Search
2024 Volume 4
Article Contents
ARTICLE   Open Access    

Optimization of a new organic approach to natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) for yield and quality management in Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): an agriculturally highly export-oriented crop

More Information
  • Senna is a leguminous and industrial crop that produces high-quality glycosides (sennosides) in its leaves and pods, which have substantial therapeutic effects for alleviating constipation worldwide. However, further research on employing Jeevamrutha in Senna is required. As a result, the experiment was carried out at CSIR-CIMAP in Hyderabad for two consecutive years, in the years 2020–2021 and 2021–2022. The main aim is to identify the optimum dose of Jeevamrutha for higher growth, yield, and quality in Senna. The study used a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with seven treatments repeated three times. From the obtained result, it was observed that the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre observed significantly high leaf yields (1,085.2 kg·ha−1) and pod (318.7 kg·ha−1) equivalent to T2 in comparison to other treatments, i.e., application of 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (1,022.5 kg·ha−1, 312.1 kg·ha−1), and was succeeded by T3, i.e., application of 100 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (998.5 kg·ha−1, 288.5 kg·ha−1, respectively). Lower leaf yield (700.2 kg·ha−1) and pod yield (487 kg·ha−1) were observed in the control (T7). Similarly, the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher sennoside content in leaves (2.01%) and pods (3.11%), in comparison to other treatments, and was followed by T2 (1.98%, 3.09%) and T3 (1.89%, 2.97%). A similar trend was noticed in returns, i.e., the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher gross returns (USD${\$} $1,495 ha−1) and net returns (USD${\$} $1,066.4 ha−1).
  • 加载中
  • [1]

    Lal RK, Chanotiya CS, Kumar A. 2023. The prospects and potential of the horticultural and pharmacological medicinal herb senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): a review. Technology in Horticulture 3:20

    doi: 10.48130/TIH-2023-0020

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [2]

    Lal RK, Gupta P, Chanotiya CS, Mishra A, Kumar A. 2023. The nature and extent of heterosis, combining ability under the influence of character associations, and path analysis in Basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Industrial Crops and Products 195:116421

    doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.116421

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3]

    Patel SP, Malve SH, Chavda MH, Vala YB. 2021. Effect of Panchagavya and Jeevamrut on growth, yield attributes, and yield of summer pearl millet. The Pharma Innovation Journal SP-10:105−09

    Google Scholar

    [4]

    Kumar A, Gupta AK, Siddiqui S, Siddiqui MH, Jnanesha AC, et al. 2022. An assessment, prospects, and obstacles of industrially important medicinal crop Indian Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): a review. Industrial Crops and Products 187:115472

    doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115472

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5]

    Shubha S, Devakumar N, Rao GGE, Gowda SB. 2014. Effect of seed treatment, panchagavya application and organic farming systems on soil microbial population, growth and yield of maize, eds Rahmann G, Aksoy U. Proceedings of the 4th ISOFAR Scientific Conference. 'Building Organic Bridges', at the Organic World Congress 2014, Istanbul, Turkey. pp. 631−34.

    [6]

    Kumar A, Jnanesha AC. 2017. Enhancing the income of the farmer by cultivating senna in low rainfall area. Popular Kheti 5:14−17

    Google Scholar

    [7]

    Kumar A, Jnanesha AC, Bharath Kumar TP. 2018. Effect of different proportions of fly ash and vermicompost on growth and yield of Senna in Semi-arid regions of India. Journal of Pharmacology and Phytochemistry 7:69−72

    Google Scholar

    [8]

    Kumar A, Jnanesha AC, Verma RK, Kumar D, Lal RK. 2022. Phytoremediation, eco-restoration, and adaptive response of lemongrass (C. flexuosus Wats) grown on fly ash and vermicompost improved quality essential oil yield. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 104:104457

    doi: 10.1016/j.bse.2022.104457

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9]

    TNSMPB. 2006. Tamil Nadu State Medicinal Plants Board, Senna. Chennai, India: Tamil Nadu State Medicinal Plants Board, Government of India.

    [10]

    Guhra T, Stolze K, Totsche KU. 2022. Pathways of biogenically excreted organic matter into soil aggregates. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 164:108483

    doi: 10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108483

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11]

    Gore NS, Sreenivasa MN. 2011. Influence of liquid organic manures on growth, nutrient content, and yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) in the sterilized soil. Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science 24:153−57

    Google Scholar

    [12]

    Malligawad LH, Parameshwarappa KG. 2006. Effect of organics on the productivity of Spanish bunch groundnut under rainfed farming situations. In Symposia of 18th World Congress of Soil Science (Frontiers of Soil Science-Technology and the Information Age), 2006. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 607 pp.

    [13]

    Duraivadivel P, Bhani K, Santosh S, Hariprasad P. 2022. Untangling microbial diversity and functional properties of Jeevamrutha. Journal of Cleaner Production 369:133218

    doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133218

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14]

    Palekar S. 2006. Shoonya bandovalada naisargika krushi. Swamy Anand, Agri Prakashana, Bangalore, India. pp. 1−270.

    [15]

    Rama Reddy NR, Mehta RH, Soni PH, Makasana J, Gajbhiye NA, et al. 2015. Next-generation sequencing and transcriptome analysis predict the biosynthetic pathway of sennosides from Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.), a non-model plant with potent laxative properties. PLoS ONE 10:e0129422

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129422

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16]

    Waksman SA. 1917. Is there any fungus flora in the soil? Soil Science 3:565−90

    doi: 10.1097/00010694-191706000-00009

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17]

    Aneja KR. 2003. Cultivation techniques for isolation and enumeration of microorganisms. In Experiments in microbiology, plant pathology, and biotechnology, IV Edition. New Age International (P) Ltd., Delhi. pp. 157–88.

