Article

Soil Property Modulation via Nutrient Inputs in Barley–Sorghum Forage Systems

Authors: Deepchandra, Vipin Kumar and Seema Kumari

Journal Name: Plant Science Archives

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51470/PSA.2025.10.2.01

Keywords: INM, soil properties, Organic Carbon, Vermicompost, Zinc Enrichment, Macro and Micronutrients

Abstract

A field experiment was carried out during the rabi and kharif seasons of 2021–22 and 2022–23 at the Agricultural Research Farm of R.B.S. College, Bichpuri, Agra, to evaluate the impact of various nutrient management practices on soil properties in a barley–fodder sorghum crop sequence. The experiment followed a randomized block design (RBD) with three replications and twelve treatment combinations: T1 (Control), T2 (N60), T3 (N120), T4 (N60P30), T5 (N120P60), T6 (N60P30K30), T7 (N120P60K60), T8 (N60P30K30Zn5), T9 (N120P60K60Zn5), T10 (N60P30K30S20), T11 (N120P60K60S20), and T12 (N60P30K30VC5). The findings revealed that soil organic carbon content was significantly enhanced with the application of treatment T12, which included 60 kg N, 30 kg P₂O₅, 30 kg K₂O, and 5 tonnes of vermicompost per hectare, recording an organic carbon level of 4.92 g kg⁻¹ compared to 3.98 g kg⁻¹ in the control. Moreover, treatment T9 (120 kg N + 60 kg P₂O₅ + 60 kg K₂O + 5 kg Zn ha⁻¹) significantly increased the availability of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sulfur, and zinc in the soil compared to the untreated control. These results highlight the positive influence of integrated nutrient management, particularly with the inclusion of micronutrients and organic amendments, on improving soil fertility in a sequential barley–fodder sorghum cropping system.

Download this article as

Introduction

The unpredictable temperature, poor irrigation water quality, insufficient fertilization, poor soil physical conditions, nutritional imbalances, and deficiencies of certain macro and micronutrients are among the factors that contribute to its poorer production in arid and semiarid regions. In addition to these, other significant characteristics linked to low output include the soil’s coarse texture, low organic matter content, low water receptivity, excessive permeability, and a fast increase in soil strength after drying.In the majority of Indian soils, nitrogen is a consistently lacking plant nutrient. Numerous substances, including nucleotides, phospholipids, enzymes, hormones, vitamins, and more, require nitrogen as a component. It significantly influences how potassium, carbohydrates, and other elements are employed.Nitrogen is essential for the creation of proteins, nucleic acids, and chlorophyll and is a major factor in photosynthesis.The use of chemical fertilizers in combination with more economical and sustainable nutrient sources, like organic fertilizers and bio-fertilizers, needs to receive greater attention because there is an immense gap between the production and consumption of N fertilizer.After nitrogen, phosphorus is another essential nutrient. In Indian agriculture, the P input is derived from organic manures, fertilizers, and crop leftovers to a very limited proportion. It is a necessary component of ATP, ADP, and nucleic acids. It improves the quality of crop products, speeds up maturity, and has positive effects on root formation and growth. The availability and form of P in the soil depends upon the native and/or added sources of phosphate fertilizer and organic matter content from external sources. It is necessary to determine and encourage the usage of the kinds of fertilizers that are needed to make corrections.

The most common micronutrient disorders in light-textured soil are Zn and sulphur deficiencies, and applying Zn coupled with NPK fertilizer significantly boosts crop yields for the majority of crops. Sulphur deficiency symptoms in barley and sorghum crops are common and lower the crops’ yields. It is commonly known that S plays a crucial role in some enzymes and plant metabolic processes. It is well recognized that a sulfur deficit slows down the activity of various enzymes, including urease, nitrogenase, nitrate reductase, and ribonuclease. Crop yields in Indian soils have been found to be limited by Zn.It helps with the production of plant development material and enzyme systems necessary for boosting specific metabolic reactions, and it is mostly transported by diffusion to the root surface of the plant.

