Vermicomposting of de-oiled cake of Brassica juncea by Eisenia foetida.
Vermicomposting is a proven technology to convert a variety of plant wastes into a best fertilizer which supports plant growth (Benitez et al., 1999; Atiyeh et al., 2002). Eisenia foetida species of earthworm is widely accepted for vermicomposting of agricultural waste.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In the present experiment we used de-oiled cake of Mustard (Brassica juncea), earthworms species Eisenia foetida and buffalo dung. Mustard cake was obtained from Kukarvada, Dist: Mehsana and other materials were procured locally from sadra and Randheja village of District Gandhinagar, Gujarat. Before addition to vermicompost pits the cake was chopped into small pieces (about 1 inches long). For vermicomposting pits from bricks were prepared on above ground of our campus. These pits were 45cm long, 45cm wide and 21cm high.
Above materials were mixed in different combinations to obtain four treatments. Control comprises Buffalo dung and Eisenia foetida only; Treatment T1 comprises Buffalo dung and Brassica juncea cake without earthworms whereas treatment T2 contains earthworms alongwith Buffalo dung and Brassica juncea cake. Last treatment T3 contains Brassica juncea cake and Eisenia foetida alone without dung. To minimize the experimental error all the above treatments were replicated thrice.
Filling of pits
A total of six kilogram of material was filled in each pit. In pits of control and T3 treatments 6kg buffalo dung and Brassica juncea cake were filled alone whereas in T1 and T2 the material was filled in layers. In layered treatments a layer of 3Kg Buffalo dung was kept at bottom of pit followed by one layer of 1Kg mustard cake which was covered by 2Kg of buffalo dung. Fermenting material was kept moist and turned after every seven days. Earthworms in respective pits were added after second turning in the amount of 18g except T1. To prevent moisture loss all pits were covered with gunny bags. The material was analysed at 30, 60 and 90 days of filling to find out the changes in various chemical properties. At maturity (90 days) the Earthworms were removed from pits and samples were analyzed for various parameters along with yield.
Analysis of vermicomposting material
The samples at different time intervals were analysed for physico-chemical parameters including pH and electrical conductivity (Richard's, 1945), total organic carbon (Walkely and Black, 1965), nutrients like phosphorus, potassium and sodium (Jackson, 1967), and for cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin content (Thimmaiah, 1999). FTIR (Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy) analysis was also performed at Center of Excellence, Vapi, Gujarat.
Completely Randomized Block Design was followed and significance level was find out to check the significance in obtained data at 5% level following procedure described in Gomez and Gomez, (1984).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Yield of vermicompost
During vermicomposting earthworm ingest the substrate, digest it, absorbs nutrients and discard undigested part as castings. If the substrate is easy to digest, contains simple forms, then more nutrients will be absorbed and eventually less part will be discarded with lower yield of product. In present experiment two substrates were used viz. buffalo dung and mustard cake. Compared to mustard cake buffalo dung is easy to degrade because it is a partially degraded product of buffalo so it contains simple forms of compounds which can be digested easily by earthworm's gut flora. Due to this fact we would obtain lesser amount of product in this case. Our results are in tune with this fact and lowest yield is recorded in control treatment containing buffalo dung and earthworms (Table 1). As a portion of buffalo dung is replaced by mustard cake ([T.sub.1] and [T.sub.2]) yield of vermicompost increased significantly and highest yield was obtained with mustard cake alone ([T.sub.3]) which differs significantly from rest of the treatments (Table 1). Weight loss of vermicomposting material at final stage was also reported by Twana and Fauziah, 2012; Senthilkumar and Kavimani, 2012.
Data presented in Table 2 and Table 3 reveals that pH, electrical conductivity, total organic carbon, available P, K and Na contents varies with treatments and except organic carbon, contents of all other parameters increased at maturity than that of initial. Further data show that at various stages of analysis the effect of treatments was significant and at some stages it was non-significant. At maturity of vermicompost the effect of treatments was found significant for pH, available phosphorus and sodium. Intestinal calcium secretion and excretion of ammonia by earthworms raise the pH of vermicompost and make it alkaline (Ismail, 1997; Ismail, 2005; Edwards and Bohlen, 1996).
Mineralization of organic substrates like cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin etc. during vermicomposting by the activities of earthworms and other microorganisms of dung releases mineral salts (Gupta and Garg, 2008; Khawairakpam and Bhargava, 2009; Kaviraj and Sharma, 2003) which results into increased values of electrical conductivity (Neuhauser et al, 1988). Organic carbon is being utilized by microorganisms as energy source and the respiratory activities of earthworms and microorganisms may results in reduced amount of organic carbon in final product (Curry et al, 1995).
Available phosphorus, potassium and sodium
Microbial mineralization of organic phosphorus and activities of earthworms gut phosphatase resulted in increased amount of available phosphorus in product (Tripathi and Bharadwaj, 2004; Lee, 1992). Acid production is claimed during microbial degradation (Premuzic et al., 1998) which causes solubilization of bound phosphorus, sodium and potassium. Mineralization, transformation and mobilization of nutrients from unavailable forms to plant available forms is being supported by a number of workers (Suthar, 2007; Adi and Noor, 2009; Lazcana et al., 2008; Sen and Chandra, 2009; Ghosh et al., 1999). Solubilization of insoluble potassium due to acid production (Adi and Noor, 2009) and increased amount of potassium in vermicompost due to higher mineralization rate of microbial activity is being well documented (Delgado et al., 1995; Benitez et al., 1999; Kaviraj and Sharma, 2003; Suthar, 2007).
Lignin, hemicellulose, cellulose
Cellulosic material present in substrates are decomposed by microorganisms and earthworms by secreting extracellular enzymes (Sinsabaugh et al., 1992). Digestion of cellulose due to cellulolytic activity in the gut of earthworms and cellulose loss in product is well documented (Lattaud et al., 1997a; Lattaud et al., 1997b; Scheu, 1993; Urba'sek and Pizil, 1991; Vinceslas-Akpa and Loquet, 1997; Zhang et al, 2000; Zhang et al, 1993). Results of present investigation are in line with above workers and showed significant decrease in amount of cellulose and hemicellulose at maturity of vermicompost compared to their initial contents (Table 4).
FTIR (Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer)
To prove the degradation of substrate during vermicomposting FTIR data were obtained for a wave number range of 4000-450 [cm.sup.-1]. and presented in Fig 1-7 and details of corresponding groups present is given in Tables 5-8. When Infrared radiation is passed through sample, a portion is absorbed by the sample and remaining is transmitted. This absorption and transmittance spectrum over a wide range of wave number creates a molecular fingerprinting because each molecule gives peak at a specific wave number. Obtained peaks are than compared with spectra library of pure substances or components (Smidt and Schwanninger, 2005). Use of FTIR is very common to describe composting process (Huang et al., 2006, Smidt et al., 2005; Tseng et al., 1996). A close examination of FTIR data obtained for Buffalo dung compared with buffalo dung + Eisenia foetida (T5, Fig.1-2); Brassica juncea compared to Brassica juncea + Eisenia foetida (T-6, Fig. 3-4); Brassica juncea + dung compared with Composted Brassica juncea +dung (T-7 and Fig. 5-6) and Composted Brassica juncea +dung+ Eisenia foetida (T-8, Fig. 7) clearly reveal that they are different in presence of compounds or groups which show that during vermicomposting some groups or compounds are lost and some are newly formed, hence degradation occurs.
Results of present investigation clearly direct that de-oiled cake of Brassica juncea can be successfully converted into nutrient rich vermicompost through the activities of Eisenia foetida species of earthworms. In 90 days, biomass, total organic carbon, cellulose, and hemicellulose are reduced by 36.67 to 73.33%, 8.46 to 18.94%, 38.52 to 63.89%, and 11.59 to 45.02%; whereas available phosphorus, potassium and sodium are increased by 64 to 84.85%, 75.44 to 92.00%, and 70.83 to 96.67% respectively. Further the FTIR data confirm the degradation process.
The experiment was carried out at Department of Biogas Research Center and Department of Microbiology, Gujarat Vidyapith, Sadara, District- Gandhinagar using its laboratory facility hence the help received from the Head of Department is acknowledged.
(1.) Atiyeh, R.M., Lee,S., Edwards, C. A., Arancon, N. Q., Metzger J. D. The influence of humic acids derived from earthworm-processed organic wastes on plant growth. Bioresource Technology, 2002; 84: 7-14.
(2.) Adi, A.J., Noor, Z.M. Waste recycling: Utilization of coffee grounds and kitchen waste in vermicomposting. Bioresource Technol., 2009; 1027-1030.
(3.) Benitez, E., Nogales, R., Elvira,C., Masciandaro, G., Ceccanti, B. Enzyme activity as indicators of the stabilization of sewage sludge composting with Eisenia foetida. Bioresource Technol, 1999; 67: 297-303.
(4.) Curry, J.P., Byrne, D., Boyle, K.E. The earthworm of winter cereal field and its effects on soil and nitrogen turnover. Biol. Fertil. Soil, 1995; 19: 166-172.
(5.) Delgado, M., Bigeriego, M., Walter, I., Calbo, R. Use of California red worm sewage sludge transformation. Turrialba., 1995; 45:33-41.
(6.) Edwards, C. A., Bohlen P. J.: Biology and Ecology of Earthworms, Chapman and Hall, London, UK, 3rd Edn. (1996).
(7.) Ghosh, M., Chattopadhya, G.N., Baral, K. Transformation of phosphorus during vermicomposting. Bioresource Technol., 1999; 69:149-154.
(8.) Gomez, K.A., Gomez, A.A.: Statistical procedures for Agricultural Research, Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons publication New York (1984).
(9.) Gupta, R., Garg, V K., : Stabilization of primary sewage sludge during vermicomposting. J. Hazardous Materials, 2008; 153:1023-1030.
(10.) Huang, G.F., Wu, Q.T., Wong, J.W.C., Nagar, B.B. Transformation of organic matter during co-composting of pig manure with sawdust. Bioresource Technology, 2006; 97:1834-1842 (2006).
(11.) Ismail, S.A.: The Earthworm Book, Other India Press, Mapusa, Goa (2005).
(12.) Ismail, S.A.: Vermitechnology: The Biology of Earthworms, Orient Longman, Chennai, India (1997).
(13.) Jackson, M.L.: Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice hall of India pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 38-226 (1967).
(14.) Kaviraj M., Sharma, S. Municipal solid waste management through vermicomposting employing exotic and local species of earthworms. Bioresource Technol., 2003; 90: 169-173.
(15.) Khawairakpam, M., Bhargava, R. Bioconversion of filter mud using vermicomposting employing two exotic and one local earthworm species. Bioresource Technol., 2009; 100: 5846-5852.
(16.) Lattaud, C., Locati, S., Mora, P., Rouland, C. Origin and activities of glycolytic enzymes in the gut of the tropical geophagous earthworm Millsonia anomala from Lamto (Cote d'Ivoire). Pedobiologia ,1997a; 41: 242-251.
(17.) Lattaud, C., Zhang, B.G., Locati, S., Rouland, C., Lavelle, P. Activities of the digestive enzymes in the gut and in tissue culture of a tropical geophagous earthworm, Polipheretima elongate (Megascolecidae).Soil Biol Biochem., 1997b; 29: 335-339.
(18.) Lazcano, C., Brandon, M.G., Dominguez, J. Comparison of the effectiveness of composting and vermicomposting for the biological stabilization of cattle manure. Chemosphere, 2008; 72: 1013-1019.
(19.) Lee, K.E. Some trends opportunities in earthworm research or: Darwin's children. The 154 Pandit et al. Int. J. Bio sci. 2012 future of our discipl. Soil Biol Biochem., 1992; 24:1765-1771.
