Pulses occupy a unique position in every system of Indian farming as a main, catch, cover, green manure and intercrop. These are the main source of protein particularly for vegetarians and contribute about 14 per cent of total protein of an average Indian diet. These cover an area of about 23.47 million hectares with an annual production of 18.34 million tones and productivity of 730 kg ha-1 in India (Anon., 2014). The productivity of pulses continues to be low, as they are generally grown in rainfed areas under poor management conditions and face various kind of biotic and abiotic stresses. Unfavourable weather, low availability of quality seeds, socio-economic factors, weed infestation, less fertile and nutrient deficient soils etc. Among these constraints, recently emerged constraint is micronutrient deficiency which is one of the cause for reduction in yield of pulses. Hence, proper management of micronutrient can enhance the production. Bio-fertilizers are one of the best modern tools for pulse production. These are cost effective, eco-friendly and renewable source of plant nutrients in sustainable pulse production. These are microbial inoculants which enhance crop production through improving the nutrient supply and their availability.

2. SIDDU M
PG15 AGR7052

3. Sequence of seminar
Introduction
Micronutrient – Importance
Management
Biofertilizers – Introduction
Classification
Use of biofertilizers
Conclusion

4. • Pulses are rich in protein and low in fat content
•India is the largest producer and consumer of pulses in the
world.
•In India- area - 24.97 m ha , production - 18.5 m t ,
productivity 730 kg/ha

5. Fig.1 Major pulses in India and their production
• Fig.1 Production of Gram is highest among pulses i.e. 8.8 m t in
India which is followed by Tur 3.2 m t
Source:- DOC

6. Fig.5 Annual growth rate of projected supply and demand
of food items in India
Source: FAO, 2012

7. How to Improve Productivity
• Proper method of sowing
• Soil fertility
• Irrigation
• Weed management
• Plant protection
• Management of micronutrients

10. Fig.6 Emerging deficiencies of
micronutrients in Indian soils

11. States
% Sample deficient
Zn Cu Fe Mn
Andra pradesh 49 <1 3 1
Assam 34 <1 2
Bihar 54 3 6 2
Gujarat 24 4 8 4
Himachal pradesh 42 0 27 5
Karnataka 73 5 35 17
Kerala 34 31 <1 0
Madya pradesh 44 <1 7 1
Maharashtra 86 1 24 0
Punjab 48 <1 14 2
Tamil nadu 58 6 17 6
Uttar pradesh 46 1 6 3
West bengal 36 <1 0 3
TOTAL 48 3 4 5
Indian institute of soil science (2008)
Table.1 Micronutrient deficiency in various
states

12. Aspects causing micronutrient deficiency
 Highly leached acidic sandy soils
 Calcareous and saline-alkaline soils very high
in pH
e.g. UP, Punjab and Bihar
 Intensive cropping with high doses of
commercial fertilizers (Macro-nutrients)
 Application of high doses of lime at one time.
 Low addition of organic matter

13. Element Functions or importance
Iron
Helps in chlorophyll formation, absorption of other nutrients. Essential for the
synthesis of proteins contained in the chloroplasts.
Manganese
Acts as catalyst in oxidation and reduction reactions within the plant tissues.
Helps in chlorophyll formation, supports movement of iron in the plant,
counteracting the bad effect of poor aeration.
Boron
It is a constituent of cell membrane and essential for cell division. Acts as a
regulated of potassium/calcium ratio in the plant, helps in nitrogen absorption
and translocation of sugars in plant.
Zinc
Constitute of several enzyme system which regulate various metabolic reaction
in the plant. Associated with water uptake and water relation in the plant.
Copper
Act as "electron carrier" in enzymes, helps in utilization of iron in chlorophyll
synthesis. It neutralizes the harmful conditions in certain peat soils when applied
in large quantity.
Molybdenum
Acts in enzyme systems which bring about oxidation reduction reactions.
Essential for the process of atmospheric nitrogen fixation.
Chlorine
The exact role which, chlorine plays in plant nutrition has not yet been clearly
defined. It requires for proper plant development. From the point of view of soil
fertility, plants requires one kg of chlorine for each four thousand kg of dry matter
which they produce.
Importance of micronutrients

