Organic materials used Aspects studied...

15

Table 2. Review of research works done by different workers on vermiculture and reproductive aspects of different earthworms using different

organic matters.

Earthworms used

Organic materials used

Aspects studied

Author(s)

E. fetida Sludge Role of moisture on the rate of feeding Mitchell et al.(1977)

L.mauritii

D.willsi

O.surensis

Cow dung Cocoon morphology, hatching and emerging

pattern

Dash and Senapati

(1980)

E.fetida Activated sludge and horse manure Influence of temperature, moisture and pH on

growth, survival and development Kaplan et al. (1980)

E.fetida Sewage sludges, animal and human

excreta, low N organic materials Production of biomass Hutha (1981)

L.mauritii

Ragi and paddy hay, leaves of cashew,

mango, guava and eucalyptus

Feed preference

Kale and

Krishnamoorthy (1981)

E.fetida Cow manure Role of moisture on the growth

Reinecke and Kriel

(1981)

P.excavatus

Fresh dung of cow, sheep and horse and

poultry manure

Survival, feeding and defecation, respiration,

growth and maturation, and fecundity

Kale et al. (1982)

Table 2: Contd….

16

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

E.fetida

E.eugeniae

Amynthas sp.

Allolobophora longa

Allolobophora

chlorotica

Aporrectodea turgida

Lumbricus rubellus

Lumbricus terrestris

Octolasion sp.

Horse manure

Rate of weight loss/gain in relation to species and

size

Hartenstein (1984)

P.excavatus

P.hawayana Sewage sludge

Role of temperature and moisture on

vermicomposting Loehr et al. (1985)

E.fetida

E.eugeniae

Agricultural residues, urban wastes and

sludge

Growth and productivity, and efficiency of

vermicomposting

Reviewed by Lee

(1985)

E.fetida Cow manure Influence of moisture on the growth and

reproduction

Reinecke and Venter

(1985)

E.fetida Mixed miscellaneous wastes and

activated sewage sludge Biomass and cocoon production

Haimi and Huhta

(1986)

E.fetida Cow manure Moisture preferences, growth and reproduction Reinecke and Venter

(1987)

L.terrestris

L.rubellus

Leaves of alfalfa, red clover, corn and

brome grass

Effect of diet on feeding, mortality, growth, food

uptake and casting activity

Shipitalo et al. (1988)

Table 2: Contd….

17

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

E.fetida Urine free cattle droppings Life cycle Venter and Reinecke

(1988)

P.excavatus Urine free cattle droppings Growth rate, maturation and cocoon production Reinecke and Hallatt

(1989)

E.fetida Cattle manure Role of feeding patterns on growth and

reproduction

Reinecke and Viljoen

(1990)

E.fetida Cow manure Rate of growth and cocoon production Bouwman and

Reinecke (1991)

E.fetida

D.veneta

E.eugeniae

P.excavatus

Animal and vegetable wastes

Role of temperature on the growth, cocoon

production and cocoon viability

Edwards and Bater

(1992)

P.excavatus Cattle manure Moisture requirements for better growth and

reproduction

Hallatt et al. (1992)

Millsonia anomala

Savanna soils, leaves and roots of

Loudetia simplex, legume leaves and

wheat roots

Growth rate Martin and Lavelle

(1992)

Eisenia andrei Pig manure Influence of population densities on the growth

and reproduction Ulrik Reeh (1992)

Aporrectodea longa

L. terrestris

Octolasion cyaneum

Paper pulp Growth, cocoon and hatchlings production,

incubation time and hatching success

Butt (1993)

Table 2: Contd….

18

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

E.fetida Cattle manure Role of selective breeding on the improvement of

growth and reproductive parameters

Meyer and Bouwman

(1995)

E.eugeniae

Maize stover, rice straw, residues of

Acioa, Gliricidia and Leucaena

prunings

Efficiency of vermicomposting

Tian et al. (1995)

E.andrei Solid paper mill sludge, sewage sludge,

pig and poultry slurry Growth rate and mortality Elvira et al. (1997)

E.andrei Grasses, garden and municipal prunings

and river weeds

Cocoon and hatchling production, hatching

success and growth rate of hatchlings

Frederickson et al.

(1997)

L.mauritii

E.eugeniae

Coir waste, press mud, water hyacinth,

farm wastes, farm yard manure, biogas

slurry of press mud and cattle dung

Life cycle, growth and population dynamics Ramalingam (1997)

E.andrei Cattle manure, paper-mill sludge and

dairy sludge Growth and reproduction Elvira et al. (1998)

E.fetida Animal dung, agricultural residues,

urban wastes and sludge

Growth, productivity and efficiency of

vermicomposting

Reviewed by Edwards

(1998b)

Table 2: Contd….

19

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

E.fetida

A mixture of anaerobically digested

sewage sludge from paper mill factory

and aerobically digested municipal

sludge

Changes in total biomass, non- clitellated

biomass, clitellated biomass and semi clitellated

biomass and loss of reproductive potential of adult

earthworms

Benitez et al. (1999)

E.eugeniae Dried areca nut leaves, cocoa leaves and

cocoa pod husk

Efficiency of vermicomposting and biomass

production

Chowdappa et al.

(1999)

L.mauritii Vegetable market wastes To assess a suitable method among methods used

in green waste decomposition

Logakanthi et al.

(2000)

E.fetida Bio solids and paper mulch Biomass change during vermicomposting Ndegwa et el.(2000)

P.excavatus Sugarcane trash and cow dung Biomass change, delay in maturation, survival and

hatchlings production

Ramalingam and

Thilagar (2000)

E.eugeniae Cattle waste solids Growth rate and reproductive potentials of

hatchlings

Dominguez et al.

(2001)

E.eugeniae Paper waste with varied ratios of cow

dung

Vermicast production, survival, growth and

reproduction of adult earthworms

Gajalakshmi et al.

(2001)

P.excavatus Sugarcane trash and press mud Change in biomass, delay in maturation, survival

and hatchlings production

Ramalingam (2001)

Table 2: Contd….

20

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

P. excavatus

L. mauritii

P.elongata

P.corethrurus

Eutyphoeus gammiei

Dichogaster

modiglianii

D.nepalensis

Cow dung, leaf litter and pasture

Morphology, cocoon production, fecundity,

incubation period and hatching pattern

Bhattacharjee and

Chaudhuri (2002)

E. fetida

Wheat straw with or without Pleurotus

sajor-caju , Trichoderma harzianum,

Aspergillus niger and Azotobactor

chroococcum

Growth and cocoon production

Singh and Sharma

(2002)

L. mauritii Farm yard manure, neem seed and neem

cake

Cocoon and hatchling production, hatching

success and hatchlings growth rate

Bakthavathsalam

(2003b)

E. fetida

L. mauritii Municipal solid waste

Change in growth rate, earthworm number,

cocoon number and body weight

Kaviraj and Sharma

(2003)

E. fetida

P. excavatus

Dichogaster bolaui

Forest litters of Tectona grandis (teak)

Madhuca indica (mahua) and Butea

monosperma (palas)

To assess the earthworms efficiency through their

growth rate and population increase Manna et al. (2003)

L.mauritii Paddy chaff and weed plants materials Cocoon production, incubation period, hatching

ability, growth and survival

Bakthavathsalam and

Geetha (2004a)

Table 2: Contd….

21

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

L.mauritii Paddy chaff and weed plants materials Growth and reproduction of F1 hatchlings Bakthavathsalam and

Geetha (2004b)

L.mauritii Cow dung, press mud, paddy chaff

powder and paddy chaff ash

Survival, cocoon production, incubation time,

hatching ability and hatchlings growth rate

Bakthavathsalam and

Ramakrishnan (2004)

E.eugeniae Coconut leaves Efficiency of vermicomposting and production of

earthworm biomass Gopal et al. (2004)

E.eugeniae Press mud Growth rate and biomass production Ramalingam (2004)

E.andrei Pine saw dust, poultry litter, cotton

industry waste and horse manure Biomass and cocoon production Castillo et al. (2005)

P.excavatus Sago wastes and press mud Growth and reproduction Christy and

Ramalingam (2005a)

E.fetida

E.andrei

Cow manure Selection of good species for vermiculture based

on growth and reproduction

Dominguez et al.

(2005)

E.fetida Waste (faeces+urine) of cow, buffalo,

horse, donkey, sheep, goat and camel Growth, sexual maturity and cocoon production Garg et al. (2005a)

Table 2: Contd….

22

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

E.fetida Municipal solid waste Influence of temperature, pH and C/N ratio on the

growth and survival Hou et al. (2005)

E.fetida Cattle and goat manures Growth and reproduction Loh et al. (2005)

Octolasion tyrtaeum Grass, maize and wheat leaves Feeding and casting activities Bisht et al. (2006)

E.fetida

Allolobophora

parva

Putranjiva roxburghii, Pongamia

pinnata, neem leaves, cow dung, biogas

slurry, neem and mustard cake

Biomass and cocoon production Garg et al. (2006a)

L.mauritii Cow dung Sublethal effect of nimbecidine on growth and

reproduction

Ramalingam and

Kavitha (2006)

Hyperiodrilus

euryaulos

Soil substrate, cellulose substrate and

dry neem leaves Growth and reproductive performance

Sogbesan and

Ugwumba (2006)

E.andrei Cow manure Effect of inbreeding and out breeding on cocoon

production

Velando et al.

(2006)

L.mauritii Press mud and cow dung Reproductive influence and hatchlings growth rate Bakthavathsalam

(2007a)

L.mauritii Cow dung Influence of annual rhythm on the cocoon

production under different media

Bakthavathsalam and

Birmanandhi (2007)

L.mauritii Vegetable market wastes Influence of time on the rate of cocoon production

under different media

Bakthavathsalam and

Uthayakumar (2007)

Metaphire posthuma Cow manure and poultry droppings Reproductive potential

Bisht et al. (2007)

Table 2: Contd….

23

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

P.excavatus Paper mill sludge with cow dung and

press mud Growth rate and hatchlings production

Chandran and

Ramalingam (2007a,b)

E.fetida

E.eugeniae

P.excavatus

Cattle manure Growth and reproduction

Meena and Renu

(2007)

Octodrilus

complanatus Cow manure

Weight change, sexual maturation, cocoon

production, incubation period and hatching

success

Monroy et al. (2007)

P.excavatus Press mud Influence of moisture on growth rate, cocoon and

hatchling production Parthasarathi (2007)

E.eugeniae

Cashew leaves, gram waste, urea,

lignolytic fungi and cellulolytic fungi

with cow dung and press mud

Efficiency of growth and reproductive

performance

Raja and Ramalingam

(2007a,b)

E.eugeniae

P.excavatus

P.sansibaricus

Jowar straw, bajra straw, sheep manure,

farm yard manure, kitchen waste and

leaf litter of Magifera indica

Growth and reproductive performance Suthar (2007a)

L.mauritii Cow dung Sublethal effect of monocrotophos on growth and

reproduction Kavitha et al. (2008)

E.fetida

Duck weed from municipal waste water

treatment plant and cattle manure

Total biomass and cocoon production

Kostecka and

Kaniuczak (2008)

Table 2: Contd….

24

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

D.nepalensis

M.houlleti

P.excavatus

Cow manure and oak litter Different modes of cocoon production and life

cycle

Namita and

Madhuri (2008)

P.excavatus

P.sansibaricus Domestic waste (house hold waste) Biomass production and rate of cocoon production

Suthar and Singh

(2008)

E.eugeniae Sheep droppings and paddy straw waste Rate of vermicast production Bakthavathsalam et al.

(2009)

E.eugeniae Green gram waste

Cocoon and hatchling production, incubation

time, hatching success, growth rate of hatchlings

and time of sexual maturity

Jayaseelan and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009a)

E.eugeniae Paddy straw waste

”

Subramaniyan and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009)

P.excavatus Horse manure with bedding materials

(saw dust and shredded news paper) Growth and reproduction Latifah et al. (2009)

E.fetida Lignite fly ash, cow dung and press mud

” Sarojini et al. (2009)

E.eugeniae Coir waste, Eichhornia crassipes, cow

dung and poultry excreta

Rate of cocoon, hatchlings and vermicast

production, incubation time and biomass

production

Bakthavathsalam et al.

