Agric. Rev., 24 (1) : 16 - 30, 2003

ECO-FRIENDLY UTILISATION OF DISTILLERY EFFLUENTIN AGRICULTURE - A REVIEW

M. Baskar, C. Kayalvizhi and M. Subash Chandra Bose. .Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry (EID Parry Project)~.D. Agricultural College and Research Institute (TNAU) , Trichy - 9, India

ABSTRACTDistillery effluent, a waste water of distillery industry is of purely plant origin and contains large

quantities of soluble organic matter and plant nutrients. It does not contain any toxic elements/compounds. The only problem with distillery effluent is exc~ssive Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD),Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and electrical conductivity. These problems could be overcomeeither by the application of distillery effluent after propl:!r dilution (1:10 to 1:50) with irrigation wateror by pre-plant application (40 to 60 days before planting) to give sufficient time for the naturaloxidation of organic matter. Application of distillery spent wash/effluent significantly increased the EC,organic carbon, available N, P, K, Ca, Mg and micronutrient status of the soil. Distillery effluentapplication significantly increased the yield of crops viz., sorghum, wheat, maize, sugarcane, cotton,groundnut, sunflower, soybean, sugarbeet, potatoes and other vegetables, forage crops and tree crops,but had adverse effect on legumes and no effect on riCe. The untreated distillery spent wash is acidicin nature (pH- 3.5 - 4.0) which could be effectively used for the reclamation of non-saline sodic soil.The technology of using distillery effluent for composting of pressmud, pressmud along with sugarcanetrash and coir waste, pressmud plus bagasse ash and city garbage have been successfully tested. Thusutilisation of distillery effluents in agriculture would save costs on fertilisers and facilitate reduction inpollution load on- aquatic ·eca-system.

In India there are about 600 sugar millsand majority of them are situated in Maharastraand Uttar Pradesh. The number is assumingan increasing trend owing to the growingdemand of at export front. The sugarproduction in the country is 15 million tonnes(Mt) annually for which about 15.0 Mt of carieis crushed. These industries release abqut 7.5million tonnes of molasses as by-product(Ramaswami, 1999). These molasses are usedin the distillery industry as a raw materia.! forthe production of alcohol. Today there are 257distilleries in India with an installed capacity of1.5 billion litres of alcohol production perannum. In the distillery industry, for every litresof alcohol producec:t, about 15 litres of spentwash is released as wastewater. So there is apossibility of getting about 10 to 11 billion litresof wastewater (Distillery Spent Wash - DSW)from distillery industries alone (Karivaratharaju,1996). Different terminologies are used for thistype of effluent in different countries viz.,stillage, vinasse, slop, s.till residue etc. Spentwash is of purely plant origin and contains larg~

quantities of soluble organic matter and plantnutrients, which the sugarcane plant hasabsorbed from the soil. The spent wash whensubjected to bio-methanation process (primarytreatment) looses upto 85 % of its BOD andbecomes dtstillery effluent. Bowever spentwash/effluent (treated spent wash) could notbe directly applied to the growing crops becauseof their excessive BOD and COD. So it shouldbe applied well before the planting of crop ordiluted with normal· water and then applied tothe growing crops. The results of theexperiments conducted all. over the world tofind out the possibility of utilising the distilleryeffluent in efficient and eco-friendly way in thefield of agriculture are discussed in this paper.

Properties of distillery effluent:The distillery spent wash is an acidic

liquid (pH 3.8 to 4.0) and contains largequantities of organic carbon and plant nutrientslike K, Ca, Mg, 5 etc. Its BOD (45,000 ­55,000 mg (-1) and COD (90,000 -1,10,000mg [-1) are high. Since the distillery spent wash

Vol. 24, No.1, 2003 17

is highly acidic and contains fairly good amount reported that the distillery effluent wasof Ca and Mg, this could be utilised as an concentrated with soluble forms of organicorganic amendment for the reclamation of matter. It contains (Table 1) appreciable ampuntsodic soils (Rajukka,nnu et al, 1996a). The of K, Ca, Mg, S .and moderate amount. of N,distillery spentwash after the primary treatment P and micro nutrients. (Devarajan etal, 1993~is called distillery effluent.The distillery effluent Rajukkannu, .1996a). Bertranou et al (1987)(primary treated) is dark brown· in colour and reported that potassium is the componenthas an unpleasant smell of burnt or carame1ised supplied in large quantities by winery andsugar. The pre-treated distillery effluent is near distillery effluent. Lakshmanan and Gopalneutral (7.8) in reaction and having high EC (1996) reported that the 'distillery effluent(24.3 dSm·l ). Sharma et aJ. (2001) stated that contains 26:5 x 106 bacteria, 14.7 x 105

potassium salts were mainly responsible for actinomycefes, 24.5 x 103 fungi and 18.3 x'increasing the EC. It carri~s a huge organic 102 yeaSt per ml of distillery effluent and they

.load ie., BOD 5600 and COD 45,000·· and also stated thelt the high BOD and COD of.the. total solids 81,000 ppm. The high COD of effluent may be the reason for the'reduced

the raw effluent might be'due to the presence microbial load. ~iemelae and Vaeaetaenenof large quantity of chemicals in the raw effluent . (1982) reported the presence of Azotobacter(Blackwell et al, 1979). Recault (1990) also sp in the distillery effluent. .

Table 1. Physico-chemica! properties of ~pentwashidistiUery effluent

Parameters

ColourOdour

pHEC(dsm·')BOO( 5 d at 20' q(mg/l)COO{mg/l)Moisture %Minero,I malter % on 0.0 basisTotal so\lds{mg/l)Total diIIOlved soIlds(mg/I)Total ..-pended IOlidI(mg/I)TotalllOlatile IIOIldJ(mg/l)Organic carbon(%)Total N(mg/I)C:N ratioTotal P as p.o. (mg/I)Total K as K.0 (mgll)Total Ca(mg/l),.otal Mg(mg/l)Total Na(mgll)Total S(mgII)Tolal"Zn(mg/l)Total Cu{mgII)Total Fe(mgII)Total Mn(mg/l)Chloride(mg/l)

Distillery spent wash - as soil amendmentAbout 2.5 million ha in India have

been affected solely by sodicity (Brinkman andSingh, 1984). Soil sodicity is characterised by

high pH, water soluble and exchangeable.sodium. The ba,sic principle in the reclamationof sodic soils is to replace the Na+ ion from soilexchange sites by cations like H+, Ca++ and