(20.) Neuhauser, E.F., Loehr, R.C., Malecki, M.R.: The potential of earthworms for managing sewage sludge. In: Earthworms in waste and environmental management (Eds.: C.A. Edwards, E.F. Neuhauser). SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp 9-20 (1988).
(21.) Premuzic, Z., Bargiela, M., Garcia, A., Rendina, A., Iorio, A. Calcium, Iron, Potassium, Phosphorous and vitamin C content of organic and hydroponic tomatoes, Hort Sci., 1998; 33:255-257.
(22.) Richard's, L.A.: Diagnosis and Improvement of saline and alkali Solids. Oxford and IBH Publishing Company, New Delhi, 97 (1945).
(23.) Scheu, S.: Cellulose and lignin decomposition in soils from different ecosystems on limestone as affected by earthworm processing. Pedobiologia, 1993; 37:167-177.
(24.) Sen, B., Chandra, T.S. Do earthworms affect dynamics of functional response and genetic structure of microbial community in a lab-scale composting system?. Bioresource Technol., 2009; 100: 804-811.
(25.) Senthilkumar P., Kavimani T. Investigation on application of synthetic nutrients for augmenting worm growth rate in vermicomposting. Journal of Urban and Environmental Engineering, 2012; 6(1): 30-35.
(26.) Sinsabaugh, R.L., Antibus, R.K., Linkins, A.E., McClaugherty, C.A., Rayburn, L., Repert, D. Weiland, T. Wood decomposition over a first order watershed: mass loss as a function of lignocellulase activity. Soil Biol Biochem., 1992; 24: 743-749.
(27.) Smidt, E., Schwanninger, M. Characterization of Waste Materials Using FT-IR Spectroscopy --Process Monitoring and Quality Assessment. Spectroscopy Letters, 2005; 38(3): 247-270.
(28.) Smidt, E., Eckhardt, K. U., Lechner, P., Schulten, H. R., Leinweber, P. Characterization of different decomposition stages of biowaste using FT-IR spectroscopy and pyrolysis-field ionization mass spectrometry. Biodegradation, 2005; 16(1): 67-79.
(29.) Suthar, S. Production of vermifertilizer from guar gum industrial wastes by using composting earthworm Perionyx sansibaricus (Perrier). Environmentalist, 2007; 27:329-335.
(30.) Suthar, S. Nutrients changes and biodynamic of epigeic earthworms Perionyx excavatus during recycling of some agricultural wastes. Biores. Technol, 2007; 98: 1608-1614.
(31.) Tripathi, G. Bharadwaj, P. Comparative studies on biomass production, life cycles and composting efficiency of Eisenia foetida (Savigny) and Lampito mauritii (Kinberg). Bioresource Technology, 2004; 94: 275-283.
(32.) Tseng, D. Y, Vir, R., Traina, S. J. Chalmers, J. J. A Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopic analysis of organic matter degradation in a bench-scale solid substrate fermentation (composting) system. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 1996; 52(6): 661-671.
(33.) Twana T., Fauziah H. Vermicomposting of two types of coconut wastes employing Eudrilus eugeniae: a comparative study. International Journal Of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture, 2012; 1(7).
(34.) Thimmaiah, S.: Standard Method for Biochemical Analysis. Kalyani Publication, 78-81 (1999).
(35.) Urba'sek, F., Pizjl, V Activity of digestive enzymes in the gut of five earthworm species (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae). Rev EcolBiol Sol., 1991; 28: 461-468.
(36.) Vinceslas-Akpa, M., Loquet, M.:Organic matter transformations in lignocellulosic waste products composted or vermicomposted (Eisenia fetida andrei): chemical analysis and [sup.13]C CPMAS NMR spectroscopy. Soil Biol Biochem, 1997; 29: 751-758.
(37.) Walkley, A., Black, J.A. An Examination of the different methods for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the Chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 1965; 34: 29-38.
