INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Volume 3, No 1, 2012

Copyright by the authors - Licensee IPA- Under Creative Commons license 3.0
Research article

ISSN 0976 4402

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared

vermicompost

Bhat M.R1, Limaye S.R2

1- Department of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, D.Y.Patil University,CBD Belapr,Pin
code 400614, Navi Mumbai,MS,India
2- Department of Microbiology, R.K.T College, Ulhasnagar,MS,India
manisbhat@gmail.com
doi:10.6088/ijes.2012030131030
ABSTRACT
Earthworms are considered as the friends of farmers. Vermicompost obtained with the help of
them has many benefits to soil, plants and in all to the environment. In the present study the
nutrient status and microbiological enumeration of vermicompost was studied. The
vermicompost was prepared from kitchen waste material obtained from the canteen of R.K.T.
College, Ulhasnagar, Dist. Thane, MS, India. Vermicompost was prepared using Eisenia
fetida. Compost and plain soil were kept as controls throughout the study. The
physicochemical parameters like pH, organic carbon, nitrogen, available phosphorus, calcium,
magnesium and chloride content were analyzed at regular intervals, over a period of 48 days.
On the 48th day the pH of the vermicompost was found to be 7, with organic carbon-10.30%,
nitrogen 0.85 %, P-0.15%, Ca-1.96%, Mg-0.80% and Cl2-0.30 mg/ml. The moisture content
of the vermicompost was 78.05%, with a water holding capacity of 79%. The efficacy of the
prepared vermicompost was studied on the three flowering plants sp. Mirabilis jalapa,
Calendula officinalis, Clitoria ternatea over a period of 75 days by sowing the seeds of the
plants in the pots. Germination time, flowering capacity, chlorophyll content and dimensions
of the leaves were the parameters studied. Significant differences were observed in the plants
grown in the vermicompost as compared to the plants grown in soil and compost without the
vermicompost.
Keywords: Eisenia fetida, vermicompost, kitchen waste, compost, plant growth.
1. Introduction
Everyday city like Mumbai generates around 10,000 tons of organic, recyclable as well as
non biodegradable waste. Large amount of this waste is literally dumped into the drainges,
rivers or on the sea shore. This causes chocking of drainges, rivers and water logging during
monsoon season in Mumbai and in other suburban areas.Such a large organic waste poses a
problem for safe disposal. Most of the waste is either burnt or used for land filling (Fulekar
M.H., 2005). Vermicomposting is an ecofriendly method to degrade this organic waste.
Earthworm species convert this waste into better end product and provide solution to the
problem of organic waste degradation (Nagavallemma KP. et. al., 2006) and (Bhatnagar R.K.
and Palta R. K.,1996)
Vermicompost contains plant hormones like Auxin and gibberlins and enzymes which
believed to stimulate plant growth and discourage plant pathogens. It improves the fertility
and water holding capacity of the soil. It also enriches the soil with useful microorganisms
which add different enzymes like phosphatases and cellulases to the soil. Vermicompost