18 AGmCULTURAL REVIEWS

Mg++' ions. Since the distillery spentwash is ESP (Singh et aJ., 1980). The pH decreasedhighly acidic and contains fairly good amount to' safe limits 'but· the extent of decrease wasof Ca and Mg and other essential plant less in lower depths. The ESP reduced fromnutrients, this could be used as an organic 100 to 2 in the top 15 cm layer. Valliappanamendment' to impro~e the soil properties etal (2001) reported that one time C:lppUcationparticularly in reclamation of non-saline sodic of spentwash at 150 ml kgl soil followed bysoils. The potential of distillery spent wash to two leaching and tr~splanting rice on ,40thsupply H+ (sinGe DSW is highly acidic), Ca++ day of its application had proved to be moreand Mg++ has been used as a basic principle to effective than lowf;lr dose of spentwash andreclaim thesodic soil (I.e. to replace Na+ ions gypsum @ 50% GR in redw:tng the soil pH,in the soil exchange complex) (Valliappan, ESP and SAR of sodic soil to the level of < 8,1999). Dhar and Mukherjee (1938 a,b) were < 10.9 and < 3.0 respectively (Table 2). Thethe pioneers to use pressmud and molasses for EC of the spentwash treated soils was broughtthe reclamation of alkali soils. Dhar (1939) down to < 1.0 dSm- l after two leaching.reported that due to oxidation of carbohydra~es Rajukkannu et aJ. (1996) and Sharmila et al(60-70% in molasses), organic acids are formed (2001)' have given stepwise sodic soilwhich solubilises the native calcium carbonate reclamation procedure using distillery spentand helps in reclamation of alkali soils. Addition wash which includfilS, i, dividing thel~ intoof spent wash with out dilution was found to compartments of convenient size, ii, ploughingbe very effective in increasing the intakera.te the land, iii, applying distillery spentwash evenlyof a sodic calcareous alluvial soil having 100 @ 5lakh Iha-t,.iv, impound water to a depth

Table 2. Effect of Spentwash and gypsum on thephysito-chemical properties andthe nutrient availability of non-saUne sodic soils

(Mean of twO repUcations and three locations)

S. No. Parameters Control Gypsum@50% GR Spentwash@ 150 mI kg.1 soil

Before After two I Before ' After twoleaching leaching leaching leaching

'1. pH 9.37 9.02 8.94 7.50 7.672. EC(dsm'l) 0.55 6.84 0.10 2.56 0.7443. SAR(1:2.5) 11.14 6.88 5.98' 6.54 2.30'4, ESP 36.94 29.65 23.85 15.94 9.65rJ. Free CaCoiJlo) 1.89 1.92 1.91 1.60 1.526 Organic carbon(%) 0.29 0.29 0.25 0,65 0.497 Bulk density (mg m-3) 1.62 1.51 1.57 1.24 1.368, Hydraulic conductivity 0.44 2.42 1.25 6.16 2.57

(x 106 ms-I )

9. Water dispersible clay (%) 7.29 2.64 3.92 0.00 2.2610. Pore space(%) 44.67 45.73 45.13 50.40 47.6711. Available N(Kg l1a· l ) 116 • 132.0 147.0 222.0 244.012. Available p(Kg ha·l ) 6.13 8.03 8:93 20.33 25.1313. Available K(Kg ha·l) 193.0 261.0 246.0 ' 2647.0 165414. 0.15% eaq's (mg kg.l) 16.0 255.0 50.0 410.0 106.015. DTPA -Zn (mg kg·l ) 0.48 0.67 0.82 2.70 3.0316. DTPA -Cu (mg kgl ) 1.12 1.21 1.26 1.73 1.8217. DTPA -Fe (mg kg· l) 11.85 18.37' 23.72 32.80 51.2018 DTPA -Mn (mg kg·l ) , 10.70 13.63 13.66 18.30 17.97

VaUlappan (1998)

Vol. 24. No.1. 2003

of 10-15 cm after 7 days, v,draining after 24hours vi, r.epeating of impounding water anddrainage two to three times, vii, ploughing atoptimal moisture level viii, application of welldecomposed FYM or composted press mud @

5 t ha'l, ix, sowing/transplanting after60 daysof spentwash application.They also suggestedthat reclamation should be carried outpreferably during summer months.

The studies conducted by Rajukkannuet a! (1996b) revealed that application ofdistillery spent wash @ 51akh litres ha'l to theair dried non-saline sodic soil, followed by twoor three leachings with water could effectivelyreclaim sodic soil and suggested a fair periodof 60 days from the days of its application andtransplanting of rice seedlings for theestablishment of rice crop. The detailed study(Valliappan,1999) of reclamation of sadic soilusing distillery spentwash revealed that thesaturated hydraulic conductivity and pore spaceof the spent wash treated leached soils had beenconsiderably increased from 0.44 to 2.57 x10-6 m S'l and 44.67% to 47.67% respectivelywith simultaneous reduction in the bulk densityand water dispersible clay from 1.6210 1.36Mg m,3 and 7.29 to 2.26% indicating theunique feature of distillery, spentwash on thereclamation of sadic soils . The availability ofN, P, K, 5, Zn, Cu, Fe and Mn in the spentwashammended sodic soils was found tremendouslyincreased to the level of 244 kg ha'l, 25.13 kgha'l, 1654 kg ha'l, 106 mg kg'l, 3.03 mgkg'I, 1.82 mg kg'I, 51.2 mg kg'I, 17.97 mgkg'l, as against 116 kg ha'l, 6.13 kg ha'1,193kg ha'l, 16 mg kg'l, 0.48 mg kg-l, 1.~2 mgkg'l, 11.85 mg kg'l and 10.7 mg kg'l in thecontroi respectively. He also mentioned thereasons for such remarkable effeCt of spentwashapplication on greater nutrient availability ofsodic soils. They are i) contribution of hugeamounts of K and organic matter, considerablequantities of N, P and 5 and traces ofmicronutrients through added spentwash ii) by

serving 'as a source of food for soil fungi,bacteria and actinomycets, it helps in rapidmultiplication and build up and consequentlyincreases the acidity of many enzyme~ iii)conversion of the unavailable native soilnutrients into a~ailable nutrients particularly Pand micronutrients due to the action of acidicspent wash iv) formation of relatively stablechelates with organic legends.