14. Fig.7 TYPICAL NUTRIENT DEFICIENCY SYPTOMS SEEN
ON PLANT FOLIAGE

15. Nutrient Soil (mg/kg) Plants (mg/kg)
Zinc 6 10 - 20
Iron 2.5 - 4.5 50
Manganese 2.0 15 - 25
Copper
0.2 2-5
Boron 0.5 5-30
Molybdenum 0.2 0.03 - 0.15
Table.2 Critical levels of deficiency of micronutrients
in soil and plants
Ali and Singh., 2004

16. Soil
Available nutrient ( kg / ha)
Zn Fe Cu Mn
Inceptisols
Kanpur 0.48 10.40 2.87 27.7
Faizabad 0.25 5.5 1.44 42.2
Delhi 0.61 3.9 1.91 45.7
Varanasi 0.87 11.3 3.76 19.6
Vertisols
Sehore 0.50 7.6 1.54 19.9
Raipur 0.55 9.1 1.51 23.6
Gulbarga 0.47 (0.20) 8.0 (3.5) 1.85 (0.81) 22.7 (10.08)
Alfisols
Hyderabad 0.42 9.0 1.48 43.5
Ranchi 0.65 15.2 1.50 34.8
Bengaluru 0.22 11.4 1.55 46.4
Table.3 Mean of different micronutrients in 10 soil
profiles
IIPR, Kanpur Srinivasarao et al., (2002)

18.  Addition of chemical micro-nutrient fertilizers (off farm
inputs)
 Organic manures/residues (on- farm inputs)
 Cultivation of fertilizer responsive plants
 Several inorganic salts, synthetic chelates
Deficiency of a micronutrient can be corrected through

19. S.No Materials Element Forms Content (%)
1 Zinc sulphate. Zn 21.0
2 Manganese Sulphate Mn 30.5
3 Ammonium Molybdate Mo 52.0
4 Borax (For soil application) B 10.5
5 Solubor (Foliar spray) B 19.0
6 Copper Sulphate Cu 24.0
7 Ferrous Sulphate Total Iron
Ferrous & Ferric
19.5
19.0 & 0.50
8 Zinc Sulphate mono-hydrate Zn 33.0
9 Zinc Phosphate Zn3(PO4)2.4H2O Zn + P 19.5
10 Chelated Zn (EDTA form) Zn 12.0
11 Chelated Fe (EDTA form) Fe 12.0
12 Boronated super phosphate B+P2O5 0.18B +16.0 P2O5
13 Zincated urea Zn+N 2.0 Zn + 43.0 N
Table.5 Micronutrient contents of fertilizers
Approved under FCO (Fertilizer Control Order)

20. Micronutrie
nt
Material containing
micronutrient
Safe range of application (kg/ha)
Soil application (kg) Foliar spray
Fe Ferrous sulphate
15.0-25.0
(once in 2-3 years) 1-2% Ferrous sulphate
Mn
Manganese
sulphate
12.5 (every year) 0.5% Manganese sulphate
Zn Zinc sulphate
12.5-25.0
(once in 2-3 years)
5% Zinc sulphate
Cu Copper sulphate
5
(once in 2-3 years)
0.25-2.2 kg in 180-360 literes of
water
B Borax
1.25
(every year)
0.5-2.2 kg in 180-360 literes of
water
Mo
Sodium
molybdenum
0.9
0.25 kg in 180-360 literes of
water
Table.6 Common fertilizers rates of micronutrients for soil
application and foliar spray

21. COPPER SULPATE COBALT
FERRIC CHLORIDE
MOLYBDENUM
POTASSIUMHUMATE
Boron
zinc

22. The common methods of micronutrient application are
 Soil Application: e.g. B, Cu, Zn
 Foliar Application: e.g. Fe, Mn, B
 Addition through mixed fertilizers: Uniform spreading
e.g. phosphates mixed with boron, molybdenum or zinc.
 Seed soaking: e.g. Mo
 Seed coating: e.g. Mo
Methods of application

23. Treatments Pods weight
/plant (g)
Seed yield
(kg/ha)
Pod yield
(kg/ha)
S1 : ZnSO4 @ 250 mg / kg of seed 40.20 1478.6 1856.0
S2 : Borax @ 100 mg / kg of seeds 42.70 1536.3 1863.7
S3 : Arappu (Albizia) leaf powder @ 250 g/kg of
seeds
40.16 1529.3 1846.3
S4 : S1 + S2 34.40 1370.0 1700.0
S5 : S1 + S3 36.56 1347.7 1604.0
S6 : S2 + S3 35.31 1258.7 1572.7
S7 : S1 + S2 + S3 35.26 1240.3 1553.3
S0 : Control (without pelleting) 33.30 1119.3 1380.3
CD at 5% 4.42 3.40 6.41
Table.7 Effect of seed pelleting with micronutrients and leaf
powder on yield and its components of cowpea
Dharwad Dileepkumar et al. (2009)

