A student conducted a study comparing the effects of biofertilizer and chemical fertilizer on rice plants. Measurements of plant length, width, and grain weight over time showed biofertilizer led to greater increases than chemical fertilizer or no fertilizer. Histological analysis also revealed anatomical differences between treatments. The study concluded that biofertilizer provided significantly more biomass and grain productivity than chemical fertilizer and could be a better, environmentally-friendly alternative for fertilization.
1 of 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
More Related Content
Neethu bft
1. A comparative study of
the efficacy of Biofertilizer
and chemical fertilizer on
Rice
Neethu Kannan
II yr Botany
Dept. of Botany
Mercy College, Palakkad
2. Why Biofertilizers?
Chemical fertilizers run into the following
disadvantages
Not environmentally viable as the fertilizers are
produced from non-renewable raw material.
Efficiency lesser than other alternative – nearly 60%
lesser.
The issues of pollution is overwhelming.
Cost of chemical fertilizers are high.
Chemical fertilizers most effective with irrigated
land but not dry lands.
Indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers deteriotes
soil health.
3. Objectives of the studyObjectives of the study
To compare efficiency of Azotobacter
sp based
biofertilizers with chemical fertilizer.
To study the biomass increase with
respect to
Morphological, Physiological and
Anatomical variations.
12. Comparison of weight of grains
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
1
Pots
Weightingrams
Reference
By adding Chemical
fertilizer
By adding Biofertilizer
15. Conclusion
• Significant increase in biomass
production and grain productivity.
• Relatively more effective than chemical
fertilizers.
• Hence can be concluded with further
study that biofertilizer is a better
alternative to chemical fertilizers.
Supportive literature also confirms its
environmental safeness (effective
decomposition).