Organic matter is regarded as a measure of the health of the soil since it provides energy to the soil’s microflora and organic carbon content. All soils contain organic elements, which are fundamental and necessary for the soil to function as a living, dynamic system. Nutrients that are necessary for plant growth are stored in organic materials.Decomposition results in the production of organic acids and CO2, which aid in the dissolution of minerals and increase their availability to developing plants. It supports protecting soil against summer and winter temperature drops and abrupt chemical changes. Enhancing the physical, chemical, and biological qualities of soil requires organic matter. Potential sources of micronutrients, organic manures enhance soil structure by binding soil aggregates and boosting the soil’sability to retain water and function as a buffer. By chelating the chemical fertilizer and halting nutrient losses through leaching and other mechanisms, it also improves the efficiency of nutrient usage. In addition to being a possible source of micronutrients and NPK, organic supplementation is an excellent substrate for microbial growth, which leads to long-term soil productivity. It has been shown that combining chemical fertilizers with organic manures has significant promise for preserving increased productivity and enhancing crop production stability. Crop production may be sustained and long-term fertility maintained with a prudent mix of inorganic and organic fertilizers. It is necessary to standardize integrated nutrient management strategies that incorporate FYM and mineral sources of nutrients.

Materials and Methods

Field experiments were conducted during the kharif and rabi seasons of 2021–22 and 2022–23 at the Agricultural Research Farm of R.B.S. College, Bichpuri, Agra, to evaluate the effect of various nutrient management practices on soil properties under a barley–fodder sorghum crop sequence. The experimental site was characterized by sandy loam soil with an electrical conductivity (EC) of 0.18 dS m⁻¹, pH 8.2, organic carbon content of 4.6 g kg⁻¹, and available nutrient levels of 198.4 kg N ha⁻¹, 14.6 kg P ha⁻¹, 214.3 kg K ha⁻¹, 15.7 kg S ha⁻¹, and 0.58 mg Zn kg⁻¹.

The study was laid out in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with twelve treatments and three replications. The treatments included:

  • T1 – Control
  • T2 – 60 kg N ha⁻¹
  • T3 – 120 kg N ha⁻¹
  • T4 – 60 kg N + 30 kg P₂O₅ ha⁻¹
  • T5 – 120 kg N + 60 kg P₂O₅ ha⁻¹
  • T6 – 60 kg N + 30 kg P₂O₅ + 30 kg K₂O ha⁻¹
  • T7 – 120 kg N + 60 kg P₂O₅ + 60 kg K₂O ha⁻¹
  • T8 – 60 kg N + 30 kg P₂O₅ + 30 kg K₂O + 5 kg Zn ha⁻¹
  • T9 – 120 kg N + 60 kg P₂O₅ + 60 kg K₂O + 5 kg Zn ha⁻¹
  • T10 – 60 kg N + 30 kg P₂O₅ + 30 kg K₂O + 20 kg S ha⁻¹
  • T11 – 120 kg N + 60 kg P₂O₅ + 60 kg K₂O + 20 kg S ha⁻¹
  • T12 – 60 kg N + 30 kg P₂O₅ + 30 kg K₂O + 5 t vermicompost (VC) ha⁻¹

For each treatment, half the nitrogen and the full doses of phosphorus, potassium, zinc, and sulfur were applied at sowing. The remaining nitrogen was top-dressed in two equal splits at critical growth stages. Nutrients were supplied using urea (N), single super phosphate (P₂O₅), muriate of potash (K₂O), zinc sulfate (Zn), and elemental sulfur (S). Vermicompost, containing 1.07% N, 0.86% P, and 1.79% K, was incorporated into the soil 15 days prior to sowing.

