Factorial randomized trial shows improved growth traits in mulberry cuttings, highlighting economic viability.
Aims: To evaluate the effect of pelletized biofertilizer formulations on quantitative traits and economic feasibility of mulberry (Morus indica L. cv. V1) cuttings under pot culture conditions. Study Design: Factorial randomized complete block design (RCBD) with ten treatment combinations. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Sericulture, Forest College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Mettupalayam, India, between February and May 2024. Methodology: The study involved ten treatments consisting of combinations of Orgafol, NAA, and microbial inoculants (Azospirillum, Phosphobacteria, and VAM), incorporated into pellet form and applied at planting time. Data were collected at intervals up to 75 days after planting. Observations recorded included rooting percentage, survival rate, root length, shoot length, number of leaves, and leaf area. Economic evaluation of pellet production was also conducted. Results: Significant variations were observed among treatments. Treatment T9 recorded the highest rooting percentage (79.75%) and survival rate (91.60%), followed by T10. Root and shoot lengths were maximum in T9 (38.99 cm and 50.08 cm, respectively), along with the highest number of leaves (13.42) and leaf area (160.82 cm²) at 75 days. The control (T1) consistently showed the lowest performance across all traits. Economic analysis indicated that each pellet costs ₹0.128 to produce and sells at ₹0.60, yielding a net daily profit of ₹516.84 at a production scale of 2000 pellets/day. The Benefit-Cost (B:C) ratio was 1.8, reflecting high profitability and feasibility of the technology. Conclusion: Pelletized biofertilizer formulations combining microbial inoculants and growth regulators significantly improve rooting, growth, and economic returns in mulberry propagation, making them a viable alternative for commercial nursery practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nath et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: