Evaluates the effects of organic amendments on tree seedlings, suggesting improved nursery practices.
The successful implementation of agroforestry and afforestation initiatives depends on optimizing the vigor of early-stage seedlings. Despite the widespread use of conventional organic amendments, it is important to compare the effectiveness of contemporary bio-stimulants against standard practices. The study aimed to ascertain the effects of various soil organic amendments on the morphological development and nutritional status of commercially significant leguminous and non-leguminous tree species. A variety of organic amendments, including Cocopeat, Jeevamrutha, Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhizae (VAM), Microbial Consortium, and Farm Yard Manure (FYM) as a control, were used to cultivate two species of each leguminous (Tamarindus indica, Pongamia pinnata) and non-leguminous (Sapindus mukorossi, Gmelina arborea). Over the course of two years (2022-2023), morphological, nutritional, and soil physicochemical characteristics (Organic carbon (OC), Electrical conductivity (EC), Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P), Potassium (K)) were examined. To account for treatment heterogeneity, ANOVA and post hoc tests were used to assess the data. Jeevamrutha showed the highest effectiveness, considerably increasing growth (Legumes-38.48 %, non-legumes-18.50 %) compared to the control, and microbial consortium was the second most effective treatment. EC increased from 175 to 620 µS/cm, while organic carbon increased to 1.16 %, indicating a significant improvement in soil quality. Among the studied species, P. pinnata and G. arborea exhibited the most favourable response to the organic amendments. These findings demonstrate that Jeevamrutha is a sustainable, high precision alternative to conventional FYM in nursery management. Therefore, implementing these organic strategies into practice may greatly improve the long-term productivity and quality of seedlings in large-scale reforestation and agroforestry initiatives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Harsimran et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: