Augmenting conventional and Nano fertilizers for growth and production efficiency of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.)

Introduction

Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.), a member of the family Brassicaceae, is one of the most important rabi oilseed crops cultivated in South Asia. It is a cool-season C₃ crop with optimum growth under temperatures of 15-20 °C and is valued for its wide adaptability, high yield potential and significant contribution to edible oil security (Shekhawat et al., 2012) [1] . Mustard seed contains 38-42% oil and 20-25% protein, making it an important source of edible oil, proteinrich meal and industrial raw material (Shekhawat et al., 2012) [1] . India is the third-largest producer of rapeseed-mustard after Canada and China. During 2024-25, rapeseed-mustard occupied about 9.8 million ha with an estimated production of 13.7-13.8 million tonnes, while productivity remained around 1443 kg ha ¹, highlighting⁻ substantial opportunities for further yield improvement through efficient crop management (MoA&FW, 2025; ICAR-IIMR, 2025). Among the essential nutrients, nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) are the primary determinants of mustard productivity. Nitrogen regulates chlorophyll synthesis, photosynthetic activity, vegetative growth and protein formation, whereas phosphorus plays a central role in root development, energy transfer (ATP), nucleic acid synthesis and assimilate translocation, thereby improving flowering, seed development and yield (Marschner, 2012; Havlin et al., 2014; Taiz).

Owing to their mobility within plants, both nutrients are absorbed during early growth and subsequently remobilized to developing siliquae and seeds, emphasizing the importance of balanced nitrogen and phosphorus management for achieving higher productivity and nutrient use efficiency (Taiz). Conventional fertilizers are widely used for mustard cultivation, although their nutrient recovery efficiency is still quite low. Because fixation processes take place right after fertilizer application, phosphorus recovery seldom surpasses 20-25%, while crops typically only absorb 30-50% of supplied nitrogen. Conventional fertilizers are prone to losses leading to lesser amount of nutrients available for crop plants, raising production costs and polluting the environment. Thus, increasing the effectiveness of fertilizer use has emerged as a key goal of sustainable nutrient management (Mirbakhsh, 2023) [2] . Recently, nanotechnology has shown promise as a means of increasing nutrient use efficiency. Nutrient particles with more surface area, higher reactivity and better penetration through stomata and cuticular pores make up nano-fertilizers, which are typically smaller than 100 nm. These qualities minimize nutrient losses to the environment while promoting quick nutrient absorption and translocation inside plant tissues. As a result, nano-fertilizers have gained a lot of interest as effective nutrient management methods that can improve crop growth, productivity, and nutrient usage efficiency with relatively smaller fertilizer inputs (Babu et al., 2022) [3] . Foliar sprays of Nano Urea and Nano DAP offer a very effective and sustained method of managing nutrients. This nutrient management strategy speeds up nutrient absorption throughout crucial crop growth phases, and can reduce conventional nitrogen fertilizer requirements by 25% without sacrificing seed production (Meena et al., 2024) [4,5] . Use of these cutting-edge nano-fertilizers greatly reduce cost involved of fertilizer production, transportation and also reduce environmental pollution while increasing total crop productivity and nutrient use efficiency.

Considering the increasing need of improving nutrient use efficiency and sustaining soil health, application of nano fertilizers foliar spray and conventional nutrient management practices appear to be a viable strategy for enhancing mustard productivity. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the effect of nano fertilizers and varying levels of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth, production efficiency and quality parameters of Indian mustard under the Tarai region of Uttarakhand.

Materials and Methods

A field experiment was conducted during rabi season of 2023-24 and 2024-25 at the Norman E. Borlaug Crop Research Centre of G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, District Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand, representing the Tarai region of Uttarakhand. Pantnagar is located at the foothills of Himalayas at 29 ⁰ N latitude, 79.29 ⁰ E longitude and an altitude of 243.83 m above mean sea level with sub-humid, sub-tropical climate and characterized by the cold winters and hot humid summers. The average annual rainfall of 1444 mm is received in the region. The soil of the experimental site was neutral in reaction with a pH of 7.1, medium in organic carbon content 0.74%, low in available nitrogen 224 kg/ha, medium in available phosphorus 23.8 kg/ha and available potassium 216 kg/ha. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design (FRBD) with twelve treatments that replicated thrice. The twelve treatments comprised three nitrogen and phosphorus levels viz., recommended dose of 100%, 75% and 50 % and four nano fertilizers spray-two sprays of nano urea, two sprays of nano DAP, one spray of nano urea+ nano DAP and two sprays of nano urea +nano DAP. The recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) used for NPKS in Indian mustard was 120:40:20:20 kg/ha. The nano fertilizers-nano urea and nano DAP were obtained from IFFCO and applied at the rate of 4 ml/litre. Plant height, SPAD, LAI, root: shoot ratio was measured from five randomly selected plants which were tagged initially in each plot to ensure accurate representation. For calculating root: Shoot ratio on the dry matter basis, following formula was used (Naidu et al., 1982) [6] .

