Abstract: A study was carried out to compare the efficacy of cowdung and N.P.K fertilizer on the growth of cowpea (Vignaunguiculata), soya bean (Glycinemax), tomato (Lycopersiconesculentum) and pepper (Capsicum frutescens). This was carried out at the Agronomy Research Farm of the University of Agriculture, Makurdi. The experimental design was a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) in three (3) replicates. The treatments examined were 150g of cowdung, 130g of cowdung and 25g of N:P:K. For all experimental plants, cowpea under150 g cowdung treatmentsresponded best, followed by 130g of cowdung. Soybean performance was enhanced by 150g and 130g cowdungwhile its least weight was recorded under NPK treatment. Tomato to which NPK soil was applied recorded the highest plant weight with the least value recorded under130g and 150g cowdung soil treatment. Performance of pepper was significantly low for all treatments. Therefore, cowdung has proven effective on the growth of cowpea, soybean, tomato and pepper. The implications of the findings in this work to agricultural enhancement in Nigeria and generally are discussed.
Keywords: Cowdung, Cowpea, Soybean, Pepper, Tomato, Efficacy.
Introduction
Manure is anything that has been added to the soil to increase its fertility for plant growth (Holttum et al, 1991; Ramadan et al., 2007; Alexandria, 2007; Berdegue et al., 1994, Bray, 1945). Manures can be divided into two classes: organic and inorganic manure (Zeidan, 2007; Bressani, 1985, Cartwright et al., 1990; Chang et al., 2007). Organic manures are derived from decaying material of plants or animal origin (Maerere et al., 2001; Chinma et al, 2008; Dave et al., 2003; Davis et al., 1991; Fall et al., 1999). Inorganic manures, also known as fertilizers, are derived from chemical processes, most of which are man-made. Inorganic manures (fertilizers) are relatively simple in structure, they break down easily and are available to plants rather quickly, but they usually provide only one of the many substances needed by plants for their growth (Holttum et al, 1991, Abou et al, 2006; Diwarkar, 2004; Erine, 1979; Eshbaugh et al., 1983).Apart from these, they fail to contribute immensely to good soil texture when compared with organic manures apart from their implication inenvironmental pollution through eutrophication and other means (Kushwaha and Ochi, 1991, Oad et al, 2004; Fery, 1990; Flordia, 1982; Hancock, 1992; Jone, 1999; Kent, 2002).
Therefore, some growers prefer to use organic source of nutrients instead of chemical fertilizers to grow plants. Organic sources do have the advantages of containing slow-release of nutrients, posing little risk of soluble salt injury, and contributing considerable amount of organic matter to the soil. Continued use of manures builds organic matter in soil and improves its structure. It is known that good soil structure helps improve water holding capacity, aeration and drainage (Deksissa et al, 2008; Lai et al., 2005; Leaiza et al., 1989; Levetin et al., 1998; Ronen et al., 2002; Schaffer, 1938).
McLeod (1983); Tindall (1986); Luther (1987); Stuessy (1990) and Kushwaha and Ochi (1999) had observed that the use of animal wastes in crop production resulted in a larger net benefit to society than the use of mineral fertilizer and therefore advocated the use of animal waste as environment friendly manure. According to Simpson et al. (1986), organic manures can be used to supplement the inorganic fertilizers, particularly cowdung which has been found to possess manuring effect to crop which could serve as a substitute for the NPK fertilizer. It has been reported that cowdung contains approximately 0.6% nitrogen, 0.1% phosphorus and 0.5% potassium (Lombini et al., 1991; Oikeh et al., 1993; Reyhan et al., 2006; Pickergill, 1989). Fermentation of this organic manure is important so as to bring easy utilization of the minerals available by the plants for better performance (Obi et al., 1995; Oad, 2004; Shi et al., 2000; Rowell et al., 2002; Krsendu, 1999; Giovanuncci, 1999; Extension Service of Mississippi State University, 1986). Ande (2000) tested the effect of cowdung on the growth of maize and reported that the effect of cowdung on maize was very close to the manuring effect of NPK fertilizer. Cowdung manure has subsequently been tested on other crops like tomato, pepper, cowpea and soybean to compare its manuring effect with that of NPK fertilizer.
