Microbial Population and Nutrient Content of a Biofertilizer Containing Azotobacter sp. and Pseudomonas fluorescens with Different Carrier Materials After Storage

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Feb 25, 2025
https://doi.org/10.55043/jaast.v9i1.365
Download
PDF
Statistic
Vol. 9 No. 1 (2025): Journal of Applied Agricultural Science and Technology

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Nelson Elita
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Rita Erlinda
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Yefriwati Yefriwati
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Rinda Yanti
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Deliana Andam Sari
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Ayu Kurnia Illahi
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Fri Maulina
Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh
Nor’ Aishah Hasan
Universiti Teknologi MARA

Abstract

Biofertilizers contain N-fixing and P-solubilizing bacteria. The microbial population is dynamic and influenced by nutrient availability and storage temperature. Maintaining microbial populations requires appropriate carrier media to maximize microbial viability. The aim of the research is to determine the appropriate carrier material for the biofertilizer after storage based on the nutrient content and microbial population. The experiment utilized a completely randomized design with seven treatments and four replications, resulting in 28 experimental units. The treatments were as follows: B0 = Compost, B1 = Compost + Bacteria (Azotobacter and Pseudomonas fluorescens), B2 = Compost + Bacteria (Azotobacter + P. fluorescens) + Molasses, B3 = Compost + bacteria (Azotobacter + P. fluorescens) + CMC, B4 = Compost + bacteria (Azotobacter + P. fluorescens) + Arginine, B5 = Compost + bacteria (Azotobacter + P. fluorescens) + Sugar + CMC, and B6 = Compost + bacteria (Azotobacter + P. fluorescens) + Molasses + Arginine. The study results showed that the highest bacterial colonies were observed seven days after storage in treatment B2, reaching 156.33 CPU. The highest bacterial population growth in the first month was recorded in treatment B5; however, in months 2, 3, 4, and 5, treatment B2 exhibited the highest bacterial colony population. The pH remained more stable in treatments B2, B4, and B6. The highest nutrient content, including pH, N, P, K, and C/N ratio, was recorded in treatment B2, respectively, with values of 6.67, 2.49%, 2.04%, 1.77%, and 20.01. Findings in this study suggested the potential biofertilizer can be applied in the field to reduce dependence on chemical fertilizers to support sustainable agriculture.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Author Biographies

Nelson Elita, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Food Crop Production Technology Study Program

Rita Erlinda, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Plantation Crop Production Technology Study Program

Yefriwati Yefriwati, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Horticultural Plant Cultivation Study Program

Rinda Yanti, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Food Crop Production Technology Study Program

Deliana Andam Sari, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Food Crop Production Technology Study Program

Ayu Kurnia Illahi, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Food Crop Production Technology Study Program

Fri Maulina, Politeknik Pertanian Negeri Payakumbuh

Food Crop Production Technology Study Program

Nor’ Aishah Hasan, Universiti Teknologi MARA

Faculty of Applied Sciences

How to Cite
1.
Elita N, Erlinda R, Yefriwati Y, Yanti R, Sari DA, Illahi AK, Maulina F, Hasan NA. Microbial Population and Nutrient Content of a Biofertilizer Containing Azotobacter sp. and Pseudomonas fluorescens with Different Carrier Materials After Storage. J. appl. agricultural sci. technol. [Internet]. 2025Feb.25 [cited 2025Apr.26];9(1):11-22. Available from: https://jaast.org/index.php/jaast/article/view/365