Distillery effluent - as composting agentSince the effluent contains organic

materials and many plant nutrient elements,there is scope for using it advantageously incomposting of other SlIgar industrial by­products namely pressmud, bagasse etc. Thecomposting enables the degradation ofcoloured organics in' the distillery effluent andevaporation of water rapidly and also reducti~n

in BOD: Distillery effluent will also enrich thecompost with plant nutrients especiallypotassium. Suitable compost can be made inthree, months' from vinasse in different,combinations e.g. vinasse + press mUd cakeor from vinasse + sugarcane bagasse + ricestraw (Pandey et aI,1994). Devarajan et aI(1996c) stated that the distillery effluent basedcompost can be prepared "by using presSffiudand the compost could be enri~hed with theuse of rock phosphate, gypsum, yeast sludge,bagasse, sugarcane trash, boiler ash, coir pithand water hyacinth. First, the pressmud isspread in the compost yard to form a heap of1.5 mheight, 3.5 m width and 300mlength.Ten Iitres of bacterial culture, diluted wiiliwater,in the ratio of 1: lOis sufficient for a tonne ofpressmud. After 3 days, distillery effluent issprayed 'on the heaps to a moisture level of 60per cent and the pressmud heaps are allowedfor 4-5 hours to'absorb the effluent. The heapsare then thoroughly mixed by aerotiller. Whenthe moisture level drops below 30-40 per cent,again the effluent is sprayed, mixed withpressmud and heaps are again formed. Effluentcan be sprayed once or twice in a week

20 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

depending on the moisture content of pressmud fertilisers in more than 4000 hectares of caneheaps. Mixing of effluent and heap formation lands in Zimbabwe. Sengik and Kiel (1995)will be repeated for 8 weeks so that the reported that vinasse application reduced thepressmud and effluent proportion reaches an volatilisation loss of NH

3in the' soil compared

optimum ratio of 1 : 3, Then the heaps are· to cattle manure, refuse compost at1d peat. Theallowed for curing for a month. The compost sorghum crop grown on a Typic chromustertobtained from this process is neutral in pH with irrigated with 25 times diluted spentwash andan EC of 3.12 to 6.40 dSm'l. It, contains supplied with 75% recommended dose fertiliser1.53 % N, 1.50 % P, 3.10 % K, 300 ppm Fe, were equal to that obtained through FYM +130 ppm Cu, 180 ppm Mn and 220 ppm Zn. 100% recommended dose of fertiliserThe orgaliic carbon al)d C: N ratio reduced (Zalawadia and Raman, 1994). Joshi et alfrom 36 to 18 % and from 28.12 to· 16.3 % (1996) reported that effluent treatment at 20%respectivelY. Ravichandran (1997) reported dilution with 50 % NP application had shownthat in distillery effluent based pressmud the best yield (5.3 t ha·1) in case of maize, savingcomposting , the effluent to pressmud ratio at· 50% N and P and 100% K. Baskar etaJ. (2001)best is 2 Le. 2 cU.m per tonne of fresh stated that in distillery effluent applied plots,pressmud. The technology of using distillery N&P and NPK gave comparable yields whicheffluent for composting of presslTlud indicated that K fertilizer could be skipped in(ManavalanandSrinivasan, 1996; Ramalingam the distillery'effluent applied fields,

. et al., 1996; Ramadurai et al., 199.6; Effluent based liquid fertiliserNagappan etal, 1996c), ~ressmudalo~gWlth , In distillery effluent, the content of K .sugarcarye trash and cOlr waste (RaJannan is very high when compared to other nutrients.et al,1996), pressmud plus bagasse ash So nutrients like N S have been added to(Devarajan et al, 1996c) and, city garbage distillery effluent in ~rder to give a balanced(Mohan Rao, 1996) have been successfully nutrition. The use of urea mixed bio-dunderte~ed in so many places: (distillery spent wash) to supply all the nitrogenDistillery efflOent as fertiliser substitute and potassium. fertilizer requirements for

The distillery 'effleunt contains fairly sugarcane in a single application ,has widehigh amounts of N, P, K, Ca, Mg and S besides appeal to cane growers of Australia. Such aappreciable amounts of micronutrients which practice, if adopted, would lead to somethe sugarcane crop has absorbed from the soil ammonia losses,but these losses may be(Manickam, 1996). Application of distillery acceptable because there are significant costeffluent @ 50 m3 ha'l will supply 75 kg N, 40 savings in using bio-dunder, andin using lowerkg P20 S' 500 kg K which represent almost half grade urea fines, which are cheaper than higherthe Nand P and 100 % of the K requirement. grade granulated urea. Urea mixed bio-dunder(Rajukkannu and Manickam, 1996). It will also alsq appears to be a suitable delivery methodsupply 105 kg Ca, 100.kg Mg, 200 kg S,0.5 for urease and nitrification inhibitors ,if suchkg Zn, 3.25 kg Fe, 0.2' kg Cu and 0.25: kg chemicals can be shown to be economically

.Mn. Chares (1985) reported tl1at the distillery effective. The experiments at Bakers creek,effluent could be used as a complement for Australia 1'evealed that the urea mixed bio­mineral fertilizer to sugarcane ip)3razil. Booth dunder (distillery spent wash) showed ~educed

and Ligntfoot ( 1990) observed that the use of ammonia volatilisation losses (19 kg/haethanol sillage (vinasse) had removed the respectively) compared to urea (22 kg N/ha),necessity for aimual dressing of P and K when applied to a green cane trash blanket

Vol. 24, No. 1,2003 21

(Chapman et ai., 1994). The exprimentsconducted by Chapman et al(1995} showedthat urea mixed bio-dunder had ammoniavolatalisation losses of 22 kg/ha whenbroadcast onto green cane trash and 16 kg N/ha when broadcast ont6 soil (Exp. 9). Theseammonia volatilisation losses were 76 and73%, respectively, of the volatilisation lossesfrom broadcast urea. NH3 loss from the ureamixed bio-dunder was only 63% of that withgranular urea at 8 days, but rose to 87% (19kg N/ha) at 29 days. Delaying applications ofurea enriched biodunder until crop has grownto 0.5 m in height will produce the best caneyield and make the most efficient use of Nfertilizer. Applying urea mixed bio-dunder atratooning is acceptable, where irrigation isavailable to wash urea into the soil, or wherewet soil conditions are imminent at the end ofseason. Use overhead irrigation to wash ureainto the soil within five days of applying ureamixed bio-dunder to green cane trash or soil,thus reducing ammonia volatilization losses.Rood irrigation is not recommended whereurea mixed bio-dunder is placed on the interrowas water will dissolve urea as it moves downthe furrow leading to uneven distribution ofnitrogen.Chapman (1995) stated that sulfur inbio~dunder is organic and will not be adequate

. for deficient· soils « 3 mg S/kg soil). Under.these conditions urea and sulfuric acid mixedbio-dunder should be used. Adding sulfuric acidto urea mixed bio-dunder to enrich it with sulfur(15 kg;ha) had no significant short-effect onsoil acidity.

