Beneficial effect of microbial bioformulations on nutrient availability, microbial biomass carbon and key enzymatic activities in citrus orchard soil

Downloads

Published

2025-06-30

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58993/ijh/2025.82.2.6

Keywords:

Microbial population, Trichoderma, rhizospere, dehydrogenase, soil health
Dimensions Badge

Issue

Vol. 82 No. 02 (2025): Indian Journal of Horticulture

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Bharat Chandra Nath, Swagata Saikia, PRANABA NANDA BHATTACHARYYA, Bhabesh Gogoi

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors

  • Bharat Chandra Nath Department of Plant Pathology, Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat 785013, Assam, India
  • Swagata Saikia Department of Plant Pathology, Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat 785013, Assam, India
  • PRANABA NANDA BHATTACHARYYA Department of Botany, Nanda Nath Saikia College, Titabar-785630, Jorhat, Assam, India
  • Bhabesh Gogoi Advanced Centre for Integrated Farming Systems Research, (AICRP on IFS under ICAR-IIFSR), Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat-785013, Assam, India

Abstract

The current investigation is designed to illustrate the beneficial effect of different microbial bioformulations on nutrient availability, microbial biomass carbon and key enzymatic activities in a citrus orchard soil. Three different microbial bioformulations namely Biogreen-5, Bioveer and Biosona were arranged in seven different treatments including T1: Biogreen (soil + foliar application); T2: Biogreen (foliar application); T3: Bioveer (soil + foliar application); T4: Bioveer (foliar application); T5: Biosona (soil + foliar application); T6: Biosona (foliar application); T7: Control (water spray). Biogreen when applied as soil and foliar application increased the soil pH by 6.18%, organic carbon by 27.27%, and cationic exchange capacity by 6.24% over control. Like-wise, Biogreen applied both as soil and foliar application increased the availability of N, P, K, Mn, Zn, Fe and B content by 20.17%, 22.19%, 31.74%, 52.81%, 40.76%, 33.60% and 51.47%, respectively over control. Furthermore, the application of Biogreen (soil + foliar application), demonstrated noteworthy enhanced in microbial biomass carbon, and key enzyme activities including dehydrogenase, phosphomonoesterase, and fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis, with significant improvements up to 39.58%, 23.39%, 30.21%, and 36.15%, respectively as compared to control. The findings of the current investigation indicated that Biogreen followed by bioveer serves as an effective biological formulation, for sustaining microbial biomass carbon, cationic exchange capacity, essential plant nutrients and key enzymatic activities.

How to Cite

Nath, B. C., Saikia, S., BHATTACHARYYA, P. N., & Gogoi, B. (2025). Beneficial effect of microbial bioformulations on nutrient availability, microbial biomass carbon and key enzymatic activities in citrus orchard soil. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 82(02), 165–170. https://doi.org/10.58993/ijh/2025.82.2.6

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Adam, G. and Duncan, H. 2001. Development of a sensitive and rapid method for the measurement of total microbial activity using fluorescein diacetate (FDA) in a range of soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 33: 943-951. doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(00)00244-3.

2. Arif, M., Ilyas, M., Riaz, M., Ali, K., Shah, K., Haq, I. and Shah, F. 2017. Biochar improves phosphorus use efficiency of organic-inorganic fertilizers, maize-wheat productivity and soil quality in a low fertility alkaline soil. Field Crops Res. 214: 25-37. doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.08.018.

3. Bhattacharyya, P.N., Sarma, B., Sarmah, S.R. Nath, B.C., Borchetia, S. Rahman, A., Madhab, M., Bhattacharyya, L.H., Handique, C., Mazumdar, M.K. and Bhattacharyya, A. 2024. Entomopathogen-based biological control of looper pests (old looper, Biston (= Buzura) suppressaria and emerging looper, Hyposidra Talaca): an in vitro sustainable approach for tea pest management. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci.44: 1713–1727. doi.org/10.1007/s42690-024-01268-8.

