response of biofertilizer in pulse production

COURSE SEMINAR COURSE SEMINAR ONON

RESPONSE OF BIOFERTILIZER IN PULSE PRODUCTIONRESPONSE OF BIOFERTILIZER IN PULSE PRODUCTION

2014

Thaneshwar

DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMYSARDAR VALLABHBHAI PATEL UNIVERSITY OF AGRI. & TECH. MEERUT (UP)-250110

I.D. NO. PG-2657/13

Speaker

Ph.D Agronomy

INTRODUCTION India is the world’s largest producer, consumer and

importer of pulses.(Reddy et al., 2012) India accounts for 33% of the world area and 22% of

the world production of pulses. About 90% of the global pigeonpea, 65% of chickpea

and 37% of lentil area falls in India, corresponding to 93%, 68% and 32% of global production, respectively (FAOSTAT, 2011).

In India total pulses were grown on an area of 23.47 m ha with production of 18.44 mt and productivity 786 kg/ha in year 2012-13(Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India).

DISTRIBUTION OF DIFFERENT PULSES TO TOTAL PULSE AREA IN INDIA

Source-DAC, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 2010-11

STATEWISE % SHARE IN TOTAL AREA OF PULSES IN INDIA

,2010-11

STATEWISE SHARE IN PRODUCTION OF PULSES

,2010-11

Source-DAC, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 2010-11

BIOFERTILIZER

Biofertilizer are the microbial inoculation which are capable of mobilizing nutritive elements required for the plants by fixing atmospheric nitrogen, solubilizing and enhancing uptake of soil phosphorus.

History of biofertilizers The commercial history of Biofertilizers

began with the launch of ‘Nitragin’ by Nobbe and Hiltner, a laboratory culture of Rhizobia in 1895.

In India the first study on legume Rhizobium symbiosis was conducted by N. V. Joshi and the first commercial production started as early as 1956.

ADVANTAGES OF BIOFERTILIZER

•PSB biofertilizer can provide 12-20 kg P2O5/ha/season.•Some biofertilizer add considerable amount of atmospheric nitrogen in soil.•Mycorrhiza can provide adequate, P, other micro nutrients and help in increased water absorption.•Mixed biofertilizer give better impact.•Keep soils biologically active.•Help in soil health maintenance.

HOW BIO-FERTILIZERS ARE COST EFFECTIVE!

Quantity of bio-fertilizer

Equivalent quantity of

chemical fertilizersSavings in Chemical Nutrients

1 mt- RHIZOBIUM 100-400 mt Urea 50-200 mt of “N” (Minimum fixation of 50 kg. /ha)

1mt-PSM 100 mt DAP 40-50 mt Of “P”(Minimum Solubilisation of 40 kg/ha of “P2O5” )

Table-1: Economics of Bio-fertilizers

Source: A book on Bio-fertilizer for extension workers, Bhattacharya & Mishra

CLASSIFICATION OF BIOFERTILIZERS

Biofertilizers

N-Fixing Biofertilizer (NBF)

PO43- Mobilizing

Biofertilizer(PSB)

Cellulolytic or Organic matter Decomposer(OMD)

NBF ForLegumese.g.,Rhizobium

NBFForCerealse.g.,Azotobacter,Azospirillum,Azolla,BGA

PO43-

Solubilizer

e.g.,

Bacillus,

Pseudomonas,

Aspergillus

PO43-

Absorber

e.g.,

VA- mycorrhiza

VAM like –

Glomus

CellulolyticOrganism e.g.,Cellulomonas,TrichodermaSpore

LingolyticOrganisme.g.,ArthrobacterAgariccus

BIOFERTILIZERS FOR PULSE CROPS

1) Rhizobium2) Phosphorus Solubilising Bacteria (PSB)3) Vesicular Arboscular Mycorrhiza (VAM)4) Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria

(PGPR)

RHIZOBIUMIt is aerobic bacteria fixes atmospheric

nitrogen in legumes symbiotically.The bacteria infect the legume root and form

root nodules within which they reduce molecular nitrogen to ammonia.

