Impact of Integrated Nutrient Management on Cucurbitaceous Crops

Vani firdos b.

M. Sc.(Vegetable Science)

Reg.No.:- 04-HORMA-01457-2015

Associate Professor & HeadDepartment of vegetable science

College of HorticultureS.D. Agricultural University,

Sardarkrushinagar.

Dr. B. M. Nandre

Assistant Research Scientist,Agriculture Research Station,

S. D. Agricultural University,Aseda-385 535 1

Out line

Introduction

What is Integrated Nutrient Management?

Objective of nutrient management

Need of nutrient management

Constraints in adoption of INM

Review of literature

Future strategies

Conclusion

In India vegetables are grown in about 90.83

lakh ha area with the production of 1564.45 lakh MT

out of which cucurbiticeous crops occupies an about 4.

22 lakh ha area with the production of 38.67 lakh MT

(Anon., 2015-2016).

In Gujarat total vegetable covers an area about

5.38 lakh ha with the production of 105.37 lakh MT.

In Gujarat, pea crop is not grown commercially so area

and production is not estimated.

1

Per capita requirement of Vegetables

By ICMR

125g greens

100 g roots

75 g of other veg.

300 g

Per capita availability of Vegetables

India

210 g

Gujarat

170 g2

• Vegetables are the friends of the doctors and glory of the cook.

• Cucurbitaceae, includes about 117 genera and 825 species.

• which share about 5.6 % of the total vegetable production.

• In India about 36 genera and around 100 species have been

identified.

• The vegetable of this group are either consumed as salad or

pickle or as cooking or as dessert fruit or preserved.

• As many as 30 to 35 cucurbits are growing in our country.3

IMPORTANCE OF CUCURBITACEOUS VEGETABLE CROPS

Used as a green vegetables/ salad

Used as a Pickle

Used as a dessert fruit

Eaten as a raw and cooked vegetables

Eaten as a Stuffed vegetables

Eaten as a Fried – Chips

Eaten as a Sweets – Petha, Burfi, Halwa

Rich source of protein and vitamins

It has an medicinal and ayurvedic value4

Major Crops of Cucurbitaceae Family

Crop Botanical Name Origin Edible part

Cucumber Cucumis sativus Africa Fruit

Bottle gourd Lagenaria siceraria South Africa Fruit

Water melon Citrullus lanatus. Tropical Africa Fruit

Musk melon Cucumis melo Tropical Africa Fruit

Ridge gourd Luffa acutangula Asia Fruit

Bitter gourd Momordica charantia Tropical Asia Fruit

Summer squash Cucurbita pepo America Fruit

Pumpkin Cucurbita moschata Tropical America Fruit

Pointed gourd Trichosanthes dioica India Fruit

5

Integrated Nutrient Management

“Integrated nutrient management means combined application of

different sources of plant nutrients like organics, inorganic and bio

fertilizers for sustainable crop production without degrading the

natural resources on long term basis.”

• Aim of Integrated nutrient management

– To integrate the use of natural and man made soil nutrients to

increase crop productivity and preserve soil productivity for future

generation.

6

Objective of Integrated Nutrient Management

To maintain fertility and physio-chemical properties of soil.

Encouragement of the judicious use of chemical fertilizers, organic manures,

green manures, biofertilizers, etc. for higher productivity.

To recycle and use of organic wastes.

Maximization of nutrient use efficiency.

To avoid over exploitation of natural resources.

To use all available pollution free sources of plant nutrient.

Environmentally safe and eco friendly sustainable agriculture.

To reduce expenditure cost.

To protect soil health for future generation.

Creation of positive nutrient balance in soil.

To meet the social and economic aspirations of the farmers lower cost with

high productivity and profitability.

7

Need of Integrated Nutrient Management

To promote sustainable agriculture.

Multiple nutrient deficiency.

Inorganic sources insufficient for nutritional needs.

Optimal use of available nutrient sources.

Prevent deterioration of soil health.

Ground water and environmental pollution.

To enhance yield of crop.

8

Constraints in adoption of INM

Insufficient availability of organic manure

Lack of facilities to collect and market agricultural wastes

Reduce in importance of organic manures, crop residues and bio

fertilizers

Urban wastes

Growing green manure crops

Use of Biofertilizer

Financial aid and quality control

9

Essential Nutrients Required By Plant

1.Nitrogen(N)

2.Phosphorous(P)

3.Potassium(K)

4.Sulphur(S)

5.Calcium(Ca)

6.Magnesium(Mg)

7.Carbon(C)

8.Hydrogen(H)

9.Oxygen(O)

Mo

Ni

Cu

Zn

Mn

B

Fe

Cl

O

H

C

Ca

Mg

S

K

P

N

A. Macroutrients B. Micronutrients

1.Molybdenum(Mo)

2.Nickel(Ni)

3.Copper(Cu)

4.Zinc(Zn)

5.Manganese(Mn)

6.Boron(B)

7.Iron(Fe)

8.Chlorine(Cl)

10

Deficiency symptoms in plant

11

Basic

Components of INM

Organic

manures

Chemical

fertilizers

Biofertilizers

Basic

Components of INM

12

Chemical Fertilizers

“A chemical fertilizer is a substance applied to soils or

directly onto plants to provide nutrients optimal for plants growth

and development.”

Fertilizer consumed in India :

1. Nitrogenous fertilizer

2. Phosphatic fertilizer

3. Potassic fertilizer

4. Complex fertilizer

5. Fertilizer mixtures

13

Different chemical fertilizers and their sources

Sr. No. Chemical Fertilizer Example

1 Nitrogenous fertilizer Urea, Ammonium sulphate,, Ammonium

Nitrate, Sodium nitrate, Calcium Nitrate.

2 Phosphatic fertilizer SSP, TSP, Ground mineral phosphate, Basic

slug.

3 Potassic fertilizer MOP,SOP, Potassium nitrate,.

4 Complex fertilizer DAP , Ammonium phosphate sulphate

5 Fertilizer mixtures Nitro- phosphate with potash 15:15:15 of

N, P and K.

14

Organic fertilizer

Organic fertilizers are the result of a decomposition process of

the organic remainders, by the diverse organisms action.

Characteristic of organic fertilizer

Bulky in nature.

They are rich in nourishment and low in cost.

Improve the soil physical, chemical and biological properties.

Increase water holding capacity.

Add organic matter.

15

Vermicompost

Oil cake FYM

Green manure Bio fertilizer

16

Vermicompost contains :1.6% Nitrogen;0.7% Phosphorus;0.8% Potash;0.5% Calcium;0.2% Magnesium;175 ppm Iron;96.5 ppm Manganese;24.5 ppm Zinc15.5 C:N ratio.

Vermicompost

Worms feed on organic material, break it down and thenexcrete it as worm castings or vermicompost. The castings are in theform of tiny pellets which are coated with a gel. This crumb-likestructure helps improve soil drainage and aeration.

17

FYM

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 FYM contains about 0.5 N, 0.2%P & 0.5%K

Bulky material

Nutritional status of FYM (%)

Nitrogen 0.5000

Phosphorus 0.2500

Potassium 0.5000

Calcium 0.0800

Sulfur 0.0200

Zinc 0.0040

Copper 0.0003

Manganese 0.0070

Iron 0.450018

Green manure

Green manuring is a practice of ploughing or turning into the soil

under composed green plant material for improving the physical

condition of the soil or for adding nitrogen when the green manure crop

is a legume.

Green manure In situ

Ex situ

In situ green manuring crop : Crotalaria juncea, Sesbania

rostrata,Vigna ungiculata, Cymopsis tetragonalobus , and

Sesbania aculeta.

Ex situ (Green Leaf )manuring crop : Sesbania grandiflora,

Pongamia globra, Azardica indica, Gliricida sepium,

Peltophorum ferrugenum.19

Average nutrient content in organic manures

Manures Nitrogen (%) Phosphorous (%) Potash (%)

FYM 0.5 0.2 0.5

Poultary manure 2 1 2

Vermicompost 0.5 - 1.50 0.1 - 0.30 0.15 - 0.56

Fish meal 4 -10 3 - 9 0.3 - 1.5

Oil cake

Castor cake 4.3 1.8 1.3

Cotton seed cake 3.9 1.8 1.6

Karanj cake 3.9 0.9 1.2

Mahua cake 2.5 0.8 1.2

Coconut cake 3.0 1.9 1.8

Ground nut cake 7.3 1.5 1.3

20

Bio fertilizers or microbial inoculants are carrier based ready to use live

bacterial or fungal formulations, which on application to plants, soil or

composting pits, help in mobilization of various nutrients by their biological

activity.

Bio fertilizer

Bio fertilizer

Nitrogen fixing micro-organisms

Symbiotic

• Rhizobium

• Azolla

Non-symbiotic

• Blue green algae

• Azotobactor

• Azospirillum

Phosphate solubilizers

Symbiotic

• mycorrhizae

Non symbiotic

• Fungi, Bacteria,

Actinomycetes

Compost making micro-organisms

Cellulolytic

Lignolytic

21

Product of Biofertilizer

22

25

Brief Review of Research

Work

26

CUCUMBER

Table - 1 Integrated Nutrient Management in Cucumber

Treatments Vine

length

(cm)

Days to

first

flowering

Fruit

length

(cm)

Fruit girth

(cm)

Mean fruit

weight (g)

Number of

fruits/plant

Yield/plant

(kg)

Yield

(t/ha)

