View Article

Abstract

Soil testing is important to understand the health and fertility of soil for better farming. In this study, soil samples from different fields were tested for key factors like pH, electrical conductivity, organic matter, and nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and minerals like iron and zinc). Simple tools and methods were used to check these properties. The results showed that different fields had different soil conditions, meaning each field needs its own care. Based on the findings, we suggested ways to improve soil quality and help farmers grow healthier crops. This study helps promote smarter farming and better use of fertilizers for sustainable agriculture.

Keywords

nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, and minerals like iron and zinc

Introduction

Soil isn’t just dirt it’s actually a complex system made up of three parts: solids (like minerals and organic matter), liquids (mainly water), and gases (the air in between the particles). All of these works together to form what we call the soil matrix. Soil forms over time through a mix of different influences things like climate, the shape and slope of the land (called relief), living organisms, and the type of rocks or materials it originally came from (known as parent material). As time goes on, soil keeps changing and developing through natural physical, chemical, and biological processes, including weathering and erosion. Because of how dynamic and interconnected all these processes are, many soil ecologists see soil as more than just a medium—it's a living ecosystem in itself.

 

 

 

 

Fig. 1 Study Area Sources Google Map

 

Soil quality is essential for agriculture, plant growth, and environmental health. Several key parameters determine soil health and fertility.  pH is a crucial factor that affects soil chemical properties and nutrient availability. Patel et al. (2011) found that low pH increases soil acidity, harming microbial activity and plant growth. Sharma et al. (2016) and Kumar et al. (2019) showed that acidic soils reduce nutrient availability, leading to poor crop yield. Verma et al. (2014) and Singh et al. (2018) demonstrated that pH imbalance causes nutrient leaching, contributing to soil degradation. Electrical conductivity (EC) measures the concentration of soluble salts in soil, indicating its salinity level. High EC levels reduce plant water uptake and affect crop health. Joshi et al. (2013) explained that EC helps determine soil suitability for agriculture, irrigation, and industrial use. Sodium and potassium content are measured using a flame photometer, calibrated with standard sodium (1–100 mg/kg) and potassium (1–5 mg/kg) solutions. For high concentrations, samples are diluted, and results are adjusted using the dilution factor for precise readings. Microbiological testing of soil assesses microbial contamination and overall soil health. Standard methods are used, including presumptive, confirmed, and completed tests. Mehta et al. (2015) and Rao et al. (2017) highlighted the importance of

MATERIAL AND METHOD:

For this study, we collected soil samples from different locations around Chandwad tehsil to check the quality of the soil.  A total of Three soil samples were taken from places like agricultural fields, gardens, farm, roadsides. Each sample was carefully collected in clean plastic containers and labelled properly. We followed the guidelines recommended by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO) to make sure the samples stayed in good condition until they were analysed in the lab.

Parameter Tested:

We checked the soil samples for several important properties, including:

O pH (to know if the soil is acidic or alkaline)

O Electrical Conductivity (EC) (to measure salts in the soil)

O Organic Matter Content (important for soil health)

O Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P), and Potassium (K) (essential nutrients for plants)

O Moisture Content

O Bulk Density (how compact the soil is)

O Microbial Activity (bacteria and fungi living in the soil

Procedure: 

1. Measuring pH

We mixed the soil with water, then used a pH meter to check whether the soil is acidic or basic. Before each test, the pH probe was cleaned with deionized water and dried properly.

2. Measuring Electrical Conductivity (EC)

A small amount of soil was mixed with distilled water. A digital meter measured how well the soil solution conducted electricity, which tells us about the salt content.

3. Organic Matter

We used a simple chemical method to find out how much organic matter was in the soil.

4. Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium (NPK)

Special laboratory methods were used to measure the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, which are vital nutrients for plant growth.

5. Moisture Content

We measured how much water was in the soil by weighing it before and after drying it in an oven.

6. Bulk Density

This was calculated by measuring the weight of dry soil per volume. It helps to understand how compact the soil is.

7. Microbial Activity

We checked how many bacteria and fungi were present by growing them in special plates and counting the colonies.

1) Soil pH

Sample

pH

A

8.0

B

8.1

C

8.0

 

 

 

 

Measured pH: Sample A = 8.0, Sample B = 8.1, Sample C = 8.0.

