Effect of Different Types of Organic Manures and Mulching Materials on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot (Daucus Carota L.) in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia

Effect of Different Types of Organic Manures and Mulching Materials on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot (Daucus Carota L.) in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Effect of Different Types of Organic Manures and Mulching Materials on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot (Daucus Carota L.) in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia Amanuel Kuma This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4512979/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Carrot is a root vegetable crop. The management of agronomic practices is an important factor that strongly affects the growth, yield and quality of carrots. A field experiment was conducted to evaluate the growth, yield and quality of carrots affected by different types of organic manure and mulching materials in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia. The study consisted of four organic manures (control, 20 t PM ha − 1 , 20 t FYM ha − 1 and 20 t mixed manure (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) ha − 1 and three types of mulching (no mulching, sawdust mulching and grass mulching) laid in the RCBD, with four replications in a factorial arrangement. Analysis was performed using the SAS software package. Root diameter, root fresh weight, root dry weight, marketable yield and total root yield were significantly (P ≤ 0.05) affected by the interaction effect of organic manure and mulching materials. The main effects of organic manure and mulching also significantly (p ≤ 0.05) affected plant height, leaf number, leaf length, root length, unmarketable root yield, root dry matter content, forked roots, cracked roots and TSS. Among the different combinations, 20 t of mixed manure (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) with grass mulching ha − 1 surpassed all the other combinations in terms of maximum root length (22.45 cm), root diameter (6.60 cm), root fresh weight (179.25 g), root dry weight (26.16 g), marketable root yield (27.90 t ha − 1 ) and total root yield (33.92 t ha − 1 ) during the experimental year. Similarly, PM with grass mulching also produced better results pertaining to carrot growth and yield. Based on these results, the highest net benefit (360,520 Birr ha − 1 ) with an MRR of 3803% was obtained from the treatment combination of 20 t FYM with grass mulching. Therefore, the use of 20 t FYM with grass mulching could be recommended for carrot production in the study area. Since this study is limited to the use of organic manure with mulching materials during one season and at one location, the results should be repeated across seasons and locations. Horticulture Cracking Forking and Sawdust Figures Figure 1 1. INTRODUCTION Carrot ( Daucus carota L.) is one of the most widely consumed, economically important, nutritious and delicious root vegetables and belongs to the Umbelliferea family (Hossain, 2012 ). The domestic carrot originated from wild plants growing in Afghanistan (Iorizzo et al ., 2013). It has been reported that carrots with purple roots were domesticated in Afghanistan and spread to the Eastern Mediterranean area under Arab influence in the 10th to 12th centuries and to Western Europe in the 14th century (Banga, 1984). Carrots were first introduced to China by the 13th century, and their cultivation spread from the Middle East to Italy, Spain and throughout Europe in the fourteenth century ( Kasiri et al., 2013 ). The exact timing of the introduction of carrots to Ethiopia is unknown, and the crop has been known since the early 1960s in the research system (Haile-Mickael, 1969). Worldwide, production approached 44,762,859 tons of carrot and turnips on 1,137,738 hectares on a yearly basis, with an average yield of 37 t ha − 1 (FAO-Stat, 2021). The development of cultivars adapted for cultivation in both the summer and winter seasons on all continents has allowed for the year-round availability of carrot products with relatively stable prices to consumers (Semagn et al., 2008 ). The main top three carrot-producing countries in terms of production are China, Uzbekistan and the United States of America, with total productions of 21,482,971, 2,769,613 and 2,259,000 tons, respectively (Eagri, 2022 ). The main top three carrot-producing countries in Africa are Algeria, Morocco, and Kenya, with total productions of 419,534, 412,219 and 329,025 tons, respectively (FAO-Stat, 2021). In Ethiopia, the total area under carrot production was approximately 4,135 ha, 16590.56 tons of which were produced in 2021, for an average yield of 6.5 t ha − 1 (CSA, 2021). This showed that the production of carrots in Ethiopia is significantly under the global average (37 t ha − 1 ) (Eagri and FAO-Stat, 2022). Ethiopia, which has diverse agro-climatic conditions, provides a favorable environment for carrot cultivation (Abdirshikur and Zekiya, 2020). However, traditional agricultural practices in the country have heavily relied on synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, leading to soil degradation, water pollution, and negative impacts on human health (Getachewu et al ., 2012). Consequently, there is a pressing need to transition toward more sustainable and eco-friendly farming methods (Shashi et al ., 2018). In recent years, several studies have explored the potential of organic farming as an alternative approach to improve agricultural sustainability (Hailu et al., 2008 ). Organic fertilizers, such as compost, manure and green manures, are considered essential components of organic agriculture because they enhance soil fertility, increase nutrient availability, promote beneficial soil microorganisms and enhance yield (Basel and Sami, 2014). Getachew et al . (2012) demonstrated the positive effects of organic fertilizers on crop growth and yield in different regions of Ethiopia. However, specific research on organic carrot production in Diguna Fango Woreda is limited, and there is a knowledge gap regarding the comparative performance of different organic manures on carrot crops in this region (Tadele and Selomon, 2014). Understanding the effectiveness of various organic manure types with mulching on carrot growth in the specific agro climatic conditions of Diguna Fango Woreda is crucial for farmers to adopt sustainable agricultural practices and improve their livelihoods (Kifle and Birhanu, 2019). The primary research problem addressed in this study was the lack of comprehensive data on the performance of carrot cultivation using organic manure with mulching in Diguna Fango Woreda. Consequently, farmers may be hesitant to shift from using inorganic fertilizer to organic fertilizer due to uncertainty about its efficacy and economic viability. This study focused on data on carrot yield under organic manure with mulching; however, further studies that include information on the soil before and after the application of mulching, nutrient status before use, and weather conditions during the experiment are important, and a lack of such information is considered a limitation of the study. Several reports have been conducted to determine the effects of organic manures on the growth and yield of carrots, but studies on the effect of organic mulching practices with organic nutrient supplementation on the growth and yield of carrots are rare. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the effects of organic manures on the mulched and no mulched conditions of carrots. Objective of the study : To investigate the growth, yield and quality response of carrots to different organic manures and mulching materials in the Diguna Fango Woreda, southern Ethiopia. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1. Description of the Study Site The experiment was conducted at Waraza Lasho Kebele of, Diguna Fango Woreda, Wolaita, Ethiopia, during the 2023 main cropping season from February to May. The experimental site is located 431 km south of Addis Ababa at 6 0 59’0" N latitude and 37 0 59’0" E longitude with an elevation of 1800 m.a.s.l. The area receives annual rainfall of 1500 mm, and the average minimum and maximum temperatures are 16°C and 25°C, respectively (Diguna Fango Woreda Information Desk, 2016). The soil is sandy clay loam in texture and slightly acidic, with a pH of 6.1 (Areka Agricultural Research Center soil laboratory, 2023). 2.2. Experimental Materials The Nantes orange-colored carrot variety imported from the Netherlands and certified by the EIRA was used as the planting material. Poultry manure, farmyard manure and mixed poultry and farmyard manures were used as mineral sources. Grass and sawdust were used as mulching materials for the study. 2.3. Experimental design and treatment combinations The treatments consisted of four levels of organic manure (0, 20 t PM, 20 t FYM, and 20 t mixed (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) ha − 1 ) and three mulching materials (no mulching, sawdust mulching and grass mulching), for a total of 12 treatment combinations (Table 1 ). The treatments were arranged in a 4×3 factorial combination in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications. 2.4. Soil Sampling and Analysis Before sowing, soil samples were taken from the entire experimental field to a depth of 0–30 cm by the zig-zag method using a soil augur. The samples were air-dried, ground, passed through a 2 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample. The following parameters were determined in the Soil Laboratory of the Areka Agricultural Research Center. The soil samples were then analyzed for soil texture, organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium, available calcium, available magnesium, available sodium, available sulphur, available boron, soil pH and CEC. The pH of the soil was determined according to FAO (2008) using a 1:2.5 (weight/volume) soil sample-to-water ratio and a glass electrode attached to a digital pH meter. The organic carbon content was determined by the volumetric method as described in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) guide for laboratory establishment for plant nutrient analysis (FAO, 2008). Available phosphorus was determined according to Olsen et al. ( 1954 ) by the Olsen method using a spectrophotometer. Total nitrogen was determined using the Kjeldahl method as described by Bremner and Mulvaney ( 1982 ). 2.5. Organic Manures sampling and analysis Before incorporation into the soil, organic manure samples were taken. The samples were air-dried, ground, passed through a 2 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample. The following parameters were determined in the Soil Laboratory of the Areka Agricultural Research Center. The pH, organic carbon, available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents of the manure samples were analyzed via a digital pH meter, the Walkley and Black Rapid titration method, the alkaline potassium permanganate method, Olsen’s method, and the flame photometer method, respectively (Jackson, 1973). 2.6. Experimental Procedures Organic manures and mulching materials were prepared near the study area from December to February. By using the sealed pit method, FYM was prepared in the back yard of the model farmer who has a cattle farm in the study area through the anaerobic decomposition of farm wastes (dung, urine and litter) in underground pits by sealing the surface of the pit with dung slurry for three months, and poultry manure was purchased from egg and meat poultry entrepreneurs. The plants in the experimental field were plowed with oxen to a fine tilth four times, and the blocks were levelled and divided into plots according to the layout of the experiment. Before sowing, soil samples were taken from the entire experimental field to a depth of 0–30 cm by zigzag methods using a soil augur. The samples were air dried and ground to pass through a 2 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample. The following parameters were determined in the Soil Laboratory of the Areka Agricultural Research Center. The soil samples were subsequently analyzed for soil texture, organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium, available calcium, available magnesium, available sodium, available sulphur, available boron, soil pH and CEC. The pH of the soil was determined according to FAO (2008) using a 1:2.5 (weight/volume) soil sample-to-water ratio and a glass electrode attached to a digital pH meter. The organic carbon content was determined by the volumetric method as described in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) guide for laboratory establishment for plant nutrient analysis (FAO, 2008). Available phosphorus was determined according to Olsen et al. ( 1954 ) by the Olsen method using a spectrophotometer. Total nitrogen was determined using the Kjeldahl method as described by Bremner and Mulvaney ( 1982 ). According to the design, a field layout was established, and each treatment was assigned randomly to the experimental units within a block. A total of 48 experimental plots were laid out as indicated above, with 0.2 m×0.1 m spacing between rows and plants. The spaces between the plot and the block were 0.5 m and 0.8 m, respectively. The total experimental area was 29.5 m in length and 8.8 m in width (259.6 m 2 ). The seeds were sown at a depth of 1.5 cm within a plot with a length of 2 m, width of 1.6 m and plot area (3.2 m 2 ) in rows according to the treatment. In the experimental plot with five rows, the seeds were sown on February 19th, 2023, to prepare holes. The organic manures were applied a month before the sowing date to allow for the requirement of substantial time for mineralization of manures and mulching applied after sowing. Two thinnings were performed to maintain the optimum plant population. The first thinning was performed 30 days after sowing, and the second thinning was performed 10 days after the first thinning. Earthling of the plants was performed twice, at 30 and 60 DAS, to protect them from direct sunlight, which could cause undesirable green coloration. Cultural practices were applied uniformly to all the plots throughout the growing period. Continuous weeding by hand pulling was performed to ensure clean fields. Harvesting was performed on May 26th, 2023, when the leaves began to log down. 2.7. Data collection and measurement 2.7.1. Growth Parameters Plant height (cm) Plant height was measured using a meter ruler from the soil surface to the tip of the longest leaf of ten randomly selected plants growing in middle rows (net plot area) at 30, 60 and 90 DAS, and the mean values were computed. Number of leaves per plant The number of leaves was counted for ten randomly selected plants grown in the net plot area at 30, 60 and 90 DAS, and the mean values per plant were computed. Leaf length (cm) Leaf length was measured using a meter ruler from the point of emergence to the tip of the leaf for ten randomly selected plants at 30, 60 and 90 DAS and is expressed as the mean value in centimeters (cm). 2.7.2. Yield Parameters Root length (cm) The length of the roots was measured using a meter ruler for ten randomly selected plants from the net plot at harvest from the base of the root to the top of the root, and the mean values were computed. Root diameter (cm) The size of the roots was measured using a side caliper for ten randomly selected plants from the net plot area and divided by the number of sampled plants to obtain the mean values, which were subsequently computed. Fresh weight of the root (g) The roots of ten sample plants were uprooted, cut from the base of the petiole, and washed off any loose soil. The surface moisture was removed, and the plants were weighed immediately to a sensitive balance and are expressed in grams. The mean values were used for further analysis. Dry weight of the root (g) Ten randomly selected plant roots at harvest were removed and chopped into small pieces with the help of a stainless steel knife. The samples were placed on drying materials, kept in a laboratory room for three days, placed in paper bags and dried in an oven at 70°C for 48 hours. After drying, each sample was weighed using a digital sensitive balance, and the average was computed and recorded as the dry weight of the roots. Marketable root yield (t ha − 1 ) Roots that were free from mechanical damage, disease and insect pest damage; uniform in color; and medium to large in size were considered marketable. The yield was determined as the weight of the healthy and saleable yield of ten sample plants from central rows, avoiding border effects, and by converting this yield to tons per hectare, the data were used for further analysis. Unmarketable root yield (t ha − 1 ) Roots that were cracked, hairy, misshaped, decayed, discolored, diseased or physiologically disordered were considered unmarketable. The weights of the roots obtained from the net plot area of each plot were measured in kilograms using a scaled balance and are expressed in tons per hectare. Total yield (t ha − 1 ): Summations of the marketable and unmarketable root yields from the net plot area were recorded. The yield of every plot was weighed and divided into the number of plants to determine the yield per plant, and the yield t ha − 1 was estimated. Dry matter content (%) : Dry matter content was measured by weighing randomly selected roots from the net plot and is expressed as a percentage. 2.7.3. Quality Parameters Forked root (%) Roots that were misshaped at the tip, slightly shortened and multirooted with several divergent tap roots were considered forked roots. The number of forked roots per plot harvested from the net plot area was recorded for each treatment, and the percentage was calculated according to the formula given below. Cracked root (%) : Roots that were vertically cracked running along the length of the tap root, bent, twisted or splinted were considered cracked roots. The number of such roots per plot was recorded for each treatment, and the percentage was calculated according to the formula below. Total soluble solids (TSS) The total soluble solids of all the roots of five randomly selected plants from the net plot were chopped, and the total soluble solids (TSS) were tested in the Wolaita Sodo University Horticulture Department Laboratory by placing three drops of transparent juice on the prism refract meter. Before being utilized for subsequent readings, the refractometer prism was dried with tissue paper and cleaned with distilled water between samples. The refractometer was calibrated at 00°C using distilled water, readings were observed on a scale, and averages were expressed in °Brix (AOAC, 1960). 2.8. Partial Budget Analysis The partial budget analysis was considered using the methods described in CYMMIT (1988) with the mean marketable yield of each treatment, the gross benefit and the field price of inputs of organic manures, mulching materials and seeds of carrot. The total cost and mean market price of carrots and organic manure were taken from the market assessment at the time of planting. All costs and returns were calculated on a hectare basis in Birr. Gross average yield (t ha − 1 ) (AvY) The average yield of each treatment Adjusted yield (AjY) Is the average yield adjusted downward by 10% to reflect the difference between the experimental yield and yield of farmers? Gross field benefit (GFB) Obtained by multiplying the field price that farmers receive for the crop when they sell it by the adjusted yield. Total variable costs (TVC) (ETB ha − 1 ) Summation of the total cost of organic manure, carrot seed, labor cost, weeding cost and application costs of organic fertilizers for the experiment. Net benefit (NB) The NB was calculated as the amount of money left when the total variable costs (TVC) were deducted from the gross field benefit (GFB) NB = GFB – TVC Marginal rate of return (MRR %) was calculated as the change in net benefit (NB) divided by the change in total variable cost (TVC) of the successive net benefit and total variable cost levels (CIMMYT, 1988). 2.9. Statistical analysis The data were subjected to ANOVA using the statistical analysis software (SAS) version 9.3 (SAS, 2014). The least significant difference (LSD 0.05 ) test was used for mean separation when the analyses of variance indicated the presence of a significant difference. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1. Soil physicochemical properties at the experimental site 3.2. Physicochemical properties of the organic manures 3.3. Growth Components of Carrot 3.3.1. Plant height (cm) Analysis of variance revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching had significant (P ≤ 0.05) effects on plant height at different growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS) ( Appendix Table 1). The mean plant height varied in relation to the growth period, and the application of 20 t of mixed manure significantly increased the plant height. The application of mixed manure resulted in a significantly greater mean height at all growth phases (30, 60 and 90 DAS), except for 90 DAS, which was significantly similar to that at 20 t PM and 20 t mixed manure. At 30 DAS, the maximum (25.68 cm) mean plant height was recorded in the 20 t mixed manure treatment, while the minimum (19.30 cm) height was recorded in the control treatment. The results showed that the plants treated with organic manure had taller plant heights than did the control plants. The increase in vegetative growth might be due to the role of nitrogen in promoting vegetative growth, enhancing cell division and elongation, and enhancing chlorophyll synthesis. Phosphorus is easily mobilized in plants and translocated to the meristematic zone, increasing leaf formation and development in carrots, and potassium activates many enzymes involved in respiration and photosynthesis. FYM and PM improved the physical, chemical and biological properties of the soil, which promoted better nutrient absorption and utilization by plants, resulting in improved plant growth. The application of organic manure likely improved the uptake of nutrients by the plants (Shweta et al ., 2017). The findings of the current study support this argument In line with the present study, Bithi et al . (2019) confirmed that organic manure application significantly produced the greatest plant height. This value decreased as the type of organic manure differed, and ultimately, the lowest value of this growth parameter was recorded in the control treatment of carrots (Rashid and Shakur, 2006 ). The mean height of the plants in the mulching treatments varied in relation to the growth period; grass mulching had the tallest (23.88 cm) mean height, while the no mulching treatment had the shortest (15.81 cm) mean height at 30 DAS. The longest (39.76 cm) mean plant height was recorded at the peak growth stage at 60 DAS in the grass mulch treatment, while the shortest (28.11 cm) was recorded in the no mulching treatment. The highest (59.58 cm) mean plant height at harvest was recorded in response to the application of grass mulch, while the shortest height was from the control (46.66 cm), which was significantly inferior to that in response to saw dust mulch but similar to that in response to the other treatments (Table 4 ). The increase in plant height due to mulching might be attributed to the favorable soil moisture and temperature condition needed for proper plant growth. 3.3.2. Number of Leaves per Plant Analysis of variance revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching had significant (P ≤ 0.05) effects on the number of leaves per plant at different growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS); however, mulching did not have a significant (P ≥ 0.05) effect at 30 DAS ( Appendix Table 1). The application of 20 t of mixed manure resulted in a significantly greater mean leaf number at all growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS), except for the results obtained with the application of 20 t of PM and 20 t of FYM at 60 and 90 DAS. The maximum number of leaves per plant was recorded (17.31) from the 20 t mixed manure treatment at 90 DAS, while the minimum number of leaves per plant was 5.03 from the control. This might be because mixed manure probably enhances soil fertility by increasing soil porosity, aeration, moisture holding capacity, and available plant nutrients; acting as complex fertilizer granules; and accelerating nitrogen mineralization, which in turn improves plant canopy growth. The highest number of leaves per plant was recorded from the grass mulch treatment at 30, 60 and 90 DAS. On the other hand, the lowest leaf number was recorded in the treatment without mulch at 30 DAS. The increased number of leaves with different mulch types might be attributed to the supply of moisture, which possibly accelerated cell division and elongation, leading to the production of more leaves and leaf development and an increased number of leaves. Jaysawal et al. ( 2018 ) reported that grass mulch treatment was the best among the various mulch treatments and recorded a maximum (16.82) number of leaves per plant of carrot. 3.3.3. Leaf length (cm) Analysis of variance revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching had significant (P ≤ 0.05) effects on leaf length at different growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS); however, mulching did not have a significant (P ≥ 0.05) effect at 30 DAS. ( Appendix Table 1). The mean leaf length varied in relation to the growth period, and the application of organic manure significantly increased the leaf length. The application of 20 t of mixed manure significantly improved the mean leaf length at all growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS), but the values were significantly similar to those obtained with the application of 20 t of poultry manure at 60 and 90 DAS. The maximum leaf length was recorded (58.15 cm) from the 20 t mixed manure treatment at 90 DAS, while the minimum leaf length per plant was 12.46 cm from the OM 0 M 0 treatment (no organic manure) at 30 DAS (Table 4 ). This might be because FYM + PM enhanced the nutrient content of the soil, providing a balanced supply of essential elements required for carrot plants to thrive. These manures contain a wide range of macronutrients, such as nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), as well as micronutrients such as calcium, magnesium, and iron. The gradual release of nutrients from organic manure ensures a sustained and steady supply, preventing nutrient deficiencies and promoting optimum plant growth. These findings are in agreement with the results of Shah et al . (2015), who documented that the leaf length of carrots varied with different types of manure application. Leaf length differed significantly due to the different mulch applications. The greatest leaf length was recorded in the grass mulch treatment (42.67 cm) at 90 DAS, while the lowest leaf length was recorded in the control treatment (9.17 cm) at 30 DAS. The use of mulching in crops not only increases growth but also plays a vital role in soil moisture conservation by creating a physical barrier between the soil and the environment. Moreover, these methods are helpful for weed control, water and soil conservation and for boosting the production and quality of crops. This result is in accordance with the findings of (Austin and Harley, 2013 ) . The means followed by the same letters in the column are not significantly different at the 5% level: OM 0 = no organic manure, OM 1 = 20 t PM, OM 2 = 20 t FYM, OM 3 = 20 t Mixed (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) manure, M 0 = no mulch, M 1 = sawdust dust mulch, M 2 = grass mulch, CV (%) = coefficient of variation, and LSD 0.05 = least significant difference at the 5% level. 3.4. Yield and yield-related components 3.4.1. Root length (cm) The analysis of the data revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching were significant (P ≤ 0.05) on root length ( Appendix Table 2). The longest root length (22.45 cm) was recorded in the 20 t mixed manure treatment, while the shortest root length (13.16 cm) was recorded in the control treatment (Table 5 ). The length of carrot roots depends on the physical characteristics of the soil. The highest root length in OM 3 might be due to the positive effects of FYM and PM on the physical characteristics of the soil. These findings are consistent with those of Ahamed et al . (2014), who reported that the maximum root length (21.0 cm) from half PM + half FYM varied with the type of manure applied (FYM, PM or leaf manure). This finding agrees with that of Michael et al . (2012), who reported that organic manure (PM and FYM) improves the soil structure and maintains uniform soil moisture and nutrient levels, which allows carrots to extend their root length to deeper soil layers. Root length differed significantly due to the different mulch applications. The maximum root length (21.15 cm) was recorded in the M 2 (grass) mulch treatment, which was significantly different from that in the other treatments. The minimum root length (13.16 cm) was found in M 0 (no mulch) (Table 5 ). A favorable soil‒water-plant relationship is created by placing mulch over the soil surface. The microclimate surrounding plants and soil is significantly affected by mulch, i.e., the thermodynamic environment, moisture, erosion, physical soil structure, incidence of pests and diseases, crop growth and yield. Arfan (2013) revealed that different types of organic mulch generated higher soil temperature and soil moisture under mulch than did the control. The results obtained in this study clearly indicated that carrots responded well to organic manures and organic mulching materials. 3.4.2. Root diameter (cm) The analysis of the data revealed that the interaction effect (P ≤ 0.05) on root diameter was significant ( Appendix Table 2). The maximum diameter of the roots (6.60 cm) was recorded from the 20 t of mixed manure with sawdust mulch applied ha − 1 , which was significantly different than that of the other organic manure treatments. On the other hand, the minimum root diameter (2.47 cm) was observed from the treatment in which no organic manure was applied with grass mulch. 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 Mog ( 2007 ), 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. Organic manure and mulching have been shown to supply the required plant nutrients, improve soil structure and water holding capacity, increase microbial activity, reduce evaporation, improve soil moisture and simultaneously promote plant growth and productivity (Jeptoo et al ., 2012). In general, the combination of PM and FYM with sawdust mulch produced significantly greater growth and yield characteristics in crops during the whole growing season. The increase in root diameter due to organic manure with mulching might be attributed to favorable soil fertility, favorable soil moisture and favorable soil temperature conditions for proper plant growth (Deepak et al ., 2020). This result is in accordance with the findings of Rahman et al . (2018). The application of 20 t of mixed (PM with FYM) manure improved vegetative growth and increased root diameter and size in carrot plants, as reported by (Blatt et al ., 2012), which was in agreement with our findings. 3.4.3. Root fresh weight (g) The analysis of the data revealed that the interaction had a significant effect (P ≤ 0.05) on the fresh weight of the roots of the carrot plants (g) ( Appendix Table 2). The maximum fresh weight per plant (179.25 g) was observed from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch ha − 1 . The minimum root weight per plant (44.32 g) was recorded for the control plot (Table 6 ). The increased fresh weight of roots from plants cultivated with different manures combined with mulch might be attributed to the supply of mineral nutrients by organic manures and moisture supplied by organic mulch, which possibly accelerated the cell division and elongation activities, thereby increasing the weight of the roots and their development, leading to increased fresh weight. The difference in root weight due to the application of different manures implies that manures differ in terms of nutrient content and in their efficiency in enhancing root weight. A greater nutrient content in manure resulted in greater root weight. Among the different manures, mixed manure was the most effective, followed by poultry and farmyard manure. Josiane et al . (2014) reported that , compared with the control, the application of 20 t ha-1 organic manure (PM, FYM and chicken manure) increased the yield of carrots (10%-20%). These results are consistent with the findings of Acharya (2011), who reported that animal waste generated with mulching materials contains considerable amounts of plant nutrients. 3.4.4. Root dry weight (g) The interaction effect of organic manure and mulching application significantly (P ≤ 0.05) influenced the root dry weight of the carrot plants ( Appendix Table 2). The maximum root dry weight (26.16 g) was observed in 20 t of mixed manure with grass mulch ha − 1 applied treatment. The minimum dry weight per plant (5.82 g) was recorded for the control treatment (Table 6 ). This result can be attributed to the slow release of nutrients from organic manures and their better utilization by carrots throughout the growing period, which might have resulted in a greater dry weight of the carrot roots. The increase in the root dry weight per plant in response to the application of PM + FYM may be attributed to the greater nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium availability in these plants than in those receiving other bulky organic manures. In line with the present study, Noopur et al . (2018) reported that the use of different organic manures (poultry, farmyard manure and cow dung) with mulch (grass, sugarcane straw and leaf mulch) on carrots resulted in significantly different root dry weights. These results are supported by the findings of Okokoh et al . (2011), who reported that the dry weight of roots was influenced by organics and mulching compared to those of the control, but in contrast with the findings of Kumawat et al . (2018), who reported that under high nitrogen application, the plant grew well but had a low yield because vegetative growth was favored over root growth. 3.4.5. Marketable yield (t ha -1 ) The analysis of the data revealed that the interaction had a significant (p ≤ 0.05) effect on the marketable root yield of the carrot plants ( Appendix Table 3). The maximum marketable root yield (27.90 t ha − 1 ) was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch ha − 1 , which was significantly different from that of the other treatments; in contrast, the minimum marketable yield (8.21 t ha − 1 ) was recorded from the control treatment (Table 6 ). 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. In the case of manures, substantial time is required for the plant to release available nutrients. The sole application of manures through FYM and/or PM or their combination had a lower yield than the combination of manures with mulching. The improvement in yield attributes through FYM + PM with grass mulch might be due to improved soil moisture holding capacity, soil moisture, and soil temperature; adequate availability of major 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. These results are in accordance with the findings of Kumar ( 2013 ), Rani et al. ( 2016 ), Kumawat et al . (2018) and Kushwah et al . (2019). Okokoh and Bisong ( 2011 ) reported similar findings that higher yields of roots in carrots were obtained when 15 t FYM ha − 1 and 15 t PM ha − 1 were used. This could be because nitrogen is the major constituent of chlorophyll, proteins and amino acids, the synthesis of which is accelerated by the increased supply of nitrogen in soil (Allok et al ., 2022). An analogous yield increase due to the amendments of poultry and FYM manure application was also reported in studies (Shah et al ., 2015), which mentioned a significant yield increase in carrot plants following the application of manures in addition to grass mulching. 3.4.6. Total root yield (t ha -1 ) The analysis of the data revealed that the interaction had a significant (P ≤ 0.05) effect on the total root yield ( Appendix Table 3). The total root yield (33.92 t ha − 1 ) maximum was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch ha − 1 , which was significantly different from that of the other treatments, whereas the minimum yield (10.56 t ha − 1 ) was recorded from the control treatment (Table 6 ). The yield of mixed poultry and farmyard manure combined with grass mulching 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 addition of organic manure by mulching improved the soil structure, increased its water holding capacity and facilitated aeration in the soil. Sugarcane also helps in the gradual release of nutrients into the soil, which makes it an ideal input for good carrot crop growth. The ability of (FYM + 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. The increased total yield of carrots with different organic manures and mulches might be attributed to the increase in soil fertility, soil structure, temperature and moisture, which possibly accelerated the cell division and elongation activities, producing more leaves and leading to increased carrot root yield (Daniel and Genis, 2021). The results of the present study revealed that poultry manure mixed with FYM influenced the increase in root yield of carrots under mulch conditions within the crop growth period. It is well recognized that poultry manure in combination with farmyard manure under grass mulch increases the yield of carrots (Khairul et al ., 2015). The means followed by the same letters in the columns are not significantly different at the 5% level: OM 0 = no organic manure, OM 1 = 20 t PM, OM 2 = 20 t FYM, OM 3 = 20 t mixed (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) manure, M 0 = no mulch, M 1 = sawdust mulch, M 2 = grass mulch, CV (%) = coefficient of variation, and LSD 0.05 = least significant difference at the 5% level. 3.4.7. Unmarketable yield (t ha -1 ) The main effect of organic manure had a significant (P ≤ 0.05) influence on the unmarketable yield of carrots ( Appendix Table 3). The maximum unmarketable root yield (5.83 t ha − 1 ) was recorded from the 20 t mixed manure treatment, while the minimum unmarketable root yield (2.60 t ha − 1 ) was recorded from the control (Table 7 ). 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. 3.4.8. Root dry matter (%) The study showed that the main effect of organic manure had a significant (p ≤ 0.05) effect on the root dry matter content of carrots ( Appendix Table 3). The maximum amount of root dry matter (14.59%) was recorded in the 20 t of mixed manure/ha treatment, while the minimum amount of root dry matter (13.65%) was obtained in the control treatment (Table 7 ). This might be because FYM + PM contributes 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, FYM and poultry manure enhance 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 Anna et al . (2013), 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 Atikur et al. (2018), who indicated that root dry matter percentages were greater in plants treated with higher doses of potassium along with mulching. 3.5. Quality Components To evaluate the quality of the carrots, the following parameters were measured: the percentage of forked roots, percentage of cracked roots and total soluble solids (Table 8 ). 3.5.1. The percentage of forked roots (%) The study showed that the main effect of organic manure and mulching had a significant (p ≤ 0.05) effect on the forked roots of carrots ( Appendix Table 4). 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 minimum percentage of forked roots (1.35%) was observed in the 20 t mixed manure/ha treatment (Table 8 ). 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 Greene and Fritz (2007), 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. Alice (2008), in studying the influence of organic fertilizers on the yield and quality of carrots, stated that an increase in the organic fertilizer rate promoted the development of hairy and forked carrots, which contradicts the current findings. The percentage of forked roots also significantly varied due to the use of different mulching materials on the carrot plants. The highest percentage of forked roots (4.34%) was obtained in the M 0 treatment (no mulch). The lowest percentage of forked roots (1.35%) was obtained in the grass mulch treatment M 2 (grass). This result indicated that the decrease in the forking percentage of roots in the mulch treatments might be due to the effect of soil moisture combined with readily available nutrients. Organic manure application combined with mulch usually enhances soil physical, chemical, and biological activities and moisture, which could be a reason for the suppression of forked root production. 