Soil Quality and Pomelo Productivity as Affected by Chicken Manure and Cow Dung
Table 2
Influence of animal manure on soil quality in the surface layer (mean value: 2018–2020).
Sites
Treatments
pHH2O (1 : 2.5)
EC (mS cm−1)
SOM (%)
Exchangeable cations (meq 100g−1)
BD (g cm−3)
Ntot (g kg−1)
Pavail (mg kg−1)
Ca2+
K+
Mg2+
CT I
Control
5.12c ± 0.17
0.71 ± 0.09
2.75b ± 0.08
5.81b ± 0.45
0.27 ± 0.05
2.20 ± 0.30
1.27b ± 0.03
1.05b ± 0.14
18.6c ± 0.74
CM
6.00a ± 0.25
0.75 ± 0.07
3.34a ± 0.26
6.50a ± 0.30
0.32 ± 0.07
2.84 ± 0.55
1.13a ± 0.07
1.47a ± 0.21
24.3b ± 3.10
CD
5.75b ± 0.15
0.77 ± 0.10
3.24a ± 0.25
6.48a ± 0.17
0.29 ± 0.09
2.96 ± 1.00
1.18a ± 0.05
1.56a ± 0.12
24.8a ± 1.75
Pvalue
ns
ns
ns
CT II
Control
4.20c ± 0.13
0.76 ± 0.07
3.40c ± 0.24
5.78b ± 0.28
0.40 ± 0.09
3.32 ± 0.13
1.24c ± 0.03
1.56b ± 0.13
25.1b ± 1.15
CM
4.91b ± 0.15
0.71 ± 0.10
3.97b ± 0.19
6.22a ± 0.70
0.44 ± 0.06
3.97 ± 0.50
1.12b ± 0.05
2.13a ± 0.21
32.6a ± 1.97
CD
5.14a ± 0.30
0.70 ± 0.05
4.18a ± 0.11
6.52a ± 0.23
0.37 ± 0.07
3.82 ± 0.89
1.05a ± 0.07
2.19a ± 0.08
33.7a ± 3.34
Pvalue
ns
ns
ns
CT III
Control
4.66c ± 0.27
0.73 ± 0.06
3.23c ± 0.23
6.55b ± 0.36
0.36 ± 0.06
3.05b ± 0.32
1.21c ± 0.03
1.54b ± 0.08
29.8c ± 4.34
CM
5.56a ± 0.24
0.69 ± 0.09
3.81b ± 0.19
7.10a ± 0.46
0.36 ± 0.06
3.81a ± 0.18
1.14b ± 0.02
2.18a ± 0.13
35.9b ± 3.54
CD
5.24b ± 0.19
0.69 ± 0.06
4.03a ± 0.18
7.14a ± 0.15
0.39 ± 0.06
3.73a ± 0.21
1.10a ± 0.06
2.11a ± 0.22
38.5a ± 3.06
Pvalue
ns
ns
The different letters indicate the significant differences among treatments at < 0.01 () and < 0.001 (); ns: not significant; CM: chicken manure applied at 10 mg per year; CD: cow dung applied at 10 mg per year. CT I, CT II, and CT III are the study locations.