Crops do better and yield more when fertilizer is applied. However, due to its exorbitant price and lack of steady supply, it is hardly applied by most farmers. Even when applied, it is rarely sufficient. In such situations, crop yields are bound to drop. Therefore, it is pertinent to seek alternative means of sustaining high crop yields. This study aimed at comparing the efficacy of cowdung as organic manure and NPK fertilizer as inorganic manure on the growth of cowpea, soyabean, tomato and pepper in Nigeria.
Materials and Methods
Seeds of tomato, chilli pepper, cowpea and soybean were bought from Wadata and Wurukum markets in Markudi, Nigeria. Dried cowdung was collected from cattle market in NorthBank, Makurdi. N:P:K fertilizer (15:15:15)was bought from Modern market in Makurdi. The experimental site was located in the Agronomy Research Farm of the University of Agriculture, Makurdi. The same quantity of soil was measured in perforated containers and used for all the treatments. Seeds were planted following the method of Aguoru et al. (2015b). The experiment was designed in such a way that there were three (3) treatments for each plant and each treatment had three replicates.130g cowdung, 150g cowdung and 25g NPK fertilizer were compared accordingly. All the treatments were left for one week before planting to allow for soil microbial decomposition essential for nutrient availability. Cultural practices were maintained in the screen house to ensure plant survival and zero insect interference. Measurement of growth parameters commenced two (2) weeks after germination. This was maintained at two weeks interval. The following parameters were measured under varying treatments: plant height, number of leaves per plant, number of branches per plants and fresh weight of plants. Data were appropriately analyzed for descriptive statistics. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was computedas test statistics at 95% confidence limit.
Results and Discussion
Mean plant height at different treatments is presented in table 1. The highest growth (98.4cm) was recorded for cowpea at 130g of cowdung. 63cm was recorded for cowpea at 150g of cowdung. Pepper gave 19.6cm at 150g cowdung (fig 1). Tomato responded best to NPK followed by 130g of cowdung. Soybean recorded its highest height from 130g cowdung. This clearly indicates that plant growth was generally enhanced by organic manure.
Soybean to which 150g of cowdung was applied recorded the highest number of leaves (108) while soybean to which 130g of cowdung was applied recorded (88 leaves) (Table 2). Tomato to which 25g of NRK was applied performed closely (87 leaves). The least number of leaves (27) was recorded for pepper to which 150g of cowdung was added. This is displayed in figure 2. Tomato responded better than NPK followed by that to which 150g of cowdung was added. Cowpea appears to have been favoured most by 150g cowdung soil closely followed by 130g cowdung soil, recording its least number of leaves from NPK soil. This has proven thatleaf production in cowpea, soybean and tomatoes was enhanced by 150g cowdung, 130g cowdung and 25g NPK soils respectively. Results obtained from ANOVA showed significant difference to treatment interactions in each plant. Tomato however showed no significant difference to treatment.
From table 3, soybean to which 130g of cowdung was applied recorded the highest number of branches (7) followed by cowpea and soybean (6 each) at 150g cowdung. However, tomato at 130g and 150g of cowdung recorded the least result (1 branch each) as shown in figure 3. This shows that 130g of cowdung increased the production of branches of soybean, followed by 150g of cowdung soil and the least in NPK. Cowpea produced the highest number of branches from 150g cowdung soil followed by 130g cowdung and the least number with 25g NPK soil. In terms of weight (table 4), cowpea to which 150g cowdung was applied gave the highest value (80g) while soybean to which the same quantity ofcowdung was applied gave (50.5g). Soybean under 130g of cowdung performed closely (50.1g). Tomato under 25g of NPK treatment recorded (49. 6g).Least mean weight was recorded for pepper at 150g of cowdung (9.2g) as illustrated in figure 4.
For all experimental plants, cowpea under150 g cowdung treatmentsresponded best, followed by 130g of cowdung. Soybean performance was enhanced by 150g and 130g cowdungwhile its least weight was recorded under NPK treatment. Tomato to which NPK soil was applied recorded the highest plant weight with the least value recorded under130g and 150g cowdung soil treatment. Pepper performed significantly low for all treatments. This aligns with the work of Bill (2001); Zdenka et al. (2010); Toapanata (2001) and Mehka (2002) where application of organic matter was found to enhance crop performance.
