Eco. Env. & Cons. 21 (4) : 2015; pp.

(1783-1787)
Copyright@ EM International
ISSN 0971–765X

Effect of organic manures and biofertilizers on fruit

yield and its contributing traits of tomato (Solanum
lycopersicum L.)
Navjot Singh Brar, 1K.S. Thakur, 1Ramesh Kumar, 2D.K. Mehta, 1Nisha Sharma,
1

Dharminder Kumar and 1Sandeep Kumar

1

Department of Vegetable Science, 2Department of Seed Science and Technology

1

Dr YS Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni-Solan 173 230,

Himachal Pradesh, India

(Received 19 December, 2014; accepted 25 January, 2015)

ABSTRACT
The present study was carried out at Experimental Research Farm of the Department of Vegetable Science,
Dr. YS Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan (H.P.) during Kharif 2011. The
experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design (RBD) and Complete Randomized Design (CRD)
comprising of ten treatment combinations of organic manures and biofertilizers viz., T1: FYM @ 20 t/ha, T2:
Vermicompost @ 5 t/ha, T3: Neem Manure @ 2 t/ha, T4: Biovita Granules @ 50 kg/ha, T5:Biofertilizers
(Azotobacter + PSB + KSB) each @ 5 kg/ha, T6: T1+ Biofertilizers, T7: T2 + Biofertilizers, T8: T3 + Biofertilizers,
T9: T4 + Biofertilizers and T10: Control. Among all the treatments, ’T7' (Vermicompost + Biofertilizers)
performed best for most of the fruit and its contributing traits for highest yield but benefit: cost ratio was
obtained highest with the treatment ’T9' (Biovita + Biofertilizers). It was rated as second best treatment for
most of fruit yield characters. Hence, treatment ’T9' from fruit quality and economic point of view and
treatment ’T7' for getting higher fruit yield can be recommended for commercial cultivation.

Key words : Tomato, Organic manures, Biofertilizers, Fruit yield

Introduction production as well as the productivity. Production

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) is one of the most
important solanaceous vegetable crops grown
worldwide for fresh and processing purposes due to
its wider adaptability in various agro-climatic con-
ditions. Its fruits are either eaten raw, cooked or pro-
cessed as ketchup, puree, paste, soup, juice, pre-
serves etc. It is a good source of vitamins A, B & C
and minerals like calcium, iron and phosphorus. In
terms of value, it is next only to potato but as far as
processing is concerned, it leads all the vegetables
(Sandhu et al., 1990). To meet out vegetable require-
ment of the country there is a need to increase the
*Corresponding author’s email : singh.navjotbrar@gmail.com
of any crop can be increased by supplying quality
inputs. After the green revolution, production of
vegetables has increased to great extent due to use of
chemical fertilizers. Tomato being heavy feeder and
exhaustive crop requires large quantities of organic
and inorganic fertilizers (Gajbhiye et al., 2003). The
extensive use of chemical fertilizers has led to soil
sickness, ecological hazards and depletion of non-re-
newable sources of energy. Moreover, they deterio-
rate the quality of the produce and are expensive
too, leading to reduction in net profit returns to the
farmers. Biofertilizers help in improving biological
activities of desirable microorganisms in the soil and
1784
also improve the crop yield and quality of produce.
Moreover, traditional organic manures release the
nutrients slowly, hence their effect is exhibited not
only on the instant crop but it is also reflected on the
performance of the other succeeding crops (Kumar
and Srivastava, 2006). Therefore, use of organic ma-
nures and biofertilizers is the only answer for the
production of good quality fruits without any ill ef-
fect on soil health and ecology.
Material and Methods
The experiment was laid out at field in Randomized
Block Design (RBD) and for lab parameters for qual-
ity parameters in Complete Randomized Design
(CRD) comprising of 10 treatment combinations of
organic manures and biofertilizers viz., T1 : FYM @
20 t/ha, T2: Vermicompost @ 5 t/ha, T3: Neem Cake
@ 2 t/ha, T 4 : Biovita Granules @ 50 kg/ha, T 5:
Biofertilizers (Azotobacter+PSB+KSB) Each @ 5 kg/
ha, T6: T1+ Biofertilizers, T7: T2 + Biofertilizers, T8: T3
+ Biofertilizers, T9: T4 + Biofertilizers and T10: Abso-
lute control. Plants were transplanted on 20th April,
2011 at a spacing of 90 cm x 30 cm in a plot having
size 3.6 m x 2.4 m, accommodating 32 plants per
plot. Biofertilizers (Azotobacter, Phosphorus Solubi-
lizing Bacteria and Potassium Solubilizing Bacteria)
application was done through root dip method and
soil application method. Observations were re-
corded from randomly selected ten plants from each
plot. While selecting the plants, care was taken that
border rows as well as one plant form both ends of
the row were avoided for recording observations.
The observations recorded were number of primary
branches per plant, days taken to 50% flowering,
plant height (cm), harvest duration (days), average
fruit weight (g), number of fruits per plant, average
fruit yield per plant (g), fruit yield (kg/plot and q/
ha), shelf life of fruits (days), total soluble solids
(ºBrix), ascorbic acid content (mg/100 g). The statis-
tical analysis was carried out for each observed
character under the study using MS-Excel and SPSS
16.0. The mean values of data were subjected to
analysis of variance as described by Panse and
Sukhatme (1987) for Randomized Complete Block
Design.
Results and Discussion
Plant Growth Characteristics
Among different plant growth characteristics days
Eco. Env. & Cons. 21 (4) : 2015
to 50% flowering, plant height (cm) and number of
primary branches per plant are important traits for
yield and as its contributing character (Table 1).
Number of primary branches per plant depends
upon the uptake of nutrients by the plant at early
stages of growth. In the present studies, maximum
number of primary branches per plant (3.47) were
observed in the treatment ’T 7' (Vermicompost +
Biofertilizers). The increase in number of primary
branches per plant in ’T7' as compared to other treat-
ments might be due to more nitrogen availability,
which may have resulted in more surface area for
the branches to appear on the main stem. These
findings are almost similar to Sharma and Thakur
(2001); Gajbhiye et al. (2003); Malik and Vijay (2009)
and Patil et al. (2010), who reported increase in num-
ber of branches per plant by the use of biofertilizers
and organic manures in tomato.
Days taken to 50% flowering are an important
attribute in tomato, determining the earliness of the
crop. Lowest number of days taken to 50% flower-
ing (41.00) were recorded in the treatment ’T7'. The
results of present findings regarding days taken to
50% flowering are in conformity with (Kumar et al.,
2007) and Shukla et al. (2009).
The maximum plant height (160.57 cm) was also
observed in the treatment ’T7'. The increase in plant
height as a result of application of biofertilizers may
be attributed to the fact that the biofertilizers are
known to synthesize the growth promoting sub-
stances besides nitrogen fixation, as a result of this,
the plant have shown luxurious growth (Chauhan et
al., 1995). The plant height considered to be an im-
portant factor to judge the vigour of the plant. More-
over, vermicompost application might have resulted
in sustainable healthy plant system leading to in-
creased plant height Shukla et al., (2006).
Fruit Characteristics
The results indicated significant differences among
the different fruit characters i.e., harvest duration
(days), average fruit weight (g), number of fruits per
plant, average fruit yield per plant (g), fruit yield
(kg/plot and q/ha), for different organic treatment
combinations with biofertilizers (Table 1). Prolonged
and extended harvest duration ensures continuous
supply of the produce over a long period of time.
Maximum harvest duration (49.33 days) was re-
corded in the treatment ’T 7', while treatment ’T10'
(Control) resulted in minimum harvest duration
(38.67 days). Longer harvest obtained by the use of
BRAR ET AL 1785