References

  1. Sneha S, Anitha B, Sahair RA, Raghu N, Gopenath TS, Chandrashekrappa GK, et al. Biofertilizer for crop production and soil fertility. Acad J Agric Res 2018;6:299–306. https://doi.org/10.15413/ajar.2018.0130.
  2. Mahmud AA, Upadhyay SK, Srivastava AK, Bhojiya AA. Biofertilizers: A Nexus between soil fertility and crop productivity under abiotic stress. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability 2021;3:100063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100063.
  3. Fasusi OA, Cruz C, Babalola OO. Agricultural Sustainability: Microbial Biofertilizers in Rhizosphere Management. Agriculture 2021;11:163. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11020163.
  4. Vejan P, Abdullah R, Khadiran T, Ismail S, Nasrulhaq Boyce A. Role of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria in Agricultural Sustainability—A Review. Molecules 2016;21:573. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules21050573.
  5. Upadhyay SK, Singh G, Singh DP. Mechanism and Understanding of PGPR: An Approach for Sustainable Agriculture Under Abiotic Stresses. In: Singh JS, Singh DP, editors. Microbes and Environmental Management, Studium Press; 2016, p. 225–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03343.
  6. Rastogi M, Nandal M, Khosla B. Microbes as vital additives for solid waste composting. Heliyon 2020;6:e03343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03343.
  7. Yadav KK, Sarkar S. Biofertilizers, Impact on Soil Fertility and Crop Productivity under Sustainable Agriculture. Environment and Ecology 2019;37:89–93. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.5555/20193074647#:~:text=Advantages%20of%20biofertilizers%20are%20as,the%20soil%2C%20(6)%20Excretion.
  8. Mahmood A, Turgay OC, Farooq M, Hayat R. Seed biopriming with plant growth promoting rhizobacteria: a review. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 2016;92:fiw112. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiw112.
  9. Vives-Peris V, de Ollas C, Gómez-Cadenas A, Pérez-Clemente RM. Root exudates: from plant to rhizosphere and beyond. Plant Cell Rep 2020;39:3–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-019-02447-5.
  10. Elita N, Yanti R, Susila E, Karmaita Y, Andam DS, Kurnia AI. Effects of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi combined with P Fertilizer on the System of Rice Intensification Cultivation. Malaysian Journal of Soil Science 2023;27:204-217. https://msss.com.my/mjss/Full%20Text/vol27/V27_17.pdf.
  11. Sohaib M, Zahir ZA, Khan MY, Ans M, Asghar HN, Yasin S, Al-Barakah FN. Comparative Evaluation of DifferentCarrier-Based Multi-Strain Bacterial Formulations to Mitigate the Salt Stress in Wheat. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2020;27:777–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2019.12.034.
  12. Sudjana B, Jingga A, Simarmata T. Enriched Rice Husk Biochar Ameliorant to Increase Crop Productivity on Typic Hapludults. Glob. Adv. Res. J. Agric. Sci. 2017;6:108–113. http://garj.org/garjas/home.
  13. Seema K, Mehta K, Singh N. Studies on the Effect of Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) on Growth, Physiological Parameters, Yield and Fruit Quality of Strawberry Cv. Chandler. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 2018;7:383–387. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324105736_Studies_on_the_effect_of_plant_growth_promoting_rhizobacteria_PGPR_on_growth_physiological_parameters_yield_and_fruit_quality_of_strawberry_cv_chandler.
  14. Aloo BN, Mbega ER, Makumba BA, Tumuhairwe JB. Effects of Cariier Materials and Storage Temperature on the Viability and Stability of Three Biofertilizer Inoculants Obtained from Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Rhizosphere. Agriculture 2022;12:140. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12020140.
  15. Elita N, Susila E, Agustamar A, Rizki R. Identifikasi Molekuler Trichoderma spp. Indigenous dari Rizosfer Beberapa Varietas Padi Asal Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota dan Kota Payakumbuh. Agroteknika 2022;5:1-13. https://doi.org/10.32530/agroteknika.v5i1.114
  16. Erlinda E, Elita N, Agustamar. The Effect of Indigenous Azotobacter Isolate on Rice Result of SRI and Land Quality Method. International Journal of Advanced Research (IJAR) 2020;8:185-93. https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/10281
