RESPONSE OF BROWN SARSON (Brassica campestris var. …Surjit Singh) under my supervision and that no...

RESPONSE OF BROWN SARSON (Brassica campestris var. brown sarson) TO INTEGRATED NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT IN MID HILL CONDITIONS OF

HIMACHAL PRADESH

THESIS

By

AMARDEEP SINGH (A-2011-30-010)

Submitted to

CHAUDHARY SARWAN KUMAR

HIMACHAL PRADESH KRISHI VISHVAVIDYALAYA PALAMPUR – 176 062 (H.P.) INDIA

in

partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE (DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY, FORAGES AND GRASSLAND MANAGEMENT)

(AGRONOMY) 2013

Dr. A. D. Bindra Sr. Agronomist

Department of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management, College of Agriculture, CSK HPKV, Palampur (H.P.) India - 176062

CERTIFICATE – I This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Response of brown sarson (Brassica

campestris var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill

conditions of Himachal Pradesh” submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the award of the degree of Master of Science (Agriculture) in the discipline of

Agronomy of CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur is a bonafide

research work carried out by Amardeep Singh son of (Smt. Mohinder Kaur and Sh.

Surjit Singh) under my supervision and that no part of this thesis has been submitted for

any other degree or diploma.

The assistance and help received during the course of this investigation have been

fully acknowledged.

Place: Palampur (Dr. A. D. Bindra) Dated: , July, 2013 Major Advisor

CERTIFICATE- II

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Response of brown sarson (Brassica

campestris var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill conditions of

Himachal Pradesh.” submitted by Amardeep Singh (Admission No. A-2011-30-010)

son of Sh. Surjit Singh to the CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science

(Agriculture) in the discipline of Agronomy has been approved by the Advisory

Committee after an oral examination of the student in collaboration with an External

Examiner.

(Dr. A.D. Bindra) Chairperson

Advisory Committee

( ) External Examiner

(Dr. V.K. Suri) Member

(Dr. Pankaj Chopra) Member

(Dr. D.K. Vatsa) Dean’s nominee

___________________ Head of the Department

______________________ Dean, Postgraduate Studies

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS No duty is more urgent then returning of thanks. In this highly complex society no

work can be accomplished by a single individual but it needs inspiration and sincere gratitude of intellectuals as well as the grace of the Almighty. With limitless humility, I would like to praise and thank ‘GOD’, the merciful, the compassionate, who bestowed me with health, tenacity and courage enough to go through this critical juncture. I am grateful to “GOD”, for bestowing me with affectionate parents who encouraged me to undergo higher studies. Their selfless persuasion and sacrifice, heartfelt blessings and firm faith has made this manuscript a remuneration to translate their dreams into reality.

There is nothing more wonderful than the love and guidance a grandparent can give his or her grandchild. Grandparents sort of sprinkle stardust over the lives of little children I emphatically extend my loyal and venerable thanks to my dadu Sub. Nand Singh Brar, dadi , Smt. Jaswant Kaur.

The dream begins with a teacher who believes in you, who tugs and pushes and leads you to the next plateau, sometimes poking you with a sharp stick called truth. With an overwhelming sense of legitimate pride and genuine obligation, I express my deep gratitude to my major advisor Dr. A.D. Bindra, Sr. Agronomist, Agronomy (COA) for his scientific acumen and impeccable guidance in the conduct of this investigation. I shall ever be indebted to him for developing in me the desire to work hard through this valuable suggestions and appreciable humanitarian behavior which evoked in me the be-stir to achieve the destination successfully in spite of all my lapses.

My sincere thanks and heartfelt special recognitions are due towards Dr. Pankaj Chopra, Dr. Y.P. Dubey and Dr. J. Kishtwaria, esteemed members of my advisory committee for their ever available help and valuable suggestions.

I feel indebted to faculty members of Department of Agronomy, forages and grassland management especially Dr. D. Badiyala (HOD), Dr. G.D. Sharma, Dr. M.C. Rana, Dr. Kapil Saroch, Dr. H.L. Sharma, Dr. S.S. Rana, Dr. Pawan Pathania, Dr. Naveen Kumar, Dr. S.C. Negi, Dr. S.K.. Gautam, Dr. V.K. Sharma, Dr. K Bassi, and Dr. Neelam for their inspiration and perpetual encouragement. Thanks are due to the Dean, Post Graduate Studies, Dean, COA and CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya authorities for providing me academic and financial help during the course of study. I must convey my gratitude to the ministerial staff especially Mr. J.N. Sharma, Mr Manjeet, Mr. Suresh Kumar, Mr. Brij Mohan and field staff of the department of Department of Agronomy, forages and grassland management for all help rendered during the course of study.

I extend my sincere thanks to Mr. Sunil Jhorar, Ph. D. student and Dr. Sushil Dhiman, Research associate for providing me the immense help during writing of this manuscript.

I express my gratitude and feeling for Sh. Baljinder Singh Brar, Smt. Tejinder Kaur, Ramandeep Kaur, Sukhveer Kaur, Lakhveer Kaur, Sukhleen Kaur, Anashbhez, Jigarjeet, Mahakpreet, Sahabjot and Anashdeep for their fortright help, inspiration and moral support which went along way in successful completion of the present study.

ii

I shall be failing in my duties if I do not record words of my deep reverence, gratitude and affection towards my brothers Gurpreet Singh Brar, Amrik Bhullar, Yadwinder Sidhu, Sharndeep Khatra, Sandeep Brar, Shaminder Dhillon, Gurveer Brar, Jaskaran Singh, Tarandeep Doda, Amrinder Sandhu, Abu and Tarlochan Singh whose love always proved to be strong feather against all currents.

A good friend is a connection to life - a tie to the past, a road to the future, the key to sanity in a totally insane world. I feel very lucky to be blessed with my lovely stars Prem Sidhu, Kushal Garg, Vicky Gill, Jasbir Sandhu, Jagmohan Mann, Anubhav Khurana, Kalu, Shallu, Tandy and Davinder Thakur who supported me every second emotionally and morally, who were always paitent to hear my woes and bring so many smiles on my sad face.

A friend comforts and encourages in the day of difficulty and sorrow, this proverb, seem to be absolutely true when I remember my fiancé Miss Gurinder Jeet Kaur Gill. I would always remember her helping hand and loving attitude, which made me, overcome the obstacles effortlessly.

No adequate words can be found to express my warmest thanks to all my seniors especially Prabjot Singh, Sandeep Singh, Kamaldeep Matharu, Dr. Jintu Datta, Sumit Vashisth, Sawroop Thakur, Rachna mam and Ramesh Kumar for their affection and support.

Genuine appreciation goes for my classmate Ashish Rahi, Ravi Sharma, Ankush Sharma, Ankush Kumar, Atul, Karan, Sukhdeep, Gunjan, Lokash, Jayant Ratna, Bengi, and Akashdeep for their cooperation, support. I would also like to thank Dr. Sanjay Chadha (Warden Shivalik P.G. hostel) for helping me indirectly for the completion of the thesis And the mess workers of the hostel mess, who not only provided me with good and healthy food but also helped me, whenever I needed.

Off course my final thanks goes to my parents. I owe all achievements of my life including this thesis to my parents (Sh. Surjit Singh Brar and Smt. Mohinder Kaur ) who gently offered counsel and unconditional support at each turn of my life by giving me strength and grace.

My special thanks to Mr. Ajay Walia who took great pain in metamorphosing this manuscript to such a presentable form.

At last but not the least, financial assistance provided to me during the course of present study by CSK HPKV, Palampur is duly acknowledged.

Needless to say, all omissions and errors are mine.

Place: Palampur Dated: ,July, 2013 (Amardeep Singh)

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Title Page

1. INTRODUCTION 1-3

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-24

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 25-36

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 37-59

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 60-93

LITERATURE CITED 64-76

APPENDICES 77-82

BRIEF BIODATA OF THE STUDENT

iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED

Sr. No. Abbreviation Meaning

1 cm Centimetre

2 et al. Et alii (and other)

3 Fig. Figure

4 g Gram

5 ha Hectare

6 i.e. Id est (that is)

7 kg Kilo gram

8 p. Page

9 q ha-1 Quintal per hectare

10 kg ha-1 Kilogram per hectare

11 viz. Namely

12 % Percent

13 -1 Per

14 mm Millimeter

15 oC Degree Celsius

16 hr Hour(s)

17 Rs. Rupees

18 µg g-1 Microgram per gram

v

LIST OF TABLES

Table no. Title Page

3.1 Physico-chemical properties of experimental soil 27

3.2 Details of cultural operations 30

4.1 Effect of different treatments on plant height (cm) of brown sarson

38

4.2 Effect of different treatments on dry matter accumulation (g plant-1) of brown sarson

42

4.3 Effect of different treatments on days to complete emergence, days to 75% flowering and 75% maturity

43

4.4 Effect of different treatments on yield attributes of brown sarson 44

4.5 Effect of different treatments on seed straw yield and harvest index of brown sarson

47

4.6 Effect of different treatments on available N, P and K (kg ha-1) 51

4.7 Effect of different treatments on total N, P, K (kg ha-1) and biomass carbon (µg g-1)

53

4.8 Effect of different treatments on N uptake (kg ha-1) 54

4.9 Effect of different treatments on S uptake (kg ha-1) 55

4.10 Effect of different treatments on protein content, oil content and oil yield

56

4.11 Cost of cultivation, gross returns, net returns and B: C ratio as influenced by different treatments

58

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. No. Title Page

3.1 Mean weekly meteorological data of Palampur during rabi

(2011-12)

26

3.1 Layout Plan of Experiment (Rabi 2011-12) 28

4.1 Effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on plant height of

brown sarson

39

4.2 Effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on dry matter

accumulation of brown sarson

41

4.3 Effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on seed and straw

yield of brown sarson

49

vii

Department of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya

Palampur-176062 Title of thesis : Response of brown sarson (Brassica

campestris var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh.

Name of the student : Amardeep Singh Admission number : A-2011-30-010 Major discipline : Agronomy Minor discipline : Soil Science Date of thesis submission : July, 2013 Total pages of the thesis : 82 Major Advisor : Dr. A.D. Bindra

ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted during Rabi 2011-12 at the experimental farm of Department of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management CSKHPKV, Palampur Himachal Pradesh to study the “Response of brown sarson (Brassica campestris var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh”. The treatments comprising of all possible combinations of three biofertilizers viz., Azotobacter, Azotobacter + PSB and no inoculation and four fertility levels viz., 100% RDF, FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and control were tested in factorial randomized block design, replicated three times. Results revealed that growth, yield attributes, seed and straw yields of brown sarson were significantly increased with the application of biofertilizers and different fertility levels over control. The increase in seed yield with Azotobacter + PSB was 20.3% over Azotobacter alone. Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 resulted in saving of 50% of recommended NPK in sarson crop. Higher net returns were received from Azotobacter + PSB. Application of 100% RDF gave higher gross returns, net returns and B:C ratio. Though, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF was comparable to 100% RDF but higher purchase cost of vermicompost other than self production lead to negative economics. Available status of NPK in soil was enhanced with the application of Azotobacter + PSB. Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% of recommended fertilizers significantly enhanced available N, P and K levels in soil.

------------------------------- ----------------------------- (Amardeep Singh) (Dr. A.D. Bindra) Student Major Advisor Date: Date:

----------------------------------- Head of the Department

1

1. INTRODUCTION

Oilseed crops are the backbone of Indian agricultural economy and occupy an

important position in daily diet being a rich source of fats and vitamins. India is the

fourth largest oilseed producer in the world next to USA, China and Brazil. Hence,

oilseeds play the second important role in the Indian agricultural economy, next only to

food grains in terms of area and production. They occupy a distinct position after cereals

constituting 14.87% gross cropped area of the country. They occupy an area of 27.86 m

ha with 27.98 mt of production and registering the productivity level of 1004 kg ha-1.

Rapeseed-mustard is the third important oilseed crop in the world after soybean (Glycine

max L. Merr.) and palm (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.). Among the seven edible oilseeds

cultivated in India, rapeseed-mustard contributes 28.6% in the total oilseeds production

and ranks second after groundnut sharing 27.8% in the India's oilseed economy

(Shekhawat et al. 2012). The estimated area, production and average yield of rapeseed-

mustard in the world is 30.74 m ha, 59.93 mt and 1,950 kg ha-1, respectively (AICRP

2010). India is the second largest rapeseed-mustard growing country in the world after

China. The crop is grown over an area of 6.19 m ha with an annual production of 7.37 mt

and productivity of 1142 kg ha-1 (AICRP 2010). Rapeseed-mustard crops in India are

grown in diverse agro climatic conditions ranging from north-eastern, north-western hills

to southern parts under irrigated or rainfed, timely or late sown, saline soils and mixed

cropping. In Himachal Pradesh, the crop is grown over an area of 8.4 thousand hectares

with a total production of 3.6 thousand tonnes. The average productivity of the crop in

Himachal Pradesh is 430 kg ha-1 as compared to 1142 and 1950 kg ha-1 in national and

world level, respectively (Anonymous 2010).

Rapeseed-mustard oil being rich source of the unsaturated fatty acids is primarily

used for human consumption as desirable edible oil. The oil obtained from rapeseed

and mustard is rich in unsaturated and low in saturated fatty acids. In addition to the

oil, most plant parts of rapeseed-mustard such as seed, sprouts, leaves, and tender

parts are also of great use to human health, and consumed as spices and vegetables.

These plant parts are rich in dietary fibre (1.08 g per 100 g on fresh weight basis),

2

omega-3 fatty acids (0.20 g per 100 g on fresh weight basis), vitamin B3 (0.60 mg

per 100 g on fresh weight basis), calcium (38.92 mg per 100 g on fresh weight

basis) and protein (1.88 g per 100 g on fresh weight basis) (Anonymous 2004). The

oil and fats serve as important raw materials for manufacture of paints, soaps, varnishes,

hair oil, lubricants, textile auxiliaries and pharmaceuticals. The cake is used as cattle

feed.

Under rapeseed-mustard group, three crops viz., brown sarson, toria and raya

are being cultivated in Himachal Pradesh. Amongst them, sarson leads in terms of

cultivated area followed by toria and raya. Rapeseed and mustard crops are mostly

grown under rainfed conditions resulting in lesser productivity as compared to the

irrigated conditions. Under irrigated conditions its cultivation as a pure crop is taken

up to a limited extent. Mixed cropping with wheat is a common practice leading to

low per hectare productivity in the State. Out of many reasons of low productivity

of sarson, low and imbalanced fertilizer application is most important in the state.

Therefore, balanced nutrient management is the most critical input for obtaining

optimum yield in rapeseed-mustard all over India (Shanker et al. 2002). Available

evidences indicate that even balanced use of chemical fertilizer alone cannot

improve the productivity under continuous cropping system whereas, incorporation

of farm yard manure, biofertilizer as well as vermicompost regulated the quality,

improved crop yield and physical status of the soil (Kabeeranthuma et al. 1993).

Moreover, the ever escalating prices of chemical fertilizers and their detrimental

effects on soil and environmental health, strongly emphasize the need of alternate

source of nutrients especially biofertilizers, vermicompost and FYM etc. Further, to

supply all the nutrients in required quantities through organic sources and

biofertilizers is not an easy proposition. The integrated nutrient supply system

involving the combined use of chemical, organic sources and bio-fertilizer has been

thought to be best option for meeting out the nutrient requirement of the crop.

Therefore, partial substitution of nutritional requirement of rapeseed-mustard with

organics such as vermicompost and FYM besides biofertilizers is the need of hour in

sustaining yield (Hedge et al. 2004). Hence, the present study was conducted to work out

the integrated nutrient requirement involving organics, inorganics and bio-fertilizers in

3

brown sarson under mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh (Palampur) with following

objectives:

1. Effect of different nutrient management practices on growth, yield and

profitability of brown sarson

2. Effect of different nutrient management practices on nutrient removal vis.à.vis on

soil status.

4

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In this chapter, an attempt has been made to review the pertinent literature

available on the study entitled “Response of brown sarson (Brassica campestris var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh”. The literature has been reviewed in this chapter under the following sub- heads:

2.1 Effect of biofertilizers

2.2 Effect of farmyard manure

2.3 Effect of vermicompost

2.4 Effect of chemical fertilizers

2.5 Effect of integrated nutrient management

2.6 Economics

2.1 Effect of biofertilizers

Biofertilizers offer an economically viable and ecologically sound route for augmenting nutrient supplies and can play a key role in bridging the gap between nutrient removal by crops and addition through fertilizers (Tewatia et al. 2007).

2.1.1 Growth and development

Kashved et al. (2010) observed that the growth and yield attributes viz. plant height, number of primary and secondary branches, dry matter, number of siliquae and length of siliquae plant-1 number of seeds siliqua-1, seed weight plant-1, 1000 seed weight and seed yield (12.43 q ha-1) were increased significantly by integrated application of 75% RDN through urea+25% N through FYM than rest of treatments. The highest yield was obtained with combined application of 75% RDN + 25% N through FYM.

Pathak and Godika (2010) in Rajasthan reported that use of biofertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB) and Trichoderma along with the recommended doses of fertilizers enhanced the plant growth and yield of mustard. Plant growth and yield of mustard also promoted by basal use of elemental sulphur as a nutritional supplement, spray of thiourea (0.1%) at 50% flowering stage of the crop, along with the adoption of recommended doses of fertilizers (i.e. NPK, 80: 40: 40 kg ha-1).

