Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Agricultural Science Digest, volume 34 issue 2 (june 2014) : 144-146


Sarangthem Indira*, Salam Jekendra Singh
1College of Agriculture, Central Agricultural University. Imphal, -795 004 India
Cite article:- Indira* Sarangthem, Singh Jekendra Salam (2024). EFFECT OF VERMICOMPOSTAND BIOFERT1LIZER ON YIELD AND QUALITY OF RABI ONION (Allium cepa L.) CV. PUNA RED . Agricultural Science Digest. 34(2): 144-146. doi: 10.5958/0976-0547.2014.00035.4.
A field experiment was conducted during rabi season of 2008-2009 to study the effect of vermicompost and biofertilizer on yield and quality of rabi onion. The experiment was laid out in the split-plot design with four replications. There were twenty-four treatment combinations comprising of for levels of vermicompost viz. 5, 10, 15, 20 q ha­-1 , three treatments of Azotobacter (A1) i.e. seedling dipping (A1S1), seed treatment (A1S2) and soil application (A2S2) and three treatments of  Azospirillum (A2 ) i.e. seedling dipping (A2S1), seed treatment (A2S2) and soil application (A2S3). The data revealed that, among vermicompost application of 20qha-1 recorded significantly higher high fresh weight of bulb (43.04 g), bulb yield (25 1.20 q ha-1), N content (0.9l8 %), TSS (11.07%) and pungency (6.63 mg / l00g) as compared to control. Among the biofertilizer levels, A1S2 recorded significantly maximum bulb yield (23 .51 q ha­-1) fresh weight of bulb (42.13 q ha­-1) TSS (10.06 %) and it was on par with A2S2. Among the interactions the treatment, 04A1S2  recorded comparatively maximum fresh  eight of  bulb (49.14 g) and bulb yield (269.52 q ha-1)  followed by O4A2S2, 03A1S2 and 03A2S2 which were at par with each other.
  1. Anonymous. (2001). Horticulture Production Year book. National Horticulture Board. Gurgaon. p. 28.
  2. Bhonde, S.R. and Pandey, U.B.(1999). Onion production in India. Newsletter for the Tropics.7:38-41.
  3. Joi, M.B., Shinde,P.A.(1976). Response of onion to Azotobacterization. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University.1:161-162.
  4. Nambiar, K.K.M. and Abrol, I.P.(1989). Long term fertilizer experiment in Indian: An overview. Fertilizer News, 34(4),11-20.
  5. Patel, Z.G. and Vachani, M.U.(1994). Effect of NPK fertilization on the yield and quality of onion. Horticultural Journal,7(1):75-77.
  6. Singh, I.S., Singh, B.D., Singh, K.K. and Singh, R.P.(1989). Character association in selected F­3 progenies of cross K851x BN of mungbean (Vignia radiata L. Wilczek ). Narendra Dev.J.Agric. Res. 4:206-211.
  7. Warade, S.D., Dhumal, M.M. and Shinde, K.G.(1996). Correlation studies in chilli. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural University.21:55-70.

Editorial Board

View all (0)