Indian Journal of Science and Technology

The PDF file you selected should load here if your Web browser has a PDF reader plug-in installed (for example, a recent version of Adobe Acrobat Reader).

If you would like more information about how to print, save, and work with PDFs, Highwire Press provides a helpful Frequently Asked Questions about PDFs.

Alternatively, you can download the PDF file directly to your computer, from where it can be opened using a PDF reader. To download the PDF, click the Download link above.

Fullscreen Fullscreen Off


A laboratory studies were conducted on the evaluation of vermicompost obtained from Farm Yard Manure (FYM) and FYM prepared from the same feedstock by only thermophilic processing. Processing of animal dung at a moisture content of around 60% consisted of 6 treatments (T1) no earthworms, no moisture, no turning, no microbial culture (E0M0T0C0), (T2) no earthworms, moisture, weekly turning, no microbial culture (E0M1T1C0), (T3) Eisenia fetida earthworms, moisture,weekly turning, no microbial culture (E1M1T1C0), (T4) Eisenia fetida earthworms, moisture, no turning, no microbial culture (E1M1T0C0), (T5) no earthworms, moisture, weekly turning, microbial culture added (E0M1T1C1), (T6) Eisenia fetida earthworms, moisture, weekly turning, microbial culture added (E1M1T1C1). Laboratory analysis for nutrient composition revealed that there was no appreciable change in nutrient composition in the vermicompost over FYM. Therefore, composting the animal dung by scientific means is as efficient as vermicomposting the animal dung.

Keywords

Animal Dung, Earthworms, Nutrient Content, Vermicomposting
User