Inm in horticulture

Data of National Soil Fertility Survey

Nutrients Deficiency (%) Need By the year 2025 (mt)

Production (mt)

N 63 45.000 17.000

P 50

K 48

S 37 2.000 -

Zn 47 0.324 0.013

Fe 11 0.130 0.007

Cu 5 0.011 0.003

Mn 4 0.022 0.001

B 1 0.004 0.004

PLANT NUTRIENT CYCLE

Nutritional deficiency symptoms

Some common leaf abnormalities resulting

from nutrient deficiencies

Continue……

Continue……

How Soil pH Affects Availability of Plant Nutrients

Nutritional deficiency Nutritional deficiency symptoms in some symptoms in some vegetable cropsvegetable crops

Nitrogen deficiency

Phosphorus deficiency

Potassium deficiency

Boron deficiency

Magnesium deficiency

Manganese deficiency

Calcium deficiency

Molybdenum deficiency

Iron deficiency

Zinc deficiency

Sulpher deficiency

Copper deficiency

AN AGRICULTURE THAT ISProductive and

profitableConserve soil and water resources and protects

the environments

Enhance health and safety

Low inputMethod and skill

management

Reduce use of synthetic and chemical inputs

Biological pest control

Use of farm and animal wastes (FYM,Poultry manure,pressmud etc.)

Natural occurring processes

Soil and water conservation practices

Crop rotation

Crop livestock diversification

Green manures and sod crops

BiotechnologyConcept in Sustainable Agriculture

INM involves maintenance or adjustment of plant nutrient supply to an optimum level for sustaining the desired crop productivity.

It involves proper combination of chemical fertilizers, organic manures, crop residues, nitrogen fixing crops and bio-fertilizers suitable to the system of land use and ecological, social and economic conditions.

What is INM ?

Unbalanced use of N:P:K have caused deleterious long term effects on soil fertility and productivity

In intensive cultivation, application of mere chemical fertilizers (N:P:K)

Not sufficient for sustaining the yields, Leads to deficiency in the soil for secondary nutrients and Deficiency of micro-nutrients in the soil which limit crop

productivity

Use of organic manures, green manures, crop residue and biodegradable rural and urban waste

Supplement the major nutrients. Increase the efficiency in other nutrients supply Leading to improvement in physical and biological properties of the

soil

WHY INM ?

GOALS OF INM

To maintain soil productivity

To ensure productive and sustainable agriculture

To reduce expenditure on cost of purchased inputs by using farm manure and crop residues etc.

To utilize the potential benefits of green manures, leguminous crops and bio-fertilizers

To prevent degradation of the environment

To meet the social and economic aspirations of the farmers without harming the natural resource base of the agricultural production

In the soil, replenishment of chemicals removed by the crop

Maintenance of organic matter content in the soil

Avoidance of weeds, pests and diseases occurrence

Control of soil acidity and toxicity

Control of soil erosion by improving soil physical properties

PRINCIPLES OF INM

To increase the availability of nutrients from all sources in the soil during growing season.

To match the crop demand for nutrients, with the capacity of soil to meet this demand plus the external sources of nutrient supply.

To optimize various soil-biota interaction.

To minimize the loss of nutrients in the soil and also the harmful effects of chemical fertilizers on the soil health.

OBJECTIVES OF INM

Components of INM

• Chemical fertilizers

• Organic manures

• Biofertilizers

• Green manures

• Crop residues

• Legumes intercropping

30

Organic manure

Chemical fertilizerBio fertilizer

GREEN MANURE

Bio fertilizer

Fertilizers are industrially manufactured chemicals containing plant nutrients. Nutrient content is higher in fertilizers than in organic manures and nutrients are released almost immediately after application such as

Fertilizers Nutrients contents (%)

Nitrogen (N) Phosphorus (P) Potash (K)

Nitrogenous Urea 46

CAN 25-28

Ammonium Nitrate 32-35

Phosphatic SSP 16

DAP 18 46

Potassic Murate of potash 60.0

Potassium sulphate 48.0-52.0

Chemical fertilizers

Farm Yard Manure (FYM):This is the traditional manure and is mostly readily available to the farmers. Farm yard manure is a decomposed mixture of Cattle dung and urine with straw and litter used as bedding material and residues from the fodder fed to the cattle. Well rotten farm yard manure contains 0.5% N, 0.25% P2O5 and 0.5% K2O.

Use of Organic Manures In Horticultural crops

Compost that is prepared with the help of earthworms is called vermicompost. The earthworms may be of local species or more vigorous exotic ones. The casts of the earthworm have several enzymes and are rich in plants nutrients, beneficial bacteria and mycorrhizae. On an average, vermicompost contains1 3% N, 1% P2O5 and 1.5% K2O. Presence of earthworms help in aerating the soil.

Vermicompost

GREEN MANURES

• Green manuring is growing in the field plants usually belonging to leguminous family and incorporating into the soil after sufficient growth.

• The most important green manure crops are sunnhemp, dhaincha, clusterbeans and Sesbania rostrata.

“Biofertilizers are the carrier-based inoculants containing cells of efficient strains of specific microorganisms used by the farmers for enhancing productivity of the soil.”

Bio-fertilizer ?

Fix atmospheric nitrogen Dissolve soil phosphorus Stimulate plant growth through synthesis of growth promoting substances.

Why to apply bio-fertilizers ?

CLASSIFICATION OF BIOFERTILIZERS

S. No. Groups Examples

N2 fixing Biofertilizers

1. Free-living Azotobacter, Beijerink ia, Clostridium, Klebsiella, Anabaena,Nostoc,

2 Symbiotic Rhizobium, Frankia, Anabaena azollae

3 Associative Symbiotic Azospirillum

P Solubilizing Biofertilizers

1. Bacteria Bacillus megaterium var. phosphaticum, Bacillus subtilisBacillus circulans, Pseudomonas striata

2 Fungi Penicillium sp, Aspergillus awamori

S. N. Group Example

P Mobilizing Biofertilizers

1 Arbuscular mycorrhiza Glomus sp.,Gigaspora sp.,Acaulospora sp.,Scutellospora sp. & Sclerocystis sp.

2 Ectomycorrhiza Laccaria sp., Pisolithus sp., Boletus sp., Amanita sp.

3 Ericoid mycorrhizae Pezizella ericae

4 Orchid mycorrhiza Rhizoctonia solani

Biofertilizers for Micro nutrients

1. Silicate and Zincsolubilizers

Bacillus sp.

Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria

1. Pseudomonas Pseudomonas fluorescens

Sl. No. Biofertilizers

1. Azotobacter

2. Azospirillum

3. Phosphate solubilising bacteria (PSB)

4. Rhizobium / Bradyrhizobium

5. Pseudomonas striata

6. Trichoderma

7. Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhizae (VAM)

Bio-fertilizers used in Horticultural crops

Rhizobium:

Rhizobium is a soil habitat bacterium, which can able to colonize the legume roots andfixes the atmospheric nitrogen symbiotically.

Azospirillium sp.●Azospirillium an associative micro-aerophillic nitrogen fixer commonly found in

association with the roots of higher plants is of interest. ●Low energy requirement, high nitrogen fixation capacity, can fix 20-40 kg N/ha

and tolerance to high soil temperature (30-40 0C) are responsible for its suitability under tropical conditions.

●The most important Azospirillium spp. is A. brasilense which has wide range of tolerance against abiotic stresses.

Azotobactor sp.• A free living heterotrophic nitrogen fixing

bacteria encounter in neutral to alkaline soil conditions.

• A. chroococcum and A. vinilandii are deemed to be the most commonly occurring species. fixes 20-40 kg N/ha.

Phosphate solubilising bacteria (Phosphobacteria):

They secrete organic acids and lower the pH in their vicinity to bring about dissolution of bound phosphates in soil.