Received on June 2012 Published on July 2012

312

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

enhances germination, plant growth and thus overall crop yield (S. Gajalakshmi and S.A.
Abbasi, 2004).
Vermicompost was prepared from farm garbage from different combinations of materials and
its nutrient status was studied. Eisenia fetida, Eudrilus eugeniae, Peronyx excavatus were
used for the production of vermicompost. There was about 74 -96 percent, 20-24 percent, 43153 percent increase in N,P,K respectively and a great reduction in C/N ratio about 59-69
percent and in electrical conductivity about 32.6 percent had been observed (Indrajeet, Rai
S.N. and Singh J, 2010). In the other study vermicompost was prepared from kitchen waste
using Eisenia fetida and then vermicompost was chemically analyzed. There was increase in
nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content while decrease in organic carbon, C/N and C/P
ratio as compare to control.In compare to control treatment vermibed with E. fetida showed
1.07, 109.4, 13.2 and 24.7% more increase in carbon, total nitrogen, potassium and
phosphorus, respectively (Suthar S.S. and et. al 2005). Similar kind of study was carried out
on crop residue along with cattle dung (Bansal S. and Kapoor KK 2000). Decomposition of
leaf litter using Eisenia fetida was studied along with nutrient status of vermicompost
(Karmegam N and Daniel T, 2010). Nutrient status of vermicompost from vegetable waste
and cow dung by using three different species (Eisenia foetida, Eudrilus eugeniae and
Perionyx excavates) of earthworms has been reported in 2010. The results showded a high
increase in nitrogen, potassium and high decrease in organic carbon, C/N and C/P
ratios .There was maximum (117.39%) increased found in nitrogen content , while minimum
(9.13%). The maximum (110%) increased found in potassium content of experiment while
minimum (51.61%) increase observed in experiment (Avinash Chuhan and et.al., 2010).
Efficacy of the prepared vermicompost had been tested on the various plants. Effect of
application of vermicompost on the growth of Vigna L. along with chemical analysis of
vermicompost had been reported. The physico-chemical parameters such as pH, electrical
conductivity, organic carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium were analyzed in
different day intervals (0th, 15th, 30th ,45th ,60th day). After 60 days the compost was used for 7
day growth studies of Vigna unguiculata L.walp. On 45th day Ec (2.00), organic carbon
(35.21 percent) and NPK (1.51, 1.03, 0.71 percent) values were high in the treatment with
Eisenia fetida than in treatment with E. eugeniae and in control. The results of plant growth
studies on 7th day showed that the germination percentage (100), shoot length (12.711.62
cm), root length( 2.52.87 cm), number of leaves (4.61.14), fresh weight of the whole
plant(0.860.23 g) and dry weight of the whole plant(0.06 0.02 g) were also significantly
enhanced by the compost prepared using E. fetida. (B. Sivasankari and et al., 2010) Efficacy
of vermicompost to improve fertility and rice yield was reported in 1999 (Vasanthi D. and
Kumaraswamy K, 1999) Similar kind of studies were reported for increased yield of spinach,
onion, potato and in turnip with the application of vermicompost. (Abdullah A., 2008).
Addition of vermicompost had significantly improved soil chemicals and physical properties
in tomato fields (Rasool Azarmi, 2008). The total fungal load was found to be 4 X 105 cfu/gm
and 8.2 X105 cfu/gm in compost and vermicompost respectively (Antonella A. and et al.,
2005). Biodiversity in vermicompost has been reported as bacteria 54 X 106 cfu/gm, fungi 8
X 104 cfu/gm and actinomycetes 1 X 104 cfu/gm (Nagavellemma KP and et al.,2006).
2. Materials and method
2.1 Vermicompost preparation: (Shah K,1999)
1. Kitchen waste (Biodegradable) was collected from R.K.T. College canteen, Ulhasnagar,
MS, India. 5 kg of the waste was mixed with 500 ml of cow dung slurry and was kept for
Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R
International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

313

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

initial degradation into the drum (3 feet in height) ,which was meant for vermicompost
preparation. The drum was covered with gunny bag and water was sprinkled every day. The
stirring of the drum was carried out every day to remove methane and the other gases from
the drum. The initial degradation was carried out for 4 days.
2. On fifth day fifty earthworms (Eisenia fetida) were added in the drum along with one
kilograms of fresh kitchen waste. Everyday water was sprinkled on the drum.
3. The completed decomposed biomass was screened to separate earthworms and
vermicompost.This was considered as vermicompost for further analysis and efficacy study.
Samples were taken at regular intervals for chemical analysis and microbial enumeration.
2.2 Compost preparation: (Shah K,1999)
Compost was prepared by the same process of vermicompost except addition of earthworms.
2.3 Analysis of nutrient status
Throughout the study prepared compost and plain garden soil was considered as control.
Nutrient status was analysed for vermicompost, Compost and plain garden soil on every
alternate 12th day starting from 0th day. Nutrient analysis was carried out for
C,N,P,Ca,Mg,Cl2.
2.3.1 Carbon estimation: (Walky and black method) (Trivedi and Goel, 1986)
1. Oven dried sample was passed through 0.5 mm sieve then 10 grams of the sample was
added to 500ml flask.
2. 10 ml of 1N K2Cr2O7 AND 20 ML of Concentrated H2SO4 was mixed in it. Flask was
then kept for 30 minutes for incubation then content was diluted to 200 ml with
distilled water.
3. 10 ml of phosphoric acid and 1ml of DPA indicator was added to the sample and was
then titrated against 0.5N ferrous ammonium sulphate. End point was brilliant green.
Calculations:

