‘‘SIGNIFICANCE OF Citrus reticulata (KINNOW) COMPOST

AND BIOCHAR ON THE GROWTH OF Impatiens balsamina AND

Solanum lycopersicum

PROJECT DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENT OF DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
MICROBIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY
2019

SUBMITTED BY
SIMRANJIT KAUR
DEPARTMENT OF MICROBIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY,

POST GRADUATE GOVERNMENT COLLEGE FOR GIRLS, SECTOR-42,

CHANDIGARH
 POST GRADUATE GOVERNMENT COLLEGE FOR GIRLS, SECTOR-42,

CHANDIGARH

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the dissertation entitled “Significance of Citrus reticulata

(Kinnow) compost and biochar on growth of Impatiens balsamina and
Solanum lycopersicum was conducted and completed by Simranjit Kaur (PUPIN
61573) under our supervision for the partial fulfillment of the requirement for the
degree of Masters of Science in Microbial Biotechnology from Post Graduate
Government College for Girls, Sector-42, Chandigarh.

Supervisor Head of Department

Mr. Sumit Dabhi Dr. Dalip Kumar
(Assistant Professor) (Associate Professor)
Post Graduate Government Post Graduate Government
College for Girls Sector-42 College for girls Sector-42
Chandigarh (UT) Chandigarh (UT)
Dedicated
to
my parents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Life itself is a project, the objectives of which can never be accomplished alone despite putting
our best endeavors in different phases of life. To taste the success, everyone requires perennial
support, guidance, motivation, logical feedback and healthy critical analysis of guides, teachers,
mentors, supporters, well-wishers and parents.

I am fortunate enough that whilst marching ahead in this project of life, I have been able to
complete an independent project called for which I would like to acknowledge with deep
appreciation and gratitude the invaluable support of the following persons which paved my path
of success.

First and foremost, I would like to thank my Creator, the Almighty God for giving me soulful
body and mind which enabled me to live and learn and particularly to work on my dissertation
project.

I take this opportunity to acknowledge my gratitude to Principal Madam Prof. Binu Dogra.,
PGGCG-42, Chandigarh for her support in every step of my work, academics and providing me
with the infrastructure for completion of this work.

I also express my sincere thanks to Head of the department, Dr. Dalip Kumar for his guidance,
timely help and motivation. Apart from the subject of my research I learnt a lot from him, which
I am sure , will be useful in the journey of my life.

I owe my endless gratitude and regards to my supervisor, my esteemed guide, MR. Sumit Dabhi,
Assistant professor, PGGCG-42, Chandigarh , for his unmatched whole hearted guidance,
cooperation , golden advices, supervision and timely help throughout this Project without which
this Project would not have seen the ligt of the day and it would have been impossible to turn
this distant dream into reality.

I owe sincere thanks to Prof. Deepika Kansal( PGGCG-42, Chandigarh) for her timely and
valuable help and support

I am greatly indebted to all my teachers Dr.Sunita, Dr. Rachna Rana, Dr. Smita, Dr. Ruchi
Sharma, Mrs. Sonia Chauhan, Dr. Vikas Sharma for their considerate behavior, valuable
advice and sage contant encouragement and guidance.

Iam thankful to the entire lab staff of Biotechnology Department Mrs Gurjit Kaur,
Mr.Mohammad, Mr. Satish and Mr. Sahil for their help.

I am also thankful to Mr. Manjeet Singh, Mr. Sukhlal and Mr. Jai Mal Singh, caretakers of
botanical garden of PGGCG-42, Chandigarh for their valuable help in the field work.

Thanks from the core of my heart also goes to my Lab mates Anisha Rana, Manu Hooda for
their unforgettable moral support, affection and company and all classmates for sharing
precious memories.

How can I forget to pen down my deepest sense of indebtedness towards my parents who left no
stone unturned to fulfill my cherished dream of pursuing higher education in this college.I
express my gratitude to all my family members who soulfully provided me with their constant
support to undertake these challenges in all spheres of life. No words are enough to describe
their unconditional love, blessings and cooperation which enabled me to achieve every goal of
my life.

Simranjit kaur
ABBREVIATIONS
°C Degree Celsius
c.c Cubic centimeter
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
% Percent
C:N Carbon : Nitrogen
USDA United States Department of Agriculture’s
FAS Foreign Agricultural Service
FAOSTAT Food and Agricultural Organization Corporate Statistical Database
kg Kilogram
N Nitrogen
P Phosphorus

K Potassium

i.e., That is

NHB National Horticulture Board

NH3 Ammonia

N2O Nitrous Oxide

v/v Volume by volume

SCG Spent Coffee Grounds

CRH Composted Rice Husk

ha Hectare
 CONTENTS

S.NO. NAME OF CHAPTER PAGE NO.

1. Introduction 1-5
2. Review of literature 6-16
3. Materials and Methods 17-24
4. Results and Discussion 25-40
5. Summary 41
6. conclusion 42
7. Scope of the study 43
8. References 44-54
9. Annexure 55-57
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION

Solid waste management is one of the most challenging issues in metro cities. They are facing
serious pollution problems due to the generation of huge quantities of solid waste (Kumar, S. et
al., 2004). Metro cities have well defined system for MSW collection, transportation and
disposal/composting. Cities are divided into different wards for collection of waste, as it become
convenient to handle (Yadav Ishwar Chandra and N.Linthoingambi Devi, 2009).The community
bin collection system is the main practice used for the waste collection. In this system residents
deposit their waste into the nearest community bins located at street corners at specific intervals
(NEERI Report, 1996). Municipal solid waste is transferred from community bin to sanitary
landfill site ( Dass ravi, 2007).

Solid waste is the useless, unwanted, and discarded material resulting from daily activities in
community. The main activities associated with solid waste management can be grouped into six
functional elements; waste generation, storage, collection, transportation, segregation and
processing, disposal (Ashish R Mishra et al, 2014).

DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE

Solid waste disposal in developing countries is major issue regarding the sustainable
development of environment. Solid waste disposal is carried out by filling up land sites,
Incineration and Composting.

COMPOSTING

Composting is the bio-oxidative decomposition of organic matter to produce a stabilized product

which can be used to improve and maintain soil quality and fertility. During composting,
microorganism decomposes the substrate by breaking it down from complex to simpler
compounds (Sayara et al. 2010). Composting can significantly reduce waste volume in various
composting systems (Peigne and Girardin, 2004). It uses naturally occurring microorganisms to
convert biodegradable organic matter into a humus-like product (Liao et al. 1993; Sims, 1994;
Georgacakis et al., 1996). The process destroys pathogens, converts Nitrogen from unstable
ammonia to stable organic forms, reduces the volume and improves the nature of the waste (Liao
et al. 1994a, b; Sims,1994; Kashmanian and Rynk, 1995; Georgacakis et al. 1996; Sequi, 1996).

1
The produced product with humus-like properties can be applied as a fertilizer, organic
amendment or growing medium, improving soil physical properties and increasing both water
retention and the supply of essential nutrients (McConnell et al. 1993; Jakobsen, 1995;
Hargreaves et al. 2008; Martinez-Blanco et al. 2009). The effect of particular plant residue
composts on soil properties however depends on its dominant nutrient components (Chaves .et al
2004).

Compost is humus like material, which is generated due to the breakdown of organic matter
under bacterial action. Composting uses aerobic method of digestion. Food waste is an important
component of all municipal waste and its disposal in landfills has critical environmental effects
(Harir A.I.et al., 2015). To solve these issues, farmers can use organic/natural fertilizer instead of
inorganic/synthetic fertilizers. Organic fertilizers include substances such as dried blood or
seaweed derivatives, which are of animal and plant origin respectively (Saini V et al, 2017).

One way of using organic fertilizer is composting (Sarkar Adriga, Rohatgi Navni,
2018).Composting benefits the environment because manure nutrients are converted to more
stable forms and are less likely to reach groundwater or move in surface runoff. Compost is
valued for its organic matter content and is used as a soil amendment to enhance the chemical,
physical and biological properties of soil (Kadiret A.A. et al, 2016).

Land application of composted household waste can be one of the most economical and
attractive method to two problems: waste disposal and the necessity to increase the organic
matter content of the soil (Giusquani et al.,1998; Changa et al.,2003; Bernel et al., 2008).
Composting is a natural process which involves the aerobic biological decomposition of organic
materials under controlled conditions (Mac’ Safley et al., 1992; Pace et al., 1995; Mishra et al.,
2003).Composting can improve soil fertility, extent fertilizers, save water, suppress plant
diseases, and boost soil tilt (Peter Moon, 1997).

Compost is one of the nature’s best soil amendments. It provides many essential nutrients for
plant growth and is often used as fertilizer. Compost also improves soil’s structure so that soil
can easily hold the correct amount of moisture, nutrients and air. Compost helps control weeds,
reduces in garbage volume, improves soil aeration and drainage and reduces the use of chemical
fertilizers.

2
BIOCHAR

It is the carbon product , gained while the raw materials, like animal compost and plant residues
is heated in a closed storage place without air. Biochar is created by seeming thermal
decomposition of organic substance below incomplete supply of oxygen (O2) and at
comparatively low temperature (Lehmann, J.S. 2009)

Biochar is the product of burning biomass, such as hardwood, rice hulls, bamboo, or even
chicken litter in a low-to-no oxygen environment. The result is the black carbon skeletal like
structure of the original biomass (Patricia Gay Burns, 2017).

It can serve as base product for production of nitrogen fertilizer (Marris, 2006), be treated with
steam to generate activated carbon (McHenry, 2008) and has been suggested as a farm fertilizer
(Lehmann, 2007) and as a way to improve forest productivity (Dumroese et al. 2009). As a soil
amendment, biochar can increase water-holding capacity, reduce bulk density, provide additional
cation exchange sites, and serve as a source of reduced carbon compounds that may benefit
microbial populations, all of which promote plant growth (Lehmann et al., 2006; DeLuca and
Aplet, 2008; Warnock et al., 2007). The chemical structure of charcoal is characterized with
poly-condensed aromatic groups, providing prolonged biological and chemical stability that
sustains the fight against microbial degradation; it also provides, after partial oxidation, the
highest nutrients retention. Biochar adds some macro- (Phosphorus, potassium, Nitrogen,
Calcium, Magnesium) and micronutrients (Copper, Zinc, iron, Manganese) to the soil, which are
needed for sustainable agriculture (Glaser et al., 2002; Mankasingh et al., 2009).

