Document Type : Research papers
Authors
1 (Plant Production Dept. Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University
2 (2) Soil and Agric. Chemistry Dept., Faculty of Agriculture (Saba Basha), Alexandria University
3 Postgraduate student
Abstract
Keywords
Mangoes (Mangifera indica L.) belong to family Anacardaceae. Native to South Eastern Asia and considered one of the most important fruits of the tropical and sub-tropical countries. Mango trees were introduced to Egypt around year 1825. It ranks the third after citrus and grape. The total cultured area in Egypt reached about 240804 feddans that produced about 4.29 tons/feddan with total fruit production 786533 tons from produced area 183341 feddans (FAO, 2013). It is very delicious tropical fruit, also considered as the queen of the fruits as it is very popular world-wide. Mango fruit is an abundant source of vitamins, minerals and is famous for its excellent flavour, attractive fragrance and nutritional value. It is as an emerging tropical export crop and is produced in about 90 countries in the world with a production of over 820.877 MT (Abbasi et at., 2011).
Mango is now commercially grown in more than 110 countries of the world, but nowhere is it so extensively cultivated as in India. India ranks first among world’s mango producing countries, it occupies an area of 22.97 lakh ha with an annual production of 151.88 lakh tons. Other major mango producing countries include China, Indonesia, Brazil, Thailand, Mexico, Pakistan, Philippines, Nigeria and Egypt. India is share is around 58 (%) of world production i.e. 12.7 million tons against world’s production of 27.96 million ton (Anonymous, 2011).
Organic amendments in the form of compost, manure, and cover crops are a source of plant nutrients that also improve the quality of the soil. Improvement in soil quality increases crop yield and can help mitigate climate change by sequestration of carbon. The addition of organic amendments is essential for sustainable soil fertility management and crop production, but can increase greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Shrestha et al., 2013).
Intelligent usage of organic manure and inorganic fertilizers is essential to augment productivity and input use efficiency and safeguard soil health (Bandyopadhyay et al., 2010). The application of organic fertilizers has been shown to affect the structure of the microbial community differently than application of solely mineral fertilizers (Wu et al., 2012). Integrated application of organic and inorganic fertilizer improves soil fertility and crop yield at long-term (Fereidooni et al., 2013). Pramanik et al. (2007) demonstrated that the presence of several enzymes in vermicompost ultimately lead to improvement in health of the soil.
The main objective of this study is to compare the use of organic fertilizers or inorganic fertilizers (NPK) or combine them as a source of soil fertilization (NPK) and food steroids in order to know which fertilizer (NPK) source and actual nutrition and demand to be more useful for mango trees produced, better control (NPK). Management is responsible for getting health and safety. It is also a fundamental goal of preserving human health, society and the environment that God has commanded us to protect. For this purpose, the best mango” Ewaise” have been studied in healthy ways to achieve economic returns in the manner of rationalization of the use of chemicals and compensation using organic fertilization together.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This study was carried out during two successive seasons 2016 and 2017 on ten years old mango (Mangifera indica L.). cv. Ewaise cultivar trees grown in region - Idku Center (Sand Basin No. 1), El- Behaira Governorate, Egypt. Ewaise mango trees grafted on Zebda seedlings grown at a distance of 6 x 4 m to study the effect of organic and mineral fertilization on yield, fruit quality and mineral content of Ewaise mango cultivar.
A surface soil sample (0-30cm depth) was collected before starting the experiment to identify some physical and chemical properties of this soil as shown in Table (1).
Table (1). Some chemical and physical soil properties of the experimental site analyzed before cultivation.
Parameter |
Sample |
Unit |
Mechanical Analysis |
||
Sand |
95.52 |
% |
Silt |
-- |
% |
Clay |
4.48 |
% |
Textural class |
Sand |
|
pH(1:1)water suspension |
8.4 |
-- |
EC(1:1, water extract) |
0.28 |
ds/m |
O.M |
3.3 |
% |
CaCO3 |
1.05 |
% |
Soluble cations |
||
Ca2+ |
24.0 |
mg/L |
Mg2+ |
9.7 |
mg/L |
Na+ |
54.9 |
mg/L |
K+ |
7.1 |
mg/L |
Soluble anions |
||
HCO3- |
97.6 |
mg/L |
Cl- |
47.0 |
mg/L |
SO42- |
14.4 |
mg/L |
Available nutrients |
||
Nitrogen (N) |
161 |
mg/kg |
Phosphorus(P) |
21 |
mg/kg |
Potassium(K) |
130 |
mg/kg |
All trees received the traditional and regular fertilization program, of which chemical fertilizers were ammonium sulphate (20.5 % N), calcium superphophate (15.5 %P2O5) and potassium sulphate (48 % K2O), as recommended dose (Shala, 2007). Plant and animal compost were added at rats 30 kg/tree, analysis of plant and animal compost shown in Table (2).