Phosphate solubilising microorganisms are recommended for all crops and can solubilize 20-30% of insoluble phosphate in the soil.

VAM fungi (vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae )

• Mycorrhizal associations produced by fungi are known as arbuscular mycorrhizas, or vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizas.

• the major genus is Glomus, considered to be the most abundant of all soil fungi.

• It is an obligate symbiotic fungus and is not very host specific.

Increase crop yield by 20-30%.

Replace chemical nitrogen and phosphorus by 25%.

Stimulate plant growth.

Activate the soil biologically.

Restore natural soil fertility.

Provide protection against drought and some soil borne diseases.

Cost effective, i.e. reduces the costs toward fertilizers use, especially regarding nitrogen and phosphorus

Supplement to fertilizers.

Eco-friendly (Friendly with nature).

Benefits / Advantages of Bio-fertilizers

Panchakavya• Panchagavya consists of nine products viz. cow dung,

cow urine, milk, curd, jaggery, ghee, banana,Tender coconut and water.

Ingradient of panchagavya• Cow dung - 7 kg• Cow ghee - 1 kg• Cow Urine - 10 liters• Water - 10 liters• Cow milk - 3 liters• Cow curd - 2 liters• Tender coconut water - 3 liters• Jaggery - 3 kg• Well ripened poovan banana – 12 nos.

Chemical compositionpH 5.45

EC dSm2 10.22

Total N (ppm): 229

Total P (ppm) : 209

Total K (ppm) : 232

Sodium (ppm) : 90

Calcium (ppm) : 25

IAA (ppm) : 8.5

GA (ppm) : 3.5

Inter cropping

• Intercropping involves growing a smother crop between rows of the main crop.

• The inclusion of intercrop crops such as legume

General nutritional recommendations for important fruit crops

Crops Nutrient recommendation ( g/plant)

Banana 300 90 200

Mango(Adult) 750 160 750

Papaya 200 200 250

Sapota 1000 500 500

Guava (Adult) 200 320 250

General nutritional recommendations for important vegetable crops

Crops Nutrient recommendation ( kg/ha.)

Tomato 150 75 75

Hybrid Tomato 150 90 90

Brinjal 100 50 50

Hybrid Brinjal 150 75 75

Onion 80 50 80

Garlic 100 50 50

Okra 60 30 0

Elephant Foot Yam 80 60 100

Greater Yam 80 60 80

Turmeric 120 90 90

Ginger 120 90 90

Fenugreek 20 60 30

Advantages of Integrated Nutrient Management Improvement in the soil physical properties such as

granulation, porosity, water holding and drainage capacity, aeration etc.

Improvement in the organic matter content in the soil

Balanced nutrition to the crops, better nutritional uptake and hence better plant growth and yield

Improvement in the produce’s quality appearance, taste and nutritional richness.

Maintenance of soil nutrients reserve

Reduced use of chemical fertilizers reduces pollution of ground water and environment

Fruitful utilization of farm wastes

Some organic sources are cheaply available hence help reduce the production cost

Enrichment of soil with beneficial soil micro organisms

Better tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses

Residual effect remains beneficial to other succeeding crops

Some Research Work In Horticultural Crops

+

Effect of INM on growth, yield attributes and yield of Banana cv.G.Naine (Av. Of 3 years)

Treatments Plant height (cm)

Stem Girth (cm)

Hands/bunch Finger/bunch

Bunch Weight

(kg)

Yield (t/ha)

50% org(FYM+GM)+ 50% Inorg.+ BF

212.1 69.24 9.03 154.7 16.18 71.9

75% org(FYM+GM+NC) + 25% Inorg.+ BF

208.1 68.04 8.53 142.0 15.31 68.0

100% org(FYM+GM+NC) +BF 205.3 64.02 7.80 113.0 13.63 60.6

50% org(VC + GM) + 50% Inorg.+ BF

211.1 68.73 8.81 151.2 15.88 70.6

75% org(VC + GM + NC) + 25% Inorg.+ BF

208.3 67.20 8.30 136.6 15.04 66.8


204.7 65.26 7.72 113.3 13.24 58.8

100% Inorg+ 10 kg FYM+ BF 216.0 70.92 9.47 167.7 17.21 76.5

CD at 5% 4.14 2.94 0.32 7.50 0.53 2.36

Bhalerao et al., 2009Banana Res. Station (MPKV)Jalgaon( MH)

Effect of INM on soil chemical properties of Banana cv.G.Naine (Av. Of 3 years)

Treatments pH EC (ds/m)

OC (%) Available N(kg/ha)

Available P(kg/ha)

Available K(kg/ha)

Initial 8.20 0.35 0.28 210 19.5 620

50% org(FYM+GM)+ 50% Inorg.+ BF

8.13 0.34 0.32 211 21.6 619

75% org(FYM+GM+NC) + 25% Inorg.+ BF

8.07 0.30 0.37 219 20.2 623

100% org(FYM+GM+NC) +BF 7.98 0.26 0.49 231 19.4 631

50% org(VC + GM) + 50% Inorg.+ BF

8.15 0.32 0.30 211 21.8 619


8.06 0.29 0.34 219 20.4 623


8.01 0.27 0.46 231 19.5 633

100% Inorg+ 10 kg FYM+ BF 8.20 0.37 0.30 228 22.2 622

CD at 5% 0.054 0.002 0.016 2.77 0.46 3.37

Bhalerao et al., 2009Banana Res. Station (MPKV)Jalgaon ( MH)

Effect of INM on yield and yield attributing characters of Banana cv. Jahaji

Treatments No. of hands/bunch

Finger/hands Weight of second

hand (kg)

Bunch Weight (kg)

Yield (t/ha)

100 % RDF (NPK ) + FYM 8.89 20.80 2.23 15.61 67.56

100 % RDF (NPK, P as rock phosphate)) + vermicompost

9.07 22.12 2.40 16.11 72.05

100 % RDF (NPK, P as rock phosphate) + FYM +Azospirillum + PSB

9.32 23.04 2.58 16.50 73.96


8.66 20.55 2.22 15.30 67.44


7.95 18.62 1.56 14.12 64.08

50 % RDF (NPK, P as rock phosphate) + vermicompost +Azospirillum + PSB

8.50 19.26 2.16 14.86 66.05

50 % RDF (NPK, P as rock phosphate) + FYM +Azospirillum + PSB + T. harzianum

8.23 18.90 1.94 14.67 65.18

50% RD of N + 100% RD of PK + FYM + PSB

8.58 19.33 2.19 15.11 66.83

CD at 5% 0.45 2.44 0.24 0.72 2.61

Hazarika and Ansari, 2010Jorhat (Assam)

Effect of integrated nutrient management on various quality components of turmeric rhizomes (Pooled data of kharif 2004 and 2005)

Treatments CurcuminContent (%)

Starch content (%)

Protein content (%)

Oil content (%)

Curing percentage

(%)Control 2.58 4.93 4.21 0.92 17.01

20t FYM ha-1 (SI) 2.85 5.38 4.36 1.13 18.33

20t FYM ha-1 (SM) 2.87 5.78 4.35 1.21 19.08

100% NPK ha-1 3.04 6.11 4.56 1.35 19.35

100% NPKS ha-1 2.96 6.82 4.65 1.66 19.86

100% NPKS +10t FYM ha-1 (SI)

3.05 7.43 4.64 2.05 20.19

100% NPKS +15t FYM ha-1(SI)

3.16 7.76 4.90 2.40 20.59

100% NPKS +20t FYM ha-1(SI)

3.29 8.11 4.92 2.82 21.53

100% NPKS +10t FYM ha-1(SM)

3.07 7.13 4.70 1.77 19.53

100% NPKS +15t FYM ha-1(SM)

3.18 7.62 4.79 2.38 20.41

100% NPKS + 20t FYM ha-1(SM)

3.31 7.89 4.83 2.85 21.19

CD(P=0.05) 0.08 0.24 0.09 0.17 0.46

Singh and Dixit, 2010Palampur (HP)

SI-FYM applied as soil incoporation at the time of earthing upSM-FYM applied as soil mulch at the time of sowing

Effect of INM on growth and yield parameters of tomato

Treatment

Control

Height of plant (cm)

No. of primary branches/plant

Fruits diameter (cm)

No. of fruits per plant

Fruit yield/plot (kg)

Yield per ha(q)

2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08

55.24 54.60 5.65 6.03 3.92 4.14 15.85 16.52 5.43 5.49 167.59 169.42

Oragnic manuresFYM (15 t/ha) 73.45 68.82 6.67 7.26 4.06 4.18 18.64 19.50 6.67 6.56 205.83 205.61Vermicompost (10 t/ha) 72.07 73.01 7.67 7.94 4.42 4.02 19.27 19.86 6.72 6.80 210.17 206.34

Poultry manures (3 q/ha)

67.07 69.79 6.58 7.08 4.10 3.91 17.28 17.89 6.32 6.06 195.72 193.15

CD. at 5% 1.20 0.92 0.92 1.12 0.06 0.07 0.27 0.32 0.11 0.09 3.23 3.47

Inorganic fertilizers2/3 dose of RDF of NPK

1/2 dose of RDF of NPK

74.17 73.17 7.24 7.69 4.36 4.25 19.71 20.17 6.80 6.81 214.92 214.85

69.82 69.54 6.79 7.33 4.15 3.92 18.18 18.86 6.61 6.37 204.38 202.38

1/4 dose of RDF of NPK 68.61 68.91 6.82 7.26 4.08 3.94 17.30 18.22 6.29 6.24 192.42 187.87

CD. at 5% 1.12 0.92 0.92 1.12 0.06 0.07 0.27 0.32 0.11 0.09 3.23 3.47BlofertillzersVAM (2 kg/ha) 69.66 73.17 6.78 7.35 4.19 4.17 17.75 18.82 6.35 6.41 197.15 214.80PSB (2 kg/ha) 73.94 69.54 7.00 7.29 4.35 4.02 19.65 20.16 6.87 6.86 209.64 202.38Azospirillum (2 kg/ha) 68.39 68.91 7.07 7.65 4.05 3.91 17.79 18.27 6.48 6.48 204.94 187.87

CD. at 5% 1.20 0.92 0.92 1.12 0.06 0.07 0.27 0.32 0.11 0.09 3.23 3.47

Kumar et al.,1996 Meerut (UP)

The impact of various INM treatments on growth yield and yield attributes of tomato

Treatment Plant height (cm)

No. of branches /plant

Size of fruit (cm2)

No. of fruit/plant

Av. Wt. of fruit(g)

Fruit yield(q/ha)

Recommended dose of NPK @120:80:60 kg/ha 24.02 40.25 95.16 6.28 34.39 19.83

FYM @20t/ha 22.68 33.50 77.22 4.95 28.76 15.72

FYM @10t/ha + ½ Recommended dose of

NPK/ha28.42 46.29 109.65 7.35 46.15 20.45

Neem cake @1 t/ha 22.61 32.86 77.58 4.88 31.87 15.03

Neem cake @0.5 t/ha + ½ Recommended dose of

NPK/ha25.26 42.08 98.63 6.57 38.16 19.24

Vermicompost @5 t/ha 22.36 32.85 80.35 80.35 4.65 16.18

Vermicompot @2.5 t/ha + ½ recommended dose of

NPK/ha25.78 42.82 102.74 6.48 41.58 20.06

Poultry manure @5 t/ha 22.69 33.96 75.00 4.32 30.67 15.70

Poultry manure @2.5 t/ha +1/2 recommended dose of

NPK/ha25.51 42.78 101.14 6.79 43.48 19.40

C.D. at 5% 0.659 1.97 4.482 0.32 1.977 0.870

Pratap et al.,2011Faizabad (UP)