  17. Elita N, Agustamar, Yulensri. Eksplorasi dan Reinokulasi Mikroorganisme Pelarut Fospat Indigenous Untuk Meningkatkan Produksi Padi Metode SRI. Prosiding Seminarv Nasional Pengembangan Agroindustri Untuk Mendukung Perekonomian Rakyat. 2012.
  18. Chinakwe EC, Ibekwe VI, Ofoh MC, Nwogwugwu NU, Adeleye SA, Chinakwe PO, et al. Effect of Temperature Changes on the Bacterial and Fungal Succession Patterns during Composting of Some Organic Wastes in Greenhouse. J Adv Microbiol 2019:1–10. https://doi.org/10.9734/jamb/2019/v15i130075.
  19. Flores R, Shi J, Yu G, Ma B, Ravel J, Goedert JJ, et al. Collection media and delayed freezing effects on microbial composition of human stool. Microbiome 2015;3:33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-015-0092-7.
  20. Garcha S, Kansal R, Gosal SK. Molasses growth medium for production of Rhizobium sp. based biofertilizer. Indian J Biochem Biophys 2019;56:378–83. http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/50508.
  21. Satinder KB. Shelf-life of Biofertilizers: An Accord between Formulations and Genetics. J Biofertil Biopestic 2012;03. https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-6202.1000e109.
  22. Cahyono P. Effect of compost on soil properties and Yield of pineapple ( Ananas comusus L. Merr.) on red acid soil, Lampung Indonesia. International Journal of GEOMATE 2020;19. https://doi.org/10.21660/2020.76.87174.
  23. Elita N, Illahi AK, Sari DA, Yulensri, Maulina F, Karmaita Y, et al. Effect of Types of organik material and microbial enrichment on C/N ratio, Nutrition of compost, and microbe population with Trichoderma sp. Indigenous Activators. Resmilitaris 2022;12. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i7MdB_IuWd21NexUYRx0aflLqjKyUbp8/view?usp=drivesdk.
  24. Wang Q, Awasthi MK, Zhao J, Ren X, Li R, Wang Z, et al. Improvement of pig manure compost lignocellulose degradation, organic matter humification and compost quality with medical stone. Bioresour Technol 2017;243:771–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.07.021.
  25. Zhang L, Sun X. Influence of bulking agents on physical, chemical, and microbiological properties during the two-stage composting of green waste. Waste Management 2016;48:115–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.11.032.
  26. Kutsanedzie F, Ofori V, Diaba KS. Maturity and Safety of Compost Processed in HV and TW Composting Systems. International Journal of Science, Technology and Society 2015;3:202–9. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsts.20150304.24.
  27. Petric I, Avdihodžić E, Ibrić N. Numerical simulation of composting process for mixture of organic fraction of municipal solid waste and poultry manure. Ecol Eng 2015;75:242–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.12.003.
  28. Aasfar A, Bargaz A, Yaakoubi K, Hilali A, Bennis I, Zeroual Y, et al. Nitrogen Fixing Azotobacter Species as Potential Soil Biological Enhancers for Crop Nutrition and Yield Stability. Front Microbiol 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.628379.
  29. Krishnaraj PU, Dahale S. Mineral Phosphate Solubilization: Concepts and Prospects in Sustainable Agriculture. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy 2014;80:389. https://doi.org/10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i2/55116.
  30. Arif M, Ahmed W, Tanveer-Ul-Haq, Jamshaid U, Imran M, Ahmad S. Effect of rock phosphate based compost and biofertilizer on uptake of nutrients, nutrient use efficiency and yield of cotton. Soil Environ 2018;37:129–35. https://doi.org/10.25252/SE/18/61580.
  31. Etesami H, Emami S, Alikhani HA. Potassium solubilizing bacteria (KSB):: Mechanisms, promotion of plant growth, and future prospects ¬ A review. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 2017;17:897–911. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-95162017000400005.
  32. Hellal FA, El-Sayed SAA, Zewainy RM. Effects of natural potassium source enriched with compost on nutrient uptake and yield of sugar beet grown in newly reclaimed soils . Middle East Journal of Agriculture Research 2013;2:101–7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270341334.