3.5.2. The percentage of cracked roots (%) The study showed that the main effect of organic manure had a significant (p ≤ 0.05) effect on the percentage of cracked roots (%) of carrots ( Appendix Table 4). The percentage of cracked roots was affected by organic manure. For amendments, the 20 t poultry manure treatment effect (3.73%) was greatest in both periods, followed by the 20 t mixed manure treatment, 20 t FYM treatment and control treatment, which were also significantly greater than those of all the other treatments (Table 8 ). The control treatment had the lowest percentage of cracked roots (1.35%). 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. The mulched and amended roots had enough room to expand, reaching the limit of internal turgor pressure and resulting in cracking (Mehwish et al., 2016) . This finding aligns with the report of Tesfu (2010) that carrot splits when the cell walls rupture, forming longitudinal fractures in the phloem parenchyma as a result of internal turgor pressure. They stated that carrot susceptibility to cracking increases following maturity of the roots and that the timing of harvest is critical. This difference in growth pattern may influence susceptibility to cracking, as outer rows are often highly susceptible to cracking. This result for cracked roots was also supported by the findings of Mehedi and Sonia (2012), who reported that the percentage of cracked roots increased due to low moisture and higher nitrogen levels. 3.5.3. Total Soluble Solid ( 0 Brix) The study showed that the main effect of organic manure had a significant (p ≤ 0.05) effect on the TSS of carrots ( Appendix Table 4). The highest total soluble solid concentration (10.56 0 Brix) was obtained for the carrots planted on the plots that received the 20 t FYM ha − 1 treatment, while the lowest TSS concentration (6.560 Brix) was obtained for the carrots in the control treatment. TSS content (Table 8 ) significantly increased with different organic manures because the organic manures, particularly FYM, FYM + PM and PM, contain fair amounts of micronutrients, especially ferrous or iron. It is an essential constituent of many respiratory enzymes, such as catalase, cytochrome A, B and C, are involved in the respiratory process of the cell system. Through this respiration in the plant system, reserve food materials are converted to simple soluble components that can be utilized for growth or maintenance. These findings are in good accordance with the results of Kumar ( 2013 ) and Umuhoza et al. ( 2014 ). Increased nitrogen through manures apparently helped in vigorous vegetative growth and favored photosynthetic activity for greater accumulation of food material, i.e., carbohydrates that increased the TSS content in carrots. These results are in close conformity with those of Wafaa ( 2013 ). Josiane et al . (2014), in studying the nutritional quality of carrots as influenced by farmyard manure, observed that farmyard manure did not significantly improve the total soluble sugar content in carrots, which contradicts the current findings. In contrast with these results, other researchers reported that the total soluble solids of carrots (Habimana and Uwizerwa, 2014) that received organic fertilizers were greater than those that received inorganic fertilizer. These findings are in line with those of Garpreet and Napoor (2018), who revealed that mulching had no significant effect on TSS. Rembiałkowska et al . (2012) confirmed that the higher content of total sugars in organic vegetables, including carrots, beets and potatoes, contributes to an increase in the technological and sensory quality (taste) of organic products. The means followed by the same letters in the column are not significantly different at the 5% level: OM 0 = no organic manure, OM 1 = 20 t PM, OM 2 = 20 t FYM, OM 3 = 20 t Mixed (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) manure, M 0 = no mulch, M 1 = sawdust dust mulch, M 2 = grass mulch, CV (%) = coefficient of variation, and LSD 0.05 = least significant difference at the 5% level. 3.6. Partial Budget Analysis The partial budget analysis of the 12 treatments is shown in Table 9 . The results were analyzed using the technique described by CIMMYT (1988) to assess the costs and benefits of the treatments. Based on the analysis, the highest net benefit of 399,980 Birr ha − 1 with an MRR of 656% was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch/ha = (10 t PM + 10 t FYM with grass mulch) ha − 1 . On the other hand, the lowest net benefit was obtained from the control treatment. The minimum acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR %) should be between 50 and 100% (CIMMYT, 1998). Therefore, the most attractive organic manure type for producers or farmers with higher net returns was (20 t FYM ha − 1 with grass mulching), for which the MRR was 3803%. The results of the present study are in agreement with those of Gerba (2018), who reported that economic analysis revealed that the highest marginal rate of return was obtained from carrot plants treated with 20 t FYM with grass mulch, followed by those treated with 20 t FYM with sawdust mulch, with values of 3803% and 3644%, respectively. In contrast, Rani et al. ( 2016 ) reported that the highest net benefit of Dollar 2950, which has a higher cost (180 dollars), was recorded from the combination of poultry manure and straw mulching, for which the marginal benefit rate was 1811%. Therefore, the best alternative net return, 20 t FYM with grass mulching, is recommended as the best economically rewarding treatment rate for the study area (Table 9 ). 4. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Carrot is one of the most important root crops cultivated throughout the country. The type and management of organic manure with mulching are important factors that strongly affect the growth and yield of carrot crops. The application of organic manure, such as poultry manure and farmyard manure, is necessary to improve the production and productivity of carrots in the study area. However, appropriate application practices that involve the combination of organic manure with mulching materials are lacking in the study area. Thus, a study was conducted to assess the effect of different types of organic manure with mulching on the growth, yield and quality of carrots and to assess the cost‒benefit of different organic manures with mulching materials for the production of carrots. A field experiment was conducted at Waraza Lasho Kebele in Diguna Fango District, Wolaita Zone of Southern Ethiopia, in 2023. The basic seeds of the carrot variety Nantes (orange) were used as the experimental material. The variety was imported from the Netherlands with certification by the EIAR in 2019 (EARO, 2019 ). The treatment consisted of four organic manures (0.0, 20 t poultry manure, 20 t farmyard manure and 20 t mixed manure/ha = (10 t PM + 10 t FYM) ha − 1 ), and three levels of organic mulching (no, sawdust and grass mulching) were used for the experiment. The experiment was performed in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications in a factorial arrangement. The size of each plot was 1.6 m × 2 m (3.2 m 2 ), accommodating 5 single rows with 6 plants per row. The spacing between rows was 20 cm, the spacing between plants was 10 cm, and the spacings between blocks and between plots were 0.8 m and 0.5 m, respectively. All basic growth and yield data were collected and subjected to analysis of variance and partial budget analysis. The effect of organic manure and mulching levels on the performance of carrots suggested that organic manure and mulching materials significantly enhanced the growth and yield attributes of carrot production. The study revealed that the interaction between organic manure and mulching material significantly affected the root diameter, fresh weight, dry weight, marketable yield and total yield. In this study, the highest marketable root yield (27.90 t ha − 1 ) was achieved using the combination of 20 t of mixed manure with grass mulch (10 t PM + 10 t FYM with grass mulch), for which the yield increased by 656% compared to the lowest marketable yield (8.21 t ha − 1 ), which was obtained from the control. On the basis of the partial budget analysis, the highest net benefit (360,520 Birr ha − 1 ) with an MRR of 3803% was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t FYM was combined with grass mulch ha − 1 . According to CIMMYT (1988), the minimum acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR %) should be between 50 and 100%. Therefore, the use of 20 t FYM with grass mulch ha − 1 application with greater net return could be suggested for carrot production in the study area. It may be concluded that 20 t of FYM ha − 1 can be used as organic manure and grass mulch material, and the combination of 20 t FYM with grass mulch ha − 1 can be used to increase the growth and yield of carrots. Further studies can be performed with additional levels of organic manure and different mulching materials. References Abdirshikur Reshid and Zekiya Fitret. 2020. Growth and yield response of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) to spacing in wolaita zone, southern Ethiopia. International Journal of Innovation Scientific Research and Review. Vol . 02, Issue, 12, pp.571-574. Adeleye EO, Ayeni LS, Ojeni SO. 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 (No 6), 1457-146. Ahmad Z, Ali N, Ahmad M, Ulhag S and Ahmad S. 2005. Yield and economics of carrot production in organic farming. Sarhad J. Agric ., 21(3): 357-364. Ahmed A, Sambo B, Arunah U and Odion. 2014. Response of Farmyard Manure and Inorganic Fertilizers for Sustainable Growth of Carrot ( Daucus carota L.) in Northern Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science (IOSR-JAVS) e-ISSN: 2319-2380, p-ISSN: 2319-2372. Akand M.H. 2003. Effect of organic manure and mulching on the growth and yield of carrot. Fert, Int., 225: 45-49. 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 L. and Young B. 2002. An introduction to vegetable production. Nutrition, fertilizers, organic manures and compost making, 3rd edition. Horticultural Science. 127: 1013-1017. Alok Tiwari and Rajendra Prasad. 2022. Studies on effect of organic manures on growth yield and quality of beetroot ( Beta vulgaris L.) cv. ‘Lali. The Pharma Innovation Journal 2022; 11(9): 2849-2859. Alsharifi S, Aljibouri M and Taher M. 2019. Effect of two types of digger machines and speeds of tractor on the qualitative characteristics of potato. Fayoum Journal. Agriculture. Res, and Dev. 33(1):308-322. Amartey J, Sarkordie M, Essilfie H, and Dapaah L. 2022. Growth and yield of carrots affected by integrated nutrient management of organic and inorganic fertilizers, Afr. J. Agric. Res. 18 (7) 576–585. Anjum MA and Amjad M. 2002. Influence of mother root size and plant spacing on carrot seed production. J. Resour. Sci ., 13(2): 105-112. Anna A and Maria G. 2013. Comparison of yield and quality of red beetroots and carrot cultivated using conventional, integrated and organic method. Journal of Horticultural Research. 2013; 21(1):107-104. 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. Arfan A, Ashraful K and Waliullah M. 2013. Effect of spacing and sowing time on growth and yield of carrot ( Daucus carrota L.). Inter. J.. Agri., vol. 5, pp. 29-36. Asfawu Melese and Eshetu Derso. 2015. Production and management of major vegetables in Ethiopia. Inst, Agric.Res. Center, Gize, Ethiopia , Vol. 5 (9): 1547 – 1556. Ashraful Kabir, Arfan Ali, and Wali Ullah. 2013. Effect of Spacing and Sowing Time on Growth and Yield of Carrot ( Daucus carrota L.). International Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 9(1): 1004-1009. Ashraful Kabir and Ismail Yand. 2015. Effect of Different Types of Organic Manure and Mulching on the Growth and Yield of Carrot ( Daucus Carota L.). International Journal of Chemical Studies 6: 2977-2979. Atikur Rahman, Tariqul Islam, Abdullah Mamun, Mohammad Shahidur and Sarmin Ashraf. 2018. Yield and Quality Performance of Carrot under Different Organic and Inorganic Nutrient Sources with Mulching Options. Asian Journal of Agricultural and Horticultural Research 1(4): 1-8, 2018. 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. Banga O. 1963b. Origin and distribution of the western cultivated carrot. Genetica Agraria, 17:357-370.Beck, Banga R and Bawa A. 2002. Studies on dehydration of grated carrots. J Food Sci Technol 39:268–271. Barkcotulla A. 2006. Effect of nitrogen level on yield and yield character of carrot ( Daucus carota L.). DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2019.24.2.1787. Basel Natsheh and Sami Mousa. 2014. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers application on soil and cucumber (Cucumis sativa L.) plant productivity, Int. J. Agric. For. 4 (3) (2014) 166–170. Bithi Biswa, Khaleda Khatu, Ehsanul Haq, Jinia Afsu, Nahidul Islam, and Montasir Ahmed. 2019. Effect of Organic Manure and Mulching on the Growth and Yield of Carrot ( Daucus carota L.). Asian Journal of Research in Crop Science 4(3): 1-11, 2019; Article no. AJRCS.50433 ISSN: 2581-7167. Bose TK and Som MG. 1990. Vegetable crops in India, Naya Prakash, Calcutta, India, 408-442. Bradly NC, Weil RR. 2008. The nature and properties of soils.14th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall. Bremner, J.M. and C.S. Mulvaney. 1982. Methods of soil analysis of total Nitrogen. Part 2-Chemical and microbiological properties. Agronomy, 9 (2):595-624. Cardinault N, Aprikian O, Busserolles J, Grolier P, Rock E, Demigne C, Mazur A, Scalbert A, Amouroux P, Remesy C. 2003. Effect of carrot intake on cholesterol metabolism and antioxidant status in cholesterol fed rats. Eur J Nutr 42:254–261. CIMMYT (Centro Internationalde Majoramento de Maize Y Trigo), 1988. Farm Agronomic to farmers’ recommendation. An Economic Training Manual. Completely revised edition. D.F.Mexico.51pp. 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. Dasari Vikram, Khushboo Kathayat and Kevin Karangiya. 2020. Effects of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield and quality and economics of carrot. The Pharma Innovation Journal 2022; SP-11(7): 4490-4493. Dawuda M, Boateng P, Hemeng O and Nyarko G. 2011. Growth and yield response of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) to different rates of soil amendments and spacing. Journal of Science and Technology 31(2): 11-20 11. 10. 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. Dey D K. 2000. Effect of nitrogen and mulch on growth and yield of carrot. An MS thesis, Department of Horticulture, Bangladesh Agril. Univ. Dudás P, Menyhárt L, Gedeon C, Ambrus G and Tóth F. 2016. Effect of hay mulching on soil temperature and the abundance and diversity of soil-dwelling arthropods in potato and carrot fields. Eur. J. Entomol, 113, 456–461. Eagri T. 2022. Origin, area, production, varieties, package of practices for carrot. http://eagri.org/eagri50/HORT281/pdf/lec27. EARO. 2019. Directory of released crop varieties and their recommended cultural practices. Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp: 1-36. EthioSIS (Ethiopian Soil Information System). 2013. Soil Analysis Report, Agricultural Transformation Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp 33.45. Gaadhe S and Tiwari K. 2022. Carrot Harvesting Methods: A Review. International Journal of Plant and Soil Science 34(10): 7-16, 2022; Article no.IJPSS.84454 ISSN: 2320-7035 Gajewski M and Dąbrowska A. 2007. Quality characteristics of carrot cultivars depending to long-term storage. Univ. Press, Univ. of Technol. and Life Sci. in Bydgoszcz. pp: 95-103. Gamliel A, Austerweil M and Kritzman G. 2000. Non - chemical approach to soil borne pest management–organic amendments. Agric. and Environ. Sci., 12 (3): 399-406. Gerba Daba, Meseret Mulugeta, and Tarike Ayana. 2018. Effect of cattle manure on growth and yield of carrot ( Daucus Carrota L.) under Jimma condition. Cogent Food and Agriculture, 6(1), 1722353.. Goel L, Shankar V, and Sharma R. 2020. Influence of different organic mulches on soil hydrothermal and plant growth parameters in potato crop ( Solanum tuberosum L.). Agric. and Environ. Sci., 12 (3): 399-406. Goulson David, Mcguire Kate, Munro Emma, Adamson Susan, Colliar Louise, Park Kirsty, Tinsley Matthew and Gilburn Andre. 2009. Functional significance of the dark central floret of Daucus carota (Apiaceae) L. Plant Species Biology. 24 (2): 77–82. Gurpreet Singh and Noopur Jaysawal, 2018. Influence of Different Mulches on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot. Annals of Biology 34 (2): 181-186. Khairul Mazed, Ashraful Islam, Shah Newaz, Jannatul Ferdous and Nur Unnahar. 2015. Effect of Different Types of Organic Manure and Mulching on the Growth and Yield of Carrot ( Daucus Carota L.). International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications ISSN 2250-3153. Haile-Michael Kidane-Mariam. 1969. Vegetable production. Guide for eastern Ethiopia. Experiment Station. Collage of Agriculture, Haile-Silassie I University, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Bulletin No. 62. 42-43. Hailu S, Seyoum T and Dechassa N. 2008. Effect of combined application of organic P and inorganic N fertilizers on yield of carrot. African Journal of Biotechnology , 7 (1) 27-34. Hossam S, El-Beltagi, Abdul Basit, Heba I, Mohamed Iftikhar, Sana Ullah, Ehab A, Kamel Tarek Shalaby Khaled, Ramadan Abdulmalik, and Hesham Ghazzawy. 2022. Mulching as a sustainable water and soil saving practice in agriculture. Agronomy, 2022, 12, 1881. Hossain S.M. 2012. Effect of Spacing and Sowing Time on Growth and Yield of Carrot LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing UK. 92 p. Iorizzo M. 2016. A high-quality carrot genome assembly provides new insights into carotenoid accumulation and euasterid genome evolution. Nature Genetics, 48: 657-666. Inusah B, Wiredu A, Yirzagla J, Mawunya M and Haruna M. 2013. Effect of different mulches on the yield and productivity of drip irrigated onions under tropical conditions. Agric. and Environ. Sci., 12 (3): 399-406. Islam S. 2006. Use of Bios - lurry as organic fertilizer in Bangladesh agriculture. Prepared for international workshop on the use of Bioslurry for domestic biogas programmes. 27th September, Bangkok, Thailand. Jaysawal N, Singh G, Kanojia A, and Debbarma B. 2018. Effect of different mulches on growth and yield of carrot ( Daucus carota L.). Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 24(13 and 14), 1583 – 1589. Jepto A, Aguyoh NJ, Mwanarusi S. 2012. Improving carrot yield and quality through the use of Bio slurry manure. Egerton, Kenya: Canadian center of science and education. http://dx.doi.org./10.5539/sar.v2n/p164. Josiane Noella, Karemera Umuhoza, Habimana Sylvestre and Sibomana Philippe. 2014. Nutritional quality of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) as influenced by farm yard manure. Department of Crop Science, University of Rwanda, College of Agriculture, Musanze, Rwanda. Kasiri M, Hassandokht M, and Shahi-Gharahlar A. 2013. Evaluation of genetic diversity in Iranian yellow carrot accessions ( Daucus carota var. sativus ), an exposed to extinction root vegetable, using morphological characters. Biology. Evaluation of geneticdiversity-in-Iranian-yellow-Kasiri. 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. Khan M.Q and Khan H.L. 2006. Impact of sewage waste on soil properties and quality of vegetables. Journal of Science and Technology 31(2): 11-20 11. 10. Khurana R, Manes GS, Dixit A, Singh A, Mahal JS and Singh BP. 2013. Proto type feasibility testing of tractor operated root crop harvester. Annual Report for 2013. Pp. 68. Punjab agricultural university, Ludhiana. Kowalczuk J, Leszczyński N and Bieganowski F. 2003. Evaluation of the quality of carrot root harvested with Alina and Simon one-row harvesters. ActaAgrophysica.2(1):1 05-111. 82. Kumar GS. 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. Lali Alok Tiwari and Rajendra Prasad. 2022. Studies on effect of organic manures on growth yield and quality of beetroot ( Beta vulgaris L.). The Pharma Innovation Journal 2022; 11(9): 2849-2859. Landon C. Weil. 1991. The Nature and Properties of CEC of Soils, 13th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Mbatha AN. 2008. Influence of organic fertilizers on yield and quality of carrots. Bloemfotein University of the Free State. McMillen M. 2013. Effect of mulch type and thickness on the soil surface evaporation rate. Acta Hortic. 