Edwards CA, Bierman P, Welch C, Metzer JD. 2004. Influence of vermicomposts onfield strawberries: effect on growth and yields. Bioresour Technol. 93:145–153.
Asghar HN, Ishaq M, Zahir ZA, Khalid M, Arshad M. 2006. Response of radish to integrated use ofnitrogen fertilizer and recycled organic waste. Pak J Bot. 38:691–700.
Association of Official Analytical Communities. 1975. Official methods of analysis of analyticalchemistry. In: Hartwitz W, editor. 12th ed. Washington (DC): AOAC.
Bachman GR, Metzger JD. 2008. Growth of bedding plants in commercial potting substrateamended with vermicompost. Bioresour Technol. 99:3155–3161.
Banerjee A, Datta JK, Mondal NK, Chanda T. 2011. Influence of integrated nutrient management onsoil properties of old alluvial soil under mustard cropping system. Commun Soil Sci Plan.42:2473–2492. doi:10.1080/00103624.2011.609256
Bhattacharyya BK. 1998. Soil tests based fertilizer recommendations for principal crops andcropping sequences in West Bengal. Bulletin No. 2. Calcutta: Department of Agriculture,Government of West Bengal.
Bray RH, Kurtz LT. 1945. Determination of total, organic, and available forms of phosphorus insoils. Soil Sci. 59:39–45.
Canellas LP, Olivares FL, Okorokova-Facanha AL, Facanha AR. 2002. Humic acids isolated fromearthworm compost enhance root elongation, lateral root emergence, and plasma membrane H?–ATPase activity in maize roots. Plant Physiol. 130:1951–1957.
Dwivedi DK, Singh SP. 2007. Effect of nutrient integrated bio-fertilizer, vermicompost and mustardoil cake + inorganic on betelvine (Piper betle L.) crop. Asian J Horti. 2:102–105.
El-Hawary FI, Ibrahim I, Hammouda F. 1998. Effect of integrated bacterial fertilization on yield andyield component of wheat in sandy soil. J Agric Sci Mansoura Univ. 23:1951–1957.
El-Kased FA, Kamh RN, Abd-El-Ghany BF. 1996. Wheat response to bio and mineral nitrogenfertigated in newly reclaimed sandy soil. Desert Inst Bull. 46:373–386.
Evans LT. 1993. Crop evolution, adaptation and yield. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge UniversityPress.
Forde B, Lorenzo H. 2001. The nutritional control of root development. Plant Soil. 232:51–68.Garai TK, Datta JK, Mondal NK. 2013. Evaluation of integrated nutrient management on Boro rice
in alluvial soil and its impacts upon growth, yield attributes yield and soil nutrient status. ArchAgron Soil Sci. 60:1–14.
Gharib FA, Moussa LA, Moussud ON. 2008. Effect of compost and biofertilizer on growth yieldand essential oil of sweet majoram (Majoram hortensis) plant. Int J Agric Biol. 10:381–387.
Gomez KA, Gomez AA. 1984. Statistical procedure for a agricultural research. 2nd ed. New York(NY): Wiley.
Ismail S. 1995. Earth worms in soil fertility management. In: Thampan PK, editor. Organicagriculture. Peekay Cochin (India): Tree Crops Development Foundation; p. 77–100.
Joshi R, Vig AP. 2010. Effect of vermicompost on growth, yield and quality of tomato(Lycopersicum esculentum L). Afr J Basic Appl Sci. 2:117–123.
Khaliq A. 2004. Irrigation and nitrogen management effects on productivity of hybrid sunflower(Helianthus annus L.) dissertation for the doctoral degree. Faisalabad (Pakistan): Department ofAgronomy, University of Agriculture Faisalabad.
Ma BL, Lianne MD, Edward GG. 1999. Soil nitrogen amendment effects on nitrogen uptake andgrain yield of maize. J Agron. 91:650–656.
Miri HR. 2007. Morpho-physiological basis of variation in rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) yield. Int JAgric Biol. 9:845–850.
Mukhopadhyay M, Datta JK, Garai TK. 2013. Steps toward alternative farming system in rice. Eur JAgron. 51:18–24.
National Research Council. 1989. Alternative agriculture. In: Committee report on the role ofalternative farming methods in modern production agriculture, Board on Agriculture.Washington, DC: National Academy Press; p. 448.
Ozer H, Oral E, Dogru U. 1999. Relationships between yield and yield components on currentlyimproved spring rapeseed cultivars. Turk J Agric For. 23:603–607.
Paarlberg D. 1990. The changing policy environment for the 1990 farm bill. In the promise of low-input agriculture: a search for sustainability and profitability. J Soil Water Conserv. 45:8.
Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 71
Panse UG, Sukhatme PV. 1967. Statistical methods for agricultural workers. New Delhi: ICAR; p.97–123.
Rashid A, Khan RU. 2008. Comparative effect of varieties and fertilizer levels on barley (Hordeumvulgare). Int J Agric Biol. 10:124–126.
Rich CI. 1965. Elemental analysis by flame photometry. In: Black CA, editor. Methods of soilanalysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties. Madison (WI): American Society ofAgronomy; p. 849–864.
Rutanga V, Steiner KG, Karaya NK, Gachene CKK, Nzabonihankuye G. 1998. Continuous fertili-zation on non-humiferrous acid oxysols in Rwanda “Plateau Central” soil chemical changes andplant population. Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ. 2:135–142. [field crop Abstract, 51: 8921].
Saeed N, Hussain M, Saleem M. 2002. Interactive effect of biological sources and organic amend-ments in the growth and yield attributes of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L). Pak J Agric Sci.39:135–136.
Sinha S. 2003. Effect of different levels of nitrogen on the growth of rapeseed. Environ Ecol.21:741–743.
Subbiah BV, Asija GL. 1956. A rapid procedure for determination of available nitrogen in soils.Curr Sci. 25:259–260.
Sultana S, Rahul Amin AKM, Hasanuzzaman M. 2009. Growth and yield of rapeseed (Brassicacampestris L.) varieties as affected by levels of irrigation. Am Euras J Sci Res. 4:34–39.
Theunissen J, Ndakidemi PA, Laubscher CP. 2010. Potential of vermicompost produced from plantwaste on the growth and nutrient status in vegetable production. Int J Physic Sci. 5:1964–1973.
Walkely A, Black CA. 1934. An examination of different methods for determining soil organicmatter and proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37:29–38.
72 T. Mondal et al.