Biochar has also demonstrated potential as a tool for carbon sequestration (Lehmann et al.,
2006) The aromatic nature of the charcoal formed by burning natural organic biomass is
recalcitrant and has the potential for long-term Carbon sequestration in soil (Atkinson et al.
2010) and therefore biochar offers the chance to turn bioenergy into a Carbon-negative industry
(Lehmann, 2007). The long-term stability of the biochar was demonstrated to be greater
compared to non-pyrolyzed organic matter that was incorporated into soils with the same
environmental conditions (Baldock and Smernik, 2002; Six et al., 2002; Liang et al., 2008).
Biochar has an approximate mean residence time in the soil of more than 1000 years. This long-

3
term stability is an essential factor in its potential utilization as a carbon sequestration agent
(Cheng et al., 2008).

Meanwhile, the greatest positive effects of biochar application have been in highly degraded,
acidic or nutrient-depleted soils such as the highly weathered tropical African soils (Lehmann et
al., 2006). Soil in tropical regions retain less carbon than temperate soil, yet they support much
of the world‘s agriculture and approximately 40% of the world‘s population; Tropical soil also
lose soil organic matter more quickly than temperate soil due to faster mineralization under
tropical conditions (Glaser et al., 2002). Thus, biochar research is of particular relevance in the
Sub-Saharan context, as many soil exhibit very low nutrient and carbon levels.

The efficiency and effectiveness of the biochar depends on the specific biomass sources used
and other factors such as holding time and pyrolysis temperature(DeLuca and Aplet, 2008).
Benefits of biochar as a soil amendment includes; Increased crop yields (Teat et al 2015, Jeffery
et al., 2015), It helps in improving soil’s water holding capacity (Basso et al., 2013), reduction of
N2O emissions from soil ( Thomazini et al., 2015), reduction of soil density in heavy soils,
improving water percolation and root development (Jeffery et al., 2015), long term sequestration
of carbon(Mcbeath et al., 2014).

DAILY DUMP

Daily dump has designed a product with which anyone can convert kitchen waste into compost
at home. The product made of terracotta, is sourced from village potters. It is marketed through
word of mouth referrals, media awareness, and their website. The current product works well in
independent homes; and they are working on a ‘mechanical composters’ for use in flats. Daily
dump not only retro fits composters at homes and other establishments but also provides
maintenance advice and assistance through its service plans, essentially allowing you to just
dump and letting nature and daily dump do the rest.

In simple words, this product allows every homeowner to reduce their contribution to city
waste. In India, no commercial home composter was available till the daily dump product was
launched.

4
PRODUCTS OFFERED BY DAILY DUMP:

COMPOSTERS : Kambha 3 T Large, Kambha 3 T small, prithvi, gobble solo, chomp, gobble
senior, gobble junior, pooja ganesha, pooja rangoli, nano Kambha. (Accessories: Remix powder,
gloves, stand up, units terracotta, lids terracotta, raincoat, metal rake, neem powder).

USES/FEATURES OF KHAMBA/STACK COMPOSTER:

 Ideal for individual homes to compost in flats, apartments and tight spaces.
 Family of 1-3 is equal to 1 3 T Small and 1 small or tiny Leave it pot to manage waste
comfortably for life. (Yes this can hold your daily waste everyday, for years to come,
organic waste reduces in volume by 80%).
 Every installed 3 T kambha keeps about 15 kg of waste from landfill / month (180 kg /
year).
 Layer your kitchen waste with Remix Powder daily for smell free and fool proof
composting.
 For outdoor use only. For use on a balcony, terrace or garden.
 Requires a sheltered area away from direct rain (or use our Kambha raincoat large).
 Holes in the surface and porosity of terracotta regulates moisture and airflow optimally.
 Harvest compost every time the base unit is full (about every 6 weeks).
 Rodent proof.
 Handcrafted terracotta, made by artisan communities.
 Its modular design makes replacement of parts simple and cost effective.

OBJECTIVES:

1. Preparation of compost and biochar from Citrus reticulata (Kinnow) peels.

2. To study the effects of compost and biochar on the growth of plants such as Impatiens
balsamina and Solanum lycopersicum.
3. To study and compare the chemical properties of soil, compost, biochar
4. To study and compare the physical properties of soil, compost, biochar

5
 REVIEW
OF
LITERATURE

6
 REVIEW LITERATURE
Composting is seen as an environmentally acceptable waste treatment method. It is an aerobic
biological process which uses naturally occurring microorganisms to convert biodegradable
organic matter into a humus like product. The process destroys pathogens and converts Nitrogen
from unstable ammonia to stable organic form, reduces the volume of waste and improves the
nature of the waste. ( Suhas S. Gonwala & Hemali jardosh, 2018).

Plant nutrients are very important for the development of crops and hygienic food for the
increasing population of world. Plant nutrients are major and important component of sustainable
agriculture (Ryckeboer et al., 2003). Bio fertilizer made by composting process has been
identified as an alternative to chemical fertilizer to enhance soil fertility and crop production
(Michael et al., 1995). There is large number of genetic heterogeneity in microbes. Studying the
microbial variety in the environment is the inability to get many of microbes in culture (Sait et
al., 2002).

TYPES OF COMPOSTING

There are two fundamental types of composting aerobic and anaerobic.

AEROBIC COMPOSTING: Composting is the decomposition of organic waste in the

presence of oxygen to produce CO2, NH3, water and heat. This can be used to treat any type of
organic waste but effective composting requires right conditions. These include moisture content
of around 40-60% and carbon to nitrogen ratio (C/N) of 25-30:1. Any significant variation
inhibits the degradation process. Generally wood and paper provide a significant source of
carbon while sewage sludge and food waste provides nitrogen. To ensure an adequate supply of
oxygen throughout, ventilation of waste is essential ( Guanzon Yvette B, et al., 2000)

ANAEROBIC COMPOSTING: Composting is the decomposition of organic waste in the

absence of oxygen and the products being methane (CH 4), CO2, NH3 and trace amounts of other
gases and organic acids. Anaerobic composting was traditionally used to compost animal manure
and human sewage sludge, but recently it has become more common for some municipal solid
waste and green waste to be treat in this way (Tweib et al, 2011)

7
METHODS OF COMPOSTING:
AERATED STATIC PILE

This system involves supply of air through mechanical means and requires no turning of
organic mixture once the pile is formed. By controlling the air mechanically, this process allows
the use of larger piles. For composting by this method , an air plenum is constructed and the
organic mixture is placed in piles on top of air plenum. Pile is normally kept eight to twelve feet
high. These piles can be constructed individually or in extended piles. Individual piles
constructed all at once, allow the composting to occur in batches. Extended piles consists of a
series of cells created over the course of many days and stacked against each other to form one
long rectangular pile. A temperature sensor is placed within the pile works in conjunction with
the blower to control temperature and oxygen concentration within the pile (Atalia et al, 2015).

PIT COMPOSTING

In this method organic wastes are piled into a pit daily and as time goes on those underneath
decompose into compost. The method is suitable for use in institutions like hospitals, boarding
schools, Colleges etc., where daily production of organic waste is high.pit is dug under shady
place .all the waste is evenly spread out in the pit. Layer of soil is placed to cover the waste and
moist the pit wherever necessary. The decomposition period will vary between 6 to 10 months as
it is an anaerobic process. Ready compost could be removed to be used in garden. However if the
pit is of same size of garden bed it could be planted with crops directly (Karanja et al, 2005)

IN VESSLE COMPOSTING

Composting is accomplished inside an enclosed container or vessel. Various types of vessels

have been used include vertical tower, horizontal rectangular and circular tanks and circular
rotating tanks. This composting system can be divided into plug flow and agitated bed.
Mechanical system are designed to minimized odor and process time by controlling
environmental conditions such as airflow, temperature and oxygen concentration. It is carried out
in the absence of air. Conversion of organic material in MSW occurs in 3 steps. The first step
involves the enzyme mediated transformation of higher molecular mass compounds into
compounds suitable for use as of energy and cell tissue. The second step involves the bacterial

8
conversion of the compounds resulting from the first step into identifiable lower molecular mass
intermediate compounds. The third step involves the bacterial conversion of the intermediate
compounds into simpler end products, principally methane and carbon dioxide (Tchobanoglous
et al, 1993).

WINDROW COMPOSTING

Windrow composting is one of the oldest methods of composting. In its simplest form, a
windrow compost system can be constructed by forming the organic material to be composted

into windows 8 to 10 feet high by 20 to 25 ft wide at base (Tchobanoglous, 1993). Windrows

may be constructed by several methods, however, it is usually done by truck and front-end
loader. Windrows can be from 2 to 6 m in width at the base and 1 to 3 m in height and of any
length. The most practical windrow size is 3 to 5 m at the base and 2 to 3 m in height and
somewhat triangular in shape. Optimum size will vary due to weather, turning equipment
utilized, and initial characteristics of the waste. Windrows which are too small are vulnerable to
weather conditions, especially rain, and require considerably more land area for an equal amount
of waste compared to larger windrows. Excessively large windrows, if not aerated at the proper
times, readily form anaerobic cores with the resultant release of odors when aerated ( L.R.
Kuhlman, 1989)

VERMICOMPOSTING

It is the process of producing organic fertilizer or the vermicompost from bio-degradable

materials with earthworms (Rogayan JR et al, 2010).. Earthworm is one of nature’s pinnacle
“soil scientist”. They breakdown organic matter and when they eat, they leave behind castings
that are an exceptionally valuable type of fertilizer (www.bjmp.gov.ph, 2010).