Method of applicationThe undiluted spent wash/effluent

(treated spent wash) could not be directlyapplied to the growing crops because of theirexcessive BOD, COD and EC. Therefore itshould be applied to the field well before theplanting of crop to give sufficient time for thenatural oxidation of organic materials or dilutedwith normal water to bring down the excessive

BOD, COD and EC and then applied to thegrowing crops. Application of undilut.edspentwash followed by irrigation rather thanthe dilution of spent wash at the time of itsapplication was very effective in the reclamationof sadie soils (Singh etal, 1980). The distilleryeffluent could be transported from distillery.factory to the agricultural field through pipelinesor tanker lorries. The distillery factories aregiving full/half of the transport cost to thefarmers.

Diluted effluent application to growing cropsas fertigation

The primary treated di~tillery effluentis found to contain all major and micronutrientsin considerable. amount to sustain .growth andyield of crops. Technology has been developedto use this effluent as fertigation source to cropslike sugarcane, sunflower, soybean etc., afterdiluting it with irrigation water to reduce theBOD level in the ratios of 1: 10 to 1:50.(Rajukkannu, 1996). Pawar (1984) reportedthat 50 times diluted spent wash was beneficialwhich recorded higher juice purity, brix, poland yield of sugarcane C0740. Agarwal andDua (1976) observed 5 times yield increase insugarcana due to the application of 20 timesdiluted spent wash. Kayalvizhi (2000) foundthat the cane yield was higher at 1:10 dilutionof distillery effluent in suagrcane. Devarajanet al (1993) and Rajannan et al (1996) haveconcluded that distillery spent wash at 40 to50 times dilutions increased the yield ofsugarcane, banana, gingellyand rice. Amongthe different sugarcane varieties compared,CoC. 771 recorded higher cane yield andmillable canes upto 20 times dilution and thatof Co.853 upto 30 times dilution. TheCo.8021 and Co.740 showed high cane yieldand millable canes upto 40 times dilution only.All the varieties showed high brix, POL, puritywhereas, Commercial Cane Sugar (CCS) % ofjuice showed decreasing trend. with distilleryeffluent irrigations at decreasing rate of dilutions

22 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

(Devarajan et aI., 1996b). Kayalvizhi (2000)found that the cane yield was higher at 1: 10dilution of distillery effluent in suagrcane. Gopal(2001) recorded higher cane yield in 1:20dilution of distillery effluent in sandy soils whileKayalvizhi (2001) observed higher cane yieldunder 1 :30 dilutions in clay loam soils. Theexperiment conducted by Pujar andManjllnathaiah (1996) revealed that distilleryeffluent at 1 : 10 dilutions showed significantlyhigher yields in maize and sugar~ane whereasthe highest yield in wheat was favoured by 1:50dilutions. Paddy recorded lower grain yield evenin 50 times diluted effluent irrigation than watercontrol. In gingelly crop, higher seed and oilyield were recorded with 40 and 50 timesdiluted irrigations. Groundmit, Soybean,sunflower and forage crops recorded higheryield at 30 to 50 times dilutions. A reductionin rhizome yield of turmeric was noticed witheffluent irrigations even at higher dilutions(Devarajan et aJ., 1993). The experimentconQucted by Kathiresan etal.(2001) revealedthat diluted (3 : 1 - water + effluent) effluentapplication after tillering phase (from 110 DAPto harvest) register~d significantly more numberof millable cane (98.6 t ha'l ), lengthier cane(135.9 em), higher cane (105.6 t h"a-1) andsugar yield (12.6 t ha-1) than irrigationscommencing from germination and grandgrowth phase. . '

Pre-plant application of undiluted distilleryeffluent .

Although the fertigation of distilleryeffluent to crops after diluting the effluent withirrigation water has given good results, farmersare finding this technology cumbersome asthere are no proper contrivances to adjust theeffluent water ratios in the field. Further theeffluent or effluent mixture could not betransported to field situated interior duringcropping season. Therefore, it was thought thatthe undiluted effluent if applied in fallow landsduring surrimer, facilitating oxidation of organic

matter and reduction of BOD levels could takecare of the soil fertility problems and increasethe crop yields (Rajukkannu, 2001). Researchwork carried out in South American Countriesrevealed that sugarcane yield could be increasedfrom 3 to 35 % when vinasee was applied aspre-sown one time application at the rate of150-606m3 ha-1 (Scandaliaris etal., 1987) andthere was no adverse effect on sprouting ofcane (Perez-Zamora et al.,1990). Devarajanand Oblisamy (1995) reported that pre-plantapplication of distillery effluent @ 125 t ha-1

registered the highest cane yield of 155.8 tha-1 followed by 250 and 50 t ha-l whichregistered 148.9 and 147.7 t ha'\ respectively.Samuel (1986) stated that distillery effluentcontains N, P, K, Ca, Mg and S04 and it is ofvalue a$ fertilizer when applied well before theplanting of sugarcane crop. Anonymous (1986)reported that pre-plant application of. distilleryeffluent at 150 and 300 t/ha increased thesugarcane yield by 53.8 and 44.0 %respectively when compared with untreatedcontrol. Baskar et al.(2001) reported thatapplication of pre~treated distinery effluent atgraded doses (0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5lakh litres per acre) progressively increased thecane yield of sugarcane when it was appliedwell before (40 days) the planting.

Effect 0n physical properties of soil .Soil permeability is an important

parameter when planning for liquid wastedisposal to agricultura1 land. VintelJ etal. (1983)reported that the reduction in hydraulicconductivity by effluent irrigation was.due toaccumulation of solids at the soil surface.Devarajan etaJ. (1996a) also reported that theinfiltration rate of. the- soils was significantlyreduced with effluent irrigations and thereduction Was marginal at 50 times dilution(5.2 %) and appreciable at 10 times dilution(54.5 %). In soils, heavily overloaded withorganiccaroon compounds due to liquidwastes, there is build up in the waste water

Vol. 24, No.1, 2003 23

solids and the solids formed by bacterial activity layer (0-15 cm)and the increase was veryunder anaerobic conditions, caused by the high marginal at lower depth. He also observed thatoxygen demand. This will inturn cause a EC of the effluent treated soil was significantlydecrease in the infiltration rate. (Bouwar and reduced after rice crop. This could be due toChaney, 1974). Jhosi etal (1996)found that leachingofthe~ during rice crop as standingthere was an improvement in saturated water of 5 cm was maintained which helped inhydraulic conductivity and reduction in bulk removing the excess salt~ from soil profile.density of the soils with effluent amendment However, Zalawadia and Raman (1994)over the controL observed three fold increase in EC values inEffect on· physico-chemical properties of soil soil (Typic chromusterfJ irrigated with diluted

