agronomy

2 downloads 0 Views 5MB Size Report
Oct 15, 2018 - Dr Rambilash Mallick, Kolkata, West Bengal. Dr Rattan Lal, Ohio, ..... 1.5 kg/ha + post-emergence bispyribac-Na at 25 g/ha at 25. DAS/ DAT + 1 ...
RNI No. 34518/79 ISSN 0537-197X Online ISSN 0974-4460

INDIAN JOURNAL OF

AGRONOMY June 2018

Volume 63

No. 2

THE INDIAN SOCIETY OF AGRONOMY ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012 website: www.isa-india.in Online: www.indianjournals.com

INDIAN SOCIETY OF AGRONOMY (Founded in 1955)

Executive Council for 2017 and 2018 President

: Dr A.K. Vyas, ADG (HRM), ICAR, KAB-II, New Delhi

Vice President

: Dr V.K. Singh, Head, Division of Agronomy, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi

Secretary

: Dr Y.S. Shivay, Professor & Principal Scientist, Division of Agronomy, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi

Joint Secretary

: Dr Prashant S. Bodake, Chief Scientist (Agronomy), AICRP on WM, MPKV, Rahuri, MS

Treasurer

: Dr Ashok Kumar, Principal Scientist, ICAR, KAB-I, New Delhi

Editor-in-Chief

: Dr T.C. Jain, Ex-Senior Agriculturist, World Bank, Gurugram, Haryana

Past Presidents

: Drs Ambika Singh, G.B. Singh, A.S. Faroda, Panjab Singh, D.P. Singh, M.S. Gill, Arvind Kumar and Gurbachan Singh [Deceased: Sh. Panjabrao S. Deshmukh, Drs P.C. Raheja, O.P. Gautam, Maharaj Singh, R.P. Singh, R.P.S. Ahlawat, P.S. Lamba]

Councillors Andhra Pradesh

Dr (Mrs.) V. Chandrika, Tirupati

Punjab

Dr Thakar Singh, Ludhiana

Asom

Dr Hemen Kalita, Nagaon

Rajasthan

Dr Dilip Singh, Udaipur

Bihar

Dr Ravi Nandan, Samastipur

Tamil Nadu

Dr A. Velayutham, Killikulam

Chhattisgarh

Dr Rajendra Lakpale, Raipur

Telangana

Dr K. Avil Kumar, Hyderabad

Delhi

Dr Shankar Lal Jat, New Delhi

Uttarakhand

Dr Rohitashav Singh, Pantnagar

Gujarat

Dr Arvindbhai M. Patel, SK Nagar

Uttar Pradesh

Dr Satish Kumar Tomar, Sohna

Haryana

Dr Satish Kumar, Hisar

West Bengal

Dr Arun Kumar Barik, Sriniketan

Himachal Pradesh

Dr Janardan Singh, Palampur

Industries

Dr D.S. Yadav, FAI, New Delhi

Jammu & Kashmir

Dr B.C. Sharma, Jammu

Dr Jitendra Kumar, Syngenta, Rudrapur

Jharkhand

Dr M.S. Yadav, Ranchi

Dr O.P. Singh, Dhanuka, New Delhi

Karnataka

Dr V.S. Kubsad, Dharwad

Dr Rajvir Rathi, Bayer, Gurugram

Kerala

Dr A. Abdul Haris, Kayamkulam

Dr R.M. Kummur, NABARD, Mumbai

Madhya Pradesh

Dr M.D. Vyas, Sehore

Dr Shashi Kant Bhinde, MOSAIC, Gurugram

Maharashtra

Dr V.S. Khawale, Nagpur

Dr Soumitra Das, IZA, New Delhi

N.E.H. States

Dr Subhash Babu, Umiam

Odisha

Dr L.M. Garnayak, Bhubaneswar

Mandate of the Society 1.

To disseminate knowledge of Agronomy

2.

To encourage research in the field of soil, water and crop management

3.

To provide suitable forum for exchange of ideas to research workers

EDITORIAL BOARD (2017 and 2018) Editor-in-Chief : Dr T.C. Jain, Ex-Senior Agriculturist, World Bank, Gurugram, Haryana, India Co-Editor-in-Chief : Dr D.S. Rana, ICAR-Emeritus Scientist (Agronomy), ICAR-IARI, New Delhi, India

Editors Dr A. Pratap Kumar Reddy, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh Dr A. Arunachalam, New Delhi

Dr K.R. Reddy, Mississippi, USA Dr K.R. Sheela, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala

Dr Amit Kar, New Delhi Dr Anil Dixit, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

Dr Kajal Sengupta, Nadia, West Bengal Dr Kaushik Majumdar, IPNI, Asia & Africa, Gurugram

Dr Ashok Kumar Gupta, Jobner, Rajasthan Dr Ashok Kumar, Hisar, Haryana

Dr M.A. Shankar, Bengaluru, Karnataka Dr M.B. Dhonde, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra

Dr B. Gangaiah, Port Blair, Andaman & Nicobar Dr B. Gangwar, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh

Dr M.K. Arvadia, Navsari, Gujarat Dr M.P. Sahu, Bikaner, Rajasthan

Dr B.K. Sagarka, Junagadh, Gujarat Dr B.P. Singh, Agra, Uttar Pradesh

Dr M.V. Venugopalan, Nagpur, Maharashtra Dr M.V.K. Sivakumar, Geneva, Switzerland

Dr B.S. Dwivedi, New Delhi Dr Basudev Behera, Bhubaneswar, Odisha

Dr Masood Ali, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh Dr Navin Kumar Jain, New Delhi

Dr Bhagirath Chauhan, ACIAR, Australia Dr Biswajit Guha, Shillongani, Asom

Dr O.P. Chautervedi, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh Dr P. Devasenapathy, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu

Dr C. George Thomas, Trichur, Kerala Dr C.M. Singh, Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh

Dr P.G. Ingole, Akola, Maharashtra Dr R.K. Paikray, Bhubaneswar, Odisha

Dr Chhibubhai L. Patel, Navsari, Gujarat Dr D.K. Sharma, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh

Dr R.P. Sharma, Bhagalpur, Bihar Dr R.S. Sharma, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh

Dr D.M. Hegde, Bengaluru, Karnataka Dr D.N. Gokhale, Parbhani, Maharashtra

Dr Raihana Habib Kanth, Kashmir, Jammu & Kashmir Dr Rambilash Mallick, Kolkata, West Bengal

Dr D.S. Yadav, Budaun, Uttar Pradesh Dr Dileep Kachroo, Chatha, Jammu & Kashmir

Dr Rattan Lal, Ohio, Columbus, USA Dr S.A. Chavan, Dapoli, Maharashtra

Dr G. Pratibha, Hyderabad, Telangana Dr G. Ravindra Chary, Hyderabad, Telangana

Dr S.K. Dhyani, New Delhi Dr S. Panneerselvam, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu

Dr Girish Jha, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh Dr Guriqbal Singh, Ludhiana, Punjab

Dr S.P. Singh, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh Dr S.S. Tomar, Kota, Rajasthan

Dr H.L. Sharma, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh Dr Ishwar Singh, Jodhpur, Rajasthan

Dr Shanti Kumar Sharma, Udaipur, Rajasthan Dr Sandip Kumar Pal, Ranchi, Jharkhand

Dr J.C. Dagar, Karnal, Haryana Dr J.K. Bisht, Almora, Uttarakhand

Dr Seema Jaggi, New Delhi Dr Sohan Singh Walia, Ludhiana, Punjab

Dr J.P. Dixit, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh Dr J.S. Mishra, Patna, Bihar

Dr T.K. Das, New Delhi Dr V.C. Patil, Dharwad, Karnataka

Dr Jagdev Singh, Hisar, Haryana Dr Jayant Deka, Jorhat, Asom

Dr V.S. Korikanthimath, Dharwad, Karnataka Dr V.S. Pawar, Nasik, Maharashtra

Dr K. Annapurna, New Delhi Dr K. Velayudham, Madurai, Tamil Nadu

Dr Vikrant Singh, Haridwar, Uttarakhand Dr C. Vishwanathan, New Delhi

Dr K.G. Mandal, Bhubaneswar, Odisha

INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY Indian Journal of Agronomy, the official journal of the Indian Society of Agronomy, is published quarterly in the month of March, June, September and December since 1956. The journal publishes papers based on the results of original research in following areas: i.

Crop production and management

ii.

Soil-water-plant relationship

iii.

Cropping and farming system research

iv.

Agro-ecosystems and environment management

v.

Other areas of agronomy research and

vi.

Invited review papers

Indian Journal of Agronomy is indexed in the AGRIS, published by the FAO, the Science Citation Index (SCI) and Current Contents (Agriculture, Biology and Environmental Sciences) published by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI), Philadelphia. It is also indexed in the abstraction journals of the Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences International (CABI) as well as all the major abstracting services of the world.

Membership and Journal Subscription *Subscription Price (2018) A.

Individual Membership Indian ( )

Annual

Life

1,000 (500*)

10,000

120 (100*)

1,200

Foreign (US $ or its equivalent) *For Students B. Libraries and Institutions (Annually) Indian ( ) Foreign (US $ or its equivalent)

Print

Online

Print+Online

5,000

5,000

6,500

500

450

650

Payment should be made by Demand Draft in favour of INDIAN SOCIETY OF AGRONOMY payable at New Delhi or NEFT transaction details: Beneficiary Name: Indian Society of Agronomy; Bank Account No. 91212010007024; Bank & Branch Name: SYNDICATE BANK (NSC Branch), IFSC Code SYNB0009121, MICR Code 110025088, Bank Address & Phone Number: National Seeds Corporation, Beej Bhavan, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, Ph. No. 011-25848197. Back Volumes of the journal, symposia proceedings and books are also available for sale. All correspondence may please be addressed to Secretary, Indian Society of Agronomy, Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012. Telefax: +91-11-25842283; 09717078548; E-mail: [email protected]; Visit Society Website: isa-india.in for author guidelines and other information.

Editorial From the Desk of the Editors Dear Esteemed ISA Members, You must have already received the circular regarding the XXI National Symposium of ISA on “DOUBLING THE FARMERS’ INCOME THROUGH AGRONOMIC INTERVENTIONS UNDER CHANGING SCENARIO” to be held at MPUAT, Udaipur from October 24 to 26, 2018. The concern of farmers income have been raised at several fora and is receiving top priority not only by the scientists and the farming community but all concerned, including the Government of India and the State Governments. A few conferences and symposia have already been held to address this issue and as such it is all the more challenging for ISA to critically examine and address this issue in the Symposium. We are giving here a few suggestions to the contributors to make their presentations which can come out with some practical recommendations to the Farming Community, Scientists and the Government: 1. We have already identified important thematic areas to reduce the cost of cultivation and increasing the farm income through increasing productivity, diversification, processing, marketing and value addition, which will ultimately result in increasing farmers’ income. 2. We need to take the advantage of outcome of the various seminars/symposia already held to address this issue (some of them recently). 3. Since ours is a scientific approach, we need to be clear for which area and what type of situation our recommendations will hold good (practical) with their economic and the environmental impact analysis. 4. Some of the short-term recommendations could be used immediately, but there will be others which will take more time (long-term) such as Agronomic education, Training, etc. There will be some recommendations on which we have no control like policy issues but these are most important and we need to highlight and make a case at the end of the symposium to share with the concerned agencies. We are sharing these issues with you as never in the past we have selected a topic of the symposium which is so wide, critical and difficult to be addressed by a scientific community, but of immediate national importance and in the interest of the farming community. A circular has also been issued by the ISA Secretary for various ISA awards on 15 May, 2018. You will be glad to know that looking to the increasing number of Agronomists in the country; the Society has increased the number of a few awards and has also made some positive changes in the award money. We expect larger and more active participation and solicit your cooperation. Last but not the least; we have to repeat our request on two accounts which the EC of ISA has started: 1. ISA Newsletter: We are still not getting enough material in time for the ISA Newsletter. Please feel free to give your considered opinion to make this new effort of ISA to be more productive and effective. 2. Editorial: We are regularly publishing Editorial page with a hope to receive your views and opinion to include some of the emerging challenges to make it more participatory and effective.

Editor-in-Chief Co-Editor-in-Chief

INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY June 2018 Volume 63 No. 2

CONTENTS Research Papers JITESH KUMAR BAGHEL, T.K. DAS, D.S. RANA AND SANGEETA PAUL. Effect of weed control on weed competition, soil microbial activity and rice productivity in conservation agriculture-based direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system

129

C.S. AULAKH, HARGOPAL SINGH, S.S. WALIA, R.P. PHUTELA AND GURMINDER SINGH. Evaluation of nutrient sources for organic production of rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system in north-west India

137

ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, S.K. TOMAR AND D.P. SINGH. Bio-efficacy of herbicides and their mixture on weeds and yield of rice (Oryza sativa) under rice–wheat cropping system

145

GUNJAN GULERIA AND NAVEEN KUMAR. Production efficiency, forage yield, nutrient uptake and quality of sorghum sudan grass hybrid (Sorghum bicolor × Sorghum sudanense) + cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) intercropping system as influenced by sowing methods and varying seed rates of cowpea

150

MOIRANGTHEM THOITHOI DEVI AND V.K. SINGH. Productivity and economics of field pea (Pisum sativum) and baby corn (Zea mays) intercropping systems as affected by planting pattern and weed management

157

S.K. TRIPATHY, S. MOHAPATRA AND A.K. MOHANTY. Effect of acetolactate synthase inhibitor herbicides with 2, 4-D ethyl ester on complex weed flora in transplanted rice (Oryza sativa)

163

HEMLATA, JITENDRA JOSHI, S.L. MEENA, A.L. RATHORE, AMBIKA TANDON AND ANAMIKA SONIT. Effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on summer rice (Oryza sativa)

168

TRIPTESH MONDAL, BIPLAB MITRA AND SAIKAT DAS. Precision nutrient management in wheat (Triticum aestivum) using Nutrient Expert®: Growth phenology, yield, nitrogen-use efficiency and profitability under eastern sub-Himalayan plains

174

H.P. VERMA, O.P. SHARMA, RAJESH KUMAR, A.C. SHIVRAN, R. SAMMAURIA AND B.L. DUDWAL. Quality and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum) as influenced by irrigation scheduling and organic manures

181

RAJ PAL MEENA, S.C. TRIPATHI, R.K. SHARMA, R.S. CHHOKAR, SUBHASH CHANDER AND ANKITA JHA. Role of precision irrigation scheduling and residue-retention practices on water-use efficiency and wheat (Triticum aestivum) yield in north-western plains of India

186

R.R. JAKHAR, P.S. SHEKHAWAT, R.S. YADAV, AMIT KUMAWAT AND S.P. SINGH. Integrated nutrient management in pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) in north-western Rajasthan

192

BRINDER SINGH, ANIL KUMAR, VIKAS ABROL, A.P. SINGH, JAI KUMAR AND ASHU SHARMA. Effect of integrated plant nutrient management on pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) productivity in rainfed subtropic Shiwalik foothills of Jammu and Kashmir

197

PRIYANKA KABDAL, S.C. SAXENA AND B.S. MAHAPATRA. Nitrogen and sulphur fertilization on yield and nutrient-uptake pattern of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) under Mollisols of Uttarakhand

201

(Continued)

II

CONTENTS

[Vol. 63, No. 2

V.M. PATEL, R.B. ARDESHNA, V.A. LODAM AND R.S. BHAKTA. Weed dynamics and productivity of irrigated winter (rabi) castor (Ricinus communis) under integrated weed-management practices

205

A.K.B. MOHAPATRA AND K.C. PRADHAN. Evaluation of productive, profitable and energy-efficient alternate cropping system options for pikka tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) on Alfisols of Odisha

211

K. SUSAN JOHN, JAMES GEORGE AND J. SREEKUMAR. Soil test-based low input nutrient-management strategy: A decade experience in cassava (Manihot esculenta) in Ultisols of Kerala, India

216

Research Communications RAJENDRA PRASAD, Y.S. SHIVAY AND DINESH KUMAR. Nitrogen and phosphorus recovery efficiency and agronomic experimentation with phosphorus

224

ANKIT, V.P. SINGH, S.P. SINGH AND T.P. SINGH. Critical period of crop-weed competition in aerobic rice (Oryza sativa) under irrigated ecosystem

227

SUMAN SEN, RAMANJIT KAUR, T.K. DAS, Y.S. SHIVAY AND P.M. SAHOO. Bio-efficacy of sequentially applied herbicides on weed competition and crop performance in dry direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa)

230

ARJUN SINGH, ANCHAL DASS, C.V. SINGH, SHIVA DHAR AND S. SUDHISHRI. Effect of planting methods, irrigation regimes and soil adjuvant on yield attributes, yield, nutrient uptake and economics in aerobic rice (Oryza sativa) in eastern India

234

ANIKET DIWEDI, RAM A. JAT AND KIRAN K. REDDY. Organic manures and nutrient solubilizers for organic cultivation of summer groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in black calcareous soil

237

RISHI KUMAR GUPTA, M.K. SINGH, MADHUSHREE DUTTA AND S.K. PRASAD. Agri-horti system compatibility and weed management for enhancing sesame (Sesamum indicum) production under Vindhyan region of eastern Uttar Pradesh

241

S.M. SINGH, ANIL SHUKLA, SUMIT CHAUDHARY, CHANDRA BHUSHAN, M.S. NEGI AND B.S. MAHAPATRA. Influence of irrigation scheduling and hydrogel application on growth and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea)

246

LOVELEEN KAUR AND VIRENDER SARDANA. Influence of sowing date and nitrogen schedule on growth and productivity of canola oilseed rape (Brassica napus)

250

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 129__136 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Effect of weed control on weed competition, soil microbial activity and rice productivity in conservation agriculture-based direct-seeded rice (Oryza sativa)– wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system JITESH KUMAR BAGHEL1, T.K. DAS2, D.S. RANA3 AND SANGEETA PAUL4

ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012 Received : January 2017; Revised accepted : April 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was carried out during 2012–13 and 2013–14 at New Delhi, to evaluate the effects of weedcontrol options on weed interference, microbial activity and direct-seeded rice (DSR) productivity in a conservation agriculture (CA)-based rice (Oryza sativa L.)–wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori et Paol) cropping system. The CA practices such as brown manuring, mungbean [Vigna radiata (L.) R. Wilczek] residue (MR) and rice-residue (RR) retention, zero tillage (ZT) significantly influenced weed density, microbial activity and crop yield. Grassy weeds were more dominant among the weeds. The DSR practices encountered more weed infestations than transplanted rice (TPR). The sequential applications of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha as pre-emergence, and bispyribac-Na @ 25 g/ha at 25 days after sowing/ transplanting (DAS/ DAT) as post-emergence resulted in better control of weeds and higher weed-control efficiency (WCE), but this combination plus 1 hand-weeding (HW) at 45 DAS was the best weed-control option in DSR. Higher WCE of 50% and 52% obtained from this treatment respectively, in 2012 and 2013. These herbicides applications slightly reduced microbial activity at 40 DAS. Soil microbial activity positively responded to CA practices. Soil-dehydrogenase activity (DHA) and microbial biomass carbon (MBC) were significantly higher in DSR than TPR. The rice yields were comparable between the TPR – ZTW and DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – SMB + wheat residue (WR) systems, but higher than in other CA-based DSR-wheat systems. Treatment DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – SMB + WR provided higher grain yield 4.41 t/ha and 4.53 t/ha in 2012 and 2013, respectively.

Key words : Conservation agriculture, Dehydrogenase activity, Direct-seeded rice, Microbial biomass carbon, Weed, Yield

Conservation agriculture (CA) is a resource-saving crop production concept that has potential to rectify the negative consequences encountered in global agriculture, threatening the sustainability and productivity of crop production systems. The CA can improve soil health, stabilize soil moisture and temperature, improve soil aggregate stability, increase soil organic matter (Chauhan et al., 2002), nullify threats to environment and increase productivity of cropping system. The rice–wheat cropping system covers 13.5 million ha area in the Indo-Gangetic plains (IGPs), out of that around 10.5 million ha area is in the IGPs of India. Substantial rice yield losses under direct-seeded Based on a part of Ph.D. Thesis of the first author, submitted to ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research, Institute, New Delhi, 2017 (Unpublished) 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Ph.D. Scholar, 2,4Principal Scientist, Division of Agronomy, 3ICAREmeritus Scientist, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012

1

conditions due to severe weed infestation is a most important anxiety and a major reason for disinclination of farmers towards adoption of direct-seeded rice (DSR). The physico-chemical conditions of soil under CA differ vastly from the conventional systems. Soil disturbance has negative effects on soil microbes and microbial biomass (Unger et al., 2009). Herbicides, particularly the sequential applications of herbicides, herbicide mixtures (Das and Yaduraju, 2012; Susha et al., 2014) would be more effective to control diverse weed flora. They might have initial temporary negative impact on soil micro-organisms and their activities, but the micro-organisms recover soon from the initial setbacks (Das et al., 2010). Herbicides can also affect succeeding crops and weeds due to carry-over effects (Tuti and Das, 2011). Usually, the productivity of DSR is lower than that in TPR, but with CA and proper weed management, higher productivity of DSR could be achieved (Bhattacharyya et al., 2015). Hence, this experiment was planned in a CA-based DSR under a 2-year old

130

BAGHEL ET AL.

CA-based rice–wheat cropping system with a superimposition of the weed-control treatments, to evaluate the impacts of CA and weed-control measures on weed interference, microbial activity and rice crop performance in rice– wheat cropping system. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted during the rainy, winter and summer seasons in 2012–13 and 2013–14 at the ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi (28°35' N, 77°12' E; 228.6 m above mean sea-level). Soil was Inceptisol with sandy clay loam texture in upper 30 cm layer and loam below. Water-table remained below 3.5 m deep from ground surface during crop-growth period. The soil was low in available N and medium in available P and organic carbon. The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design, keeping CA practices in main plots and weed-control options in subplots, with 3 replications. The plot size for main plot was 42.0 m × 4.0 m and that of sub-plot was 4.2 m × 4.0 m. Rice crop cultivar chosen for the experiment was ‘PRH 10’. Eight main plot treatments were: directseeded rice (DSR) – zero till wheat (ZTW), DSR – ZTW + rice residue (RR), DSR + brown manuring (BM) – ZTW, DSR + BM – ZTW + RR, DSR – ZTW – ZT summer mungbean (ZTSMB), DSR + mungbean residue (MR) – ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + wheat residue (WR), transplanted puddled rice (TPR) – ZTW and TPR – CTW. The subplots treatments in rice were: unweeded control (UWC), the application of pre-emergence pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha + post-emergence bispyribac-Na @ 25 g/ha at 25 DAS/ DAT; and the pre-emergence pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg/ha + post-emergence bispyribac-Na at 25 g/ha at 25 DAS/ DAT + 1 hand-weeding (HW) at 45 DAS. The DSR was conventionally-tilled and the plots were ploughed once with a disc plow, followed by harrowing and planking twice. Nursery was sown at the time of sowing of DSR for TPR. The TPR plots were conventionally-tilled as DSR and then were puddled for smooth transplanting of rice seedlings. Recommended dose of fertilizer was applied to rice. Soil microbial biomass carbon (MBC) and soil dehydrogenase activity (DHA) were studied at 70 DAS of rice. For this, 4 to 5 soil cores from the top soil (0–15 cm depth) were collected from each plot. The soil samples were airdried and sieved through a 2.0 mm mesh. The DHA was determined as per Paul et al. (2009). Microbial biomass carbon (MBC) was analyzed following chloroform fumigation extraction method as described by Paul et al. (2009). Observations on weeds were recorded at 70 DAS and data were transformed through square-root [√(x + 0.5) method. A quadrat of 0.25 m2 was thrown randomly in

[Vol. 63, No. 2

each subplot and weeds were collected from the quadrat area and counted. The species-wise weed density was expressed in number/m2. Data on weeds, microbes and rice crop were analyzed in split-plot design. The significance was tested by the variance ratio (~F-value) at 5% level (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Weeds

Weed flora in the experimental DSR field comprised Echinochloa colona (L.) Link, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv., Dactyloctenium aegyptium (L.) P. Beauv., Leptochloa chinensis (L.) Nees., Cyperus rotundus L., Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers., Digitaria sanguinalis (L.) Scop., Elusine indica (L.) Gaertn, Commelina benghalensis L. and Eclipta alba Hassak. The CA practices significantly influenced weed density in both the years of experimentation in DSR (Table 1), which resulted in higher densities of weeds than TPR (under TPR – ZTW/CTW systems). Grassy weeds were more pre-dominant than broad-leaf and sedge weeds in both DSR and TPR. The triple cropping system-based DSRs with and without residues of the respective crops (i.e. DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + WR and DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB) resulted in lower densities of grassy weeds than the other DSR treatments. The DSR in these 2 cropping systems also recorded lower densities of broad-leaf weeds in the first year (2012), but the brown manuring treatments (i.e. DSR + BM – ZTW + RR and DSR + BM – ZTW) under double cropping systems caused the highest reduction in broad-leaf weed densities in the second year (2013). The densities of sedges, mainly, Cyperus rotundus were relatively higher in the triple cropping systems-based DSR with and without residue (i.e. DSR + MR – ZTW – ZTSMB and DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + WR). The DSR – ZTW and DSR – ZTW + RR resulted in the highest total weed density, whereas the TPR – ZTW/CTW recorded significantly lower total weed densities compared to all the DSR treatments, except DSR + MR – ZTW + RR - ZTSMB + WR, which was comparable with them (Table 2). Pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW resulted in significantly lower total weed populations. Interactions revealed that CA-based DSR practices, excepting DSR – ZTW and DSR – ZTW + RR and TPR – ZTW/CTW resulted in total weed densities that were comparable between pendimethalin + bispyribac and pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW in 2012. But in 2013, all CA-based DSR treatments and TPR resulted in significantly lower total weed density in pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW than in pendimethalin + bispyribac. This indicates that in the first year, pendimethalin + bispyribac treatment was as good as the pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW treatment, but in the

June 2018]

131

RICE PRODUCTIVITY IN CA-BASED DIRECT-SEEDED R–W CROPPING SYSTEM

second year, hand-weeding with pendimethalin + bispyribac proved more effective, mainly due to slightly higher infestation of Cyperus rotundus (Table 1). Besides, frequent and higher rainfall in the second year made herbicide treatments less effective and promoted more weed infestations. Tillage and puddling were responsible for better weed control in TPR (Mishra and Singh, 2012). Buhler et al. (1994) reported that, reduced tillage in DSR caused heavy weed infestations, which subsequently increased dry matter of weed. Brown manuring could suppress weeds, particularly broad-leaf ones at the early stage. The weed-management option, pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW was more effective against weeds than UWC and pendimethalin + bispyribac treatments, and the occurrence of frequent rainfall made herbicides less effective. Singh et al. (2006) reported effective weed control in DSR by using the pre-emergence pendimethalin and post-emergence bispyribac. In our study, sedges were present in DSR crop; therefore, pendimethalin + bispyribac supplemented with hand-weeding proved more effective. Sedges, namely Cyperus rotundus, shows tolerance to both the herbicides, particularly pendimethalin. Bispyribac could suppress this weed to a little extent. Owing to higher total weed densities in UWC and much higher reductions in total weed densities by the herbicide treatments (i.e.

pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW, and pendimethalin + bispyribac), the DSR – ZTW and DSR – ZTW + RR resulted in higher weed-control efficiency (WCE) than the other DSR treatments (Table 3), although they had higher total weed density (Table 2), which resulted in higher weed index/ yield losses. This indicates that the WCE could not be a better estimate of the weed interference in DSR (Das, 2008). The DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB recorded the lowest WCE during both the years (Table 3). Among the weed-control treatments, the application of pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW provided higher WCE than pendimethalin + bispyribac. Weed index (WI) provides information about per cent yield loss due to weed interference. It was higher due to DSR – ZTW. The reasons have been discussed earlier. Much higher weed density in UWC was mainly responsible for higher yield losses under this treatment. On the contrary, the TPR – ZTW with lowest weed interference resulted in lower yield losses/ WIs. The interaction between CA and weed control was not significant for WCE, but it was significant for WI. Microbial activity

In general, higher values of microbial biomass carbon (MBC) and dehydrogenase activity (DHA) were recorded in DSR than TPR (Table 4). Puddling and flooding condi-

Table 1. Category-wise weed density at 70 days after sowing in rice as influenced by conservation agriculture and weed-control practices Treatment

CA practice (CA) DSR – ZTW DSR – ZTW + RR DSR + BM – ZTW DSR + BM – ZTW + RR DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB DSR + MR – ZTW + RR –ZTSMB + WR TPR – ZTW TPR – CTW SEm± CD (P=0.05) Weed control (WC) UWC Pendimethalin + bispyribac Pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW SEm± CD (P=0.05) CA × WC SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Grassy weeds (Nos./m2)* 2012 2013

Broad-leaf weeds (Nos./m2)* 2012 2013

Sedges (Nos./m2)* 2012 2013

4.7 (23.7) 4.2 (19.1) 3.7 (14.6) 3.6 (13.3) 3.0 (9.7) 2.8 (8.2) 2.6 (6.7) 2.8 (8.1) 0.2 0.5

4.6 ( 23.4) 4.0 (17.9) 3.0 (10.4) 2.8 (8.8) 2.9 (9.7) 2.5 (7.4) 2.9 (8.6) 3.1 (9.8) 0.2 0.6

1.6 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.4

(2.7) (1.4) (1.2) (0.6) (0.7) (0.1) (0.2) (0.2)

1.8 ( 3.3) 1.6 (2.7) 1.2 (1.2) 1.2 (1.2) 1.4 (2.0) 1.4 (1.9) 1.0 (0.6) 0.9 (0.3) 0.2 0.6

1.3 1.1 1.0 1.0 3.2 3.2 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.3

(1.4) (1.0) (0.7) (0.7) (9.7) (10.2) (0.0) (0.0)

1.6 1.5 1.3 1.3 2.2 1.8 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.6

(2.6) (2.3) (1.6) (1.3) (10.8) (12.1) (0.0) (0.0)

4.7 (22.6 ) 3.3 (11.2 ) 2.2 (4.9 ) 0.1 0.2

4.6 (21.3) 3.4 (11.4) 1.8 (3.3) 0.1 0.2

1.5 (2.0) 1.1 (0.9) 0.8 (0.3) 0.1 0.3

1.8 (3.3) 1.2 (1.1) 0.9 (0.6) 0.1 0.3

1.8 (4.2) 1.5 (3.0) 1.3 (1.8) 0.1 0.2

1.9 (5.8) 1.3 (3.3) 1.0 (2.4) 0.1 0.2

0.2 0.7

0.2 0.7

0.2 NS

0.3 NS

0.2 0.5

0.2 NS

Details of treatments are given under Materials and Methods. DSR, Direct-seeded rice; ZTW, zero till wheat; RR, rice residue; BM, brown manuring; SMB, summer mungbean; MR, mungbean residue; WR, wheat residue, TPR, transplanted puddled rice; UWC, unweeded control. *Data were transformed through square-root (√x+0.05) method. Original values are in the parentheses

132

BAGHEL ET AL.

tions had detrimental effects on micro-organisms, which could reduce the activities of micro-organisms (Unger et al., 2009). Among the DSR treatments, the treatments – DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + WR and DSR-

[Vol. 63, No. 2

ZTW – ZTSMB – resulted in significantly higher values of MBC and DHA in both the years. The lowest values of soil MBC and DHA were observed in DSR under the DSR – ZTW system. The brown manuring (i.e. DSR + BM –

Table 2. Interaction between conservation agriculture and weed-control practices on total weed density at 70 days after sowing Treatment Weed control (WC)

CA practice (CA) DSR – ZTW DSR – ZTW + RR DSR + BM – ZTW DSR + BM – ZTW + RR DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB DSR + MR – ZTW + RR– ZTSMB + WR TPR – ZTW TPR – CTW Mean SEm± CD (P=0.05)

UWC

7.2 6.3 5.4 5.1 5.4 5.4

Total weed density (Nos./m2)*2012 Pendimethalin Pendimethalin + + bispyribac bispyribac + HW

(51.0) (39.7) (29.0) (26.0) (28.7) (29.0)

3.6 (12.7) 3.8 (14.3) 5.3 CA 0.2 0.6

Mean

UWC

4.8 (22.3) 4.4 (18.7) 3.8 (14.0) 3.8 (14.0 ) 4.6 (20.3) 4.3 (18.3)

3.2 (10.0) 2.6 (6.3) 2.5 (6.3) 2.6 ( 6.3) 3.3 (10.7) 3.2 (10.0)

5.0 4.4 3.9 3.8 4.4 4.3

7.6 6.6 4.9 4.5 5.9 5.9

(57.7) (43.0) (23.7) (20.0) (34.0) (34.7)

2.3 (5.0) 2.8 (7.7) 3.8 WC 0.2 0.5

1.7 (2.7) 1.9 (3.0) 2.6 CA × WC 0.5 1.4

2.6 2.8

4.1 (16.7) 4.2 (17.3) 5.5 CA 0.2 0.5

Total weed density (Nos./m2)* 2013 Pendimethalin Pendimethain Mean + + bispyribac lbispyribac + HW 4.8 4.5 3.8 3.6 4.6 4.5

(22.3) (20.3) (14.3) (13.0) (21.7) (19.7)

3.1 (9.0) 3.2 (10.0) 4.0 WC 0.1 0.2

3.3 2.5 1.8 2.0 3.4 3.3

(10.3) (6.0) (3.0) (3.7) (11.0) (11.0)

5.2 4.6 3.5 3.3 4.6 4.6

1.9 (3.0) 2.5 (5.7) 2.6 CA × WC 0.2 0.7

3.0 3.3

Details of treatments are given under Materials and Methods. DSR, Direct-seeded rice; ZTW, zero till wheat; RR, rice residue; BM, brown manuring; SMB, summer mungbean; MR, mungbean residue; WR, wheat residue, TPR, transplanted puddled rice; UWC, unweeded control. *Data were transformed through square-root (√(x + 0.5) method. Original values are in the parentheses Table 3. Weed-control efficiency and weed index (~per cent yield loss) in rice at 70 days after sowing as influenced by conservation agriculture and weed-control practices Treatment

CA practice (CA) DSR – ZTW DSR – ZTW + RR DSR + BM – ZTW DSR + BM – ZTW + RR DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB DSR + MR – ZTW + RR –ZTSMB + WR TPR – ZTW TPR – CTW SEm± CD (P=0.05) Weed control (WC) UWC Pendimethalin + bispyribac Pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW SEm± CD (P=0.05) CA ×WC SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Weed control efficiency (%) 2012 2013

2012

Weed index (%) 2013

29.6 29.9 28.4 25.0 17.5 20.5 36.0 25.5 2.3 6.8

31.3 30.7 27.5 25.7 21.3 22.7 26.6 22.0 2.7 NS

30.4 29.5 25.9 25.8 13.5 13.9 12.1 12.3 0.6 1.9

29.4 29.0 25.4 24.6 13.8 12.7 11.9 12.0 0.5 1.6

0.0 29.6 50.0 1.8 5.1

0.0 25.4 52.5 1.5 4.4

57.8 3.5 0.0 0.5 1.5

56.4 3.0 0.0 0.4 1.2

5.0 NS

4.4 NS

1.5 4.3

1.2 3.4

Details of treatments are given under Materials and Methods. DSR, Direct-seeded rice; ZTW, zero till wheat; RR, rice residue; BM, brown manuring; SMB, summer mungbean; MR, mungbean residue; WR, wheat residue, TPR, transplanted puddled rice; UWC, unweeded control. *Weed-control efficiency and weed index were worked out on square-root (√(x + 0.5) transformed data.