Summary: soil is uniformly slightly alkaline (pH 8.0).

Discussion:

• At pH ~8.0 most nutrients such as iron, manganese, zinc and phosphorus become less available to plants, so deficiency symptoms are possible even if nutrients are present.

• Many common crops prefer near-neutral soil (pH 6.0–7.0); acid-loving crops (blueberries, azaleas, potatoes) will perform poorly.

• Alkalinity can come from parent material, alkaline irrigation water, or low organic matter.

Practical recommendations:

• For the project: treat the soil as slightly alkaline and either select tolerant crops (e.g., barley, beets, brassicas tolerate mild alkalinity) or amend the soil to lower pH.

• To lower pH: add elemental sulfur or acidifying fertilizers (ammonium sulfate) and incorporate organic matter (compost).

Exact application rates depend on soil texture and target pH — I can calculate rates if you provide soil type and target pH.

• Test additional parameters: soil texture, organic matter, electrical conductivity (salinity), and available N-P-K and micronutrients to guide fertilization

2) Conductivity

Sample

Conductance (dm/m)

A

0.28

B

0.38

C

0.28

Measured electrical conductivity (EC): Sample A = 0.28 dS/m,

Sample B = 0.38 dS/m, Sample C = 0.28 dS/m.

Average EC 0.31 dS/m.

 

Discussion

• These EC values are low — well below common salinity thresholds. Soils are non-saline and unlikely to cause salt stress for most crops.

• Sample B is slightly higher than A and C but still in the safe range; the small variation could reflect local differences in fertilizer, irrigation, or soil texture.

• Low EC means limited soluble salt supply; nutrient availability may not be affected by salinity, but low salt does not rule out nutrient deficiencies (total N, P, K and micronutrients still need checking).

Practical recommendations:

• Continue normal cropping and irrigation; monitor EC periodically (especially after fertilizer or saline irrigation) and run a full nutrient analysis if plant growth problems appear.

 

 

 

 

Samples

Standard Range

Remark

Sample A=0.47

0.50 – 0.75

Moderate Organic Matter

Sample B=0.41

0.50 – 0.75

Moderate Organic Matter

Sample C=0.47

0.50 – 0.75

Moderate Organic Matter

 

3) Major Nutrients

 

Nutrients

Valu (Kg/Ha)

Available Nitrogen (N)

Sample A= 189.41

Sample B=193.18

Sample C=189.41

Available Phoshpharus (P)

Sample A=37.63

Sample B=30.54

Sample C=37.63

Available Potash (K)

Sample A=296.53

Sample B=284.47

Sample C=297.53

 

Summary and Analysis:

 

- The data indicates that the values of the three major nutrients are relatively consistent across the three soil samples, with some minor variations.

- Available Nitrogen (N): The values range from 189.41 to 193.18 kg/ha, indicating a relatively narrow range of nitrogen availability in the soil samples.

- Available Phosphorus (P): The values range from 30.54 to 37.63 kg/ha, showing a slightly wider range compared to nitrogen. Sample 2 has a lower phosphorus value compared to Samples 1 and 3.

- Available Potassium (K): The values range from 284.47 to 297.53 kg/ha, indicating a relatively consistent level of potassium availability across the soil samples.

Effect of Readings:

The data suggests that the soil samples have a relatively consistent nutrient profile, with some minor variations. The ranges of the nutrient values can be used to inform decisions about fertilizer application, soil management, and crop selection.

For example:

The relatively narrow range of nitrogen values may indicate that nitrogen-based fertilizers may not be necessary, or that a consistent nitrogen application rate can be used across the soil samples. 

- The slightly wider range of phosphorus values may suggest that phosphorus-based fertilizers could be beneficial for Sample 2, which has a lower phosphorus value.

