Effect of integrated nutrient management on fruit growth, yield and quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Allahabad safeda

Introduction

Guava (Psidium guajava L.), often referred to as the apple of the tropics, is among the most prevalent fruit crops in India. This fruit is native to Peru, Mexico, and tropical regions of America. The introduction of guava to India occurred in the early seventeenth century, brought by the Portuguese. It belongs to the Myrtaceae family of plants. Guava is sometimes called the "poor man's apple" owing to its delightful flavor, high nutritional content, and affordability. At present, guava has secured a robust market presence across more than 60 countries globally. It is cultivated in various regions including India, Algeria, Australia, Brazil, California, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Egypt, Florida, Hawaii, Indonesia, Israel, Java, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Panama, Pakistan, the Philippines, Spain, South Africa, and the USA. In India, the area allocated for guava farming spans 307,000 hectares, yielding a total production of 4,516,000 metric tons (Anon. 2022), which translates to a productivity rate of 14 metric tons per hectare (NHB Database 2019-20). Guava is primarily grown in states such as Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Bihar, West Bengal, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Assam. In northern India, guava flowers twice a year, with the initial bloom taking place from April to May in preparation for the rainy season (July-August), which is known as Amba Bahar. The fruits that emerge from the flowers during the rainy season mature in winter (November-December) and are referred to as Mrig Bahar (Gupta and Nijjar, 1978) [25] . In Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and other southern states, there is a third crop that blossoms in winter and yields ripe fruits in spring, called Hast Bahar (Hayes, 1970) [26] . Guava fruits are mainly consumed fresh with their skin after harvesting. However, they are also processed commercially into a variety of products including jam, cream, jellies, nectar, powder, puree, juice, and cheese (Dhillon, 2013) [27] . The fruits, leaves, and roots of guava are used in the treatment of diarrhoea and dysentery, and they are also ingredients in the formulation of other traditional medicines (Ojewole et al., 2008) [28] . Guava is a hardy fruit crop, capable of thriving in poor alkaline or poorly drained soils with minimal fertilization and irrigation. In North India, guava flowers twice annually, first in February-March for the rainy season crop, and then in June-July for the winter season crop (Mitra et al., 2008). Generally, the fruit yield is higher in the rainy season crop compared to the winter season (Rathore and Singh, 1974), but the fruits from the rainy season tend to be of lower quality, lacking flavor, and are more vulnerable to pests and diseases such as fruit flies in comparison to the winter season fruits. Additionally, winter season fruits have a longer shelf life and can be transported over longer distances without spoiling (Singh, 2013). The fruits harvested during the winter season are of superior quality, thus fetching a higher price in the market. Guava is usually eaten fresh, encompassing both the skin and pulp, which suggests the feasibility of organic farming in its production. Indian farmers primarily engage in organic farming; however, in recent years, especially following the green revolution, there has been a notable rise in the application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. This trend has adversely affected both the environment and human health. Typically, guava trees produce fruit nearly throughout the year, making it essential to apply the appropriate amounts of nutrients to sustain the tree's productivity and health. There should be a significant emphasis on improving fertilizer use efficiency in conjunction with productivity, profitability, sustainability, and environmental friendliness. As a result, without the consistent application of organic manure and the recycling of crop residues, it becomes difficult to uphold and sustain productivity. Therefore, nutrient management strategies that integrate both organic and inorganic sources could prove to be very effective in creating a cost-efficient and environmentally sustainable program. Integrated nutrient management (INM) entails the deliberate combination of organic inputs (such as manures, compost, bio-fertilizers, green manure, and crop residues) with inorganic fertilizers to enhance crop yields and increase farmers' profitability, while also improving crop quality and reducing nutrient losses to the environment. In the context of guava cultivation, INM represents the improvement of soil fertility and the provision of plant nutrients to an optimal level that promotes the desired productivity and fruit quality by maximizing the benefits from all available sources in a cohesive manner (Kumar et al., 2022) [13] .

