integrated nutrient maangement in horticultural crops, inm,

4. Data of National Soil Fertility Survey
Nutrients Deficiency (%) Need By the year
2025 (mt)
Production (mt)
N 63 45.000 17.000
P 50
K 48
S 37 2.000 -
Zn 47 0.324 0.013
Fe 11 0.130 0.007
Cu 5 0.011 0.003
Mn 4 0.022 0.001
B 1 0.004 0.004

5. PLANT NUTRIENT CYCLE

6. Nutritional deficiency symptoms
Some common leaf abnormalities resulting
from nutrient deficiencies
Continue……

7. Continue……

9. How Soil pH Affects Availability of Plant Nutrients

10. Nutritional deficiencyNutritional deficiency
symptoms in somesymptoms in some
vegetable cropsvegetable crops

11. Nitrogen deficiency

12. Phosphorus deficiency

13. Potassium deficiency

14. Boron deficiency

15. Magnesium deficiency

16. Manganese deficiency

17. Calcium deficiency

18. Molybdenum deficiency

19. Iron deficiency

20. Zinc deficiency

21. Sulpher deficiency

22. Copper deficiency

24. AN AGRICULTURE THAT IS
Productive and
profitable
Conserve soil and water
resources and protects
the environments
Enhance health
and safety
Low input
Method and skill
management
Reduce use of synthetic and
chemical inputs
Biological pest control
Use of farm and animal wastes
(FYM,Poultry manure,pressmud etc.)
Natural occurring processes
Soil and water
conservation
practices
Crop rotation
Crop livestock
diversification
Green manures and
sod crops
Biotechnology
Concept in Sustainable Agriculture

25. INM involves maintenance or adjustment of plant
nutrient supply to an optimum level for sustaining the
desired crop productivity.
It involves proper combination of chemical fertilizers,
organic manures, crop residues, nitrogen fixing crops
and bio-fertilizers suitable to the system of land use
and ecological, social and economic conditions.
What is INM ?

26.  Unbalanced use of N:P:K have caused deleterious long
term effects on soil fertility and productivity
 In intensive cultivation, application of mere chemical
fertilizers (N:P:K)
 Not sufficient for sustaining the yields,
 Leads to deficiency in the soil for secondary nutrients and
 Deficiency of micro-nutrients in the soil which limit crop
productivity
 Use of organic manures, green manures, crop residue and
biodegradable rural and urban waste
 Supplement the major nutrients.
 Increase the efficiency in other nutrients supply
 Leading to improvement in physical and biological properties of the
soil
WHY INM ?

27. GOALS OF INM
To maintain soil productivity
To ensure productive and sustainable agriculture
To reduce expenditure on cost of purchased inputs by using
farm manure and crop residues etc.
To utilize the potential benefits of green manures, leguminous
crops and bio-fertilizers
To prevent degradation of the environment
To meet the social and economic aspirations of the farmers
without harming the natural resource base of the agricultural
production

28. In the soil, replenishment of chemicals removed by the
crop
Maintenance of organic matter content in the soil
Avoidance of weeds, pests and diseases occurrence
Control of soil acidity and toxicity
Control of soil erosion by improving soil physical
properties
PRINCIPLES OF INM

29. To increase the availability of nutrients from all sources in the
soil during growing season.
To match the crop demand for nutrients, with the capacity of
soil to meet this demand plus the external sources of nutrient
supply.
To optimize various soil-biota interaction.
To minimize the loss of nutrients in the soil and also the
harmful effects of chemical fertilizers on the soil health.
OBJECTIVES OF INM

30. Components of INM
• Chemical fertilizers
• Organic manures
• Biofertilizers
• Green manures
• Crop residues
• Legumes
intercropping
30
Organic manure
Chemical fertilizer
Bio fertilizer
GREEN MANURE
Bio fertilizer

31. Fertilizers are industrially manufactured chemicals containing
plant nutrients. Nutrient content is higher in fertilizers than in organic
manures and nutrients are released almost immediately after
application such as
Fertilizers Nutrients contents (%)
Nitrogen (N) Phosphorus (P) Potash (K)
Nitrogenous
Urea 46
CAN 25-28
Ammonium Nitrate 32-35
Phosphatic
SSP 16
DAP 18 46
Potassic
Murate of potash 60.0
Potassium sulphate 48.0-52.0
Chemical fertilizers

