Yield and nutritional quality of carrot (Daucus carota L.

) as influenced by Poultry manure

in South Ethiopia

Authors Name: Amanuel Kuma Majamo and Fekadu Talto Hogago

Email: amanukuma27@gmail.com and fikadutalito2020@gmail.com
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4787-0616
Affilation: Deparment of Horticulture, College of Agriculture and Natural Resource
Management, Wolaita Sodo University, P.O. Box 138, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

Abstract

An experiment was conducted at Wolaita Sodo University, college’s farm located in Southern
Ethiopia in 2023. The main objective was to determine the effectiveness of poultry manure on
carrot yield and nutritional quality. The experimental design applied was randomized complete
block design (RCBD) with three replicates for each treatment. The treatments comprised five
levels (0, 10, 15, 20 and 25 t/ha) of decomposed poultry manure. The yield and quality
parameters namely, root diameter, marketable yield, unmarketable yield, total root yield,
percentage of forked roots, percentage of cracked roots, root dry matter content, ß-carotene,
vitamin C and total soluble sugars were analyzed in harvested carrots for each treatment using
standard methods. Among the different poultry manure levels, 25 t/ha treatment surpassed all the
other treatments in terms of maximum root diameter (6.60 cm), marketable root yield (27.90
t/ha) and total root yield (33.92 t/ha) during the experimental year. The results also showed that
poultry manure had a positive effect on ß-carotene whereby the highest content of 11188 µg/100
g was recorded from the 25 t/ha treatment, while the lowest content of 10287 µg/100 g was
recorded from the carrots that did not receive any poultry manure. The results on vitamin C
showed that its content increased with the application rate of 25 t/ha recording 7.980 g/100 g,
while the lowest content was recorded in plots that did not receive any fertilization. However,
PM did not influence significantly total soluble sugars content in carrots whereby the highest
TSS of 10.267% was obtained in plots without PM, while the lowest TSS of 9.997% was obtained
in carrots from the 25 t/ha treatment. On the basis of the results of this study, a range of 20-25
t/ha of PM is therefore recommended because it improved the yield and nutritional quality of
carrots.
Key words: Carrot, nutritional quality, ß-carotene, vitamin C, total soluble sugars.

1. Introduction

Carrot (Daucus carota L.) is an essential root vegetable commonly used in the diet of human
beings (Iorizzo, 2016). It is greatly treasured as food mostly because it is the best source of
carotene; a precursor of Vitamin A (Umuhoza et al., 2014). Beta carotene is one of hydrocarbon
carotenoids while the oxygenated derivatives of these hydrocarbons are known as Xanthophylls
(Bjarnadottir, 2019). For many communities in developing countries, the major source of vitamin
A in the diet is carotenoids especially Beta carotene (Dias, 2010).

Furthermore, carrot contains also abundant quantities of nutrients and minerals (Handelman,
2001) salads, steamed or boiled in vegetables and may also be prepared with other vegetables in
the preparation of soups and stews (Swamy, 2022). Carrot in combination with other vegetables
can produce especially healthful, tasty and refreshing drinks (Pushpa et al., 2020).

Besides being food, different parts of carrot can be used for different medicinal purposes. Carrot
roots are used as refrigerant and seeds as aromatic, stimulant and carminative (Cheng et al.,
2021). They are useful in the kidney diseases, in dropsy, nervine tonic, aphrodisiac and given in
uterine pain (Chau et al., 2004). Carrot increases the quantity of urine and large amount of carrot
to the diet has a favorable effect on the nitrogen balance (Pant and Manandhar, 2007; Anjum and
Amjad, 2002; Swamy, 2022).

Carrot production can be a favorite enterprise for most small scale, resource poor farmers, since
carrot is a short duration crop and higher yields can be obtained per unit area, hence profitable
(Ahmad et al., 2014).

In most developing countries, however, carrot yields per unit area still remain below the
recommended world average (Grabowska et al., 2013). One of the reasons advanced for such
low yields is low skills in technical methods of production (Austin et al., 2013). In order to
obtain high and quality yields of carrots, good soil fertility and constant growth is required to
facilitate the production and translocation of carbohydrates from leaves to roots (Sharma et al.,
2011).
The key limiting factors in crop growth, development and yield are the essential nutrients
(nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium) and water (Kifle and Birhanu, 2019). In most cases,
carrot growers use synthetic fertilizers as the major supply of nutrients in order to attain higher
yields and growth (Shashi et al., 2018).

The use of inorganic fertilizers has, however, been associated with human health problems and
environment degradation (Tadele and Selomon, 2014). Moreover, the increasing costs of
inorganic fertilizers have rendered them unaffordable to most resource-poor small scale growers
(Getachew et al., 2012).

Organic manure can serve as a substitute to mineral fertilizers. Manures supply the required
nutrients, improve soil structure, increase microbial population and at the same time maintain the
quality of crop produce (Wong et al., 1999; Nehra et al., 2001; Suresh et al., 2004; Dauda et al.,
2008).

Despite the large quantities of plant nutrients contained in inorganic fertilizers as compared to
organic nutrients, the presence of growth promoting agents in organic fertilizers make them
important for enhancement of soil fertility and productivity (Sanwal et al., 2007). Several authors
have reported the importance of organic manure as a source of nutrients and a means of soil
rejuvenation (Adeleye et al., 2010).

Poultry manure is a by-product of poultry meat and egg poultry and is rich in nutrients, which
can provide a major source of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and trace elements for crop
production and this material can also improve physical and biological fertility of soil. (Deepak et
al., 2020). Continuous cultivation of farms has led to decline in soil fertility due to constant
removal of nutrients leading to reduction of carrot yields. Thus the mineral nutrients, especially
nitrates, in fertilizers can cause problems for natural habitats and for human health if they are
washed off soil into watercourses or leached through soil into groundwater (Stewart et al., 2005).
Therefore, the ultimate test of the nutritional value of food depends on its ability to support
health, growth, and reproduction over successive generations of animals or humans.

Win et al. (2008) and other authors reported that the use of chemical fertilizers is a critical factor
limiting carrot production by poor farmers due to their high prices and generally farmers use
their own animals by the application of organic manures. The problem that farmers are faced
with, is to know how much organic fertilizer to apply for a specific crop so that it remains with
acceptable yield quality (Oelhalf, 1978; Allemann and Young, 2001).

Therefore, a field study was carried out in Wolaita Sodo University farm (from May to August
2023) with the aim of evaluating the effects of poultry manure on yield and nutritional quality of
carrot (Daucus carota L.).

2. Materials and methods

Experimental site

The field in which the experiment was conducted is located at College of Agriculture,
Horticulture science farm located in Wolaita Sodo, Wolaita District, and Southern Region of
Ethiopia. The climate of the site is characterized by a drought season of 4 to 5 months and a long
period of rain of 7 to 8 months. This region has a sandy clay loam soil with a pH which varies
from 5.5 to 6.1 and the rainfall that ranges between 1800 to 2000 mm. The relative humidity is
86% and the altitude of this region is 2200 m above sea level and the average temperature ranges
between 16 and 24°C.

Experimental Materials

The carrot variety used in this study was Nantes that imported from Netherland and certified by
EIRA was used as a planting material. Poultry manure was used as mineral sources.

Experimental design

The experimental design was RCBD with 3 replications. Treatments comprised five levels (0, 10,
15, 20 and 25 t/ha) of poultry manure. Each plot measured 1.5 m 2 and the required area was
73.5 m 2 which means that the total width was 7 m and length of 10.5 m.

Poultry manure preparation

PM from Ethio-chicken poultry was weighed by using a balance and then applied onto each plot
at the required amount.

Land preparation and planting

Land was ploughed to a depth of 30 cm and prepared into fine soil particles using rakes. Raised
beds of 1.5 m long, 1 m wide and 15 cm height were prepared. Poultry manure (0, 10, 15, 20 and
25 t/ha) were spread on each plot before being incorporated thoroughly into the soil. Carrot seeds
sourced from EIRA suppliers were then drilled to a depth of 1 cm in rows spaced at 20 cm apart.
Thinning was done two weeks after emergence of the carrots to attain the recommended spacing
of 8 cm between plants.

Routine plant maintenance practices

Cultural practices were applied uniformly to all the plots throughout the growing period.
Continuous weeding by hand pulling was performed to ensure clean fields. We controlled
Alternalia leaf blight using Dithane (mancozeb 75%). Earthing up of carrot shoulders was done
frequently to protect them from direct sunlight which could cause undesirable green coloration.
Harvest and laboratory analysis of the carrots ten samples were collected after harvesting (105
days after sowing) with respect to treatments and replications. They were packaged in the
envelopes and then stored in laboratory. Beta carotene, Ascorbic acid and TSS were analyzed in
the following procedures (Kilyobo, 2009).

Root Diameter (cm): The size of root was measured using side caliper for ten randomly selected
plants from the net plot area and divided by the number of sampled plants to get mean values and
the mean values were computed.

