Nutrient use efficiency (NUE) is a critically important concept in the evaluation of crop production systems. Many agricultural soils of the world are deficient in one or more of the essential nutrients to support healthy and productive plant growth. Efficiency can be defined in many ways and easily increased food production could be achieved by expanding the land area under crops and by increasing yields per unit area through intensive farming. Environmental nutrient use efficiency can be quite different than agronomic or economic efficiency and maximizing efficiency may not always be effective. Worldwide, elemental deficiencies for essential macro and micro nutrients and toxicities by Al, Mn, Fe, S, B, Cu, Mo, Cr, Cl, Na, and Si have been reported.

1. WELCOME

2. Seminar on
ADVANCED TECHNIQUES TO INCREASE NUTRIENT USE EFFICIENCY
Presentation by
SHETE VIKRAM SHIVAJI
(REG.NO. 2018A/M115)
Research guide
Dr . S. L. Waikar
Seminar incharge
Dr. Syed Ismail
Head
Department of Soil Science and Agril. Chemistry
VNMKV, Parbhani.

3. Contents:
Introduction
Nutrient use efficiency
 Definition
 Classification
1. Agronomic efficiency
2.Physiological efficiency
3.Apparent recovery efficiency
 Importance
 Nutrient use efficiency of different nutrients
Techniques to increase nutrient use efficiency
1) Fertigation
2) Nano-technology
3) Nutrient briquettes
4) Seed priming
5) Use of nutrients
6) Use of amendments
7) Water management

4. INTRODUCTION
 Nutrient use efficiency (NUE) is a critically important concept in the evaluation of crop production
systems.
 Many agricultural soils of the world are deficient in one or more of the essential nutrients to
support healthy and productive plant growth.
 Efficiency can be defined in many ways and easily increased food production could be achieved by
expanding the land area under crops and by increasing yields per unit area through intensive
farming.
 Environmental nutrient use efficiency can be quite different than agronomic or economic efficiency
and maximizing efficiency may not always be effective.
 Worldwide, elemental deficiencies for essential macro and micro nutrients and toxicities by Al, Mn,
Fe, S, B, Cu, Mo, Cr, Cl, Na, and Si have been reported (Paul et al., (2008) International Plant
Nutrition Institute)

5. Fertilizer use efficiency can be optimized by fertilizer management practices that apply
nutrients at the right rate, time and place.
Nutrient use efficiency is a critically important concept for evaluating crop production
systems and is greatly impacted by fertilizer management as well as soil and plant- water
relationships.
Nutrient use efficiency can be expressed several ways:
Four agronomic indices commonly used to describe nutrient use efficiency are: Partial
factor productivity, Agronomic efficiency, Apparent recovery efficiency and Physiological
efficiency (Baligar et al., Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis).

6. • Nutrient Use Efficiency : Nutrient use efficiency is defined as the amount of dry matter
produced per unit of nutrient applied or absorbed.
• Nutrient Use Efficiency : Physiological efficiency X Apparent recovery efficiency
• Classification of NUE:
1. Agronomic Efficiency: It is defined as the economic production obtained per unit of nutrient
applied. It is calculated by the following equation:
(Grain yield of fertilized crop in kg) - (Grain yield of unfertilized crop in kg)
Agronomic Efficiency = _________________________________________________________________
(Quantity of fertilizer applied in kg)
(Robert et al., Turkish Journal of Agriculture and
Forestry)

7. 2. Physiological efficiency: It is defined as the biological production obtained per unit of
nutrient applied. It is calculated by the following equation:
(Total dry matter yield of (Total dry matter yield of
fertilized crop in kg) unfertilized crop in kg)
Physiological efficiency = _________________________________________________________________________
(Nutrient uptake by fertilized crop in kg) - (Nutrient uptake by unfertilized crop in kg)
3. Apparent recovery efficiency: It is defined as the quantity of nutrient absorbed per unit of
nutrient applied. It is calculated by the following equation:
• Apparent recovery efficiency = (Nutrient uptake by (Nutrient uptake by
fertilized crop) unfertilized crop)
____________________________________________________
(Quantity of fertilizer applied )
(Robert et al., Turkish Journal of Agriculture and

