Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Scientia Horticulturae
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scihorti

Compost and vermicompost of horticultural waste as substrates for

cutting rooting and growth of rosemary
Daicy Mendoza-Hernández, Fernando Fornes, Rosa M. Belda ∗
Instituto Agroforestal Mediterráneo, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Peat replacement is an issue that receives much attention in the horticulturist agenda. Several organic
Received 19 April 2014 materials have been suggested either as substrates or as substrate constituents. This study aims to deter-
Received in revised form 5 August 2014 mine how three such materials, one compost and two vermicomposts, affect the rooting of cuttings and
Accepted 31 August 2014
plant growth of rosemary plants grown in pots. The compost (C) and vermicomposts (V1 and V2) were
obtained from the same batch of tomato crop waste. Each material was mixed with peat at several pro-
Keywords:
portions. Two experiments were carried out in nursery conditions. In the first, rosemary cuttings were
Horticultural wastes
grown in each mix and rooting was quantified. In the second experiment, rooted seedlings were grown
Organic waste reclaim
Rosmarinus officinalis
in each mix to marketable size (six months after the seedling transplant). The physical, physico-chemical
Substrate degradation and chemical characteristics of the initial mixes and of the mixes at the end of the six-month experiment
Soilless culture were determined. The physical properties of the substrates were within adequate ranges. pH was fairly
alkaline, especially in C and salinity was particularly high in the C-based mixes. Soluble mineral contents
in C were much higher than in V1, V2 or peat. Mixing with peat produced substrates with intermediate
characteristics. Both vermicomposts outperformed compost and peat for rooting cuttings. The presence
of hormone-like substances in the vermicomposts might be behind this effect. The vermicompost-based
substrates gave acceptable results for growing plants, though none performed as well as the control.
Nitrogen and potassium contents in cuttings and ready-for-sale plants were low and phosphorus content
was very low compared to sufficiency ranges, which led to a recommendation to increase fertilization.
At the end of the six-month experiment, the mix properties had changed, representing an improvement
in the substrate quality that might be taken into consideration when transplanting the rosemary to the
soil.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In 2012 Spain exported ornamental plants worth D 252 million
and the export of trees and shrubs represented D 24 million (FEPEX,
2011). Shrubs are produced as ornamental plants for gardening
and landscaping both in commercial and governmental nurseries.
The standard procedure involves propagation by cuttings in roo-
ting trays which are later transplanted to larger pots, the plants
being considered marketable when roots cover the substrate sur-
face inside the pot. Most shrubs will eventually be transplanted to
the soil (Handreck and Black, 2005).
The main substrates which nurseries use for shrub production
are peat and, to a lesser extent, coconut coir dust. Peat replacement
has been promoted in recent years in order to reduce the negative
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 963877000.
E-mail address: rmbelda@bvg.upv.es (R.M. Belda).
impact on peatlands, which are considered natural heritage and are
included in conservation policies. Coir dust is a by-product of the
coconut industry but it must be imported to Europe from Indonesia,
The Philippines, India, Sri Lanka, Mexico or Brazil. In view of the
above, peat and coir dust are being replaced in part by composts
and vermicomposts (Abad et al., 2001; Farrell and Jones, 2010).
Besides, their use in horticulture is a good way to reclaim organic
wastes.
Composting and vermicomposting are procedures to detoxify
and stabilize organic wastes. The rendered products, composts
and vermicomposts, can be used as substrate or substrate con-
stituents for soilless culture or to amend soils with organic matter.
Vegetable crop residues have been successfully recycled through
composting (Carrión et al., 2008) and vermicomposting (Srivastava
et al., 2011) for horticultural purposes. Composting is an aero-
bic process which relies on high temperatures and thermophilic
and mesophilic bacteria to sanitize, decompose and stabilize the
organic material. Vermicomposting involves the use of worms.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.08.024
0304-4238/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202
It does not reach high temperatures and the organic material is
decomposed by the soil and worm gut bacteria as well as the gut
erosion of the material.
Consumers tend to prefer vermicompost to compost but the fact
that the former does not allow for high temperatures is a drawback
in terms of hygienization of the material (Tognetti et al., 2005).
In this sense mixed procedures have been devised, in which the
thermophilic phase of composting is followed by standard vermi-
composting (Fornes et al., 2012; Yadav et al., 2012).
The original raw material is one of the most significant factors
affecting the quality of composts and vermicomposts (Domínguez,
2004; Masaguer and Benito, 2007; Nogales et al., 2007). Neverthe-
less, most studies that compare composts and vermicomposts do
not process the same raw material (Lazcano et al., 2008; Tognetti
et al., 2005).
At the end of composting and vermicomposting, the organic
matter is stabilized, however, its characteristics may still change
during cultivation, which should be taken into account especially
if the plants are to be transplanted to soil (Domeño et al., 2011).
One of the main drawbacks to the use of composts as substrate
constituent relate to the high salinity of composts obtained from
cattle manure or agricultural wastes and to the high heavy metal
content of composts obtained from sewage sludge. Composts of
agricultural origin (horticultural wastes or olive-mill wastes) tend
to have large EC due to high K+ content, rather than high Na+ or Cl−
contents. High salinity can be successfully eliminated by leaching.
However, the leachates need the appropriate management to avoid
pollution (Fornes et al., 2010).
This study aimed first to compare the nursery performance of
rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) in one compost and two vermi-
composts (one obtained after the thermophilic phase of composting
and the other by straight vermicomposting), the materials being
produced simultaneously and from the same batch of horticultural
waste. The study also aimed to determine the changes in the sub-
strate when plants are ready to be transplanted to soil.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Compost, vermicomposts and plant material
One compost (C) and two vermicomposts (V1 and V2) were
assayed as substrate constituents for plant growth. Composting
and the two vermicomposting treatments were carried out simul-
taneously at the same site, and the raw material for the three was
prepared from the same original mix of chopped, air-dried tomato
crop waste and ground almond shell in a proportion of 75:25 (v:v).
Composting was carried out using a combined system of Rut-
gers static pile with forced aeration and controlled temperature
plus pile turning (twice during the first month). Two cubic meter
piles of raw material were watered at the start of the process and
during pile turning. The thermophile stage of composting, during
which temperatures rose to 70 ◦ C, ended on day 63. The piles were
allowed to rest for another 117 days, at which time the compost
was considered mature and stabilized to be used either as growing
media, as growing media constituent for soilless horticulture or as
soil amendment.
For V1 production, two pre-composted raw mix piles (63 days
of thermophilic phase) were transferred to two beds to which Eise-
nia andrei and Eisenia fetida worms were added. The final worm
population in the mix was approximately 25,000 individuals/m3 .
The material was maintained at 25–30 ◦ C and 70–80% humidity
throughout the vermicomposting process, which lasted 198 days.
In order to produce vermicompost V2, E. andrei and E. fetida
worms were added directly to 2 m3 beds of raw material and sub-
jected to the same conditions described for V1 during 261 days.
193
Cuttings of rosemary (R. officinalis L.), about 5 cm in length,
obtained from lateral or terminal buds of mother plants, were used
in the rooting experiment, and seedlings of rosemary of similar age
and size with root ball were used in the pot experiment.
2.2. Experimental design
Treatments consisted of mixing C, V1 or V2 with commercial
peat (Kekkilä Ornamental Plant Mix 410, Kekkilä Oy). The three
assayed mixes were C:peat, V1:peat and V2:peat in the proportions:
100:0, 75:25, 50:50, 25:75 and 0:100 (control), which totaled 13
treatments.
For the rooting experiment three 72-cell plastic rooting trays
(cell volume = 62 mL) were filled with each of the peat mixes and
distributed in a random block design.
For the pot experiment, seedlings were transplanted in 550 mL
square plastic pots which were filled with each of the peat mixes.
Three replicates of five pots each containing a single plant were
distributed in a random block design.
2.3. Plant growing conditions
The rooting experiment was conducted in a glasshouse at a
commercial nursery (TENISPLANT, S.L.) located in Picassent, Spain.
Before placing the cutting in the substrate, its basal zone – 1-
