acknowledgements to publish in this form have not been given. ... 4. Problems of Soil Impediment in Rice, Wheat Cropping. System. 57-71 ... V. Usha Sree ..... Crop yields were improved with combined application of 50, 100 and ...... Use of FYM, compost, green manuring etc. in field before 1 month ...... (10% of its gross.
ADVANCES IN
AGRONOMY Chief Editor Dr. Rajiv Kumar Singh Scientist, Agronomy, JNKVV, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Chhatarpur, M.P., India
AkiNik Publications New Delhi
Published By: AkiNik Publications AkiNik Publications 169, C-11, Sector - 3, Rohini, Delhi-110085, India Toll Free (India) – 18001234070 Chief Editor: Dr. Rajiv Kumar Singh The author/publisher has attempted to trace and acknowledge the materials reproduced in this publication and apologize if permission and acknowledgements to publish in this form have not been given. If any material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so that we may rectify it. © AkiNik Publications Pages: 176 ISBN: 978-93-5335-059-8 Price: ` 685/-
Contents Chapters
1. Improving Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Productivity through Integrated Nutrient Management
Page No.
01-13
(U. Sai Sravan, M. Thirupathi, G. Srasvan Kumar and V. Usha Sree)
2. Effect of Spacing and Weed Management Practices on Growth and Yield of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Under Rainfed Condition of Nagaland
15-26
(Sibino Dolie, D Nongmaithem and T. Gohain)
3. Agronomic Management Strategies for Abiotic Stresses in Plants
27-56
(Durgesh Singh, Asheesh Chaurasiya and Ashish Kumar Singh)
4. Problems of Soil Impediment in Rice, Wheat Cropping System
57-71
(Ritesh Kumar Parihar, Dr. V.K. Srivastava, Anoop Kumar Devedee and Sandeep Kumar)
5. Forage and Fodder Production, Conservation for Sustainable Milk Production in India
73-122
(Prasad Mithare)
6. Organic and Sustainable Strategies to Manage the Soil Fertility
123-134
(Om Singh and SA Kochewad)
7. Soil Fertility and Soil Health Card
135-146
(Om Singh and S.A. Kochewad)
8. Weed Science and Weed Management Systems (Mutum Lamnganbi)
147-176
Chapter - 1 Improving Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Productivity through Integrated Nutrient Management
Authors U. Sai Sravan Senior Research Fellow, Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad, Telangana, India M. Thirupathi Research Associate, Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad, Telangana, India G. Srasvan Kumar Junior Research Fellow, Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad, Telangana, India V. Usha Sree Junior Research Fellow, Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Page | 1
Page | 2
Chapter - 1 Improving Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Productivity through Integrated Nutrient Management U. Sai Sravan, M. Thirupathi, G. Srasvan Kumar and V. Usha Sree
Abstract Chickpea is the most important grain legume in India under rice-pulse cropping system. It has been cultivated on marginal and sub-marginal lands since time immemorial; their productivity is under substantial reduction due to imbalanced nutrient management and moisture stress. The productivity of chickpea is governed by many agronomic practices; nutrient management is of utmost important. Single application of either inorganic or organic source doesn’t enhance the growth and yield of the crop. Balanced nutrient application is essential because their imbalanced application results in reduced crop yields. Integrated application of inorganic fertilizers along with organic sources viz. farmyard manure and microbial inoculants is one of the strategies to improve the productivity. Hence, combined application of organics, inorganics and biofertilizers is needed for sustainable yield and soil health. Keywords: Chickpea, productivity, organics, biofertilizers, sustainability Introduction Pulses are mainly rich in proteins, essential amino acids, vitamins and minerals; provide nutritional and health benefits [1]. In general the protein content in pulses varies from 22-24%, which is almost twice the content in wheat and thrice than that of rice [2]. Pulses can be grown on wide range of soil and climatic conditions and have vital role in crop rotation, improving soil fertility and contributing to sustainability of the cropping system [3]. Among pulses, chickpea is a prime crop in India with maximum acreage and production, contributing to around 64% of the global chickpea production [3]. Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), is the third most important pulse crop after common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and field pea (Pisum sativum L.), belongs the legume family, commonly known as gram/chana/bengal gram/garbanzo in different countries and have been included in many Page | 3
culinary creations because of their nut-like flavour and versatile sensory applications in food [4, 5]. Chickpea is cultivated in an area of 11.5 million hectares with a production of 10 million tons and productivity of 863 kg ha-1 [6] , while in India it is cultivated in an area of 9.93 million hectares with production of 9.53 million tons and productivity of 960 kg ha-1 [7]. Chickpea is good source of protein (18-22%) and main proteins found in chickpea are albumins and globulins, trace amounts of glutelins and prolamines are also present [8]. Major chickpea producing states in India are Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Karnataka. From the last two decades the chickpea area in north India is under progressive reduction, while the central and southern regions are under increasing, owing to change in production base, cropping system and comparative economics [9]. There are basically two types of chickpea viz. desi and kabuli. The desi chickpea contribute to around 80% and the kabuli chickpea contributes around 20% of the total production [10]. About 90% of the world’s chickpea is grown under rainfed condition, cultivated on marginal and sub-marginal lands; their productivity is under substantial reduction due to poor soil fertility status and moisture stress. Chickpea is valued for its nutritional benefits, improving the productivity of succeeding crops in rotation and sustainability of the cropping system [11]. With the increasing population and events of climate change, the production has to be increased to meet the current and future demand for pulses in the country. This may be possible through improved agronomic practices and genetic improvement of the crop for different agro climatic conditions [12]. The productivity of chickpea is influenced by many factors viz. sowing time, cultivars, plant population, moisture stress and nutrient management. Among the agronomic practices, for higher yields proper crop management is important and in particular nutrient management is of most important. Nutrient Management in Chickpea Exhaustive agriculture with declined soil fertility status and imbalanced fertilization resulted in significant negative impact on soil physical, chemical and biological properties, worsening of sustainability of crop production, environmental pollution and consumer health. Sole application of organic or synthetic fertilizers could not maintain towering yield of crops in intensive cropping systems [13]. The reduction in use of organic manures and continuous use of inorganic fertilizers in unbalanced proportion resulted in the deficiency of micronutrients thus resulting in unsustainable crop yield. With the use of organics and bioinoculants the load of using chemical Page | 4
fertilizers and adverse environmental effects can be reduced. The productivity of pulses can be enhanced by adopting integrated application of inorganics, organics and bioinoculants which alleviates deficiencies of nutrients, increases the efficiency of applied nutrients, improves soil atmosphere and sustainability of the cropping system. Inorganic Fertilizers The crop responds positively to the fertilizer application, balanced amount is important to achieve higher yield. In recent times, inappropriate and indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers resulted in poor yields. Chickpea needs nitrogen and phosphorus for growth and development. A starter dose of 15-20 kg ha-1 nitrogen is required for chickpea until Rhizobiachickpea association is established and symbiotic N-fixation is commenced [14, 15, 16] . Another nutrient limiting the production and productivity is phosphorus. Phosphorus is required for effective nitrogen fixation as symbiotic nitrogen fixation is high energy demanding process and requires ATP which has phosphorus as its major component and hence for synthesis of protein. With the deficiency of phosphorus there may be poor nodule formation or even no nodule formation [16, 17]. The yield of chickpea increased by 65 and 88% due to application of P fertilizers [18]. The reports from various studies [19, 20, 21] revealed that chickpea responded positively to 40-60 kg phosphorus ha-1. The application of NP @ 27-90 kg ha-1 resulted maximum number of nodules plant-1, number of pods plant-1, test weight and grain yield (Table 1). However, the optimum nitrogen and phosphorus requirement for higher productivity varies for different agro-climatic conditions. Table 1: Impact of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth, yield attributes and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Treatment Combinations
No. of Nodules No. of Pods Test Grain Yield Plant-1 at 90 Plant-1 at 120 Weight (g) (q ha-1) Das Das
T0: N @ 0 kg ha-1 + P @ 0 kg ha-1
12.00
55.67
191.00
13.33
T1: N @ 0 kg ha-1 + P @ 30 kg ha-1
14.00
63.67
178.00
18.67
T2: N @ 0 kg ha-1 + P @ 60 kg ha-1
13.33
63.33
173.33
18.67
T3: N @ 0 kg ha-1 + P @ 90 kg ha-1
12.67
66.67
210.33
19.67
T4: N @ 9 kg ha-1 + P @ 0 kg ha-1
13.33
61.33
222.33
18.00
Page | 5
T5: N @ 9 kg ha-1 + P @ 30 kg ha-1
12.67
65.33
215.66
17.67
T6: N @ 9 kg ha-1 + P @ 60 kg ha-1
15.00
67.67
229.66
18.33
T7: N @ 9 kg ha-1 + P @ 90 kg ha-1
13.00
70.00
249.33
19.67
T8: N @ 18 kg ha-1 + P @ 0 kg ha-1
14.00
66.00
249.33
18.67
T9: N @ 18 kg ha-1 + P @ 30 kg ha-1
18.67
73.33
254.66
20.00
T10: N @ 18 kg ha-1 + P @ 60 kg ha-1
15.67
66.67
241.33
19.67
T11: N @ 18 kg ha-1 + P @ 90 kg ha-1
17.70
72.67
240.66
18.00
T12: N @ 27 kg ha-1 + P @ 0 kg ha-1
15.00
68.33
229.33
19.33
T13: N @ 27 kg ha-1 + P @ 30 kg ha-1
15.33
66.67
249.00
18.00
T14: N @ 27 kg ha-1 + P @ 60 kg ha-1
16.96
71.67
253.33
18.00
T15: N @ 27 kg ha-1 + P @ 90 kg ha-1
19.68
79.67
284.66
25.00
F test
S
S
S
S
S. Em. (±)
0.351
0.457
1.124
0.946
0.718
0.934
2.295
1.932
C.D. (P=0.05) Source: [22]
Organic Manures Organic manures are traditional sources of nutrients which help in maintaining the soil fertility. Organic manures supplies both macro and micronutrients, acts as soil conditioner, improves soil microbial activity and increase the efficiency of the applied nutrients. Among the various organic manures, the vermicompost and FYM are main sources. Organic manures play a vital role as they increase the water retention capacity of soil under limited water availability situations and improve nutrient availability especially of nitrogen in the soil. Vermicompost 2 t ha-1 has produced higher effective nodules plant-1, number of nodules plant-1, dry matter plant-1, pods plant-1, seed yield and haulm yield. Among liquid organic manures, foliar application of panchagavya 3 per cent has recorded higher seed yield effective nodules plant-1, number of nodules plant-1, dry matter plant-1, pods plant-1, seed yield and haulm yield (Table 2). Grain yield of chickpea enhanced with successive increase in dose of vermicompost from 0 to 3 and Page | 6
2 t ha-1 was found to be optimum dose. Application of 5 t ha-1 farmyard manure enhanced chickpea grain yield by 14.89% over control [23]. Table 2: Effect of different organic manures on growth, yield attributes and yield of chickpea Treatments
Effective Nodules Plant-1
No. of Nodules Plant-1
Dry Seed Haulm Pods Matter Yield Yield -1 Plant (g Plant-1) (kg ha-1) (kg ha-1)
Sources of Organic Manures OM0: Control
28.33
33.01
15.96
45.66
1310
1900
OM1: FYM 5 t ha-1
33.81
38.49
17.08
48.29
1636
2578
OM2: Compost 3 t ha-1
35.35
40.03
17.37
49.62
1736
2853
OM3: Vermicompost 2 t ha-1
36.05
40.73
18.61
50.12
1916
2998
S. Em ±
0.46
0.47
0.24
0.69
54
86
C.D. (P=0.05)
1.32
1.35
0.69
1.99
156
247
Liquid Organic Manures Spray LM0: Control
30.97
35.65
16.72
46.78
1371
2252
LM1: Panchagavya 3 per cent
35.10
39.78
17.90
49.54
1888
2804
LM2: Cow urine 10 per cent
33.35
38.03
16.94
48.35
1556
2626
LM3: Vermiwash 10 per cent
34.13
38.81
17.46
49.02
1783
2645
S. Em ±
0.46
0.47
0.24
0.69
54
86
C.D. (P=0.05)
1.32
1.35
0.69
1.99
156
247
Source: [24]
Biofertilizers With the escalating prices of chemical fertilizers, farmers cannot afford to purchase them and their indiscriminate application has resulted in deficiency of nutrients and ultimately reduced yields. Hence, there is a strong need to use organics and biofertilizers to reduce the use of inorganic fertilizers and to improve the soil fertility. Biofertilizers are low cost, ecofriendly sources of nutrients which supplement inorganic fertilizers for sustainable crop production. The bio ferilizers solubilise the nutrients viz. nitrogen and phosphorus through their activities in the soil and make them available to the plants. The phosphorus solubilizing bacteria (PSB) solubilise the insoluble phosphorus by excreting organic acids and make phosphorus availabile to crop plants and increase the efficiency of soluble forms of phosphatic fertilizers applied to the soil [25]. Arbuscular Mycorrhiza (AM) play an important role in the formation of stable soil aggregates, building up of macro pore structure of soil and prevent erosion. Selected AM strains when inoculated often yielded better growth than indigenous AM fungi populations [26].
Page | 7
Table 3: Effect of phosphorus level and biofertilizer on yield of chickpea (pooled data) Treatment
Seed Yield Straw Yield Biological Yield (q ha-1) Protein (%) (q ha-1) (q ha-1) Phosphorus Levels (kg ha-1)
0
13.07
25.18
38.25
18.26
15
18.56
30.71
49.27
19.36
30
21.98
33.76
55.73
20.35
45
23.23
35.77
59.00
21.75
60
24.24
36.92
61.16
22.59
75
24.47
37.43
61.90
22.65
S. Em.±
0.28
0.37
0.54
0.26
C.D. (P=0.05)
0.81
1.07
1.56
0.75
Biofertilizer Uninoculation
18.47
30.47
48.94
19.26
PSB
20.44
32.42
52.86
20.54
Rhizobium
21.67
34.14
55.82
21.21
PSB + Rhizobium
23.12
36.15
59.27
22.27
S. Em.±
0.23
0.31
0.44
0.21
0.66
0.87
1.27
0.60
C.D. (P=0.05) Source: [27]
However, when manure and biofertilizers is applied in conjunction with chemical fertilizers growth of crops, organic carbon was improved and productivity was enhanced to a great extent. The combined application of PSB and Rhizobium significantly improved seed yield of chickpea by 20.1% over control (Table 3). Integrated Nutrient Management Integrated nutrient management is important in crop production due to increasing cost of chemical fertilizers and declining or stagnated yields. Integrated nutrient management is the conjunctive use of inorganic fertilizers, organic manures and biofertilizers and takes into consideration of soils and crops, biological nitrogen fixing potential. It is an approach through which both macro and micronutrients are supplied through organic and inorganic nutrients for superior crop production, soil health, and to meet future food supply requirements [28]. Long-term fertilizer experiments have shown that the phosphorus and potassium efficiency increased considerably when both were applied in conjunction, suggesting their positive interactions [29] . Crop yields were improved with combined application of 50, 100 and 150% of the recommended rates of inorganic nitrogen, phosphorus and Page | 8
potassium with farmyard manure and in some cases zinc, as compared to straight fertilizers [30]. The chemical fertilizer use efficiency is improved when organic manures were applied along with it. Higher pods plant-1, seeds pod-1, 1000-seed weight and grain yield of chickpea was obtained with integrated nutrient management viz. 50 kg DAP + 5 t farmyard manure + 2 t Vermicompost ha-1 [31]. Incorporation of half of recommended dose of NPK (18-36-10 kg ha-1) in combination with farmyard manure or poultry manure @ 20 t ha-1 was found best combination for higher chickpea crop yields (Table 4). Table 4: Number of pods plant-1, 1000-seed weight and seed yield of chickpea under integrated plant nutrient management applied to rice-chickpea system Treatments
No. of Pods Plant-1
1000-Seed Weight (g)
Seed Yield (kg ha-1)
NPK 0-0-0 kg ha-1
23.75 f
112.7 j
501.0 i
NPK 36-72-0 kg ha-1
57.0 bc
233.0 e
1323.0 d
NPK 36-72-20 kg ha-1
65.0 ab
242.0 b
1531.0 b
FYM 20 t ha-1
46.0 e
172.5 i
901.5 h
PM 20 t
ha-1
47.0 de
180.8 h
915.0 g
NPK 18-36-10 kg ha-1 + FYM @ 20 t ha-1
64.0 ab
240.0 c
1529.0 b
NPK 18-36-10 kg ha-1| + PM @ 20 t ha-1
66.0 a
247.0 a
1582.0 a
NPK 36-72-20 kg ha-1 + FYM @ 20 t ha-1
58.30 abc
234.0 e
1321.0 d
NPK 36-72-20 kg ha-1 + PM @ 20 t ha-1
59.0 abc
237.4 d
1346.0 c
NPK 18-36-10 kg ha-1 + FYM @ 10 t ha-1
54.0 d
210.9 g
1101.0 f
NPK 18-36-10 kg ha-1 + PM @ 10 t ha-1
55.0 c
214.0 f
1113.0 e
SE
2.6
0.6
1.6
LSD 5% 7.5 1.7 4.7 Source: [33]. Means with the same letter (s) are not significantly different at P=0.05 level (Duncan’s multiple range test); NPK: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium; FYM: Farm Yard Manure; PM: Poultry Manure
Application of P at 37.5 kg P2O5 ha-1 + vermicompost + PSB + Rhizobium recorded higher yield attributing characters viz. number of seeds plant-1, seed yield and stover yield in chickpea over control [32]. The maximum grain yield and straw yield of chickpea were obtained with 50 percent N through subabul + 50 percent recommended dose of fertilizer N (Table 5). Page | 9
Table 5: Effect of organic and green manuring in combination with fertilizer N on the yield of chickpea in vertisol Treatments
Grain Yield Straw Yield (kg ha-1) (kg ha-1)
T1: 50% N through farmyard manure + 50% RDN
551.83
958.57
T2: 50% N through compost + 50% RDN
511.53
1075.36
T3: 50% N through sunhemp + 50% RDN
601.44
1095.74
T4: 50% N through subabul + 50% RDN
666.54
1152.13
T5: 50% N through vermicompost + 50% RDN
503.81
956.93
T6: Recommended dose of fertilizer N (25 kg ha-1)
520.83
963.08
T7: Control
478.82
924.02
S. Em±
42.56
99.02
CD at 5%
129.79
302.03
Source: [34]
As the chemical fertilizer have negative impact on human health and environmental problems, the integrated nutrient management strategy will minimize these problems without compromising crop yields. Integrated nutrient management approach is strong and convincing evidence for sustainable agriculture worldwide. References 1.
Pingoliya KK, Dotaniya ML, Mathur AK. Role of phosphorus and iron in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Lap Lambert Academic Publisher, Germany, 2013.
2.
Shukla M, Patel RH, Verma R, Deewan P, Dotaniya ML. Effect of bioorganics and chemical fertilizers on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under middle Gujarat conditions. Vegetos. 2013; 26(1):183-187.
3.
Dotaniya ML, Pingoliya KK, Lata M, Verma R, Regar KL, Deewan P et al. Role of phosphorus in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) production. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 2014; 9(51):3736-3743.
4.
Parthasarathy P, Birthal PS, Bhagvatula S, Bantilan MCS. Chickpea and Pigeonpea Economies in Asia: Facts, Trends and Outlook. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Andhra Pradesh, 2010, 76.
5.
Deosthale YG. Food processing and nutritive value of legumes. In: Pulse Production, Constraints and Opportunities. Edn 1, IBH Publishing Company, New Delhi. 1982; I:377-388.
Page | 10
6.
Faostat, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO Production Year Book, Rome, 2012. Available at http://apps.fao.org.
7.
Anonymous, Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, 2015, 107.
8.
Saharan K, Khetarpaul N. Protein quality traits of vegetable and field peas: Varietal differences. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 1994; 45:11-22.
9.
Ali M, Mishra JP, Ghosh PK, Naimuddin. Rabi (winter) pulses In: Text book of field crops production. Edn 3, Indian council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi. 2014; I:320-323.
10. Tripathi LK, Thomas T, Kumar S. Impact of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). An Asian Journal of Soil Science. 2013; 8(2):260-263. 11. Soltani A, Sinclair TR. Optimizing chickpea phenology to available water under current and future climates. European Journal of Agronomy. 2012; 38:22-31. 12. Mohammed A, Tana T, Singh P, Korecha D, Molla A. Management options for rainfed chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in northeast Ethiopia under climate change condition. Climate Risk Management. 2017; 16:222-233. 13. Sohu I, Gandahi AW, Bhutto GR, Sarki MS, Gandahi R. Growth and yield maximization of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) through integrated nutrient management applied to rice-chickpea cropping system. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture. 2015; 31(2):131-138. 14. Lemma W, Senbet Haile W, Beyene S. Response of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizers in Halaba and Taba, Southern Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Natural Resources. 2013; 13(2):115-128. 15. Thaku NS, Ragunavinsh RKS, Sharma RA. Response of irrigated chickpea to applied nutrients. International Chickpea Newsletter. 1989; 20:19-20. 16. Giller K, Cadisch G. Future benefits from biological nitrogen fixation: an ecological approach to agriculture. Plant and Soil. 1995; 174(1):255277. 17. Amijee F, Giller KE. Environmental constraints to nodulation and
Page | 11
nitrogen fixation of Phaseolus vulgaris L. in Tanzania I. A survey of soil fertility and root nodulation. African Crop Science Journal, 1998; 6(2):159-169. 18. Islam M, Mohsan S, Ali S, Khalid R, Afzal S. Response of chickpea to various levels of phosphorus and sulphur under rainfed conditions in Pakistan. Romanian Agricultural Research. 2012; 29:175-183. 19. Arya RL, Kushwaha BL, Singh BN. Effect of phosphorus management on growth, yield attributes and yield of maize-chickpea cropping system. Indian Journal of Pulses Research. 2002; 15:161-165. 20. Meena LR, Singh RK, Gautam RC. Effect of conserved soil moisture, phosphorus levels and bacterial inoculation on dry matter production and uptake of phosphorus by chickpea. Indian Journal of Pulses Research. 2001; 18:32-35. 21. Tiwari VN, Upadhyay RM, Pandey RK. Associate effect of diazotrophs and phosphorus on chickpea. Indian Journal of Pulses Research. 2001; 14:129-132. 22. Tripathi LK, Thomas T, Kumar S. Impact of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). An Asian Journal of Soil Science. 2013; 8(2):260-263. 23. Singh G, Sekhon HS, Kaur H. Effect of farmyard manure, vermicompost and chemical nutrients on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Agricultural Research. 2012; 7(2):93-99. 24. Yadav JK, Sharma M, Yadav RN, Yadav SK, Yadav S. Effect of different organic manures on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2017; 6(5):1857-1860. 25. Prajapati BJ, Gudadhe N, Gamit VR, Chhaganiya HJ. Effect of integrated phosphorus management on growth, yield attributes and yield of chickpea. Farming and Management. 2017; 2:36-40. 26. Salami A, Olusola O, Nnenna I. An investigation of the impact of Glomusclarum (mycorrhiza) on the growth of tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum Mill.) on both sterilized and non-sterilized soils. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science. 2005; 51:579-88. 27. Singh Y, Singh B, Kumar A. Response of phosphorus levels and seed inoculation with PSB and Rhizobium on economic and response studies Page | 12
of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under rainfed condition. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2017; 6(11):801-805. 28. Gruhn P, Goletti F, Yudelman M. Integrated nutrient management, soil fertility, and sustainable agriculture: current issues and future challenges, 2020. Brief No. 6, 2000, 1-3. 29. Mahajan A, Bhagat RM, Trikha A. Fertilizing bio-fertilizers. Agriculture Today. 2003; 6(9):52-54. 30. Roy SK, Sharma RC, Trehan SP. Integrated nutrient management by using farmyard manure and fertilizers in potato-sunflower-paddy rice rotation in the Punjab. Journal of Agricultural Science. 2001; 137:271278. 31. Vivek Rana NS, Dhyani BP, Singh R, Yadav RB. Integrated nutrient management in chickpea (Cicer arietinum). Journal of Farming Systems Research and Development. 2007; 13(2):288-289. 32. Jarande NN, Mankar PS, Khawale VS, Kanase AA, Mendhe JT. Response of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) to different levels of phosphorus through inorganic and organic sources. Journal of Soils and Crops. 2006; 16:240-243. 33. Sohu I, Gandahi AW, Bhutto GR, Sarki MS, Gandahi R. Growth and yield maximization of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) through integrated nutrient management applied to rice-chickpea cropping system. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture. 2015; 31(2):131-138. 34. Tolanur SI. Effect of different organic manures, green manuring and fertilizer nitrogen on yield and uptake of macro nutrients by chickpea in vertisol. Legume Research. 2009; 32(4):304-306.
Page | 13
Page | 14
Chapter - 2 Effect of Spacing and Weed Management Practices on Growth and Yield of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Under Rainfed Condition of Nagaland
Authors Sibino Dolie Department of Agronomy, School of Agricultural Sciences and Rural Development, Nagaland University, Medziphema, Nagaland, India D Nongmaithem Department of Agronomy, School of Agricultural Sciences and Rural Development, Nagaland University, Medziphema, Nagaland, India T. Gohain Department of Agronomy, School of Agricultural Sciences and Rural Development, Nagaland University, Medziphema, Nagaland, India
Page | 15
Page | 16
Chapter - 2 Effect of Spacing and Weed Management Practices on Growth and Yield of Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Under Rainfed Condition of Nagaland Sibino Dolie, D Nongmaithem and T. Gohain
Abstract A field experiment was conducted in the Agronomy experimental research farm during kharif season 2016 to study the effect of spacing and weed management practices on growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) under rainfed condition of Nagaland. The results revealed that 40 cm × 15 cm spacing recorded significantly highest growth and yield of groundnut. The dominant broad leaf weeds were Ageratum conyzoides, Borreria hispida, Mullugo pentaphylla, Scorparia dulcis, Cleome rutidosperma, Melochia corchorifolia, Mimosa pudica and Ludwigia linifolia. Cyperus iria was dominant among the sedges. Among the grassy weeds, Cynodon dactylon, Digitaria sanguinalis, Eleusine indica, Echinochloa colonum and Poa annua were dominant. Among the weed management practices, hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS gave the maximum decrease in weed density in all the categories of weed, thereby recording highest growth and yield of groundnut (1007.7 kg ha-1) which was followed by pendimethalin at 0.75 kg ha-1 (PE) fb one hand weeding at 45 DAS (946.3 kg ha-1). Keywords: Groundnut, hand weeding, spacing and yield Introduction Groundnut known as ‘The King of Oilseeds’ plays an important role in boosting oilseed production in the country which is cultivated over an area of 4.19 m ha with total production of 6.68 m t and yield of 1.59 t ha-1 [1]. It is a staple food and valuable cash crop for millions of households. It has an outstanding nutritive value with 40-45% oil, 25% protein and 18% carbohydrates in addition to minerals, vitamins and essential amino acids. Its cultivation is getting popularity among the farmers of North-Eastern Hill Region. Groundnut which is a recent introduction in North East region, has Page | 17
proved potential and can be a good substitute of uneconomical upland rice and maize for higher productivity and return [2]. Groundnut being a C3 is subjected to photorespiration. One of the reasons for low yield of groundnut is photorespiration which can be minimized by following proper crop geometry by planting the crop at proper spacing. Plant density is an efficient management tool for maximizing grain yield by increasing the capture of solar radiation within the canopy [3]. Out of the various constraints in groundnut production, weeds often pose serious problems. As groundnut is grown extensively during kharif season under rainfed condition it encounters severe weed infestation especially in the early stages. The most critical period of competition is from 3-6 weeks after sowing. The main problem limiting production of peanut is poor cultural practices (especially the practices of wide spacing) as well as inadequate weed management [4]. Weeds in groundnut may be controlled by manual, mechanical or chemical methods. However, efficient and cost effective weed control can be achieved by using either combination of herbicides or combining herbicide with other control methods. Hence keeping in view with the above context, a field experiment was carried out to study the effect of spacing and weed management practices on the growth and yield of groundnut. Materials and Methods A field experiment was carried out at school of agricultural sciences and rural development (SASRD), Nagaland University during the period of July to October 2016. The experimental site is situated at an altitude of 25˚45′43″ N latitude and 95˚53′04″ E longitude at an elevation of 310 m above mean sea level. The climate of experimental area is broadly classified as subtropical humid. The experiment was laid out in split plot design with three replications. The main plot treatments consist of three spacings: S1: 20 cm× 15 cm, S2: 40 cm × 15 cm and S3: 60 cm × 15 cm while the sub-plot treatments consist of four weed management practices: W1: Weedy check (control), W2: Hand weeding at 30 DAS and 60 DAS, W3: Pendimethalin 0.75 kg ha-1 (PE) fb Hand weeding at 45 DAS and W4: Fenoxaprop -p- ethyl 0.05 kg ha-1 (PoE) fb Hand weeding at 45 DAS. Groundnut variety kadiri-5 was sown at the rate of 65, 60 and 55 kg ha-1 for 20 cm × 15 cm, 40 cm × 15 cm and 60 cm × 15 cm spacing respectively and the recommended packages of practices were followed. The soil was sandy loam and acidic in reaction (pH 4.6). The soil contained 0.91 % organic carbon, 160 kg ha-1 available potassium and 15.8 kg ha-1 available phosphorus. The crop was fertilized with 20 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 40 kg K2O ha-1 in the form of diammonium Page | 18
phosphate and muriate of potash. The data related to each character were analysed statistically by applying the techniques of analysis of variance as described by Gomez and Gomez [5], and the significant of different source of variations was tested using Fisher Schedecor ‘F’ test at 0.05level of probalility. Results and Discussion Effect on Crops There was a significant effect on plant height and relative growth rate due to different plant spacing and weed management practices. The data (Table 1) showed that maintenance of plant spacing at 40cm × 15cm gave the highest values while the lowest values were recorded from 20cm × 15cm spacing. The decrease in plant height and relative growth rate with narrow spacing might be due to inter plant competition for space, soil moisture, nutrients and light. Similar findings were reported by Ngala et al. [6] Hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS recorded the highest values which might be due to increased availability of nutrients and lesser competition of weeds resulting in better accumulation of photosynthates. The results were in conformity with the findings reported by Bali et al. [7] and Devi et al. [8] who also reported that highest plant height was observed from two hand weeding. Different plant spacing and weed management practices significantly influence the no. of pods plant-1 and no. of kernels pod-1 where the lowest no. of pods plant-1 and no. of kernels pod-1 were recorded in 20cm × 15cm plant spacing. The highest values were recorded in 40cm × 15cm plant spacing which was statistically at par with 60cm × 15cm spacing. Similar findings were also reported by Yadeta, [9] and Foysalkabir et al. [10]. The increase in the no. of pods plant-1 and no. of kernels pod-1 could be due to the used of more nutrients and solar energy by the plant from wider spacing and reduces competition for all the inputs at wider spacing. This is in agreement with the work of Rasul et al. [11] who reported that inter row spacing of 60cm and 45cm were statistically similar and produced significantly more no. of seeds pod-1. Hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS gave the highest no. of pods plant-1 and no.of kernels pod-1. The similar results were reported by Peer et al. [12]. The highest pod and kernel yield were recorded from 40cm × 15cm plant spacing while the lowest pod and kernel yield was obtained from 60cm × 15cm spacing. This shows that increasing the plant density led to increase in pod yield per hectare until the optimum plant density was reached and beyond which further increase in number of plants did not produce significant changes and even start to decline in pod yield which might be due Page | 19
to efficient utilization of growth resources and the use of optimum plant densities. This result is in line with Howladder et al. [13]; Gunri et al. [14] and Awal and Aktar [15]. Weedy check gave the lowest pod and kernel yield and the highest yield were obtained with hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS followed by pendimethalin at 0.75 kg ha-1 (PE) fb one hand weeding at 45 DAS. The higher pod and kernel yield might be due to the fact that crop was kept free of competition with weeds at early critical stages of growth which resulted in favourable environment to have higher nutrient uptake and better source sink relationship. Similar finding was reported by Karim and Rashid [16]. Table 1: Effect of spacing and weed management practices on growth attributes, yield attributes and yield of groundnut Treatment
Plant Height (cm)
S1 S2 S3 S. Em ± CD (P=0.05)
28.3 29.1 28.4 0.09 0.43
W1 W2 W3 W4 S. Em ± CD (P=0.05)
27.4 29.7 29.0 28.3 0.07 0.24
No. of No. of Pods Kernels Plant-1 Pod-1 Spacing 0.0059 28.31 2.48 0.0071 33.65 2.93 0.0070 32.32 2.87 0.00016 0.23 0.01 0.00078 1.15 0.06 Weed Management Practices 0.0058 28.38 2.43 0.0071 34.13 3.06 0.0070 32.84 2.89 0.0067 30.34 2.66 0.00023 0.26 0.03 0.00080 0.88 0.09
RGR (g g-1 day-1)
Pod Yield (kg ha-1)
Kernel Yield (kg ha-1)
1201.66 1392.03 1097.28 16.75 82.82
827.24 977.64 755.93 7.34 36.29
917.52 1458.00 1330.46 1215.31 20.00 69.15
607.84 1007.73 946.32 852.51 9.71 33.56
Effect on Weeds Weed population and dry weight differed significantly due to different plant spacing and weed management practices. The data (Table 2 and 3) showed that the lowest population and dry weight of broad leaf weeds, grasses and sedges were obtained from 20cm × 15cm plant spacing while the highest value were recorded from 60cm × 15cm at all the stages of observation. This shows that the closely spaced groundnut might have covered the ground earlier than widely spaced crops and thus suppress the weeds. The findings are in conformity with those of Ansa et al. [17] and Sharma et al. [18]. Application of pendimethalin at 0.75 kg ha-1 (PE) fb one hand weeding at 45 DAS gave the lowest weed population and dry weight at 25 DAS. At 50 DAS, application of pendimethalin at 0.75 kg ha-1 (PE) fb one hand weeding at 45 DAS and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl at 0.05 kg ha-1 (PoE) fb one hand weeding at 45 DAS recorded the lowest population and dry weight in all the categories of weeds. Hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS Page | 20
showed the lowest weed population and dry weight in all the categories at 75 DAS and at harvest. However the maximum weed population was observed in weedy check at all the stages of observation. This result is in line with Kumawat, [19] and Samant et al. [20]. Effect on Soil The differences in the available N, P2O5 and K2O due to different plant spacing and weed management practices were found to be significant. The highest available N, P2O5 and K2O were observed in 40cm × 15cm spacing which was found to be statistically at par with 60cm × 15cm spacing. Weedy check recorded the lowest available N, P2O5 and K2O while the highest was obtained from hand weeding at 30 and 60 DAS which was at par with pendimethalin at 0.75 kg ha-1 (PE) fb one hand weeding at 45 DAS (Table 4). Lower soil available N, P2O5 and K2O in weedy check might be due to higher weed density and its dominance in utilizing the soil nutrients. The similar results were reported by Kumara et al. [21].
