Nội dung

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 10 Number 03 (2021) Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2021.1003.212 Yield, Nutrient Uptake, Quality and Economics of Foxtail Millet Cultivation as Influenced by Integrated Nutrient Management with Bacterial Consortia and Liquid Manures Manduri Veerendra1*, B. Padmaja1, M. Malla Reddy1 and S. Triveni2 1 Department of Agronomy, 2Department of Microbiology & Bioenergy, Professor Jayashankar Telangana state Agricultural University, Hyderabad, Telangana, India *Corresponding author ABSTRACT Keywords Bacterial consortia, Beejamrutha, Biofertilizers, Foxtail millet, Jeevamrutha, Liquid manures Article Info Accepted: 15 February 2021 Available Online: 10 March 2021 To study the integrated effect of chemical fertilizers, bacterial consortia, liquid manures (beejamrutha and jeevamrutha) on yield, nutrient uptake, quality of grain and economics of foxtail millet cultivation, an experiment was conducted during kharif, 2019 at College farm, College of Agriculture, Rajendranagar, PJTSAU. Highest grain yield was obtained with application of 100% RDF + bacterial consortia + liquid manures (T 7) which was significantly superior to all the other treatments. Higher Nitrogen and Phosphorus uptake at harvest stage was recorded with100% RDF + bacterial consortia + liquid manures (T7)which was superior to the other treatments. K uptake by the crop was also highest in the above treatment followed by50% RDF + bacterial consortia + liquid manures (T 8) which was at par with 100% RDF (T 2) or 50% RDF (T3) alone. Similarly the uptake of Zn was also higher in T7 which was superior to RDF alone (T2) and the later was at par with T8and T6 (bacterial consortia + liquid manures).The quality parameters of grain like crude protein and crude fibre content were comparable between T 7 and T2; T8 and T3, but superior to sole or combined application of bioagents (T 4 or T5 or T6).Significantly higher gross returns were realized in T 7 compared to all the other treatments. It was followed by 100% RDF alone (T2). Higher net returns were realized with T 7 but it was at par with 100% RDF alone (T2). The benefit: cost ratio obtained with (T 2) 100% RDF was the highest and superior to the rest of the treatments including integrated use of 100% RDF and bioagents (T7) but it was the next best treatment. Introduction The world has started endorsing the food such as jowar, bajra, ragi, korra, sama and many such millets for their nutritional value. These nutrient-rich grains now called as nutricereals are making a quick comeback in the Indian agrarian landscape after decades of neglect. Now the time has come to replenish this treasure of Nutrition. In India, the area under nutri-cereals is about 24.21 million ha (Directorate of Economics and Statistics India, 2017-18). If consumers see millets as a solution to lifestyle disorders, producers have 1703 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 realized that it requires less inputs and is an economically viable option if marketing avenues are created. of the nutrient sources can sustain the production levels for future generations reflecting better economic standards. Foxtail millet (Setaria italica) is considered as one of the oldest cultivated millets. It contains high amount of proteins, dietary fibres, iron, zinc, calcium, phosphorus, potassium, vitamin B, and essential amino acids (Hegde et al., 2005).The important foxtail millet growing districts in Telangana State are Mahabubnagar and Rangareddy whereas in Andhra Pradesh, Anantapur, Kurnool, Prakasam and Guntur are important (Hariprasanna, 2016). Generally millets require less nutrients for their growth and development, thereby less quantity of fertilizers and organics are used compared to cereal crops reducing the cost of nutrients. In this day and age, best quality grains with more fibre and protein content are preferred by the consumers. Such good quality millets can be produced through INM practices with low cost and higher profits. Materials and Methods