- The consistent level of potassium availability across the soil samples may indicate that potassium-based fertilizers are not necessary, or that a consistent potassium application rate can be used. Overall, the data provides valuable insights into the nutrient profile of the soil samples, which can be used to inform agricultural management decisions and

3) Micronutrients Status

 

Nutrients

Value (Ppm)

Available Iron (Fe)

Sample A=3.15

Sample B=3.74

Sample C=3.11

Available Zinc (Zn)

Sample A=0.37

Sample B=0.61

Sample C=0.54

Available Copper (Cu)

Sample A=3.24

Sample B=3.21

Sample C=4.11

Available Maganese (Mn)

Sample A=2.85

Sample B=4.94

Sample C=3.62

 

Summary: 

The table provides a comparison of the micronutrient levels across three samples. The results indicate variability in the micronutrient content among the samples. For instance, Sample 2 has the highest available iron and manganese, while Sample 3 has the highest available copper. Sample 2 also has the highest available zinc among the three samples.

RESULTS: 

The analysis shows that the micronutrient status varies across the samples. Understanding these variations can be crucial for applications such as soil health assessment, agricultural planning, or nutritional analysis. The data suggests that each sample has a unique micronutrient profile, which could influence its suitability for different uses.

CONCLUSION:

In this study, we analyzed soil samples collected from different regions of Chandwad Tahsil to assess soil quality and suitability for agricultural use. Soil samples were collected from agricultural fields, barren land, forest areas, and near water bodies. Key soil parameters such as pH, electrical conductivity (EC), nutrient content (N, P, K), organic matter, and soil texture were measured using standardized methods. We observed that soil pH varied across locations, with some samples showing slightly alkaline conditions, while others remained neutral, indicating differences in soil fertility. Electrical conductivity measurements revealed that soils near industrial areas showed higher salinity levels compared to agricultural lands. Nutrient analysis by flame photometry indicated variations in sodium (Na?) and potassium (K?) content, with agricultural soils generally richer in essential nutrients. Organic matter content was higher in forest and agricultural soils compared to barren lands, supporting better soil health and microbial activity. Overall, the soil quality in most regions was found to be within permissible limits for agricultural use. The study highlights the importance of regular soil assessment to ensure proper nutrient management and sustainable land use practices.