Since the distillery effluent contains distillery spent wash. Sharma etal (1981) andappreciable amount of basic cations, organic Dubey et a/. (2000) .stated that the quality ofmatter and higher salt load, its application to diluted spent wash was not suitable for irrigationsoil may affect the physico-chemical properties to a Typic HapJuserts as the EC value wasof soiL Sweeney and Graetz (1991) reported higher than 2,dSm'1 and SAR more than 4.that the addition of distillery effluent regardless Effect on available nutrients of soilof rate, raised the soil pH, owing to increase Since the distillery effluent is a plantin soil K, Ca, Mg and Na levels. Mattiazo and ~ract, it contains high organic-load. So theAda Gloria (1985 ) found that the organic application of this distillery effluent significantlymatter oxidation brought out by miCrobial increased organic carbon content of the postactivity was responsible for increased pH of harvest soil (Gurusamy, 19~6; Nagappanthe soil treated with distillery effluent. The et a/. , 1996a; Rajukkannu et aJ ., 1996a;studies conducted by Anon (1993) indicated ~yalvizhi etaL, 2001). Devarajan eta/. (1996that one time application of treated undiluted b) stated that the significant ihcrease in theeffluent before planting of the crop and . organic carbon content of the soils, with effluentploughed into the soils raised the pH slightly irrigation, could be attributed to the high

. to the alkaline (7.87) and soil EC was not raised organic load of the effluent. This is inbeyond 0,25 dSm'] even at 500 t/ha of treated accordance with Racault (1990) who reportedeffluent application. Jhosi eta/. (1996) reported that the distillery effluent was concentrated withthat the soil pH registered no significant change soluble forms of organic matter. Baskar et aLwith effluent amendment in wheat crop. Baskar (2001) stated that though the distillery effluentetaJ. (2001) reported that pre-plant application contains only small quantity of nitrogen, itsof graded doses of distillery effluent significantly application significantly increased the availableincreased the pH and EC of the soil from the N status of post harvest soiL This might be dueinitial level and they stated that the high salt to its direct contribution as well as throughload of effluent might have increased the soluble incre..ased microbial activity by the supply ofsalt content of the post harvest soiL However other essential nutrients and organic matterthe increase in the EC of the soil was well within which inturn might have increased microbialthe safe limit of 1.0 dSm·1• Increase in EC after decomposition and released the native Ndistillery effluent application in agriculture was source. Rajukkannu etaJ. (1996a) reported thatalso reported by Jadhav and Savant (1975) and the high available N in the post harvest soil inAjmal and Khan (1988). Jhosi et aL (1996) the effluent treated plots might be due to thereported that application of distillery effluent mineralisation of organic matter in soil suppliedincreased the EC after wheat harvest in surface through distillery effluent. Mena et al (1986)

24 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

also reported that the vinasse to soil increasedthe total N, C and organic matter contentsand modified the C : N ratio. Devarajan et-a/.(1996b) reported that the available N increasedfrom 276 to 412 kg ha-1With 10 times diluteddistillery effluent irrigation.

. Application of effluent. increased theavailable P and k status of the soil to the tuneof two to three times from the initial soil testvalue inspite of the crop removal which mightbe due to the higher P and K contents of theeffluent (Devarajan eta/., 1996a; Baskar etaL,2001; Kayalvizhi etaL, 2001). Application ofdistillery spent wash to alkali soil significantlyincreased the available P content of the soil.The acidity and H~03 of distillery spent washhad solubilised the native insoluble soil P andthus helped to increase the available P(Rajukkannu et a/., 1996a). Bertranou et aL(1989) .reported that the available K wasincreased by 4 to 5 times due to effluentirrigations which might be due to the fact thatK is the component supplied i~llarge quantities.Chang and Li (1988) found that the applicationof vinasse to the main crop of sugarcaneincreased the available K content of the surfacesoil and remained' high even after the harvestof the first ratoon. Thus the effluent had notonly supplied the nutrients to the existing cropbut also maintained and impro~ed the soilfertility.(for the next crop). The experimentconducted by Joshi et ai (l996) revealed thatat surface layer the available K content of thepost harvest soil (after wheat crop) waSsubstantially increased from 87 ppm (control)to 1075 ppm due to one time application ofdistillery effluent @ 240 m3ha·1. They observeda buildup in K content in the lower depths also(313 ppm in distillery effluent @ 240 m3 ha-1

applied plot as compared to control (88ppm)at 75 - 90 cm depth) but the magnitude wasless than that of the surface layer. Somashekaret aL(1984) opined that the mineralization oforganic material as well as the nutrients present

in the effluents are responsible for the increasein the availability of plant nutrients.

The excj1angeable Ca, Mg and Nacontents of the post harvest soil weresignificantly increased due to the applicationgraded doses of distillery effluent. This mightbe due to Ca, Mg and Na contents of theeffluent (Devarajan etaL, '1996aj Baskar etaL,2001; Kayalvizhi et aL, 2001). Cepro andMachado (1987) stated that the cane fieldirrigation with sugar factory waste watereffected a tendency for the exchangeable Cato increase. Sweeney and Graetz (1991)reported that the digested distillery effluentapplication increased soil concentrations' ofmost elements particularly K and Na. They alsostated that the increase in the contents of these'elements might be the reason for the littleincrease in the pH of post harvest soil due toeffluent application. Devarajan et aL (1996b)observed an increase of available Ca and Mgfrom 1400 ppm to 2200 ppm and 126 ppmto 470 ppm respectively due to the applicationof 10 times diluted distillery effluent.

Devarajan et aL (l996a) reported thatthe available micronutrients viz., Zn, Fe, Cuand Mn of the post harvest soil were increasedfrom 2.2 to 3.9 ppm, 22.9 to 31.6 ppm, 4.1to 7.3 ppm and 15.5 to 25.8 ppm respectivelydue fertigation with 10 times diluted distilleryeffluent. Similar increase in the availability ofmicrom.itrients were also observed by Kayalvizhieta/. (2001). Baskar etaL (2001) reported thatthe available micronutrients viz., Fe, Mn, Znand Cu were progressively increased by thegraded levels of distillery effluent and theavailability being maximum with the applicationof distillery effluent @ 2.5 lakh litres per acre.They also stated that increased availability mightbe due to direct contribution from the effluentas well as solubilisation and chelation effect oforganic matter supplied by the effluent.