Page | 21
Table 2: Effect of spacing and weed management practices on population of weeds (no. m-2). Figures in the parentheses are the original values which are subjected to square root transformation Broad leaved Treatment
S1 S2 S3 S.Em± CD (P=0.05) W1 W2 W3 W4 S.Em± CD (P=0.05)
25 DAS
50 DAS
8.29 (68.2) 9.14 (83.3) 10.02 (100) 0.04
Grasses
75 DAS
At Harvest
25 DAS
5.16 (41.1) 5.97 (52.8) 6.90 (71.6) 0.22
7.69 (64.1) 8.62 (81.0) 9.68 (101.1) 0.32
9.44 (92.3) 9.83 (100.6) 10.53 (116.3) 0.08
7.50 (57.4) 9.06 (83.6) 9.96 (101.6) 0.20
0.21
1.11
1.59
0.39
1.00
9.64 (93.0) 9.34 (87.4) 8.65 (74.7) 8.95 (80.2) 0.05
12.57 (158.7) 6.92 (49.9) 2.13 (5.1) 2.42 (7.0) 0.31
12.76 (164.0) 6.21 (38.6) 7.16 (52.0) 8.52 (73.7) 0.26
13.46 (181.7) 8.14 (65.9) 8.33 (69.1) 9.79 (95.4) 0.09
0.18
1.07
0.90
0.32
50 DAS Spacing 4.44 (36.8) 5.17 (53.1) 5.97 (69.3) 0.14 0.71
75 DAS
At Harvest
25 DAS
Sedges 50 75 DAS DAS
7.65 (69.6) 9.27 (97.5) 10.30 (118.5) 0.10
8.96 (87.4) 10.08 (112.6) 11.44 (145.3) 0.31
3.27 (12.2) 4.48 (22.9) 5.77 (34.8) 0.46
2.29 (10.4) 2.61 (14.5) 3.05 (20.3) 0.13
3.45 (15.5) 4.34 (23.1) 4.72 (28.1) 0.20
4.08 (18.7) 4.61 (25.1) 4.99 (30.5) 0.02
0.52
1.52
2.26
0.67
1.00
0.07
15.25 (235.1) 6.68 (44.7) 8.09 (66.3) 10.61 (114.2) 0.23
6.70 (46.1) 4.46 (20.3) 3.17 (11.7) 3.70 (15.0) 0.19
7.55 (57.4) 1.64 (2.8) 0.71 (0.0) 0.71 (0.0) 0.15
7.94 (63.6) 2.57 (6.5) 2.93 (8.7) 3.24 (10.1) 0.14
8.11 (66.2) 3.24 (10.0) 3.41 (11.1) 3.48 (11.7) 0.02
0.79
0.66
0.52
0.49
0.08
Weed Management Practices 10.92 12.96 14.70 (120.9) (170.4) (217.7) 8.76 6.14 5.96 (77.4) (41.8) (36.2) 7.09 0.71 6.62 (50.2) (0.0) (44.9) 8.59 0.71 9.02 (74.9) (0.0) (82.0) 0.18 0.14 0.20 0.64
0.49
0.71
At Harvest
Page | 22
Table 3: Effect of spacing and weed management practices on dry weight of weeds (g m-2). Treatment
25 DAS
Broad leaved 50 75 DAS DAS
S1 S2 S3 S.Em± CD (P=0.05)
5.63 6.93 8.03 0.19
3.78 3.98 6.94 0.36
0.95
W1 W2 W3 W4 S.Em± CD (P=0.05)
At Harvest
25 DAS
50 DAS
Sedges 75 DAS
20.75 24.02 28.76 0.11
1.29 2.23 2.85 0.03
1.10 1.43 1.70 0.03
2.32 3.06 3.95 0.05
4.20 4.62 5.11 0.04
1.63
0.55
0.16
0.13
0.24
0.21
Weed Management Practices 12.23 22.27 39.54 11.12 8.23 8.27 8.54 0.00 12.20 10.30 0.00 13.38 0.29 0.12 0.32
52.33 11.58 16.41 17.71 0.17
2.28 2.18 2.03 2.03 0.04
3.90 1.58 0.00 0.00 0.03
5.46 1.60 2.49 2.89 0.06
7.08 2.92 4.07 4.50 0.04
0.58
0.12
0.10
0.20
0.15
At Harvest
25 DAS
17.07 20.53 23.88 0.30
25.52 28.38 30.69 0.19
7.83 10.37 13.46 0.33
1.79
1.47
0.92
1.64
8.11 7.44 5.34 6.57 0.17
14.77 4.24 0.26 0.32 0.25
28.72 9.28 20.71 23.26 0.41
37.34 18.07 26.91 30.46 0.20
0.57
0.86
1.42
0.68
1.00
Grasses 50 75 DAS DAS Spacing 6.50 15.28 7.87 18.13 8.51 21.63 0.07 0.33 0.36
0.43
1.11
At Harvest
Page | 23
Table 4: Effect of spacing and weed management practices on soil pH, Organic carbon, available soil nitrogen, available soil phosphorus and available soil potassium. Treatment
Soil pH
Organic Carbon (%)
S1 S2 S3 S.Em± CD (P=0.05)
4.70 4.71 4.70 0.006 NS
0.933 0.915 0.904 0.017 NS
W1 W2 W3 W4 S.Em ± CD (P=0.05)
4.69 4.72 4.70 4.70 0.007 NS
0.887 0.941 0.930 0.911 0.022 NS
Available N (kg ha-1) Available P2O5 (kg ha-1) Spacing 266.75 15.97 294.54 17.79 275.12 17.76 5.10 0.066 25.23 0.328 Weed Management Practices 263.07 14.68 298.19 18.22 280.12 18.08 273.83 17.71 5.96 0.160 20.61 0.552
Available K2O (kg ha-1) 157.74 174.41 172.30 1.353 6.687 138.86 179.22 178.90 175.62 1.532 5.298
Page | 24
References 1.
DGR. Annual Report 2014-2015, ICAR-Directorate of Groundnut Research, Junagadh, Gujarat, India, 2015. 2. Panwar AS, Singh NP, Saxena DC, Munda GC. Agricultural status and cropping systems in NEH region. Proceedings Approaches for increasing agricultural productivity in hill and mountain ecosystem, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya, 2003, 191-195. 3. Monneveux P, Zaidi PH, Sanchez C. Population density and low nitrogen affects yield-Associated Traits in Tropical Maize. Crop Science. 2005; 45:2-7. 4. El Naim AM, Eldoma MA, Abdalla AE. Effect of weeding frequencies and plant density on vegetative growth characteristic of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in North Kordofan of Sudan. International Journal of Applied Biology and Pharmaceutical Technology. 2010; 1(3):1188-1193. 5. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research: An IRRI Book. A Wiley-Interscience Publication, Joh Wiley and Sons, New York, USA. 1984, 680. 6. Ngala AL, Dugje IY, Yakubu H. Effect of inter-row spacing and plant density on performance of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in a Nigerian Sudan Savanna. Science International. 2013; 25(3):513-519. 7. Bali A, Bazaya BR, Chand L, Swami S. Weed management in soya bean (Glycine max L.). An International Quaterly Journal of Life Sciences. 2016; 11(1):255-257. 8. Devi KN, Singh KL, Mangsang A, Singh NB. Effect of weed control practices on weed dynamics, yield and economics of soybean (Glycine max L.). Legume Research. 2016; 39(6):995-998. 9. Yadeta MG. Effect of plant density on growth, yield and yield components of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) varieties at Abeya, Borana Zone, Southern Ethopia. M.Sc. (Ag) Thesis, School of Graduate Studies, Haramaya University, 2014. 10. Foysalkabir AKM, Quamruzzaman Md. Effect of plant growth regulator and row spacing on yield of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.). American Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science. 2016; 16(4):814-819. 11. Rasul F, Cheema MA, Sattar A, Saleem MF, Wahid MA. Evaluating the performance of three mungbean varieties grown under varying inter-row spacing. Journal of Animal and Plant Science. 2012; 22(4):1030-1035. 12. Peer FA, Hassan B, Lone BA, Qayoom S, Ahmad L, Khanday BA et al. Page | 25
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Effect of weed control methods on yield and yield attributes of soybean. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 2013; 8(48):6135-6141. Howlader SH, Islam MSB, Mamun MH, Jahan SMH. Effect of plant spacings on the yield and yield attributes of Groundnut. International Journal of Sustainable Crop Production. 2009; 4(1):41-44. Gunri SK, Biswas T, Mandal GS, Nath R, Kundu CK. Effect of spacing on improved cultivars of summer growing groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in red and laterite zone of West Bengal. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Science. 2010; 23(5):687-688. Awal MA, Aktar L. Effect of row spacing on the growth and yield of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) stands. International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 2011; 3(1):7-11. Karim FM, Rashid MM. Performance of groundnut under different plant population and weed management. M.Sc. (Ag) Thesis, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Dhaka, 2014. Ansa Okon JE. Effects of groundnut spacing on yield and weed control in the rainforest agro-ecological zone of Nigeria. Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science. 2016; 4(12):374-377. Sharma S, Jat RA, Sagarka BK. Effect of weed-management practices on weed dynamics, yield, and economics of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in black calcareous soil. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2015; 60(2):312-317. Kumawat M. Integrated weed management in kharif groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). M.Sc. (Ag) Thesis, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, College of Agriculture Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India, 2014. Samant TK, Dhir BC, Mohanty B. Effect of weed management practices on weed control, growth attributes, yield and economics in Rabi groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). International Journal of Plant Protection. 2015; 8(2):307-312. Kumara O, Naik TB, Kumar BMA. Effect of weed management practices and fertility levels on soil health in finger millet-groundnut cropping system. International Journal of Agricultural Science. 2014; 10(1):351-355.
Page | 26
Chapter - 3 Agronomic Management Strategies for Abiotic Stresses in Plants
Authors Durgesh Singh Department of Agronomy, BAU, Sabour, Bhagalpur, Bihar, India Asheesh Chaurasiya Department of Agronomy, BAU, Sabour, Bhagalpur, Bihar, India Ashish Kumar Singh Division of Nematology IARI, New Delhi, India
Page | 27
Page | 28
Chapter - 3 Agronomic Management Strategies for Abiotic Stresses in Plants Durgesh Singh, Asheesh Chaurasiya and Ashish Kumar Singh
Abiotic stresses are serious environmental concern which harmfully affecting agricultural production and productivity. Of the total annual crop losses in agriculture, many are due to direct or indirect weather and climatic (abiotic stress) effects such as flood, drought, frost, salinity, submergence heat and cold wave etc. Climate change could seriously threaten production of food required to fulfil the feed requirement of future generations of the world. Climate change has affect agriculture by many ways including changes in long term trends in temperature, CO2 and rainfall regimes as well as increasing variability in extreme events. Scientist and several farmers already have the knowledge about impact of climate change on agriculture and rural livelihoods. Several national and international seminars /meeting are conducting at various part of the world but farmers don’t know how it is make possible to obtained efficient production under this condition of climate change. So aim of this chapter is to aware the farmers about the agronomic strategies for minimising the impact of climate change for getting higher production/profit, because improved agronomic practices should be key point of climate change adoption in agriculture. 1.
Plant Stresses
Stress may simply define as the tension/strain of crop plants due to external factors. External stresses are divided in to two groups- one is biotic (insects, fungi, bacteria, viruses and nematode etc.) and other one is abiotic (drought, heavy rainfall, high or low temperature, snow fall, heat and cold wave etc.). Stress may occur at any stage of plant growth but every stage has different detrimental effect and levels of losses. In recent years, various strategies /techniques have been evolved by which plants protect them self and produce satisfactory yield during periods of biotic and environmental (abiotic) stresses. 1.1 Biotic Stresses Stresses caused by living organisms are biotic stress in plants, it includes Page | 29
attack of insects, bacteria, fungi, viruses and nematodes etc. Among all these different biotic agents have different attacking time, mode and levels of losses in plant body. Some’s damage at germination and seedlings stage and others at vegetative or reproductive stage and cause significant losses in plants. Examples of some biotic stress on plants are fruit borer, leaf moulder, stem borer, rust, white mold, anthracnose, root rots, bacterial blights, powdery mildew, mosaic viruses, etc. 1.2 Abiotic Stresses Stresses caused by non-living organisms such as drought, flood, high and low temperature, salinity, frost, snow fall, nutrient imbalance are the major factors which limit the plant growth and crop productivity and thus are the major causes of crop losses throughout the world. According to an estimation done by Dudal (1976) only 10% of the world arable land is free from stress. Among all abiotic stress drought occupy largest arable land about 26% (Dudal 1976) and water stress is most severe to productivity of rice in rainfed condition (Widawgky and O’Toole 1990). Deficiency and toxicity of minerals are next in importance. Mineral toxicity covers 20% of arable land (Dudal 1976), among this only salinity affect 10% of world land surface (Richards 1995) and it is shocking for us this salinity causes 30% losses within next 25 years and up to 50% by the year 2050 (Wang et al. 2003). Soil acidity is major problem in tropical regions in which aluminium and manganese toxicity are major constraints to productivity of crop and fertility of soil. Yield losses in South and Southeast Asia due to different abiotic stresses have been compiled in Table 1.1 (Dey and Upadhyay 1996). Table 1.1: Estimated yield loss caused by various abiotic factors (Dey and Upadhyay 1996) Country/Region Southern India Eastern India Bangladesh North Eastern China Central China Nepal Southern China Northern China
All Technical Constraints 468 658 635 1350 1515 1422 1091 1288
Yield Reduction (kg/ha) Abiotic Drought Cold Factors 117 17 4 306 144 18 284 93 10 1156 153 194 1444 250 317 406 236 0 990 143 159 1033 169 160
Submergence 0 24 140 95 163 13 112 79
Day by day increasing population causes, uncontrolled urbanization and industrialization which reduce the area of agricultural land as well as Page | 30
deteriorate its fertility status, Resulting, availability of lands for agriculture is decreasing continuously. Abiotic stresses and reduced lands become a big problem to produce quality food for current and future generation. 1.2.1 Drought Stress Among abiotic stresses drought stress is the most disastrous factor in dry farming and dry land farming. We can say drought is a precursor of famine and worst natural enemy of people. We can’t judge the severity of drought, it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall, evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al. 1994). It’s occur when evapotranspiration exceeds soil moisture available for plants to fulfil their demands. Soil moisture available for plant is lies between -0.33 bar to -15 bar after that (-15 bar to -31 bar) moisture available only for survival. Drought occur when soil water potential depletes to a level of -31 to -60 bar or more. Condition of drought during growing period of crop plants affect photosynthesis, respiration, metabolic processes, growth, development and reproduction etc. resulting, cause much degradation of yield. Some important crops, their stage and yield reduction at that particular stage are shown below in table 1.2. Table 1.2: Economic yield reduction by drought stress in some representative field crops Crop Rice Rice Rice Rice Rice Maize Maize
Yield Reduction (%) Reproductive (mild stress) 53-92 Reproductive (sever stress) 48-94 Grain filling (mild stress) 30-55 Grain filling (sever stress) 60 Reproductive 24-84 Grain filling 79-81 Reproductive 63-87 Growth stage
Maize
Reproductive
47-70
Maize Maize Barley Chickpea Pigeonpea Soybean
Vegetative Reproductive Seed filling Reproductive Reproductive Reproductive
25-60 32-92 49-57 45-69 40-55 46-71
Sunflower
Reproductive
60
Potato
Flowering
13
References Lafitte et al. (2007) Lafitte et al. (2007) Basnayake et al. (2006) Basnayake et al. (2006) Venuprasad et al. (2007) Monneveux et al. (2006) Kamara et al. (2003) Chapman and Edmeades (1999) Atteya et al. (2003) Atteya et al. (2003) Samarah (2005) Nayyar et al. (2006) Nam et al. (2001) Samarah et al. (2006) Mazahery- Laghab et al. (2003) Kawakami et al. (2006)
Page | 31
Management Strategies for Drought Stress There are various agronomic strategies by which we protect the crop plants and get optimum yield under condition of drought stress1.2.1.1 Grow Ephemeral Plants Many short duration desert plants called ephemerals, germinate at beginning of the rainy season and complete their life cycle within very short duration (only 5-6 weeks) and some other crops have early maturity characteristics (Lewin and Sparrow 1975; Chang et al. 1986) resulting, mature before drought stress occur, so cultivation of these types of crops is easy way to get production under drought stress condition. Roy et al. (2005) found significant positive correlation of crop duration with economic yield f.eg. Cowpea, green gram, black gram and some varieties of pearl millet etc. 1.2.1.2 Grow Resistant/Tolerant Variety Different type of drought resistant varieties of crops is developed by scientist, so cultivation of this type of varieties provide better yield under drought stress condition. Resistant varieties have various physiological mechanisms like- stomatal control of transpiration, and also maintain water uptake through an extensive and prolific root system (Turner et al. 2001; Kavar et al. 2007). Characteristics of root such as biomass, length, density and depth are important drought avoidance traits that contribute to final yield under terminal drought environments (Subbarao et al. 1995; Turner et al. 2001) and effective root system is helpful for extracting water from considerable depths (Kavar et al. 2007). Glaucousness or waxy bloom on leaves desirable trait for drought tolerance (Richards et al. 1986; Ludlow and Muchow 1990) because it helps in maintaining high tissue water potential. Glaucous leaves were 0.70 C cooler and had a lower rate of leaf senescence (Richards et al. 1986) and 0.50 C reduction in leaf temperature for six hours per day was sufficient to extend the grain-filling period by more than three days. Some important crops and their drought tolerant genotypes are given below in (table 1.3). Table 1.3: Some important crops and their drought tolerant genotypes Crop
Rice (Oryza sativa)
Genotype Reference DNJ-60, ARC-10327, DJ-129, Khush and Coffman (1977) Lua Ngu, IR-36, DV-110 TKM-1, N-22, Mettansannavari, Ram and Singh (1994) Sudha, MTU-17, Sathi-34-36 Dular, Salumpikit, OS-4, Suardi (2002) Kruseng, Aceh, Ayung, Cisadane
Page | 32
Wheat Triticum sphaerococcum, T. (Triticum aestivum) Vavilovii T. aestivum Zpbl-1304 Ristic et al. (1998) Maize (Zea mayse) HI-209, HI-295, HI-536, HI-1040 Meena-Kumari et al (2004) TVu-11979, TVu-14914 Watanbe (1998) Cowpea (Vigna radiata) Kanannado, Dan IIa, IT90K-59-2 Singh et al. (1999) Bean BG365, BG364, Pusa-362, PusaKumar et al. (2004) (Phaseolus vulgaris) 256 Musturd/ rape Oscar, range, Tarnab-2 Sadaqat et al. (2003) (Brassica spp.)
1.2.1.3 Seed Priming/Hardening Amended seed priming/hardening techniques (with chemicals like- KCl, CaCl2, CaHPO4 etc.) are used to reduce emergence time, accomplish uniform emergence, better allometric (changes in growth of plant parts over time) attributes and requisite stand in many field crops (Ashraf and Foolad 2005; Farooq et al. 2005). Research conducted by Lee et al. (1998); Du and Tuong (2002) found that priming with 4% KCl solution or a saturated CaHPO4 solution, increased plant density, fertile tillers, and grain yield compared with unprimed treatment when sown in soil with low moisture content. Effects of priming or pre-treatment of seed persist under suboptimum field conditions, low soil moisture availability and thus, give better results than non-hardened seeds. 1.2.1.4 Effective Weed Control Efficient weed control in field provide competition free environment to the crops for limited soil moisture. Weeds have high transpiration rate than crop, so most of the moisture available for the crop is utilized by the weeds. Therefore, proper weed management is important for reducing the drought stress. 1.2.1.5 Tillage and Fallowing Surface of soil should be kept open for the entry of water and shallow tillage in in offseason increase the chance of infiltration as well as reduce the weed problem. In 2-3 years one deep tillage is also important for conserving the moisture. In dry land cropping system field should be kept unsown during rainy season and sowing should be done in post-rainy season, this practice provides sufficient moisture for the main post-rainy season crop. 1.2.1.6 Mulching Process of covering the soil surface by organic materials such as crop residues, grasses, plastics etc. to reduce the moisture loss by evaporation is Page | 33
mulching. This process of mulching helps to keep down weeds, moderate diurnal soil temperature and reduce runoff losses. When rainfall occurs, this process effectively conserve moisture. In case of heavy soil when water is infiltrate properly we can use vertical mulching in which tranches are dug at 5-10 m intervals at size 30-60 cm across the slope and fill the stalk materials. 1.2.1.7 In-Situ Moisture Conservation Proper bunding around the field and careful cultural operations should be done in the field for effective moisture conservation. Several methods adopt for in-situ moisture conservation are as fallows
Broad Beds and Furrows (BBF): system is effective on black soils where, beds of 120-180 cm are prepared and side of each beds furrows are made for effective moisture conservation through reduce runoff velocity and increased infiltration time.
Compartmental Bunding: convert the total area in to small bocks which temporary impounding water and improve moisture of the soil. Field having slope of 1% or less is suitable for this.
Opening Ridges and Furrows: across the slope are made before onset of monsoon for reducing flow of water from the field and enhance the time for infiltration of water. In rainy season sowing is done on this ridges (cereals and millets) and furrows (legumes) and moisture accumulate in soil is utilized by rabi crops.
Scooping: is the process of making small pits on surface of soil for increasing opportunity time for water to infiltrate in to the soil.
Inter-Row or Inter-Plot Water Harvesting: system include making of ridge (60-70 cm) or plots between the furrows (30-40 cm) for enhancing the time for water to infiltrate.
1.2.1.8 Use of Anti-Transpirants Maximum (about 99%) amount of water absorbed by plants is lost, in the form of transpiration and only 1% is utilized by plants for its metabolic activity. So if transpiration is controlled, it saves much water for long time. Anti-transpirants are four typea) Stomatal closing type b)
PMA, Atrazine herbicide (low concentration)
Film forming type -
Mobileaf, hexadeconol, silicon
c)
Reflectant type -
Kaolin (5%), celite, hydrated lime, calcium carbonate, magnesium carbonate, zincs sulphate
d)
Growth retardant -
Cycocel (CCC)
Page | 34
1.2.1.9 Windbreaks/Shelterbelts Windbreaks play important role in moisture conservation by increasing the air resistance to water vapour transfer. Adopting strip cropping of annual crops between strip of perennial grasses has also effective. 1.2.1.10 Ponds and Wells Making of those structure which promote infiltration or life-saving irrigation water in or around the field provide more opportunity for moisture conservation and cultivation of crops in drought stress condition. 1.2.1.11 Protective Irrigation Runoff water collected in various structures in or around the field is used for protected irrigation when prolonged dry spells occur during crop season. This irrigation is also called life-saving irrigation because it saves the crops until next rainfall not come. 1.2.1.12 Ratooning/Thinning Moisture depletion rate is depending on area of leaf, so if drought occur at 40-50 days after sowing reduction of leaf area should be done either by ratooning (sorghum, pearl millet etc.) or thinning (legumes). Thus by doing this process we can reduce the amount of water transpired by the plants and more water available in to the soil for our crop plants. So with the help of ratooning/thinning we can maintain optimum population and mitigate the harmful effect of drought on plants. 1.2.1.13 Selection of Efficient Cropping System In drought condition if possible, growing of two short duration crop in place of one single long duration, is beneficial (e.g. maize followed by sorghum or chickpea, moong followed by rabi sorghum). Intercropping systems are also more profitable than single crop (e.g. in MP soybean and pigeonpea intercropping). 1.2.1.14 Use of Organic Manures Application of organic manures like- FYM, compost etc. at 15-20 t ha-1 and properly incorporate it in to the soil before 1 month of sowing, give profitable results because it increases the porosity, true density, water holding capacity, nutrient supply and availability. Addition of organic manures improve the physical, chemical and biological condition of soil, resulting soil supply optimum inputs required by plants. Thus plants become stronger and ability to tolerate the drought condition will be more.
Page | 35
1.2.1.15 Crop Substitution Crop grown in drought situation if not give satisfactory results, can substitute with other crops which are more efficient in soil moisture use, input responsive and potentially high yielders. So we get better results under moisture stress condition. (E.g. Maize, Rice, Wheat etc. can substitute with Safflower, Sorghum, Chickpea, Mustard, Soybean, and other millets etc.). 1.2.1.16 Alternate Land Use Systems In dry land situation all lands are not suitable for crop production because of more restriction in growing processes. So in this condition we can go for pasture management, animal rearing, tree farming, agroforestry, ley farming, dry land horticulture or alley cropping etc. This system utilizes off-season time and resource, prevent land degradation, minimise risk of monocropping, and restores balance in the ecosystem. Various scientists have developed many alternate land use systems for different conditions
Agri-horticulture for arable lands
Alley cropping for arable lands
Horti/Silvi- Pastural system for non-arable lands
Ley farming for non-arable lands
Tree farming for non-arable lands
Medicinal and Aromatic plants
Agroforestry
1.2.1.17 Development of Watershed Watershed may define as planning and designing of water and soil conservation structures for collecting the water of a particular area and use it for agriculture and human development. Aim of watershed is to alleviate the effect of drought, moderate foods, prevent erosion and improve water availability for increasing the food, fodder, Fuel, and fibre availability. This structure also promotes alternate land use system like- animal rearing, sericulture, pisciculture etc. for sustainable development under drought situation. 1.2.2 Water Stress/Water Logging Waterlogging is most common in humid tropical lowlands, having poor drainage with adequate rainfall. It occurs extensively in both irrigated and dry land agriculture having more clay content in the soil. In submergence condition most important problem is availability of air in to the soil because Page | 36
all micro and macro pores are filled with water, so due to lack of air root development is restricted. Severe waterlogging adversely affects about 10% of the global land are (FAO 2002). It adversely affects bread wheat production in 4.7 m ha in irrigated soil of the Indo-Gangetic plains of the Northern India (CSSRI 1997). In this 4.7 m ha area, 2.5 m ha is affected by sodic soil (Sharma and Swarup 1988) and 2.2 m ha area is by seepage from irrigation canals (CSSRI 1997). Problem of waterlogging become very serious when field is not levelled or excess rainfall occur just after irrigation (Gill et al. 1992). Major causes of waterlogging are as fallowsI.
Temporary waterlogging occurs primarily in sandy duplex soils, in which rainfall rapidly penetrates sandy topsoil and accumulate above compact clay subsoil with low hydraulic conductivity at 5-100 cm depth (Tennant et al. 1992; Samad et al. 2001).
II. Raising of groundwater and flooding in river basin are cause waterlogging (Grieve et al. 1986; McDonald and Gardner 1987; Meyer and Barrs 1988). III. Continuous rainfall and improper drainage leads waterlogging, usually if heavy rainfall come just after irrigation cause waterlogging (Williamson and Kriz 1970). Countries of South and South-east Asia including India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh and China are mostly affected by waterlogging problem. Samad et al. (2001) told that area having mostly Rice-Wheat cropping system are commonly affected by waterlogging because of sub-soil compaction due to land preparation process (puddling) of rice field (to make optimize flooding condition for rice). Various effects of waterlogging on soil and plants are given below
Depletion of oxygen in root zone and increased level of CO2.
Physical, chemical and biological activities in the soil are disturbed due to low temp as a result of water logging, thus pest and diseases infestation problem arises in the fields.
Water logging makes field operations (ploughing, and intercultural operations) difficult or impossible.
Anaerobic condition adversely affects beneficial micro-organisms while harmful organisms grow well under this condition and restrict the plant growth.
Water logging adversely affect the soil water plant relationship there by creating ecological imbalance.
Page | 37
Secondary salinization caused by the salts which are brought up from lower horizon strict the uptake of moisture and nutrients in the plant roots and create toxic effect in the root system.
The adverse effects of water logging get accelerated when the capillary water brings salts from lower horizon of soil or they are present in the ground water used for irrigation.
Due to excess soluble salts the physical condition of soil deteriorates results, very low infiltration rates. Most rainfall goes as runoff, causing crop damages in adjoining area.
Crops yields reduced and sometimes crop failure due to inadequate uptake of moisture and nutrients and due to the injurious effect of salts or deteriorated soil condition.
Fodders grown in slat-affected soils may contain high molybdenum in or selenium and low amount of zinc resulting, nutritional imbalance which cause disease in animals.
Fig 1: Schematic representation of adverse effect of waterlogging on plant growth and survival (Setter and waters 2003)
Management Strategies for Waterlogging Condition Armstrong (1979) told that in the waterlogging condition gas exchange between roots and atmosphere is reduced drastically, because gases diffuse 1000 times more slowly in water than in air. Watson et al. conduct a research in 1976 and found that root growth and penetration in soil is reduced in cereals Page | 38
like- wheat, barley and rye due to waterlogging. Much research has support additive traits for waterlogging include increases in aerenchyma and root porosity, ethanolic fermentation, carbohydrate reserves, tolerance to post anoxic and recovery mechanisms. Mechanisms/management strategies for protecting the plants from waterlogging condition are as fallows1.2.2.1 Development of Proper Drainage System In the condition of waterlogging severe damage of crop occurs due to unavailability of air for the roots, so develop proper drainage system is most efficient agronomic management strategies. According to the condition of field options might vary from shallow surface drains (i.e. Spoon- and ‘W’drains) to more intensive drainage using wide-spaced furrows, to the intensive drainage form of raised beds. The efficiency of surface drainage increases in that order as does the degree of management. 1.2.2.2 Growing Crops on Raised Beds Raised beds are effective measure for reducing the losses due to water logging. For raised beds, the soil is shaped into beds that are above the normal ground level and furrows for draining out the excess water. Thus, by growing of crops on raised beds we provide additional area and time for air uptake by roots and by removing the excess water from field we can save crops from waterlogging. This method of protection is applicable only limited depth of waterlogging after that it fails because water stagnation occurs above the raised beds. In typical raised beds the soil is piled about a foot above ground level, though the height can range from a few inches to a few feet. 1.2.2.3 Use of Resistant Variety Waterlogging in field during crop period is very harmful for germination, growth and yield by changing various physiology of plant and health of soil. Varieties having root porosity, adventitious root and formation of aerenchyma tissue is ideal for growing in waterlogging condition. Yu et al. (1969) conducted a research and found higher root porosity in the tolerant plant of wheat (cv. Pato), corn and sunflower. Many other plant species develop large continuous intercellular spaces through which oxygen enter into shoot and goes to the roots of plant (Hook et al. 1971). Avoidance of waterlogging effects by plants involve various phenological development and adoption to waterlogging e.g. aerenchyma or metabolic change and recovery mechanisms (Greenway et al. 1994). Some important crops and their waterlogging tolerant genotypes are given below (Table 1.4)-
Page | 39
Table 1.4: waterlogging tolerant genotypes of important crops Crop
Genotype Panidhan-1
Reference Sahai et al. (1979) Mukherjee and Biswas CR-1002 (1979) IR39558-147-1-3, IR10198-66-2-1 Gupta (1988) Rice Jaisuria, Jalmagna, TNR-1, TNR(Oryza sativa) 2, Jaladhi-I, Jaladhi-II, Madhukar, Gangadharan (1985) Chakia-59, PLA-2 CR1030, CN-540, RAU-21, Bhattacharjee (1984) IET6207 Swarna Sub-1 IRRI Savannah, Gore, FL-302, BR-34 Hung et al. (1994) Setter and Water SARC1, Ducula-4, Chara Wheat (2003) (Triticum aestivum) Champtel, Currawong, Carnamah Setter et al. (2001) Zhemani No. 2, Nonglin No. 2 Lin et al. (1994) CH106-4, CH108-2, CH0348, Chow (1984) Maize CH0314 (Zea mayse) Kisan Goswami et al. (1975) Pungsannamulkong, Mukhankong Lee et al. (2004) Soybean (Glycine max) GC30182-2-6, Shih Shih AVRDC (1979) Mung bean VC1006-40-1, V1968, V2984, AVRDC (1979) (Vigna radiata) V3092, V3372 CoH12, Co7717, CoH14 Sethiya et al. (1986) Sugercane (Saccharum Somranjan and officinarum) CB4013, H59-3775, H49-3533 Rangarajan (1985)
1.2.2.4 Indoor Preparation of Seedlings Germination of seed is more sensitive to waterlogging because at this stage plants are just like a kid and any little problem is more and more dangerous for that. At this stage plants don’t have adventitious roots, aerenchyma tissues etc. to protect himself from waterlogging, resulted, complete failure of plants. So, if we do not insure seedlings at early stage we get nothing as output. One important solution for this problem is to grow seedlings under protected condition (e.g. within house, greenhouse etc.). Growing of seedlings within house is not only to protect the plants from waterlogging condition, it also provide shield from insect-pests. After getting optimum height plants may be able to tolerate and grow under this condition. 1.2.3 Salt Stress In recent years salt stress has become an ever increasing problem in Page | 40
agriculture production in arid and semi-arid areas of the world (Ashraf 1994; Foolad and Jones 1992) and affects around 10% of the total global land area (Richards 1995). Increased in salinization of cultivable lands is expected to have drastic global effects, cause 30% land losses within next 25 years and up to 50% by the year 2050 (Wang et al. 2003). Yadav and Gupta (1984) told that in India, about 12 m ha lands are affected with salinity and alkalinity. Increase salinity decrease and delay the germination of seeds, reduction in plant stand and shoot length (Jain et al. 2003), root-shoot dry weight and grain yield (Scardaci et al. 1996; Shannon et al. 1998). Salinity stress decrease chlorophyll content, sugar, starch and potassium (Trivedi et al. 2004) and drastically affect the root physiology. Panicle initiation and pollination stage are found very sensitive to salinity which affects the formation of grain components and ultimately grain yield (Khatun and Flower 1995; Zeng et al. 2001). Salinity affect the plant-water relationship and this not only responsible for water uptake also for nutrient availability and uptake. High level of salinity is directly related to osmotic and ionic stress in plants (Hayashi and Murata 1998; Munns 2002; Benlloch-Gonzalez et al. 2005) because growth suspension is directly related to concentration of salts or osmotic potential of soil water (Flowers 2004). Management Strategies for Salt Stress
Seedlings emergence and early seedling growth are more susceptible for salt stress, so protect the seedlings by growing it on another places and when it became stronger to tolerate the salt problem then transplant in to the main field.
Selection of salt tolerant crops like- Barley, Cotton, Sugar beet, sorghum, wheat, Mustard, Safflower etc.
Seed rate of crops should be 25% more than the normal for obtaining optimum plant population and in case of lowland rice 4-6 seedlings per hill should be used.
In furrow method salts are accumulate in the centre of ridge between furrows and on the top of the ridge, so if seed is sown on the side of the ridge or at the bottom of the ridge, salinity problem can be minimised.
Include green manuring crops in cropping system.
Use of more organic manures (FYM, compost, Vermi compost etc.).
Microorganisms like- Arbascular mycorrhiza (AM), Azospirillum, Pseudomonas, Agrobacerin etc. give beneficial effect on growth and yield. Various scientists done the research and found beneficial Page | 41
results when use all these bacteria and fungi (Tain et al. 2004; Patreza and Cordeiro 2004; Domenech et al. 2004).
Pre-sowing heavy irrigation is beneficial because it leached out the salts from top layer of the soil.
In place of heavy irrigation at the time of crop growth, more frequent irrigation is effective and if possible use sprinkler or drip irrigation system.
It ensures that water used for irrigation must be free from salts and if require use some chemicals with water having acidic nature.
If problem is more, scraping of top soil and soil should be removed from field.
Turn the top soil to below and vice-versa by digging pits and pored the soil of first pit to second and second to third and same as till last.
Use of gypsum and pyrite to reclaimed the alkalinity problem of soil, in extreme condition sulphuric acid also can be used.
Selection of salt tolerant genotypes of different crops (Table 1.5). Table 1.5: Salt tolerant genotype of some important crops
Crop
Rice (Oryza sativa)
Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Barley (hordium vulgare) Soybean (Glycine max) Pearlmillet (Pennisetum americanum) Sugercane (Saccharum officinarum)
Genotype Arya-33, AU-1, CSR-1, CSR-2,CSR-3, CSR-6, Damodar, Bhura Rata, KalaRata CSC1, Co 43 CSR-10, CSR-11, CSR-12, CSR-13, CSR-19, CSR-20, CSR-24, CSR-26 Pulot Daeng Maradka, Kautik Serai, IR2153-26-3-5, Kautic Putih HD-2285, HD-2329, WH-542, C-306 Kharchia-65, KRL-1-4, Job-666, HD2009, Raj-3077 CSB-1, CSB-2, CSB-3, Ratna, DL-348
Reference Chopra and Paroda (1986) Krishnamurty et al. (1988) Mishra (1996) Gupta (1997) Mishra (1996) Chhipa (2003) Mishra (1996)
Amber, DL-88, DL-120, jyoti, RD-137
Chhipa (2003)
SL-432, JS-94-67
Jain et al. (2003)
PHP-14
Chhipa (2003)
Co-453, Co-1341, Co-6806, Co-1111 Co-205, Co-286, Co-210, Co-321, Co513, Co- 453
Mishra (1996) Chhipa (2003)
Page | 42
1.2.4 Heat Stress In abiotic stresses, heat (temperature) stress is one of the prime element which affect growth, development, yield and productivity of the crops. Adoption of crop in a particular area is depend on temperature of that area. Every crop has a cardinal temperature (maximum, minimum and optimum temperature) for growth and development and any change from this may affects the plant. Optimum temperature for most of the crops ranges from 22350C. If temperature goes above to this cause decrease in photosynthetic rate (Berry and Bjorkman 1980; Pimental 1998). High temperature leads to stomata closure during day time to conserve the moisture. Hall (1992) told that high temperature during night is also detrimental for reproductive development and yield of various crops. High temperature disturb the pollination and fertilization of many crops during anthesis as pollen sterility (Mackill et al. 1982). Chaudhary and Wardlaw (1978) proved that how increase in day-night temperature reduce the grain growth and thus grain yield. Flower initiation, floral bud development is reduced by a combination of high night temperature and long photoperiods (Dew el-madina and Hall 1986; Petal and Hall 1990), but if high night temperature come for 2 or more consecutive weeks during first 4 weeks after germination cause complete suppression of floral buds and prevents flowering (Ahmad and Hall 1993). High temperature not only affect the reproductive parts even much affect metabolic process of plants like- photosynthesis, membrane disturbance, high respiration and protein denaturation etc. Management Strategies for Heat Stress
Use of anti-transpirants like- film forming (Mobileaf, hexadeconol, silicon), reflecting type (Kaolin (5%), celite, hydrated lime, calcium carbonate, magnesium carbonate, zincs sulphate).