(2010c)

Table 2: Contd….

25

Earthworms used


Aspects studied

Author(s)

E.eugeniae Coir waste, water lily, goat droppings

and poultry excreta

Rate of cocoon, hatchlings and vermicast

production, incubation time and biomass

production


(2010d)

E.eugeniae Polyalthia longifolia Rate of vermicast production

Umamaheswari and

Bakthavathsalam

(2010)

Table 30. Measurements of different parameters of chilli plants raised in different PSR doses of water hyacinth vermicompost.

113

PSR

Total

leaves

1

Shoot

height (cm)

2

Total

flowers

3

Total

fruits

4

Fruit

length

(cm)

5

Fruit

perimeter

(cm)

6

Fruits

dry

weight (gm)

7

PWCOS

8

0

40 16.1 6.0 3.5 8.5 2.9 2.233 –

43 27.3 7.5 4.0 8.5 2.9 2.336 4.6

41 16.3 7.5 4.0 8.5 2.9 2.329 4.3

2.5

64 17.8 8.0 3.5 8.5 2.9 2.253 0.9

70 29.2 8.5 4.0 8.6 2.9 2.341 4.9

66 17.9 8.0 4.0 8.5 2.9 2.338 4.7

5

77 18.1 9.0 4.5 8.9 3.2 3.338 49.5

81 30.4 10.0 6.0 9.6 3.3 3.624 62.3

78 18.3 9.5 5.0 9.4 3.2 3.509 57.1

7.5

82 18.2 12.0 7.0 9.5 3.3 4.878 118.5

87 31.8 16.5 10.0

000

9.7 3.3 6.650 197.8

86 18.7 16.0 8.0 9.7 3.3 5.245 134.9

10

115 20.7 14.5 9.5 9.7 3.3 6.692 199.7

122 32.9 19.5 11.0 9.9 3.3 6.975 212.4

119 20.9 18.0 10.0 9.8 3.3 6.778 203.5

15

120 21.5 18.5 10.5 9.8 3.3 6.842 206.4

144 35.8 24.0 11.0 9.9 3.4 7.975 257.1

136 22.2 23.5 11.0 9.9 3.4 7.357 229.5

Table 30 : Contd …

Upper, middle and lower row values represent the mean of two plants raised in earthworm unexposed, L.mauritii exposed and P.excavatus

exposed media respectively; 0 - Soil alone; PWCOS = Per cent Weight Change Over Soil.

114

PSR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20

133 23.1 23.0 13.5 10.0 3.4 8.533 282.1

180 41.0 32.0 20.0 10.1 3.4 13.486 503.9

170 23.9 25.0 15.0 10.0 3.4 9.610 330.4

25

138 24.8 28.0 14.5 10.1 3.4 9.610 330.4

189 42.3 40.5 21.5 10.1 3.4 14.585 553.2

181 26.4 35.5 20.5 10.1 3.4 14.135 533.0

30

220 26.9 30.0 16.0 10.1 3.4 10.080 351.4

236 45.3 55.0 22.5 10.2 3.4 16.153 623.4

220 28.2 40.0 22.0 10.1 3.4 15.760 605.8

40

272 29.4 35.5 19.5 10.2 3.4 12.736 470.4

284 47.0 64.5 27.5 10.4 3.5 19.680 781.3

278 31.3 45.0 24.0 10.2 3.4 16.921 657.8

50

327 36.6 48.0 22.5 10.3 3.4 15.504 594.3

344 49.8 73.0 40.0 10.5 3.5 28.362 1170.1

337 39.0 54.0 30.0 10.4 3.5 21.924 881.8

75

354 47.6 53.5 34.5 10.5 3.4 25.189 1028.0

380 54.0 91.5 46.0 10.7 3.5 34.967 1465.9

363 52.0 89.0 38.0 10.5 3.5 27.555 1133.9

Table 31. Measurements of different parameters of chilli plants raised in different PSR doses of paddy waste vermicompost.

115

PSR

Total

leaves

1

Shoot

height (cm)

2

Total

flowers

3

Total

fruits

4

Fruit

length

(cm)

5

Fruit

perimeter

(cm)

6

Fruits

dry

weight (gm)

7

PWCOS

8

0

37 15.5 7.5 3.0 7.9 2.5 1.730 –

41 19.3 10.0 4.0 8.2 2.7 2.313 33.7

41 16.3 8.0 3.5 8.2 2.6 2.150 24.3

2.5

63 15.7 9.0 3.5 8.1 2.6 2.150 24.3

69 20.3 11.0 4.5 8.3 2.7 2.629 51.9

65 16.8 10.5 3.5 8.2 2.7 2.170 25.4

5

70 16.3 10.0 3.5 8.1 2.7 2.187 26.4

74 21.0 14.0 5.5 8.3 2.7 3.260 88.4

71 17.4 12.0 4.0 8.3 2.7 2.314 33.8

7.5

78 16.9 13.0 4.0 8.2 2.7 2.510 45.1

80 22.3 16.5 5.5 8.4 2.7 3.421 97.7

79 18.0 14.5 5.0 8.4 2.7 3.300 90.8

10

85 18.1 16.0 5.0 8.3 2.7 3.165 82.9

91 24.1 19.5 6.5 8.4 2.7 3.932 127.3

89 19.1 18.0 6.5 8.4 2.7 3.375 95.1

15

121 19.3 17.0 5.0 8.3 2.7 3.305 91.0

129 25.0 23.0 8.5 8.5 2.7 5.530 219.7

123 20.3 20.0 7.0 8.5 2.7 4.237 144.9




116

PSR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20 131 21.6 20.0 8.0 8.3 2.7 5.270 204.6

145 25.8 26.0 11.5 8.6 2.8 7.475 332.1

137 21.9 25.5 10.0 8.6 2.7 6.351 267.1

25 139 23.2 25.5 10.5 8.7 2.7 6.636 283.6

156 28.6 30.5 17.0 8.9 2.8 11.355 556.4

151 24.2 27.5 12.5 8.9 2.8 8.536 393.4

30 179 27.9 30.0 13.5 8.8 2.8 8.782 407.6

207 33.7 33.0 18.0 8.9 2.9 12.045 596.2

183 30.7 31.0 15.0 8.9 2.8 10.215 490.5

40 216 32.3 35.0 18.0 9.0 2.9 12.560 626.0

260 41.9 36.5 24.0 9.4 3.0 16.040 827.2

249 35.2 36.0 21.5 9.1 3.0 14.362 730.2

50 251 37.0 42.0 26.5 9.2 3.0 19.225 1011.3

276 49.4 48.0 33.0 9.4 3.1 23.430 1254.3

256 39.3 43.0 31.0 9.4 3.1 22.018 1172.7

75 278 40.2 46.5 32.0 9.3 3.0 22.590 1205.8

326 52.2 62.5 38.5 9.9 3.2 27.720 1502.3

313 45.7 53.0 35.0 9.7 3.2 25.202 1356.8

Table 32. Measurements of different parameters of chilli plants raised in different PSR doses of cow dung vermicompost.

117

PSR

Total

leaves

1

Shoot

height (cm)

2

Total

flowers

3

Total

fruits

4

Fruit

length

(cm)

5

Fruit

perimeter

(cm)

6

Fruits

dry

weight (gm)

7

PWCOS

8

0

38 16.4 8.5 2.5 7.3 2.4 1.660 –

41 19.8 11.0 4.0 7.5 2.5 2.429 46.3

40 16.4 10.0 3.5 7.4 2.5 2.340 40.9

2.5

66 17.7 11.0 4.0 7.5 2.5 2.293 38.1

78 20.4 15.5 4.5 7.8 2.6 2.792 68.2

71 18.0 13.5 4.0 7.7 2.6 2.493 50.2

5

75 17.3 11.5 4.5 7.6 2.6 2.842 71.2

88 20.7 18.5 5.5 8.0 2.6 3.354 102.0

82 18.2 14.5 5.0 7.9 2.6 3.175 91.3

7.5

94 18.1 13.5 6.5 7.7 2.6 4.035 143.1

113 22.4 20.0 7.5 8.1 2.6 4.805 189.5

98 18.3 16.0 6.5 7.9 2.6 4.172 151.3

10

117 18.8 19.0 9.0 7.8 2.6 5.892 254.9

131 24.0 22.0 11.0 8.4 2.7 6.823 311.0

122 19.0 19.0 10.5 8.2 2.7 6.728 305.3

15

126 19.0 22.0 10.5 7.9 2.7 6.783 308.6

149 25.6 25.5 12.5 8.8 2.9 7.875 374.4

139 19.1 23.5 11.0 8.4 2.8 7.162 331.4


Upper, middle and lower row represent the mean of two plants raised in earthworm unexposed, L.mauritii exposed and P.excavatus


118

PSR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20

146 19.3 25.0 13.0 8.1 2.7 8.255 397.3

175 27.7 27.0 14.5 9.1 3.0 9.464 470.1

162 19.9 26.0 13.5 8.6 2.8 8.778 428.8

25

166 19.4 26.0 14.5 8.1 2.8 9.570 476.1

188 29.6 32.0 16.0 9.4 3.2 10.454 529.8

179 19.9 28.0 15.5 9.0 3.0 9.889 495.7

30

182 25.6 31.0 20.0 8.2 3.0 13.358 704.7

211 34.8 34.0 21.0 9.7 3.4 15.987 863.1

199 25.9 34.0 20.5 9.4 3.2 13.440 709.6

40

196 26.5 38.0 23.0 8.9 3.2 14.835 793.7

233 43.4 39.0 23.5 9.9 3.7 23.790 1333.1

224 26.9 39.0 23.5 9.7 3.4 15.755 849.1

50

235 26.8 44.0 30.0 9.4 3.4 19.858 1096.3

258 51.0 51.0 33.5 10.1 3.8 23.790 1333.1

253 26.9 47.0 30.5 10.1 3.6 21.269 1181.3

75

375 32.8 53.0 33.3 9.8 3.5 22.114 1232.2

384 53.7 63.0 37.0 10.4 3.8 24.840 1396.4

375 35.3 56.0 34.5 10.2 3.6 24.495 1375.6

Table 33. Measurements of different parameters of chilli plants raised in different PSR doses of organic mixture vermicompost.

119

PSR

Total

leaves

1

Shoot height

(cm)

2

Total

flowers

3

Total

fruits

4

Fruit

length

(cm)

5

Fruit

perimeter

(cm)

6

Fruits

dry

weight (gm)

7

PWCOS

8

0

37 16.1 8.5 3.5 8.4 2.9 2.050 –

42 16.8 13.5 3.5 8.5 2.9 2.410 17.6

44 16.2 10.5 3.5 8.5 2.9 2.147 4.7

2.5

59 16.7 11.0 4.0 8.5 2.9 2.269 10.7

76 17.0 21.5 4.0 8.6 2.9 2.420 18.0

66 16.9 15.5 4.0 8.5 2.9 2.410 17.6

5

71 17.6 17.0 5.0 8.6 3.0 3.081 50.3

89 17.9 28.0 6.0 8.8 3.1 3.425 67.1

80 17.8 19.0 5.0 8.7 3.1 3.275 59.8

7.5

87 18.4 18.0 6.5 9.0 3.1 3.694 80.2

118 19.3 32.5 11.5 9.3 3.2 7.592 270.3

109 18.5 23.5 7.0 9.2 3.2 4.560 122.4

10

121 19.0 23.5 9.0 9.4 3.2 5.955 190.5

137 22.3 33.0 11.5 9.5 3.3 7.707 275.9

134 20.0 26.0 10.0 9.4 3.2 6.325 208.5

15

164 19.2 26.5 10.0 9.5 3.3 6.500 217.1

172 23.4 51.5 13.0 9.6 3.3 8.712 324.9

170 23.4 40.0 11.5 9.5 3.3 7.705 275.9

Table 33 : Contd . . .