571, 149 – 152. Mehedi T, Siddique M and Sonia B. 2012. Effects of Urea and Cowdung on growth and yield of Carrot. Bangladesh Agricultural Research, Gazipur. p. 94. 10 (1): 9- 13. Mehwish Kiran and Muhammad Saleem. 2016. Response of Carrot ( Daucus carota L.) Growth and Yields to Organic Manure and Inorganic Fertilizers. J. Hort. Sc. and Biotech. 78(8), 821. Michael Masarirambi, Phiwokwakhe Dlamini, Paul Wahome and Tajudeen Oseni, 2012. Effects of Chicken Manure on Growth, Yield and Quality of Lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) and Carrot ( Daucus carota L.). Semi-Arid Sub-Tropical Environment American-Eurasian J. Agric. and Environ. Sci ., 12 (3): 399-406. Mog B. 2007. Effect of organics and biofertilizers on productivity potential in carrot ( Daucus carota L.) (M.Sc. Agric. Thesis in Crop Physiology). Department of Crop Physiology College of Agriculture, Dharwad University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India. Noopur Jaysawal, Gurpreet Singh, Amit Kanojia and Bika Debbarma. 2018. Effect of different mulches on growth and yield of carrot ( Daucus carota L.). International Journal of Chemical Studies 2018; 6(4): 381-384. Nunez Hartz, Suslow McGiffen and Natwick E. 2008. Carrot production in California. University of California. Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Publication. Agric. and Environ. Sci., 12 (3): 399-406. 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. Olsen L.k, Eskew D. L and Rayment M.R. 1954. Methods of soil analysis of available Phosphorous and Boron. Part 1- Physical and Chemical properties. Agronomy, 4 (2):455-544. Özarslan C and Erdogan D. 1990. Mechanization possibilities on carrot harvesting. International Congress on Mechanization and Energy in Agriculture. Proceedings of a conference held in Adana, Turkey, 1-4 October, 374-3 Pietmaritzburg, Kwazulu Natal. Arisha H M and Bardisi A. 1999. Effect of mineral fertilizers and organic fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of carrot under sandy soil conditions. J. Agric. Resour., 26: 391-405. 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. Rashid M. and Shakur M. A. 2006. Effect of date of planting and duration of growing period on the yield of carrot. Bangladesh Horticulture, vol. 14, pp. 28-32. Rembialkowska E. 2013. Organic farming as a system to provide better vegetable quality. Handbook of Plant Breeding. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Springer. pp. 327–357. ISBN 978-0-387-74108-6. Semagn Asredie, Abdulwahib Aliyi and Fantahun Mengistu. 2008. Evaluation of first and second generation locally produced seeds of cool season vegetables for vegetable and seed yield 19 at Ankober, Amhara Region. Pp. 21-28. Sethi V and Ana JC. 1982. Studies on the preparation, quality and storage of intermediate moisture vegetab-les. J Food Sci Technol 19:168–170. Shah Newaz, Ashraful Islam, Nigar Afsana, Farzana Hoque and Rajesh Chakraborty. 2015. Effect of different types of organic manure and mulching on yield and economic analysis of carrot ( Daucus carrota L.). J. Hort. Sc. . 721(6), 827. 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. Shweta Soni, Rumi Debbarma, Govind Vishwakarma and Pradeep K. 2017. A study on efficacy of organic and inorganic fertilizers on growth and yield of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) var. Pusa Meghali under Dehradun valley condition. International Journal of Chemical Studies ; 7(4): 2310-2312. Sudha Singh, Ankita Mishra and Anurag. 2020. Assessment of Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot ( Daucus carota L.) var. Pusa Kesar under Integrated Nutrient Management. Greene International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706. Suojala T. 2013. Variation in sugar content and composition of carrot storage roots at harvest and during storage. Sci. Hort. 8: 1-19. Tadele Shiberu and Selomon Tamiru. 2014. Effect of intra spacing on yield and yield components of carrot ( Daucus carrota L. sub sp. Sativus). Department of Plant Sciences, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, Ambo University, Ethiopia. DOI: 10.18488/journal.68/2016.3.1/68.1.1.6. Tadesse T, Dechassa N, Bayu W, and Gebeyenhu S. 2013. Effects of Farmyard Manure and Inorganic fertilize Application on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Nutrient Balance in RainFed Lowland Rice Ecosystem. American J. Plant Sci. 4, 309-316. Tanveer Ahmad, Muhammad Mazhar, Haider Ali, Asmat Batoola, and Waqas Ahmad. 2015. Efficacy of fertilizer management on carrot productivity and quality. Sci.Int. (Lahore), 27(5),4321-4325,2015 ISSN 1013-5316. Tesfa T, Asres D, and Woreta H. 2018. Lettuce ( Lactuca sativa L.) Yield and Yield Components as Affected by Mulching at Teda, Central Gondar, Northwest Ethiopia. Agricultural sciences vol.4, no.4, 175-179. Thwe E K. 2020. Effects of plastic mulching on growth, yield and cost and return analysis of Capsicum annuum l Var. Annuum cv. Accuminatum fingerh.. Fert. Soil 40(3). Umuhoza JNK, Sylvestre H and Philippe S. 2014. Nutritional quality of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) as influenced by farm yard manure. Journal of Agricultural Sciences . 2(5):102-107. Van der Vossen H.A.M. and Kahangi E. 2004. Daucus carota L. Internet Record from PROTA (Plant Resources of Tropical Africa/Ressourcesvégétales de l’Afriquetropicale), Wageningen, Netherlands. Accessed 10 August 2022. Vidhi J. 2022. Carrot: Origin, Production and Breeding Method in India. https://www.biologydiscussion.com/vegetable-breeding/carrot- origin-production-and-breeding-method-india/68528. Wafaa HM. 2013. Yield, quality and micronutrients uptake of carrot ( Daucus carota L.) and some soil properties as affected by organic fertilizers and elemental sulphur application. Egyptian Journal of Soil Science 53(4):537-554. Wassu M, Tewodros B, Nigussie D, Kebede W, Mulatua H and Bekele A. 2014. Registration of Haramaya I Carrot ( Daucus carota L.) Variety. E. African J. Sci. 8(1): 65-70. Weakley R. G, Black J. C, and Welch R. M. 1934. Methods of soil analysis of total Organic Carbon. Part 1- Physical and Chemical properties. Agronomy, 4 (2):455-544. 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). Tables Tables 1 to 9 are available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Supplementary Files Tables.docx Appendix.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4512979","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":309368122,"identity":"936c2add-d962-426f-a565-1281d8b7656d","order_by":0,"name":"Amanuel Kuma","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0008-4787-0616","institution":"WU","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Amanuel","middleName":"","lastName":"Kuma","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-06-01 09:43:33","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4512979/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4512979/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":57750491,"identity":"e8598d52-f912-44e6-88b4-2dd2b683a084","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-06-05 06:58:46","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":171279,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStudy Area Map\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4512979/v1/1e01b99c4557965740ae6660.jpeg"},{"id":57751731,"identity":"3e30265a-963c-49e8-b9ab-8eff763aea11","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-06-05 07:14:47","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1039267,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4512979/v1/b9067532-6c10-4cd0-b320-180a177fcf0c.pdf"},{"id":57750489,"identity":"2e84734b-6601-4e81-a8b0-a92591381157","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-06-05 06:58:46","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":38313,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Tables.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4512979/v1/c2977114920ea3f8a0145b0c.docx"},{"id":57750941,"identity":"17f53b55-5c6d-49fa-ab12-555b712b84a2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-06-05 07:06:46","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":1733527,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4512979/v1/a7866c1cbfccd4ef8e180c1a.docx"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEffect of Different Types of Organic Manures and Mulching Materials on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot (Daucus Carota L.) in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1. INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eCarrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) is one of the most widely consumed, economically important, nutritious and delicious root vegetables and belongs to the Umbelliferea family (Hossain, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The domestic carrot originated from wild plants growing in Afghanistan (Iorizzo \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2013). It has been reported that carrots with purple roots were domesticated in Afghanistan and spread to the Eastern Mediterranean area under Arab influence in the 10th to 12th centuries and to Western Europe in the 14th century (Banga, 1984). Carrots were first introduced to China by the 13th century, and their cultivation spread from the Middle East to Italy, Spain and throughout Europe in the fourteenth century \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003eKasiri et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). The exact timing of the introduction of carrots to Ethiopia is unknown, and the crop has been known since the early 1960s in the research system (Haile-Mickael, 1969).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWorldwide, production approached 44,762,859 tons of carrot and turnips on 1,137,738 hectares on a yearly basis, with an average yield of 37 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e (FAO-Stat, 2021). The development of cultivars adapted for cultivation in both the summer and winter seasons on all continents has allowed for the year-round availability of carrot products with relatively stable prices to consumers (Semagn et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR82\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The main top three carrot-producing countries in terms of production are China, Uzbekistan and the United States of America, with total productions of 21,482,971, 2,769,613 and 2,259,000 tons, respectively (Eagri, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The main top three carrot-producing countries in Africa are Algeria, Morocco, and Kenya, with total productions of 419,534, 412,219 and 329,025 tons, respectively (FAO-Stat, 2021). In Ethiopia, the total area under carrot production was approximately 4,135 ha, 16590.56 tons of which were produced in 2021, for an average yield of 6.5 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e (CSA, 2021). This showed that the production of carrots in Ethiopia is significantly under the global average (37 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) (Eagri and FAO-Stat, 2022).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEthiopia, which has diverse agro-climatic conditions, provides a favorable environment for carrot cultivation (Abdirshikur and Zekiya, 2020). However, traditional agricultural practices in the country have heavily relied on synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, leading to soil degradation, water pollution, and negative impacts on human health (Getachewu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2012). Consequently, there is a pressing need to transition toward more sustainable and eco-friendly farming methods (Shashi \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018). In recent years, several studies have explored the potential of organic farming as an alternative approach to improve agricultural sustainability (Hailu et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). Organic fertilizers, such as compost, manure and green manures, are considered essential components of organic agriculture because they enhance soil fertility, increase nutrient availability, promote beneficial soil microorganisms and enhance yield (Basel and Sami, 2014). Getachew \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2012) demonstrated the positive effects of organic fertilizers on crop growth and yield in different regions of Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, specific research on organic carrot production in Diguna Fango Woreda is limited, and there is a knowledge gap regarding the comparative performance of different organic manures on carrot crops in this region (Tadele and Selomon, 2014). Understanding the effectiveness of various organic manure types with mulching on carrot growth in the specific agro climatic conditions of Diguna Fango Woreda is crucial for farmers to adopt sustainable agricultural practices and improve their livelihoods (Kifle and Birhanu, 2019).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe primary research problem addressed in this study was the lack of comprehensive data on the performance of carrot cultivation using organic manure with mulching in Diguna Fango Woreda. Consequently, farmers may be hesitant to shift from using inorganic fertilizer to organic fertilizer due to uncertainty about its efficacy and economic viability. This study focused on data on carrot yield under organic manure with mulching; however, further studies that include information on the soil before and after the application of mulching, nutrient status before use, and weather conditions during the experiment are important, and a lack of such information is considered a limitation of the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral reports have been conducted to determine the effects of organic manures on the growth and yield of carrots, but studies on the effect of organic mulching practices with organic nutrient supplementation on the growth and yield of carrots are rare. Therefore, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the effects of organic manures on the mulched and no mulched conditions of carrots.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eObjective of the study\u003c/b\u003e:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo investigate the growth, yield and quality response of carrots to different organic manures and mulching materials in the Diguna Fango Woreda, southern Ethiopia.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. MATERIALS AND METHODS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Description of the Study Site\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe experiment was conducted at Waraza Lasho Kebele of, Diguna Fango Woreda, Wolaita, Ethiopia, during the 2023 main cropping season from February to May. The experimental site is located 431 km south of Addis Ababa at 6\u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003e59\u0026rsquo;0\u0026quot; N latitude and 37\u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003e59\u0026rsquo;0\u0026quot; E longitude with an elevation of 1800 m.a.s.l. The area receives annual rainfall of 1500 mm, and the average minimum and maximum temperatures are 16\u0026deg;C and 25\u0026deg;C, respectively (Diguna Fango Woreda Information Desk, 2016). The soil is sandy clay loam in texture and slightly acidic, with a pH of 6.1 (Areka Agricultural Research Center soil laboratory, 2023).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Experimental Materials\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe Nantes orange-colored carrot variety imported from the Netherlands and certified by the EIRA was used as the planting material. Poultry manure, farmyard manure and mixed poultry and farmyard manures were used as mineral sources. Grass and sawdust were used as mulching materials for the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.3. Experimental design and treatment combinations\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe treatments consisted of four levels of organic manure (0, 20 t PM, 20 t FYM, and 20 t mixed (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) and three mulching materials (no mulching, sawdust mulching and grass mulching), for a total of 12 treatment combinations (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The treatments were arranged in a 4\u0026times;3 factorial combination in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Soil Sampling and Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBefore sowing, soil samples were taken from the entire experimental field to a depth of 0\u0026ndash;30 cm by the zig-zag method using a soil augur. The samples were air-dried, ground, passed through a 2 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample. The following parameters were determined in the Soil Laboratory of the Areka Agricultural Research Center. The soil samples were then analyzed for soil texture, organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium, available calcium, available magnesium, available sodium, available sulphur, available boron, soil pH and CEC. The pH of the soil was determined according to FAO (2008) using a 1:2.5 (weight/volume) soil sample-to-water ratio and a glass electrode attached to a digital pH meter. The organic carbon content was determined by the volumetric method as described in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) guide for laboratory establishment for plant nutrient analysis (FAO, 2008). Available phosphorus was determined according to Olsen et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1954\u003c/span\u003e) by the Olsen method using a spectrophotometer. Total nitrogen was determined using the Kjeldahl method as described by Bremner and Mulvaney (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.5. Organic Manures sampling and analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBefore incorporation into the soil, organic manure samples were taken. The samples were air-dried, ground, passed through a 2 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample. The following parameters were determined in the Soil Laboratory of the Areka Agricultural Research Center. The pH, organic carbon, available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents of the manure samples were analyzed via a digital pH meter, the Walkley and Black Rapid titration method, the alkaline potassium permanganate method, Olsen\u0026rsquo;s method, and the flame photometer method, respectively (Jackson, 1973).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.6. Experimental Procedures\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganic manures and mulching materials were prepared near the study area from December to February. By using the sealed pit method, FYM was prepared in the back yard of the model farmer who has a cattle farm in the study area through the anaerobic decomposition of farm wastes (dung, urine and litter) in underground pits by sealing the surface of the pit with dung slurry for three months, and poultry manure was purchased from egg and meat poultry entrepreneurs.