32. Farm Yard Manure (FYM):
This is the traditional manure and is mostly readily available to the farmers.
Farm yard manure is a decomposed mixture of Cattle dung and urine with straw
and litter used as bedding material and residues from the fodder fed to the cattle.
Well rotten farm yard manure contains 0.5% N, 0.25% P2O5 and 0.5% K2O.
Use of Organic Manures In Horticultural crops

33.  Compost that is prepared with the help of earthworms is called
vermicompost.
 The earthworms may be of local species or more vigorous exotic ones.
 The casts of the earthworm have several enzymes and are rich in plants
nutrients, beneficial bacteria and mycorrhizae.
 On an average, vermicompost contains1 3% N, 1% P2O5 and 1.5% K2O.
 Presence of earthworms help in aerating the soil.
Vermicompost

34. GREEN MANURES
• Green manuring is growing in the field plants usually
belonging to leguminous family and incorporating into the
soil after sufficient growth.
• The most important green manure crops are sunnhemp,
dhaincha, clusterbeans and Sesbania rostrata.

35. “Biofertilizers are the carrier-based inoculants containing cells
of efficient strains of specific microorganisms used by the
farmers for enhancing productivity of the soil.”
Bio-fertilizer ?
Fix atmospheric nitrogen
Dissolve soil phosphorus
Stimulate plant growth through synthesis of growth promoting
substances.
Why to apply bio-fertilizers ?

36. CLASSIFICATION OF BIOFERTILIZERS
S. No. Groups Examples
N2 fixing
Biofertilizers
1. Free-living Azotobacter, Beijerink ia, Clostridium, Klebsiella,
Anabaena,Nostoc,
2 Symbiotic Rhizobium, Frankia, Anabaena azollae
3 Associative Symbiotic Azospirillum
P Solubilizing
Biofertilizers
1. Bacteria Bacillus megaterium var. phosphaticum,
Bacillus subtilis
Bacillus circulans, Pseudomonas striata
2 Fungi Penicillium sp, Aspergillus awamori

37. S. N. Group Example
P Mobilizing
Biofertilizers
1 Arbuscular mycorrhiza Glomus sp.,Gigaspora sp.,Acaulospora
sp.,
Scutellospora sp. & Sclerocystis sp.
2 Ectomycorrhiza Laccaria sp., Pisolithus sp., Boletus sp.,
Amanita sp.
3 Ericoid mycorrhizae Pezizella ericae
4 Orchid mycorrhiza Rhizoctonia solani
Biofertilizers for Micro
nutrients
1. Silicate and Zinc
solubilizers
Bacillus sp.
Plant Growth Promoting
Rhizobacteria
1. Pseudomonas Pseudomonas fluorescens

38. Sl. No. Biofertilizers
1. Azotobacter
2. Azospirillum
3. Phosphate solubilising bacteria (PSB)
4. Rhizobium / Bradyrhizobium
5. Pseudomonas striata
6. Trichoderma
7. Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhizae (VAM)
Bio-fertilizers used in Horticultural crops

39. Rhizobium:
Rhizobium is a soil habitat bacterium, which can able to colonize the
legume roots and
fixes the atmospheric nitrogen symbiotically.

40. Azospirillium sp.
●Azospirillium an associative micro-aerophillic nitrogen fixer commonly found in
association with the roots of higher plants is of interest.
●Low energy requirement, high nitrogen fixation capacity, can fix 20-40 kg N/ha
and tolerance to high soil temperature (30-40 0
C) are responsible for its
suitability under tropical conditions.
●The most important Azospirillium spp. is A. brasilense which has wide range of
tolerance against abiotic stresses.

41. Azotobactor sp.
• A free living heterotrophic nitrogen fixing
bacteria encounter in neutral to alkaline soil
conditions.
• A. chroococcum and A. vinilandii are deemed to
be the most commonly occurring species. fixes
20-40 kg N/ha.

42. Phosphate solubilising bacteria (Phosphobacteria):
They secrete organic acids and lower the pH in their
vicinity to bring about dissolution of bound phosphates
in soil.
Phosphate solubilising microorganisms are
recommended for all crops and can solubilize 20-30%
of insoluble phosphate in the soil.

43. VAM fungi (vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae )
• Mycorrhizal associations produced by fungi are known
as arbuscular mycorrhizas, or vesicular-arbuscular
mycorrhizas.
• the major genus is Glomus, considered to be the most
abundant of all soil fungi.
• It is an obligate symbiotic fungus and is not very host
specific.

44. Increase crop yield by 20-30%.
Replace chemical nitrogen and phosphorus by 25%.
Stimulate plant growth.
Activate the soil biologically.
Restore natural soil fertility.
Provide protection against drought and some soil borne diseases.
Cost effective, i.e. reduces the costs toward fertilizers use, especially
regarding nitrogen and phosphorus
Supplement to fertilizers.
Eco-friendly (Friendly with nature).
Benefits / Advantages of Bio-fertilizers

45. Panchakavya
• Panchagavya consists of nine products viz. cow dung,
cow urine, milk, curd, jaggery, ghee, banana,Tender
coconut and water.
Ingradient of panchagavya
• Cow dung - 7 kg
• Cow ghee - 1 kg
• Cow Urine - 10 liters
• Water - 10 liters
• Cow milk - 3 liters
• Cow curd - 2 liters
• Tender coconut water - 3 liters
• Jaggery - 3 kg
• Well ripened poovan banana – 12 nos.

46. Chemical composition
pH 5.45
EC dSm2 10.22
Total N (ppm): 229
Total P (ppm) : 209
Total K (ppm) : 232
Sodium (ppm) : 90
Calcium (ppm) : 25
IAA (ppm) : 8.5
GA (ppm) : 3.5

48. Inter cropping
• Intercropping involves growing a smother crop between rows
of the main crop.
• The inclusion of intercrop crops such as legume

49. General nutritional recommendations for important fruit crops
Crops Nutrient recommendation ( g/plant)
Banana 300 90 200
Mango(Adult) 750 160 750
Papaya 200 200 250
Sapota 1000 500 500
Guava (Adult) 200 320 250

50. General nutritional recommendations for important vegetable crops
Crops Nutrient recommendation ( kg/ha.)
Tomato 150 75 75
Hybrid Tomato 150 90 90
Brinjal 100 50 50
Hybrid Brinjal 150 75 75
Onion 80 50 80
Garlic 100 50 50
Okra 60 30 0
Elephant Foot Yam 80 60 100
Greater Yam 80 60 80
Turmeric 120 90 90
Ginger 120 90 90
Fenugreek 20 60 30

51. Advantages of Integrated Nutrient Management
Improvement in the soil physical properties such as
granulation, porosity, water holding and drainage
capacity, aeration etc.
Improvement in the organic matter content in the soil
Balanced nutrition to the crops, better nutritional
uptake and hence better plant growth and yield
Improvement in the produce’s quality appearance,
taste and nutritional richness.
Maintenance of soil nutrients reserve

52. Reduced use of chemical fertilizers reduces pollution of ground
water and environment
Fruitful utilization of farm wastes
Some organic sources are cheaply available hence help reduce
the production cost
Enrichment of soil with beneficial soil micro organisms
Better tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses
Residual effect remains beneficial to other succeeding crops

53. Some Research Work In
Horticultural Crops
+

54. Effect of INM on growth, yield attributes and yield of Banana
cv.G.Naine (Av. Of 3 years)
Treatments Plant
height
(cm)
Stem Girth
(cm)
Hands/bunch Finger/
bunch
Bunch
Weight
(kg)
Yield (t/ha)
50% org(FYM+GM)+ 50%
Inorg.+ BF
212.1 69.24 9.03 154.7 16.18 71.9
75% org(FYM+GM+NC) +
25% Inorg.+ BF
208.1 68.04 8.53 142.0 15.31 68.0
100% org(FYM+GM+NC) +BF 205.3 64.02 7.80 113.0 13.63 60.6
50% org(VC + GM) + 50%
Inorg.+ BF
211.1 68.73 8.81 151.2 15.88 70.6
75% org(VC + GM + NC) +
25% Inorg.+ BF
208.3 67.20 8.30 136.6 15.04 66.8
100% org(VC + GM + NC) +
25% Inorg.+ BF
204.7 65.26 7.72 113.3 13.24 58.8
100% Inorg+ 10 kg FYM+ BF 216.0 70.92 9.47 167.7 17.21 76.5
CD at 5% 4.14 2.94 0.32 7.50 0.53 2.36
Bhalerao et al., 2009
Banana Res. Station (MPKV)Jalgaon( MH)

55. Effect of INM on soil chemical properties of Banana cv.G.Naine
(Av. Of 3 years)
Treatments pH EC
(ds/m)
OC (%) Available
N(kg/ha)
Available
P(kg/ha)
Available
K(kg/ha)
Initial 8.20 0.35 0.28 210 19.5 620
50% org(FYM+GM)+ 50% Inorg.
+ BF
8.13 0.34 0.32 211 21.6 619
75% org(FYM+GM+NC) + 25%
Inorg.+ BF
8.07 0.30 0.37 219 20.2 623
100% org(FYM+GM+NC) +BF 7.98 0.26 0.49 231 19.4 631
50% org(VC + GM) + 50% Inorg.
+ BF
8.15 0.32 0.30 211 21.8 619
75% org(VC + GM + NC) + 25%
Inorg.+ BF
8.06 0.29 0.34 219 20.4 623
100% org(VC + GM + NC) + 25%
Inorg.+ BF
8.01 0.27 0.46 231 19.5 633
100% Inorg+ 10 kg FYM+ BF 8.20 0.37 0.30 228 22.2 622
CD at 5% 0.054 0.002 0.016 2.77 0.46 3.37
Bhalerao et al., 2009
Banana Res. Station (MPKV)Jalgaon ( MH)

56. Effect of INM on yield and yield attributing characters of Banana cv.
Jahaji
Treatments No. of
hands/bunch
Finger/hands Weight of
second
hand (kg)
Bunch
Weight (kg)
Yield
(t/ha)
100 % RDF (NPK ) + FYM 8.89 20.80 2.23 15.61 67.56
100 % RDF (NPK, P as rock
phosphate)) + vermicompost
9.07 22.12 2.40 16.11 72.05
100 % RDF (NPK, P as rock
phosphate) + FYM +Azospirillum +
PSB
9.32 23.04 2.58 16.50 73.96
75 % RDF (NPK, P as rock
phosphate) + FYM +Azospirillum +
PSB
8.66 20.55 2.22 15.30 67.44
50 % RDF (NPK, P as rock
phosphate) + FYM +Azospirillum +
PSB
7.95 18.62 1.56 14.12 64.08
50 % RDF (NPK, P as rock
phosphate) + vermicompost
+Azospirillum + PSB
8.50 19.26 2.16 14.86 66.05
50 % RDF (NPK, P as rock
phosphate) + FYM +Azospirillum +
PSB + T. harzianum
8.23 18.90 1.94 14.67 65.18
50% RD of N + 100% RD of PK + FYM
+ PSB
8.58 19.33 2.19 15.11 66.83
CD at 5% 0.45 2.44 0.24 0.72 2.61
Hazarika and Ansari, 2010
Jorhat (Assam)

57. Effect of integrated nutrient management on various quality components
of turmeric rhizomes (Pooled data of kharif 2004 and 2005)
Treatments Curcumin
Content (%)
Starch
content (%)
Protein
content (%)
Oil content
(%)
Curing
percentage
(%)
Control 2.58 4.93 4.21 0.92 17.01
20t FYM ha-1
(SI) 2.85 5.38 4.36 1.13 18.33
20t FYM ha-1
(SM) 2.87 5.78 4.35 1.21 19.08
100% NPK ha-1
3.04 6.11 4.56 1.35 19.35
100% NPKS ha-1
2.96 6.82 4.65 1.66 19.86
100% NPKS +10t
FYM ha-1
(SI)
3.05 7.43 4.64 2.05 20.19
100% NPKS +15t
FYM ha-1
(SI)
3.16 7.76 4.90 2.40 20.59
100% NPKS +20t
FYM ha-1
(SI)
3.29 8.11 4.92 2.82 21.53
100% NPKS +10t
FYM ha-1
(SM)
3.07 7.13 4.70 1.77 19.53
100% NPKS +15t
FYM ha-1
(SM)
3.18 7.62 4.79 2.38 20.41
100% NPKS + 20t
FYM ha-1
(SM)
3.31 7.89 4.83 2.85 21.19
CD(P=0.05) 0.08 0.24 0.09 0.17 0.46
Singh and Dixit, 2010
Palampur (HP)
SI-FYM applied as soil incoporation at the time of earthing up
SM-FYM applied as soil mulch at the time of sowing

