EFFECT OF COW URINE (GOMUTRA) AS A SOURCE OF NITROGEN ON GROWTH, YIELD AND NITROGEN UPTAKE IN RICE (Oryza sativa L.)

S.N. SINGH¹*, K.K. MAURYA², G.P. SINGH^3
1Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Barkachha, Mirzapur, 231 001, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005
²Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Barkachha, Mirzapur, 231 001, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005
³Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Barkachha, Mirzapur, 231 001, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005
* Corresponding Author : krishnam412@gmail.com

Received : 26-02-2018     Accepted : 07-03-2018     Published : 30-03-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 3       Pages : 1035 - 1037
Int J Microbiol Res 10.3 (2018):1035-1037
DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.9735/0975-5276.10.3.1035-1037

Keywords : Rice, Cow urine
Academic Editor : Dr Sudhanand Lal
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : The authors are thankful to Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh 221005. Author thankful to Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi for providing financial support for the research work
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed

Rice (Oryza Sativa L.) is an important food crop. The demand for rice continues to increase owing to continued growth of population. It is predicted that a 50% to 60% increase in rice production will be required to meet demand by 2025 in India. Cow urine (Gomutra) is used for several centuries in different ways in many parts of the world. Cow urine contains nitrogen constituents in different amounts and may be used as source of nitrogen for plant nutrition. Hence, the present study was taken up to evaluate the effect of cow urine on growth yield and nutrient uptake of rice. Accordingly, a field experiment was conducted during kharif 2017at crop cafeteria of BHU- Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rajiv Gandhi South campus, Barkachha, Mirzapur (Banaras Hindu University) in randomized block design taking rice variety Shusk Samrat as a test crop. The soil of the study region was red soil having pH 7.8, EC 0.67 dS m-1, organic carbon 0.42%, available N 185.3, P 9.6, K 189 and S 9.4 kg ha-1and available micronutrient Fe 32.6, Mn 18.6, Zn 2.26, Cu 2.1 and Boron 0.98 mg kg-1. The experiment consisted of five treatments comprising T1 (control- no input), T2 (N at 120 kg ha-1), T3 (N at 150 kg ha-1), T4 (N at 120 kg ha-1 + cow urine) and T5 (N at 100 kg ha-1) taking four replications in randomized block design. Cow urine procured from same cow was applied weekly up to six weeks from the date of transplanting. The results of the study revealed that paddy crop favourably responded to different levels of nitrogen through fertilizer alone and in combination of cow urine. Plant growth (plant height, number of tiller) and yield (grain and straw) significantly increased as compared to control by the application of nitrogen. Application of N at 120 kg ha-1 + cow urine registered maximum dry matter production. Without cow urine, application of nitrogen at 150 kg ha-1 recorded higher yield than control and 120 kg ha-1 level. Nitrogen content in plant (grain and straw) and uptake were also found maximum when nitrogen was applied at 120 kg ha-1 + cow urine.

1. Khush G. (2005) Plant Molecular Biology, 59: 1-6.
2. Kundu D. K. (2014) J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 62, S143-S154.
3. Choudhary S., Kushwaha M., Singh S.P., Sodani R. and Kumar S. (2017) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci., 6 (2): 1824-1829.
4. Bristow W, Andrew C.W. and David C. E. (1992) J Science of Food and Agric, 59, 387—394.
5. Sparks D.L. (1996) Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3: Chemical Methods. Soil Science Society of America Inc., American Society of Agronomy Inc., Madison Wisconsin, USA
6. Subbiah B.V. and Asija G.L. (1956) Curr. Sci., 25, 259.
7. Piper C.S. (1966) Soil and Plant Analysis. Hans Publishers, Mumbai.
8. Bray R.H. and Kurtz L.T. (1945) Soil Science, 59, 39 – 45.
9. Jackson M. L. (1973) Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
10. Walkey A. and Black I.A. (1934) Soil Sci., 37, 29-38.
11. Minocheherhomji F. P. and Vyas B. M. (2014) International J. Adv.Pharm.Biol.Chem., 3, 836-840.
12. Singh S., Singh R.N., Prasad J. and Singh B.P. (2006) J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 54 (3), 327-330.
13. Singh M.K., Singh R.P. and Rai S. (2014) Environ. Ecol., 32(4), 1277-1281.
14. Gahukar R.T. (2013) Indian J. Entomol., 75(3), 212-216.
15. Pradhan S., Bohra J.S., Bahadur S., Rajani and Ram L. (2016) J. Pure and Appl. Microbiol., 10(2), p1637
16. Weigelt A., King R., Bol R. and Bardgett R. D. (2003) J. Pl. Nutr. Soil Sci., 166 (5), 606-611.
17. Nwite J.N. (2015) Int. J. Adv. Agric. Res., 3, 31-36.