Forty trees were chosen for carrying out 8 treatments in this study. Each treatment was replicated five times (one tree for each replicate) according to complete randomized block design. The investigated treatments were arranged as follows:
Table (2). Analysis of plant and animal Compost of the tested fertilizers.
Analysis |
unit |
Plant compost |
Animal compost |
Weight per cubic meter |
kg |
475 |
580 |
Moisture |
% |
22 |
19 |
pH (1:10) |
|
8.12 |
8.25 |
EC (1:10) |
ds/m |
5.4 |
4.5 |
Total nitrogen |
% |
1.29 |
1.29 |
Ammonium Nitrogen |
mg/kg |
1550 |
920 |
Nitrogen Nitrate |
mg/kg |
31 |
22 |
Organic matter |
% |
37.43 |
29.72 |
Organic carbon |
% |
21.71 |
17.24 |
Ash |
% |
62.57 |
70.28 |
Ratio C:N |
|
16.83:1 |
13.36:1 |
Total phosphorus |
% |
1.7 |
1.6 |
Total potassium |
% |
0.78 |
0.83 |
Data were recorded for this studied two seasons on:
The produced fruit yield on each replicate tree resulting from the applied treatments was expressed as number of fruits/tree and weight of fruits (kg/ tree) which was attained at harvest stage.
At harvest time, yield of each treatment was recorded as yield weight/tree by the multiplying number of fruits × average weight of fruit.
Sample of 10 fruits per tree from each replicate was collected randomly, i.e. 50 fruits for each of the applied treatment was picked randomly at harvest when the fruits were yellow colored in both seasons, then transported quickly to the laboratory to determine physical and chemical fruit characteristics. Regarding the physical fruit characteristics the following parameters were determined:
Regarding chemical fruit characteristics, samples of 10 fruits from each replicate tree i.e. 50 fruits for each of the applied treatment was picked randomly at harvest to determine the following parameters:
Total soluble solids (TSS %): the percentage of TSS was determined by hand refractometer according to Chen and Mellenthin (1981).
Total acidity (%): was determined in fruit juice according to Chen and Mellenthin (1981). Five milliliters from the obtained juice were used to determine the titratable acidity. The titratable acidity was expressed as grams citric acid/ 100 milliliters fruit juice.
The NPK contents as percentages were determined in the dry leaves and fruits. Their dry weights were determined following drying in a drying chamber to a constant weight at 75oC for 72 hour according to Tandon (1995). After dryness, the plant samples were milled and stored for analysis as reported. However, 0.5g of the leaves and fruits powder was wet-digested with H2SO4–H2O2 mixture according (Lowther, 1980) and the following determinations were carried out in the digested solution to determine the following:
Total nitrogen was determined in digested plant material colorimetrically by Nessler`s method (Chapman and Pratt, 1978). Nessler’s solution (35 KI/100 ml + 20 g HgCl2 / 500 ml) +120 g NaOH / 250 ml Reading was achieved using wave length of 420 nm and N was determined as percentage as follows:
% N = NH4 % x 0.776485
Phosphorus was determined by the Vanadomolyate yellow method as given by Jackson (1973) and the intensity of color developed was read in spectrophotometer at 405nm wave length.
Potassium was determined according to the method described by Jackson (1973) using Beckman Flame photometer.