Bacterial consortia is combination of plant growth promoting bacteria which is ecofriendly and add nutrients through the natural processes of nitrogen fixation, solubilizing phosphorous, releasing potassium, zinc and stimulating plant growth through the synthesis of growth promoting substances. In simple terms it is a combination of different biofertilizers in view of nutrient requirement of a particular crop. Liquid manures such as jeevamrutha and beejamrutha popularized by Padmashree Subhash Palekar has gained momentum among farmers (Vinay et al., 2020) and are believed to produce qualitative yield. These together can help the plants to uptake more nutrients by cancelling all the adverse effects in the soil hindering nutrient availability coupled with efficient translocation, good quality produce can be assumed. Integration An investigation was carried out during kharif season, 2019 at College farm, College of Agriculture, Rajendranagar, PJTSAU, Hyderabad. The experimental soil was sandy loam in texture with 6.42 pH, 0.08 dsm-1 EC, 0.45% OC, low available N (172 kg ha-1), medium in P (22 kg ha-1), high in K (398 kg ha-1) and sufficient in Zn status (0.65 ppm). The size of gross and net plots was 4.8 m x 3.9 m and 4.2 m x 3.3 m respectively. The experiment was laid out in RBD with three replications and eight treatments viz.,T1 Control (No chemical fertilizers/bacterial consortia/liquid manures), T2 - 100% Recommended Dose of Fertilisers (RDF) (40:20:0 kg N: P2O5: K2O ha-1), T3 - 50% RDF, T4 - Bacterial consortia @ 2.5 kg /250 kg FYM ha-1 through soil application, T5 Seed treatment with Beejamrutha @ 50 L ha-1 and soil application of Jeevamrutha @ 500L ha-1 at fortnightly interval, T6 - T4 + T5, T7 - T6 +100% RDF, T8 - T6 + 50% RDF. Line sowing was done with SiA 3085 variety seeds @ 5 kg ha-1. The 100% RDF for foxtail millet crop is 40:20:0 kg N, P2O5 and K2O ha1 . P fertiliser was applied as basal dosage and half of the N was applied as basal and other half at 30 DAS. Similarly 50% RDF was also applied. Bacterial consortia is a combination of beneficial bacteria such as Azotobacter, Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB), Potassium Releasing Bacteria (KRB) and Zinc Solubilizing Bacteria (ZnSB) in equal proportion and was mixed with farm yard manure and applied to the soil before sowing. Liquid manure like beejamrutha was prepared as per Vinay et al., (2020) by soaking 12.5 kg cowdung in 50 litres of water followed by mixing it with 12.5 litres of cow urine, 250 g 1704 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 of ant hill soil and 125 g of lime and treated to seeds before sowing. Jeevamrutha was prepared by mixing of 25 kg cow dung, 25 litres of cow urine, 5 kg of pulse flour and 5 kg of jaggery and 250 g of ant hill soil fermented for 72 hrs and applied at fortnightly interval. Phosphorus uptake (kg ha-1) The plant samples were digested with tri acid mixture consisting of HNO3: HClO4: H2SO4 (9:4:1) for the analysis of P, K and Zn in plant sample. Yield P Uptake (kg ha-1) = P content (%) x Dry matter production (kg ha-1)/ 100 Grain yield (kg ha-1) Potassium uptake (kg ha-1) The grains obtained from the net plot area including those from the sampled plants were sun dried thoroughly till the moisture level comes down to 14%, cleaned, weighed and expressed as kg ha-1. The potassium content in the triacid mixture was determined by using flame photometer (Piper, 1967). K Uptake (kg ha-1) = K content (%) x Dry matter production (kg ha-1)/100 Straw yield (kg ha-1) Zinc uptake (g ha-1) The straw obtained from the net plot area of all the treatments including the sampled plants were sundried for 4-5 days till the straw gets constant weight, weighed and expressed as kg ha-1. After diluting tri-acid extract, the samples were fed toatomic absorption spectrophotometer using zinc hallow cathode lamp. Analysis of plant samples for nutrient uptakes Zn Uptake (g ha-1) = Zn content (ppm) x Dry matter production (kg ha-1)/1000 The N, P, K and Zn content of the plant samples were analysed at harvest stage