Marketable root yield (t/ha): Roots which were free from mechanical damage, disease and
insect pest damages, uniform in color and medium to large in size were considered as
marketable. The weight of such roots obtained from the central rows by avoiding border effect
was measured in kilogram using scaled balance and by converting this yield in to ton per hectare
marketable root yield data was recorded and used for further analysis.

Unmarketable root yield (t/ha): Roots which were cracked, hairy, misshaped, decayed,
discolored, diseased and physiologically disordered were considered as unmarketable. The
weight of such roots obtained from the net plot area of each plot were measured in kilogram
using scaled balance and expressed as ton per hectare.
Total yield (t/ha): Summation of marketable and unmarketable root yield from net plot area was
recorded.

Dry matter content (%): Dry matter content was measured by weighing randomly selected
roots from net plot and expressed by percent.
Dry weight of roots
DMC (%) = Fresh weight of roots x 100

Forked root (%): Roots which were misshaped in the tip, slightly shortened and multi-rooted
with several divergent tap roots were considered as forked roots. The number of forked roots
harvested from net plot area was recorded under each treatment and percentage was calculated as
per formula given bellow.
Number of forked roots
Forked root (%) = Number of total roots x 100

Cracked root (%): Roots which were vertically cracked running along with the length of the tap
root, bended, twisted and splinted were considered as cracked roots. The number of such roots
per plot was recorded under each treatment and percentage was calculated as per formula below.
Number of cracked roots
Cracked root (%) = Number of total roots x 100

Determination of beta-carotene content of carrots

Two grams of fresh carrots were weighed and mixed with 50 ml of acetone in a mortar. The
mixture was grinded with a pestle and the juice was recuperated. Twenty five milliliters of
acetone were added to the residues and grinded together to extract totally the carrot juice. The
residues were grinded again until their color turned into white. Petroleum ether (20 ml) was put
in a separatory funnel and the acetone extract was added. Distilled water was added slowly, and
letting it flow along the walls of the funnel and this was done five times in order to remove
acetone completely. The lower phase that contained acetone was discarded, then the petroleum
ether phase was collected in a volumetric flask and topped up to 100 ml with petroleum ether.
The absorbance of the extracts was read using colorimeter at wavelength of 430 nm, the extracts
were placed in cuvette and readings were taken. The operation was repeated 5 times for each
sample and average readings were recorded. The readings of absorbance for carotenoid content
with ethereal extract at 430 nm were used to calculate total beta carotene content using the
following formula:
4
( A−Bl )× Volume(ml)× 10
β − carotene (µg/gr) =
A11 %
cm × sample weight ( g)

A= absorbance; A11 %cm= 2592

Determination of vitamin C content of carrots

The concentration of ascorbic acid in fresh carrot was obtained by titrimetric method. The
samples (2 g each) were weighed and then grinded with a pestle and mortal. After that, 25 ml of
distilled water were added to the grinded samples and then filtered with the aid of filter paper in
order to separate residues from juice. Distilled water was added up to 100 ml. After, the second
dilution were done by taking 5 ml of carrot juice and add distilled water up to 100 ml. Five drops
of 0.1% Phenolphthalein were added to each sample in a volumetric flask and it is from the
second dilution that titration were performed using NaOH 0.01N. A number of NaOH drops
were put into the samples until persistent rose color of vitamin C in extracts appears. The amount
of NaOH to change the color of juice were recorded and used in the formula to calculate vitamin
C concentration in carrot juice:
st −3
g VolNaOH −Bl × N ×TVafter 1 dilution× 100 × MW of vit C ×10
Vit C ( )=
100 g nd
Volused for 2 dilution× sample weght

MW= 176.13 g/mol

Determination of total soluble sugar (TSS) content of carrots

Ten milligrams of dried sample were grinded using mortar and pestle and then distilled water up
to 25 ml was added and were agitated for 20 min with an electric agitator at 250 rpm and then
they were filtered with the aid of filter paper. One milliliter of the extract were mixed with 2 ml
of ZnSO4 2% and 2ml of Ba (OH) 2 1.8%, afterward they were centrifuged for 15 min. After
centrifugation, 1 ml of centrifuged extract was mixed with 1 ml of phenolphthalein 5% and 5 ml
of H2SO4Cl. The absorbance was read using a colorimeter at 490 nm and then recorded. To be
sure, from the readings, data were recorded four times for each sample and the mean were
calculated before using absorbance in the formula:
 100
% TSS = (A – B1) ×FC x FD x × 10−6
100 sample weight ( g)
FC = 1
FD = 875

3. Results

Root diameter (cm): According to the data in Table 1, the maximum diameter of the roots (6.60
cm) was recorded from the 25 t/ha of PM applied treatment, which was significantly different
than that of the other poultry manure treatments. On the other hand, the minimum root diameter
(2.47 cm) was observed in the treatment in which no poultry manure was applied treatment. The
results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed significant difference between treatments.
Means for the factors which do not differ according to Duncan multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are
marked with the same letters.

Marketable yield (t/ha): The maximum marketable root yield (27.90 t/ha) was obtained from
the treatment in which 25 t/ha of PM applied treatment, which was significantly different from
that of the other treatments; in contrast, the minimum marketable yield (8.21 t/ha) was recorded
from the control treatment (Table 1). The results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a
significant difference between treatments. Means for the factors which do not differ according to
Duncan multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are marked with the same letters.

Unmarketable yield (t/ha): The maximum unmarketable root yield (5.83 t/ha) was recorded by
the 25 t/ha of PM applied treatment, while the minimum unmarketable root yield (2.60 t/ha) was
recorded from the control (Table 1). The results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) did not
showed significant difference between treatments. Means for the factors which do not differ
according to Duncan multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are marked with the same letters.

Total root yield (t/ha): According to the data in Table 1, the maximum total root yield (33.92
t/ha) was obtained from the treatment in which 25 t/ha of PM applied, which was significantly
different from that of the other treatments, whereas the minimum yield (10.56 t/ha) was recorded
from the control treatment. The yield of 25 t/ha poultry manure surpassed that of all the other
treatments by enhancing the root yield, followed by 20 t/ha poultry manure. The results from
analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed significant difference between treatments. Means for the
factors which do not differ according to Duncan multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are marked with
the same letters.

Root dry matter content (%): The maximum amount of root dry matter (14.59%) was recorded
in the 25 t/ha of PM applied treatment, while the minimum amount of root dry matter (13.65%)
was obtained in the control treatment (Table 1). This might be because PM contributed to the
improvement of the soil structure, particularly in terms of its water-holding capacity and
drainage. They help to increase the soil’s ability to retain moisture, prevent waterlogging and
reduce the risk of root rot. The results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) did not showed
significant difference between treatments. Means for the factors which do not differ according to
Duncan multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are marked with the same letters.

Percentage of forked roots (%): According to the data in Table 1, the percentage of forked
roots was significantly influenced by the application of different concentrations of organic
manure. The maximum percentage of forked roots (4.45%) was recorded in the control
treatment, which was significantly different than that in the other organic manure treatments. On
the other hand, the lowest percentage of forked roots (1.35%) was observed in the 20 t mixed
manure/ha treatment (Table 1). The results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) did not showed
significant difference between treatments. Means for the factors which do not differ according to
Duncan multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are marked with the same letters.

Percentage of cracked roots (%): The percentage of cracked roots was affected by organic
manure. For amendments, the effect of the 25 t/ha of PM applied treatment (3.73%) was greatest
in both periods, followed by that of the 20 t/ha of PM applied treatment, 15 t/ha of PM applied
treatment and control treatment, which were also significantly greater than those of all the other
treatments (Table 1). The results from analysis of variance (ANOVA) did not showed significant
difference between treatments. Means for the factors which do not differ according to Duncan
multiple range test at P≤ 0.05 are marked with the same letters.
Table 1. Influence of poultry manure (PM) on root diameter (RD), marketable yield (MY) and
total root yield (TY) of carrot.
PM (t/ha) RD (cm) MY ((t/ha) TY (t/ha)
0 2.47g 8.21e 10.56e
10 4.85d 20.94d 23.93d
15 5.38c 22.42c 36.96c
20 6.08b 25.89b 30.96c
25 6.60a 27.90a 33.92a
CV (%) 5.67 6.71 4.60
LSD0.05 1.36 1.13 1.61
Means followed with the same letters in the column are not significantly different at 5% level,
CV (%) = coefficient of variation, LSD0.05 = Least significant difference at 5% level.

Table 2. Influence of poultry manure (PM) on unmarketable yield (UM) and root dry matter
(RDM), percentage of forked root and percentage of cracked roots (PCR) of carrot.
PM (t/ha) UM (t/ha) RDM (%) PFR (%) PCR (%)
0 2.60d 13.65b 4.45d 1.35c
10 4.02c 14.10b 2.34b 3.73a
15 4.52c 14.20b 2.12c 1.66bc
20 4.94c 14.59a 1.35a 1.95b
25 5.83b 14.89a 0.95b 2.95b
CV (%) 6.29 3.02 6.29 5.67
LSD0.05 0.83 0.44 1.22 2.67
Means followed with the same letters in the column are not significantly different at 5% level,
CV (%) = coefficient of variation, LSD0.05 = Least significant difference at 5% level.