The performance of these crops, could be as a result of the high content of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contained in cowdung (Lombini et al., 1991; Oikeh et al., 1993; Reyhan et al., 2006). Nitrogen is particularly important for enzyme (protein) synthesis while both nitrogen and phosphorus are active components of nucleic acids and ATP (energy packet). This corroborates the findings of Holttum et al. (1991) where nitrogen was essential in the healthy growth plantorgans such as leaf and stem.
This research has proven that in a third world country like Nigeria where poverty ravages the people and agricultural inputs like inorganic fertilizer is almost out of reach and most often unavailable, where cowdung litters the streets, the farmers could turn to this cheap source of organic manure which enhances the growth of crops in this experiment. This reduces the cost of input material and raises harvest. These are natural organic manures which have low tendency for environmental pollution.
References
[1] M.M.A. El-Magd, A.M. El-Bassiong and Z.F. Fawzy, Effect of organic manure with or without chemical fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of some varieties of broccoliplants, Journal of Applied Science Research, 2(2006), 791-798.
[2] C.U. Aguoru, L.O. Omoigui and O.J. Olasan, Characterization of eggplant seedlings using quantitative trait analysis, Scholars Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, 2(1B) (2015b), 54-60.
[3] V.A. Alexandria, Wind erosion process and control in the Sahelian zone, American Journal of Botany, 8(1) (2007), 73-240.
[4] V.A. Ande, Comparative study of the effect of cowdung and fowl dropping on the growth and yield of maize, Undergraduate Project, (2000), Biological Science, University of Agriculture, Makurdi.
[5] M. Berdegue, M.K. Harris, D.W. Riley and B. Villalon, Host plant resistance on pepper to the pepper weevil, anthonomuseugenii Cano, South Western Entomologist, 19(1994), 265-271.
[6] Bill, Manure and Soil Organic Matter, Plant State Field Crops Publication, (2001), 4-6.
[7] R.H. Bray and L.T. Kurtz, Determination of total organic and available forms of phosphorous in soils, Soil Science, 59(1945), 39-45.
[8] R. Bressani, Nutritive Value of Cowpea, John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Minnesota, (1985), 1-26.
[9] B. Cartwright, T.G. Teague, L.D. Chandler, J.V. Edelson and G. Bentsen, An action threshold for management of the pepper weevil (Coleopera: Curculionidae) on bell peppers, Journal of Economic Entomology, 83(1990), 2003-2007.
[10] E.H. Chang, R.S. Chung and Y.H. Tsai, Effect of different application rates of organic fertilizer on soil enzyme activity and microbial population, Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 53(2007), 132-140.
[11] C.E. Chinma, I.G. Emelife and I.C. Alemede, Physicochemical and functional properties of some Nigeria cowpea varieties, Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 7(2008), 186-190.
[12] D. Dewitt and P.W. Bosland, Pepper Profile: The Complete Chile Pepper Book, Timber Press, (2003), 34-35
[13] D.W. Davis, E.S. Oplinger and J.D. Doll, Alternative Field Corps Manual, University of Wisconsin Madison,(1991), 53-55.
[14] T. Deksissa, I. Short and J. Allen, Effect of soil amendment with compost of growth and water use efficiency of amaranth, In: Proceedings of the UCOWR/NIWR Annual Conference: International Water Resources: Challenges for the 21st Century and Water Resources Education, July 22-24 (2008), Durhan, NC.
[15] Diwarkar, What are Organic Manures? Oxford University Press, (2004), 7-9.
[16] F.R. Erine, West African Crops, Oxford University Press, London, (1979), 109.
[18] P.A. Fall, M. Fredrikson, O. Axelson and A.K. Granerus, Nutritional and occupational factors influencing the risk of Parkinson's dxs: A control study in South-eastern Sweden, Movement Disorder, 14(1) (1999), 28-37.
[19] Eshbaugh, W.H.S.I Guttman and M.J. Mcleod, The Origin and Origin and Evolution of Domesticated Capsicum Species, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, (1983), 34-35.
[20] Extension Service of Mississippi State University, Commercial Production of Southern Pea, Mississippi State University Publication, (1986), 22-25.
[21] P.A. Fall, M. Fredrikson, O. Axelson and A.K. Granerus, Nutritional and occupational factors influencing the risk of Parkinson'sdisease: A case control study in South Eastern Sweden, Movement Disorders, 14(1) (1999), 28-37.