120

PSR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20

196 19.9 28.0 12.5 9.5 3.3 8.180 299.0

219 25.4 50.0 18.0 9.7 3.4 12.240 497.1

218 24.2 40.0 13.0 9.6 3.3 8.720 325.4

25

239 21.0 32.5 16.0 9.6 3.4 10.585 416.3

259 32.8 54.5 18.0 9.8 3.4 12.243 497.2

249 27.6 46.0 17.5 9.7 3.4 12.171 493.7

30

269 21.8 39.0 16.5 9.8 3.4 10.755 424.6

283 40.1 60.5 18.5 10.1 3.4 12.592 514.2

272 31.2 54.0 18.0 9.9 3.4 12.494 509.5

40

293 25.0 47.0 21.0 9.9 3.5 14.070 586.3

310 42.6 67.0 29.0 10.2 3.5 20.155 883.2

305 35.9 55.0 29.0 10.0 3.5 14.837 623.8

50

327 31.5 54.0 28.5 9.9 3.5 19.095 831.5

344 47.0 70.5 33.0 10.3 3.6 23.180 1030.7

340 43.0 58.0 31.0 10.2 3.6 22.015 973.9

75

378 37.5 56.0 33.0 10.3 3.6 22.112 978.6

395 50.1 76.5 37.0 10.5 3.7 26.642 1199.6

386 45.7 62.0 34.0 10.3 3.6 24.122 1076.7

103

Table 26. Levels of macro and micronutrients present in the samples of partly

decomposed (PD), L.mauritii exposed (LME) and P.excavatus exposed (PEE)

water hyacinth materials.

Mean S.D. of 6 samples; a - Significant (P<0.01) over PD sample;

b - Significant (P< 0.05) over PD sample; c - Not significant (P> 0.05) over PD sample.

Parameters PD LME PEE

pH 8.23 0.31 7.61 0.21

a 7.15 0.38

a

EC(dSm-1

) 0.34 0.04 0.22 0.02 a 0.12 0.02

a

OC (%) 15.16 1.97 16.38 1.44 c 15.85 1.85

c

TN (%) 0.80 0.03 0.96 0.01 a 0.92 0.01

a

TP (%) 0.70 0.04 0.78 0.02 a 0.76 0.02

a

TK (%) 0.64 0.02 0.70 0.02 a 0.67 0.04

c

TNa (%) 0.07 0.02 0.08 0.02 c 0.07 0.01

c

TCa (%) 0.39 0.02 0.39 0.03 c 0.35 0.02

a

C:N ratio 18.92 2.13 17.05 1.43 c 17.22 2.03

c

Fe (ppm) 2.35 0.24 2.55 0.16 c 1.48 0.16

a

Mn (ppm) 1.58 0.01 1.68 0.02 a 1.38 0.04

c

Zn (ppm) 1.36 0.03 1.66 0.06 a 1.53 0.05

a

Cu (ppm) 1.28 0.03 1.46 0.02 a 1.42 0.08

a

102

Table 25. Levels of macro and micronutrients present in the samples of earthworm

unexposed (EU), L.mauritii exposed (LME) and P.excavatus exposed (PEE) soil used in

chilli cultivation.

Mean S.D. of 6 samples; a - Significant (P<0.01) over EU sample;

b - Significant (P< 0.05) over EU sample; c - Not significant (P> 0.05) over EU sample.

Parameters EU LME PEE

pH 8.43 0.12 7.70 0.23

a 7.48 0.06

a

EC(dSm-1

) 0.48 0.13 0.23 0.02 a 0.13 0.01

a

OC (%) 0.85 0.03 1.24 0.03 a 1.16 0.04

a

TN (%) 0.57 0.04 0.70 0.04 a 0.67 0.02

a

TP (%) 0.37 0.05 0.45 0.03 a 0.26 0.04

a

TK (%) 0.24 0.03 0.33 0.03 a 0.28 0.03

b

TNa (%) 0.05 0.01 0.07 0.01 a 0.06 0.01

c

TCa (%) 0.13 0.01 0.31 0.03 a 0.29 0.01

a

C:N ratio 1.48 0.10 1.76 0.11 a 1.69 0.06

a

Fe (ppm) 2.65 0.09 2.70 0.12 c 2.66 0.01

c

Mn (ppm) 1.23 0.20 1.46 0.02 b 1.40 0.02

b

Zn (ppm) 1.25 0.12 1.59 0.11 a 1.42 0.13

b

Cu (ppm) 1.14 0.01 1.29 0.01 a 1.20 0.02

a

104


decomposed (PD), L.mauritii exposed (LME) and P.excavatus exposed (PEE) paddy waste

materials.



105


pH 7.95 0.22 7.38 0.25

a 7.01 0.35

a

EC(dSm-1

) 0.28 0.04 0.16 0.02 a 0.09 0.01

a

OC (%) 12.65 1.00 15.66 0.94 a 14.70 0.68

a

TN (%) 0.65 0.02 0.77 0.01 a 0.71 0.03

a

TP (%) 0.45 0.03 0.54 0.02 a 0.50 0.01

a

TK (%) 0.45 0.03 0.48 0.02 b 0.48 0.02

b

TNa (%) 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.01 b 0.03 0.01

a

TCa (%) 0.25 0.01 0.34 0.02 b 0.30 0.01

a

C:N ratio 19.50 2.01 20.20 1.14 c 20.68 1.19

c

Fe (ppm) 2.44 0.17 2.48 0.13 c 2.46 0.13

c

Mn (ppm) 1.37 0.02 1.54 0.07 a 1.46 0.01

a

Zn (ppm) 1.44 0.03 1.70 0.02 a 1.59 0.08

a

Cu (ppm) 1.38 0.01 1.62 0.02 a 1.54 0.03

a

105


decomposed (PD), L.mauritii exposed (LME) and P.excavatus exposed (PEE) cow dung.




pH 8.26 0.35 7.56 0.36

a 7.16 0.26

a

EC(dSm-1

) 0.32 0.03 0.19 0.05 a 0.10 0.02

a

OC (%) 17.68 0.84

19.18. 1.15 b 18.82 0.89

b

TN (%) 0.81 0.01 0.92 0.01 a 0.90 0.01

a

TP (%) 0.65 0.01 0.70 0.02 a 0.68 0.02

a

TK (%) 0.63 0.02 0.68 0.01 a 0.64 0.02

c

TNa (%) 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.01 a 0.03 0.01

a

TCa (%) 0.30 0.03 0.42 0.01 a 0.36 0.01

a

C:N ratio 21.64 0.80 20.84 1.24 c 20.91 1.03

c

Fe (ppm) 2.65 0.07 2.72 0.07 c 2.68 0.06

c

Mn (ppm) 1.51 0.05 1.59 0.02 a 1.49 0.02

c

Zn (ppm) 2.50 0.15 2.55 0.04 c 2.48 0.06

c

Cu (ppm) 1.41 0.02 1.66 0.03 a 1.58 0.02

a

106


decomposed (PD), L.mauritii exposed (LME) and P.excavatus exposed (PEE)

organic mixtures .


b -Significant (P< 0.05) over PD sample; c - Not significant (P> 0.05) over PD sample.


pH 8.20 0.00 7.21 0.06

a 7.28 0.06

a

EC(dSm-1

) 0.34 0.01 0.23 0.02 a 0.10 0.05

a

OC (%) 14.23 0.75 17.32 1.05 a 16.12 0.67

a

TN (%) 0.70 0.04 0.80 0.03 a 0.78 0.01

a

TP (%) 0.53 0.01 0.60 0.02 a 0.58 0.02

c

TK (%) 0.58 0.06 0.56 0.01 c 0.56 0.00

c

TNa (%) 0.06 0.01 0.06 0.01 c 0.03 0.01

a

TCa (%) 0.30 0.04 0.38 0.02 a 0.38 0.02

a

C:N ratio 20.20 1.50 21.71 1.89 c 20.59 1.02

c

Fe (ppm) 2.48 0.04 2.56 0.04 a 2.48 0.06

c

Mn (ppm) 1.40 0.03 1.50 0.03 a 1.44 0.00

a

Zn (ppm) 1.87 0.05 2.22 0.13 a 2.07 0.20

b

Cu (ppm) 1.40 0.03 1.62 0.02 a 1.56 0.02

a

Table 13. Measurements of length (mm), body weight (mg) and growth rate (mg/day) of F1 hatchlings of L.mauritii kept in different PSR doses of partly

decomposed water hyacinth upto their clitellum formation.

The first value of PSR columns represents the length (Mean S.D.) of 12 worms; Values in parenthesis indicate mean weight of 12 worms; Values in bold

letters indicate growth rate arrived on the basis of previous body weight values; AC = Appearance of Clitellum; OGR = Overall Growth

Rate;*Measurements were made only in 8 hatchlings.

80

Days

0 PSR*

10 PSR

20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR

75 PSR

100 PSR

0 9 0 (18) 16 1 (16) 13 2 (17) 13 1 (18) 13 1 (20) 14 1 (20) 13 2 (21) 14 2 (24)

10 23 1 (84) 6.6 25 1 (38) 2.2 24 2 (79) 6.2 25 1 (98) 8.0 25 1 (150) 13.0 25 2 (166) 14.6 26 2 (166) 14.5 27 2 (187) 16.3

20 30 2 (197) 11.3 35 2 (236) 19.8 37 4 (243) 16.4 37 3 (260) 16.2 38 3 (308) 15.8 38 3 (333) 16.7 40 2 (350) 18.4 41 2 (356) 16.9

30 12 4 (94) –10.3 46 3 (291) 5.5 46 2 (363) 12.0 47 4 (368) 10.8 47 2 (412) 10.4 48 2 (483) 15.0 49 1 (500) 15.0 52 1 (533) 17.7

40 Died 54 2 (416) 12.5 57 3 (490) 12.7 59 3 (596) 22.8 61 3 (601) 18.9 61 2 (633) 15.0 63 2 (672) 17.2 67 3 (683) 15.0

50 – 61 1 (520) 10.4 61 1 (625) 13.5 63 2 (750) 15.4 67 3 (750) 14.9 70 3 (800) 16.7 72 2 (833) 16.1 82 3 (851) 16.8

60 – 73 2 (708) 18.8 79 2 (741) 11.6 80 2 (825) 7.5 82 2 (825) 7.5 85 2 (848) 4.8 86 5 (933) 10.0 92 5 (950) 9.9

70 – 86 4 (733) 2.5 86 3 (781) 4.0 90 5 (862) 3.7 – – – –

AC(days) – 70 – 73

70 – 73

70 – 73 63 – 68 63 – 68 63 – 68 60 – 63

OGR – 10.24

10.91 12.06 13.41 13.80 15.2 15.43

Table 19. Measurements of length (mm), body weight (mg) and growth rate (mg/day) of F1 hatchlings of L.mauritii kept in different PSR doses of partly

decomposed organic mixture upto their clitellum formation.

The first value of PSR columns represents the length (Mean S.D.) of 12 worms; Values in parenthesis indicate mean weight of 12 worms; Values in bold

letters indicate growth rate arrived on the basis of previous body weigh values; AC = Appearance of Clitellum; OGR = Overall Growth Rate.