June 2018]

RICE PRODUCTIVITY IN CA-BASED DIRECT-SEEDED R–W CROPPING SYSTEM

ZTW + RR; DSR + BM – ZTW) was intermediate in improving soil MBC and DHA. Among the weed-control options, the UWC recorded significantly higher values of MBC and DHA than that in pendimethalin + bispyribac and pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW treatments. Sebiomo et al. (2011) reported that, herbicides could reduce MBC and DHA. Herbicides initially affect microorganisms and reduce their population and specific enzyme activity, but the effect is short-lived/temporary (Das et al., 2010). The UWC resulted in higher MBC and DHA due to a larger rhizosphere in presence of higher weed density and root biomass that caused higher increment in microbial activity (Wardle et al., 1999). Rice crop productivity

Rice grain, straw and total biological yields were significantly influenced by CA and weed-control practices during both the years (Table 5). The TPR, irrespective of the TPR–ZTW/CTW systems, resulted in significantly higher values of these yields than DSR treatments (Gill et al., 2006), but the DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + WR was comparable with it in respect of grain yield. This DSR practice recorded slightly higher harvest index, although not significantly different from that of the TPR. However, it recorded significantly higher net benefit: cost

133

ratio than that in all other DSR and TPR treatments. Better weed management in TPR and water availability improved the yield attributes and enhanced rice yield (Kumar and Ladha, 2011). Incorporation of summer mungbean residue in the DSR + MR – ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + WR improved soil fertility through, mainly, N supply and enhanced rice yield in both the years. Besides, it improved soil physico-chemical properties, helping better microbial activities. Brown manuring (i.e. DSR + BM – ZTW + RR; DSR + BM – ZTW) in DSR was also helpful in reducing crop-weed competition, which subsequently resulted in higher crop yield than without brown manuring plots (Table 5). The grain yield, straw yield and total biological yield were lower in DSR – ZTW, DSR – ZTW + RR and DSR + BM – ZTW, mainly, because of heavy weed infestations in these plots, resulted in poor plant population and crop growth, and subsequently reduced crop yield (Kumar and Ladha, 2011). Weed-management options also differed significantly on these straw, grain and total biological yields (Table 5). The pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW treatment resulted in significantly higher grain, straw and total biological yields of rice than the other weed-control options in both the years owing to better weed control. The pendimethalin + bispyribac treatment, however, followed it closely in

Table 4. Microbial biomass carbon (MBC) and dehydrogenase activity (DHA) at 70 days after sowing as influenced by conservation agriculture and weed-control practices Treatment

CA practice (CA) DSR – ZTW DSR – ZTW + RR DSR + BM – ZTW DSR + BM – ZTW + RR DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB DSR + MR – ZTW + RR –ZTSMB + WR TPR – ZTW TPR – CTW SEm± CD (P=0.05) Weed control (WC) UWC Pendimethalin + bispyribac Pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW SEm± CD (P=0.05) CA × WC SEm± CD (P=0.05)

MBC (µg C/g soil) 2012 2013

DHA (µg TPF* /g soil/h) 2012 2013

182.9 193.4 245.5 251.7 261.2 274.8 164.0 160.7 7.0 21.2

233.8 243.0 292.9 300.8 317.2 323.9 200.7 190.3 6.1 18.5

182.9 193.4 245.5 251.7 261.2 274.8 164.0 160.7 7.0 21.2

233.8 243.0 292.9 300.8 317.2 323.9 200.7 190.3 6.1 18.5

232.0 212.1 206.3 4.3 12.3

272.9 256.3 259.3 4.6 13.3

232.0 212.1 206.3 4.3 12.3

272.9 256.3 259.3 4.6 13.3

12.1 NS

13.0 NS

12.1 NS

13.0 NS

Details of treatments are given under Materials and Methods. DSR, Direct-seeded rice; ZTW, zero till wheat; RR, rice residue; BM, brown manuring; SMB, summer mungbean; MR, mungbean residue; WR, wheat residue, TPR, transplanted puddled rice; UWC, unweeded control. *TPF-Triphenylformazan

134

BAGHEL ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Table 5. Crop productivity of rice as influenced by conservation agriculture and weed-control practices Treatment

CA practice (CA) DSR – ZTW DSR – ZTW + RR DSR + BM – ZTW DSR + BM – ZTW + RR DSR – ZTW – ZTSMB DSR + MR – ZTW + RR– ZTSMB + WR TPR – ZTW TPR – CTW SEm± CD (P=0.05) Weed control (WC) UWC Pendimethalin + bispyribac Pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW SEm± CD (P=0.05) CA × WC SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Grain yield (t/ha) 2012 2013

Straw yield (t/ha) 2012 2013

Total biological yield (t/ha) 2012 2012

Harvest index (%) 2013 2012

Net benefit : cost 2013 2012

3.14 3.23 3.43 3.46 4.26 4.41

3.17 3.29 3.50 3.56 4.40 4.53

5.02 5.11 5.37 5.49 6.69 6.82

5.12 5.20 5.49 5.58 6.81 6.93

8.16 8.34 8.80 8.96 10.95 11.23

8.29 8.49 8.99 9.14 11.21 11.46

38.5 39.6 39.4 38.3 38.7 39.1

38.6 38.9 39.2 39.2 39.1 39.3

0.48 0.52 0.55 0.57 1.21 1.34

0.53 0.58 0.62 0.65 1.69 1.86

4.59 4.49 0.04 0.11

4.67 4.55 0.04 0.1

7.24 7.11 0.03 0.10

7.32 7.19 0.04 0.1

11.82 11.61 0.05 0.14

11.99 11.75 0.07 0.2

38.7 38.5 0.7 NS

38.8 38.6 0.3 NS

0.50 0.47 0.01 0.04

0.56 0.52 0.02 0.05

2.10 4.68 4.84

2.20 4.76 4.91

3.44 7.35 7.54

3.56 7.43 7.63

5.54 12.03 12.38

5.76 12.19 12.54

38.6 38.9 39.1

38.7 39.1 39.2

0.03 1.08 1.01

0.21 1.25 1.17

0.02 0.07

0.02 0.1

0.02 0.06

0.02 0.1

0.04 0.11

0.03 0.1

0.4 NS

0.2 NS

0.01 0.03

0.01 0.02

0.1 0.2

0.1 0.1

0.1 0.2

0.1 0.2

0.1 0.3

0.1 0.3

1.3 NS

0.5 NS

0.03 0.1

0.0 0.1

Details of treatments are given under Materials and Methods. DSR, Direct-seeded rice; ZTW, zero till wheat; RR, rice residue; BM, brown manuring; SMB, summer mungbean; MR, mungbean residue; WR, wheat residue, TPR, transplanted puddled rice; UWC, unweeded control.

these regards. The grain yield was increased by 130% and 123% in 2012 and 2013, respectively, owing to the pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW treatment compared to UWC. The harvest index was non-significant, but the pendimethalin + bispyribac treatment gave significantly higher net benefit: cost than other weed-control options. This indicated that, although the pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW treatment was superior to pendimethalin + bispyribac treatment on yields, was inferior to the latter on net B : C. Unequal/ disproportionate increase in the returns due to higher rice yields in the former treatment to the higher cost required for hand-weeding caused the reduction in net benefit: cost. As mentioned earlier, the CA and weed-control options exhibited considerable differential impacts on weeds, and soil microbes and their activities (Bhattacharyya et al., 2015), which were ultimately reflected in the yields of rice. Regression analysis

The relationships of effective tillers and grain yield with weed dry matter were negatively correlated in both the years (Fig. 1a, b, c and d). Higher the weed biomass, lower were the grain yield and effective tillers and vice-

versa. However, the effective tillers and grain yield were positively correlated (Fig. 1e, f). This implied that higher weed biomass caused significant reductions in the number of effective tillers, which, in turn, reduced rice grain yield significantly. The DSR + MR-ZTW + RR – ZTSMB + WR resulted in comparable reduction in weed- population density and had comparably higher rice grain yield as that of the TPR. It recorded significantly higher net B:C and considerably improved the microbial biomass carbon and dehydrogenase activity than in other DSRs. It may be recommended as a CA-based DSR practice. Further, its combination with the pendimethalin + bispyribac, where natural weed infestation without Cyperus rotundus is present, is worth-recommending. However, the pendimethalin + bispyribac + HW may be recommended along with this CA-based DSR practice, where Cyperus rotundus is predominant. REFERENCES Bhattacharyya, R., Das, T.K., Sudhishri, S., Dudwal, B., Sharma, A.R., Bhatia, A. and Singh, G. 2015. Conservation agriculture effects on soil organic carbon accumulation and crop productivity under a rice–wheat cropping system in the west-

RICE PRODUCTIVITY IN CA-BASED DIRECT-SEEDED R–W CROPPING SYSTEM

135

Effective tillers/m2

Effective tillers/m2

June 2018]

Weed dry matter (g/m2)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Weed dry matter (g/m2)

Weed dry matter (g/m2)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Weed dry matter (g/m2)

Effective tillers/m2

Effective tillers/m2

Fig. 1. Relationship between weed dry matter and effective tillers in 2012 (a) and 2013 (b); weed dry matter and rice grain yield in 2012 (c) and 2013 (d); and effective tillers and rice grain yield in 2012 (e) and 2013 (f) as influenced by conservation agriculture and weedcontrol practices (based on 72 observations). Weed dry-matter are transformed through square-root (√(x + 0.5) method. ern Indo-Gangetic Plains. European Journal of Agronomy 70: 11–21. Buhler, D.D., Stoltenberg, D.E., Becker, R.L. and Gunsolus, J.L. 1994. Perennial weed populations after 14 years of variable tillage and cropping practices. Weed Science 42: 205–209. Chauhan, B.S., Yadav, A. and Malik, R.K. 2002. Zero tillage and its impact on soil properties: a brief review. (In) Herbicide Resistance Management and Zero Tillage in Rice–Wheat System. (Eds) Malik, R.K., Balyan, R.S., Yadav, A., Pahwa, S.K. 4–6 March, 2002. Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India, 109–114p.

Das, T.K. 2008. Weed Science- Basics and Applications, pp 901. Jain Brothers, New Delhi, India. Das, T.K. and Yaduraju, N.T. 2012. The effects of combining modified sowing methods with herbicide mixtures on weed interference in wheat. International Journal of Pest Management 58(4): 311–320. Das, T.K., Sakhuja, P.K. and Zelleke, H. 2010. Herbicide efficacy and non-target toxicity in highland rainfed maize of Eastern Ethiopia. International Journal of Pest Management 56(4): 315–325. Gill, M.S., Kumar, A. and Kumar, P. 2006. Growth and yield of rice

136

BAGHEL ET AL.

cultivars under various methods and time of sowing. Indian Journal of Agronomy 51: 123–127. Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, edn 2, pp. 591. Johns & Sons, New York. Kumar, V. and Ladha, J.K. 2011. Direct-seeding of rice: recent developments and future research needs. Advances in Agronomy 111: 297–413. Mishra, J.S. and Singh, V.P. 2012. Tillage and weed control effects on productivity of a dry seeded rice–wheat system on a Vertisol in Central India. Soil and Tillage Research 12: 11– 20. Paul, S., Prasanna, R., Lata and Wattal, Dhar D. 2009. A Manual for Agricultural Microbiologists. Division of Microbiology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, 110 012, pp. 27–28. Sebiomo, A., Ogundero V.W. and Bankole, S.A. 2011. Effect of four herbicides on microbial population, soil organic matter and dehydrogenase activity. African Journal of Biotechnology 10(5): 770–778.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Singh, S., Bhushan., L., Ladha, J.K., Gupta, R.K., Rao, A.N. and Sivaprasad, B. 2006. Weed management in dry-seeded rice (Oryza sativa) cultivated in the furrow-irrigated raised-bed planting system. Crop Protection 25: 487–49. Susha, V.S., Das, T.K., Sharma, A.R. and Nath, C.P. 2014. Carryover effect of weed-management practices of maize (Zea mays) on weed dynamics and productivity of succeeding zero and conventional till wheat (Triticum aestivum). Indian Journal of Agronomy 59(1): 41–47. Tuti, M.D. and Das, T.K. 2011. Carry-over effect of metribuzin applied to soybean (Glycine max) on weeds and wheat (Triticum aestivum) under zero and conventional tillage. Indian Journal of Agronomy 56(2): 121–126. Unger, I.M., Kennedy, A.C. and Muzika, R.M. 2009. Flooding effects on soil microbial communities. Applied Soil Ecology 42: 1–8. Wardle, D.A., Yeates, G.W., Nicholson, K.S., Bonner, K.I. and Watson, R.N. 1999. Response of soil microbial biomass dynamics, activity and plant litter decomposition to agricultural intensification over a seven-year period. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 31(12): 1,707–1,720.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 137__144 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Evaluation of nutrient sources for organic production of rice (Oryza sativa)– wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system in north-west India C.S. AULAKH1, HARGOPAL SINGH2, S.S. WALIA3, R.P. PHUTELA4 AND GURMINDER SINGH5

Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab 141 004 Received : February 2017; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) season 2009 to winter (rabi) season 2011-12 at Ludhiana to evaluate different sources of nutrition for organic production of rice (Oryza sativa L.)–wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with main plots consisting of recommended chemical fertilizers (RDF), farmyard manure (FYM200) to supply 200 kg N/ha, FYM100 to supply 100 kg N/ha and unfertilized control. The subplots included jeevamrit as soil application, jeevamrit as soil and foliar application and control plot without jeevamrit. Rice grain yields with FYM200 and FYM100 were lower by 13.3 and 17.7%, respectively, than RDF during the Ist year and were statistically at par during subsequent years. The reduction in wheat grain yield during 1st year was 34.6 and 40.5% with FYM200 and FYM100, respectively, as compared to RDF. The corresponding reductions during 2nd and 3rd year were 18.6, 36.2 and 11.7, 29.5% respectively. The FYM 200 proved significantly better than FYM100 in wheat. Soil organic carbon improved with FYM at both the rates as compared to RDF. The soil microbial population increased with application of jeevamrit, but it did not influence the productivity of the crops. Thus, rice yields at par with RDF could be obtained with both the FYM levels of FYM100 and FYM200 from 2nd year onwards; however, wheat yields even with FYM200 remained lower than RDF in 3rd year also. Jeevamrit was not effective in influencing the grain yield of rice and wheat, indicating its inability to contribute to the nutrition of these crops.

Key words : Farmyard manure, India, Jeevamrit, Organic, Rice, Wheat

Organic food market is the fastest growing sector of agriculture in the world, with a world organic food market of 80 billion US $ in 2014. In response to this growing sector of agriculture, organic farming has spread to 43.7 million ha area in 172 countries of the world which constitutes about 0.99% of the world’s agricultural land (Willer and Julia, 2016). The certified area under organic cultivation in India increased from 42,000 ha during 200304 to 1.49 million ha during 2015 (APEDA, 2016). The organic farming in Northwest India is at nascent stage. Though organic cultivation of crops has been recommended by substituting chemical fertilizers and pesticides with organic manures and biopesticides respectively (PAU, 2017) but there is little response for this due to very high input-intensive conventional agriculture in this part of the country. The commonly used organic manures like 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Senior Agronomist, School of Organic Farming; 2Ex-Senior Soil Scientist, Department of Soil Science; 4Ex-Senior Microbiologist, Department of Microbiology; 5Agricultural Development Officer, Government of Punjab 1,3

farmyard manure (FYM), composts, vermicompost and non-edible cakes are required in large quantities to meet the nutritional requirement of crops. Moreover, limited availability of these bulky organic manures demands their integration with other available nutrient-management options. The combined use of organic manures and specially prepared organics (jeevamrit, panchgavya) helps in sustaining soybean and wheat yields in organic nutrient-management system (Shwetha et al., 2009). Combined application of green manures, crop residues and composts along with liquid manures like beejamrit, jeevamrit, panchgavya, sasyamruit, vermiwash can release the nutrients in a more synchronized manner as per need of crop (Kanwar et al., 2006). Jeevamrit enhances microbial activity in soil and helps in improvement of soil fertility (Joshi, 2012). Jeevamrit is claimed to be a panacea for organic farming to fulfil the nutritional requirement of crops and pest management as well. The jeevamrit must be prepared from dung and urine of Indian cow only and dung and urine of 1 cow is sufficient for organic cultivation of 12 ha (Palekar, 2009). Organic growers primarily depend on jeevamrit for organic farming (Joshi, 2008; Singh, 2009).

138

AULAKH ET AL.

Rice–wheat is the predominant cropping system in Punjab, with rice and wheat occupying an area of 2.89 and 3.51 m ha, respectively, during 2014–15 (PAU, Ludhiana 2017). Hence a field experiment was conducted to evaluate the potential of organic farming in these crops and also the potential of jeevamrit as liquid manure to supply nutrition to these crops. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The field experiment was conducted on rice–wheat cropping system from rainy (kharif) season 2009 to winter (rabi) season of 2011–12 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana (30o–54' N, 75o–48' E, 247 m above mean sea-level). The experiment was laid out in a splitplot design with 3 replications. The main plots consisted of recommended chemical fertilizers (RDF), farmyard manure (FYM) to supply 100 kg N/ha (FYM100), FYM to supply 200 kg N/ha (FYM200) and unfertilized control. The subplots included jeevamrit as soil application (S), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and a control plot without jeevamrit. The experimental site has sub-tropical and semi-arid type of climate. The average annual rainfall at Ludhiana is 489.1 mm and about 80% of it is received from June to September. The experiment site soil was loamy sand, with pH 7.08 and medium (0.44%) organic carbon (wet digestion method) and 194.4, 90.1 and 188.0 kg/ha available nitrogen (alkaline permanganate oxidisable), phosphorus (0.5 M NaHCO3 extractable) and potassium (1 M ammonium acetate exchangeable) respectively. The rice nursery of variety ‘PAU 201’ (‘PR 120’ in 2011) was sown on 29 May during 2009 and on 21 May during 2010 and 2011 and the crop was transplanted on 3 July during 2009 and 2010 and on 25 June during 2011. The transplanting was done at a row- to- row and plant- toplant distance of 20 cm and 15 cm respectively (33 hills/ m2). The water was ponded in the field continuously for first 15 days after transplanting the crop and subsequent irrigations were given 2 days after the ponded water had infiltered into the soil. Farmyard manure (FYM), based on the per cent nitrogen on dry-weight basis, was used to supply nutrients as per the treatments. The entire quantity of FYM was applied before transplanting the crop. The chemical fertilizers (urea, diammonium phosphate and muriate of potash) were applied to supply 120 kg N, 30 kg P2O5 and 30 kg K2O/ha. One-third of N and whole amount of P and K were applied at the time of puddling. The remaining N was applied in 2 equal splits at 3 and 6 weeks after transplanting the crop. The pest management in organic nutrition treatments and unfertilized control was done by using Tricho-cards and neem-based biopesticide (Econeem). The Tricho-cards were used 5 times @ 100

[Vol. 63, No. 2

cards/ha, starting from 30 days after transplanting at weekly intervals. One spray of Econeem @ 500 ml/ha was done. The pest management in RDF treatment was done by using 2 sprays of Monocil 36 SL (monocrotophos) @ 1,400 ml/ha and one of Dursban 20 EC (chlorpyriphos) @ 2.5 litres/ha. Two sprays of Tilt @ 500 ml/ha were also done in RDF treatment. The crop was harvested on 3 November, 20 October and 7 October during 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively. Wheat variety ‘PBW 550’ was sown on 19 November, 12 November and 5 November during 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively. The crop was sown at a row spacing of 20 cm by using 112.5 kg seed/ha. The entire quantity of FYM, as per the treatments, was applied at field capacity moisture of the field and mixed well at the time of seed bed preparation. The FYM contained 1% N, 0.2% P and 0.5% K. The chemical fertilizers (urea, diammonium phosphate and muriate of potash) were applied to supply 120 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 30 K2O/ha. One-half of the N and whole amount of P and K were applied at the time of sowing and remaining N was applied at 1st irrigation. The aphid management in organic nutrition treatments and unfertilized control was done by using neem-based biopesticide (Econeem) @ 500 ml/ha. In RDF treatment, 1 spray of Rogor 30 EC (dimethoate) @ 375 ml/ha was used. The crop was harvested on 9, 12 and 20 April during 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively. Jeevamrit was prepared by using 10 kg dung and 10 litre urine of Indian cow, 2 kg jaggery, 2 kg chickpea flour, half kg virgin soil and the final volume was made 200 litres with water. It was fermented under shade for 5 days and applied 4 times to each crop as soil application @ 500 litres/ha and foliar application @ 300 litres/ha as per the treatments. It was applied to rice at monthly intervals starting from the time of transplanting and to wheat at the time of each irrigation. The jeevamrit was prepared afresh every time before its application. On an average, jeevamrit had 7.19 g carbon, 0.04 g nitrogen, 0.04 g phosphorus, 0.28 g potassium and 0.43 g sulphur/litre. Joshi (2012) reported 0.1–0.5% N, 0.02–0.04% P and 0.2–0.4% K in jeevamrit. Reddy (2009) also reported low concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in the jeevamrit solutions. The microbial population was studied in the soil taken from 0–15 cm depth of the plots receiving jeevamrit as soil + foliar application and control after the 4th application of jeevamrit to each crop. The economic analysis was done by taking mean yield of the crops. The organic treatments were compared both at normal produce price and at 30% price premium as price premium varies from 30% in rice to about 100% in wheat. Data on crop yields and soil microbial population were statistically analyzed by using statistical methods as per by

June 2018]

139

ORGANIC RICE–WHEAT CROPPING SYSTEM

Gomez and Gomez (1984) and the software used was CPCS1 developed by the Department of Statistics, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Effect of nutrient sources

Rice: The plant height under RDF was significantly more than that under all the other treatments except FYM200 which was statistically at par during 2009. The plant height did not vary significantly with different treatments during 2010. The plant height in the 3rd year of study was significantly more under RDF than all the other treatments (Table 1). The FYM100 and FYM200 treatments were statistically at par with each other and showed significantly more plant height than the unfertilized control. Effective tillers/m2 were significantly higher with RDF than all the other treatments during 1st year, but during the 2nd and 3rd year these were statistically at par with that of FYM100 and FYM200. And FYM100 and FYM200 were also statistically at par with each other. Dry-matter accumulation was statistically at par among RDF, FYM 100 and FYM200 during 1st and 3rd year, but during the 2nd year it was significantly more with RDF than both the FYM treatments. Panicle length was significantly longer with RDF than all the other treatments during the first year, but it did not vary significantly with nutrition treatments during the 2nd and 3rd year. Number of grains/panicle was significantly higher with RDF than all other treatments in the 1st year of the study and it did not vary significantly in the 2nd and 3rd year (Table 2). Thousand grain weight did not vary significantly with nutrition treatments during all the years of experimentation. The mean 1,000-grain weight

was 25.3, 24.9 and 24.7 g with RDF, FYM200 and FYM100 respectively. The mean grain yield was significantly higher with RDF (7.51 t/ha) than both the levels of FYM, i.e. FYM100 (6.95 t/ha) and FYM200 (7.09 t/ha), the latter two being statistically at par with each other but significantly better than unfertilized control (Table 2). The mean grain yield with RDF was 5.9% higher than that of FYM200. The grain yield was significantly higher with RDF (8.69 t/ha) than FYM200 (7.53 t/ha) and FYM100 (7.15 t/ha) during 2009 but during 2010 and 2011, it did not vary significantly with different nutrition treatments. The FYM100 was able to give statistically similar grain yield to that with FYM200 and it was significantly higher than unfertilized control during all the 3 years. Recommended dose of fertilizer resulted in 21.5 and 15.4% higher grain yield than lower (FYM100) and higher (FYM200) levels of FYM, respectively, in the 1st year, but in the 2nd and 3rd year there were non-significant differences in the grain yield under these treatments. The straw yield was significantly higher with RDF than FYM200 and FYM100 during the 1st year and in the 2nd year RDF and FYM200 were statistically at par but FYM100 was significantly poor than the RDF. In the 3rd year, RDF, FYM200 and FYM100 were statistically at par in respect of straw yield. The results indicated that continuous supply of FYM to both rice and wheat associated with high temperature and moisture conditions during rice-growing period was able to supply the required nutrition to rice at both the levels of FYM during 2nd and 3rd year of experimentation and resulted in at par growth, yield attributes and grain yield of rice to that with recommended fertilizers. Kharub and

Table 1. Growth and yield-attributing characters of rice as affected by different nutrient sources Plant height at maturity (cm) 2009 2010 2011

Dry-matter accumulation at maturity (g/hill) 2009 2010 2011

Effective tillers/m2 2009 2010 2011

Panicle length (cm) 2009 2010 2011

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

73.4 68.2 69.4 65.7 1.5 4.2

72.1 68.8 69.2 65.9 1.4 NS

91.6 87.5 86.5 78.5 0.4 1.5

62.2 50.3 54.1 41.4 4.3 12.1

58.0 47.5 50.1 37.6 2.1 7.3

52.7 52.6 53.1 45.7 1.2 4.3

293 243 249 241 4.6 13

341 317 340 269 8.3 29

286 281 280 246 7.4 26

25.5 23.6 23.9 23.3 0.3 0.8

26.6 25.3 25.4 25.2 0.4 NS

22.9 23.6 23.9 23.3 0.3 NS

Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

68.8 69.9 68.7 0.6 NS

69.7 68.2 69.1 0.9 NS

86.1 85.8 86.2 0.9 NS

51.0 54.1 50.8 1.1 NS

47.6 50.2 47.2 2.4 NS

50.5 51.6 51.0 1.2 NS

255 262 253 2.6 NS

316 321 313 15.4 NS

266 281 272 6.4 NS

24.0 24.4 23.9 0.2 NS

25.4 26.0 25.5 0.3 NS

23.7 23.4 23.1 0.4 NS

Treatment

RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard manure to supply 100 kg N/ha; FYM200, farmyard manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeevamrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (S+F), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit.

140

AULAKH ET AL.

Chander (2008) and Pilbeam et al. (1999) reported similar rice productivity under organic and chemical systems. Wheat

The plant height of wheat was significantly higher with RDF than FYM200 and FYM100 during 2009–10 and 2010– 11 but it was statistically at par with FYM200 but significantly higher than FYM 100 during 2011–12 (Table 3). Application of FYM200 resulted in significantly higher plant height than FYM100 during 1st year, but both were statistically at par during the 2nd and 3rd year. The effective tillers/m2 were significantly higher with RDF than both the FYM levels during all the 3 years of experimentation. Treatments FYM200 and FYM100 were statistically at par with each other during 2009–10 and 2010–11; however, FYM200 showed significantly higher number of effective tillers than FYM100 during 2011–12. The dry-matter accumulation was significantly higher with RDF than both the levels of FYM during all the years. Application of FYM200 was significantly better than FYM100 in dry-matter accumulation except during 2009–10. The unfertilized control had significantly lower dry-matter accumulation than all the other treatments except in the 1st year when it was statistically at par with FYM100. The ear length was significantly higher with RDF than FYM200 and FYM 100 during 2009–10, but it was statistically at par among the nutrition treatments during 2010–11 and 2011–12. FYM200 and FYM100 treatments had non-significant differences with each other during all the 3 years. The number of grains/ear with RDF was significantly higher than FYM200 and FYM100, the latter two being statistically at par during 2009–10. The number of grains/ear did not differ signifi-

[Vol. 63, No. 2

cantly with different nutrition treatments during 2010–11 and 2011–12 (Table 4). Thousand grains weight was significantly higher with FYM200 than RDF and it was statistically at par with FYM100 during 2009–10. Treatment FYM100 was also statistically at par with RDF. Thousand grains weight did not vary significantly during 2010–11 and 2011–12. The mean and year-wise grain yields were significantly higher with RDF than both the levels of FYM, and FYM200 gave significantly higher grain yield than that with FYM100 (Table 4). The lowest level of FYM (FYM100) resulted in significantly higher grain yield than the unfertilized control. The reduction in wheat grain yield even during the 3rd year of study was 11.7 and 29.7% with FYM200 and FYM100, respectively, as compared to RDF indicating that FYM even at highest dose for 3 years was not capable of supplying nutrition to the crop equivalent to the chemical fertilizers. This might be due to colder climate during wheat-growth period that might be responsible for slow release of nutrients from the FYM. The decrease in mean grain yield with FYM200 and FYM100 as compared to RDF was 21.3 and 35.3% respectively (Table 4). The higher level of FYM (FYM200) resulted in 21.6% more yield than lower level of FYM (FYM100). The straw yield with RDF was significantly higher than FYM200 and FYM100 during all the 3 years. The straw yield with FYM200 was statistically at par with FYM100 except during 2010–11 when it was significantly higher than FYM 100. Pilbeam et al. (1999) and Kharub and Chander (2008) also reported lower wheat productivity under organic than under chemical system.

Table 2. Yield-attributing characters, grain and straw yields of rice as affected by different nutrient sources Treatment

Filled grains/panicle 2009 2010 2011

1,000-grain weight (g) 2009 2010 2011

2009

Grain yield (t/ha) 2010 2011 Pooled

Straw yield (t/ha) 2009 2010 2011

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

193 175 178 158 7.5 21

155 155 165 150 6.7 NS

100 106 112 106 8.5 NS

25.7 23.9 24.3 23.7 1.2 NS

26.4 26.0 26.2 25.9 0.3 NS

23.9 24.2 24.2 23.9 1.2 NS

8.69 7.15 7.53 6.54 0.17 0.60

7.20 7.14 7.15 6.16 0.13 0.44

6.64 6.58 6.60 5.34 0.15 0.51

7.51 6.95 7.09 6.01 0.09 0.26

17.7 13.8 14.5 11.2 1.02 2.8

16.7 13.4 15.1 9.8 0.87 3.0

11.4 11.3 12.3 9.3 0.52 1.8

Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

178 179 170 3.9 NS

154 158 156 6.6 NS

104 110 105 5.7 NS

23.6 25.4 24.2 0.8 NS

26.1 26.3 25.9 0.2 NS

25.2 23.2 23.7 1.0 NS

7.43 7.62 7.38 0.15 NS

6.94 7.03 6.76 0.13 NS

6.23 6.30 6.33 0.15 NS

6.87 6.99 6.82 0.08 NS

14.3 14.6 14.0 0.49 NS

13.4 14.1 13.8 0.49 NS

10.7 11.2 11.4 0.42 NS

RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard manure to supply 100 kg N/ha; FYM200, farmyard manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeevamrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (S+F), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit.

RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard manure to supply 100 kg N/ha; FYM200, farmyard manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeevamrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (S+F), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit.

10.1 10.2 10.0 0.2 NS 10.7 10.5 10.7 0.1 NS 10.2 10.1 10.3 0.1 NS 1,126 1,097 1,082 30.2 NS 72.8 71.3 73.1 0.7 NS Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

76.5 77.7 78.2 0.8 NS

69.1 71.3 70.1 1.0 NS

839 844 826 40.3 NS

901 814 858 50.8 NS

306 310 311 7.0 NS

344 353 339 14.3 NS

364 364 357 11.4 NS

10.6 10.8 10.6 10.5 0.1 NS 1,334 1,062 1,202 808 36.5 126 80.1 70.3 74.0 65.3 0.6 2.2

83.4 76.0 77.6 72.8 1.2 4.1

74.1 69.1 70.9 66.5 1.0 3.6

1,064 766 893 623 46.3 160

1,207 777 856 591 19.4 67

451 264 266 255 11.6 40

452 313 356 261 18.5 64

453 326 386 283 13.2 46

10.9 10.2 10.1 9.6 0.1 0.4

10.3 10.3 10.5 9.4 0.2 0.7

ORGANIC RICE–WHEAT CROPPING SYSTEM

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Dry-matter accumulation at maturity (g/m2) 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Plant height at maturity (cm) 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12 Treatment

Table 3. Growth and yield-attributing characters of wheat as affected by different nutrient sources

Effective tillers/m2 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

Spike/ear length(cm) 2009–10 2010–11 2011–12

June 2018]

141

System productivity

The system productivity was evaluated in terms of system rice-equivalent yield (SREY). The year-wise and mean SREY was the highest with RDF which was significantly higher than both the levels of FYM (Table 5). Treatment FYM200 was significantly better than FYM100 which was further significantly better than the unfertilized control. The lower system productivity with the highest level of FYM even after 3 crop cycles was due to reduced wheat grain yields under organic nutrition. Effect of jeevamrit on rice, wheat and system productivity

Different jeevamrit treatments, viz. soil application, soil + foliar application and control (no application) did not differ significantly among themselves in respect of growth and yield-attributing characters, grain yields of rice and wheat (Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4) and system productivity (Table 5) indicating that jeevamrit was not able to influence growth and yield-attributing characters either alone or in combination with recommended chemical fertilizer or FYM. The mean data revealed that soil + foliar application of jeevamrit resulted in 17.8 and 48.1% reduction in grain yields of rice and wheat, respectively, as compared to recommended fertilizers. However, jeevamrit had been reported to enhance the productivity of crops by Shwetha et al. (2009) and Palekar (2009). Effect of nutrition sources and jeevamrit on soil properties

The effect of different nutrient sources on soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) was non-significant. The soil organic carbon improved significantly with FYM application at both the levels as compared to RDF and unfertilized control (Table 6). The increase in soil organic carbon with FYM200 and FYM 100 was 28.3 and 41.3%, respectively, over the recommended fertilizers. This might be owing to continuous application of FYM for 3 years to these treatments. The FYM200 and FYM100 did not differ significantly among each other. The soil-available N status was significantly higher with all nutrition treatments than unfertilized control. The FYM200 had significantly higher available N than the RDF but was statistically at par with FYM100. The RDF and FYM100 were also statistically at par with each other. The available soil P was significantly higher with FYM200 than all the other treatments. Treatments of RDF and FYM100 were statistically at par with each other but were significantly better than unfertilized control. The available soil K was significantly higher with all the nutrition treatments than the unfertilized control. Both the FYM levels were statistically at par with each other but were significantly better than the RDF.

142

AULAKH ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Table 4. Yield-attributing characters and grain yield of wheat as affected by different nutrient sources Treatment 2009– 10

Grains/ear 2010– 2011– 11 12

1,000-grain weight(g) 2009– 2010– 2011– 10 11 12

2009– 10

Grain yield (t/ha) 2010– 2011– 11 12

Straw yield (t/ha) Pooled 2009– 2010– 2011– 10 11 12

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

53.5 50.1 51.5 48.9 0.6 2.0

54.0 54.1 54.9 53.3 1.7 NS

56.0 56.2 57.1 50.6 1.8 NS

38.2 41.1 43.1 41.0 0.9 3.1

38.9 40.5 40.3 39.3 0.9 NS

42.5 41.0 41.5 38.8 0.8 NS

5.63 3.35 3.68 2.73 0.07 0.24

5.80 3.70 4.72 2.90 0.21 0.74

6.17 4.35 5.45 3.22 0.14 0.48

5.87 3.80 4.62 2.95 0.10 0.26

7.96 4.58 4.83 3.75 0.25 0.85

8.33 5.09 5.81 3.24 0.23 0.78

7.30 5.24 6.83 4.10 0.23 0.78

Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

52.8 49.8 50.4 1.4 NS

53.7 54.2 54.3 1.7 NS

54.6 55.1 55.2 1.6 NS

40.4 40.5 41.5 1.0 NS

39.6 39.7 39.9 0.8 NS

40.8 40.9 41.1 0.6 NS

3.92 3.80 3.82 0.09 NS

4.26 4.35 4.24 0.06 NS

4.83 4.82 4.73 0.12 NS

4.34 4.32 4.26 0.09 NS

5.29 5.18 5.37 0.09 NS

5.67 5.49 5.70 0.16 NS

5.92 5.74 5.95 0.16 NS

RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard manure to supply 100 kg N/ha; FYM200, farmyard manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeevamrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (S+F), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit.

Yadav et al. (2009) also reported improved soil health with all the organic manures. The jeevamrit was not able to influence soil properties significantly. The population of bacteria, actinomycetes and fungi was higher with application of jeevamrit in all the nutrition sources in both rice and wheat (Table 6), but the data on grain yield of crops revealed that this higher microbial population could not affect the grain yield of crops. The per cent increase in bacterial population in rice Table 5. Effect of different nutrient sources on system rice-equivalent yield Treatment

System rice equivalent yield (t/ha) 2009 2010 2011 Pooled

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

14.3 10.4 11.2 9.3 0.22 0.7

13.0 10.8 11.9 9.1 0.14 0.9

12.8 10.9 12.1 8.6 0.17 0.5

13.7 10.7 11.5 9.2 0.19 0.5

Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control (C) SEm± CD (P=0.05)

11.4 11.4 11.2 0.93 NS

11.2 11.4 11.0 0.12 NS

11.0 11.1 11.1 0.15 NS

11.3 11.4 11.1 0.16 NS

RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard supply 100 kg N/ha; FYM200, manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeemomrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (StF). jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit.

with application of jeevamrit was the highest under unfertilized condition followed by FYM application and RDF. The per cent increase in bacterial population in wheat was higher with FYM application than that under RDF and unfertilized control. The quantum of increase in microbial population was higher in the rabi season than kharif. Effect of nutrition sources and jeevamrit on economics

The cost of rice production under FYM100 was almost at par with RDF, but FYM200 had 11% higher and unfertilized control had 10.5% lower cost of production than RDF (Table 7). This was due to higher input and application costs of FYM under FYM200. The gross returns under FYM100 and FYM200 were 7.8 and 5.8% less than the RDF respectively. The net returns were 11.2 and 12.7% lower under FYM100 and FYM200 than RDF, respectively. However, net returns under FYM100 and FYM200 were 27.9 and 27.3% higher than that under RDF, respectively, if 30% organic price premium is given to these treatments. Benefit: cost ratio was the highest (2.41) under RDF at normal price but at 30% price premium to organic produce, it was the highest (3.08) under FYM100. Urkurkar et al. (2010) also reported higher net returns with recommended fertilizers than organic treatments. The cost of wheat production under FYM100 was almost at par with RFD, but under FYM200 it was 9.3% higher than RDF. The unfertilized control had 16.1% lower cost of production than RDF. This was due to higher input and application costs of FYM under FYM200. The gross returns under FYM100 and FYM200 were 35.5 and 22.2% lower than the RDF respectively. The net returns were 47.0 and 33.4% lower under FYM100 and FYM200 than RDF respec-

June 2018]

143

ORGANIC RICE–WHEAT CROPPING SYSTEM

Table 6. Effect of different nutrient sources on soil properties after 3 cycles of rice-wheat cropping system pH (1:2)

Electrical conductivity (dS/m)

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control SEm± CD (P=0.05)

6.98 6.94 6.93 7.01 0.13 NS

0.201 0.204 0.206 0.199 0.006 NS

255.3 257.9 269.3 198.8 3.31 11.5

103.3 110.5 121.9 77.1 2.11 7.3

126.1 148.7 154.4 93.0 3.06 10.6

0.453 0.581 0.640 0.433 0.025 0.070

22.3 22.1 21.6 21.3 0.52 NS

23.5 25.7 24.2 25.6 0.85 NS

18.4 18.3 18.4 17.0 0.48 NS

29.0 31.6 28.8 29.9 1.1 NS

Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control (C) SEm± CD (P=0.05)

6.97 6.96 6.96 0.051 NS

0.206 0.198 0.203 0.004 NS

242.2 247.0 246.8 2.12 NS

100.5 103.7 105.4 2.67 NS

129.4 133.7 128.6 2.5 NS

0.527 0.527 0.528 0.015 NS

23.2 20.4 1.0 NS

27.6 21.9 1.9 5.0

20.5 15.6 1.2 3.2

33.7 25.9 1.8 4.8

Treatment

Available nutrients (kg/ha) N P K

Organic carbon (%)

Microbial population (cfu*/g soil) Rice Wheat Bacteria Fungi Bacteria Fungi (× 106) (× 103) (× 106) (× 103)

Cfu, colony-forming units; RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard manure to supply 100 kg N/ ha; FYM200, farmyard manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeevamrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (S+F), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit. Table 7. Effect of different nutrient sources on economics of rice and wheat production Treatment

Nutrient source RDF FYM100 FYM200 Unfertilized control Jeevamrit application Jeevamrit (S) Jeevamrit (S+F) Control (C)

Cost of production (×103 /ha) Rice Wheat

Gross returns (×103 /ha) Rice Wheat

Net returns (× 103 /ha) Rice Wheat

32.61 32.70 36.20 29.20

27.57 26.62 30.12 23.12

111.3 102.6 (133.3) 104.9 (136.3) 88.18

104.8 67.53 (87.78) 81.54 (106.0) 52.03

78.65 69.86 (100.6) 68.66 (100.1) 58.98

77.2 40.91 (61.16) 51.42 (75.88) 28.91

33.72 34.31 32.67

27.9 28.49 26.85

101.3 103.0 100.7

77.01 76.32 75.95

67.58 68.73 68.05

49.11 47.83 49.10

Benefit: cost ratio Rice Wheat

2.41 2.80 2.14 (3.08) 1.54 (2.30) 1.90 (2,77) 1.71 (2.52) 2.02 1.25 2.00 2.00 2.08

1.76 1.68 1.83

Figures in parentheses are with 30% organic price premium. RDF, Recommended dose of fertilizers; FYM, farmyard manure; FYM100, farmyard manure to supply 100 kg N/ha; FYM200, farmyard manure to supply 200 kg N/ha; Jeevamrit (S), jeevamrit as soil application; Jeevamrit (S+F), jeevamrit as soil and foliar application (S+F) and control, plot without jeevamrit.

tively. However, net returns under FYM100 and FYM 200 were 20.8 and 1.7% lower than that under RDF, respectively, even after adding 30% organic price premium to these treatments. Benefit: cost ratio was the highest under RDF even at 30% price premium to the organic wheat indicating that organic wheat is not economical even at 30% price premium vis-à-vis the conventionally grown wheat. The economics of rice and wheat did not vary much with jeevamrit treatments due to its very low cost and negligible effect on crop yields. It was concluded that in rice–wheat cropping system, rice grain yields at par with RDF can be obtained with FYM supplying 100 kg N/ha from 2nd year onwards but wheat grain yields even at FYM supplying 200 kg N/ha

remained lower than RDF even in 3rd year. Jeevamrit both as soil and foliar application was unable to contribute towards yield improvement of both the crops. The net returns of rice were higher than RDF under organic management at 30% price premium but in wheat these were lower than RDF even at 30% price premium. REFERENCES APEDA. 2016. www.apeda.gov.in/apedawebsite/organic/ Organic_Products.htm Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Wiley & Sons, New Delhi, India. Joshi, M. 2008. Studies on organic farming practices in Karnataka. Project Report. University of Agricultural Sciences, Banga-

144

AULAKH ET AL.

lore, Karnataka, India, pp. 12–14. Joshi, M. 2012. New Vistas of Organic Farming, 140 pp. Scientific Publishers, New Delhi, India. Kanwar, K., Paliyal, S.S. and Bedi, M.K. 2006. Integrated management of green manure, compost and nitrogen fertilizer in a rice–wheat cropping sequence. Crop Research 31(3): 334– 338. Kharub, A.S. and Chander, S. 2008. Effect of organic farming on yield, quality and soil-fertility status under basmati rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 53(3): 172–177. Palekar, S. 2009. How to Practice Natural Farming? All India Pingalwara Charitable Society, pp. 22– 27. PAU, 2017. Handbook of Agriculture 2017, pp.76. Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Statistical Abstract of Punjab, 2014. PAU, 2017. Package of Practices for Crops of Punjab (Kharif). Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India, pp. 1,298– 1,343. Pilbeam, C.J., Sherchan, D.P. and Gregory, P.J. 1999. Response of wheat–rice and maize/millet systems to fertilizer and manure applications in the mid-hills of Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 35(1): 1–13.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Reddy, J. 2009. A model organic farm and holistic approach for sustainable agriculture. (In) Proceedings of International Seminar on India Organic-Strategies to Surge Ahead, International Competence Centre for Organic Agriculture, held during 10–11 September 2009 at Bangalore (now Bengaluru), Karnataka, India. Shwetha, B.N., Babalad, H.B. and Patel, R.K. 2009. Effect of combined use of organics on soybean–wheat cropping system. Journal of Soils and Crops 19(1): 8–13. Singh J. 2009. Going green. The Tribune, 7th February, 2009. Urkurkar, J.S., Chitale, S. and Tiwari, A. 2010. Effect of organic v/ s chemical nutrient packages on productivity, economics and physical status of soil in rice (Oryza sativa)–potato (Solanum tuberosum) cropping system in Chhatisgarh. Indian Journal of Agronomy 55(1): 6–10. Willer, H. and Julia, L. 2016. The World of Organic Agriculture: Statistics and Emerging Trends 2016. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick and IFOAM-Organic International, Bonn. Yadav, D.S., Kumar, V. and Yadav, V. 2009. Effect of organic farming on productivity, soil health and economics of rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 54(3): 267–271.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 145__149 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Bio-efficacy of herbicides and their mixture on weeds and yield of rice (Oryza sativa) under rice–wheat cropping system ASHOK KUMAR SINGH1, S.K. TOMAR2

AND

D.P. SINGH3

Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Sohna, Siddarthnagar, Uttar Pradesh 272 193 Received : June 2017; Revised accepted : May 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2014 and 2015 at Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sohna, Siddarthnagar Uttar Pradesh, to assess the efficacy of bispyribac-Na, pretilachlor, penoxsulam, pyrazosulfuron, bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl, bispyribac-Na + almix (metsulfuron methyl 10% + chlorimuron ethyl 10% WP), pretilachlor followed by (fb) ethoxysulfuron methyl, pretilachlor fb almix, pyrazosulfuron fb manual weeding, pretilachlor + bensulfuron in transplanted rice (Oryza sativa L.). The highest grain yield (5.2 t/ha) was recorded in weed-free plot, being at par with bispyribac-Na + almix (25 g + 4 g/ha), pretilachlor fb almix (750 g and 4 g/ha), pyrazosulfuron (20 g/ha) fb manual weeding. Uncontrolled weed growth caused 41.9% reduction in the crop yield compared to weed-free treatment. Tank-mix application of bispyribac-Na + almix, pretilachlor fb almix, pyrazosulfuron fb manual weeding and bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl (25 g + 18.75 g/ha) proved better, showing a mean increase in grain yield of 9.54% than mean of alone application of bispyribac-Na, pretilachlor, penoxsulam (22.5 g/ha) and pyrazosulfuron (20 g/h). Tank-mix application of bispyribac-Na + almix being at par with application of pretilachlor fb almix reduced the weed density and weed dry weight compared to rest of the herbicides tested. Application of bispyribac-Na + almix, remaining at par with pretilachlor fb almix, pretilachlor fb ethoxysulfuron methyl, bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl (25 + 18.75 g/ ha) at 25 days after transplanting (DAT) was the most effective in enhancing yield attributes and grain yield. The highest net return ( 44,073/ha) and benefit : cost ratio (1.97) were also obtained using bispyribac-Na + almix. Application of penoxsulam (22.5 g/ha) at 12 DAT recorded the lowest weed-control efficiency and grain yield amongst the herbicides tested which was at par with alone application of bispyribac-Na, pretilachlor, pyrazosulfuron. Application of bispyribac-Na + almix 25 + 4 g/ha at 25 DAT, though on a par with pretilachlor fb almix and pyrazosulfuron resulted significantly higher N, P and K uptake than rest of the herbicides tested and weedy check.