It has been estimated that 40-250 kg N/ha/year is fixed by different legume crops by the microbial activities of Rhizobium.

The rhizobium legume association yield increase by 10-30%.

Rhizobium nodule on legume root

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

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

Table 2: Effect of inoculation of soybean cv. PK-416 with rhizobial strains on

S.No. Strains

Shoot dry weight(g plant-1 ) Stover

yield (g plant-1 )

Grain yield No. of pods

(plant-1 )

Pod dry weight (g

per plant )40 DAS 60 DAS g plant-1 Q ha-1

1. SB-6 9.70 17.40 18.23 18.50 21.38 108.77 30.77

2. SB-12 12.17 20.53 25.83 19.43 22.21 113.70 32.23

3. SB-16 13.10 22.20 27.23 21.67 23.00 116.03 33.87

4. SB-120 10.33 16.93 17.40 16.80 18.93 105.77 27.43

5. SB-294 10.47 20.33 22.30 18.33 21.69 105.33 31.67

6. SB-102 12.83 21.27 14.70 18.77 16.32 100.43 25.10

7. SB-271 13.07 17.40 20.20 19.47 18.51 103.57 26.80

8. SB-243 10.57 15.23 16.67 17.33 16.67 109.87 26.43

9. SB-9 11.57 20.33 16.53 18.23 17.22 99.57 25.33

10. Control 9.57 14.77 16.10 14.90 16.21 101.20 23.23

Mean 11.34 18.64 19.52 18.34 19.21 106.42 28.29

C.D. (P=0.05)

1.13 3.93 3.73 2.97 2.14 10.25 3.01

growth and yield (Mean of two years)

Source- Patra et. al.,2012

Table 3: Effect of inoculation of soybean cv. PK-416 with rhizobial strains on N uptake by plant at different stages and post-harvest soil N (Mean of two years)

Sl. No.

Strains

N uptake by plant (mg per plant )Efficiency

ratio of strains at 60 DAS

Post- harvest

total soil N (%)

40 DAS 60 DAS Harvest

Shoot Shoot Stover Grain Total

1. SB-6 239.3 455.3 190.3 1121.7 1312.0 1.542 0.096

2. SB-12 296.7 558.7 339.3 1215.0 1554.3 1.892 0.097

3. SB-16 348.7 563.0 311.7 1352.3 1664.0 1.906 0.099

4. SB-120 240.7 469.0 175.7 1013.0 1188.7 1.588 0.092

5. SB-294 268.3 438.7 236.3 1113.0 1349.3 1.486 0.091

6. SB-102 336.0 492.7 169.3 1204.3 1373.6 1.668 0.092

7. SB-271 279.3 479.7 208.3 1234.7 1443.0 1.624 0.093

8. SB-243 249.0 369.3 188.7 1099.3 1288.0 1.251 0.095

9. SB-9 278.0 473.7 188.7 1123.0 1311.7 1.604 0.093

10. Control 195.3 295.3 161.0 927.7 1088.7 0.080

Mean 273.1 459.5 216.9 1140.4 1357.3 0.093

C.D. (P=0.05)

39.9 142.1 75.2 199.3 174.0 0.005Source- Patra et. al., 2012

A group of heterotrophic moss are known to have the ability to solubilize inorganic phosphorus from insoluble source.

Bacteria- Bacillus spp., Pseudomonas spp.Fungi- Aspergillus spp., Penicillium spp., Trichoderma spp.Yeast- Pchwamiomyces occidentails

The phosphate solubilizers also produce fungi static and growth promoting substances which influence plant growth.PSB can be used for all crops including paddy, millets, oilseeds, pulses and vegetables.