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe plants in the experimental field were plowed with oxen to a fine tilth four times, and the blocks were levelled and divided into plots according to the layout of the experiment. Before sowing, soil samples were taken from the entire experimental field to a depth of 0\u0026ndash;30 cm by zigzag methods using a soil augur. The samples were air dried and ground to pass through a 2 mm sieve and thoroughly mixed to obtain one composite sample. The following parameters were determined in the Soil Laboratory of the Areka Agricultural Research Center. The soil samples were subsequently analyzed for soil texture, organic carbon, total nitrogen, available phosphorus, available potassium, available calcium, available magnesium, available sodium, available sulphur, available boron, soil pH and CEC. The pH of the soil was determined according to FAO (2008) using a 1:2.5 (weight/volume) soil sample-to-water ratio and a glass electrode attached to a digital pH meter. The organic carbon content was determined by the volumetric method as described in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) guide for laboratory establishment for plant nutrient analysis (FAO, 2008). Available phosphorus was determined according to Olsen et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1954\u003c/span\u003e) by the Olsen method using a spectrophotometer. Total nitrogen was determined using the Kjeldahl method as described by Bremner and Mulvaney (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAccording to the design, a field layout was established, and each treatment was assigned randomly to the experimental units within a block. A total of 48 experimental plots were laid out as indicated above, with 0.2 m\u0026times;0.1 m spacing between rows and plants. The spaces between the plot and the block were 0.5 m and 0.8 m, respectively. The total experimental area was 29.5 m in length and 8.8 m in width (259.6 m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e). The seeds were sown at a depth of 1.5 cm within a plot with a length of 2 m, width of 1.6 m and plot area (3.2 m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) in rows according to the treatment. In the experimental plot with five rows, the seeds were sown on February 19th, 2023, to prepare holes. The organic manures were applied a month before the sowing date to allow for the requirement of substantial time for mineralization of manures and mulching applied after sowing. Two thinnings were performed to maintain the optimum plant population. The first thinning was performed 30 days after sowing, and the second thinning was performed 10 days after the first thinning. Earthling of the plants was performed twice, at 30 and 60 DAS, to protect them from direct sunlight, which could cause undesirable green coloration. Cultural practices were applied uniformly to all the plots throughout the growing period. Continuous weeding by hand pulling was performed to ensure clean fields. Harvesting was performed on May 26th, 2023, when the leaves began to log down.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.7. Data collection and measurement\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.7.1. Growth Parameters\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePlant height (cm)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePlant height was measured using a meter ruler from the soil surface to the tip of the longest leaf of ten randomly selected plants growing in middle rows (net plot area) at 30, 60 and 90 DAS, and the mean values were computed.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNumber of leaves per plant\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe number of leaves was counted for ten randomly selected plants grown in the net plot area at 30, 60 and 90 DAS, and the mean values per plant were computed.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLeaf length (cm)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeaf length was measured using a meter ruler from the point of emergence to the tip of the leaf for ten randomly selected plants at 30, 60 and 90 DAS and is expressed as the mean value in centimeters (cm).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.7.2. Yield Parameters\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRoot length (cm)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe length of the roots was measured using a meter ruler for ten randomly selected plants from the net plot at harvest from the base of the root to the top of the root, and the mean values were computed.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRoot diameter (cm)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe size of the roots was measured using a side caliper for ten randomly selected plants from the net plot area and divided by the number of sampled plants to obtain the mean values, which were subsequently computed.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFresh weight of the root (g)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe roots of ten sample plants were uprooted, cut from the base of the petiole, and washed off any loose soil. The surface moisture was removed, and the plants were weighed immediately to a sensitive balance and are expressed in grams. The mean values were used for further analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDry weight of the root (g)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTen randomly selected plant roots at harvest were removed and chopped into small pieces with the help of a stainless steel knife. The samples were placed on drying materials, kept in a laboratory room for three days, placed in paper bags and dried in an oven at 70\u0026deg;C for 48 hours. After drying, each sample was weighed using a digital sensitive balance, and the average was computed and recorded as the dry weight of the roots.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMarketable root yield (t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRoots that were free from mechanical damage, disease and insect pest damage; uniform in color; and medium to large in size were considered marketable. The yield was determined as the weight of the healthy and saleable yield of ten sample plants from central rows, avoiding border effects, and by converting this yield to tons per hectare, the data were used for further analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUnmarketable root yield (t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRoots that were cracked, hairy, misshaped, decayed, discolored, diseased or physiologically disordered were considered unmarketable. The weights of the roots obtained from the net plot area of each plot were measured in kilograms using a scaled balance and are expressed in tons per hectare.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal yield (t ha\u003c/strong\u003e \u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e): Summations of the marketable and unmarketable root yields from the net plot area were recorded. The yield of every plot was weighed and divided into the number of plants to determine the yield per plant, and the yield t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e was estimated.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDry matter content (%)\u003c/strong\u003e: Dry matter content was measured by weighing randomly selected roots from the net plot and is expressed as a percentage.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\" width=\"404\" height=\"54\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.7.3. Quality Parameters\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eForked root (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRoots that were misshaped at the tip, slightly shortened and multirooted with several divergent tap roots were considered forked roots. The number of forked roots per plot harvested from the net plot area was recorded for each treatment, and the percentage was calculated according to the formula given below.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\" width=\"322\" height=\"58\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCracked root (%)\u003c/strong\u003e: Roots that were vertically cracked running along the length of the tap root, bent, twisted or splinted were considered cracked roots. The number of such roots per plot was recorded for each treatment, and the percentage was calculated according to the formula below.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\" width=\"306\" height=\"51\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal soluble solids (TSS)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe total soluble solids of all the roots of five randomly selected plants from the net plot were chopped, and the total soluble solids (TSS) were tested in the Wolaita Sodo University Horticulture Department Laboratory by placing three drops of transparent juice on the prism refract meter. Before being utilized for subsequent readings, the refractometer prism was dried with tissue paper and cleaned with distilled water between samples. The refractometer was calibrated at \u003csup\u003e00\u0026deg;C\u003c/sup\u003e using distilled water, readings were observed on a scale, and averages were expressed in \u0026deg;Brix (AOAC, 1960).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.8. Partial Budget Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe partial budget analysis was considered using the methods described in CYMMIT (1988) with the mean marketable yield of each treatment, the gross benefit and the field price of inputs of organic manures, mulching materials and seeds of carrot. The total cost and mean market price of carrots and organic manure were taken from the market assessment at the time of planting. All costs and returns were calculated on a hectare basis in Birr.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGross average yield (t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) (AvY)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe average yield of each treatment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAdjusted yield (AjY)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIs the average yield adjusted downward by 10% to reflect the difference between the experimental yield and yield of farmers?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGross field benefit (GFB)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eObtained by multiplying the field price that farmers receive for the crop when they sell it by the adjusted yield.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal variable costs (TVC) (ETB ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSummation of the total cost of organic manure, carrot seed, labor cost, weeding cost and application costs of organic fertilizers for the experiment.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNet benefit (NB)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe NB was calculated as the amount of money left when the total variable costs (TVC) were deducted from the gross field benefit (GFB)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNB\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;GFB \u0026ndash; TVC\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMarginal rate of return (MRR %)\u003c/strong\u003e was calculated as the change in net benefit (NB) divided by the change in total variable cost (TVC) of the successive net benefit and total variable cost levels (CIMMYT, 1988).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"\" width=\"231\" height=\"54\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e2.9. Statistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe data were subjected to ANOVA using the statistical analysis software (SAS) version 9.3 (SAS, 2014). The least significant difference (LSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e) test was used for mean separation when the analyses of variance indicated the presence of a significant difference.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1. Soil physicochemical properties at the experimental site\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\"\u003e3.2. Physicochemical properties of the organic manures\u003c/div\u003e3.3. Growth Components of Carrot\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3.1. Plant height (cm)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of variance revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching had significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effects on plant height at different growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS) (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe mean plant height varied in relation to the growth period, and the application of 20 t of mixed manure significantly increased the plant height. The application of mixed manure resulted in a significantly greater mean height at all growth phases (30, 60 and 90 DAS), except for 90 DAS, which was significantly similar to that at 20 t PM and 20 t mixed manure. At 30 DAS, the maximum (25.68 cm) mean plant height was recorded in the 20 t mixed manure treatment, while the minimum (19.30 cm) height was recorded in the control treatment.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe results showed that the plants treated with organic manure had taller plant heights than did the control plants. The increase in vegetative growth might be due to the role of nitrogen in promoting vegetative growth, enhancing cell division and elongation, and enhancing chlorophyll synthesis. Phosphorus is easily mobilized in plants and translocated to the meristematic zone, increasing leaf formation and development in carrots, and potassium activates many enzymes involved in respiration and photosynthesis. FYM and PM improved the physical, chemical and biological properties of the soil, which promoted better nutrient absorption and utilization by plants, resulting in improved plant growth. The application of organic manure likely improved the uptake of nutrients by the plants (Shweta \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017). The findings of the current study support this argument\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn line with the present study, Bithi \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019) confirmed that organic manure application significantly produced the greatest plant height. This value decreased as the type of organic manure differed, and ultimately, the lowest value of this growth parameter was recorded in the control treatment of carrots (Rashid and Shakur, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe mean height of the plants in the mulching treatments varied in relation to the growth period; grass mulching had the tallest (23.88 cm) mean height, while the no mulching treatment had the shortest (15.81 cm) mean height at 30 DAS. The longest (39.76 cm) mean plant height was recorded at the peak growth stage at 60 DAS in the grass mulch treatment, while the shortest (28.11 cm) was recorded in the no mulching treatment. The highest (59.58 cm) mean plant height at harvest was recorded in response to the application of grass mulch, while the shortest height was from the control (46.66 cm), which was significantly inferior to that in response to saw dust mulch but similar to that in response to the other treatments (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The increase in plant height due to mulching might be attributed to the favorable soil moisture and temperature condition needed for proper plant growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3.2. Number of Leaves per Plant\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of variance revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching had significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effects on the number of leaves per plant at different growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS); however, mulching did not have a significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect at 30 DAS (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe application of 20 t of mixed manure resulted in a significantly greater mean leaf number at all growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS), except for the results obtained with the application of 20 t of PM and 20 t of FYM at 60 and 90 DAS. The maximum number of leaves per plant was recorded (17.31) from the 20 t mixed manure treatment at 90 DAS, while the minimum number of leaves per plant was 5.03 from the control. This might be because mixed manure probably enhances soil fertility by increasing soil porosity, aeration, moisture holding capacity, and available plant nutrients; acting as complex fertilizer granules; and accelerating nitrogen mineralization, which in turn improves plant canopy growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe highest number of leaves per plant was recorded from the grass mulch treatment at 30, 60 and 90 DAS. On the other hand, the lowest leaf number was recorded in the treatment without mulch at 30 DAS. The increased number of leaves with different mulch types might be attributed to the supply of moisture, which possibly accelerated cell division and elongation, leading to the production of more leaves and leaf development and an increased number of leaves. Jaysawal et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) reported that grass mulch treatment was the best among the various mulch treatments and recorded a maximum (16.82) number of leaves per plant of carrot.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.3.3. Leaf length (cm)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnalysis of variance revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching had significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effects on leaf length at different growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS); however, mulching did not have a significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026ge;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect at 30 DAS. (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe mean leaf length varied in relation to the growth period, and the application of organic manure significantly increased the leaf length. The application of 20 t of mixed manure significantly improved the mean leaf length at all growth stages (30, 60 and 90 DAS), but the values were significantly similar to those obtained with the application of 20 t of poultry manure at 60 and 90 DAS. The maximum leaf length was recorded (58.15 cm) from the 20 t mixed manure treatment at 90 DAS, while the minimum leaf length per plant was 12.46 cm from the OM\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003eM\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e treatment (no organic manure) at 30 DAS (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). This might be because FYM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;PM enhanced the nutrient content of the soil, providing a balanced supply of essential elements required for carrot plants to thrive. These manures contain a wide range of macronutrients, such as nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K), as well as micronutrients such as calcium, magnesium, and iron. The gradual release of nutrients from organic manure ensures a sustained and steady supply, preventing nutrient deficiencies and promoting optimum plant growth. These findings are in agreement with the results of Shah \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2015), who documented that the leaf length of carrots varied with different types of manure application.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLeaf length differed significantly due to the different mulch applications. The greatest leaf length was recorded in the grass mulch treatment (42.67 cm) at 90 DAS, while the lowest leaf length was recorded in the control treatment (9.17 cm) at 30 DAS. The use of mulching in crops not only increases growth but also plays a vital role in soil moisture conservation by creating a physical barrier between the soil and the environment. Moreover, these methods are helpful for weed control, water and soil conservation and for boosting the production and quality of crops. This result is in accordance with the findings of (Austin and Harley, 2013\u003cem\u003e)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe means followed by the same letters in the column are not significantly different at the 5% level: OM\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;no organic manure, OM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t PM, OM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t FYM, OM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t Mixed (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) manure, M\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;no mulch, M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;sawdust dust mulch, M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;grass mulch, CV (%)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;coefficient of variation, and LSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e = least significant difference at the 5% level.