REFERENCES

  1. Dr. R. K. Rattan Secretary, Indian Society of Soil Science 1st Floor, National Societies Block National Agricultural Science Centre Complex Dev Prakash Sastri Marg, Pusa New Delhi – 110012 Website : www.iss-india.org
  2. Kokate, C.K., Purohit, A.P., Gokhale, S.B. Pharmacognosy – Nirali Prakashan Chapter on evaluation of crude drugs; covers soil influence on medicinal plants
  3. Trease, G.E., Evans, W.C. Pharmacognosy, Elsevier Discusses soil and environmental factors on phytoconstituents.
  4. WHO. Quality Control Methods for Medicinal Plant Materials (1998). Includes soil sampling guidelines for medicinal plant cultivation.
  5. Khandelwal, K.R. Practical Pharmacognosy – Nirali Prakashan Provides practical approaches to soil testing for cultivation of crude drugs.
  6. Singh, R. et al. (2014). Effect of soil nutrients on secondary metabolites of medicinal plants. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 3(4), 123–128.
  7. Sharma, A., et al. (2019). Soil quality and its impact on medicinal plant growth and phytochemical content. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research, 54(2), 45–52.
  8. Thakur, M., et al. (2020). Soil analysis and its importance in standardization of herbal raw materials. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, 13(6), 20–25.
  9. AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists) Methods – standard methods for soil and plant analysis.
  10. Indian Pharmacopoeia (IP) – sections on raw material testing mention soil as a contaminant source (heavy metals, pesticides).
  11. FAO Soil Testing Guidelines – useful for medicinal plant cultivation.
  12. Chopra, S.L. and Kanwar, J.S. (1986). Analytical Agricultural Chemistry. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, pp. 514.
  13. Dhyan Singh, Chhonkar, P.K. and Pandey, R.N. (1999). Soil Plant Water Analysis – A Methods Manual. Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, pp. 160.
  14. Ghosh, A.B., Bajaj, J.C., Hasan, R. and Dhyan Singh (1983). Soil and Water Testing Methods – A Laboratory Manual. Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, pp. 52.
  15. Hesse, P.R. (1994). A Textbook of Soil Chemical Analysis. CBS Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, pp. 80.
  16. Jackson, M.L. (1973). Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, pp. 498.
  17. Kalra, Y.P. and Maynard, D.G. (1991). Methods Manual for Forest Soil and Plant Analysis. Information Report NOR-x-319, Forestry Canada, Northwest Region Northern Forestry Centre, Canada, pp. 116.
  18. Page, A.L., Miller, R.H. and Keeney, D.R. (eds.) (1982). Methods of Soil Analysis, Part II: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Agronomy Monograph No
  19. BOOK REVIEW: Soil Analysis. Edited by S. K. Singh, D. R. Biswas, C. A. Srinivasamurthy, S. P. Datta, G. Jayasree, P. Jha, S. K. Sharma, R. N. Katkar, K. P. Raverkar, A. K. Ghosh, Indian Society of Soil Science, New Delhi, India, 2019, pp. INR1400, ISBN 81?903797?8?X. - Majumdar - 2022 - European Journal of Soil Science - Wiley Online Library https://share.google/CgeSU4tnTkffDHDZX
  20. Baruah, T. C., & Barthakur, H. P. (2001). A text book of soil analysis (p. 346). Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
  21. Basak, R. K. (2002). Soil testing and recommendation: A text book (p. 225). Kalyani Publishers.
  22. Dhyan, S., Chhonkar, P. K., & Dwivedi, B. S. (2007). Manual on soil, plant and water analysis (p. 197). West Ville Publishing House.
  23. Goswami, N. N., Rattan, R. K., Dev, G., Narayanasamy, G., Das, D. K., Sanyal, S. K., Pal, D. K., & Rao, D. L. N. (2009, 704). Fundamentals of soil science (1st ed. [May, 2002] and 2nd ed. [December, 2009]). Indian Society of Soil Science.
  24. Jaiswal, P. C. (2018). Soil, plant and water analysis ( 3rd ed., p. 450). Kalyani Publishers.
  25. Majumdar, S. (2021). Review of soil science – An introduction. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 85, 1311–1312. https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2.20283
  26. McNeill, J. R., & Winiwarter, V. (2004). Breaking the sod: Humankind, history and soil. Science, 304(5677), 1627.
  27. Rattan, R. K., Katyal, J. C., Dwivedi, B. S., Sarkar, A. K., Bhattacharyya, T., Tarafdar, J. C., & Kukal, S. S. (2015). Soil science: An introduction (p. 807). Indian Society of Soil Science.
  28. Raverkar, K. P., & Thakuria, D. (2015). Soil ecology and biochemistry. In R. K. Rattan, J. C. Katyal, B. S. Dwivedi, A. K. Sarkar, T. Bhattacharyya, J. C. Tarafdar, & S. S. Kukal (Eds.), Soil science: An introduction (p. 465). Indian Society of Soil Science.
  29. Gianello C. and Amorim M.B. 2015. Ammonium chloride solution as an alternative laboratory procedure for exchangeable cations in Southern Brazilian soils. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 46(1):94 –103. DOI: 10.1080/00103624.2014.988580
  30. Parker D.R. and Gardner E.H. 1981. The determination of hot-water soluble B in some acid Oregon soils using a modified azomethine-H procedure. Communication in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 12:1311–1322.