8. Importance of nutrient use efficiency:
• To increase the overall performance of cropping systems.
• Providing economically optimum nourishment to the crop.
• Minimizing nutrient losses from the field and
• Supporting agricultural system sustainability through contributions to soil
fertility or other soil quality components.
(Paul et al.,(2008) Nutrient/fertilizer use efficiency)

9.  Cont…
 NUE is a critically important concept for evaluating crop production systems
and can be greatly impacted by fertilizer management as well as soil- and plant-
water relationships.
 NUE indicates the potential for nutrient losses to the environment from cropping
systems to meet the increasing societal demand for food, fiber and fuel.
(Paul et al.,(2008) Nutrient/fertilizer use
efficiency)

10.  Nutrient use efficiency of different nutrients:
Nutrient Efficiency Cause of low efficiency
Nitrogen 30-50 % Immobilization, volatilization, de-nitrification ,
Leaching
Phosphorus 15-20% Fixation in soils Al – P, Fe – P, Ca – P
Potassium 70-80% Fixation in clay - lattices
Sulphur 8-10% Immobilization, Leaching with water
Micro-nutrients
(Zn, Fe, Cu, Mn, B)
1-2% Fixation in soils
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286045815

11. Techniques to increase nutrient
use efficiency
(1) Fertigation :
Application of fertilizer through micro irrigation water. This technique was first started
in Israel.
 It is precisely a method of slow application of water and fertilizer in the form of
discrete continuous drops, trickled/sprayed through a mechanical device called emitters
into the root zone of the plant according to its consumptive use and demand.
 Fertigation in a way can be compared with spoon feeding to plants. It ensures supply
of plant nutrients to the root zone along with micro irrigation system.
(Patel et al .,(2017) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci)

12.  Need of fertigation :
• Decline in crop response to fertilizers.
• Stagnation in fertilizer production.
• Weakening relationship between fertilizer use and food grain production.
• Increasing dependence on fertilizer imports.
(Senthilkumar et al.,(2017) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci)

13. Advantages of fertigation:
(i) Increase in crop yield by 25–30%.
(ii) Savings in fertilizers by about 30%.
(iii) Precise application and uniform distribution of fertilizers.
(iv) Nutrients can be applied as per plant requirements.
(v) Increases nutrient use efficiency by minimizing loss of nutrients.
(vi) Exact concentration of fertilizers can be injected as per requirement of crops.
(vii) Cost effective technique due to saving of time, labour and energy.
(Patel et al, (2017) Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci)

14. Foliar Application:
• Foliar application refers to the spraying of fertilizer solution on foliage (leaves) of growing plants.
Normally, these solutions are prepared in low concentrations (2–3%) either to supply any one plant
nutrient or a combination of nutrients.
1. Advantages:
• Foliar spraying is useful to correct the nutrient deficiency growing crops.
• In extremely dry weather condition where the plants are not able to take up nutrients from soil
because of low moisture contents of soil, foliar spray is useful.
• When quick response of fertilizer (especially nitrogenous fertilizer) is required.
2. Disadvantages:
• Marginal leaf burns or scorching, may occur if strong solutions are used.
• As a solution of low concentration, only a small quantity of nutrients can be supplied at a time.
. • It cannot be recommended as a sole method of application of fertilizer.
• Only urea and micro nutrients can be applied through this method.
(Das et al., (2015). PFDCs research finding on
fertigation)

15. 2) Nanotechnology:
• “Nanotechnology as design, characterization, production and application of
structure, devices and systems controlling shape, size and composition at the nano-
scale.’’
• Different nano-enabled products in agriculture:
1. Nanofertilizers
2. Nanopesticides
3. Nanoherbicide
Nanofertilizer :
Nano fertilizer may be define as the nano particles which can directly supply
of essential nutrient for plant growth, have higher nutrient use efficiency and can be
delivered in a timely manner to a rhizosphere target or by foliar spray.
Nanomaterials are defined as materials that have a single unit, with size
between 1 nanometer (nm) and 100 nm.
( Ramprasad et al., (2017) JISSS )

