Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield and quality of rice and mustard crops

Introduction

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) and mustard (Brassica juncea L.) constitute an important cereal-oilseed sequence in eastern Uttar Pradesh. Sustaining productivity of this system requires balanced nutrient supply and maintenance of soil fertility. Continuous dependence on chemical fertilizers alone may not adequately maintain soil productivity, whereas exclusive dependence on organic sources may not provide nutrients in sufficient quantities at the required time. Integrated nutrient management combines inorganic fertilizers with organic manures and biological inputs. Such integration can provide nutrients in readily available as well as gradually mineralizable forms and may improve nutrient-use efficiency, soil biological activity, root development and crop productivity. The present experiment evaluated twelve nutrient-management combinations involving recommended NPKS, FYM, poultry manure and biofertilizer (VAM) in rice and mustard during 2024-25 and 2025-26. The study particularly examined growth, yield attributes, yield and quality responses of both crops. The objective was to determine the effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield attributes, productivity and quality of transplanted rice and mustard under a rice-mustard cropping system.

Materials and Methods

Experimental site and experimental design

A field experiment was conducted at farmer field of village Ramdaspur Patahana, Jaunpur Uttar Pradeshnear V.B.S. Purvanchal University Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh, during the agricultural years 2024-25 and 2025-26 to evaluate the effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield and quality of rice and mustard under a rice-mustard cropping system. The experiment comprised twelve nutrient-management treatments (T₀-T₁₁), involving different combinations of recommended NPKS, farmyard manure (FYM), poultry manure and biofertilizer (VAM). The treatments were evaluated in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with three replications. The same treatment structure was maintained for comparison of crop performance across the two experimental years. Growth and yield observations were recorded at specified crop growth stages and at harvest following the procedures adopted in the original experimental study.

Observations and laboratory analysis

In rice, observations on plant height, tillers hill⁻¹, dry matter accumulation, effective tillers hill⁻¹, panicle length, grains panicle⁻¹, test weight, grain yield, straw yield, biological yield and harvest index were recorded. In mustard, observations included plant height, primary and secondary branches plant⁻¹, dry matter accumulation, siliquae plant⁻¹, seeds siliqua⁻¹, test weight, seed yield plant⁻¹, stover yield plant⁻¹, harvest index, oil content and nutrient content. Plant samples were collected at harvest for estimation of nutrient concentration, while mustard seed quality was assessed through oil content. Nutrient uptake was calculated from nutrient concentration and corresponding dry matter/yield values wherever applicable. The analytical procedures and units of measurement followed those adopted in the thesis and the experimental laboratory protocol.

Statistical analysis

The experimental data obtained from both years were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) appropriate for a Randomized Block Design to determine the significance of treatment effects. The treatment means were compared using the critical difference (CD) at the 5% level of probability, wherever the F-test indicated significant differences. The standard error of mean (SEm±) was calculated to indicate the precision of treatment means. Statistical significance was interpreted at P = 0.05. For each parameter, the treatment mean, SEm± and CD (5%) were presented as reported in the original thesis tables. The statistical analysis was performed separately for the respective experimental years, and treatment differences were interpreted on the basis of the significance levels obtained from the analysis of variance.

Results and Discussion

Tillers hill⁻¹

The number of tillers hill⁻¹ increased markedly from 30 to 90 DAT under all treatments and declined slightly by harvest, which may be associated with the death of non-effective tillers during crop maturation. Nutrient management significantly affected tillering at the reported stages. At 30 DAT, the number of tillers ranged from 3.8 to 6. [1] likewise reported significant improvement in plant height and dry matter accumulation with increasing nutrient and FYM supply. [1] reported significant increases in dry matter accumulation of mustard with FYM and increasing nutrient levels, supporting the present findings. [1] , who found that FYM and nutrient application increased siliquae plant⁻¹. Singh and Amitesh Kumar Singh found that organic-source combinations with FYM and microbial inoculants improved yield attributes, yield and nutrient uptake of mustard.

Seeds

Comparative response of rice and mustard to INM

The two-year results demonstrate that the response of rice and mustard to nutrient management was consistently positive, although the optimum treatment differed slightly among individual growth parameters. In rice, T₁₀ was particularly effective for plant height and tillering, whereas T₁₁ produced the maximum dry matter accumulation and major yield attributes. This distinction is important and should be retained in the final manuscript rather than describing T₁₁ as the best treatment for every rice parameter. The original thesis data clearly show T₁₀ values of 41.0-41.03 cm at 30 DAT, 77.2-77.6 cm at 60 DAT and 20.1-20.4 tillers hill⁻¹ at 90 DAT, while T₁₁ was highest for rice dry matter accumulation.