Reference

  1. Dr. R. K. Rattan Secretary, Indian Society of Soil Science 1st Floor, National Societies Block National Agricultural Science Centre Complex Dev Prakash Sastri Marg, Pusa New Delhi – 110012 Website : www.iss-india.org
  2. Kokate, C.K., Purohit, A.P., Gokhale, S.B. Pharmacognosy – Nirali Prakashan Chapter on evaluation of crude drugs; covers soil influence on medicinal plants
  3. Trease, G.E., Evans, W.C. Pharmacognosy, Elsevier Discusses soil and environmental factors on phytoconstituents.
  4. WHO. Quality Control Methods for Medicinal Plant Materials (1998). Includes soil sampling guidelines for medicinal plant cultivation.
  5. Khandelwal, K.R. Practical Pharmacognosy – Nirali Prakashan Provides practical approaches to soil testing for cultivation of crude drugs.
  6. Singh, R. et al. (2014). Effect of soil nutrients on secondary metabolites of medicinal plants. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 3(4), 123–128.
  7. Sharma, A., et al. (2019). Soil quality and its impact on medicinal plant growth and phytochemical content. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research, 54(2), 45–52.
  8. Thakur, M., et al. (2020). Soil analysis and its importance in standardization of herbal raw materials. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, 13(6), 20–25.
  9. AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists) Methods – standard methods for soil and plant analysis.
  10. Indian Pharmacopoeia (IP) – sections on raw material testing mention soil as a contaminant source (heavy metals, pesticides).
  11. FAO Soil Testing Guidelines – useful for medicinal plant cultivation.
  12. Chopra, S.L. and Kanwar, J.S. (1986). Analytical Agricultural Chemistry. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, pp. 514.
  13. Dhyan Singh, Chhonkar, P.K. and Pandey, R.N. (1999). Soil Plant Water Analysis – A Methods Manual. Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, pp. 160.
  14. Ghosh, A.B., Bajaj, J.C., Hasan, R. and Dhyan Singh (1983). Soil and Water Testing Methods – A Laboratory Manual. Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, pp. 52.
  15. Hesse, P.R. (1994). A Textbook of Soil Chemical Analysis. CBS Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, pp. 80.
  16. Jackson, M.L. (1973). Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, pp. 498.
  17. Kalra, Y.P. and Maynard, D.G. (1991). Methods Manual for Forest Soil and Plant Analysis. Information Report NOR-x-319, Forestry Canada, Northwest Region Northern Forestry Centre, Canada, pp. 116.
  18. Page, A.L., Miller, R.H. and Keeney, D.R. (eds.) (1982). Methods of Soil Analysis, Part II: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. Agronomy Monograph No
  19. BOOK REVIEW: Soil Analysis. Edited by S. K. Singh, D. R. Biswas, C. A. Srinivasamurthy, S. P. Datta, G. Jayasree, P. Jha, S. K. Sharma, R. N. Katkar, K. P. Raverkar, A. K. Ghosh, Indian Society of Soil Science, New Delhi, India, 2019, pp. INR1400, ISBN 81?903797?8?X. - Majumdar - 2022 - European Journal of Soil Science - Wiley Online Library https://share.google/CgeSU4tnTkffDHDZX
  20. Baruah, T. C., & Barthakur, H. P. (2001). A text book of soil analysis (p. 346). Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.
  21. Basak, R. K. (2002). Soil testing and recommendation: A text book (p. 225). Kalyani Publishers.
  22. Dhyan, S., Chhonkar, P. K., & Dwivedi, B. S. (2007). Manual on soil, plant and water analysis (p. 197). West Ville Publishing House.
  23. Goswami, N. N., Rattan, R. K., Dev, G., Narayanasamy, G., Das, D. K., Sanyal, S. K., Pal, D. K., & Rao, D. L. N. (2009, 704). Fundamentals of soil science (1st ed. [May, 2002] and 2nd ed. [December, 2009]). Indian Society of Soil Science.
  24. Jaiswal, P. C. (2018). Soil, plant and water analysis ( 3rd ed., p. 450). Kalyani Publishers.
  25. Majumdar, S. (2021). Review of soil science – An introduction. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 85, 1311–1312. https://doi.org/10.1002/saj2.20283
  26. McNeill, J. R., & Winiwarter, V. (2004). Breaking the sod: Humankind, history and soil. Science, 304(5677), 1627.
  27. Rattan, R. K., Katyal, J. C., Dwivedi, B. S., Sarkar, A. K., Bhattacharyya, T., Tarafdar, J. C., & Kukal, S. S. (2015). Soil science: An introduction (p. 807). Indian Society of Soil Science.
  28. Raverkar, K. P., & Thakuria, D. (2015). Soil ecology and biochemistry. In R. K. Rattan, J. C. Katyal, B. S. Dwivedi, A. K. Sarkar, T. Bhattacharyya, J. C. Tarafdar, & S. S. Kukal (Eds.), Soil science: An introduction (p. 465). Indian Society of Soil Science.
  29. Gianello C. and Amorim M.B. 2015. Ammonium chloride solution as an alternative laboratory procedure for exchangeable cations in Southern Brazilian soils. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 46(1):94 –103. DOI: 10.1080/00103624.2014.988580
  30. Parker D.R. and Gardner E.H. 1981. The determination of hot-water soluble B in some acid Oregon soils using a modified azomethine-H procedure. Communication in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 12:1311–1322.