86

Days 0 PSR

10 PSR

20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR

75 PSR

100 PSR

0 11 1 (13) 14 1 (16) 13 1 (19) 13 1 (19) 13 1 (20) 14 1 (20) 14 8 (20) 14 1 (21)

10 14 3 (90) 7.7

20 1 (166) 15.0 21 1 (175) 15.6 21 1 (183) 16.4 22 2 (191) 17.1 23 1 (191) 17.1 25 1 (201) 18.1 25 1 (208) 18.7

20 18 3 (178) 8.8 33 2 (266) 10.0 35 0 (291) 11.6 35 1 (316) 13.3 36 2 (333) 14.2 37 4 (350) 15.9 38 3 (370) 16.9 45 5 (375) 16.7

30 7 2 (6) – 17.2 43 2 (350) 8.4 45 1 (416) 12.5 45 2 (445) 12.9 47 3 (475) 14.2 49 1 (501) 15.1 49 2 (516) 14.6 56 4 (541) 16.6

40 Died 47 1 (416) 6.6 50 3 (625) 20.9 50 1 (641) 19.6 54 2 (666) 19.1 55 2 (691) 19.0 57 1 (708) 19.2 60 4 (733) 19.2

50 – 52 1 (483) 6.7 56 2 (775) 15.0 56 2 (816) 17.5 60 4 (833) 16.7 63 1 (850) 15.9 64 3 (858) 15.0 65 3 (875) 14.2

60 – 68 2 (550) 6.7 69 2 (833) 5.8 70 2 (858) 4.2 74 2 (866) 3.3 74 2 (916) 6.6 77 2 (925) 6.7 79 3 (950) 7.5

70 – 74 1 (750) 20.0 76 3 (916) 8.3 78 2 (933) 7.5 – – – – AC(days) – 70 – 78 70 – 76 70 – 74 63 – 68 63 – 68 60 – 66 60 – 65

OGR – 10.48 12.31 13.05 14.10 14.93 15.08 15.48

Table 15. Measurements of length (mm), body weight (mg) and growth rate (mg/day) of F1 hatchlings of L.mauritii kept in different PSR doses of

partly decomposed paddy waste upto their clitellum formation.

The first value of PSR columns represents the length (Mean S.D.) of 12 worms; Values in parenthesis indicate mean weight of 12 worms; Values in

bold letters indicate growth rate arrived on the basis of previous body weight values; AC = Appearance of Clitellum; OGR = Overall Growth Rate.

82

Days

0 PSR 10 PSR 20 PSR 30 PSR 40 PSR 50 PSR 75 PSR 100 PSR

0 1 1 (13) 13 1 (16) 13 1 (16) 13 1 (17) 13 1 (16) 13 1 (16) 13 1 (17) 14 2 (18)

10 22 2 (61) 4.8 21 1 (166) 15.0 13 1 (166) 15.0 22 1 (160) 14.3 23 1 (60) 14.4 24 1 (183) 16.7 25 1 (190) 17.3 25 1 (204) 18.6

20 33 2 (93) 3.2 32 2 (266) 10.0 34 1 (266) 10.0 35 1 (275) 11.5 36 2 (281) 12.1 38 2 (291) 10.8 38 4 (308) 11.8 45 3 (333) 12.9

30 17 5 (14) –7.9 42 1 (437) 17.1 44 1 (441) 17.5 44 2 (454) 17.9 47 3 (462) 18.1 50 2 (483) 19.2 52 2 (508) 20.0 55 3 (516) 18.3

40 Died 46 2 (626) 18.9 51 3 (633) 19.2 50 1 (645) 19.1 56 2 (666) 20.4 56 2 (666) 18.3 57 1 (691) 18.3 61 4 (708) 19.2

50 – 46 3 (741) 11.5 55 1 (750) 11.7 56 2 (764) 11.9 61 4 (785) 11.9 64 1 (808) 14.2 63 3 (833) 14.2 66 3 (858) 15.0

60 – 65 1 (833) 9.2 69 2 (841) 9.1 70 2 (858) 9.4 74 2 (866) 8.1 76 2 (891) 8.3 79 3 (958) 12.5 79 3 (960) 10.2

70 – 73 1 (883) 5.0 74 2 (900) 5.9 78 3 (916) 5.8 – – – –

AC(days) – 72 – 78 70 – 75 70 – 75 60 – 67 60 – 67 60 – 67 60 – 63

OGR – 12.38 12.62 12.84 14.16 14.58 15.68 15.70

Table 17. Measurements of length (mm), body weight (mg) and growth rate (mg/day) of F1 hatchlings of L.mauritii kept in different PSR doses of

partly decomposed cow dung upto their clitellum formation.



84

Days

0 PSR

10 PSR

20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR

75 PSR

100PSR

0 9 1 (14) 13 1 (17) 13 1 (18) 14 1 (18) 14 1 (18) 14 1 (20) 14 1 (18) 15 1 (18)

10 15 2 (128) 11.4 24 1 (166) 14.9 22 1 (166) 14.8 23 1 (191) 17.3 24 2 (200) 18.2 25 1 (208) 18.8 24 1 (191) 17.3 23 1 (175) 15.7

20 19 2 (178 ) 5.0 33 2 (233) 6.7 33 2 (250) 8.4 44 1 (266) 7.5 43 4 (283) 8.3 46 3 (325) 11.7 42 2 (291) 10.0 33 1 (266) 9.1

30 0. 8 1 (6) – 17.2 41 1 (375) 14.2 46 3 (423) 17.3 51 1 (433) 16.7 53 3 (458) 17.5 57 3 (491) 16.6 46 5 (450) 15.9 41 2 (433) 16.7

40 Died

47 2 (458) 8.3 55 2 (583) 16.0 58 2 (600) 16.7 63 2 (620) 16.2 66 2 (633) 14.2 61 3 (610) 16.0 56 3 (608) 17.5

50 – 55 1 (566) 10.8 62 1 (683) 10.0 69 2 (791) 19.1 74 1 (812) 19.2 77 3 (816) 18.3 70 5 (800) 19.0 63 2 (787) 17.9

60 – 65 1 (633) 6.7 67 2 (833) 15.0 73 2 (916) 12.5 77 2 (933) 12.1 78 2 (941) 12.5 75 4 (925) 12.5 72 2 (920) 13.3

70 – 74 2 (741) 10.8 73 2 (908) 7.5 77 2 (920) 0.4 – –

–

–

80 – 78 1 (791) 5.0 –

–

–

–

–

–

AC(days) – 71 – 80 70 – 73

70 – 72 63 – 69 62 – 67 62 – 67 62 – 67

OGR – 9.67 12.71 12.88 15.25 15.35 15.11 15.03

Table 20. Measurements of length (mm), body weight (mg) and growth rate (mg/day) of F1 hatchlings of P.excavatus kept in different PSR doses of

partly decomposed organic mixture upto thier clitellum formation.


bold letters indicate growth rate arrived on the basis of previous body weight values; AC = Appearance of Clitellum; OGR = Overall Growth Rate; *

Measurements were made only in 11 hatchlings.

87

Days 0 PSR* 10 PSR 20 PSR 30 PSR 40 PSR 50 PSR 75 PSR 100 PSR

0 10 1 (4) 14 1 (5) 14 1 (5) 13 1 (5) 14 1 (6) 14 1 (5) 13 1 (6) 12 1 (6)

10 14 2 (14) 1.0 24 1 (150) 14.5 25 1 (175) 17.0 23 1 (191) 18.6 24 2 (200) 19.4 25 1 (200) 19.5 25 0 (225) 21.9 24 2 (237) 23.1

20 21 3 (152) 13.8 32 1 (358) 20.8 33 1 (358) 18.3 36 2 (375) 18.4 35 3 (391) 19.1 38 4 (416) 21.6 48 1 (470) 24.5 48 1 (483) 24.6

30 9 2 (25) – 12.7 42 1 (391) 3.3 45 1 (400) 4.2 47 1 (416) 4.1 56 2 (433) 4.2 57 1 (458 ) 4.2 77 4 (641) 17.1 79 3 (658) 17.5

40 Died

57 1 (450) 5.9 64 2 (458 ) 5.8 70 2 (608) 19.2 71 3 (625) 19.2 74 3 (641) 18.3 – –

50 – 68 1 (600) 15.0 68 1 (600) 14.2 – – – – –

AC(days) – 50 – 55 50 – 55 40 – 47 40 – 45 40 – 45 30 – 38 30 – 35

OGR OGR – 11.90 11.90 15.07 15.47 15.90 21.16 21.73


partly decomposed paddy waste upto thier clitellum formation.


bold letters indicate growth rate arrived on the basis of previous body weight values; AC = Appearance of Clitellum; OGR = Overall Growth Rate; *

Measurements were made only in 7 hatchlings.

83

Days 0 PSR* 10 PSR 20 PSR 30 PSR 40 PSR 50 PSR 75 PSR 100 PSR

0 7 1 (2)

11 1 (3) 11 1 (3) 11 1 (3) 11 1 (3) 11 1 (3) 11 1 (4) 13 1 (4)

10 16 1 (8) 0.6

20 1 (116) 8.0 22 1 (118) 11.5 23 1 (120) 11.7 24 1 (125) 12.2 25 1 (133) 13.0 27 1 (133) 12.9 28 1 (141) 13.7

20 24 1 (12) 0.4

31 1 (175) 5.9 34 1 (191) 7.3 40 3 (216) 9.6 47 1 (233 ) 10.8 53 2 (258) 12.5 53 3 (300) 16.7 56 5 (316) 17.5

30 7 1 (4) – 0.8

43 2 (416) 24.1 46 2 (450) 25.9 53 1 (466) 25.0 57 2 (558 ) 32.5 75 1 (600) 34.2 75 3 (616) 31.6 75 3 (625) 30.9

40 Died 48 3 (466) 5.0 52 2 (479) 2.5 72 2 (491) 2.5 74 2 ( 583 ) 2.5 – – –

50 – 59 3 (479) 1.3

68 1 (483 ) 4.0 – – – – –

AC(days) – 50 – 5 8 50 – 55 40 – 45 40 – 45 30 – 35 30 – 35 30 – 35

OGR – 9.52 9.60 12.20 14.50 19.90 20.40 20.70


partly decomposed water hyacinth upto their clitellum formation.



81

Days 0 PSR

10 PSR

20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR

75 PSR

100 PSR

0 13 0 (3) 13 1 (5) 14 1 (5) 14 1 (5) 15 1 (5) 14 1 (7) 14 1 (7) 15 1 (7)

10 17 2 (4) 0.1

23 2 (91) 8.6 21 1 (110) 10.5 21 2 (112) 10.7 21 1 (120) 11.5 22 1 (120) 11.3 26 2 (133) 12.6 26 2 (150) 14.3

20 20 5 (40) 3.6

32 1 (141) 5.0 32 2 (175 ) 6.5 33 2 (191) 7.9 35 1 (208) 8.8 34 1 (233) 11.3 45 2 (316) 18.3 51 5 (333) 18.3

30 13 13 5 (14) – 2.6

45 2 (229) 8.8 44 3 (250) 7.5 47 1 (275) 8.4 51 3 (291) 8.3 55 1 (291) 5.8 72 4 (625) 30.9 74 2 (650) 31.7

40 Died 61 1 (470) 24.1 58 3 (500) 25.0 65 5 (591) 31.6 70 3 (604) 31.3 70 4 (616) 32.5 – –

50 –

-- 63 1 (533) 6.3 65 2 (541) 4.1 –

–

–

–

–

CF( AC(days) – 50 – 55 50 – 55 40 – 46 40 – 46 40 – 46 30 – 35 30 – 35

OGR – 10.56 10.72 14.65 14.97 15.22 20.60 21.43

Table 18.Measurements of length (mm), body weight (mg) and growth rate (mg/day) of F1 hatchlings of P.excavatus kept in different PSR doses of

partly decomposed cow dung upto thier clitellum formation.

The first value of PSR columns represents the length (Mean S.D.) of 12 worms; Values in parenthesis indicate mean weight of 12 worms; Values

in bold letters indicate growth rate arrived on the basis of previous body weight values; AC = Appearance of Clitellum; OGR = Overall Growth Rate;

* Measurements were made only in 11 hatchlings.