4. Bhattacharyya, P.N., Sarmah, S.R., Roy, S., Sarma, B., Nath, B.C. and Bhattacharyya, L.H. 2023. Perspectives of Beauveria bassiana, an entomopathogenic fungus for the control of insect-pests in tea [Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze]: opportunities and challenges. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 43: 1-19. doi.org/10.1007/s42690-022-00932-1.

5. Bora, L.C., Kataki, L., Talukdar, L., Nath, B.C. and Sarkar, R. 2015. Molecular characterizations of microbial antagonists and development of bioformulations for management of bacterial wilt of naga chilli (Capsicum chinens Jacq.) in Assam. J. Exp. Biol. Agric. 3(2): 109-122. doi.org/10.18006/2015.3(2).109.122.

6. Casida, L.E., Klein, D.A. and Santoro, T. 1964. Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Sci. 98: 371–376.doi.org/10.1097/00010694-196412000-00004.

7. Halifu, S., Deng, X., Song, X. and Ruiqing, S. 2019. Effects of Two Trichoderma Strains on Plant Growth, Rhizosphere Soil Nutrients, and Fungal Community of Pinus sylvestris var. mongolica Annual Seedlings. Forests. 10(9): 758. doi.org/10.3390/f10090758.

8. Hasan, A., Tabassum, B., Hashim, M. and Khan, N. 2024. Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) as a plant growth enhancer for sustainable agriculture: A review. Bacteria 3: 59-75. doi.org/10.3390/bacteria3020005.

9. Jackson, M.L. 1973. Soil chemical analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 498.

10. Jamal, A., Hussain, I., Sarir, M.S. and Fawad, M. 2018. Phosphorous transformation as influenced by different levels of phosphorous alone and in combination with humic acid. World Scientific News. 102: 173–179.

11. Kausik, S., Nath, B.C., Bhattacharyya, P.N., Kaman, P.K., Kashyap, A., Saikia, S., Chetia, R., Bora, P., Sarma, B. and Borah, P.K. 2024. Bioprospecting of citrus (Citrus L.) germplasms against citrus canker pathogenesis in Assam, North-East India. Plant Breed. 143(4): 457-468.doi.org/10.1111/pbr.13176

12. Lindsay, W.L. and Norvell, W.A. 1978. Development of a DTPA soil test for zinc, iron, manganese, and copper. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 42: 421–428. doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1978.036159950 04200030009x.

13. Moraes, M., Medeiros, E., Andrade, D., Lima, L., Santos, I. and Filho, A. 2018. Microbial biomass and enzymatic activities in sandy soil cultivated with lettuce inoculated with plant growth promoters. Revista Caatinga. 31: 860-870. doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252018v31n408rc.

14. Nath, B.C., Bora, L.C., Kataki, L., Talukdar, K., Sharma, P., Dutta, J. and Khan, P. 2016. Plant growth promoting microbes, their compatibility analysis and utility in biointensive management of bacterial wilt of tomato. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol Appl. Sci. 5(6): 1007-1016. http://dx.doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2016.506.107.

15. Ngullie, E., Singh, A.K., Sema, A. and Srivastava, A.K. 2015. Citrus growth and rhizosphere properties. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 46(12): 1540-1550. doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2015.1043460.

16. Subbiah, B.V. and Asija, G.L. 1956. A rapid procedure for the estimation of available nitrogen in soils. Curr. Sci. 25: 259-260. Doi.org/10.12691/aees-2-5-1.

17. Tabatabai, M.A. and Bremner, J.M. 1969. Use of p-nitrophenol phosphate for the assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1: 301-307. doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(69)90012-1.

18. Vance, E., Brookes, P. and Jenkinson, D. 1987. An extraction method for measuring soil microbial biomass C. Soil Biol. Biochem. 19: 703-707. doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(87)90052-6.

19. Walkley, A. and Black, I.A. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 37(1): 29-38. doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003.

20. Wolf. 1974. Improvements in the azomethine-H method for the determination of boron. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 5(1): 39-44. doi.org/10.1080/00103627409366478.

Similar Articles

<< < 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.