Photo
Dr. Sandip Wagh
Corresponding author

Maratha Vidya Prasarak Samaj’s Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences Vasantnagar Adgoan, Nashik, Maharashtra- 422003

Photo
Aditi Brahamankar
Co-author

SNJB's Shriman Sureshdada Jain College of Pharmacy Chandwad

Photo
Ayush Burad
Co-author

SNJB's Shriman Sureshdada Jain College of Pharmacy Chandwad

Photo
Ishwari Chavan
Co-author

SNJB's Shriman Sureshdada Jain College of Pharmacy Chandwad

Photo
Nikita Chavan
Co-author

SNJB's Shriman Sureshdada Jain College of Pharmacy Chandwad

Photo
Siddharth Chhajed
Co-author

SNJB's Shriman Sureshdada Jain College of Pharmacy Chandwad

Photo
Ashvini Kshirsagar
Co-author

SNJB's Shriman Sureshdada Jain College of Pharmacy Chandwad

Photo
Dr. Nitin Hire
Co-author

Maratha Vidya Prasarak Samaj’s Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences Vasantnagar Adgoan, Nashik, Maharashtra- 422003

Dr. Sandip Wagh*, Aditi Brahamankar, Ayush Burad, Ishwari Chavan, Nikita Chavan, Siddharth Chhajed, Ashvini Kshirsagar, Dr. Nitin Hire, Analytical Detection of Soil Parameters Using PH Measurement, Conductivity Analysis, UV Spectrophotometer, And Incubator, Int. J. of Pharm. Sci., 2025, Vol 3, Issue 9, 1723-1731 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17129768

More related articles
Caesalpinia Bonducella: A Pharmacognostic And Phar...
Lilachand Bhaidas Patil, Khushal Kalyan Chaudhari, Mayur Sharad P...
Effect Of Sweetening Agents In Formulations On Di...
B.V.Ramana, P. Reshma , P. Chaitanya, ...
Positron Emission Tomography (Pet): Diagnosis, Scr...
Mayuri N. Jagtap, Avinash B. Darekar , Vaishnavi R. Bhalerao, ...
Microscopic Marvels: Essential Role of Fungi in Nature ...
Dave Drashti, Shivam Kapoori, Rahul Bariya, Jay Patel, Dr. Chainesh Shah, ...
Formulation Development And In Vitro Characterization of Orally Disintegrating T...
Laxman Manandhar, Prabesh Baniya, Dhanraj Pokhare, Sohan Sapkota, Balkrishna Belbase, Bishowram Bhat...
Related Articles
Comparative Analysis Of Herbal And Non Herbal Lozenges ...
Gururaj S Kulkarni , Swetha Yoganandan , Padmaa M Paarakh, Surinder kaur , ...
Review on Phenoxybenzamine for Veterinary Use ...
Pommala Nagaveni, Ulava Mahendra Chowdary, Rachamreddy Supriya, Gajula Vinunthna Grace, Devireddy Ha...
Caesalpinia Bonducella: A Pharmacognostic And Pharmacological Overview ...
Lilachand Bhaidas Patil, Khushal Kalyan Chaudhari, Mayur Sharad Patel, Nandini Arun Marathe, ...
More related articles
Caesalpinia Bonducella: A Pharmacognostic And Pharmacological Overview ...
Lilachand Bhaidas Patil, Khushal Kalyan Chaudhari, Mayur Sharad Patel, Nandini Arun Marathe, ...
Positron Emission Tomography (Pet): Diagnosis, Screening And Treatment In Prosta...
Mayuri N. Jagtap, Avinash B. Darekar , Vaishnavi R. Bhalerao, ...
Caesalpinia Bonducella: A Pharmacognostic And Pharmacological Overview ...
Lilachand Bhaidas Patil, Khushal Kalyan Chaudhari, Mayur Sharad Patel, Nandini Arun Marathe, ...
Positron Emission Tomography (Pet): Diagnosis, Screening And Treatment In Prosta...
Mayuri N. Jagtap, Avinash B. Darekar , Vaishnavi R. Bhalerao, ...