Key words : Herbicide, Rice, Weeds, Weed control, Yield

Rice–wheat is the most important cropping system in India. In eastern Uttar Pradesh, rice production is constrained by depletion of natural resources, labour shortage, climate change and weed problem. Infestation of weeds caused 28–45% yield loss in transplanted rice (Singh et al., 2003). It is well known that the yield losses increase with increasing weed density. Hence it is imperative to control them in time to avoid unproductive use of growth factors and minimize the crop-weed competition for better crop growth. Continuous use of similar herbicides for a longer period often changes the composition of weed flora (Rajkhowa et al., 2006). Herbicides are effective against 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] 1,3 Subject Matter Specialist (Agronomy), 2Project Coordinator

weed species, but most of them are specific and are effective against narrow range of weed species. Several new pre- and post-emergence herbicides have been added to the array of herbicides but there is meager information on their efficacy when used alone or in combination with other herbicides. The present study is an attempt to assess the efficacy of new pre- and post-emergence herbicides and their combination on weed dynamics and productivity of transplanted rice under conditions of eastern Uttar Pradesh. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) season of 2014 and 2015 at Krishi Vigyan Kendra Sohna, Siddharthnagar farm of the Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Faizabad.

146

SINGH ET AL.

The soil was clay loam having pH 7.8, organic carbon 0.38% and available N, P and K of 265, 13.2 and 230.5 kg/ ha respectively. The treatments comprised 12 weed-control treatments, viz. bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha [25 days after transplanting (DAT)], pretilachlor 1,000 g/ha ( 3 DAT), penoxsulam 22.5 g/ha (12 DAT), pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha (3 DAT), bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl 25 g + 18.75 g/ha (25 DAT), bispyribac-Na + almix 25 g + 4 g/ ha (25 DAT), pretilachlor 750 g/ha followed by (fb) ethoxysulfuron methyl 18.75 g/ha (3/25 DAT), pretilachlor 750 g/ha fb almix 4 g/ha (3/25 DAT), pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ ha fb mechanical weeding (3/25 DAT), pretilachlor (6%) + bensulfuron (0.6%) 6.6% GR @ 660 g/ha (5 DAT) along with weed-free (hand-weeding 20 and 40 days after transplanting) and weedy check. The experiment was laid out in a randomized block design with 3 replications. Twentytwo days old seedlings of rice variety ‘BPT 5204’ were transplanted on 25 and 27 July 2014 and 2015 respectively. One-third of recommended dose of N (40 kg/ha) and full dose of P2O5 and K2O (50 kg/ha) were applied before transplanting and the remaining N was top-dressed in 2 equal splits, half at active tillering and half at panicleinitiation stage. Herbicides were applied as per treatments. The data on weed population and weed biomass were taken at 60 DAT with the help of random quadrate (1 m × 1 m) at 2 places. These were subjected to square-root transformation √x+1 to normalize their distribution. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Weed flora

The major weed flora at the experimental site comprised grassy weeds Echinochloa crus-galli and Echinochloa colona, broad-leaf weeds Cyanotis axillaris, Eclipta alba and sedges Cyperus spp. Some other weeds were also present, viz. Lindernia spp. and Cynodon dactylon etc. The mean relative density of individual weeds species to total weed density over the seasons at 60 days of crop growth under weedy check condition showed that infestation of broad-leaf weeds was greater than grassy weeds and sedges. Among the broad-leaf weeds, C. axillaris alone constituted 24.2% of the total weed density at 60 DAS. Weed density and weed dry weight

All the weed-control treatments significantly reduced the weed population and total dry weight of weeds compared to weedy check (Table 1). The maximum weed density and dry-matter production of weeds were recorded in unweeded check due to uncontrolled weed growth. Among the herbicides, application of bispyribac-Na + almix though being at par with pretilachlor fb almix and

[Vol. 63, No. 2

pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding reduced the weed population significantly compared to rest of the herbicidal treatments. Similarly, pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding and bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl being at par recorded significantly lower weed population than the other herbicidal treatments. Single application of bispyribac-Na, pretilachlor, penoxsulam and pyrazosulfuron were found less effective in reducing the weed population compared to the application of herbicides as tank-mix or in sequence. Application of penoxsulam alone recorded the highest weed population among the herbicides followed by pyrazosulfuron, pretilachlor and bispyribac-Na. Among the combined application of herbicides, pretilachlor + bensulfuron recorded significantly higher weed population than the other combinations of herbicides. A more or less similar trend was observed in respect of dry weight of weeds. Application of bispyribacNa + almix recorded significantly the lowest weed dry weight followed by pretilachlor fb almix and pyrazosulfuron + mechanical weeding compared with other herbicidal treatments. This could be attributed to the fact that herbicides with different mode of action when applied in combination effectively control the weed flora. The highest weed-control efficiency of 91.8% and the lowest weed index of 1.84 were recorded with tank-mix application of bispyribac-Na + almix followed by pretilachlor fb almix and pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding owing to effective control of complex weed flora. Bispyribac sodium inhibits the branched amino acid biosynthesis in grassy weeds, while almix inhibits the growth of broadleaf weeds and sedges in rice crop. Mukherjee and Singh (2005) also reported higher weed-control efficiency with tank-mix application of herbicides than their individual application. The differential behaviour of herbicides could be attributed to their differential reaction to weed species. Penoxulam, being the less effective in suppressing the weed growth, exhibited the lowest weed-control efficiency and the highest value of weed index. Yield attributes and yield

All the weed-control treatments significantly improved the grain yield compared to weedy check. Weed-free treatment recorded the maximum grain yield, being at par with bispyribac-Na + almix, pretilachlor fb almix, pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding and bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl. The higher grain yield in these treatments could be attributed to better weed control and higher values of yield attributes. Weed-free treatment, being at par with bispyribac-Na + almix and pretilachlor fb almix, showed higher values of yield attributes than the other herbicidal treatments and weedy check. The results are in close conformity with the results of Yadav et al.

00 29.52 100 00 DAT, Days after transplanting; WCE, weed-control efficiency. Original values are given in parentheses, transformation √x+1

1.00 (00) 9.49 (89.2) 0.12 0.38 1.00 (00) 3.26 (9.6) 0.04 0.12 1.00 (0) 3.60 (10) 0.04 0.13 1.00 (0.0) 4.4 (18.4) 0.045 0.14

1.00 (00) 4.75 (21.6) 0.04 0.12

1.00 (00) 3.25 (9.6) 0.05 0.17

1.00 (0) 4.36 (18.0) 0.04 0.12

1.0 (00) 7.11 (49.6) 0.07 0.22

12.54 67.20 4.99 (23.9) 2.14 (3.6) 2.12 (3.5) 1.84 (2.4)

2.53 (5.4)

2.34 (4.5)

2.34 (4.5)

4.15 (16.2)

2.80 4.05 81.98 78.80 3.80 (13.5) 3.95 (14.6) 1.54 (1.4) 1.67 (1.8) 1.79 (2.2) 2.28 (4.2) 1.92 (2.7) 2.24 (4.0)

1.67 (1.8) 1.67 (1.8)

1.92 (2.7) 1.67 (1.8)

1.92 (2.7) 1.41 (1.0)

2.66 (6.1) 3.46 (11)

1.84 9.04 91.80 70.50 2.43 (4.9) 3.95 (14.6) 3.59 (11.9) 4.35 (18.0) 1.61 (1.6) 2.34 (4.5) 1.64 (1.7) 1.58 (1.5) 1.92 (2.7) 2.14 (3.6) 1.90 (2.6) 2.34 (4.5)

1.61 (1.6) 1.90 (2.6)

1.64 (1.7) 1.51 (1.3)

5.2 (26.1) 5.04 (24.4) 5.93 (34.2) 5.77 (32.3) 4.13 (16.1) 2.34 2.14 2.53 4.05 2.14

(4.5) (3.6) (5.4) (15.4) (3.60)

2.34 1.87 2.53 3.08 2.14

(4.5) (2.5) (5.4) (8.5) (3.6)

2.34 2.53 2.53 1.34 1.61

(4.5) (5.4) (5.4) (0.8) (1.6)

2.14 2.14 2.70 1.58 1.41

(3.6) (3.6) (6.3) (1.5) (1.0)

2.34 2.41 2.70 1.87 2.14

(4.5) (4.8) (6.3) (2.5) (3.6)

2.34 2.34 2.53 2.14 1.92

(4.5) (4.5) (5.4) (3.6) (2.7)

4.01 4.09 4.57 4.27 3.67

(15.1) (15.7) (19.9) (17.2) (12.5)

69.30 68.30 59.80 65.10 74.60

9.60 11.62 15.50 13.30 7.93

RICE RESPONSE TO HERBICIDES

Bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha (25 DAT) Pretilachlor 1,000 g/ha (3 DAT) Penoxsulam 22.5 g/ha (12 DAT) Pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha (3 DAT) Bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl 25 g + 18.75 g/ha (25 DAT) Bispyribac-Na + almix 25 g + 4 g/ha (25 DAT) Pretilachlor fb ethoxysulfuron methyl 750 g/18.75 g/ha (3/25 DAT) Pretilachlor fb almix 750 g/4 g/ha (3/25 DAT) Pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha fb mechanical weeding (3/25 DAT) Pretilachlor (6%) + bensulfuron (0.6%) 6.6% GR @ 660 g/ha (5 DAT) Weed-free Weedy check SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Total weeds Other weeds Sedges Cyperus spp. Broad-leaf weeds Cyanotis Eclipta axillaris alba Grassy weeds Echinochloa Echinochloa crusgalli colona Treatment

Table 1. Effect of weed-control treatments on major weed population (per/m2) and weed weight at 60 days after transplanting (mean of 2 years)

Weed dry-matter (g/m2)

WCE (%)

Weed index

June 2018]

147

(2009). It is obvious that crop grown under weedfree environment resulted in greater availability of space, sunlight and nutrients etc., which in turn led to greater photosynthesis and better translocation of photosynthates as reflected in more and bigger panicles and grains/panicle (Table 2). Among the herbicidal treatments, tank-mix application of bispyribac-Na + almix, pretilachlor fb almix, and pyrazosulfuron fb manual weeding, bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl and pretilachlor fb ethoxysulfuron methyl being at par recorded significantly higher values of yield attributes of rice, i.e. panicles/m2 and grains/panicle, compared with weedy check and the other herbicidal treatments. Our results confirm the findings of Halder and Patra (2007) and Gopinath and Kundu (2008). Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium removal by weeds

Among the herbicides, bispyribac-Na + almix significantly reduced the N, P and K removal by weeds compared to weedy check and other herbicidal treatments at harvesting stage (Table 3). Besides bispyribac-Na + almix, application of bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl recorded lower N removal than the other herbicidal treatments and weedy check. However, the magnitude of increase in N removal with pretilachlor fb almix and pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding was relatively lower compared with other herbicidal treatments. In case of P removal, pretilachlor fb almix being at par with pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding showed significantly lower P removal than the other herbicidal treatments and weedy check. Pretilachlor fb almix recorded significantly the lowest K removal after bispyribac-Na + almix. The weed growth as characterized by dry-matter of weeds in different treatments reflected the similar trend in nutrient removal by weeds. As usual weedy check recorded the highest N, P and K removal by weeds due to uncontrolled weed growth, whereas there was no nutrient loss through weeds in weed-free plots. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake by rice

The highest N, P and K uptake in rice was recorded in weed-free treatment, being significantly higher than rest of the treatments (Table 3). Among the herbicide treatments, bispyribac-Na + almix being at a par with pretilachlor fb almix and pyrazosulfuron fb mechanical weeding recorded

148

SINGH ET AL.

significantly higher N, P and K uptake than rest of the herbicide treatments and weedy check. This could be ascribed to higher grain yield in these treatments. The lowest N, P and K uptake was observed with weedy check which was at par with application of penoxsulam and pyrazosulfuron applied alone. In general, the trend in nutrient uptake in

[Vol. 63, No. 2

rice crop was more or less similar to that of grain yield. Economics

The highest net return ( 44,070/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (1.87) were recorded with bispyribac-Na + almix closely followed by weed-free, pretilachlor fb almix and

Table 2. Yield attributes, yield and benefit: cost ratio in rice as affected by herbicide treatments (mean of 2 years) Treatment Bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha (25 DAT) Pretilachlor1,000 g/ha (3 DAT) Penoxsulam 22.5 g/ha (12 DAT) Pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha (3 DAT) Bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron methyl 25 g + 18.75 g/ha (25 DAT) Bispyribac-Na + almix 25 g + 4 g/ha (25 DAT) Pretilachlor fb ethoxysulfuron methyl 750 g/ 18.75 g/ha (3/25 DAT) Pretilachlor fb almix 750 g/4 g/ha (3/25 DAT) Pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha fb mechanical weeding (3/25 DAT) Pretilachlor (6%) + bensulfuron (0.6%) 6.6% GR @ 660 g/ha (5 DAT) Weed-free Weedy check SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Panicles/ m2

Panicle length (cm)

Grains/ panicle

1,000-seed Grain yield Net returns weight (g) (kg/ha) (× 103 /ha)

Benefit: cost ratio

253 251 250 251 256

20 20 21 19 21

166 165 161 157 171

23 23 21 23 24

4900 4790 4580 4700 4990

38.87 38.19 35.14 36.79 39.68

1.73 1.77 1.61 1.70 1.70

260 255

23 21

193 177

24 24

5320 5200

44.07 41.54

1.93 1.84

260 253

21 20

181 168

24 24

5270 4930

42.89 39.44

1.87 1.75

246

19

163

23

4740

37.34

1.72

270 207 2 6

23 19 1 2

195 151 5 17

24 20 1 NS

5420 3820 122 367

43.44 27.62 – –

1.76 1.34 – –

DAT, Days after transplanting Table 3. Effect of herbicide treatments on nutrient uptake by rice and nutrient removal by weeds (mean of 2 years) Treatment

Nutrient uptake by rice crop (kg/ha) N P K

Bispyribac-Na 25 g/ha (25 DAT) 57.4 Pretilachlor1,000 g/ha (3 DAT) 52.2 Penoxsulam 22.5 g/ha (12 DAT) 38.3 Pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha (3 DAT) 39.5 Bispyribac-Na + ethoxysulfuron 66.4 methyl 25 g + 18.75 g/ha (25 DAT) Bispyribac-Na + almix 25 g + 80.1 4 g/ha (25 DAT) Pretilachlor fb ethoxysulfuron 62.5 methyl 750 g/18.75 g/ha (3/25 DAT) Pretilachlor fb almix 750 g/4 g/ha (3/25 DAT) 77.1 Pyrazosulfuron 20 g/ha fb mechanical 70.7 weeding (3/25 DAT) Pretilachlor (6%) + bensulfuron 43.8 (0.6%) 6.6% GR @ 660 g/ha (5 DAT) Weed-free 96.9 Weedy check 30.8 SEm± 3.60 CD (P=0.05) 10.48

Nutrient removal by weeds (kg/ha) N P

K

8.2 7.2 6.1 6.3 11.1

65.6 60.5 47.8 52.6 74.6

6.87 (46.22) 6.98 (47.72) 7.82 (60.27) 7.32 (52.64) 3.01 (8.12)

3.01 (8.12) 3.06 (8.38) 3.25 (10.61) 3.20 (9.24) 2.78 (6.73)

5.29 5.27 5.94 5.63 4.83

14.1

88.9

1.49 (1.24)

1.78 (2.18)

2.87 (7.25)

10.7

68.4

6.74 (44.51)

2.96 (7.82)

5.09 (26.0)

13.1 12.7

85.6 84.6

4.35 (17.97) 5.73 (31.88)

2.23 (3.16) 2.56 (5.60)

3.39 (10.5) 4.42 (18.62)

6.5

57.7

7.10 (49.43)

3.11 (8.68)

5.46 (28.87)

16.4 5.2 0.49 1.42

99.4 44.9 3.65 10.60

1 (00) 12.29 (150.16) 0.39 1.14

1.00 (00) 5.24 (26.50) 0.13 0.37

1.00 (00) 9.44 (88.12) 0.20 0.54

DAT, Days after transplanting; figures in parentheses indicate

(27.00) (27.87) (35.37) (30.75) (22.37)

June 2018]

RICE RESPONSE TO HERBICIDES

pretilachlor fb ethoxysulfuron methyl (Table 2). Weedy check had the lowest net return and benefit: cost ratio (Table 2). The higher net return and benefit :cost ratio with bispyribac-Na + almix could be attributed to low cost of treatment and higher yield. Based on the study conducted for 2 years it may be concluded that weeds associated with transplanted rice in irrigated condition of rice–wheat cropping system in northeastern plain zone may be effectively managed through application of bispyribac-Na + almix (25 + 4 g/ha) applied at 25 days after transplanting. The effect of bispyribac-Na + almix (25 + 4 g/ha) was consistent and resulted in the highest grain yield and economic return. REFERENCES Gopinath, K.A. and Kundu, S. 2008. Evaluation of metsulfuron methyl and chlorimuron ethyl for weed control in direct seed

149

rice (Oryza sativa L.). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 78(5): 466–469. Halder, J. and Patra, A.K. 2007. Effect of chemical weed control methods on productivity of transplanted rice (Oryza sativa L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy 52(3): 111–113. Mukherjee, D. and Singh, R.P. 2005. Effect of micro-herbicides on weed dynamics, yield and economics of transplanted rice (Oryza sativa L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy 5(4): 292– 295. Rajkhowa, D.J., Borah, N., Barua, I.C. and Deka, N.C. 2006. Effect of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl on weeds and productivity of transplanted rice during rainy season. Indian Journal of Weed Science 38: 25–28. Singh, G., Singh, V.P., Singh, M. and Singh, S.P. 2003. Effect of anilofos and triclopyr on grassy and non-grassy weeds in transplanted rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 35: 30–32. Yadav, D.B.; Yadav, A. and Punia, S.S. 2009. Evaluation of bispyribac-Na for weed control in transplanted rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 41: 23–27.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 150__156 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Production efficiency, forage yield, nutrient uptake and quality of sorghum sudan grass hybrid (Sorghum bicolor × Sorghum sudanense) + cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) intercropping system as influenced by sowing methods and varying seed rates of cowpea GUNJAN GULERIA1 AND NAVEEN KUMAR2

Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh 176 062 Received : May 2016; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was carried out at Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2012 and 2013, to study the effect of sowing methods and varying seed rates of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] on forage yield of sorghum sudan grass hybrid [Sorghum bicolour (L.) Moench. × Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf.] and cowpea. Broadcast sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid (SSGH) with 75% recommended seed rate of cowpea (33.75 kg/ha) realized significantly higher plant height, shoot number, SSGH and cowpea dry-matter accumulation, total green forage yield (34.18 t/ha), dry forage yield (10.08 t/ha) and production efficiency. Broadcast sowing of SSGH with recommended seed rate of cowpea resulted in significantly higher N (195.17 kg/ha), P (21.52 kg/ha) and K (56.86 kg/ha) uptake. Further, broadcast sowing of SSGH with 75% recommended seed rate of cowpea gave highest net returns ( 32,001/ha), benefit: cost ratio (1.57), SSGH-equivalent yield (SSGHEY) and was followed by broadcast sowing of SSGH with recommended seed rate of cowpea.

Key words : Broadcast sowing, Green fodder yield, Intercropping system, Nutrient uptake, Sorghum sudan grass hybrid

Livestock plays an important role in rural economy of India by providing employment and supplementing family income, which contributes about 21% of the total agriculture income of the family (Sharma et al., 2009). Fodder requirement of livestock is generally met through low quality crop residues and degraded grasslands, which are not enough for maintenance of animal health and productivity. In Himachal Pradesh too, the feed and forage resources are able to meet partial requirement of the livestock. Green herbage in addition to energy also provides vitamins, minerals with better dry-matter digestibility (Surve et al., 2012). Among cultivated fodder crops, sorghum [Sorghum bicolour (L.) Moench.] is an important rainy (kharif) season crop, grown mainly under rainfed conditions. Recently, sorghum sudan grass hybrid [Sorghum bicolour (L.) Moench. × Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf.], a cross between male-sterile grain sorghum with sudan

1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Ph.D. Student, 2Principal Scientist, Department of Agronomy, Forages and Grassland Management, College of Agriculture, CSK HPKV, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh

1

grass, is becoming popular among the farmers owing to its quick growth, succulence, better palatability and low levels of HCN (Prussic acid) compared to sorghum. Cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] is an important quickgrowing drought-tolerant kharif legume, produces sufficient quantity of biomass in a short span. Cowpea is tolerant to moderate shade and can be successfully grown in combination with maize, sorghum, pearl millet etc. to get nutrient-rich green fodder (Thomas, 2003). Sorghum sudan grass hybrid (SSGH) and cowpea are the potential kharif fodder crops, which can provide higher fodder yields with better quality, when grown in association; further, it may also be beneficial for improving the fertility of the soil. The type of inter/ mixed crop and spatial arrangement in inter/ mixed cropping have important effects on the balance of competition between the component crops and their productivity. Hence to get the best results, a rational approach is required for obtaining information on appropriate plant population of inter/ mixed crop stand. Since information on performance of a new crop SSGH with forage cowpea is lacking, the present investigation was planned to assess the effects of variable seed rates of

June 2018]

PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY OF SORGHUM SUDAN GRASS HYBRID + COWPEA SYSTEM

cowpea under different methods of cropping on the performance of SSGH under mid-hill rainfed conditions of north-western Himalayas. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2012 and 2013 at Fodder Section, Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur (32.4o N and 76.3 o E and 1,227 m altitude) on silty clay loam soil in mid-hills of North-Western Himalaya, having sub-humid climate. The rainfall received during the growing period of crop was 1,308.0 mm in 2012 and 1,607.5 mm in 2013. The experimental soil was acidic in reaction (5.5), high in organic carbon (1.01%), low in available nitrogen (271.0 kg/ha), medium in available phosphorus (11.0 kg/ha) and available potassium (281.0 kg/ha). The experiment was laid out in randomized block design with 3 replications. Total 10 treatments comprised all possible combinations of 2 sowing methods (line and broadcast sowing) and 3 seed rates of cowpea (50, 75 and 100% of recommended seed rate) + sole stands of SSGH and cowpea in line, and broadcast sowing were: line sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid + cowpea with 50% recommended seed rate, line sowing of SSGH + cowpea with 75% recommended seed rate, line sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid + cowpea with recommended seed rate, broadcast sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid + cowpea with 50% recommended seed rate, broadcast sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid + cowpea with 75% recommended seed rate, broadcast sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid + cowpea with recommended seed rate, line sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid, broadcast sowing of sorghum sudan grass hybrid, line sowing of cowpea, broadcast sowing of cowpea. The SSGH was sown using recommended package of practices. Recommended seed rate of SSGH was 40 kg/ha and of cowpea 45 kg/ha. Cowpea was sown as per treatments in additive series with SSGH in line sowing, whereas in broadcast sowing, seed of both crops was mixed and sown by broadcast. Fertilizer dose of N, P2O5 and K2O for cowpea was 20 : 60 : 30 kg/ha and was adjusted according to seed rate used in respective treatment, while for SSGH the recommended dose of N, P2O5 and K2O was 90 : 60 : 30 kg/ha. The crops were raised on 23 June 2012 and 17 June 2013. Green and dry fodder yields were computed cut-wise as well as total yield of all the cuts of SSGH and cowpea. In all, 2 cuts of SSGH and 1 of cowpea were taken. The crop from net plot was harvested and weighed. The total yield for each plot was adjusted by including the fresh weight of samples, taken for various observations. In order to work out the most profitable treatment, the economics of each

151

treatment was worked out on the basis of prevalent market prices of the inputs and output. Data for 2 seasons were pooled for final statistical analysis. Plant samples in each treatment were taken based on per cent proportion of each species in the mixture and were subjected to chemical analysis following standard procedures. The cowpea fodder yield was converted to Sorghum Sudan Grass Hybrid Equivalent Yield (SSGHEY) with the following relationship: Price of cowpea per kg × Yield of cowpea (t/ha) SSGHEY (t/ha) = Price of sorghum sudan grass hybrid fodder/kg

The per cent crude protein content was calculated by multiplying % nitrogen in plant sample obtained with a constant factor of 6.25. Crude fibre content (%) was workout by Soxhlet extraction procedure. The crude protein and crude fibre yields were computed by multiplying their respective contents with dry-matter yield. Land-equivalent ratio (LER) was calculated as per the standard procedure. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Growth and development

Broadcast sowing of crops resulted in significantly taller plants and more dry-matter accumulation of SSGH. Plant height of cowpea and plant population of both the crops was not significantly influenced by methods of sowing, but cowpea has better dry-matter accumulation in line sowing (Table 1). In line sowing, close plant spacing within row might have offered more competition for SSGH, a tillering crop for growth resources which ultimately has its effect on growth of the plant. Plants with similar growth habit have more competition among themselves for growth resources (Grof, 1981). However, under broadcast sowing proper distribution of plant population resulted in optimum utilization of growth resources by each and every plant and helps in better growth of the plants (Kumar, 2006). Among seed rates of cowpea, 50% recommended seed rate, remaining at par with 75% recommended seed rate, resulted in significantly taller plants and higher dry-matter accumulation of SSGH. Shoot numbers of SSGH were not influenced significantly by variable seed rates of cowpea. Cowpea had more number of plants with more height and dry-matter accumulation with recommended seed rate. The population of cowpea increased proportionately with the increase in seed rate. The reduction in plant height of SSGH with increasing seed rate of cowpea may be attributed to more inter specific competition offered by increased plant population of cowpea. These results corroborate the findings of Babu et al. (1994). Significantly taller plants in sole broadcast-sown SSGH resulted in significantly more dry-matter accumulation. Sowing methods have no effect on shoot number of

[Vol. 63, No. 2

11.6 9.4 0.11 0.38 9.1 7.8 0.11 0.34 38.8 32.0 0.43 1.29

2.5 1.7 0.13 0.38

8.8 9.4 2.4 2.6 0.28 0.59 8.8 9.4 – – 0.16 0.46 25.5 27.3 11.3 11.3 0.95 2.0

– – 2.4 2.6 0.13 NS

9.3 10.0 9.2 0.14 0.41 8.2 8.1 7.0 0.10 0.33 29.5 34.2 32.3 0.47 1.41

1.1 1.9 2.2 0.10 0.30

8.9 10.1 0.11 0.34 7.0 8.5 0.01 0.27 30.2 33.8 0.39 1.15

1.9 1.6 0.01 0.24

SSGH. No significant effect of sowing method on plant height, plant number/ m 2 and dry-matter accumulation of cowpea was observed. Interspecific competition in mixture reduced the plant height of SSGH, shoot number and dry-matter accumulation of both the crops. However, cowpea crop in mixture tend to grow upward with SSGH support might have resulted in more plant height.

11.3 7.5 0.43 1.30 26.4 24.6 0.51 1.53 1247 1068 11.3 33.7 254 186 7.3 22.0 982 882 10.2 30.4 SSGH, Sorghum sudan grass hybrid; NS, non-significant

44.8 31.9 0.8 3.5 70.4 66.5 1.0 3.0 274 261 3.6 10.7 Sole vs. other Sole Others SEm± CD (P=0.05)

90 127 4.6 13.8

– – 11.3 11.3 0.53 NS 25.5 27.3 – – 0.62 1.87 937 1028 243 265 24.8 52.1 – – 243 265 9.0 NS 937 1028 – – 12.5 37.1 – – 44.2 45.3 1.0 NS 70.5 70.3 – – 1.2 NS 265 283 – – 4.4 13.2 Between sole Line sowing SSGH Broadcast sowing SSGH Line sowing cowpea Broadcast sowing cowpea SEm± CD (P=0.05)

– – 84 95 5.7 NS

5.1 7.9 9.4 0.38 1.12 24.6 26.4 22.8 0.44 1.32 1004 1084 1115 12.4 36.9 94 199 263 6.4 19.01 909 885 852 8.9 26.3 23.3 31.8 40.7 0.7 3.1 66.6 66.1 66.7 0.9 NS 269 262 250 3.1 9.3 Seed rate of cowpea 50% recommended 75% recommended Recommended SEm± CD (P=0.05)

118 130 134 4.0 12.0

250 271 2.6 7.6

128 127 3.3 NS

65.9 67.0 0.7 NS

30.7 33.1 0.6 NS

853 911 7.2 21.5

195 178 5.2 15.5

1046 1089 10.1 30.1

22.1 27.0 0.36 1.08

8.1 6.9 0.31 0.92

Yield

Sowing method Line sowing Broadcast sowing SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Plant height (cm) SSGH Cowpea

Shoot number (Nos./m2) SSGH Cowpea

Dry-matter accumulation (g/m2) SSGH Cowpea Total

Green-fodder yield (t/ha) SSGH Cowpea Total

Dry-fodder yield (t/ha) SSGH Cowpea Total

GULERIA AND KUMAR

Treatment

Table 1. Effect of different treatments on plant height, shoot number and dry matter accumulation, green fodder yield and dry fodder yield (pooled data of 2 years)

152

Both the crops, SSGH and cowpea, sown with broadcast method resulted in higher green and dry fodder yields of SSGH and total of SSGH + cowpea over line sowing (Table 1). In broadcast sowing, the random crop geometry perhaps provided more space to SSGH to flourish (Allen, 1974), and hence had positive effect on number of shoots and plant height (Table 1). More plant height also favours more number of leaves/plant (Babu et al., 1994). Secondly, in broadcast sowing, better utilization of resources resulted in SSGH plants with more girth thickness (Kumar, 2006). Significantly higher green and dry forage yields of SSGH and total yield of SSGH + cowpea were obtained under SSGH + 75% recommended seed rate of cowpea treatment. The cowpea yield increased continuously with the increasing seed rate of this crop. Among sole stands, broadcast sowing resulted in higher green and dry forage yields of SSGH and SSGH + cowpea, whereas different sowing methods did not have effect on herbage yield of cowpea. Sole stand of both the crops exhibited significantly higher green and dry fodder yields of each crop, as reflected in higher herbage yield of crops in sole stands compared to other crop combinations. System productivity

Broadcast sowing of crops either in intermixed cropping or as sole stands resulted in higher SSGH green fodder-

June 2018]

PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY OF SORGHUM SUDAN GRASS HYBRID + COWPEA SYSTEM

equivalent yield (Table 2). Recommended seed rate of cowpea @ 75% resulted in significantly more SSGH green fodder-equivalent yield. Association of SSGH with cowpea gave higher SSGH green fodder-equivalent yield than pure crops. The SSGH green fodder-equivalent yield decreased and cowpea green fodder yield increased with the increasing seed rates of cowpea (Table 1), but more yield of cowpea at higher seed rate and its more price of fodder ( 2,000/t) compared to SSGH ( 1,500/t) contributed to increase in the equivalent yield in the treatments with recommended seed rate and made it comparable with 75% recommended seed rate. In pure stand, low yield of cowpea and contribution of cowpea with more price put mixed/intercropped treatments on upper hand than sole stand in term of SSGH green fodder-equivalent yield. On dry-weight basis, proportion of SSGH was higher in broadcast sowing than in line sowing (Table 2). Better growth in broadcast sowing (Table 1) increased the drymatter accumulation of SSGH which in turn resulted in higher proportion of this crop, whereas in cowpea reverse trend was observed. The proportion of cowpea crop increased with increasing seed rates of cowpea and reverse trend was observed in SSGH. Increased seed rate of cowpea improved growth and development of this crop, whereas increase in population of cowpea suppressed SSGH growth and development. This effect of treatments on growth and development of crops was reflected on proportion of each crop in respective treatments. Production efficiency

Broadcast sowing of crop; 75% recommended seed rate of cowpea with SSGH showed the highest production efficiency (PE) of the system (Table 2). Broadcast sowing has 10.29% more production efficiency than line sowing. Sowing of SSGH with 75% recommended seed exhibited 17.90% and 4.08% more production efficiency than 50% recommended seed rate and recommended seed rate respectively. Intercropping of SSGH and cowpea revealed best results for production efficiency as compared to sole cropping. Sheoran et al. (2010) also reported higher production efficiencies of intercropping of legumes in maize as compared to monoculture of crops. Land-equivalent ratio

No significant effect of sowing methods was observed on land-equivalent ratio (LER) of SSGH and cowpea (Table 2). However, among seed rates of cowpea, 75% recommended seed rate remaining at par with recommended seed rate resulted in significantly higher landequivalent ratio of 1.70 than the lowest seed rate of cowpea. The result indicated that multiple cropping systems have resulted in better utilization of land in comparison to

153

pure cropping (Barik and Tiwari, 1996). Quality

Sowing methods had no effect on crude protein and crude fibre content of forage; however, higher dry-matter yield in broadcast sowing (Table 1) resulted in significantly better crude protein and crude fibre yields. Dhar et al. (2006) also reported same results owing to better dry matter yield under broadcast sowing. Recommended seed rate of cowpea resulted in production of herbage with highest crude protein content, whereas the crude fibre content was higher with 50% recommended seed rate of cowpea. Higher proportion of SSGH and low proportion of cowpea (Table 2) support these findings which might have redefined its effect on crude protein content, as cowpea being legume is rich in crude protein content than SSGH. Higher crude fibre content was observed in monoculture than intercropping systems. Sowing of SSGH with 75% recommended seed rate resulted in higher crude protein yield, whereas highest crude fibre yield was obtained when SSGH was sown with 50% recommended seed rate of cowpea.These results are in line with those reported by Krishna et al. (1998). Sole stand of SSGH and cowpea had higher crude protein and crude fibre yields over intercropped treatments. Kumar and Bhanumurthy (2001) also found high crude protein yield in sole cowpea as compared to other systems. The difference in crude protein and fibre yields in all treatments can be ascribed to variations in crude protein content in treatments but more pronouncedly dry matter yield of each crop in different treatments. Nutrient uptake

The SSGH sown with cowpea using broadcast sowing showed significantly higher uptake of N and P (Table 3). Growing of SSGH with cowpea using recommended seed rate and cowpea with 75% recommended seed rate resulted in significantly higher N, P and K uptake by the crops than 50% recommended seed rate of cowpea and sowing methods on K by the crops have no significant effect. All the treatments, comprising SSGH + cowpea resulted in higher uptake of N, P and K over their respective sole stand. On an average, in pure stands broadcast sowing resulted in more uptake of N and P over line sowing. Nutrient uptake is a function of dry-matter yield and content of respective nutrients. The dry-matter yield obtained under different treatments in the present study amply supports nutrient uptake behaviour of the crops in respective treatments. Soil properties

Different treatments did not show significant effect on

31.1 36.7 35.3 0.57 1.68

26.0 28.1 14.5 15.06 1.13 2.38

20.9 34.3 0.52 1.54

Seed rate of cowpea 50% recommended 75% recommended Recommended SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Between sole Line sowing SSGH Broadcast sowing SSGH Line sowing cowpea Broadcast sowing cowpea SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Sole vs. other Sole Others SEm± CD (P=0.05) – – – –

– – – – – –

89.3 81.0 75.3 0.43 1.28

79.7 84.0 0.35 1.04

– – – –

– – – – – –

10.6 18.9 24.3 0.35 1.05

19.9 15.9 0.29 0.85

Proportion of crops (%) SSGH Cowpea

436 358 5.4 15.9

271 293 151 157 11.8 24.8

324 382 367 5.9 17.5

340 375 4.8 14.3

Production efficiency (kg/ha/day)

– – – –

– – – – – –

1.4 1.7 1.7 0.02 0.08

1.6 1.6 0.02 NS

Land equivalent ratio

14.2 14.9 0.45 NS

7.6 9.1 20.1 20.0 1.0 2.1

12.8 15.4 16.6 0.5 1.5

14.7 15.2 0.4 NS

Crude protein content (%)

SSGH, Sorghum sudan grass hybrid; SSGHEY, Sorghum sudan grass-equivalent yield; NS, non-significant

32.7 36.0 0.46 1.37

SSGHEY (t/ha)

Sowing method Line sowing Broadcast sowing SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Treatment

1.31 1.26 0.04 0.12

0.70 0.92 0.48 0.52 0.09 0.18

1.09 1.35 1.34 0.04 0.13

1.18 1.34 0.03 0.11

Crude protein yield (t/ha)