16. Types of Nano-fertilizers:
A. Macronutrient Nano-fertilizers:
Macronutrient nano-fertilizers are chemically composed of one or more
macronutrient elements such as nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P),
potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), and calcium (Ca), thus being able to
supply one or more of these essential elements to plants.
B. Micronutrient Nano-fertilizers:
Micronutrient nano-fertilizers are chemically composed of one or more
micronutrient elements in nano form such as zinc (Zn) iron (Fe),
copper ( Cu), silicon (Si), nickel (Ni) etc.
( Ramprasad et al., 2017)

17. WHY TO USE NANO-FERTILIZERS:
Nano-fertilizers are more beneficial as compared to chemical fertilizers.
(i) Three-times increase in Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE)
(ii) 80-100 times less requirement of chemical fertilizers
(iii) 10 times more stress tolerant by the crops
(iv) Complete bio-source, so eco-friendly
(v) 30% more nutrient mobilization by the plants.
(vi) 17-54 % improvement in the crop yield.
(Qureshi et al ., 2018 . Int.J.Microbial.App.Sci.7(2)

18. (3)Use of Amendments:
• Soil amendments:-
Soil amendments are organic or inorganic matter added to the soil to improve
texture , water retention , drainage or aeration.
(1) Gypsum (CaSO4 .2H2O):
Gypsum is the best soil amendment for reclamation of the sodic soil.
• An addition of gypsum improves physical conditions of soil. Soils become flocculated
and drainage improves, pH is lowered down to a desirable level.
• Besides gypsum, iron pyrite is also used on calcareous sodic soil.
(Patil et al., Fundamentals of Soil Science)

19. (2)Sulphur :
In case of alkali soils that contain free calcium carbonate, addition of
sulphur, sulphuric acid, iron and aluminium sulphate, green manure etc.
reclaim the soil very effectively. The acidity developed during the course of
their decomposition in soil neutralises alkalinity.
(3)Lime:-
Liming Materials: Eg. Lime stone, Quick lime, Hydrated lime,
Dolomitic lime, Basic slag, Chalk, etc. used for reclamation of acid soil.
(Patil et al.,2003, Fundamentals of Soil Science)

20. (4) Nutrient briquettes:
• Briquetting is the method used to convert loose biomass into high-density solid blocks,
while during pelletization, the fine particle raw material is compacted to pellets under
pressure.
• The briquettes are a unique fertilizer concept apart from the conventional fertilizers in
which the fertilizer is manufactured into a briquette approximately as the size of the end
of one`s finger (about 2.75 gm) as opposed to the more common granular prill sized
fertilizers or liquid fertilizers.
(Sunil et al., International Journal of Plant & Soil Science (2018)

21. • The land application of briquette is also unique in that it is banded below the soil
surface between planted rows.
• Surface applied urea is reported to reach nitrogen loss as high as 35% however;
buried briquettes only lose approximately 4% of its nitrogen, which is a
considerable improvement in nitrogen use efficiency
(Patil et al.,(2018)International Journal of Plant and Soil Science)

22. (5)Seed priming:
• Seed priming is the controlled hydration technique in which seeds are
soaked in water or low osmotic potential solution to a point where the
germination related metabolic activities begin in the seeds but radical
emergence does not occur.
• Seed priming process:
• Priming allows some of the metabolic processes necessary for germination
to occur without germination take place.
• This prevents the seeds from absorbing in enough water for radical
protrusion, thus suspending the seeds in the lag phase.
• This hydration is sufficient to permit pre-germinative metabolic events but
insufficient to allow radicle protrusion through the seed coat.
(Javid et al.,(2013) International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences)

23.  Seed Priming Methods:
There are four common methods utilized for priming seeds:
(1) Hydro-priming
(2) Osmotic priming
(3) Solid matrix priming
(4) Bio-priming
(Javid et al., (2013).International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences)

24. 1) Hydro-priming:
• Hydro-priming involves soaking the seeds in water before sowing and may
or may not be followed by air-drying of the seeds.
• Although, soaking seeds in water and drying before sowing is the easiest
way to achieve hydration.
• Effect of Hydro-priming on Wheat Seed:
Hydro-priming of wheat seed improves:
(1) Vigor
(2) Germination percentage
(3) Seedlings Establishments
(4) Uniform Growth
(5) Water use efficiency
(6) Grain yield
(Javid et al.,2013 International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences)

25. (2) Osmotic priming:
• Osmotic priming is the soaking of seeds in solutions containing chemicals
such as:
1) Mannitol
2) Potassium nitrate (KNO3)
3) Potassium chloride (KCl)
4) Polyethylene glycol (PEG)
5) Sodium chloride (NaCl)
(Javid et al., 2013. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences)

26. 3)Solid matrix priming:
• Solid matrix priming involves the incubation of seeds in a solid, insoluble
matrix, such as vermiculite or another highly water absorbent polymer, with
a limited amount of water allowing for slow imbibition.
4) Bio-priming:
• Bio-priming is a process of biological seed treatment that refers to
combination of seed hydration (physiological aspect of disease control) and
inoculation (biological aspect of disease control) of seeds with beneficial
organism to protect the seeds.
(Javid et al., 2013 International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences)

27. 5) Halo priming:
• Halo priming refers to soaking of seeds in solution of inorganic salts i.e. NaCl,
KNO3, CaCl2,CaSO4, etc.
Results:
Improvement in seed germination, seedling emergence and establishment
and final crop yield in salt affected soils in response to halo priming.
6) Hormonal priming:
• Hormonal priming is the pre seed treatment with different hormones i.e.
salicylic acid, ascorbate, kinetin,etc. which promote the growth and
development of the seedlings.
• (Javid et al., International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences)

28. (6)Water management: (Das et al., 2014, ICAR Research Complex)
Strategies for efficient management of water for agricultural use involves
conservation of water, integrated water use, optimal allocation of water and enhancing
water use efficiency by crops.
1.Conservation of water:
• In-situ conservation of water can be achieved by reduction of runoff loss and
enhancement of infiltrated water and reduction of water losses through deep
seepage and direct evaporation from soil.
• Ex-situ conservation of water can be achieved by harvesting of excess water in
storage ponds for its reuse for irrigation purpose.
2.Integrated water use:
Integrated use of water from different sources viz. by irrigation to supplement profile
stored rainwater, conjunctive use of surface-water and groundwater, poor and good
quality water and recycled (waste) water for irrigation.

29. 3. Enhancing water-use efficiency crops:
• Water-use efficiency by crops can be improved by selection of crops and
cropping systems based on available water supplied and increasing seasonal
evapotranspiration (ET).
• The later can be achieved by selection of irrigation method, irrigation
scheduling, tillage, mulching and fertilization.
(Das et al., 2014, ICAR Research Complex)

30. (7)Nitrogen use efficiency:
Practices for improving nitrogen use efficiency
Various strategies for improving nitrogen use efficiency will be discussed below:
1) SITE SPECIFIC NITROGEN MANAGEMENT (SSNM):
SSNM is a concept which involves field specific N management strategies that includes
quantitative knowledge of field specific variability in crop N requirement and expected soil N
supplying power.
2) INTEGRATED NITROGEN MANAGEMENT (INM):
INM involves optimum use of indigenous N components i.e. crop residues, organic
manure, biological N fixation as well as chemical fertilizer and their complementary interactions to
increases N recovery.
3) Slow release fertilizers:
Neem coated urea is widely used and demonstrated for slow release N fertilizer in India.
(Yadav et al., Agricultural Reviews, 38 (1) 2017 )

