Study of performance of integrated nutrient management on soil fertility in garden pea (Pisum sativus L.)

Introduction

The garden pea, Pisum sativum L., belongs to the family Fabaceae with chromosome number 2n=2x=14. The garden pea is one of the most significant and versatile legume crops. The most significant off-season vegetable in the North Indian hills, it is grown as both a summer and an autumn crop, making green pods available from March onwards to the end of October, when they are not available in the lowlands. After Russia, India is the world's second-largest producer of peas. It is an important pulse crop farmed in India. The USA, China, France, UK and other countries are important pea growers in addition to India. Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Haryana, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Odisha, and Karnataka are the principal pea-growing states in India. Garden peas are grown over about 551 hectares and produce 5363 Mt in India (NHB, 2017-2018). Pea is a nutritional vegetable crop; it has a significant amount of digestible carbohydrates, protein, lipids, minerals and vitamins. It also has a high level of antioxidant activity, it contains 2% fat, 60-65% carbohydrates, 25-28% protein, and other minerals. Lysine and tryptophan are two amino acids found in peas in large quantities, like cereal grains. The seeds are free of cholesterol, abundant in fibre and low in fat. It can be cultivated for hay, pasturage, green manure, and as a forage crop. Compared to soybeans, it has 5 to 20% fewer trypsin inhibitors. As a result, it can be fed to animals without undergoing the extrusion heating process. Pea plays a key role in promoting sustainable agriculture by maintaining soil fertility through biological nitrogen fixation in conjunction with symbiotic rhizobium present in its root nodules (Negi et al., 2004) [4] . The availability of nutrients is directly related to food production. The need for chemical fertilizers has increased as a result of the need to produce more and more food for the growing population. Despite the best use of high yielding varieties and higher volumes of chemical fertilizers, the rise of food production has slowed over the past three decades (Sharma et al., 2009) [7] . According to Pawar et al. (2017) [5] , it is the second most valuable legume crop in the world. The dry, green foliage is fed to cattle, and the exceptionally nutrient dense green pods are preferred for food. According to Gopinath et al. (2017) [2] , this legume has a high concentration of nutrients per 100 g of edible part, including digestible protein (7.2 g), carbohydrate (15.8 g), vitamin A (139 I.U.), vitamin C (9 mg), magnesium (34 mg) and phosphorus (139 mg). Pea is the most significant source of vegetable protein, pea enriches the soil and as it is a leguminous crop, it may not require much nitrogen. However, during the early growth and nodulation stages of the young plants, when nitrogen deficiency may manifest and the plant may suffer from nitrogen starvation, a small amount of inorganic nitrogen may be used to stimulate these processes and increase the amount of nitrogen fixed in a plant Uikey et al., 2015) [8] . Garden pea has long been recognised as a restorer of soil fertility due to its unique ability of symbiotic nitrogen fixation (Rana et al., 1998) [6] . This ability has made the crop one of the most important and useful components of existing cropping systems in the present context of soil fertility degradation. Improving the yield of garden peas depends on proper nutrient management and the genetic makeup of the variety.

Materials and Methods

The experiment was carried out at Medicinal and Aromatic Plant Research Station (MAPRS), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. Telangana during rabi season 2022-2023. The experimental site falls under a semiarid tropical climate with an average rainfall of 800 mm per annum, located at an altitude of 542.3 m above mean sea level at a latitude of 17019' and a longitude of 79°23. The mean monthly meteorological data, i.e., rainfall, mean minimum and maximum temperature. The soil was red sand loam with a pH of 7.2 and an electrical conductivity of 0.363 dsm-1. the soil had good drainage facilities with low water holding capacity. The nutrient availability of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash per hectare is, respectively. Arkel variety was taken for this experiment. The soil of the experiment site was black sandy loam. The soil is prepared by ploughing and, at last, ploughing soil enriched with well-decomposed farm yard manure @ 25 tonnes per hectare. The seeds were mixed with sand and sown in a ridge and furrow system at a depth of 1.5 cm in rows as per the treatment. The field was irrigated immediately after sowing, taking utmost care so that the seeds were not disturbed by the flow of water. Farmyard manure was applied at 10 tons per hectare at the time of plot preparation and the recommended dose of NPK (25:40:50 kg ha -1) was applied in the form of Urea, Single super phosphate (SSP) and Muriate of potash (MOP). Nitrogen 50 kg ha -1 was applied in two splits, half of the nitrogen was applied at the time of sowing and the rest at one month after sowing. The full dose of Phosphorus (40 kg ha -1 ) and Potassium (50 kg ha 1) were applied as basal. The crop was irrigated immediately after sowing to obtain better and uniform germination. Subsequently, the irrigations were given at seven-day intervals depending upon the moisture condition of the experimental plot to maintain uniform soil moisture throughout the crop growth period.

The results in Table 1 revealed that the values of Available nitrogen before and after harvest. There is no significant difference observed between the treatments in available nitrogen uptake before and after harvest.

The results in Table 4.4.2 revealed that the highest values of available phosphorus before harvest (12.93 kg/ha) was recorded in the treatment T 3 -75% RDF+ FYM (5t/ha) + Vermicompost (1.5 t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg /ha) which was at par with T 1 -75% RDF + FYM (10 t/ha)+ Azotobacter (5kg/ha) followed by T 2 -75% RDF + Vermicompost (3t /ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ ha)) which was at par with T 4 -50% RDF +FYM (10t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha), T 5 -50% RDF + Vermicompost(3t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha), T 6 -50% RDF + FYM (5t/ha) Vermicompost (1.5t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) Whereas, minimum Average Available phosphorus (kg/ha) before harvesting was observed in the treatment T 7 -100% RDF.

The results in Table 4.4.2 revealed that the highest values of Available phosphorus after harvest (12.84kg/ha) was recorded in the treatment T 3 -75% RDF + FYM (5t/ha) + Vermicompost (1.5 t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) which was at par with T 1 -75%RDF + FYM (10 t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) followed by T 5 -50% RDF + Vermicompost (3t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) T 2 -75% RDF + Vermicompost (3t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha), T 4 -50% RDF + FYM (10t/ha)+ Azotobacter (5kg/ha), T 6 -50% RDF + FYM (5t/ha) Vermicompost (1.5t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) Whereas, minimum Average available phosphorus (kg/ha) after harvesting was observed in the treatment T 7 -100% RDF.

The results in Table 4.4.3 revealed that the highest values of Available potassium before harvest (199.25 kg/ha) was recorded in the treatment T 3 -75% RDF + FYM (5t /ha)+ Vermicompost (1.5 t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg /ha) which was at par with T 6 -50%RDF+FYM (5t/ha) Vermicompost (1.5t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) followed by T 2 -75% RDF + Vermicompost (3t /ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ ha). Whereas, minimum Average Available phosphorus (kg/ha) before harvesting was observed in the treatment T 7 100% RDF.

The results in Table 4.4.3 revealed that the highest values of Available potassium after harvest (197.90 kg/ha) was recorded in the treatment T 3 -75% RDF + FYM (5t/ha) + Vermicompost (1.5 t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) after harvesting was observed in the treatment T 7 100% RDF. Following harvest, different integrated nutrient management treatments had an impact on the available nutrients, N, P2O5, and K2O (Table 1), in the soil. According to Bhardwaj et al. (2012) [1] , higher values of NPK at harvest may be due to residual effects of applied nutrients, the benefits of Integrated Nutrient Management in helping crops extract different nutrients from the soil, and increased mineralization of FYM as a result of the synergistic effects of inoculating crop with bacteria that fix nitrogen and bacteria that fix phosphorus.

Economics 2.1 Benefit: Cost ratio

The economic benefits ultimately matter for growing the crops. The economics of garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) in terms of gross and net profit or return for different integrated nutrient management treatments involved in the present experiment were worked out and computed (Table 2). Among the various treatments tested, the treatments combination of 75% RDF+ FYM (5t /ha)+ Vermicompost (1.5 t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg /ha) (T 3 ) was found superior in terms of net returns (₹ 356,020ha -1 ) and benefit cost ratio (2.50) followed by T 2 -75% RDF + Vermicompost (3t /ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ ha) found was of net returns (₹ 303,420 ha -1 ) and benefit cost ratio (2.35) Whereas, minimum T 4 -50% RDF+FYM (10t/ha) + Azotobacter (5kg/ha) net returns (₹ 243,292 ha -1 ) and benefit cost ratio (1.58).

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors sincerely thanks to J. Srinivas, J. Cheena, B. Naveen Kumar and G. Sathis for their kind help in the research work. I am highly thankful to SKLTSHU, Mulugu, Siddipet, Telangana, for providing all the facilities to complete this endeavour.

References

1. Bhardwaj SK, Sharma SD, Kumar P. Effect of conjoint use of bio-organics and chemical fertilizers on yield and soil properties under French bean-cauliflower-based cropping system. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 2012;58(7):759-763.
2. Gopinath KA, Mina BL. Effect of organic manures on agronomic and economic performance of garden pea (Pisum sativum) and on soil properties. Indian J Agric Sci. 2011;81(3):236.
3. National Horticulture Board (NHB). Indian Horticulture Database 2017-2018. Gurugram (India): National Horticulture Board; 2018.
4. Negi S, Singh RV, Dwivedi GK. Effect of biofertilizers, FYM, NPK and lime on pea in acidic soil of Uttaranchal hills. Veg Sci. 2004;31:193-195.
5. Pawar Y, Varma LR, Verma P, Joshi HN, More SG, Dabhi JS. Influence of integrated use of organic and inorganic sources of nutrients on growth, flowering and yield of garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) cv. Bonneville. Legume Res. 2017;40(1):117-124.
6. Rana NS, Singh GV, Ahlawat IPS. Effect of nitrogen, Rhizobium inoculation and phosphorus on root nodulation, dry matter yield and nutrient uptake in pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan). Indian J Agron. 1998;43:102-106.
7. Sharma A, Plaha P, Rathour R, Katoch V, Singh Y, Khalsa GS. Induced mutagenesis for improvement of garden pea. Int J Veg Sci. 2009;16(1):60-72.
8. Uikey V, Verma H, Nawange D. Influence of organic, chemical and biofertilizer on growth and yield of pea. Agric Sci Dig. 2015;35(3):237-240.