25.7 24.2 0.32 1.0

31.6 29.5 20.6 21.1 0.7 1.5

26.3 23.6 22.6 0.4 1.0

24.6 23.8 0.3 NS

Crude fibre content (%)

3.30 2.29 0.04 0.12

2.77 2.79 0.50 0.55 0.08 0.08

2.45 2.35 2.07 0.04 0.13

2.19 2.40 0.03 0.10

Crude fibre yield (t/ha)

13.1 28.4 0.70 2.08

19.4 24.9 2.73 5.43 1.54 3.23

26.2 31.4 27.6 0.77 2.28

24.8 32.0 0.63 1.86

Net returns ( × 103 /ha)

0.73 1.34 0.03 0.10

1.02 1.48 0.12 0.31 0.07 0.15

1.37 1.42 1.22 0.04 0.11

1.11 1.57 0.03 0.09

Benefit: cost ratio

Table 2. Effect of different treatments on sorghum sudan grass-equivalent yield, proportion of crops, production efficiency, land-equivalent ratio and crude protein content, crude protein yield, crude fibre content and crude fibre yield (pooled data of 2 years)

154 GULERIA AND KUMAR [Vol. 63, No. 2

June 2018]

155

PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY OF SORGHUM SUDAN GRASS HYBRID + COWPEA SYSTEM

Table 3. Effect of different treatments on soil organic carbon, pH, available nutrients and nutrient uptake of crops (pooled data of 2 years) Organic carbon (%)

pH

Sowing method Line sowing Broadcast sowing SEm± CD (P=0.05)

1.1 1.2 0.04 NS

5.1 5.1 – –

274.2 270.8 3.2 NS

10.4 9.2 0.13 0.40

294.5 308.2 10.1 NS

165.8 194.3 6.02 13.9

17.4 20.9 0.3 2.8

49.4 53.2 3.02 NS

Seed rate of cowpea 50% recommended 75% recommended Recommended SEm± CD (P=0.05)

1.1 1.2 1.1 0.05 NS

5.1 5.1 5.1 – –

270.1 267.7 279.7 3.9 NS

10.1 9.7 9.6 0.16 NS

286.6 306.0 311.4 12.4 NS

155.3 189.8 195.2 7.3 17.0

15.9 20.0 21.5 1.2 3.4

43.3 53.8 56.9 3.7 9.5

Between sole Line sowing SSGH Broadcast sowing SSGH Line sowing cowpea Broadcast sowing cowpea SEm± CD (P=0.05)

1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 0.09 NS

5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 – –

243.0 244.6 283.7 271.9 7.9 NS

10.1 11.9 9.3 9.1 0.32 0.70

277.8 319.0 265.3 274.9 24.9 NS

134.4 149.8 77.0 86.0 14.8 24.1

11.5 14.5 10.8 9.9 2.3 11.5

42.3 34.9 11.1 9.8 7.4 13.4

Sole vs. other Sole Others SEm± CD (P=0.05) Initial value

1.1 1.1 0.04 NS 1.01

5.2 5.1 – – 5.5

260.8 272.5 3.6 NS 271.0

10.1 9.8 0.15 NS 11.0

284.3 301.3 11.3 NS 281.0

111.8 180.1 6.73 15.5 –

11.7 19.2 1.1 3.1 –

24.5 51.3 3.4 8.7 –

Treatment

N

Available nutrient (kg/ha) P K

N

Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) P K

SSGH, Sorghum sudan grass hybrid; NS, non-significant

soil properties, viz. organic carbon content (%), pH, available N and K (Table 3) was observed. After completion of experiment, a reduction in available phosphorus was observed under broadcast sowing and in sole cowpea compared to sole SSGH. Cowpea being a leguminous crop might have enriched the soil N pool; but at sufficient rate of P application cowpea competes more for P uptake than SSGH (Wahua, 1983). Although, appreciable variation in soil properties was observed after the completion of experiment over initial respective values of different parameter. Economics

Net returns and benefit: cost ratio (Table 2) calculated to find out the economic viability of different treatments imposed indicated broadcast sowing more profitable in terms of net returns (32.0 × 103 /ha) and B: C ratio (1.57). Higher herbage yield (Table 1) coupled with low cost of cultivation in broadcast sowing made this treatment more profitable. Sowing of crops using 75% recommended seed rate gave higher net returns (31.4×103 /ha) and B: C ratio (1.42). Broadcast sown monoculture of both the crops resulted in higher net returns and B: C ratio owing to better herbage yield and low cost of cultivation than line sow-

ing. Multiple cropping resulted in better net returns (28.4 ×103 /ha) and B: C ratio (1.34) over sole crops owing to better herbage yield. The herbage yield gap between 75% recommended and recommended seed rate was less but increased cost of cultivation at higher seed rate indented the difference in net returns among these treatments. The present study clearly indicates that cultivation of SSGH with cowpea is advantageous from herbage yield, quality, economics and nutrient uptake (NPK) point of view. Broadcast sowing of SSGH with cowpea using 75% recommended seed rate of cowpea was most productive and profitable. REFERENCES Allen, L.H. 1974. Model of light penetration into a wide row crop. Agronomy Journal 66 (1): 41–47. Babu, R., Gumaste, S., Jayanne, M., Patil, J.C., Prabhakar, A.S. and Meli, S.S. 1994. Effect of mixing cowpea with maize genotypes on forage yield and quality. Forage Research 20(4): 245–249. Barik, A.K. and Tiwari, D.P. 1996. Growth and herbage yield of maize, sweet sudan and cowpea when grown solely and cereals together with cowpea. Forage Research 22(2 and 3): 77–82. Dhar, S., Das, S.K., Kumar, S. and Tripathi, S.B. 2006. Response of

156

GULERIA AND KUMAR

fodder sorghum to different weed management techniques and nitrogen levels. Indian Journal of Agronomy 51(4): 310–313. Grof, B.L. 1981. The performance of Andropo gongayanus–legume associations in Colombia. Journal of Agricultural Science 96(1): 233–237. Krishna, A., Raikhakhar, and Reddy, A.S. 1998. Effect of planting pattern and nitrogen on fodder maize (Zea mays) intercropped with cowpea (Vigna unguiculata). Indian Journal of Agronomy 43(2): 237–240. Kumar, A. 2006. Effect of date and method of sowing on the green forage yield of sorghum sudan grass under alkali water using irrigation. Forage Research 31(4): 247–250. Kumar, R.K. and Bhanumurthy, V.B. 2001. Effect of staggered sowing and relative proportion of cowpea on the performance of maize + cowpea. Forage Research 27(2): 105–110. Sharma, R.P., Raman, K.P., Singh, A.K., Poddar, B.K. and Kumar, R. 2009. Production potential and economics of multicut

[Vol. 63, No. 2

fodder sorghum (Sorghum sudanense) with legumes intercropping under various row proportions. Range Management and Agroforestry 30(1): 67–69. Sheoran, P., Sardana, V., Singh, S. and Bhushan, B. 2010. Bioeconomic evaluation of rainfed maize (Zea mays)-based intercropping systems with blackgram (Vigna mungo) under different spatial arrangements. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 80(3): 244–247. Surve, V.H., Arvadia, M.K. and Tandel, B.B. 2012. Effect of row ratio in cereal–legume fodder under intercropping systems on biomass production and economics. International Journal of Agriculture: Research and Review 2(1): 34–35. Thomas, C.G. 2003. Forage Crop Production in the Tropics. (In) Ground Legumes, edn 2, 149 pp. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi. Wahua, T.A.T. 1983. Nutrient uptake by intercropped maize and cowpea and a concept of nutrient supplementation index (NSI). Experimental Agriculture 19(1): 263–275.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 157__162 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Productivity and economics of field pea (Pisum sativum) and baby corn (Zea mays) intercropping systems as affected by planting pattern and weed management MOIRANGTHEM THOITHOI DEVI1 AND V.K. SINGH2

Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand 263 145 Received : July 2015; Revised accepted : January 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the consecutive winter seasons of 2011–12 and 2012–2013 to find out the effect of planting patterns and weed-management practices on yield attributes, yields and economics of field pea (Pisum sativum L.) + baby corn (Zea mays L.) intercropping system. The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design, keeping 4 planting patterns as main plot and 4 weed-management practices as subplot with 3 replications. An intercropping of field pea with baby corn reduced the yield attributes of field pea, viz. pods/plant, grains/pod, 1,000-grain weight and grain yield/plant and cobs/plant of baby corn. Sole field pea recorded significantly higher grain (1.85 t/ha) and straw yields (2.90 t/ha) than yield obtained as a component crop in paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2 : 2) and maize + field pea (1 : 1). Baby corn yield was similar in sole, paired (2 : 2) and 1 : 1 planting but significantly higher stover yield of baby corn (3.55 t/ha) was obtained from sole crop than other planting methods. Both the intercropping systems had significantly higher field pea-equivalent yield than sole crop of either field pea or baby corn. Hand-weeding 30 days after sowing (DAS), pre-emergence application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and post-emergence application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) improved all the growth and yield parameters of field pea and baby corn than weedy check. Hand-weeding (30 DAS), pre-emergence application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and post-emergence application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) resulted in significantly higher field pea-equivalent yield than weedy check. The highest gross return (80.71 × 103 /ha) and net returns (53.25 × 103 /ha) were obtained under paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2 : 2) and the highest benefit: cost ratio (2.15) was found in sole field pea (30 cm). Hand-weeding (30 DAS) resulted in the maximum value of gross returns (103.42 × 103 /ha), net returns (77.80 × 103 /ha) and benefit: cost ratio (3.04).

Key words: Baby corn, Economics, Field pea, Planting pattern, Weed management, Yield

Intercropping of cereals with pulses is an age-old practice. Pulses can do wonder when intercropped with widely spaced crops like maize, sorghum, pearlmillet, cotton and sugarcane, particularly in Northern India (Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar). There are evidences that intercropping of short-growing grain legumes with tall cereals give higher productivity than corresponding sole crops (Rao and Willey, 1983). Field pea (Pisum sativum), one of the important pulse crops of the winter Based on a part of Ph.D. Thesis of the first author, submitted to the Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, in 2015 (unpublished) 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected]; [email protected] 1 Scientist, ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya 793 103; 2Professor, Department of Agronomy.

season, has great potential to contribute to the pulse basket in India. During the recent past, Maize, the queen of cereals, has been used as vegetable where unfertilized young cob is used for cooking purpose, popularly known as baby corn (Zea mays L.) (Barod et al., 2012). Introduction of baby corn during off-season (winter months), because of its photo- and thermo-insensitiveness will promote nutritive dish of the people and also fetch additional income to farming community. Normally, baby corn is planted in wider rows and a considerable portion of the incident solar radiation remains un-intercepted due to poor canopy development because of its slow growth during the winter season. Slow crop growth during the winter months provide ample opportunity to the growth of weeds. Maintenance of adequate crop cover turns the competition in favour of crop. Intercropping itself has been found helpful in limiting weed population by way of cutting light to

158

[Vol. 63, No. 2

DEVI AND SINGH

them. So field pea may be introduced between the rows of baby corn. Intercropping of legumes with maize has been found to give yield advantage owing to efficient utilization of growth resources and maintenance of soil health (Singh et al., 1998). Mishra (2014) reported that maize + field pea intercropping system resulted an extra advantage of 85.6% in terms of maize-equivalent yield over sole maize. Development of feasible and economically viable intercropping system depends largely on adoption of proper planting pattern as well as weed management. Efficiency of production in intercropping system could be improved by minimizing inter-specific competition between the component crops. Planting pattern alters the space available to individual plant; hence the degree of competition for natural resources becomes variable between component crops. Appropriation of suitable planting pattern is thus, necessary to bring the competition to the minimum level. Pandey et al. (1999) at the Vivekananda Parvatiya Krishi Anusandhan Shala (VPKAS), Almora, Uttarakhand, found that soybean yield under paired rows of maize (30/90 cm) + soybean in 2 : 2 row was 46.7% higher than that of maize (45/90 cm) + soybean in 2 : 2 row ratio. Aravinth et al. (2011) at the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Univesity (TNAU), Coimbatore, found that different intercrops did not influence the growth parameters (plant height, leaf-area index and dry-matter production) of baby corn. They found that baby corn raised at 60 cm × 5 cm planting geometry produced taller plants, higher leaf area index and more dry matter than that at 45 cm × 25 cm. Weeds are one of the major obstacles that severely affect the productivity and quality of the component crops. Weeds compete with the crop plants for nutrients, moisture and light and thus, reduce the yield considerably. Gopinath et al. (2009) revealed that season-long crop-weed competition reduced the green pod yield of garden pea by 74% in 2003–2004 and 93% in 2004–2005 under Indian Himalayas condition. Keeping the above points in view, the experiment was conducted to see the response of field pea and baby corn to planting pattern and weed management in field pea + baby corn intercropping system. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted during the winter (rabi) seasons of 2011–12 and 2012–13 at Dr Norman E. Borlaug Crop Research Centre, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, Uttarakhand (29o N, 79.3 o E and 243.84 m above mean sea-level). The maximum temperature during the crop season of 2011–12 and 2012–13 ranged between 17.5 and 36.5oC and 12.0–40.6oC, respectively. The minimum temperature during the same period ranged between 3.7 and 21.5oC and 2.5–23.7oC respectively. A total rainfall of 1.16

mm and 5.44 mm were received during the crop season of 2011–12 and 2012–13 respectively. There was frost in the second fortnight of January during 2012–2013. The soil was sandy loam, high in organic carbon (0.79%), low in available nitrogen (210.6 kg N/ha) and medium in available phosphorus (16.5 kg P/ha) and potassium contents (184.7 kg K/ha) and neutral in soil reaction (pH 7.3). The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with 3 replications. Main plot consisted of 4 planting patterns, viz. sole field pea (30 cm), sole baby corn (45 cm), maize + field pea (1:1) and paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2) and sub-plot consisted of 4 weed-management practices, viz. weedy check, hand-weeding at 30 days after sowing (DAS), pre-emergence (PE) application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and post-emergence (POE) application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha at 30 DAS. Maize crop was fertilized with 120, 60 and 40 kg/ha of N, P2O5 and K2O through urea, single super phosphate and muriate of potash respectively. Half dose of nitrogen and full dose of P2O5 and K2O were applied basal in all the plots and remaining N was applied at days after sowing as top-dressing. A dose of 18 kg N, 48 kg P2O5 and 24 kg K2O/ha was applied to field pea sole through NPK mixture (12 : 32 : 16) @150 kg/ha as basal. No additional dose of fertilizer to pea was given to intercropping system. Different observations related to yield and its attributes were recorded following the standard procedures. Landequivalent ratio (LER) was calculated as: Y1i LER =

Y1s

Y2i +

Y2s

where Y1i and Y1s are the intercrop and sole crop yields of component 1 and Y2i and Y2s are the intercrop and sole crop yields of component 2 respectively. Crop-equivalent yield was computed with the help of following formula: Y1P1 = Y2P2 where Y1 and Y2 are the yields of component 1 and 2, respectively, and P1 and P2 are the prices of component 1 and 2 respectively. Cost of cultivation of sole and intercropping system was calculated on the basis of prevailing market price of different inputs like labour, implements, seeds, fertilizers and herbicides, used in cultivation of crops under different treatments. The grain and straw yields of field pea, fresh weight of baby corn and stover yield of maize were computed into gross return on the basis of prevailing local market prices of produce (grain, baby corn and straw/stover). The net return of each treatment was calculated by deducting the cost of cultivation from the gross return of individual treatment. Benefit: cost (B : C) ratio was obtained by dividing the net return by cost of cultivation.

June 2018]

159

PERFORMANCE OF FIELD PEA AND BABY CORN INTERCROPPING

The data collected for various parameters were subjected to analysis by using STPR-1, programme developed by Department of Statistics and Mathematics, College of Basic Science and Humanities, Pantnagar. Comparison of treatment means was done using critical differences (CD) at 5% level of significance. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Field pea

Yield attributes: Sole field pea (30 cm) produced significantly higher pods/plant than both the intercropping systems (Table 1). Possible reasons for higher pods/plant in sole field pea plots might be attributed to no inter-specific competition, more number of pod-bearing branches and better utilization of nitrogen being applied as a starter dose and fixed by root nodule. Shading by the taller component resulted in flower and pod dropping, which ultimately decreased number of pods/plant in intercropping systems. Similar results were reported by Khan et al. (2012) and Das et al. (2013) in mungbean and soybean when they found higher pods/plant in monoculture as compared to their corresponding intercropping with maize. Among the weed-management practices, handweeding (30 DAS) resulted in statistically similar number of pods/plant as PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha. Planting patterns had no significant effect on grains/pod, but hand-weeding (30 DAS) resulted in significantly higher grains/pod than remaining weed-management practices (Table 1). The maximum number of grains/pod in hand-weeding (30 DAS) might be due to less competition from weeds which provides ample space for the crop

plants to spread their source (leaves) which trapped solar radiation more efficiently than the remaining treatments resulting in more dry-matter accumulation which is the pre-requisite for better development of yield-attributing characters. Planting patterns and weed-management practices had no significant effect on 1,000- grain weight (Table 1). Sole field pea (30 cm) gave significantly more grain yield/plant than both the intercropping systems. Hand-weeding (30 DAS) recorded the highest grain yield/ plant (Table 1). Grain yield, straw yield and harvest index: On an average, sole field pea yielded 85.3 and 61.4% more grain yield than maize + field pea (1:1) and paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2) respectively (Table 1). Higher yield of field pea in the treatments where it was grown alone might be owing to higher planting density, plant height and higher values of yield-attributing characters like pods/ plant, grains/pod and grain yield/plant. On an average, hand-weeding (30 DAS), PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) resulted in 50.8, 31.6 and 24.0% higher yield over weedy check respectively. The higher grain yield in these treatments could be attributed to improvement in yield components which was the result of lower crop-weed competition, which shifted the balance in favour of crop in the utilization of nutrients, moisture, light and space. The interaction between planting patterns and weed-management practices with respect to grain yield/ha was significant during both the years (Table 2). Sole field pea (30 cm) recorded the highest grain yield which was significantly higher than paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea

Table 1. Effect of planting patterns and weed-management practices on yield attributes, grain and straw yields and harvest index of field pea (data pooled over 2 years) Treatment

Pods/plant

Grains/pod

1,000-grain weight (g)

Grain yield/ plant (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Straw yield (t/ha)

Harvest index (%)

Planting pattern Sole field pea (30 cm) 18.5 Maize + field pea (1:1) 17.4 Paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2) 17.6 SEm± 0.2 CD (P=0.05) 0.6

5.9 5.6 5.7 0.1 NS

154.4 152.7 151.3 4.0 NS

17.6 16.9 17.0 0.2 0.6

1.85 1.00 1.15 0.05 0.20

2.90 2.46 2.27 0.07 0.28

38.4 29.0 32.4 0.9 3.2

Weed management Weedy Hand-weeding (30 DAS) Pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (PE) Imazethapyr 50 g/ha (PoE, 30 DAS) SEm± CD (P=0.05)

5.3 6.2 5.8 5.7 0.1 0.4

150.4 152.2 149.7 159.0 3.2 NS

14.9 18.8 17.9 17.1 0.2 0.5

1.05 1.59 1.38 1.30 0.04 0.11

2.40 2.70 2.52 2.55 0.05 0.14

29.5 35.9 34.6 33.0 0.8 2.3

16.5 19.1 18.5 17.2 0.2 0.7

DAS, Days after sowing; PE, pre-emergence; PoE, post-emergence

160

[Vol. 63, No. 2

DEVI AND SINGH

(2 : 2) and maize + field pea (1 : 1) under all weed-management practices. Hand-weeding (30 DAS) recorded the highest grain yield under all planting patterns, and the lowest yield was found in weedy check under all planting patterns. On an average, increase in straw yield in sole field pea than maize + field pea (1 : 1) and paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2) was 18.0 and 27.9% respectively (Table 1). This was mainly owing to higher plant population in sole planting of field pea. Similar results were reported by Barod et al. (2017), who reported significantly higher grain and straw yields in sole crop of pigeonpea and mungbean than their intercropping with pearlmillet. On an average, hand-weeding (30 DAS), PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) resulted 12.6, 5.0 and 6.1% higher straw yield over weedy check respectively. The highest harvest index was observed in field pea sole (30 cm) which was significantly higher than both the inter-

cropping systems (Table 1). Oljaca et al. (2000) and Das et al. (2013) also reported similar results, who observed lower HI of soybean under intercropping system compared to that in sole cropping. Hand-weeding (30 DAS) being at par with PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ ha), recorded significantly higher harvest index than remaining weed-management practices. Baby corn

Number of baby cobs/plant: Planting patterns had no significant effect on the number of baby cobs/plant (Table 3). Hand-weeding (30 DAS) resulted in comparatively more number of baby cobs/plant than PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha, PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) and weedy check. Baby corn and stover yield: The yield of baby corn under different planting patterns was statistically similar (Table 3). On an average, hand-weeding (30 DAS), PE

Table 2. Interaction between planting pattern and weed management on grain yield of field pea (data pooled over 2 years) Planting pattern

Grain yield (t/ha)

Sole field pea (30 cm) Maize + field pea (1 : 1) Paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2 : 2)

Weedy

Hand-weeding (30 DAS)

Pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (PE)

Imazethapyr 50 g/ha (PoE, 30 DAS)

1.48 0.79 0.89

2.21 1.14 1.41

1.85 1.12 1.18

1.85 9.57 1.10

SEm± 0.06 0.08

Comparison between 2 planting patterns at same weed management Comparison between 2 weed managements at same planting pattern

CD (P=0.05) 0.19 0.26

DAS, Days after sowing; PE, pre-emergence; PoE, post-emergence Table 3. Effect of planting patterns and weed-management practices on number of baby cobs/plant, baby corn and stover yields of baby corn, land-equivalent ratio (LER), field pea-equivalent yield and economics (data pooled over 2 years) Treatment

Baby cobs/ plant

Baby corn yield (t/ha)

Stover yield (t/ha)

LER

Field pea equivalent yield (t/ha)

Planting pattern Sole field pea (30 cm) Sole baby corn (45 cm) Maize + field pea (1:1) Paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2) SEm± CD (P=0.05)

– 3.0 2.7 2.8 0.05 NS

– 0.81 0.76 0.78 0.02 NS

– 3.55 1.59 1.80 0.05 0.21

1.00 1.00 1.52 1.61 0.02 0.09

1.85 1.45 2.36 2.54 0.06 0.20

18.6 24.3 27.5 27.5 – –

40.0 25.1 48.6 53.3 – –

2.15 1.04 1.77 1.95 – –

Weed management Weedy Hand-weeding (30 DAS) Pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (PE) Imazethapyr 50 g/ha (PoE, 30 DAS) SEm± CD (P=0.05)

2.5 3.2 2.9 2.8 0.05 0.16

0.54 0.92 0.90 0.78 0.02 0.05

1.95 2.59 2.71 2.02 0.06 0.17

1.07 1.04 1.04 1.01 0.05 NS

1.51 2.43 2.23 2.02 0.04 0.12

23.1 25.7 24.9 24.2 – –

43.8 77.8 71.4 62.3 – –

1.91 3.04 2.87 2.58 – –

DAS, Days after sowing; PE, pre-emergence; PoE, post-emergence; NS, non-significant

Cost of Net cultivation returns (× 103 /ha) (× 103 /ha)

Benefit: cost ratio

June 2018]

161

PERFORMANCE OF FIELD PEA AND BABY CORN INTERCROPPING

Table 4. Interaction between planting pattern and weed management on baby corn yield (data pooled over 2 years) Planting pattern Weedy Sole baby corn (30 cm) Maize + field pea (1:1) Paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2)

0.53 0.50 0.58

Baby corn yield (t/ha) Hand-weeding Pendimethalin (30 DAS) 1 kg/ha (PE) 1.00 0.83 0.95

Imazethapyr 50 g/ha (PoE, 30 DAS)

0.90 0.91 0.88 SEm± 0.03 0.03

Comparison between 2 planting patterns at same weed management Comparison between 2 weed managements at same planting pattern

0.81 0.81 0.71 CD (P=0.05) 0.08 0.11

DAS, Days after sowing; PE, pre-emergence; PoE, post-emergence

application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) resulted in 72.6, 67.2 and 45.5% higher baby corn yield over weedy check respectively. The higher baby corn yield in hand-weeding (30 DAS) and herbicide-treated plots was owing to better growth and development of baby corn plants as a result of less competition from weeds for light, water, nutrients, carbon dioxide, etc. as a result of better control of weeds. Interaction between planting pattern and weed management on baby corn yield/ha was significant (Table 4). Hand-weeded (30 DAS) plots gave more baby corn yield under different planting patterns. On an average, sole baby corn gave 123.1 and 97.3% more stover yield over maize + field pea (1 : 1) and paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2 : 2) respectively (Table 3). This was mainly owing to better growth and dry-matter accumulation in sole baby corn. Similar results were reported by Singh et al. (2017), who reported reduction in straw yield of associated cereal crop, i.e. barley in an intercropping system with chickpea. Among the weed-management practices, on an average, hand-weeding (30 DAS), PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha and PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) resulted in 33.3, 39.2 and 3.5% higher stover yield over weedy check respectively. These results confirm the findings of Sinha et al. (2001) and Shinde et al. (2001), who found that use of herbicides to control weeds resulted in increased plant height, plant population and stover yield. Land equivalent ratio: Land-equivalent ratio (LER) differed significantly only due to planting pattern (Table 3). Both the intercropping systems had higher LER than sole field pea or baby corn. Yield advantages occurred owing to the development of both temporal and spatial complementarities. The results agreed with the findings of Dahmardeh et al. (2010) who reported that LER values were greater in all intercropping systems of maize and cowpea than their sole crops. Field pea equivalent yield: Both the intercropping systems had higher field pea-equivalent yield than sole plant-

ing of either field pea or baby corn (Table 3). This was mainly owing to additional advantage of intercrops yield and higher economic values of intercrops. Field peaequivalent yield was the highest for hand-weeding (30 DAS) which was followed by PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha, PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) and weedy check. Economics

The net returns was higher from both the intercropping systems than sole planting of either field pea or baby corn (Table 3). The highest net return was found in handweeded (30 DAS) plots which was followed by PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha, PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) and weedy check. The highest benefit: cost ratio was found in field pea sole (30 cm) (2.15), which was followed by paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2:2) (1.95), maize + field pea (1:1) (1.77) and sole baby corn (45 cm) (1.04) (Table 3). Hand-weeding (30 DAS) had the highest benefit: cost ratio (3.04) which was followed by PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (2.87), PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) (2.58) and weedy check (1.91). Hand-weeding (30 DAS) fetched higher net return (77.80 × 103 /ha) as well as benefit: cost ratio (3.04) which might be owing to higher combined intercrop yield. It may be concluded that paired maize (30/60 cm) + field pea (2 : 2) proved more remunerative and efficient in terms of land utilization (LER) and yield advantage (field pea equivalent yield) than maize + field pea (1:1) and sole planting of either field pea or baby corn. Hand-weeding (30 DAS) was found more beneficial than PE application of pendimethalin 1 kg/ha, PoE application of imazethapyr 50 g/ha (30 DAS) and weedy check. REFERENCES Aravinth, V., Kuppuswamy, G. and Ganapathy, M. 2011. Growth and yield of baby corn (Zea mays) as influenced by intercropping, plant geometry and nutrient management. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 81(9): 875–877.

162

DEVI AND SINGH

Barod, N.K., Dhar, S. and Kumar, A. 2012. Effect of nutrient sources and weed control methods on yield and economics of baby corn (Zea mays). Indian Journal of Agronomy 57(1): 96–99. Barod, N.K., Kumar, S., Dhaka, A.K. and Kathwal, R. 2017. Evaluation of intercropping systems involving pearlmillet (Pennisetum typhoides) and mungbean (Vigna radiata) as intercrop in pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan). Indian Journal of Agronomy 62(2): 170–173. Dahmardeh, M., Ghanbari, A., Syahsar, B.A. and Ramrodi, M. 2010. The role of intercropping maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) on yield and soil chemical properties. African Journal of Agricultural Research 5(8): 631–636. Das, A.K., Khaliq, Q.A. and Haider, M.L. 2013. Effect of planting configurations on yield and yield components in maize + soybean and maize + bushbean intercropping system. International Journal of Experimental Agriculture 3(1): 38–45. Gopinath, K.A., Kumar, N., Banshi, L., Mina, A., Srivastva, K. and Gupta, H.S. 2009. Evaluation of mulching, stale seedbed, hand weeding and hoeing for weed control in organic garden pea (Pisum sativum sub sp. hortense L.). Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 55(1): 115–123. Khan, M.A., Naveed, K., Ali, K., Ahmad, B. and Jan, S. 2012. Impact of mungbean–maize intercropping on growth and yield of mungbean. Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research 18(2): 191–200. Mishra, A. 2014. Effect of winter maize-based intercropping systems on maize yield, associated weeds and economic efficiency. Comunicata Scientiae 5(2): 110–117.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Oljaca, S., Cvetkovic, R., Kavacevic, D., Vasic, G. and Momirovic, N. 2000. Effect of plant arrangement pattern and irrigation on efficiency of maize (Zea mays) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) intercropping system. Journal of Agricultural Science 135(3): 261–270. Pandey, A.K., Prakash, V., Singh, R.D. and Mani, V.P. 1999. Effect of intercropping pattern of maize (Zea mays) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merril] on yield and economics under mid-hills of N-W Himalayas. Annals of Agricultural Research 20(3): 354–359. Rao, M.R. and Willey, R.W. 1983. Effect of genotypes in cereal/ pigeonpea intercropping on alfisols of semi-arid tropics of India. Experimental Agriculture 19: 67–78. Shinde, S.H., Kolage, A.K. and Bhilare, R.L. 2001. Effect of weed control on growth and yield of maize. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities 26(2): 212–213. Singh, B., Dhaka, A.K., Kumar, S., Singh, S. and Kumar, M. 2017. Land, biological and economic evaluation of intercropping systems involving barley (Hordeum vulgare), Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum) under different spatial arrangements. Indian Journal of Agronomy 62(4): 443–450. Singh, M.K., Thakur, R., Verma, U.N., Pal, S.K. and Pasupalak, S. 1998. Productivity and nutrient balance of maize (Zea mays) + blackgram (Phaseolus mungo) intercropping as affected by fertilizer and plant density. Indian Journal of Agronomy 43(3): 495–500. Sinha, S.P., Prasad, S.M. and Singh, S.J. 2001. Response of winter maize (Zea mays) to integrated weed management. Indian Journal of Agronomy 46(3): 485–488.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 163__167 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Effect of acetolactate synthase inhibitor herbicides with 2, 4-D ethyl ester on complex weed flora in transplanted rice (Oryza sativa) S.K. TRIPATHY1, S. MOHAPATRA2 AND A.K. MOHANTY3

Regional Research and Technology Transfer Station, Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology, Chiplima, Odisha 768 025 Received : September 2017; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2015 and 2016 at Chiplima, Odisha, to evaluate acetolactate synthase herbicides with 2,4-D ethyl ester for control of complex weed flora in transplanted rice (Oryza sativa L.). Post-emergence application of bispyribac sodium @ 20 g/ha, penoxsulam @ 22.5 g/ha, chlorimuron + metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha in sole as well as in combination with 2, 4-D ethyl ester @ 200 g/ha, effectively controlled Marsilea quadrifolia L., Ludwigia perennis L. and Ammnia baccifera L. Weeds reduced the grain yield of rice by 37.6%. Application of 2, 4-D ethyl ester alone was not effective against grassy weeds and aquatic fern (Marsilea quadrifolia L.) and bispyribac, penoxsulam and chlorimuron + metsulfuron were not much effective against Ammania baccifera and Cyperus difformis L. However, 2, 4-D ethyl ester in combination with bispyribac or penoxsulam was comparable to weed-free treatment in reducing the weed density. Tank-mix application of bispyribac sodium with 2, 4-D ethyl ester (20 + 200 g/ha) proved the most effective in minimizing Cyperus spp. and Ammania baccifera along with total control of Echinochloa spp., Marsilea quadrifolia and Ludwigia perennis. This treatment also resulted in the minimum total weed density (8.1/m2), biomass (11.1 g/m2) comparable to weedfree condition and the highest grain yield (5.97 t/ha), net returns (51.8 × 103 /ha) and benefit: cost ratio (1.4) .

Key words : Bispyribac sodium, Chlorimuron ethyl + metsulfuron methyl, Penoxsulam, Rice, 2, 4-D ethyl ester, Weed management

Rice–rice cropping system is very popular in Hirakud command area of Odisha because of its higher yield potential as well as assured procurement price. Among different production factors, weed competition is one of the prime limiting biotic constraints resulting in a reduction of 28– 45% in the yield of transplanted rice (Singh et al., 2003). 2, 4-D ethyl ester is commonly used herbicide for control of weeds in rice due to its low cost ( 350/L). But this is not effective against aquatic fern such as Marsilea quadrifolia and grassy weeds. Acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitor herbicides have become popular because of their excellent control of wide-spectrum weed flora which includes aquatic ferns also. Besides this, it worked well in flooded soil of low-land situation resembling that of rice–rice eco-system (Jabusch and Tjeerdema, 2006). Herbicides with different mode of action when mixed together, bind with different target sites of the weeds and prevent the probability of resistance in susceptible weed species (Paswan et al., 2012). Thus, herbicide combina1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Senior Agronomist, 3Associate Director of Research

1,2

tion has become one of the options for control of complex weed flora. In the light of these facts, the present investigation was proposed to examine the possibility of suitable acetolactate synthase herbicides to be tank mixed with 2, 4-D ethyl ester to widen the weed-control spectrum in transplanted rice. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was undertaken at Regional Research and Technology Transfer Station, Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology, Chiplima, Sambalpur, Odisha, during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2015 and 2016. The soil of the experimental field was sandy clay loam with acidic in reaction (pH 5.8), having organic carbon 0.38% and available N (KMnO4 method), P (Olsen) and K (NH4OHC method) content of 187, 15.4 and 172 kg/ha respectively. The total rainfall received during crop season was 865 and 925 mm during 2015 and 2016 respectively. Nine treatments consisting of T1, 2, 4-D ethyl ester 38% EC @ 200 g/ha; T2, penoxsulam 24% SC @ 22.5 g/ha); T 3, bispyribac sodium 10 EC @ 20 g/ha; T 4,

164

TRIPATHY ET AL.

chlorimuron ethyl + metsulfuron methyl 20 WP @ 4 g/ha); T5, 2, 4-D ethyl ester + penoxsulam (200 + 22.5 g/ha); T6, 2, 4-D ethyl ester + bispyribac sodium (200 + 20 g/ha); T7, 2, 4-D ethyl ester + chlorimuron ethyl + metsulfuron methyl (200 + 4 g/ha); T8, weed-free; and T9, weedy check were tried in a randomized block design with 3 replications. All the herbicides were applied 20 days after transplanting. The combined applications of herbicides are tank-mixed. The rice cultivar MTU 1001 of 135 days was transplanted at a spacing of 20 cm × 10 cm. A common fertilizer dose of 80, 40 and 40 kg N, P2O5 and K2O/ha, in the form of urea, diammonium phosphate and muriate of potash, respectively was applied to each experimental unit. Full dose of phosphorus and half dose of potassium and nitrogen were applied basal and the remaining N and P were top-dressed in 2 equal splits, at the maximum tillering and panicle-initiation stages of the crop. The required quantity of herbicides were applied with manually operated knapsack sprayer fitted with flat-fan nozzle using a spray volume of 500 litres of water/ha. Water in the field was drained before application of herbicides to expose the weed and irrigated 1 day after application. Weed counts (numbers/m2) and biomass (g/m2) were taken as random samples from 2 places in the field with the help of (0.5 × 0.5 m) quadrant at 45 days after transplanting (DAT). The weed samples were air dried in shade initially followed by oven drying at 65oC for 48 h or till they attain constant weight. Data on weed density and biomass were subjected to square-root transformation before statistical analysis to normalize their distribution (Gomez and Gomez, 2010). The crop was harvested at full physiological maturity, sun-dried for a week and threshed manually. All the biometrical observation on crop and weeds were observed as per the standard practices. Weed-control efficiency (WCE) and weed index (WI) were calculated based on the weed biomass and rice grain yield respectively. Economics of different treatments was computed taking into prevailing minimum market prices for inputs used and output obtained from each treatment. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Effect on weeds

Rice field was infested with grasses, sedges and broadleaf weeds. However, the weed flora was dominated by sedges like Cyperus difformis L. and Cyperus iria L., constituting 27.8 and 16% of total weed flora respectively. Among grasses, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv and Echinochloa colonum (L.) Link. constitute 9.6 and 16% of total weed flora respectively. Among the broad-leaf weeds, Ammania baccifera (L.) Roxb., Marsilea quadrifolia L. and Ludwigia perennis L. constitute 12.8, 9.9 and 7.8% of total weed flora respectively (Table 1).