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Yield and yield-related components\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.1. Root length (cm)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the data revealed that the main effects of organic manure and mulching were significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) on root length (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe longest root length (22.45 cm) was recorded in the 20 t mixed manure treatment, while the shortest root length (13.16 cm) was recorded in the control treatment (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). The length of carrot roots depends on the physical characteristics of the soil. The highest root length in OM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e might be due to the positive effects of FYM and PM on the physical characteristics of the soil. These findings are consistent with those of Ahamed \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2014), who reported that the maximum root length (21.0 cm) from half PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;half FYM varied with the type of manure applied (FYM, PM or leaf manure). This finding agrees with that of Michael \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2012), who reported that organic manure (PM and FYM) improves the soil structure and maintains uniform soil moisture and nutrient levels, which allows carrots to extend their root length to deeper soil layers.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRoot length differed significantly due to the different mulch applications. The maximum root length (21.15 cm) was recorded in the M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (grass) mulch treatment, which was significantly different from that in the other treatments. The minimum root length (13.16 cm) was found in M\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e (no mulch) (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). A favorable soil‒water-plant relationship is created by placing mulch over the soil surface. The microclimate surrounding plants and soil is significantly affected by mulch, i.e., the thermodynamic environment, moisture, erosion, physical soil structure, incidence of pests and diseases, crop growth and yield. Arfan (2013) revealed that different types of organic mulch generated higher soil temperature and soil moisture under mulch than did the control. The results obtained in this study clearly indicated that carrots responded well to organic manures and organic mulching materials.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.2. Root diameter (cm)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the data revealed that the interaction effect (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) on root diameter was significant (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum diameter of the roots (6.60 cm) was recorded from the 20 t of mixed manure with sawdust mulch applied ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e, which was significantly different than that of the other organic manure treatments. On the other hand, the minimum root diameter (2.47 cm) was observed from the treatment in which no organic manure was applied with grass mulch. 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 Mog (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), 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.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOrganic manure and mulching have been shown to supply the required plant nutrients, improve soil structure and water holding capacity, increase microbial activity, reduce evaporation, improve soil moisture and simultaneously promote plant growth and productivity (Jeptoo \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2012). In general, the combination of PM and FYM with sawdust mulch produced significantly greater growth and yield characteristics in crops during the whole growing season. The increase in root diameter due to organic manure with mulching might be attributed to favorable soil fertility, favorable soil moisture and favorable soil temperature conditions for proper plant growth (Deepak \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). This result is in accordance with the findings of Rahman \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2018). The application of 20 t of mixed (PM with FYM) manure improved vegetative growth and increased root diameter and size in carrot plants, as reported by (Blatt \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2012), which was in agreement with our findings.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.3. Root fresh weight (g)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the data revealed that the interaction had a significant effect (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) on the fresh weight of the roots of the carrot plants (g) (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum fresh weight per plant (179.25 g) was observed from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e. The minimum root weight per plant (44.32 g) was recorded for the control plot (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). The increased fresh weight of roots from plants cultivated with different manures combined with mulch might be attributed to the supply of mineral nutrients by organic manures and moisture supplied by organic mulch, which possibly accelerated the cell division and elongation activities, thereby increasing the weight of the roots and their development, leading to increased fresh weight. The difference in root weight due to the application of different manures implies that manures differ in terms of nutrient content and in their efficiency in enhancing root weight. A greater nutrient content in manure resulted in greater root weight. Among the different manures, mixed manure was the most effective, followed by poultry and farmyard manure. Josiane \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2014) reported that\u003csup\u003e, compared with the control, the\u003c/sup\u003e application of 20 t ha-1 organic manure (PM, FYM and chicken manure) increased the yield of carrots (10%-20%). These results are consistent with the findings of Acharya (2011), who reported that animal waste generated with mulching materials contains considerable amounts of plant nutrients.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec26\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.4. Root dry weight (g)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe interaction effect of organic manure and mulching application significantly (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) influenced the root dry weight of the carrot plants (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum root dry weight (26.16 g) was observed in 20 t of mixed manure with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e applied treatment. The minimum dry weight per plant (5.82 g) was recorded for the control treatment (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). This result can be attributed to the slow release of nutrients from organic manures and their better utilization by carrots throughout the growing period, which might have resulted in a greater dry weight of the carrot roots. The increase in the root dry weight per plant in response to the application of PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;FYM may be attributed to the greater nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium availability in these plants than in those receiving other bulky organic manures.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn line with the present study, Noopur \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2018) reported that the use of different organic manures (poultry, farmyard manure and cow dung) with mulch (grass, sugarcane straw and leaf mulch) on carrots resulted in significantly different root dry weights. These results are supported by the findings of Okokoh \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2011), who reported that the dry weight of roots was influenced by organics and mulching compared to those of the control, but in contrast with the findings of Kumawat \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2018), who reported that under high nitrogen application, the plant grew well but had a low yield because vegetative growth was favored over root growth.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec27\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.5. Marketable yield (t ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the data revealed that the interaction had a significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect on the marketable root yield of the carrot plants (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum marketable root yield (27.90 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e, which was significantly different from that of the other treatments; in contrast, the minimum marketable yield (8.21 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded from the control treatment (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). 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. In the case of manures, substantial time is required for the plant to release available nutrients. The sole application of manures through FYM and/or PM or their combination had a lower yield than the combination of manures with mulching. The improvement in yield attributes through FYM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;PM with grass mulch might be due to improved soil moisture holding capacity, soil moisture, and soil temperature; adequate availability of major 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. These results are in accordance with the findings of Kumar (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), Rani et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), Kumawat \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2018) and Kushwah \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOkokoh and Bisong (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) reported similar findings that higher yields of roots in carrots were obtained when 15 t FYM ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e and 15 t PM ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e were used. This could be because nitrogen is the major constituent of chlorophyll, proteins and amino acids, the synthesis of which is accelerated by the increased supply of nitrogen in soil (Allok \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). An analogous yield increase due to the amendments of poultry and FYM manure application was also reported in studies (Shah \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015), which mentioned a significant yield increase in carrot plants following the application of manures in addition to grass mulching.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec28\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.6. Total root yield (t ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of the data revealed that the interaction had a significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect on the total root yield (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe total root yield (33.92 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) maximum was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e, which was significantly different from that of the other treatments, whereas the minimum yield (10.56 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded from the control treatment (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). The yield of mixed poultry and farmyard manure combined with grass mulching 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 addition of organic manure by mulching improved the soil structure, increased its water holding capacity and facilitated aeration in the soil. Sugarcane also helps in the gradual release of nutrients into the soil, which makes it an ideal input for good carrot crop growth. The ability of (FYM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;PM) to significantly influence growth and yield may be because it supplies nitrogen and phosphorous, as reported by (Austin et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e), and because of its ability to improve the physio-chemical properties of soils (FAO, 2023), resulting in improved soil conditions and better nutrient availability.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe increased total yield of carrots with different organic manures and mulches might be attributed to the increase in soil fertility, soil structure, temperature and moisture, which possibly accelerated the cell division and elongation activities, producing more leaves and leading to increased carrot root yield (Daniel and Genis, 2021). The results of the present study revealed that poultry manure mixed with FYM influenced the increase in root yield of carrots under mulch conditions within the crop growth period. It is well recognized that poultry manure in combination with farmyard manure under grass mulch increases the yield of carrots (Khairul \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe means followed by the same letters in the columns are not significantly different at the 5% level: OM\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cstrong\u003e=\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026thinsp;no organic manure, OM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t PM, OM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t FYM, OM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t mixed (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) manure, M\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cstrong\u003e=\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026thinsp;no mulch, M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;sawdust mulch, M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;grass mulch, CV (%)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;coefficient of variation, and LSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e = least significant difference at the 5% level.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec29\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.7. Unmarketable yield (t ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe main effect of organic manure had a significant (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) influence on the unmarketable yield of carrots (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum unmarketable root yield (5.83 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded from the 20 t mixed manure treatment, while the minimum unmarketable root yield (2.60 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded from the control (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). 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.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec30\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.4.8. Root dry matter (%)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study showed that the main effect of organic manure had a significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect on the root dry matter content of carrots (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 3).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe maximum amount of root dry matter (14.59%) was recorded in the 20 t of mixed manure/ha treatment, while the minimum amount of root dry matter (13.65%) was obtained in the control treatment (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). This might be because FYM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;PM contributes to the improvement of the soil structure, particularly in terms of its water-holding capacity and drainage. They help to increase the soil\u0026rsquo;s ability to retain moisture, prevent waterlogging and reduce the risk of root rot. Additionally, FYM and poultry manure enhance 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 Anna \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2013), 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 Atikur \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e (2018), who indicated that root dry matter percentages were greater in plants treated with higher doses of potassium along with mulching.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec31\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Quality Components\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTo evaluate the quality of the carrots, the following parameters were measured: the percentage of forked roots, percentage of cracked roots and total soluble solids (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec32\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5.1. The percentage of forked roots (%)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study showed that the main effect of organic manure and mulching had a significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect on the forked roots of carrots (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe 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 minimum percentage of forked roots (1.35%) was observed in the 20 t mixed manure/ha treatment (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). 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 Greene and Fritz (2007), 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. Alice (2008), in studying the influence of organic fertilizers on the yield and quality of carrots, stated that an increase in the organic fertilizer rate promoted the development of hairy and forked carrots, which contradicts the current findings.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe percentage of forked roots also significantly varied due to the use of different mulching materials on the carrot plants. The highest percentage of forked roots (4.34%) was obtained in the M\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e treatment (no mulch). The lowest percentage of forked roots (1.35%) was obtained in the grass mulch treatment M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (grass). This result indicated that the decrease in the forking percentage of roots in the mulch treatments might be due to the effect of soil moisture combined with readily available nutrients. Organic manure application combined with mulch usually enhances soil physical, chemical, and biological activities and moisture, which could be a reason for the suppression of forked root production.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec33\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5.2. The percentage of cracked roots (%)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study showed that the main effect of organic manure had a significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect on the percentage of cracked roots (%) of carrots (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe percentage of cracked roots was affected by organic manure. For amendments, the 20 t poultry manure treatment effect (3.73%) was greatest in both periods, followed by the 20 t mixed manure treatment, 20 t FYM treatment and control treatment, which were also significantly greater than those of all the other treatments (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). The control treatment had the lowest percentage of cracked roots (1.35%). 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. The mulched and amended roots had enough room to expand, reaching the limit of internal turgor pressure and resulting in cracking (Mehwish \u003cem\u003eet al., 2016)\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThis finding aligns with the report of Tesfu (2010) that carrot splits when the cell walls rupture, forming longitudinal fractures in the phloem parenchyma as a result of internal turgor pressure. They stated that carrot susceptibility to cracking increases following maturity of the roots and that the timing of harvest is critical. This difference in growth pattern may influence susceptibility to cracking, as outer rows are often highly susceptible to cracking. This result for cracked roots was also supported by the findings of Mehedi and Sonia (2012), who reported that the percentage of cracked roots increased due to low moisture and higher nitrogen levels.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv id=\"Sec34\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.5.3. Total Soluble Solid (\u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003eBrix)\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe study showed that the main effect of organic manure had a significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) effect on the TSS of carrots (\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003eAppendix\u003c/span\u003e Table 4).