Effect of PM levels on beta carotene in carrots

The results in Fig 1 showed that the maximum Beta carotene (11188 µg/100 g) content was
obtained when 25 t/ha of PM were used on carrots. The mean of 10995 µg/100 g followed and it
was obtained when 20 t/ha of PM were applied. Carrots fertilized with 10 t/ha of PM gave 10866
µg/100 g, followed by 10673 µg/100 g in carrots that received 10 t/ha of PM. The lowest beta
carotene (10287 µg/100 g) was obtained in carrots that did not receive any fertilizer.
Effect of PM levels on vitamin C in carrots

The highest vitamin C content (7.98 g/100 g) was obtained in the carrots that received 25 t/ha of
PM, followed by 7.84 g/100 g obtained in carrots fertilized by 20 t/ha of PM. Thus carrots
fertilized with 15 t/ha of PM resulted in 7.747 g/100 g of vitamin C. The application of 10 t/ha of
PM resulted in 7.67 g/100 g of vitamin C. The lowest vitamin C was obtained in carrots that did
not receive any fertilizer (Fig 2).

Effect of PM on total soluble sugar (TSS) of carrots

The results of TSS varied between 9.9 and 10.27% from the treatments with higher poultry
manure rate to the ones with no poultry manure application, respectively (Fig 3). The highest
TSS (10.27%) was obtained in carrots that did not receive any fertilizer. TSS (10.27%) was
obtained in the carrots that received the lowest PM level (15 t/ha). The application of 20 t/ha of
PM in carrots resulted in 10.03% of TSS. This was followed by 9.92% TSS which was obtained
in carrots that received 20 t/ha of PM. The lowest TSS (9.9%) was obtained when 25 t/ha of PM
were applied in carrots (Fig 3).
 Fig 1. Mean value of β- carotene content (μg/gr) of carrots
11188
11200
10995
11000 10866

10800 10673

10600 β- carotene

10400 10287

10200

10000

9800
0 t/ha PM 10 t/ha PM 15 t/ha PM 20 t/ha PM 25 t/ha PM

Fig 2. Mean value of Vitamin C (g/100g) of carrots

7.98
8
7.9 7.84
7.75
7.8
7.67
7.7
7.6 Vitamin C
7.5
7.38
7.4
7.3
7.2
7.1
7
0 t/ha PM 10 t/ha PM 15 t/ha PM 20 t/ha PM 25 t/ha PM
 Fig 3. Mean value of total soluble sugar content (%) of carrots

10.27
10.3

10.2
10.09
10.1 10.03
TSS
10 9.92
9.9
9.9

9.8

9.7
0 t/ha PM 10 t/ha PM 15 t/ha PM 20 t/ha PM 25 t/ha PM

4. Discussion

Root diameter (cm)

In the present study, the difference in root size might be due to increased microbial activity in the
root zone because of the adequate moisture availability and optimum temperature combined with
the stabilized soil pH, which decomposed organic manure and fixed unavailable forms of mineral
nutrients into available forms in the soil, thereby substantiating crop requirements, improving the
organic carbon level and stabilizing soil reactions. These findings are also in accordance with
those of Jeptoo et al. (2012), who reported that different combinations of organic manures
significantly affect the diameter and size of carrot roots. The minimum size of the carrot roots
was observed in the control treatment compared with all the other treatments. The increase in
root diameter due to poultry manure might be attributed to favorable soil fertility, favorable soil
moisture and favorable soil temperature conditions for proper plant growth (Deepak et al., 2020).

Marketable yield (t/ha)

This difference might be due to the steady and readily available nutrients to the crops being
present in greater quantities than during the slow release of organic manure. The improvement in
yield attributed to PM might be due to improved soil moisture holding capacity, soil moisture,
and soil temperature; adequate availability of major nutrients and micronutrients due to favorable
soil conditions; and an increase in the rate of photosynthesis, which further increases vegetative
growth and yield by providing additional sites for the translocation of photosynthesis (Okokoh
and Bisong. 2011).

Total root yield (t/ha):

The yield of 25 t/ha poultry manure surpassed that of all the other treatments by enhancing the
root yield, followed by poultry manure. This difference might be due to the greater quantity of
nutrients being steadily available than they were from other organic sources. The ability of PM to
significantly influence growth and yield may be because it supplies nitrogen and phosphorous, as
reported by (Austin et al., 2013), and because of its ability to improve the physio-chemical
properties of soils (FAO, 2023), resulting in improved soil conditions and better nutrient
availability.