31. 4) IMPROVED METHOD OF N APPLICATION:
• Among the various methods of N application, deep placement, use of super
granules and foliar spray of N fertilizer can enhance the recovery of applied N
fertilizer.
• Foliar feeding of nitrogen either through urea spray, can also improve NUE as it
reduce different losses i.e. runoff, volatilization, immobilization and de-
nitrification prior to being absorbed by the plant.
• (Yadav et al., Agricultural Reviews, 38 (1) 2017 )

32. Table 1: Effect of fertigation and conventional method of fertilizer application on growth
parameter of banana (Av. Of 3 years) location: Jalgaon
Sr.No Treatments
Plant height
(cm)
Stem girth
(cm)
Days to
flower
Days to
harvest
T1
100%RD-NK through
drip
185 73.0 282 388
T2 75%RD-NK through drip 181 70.8 284 393
T3 50%RD-NK through drip 176 69.4 289 402
T4
100%RD-NK through
soil
180 69.7 291 398
T5 75%RD-NK through soil 175 68.6 293 406
T6 50%RD-NK through soil 170 67.2 299 416
S.E± 1.67 0.74 4.01 4.10
C.D.(=0.05) 5.27 2.32 NS 12.91
(Bhalerao et al., 2010. An Asian journal of soil science.Vol.4 No.2:220-224)

33. TABLE 2: Effect of fertigation and conventional method of fertilizer application on yield
parameter of banana location: Jalgaon
Sr. No Treatments Hands bunch-1
Fingers
bunch-1
Bunch weight
(kg)
Yield (t ha-1)
T1
100%RD NK through
drip
8.7 151 20.6 91.4
T2
75%RD-NK through
drip
8.3 144 20.0 88.8
T3
50%RD-NK through
drip
7.9 138 17.9 78.5
T4
100%RD-NK through
soil
8.2 140 18.8 83.7
T5
75%RD-NK through
soil
7.8 132 17.5 77.8
T6
50%RD-NK through
soil
7.5 126 15.4 68.4
S.E± 0.12 2.38 0.30 1.04
C.D.(=0.05) 8.7 7.48 0.95 3.27
(Bhalerao et al., 2010. An Asian journal of soil science. Vol.4 No.2:220-224)

34. Table 3: Effect of fertigation and conventional method of fertilizer application on nutrient
uptake by banana (Av. of 3 years) (110: 35 : 330 NPK Kg ha-1) location: Jalgaon
Sr.
No
Treatments Kg ha-1 Kg t-1
N P K N P K
T1
100 % RD-NK through
drip
685 127 1275 7.63 1.40 14.0
T2
75 % RD-NK through
drip
634 118 1193 7.21 1.32 13.4
T3
50 % RD-NK through
drip
561 104 1051 7.13 1.30 13.2
T4
100 % RD-NK through
soil
606 111 1135 7.32 1.33 13.6
T5
75 % RD-NK through
soil
550 99 1033 7.13 1.28 13.3
T6
50 % RD-NK through
soil
465 82 888 6.84 1.18 13.0
S.E. + 19.02 2.5 20.4 0.22 0.04 0.16
C.D. (P=0.05) 59.9 7.9 64.1 NS NS 0.50
Bhalerao et al.,2010. An Asian journal of soil science. Vol.4 No.2:220-224