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe highest total soluble solid concentration (10.56 \u003csup\u003e0\u003c/sup\u003eBrix) was obtained for the carrots planted on the plots that received the 20 t FYM ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e treatment, while the lowest TSS concentration (6.560 Brix) was obtained for the carrots in the control treatment. TSS content (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e) significantly increased with different organic manures because the organic manures, particularly FYM, FYM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;PM and PM, contain fair amounts of micronutrients, especially ferrous or iron. It is an essential constituent of many respiratory enzymes, such as catalase, cytochrome A, B and C, are involved in the respiratory process of the cell system. Through this respiration in the plant system, reserve food materials are converted to simple soluble components that can be utilized for growth or maintenance. These findings are in good accordance with the results of Kumar (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) and Umuhoza et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIncreased nitrogen through manures apparently helped in vigorous vegetative growth and favored photosynthetic activity for greater accumulation of food material, i.e., carbohydrates that increased the TSS content in carrots. These results are in close conformity with those of Wafaa (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Josiane \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2014), in studying the nutritional quality of carrots as influenced by farmyard manure, observed that farmyard manure did not significantly improve the total soluble sugar content in carrots, which contradicts the current findings. In contrast with these results, other researchers reported that the total soluble solids of carrots (Habimana and Uwizerwa, 2014) that received organic fertilizers were greater than those that received inorganic fertilizer. These findings are in line with those of Garpreet and Napoor (2018), who revealed that mulching had no significant effect on TSS. Rembiałkowska \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2012) confirmed that the higher content of total sugars in organic vegetables, including carrots, beets and potatoes, contributes to an increase in the technological and sensory quality (taste) of organic products.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe means followed by the same letters in the column are not significantly different at the 5% level: OM\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cstrong\u003e=\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026thinsp;no organic manure, OM\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t PM, OM\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t FYM, OM\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 t Mixed (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) manure, M\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u003cstrong\u003e=\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026thinsp;no mulch, M\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;sawdust dust mulch, M\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;grass mulch, CV (%)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;coefficient of variation, and LSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e = least significant difference at the 5% level.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec35\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.6. Partial Budget Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe partial budget analysis of the 12 treatments is shown in Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e. The results were analyzed using the technique described by CIMMYT (1988) to assess the costs and benefits of the treatments. Based on the analysis, the highest net benefit of 399,980 Birr ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e with an MRR of 656% was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t of mixed manure was combined with grass mulch/ha = (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM with grass mulch) ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e. On the other hand, the lowest net benefit was obtained from the control treatment. The minimum acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR %) should be between 50 and 100% (CIMMYT, 1998). Therefore, the most attractive organic manure type for producers or farmers with higher net returns was (20 t FYM ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e with grass mulching), for which the MRR was 3803%.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe results of the present study are in agreement with those of Gerba (2018), who reported that economic analysis revealed that the highest marginal rate of return was obtained from carrot plants treated with 20 t FYM with grass mulch, followed by those treated with 20 t FYM with sawdust mulch, with values of 3803% and 3644%, respectively. In contrast, Rani et al. (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) reported that the highest net benefit of Dollar 2950, which has a higher cost (180 dollars), was recorded from the combination of poultry manure and straw mulching, for which the marginal benefit rate was 1811%.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTherefore, the best alternative net return, 20 t FYM with grass mulching, is recommended as the best economically rewarding treatment rate for the study area (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION","content":"\u003cp\u003eCarrot is one of the most important root crops cultivated throughout the country. The type and management of organic manure with mulching are important factors that strongly affect the growth and yield of carrot crops. The application of organic manure, such as poultry manure and farmyard manure, is necessary to improve the production and productivity of carrots in the study area. However, appropriate application practices that involve the combination of organic manure with mulching materials are lacking in the study area. Thus, a study was conducted to assess the effect of different types of organic manure with mulching on the growth, yield and quality of carrots and to assess the cost‒benefit of different organic manures with mulching materials for the production of carrots.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA field experiment was conducted at Waraza Lasho Kebele in Diguna Fango District, Wolaita Zone of Southern Ethiopia, in 2023. The basic seeds of the carrot variety Nantes (orange) were used as the experimental material. The variety was imported from the Netherlands with certification by the EIAR in 2019 (EARO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The treatment consisted of four organic manures (0.0, 20 t poultry manure, 20 t farmyard manure and 20 t mixed manure/ha = (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e), and three levels of organic mulching (no, sawdust and grass mulching) were used for the experiment. The experiment was performed in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications in a factorial arrangement. The size of each plot was 1.6 m \u0026times; 2 m (3.2 m\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e), accommodating 5 single rows with 6 plants per row. The spacing between rows was 20 cm, the spacing between plants was 10 cm, and the spacings between blocks and between plots were 0.8 m and 0.5 m, respectively. All basic growth and yield data were collected and subjected to analysis of variance and partial budget analysis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe effect of organic manure and mulching levels on the performance of carrots suggested that organic manure and mulching materials significantly enhanced the growth and yield attributes of carrot production. The study revealed that the interaction between organic manure and mulching material significantly affected the root diameter, fresh weight, dry weight, marketable yield and total yield. In this study, the highest marketable root yield (27.90 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) was achieved using the combination of 20 t of mixed manure with grass mulch (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM with grass mulch), for which the yield increased by 656% compared to the lowest marketable yield (8.21 t ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e), which was obtained from the control.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn the basis of the partial budget analysis, the highest net benefit (360,520 Birr ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e) with an MRR of 3803% was obtained from the treatment in which 20 t FYM was combined with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e. According to CIMMYT (1988), the minimum acceptable marginal rate of return (MRR %) should be between 50 and 100%.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, the use of 20 t FYM with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e application with greater net return could be suggested for carrot production in the study area. It may be concluded that 20 t of FYM ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e can be used as organic manure and grass mulch material, and the combination of 20 t FYM with grass mulch ha\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/sup\u003e can be used to increase the growth and yield of carrots. Further studies can be performed with additional levels of organic manure and different mulching materials.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbdirshikur Reshid and Zekiya Fitret. 2020. Growth and yield response of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) to spacing in wolaita zone, southern Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Innovation Scientific Research and Review. Vol\u003c/em\u003e. 02, Issue, 12, pp.571-574.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdeleye EO, Ayeni LS, Ojeni SO. 2010. Effect of poultry manure on soil physico-chemical properties, leaf nutrient content and yield of yam (\u003cem\u003eDioscorea rotundata\u003c/em\u003e) on alfisol in South Western Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eJ. Am. Sci\u003c/em\u003e., 6(10): 871-878.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmad T, Amjad M, Iqbal Q, Nawaz A. and Iqbal Z. 2014. Integrated nutrient management practices improve growth and yield of carrot. \u003cem\u003eBulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 20 (No 6), 1457-146.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmad Z, Ali N, Ahmad M, Ulhag S and Ahmad S. 2005. Yield and economics of carrot production in organic farming. \u003cem\u003eSarhad J. Agric\u003c/em\u003e., 21(3): 357-364.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmed A, Sambo B, Arunah U and Odion. 2014. Response of Farmyard Manure and Inorganic Fertilizers for Sustainable Growth of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) in Northern Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eIOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science\u003c/em\u003e (IOSR-JAVS) e-ISSN: 2319-2380, p-ISSN: 2319-2372.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAkand M.H. 2003. Effect of organic manure and mulching on the growth and yield of carrot. Fert, Int., 225: 45-49.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlice Mbatha, Gert Ceronio and Gesine Coetzer. 2014. Response of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) yield and quality to organic fertilizer ISSN: 057-1862 (Print) 2167-034.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAllemann L. and Young B. 2002. An introduction to vegetable production. Nutrition, fertilizers, organic manures and compost making, 3rd edition. Horticultural Science. 127: 1013-1017. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlok Tiwari and Rajendra Prasad. 2022. Studies on effect of organic manures on growth yield and quality of beetroot (\u003cem\u003eBeta vulgaris\u003c/em\u003e L.) cv. \u0026lsquo;Lali. \u003cem\u003eThe Pharma Innovation Journal\u003c/em\u003e 2022; 11(9): 2849-2859.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlsharifi S, Aljibouri M and Taher M. 2019. Effect of two types of digger machines and speeds of tractor on the qualitative characteristics of potato. Fayoum Journal. Agriculture. Res, and Dev. 33(1):308-322.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAmartey J, Sarkordie M, Essilfie H, and Dapaah L. 2022. Growth and yield of carrots affected by integrated nutrient management of organic and inorganic fertilizers, \u003cem\u003eAfr. J. Agric. Res.\u003c/em\u003e 18 (7) 576\u0026ndash;585.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnjum MA and Amjad M. 2002. Influence of mother root size and plant spacing on carrot seed production. \u003cem\u003eJ. Resour. Sci\u003c/em\u003e., 13(2): 105-112.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnna A and Maria G. 2013. Comparison of yield and quality of red beetroots and carrot cultivated using conventional, integrated and organic method. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Horticultural Research. \u003c/em\u003e2013; 21(1):107-104.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnteneh Nestere, Girma Hailemichael and Endale Taye. 2008. Effect of poultry manure on yield of carrot. \u003cem\u003eEast African journal of sciences, 2(1) 25-28.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArfan A, Ashraful K and Waliullah M. 2013. Effect of spacing and sowing time on growth and yield of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carrota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eInter. J.. Agri.,\u003c/em\u003e vol. 5, pp. 29-36.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAsfawu Melese and Eshetu Derso. 2015. Production and management of major vegetables in Ethiopia. Inst, Agric.Res. Center, Gize, Ethiopia , Vol. 5 (9): 1547 \u0026ndash; 1556.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAshraful Kabir, Arfan Ali, and Wali Ullah. 2013. Effect of Spacing and Sowing Time on Growth and Yield of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carrota \u003c/em\u003eL.). \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. Journal of Applied Sciences Research,\u003c/em\u003e 9(1): 1004-1009.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAshraful Kabir and Ismail Yand. 2015. Effect of Different Types of Organic Manure and Mulching on the Growth and Yield of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus Carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Chemical Studies\u003c/em\u003e 6: 2977-2979.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAtikur Rahman, Tariqul Islam, Abdullah Mamun, Mohammad Shahidur and Sarmin Ashraf. 2018. Yield and Quality Performance of Carrot under Different Organic and Inorganic Nutrient Sources with Mulching Options. \u003cem\u003eAsian Journal of Agricultural and Horticultural Research \u003c/em\u003e1(4): 1-8, 2018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAtta Poku, P. 2012. Influence of green manure, NPK and chicken manure amendments on soil Physico-chemical properties, growth and yield of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carrota\u003c/em\u003e L.) Department of crop and soil science education, faculty of agriculture education, University of Education,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAustin J, Chris U and Harley S. 2013. Effect of farmyard manure on growth and yield of carrot. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Hort. Science, \u003c/em\u003e38, 2013, 22 \u0026ndash; 26.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBanga O. 1963b. Origin and distribution of the western cultivated carrot. Genetica Agraria, 17:357-370.Beck,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBanga R and Bawa A. 2002. Studies on dehydration of grated carrots. \u003cem\u003eJ Food Sci Technol\u003c/em\u003e 39:268\u0026ndash;271.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarkcotulla A. 2006. Effect of nitrogen level on yield and yield character of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2019.24.2.1787. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBasel Natsheh and Sami Mousa. 2014. Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers application on soil and cucumber (Cucumis sativa L.) plant productivity, \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Agric. For.\u003c/em\u003e 4 (3) (2014) 166\u0026ndash;170.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBithi Biswa, Khaleda Khatu, Ehsanul Haq, Jinia Afsu, Nahidul Islam, and Montasir Ahmed. 2019. Effect of Organic Manure and Mulching on the Growth and Yield of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eAsian Journal of Research in Crop Science 4(3): 1-11, 2019; Article no.\u003c/em\u003eAJRCS.50433 ISSN: 2581-7167.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBose TK and Som MG. 1990. Vegetable crops in India, Naya Prakash, Calcutta, India, 408-442.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBradly NC, Weil RR. 2008. The nature and properties of soils.14th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBremner, J.M. and C.S. Mulvaney. 1982. Methods of soil analysis of total Nitrogen. Part 2-Chemical and microbiological properties. Agronomy, 9 (2):595-624.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCardinault N, Aprikian O, Busserolles J, Grolier P, Rock E, Demigne C, Mazur A, Scalbert A, Amouroux P, Remesy C. 2003. Effect of carrot intake on cholesterol metabolism and antioxidant status in cholesterol fed rats. Eur J Nutr 42:254\u0026ndash;261.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCIMMYT (Centro Internationalde Majoramento de Maize Y Trigo), 1988. Farm Agronomic to farmers\u0026rsquo; recommendation. An Economic Training Manual. Completely revised edition. D.F.Mexico.51pp. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDao 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.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDasari Vikram, Khushboo Kathayat and Kevin Karangiya. 2020. Effects of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield and quality and economics of carrot. \u003cem\u003eThe Pharma Innovation Journal\u003c/em\u003e 2022; SP-11(7): 4490-4493.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDawuda M, Boateng P, Hemeng O and Nyarko G. 2011. Growth and yield response of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) to different rates of soil amendments and spacing. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Science and Technology \u003c/em\u003e31(2): 11-20 11. 10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeepak 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 (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences\u003c/em\u003e ISSN: 2319-7706.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDey D K. 2000. Effect of nitrogen and mulch on growth and yield of carrot. An MS thesis, Department of Horticulture, Bangladesh Agril. Univ.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDud\u0026aacute;s P, Menyh\u0026aacute;rt L, Gedeon C, Ambrus G and T\u0026oacute;th F. 2016. Effect of hay mulching on soil temperature and the abundance and diversity of soil-dwelling arthropods in potato and carrot fields. Eur. J. Entomol, 113, 456\u0026ndash;461.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEagri T. 2022. Origin, area, production, varieties, package of practices for carrot. http://eagri.org/eagri50/HORT281/pdf/lec27.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEARO. 2019. Directory of released crop varieties and their recommended cultural practices. Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp: 1-36.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEthioSIS (Ethiopian Soil Information System). 2013. Soil Analysis Report, Agricultural Transformation Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, pp 33.45.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGaadhe S and Tiwari K. 2022. Carrot Harvesting Methods: A Review. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Plant and Soil Science\u003c/em\u003e 34(10): 7-16, 2022; Article no.IJPSS.84454 ISSN: 2320-7035\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGajewski M and Dąbrowska A. 2007. Quality characteristics of carrot cultivars depending to long-term storage. Univ. Press, Univ. of Technol. and Life Sci. in Bydgoszcz. pp: 95-103.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGamliel A, Austerweil M and Kritzman G. 2000. Non\u003cdel cite=\"mailto:Curie\" datetime=\"2024-06-01T06:46\"\u003e-\u003c/del\u003echemical approach to soil borne pest management\u0026ndash;organic amendments. Agric. and Environ. Sci., 12 (3): 399-406.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGerba Daba, Meseret Mulugeta, and Tarike Ayana. 2018. Effect of cattle manure on growth and yield of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus Carrota\u003c/em\u003e L.) under Jimma condition. Cogent Food and Agriculture, 6(1), 1722353..\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoel L, Shankar V, and Sharma R. 2020. Influence of different organic mulches on soil hydrothermal and plant growth parameters in potato crop (\u003cem\u003eSolanum tuberosum\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eAgric. and Environ. Sci., \u003c/em\u003e12 (3): 399-406.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoulson David, Mcguire Kate, Munro Emma, Adamson Susan, Colliar Louise, Park Kirsty, Tinsley Matthew and Gilburn Andre. 2009. Functional significance of the dark central floret of \u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e (Apiaceae) L. Plant Species Biology. 24 (2): 77\u0026ndash;82.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGurpreet Singh and Noopur Jaysawal, 2018. Influence of Different Mulches on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot. Annals of Biology 34 (2): 181-186.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhairul Mazed, Ashraful Islam, Shah Newaz, Jannatul Ferdous and Nur Unnahar. 2015. Effect of Different Types of Organic Manure and Mulching on the Growth and Yield of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus Carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Scientific and Research Publications\u003c/em\u003e ISSN 2250-3153.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaile-Michael Kidane-Mariam. 1969. Vegetable production. Guide for eastern Ethiopia. Experiment Station. Collage of Agriculture, Haile-Silassie I University, Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Bulletin No. 62. 42-43.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHailu S, Seyoum T and Dechassa N. 2008. Effect of combined application of organic P and inorganic N fertilizers on yield of carrot. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Journal of Biotechnology\u003c/em\u003e, 7 (1) 27-34.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHossam S, El-Beltagi, Abdul Basit, Heba I, Mohamed Iftikhar, Sana Ullah, Ehab A, Kamel Tarek Shalaby Khaled, Ramadan Abdulmalik, and Hesham Ghazzawy. 2022. Mulching as a sustainable water and soil saving practice in agriculture. Agronomy, 2022, 12, 1881.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHossain S.M. 2012. Effect of Spacing and Sowing Time on Growth and Yield of Carrot LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing UK. 92 p.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIorizzo M. 2016. A high-quality carrot genome assembly provides new insights into carotenoid accumulation and euasterid genome evolution. Nature Genetics, 48: 657-666.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eInusah B, Wiredu A, Yirzagla J, Mawunya M and Haruna M. 2013. Effect of different mulches on the yield and productivity of drip irrigated onions under tropical conditions. \u003cem\u003eAgric. and Environ. Sci., \u003c/em\u003e12 (3): 399-406.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIslam S. 2006. Use of Bios\u003cdel cite=\"mailto:Curie\" datetime=\"2024-06-01T06:46\"\u003e-\u003c/del\u003elurry as organic fertilizer in Bangladesh agriculture. Prepared for international workshop on the use of Bioslurry for domestic biogas programmes. 27th September, Bangkok, Thailand.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJaysawal N, Singh G, Kanojia A, and Debbarma B. 2018. Effect of different mulches on growth and yield of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 24(13 and 14), 1583 \u0026ndash; 1589.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJepto A, Aguyoh NJ, Mwanarusi S. 2012. Improving carrot yield and quality through the use of Bio slurry manure. Egerton, Kenya: Canadian center of science and education. http://dx.doi.org./10.5539/sar.v2n/p164.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJosiane Noella, Karemera Umuhoza, Habimana Sylvestre and Sibomana Philippe. 2014. Nutritional quality of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) as influenced by farm yard manure. Department of Crop Science, University of Rwanda, College of Agriculture, Musanze, Rwanda.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKasiri M, Hassandokht M, and Shahi-Gharahlar A. 2013. Evaluation of genetic diversity in Iranian yellow carrot accessions (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e var. \u003cem\u003esativus\u003c/em\u003e), an exposed to extinction root vegetable, using morphological characters. Biology. Evaluation of geneticdiversity-in-Iranian-yellow-Kasiri.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKifle 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, \u003cem\u003eInternationals Journal of African and Asian Studies\u003c/em\u003e 54 (2019) 24\u0026ndash;31.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhan M.Q and Khan H.L. 2006. Impact of sewage waste on soil properties and quality of vegetables. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Science and Technology \u003c/em\u003e31(2): 11-20 11. 10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhurana R, Manes GS, Dixit A, Singh A, Mahal JS and Singh BP. 2013. Proto type feasibility testing of tractor operated root crop harvester. Annual Report for 2013. Pp. 68. Punjab agricultural university, Ludhiana.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKowalczuk J, Leszczyński N and Bieganowski F. 2003. Evaluation of the quality of carrot root harvested with Alina and Simon one-row harvesters. ActaAgrophysica.2(1):1 05-111. 82.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKumar GS. 2013. Effect of organic manures on growth, root yield and quality of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ecarota\u003c/em\u003e L.). Master thesis submitted to Dr. Y.S.R. Horticultural University.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLali Alok Tiwari and Rajendra Prasad. 2022. Studies on effect of organic manures on growth yield and quality of beetroot (\u003cem\u003eBeta vulgaris\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eThe Pharma Innovation Journal\u003c/em\u003e 2022; 11(9): 2849-2859.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLandon C. Weil. 1991. The Nature and Properties of CEC of Soils, 13th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMbatha AN. 2008. Influence of organic fertilizers on yield and quality of carrots. Bloemfotein University of the Free State. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcMillen M. 2013. Effect of mulch type and thickness on the soil surface evaporation rate. Acta Hortic. 571, 149 \u0026ndash; 152.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMehedi T, Siddique M and Sonia B. 2012. Effects of Urea and Cowdung on growth and yield of Carrot. Bangladesh Agricultural Research, Gazipur. p. 94. 10 (1): 9- 13.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMehwish Kiran and Muhammad Saleem. 2016. Response of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota \u003c/em\u003eL.) Growth and Yields to Organic Manure and Inorganic Fertilizers. \u003cem\u003eJ. Hort. Sc. and Biotech.\u003c/em\u003e 78(8), 821.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMichael Masarirambi, Phiwokwakhe Dlamini, Paul Wahome and Tajudeen Oseni, 2012. Effects of Chicken Manure on Growth, Yield and Quality of Lettuce (\u003cem\u003eLactuca sativa\u003c/em\u003e L.) and Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota \u003c/em\u003eL.). \u003cem\u003eSemi-Arid Sub-Tropical Environment American-Eurasian J. Agric. and Environ. Sci\u003c/em\u003e., 12 (3): 399-406.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMog B. 2007. Effect of organics and biofertilizers on productivity potential in carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) (M.Sc. Agric. Thesis in Crop Physiology). Department of Crop Physiology College of Agriculture, Dharwad University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, India.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNoopur Jaysawal, Gurpreet Singh, Amit Kanojia and Bika Debbarma. 2018. Effect of different mulches on growth and yield of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Chemical Studies 2018; \u003c/em\u003e6(4): 381-384.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNunez Hartz, Suslow McGiffen and Natwick E. 2008. Carrot production in California. University of California. Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Publication. Agric. and Environ. Sci., 12 (3): 399-406.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOkokoh 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. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOlsen L.k, Eskew D. L and Rayment M.R. 1954. Methods of soil analysis of available Phosphorous and Boron. Part 1- Physical and Chemical properties. Agronomy, 4 (2):455-544.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Ouml;zarslan C and Erdogan D. 1990. Mechanization possibilities on carrot harvesting. International Congress on Mechanization and Energy in Agriculture. Proceedings of a conference held in Adana, Turkey, 1-4 October, 374-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePietmaritzburg, Kwazulu Natal. Arisha H M and Bardisi A. 1999. Effect of mineral fertilizers and organic fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of carrot under sandy soil conditions. \u003cem\u003eJ. Agric. Resour.,\u003c/em\u003e 26: 391-405.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRani R, Malek M and Robbani M. 2016. Effect of organic manures and mulching on growth and yield of carrot. \u003cem\u003eJ. Veg. Crop Produc\u003c/em\u003e 2(1), 13 \u0026ndash; 25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRashid M. and Shakur M. A. 2006. Effect of date of planting and duration of growing period on the yield of carrot. Bangladesh Horticulture, vol. 14, pp. 28-32. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRembialkowska E. 2013. Organic farming as a system to provide better vegetable quality. Handbook of Plant Breeding. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Springer. pp. 327\u0026ndash;357. ISBN 978-0-387-74108-6. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSemagn Asredie, Abdulwahib Aliyi and Fantahun Mengistu. 2008. Evaluation of first and second generation locally produced seeds of cool season vegetables for vegetable and seed yield 19 at Ankober, Amhara Region. Pp. 21-28.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSethi V and Ana JC. 1982. Studies on the preparation, quality and storage of intermediate moisture vegetab-les. \u003cem\u003eJ Food Sci Technol\u003c/em\u003e 19:168\u0026ndash;170.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShah Newaz, Ashraful Islam, Nigar Afsana, Farzana Hoque and Rajesh Chakraborty. 2015. Effect of different types of organic manure and mulching on yield and economic analysis of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carrota\u003c/em\u003e L.). \u003cem\u003eJ. Hort. Sc.\u003c/em\u003e. 721(6), 827.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShashi Kamal, Mohit Kumar and Manoj Rajkumar. 2018. Effect of biofertilizers on growth and yield of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum mill), \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci\u003c/em\u003e 7 (2) (2018) 2542\u0026ndash;2545.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShweta Soni, Rumi Debbarma, Govind Vishwakarma and Pradeep K. 2017. A study on efficacy of organic and inorganic fertilizers on growth and yield of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) var. Pusa Meghali under Dehradun valley condition. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Chemical Studies\u003c/em\u003e; 7(4): 2310-2312.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSudha Singh, Ankita Mishra and Anurag. 2020. Assessment of Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) var. Pusa Kesar under Integrated Nutrient Management. \u003cem\u003eGreene International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences\u003c/em\u003e ISSN: 2319-7706.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSuojala T. 2013. Variation in sugar content and composition of carrot storage roots at harvest and during storage. Sci. Hort. 8: 1-19.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTadele Shiberu and Selomon Tamiru. 2014. Effect of intra spacing on yield and yield components of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus\u003c/em\u003e carrota L. sub sp. \u003cem\u003eSativus). \u003c/em\u003eDepartment of Plant Sciences, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Sciences, Ambo University,\u003cem\u003e Ethiopia. \u003c/em\u003eDOI: 10.18488/journal.68/2016.3.1/68.1.1.6. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTadesse T, Dechassa N, Bayu W, and Gebeyenhu S. 2013. Effects of Farmyard Manure and Inorganic fertilize Application on Soil Physicochemical Properties and Nutrient Balance in RainFed Lowland Rice Ecosystem. American J. Plant Sci. 4, 309-316.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTanveer Ahmad, Muhammad Mazhar, Haider Ali, Asmat Batoola, and Waqas Ahmad. 2015. Efficacy of fertilizer management on carrot productivity and quality. \u003cem\u003eSci.Int. (Lahore), \u003c/em\u003e27(5),4321-4325,2015 ISSN 1013-5316.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTesfa T, Asres D, and Woreta H. 2018. Lettuce (\u003cem\u003eLactuca sativa\u003c/em\u003e L.) Yield and Yield Components as Affected by Mulching at Teda, Central Gondar, Northwest Ethiopia. \u003cem\u003eAgricultural sciences vol.4, no.4, \u003c/em\u003e175-179. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eThwe E K. 2020. Effects of plastic mulching on growth, yield and cost and return analysis of \u003cem\u003eCapsicum annuum\u003c/em\u003e l Var. Annuum cv. Accuminatum fingerh.. Fert. Soil 40(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUmuhoza JNK, Sylvestre H and Philippe S. 2014. Nutritional quality of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ecarota\u003c/em\u003e L.) as influenced by farm yard manure. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Agricultural Sciences\u003c/em\u003e. 2(5):102-107.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVan der Vossen H.A.M. and Kahangi E. 2004. \u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L. Internet Record from PROTA (Plant Resources of Tropical Africa/Ressourcesv\u0026eacute;g\u0026eacute;tales de l\u0026rsquo;Afriquetropicale), Wageningen, Netherlands. Accessed 10 August 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVidhi J. 2022. Carrot: Origin, Production and Breeding Method in India. https://www.biologydiscussion.com/vegetable-breeding/carrot- origin-production-and-breeding-method-india/68528.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWafaa HM. 2013. Yield, quality and micronutrients uptake of carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ecarota\u003c/em\u003e L.) and some soil properties as affected by organic fertilizers and elemental sulphur application. Egyptian Journal of Soil Science 53(4):537-554.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWassu M, Tewodros B, Nigussie D, Kebede W, Mulatua H and Bekele A. 2014. Registration of Haramaya I Carrot (\u003cem\u003eDaucus carota\u003c/em\u003e L.) Variety. E. African J. Sci. 8(1): 65-70. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWeakley R. G, Black J. C, and Welch R. M. 1934. Methods of soil analysis of total Organic Carbon. Part 1- Physical and Chemical properties. Agronomy, 4 (2):455-544.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZakir 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).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Tables","content":"\u003cp\u003eTables 1 to 9 are available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Cracking, Forking and Sawdust","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4512979/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4512979/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eCarrot is a root vegetable crop. The management of agronomic practices is an important factor that strongly affects the growth, yield and quality of carrots. A field experiment was conducted to evaluate the growth, yield and quality of carrots affected by different types of organic manure and mulching materials in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia. The study consisted of four organic manures (control, 20 t PM ha\u003c/em\u003e \u003csup\u003e \u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e \u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20 t FYM ha\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003eand 20 t mixed manure (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) ha\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003eand three types of mulching (no mulching, sawdust mulching and grass mulching) laid in the RCBD, with four replications in a factorial arrangement. Analysis was performed using the SAS software package. Root diameter, root fresh weight, root dry weight, marketable yield and total root yield were significantly (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) affected by the interaction effect of organic manure and mulching materials. The main effects of organic manure and mulching also significantly (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) affected plant height, leaf number, leaf length, root length, unmarketable root yield, root dry matter content, forked roots, cracked roots and TSS. Among the different combinations, 20 t of mixed manure (10 t PM\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 t FYM) with grass mulching ha\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003esurpassed all the other combinations in terms of maximum root length (22.45 cm), root diameter (6.60 cm), root fresh weight (179.25 g), root dry weight (26.16 g), marketable root yield (27.90 t ha\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003e) and total root yield (33.92 t ha\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003e) during the experimental year. Similarly, PM with grass mulching also produced better results pertaining to carrot growth and yield. Based on these results, the highest net benefit (360,520 Birr ha\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cem\u003e) with an MRR of\u003c/em\u003e 3803% \u003cem\u003ewas obtained from the treatment combination of 20 t FYM with grass mulching. Therefore, the use of 20 t FYM with grass mulching could be recommended for carrot production in the study area. Since this study is limited to the use of organic manure with mulching materials during one season and at one location, the results should be repeated across seasons and locations.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effect of Different Types of Organic Manures and Mulching Materials on Growth, Yield and Quality of Carrot (Daucus Carota L.) in Diguna Fango Woreda, South Ethiopia","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-06-05 06:58:42","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4512979/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"c3153e32-85ca-405c-931e-6ef085942846","owner":[],"postedDate":"June 5th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":32839008,"name":"Horticulture"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-06-05T09:08:53+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-06-05 06:58:42","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4512979","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4512979","identity":"rs-4512979","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}