[22] R.L. Fery, The cowpea: Production, utilization and research in the United States, Horticultural Reviews, 12(1990), 197-222.
[23] Florida Cooperative Extension, Southern Pea in the Florida, A Small Farm Production Guide, (1982), 1-9.
[24] E. Giovannucci, Tomatoes, Tomato - based products, lycopene and cancer remedy, Journal of National Cancer Institute, 91(4) (1999), 319-331.
[25] J.F. Hancock, Plant Evolution and the Origin of Crop Science, Englewood Cliff's Publisher, (1992), 275-276.
[26] R.E. Holttum and I. Enoch, Gardening in the Tropics, USA, Cornell University Times Publisher, (1991), 1-13.
[27] J.B. Jones, Tomato Plant Culture, CRC Press LLC, Beca Ration, (1999), 1-3.
[28] J.K. Messick, Fertilizing with Organic Nutrient NCDA and CS Agronomic, Division Publication, 2002.
[29] Krsendu, Uses of Cowdung, USA, Academic Publishers, (1999), 1.
[30] S. Kushwaha and J.K. Ochi, The economic and social implication of using animal excreta as fertilizer and feedstuff: Profitability and environmental protection stimulation model, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 14(1) (1991), 81-89.
[31] T. Lai, Q.R. Shen, B.Q. Chu and C.L. Zhang, Effects of organic manure on soil N supplying and strawberry quality, Chinese Journal of Soil Science, 36(2005), 891-895.
[32] L. Gibson and G. Benson, History and Origin of Soyabean Iowa State, University Press, (2005), 1-3.
[33] R.F. Leaiza-Figuerea, L. Cancino and S.D. Tanksley, Patterns of Genetic Variation of the Genus Capsicum in Mexico, Springer, 165(4) (1989), 159-188.
[34] E. Levetin and M. Karen, Plant and Society (2nded.), McGraw Hill Companies, New York, (1998), 91-93.
[35] A.C. Levitt, Photosynthetic responses of plant to sand burial, Canadian Journal of Botany, 95(5) (1972), 869-875.
[36] C.H. Liu, Y. Liu, W.L. Li and G.P. Zhang, A comparison of aroma components of pineapple fruits ripened in different seasons, African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(2011), 1771-1778.
[37] L.G. Lombini, J.A. Adeputu and K.A. Ayotade, Complementary use of organic and inorganic fertilizer in arable crop production, In: Organic Fertilizer in the Nigerian Agricultural Present and Future, FFDD Abuja, (1991), 146-162.
[38] Luther, Cowpea in grain legumes as alternative crops, The Proceeding of a Symposium Sponsored by the Center for Alternative Plant and Animal Productsof the University of Minnesota, (1987).
[39] A. Maerere, G. Kimbi and D. Nonga, Comparative effectiveness of animal manures on soil chemical properties, yield and root growth of amaranthus, African Journal of Science, 1(4) (2001), 14-21.
[40] M.A. Maun, Adaptations of plant burial in costal sand dunes, Canadian Journal of Botany, 76(5) (1998), 713-738.
[41] M.J. McLeod, S.I. Guttman and Eshbaugh, Early Evolution of Chili Peppers, Academic Press, London, (1983), 37-40.
[42] R.A. Mehka, I.T. Casso, A.K. Handa and A.K. Mattoo, Engineered polyamine accumulation in tomato, Nature Biotechnology, 20(6) (2002), 613-618.
[43] F.C. Oad, U.A. Burio and S.K. Agha, Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizer application on maize fodder production, Asia Journal of Plant Science, 3(3) (2004), 375-377.
[44] M.E. Obi and P. Ebo, The effect of organic and inorganic amendments on soil physical properties and production in a severally degraded sandy soil in southern Nigeria, Bioresources Technology, 51(2-3) (1995), 117-123.
[45] M.O. Ogaraku, Separate and combine infection of root-knot Nematode and Fusariumoxysporum on cowpea: Asian network for scientific information, Plant Pathology Journal, 7(1) (2008), 114-117.
[46] S.O. Oikeh and J.E. Aseigbu, Growth and yield responses of tomatoes to sources and rates of organic manure in ferralities soils, Biores. Technol., 45(1) (1993), 21-25.