58. Effect of INM on growth and yield parameters of tomato
Treatment
Control
Height of plant
(cm)
No. of primary
branches/plant
Fruits diameter
(cm)
No. of fruits per
plant
Fruit yield/plot
(kg)
Yield per ha
(q)
2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08 2006-07 2007-08
55.24 54.60 5.65 6.03 3.92 4.14 15.85 16.52 5.43 5.49 167.59 169.42
Oragnic manures
FYM (15 t/ha) 73.45 68.82 6.67 7.26 4.06 4.18 18.64 19.50 6.67 6.56 205.83 205.61
Vermicompost
(10 t/ha) 72.07 73.01 7.67 7.94 4.42 4.02 19.27 19.86 6.72 6.80 210.17 206.34
Poultry
manures (3
q/ha)
67.07 69.79 6.58 7.08 4.10 3.91 17.28 17.89 6.32 6.06 195.72 193.15
CD. at 5% 1.20 0.92 0.92 1.12 0.06 0.07 0.27 0.32 0.11 0.09 3.23 3.47
Inorganic fertilizers
2/3 dose of
RDF of NPK
1/2 dose of
RDF of NPK
74.17 73.17 7.24 7.69 4.36 4.25 19.71 20.17 6.80 6.81 214.92 214.85
69.82 69.54 6.79 7.33 4.15 3.92 18.18 18.86 6.61 6.37 204.38 202.38
1/4 dose of
RDF of NPK 68.61 68.91 6.82 7.26 4.08 3.94 17.30 18.22 6.29 6.24 192.42 187.87
CD. at 5% 1.12 0.92 0.92 1.12 0.06 0.07 0.27 0.32 0.11 0.09 3.23 3.47
Blofertillzers
VAM (2 kg/ha) 69.66 73.17 6.78 7.35 4.19 4.17 17.75 18.82 6.35 6.41 197.15 214.80
PSB (2 kg/ha) 73.94 69.54 7.00 7.29 4.35 4.02 19.65 20.16 6.87 6.86 209.64 202.38
Azospirillum
(2 kg/ha) 68.39 68.91 7.07 7.65 4.05 3.91 17.79 18.27 6.48 6.48 204.94 187.87
CD. at 5% 1.20 0.92 0.92 1.12 0.06 0.07 0.27 0.32 0.11 0.09 3.23 3.47
Kumar et al.,1996
Meerut (UP)

59. The impact of various INM treatments on growth yield and yield attributes of
tomato
Treatment Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches /
plant
Size of fruit
(cm2
)
No. of
fruit/plant
Av. Wt. of
fruit(g)
Fruit
yield(
q/ha)
Recommended dose of
NPK @120:80:60 kg/ha 24.02 40.25 95.16 6.28 34.39 19.83
FYM @20t/ha 22.68 33.50 77.22 4.95 28.76 15.72
FYM @10t/ha + ½
Recommended dose of
NPK/ha
28.42 46.29 109.65 7.35 46.15 20.45
Neem cake @1 t/ha 22.61 32.86 77.58 4.88 31.87 15.03
Neem cake @0.5 t/ha + ½
Recommended dose of
NPK/ha
25.26 42.08 98.63 6.57 38.16 19.24
Vermicompost @5 t/ha 22.36 32.85 80.35 80.35 4.65 16.18
Vermicompot @2.5 t/ha + ½
recommended dose of
NPK/ha
25.78 42.82 102.74 6.48 41.58 20.06
Poultry manure @5 t/ha 22.69 33.96 75.00 4.32 30.67 15.70
Poultry manure @2.5 t/ha
+1/2 recommended dose of
NPK/ha
25.51 42.78 101.14 6.79 43.48 19.40
C.D. at 5% 0.659 1.97 4.482 0.32 1.977 0.870
Pratap et al.,2011
Faizabad (UP)