Table 1. Mean performance of different organic treatment combinations on fruit yield characteristics in tomato
Treatment Number Days Plant Harvest Number Average Average Fruit Fruit
of primary taken Height duration of fruits fruit fruit yield yield yield
branches to 50% (cm) (days) per plant weight (g/plant) (kg/plot) (q/ha)
per plant flowering (g) [converted]
T1 2.40 46.67 144.43 43.00 14.40 57.40 827.17 26.47 245.11
T2 2.73 45.00 149.40 44.67 15.73 58.87 925.59 29.62 274.27
T3 2.47 46.33 145.37 43.33 14.67 58.13 853.20 27.30 252.82
T4 2.53 45.67 146.63 44.00 15.20 61.80 938.87 30.04 278.21
T5 2.80 44.33 150.50 45.33 16.27 61.07 993.88 31.80 294.51
T6 2.93 43.00 152.47 46.67 17.33 63.27 1097.69 35.13 325.27
T7 3.47 41.00 160.57 49.33 19.47 67.67 1317.66 42.17 390.45
T8 3.20 42.33 156.43 48.00 18.40 66.20 1218.07 38.98 360.94
T9 3.33 41.67 158.60 48.33 18.67 69.13 1291.07 41.31 382.57
T10 2.20 48.00 141.23 38.67 10.93 55.20 605.25 19.37 179.35
Mean 2.81 44.40 150.56 45.33 16.11 61.87 1006.84 32.22 298.35
S.E. ± (d) 0.13 0.73 2.35 0.94 0.57 1.50 42.87 1.37 12.7
C.D.(0.05) 0.252 1.452 4.70 1.88 1.14 3.00 85.83 2.75 25.43

vermicompost + biofertilizers might be attributed to
longer vegetative growth. Vermicompost has been
reported to hasten many reactions in plant by releas-
ing certain hormones viz., gibberellic acid, Indole-3-
acetic acid and dihydrozeatin Arancon et al. (2004),
which possibly delay the senescence and thereby
enhancing the harvest duration. Similar results have
also been reported in tomato by Thakur et al. (2010).
Mean performance of various treatments in the
present investigations revealed that maximum num-
ber of fruits per plant (19.47) were recorded with
treatment ’T7'. The possible reason for increased
number of fruits per plant might be due to better
proliferation of roots in organic manure, which
helped in increased uptake of nutrients as well as
plant growth hormones produced by microbes at
root zone and also enhanced the biological nitrogen
fixation by the application of biofertilizers Thakur et
al. (2010).
In the present studies, highest average fruit
weight (69.13 g) was observed in the treatment ’T9'
(Biovita + Biofertilizers). Increased fruit weight by
using biovita and biofertilizers may be due the pres-
ence of certain elements like calcium, boron, so-
dium, magnesium, sulphur, iron, manganese, cop-
per, zinc and growth promoters like cytokinins and
auxins as well as proteins and amino acids. On the
other hand lowest fruit weight in ’T10' (Control), is
due the lack of essential nutrients required for
proper growth and development of plant and fruits.
The highest average fruit yield/plant/plot/hect-
are (1317.66 g, 42.17 kg and 390.45 q/ha, respec-
tively) was observed in the treatment ’T7' (Fig. 1).
This may be due to better root proliferation, more
photosynthesis efficiency, enhanced food accumula-
tion, increased availability of atmospheric nitrogen
and soil phosphorus by microbial inoculants and
synthesis of plant growth hormones at all the essen-
tial stages of growth and development by the com-
bined application of biofertilizers and organic ma-
nure (Chattoo et al., 2007). The results of present in-
vestigation regarding average fruit yield are in con-
formity with Thakur et al. (2010).
Fig. 1. Effect of organic treatment combination
(vermicompost and biofertilizers) on average fruit
yield (g/plant) and fruit yield (q/ha).
Fruit Quality Characteristics
Data presented in Table 2 illustrated the effect of or-
ganic manures and biofertilizers on fruit quality ex-
pressed as shelf life (days), TSS (ˆBrix) and Ascor-
bic acid (mg/100g) content and found highest when
crop grown in with combination T 9 (Biovita +
1786 Eco. Env. & Cons. 21 (4) : 2015