Results of the measured parameters were subjected to computerized statistical analysis using MSTAT package for analysis of variance (ANOVA) and means of treatments were compared using LSD at 0.05 according to Snedecor and Cochran (1990).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Mango crop is highly responsive to nutrient applications. The data revealed that the increasing level of nutrient application either chemical or organic sources increased the number of fruits. The data on number of fruits per tree as influenced by different organic practices and mineral fertilization are presented in Table (3). The data on number of fruits per tree showed significant differences among the treatments. The treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) recorded maximum number of fruits per tree (324.3 and 427.0) which was followed by treatment 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (304.0 and 411.5). However, control treatment recorded minimum number of fruits per tree (207.3 and 298.5), during both experimented seasons. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Nasreen et al. (2014), Baiea et al. (2015) and Sharma et al. (2016) on mango.
Data presented in Table (3) showed that 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) significantly increased yield (87.1 and 124.6 kg/tree) followed by 50% combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (78.3 and 113.9 kg/tree) during both seasons, while, the control treatment recorded the lower yield (43.0 and 68.8 kg/tree) than the others treatments under the study, in 2016 and 2017 seasons. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Nasreen et al. (2014), Krishnamoorthy and Hanif (2015) and Khamis et al. (2017) on mango.
Table (3). Effect of organic and mineral fertilization on the number of fruit/tree and yield (kg/tree) of Ewaise mango during 2016 and 2017 seasons.
Treatments |
No. fruit/Tree |
Yield (kg/Tree) |
||
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
|
Control (100% NPK) |
207.30 |
298.50 |
43.00 |
68.80 |
50 % NPK + 100 % P.C |
236.00 |
336.50 |
54.00 |
83.20 |
50 % NPK + 100 % A. C |
241.00 |
345.00 |
57.10 |
86.70 |
100% P.C |
233.50 |
334.50 |
48.70 |
75.00 |
100 % A.C |
227.50 |
332.30 |
49.50 |
79.20 |
50% (P.C + A. C) |
216.00 |
302.00 |
48.60 |
71.10 |
50% (NPK+P.C+A.C) |
304.00 |
411.50 |
78.30 |
113.90 |
100 % (NPK+P.C+A.C) |
324.30 |
427.00 |
87.10 |
124.60 |
LSD (0.05) |
6.30 |
7.80 |
0.20 |
0.10 |
Data tabulated in Table (4) indicated that average fruit weight differed significantly among the treatments. The treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) recorded highest average fruit weight (327.0 and 339.0 g), which was followed by treatment 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (297.0 and 313.0 g). The lowest average fruit weight was observed in treatment 100 % plant compost (243.3.0 and 254.0 g), in the first and second seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Yadav et al. (2011), Nasreen et al. (2014), Krishnamoorthy and Hanif (2015) and Sharma et al. (2016) on mango.
The data in Table (4) indicated that, the maximum fruit length (11.7 and 12.6 cm) was found in treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) and which was followed by the treatments 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (11.2 and 11.6 cm) were on par with each other. 100 % plant compost treatment recorded the minimum fruit length of (10.1 and 10.2 cm), during both studied seasons.These results are agreement with those obtained by Krishnamoorthy and Hanif (2015), Reddy and Singh (2015) on mango.
The results Table (4) demonstrated that, the maximum fruit diameter (8.3 and 8.8 cm) was found in treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) and which was followed by the treatments 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (7.8 and 8.2 cm for the 1st and 2nd seasons, respectively). In addition, treatment 100 % plant compost recorded minimum fruit diameter of (6.9 and 7.2 cm), during both seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Taha et al. (2014), Krishnamoorthy and Hanif (2015) and Reddy and Singh (2015) on mango.
Table (4) indicated that, the maximum fruit volume was observed in the treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (295.0 and 363.0 cm3), followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (275.0 and 321.8 cm3). While, the minimum fruit volume was recorded in the treatment 50 % combination of (plant compost and animal compost) (210.0 cm3) in the first seasons and treatment100 % plant compost (225.0 cm3) in the second season. These results are agreement with those obtained by Taha et al. (2014) and Reddy and Singh (2015) on mango.
Analysis of data presented in Table (4) revealed that the maximum pulp percentage (80.4 and 81.6 %) was recorded with an application of 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost), whereas, control treatment recorded minimum pulp percentage (77.7 and 77.8 %) during both seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Dinesh et al. (2008), Baiea et al. (2015) and Krishnamoorthy and Hanif (2015) on mango.
Table (4). Effect of organic and mineral fertilization on fruit weight (g), fruit length (cm), fruit diameter (cm), fruit volume (cm3) and pulp (%) of Ewaise mango during 2016 and 2017 seasons.