Effect on biological properties of soilThe rhizosphere region could be

Vol. 24, No.1, 2003 25

influenced by various environmental factors andphysiological conditions of the plant, whichmight have been responsible for variations inthe pOpulation dynamics of different groups ofmicroflora in the rhizosphere of crops asinfluenced by effluent irrigation. Theexperiment conducted by Rajukkannu et al.(1996a) reveal~d that application of distilleryspent wash drastically reduced the number ofbacteria, fungi and actinomycets during theinitial periods. The higher BOD of the OSWand the resultant depletion of oxygen in thesoil would have drastically reduced the microbialpopulation. However, the post harvest soilsamples had showed the built up of microbialpopulation greater than the original level in thetreated soil samples collected 7 days afterapplication. Therefore a minimum period of45· 60 should be given between the undilutedspent wash application and planting. Thepopulation dynamics of bacteria, actinomycets,fungi, Azospirillum and Azotobacter in the fieldsoils grown with. turmeric, paddy, gingelly,cotton, banana and groundnut showed that the50 time and 40 time diluted effluent irrigationsenhanced or maintained the microbialpopulations in the soils (Oevarajan etal., 1993).The soil enzyme activities were also maintainedwith 50 times diluted effluent irrigation.Lakshmanan and Gopal (1996) also found thatthe population of bacteria, fungi, actinomycetesarid acetobactor in the soils irrigated with 50times diluted effluent was higher than the soilsirrigated with other dilutions viz., 40, 30, 20and 10 time dilutions and they reported thatthe population varied with period under effluentirrigation and the peak was recorded in thefifth month.

Effect on cropsSjnce the distillery effluent is essentially

a plant extract and contains high level oforganic carbon, K, Ca, Mg, S and appreciablequantities of micronutrients and does notcontain any toxic constituents, it has been

advantageou;>ly used as fertigation for crops.Pathak etal. (1998) observed that the distilleryeffluent after methanation (BOD 5000mg LICOD 25,000 mg LI) can be used for irrigationto wheat and rice crop in an Inceptisol withoutsignificant effect on rice crop by diluting itsuitably ·to a BOD level below 1000 mg L-I.They also stated that applicati6n of distilleryeffluent decreased the grain yield of wheatwhereas the rice grajn yield registered anincreasing trend upto BOD 2000 mg L·I.Rajukkannu et aJ. (1996a) reported thatapplication of distillery spentwash to sodic soilsignificantly increased the number of tillers,productive tillers and grain yield of rice (TRY­1) crop. Kaushik et al, (1996) reported thatthe seedling growth of wheat cv. WH-147reduced significantly in aquous and soil mediumdue to application of spentwash and they alsoobserved that the effluent treatment increasedthe concentration of various pigments in wheatcrop.The acidic characteristics of the spentwash results in high evoluation of CO2 whichwas q times greater than FYM which affectthe dry matter yield of maize cv. African Tallsignificantly (Patil and Shinde, 1995). Madrodetal (1986) reported that the protein per centin wheat grains showed an increased trend atlower dilutions of effluent irrigation but thestarch pet cent in maize grains was vice versa~

Scaloppi et aJ. (1989) stated thatsugarcane could be successfully grown jn soilstreated with vinasse and that these soils werenot particularly suitable before vinasseapplication. Application of spent washincreased the cane yield of sugarcane inPhilippines (Gonzales and Tianco; 1982),Australia (Usher and Wellington, 1979), Cuba(Vierira, 1982) and South Americq (Scandaliariset al., 1987). Ghugare and Magar (1995)reported that application of 50 fold diluted 16Mg ha- l lagoon stored vinasse (BOD 4350 mg .L-I) to medium black soil gave 20% higher caneyield than control. Oevarajan and Oblisami

26 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

Legumes were more sensitive.tovinasse application (Sharma, 2001). The seedgermination and seedling growth of Phaseolousradiatus and Cajanus'cajan were significantlyreduced due to the application 5% distilleryeffluent. (Sahaiand Neelam,-1987; ~ukherjeeand Sahai, 1988). Distillery effluent appliedbeyond 10% v/v inhibited root growth in Pisumsativum (Rani and Shrivastava, 1990). Thehigh BOD load and excess soluble salts in theeffluent were responsible for their toxic effect

(1995) recorded similar observation. An on legumes~ The protein content in peasincrease of 5.5,8.4,11.4,12.7,13.7 t ac·1 registered a decreasing trend with increasingof cane yield were recorded due to the pre- concentration of spentwash (Rani etal., 1991).plant (40 days before planting) application of Less nodulation and no poding Was observed0.5,1.0, 1.5,2.0 and 2.5lakhlitres of distillery in case of groundnut receiving raw distilleryeffluent overcontrol (Baskar etal., 2001). Anon effluent (Juwarkar et al,·1990).(1986) reported that the application of distillery . Sharma (2001) reported that vinasseeffluent at 150 and 300 t/ha increased the· (2.5 -'3.5 t ha·1) increased the yield ofsugarcane yield .by 53.8 and 44.0 % sugarbeet, potatoes and other vegetables byrespectively when' compared with untreated 20 %, but had adverse effect on legumes. Incontrol. The quality parameters of sugarc~ne Okra germination percentages increased fromviz., POL, putrity, commercial CCS % were 75% with tap w?lterto 90% with 25 % effluent,not· influenced due to diluted effluent then fell markedly.to 10% with 50% effluent,irrigation.But the brix percentage in cane juice and 0% with 100% effluent. Both shpot andwas found significantly increased in plots root length and fruit weight together withirrigated with 10 times diluted effluent (23.0%) biomass and root dry weight were greatest withover river water irrigation(22.34%). Mohan 25% effluent. Shoot dry weight was greatestSingh et al.(1993) and Madrod et al (1986) with 50% effluent (Hari etal, 1994). Devarajanwere reported similar findings when they used etal. (1993) reported that there was a reductiondistillery effluent to irrigate sugarcane crop. in rhizome yield of turmeric with effluent

Nagappan etal(1996a) reported that irrigations even at higher dilutions and the otherapplication of distilleiy effluent @ 0.30 lakh crops viz., groundnut, soybean; sunflower andlitres per acre per month along with irrigation forage crops recorded higher yield at 30-50water for wet land and garden land crops and times dilutions.0.90 lakh litres per acre for rainfed crops In Otrusmaxima the shoot length, leafincreased the yield of crops viz., wet land number/plant, leaf area, chlorophyll contentsugarcane, wet land paddy, garden land and phytomass exhibited a gradual increasesugarcane, garden land paddy, garden land upto 10% effluent concentration applicationcotton, rainted maize, rainfed sorghum, rainfed (Rani and Srivastava, 1990). In the treated Cbajra and rainfed redgram to the tune of 39.01, maxima plants, the concentration of most of0.070,28.85,0.79,0.50,0.17,0.23,0.26, the aminoacids was lower than in the controland 0.43 tonnes per ha respectively over and aspartic acid, glycine, glutamic acid andcontrol. tryptophan concentrations were distinctly

higher in the control than the treated plants.(Rani et ai, 1991). Devarajan and Oblisamy(1994) found that the highest annual yield ofBanana cv. Poovan (48.4 t/ha) was obtainedfrom the control treatment, although the yieldswith the 50 and 40 times dilutions gavecomparable results (47.6 and 45.5 t/harespectively) and the yield increased withincreasing effluent concentration, falling to16.9 t/ha with the 10 times dilution and theyconcluded that the higher dilutions could be