Materials and methods

This chapter contains the details of methodology and materials used during experimentation the investigation entitled "Effect of integrated nutrient management on fruit growth, yield and quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Allahabad safeda " was conducted at the experimental orchard of Horticulture Research Farm, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Allied Industries, Rama University, Kanpur (U.P.), during the year 2025-2026. The experimental site for this study is located at the during the rabi season of 2025-2026 Positioned approximately 25 km from the district headquarters of Uttar Pradesh 208024. The farm is situated at 20°16' North latitude and 80°08' East longitude in the southwestern plains of Uttar Pradesh. It sits at an altitude of 180 meters above sea level, falling within the subtropical zone. The application of integrated nutrient management was carried out on guava (Psidium guajava L.) variety Allahabad Safeda. A total of thirty uniform plants, each six years old and spaced 8×8 metres apart, were selected for the study. The experiment was executed with three replications using a randomized block design. The experiment was conducted in a Randomized Block Design with three replications. The experiment consists of 10 treatments including control. The treatment details viz., T 0 Control, T 1 N: P: K 600:200:400 gm (Recommended dose), T 2 75% Recommended dose of N P K + 15 kg FYM, T 3 75% Recommended dose of N P K + 6 kg Vermicompost, T 4 50% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM, T 5 50% Recommended dose of N P K + 6 kg Vermicompost, T 6 75% Recommended dose of N P K + 15 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake, T 7 50% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake, T 8 50% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake+250g Azotobacter and T 9 75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter were used. Observations were recorded physical characters/parameters viz., days to first flower initiation, number of flowers per tree, number of flower cluster's per tree, percentage of fruit set, number of fruits per tree, fruit weight (g), fruit polar diameter (cm), fruit radial diameter (cm), specific gravity (w/v), fruit yield (kg/tree) and fruit yield per hectare (t/ha) and chemical constituents/chemical parameters viz., total soluble solids ( 0 brix) and ascorbic acid/vitamin-c (mg/100 ml of juice), acidity (%), total sugars (%), reducing sugars, non-reducing sugars (%) and sugar/acid ratio. Statistical analysis of the data obtained in the different set of experiments was calculated as suggested by Panse and Sukhatme (1985).

Results and discussion

The Data relevant to flowering, fruit growth and yield of guava is presented in the Table 1. The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on days to first flower initiation as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter ) was taken minimum days to initiation of flowering (21.60) which was followed by treatment T 8 (50% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neemcake+250g Azotobacter) and T 6 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 15 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake). Control (T 0 ) was taken maximum days to initiation of flowering (39.62). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on number of flower per tree as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter ) was taken maximum number of flower per tree (551.63). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum number of flower per tree (258.71). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on number of flower cluster's per tree as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum number of flower cluster's per tree (470.93). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum number of flower clusters per tree (178.02). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on percentage of fruit set (%) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum percentage of fruit set (%) (68.29). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum percentage of fruit set (%) (41. 19). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on number of fruits per tree as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum number of fruits per tree (106.57). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum number of fruits per tree (106.57).