Soil Sampling and Analysis

Soil samples were collected in 2023 from the plow layer (0–20 cm depth) of the experimental plots after the harvest of the crop sequence. The samples were air-dried, gently crushed, and sieved for further analyses. For the estimation of soil organic carbon (SOC), samples were passed through a 0.2-mm sieve, while for the assessment of other soil quality parameters—such as chemical properties (pH, EC) and available nutrients (N, P, K, S, and Zn)—samples that passed through a 2-mm sieve were used.

  • Soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) were determined using a 1:2 soil-to-water suspension method [1].
  • Soil organic carbon (SOC) was estimated by the wet oxidation method using sulfuric acid (H₂SO₄) and potassium dichromate (K₂Cr₂O₇) as oxidizing agents [2].
  • Available nitrogen (N) was analyzed using the alkaline KMnO₄ oxidizable nitrogen method [3].
  • Available phosphorus (P) was extracted using 0.5 M sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO₃) and measured as per the Olsen method [4].
  • Available potassium (K) was determined using neutral normal ammonium acetate extraction [5].
  • Available sulfur (S) was extracted with 0.15% calcium chloride (CaCl₂) solution [6].
  • Available zinc (Zn) was analyzed by the DTPA (diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid) extraction method [7].

These standard procedures ensured the reliability and accuracy of soil quality assessment, which formed the basis for evaluating the influence of different nutrient management treatments under the barley–fodder sorghum cropping system.

Results and Discussion

EC and pH

The EC and pHin soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments are presented in Table 1. The Electrical Conductivity (EC) in the soils varied from 0.26 to 0.37dSm-1 across the treatments. However, application of (T11) @ 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1 recorded significantly higher EC values compared to (T2) @ 60Kg N ha-1. The pH value in the soils varied from 8.15 to 8.49 across the treatments. Significantly higherpH value in soil with the application of @ (T9) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1was recorded (8.49) compared to control (8.15) respectively.

Soil organic carbon

The soil organic carbon in the soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments ispresented in Table 1. Thesoil organic carbon in soil varied from 3.98 to 4.92 g kg-1 across the treatments. Significantly higher organic carbon was observed with the application of (T12) @ 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 5 tVC ha-1 (4.92 gKg-1), @ (T9)120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 (4.78 gKg-1), @ (T11) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1 (4.67 gKg-1), @ (T10) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1, (4.57 gKg-1), @ (T7) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O ha-1 (4.48 gKg-1), @ (T5) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 ha-1 (4.38 gKg-1), @ (T3) 120Kg N ha-1 (4.32 gKg-1), @ (T8) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 (4.25gKg-1), @ (T4) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 ha-1 (4.20 gKg-1), @ (T6) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O ha-1 (4.14 gKg-1) and @ (T2) 60Kg N ha-1 (4.07gKg-1) compared to control (3.98 gKg-1). The increase in organic carbon the application of nutrient management with: (T2)> (T6)> (T4)> (T8)> (T3)> (T5)> (T7)> (T10)> (T11)> (T9)> (T12) levels of nutrient management treatments over control were 2.2, 4.0, 5.5, 6.8, 8.5, 10.0, 12.5, 14.6, 17.2, 20.0 and 23.4% respectively over control. Similar results were obtained by [8, 9, 10 and 11].