(38.) Zhang, B.G., Li, G.T, Shen, T.S., Wang, J.K. Sun, Z. Changes in microbial biomass C, N and P and enzyme activities in soil incubated with the earthworms Metaphire guillelmi or Eisenia fetida. Soil Biol Biochem., 2000; 32: 2055-2062.
(39.) Zhang, B.G., Rouland, C., Lattaud, C., Lavelle, P. Activity and origin of digestive enzymes in the gut of tropical earthworm Pontoscolex corethurus. Eur J Soil Biol., 1993; 29:7-11.
Vikram C. Solanki * and Prateek Shilpkar
Biogas Research and Extension Centre and Department of Microbiology, Gujarat Vidyapith, At & Po--Sadara, District--Gandhinagar, Gujarat--382320, India.
(Received: 23 January 2016; accepted: 03 March 2016)
* To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: +91 9913443451; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Caption: Graph No. : 4.1 FT- IR analysis of Buffalo dung only
Caption: Graph No. : 4.3 FT- IR analysis of Brassica juncas * Eisenia foetida
Caption: Graph No. : 4.4 FT- IR analysis of Brassica juncea only
Caption: Graph No : 4.5 FT- IR analysis of Srassica/uncea ? Buffalo dung
Caption: Graph No : 4.6 FT- IR analysis of Srassica /uncea * Buffalo dung (mature)
Caption: Graph No. : 4.7 FT- IR analysis of Srassica /uncea * Eisenia toot'd a ? Buffalo dung
Table 1. Effect of treatments on yield of vermicompost (kg) Treatments Yield (kg) Control 1.60 (a) [T.sub.1] 2.60 (b) [T.sub.2] 2.25 (a,b) [T.sub.3] 3.80 (c) SEM ([+ or -]) 0.33 CD 5% 0.75 Control: Buffalo dung + Eisenia foetida; [T.sub.1]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake; [T.sub.2]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida; and [T.sub.3]: Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida Alphabet (a,b,c) shows significance and nonsignificance of treatments at 5% level of significance. Treatments with same alphabet are non-significant and with different alphabet aresignificant. Table 2. Effect of treatments on pH, EC, Total organic carbon (TOC) contents at various stages (0, 30, 60 and 90 days) of vermicomposting pH Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 6.25 (a,b) 6.64 (a,b) 6.90 7.46 (a) [T.sub.1] 6.13 (a) 6.33 (a) 6.76 7.43 (a) [T.sub.2] 6.33 (a,b) 6.53 (a,b) 6.73 7.83 (a,b) [T.sub.3] 6.56 (b) 6.78 (b) 7.10 7.96 (b) SEM([+ or -]) 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.19 CD5% 0.31 0.31 NS 0.45 EC (dS[m.sup.-1]) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 0.21 0.21 0.23 (a) 0.37 [T.sub.1] 0.27 0.31 0.38 (b) 0.47 [T.sub.2] 0.26 0.28 0.33 (b) 0.46 [T.sub.3] 0.21 0.31 0.37 (b) 0.41 SEM([+ or -]) 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.05 CD5% NS NS 0.09 NS TOC (%) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 14.72 13.99 13.25 13.11 [T.sub.1] 15.24 14.36 14.01 13.95 [T.sub.2] 15.31 14.99 13.97 12.41 [T.sub.3] 14.98 14.44 13.30 12.15 SEM([+ or -]) 1.82 1.93 2.57 1.69 CD5% NS NS NS NS Control: Buffalo dung + Eisenia foetida; [T.sub.1]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake;[T.sub.2]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida; and [T.sub.3]: Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida Alphabet (a,b) shows significance and non-significance of treatments at 5% level of significance. Treatments with same alphabet are non-significant and with different alphabet are significant. Table 3. Changes in available phosphorus, available potassium and available sodium at various stages (0, 30, 60 and 90 days) of vermicomposting Available Phosphorus (%) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 0.023 (a) 0.028 (a) 0.033 (a) 0.041 (a) [T.sub.1] 0.025 (a) 0.029 (a) 0.034 (a) 0.041 (a) [T.sub.2] 0.033 (a,b) 0.038 (a,b) 0.048 (b) 0.061 (b) [T.sub.3] 0.044 (b) 0.051 (b) 0.061 (c) 0.074 (c) SEM([+ or -]) 0.005 0.006 0.003 0.004 CD5% 0.012 0.014 0.007 0.009 Available Potassium (%) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 0.053 0.075 0.085 0.099 [T.sub.1] 0.054 0.066 0.079 0.098 [T.sub.2] 0.057 0.072 0.086 0.100 [T.sub.3] 0.050 0.074 0.089 0.096 SEM([+ or -]) 0.007 0.008 0.006 0.007 CD5% NS NS NS NS Available Sodium (%) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 0.024 0.032 0.036 (a,b) 0.041 (a) [T.sub.1] 0.022 0.027 0.031 (a) 0.039 (a) [T.sub.2] 0.030 0.035 0.043 (b) 0.059 (b) [T.sub.3] 0.021 0.026 0.032 (a,b) 0.040 (a) SEM([+ or -]) 0.005 0.004 0.005 0.005 CD5% NS NS 0.011 0.011 Control: Buffalo dung + Eisenia foetida; [T.sub.1]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake; [T.sub.2]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida; and [T.sub.3]: Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida Alphabet (a,b,c) shows significance and non-significance of treatments at 5% level of significance. Treatments with same alphabet are non-significant and with different alphabet are significant. Table 4. Changes in lignin, cellulose and hemicellulose at various stages (0, 30, 60 and 90 days) of vermicomposting Lignin (%) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 2.71 (a) 3.12 (a) 3.56 (a) 4.25 (a) [T.sub.1] 16.32 (b) 20.25 (b) 24.36 (b) 31.25 (b) [T.sub.2] 17.74 (c) 22.13 (c) 25.70 (c) 31.25 (b) [T.sub.3] 30.02 (d) 36.25 (d) 40.39 (d) 48.36 (c) SEM ([+ or -]) 0.39 0.54 0.27 0.74 CD5% 0.91 1.25 0.61 1.71 Cellulose ([micro]g) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 26.24 (a) 19.71 (a) 16.01 (a) 14.65 (a) [T.sub.1] 25.60 (a) 22.27 (b) 17.95 (b) 15.74 (b) [T.sub.2] 31.68 (b) 23.29 (c) 19.55 (c) 14.04 (a) [T.sub.3] 33.48 (c) 28.29 (d) 18.30 (b) 12.09 (c) SEM ([+ or -]) 0.65 0.30 0.41 0.45 CD5% 1.50 0.68 0.94 1.04 Hemicellulose (%) Treatments 0 30 60 90 Control 2.71 (a) 2.10 (a) 1.71 (a) 1.49 (a) [T.sub.1] 16.99 (b) 16.12 (b) 15.26 (b) 15.02 (b) [T.sub.2] 15.54 (c) 13.69 (c) 11.25 (c) 9.64 (c) [T.sub.3] 29.99 (d) 25.63 (d) 26.25 (d) 22.36 (d) SEM ([+ or -]) 0.38 0.42 0.33 0.45 CD5% 0.88 0.96 0.76 1.03 Control: Buffalo dung + Eisenia foetida; [T.sub.1]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake; [T.sub.2]: Buffalo dung + Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida; and [T.sub.3]: Brassica juncea cake + Eisenia foetida Alphabet (a,b,c,d) shows significance and non-significance of treatments at 5% level of significance. Treatments with same alphabet are non-significant and with different alphabet are significant Table 5. Specific functional group/compound present in control of raw buffalo dung and dung composted with Eisenia foetida Raw buffalo dung Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3420.85 Moisture 3011.51 Aromatic C-H structure 2933.28 C-H with methyl and methylene 2226.58 C[O.sub.2] 1487.17 Aromatic monomer 1423.99 C-N stretching/-OH bond of carboxyl 1296.03 Phosphate ester 1052.37 Ethanol 848.80 Aromatic carbon compound Raw buffalo dung Dung composted with Eisenia foetida Adsorption Adsorption Functional group frequency frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) ([cm.sup.