5

Gudadhe et al. (2005) observed that biofertilizers (Azotobacter and Phosphate

Solubilizing Bacteria) in mustard (Brassica juncea L.) significantly increased plant

height, number of branches, dry matter and leaf area per plant as compared to the

recommended fertilizers.

Nanwal et al. (2000) conducted the study under conserved moisture conditions

and they found that the growth of Indian mustard cultivars were increased with increasing

levels of nitrogen along with Azotobacter.

2.1.2 Yield and yield attributes

In Udaipur, Rajasthan, Mahala et al. (2006) reported that residual effect of PSB

application was equally effective in improving the yield and yield attributes of mustard.

The residual effect of 80 kg P2O5 ha-1 increased the seed yield of mustard by 5.16 and

6.89% over 60 kg ha-1 and 11.47 and 13.00% over 40 ka P2O5 ha-1 during 2001-02 and

2002-03, respectively.

Gudadhe et al. (2005) found that biofertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB) along with

75 percent NPK in mustard (Brassica juncea L.) significantly increased number of

siliquae per plant, number of seeds per siliqua, seed weight and straw yield as compared

to the recommended fertilizer application. Hence, with 25% saving in recommended dose

of fertilizer, more yield was obtained even than 100% recommended dose of fertilizer

with the use of Azotobacter and PSB in mustard.

Sharma (2002) in Nauni, Himachal Pradesh, reported that Azospirillum

application significantly increased number and weight of leaves per plant, head length

and width, gross and net weight of head per plant and yield per hectare in cabbage.

Chauhan et al. (1996) found that seed inoculation with either Azotobacter or

Azosperillium significantly increased yield attributes, viz. number of branches and pods

plant-1, 1000 seed weight and yield of seed, stover and oil in mustard. The increase in

seed yield was up to 13.9-17.3% and 15.6-18.6% during 1992-93 and 1993-94,

respectively. The favourable effect of bacterial inoculation could be attributed to increase

in N supply in inoculated plots due to N fixation ability of these bacteria.

Chauhan et al. (1995) also reported that seed inoculation with Azotobacter and

Azospirillum significantly increased seed yield of raya.

6

Conducted a study in arid soils, Kumar (1995) and found that seed yields of

Indian mustard were significantly increased with inoculation of Azotobacter. Seed

inoculation with either Azotobacter or Azospirillum significantly increased the pods per

plant, seeds per pod and yield of seed and stover of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea)

over no inoculation (Chauhan et al. 1995 & 1996).

2.1.3 Quality studies

Meena et al. (2013) at Rajasthan found that application of 100% RDF (N 80; P

17.5; S 60) + seed inoculation with Azotobacter + PSB significantly increased number of

primary and secondary branches per plant, number of siliquae per plant, test weight, seed

and stover yield, oil content and oil yield (1,034 kg ha-1) over control.

Singh M (2001) in Hisar revealed that Azotobacter inoculation improved the plant

height number of primary and secondary branches per plant and dry matter per plant.

Inoculation of seed with Azotobacter significantly increased the number of siliqua per

plant, number of seeds per siliqua, seed yield per plant and seed yield ha-1 over no

inoculation. Inoculation of seed with Azotobacter did not bring about any significant

change in protein content, iodine value of oil and N and P content in seed and stover.

Shankar et al. (2002) reported that use of farm yard manure and sulphur

significantly increased oil and protein contents in mustard seeds.

Nanwal et al. (2000) found that oil content of Indian mustard was increased with

increasing levels of nitrogen along with Azotobacter. Chauhan et al. (1996) also found

that seed inoculation with either Azotobacter or Azospirillum significantly increased oil

yield of Indian mustard.

2.1.4 Nutrient content and uptake

Hossain et al. (2012) at Dhaka, Bangladesh reported that N, K, B and S content in

seeds increased with increasing level of N up to certain level. The highest N content in

seeds (3.6%) was found due to application of N at higher level (@ 150 kg/ha). Potassium

(K) and B content in seeds significantly increased with increasing level of N up to 100

kg/ha and then decreased. The application of N @ 150 kg/ha and B @ 2 kg/ha produced

the better quality of seeds in respect of protein content.

7

Yasari et al. (2009) found that biofertilizers resulted in 3.86, 0.82, 2.25, 0.75 and

0.91% increase in concentrations of N, P, K, S and Zn in the seeds of rapeseed over the

non biofertilizer treatments.

2.1.5 Soil properties

Banerjee et al. (2011) in West Bengal reported significant improvement in the soil

quality by increasing soil porosity and water holding capacity as well as gradual build-up

of soil macronutrient status after harvesting of the crop. Applications

of biofertilizers have contributed significantly toward higher soil organic matter,

nitrogen, available phosphorus, and potassium. The use of biofertilizers and compost has

mediated higher availability of iron, manganese, zinc, copper and boron in soil. The use

of biofertilizers and compost significantly improved soil bacterial and fungal population

count in the soil, thereby increasing the soil health.

Saha et al. (2010) reported significant improvement in the soil physical conditions of

the soil with integrated application of organic manure and inorganic fertilizers.

Application of NPK fertilizers along with organic manure, lime, and biofertilizers

increased soil organic carbon (SOC) content, aggregate stability, moisture-retention

capacity, and infiltration rate of the soil while reduced the bulk density.

Vendan and Subramanian (2000) obtained higher crop yield with PSB application

due to vigorous solubilization of phosphate in lower levels of phosphorous.

Gaur (1990) observed that inoculation with PSB caused improvement in soil

phosphorous, possibly due to the solubilization of fixed or the added phosphorous.

2.2 Effect of farmyard manure

Farmyard manure (FYM) is a bulky organic manure resulting from decomposed

mixture of dung and urine of farm animals along with the litter (bedding material).

Well rotten FYM, on an average, contains 0.5-1.0% N, 0.15-0.2% P2O5 and 0.5-1.0%

K20. Farmyard manure being organic in nature has a significant influence on the

physical, chemical and biological properties of soil. These beneficial effects are

ultimately reflected in the grain yield of crop. The study made by Drechel and Reck

(1997) confirmed the farmers general opinion that the FYM has high manurial value

for crop yields. Maintaining and improving the crop yield in long run is essential part

8

of sustaining the ecosystem (Ram 2009). Farmyard manure acts as a nutrient

reservoir and upon decomposition produces organic acids, thereby adsorbed ions are

released slowly during entire crop growth period leading to higher seed yield and

yield components.


Laura and Stanislava (2010) in a study found that the highest dry matter in white

mustard either grown with buckwheat or grown as a mono crop when green manure and

farmyard manure were incorporated.

Basnet (2005) found that the application of NPK fertilizers along with FYM at all

stages (25 to 85 DAS) of growth and development resulted in significantly higher leaf

area and total dry matter plant-1.

FYM application at 10 t ha-1 in Indian mustard significantly increased its leaf area

index, crop growth rate and dry matter accumulation per plant (Patel et al. 1998).


Kumar et al. (2006) reported that organic compost with FYM resulted in

significant improvement in yield and yield attributes of mustard. Similarly, Patel and

Shelke (2000) reported that FYM application increased seed yield of mustard.

In Hisar, Singh and Singh (1997) found that the application of FYM @ 5 and 10 t

ha-1 resulted in significantly more plant height, dry matter and leaf area per plant, yield

attributes seed and stalk yields over no FYM and Azotobacter inoculation however, the

increase in harvest index was not significant. Both the levels of FYM were statistically at

par with each other for the above parameters except dry matter which was significantly

more with 10 t ha-1 FYM than 5 t. The increase in seed yield was 10.0 and 16.0% with 5

and 10 t FYM ha-1, respectively over no FYM.

Dixit (1997) reported that seed yield was highest with 10 t FYM + 25 t sand.

Application of organic manure, in preceding groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) significantly

increased the branches per plant, siliquae per plant, 1000-seed weight and seed yield of

Indian mustard (Rao and Shaktawat 2002).

9

On sandy loam acidic soil, Mandal and Sinha (2002) found that number of siliqua

per plant, number of seeds per siliquae, 1000-seed weight, and seed yield of Indian

mustard improved significantly when application of 100% recommended rates of

NPK+10 t ha−1 farmyard manure (FYM) as compared with 100% NPK.

Singh and Pal (2011) reported that the plant height, total dry matter accumulation,

leaf area index and seed and stover yields were recorded significantly higher when

recommended dose of fertilizers (RDF) i.e. 120:17.6:16.6:40, N:P:K:S kg ha-1 was

applied along with FYM 10t/ha, 25 kg ZnSO4/ha and seed treatment with Azotobacter.

On an average, seed yield of mustard increased by 41.2 percent over alone application of

RDF. Application of either FYM or Zn or seed treatment along with RDF enhanced the

mustard seed yield by 12.0, 11.5 and 13.0 percent, respectively over RDF alone.

Additional application of either of FYM or Zn further increased the oil and glucosinolate

contents. Azotobacter seed treatment reduced the glucosinolate but improved the oil

content. The highest values of N, P, K, S and Zn content and its uptake were recorded

with combined application of RDF with FYM, Zn and Azotobacter.

Sahoo et al. (2010) reported that improper nutrient management in Indian mustard

has been a great concern leading to low productivity in India (908 kg ha-1) at large and

more specifically in Orissa (480 kg ha-1) compared to world average (1,291 kg ha-1).

Azotobactor + 80 kg N ha-1 recorded highest seed yield of 13.17 q ha-1 which was at par

with 60 kg N ha-1 + Azospirillum (12.34 q ha-1) and 80 kg N ha-1 sole (12.23 q ha-1) and

differed significantly from rest of the treatment combinations. Maximum stover yield

(23.06 q ha-1) was recorded with Azospirillum +80 kg N ha-1 and was at par with 60 kg N

ha-1+Azospirillum, 60 or 80 kg N ha-1 with Azotobactor treatment combinations and 80

kg N ha-1 sole. The highest uptake of nitrogen (60.2 kg ha-1), phosphorus (13.01 kg ha-1)

and potash (23.88 kg ha-1) were noticed at 80 kg N ha-1. Similarly the uptake of nitrogen

(53.98 kg ha-1) was highest in Azospirillum treatment followed by Azotobactor and

control.

10


Patel and Shelke (2000) reported that FYM application increased the nutrient

content of mustard. Similarly, Basumatary and Talukdar (2007) found that integrated use

of 30 kg sulphur ha-1 along with farm yard manure @ 1.5 or 3 t ha-1 resulted in increased

uptake of N, P and K, in seeds of both rapeseed and rice than that of either single

application of sulphur or farm yard manure alone.

Application of different combinations of organic manures resulted in higher

uptake of nutrients, higher soil organic carbon, higher available soil N, P, K and soil

biological parameters (dehydrogenase, phosphatase and microbial biomass carbon) when

compared with recommended dose of fertilizers and control (Ramesh et al. 2009).

Rao (2003) found that application of organic manure had significant effect on

available N content in mustard crop. Farmyard manure at 10 t ha-1 and poultry manure at

5 t ha-1 brought significant improvement in the post harvest available N content in the soil

over control.

Nagdive et al. (2007) observed that nutrient application i.e 50% RDF and 75%

RDF with FYM @ 5 t ha-1 + Azotobacter + PSB increased the uptake of N, P and S both

by seed and stover and consequently increased the total uptake. The higher uptake of

these nutrients are closely correlated with their increased availability in soil Treatment

75% RDF + FYM @ 5 t ha-1 + Azotobacter + PSB recorded significantly higher nitrogen

and phosphorus uptake than the other treatment however , treatment 50% RDF recorded

significantly lower uptake.


In deep Vertisols of central India, Ramesh et al. (2009) found that application of

organic manures recorded higher oil content of mustard seed compared to the application

of recommended dose of fertilizers. Among the organic manures, cattle dung manure +

poultry manure combination recorded the highest oil content (38.44%) compared to

recommended dose of fertilizers (37.54%) and the control (36.82%). Application of

farmyard manure was reported to improve the oil content of mustard compare to

inorganic fertilizers (Patel and Shelke 2000).

11

Singh and Sinsinwar (2006) in Rajasthan reported that number of primary and

secondary branches, 1000-seed weight, and oil content of Indian mustard, and yields of

seed and straw increased significantly with the application of farmyard manure at 5 t ha-1

+ Azotobacter chroococcum + Azospirillum over the control.

In sandy loam acidic soil, Mandal and Sinha (2004) found that oil yield of Indian

mustard was improved with 100% recommended rates of NPK in combination with

10 t ha−1 farmyard manure when compared with 100% NPK alone.

Patel and Shelke (1998) observed that oil and protein contents in mustard were

higher with application of FYM and increased with increasing phosphorus and sulphur

levels. Farm yard manure and sulphur significantly increased the oil content of mustard

(Shankar et al. 2002).


Bhardwaj and Omanwar (1994) reported that organic carbon, total nitrogen,

available phosphorus and potassium contents of soils were improved by the combined use

of organic sources of nutrients.

2.3 Effect of vermicompost

Vermicompost contains all the essential macro and micro nutrients for plant growth

in readily available forms. It has an inherent ability to maintain the soil pH and keep it

near neutral which is essential for plant growth, being hygroscopic in nature it absorbs

moisture even from the air. It reduces water requirement of the crop. It consists of humus

which is the basic building block of fertile soil and has a large number of micro-

organisms which are beneficial for soil and plant life (Anonymous 1999). Robinson et al.

1992 also verified that nutrients present in vermicompost are readily available to crop

plants. Vermicompost has been advocated as good organic manure for integrated nutrient

management (Ranwa and Singh, 1999). On an average, vermicompost contains 0.80 to

1.10% N, 0.40 to 0.80% P2O5 and 0.80 to 0.98% K2O. In addition to these, it contains 10

to 52 ppm Cu, 186.60 ppm Zn and 930.00 ppm Fe (Giraddi 2001 and Giraddi et al. 2006).

12


Theunissen et al. (2010) reported from their study that vermicompost contains plant nutrients including N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Zn, Cu and B, the uptake of which has a positive effect on plant nutrition, photosynthesis, the chlorophyll content of the leaves and improves the nutrient content of different plant components (root, shoot and the fruits). The high percentage of humic acids in vermicompost contribute to plant health, as it promotes the synthesis of phenolic compounds such as anthocyanins and flavonoids which may improve the plant quality and act as a deterrent to pests and diseases.

Premi et al. (2004) in Rajasthan observed that application of vermicompost at 5 t ha-1 + 75% RDF recorded maximum plant height, number of primary and secondary branches, number of siliqua per plant and number of seeds per siliqua which in turn resulted in higher seed yield. It was at par with FYM at 10 t ha-1 + 75% RDF.


In a study conducted in deep Vertisols of central India, Ramesh et al. (2009) recorded significantly higher number of siliquae per plant, seeds per siliqua and seed yield of Indian mustard with organic nutrient management practices as compared to both recommended doses of fertilizers and control. While studying the effect of manure and vermicompost on yield of winter rapeseed, Basumatary and Talukdar (2007) observed that organic fertilizer along with inorganic nitrogen fertilizer increased the yield. Bury 1996 reported that application of vermicompost at earlier stage of mustard was more effective.

Premi et al. (2004) obtained maximum seed yield of Indian mustard with recommended NPK combined with 7.5 t vermicompost or 15.0 t FYM per hectare.

Even in groundnut, application of vermicompost (10 t ha-1) or vermicompost coupled with 25 to 50 % of recommended fertilizer showed significant increase in yield over application of FYM with recommended dose of chemical fertilizers (Kale et al. 1994).

Krishnamurthy et al. (1995) reported that application of recommended dose of fertilizers (RDF) along with vermicompost (2.5 t ha-1) resulted in highest seed yield of sorghum (5.08 t ha-1) over control.

13


Singh et al. (2009) found that total uptake of N, P, K, and S in mustard was

significantly higher with 50% NPK + vermicompost at 2 t ha-1 as compared to control.

At Tropopsamment, Zulfatan and Syukur (2008) estimated highest P uptake under 30 t ha-1 vermicompost treatment.


Sheik et al. (2004) found that protein and oil content of mustard fertilized with cage system poultry manure @ 20 t ha-1 were significantly higher.


In the vermicompost production, the complex organic residues are biodegraded by symbiotic association between earthworms and microbes. In the process of vermicomposting, it helps to increase the density of microbes and also provides the vital macro nutrients viz., N, P, K, Ca, Mg and micro nutrients such as Fe, Mo, Zn, Cu etc. Apart from this, it also contains plant growth promoting substances like NAA, cytokinins, gibberlines etc. The chemical analysis of vermicompost at Dharwad it was revealed nutrient N, P and K content present in vermicompost was 0.8, 1.1 and 0.5%, respectively (Giraddi 1993).

Azami et al. (2008) showed that addition of vermicompost at 15 t ha-1

significantly increased contents of soil total organic carbon, total N, P, K, Ca, Zn and Mn as compared to control plots. The soil treated with vermicompost had increased EC, decreased soil pH, and improved bulk density and total porosity of soil in comparison to unamended plots.

Kumar and Singh (2001) found that inoculation of N2 fixing bacteria into vermicompost increased the content of N and P in it.

2.4 Effect of chemical fertilizers


At Varanasi, Dinesh et al. (2006) found that plant height and primary branches

per plant of Indian mustard increased significantly up to 80 kg N ha-1 and secondary

branches, dry matter per plant and leaf chlorophyll content up to 120 kg N ha-1.

Application of phosphorus up to 60 kg ha-1 significantly enhanced dry matter per plant.

14

Whereas, plant height, branches per plant and leaf chlorophyll content increased

significantly only up to 40 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, significant increase in Stover and

biological yields was recorded up to 120 kg N ha-1 (Reager et al. 2006).

The light interception (%) and leaf area index of 4 rowed mustard or raya were

maximum at 120 kg N ha-1 and 37.35 kg P2O5 ha-1 compared with lower doses of both

the nutrients (Kumar et al. 2001).

Mankotia and Sharma (1998) found that dry matter accumulation by gobhi sarson

and interception of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) by gobhi sarson and toria in

gobhi sarson and toria cropping system increased with increasing supply of N (40-160 kg

ha-1), P (40-80 kg ha-1) and FYM (0-5 t ha-1).

Tomer et al. (1996) found that plant height, number of branches and dry matter

accumulation per plant increased significantly with the increasing levels of fertilization

up to 120 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 + 60 kg K2O per hectare.


Hassan and Malhi (2011) at Peshawar, Pakistan reported that the seed yield and

yield components of mustard crop increased significantly with K and S fertilization as

compared to the control. It was concluded that a combination of 60 kg K+30 kg S ha-1

would improve seed yield and yield components of rape and mustard in the study area

and contribute significantly to increased production.

Parihar et al. (2010) reported that application of recommended dose of fertilizers

to mustard improved seed yield (1.31 t ha-1) by 43.8 and 33.0% over control and 50%

recommended dose of fertilizers.

Under rainfed conditions, Singh et al. (2009) found that 100% fertilizers (RDF)

produced significantly higher yield attributes and yield of mustard and lentil over control

in a mustard + lentil cropping system. Kumar et al. (2009) obtained 95.1, 49.1 and 14.7%

higher Ethiopian mustard yield with 90 kg N ha-1 over 0, 30 and 60 kg N ha-1,

respectively.

In high Ganges river floodplain soil, Siddiky et al. (2008) found that yield of

Mustard increased with application of 86, 15 and 30 kg ha-1 of N, P and S, respectively.

15

On sandy-loam soils at Navgaon (Alwar), maximum seed yield and yield

attributes of Indian mustard were recorded with 120 kg N ha-1 (Sharma and Jain 2002).

Total number of siliquae per plant and number of siliquae on main shoot of 4-

rowed mustard or raya were maximum at 120 kg N ha-1 and 37.35 kg P2O5 ha-1; the 1000-

seed weight and seed yield responded significantly upto 90 kg N ha-1 and 24.90 kg P2O5

ha-1 (Kumar et al. 2001). Residual effect of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased

siliquae per plant, 1000-seed weight and seed yield of Indian mustard by 9.7% over 20

kg P2O5 ha-1 (Rao and Shaktawat 2002).

Sharma (2002) found that application of nitrogen at the rate of 60 kg ha-1 resulted

in maximum number and weight of non wrapped leaves per plant, head length and width,

gross and net weight of head per plant and yield per hectare in cabbage

Kumar et al. (2000) in West Bengal found that there was an increase in mustard

yield by about 165% with higher level (N60 P36 K24 ha-1) of fertilizer application. But

there was no significant difference between inorganic or combined organic and inorganic

sources.

Shrivastava et al. (2000) in Madhya Pradesh reviewed that recommended

fertilizer 80:40:20 kg N:P:K ha-1 for Indian mustard produced higher yields than farmer's

fertilizer levels 40:20 kg N:P ha-1. Sulphur 25 kg ha-1 added to recommended fertilizer

increased seed yield by 16.0%, over recommended fertilizer alone. Seed inoculation with

Azotobacter increased the yields of Indian mustard by 11.4% over recommended

fertilizer alone.

Under mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh, Thakur and Singh (1997)

reported that maximum seed yield of Indian mustard was obtained when all the inputs

were used as per recommendations. The reduction in yield was highest when the crop

was grown without fertilizer and plant protection measures (66.3%), followed by

withdrawal of fertilizer and irrigation (64.5 %). Thus, use of fertilizer was found to be the

most critical input in Indian mustard under mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh.

Tomer et al. (1996) found that the number of siliquae per plant, 1000-seed weight and

seed yield of Indian mustard increased significantly with increasing levels of fertilization

16

up to 120 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 60 kg K2O ha-1. Chauhan et al. (1995) found that growth

and yield attributes and seed yield of Indian mustard increased significantly with

increasing doses of nitrogen up to 60 kg ha-1.


Meena et al. (2013) in Rajasthan found out that maximum uptake of nutrients (N

80; P 17.5; S 60) was recorded with 100% RDF + Azotobacter + PSB, in seed and stover

over rest of the fertility levels. The next best fertility treatment was 100% RDF.

Dinesh et al. (2006) reported that the uptake of NPK and S by both seed and

stover increased significantly with successive increase in nitrogen levels upto 120 kg ha-1

and sulphur levels upto 60 kg ha-1. Incorporation of 25% FYM + 75% nitrogen + 100%

sulphur significantly enhanced the uptake of nitrogen and sulphur in both seed and stover

of the crop (Bhat et al. 2005). Reager et al. (2006) found that increasing the levels of

nitrogen from 40 to 100 kg ha-1 significantly enhanced NPK uptake.


Under mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh, Choudhary et al. (2002) found

that oil and protein contents of Brassica species increased significantly with increase in

fertility levels from 0 to 150 kg ha-1; Brassica campestris recorded maximum protein

content (19.72%) compared to B. napus (19.38%) and B. carinata (19.21%). Kumar et al.

(2001) found that oil yield in mustard was increased significantly upto 90 kg N ha-1 and

24.90 kg P ha-1, but oil content decreased with an increase in level of nitrogen upto 120

kg ha-1, whereas, phosphorus has no significant effect on oil content. Tomer et al. (1996)

found that oil yield per hectare of Indian mustard increased significantly with the

increasing levels of fertilization up to 120 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 60 kg K2O ha-1.

Ahmad and Abdin (2000) suggested that a balanced use of N and S (100 kg N

and 40 kg S ha-1) supply should be maintained for both quantity and quality of oil of

Brassica genotypes. Increasing levels of N decreased the oil content while application of

sulphur improved the oil content of mustard.

17


Ganai (1983) reported that increased fertilizer level from 50 to 100% in rice-wheat

system increased available nutrient content of soil. Physico-chemical properties of soil

were not affected but organic carbon content determined at the end of the experiment

increased significantly with increase in fertilizer level from 50 to 150% of recommended

N, P and K. Increase in bulk density and available water with increase in NPK levels was

reported by Sarkar (1998).

2.5 Effect of integrated nutrient management

Venkatesh et al. (1997) reported that application of chemical fertilizers along with

vermicompost resulted in greater availability of micronutrients. Similar results were also

reported by Sudhakar et al. (2002) at JNKVV, Jabalpur (M.P.) Tiwari et al. (2002)

reported that with the application of 100% NPK + FYM, highest value of Organic carbon

(9.6 g ha-1), available N (290 kg ha-1) and available P (39.40 kg ha-1) were recorded

whereas, availability of K was decreased.

It is widely known that neither organic manures nor chemical fertilizers used

separately can achieve the yield sustainability at a higher order under the modern

intensive farming, in which the nutrient turn over in the soil-plant system has been quite

high (Hegde et al. 1999). Integrated nutrient management (INM) is a concept, which aims

at the maintenance of soil fertility and plant nutrient supply in an optimum amounts to

sustain soil and crop productivity through optimization of the benefits of all the possible

sources of plant nutrients in an integral manner. INM could play important role in

improving the efficiency of resource use, enhanced food grain production, maintenance

of soil fertility and increasing the farmer’s income. Extra mining of nutrients will have to

be checked in order to maintain the soil health. Thus, the most logical way to manage

long-term fertility and productivity of soil is integrated use of both organic and inorganic

sources of plant nutrients, which will also take care of the environmental pollution

including soil, water and air (Antil and Narwal 2007).

Several studies have reported increased oil content from 2 to7% due to the use of

fertilizers either singly or in combination with major, secondary and micronutrients. Thus

more popularization of integrated nutrient use for oilseed production is the need of the

18

hour for realizing higher quality from oilseeds (Hegde and Sudhakara 2004). Similarly,

Hegde and Sudhakara (2009) reported that sustainable oilseed production requires

efficient use of inputs through adequate and balanced fertilization, including organic

manures, secondary and micronutrients, biofertilizers, cropping system-based

fertilization, and site-specific nutrient management to avoid wastages and harness

positive interactions of nutrients and growth factors.


Singh et al. (2011) in Uttarakhand, India, reported that the application of 100

percent of the recommended NPK rates + 50% FYM + 50% vermicompost + Azotobacter

resulted in the highest plant height, highest number of branches per plant, number of

siliquae per plant, seed weight per plant, seed yield, oil content and oil yield of mustard.

Pal et al. (2008) obtained highest values of plant height and number of branches with

complete integrated nutrient management (INM) package involving 100% of

recommended fertilizer, followed by treatments where the same INM package was

applied with 75 and 50% of recommended fertilizer level.

In sandy loam acidic soil, Mandal and Sinha (2004) obtained significantly higher

plant height and number of branches per plant of Indian mustard with 100% NPK in

combination with 10 t ha−1 farmyard manure over 100% NPK alone.

A study carried out in foothills soils of eastern India, showed that plant height and

branches per plant of Indian mustard were significantly with application of 100%

recommended dose of NPK (80:17.2:33.2) + FYM @ 10 t ha-1 compared with 100%

NPK alone (Mandal and Sinha 2002).

Shukla et al. (2002) obtained highest total dry matter and number of branches per

plant of Indian mustard with the application of 50 or 100% of the recommended fertilizer

rates + FYM (10 t ha-1) + Azotobacter.

Similarly, Jat et al. (2000) reported that application of 10 t FYM + 30 kg N and 20

kg P2O5 ha-1 to mustard significantly increased plant height, dry matter accumulation and

number of primary and secondary branches over the control.

19


Tripathi et al. (2010) reported that application of 20 t FYM + 40 kg S along with

recommended dose of fertilizers or 75% recommended dose of fertilizers resulted in

significant increase of 18.2 and 20.3% in mustard yield over recommended dose of

fertilizer and 75% of recommended dose, respectively. Similarly, at Jorhat Basumatary

and Talukdar (2007) observed that integrated use of 30 kg sulphur ha-1 along with farm

yard manure @ 1.5 or 3 t ha-1 gave highest seed yield, starw yield, uptake of N, P, K and

protein content in seed of both rapeseed and rice than that of single application of sulphur

or farm yard manure.

Saha et al. (2010) reported that yield of the mustard crop was significantly

increased (21.09-folds) with continuous application of balanced inorganic (100% NPK) +

lime + biofertilizer + FYM as compared to the control plots. However, crop yields

drastically reduced under application of integrated nutrients without FYM as compared to

the treatment where FYM was applied. Thus, the results suggested that integrated use of a

balanced inorganic fertilizer in combination with lime and organic manure sustained a

soil physical environment that was better for achieving higher crop productivity under

intensive cropping systems in the hilly ecosystem of northeastern India.

Under old alluvial soil, of plot receiving the treatment ‘40% less fertilizer N, 25%

less fertilizer P + 12 kg ha-1 biofertilizer and organic manure 5 t ha-1’ resulted in

maximum seeds per siliqua, test weight and seed yield of yellow sarson (Datta et al.

2009).

Pal et al. (2008) obtained highest number of siliquae and seed yield of mustard

with integrated nutrient management (INM) package involving 100% of recommended

fertilizer, followed by treatments where the same INM package was applied with 75 and

50% of recommended fertilizer level.

In pearlmillet-mustard cropping system, Satyajeet and Nanwal (2007) obtained

highest grain yield of mustard with 100% recommended dose (RDF) in conjunction with

vermicompost and biofertilizer. Application of 100% RDF and 75% RDF +

vermicompost 5 t ha-1 + biofertilizer also gave comparable yields.

20

In a long term field experiment on farmers field 15 t FYM ha-1 year-1 in

conjunction with recommended dose of N, significantly increased the productivity of

cotton-mustard and mustard-sorghum and rice-wheat cropping system, while maintaining

soil fertility (Antil and Nanwal 2007). Roul et al. (2006) found that productivity of rice -

Indian mustard cropping system was highest under 100% recommended dose of nitrogen

blended with farm yard manure.

Similarly, Kumar et al. (2004) reported significantly higher yield under treatments

receiving 100% NPK and 75% NPK through chemical fertilizer + 25% through FYM.

Shankar et al. (2002) reported that application of 100% NPK + 10 t FYM + Azotobacter

resulted in significantly highest seed yield of Indian mustard (Brassica Juncea) was

highest under.

In soybean-mustard-fodder cowpea cropping system, Abraham and Lal (2003)

observed that most of the yield and yield parameters with 100% recommended fertilizer

dose along with organics were higher than those with lower dose of fertilizers.

In foothill soils of eastern India, yield attributes viz. siliquae per plant, seeds per

siliqua, 1000-seed weight and seed yield of Indian mustard were improved with the

application of 100% recommended dose of NPK (80:17.2:33.2) + FYM @ 10 tonnes ha-1

as compared with 100% NPK alone (Mandal and Sinha 2002).

Shukla et al. (2002) obtained highest number of siliquae per plant, siliqua length,

1000-seed weight, number of seeds per siliqua, seed yield per plant and seed yield of

Indian mustard with the application of 50 and 100% of the recommended fertilizer rates +

FYM (10 t ha-1) + Azotobacter. Jat et al. (2000) reported that application of 10 t FYM +

30 kg N and 20 kg P2O5 per hectare to mustard significantly increased number of siliquae

per plant, number of seeds per siliqua and seed yield over the control.

Lenart et al. (1996) reported that seed and branch numbers and 1000-seed weight

of winter rape were highest in the recommended NPK + 0.87 tonnes farm yard manure

treatment. Similarly, in western hills of Nepal, Subedi et al. (1994) obtained highest seed

yield in rapeseed with the application of 60 kg N ha-1 and 15 t ha-1 farm yard manure.

Patel and Shelke (1998) reported that yield and yield components of mustard were higher

with the application of FYM.

21


Rundala et al. (2012) reported that different fertility levels had significant effect

on quality and nutrient uptake of Indian mustard. Application of 100% RDF through

inorganic fertilizers though recorded significantly highest nitrogen uptake by stover but it

remained at par with 75% RDF through FYM+25% through inorganic fertilizers and 25%

RDF through FYM+75% through inorganic fertilizers. Whereas, 75% RDF through

FYM+25% through fertilizers registered significantly highest uptake of nitrogen by seed

over control and 100% RDF through FYM.

Singh et al. (2010) at Lakhaoti, Bulandshahar (Uttar Pradesh) reviewed that the

mean plant height, total dry matter accumulation, leaf area and seed yield were higher

when 100% recommended fertilizers (120:40:20:40 : N:P2O5:K2O:S kg ha-1) were applied

along with Farmyard manure at 10 t ha-1, ZnSO4 (25 kg ha-1) and seed treatment with

Azotobacter. Mean seed yield of mustard with this treatment increased by 41.2% over

application of recommended fertilizers. The recommended fertilizers combined with

application of FYM + ZnSO4 + seed treatment gave the highest N, P, K, S and Zn content

as well as their uptake in seed and stover.

Huang et al. (2007) observed that the incorporation of inorganic fertilizers and

biofertilizers along with organic fertilizers in Brassica campestris gave higher yields.

Satyajeet and Nanwal (2007) reported that nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur

uptake as well as protein content was highest in plots receiving 75% recommended dose

of NPK (45:22.5:22.5 kg NPK ha-1) + FYM @ 5 t ha-1 + Azotobacter + PSB.

Incorporation of treatments 100% NS and 25% FYM + 75% N + 100% sulphur

significantly enhanced the uptake of N both in seed and stover of Indian mustard (Bhat et

al. 2005). Roul et al. (2006) found that nitrogen uptake by rice and Indian mustard crops

as higher under 100% recommended dose of nitrogen blended with FYM. Uptake of

nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium was improved by composite inoculums of

biofertilizers (Khanda et al. 2005).

From a study carried out in foothills soils of eastern India, it was revealed that

there was significant improvement in the uptake of nitrogen by Indian mustard owing to

appropriate combination of NPK, FYM, borax and ZnSO4 (Mandal and Sinha 2002).

22


Rundala et al. (2012) reviewed that phosphorus and potassium uptake in both seed

and stover and oil yield of Indian mustard improved significantly with the application of

75% RDF through FYM + 25% through fertilizers (NPK), which remained at par with

50% RDF through FYM + 50% through fertilizers. Results further showed that dual

inoculation with Azotobactor + PSB significantly increased protein content in seed and

oil yield over control.

Pal et al. (2008) obtained highest mustard oil yield where complete integrated

nutrient management (INM) package involving 100% of recommended fertilizer was

applied, followed by INM package along with 75 and 50% of recommended fertilizer

level.

Nagdive et al. (2007) in Maharashtra reported that nutrient management levels

significantly influenced oil content and oil yield. Treatment with 50% RDF recorded

significantly higher oil content in seed than 100% RDF and 75% RDF with FYM@ 5 t

ha-1 + Azotobacter + PSB. Treatment 50% RDF + FYM @ 5 t ha-1 + Azotobacter + PSB

recorded highest protein content followed by 50% RDF with FYM@ 5 t ha-1 +

Azotobacter + PSB. The highest protein and oil yield were recorded by 75% RDF with

FYM@ 5 t ha-1 + Azotobacter + PSB were applied but it was at par with 100% RDF.

Hegde et al. (2004) reported that profitable oilseed cultivation along with higher

productivity and quality of oil and protein was possible with integrated use of nutrient

sources. Similarly Mandal and Sinha (2002 reported that oil yield of Indian mustard was

improved with the application 100% recommended dose of NPK (80:17.2:33.2) + FYM

@ 10 tonnes per hectare compared with 100% NPK alone.


Premi (2003) reported that combined use of organic and inorganic sources of N

decreased the bulk density of soil.

23

2.6 Economic studies

Babar (2011) studied the effect of integrated use of inorganic and organic manure on yield and monetary returns of mustard - cowpea - rice cropping sequence in lateritic soils of Konkan region during rabi, summer and kharif seasons during the year of 2005-06. It was revealed from the study that the economic benefits of mustard crop can not be increased only with the application of organic manure (100% N through FYM ) alone, however, its integration with chemical fertilizers 50% NPK through inorganic fertilizer and 50% N through FYM was helpful to increase the B:C ratio over that of B:C ratio of only organic manuring treatment.

Kumar et al. (2011) found that when the mustard crop was fertilized with 150-30-0.50 kg N-S- Zn EDTA per hectare it fetched the highest net returns and benefit: cost ratio. Under rainfed conditions at Varanasi, maximum net returns and benefit: cost ratio were obtained with the application of 80 kg N and 45 kg S ha-1, respectively (Singh et al. 2010).

Tripathi et al. (2010) reported that RDF + FYM + S + Zn + B + Azotobacter with mean return of Rs 19,505 ha-1 was the most promising INM treatment.

Ramanjaneyulu et al. (2010) obtained highest agronomic efficiency, net return and benefit: cost ratio with 50% RDF + biofertilizers application in sorghum-mustard cropping system. Patel and Shelke (2000) reported that FYM application increased the net returns of the mustard crop. Similarly, Ramesh et al. (2009) recorded highest gross returns, net returns and benefit: cost ratios were recorded in the treatment receiving organic manures.

Yasari et al. (2008) reported that the highest net benefit of adding biofertilizers was observed in canola (Brassica napus L.) with recommended N and P fertilizers.

Huang et al. (2007) observed that the incorporation of inorganic fertilizer and biological fertilizer into organic fertilizer gave maximum economic returns.

INM is a viable technology, which not only improved the soil fertility but was also economical and the benefit: cost ratio of FYM use ranged from 2.1 to 10.0 in different cropping systems (Antil and Nanwal 2007). Highest net return and benefit: cost ratios were recorded with the application of 100% recommended dose of nitrogen blended with farm yard manure (Roul et al. 2006).

24

Singh and Kumar (2006) in a rice-rapeseed sequence found that application of 80

kg N ha-1 + Azolla + BGA most remunerative giving highest gross return (Rs. 40937

ha-1) per rupee investment of 2.33.

Kumar et al. (2004) obtained higher net income and benefit: cost ratio either with

the application of 100% NPK through chemical fertilizer alone or 75% NPK through

chemical fertilizer + 25% through FYM as compared to the other treatments.

25

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The field experiment entitled, “Response of brown sarson (Brassica campestris

var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill conditions of Himachal

Pradesh” was conducted during Rabi season of 2011-12 at research farm of Department of

Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi

Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur (H.P.). The details of materials used and the methods

employed during the course of the study have been described in this chapter.

3.1 Experimental Site

3.1.1 Location

The experimental farm is located at 32o6' N latitude, 76o3' E longitude and an

altitude of 1290 meters amsl. The site falls in the sub-temperate mid hill zone of

Himachal Pradesh.

3.1.2 Climate and weather

The place is characterized by severe winters and mild summers. On an

average, about 2600 mm rainfall is received annually and out of which 80% is

received during June to September and rest between October to May. Mean weekly

meteorological data recorded during 2011-12 in the meteorological observatory of

Department of Agronomy have been given in Appendix-I and illustrated graphically

in Fig 3.1, respectively. During the period of experimentation (November, 2011 to

March, 2012), mean minimum temperature ranged from 2.4 oC in Januray to 14.9 oC

in April. The mean maximum temperature during these corresponding months

remained at 9.8 oC and 28.4 oC, respectively. In Rabi 2011-12, a total rainfall of 320

mm was received. Relative humidity ranged from 42.0 to 87.0% during the entire

cropping season.

26

26

Fig 3.1 Mean weekly meteorological data of Palampur during rabi (2011-12)

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Rain

fall

(mm

) and

Rel

ativ

e Hu

mid

ity (%

)

Rainfall (mm) Max. Temp. Min. Temp. Relative Humidity (%)

27

3.1.3 Soil characteristics

Before the sowing of crop in the experiment, a composite soil sample (0-15

cm depth) was collected. The soil sample was air dried, ground and passed through

2 mm sieve and analyzed for different physico-chemical properties of soil (Table

3.1).

A perusal of data given in Table 3.1 revealed that the soil of the experimental

site was acidic in reaction and silty-clay loam in texture. On the basis of chemical

values the soil was categorized as medium in organic carbon, high in available

phosphorus and medium in available nitrogen and potassium.

Table 3.1 Physico-chemical properties of experimental soil

Determination Values Method employed

Sand (%)

Silt (%)

Clay (%)

Texture class

26

42

30.4

Silty clay loam

International pipette method (Piper 1966)

Chemical properties

pH 5.6 1:2.5 soil water suspension using glass electrode pH meter (Jackson 1967)

Organic Carbon (%) 0.82 Walkley and Black’s rapid titration (Piper 1966)

Available N (kg ha-1) 266 Alkaline permanganate method (Subbiah and Asija 1956)

Available P (kg ha-1) 30.1 Olsen’s method (Olsen et al. 1954)

Available K (kg ha-1) 187 Ammonium acetate extraction method (AOAC 1970)

28

28

R1 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12

Irrigation channel

R2 T12 T10 T11 T7 T8 T9 T3 T1 T2 T6 T4 T5

Irrigation channel

R3 T9 T8 T6 T12 T10 T2 T1 T5 T3 T4 T7 T11

Gross plot size : 4.5 m X 4.5 m = 20.25 m2

Irrigation channel : 1 m Net plot size : 3.3 m X 3.9 m = 12.17 m2

Fig 3.2 Layout Plan of Experiment (Rabi 2011-12)

T1 Azotobacter + 100% RDF T2 Azotobacter + FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF T3 Azotobacter + Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF T4 Azotobacter + Control (No NPK) T5 Azotobacter + PSB + 100% RDF T6 Azotobacter + PSB + FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF T7 Azotobacter + PSB + Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF T8 Azotobacter + PSB + Control T9 100% RDF T10 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF T11 Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF T12 Control (No-inoculation + No NPK)

N S

E

W W

29

3.1.4 Cropping History

Prior to the conduct of present experiment, the field was under cultivation of

rice crop in Kharif and wheat crop during Rabi for past number of years.

3.2 Seed

The brown sarson variety KBS-3 was sown in 30 cm apart rows using 10 kg

seed per hectare.

3.3 Experimental Details

3.3.1 Layout

The field experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design

consisting of three replications. The layout plan showing randomization of the

treatments has been shown in Fig 3.2.

3.3.2 Treatment details

The details of twelve treatments consisting of three levels of biofertilizers

and four fertility levels are given below:

A. Biofertilizers

1. Azotobacter

2. Azotobacter + PSB (Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria)

3. No-inoculation

B. Fertility levels

1. 100% RDF (Recommended dose of fertilizers i.e. 100% N:P:K)

2. FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF

3. Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF

4. Control

3.4 Cultural operations

The details of the cultural operations carried out and crop management

practices adopted to raise brown sarson crop have been described here as under. The

dates of various operations done in the experiment has been given in Table 3.2.

30

Table 3.2 Details of cultural operations

Cultural operations Date

Pre-sowing irrigation

Land preparation

29-10-11

01-11-11

Layout

Application of organic manures

02-11-11

03-11-11

Sowing

Fertilizer application

04-11-11

04-11-11

Herbicide application (Pendimethalin 1.5 kg ha-1) 05-11-11

Date of second irrigation 05-12-11

Thinning

Top dressing

12-12-11

21-12-11

Hoeing and weeding 31-12-11

Insecticide (Cypermethrin) 03-02-12

Harvesting 01-04-12

Threshing and winnowing 07-04-12

3.4.1 Field preparation

The experimental field was given pre-sowing irrigation and when the field

attained optimum soil moisture conditions, it was ploughed with the help of tractor

driven disc plough followed by disc harrow and planking. The layout of the

experiment was carried out with the help of manual labourers. Subbles and weeds

were removed from the field. Field was divided into three blocks and plots of size

20.25 m2 were prepared with bunding of 30 cm width.

31

3.4.2 Seed treatment and sowing

Pre-sowing inoculation of seeds with Azotobacter chroococcum and

phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB) cultures was carried out as under:

About 10% juggery solution was prepared in water, which served as a

sticker. To this solution, bioculture was added and mixed so as to form the slurry.

The seeds were mixed with this slurry of culture with clean hands, taking care that

all the seeds were equally coated with the product. This coated seed material was

spread on a polythene sheet in the shade and was allowed to dry for half an hour in

shade. Azotobacter and PSB were used @ 200 g per 10 kg of seed.

The seeds of Brown sarson variety “KBS-3” were sown on 4th November,

2011 in rows 30 cm apart, using a seed rate of 10 kg ha-1.

3.4.3 Application of fertilizers, FYM and vermicompost

FYM and vermicompost on oven dry weight basis were broadcast and

incorporated in upper 10-15 cm layer of each plot as per treatment before sowing of

the crop. Half dose of the nitrogen and full dose of phosphorus and potassium as per

treatment was applied as basal dose and the remaining half dose of nitrogen was top

dressed after 47 days of sowing. The doses under 100% RDF (Recommended dose

of fertilizer) of N, P2O5 and K2O were 60, 40 and 40 kg ha-1, respectively. The

source of fertilizers were urea, single super phosphate, muriate of potash for

nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium, respectively.

3.4.4 Weed control

For control of weeds spray of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg ha-1 in 750 litres of water on a day after sowing.

3.4.5 Plant protection

For the control/management of aphids, the crop was sprayed with cypermethrin @ 1 ml litre-1 of water on 3rd February, 2012. No other incidence of any insect-pest or disease was noticed during the entire cropping period.

32

3.4.6 Harvesting and threshing

Two rows from each side of the plot were left as border rows and the crop

was harvested from the net plot size of 12.17 m2 manually with sickles on 1st April,

2012. The produce was left in the field for drying in the sun for next five days. After

sun drying the produce was threshed manually and winnowing was done to get the

clean seed.

3.5 Field observations

For recording data on different non-destructive nature of growth and yield

attributes, five randomly selected plants from each net plot were tagged.

3.5.1 Crop studies

3.5.1.1 Growth studies

i. Plant height

The height of five randomly selected plants from net plot area were recorded

at 30, 60, 90,120 days after sowing and at harvesting stage. The height was

measured in centimeters from the base of plant to the apical bud till flowering and

youngest flower bud after flowering. The average height of plant was calculated and

expressed as plant height.

ii. Dry matter accumulation

For recording dry matter accumulation, the plant samples were taken from

the border rows. Five plants from border rows of each plots were taken at 30, 60,

90,120 days and at harvesting for dry matter accumulation studies. The samples

were sun dried followed by hot air oven drying at 650C till constant weight was

achieved.

3.5.1.2 Development studies

i. Days to emergence

The emergence count was recorded daily from the earmarked 1 m length in

each net plot from the date of first emergence of seedling till it was constant. The

number of days taken to emergence was worked out from the date of sowing.

33

ii. Days to 75% flowering

The plots were visited daily after the appearance of first flower. The date on

which 75% plants in the net plot had at least one open flower was recorded and

number of days taken to 75% flowering were calculated from the date of sowing.

iii. Days to 75% maturity

The stage on which plants in each plot turned golden yellow was carefully judged.

The date on which seeds attained sufficient hard stage was recorded and days taken for

75% maturity were counted from the sowing date.

3.5.1.3 Yield and yield attributes

i. Number of primary branches

Total number of primary braches were counted from five tagged plants and

averaged to get number of primary branches per plant near to harvesting of the crop.

ii. Number of secondary branches

Total number of secondary braches were counted from five tagged plants

and averaged to get number of secondary branches per plant near to harvesting of

the crop

iii. Number of siliquae per plant at harvest

All the siliquae from the five tagged plants were counted and then averaged

to get the number of siliquae per plant.

iv. Number of seeds per siliqua at harvest

Five siliquae from each of the five tagged plants were plucked at random.

Then these siliquae were threshed, seeds were cleaned, counted and averaged to get

number of seeds per siliqua.

v. 1000 seed weight (g)

Random seed samples from the produce of net plot were collected and

thousand seeds were counted, dried thoroughly and then weight was recorded.

34

vi. Seed yield (kg ha-1)

Net plot was harvested after removing two border rows from each gross plot and 30 cm each from other sides of the plot. After threshing and cleaning the produce, the seeds were dried and seed yield was expressed as kg ha-1.

vii. Straw yield (kg ha-1)

After sun drying, the weight of the total biomass harvested from the net plot was recorded. The straw yield was calculated by subtracting the seed yield from the biological yield which contained straw and seeds and expressed as kg ha-1.

viii. Harvest index Harvest index (HI) was worked out by dividing grain yield with biological yield

as per formula given below:

HI = Grain yield (kg/ha)Biological yield (kg/ha)

3.5.2 Chemical studies

3.5.2.1 Soil analysis

i. Total Nitrogen

Total nitrogen was determined by micro kjeldahl’s method as outlined by Jackson 1967.

ii. Available Nitrogen

Available nitrogen was determined by alkaline permanganate method (Subbiah and Asija 1956).

iii. Total Phosphorus

Total phosphorus was determined by the vanadomolybdo phosphoric acid yellow colour method described by Jackson 1967.

iv. Available Phosphorus

Available phosphorus was determined by Olsen’s method (Olsen et al. 1954).

v. Total Potassium

Total Potassium was determined by Aqua Regia Digestion method as described by Nieuwenhuize et al. (1991).

35

vi. Available Potassium

Available potassium was determined by Ammonium acetate extraction

method. (AOAC 1970)

vii. Total biomass carbon (µg g-1 of soil)

Total biomass carbon was determined by fumigation-extraction method (Vance

et.al. 1987).

3.5.2.2 Plant analysis

Representative samples of seed and straw from each net plot produce of the

crop were taken at the harvest of the crop, oven dried at 60oC, then ground and

stored for further analysis. The detail of chemical analysis is given below:

i. Nitrogen uptake

Processed plant samples were digested with concentrated H2SO4 using

digestion mixture and nitrogen content (%) was determined by modified Kjeldahl’s

method (Jackson 1967). The nitrogen content was multiplied with yields (kg/ha) to

get the uptake values.

ii. Sulphur uptake

The sulphur content in both grain and straw/stover of brown sarson samples were

analyzed by turbidimetric method after wet digestion with concentrated HNO3 and

HClO4 (9:4) adapted from Chesnin and Yien (1950). The uptake was calculated by

multiplying contents with respective yields.

3.5.2.3 Quality studies

i. Oil content and yield

The seed samples were oven dried at 70oC till constant weight. The oil

content was determined with the help of Soxhlet’s extraction method (A.O.A.C

1970). The oil content was expressed in per cent. Oil yield was calculated by

multiplying seed yield and oil content in the seeds.

36

ii. Protein content

The seed samples collected at harvest were used for estimation of total nitrogen

content. Total nitrogen was determined using the modified micro kjeldahl method

(A.O.A.C. 1970). The % crude protein was calculated by multiplying % nitrogen with a

constant factor of 6.25.

3.6 Economic studies

Economics of different treatments was worked out by calculating cost of cultivation, gross and net return per hectare and benefit: cost ratio.

3.6.1 Gross returns

The value of the produce and biproduce was obtained on the basis of prevailing selling prices in the university farm and expressed in Rs ha-1. The selling price of brown sarson seed and straw was Rs. 25 and Rs. 0.25 kg-1, respectively.

3.6.2 Net returns

Net returns were computed by subtracting the cost of cultivation from the gross returns.

3.6.3 Benefit cost ratio

The returns per rupee invested were calculated as follow: Net return (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio (B:C) = Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1)

3.6.4 Statistical analysis

The data obtained for different parameters were subjected to statistical

analysis as per Gomez and Gomez (1984) and were tested at 5% level of

significance to interpret the treatment differences. The ANOVA has been given in

Appendix VI

37

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results obtained from the present investigation have been presented in this

chapter through tables and figures. An attempt has been made to explain the important

findings by establishing a cause and effect relationship on the basis of observations,

available literature and evidences under the following heads:

4.1 Crop weather interaction

4.2 Effect on growth and development

4.3 Effect on yield and yield attributes

4.4 Effect on soil properties, nutrient content and uptake

4.5 Effect on quality

4.6 Economics of treatments

4.1 Crop weather interaction

The performance of any crop depends upon the interaction between genetic

characters and environmental factors. The environment plays an important role in

influencing growth, development and ultimately the yield of a crop. Among the various

environmental factors, weather parameters like ambient temperature, rainfall, sunshine

hours and relative humidity play an important role.

The weather data depicted in Fig. 3.1 and appended in Appendix I, revealed that

during the crop growing season (November 2011- April 2012), mean minimum

temperature ranged from 2.4 oC in December to 14.9 oC in April. The mean

maximum temperature during the corresponding months remained 9.8 oC and 28.4 oC. In Rabi 2011-12, a total rainfall of 320 mm was received. It indicated that

temperature during the crop cycle was favourable for better growth, development and

production of cop. Relative humidity ranged from 42.0 to 87.0% during the entire

cropping season. The overall weather conditions were favourable for growth and

development of sarson.

38

4.2 Effect on growth and development

4.2.1 Plant height

The data on average plant height (cm) of brown sarson at different time intervals

have been presented in Table 4.1 and depicted in figure 4.1. The data showed that up to

60 days after sowing biofertilizers did not play any significant role in affecting the plant

height of brown sarson. However at 90 days after sowing combined application of

Azotobacter + PSB produced significantly taller plants as compared to Azotobacter and

no-inoculation, though latter treatments remained at par with each other. At 120 days

after sowing, Azotobacter remained at par with Azotobacter + PSB, but at harvest

Azotobacter + PSB surpassed it producing significantly taller plants, mainly due to slow

release of nutrients in initial stages.

Table 4.1 Effect of different treatments on plant height (cm) of brown sarson

Treatments

30

DAS

60

DAS

90

DAS

120

DAS

At

harvest

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter 6.3 27.5 77.0 101.3 113.2

Azotobacter + PSB 6.6 28.8 83.2 104.5 117.8

No-inoculation 5.9 27.9 75.7 97.8 110.4

CD (0.05) NS NS 3.8 3.4 2.5

Fertility levels

100% RDF 6.9 28.8 81.4 104.4 118.4

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 6.2 28.2 80.0 101.0 115.1

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 7.2 29.3 81.6 103.8 116.7

Control 4.7 25.9 71.5 95.6 104.9

CD (0.05) 0.8 1.6 4.4 3.98 2.9

DAS = Days after sowing; PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

39

Fig 4.1 Effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on plant height of brown sarson

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

30 60 90 120 At harvest

Plan

t hei

ght (

cm)

Days after sowing

Azotobacter Azotobacter + PSB No-inoculation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

30 60 90 120 At harvest

Plan

t hei

ght (

cm)

Days after sowing

100% RDF FYM 5.0 t/ha + 50 % RDFVC 5.0 t/ha+ 50 % RDF Control

40

Among fertility levels (Table 4.1) the treatment effect at 30 days after sowing showed that vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF remaining at par with 100% RDF gave significantly taller plants followed by FYM 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. At stages from 60 to 120 days after sowing no significant difference among fertility levels was observed, except in control significantly smallest plants were produced. However at harvest, 100% RDF resulted in significantly taller plants remaining at par with vermicompost 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. Statistically, the vermicompost 5 t ha-1 and FYM 5 t ha-1 along with 50% NPK were at par with each other, giving similar plant height. Non significant effect during initial stages might be due to less release of plant nutrients compared to later stages of crop growth or smaller nutrient demand by smaller growing plants.

Pal et al. (2008) also found significantly highest values of plant height where complete integrated nutrient management (INM) package was applied along with 100% of recommended fertilizer, followed by treatments where the same INM package was applied along with 75 and 50 % of recommended fertilizer level.

4.2.2 Dry matter accumulation

Observational data recorded on dry matter accumulation have been presented in Table 4.2 and pattern of growth in terms of dry matter accumulation is depicted in fig 4.2 which indicated that with advancement of crop growth stages plant dry matter accumulation increased upto harvesting stage. During initial stages of 30 and 60 days after sowing, differences among biofertilizers were non significant. At 90 and 120 days after sowing and at harvest, Azotobacter + PSB resulted in significantly higher dry matter accumulation as compared to Azotobacter and no inoculation. At 90 days after sowing Azotobacter remained at par with no inoculation, but at later stages Azotobacter caused a significantly increase in the dry matter over the control.

Effect of fertility levels on dry matter accumulation tabulated in the same Table 4.2 revealed that though there was consistent increase in dry matter accumulation with the progress of growth stages, but statistical differences among compost application were non significant as these remained at par with chemical fertilizers, except only with those where no fertilizers were applied.

The increase in dry weight might be due to luxurious vegetative growth in terms

of plant height, number of leaves, leaf area, stem girth and number of branches. The

increase in dry matter has been ascribed to effects of high rate of photosynthates

translocation from vegetative parts to the reproductive parts which subsequently might

41

Fig 4.2 Effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on dry matter accumulation of

brown sarson

05

1015202530354045

30 60 90 120 At harvestDry

mat

ter

accu

mul

atio

n (g

pla

nt-1

)

Days after sowing


05

1015202530354045

30 60 90 120 At harvest

Dry

mat

ter

accu

mul

atio

n (g

pla

nt-1

)

Days after sowing

100% RDF FYM 5.0 t/ha + 50% RDF

VC 5.0 t/ha + 50% RDF Control

42

have resulted in higher dry matter accumulation. The variation in the performance of

Brassica campestris grown with different plant nutrient management practices might be

attributed to availability of different nutrients at different stages of crop growth. It was

observed that the increased availability of nutrients resulted in higher plant height and dry

matter accumulation. (Prasad 2000 and Singh and Kumar 1999).

Table 4.2 Effect of different treatments on dry matter accumulation (g plant-1) of

brown sarson

Treatments

30 DAS 60 DAS 90 DAS 120 DAS At harvest

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter 3.6 11.9 21.4 33.3 39.7

Azotobacter + PSB 3.6 13.0 24.2 34.7 41.2

No-inoculation 2.8 12.2 20.1 28.9 38.0

CD (0.05) NS NS 1.9 1.2 1.3

Fertility levels

100% RDF 3.2 12.8 23.8 33.8 41.3

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 4.0 12.9 22.1 32.8 40.1

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50%

RDF 3.7 13.5 22.9 33.2 40.3

Control 2.4 10.2 18.8 29.4 36.8

CD (0.05) 0.8 1.1 2.2 1.3 1.5

DAS = Days after sowing; PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

The normal effect of nitrogen on growth is to increase the height and vigour of the crop, increased branching of the inflorescence and total dry matter production, while P and K application directly or indirectly resulted in increase in nitrogen use efficiency (Holmes 1980). 4.2.3 Days to emergence

The data in Table 4.3 on days to emergence of plants of brown sarson indicated that both biofertilizer treatments and fertility levels did not have any significant effect on the number of days taken to emergence. In a general observation emergence was completed by 8th day after sowing.

43

Table 4.3 Effect of different treatments on days to complete emergence, 75% flowering and 75% maturity

Treatments Days to

complete emergence

(100%)

Days to 75 % flowering

Days to 75 % maturity

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter 7.8 72.9 125.8

Azotobacter + PSB 7.8 72.5 126.4

No-inoculation 7.7 72.4 126.0

CD (0.05) NS NS NS

Fertility levels

100% RDF 8.0 73.1 127.1

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 7.6 72.6 125.7

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 7.6 72.3 126.0

Control 7.9 72.4 125.6

CD (0.05) NS NS NS

PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

4.2.4 Days to 75 % flowering

A perusal of the data presented in Table 4.3 revealed that the biofertilizer

inoculation as well as different fertility levels involving organics could not statistically

influence the number of days to 75% flowering. However, numerically, application of

100% RDF delayed the 75% flowering by 1 day as compared to control. In general, crop

has taken 72 to 73 days for 75% flowering. However, application of vermicompost 5.0 t

ha-1 + 50% RDF took minimum numerical value of days to reach 75% flowering.

4.2.5 Days to 75 % maturity

A critical examination of the data presented in Table 4.3 showed that similar to

days to 75% flowering, the number of days to 75% maturity were not significantly

affected by the biofertilizer treatments. Similar trend was observed in organics and

chemical fertilizer treatments. However, numerical values were higher in 100% RDF than

other treatments. In general, crop has taken 125 to 127 days for 75% maturity.

44

4.3 Effect on yield and yield attributes

It is evident from data presented in Table 4.4 that different biofertilizers and

fertility levels involving chemical fertilizers as well as organics have significantly

influenced all recorded yield contributing characters viz. number of primary branches,

number of secondary branches, number of seeds per siliqua and number of siliquae per

plant.

Table 4.4 Effect of different treatments on yield attributes of brown sarson

Treatments

No. of primary branches per plant

No. of secondary branches per plant

No. of seeds per

siliqua

No. of siliquae (plant-1)

1000 seed

weight (g)

Biofertilizers Azotobacter 4.7 4.3 7.6 115.1 3.0

Azotobacter + PSB 6.1 4.9 8.8 132.3 3.2

No-inoculation 4.7 3.6 7.3 109.1 2.7

CD (0.05) 0.6 0.6 0.9 11.0 0.2

Fertility levels 100% RDF 5.6 4.9 8.4 130.4 3.2

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 5.4 4.5 8.3 117.8 2.9

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 5.6 4.4 8.7 124.1 3.1

Control 4.2 3.3 6.1 101.9 2.5

CD (0.05) 0.7 0.7 1.0 12.7 0.3


4.3.1 Number of primary branches

The data pertaining to effect of treatments on number of primary branches (Table

4.4) indicated that among biofertilizers, Azotobacter + PSB resulted in significantly

higher number of primary branches as compared to Azotobacter. The latter remained at

par with no inoculation showing that Azotobacter along with PSB could mobilize plant

nutrients in more efficient way.

45

Among fertility treatments vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF remaining at par

with FYM 5 t ha-1 +50% RDF and 100% RDF produced significantly higher number of

primary branches plant-1 compared to no NPK application. Significantly lowest number

of primary branches were recorded under treatment where no fertilizer or organics were

applied.

4.3.2 Number of secondary branches

The data presented in Table 4.4 on number of secondary branches plant-1 revealed

that among biofertilizer treatments, Azotobacter + PSB resulted in significantly higher

number of secondary branches but it remained at par with Azotobacter. Both biofertilizer

treatments were statistically superior to the control. No-inoculation has resulted in

significantly lowest number of secondary branches.

As far as fertility treatments are concerned, the data shown in Table 4.4 indicated

similar trend as was observed in the number of primary branches. Higher numerical

values of number of secondary branches were recorded with application of 100% RDF

but statistically it was at par with other treatments except control treatment where

significantly lower primary branches were recorded. The higher number of primary

branches so obtained in treatments gave rise to higher secondary branches.

The results on growth parameters were obtained in confirmation with the findings

of Gayathri et al. (2004). They have reported that combined application of biofertilizers,

vermicompost with inorganic fertilizers significantly increased the number of leaves, leaf

area and stem girth. The growth regulators like NAA and cytokinnins released by

biofertilizers might have resulted in breaking of apical dominance and accelerated higher

number of branches. The increased nitrogen nutrition may also have accelerated the

process of cell division and differentiation.

4.3.3 Number of seeds per siliqua

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.4 showed that among biofertilizers,

Azotobacter + PSB resulted in significantly higher number of seeds per siliqua followed

by Azotobacter alone and no-inoculation. Whereas, Azotobacter and no-inoculation

remained at par with each other in producing number of seeds per siliqua.

46

The same Table 4.4 depicting the effect of different fertility levels indicated that

significantly higher total number of seeds per siliqua were recorded with the application

of vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. However, this treatment remained statistically at

par with all the other treatments viz., FYM 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and 100% RDF under

study, except, control treatment where significantly lowest seeds per siliqua were

recorded.

4.3.4 Number of siliquae per plant

The data pertaining to number of siliquae per plant have been presented in Table

4.4. The observations indicated that seed inoculation with Azotobacter + PSB

significantly increased the number of siliquae per plant giving higher values compared to

Azotobacter alone and no inoculation. However, Azotobacter alone had no significant

advantage over no inoculation inspite of the higher numerical values.

Under fertility levels of chemical fertilizers and organics, the data have been

presented in Table 4.4. The data revealed that significantly higher number of siliquae per

plant were recorded with the application of 100% RDF. However, this treatment

remained statistically at par with vermicompost 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. The latter, further

was found to be statistically at par with FYM 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. All treatments were

found superior to control.

Similar results were also reported by Shukla et al. (2002) as they observed that

highest number of siliquae per plant, siliqua length, 1000-seed weight, number of seeds

per siliqua, seed yield per plant and seed yield ha-1 were obtained with the application of

50 and 100% of the recommended fertilizer rates + FYM (10 t ha-1) + Azotobacter.

Hence, above studies corroborated the positive effect of organics and biofertilizers in

conjugation with chemical fertilizers.

4.3.5 1000 seed weight

The data presented in Table 4.4 revealed that among biofertilizers, Azotobacter +

PSB remaining at par with Azotobacter alone resulted in significantly higher 1000 seed

weight. No inoculation treatment was statistically inferior as far as 1000 seed weight was

concerned.

47

Effect of different fertility levels has been shown in Table 4.4. The data revealed that FYM 5 t ha-1 and vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 along with 50% RDF were statistically at par with 100% RDF. Whereas, these treatments gave significantly higher 1000 seed weight over the control.

Similarly, Rao and Shaktawat (2002) also found significant increase in the branches per plant, siliquae per plant, 1000-seed weight and seed yield of Indian mustard with organic manure. Similarly, effect of organic fertilizer on yield of winter oilseed were studied by Lenart et al. (1996) and observed that seed and branch numbers and 1000-seed weight were highest with the combination of recommended NPK + farm yard manure.

The interaction effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on yield attributes was found to be non significant and presented in Appendix IV.

Table 4.5 Effect of different treatments on seed, straw yield (kg ha-1) and harvest index of brown sarson

Treatments Seed yield (kg ha-1)

Straw yield (kg ha-1) Harvest index

Biofertilizers Azotobacter 827.3 4195.6 0.16 Azotobacter + PSB 995.1 4586.2 0.16 No-inoculation 797.8 3364.3 0.19 CD (0.05) 102.5 320.3 NS Fertility levels 100% RDF 1083.4 5116.0 0.17 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 938.4 4119.0 0.19 Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 1031.3 4571.6 0.19 Control 440.5 2388.1 0.16 CD (0.05) 118.4 369.9 NS PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

4.3.6 Seed yield

The data on seed yield as influenced by biofertilizers inoculation and different

fertility levels through chemical fertilizers and organics have been presented in the Table

4.5 and depicted in Fig 4.3. A perusal of above data showed that inoculation with

biofertilizers showed the positive influence on the seed yield of brown sarson.

Inoculation of seeds with Azotobacter though increased the seed yield of brown sarson

over no inoculation, but the differences were not statistically significant in the study.

48

However, when Azotobacter was inoculated along with PSB to the seeds of brown sarson

the seed yield was significantly increased over the Azotobacter alone as well as where no

inoculation was done. The increase in seed yield to the tune of 3.7% was observed with

the application of Azotobacter alone over the treatment receiving no biofertilizer. Since

there was an increase in seed yield of brown sarson with Azotobacter alone but the

further increase in the seed yield was made significant with the synergetic effect of

Azotobacter and Phosphate solubilizing bacteria recording an increase to the tune of

24.7% over the no inoculation, thus registering the significant differences between the

treatments. Further, in comparison to inoculation with Azotobacter alone, the combined

application of Azotobacter + PSB made an increase to the tune of 20.3% over the

application of Azotobacter alone. The positive influence of increasing the seed yield of

brown sarson with the inoculation of seeds with biofertilizers was the result of

significantly higher yield contributing characters under these treatments. Hence, the

significantly higher value of yield contributing characters manifested these positive effect

on the seed yield of brown sarson, thereby recording higher yield under biofertilizer

treatments.

Narula et al. (1993) observed that the seed treatment with Azotobacter @ 10 g kg-

1 seed before sowing in addition to rest of the supplementary ingredients further increased

the seed yield. The increase might be attributed to fixation of atmospheric nitrogen

production of biologically active compounds like organic siderophores which regulate the

availability of nutrients to the crop.

The observations on seed yield of sarson as varied by different fertility levels

have been presented in Table 4.5. Application of recommended dose of NPK (100%

RDF) resulted in significantly higher seed yield of sarson. However, when 100% NPK

was reduced to 50% NPK and in addition to it vermicompost 5 t ha-1 was applied, the

seed yield obtained was statistically at par with 100% RDF. However, curtailing 50%

NPK and adding FYM 5.0 t ha-1 could not match the yield statistically with 100% RDF.