[Vol. 63, No. 2

All treatments were significantly superior to weedy check in reducing the count of E. crus-galli and E. colonum except 2, 4-D ethyle ester which was not effective against grasses, meant for controlling broad-leaf weeds. Acetolactate synthase (ALS) herbicides (penoxsulam, bispyribac and chlorimuron + metsulfuron) alone and with 2, 4-D provided excellent control of Echinochloa spp. and was comparable with weed-free check. The activity of acetolactate synthase herbicides against grassy weeds has been well established (Yadav et al., 2008; Walia et al., 2008). 2, 4-D ethyl ester alone or in combination with acetolactate synthase herbicides effectively controlled Cyperus iria as good as weed-free treatment. It was not effective against broad-leaf weed Marsilea quadrifolia, as the weed count under the treatment (4.7/m2) was at par with that under weedy check (5.7/m2). Acetolactate synthase herbicides alone were less effective in controlling Cyperus difformis. Application of bispyribac sodium and penoxsulam alone or in combination with 2, 4-D ethyl ester gave effective control of Marsilea quadrifolia and other broad-leaf weeds. Rawat et al. (2012) reported effectiveness of bispyribac in combination with 2, 4-D ethyl ester in controlling broad-leaf weeds of rice. The same combination or sole application was also effective against Ludwigia perennis. Total weed density was less (19.1/m2) with sole application of bispyribac sodium followed by penoxsulam (21.6/m2) in comparison to 2, 4-D ethyl ester (31/m2). The lower weed density under these treatments might be due to broad-spectrum control of all grasses, sedges and broad-leaf weeds by these ALS herbicides. However, tank-mix application of bispyribac sodium with 2, 4-D ethyl ester was the best (8.1/m2) in control of all the weeds. The weed density under this treatment was statistically at par with weed-free treatment (Table 1). Among sole application of herbicide, the lowest biomass of Echinochloa spp. was found with bispyribac sodium (3.4 to 5.2 g/m2) followed by penoxsulam (4 to 7 g/m2), whereas the lowest Cyperus spp. biomass was found with sole application of 2, 4-D ethyl ester (4.9 to 11 g/m2). The tank-mix application of penoxsulam, bispyribac sodium and chlorimuron + metsulfuron with 2, 4-D ethyl ester resulted in lower weed biomass than that of their sole application. Total control of Echinochloa spp., M. quadrifolea and L. perennis was recorded by 2, 4-D ethyl ester + bispyribac sodium. All the herbicide combinations were equally effective for control of sedges (C. difformis and C. iria). Sole application of 2, 4-D ethyl ester was less effective than their tank-mixture application due to the fact that field was infected with complex weed flora and this being basically herbicides of only broad-leaf weeds, failed to control grassy weeds (Echinochloa spp.). However, all the

EC, Echinochloa colonum; ECr, Echinochloa crus-galli; CD, Cyperus difformis; CI, Cyperus iria; AB, Ammania baccifera; MQ, Marsilea quadrifolia; LP, Ludwigia perennis. Data subjected to square root transformation (√x+1); values in the parentheses are transformed values

0.0 (1.0) 89.3 (9.5) 0.6 1.8 0 (1.0) 1.8 (1.7) 0.1 0.3 0.0 (1.0) 2.2 (1.8) 0.1 0.4 0.0 (1.0) 2.8 (1.9) 0.1 0.3 0.0 (1.0) 14.7 (4.0) 0.1 0.3 0.0 (1.0) 24.0 (5.0) 0.1 0.4 0.0 (1.0) 26.7 (5.3) 0.2 0.5 0.0 (1.0) 17.1 (4.2) 0.1 0.4 0.0 (1.0) 9.2 (3.0) 0.1 0.4 0.0 (1.0) 5.5 (2.5) 0.2 0.6

0.0 (1.0) 16.0 (4.1) 0.3 0.9

0.0 (1.0) 9.2 (3.2) 0.1 0.3

0.0 (1.0) 7.4 (2.9) 0.2 0.5

0.0 (1.0) 5.7 (2.6) 0.1 0.4

0.0 (1.0) 4.5 (2.3) 0.1 0.3

0.0 (1.0) 57.5 (7.6) 0.9 2.7

25.8 (5.2) 7.0 (2.8) 5.2 (2.5) 9.0 (3.2) 3.8 (2.2) 0.0 (1.0) 5.2 (2.5) 15.5 (4.1) 4.0 (2.2) 3.4 (2.1) 4.3 (2.3) 3.7 (2.2) 0.0 (1.0) 4.3 (2.3) 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 (2.4) (1.5) (1.0) (1.8) (1.5) (1.0) (1.6) 4.7 1.2 0.0 2.1 1.2 0.0 1.6 2.0 (1.7) 3.8 (2.2) 3.8 (2.2) 4.6 (2.4) 1.6 (1.6) 1.2 (1.5) 1.3 (1.5) 3.1 (2.0) 2.9 (1.9) 2.8 (1.9) 4.3 (2.3) 2.1 (1.8) 2.4 (1.8) 2.5 (1.9) 7.3 (2.9) 10.0 (3.3) 9.6 (3.3) 11.0 (3.5) 5.0 (2.4) 4.5 (2.3) 5.5 (2.5) 8.9 (3.0) 2.4 (1.5) 1.8 (1.3) 3.1 (1.8) 1.3 (1.1) 0.0 (0.0) 1.8 (1.3) 5.0 (2.4) 1.3 (1.5) 1.1 (1.4) 1.4 (1.5) 1.2 (1.5) 0.0 (1.0) 1.4 (1.5)

2,4-D Penoxsulam Bispyribac Chlorimuron +metsulfuron Penoxsulam + 2,4-D Bispyribac + 2,4-D Chlorimuron + metsulfuron + 2, 4-D Weed-free Weedy check SEm± CD (P=0.05)

ECr EC

CD

Weed density (Nos./m2) CI AB

MQ

LP

(1.0) (1.0) (1.0) (1.5) (1.0) (1.0) (1.0)

31 (5.6) 21.6 (4.8) 19.1 (4.5) 27.8 (5.4) 12.4 (3.6) 8.1 (3.0) 14.1 (3.8)

ECr Total density

EC

11.0 (3.5) 15.0 (4.0) 14.4 (3.9) 16.5 (4.2) 7.5 (2.9) 6.8 (2.8) 8.3 (3.0)

4.9 4.6 4.5 6.8 3.4 3.8 4.0

(2.4) (2.4) (2.3) (2.8) (2.1) (2.2) (2.2)

0.7 1.4 1.4 1.7 0.6 0.5 0.5

(1.3) (1.5) (1.5) (1.6) (1.3) (1.2) (1.2)

1.8 0.5 0.0 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.6

(1.7) (1.2) (1.0) (1.3) (1.2) (1.0) (1.3)

0 (1.0) 0 (1.0) 0 (1.0) 0.5 (1.2) 0 (1.0) 0 (1.0) 0 (1.0)

59.7 32.5 28.9 39.6 19.5 11.1 22.9

(7.8) (5.8) (5.5) (6.4) (4.5) (3.5) (4.9)

EFFECT OF ACETOLACTATE SYNTHASE INHIBITOR ON WEEDS IN TRANSPLANTED RICE

Treatment

Table 1. Effect of weed management practices on weed density and biomass at 45 days after transplanting in rice (mean data of 2 years)

CD

Weed biomass (g/m2) CI AB

MQ

LP

Total biomass

June 2018]

165

herbicides were effective over weedy check in this respect. Weed-control efficiency of herbicide tank mixture were superior to their sole applications (Table 2). The highest weed-control efficiency (89.7%) was achieved by bispyribac sodium + 2, 4-D ethyl ester as post-emergence. The efficacy of this treatment was 71.8 to 73.8% for Cyperus spp, 82.1% for Ammania baccifera and 100% Echinochloa spp., Marsilea quadrifolia and Ludwigia perennis. In their sole application, bispyribac was effective against most of the weeds only except A. baccifera (50%) which was better controlled by 2, 4-D ethyl ester (75%) and both were equally effective against L. perennis (100%) Data on weed index showed the least yield reduction (2.4%) with tank-mix of bispyribac sodium + 2,4-D ethyl ester followed by penoxsulam + 2,4-D ethyl ester (4.7%) and chlorimuron + metsulfuron + 2,4-D ethyl ester (5.7%), whereas yield reduction varied from 10.6 to 22.1% in the sole herbicide applied plots as compared to weed-free treatment. The weed index was lower in all the treatment as compared to weedy check. Yield attributes and yield

The herbicide treatments affected the number of effective tillers and number of grains/panicle. Effective tillers/ m2 and grains/panicle which were the highest with 2, 4-D ethyl ester + bispyribac sodium, were at par with that of weed-free treatment (Table 3). Data on effective tillers and grains/panicle showed that all the tank mixtures of herbicides penoxsulam, bispyribac sodium, chlorimuron + metsulfuron with 2, 4-D ethyl ester were at par, whereas their effect was significantly superior to sole application of all the herbicides. The complex weed flora comprising grasses, sedges and broad-leaf weeds caused reduction of 37.6% in grain yield in weedy check as compared to weedfree treatment (6.12 t/ha). Among the tank-mix application, the highest grain yield (5.97 t/ha) was recorded with bispyribac sodium + 2, 4-D ethyl ester which was at par with weed-free check. Bispyribac sodium + 2,4-D ethyl ester, penoxsulam + 2,4-D ethyl ester and chlorimuron + metsulfuron + 2,4-D ethyl ester resulted in an average increase of 36.0, 34.4 and 33.7% in grain yield as compared to the weedy check. Sole application of bispyribac sodium, chlorimuron + metsulfuron and penoxsulam recorded lower grain yield than their tank-mix application with 2,4D ethyl ester which was possibly due to their ineffectiveness to control A. baccifera and C. difformis, resulting in lower weed-control efficiency (Tables 1, 2). There was significant reduction of 8.4 and 14.3% of grain yield in bispyribac and penoxsulam treated plots as compared to their tank-mix with 2, 4-D ethyl ester. Rawat et al. (2012) also reported that, 2, 4-D ethyl ester did not provide any

166

TRIPATHY ET AL.

control of grassy weeds. Bispyribac sodium, penoxsulam and chlorimuron + metsulfuron were compatible with 2, 4D ethyl ester, as there site of action is different in the plant. The 2, 4-D ethyl ester, affects cell-wall plasticity and nucleic acid metabolism in plant, whereas bispyribac sodium, chlorimuron + metsulfuron and penoxsulam inhibit the synthesis of amino acids. Better performance of these treatments in terms of yield could be owing to better control of complex weed flora tilting the crop-weed proportion in favour of the crop. Rawat et al. (2012) observed that, post-emergence application of bispyribac sodium + 2, 4-D ethyl ester was as effective as the hand-weeding. Economics

All the herbicides alone or in tank-mix application re-

[Vol. 63, No. 2

corded higher monetary returns than their sole application and weedy check (Table 3). Among the chemical weedcontrol treatments, bispyribac sodium + 2, 4-D ethyl ester gave the maximum net returns ( 51.8×103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (1.4) followed by penoxsulam + 2, 4-D ethyl ester owing to low cost and high grain yield as compared to the other post-emergence herbicides. Dewangan et al. (2013) and Tripathy et al. (2016) also reported similar findings with tank-mix application of herbicides. Weed-free treatment though registered higher grain yield (6.12 t/ha), recorded lower monetary returns than tank-mix application of herbicide mixture, due to high cost incurred on manual weeding to keep the crop weed free. It can be concluded that penoxsulam, bispyribac sodium and chlorimuron + metsulfuron were compatible

Table 2. Effect of weed-management practices on weed-control efficiency and weed index at 45 days after transplanting in rice (mean data of 2 years) Treatment

2,4-D Penoxsulam Bispyribac Chlorimuron + metsulfuron Penoxsulam + 2,4-D Bispyribac + 2,4-D Chlorimuron + metsulfuron + 2, 4-D Weed-free Weedy check

EC

ECr

CD

9.3 76.4 80.1 74.6 78.2 100 74.6 100 0

3.4 73.9 80.4 66.3 85.8 100 80.4 100 0

54.2 37.5 40 31.2 68.7 71.8 65.6 100 0

WCE (%) CI AB 66.6 68.7 69.3 53.7 77.1 73.8 72.8 100 0

75.0 50.0 50.0 39.2 78.6 82.1 82.1 100 0

MQ

LP

Average

Weed index (%)

17.5 78.8 100 63.1 78.8 100 71.8 100 0

100 0 100 70.9 100 100 100 100 0

46.6 55.0 74.3 57.0 81.0 89.7 78.2 100.0 0.0

22.1 19.3 10.6 20.4 4.7 2.4 5.7 0 37.6

EC, Echinochloa colonum; ECr, Echinochloa crus-galli; CD, Cyperus difformis; CI, Cyperus iria; AB, Ammania baccifera; MQ, Marsilea quadrifolia; LP, Ludwigia peremis; WCE, Weed-control efficiency. Data subjected to square root transformation (√x+1); values in the parentheses are transformed values. Table 3. Effect of weed-management practices on yield attributes, yield and economics of rice (mean data of 2 years) Treatment

2,4-D Penoxsulam Bispyribac Chlorimuron + metsulfuron Penoxsulam + 2, 4-D Bispyribac + 2, 4-D Chlorimuron + metsulfuron + 2, 4-D Weed-free Weedy check SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Effective tillers/m2

Grains/ panicle

1,000grain Weight (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Straw yield (t/ha)

Gross returns (× 10 3 /ha)

Net returns (× 103 /ha)

Benefit: cost ratio

331 336 377 333 413 419 397 421 263 7.7 23.3

117 115 119 113 122 124 123 125 112 0.8 2.5

22.0 22.2 22.8 23.4 23.4 24.3 23.5 24.1 22 1.2 NS

4.77 4.94 5.47 4.87 5.83 5.97 5.77 6.12 3.82 0.1 0.3

5.67 5.87 6.50 5.79 6.93 7.09 6.86 7.27 4.18 0.6 1.7

71.8 74.4 82.3 73.2 87.7 89.9 86.8 92.1 53.9 – –

35.4 36.5 44.8 36.9 49.4 51.8 49.9 48.4 21.7 – –

1.0 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.1 0.6 – –

Input price ( /kg) rice seed, 22; urea, 5.52; dimmonium phosphate, 24.45; muriate of potash, 17.44; bispyribac sodium, 664/100 ml; chlorimuron +metsulfuron, 220/8 g, penoxsulam 740/35 ml, 2, 4-D ethyl ester, 174/500 ml. Sale rate of rice grain ( 14,100/t), rice straw ( 800/t) and manual labour ( 200/day).

June 2018]

EFFECT OF ACETOLACTATE SYNTHASE INHIBITOR ON WEEDS IN TRANSPLANTED RICE

with 2, 4-D ethyl ester and there was no adverse effect on crop growth. It successfully controlled the complex weed flora in rice. Application of bispyribac sodium @ 20 g/ha with 2, 4-D ethyl ester @ 200 g/ha 20 DAT was the most remunerative and effective herbicide mixtures for broad spectrum weed control in transplanted rice. REFERENCES Dewangan, D., Singh, A., Sahu, E. and Toppo, A.R. 2013. Effect of integrated weed management on weed flora distribution, weed dynamics and performance of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under system of rice intensification (SRI) in Chhattisgarh. Advance Research Journal of Crop Improvement 4(1): 79– 84. Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. 2010. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, 2nd edn. Wiley India Pvt. Ltd., India. Jabusch, T. W. and Tjeerdema, R. S. 2006. Photochemical degradation of penoxsulam. Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry 54: 5,958–5,961. Paswan, A.K., Kumar, R., Kumar, P. and Singh, R.K. 2012. Influ-

167

ence of metsulfuron –methyl and carfentrazone-ethyl either alone or in combination on weed flora, crop growth and yield in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Madras Agricultural Journal 99(7–9): 560–562. Rawat, A., Chaudhary, C.S., Upadhyaya, V.B. and Jain, V. 2012. Efficacy of bispyribac-sodium on wed flora and yield of drilled rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 44(3): 183–185. Singh, G., Singh, V.P., Singh, M. and Singh, S.P. 2003. Effect of anilophos and triclopyr on grassy and non-grassy weeds in transplanted rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 35(1 and 2): 30–32. Tripathy, S.K., Mohapatra, S. and Mohanty, A.K. 2016. Bio-efficacy of post-emergence herbicides for control of complex weed flora in drum-seeded rice (Oryza sativa). Indian Journal of Agronomy 61(4): 474–478. Walia, U.S., Singh, O., Nayyar, S. and Sindhu, V. 2008. Performance of post-emergence application of bispyribac sodium in dry seeded rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 40(3 and 4): 157–160. Yadav, D.B., Yadav, A. and Punia, S.S. 2008. Efficacy of penoxsulam against weeds in transplanted rice. Indian Journal of Weed Science 40(3 and 4): 142–146.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 168__173 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on summer rice (Oryza sativa) HEMLATA1, JITENDRA JOSHI2, S.L. MEENA3, A.L. RATHORE4, AMBIKA TANDON5 AND ANAMIKA SONIT6

Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492 012 Received: July 2017; Revised accepted: May 2018

ABSTRACT Field experiment was conducted during summer (Kharif) seasons of 2012 and 2013 at the research cum instructional farm of Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh to evaluate the effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on productivity and quality of summer rice (Oryza sativa L.). Out of the 3 methods of crop establishment, viz. direct-seeded rice (DSR), transplanted rice (TPR) and wet-seeded rice (WSR); TPR produced significantly higher grain yield (4.8 t/ha) which was statistically at par with direct-seeded rice (4.6 t/ha). Among the 4 methods of irrigation, viz. conventional irrigation, alternate wetting and drying, drip and sprinkler irrigation methods; drip irrigation recorded the maximum grain yield over the rest of the irrigation methods followed by recommended practice with respect to grain yield and quality parameters. TPR recorded maximum grain length which was statistically at par with DSR and minimum grain length was measured in WSR. Among methods of irrigation, drip irrigated crop attained maximum grain length which was statistically at par with recommended practice and conventional irrigation. Significant variations were observed in rice length due to crop establishment and irrigation methods. TPR and drip irrigation methods recorded the maximum rice grain length. TPR resulted in the highest net returns ( 37.05 × 103/ha) and benefit : cost ratio (1.34) among crop establishment methods; whereas among irrigation methods, drip irrigation recorded significantly higher net returns ( 44.14 × 103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (1.77).

Key words : Direct seeded rice, Drip irrigation, Quality parameters, Transplanted rice, Wet seeded rice

Rice is an important global food crop and provides food security for many countries. In the future climatic conditions, the yields of rice would be reduced depending on the growing-season and environmental conditions as present-day high temperatures have been implicated to cause reductions in rice yield in many rice-growing areas (Nagarajan et al., 2010; Wassmann et al., 2009a, b). In the rice-growing regions including those in tropical and subtropical regions, rice has already been cultivated as a summer crop despite relatively high temperatures that occur during its growth cycle (Sung et al., 2003). Rice is commonly grown by transplanting seedlings into puddled soil (wet tillage). This production system is labour, water and energy-intensive and is becoming less profitable as these resources are becoming increasingly 1

Corresponding author’s mail: [email protected] Subject Matter Specialist, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Anjora; 2Ph.D. Scholar, Raipur; 3Principal Scientist, Division of Agronomy, ICARIndian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi; 4Director of Extension Service; 5Assistant Professor, Agronomy; 6Farm Manager, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 1

scarce (Kumar and Ladha, 2011). These factors demand a major shift from transplanting to direct seeding of rice in irrigated ecosystem. Cultivation of rice during dry season offers a great potential for boosting and stabilizing the rice yield where kharif rice is having low productivity due to erratic rainfall distribution. Summer rice recorded higher productivity in shallow lowland areas, whereas productivity had traditionally been very poor during the wet season which is mainly because of the fact that summer rice is more manageable than the wet season rice (Singh, 2002; Singh et al., 2015). In these areas, farmers are shifting to summer rice cultivation by utilizing the harvested rain water stored in small ditches, village ponds and by tapping the ground water using shallow tube wells. Sowing pregerminated seeds in wet (saturated), puddled soils offer a good alternative method of crop establishment under such situation (Saha et al., 2012; Satapathy et al., 2016). Flood irrigation is common practice in canal command area where rice is grown. Improper irrigation methods and misconceptions are chief reasons for the high wastage of a scare resource. A large amount of water is lost in seepage

June 2018]

EFFECT OF CROP ESTABLISHMENT AND IRRIGATION METHODS ON SUMMER RICE

and percolation and also overflows through streams in canal command areas. Loss from seepage and percolation is estimated about 50% in heavy textured clay soils and 85% in light textured loamy sands and laterite soils (Rathore et al., 2000). In Chhattisgarh, farmers are growing summer rice both in canal and tube well commanded area. Tube well irrigation in summer rice is highly injudicious because of high energy use in lifting of groundwater which is scarce resource in the state. Alternate water management technologies for rice are needed to economize water use and improve rice productivity over existing level. Grain yield is not the only consideration in the cultivation of rice, and grain dimensions, the appearance in terms of colour, texture, and surface abnormalities and milling characteristics are also important factors regulating the popularity and marketability. There may be differences among cultivars in the ratio of imperfect rice incidence, suggesting that the cultivar difference in the pattern and severity of the incidence and the ripening capability at high temperature are genetically controlled. The quality characteristics of milled rice are classified both physically and chemically. Across the relative humidity range of 25– 85%, high air temperature produces higher amounts of broken grains. At higher moisture content levels, milled rice sustains more extensive stress crack damage at low relative humidity conditions and less stress crack damage at high relative humidity conditions, relative to milled rice at lower moisture content levels (Siebenmorgen et al., 1998). Thus, crop establishment and irrigation management are the important issues with regard to changing climatic as well as genotypic characteristics, which might be required distinct management practices in the field. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on the productivity quality and profitability of summer rice. MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experiment was conducted for 2 years during summer (kharif) seasons of 2012 and 2013 at research cum instructional farm of Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The growing season of summer rice was from end of December to May in the respective years. The soil was neutral in reaction (pH 7.3), medium in available nitrogen (318 kg/ha) and phosphorus (14.8 kg/ha) and rich in potassium (428 kg/ha). Experiment was divided into vertical and horizontal strip with strip plot design. The vertical strip was further divided into three methods of establishment i.e. direct seeded rice (DSR), wet direct seeded rice (WSR) and transplanted rice (TPR) as main plots and 4 methods of irrigation i.e. conventional irrigation, recommended practice, drip and sprinkler irri-

169

gation as sub-plots. Rice variety ‘MTU 1010’ was taken as test crop and treatments were laid out in strip plot design replicated thrice. Recommended fertilizer dose of 80–60– 40 kg NPK/ha was applied in all the treatments. Onefourth of nitrogen, full dose of P through DAP and K through muriate of potash was applied as basal at the time of transplanting/sowing in all the treatments. Remaining nitrogen was applied in three equal splits at early vegetative, active tillering and panicle initiation stages in both the years. The crop was established by using a seed rate of 40 kg/ha for TPR and 80 kg/ha for DSR and WSR during both the years. The field was prepared by ploughing with tractor drawn cultivar followed by cross harrowing to pulverize the soil and levelling of land was done through tractor drawn leveler. Puddling was done at sufficient water level for TPR and WSR treatments. Data were recorded at the time of harvesting and statistically analysed. Economics were calculated for crop establishment and irrigation methods based on prevailing minimum support price of rice and labour wages/man-day. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Crop phenology stages

Sowing of seeds was done on 1 st January in all the methods of crop-establishment. In the DSR, seeds were drilled directly in field, while seeds were sown in nursery for TPR on the same day. Emergence of rice seed took place 8–10 days after sowing, which indicates that low temperature inhibit germination and therefore sowing should be delayed up to mid-January when temperature starts rising. But it can delay the crop maturity and may coincide with onset of monsoon in June. Therefore, farmers prefer to WSR i.e. broadcast sprouted seed in puddled soil or prepare nursery using sprouted seed and subsequently transplant in the field. Although the sowing was done on the same day in all the 3 methods but establishment of crop occurred 9, 13 and 37 days after sowing of dry seeds respectively in DSR, WSR and TPR. The reproductive phase appeared within 45 days after sowing and booting stage occurred about 15–20 days later. However, TPR was delayed by 24 days over WSR and 27 days to DSR although flowering advanced by 2–5 days than DSR and 7–11 days over WSR. On an average, 50% flowering was recorded in TPR in 100 days whereas DSR and WSR took 102 and 108 days, respectively. In TPR, better roots growth and better nutrient uptake may be the reasons for advancement of crop stage in this study. Flooding and micro sprinkler irrigation delayed flowering by 7– 10 days, whereas maturity was delayed by 13 days as compared to DSR and drip irrigation. Limited water supply through drip irrigation also delayed flowering by 6–8 days and maturity by 13–14 days. When temperature dropped

170

HEMLATA ET AL.

from 24 to 21oC, there was a sharp increase in days to heading. Drip irrigation at 1.4 IW : CPE ratio advanced flowering by 7–10 days and maturity by 15 days over flooding and sprinkler irrigation (Sonit et al., 2015). An intermediate optimum temperature permits the most rapid development. Adverse temperature above the optimum cause a lengthening of the time required for development. Maturity of the crop varied in different treatments. In DSR, crop matured in 132–139 days whereas maturity in drip irrigated and conventional irrigation was recorded in 129-132 and 137–139 days, respectively. Delayed maturity in WSR was recorded by 138–145 days as compared to 132–137 days in drip irrigation. Drip irrigated plot in TPR matured in 125–130 days, whereas 129–136 days was taken for maturity by crop in conventional irrigation. On an average, the crop matured in 130, 135 and 138 days respectively in TPR, DSR and WSR. Normally transplanted crop matured in 130 days, whereas DSR and WSR were delayed by 5 and 8 days, respectively. Drip irrigation advanced crop maturity by a week over conventional flooding method. Thus, drip irrigation and transplanted rice matured about a week earlier than conventional irrigation and wet seeded rice.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

crop establishment methods, significantly highest number of tillers/m2 were recorded with DSR compared to TPR and remained statistically at par with WSR. Among the irrigation methods, drip irrigation recorded highest number of tillers/m2 compared to sprinkler irrigation and remained at par with other irrigation methods. Highest panicle length was recorded with TPR compared to WSR and remained statistically at par with DSR. Similar trend was also observed for panicle weight. Among the different irrigation methods, the highest panicle length and weight were recorded with drip irrigation compared to sprinkler irrigation; however, it remained at par with conventional irrigation and recommended practice. Yield

Grain yield differed significantly due to different crop establishment and irrigation methods (Table 1). TPR produced higher grain yield (4.8 t/ha) which was statistically similar to DSR (4.6 t/ha). Significantly lowest yield was recorded in WSR (3.5 t/ha). Rice crop irrigated with different method of irrigation behaved differently. Among various irrigation methods, drip irrigation produced significanly higher grain yield (5.3 t/ha) over the rest of the irrigation methods. Better yield in drip irrigated crop might be due to sufficient availability of water whereas, stress condition might have reduced the seed yield. Interaction between establishment and irrigation methods indicated that drip irrigated TPR gave statistically highest yield whereas it was statistically similar to conventional irrigation, recommended practice of irrigation to transplanted rice (Table 2). Similar trend was also reported by Sonit et al. (2015) who revealed that the maximum seed yield was accured in drip irrigation at 1.4 IW : CPE ratio

Growth and yield attributes

Significantly taller plants were recorded under TPR compared to WSR; however, it remained at par with DSR (Table 1). Among the different irrigation methods, drip irrigation recorded significantly higher plant height compared to sprinkler irrigation, although it remained at par with conventional irrigation and recommended practice. Number of tillers/m2 were significantly influenced due to crop establishment and irrigation methods. Among the

Table 1. Effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on growth, yield attributes and yield of summer rice (mean data of 2 years) Plant height (cm)

Tillers/m2 (Nos.)

Panicle length (cm)

Panicle weight (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Straw yield (t/ha)

Harvest index (%)

Crop establishment method DSR WSR TPR SEm± CD (P=0.05)

69.0 61.5 71.7 1.90 7.45

706.6 678.4 534.3 28.95 113.75

21.0 19.8 21.7 0.35 1.00

2.1 1.7 2.1 0.1 0.3

4.6 3.5 4.8 0.08 0.30

5.5 4.8 5.1 0.13 0.50

45.4 45.3 48.1 0.46 1.81

Irrigation method Conventional irrigation Recommended practice Drip irrigation Sprinkler irrigation SEm± CD (P=0.05)

67.3 69.5 70.8 62.1 1.89 7.02

722.2 731.5 809.7 571.3 37 128.1

20.5 21.1 21.6 19.3 0.35 1.10

2.0 2.0 2.1 1.7 0.1 0.3

4.3 4.4 5.3 3.7 0.17 0.60

5.3 5.4 5.5 4.4 0.09 0.30

45.1 45.0 48.8 46.1 0.89 NS

Treatment

DSR, Direct-seeded rice; WSR, wet-seeded rice; TPR, transplanted puddle rice

June 2018]

EFFECT OF CROP ESTABLISHMENT AND IRRIGATION METHODS ON SUMMER RICE

and remained statistically at par with traditional flooding. The above reasons might be responsible for low yield across the treatments and statistically similar seed yield in drip and conventional flooding treatments. The maximum straw yield was obtained under DSR which was significantly higher compared to WSR and remained at par with TPR. The significantly higher harvest index was registered with TPR compared to other crop establishment methods. The significantly higher straw yield (5.5 t/ha) was recorded with drip irrigation compared to sprinkler irrigation; however, it remained statistically at par with conventional irrigation and recommended practice. Table 2. Interaction of establishment and irrigation methods on seed yield (t/ha) of summer rice Treatment Irrigation method

DSR

Conventional irrigation Recommended practice Drip irrigation Sprinkler irrigation SEm± CD (P=0.05)

4.2 4.3 4.8 3.5 0.24 0.81

Establishment method WSR TPR 3.8 3.8 4.1 3.4 0.24 NS

4.5 4.6 5.8 3.6 0.26 0.84

Quality parameters

Data pertaining to length, breadth and L : B ratio of grain is presented in Table 3. Results revealed that different methods of crop-establishment and irrigation were unable to bring significant variation in length, breadth and L: B ratio of grain except grain length and breadth due to irrigation methods. TPR recorded maximum grain length and minimum grain length was recorded with WSR.

171

Among methods of irrigation, drip irrigated crop attained maximum grain length which was statistically at par with recommended practice and conventional irrigation and significantly superior than sprinkler irrigation. Minimum grain length was measured in sprinkler irrigation. Similar results were also found by Kumar et al. (1996), Pandey et al. (1999), and Dahiphale et al. (2004). Hulling, milling and head rice recovery varied significantly due to different methods of establishment and irrigation (Table 3). Among the crop-establishment methods, transplanted puddled rice recorded significantly higher hulling, milling and head rice recorded compared to DSR and WSR. Among the irrigation methods, recommended practice recorded significantly higher hulling, milling and head rice recovery compared to rest of the irrigation methods. Similar results were also found by Kumar et al. (1996), Pandey et al. (1999) and Dahiphale et al. (2004). Economics

Productivity of rice in irrigated areas has approached to plateau. Therefore, reduction in cost of cultivation is the need of hour for further increase in the output. There were significant differences in cost of cultivation, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio (B:C ratio) due to different methods of crop-establishment and irrigation except due to methods of establishment in B : C ratio (Table 4). It is evident from the data that among the crop-establishment mehtods, highest input cost of cultivation was recorded in TPR (`27.85 × 103/ha) and the lowest cost of cultivation was recorded under WSR (`24.72 × 103/ha). Among the different methods of irrigation, conventional irrigation registered highest total cost of cultivation

Table 3. Effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on quality parameters of summer rice (mean data of 2 years) Treatment

Grain length (mm)

Grain breadth (mm)

Grain L:B ratio

Hulling (%)

Milling (%)

Head rice recovery (%)

Crop establishment method DSR WSR TPR SEm± CD (P=0.05)

9.61 9.56 9.63 0.03 NS

2.48 2.41 2.53 0.04 NS

3.90 3.98 3.82 0.05 NS

74.8 74.7 76.1 0.03 0.09

65.4 65.3 67.6 0.02 0.07

51.6 53.1 53.6 0.04 0.14

Irrigation method Conventional irrigation Recommended practice Drip irrigation Sprinkler irrigation SEm± CD (P=0.05)

9.59 9.64 9.67 9.51 0.03 0.09

2.47 2.49 2.54 2.37 0.05 0.15

3.90 3.89 3.81 4.02 0.08 NS

77.2 77.3 76.4 75.9 0.05 0.16

66.8 67.8 66.8 64.9 0.03 0.11

54.0 55.5 53.1 51.0 0.06 0.23

DSR, Direct-seeded rice; WSR, wet-seeded rice; TPR, transplanted puddled rice

172

HEMLATA ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Table 4. Effect of crop establishment and irrigation methods on economics of summer rice Treatment

Cost of cultivation (× 103 `/ha)*

Gross returns (× 103 `/ha)

Net returns (× 103 `/ha)

Benefit: cost ratio

Crop establishment method DSR WSR TPR SEm± CD (P=0.05)

26.91 24.72 27.85 0.63 1.90

59.94 53.51 64.90 1.91 6.33

33.03 28.80 37.05 1.76 5.38

1.24 1.18 1.34 0.05 NS

Irrigation method Conventional irrigation Recommended Practice Drip irrigation Sprinkler irrigation SEm± CD (P=0.05)

29.46 26.92 24.75 24.84 0.69 2.01

58.67 60.45 68.90 49.79 2.17 6.51

29.31 33.53 44.14 24.95 1.85 5.54

0.99 1.24 1.77 1.01 0.06 114

*Irrigation charges with cost of drip system (Basic cost 1.20 lakh/ha, life 10 year for 3 seasons each year were included); DSR, directseeded rice; WSR, wet-seeded rice; TPR, transplanted puddled rice

(`29.46 × 103/ha). The minimum cost of cultivation was recorded under drip irrigation (`24.75× 103/ha). Among the crop-establishment methods, the maximum gross return was registered in TPR (`64.90× 103/ha). However, it was nearer to DSR in respect to gross returns (`59.94× 103/ha). The lowest gross returns was recorded under WSR (`53.51 × 103/ha). Among the irrigation methods, the maximum gross returns was registered in drip irrigation (`68.89 × 103/ha) and the lowest gross return was recorded under sprinkler irrigation (`49.79× 103/ha). Among methods of establishment, the maximum net returns was registered with TPR (`37.05 × 103/ha) which was nearer to DSR (`33.03 × 103/ha). The minimum net returns was recorded under WSR (`28.80 × 103/ha). With regards to methods of irrigation, maximum net return (`44.14 × 103/ha) was registered in drip irrigation which was significantly superior over the other treatments. The lowest net returns (`24.95 × 103/ha) was obtained under sprinkler irrigation. Different methods of establishment did not affect benefit : cost ratio significantly; however, the maximum value of benefit: cost ratio was registered with TPR (1.34) and it was similar to DSR (1.24). Among the methods of irrigation, drip irrigation recorded significantly higher benefit : cost ratio (1.77) compared to other irrigation methods and the minimum benefit : cost ratio was obtained under conventional irrigation (0.99). Based on the 2 years study, it can be concluded that the TPR method of rice cultivation was better option amongst the crop establishment methods and among the irrigation methods, drip irrigation resulted in significantly higher productivity, net returns and benefit : cost ratio. Therefore, it is suggested that for increased productivity and profit-

ability of the farmers rice can be grown through TPR method in conjunction with drip irrigation under summer rice conditions in Chhattisgarh. REFERENCES Dahiphale, A.V., Giri, D.G., Thakre, G.V. and Kubde, K.J. 2004. Yield and yield parameters of scented rice as influenced by integrated nutrient management. Annals of Plant Physiology 18(1): 207–208. Kumar, M., Haque, M., Singh, S.B. and Pathak, S.K. 1996. Effect of graded levels of nitrogen on yield and quality of scented rice varieties in Southern alluvial soil. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 48(2): 279–282. Kumar, V. and Ladha, J.K. 2011. Direct-seeded rice: recent developments and future research needs. Advances in Agronomy 111: 297–413. Nagarajan, S., Jagadish, S.V.K., Hari Prasad, A.S., Thomar, A.K., Anand, A., Pal, M. and Agarwal, P.K. 2010. Local climate affects growth, yield and grain quality of aromatic and nonaromatic rice in northwestern India. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 138: 274–281. Pandey, N., Sarawgi, A.K., Rastogi, N.K. and Tripathi, R.S. 1999. Effect of farmyard manure and chemical N fertilizer on grain yield and quality of scented rice (Oryza sativa L.) varieties. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 69(9): 621–623. Rathore, A.L., Sahu, K.K., Pal, A.R., Tomar, H.S., Verma, S.K. and Markale, P.C. 2000. Dry seeded rice technology: An effective measure for drought alleviations. A technical Bulletin published by Directorate of Research Services, Indira Gandhi Agriculture University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 27 P. Saha, S., Rao, K.S. and Jena, S.R. 2012. Agro-techniques for wet direct sown rice. (In) Extended Summaries. Vol. 3. 3rd International Agronomy Congress, Nov, 26-30, New Delhi, pp. 718–720. Satapathy, B.S., Pun, K.B., Singh, T. and Rautaray, S.K. 2016. Influence of dates of sowing and varieties on growth and yield of direct wet sown early ahu rice (Oryza sativa L.) under flood prone lowland ecosystem of Assam. Annals of Agricul-

June 2018]

EFFECT OF CROP ESTABLISHMENT AND IRRIGATION METHODS ON SUMMER RICE

tural Research New series 37(1): 1–5. Siebenmorgen, T.J., Nehus, Z.T., and Archer, T.R. 1998. Milled rice breakage due to environmental conditions. Cereal Chemistry 75: 149–152. Singh, T., Pun, K.B., Satapathy, B.S., Saikia, K. and Lenka, S. 2015. Incremental yield and returns from rice variety Naveen in front line demonstrations- an analysis. Oryza 52(1): 59-64. Singh, U.P. 2002. Boro Rice in Eastern India. Rice-Wheat Consortium Regional Technical Coordination Committee Meeting. 10-14 February 2002. Rice- Wheat Consortium for the IndoGangetic Plains, New Delhi, India. Pp 2. Sonit, A., Rathore, A.L., Hemlata, Jha, D., Rathore, K., Suneel and Nandeha, K.L. 2015. Effect of pressurized irrigation system on productivity, water and energy use efficiency of summer

173

rice. The Ecoscan 9(1 and 2): 249–254. Sung, D.Y., Kaplan, F., Lee, K.J. and Guy, C.L. 2003. Acquired tolerance to temperature extremes. Trends in Plant Science 8: 179–187. Wassmann, R., Jagadish, S.V.K., Heuer, S., Ismail, A., Redona, E., Serraj, R., Singh, R.K., Howell, G., Pathak, H. and Sumfleth, K. 2009a. Climate change affecting rice production: The physiological and agronomic basis for possible adaptation strategies. Advances in Agronomy 101: 59–122. Wassmann, R., Jagadish, S.V.K., Sumfleth, K., Pathak, H., Howell, G., Ismail, A., Serraj, R., Redon, A.E., Singh, R.K. and Heuer, S. 2009b. Regional vulnerability of climate change impacts on Asian rice production and scope for adaptation. Advances in Agronomy 102: 91–133.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 174__180 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Precision nutrient management in wheat (Triticum aestivum) using Nutrient Expert®: Growth phenology, yield, nitrogen-use efficiency and profitability under eastern sub-Himalayan plains TRIPTESH MONDAL1, BIPLAB MITRA2 AND SAIKAT DAS3

Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Pundibari, Coochbehar, West Bengal 736 165 Received : December 2016; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the winter season (rabi) of 2014–15 and 2015–16 at Coochbehar, West Bengal, to assess the performance of Nutrient Expert® software on performance of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under both zero and conventional tillage. The experiment was designed in a split-plot design, with tillage options in main plot and nutrient management options in subplot. The treatment receiving 100% N-P-K through Nutrient Expert (NE) software resulted in higher plant height (90.2 cm) and leaf-area index (LAI) (4.70 at 90 days after sowing) with increased biomass (9.10 t/ha). As indicated from attainment of various phonological dates, it was revealed that the crop duration was drastically reduced due to shorter vegetative and reproductive phase under noor minimum nutrient-application treatment. Nutrient-management options also had a significant effect on the yield components of wheat, viz. spikes/m2, grains/spike as well as 1,000-seed weight. Treatment based on Nutrient Expert® produced significantly higher number of spikes/m2 (382), grains/spike (55.7), spike length (11.25 cm) as well as 1,000-seed weight (41.65 g) leading to the maximum yield (3.83 t/ha), 11% higher over recommended dose of nutrient application; thus, reflecting its superiority under both conventional and zero tillage. The NE-based recommendation indicated the superiority towards greater agronomic nitrogen-use efficiency (16.74 kg grain/kg N), economic nitrogen-use efficiency (2.11 kg grain/ invested in N) as well as benefit: cost ratio (1.57).

