Banner

Chief Editor:
J. S. Sandhu
Vice Chancellor, SKN Agriculture, University, Jobner, VC, NDUAT, Faizabad, Deputy Director General (Crop Science), Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), New Delhi
Frequency:Monthly
Indexing:
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Go...

Assessment of Plant Growth and Productivity of Kabuli Chickpea Crop as Influenced by Organic, Inorganic Inputs and Biofertilizer Application under a Partially Reclaimed Sodic Soil

Vikas Yadav1,*, Alok Kumar Pandey1,*, Mahendra Singh1, Robin Kumar1, Anand Singh1, Ram Ratan Singh1, Abhinav Kumar2, Dharmendra Kumar1
  • https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2042-3712, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8008-3189, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8040-7596, https://orcid.org/0009-0003-4430-7880, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0812-1539
1Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Ayodhya-224 123, Uttar Pradesh, India.
2Department of Agronomy, Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Ayodhya-224 123, Uttar Pradesh, India.
  • Submitted01-05-2025|

  • Accepted10-07-2025|

  • First Online 18-08-2025|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-5513

Background: Kabuli chickpea or white chickpea has lower area and productivity compared to black chickpea types, especially in India which is the leading producer of chickpea across the globe. Sodic soils, common in regions like Uttar Pradesh, pose challenges to chickpea cultivation due to poor soil conditions and nutrient imbalances. Integrated use of organic, inorganic and biofertilizer inputs offers a promising approach to improving growth and yield of Kabuli chickpea in such degraded soils.          

Methods: Field experiments were conducted during the Rabi seasons of 2023-24 and 2024-25 at the Agronomy Research Farm andUAT, Ayodhya, on the Kabuli chickpea crop. The experiment was laid out in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with three replications and twelve treatment combinations. This investigation studied the growth and productivity of Kabuli chickpea as influenced by organic inputs, inorganic inputs and biofertilizers (Rhizobium and PSB).

Result: The integration of 50% recommended dose of fertilizers (RDP) with organic sources like FYM and vermicompost, in combination with Jeevamrit and biofertilizers (50% RDP + 25% P through FYM + 25% P through Vermicompost + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1 +Biofertilizer) (T11), significantly enhanced the growth attributes, yield attributes and yield of Kabuli chickpea.

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is a major pulse crop cultivated and consumed worldwide. Ranking third among pulses after beans and peas, chickpea is highly valued for its rich nutritional profile, offering easily digestible protein (21.10%), carbohydrates (61.50%) and fats (4.50%) (Anonymous, 2017). It is increasingly used as a plant-based protein alternative to animal sources. Chickpea is consumed in several forms, including whole grains, chickpea lentils soup (dal), sprouted seeds, green seeds and mature dry seeds and is a key ingredient in a variety of snacks, sweets and condiments. Based on seed characteristics like size, shape and color, chickpea is classified into Kabuli chickpea (also known as white chickpea or Garbanzo beans) and black chickpea (Bengal gram), both of which are cultivated globally. However, the area under cultivation, production and productivity of Kabuli chickpea are generally lower than black chickpea.
       
India is the world’s leading chickpea producer, contributing over 75% to global production. The country grows chickpeas across 107.40 lakh hectares, producing 135.44 lakh tonnes, with an average yield of 1,261 kg ha-1 followed by countries like Australia, Turkey, Ethiopia and Russia are significant producers, with Ethiopia recording the highest productivity at 2,170 kg ha-1, followed by Australia at 1,725 kg ha-1 (FAO Stat, 2022). In Uttar Pradesh, chickpea cultivation holds an important place in the agricultural sector, covering an area of 577 thousand hectares and producing 475.4 thousand tonnes with an average yield of 824 kg ha-1. The state ranks fifth in chickpea production in India, following Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. The crop is important for its nutritional richness, being a good source of protein, fiber and essential minerals. To boost productivity and sustainability, farmers in Uttar Pradesh are increasingly adopting organic farming practices and integrated nutrient management techniques (Rajbhar et al., 2018).
       
Sodic soils, identified by their high exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP), negatively affect soil physical and chemical properties, leading to poor soil structure, reduced permeability, nutrient imbalances and diminished microbial activity. These adverse conditions hinder seed germination, root growth and nutrient absorption, ultimately reducing crop yields (Qadir et al., 2006). Although physical and chemical soil amendments have been used to reclaim sodic soils, full reclamation remains a slow and costly process. Therefore, managing crop production in partially reclaimed sodic soils continues to be a major challenge (Minhas and Sharma, 2006).
       
