Comparison of Struvite Compost with other Fertilizers on Maize Fodder Production

Abstract

The present experiment was conducted to examine the effect of struvite compost, cowdung and urea on maize fodder production. The experiment was designed in a Completely Randomized Deign (CRD) with three replications. The treatments under study were T₀-Control, T₁-Struvite Compost @10MT/ha, T₂-Cowdung @ 10MT/ha, T₃-Urea@ 250kg/ha. The total biomass yields of maize fodder was significantly (P<0.01) higher in struvite composting (6.88 t/ha) treatment group over control (3.03 t/ha), cowdung (4.68 t/ha) and urea (6.78 t/ha). The plant height was similar and more in treated group than control but in case of plant diameter similar effect was observed when applied struvite compost and urea. Leaf area index was highest (2018.11 cm²) in struvite compost. The crude protein content was the highest (15.63%) in struvite compost. In case of ether extract, similar effect was observed when applied struvite compost and urea. The highest value (3.60%) was observed when cowdung was applied. In case of ash content, the similar effect was observed when applied struvite compost and cowdung. The potassium content of maize was significantly (P<0.01) higher in struvite compost (35.54 ppm) treated group than control but in case of phosphorus content of maize fodder, similar effect was observed when applied struvite compost, urea and cowdung. The carbon content of post harvesting soil was significantly (P<0.05) higher in struvite compost group among other treated groups. The highest carbon content value (2.03%) in the soil of struvite compost treated group indicates the maximum carbon sequestration occurred than all other treatments. The nitrogen content of post harvesting soil was significantly (P<0.05) higher in struvite compost treatment than control. Therefore, considering the above mentioned parameters, the application of struvite compost could be recommended for maize fodder production.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/jesnr.v6i2.22123

J. Environ. Sci. & Natural Resources, 6(2): 227-231 2013