cm from cut – was immersed in a commercial indolbutyric acid
solution (Flower Hormonas Enraizantes, Codyesa). One cutting per
cell was placed in the substrate. Cuttings were irrigated using a
microsprinkler system (performance of 36 L h−1 m−2 ) at a regime
of 5 min once a day, resulting in 0.6 L tray−1 day−1 . Rooting and
growth results were recorded three months after planting.
The pot experiment was conducted outdoors at the same
commercial nursery. Plants were irrigated with sprinklers (perfor-
mance of 25 L h−1 m−2 ) at a regime of 15 min once a day. Fertilizers
were applied by fertigation twice a week with an 8–1–10–1 ratio
(N–P2 O5 –K2 O–MgO) at a rate of 1.5 L m−3 of water. This experiment
ended when the control plants reached commercial size (roots filled
the pots).
The management of both experiments followed nursery stan-
dards. The water for irrigation in both experiments was chemically
characterized as follows: pH 7.95, EC 180.6 mS/m, N-NH4 + non-
detectable, N-NO3 − 23 mg/L, P non-detectable, K 8 mg/L, Ca
178 mg/L, Mg 39.4 mg/L, bicarbonates 220 mg/L, sulfates 345 mg/L
and Na 64 mg/L.
2.4. Physical characterization of the substrates
Bulk density (DB ) and water capacity (Vwater ) were determined
using loosely packed cores and methods from EN 13041 (2011). For
this study, steel cylinders measuring 40 mm in height and 82.3 mm
internal diameter (210 mL) were used. Shrinkage was calculated
as the percentage of bulk volume lost after drying the material
contained in the cylinder at 105 ◦ C.
Particle density (DP ) was indirectly estimated from the organic
matter content (OM) and the mineral matter content (MM) by
applying the equation:
100
DP (kg m−3 ) =
%OM/1550 + %MM/2650
where 1550 kg m−3 is the organic matter mean density and
2650 kg m−3 is the mineral matter mean density. Total pore space
(PT ) is the percentage of volume of the material that can be filled
with water. Air capacity (Vair ) is the difference – in percentage by
volume – between the total pore space and the moisture content
at a suction of −1 kPa (EN 13041, 2011).
194 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202
All determinations were performed three times.
2.5. Physico-chemical and chemical characterization of the
substrates
pH (EN 13037, 2011), electrical conductivity (EC) (EN 13038,
2011) and concentration of water soluble (available) mineral ele-
ments (EN 13652, 2001) of the mixes were determined in a 1:5
(v:v) material:water suspension. The pH was measured before fil-
tration using a Crison mod. 2000 pH-meter fitted with a special
pH electrode (Crison mod. 5000-20). The filtrate from the 1:5 (v:v)
compost:water suspension was used for EC and mineral content
determinations. EC was determined with a conductimeter (Cri-
son mod. 522) using a PVC/graphite conductivity cell (Crison mod.
52-89), and corrected to 25 ◦ C. Water-soluble mineral nitrogen
(Nmin = NO3 − plus NH4 + ) was determined in a semiautomatic nitro-
gen analyzer using an MgO and Devarda alloy (Puchades et al.,
1985). H2 PO4 − , K+ , Ca2+ , Mg2+ SO4 2− and Na+ were determined
by atomic emission spectrophotometry with inductively coupled
plasma (ICP-AES; Spectro flame, Spectro Analytical Instruments,
Inc). Water soluble mineral contents were expressed as mg/L sub-
strate.
All determinations were performed three times.
2.6. Growth of plants and determination of shoot nutrient content
The number of rooted cuttings was counted at the end of the
rooting experiment and the results are presented as percentage of
planted cuttings. At this time 15 plants of each replicate (45 plants
per treatment) were collected, and shoot dry weight and length
along with root dry weight and length were recorded. Additionally,
the root ball of the remaining plants was visually rated (root ball-
VR). Root ball-VR was scored on a 1–5 scale: value 1 representing
roots which did not reach the surface of the substrate and value 5
representing a root system forming a compact mesh that colonized
the whole substrate (Fornes et al., 2007).
At the end of the pot experiment, the following growth param-
eters were determined: shoot and root dry weight, shoot length,
shoot diameter, number of branches and root length. Results are
presented as per plant. Chlorosis was evaluated visually using an
arbitrary scale ranging from 1 to 5, with value 1 representing no
chlorosis in leaves; 2, less than 25% of leaves showing chlorosis; 3,
25–50% of leaves showing chlorosis; 4, from 50% to 75% of leaves
showing chlorosis and 5, more than 75% of leaves showing chloro-
sis. This estimation was performed by five independent individuals,
and the mean value was calculated.
Oven-dried aerial tissue from plants was finely ground and
analyzed after acid digestion for nitrogen and mineral elements.
Nitrogen was determined following the Kjeldahl method whilst
the H2 PO4 2− , K+ , Ca2+ , Mg2+ and Na+ contents were determined
by atomic emission spectrophotometry with inductively coupled
plasma (ICP-AES; Spectro flame, Spectro Analytical Instruments,
Inc). Results are expressed as percentage on a dry weight basis.
2.7. Data analysis
A two factorial ANOVA was conducted to determine significant
differences of physical, physico-chemical and chemical characteris-
tics of substrates and of plant growth parameters and plant nutrient
contents between treatments. When significant differences were
found, the Student–Newman–Keuls test at P ≤ 0.05 was carried out
to establish significant differences between means.
One-way analysis of variance was carried out to compare ini-
tial characteristics of the substrate with those after the six-month
experiment. Significant differences at P ≤ 0.01 or P ≤ 0.001 are
directly commented in Section 3.4.
Regression analysis was used to study the relationship between
substrate characteristics and plant growth parameters. Only regres-
sions with determination coefficients above 0.75 are presented
here.
3. Results
3.1. Substrate characterization: physical and physico-chemical
characteristics
Table 1 shows the effect of the materials and the dilution on the
physical and physico-chemical characteristics of the substrates at
the beginning (I) and at the end (F) of the growing cycle of rosemary.
At the beginning of the experiment, DB and DP were greater in
C, V1 and V2 than in the control (83 and 1492 kg m−3 , respectively
in the control) while shrinkage was lower in C, V1 and V2 than in
the control (94%). Mixing with peat reduced DB by two thirds on
average in C, V1 and V2, reduced DP by 6% in C and V1, increased PT
by 14% on average in the three materials and increased shrinkage by
103% in C, 23% in V2 and 15% in V1. Vair in C was similar to that in the
control (43%) but Vair in V1 and V2 was half the value found for C and
the control. Vwater was greatest in V1 and V2 (14% greater than in
the control) and lowest in C (24% lower than in the control). Mixing
with peat also increased Vair (121% on average) and decreased Vwater
(28% on average) in V1 and V2. Mixing with peat hardly changed
Vair in C but it did increase Vwater by 37%.pH was alkaline in C, V1 and
V2 (8.7 on average) and acidic in the control (5.5). EC was greatest
in C (8.4 times more than in the control – 29 mS/m – and 3.3 times
more than in V1 and V2). OM in pure materials was between a third
(V1 and V2) and a fourth (C) less than control (94%). Mixing with
peat decreased pH to 13% on average in the three materials. In the
25:75 mix all three materials were still slightly alkaline. EC also
decreased when mixing with peat (by 61% in C, 52% in V2 and 22%
in V1). OM increased in the mixes of the three materials as peat
increased (reaching 87% and 83% and 85% of the control OM in the
25:75 C:peat, V1:peat and V2:peat mix, respectively).
3.2. Cutting rooting and plant growth
Table 2 shows the results of rooting, growth and nutrient
contents for rosemary cuttings grown in the various substrates.
Rooting in the vermicompost based substrates was double that
in the compost. Dilution increased rooting 9.5 times in C but did
not change it in V1 and V2 based substrates. Compared to the peat
(100%), there were no differences in the rooting of the most diluted
C substrates or in the V1 or V2 based substrates.
Shoot dry weight of rooted cuttings was lowest in pure C (47% of
the control), followed by V1 (61% of the control) and V2 (70% of the
control). Shoot dry weight increased with dilution and was highest
in the most diluted substrates of C and V1 and the two most diluted
substrates of V2. Shoot dry weight was significantly larger in C-4
(14%), V2-3 (9%) and V2-4 (9%) than in the control. Shoot length
was 74% of the control in C and did not differ from the control in V1
and V2. Shoot length was increased by dilution in C and V2 based
substrates but was not affected in V1.
Root dry weight was largest in V1 and V2, these two differing
little from the control (115 mg/cutting). Root dry weight increased
with dilution in the C and V2 based substrates yet did not change in
V1. Roots were shortest in C and V1 and lengthened with dilution,
reaching the control values (15 cm) for the most diluted substrates.
The highest root ball VR-score was found in the control (4) followed
by the most diluted C mixes and all V1 and V2 based mixes, C-1,
C-2 and C-3 having the lowest root ball scores.
Table 3 shows the main effects of the substrates on dry weight,
shoot and root length, shoot diameter, branch number and the
chlorosis level of rosemary plants after the six-month growth
period.
Table 1
Physical and physico-chemical characteristics of the substrates made from compost C, vermicomposts V1 and V2, and peat (control) at the beginning (I) and at the end (F) of the growing cycle of rosemary.

Mat Dil DB (kg/m3 ) DP (kg/m3 ) PT (% v/v) Shrinkage (% v/v) Vair (% v/v) Vwater (% v/v) pH EC (mS/m) OM (%)

I F I F I F I F I F I F I F I F I F

C 1a 327bA 330A 1655de 1745 80.2 81.0 12.1eB 20.6eA 41.2cdA 35.3deB 39.0deB 45.7cdA 8.90aA 8.13B 272aA 46B 72.6cdA 62.7dB
2 235eB 258A 1598ef 1637 85.6 83.0 20.4cdB 21.3dA 38.8dB 46.8aA 46.8cA 36.2eB 8.23eA 7.98B 243 45B 79.5bcA 74.8bA

D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202

3 203gB 214A 1593ef 1630 87.5 85.9 18.2dB 21.4dA 35.2eB 44.5abA 52.3bA 41.4deB 8.38dA 7.94B 188cA 51B 80.2bA 75.6bA
4 132iB 152A 1581f 1600 91.7 91.0 24.6aA 24.0aA 38.4dB 41.8abcA 53.3bA 49.2bB 7.76gA 7.75A 106dA 48B 81.5bA 79.2bA

V1 1 309cA 317A 1798a 1830 81.8 82.5 20.3cdB 22.9bA 21.7fB 38.5cdeA 60.1aA 44.0dB 8.51cA 8.05B 63eA 54B 66.7deA 54.0fB
2 247eB 277A 1729bc 1774 86.2 84.1 22.1cB 24.2aA 43.7cA 36.1deB 42.5dB 48.0cA 8.27eA 7.99B 59eA 49B 69.2dA 62.3dB
3 221fA 222A 1708cd 1749 87.4 87.2 23.6bA 23.9abA 51.0aA 39.2bcdB 36.4eB 48.0cA 8.11fA 7.91B 52fA 50A 72.3cdA 59.6deB
4 161hA 167A 1654de 1686 90.2 90.0 23.3bcB 24.5aA 48.8abA 31.2eB 41.4dB 58.8aA 7.69gB 7.79A 49fA 45A 77.8cA 69.1cB

V2 1 351aA 355A 1784ab 1806 79.8 80.3 18.5dB 21.8cA 22.0fB 36.8deA 57.8abA 43.5deB 8.76bA 7.70B 63eA 41B 62.8efA 56.5efA
2 265dA 275A 1750abc 1766 85.0 84.2 20.4cdB 22.4cA 45.1bA 39.2bcdB 39.9deB 45.0cdA 7.76gA 7.71A 51fA 40B 69.7dA 62.7dB
3 209fgB 229A 1745abc 1745 88.0 88.0 22.3cA 22.2cA 46.8abA 39.9bcdB 41.2dB 48.1bcA 7.61hB 7.70A 34gB 44A 70.1dA 60.5deB
4 148hB 171A 1738abc 1691 91.5 89.5 22.8cB 23.5bA 47.7abA 34.5deB 43.8dB 55.0aA 7.46iB 7.63A 30gB 46A 79.6bA 68.4cB

Main effects
Mat 223 239c 1606 1653b 86.3 85.2 18.8 21.8 38.4 42.1 47.9 43.1 8.32 7.95a 202 47.5b 78.5 73.1
237 246b 1729 1760a 86.4 86.0 22.3 23.9 41.7 36.3 45.1 49.7 8.15 7.94a 56 49.5a 71.5 61.3
243 258a 1756 1752a 86.1 85.5 21.0 22.5 40.9 37.6 45.7 47.9 7.90 7.69b 45 42.8c 70.6 62.0

Dil 329 334a 1747 1794a 80.6c 81.3d 17.0 21.8 28.3 36.9 52.3 44.4 8.80 7.96a 134 47.0a 67.0 57.7
248 270b 1694 1726b 86.0b 83.8c 21.3 22.6 42.0 40.7 43.3 43.1 8.09 7.89ab 120 44.7c 73.2 66.6
209 222c 1585 1708c 87.6b 87.0b 21.4 22.5 44.7 41.2 43.7 45.8 8.07 7.85b 90 48.3a 74.1 65.2
147 163d 1657 1659d 91.1a 90.2a 23.6 24.0 45.0 35.8 46.2 54.3 7.60 7.72c 62 46.3b 79.8 72.2

St Sig
Mat *** ** *** ** ns ns *** * *** ** *** *** ** * *** * *** ***
Dil *** *** ** ** ** ** *** *** *** * *** *** ** * *** * *** ***
M×D *** ns *** ns ns ns *** ** *** * *** *** * ns *** ns *** ***

DB: bulk density; DP: particle density; PT: total porous space; Vair: air capacity; Vwater: water capacity; EC: electrical conductivity; OM: organic matter; Mat: material; Dil: dilution; C: composted material; V1: vermicompost
produced on pre-composted material; V2: straight vermicomposted material; M × D: interaction material × dilution.
a
Dilution of compost or vermicompost:peat (% v:v). 1 = 100:0; 2 = 75:25; 3 = 50:50; 4 = 25:75.
St Sig: statistical significance. ns, *, **, *** indicate not significant, statistically significant differences at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, P ≤ 0.001, respectively. Values in the same column with different lower case letter differ at P ≤ 0.05
(Student–Newman–Keuls test). Values of the same variable in the same file with different upper case letter differ at P ≤ 0.05 (Student–Newman–Keuls test).

195
196 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202

Table 2
Effect of the substrates made from compost C, vermicomposts V1 and V2, and peat (control) on rooting, growth and nutrient contents of cuttings of rosemary.

Mat Dil Rooted Shoot Root N (% dw) P (% dw) K (% dw) Ca (% dw) Mg (% dw) Na (% dw)
cuttings
(%)

Dry weight Length Dry weight Length Root

(mg/ (cm) (mg/ (cm) ball-VR
cutting) cutting) score

C 1a 9c 204g 7.9d 68f 10.6f 2c 0.14 0.04 3.01a 2.65a 0.71a 0.82a
2 23c 252f 8.3d 84f 6.9g 2c 0.14 0.04 2.95ab 2.53a 0.66a 0.78a
3 42bc 313d 8.8d 69f 10.1f 2c 0.14 0.03 1.95d 2.33ab 0.54b 0.60bc
4 95a 496a 13.5a 121ab 14.1bc 3b 0.15 0.03 1.74de 1.89cd 0.51bc 0.56bcd

V1 1 79ab 264def 11.4bc 100de 9.9f 3b 0.15 0.03 2.76b 2.17bc 0.52b 0.68ab
2 83ab 261ef 11.5bc 98de 11.2ef 3b 0.16 0.02 2.16c 2.13bcd 0.48bc 0.59bc
3 79ab 306de 10.6c 92ef 11.9def 3b 0.16 0.03 1.62e 2.06bcd 0.44cd 0.54bcd
4 80ab 430b 11.3bc 91ef 15.6ab 3b 0.16 0.03 1.57e 2.00bcd 0.47bc 0.50cde

V2 1 79ab 303de 11.0c 105cde 11.5def 3b 0.15 0.03 1.57e 1.75cd 0.40de 0.39de
2 89ab 372c 12.3b 102cde 13.2cde 3b 0.16 0.03 1.55e 1.92cd 0.37de 0.39de
3 93a 474ab 13.7a 108cd 13.5cd 3b 0.17 0.03 1.55e 1.74de 0.39de 0.35e
4 99a 473ab 13.4a 130a 16.4a 3b 0.18 0.04 1.73de 2.03bcd 0.34e 0.35e

Main effects
Mat 42 316 9.6 86 10.4 2 0.14 0.04 2.41 2.35 0.61 0.69
80 315 11.2 95 12.2 3 0.16 0.03 2.03 2.09 0.48 0.58
90 406 12.6 111 13.7 3 0.17 0.03 1.60 1.86 0.37 0.37

Dil 56 257 10.1 91 10.7 3 0.15 0.03 2.45 2.19 0.54 0.63
65 295 10.7 95 10.4 3 0.15 0.03 2.22 2.19 0.50 0.59
71 364 11.0 90 11.8 3 0.16 0.03 1.71 2.04 0.46 0.50
91 466 12.7 114 15.4 3 0.16 0.03 1.68 1.97 0.44 0.47

St Sig
Mat * *** *** *** *** * ns ns *** *** *** ***
Dil *** *** *** *** *** * ns ns *** *** *** ***
M×D * *** *** *** *** * ns ns *** *** *** *

VR = visual rate, scale 1–5 (1 lowest growth, 5 largest growth); Mat: material; Dil: dilution; C: composted material; V1: vermicompost produced on pre-composted material;
V2: straight vermicomposted material; M × D: interaction material × dilution.
a
Dilution of compost or vermicompost:peat (% v:v). 1 = 100:0; 2 = 75:25; 3 = 50:50; 4 = 25:75.
St Sig: statistical significance. ns, *, *** indicate not significant, statistically significant differences at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.001, respectively. Values in the same column with different
letter differ at P ≤ 0.05 (Student–Newman–Keuls test).

In the long-term experiment, shoot dry weight was lowest in
C (30% of the control), followed by V2 (43% of the control) and
V1 (70% of the control). Dilution increased shoot dry weight in C
and V2 based mixes and slightly decreased it in V1. Shoot length
it was again lowest in C followed by V1 and V2. Compared to
the seedling production experiment, in the long-term experiment
shoots were longer in the control substrate (19 cm). Dilution also
increased shoot length in the long-term experiment, particularly in
the C based substrates. Shoot diameter was greatest in the control
(3.6 mm) followed by V1, V2 and C in that order, dilution hardly
affecting this. The number of branches per plant was not affected
by the treatments.
Chlorosis measures commercial quality in terms of greenness:
the more chlorotic in the leaves, the more yellow and less mar-
ketable the plants are. Regardless of dilution the largest chlorosis
level was found in C and C based substrates (2.85 on average), fol-
lowed by V2 and V2 based mixes (1.90 on average) and by V1 and V1
based mixes (1.12 on average), the peat control having the lowest
chlorosis levels (0.73).
Root dry weight was highest in the control substrate
(2.4 g/plant), dry weight of C, V1 and V2 representing 60% of the
root dry weight of the control. This parameter increased with dilu-
tion in the C based mixes and decreased in the V1 mixes. Roots
were longest in V2, followed by C and V1. Dilution did not affect
root length.
3.3. Nutrient contents in plants and substrates
The nutrient contents of the aerial parts of the cuttings were
determined after rooting, when they were ready to transplant. The
results are given in Table 2. No fertilization was applied during the
rooting experiment and plants took up the nutrients available in
the substrate. N and P contents were very low and there were no
significant differences among materials or dilutions. K content was
highest in plants grown in C and lowest in those grown in V2. Sub-
strate dilution with peat decreased K contents in plants of the C
based mixes and in those of the V1 based mixes but did not affect
K contents in those of the V2 based mixes (the K content was the
same in plants grown in pure V2 and in the control). Ca content
was highest in rosemary grown in C followed by V1, V2 and control
(1.46%) in that order. Ca content in plants diminished with sub-
strate dilution. Mg and Na were largest in C followed by V1 and V2.
Dilution generally decreased both Mg and Na contents.
Table 4 shows the nutrient contents of marketable plants after
growing six months in pots. Plants were fertigated twice a week
with an 8–1–10–1 ratio (N–P2 O5 –K2 O–MgO). N content was low-
est in cuttings grown in the C-based substrates and it increased with
dilution. N content of cuttings grown in V1, V2 and their mixes was
similar to that of cuttings grown in the control (1.04%). P content
was very low in all the cuttings. It was larger in the plants grown
in C- and V2-based mixes than in the V1-based ones, without any
interaction with dilution. The highest K content was found in cut-
tings grown in the C-based mixes and it decreased with dilution.
Cuttings grown in V1- and V2-based mixes had lower K content
than the control (1.50%). Ca, Mg and Na contents of cuttings were
highest in C-based substrates. Cuttings grown in V1, V2 and their
mixes had Ca contents similar to the control (1.42%). For cuttings
grown in V1 and V1-based substrates, Mg content was larger than
for those grown in V2 and V2-based substrates or in the control in
that order, the opposite being true for Na content.
 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202 197

Table 3
Effect of the substrates made from compost C and vermicomposts V1 and V2 on the growth and quality of rosemary plants of commercial size.

Mat Dil Dry weight (g/pl) Shoot length (cm) Shoot diameter (mm) Branch number/pl Root length (cm) Chlorosis level (score)

Shoot Root Total

C 1a 1.53f 0.86g 2.39g 13.9e 2.17 3.4 24.4 3.46a

2 1.69f 1.00f 2.70fg 13.7e 2.29 3.7 25.4 3.21ab
3 1.71f 1.14f 2.85f 13.0e 2.41 3.2 24.3 2.20cd
4 2.82d 1.42e 4.24c 15.4d 2.87 3.9 24.6 2.53bc

V1 1 3.50bc 1.93b 5.42b 17.6abc 3.36 3.6 20.9 0.66e

2 3.59b 1.76c 5.34b 17.3abcd 3.26 3.8 22.8 0.80e
3 3.03d 1.15f 4.17cd 15.9cd 3.19 3.4 18.2 1.20de
4 3.12cd 1.32e 4.43c 18.2ab 3.59 2.6 22.3 1.80cd

V2 1 2.17e 1.65c 3.82de 16.3bcd 2.94 2.7 28.9 1.93cd

2 2.32e 1.42e 3.73e 16.1bcd 3.05 3.4 26.7 2.00cd
3 2.89d 1.47de 4.36c 17.3abcd 2.89 3.0 28.3 1.93cd
4 3.42bc 1.60cd 5.02b 17.5abcd 3.05 3.2 28.7 1.73cd

Main effects
Mat 1.94 1.11 3.05 14.0 2.44c 3.6 24.7b 2.85
3.20 1.54 4.84 17.3 3.35a 3.4 21.1c 1.12
2.70 1.54 4.23 16.8 2.98b 3.1 28.2a 1.90

Dil 2.40 1.48 3.88 15.9 2.82b 3.2 24.7 2.02

2.53 1.39 3.92 15.7 2.87b 3.6 25.0 2.00
2.54 1.25 3.79 15.4 2.83b 3.2 23.6 1.78
3.12 1.45 4.56 17.0 3.17a 3.2 25.2 2.02

St Sig
Mat *** *** *** *** *** ns *** ***
Dil *** *** *** *** ** ns ns ns
M×D *** *** *** * ns ns ns ***

Mat: material; Dil: dilution; C: composted material; V1: vermicompost produced on pre-composted material; V2: straight vermicomposted material; M × D: interaction
material × dilution.
a
Dilution of compost or vermicompost:peat (% v:v). 1 = 100:0; 2 = 75:25; 3 = 50:50; 4 = 25:75.
St Sig: statistical significance. ns, *, **, *** indicate not significant, statistically significant differences at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, P ≤ 0.001, respectively. Values in the same column
with different letter differ at P ≤ 0.05 (Student–Newman–Keuls test).

Table 4
Effect of the substrates made from compost C and vermicomposts V1 and V2 on nutrient contents of shoots of rosemary plants of commercial size.

Mat Dil N (% dw) P (% dw) K (% dw) Ca (% dw) Mg (% dw) Na (% dw)

C 1a 0.76c 0.026 2.06a 2.33a 0.53a 0.27a

2 0.78c 0.017 1.56b 2.28a 0.46b 0.25a
3 0.79bc 0.014 1.47c 2.27a 0.43c 0.26a
4 0.88abc 0.012 1.28def 2.21a 0.35d 0.21ab

V1 1 1.13a 0.008 1.23f 1.50bc 0.32de 0.12cde

2 1.07a 0.010 1.14g 1.31c 0.31ef 0.06e
3 1.06a 0.013 1.00h 1.44bc 0.33de 0.08de
4 0.99abc 0.009 1.06h 1.56b 0.30ef 0.16bc

V2 1 1.03ab 0.026 1.24ef 1.38bc 0.28g 0.09cde

2 1.06a 0.022 1.31de 1.48bc 0.29fg 0.14bcd
3 1.03ab 0.017 1.35d 1.38bc 0.24h 0.12cde
4 0.90abc 0.016 1.22f 1.46bc 0.25h 0.09cde

Main effects
Mat 0.80 0.017a 1.59 2.27 0.44 0.25
1.06 0.010b 1.11 1.45 0.32 0.11
1.01 0.020a 1.28 1.43 0.27 0.11

Dil 0.97 0.020 1.51 1.74 0.38 0.16

0.97 0.016 1.34 1.69 0.35 0.15
0.96 0.015 1.27 1.70 0.33 0.15
0.92 0.012 1.19 1.74 0.30 0.15

St Sig
Mat *** *** *** *** *** ***
Dil ns ns *** ns *** ns
M×D * ns *** ** *** ***

Mat: material; Dil: dilution; C: composted material; V1: vermicompost produced on pre-composted material; V2: straight vermicomposted material; M × D: interaction
material × dilution.
a
Dilution of compost or vermicompost:peat (% v:v). 1 = 100:0; 2 = 75:25; 3 = 50:50; 4 = 25:75.
St Sig: statistical significance. ns, *, **, *** indicate not significant, statistically significant differences at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, P ≤ 0.001, respectively. Values in the same column
with different letter differ at P ≤ 0.05 (Student–Newman–Keuls test).
 198
Table 5
Mineral contents of the substrates made from compost C, vermicomposts V1 and V2, and peat (control) at the beginning (I) and at the end (F) of the growing cycle of rosemary.

Mat Dil Nmin (mg/L substrate) H2 PO4 (mg/L substrate) K+ (mg/L substrate) Ca2+ (mg/L substrate) Mg2+ (mg/L substrate) SO4 2− (mg/L substrate) Na+ (mg/L substrate)

I F I F I F I F I F I F I F
a
C 1 77.3aA 0.87gB 59.6efA 43.3B 5745aA 118.4aB 245.2aB 173.2eB 164.2aA 78.6B 3124aA 506.4deB 485.9aA 143.9bB

D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202

2 71.4abA 3.09fgB 60.9efA 29.8B 3721bA 83.58deB 136.1bA 185.6 90.6cA 78.8B 1372bA 712.6dB 339.2bA 108.2dB
3 59.5bcA 3.50efgB 71.8dA 36.5 2552cA 79.10eB 110.8eA 201.1cdB 63.5eB 81.1A 768.9cB 1088cA 244.5cA 118.4cdB
4 53.2bcdA 9.80cdA 87.9bA 29.8B 1331dA 69.19fB 87.65gA 201.3cdB 43.9jB 71.4A 398.6dB 1592bA 133.7gA 116.6cdB

V1 1 49.7bcdA 26.1aB 51.7fA 30.7B 550.3eA 101.6bB 87.58gA 214.6bcB 48.8hB 92.9A 359.9deB 1116cA 151.9eA 116.1cdB
2 68.6abA 18.0bB 67.6deA 34.3B 413.0gA 86.81cdB 86.52gA 190.4deB 97.2bA 75.1B 285.7efB 1636bA 126.9hA 119.8cdB
3 56.7bcA 19.2bB 68.8deA 37.8B 352.0hA 83.72deB 84.25gA 222.9bB 77.7dA 79.9A 278.8fB 1783bA 126.0hA 129.4cA
4 48.4bcdA 8.05cdefB 69.0deA 33.2B 350.6hA 70.13fB 82.37gA 213.5bcB 60.6efB 74.5A 193.5gB 2488aA 125.3hA 124.3cA

V2 1 8.0fA 5.13defA 55.7fA 58.2A 472.2fA 66.81fB 125.6dA 229.0bB 62.0eB 88.3A 329.4deB 397.3eA 175.1dA 124.1cB
2 17.5efA 8.34cdefB 67.6deA 58.5B 379.9gA 84.94dB 127.5cdA 258.8aB 59.8fB 98.2A 279.5fB 458.7deA 138.9fA 142.1bA
3 17.8efA 8.98cdeB 78.9cA 62.4B 249.9hA 92.08cB 129.5cA 262.9aB 57.6fgB 95.3A 127.8ghB 530.7deA 140.4fA 151.1bB
4 28.5defA 11.31cB 86.4bA 63.5B 138.2iA 97.42bB 102.6fA 248.1aB 45.4hiB 87.7A 94.83hB 573.6deA 92.5iB 170.2aA

Main effects
Mat 65.4 4.3 70.0 34.9b 3337 87.6 144.9 190.3 90.6 77.5c 1416 974.8 300.8 121.8
55.9 17.8 64.3 34.0b 416.5 85.6 85.2 210.4 71.1 80.6b 279.5 1756 132.5 122.4
18.0 8.4 72.2 60.7a 310.1 85.3 121.3 249.7 56.2 92.4a 207.9 490.1 136.7 146.9

Dil 45.0 10.7 55.7 44.1 2259 96.6 152.8 205.6 91.7 86.6a 1271 673.2 271.0 128.0
52.5 9.8 65.4 40.9 1505 85.1 116.7 211.6 82.5 84.0a 645.7 935.8 201.7 123.4
44.7 10.6 73.2 45.6 1051 85.0 108.2 229.0 66.3 85.4a 391.8 1134 170.3 133.0
43.7 9.7 81.1 42.2 606.6 78.9 90.9 221.0 50.0 77.9b 228.8 1551 117.2 137.0

St Sig
Mat ** * ** ** *** ns *** *** *** *** *** *** *** **
Dil * ns * ns *** ** *** ** *** * *** *** *** **
M×D ** * ** ns *** * *** *** ** ns *** *** *** *