T1 –RDF 20:30:30 kg/ha 2.39 35 22.70 15.80 277.00 5.60 1.55 15.50

T2 – FYM 20 t/ha 2.52 35 23.20 16.00 280.00 5.70 1.60 16.00

T3 - VC 4 t/ha 2.63 32 23.60 16.20 290.00 6.50 1.88 18.80

T4 – FYM 10 t/ha + VC 2 t/ha 2.94 31 27.50 17.80 340.00 7.50 2.55 25.50

T5 – GLM 5 t/ha + Biofertilizers 2.76 33 24.00 16.70 295.00 7.00 2.06 20.60

T6 – FYM 10 t/ha+ Biofertilizers 2.82 32 24.20 16.90 310.00 7.10 2.20 22.20

T7 – 50% RDF + FYM 10 t/ha +

Biofertilizers

3.15 30 30.10 20.10 380.00 7.90 3.00 30.00

T8 - 50% RDF + GLM 2.5 t/ha +

Biofertilizers

3.01 31 29.20 19.70 360.00 7.50 2.70 27.00

T9 - 50% RDF + VC 2 t/ha+ Biofertilizers 3.25 29 32.50 21.70 390.00 8.40 3.28 32.80

CD (5%) 0.15 2.34 2.43 1.58 11.97 0.39 0.17 3.37

TNAU, Coimbatore Prabhu et. al. (2006)

25

Table -2 Effect of chemical fertilizer and bio-fertilizers on the flowering parameters of cucumber

cv. Gujrat cucumber-1

Treatment Vine length (cm) Appearence of the

first female flower

(days)

Male

flowers/vine

Female

flowers/vine

Male:female sex

ratio

T1 274.00 35.50 70.00 11.15 8.18

T2 292.75 33.50 80.75 16.25 7.44

T3 324.75 28.50 90.75 19.70 6.33

T4 285.50 33.75 73.80 13.45 7.49

T5 317.25 29.75 89.60 19.25 6.60

T6 286.75 34.75 74.90 13.85 7.71

T7 330.75 28.00 92.75 19.75 6.00

T8 296.25 32.00 83.05 17.15 7.10

SEm± 1.37 0.97 3.28 0.86 0.26

CD at 5% 4.01 2.84 9.63 2.54 0.77

Navsari Parmar et al.(2011)

26T5:75% RDF + PSB

Table - 4 Effect of integrated nutrient management on vine length, plant height and number of branches

per plant at 90 Days After Sowing (DAS) in cucumber grown under open condition

Treatment

90 days after sowing (DAS)

Number of leaves vine-1 Plant height (cm) Number of branches plant-1

Summer, 2005 Rabi ,

2006

Summer, 2005 Rabi

,2006

Summer, 2005 Rabi ,

2006

T1 88.00 94.65 205.00 217.50 6.15 7.30

T2 93.26 96.50 250.33 255.16 7.23 7.78

T3 84.50 85.50 195.33 201.16 5.13 5.78

T4 89.76 95.00 208.33 220.33 6.20 7.60

T5 48.53 86.83 194.16 203.43 5.23 6.11

T6 91.10 96.50 247.83 253.76 6.76 7.61

T7 86.50 89.81 203.83 209.33 6.06 7.28

T8 86.16 88.66 203.00 207.33 5.46 6.85

T9 82.93 84.66 190.33 197.50 5.06 5.63

T10 85.50 87.83 195.83 205.16 5.30 6.48

T11 82.83 84.16 178.00 184.16 4.53 5.41

T12 81.83 83.33 169.66 172.16 4.50 5.11

SEm± 4.89 8.29 11.53 6.03 0.47 0.31

CD at 5% NS NS 33.82 17.68 1.40 0.93

CV (%) 9.80 16.07 9.82 4.90 14.69 8.35

GVKV, Bangalore Anjanappa et al. (2012)

29T2 :75% RDF + 75% FYM +Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

Table - 3 Effect of chemical fertilizer and bio-fertilizers on the performance of yield and quality

characters of cucumber cv. Gujrat cucumber-1

Treatment Fruit length(cm) Fruit girth (cm) Fruit yield TSS

%Kg/plot Kg/ha

T1 21.99 7.99 10.51 13144.06 2.07

T2 28.63 9.96 15.86 19831.56 2.42

T3 32.80 12.37 18.19 22740.93 2.99

T4 28.30 10.69 14.22 17777.19 2.20

T5 32.06 12.05 18.00 22500.00 2.97

T6 28.14 9.87 13.49 16874.38 2.18

T7 33.75 12.53 18.87 23590.31 3.11

T8 29.01 11.00 16.22 20275.00 2.53

SEm± 1.37 0.63 0.87 1081.39 0.10

CD at 5% 4.01 1.86 2.54 3179.90 0.30

Navsari Parmar et al.(2011)

28

T7:75% RDF + Azospirillum + PSB

Treatment detail

T1: Control (Untreated)

