CERTIFICATE

IMPACT FACTOR 2021

Subject Area

  • Life Sciences / Biology
  • Architecture / Building Management
  • Asian Studies
  • Business & Management
  • Chemistry
  • Computer Science
  • Economics & Finance
  • Engineering / Acoustics
  • Environmental Science
  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Pharmaceutical Sciences
  • General Sciences
  • Materials Science
  • Mathematics
  • Medicine
  • Nanotechnology & Nanoscience
  • Nonlinear Science
  • Chaos & Dynamical Systems
  • Physics
  • Social Sciences & Humanities

Why Us? >>

  • Open Access
  • Peer Reviewed
  • Rapid Publication
  • Life time hosting
  • Free promotion service
  • Free indexing service
  • More citations
  • Search engine friendly

Effect of bulky and concentrated organic manures on the growth, yield, quality enhancement and soil properities of Tomato

Author: 
Mullaimaran, S. and Haripriya, K.
Subject Area: 
Life Sciences
Abstract: 

This experiment was conducted to standardize the quantity of bulky and concentrated organic manures required for tomato as a substitute for the inorganic fertilizers. Solarization was done for a period of 6 weeks during April-May 2009, using 300 guage transparent polythene sheets. As per the schedule of treatments, basal dose of manures were incorporated before solarization. After the removal of trap, transplanting of solarized tomato seedlings were done on 3rd day leaving 2 days gap. In the main field, an experiment was conducted to standardize the quantity of bulky and concentrated organic manures for tomato to substitute the inorganic fertilizers. The experiment was laid out in a randomized block design with 14 treatments in 3 replications. The treatment schedule included various levels of bulky (25 and 75 % N) and concentrated organic manures (25 and 75 % N), inorganic fertilizers along with an absolute control. The bulky organic manures used were FYM and vermicompost and the concentrated manures used were neem cake and castor cake. The nutrient content of bulky and concentrated organic manures used in the study were FYM (0.80, 0.41 and 0.74 % NPK), vermicompost (1.60, 2.20 and 0.67 % NPK), poultry manure (3.47, 1.33 and 3.1 NPK), neem cake (5.2, 1.0 and 1.4 % NPK) and castor cake (4.1, 1.9 and 1.4 % NPK). The experiment was initiated in June 2009. Among the various levels and sources of organic manures and inorganic fertilizers tried, inorganic fertilizers recorded the maximum growth characters, yield attributes, fruit yield and highest nutrient uptake. Among the organic manures and concentrated oil cakes applied, 75 per cent N supplied through vermicompost @ 10.03 t ha-1 along with 25 per cent N supplied through neem cake @ 0.73 t ha-1 followed by poultry manure@ 2.16 t ha-1 neem cake @ 0.73 t ha-1 was identified as the best treatments in tomato The quality attributes viz., ascorbic acid content and acidity in tomato were found to be maximum under inorganic fertilization as well as 75 per cent N supplied through vermicompost along with 25 per cent N supplied through neem cake. Both the treatments were found to be influencing these traits at same level. This was closely followed by the application of 75 per cent N supplied through poultry manure along with 25 per cent N supplied through neem cake. The maximum availability of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in post harvest soil was recorded in plots incorporated with the application of 75 per cent N supplied through vermicompost @ along with 25 per cent N supplied through neem cake followed by the application of 75 per cent N supplied through poultry manure along with 25 per cent N supplied through neem cake in tomato.

PDF file: 

ONLINE PAYPAL PAYMENT

IJMCE RECOMMENDATION

Advantages of IJCR

  • Rapid Publishing
  • Professional publishing practices
  • Indexing in leading database
  • High level of citation
  • High Qualitiy reader base
  • High level author suport

Plagiarism Detection

IJCR is following an instant policy on rejection those received papers with plagiarism rate of more than 20%. So, All of authors and contributors must check their papers before submission to making assurance of following our anti-plagiarism policies.

 

EDITORIAL BOARD

Dr. Swamy KRM
India
Dr. Abdul Hannan A.M.S
Saudi Arabia.
Luai Farhan Zghair
Iraq
Hasan Ali Abed Al-Zu’bi
Jordanian
Fredrick OJIJA
Tanzanian
Firuza M. Tursunkhodjaeva
Uzbekistan
Faraz Ahmed Farooqi
Saudi Arabia
Eric Randy Reyes Politud
Philippines
Elsadig Gasoom FadelAlla Elbashir
Sudan
Eapen, Asha Sarah
United State
Dr.Arun Kumar A
India
Dr. Zafar Iqbal
Pakistan
Dr. SHAHERA S.PATEL
India
Dr. Ruchika Khanna
India
Dr. Recep TAS
Turkey
Dr. Rasha Ali Eldeeb
Egypt
Dr. Pralhad Kanhaiyalal Rahangdale
India
DR. PATRICK D. CERNA
Philippines
Dr. Nicolas Padilla- Raygoza
Mexico
Dr. Mustafa Y. G. Younis
Libiya
Dr. Muhammad shoaib Ahmedani
Saudi Arabia
DR. MUHAMMAD ISMAIL MOHMAND
United State
DR. MAHESH SHIVAJI CHAVAN
India
DR. M. ARUNA
India
Dr. Lim Gee Nee
Malaysia
Dr. Jatinder Pal Singh Chawla
India
DR. IRAM BOKHARI
Pakistan
Dr. FARHAT NAZ RAHMAN
Pakistan
Dr. Devendra kumar Gupta
India
Dr. ASHWANI KUMAR DUBEY
India
Dr. Ali Seidi
Iran
Dr. Achmad Choerudin
Indonesia
Dr Ashok Kumar Verma
India
Thi Mong Diep NGUYEN
France
Dr. Muhammad Akram
Pakistan
Dr. Imran Azad
Oman
Dr. Meenakshi Malik
India
Aseel Hadi Hamzah
Iraq
Anam Bhatti
Malaysia
Md. Amir Hossain
Bangladesh
Ahmet İPEKÇİ
Turkey
Mirzadi Gohari
Iran