    [18]

    Santosha Gowda GB, Sudhir Kamath KV, Lakshmana. 2021. Shelflife study of jeevamrutha prepared from cow dung and cow urine of different desi breeds. The Pharma Innovation Journal SP-10:236−39

    Google Scholar

    [19]

    Casida LE Jr, Klein DA, Santoro T. 1964. Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Science 98:371−76

    doi: 10.1097/00010694-196412000-00004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20]

    Tabatabai MA, Bremner JM. 1972. Assay of urease activity in soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 4:479−87

    doi: 10.1016/0038-0717(72)90064-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21]

    Hayano K. 1973. A method for the determination of β-glucosidase activity in soil. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 19:103−08

    doi: 10.1080/00380768.1973.10432524

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [22]

    Panse VG, Sukhatme PV. 1956. Statistical methods for agricultural workers. Agronomy Journal 48:323

    doi: 10.2134/agronj1956.00021962004800070014x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23]

    Somasundaram E, Sankaran N, Meena S, Thiyagarajan TM, Chandragiri KK, et al. 2007. Response of green gram to varied concentrations of Panchakavya (organic nutrition) foliar application. Madras Agriculture Journal 90:169−72

    Google Scholar

    [24]

    Chongre S, Mondal R, Biswas S, Munshi A, Mondal R, et al. 2019. Effect of liquid manure on growth and yield of summer green gram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek). Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology 38:1−7

    doi: 10.9734/CJAST/2019/v38i630460

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25]

    Manjunatha GS, Upperi SN, Pujari BT, Yeledahalli NA, Kuligod VB. 2009. Effect of farm yard manure treated with jeevamrutha on yield attributes, yield and economics of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science 22:198−99

    Google Scholar

    [26]

    Siddappa MK, Devakumar N. 2016. Organically grown field bean (Lablab purpureus Var. lignosus) using jeevamrutha and farm yard manure. National Conference on Sustain Self-Sufficient Production of Pulses through an Integrated Approach. Bengaluru, India. pp. 105.

    [27]

    Brajeshwar, Joshi AK, Dey S. 2007. Effect of Kunapajala and Fertilizers on Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.). Indian Forester 133:1235−40

    doi: 10.36808/if/2007/v133i9/1199

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [28]

    Aruw K, Bapi D, Reddy GS. 2011. Effect of organic manures, biofertilizers, and inorganic fertilizers on growth and yield of Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.). The Asian Journal of Horticulture 7:144−47

    Google Scholar

    [29]

    Bhattacharjee U, Uppaluri RVS. 2023. Production and optimization of Jeevamrutha bio-fertilizer formulations for soil fertility and its role in waste minimization. Sustainable Chemistry for Climate Action 2:1000025

    doi: 10.1016/j.scca.2023.100025

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [30]

    Upperi SN, Lokesh BK, Maraddi GN, Agnal MB. 2009. Jeevamrutha, a new organic approach for disease management and crop production in pomegranate and groundnut. Environment and Ecology 27:202−04

    Google Scholar

    [31]

    Ramesh Babu TI. 1996. Nutritional studies in ashwagandha. Thesis. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore

    [32]

    Hemalatha P, Suresh T, Saraswathi T, Vadivel E. 2008. Studies on nutrient content, herbage yield and alkaloid content of kalmegh under integrated nutrient management system. Advances in Plant Science 21:447−51

    Google Scholar

    [33]

    Kalyanasundaram B, Kumar TS, Kumar S, Swaminathan V. 2008. Effect of N, P, with biofertilizers and vermicompost on growth and physiological characteristics of sweet flag (Acorus calamus L.). Advances in Plant Science 21:277−80

    Google Scholar

    [34]

    Anuja S, Jayasri P. 2011. Effect of organic nutrients on flowering and herbage yield of sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Advances in Plant Sciences 24:601−03

    Google Scholar

    [35]

    Senthilkumar B, Vasundhara M, Farooqi AA. 2003. Studies on dry matter production, nutrient uptake and quality in Tagetes minuta L. Indian Perfumer 47:375−81

    Google Scholar

    [36]

    Malligawad LH. 2010. Effect of organics on the productivity of groundnut and its residual effects on succeeding safflower under rainfed farming situations. In 19th World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a Changing World, 2010, Brisbane, Australia. pp. 128–31

    [37]

    Kumar A, Husain D, Lal RK, Singh S, Singh V, et al. 2023. Genetic diversity and future prospects in Withania somnifera (L.) Dunal: an assessment based on quantitative traits in different accessions of Ashwagandha. The Nucleus 66:151−59

    doi: 10.1007/s13237-023-00423-9

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [38]

    Kumar A, Jnanesha AC, Lal RK, Chanotiya CS, Venugopal S, et al. 2023. Precision agriculture innovation focuses on sustainability using GGE biplot and AMMI analysis to evaluate GE interaction for quality essential oil yield in Eucalyptus citriodora Hook. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 107:104603

    doi: 10.1016/j.bse.2023.104603

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [39]

    Bilia AR, Cioni P, Morelli I, Coppi C, Lippi A, et al. 1992. Essential oil of Satureja montana, L. ssp. montana. composition and yields of plants grown under different environmental conditions. Journal of Essential Oil Research 4:563−68

    doi: 10.1080/10412905.1992.9698136

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [40]

    Devakumar N, Rao GGE, Shubha S, Imrankhan N, Gowda SB. 2008. Activities of organic farming research centre. Navile, Shivamogga, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. 12 pp.