T2:100% RDF + (N50:P25:K25 Kg/ha)

T3:75% RDF + Azospirillum

T4:0% RDF + Azospirillum

T5:75% RDF + PSB

T6:50% RDF + PSB



27

Table - 5 Effect of integrated management on fruit length, fruit volume and fruit diameter of cucumber at

harvest grown under open condition

Treatment Fruit length (cm) Fruit volume (cc) Fruit diameter (cm)

Summer, 2005 Rabi ,

2006

Summer, 2005 Rabi

,2006

Summer, 2005 Rabi ,

2006

T1 16.58 17.65 259.33 288.00 22.03 22.20

T2 18.16 20.81 295.61 330.00 22.23 22.40

T3 15.33 15.91 227.66 225.33 21.76 21.93

T4 17.41 17.91 261.66 316.33 22.06 22.21

T5 15.75 17.08 246.66 246.66 21.88 21.93

T6 18.00 19.68 289.00 320.66 22.20 22.33

T7 16.25 17.58 258.33 275.33 22.00 22.06

T8 16.00 17.53 253.66 260.66 21.93 22.00

T9 15.16 15.62 221.33 223.33 21.53 21.93

T10 15.83 17.25 247.00 251.66 21.90 21.93

T11 14.68 15.10 200.33 218.33 21.50 21.86

T12 14.66 15.06 189.00 195.33 21.41 21.86

SEm± 0.81 1.00 12.17 12.36 0.12 0.10

CD at 5% 2.37 2.96 35.17 36.27 0.36 0.31

CV (%) 8.69 10.12 8.58 8.15 9.66 8.13



Treatment detail

T1: 100% Recommended dose of fertilizer (72:60:96 kg NPK ha) +100% FYM (25t ha-1 )

T2 :75% RDF + 75% FYM +Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

T3: 50% RDF + 50% FYM +Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

T4:75% RDF + VC (1.5t ha-1) + Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

T5: 50% RDF + VC (1.5t ha-1) +Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

T6: 75% RDF + 50% FYM + VC (1.5t ha-1) + Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma


T8: : 75% RDF + 50% FYM + Azotobacter Tricoderma

T9: 50% RDF + 50% FYM + Azotobacter

T10: 75% RDF + 50% FYM + phosphobacteria


30

Table - 6 Effect of integrated nutrient management on number of fruits per vine and fruit yield of

cucumber grown under protected condition

Treatment 90 days after sowing (DAS)

Number of leaves vine-1 Plant weight(g) Fruit weight(kg vine-1) Fruit yield ( t ha-1 )

Summer,

2005

Rabi ,2006 Summer,

2005

Rabi ,2006 Summer,

2005

Rabi ,2006 Summer,

2005

Rabi,

2006

T1 7.60 9.66 245.69 280.49 2.09 2.17 54.33 56.34

T2 9.60 11.66 270.20 349.97 2.42 2.45 62.76 63.68

T3 6.83 8.81 214.24 223.65 1.83 2.03 47.52 52.28

T4 8.73 9.91 254.07 315.47 2.27 2.19 59.02 57.86

T5 6.88 8.91 221.22 266.40 1.83 2.06 50.11 52.46

T6 9.03 11.03 256.98 333.22 2.41 2.41 62.73 62.47

T7 6.95 9.53 239.18 271.92 1.94 2.10 50.85 54.52

T8 6.93 9.20 231.08 272.71 1.93 2.10 50.55 54.45

T9 6.73 8.46 210.79 221.58 1.83 2.01 42.27 52.13

T10 6.91 9.08 228.07 267.56 1.86 2.08 50.11 54.01

T11 6.68 8.30 209.23 206.02 1.70 1.96 44.07 50.55

T12 6.63 8.11 176.72 177.26 1.52 1.95 38.62 50.41

SEm± 0.85 0.86 15.62 17.16 0.24 0.26 4.31 4.86

CD at 5% 2.51 2.52 45.83 50.35 0.72 NS 12.66 12.80

CV (%) 19.92 15.86 11.77 11.18 21.73 21.48 14.56 13.72


32


Treatment detail

T1: 100% Recommended dose of fertilizer (72:60:96 kg NPK ha) +100% FYM (25t ha-1 )


T3: 50% RDF + 50% FYM +Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

T4:75% RDF + VC (1.5t ha-1) + Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma

T5: 50% RDF + VC (1.5t ha-1) +Azotobacter + phosphobacteria + Tricoderma



T8: : 75% RDF + 50% FYM + Azotobacter Tricoderma

T9: 50% RDF + 50% FYM + Azotobacter



33

Table – 7 Effect of integrated nutrient management on ascorbic acid content, TSS, moisture content and

shelf life and physiological loss in weight in cucumber grown under protected condition.