85

Days 0PSR* 10 PSR 20 PSR 30 PSR 40 PSR 50 PSR 75 PSR 100 PSR

0 11 1 (4) 13 1 (5) 13 1 (5) 13 1 (5) 13 1 (6) 14 1 (5) 14 1 (6) 13 1 (6)

10 21 1 (10) 0.6 22 1 (120) 11.5 23 2 (145) 14.0 22 1 (162) 15.7 23 1 (166) 16.0 25 1 (176) 17.1 25 1 (183) 17.7 27 1 (186) 18.0

20 31 2 (15) 0.5 32 2 (208) 8.8 32 1 (231) 8.6 35 1 (291) 12.9 35 2 (316) 15.0 47 1 (350) 17.4

47 1 (370) 18.7 48 1 (375) 18.9

30 12 2 (9) – 0.6 41 1 (391) 18.3 43 2 (420) 18.9 55 3 (516) 22.5 55 1 (525) 20.9 77 1 (616) 26.6 77 3 (633) 26.3 78 2 (650) 27.5

40 Died 5 59 1 (470) 10.5 63 2 (490) 7.0 71 3 (587) 7.1 73 4 (600) 7.5 – – –

50 – 66 1 (576) 10.5 67 1 (583) 9.3 – – – – –

AC(days) – 50 – 58 50 – 56 40 – 47 40 – 45 30 – 35 30 – 35 30 – 35

OGR – 11.42 11.56 14.55 14.85 20.36 20.90 21.46

67

Table 5. Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time (IT) and the body weight (gm) change of adult L.mauritii kept in

different per cent substrate ratio (PSR) doses of partly decomposed water hyacinth for 30 days.

Period 0 PSR 10 PSR 20 PSR 30 PSR 40 PSR 50 PSR 75 PSR 100 PSR

Initial – (0) 65 – (0) 67 – (0) 65 – (0) 66 – (0) 71 – (0) 66 – (0) 65 – (0) 69

After 6 day 0 (0) 66 0 (0) 67 0 (0) 65 0 (0) 66 0 (0) 74 0 (0) 67 0 (0) 62 0 (0) 68

After12 day 0.5 0.3 (3) 68 1.1 0.5 (7) 69 1.5 0.6 (9) 67 2.1 1.3 (13) 68 2.5 0.9 (15) 73 3.8 1.3 (23) 68 4.1 1.3 (25) 67 4.6 1.3 (28) 80

After18 day 0.8 0.6 (5) 67 3.6 0.9 (21) 69 4.1 0.9 (25) 69 6.6 2.9 (40) 75 7.3 1.4 (44) 76 8.0 2.1 (48) 72 10.0 2.9 (60) 77 11.0 2.7 (66) 72

After 24 day 0.1 0.3 (1) 52 3.5 1.1 (21) 66 4.3 0.7 (26) 66 5.1 0.9 (31) 73 10.0 1.5 (60) 80 17.3 2.2 (104) 70 19.3 3.7 (116) 67 20.0 3.4 (121) 73

After 30 day 0.5 0.6 (3) 58 2.1 1.3 (13) 64 3.5 0.5 (21) 60 5.1 1.4 (31) 68 15.3 2.2 (92) 68 25.8 5.2 (155) 71 29.0 4.0 (174) 68 31.1 3.5 (187) 74

TC PWC (12 ) – 10.8 (62 ) – 4.4 (81) b – 7.6 (115) b + 3.0 (211) a – 4.2 (330) c + 7.5 (375) d + 4.6 (402) e + 7.2

C/W/D 0.006 0.028 0.037 0.052 0.097 0.152 0.173 0.186

TH 8 50 76 97 188 305 361 408

HC

UC

UC 8 4 50 12 72 9 93 22 186 25 299 31 345 30 374 28

PHS 66.7 80.6 88.9 80.9 88.2 90.6 92.0 93.0

IT (days) 10 – 13 20 – 23 20 – 23 20 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 –

23 21 – 23

H/C 0.67 0.81 0.94 0.84 0.89 0.92 0.96 1.01

Values in front of brackets are Mean S.D. of cocoons collected from 6 pots; Values in brackets are total cocoons collected from 72 earthworms kept in

6 pots; Values in bold letters are total body weight of 72 earthworms; TC = Total Cocoons; PWC = Per cent Weight Change;

C/W/D = Cocoon/Worm/Day; TH = Total Hatchlings; HC = Hatched Cocoons; UC = Unhatched Cocoons; PHS = Per cent Hatching Success;

H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon; Out of total cocoons collected, a, b, c, d and e represents 2, 4, 6, 16 and 34 cocoons respectively produced 2 hatchlings/cocoon

while hatching.

68

Table 6. Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time (IT) and the body weight (gm) change of adult P.excavatus kept in

different PSR doses of partly decomposed water hyacinth for 30 days.


Initial – (0) 75 – (0) 79 – (0) 76 – (0) 78 – (0) 73 – (0) 76 – (0) 73 – (0) 78

After 6 day 0 (0) 77 0 (0) 80 0 (0) 76 0 (0) 78 0 (0) 73 0 (0) 77 0 (0) 73 0 (0) 79

After 12 day 0.6 0.3 (4) 77 1.1 0.5 (7) 80 1.6 0.8 (10) 78 2.0 0.8 (12) 78 2.0 0.6 (12) 79 3.0 1.0 (18) 80 3.5 0.9 (21) 77 3.8 1.1 (23) 82

After 18 day 1.1 0.5 (7) 76 2.3 0.9 (14) 79 3.3 0.9 (20) 76 4.6 3.1 (28) 77 4.5 1.5 (27) 78 6.3 1.4 (38) 82 6.6 1.2 (40) 80 8.5 1.8 (51) 85

After 24 day 6.3 0.3 (2) 72 2.0 1.0 (12) 76 2.6 1.1 (16) 74 5.0 0.9 (30) 77 6.0 0.5 (36) 79 5.8 1.5 (35) 85 7.0 1.9 (42) 83 8.5 0.1 (51) 88

After 30 day 0 (0) 66 0 (0) 70 0 (0) 71 1.0 0.8 (6) 72 2.5 0.9 (15) 77 3.6 1.1 (22) 83 4.6 1.7 (27) 84 5.6 2.1 (34) 87

TC PWC (13) – 12.0 (33) – 11.3 (46) – 6.5 (76) – 7.6 (90) + 5.4 (113) + 9.2 (130) + 15.1 (159) + 11.5

C/W/D 0.006 0.015 0.021 0.035 0.041 0.052 0.060 0.073

TH 13 33 46 76 90 111 130 159

HC UC 13 0 33 0 46 0 76 0 90 0 111 2 130 0 159 0

PHS 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 98.2 100.0 100.0

IT (days) 10 – 11 10 – 13 10 – 13 10 – 13 17 – 18 17 – 18 17 – 18 17 – 18

H/C 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00




H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon.

69


different PSR doses of partly decomposed paddy waste for 30 days.


Initial – (0) 62 – (0) 63 – (0) 58 – (0) 69 – (0) 78 – (0) 89 – (0) 87 – (0) 88

After 6 day 0 (0) 64 0 (0) 64 0 (0) 65 0 (0) 73 0 (0) 79 0 (0) 92 0 (0) 88 0 (0) 88

After 12 day 1.0 0.7 (6) 64 0.6 0.6 (4) 65 0.8 0.5 (5) 66 0.8 0.5 (5) 75 1.1 0.5 (7) 80 1.6 0.4 (10) 90 2.8 0.1 (17) 87 1.6 0.4 (10) 87

After 18 day 0.6 0.9 (4) 63 2.0 0.8 (12) 64 2.8 1.0 (17) 63 3.1 0.3 (19) 74 4.3 1.3 (26) 80 5.3 1.1 (32) 89 7.1 1.2 (43) 88 5.6 1.1 (34) 86

After 24 day 0.3 0.4 (2) 61 4.0 1.2 (24) 63 5.1 1.0 (31) 62 6.1 1.0 (37) 73 7.6 1.4 (46) 80 9.0 1.2 (54) 88 11.3 0.7 (68) 86 9.1 1.5 (55) 87

After 30 day 0 (0) 60 2.5 1.2 (15) 61 3.0 1.2 (18) 59 4.3 1.4 (26) 68 9.6 1.2 (58) 78 11.0 1.2 (66) 87 14.6 0.7 (88) 86 12.3 1.3 (74) 86

TC PWC (12) – 3.2 (55) a – 3.1 (71) + 1.7 (87) – 1.4 (137) 0.0 (162) – 2.2 (216) b – 1.1 (173)b – 2.2

C/W/D 0.006 0.025 0.032 0.040 0.063 0.073 0.100 0.073

TH 12 56 70 86 135 159 230 183

HC UC 12 0 52 3 70 1 86 1 135 2 159 3 216 0 169 4

PHS 100.0 94.5 98.6 98.9 98.5 98.1 100.0 97.7

IT (days) 9 – 11 10 – 12 10 – 13 10 – 14 20 – 23 20 – 23 20 – 23 20 – 25

H/C 1.00 1.02 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 1.06 1.06




H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon; Out of total cocoons collected, a and b represents 4 and 14 cocoons respectively produced 2 hatchlings/cocoon while hatching.

70


different PSR doses of partly decomposed paddy waste for 30 days.


Initial – (0) 69 – (0) 73 – (0) 78 – (0) 77 – (0) 68 – (0) 67 – (0) 69 – (0) 70

After 6 day 0 (0) 68 0 (0) 72 0 (0) 77 0 (0) 77 0 (0) 68 0 (0) 68 0 (0) 70 0 (0) 72

After 12 day 1.1 0.5 (7) 71 2.0 0.5 (12) 75 3.0 0.8 (18) 80 3.3 0.7 (20) 79 3.6 0.9 (22) 78 4.3 1.1 (26) 71 5.3 1.2 (32) 74 6.0 1.9 (36) 74

After 18 day 0 (0) 70 2.8 0.8 (17) 75 3.8 0.6 (23) 80 5.6 2.2 (34) 82 7.3 1.2 (44) 74 7.8 2.4 (47) 74 9.6 3.0 (58) 78 11.8 2.7 (71) 77

After 24 day 0 (0) 53 0.6 0.6 (4) 70 2.5 0.7 (15) 74 6.6 1.2 (40) 78 8.0 2.7 (48) 76 8.3 0.7 (50) 77 9.1 2.2 (55) 78 10.8 1.5 (65) 81

After 30 day 0 (0) 55 0 (0) 64 0.6 0.6 (4) 70 2.8 1.6 (17) 76 4.8 1.5 (29) 75 5.1 1.6 (31) 76 5.8 1.2 (35) 78 6.3 2.2 (38) 80

TC PWC (7) – 20.3 (33) – 12.3 (60) – 10.3 (111) – 10.3 (143) + 10.3 (154) + 13.8 (180) b + 13.1 (210) a + 14.3

C/W/D 0.003 0.015 0.027 0.051 0.066 0.071 0.083 0.097

TH 7 33 59 111 143 154 187 213

HC UC 7 0 33 0 59 1 111 0 143 0 154 0 179 1 207 3

PHS 100.0 100.0 98.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.4 98.6

IT (days) 9 – 10 9 – 10 9 –

10 9 – 10 17 – 18 17 – 18 17 –

18 17 – 18

H/C 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.01





71


different PSR doses of partly decomposed cow dung for 30 days.