Mat: material; Dil: dilution; C: composted material; V1: vermicompost produced on pre-composted material; V2: straight vermicomposted material; M × D: interaction material × dilution.
a
Dilution of compost or vermicompost:peat (% v:v). 1 = 100:0; 2 = 75:25; 3 = 50:50; 4 = 25:75.
St Sig: statistical significance. ns, *, **, *** indicate not significant, statistically significant differences at P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.01, P ≤ 0.001, respectively. Values in the same column with different lower case letter differ at P ≤ 0.05
(Student–Newman–Keuls test). Values of the same variable in the same file with different upper case letter differ at P ≤ 0.05 (Student–Newman–Keuls test).
 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202
Table 5 shows the water soluble (available) mineral contents of
the substrates prepared with C, V1 and V2 at the beginning (I) and
at the end (F) of the growing cycle of rosemary.
At the beginning of the growing cycle, mineral nitrogen content
(Nmin ) was largest in C-1 (66% larger than in the control) and lowest
in V2-1 (a sixth of the amount in the control). Dilution with peat
decreased Nmin in the C mixes (87%) and increased it in the V2 mixes
(3.6 times), remaining practically unchanged in V1. Phosphate con-
tent (H2 PO4 ) was similar in the three pure materials (55.7 mg/L on
average), representing a third of the H2 PO4 content of the control.
Dilution increased the H2 PO4 content to 47%, 33% and 55% in C, V1
and V2, respectively. With respect to the other nutrients, the largest
differences among the pure materials were found for K+ and SO4 2−
followed by Na+ . K+ content was 11 times and SO4 2− content 9 times
larger in C than in V1 and V2. For K+ and for SO4 2− the contents in
the control were approximately a third and a sixth of that in V1
and V2, respectively. Na+ content in C was 3 times larger than in V1
and V2 on average and 15 times larger than in the control. Mixing
with peat reduced the cation contents particularly in the case of
K+ (77%, 36% and 71% for C, V1 and V2, respectively, in the 25:75
dilution) and SO4 2− (87%, 46% and 71% for C, V1 and V2, respec-
tively, in the 25:75 dilution). Na+ contents dropped 72%, 18% and
47% in the 25:75 dilutions of C, V1 and V2, respectively. Ca2+ and
Mg2+ contents also differed for the different pure materials. Ca2+
content in C doubled that in the control and V2 and tripled that in
V1. Dilution reduced Ca2+ content by 64% in C and by 18% in V2 but
did not change Ca2+ content in V1. Mg2+ content was reduced by
73% in C and by 27% in V2 in the most diluted mixes.
3.4. Substrate characteristics after the six-month plant growth
period
Rosemary shrubs were grown in the different substrates for six
months. At the end of the experiment the physical and physico-
chemical characteristics of the substrates were determined once
more. Capital letters in Table 1 indicate the statistical comparison
between the initial and final values of the substrate physical and
physico-chemical characteristics. Substrates showed an increase in
DB , which was significant for both materials and mixes, though not
for their interaction. DP had not significantly changed by the end
of the six-month period. Changes in PT after plant growth were
not significant, however the dilution effect still remained. Shrink-
age had increased by the end of the growing cycle, particularly in
C. Vair and Vwater changed significantly in the three materials and
their mixes. After the six-month period Vair had decreased in C and
increased in the pure vermicomposts but had increased in the C-
based mixes and decreased in the V1- and V2-based mixes. The
opposite trend was observed for Vwater . All these changes are typ-
ical symptoms of material degradation but, in the case of Vair , the
final values were closer to the AR values. pH had decreased by the
end of the experiment in most of the mixes, remaining slightly alka-
line. The largest pH decrease occurred in the pure materials (9% in
C, 5% in V1 and 12% in V2). In the control pH had increased to 7.36
by the end of the experiment. EC had decreased by the end of the
experiment in all the mixes with C and V1, and in V2-1 and V2-2
but increased in V2-3, V2-4 and the control (from 29 to 46 mS/m),
the largest EC loss being found in the C mixes (73% on average).
The average EC of all the mixes at the end of the experiment was
equal to the EC of the control. These changes reveal the equilibrium
reached with the fertigation solution and thus an improvement in
these parameters. OM decreased significantly in all the dilutions
with V1 and V2 except for V2-1 and only in C-1 in the C dilutions.
In all instances OM decreased: 11% on average for the C, V1 and V2
based substrates and 9% for the peat.
199
Capital letters in Table 5 indicate the statistical comparison
between the initial and final (after the six months of shrub growth)
values of the substrate mineral contents.
The nutrient contents after six months had changed in most sub-
strates. Nmin decreased in all substrates, most particularly in the C
based mixes and in the control (93% and 84%, respectively), despite
the fact that it was added by fertigation. H2 PO4 also decreased with
rosemary growth. The largest decrease was also found in the con-
trol and in the C based mixes (84% and 50%, respectively). K+ had
fallen by 97%, 79%, 72% and 41% at the end of the pot experiment
in the C, V1 and V2 based mixes and in the control, respectively.
The irrigation water was near the very hard limits (based on the
USGS Water Quality Information: water hardness and alkalinity).
This is reflected in an increased Ca2+ content after irrigating for
six months. The increase was particularly acute in the V1 and V2
based mixes (150% and 106%, respectively). With respect to Mg2+
there was an increase in all substrates initially containing less than
90 mg/L. For the V2 based mixes the increase averaged 119%. A large
increase in SO4 2− was observed in all mixes except for C-1 and C-2,
in which a decrease was observed due likely to the high SO4 2− initial
content of these two. Na+ increased in the substrates which con-
tained less than 130 mg/L and decreased in those containing more
than 130 mg/L. Ca2+ , SO4 2− and Na+ contents might be explained by
the characteristics of the irrigation water, which would have added
minerals to the mixes with low values and wash them in the mixes
with high values.
4. Discussion
The importance of physical properties of organic materials when
they are to be used as growth media has been extensively reported
(Gizas et al., 2012; Raviv et al., 2004) and is based on the root’s need
for aeration and the container’s restriction on drainage (Mathers
et al., 2007). The physical characterization of substrates before
beginning cultivation is of paramount importance since these prop-
erties cannot be modified once the substrate is in the containers.
The adequate ranges (AR) for physical properties have been pro-
posed for both rooting (Maronek et al., 1985) and plant growth
(Bunt, 1988; Carmona and Abad, 2008) in containers. For rooting
media DB should be between 300 and 800 kg m−3 , higher than for
plant growth (AR < 400 kg m−3 ). In this study only pure C, V1 and V2
were appropriate for rooting, whilst all mixes were within the ade-
quate range for plant growth. Ideally Vair should range between 20
and 30% both for rooting and for plant growth whilst Vwater should
range between 20 and 60% for rooting and between 52 and 68% for
plant growth. Only pure V1 and V2 had a Vair within the adequate
range whilst all materials were within AR with respect to Vwater .
AR for physico-chemical and chemical characteristics have also
been recommended for both rooting (Maronek et al., 1985) and
plant growth (Bunt, 1988; Carmona and Abad, 2008). pH should
be between 5.0 and 6.5, a condition only fulfilled by peat in our
experiment. EC ought to be between 5 and 20 mS m−1 for rooting
and between 75 and 349 mS m−1 for plant growth. Our mixes were
far from adequate for rooting, yet they were within the ranges
indicated for plant growth. Composts and vermicomposts from
agricultural wastes tend to be alkaline (Belda et al., 2013) and some
authors recommend acidifying amendments before using them as
growth media. However, acidifying amendments may result in an
increase in EC (Carrión et al., 2008). Excessive EC can be counter-
acted by leaching treatments (Fornes et al., 2010). In fact, irrigation
requirements are greater for vermicomposting than for composting
and the resulting vermicomposts (in this case V1 and V2) become
less saline than composts (Fornes et al., 2012). OM should be above
80%. This amount of OM was only found in peat and the C:peat
mixes.
200 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202
Although physical and physico-chemical properties are con-
sidered to be inadequate for rooting, V1 and V2 and their mixes
proved successful for rooting rosemary plants. Gutiérrez-Miceli
et al. (2008) found that the cress germination index with a ver-
micompost leachate met standards, the vermicompost leachate
stimulating plant development when used as fertilizer for sorghum
growth. Arancon et al. (2012) reported that germination and
seedling growth of lettuce and tomato increased with higher pro-
portions of vermicompost extracts. Humic substances of some
composts have been linked to growth-promoting factors and, in
particular, to increased root dry matter (Azcona et al., 2011).
Auxin-like compounds which were not present at the start of
composting were released during fern composting (Arthur et al.,
2007). V1 and V2 based substrates might supply plants with
such growth-promoting factors that induce root growth in cut-
tings.
None of the substrates outperformed peat in terms of plant
growth or greenness in the long-term experiment. Some of the
beneficial effects of vermicomposts might be lost in the long run.
Azcona et al. (2011) observed that compost’s early stimulation of
plant growth was attenuated as plants reached maturity. Chloro-
sis in leaves is an indicator of poor quality. Doan et al. (2013)
obtained higher SPAD values (chlorophyll content) in plants grown
with vermicompost amendment than in those grown with a com-
post treatment. This agrees with the results obtained in the present
study: C based mixes produced plants with the poorest quality and
V1 performed similar to peat, producing the greenest leaves.
Mixing is suggested as a way to improve some of the neg-
ative characteristics of composts (Carmona and Abad, 2008) or
vermicomposts. In our case, mixing improved qualities such as
PT , Vair , pH, salinity, in particular, or OM. This was reflected in
the rooting and the shoot growth of cuttings. However, long-
term (six months in the experiment) irrigation renders some of
those characteristics more homogenous among mixes, particularly
pH and EC, and the dilution effect disappears in the marketable
plants.
With respect to nutrient contents and considering Mills and
Jones (1996) sufficiency range (SR) for nursery grown rosemary,
we observed the following: N content was below SR (2.09–2.52%)
in plants grown in all the mixes, particularly in those grown in the C
based ones, which represented 78% of the N content of those grown
in the other mixes; P content was also below SR (0.26–0.35%),
being 94% less on average considering all the treatments together;
K content was below SR (2.36–2.55%) in all mixes, plants growing
in C having the largest K content; Ca content was well above SR
(0.48–0.69%) and, once more, plants growing in C had the largest
Ca content; Mg content was within SR (0.17–0.40%) for all mixes
except for the C based ones, in which plants contained Mg above SR;
Na content in plants was within the adequate range (0.02–0.19%) –
Na is not an essential nutrient – in all V1 and V2 based mixes and
in the control and it was above the SR in plants grown in all the C
based substrates.
Plant N and P contents were particularly low in cuttings and
six-month old plants, which might have influenced plant develop-
ment and were possibly responsible for the chlorosis levels found
in all treatments. Hence, we studied the correlations between
each plant nutrient content, both for cuttings and six-month old
plants, with each growth parameter. Additionally, we examined the
correlations between substrate nutrient content and plant nutri-
ent content (cuttings and six-month old plants) and of substrate
nutrient content and growth parameters. Fig. 1 shows the regres-
sions of the rooting experiment with a determination coefficient
above 0.75. It illustrates the relationship between rooting and the
electrical conductivity (A) and the potassium (B), sulfate (C) and
sodium (D) contents in substrates. The high and inverse corre-
lation between rooting and EC, and the main cations (K+ , SO4 2− ,
and Na+ ) contributing to salinity might indicate phytotoxicity. The
clouds of data with the highest rooting in the four graphs belong
to substrates containing vermicompost and peat. The addition of
compost to the substrate might have been responsible for the dele-
terious effect on rooting. However, the two vermicomposts were
not identical. V2 was not subject to pre-composting and it pro-
duced longer roots which weighed more than those of the other
two materials (Table 2). Hence, the factors eliciting rooting are to
be sought in V2 and they might be of hormonal rather than nutri-
tional nature, since V2 is generally the poorest vermicompost of
the two (Table 5). Hormone-like factors such as IAA, cytokinin,
gibberellins and humic acids have been shown to be present in
vermicomposts teas (Arancon et al., 2012). These hormone-like fac-
tors might be present in the initial piles and be thermolabile, hence
disappearing during the composting processes (C and V1). Addi-
tionally, their concentration might rise with the loss of biomass
during vermicomposting (V2). The slowdown of growth and nutri-
ent accumulation in leaves is characteristic when toxic levels of
nutrients are present in growth media (Marschner, 1995). In the
six-month experiment only the relationship between shoot dry
weight and substrate Na+ content had a determination coefficient
above 0.75. A similar effect to that of rooting and the main cations
was found between shoot dry weight and substrate Na content
in six-month old plants (y = 3E−05x2 − 0.0219x + 5.43, R2 = 0.86).
The plateau of the polynomial relationship was reached with the
shoot dry weight of the plants grown in the C based substrates,
which might indicate that the high Na content of C is harmful for
rosemary. Reports of rosemary’s response to salinity are contradic-
tory. Rosemary is generally thought to be moderately salt-resistant
(Tounekti et al., 2008). However, Tounekti et al. (2011) proved
reduced shoot extension after a two-month treatment with high
NaCl concentrations added to the soil. The results of our study
support the latter contention. The relatively uniform low N tis-
sue content found in rosemary as a response to variable N content
in the soil has been reported for this species and compared to
the more variable responses of annuals reported by Ochoa-Hueso
et al. (2013). Conservative N economy, absorbing only a small frac-
tion of its N needs, has been found to be a feature of rosemary
in comparison to grass species (Sala et al., 2012). The very low
P content cannot be attributed to high pH (Jin et al., 2014) in
the case of this substrate, given that the lowest P content in cut-
tings and in six-month old plants was obtained in peat. Hence,
to improve quality an increase in N and P fertilization is recom-
mended.
In medium- to long-term soilless cultivation, growth media tend
to degrade and lose desirable qualities. Recently, this effect was
shown for peat-based substrates and was alleviated by mixing peat
with biochar (Tian et al., 2012).
Rosemary is a species native to the Mediterranean ecosystem.
It is a species to be considered in the maintenance or recovery
(i.e. after fire) of such ecosystems due to its positive influence on
soil aggregate stability (Pérez-Bejarano et al., 2010). In nurseries
rosemary is grown in containers; however, its final destination is
usually transplanting to soil. Transplanting involves transferring
the substrate in which the plant is growing to the natural soil in
order to prevent root damage. Environmentalists are reluctant to
use such practices in preserved environments. During the months
in which plants are grown in soils amended with organic matter,
the soil characteristics change (Doan et al., 2013). The same might
be true for substrates and, indeed, this was the case of our mixes for
several of their characteristics. The reported increase in DB might
not have much impact on the soil. However, the air–water relation-
ship in the substrate may critically influence plant survival after
transplanting to soil. Roots of growing plants need more oxygen in
containers than in soil and large Vair is essential. When transplanted
to the soil, plants need a root environment that can successfully
 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202 201