[47] B. Pickergill, CY to Logical and Genitival Evidence on the Domestication and Diffusion of Crops within the Americans, Hillman Press, London, (1989), 81-89.
[48] T. Prabu, P.R. Narwadkar, A.K. Sanindranath and M. Rafi, Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and yield of okra ev. Parbhani Kranti, Orissa J. Hort., 31(1) (2003), 17-21.
[49] M.A.E. Ramadan and S.M. Adam, The effects of chicken manure and mineral fertilizers on distribution of heavy metals in soil and tomato organs, Aust. J. Basic Applied Scci., 1(2007), 226-231.
[50] M.K. Reyhan and F. Amisalani, Studying the relationship between the vegetation and physicochemical properties of soil: Case study, Tabas region, Iran Pak. J. Nutr., 5(2006), 169-171.
[51] G. Ronen, L. Carmel, D. Zamir and J. Hirsehberg, An alternative pathway to P-carotene formation in plant chromoplasts discovered by map-based cloning of beta and old-gold color mutations in tomato, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 97(20) (2002), 11102-11107.
[52] R. Brent and R. Hadad, A Guide to Managing Home Organic Waste, UK Extension Publisher's, (2002), 3-8.
[53] J. Shi and M. LeMaguer, Lycopene in tomatoes: Chemical and physical properties affected, Crit Rev Food Sci Nutrition, 40(1) (2000), 1-42.
[54] B.B. Simpson and M.C. Ogorzaly, Economic Botany, McGraw Hill Companies, New York, (1986), 41.
[55] T. Stuessy, Plant Taxonomy, Columbia University Press, New York, (1990), 2.
[56] S. Mayhew and A.Penny, Tropical and Subtropical Food, Macmillan Publishers Ltd, London, (1988), 36-41.
[57] H.D. Tindall, Rice and L.W. Rice, Fruit and Vegetables Production in Africa, Macmillan Press, (1986), 227-235.
[58] M.A. Toapanta, Population ecology, life history and biological control of thee pepper weevil, Anthonomuseugenii Cano (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville, (2001), 152.
[59] O.D. Tracy, Tomato mosaic virus in weeds (sidaspp), Journal of Plant Production in Tropics, 1(1917), 19-23.
[60] P. Zdenka, S. Petr, D. Hana and H. Milan, Antimuagenic effects of lycopene and tomato puree, Journal of Medical Food, 13(6) (2010), 1443-1450.
[61] M.S. Zeidan, Effect of organic manure and phosphorus fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of lentil plants in sandy soils, Research Journal ofAgriculture and Biological. Science, 3(2007), 748-752.
[62] C.X. Zhang, S.C. Ho, Y.M. Chen, J.H. Fu, S.Z. Cheng and F.Y. Lin, Greater vegetable and fruit in take is associated with lower risk of breast cancer among Chinese women, International Journal of Cancer, 122(10) (2009), 2330-6.
C.U. Aguoru1,*, A. Hassan1 and J.O. Olasan1
1 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Nigeria
* Corresponding author, e-mail: ([email protected])
(Received: 1-4-15; Accepted: 8-5-15)
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Copyright International Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences and Technology May 2015
Abstract
A study was carried out to compare the efficacy of cowdung and N.P.K fertilizer on the growth of cowpea (Vignaunguiculata), soya bean (Glycinemax), tomato (Lycopersiconesculentum) and pepper (Capsicum frutescens). This was carried out at the Agronomy Research Farm of the University of Agriculture, Makurdi. The experimental design was a Randomized Complete Block Design in three replicates. The treatments examined were 150g of cowdung, 130g of cowdung and 25g of N:P:K. For all experimental plants, cowpea under150 g cowdung treatmentsresponded best, followed by 130g of cowdung. Soybean performance was enhanced by 150g and 130g cowdung while its least weight was recorded under NPK treatment. Tomato to which NPK soil was applied recorded the highest plant weight with the least value recorded under 130g and 150g cowdung soil treatment. Performance of pepper was significantly low for all treatments. Therefore, cowdung has proven effective on the growth of cowpea, soybean, tomato and pepper. The implications of the findings in this work to agricultural enhancement in Nigeria and generally are discussed.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer




