See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315769645

TECHNOLOGY FOR RAPID COMPOSTING OF

COTTON STALK

Article · February 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 98

4 authors, including:

Vallabhbhai Vora P. D. Vekariya

Junagadh Agricultural University Junagadh Agricultural University
26 PUBLICATIONS 42 CITATIONS 14 PUBLICATIONS 5 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Nutrient management View project

Alley cropping system View project

All content following this page was uploaded by P. D. Vekariya on 04 April 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Agricultural
Science and Research (IJASR)
ISSN(P): 2250-0057; ISSN(E): 2321-0087
Vol. 6, Issue 1, Feb 2016, 211-216
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

TECHNOLOGY FOR RAPID COMPOSTING OF COTTON STALK

G. S. SUTARIA, V. D. VORA, P. D.VEKARIYA & K. N. AKBARI

Dry Farming Research Station, Junagadh Agricultural University Targhadia, Gujarat, India
ABSTRACT

An experiment was under taken for rapid composting of cotton stalks at Main Dry Farming Research Station,
Junagadh Agricultural University, Targhadia (Rajkot) during 2009. There were seven treatments: T1: cotton stalk only
(control), T2: cotton stalk + compost culture, T3: cotton stalk + urea, T4: cotton stalk + urea + compost culture, T5: cotton
stalk + cow dung + compost culture, T6: cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture and T7: cotton stalk + cow
dung + urea + compost culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture. Total
carbon, N, C/N ratio, P, K, S and micronutrient content at 90 and 120 DAC were significantly influenced due to
application of various decomposing materials i.e. compost culture, urea, cow dung and rock phosphate. The highest
value for all the nutrients at 120 DAC was recorded with T7 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture + rock
phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture).

KEYWORDS: Cotton Stalk, Composting, Nutrient Content

Original Article
Received: Jan 12, 2016; Accepted: Jan 23, 2016; Published: Jan 28, 2016; Paper Id.: IJASRFEB201630

INTRODUCTION

Composting is one of the major recycling processes in which organic materials are
biologically/biochemically converted into an amorphous humus like substance (under conditions of optimum
temperature, moisture and aeration) that can be handled, stored and applied to land without environmental impacts
(Gallardo- Larva and Nogades, 1987). Over the couple of decades, compost production has got dramatic attention
in agricultural. This is mainly due to increased solid waste management costs, and heightened public enthusiasm
for organic waste recycling. Composting provides a way to manage high volume of organic waste in
environmentally sound manners (Hoitink and Fahy, 1989). In general, composted materials are highly regarded for
their ability to improve soil health and plant growth. Moreover, compost has also been found to aid in suppression
of pathogens and plant diseases.

Residue recycling is a key measure to enhance the soil fertility and productivity in crop production
systems (Somasundaram et al. 2007). Plant residues are made up of several constituents like proteins, non-
polymeric carbohydrates, cellulose, hemi-cellulose, lignins, fats, waxes etc (Sridevi et al. 2003). Generally,
anything of plant or animal origin can be used for the compost. However, it is important to know the combination
of materials that can be used. An important aspect of this, is the amount of nitrogen compared to the amount of
carbon or the ratio of carbon to nitrogen (C:N ratio) in the material. Numerous organisms take part in the
decomposition of organic residues. Some micro-organisms, help in the composting process by chewing, cutting
and tearing the waste materials into small pieces which are again more readily broken down by the micro-
organisms. These micro-organisms are bacteria, fungi and actinomycetes.

The area under rain fed cotton is 111.95 lakh hectares, which is 48.22 per cent of the total cultivated areas

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
212 G. S. Sutaria, V. D. Vora, P. D. Vekariya & K. N. Akbari

of the Zone. Huge quantity of cotton stalks is left after the harvest of cotton. It is estimated that 50 mt of cotton wastes
mostly cotton stalks is available in India. The general practice is to remove the stalks manually and burn them. This present
practice of burning the cotton stalks in the field results in emission of GHGs (Tandon and Sudaramoorthy, 2009). In order
to avoid such a consistent environmental degradation by burning of cotton stalks every year after harvest, an effective
utilization of the cotton stalks will save the environmental degradation and reduce the burden for chemical fertilizers. The
cotton stalk are rich in nutrients having 51.0, 4.9, 1.0, 0.61, 0.08, 0.43 and 0.12 per cent C, H, N, K, P, Ca and Mg,
Respectively (Anil Kumar Dubey et al. 2004).