Key words : Crop phenology, Economics, Nutrient Expert®, Nutrient use efficiency, Wheat productivity

Wheat is one of the major sources of calories for the rising human population in Asia. It has been projected that the demand of wheat in India by 2020 would be between 105 to 109 million tonnes as against 94 million tonnes production of present day for which balanced nutrition holds the key. Existing fertilizer recommendations for wheat are mostly blanket application which often consists of predetermined rates of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) for vast areas. Such recommendations assume that the need of a cereal crop like wheat for nutrients is constant over time and over large areas. Hence the management of nutrients for cereals like wheat requires an approach that enables adjustments in N-P-K applications to accommodate the field-specific needs of the crop for supplemental nutrients. Nutrient Expert® (NE) is a nutri-

1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Research Scholar, 2Assistant Professor (Senior Scale), Department of Agronomy; 3Assistant Professor (Senior Scale) and In-Charge, All India Coordinated Wheat and Barley Improvement Project (AICW and BIP)

1

ent decision support software that enables farm advisors to develop fertilizer recommendations tailored to a specific field or growing environment (Dobermann and Witt, 2004). Nutrient Expert® also follows site-specific nutrient management (SSNM) guidelines for fertilizer application and split dressings, which consider the nutrient demand of a crop at critical growth stages (Witt et al., 2009). The NE does not require a lot of data nor very detailed information, even it can recommend without any soil-test data and it allows users to draw the required information from their own experience, the farmers’ knowledge of the local region, and the farmers’ practices. The NE was a joint development of wheat stakeholders in India including representatives from national research and extension system, private industries, CIMMYT and IPNI (Pampolino et al., 2012). The recommendations of NE were extensively tested in real-farm conditions with the objective of easy implementation of improved nutrient-management practices in smallholder wheat systems of India. However, the validation of Nutrient Expert was mostly carried out over North Western Plains zone (NWPZ), the wheat bowl of

NUTRIENT EXPERT® FOR WHEAT NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

June 2018]

the country. The Eastern sub-Himalayan plain also holds a potential area of wheat under North Eastern Plains Zone (NEPZ) and no work done on this aspect in this region. Opportunities exist to further enhance the yield, profitability, and resource-use efficiency of wheat production of this belt through SSNM approaches. In this backdrop, an experiment was conducted to assess the performance of NE software on wheat under both zero and conventional tillage. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted at the instructional farm of Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Pundibari, Coochbehar (26°24' 02.2" N, 89°23'21.7" E, 43 m above mean sea-level), West Bengal. It was carried out during the winter (rabi) seasons of 2014–15 and 2015–16. The experimental soil was sandy loam, with pH 5.51, Organic C (%) 0.92, low in available N (132.3 kg/ha) and medium in available P (16.9 kg/ha) and K (178.8 kg/ha). The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design, having 12 treatment combinations in 3 replicates. Two levels of tillage practices, viz. conventional tillage (CT) and zero tillage (ZT), in main plot and 6 levels of nutrient-management options (Table 1) in subplots were allocated randomly. The sizes of each experimental plot were 7 m × 2 m. The wheat variety used in the experiment was ‘DBW 39’. For conventional tillage, the land was prepared by ploughing twice with a rotovator and then the soil was brought into good tilth with a power tiller. Levelling was done with lad-

175

der finally. However, no land preparation was done for zero tillage. Seeds were sown in lines, 20 cm apart manually with a seed rate of 100 kg/ha for conventional tillage; while seeds were sown with 9-tyne zero-till-drill for zerotilled plots, keeping the same seed rate. In zero tillage plots, Glyphosate 41 % SL @ 3.75 litres/ha was applied 7 days before sowing for killing the existing weed flora. Broad-leaf weeds were controlled with 2, 4-D Na salt 80% WP @ 1 kg a.i./ha at 4–5 weeks after sowing. However, in conventional tillage plots, thinning and weeding were done simultaneously with the help of manual labour at 3–4 weeks after sowing. Boron was applied twice @ 0.20% with Solubor (B 20%), once at 35–40 days after sowing (DAS) and the next at 55–60 DAS. Zinc was applied with B in the second spray, i.e. @ 0.10% with Chelated Zn (Chelamin). Half of each plot was kept undisturbed for determining yield and remaining was used for recording biometrical observations including destructive samples. The data on plant height, leaf-area index, biomass production and tillering were taken periodically, while yield components and yield were recorded at the harvesting. Days to booting, heading, 50% flowering and physiological maturity stages were recorded by counting days from date of sowing to the date plants when attained such stages. Complete loss of the green colour of the glumes was used as indication of physiological maturity. Agronomic nitrogen-use efficiency (ANUE) was calculated as the additional grain yield produced owing to application of

Table 1. Details of nutrient-management options allotted to sub-plots Treatment

Details

N0

Without application of any fertilizer

N1

Recommended NPK (150–26.3–33.3 kg/ha): Applied 25 kg/ha N, full P and half K using NPK mixture as basal. The remaining N was applied in 2 equal splits–at first and second irrigation and the remaining half K at second irrigation. Topdressing just after irrigation

N2

Recommended NPK (150–26.3–33.3 kg/ha): Applied 25 kg/ ha N, full P and half K using NPK mixture as basal. The remaining N was applied in 2 equal splits–at first and second irrigation and the remaining half K at second irrigation. Topdressing just before irrigation

SSNM1

SSNM-based on Nutrient Expert* (140-32.9-65 kg/ha): Applied 25 kg/ha N, full P and half K using NPK mixture as basal. The remaining N was applied in 2 equal splits–at first and second irrigation and the remaining half K at second irrigation. Top-dressing just before irrigation

SSNM2

SSNM based on Nutrient Expert with 70% N and full P and K (98–32.9–65 kg/ha) + LCC guided N (if any): Applied 25 kg/ha N, full P and half K using NPK mixture as basal and the remaining N in 2 equal splits–just before first and second irrigation completing 70% of nutrient expert recommended nitrogen. Leaf Colour Chart (Wheat LCC) guided N, if any may be applied just before the third irrigation. The remaining half K was applied just before second irrigation.

Nrich

150% N and full P and K as per recommendation (225–26.3–33.3 kg/ha): Applied 25 kg/ha N, full P and half K using NPK mixture as basal. The remaining N was applied in 2 equal splits–at first and second irrigation and the remaining half K at second irrigation. Top-dressing just before irrigation

*The dose was determined by NE software based on omission plot data with a target yield of 5.5 t/ha

176

MONDAL ET AL.

N over unfertilized control. It was expressed in kg grain/ kg N. Economic nitrogen-use efficiency (ENUE) was calculated as the grain yield obtained per unit investment on the nutrient nitrogen (N). It was expressed in kg grain/ invested in N. Economic analysis was carried out using the prevailing market price and expenditure incurred towards treatment differences. Benefit: cost (B: C) ratio was calculated based on the ratio of gross income to total cost of cultivation. The statistical analysis of data was done by using statistical software MSTAT-C version 2.1. Significant differences between the treatments were compared with the critical difference at (±5%) probability by LSD. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

[Vol. 63, No. 2

and more values of yield-attributing characters. Adequate nutrition of the crop at higher N levels was mainly responsible for increasing dry-matter production as well as LAI (Pande et al., 2003). However, plant height, LAI as well as tiller production were found to differ non-significantly due to tillage practices, signifying similar crop environments though in all the dates of observation, conventional tillage (CT) recorded higher values over zero tillage (ZT). Total biomass production was found to be significantly higher under CT (7.90 t/ha) than ZT (7.35 t/ha). It was might be due to more vigorous vegetative growth of the crop with more number of spikes/m2 and higher grain yield under CT.

Growth attributes

Days to attain important phenological dates

Nutrient-management options had a significant effect on the growth attributes as well as total biomass production of the crop (Table 2). The treatment receiving 100% N-P-K through NE software (SSNM1) resulted in higher plant height and leaf-area index. In the said treatment, the tillers/m2 was as high as 431 with a higher biomass production of 9.10 t/ha. It was closely followed by N-rich treatment where number of tillers/m2 and total dry-matter production were 408 and 8.30 t/ha respectively. Optimum nutrient availability resulted from higher nutrient levels might be responsible for increased plant height as well as number of tillers owing to positive effects of N on celldivision and cell enlargement that ultimately lead to higher yield (Malik et al., 2012). Total biomass production might be maximized in SSNM1 treatment by balanced fertilizer application through NE software, which in turn resulted in higher leaf-area index (LAI) with increased plant height

Phenological dates (50% booting, heading, 50% flowering, physiological maturity) were studied with respect to both tillage- and nutrient-management options. There was no significant difference between CT and ZT in attaining the phenological dates under same set of nutrient management practices (Table 3). The crop raised through CT and ZT attained physiological maturity almost at a time (1 day variation in CT and ZT). The stages, viz. 50% booting, heading and 50% flowering dates were also attained almost at similar dates, signifying similar environments under both the tillage options. However, nutrient-management options had a significant influence on attaining various phenological dates of wheat. The treatments in which a good quantity of N, P and K were added (N1, N2, SSNM1 and SSNM 2), the crop exhibited similar dates of 50% booting (76–77 days), heading (81–83 days), 50% flowering (86–88 days) and physiological maturity (120–122

Table 2. Growth attributes of wheat as affected by tillage and nutrient-management options (pooled data of 2 years) Treatment

Plant height (cm) 60 DAS Harvesting

Leaf-area index 60 DAS 90 DAS

45 DAS

Tillers/m2 60DAS

75 DAS

Biomass at harvesting (t/ha)

Tillage CT ZT SEm± CD (P=0.05)

46.2 42.8 0.9 NS

85.1 80.3 1.3 NS

2.58 2.51 0.03 NS

4.20 4.08 0.08 NS

177 159 1.7 9.3

284 269 2.4 13.2

393 381 2.9 NS

7.90 7.35 0.09 0.50

Nutrient management option N0 N1 N2 SSNM1 SSNM2 Nrich SEm± CD (P=0.05)

30.7 46.1 46.7 47.9 44.9 46.8 0.89 2.7

63.5 86.5 88.1 90.2 87.8 88.6 1.26 3.8

1.33 2.70 2.72 2.94 2.90 3.10 0.04 0.12

2.65 4.40 4.42 4.70 4.45 4.65 0.07 0.21

176 183 194 197 174 196 3.2 9.6

149 273 286 304 265 284 4.9 14.8

210 389 402 431 397 408 7.9 23.7

4.20 8.10 8.30 9.10 7.90 8.30 0.22 0.65

DAS, Days after sowing, CT, conventional tillage; ZT, zero tillage. Details of nutrient-management options are given in Table 1.

June 2018]

NUTRIENT EXPERT® FOR WHEAT NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

days). However, in excess nitrogen applied treatments, all the dates attained later while in no-fertilizer treatments, the dates attained faster, 5–7 days earlier (Table 3). Nutrient stress in N0 forced the crop to attain the dates earlier. With no or minimum application of nutrient the crop duration was drastically reduced on account of shorter vegetative and reproductive phase. Though, it is an established fact that crop phenology are largely dependent on genetic and environmental factors, viz. temperature, relative humidity, sun-shine hours, rainfall, etc but nutrient management also played a significant role.

177

owing to less number of tiller productions in zero-till plots resulted from non-uniform crop stand. The crop raised with CT produced significantly higher grain yield (3.55 t/ha) over ZT (Table 4). It was probably owing to better crop stand as reflected by higher number of spikes/m 2 coupled with increased number of grains/ spike. In zero-till plots, there was some problem with respect to seed germination, seedling emergence as well as weed management. Spraying of 2, 4-D in ZT treatments temporarily suppressed Polygonum spp. but could not control the flush completely for which the performance of the crop affected a bit at later stages. Improved crop yield under CT compared to ZT with 150 kg/ha of N was previously reported by Abid et al. (2014). Grain yields were appreciably and significantly influenced owing to various nutrient-management options. The results showed that SSNM1, i.e. 100% of NE dose resulted in the highest grain yield (3.83 t/ha), reflecting that through balanced dose of nutrient application coming from NE (SSNM1), 11% yield increment was achieved over recommended dose of nutrient application (N1 and N2). A positive relation with yield and nitrogen application was reported by Mitra et al. (2014). The NE-based fertilizer-management strategies increased yield as well as nutrient-use efficiencies in wheat (Sapkota et al., 2013; Majumdar et al., 2013; Mohanty et al., 2015).

Yield components and yield

Nutrient-management options had a significant effect on the yield components of wheat, viz. number of spikes/ m 2, grains/spike as well as 1,000-grain weight. The SSNM1 treatment produced significantly more spike/m2, grain/spike, spike length as well as 1,000-grain weight. It was also observed that there was no significant difference in spikes/m2 between N1 and N2, indicating that there was not much difference in number of spikes with respect to top-dressing of nitrogen after and before irrigation. Balanced fertilization through NE-based recommendation might be the key for this increased number of spikes/m2, the prime yield component. Mauriya et al. (2013) also reported higher values of yield-attributing character in wheat under site-specific crop-management practices. There was no significant difference in spike length and grains/spike under both tillage options; however, the maximum number of spike/m2 (324) was achieved with CT. It was probably

Nitrogen-use efficiencies

During both the years, higher ANUE values were obtained with SSNM treatments (Table 5). This was prob-

Table 3. Effect of tillage practices and nutrient-management options on days to attain important phenological dates of wheat (pooled data of 2 years) Treatment

Phenological dates 50% booting (DAS)

Heading (DAS)

50% flowering (DAS)

Physiological maturity (DAS)

Tillage CT ZT SEm± CD (P=0.05)

74 76 0.9 NS

80 80 0.9 NS

85 87 1.1 NS

121 120 1.2 NS

Nutrient management option N0 N1 N2 SSNM1 SSNM2 Nrich SEm± CD (P=0.05)

71 77 76 77 77 77 1.5 4.7

78 82 83 81 82 83 1.5 4.7

84 86 88 87 87 90 1.6 4.8

117 121 122 121 120 123 1.7 5.2

DAS, Days after sowing, CT, conventional tillage; ZT, zero tillage. Details of nutrient-management options are given in Table 1.

178

MONDAL ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Table 4. Yield attributes and yields of wheat as affected by tillage and nutrient-management options (pooled data of 2 years) Spikes/m2

Grains/ spike

Spike length (cm)

1,000-grain weight (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Straw yield (t/ha)

Harvest index (%)

Tillage CT ZT SEm± CD (P=0.05)

324 308 2.6 14.3

47.2 45.1 0.65 NS

10.65 10.45 0.07 NS

42.35 40.70 0.13 0.70

3.55 3.37 0.03 0.16

4.54 4.17 0.07 NS

40.90 41.30 0.12 NS

Nutrient management option N0 N1 N2 SSNM1 SSNM2 Nrich SEm± CD (P=0.05)

159 347 353 382 318 324 10.4 31.4

30.5 47.8 47.2 55.7 48.1 45.3 1.4 4.3

8.55 10.70 11.15 11.25 10.80 10.65 0.12 0.35

38.90 41.10 41.40 41.65 41.20 41.15 0.28 0.85

1.45 3.44 3.41 3.83 3.46 3.24 0.16 0.48

2.74 4.72 4.87 5.21 4.89 5.31 0.42 1.25

34.10 42.20 41.15 42.30 41.40 37.80 1.93 5.78

Treatment

CT, conventional tillage; ZT, zero tillage. Details of nutrient-management options are given in Table 1.

ably because of more uniform and more availability of N throughout the growing season as well as avoiding excess single application at early stages, the most common practice. The ANUE value under N1 (13.06 kg grain/kg N) and N2 (12.84 kg grain/kg N) treatments was significantly lower than SSNM treatments (16.74 and 18.88 kg grain/kg N under SSNM1 and SSNM2 respectively). Despite lesser yield under SSNM2 than SSNM1, ENUE value was higher under SSNM2 (2.72 kg grain/ invested in N), indicating Table 5. Effect of tillage and nutrient-management options on grain yield, agronomic and economic nitrogen use efficiencies (pooled data of 2 years) Treatment

Grain yield (t/ha)

Tillage CT 3.55 ZT 3.37 SEm± 0.03 CD (P=0.05) 0.16 Nutrient management option N1 3.44 3.41 N2 SSNM1 3.83 3.46 SSNM2 Nrich 3.24 SEm± 0.16 CD (P=0.05) 0.48

ANUE (kg grain/kg N)

ENUE (kg grain/ invested in N)

14.46 13.27 0.28 NS

1.95 1.84 0.05 NS

13.06 12.84 16.74 18.88 7.80 0.42 1.20

1.77 1.76 2.11 2.72 1.11 0.07 0.20

CT, conventional tillage; ZT, zero tillage; ANUE, Agronomic nitrogen use efficiency; ENUE, economic nitrogen-use efficiency. Details of nutrient-management options are given in Table 1.

higher grain yield per rupee investment on N. It was due to lesser rate of N application (98 kg/ha); though the yield drop due to less application of N was not significant compared with recommended dose of N application (150 kg/ ha for N1 and N2) or SSNM1 (140 kg/ha) rates. Higher nitrogen-use efficiency through SSNM treatments in ricewheat cropping system was previously reported by Bharadwaj et al. (2008), Singh et al. (2008) and Mohanty et al. (2015). Production economics of wheat cultivation

Data on production economics of wheat cultivation (Table 6) revealed the superiority of ZT to CT owing to its lesser cost of cultivation. As in ZT, no extra cost was incurred towards land preparation and weeding was performed through herbicides application, the treatments comprising zero tillage resulted in overall saving of 3,500/ha. However, with respect to different fertility treatments, higher cost of cultivation was noted in SSNM1 treatment ( 31,775/ha ) as compared to recommended dose of fertilizer application due to extra cost involvement for the additional P and K fertilizer application under SSNM treatments. The maximum gross returns of 49,725/ha was obtained from the treatment receiving 100% of SSNM dose (SSNM1), being significantly higher than the other fertility treatments. It was followed by N1 ( 44,743/ha), N2 ( 44,317/ha) and Nrich ( 42,062/ha) treatments, being at par with each other. This variation in gross returns was attributed to the difference in yield under various set of nutrient-management practices. In all the cases, gross returns were higher in CT than ZT owing to higher economic

NUTRIENT EXPERT® FOR WHEAT NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

June 2018]

179

Table 6. Production economics of wheat under various tillage and nutrient-management options in interactive way (pooled data of 2 years) Treatment

Total cost of cultivation (×103 /ha)

Gross return (×103 /ha)

Net return (×103 /ha)

Benefit: cost ratio

Tillage CT ZT SEm± CD (P=0.05)

31.492 27.955 0.58 3.12

41.544 38.859 0.47 2.52

10.052 10.904 0.34 NS

1.30 1.35 0.02 NS

Nutrient management option N0 N1 N2 SSNM1 SSNM2 Nrich SEm± CD (P=0.05)

20.950 31.058 31.058 31.775 30.926 32.574 1.21 3.56

16.153 44.743 44.317 49.725 44.210 42.062 1.56 4.58

-4.798 13.685 13.259 17.950 13.284 9.488 0.55 1.62

0.78 1.45 1.43 1.57 1.43 1.30 0.04 0.11

CT, conventional tillage; ZT, zero tillage Details of nutrient-management options are given in Table 1.

yield obtained under CT (Table 6). Higher returns with reduced cost for tillage under ZT was previously reported by Sah et al. (2014).The trend was similar for net return also where SSNM 1 treatment resulted in significantly higher net return ( 17,950/ha). Benefit: cost (B: C) ratio varied from 0.78 to 1.57 under different treatments taken under the experiment. In general, the treatments having higher gross returns and net returns showed higher benefit: cost ratio. Despite lower yields, benefit: cost ratio was recorded higher under ZT (1.35) over CT (1.30). Lesser yield was superseded by the curtailment of extra cost of land preparation and weeding in ZT. The NE-based recommendation significantly improved wheat yield and economics (Majumdar et al., 2013). It can be concluded that Nutrient Expert® (NE) was very effective tool for nutrient recommendation of wheat for this zone based on the principles of SSNM. This easyto-use computer-based decision-support tool could rapidly provide nutrient recommendations bringing more balance towards fertilization and wheat grown under both ZT and CT responded well to NE- based recommendation. REFERENCES Abid, M., Rehman, S. and Hussain, S. 2014. Tillage practices and nitrogen application influenced soil physical properties and wheat production. Pakistan Journal of Agriculture, Agricultural Engineering, Veterinary Sciences 30(1): 75–84. Bharadwaj, A.K., Mahapatra, B.S., Singh, A.P., Chaubey, A.K., Singh, N. and Singh, D. 2008. Productivity of rice–wheat cropping system as influenced by site-specific nutrient management (SSNM) treatments. Journal of Farming Systems Research and Development 14(1): 102–104.

Dobermann, A. and Witt, C. 2004. Increasing productivity of intensive rice systems through site-specific nutrient management. (In) Enfield, NH (USA) and Los Banos (Philippines): Science Publishers, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), pp. 75–100. Majumdar, K., Jat, M.L., Pampolino, M., Satyanarayana, T., Dutta, S. and Kumar, A. 2013. Nutrient management in wheat: Current scenario, improved strategies and future research needs in India. Journal of Wheat Research 4(1): 1–10. Malik, G.C., Iftikar, W., Banerjee, M. and Ghosh, D.C. 2012. Effect of irrigation,variety and nitrogen on growth and productivity of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the lateritic belt of West Bengal. International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management 3(2): 158–164. Mauriya, A.K., Maurya, V.K., Tripathi, H.P., Verma, R.K. and Radhey Shyam. 2013. Effect of site-specific nutrient management on productivity and economics of rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 58(3): 282–287. Mitra, B., Mookherjee, S. and Das, S. 2014. Performances of wheat under various tillage and nitrogen management in sub-Himalayan plains of West Bengal. Journal of Wheat Research 6(2): 150–153. Mohanty, S.K., Singh, A.K., Jat, S.L., Parihar, C.M., Pooniya, V., Sharma, S., Sandhya, Chaudhary, V. and Singh, Bahadur. 2015. Precision nitrogen-management practices influences growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum) under conservation agriculture. Indian Journal of Agronomy 60(4): 617– 621. Pampolino, M., Majumdar, K., Jat, M.L., Satyanarayana, T., Kumar, A., Shahi, V.B., Gupta, N. and Singh, V. 2012. Development and evaluation of nutrient expert for wheat in south Asia. Better Crops 96(3): 29–31. Pande, I.B., Singh, H. and Tiwari, S. 2003. Response of timely sown wheat to levels and time of application. Journal of Research: Birsa Agricultural University 15(1): 35–38. Sah, G., Shah, S.C., Sah, S.K., Thapa, R.B., McDonald, A.J., Sidhu,

180

MONDAL ET AL.

H.S., Gupta, R.K., Tripathi, B.P., Justice, S.E. and Sherchan, D.P. 2014. Evaluation of different tillage and crop establishment methods for wheat cultivation in rice–wheat system in the terai region of Nepal. Nepal Journal of Agricultural Research 14: 1–13. Sapkota, T.B., Majumder, K., Jat, M.L., Kumar, A., Bishnoi, D.K., Mcdonald, A.J. and Pampolino, M. 2013. Precision nutrient management in conservation agriculture based wheat production of Northwest India: Profitability, nutrient use effi-

[Vol. 63, No. 2

ciency and environmental footprint. CIMMYT BLOG. Singh, V.K., Tiwari, K.N., Gill, M.S., Sharma, S.K., Dwivedi, B.S., Shukla, A.K. and Mishra, P.P. 2008. Economic viability of site-specific nutrient management in cropping system. Better Crops with Plant Food. 92(3): 28–30. Witt, C., Pasuquin, J.M., Pampolino, M.F., Buresh, R.J. and Dobermann, A. 2009. A manual for the development and participatory evaluation of site-specific nutrient management for maize in tropical, favorable environments. http:// seap.ipni.net, 30.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 181__185 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Quality and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum) as influenced by irrigation scheduling and organic manures H.P. VERMA1, O.P. SHARMA2, RAJESH KUMAR3, A.C. SHIVRAN4, R. SAMMAURIA5 AND B.L. DUDWAL6

Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner, Rajasthan 303 329 Received : September 2017; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted on loamy sand soil during 2 winter (rabi) seasons of 2014–15 and 2015–16 at Jobner, Rajasthan, to study the effect of irrigation scheduling and organic manures on growth, yield and quality of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). The treatments consisted of 5 irrigation scheduling, i.e. I 1 (irrigation at critical stages), I2 (0.9 Irrigation water (IW) : Cumulative pan evaporation (CPE) ratio), I 3 (0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase), I4 (0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase) and I5 (0.8 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase in main plots) and 4 organic manures, viz. control (M0), FYM @ 15 t/ha (M1), vermicompost (VC) @ 6 t/ha (M2) and FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + VC @ 3 t/ha (M3) in subplots were replicated 4 times in split-plot design. The pooled data results showed that irrigation applied at 0.9 IW: CPE ratio (I2) recorded the maximum values of number of grains/ear and yield (grain and straw) proved significantly superior to I1, I4 and I3 except treatment I5. The treatment I2 exhibited the maximum consumptive use (395 mm). But the treatment I5 attained significantly highest water-use efficiency (WUE) and excelled rest of the treatments. Irrigation applied at 0.9 IW : CPE ratio (I2) resulted in the maximum chlorophyll content and was significantly superior to I3, I4 and I5 except treatment I1. However, that irrigation treatment did not to bring any significant variation in protein content and protein yield. Significantly higher number of grains/ear and yield (grain and straw) was recorded with FYM at 7.5 t/ha + VC @ 3 t/ha (M3), being at par with VC @ 6 t/ha and superior to rest of the treatments. The highest consumptive use (409 mm) by crop was shown by the treatment M0. The significantly highest WUE was recorded under M3. The maximum chlorophyll and protein content were recorded under the treatment M3 (FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + vermicompost @ 3 t/ha), which remained at par with M2, but significantly higher than M0 and M1. However, treatment M3 resulted in the significantly highest protein yield over rest of the treatments. Scheduling of irrigation to wheat either at 0.9 IW: CPE ratio throughout the growth or 0.8 IW: CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW: CPE ratio at reproductive phase brought about significantly higher yield (grain and straw) and quality parameter (chlorophyll content). So far as saving of irrigation water is concerned, irrigating the crop with 0.8 IW: CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW: CPE ratio at reproductive phase was most effective as the above schedule besides resulting almost equal yields also curtailed 1 irrigation with highest water-use efficiency. Manuring the crop either at 7.5 t FYM + 3 t/ha VC or 6 t/ha VC were equally effective treatments with regard to yield (grain and straw) and quality parameters (chlorophyll content, protein content and protein yield).

Key words : Farmyard manure, Irrigation, Quality, Scheduling, Vermicompost, Wheat, Water-use efficiency, Yield

Wheat is one of the most important staple food crops of the world as well as India. It is cultivated under diverse Based on a part of Ph.D. Thesis of the first author, submitted to Sri Karan Narendra Agriculture University, Jobner, Rajasthan, in 2016 (unpublished) 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Senior Research Fellow (SRF), 6Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy; 2 Director Education, 3SRF, 4Professor, 5Professor, Rajasthan Agricultural Research Institute, Durgapura, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302 018 1

growing conditions of soil and climate. In India, it is the second most important food crop after rice. It is an excellent health-building food containing approximately 78% carbohydrates, 11–12% protein, 2% fat and minerals each and considerable amount of vitamins (Kumar et al., 2011). Wheat is used for making chapaties, bread, cake, biscuits, pastry and other bakery products. Wheat is highly sensitive to water stress during the crown-root initiation (CRI) and flowering but excess irrigation may lead to heavy vegetative growth and shortening of reproductive period and

182

VERMA ET AL.

ultimately decrease in yield. Thus, timing the length of irrigation is necessary for increase the crop yield. In principle, irrigation should take place while the soil water potential is still high enough to enable soil supply water fast enough to meet the local atmospheric demands without placing the plants under stress that would reduce yield and quality of crop. Although, a high water status throughout the growing season is necessary to maintain unimpaired crop growth and high economic yield, the imposition of some stress by longer irrigation intervals during vegetative or maturation by way of narrowing or widening irrigation water (IW) : cumulative pan evaporation (CPE) ratio could attain similar economic yields as well as saving of irrigation water and improving water-use efficiency. In general, irrigation is being scheduled on the basis of climatological approach (IW : CPE ratio) during entire period of crop irrespective of the stage of growth. But proper scheduling of irrigation is necessary at both vegetative and reproductive phases to maintain the optimum moisture regime for better growth and development of crop in the changing climatic scenario where abrupt variation in temperature takes place. Application of organic manures not only improves the soil organic carbon for sustaining the soil physical properties but also increases supply of plant nutrients. In this context, farmyard manure (FYM) and vermicompost (VC) are of paramount importance for application in food crops. Addition of organic material to the soil such as FYM helps in maintaining soil fertility and productivity. It increases soil microbiological activities, plays key role in transformation, recycling and availability of nutrients to the crop. Hence a study was carried to evaluate the effect of irrigation scheduling and organic manures on growth, yield and quality of wheat. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was carried out during the winter (rabi) seasons of 2014–15 to 2015–16 at Sri Karan Narendra College of Agriculture, Jobner (26o 05' N, 75o 28' E, 427 m above mean sea-level), Rajasthan. The soil was sandy loam having bulk density 1.52 Mg/m3, pH 8.3. The soil was poor in organic carbon (0.23%), low in available nitrogen (130.5 kg/ha) and phosphorus (15.1 kg/ha) and medium in potassium (148.9 kg/ha). The experiment was laid out in a split-plot design with 4 replications. The treatments comprised 5 irrigation scheduling, viz. I1, irrigation at critical stages; I2, 0.9 IW : CPE ratio; I3, 0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 0.8 irrigation water : cumalative pan evaporation (IW : CPE) ratio at reproductive phase; I4, 0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; and I5, 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW: CPE ratio at reproductive phase, and 4 organic manures, viz. M0, control; M1, FYM

[Vol. 63, No. 2

@ 15 t/ha; M2, vermicompost (VC) @ 6 t/ha; and M3, FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + VC @ 3 t/ha. Wheat variety ‘Raj 4037’ was sown on 16 December and 18 December during 2014 and 2015 and harvested on 8 April and 10 April during 2015 and 2016 respectively. Seed @ 100 kg/ha was sown with 22.5 cm row spacing. Crop was raised with recommended package of practices of weed management, viz. application of 2, 4-D @ 0.8 kg/ha 30 days after sowing used. The field plots of size 4.0 m × 2.7 m were separated from each other by using 0.50 m buffer rows. Irrigations were applied as per treatment on the basis of IW: CPE ratio approach using 4.5 cm depth of irrigation water. Six irrigations in I1 (irrigation at critical stages), 7 irrigations in I2 (0.9 IW : CPE ratio), 4 irrigations in I3 (0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase), 5 irrigations in I4 (0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase) and 6 irrigations in I5 (0.8 IW: CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase) were applied. Recommended doses of fertilizer @ 90 : 30 : 0 kg N, P2O5 and K2O/ha were applied basal with half dose of nitrogen and full dose of phosphorus through urea and diammonium phosphate, remaining dose of nitrogen topdressed at the time of first and second irrigation. The FYM was applied 2 weeks before sowing and vermicompost just before sowing as per treatment. The NPK contents in FYM were @ 0.49, 0.28 and 0.42% and in vermicompost @ 1.21, 0.69 and 1.02% respectively. The crop was harvested manually with the help of sickle when grain almost matured and straw had turned yellow, and data on grain and straw yields were recorded. The straw yield was obtained by subtracting the seed yield from the biological yield. Consumptive use of water was worked out as per Dastane (1972) and from that water-use efficiency was calculated. Grain and straw yields (kg) were determined from the each plot and the yield in tonnes per hectare was calculated. All the observations during individual years as well as in pooled analysis were statistically analyzed for their test of significance using the F-test (Gomez and Gomez, 1984). The significant of difference between treatment means were compared with t critical difference at 5% level of probability. Water-use efficiency (WUE) was worked out as: WUE =

Economic crop yield (kg/ha) Consumptive use (mm)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Growth and yield attributes

Effect of irrigation scheduling: Irrigation scheduling treatments did not show significant influence on plant stand/m row length (Table 1). The maximum number of

June 2018]

183

QUALITY AND YIELD OF WHEAT AS INFLUENCED BY IRRIGATION

grains/ear was recorded with the treatment I2 which was significantly superior to I3 and I4, but the former was at par with treatment I5. In treatments receiving frequent irrigations without any stress during reproductive phase, i.e. I2 and I5, the higher reproductive efficiency was the main reason responsible for number of grains/ear (Nayak et al., 2015). Effect of organic manures: Organic manures treatments did not exhibit significant influence on plant stand/m row length. The treatment M3 remaining at par with the treatment M2, significantly increased the number of grains/ear over M0 and M1 (Table 1). The sink capacity of plant depends mainly on vegetative and reproductive growth of the plant which affected positively by application of organic manures and supply of photosynthates for the formation of yield component, i.e. number of grains/ear. These results are in agreement with those reported by Sepat et al. (2010). Yield, consumptive use and water-use efficiency

Effect of irrigation scheduling: Significantly higher grain yield (4.45 t/ha) was recorded under treatment I2 (4.37 t/ha) and proved significantly superior to rest of the treatments. It was also found that with sufficient moisture in the soil profile under higher irrigation frequency, plant nutrients particularly N, P and K were more which have resulted in production of more grain yield. Secondly, higher yield with higher levels of irrigation might be ow-

ing to its key role in root development by reducing mechanical resistance of soil, higher transpiration, greater nutrient uptake and more photosynthesis due to metabolic activities in plant (Bhunia et al., 2006). The other reason of yield increase might be that scheduling irrigation at 0.9 IW : CPE ratio and 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase created longer reproductive period with larger photosynthetic surface and reproductive storage capacity to attain higher allocation of net photosynthates to grain yield (Mishra and Kushwaha, 2016). The irrigation at 0.9 IW : CPE ratio (I2) recorded the maximum straw yield (6.34 t/ha) which remained at par with I5 but significantly higher than rest of the treatments. Higher straw yield under optimum level of irrigation schedules might be owing to healthy vegetative crop growth in terms of dry matter obviously resulted into more straw yield (Narolia et al., 2016). The treatment I2 (Irrigation at 0.9 IW : CPE ratio) exhibited the maximum value of consumptive use (398 mm) over all other treatments, while the minimum consumptive use was brought about by I3 (369 mm). Thus consumptive use of water increased with the increasing in quantity of irrigation water. This might be owing to more number of irrigations which increased consumption of water because of better growth of crop and simultaneously the loss of water through evaporation under treatment I2 (Bandyopadhyay and Mallick, 2003). Significantly highest WUE (11.34 kg/ha/mm) was recorded with treatment I5 (Irrigation at 0.8 IW : CPE ra-

Table 1. Effect of irrigation scheduling and organic manures on plant stand, number of grains/ear, grain and straw yield, consumptive use and water-use efficiency of wheat (on pooled basis) Treatment

Plant stand/m row length

Grains/ear

Grain yield (t/ha)

Straw yield (t/ha)

Consumptive use (mm)

Water-use efficiency (kg/ha/mm)

Irrigation scheduling I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

29.0 29.3 28.4 28.7 29.2 0.53 NS

38.7 40.8 34.6 37.2 40.1 0.67 1.96

4.24 4.45 3.78 4.14 4.37 0.07 0.20

6.06 6.34 5.76 6.05 6.25 0.07 0.19

380 398 369 378 385 – –

11.14 11.20 10.24 10.95 11.34 0.04 0.12

Organic manures M0 M1 M2 M3 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

28.4 28.6 29.2 29.6 0.34 NS

35.7 38.0 39.0 40.4 0.56 1.58

3.48 4.29 4.43 4.57 0.06 0.18

5.12 6.26 6.42 6.58 0.06 0.17

409 365 379 369 – –

8.53 11.73 11.79 12.40 0.03 0.11

I1, Irrigation at critical stages; I2, 0.9 IW : CPE ratio; I3, 0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative + 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; I4, 0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; and I5, 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; M0, control; M1, FYM @ 15 t/ha; M2, vermicompost @ 6 t/ha and M3, FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + vermicompost @ 3 t/ha

184

VERMA ET AL.

tio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW: CPE ratio at reproductive), while the lowest WUE (10.24 kg/ha/mm) with treatment I3. The highest WUE in the treatment I5 might be owing to the fact that crop was supplied with conserving soil moisture during reproductive phase. Moreover, the above treatment utilized lesser water consumptively as compared to I2. Hence proportionately higher yield with the judicious use of limited water resulted in significantly highest WUE (Bikrmaditya et al., 2011). Effect of organic manures: The significantly higher values (4.57 and 6.58 t/ha) of grain and straw yield were recorded with the application of FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + vermicompost @ 3 t/ha (M3) which superseded the rest of the treatments, while it remained at par with M2 (Table 1). It is well known that addition of FYM and vermicompost could increase the macronutrient as well as micronutrient concentration in the soil and increase the adsorption power of soil for cations and anions, particularly, phosphates and nitrates and they were released slowly for the benefit of the crop during entire growth period. These results are in close proximity with those of Singh and Agarwal (2004). The maximum consumptive use (409 mm) by the wheat crop was observed with treatment M0 (control) over rest of the treatments. The minimum consumptive use was obtained in treatment where FYM 7.5 t + vermicompost 3 t/ ha (M3) was applied. Lower consumptive use in organic manure treated plots might be owing to better conservation of soil moisture and reduced evaporation as compared to no manure treatment (Vishuddha et al., 2014). The significantly highest WUE was obtained under treatment M3

[Vol. 63, No. 2

(12.40 kg/ha/mm). The reason may be ascribed to the fact that proportionate increase in grain yield was greater than the evapo-transpiration owing to combined application of FYM and vermicompost. Thus, WUE enhanced significantly over sole application of organic manures or no organic manure treatment where increase in yield was lesser than the loss of water through ET (Ebtisam et al., 2013). Quality parameters

Effect of irrigation scheduling: Protein content and protein yield did not differ significantly due to irrigation schedules (Table 2). Treatment I2 where irrigation was practiced with 0.9 IW : CPE ratio fetched significantly higher chlorophyll content over rest of the treatments and remained at par with I1. This may be attributed to better root growth, resulting in higher water and nutrient uptake which in turn resulted in increased chlorophyll content in leaves. Higher root density had a large influence on plant water status through its effect on water uptake from soil (Patidar and Mali, 2004). Effect of organic manures: The maximum chlorophyll and protein content were recorded under the treatment M3 (FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + vermicompost @ 3 t/ha) which remained at par with M2 but significantly higher than M0 and M1 treatments (Table 2). This may be attributed to better root growth, resulting in higher water uptake which has resulted in increased chlorophyll content in leaves (Patidar and Mali, 2004). However, above treatment, i.e. M3, resulted in the significantly highest protein yield over rest of the treatments. Since protein contents in grain and protein

Table 2. Effect of irrigation scheduling and organic manures on quality parameters and net returns of wheat (on pooled basis) Treatment

Chlorophyll content (mg/g)

Protein content (%)

Protein yield (kg/ha)

Net returns ( /ha)

Irrigation scheduling I1 I2 I3 I4 I5 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

2.18 2.31 1.82 1.96 2.00 0.05 0.15

9.51 9.44 9.72 9.56 9.53 0.25 NS

403 422 371 397 416 5.31 16.22

51,021 54,883 44,071 50,282 53,861 939 2,740

Organic manures M0 M1 M2 M3 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

1.73 2.17 2.08 2.24 0.04 0.10

8.07 9.58 9.95 10.58 0.21 0.67

282 411 442 484 4.91 14.63

45,346 55,179 47,492 55,276 785 2,206

I1, Irrigation at critical stages; I2, 0.9 IW : CPE ratio; I3, 0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative + 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; I4, 0.6 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; and I5, 0.8 IW : CPE ratio at vegetative + 1.0 IW : CPE ratio at reproductive phase; M0, control; M1, FYM @ 15 t/ha; M2, vermicompost @ 6 t/ha and M3, FYM @ 7.5 t/ha + vermicompost @ 3 t/ha

June 2018]

QUALITY AND YIELD OF WHEAT AS INFLUENCED BY IRRIGATION

yield are essentially manifestation of nitrogen content, increased nitrogen content owing to organic manures resulted in higher protein content. The protein yield depends on grain yield and protein content in grain. It could be explained in terms of greater synthesis of amino acids for improvement in nitrogen content in grain which has also been reported by Channabasanagowda et al. (2008) and Ram et al. (2014). Economics

Effect of irrigation scheduling : The treatment I2 (irrigation at 0.9 IW : CPE ratio) fetched the maximum net returns ( 54,883/ha), while being at par with I5 proved significantly superior to rest of the treatments. Effect of organic manures : The treatment M3 and M1 giving almost same net returns proved significantly superior over M0 and M2. The treatment M3 fetched higher net returns by 9,930 and 7,784/ha, respectively over M0 and M2 . Based on these results, it can be concluded that scheduling of irrigation to wheat either at 0.9 IW: CPE ratio throughout the growth or 0.8 IW: CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW: CPE ratio at reproductive phase and manuring the crop either @ 7.5 t FYM + 3 t/ha VC or 6 t/ha VC were the equally effective treatments brought about significantly higher yields, net returns and quality parameter. So far as saving of irrigation water is concerned, irrigating the crop with 0.8 IW: CPE ratio at vegetative phase + 1.0 IW: CPE ratio at reproductive phase was most effective as this schedule besides resulting in almost equal yields also curtailed 1 irrigation with highest water-use efficiency. REFERENCES Bandyopadhyay, P.K. and Mallick, S. 2003. Actual evapo-transpiration and crop coefficient of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under varying moisture levels of humid tropical canal command area. Agricultural Water Management 49(1): 33–47. Bhunia, S. R., Chauhan, R. P. S., Yadav, B.S. and Bhati, A.S. 2006. Effect of phosphorus, irrigation and rhizobium on productivity, water use and nutrient uptake in fenugreek (Trigonella foenum- graecum). Indian Journal of Agronomy 51(3): 239– 241. Bikrmaditya, Verma, R., Ram, S. and Sharma, B. 2011. Effect of soil moisture regimes and fertility levels on growth, yield and

185

water use efficiency of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Progressive Agriculture 11(1): 73–78. Channabasanagowda, N.K., Patel, B., Patil, B.N., Awaknavar, J.S., Ninganur, B.T. and Hunje, R. 2008. Effect of organic manures on growth, seed yield and quality of wheat. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 21(3): 366–368. Dastane, N.G. 1972. A Practical Manual for Water Use Research in Agriculture. 702 pp. Navbharat Prakashan Budhawar Path, Poona (now Pune), Maharashtra, India. Ebtisam, E., Hellal, F., Mansour, H. and Mohammed A.E.H. 2013. Assessment organic manures addition on some soil properties, nutrient content and wheat yield under sprinkler irrigation system. Agricultural Science Digest 4(1): 14–22. Gomez, A.A. and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, edn 2. John Wiley & Sons, Singapore. Kumar, P., Yadav, R.K., Gollen, B., Kumar, S., Verma, R.K. and Yadav, S. 2011. Nutritional contents and medicinal properties of wheat: A review. Life Sciences and Medicinal Research 47(2): 145–149. Mishra, G. and Kushwaha, H.S. 2016. Winter wheat yield and soil physical properties responses to different tillage and irrigation. European Journal of Biological Research 56: 530–537. Narolia, R.S., Meena, H., Singh, P., Meena, B.S. and Ram, B. 2016. Effect of irrigation scheduling and nutrient management on productivity, profitability and nutrient uptake of wheat (Triticum aestivum) grown under zero-tilled condition in southeastern Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Agronomy 61(1): 53– 58. Nayak, M.K., Patel, H.R., Prakash, V. and Kumar, A. 2015. Influence of irrigation scheduling on crop growth, yield and quality of wheat. Journal of Agriculture Research 2(1): 65–68. Patidar, M. and Mali, A. L. 2004. Effect of FYM, fertility levels and biofertilizers on growth, yield and quality of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Indian Journal of Agronomy 49(2): 117–120. Ram, M., Davari, M.R. and Sharma, S.N. 2014. Direct, residual and cumulative effects of organic manures and biofertilizers on yields, NPK uptake, grain quality and economics of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under organic farming of rice–wheat cropping system. Journal of Organic Systems 9(1): 16–30. Sepat, R.N., Rai, R.K. and Shiva, D. 2010. Planting system and integrated nutrient management for enhanced wheat (Triticum aestivum) productivity. Indian Journal of Agronomy 55(2): 114–118. Singh, R. and Agarwal, S.K. 2004. Effect of organic manuring and nitrogen fertilization on productivity, nutrient use efficiency and economics of wheat (Triticum aestivum). Indian Journal of Agronomy 49(1): 49–52. Vishuddha. N., Singh, G.R., Kumar, R., Raj, S. and Yadav, B. 2014. Effect of irrigation levels and nutrient sources on growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Annals of Agricultural Research 35(1): 14–20.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 186__191 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Role of precision irrigation scheduling and residue-retention practices on water-use efficiency and wheat (Triticum aestivum) yield in north-western plains of India RAJ PAL MEENA1, S.C. TRIPATHI2, R.K. SHARMA3, R.S. CHHOKAR4, SUBHASH CHANDER5 AND ANKITA JHA6

ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research, Karnal, Haryana 132 001 Received : November 2017; Revised accepted : March 2018

ABSTRACT The field experiment was carried out in split-plot design during the winter (rabi) seasons of 2011–12 to 2014– 15 at Karnal, Haryana, to study the effect of precision irrigation scheduling and conservation agricultural practices on yield and water-use efficiency (WUE) of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) crop in north-western plains of India. The crop residue retention @ 2.5 t/ha resulted in significantly higher grain yield (5.73 t/ha) and generated a net return of ( 42,645/ha) in comparison to no-crop residue retention (5.54 t/ha) and residue retention @ 5 t/ha (5.61 t/ha). Application of less volume of water at greater frequency via tensiometer-based irrigation scheduling helped conserve water. The tensiometer-based irrigation scheduling proved far superior to the other irrigation practices for the fact that irrigation scheduling was significantly affected based on SWP. The water-use efficiency under irrigation scheduled at 80 kPa was the highest (1.95 kg/m3) followed by 60 kPa (1.45 kg/m3) and irrigations scheduled at critical growth stages (1.11 kg/m3), though yield at 80 kPa was significantly lower than other 2 irrigation schedules. Irrigation scheduling at 60 kPa yielded higher and also was more efficient than irrigation at all critical growth stages.