60. The impact of various INM treatments on quality of tomato
Treatment T.S.S. (%) Ascorbic
acid (mg)
Reducing
sugar (%)
Non-
reducing
sugar (%)
Recommended dose of NPK
@120:80:60 kg/ha
4.31 17.17 2.49 1.65
FYM @20t/ha 4.06 15.48 2.18 1.44
FYM @10t/ha + ½ Recommended
dose of NPK/ha 5.26 19.61 2.95 1.95
Neem cake @1 t/ha 3.99 16.10 2.29 1.52
Neem cake @0.5 t/ha + ½
Recommended dose of NPK/ha
4.59 18.70 2.56 1.70
Vermicompost @5 t/ha 4.12 16.65 2.25 1.49
Vermicompot @2.5 t/ha + ½
recommended dose of NPK/ha 4.85 19.50 2.57 1.70
Poultry manure @5 t/ha 4.10 16.10 2.23 1.47
Poultry manure @2.5 t/ha +1/2
recommended dose of NPK/ha 4.67 18.92 2.79 1.85
C.D. at 5% 0.11 0.453 0.07 0.049
Pratap et al.,2011
Faizabad (UP)

61. Effect of organic, inorganic and micronutrient fertilizers on
growth parameters of turmeric
Treatment
Plant height
(cm)
Leaves/plant Tillers/plant
Leaf area
index
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
Control 63 61 5.6 5.7 3.5 3.6 2.08 2.18
75% recommended dose of NPK 87 88 6.7 6.8 3.7 3.8 2.84 2.79
Recommended dose of NPK 101 103 8.3 8.4 3.8 3.9 2.96 3.03
Recommended dose of NPK + FYM @ lOt /ha 104 104 9.6 9.6 4.4 4.5 3.12 3.22
Recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn + B 108 107 10.3 10.1 5.1 4.9 3.49 3.67
75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM +
Zn + B +biofertilizers 112 117 11.2 11.9 5.3 5.5 3.96 4.11
CD (P=0.05) 6.6 4.6 0.6 0.9 0.13 0.28 0.162 0.114
Nanda et al., 2012
OAUT (Odisha)

62. Effect of organic, inorganic and micronutrient fertilizers on
yield and quality of turmeric
Nanda et al., 2012
OAUT (Odisha)
Treatment Fresh Rhizome
yield(t/ha)
Dry turmeric
yield(t/ha)
Curcumin
content(%)
Curcumin
yield (kg/ha)
2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010
Control 8.2 8.3 2.1 2.2 2.31 2.37 49.5 51.4
75% recommended dose of NPK 8.8 9.8 2.3 2.6 2.98 3.08 68.5 78.8
Recommended dose of NPK 11.6 12.0 3.0 3.1 3.08 3.1 93.3 97.1
Recommended dose of NPK + FYM @ l0 t/ha 13.0 13.3 3.4 3.5 3.12 3.16 106.1 110.0
Recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn 5kg
+ B 3 kg/ha
14.3 14.4 3.7 3.8 3.69 3.75 138.0 141.3
75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn
5 kg +B 3 kg/ha + biofertilizers
15.8 16.0 4.1 4.2 4.15 4.23 171.5 177.0
CD(P=0.05) 0.80 0.84 0.21 0.22 0.03 0.06 7.1 8.2