Available nitrogen

The available nitrogen in soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments ispresented in Table 1. Theavailable nitrogen in soil varied from 182.0 to 220.5 ha-1 across the treatments. Among the nutrient managementtreatments, application of @ (T9)120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O + 5 Kg Zn ha-1 recorded significantly higher available nitrogen in soil (220.5Kg ha-1) followed by (T11) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1 (216.5Kg ha-1), (T12) 60Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 tVC ha-1 (213.9 Kg ha-1), (T10) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 20 Kg S ha-1, (209.8 Kg ha-1), (T7) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O ha-1, (205.6 Kg ha-1), (T5) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (202.1 Kg ha-1), (T3) 120Kg N ha-1 (199.0Kg ha-1), (T8) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 (195.0Kg ha-1), (T4) 60Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (192.6 Kg ha-1), (T6) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O ha-1 (188.5 Kg ha-1) and (T2) 60 Kg N ha-1 (185.8 Kg ha-1) compared to control (182.0 Kg ha-1) respectively. Similarly, the increase in available nitrogen in soil with: (T2)> (T6)> (T4)> (T8)> (T3)> (T5)> (T7)> (T10)> (T12)> (T11)> (T9) levels of nutrient management treatmentsover control were 2.1, 3.6, 5.8, 7.1, 9.4, 11.1, 13.0, 15.3, 17.6, 19.0 and 21.2% respectively.Similar to these findings are [12, 10].

Available phosphorus

The available phosphorus in the soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments are presented in Table 1. Theavailable phosphorus in soil varied from 12.3 to 20.8 kg ha-1 across the treatments. Among the nutrient management treatments, application of @ (T9)120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 recorded significantly higher available phosphorus in soil (20.8Kg ha-1) followed by (T11) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1 (19.7Kg ha-1), (T12) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 tVC ha-1 (19.2 Kg ha-1), (T10) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 20 Kg S ha-1, (18.4 Kg ha-1), (T7) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O ha-1, (17.5Kg ha-1), (T5) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (17.0 Kg ha-1), (T3) 120 Kg N ha-1 (16.3 Kg ha-1), (T8) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 Kg Zn ha-1 (15.5 Kg ha-1), (T4) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (14.8 Kg ha-1), (T6) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O ha-1 (14.1Kg ha-1) and (T2) 60 Kg N ha-1 (13.4 Kg ha-1), compared to control (12.3 Kg ha-1) respectively. Similarly, the increase in available phosphorus in soil with: (T2)> (T6)> (T4)> (T8)> (T3)> (T5)> (T7)> (T10)> (T12)> (T11)> (T9) levels of nutrient management treatments over control were 8.9, 14.1, 19.7, 25.9, 32.4, 37.8, 41.9, 49.5, 55.7, 60.0 and 68.4% respectively.These results are following those of [12, 10].

Available potassium

The available potassium in soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments ispresented in Table 1. Theavailable potassium in soil varied from 202.0 to 222.1 Kg ha-1 across the treatments. Among the nutrient management treatments, application of @ (T9)120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O + 5 Kg Zn ha-1 recorded significantly higher available potassium in soil (222.1Kg ha-1) followed by (T11) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1 (221.2Kg ha-1), (T12) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 tVC ha-1 (219.9 Kg ha-1), (T10) 60 Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 20 Kg S ha-1, (217.5 Kg ha-1), (T7) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O ha-1, (215.9Kg ha-1), (T5) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (213.1Kg ha-1), (T3) 120 Kg N ha-1 (211.3 Kg ha-1), (T8) 60Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 Kg Zn ha-1 (209.3 Kg ha-1), (T4) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (206.2 Kg ha-1), (T6) 60Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O ha-1 (205.3 Kg ha-1) and (T2) 60Kg N ha-1 (204.5 Kg ha-1), compared to control (202.0 Kg ha-1) respectively. Similarly, the increase in available potassium in soil with: (T2)> (T6)> (T4)> (T8)> (T3)> (T5)> (T7)> (T10)> (T12)> (T11)> (T9) levels of nutrient management treatments over control were 1.3, 1.7, 2.1, 3.6, 4.6, 5.5, 6.9, 7.7, 8.9, 9.5 and 10.0% respectively.These results are in favor of [12, 9, 10 and 11].