Treatments |
Fruit weight (g) |
Fruit length (cm) |
Fruit diameter (cm) |
Fruit volume (cm3) |
Pulp (%) |
|||||
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
|
Control (100% NPK) |
270.00 |
287.30 |
10.80 |
10.90 |
7.4 |
7.60 |
251.30 |
273.00 |
77.70 |
77.80 |
50 % NPK+100 % P.C |
265.00 |
280.00 |
10.70 |
11.20 |
7.20 |
7.60 |
225.30 |
252.80 |
78.90 |
79.60 |
50 % NPK+100 % A.C |
273.00 |
285.00 |
10.80 |
11.20 |
7.40 |
7.80 |
218.30 |
265.80 |
78.80 |
79.60 |
100% P.C |
243.30 |
254.00 |
10.10 |
10.20 |
6.90 |
7.20 |
216.30 |
225.00 |
79.90 |
79.80 |
100 % A.C |
254.00 |
268.00 |
10.20 |
10.60 |
7.20 |
7.30 |
217.30 |
235.00 |
79.40 |
79.80 |
50% (P.C+A.C) |
256.00 |
266.00 |
10.10 |
10.40 |
7.10 |
7.20 |
210.00 |
230.30 |
79.40 |
79.20 |
50% (NPK+P.C+A.C) |
297.00 |
313.00 |
11.20 |
11.60 |
7.80 |
8.20 |
275.00 |
321.80 |
80.20 |
80.50 |
100 % (NPK+P.C+A.C) |
327.00 |
339.00 |
11.70 |
12.60 |
8.30 |
8.80 |
295.00 |
263.00 |
80.40 |
81.60 |
LSD (0.05) |
2.10 |
1.60 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
0.10 |
2.50 |
1.90 |
0.70 |
0.70 |
A perusal of data pertaining to influence of different treatments on total sugars percentage of mango fruits are presented in Table (5).Total sugars were significant over the treatments and found to be higher at 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) as (20.15 and 20.33%), followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) was recorder (18.13 and 18.28 %), lower total sugars (14.30 and 14.40 %) were recorded in recommended dose of fertilizers (control). These results are agreement with those obtained by Omar and Belal (2007), Baiea et al. (2015), Khamis et al. (2017) and Kumar et al. (2018) on mango.
The reducing sugar was determined from ripe fruits during each year and presented in Table (5). Data revealed significant improvement in reducing sugar content with application of 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) as (8.18 and 8.20%), followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) was recorder (7.70 and 7.63 %), though lower reducing sugar content (6.15 and 6.28 %) were recorded with 100 % plant compost, during both seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Omar and Belal (2007), Baiea et al. (2015), Khamis et al. (2017) and Kumar et al. (2018) on mango.
The non-reducing sugar was computed by subtracting reducing sugar from the total sugar value obtained during both the year as well as in pooled data Table (5). The data indicated that the maximum non reducing sugar content (11.95 and 12.15 %) was recorded with 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) was recorder (10.40 and 10.63 %), Whereas, the minimum non reducing sugar content of 7.73 and 7.90% was noted with recommended dose of chemical fertilizer (control), during both seasons, under this study. These results are agreement with those obtained by Omar and Belal (2007), Baiea et al. (2015), Khamis et al. (2017) and Kumar et al. (2018) on mango.
Results in Table (5) revealed that significant improvement in ascorbic acid content with application of 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (57.8 and 59.3 mg/ 100 ml juice) followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) which recorded (45.7 and 46.6 mg/ 100 ml juice) whereas, the lowest ascorbic acid content (27.5 and 28.5 mg/ 100 ml juice.) was noted with100 % plant compost, during the first and second seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Omar and Belal (2007), Baiea et al. (2015), Khamis et al. (2017) and Kumar et al. (2018) on mango.
The data presented in Table (5) revealed that the maximum acidity content (0.38 and 0.36 %) was recorded with 100% NPK (control treatment), whereas, the minimum acidity content (0.24 and 0.21 %) was recorded with 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost), during both seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Omar and Belal (2007), Baiea et al. (2015), Khamis et al. (2017) and Kumar et al. (2018) on mango.