Key words : Crop residue, Economics, Irrigation scheduling, Water use efficiency, Wheat

For the survival of any civilization, water is the most critical resource and agriculture sector is the largest consumer of water resources worldwide. The water requirement has been increasing more and more especially in agriculture. The agricultural sector makes use of 75% of the water withdrawn from river, lakes and aquifers. Over the years, the increase in population has resulted in increased demand of water for irrigation and other uses which caused excessive withdrawal of underground water. Depletion in groundwater increased from about 2,800 km3/year in 1977 to about 4,200 km3/year in 2005 and may rise to 5,200 km3/year by 2025. The per capita available water has declined from about 10,018 m3 in 1975 to about 6,500 m3 in 2000 and the trend continues till date (Singh et al., 2012). India’s per capita water availability has been projected to reduce sharply to 1,341 m3 by 2025 and further down to 1,140 m3 by 2050 (Government of India, 2009). Water is an essential input for sustainable crop production and its timely and adequate availability

1 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Senior Scientist, 2,3,4,5Principal Scientist, 6Scientist

ensures higher yields with better quality (Tripathi et al., 2009). Though water is a precious and scarce natural resource, its use efficiency is very low in the range of 30– 40%. About 60–70% of irrigation water is lost during conveyance and application. Since volumetric soil moisture content and potential evaporation are the two major factors directly influencing the water use for growing wheat, proper irrigation scheduling is critical for efficient water management in crop production, particularly under conditions of water scarcity. Adequate soil moisture is required for normal growth and development of wheat crop at all growth stages which can be created by timely scheduling of irrigation. The effects of applied amount of water, irrigation frequency and water use are particularly important in order to obtain higher yields (Seren and Yazar, 2006). Precision irrigation scheduling is necessary to reduce overirrigation (Montazar and Sadeghi, 2008). The excessive water application can result in waterlogging or leaching of nutrients and water beyond the root zone. To improve water-use efficiency for increasing crop yields there must be a proper irrigation scheduling. Water-use efficiency has been reported to be decreasing with increasing irrigation frequency and amount of irrigation water applied for

June 2018]

WHEAT RESPONSE TO PRECISION IRRIGATION AND RESIDUE RETENTION

growing the crop per growing season (Qui et al., 2008). The use of less volume of water but more frequent is superior to the more traditional scheduling of few applications of large irrigation volumes in terms of irrigation water-use efficiency. Tillage, irrigation and fertilizer constitute the major components of energy input in a crop production system. Adoption of suitable tillage system and its long-term effect on yield, input-use efficiency and physical environment are the current research priorities. Recently, greater emphasis is being given to conservation agriculture for reversing the degradation of soil and water resources due to intensive tillage and indiscriminate use of irrigation water as well as for improving the system productivity and inputs-use efficiencies. Adaptive strategies for conservation agriculture are site-specific; perform well in a particular set of situation and may not be doing well in another set of situations. In future, there is every possibility that wheat area under conservation agriculture is going to increase so as to address the deviant and changing climatic scenario like moisture or drought stress, terminal heat stress, waterlogging due to untimely and excessive rainfall events, salt stress, cold stress, depleting soil health as well as the natural resources etc. So, these problems can be addressed by suitable mitigation measures through proper use of locally available resources at farm level like crop residue, minimum soil disturbance and intelligent irrigation scheduling. Of the many intelligent irrigation systems computing applied irrigation water based on climatic conditions, tensiometer sensor is one for irrigation scheduling in crops. In

187

case of wheat, number of tillers, plant height and dry-matter accumulation may usually decrease when wheat plants are exposed to high temperature combined with soil-moisture stress (Hossain et al., 2012). Water stress during vegetative as well as reproductive phases can reduce yield (Farooq et al., 2014). Furthermore, high temperature reduces number of grain/spike, if it prevailed during spikedevelopment stage (Kaur and Behl, 2010). The duration of grain-filling period could be reduced under high temperature, as well as growth rates with a net effect of lower final kernel weight (Zahedi and Jenner, 2003). Thus, it is expected that climate change will have implications for possible fluctuation on wheat yield and sustainable water management combined with innovative agricultural technologies could mitigate the implications of climate change. The challenge under the climatic changing scenario is to use improved agricultural management practices to minimize the impact of climate change on the yield, simultaneously conserving a considerable per cent of irrigation water. Hence the present study aims at evaluating the impact of precise irrigation scheduling and conservation agriculture on water-use efficiency and yield of wheat under changing climatic scenario. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The field experiment was conducted for 4 years (2011– 12 to 2014–15) at the research farm of ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research, Karnal, (29°43' N, 76°58' E and 252 altitude), Haryana. The agro-climatic conditions of the location are characterized by sub-tropi-

Fig. 1. Meteorological data of the experimental site

188

MEENA ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Fig. 2. Meteorological data of the experimental site

cal and semi-arid conditions. Average annual rainfall of this area is 744 mm, of which about 80% is received during the monsoon season, starting from the end of June to middle of September. The mean maximum temperature ranges between 34 and 39°C in summer and mean minimum temperature ranges between 6 to 7°C in winter. The soil texture of experimental field was sandy loam with pH 7.8 and electrical conductivity 0.26 dS/m in 1 : 2.5 soil water suspension. The soil was having 0.40% organic carbon, 196 kg/ha available N, 18.6 kg/ha available P, and 236 kg/ha available K at the beginning of the experiment. The experiment was laid out in split-plot design with 3 replications. The treatments consisted of 3 crop residue levels (no crop residue, crop residue @ 2.5 and 5.0 t/ha) in main plot and 3 irrigation levels (irrigations at critical growth stages, irrigations at 60 kPa and 80 kPa) in subplots. The residue of rice crop was used as surface mulch in the field. Wheat variety ‘HD 2967’ was sown 20 cm apart in rows with a seed rate of 100 kg/ha. Tensiometers were installed in the centre of each plot at 45 cm depth in the soil. During installation care was taken that ceramic cups of the tensiometers have good contact with the surrounding soil. Before installation, it was ensured that the ceramic cups of tensiometers were soaked in a container of water for 24 hours. Tensiometers were monitored daily for recording the prevailing soil water potential. The first irrigation was applied uniformly to all the treatments at the crown root-initiation stage (20–25 days after sowing) and subsequent irrigations were applied as per the treatments.

Sulfosulfuron @ 25 g/ha at 35 days after sowing was sprayed in 400 litres of water to control weeds in wheat. The amount of irrigation water applied was based on the conventional practice, soil water potential and cumulative pan evaporation. In the treatment where irrigation was applied on the basis of critical crop-growth stages, water was applied as per the prevailing recommendation, i.e. 60 mm water at each irrigation. In second and third irrigation level treatments (irrigation at 60 and 80 kPa respectively), the amount of water applied was equal to the amount lost through cumulative evaporation. The amount of irrigation water applied to each plot was measured using Parshall flume flow meter. The number of ears/m2 were counted at 2 places in the plot and averaged at maturity. A net plot of 9.8 m 2 was harvested manually for biomass and yield data. Grain samples were randomly collected for 1,000-grain weight and counted by using Contador seed counter and weighed. Water-use efficiency analysis combined for physical accounting of water with yield to assess how much value is being obtained from the use of water. For this analysis, physical water productivity (WP) was calculated as: WUE = Output/Q where WUE, water-use efficiency (productivity of water) in kg/m3; output, yield of wheat in kg/ha; Q, water used by the crop in m3/ha. The economics i.e. cost of cultivation, gross return, net return and benefit: cost ratio was calculated on pooled data basis to assess the profitability of retaining rice residue in

June 2018]

189

WHEAT RESPONSE TO PRECISION IRRIGATION AND RESIDUE RETENTION

wheat crop and irrigation scheduling. For calculating economics, all expenditure factors were taken into account, i.e. rental value of land for one season, cost of land preparation, sowing with drill, rice residue, seed, fertilizer, fungicide for seed treatment, herbicides for weed control, irrigation charges including labour charges, cost of pest control measures, labour charges for harvesting, threshing charges including labour and cost of transportation for market. The data recorded for different parameters were analyzed with the help of analysis of variance (ANOVA) techniques for split-plot design using SAS (Statistical Analysis Software) version 10.3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

ment of crop-residue retention of 5.0 t/ha (595) followed by residue retention at the rate of 2.5 t/ha (592) over nocrop residue (589) retention. Both the treatments of cropresidue (2.5 and 5.0 t/ha) retention were statistically at par for ears/m2; however, crop residue @ of 5.0 t/ha was statistically superior to the control. The crop-residue treatment @ 2.5 t/ha showed the maximum number of grains/ ear and 1,000-grain weight which were 3.52% and 0.57% higher, respectively, to the treatment with no-crop residue (Table 1). Crop irrigated at 60 kPa showed the maximum number of ears/m 2, grains/ear and 1,000-grain weight which were higher, being 1.86, 4.70 and 0.84% higher, respectively, than the conventional method of irrigation (I1) (60 mm) at physiological critical growth stages of crop (Table 1).

Yield attributes

The effect of residue-management options on ears/m2, grains/ear was significant, whereas 1,000-grain weight was recorded at par among the treatments. Similarly, effect of irrigation scheduling was found significant for ears/m2 and grains/ear, whereas 1,000-grain weight was found statistically similar. During most of the years, irrigation scheduling at 60 kPa resulted in higher values of yield-attributing parameters than other 2 irrigation scheduling options (Table 1). Yield attributes of wheat were significantly influenced by conservation agricultural practice, i.e. retaining previous rice residues and precise irrigation scheduling. Surface-residue retention significantly influenced the ears/m2 and grains/ear, whereas 1,000-grain weight was statistically at par among various treatments. Retaining rice crop residue @ 2.5 t/ha and 5.0 t/ha showed beneficial effects on yield-attributing characters. Maximum and significantly higher number of ears/m2 was recorded in the treat-

Yield

Effects of residue-management treatments on yield, biomass and harvest index were significant. Residue-retention treatments gave higher yield and biomass than noresidue retention treatments. Similarly, the effect of precision irrigation scheduling on grain yield, biomass and harvest index were found significant (Table 1). Pooled analysis showed that retaining residue @ 2.5 t/ ha resulted in significantly higher grain yield (5.73 t/ha) and biomass (12.9 t/ha) than residue retention of 5 t/ha and no-residue retention (5.61 and 12.60 t/ha respectively). This indicated that increasing residues rates beyond optimum level decreased the grain yield of wheat which may be due to proper crop-stand problems. Asal et al. (2015) also reported similar results, which revealed that increasing residue rates from 25 to 50% significantly decreased the grain yield. Generally, crop residue-retention improves aggregate stability, increases infiltration and conserves

Table 1. Effect of irrigation scheduling and crop-residue retention on yield attributes, yield and harvest index of wheat (pooled of 4 years) Ears/m2

1,000-grain weight (g)

Grains/ear

Grain yield (t/ha)

Biomass yield (t/ha)

Harvest index

Residue management R1 R2 R3 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

589 592 595 1.44 5.7

36.61 36.82 36.56 0.126 NS

25.6 26.5 25.7 0.158 0.64

5.54 5.73 5.61 0.015 0.06

12.50 12.90 12.60 0.041 0.13

0.45 0.43 0.44 0.001 0.005

Irrigation scheduling I1 I2 I3 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

590 601 584 1.77 5.4

36.54 36.85 36.6 0.12 NS

25.5 26.7 25.6 0.09 0.282

5.64 5.65 5.59 0.011 0.03

12.80 12.70 12.50 0.026 0.08

0.44 0.45 0.45 0.001 0.004

Treatment

R1, No-crop residue; R2, residue retention @ 2.5 t/ha; R3, residue retention @ 5.0 t/ha; I1, irrigation scheduling at critical growth stages; I2, irrigation scheduling at 60 kPa; I3, irrigation scheduling at 80 kPa; NS, non-significant

190

MEENA ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

Table 2. Effect of irrigation scheduling and crop-residue retention on water-use efficiency and economics Treatment

WUE (kg/m3)

Gross returns

Economics (×103 /ha) (pooled data basis) Net returns Benefit: cost ratio

Residue management R1 R2 R3 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

1.53 1.48 1.49 0.005 NS

94.96 98.14 96.01

40.46 42.64 39.51 0.25 1.01

1.74 1.77 1.70 0.004 0.016

Irrigation scheduling I1 I2 I3 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

1.11 1.45 1.95 0.003 0.01

96.86 96.72 95.53

42.36 42.72 42.03 0.16 0.51

1.78 1.79 1.79 0.003 0.010

R1, No-crop residue; R2, residue retention @ 2.5 t/ha; R3, residue retention @ 5.0 t/ha; I1, irrigation scheduling at critical growth stages; I2, irrigation scheduling at 60 kPa; I3, irrigation scheduling at 80 kPa; NS, non-significant.

soil moisture. Besides, residue retention directly increases organic matter and conserves moisture in soil, which in turn may result in better soil-nutrient availability for crop. On the other hand, excessive residue retention may cause poor germination by causing hindrance to seeding and seedling emergence, and depression in crop growth due to temporary nutrient immobilization by soil microbes. However, despite the potential minor negative effects of residue retention on crop growth, the benefits derived from improved soil fertility and moisture availability may override the negative influences. Combined analysis over the years showed that irrigations scheduled at 60 kPa and irrigations at physiological critical growth stages produced at par yield and biomass which were significantly higher than 80 kPa irrigation schedule (Table 1). The highest yield was obtained at 60 kPa irrigation schedule. Creating favourable soil-moisture status in the root zone through precise irrigations favoured the growth and development of plants, and this might have resulted in proper photosynthesis, translocation of photosynthates from source to sink and thus higher yield attributes and yield were obtained (Meena et al., 2015). Higher biological yields were recorded when irrigations were applied at physiological critical growth stages of crop (12.8 t/ha) over irrigations scheduled at 60 kPa (12.7 t/ha) and 80 kPa (12.5 t/ha). It might be due to application of more irrigation water which would have promoted more vegetative growth The highest grain yield of wheat was obtained in crop season of 2013–14 owing to favourable weather conditions and well-distributed rainfall (179.4 mm) during the cropping season (December 1.8 mm; January 65.8 mm, February 72 mm; March 28.4 mm and April 11.4 mm), whereas the minimum grain yield was harvested in year

2012–13. It is worth mentioning here that although during crop season 2012–13 total rainfall received was 202.6 mm, but it was not evenly distributed. The major portion of it was received in February (116 mm), in 3 spells (4–6 February, 67.2 mm; 15–17 February, 14.6 mm; 22–24 February, 34.2 mm) which caused waterlogging and lodging in crop, resulting in less yield. Water-use efficiency

Data revealed that different irrigation scheduling significantly influenced water-use efficiency (WUE) and irrigations scheduled by tensiometer at 60 kPa and 80 kPa showed higher water-use efficiency. Total irrigation water consumed (irrigation + rainfall) varied from 300 to 484 mm under irrigation scheduled at 60 kPa, whereas it was 390 to 602 mm under irrigation scheduled at critical growth stages. This indicated that there was about 30% saving in irrigation water in case of 60 kPa compared to critical growth stages treatment. On pooled data basis, significantly higher WUE was recorded under irrigation scheduled at 60 kPa (1.45 kg/m3) and at 80 kPa (1.95 kg/ m3) over irrigation scheduled at critical growth stages (1.11 kg/m3) (Table 3). As water is one of the costliest inputs used in agriculture, its efficient utilization becomes quite imperative to quantify ‘when and how much’ irrigation should be given to harness optimum production. These findings are in line with those of Kumar et al. (2013). Economics

The gross returns varied from 94,960/ha without surface-residue retention to 98,1245/ha with surface-residue retention of 2.5 t/ha with corresponding net returns of 40,460/ha and 42,645/ha. Gross returns, net returns

June 2018]

WHEAT RESPONSE TO PRECISION IRRIGATION AND RESIDUE RETENTION

and benefit: cost (B:C) ratio were the highest when 2.5 t/ ha residue was retained as compared to no-residue or residue @ 5.0 t/ha. Retaining of 2.5 t/ha rice residue in wheat recorded significantly higher net returns than the other 2 treatments. The maximum profitability was observed in crop residue retention @ 2.5 t/ha (1.77) owing to higher yield (grain and straw) and less investment under residue head than no-residue retention (1.74) and residue retention @ 5.0 t/ha (1.70). Among the irrigation schedules, the higher B:C ratio of 1.79 was observed in tensiometerbased irrigation scheduling than conventional irrigation (1.78) scheduling based on critical crop-growth stages. The results revealed that tensiometer-based irrigation scheduling has added advantages over the other irrigation methods. In the present scenario, farmers apply ample amount of irrigation which is far above the recommended irrigation amount under critical physiological growth stage approach. The tensiometer-based irrigation scheduling helps conserve moisture which is evident from the fact that water-use efficiency under irrigation scheduled at 80 kPa was the highest (1.95 kg/m3) followed by 60 kPa (1.45 kg/ m3) and the irrigations scheduled at critical growth stages (1.11 kg/m3), though yield at 80 kPa was significantly lower than irrigations scheduled at 60 kPa. Conservation of water is a must as vast areas are experiencing severe water shortage and depletion of ground water has turned out to be one of the major concerns. The application of less volume of water at greater frequency is far superior with respect to the traditional scheduling methods using larger volumes at lower frequencies. The study revealed 30% saving of water at 60 KPa as compared to recommended method of irrigation. In addition to the abovementioned facts, retaining crop residues at optimal level (2.5 t/ha rice residue in wheat crop) also plays a major role in mitigating the abiotic stress via creation of favourable micro-climate; thereby increasing the productivity as well as water-use efficiency. REFERENCES Asal, K.G., Seyed A.K. and Bahrani, M.J. 2015. Wheat yield and soil properties as influenced by crops residues and nitrogen rates.

191

Australian Journal of Crop Science 9(9): 853–858. Farooq, M., Hussain, M. and Siddique, K.H.M. 2014. Drought stress in wheat during flowering and grain-filling periods. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 33: 331–349. Government of India. 2009. Background note for consultation meeting with Policy makers on review of National Water Policy. Ministry of Water Resources. Government of India, New Delhi. 50 pp. Hossain, A., Jaime A.T., da Silva, Marina, V.L. and Vacheslav, P.Z. 2012. High temperature combined with drought affect rainfed spring wheat and barley in South-Eastern Russia: I. Phenology and growth. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences 19(4): 473–487. Kaur, V. and Behl, R.K. 2010. Grain yield in wheat as affected by short periods of high temperature, drought and their interaction during pre and post-anthesis stages. Cereal Research Communications 38(4): 514–520. Kumar, N., Singh, H., Kumar, V. and Singh V.P. 2013. Productivity and water-use efficiency of spring-planted sugarcane (Saccharum sp.) under various planting methods and irrigation regimes. Indian Journal of Agronomy 58(4): 592–596. Meena R.P., Sharma, R.K., Chhokar, R.S., Chander, S, Tripathi, S.C., Kumar, R. and Sharma, I. 2015. Improving water use efficiency of rice–wheat cropping system by adopting microirrigation systems. International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management 6(3): 341–345. Montazar, A. and Sadeghi, M. 2008. Effects of applied water and sprinkler irrigation uniformity on alfalfa growth and hay yield. Agricultural Water Management 95: 1,279–1,287. Qui, G.Y., Wang, L., He, X., Zhang, X., Chen, S., Chen, J. and Yang, Y. 2008. Water use efficiency and evapotranspiration of wheat and its response to irrigation regime in the North China. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 148: 1,848– 1,859. Seren, S.M. and Yazar, A. 2006. Wheat yield response to line-source sprinkler irrigation in the arid Southeast Anatolia region of Turkey. Agricultural Water Management 81: 59–76. Singh, A., Aggarwal, N., Aulakh, G.S. and Hundal, R.K. 2012. Ways to maximize the water use efficiency in field crops - A review. Greener Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2(4): 108– 129. Tripathi, M.L., Trivedi, S.K. and Yadav, R.P. 2009. Effect of irrigation and nutrient levels on growth and yield of coriander (Coriandrum sativum). Indian Journal of Agronomy 54(4): 454-458. Zahedi, M. and Jenner, C.F. 2003. Analysis of effects in wheat of high temperature on grain filling attributes estimated from mathematical models of grain filling. Journal of Agriculture Science 141(2): 203–212.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 192__196 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Integrated nutrient management in pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) in north-western Rajasthan R.R. JAKHAR1, P.S. SHEKHAWAT2, R.S. YADAV3, AMIT KUMAWAT4

AND

S.P. SINGH5

Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner, Rajasthan 334 006 Received : July 2017; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2014 and 2015 on loamy sand soil of Bikaner, Rajasthan, to study the integrated nutrient management in pearlmillet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.]. The experiment comprising of 8 treatments, viz. control, 50% recommended dose of fertilizer (30 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 10 kg K2O/ha), 50% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) + Azotobactor + phosphorus-solubilizing bacteria (PSB), 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + PSB, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB, 100% RDF (60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O/ha) and 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB in randomized block design with 3 replications. Application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB significantly increased plant height (182.2 cm), dry-matter accumulation (81.83 g/plant), total tillers (2.23), chlorophyll content (2.96 mg/g), effective tillers/plant (1.63), ear length (19.63), girth of ear (78.6 mm), grain weight/ear (6.19 g), 1,000-seed weight (7.73 g), grain (2.48 t/ha) and straw yields (4.34 t/ha), content of N (1.84 and 0.594%), P (0.293 and 0.141%) and K (0.735 and 2.28%) in grain and straw and total uptake of N (71.5 kg/ha), P (13.4 kg/ha) and K (117.0 kg/ha). Organic carbon, available N, P and K status of soil after harvest of pearlmillet increased significantly with 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB or 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB. Significantly maximum net returns ( 37,594/ha) with benefit: cost ratio (2.29) of pearlmillet was obtained under 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB.

Key words: Azotobactor, FYM, Pearlmillet, Phosphorus-solubilizing bacteria, Residual, Yield

Pearlmillet is one of the important cereal crops of arid and semi-arid regions of the country and is extensively cultivated as dual-purpose crop. In Rajasthan, pearlmillet cultivation is mainly confined to the arid (62% of total area) and semi-arid (12.6% of the total area) regions (Kumar and Gautam, 2004). Rajasthan stands first in the country and produced 4.49 million tonnes of grains from 4.10 million ha area, with average productivity of 1017 kg/ ha (GoI, New Delhi, 2015). Integration of chemical fertilizers with organic manures has been found quite promising not only in sustaining the soil health and productivity but also in stabilizing the crop production in comparison to the use of each component separately. Most of the pearl millet-growing areas in the country are confined to the light-textured soils suffering from the problem of low soilfertility status and poor moisture-retention capacity. In the Based on a part of the Ph.D. Thesis of the first author, submitted to the Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner, in 2016 (unpublished) 1 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Reseach Scholar, 2,3Professor, 4,5Assistant Professor (Agronomy)

present system of intensive agriculture, most of the farmers are using high-yielding hybrid or varieties of the crops that have led to heavy withdrawal of nutrients from the soil. During the past few years, fertilizer application remained much below as compared to removal. This gap between nutrient removal and supply cannot be bridged by fertilizers alone. It can only be achieved through integrated nutrient-supply approach (INSA). Indiscriminate use of fertilizers without recycling of organic wastes has not only aggravated multi nutrient deficiencies in soil-plant system but also deteriorated soil health and created environmental pollution. Moreover, chemical fertilizers are becoming costlier input in agriculture. Integration of chemical fertilizers with organic manures has been found quite promising not only in sustaining the soil health and productivity but also in stabilizing the crop production in comparison to the use of each component separately (Rathore et al. 2006). Therefore, it is the right time to evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of organic wastes along with biofertilizers not only for improving and building up of soil fertility but also to increase the fertilizer-use efficiency.

June 2018]

INM IN PEARLMILLET

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2014 and 2015 at Agronomy farm, College of Agriculture, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, Bikaner (Rajasthan). The soil of the experimental site was loamy sand (83.4% sand, 10.3% silt and 6.3% clay), slightly above neutral in reaction (pH 8.2), low in organic carbon (0.11%), available nitrogen (117.1 kg/ha), available phosphorus (14.2 kg/ha) and medium in available potassium (172.4 kg/ha). The content of N, P and K in farmyard manure (FYM) was 0.52, 0.20 and 0.58% respectively. The FYM was applied 21 days before sowing of pearlmillet. About 125 g jaggery was boiled in 1 litre water and then cooled. One packet each of PSB and Azotobactor culture, i.e. Azotobactor chroococcum was added and mixed thoroughly in required quantity of jaggery solution. The required seed was mixed thoroughly with the paste of culture as per treatment and allowed to dry in shade. The total rainfall received during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2014 and 2015 was 417.4 and 324.6 mm respectively. The experiment comprising 8 treatments, viz. T1, control; T2, 50% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) (30 kg N + 20 kg P 2O 5 + 10 kg K 2O/ha); T 3, 50% RDF + Azotobactor + phosphate-solubilizing becteria (PSB); T4, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor; T5, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + PSB; T6, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB; T7, 100% RDF (60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O/ ha) and T8, 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB, in randomized block design with 3 replications. Pearlmillet hybrid ‘RHB 177’ was sown on 14 and 10 July of 2014 and 2015 respectively, using seed rate @ 4.0 kg/ha with row spacing of 30 cm and harvested on 29 and 23 September of 2014 and 2015. The field observations on plant height, dry-matter accumulation, total tillers, chlorophyll content, effective tillers/plant, length of ear, girth of ear, grain weight/ ear, 1,000-seed weight, grain and stover yields were recorded. Five randomly selected plants from each plot were uprooted and later cleaned and observations like plant height, dry-matter and chlorophyll content at peak growth stage (60 DAS) were recorded and averaged. The yield attributes were recorded at harvesting to assess the contribution to yield. The experimental data analysed statistically by applying the technique of analysis of variance (ANOVA) prescribed for the design to test the significance of overall difference among treatments by the F test and conclusion were drawn at 5% probability level. Economics of treatments was also worked out. RESULTS AND DISSCUSION Growth attributes

The highest plant height, dry-matter accumulation at 60

193

days after sowing (DAS), total tillers and chlorophyll content of leaves at harvesting (Table 1) of pearlmillet were obtained with application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB over the control and the other treatments, but it remained at par with 100% RDF and 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB. Further, application of 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + PSB significantly increased the plant height, dry-matter accumulation, total tillers and chlorophyll content of leaves at 60 DAS over the control, 50% RDF and 50% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB but remained at par with 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor. Hence a suitable combination of fertilizers, manures and biofertilizer maintained a long-term soil fertility and sustained high level of productivity. Being a cereal crop, pearlmillet required nutrients throughout the growing season and therefore, better growth and development under these treatments might be owing to the increased availability of nutrients to plant initially through inorganic fertilizers and then by organic manure like FYM and biofertilizer matching to the need of crop throughout the growing season. This increase in growth parameters might be ascribed to supply of superoptimal fertility dose and to additional advantages provided by biofertilizers with seed inoculation of Azotobacter and PSB having ability to produce plant growthproducing substances and antifungal substances in addition to the contribution of atmospheric nitrogen made available to plant (Kumar, 2015). The positive effect of nitrogen and phosphorus supplied through combinations of N and P fertilizers with adequate dose of manures on growth could be ascribed to its effectiveness in providing a balanced nutritional environment favourbly both in rhizosphere and plant system. The results obtained in the present investigation are in close conformity with the findings of Chaudhary et al. (2013). Yield attributes and yield

Application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB significantly improved yield attributes like number of effective tillers/plant, length of ear, girth of ear, grain weight/ ear and 1,000-seed weight of pearlmillet (Table 1) over all other treatments, but it remained at par with 100% RDF and 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB. This could mainly be associated with the increased growth of the crop in terms of plant height, chlorophyll content and dry-matter accumulation at growth stage recorded under these treatments owing to greater availability of most of the macro- and micro-nutrients in appropriate amounts and balanced proportion that lead to higher uptake of the nutrients. The increased growth provided greater site for photosynthesis and diversion of photosynthates towards sink (ear and grain). The beneficial effect on yield attributes might also be owing to the increased supply of all

194

JAKHAR ET AL.

the essential nutrients by FYM and enhanced availability of nitrogen and phosphorus by Azotobactor and PSB might have resulted in higher manufacture of food and its subsequent partitioning towards sink. The findings of present investigation are supported by Parihar et al. (2010) in pearlmillet. The significantly higher grain yield was obtained by the application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB (Table 1). The higher values of yield attributes like effective tillers/plant, length of ear, girth of ear, grain weight/ear and 1,000-seed weight coupled with the higher crop dry matter observed with this treatment might be the most probable reason of higher grain and stover yields. The increase in stover yield with application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB could be partly attributed to its direct influence on dry-matter production of each vegetative part and indirectly through increased morphological parameters of growth (plant height and number of total

[Vol. 63, No. 2

tillers). Our results are in close agreement with the findings of Khambalkar et al. (2012) and Singh et al. (2013) in pearlmillet. Nutrient content and uptake

Application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB significantly increased nutrient content and uptake of N, P and K in grain and stover of pearlmillet crop (Table 2). Combined application of inorganic fertilizers, manures and biofertilizer significantly increased the content of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in grain and stover. It can chiefly be associated with the better growth of the crop owing to favourable nutritional environment mainly for supply of most of the macro nutrients in balanced and available form throughout the growing period of the crop and in adequate amounts. Since the uptake of nutrients in grain and stover is a function of their content and yield,

Table 1. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield attributes and yield of pearlmillet (data pooled over 2 years) Treatment

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8

Plant Dry-matter Chlorophyll Total height accumulation content tillers/ (cm) (g/plant) (mg/g) plant

95.1 115.6 117.1 142.9 147.3 175.2 178.2 182.2 SEm± 2.48 CD (P=0.05) 7.17

41.34 50.21 51.66 59.20 61.10 79.65 81.16 81.83 0.84 2.44

2.23 2.51 2.56 2.73 2.75 2.91 2.94 2.96 0.03 0.08

1.33 1.55 1.61 1.85 1.91 2.15 2.19 2.23 0.04 0.12

Effective Ear-length tillers/ (cm) plant 1.09 1.22 1.25 1.40 1.44 1.58 1.60 1.63 0.02 0.07

12.78 14.72 15.20 17.36 17.48 19.07 19.31 19.63 0.29 0.85

Girth of ear (mm)

Grain weight /ear (g)

1,000seed weight(g)

62.1 67.7 68.8 72.6 73.1 77.3 77.9 78.6 0.80 2.33

4.13 5.07 5.13 5.62 5.66 6.08 6.11 6.19 0.09 0.25

6.11 6.64 6.71 7.17 7.20 7.65 7.67 7.73 0.10 0.28

Yield (t/ha) Grain Stover 1.22 1.59 1.70 2.01 2.03 2.35 2.40 2.48 0.06 0.18

2.37 2.94 3.19 3.66 3.70 4.15 4.21 4.34 0.10 0.28

T1, control; T2, 50% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) (30 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 10 kg K2O/ha); T3, 50% RDF + Azotobactor + phosphate-solubilizing becteria (PSB); T4, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor; T5, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + PSB; T6, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB; T7, 100% RDF (60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O/ha) and T8, 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB Table 2. Effect of integrated nutrient management on nutrient content and uptake of pearlmillet (data pooled over 2 years) Treatment

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Nitrogen content (%) Grain Stover 1.44 1.55 1.57 1.71 1.68 1.82 1.83 1.84 0.02 0.05

0.464 0.500 0.505 0.562 0.557 0.585 0.589 0.594 0.003 0.010

Phosphorus content (%) Grain Stover 0.229 0.246 0.248 0.268 0.271 0.287 0.290 0.293 0.003 0.009

0.111 0.119 0.120 0.130 0.132 0.139 0.140 0.141 0.001 0.003

Potassium content (%) Grain Stover 0.575 0.615 0.625 0.697 0.686 0.723 0.729 0.735 0.005 0.014

1.56 1.75 1.76 2.02 2.00 2.23 2.27 2.28 0.04 0.11

Total uptake (kg/ha) Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium 28.6 39.2 42.6 55.6 54.2 67.0 68.7 71.5 1.2 3.5

5.4 7.4 8.0 10.2 10.4 12.5 12.8 13.4 0.2 0.6

44.1 61.1 66.8 88.8 86.8 109.6 113.0 117.0 2.6 7.6

T1, control; T2, 50% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) (30 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 10 kg K2O/ha); T3, 50% RDF + Azotobactor + phosphate-solubilizing becteria (PSB); T4, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor; T5, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + PSB; T6, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB; T7, 100% RDF (60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O/ha) and T8, 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB

June 2018]

195

INM IN PEARLMILLET

Table 3. Effect of integrated nutrient management on economics and soil fertility (data pooled over 2 years) Treatment Cost of cultivation T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

13.2 15.2 15.3 18.7 18.7 18.8 17.1 17.3 – –

Economics (×103 /ha) Net returns 14.5 20.5 22.9 26.2 26.6 33.3 36.0 37.5 0.98 2.85

Benefit: cost ratio

Organic carbon (%)

1.09 1.38 1.53 1.49 1.52 1.89 2.20 2.29 0.08 0.24

0.112 0.113 0.114 0.115 0.116 0.116 0.117 0.119 0.001 0.002

Soil fertility Available N Available P (kg/ha) (kg/ha) 117.7 121.5 122.2 125.8 126.1 129.9 130.8 131.9 0.8 2.4

14.96 15.72 15.86 16.42 16.68 17.15 17.17 17.25 0.09 0.27

Available K (kg/ha) 170.1 173.7 175.4 179.3 179.8 183.3 184.3 184.9 0.63 1.82

T1, control; T2, 50% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF) (30 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 + 10 kg K2O/ha); T3, 50% RDF + Azotobactor + phosphate-solubilizing becteria (PSB); T4, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor; T5, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + PSB; T6, 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB; T7, 100% RDF (60 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O/ha) and T8, 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB

the increase in grain and stover yields coupled with increased nutrient content also resulted in higher total uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium with the application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB. Use of FYM has been also known to help in reducing the soil pH to some extent by producing carbonic acids while their decomposition that may also be the reason of greater availability and mobility of nutrients mainly of micronutrients. This could have also helped in additional uptake of the nutrients by plants. Similar results were reported by Manan et al. (2013). The content and uptake of any nutrient in the plant is directly related to its availability in the root zone and growth of the plant. Use of Azotobactor and PSB in combination with recommended dose of fertilizers increased the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content in grain and stover significantly that might be attributed to their availability in soil in appropriate amount and in the available form due to these microbial inoculants. Azotobactor improved the nitrogen content in grain and stover owing to greater availability of it through biological nitrogen fixation. It also promotes secretion of growth promoting substances. This also resulted in better utilization of other nutrients like phosphorus and potassium by plants. These results confirm the findings of Ansari et al. (2011). Economics

Application of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB significantly increased the net returns ( 37,594/ha) of pearl millet with benefit: cost (B:C) ratio (2.29) as evident in Table 3. It is obvious because grain and stover yields of pearlmillet increased with combined application of fertilizer, FYM and biofertilizer in soil and hence net returns and benefit: cost ratio. The increase in net returns and ben-

efit: cost ratio owing to chemical fertilizer, FYM and biofertilizer was also observed by Kumar et al. (2014). Soil fertility

Significant improvement in organic carbon, available N, P and K status of soil was observed owing to incorporation of 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB in pearlmillet after harvesting (Table 3). This may be ascribed to the beneficial role of fertilizers in mineralization of native as well as nutrients through fertilizer in addition of its own nutrient content which enhanced the available nutrient pool of the soil after harvesting. The favourable conditions for microbial as well as chemical activities because of addition of FYM and integrated with other nutrients augmented the mineralization of nutrients and ultimately increased the available nutrients status of soil. It could be further understood in the light of differential solubility of fertilizers and manures. It is quite established fact that only a part of FYM is mineralized in one season and the rest has carryover effect. The residual status of nutrient is a function of nutrients supplied and their loss or removal by crop. This can be chiefly ascribed to the fact that a part of nitrogen and phosphorus requirement of the crop was met through the nitrogen fixation and phosphorus solubilization by the microbial inoculants. This resulted in less removal of these nutrients from the soil by the crop that could be the result of higher availability of these nutrients in soil after harvest. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Khambalkar et al. (2012). Hence it may be concluded that growing of pearlmillet with 100% RDF + Azotobactor + PSB or 50% RDF + 5 t FYM + Azotobactor + PSB holds great promise for increased productivity of pearlmillet in north western Rajasthan.

