Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth of mustard (Brassica juncea L.)

Introduction

Mustard (Brassica juncea L.) belongs to the family cruciferae popularly known as rai and is an important rabi season oilseed crop of north India. In India estimated area, production and productivity of rapeseed-mustard was 8.06 million hectares, 11.75 million tonnes and 1458 kg/ha, respectively, (Anonymous, 2024-25) [1] . Indian mustard is predominantly cultivated in the states of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh which contribute 75.21% area and 81.43% production (Sahoo et al., 2018) [21] . The seed and oil are used as condiment in the preparation of pickles and for flavouring curries and vegetables. The oil is utilized for human consumption throughout the northern India, in cooking and frying purposes. It is also used in the preparation of hair oils and medicines. It is used in the manufacture of greases. The major constraint attributing to low production of mustard are scare and untimely water supply and poor fertility status of soil. To maintain the soil health and sustaining the crop productivity, INM approach involving FYM, bio fertilizers and inorganic fertilizers needs to be standardized. Crop production largely depends on cultivation of high yielding cultivars and need based application of nutrients. FYM not only provides most of the essential plant nutrients but also improves soil structure through binding effect on soil aggregates, cation exchange capacity, water holding capacity, fertilizers use efficiency, microbial activity and nutrient availability in soil. Azotobacter is a freeliving bacteria. It has been reported to fix about 20 kg N/ha per year in a field of non-legume crop and also secretes some growth promoting substance (Singh et al., 2018) [22] .

Materials and Methods

The experiment was laid out in the Randomized Block Design with three replications. Each replication was comprised of nine treatments i.e. T 1 -100% RDF (Control), T 2 -75% RDF + FYM, T 3 -75% RDF + Vermicompost, T 4 -75% RDF + Azotobacter + PSB, T 5 -75% RDF + Azotobacter + KSB, T 6 -75% RDF + PSB + KSB, T 7 -75% RDF + Azotobacter + PSB + KSB, T 8 -75% RDF + FYM + Azotobacter + PSB + KSB and T 9 -75% RDF + Vermicompost + FYM + Azotobacter + PSB + KSB were applied in mustard cv. Pioneer.

Results and Discussion

Growth parameters

Result reported that the treatment T 9 -75% RDF + Vermicompost + FYM + Azotobacter + PSB + KSB was statistically superior treatment for enhancing the growth parameters in mustard and it gave the maximum growth parameters viz., plant height (cm), number of branches per plant and dry matter at 30, 60 and 90 DAS. However, the T 1 -100% RDF (Control) was recorded the minimum growth parameters viz., plant height (cm), number of branches per plant and dry matter at 30, 60 and 90 DAS, respectively. This could be due to adequate supply of readily available nitrogen, phosphorus, potash and other nutrients produced taller and superior plants. It will be expected that plants grow taller with more number of leaves having bigger size and higher chlorophyll content (Rundala et al., 2013) [20] . Taller plants produced more dry matter because of more opportunity for production and accumulation of photosynthates and improve plant growth (Indira et al., 2023). The beneficial effect of chemical fertilizers with FYM and seed treatment on growth parameters was also observed by several researchers in mustard. Similar findings have been earlier reported by Singh and Pal (2011) [23] , Kumar et al. (2013) [14] , Meena et al. (2013) [16] , Parihar et al. (2013) [18] , Yadav et al. (2018) [27] , Bisht et al. (2018) [3] , Dubey and Shukla (2020) [6] , Karbak et al., (2023) [10] , Kumar et al., (2024) [12] and Awasthi et al. (2024) [2] .

Yield parameters

Result shows that the treatments of FYM, Vermicompost, and biofertilizers with different recommended doses of fertilizers were significantly influenced the yield parameters of mustard. The maximum yield parameters viz., number of siliqua/plant, number of seeds/ siliqua, length of siliqua /plant, seed yield and biological yield were found in treatment T 9 -75% RDF + Vermicompost + FYM + Azotobacter + PSB + KSB and the minimum yield parameters viz., number of siliqua /plant, number of seeds/ siliqua, length of siliqua /plant, seed yield and biological yield were observed under treatment T 1 -100% RDF (Control). The result revealed that minimum harvest index (%) was observed under treatment T 9 -75% RDF + Vermicompost + FYM + Azotobacter + PSB + KSB, whereas the maximum harvest index (%) was recorded under treatment T 1 -100% RDF (Control). Mustard responds well to integrated nutrient management which might be owing to the favourable soil condition (Tripathi and Singh, 2021) [25] . Application of FYM, vermicompost with chemical fertilizers improved the physio-chemical condition of the soil, provided favourable environment, stimulated the uptake of nutrients and almost continuous supply of N, P, K, S and micro nutrient distributed over the entire crop and batter availability in sufficient amounts of plant nutrients throughout the growth period and especially at critical period of crops growth which has resulted in better plant vigour and superior yield attributes (Dubey and Shukla, 2020) [6] . The use of growth stimulating seed inoculants (Azotobacter) help in greater uptake of plant nutrients from applied chemical fertilizers by increasing the root growth beside improving the availability of nutrient particularly N and enhanced the seed yield (Singh et al., 2024) [24] . These results are supported by the findings of Gora et al. (2022) [7] , Gupta and Kumar (2022) [9] , Biswas et al. (2023) [4] , Chand et al. (2023) [5] , Goyal et al. (2023) [8] , Kaur and Verma (2023) [11] , Tripathy et al. (2024) [26] , Kumar et al. (2025) [13] , Marahatta et al. (2025) [15] , Pardhi et al. (2025) [17] and Pratiwi et al. (2025) [19] .