It could be noticed from Table (5) that the higher total soluble solid (28.0 and 28.4 %) was noted with application of 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) was recorded (27.0 and 28.7 %), whereas, the lower total soluble solid (24.7 and 24.9 %), was recorded with control treatment, during both seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Omar and Belal (2007), Dinesh et al. (2008), Nasreen et al. (2014), Baiea et al. (2015), Krishnamoorthy and Hanif (2015), Khamis et al. (2017) and Singh et al. (2017) on mango.
Table (5). Effect of organic and mineral fertilization on sugars (%), vitamin C, total acidity % and TSS % of Ewaise mango during 2016 and 2017 seasons.
Treatments |
Total sugar (%) |
Reducing sugar (%) |
Non- reducing sugar (%) |
Vitamin C (mg/ 100 ml juice ) |
Total acidity (%) |
T.S.S (%) |
||||||
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
|
Control(100% NPK) |
14.30 |
14.40 |
6.58 |
6.50 |
7.73 |
7.90 |
41.10 |
43.00 |
0.38 |
0.36 |
24.70 |
24.90 |
50 % NPK+100%P.C |
14.30 |
14.50 |
6.25 |
6.38 |
8.13 |
8.15 |
39.10 |
39.80 |
0.34 |
0.32 |
25.40 |
25.80 |
50 % NPK+100%A.C |
16.75 |
17.18 |
6.60 |
6.68 |
10.33 |
10.43 |
42.50 |
43.40 |
0.34 |
0.30 |
25.50 |
25.70 |
100% P.C |
14.20 |
14.20 |
6.15 |
6.28 |
8.08 |
7.93 |
27.50 |
28.50 |
0.32 |
0.30 |
22.40 |
22.70 |
100 % A.C |
15.60 |
15.68 |
6.90 |
6.83 |
8.70 |
8.83 |
33.10 |
34.10 |
0.26 |
0.26 |
23.40 |
23.40 |
50% (P.C+A.C) |
16.18 |
16.33 |
6.58 |
6.60 |
9.58 |
9.70 |
42.20 |
42.40 |
0.30 |
0.28 |
23.40 |
24.00 |
50% (NPK+P.C+A.C) |
18.13 |
18.28 |
7.70 |
7.63 |
10.40 |
10.63 |
45.70 |
46.60 |
0.21 |
0.19 |
27.00 |
28.70 |
100%(NPK+P.C+A.C) |
20.15 |
20.33 |
8.18 |
8.20 |
11.95 |
12.15 |
57.80 |
59.30 |
0.24 |
0.21 |
28.00 |
28.40 |
LSD (0.05) |
0.12 |
0.24 |
0.06 |
0.06 |
0.15 |
0.24 |
1.20 |
1.60 |
0.03 |
0.04 |
0.60 |
0.50 |
The nitrogen content was considerably influenced by different treatments. Data presented in Table (6) indicated that, nitrogen content in leaves of shoot bearing healthy and malformed panicles was almost similar. However, the values were slightly low in leaves of shoot bearing healthy panicles. Further, it was also noted that the increasing dose of fertilizer increased the content of nitrogen in leaves. The highest nitrogen content in the leaves (2.50 and 2.63 %) was recorded in treatment100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) and it was on par with treatment (2.13 and 2.63 %). However, lowest nitrogen content in leaves was registered in treatments 100 % plant compost (1.33 and 1.40 %) and 50 % of plant compost and animal compost (1.33 and 1.40 %), during both seasons, under this study.
On the other hand, it is clear from the results presented in Table (6) that 100 % combination of (NPK+ plant compost + animal compost) significantly improved total nitrogen in fruits (2.80 and 2.88 %) followed by 50 % combination of (NPK+ plant compost + animal compost) (2.40 and 2.50 %) , comparison with 50 % combination of (plant compost and animal compost) (1.50 and 1.60 %) and with 100 % plant compost (1.50 and 1.60 %), in the first and second seasons, respectively. These results are agreement with those obtained by Raheel et al. (2011), Faissal et al. (2013), Silva et al. (2013), Antonio et al. (2014), Taha et al. (2014) and Baiea et al. (2015) on mango.