% Carbon = 3.951/G X (1-T/S)

G= wt. of the sample

S= ml of Ferrous ammonium sulphate
T=Titration reading in ml.
2.3.2 Nitrogen estimation: (Microkjeldhal method)
1. 0.5 gms of the sample was wrapped in aluminum foil and then was put in a kjeldhal
flask. The catalyst mixture was added and digestion was carried out.
2. Sample was heated on flame for 10-30 min till charred. The flask was rotated until the
organic matter destruction and till gray colored solution obtained.
3. Digested sample was then diluted with 10 ml of distilled water and 5ml was taken in
condensation flask. Flask was then heated till solution boils.
4. At the end titration was carried out with 0.1 ml HCl by adding phenolphthalein
indicator. End point Purple to pink.

Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R

International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

314

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

Calculations:
%N = (A-B) X N of HCl X 1.4/ wt. of the sample.
A= ml of HCl used, B= ml of HCl used for blank
2.3.3 Calsium estimation
1. 50 gms of dried sample was taken in 500 ml beaker and 100 ml of 40% ethyl alcohol
was added and mixture was shaken for 15 min.
2. Solution was filtered through whatman filter paper no.2. Sample was then washed
with 40 % ethyl alcohol for 4-5 times. Mixture was stirred and kept overnight with
100 ml of ammonium sulphate, was filtered then and used as extract for Ca
estimation.
3. Volume of extract was made upto 250 ml with distilled water. 10 ml of this was taken
and 2 ml of NaoH, 100 mg of murexide indicator was added. Solution turns pink.
4. Titration was carried out with 0.01 M EDTA solution. End point Pink purple
Calculations:
% Ca =

A X 400.8 X V/ v X 1000 X S

A= Volume of EDTA used in ml , V= Total volume of extraxt=500 ml, S= Wt. of the

sample= 50gm,
V= Volume of extract in ml.
2.3.4 Magnesium estimation
1. 100ml of ammonium acetate was added to 50 gms of dried sample. Solution was
leached overnight, and filtered through whatman filter paper no. 42
2. Extract was made to 250 ml with distilled water. 10 ml of extract was taken and 2 ml
of buffer solution was added with 100mg of Erichrome black T indicator.
3. Solution was then titrated with 0.01 M EDTA. End point- wine red to blue.
Calculations:
%Mg = (B-A) X 400.8 X V/ V X 1.645 X 1000 X S
2.3.5 Chloride estimation
1. 50 ml of the sample and 2 ml of K2Cr2O7 was mixed together.
2. Titration against 0.02N AgNO3 was carried out until red tinge obtained.
Calculations:
% Cl2 = Titration reading in ml X Normality of AgNO3 X 35.5 / ml of solution taken X 2
2.3.6 Phosphorus estimation
1. 1 gm of dried sample was taken and 200 ml of 0.002 N H2SO4 was added in it and
mixture was stirred for half an hour.
2. Solution was then filtered through Whatman filter paper no. 42.
Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R
International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

315

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

3. 5 ml of filtrate was taken and 2 ml of ammonium molybdate along with 05 drops

of SnCl2 was added in it.
4. Total volume of the mixture was made to 100 ml with distilled water and
absorbance was taken at 690 nm.
5. Standard graph was plotted and readings were extrapolated.
Calculation:
% Available Phosphorus = mg P/l of sample/50.
2.4 Enumeration of microorganisms
1. 1 gram of sample was collected and mixed in 10 ml of Sterile saline and dilutions
were made up to 10-6. Last three dilutions were spread on the respective agar for
respective temperature and time.
2. After incubation period CFU count was taken.
Organisms