The impact of various INM treatments on quality of tomato

Treatment T.S.S. (%) Ascorbic acid (mg)

Reducing sugar (%)

Non-reducing sugar (%)

Recommended dose of NPK @120:80:60 kg/ha 4.31 17.17 2.49 1.65

FYM @20t/ha 4.06 15.48 2.18 1.44

FYM @10t/ha + ½ Recommended dose of NPK/ha 5.26 19.61 2.95 1.95

Neem cake @1 t/ha 3.99 16.10 2.29 1.52

Neem cake @0.5 t/ha + ½ Recommended dose of NPK/ha 4.59 18.70 2.56 1.70

Vermicompost @5 t/ha 4.12 16.65 2.25 1.49

Vermicompot @2.5 t/ha + ½ recommended dose of NPK/ha 4.85 19.50 2.57 1.70

Poultry manure @5 t/ha 4.10 16.10 2.23 1.47

Poultry manure @2.5 t/ha +1/2 recommended dose of NPK/ha 4.67 18.92 2.79 1.85

C.D. at 5% 0.11 0.453 0.07 0.049

Pratap et al.,2011 Faizabad (UP)

Effect of organic, inorganic and micronutrient fertilizers on growth parameters of turmeric

Treatment

Plant height (cm) Leaves/plant Tillers/plant Leaf area

index

2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010

Control 63 61 5.6 5.7 3.5 3.6 2.08 2.18

75% recommended dose of NPK 87 88 6.7 6.8 3.7 3.8 2.84 2.79

Recommended dose of NPK 101 103 8.3 8.4 3.8 3.9 2.96 3.03

Recommended dose of NPK + FYM @ lOt /ha 104 104 9.6 9.6 4.4 4.5 3.12 3.22

Recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn + B 108 107 10.3 10.1 5.1 4.9 3.49 3.67

75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn + B +biofertilizers 112 117 11.2 11.9 5.3 5.5 3.96 4.11

CD (P=0.05) 6.6 4.6 0.6 0.9 0.13 0.28 0.162 0.114

Nanda et al., 2012 OAUT (Odisha)

Effect of organic, inorganic and micronutrient fertilizers on yield and quality of turmeric


Treatment Fresh Rhizome yield(t/ha)

Dry turmeric yield(t/ha)

Curcumin content(%)

Curcumin yield (kg/ha)

2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010

Control 8.2 8.3 2.1 2.2 2.31 2.37 49.5 51.4

75% recommended dose of NPK 8.8 9.8 2.3 2.6 2.98 3.08 68.5 78.8

Recommended dose of NPK 11.6 12.0 3.0 3.1 3.08 3.1 93.3 97.1

Recommended dose of NPK + FYM @ l0 t/ha 13.0 13.3 3.4 3.5 3.12 3.16 106.1 110.0

Recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn 5kg + B 3 kg/ha

14.3 14.4 3.7 3.8 3.69 3.75 138.0 141.3

75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn 5 kg +B 3 kg/ha + biofertilizers

15.8 16.0 4.1 4.2 4.15 4.23 171.5 177.0

CD(P=0.05) 0.80 0.84 0.21 0.22 0.03 0.06 7.1 8.2

Effect of organic, inorganic and micronutrient fertilizers on soil nutrient status of turmeric


Treatment

pH EC (dSm-1) OC (%)Available N (kg/hsa)

Available P (kg/hsa)

Available K (kg/hsa)

A B A B A B A B A B A B

Control 4.8 4.82 0.13 0.14 0.41 0.42 235.0 234 18.4 18.8 178.1 176.8

75% recommended dose of NPK 5.05 5.06 0.24 0.15 0.42 0.42 244.3 241.4 20.3 19.6 192.5 194.6