Initial – (0) 68 – (0) 65 – (0) 57 – (0) 56 – (0) 63 – (0) 67 – (0) 80 – (0) 68

After 6 day 0 (0) 68 0.5 0.3 (3) 68 0.5 0.3 (3) 62 0.1 0.3 (1) 72 0 (0) 79 0.8 1.0 (5) 92 0.5 0.3 (3) 89 0 (0) 90

After 12 day 0.6 0.6 (4) 64 1.8 1.0 (11) 65 2.6 1.1 (16) 58 2.8 1.3 (17) 69 3.1 0.6 (19) 78 4.0 0.8 (24) 91 3.1 1.0 (19) 87 3.0 1.2 (18) 87

After 18 day 1.3 0.5 (8) 61 4.0 1.9 (24) 61 5.8 0.9 (32) 57 6.3 1.3 (38) 67 7.1 0.9 (43) 78 9.3 1.7 (56) 94 6.5 1.5 (39) 90 6.5 1.3 (39) 84

After 24 day 0.6 0.9 (4) 69 4.3 0.9 (26) 58 6.3 2.1 (38) 55 7.8 2.6 (47) 67 12.0 1.6 (72) 79 13.0 2.7 (78) 95 10.3 1.5 (62) 93 9.8 2.1 (59) 84

After 30 day 0 (0) 52 1.8 1.1 (11) 53 2.6 1.1 (16) 53 7.1 1.8 (43) 71 11.3 1.8 (68) 81 14.6 2.8 (88) 97 9.5 2.6 (57) 94 9.1 1.5 (55) 88

TC PWC (16) – 23.5 (75) – 18.5 (105) – 7.0 (146) a + 26.8 (202) a + 28.6 (251) d + 44.8 (180) b + 17.5 (171) c + 29.4

C/W/D 0.007 0.034 0.048 0.067 0.093 0.116 0.083 0.079

TH 16 72 100 139 193 270 181 170

HC UC 16 0 72 3 100 5 137 9 191 11 249 2 177 3 162 9

PHS 100.0 96.0 95.2 93.8 94.6 99.2 98.3 94.7

IT (days) 10 – 12 10 – 12 11 – 14 15 – 17 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23

H/C 1.00 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.96 1.08 1.01 0.99



C/W/D = Cocoon/Worm/Day; TH = Total Hatchlings; HC = Hatched Cocoons; Unhatched Cocoons; PHS = Per cent Hatching Success;

H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon; Out of total cocoons collected, a, b, c and d represents 2, 4, 8 and 21 cocoons respectively produced 2 hatchlings/cocoon while

hatching.

72


different PSR doses of partly decomposed cow dung for 30 days.


Initial – (0) 70 – (0) 73 – (0) 78 – (0) 82 – (0) 76 – (0) 76 – (0) 94 – (0) 83

After 6 day 0 (0) 71 0 (0) 76 0 (0) 78 0 (0) 83 0 (0) 75 0 (0) 71 0 (0) 75 0 (0) 83

After 12 day 0.5 0.4 (3) 74 1.3 0.5 (8) 79 1.8 0.5 (11) 81 2.5 1.1 (15) 85 3.1 1.3 (19) 78 3.0 1.0 (18) 80 3.6 0.4 (22) 78 4.3 1.5 (26) 87

After 18 day 0.1 0.3 (1) 73 1.8 0.6 (11) 74 3.1 0.6 (19) 75 4.1 1.4 (25) 81 6.0 1.4 (36) 79 6.6 1.7 (40) 82 7.5 0.5 (45) 81 9.0 1.5 (54) 88

After 24 day 1.1 0.6 (7) 62 2.1 0.3 (13) 64 3.0 1.0 (18) 56 5.0 1.7 (30) 75 6.3 0.7 (38) 77 7.5 1.8 (45) 79 8.3 1.9 (50) 81 11.3 0.9 (68) 87

After 30 day 0 (0) 53 0.5 0.3 (3) 55 1.0 0.5 (6) 63 3.1 1.7 (19) 59 4.3 1.5 (26) 73 6.3 1.5 (38) 77 6.8 0.6 (41) 80 9.1 1.6 (55) 89

TC PWC (11) _

– 24.3 (35) – 24.7 (54) – 19.2 (89) a – 28.0 (119) _

– 3.9 (141) + 1.3 (158) b – 14.9 (203) c + 7.2

C/W/D 0.005 0.016 0.025 0.041 0.055 0.065 0.073 0.093

TH 11 35 54 91 117 141 162 225

HC UC 11 0 35 0 54 0 89 0 117 2 141 0 158 0 203 0

PHS 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 98.3 100.0 100.0 100.0

IT (days) 10 – 11 10 – 11 10 – 11 10 – 11 17 – 18 17 – 18 17 – 18 17 – 18

H/C 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.02 0.98 1.00 1.03 1.11




H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon; Out of total cocoons collected, a, b and c represents 2, 4 and 22 cocoons respectively produced 2 hatchlings/cocoon while

hatching.

73


different PSR doses of partly decomposed organic mixture for 30 days.




H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon; Out of total cocoons collected, a, b, c and d represents 2, 8, 16 and 30 cocoons respectively produced 2 hatchlings/cocoon

while hatching.


Initial – (0) 73 – (0) 67 – (0) 68 – (0) 66 – (0) 71 – (0) 67 – (0) 67 – (0) 70

After 6 day 0 (0) 74 0 (0) 69 0 (0) 70 0 (0) 67 0 (0) 72 0 (0) 69 0 (0) 68 0 (0) 71

After 12 day 1.0 0.7 (6) 76 2.0 0.9 (12) 70 2.3 1.3 (14) 71 3.3 1.5 (20) 69 4.3 2.1 (26) 74 5.3 2.1 (32) 70 6.5 1.8 (39) 71 8.0 1.5 (48) 73

After 18 day 1.1 0.3 (7) 75 3.6 0.4 (22) 70 5.5 1.7 (33) 72 8.0 1.0 (48) 69 9.8 2.2 (59) 76 12.1 2.1 (73) 72 15.8 2.1 (95) 72 19.6 3.3 (118) 76

After 24 day 0.8 0.7 (5) 72 3.3 0.7 (20) 66 6.1 1.5 (37) 68 8.8 1.4 (53) 68 11.3 0.9 (68) 78 16.0 1.1 (76) 75 22.3 2.4 (134) 75 25.1 4.2 (151) 79

After 30 day 0 (0) 64 0.8 0.5 (5) 60 3.3 0.9 (20) 63 5.6 1.6 (34) 65 9.6 1.1 (58) 78 15.5 2.6 (93) 77 21.1 5.1 (127) 77 25.0 5.8 (150) 80

TC PWC (18) – 12.3 (59) a – 10.4 (104) – 7.4 (155) a – 1.5 (211) b + 9.9 (274) c + 14.9 (395) c + 14.9 (467) d + 14.3

C/W/D 0.008 0.027 0.048 0.071

.

0.097 0.126 0.182 0.216

TH 18 61 102 152 213 287 402 486

HC UC 18 0 59 0 102 2 150 5 205 6 271 3 386 9 456 11

PHS 100.0 100.0 98.0 96.8 97.2 98.9 97.7 97.6

IT (days) 10 – 11 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23 21 – 23

H/C 1.00 1.03 0.98 0.98 1.01 1.05 1.02 1.04

74


different PSR doses of partly decomposed organic mixture for 30 days.






Initial 0 (0) 62 – (0) 69 – (0) 77 – (0) 76 – (0) 68 – (0) 82 – (0) 69 – (0) 80

After 6 day 0 (0) 58 0 (0) 71 0 (0) 92 0 (0) 78 0 (0) 70 0 (0) 85 0 (0) 71 0 (0) 81

After 12 day 0.6 0.6 (4) 59 1.3 0.5 (8) 73 2.0 0.8 (12) 68 1.6 0.6 (10) 80 2.1 1.0 (13) 72 2.8 0.7 (17) 86 3.3 1.3 (20) 76 3.6 1.2 (22) 90

After 18 day 1.1 1.2 (7) 58 2.8 0.6 (17) 74 4.3 1.3 (26) 80 5.0 1.2 (30) 81 6.0 1.7 (36) 73 7.0 2.1 (42) 88 7.6 1.3 (46) 80 8.5 1.2 (51) 93

After 24 day 0 (0) 56 0.6 0.6 (4) 72 1.8 0.9 (11) 80 3.0 0.7 (18) 81 6.0 1.5 (36) 75 6.8 1.6 (41) 89 8.0 1.4 (48) 82 9.6 1.1 (58) 95

After 30 day 0 (0) 53 0 (0) 70 0.6 0.6 (4) 77 2.1 1.0 (13) 78 4.1 1.9 (25) 74 7.6 1.2 (46) 87 7.3 1.4 (44) 83 9.3 2.1 (59) 95

TC PWC (11) – 14.5 (29) + 1.4 (53) 0. 0 (71) +2.6 (110) + 8.8 (146) a + 6.1 (158) +20.3 (190) b +18.8

C/W/D 0.005 0.013 0.024 0.032 0.050 0.067 0.073 0.087

TH 11 29 51 70 108 150 157 198

HC UC 11 0 29 0 51 2 70 1 108 2 146 0 157 1 190 0

PHS 100.0 100.0 96.2 98.6 98.2 100.0 99.4 100.0

IT (days) 10 – 11 10 – 11 10 –11 10 – 11 16 – 17 16 – 17 16 – 17 16 – 17

H/C 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.98 0.98 1.03 0.99 1.04

92

The values of L.mauritii and P.excavatus are represented in upper and lower rows respectively; BW = Body Weight;

PWG = Per cent Weight Gain; TCP = Total Cocoon Production; C/W/D = Cocoon/Worm/ Day; * 30 days value over respective initial.

Table 21. Body weight (gm) and cocoon production (CP) of 12 mature F1 offsprings (obtained from their adult parents previously

exposed to different PSR doses of partly decomposed water hyacinth for 30 days) of L.mauritii and P.excavatus kept in the same PSR

doses of water hyacinth for 30 days.

Period

10 PSR 20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR 75 PSR 100 PSR

BW

CP

BW

CP

BW

CP

BW CP BW

CP

BW CP BW CP

Initial

9.1 0 9.3 0 9.9 0 10.6 0 12.0 0 12.2 0 13.3 0

6.5 0 7.0 0 7.2 0 7.3 0 7.6 0 7.8 0 8.0 0

After 6 day 9.2 2 9.4 5 10.3 6 10.9 6 12.3 7 12.3 8 13.6 7

6.8 2 7.1 3 7.5 3 7.6 4 7.8 6 7.9 5 8.3 5

After 12 day 9.3 2 9.6 3 10.5 1 11.0 1 12.5 4 12.5 4 13.8 5

7.2 2 7.3 1 7.8 2 7.8 2 8.0 2 8.1 3 8.7 3

After 18 day 9.4 3 9.8 3 10.8 2 11.2 3 12.6 3 12.6 4 14.0 6

7.6 0 7.6 1 8.0 2 8.3 3 8.2 2 8.3 4 9.0 5

After 24 day

9.5 0 10.1 2 11.0 2 11.4 3 12.8 2 12.8 3 14.1 4

8.0 2 7.9 3 8.3 3 8.5 2 8.4 3 8.5 3 9.2 5

After 30 day

9.7 0 10.3 0 11.2 3 11.7 3 12.9 4 13.0 5 14.3 5

8.3 2 8.4 2 8.5 1 8.7 3 8.8 3 9.0 2 9.5 4

PWG*\TCP 6.6 7 10.8 13 13.1 14 10.4 16 7.5

7.5.5

20 6.6 24 7.5 27

27.7 8 20.0 10 18.1 11 19.2 14 15.8 16 15.4 17 18.8 22

C/W/D

0.019 0.036 0.038 0.044 0.055 0.066 0.075

0.022 0.027 0.030 0.038 0.044 0.047 0.061

93

Table 22. Body weight (gm) and cocoon production (CP) of 12 mature F1 offsprings (obtained from their adult parents previously

exposed to different PSR doses of partly decomposed paddy waste for 30 days) of L.mauritii and P.excavatus kept in the same PSR

doses of paddy waste for 30 days.