At present, the practice of recycling of cotton stalk is very rare. There is urgent need to develop technology for
easily recycling of cotton stalk for reduced the burden for chemical fertilizer and maintained the soil productivity along
with prevention of disease and pest. Thus, there is a potentiality for recycling nutrient elements through organics. Keeping
these views in mind, an experiment was conducted to develop Technology for rapid composting of cotton stalks under rain
fed agriculture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experiment was under taken for rapid composting of cotton stalks at Main Dry Farming Research Station,
Junagadh Agricultural University, Targhadia (Rajkot) during 2009. The various combination of chopped cotton stalk,
compost culture (contains: Trichurus spiralis, Trichoderma viride, Paceolomyces fugisporsus and Aspergillus spp) @ 500
g/t of cotton stalk, urea (N @ 0.5% by weight, cow dung @ 20% by weight, rock phosphate @ 5% by weight, castor and
neem cake each @ 3 % by weight and Azotobacter and PSM culture @ 500g/t. There were seven treatments: T1: cotton
stalk only (control), T2: cotton stalk + compost culture, T3: cotton stalk + urea, T4: cotton stalk + urea + compost culture,
T5: cotton stalk + cow dung + compost culture, T6: cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture and T7: cotton stalk +
cow dung + urea + compost culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture during
first turning in completely randomized design with three replications. The experiment was carried out in pit having size of
1.5 length m x 1.00 m width x 0.75 m depth. The cotton stalks used for composting is having 6.2, 1.8, 6.8, 0.9, 4 and 1.5
g/kg content of N, P, K, Mg, Ca and S, respectively. It’s also contains considerable amount of micronutrients (324, 147, 27,
9 & 1.6 mg/kg of Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu & Mo, respectively.

Chopped the cotton stalks into small pieces of 5-6 cm using cotton shredder and filled up the pit with chopped
cotton stalk having layer of 10-15 cm by adding compost culture @ 500 g per tonne, urea (N @ 0.5 per cent), cow dung @
20 per cent, rock phosphate @ 5.0 per cent and castor cake and neem cake @ 3 per cent by sprinkling water to maintain
adequate moisture and make layer. Repeat the process 2-3 times until the pit becomes full. Cover the upper most layer by
murrum to maintain temperature and to avoid evaporation losses from the pit. Periodic watering is made to maintain
sufficient moisture in the pit and turning of the top layer at least once during the decomposition process. Bring out the
partially decomposed material from pit after one and half month & fill the thoroughly mixed materials in the pit and then
after one month give second turn with addition of Azotobacter and PSM @ 500 g/t of material and fill the thoroughly
mixed materials in the pit. In the span of four months, turn out the material from pit, most of the cotton stalks are converted
into compost having dark-brown powder form and no foul smell and keep it under shed. The prepared compost is suit for
use.

Representative samples of compost from each treatment was taken at 90, and 120 days, dried and analyzed for
organic carbon (Walkley and Black 1934), total N, P and K (Jackson, 1973), total S (Williams and Steinbergs, 1959) and

