Response of bio-fertilizers on growth and yield of garlic (Allium sativum L.) garlic

Introduction

Garlic is the second most widely used cultivated Allium after onion. It has long been recognized all over the world as a valuable spice for food and a popular remedy for various ailments and physiological disorder. It is grown throughout the plains of India and consumed by most of the people. It is used practically all over the world for flavoring various dishes. In America about 50% of the entire output of fresh garlic is dehydrated and sold to food processors. Recently, spray dried garlic products are also available for some year (Pruthi, 1979) [14] . The area covered by garlic exceeds 1,142,000 ha and its average productivity is estimated to be 12t ha -1 in the world. World production of garlic is ranked 14 th among vegetables with a total of 14.5 million ton (Trejo, 2006). In Mexico, its consumption is about 400 g per capita (Chavez, 2008), and the production is considered low as compared to other countries such as China (80% world production), India, Korea and (20%) the rest of the world. Garlic contains moisture 62.8%, protein 6.3%, mineral matter 1.0%, carbohydrate 29.0%, fat 0.7%, fibre 0.8%, calcium 0.03%, phosphorus 0.31%, iron 0.0013%, calorific value 141, vitamin C 13 mg per 100 g, nicotinic acid 0.4 mg, thiamine 0.16 mg, riboflavin 0.23mg its 100 gyible portion contains: Na 32mg, Mg 36 mg and fibre 1.1% (Chatfield, 1954) [4] .

Materials and Methods

The experiments was conducted during rabi season 2022-23 and 2023-24 at the field of Horticulture department, Mansarovar Global University, Bilkishganj Sehore (Madhya Pradesh) India. The site is situated in part of Madhya Pradesh and covers geographical area of 25.60 lakh ha and represents 8.71 per cent of the total geographical area of the state. The zone is located between 23016´ North latitudes and 77036´ East longitudes. This zone possesses typically subtropical climatic conditions characterized by mild winters and moderate summers associated with high relative humidity during the months of July to September. The annual rainfall of the region is 650 -1000 mm, most of which is contributed by south west monsoon from July to September. The experiment consisting of 10 treatments viz., T1-Control (No fertilizer), T2-RDF 100%, T3-RDF 90%, T4-RDF 80%, T5-Control (un-inoculated), T6-Azotobacter, T7-Phosphobacteria, T8-Azospirillum, T9-Azospirillum + Phosphobacteria, T10 Azotobacter + Phosphobacteria, was laid out in RBD with three replications.

Results and Discussion

The data regarding the effect of different bio-fertilizers on the plant height of garlic has been presented in the (Table 1). The perusal of data revealed that the plant height at 90 DAP was significantly affected by various bio-fertilizers. The maximum plant height was recorded under T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) during investigation, while minimum plant height was recorded under T1 (control) treatment during investigation showed in pool data.

Number of leaves

The data regarding the effect of different bio-fertilizers on the number of leaves of garlic has been presented in the (Table 2). The perusal of data revealed that the number of leaves at 90 DAP was significantly affected by various bio-fertilizers. The maximum number of leaves was recorded under T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria), while minimum number of leaves was recorded under T1 (control) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

Data ((Table 3). further showed that application of bio-fertilizers significantly enhanced the diameter of bulb. The maximum diameter of bulb was recorded under T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) during investigation, while minimum diameter of bulb was observed under T1 (control) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

Number of cloves per bulb

Data revealed in (Table 3) clearly showed that application of bio-fertilizers significantly enhanced the number of cloves over control. Treatment T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) recorded the maximum number of cloves per plant, and the minimum number of cloves per plant was recorded under T1 (control) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

It is apparent from the data (Table 3). further showed that application of bio-fertilizers significantly enhanced the length of cloves over control. Treatment T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) recorded the maximum length of cloves (4.98 cm) per plant during investigation. The minimum length of cloves (3.16cm) was observed under T1 (control) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

It is obvious from the data (Table 3). further showed that application of bio-fertilizers significantly enhanced the yield of bulb over control. Treatment T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) recorded the maximum yield of bulb, while the minimum yield of bulb observed under T1 (control) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

Discussion

Observation on Diameter of bulb (cm), Number of cloves per bulb, Length of clove (cm) and Bulb yield (q/ha) influenced by various treatments was recorded at after harvest during 2022-23 and 2023-24.The maximum diameter of bulb (4.94 cm), the maximum number of cloves per plant(28.37), the maximum length of cloves (4.94 cm) and the maximum yield of bulb (81.75 q/ha)was recorded under T9 (Azospirillum + Phosphobacteria), while minimum diameter of bulb (2.55cm), minimum number of cloves per plant(22.58), minimum length of cloves (3.14 cm) and minimum yield of bulb (67.44 q/ha) was recorded under T1 (control) treatments during 2022-23-2023-24 Pool mean. Similar findings were also reported by Singh et al. (2004) [17] in pea, Narayan et al. (2005) [13] in cauliflower, Dadhich et al. (2006) [9] in soybean.

Qualitative Total Soluble Solids (TSS)

Data (Table 4) further revealed that application of bio-fertilizers significantly enhanced the Total Soluble Solids (TSS) over control. Treatment T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) recorded the maximum Total Soluble Solids per plant, while the minimum Total Soluble Solids was recorded under T1 (control) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

Data (Table 4) further revealed that application of bio-fertilizers significantly enhanced the dry matter content in bulb (%) over control. Treatment T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) recorded the maximum dry matter content in bulb, while the minimum dry matter content in bulb was recorded under T6 (Azotobacter) treatments during investigation showed in pool data.

Discussion

Significantly increase in TSS content in the crop was also observed with PSB inoculation. PSB enhance the availability of phosphorus to plant which might have utilized by the crop for greater root development and nodulation which in turn resulted in high nitrogen fixation in the soil by nodules. Sinde and Saraf (1992) [20] in chick pea, Moduket al. (1993) [12] in pigeon pea, Shrivastavaand Ahlawat (1993) [19] in pea, Chalka (1999) [7] in cowpea, Gaur (1990) [8] in mungbean and Yogita and Ram (2012) [21] in onion reported similar kind of results. VAM inoculation helps in uniform crop growth, increased yield of crop and also enhance resistance to root disease and improve hardiness of transplant stock. So due to its obligatory symbiotic nature and above discussed characteristics, increases its use in various crops (Yawalkaret. al., 1996). Similar results were also reported by Bahadur et al. (2006) [1] in pea, Biswas and Patra (2007) [2] in green gram, Djebaliet al. (2010) [10] in common bean, pea, alfalfa and Ramana et al. (2010) [16] in French bean, who observed significantly higher plant height, root nodules and other growth attributes due to inoculation with VAM over uninoculated (control).

Conclusion

On the basis of the results obtained in the present investigation, it may be concluded that application of different RDF and biofertilizers enhanced the growth; yield and quality of garlic except days take bulb initiation in comparison to control. Application of T9 (Azospirillum +Phosphobacteria) may be considered as best treatment in terms of all growth and yield characters. It is recommended for higher production of garlic under Bilkishganj Sehore (Madhya Pradesh) conditions.

References

1. Bahadur A, Singh J, Singh KP, Rai M. Plant growth, yield and quality attributes of garden pea as influenced by organic amendments and bio-fertilizers. Indian J Hortic. 2006;63(4):464-466.
2. Biswas A, Patra AP. Study on the effect of phosphorus, Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhizae (VAM) and Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB) on the performance of summer green gram. In: National Symposium on Legumes for Ecological Sustainability, Emerging Challenges and Opportunities; Nov 3-5, 2007; Indian Institute of Pulses Research, Kanpur.
3. Biswas BC, Das S, Subhash KP. Crop response to bio fertilizers. Fertilizer News. 2001;46:15-24.
4. Chatfield C. Food composition tables for international use, minerals & vitamins FAQ Nut. Stu. 1954;11.
5. Chattoo MA, Ahmed N, Faheema S, Narayan S, Khan SH, Hussain K. Response of garlic (Allium sativum L.) to biofertilizer application. Asian J Hort. 2007;2(2):249-252.
6. Chaudhary SVS. Effect of biofertilizers with nitrogen and phosphorus on sprouting of bulbs and flowering in tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.) Cv. Double. Frog Agric. 2009;9(2):277-281.
7. Chalka M. Effect of Phosphorus, Sulphur and PSB on cowpea. M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, Rajasthan Agriculture University, Bikaner. 1999.
8. Dadhich SK, Somani LL, Verma A. Improved soybean yield, nutrient uptake and P enrichment in soil due to coinoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria and VAM fungi in a clay loam soil. Indian J Microbiol. 2006;46:4.
9. Djebali N, Turki S, Zib M, Hajlaoui MR. Growth and development responses of some legume species inoculated with a mycorrhiza-based bio-fertilizer. Agric Biol J North Am. 2010;1(5):748-754.
10. Kumar J, Singh OP, Pal K. Response of bio-fertilizers and chemical fertilizers in onion (Allium cepa Linn.). Prog Agric. 2010;10(1):170-172.
11. Moduk SB, Rai RK, Sinha MN. Effect of phosphorus and phosphate bacteria on yield, N, P uptake and balance in pigeon pea wheat sequence. Ann Agric Res. 1993;15:36-40.
12. Narayanamma M, Chiranjeevi CH, Reddy IP, Riazuddinahmed S. Integrated nutrient management in cauliflower (Brassica oleracea var. botrytis L.). Veg Sci. 2005;32(1):62-64.
13. Ramana V, Ramakrishna M, Purushotham K, Balakrishna KR. Effect of bio-fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Veg Sci. 2011;38(1):35-38.
14. Ramana V, Ramakrishna M, Purushotham K, Reddy KB. Effect of bio-fertilizers on growth, yield attributes and yield of French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Legume Res. 2010;33(3):178-183.
15. Singh S, Godara NR, Sharma BP. Effect of VAM, nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and flowering in tuberose (Polianthes tuberosa L.). In: Conference on Integrated Plant Disease Management: Challenging problems in horticultural and forest pathology. 2003. p. 241-245.
16. Srivastava R, Govil M. Influence of biofertilizers on growth and flowering in gladiolus cv. American Beauty. Acta Hortic. 2005;742:739-742.
17. Shrivastava TK, Ahlawat IPS. Response of pea (Pisum sativum L.) to phosphorus, molybdenum and bio-fertilizers. Indian J Agron. 1993;40:630-635.
18. Sinde VS, Saraf CS. Nodulation pattern in chickpea plant type as influenced by phosphorus with and without PSB and sulphur application. Ann Agric Res. 1992;13:85-88.
19. Yogita, Ram RB. Effect of chemical and bio-fertilizers on quality of onion. Hort Flora Res Spectrum. 2012;1(4):367370.