PSB culture

Table 4. Balance sheet of P (Kg/ ha) as influenced by integrated nutrient management in kabuli chickpea

Treatment

Initial soil P status (a) P added

(b)

P uptake by crop (c)

Soil P status after harvest

(d)

Actual gain/ lossover initial status P=(a-d)

P Balance (a+b)-(c+d)

2005-06

2006-07

2005-06

2006-07

2005-06

2006-07

2005-06

2006-07

2005-06

2006-07

2005-06

2006-07

Control 10.4 10.6 0.0 0.0 21.5 22.3 10.0 10.2 -0.4 -0.4 -21.1 -21.9

PSB 10.4 10.6 0.0 0.0 21.7 26.2 10.7 10.4 0.3 -0.2 -22.0 -26.1

FYM (5t/ha) 10.4 10.6 2.6 2.6 21.0 26.4 11.0 11.4 -0.6 0.8 -19.0 -24.5

FYM + PSB 10.4 10.6 2.6 2.6 24.1 31.7 11.7 11.6 -1.3 1.0 -22.8 -30.1

P 12.9 kg/ha 10.4 10.6 12.9 12.9 26.3 28.3 11.4 10.3 -1.0 -0.3 -14.4 -15.2

P 12.9 kg/ ha +PSB 10.4 10.6 12.9 12.9 27.5 31.2 11.5 11.5 -1.1 0.9 -15.7 -19.1

P 12.9 kg/ha +FYM 10.4 10.6 15.5 15.5 27.9 30.6 12.0 11.9 -1.6 1.3 -14.0 -16.5

P 12.9 kg/ha + FYM+ PSB

10.4 10.6 15.5 15.5 31.0 33.6 12.7 12.30 -2.3 1.7 -17.8 -19.8

P 25.8 kg/ha 10.4 10.6 25.8 25.8 27.7 30.6 12.2 11.40 -1.8 0.8 -3.7 -5.6

P 25.8 kg/ha + PSB 10.4 10.6 25.8 25.8 28.6 31.2 12.7 12.30 -2.3 1.7 -5.1 -7.1

P 25.8 kg/ha+FYM 10.4 10.6 28.4 28.4 28.3 36.5 12.9 12.90 -2.5 2.3 -2.4 -10.4

P 25.8 kg/ha+ FYM+ PSB

10.4 10.6 28.4 28.4 30.5 37.7 13.3 13.3 -2.9 2.7 -5.0 -12.0

CD (P=0.05) 4.9 5.6 0.5 0.5 0.5

Source- Tanwar et al., 2010

Table 5. Growth attributes, yield attributes and yield of chickpea as influenced by phosphorus and PSB (Mean of two years)

TreatmentPlant height (cm)

Dry matter

accumulation (g/ plant)

No. of branches

/ plant

Days to

50% flower

ing

Pods/ plant

100 seed weight

(g)

Seeds yield (kg./h

a)

Harvest index

(%)

Phosphorus (kg P2O5/ ha)

0 52.2 15.1 5.8 73.8 16.5 23.0 1408.5 25.930 53.3 15.4 5.9 75.6 22.4 25.8 1624.5 28.260 56.9 16.5 6.3 76.4 26.3 27.4 1765.5 31.1

C.D. (P= 0.05) 2.74 0.8 0.33 1.20 0.92 0.73 78.0 0.79

PSBControl 52.4 15.2 5.8 74.0 20.9 24.7 1556.0 27.8

Inoculated 55.8 16.2 6.2 76.2 22.7 26.1 1643.0 29.0C.D. (P=

0.05) 2.24 0.65 0.27 1.10 0.75 0.6 63.5 0.64

Source-Thenua and Sharma (2011)

SI No.