of the crop. The plant samples were dried in hot air oven at 60oC and the dried samples were grinded in a Willey mill. The powdered samples were then used for analysis. Analysis of grain samples for quality parameters Nitrogen uptake (kg ha-1) The nitrogen content in dried plant samples was determined by Microkjeldahl method (AOAC, 1960) after digestion of the sample with H2SO4 and H2O2. N Uptake (kg ha-1) = N content (%) x Dry matter production (kg ha-1)/ 100 Crude protein (%) Nitrogen content in the grain was determined by Micro kjeldhal method as described by Jackson (1973). The crude protein content was worked out by multiplying the nitrogen percentage with thye factor 6.25 (AOAC, 1960). Crude fibre (%) Crude fibre content was estimated by acidalkali digestion method. The residue obtained after digestion was dried in a crucible and its 1705 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 weight was recorded (We). The dried residue was then ashed in a muffle furnace at 600oC for 3 to 4 hours and its weight (Wa) was recorded. The difference between the two weights (We-Wa) was taken as the weight of the crude fibre (AOAC, 2005). Economics Cost of cultivation (Rs.. ha-1) The total cost of cultivation ha-1 was calculated for each treatment on the basis of all input costs including labour wages. Gross returns (Rs.. ha-1) Gross monetary returns for each treatment were calculated by multiplying the economic yield with the prevailing market price. -1 Net returns (Rs.. ha ) Net returns for each treatment were estimated at harvest by deducting the cost of cultivation of respective treatments from their gross returns. Net returns (Rs.. ha-1) = Gross returns (Rs.. ha-1) – Cost of cultivation (Rs.. ha-1) Benefit: Cost ratio (B:C ratio) Benefit: Cost ratio was worked out for each treatment by using the following formula. Benefit: Cost ratio = Gross returns (Rs.. ha-1)/ Cost of cultivation (Rs.. ha-1) Statistical analysis The data generated on various parameters of growth, yield and soil components during the course of investigation were analysed statistically, applying the technique of analysis of variance procedure as outlined for simple randomized block design (RBD) suggested by Gomez and Gomez (1984). Results and Discussion The grain yield of foxtail millet as influenced by the treatment combination is presented in Table 1. The perusal of the data reveals that among the treatments, highest yield was obtained in 100% RDF + bacterial consortia + liquid manures (T7) which was significantly superior to all the other treatments including 100 % RDF alone (T2). Similarly, 50% RDF + bacterial consortia + liquid manures (T8) was also superior to 50 % RDF alone (T3) over the later treatment. However, all the treatments consisting of inorganic fertilizers, biofertilizers and bio-enhancers alone or in combination enhanced the yield over control. With the conjunctive use of bacterial consortia, liquid manures and inorganic fertilizers, the plants obtain nutrients steadily during the critical stages of growth leading to improved growth and yield parameters. With the inclusion of biofertilizers and liquid manures in nutrient supply, the fertilizer use efficiency was enhanced by 5.5% in T7 over T2 and 7.6% in T8 over T3. Till recently, most of the research on organic production of crops was mainly concentrated on the use of FYM, compost, green manure, oil cakes etc. which needs large quantities to compensate the crop yields obtained with inorganic fertilizers. But, decrease in cattle population in recent years and utilization of agricultural wastes into valuable by products have made the availability of organic manures in agriculture questionable both in time and quantity besides the escalated prices. Hence, biofertilizers and liquid manures appear to be the best alternative in such situations. The data recorded on straw yield is presented in Table 1. On observing the data, it is evident 1706 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 that significantly higher yield was obtained with T7 in which 100% RDF was appended