Unmarketable yield (t/ha)

This difference might be caused by a range of factors, including attack by insects, diseases or
nematodes; mechanical damage from deep and/or too close cultivation; physical obstructions;
poor soil conditions; or excessively close plant density.

Root dry matter Content (%)

This might be because PM contributed to the improvement of the soil structure, particularly in
terms of its water-holding capacity and drainage. They help to increase the soil’s ability to retain
moisture, prevent waterlogging and reduce the risk of root rot. Additionally, poultry manure
enhanced soil aeration, promoting the development of a healthy root system and facilitating
nutrient uptake by carrot plants. These results are supported by the findings of Dao et al. (2021),
who reported variations in macro- and micronutrients among organic manures and industrial and
municipal wastes and their effects on the growth and yield of crops. In line with the findings of
Habimana et al. (2014), root dry matter percentages were greater in plants treated with higher
doses of potassium along with mulching.
Percentage of forked roots (%)

Interestingly, the percentage of forked roots varied significantly between amendments,

suggesting that nonbiotic factors may contribute to the development of this disorder. In the
present study, plants that received manure presented lower percentages of branched roots than
did the control plants. The high nitrogen content in the organic manure and organic mulch might
have contributed to the low percentage of forked roots. These findings are in line with those of
Atta (2012), who reported that forking in carrots is promoted by factors such as poor soil
structure (compacted heavy clay soil), the application of fresh manure, the application of excess
nitrogen and improper irrigation management.

Percentage of cracked roots

The increasing trend of the cracking percentage of roots with increasing root size per plant might
be due to the larger roots that occurred among the mulching and organic manure-treated plants.
These plants supplied low amounts of nutrients, and moist plants produced thinner roots with
minimum diameters, which might have contributed to their resistance to cracking.

Effect of PM levels on ß-carotene content of carrots

Carrot (Daucus carota L.) was analyzed for Beta carotene content because it is the precursor of
vitamin A and eaten in both raw and cooked form by humans in daily life (Sarhad, 2007). The
results of the current study proved that the highest mean for the quantity of beta carotene (11188
µg/100 g) was obtained on carrots fertilized with 25 tons of FYM per hectare. On the other hand,
the lowest quantity of beta carotene (10287 µg/100 g) was obtained for treatment with no
farmyard manure application. Statistically, the beta carotene in carrots fertilized with 15 tha-1
and those fertilized with 20 t/ha of farmyard manure showed no significant difference (Fig 1)

Therefore, the result showed that as the higher Farmyard manure rate is increased, the higher the
quantity of beta carotene is obtained. This is in agreements with the findings of Anteneh et al.
(2008) who reported that the content of beta carotene increases with increasing levels of
fertilizers. These results are also in the same range with those reported by Sarhad (2007) in
which beta carotene content in carrot was 11210 µg/100 g and those reported by Higdon and
Atakora (2011) who reported that the quantity of beta carotene in carrot was 10110 µg/100 g.
However, the beta carotene content obtained during this study was higher than that obtained by
Agte et al. (2000) who analyzed 24 green vegetables for different macro nutrients contents
including ß- carotene. According to their analysis, ß-carotene in carrots was 5340 µg/100 g.

Effect of PM levels on vitamin C content of carrot

PM increased significantly the vitamin C in carrots. Duncan multiple range test showed that
there was no significant difference for vitamin C between carrots that received 10-20 t/ha of PM,
but a significant difference occurred between carrots that did not receive a fertilizer and those
that received 25 t/ha of PM (Fig 2). The highest vitamin C content (7.98 g/100 g) was obtained in
carrots that received highest PM level (25 t/ha) while the lowest vitamin C (7.38 g/100 g) where
obtained in carrots that did not receive any fertilizer. In this study, the increase in PM level
resulted in an increase of vitamin C content. This is in accordance with Ali et al. (2016) who
reported that vitamin C increased at 20-25 tons/ha of PM. However, this is different from those
reported by FAO (2011) where they reported that the vitamin C content in carrots was 5.9
mg/100 g. Matejkova and Petrova (2010) also reported that vitamin C in carrots was 12%. The
slight variation in the data compared to others may be due to difference in experimental
conditions, storage conditions of carrots, extraction procedures and materials used. This may also
be attributed to the different solvent used, temperature during analytical process because all these
have a tremendous effect on results (Acharya, 2011).

Effect of PM levels on total soluble sugar (TSS) content of carrots

The highest TSS (10.27%) were obtained in carrots planted in plots that did not receive PM,
while the lowest TSS (9.9%) were obtained in carrots with highest PM application (25 t/ha).
Zakir et al. (2012) reported that the highest TSS in carrot was 10.51%. Therefore, the results
showed that the TSS reduced with the increase of PM levels. This is in fair agreements with
Mbatha (2008) who reported that the TSS of carrot that received chicken manure at different
rates was significantly lower than those that did not receive any fertilizer (Umuhoza et al.,
2014).. This reduction of TSS in carrots may be caused by the increase of Nitrogen, Phosphorus
and potassium in soil which have negative effect on plant sugars (Kumar, 2013).
5. References

Acharya Ranga. 2011. Manures, Fertilizers and Agricultural Chemicals. Department of soil
science and agricultura chemistry. S.V.Agricultural College, Tirupati 502-517.
Adeleye E, Ayeni L, Ojeni S. 2010. Effect of poultry manure on soil physico-chemical
properties, leaf nutrient content and yield of yam (Dioscorea rotundata) on alfisol in
South Western Nigeria. J. Am. Sci., 6(10): 871-878.
Ahmad T, Amjad M, Iqbal Q, Nawaz A. and Iqbal Z. 2014. Integrated nutrient management
practices improve growth and yield of carrot. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science,
20(6), 1457-146.
Ali Abu, Solaiman Abul and Saha K. 2016. Influence of Organic Nutrient Sources and Neem
(Azadirachta) Products on Growth and Yield of Carrot. International Journal of Crop
Science and Technology, Volume 2, Issue 1, Page 19- 25. ISSN: 2458-7540.
Alice Mbatha, Gert Ceronio and Gesine Coetzer. 2014. Response of carrot (Daucus carota L.)
yield and quality to organic fertilizer ISSN: 057-1862 (Print) 2167-034.
Allemann, Young BW. 2001. Vegetable production guidelines for Kwazulu Natal. Department
of agriculture and environmental affairs.
Anjum A and Amjad M. 2002. Influence of mother root size and plant spacing on carrot seed
production. J. Resour. Sci., 13(2): 105-112.
Anteneh Nestere, Girma Hailemichael and Endale Taye. 2008. Effect of poultry manure on yield
of carrot. East African journal of sciences, 2(1) 25-28.
Atakora K. 2011. Influence of poultry manure and NPK amendments on soil characteristics,
growth and yield response of carrot (Daucus carota). Department of crop and soil science
education, faculty of agriculture education, University of Education, Winneba.
Atta Poku, P. 2012. Influence of green manure, NPK and chicken manure amendments on soil
Physico-chemical properties, growth and yield of carrot (Daucus carrota L.) Department
of crop and soil science education, faculty of agriculture education, University of
Education,
Austin J, Chris U and Harley S. 2013. Effect of farmyard manure on growth and yield of carrot.
Journal of Hort. Science, 38, 2013, 22 – 26.
Bjarnadottir A. 2019. Nutrition Facts and Health Benefits of Carrots. https://www.healthline.com
/nutrition/ foods.
Chau C.F, Chen C.H and Lee M.H. 2004. Comparison of the Characteristics, Functional
Properties, and in Vitro Hypoglycemic Effects of Various Carrot Insoluble FiberRich
Fractions. LebensmittelWissenshaff und Technologie, 37, 155-160.
Ching L.S. and Mohamed S. 2001. Alpha-Tocopherol Content of 62 Edible Tropical Plants.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 49, 3101-3105.
CSA (Central Statistical Agency).2021/2022. Agricultural Sample Survey Report on Area and
Production (Private Peasant Holdings Meher Season. Central Statistical Agency of
Ethiopia.
Dao Cheng, Xiang Tian and Pinxiang Guo. 2021. Effect of Yield and Quality of carrot Under
Different Dosage and Proportion of Chicken Manure and Cow Manure. A case study in
Shandong Peninsul. Sci. Hortic-Amsterdam, 265: 109201.
Dauda SN, Ajayi FA, Ndor E. 2008. Growth and yield of water melon (Citrullus lonatus) as
affected by poultry manure application. J. Agric. Soc. Sci., 4: 121-124.
Deepak Kumar, Tarence Thomas and Narendra Swaroop. 2020. Effect of Different Level of
Inorganic Fertilizer, FYM, and Neem Cake on Soil Properties and Yield Attributes by