Treatments

Nodule number/ plant

Dry wt. (mg)/ plant

Plant height (cm)

Dry wt./

plant at 45 DAS (g)

Plot Pl. dry wt. (kg)

Yield (kg/ha)

1 Uninoculated control 6.93 18.40 46.00 2.54 2.33 859

2. RDF (20:50 NP kg/ha) 4.93 24.87 42.67 3.04 3.17 1157

3. RDF + (Rh+PSB) 6.53 34.40 59.33 3.67 3.43 1208

4. Compost (10 t/ha) 7.53 33.17 60.67 3.58 3.33 1033

5. Compost + (Rh+PSB) 8.53 31.53 70.00 3.51 3.50 1054

6. RDF (50%) + compost (2.5t/ha) + (Rh+PSB)

10.07 33.87 65.33 3.80 3.90 1111

7. RDF (50%) + compost (5t/ha) + (Rh+PSB)

11.27 37.73 69.33 4.59 4.37 1265

8. RDF (25%) + compost (5t/ha) + (Rh+PSB)

11.80 35.40 72.67 3.64 3.63 1219

CD at 5% 1.72 5.16 8.41 0.51 0.43 182

Table 6. Integrated nutrient management with biofertilizers in pigeonpea

Source- Patil et al.,2004

under rainfed situations

TreatmentNo. of pods per

plant (g)

1000 seed

weight

Grain yield

(kg/ha)

Haulm yieid kg/ha B:C ratio

Organic manures (OM)OM1: Compost @ 5 t ha-1

OM2: FYM @ 5 t ha-1

C.D. at 5%

63.8660.65NS

19.9819.61NS

19911923NS

31633079NS

3.183.08NS

Levels of rock phosphate(RP) with PSB

RP1: 50 kg rock phosphate ha-1




C.D. at 5%

57.7261.2963.7766.225.59

19.0519.2720.3920.480.70

1775188020692104172

2930304732543255NS

2.883.023.303.320.25

Table 7. Effect of organic manures and rock phosphate with PSB on yield and

Source- Patil et al., 2011

yield attributes, B:C ratio of chickpea (Pooled data)

Interaction No. of pods per plant (g)

1000 seed

weight

Grain yield

(kg/ha)

Haulm yieid kg/ha

B:C ratio

OM1RP1

OM1RP2

OM1RP3

OM1RP4

OM2RP1

OM2RP2

OM2RP3

OM2RP4

Absolute controlC.D. at 5%

58.9563.0065.7167.7656.4959.5861.8364.6848.977.52

19.2119.4220.6020.7118.8919.1220.1820.2518.920.93

180319112120213017471849201720791450229

296930913292330028903003321532102597398

2.933.073.373.362.832.973.223.282.800.34

………..Continued

Source- Patil et al.,2011

VAM, a fungus, colonize the plant root system and increase the growth and yield of crop

Produce growth-promoting substances

Increase nutrient uptake particularly P, Zn and other micronutrients.

We can save 50% Phosphatic fertilizer without affecting the yield.

VAM inoculation improves water relation of the plants

.

VAM

Table 8. Effect of dual inoculation of Glomus fasciculatum (VAM) 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 ( p = 0.05 ) 0.03 1.02 0.02

Source- Bhattacharjee and Sharma (2012)

Varieties

Pod length (cm) 100-seed weight (g) Pod yield per plant (g) Pod yield (t/ha)

V1 V2 V3 Mean V1 V2 V3 Mean V1 V2 V3 Mean V1 V2 V3 Mean

B1 11.68 14.06 11.96 12.56 25.68 29.88 26.51 27.35 50.48 65.14 53.62 56.41 4.487 5.790 4.765 5.014

B2 12.87 15.64 14.93 14.48 28.28 33.75 32.28 31.43 59.62 79.00 72.62 70.41 5.300 7.023 6.455 6.260

B3 14.45 16.17 15.23 15.28 30.58 34.77 33.02 32.80 66.93 81.86 76.00 74.93 5.950 7.277 6.755 6.660

B4 12.36 14.78 13.72 13.62 27.41 31.41 29.10 29.30 55.81 69.43 62.20 62.48 4.960 6.171 5.528 5.553

Mean 12.84 15.16 13.96 27.98 32.45 30.22 58.21 73.86 66.11 5.174 6.565 5.875

SEm±

C.D. (5%)

SEm± C.D. (5%)

SEm±

C.D. (5%)

SEm± C.D. (5%)