Available sulphur

The available sulfur in the soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments are presented in Table 1. Theavailablesulfur in soil varied from 13.7 to 20.4Kg ha-1 across the treatments. Among the nutrient management treatments, application of (T11) @ 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1recorded significantly higher available sulphur in soil (20.4Kg ha-1) followed by (T9) @120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 (19.2Kg ha-1), (T12) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 5 tVC ha-1 (18.1Kg ha-1), (T10) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 20Kg S ha-1, (17.6Kg ha-1), (T7) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 + 60Kg K2O ha-1, (17.0Kg ha-1), (T5) 120Kg N + 60Kg P2O5 ha-1 (16.3Kg ha-1), (T3) 120Kg N ha-1 (15.8Kg ha-1), (T8) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 (15.2Kg ha-1), (T4) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 ha-1 (14.6Kg ha-1), (T6) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30Kg K2O ha-1 (14.2Kg ha-1) and (T2) 60Kg N ha-1 (14.0Kg ha-1) compared to control (13.7Kg ha-1) respectively. Similarly, the increase in available sulfur in soil with: (T2)>(T6)>(T4)>(T8)>(T3)>(T5)>(T7)>(T10)>(T12)>(T9)>(T11) levels of nutrient management treatments over control were 2.4, 3.7, 7.1, 11.2, 15.6, 19.0, 24.6, 28.5, 32.4, 40.2 and 49.3% respectively.These resultsare aggregatedby [11].

Available zinc

The available zinc in soil as influenced by different nutrient management treatments ispresented in Table 1. Theavailable zinc in the soil varied from 0.51 to 0.66 mg kg-1 across the treatments. Among the nutrient management treatments, application of @ (T9)120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O + 5Kg Zn ha-1 recorded significantly higher available zinc in soil (0.66 mgKg-1) followed by (T11) 120Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O + 20 Kg S ha-1 (0.64 mgKg-1), (T12) 60Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 tVC ha-1 (0.62 mgKg-1), (T10) 60Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 20 Kg S ha-1, (0.61 mgKg-1), (T7) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 + 60 Kg K2O ha-1, (0.60 mgKg-1), (T5) 120 Kg N + 60 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (0.58 mgKg-1), (T3) 120 Kg N ha-1 (0.57 mgKg-1), (T8) 60 Kg N + 30Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O + 5 Kg Zn ha-1 (0.55mgKg-1), (T4) 60Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 ha-1 (0.54 mgKg-1), (T6) 60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2O5 + 30 Kg K2O ha-1 (0.53mgKg-1) and (T2) 60Kg N ha-1 (0.52 mgKg-1) compared to control (0.51 mgKg-1) respectively. Similarly, the increase in available zinc in soil with: (T2)>(T6)>(T4)>(T8)>(T3)>(T5)>(T7)>(T10)>(T12)>(T11)>(T9) levels of nutrient management treatments over control were 1.3, 2.6, 5.8, 7.8, 10.4, 13.6, 17.5, 19.5, 20.1, 24.7 and 28.6% respectively. Over findings agree with those of [13, 10, 11].

Conclusion

The study clearly demonstrates that integrated nutrient management practices significantly influence soil fertility and nutrient dynamics in a barley–fodder sorghum crop sequence. Among the various treatments, the application of T12 (N60P30K30VC5)—which combined balanced fertilization with organic amendments (vermicompost)—markedly improved soil organic carbon content, indicating enhanced soil health and biological activity. Likewise, T9 (N120P60K60Zn5) emerged as the most effective treatment in improving the availability of key macro- and micronutrients, including nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, sulfur, and zinc. These findings underscore the critical role of combining chemical fertilizers with organic and micronutrient inputs to sustainably maintain and enhance soil quality. The use of vermicompost and zinc supplementation not only improved nutrient availability but also supported long-term soil productivity, making them valuable components of nutrient management strategies in sequential cropping systems. Therefore, adopting integrated nutrient management approaches is recommended for sustaining soil health, optimizing crop productivity, and ensuring agricultural sustainability in similar agro-ecological zones.