Treatments Ascorbic acid TSS (°Brix) Moisture content ( %) Shelf life

(Days)

Physiological loss

in weight (%)

Summer

2005

Rabi

2006

Summer

2005

Rabi

2006

Summer

2005

Rabi

2006

Summer

2005

Rabi

2006

Summer

2005

Rabi

2006

T1 6.13 5.58 2.90 2.56 95.00 95.60 6.81 6.96 22.58 21.01

T2 6.50 5.91 3.00 3.16 95.50 96.06 7.18 7.86 22.25 20.58

T3 5.76 5.25 2.63 2.23 94.50 94.50 7.02 7.37 21.71 20.21

T4 6.36 5.70 2.93 2.60 95.06 95.66 7.30 7.87 22.46 20.66

T5 5.76 5.35 2.76 2.33 94.66 95.00 7.03 7.58 22.00 20.30

T6 6.40 5.75 2.96 3.00 95.16 96.00 7.37 8.00 21.80 20.58

T7 6.06 5.50 2.86 2.43 94.90 95.33 7.51 8.01 20.66 20.00

T8 6.06 5.41 2.86 2.40 94.83 95.33 7.11 7.60 22.50 20.93

T9 5.53 5.12 2.60 2.20 94.40 94.50 6.87 7.25 21.68 20.20

T10 5.93 5.41 2.80 2.36 94.66 95.16 7.03 7.57 22.25 20.25

T11 5.43 4.91 2.56 2.20 94.33 94.33 6.83 7.18 22.16 20.28

T12 5.33 4.85 2.36 2.13 94.16 91.83 7.95 8.08 19.83 19.91

SEm± 0.23 0.22 0.08 0.12 3.14 3.17 0.27 0.31 0.53 0.73

CD at 5% 0.68 0.64 0.25 0.36 NS NS 0.80 0.91 1.57 NS

CV (%) 6.76 7.09 5.41 8.81 5.74 5.79 6.58 7.06 4.25 6.24



Table - 8 Effect of integrated nutrient management on number of fruits per vine and fruit yield of

cucumber grown under protected condition.

Number of fruits vine-1 Fruit weight (g) Fruit yield (kg vine-1) Fruit yield ( t ha-1 )

Treatment Summer,

2005

Rabi ,2006 Summer,

2005

Rabi ,2006 Summer,

2005

Rabi ,2006 Summer,

2005

Rabi,

2006

T1 8.11 8.58 279.27 289.15 2.18 2.21 15.52 15.75

T2 10.25 10.30 309.01 324.94 2.47 2.55 17.60 18.22

T3 7.66 7.90 243.69 244.72 2.02 2.03 14.36 14.45

T4 8.70 9.03 298.14 310.83 2.19 2.23 15.59 15.85

T5 7.66 8.26 246.94 268.25 2.03 2.03 14.45 14.45

T6 10.00 10.25 302.14 313.98 2.45 2.51 17.41 17.79

T7 8.00 8.56 286.99 266.66 2.13 2.19 15.16 15.59

T8 7.83 8.50 278.35 259.50 2.08 2.18 14.81 15.42

T9 6.75 7.33 240.23 20366 1.99 2.02 14.17 14.43

T10 7.73 8.33 255.65 269.49 2.08 2.11 14.81 15.04

T11 6.46 7.25 238.35 195.98 1.98 1.98 14.10 14.10

T12 6.26 7.01 193.07 191.94 1.81 1.87 12.91 13.29

SEm± 0.83 0.70 16.46 30.43 0.21 0.27 0.97 1.03

CD at 5% 2.46 2.06 48.29 89.25 0.62 NS 2.86 3.04

CV (%) 18.27 14.42 10.92 19.90 17.41 21.81 11.20 11.69



38

BITTER GOURD

Table- 9 Effect of boifertilizer and nitrogen on growth, yield and yield attributes of bitter gourd cv. Pusa

vishesh

Treatment Number of fruit

per plant

Average fruit

weight(g)

Fruit

thikness(cm

)

Fruit length

(cm)

Fruit girth

(cm)

Fruit yield

/plant(kg)

Fruit yield

t/ha

T1 (Azotobacter) 18.91 66.31 0.81 10.02 4.42 1.29 16.72

T2(Azotobacter+ 20 kg

N/ha)

21.17 67.14 0.89 12.15 4.52 1.42 18.95

T3 (PSB) 15.80 64.16 0.85 12.59 4.27 1.01 13.52

T4 (PSB + 20 Kg N/ha) 17.65 65.16 0.85 11.37 4.12 1.15 15.34

T5(Azotobacter+ PSB) 19.77 65.20 0.83 13.34 4.43 1.25 17.18

T6(Azotobacter+ PSB +

20 kgN/ha)

