EFFECT OF VERMICOMPOST AND P ENRICHED BIOCOMPOST ON YIELD ATTRIBUTES AND YIELD OF FRENCH BEAN

V. PAUL¹, SHILVA DHIMAN²*, Y. DUBEY^3
1Department of Soil Science, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Palampur, 176062, Himachal Pradesh India
²Department of Soil Science, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Palampur, 176062, Himachal Pradesh India
³Department of Soil Science, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Palampur, 176062, Himachal Pradesh India
* Corresponding Author : dr.shilvadogra0502@gmail.com

Received : 31-08-2018     Accepted : 12-09-2018     Published : 30-09-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 9       Pages : 1360 - 1362
Int J Microbiol Res 10.9 (2018):1360-1362

Keywords : Cowdung, Biocompost, Biofertilizer
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Author thankful to CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, 176062, Himachal Pradesh
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed

An experiment was conducted at the experimental farm of Department of Soil Science, CSKHPKV, Palampur by taking French bean crop during kharif, 2009. Biocompost and vermicompost were prepared by using cow dung and weeds and were inoculated with microbial inoculants and rock phosphate. Biocompost and vermicompost were analysed and the best one among nine composts prepared i.e., 50% each of cowdung and substrate+ 2% rock phosphate + inoculants and three vermicomposts i.e., the one prepared by using Eupatorium waste, on the basis of nutrient content, was selected and applied to the crop in combination with fertilizers depending upon the treatment. The yield attributes of the crop were recorded and an increase in emergence, number of pods per plant and height was observed in the treatments where vermicompost was applied @15 t ha-1. The highest seed yield was recorded in the treatment 100% P and K + biofertilizer + vermicompost followed by 100% NPK + vermicompost treatment which was significantly higher than the same treatment with replacement of biocompost.

1. Jambhekar H.A. (1992) In proceeding National seminar on organic farming, 52-53.
2. Saxena M., Chauhan A. and Ashoka N.P.(1998) Pollution Research 17(1), 5-11.
3. Vasanthi D. and Kumarswami K. (1999) Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science 47(2), 268-272.
4. Sarangthen I. and Singh S.J. (2005) Recycling of urban wastes as manures and their evaluation in French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) In, Conference on Soil, Water and Environmental Quality Issue and Strategies 296.
5. Manna M.C. and Ganguly T.K. (1999) Indian Farming 49(1), 14-16.
6. Manna M.C., Hazra J.N., Sinha N.B. and Ganguly T.K.(1997) Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science 45(4), 831-833.
7. Thakur S. and Sharma L.R. (1998) Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science 46(2), 228-231.
8. Kumarjitsingh R.K., Athokpam Herojitsingh, Changte Zoliana and Singh G.N.(2005) Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science 53(1), 107-110.
9. Varalakshmi B.R., Srinivasamurthy C.A. and Bhaskar S.(2005) Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science 53(3), 315-318.
10. Yadav D.S. and Kumar A. (2000) Indian Farming 50(1), 28-30.
11. Janaki P., Sita N., Hari N. and Sree (1997) Indian Farming 47 (8), 29.
12. Jagdale R.B., Khawale V.S., Baviskar P.K., Doshinge B.B. and Kore M.S. (2005) Soils and Crops 15(2), 401-405.
13. Singh N.I. and Chauhan J.S. (2009) Nature and Science 7(5), 52-54.
14. Aziz S. and Eliot E. (2010) Compost effect on cotton growth and yield. From http,//www.p2pays.org
15. Otieno P.E., Muthomi J.W., Cheminingwa G.N. and Nderitu J.H. (2009) Journal of Biological Sciences 9, 326-332.
16. Smith D.C., Beharee and Hughes J.C. (2001) Scientia Horticulturae 91(3-4), 393-406.
17. Arancon N.Q., Edwards C.A., Lee S. and Byrne R. (2006) European Journal of Soil Biology 42(suppl.1), s65-s69
18. Kanwar K. and Paliyal S.S.(2004) Himachal Journal of Agricultural Research 30(1), 38-43.
19. Kushwaha (1994) Indian Journal of Agronomy 39(1), 34-37
20. Rajkhowa D.J., Saikia M. and Rajkhowa K.M.(2003) Legume Research 26(1), 63-65.