35. Table 4: Seed cotton yield as influenced by various treatments (100:50:50 NPK Kg ha-1)
Treatment
Seed cotton (q ha-1) Pooled
mean
Cotton stalk (q ha-1) Pooled
mean
2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
T1 - 100% RD through drip
(WSF)
16.45 17.58 16.01 16.68 36.78 38.80 38.07 37.88
T2 - 75% RD through drip
(WSF)
14.90 15.43 14.74 15.02 36.42 36.78 33.75 35.65
T3 - 100% RD soil application 15.80 15.00 14.19 15.00 38.66 36.00 35.78 36.81
T4 - 100% RD + Zn (4 kg ha-1)
+ Fe (5 kg ha-1) through drip
(WSF)
18.10 18.69 17.78 18.19 42.40 43.08 40.21 41.89
T5 - 75% RD + Zn (3 kg ha-1) +
Fe (3.75 kg Fe ha-1) through
drip (WSF)
16.50 17.63 16.85 16.99 39.30 41.30 37.86 39.49
T6 - 100% RD + Zn (4 kg ha-1) + Fe
(5 kg ha-1) soil application
17.50 16.12 14.56 16.06 41.48 35.92 33.44 36.94
T7 - 75% RD through drip (Urea,
Phosphoric acid, MOP)
14.00 14.45 13.72 14.05 34.67 33.14 29.45 32.42
SE (m) ± 1.20 0.75 0.77 0.70 1.73 1.71 1.99 1.72
CD at 5% 3.57 2.24 2.28 2.09 4.87 5.08 5.93 5.11
C.V 14.87 9.21 9.99 9.01 9.10 11.16
(Mangare et al., International journal of chemical studies (2018)) location: Akola

36. Table 5: Soil fertility status (kg ha-1) of soil after harvest of cotton as influenced by various treatments (2011-12)
Treatments
Available nutrients (kg ha-1)
Nitrogen Phosphorous Potassium
T1 –100 % RD through drip(WSF) 227.2 16.15 416.9
T2 –75 % RD through drip (WSF) 220.1 13.32 398.7
T3 –100 % RD soil application (Urea, DAP, MOP) 225.2 15.19 403.4
T4 –100 % RD through drip + Zn(4 kg Zn ha-1)+Fe (5 kg Fe ha-
1) through drip (WSF)
229.0 18.00 429.9
T5 –75 % RD through drip + Zn (3 kg Zn ha-1)+ Fe (3.75 kg Fe ha-
1) through drip (WSF)
221.3 13.95 400.6
T6 –100 % RD soil application + soil application of Zn (4 kg Zn ha-
1) + Fe (5 kg Fe ha-1) (Urea, DAP, MOP)
231.0 19.22 406.1
T7 –75 % RD through drip (Urea, Phosphoric acid, MOP) 211.1 10.91 342.3
SE (m) ± 3.43 0.31 7.94
CD at 5 % 10.51 0.94 23.61
Initial status 189.3 15.88 338.32
Treatment
Available nutrient kg ha-1
Mangare et al., 2018. International journal of chemical studies .6(2):42-46. location: Akola

37. Table 6. Effect of different size nano-particle on plant growth parameters of maize
Sl.
No.
Treatments Root
Length
(cm)
Root
Volume
(cc)
Shoot
Length
(Cm)
DMY* (g) P content (%) Uptake (mg)
Shoot Root Shoot Root Shoot Root
1. Control 400 10 13 0.41 0.26 0.29 0.16 0.4 0.41
2. HA (<200nm) 2479 60 61 12.46 4.54 0.55 0.13 68.5 14.00
3. TCP (<100nm) 2132 50 57 10.85 3.71 0.52 0.25 56.4 9.20
4. Stone 3 (42
nm)
2045 45 52 9.98 3.01 0.45 0.20 44.9 6.00
5. HGRP3
(28nm)
1850 40 45 9.25 2.27 0.40 0.15 37.0 3.40
6. HGRP3 (53
µm)
830 25 26 3.94 0.72 0.20 0.19 7.8 1.36
(Kundu et al., (2010). Journal of ISSS ; 59(4) location: Jodhpur

38. Table 7. Nano phosphate recovery in Aridosol after 15 days
Sr. No. Nano P
fertilizer added
(mg kg-1)
Recovery of P (%) from
Nano RP KH2PO4
1. 2.5 45.0 29.8
2. 5.0 40.8 42.2
3. 7.5 32.3 44.6
4. 10.0 24.2 59.2
(Kundu et al., (2010) Journal of ISSS ; 59(4)) location: Jodhpur

39. Table 8. Extent of P solubilization of nano rock phosphate by Pseudomonas stiata
Substrate % P solubilized
24 h 48 h 72 h
0.1% TCP Powder-control 5.44 10.23 12.84
0.1% TCP Powder-inoculated 41.94 75.77 82.61
0.1% BRP (nano RP 100nm) control 9.83 14.20 16.23
0.1% BRP (nano RP 100nm) inoculated 11.45 33.73 36.15
0.1% BRP ( 125 um) control 5.38 6.56 6.83
0.1% BRP ( 125 um) inoculated 8.56 10.49 14.50
(Kundu et al., (2010) Journal of ISSS ; 59(4)) location: Jodhpur

40. Table 9 : Available potassium of soil after nano fertilizer applications at different
incubation days.
Incubation
Days
Available potassium (mg/kg)
Control Conventional
fertilizer
Nano fertilizer
K-nf
0 0.19 1.06 1.51
15 0.12 0.82 1.33
30 0.09 0.48 0.70
Source: Rajonee et al., (2017). Advances in Nano particles 6; 62-74 location: Udaipur

41. Table 10 : Effect of nano-materials on nutrient use efficiency of wheat under different fertilizer doses
Treatment
Recovery efficiency (%) Agronomic efficiency
(kg grain/ kg nutrient applied)
N P K N P K
50 % RDF 88.3 32.3 340.5 0.33 0.83 1.25
100 % RDF 61.6 22.8 218.0 0.22 0.55 0.83
50 % RDF +
NM
104.8 43.3 380.5 0.49 0.97 1.45
100 % RDF +
NM
42.5 22.7 153.0 0.19 0.47 0.70
(Kumar et al., 2014)
RDF:150:60:40 kg/ ha NM :3 kg /ha (NM of gypsum and nanofertilizer)

42. Table: 11 Effect of zeolite based N fertilizers on maize yield and quality
parameters
Treatments Inceptisol Alfisols
Grain
yield/plant (g)
100 grain
wt(g)
Crude protein
(%)
Grain
yield/plant (g)
100 grain
wt(g)
Crude
protein(%)
T1- Urea 268 27.8 3.62 156 25.8 3.00
T2-Zeolite +Urea 232 28.2 3.32 203 25.4 3.25
T3- Nanozeolite +Urea 238 28.0 3.85 133 25.7 3.22
T4- Zeourea 295 29.3 3.90 173 27.1 3.70
T5-Nanozeourea 291 29.8 4.90 254 29.4 4.70
S.Ed 23.01 1.11 0.28 27.59 1.27 0.41
CD (0.05) 47.00 NS 0.57 56.36 2.60 0.83
)
Souce : Manikandan et al. IJPSS,9(4): 1-9, 2016

43. Table 12. Effects of briquettes on movement of available nitrogen (kg/ha) in soil%
DAS-Days after sowing, G.M- Grand mean, SE(m)- Standard error mean, C.D- Critical difference at 5
Treatments 30 DAS depth (cm) 60 DAS depth (cm) At last picking depth (cm)
15-15 15-30 30-15 30-30 15-15 15-30 30-15 30-30 15-15 15-30 30-15 30-30
T1 Absolute
Control
159.15 165.06 166.91 165.23 163.91 161.50 154.89 182.20 202.94 179.53 168.12 191.58
T2 NPK 120:60:60
OF Soil Aplication
166.99 173.31 170.91 167.77 167.77 155.21 164.40 187.86 205.75 189.72 159.93 195.99
T3 RDF
80:40:40
193.64 208.91 193.64 168.23 165.23 181.83 187.44 189.00 204.48 163.07 187.72 198.26
T4 120:60:60
NPK
177.96 196.95 190.51 165.51 168.23 176.42 183.44 183.70 206.93 217.16 187.72 194.29
T5 120:60:60+20
Zn
177.96 190.96 168.56 170.91 170.91 155.40 155.20 184.01 205.49 164.64 170.56 193.86
G.M 177.50 187.03 178.18 163.91 163.91 166.01 169.07 185.35 205.12 173.89 171.85 194.79
S.E ± 6.62 5.80 5.75 7.18 7.19 5.77 5.40 5.23 5.90 7.55 5.80 5.98
CD at 5% 19.94 17.89 17.31 22.13 22.15 17.79 18.79 16.65 18.19 22.73 17.46 18.03
(PATIL et al., (2015) International Journal of plant and soil Science 24(2)