21.68 68.93 0.94 13.45 4.56 1.49 19.92

T7( 20kg N/ha) 14.71 50.19 0.76 10.20 3.88 0.74 9.91

T8 (control)13.09 40.15 0.71 8.50 3.23 0.53 7.02

CD at 5% 1.085 2.395 0.034 0.150 0.089 0.0067 8.477

West Bengal Prasad et al. (2009)

37

Table - 10 Effect different treatments on vegetative characters of bitter gourd

Treatment Days to germination Vine length Primary branches

(No)

Root length (cm)

T1 6.76 3.15 4.43 15.64

T2 7.07 3.80 3.23 18.57

T3 6.48 4.42 4.80 23.57

T4 7.85 3.60 3.93 16.89

T5 6.91 3.50 4.40 17.58

T6 6.93 3.14 3.66 18.24

T7 6.59 3.24 4.13 17.62

T8 7.63 4.41 4.33 14.78

T9 7.05 3.88 3.60 18.24

T10 7.57 3.37 4.40 14.21

T11 7.71 4.10 4.26 17.27

CD (0.05) NS 0.56 NS 4.76

Bagalkote Kumar et al. (2012)

38

T3: 100% RDF + Azospirillum-5 kg/ha (basal) and (40 DAS)

Treatment detail

T1: RDF (Manure and fertilizers as per recommendation)

T2: T1 + Azospirillum-5 kg/ha (basal)

T3: T2 + Azospirillum-5 kg/ha (40 DAS)

T4: T1+PSB-5 kg/ha (basal)

T5: T4 +PSB-5 kg/ha (basal) (40 DAS)

T6: T1 + Pseudomonas flourescens-2.5 kg/ha (basal)

T7: T6 + Pseudomonas flourescens-2.5 kg/ha (40 DAS)

T8: T6+ Bacillus subtilis suspension- (108 cfu/ml)21/plant (40DAS)

T9: T8+ Bacillus subtilis - (108 cfu/ml)21/plant (40DAS)

T10: T1+Aishwarya-30g/plant (basal)

T11: T10+Aishwarya-30g/plant (40 DAS)

39

Table – 11 Effect of different treatments on yield of bitter gourd

Treatment Yield per plant

(kg)

Yield per plot

(kg)

T1 1.42 8.55

T2 1.47 8.85

T3 1.43 8.54

T4 1.52 9.08

T5 1.51 9.08

T6 2.36 14.19

T7 1.94 11.61

T8 1.72 10.30

T9 2.72 16.33

T10 1.61 9.65

T11 2.06 12.35

CD (0.05) 0.29 1.74

Bagalkote Kumar et al. (2012)

40

T9: 100 % RDF + Pseudomonas flourescens-2.5 kg/ha (basal)+cillus

subtilis suspension- (108 cfu/ml)21/plant (40DAS) + Bacillus subtilis - (108

cfu/ml)21/plant (40DAS)

Table - 12 Effect of inorganic, organic and biofertilizer on growth and flowering attributes of bitter

gourd cv. Hybrid prachi.

Treatment Vine length

(cm)

Branches per

vine

Days to first male

flower appearance

Days to first female

flower appearance

Average node number of

first female flower anthesis

T1 306.4 8.00 49.3 59.0 34.0

T2 357.0 12.20 44.0 48.0 29.0

T3 373.0 13.00 42.0 46.0 28.2

T4 387.5 13.50 40.0 45.7 28.0

T5 393.5 13.00 42.0 45.0 28.4

T6 416.5 14.00 40.4 44.7 27.8

T7 436.0 15.00 39.7 44.3 27.0

T8 464.0 16.00 42.0 45.6 28.0

T9 483.4 16.30 40.0 45.0 27.4

T10 534.0 18.00 39.6 44.0 24.6

CD 0.05 13.67 1.29 4.73 7.01 5.30

CV (%) 9.12 5.49 6.56 8.64 10.89

Odisa Thriveni et al. (2015)

41T10:(100%N:P:K + Vermicompost + Biofertilizers)

Treatment detail

T1: (absolute control)

T2:50% recommended dose of fertilizers

T3:50% N:P:K+ Vermicompost 2.5 tons/ha

T4: 50% N:P:K+ Vermicompost + Biofertilizers Azotobacter,Azospirillum and PSB @ 4 kg/ha

T5:75% N:P:K

T6:75% N:P:K + Vermicompost

T7: 75% N:P:K+ Vermicompost + Biofertilizers

T8:(100%N:P:K)

T9:(100%N:P:K + Vermicompost)

T10:(100%N:P:K + Vermicompost + Biofertilizers)

42

Table - 13 Effect of inorganic, organic and biofertilizer on yield and quality attributes of bitter goard

cv. Hybrid prachi

Treatment Fruits per plant Weight per

fruit (gm)

Fruit yield (kg

per ha)

Ascorbic acid

(mg/100g)

Protein content

( %)

TSS (°BRIX )