Media used

Incubation period

Total bacterial count

St. Nutrient agar

Room temperature /24 hrs

Yeast Mould count

St. PDA

Room temperature /48 hrs

Thermophilic count

St. Nutrient agar

550C /24 hrs

2.5 Moisture content estimation

1. 10 gm of sample was transferred to pre weighed crucible.
2. Crucible was then kept at 105oC for 12-16 hrs.
3. Crucible was then cooled in desiccator.
Calculations: % moisture content = d/10 X 100 where D = loss of wt. after heating.
2.6 Water holding capacity estimation
1. Wet filter was kept at the bottom of strainer and wt. of strainer was taken (a).
2. Strainer was filled with sample and then it was kept in beaker of water for 3 hrs (b).
3. Strainer was wiped, dried and its wt. was determined (c).
Calculation: % Water holding capacity = c-b/b-a X 100
2.7 Temperature and pH estimation
1. Temperature and pH was recorded every 12th day with thermometer and pH of the
sample was determined by the standard electrometric method for every 12th day.
2.8 Efficacy testing: (Field work)

Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R

International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

316

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

1. Ten Seeds of the each of the three plants were sown in the pots with only soil, soil +
prepared compost and soil + prepared vermicompost and filed work was carried over
a period of 75 days.
2. Pots with only soil and soil + prepared compost were the controls and soil + prepared
vermicompost was test throughout the field work.
3. % germination, flowering capacity, chlorophyll content and dimensions of the leaves
were the parameters studied during the field work.
2.9 Chlorophyll content estimation
1. One gram of finely cut and well mixed sample of leaf was taken. It was ground to fine
pulp with mortar and pestle by adding pinch of MgCO3 and 1 ml of acetone.
2. The mixture was washed with 9 ml of acetone and it was then centrifuged at 500 rpm
for 5 minutes.
3. Supernatant was collected and Optical density was read at 660 and 540 nm.
Calculation:
Mg of total chlorophyll tissue =
20.2 X (absorbance at 660 nm) + 8.02 (absorbance at 660 nm) X V/100 X W
V= Final volume of extract in ml.
W= 1 gm (Weight of the sample)
3. Results
Table 1: Physicochemical parameters
Day

Treatment Temp(0C) pH

%C

%N

%P

%Ca

%Mg

Cl2
mg/ml

Test

27

6.5

5.82

0.61

0.12

1.60

0.63

0.37

Control I

26.5

6.5

5.44

0.56

0.11

1.62

0.63

0.30

Control II

27

6.9

4.65

0.58

0.11

1.58

0.60

0.35

Test

31

7.2

10.49 0.72

0.15

1.84

0.73

0.37

Control I

31

6.5

5.82

0.61

0.14

1.67

0.63

0.34

Control II

27

6.5

5.05

0.56

0.11

1.57

0.58

0.34

Test

35

11.72 0.75

0.22

1.87

0.73

0.43

Control I

34

5.79

0.67

0.11

1.73

0.68

0.31

Control II

27

6.5

4.86

0.58

0.20

1.58

0.65

0.30

Test

28

10.20 0.95

0.15

1.96

0.79

0.32

Control I

45

6.9

6.60

0.09

1.74

0.68

0.27

12

24

36

0.67

Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R

International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

317

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

48

Control II

27

6.5

4.85

0.58

0.05

1.58

0.65

0.31

Test

26

10.30 0.85

0.15

1.96

0.80

0.30

Control I

35

6.9

7.37

0.70

0.09

1.79

0.68

0.25

Control II

26

6.5

4.80

0.58

0.05

1.58

0.65

0.32

Table 2: Microbial Count

Days

Treatment

Total bacterial count Yeast and mold Thermophilic

(cfu/ml)
count (cfu/ml)
count (cfu/ml)

