integrated nutrient management in dryland agriculture

1. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:
Dr . P . Laxmi narayana K. Archana
Professor(Agronomy) MSc. 1 st year
RAM/2020-107

2. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
INTRODUCTION
 Nutrient management is a major factor governing soil health status and crop productivity
as most of the Indian soils are multi-nutrient deficient.
 The intensity of nutrient deficiencies in Indian soils under diverse ecosystems is increasing.
 Dryland -ecosystems hold pivotal importance as they contribute a major share to the food
basket of the nation.
 These agro-ecosystems need to be developed with efficient management practices as they
hold the potential to meet the increasing demands of burgeoning population.
 Crop production in these regions is constrained by various factors viz., erratic rainfall, poor
soil conditions, resource poor and marginal farmers, poor infrastructure and market
linkages, etc.
 Integrated nutrient management (INM) system has been promoted in dryland ecosystems
as it takes the advantage of locally available organic resources along with fertilizer nutrients
towards sustainability of dryland systems in India.

3. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
 The maintenance or adjustment of soil fertility and of plant nutrient supply to an optimum
level for sustaining the desired productivity through optimization of the benefits from all
possible sources of plant nutrients in an integrated manner (Roy, R.N., 1995)
 Integrated nutrient management, developed on the principles of eco-friendly and efficient
balanced fertilization and based on optimization of nutrient supplies from all the available
sources, inorganic and organic. INM is a system that helps to restore and sustain crop
productivity and also assist in checking the emerging micro-nutrient deficiencies.

4. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
The objectives of integrated plant nutrient management are:
 To increase the availability of nutrients from all sources in the soil during growing season
 To reduce the inorganic fertilizer requirement
 To match the demand of nutrients by the crop and supply of the nutrients from all
sources
 To optimize the functioning of the soil biosphere with respect to specified function
 To minimize the losses of nutrients to the environment through volatilization,
denitrification, surface runoff and leaching beyond the rooting zone.

5. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
COMPONENTS OF INM:
1.Inorganic fertilizer
a. Nitrogen nutrition
b. Phosphorous nutrition
c. potash nutrition
d. Sulphur nutrition
e. Micro nutrients
2. Cropping system approach
3. Legume bio mulching
a. Legume as green manuring crop
b. Legume as intercrop
4. Organic manures
5. Crop residues
6. Factory wastes
7. Bio fertilizers

6. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
BENEFITS OF INM

7. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU

8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : Innovations in Dryland Agriculture (Nutrient management in dryland
agriculture systems)
Location : Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad ,
Pakistan

9. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
• Impact of nitrogen and various rates of organic fertilizers on percent increase in grain
yield and precipitation use efficiency of wheat
Table - 1
Nitrogen rate (Kg/ha) Organic fertilizer rate Yield increase % Increase in PUE %
00 No organic fertilizer - -
50 No organic fertilizer 10.1 9.7
50 Organic fertilizer (19 t/ha) 34.2 34.1
50 OF (38 t/ha) 37.5 37.1
50 OF (72 t/ha) 39.3 39.1
50 OF(124 t/ha) 39.7 41.0
50 OF (248 t/ha) 41.1 41.7
A. Nawaz and M. Farooq (2016).
Faisalabad , Pakistan.

10. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : Advances in Agronomy.
Location : CRIDA , Hyderabad.

11. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Table-2 Mean crop yield, percentage improvement over control plots, and sustainable yield index (SYI)
Location/
production system
treatments
Ananthapur
(ground nut)
Control 100% RDF 50% RDF +4 Mg /ha
GNS
50% RDF+ FYM 4
Mg /ha
100% organic (FYM
5 Mg /ha)
Mean yield 0.78 0.98 1.02 1.03 0.92
SYI 0.25 0.32 0.48 0.46 0.38
Bangalore (finger
millet)
Control 100% RDF 505 RDF +4Mg/ha
GNS
50% RDF + FYM 4
Mg/ha
100% organic (FYM
5 Mg/ha)
Mean yield 0.84 2.48 2.92 3.28 2.16
SYI 0.04 0.58 0.62 0.59 0.36
Ch. Srinivasarao et al. (2013).
CRIDA , Hyderabad.

12. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science.
Location : Resilient Dryland Systems, International Crop Research Institute for
the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru , Hyderabad .

13. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Table : 3: effect of nutrient management on soya bean :
District Grain yield(Kg/ha) Benefit to cost ratio Rain water use efficiency
(Kg/mmha)
FP BN INM LSD(%) BN INM FP BN INM
2010
Guna 1270 1440 1580 115 1.31 4.58 1.76 1.99 2.19
Shajapur 1900 1600 2410 69 2.99 10.2 3.45 3.85 4.38
vidisha 1130 1410 1700 640 2.16 8.43 1.48 1.84 2.22
2011
Guna 1370 1560 1600 169 1.47 3.4 0.83 0.95 0.97
Shajapur 1220 1400 1510 44 2.45 5.8 1.12 1.28 1.38
vidisha 1190 1380 1460 91 1.47 3.99 0.88 1.02 1.08
FP : farmers practice (application of N,P,K):BN : (balanced nutrition) : INM : integrated nutrient management (50% BN inputs +
vermicompost.

14. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Effects of nutrient managements under dryland conditions in Rajasthan, India
Districts
2010
Grain yield(Kg/ha) Benefit to cost ratio Rain water use efficiency
(Kg/mmha)
FP BN INM LSD% BN INM FP BN INM
Maize
Sawai
madhopur
1560 2180 2530 268 4.28 8.24 2.31 3.23 3.75
Tonk 2840 3350 3560 280 2.32 5.08 4.21 4.96 5.27
Pearl
millet
Sawai
madhopur
1410 1590 1700 234 1.12 2.42 2.09 2.36 2.52
Tonk 2210 2560 2800 325 1.43 3.66 3.27 3.79 4.15
Table :4

15. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Districts
2011
Grain yield (Kg/ha) Benefit to cost ratio Rain water use efficiency(kg/mm
ha)
FP BN INM LSD% BN INM FP BN INM
Maize
Sawai
madhopur
2330 2700 3000 324 2.55 5.69 3.12 3.61 4.02
Tonk 2410 2760 3060 378 1.59 4.59 3.07 3.51 3.89
PEARL
MILLET
Sawai
madhopur
1340 1470 1610 73 0.81 2.26 1.79 1.97 2.16
Tonk 1720 2060 2280 365 1.39 3.47 2.19 2.62 2.90
Table : 5
(ICRISAT), Hyderabad (2013).

16. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences.
Location : Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, India

17. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Nitrogen uptake (kg ha-1 )
Seed stalk Total
T 1 Control 6.35 2.58 8.93
T 2 100% NP (50:25:00 NPK kg ha-1 ) 10.73 4.16 14.88
T 3 100% NP + biofertilizers 11.58 4.87 16.45
T 4 100% N through FYM + biofertilizers 8.58 2.81 11.39
T 5 100 % N through gliricidia+ biofertilizers 8.67 3.18 11.85
T 6 100% NP+ 25kg K ha-1 15.57 5.63 21.21
T 7 100% NP + 25kg K ha-1 + biofertilizers 21.23 8.29 29.52
T 8 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics+ 100% P 13.76 4.95 18.71
T 9 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics+ 100% P +
biofertilizers
15.10 5.96 21.06
T 10 50% N through gliricidia +50% N through inorganics+ 100% P +
biofertilizers + 25kg Kg ha-1
28.05 10.31 38.36
SE (m) + 2.25 0.81 3.03
CD at 5% 6.70 2.41 8.99 6.70 2.41 8.99
Table : 6 Effect of INM on nitrogen uptake by cotton

18. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Phosphorus uptake (kg/ha)
Seed Stalk Total
T 1 Control 0.95 1.31 2.26
T 2 100% NP (50:25:00 NPK kg ha-1 ) 1.66 2.51 4.17
T 3 100% NP + biofertilizers 1.79 2.81 4.59
T 4 100% N through FYM + biofertilizers 1.14 1.65 2.80
T 5 100 % N through gliricidia+ biofertilizers 1.23 1.80 3.03
T 6 100% NP+ 25kg K ha-1 2.30 3.65 5.95
T 7 100% NP + 25kg K ha-1 + biofertilizers 3.17 5.27 8.44
T 8 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics+ 100% P 2.06 3.25 5.30
T 9 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics+ 100% P + biofertilizers 2.31 3.73 6.05
T 10 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics + biofertilizers + 100% P
+ 25kg K ha-1
4.02 6.70 10.72
SE (m)+ 0.31 0.51 0.82
CD at 5% 0.92 1.52 2.43
Table : 7 Effect of INM on phosphorus uptake by cotton

19. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Potassium uptake (Kg/ha)
seed Stalk Total
T 1 Control 1.23 5.04 6.27
T 2 100% NP (50:25:00 NPK kg ha-1 ) 1.80 7.65 9.44
T 3 100% NP + biofertilizers 2.14 8.52 10.66
T 4 100% N through FYM + biofertilizers 1.48 6.31 7.79
T 5 100 % N through gliricidia + biofertilizers 1.57 6.72 8.29
T 6 100% NP + 25kg K ha-1 2.46 10.02 12.48
T 7 100% NP + 25kg K ha-1 + biofertilizers 3.35 13.94 17.29
T 8 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics + 100% P 2.18 9.03 11.21
T 9 50% N through gliricidia + 50% N through inorganics + 100% P +
biofertilizers
2.41 10.09 12.50
T 10 50% N through gliricidia +50% N through inorganics + biofertilizers + 100%
P + 25kg K ha-1
4.27 17.79 22.06
SE (m)+ 0.34 1.41 1.74
CD at 5% 1.00 4.18 5.18
Table : 8 Effect of INM on potassium uptake by cotton

20. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
Location : Akola , India.

21. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Grain yield (q/ha)
2013 2014 2015
N 1 100% RDN(IF) 12.32 11.70 9.17
N 2 50% RDN(IF) +50% RDN FYM 15.78 12.51 10.86
N 3 75% RDN (IF) +25% RDN FYM 11.07 14.14 10.38
N 4 50% RDN (IF)+50% RDN VC 14.93 9.95 8.87
N 5 75% RDN(IF) +25% RDN VC 10.57 14.08 10.17
N 6 50% RDN(IF) +25% RDN FYM+25% RDN VC 14.76 10.45 9.15
N 7 5%RDN(IF)+25%RDNFYM+SD(PS B+ Azspirillum) 14.70 15.16 12.27
N 8 :75% RDN(IF) +25% RDN SD (PSB+ Azospirillum) 13.13 14.31 11.18
N 9 75% RDN(IF) + SD (PSB+ Azospirillum) 10.42 9.80 7.27
SE (m)+ 0.47 0.47 0.55
CD P=0.05 1.40 0.99 1.55
Akola, India Seema M. nemade et al .(2017)
Table : 9 Influence of different treatments on grain yield of chick pea

22. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences.
Location : Akola , India.

23. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Grain yield
2013 2014 2015
N 1 100% RDN(IF) 27.39 30.14 23.10
N 2 50% RDN(IF) +50% RDN FYM 21.69 34.03 26.04
N 3 75% RDN (IF) +25% RDN FYM 20.21 35.74 27.33
N 4 50% RDN (IF)+50% RDN VC 31.66 31.64 24.23
N 5 75% RDN(IF) +25% RDN VC 27.01 35.36 27.04
N 6 50% RDN(IF) +25% RDN FYM+25% RDN VC 19.54 32.78 25.09
N 7 75%RDN(IF)+25%RDN FYM+ST(PSB+ Azspirillum) 26.31 38.86 29.69
N 8 75% RDN(IF) +25% RDN ST (PSB+ Azospirillum) 27.49 37.37 28.56
N 9 75% RDN(IF) + ST (PSB+ Azospirillum) 19.08 31.04 23.77
SE(m)+ 1.94 1.18 0.90
CD
P=0.05
5.82 2.50 2.56
Akola . India Seema M. Nemade et al .(2017)
Table 10 Effect of different treatments on grain yield of sorghum

24. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
Location : Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, College of
Agriculture, GKVK, UAS, Bengaluru, India

25. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Total dry matter production yield (q/ha)
Grain Straw
T1: Absolute control 1.11 0.94 1.79
T2: 100% RDF 38.18 11.64 18.63
T3: FYM @ 10 t ha-1 42.17 12.58 22.18
T4: FYM @ 10 t ha -1 + 50% RDF 56.87 18.09 21.73
T5: FYM @ 10 t ha-1 + 100% RDF 82.67 20.96 25.40
T6: Maize Residue @ 5 t ha-1 28.80 7.64 12.90
T7: Maize Residue @ 5 t ha-1 + 50% RDF 46.13 15.45 20.65
T8: Maize Residue @ 5 t ha-1 + 100%
RDF
50.17 16.37 21.28
S.Em± 2.77 0.72 0.99
CD @ 5% 8.40 2.19 3.01
Eastern Dry Zone of Karnataka, India D.V Prashanth et al .(2019)
Table :11 Effect of long term INM on yield of Finger millet

26. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : Agricultural reviews
Location : Agricultural College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural
University, Killikulam

27. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Table 12:
Treatments Black gram Cotton
Sole crop Sole crop Inter crop
Yield (q/ha) % increase over
control
Yield % increase over
control
Yield % increase over
control
40:20:0 6.67 - 6.3 - 4.0 -
40:20:0 + FYM
0.75 t/ha
7.16 7.3 5.8 - 4.7 7.5
40:20:0 +FYM
0.75 t/ha
+azospirillum.
7.21 8.1 6.3 - 3.8 -
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Killikulam Anabayan, K et al .(2005)

28. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Location : Agricultural Research Station , Gulbarga , Karnataka, India

29. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Table 13 :
Treatments Pigeon pea yield
2005 2006 2007
Pearl millet yield
2005 2006 2007
Pigeon pea equivalent yield
2005 2006 2007
T 1 0 % RDF 12.36 11.11 10.30 7.22 6.55 6.00 15.02 13.50 12.52
T 2 50% RDF 13.98 12.57 11.65 7.83 7.11 6.51 16.89 15.18 14.08
T 3 100% RDF 14.64 13.16 12.20 8.10 7.36 6.74 17.97 16.15 14.97
T 4 FYM @ 5t/ha 14.05 12.63 11.71 7.77 7.06 6.47 16.97 15.25 14.14
T5 FYM
@5t/ha+50%RDF
6.10 14.47 13.42 8.50 7.71 7.07 19.86 17.85 16.55
T6 VC @ 2.5t/ha 14.50 13.03 12.08 8.11 7.37 6.75 18.00 16.18 15.00
T7 VC
@2.5t/ha+50%RDF
17.26 15.52 14.38 9.32 8.46 7.75 21.26 19.11 17.71
T8 PC@ 2.5t/ha 14.18 12.74 11.81 8.18 7.43 6.81 17.51 15.74 14.59
T9 PC@
2.5t/ha+50%RDF
16.37 14.72 13.64 8.96 8.13 7.45 20.24 18.19 16.87
SE m+/- 0.34 0.29 0.27 0.27 0.30 0.25 0.38 0.42 0.41
CD at 5% 1.01 0.85 0.81 0.80 0.88 0.74 1.10 1.20 1.17
RDF – recommended dose of fertilizer : VC – vermi compost : PC- phospho compost

30. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Pigeon pea yield
2005 2006 2007
Green gram yield
2005 2006 2007
T1 0% RDF 12.36 11.11 10.30 2.75 2.49 2.29
T2 50%RDF 13.98 12.57 11.65 3.02 2.74 2.51
T3 100%RDF 14.64 13.16 12.20 3.73 3.39 3.11
T4 FYM @5t/ha 14.05 12.63 11.71 3.06 2.77 2.54
T5 FYM @5t/ha +50%RDF 6.10 14.47 13.42 4.41 4.01 3.67
T6 VC@ 2.5t/ha 14.50 13.03 12.08 4.05 3.68 3.37
T7 VC @2.5t/ha+50%RDF 17.26 15.52 14.38 4.61 4.18 3.84
T8 PC@2.5t/ha 14.18 12.74 11.81 3.72 3.38 3.10
T9 PC @ 2.5t/ha+50%RDF 16.37 14.72 13.64 4.48 4.07 3.73
SE m +/- 0.34 0.29 0.27 0.19 0.17 0.20
CD at 5% 1.01 0.85 0.81 0.58 0.49 0.59
ARS , Karnataka Arjun sharma et al .(2010)
Table 14 :

31. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Source : International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science
Location : AICRP for Dryland Agriculture, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi
Vidyapeeth, Akola , Maharashtra, India

32. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Table 15: Effect of long term INM on soil fertility:
Treatments Available nutrients(Kg/ha)
N P K
T 1 Control 209.1 10.3 280.3
T 2 100%N +100% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 240.4 13.3 317.3
T3 50% N + 50% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 236.6 12.5 313.6
T4 50% N ha-1gliricidia 234.2 11.3 324.8
T5 50% N ha-1 FYM 238.3 12.2 326.7
T6 50% N fertilizers + 50% N gliricidia +100% P2O5
ha-1 fertilizers
250.9 15.1 358.4
T7 50% N fertilizers + 50% N ha-1 FYM + 100%
P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers
257.2 15.8 362.1
T8 100% N ha-1gliricidia + 100% P2O5 ha-1
fertilizers
242.5 14.9 339.7
SE (m) ± 6.4 0.6 11.7
CD at 5% 19.0 1.9 34.6

33. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments Cotton yield Green gram yield
Seed cotton Stalk Grain Straw
T1 Control 648.0 1608.7 245.4 179.0
T2 100% N + 100% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 968.9 2132.4 344.8 247.2
T3 50% N + 50% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 895.2 1833.1 325.6 209.1
T4 50% N ha-1gliricidia 810.7 1683.5 309.8 194.0
T5 50% N ha-1 FYM 827.5 1646.1 321.0 198.7
T6 50% N fertilizers + 50% N gliricidia +100% P2O5
ha-1 fertilizers
1017.6 2169.8 413.4 260.3
T7 50% N fertilizers + 50% N ha-1 FYM + 100%
P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers
1179.9 2207.3 448.4 264.0
T8 100% N ha-1gliricidia + 100% P2O5 ha-1
fertilizers
987.7 1795.7 357.5 231.2
SE (m) ± 63.1 112.6 23.4 13.3
CD at 5% 187.4 334.5 69.6 39.5
Table 16: yield of cotton + green gram (1:1) inter cropping system .

34. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
Treatments GMR Gross Monetary
Returns
NMR Net Monetary
Returns
B:C ratio
T1 Control 51675.69 28873.69 2.27
T2 100% N + 100% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 75407.89 46161.89 2.58
T3 50% N + 50% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 69999.79 43125.79 2.60
T4 50% N ha-1gliricidia 64524.21 38643.21 2.49
T5 50% N ha-1 FYM 66208.75 35177.75 2.13
T6 50% N fertilizers + 50% N gliricidia +100% P2O5
ha-1 fertilizers
82813.32 51117.32 2.61
T7 50% N fertilizers + 50% N ha-1 FYM + 100% P2O5
ha-1 fertilizers
93490.16 56475.16 2.53
T8 100% N ha-1gliricidia + 100% P2O5 ha-1 fertilizers 77102.88 484117.88 2.69
SE (m) ± 3826.127 3826.127 -
CD at 5% 11368.43 11368.43 -
AICRP for Dryland Agriculture, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, Maharashtra. Ashwini Chandel(2017)
Table 17: effect of INM on economics of cotton+ green gram :

35. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU
In conclusion, integrated nutrient management is a tool which can offer good
options and economic choices to supply plants with sufficient amounts of most
macro- and micronutrients and also can reduce the dose of chemical fertilizers,
create favorable soil physiochemical conditions and healthy environment, eliminate
the constraints, safeguard the soil nutrient balance in the long run to an optimum
level for sustaining the desired crop productivity, and find safety methods to get rid of
agriculture wastes

36. DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY,PJTSAU