Seed should be grow under the shade or protected condition if possible for getting strong and healthy seedlings.
Grow heat tolerant crops like- rice, pearlmillet, maize etc.
If possible, vegetables (tomato, chilli, broccoli etc.) having high market price can grow under protected condition.
Use of FYM, compost, green manuring etc. in field before 1 month improve the physical, chemical and biological conditions of soil, so a good soil condition promote plant strengthening to tolerate the heat stress.
Frequent application of irrigation water to maintain the internal temperature of the plants. Page | 43
Use of mulching above the soil surface act as shield which kept the soil temperature low compare to above outer temperature.
Sprinkler and drip irrigation system provide safety to plants from heat stress.
Heat tolerant genotype of some important crops (Table 1.6). Table 1.6: Some common genotype of important crops Crop
Genotype
Reference
Rice (Oryza sativa)
Intermediate Jamaica red
Roman-Aviles and Beaver (2003)
BG33-2
Zhang et al. (2004)
HD 2501
Hanchinal et al. (1994)
WH730, WH781, C306, PBW373, Raj3765, AP1074
Munjal et al. (2004)
Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis)
Erget
Stone and Nicolas (1998)
G122, G5273
Udomprasert et al. (1995)
Haibushi
Suzuki et al. (2001)
Cornell 503
Rainey and Griffiths (2005)
Qngyan 1
Li et al. (1999)
Cotton Karishma, FH-900, MNH(Gossypium spp.) 552, CRIS-19
Hafeez-ur-Rahaman et al. (2004)
1.2.5 Cold Stress Low temperature during crop growth also an impotent environmental constraint that limit the crop growth and yield. Many tropical origin plants suffer cold injury when exposed to temperature below 200C (Graham and Patterson 1982; Andrews 1987). Cold stress during crop period decrease germination percentage, vegetative growth by metabolic disturbance and also affect reproductive development. Cold stress is two types- 1) Chiling injuryin this type of cold stress temperature remain above the freezing point (more than 00C) and 2) Freezing injury- temperature goes below freezing point (less than 00C). Freezing injury is more dangerous because ice crystals are formed in intracellular space that kill the cells by increasing the size when water convert in to the ice. Chilling temperature cause plant tissue damage but not cause freezing of tissue (Levitt 1980). Most of the plants affected by chilling injury when temperature is between 00C-100C (Lyons et al. 1979). Salveit and Morris (1990) reported that, visual symptoms seen on plants due to cold injury is not same at every time its depends on temperature, stage of plant and tissue, Page | 44
duration of coldness and environmental conditions (light, wind, water and nutrients). Chilling injury during night is more dangerous than the day because photosynthesis is severely affected for several days following a single cool night (Bell 1993). Chilling during night may damage electron transport (Hallgren and Oquest 1990), enzymes involved in CO2 fixation (Sassenrath et al. 1990), translocation of sugar from source to sinks (Bagnall et al. 1988) or disturb water relations (Mcwilliam et al. 1982). Management Strategies for Cold Stress
Vernalization treatment of seed is important for winter survival mechanisms. Longer vernalization requirement delay the time of reproductive phase of plant which is most sensitive to cold stress.
Irrigation of field can save the plants for some extent because temperature change in water is lower than the soil.
Wood burn and Smoke around the field can save the plant by increasing the temperature of field and thus reduce the chance of cold injury.
If possible cultivation should be done under protected cultivation (greenhouse, glasshouse etc.) because in these structure temperature is more than the outer place or we can use some heater/A.C. for increasing the temperature of the structure.
Grow such crops which can tolerate low temperature during crop growth period.
Chilling tolerate crop genotype (Table 1.7). Table 1.7: Important crops and their genotypes
Crop Rice (Oryza sativa) Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Maize (Zea mays) Chickpea
Genotype
Reference
Padi Sashal, Lambayaque1, Jumali, C-21, Alumbis,
IRRI (1978)
IR 781, IR 667, K 332, K 330, VL 191, VL 206, HPU 734
Nanda and Mani (1983)
VL Dhan-163,Himalaya-741,Pant Dhan-6
Ram and Singh (1994)
Albumin 114, Odesskara 51
Moreru and Syrku (1991)
Albumin 24
Voinikov and Korytov (1991)
C123, W117, B37, Mo17
Bocsi (1988)
Pratap, WCYC3
Dhillon and Reddy(1988)
CO255, CO304, CO308
Hodges et al. (1997)
ICCV-88552,ICCV-88503,ICCV-88502
Srinivasan et al. (1999)
Page | 45
(cicer ILC-794,ILC-1071,ILC-1444,ILC-1455, arietinum) ILC-1251 Pea (Pisum sativum)
Singh et al. (1989)
PI-102888, PI-125673, PI-251051
Auld et al. (1983)
Dalibor, Mutant-57, Raman, Izum rud, K1053, K-5284
Balachkova et al. (1986)
References 1.
Ahmed FE, Hall AE. Heat injury during early floral bud development in cowpea. Crop Sci. 1993; 33:764-767.
2.
Andrews CJ. Low temperature stress in field and forage crop production an-overview. Canadian J Plant Sci. 1987; 67:1121-1133.
3.
Armstrong W. Aeration in higher plants. In: Advances in Botanical Research, Wool house HW (Ed.). Academic Press, New York. 1997; 7:225-232.
4.
Ashraf M. Breeding for salt tolerant plant. Critical Rev Plant Sci. 1994; 13:17-42.
5.
Ashraf M, Foolad MR. Pre-sowing seed treatment- a shotgun approach to improve germination, plant growth, and crop yield under saline and nonsaline conditions. Adv Agron. 2005; 88:223-271.
6.
Atteya AM. Alteration of water relations and yield of corn genotypes in response to drought stress, Bulg J Plant Physiol. 2003; 29:63-76.
7.
Auld DI, Adams KJ, Swensen JB, Murray GA. Screening peas for winter hardiness in peas. Crop Sci. 1983; 23:763-766.
8.
AVRDC, Taiwan Progress Report for. Shanhua, Taiwan, 1979, 1978, 173.
9.
Balachkova NE, Lakhanov AP, Zaitsev VN. Resistance of pea and French bean breeding material to unfavourable temperature (in Russian). Nauchno-Tekni-Cheskii-Byulleten Vsesoyusnogo. Nauchno-Inssledvatel Skogo Instituta Zernobovykhi Krupanykh Kul Tur. 1986; 35:66-71.
10. Basnayake J, Fukai S, Ouk M. Contribution of potential yield, drought tolerance and escape to adaptation of 15 rice varieties in rainfed lowlands in Cambodia. Proceedings of the Australian Agronomy Conference, Australian Society of Agronomy, Birsbane, Australia, 2006. 11. Begnall DJ, King RW, Farquhar GD. Temperature dependent feedback inhibition photosynthesis in peanut. Planta. 1988; 175:348-354. 12. Bell MJM. Low night temperature response in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) Ph.D Thesis, University of Guelph, 1993. Page | 46
13. Benlloch-Gonzalez M, Fournier J, Ramos J, Benlloch M. Strategies underlying salt tolerance in Halophytes are present in Cynara carduncullus. Plant Sci. 2005; 168(3):653-659. 14. Berry J, Bjorkman O. Photosynthetic response and adaptation to temperature in higher plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol. 1980; 31:491-543. 15. Bhattacharjee DP. Vertical improvement for rainfed lowland rice. Oryza. 1984; 21:106. 16. Bocsi J. In vitro study of cold tolerance in maize (Zea mays l.) Novenytermeles. 1988; 37(5):421-429. 17. Chang TT, Armenta-Soto JL, Mao EX, Peiris R, Loresto GC. Genetic studies on the components of drought resistance in rice (Oryza sativa L.). In: Rice Genetic I, International Rice Research Institute, Manila, Philippines, 1986, 387-398. 18. Chapman SC, Edmeades GO. Selection improves drought tolerance in tropical maize populations II. Direct and correlated responses among secondary traits, Crop Sci. 1999; 39:1315-1324. 19. Chhipa BR. Management of salt affected soils through cultural manipulation. In: Abiotic stresses and crop Production, Maloo SR (ed.), Agrotech Publishing Academy, Udaipur, Indian, 2003, 143-192. 20. Chopra VL, Paroda RS. Approaches for incorporating drought and salinity resistance in crop plants. Oxford and IBH Publ Co Pvt Ltd New Delhi, 1986. 21. Chow KH. Alcohol dehydrogenase synthesis and water logging tolerance in maize. Trop Agri (Trinidad). 1984; 61:302-304. 22. Chowdhury S, Wardlaw IF. The effect of temperature on kernel development in cereals. Aust J Agric Res. 1978; 29:205-223. 23. CSSRI. Vision-2002. CSSRI Perspective Plan. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Director, Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, India, 1997, 95. 24. Dew el-madina IM, Hall AE. Flowering of contrasting cowpea (Vigna radiate L.) genotypes under different temperature and photoperiods. Field Crop Research. 1986; 14:89-104. 25. Dey MM, Upadhyay HK. Yield loss due to drought, cold and submergence tolerance. In Rice Research Asia: Progress and priorities, (eds.), Evenson RE, Herdt RW, Hossain M, International Rice Research Institute in collaboration with CAB International, UK, 1996, 291-303 Page | 47
26. Dhillon BS, Reddy AN. Response to selection for cold tolerance in maize. Indian J Genet. 1988; 48:129-133. 27. Domenech J, Rasmos-Solano B, Probaza A, Lucas-Garcia JA, Juan JC, Gutierrez-Manero FJ. Bacillus spp. and Pisolithus Tinetorius effects on Quercus ilex spp. Battota: a study on tree growth, rhizosphere community structure and mycorrhizal infection. Forest Ecol Mangt. 2004; 196:293303. 28. Du LV, Tuong TP. Enhancing the performance of dry-seeded rice: effects of seed priming, seedling rate, and time of seedling. In: Pandey S, Mortimer M, Wade L, Tuong TP, Lopes K, Hardy B (eds) Direct seeding: research strategies and opportunities. International Research Institute, Manila, Philippines, 2002, 241-256. 29. Dudal R. Inventory of major soils of the world with special references to mineral stress. In: Plant Adaptation of Mineral Stress in Problem Soils, (ed.), Wright MJ, Cornell University, Agriculture Experiment Station, Ithaca, New York, 1976. 30. FAO, 2002. http://www.fao.org/waient/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/agl/ agll/nav.html on March 18, 31. Farooq M, Basra SMA, Hafeez K, Ahmad N. Thermal hardening: a new seed vigor enhancement tool in rice. Acta Bot Sin. 2005; 47:187-193. 32. Flowers TJ. Improving crops salt tolerance. J Exp Bot. 2004; 55:363-373. 33. Foolad MR, Jones RA. Parent-offspring regression estimates of heritability for salt tolerance during germination in tomato. Crop Sci. 1992; 32(2):439-442. 34. Gangadharan C. Breeding. In: Rice Research in India, Jaiswal et al (eds.), Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, India, 1985, 73-109. 35. Gill KS, Qadar A, Singh KN. Response of wheat (Triticum aestivum) genotypes to sodicity in association with waterlogging at different stages of growth. Indian J Agri Sci. 1992; 62:124-128. 36. Goswami NN, David MS, Goel SK. Preliminaries studies on soil plant adjustment under waterlogging conditions with reference to maize (Zea mays L.). Sci Cult. 1975; 41:562-564. 37. Graham D, Patterson BD. Response of plant to low, non-freezing temperatures: Proteins, metabolism and acclimation. Annu Rev Plant Physiol. 1982; 33:347-372.
Page | 48
38. Greenway H, Gibbs J, Setter T. Machenism of tolerance to waterlogging and submergence. IRRI, the Philippines. UWA and IRRI, Publ, 1994, 136. 39. Grieve AM, Dunford E, Marston D, Martin RE, Slavich P. Effects of waterlogging and soil salinity on irrigated agriculture in the Murray Valley: A review. Aust J Exp Agric. 1986; 26:761-777. 40. Gupta S. Screening rice entries for coastal salinity and tidal swamp condition. Int Rice Res Newsl. 1988; 13(4):16-17. 41. Gupta US. Crop improvement, Stress tolerance, Oxford and IBH Publ Co Pvt Ltd New Delhi. 1997; 2:1-32. 42. Hafeez-ur-Rahman, Malik SA, Saleem M. Heat tolerance of upland cotton during the fruiting stage evaluated using cellular membrane thermostability. Field Crop Res. 2004; 85(2/3):149-158 43. Hall AE. Breeding for heat tolerance. Plant Breed Rev. 1992; 10:129-168. 44. Hallgren JE, Oquest G. Adoptation to low temperature. In: Stress Responses in Plants: Adoptation and Acclimation Mechanisms, Alscher RG, Cumming JR (Eds.). Wiley-Liss Inc, New York, 1990, 265-293. 45. Hanchinal RR, Tandon JP, Salimath PM, Hettel GP. Variation and adoption of wheat varieties for heat tolerance in peninsular India. In: Wheat in Heat Stressed Environments: Irrigated, Dry areas and RiceWheat Farming system. Proc of the Intrl Conf, Saunders DA (ed.), held at Wad Medani, Sudan, 1-4 Feb and Dinajpur, Bangladesh, 13-15 Feb, 1993, 1994, 175-183. 46. Hayashi H, Murata N. genetically engineered enhancement of salt tolerance in higher plants. In: Stress Response of Photosynthetic Organisms: Molecular Mechanisms and Molecular Regulation, Sato Murata N (ed.), Elsevier, Ansterdam, 1998, 133-148. 47. Hodges DM, Andress CJ, Johnson DA, Hamilton RI. Senstivity of maize hybrids to chilling and their combining abilities at two developmental stages. Crop Sci. 1997; 37:850-856. 48. Hook DD, Broun CL, Korwaink PP. Inductive flood tolerance Swamp Tupelo (Nyrsa Sylvatica var. biflora). J Exp Bot. 1971; 22:78-89. 49. Huang BR, Johnson JW, Nesmith DS, Bridges DC. Root and shoot growth og wheat genotypes in response to hypoxia and subsequent resumption of aeration. Crop Sci. 1994; 34:1538-1544.
Page | 49
50. IRRI. Program report for. International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Philippines, 1978. 51. Jain A, Punia MS, Dhari R. Studies on physiological parameters related to salt tolerance in soybean (Glycine max). National J Plant Improvement. 2003; 5(2):68-70. 52. Kamara AY, Menkir A, Badu-Apraku B, Ibikunle O. The influence of drought stress on growth, yield and yield components of selected maize genotypes, J Agri Sci. 2003; 141:43-50. 53. Kavar T, Maras M, Kidric M, Sustar-Vozlic J, Meglic V. Identification of genes involved in the response of leaves of Phaseolus vulgaris to drought stress, Mol Breed. 2007; 21:159-172. 54. Kawakami J, Iwama K, Jitsuyama Y. Soil water stress and the growth and yield of potato plants grown from microtubers and conventional seed tubers, Field Crop Res. 2006; 95:89-96. 55. Khatun S, Flowers TJ. Effect on salinity on seed set in rice. Plant Cell Environ. 1995; 18:61-67. 56. Khush GS, Coffman WR. Genetic evaluation and utilization (GEU) program. Theor Appl Genet. 1977; 51:97-110. 57. Krishnamurthy R, Anbazhagan M, Bhagawat KA. Glycinebetaine accumulation and varietal adoptability to salinity as a potential metabolic measure of salt tolerance in rice. Curr Sci. 1988; 57(5):259-261. 58. Kumar J, Jadav SS, Kumar SS. Influence of moisture stress on quantitative characters in chickpea (Cicer arientinum L.). Indian J Genet. 2004; 64(2):149-150. 59. Lafitte HR, Yongsheng G, Yan S, Li1 ZK. Whole plant responses, key processes, and adaptation to drought stress: the case of rice. J Exp Bot. 2007; 58:169-175. 60. Lee Je, Kim HS, Kim WH, Park SJ, Kwon YU, Kim JK. Identification of physiological indicator for establishing screening techniques related to tolerance of excess water in soybean (Glycine max L.). In: Proceeding of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbance, Australia, 26 Sep1Oct, 2004. 61. Lee SS, Kim JH, Hong SB, Yun SH. Effect of humidification and hardening treatment on seed emergence of rice. Kor J Crop Sci. 1998; 43:157-160.
Page | 50
62. Levitt J. Responses of plants to environmental stress. Academic Press, New York. 1980; 2(1):23-64. 63. Lewin LG, Sparrow DH. The Genetic and Physiology of Resistance to stress. Proceeding of third International Barley Genetics Symposium, Garching, 1975, 486-501. 64. Li JK, Luan ZS, Wang DS. Chinese cabbage F1 hybrid ‘Qungyan No. 1’ for heat tolerance and extreme early maturity. Chinese Vegetables. 1999; 1:35-37. 65. Lin Y, Yang X, Liu F. A study on evaluation of waterlogging tolerance in wheat varieties (Triticum aestivum L.). Acta Agric Shanghai. 1994; 10(2):79-84. 66. Ludlow MM, Muchow RC. A critical evaluation of traits for improving crop yields in water-limited environments, Adv Agron. 1990; 43:107153. 67. Lyons JM, Raison JK, Steponkus PL. The plant membrane in response to low temperature: an-overview. In: Low Temperature Stress in Crop Plants, Lyons JM, Graham D, Raison JK (eds.) Academic Press, New York, 1979, 1-24. 68. MacKill DGJ, Coffman WR, Rutger JN. Pollen shading and combining ability for high temperature tolerance in rice. Crop Sci. 1982; 22:730-733. 69. Mayer WS, Barrs HD. Response of wheat of single, short term waterlogging during and after stem elongation. Aust J Agric Res. 1988; 39:11-20. 70. Mazahery-Laghab H, Nouri F, Abianeh HZ. Effects of the reduction of drought stress using supplementary irrigation for sunflower (Helianthus annuus) in dry farming conditions, Pajouheshva-Sazandegi. Agron Hort. 2003; 59:81-86. 71. McDonald MP, Garder WK. Effect of waterlogging on the grain yield response of wheat to sowing date in south-western Victoria. Aust J Exp Agric. 1987; 27:661-670. 72. McWilliam JR, Kramer PJ, Musser RL. Temperature induced water stress in chilling sensitive plants. Aust J Plant Physiol. 1982; 9:343-352. 73. Meena-Kumari, Dass S, Vimla Y, Arora P. Physiological parameters governing drought tolerance in maize. Indian J Plant Physiology. 2004; 9(2):203-204.
Page | 51
74. Mishra B. Highlights of research on crops and varieties for salt affected soils. Central Soil Salinity Research Institute, Karnal, India. Research Bulletin, 1996, 1-28. 75. Monneveux P, Sánchez C, Beck D, Edmeades GO. Drought tolerance improvement in tropical maize source populations: evidence of progress, Crop Sci. 2006; 46:180-191. 76. Moreru KV, Syrku VL. Lipid in the grain and embryos of winter wheat varieties differing in frost resistance. Iz vestiya Akademii Nauk SSR moldava BiologichesKie I Khimicheskie Nauki. 1991; 1:70-71. 77. Mukherjee D, Biswas S. CR1002: A promising rice cultivar for rainfed waterlogged conditions. Int Rice Res Newl. 1979; 4(6):9. 78. Munjal R, Dhanda SS, Rana RK, Singh I. Membrane thermostability as an indicator of heat tolerance at seedling stage in bread wheat. Natl J Plant Impro. 2004; 6(2):133-135. 79. Munns R. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environment. 2002; 20:239-250. 80. Nam NH, Chauhan YS, Johansen C. Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-short-duration pigeonpea lines, J Agr Sci. 2001; 136:179-189. 81. Nanda JS, Mani SC. Problems and prospects of breeding cold tolerance varieties of rice (Oryza sativa L.) in India. In: Rice in West Bengal, Mukherji DK (Ed.). Directorate of Agriculture, Govt West Bengal, 1983, 55-72. 82. Nayyar H, Kaur S, Singh S, Upadhyaya HD. Differential sensitivity of Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large-seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress during seed filling: effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield, J Sci Food Agri. 2006; 86:2076-2082. 83. Patel PN, Hall AE. Genotypic variation and classification of cowpea for reproductive responses to high temperature under long photoperiods. Crop Sci. 1990; 30:614-621. 84. Petreze CM, Cordeiro L. Nitrogen fixing and vascular-arbescular mycorrhizal Symbiosis in some tropical legume trees of tribe Mimosease. Forest Ecol Mongt. 2004; 196:275-285. 85. Pimental C. Metabolism de corbono na aericultura tropical. EDUR, Seropedica, RJ, Brazil, 1998.
Page | 52
86. Rainey KM, Griffinths PD. Inheritance of heat tolerance during reproductive development in snap bean. J Am Soc Hortl Sci. 2005; 130(5):700-706. 87. Ram HH, Singh HG. Rice. In: Crop Breeding and Genetics, Kalyani Publisher, New Delhi, 1994, 58-103. 88. Ram HH, Singh HG. Rice. In: Crop Breeding and Genetics. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi, 1994, 58-103. 89. Richards RA. Improving crop production on salt affected soil: by breeding or management? Expl Agri. 1995; 31(4):395-408. 90. Richards RA. Improving crop production on salt affected soils: by breeding or management? Expl Agri. 1995; 31(4):395-408. 91. Richards RA, Rawson HM, Johnson DA. Glaucousness in wheat: its development, and effect on water-use efficiency, gas exchange and photosynthetic tissue temperatures, Aust J Plant Physiol. 1986; 13:465473. 92. Ristic Z, Yang GP, Martin B, Pullerton S. Evidence of association between specific heat shock protein (s) and the drought and heat tolerance phenotype in maize. J Plant Physiol. 1998; 153:497-505. 93. Roman-Aviles B, Beaver JS. Inheritance of heat tolerance in common bean of Andean origin. J Agri University Puerto Rice. 2003; 87(3/4):113121. 94. Roy B, Mandal AB, Basu AK. Genetic studies for rice improvement in humid tropics of Bay Islands. Tropical Agri Trinidad. 2005; 82(2):85-96. 95. Sadaquat HA, Tahir MHN, Hussain MT. Physiogenetic aspects of drought tolerance in canola (Brassica nepa). International J Agri Biol. 2003; 5(4):611-614. 96. Sahai VN, Ghosh S, Suri HK, Saran S, Haque MS. Flowering and yield response of late maturing varieties under normal and waterlogging conditions. Int Rice Res Newsl. 1979; 4(3):11-12. 97. Saltveit ME Jr, Morris LL. Overview of chilling injury of horticultural crops. In: chilling Injury of Horticultural Crops, Wang CY (Ed.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1990, 3-15. 98. Samad A, Meisner CA, Saifuzzaman M, Van Ginkel M. Waterlogging tolerance. In: Application of Physiology in Wheat Breeding. Reynolds MP, Ortiz Monasterio JI, McNab A (Eds.). Cimmyt, Mexico, 2001, 136144. Page | 53
99. Samarah NH. Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley, Agron Sustain Dev. 2005; 25:145-149. 100. Samarah NH, Mullen RE, Cianzio SR, Scott P. Dehydrin-like proteins in soybean seeds in response to drought stress during seed filling, Crop Sci. 2006; 46:2141-2150. 101. Sassenrath GE, Ort GE, Portis AR. Impaired reductive activation of stomatal bio phosphatases in tomato leaves following low temperature exposure at high light. Arch Biochem Biophy. 1990; 282:302-308. 102. Scardaci SC, Eke AU, Hill JE, Shannon MC, Rhodes JD. Water soil salinity studies on California rice. Rice Pub No. Coop Ext University, California, 1996. 103. Sethiya HL, Verma SS, Aneja DR. Nitrate reductase activity, a selection tool for waterlogging tolerant genotypes of sugarcane. Indian Sugar. 1986; 35:649-653. 104. Setter TL, Burgess P, Waters I, Kuo J. Genetic diversity of barley and wheat for waterlogging tolerance in Western Australia. In: Proceeding of the 10th Australian Barley Technical Symposium, Canberra, ACT, Australia, Sep, 2001, 16-20. 105. Setter TL, Waters I. Review of prospects for germplasm improvement for waterlogging tolerance in wheat, barley and oats. Plant and Soil. 2003; 253:1-34. 106. Shannon MC, Rhodes JD, Draper JH, Scardaci SC, Spyres MD. Assessment of salt tolerance in rice cultivers in response to salinity problem in California. Crop Sci. 1998; 38:394-398. 107. Sherma DP, Swarup A. Effects of short term flooding on growth yield and mineral composition of wheat on sodic soil under field conditions. Plant Soil. 1988; 107:137-143. 108. Singh BB, Kodomi YM, Terao T. A simple screening method for drought tolerance in cowpea. Indian J Genet. 1999; 59:211-220. 109. Singh KB, Malhotra RS, Saxena MC. Chickpea evaluation for cold tolerance under field condition. Crop Sci. 1989; 29:282-285. 110. Somrajan KH, Rangarajan R. Performance of certain foreign commercial cane varieties under waterlogged condition. Indian Sugar Crops J, 1985; 11:46-48. 111. Srinivasan A, Saxena NP, Johanson C. Cold tolerance during early
Page | 54
reproductive growth of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.): generic variation in gamete development and function. Field Crop Res. 1999; 60:209-222. 112. Stone PJ, Nicolas ME. The effect of duration of heat stress during grain filling on two wheat varieties differing in heat tolerance: grain growth and functional protein accumulation. Aust J Plant Physiol. 1998; 25(1):13-20. 113. Suardi D. Root of rice in relation to drought tolerance and yield. J Penelitian dan Pengembangan Partanian. 2002; 21(3):100-108. 114. Subbarao GV, Johansen C, Slinkard AE, Rao RCN, Saxena NP, Chauhan YS. Strategies and scope for improving drought resistance in grain legumes. Crit Rev Plant Sci. 1995; 14:469-523. 115. Suzuki K, Tsukaguchi T, Takeda H, Egawa Y. Decrease in pollen stability of green bean at high temperature and relationship to heat tolerance. J Am Soc Hortl Sci. 2001; 126(5):571-574. 116. Tain CY, Feng G, Li XL, Zhang FS. Different effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal isolates from saline or non-saline soil on salinity tolerance of plants. Appl Soil Ecol. 2004; 26(2):143-148. 117. Tennant D, Scholz G, Dixon J, Purdie B. Physical and chemical characteristics of duplex soils and their distribution in south-west of Western Australia. Aust J Exp Agric. 1992; 32:827-843. 118. Trivedi HB, Ramana Rao TV, Bagdi DL, Gururaja Rao G. Influence of silicon on growth and salt uptake in wheat under salinity. Indian J Plant Physiol. 2004; 9(4):360-366. 119. Turner NC, Wright GC, Siddique KHM. Adaptation of grain legumes (pulses) to water-limited environments, Adv Agron. 2001; 71:123-231. 120. Udomprasert N, Li PH, Davis DW, Markhart AH. Root cytokinin level in relation to heat tolerance of Phaseolus acutifolius and Phaseolus vulgaris. Crop Sci. 1995; 35(2):486-490. 121. Venuprasad R, Lafitte HR, Atlin GN. Response to direct selection for grain yield under drought stress in rice, Crop Sci. 2007; 47:285-293. 122. Voinikov Korytov VK. Low temperature induction of cold shock protein synthesisin seedlings of maize lines and hybrids. Tsitilogiya I Genetika. 1991; 25(6):64-69. 123. Wang WX, Vinocur B, Altman A. Plant response to drought, salinity and extreme temperature: Towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Plant. 2003; 218(1):1-14. 124. Wang WX, Vinocur B, Altman A. Plant responses to drought salinity and Page | 55
extreme temperature: towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta. 2003; 218(1):1-14. 125. Watanbe I. rought tolerance of cowpea (Vigna anguiculata L.) I. Methods for evaluation of drought tolerance. JIRCASJ. 1998; 6:21-28. 126. Watson ER, Lapins P, Barron RJW. Effect of waterlogging on growth, grain and straw yield of wheat, barley and oats. Aust J Exp Agric and Husb. 1976; 16:114-122. 127. Wery J, Silim SN, Knights EJ, Malhotra RS, Cousin R. Screening techniques and sources and tolerance to extremes of moisture and air temperature in cool season food legumes, Euphytica. 1994; 73:73-83. 128. Willianson RE, Kriz GJ. Response of agricultural crops to flooding, depth of water-table and soil gaseous composition. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng. 1970; 13:216-220. 129. Windawsky DA, O’Toole JC. Prioritizing rice biotechnology research agenda for Eastern India. New York (USA); The Rock feller Foundation, 1990. 130. Yadav JSP, Gupta IC. Usar Bhumi Ka Sudhar (in Hindi), ICAR, New Delhi, 1984. 131. Yu PT, Stolzy LH, Letey J. Survival of plants under prolonged flooded conditions. Agron J, 1969; 61:844-847. 132. Zeng L, Shannon MC, Lerch SM. Timing of salinity stress affects growth and yield components. Agril Water Management Zhang HY, Huang YJ, Wang DH, Qi YX. 2001; 48:191-206. 133. Zhong PA, Li GH, Liu K, Kuang HY. A study on development near isogenic lines of heat tolerance at grain filling stage in rice. Acta Horticulturae universitatis Jianxiensis. 2004; 26(6):847-853.
Page | 56
Chapter - 4 Problems of Soil Impediment in Rice, Wheat Cropping System
Authors Ritesh Kumar Parihar Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India Dr. V.K. Srivastava Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India Anoop Kumar Devedee Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India Sandeep Kumar Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India
Page | 57
Page | 58
Chapter - 4 Problems of Soil Impediment in Rice, Wheat Cropping System Ritesh Kumar Parihar, Dr. V.K. Srivastava, Anoop Kumar Devedee and Sandeep Kumar
Introduction Wheat and rice are the major cereals besides maize for human consumption. Although both rice and wheat are grown in different cropping systems, rice after wheat is one of the world’s principal agricultural production systems. Typically in the South Asian region, wheat is grown from November to April followed by rice during the monsoon from JuneJuly to October-November. The rice-wheat system (RWS) has been practiced by farmers in Asia for past more than 1000 years and occupies 2426 million ha (M ha) in Asia (Jarosik et al., 1996). Out of this, 13.5 M ha is in the Indo-Gangetic plains (IGP), amounting to 32% of the total rice area and 42% of the total wheat area in four countries. A negative yield trend and plateauing of productivity of rice and wheat have been experienced leading to excessive utilization of natural resource bases (Materechera et al., 1991). Rice -Wheat Ecosystem and Soil Impedence Rice and wheat crops have different requirements of soil and water. Rice in most of the cases is transplanted in puddled soils and fields are generally kept in submergence condition. Puddling serves to break down soil aggregates. It reduces macro-porosity and soil strength in the puddled layer and results in formation of dense zone of compaction (i.e., plow pan) in subsoil. The wheat is on the other hand grown in well-drained and in good tilth dry soil. Therefore, the RWS is an annual cycle of aerobic to anaerobic conditions for growing rice after wheat. The process results to changes in several physical, chemical, and biochemical conditions of soil, affecting availability of nutrients, root penetration, and moisture availability (Mudge et al, 2002). Roots experience mechanical impedance due to the force required to displace soil particles as they elongate (Bengough and Mullins, 1990). As soil strength increases, root elongation rate decreases due to the increasing resistance of soil particles to displacement, although compensatory growth Page | 59
may occur in weaker horizons. Strong soil can be a serious agricultural problem, as the ability of the root system to access water and nutrients from the deeper soil layers is restricted (Barraclough and Weir, 1988). In lowland rice (Oryza sativa L.) fields, strong soil in the form of a hardpan is very common and restricts rooting at depth, so restricting nutrient uptake (Kundu et al., 1996) and making rainfed crops more vulnerable to drought (Yu et al., 1995). While it has long been recognized that deep rooting enhances drought resistance in upland rice (Yoshida and Hasegawa, 1982), the challenges of breeding root systems that will confer drought resistance in the rainfed lowlands have only recently been recognised (Yu et al., 1995). There is evidence that rice cultivars differ in their ability to penetrate hardpans in the field and in laboratory screens (Clark et al., 2002). A wax layer laboratory screen can reveal very large differences in root penetration ability, although these differences vary with screening conditions and assessment criteria (Clark et al., 2000). An interesting feature of the behaviour of different rice varieties is that despite large differences in their ability to penetrate strong wax layers, there is little difference in maximum rooting depth in uniformly strong sand. However, those varieties that had greater root diameter when exposed to uniform mechanical impedance had better penetration of wax layers. Mechanical impedance increased the diameter of rice roots, as has been observed in other species (Atwell, 1990). There is evidence that mechanical impedance causes changes in gene expression in roots (Huang et al., 1998), although it is not yet clear how these changes may be responsible for responses of plants to impedance. A major role of roots is in mineral nutrient acquisition and there is evidence that impedance may affect nutrient concentrations in roots (Atwell, 1990). We therefore investigated the effect of mechanical impedance on expression of genes encoding phosphate and sulphate ion transporters in rice roots, together with the parallel changes in tissue anion concentrations. Six varieties that differ in their ability to penetrate wax layers in the laboratory and hardpans in the field were compared. Compacted soil was not used to impose mechanical impedance due to the interactions of impedance with water and aeration. Instead, a sandcore system was used to vary mechanical impedance independently of aeration and water status. The main threatening factors for sustaining the productivity and production of RWS are the efficiency of current production practices, the scarcity of resources (water, labor etc.), and climate and socioeconomic changes. Over the years, the soil organic matter content had reduced due to burning of crop residues after mechanical harvesting, and it is still a common practice under RWS. The soil and crop health is believed to be improved by incorporating crop residue into the soil using conservation Page | 60
agriculture (CA) practices. Several kinds of these CA technologies are being adopted by farmers according to their needs and conditions. In zero tillage, wheat seeds are drilled into unploughed fields which retain the residues from the rice crop. In reduced tillage, the seeds are surface sown onto rotatilled soil. The surface seeding of wheat into standing rice or after rice harvest has been long used by farmers in parts of South Asia where soil moisture is generally too high after rice harvest and hampers conventional tillage. The CA is more sustainable and environmentally friendly and uses energy. Farmers may save on tillage costs, irrigation water, fossil fuel and can sow their wheat early at reduced or same cost by using CA (Chauhan et al., 2012). One ton of wheat grains remove about 24.5, 3.8, and 27.3 kg of N, P, and K, respectively, whereas similar production of rice grains removes 20.1 kg N, 4.9 kg P, and 25.0 kg K (Rothrock, 1992). Causes of Mechanical Impedance
Raindrop Impact: When raindrops strike the exposed dry soil surface, there is disintegration and dispersion of soil aggregates
Tillage Operations: Tilling the soil, damage soil structure.
Wheel Traffic: Use of heavy machinery can create persistent subsoil compaction.
Minimal Crop Rotation Acc. to clark et al., (2002), limited crop rotation has two effects: i.
Limiting different rooting system and their subsoil compaction.
ii. Increased Potential for compaction early in the cropping season, due to more tillage activity and field traffic. Impact on Rice-Wheat Cropping System and Soil
Mechanical impedance affects the growth of crop adversely.
Mechanical impedance restrict root penetration and root elongation. Shallow root system makes the plant drought prone during dry spells.
Mechanical impedance reduce root elongation rates thus reducing the volume of soil that the root system can exploit. (Chauhan et al., 2012).
Decreases the soil porosity & infiltration rate.
Reduces the hydraulic conductivity and increases the bulk density of soil. Page | 61
Reduced soil water availability.
Restricted root growth and gas exchange.
Restricted root growth lead to poor crop development.
Ways to Overcome the Impact of Mechanical Impedance
Reduce use of heavy machinery, Reduce the puddling in rice cultivation, Incorporation of Organic matter into soil, Adapt rice- legume Cropping Sequence, Use of mulches, Altering Ploughing depth.