with bacterial consortia and liquid manures but it was at par with 100% RDF alone (T2). Similarly the combination at 50% RDF (T8) was also comparable with 50% RDF alone (T3), in producing the straw yield. Similar to grain yield, significantly higher straw yield was recorded in the treatment consisting of conjunctive use of bacterial consortia + liquid manures (T6) over their individual application (T4 or T5) which were at par with each other but superior to control (T1). Conjunction of nutrient sources lead to the better performance of the plant by improving physiological activities such as better uptake, translocation and accumulation leading to production of more dry matter thus contributing to the yield. Our results are in line with findings of Monisha et al., (2019) in foxtail millet, Ahiwale et al., (2011), Kumari et al., (2017), Ananda et al., (2017) in other millets. The amount of nutrients accumulated by foxtail millet at harvest were determined and presented in Table 2. In general, the uptake of NPK and Zn was found to be influenced by the different treatments. Similar trend was observed with respect to N and P uptake. Highest uptake was recorded with T7 where 100% RDF was augmented with bioagents and it was superior to the rest of the treatments. Liquid manures alone (T5) and bacterial consortia (T4) were at par with each other but superior to control (T1). K uptake by the crop was also highest in T7 followed by the T8 (50% RDF + bioagents) which was at par with 100% RDF (T2) or 50% RDF (T3) alone. Similarly the uptake of Zn was also higher in T7 which was superior to RDF alone (T2) and the later was at par with T8 and T6. The uptake of both K and Zn in conjunction of bioagents (T6) was significantly superior to their individual application (T4 or T5) which were at par with each other but superior to control (T1). Table.1 Yield of foxtail millet as influenced by integrated nutrient management Treatment T1- Control (No chemical fertilizers/ bacterial consortia/ liquid manures) T2- 100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizers (RDF) (40:20:0 kg N:P2O5: K2O ha-1) T3- 50% RDF T4- Bacterial consortia @ 2.5 kg/250 kg FYM ha-1 through soil application T5- Seed treatment with Beejamrutha @ 50 L ha-1 and soil application of Jeevamrutha @ 500L ha-1 at fortnightly interval T6- T4 + T5 T7- T6 + 100% RDF T8- T6 + 50% RDF SEm± CD (P=0.05) 1707 Grain yield (kg ha-1) 709 Straw yield (kg ha-1) 1400 1760 2800 1342 916 2256 1714 933 1692 1117 2093 1570 56.4 171.0 2003 2933 2526 89.8 272.5 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 Table.2 Nutrient uptake at harvest stage in foxtail millet as influenced by integrated nutrient management Treatment T1- Control (No chemical fertilizers/ bacterial consortia/ liquid manures) T2- 100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizers (RDF) (40:20:0 kg N:P2O5: K2O ha-1) T3- 50% RDF T4- Bacterial consortia @ 2.5 kg / 250 kg FYM ha-1 through soil Application T5- Seed treatment with Beejamrutha @ 50 L ha-1 and soil application of Jeevamrutha @ 500 L ha-1 at fortnightly interval T6- T4 + T5 T7- T6 + 100% RDF T8- T6 + 50% RDF SEm± CD (P=0.05) N uptake (kg ha-1) 20.51 P uptake (kg ha-1) 8.62 K uptake (kg ha-1) 24.79 Zn uptake (g ha-1) 94.17 39.57 19.43 43.99 155.53 32.29 23.42 13.67 9.13 40.08 28.53 135.10 112.40 24.41 10.27 29.67 115.67 28.01 43.10 35.61 1.05 3.19 11.92 22.01 16.1 0.50 1.52 35.36 52.73 44.39 1.47 4.44 130.10 171.00 152.67 4.27 12.96 Table.3 Crude protein and crude fibre of foxtail millet grain as influenced by integrated nutrient management Treatment T1- Control (No chemical fertilizers/ bacterial consortia/ liquid manures) T2- 100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizers (RDF) (40:20:0 kg N:P2O5: K2O ha-1) T3- 50% RDF T4- Bacterial consortia @ 2.5 kg / 250 kg FYM ha-1 through soil application T5- Seed treatment with Beejamrutha @ 50 L ha-1 and soil application of Jeevamrutha @ 500L ha-1 at fortnightly interval T6- T4 + T5 T7- T6 + 100% RDF T8- T6 + 50% RDF SEm± CD (P=0.05) 1708 Crude protein (%) 9.97 Crude fibre (%) 4.35 12.47 5.56 11.25 10.03 5.24 4.48 10.10 4.56 10.13 12.50 11.32 0.37 1.12 4.78 5.64 5.31 0.16 0.48 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 Table.4 Economics of foxtail millet cultivation as influenced by integrated nutrient management Treatment COC (Rs.. ha-1) T1- Control (No chemical fertilizers/ bacterial consortia/liquid manures) T2- 100% Recommended Dose of Fertilizers (RDF) (40:20:0 kg N:P2O5: K2O ha-1) T3- 50% RDF T4- Bacterial consortia @ 2.5 kg / 250 kg FYM ha-1 through soil Application T5- Seed treatment with Beejamrutha @ 50 L ha-1 and soil application of Jeevamrutha @ 500L ha-1 at fortnightly interval T6- T4 + T5 T7- T6 + 100% RDF T8- T6 + 50% RDF SEm± CD (P=0.05) Nutrient uptake is a function of dry matter production and concentration of the respective nutrient. Hence, in the present study also the superiority of conjunctive use of 100% RDF with bioagents (T7) was maintained. Basha (2015) and Patidar (2017), Vinay et al., (2020) also reported the improved nutrient uptake with the conjunctive use of bioagents with inorganic fertilisers in various crops. The data recorded on protein content of the harvested grain was presented in Table 3. The data revealed highest protein content with the application of 100% RDF along with bacterial consortia + beejamrutha and jeevamrutha (T7) but it was on par with the application of 100% RDF (T2) alone. Same trend was obtained with 50% RDF as well. This implies no significant influence with conjunctive usage of bioagents along with inorganic fertilizers on protein content. The remaining treatments were at par with each other and with control. Net returns (Rs.. ha-1) 5779 B:C ratio 16150 Gross returns (Rs.. ha-1) 21929 18568 54200 35632 2.92 17859 17025 41378 28327 23519 11302 2.32 1.66 21300 28836 7536 1.35 22175 24593 23884 - 34501 64266 48363 1712.4 5193.3 12326 39673 24479 1712.4 5193.3 1.56 2.61 2.02 0.08 0.25 1.36 The crude fibre percent is a measure of the quantity of indigestible cellulose, pentosans, liginin and other such components present in the grain. The data presented in Table 3. shows that even though highest crude fibre content was recorded in T7 (100% RDF + bioagents), it was comparable to 100% RDF alone (T2), 50% RDF alone (T3) and 50% RDF + bioagents (T8) and superior to the rest of the treatments. Further, the crude fibre per cent in the treatments which received bacterial consortia (T4) or beejamrutha and jeevamrutha (T5) or their combination (T6) was at par with control (T1) only. Economics of foxtail millet as influenced by various treatments was presented in Table 4. The cost of cultivation was found to be more with T7 in which, apart from 100% RDF, cost had to be incurred for the application of bioagents. It was followed by T8 where 50% RDF was appended with bioagents. In 1709 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 general, the cost of cultivation in the treatments which received bioagents was higher because of repeated preparation and application of jeevamrutha at fortnightly interval. However, significantly higher gross returns were realized in T7 as well, compared to all the other treatments. It was followed by 100% RDF alone (T2) and again it was significantly superior to the rest of the treatments. Conjunctive use of both the bioagents was better in gross returns over their individual application due to increased grain yield. On observing the net returns, it is evident that the trend is different to gross returns. Higher net returns were realized with T7 (100% RDF + bioagents) but it was at par with 100% RDF alone (T2). The additional gross returns obtained with T7 were offset with the increased cost of cultivation compared to T2. But, both the treatments were superior to the rest of the treatments. Between the two, net returns in T5 where liquid manures were applied, was very less owing to the increased cost of application of jeevamrutha over T3. Least returns were obtained with control. The benefit: cost ratio obtained with T2 (100% RDF) was the highest and superior to the rest of the treatments