Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 38 issue 2 (june 2004) : 147 - 150

QUALITY OF SEWAGE BIOSOLID COMPOSTS AND . THEIR IMPACT ON THE YIELD OF MAIZE

T. Chitdeshwari, P. Savithri
1Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 641003, India
  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Chitdeshwari T., Savithri P. (2024). QUALITY OF SEWAGE BIOSOLID COMPOSTS AND . THEIR IMPACT ON THE YIELD OF MAIZE. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 38(2): 147 - 150. doi: .
Sewage sludge, heterogenous urban waste rich in major and micronutrients. But their heavy metal and pathogenic microorganisms restricted their use in agricultural crop production. Hence a study was formulated to compost the sewage sludge with coir dust, a by product from coir industries and green leaf manure (Glyricidia sp.) and used for assessing the impact on the dry matter yield of maize under green house conditions. The results revealed that seage biosolid composts prepared with coir pith was found to be a best one in restricting the availability of heavy metals and 60 days of composting was found sufficient for land application. Increasing levels of sewage sludge application increased the dry matter yield of maize and the availability of heavy metals were not exceeding the toxic limits in soil amended with sewage sludge compost even upto 20 t ha−1.
    1. Canarutto et a/. (1991). Biocycle, 32(6): 48-50.
    2. Diaz Burgos, M.A. et a/. (1993). Bioi. Fertil. Soils, 16: 145-150.
    3. Garcia, C.T. eta/. (1990). Biocycle, 31: 62-63.
    4. Jimenez, I.E. and Garcia, p.v. (1992). Agric. Eco. Systems Environ., 38: 331-343.
    5. Moreno, J.L. et a/. (1997). Soil Sci. PI. Nutr., 43: 565-573.
    6. Paulraj, C. and Sree Ramulu, U.S. (1994). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci., 42: 485-487.
    7. Peruzzelli. G. et a/. (1985). Communi. Soil. Sci. Plant Anal., 16: 971-986.
    8. Sposito, G. et a/. (1982). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 46: 260-264.
    9. SuduanGao. eta/. (1997). Water Air and Soil Polin., 93: 331-345.

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)