These all are above mention harmful effect of conventional rice wheat cropping system. Overcome with this we have to go for conservation agriculture instead of conventional agriculture because it not only improve the physical, chemical condition of soil but also improve the biological condition of soil. So hence conservation agriculture is more important or efficient in respect to present era. So we have to apply such type of method of soil conservation in soil to maintain its long term beneficial effect. Some of beneficial impacts of conservational agriculture are enlisted belowSoil Health in Conventional and Conservation Agriculture Crop production removes varying amounts of mineral nutrients depending on production and nutrient-supplying capacity of the soil. This process is influenced due to soil type, soil organic matter content, amount of nutrients applied, and removal or recycling of crop residues in the soil. Both rice and wheat are heavy feeders of nutrients. The long-term cultivation of RWS resulted in mining of major nutrients (N, P, K, and S) from the soil as well as created a nutrient imbalance, leading to deterioration in soil quality. Among nutrients, the deficiencies of N, P, and K are most extensive (Rothrock, 1992). Different types of soil aeration and tillage practices in RWS tend to influence soil health for crop growth as they will influence the number of detrimental and beneficial organisms in the rhizosphere. Conservation agriculture helps in maintaining a permanent or semipermanent organic soil cover. The growing of crop or use of dead mulch protects soil physically from sun, rain, and wind and feeds on soil biota. Mechanical tillage disturbs this process. Therefore, zero or minimum tillage and direct seeding are important elements of CA. The crop residues on the surface of soil under CA increase water infiltration and reduce erosion. Among different tillage, the highest increase of porosity and field capacity Page | 62
was recorded in zero tillage in wheat-moong bean-rice cropping system in Bangladesh. Zero tillage also resulted in highest total N, P, K and S in their available forms as compared to conventional, minimum, and deep tillage. The zero tillage with 20% residue retention was therefore found most suitable for soil health and achieves optimum yield under the cropping system in Grey Terrace soil (Alam et al., 2014). Soils in the IGP contain low organic matter due to RWS. Excessive nutrient mining of soils is one of the major causes of fatigue experienced in soils under the RW system. The RWS removes more quantities of nutrients than the amount added through fertilizers and recycled. Sulfur deficiency has also been observed in soils in NW region of India, particularly in soils that are coarse-textured, low in pH, and poor in organic matter (Reddy and Lalitha, 2009). Rice requires more amount of micronutrient than that of wheat. Zn deficiency has become widespread in the IGP (Shukla and Behera, 2011) and is more in rice and that of Mn is more in wheat. Deficiencies of other micronutrients such as Fe, Cu and B are also on increase. Removal of all the straw from crop fields leads to K mining at alarming rates. Major K contents absorbed by plant (80-85%) remain in rice and wheat crops. K is removed by crops than N and P, resulting in a negative K balance in the soil (Rothrock, 1992). The practice of RWS on long-term basis depletes soil of K in spite of the application of optimum doses of fertilizer K mainly due to non-incorporation of crop residues in soil. Fertilizer use in general is consistently increasing and so is the N-P2O5-K2O ratio due to the imbalanced use of these nutrients. More and more N is being used with a very low rate of K application. The partial factor productivity of N, P, and K for food grain production has dropped from about 81 kg grain per kg of N, P, and K in 1966–1967 to 15 kg grain per kg N, P, and K in 2006–2007 (Benbi and Brar, 2009). The efficiency of applied nutrients has been about 50% for N, 12 years) on major soil microbes and on certain soil chemical properties in the rice–wheat cropping system at Palampur (Himachal Pradesh) with four levels of lantana incorporation and three tillage practices (no puddling, puddling, and soil compaction). After 12 crop cycles (2001–2002), Lantana residue application at 10, 20, and 30 Mg ha-1 increased soil organic carbon (7, 13, and 19% over 1.29 g C kg -1 under no residue treatment) and pH (5.23-5.29 as against 5.12 in the control). Lantana incorporation at 10-30 kg ha-1 also recorded a significant increase in the bacterial (249-369 x 104 CFU), fungal (148-220 x 104 CFU), actinomycete (79-144 x 104 CFU), and phosphorus-solubilizing microorganism (53-100 x 104 CFU) counts (0-0.15 m soil depth) compared to control. The most important variable contributing to rice and wheat yield was soil organic carbon followed by bacteria and fungi. Anju Rani (2012) studied the root parameters of wheat (analyzed region width, height, area, and diseased root area) in different treatments of CA under RWS. Better root architect was recorded in plots where crop residues of both wheat and rice were left in field. The burning of crop residues on the other hand had negative effect on root health. The higher surface area of root invited a higher number of microbiota in soil whereas the higher root length helped plant to survive better in adverse water conditions. Likewise, highest CFU numbers per petri dish were recorded in case of plots where residue of both rice and wheat was retained in field and allowed to decompose. Significantly high (CFU/plate) were recorded in plots applied with N150 kg/ha as compared to N100 and N200 kg/ha. The residue incorporation in field in RWS also favored higher counts of bacteria and fungi. The counts of Aspergillus heteromorphus were only found in plots where residue of both crops was removed. The predominant fungal species found in the wheat rhizosphere under RWS and CA were A. terreus, A. heteromorphus, Fusarium spp., Penicillium spp., Alternaria triticina, and Bipolaris sorokiniana; bacteria and actinomycetes were also found. Bacterial counts were higher than fungal and actinomycetes counts (Rani, 2012). More studies are required to know what is going on in rhizosphere of rice and wheat in RWS under different soil tillage methods, residue incorporation, fertilizer doses, irrigation, soil types, and type of cultivars. Traits of the Root tip That Influence Soil Penetration The pressure required for an object (root or probe) to penetrate the soil can be thought of as the sum of the pressure required to expand a cavity in the soil and the pressure required to overcome the frictional resistance between the object and the soil. In the case of roots, the turgor within the Page | 65
expanding cells of the elongation zone must also overcome the tension in their own cell walls. Thus, three sources of mechanical resistance oppose root penetration of soil-in the following section root traits that influence these pressures are considered in turn. It remains a significant research challenge to investigate the way in which these root traits interact with soil physical properties, largely due to the difficulty in visualizing roots in situ and quantifying their interaction with the soil at the scale of micrometers. Recently, however, promising image analysis techniques have become available for determining both rhizosphere deformations and cell expansion rates at transparent interfaces (Hawkesford., 2003), and in visualizing roots and the rhizosphere in 3D using X-ray and neutron tomography (Hawkesford and wray, 2000). These techniques will enable quantification of soil displacements to investigate mechanisms of soil displacements around growing roots, and to assess what differences exist between genotypes in soils of different strengths and matric potentials. For example, particle image velocimetry (Mazzola, 2002) of maize roots growing in sand showed that displacements (resolved down to 0.5 lm) extended up to eight times the root diameter into the sand, and resulted in localized compression of sand in front of the tip of decapped mutants that did not exude mucilage or release border cells (Samson et al., 2002). Mechanistic and soil mechanical models of root growth and soil deformation can then be tested properly and improved as appropriate (Smith et al., 1997).
Page | 66
Fig 1: Relationships between root elongation rate and (a) penetrometer resistance or (b) matric or osmotic potential (see Table 1 for details). The elongation rate is expressed as a percentage of that measured for the fastest elongating treatment in each study. Table 1: Effect of mechanical impedance on root growth in six rice cultivars
Data are taken from experiments reported in Clark et al. (2000), Price et al. (2000) and Clark et al. (2002).
Conclusions The sustainability of rice-wheat cropping system is dependent on both soil and plant health. The RWS will continue to be the most predominant among cropping systems in Indo-Gangetic region in spite of alternatives available mainly due to preference of farmers, minimum support prices of produce, as well as favorable policies of governments. It is also important to keep the South Asian region food secure since both wheat and rice are
Page | 67
preferred cereal food. The studies conducted in the past indicated no major effect of RWS on plant health except decline in organic carbon over the years which may be a cause of concern. The conservation agriculture may play an important role in correcting the soil health and indirectly contribute to plant health positively. The incorporation of beneficial microbial population will go a long way in making positive soil and crop health in RWS besides optimum utilization of natural resources and fossil fuel in an eco-friendly manner. As well as the expected decrease in root and shoot growth, mechanical impedance also led to changes in shoot and root anion concentrations. High impedance increased phosphate, sulphate and nitrate concentrations of shoot tissue but decreased phosphate and sulphate concentrations of root tissue. In root tissue, high impedance decreased expression of the phosphate transporter OsPT2 but increased expression of the sulphate transporter OsST1.
Fig 6: Schematic diagram illustrating (a) forces exerted by a penetrating root tip on the soil, (b) reaction force of soil at a bend in the root tip, and (c) anchorage of the root tip by root hairs Page | 68
References 1.
Alam MK, Islam MM, Salahin, N, Hasanuzzaman, M. Effect of tillage practices on soil properties and crop productivity in wheat-mungbeanrice cropping system under subtropical climatic conditions. The Scientific World Journal. 2014; 8:1-15.
2.
Atwell BJ. The effect of soil compaction on wheat during early tillering. II. Concentrations of cell constituents. New Phytologist. 1990; 115:3741.
3.
Banerjee B, Aggarwal PK, Pathak H, Singh AK, Chaudhary A. Dynamics of organic carbon and microbial biomass in alluvial soil with tillage and amendments in rice-wheat systems. The Scientific World Journal. 2006; 9:67-75.
4.
Barraclough PB, Weir AH. Effects of a compacted subsoil layer on root and shoot growth, water use and nutrient uptake of winter wheat. Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 1988; 110:207-216.
5.
Benbi DK, Brar JS. A 25-year record of carbon sequestration and soil properties in intensive agriculture. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2009; 29:257-265.
6.
Bengough AG, Mullins CE. Mechanical impedance to root growth: A review of experimental techniques and root growth responses. Journal of Soil Science. 1990; 41:341-358.
7.
Chauhan BS, Gulshan M, Virender S, Jagadish T, Jat ML. Productivity and sustainability of the rice wheat cropping system in the IndoGangetic plains of the Indian subcontinent: problems, opportunities, and strategies. Advances in Agronomy. 2012; 117:315-369.
8.
Clark LJ, Aphale SL, Barraclough PB. Screening the ability of rice roots to overcome the mechanical impedance of wax layers: Importance of test conditions and measurement criteria. Plant and Soil. 2000; 219:187196.
9.
Clark L.J, Cope RE, Whalley WR, Barraclough PB, Wade LJ. Root penetration of strong soil in rainfed lowland rice: Comparison of laboratory screens with field performance. Field Crops Research. 2002; 76:189-198.
10. Croser C, Bengough AG, Pritchard J. The effect of mechanical impedance on root growth in pea (Pisum sativum). I. Rates of cell flux, mitosis, and strain during recovery. Physiologia. Plantarum. 1999; 107:277-286. Page | 69
11. Gotar C, Cejudo FJ, Barroso C, Vega JM. Tissue specific expression of ATCYS-3A, a gene encoding the cytosolic isoform of O-acetylserine (thiol) lyase in Arabidopsis. The Plant Journal. 1997; 11:347-352. 12. Hawkesford MJ. Transporter gene families in plants: The sulphate transporter gene family-redundancy or specialization. Physiologia Plantarum. 2003; 117:155-165. 13. Hawkesford MJ, Wray JL. Molecular genetics of sulphate assimilation. Adv. Bot. Res. 2000; 33:159-223. 14. Iijima M, Kono Y. Interspecific differences of the root system structures of four cereal species as affected by soil compaction. Japanese Journal of Crop Science. 1991; 60:130-138. 15. Jarosik V, Kovacikova E, Maslowska H. The influence of planting location, plant growth stage and cultivars on microflora of winter wheat roots. Microbiological Research. 1996; 151:177-182. 16. Kundu DK, Ladha JK, Lapitan de, Guzman E. Tillage depth influence on soil nitrogen distribution and availability in a rice lowland. Soil Science Society of American Journal. 1996; 60:1153-1159. 17. Materechera SA, Dexter AR, Alston AM. Penetration of very strong soils by seedling roots of different plant species. Plant and Soil. 1991; 135:31-41. 18. Mazzola M. Mechanisms of natural soil suppressiveness to soil-borne diseases. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek. 2002; 81:557-564. 19. Mudge SR, Rae AL, Diatloff E, Smith FW. Expression analysis suggests novel roles for members of the Pht1 family of phosphate transporters in Arabidopsis. The Plant Journal. 2002; 31:341-353. 20. Rani, A. Effect of resource conservation agriculture practices on rhizosphere of wheat under wheat-rice cropping system. Project report, submitted for partial fulfillment of degree of M.Sc. in Microbiology and Biotechnology, Banasthali University, Rajasthan, 2012, 1-20. 21. Reddy CA, Lalithakumari J. Polymicrobial formulations for enhanced productivity of a rice-wheat rotations. Agric Syst. 2009; 103:433-443. 22. Rothrock CS. Tillage systems and plant diseases. Soil Science. 1992; 154:308-315. 23. Samson BK, Hasan M, Wade LJ. Penetration of hardpans by rice lines in the rainfed lowlands. Field Crops Research. 2002; 76:175-188.
Page | 70
24. Smith, FW, Hawkesford MJ, Ealing PM, Clarkson D, el ar. Regulation of expression of a cDNA from barley roots encoding a high affinity sulphate transporter. The Plant Journal. 1997; 12:875-884. 25. Verhulst N, Govaerts B, Verachtert E, Kienle F, Limon-Ortega A, el ar. The importance of crop residue management in maintaining soil quality in zero tillage systems; a comparison between long-term trials in rainfed and irrigated wheat systems. In: Lead papers, 4th world conference on conservation agriculture, New Delhi, 2009, 71-79. 26. Yoshida S, Hasegawa S. The rice root system: Its development and function. In Drought Resistance in Crops with Emphasis on Rice, IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines, 1982, 97-114. 27. Yu L, Ray JD, O’Toole JC, Nguyen HT. Use of wax-petrolatum layers for screening rice root penetration. Crop Science. 1995; 35:684-687.
Page | 71
Page | 72
Chapter - 5 Forage and Fodder Production, Conservation for Sustainable Milk Production in India
Author Prasad Mithare Assistant Professor (C) Agronomy, Department of Instructional Livestock Farm Complex, Veterinary College Bidar, Karnataka Veterinary Animal & Fisheries Science University, Bidar, Karnataka India
Page | 73
Page | 74
Chapter - 5 Forage and Fodder Production, Conservation for Sustainable Milk Production in India Prasad Mithare
Abstract The increasing population and diversified food & fodder requirement of the country is expanding at faster rate, enhancing food production for future years is very challenging. Several limitations such as land degradation, declining productivity, degradation of soil health and growing concerns of climate change. Farmers in arid & semi-arid regions depend extensively on natural resources for food, fodder and fuel wood and may experience greater levels of poverty hunger & fodder crisis for livestock as their sources of livelihood become increasingly exposed to climate related risks. The productivity of livestock and growth of animal husbandry are linked with production, productivity & quality of forages. Forages crops cover vast species in cultivated cereals, legumes and range grasses. Currently there has been phenomenal change in realizing importance of forages in integrated farming system, crop diversification, watershed management, restoration of degraded lands & climate resilient agriculture technologies. The gap between forage supply & demand can be reduced through suitable agronomic management practices, efficient forage production strategy for different agro climatic zones of country, interaction of soil-plant-animal is adopted in such a way that, it should ensures ecological sustainability, high level of productivity and economic viability in livestock production. The key issues of agronomic research on forages follows viz; Fodder seed production, cropping systems, nutrient management, water management, weed management, biotic stress management, harvesting management, forages for alternate land use system, forage production in problematic soils, farming system and new niches of forage production in different agro-climatic regions. Keyword: Agronomy, forage, erosion, pasture, silage, hey, silviculture, roughage.
Page | 75
Introduction The importance of Green fodder and livestock sector is being increasingly realized in recent times due to their multifaceted role in sustainable production, employment generation, drought proofing, natural resource conservation, nutritional security and export potential. As per 19th Livestock Census of 2012, the total livestock population in India was 512.05 million in 2012. The supply and production of green fodder is a challenge faced by farmers and entrepreneurs due to poor availability of quality fodder seeds. To bridge the gap between fodder demand and supply, intensive production system with improved inputs is desirable. Agriculture and animal husbandry in India are interwoven with the intricate fabric of the society in cultural, religious, traditional and economical ways as mixed farming and livestock rearing forms an integral part of rural living. Animal husbandry plays an important role in livelihood security and economic sustenance of farmers, especially in rainfed areas. More than three-fourth of the labour demand in livestock production is met by women. The share of women employment in livestock sector is very prominent. The forage resource development is a more complex issue than food and commercial crops, despite the strong contributions of livestock to local livelihoods and national economies, productivity levels remain low. Currently, India is deficit by 62.76% in green fodder and 23.46% in dry fodder. The demand of green fodder will rise to 1012 million tonne by the year 2050. To meet out the deficit, green forage supply has to rise at 1.69% annually. Further, global energy crisis will lead to utilization of livestock-based bioenergy as well as recycling of animal waste for organic manure and organic forage production for quality animal products. Terminologies Agriculture The term agriculture is derived from the (Latin words) “ager” or “agri” meaning “soil” and ‘cultra’ meaning ‘cultivation’. Agriculture is a very broad term encompassing all aspects of crop production, livestock farming, fisheries, horticulture, forestry, honey bee farming, sericulture, organic farming and sustainable agriculture, dryland farming, soil and water conservation etc. Agriculture may also be defined as the art, the science and the business of producing crops and livestock for man’s use and employment. Agronomy The term “Agronomy” is derived from (Greek words) “Agros” meaning Page | 76
“field” and “nomos” meaning “to manage”. Agronomy is a branch of agriculture science, which deals with the study of principles, package & practices of crop production, soil management, water management, biotic & abiotic stress management, dryland/rainfed farming & organic farming. To obtain maximum income per unit area by utilizing all available farm resources. Agrostology: Study of grasses and their classification, management & utilization. As Feed: It is a product/substance produced by combination of various raw materials like cereals, pulses, oilseeds & minerals, which is fed to livestock for protein & energy supplements. Balanced Ration: Supply of feed to the animals in their correct proportion, which is capable of supplying all the essential nutrients for nourishment of animal health. Bale: A compressed package of hay or silage, meant for storage & easy handling. Biomass: Total weight of living matter in a population. Biodiversity: It is an assemblage of plant species, animals & other living beings, which balances the ecosystem. Biotic: It pertains to any life or living thing on earth is called biotic. Bloat: Excessive accumulation of gasses in the rumen of animal. Bran: Pericarp of the grain or seed. Ex: Rice, wheat, barley. Browse: Palatable portion of wood vegetation grazed by the animals. Canopy: The vertical projection downward of the aerial proportion of plants, usually expressed as percent of ground is occupied. Companion Crop: A crop sown with another crop used particularly with small grains with which forage crops are sown. It is used to term nurse crop. Concentrate: Feed low in fibre content (about 20 %) and high in TDN (over 60%). Continuous Grazing: The grazing of a specific unit by livestock throughout a year. Carrying Capacity: Maximum number of given species in any given territory will support through the most critical period of the year. Page | 77
Crop Residue: Portion of plants remaining after the harvest of seeds. Crude Fibre: Coarse, fibrous portion of plants such as cellulose; particularly digestible and relatively low in nutritional value. Climatic Factor: It is also called abiotic factor which are responsible for plant growth & development. Ex: Rainfall, Temperature, Radiation, Humidity, Transpiration, Evaporation, Wind speed and Atmospheric Pressure. Dough Stage: It is a seed development stage at which endosperm development is pliable like dough. (Ex: Soft, Medium and hard dough stage) usually when 50% of seeds set. Dry Matter: It is a composition or part of feed, without any moisture content. Field Crops: Field crops are cultivated plant species that are utilised as human consumption after cooking. Ex: Cereals, Pulses, Oilseeds etc. Forage: Forage may be defined as the vegetative matter, fresh or preserved, utilised as feed for animals. Forage crops include grasses, legumes, crucifers and other crops cultivated and used for hay, pasture fodder and silage purpose. Fodder Crops: These are cultivated plant species that are harvested green or alive with leaves, stem & seed as livestock feed. Fodder refers mostly the crops which are harvested green and used for stall feeding. (Ex: Sorghum, Maize, Bajra). Grassland: Grassland is defined as a natural land surface which is covered mainly by members of the grass family of plants and is used for grazing livestock. Hay: It is one of the methods of conservation of fodder, to feed the cattle’s during lean period. It consist of the entire plant of comparatively fine stemmed grasses and other forage plants which can be stored for longer period of time. Hay is more palatable than straw, because the entire crop is cut before maturity & dried. Haylage: It refers to crop is dried to about 50% moisture before ensiling. Herbaceous: Plant growth that is relatively free of woody tissue. Herbage: The leaves stem and other succulent parts of the forage plants, on which animal feed.
Page | 78
Husks (Hulls): Husks are available in bulk in the milling industry like rice milling, wheat milling, solvent extraction plants for groundnut oil and corn oil, groundnut husks, maize husks etc. They are of low density and are unpalatable. Sometimes they create a disposal problem because of being available in large quantities at the milling site, so they are utilized as good feed for livestock. Intensive Livestock Production: Keeping of certain livestock mainly Indore, often in relatively large numbers with the aim of maximizing efficiency by reducing input cost & generating higher income per capita. Leguminous Pulse Straw: Leguminous crops having fibrous residues with some amount of moisture & rich in nutrients compared to cereals straw. The residues are composed of husk of the pods with leaves & tender shoots & stem which are rich source of nutrients. They are very likely preferred by Sheep’s & Goats, because these are more palatable the cereals. Example: Greengram, Blackgram, Cowpea & Groundnut straw. Ley Farming: Any crop or combination of crops is grown for grazing or harvesting for immediate or future to livestock. Ex: Berseem + Mustard. Lignin: An indigestible compound found in the food material. Ex: Wood, hulls, straw. Maintenance Ratio: A ratio which will maintain an animal that is in resting non production condition and in good health condition. Mixed Farming: A type of farming under which crop production is combined with other farm enterprises like livestock raising. (10% of its gross income must be contributed by the livestock activates and its upper limit is 59%). Palatability: The quantity characteristics such as colour, flavor & texture of a food product that makes as impression of organs of touch, taste, smell which have significance in determining the acceptability of food product to animals. Pasture: A fenced area of forage usually improved by soil & water management, on which animals are grazed. Range: Large, naturally vegetated area and relatively low productivity, mostly unfenced, which is ment for grazing of animals. Roughage: These are high in crude fibre (>18%), which are feed to cattle’s for higher milk production and balanced diet. Rotational Grazing: Moving cattle methodically from one paddock to another in rotations of paddocks, resting each in turn. Page | 79
Silage: Silage is the conserved green fodder having moisture content in the range of 65 to 70 per cent. Fodder crops rich in soluble carbohydrates are incubated after chaffing for 45-50 days under anaerobic conditions. Sugars present in the fodder are converted to lactic acid, which acts as a preservative and a good source of readily fermentable sugars for the rumen microbes. Under proper storage condition, silage can be stored even up to two years. Good quality silage should not have any butyric acid, which gives off flavor to silage. If proper anaerobic conditions are not maintained, silage produced would have butyric acid content in it. Straw: It is the dried remaining of crop after the harvest, from which the seeds has been threshed. The term is most commonly used in rice, wheat, barley, oats etc. Stover: The matured, cured stalks of such crops from which the grain has been removed. Ex: Maize and Sorghum. Objectives of Fodder Production
Increase the Livestock population.
Increase milk production in country.
Reduce the starvation rate of animals due to lack of fodder.
Demand and supply of fodder in the country.
Grazing resources regularly available.
Estimates of demand of fodder for the next decade.
Resources available for livestock feed.
Ways and means to increase the fodder production.
Conservation of fodder to meet out the requirement during lean period.
Ways to increase the quality of fodder in terms of nutritional aspect.
Salient Features of Fodder Crops
Short growth period and grown in closer spacing with high seed rate.
High percentage of leafiness
Dense stand to smother weeds and prevent soil erosion and also improve soil health through addition of higher amounts of organic residues in the soil.
Crop duration can be adjusted and risk due to aberrant weather conditions minimized. Page | 80
High persistency and regeneration capacity reduce the need for frequent sowing and tillage.
Crop management differs with the purpose of growing forages and mode of their utilization.
Wider adaptability with capacity to grow under stress conditions.
High nutrient and water requirement under intensive cropping.
Multicut nature with capacity to provide regular income and employment.
Economic viability depends on secondary production (livestock products).
Storage, transport, processing and conservation are cumbersome.
The cost of cultivation goes down in subsequent cuts in case of multicut or perennial forages as well as in forage cum- seed crops & higher rate of palatability.
Limitations and Constraints in Fodder Production Forage improvement has its own limitations. Many aspects related to forage breeding, plant genetic resources, plant-protection measures, forage quality, palatability and seed production need to be appropriately addressed adopting an integrated approach. Some of the general constraints/limitations in forage crop improvement and production are as follows:
Non-availability of sufficient quantity of quality fodder seeds as the crop for fodder is harvested before seed set and also the nonavailability of dual-purpose varieties.
Non-synchronous flowering/anthesis and spikelet maturity, abscission of spikelets after maturity in grasses and the presence of large number of sterile glumes in grasses.
Overlapping of vegetative and reproductive growth phases, uneven pod setting, non-synchronous maturity and seed shattering in forage legumes. Table 1: Classification of Forages
On the Basis of Season of Cultivation Kharif: Sorghum, Bajra, Maize, Cowpea,
On the Basis of Nutrient Density in Dry Matter
On the Basis of Plant Types
Maintenance: Cultivated: Sorghum, Maize, Sorghum, Maize, Bajra, Napier & Para Oats, Bajra,
On the Basis of Duration of the Crop Annual Cereals: Sorghum, Maize, Bajra.
Page | 81
Cluster bean, Field bean.
grass.
Berseem, Lucerne & Cowpea
Rabi: Barley, Oats, Berseem, Lucerne
Non- Maintenance: Rice straw, Sorghum stover, Maize stover, Wheat straw etc.
Managed Grassland: Legumes, Grasses, Shrubs and fodder trees.
Summer: Sorghum, Maize, Bajra, Cowpea, Clusterbean, Field bean etc.
Low Protein: Sorghum, Maize, Oats, Barley and Root crops.
Un-Managed Perennial Grassland/Pasture: Legumes: Lucerne Grasses and Bushes. and Stylosanthus.
High Protein: Berseem, Lucerne, Cowpea, Subabul.
Forest: Annual Grasses: Grasses, Shrubs and Deenanath grass. tree leaves.
Annual Legumes: Berseem and Cowpea.
Plantation: Grass, tree leaves and fruits trees.
Perennial Grasses: Hybrid Napier and Guinea grass.
Aquatic: Water hyacinth, lotus and algae.
Perennial Trees: Subabul, Sesbania and drumstick etc.
Table 2: Classification of Feed Concentrate
Roughages
Energy supplement Grains and seeds (Maize Barley, Sorghum, Minor millets) Mill by products (Bran grits etc.) Roots crops (tapioca, turnips and potatoes)
Succulent Pasture (Natural and Artitificial) Green Legumes (Lucerne, Berseem, Cowpea, Cluster bean, Stylo, Agathi, Hedge Lucerne etc.) Tree leaves (Jack, Subabul, Mango, Tamarind, Rubber) Root crops and silage
Protein Supplement Animal by products (Blood meal, meat meal) Marine by products (Fish meal) Avian by products (Feather meal) Brewer’s grain, yeast and Oil seed cakes.
Dry Hay: (Legumes) Lucerne and (Non legumes) Cenchrus Straws (Paddy, wheat, barley) Stover (Maize and jowar) Haulms (Groundnut)
------------
Mineral Supplements (Natural and Pure Elements) Major minerals Trace minerals Vitamin supplements (Water and fat soluble). Additives (Antibiotics, hormones, coloring agents, liver stimulants, probiotics, enzymes etc. Page | 82
Strategies for Fodder Production and Improvement in India 1.
2.
3.
4.
Seed Production and Seed Availability
Seed availability of forage crops is just 15-20% requirement
Fodder seed production must be encouraged at ICAR institutes and SAU’s.
Livestock/ dairy co-operatives must be involved in seed production and distribution.
Emphasis on creation of seed processing and storage facilities.
Compulsory targets of fodder seed production must be linked with general seed production.
Production Technology
Need to highlight economic viability of round the year green fodder production in comparison to conventional agriculture to bridge the gap in demand and availability.
Regular interface between ICAR and DAH and also among ICAR institute related to fodder.
Extension personnel must be given training regarding fodder production technology.
Fodder crops have opportunity to fit well in contingent crop planning.
Conservation of Fodder
Development of cost effective equipment for processing of feed and fodder.
Use Chaff-cutter to minimise wastage of fodder & Conservation in form of hay and silage.
Establishment of fodder banks and Conversion of fodder into feed blocks.
Transfer of Technology
On-farm evaluation of fodder technologies should practiced.
Capacity building activates should be planned for farmers, specific to fodder crops.
Regular interface between Scientist-Farmers related to fodder production.
Hay/Silage demonstrations should be given to farmers. Page | 83
5.
6.
Research Activities
Development of fodder production technologies for different cultivated fodder areas and there adoption- adaptive research trials. Promote non-conventional fodder crops like Azolla etc.
Exploration of possibilities of hydroponic fodder through intensive research.
Research activities must be expanded on quality/anti quality aspects.
Development of new cultivars of fodder crops and grasses.
Nutritional evaluation of forage resources and development of feeding strategies.
Area Expansion
Area expansion is not possible but fodder crops can be grown in various cropping systems namely; Intensive Forage Production Systems, Multiple cropping System, Year-Round Forage Production through Combination of Perennial and Annual Forages, Integration of Forage Production with Food and Other Crops, Inclusion of Forages in Crop Sequences: Inclusion of Forages as Catch Crops, Inclusion of Forages as Intercrops in Widely Spaced Row Crops, Inclusion of Forages through Ratooning, Mixed Intercropping System of Forage Production, Integration of Perennial Forages on Bunds and Boundaries, Fodder on wastelands, Cultivation of forages from arable lands, Enhancing the forage production from non-arable land, Horti-Pasture system Strengthened Fodder Production etc. Forage Production Systems in India Intensive Forage Production Systems Efficient & effective utilization of available resources and other farm inputs for obtaining the highest yield in the form of herbage per unit area and time is the prime objective of intensive forage production system. An ideal system, besides giving higher yields and making the maximum use of available resources, must have favourable effect on soil fertility & productivity to provide sustainability for production system. In fact, intensive cropping is the only alternative to boost forage yield from irrigated lands and overall productivity which covers about 30-35% of the cultivated area in the country. Multiple Cropping Systems It consists of growing more than 3 crops species, appropriate annual Page | 84
forage crops as sole crops in mixed stands (graminaceous and leguminous) in a particular year to improve forage quality, substantially and to enhance forage productivity per unit area. It also helps to maintain soil fertility for longer period of time due to addition of root organic matter & residues. The success depends upon agro-climatic conditions, crop and soil micro climate and management practices followed and availability of inputs. Year-Round Forage Production through Combination of Perennial and Annual Forages This systems has developed at the Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute (IGFRI), Jhansi, to fulfill the needs of dairy farmers for green fodder throughout the year for small farmers, requiring maximum forage from a piece of land. It consists of raising berseem/lucerne, interplanted with hybrid Napier in spring and intercropping the inter-row spaces of the grass with cowpea during summer after the final harvest of berseem. This system was found superior to multiple crop sequences both in terms of production and economic returns. The hybrid Napier could be successfully replaced with relatively soft and palatable perennial grasses like Setaria and guinea grass and berseem with lucerne wherever required. Round-the-Year Forage Crop Sequence 1.
Napier x Bajra Hybrid + Cowpea/Cluster Bean – Berseem/Lucerne.
2.
Maize + Cowpea – MP Chari + Cowpea/Cluster Bean – Berseem/Lucerne + Japanese Rape.
3.
MP Chari + Cowpea/Cluster Bean – Berseem/Lucerne + Japanese Rape.
4.
Cowpea – MP Chari + Cowpea – Berseem/Lucerne + Japanese Rape.
5.
Napier x Bajra Hybrid + Cowpea – Berseem/Lucerne – Cowpea.
Integration of Forage Production with Food and Other Crops Inclusion of Forages in Crop Sequences On medium and heavy soils in rainfed areas, only Rabi crops are taken on conserved moisture through fallowing in the rainy season. In this situation, short duration forage crops like cowpea, cluster bean, rice bean, and pearl millet can be taken. This will conserve soil and suppress weeds besides providing forage in large quantity. Under irrigated conditions inclusion of fodder crops in sequences improves the soil productivity due to dense canopy and addition of large amounts of stubble biomass. Leguminous Page | 85
forages enrich the soil nitrogen also by utilizing nitrogen fixing bacteria like Rhizoctonia and Azotobactor. Examples are:
Paddy - berseem/lucerne; maize + cowpea – wheat/potato.
Maize - berseem/lucerne; Sorghum + cluster bean-wheat/chickpea.
Inclusion of Forages as Catch Crops Short duration forages can be fitted in gap periods of main crops and grown on residual moisture. Example: maize + cowpea/sorghum/pearl millet after harvest of rabi crops and before planting of rainy season crops. Similarly, turnips, carrot and mustard can be taken as catch crops after the harvest of early rainy season crops. Leguminous forages like horsegram (Macrotyloma uniflorum), moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia) and grasspea (Lathyrus sativus) are suitable for cultivation on residual moisture after the harvest of paddy. Inclusion of Forages as Intercrops in Widely Spaced Row Crops Cotton, sugarcane, maize and sorghum will provide a inter space for growing of short duration & short height forage crops like cowpea, moth bean and clusterbean, rice bean in the interspaces without affecting their yields. Besides these they fix the atmospheric nitrogen, smothers the weeds and some of these forages benefit the main crop indirectly. Ex: Moth bean reduces root rot disease. Inclusion of Forages through Ratooning Pearl millet has good regeneration capacity; this crop can be harvested 45-50 days after sowing to harvest green forage yields without adversely affecting the grain yields. Likewise, fodder maize can be planted at 30 cm spacing; alternate rows may be harvested for forage 45-50 days after planting to get around 15-20 tonnes ha-1 green forage. Mixed Intercropping System of Forage Production It consists of growing two or more plant species without definite row arrangement, with characters like different growth habit, canopy structure, rooting pattern and offering little or no mutual competition. By associative cropping of graminaceous and leguminous forages, the nutritive value of the mixed herbage could greatly be improved. Example: Sorghum/Maize/Pearl millet with Cowpea/Rice bean (Vigna umbellata). Integration of Perennial Forages on Bunds and Boundaries Bunds around fields are a common feature on cultivated lands and
Page | 86
occupy 2-10% of the cultivated area. Bunds are formed to demarcate field boundaries, conserve water and soil; if not properly protected the bunds are eroded by rains and damaged by animals. Growing of appropriate forages/bushes stabilizes the bunds through protective cover and soil binding action of roots will avoid soil erosion to greater extent, besides it provide sufficient amount of forage for feeding animals. Example: Vitever grass, range grasses and Sesbania grown on field boundaries yield maximum forage among perennial. Fodder Production on Wastelands Government unused land, public land, wastelands could be used for fodder production. Watershed development programs in the country can also provide an excellent opportunity for promoting fodder production by utilizing the waste land to greater extent. Forage Production from Arable Lands Many technological interventions we can made in multidisciplinary approach to improve the livestock productivity through increased fodder availability and accessibility. Arable lands offer sufficient scope for Varity of different forage crop species for fodder production. Forage Production from Non-Arable Land Improving the forage production from non-arable ecosystem by bringing the area into alternate land use systems such as Horti-pasture, Silvi-pasture and Agro-Horti-Silvi-Pasture in different agro climatic zones based on suitability. The best tree pasture combination for higher forage yield (>10 t ha) is Morus alba with Panicum maximum and Sesbania grandiflora under rainfed conditions in non-arable lands to fulfill the necessity of food, fodder, fuel wood, fibre and timber along with aesthetic and environmental services. Horti-Pasture system Strengthened Fodder Production The low level of farmers’ income and year-to-year fluctuations in it are a major source of agrarian distress. Horticultural crops like citrus (Citrus sp.), guava (Psidium gujava), mango (Mangifera indica), bael (Aegle marmelos) and ber (Ziziphus mauritiana) play promising role in enhancing farm income. Utilization of inter-space between trees can be utilised by planting the fodder crops which are capable of growing under partial shade. Hortipasture system is a promising land use system in which fruit trees are grown in association with perennial forage grasses and legumes considering both ecological and economic interactions among different components. It is an alternate land use system in arid and semi-arid regions and may Page | 87
potentially support livelihood improvement through simultaneous production of fruit, fodder and firewood utilizing IV and V type of land. Agronomy of Legume Fodder Crops Crop
Berseem
Synonyms
Egyptian clover, King of fodder
Botanical name Trifolium Alexandrinum Family
Leguminaceae
Origin
Egypt Weather:
Climatic requirement
Temperature (° C)
Cool to Max: 36 moderate Min: 8 cool Optimum:18-22
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
400-700
80-85
Plant Annual, Leaves are hairy oblong, thin trifoliate, flower are white to characteristics yellow colour, Seed colour range from bright yellow to brown. Toxicants
Oestrogen, bloat (It leads to Tymparitis, when berseem is feed heavily in early stage & mostly during early morning.
Soil
Well drained, Loam to clay loam soils is suitable (Except sandy soils).