Root: Shoot ratio = Dry weight of root Dry weight of shoot

Oil content (%) and protein content (%) was estimated using a Fourier Transform Near-Infrared (FT-NIR) spectrometer NIRFLEX 500, a rapid and non-destructive analytical technique based on the absorption of near-infrared radiation by chemical bonds in the seed, enabling accurate quantification of oil content. Production efficiency (kgha⁻¹day⁻¹) was calculated by using the following formula: -Production efficiency (kg ha -1 day -1 ) = Seed yield( kg ha )

All the recorded data were statistically analysed to draw a valid conclusion.

Results and Discussion

The growth parameters and yield attributes of Indian mustard were significantly influenced by varied dose of nitrogen, phosphorus and nano fertilizer as foliar spray.

Plant height was significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels as well as nanofertilizer application, whereas their interaction remained non-significant (Table 1). Application of 100% NP recorded the tallest plants (205.4 and 207.2 cm during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), which remained statistically on a par with 75% NP but significantly higher than 50% NP. Among the nano-fertilizer treatments, two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano DAP produced the highest plant height (203.2 and 205.9 cm) during both the year of study. The increase in plant height could be attributed to enhanced nutrient availability, improved chlorophyll synthesis, higher photosynthetic activity and efficient nutrient use, resulting in greater cell division, cell elongation and dry matter accumulation. Tarafdar et al. (2020) [7] also observed the response to enhanced nutrient availability and utilization with the nano fertilizer application. Likewise, Chaudhary et al. (2023) [8] reported that balanced nutrient supply through nano-fertilizers improved vegetative growth and plant vigor in crops.

SPAD Value

Nitrogen and phosphorus levels and nano-fertilizer application significantly influenced SPAD values (Table 1). Among the fertility levels, application of 100% NP recorded the highest SPAD values (43.2 and 43.4 during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), which remained statistically at par with 75% NP (42.9 and 43.1), whereas the lowest values were recorded under 50% NP (39.1 and 39.7). Among the nano-fertilizer treatments, two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano DAP recorded the maximum SPAD values (43.3 and 43.5). The higher SPAD values under these treatments could be attributed to improved nitrogen availability, enhanced chlorophyll biosynthesis and greater photosynthetic efficiency, resulting from synchronized nutrient supply and improved nutrient use efficiency. Delfine et al. (2005) [9] , also observed increased chlorophyll content with improved nitrogen nutrition, similarly Harode et al. (2024) [10] also reported enhanced SPAD values following nano-fertilizer application due to improved nutrient use efficiency. Increase chlorophyll content with the balanced nutrient management practices also reported by Nanda et al., (2025).

Leaf area index (LAI)

Leaf area index was significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels and nanofertilizer application, whereas their interaction remained non-significant during both the years of experimentation (Table 1). The highest LAI was recorded under 100% N and P (4.52 and 4.55), which was statistically at par with 75% N and P (4.50 and 4.51). Among nano-fertilizer treatments, two sprays each of nano urea and nano-DAP produced the highest LAI (4.56 and 4.60), which was statistically comparable with two sprays of nano-DAP (4.42 and 4.44) and one spray each of nano urea and nano-DAP (4.38 and 4.38). The interaction effect was found to be non-significant during both years.. The higher LAI may be attributed to enhanced leaf expansion and canopy development resulting from improved nutrient availability and photosynthetic activity. Prasad et al. (2021) [11] also found the role of nano fertilizers in improving vegetative growth and leaf development and Harode et al. (2024) [10] and Meena et al. (2022) [12] also reported greater canopy development under balanced nutrient management with nano fertilizer application.