Control I

5 X 103

3 X 103

18 X 102

Control II

4 X 104

5 X 106

4 X 102

Test

8 X 103

5 X 106

3 X 102

Control I

5 X 104

3 X 106

3 X 103

Control II

6 X 104

3 X 103

2 X 102

Test

5 X 105

7 X 106

3 X 106

Control I

6 X 105

7 X 103

6 X 105

Control II

5 X 103

3 X 103

3 X 102

Test

4 X 104

7 X 102

5 X 104

Control I

6 X 106

4 X 104

3 X 107

Control II

5 X 105

5 X 103

2 X 102

Test

8 X 107

7 X 102

2 X 102

Control I

2 X 106

2 X 102

5 X 104

Control II

3 X 104

3 X 103

2 X 102

Test

8 X 107

7 X 103

2 X 103

12

24

36

48

Key: Cfu/ml = Colony forming unit / milliliter

Table 3: Water holding capacity and Moisture content on 48th day
Sample

% water holding capacity

% Moisture content

Vermicompost

78.95

78.50

Compost

57.40

64.60

Soil

46.49

39.60

Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R

International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

318

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

Table 4a: Field work analysis

Sr.No. Treatment

% germination on 5th day

Chlorophyll content (mg/gm of

tissue) on 75th day

Ma

Mi

Ba

Ma

Mi

Ba

1.

Vermicompost

100

100

100

20.20

34.32

11.81

2.

Control I

90

90

90

14.10

34.32

11.28

3.

Control II

70

80

90

14.11

20.29

11.23

Table 4b: Flowering capacity and Height on 75th day

Sr.No. Treatment

Total no of flowers

Height in inches

Ma

Mi

Ba

Ma

Mi

Ba

1.

Vermicompost

12

10

20

27

30

38

2.

Control I

10

08

15

17

29

33

3.

Control II

06

05

09

15

29

35

Key:
Mi-Mirabilis (Mirabilis jalapa)
Ma-marigold (Calendula officinalis)
Ba-Balsam (Clitoria ternatea)
Table 4c: Dimensions of leaves (Breadth and Length in cms on 75th day
Sr.No. Treatment
Mirabilis Marigold Balsam
L

1.

Vermicompost

1.8

0.5

5.7

2.2

07

2.5

2.

Control I

1.7

0.3

05

2.5

06

02

3.

Control II

1.7

0.3

4.3

02

05

02

Key:
L-length, B-Breadth
Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R
International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

319

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

4. Discussion
The result of physicochemical parameters like pH, temperature, organic carbon, N, P, Ca, Mg
and chloride are depicted in (Table 1).The initial pH of the test was 6.5 and it was 7 at the end
of the treatment. The initial temperature of vermicompost drum was 27oC which later
increased to 350 C due to composting and degradation action by earthworms. Vermicompost
was ready within 48 days and hence other control observations were also carried out till the
48th day only. Decrease in organic carbon content was observed which may be due to loss of
CO2 during earthworm action in test. Nitrogen content on 0th day in vermicompost drum was
0.61% and it increased up to 0.85%. Similarly the content of P, Ca, Mg and chloride was
found more as compared to the controls. For microbial analysis (Table 2) total bacterial count,
yeast and mold count, thermophilic bacterial count was determined. Total bacterial count was
highest in vermicompost as compared to the other two controls. The thermophilic bacterial
count was found to be highest in the vermicompost between 12th and 24th day, whereas in
compost thermophic count was high till 48th day , this indicates that the compost was not
ready even on the 48th day and composting was still going on. Increase in temperature during
degradation of waste could have enhanced the thermophilic count. There was no much
difference seen with respect to yeast and mold count in the test as compared to controls.
During field work analysis % moisture content, % water holding capacity was also
determined. Both these parameters were high for the vermicompost as compared to compost
and soil (Table no. 3). On 5th day the % germination for vermicomposted plants was 100%
and 70-90 % for controls. Chlorophyll content was found higher in the leaves of all the three
plants potted in vermicompost (Table 4a). Flowering capacity was more in vermicomposted
plants indicated by bunches of flowers on the respective plants (Table 4b). Height of plants,
breadth and length of leaves was found more in all the three plants of vermicompost as
compared to controls (Table 4c). Thus it can said that the prepared vermicompost is better in
all aspect like high microbial load, high water holding capacity and moisture content and
comparatively good for germination, Chlorophyll content, flowering capacity and overall
growth of plants as compared to plain soil and composted material.
Acknowledgement
The author is thankful to the almighty and Parents for their encouragement and he is thankful
to staff members of Usuf Meher Ali Centre of Vermicomposting, Panvel for their immense
interest and support.
5. References
1. Abdullah Adil Ansari, (2008), Effect of Vermicompost on the Productivity of Potato
(Solanum tuberosum), Spinach (Spinacia oleracea) and Turnip (Brassica campestris),
World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 4 (3), pp 333-336.
2. Antonella Anastasi , Giovanna Cristina Varese and Valeria Filipello Marchisio,
(2005), Isolation and identification of fungal communities in compost and
vermicompost Mycologia, 97(1), 2005, pp. 3344.
3. Avnish Chauhan, Sanjeev Kumar, Amit Pal Singh and Mohit Gupta ,(2010),
Vermicomposting of Vegetable Wastes with Cowdung Using Three Earthworm
Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R
International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