The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on fruit weight (g) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum fruit weight (g) (185.10). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum fruit weight (g) (80.13). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on polar diameter (cm) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum polar diameter (cm) (7.77). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum polar diameter (cm) (5.46). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on radial diameter (cm) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum radial diameter (cm) (8.51). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum radial diameter (cm) (6.21). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on specific gravity (w/v) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum specific gravity (w/v) (0.86). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum specific gravity (w/v) (0.57). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on fruit yield (kg/tree) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum fruit yield (kg/tree) (69.72). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum fruit yield (kg/tree) (8.54). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on fruit yield (t/ha) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum fruit yield (t/ha) (108.77). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum fruit yield (t/ha) (13.32). This result may be due to a better nutritional environment developed by the application of both organic manure along inorganic fertilizers, which resulted in improved soil physico-chemical and biological activities. Integrated application of different fertilizers, organic manures and biofertilizers enhanced the vegetative growth character, number of fruits and yield in guava cv. Sardar Ram et al., (2007) [19] , Shukla et al., (2009) [24] and Dwivedi (2013) [11] . Athani et al., (2007 a, b) [2,3,4] reported that organic and inorganic fertilizers on guava cv. Sardar. Application of 75% RDF + 10 kg vermicompost was found significant in yield and fruit quality. Ram et al., (2007) [20] reported that the application of different fertilizers, organic manures and biofertilizers improve the vegetative growth, number of fruits and yield of guava cv. Sardar. Similar findings have been reported by Kumar et al., (2009) [14] , Dutta et al., (2009) [8] , Patel et al., (2009) [18] , Shukla et al., (2009) [24] , Agnihorti et al., (2013) [1] , Dwivedi (2013) [11] , Athani et al., (2007) [2,3,4] , Dwivedi et al., (2010) [11] and Binepal et al., (2013) [6] . The Data relevant to biochemical analysis is presented in the Table 2. The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on total soluble solids (Brix 0 ) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum total soluble solids (Brix 0 ) (12.76), Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum total soluble solids (Brix 0 ) (9.09). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on ascorbic acid (mg/100 ml of juice) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum ascorbic acid (mg/100 ml of juice) (221.43. Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum ascorbic acid (mg/100 ml of juice) (158.61). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on acidity (%) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken minimum acidity (%) (0.32). Control (T 0 ) was taken maximum acidity (%) (0.62). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on total sugars (%) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum total sugars (%) (10.95). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum total sugars (%) (8.37). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on reducing sugars (%) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum reducing sugars (%) (6.08). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum reducing sugars (%) (4.82). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on non-reducing sugars (%) as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum non-reducing sugars (%) (4.87). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum non-reducing sugars (%) (3.55). The data shown that application of different integrated nutrient management have significant effect on sugar-acid ratio as compare to control (T 0 ). Treatment T 9 (75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was taken maximum sugar-acid ratio (35.51). Control (T 0 ) was taken minimum sugar-acid ratio (19.05). Intake of potassium influenced fruit quality and in combination with Azotobacter and PSB amplified better results. Organic manure such as neem cake and vermicompost also contributed to fruit quality attributes. Similar findings were reported by Kundu et al. (2007) [15] , Kumar et al. (2009) [14] , Maity et al. (2006) [16] , Athani et al. (2007) [2,3,4] , Naik and HariBabu (2007) [17] , Katiyar et al. (2008) [12] , Bashir et [21] , Ram and Pathak (2007) [19] , Shukla et al. (2009) [24] , Dutta et al. (2010) [9] , Dwivedi et al. (2010) [10] , Rubee et al. (2011) and Sharma et al. (2016) [23] .

Conclusion

In the present investigation concluded that among the different treatment combinations the treatment T 9 75% Recommended dose of N P K + 25 kg FYM.+6kg Vermocompost +3kg Neem cake + 250g PSB and Azotoabacter) was superior in respect to fruit growth, yield and quality parameters.