Root: shoot ratio

Root:shoot ratio was significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels and nanofertilizer application, whereas their interaction remained non-significant (Table 1) during both the years. Application of 100% NP recorded the highest root: shoot ratio (0.26 and 0.27 during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), which remained statistically at par with 75% NP (0.25 and 0.26) but significantly exceeded 50% NP (0.21 and 0.22). Among the nano-fertilizer treatments, two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano DAP recorded the maximum root: shoot ratio (0.26 and 0.27). The higher root: shoot ratio under these treatments indicates improved root growth and biomass partitioning due to enhanced nutrient uptake and utilization. Raliya et al. (2018) [13] , observed enhanced root development and nutrient uptake with nano-fertilizer application, similarly Singh et al. (2026) [14] also found improved root weight with the nano fertilizer application and Kah et al. (2018) [15] recorded the potential of nano fertilizers to improve plant growth and nutrient use efficiency.

Test weight

Test weight was significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels, whereas nanofertilizer application and their interaction had no significant effect (Table 2) during both the years of study. Application of 100% NP recorded the highest test weight (4.9 and 5.2 g during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), which remained statistically at par with 75% NP (4.8 and 5.1 g) but significantly exceeded 50% NP (4.6 and 4.6 g). Although the effect of nano-fertilizers was non-significant, two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano DAP recorded the highest numerical values (5.0 and 5.3 g). The improvement in test weight under adequate NP nutrition may be attributed to enhanced assimilate production and efficient translocation to developing seeds during grain filling. Similarly, Harode et al. (2024) [10] found nonsignificant values of test weight (g) whereas Malhi and Gill (2007) [16] , recorded improved seed weight with balanced nitrogen and phosphorus nutrition, while Ahmad et al. (2023) and Acharya et al. (2024) [17] also reported that nano-fertilizers enhanced nutrient use efficiency and seed development.

Seeds per siliqua

Seeds per siliqua were significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels as well as nano-fertilizer application, whereas their interaction remained non-significant during both the years (Table 2). Application of 100% NP recorded the highest number of seeds per siliqua (13.6 and 14.9 during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), which remained statistically at par with 75% NP (13.2 and 14.4) but significantly exceeded 50% NP (10.0 and 12.3). Among the nano-fertilizer treatments, two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano DAP recorded the maximum number of seeds per siliqua (13.9 and 14.9). The higher seed set may be attributed to improved nutrient availability during the reproductive phase, resulting in better fertilization and assimilate translocation towards developing siliquae. Similar findings were reported by Singh et al. (2026) [14] , who observed improved reproductive growth and yield attributes with nano-fertilizer application, while Chaudhary et al. (2023) [8] also reported enhanced seed development due to improved nutrient use efficiency and balanced nutrient supply. Rathour et al., (2024) [18] also reported increased yield attributes with the application of nano urea.

Protein content was not significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels, nanofertilizer application or their interaction during both the years of study (Table 2). However, numerically the highest protein content was recorded under 100% NP (20.7 and 21.1% during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), while among the nano-fertilizer treatments, two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano DAP recorded the highest values (20.5 and 21.0%). The slight increase in protein content under higher NP levels may be attributed to enhanced nitrogen assimilation and amino acid synthesis, which favoured protein accumulation in seeds. Johnson et al. (2003) [19] , observed increased seed protein content with higher nitrogen fertilization, while Raliya et al. (2018) [13] also observed the role of nanofertilizers in improving nutrient uptake and nitrogen use efficiency, thereby supporting protein accumulation.

Production efficiency

Production efficiency was significantly influenced by nitrogen and phosphorus levels, nanofertilizer application and their interaction (Tables 2 and3). Among fertility levels, 100% N and P recorded the highest production efficiency (17.7 and 17.8 kg ha ¹ day ¹), which was⁻ ⁻ statistically comparable with 75% N and P (16.8 and 17.1 kg ha ¹ day ¹) but significantly⁻ ⁻ superior to 50% N and P (10.5 and 10.9 kg ha ¹ day ¹). Among nano-fertilizer treatments,⁻ ⁻ two sprays each of nano urea and nano-DAP resulted in the maximum production efficiency (16.8 and 17.3 kg ha ¹ day ¹) remained statistically similar with two sprays of nano-DAP⁻ ⁻ (14.9 and 15.0 kg ha ¹ day ¹) and one spray each of nano urea and nano-DAP (14.7 and 14.9⁻ ⁻ kg ha ¹ day ¹).⁻ ⁻ A significant interaction between nitrogen and phosphorus levels and nano-fertilizer application was observed for production efficiency during both years (Table 3). The highest production efficiency was recorded with 100% N and P + two sprays each of nano urea and nano-DAP (18.1 and 18.7 kg/ha/day during 2023-24 and 2024-25, respectively), which remained statistically on a par with 75% N and P + two sprays each of nano urea and nano-DAP (18.8 and 19.2 kg/ha/day). The lowest production efficiency was recorded under⁻ ⁻ 50% N and P + two sprays of nano urea (8.6 and 9.2 kg/ha/day). The higher production efficiency under these treatments may be attributed to enhanced nutrient use efficiency and greater assimilate partitioning, resulting in higher seed yield within the crop duration. Nanofertilizers improving nutrient use efficiency and crop productivity was reported by Dimkpa et al. (2020) [20] . The beneficial effect of balanced nutrient management on improving crop productivity and quality has also been demonstrated by Pyne et al., (2024) [21] . Pramanick et al. (2023) [22] also revealed the importance of balance nutrient management resulted increased seed yield and ultimately production efficiency