Recently, the combined use of organic manures, biofertilizers and chemical fertilizers has garnered attention as a strategy to improve soil health, enhance nutrient use efficiency and support better crop performance, especially in degraded soils (Kumar et al., 2014). Organic amendments such as farmyard manure (FYM) and vermicompost not only supply essential nutrients but also improve soil structure, increase microbial activity and enhance the soil’s buffering capacity, helping to counteract the harmful effects of sodicity (Rengel and Damon, 2008). Meanwhile, inorganic fertilizers provide immediate nutrient availability and when carefully integrated with organic sources, they promote consistent plant growth and higher yields.
       
The current study focuses on investigating the combined effects of various organic and inorganic nutrient sources on the growth, yield and physiological performance of Kabuli chickpea cultivated in partially reclaimed sodic soils. The outcomes are expected to support the development of sustainable nutrient management practices for Kabuli chickpea production under sodic soil conditions.
Experimental site, climate and initial soil properties
 
Field experiments were carried out during the Rabi seasons of 2023-24 and 2024-25 at the Agronomy Research Farm of Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Ayodhya, located in a sodicity affected area. The soil at the experimental site was moderately sodic, sandy loam in texture, with a pH of 8.20, an electrical conductivity (EC) of 0.334 dSm-1, organic carbon content of 0.32%, low available nitrogen (137.65 kg ha-1) and phosphorus (12.5 kg ha-1) and medium potassium availability (215 kg ha-1). The experimental site is situated in the subtropical Indo-Gangetic plains, the site features alluvial soils and lies between 24.4o to 26.5o N latitude and 82.12o to 83.98E longitude, at an elevation of approximately 113 meters above mean sea level. The region experiences a tropical to subtropical climate with relatively stable seasonal temperature variations, where January records the lowest average temperatures and June the highest.
 
Experimental details
 
The experiment was set up in randomized block design (RBD) with 12 treatments under three replications. Treatments included a “Control” treatment (T1); a treatment containing Recommended dose of fertilizers (RDF) @100% (T2) comprising of N: P: K @ 20:40:20 kg ha-1 provided in the form of urea, DAP and MOP respectively; treatment T3 comprised of 75% of the recommended dose of phosphorous (RDP) through DAP  + 25% P through FYM; T4 comprised of 75% RDP + 25% P through FYM + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1; T5 comprised of  75% RDP + 25% P through FYM + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1 + Biofertilizer (Rhizobium and PSB) applied through seed treatment @ 10 ml of 10cfu of inoculum used to coat one kg of seeds; T6 comprised of 75% RDP + 25% P through Vermicompost; T7 contained 75 % RDP + 25% P through Vermicompost + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1; treatment T8 comprised of 75% RDP + 25% P through Vermicompost + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1 + Biofertilizer (Rhizobium and PSB) applied as above; T9 contained 50% RDP + 25% P through FYM + 25% P through Vermicompost; treatment T10 comprised of 50% RDP + 25% P through FYM + 25% P through Vermicompost + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1; T11 comprised of 50% RDP + 25% P through FYM + 25% P through Vermicompost + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1 + Biofertilizer (Rhizobium and PSB) applied as above; whereas T12 comprised of 50% P through FYM + 50% P through Vermicompost + Jeevamrit @ 500 L ha-1 + Biofertilizer (Rhizobium and PSB) applied as above. The chickpea variety, ‘Pusa-3022’, used in this experiment, is an extra-large seeded, high-yielding variety, released in 2016 for cultivation in the northwestern plains of India. It also exhibits resistance to fusarium wilt and Ascochyta blight. Soil amendments were applied at sowing time. Irrigation and weeding were carried out uniformly across all plots. The organic manures viz., Vermicompost, Farm yard manure, Jeevamrit and biofertilizers viz., Rhizobium, PSB and chemical fertilizer viz, Urea, SSP and MOP were used among different treatments applied under the present investigation. The nutrient composition and quantity of these soil amendments is given in Table 1 and 2.

Table 1: Nutrient composition of Farm Yard Manure (FYM), Vermicompost, Jeevamrit used as organic inputs during 2023-24 to 2024-25.



Table 2: Quantity of FYM, vermicompost and jeevamrit as per P dose requirement during 2023-24 to 2024-25.


       
The observations on growth parameters were recorded at different stages of the plant growth. For recording various parameters 5 plants at random from net plot area were selected and tagged in each plot for taking observations on plant height. The yield attributing parameters like the number of primary and secondary branches (plant-1) were recorded at 30 and 60 DAS respectively, while number of pods (plant-1), dry matter accumulation of plant, hundred seed weight and yield (Grain, Stover and Biological yield) per hectare were recorded at harvest stage. The data collected from the experiment were subjected to statistical testing by following the ‘Analysis of Variance Technique’ as suggested by Gomez and Gomez (1984).
Plant height
 
The pooled analysis showed a progressive increase in plant height at successive stages of crop growth. The differences among treatments were non-significant at 30 DAS but became significant from 60 DAS onwards (Table 3). The treatment T11 (100% RDF + Vermicompost @ 2 t ha-1 + PSB + Rhizobium) recorded the maximum plant height at all growth stages (13.25 cm at 30 DAS, 28.83 cm at 60 DAS, 52.84 cm at 90 DAS and 67.92 cm at harvest), which was at par with T10 and T12. The minimum plant height was observed in the control (T1). The increase in plant height under T could be attributed to the synergistic effect of inorganic fertilizers, organic manures and biofertilizers, which enhanced nutrient availability and stimulated vegetative growth. Similar findings were reported by Choudhary et al., (2017) and Kumar et al. (2020).

Table 3: Plant height (cm) at different stages as influence by organic, inorganic inputs and biofertilizer (Pooled data of 2023-24 to 2024-25).


 
Yield attributes and yield-
 
Number of branches
 
Significant variations were observed in the number of primary and secondary branches due to nutrient management practices (Table 4). T11 recorded the highest number of primary (8.52) and secondary branches (15.74), whereas the lowest was observed under T1 (control). The greater number of branches might be due to better nutrient uptake and enhanced meristematic activity induced by integrated nutrient application (Sharma et al., 2018; Verma et al., 2018).

Table 4: Effect of different treatments on Number of branches, Dry matter accumulation, Number of pods and Seed index in Kabuli chickpea crop (Pooled data of 2023-24 to 2024-25).


 
Dry matter accumulation
 
The data indicated a significant influence of treatments on dry matter accumulation. Maximum dry matter (27.18 g plant-1) was obtained in T11 which was at par with T10 (26.24 g plant-1) and T12 (26.15 g plant-1), while Trecorded the minimum (18.65 g plant-1) (Table 4). Improved dry matter accumulation might be due to higher photosynthetic efficiency and nutrient assimilation under integrated nutrient management, corroborating the findings of Patel et al., (2020).

Number of pods per plant
 
The number of pods per plant was significantly influenced by treatments. T11 registered the highest number of pods (83.22 plant-1), at par with T10 (80.05 plant-1), while the lowest number (46.32 plant-1) was recorded under control (T1) (Table 4). The better pod formation under T11 may be attributed to an increased number of branches and better flowering synchronization, as also reported by Kumar and Kushwaha (2020).
 
Seed index
 
Seed index did not show significant variation among the treatments. However, numerically higher seed index was observed in T11 (35.36 g), whereas the lowest was recorded in T1 (31.01 g) (Table 4). These results are in agreement with the findings of Singh et al. (2021), who also reported minor influence of integrated nutrient management on seed weight.
 
Grain yield
 
Grain yield was significantly influenced by nutrient management practices. The highest grain yield was recorded under T11 (28.92 q ha-1), at par with T10 (28.25 q ha-1) and T12 (28.08 q ha-1). The lowest yield was noted under T1 (17.13 q ha-1) (Table 5). The increase in yield could be attributed to better plant growth, highest number of pods and higher dry matter production. These results are in conformity with those reported by Yadav et al. (2021) and Choudhary et al. (2017).
 

Table 5: Response of different treatments on grain yield, stover yield, biological (kg h-1) yield and harvest index under Kabuli chickpea crop. (Pooled data 2023-24 and 2024-25).



Stover yield and biological yield
 
Significant differences were also observed in stover and biological yields. T11 produced the maximum biological yield (77.36 q ha-1), followed by T10 (73.87 q ha-1) and T12 (72.94 q  ha-1), while the lowest was observed in T1 (Table 5).  Enhanced stover and biological yields in integrated treatments may be due to better vegetative growth, which was in accordance with the findings of Verma et al. (2018). Harvest index was not significantly affected by treatments. However, numerically higher harvest index was recorded under T2 (39.52%), followed by T6 (39.03%). Similar observations were made by Patel et al. (2020), who reported little variation in harvest  index due to integrated nutrient management practices.
Integrated nutrient management, involving the partial substitution of chemical fertilizers with organic manures, biofertilizers and liquid organic inputs like Jeevamrit, significantly enhances plant height, yield attributes and yields of Kabuli chickpea in partially reclaimed sodic soils. The integration of 50% of the recommended dose of phosphorus (RDP) with organic sources like FYM and vermicompost, in combination with Jeevamrit and biofertilizers, significantly recorded the highest plant height, number of branches, dry matter accumulation, pods per plant and grain and biological yields of Kabuli chickpea. The treatment T11 consistently outperformed the others, confirming the efficiency of integrated nutrient management in improving productivity under field conditions. These findings highlight the potential of integrated nutrient management to sustainably enhance chickpea productivity in partially reclaimed sodic soils.
In the present study, the laboratory experiments were conducted at the Biofertilizer and Biopesticide unit of Deptt. of Soil Science, Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Ayodhya, India established under the funding of Rastriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, Govt. of India. Their provision of the necessary facilities for conducting this research is gratefully acknowledged. Acknowledgments are also due to The Head, Department of Soil Science and Vice-Chancellor of Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Ayodhya, India to allow for utilization of the necessary facilities required for completing this research study.
 
Disclaimers
 
The views and conclusions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of their affiliated institutions. The authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided, but do not accept any liability for any direct or indirect losses resulting from the use of this content.
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article. No funding or sponsorship influenced the design of the study, data collection, analysis, decision to publish,or preparation of the manuscript.

  1. Anonymous, (2017). Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Directorate of Pulses Development. Annu. Rep. pp-23.

  2. Choudhary, D., Singh, R. P. and Sharma, N. (2017). Synergistic effect of farmyard manure and biofertilizers on soil microbial nitrogen pools and nutrient uptake in pulses. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 115: 256-263.

  3. FAO Stat. (2022). Crop-Wise Pulses Global Scenario: 2022. Department of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India. Retrieved from FAO Stat.

  4. Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley and Sons.

  5. Gupta, R.K. and Abrol, I.P. (1990). Salt-affected soils: Their reclamation and management (FAO Soils Bulletin No. 39). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

  6. Kumar, A. and Kushwaha, B.L. (2020). Response of chickpea to integrated nutrient management under irrigated condition. Legume Research. 43(3): 386-391. doi: 10.18805/LR-4465.

  7. Kumar, S., Yadav, D.S. and Singh, R.S. (2014). Integrated nutrient management: A pathway for sustainable agriculture. Research Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences. 2(4): 26-30.

  8. Kumar, V., Meena, B.L. and Choudhary, M. (2020). Integrated nutrient management for improving yield and nutrient uptake of chickpea. Legume Research. 43(1): 92-97. doi: 10. 18805/LR-4465.

  9. Minhas, P.S. and Sharma, D.R. (2006). Management of soil sodicity for sustainable agriculture. Journal of Indian Society of Soil Science. 54(3): 374-385.

  10. Patel, J.R., Patel, J.G. and Patel, A.J. (2020). Influence of INM on yield and economics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Legume Research. 43(5): 644-647. doi: 10.18805/LR-4465.

  11. Qadir, M., Ghafoor, A. and Murtaza, G. (2006). Amelioration strategies for saline soils: A review. Land Degradation and Development. 12(4): 357-386.

  12. Rajbhar, A.K., Singh, H.C., Jha, K.K., Kumar, M. and Maurya, K. (2018). Adoption of chickpea production technology among farmers in the central plain zone of Uttar Pradesh. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 7(4): 2250-2254.

  13. Rengel, Z. and Damon, P. M. (2008). Crops and genotypes differ in efficiency of potassium uptake and use. Physiologia Plant- arum. 133(4): 624-636.

  14. Sharma, A., Singh, D. and Dhaka, B.L. (2018). Influence of integrated nutrient management on growth and yield attributes of chickpea. Legume Research. 41(3): 419-423. doi

  15. Sharma, S.K., Verma, S.K. and Kumar, A. (2020). Role of biofertilizers in sustainable agriculture: A review. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences. 12(20): 10034-10038.

  16. Singh, G., Yadav, R. L., Meena, M. C. and Kumar, S. (2016). Effect of integrated nutrient management on soil health and productivity of pulse crops. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition. 16(3): 760-773. 

  17. Singh, R., Yadav, R.L. and Singh, S. (2021). Effect of nutrient management practices on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Legume Research. 44(8): 984-988.

  18. Verma, S.K., Singh, R. and Singh, V.K. (2018). Impact of integrated nutrient management practices on productivity and profitability of chickpea. Legume Research. 41(5): 741-745. 

  19. Yadav, R.L. and Meena, M.C. (2009). Sustainable nutrient management practices in pulse-based cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 54(3): 281-287.

  20. Yadav, S.K., Kumar, M. and Singh, R.K. (2021). Performance of chickpea under integrated nutrient management in alluvial soils. Legume Research. 44(9): 1120-1124. 

Editorial Board

View all (0)