24. Mallareddy et al. (2007)
Vertisols, Warangal(AP)
Treatments
Plant
height (cm)
Pods
plant-1
Seed yield
t ha-1
T1: 20:50:20 and 20 N:P2O5:K2O and S kg/ha 166 159 1.9
T2: T1 + boron at 10 kg/ha 175 175 2.1
T3: T1 + boron at 20 kg/ha 181 182 2.1
T4: T1 + sodium molybdate at 1.5 kg/ha 179 179 2.1
T5: T1 + sodium molybdate at 3.0 kg/ha 198 214 2.3
T6: T1 + chelated iron at 2.0 kg/ha 190 196 2.1
T7: T1 + chelated iron at 3.0 kg/ha 192 198 2.2
T8: T1 + seed treatment with boron at 4 g/kg seed 189 192 2.1
T9: T1 + seed treatment with sodium molybdate at 4 g/kg seed 195 204 2.2
T10: T1 + seed treatment with chelated iron at 4 g/kg seed 193 201 2.2
CD (5%) NS 21 0.24
Table.8 Influence of micronutrients on yield attributes and seed yield
of pigeonpea (ICPL 87119)

25. Treatment Yield
(kg ha -1 )
% Increase
over control
Net returns
Kg ha -1
B:C ratio
T1: control 418.97 - 3279 1.64
T2: 0.5% FeSO4 @ 25 DAS 511.92 22.18 4818 1.89
T3 :0.5% FeSO4 @ 45 DAS 505.99 20.76 4700 1.87
T4: T2+T3 529.01 26.26 4840 1.84
T5: 0.5% ZnSO4 @ 25 DAS 506.25 20.83 4530 1.81
T6: 0.5% ZnSO4 @ 45 DAS 518.30 23.70 4771 1.85
T7:T5+T6 510.77 21.91 4125 1.67
T8: 0.5% FeSO4 @ 25 DAS +
0.5% ZnSO4 @ 25 DAS
587.17 40.14 5825 1.98
T9: :0.5% FeSO4 @ 45 DAS +
0.5% ZnSO4 @ 45 DAS
599.54 43.09 6076 2.02
CD(5%) 67.06
Table.9 Response of cowpea to foliar nutrition of zinc
and iron
Oxisols, Kerala Anitha et al.(2005)

26. Treatments No of
pods/plant
Seed yield
(g/plant)
100 seed
weight(g)
Seed yield
(q/ha)
% Increase
yield over
check
T1 1365 538.45 11.34 28.57 13.64
T2 1294 461.87 11.1 25.14
Table.10 Effect of pulse magic on yield attributes and yield of
transplanted pigeonpea
T1 : All practices as per package of practice with pulse magic application in
transplanted pigeon pea
T2 : Only package of practice and no pulse magic spray
Teggelli et al.(2016)
Kalaburagi

27. Zinc
(kg/ha)
Plant
height
(cm)
Dry
matter/
plant
(g)
No. of
nodules/
plant
Pods/plant Seeds/pod
Seed
yield
(q/ha)
Stover
yield
(q/ha)
Z1
(0 kg)
51.99 16.86 10.99 24.08 4.02 16.13 23.86
Z2
(15 kg)
53.98 20.30 12.07 28.54 4.42 17.53 26.35
CD
(5%)
0.68 1.03 NS 0.97 0.21 0.26 0.20
Table.11 Effect of Zn on yield attributes of blackgram
Sandy loam, Allahabad Sharma and Abraham (2010)

28. Fig.8 Response of lentil to B fertilization
Quddus et al.(2014)
Bangladesh

29. Fig.9 Response of lentil to Zn fertilization
Quddus et al.(2014)
Bangladesh

30. Table.12 Effect of foliar fertilization of Fe, B and Zn on
protein percentage in cowpea seed
Treatments Protein percentage of seed
Control, 0 ppm 23.4
Fe, 1 ppm 26.7
Fe, 2 ppm 28.9
B, 1 ppm 25.3
B, 2 ppm 26.8
Zn, 1 ppm 25.3
Zn, 2 ppm 28.4
Salih (2013)
Iraqi Kurdistan