Vermicompost is the result of combined activity of microorganisms and earthworms (Neuhauser

E. F. et al, 1980). The ” tiger” or ” brandling” worm Eisenia foetida has received most attention
and work at Rothamsted showed that it could grow well in a wide range of wastes including pig
and cattle solid and slurries, horse manure and potato waste (Edwards C.A., et al.,1985) Worms
are useful in converting agricultural wastes into useful soil conditioners. E. foetida prefers a pH

9
of 5, temperature exceeds <35°C, and it will not enter poultry waste with high ammonia content
(Atalia et al, 2015).

FACTORS AFFECTING COMPOSTING

TEMPERATURE

Rate of organic matter degradation depends on the temperature of the raw material. The
decomposition of organic compounds starts in a temperature range (40°-65°C). Temperature
higher than 50°C should be maintained for at least 3-4 days to destruct harmful organisms such
as plant pathogens, weed seeds and fly larvae. Temperature as high as 85°C doubles the
decomposition rate than at 55°C.However this temperature is fatal for certain microbial
populations. Hence, most of composting plants are operating in thermophilic temperature range
(55°-65°C) (Garg and tothill, 2009). High temperatures characterizes the aerobic composting
process and serve as sign of vigorous microbial activities. Critical point for elimination of the
weed seeds is 62°C .Turnings and aeration can be used to regulate temperature.

MOISTURE CONTENT

Moisture is necessary to support the metabolic processes of the microbes. Composting

materials should be maintained within a range of 40% to 65% moisture. It was shown in some
experiments that composting process become inhibited when the moisture content is below
40%.Water displaces much of the air in the pore spaces of the composting materials when the
moisture content is above 65%.This limits air movement and leads to anaerobic conditions.
Moisture content generally decreases as composting proceeds; therefore, you may need to add
additional water to the compost.(Michael G. Pace et al,1995).

In aerobic composting high moisture content must be avoided because water displaces the air
from the intersticial space between the particles and gives rise to anaerobic conditions. Excessive
moisture can have several adverse effects on the subsequent processes after the final
decomposition phase (Atalia et al, 2015).

OXYGEN AND AERATION

Oxygen is necessary for the survival of aerobic microorganisms. If sufficient oxygen is not
provided to sustain aerobic microorganisms, anaerobic microorganisms begin to dominate the

10
compost pile, slow the composting process, and produce odors. A minimum oxygen
concentration of 5% is required to maintain aerobic conditions. Oxygen can be supplied to the
pile using either forced or passive aeration.

Regardless of the method of aeration, the amount of air that is being supplied to the compost pile
does not necessarily reflect the amount of oxygen that is actually reaching the microorganisms.
Therefore, although air may be entering the pile at a sufficient rate to provide the required
oxygen, the oxygen may not be reaching the micro organisms at the correct rate. This factor must
be taken into account when aerating the pile and when managing the moisture content of the pile
(https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/internet)

PARTICLE SIZE

Nevertheless aerobic decomposition of fine or dense particles occurs at faster rate, it may
cause obstruction in oxygen movement through the material. Hence, a bulking agent like straw,
paper and cardboard is added to the raw material to facilitate free aeration. In general, preferred
particle size range depends on the particular feedstock, pile, size and weather conditions.
However, the average particle diameter should be in the range of 0.3-5.0 cm (Pace et al, 1995).

C : N ratio

Carbon (C), nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K), are the primary nutrients required
by the microorganisms involved in composting. Microorganisms use carbon for both energy and
growth, while nitrogen is essential for protein production and reproduction. The appropriate C: N
ratio ensure that other required nutrients are present in adequate amount.

Raw materials blended to provide a C: N ratio of 25:1 to 30:1 are ideal for active composting,
although initial C: N ratios from 20:1 up to 40:1 consistently give good composting results. For
C: N ratios below 20:1, the available carbon is fully utilized without stabilizing all of the
nitrogen which can lead to the production of excess ammonia and unpleasant odors. For C:N
ratios above 40:1, not enough Nitrogen is available for the growth of microorganism and the
composting process slows dramatically.(Pace et al,1995).

11
TIME

The length of time required to transform raw materials into compost depends upon the factor
above. In general, the entire decomposition and stabilization of materials may be accomplished
within few weeks under favourable conditions, but research at Utah State University has shown
that 10-14weeks of active composting for dairy cattle waste is more common. Active composting
will change depending upon the amount of natural moisture or water added to the compost,
turning frequency, materials being composted, and temperatures reached (Pace et al,1995).

STAGES OF COMPOSTING PROCESS

If the heat produced by the metabolism of microorganisms is prevented by some kind of

insulation from being dissipated to the environment, the temperature of the habitat increases.
This occurs when damp organic matter is collected in bulky heaps or kept in tight containers, as
it is done when organic waste is composted either in large piles or in boxes of various kinds.
There are 4 temperature phases and these phases are of course the reflection of activities of
microbial populations performing the degradation of increasingly more recalcitrant organic
matter. The four phases are:

1. During the first phase a diverse population of mesophilic bacteria and fungi proliferate,
degrading primarily the readily available nutrients and thereby raising the temperature to
about 45°C. At this point their activities cease, the vegetative cells and hyphae die and
eventually lyse and only heat resistant spores survive.
2. After a short lag period, there occurs a second more or less steep rise of temperature. This
second phase is characterized by the development of a thermophilic microbial population
comprising some bacterial species, actinomycetes and fungi. The temperature optimum of
these microorganisms is between 50 and 65°C, their activities terminate at 70°-80°C.
3. The third phase can be regarded as a stationary period without significant changes of
temperature because microbial heat production and heat dissipation balance each other. The
microbial population continues to consist of thermophilic bacteria, actinomycetes, and fungi.
4. The fourth phase is characterized by a gradual temperature decline; it is best described as the
maturation phase of the composting process. Mesophilic microorganisms having survived the

12
high temperature phase or invading the cooling down material from the outside, succeed the
thermophilic ones and extend the degradation process as far as it is intended.
(http://application.wiley-vch.de)

HUMAN HEALTH RISKS DUE TO COMPOSTING

Municipal solid waste contains a number of chemical and biological agents, hence it contains a
lot of harmful substances. These contaminants can cause various health hazards ranging from
composting plant workers to vegetable consumers. Potential health risks are due to the volatile
organic compounds released during composting ( Domingo et al., 2009 ).

With respect to the health risk of compost, there are three main exposure routes for the
population: 1) ingestion of soil treated with compost, 2) Contamination through the food chain
by consumption of the products cultivated in soil where compost has been applied and, 3)
Dispersion of atmospheric dust of compost that transports microorganisms and toxicants
susceptible of being inhaled (Domingo et al., 2009).

ISSUES OF GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DUE TO COMPOSTING

Green house gas emission due to composting is often neglected. Aerobic decomposition from
well managed composting results in the emission of CO2 and H2O. Due to the heterogenous
nature of the compost pile, some CH4 may form in anaerobic pockets within the pile (Bogner J. et
al.,2007 and Brown S. et al., 2004).Majority of this CH 4 emission oxidizes to CO2 in an
anaerobic pockets and near the surface of the compost pile making CH 4 emission negligible
(Zeman, C. et al, 2002 and Brown S. et al, 2004). However, many investigators have reported the
considerable CH4 emission even in well managed system. This happens due to various variables
controlling the nature of the compost pile (Edelmann, W. et al, 1999; Rynk, R. et al, 2001;
Amlinger, F. et al,2008 ).

SUBSTRATES USED IN COMPOSTING

Vegetable waste is the non edible part of vegetables that are discarded during collection,
handling, transportation, and processing. The leafy vegetables were first cut into small pieces of
different sizes from 3-5mm to 30-50mm in width and then were tested in the reactor, separately.

13
Experiment result showed that the vegetable waste could be composted successfully in a
laboratory- scale reactor (chang et al., 2006)

FRUIT WASTE

Effective Microorganisms (EM), a culture of co-existing beneficial micro organisms

predominantly consisting of lactic acid bacteria, photosynthetic bacteria, yeast, fermenting fungi
and actinomycetes that are claimed to enhance the decomposition of organic matter which in turn
improves soil fertility. The fruit wastes were effectively decomposed by applied effective
microorganisms with complete reduction of volume of waste. The plant growth parameters such
as shoot length, leaf surface area, and total chlorophyll, height of the plant, total leaves, and
branches emerged in the plant, total foliage density/plant was increased in compost treated plants
and distinct reduction in pest infestation and disease spots were recorded. As in plant growth
parameters, compost treated plots reveals maximum phyllosphere, soil heterotrophic microbial
population and soil nutrients via total nitrogen, phosphorus , potassium, organic carbon and
humic acid. Total yield and cost benefit ratio was also increased in compost treated pots
(RajaNamasivayam and Arvind Bharani (2012)

SPENT COFFEE

One of the main coffee residues are spent coffee grounds(SCG). Its use as a organic fertilizer in
domestic cultures, especially in gardens ,are common. The effect of spent coffee grounds, both
composted and uncomposted, on Lactuca sativa L. growth and mineral composition was assessed
under greenhouse conditions. It is also expected to find the optimum dose of spent coffee
grounds that would give maximum lettuce growth. With this purpose, lettuce plants cv. “Four
seasons” were grown on topsoil (control) or in topsoil mixed with different concentrations of
fresh (2.5; 5; 10; 15; 20%, v/v) or composted (5; 10; 15; 20; 30%, v/v) spent coffee grounds.
After 39 days of transplantation, the plants were collected and used to evaluate several growth
parameters, as well as photosynthetic pigments and mineral contents on leaves. The application
of both fresh and composted spent coffee grounds, as well as their concentrations, had significant
influence on all the parameters measured. Fresh spent coffee grounds stimulated the plant growth
at low concentrations (2.5-5%) but without significant differences when compared to control. A
similar effect was observed for composted spent coffee ground, but only when applied at high

14
concentrations (≥10%). By contrast, the foliar-N, -P and K- contents were, in general, reduced by
fresh and composted spent coffee ground. When comparing to fresh spent coffee ground, the
composted spent coffee grounds resulted, in average, in higher carotenoids content, foliar-N and
-K contents, and plant growth. Both treatments could be used to recycle coffee grounds with
demonstrated horticultural benefits. (Teresa Gomes et al., 2013)

TEA POWDER

The used tea powder is the suitable substrate for making compost. Studies were performed on
the effects of used tea on the plant growth and soil properties. Compost was prepared using tea
powder that is thrown after use. Equal layers of soil, cow-dung and soil were laid at the top of
the other. The material was allowed to decompose for three months. Moong, chick peas and
Marigold were chosen to see the effect of compost. The leaf density, germination rate and height
of Moong, chick peas and Marigold were found to be enhanced. The period of germination
appears to get decreased after the application of compost (Gurav and Sinalkar, 2013) .

CHICKEN MANURE

Chicken manure is preferred amongst other animal waste because of its high concentration of
macronutrients (Warman, 1986; Duncan, 2005; Oagile and Namasiku, 2010). Ismaeil et al, 2012
conducted the experiment at the Experimental Farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, University of
Khartoum, Shambat during the period to study the effect of different rates of chicken manure on
growth and forage yield of sorghum. The treatments consisted of four levels of chicken manure;
0, 1.2, 2.5 and 5.0 tons/ha. Chicken manure (5 tons/ha) produced higher fresh and dry forage at
harvest than the other. Increase in nitrogen levels from 40 - 60% with respect to control for
Norfolk sandy soils was recorded following application of manure (Chescheir et al., 1986).

RICE HUSK

Bio-degradation of agricultural waste into compost and incorporation into soil may enhance the
nutrient recycling and maintain soil fertility (Gaind S et al , 2006).
Thiyageshwari et al, 2018 used cellulolytic bacterium Enhydrobacter and fungi Aspergillus sp.
for preparing compost from rice husk (RH). Further, the prepared compost was tested for their
effect on blackgram growth promotion along with different levels of recommended dose of

15
fertilizer (RDF) in black soil (typic Haplustalf) and red soil (typic Rhodustalf) soil. The results
revealed that, inoculation with lignocellulolytic fungus (LCF) Aspergillus sp. @ 2% was
considered as the most efficient method of composting within a short period. At the end of
composting, N, P and K content increases. In comparison to inorganic fertilization, an increase
in grain yield of 16% in typic Haplustalf and 17% in typic Rhodustalf soil over 100% RDF was
obtained from the integrated application of CRH@ 5 t ha−1 with 50% RDF and biofertilizer.
Nutrient rich CRH has proved its efficiency on crop growth and soil fertility. They reported that
the rice husk (RH) composted with 2% (LCF) for 90 days can be a viable alternate organic manure to
enhance the yield and quality of blackgram crop .

Many studies have found increased growth of plants in biochar amended soils Biochar improves
plant growth by altering soil quality. Few studies have investigated biochar’s direct effect on
roots, but The addition of biochar improved root growth, which was correlated to increased
barley grain yield(Bruun et al. (2014) . However, many studies have found no increases or even
decreases in plant growth (Spokas et al., 2012). Some kinds of biochar, depending on how they
are made, may contain toxic compounds, which may dissolve into the soil water (Kim et al.,
2003).. An important way that biochar is able to affect plant growth is by improving fertilizer
holding capacity of the soil. Taghisadeh- Toosi et al. (2012) used N15 to verify that the ammonia
sorbed to the surface of the biochar is still bioavailable. Many studies have found that the
application of biochar, with fertilizer, increases nutrient uptake in plants. (Chan et al. 2008a;
Chan et al. 2008b; Steiner et al., 2007; Van Zwieten et al., 2010)

16
MATERIAL
AND
METHOD

17
 MATERIALS AND METHOD
CHEMICALS: All the chemicals used in the study were of analytical grade, obtained from
Nice, HIMEDIA and SRL. Soil testing kit was produced from the Nice chemical company.

COMPOSTER: Kambha composter and remix powder was purchased from Vatama Solution,
Sector-21, Chandigarh in collaboration with Daily Dump Organization.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:

Kinnow peels were collected from the juice shops in Ropar. Collected peels were separated from
seeds and other wastes. Peels were then placed into the composters called kambha. On day 1,
layer the remix powder on the bottom of the Kambha. Kinnow peels were then put into the
kambha. Again a layer of remix powder was placed over the peels and then covered it with a
paper. Remix powder uses the absorption strength of cocopeat to soak up the liquid released
during composting. That means no more gooey, sticky or smelly piles. The powder is light and
airy, creating plenty of gaps in the compost pile. Powder is a source of carbon for composting. Its
high lignin content adds to the nutrient value of the done compost and boosts root health. Remix
powder contains a culture of cellulolytic and lignolytic microbes mixed with magnesium silicate.
This is a natural and safe accelerator that speeds up composting.

After 2-3 days, composters were checked and the volume of waste was decreased to some level
due to its degradation by the microbes. Holes in the kambha’s surface and porosity of terracotta
regulate moisture and airflow optimally. Another benefit is that it is rodent proof.

BIOCHAR PREPARATION:

In this study, we prepared biochar of kinnow peels. The peels were first cut down into small
pieces. Then the peels were kept in sunlight for 2 day to reduce their moisture content. These
dried peels were heated to temperature of 200°C in hot air oven for 24 hours (Fig.1). Biochar
produced was of approximately 1 kg. This biochar was then ground in grinding machine or mixer
to form a fine powder.

18
 Fig 1. Biochar made by heating kinnow peels

PRINCIPLE: The method is based on removing soil moisture by oven-drying soil sample until
the weight becomes constant.

Moisture content (%) = (initial weight-final weight) ×100/weight of the sample.

REQUIREMENTS:

1. Hot air oven

2. Soil and compost samples(20g)
3. Aluminium foil
4. Weighing balance

PROCEDURE:

1. Samples were taken from the ground

2. Sample was weighted using the weighing balance (10g).
3. Temperature of hot air oven was set at 10±5°C.
4. Sample was then kept inside the oven for 24 hours

Final weight of the sample was taken and the moisture was determined by using the formula.

pH DETERMINATION: pH of the samples was determined by the method cited in the soil
testing kit handbook by NICE chemicals pvt.ltd.

19
Reagents:

1. pH reagent-1(pH-1)
2. pH reagent-2(pH-2)
3. Decolourizer
4. pH color chart

Method:

1. Measure 10 c.c of sample and transfer it into the soil mixing tube.
2. Add 25ml of pH reagent into it and shake well for 5 minutes. Then add a pinch of
decolouriser into the mixture, again, well. Filtered it into the color developing bottle by
using a funnel and filter paper.
3. To the clean filtrate, add 2-3 drops of pH reagent and mix well. Compare the color
developed with the pH color chart.

NITROGEN ESTIMATION:

Nitrogen estimation was done as described in the soil testing kit handbook by NICE pvt. Ltd.

Reagents:

1. Nitrogen reagent -1
2. Nitrogen reagent-2
3. Decoloriser
4. Nitrogen color chart

Method:

1. Measure 5c.c of soil and transfer into soil mixing tube.

2. Add 25ml of nitrogen reagent-1 into the sample and shake well for 5 minutes. Then add a
pinch of decoloriser into the soil mixture, again shake well. Then filter it into the color
developing bottle by using a funnel and filter paper.
3. To the clear filtrate, add 2-3 drops of nitrogen reagent-2 and mix well. Compare the color
developed with nitrogen color chart.(Table No. 1)

20
TABLE1. OBSERVATION TABLE OF ESTIMATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN
IN SOIL:

Approximate quantity of

Amount of available available Nitrogen present

in kg/Acre
nitrogen in soil

Low L1 <50 Kg/Acre

L2 50-99 Kg/Acre
(<100kg/Acre)
Medium M1 100-150 Kg/Acre
M2 151-200 Kg/Acre
(100-200 Kg/Acre)
High H1 201-300 Kg/Acre
H2 >300 Kg/Acre
(>200Kg/Acre)

PHOSPHORUS ESTIMATION

Phosphorus estimation was done as described in the soil testing kit handbook by NICE pvt. Ltd.

Reagents:

1. Phosphorus reagent -1
2. Phosphorus reagent-2
3. Decolouriser
4. Phosphorus color chart

Method:

1. Measure 5 c.c of sample in the measuring tube and transfer it into the soil mixing tube
2. Add 25ml of phosphorus reagent-1 into the tube and shake well for 15 minutes. Then add a
pinch of decolorizer into the mixture and again shake it well. Then filter into the color
developing bottle by using a funnel and filter paper.
4. To the clear filtrate, add 2 ml of phosphorus reagent -2 and mix well. Wait for 1-2 minutes
for the color to develop. Compare the color developed to the phosphorus color chart. (Table
No. 2)

21
TABLE 2: OBSERVATION TABLE OF ESTIMATION OF AVAILABLE
PHOSPHORUS IN SOIL:

Approximate quantity of

Amount of available available Phosphorus

present in kg/Acre
Phosphorus in soil

Low L1 <1 Kg/Acre

L2 1-3Kg/ Acre
(< 4 kg/Acre)
Medium M1 4-7Kg/Acre
M2 8-10 Kg/Acre
(4-10 Kg/Acre)
High H1 11-15 Kg/Acre
H2 > 15Kg/Acre
(>10 Kg/Acre)

POTASSIUM ESTIMATION:

Potassium estimation was done as described in the soil testing kit handbook by NICE Pvt. Ltd.

Reagents:

1. Potassium reagent-1
2. Potassium reagent-2
3. Decolouriser
4. Potassium color chart

Method:

1. Measure 5 c.c of sample in the measuring tube and transfer it to the soil mixing tube.

2. Add 25ml of potassium reagent -1 into the soil and shake well for 15 minutes. Then add a
pinch of decolouriser into the mixture and again shake well. Then filter into the color developing
bottle by using a funnel and filter paper.

3. To the clear filtrate, add 2 ml of potassium reagent-2 and mix well. Wait for 1-2 minutes for
the color to develop. Compare the color developed to potassium color chart. (Table No. 3)

22
TABLE 3. OBSERVATION TABLE OF ESTIMATION OF AVAILABLE POTASSIUM
IN SOIL:

Approximate quantity of

Amount of available available Potassium present

in kg/Acre
Potassium in soil

Low L1 < 25Kg/Acre

L2 25- 49Kg/Acre
(< 50 kg/Acre)
Medium M1 50-80Kg/Acre
M2 81-120 Kg/Acre
(50-120 Kg/Acre)
High H1 121-150 Kg/Acre
H2 >150 Kg/Acre
(>120Kg/Acre)

The biochar was added to soil in the pots to which plants were grown. The effect of biochar on
the growth of experimental plants was determined. Its effects on the height of balsam plants and
number of leaves of balsam and tomato plants were recorded at the end of every week.

EFFECT OF SOIL, COMPOST AND BIOCHAR ON THE GROWTH OF FLOWERING

PLANT: Impatiens balsamina & Solanum lycopersicum.

The effect of soil, compost and biochar was studied on the growth of flowering plant and the
experiment was conducted at the green house of PGGCG-42, Chandigarh. Plants of Balsam were
purchased from Government Plant Nursery Sector 23, Chandigarh. Seeds of tomato were
purchased from seed shop, Sector 26, Chandigarh.

Impatiens balsamina (Balsam) is an annual plant growing to 20-75cm tall, with a thick but soft
stem .Its leaves are spirally arranged, 2.5-9cm long and 1-2.5 cm broad. Its flowers are pink, red,
or white having 2.5-5cm diameter (Huxley, A., ed, 1992). Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)
belongs to family Solanaceae. They typically grow to 1-3 meters (3-10 ft) in height. They are
vines that have a weak stem that sprawls and typically needs support. The size of tomato varies
according to the cultivar, with a range of 0.5-4 inches in width (“Solanum lycopersicum-
tomato”. Encyclopedia of life, 2014).

23
2-3 saplings of balsam were planted and 4-5 seeds of tomato were sown in separate pots and kept
in the green house of Postgraduate Government College for Girls Sector 42, Chandigarh.

About 2-3 saplings of Balsam and 5 to 6 seeds of tomato were planted in separate pots. Both
control and experimental set up were run simultaneously under controlled conditions. The data
on plant heights, number of leaves were recorded at end of every week. This study was
conducted for four weeks. The results were recorded at the end of every week. The plants were
monitored regularly and various parameters such as plant height, number of leaves were recorded
at the end of every week. The study was carried out for 4 weeks. Both the plants exhibited
different response to soil, biochar and compost.

24
 RESULT
AND
DISCUSSION

25
 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

COMPOSTING OF KINNOW PEELS USING KHAMBA COMPOSTER:

In the present study, we have used the waste kinnow peels as substrate in composting. Kinnow
peels for making compost were collected from local fruit juice shops in Ropar city. Kinnow peels
were then separated from other waste such as seeds, leaves and pulp. We used Kambha
composters (Fig.2) for making the compost. These Kambha composters are ideal for individual
homes to compost in flats, apartments and tight spaces. These are applicable for outdoor use only
such as terrace, balcony or garden. Kinnow peels were layered with remix powder daily for
odour proof composting in kambha.

Fig 2. Kambha composter Fig 3. Remix powder

26
On day 1, kinnow peels were layered with fist full of remix powder in kambha composter and
covered with the newspaper. On day 3, no changes were observed in the colour and texture of the
substrate used for composting. On 5th day, a change in colour was observed in the kambha
composter depicting initiation of composting process. On day 15, presence of white fungus
denotes the proper degradation process. On 20th day, brown colour of immature compost was
found to be present in the composter. On 24 th day, the compost shift to unit A of kambha
composter for maturation for 24 hours. The process of composting was carried out for 25 days
till the production of mature compost.

Fig4. (1st DAY) Fig 5. (3rd DAY)

Fig 6. (10th DAY ) Fig7. (15th DAY)

27
 Fig 8. (20th DAY) Fig 9. Matured Compost ( 25th DAY)

BIOCHAR

Powdered biochar was produced from kinnow peels (Fig.10). This biochar can be used as
additional nutrients in the soil, which can be more beneficial for plant growth.

Biochar can be used as a liquid slurry if delicately ground. It can rise microbial action and
decrease nutrient damages through fertilizing or composting ( Chan, K. and Xu, Z, 2009)

Fig 10. Powdered biochar

28
TO COMPARE THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL, COMPOST AND BIOCHAR

Optimization of different physical parameters such as pH, temperature, aeration, moisture

content is very necessary for effective composting. In the absence of appropriate conditions,
microbes won’t survive and hence composting will not take place.

In the present study, we measured pH of the kinnow biochar and kinnow compost on 25 th day of
the composting process. We also analysed the pH of soil and compared it with both the biochar
and compost. As shown in Fig.11, the pH of the biochar (7.0) was more than both compost (6.5)
and soil (6.5).
The Composting of kinnow peels was done in pits for 90 days. Pit was divided into two parts:
control and other was treated with microbial consortium containing Bacillus subtilis NA15,
Paenibacillus polymyxa, Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Trichoderma reesei. After the
completion of composting process, she determined various parameters of the compost. The pH of
Kinnow peel compost was more on acidic scale due to its citrus nature. The initial pH recorded
for kinnow peels was 3.84 and later on it showed increasing trend in pH during composting and
finally stabilized pH at of 7.1(Drishti Sharma., 2015)

pH is a measure of acidity and alkalinity of a system. The alkaline pH is important parameter to

evaluate the compost maturity and stability. The acidic pH affects the rate of respiration of
microbes and decreases the rate of degradation. The pH of the compost should be alkaline
throughout and end of the composting process. The high activity of microbes at thermophilic
stage is because of the alkaline pH (Sundberg et al., 2004).

29
 8

5
pH

0
Soil Biochar Compost

Figure 11.Comparison of pH in Soil, Biochar and Compost

Moisture content is a dominant factor in aerobic composting (Liang et al., 2003). It provides
better degradation of organic matter and maintains temperature for longer time period. The
moisture is inversely proportional to the temperature and the microbe activity (Makan et al.,
2012). The decrease in the moisture percentage is positive sign to evaluate the stability of
compost. The reduction in moisture percentage gives more stable and mature compost.

The optimum moisture range for compost is 40-60%. Thus, if the moisture content falls from
40%, the bacterial population will reach the dormant stage and if it exceeds 60% the nutrients are
leached and anaerobic conditions will prevail affecting degradation process. In case of excess
moisture bulking agents like grass clippings, paper cuttings and leaf litter can be used to maintain
moisture content (Dickson et al, 1991).
In the composting of kinnow peels, the moisture content generally decreases as composting
proceeds. Initial moisture content of kinnow peels was 58.07 ± 0.06% and at the end of
composting it decreases to 25.64 ± 0.08% in control and 18.57± 0.12% in treated kinnow peels
(Drishti Sharma, 2015).

30
 90%

80%
Moisture content %
70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Soil Biochar Compost

Figure 12. Comparison of moisture content in Soil, Biochar and Compost

After the completion of composting process, moisture content in soil, biochar and compost was
determined by oven dry method. The level of moisture in compost (77%) was higher than soil
(8%) and biochar (20%) (Fig. 12).

TO COMPARE THE CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL, COMPOST AND BIOCHAR

The chemical composition of compost plays a very important role in determining its efficiency.
The presence of optimum amount of nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus in the compost is
responsible for the proper plant growth.

We examined the nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) content of compost after the
completion of composting process i.e., on day 25. The NPK content of soil and biochar was also
determined and compared with compost. A significant increase was observed in the nitrogen
content of biochar (350kg/acre) as compared to compost (125kg/acre). However no traces of
nitrogen were found in the soil (Fig. 13).

31
 400

Nitrogen content (kg/acre) 350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
Soil Biochar Compost

Figure 13.Comparison of nitrogen content of soil, biochar and compost

Kinnow peel nitrogen content increased from 0.057% to 3.67% in treated case and 3.02% in
case of control (Drishti Sharma, 2015). Typical values of compost total nitrogen content in the
literature may vary from 0.8% to 3% (Iglesias-Jimenez & Alvarez, 1993; Wolkowski, 2003;
Zmora-Nahum et al., 2007).
Phosphorus content(kg/acre)

30

25

20

15

10

0
Soil Biochar Compost

Figure 14. Comparison of Phosphorus content in soil, biochar and compost

32
An increase in phosphorus content of biochar (24kg/acre) was observed as compared to that of
compost (5.5kg/acre) and soil (2kg/acre) (Fig. 14). Similarly, the potassium content of soil
(135.5kg/acre) was higher than those of biochar (100.5kg/acre) and compost (100.5kg/acre).

160
Potassium content (kg/acre)

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
Soil Biochar Compost

Figure15. Comparison of Potassium content in soil, biochar and compost

TO STUDY THE EFFECT OF SOIL, COMPOST AND BIOCHAR ON THE GROWTH

OF Impatiens balsamina and Solanum lycopersicum.

In the present study we also examined the effect of compost and biochar alongwith soil, on the
growth of Impatiens balsamina and Solanum lycopersicum.

Impatiens balsamina

The average height of balsam plants grown in biochar remained high than the plants grown in the
soil and compost throughout the study (Fig. 16). A significant increase was observed in the
height of plants grown in biochar (week1 =10cm, week 2 =14cm, week 3= 18cm, week 4 =
21cm) than in soil (week1=3cm , week 2=3.5cm, week 3=5cm, week 4=8cm ) and compost
(week 1=4.5cm, week 2=6cm, week3 =8cm , week 4=11cm).

33
Similarly number of leaves of balsam plant were higher in biochar (week 1= 8 , week 2= 10 ,
week 3= 12, week 4= 20) than in soil ( week 1=6, week 2= 7 , week 3= 8, week 4= 13,) and
compost ( week 1= 6, week 2= 9, week 3= 11, week 4= 16).

25

20
Height of plants (cm)

15
Soil
Compost
10 Biochar

0
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4

Figure 16. Comparison of height of Impatiens balsamina (cm) in soil, compost and
biochar

34
 25

20
Number of leaves

15
Soil
Compost
10 Biochar

0
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4

Figure 17. Comparison of number of leaves of Impatiens balsamina in soil, compost and
biochar

WEEK 1

Fig.18. Growth of balsam in Fig.19. Growth of balsam in Fig 20. Growth of balsam in
soil compost biochar

35
week 2

Fig 21.Growth of balsam Fig 22.Growth of balsam in Fig23. Growth of balsam

in soil compost in biochar

Week 3

Fig 24. Growth of balsam in Fig 25.Growth of balsam in Fig26. Growth of balsam in
soil compost biochar

36
Week 4

Fig 27. Growth of balsam in Fig 28.Growth of balsam in Fig29. Growth of balsam in
soil compost biochar

Solanum lycopersicum

Solanum lycopersicum was grown in soil and compost. The height of plant was significantly
higher in compost (week 1= 4.5cm, week 2= 6cm, week 3= 9cm, week 4= 12cm) than in soil
(week1=4cm, week 2=6cm, week 3=9cm, week 4=12cm).

Similarly number of leaves of Solanum lycopersicum were more in plant grown in compost
(week 1= 8, week 2=12, week 3= 16, week 4= 29) than in soil (week 1= 3, week 2= 7, week
3=11, week 4=27).

37
 14

12

10
Height of plant(cm)

8
Soil
6 Compost

0
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4

Figure 30. Comparison of height of Solanum lycopersicum in soil and compost

35

30

25
Number of leaves

20
Soil
15 Compost

10

0
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4

Fig 31. Comparison of number of leaves of Solanum lycopersicum in soil and compost

38
Week 1

Fig32.Growth of tomato in soil Fig33. Growth of tomato in compost

Week 2

Fig34. Growth of tomato in soil Fig35. Growth of tomato in compost

39
Week 3

Fig 36Growth of tomato in soil Fig 37. Growth of tomato in compost

Week 4

Fig38. Growth of tomato in soil Fig 39. Growth of tomato in compost

40
 The compost prepared from kinnow peels was applied to brinjal and lady finger respectively.
The growth of these plants was monitored for 30 days and the comparison was done with the
control in which no compost was added. The growth of crop in case of pots with compost was
more as compared to control. The root length of brinjal in case of control and treated was 4.3cm
and 5.37 cm. Similarly shoot length of brinjal in control and compost was 6.9cm and 15.5cm. In
case of lady finger, root length in control and treated was 3.8cm and 5 cm whereas shoot length
is 14.5cm and 16.7cm (Drishti Sharma, 2015).

In conclusion, our study showed that application of compost and biochar to soil can have positive
effects on the growth of plants. It also show that biochar is better than compost as leaf number
and height of balsam was more in case of soil amended with biochar than soil amended with
compost.

SUMMARY

Present research work was aimed at developing a system for recycling and utilization of compost
and biochar derived from waste kinnow peels for soil amendment to improve plants growth. In
the study Kambha and remix powder were used for making the compost. Various physical
properties such as pH and moisture content and chemical properties such as nitrogen, phosphorus
and potassium content of the soil, biochar and compost were investigated. Then the effect of soil,
biochar and compost on the growth of plants such as Impatiens balsamina and Solanum
lycopercicum was studied.

1. Kinnow peels turned into brown coloured mature compost on 25 th day of composting
process. Microorganisms present in remix powder such as cellulolytic and lignocellulosic
microbes converts the kinnow peels into effective compost.

41
2. Biochar was made from kinnow peels that were dried in sunlight for 2 days. Then dried
peels were heated or burned at 200°C temperature for 24 hours in hot oven. Burned biochar
was then turned into powder form by grinding it.
3. The ph of the biochar (7.0) was more than both soil (6.5) and compost (6.5). The level of
moisture in compost (77%) was higher than both soil (8%) and biochar (20%).
4. The nitrogen content of biochar (350kg/acre) was more than compost (125kg/acre).
However Nitrogen was absent in soil. Phosphorus content of Biochar (24kg/acre) was
higher than soil (2kg/acre) and compost (5.5kg/acre). And potassium content of soil
(135.5kg/acre) was higher than those of compost (100.5kg/acre) and biochar (100.5kg/acre).
5. Various parameters such as plant height and number of leaves in Impatiens balsamina and
Solanum lycopersicum revealed that Impatiens balsamina exhibits luxuriant growth when
treated with biochar as compared to soil and compost. Whereas, Solanum lycopersicum
grow well in compost as compared to soil.

CONCLUSION:

The present was conducted to evaluate the fertility enhancement of soil by the addition of
kinnow peels compost and biochar. The present study showed that Nitrogen and phosphorus
content is high in biochar and plants grown in biochar has increased plant height and more
number of leaves in experimental plant Impatiens balsamina as compared to compost and
soil. Whereas, Solanum lycopersicum has more height and more number of leaves in
compost as compared to soil.
Thus, we conclude that kinnow compost and biochar can be used for rapid growth of the
plants and supplements various nutrients to the plants for healthy growth and improve
fertility of soil.

42
SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Citrus reticulata (Kinnow), a hybrid between king and willow mandarins (Citrus nobilis Lour ×
Citrus deliciosa Tenora) is one of the important citrus fruit crops in Northern Indian States
(Sharma S et al, 2007). Jammu and Kashmir produces 19070 million tons of citrus fruit
(nhb.gov.in/database2009.pdf), majority of which is produced in Jammu Division and out of
which a considerable share is that of Kinnow-mandarins. Kinnow peel and pulp are the by-
products of the kinnow juice processing industry and account for about 55-60% of the fresh fruit
weight (Kalra K.L, et al., 1989). After extraction of juice the remainder of the fruit, i.e., peel,
membranes, juice vesicles and seed, are discarded as waste. About 30% of the production of
citrus fruits (and 40% of orange production) is processed (USDA-FAS citrus: World Markets
Trade, 2010), principally to make juice. India ranks fourth in citrus fruit production and
generates about 7.8 million tons of waste annually while world average is about 119.7 million
tons (NHB Indian Horticulture Database, 2011 and FAO STAT, 2012). Microorganisms present
in the remix powder converts the kinnow peels into compost .It reduces the use of chemical
fertilizers as kinnow peels acts as a natural fertilizer. This Kinnow peel compost is utilized as a
growth activator of different plants. According to previous growth results of two plants species,
this compost also has a very good impact on plant height and number of leaves.

43
 REFERENCES

1. Amlinger, F., Peyr, S., Cuhls, C. Greenhouse gas emissions from composting and mechanical
biological treatment. Waste Management Research, 2008,26,47-60.

2. Ashish R. Mishra, Shweta A. Mishra, Anurag V. Tiwari (2014): Solid waste management –
A case study. .
3. Atalia K.R., Buha D.M., Bhavsar K.A., Shah N.K.(2015). A Review on Composting of
Municipal Solid Waste. Journal of env.sci., toxicology and food technology, Vol 9, pp 20-29.
4. Atkinson, C.J., Fitzgerald, J.D., Hipps, N.A. 2010. Potential mechanisms for achieving
agricultural benefits from biochar application to temperate soils: a review. Plant Soil 337, 1–
18
5. Baldock, J.A., Smernik, R.J. 2002. Chemical composition and bioavailability of thermally
altered Pinus resinosa (red pine) wood. Organic Geochemistry 33, 1093–1109
6. Basso, Andres S., Fernando E. Miguez, David A. Laird, Robert Horton, Mark Westgate.
2013. “Assessing potential of biochar for increasing water-holding capacity of sandy soils.” GCB
Bioenergy 5(2):132-143.

7. Bernal, M.P. Albuqueque J.A. and Moral, R. (2008). Composting of animal manures and
chemical criteria for compost maturity assessment: A review, Bioresour. Technol ,vol. 100, pp.
5444 – 5453.

8. Bogner, J., Ahmed, M.A., Diaz, C., Faaij A., Gao Q., Hashimoto, S., Mareckova, k., Pipatti,
R., Zhang, T. Waste Management in Climate Change: Mitigation, Contribution of Working
Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change .Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,USA,
2007.

9. Brown, S., Leonard, P. Biosolids and global warming: evaluating the management impacts.
Biocycle, 2004, 45, 54-61.

10. Brown, S., Subler, S. Composting and greenhouse gas emissions: a producer’s perspective.
Biocycle, 2007,48,37-41

44
11. Bruun, E. W., Petersen, C. T., Hansen, E., Holm, J. K., & Hauggaard-Nielsen, H. (2014).
Biochar amendment to coarse sandy subsoil improves root growth and increases water retention.
Soil use and management, 30(1), 109 -118.

12. Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (2010). Retrieved on October 2, 2010 from http://
www.bjmp.gov.ph/pdf%20html/verm/vermiculture.htm.

13. Chan, K. and Xu, Z. (2009) Biochar: Nutrient Properties and Their Enhancement. In:
Lehmann, J. and Joseph, S., Eds., Biochar for Environmental Management Science and
Technology, Earthscan, London, Uk, 67-84.

14. Chan, K. Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A., & Joseph, S. (2008). Agronomic
values of greenwaste biochar as a soil amendment. Soil Research, 45 (8), 629-634.

15. Chan, K. Y., Van Zwieten, L., Meszaros, I., Downie, A.,& Joseph, S. (2008). Using poultry
litter biochars as soil amendments. Soil Research, 46(5), 437-444.

16. Change, C., P. Wang, M. Watson and H. Hoitink, 2003. Assessment of the reliability of a
commercial maturity to plant growth. Compost Sci. Utiliz., vol. 11, pp. 96 – 112.

17. Chaves, B., DeNeve, S., Hofman, G., Boeckx, P., Van Cleemput, O. 2004. Nitrogen
mineralization of vegetable root residues and green manures as related to their biochemical
composition. Eur. J. Agron. 21, 161–170.

18. Cheng, C.H., Lehmann, J., Thies, J.E., Burton, S.D. 2008. Stability of black carbon in soils
across a climatic gradient. Journal of Geophysical Research 113, G02027.