Data presented in Table (6) revealed that the incremental dose of nutrient application increased the phosphorous content in the leaves of shoot bearing healthy and malformed panicles. The content of phosphorous in leaves of shoot bearing healthy and malformed panicles was almost similar. However, there were slight reductions in phosphorous content of leaves of shoot bearing malformed panicles. The maximum content of P (0.42 and 0.44 %) was recorded with 100 % combination of (NPK+ plant compost + animal compost) whereas, it was minimum (0.23 and 0.24%) with 100 % plant compost, during both seasons, respectively.
The highest value of phosphorous content in mango fruits (0.37 and 0.39 %) was recorded with application of 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) followed by 50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) which recorded (0.32 and 0.34 %), whereas, the lowest mean values of phosphorous content (0.19 and 0.20%) was recorded with 50 % combination of (plant compost and animal compost), in the two seasons under study. These results are agreement with those obtained by Raheel et al. (2011), Faissal et al. (2013), Silva et al. (2013), Antonio et al. (2014), Taha et al. (2014) and Baiea et al. (2015) on mango.
Data presented in Table (6) indicated that the fertilizer dose had significant effect on the potassium content in leaves of shoot bearing healthy and malformed panicles. The maximum potassium content in leaves (2.13 and 2.30 %) were recorded with 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost). Whereas, the minimum potassium content (1.00 and 1.13 %) were recorded with 100 % of plant compost, during both seasons.
In the other side, the combination of different organic and mineral fertilization significantly influenced the potassium content in fruits (%) of Ewaise mango and presented in Table (4). The treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) recorded significantly superior potassium content in fruits (2.40 and 2.50 %) of followed by treatment 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) (1.93 and 2. 05 %). The least potassium content was observed with treatment 100 % of plant compost (0.34 %) (1.20 and 1.30 %), during both seasons. These results are agreement with those obtained by Raheel et al. (2011), Faissal et al. (2013), Silva et al. (2013), Antonio et al. (2014), Taha et al. (2014) and Baiea et al. (2015) on mango.
Table (6). Effect of organic and mineral fertilization on NPK contents on fruits and leaves of Ewaise mango cultivar during 2016 and 2017 seasons.
|
Fruits |
Leaves |
||||||||||
Treatments |
N (%) |
P (%) |
K (%) |
N (%) |
P (%) |
K (%) |
||||||
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
2016 |
2017 |
|
Control |
1.80 |
1.93 |
0.26 |
0.26 |
1.60 |
1.63 |
1.60 |
1.70 |
0.31 |
0.32 |
1.40 |
1.50 |
50 % NPK+100 % P.C |
1.70 |
1.80 |
0.24 |
0.25 |
1.50 |
1.60 |
1.50 |
1.60 |
0.30 |
0.31 |
1.30 |
1.50 |
50 % NPK+100% A.C |
1.80 |
1.93 |
0.25 |
0.28 |
1.60 |
1.70 |
1.60 |
1.80 |
0.32 |
0.33 |
1.40 |
1.60 |
100% P.C |
1.50 |
1.60 |
0.21 |
0.21 |
1.20 |
1.30 |
1.33 |
1.40 |
0.23 |
0.24 |
1.00 |
1.13 |
100 % A.C |
1.60 |
1.70 |
0.21 |
0.22 |
1.40 |
1.50 |
1.43 |
1.50 |
0.26 |
0.27 |
1.20 |
1.30 |
50% (P.C+A.C) |
1.50 |
1.60 |
0.19 |
0.20 |
1.30 |
1.40 |
1.33 |
1.40 |
0.25 |
0.26 |
1.13 |
1.20 |
50% (NPK+P.C+A.C) |
2.40 |
2.50 |
0.32 |
0.34 |
1.93 |
2.05 |
2.13 |
2.63 |
0.36 |
0.38 |
1.70 |
1.93 |
100 %(NPK+P.C+A.C) |
2.80 |
2.88 |
0.37 |
0.39 |
2.40 |
2.50 |
2.50 |
2.63 |
0.42 |
0.44 |
2.13 |
2.30 |
LSD (0.05) |
0.12 |
0.13 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
0.13 |
0.12 |
0.10 |
0.13 |
0.01 |
0.01 |
0.12 |
0.13 |
Conclusion
The treatments of 100 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) followed by50 % combination of (NPK, plant compost and animal compost) gave the best results of yield, fruit quality and chemical composition compared the other treatments and control.