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987 NAAS Rating: 3.53

Technology for Rapid Composting of Cotton Stalk 213

total micronutrients Zn, Fe & Mn ((Black, 1965). The data were statistically analyzed as per procedure outline by Panse
and Sukhatme (2000). Treatment means were compared at 5 per cent level of significance using least significant difference
(LSD).).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Total Carbon, Total N and C:N Ratio Content
The total carbon content was significantly decreased to the tune of 9.6, 14.1, 7.9, 17.1 and 29.4 per cent due to T3
(cotton stalk + urea) T4 (cotton stalk + urea + compost culture) T5(cotton stalk + cow dung + compost culture) T6 (cotton
stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture) and T7 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture + rock phosphate +
castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture) over that of cotton stalk (control) only (T1) at 120 days to
composting. Contrary to this, total nitrogen content was significantly increased to the tune of 70.5, 91.6, 32.6, 103.1 and
106.3 per cent due to T3 (cotton stalk + urea) T4 (cotton stalk + urea + compost culture) T5(cotton stalk + cow dung +
compost culture) T6 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture) and T7 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost
culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture) over that of cotton stalk (control)
only (T1) at 120 days to composting. The effect of different treatments on C/N ratio were found significant and it values
were varied from 14.14 to 41.23 and minimum value was recorded with T7 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost
culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture). Sridevi et al. 2003 was also
reported the dependence of decomposition of C mineralization of plant residues on the proportion of soluble and fibre
fractions in the residues, their N concentration and C/N ratio.

Total Phosphorus, Potash and Sulphur Content

The total phosphorus content was significantly increased to the tune of 17.9, 23.1, 23.6, 28.2, 38.5 and 376.9 per
cent due to T2 (cotton stalk + compost culture), T3 (cotton stalk + urea) T4 (cotton stalk + urea + compost culture) T5(cotton
stalk + cow dung + compost culture) T6 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture) and T7 (cotton stalk + cow dung
+ urea + compost culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture) respectively over
that of cotton stalk (control) only (T1) at 120 DAC. The maximum content of 1.86 per cent of total P was recorded with T7
might be due to addition of rock phosphate @ 5.0 per cent and castor cake and neem cake @ 3 per cent for composting.
Tandon S.K. and C. Sundaramoothy (2009) also reported that the addition of rock phosphate can enhance the humification
process in plant residues by enhancing microbial population and activity and by weakening lignin structure. The
phosphates and micronutrients contained in rock phosphate make composts rich in plant nutrients. At 120 DAC, total K
and S contents were varied from 1.76 to 2.27 and 0.10 to 0.14 per cent, respectively and its maximum value was observed
with T7 (cotton stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter
and PSM culture). Such beneficial effect of addition of N-fixing and P-solubilizing cultures was also showed by
Mahimairaja et al. (2008).

Micronutrient Content

The micronutrient (Fe, Mn, Zn) content in compost materials at 120 DAC was significantly influenced due to
various treatments (Table 1) and total Fe, Mn and Zn content was varied from 421 to 605, 264 to 341 and 49 to 71 ppm,
respectively. The highest values for content of all micronutrients in compost at 120 DAC were recorded with T7 (cotton
stalk + cow dung + urea + compost culture + rock phosphate + castor and neem cake each + Azotobacter and PSM culture).

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
214 G. S. Sutaria, V. D. Vora, P. D. Vekariya & K. N. Akbari

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that the recycling of cotton stalk (which are either burned or wasted) by chopping into small pieces
of 5-6 cm using cotton shedder and composting with addition of compost culture @ 500 g per tonne, urea (N @ 0.5%),
cow dung @ 20 % as well as Azotobacter and PSM) @ 500 g each per tonne during first turning of cotton stalk to get
enriched compost within 120 days having higher content of all plant nutrients.

REFERENCES

1. Anil Kumar Dubey, Pitam Chandra, Debasish Padhee and Gangil, S. ( ) Energy from cotton stalks and other crop residues.
CIAE, Bhopal, India.

2. Gallardo-Larva, F. and R. Nogades. 1987. Effect of application of town refuse compost on the soil plant system – A review.
Biological Wastes 19:35-62.

3. Hoitink, H.A.J. and P.C. Fahy. 1989. Basis for the control of soil borne plant pathogens with composts. Annual Review of
Phytopathology 24: 39-114.

4. Jackson, M. L. (1973) Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt, ltd., New delhi

5. Mahimairaja,S., P.Dooraisamy, A.Lakshmanan, G.Rajannan, C.Udayasoorian and S.Natarajan.2008.Composting technology

and organic waste utilization in Agriculture. A.E.Publications, P.N.Pudur, Coimbatore

6. Somasundaram, E., Thirukumaran, K., Mohamed Amanullah M. and Chandrasekaran, R. (2007). Performance of implements
for in-situ incorporation of post-harvest cotton stalks. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 3(6): 835-837.

7. Sridevi, S.; KatyalmJ.C.; Srinivas, K. and Sharma, K.L. (2003). Carbon mineralization and microbial biomass dynamics in
soil amended with plant residues and residue fractions. Journal of Indian Scociety of Soil Science, 51 (2):133-139.

8. Tandon S.K. and C. Sundaramoothy (2009). Environmental preservation through use of cotton stalks for industrial purpose.
Paer presented during the International Workshop on ‘Utilization of cotton Plants by- produce for value added Products’ held
at Nagpur on Nov, 2009.

9. Walkley, A. and Black, I. A. (1934) An examination of the Degtijareff method for determining soil organic matter and a
proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37, 355-358.

10. Williams, C.H. and Steinbergs, A. (1959) Soil sulphur fractions as chemical indices of available sulphur in some Australian
soils. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 10, 340-352.

APPENDICES

Table 1: Composition of Compost Prepared from Cotton Stalk Days after Composting
DAC Total C (%) Total N % C/N Ratio
90 44.67 1.03 43.37
120 34.69 1.51 22.97
S.Em.± 0.63 0.02 1.21
C.D. 5 % 1.44 0.07 3.23
Total P % Total K % Total S %
90 0.45 0.99 0.124
120 0.68 2.00 0.164
S.Em.± 0.01 0.02 0.003
C.D. 5 % 0.03 0.05 0.009
Total Fe ppm Total Mn ppm Total Zn ppm
90 409 224 41.4

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.7987 NAAS Rating: 3.53

Technology for Rapid Composting of Cotton Stalk 215

Table 1 Contd.
120 509 300 61.7
S.Em.± 3.9 3.8 1.0
C.D. 5 % 11.2 11.2 2.8

Table 2: Effect of Different Treatments on Composition of Compost Prepared from Cotton Stalk
90 90 90 120
Days 120 DAC 120 DAC
DAC DAC DAC DAC
Treatment Total C (%) Total N (%) C/N Ratio
T1 49.75 39.25 0.84 0.95 59.23 41.23
T2 47.5 38.01 0.87 1.01 54.72 37.71
T3 45.5 35.48 1.01 1.62 45.14 21.84
T4 44.5 33.73 1.15 1.82 38.76 18.53
T5 45.75 36.13 1.06 1.26 43.00 28.67
T6 44.25 32.55 1.18 1.93 37.63 16.85
T7 33.50 27.72 1.12 1.96 31.70 14.14
S. Em± 1.69 1.70 0.06 0.07 3.76 1.64
CD at 5 % 5.13 5.16 0.18 0.22 11.40 4.97
CV% 6.56 8.49 10.10 8.21 14.57 11.05
Total P (%) Total K(%) Total S (%)
T1 0.23 0.39 0.77 1.76 0.10 0.14
T2 0.27 0.46 0.91 1.86 0.11 0.15
T3 0.28 0.48 0.94 1.92 0.12 0.15
T4 0.30 0.49 1.00 2.00 0.13 0.18
T5 0.32 0.50 1.07 2.00 0.13 0.17
T6 0.33 0.54 1.11 2.18 0.13 0.17
T7 1.45 1.86 1.16 2.27 0.14 0.19
S. Em± 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.01
CD at 5 % 0.08 0.10 0.16 0.13 0.02 0.03
CV% 9.58 8.59 9.01 3.82 8.86 9.89
Total Fe (ppm) Total Mn (ppm) Total Zn (ppm)
T1 332 421 174 264 32 49
T2 381 467 205 278 38 59
T3 415 498 211 288 39 60
T4 431 530 242 301 42 61
T5 402 490 225 299 45 63
T6 428 555 249 327 46 69
T7 472 605 261 341 48 71
S. Em± 9 12 9 11 2 3
CD at 5 % 27 36 26 34 7 9
CV% 3.81 4.01 6.66 6.55 9.08 7.99
DAC= Days after composting

www.tjprc.org editor@tjprc.org
View publication stats