In contrast, T₁₁ consistently ranked first for mustard growth, yield attributes, seed yield and oil content. This suggests that the full NPKS dose combined with FYM, poultry manure and VAM provided an especially favourable nutrient environment for mustard.

The overall trend agrees with published evidence that integrated use of mineral fertilizers, organic manures and microbial inoculants can improve nutrient availability, crop growth, yield formation and nutrient uptake compared with either inadequate fertilization or fertilizer-only approaches. Studies in ricemustard systems have specifically demonstrated benefits from combining inorganic fertilizers with FYM and biofertilizers.

Overall discussion

The overall superiority of integrated nutrient management can be explained by nutrient complementarity and synchronization. Chemical fertilizers provide immediately available nutrients, while FYM and poultry manure supply nutrients progressively through decomposition and mineralization. Organic amendments also contribute to improved soil structure, water-holding capacity, microbial activity and nutrient buffering. VAM provides an additional biological mechanism for nutrient acquisition by increasing the effective root-soil interface. Thus, the present two-year investigation provides evidence that INM is not merely a means of increasing crop yield but also a strategy for improving crop growth, yield components, nutrient utilization and produce quality in the rice-mustard cropping system.

Conclusion

The two-year investigation demonstrated that integrated nutrient management substantially improved the growth, yield attributes, yield and quality of rice and mustard compared with the unfertilized control.

In rice, the treatment T₁₁ (100% NPKS + 5 t FYM ha⁻¹ + 1 t poultry manure ha⁻¹ + 5 kg biofertilizer/VAM) produced the highest dry matter accumulation, yield attributes and grain yield, whereas T₁₀ showed particularly strong performance for plant height and tillering.

In mustard, T₁₁ consistently produced the highest growth, yield attributes, seed yield and oil content. The maximum mustard oil content of 44.0 and 44.4% was recorded under T₁₁ during 2024-25 and 2025-26, respectively. Therefore, under the experimental conditions, integrated application of recommended NPKS with FYM, poultry manure and VAM, particularly T₁₁, was effective nutrientmanagement strategy for improving productivity and quality of the rice-mustard cropping system. 5. Tables.

References

1. Apon M, Gohain T, Apon R, Banik M, Mandal AK. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and yield of local rice (Oryza sativa L.) under rainfed upland condition of Nagaland. Pharma Innov J. 2018;7:426-429.
2. Kaur G, Verma K. Effect of integrated nutrient management on mustard crop (Brassica juncea L.). Plant Arch. 2023;23(1).
3. Kausotha BC, Sharma Y, Meena RS, Reager ML, Dadhich RK. Effect of vermicompost and inorganic fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of Indian mustard. Bioinfolet. 2015;12(1):35-38.
4. Kharlukhi DG, Upadhyaya K, Sahoo UK. Influence of integrated nutrient management on soil health, growth and yield of paddy in "jhum lands" of north-eastern Himalayas. Discov Agric. 2024. Article in press.
5. Kumar A, Meena RN, Yadav L, Gilotia YK. Effect of organic and inorganic sources of nutrients on yield, yield attributes and nutrient uptake of rice cv. PRH-10. J Life Sci. 2012;9(2):595-597.
6. Kumar V, Singh V, Singh S, Tiwari NK. Effect of macronutrients and farmyard manure on productivity and profitability of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) in western Uttar Pradesh, India. Asian J Soil Sci Plant Nutr. 2017;1(3):1-6.
7. Kumawat A, Pareek BL, Yadav RS, Rathore PS. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield, quality and nutrient uptake of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) in arid zone of Rajasthan. Indian J Agron. 2014;59(1):60-65.
8. Mondal S, Mallikarjun M, Ghosh M, Ghosh DC, Timsina J. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and productivity of hybrid rice. J Agric Sci Technol B. 2015;5:297-308.
9. Sharma A, Rana N, Pandey R. Integrated nutrient management strategies for sustainable rice production: impact on growth, development, yield and environmental sustainability. Int J Res Agron. 2025;8(4):426-432.
10. Singh H, Singh RP, Meena BP, Lal B, Dotaniya ML, Shirale AO, et al. Effect of integrated nutrient management (INM) modules on late-sown Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson] and soil properties. J Cereals Oilseeds. 2018;9(4):37-44.
11. Singh SP, Pal MS. Effect of integrated nutrient management on productivity, quality, nutrient uptake and economics of mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian J Agron. 2011;56(4):381-387.
12. Singh V, Verma P, Khaiper M, Kaur K. Examining the impact of integrated nutrient management and vermicompost on mustard growth and nutrient composition. Int J Plant Soil Sci. 2023;35(21):1241-1249.