Carrot (Daucus carota L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied
Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706.
Dias J.S. 2012. Major Classes of Phytonutriceuticals in Vegetables and Health Benefits: A
Review. Journal of Nutritional Therapeutics, 1, 31-62.
FAO. 2011. Harvested carrot. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/carrot.
FAO-Stat. 2023. Food and agricultural commodities production. htip://faostal.fao.org.
Getachew Tabor and Mohhamed Yesuf. 2012. Mapping the current knowledge of carrot
cultivation in Ethiopia. Inst, Agric.Res.Center,Gize,Ethiopia, Vol. 5 (9): 1547-1556.
Habimana S, Uwamahoro C and Uwizerwa JB. 2014. Influence of chicken manure and NPK (17-
17-17) fertilizer on growth and yield of carrot. Net Journal of Agricultural Science.
2(4):117-123.
Handelrman GJ. 2001. The evolving role of carotenoids in human biochemistry. Nutrition, pp.
818-822.
Higdon G S, Bendish A. 2004. Biological action of Beta carotene. Am. J. Nutr., 32(2): 225-230.
Jepto A, Aguyoh NJ, Mwanarusi S. 2012. Improving carrot yield and quality through the use of
Bio-slurry manure. Egerton, Kenya: Canadian centre of scienceand education.
http://dx.doi.org./10.5539/sar.v2n/p164.
Kifle Zerga, and Birhanu Tsegaye. 2019. Effect of different rates of compost application on
growth performance and yield components of carrot (Daucus carrota L.) in gurage zone,
Ethiopia, Internationals Journal of African and Asian Studies 54 (2019) 24–31.
Kilyobo J M. 2009. ISAE laboratory for soil and plant analysis. Busogo, Rwanda. Unpublished.
Mbatha AN. 2008. Influence of organic fertilizers on yield and quality of cabbage and carrots.
Bloemfotein University of the Free State.
Kumar G S. 2013. Effect of organic manures on growth, root yield and quality of carrot (Daucus
carota L.). Master thesis submitted to Dr. Y.S.R. Horticultural University.
Mbatha AN. 2008. Influence of organic fertilizers on yield and quality of carrots. Bloemfotein
University of the Free State.
Nehra AS, Hooda IS, Singh KP. 2001. Effect of integrated nutrient management on Growth and
yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Indian J. Agron., 45: 112- 17.
Oelhalf RC. 1978. Organic agriculture: Economoc and ecological comparisons with
conventional methods. http://ideas.repec.org. /a/eee/jfpoli/v6y198li3 p207.
Okokoh SJ and Bisong BW. 2011. Effect of Poultry Manure and Urea-N on Flowering
Occurrence and Leaf Productivity of carrot. Journal of Apl. Sic. Environmental
Management. 2011; 15(1):13-15.
Pushpa Yadav and Luck Fnow. 2020. A Review on different types of carrot and its chemical
compositions. IOSR Journal of Pharmacy (e)-ISSN: 2250-3013, (p)-ISSN: 2319- 4219.
Rani R, Malek M and Robbani M. 2016. Effect of organic manures and mulching on growth and
yield of carrot. J. Veg. Crop Produc ., 2(1), 13-25.
Sanwal SK, Lakiminarayana K, Yadav RK, Yadav N, Musumi B. 2007. Effect of quality of
turmeric. Indian J. Hortic., 64(4): 444-449.
Sarhad J. 2007. Determination of beta carotene content in Fresh vegetables using High
performance Liquid Chromatography. Peshawar: Agriculture University peshawar-
Pakistan.
Shashi Kamal, Mohit Kumar and Manoj Rajkumar. 2018. Effect of biofertilizers on growth and
yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum mill), Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci 7 (2)
(2018) 2542–2545.
Stewart MW, Dibb, Johnston EA, Syth JT. 2005. The contribution of commercial fertilizer
nutrients to food production. Agron. J., 97: 1-6.
Swamy K.R.M. 2022. Origin, distribution, taxonomy, botanical description, and crop
improvement of carrot (Daucus carota var. sativus). International Journal of Current
Research Vol. 14, Issue, 09, pp.22281-22294.
Wong JWC, Ma KK, Fang KM, Cheung C. 1999. Utilization of manure compost for Organic
farming in Hong. Bio-resource Technol., 67: 6-43.
Zakir H M, Sultana M N and Saha K C. 2012. Influence of Commercially Available Organic vs
Inorganic Fertilizers on Growth Yield and Quality of Carrot. Biol. Fert. Soil 40(3).
Zeb A, Mahmood S. 2004. Carotenoid contents from various sources and their potential health
applications. Pakistan J. Nutr., 3(3): 199-204.