    [41]

    Lal RK, Chanotiya CS, Gupta P, Mishra A, Bisht D, Maurya R, Srivastava S, Pant Y. 2021. Multi-years/environmental evaluation for high photosynthetic, bio-efficient, and essential oil genotypes selection in the breeding of vetiver (Chrysopogon zizanioides (L.) Roberty) crop. Journal of Essential Oil Research 33:471−87

    doi: 10.1080/10412905.2021.1917459

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [42]

    Lal RK. 2022. The opium poppy (Papaver somniferum L.): historical perspectives recapitulate and induced mutation towards latex less, low alkaloids in capsule husk mutant: a review. Journal of Medicinal Plants Studies 10:19−29

    Google Scholar

    [43]

    Lal RK, Chanotiya CS, Gupta P, Mishra A. 2022. Influences of traits associations for essential oil yield stability in multi-environment trials of vetiver (Chrysopogon zizanioides L. Roberty). Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 103:104448

    doi: 10.1016/j.bse.2022.104448

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [44]

    Boraiah B, Devakumar N, Shubha S, Palanna KB. 2017. Effect of Panchagavya, Jeevamrutha and cow urine on beneficial microorganisms and yield of capsicum (Capsicum annuum L. var. grossum). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 6:3226−34

    doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2017.609.397

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [45]

    Mallikarjun M, Maity SK. 2018. Effect of integrated nutrient management on soil biological properties in Kharif rice. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 7:1531−37

    doi: 10.20546/ijcmas.2018.711.176

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [46]

    Kulkarni SS, Gargelwar AP. 2019. Production and microbial analysis of Jeevamrutham for nitrogen fixers and phosphate solubilizers in the rural area of Maharashtra. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science 12:85−92

    Google Scholar

    [47]

    Kumar A, Lal RK, Chanotiya CS. 2023. Geraniol-rich aromatic grasses (Cymbopogon spreng) can adapt to the environment by modifying harvest dates over the ecosystems in southern India on the Deccan plateau utilizing participatory management modeling and agronomic practices. Industrial Crops and Products 193:116196

    doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.116196

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Jnanesha AC, Venugopal S, Kumar SR, Kumar A, Bisht D, et al. 2024. Optimization of a new organic approach to natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) for yield and quality management in Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): an agriculturally highly export-oriented crop. Technology in Horticulture 4: e009 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0006
    Jnanesha AC, Venugopal S, Kumar SR, Kumar A, Bisht D, et al. 2024. Optimization of a new organic approach to natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) for yield and quality management in Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): an agriculturally highly export-oriented crop. Technology in Horticulture 4: e009 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0006

Figures(4)  /  Tables(7)

Article Metrics

Article views(2610) PDF downloads(651)

ARTICLE   Open Access    

Optimization of a new organic approach to natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) for yield and quality management in Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): an agriculturally highly export-oriented crop

Technology in Horticulture  4 Article number: e009  (2024)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Senna is a leguminous and industrial crop that produces high-quality glycosides (sennosides) in its leaves and pods, which have substantial therapeutic effects for alleviating constipation worldwide. However, further research on employing Jeevamrutha in Senna is required. As a result, the experiment was carried out at CSIR-CIMAP in Hyderabad for two consecutive years, in the years 2020–2021 and 2021–2022. The main aim is to identify the optimum dose of Jeevamrutha for higher growth, yield, and quality in Senna. The study used a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with seven treatments repeated three times. From the obtained result, it was observed that the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre observed significantly high leaf yields (1,085.2 kg·ha−1) and pod (318.7 kg·ha−1) equivalent to T2 in comparison to other treatments, i.e., application of 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (1,022.5 kg·ha−1, 312.1 kg·ha−1), and was succeeded by T3, i.e., application of 100 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (998.5 kg·ha−1, 288.5 kg·ha−1, respectively). Lower leaf yield (700.2 kg·ha−1) and pod yield (487 kg·ha−1) were observed in the control (T7). Similarly, the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher sennoside content in leaves (2.01%) and pods (3.11%), in comparison to other treatments, and was followed by T2 (1.98%, 3.09%) and T3 (1.89%, 2.97%). A similar trend was noticed in returns, i.e., the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher gross returns (USD${\$} $1,495 ha−1) and net returns (USD${\$} $1,066.4 ha−1).

    • Cassia angustifolia (Caesalpinaceae), known as Tinnevelly or Indian Senna, is cultivated for its leaves and immature pods. Dianthrone glucosides and sennosides A and B in the leaves and pods have potent laxative properties[1,2]. Sennosides primarily operate on the lower colon and are notably beneficial in cases of chronic constipation[1,3]. The glycosides are absorbed from the intestinal system; they stimulate the peristaltic movements of the colon, causing it to move. Long-term usage of the leaves may induce colon problems and produce grip if not paired with carminatives. The National Medicinal Plant Board (NMPB) of India has identified 32 plants for scaling up, and Senna is one of them. Senna is the second-largest earner of foreign exchange through exports. Its leaves and pods are regarded as reliable sennoside sources in global trade[4]. However, Indian Senna should compete with Alexandrian Senna regarding cost-effectiveness and quality. Alexandrian senna natural collections cannot supply the growing demand for Senna commodities. India has a tremendous opportunity to expand its manufacturing, commerce, and export opportunities. Tinnevelly Senna (C. angustifolia) is grown in India's southern and central parts[5]. Senna herbage production is estimated to be around 7,500 tonnes per year. The pods and leaves of a few other senna species, the most important of which is Alexandrian Senna, have laxative properties similar to those of Cassia angustifolia. Alexandrian Senna grows naturally in North African countries such as Ethiopia and Sudan[1,2].

      The swiftly increasing global population and continuously expanding geographical boundaries of the global agricultural system are extending agricultural activities on marginal soils unsuited for growing. On such terrain, crop options are limited, especially in an arid macroregion. Senna is a tropical medicinal plant that could be a dry-land crop for barren land. Areas with inadequate irrigation facilities (arid or semi-arid) are ideal for Senna cultivation, while regions with heavy rainfall, high humidity, and poor drainage are not perfect[68]. Senna grows as a perennial shrub in dry areas of Africa and neighboring countries. The Senna crop is commercially grown in all sub-tropical regions of India and spread in semi-arid parts of southern India; it is marketed under the brand name 'Tirunelveli Senna' (C. angustifolia)[3,9,10]. Tuticorin has many exporters, shipping 7,500 to 9,000 tonnes of Senna leaves each year and earning Rs 35 to 60 crore in forex 'depending on the current market price'[9].

      Modern agriculture relies heavily on chemical fertilizers to cope with the demands of a growing population. The continued use of inorganic fertilizers endangers soil health. The beneficial microorganisms decline, and natural nutrition restoration in the soil ceases, causing the soil to become unfertile[9,10]. As a result, the use of organic manure and proportionate inorganic fertilizers needs to be reduced to improve the quality and productivity of the crop's food grain, oilseed, or medicinal crop. This gradually results in a significant need for integrated nutrient management (INM), which will boost soil productivity continuously over time through the appropriate use of fertilizers and liquid organic manure[11,12].

      Organic farming has recently risen in popularity because of its inherent benefits. It contributes to crop production sustainability, complex soil nutrient status, and a clean environment[11,12]. Using fermented liquid organic manure or bio-enhancers like Jeevamrutha is a less expensive and eco-friendly preparation made from cow products. A natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) is a plant growth stimulant that increases crop biological efficiency[13]. It aids in accelerating soil, protects plants from diseases, and enhances the nutritional content of fruits and vegetables. It has been utilized in seedling treatment, soil application with irrigation water, foliar spraying, and much more.

      The application of liquid manure boosts microbial activity and biomass in the soil. The use of liquid organic inputs like Jeevamrutha boosts the population of beneficial bacteria and has a substantial impact on soil enzyme activity. As a result, they promote crop growth and help to maintain a safe environment and production of crops. Given the foregoing, the experiment was conducted at CSIR-CIMAP, RC, Hyderabad, with the aim of establishing the optimal doses of Jeevamrutha for increasing Senna quality and production.

    • A trial was undertaken in the CSIR-CIMAP R.C. in Hyderabad, India, for two consecutive years, 2020−2021 and 2021−2022 in the Rabi season (September to January). The experimental site's latitude, longitude, and altitude were 17°25' N, 78°33' E, and 582 m above mean sea level. Table 1 lists further information, including the climatic conditions. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications on well-drained, red sandy soil (Table 1).

      Table 1.  Location, climate and soil of CSIR-CIMAP R.C. at Boduppal, Hyderabad, Telangana State, PIN: 500 092, India and chemical composition of bio stimulant.

      GPS coordinates, soil and climateEstimated parameters of bio stimulant (Jeevamrutha)
      Latitude17°25' N
      Longitudes78º33' EpH7.08
      Mean sea level582 m aboveEC (dS·m−1)2.98
      ClimateSemi-arid tropicalTotal nitrogen (ppm)67
      Average annual rainfall764 mmTotal phosphorus (ppm)154
      SoilRed sandy soil (79.2% sand, 9.8% silt, 6.8% clay)
      Total potassium (ppm)112
      pH7.7Total zinc (ppm)3.52
      EC0.77 dS·m−1Total copper1.32
      Organic carbon0.29%Total iron (ppm)12.4
      Available N162.4kg·ha−1Total manganese (ppm)7.4
      Available P9.2 kg·ha−1IAA (ppm)5.9
      Available K272.6 kg−1GA3 (ppm)3.1
    • The method of Palekar was used to prepare the organic liquid formulation Jeevamrutha[14]. The following were the ingredients: 10 kg cow dung, 10 L of cow urine of Gir cow breeds, 2 kg jaggery, 2 kg gram/chickpea (pulse) flour, a handful of rhizospheric soil, and 200 L of water were well combined in a stainless steel container with the help of a wooden stick. The cow dung and urine source was a local dairy farm located at Boduppal, Hyderabad, Telangana State, 500092, India. The mixture was mixed twice daily and fermented for 5–7 d. The prepared liquid formulation was used for soil application by applying irrigation water. In the Department of Soil Chemistry Laboratory at the Council of Scientific Research-Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Boduppal, Hyderabad, Telangana State, 500092, India, the chemical composition of the biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) was determined. The results are presented in Table 1.

    • The treatments were comprised of seven treatments with three replications, viz., T1: application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre, T2: application of 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre, T3: application of 100 L of Jeevamrutha per acre, T4: application of 75 L of Jeevamrutha per acre, T5: application of 50 L of Jeevamrutha per acre, T6: application of 25 L of Jeevamrutha per acre, and T7: control (treated with water).

    • Senna (C. Angustifolia) var: Sona seeds were soaked in water for a whole night and treated with Trichoderma to minimize the seeds' correlation with diseases before dibbling in the field at 45 cm × 30 cm spacing. The field was irrigated for the first few weeks; one weeding was performed 30 d after seeding, and N:P:K (kg·ha−1) was applied at the seeding time.

    • Growth and yield contributing attributes were recorded at regular intervals at various phases of plant growth. The sennoside content of leaves and pods was determined using the HPLC method developed by Rama Reddy et al.[15] at the pod formation stage. Finely ground samples of dry leaves and pods (300 mg) were extracted three times with sonication (25 °C) in 30 ml of 70% methanol in water. Before being fed into the chromatographic equipment, the materials were filtered through a 0.45 m membrane. The HPLC study was conducted on a Waters HPLC system outfitted with an SPD-M20 photodiode array detector.

      The dilution plate technique determined each treatment's fungal, bacterial, and actinomycete populations[10,13,16]. For each treatment, a composite of 10 g of soil samples was extracted, and 1 g of each sample was suspended in 1 mL sterile saline (1g NaCl in 100 mL distilled H2O) in a sterile test tube and carefully vortexed. Different treatment tubes were employed to count fungi, bacteria, and actinomycetes as part of the inoculation. Soil samples were taken from the rhizosphere of plants for counting microbial load at harvest for N-fixers and P-solubilizers. Ten grams of soil was serially diluted up to 10−6 by using sterilized distilled water, and cell count per gram of rhizosphere soil was enumerated for P-solubilizers and free-living N-fixer by Pikovaskaya's media (Himedia) and Waksman No.77[13,17,18], respectively, by following the serial dilution plate count technique.

      Soil dehydrogenase activity was determined by reducing 2,3,5-triphenyl tetrazolium chloride[2,10,19]. Protease activity was measured by measuring the amount of tyrosine produced after incubating 1 g of the oven-dry equivalent of a field-moist soil sample in 5 ml of 50 mM Tri's buffer (pH 8.1) and 5 ml of 2% Na-caseinate for 2 h at 50 + 1 °C. The aromatic amino acids were removed, and the residual substrate was precipitated with 0.92 M trichloroacetic acid and calorimetrically quantified at 700 nm using the Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Protease activity was quantified as mg tyrosine generated g−1·soil·h−1.

      Acid and alkaline phosphatase activities were determined using a standard approach[20]. In a 50 ml flask, 1 g of soil was mixed with 0.2 mL toluene, 4 mL of modified universal buffer (MUB) (pH 6.5 and 11, respectively, for acid and alkaline phosphatase), and 1 mL of p-nitrophenyl phosphate solution. After an hour of incubation, 1 mL of 0.5 M CaCl2 and 4 mL of 0.5 M NaOH were added. After the suspension was filtered, the filtrate's absorbance at 420 nm was measured using a UV-visible spectrophotometer. Controls were prepared by repeating the phosphatase activity assay technique but adding 1 mL of p-nitrophenol solution after adding 0.5 M CaCl2 and 4 mL of 0.5 M NaOH. Determination of β-glucosidase enzyme involves colorimetric estimation of P-nitrophenol released by β-glucosidase activity when soil is incubated in Mcilvaine buffer (pH 4.8) with P-nitrophenyl β-D-glucoside and toluene at 30 °C for 1 h[21] (Fig. 1).

      Figure 1. 

      Field view of the experimental plot of Senna crop.

    • The benefit of gross returns was determined by multiplying the total yield by the present cost of each kilogram. The cost of cultivation for each treatment was calculated by summing up the seed cost, land preparation, labour, cultural operations, pesticides, and manure costs. Net returns were computed by subtracting manufacturing costs from gross returns. The benefit-cost ratio was determined by calculating the ratio between cultivation costs and gross returns. It is obtained by dividing the gross returns by the cost of cultivation in USD${\$} $·ha−1.

    • The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on the pooled data for the experimental years 2020−2021 and 2021−2022 using CSIR-CIMAP statistical software Ver. 4.0[22].

    • The obtained results reveal that Jeevamrutha application had a significant influence on all of the characteristics of Senna (C. angustifolia). Amid the various doses of Jeevamrutha, the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha recorded significantly higher plant height (T1; 43.7 cm) compared to another dose of application and was comparable to the applications of 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (T2; 40.2 cm) and 100 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (T3; 39.2 cm). Significantly, lower plant height was noticed in control (T7; 26.9 cm) and was on par with applying Jeevamrutha at 25 L per acre (T6; 29.9 cm). The number of branches and plant leaves per plant, and total dry matter production all followed a similar pattern. Applying 150 L (T1) of biostimulant/Jeevamrutha per acre recorded a substantially higher branch per plant, leaves per plant, and total dry matter production (19.9, 180.3, and 35.9 g·plant−1). It was on par with (T2) 125 L of Jeevamrutha (17.2, 177.2, and 34.2 g·plant−1), and the application of 100 L (T3) of Jeevamrutha (16.8, 176.4 and 33.1 g·plant−1). Senna's plant height and dry matter content may have improved substantially due to the availability of micronutrients and a big beneficial microbial population in Jeevamrutha[13,23]; thus, when applied to the crop as a foliar spray and through the soil, they stimulate the necessary plant growth, which encourages vegetative growth and finally increases plant height and metabolic and photosynthetic activity for improving the biological efficiency of the plant, allowing the roots to spread into deeper layers of soil and uptake more nutrients from the soil, resulting in the accumulation of more carbohydrates and higher dry matter. Our results are consistent with those of other researchers[3,16,2426]. Whereas, chlorophyll content, leaf area, and index also differed significantly with the use of a varied dose of Jeevamrutha, with the application of 150 L (T1) of Jeevamrutha per acre recording significantly higher chlorophyll content (13.2), leaf area (66.2 cm2) and LAI (4.89) comparison with the other treatments and was succeeded with T2 (12.1, 64.2 cm2, 4.76) and T3 (10.2, 63.9 cm2, 4.73) (Fig. 2). The use of Jeevamrutha resulted in faster synthesis, translocation, and accumulation of photosynthates from sources to sinks, ultimately contributing to higher growth and yield metrics (Tables 1 & 2, Fig. 2). These findings are consistent with those of other studies[27,28] in Senna.

      Figure 2. 

      Influence of different doses of biostimulant/Jeevamrutha on leaf yield (kg·ha−1) and pod yield (kg·ha−1) of Senna.

      Table 2.  Microbial population in bio stimulant.

      OrganismsBio stimulant (Jeevamrutha)
      Bacteria (cfu·mL−1)15.42 × 105
      Fungi (cfu·mL−1)12.12 × 103
      Actinomycetes (cfu·mL−1)2.92 × 103
      Free-living nitrogen fixers (cfu·mL−1)5.20 × 102
      Phosphate solubilizing organisms (cfu·mL−1)3.20 × 102
    • The pods/plant produced significantly depended on the dose of Jeevamrutha used. Among the various Jeevamrutha dosages, the application of Jeevamrutha at 150 L per acre recorded significantly higher pods per plant (T1; 726) compared to other treatments and was on par with (T2; 720) and (T3; 689). The significantly lower pods per plant were noticed in control (T7; 700.8) and were followed by T6 (T6; 758.9) (Table 3). The increase in pods per plant might be due to Jeevamrutha, which increases the production of growth hormones, viz., IAA, GA, and dehydrozeatin, resulting in good pod characteristics[1,29,30]. These phytohormones increased cell proliferation, elongation, and nutrient uptake, increasing pods per plant. Ramesh Babu[31] found similar results in Ashwagandha (Table 3).

      Table 3.  Effect of different doses of bio stimulant (Jeevamrutha) on growth and yield parameters of Senna in semi-arid regions of India.

      TreatmentsPlant height (cm)No. of branches per plantNo. of leaves per plantTotal dry matter production (g·plant−1)Chlorophyll contentLeaf areaLAINo of pods
      per plant
      T143.719.9180.335.9113.2566.024.89726
      T240.217.2177.234.2512.1364.214.76720
      T339.216.8176.433.1210.2463.924.73689
      T434.214.2165.229.749.2359.214.39654
      T531.513.8154.725.159.0156.274.17598
      T629.910.2144.323.218.7855.324.10546
      T726.98.5135.221.588.0349.133.64487
      S.Em±1.820.912.81.340.521.40.1118.2
      CD (P = 0.05)5.412.748.44.021.564.20.3454.7
      T1: 150 L of bio stimulant per acre, T2: 125 L of bio stimulant per acre, T3: 100 L of bio stimulant per acre, T4: 75 L of bio stimulant per acre, T5: 50 L of bio stimulant per acre, T6: 25 L of bio stimulant per acre, T7: Control.
    • Leaf and pod yield of C. angustifolia differ significantly with a varied dose of Jeevamrutha. Among the varied treatments, the application of 150 L (T1) of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher leaf yield (1,085.2 kg·ha−1) and pod yield (318.7kg·ha−1) in comparison to the rest of the treatments. It was on par with T2 i.e., applying 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (1,022.5 kg·ha−1, 312.1 kg·ha−1) followed by T3, i.e., application of 100 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (998.5 kg·ha−1, 288.5 kg·ha−1, respectively). Significantly, lower leaf (700.2 kg·ha−1) and pod yield (487 kg·ha−1) were noticed in the control (T7) (Fig. 3). Raised nutrient availability, enhanced soil health, and an appropriate supply of macro and micronutrients might all have contributed to the rise in leaf and pod yield, which raised seed yield. Furthermore, Jeevamrutha may have created a favorable environment in the soil for nitrogen buildup in addition to boosting nutrient availability (Fig. 3). Hemalatha et al.[32] found similar results in kalmegh[13,32], and Kalyanasundaram et al.[33] in the sweet flag, and Anuja & Jayasri[34] in sweet basil[30,34]. The sustained availability of nutrients by applying Jeevamrutha throughout the cropping period increased soil microbial activity, and the photosynthetic rate might have increased the leaf and pod yield[4,8,3538].

      Figure 3. 

      Influence of biostimulant/Jeevamrutha on gross and net return in Senna.

    • Despite the Jeevamrutha dose, the sennoside concentration of Senna (C. angustifolia) pods is always higher than that of the leaves. Sennoside content in both leaf and pod altered drastically following Jeevamrutha treatment, as seen in (Table 2). Among the different treatments, T1, i.e., application of 150 l of Jeevamrutha per acre, recorded significantly higher sennoside content in leaves (2.01%) and pods (3.11%) in comparison to the rest of the treatment and was followed by T2 (1.98%, 3.09%) and T3 (1.89%, 2.97%). This feature could be related to an increase in enzyme activity associated with the sennoside biosynthesis pathway, as well as a shift from primary to secondary metabolite synthesis[3943]. Lower sennoside content in leaves and pods is recorded in control (T7; 1.52%, 2.42%). A similar trend was noticed in sennoside yield with T1, i.e., application of Jeevamrutha at 150 L per acre recorded significantly higher sennoside yield (31.7 kg−1) compared to other treatments. It was followed by T2 (29.9 kg·ha−1) and T3 (27.4 kg·ha−1). Lower sennoside yield was noticed in control (T7; 15.2 kg·ha−1) (Table 4). This attribute might be owing to increased yield and sennoside content in the leaf and pod, which in turn, increase the sennoside yield in T1 and T2 treatments, i.e., application of Jeevamrutha at 150 and 125 L per acre, respectively (Tables 4 & 5).

      Table 4.  Effect of bio stimulant (Jeevamrutha) on sennoside content in leaves and pod and sennoside yield.

      TreatmentsSennoside content (%)Sennoside yield
      (kg·ha−1)
      LeavesPod
      T12.013.1131.7
      T21.983.0929.9
      T31.892.9727.4
      T41.932.6922.8
      T51.872.6620.5
      T61.692.5917.9
      T71.522.4215.2
      S.Em±0.030.061.2
      CD (P = 0.05)0.090.123.7
      T1: 150 L of bio stimulant per acre, T2: 125 L of bio stimulant per acre, T3: 100 L of bio stimulant per acre, T4: 75 L of bio stimulant per acre, T5: 50 L of bio stimulant per acre, T6: 25 L of bio stimulant per acre, T7: Control.

      Table 5.  Effect of different doses of bio stimulant (Jeevamrutha) on beneficial microorganisms in the soil.

      TreatmentsBacteria
      (cfu·g−1)
      Fungi
      (cfu·g−1)
      Actinomycetes
      (cfu·g−1)
      Nitrogen fixer
      (cfu·g−1)
      P solubilizers
      (cfu·g−1)
      T18.2 × 1057.3 × 1044.1 × 1031.9 × 1033.9 × 103
      T27.6 × 1056.8 × 1044.0 × 1032.1 × 1033.2 × 103
      T37.1 × 1056.2 × 1043.7 × 1031.7 × 1032.7 × 103
      T46.7 × 1055.8 × 1043.6 × 1031.8 × 1032.5 × 103
      T56.0 × 1055.1 × 1043.4 × 1031.2 × 1031.9 × 103
      T66.2 × 1054.9 × 1042.8 × 1031.4 × 1031.7 × 103
      T75.7 × 1054.2 × 1042.2 × 1031.3 × 1031.6 × 103
      S.Em±0.3 × 1050.4 × 1040.23 × 1030.3 × 1030.1 × 103
      CD
      (P = 0.05)
      0.9 × 1051.2 × 1040.55 × 103NS0.3 × 103
      T1: 150 L of bio stimulant per acre, T2: 125 L of bio stimulant per acre, T3: 100 L of bio stimulant per acre, T4: 75 L of bio stimulant per acre, T5: 50 L of bio stimulant per acre, T6: 25 L of bio stimulant per acre, T7: Control.
    • Beneficial microorganisms in soil differ significantly with the application of different doses of Jeevamrutha in Senna; with an application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher bacteria (8.2 × 105 cfu·g−1), fungi (7.3 × 104 cfu·g−1), actinomycetes (4.1 × 103 cfu·g−1) and P solubilizers (3.9 × 103 cfu·g−1) compared to rest of the treatment and was on par with the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (7.6 × 105 cfu·g−1, 6.8 × 104 cfu·g−1, 3.7 × 103 cfu·g−1, and 2.7 × 103 cfu·g−1, respectively).

      Nonetheless, the greater dose of Jeevamrutha resulted in a more substantial microbial population, which might be ascribed to Jeevamrutha acting as a source of carbon and energy for microorganisms, boosting the number of microorganisms in the soil. However, a significantly lower microbial population was noticed in control, i.e., bacteria (5.7 × 105 cfu·g−1), fungi (4.2 × 104 cfu·g−1), actinomycetes (2.2 × 103 cfu·g−1), and P solubilizers (1.6 × 103 cfu·g−1). The low microbial population counts in control could be attributed to a lack of substrate to sustain microbial biomass. The acquired results are consistent with the findings of Boraiah et al.[44]. Similarly, enzyme activity in soil differs dramatically when Jeevamrutha is applied to Senna. Among the different doses of Jeevamrutha, the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded significantly higher dehydrogenase activity (1.33 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1), alkaline phosphatase (412 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1), acid phosphatase (367 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1), β-Glucosidase (120 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1) and protease (154 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1) compared to rest of the treatment and was followed by application of 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (1.17 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1, 374 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1, 355 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1, 99 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1 and 123 µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1). Enzymatic activity was considerably lower in the control group.

      Nonetheless, the increased enzymatic activity in the soil can be attributed to the important function of the microbial population as a result of the addition of Jeevamrutha, which acted as a tonic for enhanced microbial development[1,2,4,29]. Enzymatic activity in the soil may have increased due to favorable bacterial environments (Tables 5 & 6). The higher enzymatic activity in the Jeevamrutha plot could be explained by enhanced microbial activity[4447].

      Table 6.  Effect of different doses of bio stimulant (Jeevamrutha) on enzyme activity in the soil.

      TreatmentsDehydrogenase activity (µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1)Alkaline phosphatase (µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1)Acid phosphatase (µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1)β-Glucosidase
      (µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1)
      Protease
      (µg·TPF−1·g−1·h−1)
      T11.33412367120154
      T21.1737435599123
      T30.9038224884120
      T40.7529120175100
      T50.542771556585
      T60.481321125059
      T70.4188552922
      SEm±0.1512.87.13.94.8
      CD (P = 0.05)0.4538.221.411.714.1
      T1: 150 L of bio stimulant per acre, T2: 125 L of bio stimulant per acre, T3: 100 L of bio stimulant per acre, T4: 75 L of bio stimulant per acre, T5: 50 L of bio stimulant per acre, T6: 25 L of bio stimulant per acre, T7: Control.
    • Economics of Senna (C. angustifolia) may differ significantly about the varied application of Jeevamrutha, with the application of 150 L (T1) of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded substantially higher gross return per ha (USD${\$} $1,495) and Net return (USD${\$} $1,066.4 compared to other treatments and was on par with the application of 125 L (T2) of Jeevamrutha per acre (USD${\$} $1,423.8 and 995.2 respectively) and was followed by T3 (USD${\$} $1,369.4 and 940.9). Significantly lower gross return (USD${\$} $942.9) and net returns (USD${\$} $585.8) were noticed in control (T7) (Fig. 4). Similarly, the benefit-cost ratio differed significantly from T1, i.e., the application of 150 L of Jeevamrutha per acre recorded a higher benefit-cost ratio (3.49) than other treatments. T2 applied 125 L of Jeevamrutha per acre (3.32) (Tables 57). In contrast, a lower benefit-cost ratio was noticed in control (T7; 2.64) and was followed by T6 (2.72) (Table 7, Fig. 4).

      Figure 4. 

      Application of 150 L (T1) of Jeevamrutha to Senna crop.

      Table 7.  Effect of different doses of bio stimulant (Jeevamrutha) on gross and net return of Senna.

      TreatmentsGross return
      (USD${\$} $·ha−1)
      Net return
      (USD${\$} $·ha−1)
      Benefit-cost ratio
      T11,495.01,066.43.49
      T21,423.8995.23.32
      T31,369.4940.93.20
      T41,154.9726.32.99
      T51,067.9689.32.82
      T61,009.4637.92.72
      T7942.9585.82.64
      S.Em±21.821.8
      CD (P = 0.05)64.564.5
      T1: 150 L of bio stimulant per acre, T2: 125 L of bio stimulant per acre, T3: 100 L of bio stimulant per acre, T4: 75 L of bio stimulant per acre, T5: 50 L of bio stimulant per acre, T6: 25 L of bio stimulant per acre, T7: Control.

      Finally, Jeevamrutha is a natural fertilizer that can be used in place of chemical fertilizers. It is a type of organic liquid fertilizer used in organic farming and gardening. It is made from natural ingredients and is believed to be a sustainable and eco-friendly alternative to synthetic fertilizers. While it can be a valuable addition to organic farming practices, it's important to note that its nutrient content, including NPK (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium), varies depending on how it's prepared. In general, Jeevamrutha is not typically formulated to have specific NPK values like synthetic fertilizers. Instead, its primary focus is on improving soil health and promoting microbial activity in the soil, which can lead to better nutrient availability for plants over time. It is rich in beneficial microorganisms, such as beneficial bacteria, fungi, and other soil organisms, which help break down organic matter and release nutrients in a form that plants can absorb. Jeevamrutha is more of a soil conditioner and biofertilizer that enhances soil fertility and overall plant health rather than directly providing specific nutrient values like NPK ratios. It is used to improve the structure and fertility of the soil and is often considered a holistic approach to sustainable agriculture. If farmers are looking for specific NPK values in fertilizer, they may need to consider synthetic fertilizers or other organic fertilizers that provide more precise nutrient content. However, many organic and sustainable farmers prefer using Jeevamrutha and similar products to support long-term soil health and reduce their reliance on chemical fertilizers. It is high in macronutrients and micronutrients, which are necessary for plant growth and development. Jeevamrutha promotes microbial activity, which enhances soil fertility. When compared to previous Jeevamrutha doses, using Jeevamrutha at 150 (T1) or 125 (T2) L per acre resulted in significantly higher leaf, pod, and sennoside yields. Meanwhile, increased leaf and pod production from a higher Jeevamrutha dose boosts Senna's gross and net returns, as well as the benefit-cost ratio.

    • Jeevamrutha is a natural fertilizer that can replace chemical fertilizers. It is an excellent source of macro and micro nutrients for plant growth and development. Jeevamrutha improves soil fertility by stimulating microbial activity. The current study found that applying Jeevamrutha at 150 (T1)/125 (T2) L per acre resulted in significantly higher leaf, pod, and sennoside yields when compared to other Jeevamrutha doses. Meanwhile, increased leaf and pod production from a higher dose of biostimulant/Jeevamrutha raises Senna's gross and net returns and the benefit-cost ratio.

    • The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study planning, actual experimentation: Jnanesha AC; experimentation: Venugopal S, Kumar SR; Kumar A; data collection: Bisht D; Chemical analysis: Chanotiya CS; statistical analyses, and manuscript preparation: Lal RK. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    • The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

      • This work was supported by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, India, under HCP 010; the last author is related to an emeritus scientist, CIMAP Publication No. CIMAP/PUB/2021/118. The authors are thankful to the director of CSIR-CIMAP Lucknow, India, for providing facilities and encouragement throughout the work. Thanks also to the Scientist-in-Charge at CRC Hyderabad for the necessary facilities during this investigation.

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

      • Copyright: © 2024 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press, Fayetteville, GA. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (4)  Table (7) References (47)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Jnanesha AC, Venugopal S, Kumar SR, Kumar A, Bisht D, et al. 2024. Optimization of a new organic approach to natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) for yield and quality management in Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): an agriculturally highly export-oriented crop. Technology in Horticulture 4: e009 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0006
    Jnanesha AC, Venugopal S, Kumar SR, Kumar A, Bisht D, et al. 2024. Optimization of a new organic approach to natural biostimulant (Jeevamrutha) for yield and quality management in Senna (Cassia angustifolia Vahl.): an agriculturally highly export-oriented crop. Technology in Horticulture 4: e009 doi: 10.48130/tihort-0024-0006

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return