Whereas, treatment differences between FYM 5 t ha-1 and vermicompost 5 t ha-1 along

with 50% NPK were found to be non significant. But all the treatments were significantly

superior to the control treatment where no fertilizer or organics were applied. Hence, it

was observed that application of 100% RDF registered an increase of 146% in the seed

yield over the control. Similarly by curtailing 50% of NPK but adding vermicompost

49

Fig 4.3 Effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on seed and straw yield (kg ha-1) of

brown sarson

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000


kg h

a-1

Seed yield Straw yield

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

100% RDF FYM 5.0 t/ha +50% RDF

VC 5.0 t/ha + 50%RDF

Control

kg h

a-1

Seed yield Straw yield

50

5 t ha-1 registered an increase of yield to the tune of 134% over the control indicating the

advantage of application of vermicompost. However, application of FYM 5.0 t ha-1 in

replacement of vermicompost enhanced the seed yield up to 113% over the control. The

positive influences as recorded in yield contributing characters under these treatments

were manifested in the seed yield of sarson.

4.3.7 Straw yield

The data pertaining to straw yield as affected by biofertilizers inoculation and

different fertility levels have been presented in the Table 4.5. Significantly higher straw

yield was observed with Azotobacter + PSB. It was followed by the treatment of

Azotobacter alone. Under control treatment significantly lowest straw yield was recorded.

The observations on straw yield as affected by different fertility levels as depicted in

Table 4.5 revealed that almost similar trend for straw yield was observed as for seed

yield. Significantly highest straw yield was recorded under 100% RDF followed by

vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF.

The interaction effect of biofertilizers and fertility levels on seed and straw yield

was found to be non significant and presented in Appendix V.

4.3.8 Harvest index

The data regarding the effect of biofertilizers and different fertility levels on

harvest index have been summarized in the Table 4.5. It was apparent from data that the

biofertilizers and fertility levels could not exhibit any significant effect on harvest index

of the sarson crop under study.

4.4 Effect on soil properties, nutrient content and uptake

4.4.1 Soil studies

The data recorded on available nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium in soil as

influenced by the application of biofertilizers and different fertility levels after the harvest

of crop have been summarized in the Table 4.6.

4.4.1.1 Available nitrogen

The data given in Table 4.6 indicated that the available nitrogen in soil was

significantly influenced by the treatments where inoculation was done using biofertilizers

over un-inoculated treatment. Inoculation with Azotobacter + PSB resulted in

significantly higher nitrogen content in soil after harvest but it remained at par with

51

Azotobacter alone. It might be due to the fact that the biofertilizer resulted in higher

nitrogen fixation and hence, increased the nitrogen content of soil (Kachroo and Razdan

2006).

The same data presented in Table 4.6 indicated that vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF significantly increased the available nitrogen in soil. However, it was found at

par with 100% RDF. Whereas, FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF followed these treatments but

remained significantly superior to control.

Table 4.6 Effect of different treatments on available N, P and K (kg ha-1)

Treatments Available N Available P Available K

Biofertilizers Azotobacter 263.7 33.3 209.4

Azotobacter + PSB 267.8 37.0 212.5

No-inoculation 234.8 32.6 202.0

CD (0.05) 11.5 2.5 NS

Fertility levels 100% RDF 268.2 36.9 223.0

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 245.8 33.6 207.6


Control 230.1 29.7 186.8

CD (0.05) 13.3 2.9 11.0

PSB = Phosphate solubilizing bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm yard manure

In the vermicompost production, the complex organic residues are biodegraded by

symbiotic association between earthworms and microbes. In the process of

vermicomposting, it helps to increase the density of microbes and also provides the vital

macro nutrients viz., N, P, K, Ca, Mg and micro nutrients such as Fe, Mo, Zn, Cu etc.

Apart from this, it also contains plant growth promoting substances like NAA,

cytokinins, gibberllines etc. as reported by Giraddi (1993).

52

4.4.1.2 Available phosphorous

The data on available phosphorus have been presented in Table 4.6. The

observations revealed that the role of Azotobacter in available phosphorus build up in soil

was not much significant. However, Azotobacter + PSB resulted in significant increase of

available phosphorus in soil compared to Azotobacter alone and control. Among

chemical fertilizers as well as organics similar trend was observed as obtained in

available nitrogen. Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF significantly enhanced the

available phosphorus in soil over FYM 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and control.

4.4.1.3 Available potassium

A close examination of data presented in Table 4.6 revealed that the available

potassium in soil was not significantly influenced by the different biofertilizers.

However, under different fertility levels, it was observed that application of 100% RDF

significantly resulted in the build up of available potassium in soil remaining at par with

application of vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. The latter also remained at par with

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF treatments. Control treatment lagged far behind in potassium

build up.

4.4.1.4 Total nitrogen

The data presented in Table 4.7 revealed that the total nitrogen in soil was not

significantly influenced by the treatments using biofertilizers. However, combined

application of Azotobacter + PSB gave higher numerical values than Azotobacter alone.

Among fertility levels, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF significantly contributed

higher total nitrogen in soil.

4.4.1.5 Total phosphorous

A perusal of the data presented in Table 4.7 indicated that the total phosphorus in

soil was significantly higher in the plots receiving Azotobacter + PSB. Azotobacter alone

could not influence the phosphorus levels in soil in comparison to no-inoculation. Among

the fertility levels, application of 100% RDF and vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF

were found at par in getting significantly higher values of total phosphorus in soil over

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and control.

53

4.4.1.6 Total potassium

An examination of data presented in Table 4.7 on total potassium in soil revealed

that the differences obtained from different biofertilizers treatments were not significant.

As far as fertility levels were concerned, the application of 100% RDF significantly gave

higher values of total potassium in soil over FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, vermicompost

5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and control.

Rundala et al. (2012) also observed improvement in available N, P, organic

carbon and total N of surface soil due to seed inoculation with Azotobacter + PSB.

Babar and Dongale (2011) also reported that soil fertility parameters viz., bulk

density, organic carbon content, microbial count and content of available nutrients (NPK)

in soil increased significantly with the application of organic, inorganic and organic +

inorganic sources of nutrient compared to control.

Table 4.7 Effect of different treatments on total N, P, K (kg ha-1) and biomass carbon (µg g-1)

Treatments Total N Total P Total K Biomass carbon

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter 768.7 225.7 732.9 102.2

Azotobacter + PSB 794.7 236.2 709.3 108.6

No-inoculation 760.6 216.3 698.4 95.0

CD (0.05) NS 9.4 NS 5.5

Fertility levels

100% RDF 804.9 263.1 781.6 101.4

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 749.2 236.1 701.3 103.2

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 865.7 254.1 715.3 107.6

Control 678.8 160.1 569.7 95.4

CD (0.05) 32.7 10.9 58.9 6.4 PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

54

4.4.1.7 Biomass carbon It is evident from the data presented in Table 4.7 that among biofertilizers,

Azotobacter + PSB resulted in significantly higher biomass carbon as compared to

Azotobacter alone and control. In case of different fertility levels, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1

+ 50% RDF, remaining at par with 100% RDF resulted in significantly higher biomass

carbon. However, 100% RDF and FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF remained at par with each

other. Significantly lowest biomass carbon was recorded in control treatment.

4.4.2 Plant studies 4.4.2.1 Nitrogen uptake

It was evident from the data given in Table 4.8 that the seed inoculation with

Azotobacter + PSB recorded significantly higher nitrogen uptake in seed and straw

followed by the Azotobacter alone in case of N uptake in both seed and straw of brown

sarson. Similarly, total N uptake was significantly higher under the treatment receiving

Azotobacter + PSB than other treatments under study. Significant lowest uptake of N

was observed in treatment where no biofertilizer was applied.

Table 4.8 Effect of different treatments on N uptake (kg ha-1)

Treatments Uptake in Seed

Uptake in Straw

Total uptake

Biofertilizers Azotobacter 26.4 15.7 42.1

Azotobacter + PSB 31.9 17.6 49.5 No-inoculation 24.8 12.2 37.0

CD (0.05) 3.2 1.3 3.6

Fertility levels 100% RDF 35.6 20.9 56.5 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 29.4 14.8 44.2

Vermicompost 5.0 `t ha-1 + 50% RDF 33.2 16.9 50.1 Control 12.7 7.9 20.6

CD (0.05) 3.7 1.5 4.2 PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

55

Observations on effect of chemical fertilizers and organics showed that N uptake

by seed was significantly higher in both treatments i.e. 100% RDF and vermicompost

5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, as both remained statistically at par with each other. FYM 5.0 t

ha-1 + 50% RDF followed these treatments. Control treatment recorded lowest uptake of

N in seeds. Almost similar trend was observed in case of N uptake in straw. However in

case of total uptake of N, 100% RDF was found statistically superior to all other

treatments.

4.4.2.2 Sulphur uptake

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.9 revealed that in treatment inoculated

with Azotobacter + PSB recorded significantly higher sulphur uptake in seeds as well as

straw over the Azotobacter alone and un-inoculated treatment. Similarly, in total uptake

the same treatment was found superior followed by Azotobacter alone. However, further

it was observed that Azotobacter alone was statistically superior to no inoculation

treatment.

Table 4.9 Effect of different treatments on S uptake (kg ha-1)

Treatments Uptake in seed Uptake in straw

Total uptake

Biofertilizers Azotobacter 8.5 10.2 18.7 Azotobacter + PSB 10.9 11.9 22.8

No-inoculation 8.0 8.2 16.2 CD (0.05) 1.0 1.2 1.7

Fertility levels 100% RDF 11.9 12.9 24.8

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 9.7 10.4 20.1


Control 4.2 5.5 9.7

CD (0.05) 1.2 1.4 2.0


56

Among different fertility treatments, 100% RDF recorded significantly higher

sulphur uptake in seeds, straw and total uptake. In case of sulphur uptake in seeds, 100%

RDF remained at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. But this relationship

could not be maintained for straw and total sulphur uptake, where vermicompost 5.0 t

ha-1 + 50% RDF was second highest being followed by FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and

control.

4.5 Effect on quality

4.5.1 Protein content (%) The data pertaining to the effect of biofertilizers and different fertility levels on

protein content have been summarized in the Table 4.10. It was apparent from data that

among biofertilizers, Azotobacter + PSB being at par with Azotobacter alone resulted in

significantly higher protein content of sarson as compared to no inoculation. Under

different fertility treatments, 100% RDF gave significantly higher protein content, but

remained at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. The results are in conformity

with Singh et al. (2010).

Rundala et al. (2012) also reported increased protein contents in seed and oil yield

of sarson over control with dual inoculation of Azotobacter + PSB.

Table 4.10 Effect of different treatments on protein content, oil content and oil yield

Treatments Protein content (%)

Oil content (%)

Oil yield (q ha-1)

Biofertilizers Azotobacter 19.7 38.4 3.2 Azotobacter + PSB 19.8 41.1 4.2 No-inoculation 19.1 37.5 3.1 CD (0.05) 0.2 0.9 0.4 Fertility levels 100% RDF 20.6 41.3 4.5 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 19.5 38.8 3.7 Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 20.1 40.1 4.2

Control 18.0 35.7 1.6 CD (0.05) 0.2 1.0 0.5 PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard Manure

57

4.5.2 Oil content (%) and oil yield (q ha-1) The data pertaining to the effect of treatments on oil content and oil yield of

brown sarson have been presented in Table 4.10. The data exhibited that among

biofertilizers, significantly higher oil content and oil yield was obtained with Azotobacter

+ PSB as compared to Azotobacter alone and no inoculation. Though latter treatments

were at par with each other. In different fertility levels, significantly higher oil content

was obtained under 100% RDF as compared to other fertility levels. Hence, significantly

higher oil yield was obtained under 100% RDF but it remained at par with vermicompost

5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. The latter treatments also remained at par with FYM 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF. Lowest oil yield was recorded under control treatment.

This may be due to the fact that more availability of nitrogen increased the

proportion of protein substances in the seed. These results are in close conformity with

the findings of Prasad (2000), Singh and Kumar (1999); Tomar et al. (1996); Tomer et al.

(1992) and Zho et al. (1991).

4.6 Economics of treatments

The economics of treatments in terms of cost of cultivation, gross returns, net

returns and B:C ratio has been presented in Table 4.11. The cost of cultivation of

different treatments has been appended in appendices III.

4.6.1 Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1)

The data pertaining to cost of cultivation presented in Table 4.11 indicated that

maximum expenditure of Rs. 16314 ha-1 was incurred on Azotobacter + PSB followed by

Azotobacter alone and no inoculation. Under the different fertility treatments, maximum

cost of cultivation was involved in Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF (Rs. 34524 ha-1)

which was followed by FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF (Rs. 11524 ha-1) and 100% RDF (Rs.

10478 ha-1). Control treatment had lowest cost of cultivation (Rs. 8570 ha-1).

4.6.2 Gross returns (Rs. ha-1)

A perusal of the data depicted in Table 4.11 revealed that inoculation treatment of

Azotobacter + PSB had fetched higher gross returns of Rs. 26024 ha-1 as compared to

Azotobacter alone (Rs. 21731 ha-1) and no inoculation (Rs. 20786 ha-1). Among different

58

fertility levels, 100% RDF recorded maximum gross returns (Rs. 28364 ha-1) followed by

vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF (Rs. 26924 ha-1), FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF

(Rs.24364 ha-1) and control (Rs. 11609 ha-1).

4.6.3 Net returns (Rs. ha-1)

A cursory glance at the data in Table 4.11 revealed that treatment having

Azotobacter + PSB recorded maximum net returns of Rs. 9710 ha-1 followed by

Azotobacter alone (Rs. 5457 ha-1) and no inoculation (Rs. 4552 ha-1). Among different

fertility levels, 100% RDF treatment recorded higher net returns of Rs. 17886 ha-1 as

compared to FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF (Rs. 12966 ha-1). However, vermicompost 5.0 t

ha-1 + 50% RDF gave net returns in minus (Rs.-7599 ha-1) due to its higher purchase

prices which escalated the cost of cultivation.

Table 4.11 Cost of cultivation, gross returns, net returns and B: C ratio as influenced by different treatments

Treatments Cost of

cultivation (Rs. ha-1)

Gross return

(Rs. ha-1)

Net return

(Rs. ha-1) B:C ratio

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter 16274 21731 5457 0.4

Azotobacter + PSB 16314 26024 9710 0.6

No-inoculation 16234 20786 4552 0.3

Fertility levels

100% RDF 10478 28364 17886 1.7

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 11524 24490 12966 1.1

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 34524 26924 -7599 -0.2

Control 8570 11609 3039 0.4

CD (0.05) PSB = Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria; RDF = Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM = Farm Yard

Manure

59

4.6.4 B:C Ratio

A perusal of the Table 4.11 showing the impact of biofertilizers on B:C ratio

revealed that Azotobacter + PSB resulted in getting maximum B:C ratio (0.6) over

Azotobacter alone (0.4) and no inoculation (0.3). Among different fertility levels, 100%

RDF treatment recorded maximum B:C ratio in terms of net returns per rupee invested

(1.7) over FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF (1.1). However, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50%

RDF could record B:C ratio of -0.2 because of higher cost of cultivation.

Babar and Dongale (2011) also reported that the economic benefits of mustard

crop cannot be increased with the application of organic manure alone however, its

integration with chemical fertilizers was helpful to increase the B:C ratio over that of B:C

ratio of only organic manure treatment.

60

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The field experiment entitled, “Response of brown sarson (Brassica campestris

var. brown sarson) to integrated nutrient management in mid hill conditions of Himachal

Pradesh” was conducted during Rabi season of 2011-12 at research farm of Department

of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management, CSK HPKV, Palampur with the

following objectives:

1. Effect of different nutrient management practices on growth, yield and

profitability of brown sarson.

2. Effect of different nutrient management practices on nutrient removal vis.à.vis on

soil status.

The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with three

replications. Twelve treatment combinations consisted of three biofertilizers viz.,

Azotobacter, Azotobacter + PSB (Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria) and no biofertilizer

and four fertility levels viz., 100% RDF, FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, vermicompost 5.0 t

ha-1 + 50% RDF and control (No NPK). The meteorological data during the crop season

have been illustrated graphically in Fig. 3.1. The salient findings emerged from the field

as well as laboratory studies have been summarized in this chapter as under:

Significantly highest plant height was recorded with the application of

Azotobacter + PSB over Azotobacter alone and no inoculation at 90, 120 DAS and at

harvest. Among different fertility levels, application of 100% RDF being statistically at

par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF produced significantly taller plants as

compared to other treatments.

Inoculation of seeds with Azotobacter + PSB produced periodically significantly

higher dry matter accumulation over Azotobacter and no inoculation. Whereas, in case of

fertility levels, 100% RDF remaining at par with other treatments expect control

produced significantly higher dry matter accumulation g plant-1 at different stages of crop

growth.

61

Days to emergence, days to 75% flowering and 75% maturity were not

statistically affected by different treatments of biofertilizers and fertility levels.

Treatment receiving the biofertilizer significantly influenced all yield contributing

characters viz. number of primary branches, number of secondary branches, number of

seeds per siliqua and 1000 seed weight. Azotobacter + PSB was found superior to

Azotobacter alone and no inoculation. Among different fertility treatments, 100% RDF

recorded significantly more number of primary and secondary branches, number of seeds

per siliqua, number of siliquae per plant and 1000 seed weight over control but, it was

found statistically at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and FYM 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF.

The treatment receiving Azotobacter + PSB significantly increased the seed and

straw yields followed by Azotobacter and no inoculation. Effect of fertility levels on seed

and straw yields showed that 100% RDF resulted in significantly higher seed and straw

yield as compared to other fertility levels and control treatment. However, 100 % RDF

treatment remained at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF. The application of

biofertilizers and fertility levels could not exhibit any significant effect on harvest index.