BVB x V

0.0450.0390.066

0.0930.0810.137

0.1680.1450.291

0.3480.3020.603

0.4210.3650.730

0.8740.7571.514

0.0640.0560.111

0.1330.1150.231

V1 : Arka Komal B1 : 25% RDF + VAM @ 2 kg ha-1 + PSB @ 2.5 kg ha-1

V2 : Arka Suvidha B2 : 50% RDF + VAM @ 2 kg ha-1 + PSB @ 2.5 kg ha-1

V3 : Selection-9 B3 : 75% RDF + VAM @ 2 kg ha-1 + PSB @ 2.5 kg ha-1

B4 : 100% RDF only (Control)

Source-Ramana et al., 2011

Table 9: Pod length (cm), 100-seed weight (g), Pod yield per plant (g), and Pod yield per hectare (t/ha) of french bean as influenced by soil application of VAM and PSB.

Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR)

• This group of bacteria colonize roots or rhizosphere soil.

• These PGPR are referred to as biostimulants and the phytohormones as they produce indole-acetic acid, cytokinins, gibberellins and inhibitors of ethylene production.

• Some common examples of are Pseudomonas, Burkholdaria, Enterobacter, Erwinia, Mycobacterium, Mesorhizobium, Flavobacterium, etc.

Table 10. Inoculation effects of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on grain yield, biomass, dry weight and nitrogen and phosphorus uptake by grains of chickpea

S.No. Treatments Grain yield (kg ha-1)

Biomass (kg ha-1)

N yield (kg ha-1)

P yield (kg ha-1)

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.

10.11.12.13.14.15.16.

UninoculatedAzos.Azot.MesorhizobiumPseudomonasAzos.+Azot.Azos.+M.Azos.+P.Azot.+M.Azot.+P.M.+P.Azos.+Azot.+M.Azos.+Azot.+P.Azos.+M.+P.Azot.+M.+P.Azos.+Azot.+M.+P.

543.9826.8797.1772.5739.3877.2751.8781.1835.3697.5689.9818.6910.6864.0847.5743.3

1082.31609.31549.41514.41445.81695.81493.11509.61629.41427.81340.81621.81845.81705.61665.31442.8

14.4927.8528.6027.0522.1727.0524.5320.3227.5321.9722.9625.4029.7826.6025.2822.10

2.0883.2523.1682.8902.7473.4592.8693.1323.1422.9633.0173.1473.6063.2773.1513.016

Selected group comparisons

Azospirillum- cotaining versusNon Azospirillum -containing treatments

Significant at 1% probability level


Azotobacter-containing versus non Azotobacter-containing treatments



Mesorhizobium-containing versus non Mesorhizobium-containing treatments

NS NS

Pseudomonas-containingversus non Pseudomonas-containing treatments

NS NS

Source-Asad and Vafa (2011)

How Bio-fertilizer are applied to crops

Methods of biofertilizer application

Soil treatment Seed treatment

Soil Treatment

For each hectare area four kilogram each 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

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

Seedling root deepo For rice crop, a bed is made in

the field and filled with water .Recommended biofertilizers are mixed in this water and the roots of seedlings are dipped for minimum ½ an hour before transplanting.

Application of Biofertilizer on seed

Chickpea seeds before (left) and after (right)treatment with biofertilizer

Table 11. Yield attributes and grain yield of soyabean as influenced by application of phoshphorus with and without PSB, RI and VAM (Pooled mean of three years)

Treatment Pods/plant

Seeds yield/

plant (g)

100 seed

weight (g)

Seed Yield (t/ha)Straw

yield (t/ ha)2005 2006 2007 Mean

No P application 49 11.7 11.3 1.89 2.80 2.41 2.37 2.99

30 kg P2O5/ha through rock phosphate(RP)

56 14.8 12.3 2.00 3.11 2.62 2.58 3.28

60 kg P2O5/ha through RP 63 17.4 12.8 2.66 3.36 2.73 2.92 3.88

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB 57 15.5 12.3 1.95 3.18 2.66 2.60 3.36