Period

10 PSR 20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR

75 PSR 100 PSR

BW CP BW CP BW CP BW CP BW CP BW

CP

BW CP

Initial

11.8 0 12.0 0 12.2 0 12.4 0 12.5 0 12.6 0 12.8 0

6.2 0 6.7 0 7.0 0 7.3 0 7.4 0 7.5 0 7.6 0

After 6 day 12.1 5 12.3 5 12.4 5 12.9 9 12.8 9 13.0 12 13.3 12

6.4 3 7.0 5 7.4 6 7.5 6 7.6 8 7.6 11 7.8 13

After12day 12.3 1 12.8 2 13.0 2 13.2 4 13.2 4 13.3 6 13.5 6

6.9 2 7.5 3 7.8 5 7.8 5 8.0 2 7.9 5 8.0 4

After18 day 12.6 2 13.3 3 13.4 4 13.8 5 13.5 6 13.7 4 14.1 5

7.4 3 7.9 4 8.0 4 8.1 3 8.1 4 8.2 4 8.4 7

After24 day

13.0 2 13.5 3 14.0 3 14.2 3 13.9 4 14.0 7 14.6 5

7.9 1 8.1 3 8.3 2 8.3 2 8.4 5 8.6 5 8.7 6

After30 day

13.4 1 13.8 2 14.2 4 14.4 4 14.5 5 14.6 5 14.9 6

8.3 3 8.5 3 8.6 3 8.7 4 8.8 4 8.9 5 9.0 5

PWG*\TCP 13.6 11 15.0 15 16.4 18 16.7 25 16.0 28 15.9 34 16.4 34

33.9 12 26.9 18 22.9 20 19.2 20 18.9 23 18.7 30 18.4 35

C/W/D

0.030 0.041 0.050 0.069 0.077 0.094 0.094

0.033 0.050 0.055 0.055 0.063 0.083 0.097

94

Table 23. Body weight (gm) and cocoon production (CP) of 12 mature F1 offsprings (obtained from their adult parents previously exposed to

different PSR doses of partly decomposed cow dung for 30 days) of L.mauritii and P.excavatus kept in the same PSR doses of cow dung for 30

days.

Period

10 PSR

20 PSR

20 PSR

30 PSR 40 PSR

50 PSR

75 PSR

100 PSR

BW CP BW

CP

BW CP BW

CP

BW CP BW CP BW CP

Initial 11.5 0 11.8 0 12.0 0 12.3 0 12.5 0 12.4 0 12.3 0

6.0 0 6.3 0 6.7 0 7.0 0 7.2 0 7.5 0 7.7 0

After 6 day 11.9 5 12.3 4 12.4 6 12.5 9 12.7 13 12.7 10 12.8 12

6.3 5 6.8 5 6.9 5 7.3 7 7.5 5 7.8 7 7.7 9

After12day 12.3 1 12.5 2 12.7 3 12.9 5 13.2 5 13.0 5 13.2 4

6.7 2 7.1 2 7.0 3 7.7 2 7.9 3 8.1 4 8.3 5

After18day 12.6 2 12.9 4 13.0 3 13.1 4 13.5 4 13.4 5 13.5 5

7.0 0 7.4 2 7.4 2 8.0 3 8.1 5 8.4 6 8.6 5

After24day 12.9 2 13.3 1 13.3 2 13.5 6 13.8 7 13.8 6 13.8 5

7.3 3 7.7 3 7.7 3 8.3 4 8.5 5 8.7 4 8.9 4

After30day 13.3 1 13.6 4 13.8 5 14.0 6 14.5 7 14.3 6 14.2 4

7.7 2 8.1 1 8.2 3 8.5 3 8.8 4 9.0 3 9.3 5

PWG*/TCP 15.7 11 15.3 15 15.0 19 13.8 30 16.0 36 15.3 32 15.4 30

28.3 12 28.6 13 22.4 16 21.4 19 22.2 22 20.0 24 20.8 28

C/W/D

0.030 0.041 0.052 0.083 0.100 0.088 0.083

0.033 0.036 0.044 0.052 0.061 0.066 0.077


PWG = Per cent Weight Gain; TCP = Total Cocoon Production; C/W/D = cocoon/Worm/ Day; * 30 days value over respective initial.

.

95

Table 24. Body weight (gm) and cocoon production (CP) of 12 mature F1 offsprings (obtained from their adult parents previously exposed to

different PSR doses of partly decomposed organic mixture for 30 days) of L.mauritii and P.excavatus kept in the same PSR doses of organic

mixture for 30 days.



Period

10 PSR

20 PSR

30 PSR

40 PSR

50 PSR 75 PSR

100 PSR

BW CP BW

CP

BW

CP

BW CP BW

CP

CP

BW

CP

BW CP

Initial

11.1 0 11.5 0 12.0 0 12.4 0 12.5 0 12.8 0 13.0 0

6.1 0 6.5 0 7.0 0 7.3 0 7.5 0 7.8 0 8.1 0

After 6 day 11.4 3 11.7 5 12.3 5 12.8 7 12.9 8 13.1 10 13.4 11

6.4 5 6.7 5 7.3 6 7.5 7 7.7 7 8.0 7 8.4 9

After 12day 11.7 0 12.0 2 12.6 3 13.1 2 13.2 3 13.4 5 13.8 6

6.7 1 7.0 2 7.6 3 7.6 3 8.0 3 8.3 4 8.7 4

After 18 day 11.9 3 12.3 4 13.0 2 13.4 5 13.5 5 13.7 6 14.2 7

6.9 3 7.2 2 7.9 2 7.7 4 8.2 4 8.6 3 9.1 5

After 24 day

2.2 2 12.5 1 13.3 4 13.7 4 13.8 6 14.1 5 14.6 5

7.2 2 7.5 3 8.2 2 8.0 2 8.5 3 8.8 4 9.5 6

After 30 day

12.5 4 12.8 2 13.5 3 14.1 6 14.3 7 14.6 6 14.9 8

7.3 0 7.7 2 8.5 2 8.4 2 8.9 2 9.3 3 9.7 3

PWG*\TCP

12.6 12 11.3 14 12.5 17 13.7 24 14.4 29 14.1 32 14. 6 37

19.7 11 18.5 14 21.4 15 15.1 18 18.7 19 19.2 21 19.8 27

C/W/D

0.033 0.038 0.047 0066 0.080 0.088 0.102

0.030 0.038 0.041 0.050 0.052 0.058 0.075

33

Table 4. Review of research papers published in the cultivation studies with different plants using composts and vermicomposts of organic matters

obtained from different sources.

Species used Substrate composition Cultivation type/ plant used Observations made Author(s)

–

Compost of municipal

solid waste and biosolids

Lab study of ivy leaf morning glory,

barnyard grass, common purslane

and corn seeds germination

Germination time, root growth and

germination index

Hampton et al.

(1999)

E.eugeniae

Vermicompost of sugar

cane press mud,

biodigested slurry, coir

pith, cow dung and mixture

of weeds

Pot and field cultivation of rice and

black gram Growth and yield

Jeyabal and

Kuppuswamy

(2001)

E.eugeniae

Vermicompost of press

mud and NPK

Field cultivation of black gram and

ground nut

Germination, leaf area, shoot and

root length, shoot and root weight,

root nodules, chlorophyll, sugar

and protein content of leaf, shoot

and root, and yield

Parthasarathi and

Ranganathan (2002)

E.fetida

Vermicompost of tannery

sludge with saw dust, card

board and wheat straw

Pot cultivation of maize, rape,

sunflower and oat

Stem + leaves, roots, shoots, grain

and straw weight

Gondek and Filipek

- Mazur

(2003)

Table 4: Contd….

34


E.fedita

P.excavatus

D.bolaui

Vermicompost of forest

litters of T.grandis (teak),

M.indica (mahua) and

B.monosperma (palas)

Field cultivation of Tectona grandia

(forest tree)

Growth characteristics Manna et al. (2003)

–

Sandy clay loam soil,

poultry manure, sewage

sludge, urban compost,

farm yard manure and

NPK

Field cultivation of ground nut

Number of pegs/plant, total

number of pods/plant, mature

pods/plant, pod yield/plant, kernal

weight, pod, haulm and kernal

yield and harvest index

Ananda et al.

(2004a)

–

Sandy clay loam soil, farm

yard manure, poultry

manure, recommended

NPK, urban compost,

enriched urban compost

and sewage sludge

Field cultivation of ground nut

Plant height, number of pods/

plants, pod yield/plant, total dry

matter, and number of

nodules/plant

Ananda et al.

(2004b)

L.mauritii

Vermicompost of paddy

chaff and weed plants

materials

Pot cultivation of radish

Shoot height, root height, total

height, shoot weight, root weight

and total weight

Bakthavathsalam and

Geetha (2004c)

– Sandy clay loam soil, farm

yard manure and NPK Field cultivation of potato

Dry matter production, tuber

bulking rate and tuber yield

Chettri and Thapa

(2004)

Table 4: Contd….

35


P.excavatus

O.phillotti

O.rosea

Vermicompost of rice

straw

Pot cultivation of sorghum

Plant height, root length, number

of leaves, leaf area, shoot biomass

and root biomass

Vikram Reddy and

Ohkura (2004)

–

Sandy loam soil, farm yard

manure, coir pith compost,

vermicompost and

Asospirillum*

Field cultivation of tomato Biological properties of soil and

fruit yield/plant Kannan et al. (2005)

E.fetida

Vermicompost of cow

dung, silk worm rearing

wastes, farm refuse, weeds,

mulberry leaves

Field cultivation of mulberry

Leaf yield, plant height, number of

effective branches, average

number of leaves/plant and

average leaf area

Sinha et al. (2005)

O.tyrtaeum Litters of grass, maize and

wheat with earthworm

Pot cultivation of maize, barley and

wheat Shoot and root weight Bisht et al. (2006)

–

Alluvium soil, NPK,

Rhizobium,* cow dung

and vermicompost

Pot cultivation of black gram

Shoot and root length, fresh

weight, water content of roots,

shoot and leaves, number of

leaves/plant, number of lateral

roots and root nodules, total

flowers, pods and seeds, seed

protein, chlorophyll and carotenoid

content

Bakthavathsalam and

Deivanayaki (2007)

Table 4: Contd….

36


–

Red soil, poultry manure,

farm yard manure,

vermicompost and sewage

sludge

Pot cultivation of ground nut and

corn

Stem and leaf biomass, kernal

yield and micronutrient uptake of

ground nut, and biomass yield and

micronutrient uptake of corn

Mohanty et al.

(2007)

Pleurotus sajor

caju**

Compost of coir pith, farm

yard manure, press mud

and gypsum

Field cultivation of finger millet Grain yield Rangaraj et al.

(2007)

P.excavatus

L.mauritii

Sodic soil, vermicompost

and vermiwash of paddy

straw and cattle dung

Field cultivation of spinach, onion

and potato

Reclamation of sodic soil through

application of vermicompost and

vermiwash, and yield of

vegetables

Ansari (2008)

E.fetida

Vermicompost of tannery

sludge with saw dust, card

board and wheat straw

Pot cultivation of maize, rape,

sunflower and oat

Tolerance indices and

contamination indices of cob, stem

+ leaves, roots, grains and straw

Gondek (2008)

E.eugeniae

Clay loam soil, red soil,

sandy loam soil,

vermicompost of press

mud, sugar cane trash and

bagasse mixture

Field cultivation of black gram Grain yield, and protein and sugar

contents in seeds

Parthasarathi et al.

(2008)

E.fetida Sandy loam soil and cattle

manure vermicompost Cultivation of spinach using bags

Plant height, leaf and root weight,

total leaves/plant and leaf area

Peyvast et al.

(2008)

Table 4: Contd….

37


E.eugeniae

Alluvium and red soil,

vermicasts of sheep

droppings and paddy straw

waste and compost of cow

dung

Pot cultivation of red rose Total nods, total leaves and total

flowers

Bakthavathsalam

et al. (2009)

E.eugeniae

Alluvium soil and

vermicompost of green

gram waste


Total leaves, leaves weight, tap

root weight, plant weight, tap root

length, tap root perimeter

Jayaseelan and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009b)

–

Alluvium soil and

composts of cabbage waste

and cow dung

Pot cultivation of chilli Total leaves, stem length and total

fruits

Muruganandham and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009)

E.eugeniae

Alluvium soil and

vermicompost of paddy

straw waste

Pot cultivation of radish Root weight, shoot weight and

total weight

Subramaniyan and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009)

L.mauritii

Alluvium soil and

vermicompost of vegetable

market wastes

Pot cultivation of black gram

Number of leaves, stem height,

petiole length, and number of

flowers, pods and seeds

Uthayakumar and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009)

–

Alluvium soil, and

compost of coir waste,

E.crassipes, cow dung and

poultry excreta mixture



root length and weight, and plant

weight

Bakthavathsalam

et al. (2010c)

Table 4: Contd….

