Effect of fertilizer doses and foliar application of NPK on growth and yield of Finger millet (Eleusie coracana L. Gaertn)

Introduction

Finger millet (Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn.) is an important cereal and nutri-cereal crop in India, serving as a staple food and a rich source of nutrients for millions of people. It belongs to the family Poaceae (Gramineae) and has a diploid chromosome number of 2n = 4x = 36. Finger millet is valued for its high calcium content, adaptability to diverse agro-climatic conditions and tolerance to drought, making it an important crop for sustainable agriculture and nutritional security. Finger millet is a vital staple food crop in central and eastern Africa as well as India. It is particularly beneficial for diabetic patients because of its low sugar content and slow glucose release, helping to regulate blood sugar levels (Kang et al., 2008) [5] . The grain is gluten-free, rich in essential amino acids, and possesses antioxidant properties. Additionally, finger millet consumption may reduce the risk of lifestyle-related diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disorders. Finger millet is a rich source of calcium, phosphorus, and iron. It has gained attention due to its functional components like slowly digestible starch and resistant starch, which offer health benefits. Additionally, finger millet provides high-quality protein along with essential amino acids, vitamin A, vitamin B, and phosphorus (Gopalan et al., 2004) [4] . It is nutritionally superior to rice and wheat, offering higher levels of minerals, dietary fiber, and micronutrients. Finger millet is notably rich in calcium (350-400 mg/100 g) and iron, which helps to prevent anemia. Its grain composition includes approximately 81.5% carbohydrates, 9.8% protein, 4.3% crude fiber, 2.7% minerals, 1-2% fat, along with significant amounts of calcium (0.38%), iron (3-20%), and vitamins such as B-complex vitamins-especially niacin, pyridoxine, and folic acid (Gull et al., 2014). In India the total area under finger millet is 1162 thousand hectares (Anonymous, 2023-24) [2] . [9] . Therefore, nitrogen is a critical factor for finer millet and metabolism. Phosphorus (P), is an essential macronutrient, and plays a major role in growth and the development of the plant. Potassium (K), functioning as an activator of diverse array of enzymes, plays a significant role in intracellular osmotic regulation and the transport of proteins across cellular membranes, thereby contributing to essential cellular functions. Foliar application of nutrients enhances their uptake during the critical growth stages, thereby stimulating increased physiological activity and ultimately leading to a significant enhancement in yield (Kundu and Sarkar, 2009). Alam et al., (2010) suggested that foliar application should be considered as an additional method to the primary application of nutrients to the soil. Foliar application of fertilizers could be 6-20 times more effective than soil application based on the soil characteristics (Arif et al., 2006) [1] . The effects of foliar fertilizer application on growth, yield economic viability, and nutrient uptake in rice plant. The combined approach, incorporating recommended fertilizers in to the soil along with foliar application of nutrients through NPK 19:19:19, resulted in a significant enhancement in grain yield (Rani et al., 2014) [8] .

Materials and methods

Statical Analysis:

The data collected for all the characters were subjected to statistical analysis as per the procedure of Randomized Block Design with factorial concept in OPSTAT. The 'F' test was used for test of significance. The Standard Error of Mean (S.Em.±) was computed in each case. For the treatment effects which were found significant, critical difference (C.D.) at 5 per cent level of probability was worked out to compare the treatments mean.

The highest straw yield of 4225.05 kg ha⁻¹ was recorded in treatment T₃, which involved (100% RDF + NPK foliar spray once at 30 DAS). This was followed closely by T₂ (4077.52 kg ha⁻¹), where 100% RDF alone was applied and T₅ (3954.31 kg ha⁻¹), which received 75% RDF + NPK foliar spray twice at 30 and 50 DAS. The lowest straw yield (Control), with values of 3.03 g plant⁻¹ at 30 DAS, 7.24 g was observed under the control treatment (T₁) at 1465.72 kg ha⁻¹, indicating minimal biomass accumulation without fertilizer input.