including T7 (conjunction of 100% RDF + bioagents) but it was the next best treatment. Vinay et al., (2020) also reported lower returns and negative B:C ratio in natural farming with liquid manures. However, favourable premium prices for the organic as well as quality produce can offset the higher COC in non-chemical methods of nutrient management systems. In conclusion the higher grain yield, nitrogen and phosphorus uptake at harvest was recorded in T7 which was superior to the other treatments. Potassium uptake by the crop was also highest in T7 followed by the T8 (50% RDF + bioagents) which was at par with 100% RDF (T2) or 50% RDF (T3) alone. Similarly the uptake of Zn was also higher in T7 which was superior to RDF alone (T2) and the later was at par with T8 and T6. Crude protein and crude fibre content were comparable between T7 and T2; T8 and T3, but superior to sole or combined application of bioagents (T4 or T5 or T6). Higher B: C ratio was realized with 100% RDF alone followed by bacterial consortia + liquid manures with 100% RDF. References Agricultural Statistics at a Glance- India, 2017-18, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, India. Ahiwale, P.H., Chavan, L.S and Jagtap, D.N. 2011.Effect of establishment methods and nutrient management on yield attributes and yield of finger millet. Advanced Research Journal of Crop Improvement. 2(2): 247-250. Ananda, M.R., Sharanappa and Murthy, K.N.K. 2017.Response of finger millet under organic nutrient management in groundnut-finger millet cropping system. International Journal of Pure and Applied Bioscience. 5(5): 200-206. AOAC. 1960. Official methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 9th ed. Washington, DC. AOAC. 2005. Official method of Analysis of Association of Official Analytical Chemists International. 18th ed. Washington, DC. Basha, J.S. 2015. Plants geometry, irrigation and organic nutrient management practices for aerobic rice in Northern Transitional Zone of Karnataka. Ph.D Thesis. University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka, India. Gomez, K.A and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley and Sons Publishers, New York. pp: 97-107. Hariprasanna, K. 2016. Foxtail millet- 1710 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1703-1711 Nutritional importance and cultivation aspects. Indian Farming. 65(12): 25-29. Hegde, P.S., Rajasekaran, N.S and Chandra, T.S. 2005. Effects of the antioxidant properties of millet species on oxidative stress and glycemic status in alloxan induced rats. Nutritional Research. 25: 1109–1120. Jackson, M.L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis. Printer Hall of India Pvt, Ltd., New Delhi.151-153. Kumari, S., Singh, V., Neha., Choudhary, P. 2017. Study of effect of organic and inorganic sources of nitrogen on growth and yield of kharif pearl millet. International Journal on Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 6(8): 769-782. Monisha, V., Rathinaswamy, A., Mahendran, P.P and Kumutha, K. 2019. Influence of integrated nutrient management on growth attributes and yield of foxtail millet in red soil. International Journal of Chemical Studies. 7(3): 3536-3539. Patidhar, A. 2017. Effect of organic, integrated and chemical sources of nutrtion on maize productivity and soil health. M.Sc Thesis. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India. Piper, C. S. 1966. Soil and plant analysis. Inter Science Publisher. New York. USA. pp. 59. Vinay, G., Padmaja, B., Reddy, M.M and Jayasree, G. 2020.Impact of natural farming on economics of maize in comparison with inorganic and organic farming. Multilogic in Science. 10(33): 598-599. How to cite this article: Manduri Veerendra, B. Padmaja, M. Malla Reddy and Triveni, S. 2021. Yield, Nutrient Uptake, Quality and Economics of Foxtail Millet Cultivation as Influenced by Integrated Nutrient Management with Bacterial Consortia and Liquid Manures. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 10(03): 1703-1711. doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2021.1003.212 1711