Table 2. Mean performance of different organic treat- fected by the various treatments revealed that high-
ment combinations on fruit quality characteris- est cost of production (Rs. 1,15,934 and Rs.1,20,034,
tics in tomato respectively) and maximum gross income (Rs.
Treatment Shelf life Total Ascorbic 3,90,449.01 and Rs.2,09,601.67, respectively) (Fig.2)
of fruits soluble acid content were recorded in the treatment ’T7' (Vermicompost
(Days) solids content (mg/100 g + Biofertilizers). This is due to the high cost of culti-
(0B) or 100 mL) vation and maximum marketable yield in ’T 7' as
T1 9.22 4.85 18.73 compared to other treatments used in the study.
T2 9.66 5.08 19.15 However, maximum net returns (Rs.2, 99,384.87 and
T3 9.44 4.77 18.58 Rs.1, 17,984.01, respectively) (Fig. 2) and benefit: cost
T4 10.54 5.55 19.99 ratio (3.60:1 and 1.35:1, respectively) was recorded
T5 10.32 5.43 19.78 in treatment ’T9' (Biovita + Biofertilizers), which may
T6 10.98 5.58 20.04 be due to the lower cost of production and compa-
T7 12.30 6.47 21.65
rable gross income to the treatment ’T7'. Hence the
T8 11.86 6.24 21.24
application of biovita in combination with
T9 12.74 6.51 21.71
T10 8.56 4.58 18.25 biofertilizers is rated as the most economic treat-
Mean 10.56 5.51 19.91 ment for quality fruit production of tomato under
S.E. ± (d) 0.45 0.37 0.56 mid hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh.
C.D.(0.01) 0.90 0.74 1.11

Biofertlizers) (Table 2). Shelf life plays an important

role in determining keeping quality of the fruits.
Maximum shelf life of fruits (12.67 days) was re-
corded in the treatment ’T9' (Biovita + Biofertilizers).
The possible reason for better shelf life may be at-
tributed to better growth resulting into firm fruits
with more pericarp thickness, on account of proper
and adequate availability of all macro and micro
nutrients Gosavi et al., (2010). Results of present
study are in line with the findings of Chaurasia et al.
(2001). Fig. 2. Economics analysis for gross income (Rs/ha) and
Total soluble solids content in the fruit is an im- net return (Rs/ha) for different organic treatment
portant quality parameter. Maximum total soluble combinations
solids (6.51 0B) were recorded in the treatment ’T9'
(T4 + Biofertilizers). The improvement in quality at- Conclusion
tributes like TSS content by application of biovita +
biofertilizers may be due to their nutritional, stimu- In the present investigations, treatment ’T 7'
latory and therapeutic behavior as reported by (Vermicompost + Biofertilizers) performed best for
Karuthamani et al. (1995); Chattoo et al., (1997) and most of the fruit yield and its contributing character,
Thiikavathy and Ramaswamy (1999). but fruit quality and benefit: cost ratio was obtained
The highest ascorbic acid content (21.71 mg/100 highest with the treatment ‘T9’ (Biovita + Biofer-
g) was also observed in the treatment ’T9'. The pos- tilizers), rated as second best treatment for most of
sible reason for increase in ascorbic acid content in fruit yield characters. Hence, treatment ’T9' from
tomato fruits may be due to longer phase of fruit economic point of view and treatment ’T7' for get-
development and thus more accumulation of carbo- ting high fruit yield can be recommended for com-
hydrates which is the major source of vitamin C syn- mercial cultivation of tomato, being high feeder
thesis. Results of current study are in conformity crop.
with the findings of Gosavi et al., (2010).
References
Economic Analysis of Treatments
The economics of the tomato fruit production as af- Arancon, N.Q., Edwards, C.A., Atiyeh, R. M. and Metzger,
BRAR ET AL
J. D. 2004. Effects of vermicomposts produced from
food waste on green peppers. Bioresource Technology.
93 : 139-144.
Chattoo, M. A., Ahmed, N., Faheema, S., Narayan, S.,
Khan, S. H. and Hussain, K. 2007. Response of gar-
lic (Allium sativum L.). The Asian Journal of Horticul-
ture 2 (2): 249-252.
Chattoo, M. A., Gandroo, M. V. and Zargar, M. Y. 1997.
Effect of Azospirillum and Azotobacter on growth,
yield and quality of Knol Khol (Brassica oleracea var.
gongylodes L.). Vegetable Science. 24 (1): 16-19.
Chauhan, D. R., Paroda, S. and Singh, D. P. 1995. Effect of
biofertilizers, gypsum and nitrogen on growth and
yield of Raya (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of
Agronomy. 40(4): 639-642.
Chaurasia, S. N. S., Nirmal De, Singh, K. P. and Kalloo, G.
2001. Azotobacter improves shelf life of tomato
(Lycopersicon esculentum Mill). Indian Journal of Agri-
cultural Sciences. 71 (12): 765-767.
Gajbhiye, R. P., Sharma, R. R. and Tewari, R. N. 2003. Ef-
fect of biofertilizers on growth and yield parameters
of tomato. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 60 (4): 368-
371.
Gosavi, P. U., Kamble, A. B. and Pandure, B. S. 2010. Ef-
fect of organic manures and biofertilizers on qual-
ity of tomato fruits. The Asian Journal of Horticulture
5(2) : 376-378.
Karuthamani, M., Natrajan, S. and Thamburaj, S. 1995. Ef-
fect of inorganic and biofertilizers on growth, flow-
ering and yield of Pumpkin. South Indian Horticul-
ture 43 : 134-136.
Kumar Anant, Kumar Jitendra and Babu Ram. 2007. Effect
of inorganic and bio-fertilizers on growth, yield and
quality of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.).
Progressive Agriculture. 7 (1-2): 151-152.
Kumar Rabindra and Srivastava, B. K. 2006. Residual ef-
fect of integrated nutrient management on growth,
1787
yield and yield attributes of tomato. Indian Journal of
Horticulture. 63 (1): 98-100.
Malik, M. F. and Vijay Kumar. 2009. Influence of INM on
growth and yield of tomato. Annals of Horticulture.
2 (2) : 221-223.
Panse, V. and Sukhatme, P. 1987. Statistical Methods for
Agricultural Workers, ICAR, New Delhi, India.
Patil, D. N., Bhalekar, M. N., Dhumal, S. S., Shinde, U. S.
and Kshirsagar, D. B. 2010. Effect of inorganic fer-
tilizers and biofertilizers on growth and yield of to-
mato. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities.
35 (3): 396-399.
Sandhu, K. S., Cheema, D. S. and Singh, S. 1990. Studies
on the varietal differences in physio-chemical char-
acters of some tomato varieties. Beverage and Food
World. 17 : 34-35.
Sharma, S. K. and Thakur, K. S. 2001. Effect of Azotobacter
and nitrogen on plant growth and fruit yield of to-
mato. Vegetable Science. 28 (2): 146-148.
Shukla, Y. R., Thakur, A. K. and Joshi, A. 2006. Effect of in-
organic and organic fertilizers on yield and horticul-
tural traits in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill).
Annals of Biology. 22 (2): 137-141
Shukla, Y. R., Thakur, A.K. and Joshi, A. 2009. Effect of in-
organic and biofertilizers on yield and horticultural
traits in tomato. Indian Journal of Horticulture. 66 (2):
285-287.
Thakur, K. S., Thakur Rajneesh, Shukla, Y. R., Mehta, D.
K. and Thakur, A. K. 2010. Effect of organic manures
and biofertilizers on growth and fruit yield of to-
mato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Journal of Hill Agri-
culture. 1 (2) : 190-192.
Thiiakavathy, S. and Ramaswamy, N. 1999. Effect of inor-
ganic and biofertilizers on yield and quality param-
eters of Multiplier Onion (Allium cepa var.
aggregatum). Vegetable Science. 26 : 97-98.