19. Chescheir PW, Westserman LM, Safley Jr LM (1986). Laboratory methods for estimating
available nitrogen in manures and sludges.Agricultural Wastes 18: 175-195

20. Dass Ravi, 2007. Solid waste management issues and challenges in Asia, Asian Productivity
Organization.

21. DeLuca, T.H., Aplet, G.H. 2008. Charcoal and carbon storage in forest soils of the Rocky
Mountain West. Front Ecol Environ 2008;6:18e24. doi: 10.1890/070070

45
22. Dickson N., Richard T., and Kozlowski R., (1991). Composting To Reduce The Waste
Stream A Guide To Small Scale Food And Yard Waste Composting, NRAES-43. Cooperative
Extension. Ithaca, New York 14853.

23. Domingo, J. L., Nadal, M. Domestic waste composting facilities: A review of human health
risks. Environment International, 2009, 35, 382–389.

24. Drishti Sharma, 2015. Composting of organic waste for use in agriculture.

http://tudr.thapar.edu:8080/jspui/bitstream/10266/3649/4/3649.pdf

25. Dumroese, D.S., Coleman, M., Jones, G., Chung, W., Dumroese, R.K., Venn, T. 2009.
Portable in-woods pyrolysis: Using forest biomass to reduce forest fuels, increase soil
productivity, and sequester carbon. In: Proceedings of the 2009 North American Biochar
Conference.

URL: http://cees.colorado.edu/biochar_production.html [accessed 05 01 10].

26. Duncan J (2005). Composting chicken manure. WSU Cooperative Extension, King County
Master Gardener and Cooperative Extension Livestock Advisory

27. Edelmann, W., Joss, A., Engeli, H. Two step anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes. In:
Mata-Alvarez, 1999.

28. Edwards C.A., Burrows I., Fletcher K.E., and Jones B.A., The use of earthworms for
composting farm wastes. In J. K. R. Gasser (ed.). Composting of Agricultural and Other Wastes.
Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, 1985, 229-241

29. FAO. FAO STAT. Food and Agriculture Organization. Italy: The United Nations Rome;
2012. [Google Scholar]

30. Gaind S., Pandey A.P. Bioconversion of Crop Residues of Barley (Hordeum vulgare) and
Rice (Oryza sativa) by Gliocladium virens and Trichoderma reesei QM 9414 under solid-state-
fermentation conditions. J. Indian Bot. Soc. 2006;77:205–212

31.Garg A., Tothill I.E. (2009). A Review of Solid Waste Composting Process- The UK
Perspective.

46
32. Georgacakis, D., Tsavdaris, A., Bakouli, J. & Symeonidis, S. 1996. Composting solid swine
manure and lignite mixtures with selected plant residues. Bioresource Technology, 56, 195-200.
33. Giusquani, P.L. Marucchini C. and Businelli, M. (1988). Chemical properties of soil
amended with compost of urban waste. Plant Soil, vol. 109, pp. 73-78

34. Glaser, B., Lehmann, J., Zech, W. 2002. Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of
highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal – a review. Biol. Fertil. Soils 35, 219–230.

35. Gurav M. and Silankar S. (2013) Preparation of organic compost using waste tea powder.
National Conference on Biodiversity: Status and Challenges in Conservation- ‘FAVEO’-2013,
97-99.

36. Harir A.I., Kasim R. and Ishiyaku B. (2015) International Journal of Scientific and Research
Publications, 5(4), 1-8.

37. Huxley, A., ed. (1992). New RHS Dictionary of Gardening. Macmillan ISBN 0-333-47494-5

38. Hargreaves JC, Adl MS, Warman PR. 2008. A review of the use of composted municipal
solid waste in agriculture. 123:1–14.
39. http://application.wiley-vch.de/books/biotech/pdf/v11c_comp.pdf
40.http://www.coursehero.com/file/3068062/SolidWasteCompostingReviewDomingoNadal
2009

41. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_022229.pdf

42. Iglesias- Jimenez E. and Alvarez C.E. (1993). Apparent availability of nitrogen in composted
municipal refuse. Biology and Fertility of Soils 16, 313-318.

43. Ismaeil F. M., Abusuwar A O., Naim A M (2012). Influence of Chicken Manure on Growth
and Yield of Forage Sorghum. International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 2012, 2(2): 56-
60.

44. J. A., Collins, H. P. & Lentz, R. D. (2012). Biochar: a synthesis of its agronomic impact
beyond carbon sequestration. Journal of environmental quality, 41(4), 973-989

47
45. Jakobsen, S. T. 1995. Aerobic decomposition of organic wastes II: value of compost as a
fertilizer. Resource Conserve Recycle; 13:57–71.
46. Jeffery, Simon, Diego Abalos, Kurt Spokas, Frank G.A. Verheijen.Biochar effects on crop
yield”. In Biochar for Environmental Management: Science, Technology, and Implementation.
Editors Johannes Lehmann and Stephen Joseph. London and New York. Earthscan . 2015.

47. Kadiret A.A., Rahman N.A. and Azhari N.W. (2016) Material Science and
Engineering,136(1), 1-7.

48. Kalra K.L, Grewal H.S, Kahlon S.S. Bioconversion of Kinnow-mandarin waste into single-
cell protein. Mircen J. Appl. Microbial. 1989;5:321–326. [Google Scholar]

49. Karanja N., Kwach H., Njenga M., (2015). Low cost composting training manual.

50. Kashmanian, R. M., Rynk, R. 1995. Agricultural composting in the United States Compost
Science and Utilization, 3, 3 84-88.
51. Kim, E. J., Oh, J. E., & Chang, Y. S. (2003). Effects of forest fire on the level and
distribution of PCDD/Fs and PAHs in soil. Science of the Total Environment, 311(1),177-189
52. Kuhlman L.R. (1989). Windrow Composting of Agricultural and Municipal Waste.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 4 ( 1990) I5 1- 160
53. Kumar, S., A. N. Mondal, S. A. Gaikwad, S. Devotta & R. N. Singh. 2004. Qualitative
assessment of methane emission inventory from municipal solid waste disposal sites: a case
study. Atmospheric environment 38: 4921-4929.
54. Lehmann, J. 2007. A handful of carbon. Nature 447, 143–144.

55. Lehmann J. 2007. Bio-energy in the black. Front Ecol Environ 2007; 5:381e7. doi: 10.1890/1540-
9295(2007)5[381:BITB]2.0.CO;2.

56. Lehmann, J., Gaunt, J., Rondon, M. 2006. Biochar sequestration in terrestrial ecosystem - a
review.

57. Lehman , J.S. (2009) Biochar for Environmental Management. Earthscan, Oxford, UK

48
58. Liang, B., Lehmann, J., Solomon, D., Sohi, S., Thies, J.E., Skjemstad, J.O., Luizão, F.J.,
Engelhard, M.H., Neves, E.G., Wirick, S. 2008. Stability of biomass-derived black carbon in
soils. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 72, 6078–6096.

59. Liang, C., Das, K. C., and McClendon, R. W. 2003. The influence of temperature and
moisture contents regimes on the aerobic microbial activity of a bio solids composting blend.
Bioresource Technology, 86(2): 131-137.[4]

60. Liao, P. H., Vizcarra, A. T., Chen, A. & Lo, K. V. 1993. Composting separated solid swine
manure. J. Environ. Sci. Health, A28, 9 1889-1901.

61. Liao, P. H., Vizcarra, A. T., Chen, A. & Lo, K. V. 1994. Composting salmon farm mortalities
with passive aeration. Compost Science and Utilization, 2, 4 58-66.

62. Mac’ Safley, L.M., Dupoldt, C. Geler, F. Stettler D. and Murphy, T. (1992). Agricultural
waste management system component design. In: Krider, J.N & Rickman, J.D., (Eds).
Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, United States. Soil Conservation Service.

63. Makan, A., Assobhei, O., and Mountadar, M. 2012. Effect of initial moisture content on the
in-vessel composting under air pressure of organic fraction of municipal solid waste in Morocco.
Iranian Journal of Environmental Health, 10(3).

64. Mankasingh, U., Choi, P.C., Ragnarsdottir, V. 2009. Biochar application in Tamil Nadu and
the global food crisis. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 73, A828.
65.Marris E. 2006. Putting the carbon back: black is the new green. Nature 2006;442:624e6.
doi:10.1038/442624a

66. Martínez-Blanco J., Munoz, P., Anton, A., Rieradevall, J. 2009. Life cycle assessment of the
use of compost from municipal organic waste for fertilization of tomato crops. Resour Conserv
Recycl;53:340–51.
67. McBeath, Anna V., Ronald J. Smernik, Evelyn S. Krull, Johannes Lehmann. 2014. “The
influence of feedstock and production temperature on biochar carbon chemistry: A solid-state
C13NMR study.” Biomass and Bioenergy (60):121-129

49
68. McConnell, D.B., Shiralipour, A., Smith, W.H. 1993. Agricultural impact—compost
application improves soil properties. Biocycle; 34:61–3.
69. McHenry, M.P. 2009. Agricultural biochar production, renewable energy generation and
farm carbon sequestration in Western Australia: certainty, uncertainty and risk. Agr Ecosyst
Environ 2009;129:1e7. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2008.08.006

URL: http://cees. colorado.edu/biochar_production.html [accessed 05 01 10].

70. Michel Jr, F. C., Pecchia, J. A., Rigot, J., and Keener, H. M. 2003. Mass and nutrient losses
during composting of dairy manure with sawdust versus straw amendment. Compost Science and
Utilization,23: 1-33.

71. Mishra, R.V., R.N. Roy and Hiraoka, H. (2003). On farm composting methods. Rome: FAO..

72. NEERI Report “Strategy Paper on Solid Waste Management in India”, pp.1-7, 1996.

73. Neuhauser E.F., Kaplan D.L., Malecki M.R., and Hartenstein R., Materials supporting weight
gain by earthworms, Eisenia foetida, in waste conversion systems, Agricultural Wastes, 2 (1),
1980, 43-60.