References

1. Anonymous. Data of rapeseed and mustard. 2023-2024. https://www.srmr.org.in/nbc
2. Awasthi S, Singh R, Maurya DK, Pal RK, Yadav N. Integrated nutrient management on growth and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) in central alluvial tract of Uttar Pradesh. International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2024;7(6S):567-571.
3. Bisht S, Saxena AK, Singh S. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) cultivar T-9 under Dehradun region (Uttarakhand). International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2018;6(4):1856-1859.
4. Biswas C, Pramanik K, De SK. Productivity and profitability of Indian mustard under nutrient management and different sowing method in lateritic soil of West Bengal. Journal of Environmental Biology. 2023;44:250-258.
5. Chand P, Yadav S, Singh R, Kumar V. Integrated nutrient management effects on mustard yield and soil nitrogen in rice-mustard cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2023;93(1):120-128.
6. Dubey S, Shukla G. Analysis of integrated nutrient management as a performance enhancer in mustard. International Journal of Agricultural Invention. 2020;5(2):300-305.
7. Gora RS, Meena BL, Choudhary R, Singh P. Integrated nutrient management enhances mustard yield and soil physical properties in calcareous soils. Journal of Oilseed Brassica. 2022;13(2):145-152.
8. Goyal S, Verma RK, Singh A, Chauhan V. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2023;10(5):2450-2457.
9. Gupta N, Kumar R. Effect of organic and inorganic nutrients on yield and quality parameters of Indian mustard. International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2022;10(2):15341539.
10. Karbak B, Rina M, Pertin I, Darang T. Effect of organic and inorganic nutrient management on growth and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L. var. M27) under Arunachal Pradesh conditions. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2023;12(4):593-600.
11. Kaur G, Verma K. Effect of integrated nutrient management on mustard crop (Brassica juncea L.). Plant Archives. 2023;23(1):234-238.
12. Kumar P, Kumar R, Kumar A, Yadav V, Qidwai S, Kumar P. Evaluation of different organic manure on nutrient content, uptake and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) crop. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science. 2024;36(6):99107.
13. Kumar P, Nand V, Kumar D, Mishra A, Kumar S, Bagri JP. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield and quality of Indian mustard. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis. 2025;41(18):2187-2200.
14. Kumar S, Paswan AK, Kumar R, Kumawat N, Singh AK, Singh RS, Singh RK. Effect of organic manures, biofertilizer and chemical fertilizers on growth, yield and economics of mustard. Bioinfolet. 2013;10(3A):834-838.
15. Marahatta S, Sah SK, McDonald A, Timsina J, Devkota KP. Improving soil health and crop productivity through conservation agriculture and nitrogen management in ricemustard-maize systems. Field Crops Research. 2025;325:109825.
16. Meena RK, Sharma DD, Chouhan GS, Shukla KB, Sumeriya HK, Padiwal NK. Growth and productivity of mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. & Coss.] as influenced by irrigation levels and agrochemicals. Annals of Agri Bio Research. 2013;18(3):312-317.
17. Pardhi R, Shivhare S, Patel M, Patre R. Influence of integrated nutrient management on yield as well as uptake of nutrients in mustard (Brassica juncea L.). International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2025;9(4S):700-702.
18. Parihar CM, Bhakar RN, Rana KS, Jat ML, Singh AK, Jat SL, Parihar MD, Sharma S. Energy scenario, carbon efficiency, nitrogen and phosphorus dynamics of pearl millet-mustard system under diverse nutrient and tillage management practices. Academic Journals. 2013;8(10):903915.
19. Pratiwi SH, Hidayanto F, Purnamasari RT. Effectiveness of sludge organic fertilizer and its combination with inorganic fertilizer on growth, nutrient uptake, and yield of mustard (Brassica rapa L.). Acta Fytotechnica et Zootechnica. 2025;28(1):40-48.
20. Rundala SR, Kumawat BL, Choudhary GL, Prajapat K, Kumawat S. Performance of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) under integrated nutrient management. Crop Research (Hisar). 2013;46(1-3):115-118.
21. Sahoo RC, Purohit HS, Prajapat OP. Integrated nutrient management in mustard (Brassica juncea L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2018;7:3545-3549.
22. & Cosson] and soil properties. Journal of Cereals and Oilseeds. 2018;9(4):37-44.
23. Singh SP, Pal MS. Effect of INM on productivity, quality, nutrient uptake and economics of mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2011;56(4):381-387.
24. Singh UK, Gangwar B, Kumar S, Kumar R. Effect of mustard-based intercropping systems on efficiency indices under organic management. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 2024;58(2):230-239.
25. Tripathi V, Singh P. Role of integrated nutrient management in improving mustard productivity and soil fertility. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Technology. 2021;39(1):43-51.
26. Tripathy S, Singh S, Saha N, Raha P. Effect of row ratios and organic nutrient management on productivity and economics of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) + chickpea (Cicer arietinum) intercropping system under rainfed condition. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2024;94(10):10661072.
27. International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2018;6(2):35713573.