Conclusion

From the results, it can be concluded that, 100% NP and two foliar sprays each of Nano urea-Nano DAP recorded the higher plant height, leaf area index, SPAD values, root shoot ratio, test weight (g), seeds per siliqua and protein content (%) and production efficiency (kg/ha/day), but was on par with the treatment 75% NP fertilizer and two foliar sprays each of nano urea and nano-DAP during both the year of experimentation. Since both treatment combinations recorded higher growth and yield of Indian mustard. The adoption of a reduced dose of nitrogen; 75% N and two foliar sprays of nano-urea and nano-DAP at 25 DAS and 45 DAS is an economically and sustainably viable choice for boosting growth when applying a foliar application of nano-urea and nano DAP. The results showed the potential of nano fertilizers as an important component of sustainable nutrient management strategies for enhancing mustard productivity under Tarai region conditions.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementI, as an author so grateful to my supportive guide Dr M.S. Negi and my advisory committee who helped me throughout my research work and also thankful to College of Agriculture, Department of Agronomy, GBPUA&T, Pantnagar India for providing necessary research facilities.

References

1. Shekhawat K, Rathore SS, Premi OP, Kandpal BK, Chauhan JS. Advances in agronomic management of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. Cosson): an overview. International Journal of Agronomy. 2012;2012:408284. doi:10.1155/2012/408284.
2. Mirbakhsh M. Role of nano-fertilizer in plants nutrient use efficiency (NUE): a mini-review. arXiv [Preprint]. 2023:2305.14357.
3. Babu S, Singh R, Yadav D, Rathore SS, Raj R, Avasthe R, et al. Nanofertilizers for agricultural and environmental sustainability. Chemosphere. 2022;292:133451.
4. Meena MK, Singh HV, Jat RS, Dotaniya ML, Meena MD, Choudhary RL, et al. Effects of nano urea on Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) productivity and nutrient uptake in calcareous soils. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2024;94(11):1234-1239.
5. Meena V, Dotaniya ML, Meena MD, Jat RS, Meena MK, Choudhary RL, et al. Conjoint application of nutrients as customized fertilizers influences growth and yield characteristics of Brassica juncea L., augmented profitability and nutrient use efficiency indices. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2024;24(4):7605-7620. doi:10.1007/s42729-024-02062-8.
6. Naidu KR, Seethambaram Y, Das VSR. Leaf proteinase and nitrate reductase activities in relation to grain protein and grain yield in four species of grain amaranth. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences. 1982;91(5):433-441.
7. Tarafdar JC, Raliya R, Mahawar H, Rathore I. Development of zinc nanofertilizer to enhance crop production. Agricultural Research. 2020;9:324-331.
8. Chaudhary K, Debbarma V. Response of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth, yield and economics of fodder maize (Zea mays L.). International Journal of Plant & Soil Science. 2023;35(14):330-337. doi:10.9734/ijpss/2023/v35i143055.
9. Delfine S, Tognetti R, Desiderio E, Alvino A. Effect of foliar application of nitrogen and humic acids on growth and yield of durum wheat. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2005;25:183-191.
10. Harode MN, Mankar DD, Thakare SS, Pagar PC, Koytade GG, Kubde KJ, et al. Effect of nano-urea supplementation on growth and yield of linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.). International Journal of Advanced Biochemistry Research. 2024;8(10S):427-431. doi:10.33545/26174693.2024.v8.i10Se.2491.
11. Prasad R, Bhattacharyya A, Nguyen QD. Nanotechnology in sustainable agriculture: recent developments, challenges and perspectives. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2021;12:709721.
12. Meena BS, Meena SN, Kumawat R, Nagar G, Sharma A. Effect of fertility levels on yield attributes, yield and quality of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) under irrigated conditions of south-eastern Rajasthan. Annals of Agricultural Research. 2022;43(3):293-301.