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI 59 16.0 12.3 1.93 3.21 2.69 2.61 3.43

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+VAM 60 15.8 12.5 2.03 3.29 2.70 2.67 3.50

30 kgP2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI 64 17.0 13.0 2.13 3.41 2.88 2.81 3.75

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+VAM

67 17.1 13.2 2.52 3.49 2.80 2.94 3.75

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI+VAM 67 17.2 12.6 2.21 3.48 2.89 2.86 3.89

30 kgP2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI+VAM

70 18.8 13.7 2.56 3.67 3.02 3.08 4.08

CD (P=0.05) 7 1.4 0.6 NS 0.20 0.33 - 0.32

Source- Sarawgi et al., 2011

TreatmentTotal

cost (× 103 / ₹ha)

Net profit (×

103 / ₹ha)

B:C ratio

Rhizobium / g of soil (× 105)

PSB/ g of soil (× 105)

No P application 10.3 19.8 1.92 - -

30 kg P2O5/ha through rock phosphate (RP) 11.0 21.6 1.97 1.22 0.35

60 kg P2O5/ha through RP 11.6 25.2 2.17 1.28 0.44

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB 11.0 21.8 1.99 1.25 0.63

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI 11.0 22.0 2.00 1.48 0.44

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+VAM 11.1 22.6 2.02 1.25 0.43

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI 11.0 24.5 2.23 1.54 0.67

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+VAM 11.2 25.8 2.31 1.36 0.64

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+RI+VAM 11.2 25.0 2.23 1.50 0.45

30 kg P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI+VAM 11.2 27.7 2.48 1.58 0.74

CD (P=0.05) - 2.6 - 0.15 0.07

Table 12. Economics of soyabean and microbial population in soil after soyabean harvest as influenced by application of phosphorus with and without PSB, Rhizobium and VAM (Pooled mean of three years)

Source- Sarawgi et al., 2011

What precautions one should take for using biofertilizers?

Biofertilizer packets need to be stored in cool and dry place away from direct sunlight and heat.

Right combinations of biofertilizers have to be used. As Rhizobium is crop specific, one should use for the

specified crop only. Other chemicals should not be mixed with the biofertilizers. The packet has to be used before its expiry, only for the

specified crop and by the recommended method of application.

It is highly beneficial to use biofertilizers along with organic manures.

Limitations of biofertilizers

Non availability of quality biofertilizers.Short shelf life.Improper inoculation.Adverse climatic conditions like waterlogging,

high temperature and salinity and acidity of soil.

Poor AcceptabilityPoor Acceptability among farmers may be attributed to :a. Inconsistent responsesb. Poor quality of carrier based productsc. Sensitivity to temperature and short shelf lifed. Non-compatibility with chemical seed dressers/

fertilizerse. Poor organic carbon in soilsf. Dependence for supply on Government system

Increase crop productivity through balanced use of fertilizers

Use of balanced inorganic fertilizers, organic fertilizers and biofertilizers can provide viable leverage to increase crop productivity.

It enrich the soil with important nutrients.Biofertilizers has potential to generate

additional income to farmers from the same size of land.

FUTURE NEEDSIt is necessary to develop strains of

bacteria suitable for different crops in different agroclimatic condition and soil types to fully harness the benefit from the biofertilizers.

There is need to put in greater effort to achieve better quality of inoculants by making necessary arrangements in storage and transport.

Rhizobium strain SB-16 in soyabean increases grain yield by 41.88% and stover yield by 69.10% over control beside increased N uptake.Application of 30 kg. P2O5/ha through RP+PSB+RI+VAM in soyabean increases seed yield to maximum (30.6%), increases microbial activity and higher net returns. Dual inoculation of VAM and Rhizobium found better for pigeonpea crop.The application of 60 kg P2O5/ha inoculated with PSB recorded the highest value of all yield parameters in chickpea.

CONCLUSION

Use Biofertilizers For Healthy and living soil