Recommended dose of NPK 5.02 5.11 0.14 0.22 0.44 0.41 248.7 251.6 20.6 21.3 201.8 202.4

Recommended dose of NPK + FYM @ lOt /ha

5.12 5.13 0.18 0.19 0.46 0.47 254.1 256.4 20.4 20.3 197.4 201.8

Recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn + B 5.08 5.11 0.09 0.13 0.46 0.46 259.2 261.8 21.7 22.8 209.8 210.7

75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn +B + biofertilizers

5.09 5.08 0.16 0.18 0.48 0.46 269.8 273.6 22.3 24.7 218.5 222.5

A-After harvest of first crop (2009-10), B- After harvest of second crop (2010-11)

Fruit crops

Best treatments of INM Yield References

Banana cv.G.naine

50% org(FYM+GM)+ 50% Inorg.+ BF 71.90 t/ha Bhalerao et al., 2009Banana Res. Station (MPKV)Jalgaon( MH)

Banana cv. Jahaji


73.96 t/ha Hazarika and Ansari, 2010Jorhat (Assam)

Mango cv.kesar

25% N through BC + 75% N through Inorganic 65.37 kg/tree10.12 t/ha

Kumar et al.,2012.AGRESCO REPORT,ACHF,NAU-Navsari

Mango cv.sunderja

50%RDF+50 kg FYM+10kg vermicompost 124.64 kg/tree

Gautam et al.,2012.JNKV(MP)

Papaya cv. surya

75% RDF(200:250:250) + 25% vermicompost + rhizosphere bacteria culture

40kg/plant Singh et al., 2010.AADU,Allhabadad

Some Research Findings of Horticultural Crops

Vegetable crops

Best treatments of INM Yield References

Tomato 10t/ha vermicompost +2/3 RDF +2 kg /ha PSB

209.72 q/ha Kumar et al.,1996 Meerut (UP)

Onion cv. GW-1

60% RDF + banana pseudostem sap @2000l/ha

47.45 t/ha Patel et al.,2011.AGRESCO REPORT,ACHF,NAU-Navsari

Garlic cv.GG-1

50% RDN + 50% N through BC 4.3 t/ha Desai et al.,2012.AGRESCO REPORT,ACHF,NAU-Navsari

Greater Yam cv.lacal round

20 t/ha FYM + 100 % RDF of NPK 19.73 t/ha Patel et al.,2012.AGRESCO REPORT,ACHF,NAU-Navsari

Turmeric 75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn 5 kg +B 3 kg/ha + biofertilizers

15.90t/ha fresh rhizome4.15 t/ha Dry rhizome

Nanda et al.,2012.OUAT (Odisha)

Fenugeek cv. Pusa early bunching

Vermicompost 5 t/ha + 30 kg N /ha 19.50 q/ha (Seed) Dubey et al.,2013.Pantnagar

Okra cv. GO-2

Bio-Compost 10 t/ha + 100% RDF 19.24 t/h Vashi et al.,2013.AGRESCO REPORT,ACHF,NAU-Navsari

Use of INM should ensure both enhanced and sustainable production and safeguard the environment.

Chemical fertilizers have its own advantages and disadvantages in

terms of nutrient supply, but organic and bio-fertilizers improve

soil health and productivity along with better crop growth.

Developing a suitable nutrient management system that integrates

use of these three kinds of nutrient source (Inorganic, Organic and bio fertilizers) may be a challenge to reach the goal of sustainable agriculture, however much research is still needed.

Conclusion

Future strategies

• Emphasis should be given to INM research in horticultural crops.

• Direct and indirect benefits of INM on a long term basis needs to be quantified.

• More effective ways of converting organic wastes into manures are to be evolved.

• Promotion of bio-fertilizers.• Demonstrations for spreading the concept and

technologies of INM.

Thank you

Inm in horticulture

Science

Transcript of Inm in horticulture