13. Raliya R, Saharan V, Dimkpa C, Biswas P. Nanofertilizer for precision and sustainable agriculture: current state and future perspectives. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 2018;66(26):6487-6503. doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.7b02178.
14. Singh RK, Upadhyay PK, Hasanain M, Shekhawat K, Rathore SS, Meena VS, et al. Nano-urea driven improvements in nitrogen efficiency and wheat productivity: trade-offs, synergies and climate resilience pathways. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2026;9:1670081. doi:10.3389/fsufs.2025.1670081.
15. Kah M, Kookana RS, Gogos A, Bucheli TD. A critical evaluation of nanopesticides and nanofertilizers against their conventional analogues. Nature Nanotechnology. 2018;13:677-684.
16. Malhi SS, Gill KS. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization on seed yield and quality of oilseed crops. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2007;30:1773-1789.
17. Acharya P, Solanki NS, Gehlot JK, Rajwaniya A, Jaiswani S, Champawat TS, et al. Effect of nano urea on growth and yield attributes of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2024;7(12S):236-238. doi:10.33545/2618060X.2024.v7.i12Sd.2139.
18. Rathour SK, Bhatnagar A, Singh G, Kumar A, Hasanain M, Pandey A, et al. Effect of foliar fertilization of nano urea and 2% urea on yield, nutrient uptake, nitrogen use efficiency and economics of maize (Zea mays L.). International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2024;7(11S):330-336. doi:10.33545/2618060X.2024.v7.i11Se.1992.
19. Johnson BL, Hanson BK, Henson RA, Riveland NR. Nitrogen fertilization effects on canola seed yield and quality. Agronomy Journal. 2003;95:819-824.
20. Dimkpa CO, Singh U, Bindraban PS, Elmer WH, GardeaTorresdey JL, White JC. Developing fertilizers for enhanced nitrogen use efficiency: trends and perspectives. Science of the Total Environment. 2020;731:139113.
21. Pyne S, Negi MS, Mahapatra BS, Kumar A, Dey P, Pandit P. Hybrid modeling and management of lodging in subtropical fiber flax: optimizing plant nutrition for sustainable cultivation. Journal of Natural Fibers. 2024;21(1):2394139. doi:10.1080/15440478.2024.2394139.
22. Pramanick B, Mahapatra BS, Datta D, Dey P, Singh SP, Kumar A, et al. An innovative approach to improve oil production and quality of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) with multi-nutrient-rich polyhalite. Heliyon. 2023;9(3). doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13997.
23. Ahmad MA, Adeel M, Shakoor N, Ali I, Ishfaq M, Haider FU, et al. Unraveling the roles of modified nanomaterials in nano-enabled agriculture. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 2023;202:107944. doi:10.1016/j.plaphy.2023.107944.
24. Directorate of Economics and Statistics. Agricultural statistics at a glance 2024. New Delhi: Department of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India; 2024.
25. Choudhary R, Kumar A, Verma N. Role of nano urea in enhancing micronutrient uptake in oilseed crops. Indian Journal of Plant Nutrition. 2023;8(4):221-229.
26. Mahto R, Singh RK, Mahajan NC, Ankita. Productivity and profitability of oilseed Brassica species under system of mustard intensification. Plant Archives. 2024;24(2):157162.
27. Nanda A, Shukla A, Nayak JK, Kumar R, Jayara AS, Nath S, et al. Sustainable enhancement of leaf and seed yield in Brassica species under dense crop configuration through the addition of liquid microbial fertilizers. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 2026;26(1):387-402. doi:10.1007/s42729-025-02863-5.
28. Szőllősi R. Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) seeds in health. In: Preedy VR, Watson RR, editors. Nuts and seeds in health and disease prevention. 2nd ed. Academic Press; 2020. p. 357-364.
29. Zhu J, Dai W, Chen B, Cai G, Wu X, Yan G. Research progress on the effect of nitrogen on rapeseed seed yield and oil content and its regulation mechanism. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023;24:14504.