196

JAKHAR ET AL.

REFERENCES Ansari, M.A., Rana, K.S., Rana, D.S. and Kumar, P. 2011. Effect of nutrient management and antitranspirant on rainfed sole and intercropped pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) and pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan). Indian Journal of Agronomy 56(3): 209–216. Chaudhary, S., Yadav, L.R., Yadav, S.S., Sharma, O.P. and Keshwa, G.L. 2013. Integrated use of fertilizers and manures with foliar application of iron in barley (Hordeum vulgare). Indian Journal of Agronomy 58(3): 363–367. GoI, 2015. Economic Survey of India, 2014–15. Ministry of Finance (Economic Division), Government of India, New Delhi. Khambalkar, P. A., Tomar, P. S. and Verma, S. K. 2012. Long term effect of integrated nutrient management on productivity and soil fertility in pearlmillet (Pennisetum glacum)–mustard (Brassica juncea) cropping sequence. Indian Journal of Agronomy 57(3): 222–228. Kumar, N. and Gautam, R.C. 2004. Effect of moisture conservation and nutrient management practices on growth and yield of pearlmillet under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Agronomy 49(3): 182–185. Kumar, P., Singh, R., Singh, A., Paliwal, D. and Kumar, S. 2014. Integrated nutrient management in pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping sequence in

[Vol. 63, No. 2

semi arid condition of India. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences 10: 96–101. Kumar, R. 2015. Productivity, profitability and nutrient uptake of maize (Zea mays) as influenced by management practices in North-East India. Indian Journal of Agronomy 60(2): 273– 278. Manan, J., Singh, D. and Manhas, S.S. 2013. Winter maize as affected by preceding rainy seasons crops, farmyard manure and nitrogen levels. Indian Journal of Agronomy 58(4): 539–542. Parihar, C.M., Rana, K.S. and Kantwa, S.R. 2010. Nutrient management in pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum)–mustard (Brassica juncea) cropping system as affected by land configuration under limited irrigation. Indian Journal of Agronomy 55(3): 191–196. Rathore, V.S., Singh, P. and Gautam, R.C. 2006. Productivity and water-use efficiency of rainfed pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum L.) as influenced by planting patterns and integrated nutrient management. Indian Journal of Agronomy 51(1): 46–48. Singh, R., Gupta, A.K., Ram, T., Choudhary, G.L. and Sheoran, A.C. 2013. Effect of integrated nitrogen management on transplanted pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) under rainfed condition. Indian Journal of Agronomy 58(1): 81–85.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 197__200 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Effect of integrated plant nutrient management on pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) productivity in rainfed subtropic Shiwalik foothills of Jammu and Kashmir BRINDER SINGH1, ANIL KUMAR2, VIKAS ABROL3, A.P.SINGH4, JAI KUMAR5 AND ASHU SHARMA6

Advanced Centre for Rainfed Agriculture, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Rakh-Dhiansar, Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir181 133 Received : October 2017; Revised accepted : April 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) seasons of 2013, 2014 and 2015 at Advanced Centre for Rainfed Agriculture, Rakh-Dhiansar, Jammu to study the effect of integrated nutrient management on productivity of pearlmillet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.]. The experiment was laid out in randomized block design with 8 treatments, replicated thrice. Application of 100% recommended dose of NPK significantly improved the growth parameters, yield attributes, yield and nutrient uptake of pearlmillet which was statistically at par with other nutrient resource combinations like 75% N inorganic + 25% N through vermicompost, 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM and 50% N inorganic + 50% N through vermicompost. Application of 100% NPK (RDF) also resulted in higher net returns ( 34.9 × 103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (3.0) followed by 75% inorganic + 25% N through FYM (net returns, 27.4 × 103/ha; B:C ratio, 2.4) with respect to pearlmillet productivity.

Key words : Economics, Nutrient uptake, Pearlmillet, Yield

Pearlmillet is one of the major coarse grain crops which is predominantly grown in rainfed low soil-moisture conditions. In Asia, it is an important cereal crop of India, Pakistan, China and other parts of South-eastern Asia. In India, pearlmillet is the fifth most important cereal grain crop grown next to rice, wheat, maize and sorghum and is largely grown in Rajasthan, Gujarat, Maharastra, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Karnataka in the rainy season during June to September. Of late, its cultivation has gained more importance owing to increasing evidences of lower seasonal rainfall, terminal heat and frequent occurrence of extreme weather events coupled with scanty water resources (Singh et al., 2010). Farmers generally apply imbalanced chemical fertilizers leading to nutrient deficiency of other than applied nutrients that leads to declined organic carbon level in soil. Therefore, application of chemical fertilizers alone may not keep pace with time in maintenance of soil fertility for sustaining higher productivity and hence, adequate and balanced use of manures and fertilizers is essential for better soil health (Gupta, 2001). 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Junior Scientist, 2Associate Director (Research), 3,4Senior Scientist, 5Junior Scientist, 6Senior Research Fellow 1

The gap between nutrient removal and supply under rainfed situations calls for integrated nutrient management strategy involving use of inorganic fertilizers and organic manures (Prasad, 2011). Hence present investigation was initiated to find out the effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, productivity and relative economics of pearlmillet under rainfed situations. MATERIALS AND METHODS

A field experiment was conducted during the rainy seasons (kharif) of 2013, 2014 and 2015 in randomized block design with 3 replications at the Research farm of Advanced Centre for Rainfed Agriculture, Rakh-Dhiansar, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Jammu. The soil of experimental site was sandy loam in texture, with a pH of 6.58, low in organic carbon (0.28%), available nitrogen (172 kg/ha), medium available phosphorus (15.1 kg/ha) and potassium (108 kg/ ha). The experiment consisted of 8 treatments of inorganic and organic combinations of nutrient sources, viz. control, 100% NPK inorganic (RDF), 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM, 50% N inorganic + 50% N through FYM, 100% N through FYM, 75% N inorganic + 25% N through vermicompost (VC), 50% N inorganic + 50% N through vermicompost and 100% N through

198

SINGH ET AL.

vermicompost. Pearlmillet hybrid ‘Nandi 65’ was sown at 45 cm × 10 cm spacing. The recommended dose of NPK, i.e 50 : 30 : 15 kg/ha was applied. Half dose of nitrogen and full dose of phosphorus and potassium to the tune of 30 and 15 kg, respectively, was applied basal and the remaining nitrogen (25 kg) was applied 35 days after sowing of crop. The total mean monthly rainfall received during the crop season was about 870, 659.2 and 584.7 mm during the respective kharif seasons of 2013, 2014 and 2015. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Growth parameters

Different integrated nutrient-management treatments had a significant influence on plant height, tillers/m row length, and dry-matter accumulation of pearlmillet. Application of 100% recommended dose of fertilizers significantly improved the plant height, tillers/m row length and dry-matter accumulation as compared to the rest of the treatments; however, it was statistically at par with 75% N inorganic + 25% N through vermicompost. Treatments comprising 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM and 50% N + 50% N through vermicompost were also statistically at par with each other for plant height, tillers/m row length and dry-matter, whereas significantly lowest values were recorded in the control treatments (Table 1). Improvement in growth parameters owing to integrated use of inorganic fertilizers and organic manures could be attributed to better availability of major and minor nutrients that are essentially required in various metabolic processes which ultimately resulted in better mobilization of synthesized carbohydrates into amino acids and proteins that in turn stimulated rapid cell-division and cell elongation and facilitated the faster vegetative growth. Similar results were also reported by Singh and Chauhan (2016). Among the organics, application of vermicompost resulted in the

[Vol. 63, No. 2

maximum plant height, number of tillers/m row length and dry-matter accumulation. Superiority of organics in combination with inorganic is contributed by vermicompost and FYM application, enriching the supply of all the essential macro and micronutrients higher than other organic sources. The vermicompost and FYM enhanced soil physical, chemical and biological properties and thus overall vegetative growth of the crop (Bana et al., 2012). Yield attributes and yield

The yield-attributing characters such as ear length, ear girth, grain weight/ear, 1000 grain weight, along with grain and stover yields were significantly influenced due to different treatments (Table 2). Application of 100% recommended dose of fertilizer recorded superior yield attributes as compared with the control, 100% N through FYM and 100% N through vermicompost. However, these were statistically at par with 75% N inorganic + 25% N through vermicompost, 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM and 50% N inorganic + 50% N through vermicompost and also remained superior to the rest of the treatments which may be ascribed to increased availability of nutrients in soil owing to the fact that the combined application of inorganic and organic sources might have enhanced the organic carbon content in soil and improved water-holding capacity of soil which resulted in better uptake and response of applied nutrients. The application of 100% NPK (RDF) recorded significantly higher grain and stover yields of pearlmillet. However, among the integrated nutrient-management treatments, significantly higher grain and stover yields were recorded in the treatment where 75% N inorganic + 25% N through vermicompost followed by treatments, i.e. 75% N inorganic +25% N through FYM and 50% N inorganic + 50% with the corresponding yield value of 2.6, 2.5 and 2.4 t/ha respectively. The improved vegetative growth under these

Table 1. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth and development of pearlmillet (pooled data of 3 years) Treatment Control 100% NPK 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM 50% N inorganic + 50% N through FYM 100% N through FYM 75% N inorganic + 25% N through VC 50% N inorganic + 50% N through VC 100% N through VC SEm± CD (P=0.05) VC, Vermicompost

Plant height (cm)

Tillers/m row length

Dry-matter accumulation (g/plant)

203.3 229.1 219.9 211.8 208.3 225.3 219.6 213.6 2.0 6.3

20.9 35.8 30.8 28.6 25.0 34.1 30.7 27.1 0.6 1.9

53.0 80.9 77.8 74.3 67.7 80.3 79.3 69.8 0.4 1.2

June 2018]

199

PEARLMILLET RESPONSE TO IPNM

Table 2. Effect of integrated nutrient management on yield attributes, grain yield and relative economics of pearlmillet (pooled data of 3 years) Treatment

Control 100% NPK 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM 50% N inorganic + 50% N through FYM 100% N through FYM 75% N inorganic + 25% N through VC 50% N inorganic + 50% N through VC 100% N through VC SEm± CD (P=0.05)

Ear length (cm)

Ear girth (cm)

Grain weight/ear (g)

1,000grain weight (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

20.7 24.4 23.7 22.2 22.1 23.9 23.1 22.5 0.58 1.79

9.6 11.2 10.4 10.1 10.0 10.7 10.4 10.2 0.12 0.36

18.2 29.6 26.8 25.3 23.7 29.1 28.3 24.8 0.31 0.95

10.0 12.6 11.8 11.0 10.7 12.3 12.1 11.5 0.25 0.76

1.6 2.9 2.5 2.2 2.2 2.6 2.4 2.3 0.1 0.16

Stover Net Benefit: yield returns cost (t/ha) (× 103 /ha) ratio 4.3 6.1 5.8 5.6 5.6 6.0 5.8 5.7 0.1 0.15

15.0 34.9 27.4 22.8 21.6 28.8 23.0 18.9 – –

1.8 3.0 2.4 2.0 1.9 2.3 1.8 1.5 – –

VC, Vermicompost

treatments might have enhanced the synthesis of carbohydrates, leading to better yield attributes which ultimately enhanced the grain yield. Our results confirm the findings of Parihar et al. (2010). Also integration of organics might have helped in increased photosynthetic activity thereby resulted in accumulation of photosynthates which might have translocated to sink due to better source-sink relationship. Similar results were reported by Bana et al. (2012). Economics

Net returns (34.9 × 103 /ha) and benefit: cost ratio (3.0) of pearlmillet production were higher with application of recommended dose of fertilizer followed by 75% N inorganic + 25% N through FYM (Table 2).

REFERENCES

Nutrient uptake

Integrated nutrient management treatments increased the total uptake of N, P and K in comparison to control (Fig.1). Significantly higher NPK uptake was recorded with application of 100% NPK (RDF) followed by integrated use of 75% N inorganic + 25% N through vermicompost and 50% N Inorganic + 50% N through vermicompost. This might have happened owing to im-

Control

100% NPK

proved nutritional environment in the rhizosphere as well as its utilization by the plant. These results are in conformity with the findings of Meena and Gautam (2005). Application of organic sources resulted in balanced supply of macro and micronutrients improving the bio-chemical properties of the soil (Bana et al. 2016). It may be concluded that the application of 100% NPK (RDF) recorded significantly higher grain and stover yield of pearlmillet. However, among the integrated nutrient management, application of 75% N through chemical fertilizer and 25% N through vermicompost with recommended doses of phosphorus and potassium produced significantly higher grain and stover yields, which could be viable option for sustaining productivity in rainfed region of subtropic foothills.

75% 50% N 50% N 75% N 50% N 100% N inorganic inorganic through inorganic inorganic through + 25% N + 50% N FYM + 25% N + 50% N VC FYM FYM VC VC

Fig. 1. Total uptake of nutrients by different treatments

Bana, R.S., Gautam, R.C. and Rana, K.S. 2012. Effect of different organic sources on productivity and quality of pearl millet and their residual effect on wheat. Annals of Agricultural Research 33(3): 126–130. Bana, R.S., Pooniya, V., Choudhary, A.K., Rana, K.S. and Tyagi, V.K. 2016. Influence of organic nutrient sources and moisture management on productivity, biofortification and soil health in pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) + clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonaloba) intercropping system of semiarid India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 86(11): 1,418–1,425. Gupta, A.K. 2001. Nutrient mining in agro-climatic zones of Rajasthan. Fertilizer News 46 (9): 39–46. Meena, R. and Gautam, R.C. 2005. Effect of integrated nitrogen management on productivity, nutrient uptake of moisture use functionally pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum). Indian Journal of Agronomy 50(4): 305–307. Parihar, C.M., Rana, K.S. and Kantwa, S.R. 2010. Nutrient management in pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum) –mustard (Brassica juncea) cropping system as affected by land configuration under limited irrigation. Indian Journal of Agronomy 55(3): 191–196.

200

SINGH ET AL.

Prasad, R. 2011. Nitrogen and food grain production in India. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 7(12): 66–76. Singh, R.K., Chakraborty, D., Garg, R.N., Sharma, P.K. and Sharma, U.C. 2010. Effect of different water regimes and nitrogen application on growth, yield, water use and nitrogen uptake

[Vol. 63, No. 2

by pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 80(3): 213–216. Singh, S.B. and Chauhan, S.K. 2016. Effect of integrated nutrient management on pearl millet crop grown in semi-arid climate. A Journal of Multidisciplinary Advance Research 5(2): 54– 57.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 201__204 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Nitrogen and sulphur fertilization on yield and nutrient-uptake pattern of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) under Mollisols of Uttarakhand PRIYANKA KABDAL1, S.C. SAXENA2 AND B.S. MAHAPATRA3

Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar, U.S. Nagar, Uttarakhand 263 145 Received : June 2017; Revised accepted : January 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the winter (rabi) seasons of 2015-16 and 2016-17 at Pantnagar, district Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand, to study the effect of nitrogen and sulphur fertilization on yield and nutrientuptake pattern of ‘RGN 73’ Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson]. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with 2 factors, viz. Factor A (nitrogen 80, 120, 160 kg/ha) and Factor B (sulphur 0, 20, 40, 60 kg/ha). Each replication comprised 12 treatment combinations of different levels of nitrogen and sulphur and replicated thrice. Application of 120 kg N/ha in combination with 40 kg S/ha resulted in increased siliqua length, higher seeds/siliqua, 1,000-seed weight and ultimately the seed yield over the control (80 kg N/ha and 0 kg S/ha), but was found at par with 160 kg N/ha and 60 kg S/ha. Increasing the levels of nitrogen up to 160 kg/ha significantly increased the uptake of nitrogen (65.49, 39.68 kg/ha), phosphorus (14.29, 20.56 kg/ha), potassium (19.59, 97.44 kg/ha), sulphur (9.46, 14.07kg/ha) and carbon (2482, 865 kg/ha) during both the years in the seed and stover of the crop compared with the control (80 kg N/ha). Among the different sulphur levels, 60 kg S/ha resulted in achieving significantly higher nutrient uptake in Indian mustard in 2015–16 and 2016–17. The cost of cultivation was found to be 2.10% and 2.17 % lower with the combination 120 kg N/ha and 40 kg S/ha compared to 160 kg N/ha and 60 kg S/ha; hence it could be adopted for achieving higher yield levels and nutrient uptake in Indian mustard under Mollisols of Uttarakhand.

Key words : Carbon, Indian mustard, Nitrogen, Nutrient uptake, Sulphur, Yield

Rapeseed–mustard a group of oilseed crops in India accounts for approximately 20–22% of total oilseeds produced in the country. Out of 7 cultivated oilseeds species of genus Brassica, more than 80% of total area is occupied by Indian mustard alone (Chandrashekar et al., 2013). The imperfect integration of essential plant nutrients and their poor supply are among the major causes of low seed and oil yield in Indian mustard. Among the various nutrients, a strong interaction of nitrogen and sulphur for enhancing the total seed yield as well as the nutrient uptake has been found significant in Indian mustard. The assimilatory pathways of nitrogen and sulphur are considered to be functionally convergent and the availability of one nutrient, in addition to its direct role in promoting growth and yield, regulates the activity of another. There is greater synergistic influence of nitrogen and sulphur on Based on a part of the Ph.D. Thesis of the first author, submitted to the Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, in 2017 (unpublished) 1 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] Ph.D. Scholar, 2Professor (Agronomy), 3Professor (Agronomy).

growth, yield, nutrient uptake, protein and oil production in oilseed rape. Due to metabolic coupling between nitrogen-sulphur metabolism, sulphur deficiency in plants leads to nitrogen deficiency as well (Akmal et al., 2014).Thus, the combined application of nitrogen and sulphur had the largest effect on the concentration and uptake of nitrogen and sulphur on yield ttributes, yield as well as uptake of the nutrients in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Hence, a field experiment was conducted to access the effect of varying levels of nitrogen and sulphur fertilization on yield and nutrient-uptake pattern of Indian mustard under the Mollisols of Uttarakhand. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted during the winter (rabi) seasons of 2015–16 and 2016–17 at the Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar (29° N, 79.3° E and 243.84 m above mean sea-level), district Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand, in the foothills of Kumaon Himalaya. The soil of the experimental site was silty clay loam with pH 7.54, organic carbon 0.83%, available nitrogen

202

KABDAL ET AL.

[Vol. 63, No. 2

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

(225.70 kg/ha), available phosphorus (24.80 kg/ha) and potassium (195.4 kg/ha). The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with 2 factors: Factor A-nitrogen 80, 120, 160 kg/ha and Factor B-sulphur 0, 20, 40, 60 kg/ha. Each replication comprises 12 treatment combinations of different levels of nitrogen and sulphur, and replicated thrice. A pre-sowing irrigation was applied and when soil reached proper moisture level seedbed was prepared. Mustard variety ‘RGN 73’ was sown manually with liner at 30 cm spaced rows using seed rate of 4 kg/ha and an inter-plant distance of 20 cm was maintained by thinning at 4–6-leaf stage. The seed was sown on 9 and 10 October and the crop was harvested on 28 and 20 February in 2015–16 and 2016–17 respectively. The amount of different fertilizers required to supply the needed quantities of nutrients were calculated on per plot basis. Sulphur was applied through gypsum as basal, while the requirement of nitrogen was met by application of NPK mixture (12 : 32 : 16) along with urea as basal dose (50%) and further top-dressing of urea (remaining 50%) was done at 35 days after sowing (DAS). The required quantity of phosphorus and potassium were applied through NPK mixture (12 : 32 : 16) itself as basal dose. All other agronomic practices were kept normal and uniform for all the treatments. Plant-protection measures were adopted to keep the crop free from weeds, insect-pests and diseases. Crop was harvested manually when it was fully matured. Sun-dried crop was threshed manually after the harvesting. Seed and biomass yields from the whole plots were measured and converted into kg/ha. The processed samples were used for different chemical studies for uptake of the nutrients, viz. nitrogen (CHNS analyzer), phosphorus (Jackson, 1973), potassium (Jackson, 1973), sulphur (CHNS analyzer) and carbon (CHNS analyzer) in both seed and stover at harvest stage of the crop.

Yield attributes and yield

Application of 160 kg N/ha increased the length of siliqua and seeds/siliqua 11.36% and 15.07%, respectively, over 80 kg N/ha but was found to be at par with 120 kg N/ ha on pooled basis (Table 1). The 1,000-seed weight increased with the increasing levels of nitrogen, but did not varied significantly. The successive increase in the rate of nitrogen resulted in increased seed yield of Indian mustard. Seed yield increased significantly, being the maximum with the application of 160 kg N/ha but was at par with 120 kg N/ha. The increase in the yield was to the tune of 17.72% with the application of 160 kg N/ha over 80 kg N/ha. Yield attributes have cumulative response in determining the seed yield of Indian-mustard. Length of siliqua, seeds/siliqua and 1,000-seed weight increased with the successive increase in N levels, as it results in increased translocation of the food material for seed formation in the crop. Increase in the seed yield owing to successive increase in the N levels might be owing to the fact that N acts as an important constituent for the synthesis of chlorophyll and various amino acids which act as the building blocks of protein. It also influences the source-sink relationship through higher production of photosynthates and its increased translocation to the reproductive parts that finally boosts the seed yield of Indian mustard (Kumar et al., 2012; Hashem, 2014). Increase in the doses of sulphur from 0 to 60 kg/ha resulted in increase in the yield attributes, viz. length of siliqua, seeds/siliqua, 1,000-seed weight and ultimately the seed yield of Indian mustard. Application of 60 kg S/ha showed an increase of seed yield to the tune of 15.04% over no-sulphur application, while the 2 higher levels, i.e.

Table 1. Length of siliqua, seeds/siliqua, 1,000-seed weight and seed yield as influenced by varying levels of nitrogen and sulphur fertilization in Indian mustard (pooled data of 2 years) Treatment

Length of siliqua(cm)

Seeds/siliqua

1,000-seed weight(g)

Seed yield (t/ha)

N (kg/ha) 80 120 160 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

3.9 4.3 4.4 0.05 0.1

10.7 12.1 12.6 0.2 0.6

3.7 3.8 3.9 NS 0.2

1.57 1.84 1.91 0.025 0.074

S (kg/ha) 0 20 40 60 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

4.0 4.2 4.3 4.4 0.06 0.2

10.8 11.6 12.2 12.6 0.2 0.7

3.6 3.7 3.8 4.0 NS 0.2

1.59 1.77 1.86 1.88 0.029 0.085

June 2018]

203

MUSTARD RESPONSE TO N AND S FERTILIZATION

40 kg S/ha and 60 kg S/ha, were found to be at par. Significant improvement in seed yield might be a consequence of the initially increased branching of the crop which increased length of siliqua, seeds/siliqua, 1,000seed weight which finally increased the seed yield of Indian mustard. The findings are in corroboration with Khalid et al. (2009) and Yadav et al. (2017). Nutrient uptake

Effect of increasing nitrogen application showed a statistically significant increase for the uptake of N, P, K, S and C in Indian mustard (Table 2). Application of 160 kg N/ha significantly increased in the uptake of nitrogen (65.49, 39.68 kg/ha), phosphorous (14.29, 20.56 kg/ha), potassium (19.59, 97.44 kg/ha), sulphur (9.46, 14.07kg/ ha) and carbon (2482, 865kg/ha) in the seed and stover of the crop except for potassium and carbon uptake in the

stover where the two higher levels i.e 120 kg N/ha and 160 kg N/ha were found to be at par. Lowest uptake of the nutrients was recorded with 80 kg N/ha. Higher doses of N (160 kg/ha) increased the uptake of N, P, K, S and C 24.87%, 18.68%, 21.28%, 20.40% and 24.73% higher in the seed, respectively, compared with the control (80 kg/ ha). Applying higher doses of N increased the initial crop growth which in turn results in more photosynthetic rate of the crop, thus resulting in more uptake of nutrients by the crop. Higher rate of N also enhances the root cation-exchange capacity and root proliferation that ultimately increases nutrient absorption by the crop (Tomar and Singh, 2007; Parmar et al., 2011). The nutrient uptake in seed and stover of the crop increased significantly with the successive increase in the doses of sulphur. The application of 60 kg S/ha increased

Table 2. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium, sulphur and carbon uptake at harvest as influenced by varying levels of nitrogen and sulphur fertilization (pooled data of 2 years) Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) Treatment

N uptake Seed Stover

P uptake Seed Stover

K uptake Seed Stover

S uptake Seed Stover

C uptake Seed Stover

N (kg/ha) 80 49.20 120 60.33 160 65.49 SEm± 0.36 CD (P=0.05) 1.07

23.66 34.75 39.68 0.43 1.27

11.62 13.62 14.29 0.07 0.23

15.26 19.46 20.56 0.29 0.85

15.42 18.59 19.59 0.15 0.45

75.24 94.62 97.44 1.45 4.27

7.53 8.79 9.46 0.04 0.12

9.93 13.34 14.07 0.17 0.50

1868 2380 2482 255.8 NS

685 820 865 33.4 98.7

S (kg/ha) 0 20 40 60 SEm± CD (P=0.05)

27.15 31.64 35.39 36.59 0.50 1.50

11.75 13.07 13.76 14.03 0.09 0.26

15.93 18.17 19.57 20.03 0.33 0.99

15.46 17.24 18.69 20.09 0.18 0.52

76.96 87.57 94.34 97.53 1.67 4.93

7.41 8.38 9.03 9.55 0.05 0.14

10.35 12.12 13.34 13.98 0.19 0.58

1938 2222 2382 2431 295.4 NS

705 785 827 843 38.6 NS

51.35 57.43 61.27 63.32 0.42 1.23

Table 3. Cost of cultivation, gross return, net return, and benefit cost ratio as influenced by varying levels of nitrogen and sulphur fertilization (pooled data of 2 years) Treatment N (kg/ha) 80 120 160 S (kg/ha) 0 20 40 60

Cost of cultivation (× 103 /ha)

Gross returns (× 103 /ha)

Net returns (× 103 /ha)

Benefit: cost ratio

23.4 23.9 24.4

56.5 65.9 68.5

33.1 42.0 44.1

1.42 1.76 1.81

23.1 23.6 24.2 24.7

57.4 63.3 66.5 67.4

34.3 39.7 42.3 42.7

1.48 1.68 1.75 1.73

**The cost of well as return values were recorded off to nearest values in table 3 but the exact values still appear in text in economics

204

KABDAL ET AL.

the uptake of N (18.90% and 25.79%), P (16.25% and 20.46%), K (23.46% and 21.09%), S (22.40% and 25.96%) and C (20.27% and 16.37%) in seed and stover compared to no-sulphur application (0 kg S/ha). The highest doses of S resulted in significantly higher uptake of all the nutrients by the crop except for N, P and K uptake in stover where 60 kg S/ha was found to be at par with 40 kg S/ha (Table 2). Increase in the uptake of the nutrients by the S fertilization might be due to the profused vegetative growth by the crop, as S regulates the synthesis of chlorophyll and coenzyme A and also causes profuse root development which in turn increases the absorption of nutrients from the soil (Parmar et al., 2011). Economics

The maximum gross return (68,526 /ha), net return (44,107 /ha) as well as benefit: cost ratio (1.81) were fetched with the application of 160 kg N/ha, followed by 120 kg N/ha, while the least with 80 kg N/ha (Table 3) on pooled basis. The cost of cultivation was found to be 2.10% lower at 120 kg N/ha as compared with 160 kg N/ ha, thus making it more economical over 160 kg N/ha from farmers point of view. Similarly, higher dose of S (60 kg/ha) recorded the highest gross return (67,407 /ha), net return (42,695 /ha) while the benefit: cost ratio (1.75) was found to be highest with 40 kg S/ha. The cost of cultivation was found to be 2.17% lower with 40 kg S/ha compared to 60 kg S/ha. Nitrogen and sulphur plays a key role in synthesis of protein and amino acids therefore plays an important role in improving nutrient uptake and the yield of Indian mustard. Thus, on the basis of aforesaid findings, it could be concluded that the combination of 120 kg N/ha with 40 kg S/ha is more economical and resulted in increasing the N,

[Vol. 63, No. 2

P, K, S and C uptake and finally achieving higher yield levels in Indian mustard thus, could be recommended under the Mollisols of Uttarakhand for better yield and productivity of Indian mustard. REFERENCES Akmal, M., Kiran, U., Ali, A. and Abdin, M.Z. 2014. Enhanced nitrogen assimilation in transgenic mustard (Brassica juncea L.) over expressing high affinity sulphate transporter gene. Indian Journal of Biotechnology 13(1): 381–387. Chandrashekar, U.S., Dadlani, M., Vishwanath, K., Chakrabarty, S.K. and Prasad, C.T.M. 2013. Study of morpho-physiological, phonological and reproductive behaviour in protogynous lines of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Euphytica 193(1): 277–291. Hashem, A. 2014. Effect of nitrogen rate on seed yield, protein and oil content of two canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Acta Agriculturae Slovenica 101(2): 183–190. Jackson, M.L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis, pp. 498. Prantice Hall Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi, India. Khalid, R., Khan, K.S., Yousaf, M., Shabbir, G. and Subhani, A. 2009. Effect of sulphur fertilization on rapeseed and plant available sulphur in soils of pothwar, Pakistan. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture 25(1): 65–71. Kumar, V., Kumar, M. and Kumar, A. 2012. Response of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) to nitrogen fertilization grown in different cropping systems. Progressive Agriculture 12(1): 214– 218. Parmar, R.M., Parmar, J.K. and Patel, M.K. 2011. Effect of nitrogen and sulphur on content and uptake of nutrients by mustard crop under the loamy and sand soil of north Gujarat. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences 7(1): 103–108. Tomar, S.K. and Singh, K. 2007. Response of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) to nitrogen and sulphur fertilization under rainfed condition of daira land. International Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3(2): 5–9. Yadav, R., Singh, P.K., Singh, R.K., Tiwari, P. and Singh, S.N. 2017. Impact of sulphur nutrition on promising mustard cultivars in eastern Uttar Pradesh. International Journal of Pure and Applied Biosciences 5(1): 389–394.

Indian Journal of Agronomy 63 (2): 205__210 (June 2018)

Research Paper

Weed dynamics and productivity of irrigated winter (rabi) castor (Ricinus communis) under integrated weed-management practices V.M. PATEL1, R.B. ARDESHNA2, V.A. LODAM3

AND

R. S. BHAKTA4

Pulses and Castor Research Station, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat 396 450 Received : November 2017; Revised accepted : February 2018

ABSTRACT A field experiment was conducted during the winter (rabi) season of 2012–13 to 2014–15 on Vertisols of Navsari, Gujarat, to study the effect of integrated weed-management practices on weed dynamics and productivity of winter (rabi) castor (Ricinus communis L.) under irrigated condition. The grassy weeds were dominant as compared to broad-leaf ones during the period of experimentation. Maintenance of weed-free condition [3 handweedings (HW) at 20, 40 and 60 days after sowing (DAS)] resulted in significant reduction in population of monocot, dicot and total weeds at 60 DAS. But, it remained at par with pre-emergence application of pendimenthalin 1.0 kg/ha + 2 hand-weedings at 40 and 60 DAS for density of monocots weeds. All the weed-management treatments recorded significantly lower weed dry matter at 120 DAS as compared to unweeded control and application of pendimenthalin 1.0 kg/ha as pre-emergence, followed by quizalofop-p-ethyl@ 0.05 kg/ha at 20 DAS as postemergence. Similarly, significantly more number of branches, spikes and capsules/plant, spike length and seed yield were also recorded with pre-emergence application of pendimenthalin 1 kg/ha, followed by either 2 HW at 40 and 60 DAS or 1 HW at 40 DAS which remained statistically at par with weed-free condition. The weed-free condition (3 hand-weedings at 20, 40 and 60 DAS) accrued higher net returns ( 42.7 × 103/ha), closely followed by pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (pre-emergence) + HW at 40 and 60 DAS ( 42.2 × 103/ha) and pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (preemergence) + HW at 40 DAS ( 40.4 103/ha). However, higher benefit: cost (BCR) was recorded with pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (PE) + HW at 40 DAS (2.41), followed by pendimethalin 1 kg/ha (PE) + HW at 40 and 60 DAS (2.33).

Key words : Castor, Economics, Pendimenthalin, Seed yield, Weed management

Castor is an important non-edible oilseed crop of India, having immense industrial and commercial value. India is the world leader in its production followed by China and Brazil. Gujarat is the leading castor-growing state of our country. Of late, the area under this crop is increasing in south Gujarat reflecting its profitable cultivation. Weeds cause enormous crop losses and are one of the most important production constraints in south Gujarat due to high rainfall. Weeds also increase the problem of pests and diseases, as they acts as alternate hosts. Severe crop losses (up to 85 to 89%) have been observed due to weeds in castor crop also (Etagegnehu and Fufa, 2016). Weed menace in this crop is high due to wider crop space and its slow initial growth, conditions for availability of sunlight.

1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] [email protected] 1, 4 Assistant Research Scientist, 3Research Associate, 2Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy, N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat

This problem will be more under irrigated ecosystem due to availability of sufficient moisture. Several measures have been suggested to control the weeds. Hoe and handweeding on day 30 and day 60 after sowing are effective in removing the weeds. Hand-weeding and inter-culturing are effective, but always associated with regeneration of weeds and require frequent operations, which makes this practice sometimes costly and also not feasible all times due to poor soil physical condition and unavailability of labour and implements (Patel and Virdia, 2011). In this context, herbicides and other effective methods like mulching can play vital role in management of weeds. The use of herbicides in crop land, results in increase in crop yield, improve crop quality and reduce production cost besides timely control of weeds. Various methods of weed control do have restrictions in usage depending on the crop, soil and climate besides economics. Hence integrated weed management has gained importance. Since studies on integrated weed management and its impact on castor ecosystem are meager, the present study was carried

206

PATEL ET AL.

with an objective to standardize the effective weed-management practices for castor under irrigated condition. METHODS AND MATERIALS

A field experiment was conducted during the winter (rabi) season for 3 consecutive years, i.e. from 2012–13 to 2014–15 at Pulses and Castor Research Station, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari (20° 57' N, 72° 54' E, 10 m above sea-level), Gujarat. The region has sub-tropical humid climate and receives annual rainfall of 1,400 mm and experiences mean annual maximum and minimum temperature of 43 and 10°C respectively. The soil is Vertisols with clayey texture, having pH 8.2, bulk density 1.42 g/cm3, low organic carbon content (0.42%), low available nitrogen (230 kg/ha), medium in available phosphorus (40.2 kg/ha) and fairly rich in potash (310 kg/ha). Eight integrated weed-management practices, viz. pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha (PE) with hand-weeding (HW) at 40 days after sowing (DAS), pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ ha (PE) with HW at 40 and 60 DAS, weed-free through hand-weeding (HW) at 20, 40 and 60 DAS, farmer’s practice (2 HW at 30 and 60 DAS), quizalofop ethyl @ 0.05 kg/ha (PoE) at 20 DAS + HW at 60 DAS, pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha (PE) + Quizalofop ethyl @ 0.05 kg/ha (PoE) at 20 DAS, pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha (PE) + Quizalofop ethyl @ 0.05 kg/ha (PoE) at 20 DAS + HW at 60 DAS and unweeded (control) were evaluated in a randomized block design (RBD) with 3 replications. Castor hybrid ‘GCH 7’ was used for the study. Crop was sown at a spacing of 120 cm × 60 cm. Nitrogen and phosphorus (120 : 25 kg N : P2O5/ha) were applied as per local recommendation in form of urea and diammonium phosphate respectively. Entire dose of P and one-third of total N were applied at the time of sowing and remaining dose of nitrogen was applied in 2 equal splits at 35 and 75 to 80 DAS. Irrigations, plant protection and other practices were followed as per recommendation for this region for healthy crop growth. Pendimethalin was applied as pre-emergence one day after sowing, whereas Quizalofop-ethyl was applied at 20 DAS as per treatment. Hand-weeding was done as per treatment with help of khurpi. An iron square of size 1 m2 was used to take observation on weed population through random sampling in each plot at 60 DAS (just before hand weeding). The total number of monocot (including sedges) and dicot weeds were counted in each plot separately and analyzed after subjecting the original data to square-root transformation. For weed dry weight, weeds collected from 1 m2 area at 120 DAS were dried under the sun and then in an oven at 65 °C for 42 h and weighed. Weed index (WI) was calculated as per following formula given by Nandekar (2005).

[Vol. 63, No. 2

(X–Y) × 100 X where WI, weed index; X, yield in weed-free plot; Y, yield under treatment for which WI is to be worked out. Economics of treatments were computed on the basis of prevailing market price of inputs and outputs in Indian rupees under each treatment. The total cost of cultivation was calculated on the basis of different operations performed and materials used for raising crop. Statistical analysis of the data was done as per the standard analysis of variance technique and treatment means were compared at P40%) in oil and glucosinolates (100–130 μM per g) in de-oiled seed meal which pose health-related risks in human being (thickening of arteries) and livestock (reduced appetite and reproductively, and affect thyroid activity leading to thyroid associated health problems (Van Etten Based on a part of M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis of the first author, submitted to Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, in 2017 (Unpublished) 1

Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected] M.Sc. (Agric.) Student, Department of Agronomy; 2Senior Agronomist, Oilseeds Section, Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics 1

et al., 1976). Canola cultivars of rapeseed–mustard, besides having similar low levels of saturated fatty acids (7– 10%) and moderate levels of poly-unsaturated essential fatty acids (18–22% linoleic acid and 8–12% linolenic acid) in oil as that of non-canola cultivars, posses extremely low level of erucic acid (