Status of available N, P and K in soil was statistically influenced by the

application of biofertilizers and fertility levels. In biofertilizers inoculation with

Azotobacter + PSB significantly increased the levels of available N and P in soil.

Available N was found to be at par with Azotobacter alone and its combination with PSB.

However, for available P, Azotobacter alone could not compete with Azotobacter + PSB.

Whereas, in case of available K, in soil both biofertilizers had non significant effects.

Further, available N, P and K were significantly higher in vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50%

remaining at par with 100% RDF.

As regards the total N and K, biofertilizers had non -significant effects. However,

total P in soil was significantly influenced by the application of biofertilizers.

Azotobacter + PSB recorded significantly higher total P in soil over Azotobacter and no

inoculation treatments. In fertility levels, total N was significantly higher under

vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF followed by 100% RDF but remained at par with

each other in case of total P. However, values of total K were significantly higher under

62

100 % RDF. Biomass carbon was significantly higher in Azotobacter + PSB followed by

Azotobacter alone. Under fertility levels, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% recorded

significantly higher biomass carbon over control but remaining at par with 100% RDF

and FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF.

Treatment of inoculating with Azotobacter + PSB recorded significantly higher

nitrogen uptake in seeds and straw over the Azotobacter alone and un-inoculated

treatments. The total nitrogen uptake was also significantly higher under the Azotobacter

+ PSB being followed by Azotobacter alone treatment.

Among different fertility levels, 100% RDF recorded significantly higher nitrogen

uptake in seeds and straw remaining at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50 % RDF.

However, FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF was at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50%

RDF in case of N uptake in straw. Total nitrogen uptake by 100% RDF was significantly

higher than FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF and control.

For the uptake of sulphur, inoculation with Azotobacter + PSB recorded

significantly higher uptake in seeds and straw being followed by Azotobacter alone and

un-inoculated treatment recorded lowest uptake. Total sulphur uptake was also

significantly higher under Azotobacter + PSB over Azotobacter alone and un-inoculated

treatment.

Under the effect of different fertility levels on sulphur uptake, 100% RDF

recorded significantly higher uptake in seeds and straw compared to FYM 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF and control, but vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF remained at par with

100% RDF for sulphur uptake in seed. Similarly, total sulphur uptake by 100% RDF was

significantly higher as compared to FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1

+ 50% RDF and control.

Protein content was significantly increased with application of Azotobacter +

PSB. However, it remained at par with Azotobacter alone. In different fertility levels,

100% RDF and vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF being at par with each other showed

significantly higher protein content as compared to other fertility levels.

Similarly, oil content and oil yields were significantly higher in Azotobacter +

PSB as compared to Azotobacter alone and no inoculation. In different fertility levels,

63

significantly higher oil content and yield were obtained in 100% RDF. However, it

remained at par with vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF in case of oil yield of brown

sarson.

As far as economics is concerned, the treatment of inoculation with Azotobacter +

PSB recorded the higher gross return, net returns and B:C ratio (net returns per rupee

invested) as compared to the Azotobacter application and no inoculation. Among the

comparison of different fertility levels, higher cost of cultivation was recorded in

vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF, whereas, higher gross returns, net return and net

returns per rupee invested were obtained in 100% RDF followed by FYM 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF.

Conclusion

Ø On the basis of results obtained, it was concluded that brown sarson (B.

campestris var. brown sarson) crop inoculated with Azotobacter + PSB gave

significantly higher seed and oil yields. Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50%

recommended fertilizer NPK remaining at par with 100% NPK dose showed that

50% dose of recommended NPK could be curtailed in brown sarson.

Ø Higher net returns and B:C ratio were obtained from treatment of Azotobacter +

PSB. Application of 100% recommended NPK gave higher gross returns, net

returns and B:C ratio, because of the higher purchase cost of vermicompost.

Ø Available status of NPK in soil was enhanced with the application of

Azotobacter + PSB. Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% of recommended fertilizers

significantly enhanced available N, P and K levels in soil.

Ø Nitrogen and Sulphur uptake was found higher in the treatment where seeds

were inoculated with Azotobacter + PSB. Application of recommended fertilizer

100% RDF made higher N and S uptake followed by vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF

64

LITERATURE CITED

Abraham T and Lal RB. 2003. Strategies for INM technology in sustainable edapho-

cultivar management for a legume based (soybean-mustard-fodder cowpea) cropping

system for the inceptisols in the NEPZ. Crop research 26(1): 33-41

Ahmad A and Abdin MZ. 2000. Interactive effect of sulphur and nitrogen on the oil and

protein concentrations and on the fatty acid profiles of oil in the seeds of rapeseed

(Brassica campestris L.) and mustard (Brassica juncea L. Czern. and Coss.). Journal of

Agronomy and Crop Science 185(1): 49-54

AICRP (Rapeseed-mustard). 2010. Annual Progress Report. Directorate of Rapeseed-

Mustard Research, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, India.

Anonymous 1999. Package of practices and contingency plan for enhancing production

of rapeseed and mustard. National Research Centre on Rapeseed-Mustard, Bharatpur,

Rajasthan. p 11-13

Anonymous. 2004. Health and Nutrition. Vol. 15: p 3

Anonymous. 2010. Statistical Outline of Himachal Pradesh, Directorate of Economics

and Statistics, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla

Antil RS and Narwal RP. 2007. Integrated nutrient management for sustainable soil

health and crop productivity. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 3(9): 111-121

AOAC. 1970. Methods of analysis. Association of official agricultural chemists,

Washington DC

Azami R, Mousa TG and Rahim DT. 2008. Influence of vermicompost on soil chemical

and physical properties in tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum) field. African Journal of

Biotechnology 7 (14): 2397-2401

Babar S and Dongale JH. 2011. Soil fertility status as influenced by integrated nutrient

management in mustard-cowpea-rice cropping sequence in lateritic soils of Konkan.

Asian Journal of Soil Science 6(1): 33-38

65

Banerjee A, Datta JK, Mondal NK and Chanda T. 2011. Influence of integrated nutrient

management on soil properties of old alluvial soil under mustard cropping system.

Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 42(20): 2473-2492

Basnet KB. 2005. Effect of different combinations of nutrient sources and weeding

practice on the physiological characters of rapeseed in humid subtropical condition of

Chitwan. Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science 26: 51-55

Basumatary A and Talukdar. 2007. Integrated effect of sulphur and farmyard manure on

yield and mineral nutrition of crops in rapeseed (Brassica napus)-rice (Oryza sativa)

sequence. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 77(12): 797-800

Bhardwaj V and Omanwar PK. 1994. Long-term effects of continuous rotational

cropping and fertilization on crop yields and soil properties-II. Effects on EC, pH,

organic matter and available nutrients of soil. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil

Science 42(3): 387-392

Bhat MA, Singh R and Dash D. 2005. Effect of integrated nutrient management on

uptake and use efficiency of nitrogen and sulphur in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.)

on an inceptisol. Crop Research 30(1): 23-25

Bury M. 1996. Effect of application of manure and vermicompost on yield of winter

rapeseed. Zeszyty Naukowe Akademii Roliniczej-W-Szczecinie Rolnictwo 62: 43-48

Chesnin, L. and C. H. Yien 1950. Turbidimetric determination of available sulphate. Soil

Science Society America Proceedings 15: 149-151

Chauhan DR, Paroda S and Singh DP. 1995. Effect of biofertilizers, gypsum and nitrogen

on growth and yield of raya (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of Agronomy 40(4): 639-

642

Chauhan DR, Shashi P and Ram M. 1996. Response of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea)

to biofertilizers, sulphur and nitrogen fertilization. Indian Journal of Agronomy 41(4):

620-623

Chauhan DR, Shashi P, Kataria OP and Singh KP. 1995. Response of Indian mustard

(Brassica juncea) to biofertilizers and nitrogen. Indian Journal of Agronomy 40(1): 86-90

66

Choudhary AK, Negi PS, Badiyala D and Awasthi CP. 2002. Effect of fertility levels on

quality of Brassica species under mid-hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh. Indian

Journal of Agricultural Biochemistry 14(1/2): 51-53

Datta JK, Banerjee A, Saha Sikdar M, Gupta S and Mondal NK. 2009. Impact of

combined exposure of chemical, fertilizer, bio-fertilizer and compost on growth,

physiology and productivity of Brassica campestries in old alluvial soil. Journal of

Environmental Biology 30(5): 797-800

Dinesh S, Bohra JS and Shukla DN. 2006. Effect of N, P and S on growth attributes and

nutrients uptake by Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Crop Research 31(1): 52-55

Dixit SP. 1997. Effect of nitrogen and farmyard manure on productivity of cabbage in a

dry temperate high hill zone of Himachal Pradesh. Annals of Agricultural Research

18(2): 258-261

Drechel P and Reck B. 1997. Composted shrub-prunings and other organic manures for

small holding farming systems in southern Rwanda. Agroforestry Systems 39: 1-12

Ganai BA. 1983. Fertility management studies in rice-wheat rotation. Ph.D. thesis,

Department of Agronomy, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur

Gaur AC. 1990. Phosphorous solubilizing microorganisms as biofertilizers. Omega

Scientific Publishers, New Delhi, p 63-90

Gayathri HN, Jayaprasad KV and Narayanaswamy P. 2004. Response of biofertilizers

and their combined application with different levels of inorganic fertilizers in statice

(Limonium caspia). Journal of Ornamental Horticulture 7 (1): 70-74

Giraddi RS, Babalad HB and Chandargi DM. 2006. Vermicompost technology. Technical

Bulletin, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad and DBT, New Delhi, P 1-6

Giraddi RS 2001. Vermi technology (in Kannada), CAPART, GOI & University of

Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, p 1-60

Giraddi RA. 1993. Vermiculture and role in agriculture. In : Course on the Officers of the

State Department of Agriculture, Karnataka, by the Department of Agricultural

Microbiology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad P 50-54

67

Gudadhe NN, Mankar PS, Khalwe VS and Dongarkar KP. 2005. Effect of bio-fertilizers

on growth and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Journal of Soils and Crops 15(1):

160-162

Hassan AM and Malhi SS. 2011. Seed yield and yield components response of rape (O.

napus) versus mustard (B. juncea) to sulfur and potassium fertilizer application in North

West Pakistan. Journal of Plant Nutrition 34(8): 1164-1174

Hegde DM, Dwivedi BS and Sudhakara Babu SNS. 1999. Biofertilizer for cereal

production in India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 69(2): 73-83

Hegde DM and Sudhakara Babu SNS. 2004. Balanced fertilization for nutritional quality

in oilseeds. Fertilizer News 49(4): 57-62 & 65-66

Hegde DM and Sudhakara Babu SNS. 2009. Declining factor productivity and improving

nutrient-use efficiency in oilseeds. Indian Journal of Agronomy 54(1): 1-8

Holmes MRJ. 1980. Nutrition of the oilseed rape crop. Applied Science Publishers Ltd.

London

Hossain MN, Hossain MM and Yesmin S. 2012. Effect of nitrogen and boron on

nutrients and protein content in seeds of mustard. International Journal of Sustainable

Agricultural Technology 8(10): 1-5

Huang J, Zhen W, Shirong G and Shijun L. 2007. Effect of types and applying amount of

solid fertilizers on growth, quality and yield of Brassica campestris. Chinese Journal of

Eco Agriculture 15(1): 45-48

Jackson ML. 1967. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Ltd. New Delhi. p 498

Jat RS, Khangarot SS and Rathore SS. 2000. Effect of different fertility levels on growth

and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Annals of Agricultural Research 21(3): 421-

423

Kabeeranthuma S, Kumar MCR, Nair GM and Nair PG. 1993. Effect of continuous

cropping of cassava with organics and inorganics on secondary and micronutrient

element status of Ultisol. Indian Journal of Soil Science 41(6): 713-716

68

Kachroo D and Razdan R. 2006. Growth, nutrient uptake and yield of wheat (Triticum

aestivum) as influenced by biofertilizers and nitrogen. Indian Journal of Agronomy.

51(1): 37-39

Kale RD, Bano K, Sunitha N and Ganghadhar HS. 1994. Adhoc scheme on promotion of

vermicomposting for production of organic fertilizer. Sponsored by ICAR, New Delhi

Cons. Technical Rep., UAS, Bangalore p 73

Kashved SM, Raskar BS and Tamboli BD. 2010. Effect of integrated nitrogen

management and irrigation regimes on productivity of mustard (Brassica juncea L.).

Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities 35(3): 349-353

Khanda CM, Mandal BK and Garnayak LM. 2005. Effect of integrated nutrient

management on nutrient uptake and yield of component crops in rice (Oryza sativa)

based cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agronomy 50(1): 1-5

Krishnamurthy J, Kachapur MD and Chittapur RB. 1995. Integrated nutrient

management in sorghum production. In: Abstract of Seminar on Conservation of Natural

Resources for Stainable Production November 16-17 1995, UAS, Dharwad. P 33

Kumar A, Thakur KS and Manuja S. 2009. Response of Ethiopian mustard (Brassica

carinata) to nitrogen and spacing under rainfed conditions. Himachal Journal of

Agricultural Research 35 (1): 27-30

Kumar A, Singh B, Yadav YP and Dhankhar OP. 2001. Performance of four rowed

Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) mutant under different levels of nitrogen and

phosphorus. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 71(6): 375-377

Kumar A and Yadav DS. 1995. Use of organic manure and fertilizer in rice (Oryza

sativa)-wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system for sustainability. Indian Journal of

Agricultural Sciences 65(10): 703-707

Kumar S, Sharma R and Dwivedi VK. 2006. Effect of organic manure based on distillery

compost with and without FYM on yield and yield attributing characters of Indian

mustard (Brassica juncea L.) Journal of Living World 13(1): 6-9

69

Kumar S, Verma SK, Singh TK and Singh S. 2011. Effect of nitrogen and sulphur on

growth, yield and nutrient uptake by Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) under rainfed

conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 81(2): 135-138

Kumar S, Singh RK and Solanki NS. 2004. Economics and productivity of two crop

rotations and their integrated nutrient management of irrigated areas in South-Western

Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Agronomy 49(4): 237-240

Kumar V and Singh KP. 2001. Enriching vermicompost by nitrogen fixing and phosphate

solubilizing bacteria. Bioresource Technology 76 (2001): 173-175

Kumar V, Ghosh BC and Bhat R. 2000. Complementary effect of crop wastes and

inorganic fertilizers on yield, nutrient uptake and residual fertility in mustard (Brassica

juncea)-rice (Oryza sativa) cropping sequence. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

70(2): 69-72

Laura M and Stanislava M. 2010. The influence of various organic fertilizers and catch

crops on the balance of biogenic elements in agroecosystem. Zeindirbyste-Agriculture 97

(2): 41-52

Lenart S, Suwara I and Gawronska KA. 1996. Effect of organic fertilizer application on

yield of winter oilseed rape. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych Seria-A, Produkcja Roslinna

111(3-4): 79-89

Mahala HL, Shaktawat MS and Shivran RK. 2006. Direct and residual effects of sources

and levels of phosphorus and farm yard manure in maize (Zea mays)-mustard (Brassica

juncea) cropping sequence. Indian Journal of Agronomy 51(1): 10-13

Mandal KG and Sinha AC. 2002. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth,

yield, oil content and nutrient uptake of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) in foothill soils

of Eastern India. Indian Journal of Agronomy 47(1): 109-113

Mandal KG and Sinha AC. 2004. Nutrient management effects on light interception,

photosynthesis, growth, dry-matter production and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica

juncea). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 190(2): 119-129

70

Mankotia BS and Sharma HL. 1998. Response of gobhi sarson (Brassica napus subsp.

oleifera var. annua) + toria (B. campestris var. toria) to fertilizer and manure and their

residual effect on maize (Zea mays). Indian Journal of Agronomy 43(4): 596-600

Meena DS, Tetarwal JP and Ram B. 2013. Effect of chemical and bio-fertilizers on

productivity, profitability and quality of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) in Vertisols.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 58(1): 96-99

Nagdive SJ, Bhalerao PD, Dongarwar UR and Goud VV. 2007. Effect of irrigation and

nutrient management on yield, quality and uptake of nutrients by mustard. Journal of

Soils and Crops 17(1): 128-132

Nanwal RK,Thakral SK and Kumar R. 2000. Response of Indian mustard (Brassica

juncea) cultivars to nitrogen and Azotobacter under conserved moisture conditions.

Annals of Biology 16(1): 85-86

Narula N, Gupta PP, Kumar PR and Lakshminarayana K. 1993. Field response of Indian

mustard Brassica juncea to inoculation of soil isolates and analogue resistant mutants of

Azotobacter chroococcum. Annals of Biology 9(1): 144-148

Nieuwenhuize JC, Poley HV, Akker AH and Delft WV. 1991. Comparison of microwave

and conventional extraction techniques for the determination of metals in soils, sediment,

and sludge samples by atomic spectrometry. Analyst. 116:347–351

Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanbe FS and Dean LA. 1954. In: Estimation of available

phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. United States Department of

Agriculture circulation 939: 1923

Pal Y, Singh RP, Sachan RS and Pandey PC. 2008. Effect of integrated nutrient

management practices on yield, nutrient uptake and economics of mustard (Brassica

juncea L.) grown in rice-mustard cropping system. Pantnagar Journal of Research 6(2):

199-204

Parihar CM, Rana KS and Kantwa SR. 2010. Nutrient management in pearlmillet

(Pennisetum glaucum)-mustard (Brassica juncea L.) cropping system as affected by land

configuration under limited irrigation. Indian Journal of Agronomy 55(3): 191-196

71

Patel JR and Shelke VB. 2000. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on yield of

mustard. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University 25(1): 70-71

Patel JR and Shelke VB. 1998. Effect of farmyard manure, phosphorus and sulphur on

growth, yield and quality of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of

Agronomy 43(4): 713-717

Pathak AK and Godika S. 2010. Effect of organic fertilizers, biofertilizers, antagonists

and nutritional supplements on yield and disease incidence in Indian mustard in Arid soil.

Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 80(7): 652-654

Piper CS. 1966. Soil and Plant Analysis (Asia Edition), Hans Publishers, Bombay, India

Prasad B. 2000. Performance of mustard varieties under different fertility levels. M.Sc.

Thesis, p 15. GB Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India

Premi OP. 2003. Integrated nutrient supply for sustainable rice production in Acid

Alfisol. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 37(2): 132-135

Premi OP and Kumar M. 2004. Response of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) to

different levels of nitrogen and phosphorus under irrigated condition. Indian Journal of

Agricultural Research 38(2): 151-153

Premi OP, Kumar A, Kumar M and Sininwar BS. 2004. Effect of organics on Indian

mustard (Brassica juncea). Journal of Oilseeds Research 21(1): 180

Ram M. 2009. Effect of organic manures and biofertilizers in organic farming of rice

(Oryza sativa) - wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Ph.D Thesis., Department of

Agronomy, IARI, New Delhi, India

Ramanjaneyulu AV, Giri G and Kumar SR. 2010. Biofertilizers, nitrogen and phosphorus

on yield and nutrient economy in forage sorghum affected by nutrient management in

Preceding mustard. Indian Journal of Bio-resource Management 1(2): 66-68

Ramesh P, Panwar NR, Singh AB and Ramana S. 2009. Effect of organic nutrient

management practices on the productivity potential, nutrient uptake, soil quality, input

use efiiciency and economics of mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of


72

Ranwa RS and Singh KP. 1999. Effect of integrated nutrient management with

vermicompost on productivity of wheat (Triticum aestivum). Indian Journal of Agronomy

44(3): 554-559

Rao SS. 2003. Nutrient balance and economics of integrated nutrient management in

groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)-mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Madras Agricultural

Journal 90 (7-9): 465-471

Rao MS and Shaktawat MS. 2002. Residual effect of organic manure, phosphorus and

gypsum application in preceding groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) on soil fertility and

productivity of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of Agronomy 47(4):

487-494

Reager ML, Sharma SK and Yadav RS. 2006. Yield attributes, yield and nutrient uptake

of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) as influenced by nitrogen levels and its split

application in Arid Western Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Agronomy 51(3): 213-216

Robinson CH, Inesan P, Piearce TG and Rowland AP. 1992. Nitrogen metabolization by

earthworm in limed peat soils. Journal of Applied Ecology 29: 226-227

Roul PK, Sarawgi SK, Shrivastav GK and Kumar D. 2006. Effect of integrated nutrient management techniques on productivity, nitrogen uptake, N-use efficiency, economics

and energetic of rice (Oryza sativa)-Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) sequence. Indian

Journal of Agronomy 51(3): 170-173

Rundala SR, Kumawat BL, Choudhary GL and Prajapat K. 2012. Effect of integrated

nutrient management on quality and nutrient uptake of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea

L.) and after experimentation soil fertility. Environment and Ecology 30(4A): 1571-1575

Saha R, Mishra VK, Majumdar B, Laxminarayana K and Ghosh PK. 2010. Effect of

integrated nutrient management on soil physical properties and crop productivity under a maize (Zea mays)-mustard (Brassica compestris) cropping sequence in acidic soils of

North East India. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 41: 2187-2200

Sahoo SK, Dwibedi SK and Pradhan L. 2010. Effect of biofertilizers and levels of

nitrogen on yield and nutrient uptake of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Environment

and Ecology 28(1): 129-131

73

Sankar G, Verma LP and Singh R. 2002. Effect of integrated nutrient management on

yield and quality of Indian mustard and properties of soil. Indian Journal of Agricultural

Sciences 72(9): 551-552

Sarkar AK. 1998. Integrated nutrient management strategies for sustainable crop production in eastern region. In: Proceedings of National Workshop on long term soil fertility management through integrated plant nutrient supply, Indian Institute of Soil Science, Bhopal, India. p.112-124

Satyajeet and Nanwal RK. 2007. Integrated nutrient management in pearlmillet-mustard cropping system. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 3(4): 59-62

Shankar G, Verma LP and Singh R. 2002. Effect of nutrient management on yield and quality of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) and properties of soil. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 72(9): 551-552

Sharma K. 2002. Effect of Azospirillum, Azotobacter and nitrogen on growth, yield of cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata). Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 72(9): 555-557

Sharma PP and Jain NK. 2002. Nitrogen requirement of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) under different crop sequences. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 72(2): 101-103

Sheik SZ, Quari KQ, Choudhary MAH and Wahid AA. 2004. Effect of different animal manures on yield, quality and nutrient uptake by mustard cv. Agrani. BRAC University Journal 1(2): 59-66

Shekhawat K, Rathore SS, Premi OP, Kandpal BK and Chauhan JS. 2012. Advances in agronomic management of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. Cosson): An overview. (Special Issue: Oilseeds crops: Agronomy, science, and technology.). International Journal of Agronomy

Shrivastava UK, Rajput RL and Dwivedi ML. 2000. Response of soybean-mustard cropping system to sulphur and biofertilizers on farmer's field. Legume Research 23(4): 277-278

Shukla RK, Kumar A, Mahapatra BS and Kandpal B. 2002. Integrated nutrient management practices in relation to morphological and physiological determinants of seed yield in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 72(11): 670-672

74

Siddiky MA, Ahammad KU, Shaikh NY, Mahmud JA and Malakar JC. 2008. Yield

response of mustard, boro and T. aman rice to NPKS fertilizers in high Ganga river

floodplain soil. Inernational Journal of Sustainable Crop Production 4(1): 49-54

Singh RP, Pal Y and Singh H. 2011. Effect of organic and inorganic sources of nutrients

on growth, yield and quality of Indian mustard (B. juncea L.) under late sown condition.

Pantnagar Journal of Research 9(2): 308-310

Singh SP, Pal MS and Dube SN. 2010. Yield, quality and nutrient uptake of mustard

(Brassica juncea) with organic and inorganic fertilization. Current Advances in


Singh Y, Singh T, Singh UN and Rajput PK. 2010. Effect of nutrient management on

yield, quality and economics of irrigated Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian

Journal of Agricultural Sciences 80(8): 399-402

Singh PK, Imnuksungba and Kanajuia SP. 2009. Effect of integrated nutrient

management on growth, yield, its attributes and nutrients uptake of mustard crop in acidic

soils of Nagaland. Environment and Ecology 27 (3): 1036-1039

Singh T, Rana KS, Shivay YS, Ramanjaneyulu AV and Rahal A. 2009. Productivity

and sustainability of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris L.)

intercropping system as affected by moisture conservation practices and fertility levels

under rainfed conditions. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 55(2): 183-196

Singh LN and Kumar AK. 2006. Integrated nutrient management in rice (Oryza sativa)-

rapeseed (Brassica comprestris var. toria) cropping sequence under rainfed condition.

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 40 (2): 151-153

Singh R and Sinsinwar BS. 2006. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth,

yield, oil content and nutrient uptake of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) in Eastern part

of Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 76(5): 322-324

Singh M. 2001. Response of mustard varieties to Azotobacter and nitrogen. Ph.D. Thesis.

CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India

75

Singh RP and Kumar A. 1999. New horizons for Brassica carinata under resource

constraints in northern plains of India. In: 10th International Rapeseed Congress,

Canberra, Australia. P 26-29

Singh J and Singh KP. 1997. Integrated nutrient management in sunflower (Helianthus

annuus). Indian Journal of Agronomy 42(2): 370-374

Subbiah BV and Asija GL. 1956. A rapid procedure for estimation of available nitrogen

in soils. Current Science 25: 259-260

Subedi KD, Subedi M and Kadayat KB. 1994. Effect of different sources of nitrogenous

fertilizer on the seed yield and oil content of rapeseed in western hills of Nepal. Technical

Paper Lumle Agriculture Centre (94/4): 11

Sudhakar G, Lourduraj AC, Rangaswamy A, Subiah P and Velayuthem A. 2002. Effect

of vermicompost application on soil properties, nutrient availability, uptake and yield of

rice: A review. Agricultural Reviews 23(2): 127-133

Tewatia RK, Kalwe SP and Chaudhary RS. 2007. Role of biofertilizers in Indian

agriculture. Indian Journal of Agronomy 3(1): 111-118

Thakur KS and Singh CM. 1997. Contribution of agronomic inputs in Indian mustard

(Brassica juncea) under mid-hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh. Indian Journal of

Agronomy 42(4): 665-669

Theunissen J, Ndakidemi PA and Laubscher CP. 2010. Potential of vermicompost

produced from plant waste on the growth and nutrient status in vegetable production.

International Journal of the Physical Science 5(13): 1964-1973

Tiwari A, Dwivedi AK and Dikshit PR. 2002. Long term influence of organic and

inorganic fertilization on soil fertility and productivity of soybean-wheat systems in a

vertisol. Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science 50(4): 472-475

Tomar RKS, Chourasia SC, Raghu JS and Singh VB. 1996. Growth, yield and net returns

of mustard under different levels of nitrogen and sulfur on clay loam soils. Journal of

Oilseed Research 13(1): 13-17

76

Tomer S, Tomer TVS, Kumar S, Tomer S, Singh M and Singh S. 1996. Response of

Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) to nitrogen, phosphporus and potassium fertilizers.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 41(4): 624-626

Tomer S, Subey S and Singh S. 1992. Effect of irrigation and fertility levels on growth,

yield and quality of mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of Agronomy 37(1): 76-78

Tripathi MK, Chaturvedi S, Shukla DK and Mahapatra BS. 2010. Yield performance and

quality in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) as affected by integrated nutrient

management. Indian Journal of Agronomy 55(2): 138-142

Vance ED, Brookes PC and Jenkinson DS. 1987. An extraction method for measuring

soil microbial biomass carbon. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 19: 703-707

Vendan RT and Subramanian M. 2000. Effect of phosphobacteria with graded levels of

phosphatic fertilizers on low land rice. Crop Research 19(2): 194-197

Venkatesh, Patil PB, Kumar KS, Patil CV and Giradii RS. 1997. Influence of insitu

vermiculture and vermicompost on availability and plant content of micronutrients.

Advances in Agricultural Research in India 8: 53-56

Yasari E, Azadgoleh MAE, Mozafari S and Alashti MR. 2009. Enhancement of growth

and nutrient uptake of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) by applying mineral nutrients and

biofertilizers. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 12(1): 127-133

Yasari E, Azadgoleh MAE, Pirdashti H and Mozafari S. 2008. Azotobacter and

Azospirillum inoculants as biofertilizers in canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivation. Asian

Journal of Plant Sciences 7(4): 490-494

Zho HJ, Li PW, Li GM and Li SG. 1991. The effects of fertilizer application on

biochemical qualities of rape. Acta Agronomica Sinica 17(4): 255-260

Zulfatan L and Syukur AD. 2008. Kajian serapan p oleh sawi (Brassica juncea) pada

tropopsamment yang diberi vermikompos, kompos sampah kota dan batuan fosfat. Jurnal

Ilmu Tanah dan Lingkungan 8(1): 67-73.

77

Appendix – I

Mean weekly weather data at Palampur during 2011-12 (November 2011 to April 2012)

Standard Week

Maximum Temperature (°C)

Minimum Temperature

(°C)

Average Relative Humidity (%)

Rainfall (mm)

44 23.6 12.8 78 2

45 23.7 11.6 76 0

46 22.8 9.6 81 0

47 22.2 9.1 77 0

48 21.2 7.7 83 0

49 20.8 7.7 87 6

50 18.3 6.2 85 0

51 17.6 3.3 86 0

52 18.6 4.1 62 0

1 (2012) 14.9 4.3 74 51

2 13.0 2.4 73 35

3 9.8 2.4 82 109

4 15.3 3.3 62 0

5 16.4 4.8 63 31

6 14.6 3.3 70 7

7 14.2 5.1 73 34

8 17.9 9.0 67 10

9 19.9 8.0 48 0

10 18.9 6.8 53 20

11 20.8 8.5 53 8

12 25.5 11.0 44 0

13 26.0 13.5 45 0

14(April) 28.4 14.9 42 7

78

Appendix II A. Fixed cost of brown sarson cultivation (ha-1)

Particulars Quantity Rate

(Rs)

Amount

(Rs)

LAND PREPARATION

1. Ploughing

2. Labour

5 hrs

10 man days

230/hr

120/day

1150

1200

COST OF SEED AND SOWING

1. Seed

2. Labour

10 kg

5 man days

45\kg

120/day

450

600

INTERCULTURAL OPERATIONS

1. Thinning

2. Weeding

5 man days

5 man days

120/day

120/day

600

600

COST OF PLANT PROTECTION

MEASURES

1. Cypermetrin

2. Labour

1 lt

2 man days

300/litre

120/day

300

240

COST OF WEED CONTROL

1. Pendimethalin

2. Labour

1.5 kg

2 man days

500/kg

120/day

750

240

Irrigation 5 man days 120/day 600

Harvesting 10 man days 120/day 1200

Threshing And Winnowing 5 man days 120/day 600

Total 8530

79

Appendix III Treatment wise cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1)

Treatments Treatment

cost

Fixed

cost

Total

cost

T1 Azotobacter + 100% RDF 1948 8530 10478

T2 Azotobacter + FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 2994 8530 11524

T3 Azotobacter + Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 26054 8530 34554

T4 Azotobacter + Control (No NPK) 40 8530 8570

T5 Azotobacter + PSB + 100% RDF 1988 8530 10518

T6 Azotobacter + PSB + FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 3034 8530 11564

T7 Azotobacter + PSB + Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF 26034 8530 34564

T8 Azotobacter + PSB + control 80 8530 8610

T9 100% RDF 1908 8530 10438

T10 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 2954 8530 11484

T11 Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 25954 8530 34484

T12 Control (No-inoculation + No NPK) 0 8530 8530

PSB = phosphorus solubilizing bacteria, FYM = Farmyard manure, VC = vermicompost

80

Appendix IV Interaction effect of treatments on yield attributes characters of brown sarson

Fertility levels

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter Azotobacter + PSB No

inoculation Mean No. of seeds per silique

100% RDF 8.0 9.6 7.6 8.4 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.3 Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 8.0 10.3 7.6 8.6 Control 5.6 7.3 5.3 6.1 Mean 7.5 8.8 7.2

CD (P=0.05)

NS

No. of sliquie per plant


CD (P=0.05)

NS

No. of primary branches per plant


CD (P=0.05)

NS

No. of secondary branches per plant


CD (P=0.05) NS

1000 seed weight (g)


CD (P=0.05) NS

81

Appendix V

Interaction effect of treatments on seed and straw yield (kg ha-1) of brown sarson

Fertility levels

Biofertilizers

Azotobacter Azotobacter +

PSB No

inoculation Mean Seed yield (kg ha-1)

100% RDF 989.6 1273.7 987.0 1083.4

FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 931.3 996.5 887.4 938.4

Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF 980.1 1155.7 958.0 1031.3

Control 408.1 554.6 358.8 440.5

Mean 827.3 995.1 797.8

CD (P=0.05)

NS

Straw yield (kg ha-1)

100% RDF 5130.3 5374.4 4843.3 5116.0 FYM 5.0 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 4312.1 4782.9 3262.1 4119.0 Vermicompost 5.0 t ha-1 +

50% RDF 4823.0 5369.0 3522.9 4571.6

Control 2517.1 2818.4 1828.6 2388.1 Mean 4195.6 4586.2 3364.3 CD (P=0.05)

NS

82

Appendix VI

Appendix XIX Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

Source of variation Degree of freedom

Total sum of square 35

Replication 2

Treatment 11

Biofertilizers 2

Fertility levels 3

Interaction 6

Error 22

83

Brief Biodata of student

Name : Mr. Amardeep Singh

Mother’s Name : Smt. Mohinder Kaur

Father’s Name : Sh. Surjit singh

Date of Birth : 14th August, 1988

Permanent Address : V.P.O.Chand Bhan Teh. Jaitu Dist. Faridkot, Punjab

`

Academic Qualification

Qualification Year School/ Board/ University

Marks (%)

Division Major subjects

10th 2005 Punjab School Education Board, Mohali

60.9 Ist English, Punjabi, Science, Hindi, Math and Social Science

10+2 2007 Punjab School Education Board, Mohali

51.6 IInd Non Medical

B. Sc. Agri. 2011 Punjabi university Patiala

60.0 Ist Agriculture

RESPONSE OF BROWN SARSON (Brassica campestris var. …Surjit Singh) under my supervision and that no...

Documents

Transcript of RESPONSE OF BROWN SARSON (Brassica campestris var. …Surjit Singh) under my supervision and that no...