Effect of co-compost and vermicompost on yield and yield attributing parameters of Abelmoschus esculentus in acidic soil

Introduction

Natural farming can be characterised by avoiding the use of chemicals and relying on a diverse agroecological system, including crops, trees, and livestock. It focuses on using resources generated on the farm, optimizing functional biodiversity, thereby encouraging farmers to forgo the use of industrial pesticides and artificial fertilizers. Research indicates that natural farming is not only more productive and sustainable but also more waterefficient and ecologically beneficial for both farms and soil (Devarinti, 2016; Tiwari & Raj, 2020) [4,5] . In this experiment, co-compost has been used as a component of natural farming, which is a stabilized organic product produced by controlled aerobic decomposition of organic compounds using more than one feed stock. It can be effectively utilized for all crops alongwith fertilizers to improve the nutrient use efficiency. The use of chemical fertilizer can be reduced by 37-44% by the use of co-compost (Fendel et al., 2022) [5] . Co-compost enhances soil nutrient content, making it more suitable for producing high yields (Singh et al., 2012) [13] . The quality of vegetables and the sale price was increased by the application of co-compost in vegetables, as per the result conducted in farmers' field in Tamil Nadu (Yazhini et al., 2022) [16] . Co-composting using municipal and agricultural waste materials promises safe, economic and eco-friendly solution for bringing out organic fertilizers as part of resource recovery as reported by Zhang et al., 2014 [17] . Okra is a vital vegetable crop extensively grown in tropical and subtropical regions for its tender, non-fibrous green pods. These nutritious pods are considered a powerhouse of valuable nutrients and can be used in various ways, such as boiling, canning, freezing, or drying, and are often added to soups and curries. Additionally, okra is a rich source of iodine, which helps prevent goiter. Fresh okra fruits contain 2.1 g of protein, 0.2 g of fat, 8 g of carbohydrates, 36 calories, 1.7 g of fiber, and 175.2 mg of minerals, including 103 mg of potassium, 6.9 mg of sodium, 56 mg of phosphorus, 66 mg of calcium, 1.5 mg of iron, 30 mg of sulfur, 88 ml of water, 88 IU of vitamin A, 0.07 mg of thiamine, 0.1 mg of riboflavin, and 13 mg of vitamin C per 100 g of the edible portion (Tindall, 1983; Berry et al., 1988) [14,2] . Application of vermicompost and poultry manure subsequently increase yield attributing characters and yield of okra (Sameera et al., 2005) [12] . The effect of co-compost and vermicompost on yield and yield attributing parameters was studied in this experiment. The experiment was laid out in Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with 10 treatments, replicated thrice in acid soil of Odisha.

Materials and Methods

Observations recorded

The plants were harvested at maturity and yield attributing parameters were recorded. Plant height was measured at 30 and 60 days after sowing and after harvest, the number of days from the date of seeding to the date of first flowering, number of fruits harvested from the plant in each treatment, weight of tender fruits and average yield was recorded individually for each pot. Sample taken from the plants were oven dried at 60 °C and reduction in the weight was recorded consistently. When constant dry weight was found for few days, dry weight was taken and harvest index was calculated.

Harvest Index =

Fruit yield fruit yield + stover yield ×100 Uptake of nutrients (N, P, K, Ca and Mg) was computed by multiplying the respective nutrient concentration to dry matter yield obtained.

Nutrient content (%) x Dry matter yield Uptake of nutrients (kg/ha) = 100

Statistical analysis

All the data pertaining to the present investigation were statistically analyzed by Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) as per the method described by Gomez and Gomez, 1984. The statistical significance of various treatment effects was tested at 5 per cent level of probability. In order to test the significance of mean differences between treatments, the following statistical parameters were computed.