63. Effect of organic, inorganic and micronutrient fertilizers on soil
nutrient status of turmeric
Nanda et al., 2012
OAUT (Odisha)
Treatment
pH EC (dSm-1
) OC (%)
Available N
(kg/hsa)
Available P
(kg/hsa)
Available K
(kg/hsa)
A B A B A B A B A B A B
Control 4.8 4.82 0.13 0.14 0.41 0.42 235.0 234 18.4 18.8 178.1 176.8
75% recommended dose of NPK 5.05 5.06 0.24 0.15 0.42 0.42 244.3 241.4 20.3 19.6 192.5 194.6
Recommended dose of NPK 5.02 5.11 0.14 0.22 0.44 0.41 248.7 251.6 20.6 21.3 201.8 202.4
Recommended dose of NPK + FYM @ lOt
/ha
5.12 5.13 0.18 0.19 0.46 0.47 254.1 256.4 20.4 20.3 197.4 201.8
Recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn + B 5.08 5.11 0.09 0.13 0.46 0.46 259.2 261.8 21.7 22.8 209.8 210.7
75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn
+B + biofertilizers
5.09 5.08 0.16 0.18 0.48 0.46 269.8 273.6 22.3 24.7 218.5 222.5
A-After harvest of first crop (2009-10), B- After harvest of second crop (2010-11)

64. Fruit
crops
Best treatments of INM Yield References
Banana
cv.G.naine
50% org(FYM+GM)+ 50% Inorg.+ BF 71.90 t/ha Bhalerao et al., 2009
Banana Res. Station
(MPKV)Jalgaon( MH)
Banana cv.
Jahaji
100 % RDF (NPK, P as rock phosphate) + FYM
+Azospirillum + PSB
73.96 t/ha Hazarika and Ansari, 2010
Jorhat (Assam)
Mango
cv.kesar
25% N through BC + 75% N through Inorganic 65.37
kg/tree
10.12 t/ha
Kumar et al.,2012.AGRESCO
REPORT,ACHF,NAU-Navsari
Mango
cv.sunderja
50%RDF+50 kg FYM+10kg vermicompost 124.64
kg/tree
Gautam et al.,2012.JNKV(MP)
Papaya cv.
surya
75% RDF(200:250:250) + 25% vermicompost +
rhizosphere bacteria culture
40kg/plant Singh et al.,
2010.AADU,Allhabadad
Some Research Findings of Horticultural Crops

65. Vegetable
crops
Best treatments of INM Yield References
Tomato 10t/ha vermicompost +2/3 RDF +2 kg /ha
PSB
209.72 q/ha Kumar et al.,1996
Meerut (UP)
Onion cv.
GW-1
60% RDF + banana pseudostem sap
@2000l/ha
47.45 t/ha Patel et al.,2011.AGRESCO
REPORT,ACHF,NAU-
Navsari
Garlic
cv.GG-1
50% RDN + 50% N through BC 4.3 t/ha Desai et al.,2012.AGRESCO
REPORT,ACHF,NAU-
Navsari
Greater Yam
cv.lacal
round
20 t/ha FYM + 100 % RDF of NPK 19.73 t/ha Patel et al.,2012.AGRESCO
REPORT,ACHF,NAU-
Navsari
Turmeric 75% recommended dose of NPK + FYM + Zn
5 kg +B 3 kg/ha + biofertilizers
15.90t/ha fresh
rhizome
4.15 t/ha Dry
rhizome
Nanda et al.,2012.OUAT
(Odisha)
Fenugeek cv.
Pusa early
bunching
Vermicompost 5 t/ha + 30 kg N /ha 19.50 q/ha (Seed) Dubey et al.,2013.Pantnagar
Okra cv.
GO-2
Bio-Compost 10 t/ha + 100% RDF 19.24 t/h Vashi et al.,2013.AGRESCO
REPORT,ACHF,NAU-
Navsari

66.  Use of INM should ensure both enhanced and sustainable
production and safeguard the environment.
 Chemical fertilizers have its own advantages and disadvantages in
terms of nutrient supply, but organic and bio-fertilizers improve
soil health and productivity along with better crop growth.
 Developing a suitable nutrient management system that integrates
use of these three kinds of nutrient source (Inorganic, Organic and
bio fertilizers) may be a challenge to reach the goal of sustainable
agriculture, however much research is still needed.
Conclusion

67. Future strategies
• Emphasis should be given to INM research in
horticultural crops.
• Direct and indirect benefits of INM on a long
term basis needs to be quantified.
• More effective ways of converting organic
wastes into manures are to be evolved.
• Promotion of bio-fertilizers.
• Demonstrations for spreading the concept and
technologies of INM.

68. Thank you