References

1. Agnihotri A, Tiwari R, Singh OP. Effect of crop regulators on growth, yield and quality of guava. Ann Plant Soil Res. 2013;15(1):54-57.
2. Athani SI, Praburaj HS, Ustad AI, Swamy GSK, Patil PB, Kotikal YK. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on growth, leaf, major nutrient and chlorophyll content and yield of guava cv. Sardar. Acta Hortic. 2007;735:381-385.
3. Athani SI, Ustad AI, Praburaj HS, Swamy GSK, Patil PB, Kotikal YK. Influence of vermicompost on growth, fruit yield and quality of guava cv. Sardar. Acta Hortic. 2007;735:386-388.
4. Athani SI, Praburaj HS, Ustad AI, Swamy GSK, Patil PB, Kotikal YK. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on growth, leaf, major nutrient and chlorophyll content and yield of guava cv. Sardar. Acta Hortic. 2007;735:351-356.
5. Bashir MA, Ahmad M, Salik MR, Awan MZ. Manure and fertilizers effect on yield and fruit quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.). J Agric Res. 2009;47(3):247-254.
6. Binepal MK, Tiwari R, Kumawat BR. Effect of integrated nutrient management on physio-chemical parameters of guava under Malwa plateau conditions of Madhya Pradesh. Ann Plant Soil Res. 2013;15(1):4749. International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research https://www.biochemjournal.com
7. Dutta P, Moji SB, Das BS. Studies on the response of biofertilizer on growth and productivity of guava. Indian J Hortic. 2009;66(1):39-42.
8. Dutta P, Kundu S, Biswas S. Integrated nutrient management in litchi cv. Bombai in new alluvial zone of West Bengal. Indian J Hortic. 2010;67(2):181-184.
9. Dwivedi DH, Lata R, Ram RB. Effect of biofertilizers and organic manures on yield and quality of guava cv. Red Fleshed. Sci Temper. 2010;193(1):193-198.
10. Dwivedi V. Effect of integrated nutrient management on yield, quality and economics of guava. Ann Plant Soil Res. 2013;15(2):149-151.
11. Katiyar PN, Singh JP, Singh PC. Effect of nitrogen with and without zinc and organic manure on growth, yield and quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Sardar. Asian J Hortic. 2008;3(2):283-286.
12. Kumar P, Rehalia AS. Standardization of micronutrient ranges in mango (Mangifera indica L.) by orchard survey. Asian J Hortic. 2007;2(1):218-221.
13. Kumar D, Pandey V, Anjaneyulu K, Nath V. Optimization of major nutrients for guava yield and quality under east coastal conditions. Indian J Hortic. 2009;66(1):18-21.
14. Kundu S, Ghosh B, Mitra SK, Mazumdar D. Effect of foliar spraying of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium on yield and fruit quality of guava (Psidium guajava L.). Acta Hortic. 2007;735:433-440.
15. Maity PK, Das BC, Kundu S. Effect of different sources of nutrients on yield and quality of guava cv. L49. J Crop Weed. 2006;2(2):17-19.
16. Naik MH, Sri Hari Babu R. Feasibility of organic farming in guava (Psidium guajava L.). Acta Hortic. 2007;735:365-372.
17. Patel VB, Singh SK, Asrey R, Nain L, Singh AK, Singh L. Microbial and inorganic fertilizers application influenced vegetative growth, yield, leaf nutrient status and soil microbial biomass in sweet orange cv. Mosambi. Indian J Hortic. 2009;66(2):163-168.
18. Ram RA, Bhringuvanshi SR, Garg N, Pathak RK. Studies on organic production of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Allahabad Safeda. Acta Hortic. 2007;735:373-379.
19. Ram RA, Pathak RK. Integration of organic farming practices for sustainable production of guava: a case study. Acta Hortic. 2007;735:357-363.
20. Ram RA, Bhriguvanshi SR, Pathak RK. Integrated plant nutrient management in guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. Sardar. Acta Hortic. 2007;735:364-372.
21. Rubee L, Dwivedi DH, Ram RB, Meena ML. Response of organic substrates on growth, yield and physiochemical characteristics of guava cv. Red Fleshed. Indian J Ecol. 2011;38(1):81-84.
22. Sharma A, Wali VK, Bakshi P, Sharma V, Bakshi M, Rani S. Impact of poultry manure on fruit quality attributes and nutrient status of guava (Psidium guajava L.) cv. L-49 plant. Indian J Agric Sci. 2016;86(4):533540.
23. Shukla AK, Sarolia DK, Kumari B, Kaushik RA, Mahawer LN, Bairwa HL. Evaluation of substrate dynamics for integrated nutrient management under high density planting of guava cv. Sardar. Indian J Hortic. 2009;66(4):461-464.
24. Gupta MR, Nijjar GS. Crop regulation in guava (Psidium guajava L.). Indian Journal of Horticulture. 1978;35(1):23-7.
25. Hayes DS. An absolute spectrophotometric calibration of the energy distribution of twelve standard stars. Astrophysical Journal, vol. 159, p. 165. 1970 Jan;159:165.
26. Dhillon BS. Human reliability: with human factors. Elsevier; 2013 Oct 22.
27. Ojewole JA, Awe EO, Chiwororo WD. Antidiarrhoeal activity of Psidium guajava Linn.(Myrtaceae) leaf aqueous extract in rodents. Journal of Smooth Muscle Research. 2008;44(6):195-207.