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
October to November, December (Late sown)
Sowing method Broadcasting Spacing
25-30 cm (Only in line sowing)
Seed rate
25-30 kg ha-1
Depth Sowing
of
3-5 cm
Seed treatment Rhizobium Trifoli (20-25 g/kg seeds) NPK (Kg ha-1)
N (Kg ha-1) P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
20
30
60
Weed flora Control Weed management
Irrigation
Chicorium inbytus Coronopus dedymus
10-12 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest:
Pest management
Management: 10% Salt solution to separate weed seeds. Summer deep Ploughing is necessary. Control: (PE) Butachlor @ 1.0-2.0 kg/ha or alachlor @ 2.0 kg/ha or Imazethapyr @ 0.100 kg ai ha-1.
Control
Monocrotophos/Chloropyriphos White fly (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids @ 1ml/lit (Aphis spp), Thrips & Leaf minor Quanolphos @ 0.3 ml/lit
Page | 88
Disease
Disease management
Control
Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ Stem Rot (Sclerotinia trifoliorum) 2g/lit.
Varieties
Vardhan, Maskavi, IGFRI 99-1, BL-1,11,22,52, BB-2, UPB-103
Harvesting
50-60AS (1St) 30-35 AS (2nd)
Yield
100-120 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 80-100 t ha-1 (Rainfed).
Crop
Lucerne
Synonyms
Alfa alfa, Queen of fodder
Botanical name Medicago sativa Family
Leguminaceae
Origin
South West Asia Weather:
Climatic requirement
Temperature (° C)
Cool to Max: 35 moderate Min: 8 cool Optimum:20-22
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
400-600
80-85
Perennial in nature, It can be grown for 3-4 years with average yield, Plant leaves are trifoliate, flowers are purple to violet blue in colour and characteristics seeds are kidney shaped. Toxicants
Plant estrogens, Saponin (Bitter taste) It affects when lucerne is feed heavily in early stage.
Soil
Well drained, Loam to clay loam soils is suitable (Except sandy soils).
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
October to November, December (Late sown)
Sowing method Broadcasting Spacing
25-30 cm (Only in line sowing)
Seed rate
20-25 kg ha-1
Depth Sowing
of
3-5 cm
Seed treatment Rhizobium milliloti (20-25 g/kg seeds) NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
20
60
30
Weed flora
Control
Dinoceb 1 g/lit Dodder (Cuscuta Bromaxil 1.5 g/lit reflex) 2,4D 1g/lit
Irrigation
10-12 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage.
Pest
Pest:
Control Page | 89
management
Monocrotophos/Chloropyriphos White fly (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids @ 1ml/lit (Aphis spp), Thrips, Leaf minor & Quanolphos /Imdacloprid @ cutworms. 0.3-0.5 ml/lit Disease
Disease management
Control
Fusarium Rot (Fusarium spp.) Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) 2g/lit. Stem Rot (Sclerotinia trifoliorum)
Varieties
Anand-2, 3, NDRI-1, 2, IGFRI-5, 54, 244, Type-8, 9, Moopa, Rambler, Sirsa-8, 9.
Harvesting
50-60 AS (1St) 30-40 DAS (2nd) 30-35 DAS (3rd)
Yield
80-100 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 60-80 t ha-1 (Rainfed).
Crop
Cow Pea
Synonyms
Southern pea, Black eye pea, Crowder pea, lubia.
Botanical name
Vigna Sininsis, Vigna unguiculata
Family
Leguminaceae
Origin
Africa
Climatic requirement
Weather:
Temperature (°C)
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
Warm humid and moist
Max: 36 Min: 8 Optimum:18-22
400-700
80-85
Annual, herbaceous legume, Erect, semi-erect, prostrate or climbing. Plant The leaves are trifoliolate which develop alternately. Leaves are characteristics smooth, dull to shiny, and rarely pubescent. Seeds are kidney shaped in nature. Toxicants
Tripsin inhibiters, Anti-vitamin (E) factor
Soil
It comes under wide range of soils; Mostly it requires well drained, slightly acidic 5.5-6.5 pH. (It prefers Sandy to sandy loam soils)
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
June - July March - April
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
30×5 cm
Seed rate
30 kg ha-1
Depth of Sowing
5-6 cm
Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
Rhizobium. spp (20-25 g/kg seeds) N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
20
60
30 Page | 90
Weed flora Weed management
Irrigation
Pest management
Disease management
Control
Management: 1 hand weeding @ 15-20 Echinochloa. spp, DAS Amaranthus. spp, Control: (PPI) Fluchloraline @ 0.75 kg Euphorbia hirta, ai/ha. Phyllanthus niruri, (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg ai/ha. Commelina benghalensis (POE) Imazethapyr @ 0.2 kg ai/ha. 6-8 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest:
Control
Pod borer (Adisura spp), White fly (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids (Aphis spp) weevil (Bruchus spp) & Thrips.
Monocrotophos/Chloropyrip hos@ 1ml/lit Quanolphos/Imdacloprid 0.3-0.5 ml/lit
Disease
Control
Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) Damping off (Pytheium spp.) Stem Rot (Sclerotinia trifoliorum) Blight, Fusarium wilt, Mosaic
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2g/lit. Quanolphos/Imdacloprid @ 0.3-0.5 ml/lit. COC @ 2 g/lit
Varieties
Kohinoor, UPC-5286, 5287, 287, DFC-1, GFC-123, Bundel Lobia-1, 2, Shweta.
Harvesting
50-60 DAS (1st) 25-30 DAS (Subsequent).
Yield
25-30 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 15-20 t ha-1 (Rainfed). 6-8 q ha-1 (Grain yield).
Crop
Cluster bean
Synonyms
Guar
Botanical name
Cyamopsis Tetragonalabus [Smooth (vegetative type) & Hairy (fodder type)]
Family
Leguminaceae
Origin
West Africa
Climatic requirement
Weather:
Temperature (°C)
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
Warm humid and moist
Max: 40 Min: 10 Optimum:20-25
500-700
80-85
Annual, herbaceous legume, Erect to semi-erect in nature, The leaves are trifoliolate with small petiole and leaves are smooth, Plant shiny. Flower are white to violet colour, Seeds are tiny ovule shaped. characteristics Mucilaginous seed flour is valued as guar gum (galactomannan) & used in textile, paper, cosmetic & oil industry. Toxicants Soil
Tripsin Inhibitor & Tannic acid It comes under wide range of soils; Mostly it requires well drained soils,
Page | 91
It can tolerate slightly saline & moderately alkaline soils with 7.5-8.0 pH. (It prefers Sandy to sandy loam soils). Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time June - July, October – November & March-April Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
20×5 cm (Fodder purpose) & 30×5 cm (Fruit Purpose)
Seed rate
30-35 kg ha-1
Depth of Sowing
3-5 cm
Seed treatment Rhizobium. Spp (20-25 g/kg seeds) NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
Irrigation
Pest management
Disease management
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
20
40
K (Kg ha-1) 20
Weed flora
Control
Echinochloa.spp, Amaranthus.spp, Euphorbia hirta, Parthenium spp, Cynodon spp, Cyperus spp.
Management: 2 hand weedings @ 20 & 40 DAS. Control: (PPI) Fluchloraline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha. (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg ai/ha. (POE) 2, 4-D at 2.0 kg ha-1 to control Parthenium.
4-5 irrigation is needed at 10-12 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest:
Control
Pod borer (Adisura spp), White fly (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids, Weevil (Bruchus spp) & Thrips.
Monocrotophos/Chloropyrip hos@ 1ml/lit Quanolphos/Imdacloprid 0.3-0.5 ml/lit
Disease
Control
Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) Leaf spot, Powdery mildew, YMV.
Carbendazim @ 2g/lit. Mencozeb @ 0.5 ml/lit (powdery mildew). Imdacloprid 0.3 ml / lit.
Varieties
Bundel Gaur - 1, 2, 3, HFG-156, 119, HG-182, 75, FS277, Pusa Sadabahar.
Harvesting
50-60 DAS (1st)- Harvesting should be done at small Pod Formation stage 35-40 DAS (Subsequent)
Yield
20-25 t ha1 (Irrigated), 15 t ha-1 (Rainfed) & 1-2 t ha-1 (green pods).
Crop
French bean
Synonyms
Common French, Snap bean, Lima bean, Butter bean
Botanical name
Phaseolus vulgaris
Page | 92
Family
Leguminaceae
Origin Climatic requirement
Southern Mexico and Central America Weather:
Temperature (°C)
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
Cool and dry
Max: 35 Min: 8 Optimum:25-30
400-600
80-85
Annual, herbaceous legume, Erect, semi-erect, prostrate or climbing. Plant The leaves are trifoliolate which develop alternately. Seeds are flat, characteristics oval and round in nature. Toxicants
Tripsin Inhibitor & Antivitamin (E) factor
Soil
It comes under wide range of soils; Mostly it requires well drained soils, It prefers slightly acidic soils with 5.5-6.0 pH. (Silty loam to clay loam soils is best for higher yields).
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
October to November March-April
Sowing method Line sowing Spacing
25x5 cm
Seed rate
25-30 kg ha-1
Depth of Sowing
5-6 cm
Seed treatment Rhizobium. Spp (20-25 g/kg seeds) NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
Irrigation
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
30
60
Disease management
30
Weed flora
Control
Echinochloa.spp, Amaranthus.spp, Euphorbia hirta, Parthenium spp, Cynodon spp, Cyperus spp.
Management: 2 hand weedings @ 20 & 40 DAS. Control: (PPI) Fluchloraline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha. (PE) Methyl 1-N-Carbamate @ 3 Kg/ha. (POE) 2, 4-D at 2.0 kg ha-1 to control Parthenium.
5-6 irrigation is needed at 10-12 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest:
Pest management
K (Kg ha-1)
Control
Monocrotophos/Chloropyrip Pod borer (Adisura spp), White fly hos@ 1ml/lit (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids (Aphis spp) Quanolphos/ Imdacloprid 0.3-0.5 ml / lit Disease
Control
Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) Mosaic (Vector: Bemisia tabaci)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2g/lit.
Page | 93
Quanolphos/Imdacloprid 0.3-0.5 ml/lit Varieties Harvesting
UPF 191, UPF 204, Premier, Kentucky Wonder 40-50 DAS (1st) Harvesting should be done at small Pod Formation stage 35- 40 DAS (Subsequent)
Yield
20-25 t ha1 (Irrigated) 15 t ha-1 (Rainfed) & 1-2 t ha-1 (green pod).
Crop
Horse gram
Synonyms
Kulthi, Hurli (Kannada)
Botanical name Dolichos biflorus Family
Leguminaceae
Origin
South West Asia, India
Climatic requirement
Weather:
Temperature (° C)
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
Hot & humid
Max: 40 Min: 10 Optimum:20-25
400-600
80-85
Annual, herbaceous, erect type. It is important fodder crop in dry Plant land areas, leaves are trifoliate in nature, Suitable for multiple characteristics cropping, mixed & inter cropping. Toxicants
Cyanogens, Tripsin inhibitors & Antivitamin (E) factor
Soil
Well drained, light textured soils are suitable. (Sandy loam to clay loam soils) are preferred for obtaining higher yields. Soils with neutral pH are good for this crop. This crop is slightly tolerant to salinity, alkalinity, drought & low fertility.
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time June – July Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
20 x 5 cm (Rainfed) & 25-30 x 5 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
30-35 kg ha-1
Depth of Sowing
4-5 cm
Seed treatment Rhizobium. Spp (20-25 g/kg seeds) NPK (Kg ha-1)
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
20
30
20
Weed flora
Control
Weed management
Control: (PPI) Fluchloraline @ Echinochloa spp, Bracharia 0.75 kg ai/ha. (PE) Pendimethaline mutica, Euphorbia hirta, @ 1kg ai/ha. Parthenium spp, Cynodon spp (POE) 2, 4-D at 2.0 kg ha-1.
Irrigation
4-5 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green
Page | 94
foliage. Pest: Pest management
Disease management
Control
Monocrotophos/Chloropyrip Pod borer (Adisura spp), Cut worms, hos@ 1ml/lit White fly (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids Quanolphos /Imdacloprid @ (Aphis spp),mites etc. 0.3-0.5 ml/lit Disease
Control
Leaf spot, YMV (Vector: Bemisia tabaci), Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) Stem Rot (Sclerotinia trifoliorum)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2g/lit. Quanolphos/Imdacloprid 0.3-0.5 ml/lit
Varieties
Denanath, Bundel Sem - 1, JLP – 4.
Harvesting
50- 60 DAS (1st) 35- 40 DAS (Subsequent)
Yield
15-20 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 10-15 t ha-1 (Rainfed), 2-3 q ha-1 (Seeds).
Crop Synonyms
Stylosanthus Stylo, Muyal Masal (Tamil)
Botanical name Stylosanthus hamata & Stylosanthus Scabra Family
Leguminaceae
Origin
South America
Climatic requirement
Plant characteristics Toxicants
Weather:
Temperature (°C)
Rainfall (mm)
RH (%)
Hot & humid
Max: 30 Min: 10 Optimum:20-25
500-800
80-85
Perennial in nature, Erect, spreading type, it can be grown for 4-5 years with average yield; leaves are tiny small pinnate shaped, juicy succulent in nature. flowers are white, purple to violet --
Soil
Well drained, light textured soils are suitable. (Sandy loam to clay loam soils) are preferred for obtaining higher yields. This crop is slightly tolerant to salinity, alkalinity, drought & low fertility.
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
June – July
Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
25 x 5 cm (Rainfed) & 30 x 5 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
8-10 kg ha-1
Depth of Sowing 1-2 cm (Over depth will reduce germination) Seed treatment
Rhizobium. Spp (20-25 g/kg seeds) & soak the seeds in hot water (80 ° C) for 4 minutes and soak it in cold water over night. It Page | 95
enhances germination percentage. NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
20
40
20
Weed flora
Control
Echinochloa. Spp, Bracharia mutica, Euphorbia hirta, Parthenium spp, Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus.
Management: 2 hand weedings @ 20 & 40 DAS. Control: (PPI) Fluchloraline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha. (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg ai/ha or Butachlor @ 1.0-2.0 kg/ha. (POE) 2, 4-D at 2.0 kg ha-1.
5-6 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage.
Irrigation
Pest management
Pest
Control
Borer (Adisura spp), Leaf minor, caterpillar, White fly (Bemisia tabaci), Aphids (Aphis spp) & Thrips.
Monocrotophos/Chloropyriphos@ 1ml/lit Quanolphos @ 0.3 ml/lit
Disease
Control
Disease management
Root Rot (Rhizoctonia soloni) Anthracnose (Colletotrichum gleosporidis), Blight (Rhizoctonia spp)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2g/lit. Mencozeb/Hexaconazole @ 0.5 ml/lit.
Varieties
Hamata, Scabra, Verano, RS-95
Harvesting Yield
65-70 DAS (1st) 35-40 DAS (Subsequent) 40-50 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 25 -30 t ha-1 (Rainfed).
Agronomy of Cereal Fodder Crops Crop Synonyms
Sorghum Jowar, Javari, Jola, Camel crop.
Botanical name Sorghum bicolor Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Africa
Climatic requirement
Weather:
Temperature (° C)
Rainfall (mm) RH (%)
Cool and dry
Max: 41 Min: 6-7 Optimum:27-30
400-500
80-85
Annual, short day plant, often cross pollinated crop, Sorghum can tolerate high temperature, drought, salt resistant, slightly frost Plant resistant throughout their life cycle, better than any other cereal. It is characteristics highly resistant to desiccation. It can tolerate water logging. Rainfall at maturity affects the quality. Low temperature with cloudy weather at flowering induces sugary disease.
Page | 96
Toxicants
Cynogenic glucoside (Dhurin), this glucoside is converted into HCN in stomach of ruminants. It causes bloating and reduces the transfer of oxygen to the blood stream and causes death of the animal. It is called sorghum poisoning. HCN content is more than 100 ppm in the early stage. Critical level is 50 ppm. It normally occurs during 60 to 65 days after sowing or at heading stage. If it is harvested earlier, it should be dried and fed to cattle. It also contains high amount of Niacin, which interface with the synthesis of Tryptophane which is the precursor for synthesis of IAA. Pellagara it is a nutritional disorder due to presence of high amount of Leucine: iso-leucine ratio (3.4).
Soil
It is grown under variety of soil. It need Well drained, medium textured to heavy textures having good water retention are best suited. (Loam to clay loam soils is preferred for obtaining higher yields, except sandy soils). It does well in pH range of 6.0 to 8.5 as it tolerates considerable salinity and alkalinity. The black cotton soils of Central India are very good for its cultivation “Sorghum injury”: Sorghum stubbles / roots have high C: N ratio (50:1), ie. It contain low amount of ‘N’. Hence microbes take the soil ‘N’ for decomposition than from the decomposed stubble, which causes temporary immobilization of soil ‘N’. Hence succeeding crop after sorghum is affected due to N deficiency in the early stage called sorghum injury. Succeeding crops need higher N.
Land Preparation
1 summer deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
June - July October – November March – April
Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
30 x 10 cm (Rainfed) & 45 x 10 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
30 kg ha-1 (Irrigated), 15-20 kg ha-1 (Multi-cut Varites)
Depth Sowing
of
4-5 cm
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan/Bavistin 2 ml/lit. Seed hardening: Soak the seeds in 2% Potassium di hydrogen Seed treatment phosphate (20 g/lit) or cycocel (1ml/lit) for 6hrs & shade dried for 6 hrs. NPK (Kg Weed
ha-1)
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
80
40
30
60
40
Weed Flora
30 Control
Page | 97
management
Irrigation
Pest management
Disease management
Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus Management: 1 hand weedings @ rotundus, Cyperus esculentus, 20-25 DAS. celosia argentia, Commelia Control: (PE) Pendimethaline @ bengalensis, Amaranthus 1kg ai/ha. Viridis, Parthenium spp, Striga (PE) Atrazine @ 500 g ai/ha. Asiatic, Striga lutera (Witch (POE) 2, 4-D at 2.0 kg ai/ ha-1 to weed) control Striga 5-6 irrigation is needed at 15-20 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest
Control
Shoot fly, Stem borer, cut worms, gall midge.
Carbofuron @ 125 ml/ha. Malathion @ 1ml/lit. Monocrotophos @ 1ml/lit
Disease
Control
Anthracnose (C. gleosporidis) Grain smut, loose smut, long smut.
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 5 g/lit. Zineb/Manab @ 1kg/ha.
Varieties
Pusa chari-6, 9, 23, MP chari, Pant chari-3, UP chari-1, 2, Jawahar chari-6, 69, JS-20, 29, 263, CO–11, 18, 19, 25, 26, CSH 13R, CSH 15, CSV 14R, 15R, CSV 8R, Swati, Gwalior – 82, 304, (Low HCN Varites) IS-208, 28450, 288692. (Multi-cut Varites) MFSH7, 885F, CoFS-29.
Harvesting
65-70 DAS (1st) 35-40 DAS (Subsequent) Harvesting has to be done after 50% flowering to small grain stage to avoid HCN toxicity/sorghum poisoning in cattles.
Yield
25-30 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 15-20 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder} 8-10 t ha-1 {Dry fodder} 15-20 q ha-1 {Grain yield} Crop
Maize
Synonyms
Corn, Makka, Bhuta, Queen of Cereals
Botanical name
Zea mays (Indurata-Flint, Indenta-Dent, Everata-Pop, TunicataPod, Saccharata-Sweet, Amylaicca-Soft, Ceretina-Waxy).
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Maxico Weather:
Climatic requirement
Plant characteristics
Hot and humid
Temperature (°C) Rainfall (mm) Max: 38 Min: 6-7 Optimum:30-32
500-600
RH (%) 80-85
Annual, day neutral plant, highly cross pollinated crop, Quickly growing, emerging fodder, suited to wide of range of climate, High yield and digestibility obtained when harvested at 50% flowering to dough stage. Maize is susceptible for high temperature, drought, frost, waterlogging, throughout their life cycle, compared to any other cereal. Page | 98
Toxicants
Lactogenic effect, it also contains high amount of Niacin, which interface with the synthesis of Tryptophane which is the precursor for synthesis of IAA. Pellagara it is a nutritional disorder due to presence of high amount of Leucine: iso-leucine ratio (3.4). It normally occurs during 60 to 65 DAS or at heading stage. If it is harvested earlier, it should be dried and fed to cattle.
Soil
It is grown under variety of soil. It need Well drained, medium textured to heavy textures having good water retention are best suited. (Sandy Loam to clay loam soils is preferred for obtaining higher yields, except sandy soils). It does well in pH range of 6.5 to 7.5. The black cotton soils of Central India are very good for its cultivation. Maize is highly susceptible for drought & waterlogging condition
Land Preparation
1 summer deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
June - July October – November March – April
Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
30 x 10 cm (Rainfed) & 45 x 10 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
40-60 kg ha-1 (Irrigated)
Depth Sowing Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
of
5-8 cm Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan/Bavistin 2 ml/lit. N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
80
40
30
100
40
Weed flora
Weed management
Irrigation
Management: 1 hand weedings @ Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus 20 DAS. rotundus, Cyperus Control: (PE) Simazine @ 250-500 g esculentus, Commelia ai/ha. bengalensis, Amaranthus (PE) Alachlor @ 2.0 kg ai/ha Viridis, Parthenium spp, (POE) 2, 4-D at 1.0 kg ai/ ha-1 to Striga lutera control Striga 8-10 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest
Pest management
Disease management
30 Control
Control
Shoot fly, Shoot borer, Stem Carbofuron @ 125 ml/ha. borer, cob borer, Cut worms, Malathion/ Cypermethrin @ 1ml/lit. gall midge, army worms, Monocrotophos/Chloropyriphos@ and false army worm. 1ml/lit Disease
Control
Downy mildew, Stalk rot,
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 5 Page | 99
root rot
g/lit. Zineb/Manab @ 1kg/ha. Sulphur compound @ 5g/lit Dithane M-45 @ 2 ml/lit
Varieties
African Tall, Ganga -5, Vijay Composite, Manjari, APFM -8, J1006.
Harvesting
60-70 DAS (1st) (No subsequent harvesting is possible due to poor regeneration)
Yield
40-50 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 25-30 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder} 10-15 t ha-1 {Dry fodder} 30-50 q ha-1 {Grain yield}
Crop Synonyms
Pearlmillet Bajra, Cumbu, Sajji.
Botanical name Pennisetum glaucum & Pennisetum purpurea Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Africa Weather:
Climatic requirement
Hot & humid Cool and dry
Temperature (°C) Rainfall (mm) Max: 42 Min: 6-7 Optimum:30-32
400-700
RH (%) 80-85
Plant characteristics
Annual, short day plant, highly cross pollinated crop, As a rainy season crop, Quickly growing crop and it responds to multicut. Emerging fodder, suited to wide of range of climate, The fodder is not as palatable as that of sorghum or maize. But recently evolved Co8 is palatable and sweet, Obtained when harvested at 50% flowering to dough stage. Bajra is resistant for high temperature, drought, frost, waterlogging, throughout their life cycle, compared to any other crops.
Toxicants
(Oxalates and Oxalic acid): which interface with the synthesis of various enzymes & metabolic activates &Tryptophane which is the precursor for synthesis of IAA. It normally occurs during 45-50 DAS or at heading stage. If it feed heavily during seedling stage then possibility of stomach/abdomen swelling, so to avoid it is harvested after 59% flowering & fed to cattle.
Soil
It is grown under variety of soil. It need Well drained, medium textured to heavy textures having good water retention are best suited. (Sandy Loam to clay loam soils is preferred for obtaining higher yields, except sandy soils). It does well in pH range of 6.5 to 7.5. The black cotton soils of Central India are very good for its cultivation. Bajra is highly sensitive for acidic soils & waterlogging condition.
Land Preparation
1 summer deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Page | 100
Sowing time
June – July October – November March – April
Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
30 x 5 cm (Rainfed) & 30 x 10 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
10-12 kg ha-1 (Fodder), 5-6 kg ha-1 (Grain)
Depth of Sowing 2-3 cm Seed treatment
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan/Bavistin 2 ml/lit.
NPK (Kg ha-1)
N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
50
40
20
Weed Flora
Weed management
Irrigation
Pest management
Disease management
Control
Management: 1 hand weedings @ 20 Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus DAS. rotundus, Striga.lutea, Control: (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg Cyperus esculentus, ai/ha. Commelia spp, Amaranthus (PE) Atrazine @ 250-500 g ai/ha. Viridis, Sorghum (POE) 2, 4-D at 1.0 kg ai/ ha-1 to halepense, Parthenium spp. control Striga 2-3 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest
Control
Shoot fly, Stem borer, ear head borer, army worms, and false army worm.
Carbofuron @ 125 ml/ha. Malathion/Cypermethrin @ 1ml/lit. Monocrotophos/Chloropyriphos@ 1ml/lit
Disease
Control
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 5 g/lit. Anthracnose, Charcoal rot, Zineb/Manab @ 1kg/ha. Grain smut, Long Smut, Ridomil MZ @ 2kg/ha Downy mildew, Rust. Sulphur compound @ 5g/lit Dithane M-45 @ 2 ml/lit
Varieties
Giant bajra, Raj bajra, Avika bajra, FBC-16, Co-8, HB-4, DFB-1, GFB-1, TNSC-1
Harvesting
45-50 DAS (1st) 35-40 DAS (Subsequent)
Yield
30-35 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 20-25 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder} 5-6 t ha-1 {Dry fodder} 6-8 q ha-1 {Grain yield}
Crop Synonyms
Oats Oats
Botanical name Avena sativa Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Asia Minor Page | 101
Climatic requirement
Weather:
Temperature (°C)
Cool and dry
Max: 32 Min: 4 Optimum:20-25
Rainfall (mm) RH (%) 400-600
85-90
Annual, long day plant, highly self-pollinated crop, as a winter season crop, growth is slow and it responds to single cut. The Plant fodder has low palatability as compared to other cereals. Oats are characteristics harvested at 50% flowering to soft dough stage. Oats is highly resistant for high temperature, salinity-alkalinity, drought & frost. Toxicants
(Nitrates & Nitrites, Hemoglobin, Meta hemoglobulin): which restrict oxygen supply to brain in cattles leads to brain hemorrhages.
Soil
It is grown under variety of soil. It need Well drained, light textured to medium textures (Sandy Loam to clay loam soils are preferred for obtaining higher yields, except sandy soils). It does well in pH range of 6.5 to 7.5. Oats are highly sensitive for acidic soils & waterlogging condition.
Land Preparation
1 summer deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings followed by planking to break big clods obtain fine seed bed which enhance seed germination.
Sowing time
October – November
Sowing method Line Sowing Spacing
20 x 5 cm
Seed rate
80-100 kg ha-1
Depth Sowing
of
Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
4-5 cm Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan 2 ml/lit & Chloropyriphos 1ml/lit. N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
60
30
Weed flora Weed management
Irrigation Pest management Disease management
K (Kg ha-1) 20 Control
Avena fatua, Management: 1hand weedings @ 20-25 DAS. Phalaris minor, Control: (PE) Sulfosulfuron @ 0.025 g/lit Cynodon dactylon, Isoproturon @ 0.75 g/lit or Metasulfuron @ Cyperus rotundus, 8g/lit Cyperus esculentus. 2-3 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green foliage. Pest
Control
Termites, Red ants, Chloropyriphos@ 2 ml/lit. Rats/mice Zinc/Aluminium phosphide @ 5g tablet/colony. Disease
Control
Rust, Root rot
Propiconazole/tilt @ 0.5 ml/lit Page | 102
Dimethoate @ 0.03%. Varieties
HFO-114, OS-6,7, UPO-94, OL-9, 125, Bundel Jai-822, 851, 99-1, 99-2, Harita
Harvesting
70-85 DAS (1st) & 40-45 DAS (2nd)
Yield
35-30 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 20-25 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder} 4-5 t ha-1 {Dry fodder}& 8-10 q ha-1 {Grain yield}
Agronomy of Grasses and Range Species Crop
Napier Grass
Synonyms
Napier, Elephant grass
Botanical name
Pennisetum glaucum (P. glaucum x P. purpureum).
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
South Africa (Rhodessia) Weather:
Climatic requirement
Warm and humid
Temperature (°C) Rainfall (mm) RH (%) Max: 35 Min: 10 Optimum:20-30
600-800
80-85
Plant characteristics
Perennial, quickly growing, tall, succulent plant growing to a height of 2 to 5 m and the leaves are taller, broader in large clumps with numerous branching tillers. Suited to wide of range of climate, high yielding. Napier is susceptible for high temperature, drought, frost, waterlogging, throughout their life cycle.
Toxicants
Oxalates, Nitrates & Nitrites it normally occurs during 45 to 50 DAS, feeding during early stage of crop (Seedling stage) leads to swelling of abdomen.
Soil
It is grown under variety of soil. It need Well drained, medium textured to heavy textures having good water retention are best suited. (Loam to clay loam soils is preferred (except sandy soils). It does well in pH range of 6.0 to 7.5. Napier is highly susceptible for waterlogging.
1 summer deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings, followed by ridges & furrows are made using ridge plough. The rooted slips are planted Land Preparation on ridges & furrows are for irrigation. This method will be promising for obtain higher yields. Sowing time
June-August October – November
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
50 x 50cm (Rainfed) & 60 x 50 cm, 70 x 60 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
30000-40000 (Rooted slips) ha-1
Depth of Sowing 4-5 cm Seed treatment NPK (Kg
ha-1)
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan/Bavistin 2 ml/lit. N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1) Page | 103
80
40
30
Weed flora Weed management
Irrigation
Pest management
Disease management
Control
Cynodon dactylon, Management: Hoeing @ 35-40 DAS. Cyperus Control: (PE) Atrazine/Simazine @ 1kg ai/ha. rotundus, Striga (POE) 2, 4-D at 1.0 kg ai/ ha-1. lutera, Parthenium spp 4-5 irrigation is needed at 10-15 day’s interval to obtain high green forage. Pest
Control
Grass hopper, Leaf eating caterpillar
Malathion @ 1ml/lit.
Disease
Control
Root rot, Leaf spot (No major disease)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2 g/lit.
Varieties
Pusa Giant, NB-5, 21, 37, EB-4, Co-1, 2, 3, HB-3, Yeshwant, PNB-83, KKM-1
Harvesting
60-70 DAS (1st) & 40-45 DAS (Subsequent) {6 to 8 cuts/per year}
Yield
300-350 t ha-1 (Irrigated), 200-300 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder}
Crop
Guinea Grass
Synonyms
Gini grass
Botanical name
Panicum maxicum
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Africa Weather:
Climatic requirement
Warm and humid
Temperature (° C) Rainfall (mm) RH (%) Max: 35 Min: 10 Optimum:20-30
600-800
80-85
Plant characteristics
Perennial, fast growing, tall, vigorous, tufted, succulent plant growing to a height of 1-1.5 m and the leaves are taller in large clumps with numerous tillers. Suited to wide of range of climate, especially grown under orchards trees. Guinea is susceptible for high temperature, frost & waterlogging conditions.
Toxicants
No toxins
Soil
It is grown under variety of soil. It need well drained, low textured to medium textures having good water retention capacity (Sandy loam to clay loam soils is preferred except sandy soils); it does well in pH range of 6.5 to 7.5. Black cotton soils are prominent for obtaining higher yields.
1 summer deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings, followed by ridges & Land Preparation furrows are made. The rooted slips are planted on ridges & furrows are for irrigation.
Page | 104
Sowing time
June-August October – November March-April
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
50 x 50cm (Rainfed) & 60 x 60 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
30000-40000 Rooted slips ha-1 or (3-4 kg seeds)
Depth of Sowing 4-5 cm Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan/Bavistin 2 ml/lit. N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
40
40
30
Weed Flora
Weed management
Irrigation Pest management Disease management
Control
Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus Management: Hoeing @ 30-35 DAS. rotundus, Striga, Control: (PE) Atrazine/Simazine @ 1kg ai/ha. Parthenium, (POE) 2, 4-D at 1.0 kg ai/ ha-1. Commelina bengalensis. 4-5 irrigation is needed at 15-20 day’s interval to obtain high green forage. Pest
Control
Grass hopper
Malathion @ 1ml/lit.
Disease
Control
Root rot, Leaf spot (No major disease)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2 g/lit.
Varieties
Samrudhi, Nandini, PGG-1, 9, 13, 14, 19, 101, 518, 616, Bundel Guinea-1, 2
Harvesting
70-80 DAS (1st) 40-45 DAS (Subsequent) {5 to 6 cuts/per year}
Yield
200-250 t ha-1 (Irrigated) 150-200 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder}.
Crop
Para grass
Synonyms
Water grass, Buffalo grass
Botanical name
Brachiaria mutica
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
South America Weather:
Temperature (°C) Rainfall (mm) RH (%)
Climatic requirement
Warm and humid
Plant characteristics
Perennial, fast growing, tall, vigorous, tufted, succulent plant growing to a height of 2.0-2.5 m. Suited to wide of range of
Max: 35 Min: 10 Optimum:20-30
600-800
80-85
Page | 105
climate, especially grown grows on moist soils/marshy land and withstands prolonged flooding or water logging conditions. Toxicants
No toxins
Soil
It is grown under all type of soil. It prefers low textured to medium textures having good water retention capacity (loam to clay loam soils is preferred except sandy soils); it does well in pH range of 5.5 to 7.5. It yields higher green forage in Marshy/Swamp river bed soils.
1 summer deep Ploughing, 1 Harrow ings, followed by ridges & Land Preparation furrows are made. The rooted slips are planted on ridges & furrows are for irrigation. Sowing time
June-August October -November March-April (Throughout year planting can be done with assured irrigation)
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
50 x 30cm (Rainfed) & 50 x 50 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
30000-50000 (Irrigated) Rooted slips ha-1 50000-80000 (Rainfed) Rooted slips ha-1
Depth of Sowing 3-4 cm Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
Irrigation Pest management Disease management
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) & Captan/Bavistin 2 ml/lit. N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
40
40
K (Kg ha-1) 30
Weed flora
Control
Panicum maxicum, Echinochloa spp, Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus, Striga lutera, Parthenium, Commelina bengalensis.
Management: Hoeing @ 30-35 DAS. Control: (PE) Atrazine/Simazine @ 1kg ai/ha. (POE) 2, 4-D at 1.0 kg ai/ ha-1.
5-6 irrigation is needed at 15-20 day’s interval to obtain high green forage. Pest
Control
Grass hopper
Malathion @ 1ml/lit.
Disease
Control
Root rot, Leaf spot (No major disease)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2 g/lit.
Varieties
No improved varieties available
Harvesting
60-65 DAS (1st) 40-45 DAS (Subsequent) {5 to 6 cuts/per year}
Yield
200-250 t ha-1 (Irrigated) 150-200 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder}
Crop
Anjan Grass
Synonyms
Buffel Grass, Dhaman Grass, Kollukottai (Tamil) Page | 106
Botanical name
Cenchrus ciliaris, Cenchrus glaucus
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
East Africa Weather:
Climatic requirement
Temperature (° C) Rainfall (mm) RH (%)
Hot and humid
Max: 35 Min: 10 Optimum:20-30
400-600
80-85
Plant characteristics
Perennial pasture grass, 4-6 cuts a year. Adapted in arid and semiarid tropical climate with long dry spell, fast growing succulent plant growing to a height of 1-1.5 m. Suited to wide of range of climate, it is a promising green grass type which perform well in dry lands under rainfed condition.
Toxicants
No toxins
Soil
It is grown under all type of soil. It prefers well drained, low textured textures soil, having good water retention capacity. It prefers (sandy to clay loam soils) except waterlogged soils. It also does well under alkaline/calcarious soil compared to other grasses. Anjan grass prefers pH range of 6 to 8.5
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 2 Harrow ings, followed by planking to obtain fine seed bed which enhance germination.
Sowing time
June-August October -November
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
50 x 30cm (Rainfed) & 50 x 20 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
4-5 kg ha-1 (Irrigated) 5-6 kg ha-1 (Rainfed)
Depth of Sowing 1-2 cm Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
Irrigation Pest management Disease management Varieties
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
30
20
K (Kg ha-1) 20
Weed flora
Control
Panicum maxicum, Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus.
Management: Hoeing @ 30-35 DAS. Control: (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg ai/ha.
1-2 irrigation is needed at 15-20 day’s interval to obtain high green forage. Pest
Control
Grass hopper
Malathion @ 1ml/lit.
Disease
Control
Leaf spot (No major disease)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2 g/lit.
Bundel, Anjan-1, 2,3, CAZRI-78, Co-1 (No improved varieties Page | 107
available) Harvesting
70-75 DAS (1st) 40-45 DAS (Subsequent) {5 to 6 cuts/per year}
Yield
25-30 t ha-1 (Irrigated) 15-20 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder}
Crop
Rhodes grass
Synonyms
Abyssinian Rhodes grass, Callide Rhodes grass
Botanical name
Chloris gayana
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Rhodes Island Weather:
Climatic requirement
Temperature (° C) Rainfall (mm) RH (%)
Hot and humid
Max: 35 Min: 8 Optimum:20-25
500-700
80-85
Plant characteristics
Rhodes grass is a perennial or annual tropical pasture grass, adapted in arid and semi-arid climate with long dry spell, fast growing, succulent plant growing to a height of 1-2 m. Suited to wide of range of climate, It is a promising green grass type which performs well in dry lands under rainfed condition. The inflorescences are light greenish brown colour, It is grazed, cut for hay or used as deferred feed but it is not fit for making silage. It can form pure stands or is sown with other grasses or legumes.