References

  1. Richards, L.A. (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. Agricultural hand book 60.U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington D.C., p.160
  2. Walkley A.J. and Black C.A. (1934) Estimation of organic carbon by chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37, 29-38.
  3. Subbiah B.V. and Asija G.L. (1956). A rapid procedure for the determination of available nitrogen in soils. Curr. Sci. 25, 259-260.
  4. Olsen S.R., Cole C.U., Watanabe F.S. and Dean L.A. (1954). Estimation of available phosphorus in soil by extracting with sodium bicarbonate. U.S. Dep. of Agric. Circ. Washington, 939, 1-19.
  5. Hanway, J.J and Heidel, H. (1952) Soil analysis methods as used in Iowa State College, Soil Testing Laboratory, Iowa State College Bull. 57: 1-131.
  6. Williams, C. H., and A. Steinbergs (1959) Soil sulphur fractions as chemical indices of available sulphur in some Australian soils. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 10:340–52. doi:10.1071/AR9590340.
  7. Lindsay WL and Norvell WA. 1978. Development of a DTPA soil test for zinc, iron manganese and copper. Soil Science Society of American Journal, 42: 421–428.
  8. Tenguria, R.K. and Menaria, K. (2006) Influence of different integrated plant nutrient management treatments on chemical, biological composition of soil and sustainable yield of wheat in central India. International J. of Chemical Sci.  4(4): 975-979.
  9. Bhama, K.S., Somasundaram, E., Sivakumar S.D. and Latha K.R. (2017) Soil health and nutrient budgeting as influenced by different cropping sequences in a vertisol of Tamil Nadu, International Journal of Chemical Studies, 5(5): 486-491.
  10. Sharma, K.L., Munna Lal, G. Ravindra Chary, K. Sammi Reddy, A.K. Indoria, K. Srinivas, Vinod Kumar Singh, Ch. Chandra Sekhar, A.P. Singh, Vikas Abrol, Anil Sharma, Hemant Dadhich, K.A. Gopinath & D. Lakshmi Aruna Gayatri (2022) Long Term Effects of Conjunctive Nutrient Management Practices on Soil Quality in Maize (Zeamays) –Mustard (Brassica compestrisvar. sarson) Rotation under Rainfed Hill Inceptisol Soils, Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 53:4, 439-452, DOI: 10.1080/00103624.2021.2017448
  11. Sharma, K.L., Munna Lal, A.K. Indoria, Ch. Chandra Sekhar, Vinod Kumar Singh, K. Sammi Reddy, K. Srinivas, B.V. Asewar, W.N. Narkhede, A.K. Gore, G.K. Gaikwad, G.R. Hanwate& M.S. Pendke (2024) Influence of Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) Practices on Soil Quality Indicators and Indices Under Cotton (Gossypium Spp.) + Black Gram (Vigna Mungo (L.) Hepper) and Green Gram (Vigna Radiata (L.) R. Wilczek) + Rabi Sorghum (Sorghum Bicolor (L.) Moench) Inter Cropping Systems in Rainfed Vertisols of Western India, Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 55:9, 1258-1273, DOI: 10.1080/00103624.2024.2303124
  12. Parmar, D.K. (2014) Yield, produce quality and soil Health under vegetable cropping system as influenced by integrated nutrient management in mid-hill zone of Himachal Pradesh. Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science, 62(1): 45-51.
  13. Lal, Munna, K.L. Sharma, A.K. Indoria, K. Sammi Reddy, G. Ravindra Charry,K. Srinivas, M. Prabhakar, Brajendra Parmar, D. Suma Chandrika, M. Vasavi, P. Haindavi and D.L.A. Gayatri (2020) Long-term effects of soil management practices on soil Zn chemical fractions and their availability to grain sorghum (Sorghum vulgare(L.)) grown in a yearly rotation with castor (Ricinus communis) in rainfed red Alfisol soils, Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 51:2, 276-287, DOI: 10.1080/00103624.2019.1705326
Post Views: 128
Tags: , , , ,