V~.2~,No.l,2003 27

used without adversely affecting soil fertility or destruction of aquatic life and bad smellcrop yield. (obnoxious odour of H2S from sulfates, indole

Pandey and Soni (1994) noted that at and skatole from the yeast cells )are some ofa lower concentration (10%), effluent enhanced the major pollution problems due to distillerythe value of PV (peak value of germination) waste water (Jeshi et al 1996). The distillery

spent wash is a major pollutant because of itsand MDG (mean daily germination) in Accasia high organic contents (Kulkarni et al.,1987).catechuand Dalbergia sissoo but there was no The high BOD causes depletion of dissolvedeffect on time required for germination oxygen and proves very harmful to aquatic life.compared with control values for the two Additiol) of distillery effluent to river Wainspecies. Pandey et al. (1994) evaluated Ganga in high concentration of organic mattercomparative effect of different concentration and salts in the river which is responsible ofon germination of 3MPTs (Acacia catechu, for decrease in 00 and pH and increase inDalbergia sissooand Morusa1~ and reported BOD, COD anQ total dissolved solids in riverthat the low effluent concentration (10%) water(Chauhan,1991).lnstancesofiargescaleenhanced the germination of all species relative mortality of fish in river Gomtri due to distilleryto control values, but ~igher effluent effluent had been reported by Joshi (1990).concentrations (20-80%) increasingly inhibited Joshi et aJ. (1994) noticed ground watergermination; and 1000AJ effluent totally inhibited contamination by e{fluent with high BOD andgermination in all species. In Albizia procera salt content near the lagoon sites in most of(Pandey et aI., 1994) germination percentage the distilleries. This problem have beenand time were similar in control and 10%' overcome at some of the sites by lining theeffluent treatments (89-90% and 7 days lagoons and ensuring effluent to be regularlyrespectively),but at 20-100% effluent used for irrigation ona larger area under wellconcentration, germination decreased devised agronomic plan resulting in minimumprogressively, with very little germination at retention time in the lagoons.80% effluent and none at 100%. Nagappan CONCLUSIONet aJ. (1996 b) found that fertigation with .The salts commonly present in thistreated distillery effluent @ 175 IItree.. effluent are pf K and SO apart: from N, P andsignificantly increased the yield of cashew when microni.Jtrients and all these elements arecompared to normal irrigation water. essential nutrients of plants. Therefore, itsEnvironmental impact of distillery effluent fertiliser potential can suitably be harhessed in_ If the distillery effluent. is not utilized agriculture as. above mentioned methods (pre-

in agriculture and it finds access into the open plant application or with proper dilution). Thusdrains, it will pose a Serious threat to. water utilisation .of distillery effluents in agriculturequality. and fragile ecosystem. Lowering of pH would. save costs on fertilisers and fac!litatevalue of the stream, increase in organic load, reduction in pollution load on aquatic eco­depletion of oxygen content, discoloration; system.

REFERENCESAgarval, M.L. and Dua, S.P. (1976). Nat. Sem. Treatment and Disposal of Effluents from Sugar and Distillery Industry.

.BangaIore. Distillery Sec. 15-58.Ajamal, M. and Khan, A.V. (1988). Environ: PoUut 30: 135.Anonymous (1986). Exp. Agro-Ind. "Obispo colombres" (TiJcuman) 28: 152 (Spanish).Anonymous (19~3). Final Report submitted by Department of Environmental Sciences. Tamil Nadu Agricultural

University, Coimbatore.

28 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

Baskar, M. et aL (2001). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.Feb. 5'\2001. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:76.

Bertranou, AV. eta/. (1987). Wat. Sci. Tech., 19: 1243-1246.Blackwell, B.R. eta/. (1979). TAPPI, 62: 33-37.Booth, R.J. and Ughtfot, C.J. (1990). Agric. Water Mgmt. , 17: 49-58.Bouwar, H.and Choney, R.L. (1974). Adv. Agron., 26: 133-176.Brinkman, R.T. and Sing, K.(1984). Ecology and Management of Problem Soil of Asia. Food and Fertil. Tool. Centre

Series. No.27 Taiwan, China.Cepro, G.S. and Machado, AJ. (1987). CentroAgric., 14(4): 76-80. (Spanish)Chang, S.J. and Li, S.W. (1988). Ann. Rpt. Taiwan Sugar Res.lnst., 11-12. .Chapman, L.S. (1995). Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations Queensland, Australia. 1-14.Chapman, L.S. et a/. (1994). Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations Queensland, Australia, 1-14Chapman, L.S. etaL (1995). Proc. Australian Society of Sugateane Technologists, 199-206.Chares, S. (1985). Sugarcane, 1987. 1: 20.Chauhan, A (1991).lndianJ. Environ. Hlth., 33: 203-207.Devarajan, L. and Oblisami, G. (1995). MadrasAgric. J., 82: 397~399.Devarajan, L. and Oblisami, G. (1994). South Indian Hart., 42: 324-326. .Devarajan, L. et a/: (1993). Final Report- 1990-1993.Department of Environmental Sciences, TNAU, Coimbatore.Devarajan, L. et aL(1996a). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:80-88. .Devarajan, L. et a/. (1996b). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:89-96. .Devarajan, L. et aL (1996c). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996.AC & R1, Trichy. pp:171-175.Dhar, N.R. (1939). J.lndian Chern. Soc., 2: 105-11I.Dhar, N.R. and Mukharji, SK (1938a). Proc. Natn. Aco. Sci. India, 6a: 297-303.Dhar, N.R. and Mukharji, SK (1938b). Prog. Sug. Tech. Assoc. India, 5: 15-24.Dubey, D.O. et aL (2000). Proc. Int. Conf. Managing Natural Resource for Sustainable Agric. Production in the 21­

Century. 2: 556-558.Ghugare, R.v. and Magar, S.S. (1995). Bhartiya - Sugar; 22: 97c98.

. Gonzales, MY. and Tianco,AP. (1982). In: Proc. 29th Annual Convention of Sugar Tech. Assoc. Ag., Philipines,467-490.

Gopal, H. et a/. (2001). In : Proc. Nat. Sem. Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.Feb. 5th , 2001. AC & R1, Trichy. pp:75. .