Toxicants
No toxins
Soil
It is grown under all type of soil. It prefers well drained, low textured textures soil, having good water retention capacity. It prefers (sandy loam to clay loam soils) except waterlogged soils. It also does well under alkaline soil compared to other grasses. Anjan grass prefers pH range of 6.5 to 7.5
Land Preparation
1 deep Ploughing, 1harrow ings, followed by planking to obtain fine seed bed which enhance germination.
Sowing time
June-August
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
30 x 30cm (Rainfed) & 50 x 30 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
1 lakhs rooted slips
Depth of Sowing 1-2 cm Seed treatment NPK (Kg ha-1)
Weed management
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
50
30
K (Kg ha-1) 20
Weed flora
Control
Panicum maxicum, Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus
Management: Hoeing @ 30-35 DAS. Control: (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg ai/ha Page | 108
2-3 irrigation is needed at 15-20 day’s interval to obtain high green forage.
Irrigation
Pest
Control
Grass hopper
Malathion @ 1ml/lit.
Disease
Control
Leaf spot (No major disease)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2 g/lit.
Pest management Disease management Varieties
Pioneer, Callide fine cut, Top cut, Katambora.
Harvesting
65-70 DAS (1st) 40-45 DAS (Subsequent) {4-5 cuts/per year}
Yield
20-25 t ha-1 (Irrigated) 10-15 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder}
Crop
Marvel grass
Synonyms
Hindi grass, Sheda grass
Botanical name
Dichanthium annulatum
Family
Poaceae/Gramineae
Origin
Tropic Asia & Africa Weather:
Climatic requirement
Hot and humid
Temperature (°C) Rainfall (mm) RH (%) Max: 35 Min: 10 Optimum:20-25
500-700
80-85
Plant characteristics
Marvel grass is a tufted perennial grass, adapted in arid and semiarid climate with long dry spell, fast growing, succulent plant growing to a height of 0.5-1 m, suited to wide of range of climate; It is a promising green grass type which performs well in dry lands under rainfed condition. Marvel grass is one of the best grasses for soil erosion control and ground cover: it helps binding the soil even on 15-20% slopes
Toxicants
No toxins
Soil
It is grown under all type of soil. It prefers well drained, low textured textures soil, having good water retention capacity. It prefers pH range of 6.5 to 7.5. It prefers (sandy loam to loam soils) except waterlogged soils.
Land Preparation 1 deep Ploughing, 1harrow ings is done Sowing time
June-July March-April
Sowing method
Line Sowing
Spacing
30 x 30cm (Rainfed) & 45 x 30 cm (Irrigated)
Seed rate
5-6 kg ha-1
Depth of Sowing 1-2 cm Seed treatment NPK (Kg
ha-1)
Azospirilium (20-25 g/kg seeds) N (Kg ha-1)
P (Kg ha-1)
K (Kg ha-1)
Page | 109
40
Weed management
Irrigation Pest management Disease management
30
20
Weed Flora
Control
Panicum maxicum, Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus
Management: Hoeing @ 30-35 DAS. Control: (PE) Pendimethaline @ 1kg ai/ha
1-2 irrigation is needed at 15-20 day’s interval to obtain high green forage. Pest
Control
Grass hopper
Malathion @ 1ml/lit.
Disease
Control
Leaf spot (No major disease)
Thiram/Captan/Carbendazim @ 2 g/lit.
Varieties
Phule Marvel-6, 8, GMG-1
Harvesting
60-65 DAS (1st) 40-45 DAS (Subsequent) {4-5 cuts/per year}
Yield
10-15 t ha-1 (Irrigated) 8-12 t ha-1 (Rainfed) {Green fodder}.
Page | 110
Agronomy of Tree Fodder Crop
Botanical Name (Family)
Gliricidia
Gliricidia sepium (Legume)
Origin
Philippine Well drained s Clay Loam Soils
Irrigation:- Irrigation is given @ 25-30 Days interval
Subabul
Leucaena leucocephala (Legume)
South Mexico
Irrigation:- Irrigation is given @ 25-30 Days interval Agasti/ Hummingbird tree
Sesbania grandiflora (Legume)
South Mexico
Irrigation:- Irrigation is given @ 30 - 40 Days interval Shevri
Bombax ceiba (Legume)
Land Preparation (Soil Type)
Asia
Optimum Sowing Temp Time (°C)
Sowing Method & (Spacing)
Well drained Sandy loam- Clay
20-25 Min-10
June-Sept
1 yrs after Planting (40-60t)
Local
1 yrs after Planting (30-40t)
Insect: Not Major Disease is Noticed Disease: Not Major Disease is Noticed
20-25 Line Spacing Min-10 June-Sept 4-5 kg/ha 20:60:30 (500×100 cm) Max-40
Weed : Kharif weeds are more Control: Pendimethaline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha 2,4D @ 1kg ai/ha.
Local
Harvesting (Yield) Tonnes
Insect: Not Major Disease is Noticed Disease: Not Major Disease is Noticed
20-25 Line Spacing Min-10 June-Sept 4-5 kg/ha 25:60:30 (500×100 cm) Max-40
Weed : Kharif weeds are more Control: Pendimethaline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha 2,4D @ 1kg ai/ha. Well drained Sandy loam- Clay Loam Soil
NPK Important Kg/ha Varites
20-25 2000 Line Spacing Min-10 June-Sept Stem 25:60:30 (500×100 cm) Max-40 cuttings
Weed: Echinochloa, Amaranthus, Euphorbia hirta, Phyllanthus niruri, Commelina benghalensis, Echinochloa spp, Cynodon dactylon, Panicum maximum, Sorghum halepense, Cyperus spp. Control: (PE) Pendimethaline @ 0.75 kg (POE) 2,4D @ 1kg ai/ha. Well drained Sandy loam- Clay Loam Soil
Seed Rate Kg/ha
Local
1 yrs after Planting (40-60t)
Insect: Not Major Disease is Noticed Disease: Not Major Disease is Noticed
Line Spacing 4-5 kg/ha 20:60:30 (500×100 cm)
Local
1 yrs after Planting Page | 111
Loam Soil Irrigation:- Irrigation is given @ 30 - 40 Days interval Prosopis
Prosopis glandulosa (Legume)
(500×200 cm)
Weed : Kharif weeds are more Control: Pendimethaline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha 2,4D @ 1kg ai/ha.
Well drained South US Sandy loam- Clay & Mexico Loam Soil
Irrigation:- Irrigation is given @ 30 - 40 Days interval
Max-40
(50-60t) Insect: Not Major Disease is Noticed Disease: Not Major Disease is Noticed
20-25 Line Spacing Min-10 June-Sept (500×100 cm) 5-8 kg/ha 20:60:30 Max-40 (500×200 cm)
Weed : Kharif weeds are more Control: Pendimethaline @ 0.75 kg ai/ha 2, 4D @ 1kg ai/ha.
Local
1 yrs after Planting (50-60t)
Insect: Not Major Disease is Noticed Disease: Not Major Disease is Noticed
Page | 112
Forage Conservation & Post-Harvest Techniques India being a tropical monsoon bound country with unimodal rainy season, surplus green herbage is available at the flush growth periods during kharif as well as rabi (in irrigated areas). It is desirable that these are preserved /conserved with minimum loss of nutrients. These can be conserved either as hay or silage or artificial dehydration for feeding to livestock during lean periods when availability of fresh forage is meager or negligible during (October-December and April-June). I.
Silage
Silage is the material produced by controlled fermentation of crops under anaerobic conditions. This process is known as ensilage and the container used for the purpose is known as silo. The fermentation process is carried out by microorganisms present in fresh herbage or by additives to maintain anaerobic condition. When chopped herbage is placed in an airtight container, naturally occurring bacteria ferment the carbohydrates (sugar) present in the herbage to produce mainly the lactic acid. The aim is to achieve a sufficient concentration of lactic acid to prevent other type of bacterial activity, i.e. clostridia activity. The main requirements are the exclusion of air & optimum moisture to maintain anaerobic conditions and to discourage clostridial fermentation which leads to production of carbon dioxide, ammonia, amines, butyric acid, etc. Methods of Controlling Fermentation There are several ways in which the clostridial type fermentation can be checked. One of the commonly used practices is to increase the dry matter of the herbage. In ensiled crops containing 30% or more dry matter, will be sufficient. Promotion of lactic acid fermentation is important way for controlling clostridial growth. Other method of controlling fermentation is by addition of preservatives and additives. Carbohydrates in the forages may be naturally occurring or may be added as a separate ingredient such as molasses/jaggry obtained as sugar industry byproducts, which acts as a fermentable substance in silage. Additives for Effective Ensiling of Nutrients Various types of additives can be used to improve or inhibit the fermentation or supplement nutrients needed by ruminants to be fed as silage. Propionic acid, formaldehyde, etc. have been used to increase the rate of lactic acid fermentation and produce stable silage. Carbohydrate sources such as molasses/jaggry (3%), whey, yeast, citrus pulp (2%), common salt Page | 113
(0.1%) and other energy-rich ingredients like pulse floor have also been used as additives to increase the fermentation and feeding value of silage. Urea @ 0.5-1.0% have been found to increase crude protein content and also the lactic acid content of silage made from cereal fodders. Microbial Activity As anaerobic conditions are achieved in silo, the species of Bacillus, Clostridium, Leuconostoc, and Lactobacillus develop. Lactic acid bacteria (Streptococcus, Leuconostoc, Lactobacillus and Pediococcus) are the important organisms for preservation of silage for good quality. Silos The different types of silos generally used are: (i) Pit silo, (ii) Tower silo, (iii) Trench cum bunker silo (iv) Trenches (v) Drum and PVC silo. The silo must provide a solid surface to permit consolidation of the ensiled material and elimination of air. It must protect the silage from rain water penetration. In India, pit silo is the most common. Techniques of Silage Making Dry Matter: Dry matter should be above 30%. Crops of high moisture should be ensiled by adding preservatives and additives. In poor weather, wilting should be avoided and additive should be used for proper fermentation. Stage of Growth: Crops should be cut at a proper stage of maturity as it is the most important factor for controlling the silage quality. The appropriate stage of growth for cutting different fodder crops for silage making: Sorghum - Flowering to soft dough stage, Maize - Milk to soft dough stage, Oat - 50% flowering to soft dough stage. (Grasses - pre flowering stage) Chopping: Crop should be chopped before ensiling. The chop length should be 3-5 cm, for obtaining better quality. Chopped silage is more palatable to livestock and has little chance of secondary fermentation. Filling of Silo: Silo should be filled rapidly and should not be left open. It should be sealed as soon as possible. Packing is important to create anaerobic conditions, it should be thoroughly pressed so that no air pocket is left in the silo otherwise chances of mould & fungus formation will be there which will spoil the silage. After filling, silo should be covered with polythene sheet followed by that of a layer of soil/clay etc. Removal of Silage: After 45-50 days of ensilage, the silage can be Page | 114
removed for feeding to animals. Care should be taken in removing the silage from silo. It should not be allowed to deteriorate after the silo is opened for feeding. Covers should be kept firmly in place as long as possible and the minimum face should be exposed at one time. The sugars, proteins and lactic acid present in the silage are subject to attack by mould growth and oxidation as some air is allowed to fermentation and causes loss of feeding value and intake by the animals. Silage Quality: Silage quality is determined mainly by the colour (Yellow to green), odour (fruity pleasant), physical state (firm & non sticky), pH, ammonical nitrogen, volatile acids and lactic acid. For desirable fermentation, the forage should be rich in water soluble sugar (more than 5% on dry-matter basis). A good-quality silage should have the following characteristics: (i) pH 4.5-5.0, (ii) ammonical nitrogen of total N – less than 10% of total N, (iii) butyric acid- less than 0.2%, (iv) lactic acid -3 to 12%, and (v) volatile acids, alcohol should be low. II. Hay Making Conservation of high-quality forages by drying is termed as hay making. The principle of hay making is to preserve nutritional value of forages through drying it to a optimum level at which the activity of microbial decomposers is inhibited. In India, sunlight is naturally available in abundance quantity, which enables farmers to dry the green forage in sunlight and thus making hay more economical with low cost. The hay making leads to reduction of moisture content to 10-20%, which inhibits the enzyme activity in the plant to be conserved. The cereal crops like sorghum, oat, guinea grass, range grasses, range legumes particularly Sylosanthes, Siratro, lablab bean are suitable for hay making. Legume fodders like berseem, lucerne, and cowpea are suitable for hay making. Leguminous forages have high buffering action and high nitrogen content, and hence are more suitable to be conveniently conserved as hay. Hay making is relatively more convenient and easy for Indian farmers. Harvested forage particularly thick stemmed should be chopped to optimum size of 5-6 cm and spread over the clean ground for sun curing and the layers should be changed every day to prevent any sort of fermentation or bacterial growth. After it is well dried (dry-matter content at the time of storing should be around 85-90%), this can be stored for feeding during the lean periods. Factors Affecting the Quality of Hay The following factors affecting the quality of hay; (i) Plant species, (ii) Stage of harvest, (iii) Leaf: stem ratio, (iv) Chemical composition, (v) Page | 115
Physical form, and (vi) Deterioration during storage. Bailing and Densification The transport of dry grass occupies more volume and takes lot of time to transport resulting into higher costs. Bailing and densification of dry grass helps in reducing the volume and could be transported economically and efficiently. By using these techniques, the hay could be transported from excess producing areas to deficit areas especially during the lean period or drought period. Wheat straw (bhusa) can be enriched by treating with 20% molasses and then densified and bales can be prepared to increase the digestibility of feed intake. Densified block of wheat straw, molasses and urea could be developed through high density bailing machine. The average density of wheat straw and stubble block obtained thus would be 398 kg per m3 and 355.0 kg per m3 respectively. Moisture level of admixture was maintained at 15-20% for densification. The optimum ratio of physical composition of straw block is 78:20:2 (wheat straw: molasses: urea). III. Production of Complete Feed Blocks Complete feed blocks could also be prepared by densifying machine. Nutritive value of forage is enhanced through mixing with molasses and blending with leguminous fodder, concentrate mixture, minerals and vitamin additives. The composition of complete feed blocks included wheat straw (40%), molasses (20%) dry leaves of berseem (20%), concentrate mixture (18%) and mineral mixture and vitamin additives (2%). IV. Preservation in the form of Leaf Meal Preparation of leaf meal out of top feeds and leguminous forages as an animal feed stuff because of high concentration of protein of high biological value and other nutrients such as carotene and minerals. There exists a big deficit of concentrate in the country to the tune of 60% and this deficit can be partially bridged by replacing the concentrate feeds by leaf meals. Leaf meal production technology is simple as well as profitable enterprise for the farmers. Crude protein content (% DM basis) in leaf meals of important forage crops are as follows – Leucaena leucocephala (18-21%), Sesbania sesban (18%), lucerne (20-21%), Stylosanthes sp. (12-18%), Ziziphus nummularia (13-16%). The leaf meal of leguminous forages are also known to have rich content of essential amino acids such as lysine, leucine, isoleucine, threonine, methionine, cysteine, valine, histidine, and arginine. A lot of scope exists in establishing a production, processing and marketing chain for its popularization in different parts of the country.
Page | 116
Importance of Green Fodder 1.
Animals as well as man, could not exist were if not plants, and among them are Grasses, the most useful of all plants. Green fodder is the primary only source of vit A for lactation (Req. of Vit A -50 I.U/live wt M: 87 I.U (M+P).
2.
Maintenance & function of the mucous membrane
3.
It is directly related to vision.
4.
It is essential reproduction, conception, early embryonic mortality, maintenance of pregnancy, deshedding of placenta and essential for the respiratory tract.
5.
It is essential in the Gastro intestinal tract digestive tract-deficiency cause’s diarrhoea, mal absorption of nutrients etc.
6.
It is essential for the urinary tract; deficiency causes stones in the kidney, ureter, and bladder.
7.
During lactation 2000 I.U. of Vitamin ‘A’ is eliminated in every litre of milk-It is to replenished
8.
Laxative in action, cheap source of Vitamin’A’ and source of minerals, Crude protein, Total digestible nutrients and dry matter.
9.
Carotene Content of some fodder: Agathi 18.3 mg / 100 dry matter, Lucerne 15.6 mg /100 dry matter, Guinea grass-14.2 mg / 100 dry matter, Desmodium 7.09 mg / 100 dry matter.
Nutritive Value of Fodder Crops These are highly digestible in nature (55–65%) mostly when it is harvested at a proper time. The crude protein may range from as little as 3% in very mature forages to over 30% in young grass (Dry Matter basis). The soluble carbohydrate of grasses ranges in the dry matter from 4-30%. The cellulose and hemicellulose are generally within the range of 20-30% and 10-30% of the dry matter, with trace amount of lignin respectively. Grass proteins are particularly rich in arginine, glutamic acid and lysine. Green forages are excellent source of carotene 250 mg/kg). Generally leguminous fodder contains 8-12% DCP and 45-60% TDN. The phosphorus content of leguminous fodder is poor. The non-leguminous fodders are having 2.5% DCP and 45-60% TDN on dry matter basis. Green fodder contains 100 mg carotenes/Kg when compared with about 20 mg/Kg in silage. Carotene requirement of milch animals is 60 mg for production; 30 mg for pregnancy, for growth requirement is 11 mg carotene per 100 Kg live weight. Vit A is directly related to vision, maintenance and function of mucous membrane, Page | 117
essential for reproduction (for conception, maintenance of pregnancy, shedding of placenta), deficiency leads to diarrhoea, poor absorbtion of nutrients, incidence of stones in kidney, ureter & bladder. Value of Tree Fodder Trees, which can be grown either in combination with agricultural crops or on separate land usually fit for agriculture, offer opportunity of producing green nutritious fodder for the livestock. In some parts of our country, more number of animals feed on shrubs and trees than on grass or grass legume pasture. Trees can produce as much as green fodder per unit area as fodder crops. Table 4: Nutritive Values of Tree Leaves (% DMB) Tree Species
CP
EE
CF
NFE
TA
DCP TDN
Nitrogen Fixing Trees 1 Gliricidia sepium
17.21 4.25 15.50 51.65 11.40 14.90 62.20
2. Inga dulci
15.21 4.37 13.81 55.71 10.91 -
3. Albizia lebbek
16.85 3.16 15.21 51.98 10.82 14.70 57.30
4. Sesbania grandiflora
29.88 3.02 8.61
5. Leucaena leucocephala
16.74 4.90 12.94 53.32 12.10 16.70 65.00
6. Erythrina indica
17.52 4.29 13.76 50.51 13.92 -
7. Acacia nilotica
-
46.08 12.52 -
14.00 4.30 12.50 64.70 4.50
-
10.20 66.50
Non-Nitrogen Fixing Trees 1. Artocarpus heterophyllus
14.01 5.63 18.74 50.53 11.07 8.04
68.19
2. Ficus bengalensis
11.40 5.17 15.46 53.59 11.93 6.22
46.63
3. Ficus religiosa
9.84
3.97 23.20 49.17 13.82 6.24
40.00
4. Millingtonia hortensis
8.444 4.81 22.49 50.08 14.18 8.29
54.85
5. Lannea Coromandelica
12.06 5.23 20.61 53.72 7.48
55.15
5.93
Azolla Production Azolla is a floating aquatic fern; belong to Azollaceae family and azolla genus. These are small, flat, compact and moss like plants floating on water surface of flooded rice fields, small pounds and other water bodies. Upon close examination these floating mats are seen to consist of many tiny ferns with multiple pairs of individuals overlapping scale-like leaves that resemble a cedar leaf. Each plant may have a branching stem with several pairs of leaves, but only a single dangling root and becomes dark brown, when exposed to strong sunlight. Plant: Its size is about 1-5 cm, except for a giant variety ie. Azolla nilotica. Leaf: The leaves are small (1 mm) and overlapping with each leaf consisting of 2 unequal lobes. The large lobe is Page | 118
submerged and severs to keep the plant afloat. The smaller lobe remains above water. Stem: The inconspicuous, branched stem is 1-2 cm long and generally hidden by the overlapping leaves. Nutrient Composition
Rich in proteins, essential amino acids, vitamins (vitamin A, vitamin B12 and Beta- Carotene), growth promoter intermediaries and minerals like calcium, phosphorous, potassium, ferrous, copper, magnesium etc.
On dry weight basis, it contains 25-35 percent protein, 10 - 15 percent minerals and 7-10 percent of amino acids, bio-active substances and bio-polymers are present.
Livestock easily digest it, owing to its high protein and low lignin content. Azolla can be mixed with concentrates or can be given directly to livestock. It can also be fed to poultry, sheep, goats, pigs and rabbits.
Environmental Factors for the Growth Water: Azolla is very sensitive to desiccation, when water depth over soil is few cm, it can grow well adhering on moist soil. Therefore it should be kept in a small pound (5-12 cm water depth) during dry season or nonirrigated period. Wind: It pushes azolla to one side of the plot, accumulating a dense mass, leading often to its death, Strong winds make azolla fragmented, leading to poor growth or death. Temperature: Azolla multiplies at the daily mean temperature of 1530°C, the growth could sharply retard at temperature above 30-33°C or below 10°C. Light: Under nutrient deficient and strong light condition, azolla becomes dark brown, under shade condition or nutrient rich condition remains green. It needs 50% of light for its growth. pH: Azolla prefers slightly acidic media. The optimum pH range for good azolla production is 5.0-6.5. RH: It requires optimum moisture in the atmosphere so for obtaining higher yield, 65-75% RH is necessary. Azolla Production Techniques
The soil in the area is first cleared of weeds and leveled the land. Page | 119
Bricks are lined horizontally in a rectangular fashion.
A UV stabilized silpauline sheet of 2m X 2m size is uniformly spread over the bricks in such a way as to cover the margin of the rectangle made by the bricks.
10-15 kg of sieved soil is uniformly spread over the silpauline pit and Slurry is made of 2 kg cow dung and 30 g of super phosphate mixed in 10 liters of water, is poured onto the sheet. More water is poured on to raise the water level to about 10 cm.
About 0.5-1kg of pure mother azolla culture seed material is spread uniformly over the water, after mild stirring of soil and water in the azolla bed. Fresh water should be sprinkled over the azolla immediately after inoculation to make the azolla plants upright.
In a week’s time, the azolla spreads all over the bed and develops a thick mat like appearance.
A mixture of 20 g of superphosphate and about 1 kg of cow dung should be added once in 5 days in order to maintain a rapid multiplication of the azolla and to yield of 500 g per day.
A micronutrient mix containing magnesium, iron, copper, sulphur etc., can also be added at weekly intervals to enhance the mineral content of azolla
About 5 kg of bed soil should be replaced with fresh soil, once in 30 days, to avoid nitrogen build up and prevent micro-nutrient deficiency. 25 to 30 percent of the water also needs to be replaced with fresh water, once every 10 days, to prevent nitrogen build up in the bed.
The bed should be cleaned, the water and soil replaced for new azolla production.
Harvesting Will grow rapidly and fill the pit within 10-15 days. From then on, 500600 g of azolla can be harvested daily. It can be done every day from the15th day onwards with the help of a plastic sieve or tray with holes at the bottom. The harvested azolla should be washed in fresh water to get rid of the cow dung smell. Summery Most of our farmers are involved in animal husbandry activities; their livelihood mainly depends on agriculture-based activities and fulfilling the Page | 120
demand, training to farmers in fodder production for growing year round green fodder production is important. Fodder based enterprises could be a sustainable option for income generation. Although much of work in livestock farming is practiced by farmer but scientific knowledge is necessary to boost the production, they have very limited awareness about new technologies which can enhance their knowledge, skills, practices and productivity. Improved varieties and fodder production technologies of the leguminous forages are available now, which may be adopted for enhancing fodder production in the region. A greater attention may be paid to produce more leguminous forages from cultivated crops. Enhance fodder seed production. Healthy fodder will lead to healthy livestock and better quality livestock products. References 1.
http://www.igfri.res.in.
2.
http://www.ndri.res.in.
3.
Handbook of Good Dairy Husbandry Practices. https://www.nddb.coop.
4.
M.R. Garg. Improved Green Fodder Production; An important and economic source of macro and micro nutrients for livestock. https://www.nddb.coop.
5.
Rakesh Kumar. Fodder Production Status, constraints and strategies. Biotech Articles. https://www.biotecharticles.com.18, dec, 2016.
6.
Hanamant M Halli, Rathore SS, N Manjunatha and Vinod Kumar Wasnik et al. Advances in Agronomic Management for Ensuring Fodder Security in Semi-Arid Zones of India- A Review. Int. J Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 2018; 7(2):1912-1921.
7.
Mahindra Singh KB, Sridhar Dhiraj Kumar, Dwivedi RP, Inder Dev, Tewari RK, Chaturvedi OP et al. Agroforestry for doubling farmers' income: a proven technology for trans-Gangetic plains zone of India. Indian Farming. 2018; 68(01):33-34.
8.
Sreeram V, Jancy Gupta. Collective fodder cultivation. Indian Farming. 2018; 68(06):13-14.
9.
Ghosh PK, Palsaniya DR, Srinivasan R. Forage Research in India: Issues and Strategies. Agric Res J, 2016; 53(1):1-12.
10. Meena SL, Anchal Dass. Improving Fodder Productivity and Quality for Sustaining Livestock. Indian Farming. 2014; 64(3):15-18.
Page | 121
11. Ghosh PK, Sunil Kumar, Ram SN. Opportunities for forage production from degraded lands. Indian Farming. 2014; 63(11):47-50. 12. Shekhawat SS et al. Successful cultivation of Guinea grass in arid region of Rajasthan. Indian Farming. 2014; 64(8):24-25. 13. Misra AK, Rama Rao CA, Subrahmanyam KV, Vijay Sankar Babu M, Shivarudrappa B, Ramakrishna YS et al. Strategies for livestock development in rainfed agro-ecosystem of India. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 2018; 19(6):1-11. 14. Sharma RK, Pandey N, Singh AP, Maitry RS. Guide for Agricultural Competitive Examinations. 2nd Edition, Daya publishing house, New Delhi, 2016. 15. Sharma RK, Bhoi SK, Pandey N, Shinde S, Pandey VK. Agriculture at a Glance. 2nd Edition. Daya publishing house, New Delhi, 2017. 16. Yakadri M. Practical Manual on Crop Production (Cereals, Millets, Pulses and Fodder). 2nd Edition (1), B.S. Publications, 2009. 17. Srinivasan R, Tripathi SB, Rai AK, Das SK, Rao DVKR, Ghosh PK et al. Strides in Soil Research: Soil health Management and Fodder Production. Director, ICAR-Indian Grassland & Fodder Research Institute Jhansi, 2016, 66-76. 18. Birendra Kumar, Ashisan Tuti. Effect and Adaptation of Climate Change on Fodder and Livestock Mangement. International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology. 2016; 5(3):1638-1645.
Page | 122
Chapter - 6 Organic and Sustainable Strategies to Manage the Soil Fertility
Authors Om Singh Livestock Production and Management Section Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India SA Kochewad Livestock Production and Management Section Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India
Page | 123
Page | 124
Chapter - 6 Organic and Sustainable Strategies to Manage the Soil Fertility Om Singh and SA Kochewad
Abstract Green revolution has significantly increased the food production of country. The over-exploitation of the soil resources has started showing the signs of fatigue in terms of productivity. The factor productivity and rate of response of crops to applied fertilizers under intensive cropping systems have been showing progressive decline year-after-year. The current status of nutrient use efficiency is quite low due to deterioration in physical, chemical and biological health of soils. It has become very important to follow the sustainable approaches to maintain the soil fertility and productivity of fields. The sustainable practices of soil regeneration, along with judicious use of agrochemicals should be followed to maintain the country's productivity. The farmers must take the concern of this alarming situation and follow organic strategies that will help to improve the health of soil. The farmers should be made aware through extension system regarding the soil health status and encourage to practice sustainable organic practices for restoring of soil fertility. Keywords: Cover crop, crop rotation, inter cropping, organic, soil fertility Introduction India is having less than 3 per cent of the global land area. It has 1/5th of total world's livestock population and 16 percent of total human population. The country has recorded the all-time high total food grain production of 272 million tonnes in 2016-17. The increasing intense pressure for food, fodder, feed, fibre and fuel production that the soil has been exploited often exceeding its carrying capacity (Chaudhari, 2016). According to estimates, the demand for food grain is expected to increase from 192 million tonnes in 2000 to 355 million tonnes in 2030. Improving the soil fertility is one of the most important aspect for achieving this target. The practices and methods for conserving and making soil more fertile include, using compost, Page | 125
manures, crop residues, fertilizer trees, intercropping legumes with cereals and including the principles of conservation agriculture such as crop rotation, ensuring permanent cover for the soil and no disturbing of the top soil layer. Soils have to be nourished and cared for and allowed to rest from time to time. Soil micro- and macro-organisms are responsible for the decomposition of organic matter and formation of humus and thus essential for a healthy soil. They play a key role in the recycling of soil nutrients and greatly improve their availability to plants. It is therefore, required to take steps to conserve and increase these useful microorganisms. The use of fertilizers must consider the chemical properties of local soils, the crops planned and the required input. The local environment must be taken into consideration. Farmers should not use ready-made fertilizers that have been designed for other regions. The decision to apply which type of fertilizer should be based on soil testing reports. Status of Soil Health The intensive agriculture with persistent use of conventional tillage and removal or burning of crop residues, soil health has been constantly and consistently degraded; which has been a matter of serious concern for the scientists, environmentalists and the planners at different levels (Chaudhari, 2016). Bhattacharya et al., (2000) reported that the SOC stock of Indian soils at 24.3 Pg. Latest estimates put the current SOC stock at 63 Pg in the 0-150 cm soil depth. Soil degradation is estimated to be severely impacting the 147 million hectares of cultivable land in India, causing a successive deterioration in its productive capacity. Symptoms observed in a plant could be a result of nutrient deficiencies, diseases or pest damage. It is important to examine closely the plant leaves, stem and roots to check for insects or signs of diseases. A nutrient deficiency is suspected when the plant shows, very poor initial growth, stunting in early growth, restricted or abnormal root growth, maturing too early or too late, growth is different from crops growing close by, poor-quality products: appearance, taste, firmness, moisture content and leaf symptoms that may point to deficiencies of specific nutrients. Across the country in several agricultural regions, it has been observed a gap between nutrient demand and supply including decline in organic matter status, deficiencies of micronutrients in soil, soil acidity, salinisation and sodification. The need of the hour is to educate farmers about what they can do to improve the health of their nutrient-depleted soil by following practices such as crop rotation, and using organic manure boosters such as cow dung and dried leaves. ICAR (2010) has reported that out of the total geographical area of 328.73 million hectares, about 120.40 million hectares (37 per cent) was affected by various kinds of land Page | 126
degradation (Figure 1). This includes water and wind erosion (94.87 million hectares), water logging (0.91 million hectares), soil alkalinity/sodicity (3.71 million hectares), soil acidity (17.93 million hectares), soil salinity (2.73 million hectares) and mining and industrial waste (0.26 million hectares) (GOI, 2016).
Fig 1: Forms of land degradation
Source: Indian council of agricultural research (ICAR) ministry of agriculture and farmers welfare Different Organic and Sustainable Strategies to Manage Soil Fertility. 1.
Organic Fertilisers: These are materials obtained from plant and animals such as weed residues, tree prunings, urine, green manure, farmyard manure, crop residues, and others. These are used to fertilise the soil. Also grazing livestock play an important role in nutrient flow to cropland. Farmyard manure is decomposed mixture of dung and urine of farm animals along with litter and left over material from roughages or fodder fed to the cattle. On an average well decomposed farmyard manure contains 0.5 per cent N, 0.2 per cent P2O5 and .0.5 per cent K2O. Urine, which is wasted, contains one per cent nitrogen and 1.35 per cent potassium. Partially rotten farmyard manure has to be applied three to four weeks before sowing while well rotten manure can be applied immediately before sowing. Generally 10 to 20 t/ha is applied, but more than 20 t/ha is applied to fodder grasses and vegetables. In such cases farmyard manure should be applied at least 15 days in advance to avoid immobilization of nitrogen. In general soil management practices include addition of organic matter in large quantities for a healthier soil, increase in on-farm biodiversity, prevention of soil erosion with help of soil mulching and use of green manure (Nicholls 2012). Page | 127
2.
Crop Residues: Crop residues can be an important source of nutrients to subsequent crops. The quantity and quality of crop residues will clearly influence the build-up of soil organic matter and the subsequent availability and timing of release of nutrients to following crops. Cereal straw contains only around 35 kg N ha-1 compared with more than 150 kg N ha-1. Residues also contain variable amounts of lignin and polyphenols, which influence decomposition and mineralization rates. Incorporation of N rich, low C: N ratio residues leads to rapid mineralization and a large rise in soil mineral N, while residues low in N such as cereal straw can lead to net immobilization of N in the short time. Salih et al., (2012) reported that average plant yield was higher in crop residue plots treatments than that found in residue removal plots in wheat - guar crop rotation (227.78%). Also, fertility of soil was consistently higher with crop residue plots compared to crop residue removal.
3.
Green Manuring: This practice helps in the improvement in soil physical conditions as a result of build-up of organic matter with a decrease in bulk density, increase in total pore space, water stable aggregates and hydraulic conductivity of the soil. Dhaincha (Sesbania aculeata) and green gram or mung bean (Vigna radiata) are some of the important leguminous green manuring plants. It improves the soil’s physical and chemical properties. As a practice, the farmers grow dhaincha every alternate year in the fields. For green manuring, the crop is mixed with the soil through a harrow or a cultivator once it is 45–60 days old and reaches a height of 120– 150 cm. A 60-day crop provides 23.2 tonnes of dry matter per ha and accumulates 133 kg of nitrogen per ha. Fast growing leguminous green manures with their adaptability to different rice based cropping pattern and their ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen may offer opportunities to increase and sustain productivity. The organic matter and total soil nitrogen concentrations were found to be higher under green manuring treated plots than summer fallow. The magnitude of reduction in bulk density due to green manuring over fallow was 0.03–0.07 Mg m−3 in 0–15 cm soil layer and 0.05– 0.09 Mg m−3 in 15–30 cm soil layer during the growth of rice and wheat. Green manuring improved the soil physical environments as was evident from higher values of mean weight diameter and saturated hydraulic conductivity than fallow (Mandal et al., 2003). Adekiya et al., (2018) compared the impact of different green manures and NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer on soil properties, growth, Page | 128
yield, mineral and vitamin C composition of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench). The experiment each year consisted of four green manure (GM) types {Pawpaw (Carica papaya L.) leaves, Neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss.) leaves, Moringa (Moringa oleifera Lam.) leaves, and Mesquite (Prosopis Africana Guill., Perr. & A. Rich) Taubert leaves}, NPK 15-15-15 fertilizer and a control. Application of GMs reduced soil bulk density and increased soil organic matter (OM), N, P, K, Ca, Mg, growth and yield of okra compared with the control. NPK fertilizer did not reduce soil bulk density and increase soil OM, but did increase soil N, P, K, Ca, Mg, growth and yield of okra compared with the control. Mesquite increased growth and yield of okra compared with NPK fertilizer and other GMs. This was due to increased availability of N and K in the soil at the level of this treatment. Compared with the control and NPK fertilizer, Mesquite increased pod yield of okra by 214 and 53%, respectively. Also GMs and NPK fertilizer increased okra mineral and vitamin C contents compared with the control. Moringa had the best fruit quality in terms of higher K, Ca, Fe, Zn, Cu, and vitamin C contents compared with other GMs and NPK fertilizer. 4.
Vermicompost: Vermicomposting is the use of earthworms to transform organic materials into rich, organic fertilisers. They accelerate the composting process and the addition of this compost to the soil, results in improved chemical, biological and physical properties and better conditions for plant growth. Azarmi et al., (2008) reported that addition of vermicompost at rate of 15 t ha-1 significantly (P< 0.05) increased contents of soil total organic carbon, total N, P, K, Ca, Zn and Mn substantially compared with control plots. The soils treated with vermicompost had significantly more EC. The addition of vermicompost in soil resulted in decrease of soil pH. The physical properties such as bulk density and total porosity in soil applied with vermicompost were improved.
5.
