24.04.2013 Views

impact of farmers' organic farming practices on soil properties in ...

impact of farmers' organic farming practices on soil properties in ...

impact of farmers' organic farming practices on soil properties in ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS<br />

The results <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the study <strong>on</strong> changes <strong>in</strong> <strong>soil</strong> <strong>properties</strong> as <strong>in</strong>fluenced by <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>farm<strong>in</strong>g</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>in</strong> some selected <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> farms <strong>in</strong> Northern dry z<strong>on</strong>e <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Karnataka (Z<strong>on</strong>e-3) are<br />

presented <strong>in</strong> this chapter under the follow<strong>in</strong>g heads.<br />

4.1 Organic manures as a source <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> plant nutrients<br />

4.2 Effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>farm<strong>in</strong>g</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>soil</strong> physical <strong>properties</strong><br />

4.3 Effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>farm<strong>in</strong>g</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>soil</strong> chemical <strong>properties</strong><br />

4.4 Effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>farm<strong>in</strong>g</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> availability <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> plant nutrients<br />

4.5 Effect <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>farm<strong>in</strong>g</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <strong>soil</strong> biological <strong>properties</strong><br />

4.1 ORGANIC MANURES AS A SOURCE OF PLANT<br />

NUTRIENTS<br />

4.1.1 Analysis <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> manures used by <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> farmers<br />

The analytical results <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the representative samples <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> manures used by<br />

farmers are presented <strong>in</strong> Table 2.<br />

Am<strong>on</strong>g different vermicompost samples used <strong>in</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>farm<strong>in</strong>g</str<strong>on</strong>g>, vermicomposts<br />

used by C1 and R3 farmer recorded highest <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> carb<strong>on</strong> (42.46%) and lowest was<br />

recorded <strong>in</strong> the sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> K1 farm (32.68%). Farmyard manure (FYM) sample collected from<br />

K 2 farmer recorded highest <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g> carb<strong>on</strong> (30.15%) and the lowest was noticed <strong>in</strong> the<br />

sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> V1 farm (24.60%).<br />

The total N c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> vermicompost samples varied from a low 2.04 per cent (C2) to<br />

a high <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 3.10 per cent (C3). In FYM samples the total N c<strong>on</strong>tent was lower than its c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong><br />

vermicomposts. It ranged from 0.68 per cent <strong>in</strong> the sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> K 1 farmer to 1.20 per cent <strong>in</strong> the<br />

sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> K2 farmer.<br />

The total P c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> vermicompost was highest <strong>in</strong> the sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> K1 farm (0.78%)<br />

and was lowest (0.52%) <strong>in</strong> the sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> C1 farm. The total P c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> FYM samples varied<br />

from a high <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 0.54 per cent (V 2) to a low <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 0.30 per cent (C 1).<br />

The total K c<strong>on</strong>tent <strong>in</strong> vermicompost samples was around 1.0 per cent <strong>in</strong> most <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />

samples, the highest (1.17%) be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the sample used by C3 farmer and lowest (0.98%) <strong>in</strong><br />

sample <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> V1 farmer. In FYM, total K c<strong>on</strong>tent varied from 0.64 (S2) to 1.02 (K2) per cent.<br />

The C:N ratio was narrow <strong>in</strong> vermicompost samples (13:1 <strong>in</strong> C 3 to 20:1 <strong>in</strong> C 1 sample)<br />

compared to FYM samples (25:1 <strong>in</strong> K2 to 38:1 <strong>in</strong> C1 sample).<br />

4.1.2 Quantity <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> nutrients added to <strong>soil</strong> through <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g>s under different<br />

cropp<strong>in</strong>g systems<br />

The Table 3 shows the total quantity <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> nutrients added to the <strong>soil</strong> through <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g>s<br />

under different cropp<strong>in</strong>g systems. The additi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> nitrogen through <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g>s <strong>in</strong> cott<strong>on</strong> based<br />

cropp<strong>in</strong>g system varied from 95.56 (C1) to 162.60 (C4) kg per ha per year, phosphorus from<br />

36.24 (C1) to 79.90 (C4) kg per ha per year and potassium from 99.15 (C2) to 144.60 (C4) kg<br />

per ha per year.<br />

In case <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> kharif jowar based cropp<strong>in</strong>g system, nitrogen c<strong>on</strong>tent added through<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g>s ranged from 89.30 to 118.70 kg per ha per year, phosphorus c<strong>on</strong>tent from 47.20 to<br />

55.80 kg per ha per year and potassium c<strong>on</strong>tent from 93.40 to 94.00 kg per ha per year.<br />

Under rabi jowar based cropp<strong>in</strong>g system, nitrogen c<strong>on</strong>tent added through <str<strong>on</strong>g>organic</str<strong>on</strong>g>s ranged<br />

from 95.60 (R 3) to 123.90 (R 1) kg per ha per year, phosphorus c<strong>on</strong>tent from 41.20 (R 3) to<br />

58.80 (R1) kg per ha per year and potassium c<strong>on</strong>tent from 96.20 (R3) to 109.50 (R1) kg per ha<br />

per year.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!