A B
120 y= -0,0006x2 - 0,1451x + 97,539 120 y = 3E-06x2 - 0,034x + 101,97
R² = 0,8932 R² = 0,8721
100 100

80 80

Rooting%
Rooting%
60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
0 100 200 300 0 2000 4000 6000
EC (mS/m) Potassium (mg/L)

C D
120 y = 1E-05x2 - 0,0694x + 106,26 120 y = 0,0001x2 - 0,3291x + 131,78
R² = 0,8674 R² = 0,754
100 100

80 80
Rooting%

Rooting%
60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 200 400 600
Sulfate (mg/L) Sodium (mg/L)

Fig. 1. Relationship between cutting rooting percentage of rosemary and electrical conductivity (EC) (A), potassium (B), sulfate (C) and sodium (D) contents in the rooting
substrate.

compete for water with the surrounding soil and then a large Vwater ,
to the detriment of Vair , is the priority (Mathers et al., 2007). After
growing rosemary in the organic substrates for six months, Vair had
decreased and Vwater had increased in the V1 and V2 mixes and in
peat, rendering them more suitable for the early stages of plant life
in the soil.
Two of the most negative characteristics of composts/
vermicomposts are their pH, which is generally too alkaline, and
their salinity, which verges in the toxicity range. As seen above,
compost pH and EC can be reduced by acidifying amendments and
by leaching, respectively (Fornes et al., 2010). The pure materials
used in this study showed moderate alkalinity, which decreased
during plant growth. After the six-month experiment, pH decreased
in the mixes with a large amount of compost or vermicompost
whilst it increased in both the control and the most diluted mixes.
In all the substrates, pH was above neutrality, which might be
related to the characteristics of the irrigation water (pH = 7.95).
Soils in the area of our study are alkaline, ranging between 7.5
and 8.3 (Forteza Bonnin et al., 1995). The buffering capacity of soils
enables them to neutralize extreme pH (Diacono and Montemurro,
2011), yet the final pH of the compost and vermicompost mixes
is close to the soil pH expected in nature. With respect to EC, the
mixes showed a reduction in salinity when salinity was initially
high (i.e. pure materials, compost and less diluted vermicompost
mixes). Indeed, irrigation eliminated the excess of salts and in
all the substrates EC would be acceptable EC for transplanting
to the soil. OM either decreased slightly or remained unchanged.
Although these are low values for container growth, the OM con-
tent of the mixes might contribute to improve the organic matter
in the soil, mostly since soils in these regions are poor in organic
matter.
5. Conclusion
In conclusion, vermicomposts and composts from agricultural
wastes can be used as ingredients in growth media. However, ver-
micompost, either produced by straight vermicomposting or by
vermicomposting after composting (thermophilic phase only), out-
performs compost obtained simultaneously from the same batch
of horticultural waste: vermicompost can be used in high propor-
tions (more than 50%) in the growth media for rooting cuttings
of rosemary whilst compost can only be used in low proportions
(not above 25%). Besides, vermicompost produced by straight ver-
micomposting improved rooting, root length and root weight of
cuttings despite its low levels of nutrients. However, although ver-
micomposts give acceptable results, they do not perform as well
as peat for growing rosemary. Finally, the degradation observed
in all the growth media assayed after six months represented an
improvement in the substrate quality and might facilitate the trans-
planting of rosemary to the soil.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Dr. Debra Westall for revising the
English. This study was funded by the Instituto Nacional de Inves-
tigación y Tecnología Agraria (INIA) of the Spanish Ministerio de
Ciencia e Innovación (Project Reference RTA2006-00008-C02-02).
References
Abad, M., Noguera, P., Burés, S., 2001. National inventory of organic wastes for use
as growing media for ornamental potted plant production: case study in Spain.
Bioresour. Technol. 77, 197–200.
202 D. Mendoza-Hernández et al. / Scientia Horticulturae 178 (2014) 192–202
Arancon, N., Pant, A., Radovich, T., Hue, N.V., Potter, J.K., Converse, C.E., 2012. Seed
germination and seedling growth of tomato and lettuce as affected by vermi-
compost water extracts (teas). HortScience 47, 1722–1728.
Arthur, G.D., Stirk, W.A., Novak, O., Hekera, P., van Staden, J., 2007. Occurrence of
nutrients and plant hormones (cytokinins and IAA) in the water fern Salvinia
molesta during growth and composting. Environ. Exp. Bot. 61, 137–144.
Azcona, I., Pascual, I., Aguirreolea, J., Fuentes, M., García-Mina, J.M., Sánchez-Díaz,
M., 2011. Growth and development of pepper are affected by humic substances
derived from composted sludge. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 174, 916–924.
Belda, R.M., Mendoza-Hernández, D., Fornes, F., 2013. Nutrient-rich compost versus
nutrient-poor vermicompost as growth media for ornamental-plant production.
J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 176, 827–835.
Bunt, A.C., 1988. Media and Mixes for Container-Grown Plants: A Manual on the
prepaRation and Use of Growing Media for Pot Plants, 2nd ed. Unwin Hyman,
London.
Carmona, E., Abad, M., 2008. Aplicación del compost en viveros y semilleros. In:
Moreno, J., Moral, R. (Eds.), Compostaje. Ed Mundi-Prensa, Madrid, pp. 397–424.
Carrión, C., García-de-la-Fuente, R., Fornes, F., Puchades, R., Abad, M., 2008. Acid-
ifying compost from vegetable crop wastes to prepare growing media for
containerized crops. Compost Sci. Util. 16, 20–29.
Diacono, M., Montemurro, F., 2011. Long-term effects of organic amendments on soil
fertility. In: Lichtfouse, E., Hamelin, M., Navarrete, M., Debaeke, P. (Eds.), Sustain-
able Agriculture, vol. 2. Springer Science + Business Media B.V., Dordrecht, pp.
761–786.
Doan, T.T., Ngo, P.T., Rumpel, C., Nguyen, B.V., Jouquet, P., 2013. Interactions between
compost, vermicompost and earthworms influence plant growth and yield: a
one-year greenhouse experiment. Sci. Hortic. 160, 148–154.
Domeño, I., Irigoyen, I., Muro, J., 2011. Comparison of traditional and improved
methods for estimating the stability of organic growing media. Sci. Hortic. 130,
335–340.
Domínguez, J., 2004. State of the art and new perspectives on vermicomposting
research. In: Edwards, C.A. (Ed.), Earthworm Ecology. , 2nd ed. CRC Press, Boca
Raton, USA, pp. 401–424.
Farrell, M., Jones, D.L., 2010. Food waste composting: its use as a peat replacement.
Waste Manage. 30, 1495–1501.
FEPEX – Federación Española de Asociaciones de Productores y Exportadores de
Frutas, 2011. Hortalizas, Flores y Plantas Vivas. http://www.fepex.es/archivos/
publico/ESTADISTICAS/ADUANAS/FLORES/EXPORT/FP EPRODPAIEUROS.xls
(accessed May 2013).
Fornes, F., Belda, R.M., Carrión, C., Noguera, V., García-Agustín, P., Abad, M., 2007. Pre-
conditioning ornamental plants to drought by means of saline water irrigation
as related to salinity tolerance. Sci. Hortic. 113, 52–59.
Fornes, F., Carrión, C., García-de-la-Fuente, R., Puchades, R., Abad, M., 2010. Leaching
composted lignocellulosic wastes to prepare container media: feasibility and
environmental concerns. J. Environ. Manage. 91, 1747–1755.
Fornes, F., Mendoza-Hernández, D., García de la Fuente, R., Abad, M., Belda, R.M.,
2012. Composting versus vermicomposting: a comparative study of organic
matter evolution through straight and combined processes. Bioresour. Technol.
118, 296–305.
Forteza Bonnin, J., Rubio Delgado, J.L., Gimeno García, E., 1995. Catálogo de suelos
de la Comunidad Valenciana. Conselleria d’agricultura, pesca i alimentació, ISBN
84-482-0851-X.
Gizas, G., Tsirogiannis, I., Bakea, M., Mantzos, N., Savvas, D., 2012. Impact of hydraulic
characteristics of raw or composted Posidonia residues, coir and their mixtures
with pumice on root aeration, water availability, and yield in a lettuce crop.
HortScience 47, 896–901.
Gutiérrez-Miceli, F.A., García-Gómez, R.C., Rincón-Rosales, R., Abud-Archila, M.,
Oliva-Llaven, M.A., Guillen-Cruz, M.J., Dendooven, L., 2008. Formulation of a liq-
uid fertilizer for sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) using vermicompost
leachate. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 6174–6180.
Handreck, K., Black, N., 2005. Growing Media for Ornamental Plants and Turf, 3rd
edition reprinted with revisions. New South Wales University Press, Australia.
Jin, J., Tang, C.X., Hogarth, T.W., Armstrong, R., Sale, P., 2014. Nitrogen form but
not elevated CO2 alters plant phosphorus acquisition from sparingly soluble
phosphorus sources. Plant Soil 374, 109–119.
Lazcano, C., Gómez-Brandón, M., Domínguez, J., 2008. Comparison of the effective-
ness of composting and vermicomposting for the biological stabilization of cattle
manure. Chemosphere 72, 1013–1019.
Maronek, D.M., Studebaker, D., Oberly, B., 1985. Improving media aeration in liner
and container production. Comb. Proc. Int. Plant Prop. Soc. 35, 591–597.
Marschner, H., 1995. Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants, 2nd ed. Academic Press,
San Diego.
Masaguer, A., Benito, M., 2007. Evaluación de la calidad del compost. In: Moreno, J,
Moral, R. (Eds.), Compostaje. Ed Mundi-Prensa, Madrid, pp. 285–304.
Mathers, H.M., Lowe, S.B., Scagel, C., Struve, D.K., Case, L.T., 2007. Abiotic factors
influencing root growth of woody nursery plants in containers. HortTechnology
17 (2), 151–162.
Mills, H.A., Jones Jr., J.B., 1996. Plant Analysis Handbook. II. A Practical Sampling,
Preparation, Analysis, and Interpretation Guide. MicroMacro Publishing, Athens,
USA.
Nogales, R., Domínguez, J., Mato, S., 2007. Vermicompostaje. In: Moreno, J., Moral,
R. (Eds.), Compostaje. Ed Mundi-Prensa, Madrid, pp. 187–207.
Ochoa-Hueso, R., Perez-Corona, M.E., Manrique, E., 2013. Impacts of Simulated N
Deposition on Plants and Mycorrhizae from Spanish Semiarid Mediterranean
Shrublands. Ecosystems 16, 838–851.
Perez-Bejarano, A., Mataix-Solera, J., Zornoza, R., Guerrero, C., Arcenegui, V., Mataix-
Beneyto, J., Cano-Amat, S., 2010. Influence of plant species on physical, chemical
and biological soil properties in a Mediterranean forest soil. Eur. J. Forest Res.
129, 15–24.
Puchades, R., Maquieira, A., Rubio, J.L., Primo-Yúfera, E., 1985. Evolución del
nitrógeno nítrico y amoniacal en un suelo de cítricos fertilizado con urea recu-
bierta de azufre. Relación con el nitrógeno foliar. Agrochimica 29, 30–39.
Raviv, M., Wallach, R., Blom, T.J., 2004. The effect of physical properties of soilless
substrate on plant performance – a review. Acta Hosp. 644, 251–259.
Sala, O.E., Golluscio, R.A., Lauenroth, W.K., Roset, P.A., 2012. Contrasting nutrient-
capture strategies in shrubs and grasses of a Patagonian arid ecosystem. J Arid
Environ. 82, 130–135.
Srivastava, P.K., Singh, P.C., Gupta, M., Sinha, A., Vaish, A., Shukla, A., Singh, N., Tewari,
S.K., 2011. Influence of earthworm culture on fertilization potential and biolog-
ical activities of vermicomposts prepared from different plant wastes. J. Plant
Nutr. Soil Sci. 174, 420–429.
Tian, Y., Suna, X., Li, S., Wanga, H., Wang, L., Caoc, J., Zhanga, L., 2012. Biochar made
from green waste as peat substitute in growth media for Calathea rotundifolia cv
Fasciata. Sci. Hortic. 143, 15–18.
Tognetti, F.L., Mazzarino, M.J., Hernández, M.T., 2005. Composting vs. vermicom-
posting: a comparison of end product quality. Compost Sci. Util. 13, 6–13.
Tounekti, T., Vadel, A.M., Bedoui, A., Khemira, H., 2008. NaCl stress affects growth
and essential oil composition in rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.). J Hortic.
Sci. Biotech. 83, 267–273.
Tounekti, T., Vadel, A.M., Ennajeh, M., Khemira, H., Munne-Bosch, S., 2011. Ionic
interactions and salinity affect monoterpene and phenolic diterpene compo-
sition in rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis). J Plant Nutr Soil Sci. 174, 504–
514.
USGS (US Geological Survey), 2014. Water Quality Information: Water Hardness
and Alkalinity. https://water.usgs.gov/owq/hardness-alkalinity.html (accessed
April 2014).
Yadav, K.D., Tare, V., Ahammed, M.M., 2012. Integrated
composting–vermicomposting process for stabilization of human faecal
slurry. Ecol. Eng. 47, 24–29.