Crop Rotation: Crop rotation is a practice of cultivating of leguminous and non-leguminous crops for nutrient supply in the soil. It is also used to minimise the spread of weeds, pests and diseases. The planned rotation may vary from 2 or 3 year or longer period. Crop rotation is a key principle of conservation agriculture because it improves the soil structure and fertility, and because it helps control weeds, pests and diseases. Crop rotation increases Page | 129
organic matter, nitrogen supply and improves soil structure, especially deep-rooted legumes or crops capable of feeding themselves efficiently at various soil depths. Deep-rooted crops increase the permeability of soil at lower depths to air and water. Crop rotation is effective in controlling run-off, soil erosion and efficient use of fertilizers. Rice-wheat system contributes major share towards food security of India. Resource conservation in ricewheat system has the potential to address some of the emerging ill effects of nutrient mining, poor input use efficiency, and pest pressure and yield stagnation (Singh et al., 2015). 6.
Intercropping: Intercropping is the growing of two or more crops together in proximity on the same land. As a result, two or more crops are managed at the same time. Intercrops are useful because they supply either food or additional income, especially at times when the crop cannot yet be harvested; they may fix N and supply other nutrients to the topsoil; they may protect the soil from the direct impact of rainfall when the canopy is not yet closed, thus reducing soil erosion; and they may reduce weed growth during the early stages of cassava development. However, intercrops need to be carefully managed in order to reduce the competition with main crop, for light, water and nutrients. Wang et al., (2014) conducted experiment on intercropping of maize/faba bean, maize/soybean, maize/chickpea and maize/turnip intercropping, and their corresponding mono-cropping. Both grain yields and nutrient acquisition were significantly greater in all four intercropping systems than corresponding mono-cropping over two years. Generally, soil organic matter (OM) did not differ significantly from mono-cropping but did increase in maize/chickpea and maize/turnip in both years. Soil total N (TN) did not differ between intercropping and mono-cropping in either year with the sole exception of maize/faba bean intercropping receiving 80 kg P ha−1 in 2011. Intercropping significantly reduced soil Olsen-P, soil exchangeable K in both years, soil cation exchangeable capacity (CEC). And soil pH. In the majority of cases soil enzyme activities did not differ across all the cropping systems at different P application rates compared to mono-crops, with the exception of soil acid phosphatase activity which was higher in maize/legume intercropping than in the corresponding mono-crops at 40 kg ha−1 P. P fertilization can alleviate the decline in soil Olsen-P and in soil CEC to some extent. Page | 130
7.
Alley Cropping: Growing crops between hedgerows of leguminous tree species is called “alley cropping”, and is another alternative to improve soil fertility and reduce soil erosion. The space between hedgerows can be varied, but is usually around 4-5 meters, so that less than 20% of the total land area is occupied by the hedgerows. The hedgerows are pruned before and at regular intervals after planting the crop and the prunings are distributed among crop plants to serve as a mulch, to supply nutrients (especially N), and to control weeds and erosion. Ferdush et al., (2018) conducted experiment to investigate the effect of pruned materials of two hedgerow species on wheat production and soil nutrient changes at different nitrogen levels with two multipurpose tree species (MPTS) namely Gliricidia sepium and Leucaena leucocephala and five different doses of nitrogen (0, 25, 50, 75 and 100% of recommended dose). Alley widths of both tree species were 6.0 meter. There were also control plots where full dose of recommended nitrogen was applied but no pruned material (PM) was incorporated. The grain yield of wheat varied significantly by the mean effect of two tree species. The grain yield was statistically similar to Gliricidia sepium (3.63 t ha-1) and Leucaena leucocephala (3.31 t ha-1). Interaction of effect tree species and N dose on grain yield was significant. The highest grain yield was found in N100×GS combination (3.93 t ha-1) which was statistically similar to N25×GS, N50×GS, N75×GS, N25×LL, N50×LL, N75×LL and N100×LL combinations. The lowest yield was found in N25×C (2.27 t ha-1) and N75×C (2.47 t ha-1).
8.
Cover crops: Cover crops are usually perennial forage legumes that are planted to fix N and recycle soil nutrients in order to improve soil fertility, and to prevent serious soil erosion on sloping land. Annual crops may be planted in individual planting holes or in strips where the cover crop has been incorporated or killed with herbicides. Plantation of biomass on field bunds and wastelands becomes significant in enriching soil-health and optimum crop production. Such interventions being low-external-input are also environmentally safe and economically viable. Trees around a small farm serve a variety of purposes. In fact a single species of tree has manifold benefits ranging from food security to better soil health. Production of biomass from an acre yielding 8 tons contains approximately 60-72 kg of nitrogen that can be sufficient per acre crop for boosting the yield. Glyricidia/Cassia siamea (200 per Page | 131
acre) planted on bunds yielded biomass of 30 kgs/plant/ year from fifth year after planting. Neem trees on wastelands gives 300 kgs per tree per year. Nzokou et al., (2014) investigated the effect of three ground covers Alfafa (Medicago sativa), Dutch white clover (Trifolium repens) and perennial rye (Lolium perenne) on the sustainability of Fraser fir Christmas tree production system. The results indicated that cover crop species affected the amount of green manure produced and its total nitrogen and macronutrients content. Soil organic matter content was stable in the upper soil profile due to the relatively small quantities of organic matter added with the cropping system compared with the total stock of soil C. Mineral nitrogen decreased over the season due to the synchrony of cover crop decomposition, mineralization and nutrient uptake by trees in the upper profile. These results indicate that intercropping cover crops can improve soil nitrogen fertility and organic matter; however, there is strong competition for other nutrients that need to be carefully considered. 9.
Practice No-Tillage/Strip-Tillage: Reducing tillage practices minimizes disruptions to soil aggregates by not breaking them up continuously and forcing the system to restart. Less tillage practices maintains natural aggregates, one of the key components of soil health, and helps prevent loose soil particles from washing or blowing away easily. The fewer soil aggregates are broken up with less intensive tillage, so less organic matter is exposed to decomposition. Reduced tillage can make soil temperatures slightly cooler. Lower temperatures help organic matter accumulate, because the residue is not broken down as quickly. Reducing tillage can increase soil organism diversity and activity, another one of the key components of soil health. Minimum tillage does not disrupt earthworm burrowing and helps protect the network created by fungi that connects them to their host plant. Leaving residue on the soil surface also acts as a barrier against raindrops and wind that could cause erosion. Tan et al., (2015) reported that in long term experiment with traditional tillage (CK), no tillage (NT), straw mulching (SM), plastic-film mulching (PM), ridging and plasticfilm mulching (RPM) and intercropping (In)., found that the available nutrients in soils subjected to non-traditional tillage treatments decreased during the first several years and then remained stable over the last several years of the experiment. The soil organic matter and total nitrogen content increased gradually Page | 132
over 6 years in all treatments except CK. The nutrient content of soils subjected to conservative tillage methods, such as NT and SM, were significantly higher than those in soils under the CK treatment. Straw mulching and film mulching effectively reduced an observed decrease in soybean yield. Over the final 6 years of the experiment, soybean yields followed the trend RPM > M > SM > NT > CK > In. 10. Legume Integrated Soil Fertility Management: An integrated soil fertility management aims at maximizing the efficiency of the agronomic use of nutrients and improving crop productivity. This can be achieved through the use of grain legumes, which enhance soil fertility through biological nitrogen fixation, and the application of organic manure. Whether grown as pulses for grain, as green manure, as pastures or as the tree components of agro-forestry systems, a key value of leguminous crops lies in their ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen, which helps reduce the use of commercial nitrogen fertilizer and enhances soil fertility. Nitrogen-fixing legumes are the basis for sustainable farming systems that incorporate integrated nutrient management. Soil fertility can be further improved by incorporating cover crops that add organic matter to the soil, which leads to improved soil structure and promotes a healthy, fertile soil; by using green manure or growing legumes to fix nitrogen from the air through the process of biological nitrogen fixation; by micro-dose fertilizer applications, to replenish losses through plant uptake and other processes; and by minimizing losses through leaching below the crop rooting zone by improved water and nutrient application. References 1.
Azarmi R, Mousa TG, Rahim DT. Influence of vermicompost on soil chemical and physical properties in tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum) field. African Journal of Biotechnology. 2008; 7:2397-2401.
2.
Bhattacharyya T, Pal DK, Mandal C, Velayutham M. Organic carbon stocks in Indian soils and their geographical distribution. Current Science. 2000; 79:655-660.
3.
Chaudhari SK. Soil Health in India: Retrospective and Perspective. Bulletin of the Indian Society of Soil Science. 2016; 30:34-52.
4.
Ferdush Jannatul, Md. Meftahul Karim, Raihan Mujib Himel, Sataya Ranjan Saha, Tofayel Ahamed. Impact of Alley Cropping on Wheat Productivity. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science. 2018; 11:17-25. Page | 133
5.
GOI. State of Indian Agriculture 2015-16. Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare Department of Agriculture, Cooperation & Farmers Welfare Directorate of Economics and Statistics New Delhi, 2016, 42p.
6.
Mandal UK, Singh G, Victor US, Sharma KL. Green manuring: its effect on soil properties and crop growth under rice–wheat cropping system. European Journal of Agronomy volume. 2003; 19:2225-237.
7.
Nicholls C, Altieri M. Agro-ecological approaches to enhance resilience. Low External Input Sustainable Agriculture (LEISA) India, 2012.
8.
Salih NOH, Mubarak AR, Hassabo AA. Effect of crop residues on soil fertility and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum) - guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba) crops in dry tropics. International Journal of Scientific& Engineering Research. 2012; 3:2229-5518.
9.
Singh R, Tripathi RS, Sharma DK, Chaudhari SK, Josh PK, Dey P et al. Effect of direct seeded rice on yield, water productivity and saving of farm energy in reclaimed sodic soil. Indian Journal of Soil Conservation. 2015; 43:230-235.
10. Tan C, Cao X, Yuan S, Wang W, Feng Y, Qiao B. Effects of long-term conservation tillage on soil nutrients in sloping fields in regions characterized by water and wind erosion. Sci, 2015. Rep., 5:17592, 10.1038/srep17592 11. Wang ZG, Jin X, Bao XG, Li XF, Zhao JH, Sun JH et al. Intercropping Enhances Productivity and Maintains the Most Soil Fertility Properties Relative to Sole Cropping. PLoS ONE. 2014; 9(12), e113984. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113984
Page | 134
Chapter - 7 Soil Fertility and Soil Health Card
Authors Om Singh Sr. Scientist (Agronomy), 2. Scientist, Livestock production Management, IVRI, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India S.A. Kochewad Sr. Scientist (Agronomy), 2. Scientist, Livestock production Management, IVRI, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh, India
Page | 135
Page | 136
Chapter - 7 Soil Fertility and Soil Health Card Om Singh and S.A. Kochewad
Abstract Proper nutrition is essential for satisfactory crop growth and production and use of soil tests can help to determine the status of plant available nutrients to develop fertilizer recommendations to achieve optimum crop production. The profit potential for farmers depends on producing enough crop per acre to keep productino costs below the selling price. Efficient application of the correct types and amounts of fertilizers and manure for the supply of the nutrients is an important part of achieving profitable yields and minimizing environmental impacts. Keywords: Soil, health, nutrition, fertility Introduction Soil testing is an effective process to maintain ssutainable soil health. The main reason of decreasing soil health is intensive cropping pattern & continuous use of imbalance fertilization. Due to this the quality & productivity of the crops adversely affected. Regular insufficiency of plant nutrients in soil crates so many problems in farmers field. Fertilizers recommendations for different crops based on the available plant nutrients in the soil resulting better yeild. Soil fertility depends upon the fertilizer use on soil test basis (including pH & EC). Soil analysis is a valuable tool for farm as it determines the input required for efficient and economic production. A proper soil test will help to ensure the application of enough fertilizer to meet the requirements of the crop while taking advantage of the nutrients already present in the soil (Dominy CS et.al.2002). It is very important that your sampling technique is correct as the results are only as goog as the sample you take. Proper soil sampling will provide accurate soil test results and reliable nutrient recommendations. Soils are alive. A variety of soil organisms live in the soil. These include bacteria, fungi, microarthropods, nematodes, earthworms and insects. Soil chemistry is concerned with the availability of elements for plant uptake as well as the presence in soil of elements. Physical properties and processes of Page | 137
soil affect soil fertility by altering water movement through soil, root penetration of soil and waterlogging. What is Soil: “Soil is a dynamic natural body on the surface of the earth in which plants grow, composed of minerals, organic materials & living forms”. Buckman & Brady. Soil is the mixture of minerals, organic matter, gases, liquids and countless of micro-organisms that together support life on Earth. Soil is a wonderful gift of nature which man started utilizing for agriculture since last more than 10,000 years. Soil Biological Fertility: These organisms live on soil organic matter or other soil organisms and perform a number of vital processes in soil. Other organisms are involved in transformation of inorganic molecules (Insam H et al. 2002). Very few soil organisms are pests. The role of soil organisms in soil fertility may involve the following:
helping soil to form from original parent rock material,
contributing to the aggregation of soil particles,
enhancing cycling of nutrients,
transforming nutrients from one form to another,
assisting plants to obtain nutrients from soil,
degrading toxic substances in soil,
causing disease in plants,
minimizing disease in plants,
Assisting or hindering water penetration into soil.
Soil Physical Fertility: Important physical properties that affect fertility include soil structure and texture. Structure is the amount of aggregation and pores in soil and texture is the proportion of clay and sand particles in soil. Both and texture is the proportion of clay and sand particles in soil. Both affect soil fertility by affecting water movement through soil, root penetration and water logging. Erosion is an important physical process that decreases soil fertility. When soil structure and texture are unfavourable for water movement through soil water erosion and water logging may be increased. Soil salinity is a chemical property but can effect soil physical fertility by decreasing the movement of water through the soil. Physical soil characteristics important to soil physical fertility include:
Soil structure
Soil texture
Water repellence Page | 138
Physical process related to soil physical fertility include:
aggregation,
water,
infiltration,
water logging,
Soil erosion.
Soil texture is an approximation of the relative quantities of sand, silt and clay particles in a soil. Soil structure is a measure of the arrangement of these soil particles and the spaces between them. Soil structure is somewhat dependent on soil texture. Good soil structure is one of the major factors for soil health and therefore, sustainable soil fertility. Good soil structure is present when the soil forms stable aggregates or cohesive groups of particles. This produces numerous pore spaces, which encourage root penetration and easy passage of water, nutrients and air and which also assist the growth of microorganisms. There are two main types of structureless or non-structured soil: Single grain-like sands, and Massive-like compacted clays There are four main types of soil structure: 1.
Crumb Structure - which has small rounded aggregates of soil particles loosely adjoining other aggregates. The soil is therefore porous and permeable, yet retains moisture. It is the most ideal soil structure.
2.
Prismatic structure – which forms aggregates in columns with flat tops and separated by deep cracks. Aggregates usually form larger units called clods. Permeability is variable better around the deep cracks and poorer inside columns.
3.
Blocky structure- aggregates are blocky and soil is moderately permeable.
4.
Platey structure-flat horizontal laminated aggregates like alluvial floodplain soil. Drainage and permeability are poor.
Soil texture is not easily changed whereas soil structure can degrade or improve very quickly through various agricultural practices. The tendency of the soil structure to become unstable is related to soil type, texture (finer texture-higher tendency), water content and soil chemistry. Some soil Page | 139
chemistry factors that adversely affect soil structure include soil sodicity, acidity and salinity. The decline of soil structure will exacerabate the decline in soil health and fertility. Soil pores become smaller or less numerous which restricts water, air and nutrient movement. Therefore porosity, drainage and plant root growth are reduced (Abbott LK, Murphy MV, 2003). This can lead to an increase in either soil density or structural instability or both, especially in clayey soils. Sometimes a surface crust may form, inhibiting seeding growth, preventing water penetration and increasing erosion. The good news is that all these changes are reversible. The actions required to improve soil structure depend on the individual soil conditions including stability of the soil structure. There are various options to improve soil structure, including some physical and chemical techniques such as: 1.
Maintaining continued plant cover on land by using appropriate stocking rates.
2.
Using cultivating discs to elevate dispersive subsoils to the surface.
3.
Deep ripping of compacted soils or layers.
4.
Using minimum tillage practices especially when soil is wet,
5.
Retaining stubble and green manuring to increase organic content and reduce compaction and erosion.
6.
Applying gypsum on sodic soils.
Soil Chemical Fertility: Chemical compounds that might be present at levels that are detrimental to plants and soil organisms. Some elements in the soil are nutrients and are essential for plant growth. Other elements are not essential and may be toxic to plants. The availability of elements for plant uptake is affected by soil pH and reactions of the elements with soil practices and organic matter. Soil chemical fertility is affected by:
Composition and parent material of the soil,
Soil pH
element adsorption to clay surfaces and organic matter,
soil salinity
Plant Elements: For proper growth & development of plants, 16 nutrients are required in optimum level in the soil. Carbon, Hydrogen & Oxygen are non- fertiliser nutrients available to plants through air & water. Six Macro nutrients are N, P & K required in large quantity by plants through soil hence called the Primary nutrients and secondary plant nutrients are Calcium, Magnesium & Sulphur which are required comparatively in Page | 140
lesser but play an important role in plant growth and development, Copper, Manganese, Iron, Zinc, Molybdenum, Chlorine & Boron are required in very less quantity hence called micro-nutrients. Category Non-fertilizer Nutrients Macro-Primary Macro-Secondary Micro-Nutrients
Plant Nutrients C, H & O N, P & K Ca, Mg & S Zn, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, B & Cl
Function of Plant Nutrients Nitrogen: Part of chlorophyll & other proteins, gives dark green colour to stem & leaves, growth. Phosphorus: Essential for growth cell division, roots, seeds & fruits development & early ripening & part of several compounds including oils & amino-acids. Potassium: Involved in the working of enzymes, production & movement of food material, water economy, resistance to insects & pests, diseases, frost & drought. Sulphur: Part of amino-acids & essential for protein production, chlorophyll formation, enzymes activation, vitamins formation, increase oil contents in oilseeds & onion pungency. Calcium: Part of cell balls & membrances, involved in cell division, growth, root lengthening & activation of inhibition of enzymes. Magnesium: Important part of chlorophyll which is vital for photosynthesis, activation of enzyems, production of proteins & metabolism of carbohydrates, energy transfer etc. Zinc: Required by several enzymes, auxins, protein synthesis, seed production & crop maturity. Copper: Chlorophyll formation & part of enzymes, lignin formation, protein & carbohydrate metabolism. Iron: Making of chlorophyll, carbohydrates production, respiration, reduction of nitrate & sulphate in nitrogen assimilation. Manganese: Actives enzymes, essential for hydrolysis during photosynthesis, important in nitrogen metabolism & Carbon dioxide uses for photosynthesis.
Page | 141
Molybdenum: Essential part of nitrate reeducates enzyme involved in root nodules of legumes for biological nitrogen fixation, protein synthesis. Boron: Key roles are membrane stability & cell ball development, cell division, seed & fruit setting. Chlorine: Production of oxygen during photosynthesis, raising cell osmotic pressure & maintain tissue hydration. Assesment of Soil Health: Measuring the level of Macro and Micro plant nutrients in the soil & to determine the relative ability of soil to supply crop nutrients in a particular growing season. Measuring salinity, acidity and alkalinity of the soil. For proper management & application of plant nutrients through manures & fertilizers. Optimization & application of lime & gypsum for soil reclamation. To lay-out the specific zones on fertility status for particular crop cultivation. Recommendation of crop varities susceptible to salinity, acidity & alkalinity of the soil by applying proper crop rotation. How Soil Sampling: One month before seed sowing or transplanting is the right time of taking soil sample. Problem soil areas may be sampled anytime. Soil sampling has become an important tool for assessing soil fertility. The main problem in the effective use of soil testing is obtaining proper representative soil sample. Proper soil sampling will provide accurate soil test results and reliable nutrient recommendations for a particular crop (Smith J. et al., 2008). Collecting Sample: Sample must truly represent the field it belongs to. A field of one acre area generally treated as a single sampling unit. Larger area may be divided into smaller homogeneous units for best representation of the soil. Areas near trees, wells, compost pit, recently fertilized plots, bunds, irrigation channels etc. must be carefully avoided during sampling. An area of about 2-3 meters along all the sides of the field should be left. Sample should be drawn from 0-15 cm. i.e. plough layer of furrow slice in case of cereals, vegetables and other seasonal crops & take the sample from 8-10 celaned marked spots of entire field. Samples should be collected from different depths in case of deep rooted & longer duration crops like sugarcane or under dry-farming conditions. In case of garden of fruit or other trees, composite sample from 0-30, 30-60 and 60-90 cm depth should be made from 4-5 pits dug in one acre field. Collect a small portion of soil up to the desires depth side by means of suitable sampling tools (Khurpi, Kassi or Phawda, Screw/Tube/Post hole Auger) from well-marked 8-10 spots, moving in to zigzag manner from each individual samplnig site in the entire Page | 142
field. Fields having standing crops in row, draw the soil sample in between the rows (Robertson FA, Thornborn PJ, 2007). Mixing of Samples: Collected soil from all the spots with in one field may be mixed uniformly & throughly by hands on clean floor or plain sheet under the shed. Reduce the bulk sample soil to about 250-500 gm. by quartering process. Spread the entire clean bulk sample soil, divide it it to four quarters, discard two opposite ones & remix the remaining two, repeat this process until soil is left about 250gm. & dry it properly in the shade. It may be the representative soil sample of the particular field. Transfer minimum 150 gm sample in to clean small polythene bag. Fill all required information in Soil Sample Identification slip and place it in another polythene bag to avoid spreading of ink/missing information and again put it in soil sample bag for testing. Soil Analysis pH: For measuring acidity, alkalinity, availability of plant nutrients, physical structure & activity of micro-organism to decide the recommendations of different crops for cultivation. Classification of Soils, Availability of Plant Nutrients & Crop Recommendations Classifications Acidic (8.0pH) Neutral (7.0pH)
Availability of Plant Nutrients Low High Nitrogen, Zinc, Copper, Phosphorus, Sulphur, Manganese, Iron, Calcium, Magnesium Potassium, Boron Nitrogen, Potassium, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Copper, Calcium, Zinc, Manganese, Magnesium, Iron, Boron Molybdenum Available all plant nutrients
Saline-alkaline Scarcity of Plant Nutrients availability
Recommended Crops Paddy, Wheat, Maize, Potato, Sugarcane, Tea, Tomato, Banana, Onion Paddy, Wheat, Sorghum, Bajra, Potato, Barley, Mustard, Linseed All crops Paddy, wheat, Barley, Bajra, Mustard
Electric Conductivity (Soluble Salts): For measuring the available soluble salts level in soil. On the basis of test level, green, saline resistant & semisaline resistant crop varieties are recommended. Electric Conductivity Salinity of Soil Recommended Crops for cultivation (1:2 mlmhos/cm at 250C) 3.0
Highly Saline
Paddy, Wheat, Barley, Cotton, Mustard, Carrot, Spinach, Sugar beet etc. Harmful to all crops cultivation
Primary Elements Analysis: N-Test on the basis of quickly oxidize organic carbon find out the available N in the soil sample and recommend the fertilizers dose accordingly for different crops. P-test on the basis of available phosphorous in the soil & recommendation of phosphatic fertilizers dose accordingly. K-Test on the basis of available potassium in the soil & recommedation of potassic fertilizer dose accordingly in crops. Range of Available Plants Nutrients in Soil Available Nutrient
Low
Medium
High
Organic Carbon (%)
0.75
Nitrogen (N) (Kg/Acre)
200
Phosphorus (P)(Kg/acre)
11.0
Potash(K) (Kg/acre)
136
Secondary Elements Analysis: Ca, Mg & S- Test on the available Ca, Mg and S in soil & dose recommendation of Ca, Mg and S fertilizers accordingly to the crop application. Secondary Nutrients Testing: Micro-nutrients are equally important & plays a significant role in qualitative crop production, better plant growth & maintain hormones level in crop for natural development. Range of Available Secondary Nutrients in Soil Nutrient (PPM) Sulphur (S) Zinc (Zn) Iron (Fe) Manganese (Mn) Boron (B) Molybdenum(Mo) Deficiency ** Sufficiency
Low* 0.2
Celebration for Soil Health On 5th December, 2015: The year 2015 has been declared by the United Nations as the “International Year of the Soils. Message of the Hon’ble Prime Mininster: “The year 2015 is being celebrated as “International Year of Soil” and 5th December is ‘World Soil Day’. India joins the world in celebrating the importance of soil and its role in the overall development and the welfare of our country. Our Government Page | 144
has launched a comprehensive Soil Health Card Scheme, which aims at collecting soil samples and testing them in laboratories to generate Soil Health Cards for every farmer in the country. On this occassion, I urge all farmer friends to take advantage of this scheme, get their soil tested, and follow the recommendations they receive through the Soil Health Card.” Soil Health Card Soil Test Reports and Recommendations
Status of Soil Health Card scheme as on 09.12.2015 S. No.
State
I. 1 2I 3 4 5 II. 6 7 8 9 10 11 III. 12 13 14 15 16
South Zone Andhra Pr Karnataka Kerala Tamil Nadu Telangana West Zone Gujarat Madhya Pr Maharashtra Rajasthan Chhattlsgarh Goa North Zone Haryana Punjab Uttarakhand Uttar Pr Himachal Pr
Target No of Samples 2015-16
No. of No. of SHCs No. of Samples Samples Issued Till Tested Collected 09.12.2015
400000 533000 63800 426000 684000
401782 0 20000 364576 324561
401610 10 9000 239366 238245
1274518 3700 12064 980892 242000
1366000. 805000 911000 904000 292588 26000
1208000 421000 800000 530000 92000 13993
1091000 275000 370000 190000 62000 210
800000 275000 1522000 225000 59248 0
400000 176000 67601 1800000 69635
223509 152345 ,28562 468327 50522
19064 66674 21433 22894 26377
20000 64897 72322 66736 18994 Page | 145
17 IV. 18 19 20 21 V. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
J&K 55106 East Zone Bihar 448000. Jharkhand 47850 Odisha 310000 West Bengal 310000 Ne Zone Arunachal Pr 9000 Assam 180000 Manipur 11000 Meghalaya 22000 Mizoram 9671 Nagaland 11141 Sikkim 13000 Tripura 10912 Total 1,02,61,310
16431
8995
8586
234931 22730 97122 96240
95709 5747 75814 32000
660000 9844 222436 10500
0 16847 3000 I 19432 2000 9400 65000 8388 56,90,698
0 3756 0 10589 2000 8400 66000 6391 33,47,174
0 413 0 15668 5470 0 6950 65,77,238
References 1.
Abbott LK, Murphy MV. Soil biological fertility: A key to sustainable land use in agriculture. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 2003, 264.
2.
Dominy CS, Haynes RJ, Van Antwerpen R. Loss of soil organic matter and related soil properties under long-term sugarcane production on two contrasting soils. Biology and Fertility of Soils. 2002; 36:350-356.
3.
Insam H, Riddech N, Klamme S. Microbiology of composting. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002, 632.
4.
Robertson FA, Thorburn PJ, Decomposition of sugarcane harvest residue in different climatic zones. Australlian Journal of Soil Research. 2007; 45:13-23.
5.
Smith J, Potts S, Eggleton P. Evaluating the efficiency of sampling methods in assessing soil macrofauna communities in arable systems. European Journal of Soil biology. 2008; 44:271-276.
Page | 146
Chapter - 8 Weed Science and Weed Management Systems
Author Mutum Lamnganbi Assistant professor, Dr. K.N. Modi University, Newai, Tonk, Rajasthan, India
Page | 147
Page | 148
Chapter - 8 Weed Science and Weed Management Systems Mutum Lamnganbi
Abstract Weeds are the unwanted plants grown in the places where they are not desired. Even a crop can be weed according to the time and place they are growing. They had been creating a menace in our surrounding. It has spread in our cultivated areas hampering the normal growth of the crops. Because of the competition of weeds with the crops for their survival there was insufficient nutrient availability for the crop. A proper management is what we should follow though not a complete control. For better management, understanding of the weed characteristics or their classifications is essential. Knowledge of herbicides in relation to their properties and reactions they show is essential to take prerequisite steps to avoid default in the application. Such management of weed infestation by using herbicides (chemicals) is the chemical method. There are also other different types of management practices like the preventive method, cultural method, physical method, biological method. Keywords: weeds, competition, management, control, chemical method, preventive method, cultural method, physical method, biological method. Introduction According to the modern definition of agricultural science, it is simply the method of providing favourable environment to crop production. And the environment indicates an aggregate of all external conditions comprising of both biotic and abiotic components which are constantly under the physical, chemical and biological processes. The biotic component includes all living entities while abiotic consists of weather parameters and physical soil conditions. There are mainly five categories of agricultural pest viz, insect pests (including mites, ticks and spiders), plant pathogens (fungi, bacteria, viruses, nematodes, mycoplasma, MLOs etc.), weeds, vertebrate pests (birds, rats and rodents and a variety of ruminants) and molluscs (snails and slugs). This chapter will deal with one of the categories ‘weeds’ in brief. Page | 149
Weeds have been accompanying the crop production ever since we began growing crops. They are the most underestimated crop pests in tropical agriculture although they cause higher loss in the yields of crops than other pests and diseases. Of the annual loss of agricultural produce from various pests in India, weeds roughly account for 45%, insects for 30%, diseases for 20% and other pests for 5%. Yaduraju (2006) reported that weeds roughly account for 37%. India loses farm produce worth $11b to weeds every year according to a study by researchers associated with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. At $4.42 billion, the actual economic losses due to weeds were found to be highest in rice, followed by wheat ($3.376 billion) and soybean ($1.56 billion). However, the average yield loss is the lowest in rice -14 percent in transplanted rice and 21 per cent in direct-seeded condition. The researchers, from the Jabalpur-based Directorate of Weed Research (DWR), estimated the economic losses using data generated by an All India Co-Ordinated Research Project on Weed Management, which carried out 1,580 on-farm research trials on 10 major crops at different locations in 18 states over a decade. The crop under trial includes rice, wheat, soybean, maize, groundnut, sorghum, greengram, mustard, sesame, pearlmillet. Proper weed management could bring down such yield losses substantially and also judicious use of herbicides can cost farmers just onethird of what they spend on manual weeding. One major drawback that limited the introduction of weed control measures is the agricultural policy that discourages the introduction of improved weed control practices in any developing country on the grounds that such an introduction will lead to unemployment condemning the future generations of that country to a lifestyle that is both degrading and dehumanizing. 1.1 Concepts and Definitions of Weeds Weeds are plants easily adapted to disturbed habitat. And so weeds came from i) wild species long adapted to sites of natural disturbances, or ii) new species or varieties that evolved since agriculture was developed. Natural hybridization is more common among weeds than among other plants. Therefore, natural hybridization at inter- and intra- specific levels and several other processes like Back-crossing, infiltration of genes and natural selection might have been responsible for evolution of more rigorous weeds. The oxford English dictionary (1973:cited in Zimdahl, 1999) defines a weed as “ a herbaceous plant not valued for use or beauty, growing wild and rank, and regarded as cumbering the ground or hindering the growth of superior vegetation.’’ The word ‘weed’ seems to have originated from the Page | 150
earlier forms of German words “weyt,” the dutch words “weet’ and “weed” and the Belgian word “ weedt” (King, 1974).Jethro Tull (1731) was the first to use the presently used word “weed” in his book “ Horse- Hoeing Husbandry.” Weeds are undesirable and unwanted plant that interfere with utilization of land and water resources and thus adversely affect crop production and human welfare. Weds compete with crops for water, soil nutrients, light and space (i.e.co2) and thus reduce crop yields. Sometimes, agriculture is also defined as a battle with weeds as they strongly compete with crop plants for growth factors. 1.2 Characteristics of Weeds 1.2.1 Dormancy, viability and germination: dormancy is a state in which viable seeds, spores or buds fail to germinate under conditions favourable for germination and vegetative growth. It is one of the most important functions of most seeds which allows time for dispersal and prevents germination of all the seeds at the same time. Factors that cause seed dormancy includes genetical factor/cause (physiological, embryo dormancy, undeveloped cotyledon and immature embryo); coat imposed dormancy: embryo factor and inhibitor factor. Dormancy may be of three types viz, induced dormancy, enforced dormancy and innate dormancy. Induced dormancy/secondary dormancy: It develops in the seeds after they are removed from the mother plant and subjected to adverse environmental condition. Different seeds within a species can have different level of induced dormancy. Examples: Papaver spp., Chenopodium album, Avena fatua etc. induced dormancy can be removed by methods such as chilling, illumination, gibberellins and storage at 20⁰C. Enforced dormancy is an inability to germinate due to an environmental restraint: shortage of water, low temperature, poor aeration, etc. It usually occurs when the seeds are not able to germinate because of placement of the seeds at greater depth. Tillage can break enforced dormancy by bringing up the seeds to the upper soil layer. For example, Avena fatua (wild oat), Innate dormancy is the condition of seeds as they leave parent plant and is a viable state but prevented from germinating when exposed to warm, moist aerated conditions by some property of embryo or the associated endosperm or maternal structure. For example: Heracleum spondylium; Avena spp. Spergula arvensis, Nicandra physaloides. Page | 151
1.2.2 Growth Habits Weeds usually have great plasticity / flexibility in their growth pattern over fluctuating environments. They compete inter-specifically by special means, e.g. by rosette formation, choking growth, climbing/ twinning habit, releasing allelochemicals and different vegetative structures lying deep in the soil. Therefore, many weeds have high ecological amplitude (ranges of tolerance) and continue to grow under adverse climatic and edaphic conditions where most of the tame crop plants fail. 1.2.3 Reproduction/ Multiplication Weeds have early and rapid seed setting than most crops and short period of maturity through quick transition from vegetative to flowering stage. For example, Avena fatua/ ludoviciana, Phalaris minor which are normally considered having more or less similar maturity as that of wheat and barley start setting seeds often prior to or simultaneously with those crops, but shed 80-90% seeds before wheat and barley are harvested. Most weeds are prolific breeders and seeders. They set seeds in wide range of environments and have very high seeds out-put (both dormant and nondormant seeds) in favourable environment. They are mostly angiosperms and mesophytes and have sexual, asexual and vegetative reproduction. 1.2.4 Persistence and Tolerance Weeds are highly persistent in nature and hardy enough to tolerate adverse climate, edaphic, insect pest or disease situations. Persistence/ continuance/ consistent appearance is an attribute of weeds gifted by nature by which they appear repeatedly in an environment even though frequently weeded out by humans (through control measures adopted in every crop). While hardiness is different from persistence, it refers to in-born / inherent ability of weeds to withstand adverse climatic, edaphic and various biotic conditions. Day and Russell (1995) observed that drying killed Cyperus rotundus tubers, whereas Cyperus esculentus tubers had drought-resistence ability and were hardly killed. 1.2.5 Seed Dissemination/Dispersal Weeds have both short and long distance seed dispersal adaptations and mechanisms. Their seeds/fruits being tiny, light, spiny and/or feathery are blown, flown or carried away by wind, water, animals, soil, animals, birds and insects. Some of the examples are given as follows. Animal agents: example. Solanum nigrum produces small juicy fruits that contain yellow seeds which are eaten by birds and small animals and then the seeds often pass through their gullets. Page | 152
Machine agency: For example, automobiles and trucks raise gusts of wind as they travel up and down highways. As a result, tiny seeds or seeds with tuft of hair are easily carried aloft in the wind and blown along the highway with each passing motor vehicle. Wind and water agents: examples of wind dispersed weeds include Asclepias syriaca, Taraxacum officinale, Artemesia vulgaris etc. water dispersed weed seeds include Lythrum salicaria and Rumex spp. 1.2.6 Aggressiveness Weeds are highly aggressive, cause invasion to a new area and in course of time establish them in that area. Parthenium hysterophorus, Chromolaena odorata, Commelina bengalensis, Rumex spp. are few examples of aggressive weeds. 1.2.7 Adaptation Strategies Weeds have higher mortality in the younger individuals with increasing survival or low death rates with growing age. Weeds show great tolerance/ resistance to control and eradication taken up by humans. Some are even very difficult-to- control and noxious weeds. Their high persistence, hardiness and flexibility in growth under fluctuating and variegated environments are, to a great extent, responsible for such tolerance. 1.2.8 Water Requirement Weeds have higher transpiration coefficient and as a result, they remove more water from soil compared to many crops and become more competitive. For example Chenopodium album has water requirement of 658 mm compared to its associated crop sunflower with water requirement of 623 mm. 1.3 Weeds Classification Identification and naming of a particular weed based on its genus and species may not be much useful since weed control, unless specific weed problem in certain area, usually aims t composite weed culture. Some common characteristics of the species which are clearly visible and understandable are to be exploited for making of their class/group towards recommending control. Botanical/Taxonomic Classification Botanical classification of organisms takes into consideration of their morphology, anatomy and genetic relationship. There are 13 orders for monocot weeds whereas 56 orders for dicot weeds. Page | 153
1.3.1 Based on Life Cycle/ Ontogeny Weed classes based on life cycle/span is not always constant since the growing duration of some weeds varies under the influence of climatic factors. Annual weeds sometimes may behave as biennials and biennials as perennials depending on prevailing climate. i)
Annual Weeds
Annual weeds usually germinate, grow and produce seeds within a season/year and die up. It may be of three types according to the season they grow viz. summer season annuals, rainy/wet season annuals and winter season annuals. For example, Digera arvensis, Digitaria sp. Trianthema monogyna etc. are summer season annuals and Commelina benghalensis, Setaria glauca, Amaranthus spinosus etc are rainy/wet season while Phalaris minor, Avena fatua, Chenopodium album etc. are winter season annuals. ii) Biennial Weeds Biennial weeds complete their life cycle in two seasons/years and normally live more than one but less than two seasons/ years. They form rosette and remain vegetative in the first season/year and produce flowers and set seeds in the second season / year. Tribulus terrestris (Puncture vine), Cichorium intybus (Chicory), Cirsium vulgare (Bull thistle) are found mainly in the croplands, whereas Daucus carota (Wild carota), Alternanthera echinata are exclusively present in the non-cropped areas. iii) Perennial Weeds They grow for more than two years before they wither away or die-up. They flower for the first time in the second year of their growth and then flower each year regularly and grow indefinitely from the same root system. Perennial weeds may be sub-divided as follows. a) Simple Perennials: They are perennials, but reproduce predominately by seeds and have no natural means of spreading vegetatively unless injured or cut. For example, Sonchus arvensis, Oxalis latifolia, Lantana camara, Rumex spp. b) Creeping Perennials: they although have seed propagation, reproduce predominantly by vegetative means such as stolons, rhizomes, tubers, bulbs, bulbils, corms, roots stems and leaves and most difficult to control. E.g. Imperata cylindrica, Cynodon dactylon, cyperus rotundus, chromolaena odorata etc. c)
Woody Perennials: they grow continuously and consistently over the seasons or years and have annual growth increment. Depending Page | 154
on underground root growth, perennial weeds may be further divided as shallow- rooted perennials (eg. Cynodon dactylon), deep rooted perennials (E.g. Sorghum halepense, Cyperus rotundus, pluchea lanceolata). 1.3.2 Based on Seed type/Morphology A. Monocotyledonous Weeds: weeds with seed of one cotyledon and cannot be splitted into two halves. They are divided into a) Grasses and b) Sedges. a) Grasses: It is further divided into Narrow-leaved monocotyledons (e.g. Phalaris minor, Cynodon dactylon, Poa annua) and broad- leaved monocotyledons (e.g. Commelina sp., Cynotis sp., Eichhornia crassipes). b) Sedges: Cyperus iria/difformis/compactus, Fimbristylis miliacea Scirpus supinus are some examples of sedges. B. Dicotyledonous Weeds: The seeds of the dicotyledonous weeds have two cotyledons and can be splitted into two halves. They may be subdivided as Narrow-leaved dicotyledonous weeds (Spergula arvensis, Plantago lanceolata) and broad- leaved dicotyledonous weeds (Trianthema portulacastrum, Amaranthus viridis, Chenopodium album, Melilotus indica, Striga asiatica). 1.3.3 Based on Nutritional Habits/Nature of Competition I.