Gurusamy, R. (1986). Pollution Control Hand Book. pp: 203-212.Hari, O.M. etaL (1994). J. Environ. BioL, 15: 171-175.Jadhav, H.D. and Savant, NK (1975).lndianJ. Agric. Chern., 8: 73.Joshi, H.C. (1990). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. Management of Fisheries in Inland Open Water System$ of India, Barrackpore,

W. Bengal, India, Dec, 1998.·PP: 23~30. .Joshi, H.C. etaL (1994). AsiaPacilicJ. Environ. Development, 1: 92-103.Joshi, H.C. et a/. (1996). In : Pro. Nat. Symp.Use of-Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th & 29th

October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:97-107.Juwarkar, A et a/. (1990). Environ. Monitoring Assessment, 15: 200-210.Juwarkar, A. eta/. (1992). In: Fertilizers, Organic Manure, Recyclable Wastes and Biofertilizers. (Tandon, H.L.S. ed.)

Fertilizer Development and Consultation Organization, New Delhi, 72-90. .Karivaratharaju (1996). Proc. Nat. Symp.Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th & 29th

October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp: 8-13.Kathiresan, G. etaL (2001). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. Use of Poor Quality Water and.Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.

Feb. 5th,2001. AC & R1, Trichy. pp:80.Kaushik, eta/. (1996). Water Air Soi1PoUn., 137: 39-46.Kayalvizhi, C. et a/. (2000). SISSTA, 25: 65-70.Kayalvizhi, C: et a/. (2001). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.

Feb. 5th ,2001. AC & R1, Trichy. pp:75.Kulkarni, AD. et aL (1987). Bhartiya Sug., 12: 17-20.Lakshmanan, A. and Gopal, N.O. (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes iri.

Agriculture. 28th & 29th October,1996,AC & R1,Trichy. pp: 51-57.

Vol. 24, No. 1,2003 29

Madrod, P.v. etai. (1986). Sugarcane, 2: 23.Manavalan; R. and Srinivasan, G. (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp.Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture.

28th & 29th October, 1996. AC & RI,Trichy. pp:195~196.Manickam, T.S. (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th & 29th

October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:14-22.Mattiazo, M.E and Ada Gloria, N. (1985). STAB( Portugese), 4: 38-40.Mena, M.A. eta/. (1986). Cien. Agric., 29: 122-127.Mohan Rao, G. (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th & 29th

October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:162-164.Mohan Singh, M.P. etal (1993). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Improvement in Sugarcane Quality for Increasing Sugar

Production. Indian InstitUte of Sugarcane Research, Luclmow.Mukherjee, U. and Sahai, R. (1988). Act. Botanica Indica., 14: 21-25.Nagappan, M. et al. (1996a). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:62-65.Nagappan, M. et ai. (1996b). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:66-70. .Nagappan, M. etal (1996c). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp: 176-179.Niemelae, S.1. and Vaeaetanen, P. (1982). Appl Environ. Microbiol, 44: 264--269.Pandey, D.K. and Soni, P. (1994). Indian J. Forestry, 17: 35-40.Pandey, D.K. et al (1994). Adv. Pl Sci. Res., 2: 62-68.Pathak, H. etal (1998) J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 46: 155-i57.PatH, G.D. and Shinde, B.N. (1995). J. Indian Soc.Soil Sci., 43: 700-02.Pawar, R.B. (1984). M.Sc.Thesis, MPAU, Rahuri. .Perez-Zamora, F. et al (1990). Revista Industria/y Agricola de Tucuman, 67: 79-89PUjar, S. and Manjunathaiah, H.M. (1996). In : Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in

Agriculture. 28th & 29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:71-79.Rajannan, G. et al. (1996). In : Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:180-187.Rajukkannu, K. and Manickam, T.S. (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in

Agriculture. 28th & 29th October, 1996.. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:23-29.Rajukkannu, K. et al (1996a). In: Proc. ~at. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Ttichy. pp:30-39. .Rajukkannu, K. etal (1996b). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy.pp:40-45. .Rajukkannu, K. (2001). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. ·Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.

Feb. 5th , 2001. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:39-49.Ramadurai, R. et ai. (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugar Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th &

29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:1l5-1l8.Ramalingam, P.K. et al (1996). In: Proc. Nat. Symp. Use of Distillery and Sugat Industry Wastes in Agriculture. 28th

& 29th October, 1996. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:1l3-1l4.Ramaswami, P.P. (1999). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 47: 661-665.Rani, R. and Shrlvastava, M.M. (1990). Int. J. Ecology Environ. Sci., 16: 125-132.Rani, R. and Shrivastava, M.M. (1991). Advances in Himalayan Ecology - Recent Researches in Ecology,Environment

& Pollution, 6: 131-139.Ravichandran, V. (1997). In: Proc. Recycling of Biomass and Industrial By-products of Sugarcane. pp: 33-38.Recault, Y. (1990). Wat. Sci. Tech., 22: 361-372.Sahai, R. and Neelam. (1987). Indian J. Ecology, 14: 21-25.Samuel, G. (1986). Proc. Inter-Amen. Sugarcane Seminar. pp: 245 - 252.Scalopi, E.J. et a/. (1989). In: 2nd Pan - American ICID Regional Conference, North Carolina. pp: 195-207.Scandalians, J. et aJ. (1987). Revista Industrial Agricola de Tucuman., 64: 1-44.Sengik, E. and Kiel, J.C. (1995). Revista Srasi/eira deCiencia do solo, 19: 321-326.Sharma, b.p. et a/. (1981). Curro Agric., 5: 48-53.Sharma, a.p. (2001). In: Proc. Nat. $em. Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.

Feb. 5th , 2001. AC & RI, Trichy. pp: 50-59.Singh, R. eta/. (1980). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci.; 28: 38-41.

30 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS

Somashekar, P.K. et aJ. (1984). Indian J. Environ. Hlth., 26: 36 - 146.Sweeney, D.W. and Graetzm, D.A. (1991). Agric. Ecosystems Environ., 33~ 341-351.Thiyagarajan, T.M. (2001). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.

Feb. 5th , 2001, AC & RI, Trlchy. pp:1-19.Usher, J.E and Wellington, J.P. (1979). Proc. ABBCT, 1: 143.Valliappan, K. (1999). Ph.D. Thesis submitted to TNAU. Coimbatore.VaUiappan, K. etaJ. (2001). In: Proc. Nat. Sem. Use of Poor Quality Water and Sugar Industrial Effluents in Agriculture.

Feb. 5th, 2001. AC & RI, Trichy. pp:73.Vierira, D.B. (1982). Sacchatum APe, Sao Paulo, 5: 21.26.Vinten, A.J.A. etaJ.(1983). SoUSci. Soc. AmJ., 47: 408 -412.Zalawadia, N.M. and Raman. S. (1994). J. Indian Soc. SoilSci., 42: 575-9.