SEm (±) = √(Error MS/No. of replications)

CD (p = 0.05) = SEm x t value x √2

Results and Discussion

The nutrient content of co-compost and vermicompost is mentioned in table 2. It was observed that, pH of cocompost was slightly alkaline, may be due to presence of cations and release of acids at the time of decomposition. Presence of the plant nutrients in the form of soluble salts may have increased the EC values of both CC and VC. Organic carbon was slightly more in vermicompost than cocompost and N was slightly more on vermicompost than cocompost. This variation may be due to inputs and ingredients used for co-compost and vermicompost preparation. The carbon nitrogen ratio (C:N ratio) of 12.9, indicated that well decomposed and maintenance of the proper ratio of C & N in compost. N, P, K, Ca, Mg of vermicompost was higher than co-compost because of the source material used for preparation and handling after preparation. Heavy metals content like Cd, Pb, Ni were found below permissible limit of compost. Pb content was higher than other but within the permissible limit, which might be find route to petrochemicals, fossil fuel or geogenic. This result was in accordance with the report by Khater, 2015.

The height at 30 and 60 days after sowing and at maturity stage (90 days after sowing) were recorded and presented in table 3. It was revealed that with the age of the crop, plant height increased. Maximum plant height (64.32 cm) in T 7 and minimum (44.92 cm) in T 1 was recorded at maturity. Similar trend was observed in % increase in plant height over control. The plant height recorded in T 2 , T 7 , T 8 and T 9 were statistically at par and significantly different from rest other treatments. Application of soil test dose of nutrients with the vermicompost helped in supplying appropriate quantity of nutrient required by the crop at different growth stage where non application of ever manure and fertilizer restricted the height of plant in control treatment. T 8 showed higher heights compared to the other combination. This type of result where also reported by Khatun et al., 2020 [8] and Akber and Joardar, 2020 [1] in okra crop.

Days to first flowering

Flowering at comparatively earlier stage increased the yield of the crop. First flowering was observed at 35 days in T 7 , which was lesser than other treatments, followed by T 8 and longer (48 days) in T 1 was observed (Table 3). Lesser days to first flowering made the plant able to bear more number of flowers, ultimately increasing the yield of crop.

Number of fruits per plant and fruit weight

Maximum no. of fruits (15) in T 7 and minimum (7) in T 1 was recorded (Table 3). The no. of fruits observed in T 2 , T 7 , T 8 and T 9 were statistically at par and significantly different from other treatments. Similar trend was observed in fruit weight. The number of fruits trend was due to application of organic manure with chemical fertilizer to light texture, acid soil with low fertility. Okra being a nutrient responsive crop showed higher number of fruit content to the application of chemical fertilizer with compost either in the form of cocompost or vermicompost. Although T 8 (co-compost with STD) recorded the second maximum weight of fruit per plant but statistically at par with T 7 .

Fruit yield and % yield increase over control Maximum yield and % yield increase over control was evaluated and found to be maximum (128.87 g/plant) in pot having STD and 2 t/ha vermicompost, followed by having 2 t/ha co-compost (Table 4). Lowest yield was recorded in absolute control. The same observation was recorded by Pandiyan et al., 2020 in sugarcane.

Total biomass (Dry matter Yield) and Harvest Index T 7 receiving STD with 2 t/ha vermicompost had maximum biomass yield between fresh and dry compared to other treatments, may be because of the supply of nutrients in smooth harmony with the nutrient requirement of the crop through chemical fertilizer and vermicompost. The treatment application of 2 t/ha of co-compost was at par. Application of co-compost helped in creating a positive, congenial, edaphic condition for better availability, water, air, nutrients, temperature and other nutrients in the experimental pot soil. Different combinations of organic and inorganic exhibited the biomass yield accordingly whereas absence of organics application resulted with lower biomass. D'Hose et al., 2012 [3] also confirmed that co-composted animal manure considerably increased dry matter yield of potatoes, fodder beets, forage maize, okra and Brussels sprouts. The HI percentages, which are a key indicator of the efficiency of resource allocation between plant organs, were noticeably affected by the application co-compost and exhibited a range from 64.6 to 70.8%. Highest value was observed in the treatment receiving STD with 2t per hectare vermicompost, which was due to the highest biomass yield in this treatment with the impacts of nutrient source applied to it. This type of findings was reported by Kumar and Prasad, 2020.

