<b>Evaluation of Engineered Composting Technologies for Diverse Feedstocks to Improve Compost Quality in Pakistan</b>
PDF

Keywords

Composting methods, Feedstock variability, Quality, Waste utilization

How to Cite

Evaluation of Engineered Composting Technologies for Diverse Feedstocks to Improve Compost Quality in Pakistan. (2026). Pak-Euro Journal of Medical and Life Sciences, 9(1), 109-116. https://doi.org/10.31580//pjmls.v9i1.3461

Abstract

Sustainable and climate resilient strategies are indispensable for efficient management of ever depleting soil fertility in sub-tropical dry land areas of Pakistan. For this purpose, integrated addition of organic and inorganic amendment can play a crucial role. The present study aimed to develop and evaluate the influence of three variable composting technologies, (i) Indore method (IM), (ii) Bangalore method (BM), and Effective microorganisms’ method (EM) on the decomposition of feed stocks including sugarcane bagasse, wheat straw, and mustard stalks. The composting was done for a period 120 days and the periodical sampling (in triplicate) was done after 20, 30, 60, 90, and 120 days to evaluate the rate of decomposition and release of nutrients. The results of the study revealed showed a periodical decrease in in organic carbon and C:N ratio while the concentrations of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), and micronutrients (Zn, Cu, Fe, and Mn) increased consistently with time. We observed that EM composting method compared to other two methods showed a better decomposition of feed stocks and release of nutrients as indicated by the lowest value of C:N ratio of EM-method compared to other two methods at end of 120 days. Similarly, among feed stocks, the mustard stalks generated the compost with the highest N, P, K, Zn, and Fe contents, however, the highest Cu contents were found in wheat straw and Mn contents in sugarcane bagasse. It was concluded that the EM-method is superior method while cotton stalks is the best feedstock to produce high value compost. This study, however, restricted to controlled composting only but did not include the field evaluations. Therefore, the future research should be on field validation and economic feasibility of EM-compost for sustainable crop production under varied agroecological environments.

PDF

References

1. Oyebiyi OO, Laezza A, Hoque MM, Thammavongsa S, Li M, Tsipas S, Tasiopoulos AJ, Scopa A, Drosos M. Organic Amendments for Sustainable Agriculture: Effects on Soil Function, Crop Productivity and Carbon Sequestration Under Variable Contexts. Journal of Carbon Research. 2026;12(1):7.

2. Waqas M, Hashim S, Humphries UW, Ahmad S, Noor R, Shoaib M, Naseem A, Hlaing PT, Lin HA. Composting Processes for Agricultural Waste Management: A Comprehensive Review. Processes. 2023;11(3):731.

3. Manea EE, Bumbac C, Dinu LR, Bumbac M, Nicolescu CM. Composting as a Sustainable Solution for Organic Solid Waste Management: Current Practices and Potential Improvements. Sustainability. 2024; 16(15):6329.

4. Ayilara MS, Olanrewaju OS, Babalola OO, Odeyemi O. Waste Management through Composting: Challenges and Potentials. Sustainability. 2020; 12(11):4456.

5. Vijayakumar S, Murugaiyan V, Ilakkiya S. Opportunities, Challenges, and Interventions for Agriculture 4.0 Adoption. Discover Food. 2025;5:265.

6. Greff B, Szigeti J, Nagy Á, Lakatos E, Varga L. Influence of Microbial Inoculants on Co-Composting of Lignocellulosic Crop Residues with Farm Animal Manure: A review. Journal of Environmental Management. 2022;302.

7. Ezeagu GG, Omotosho AO, Suleiman KO. Effective Microorganisms, Their Products and Uses - A Review. Nile Journal of Engineering and Applied Science. 2023;1(1):42-53.

8. Bernat K, Kulikowska D, Wojnowska-Baryła I, Kamińska A. Can the biological stage of a mechanical–biological treatment plant that is designed for mixed municipal solid waste be successfully utilized for effective composting of selectively collected biowaste? Waste Management. 2022;149:291-301.

9. Maheboob SS. Comparative Studies on Different Methods of Composting From Agricultural Wastes. Marathwada Agricultural University, Pakistan Journal of Agricuture Research. 2004;22(2):15-18.

10. De Vos B, Lettens S, Muys B, Deckers JAJSU. Walkley–Black Analysis of Forest Soil Organic Carbon: Recovery, Limitations and Uncertainty. Carbon Management.2007;23(3):221-229.

11. Bremner JM. Determination of Nitrogen in Soil by the Kjeldahl Method. The Journal of Agricultural Science. 1960;55(1):11-33.

12. Recena R, García-López AM, Quintero JM, Skyttä A, Ylivainio K, Santner J, Buenemann EC, Delgado AJ. Assessing the phosphorus demand in European agricultural soils based on the Olsen method. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022;379(2):134749.

13. Ullah R, Abbas Z, Bilal M, Habib F, Iqbal J, Bashir F, Noor S, Qazi MA, Niaz A. Method Development and Validation for the Determination of Potassium (K2O) in Fertilizer Samples by Flame Photometry Technique. Journal of King Saud University – Science. 2022;34(13-14):102070

14. Rashid A. Mapping Zinc Fertility of Using Indicator Plants and Soil Analyses (Seed, Geostatistics, Hawaii, Colorado). 1986; University of Hawai’i, Manoa.

15. Paul V, Ramesh K, Pandey R. Analysis of mineral nutrients: Sampling techniques and methods of digestion for plant samples. 2017; Manual of ICAR Sponsored Training Programme on “Physiological Techniques to Analyze the Impact of Climate Change on Crop Plants” 16-25 January, 2017, Division of Plant Physiology, IARI, New Delhi.

16. Piepho HP. A SAS Macro for Generating Letter Displays of Pairwise Mean Comparisons. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science. 2012;7(1):4-13.

17. Schloss PD, Chaves B, Walker LP. The Use of the Analysis of Variance to Assess the Influence of Mixing During Composting. Process Biochemistry. 2000;35(7):675-684.

18. Ibrahim M, Ahmad N, Shinwari ZK, Bano A, Ullah F. Allopathic Assessment of Genetically Modified and Non-Modified Maize (Zea mays L.) on Physiology of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Pakistan Journal of Botany. 2013;45(1):235-240.

19. Feng Y, Zhai Y, Ao J, Qian K, Wang Y, Ma M, Sun P, Li Y, Zhang B, Li X. Effects of Effective Microorganism (EM) Inoculation on Co-Composting of Auricularia heimuer Residue with Chicken Manure and Subsequent Maize Growth. Microorganisms. 2026; 14(1):106.

20. Riffaldi R, Levi-Minzi R, Pera A, De Bertoldi MJW. Evaluation of Compost Maturity by Means of Chemical and Microbial Analyses. Carbon research. 1986;4(4):387-396.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2026 Pak-Euro Journal of Medical and Life Sciences