-1]) 3420.85 3397.69 Heteroaromatic compound 3011.51 containing N-H group 2933.28 2352.87 C[O.sub.2] 1049.32 C-O starching vibration in 2226.58 alcohol and phenol 1487.17 829.79 Aromatic compound region 1423.99 1296.03 1052.37 848.80 Table 6. Specific functional group /compound present in control of Brassica juncea and Brassica juncea composted with Eisenia foetida Raw Brassica juncea Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3421.91 Two N-H group (primary amine and amide) 3009 Heteroaromatic like pyridine, parazine pyrols, furan 2924.11 C-H with methyl and methylene 2352.96 C[O.sub.2] 1637.94 C-O,C-N,N-O 1425.55 C-N stretching 1287.52 Aromatic/ heteromatic carbon 848.80 Aromatic carbon compound Brassica juncea composted with Eisenia foetida Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3396.59 Heteroaromatic compound containing N-H group 3007.63 Heteroaromatic like pyridine, parazine pyrols, furan 2927.48 Asymmetric/symmetric stretching of methylene 2208.24 Weak (C=N) stretching bond alkaline molecule, C=C. 1420.35 Aromatic/ heteroaromatic , C-N stretching 1036.22 C-O bond, C-O stretching vibrations in alcohol and phenol Table 7. Specific functional group/compound present in control of Brassica juncea+dung and Brassica juncea composted with dung Control of Brassica juncea + dung Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3410.48 Two N-H group(primary amine and amide) 3006.49 Heteroaromatic like pyridine, parazine pyrols, furan 2924.32 Asymmetric/symmetric stretching of methylene 1937.33 C=C-C[H.sub.2] 1637.09 C-O,C-N,N-O 1425.48 C-N stretching 1488.76 Aromatic/ heteroaromatic compound 848.80 Aromatic carbon compound Composted Brassica juncea +dung Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3404.52 Heteroaromatic compound containing N-H group, Two N-H group(primary amine and amide) 2925.54 Asymmetric/symmetric stretching of methylene 1054.53 Quinones 3002.60 Aromatic C-H stretching 1420, 1485.66 Aromatic/ heteroaromatic, C-N stretching 1296 C-O,C-N, phosphate ester 874.38, Interaction between C=S and N, 888.58, Si-H Bend. 841.33 Table 8. Specific functional group /compound present in control of dung+ Brassica juncea and Brassica juncea composted with Eisenia foetida +dung Control of Brassica juncea + dung Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3410.48 Two N-H group(primary amine and amide) 3006.49 Heteroaromatic like pyridine, parazine pyrols, furan 2924.32 Asymmetric/symmetric stretching of methylene 1937.33 C=C-C[H.sub.2] 1637.09 C-O,C-N,N-O 1425.48 C-N stretching 1488.76 Aromatic/ heteroaromatic compound 848.80 Aromatic carbon compound Composted Brassica juncea +dung+ Eisenia foetida Adsorption Functional group frequency or compound ([cm.sup.-1]) 3401.85 Two N-H group(primary amine and amide) Heteroaromatic compound containing N-H group 2925.09 Asymmetric/symmetric stretching of methylene. 2997.91 C-H with methyl and methylene 2085.70 C=C,C=N 1654.56 Quinone 1420, 1485.7 Aromatic / heteroaromatic C-N stretching. 1297 C-C,C-O,C-N, phosphate ester 1037 C-O stretching vibration in alcohol a and phenol 832 C-C,C-O,C-N, furan ring
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Solanki, Vikram C.; Shilpkar, Prateek|
|Publication:||Journal of Pure and Applied Microbiology|
|Date:||Jun 1, 2016|
|Previous Article:||Progression of powdery mildew, Alternaria blight and bacterial leaf blight of cluster bean in relation to weather parameters.|
|Next Article:||Factors responsible for phosphorus uptake efficiencies of crop species in hot sub humid eco-region of Middle Gangetic Plains of India.|