44. Table.13 Effects of treatments on seed cotton yield (q ha-1) and Stalk yield (q ha-1) at various
growth stages of Bt-cotton
Treatment Treatment details Seed cotton yield q/ha Stalk yield q/ha
T1 Absolute control 10.74 54.35
T2 RDF 12.15 63.50
T3 Soluble fertizers 15.59 74.84
T4 NPK briquettes 11.6 65.14
T5 NPK + Zn briquettes 14.11 65.64
Grand mean 12.85 64.69
SEm(±) 0.173 0.51
CD at 5% 0.539 1.54
(Sunil et al., Int .J . Curr. Microbiol .App. Sci (2017) )

45. Table 14: Effects of treatments on plant height (cm) at various growth stages of Bt-
cotton
Treatments Treatment details
Plant height (cm)
30 DAS 60 DAS Boll formation Last picking
T1
Absolute Control(Drip
irrigation)
21.80 58.10 65.28 84.05
T2 RDF(Soil) 31.68 59.55 70.47 86.65
T3
Soluble(fertigation)
Fertilizers
35.50 70.0 85.51 101.50
T4 NPK Briquetes with Drip 33.15 69.55 76.86 95.15
T5
NPK + Zn Briquettes with
Drip
35.45 70.80 83.33 99.25
G rand mean 31.51 65.60 76.29 93.32
S.Em (±) 0.334 0.278 0.223 0.563
CD at 5% 1.042 0.865 0.696 1.754
Sunil et al., Int .J . Curr. Microbiol .App. Sci (2017) 6(11

46. Fig- Effects of treatments on plant height (cm) at various growth stages of Bt-
cotton
Sunil et al., Int .J . Curr. Microbiol .App. Sci (2017) 6(11

47. Table.15 Effects of treatments on total no of boll/plant (No.) and boll weight (gm) at
various growth stages of Bt-cotton
Treatments Treatment details Total no of boll/plant (No.) Boll weight(gm)
T1 Absolute Control 44.88 4.37
T2 RDF 47.87 5.19
T3 Soluble Fertilizers 51.83 5.75
T4 NPK Briquettes 51.63 5.25
T5 NPK + Zn Briquettes 51.77 5.55
Grand mean 49.59 5.22
SEm (±) 0.432 0.15
CD at 5% 1.345 0.469
(Sunil et al., Int .J . Curr. Microbiol .App. Sci (2017) )

48. Sunil et al., Int .J . Curr. Microbiol .App. Sci (2017) 6(11
Fig- Effects of treatments on total no of boll/plant (No.) and boll weight (gm) at various
growth stages of Bt-cotton

49. Conclusion:-
 Increased NUE in plants is vital to enhance the yield and quality of crops, reduce nutrient
input cost and improve soil, water and air quality.
 Different advanced techniques such as fertigation, nano-technology, nutrient briquettes,
seed priming, soil amendment and water management practices are adopted for
increasing nutrient use efficiency.
 For tissue cultured banana under drip irrigation, application of 100 % recommended
dose of fertilizers through drip, indicating 25 % saving in N and K fertilizers due to use of
fertigation technique.
 It may be concluded that maximum nitrogen was retained by the treatment of fertigation
at all depths followed by application of briquette in root rhizosphere.
 Growth and yield of Bt cotton showed significantly superior results with the application of
RDF through a fertigation (soluble fertilizer) followed by multinutrient NPK + Zn briquettes
application.

50. THANK YOU