T1 17.3 42.2 1303 47.14 1.11 1.10

T2 26.4 60.0 2760 63.9 1.20 1.43

T3 28.7 73.1 2937 72.8 1.37 1.50

T4 29.4 85.4 3430 79.7 1.95 1.80

T5 32.0 74.4 3230 84.0 1.22 1.50

T6 33.0 76.1 3396 92.9 1.37 1.83

T7 36.6 86.0 3773 104.0 1.70 2.00

T8 34.7 78.4 3523 99.7 1.56 1.60

T9 35.7 79.1 3683 99.7 1.60 1.90

T10 40.0 86.4 4036 111.1 1.76 2.10

CD 0.05 2.61 17.1 623.04 16.3 0.23 0.37

CV (%) 4.84 13.4 11.32 11.17 9.25 12.95

Odisa Thriveni et al. (2015)

43

T10:(100%N:P:K + Vermicompost + Biofertilizers)

46

BOTTLE GOURD

Table - 14 Effect of integrated nutrients on vegetative character of bottle gourd. Cv. pusa naveen

Treatment Length of main vine

(cm)

Length of internode

(cm)

Number of branches

per plant

Numer of nodes on

main vine

T1 133.33 10.47 4.00 19.17

T2 183.07 13.32 5.00 19.83

T3 196.67 14.39. 5.00 20.25

T4 137.00 15.22 4.67 20.08

T5 166.67 15.56 5.00 21.83

T6 175.67 12.39. 4.67 21.08

T7 179.00 14.78 5.00 20.75

T8 222.06 17.57 5.33 22.08

T9 220.67 17.28 4.33 22.00

T10 183.33 17.17 5.00 21.25

T11 226.00 18.11 5.67 22.17

S.Em. (±) 39.82 1.30 0.67 2.39

CD at 5 % 96.76 3.16 1.62 5.81

Nadia Das et al. (2015)

45

T11: 50 % of N through inorganic fertilizer + 50% of N through vermicompost +

full P and K +Azotobacter @ 5Kg/ha + PSB @ 5Kg/ha

Treatment detail

T1 : Control

T2 : Full recommended dose of NPK ( N: P2O5 :K2O:: 80:60:50 Kg/ha )

T3 : Full recommended dose of NPK + Azotobacter @ 10Kg/ha

T4: Full recommended dose of NPK + PSB @ 10 Kg /ha

T5: Full recommended dose of NPK + Azotobacter @ 5 Kg/ha + PSB @ 5Kg/ha

T6: 75 % of N through inorganic fertilizer + 25% of N through vermicompost + full P and K +

Azotobacter @ 10Kg/ha


PSB @ 10Kg/ha

T8 : 75 % of N through inorganic fertilizer + 25% of N through vermicompost + full P and K

+Azotobacter @ 5Kg/ha + PSB @ 5Kg/ha


Azotobacter @ 10Kg/ha


PSB @ 10Kg/ha

T11: 50 % of N through inorganic fertilizer + 50% of N through vermicompost + full P and K

+Azotobacter @ 5Kg/ha + PSB @ 5Kg/ha

46

Table - 15 Effect of integrated nutrients on yield attributing characters of bottle gourd. Cv. pusa naveen

Treatment Number of fruits per

plant

Average fruit weight

(g)

Fruit length (cm) Fruit diameter (cm)

T1 7.51 695.00 17.24 5.49

T2 7.96 711.67 18.18 5.99

T3 8.67 715.00 18.67 6.14

T4 8.06 741.67 19.79 6.26

T5 8.87 781.67 19.37 7.22

T6 8.15 751.67 19.67 6.55

T7 8.60 773.33 18.53 6.09

T8 9.98 830.00 20.32 7.82

T9 9.72 803.33 20.30 7.78

T10 9.05 773.33 20.00 7.72

T11 10.00 873.33 21.07 8.18

S.Em. (±) 0.72 42.68 0.40 0.36

CD at 5 % 1.15 103.71 0.97 0.87

Nadia Das et al. (2015)

47

T11: 50 % of N through inorganic fertilizer + 50% of N through vermicompost

+ full P and K +Azotobacter @ 5Kg/ha + PSB @ 5Kg/ha

Table - 16 Effect of INM on growth & Yield of bitter gourd type Mithipagal

Treatments Vine length

(cm)

Days to first

female

flowering

Number of female

flowers/plant

Number of

fruits/plant

Fruit

weight (g)

Fruit

yield/plant

(kg)

T1 RDF (NPK-60:30:20 kg/ha) 55.40 35.25 37.58 36.19 25.57 0.84

T2 RDF + FYM 25 t/ha 56.72 34.66 38.91 37.48 26.52 0.91

T3 RDF + VC @ 5 t/ha (soil application) 59.85 32.92 42.85 41.42 29.76 1.22

T4 RDF + PMC @ 10 t/ha (soil

application)