74. NHB. Database of production. National Horticulture Board, India. 2010. [Last accessed on
15-11-2014]. Available from: http://www.nhb.gov.in/database2009.pdf .

75. NHB. Indian Horticulture Database. New Delhi: National Horticulture Board, Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India; 2011. [Google Scholar]

76. Oagile D and Namasiku M (2010). Chicken manure-enhanced soil fertility and productivity:
Effects of application rates. Journal of Soil Science and Environmental Management. 1(3) 46-54

77. Pace M. G., Miller B.E., Farrell-Poe K. E.,(1995).The Composting Process.

78. Patricia Gay Burns (2017) Reviewing biochar research and introducing a possible
classification system. B.A. Southern Illinois University.

79. Peigne, J., Girardin. P. 2004. Environmental impacts of farm-scale composting practices.
Water Air Soil Pollut.153, 45–68

50
80. Peter Moon, P.E. (1997). Basic on-farm composts manual, pp.3-15.

81. Raja Namasivayam SK, Bharani RSA (2012) Effect of Compost Derived From Decomposed
Fruit Wastes by Effective Microorganism (EM) Technology on Plant Growth Parameters of
Vigna mungo. J Bioremed Biodeg 3:167. doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000167

82. Rogayan J.R., Page V.A., Lim Karl LYndon P., Ararro R., Ocampo G., Ballon D., Corpus R.,
Gregorio S.(2010). Research paper on Vermiculture and Vermicomposting.

83. Ryckeboer, J., Mergaert, J., Coosemans, J., Deprins, K., & Swings, J. (2003).
Microbiological aspects of biowaste during composting in a monitored compost bin. Journal of
Applied Microbiology,94(1), 127-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2003.0180. x

84. Rynk, R., Richards, T.L. Commercial compost production systems. In, (2001).

85. Saini V., Gupta S., Verma R. and Singh B. (2017) International Research Journal of
Engineering and Technology, 4(4), 1596-1599.

86. Sait, M., Hugenholtz, P., & Janssen,P. H. (2002). Cultivation of globally distributed soil
bacteria from phylogenetic lineages previously only detected in cultivation‐independent sur-
veys.Environmental Microbiology, 4 (11), 654-666.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1462-2920.2002.00352.x31.

87. Sayara, T., Sarrà, M., Sanchez. A. 2010. Effects of compost stability and contaminant
concentration on the bioremediation of PAHs-contaminated soil through composting J. Hazard.
Mater. 179, 999–1006.

88. Sequi, P. 1996. The role of composting in sustainable agriculture. In The Science of
Composting, Part 1, eds M. de Bertoldi, P. Sequi, B. Lemmes and T. Papi, pp. 23-29. Blackie,
Glasgow
89. Sharma S, Singh B, Rani G, Zaidi A.A, Hallan V, Nagpal A, Virik G.S. In vitro production
of Indian citrus ring spot virus (ICRSV) free Kinnow plants employing phyto-therapy coupled
with shoot tip grafting. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Plant. 2007;43:254–259. [Google Scholar]

51
90. Sims, J. T. 1994. Animal waste management In Encyclopedia of Agricultural Science, Vol 1,
eds C. J. Arntzen and E. M. Ritter, pp. 185-201. Academic Press, New York.
91. Six, J., Conant, R. T., Paul E. A., Paustian, K. 2002. Stabilization mechanisms of soil organic
matter: Implications for C-saturation of soils. Plant and Soil 241: 155–176
92. “Solanum lycopersicum- Tomato”. Encyclopedia of life . Retrieved 1 January 2014.
93. Spokas, K. A., Cantrell, K. B., Novak, J. M., Archer, D. W., Ippolito, . Sharma S, Singh B,
Rani G, Zaidi A.A, Hallan V, Nagpal A, Virik G.S. In vitro production of Indian citrus ring spot
virus (ICRSV) free Kinnow plants employing phyto-therapy coupled with shoot tip grafting. In
Vitro Cell. Dev. Plant. 2007; 43:254–259. [Google Scholar]

94. Steiner, C., Glaser, B., Geraldes Teixeira, W., Lehmann, J., Blum, W. E., & Zech, W. (2008).
Nitrogen retention and plant uptake on a highly weathered central Amazonian Ferralsol amended
with compost and charcoal. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 171(6), 893-899.

95. Suhas S.Gonwala, Jardosh H., 2018. Organic waste in composting: A brief review.
International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, Vol8. No1.

96. Sundberg, C., Smårs, S., and Jönsson, H. 2004. Low pH as an inhibiting factor in the
transition from mesophilic to thermophilic phase in composting. Bioresource Technology, 95(2),
145-150.

97. Taghizadeh-Toosi, A., Clough, T. J., Sherlock, R. R., & Condron, L. M. (2012). Biochar
adsorbed ammonia is bioavailable. Plant and soil, 350(1-2), 57-69

98. Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., and Vigil, S. Integrated solid Waste Management:
Engineering Principles and Management Issues, McGraw Hill (1993).

99. Teat A.H. Neufeld, R. Gehl, E. Gonzales.2015. “Growth and yield of Miscanthus x
giganteus Grown in Fertilized and Biochar amended soils in the Western- North Carolina
Mountains.” Castanea 80(1): 45-58.

100. Thiyageshwari S, Gayathri P, Krishnamoorthy R, Anandham R, Paul D(2018). Exploration

of Rice Husk Compost as an Alternate Organic Manure to Enhance the Productivity of
Blackgram in Typic Haplustalf and Typic Rhodustalf. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Feb;
15(2): 358

52
101. Thomazini, A., K. Spokas, K. Hall, J. Ippolito, R. Lentz, J. Novak. 2015. “GHG impacts of
biochar: Predictability for the same biochar.” Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 207:
183-191.

102.Tweib S.A., Rahman R.A., Kalil M.S.(2011).A Literature Review on Composting.

International Conference on Environmental and Industrial Innovation . Vol 12 ( 124-127)

103. USDA-FAS. Citrus: World Markets and Trade. July 2010 Citrus Update. Foreign
Agriculture Service – USDA. 2010 [Google Scholar]

104. Van Zwieten, L., Kimber, S., Morris, S., Chan, K. Y., Downie, A., Rust, J. & Cowie, A.
(2010). Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste onagronomic performance and
soil fertility. Plant and soil, 327(1-2), 235-246.

105. Warman PR (1986). The effect of fertilizer, chicken manure and dairy manure on Timothy y
yield, tissue composition and soil fertility. Agricultural Wastes 18: 289-298.

106. Warnock, D.D., Lehmann, J., Kuyper, T.W., Rillig, M.C. 2007. Mycorrhizal responses to
biochar in soil; concepts and mechanisms. Plant Soil 2007;300:9e20. doi:10.1007/s11104-007-
9391-5.

107. Wolkowski R.P. (2003) Nitrogen management considerations for landspreading municipal
solid waste compost. Journal of Environmental Quality 32, 1844-1850.

108. Yadav Ishwar Chandra and N. Linthoingambi Devi (2009): Studies on Municipal Solid
Waste Management in Mysore City- A case study. net. sciencepub. 15-21

109.Yvette B. Guanzon, Robert J. Holmer, Composting of Organic Wastes: A Main Component

for Successful Integrated Solid Waste Management in Phillipine cities(2000).

110. Zeman, C., Depken, D., Rich, M. Literature review- research on how composting process
impacts greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. Compost Science Utilization, 2002, 10,
72-86.

53
111. Zmora- Nahum S., Hadar Y. and Chen Y,(2007). Physico-chemical properties of
commercial composts varying in their source materials and country of origin. Soil Biology and
Biochemistry 39, 1263-1276..

54
ANNEXURE:
LIST OF TABLES
S.NO. TITLE PAGE NO.
1. Observation Table of Estimation of Available Nitrogen in Soil 21

2. Observation Table Of Estimation Of Available Phosphorus In 22

Soil

3. Observation Table of Estimation of Available Phosphorus in 23

soil:

LIST OF FIGURES
S.NO TITLE PAGE NO.
1. Biochar made by heating kinnow peels 20
2. Kambha composter 26
3. Remix powder 26
4 Kinnow peels inside composter (DAY1) 27
5 Kinnow peels inside composter (DAY 3) 27
6. Kinnow peels inside composter (DAY 10) 27
7. Kinnow peels inside composter ( DAY 15) 27
8. Kinnow peels inside composter ( DAY 20) 28
9. Matured kinnow compost(DAY 25) 28
10. Powdered biochar 28

11 Comparison of pH of soil, biochar and compost 30

12 Comparison of moisture content(%) of soil, biochar and 31

compost
13 Comparison of nitrogen content (kg/acre) of soil, biochar and 32
compost
14. Comparison of phosphorus content (kg/acre) of soil, biochar and 32
compost
15. Comparison of potassium content (kg/acre) of soil, biochar and 33
compost
16. Comparison of height of Impatiens balsamina (cm) in soil, 34
compost and biochar
17. Comparison of number of leaves of Impatiens balsamina in soil, 34

55
 biochar and compost
18. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in soil at the end of first week 35
19. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in compost at the end of first 35
week
20. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in biochar at the end of first 35
week
21. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in soil at the end of second week 35
22. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in compost at the end of second 35
week
23. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in biochar at the end of second 35
week
24. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in soil at the end of third week 36
25. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in compost at the end of third 36
week
26. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in biochar at the end of third 36
week
27. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in soil at the end of fourth week 36
28. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in compost at the end of fourth week 36

29. Growth of Impatiens balsamina in biochar at the end of fourth week 36

30 Comparison of growth height(cm) of Solanum lycopersicum in soil 37

and compost

31 Comparison of number of leaves of Solanum lycopersicum in soil and 38

compost

32. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in soil at the end of first week 38

33.. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in compost at the end of first 38
week
34. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in soil at the end of second week 39
35. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in compost at the end of second 39
week
36. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in soil at the end of third week
39
37. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in compost at the end of third week
39
38. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in soil at the end of fourth 40
week
39. Growth of Solanum lycopersicum in compost at the end of 40
fourth week

56
57