31. Table.13 Effect of Fe and B on nutrient concentration in
cowpea
Treatments Fe (mg/kg) B (mg/kg)
Control, 0 ppm 40.00 16.00
Fe, 1 ppm 90.00 31.00
Fe, 2 ppm 154.00 37.00
B, 1 ppm 51.00 31.00
B, 2 ppm 58.00 40.00
Iraqi Kurdistan Salih (2013)

33. ADVANTAGES OF BIOFERTILIZER
• PSB biofertilizer can provide 12-20 kg P2O5/ha/season
• Rhizobium add considerable amount of atmospheric
nitrogen in soil
• Mycorrhiza can provide adequate P, other micro
nutrients
• Keep soils biologically active.
• Help in soil health maintenance

34. Table.14 HOW BIO-FERTILIZERS ARE COST EFFECTIVE!
Quantity of
bio-fertilizer
Equivalent quantity of
chemical fertilizers
Savings in Chemical Nutrients
1 m t- RHIZOBIUM 100-400 m t Urea 50-200 m t of “N” (Minimum fixation of 50
kg. /ha)
1m t-PSM 100 m t DAP 40-50 m t Of “P”(Minimum Solubilisation of
40 kg/ha of “P2O5” )
Source: A book on Bio-fertilizer for extension workers, Bhattacharya and Mishra

35. CLASSIFICATION OF BIOFERTILIZERS
Biofertilizers
N-Fixing Biofertilizer
(NBF)
PO4
3- Mobilizing
Biofertilizer
Cellulolytic or Organic matter
Decomposer(OMD)
NBF
For
Legumes
e.g.,
Rhizobium
NBF
For
Cereals
e.g.,
Azotobacter,
Azospirillum,
Azolla,
BGA
PO4
3-
Solubilizer
e.g.,
Bacillus,
Pseudomona
s,
Aspergillus
PO4
3-
Absorber
e.g.,
VA- mycorrhiza
VAM like –
Glomus
Cellulolytic
Organism e.g.,
Cellulomonas,
Trichoderma
Spore
Lingolytic
Organism
e.g.,
Arthrobacter
Agariccus

36. Methods of application

37. SEED TREATMENT
 Rate of application
o Nitrogenous bio-fertilizer - 200 gm./10 kg. seed
o Phosphate bio-fertilizer - 200 gm./10 kg. seed
o Liquid biofertilizer -3 ml /lit. water (seeds are to be dipped in the solution)
Application of Biofertilizer on seed Chickpea seeds before (left) and after (right)
treatment with biofertilizer

38. Soil Treatment
 For each hectare area four kilogram of the
recommended biofertilizers is mixed in 200 kg
of compost and kept overnight.
 This mixture is incorporated in the soil at the
time of sowing or planting.
Source-Indian Society of Soil Science, Fundamental of Soil Science

39. BIOFERTILIZERS FOR PULSE CROPS
1. Rhizobium
2. Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB)
3. Vesicular Arboscular Mycorrhiza (VAM)

40. Root nodules
Rhizobium

41. Table.15 Rhizobium species suitable for different crops
Sr. No. Rhizobium sp. Crops
1 R. leguminosarum Pea, Lentil,Vicia,
2 R. trifoli Berseem
3 R. phaseoli Beans
4 R. lupini Lupinus, Ornithopus
5 R. japonicum Soybean, cowpea, groundnut
6 R. meliloti Melilotus(sweet clover), Lucerne
Source-Katyayan, Arun., Fundamentals of Agriculture,Vol. 1

42. Table.16 Amount of nitrogen fixed by important legume crops
Sr. No. Crops N fixed (kg/ha)
1 Pigeonpea 200
2. Alfalfa(Lucerne) 194
3. White clover 103
4. Cowpeas 90
5. Vetch 80
6. Peas 72
7. Soybean 58
8. Beans 40
Source-Katyayan, Arun., Fundamentals of Agriculture,Vol. 1

43. Treatment
Grain yield (kg/ha) % increase
over control
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 Mean
Rhizobium
Without
Rhizobium
915 1202 943 1020 -
With
Rhizobium
1052 1430 1107 1196 17
S.Em± 24 28 19 -
C.D. (5%) 71 82 57 -
Table.17 Effect of Rhizobium on grain yield of
lentil (L 4076)
GBAUAT, Pantnagar Sahu et al. (2002)

44. Fig.10 Growth of B. japonicum strains at different levels.
Meghvansi et al. (2005)
Ajmer (Rajasthan)
ph

45. Table.18 Number of nodules as effected by different
treatments in lentil
Treatments 2000-01 2000-01
Control 15.0e 16.0e
Inoculation alone (Rhizobium) 20.0c 22.0c
57 kg P2O5/ha + 22 kg N/ha 25.0b 23.7b
57 kg P2O5/ha + 22 kg N/ha + inoculation
28.0a 29.3a
28 kg P2O5/ha +11kg N/ha + inoculation
20.0c 19.0d
28 kg P2O5/ha +11kg N/ha
18.0d 18.0d
LSD(5% Probability level) 1.21 1.47
Faisalabad (Pakistan) Ali et al. (2004)

46. Treatments Avg. yield
(kg/ha)
Gross income
(Rs/ha)
Net income
(Rs/ha)
Control 977.5 19550 15850
Inoculation alone 1122.0 22440 18720
57 KgP2O5/ha+22kg N/ha 1405.0 28100 22284
57 KgP2O5/ha+22kg N/ha +
inoculation
1535.0 30700 24864
28 KgP2O5/ha+11kg N/ha +
inoculation
1197.0 23940 19162
28 KgP2O5/ha+11kg N/ha 1054.0 21080 16322
Table.19 Economic analysis of Rhizobium inoculation and phosphorus
on grain yield and nodulation behaviour of lentil
Ali et al. (2004)
Faisalabad (Pakistan)

47. Phosphorus Solubilizing Bacteria
(PSB)
 Bacillus spp.,
 Pseudomonas spp.

48. Table.20 Effect of bio-fertilizer application(PSB) on growth parameters, yield
parameters and quality parameters of greengram
Treatments Numb
er of
pods
/plant
Length
of pod
(cm)
Number
of
seeds/
pod
Seed
yield/
Plant
Seed
yield
(kg/ha)
Stalk yield
(kg/ha)
Protein
content
(%)
B0
(Uninoculated)
16.34 6.60 09.65 6.14 1274.68 2000.72 20.22
B1 (Inoculated) 17.39 7.03 10.35 6.66 1350.19 2153.29 20.50
S.Em.± 0.336 0.114 0.187 0.154 26.359 44.318 0.124
CD (5 %) 0.954 0.322 0.531 0.436 74.917 125.959 0.351
Patel et al. (2012)
Dantiwada (Gujarat)

49. Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhiza (VAM)
VAM is a fungus, colonize the plant root system and increase the
growth and yield of crop

50. Table.21 Effect of dual inoculation of Rhizobium and AM
fungi on grain yield of different pulse crops
Pulses Grain yield (kg/ha)
Crop C RH AMF RH+AMF
Field pea 85.37 94.81 93.33 102.78
Green gram 616 749 703 875
Common beans 1729.9 1903.9 2037.8 2664.3
Pigeon pea 1324 2361.4 1551 2581.4
Soy bean 576.9 804.1 760.2 956.6
Chick pea 1253.13 1568.75 1671.88 2012.5
Cow pea 726.8 792.4 838.7 905.9
Lentil 270 372 328 445
Erneste et al. (2015)
Phagwara, India

51. Table.22 Effect of dual inoculation of Glomus fasciculatum and
Rhizobium on the chlorophyll, nitrogen and phosphorus
contents of pigeon pea
Microbial Inoculants Chlorophyll Content
(mg/g)
N (%) P (%)
Uninoculated Control 2.47 3.04 0.98
Rhizobium 2.81 3.18 1.87
VAM 2.85 3.26 2.03
VAM + Rhizobium 2.94 3.34 2.1
CD ( 5% ) 0.03 0.02 0.02
Sujata et al. (2012)
Silchar (Assam)

52. Table.23 Effect of integrated fertilization management on
microbial enzymes activities in pea
Treatments
Nitrogenase activity
as μl C2H4/g dry nodules
Phosphatase
activity as μg P/g
dry soil
Zaghloul et al. (2015)
Egypt

53. 55
Conclusion