ISSN : 0975-3710
EISSN : 0975-9107
M.S. PAL1*, S.P. SINGH2
1Professor, Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Gobind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, 263145, Uttarakhand, India
2Government Inter College, Moradabad, 244001, Uttar Pradesh, India
* Corresponding Author : drmspal1@gmail.com
Received : 07-03-2019 Accepted : 24-03-2019 Published : 30-03-2019
Volume : 11 Issue : 6 Pages : 8066 - 8069
Int J Agr Sci 11.6 (2019):8066-8069
Keywords : Azotobacter, FYM, Glucosinolate, Oil content, B:C ratio, Bio-fertilizers, ZnSO4, leaf area
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Gobind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, 263145, Uttarakhand, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed
Field experiments were carried out at Research Farm of A. S. (P.G.) College, Lakhaoti, Bulandshahar (U.P.) during rabi season of 2005-06 and 2006-07 with objective to study the effect of organic and inorganic fertilization on growth, seed yield and oil quality of Indian mustard in Indo-Gangetic plains of Uttar Pradesh, India. The recommended fertilizers (120:40:20:40::N:P2O5:K2O:S kgha-1) combined with FYM@10 t ha-1 + Zinc @ 25kg ZnSO4 + seed treatment with Azotobacter gave significantly higher mean plant height, total dry matter accumulation, leaf area, seed and stover yield. The mean seed yield of mustard was increased by 41.2% when recommended fertilizers were applied along with FYM@10 t ha-1, Zinc @ 25kg ZnSO4 and seed treatment with Azotobacter over alone application of recommended fertilizers. Similarly, the results revealed that additional application of either FYM@ 10 t ha-1 or Zn @ 25kgZnSO4 ha-1 or seed treatment with Azotobacter enhanced the mean mustard yield by 12.0, 11.5 and 13.0%, respectively. The higher fertility levels increased the protein content but reduced the glucosinolate content in the seed. The oil content decreased at higher inorganic fertility levels but application of FYM and Azotobacter improved the oil content.
1. Sharma A.R., Bahera U.K. (2004) Fertilizer News, 49, 115-31.
2. Mahapatra I.C., Bahera U.K. (2011) Indian Journal of Agronomy, 56, 1-19.
3. Condron L.M., Cameron K.C., Di H. J., Clugh T.J., Forbes E.A. McLaren R.G., Silva R.G. (2000) New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 43, 473-66.
4. Chand S., Anwar M., Patra D.D. (2006) Soil Science Plant Annals, 37, 63-73.
5. Bokhtiar S., Sakurai K. (2005) Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 51, 325-34.
6. Dutta S., Pal R., Chakraborty A. (2003) Chakraborty K. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 49, 631-37.
7. Beare Joyce L., Campbell J.A., Youngs C.G., Craig B.M. (1963) Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology, 41, 605-12.
8. Singh R., Sinsinwar B.S. (2006) Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 76, 322-24.
9. Mohammad, Auyoub B., Singh Room, Anshuman K. (2007) Journal of Society of Soil Science, 55, 224-26.
10. Singh S. P. and Pal M.S. (2011) Indian Journal of Agronomy, 56, 381-87.
11. GOI. (2011) Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
12. Tripathi M.K., Chaturvedi S., Shukla D.K., Mahapatra B.S. (2010) Indian Journal of Agronomy, 55, 138-42.
13. Ahmad A., Abdin M. (2000) Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 185, 49-54.
14. Wang X. and McGregor D.I. (1991) Proceedings of the Eight International Rapeseed Congress. Saskatoon, Canada, 9-11 July 1991, pp 850-55.
15. Shukla R.K., Kumar A., Mahapatra B.S. and Kandpal B. (2002) Indian journal of Agricultural Sciences, 72, 670-72.
16. Kumar A., Singh S.M.P. and Singh S.B. (2002) Indian Journal of Agronomy, 47, 105-08.
17. Kumar N. (2006) Ph.D. thesis submitted to CCS University, Meerut.
18. Yadav K. K. and Chhipa B. R. (2007) Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science, 55, 324-29.
19. Prasad B. (2000) Thesis M.Sc., G.B.Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, 5.
20. Krishna S., Singh R.S. and Bhushan C. (2005) Agricultural Science, 5, 198-200.