38


E.eugeniae

T.viride**

Alluvium soil, and

vermicompost of coir

waste, water lily, goat

droppings and poultry

excreta mixture



root length and weight, and plant

weight

Bakthavathsalam

et al. (2010d)

–

Alluvium soil, and

composts of I.carnea and

cow dung

Pot cultivation of green gram Total leaves, total pods and total

seeds/pod

Bakthavathsalam

et al. (2010e)

–

Alluvium and red soil, and

compost of sheep

droppings, E.crassipes and

I.carnea

Pot cultivation of Ooty rose

Total nods, total leaves and total

flowers

Kamaladevi and

Bakthavathsalam

(2010)

T.viride** Acidic soil and compost of

E.crassipes Pot cultivation of radish

Total leaves, plant length, tap root

length, leaves, tap root and plant

weight, and tap root perimeter

Mathialagan and

Bakthavathsalam

(2010)

E.eugeniae

Alkaline soil, compost of

cow dung and

vermicompost of

P.longifolia


”

Umamaheswari and

Bakthavathsalam

(2010)

* Bacteria ** Fungus

26

Table 3. Review of literature regarding the analysis and observations made in the physico - chemical characteristics of different organic matters after

using them by earthworms.

Earthworms used Materials used Analysis/ Observations made Author(s)

L.mauritii Ragi hay, paddy hay, and cashew, mango,

guava and eucalyptus leaf matters Food preferences in relation to C:N ratios

Kale and

Krishnamoorthy (1981)

L.terrestris

L.rubellus

Alfalfa leaves, red clover leaves, corn leaves

and brome grass

Analysis of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, OC, C:N ratio, and

ratio of aliphatic, carbohydrate, aromatic and

carboxylic acid C

Shipitalo et al. (1988)

E.andrei Solid paper-pulp mill sludge, sewage sludge,

pig slurry and poultry slurry

Analysis of pH, TOC, N, C:N ratio, total solid,

ash and crude fibre Elvira et al. (1997)

E.andrei Grasses, garden and municipal prunings and

river weeds

Analysis of pH, C, N, C:N ratio, cellulose, lignin

and ash

Frederickson et al.

(1997)

L.rubellus Onion sludge waste Analysis of N,P and K Kavian et al. (1997)

L.mauritii

E.eugeniae

Coir waste, press mud, water hyacinth, farm

wastes, farm yard manure, biogas slurry of

press mud and cattle dung

Analysis of pH, EC,OM, OC, TN, TP, TK, Ca,

Mg, S, Na, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, C:N ratio and C:P

ratio

Ramalingam (1997)

E.andrei Cattle manure, paper mill sludge and dairy

sludge

Analysis of pH, EC, TEC, non-humified

fraction, humic acids, fulvic acids, total soluble

carbon, humification index, degree of

humification, N, P, K, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, Pb and

Ni

Elvira et al. (1998)

Table 3: Contd….

27


E.fetida

Sewage sludge

Analysis of pH, C, N and C:N ratio

Benitez et al. (1999)

E.eugeniae Areca nut leaves and cocoa leaves Analysis of pH, OC, N, P, K, Cu, Fe, Zn, Mn

and C:N ratio

Chowdappa et al.

(1999)

E.fetida

Kitchen waste, cow dung, poultry droppings,

municipal waste and dry leaves

Transformation of phosphorus during

vermicomposting

Ghosh et al. (1999a)

E.fetida

Mustard residues, sugarcane trash and cattle

dung Analysis of C:N ratio, N, P, K, Cu and Zn

Bansal and Kapoor

(2000)

L.mauritii Vegetable market wastes Analysis of EC, N, P, K, C, Ca, S, total solids,

volatile solids and ash Logakanthi et al. (2000)

E.fetida Aerobic and anaerobic sludges of municipal

sewage plant

Analysis of pH, EC, TN, TC and inorganic

anions

Masciandaro et al.

(2000a)

E.fetida Biosolids and paper mulch Analysis of pH, N, P, volatile solids and ash

content Ndegwa et al. (2000)

P.excavatus Sugarcane trash and cow dung Analysis of pH, EC, OM, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg,

S, Na, Fe, Cu, Mn, Zn, C:N ratio and C:P ratio

Ramalingam and

Thilagar (2000)

P.excavatus Sugarcane trash and press mud ” Ramalingam (2001)

E.eugeniae Press mud

Analysis of pH, EC, OM, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg,

S, Na, Zn, Fe, Mn, Cu, C:N ratio, C:P ratio and

crude protein

Ramalingam and

Ranganathan (2001)

Table 3: Contd….

28


E.eugeniae Press mud vermicasts Analysis of N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Zn and humic acid Parthasarathi and

Ranganathan (2002)

E.fedita Wheat straw residue Analysis of OC, N, P, K, C:N ratio, cellulose,

hemi cellulose and lignin

Singh and Sharma

(2002)

L.rubellus Compost of cattle manure, leaves and food

scraps

Analysis of TN, TC, C:N ratio P,K, extractable

NH4 +- N and NO3

- -N

Chaoui et al. (2003)

E.fetida Farm yard manure, tannery

sludge, saw dust, card board and wheat straw

Analysis of OC, TN, P, K, Ca, Mg, Na, Cu, Zn,

Cr, Ni, Pb and Cd

Gondek and

Filipek - Mazur (2003)

E.fetida

L.mauritii Municipal solid waste

Efficiency of vermicomposting and chemical

analysis of vermicompost

Kaviraj and Sharma

(2003)

E.fetida

P.excavatus

D.bolaui

Compost and vermicompost of forest litters

such as T.grandis (teak),

M.indica (mahua) and

B.monosperma (palas)

Analysis of TOC, TN, C:N ratio,TP, TK, TCa,

TMg, lignin, cellulose and lignin/ cellulose ratio Manna et al. (2003)

L.mauritii Sewage sludge, rice straw and cow dung Analysis of TN and TOC Arumugam et al.

(2004)

L.mauritii Paddy chaff and weed plants materials Analysis of pH, N, P and K Bakthavathsalam and

Geetha (2004c)

P.excavatus

Octonochaeta rosea

Octochaetona

phillotti

Rice straw Analysis of OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg and Na

Vikram Reddy and

Ohkura (2004)

Table 3: Contd….

29


E.andrei Pine saw dust, poultry litter, cotton industry

waste, horse manure and shredded paper

Analysis of pH, OC, N, P, K, Mn, Cu, Fe, and

C:N ratio Castillo et al. (2005)

E.eugeniae Sago solid waste and press mud Analysis of pH, OM, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Na,

S, C:N ratio and C:P ratio

Christy and

Ramalingam (2005b)

E.fetida Animal wastes of cow, buffalo, horse,

donkey, sheep, goat and camel Analysis of pH, EC, TOC, N ,P, K and C:N ratio Garg et al. (2005a)

E.fetida Cow dung, biogas plant slurry and solid

textile mill sludge

Analysis of pH, TOC, TN, TP,TK and C:N ratio

Garg et al. (2005b)

E.fetida

Sewage sludge added with heavy metals

Accumulation of heavy metals such as Zn, Cu,

Cr, Cd and Pb in earthworm body

Shahmansouri et al.

(2005)

O.tyrtaeum Litters of grass, maize and wheat Analysis of pH, OC, N, P, K and C:N ratio Bisht et al. (2006)

E.eugeniae Fruit waste, yard waste, municipal solid

waste and paper mill sludge

Analysis of pH, EC, total solids, volatile

solids,C, N, P, K, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu and Cd

Hemalatha and

Meenambal (2006)

L.mauritii Organic kitchen waste Analysis of pH, EC, N, P, K, Fe, Zn, Mn and Cu Indirabai et al. (2006)

P.excavatus Sago solid waste and press mud Analysis of pH, EC, OM, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg,

S, Na, C:N ratio and C:P ratio

Ramalingam and

Christy (2006)

L.mauritii Cow dung and press mud Analysis of pH, N, P and K Bakthavathsalam

(2007b)

Table 3: Contd….

30


E.eugeniae Press mud, bagasse, coir waste, rice husk

and ground nut shell Analysis of pH, EC, N, P, K, Ca, Fe and Zn Kitturmath et al. (2007)

E.fetida

E.eugeniae

P.excavatus

Cattle manure with saw dust Analysis of pH, EC, ash content, OC, N, P, K,

Ca and Na Meena and Renu (2007)

P.excavatus Press mud Role of moisture on the content of N, P and K

during vermicomposting

Parthasarathi (2007)

E.fetida

E.eugeniae

Weed materials such as Achyranthes

asperal, Cassia tora L. and Parthenium

hysterophoruse

Analysis of N, P, K, C, ash and C:N ratio Umesh Mogle and

Bharati Jadha (2007)

P.excavatus

L.mauritii Sodic soil, paddy straw and cattle dung Analysis of pH, EC, OC, N, K, Na and Ca Ansari (2008)

E.fetida Duck weed and cattle manure Analysis of pH, ash, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Na,

Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Ni, Cr, Co, Cd and Pb

Kostecka and

Kaniuczak (2008)

L.mauritii Cow dung and vegetable market wastes Analysis of pH, N, P and K Muthukumaravel et al.

(2008)

E.fetida Cattle manure vermicompost Analysis of pH, EC, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Fe,

Zn, Mn and Cu Peyvast et al. (2008)

P.excavatus

P.sansibaricus Domestic waste (house hold waste)

Analysis of pH, OC, TN, P, K, C:N ratio and

C:P ratio

Suthar and Singh (2008)

Table 3: Contd….

31


E.eugeniae Fly ash and cow dung Analysis of pH, EC, OC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Zn,

Cu, Mn, Fe, B and Mo

Venkatesh and Eevera

(2008)

L.mauritii Fly ash and cow dung Analysis of OC, N, P and K Ananthakrishnasamy

et al. (2009)

E.fetida Kitchen waste, grass clippings, goat manure,

vermicompost and garden soil

Analysis of pH, OC, N, P, K, Cu, Cr, Cd, Ni, Pb

and Zn

Fauziah and Agamuthu

(2009)

E.eugeniae Green gram waste Analysis of pH, EC, N, P, K, Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu

Jayaseelan and

Bakthavathsalam

(2009b)

E.fetida Cow manure added with heavy metals Accumulation of heavy metals (Zn, Pb, Ni, Cd,

Cr, Mo) in earthworm body

Macki Aleagha et al.

(2009)

– Compost of cabbage waste Analysis of pH, EC, N, P, K, Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu

Muruganandham and

Bakthavathsalam (2009)

E.eugeniae Paddy straw waste ”

Subramaniyan and


L.mauritii Vegetable market wastes Analysis of pH, EC, N, P, K, Ca, Mg, OC, Zn,

Fe, Cu and Mn

Uthayakumar and


E.eugeniae Mixture of coir waste, E.crassipes, cow dung

and poultry excreta

Analysis of pH, EC, OC, N, P, K, Na, Ca, Mg,

S, Zn, Cu, Fe and Mn


(2010c)

Table 3: Contd….

32


E.eugeniae Mixture of coir waste, water lilly, goat

droppings and poultry excreta

Analysis of pH, EC, OC, N, P, K, Na, Ca, Mg,



(2010d)

– Fresh and decomposed Ipomoea carnea Analysis of pH, EC, N, P, K, Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu Bakthavathsalam et al.

(2010e)

Trichoderma viride* Compost of E.crassipes Analysis of pH, EC, OC, N, P, K, Na, Ca, Mg,


Mathialagan and


E.eugeniae Elephant dung ” Sudha and


E.eugeniae Cow dung and P.longifolia ” Umamaheswari and


* Fungus

Date post:	21-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	tranthuan
View:	215 times
Download:	1 times

Organic materials used Aspects studied...

Documents