Nutrient uptake (N, P, K)

It was observed from the table 5 that uptake of N per plant varied from 0.141 g/plant to 0.290 g/plant in different treatments. It was lowest in control and highest in T 7 , receiving 100% N through chemical source with 2 t/ha vermicompost. The same trend was followed for P and K uptake by okra crop. Maximum uptake was due to more fruit yield and stover, which was further increased due to more concentration in fruit and stover compared to other treatments. The P uptake found in T 3 , T 4 , T 5 , T 6 and T 10 were statistically at par. Application of organic manure, either in the form of co-compost or vermicompost increased the nutrient uptake for better growth of plants. Malhi, 2012 also reported that the application of organic manures favoured the uptake of N, K and S in wheat. K uptake was lowest in control and highest in treatment receiving 100% N through chemical source with 2 t/ha vermicompost. K applied through 100% chemical source with 2 t of vermicompost per ha was at par with 100% chemical source with 2 t of cocompost per ha.

Conclusion

Addition of co-compost @ 2 t/ha with chemical fertiliser enhances the marketable yield, which increases the profit, compared to other treatments. Higher benefit creates a positive mindset of the farmer towards the acceptability of technology. Application of 2 t/ha co-compost with STD for okra crop is statistically at par with that of STD + 2 t/ha of vermicompost with regard to yield, uptake and yield attributing parameters etc. But presence of few toxic elements like Cd, Pb and Ni may limit its use in agricultural crop, particularly in edible vegetables. In order to enable the good quality of co-compost the elements should be avoided at the time of preparation.

References

1. Akber S, Joardar JC. Co-composting of water hyacinth with cattle manure and its effects on growth, yield and economics of okra. Int J Mod Sci Technol. 2020;5(2):59-64.
2. Berry SK, Kalra CL, Sehgal RC, Kulkarni SG, Kour S, Arora SK, Sharma BR. Quality characteristics of seeds of five okra [Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench] cultivars. J Food Sci Technol. 1988;25(5):303-305.
3. D'Hose T, Cougnon M, De Vliegher A, Van Bockstaele E, Reheul D. Influence of farm compost on soil quality and crop yields. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 2012;58(S1):S71S75.
4. Devarinti SR. Natural farming: eco-friendly and sustainable? Agrotechnology. 2016;5:147-151.
5. Fendel V, Kranert M, Maurer C, Garcés-Sánchez G, Huang J, Ramakrishna G. The impact of using cocompost on resource management and resilience of smallholder agriculture in South India. Environments. 2022;9(11):143-155.
6. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research. Singapore: John Wiley and Sons; 1984. p. 28-192.
7. Khater E. Some physical and chemical properties of compost. Int J Waste Resour. 2015;5:1-5.
8. Khatun A, Sikder S, Joardar JC. Effect of co-compost made from cattle manure and sawdust on the growth and yield of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.). Malays J Sustain Agric. 2020;4(1):36-39.
9. Kumar C, Prasad CC. Preparation of quality enriched vermicompost and its analysis. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9(7):3556-3571.
10. Malhi SS. Relative effectiveness of various amendments in improving yield and nutrient uptake under organic crop production. Open J Soil Sci. 2012;2(3):299-311.
11. Pandiyan B, Mangottiri V, Narayanan N. Insights into the application of co-composting for soil nutrient stability-a review. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng. 2020;955(1):012045-012052.
12. Sameera DL, Shankaraiah V, Srihari D. Effect of packaging and storage on organic manures grown okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L. Moench). J Res ANGRAU. 2005;33(4):30-35.
13. Singh J, Kalamdhad AS. Reduction of heavy metals during composting: a review. Int J Environ Prot. 2012;2(9):36-43.
14. Tindall HD. Vegetables in the tropics. London: Macmillan Press Ltd; 1983. p. 37-45.
15. Tiwari A, Raj S. Natural farming: A game changer in the era of social, economical and ecological crisis. MANAGE. 2020;64:1-8.
16. Yazhini SP, Balaji P, Uma K, Balasubramaniam P. Cocompost practising farmers in the Nilgiris district of Tamil Nadu, India: problems and prospects. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Sociol. 2022;40(10):736-741.
17. Zhang L, Sun X. Changes in physical, chemical and microbiological properties during the two-stage cocomposting of green waste with spent mushroom compost and biochar. Bioresour Technol. 2014;171:274-284.