320

Nutrient status and plant growth promoting potential of prepared vermicompost

Species Eisenia foetida, Eudrilus eugeniae and Perionyx excavates, Nature and
Science , 8(1), pp 34-42.
4. B. Sivasankari, W. Anitha Reji and Thilagavathy Daniel, (2010), Effect and
Application of Vermicompost Prepared from Leaf Materials on Growth of Vigna
unguiculata L. Walp, Journal of pure and applied microbiology, 4 (2), pp 889-898.
5. Bansal S. and Kapoor K.K.-(2000)- Vermicompost of crop residues and cattle dung
with Eisenia Fetida-Nutrient content of vermicompost Bioresourse technology,
73(2) , pp 95-98.
6. Bhatnagar R.K. and Palta R. K.-(1996)-Earthworms,Vermiculture
vermicomposting-Kallyani publisher, Ludhiana, pp 106.

and

7. Fulekar M.H.-(2005)-Environmental Biotechnology- 5th edition Oxford and IBH

publisher, pp 177-182.
8. Indrajeet, - and Rai, S.N. and Singh, J, (2010), Vermicomposting of farm garbage in
different combination. Journal of Recent Advances in Applied Sciences, 25(5), pp 1518.
9. Karmegam, N. and Thilagavathy Daniel, (2000), Decomposition of leaf litters using
the compost worm, Eisenia fetida. Indian Journal of Environment and Ecoplanning,
3(1), pp 111-116.
10. Nagavallemma KP, Wani SP, Stephane Lacroix, Padmaja VV , Vineela C, Babu Rao
M Sahrawat K. L,(2004). Vermicomposting: Recycling wastes into valuable organic
fertilizer., SAT eJournal , ejournal.icrisat.org, An Open Access Journal published by
ICRISAT ,2(1), pp 1-16.
11. Rasool A, Mousa Torabi Giglou and Rahim Didar Taleshmikail, (2008), Influence of
vermicompost on soil chemical and physical properties in tomato (Lycopersicum
esculentum) field, African Journal of Biotechnology, 7 (14), pp 2397-2401.
12. S S Suthar, J Watts, M Sandhu, S Rana, A Kanwal, D Gupta, M S Meena, (2005),
Vermicomposting of kitchen waste by using Eisenia fetida (Savigny), Asian Journal
of Microbiology Biotechnology and Environmental Sciences ,7 (3), pp 541-544
13. S. Gajalaksmi and K.A.Aabbasi, (2004), Earthworms and Vermicomposting, Indian
journal of Biotechnology, 3, pp 486-494.
14. Shah K , (1999), Decomposition of organic matter by soil microorganisms, PhD thesis,
Thesis section, Mumbai University Library.
15. Trivedi R. K. and Goel P.K., (1986), Chemical and biological methods for water
pollution studies, Environmental publication , Karad ,India, 1st edition, pp 250.
16. Vasanthi D., Kumaraswamy K, (1999)- Efficacy of Vermicompost to Improve Soil
Fertility and Rice Yield - Journal of the Indian Society of Soil Science,47(2) , pp 268272.

Bhat M.R, Limaye S.R

International Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 3 No.1, 2012

321