57.11 34.34 39.08 38.43 26.98 0.94

T5 RDF + Panchagavya 3% foliar

application

57.63 33.72 40.42 39.72 27.94 1.12

T6 75% NPK + VC + Azospi 2 kg/ha 62.02 32.04 45.24 43.64 31.61 1.33

T7 75% NPK + PMC + Azospi 2 kg/ha 58.93 33.11 41.74 40.98 28.89 1.20

T8 75% NPK + Panchagavya + Azospi 2

kg/ha

60.61 30.67 43.91 42.39 30.68 1.25

T9 Control 54.12 35.92 36.24 34.92 24.65 0.75

SED 0.59 0.26 0.68 0.61 0.45 0.03

CD (5%) 1.21 0.57 1.32 1.25 0.92 0.07

Annamalai, Tamilnadu Sureshkumar et. al. (2008)

48

Table - 17 Influence of integrated nutrient management on growth of gherkin cv.Ajax Hybrid

Treatment Vine length

(cm)

Number of leaves Leaf area

(cm2)

Internodal length

(cm)

T1 Recommended dose of inorganic fertilizers alone (RDF)

(120:90:50: kg NPK/ha)

127.24 31.90 60.50 11.08

T2 FYM @25 t/ha + RDF 136.57 35.35 69.84 11.70

T3 Pressmud (PM) @ 5t/ha + RDF 147.42 38.82 79.20 12.86

T4 Vermicompost (Ve) @ 5 t/ha + RDF 140.08 35.41 69.91 12.30

T5 FYM @25 t/ha + RDF + Vermiwash (VW) 1.5 diluation 176.81 52.11 116.67 15.17

T6 FYM @25 t/ha + RDF + Panchagavya(PO) @ 3% 154.80 42.25 88.54 13.42

T7 FYM @25 t/ha + RDF + Humic acid (HA) @ 0.2% 198.87 62.72 144.65 16.84

T8 PM @25 t/ha + RDF +VW 1.5 diluation 191.56 59.31 135.28 16.28

T9 T8 PM @25 t/ha + RDF + PO @ 3% 169.54 49.08 107.23 14.60

T10 T8 PM @25 t/ha + RDF +HA @0.2% 213.39 69.54 163.52 17.90

T11 T8 VC @ 5 t/ha + RDF +VW 1.5 diluation 184.15 55.90 126.01 15.72

T12 T8 VC@ 5 t/ha + RDF +PO @ 3% 162.18 45.67 97.84 14.01

T13 T8 VC @ 5 t/ha + RDF + HA @ 0.2% 206.12 66.14 153.94 17.42

CD (P=0.05)* 7.21 3.38 9.29 0.51

Annamlainagar Sareedha et al. (2006)

49

Table - 18 Effect of different treatments organic manure and biofertilizers on vine length (cm) number of

branches per vine, internodal length (cm) ,node at which first female appeared, Fruit yield per vine (g) in

Gherkin

Treatment

Vine length

(cm)

Number of

branches per vine

Internodal length

(cm)

Node at which first female

flower appeared

Fruit yield

per vine (g)

T1 – Control 126 4.28 14.00 2.68 120

T2- RDF (150 N: 75 P: 150 Kgha-1 167 5.75 16.44 1.88 276

T3- Neem cake @ 3 t ha-1 +Biofertilizer 137 4.37 14.21 2.52 161

T4 - Neem cake @ 4.2 t ha-1 +Biofertilizer 141 4.58 14.80 2.38 190

T5- Neem cake @ 5.4 t ha-1 +Biofertilizer 146 4.76 15.39 2.13 212

T6- Vermicompost @ 10 t ha-1

+Biofertilizer

155 5.18 15.96 2.08 240


+Biofertilizer

157 5.51 16.18 2.01 246


+Biofertilizer

165 5.68 16.37 1.95 257

T9 - Caster cake @ 3 t ha-1 +Biofertilizer 139 4.43 14.65 2.40 176

T10 - Caster cake @ 4.2 t ha-1

+Biofertilizer

146 4.77 15.39 2.25 214

T11 - Caster cake @ 5.4 t ha-1

+Biofertilizer

150 5.17 15.83 2.13 228

Mean 148 4.95 15.38 2.22 211

SEm± 2.79 0.04 0.11 0.03 6.89

CD at 5% 8.23 0.11 0.32 0.09 20.32

Hyderabad Bindiya et al.(2012) 49

• Awareness and popularising.

• Increase on-farm production of organic amendments.

• Soil test techniques.

• Promote nutrient supply through organic and biological sources

• Developing a suitable nutrient management system through

integrated use of these three kinds of fertilizers may be a

challenge to reach the goal of sustainable agriculture, however

much research is still needed.50

52

55

THANK YOU

Education

Impact of Integrated Nutrient Management on Cucurbitaceous Crops