In terms of the harvest index (HI), which represents the proportion of total biomass converted to grain yield, the highest value was recorded under T₃ (35.30%), indicating superior partitioning of biomass towards grain production. This was followed closely by T₂ (34.80%) involving 100% RDF alone and T₅ (34.70%), involving 75% RDF + NPK foliar spray twice at 30 and 50 DAS. The lowest harvest index was recorded in the control treatment (T₁) with an HI of 31.22%, highlighting the limited efficiency of grain production without any nutrient supplementation.

NPK Content and Uptake NPK Content

The highest total nitrogen content was recorded under

Conclusion

The results showed that growth parameters, viz. plant population, plant height, number of tillers, dry matter accumulation, CGR, RGR and yield attributes viz., panicle length, test weight was found to be higher under treatment T₃ (100% RDF + NPK foliar spray once at 30 DAS) followed closely by Treatment T 2 involving (100% RDF alone) and treatment T 5 involving (75% RDF + NPK foliar spray twice at 30 and 50 DAS). The yield parameters like grain yield and straw yield, recorded maximum grain yield (2307.20 Kg ha -1 ) and straw yield (4225.05 Kg ha -1 ) under T 3 it is at par with treatment T 2 (grain yield -2177.00 Kg ha - 1 ) and (straw yield -4077.52 Kg ha -1 ) and T 5 (grain yield -2099.46 Kg ha -1 ) and (straw yield -383954.31 Kg ha -1 ). The economic parameters like gross monetary returns, net monetary returns and B:C ratio was significantly superior

Acknowledgement

International Journal of Agriculture and Food Science https://www.agriculturaljournals.com under treatment T 3 highest gross return (1,23,292.45 ₹ ha -1 ) was obtained with the application of 100% RDF + NPK foliar spray once at 30 DAS and this treatment also gave highest net return (86,040.45 ₹ ha -1 ) and B:C ratio 3.30. However, lowest gross return (31160 ₹ ha -1 ) lowest net return (5152.57 ₹ ha -1 ) and lowest B:C ratio (1.16) was obtained under control (T 1 ).

References

1. Arif M, Ali S, Khan M. Comparative efficiency of foliar and soil application of fertilizers under different soil conditions. J Plant Nutr. 2006;29(7):1295-1305.
2. Anonymous. Agricultural statistics at a glance 2023-24. New Delhi: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India; 2024.
3. Directorate of Economics and Statistics. Agricultural statistics at a glance: Chhattisgarh 2021-22. Raipur: Department of Agriculture, Government of Chhattisgarh; 2022.
4. Gopalan C, Rama Sastri BV, Balasubramanian SC. Nutritive value of Indian foods. Hyderabad: National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of Medical Research; 2004. p. 2-58.
5. Kang Y, Hassan M, Islam M, Obaidullah A. Nutritional and health-promoting properties of finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.). J Food Sci Technol. 2008;45(6):449-456.
6. Prakasha HC, Halepyati AS, Pujari BT. Influence of nutrient management practices on growth parameters and yield of finger millet. Karnataka J Agric Sci. 2010;23(3):453-456.
7. Rao AS, Reddy KS, Prasad JVNS. Fertilizer management for improving productivity of finger millet under rainfed conditions. J Millets Res. 2013;8(2):4549.
8. Rani R, Singh P, Kumar V. Effect of foliar application of water-soluble fertilizers on growth, yield, and nutrient uptake in rice. Int J Agric Sci Res. 2014;4(6):123-130.
9. Sinfield JV, Greenwood DJ, McDonald AJ. Nitrogen nutrition and plant growth: Enzymatic roles and metabolic regulation. Plant Physiol. 2010;154(3):12011210.
10. Sase VS, Patil JB, Kamble SA, Sonawane CV, Shende SM, Hritik. Performance of different foliar nutrient applications on yield and nutrient uptake by finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.). Int J Res Agron. 2025;8(9):1572-1575. doi:10.33545/2618060X.2025.v8.i9p.3922.