Autotrophs/Non–Parasitics: They produce their own food by themselves. E.g. Phalaris minor, Avena sativa, Commelina benghalensis etc.
II. Heterotrophs/Parasitic Weeds: They do not produce their own food by themselves and therefore, remain dependent upon crops/ others for food. They may again be classified on the basis of parasitism on roots and shoots in the following ways: a) Root-Parasitism: Total root/holo-root parasite do not have any other source of gathering food and depends completely on the host like orobanche sp. While partial root/hemi-root parasite are those weeds that initially depend upon the host-roots for their food and living e.g. Striga sp. b) Stem Parasitism: Total stem/holo stem parasite are those that take away food from the host-shoot/stem-parasite like Cuscuta campestris/chinensis/epilinum. Cuscuta is the only parasitic Page | 155
genus of the autotrophic family Convolvulaceae now separated as cuscutaceae family while partial stem/ hemi stem parasite are weeds that initially depends upon the host-shoot/stem for their food, but later for becoming green and chlorophyllous, can produce their own food e.g. Loranthus longiflorus, Cassytha filiformis etc. 1.3.4 Based on Origin I.
Indigeneous Weeds: weeds originated in a particular country/continent and growing since long time in a large number with considerable diversity are indigenous to that country/continent. For example, Striga asiatic is a native to Asia while Parthenium hysterophorus is a native to tropical North America.
II. Exotic/Introduced Weeds: Weeds originating in a country, but got introduced to another country through process of dispersal in course of time are exotic/ introduced weeds to that country since they are of foreign origin with respect to that country. Weeds like Mikania micrantha from Malaysia and Sorghum halepense from USA was introduced in India. 1.3.5 Based on Association with Crops I.
Season-Bound Weeds: They grow in a specific season of the year irrespective of the crop species grown or cultivated. For example Fumaria sp, Poa annua etc are season bound weeds.
II. Crop-Bound Weeds: The weeds which usually parasitize a crop for their food and survival partially or wholly are called crop-bound weeds. Eg. Loranthus longiflorus is bounded to tea plantations while Striga sp. is bounded to maize crops. III. Crop-Associated Weeds: Crop- associated weeds are not parasitic like crop-bound weeds. They are associated with the crops for certain reasons. a) Specific Micro-Climate Requirement: Some weeds for their higher growth and survival require shady, cool and moist habitat and therefore, they associate themselves where such situation is available. Cichorium intybus is associated with berseem while Coronopus didymus is associated with lucerne for the same reason. b) Weed Mimicry with Crops: Some plants pretend in various forms to maintain their survival and continue existence. There Page | 156
are different types of mimicry viz. vegetative/phenotypic mimicry, seed mimicry, chronological mimicry and biochemical mimicry. Vegetative mimicry is mimicking crop plants with vegetative/phenotypic structure. E.g. Phalaris minor in wheat, Saccharum spontaeneum (wild cane) in sugarcane. Some seeds have seeds similar in shape, size and even to some extent by weight to that of some crops called “seed mimicry”.Eg. Avena fatua seeds resemble cultivated oat seeds, Camelina sativa seeds resemble flax seeds, Cichorium intybus seeds resemble berseem seeds and Agrostemma githago resemble wheat seed. Some weeds have height and ripening time similar to that of the crop plants associated called “chronological mimicry”. For example, Phalaris minor has almost similar maturity with wheat crops. A weed associated with the crop although controlled by it may develop resistance to that herbicide through biochemical alterations on continuous exposure to it in course of time and behaves like the tolerant crop. This is called biochemical mimicry. 1.3.6 Based on Ecology and Habitat of Growing 1.
Terrestrial Weeds: Weeds grown on land are called terrestrial weeds. E.g. Crop-fields or in the non-crop waste and fallow lands. a) Xerophytic Weeds: Weeds/plants growing in arid or semi-arid areas having very low water requirement and high water use efficiency. E.g. Opuntia spp., Prosopis juliflora. b) Mesophytic Weeds: Mesophytic weeds/plants are medium water requiring plants. E.g. Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotundus etc.
I.
Cultivated Field/Arable Crop Weeds: Arable crops are mainly those agronomical and horticultural crops which require enough cultivation for their germination and continued growth. They may be obligate weeds/anthropophytes or facultative weeds/apophytes. Weeds occurring mainly in the cultivated or otherwise disturbed land and have never been found in wild state anywhere are “obligate weeds” e.g. Convolvulus arvensis, Lolium temulentum. Whereas weeds growing primarily in the wild communities, but often encroach to cultivated and associate them closely with human’s activities, mainly crop cultivation, are “facultative weeds” e.g. Euphorbia thymifolia, Anagallis arvensis etc. Page | 157
II. Plantation and Orchard Weed: weeds associated with plantation and orchard crops are “plantation and orchard weeds.” For example, Chromolaena odorata, Paspalum conjugatum, Parthenium hysterophorus. III. Pasture/Grassland/Lawn Weeds: Weeds growing or present in the pastures/ grasslands/lawns are “lawn weeds”. Cynodon dactylon, Poa annua, Melilotus sp. etc belongs to this class. IV. Non-Crop/Wasteland/Roadside Weeds: Weeds growing or present in the non-crop, waste and fallow lands are called wasteland weeds. Wasteland weeds may have a) ruderal or b) escaping habits. a) Ruderals: These are the weeds of disturbed, non-cropped areas such as landfills, roads, compost heaps, channel bunds etc. Parthenium hysterophorus, Cannabis sativa etc may be ruderals. b) Escapes: Some plants under cultivation in the gardens and fields for food, fibres, vegetables or ornamental purposes are frequently met in ruderal areas along canal banks, roadsides etc. are called escapes. c)
Wetland Weeds: weeds found in moist soil which remains wet in most part of the year. E.g. Oxalis corniculata, Centella asiatica are weeds found in this soils.
2.
Aquatic Weeds: Weeds growing in water bodies like ponds, lakes, drainage-ditches or main irrigation canal/channels as floating, emergent or sub-merged and complete at least part of their life cycle in water are called aquatic weeds.
I.
Floating Aquatic Weeds: The whole plants or leaves of these aquatic weeds float freely on the surface, its root do not reach the ground. E.g. Eichhornia crassipes, Pistia stratiotes.
II. Emergent Aquatic Weeds: These aquatic weeds may emerge/grow out of water with aerial stems and leaves at or above the water surface but unlike the floating aquatic weeds its roots remain impregnated into the bottom-mud of water bodies. Eg. Typha elephantine, Nelumbo nucifera. III. Submerged Aquatic Weeds: They have roots, stems and leaves, but grow completely under water. For example, Hydrilla verticillata, Salvinia molesta.
Page | 158
IV. Marginal Aquatic/Amphibian Weeds: They grow near the edges/embankment of water bodies or along shore lines which remain moist and marshy with shallow water ponding which varies across seasons. E.g. Alternanthera axillaris, Fimbristylis miliacea. 1.3.7 Based on Relative Position I.
Absolute Weeds: Wild plants which have no value as crops or any use to farmers under any conditions. E.g. Rumex spp.
II. Relative Weeds: They are not weeds in nature, but, because of their sudden occurrence, or relative presence with certain crop of prime importance. E.g. mustard in wheat field. III. Rogues: plants of different variety when grown between varieties of prime importance are considered weed. E.g. Jaya variety of rice in between Rasi variety. 1.4 Crop-Weed Competition and Interference Competition is the struggle for survival and continued existence. Competition is for essential elements of growth like light, water, nutrients, physical space. While interference is the combination of competition plus other factors (harvest efficiency, parasitism, allelopathy). In the interaction between weed and crop, the weed-competition period is very important. The time that the crop needs to be weed-free to show no detrimental effect on yield (immediately after emergence) is the weed-free period. The weedcompetition period is the phase, the crop compete with weeds. It is most serious when the plants or crops are young and the competition is likely greater between plants of similar morphology. Crops as well as weeds vary in their competitive ability and similarly, the crops, cultivars too and there is always a critical period of weed competition in crop. Factors affecting Weed/Crop Interference 1.
Time of Weed/Crop Emergence (Most of Time Emerge with the Crop, due to Tillage) a)
First plant to establish (water, nutrients, light) gains the advantage.
b) Effect of competition greatest when crop is young. c) 2.
Late emerging/developing weeds have greater impact on quality, harvest efficiency.
Growth Form a)
Root form- tap root or fibrous root and whether the roots have branched or not. Page | 159
b) Height- either prostrate or erect. c)
Leaf orientation: either horizontal or vertical.
d) Branching habit etc. There are distinct advantages of rapid growth with a tall, dense canopy than the slow growth rate, with a prostrate, thin canopy. 3.
Weed Density: as weed density increases severity of crop damage increase. In intraspecific competition maximum competition is due to high weed density.
4.
Physiological Basis of Competition-Above Ground a)
Light is often the most critical. For example, pigweed can reduce light to vegetables by 85%. Some features that are advantageous for increase light trapping are horizontal, alternatively arranged leaves, rapid expansion of a tall canopy, large leaves, low light compensation and high allocation of dry matter.
b) C4 photosynthesis are more advantageous than C3. 5.
Physiological Basis of Competition- Below Ground. a)
Root growth/morphology like early and rapid root penetration, high root density, high root shoot ratio etc. are some important features of highly efficient weeds.
b) Nutrients: weeds compete with crops mostly for nutrients like nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium and the weeds are often better in obtaining nutrients. c)
Water: weeds require high amount of water and they are more competitive in deficit conditions like upland where irrigation facilities are not available.
1.5 Allelopathy and Allelochemicals Allelopathy refers to the inhibitive/detrimental effects of one plant species on the germination, growth and metabolism of another plant species due to release of chemicals. It is an important functional aspect of the chemical ecology representing plant against plant interaction through the release of chemical compounds. There are different forms of allelopathic interactions. Crop against Other Crops: crop against crop allelopathic interaction is likely operative in multiple crop culture like inter-cropping, mixed-cropping, parallel multiple cropping, multi-storeyed cropping and agro-forestry. Page | 160
Selection of suitable pairs of crops having no allelopathic effect with each other is of paramount importance in crop diversification or crop mixture programme. We can take the example of sorghum that is allelopathic to wheat and sweet potato to cowpea. Crop against Weeds: several crops show allelopathic effects on weeds. For example, sorghum releases prussic acid and suppresses weeds in its vicinity like the amaranthus hybridus, Setaria viridis etc. Weeds against Crops: many weeds impose allelopathic influence on certain weeds. Chenopodium album has effect on alfalfa, oat, maize etc. while cyperus rotundus against sorghum and soybean. Weed Against other Weeds: Rumex sp. shows allelopathic effect to Amaranthus sp. Crop against Same Crop: Several crops like wheat, alfalfa, cowpea, rice, apple, clover and sweet potato are autotoxic. The soil where these crops were previously grown, has been found inhibitive to their growth when replanted or their residues proved autotoxic to them when incorporated. Weed against Same Weed: there is equal possibility that chemical autotoxic to a certain to a certain weed, may be toxic to other plants specifically crop plants, otherwise, it will accumulate in the soil and develop soil sickness in the long run. Trifolium repens has autotocicity. Some of the Allelochemicals with Their Natural Sources are Cited Below. S. No. Allelochemicals
Natural Sources
1
Acetic acid
Decomposing straw
2
allylisothiocyanate
Mustard plants
3
Cinnamic acid
Guayule plant
4
tentoxin
Alternaria alternata
5
Juglone
Black walnut trees
6
Durin
sorghum
7
Anisomycin
Streptomyces
8
Bialaphos
Streptomyces hygroscopicus
Application of Allelopathy in Weed Management. I.
Allelochemicals can be used in development of novel biopesticides, namely herbicides, insecticides or fungicides from allelochemicals or allelopathic agents assumes paramount importance. E.g. Biolaphos is used as a bioherbicide. Page | 161
II. Identifying the allelochemicals helps in cropping system. III. Application of the residues of allelopathic crop plants as mulches. IV. Utilizing a companion crop/plant that is selectively allelopathic to weeds and does not interfere appreciably with crop growth has enough bearing towards weeds control in the fields. 1.6 Principles of Weed Control. It include thorough understanding of the ontogeny of weeds, weed characteristics and mode of reproduction, critical period of weed competition, soil conditions, habitat and location, farming practice, wholefarm or community approach, system approach, climate/season/weather, several aspects of chemical weed control if adopted, follow-up weed prevention measures and socio-economic condition of the farmers. For successful control, one has to consider the following points: 1.
Habits of Weed Plants: xerophytes weed thriving under dry and arid conditions will die if fields are flooded with water. Similarly weeds which thrive under marsh or ill drained condition of the soil can be controlled by improving drainage.
2.
Life Cycle of the Weed: annuals and biennials can be controlled effectively if the land is cultivated before seedling stage of weeds.
3.
Susceptibilities: Some weeds are susceptible to certain chemicals while others are not. E.g. dicots are susceptible to 2, 4-D while monocots are not, hence 2, 4-D is used to control broad leaved weeds in monocot crops.
4.
Dormancy Period: while controlling dormancy weeds, period is to be considered as they have long dormancy period.
5.
Resistance to Adverse Conditions without Losing Viability: some weed seeds have hard seed coats which enable them to remain for a long time without losing their viability, hence they should be controlled before seed formation.
6.
Methods of Reproduction: weeds propagate either by seeds, vegetative parts or by both. Seeded weeds should be removed or smothered before seed formation. Vegetatively propagated weeds should be exposed to sun heat to dry and die like rhizome, bulbs, stolons, etc. by deep ploughing. Frequent cultivation leads to destroy green leaves and thereby exhaust the food reserves and starve the plants may have to be restored too. In weeds propagated by both mechanical and chemical methods may have to be followed. Page | 162
7.
Dispersal of seeds: weeds can be controlled or kept in check if the ways in which different weed seeds disseminate are known and counter measures are undertaken.
1.7 Weed/Control Management Methods 1.7.1 Preventive Measures: Such measures usually do not offer remedy over the already existing population and diversity of weeds in the crop fields, but they focus on the prevention of further introduction of weeds from different external sources/agents as well as perpetuation of weeds in the forth-coming years from the existing stands of weeds in crop fields. Some preventive approaches are: I.
Pure and Clean Crop Seeds and Seed Certification: it is always advised to use pure and clean seeds of crops as possible. Clean crop seeds do not add seeds of the existing or new weed species to soil seed bank. It acts as an insurance/check against increasing weed (both existing and new weeds) problem in the long run. Seeds should be certified and purchased from some authentic sources.
II. Well-Decomposed farm Yard Manure/Compost, Sewage and Sludge: Fresh or undecomposed farm yard manure/compost is a source through which weed seeds are added to soil. Sewage and Sludge are good sources of organic matter and now-a-days are being used for organic agriculture. They, however, need to be treated properly towards making free from weed seeds before applying to crop fields. III. Clean Machineries: weed seeds are sometimes disperse by the ones stuck to the wheels or part of the machines, so we should put a check on such dispersal by cleaning the machines after use or before using in another field. IV. Clean Farm Bunds, Irrigation Channels, Roadsides: Weeds on bunds, paths and irrigation channel are easy to spread as they are the route of movement of labourers and irrigation water and are serve as a good medium of dispersal. V.
Quarantine Law: Weeds like Parthenium hysterophorus came to India in 1950s during the period of ship to mouth. The weed seeds came along with the wheat grains imported from America. Therefore, to avoid such dispersal of noxious alien weeds, the enactment of quarantine law is required. Weed quarantine law enforces isolation of an area where a serious weed has established Page | 163
and prevents further movement of the weed into a non-infested area. Plant quarantine order was enacted/ issued in 2003 with 30 stations. 1.7.2 Physical Methods: It includes both manual and mechanical methods. I.
Hand Weeding/Hand Hoeing: These could be considered as the oldest method. Since it uses hand to pull the weeds, it takes more time compared to machines, it is labour- intensive, back-breaking and often costlier than chemical method of weed control. Small hand tools are used to implement hand weeding like khurpi, sticks etc. It should be carried out early as they are easy to maintain in seedling stage. In this process the soil gets aerated, as the soil around the Rhizosphere loosens. It is effective for annual weeds but not so useful for perennial weeds.
While hand hoeing is a post-planting intercultural operation, which stirs the soil and makes it more loosened. Hoeing is faster operation and requires less man power than weed weeding. II. Tillage: Tillage is usually done for the top layer of soil (surface soil of 15-20 cm or 6 inches) as it is the region where most of the Rhizosphere activity occurs. Such top-most layer is also called the agricultural soil, furrow slice or plough-sole layer. When the bulk density is assume to be around 1.5 mg/m3, plough- sole layer would weight around 2.24 x 106 kg/ ha. Tillage is simply mechanical turning of the soil which may be deep tillage or shallow tillage. Deep tillage may extend from top to as deep as up to 60 cm but in shallow tillage it is usually done only in the agricultural soil. Conventionally, farmers often follow two tillage, primary and secondary. The primary tillage implements operate mainly through plough-sole layer and cut, uplift and invert crop residues and weeds along with soil and bury them into soil, whereas secondary tillage usually breaks the clods, makes soil loosened, pulverized and dried up to some extent and removes dried plants or plant parts including vegetative propagules of the perennial weeds. Advantages of Tillage on Weed Management Includes the Following a)
It breaks, cuts or tears off weeds and exposes them to dessication by sun.
b) It exhaust the food reserves of vegetative structures of perennial weeds. c)
It removes standing/existing weeds, renders up-down turning of soil allowing lateral movement of soil. Page | 164
d) It helps in preparation of fine seed-bed allowing better plant stand. e)
Primary tillage provokes germination of annual weeds which can be killed with next/secondary tillage.
I.
Cheeling and Digging: Cutting and scraping of aerial growth of weeds by cheel hoe at the soil surface is the cheeling while digging is the process of using some implement such as hands or tools to remove weeds from solid soil surface.
II. Mowing and Sickling: This method is used commonly in non-crop areas. Here, weed populations are checked by cutting off the growing part with the help of mower. Whereas cutting off growing part with sickle is called sickling. III. Dredging and Chaining: These methods are mainly for aquatic weeds. Cleaning of weeds from water along with their roots or the plant as a whole by applying some mechanical force is called dredging while the process of removing the floating weeds by using a heavy chain is the chaining. IV. Fallowing and Burning: Common practice of semi-arid regions where Dryland farming is followed. Here the land is kept fallow after harvest of Rabi-season and sometimes even after Kharif season. The underground parts of the perennial weeds are exposed to strong sunlight and destroyed. V. But in burning, the weeds of non-cropped areas are taken into consideration. The heat kills the living cells by coagulating the protoplasm and inactivating enzymes. VI. Flooding: it is a method of impounding water to kill the weeds like Saccharum spontaenum through submergence. VII. Mulching: it check weed growth by blocking aeration and sunlight. Both organic like rice straw, husk, dried leaves and inorganic mulch like polythene sheet is effective. 1.7.3 Cultural Method I.
Scouting for Weeds: the key to a better weed management on any field is the correct identification of weed species present accomplished with a good field scouting. Scouting is the gathering information about extend of infestation. The concept behind scouting for weeds is to provide accurate and timely intelligent sitespecific weed management decisions. Page | 165
II. Cover Cropping for Weed Suppression: To plan for the greatest weed management benefit with cover crops, we should start by knowing when your key weed species of concern germinate and emerge. So, the cover crop should be planted early such that it establishes prior to that key point in the life cycle of the weed for most impact. Living cover crops reduces sunlight reaching the soil surface. This will serve to smother and out-compete weeds for light, water and nutrition. III. Crop and Crop Variety Selection: Crop vary greatly in their ability to compete with weeds from providing essentially no competition to competing very aggressively. E.g. in soybean fields weeds that rarely grew taller than soybeans often caused less yield loss in soybeans due to excellent shading provided by a healthy stand of soybean. IV. Crop varieties and hybrids can vary substantially in response to weed competition, with those that canopy earlier and provide more shading being the most competitive V. Optimizing Soil Fertility: Main aim of optimizing soil fertility is to promote competitive crops. Fertilizing can affect the competition between crops and weeds and to subsequent crops. Among all fertilizer, nitrogen shows maximum influences. We should keep in mind that fertilizing should be for the crops not the weeds. Pre-plant broadcasting of soluble nutrients may be readily utilized by fastgrowing weeds than slow-growing crops. Applying fertilizer near the soil and application of slow-released fertilizer or controlled release fertilizers in low rates at planting or sidedress for primary fertility can be the possible alternative. VI. Row Spacing and Seed Rate: Since thicker, denser crop canopy suppresses weeds, altering crop row spacing and seedling rate can be effective in weed management. Each weed species requires a certain amount of light to germinate and grow, and a thick crop canopy can greatly reduce the amount of sunlight and also dense healthy crop may outcome weeds for other resources like water and nutrients. VII. Planting Dates: Planting at the same time every year may result in the selection of weeds that germinate prior to that date, so diversifying planting dates from year to year is important for preventing selection of weed populations. Page | 166
VIII. Crop Rotations: Weed species have characteristic times of the year during which they emerge. Crop rotation may be an effective practice for controlling serious weeds because it introduces conditions that affect weed growth and reproduction, which may greatly reduce weed density (Derksen et al., 1993; Blackshaw et al., 1994). In addition, Forcella and Lindstorm (1988) reported that after seven to eight years of weed management the number of weed seeds was about six times greater in continues than in rotated system. E.g. Hyacinth bean and velvet bean rotations reduced weed cover, total weed dry matter accumulation and weed dry matter accumulation and weed density by about 70, 80 and 90% respectively, in comparison to continues rice. 1.3.7 Biological Methods: biological control of weeds is the use of living organism’s viz., insects, disease organisms, herbivorous fish, snails or competitive plants for the control of weeds. The diversity of biological control agents including Coleopteran, Lepidoptera, Hemiptera, Homoptera, Hymenoptera, Diptera, Acari, snails, nematodes, fish, fungi, bacteria and allelopathic plants. The control programme are developed from the stage of determining the suitability of the weed to be controlled to finding a suitable control agent and eventually implementing and evaluating the effectiveness of the measures. Bioagent Insects
Weeds Octotoma scrabripennis and Uroplata giraldi
Lantana camara
Agasicles hygrophyla
Alligator weed- Alternanthera philoxeroides
Dactylopius tomentosus
Prickly pear weed – Opuntia sp.
Melanagromyza cuscutae
Cuscuta sp.
Zygogramma bicolarata
Parthenium hysterophorus
Mites
Tetranychus sp.
Prickly pear
Fungi
Rhizoctonia sp.
Hyacinth
Fish
Common carp (Cyprimus carpio) Aquatic weeds like water hyacinth
Snails
Marisa sp.
Submerged weeds
1.7.5 Chemical Methods: In chemical weed control, chemicals called herbicides are used to kill certain plants or inhibits their growth. It requires less labor, cost-effective, no need to wait for weeds to grow bigger for hand weeding and also many herbicides are selective to weeds. Page | 167
1.7.5.1 Herbicide Classification Based on Different Parameters 1.
Based on Time of Application.
The time at which herbicides are applied is very important. Every herbicide has its particular effectiveness period. a) Pre- Planting Herbicides: those herbicides applied after the soil has been prepared but before seeding/planting. Mostly temporary soil sterilant types are used as pre-planting herbicides. E.g. Fluchloralin, Trifluralin, Basalin. b) Pre- Emergence Herbicides: herbicides applied after sowing but before the emergence of crop. Eg. Butachlor, Anilophos, Pretilachlor, Thiobencarb. c)
2.
Post- Emergence Herbicides: treatment is made after emergence of specified weed or crop. Eg. Paraquat, Propanil, 2,4-D, Isoproturon, Sulfosulfuron.
Based on Selectivity a) Selective Herbicides: a chemical that is more toxic to some plant species than to others is called selective herbicides. Eg. Atrazine, EPTC b) Non- Selective Herbicides: a material that tends to kill plants with which it comes in contact is called non-selective herbicides. Eg. Glyphosate, weed oils, Acrolein.
Based on mode of action it is classified as contact and translocated/systemic herbicides. Contact herbicides are chemicals that primarily kills the weeds by contact with plant tissue rather than as a result of translocation. For example, Paraquat, Diquat, Propanil. On the other hand, systemic herbicides are herbicides capable of moving within the plant to exert effects throughout the entire plant system irrespective of its place of entry. E.g. 2, 4-D and Atrazine. Based on residual action in soil herbicides are classified as non-residual herbicides and residual herbicides. Residual herbicides are those herbicides which after application usually maintain their phytotoxic effect in soil for a considerable period of time, but not for the whole crop growing season. Therefore, they offer good control of weeds in crops for sufficient period at least for the critical period of weed competition. Atrazine, Trifluralin, Pendimethalin are included in such categories. While non-residual herbicide are those which usually leave no or less residue in soil and get quickly inactivated or metabolized upon falling on soil Page | 168
are non-residual herbicides. They do not have extended period of activity in the soil. For example, Amitrole, Paraquat, Diquat etc. are non-residual herbicides. The Herbicides Available are Separated into Several Groups. Some Herbicide Groups are as Follows.
Acetamides (Amides): Perfluidone, Diphenamid, Isoxaben
Acetamides (Anilides): Propanil, Acetachlor, Alachlor, Butachlor, Metolachlor, Propachlor, Pretilachlor
Aliphatics (Aldehydes): Acrolien, Diflufenican
Aliphatic acids (Chloro- substituted): MCA, TCA
Azoles : Clomazone, Oxadiazon, Amitrole
Benzoic acids: Chloramben, Dicamba, Tricamba, DCPA
Bipyridiliums: Diquat, Paraquat
Carbamates & Thiocarbamates: Asulam, Terbutol, Metham, Propham, EPTC, Diallate, Triallate, Benthiocarb
Dinitroanilines: Benfluralin, Fluchloralin, Nitralin, Pendimethalin, Trifluralin
Dinitrophenols: Dinoseb
Dephenylethers: Nitrofen, Acifluorfen, Oxyfluorfen
Imidazolinones Imazethapyr
Phenoxy- phenoxy propionates: Diclofop methyl, Fenoxaprop-pethyl, Clodinafop- propargyl
Phenoxyalkanoic acids: 2,4-D, MCPA
Phenylalkanoic acids: Fenac/ Chlorfenac
Phenyl ureas; Monuron, Isoproturon, Linuron, Diuron,
Phthalic & phthalamic acids: Endothall, Naptalam
Sulfonylureas: Sulfosulfuron, Chlorimuron-ethyl, Bensulfuronmethyl, Chlorsulfuron, Metsulfuron- methyl
Triazines: Atrazine, Propazine, Simazine
Uracils: Bromacil, Isocil, Lenacil, Terbacil
&
Imidazolidinones:
Buthidazole,
Imazapyr,
Page | 169
Classification of Herbicide Groups Based on Mode of Action. 1.
Interference with Photosynthesis a)
Blockage of Electron Transport: triazine, urease, dinoseb, propanil.
b) Photophosphorylation: perfluidone, ether. 2.
Interference with Normal Respiration a)
Uncouplers of Phosphorylation: dinoseb and ether.
b) Inhibition of Glycolysis: copper and arsenic compound. 3.
Interference with Plant Growth a)
Mitotic Poison: dcpa, mh, carbamate, dinitroalanins.
b) Cell Proliferation: phenoxy alkanoic acid. c) 4.
Antigeotropism: nepham.
Interference with Biosynthetic Reactions a)
Protein synthesis inhibition: aliphatic acids, chloroacetamides, endothal.
b) Lipid synthesis inhibition: EPTC. c)
Loss of cell membrane permeability: dinoseb, ether, aliphatic acids.
d) Carotenoid synthesis: triazoles. 5.
Other Actions e)
Inhibition of enzyme activity in seeds (amylase): endothal.
f)
Denaturation of plant proteins: sodium chlorate.
1.7.5.2 Product Levels of Herbicide: The label provides a great deal of information about the product, including how it is to be applied, where, and in what quantity. And every product should have a label. The label is considered a legal document. Herbicide labels change frequently, so be sure to consult the most current label when using a product. 1.7.5.3 Application Rates: Herbicide application rates can vary according to many factors. Some factors includes soil characteristics such as organic matter content, texture, and pH, weed species, climate, topography etc. to calculate the application rate of herbicide, the following formula can be used.
Page | 170
Herbicide Calculation
Example: A farmer applied 1.0 lit stomp 30 EC (Pendimethalin) in his 1 acre Kabuli gram plot. What is the application rate in terms of a.i./ha? Solution Application rate of stomp 30 EC = 1.0 lit/ acre = 1.0 x 2.5 lit/ha =2.5 lit/ha 1 lit stomp 30 EC will yield
= 0.3 kg Pendimethalin
Therefore, 2.5 lit stomp 30 EC will yield = 0.3 x 2.5 Kg Pendimethalin = 0.75 Kg Pendimethalin 1.7.5.4 Herbicide Premixes Herbicide premixes are commercially formulated products containing more than one herbicide active ingredient. Such condition can create several advantages like broader weed control spectrum than any individual component has alone, reduced potential for physical or chemical incompatibility problems, and reduced cost compared with purchasing the components separately and mixing them. E.g. Harness Xtra (trade name) 5.6L (formulation) is composed of the active ingredient Acetachlor and Atrazine. 1.7.5.5 Additives: They are mostly needed in post emergence herbicides. Additives are compounds added to a herbicide formulation or spray mixture that in some way modify the characteristics of the spray solution. Additives either are included in the commercial herbicide formulation or are added to the spray mixture prior to application. These are used to increase the effect of the herbicide on the target plants. Some of the most common additives for post-emergence herbicides are Nonionic Surfactants (NIS), Crop oil Concentrates (COC), and ammonium fertilizer salts. 1.7.5.6 Herbicide Resistance in Weeds and its Management Herbicide resistance is the inherited ability of a plant to survive and reproduce following exposure to a dose of herbicide normally lethal to the wild type. If the same herbicide is used year after year or several times
Page | 171
during a single season, the resistant biotypes continue to thrive, eventually out numbering the normal population. Weed Management of Some Crops and Cropping System Pulse Crop 1.
Application of pre-emergence herbicide like pendimethalin followed by weeding at 30-35 das
fluchloralin,
2.
Soil solarization, mulching, repeated summer cultivation with irrigation, stale seedbed, crop residues incorporation do influence weed growth in pulses.
Rice 1.
Crop rotations and hand weeding at 30-45 DAS.
2.
Transplanting rather than broadcasting.
3.
Chemical control for rice includes use of 2, 4-D, Propanil (postemergence), Butachlor (pre-emergence) etc.
4.
Reducing or avoiding basal application of nitrogen.
5.
Beushening/ blind hoeing can be done.
Wheat and Barley 1.
Stale seedbed, quality seed, shifting of sowing time, increase seed rate or closer row spacing.
2.
Post emergence herbicides like clodinafop-propargyl, fenoxapropp-ethyl or sulfosulfuron may be recommended in mixture of followed by application with 2,4-D, or metsulfuron- methyl for broad –spectrum weed control.
3.
Crop rotation may control weeds like Phalaris minor.
Sugarcane 1.
Blind hoeing, intercropping (with green gram/ soybean/ chickpea/ blackgram), earthing-up are few intercultural operations effective in weed management of sugarcane.
2.
Good cultural practices with pre-emergence herbicide along with weeding and earthing-up at 35-40 DAS
3.
Pendimethalin (0.75-1.0 kg/ha) or thiobencarb (1-1.5 kg /ha) as preemergence and Atrazine as post emergence herbicide can be followed.
Page | 172
References 1.
AICRPWC. All-India Coordinated Research Project on Weed Control (AICRPWC), Project co-ordinators’ report, 1994, 70-73.
2.
Akobundu IO. Weed science in the tropics: principles and practices. John wiley & sons, New York, 1987, 522.
3.
Aldrich RJ, Kremer RJ. Principles in weed management. Breton publishers, North Scituate, Massachusetts, USA, 1997, 465.
4.
Anonymous. The report of the terminology committee, Weeds. 1964; 12:331-332.
5.
Anonymous. Weed Science Society of America. Weed technology. 1998; 12(4):789.
6.
Ashton FM, Monaco TJ. weed science: principles and practices.3rd edition. John wiley & sons. Inc., New York, 1991, 342.
7.
Ashton FM, Crafts AS. Mode of action of herbicides.2nd edition.john wiley & sons, New York, 1981.
8.
Balyan RS, Pahwa SK. Indian journal of weed science. 1998; 30:189193.
9.
Barton LV. The germination of weed seeds. Weeds. 1962; 10:174-182.
10. Behera B, Prusty JC. Weed competition in upland rice. In: abstracts of papers:annual weed science conference, Indian society of weed science, march 3-4, Hisar, Haryana, India, 1992, 11. 11. Bhowmik PC, Inderjit. Rationale, approach and adoption of integrated weed management. In: weed biology and management. Inderjit (ed), 2004; 363-373. 12. Blackshaw RE, Derksen DA, Muende HH. Weed control. 1990; 4:97104. 13. Blatchley WS. The Indiana weed book, nature publishing company, Indianapolis, Indiana. 1912, 191. 14. Chittapur BM, Kulkarni SS. Major consideration in the selection of herbicides in intercropping and multiple cropping systems. Pesticides information. 2002; 28(1):46-50. 15. Chittapur BM, Arvind Kumar BN, Hosmani MM. Herbicide mixture for efficient weed management. Pesticide information. 1997; 23(1):1-9, 33. 16. Cobb A. Herbicides and plant physiology. Chapman & hall, 1992, 176. Page | 173
17. Das TK. Weed science: basics and applications. Jain brothers, New Delhi, 2011, ISBN 81-8360-096-4. 18. Dekker J, Duke OS. Herbicide resistant field crops. Adv. Agron. 1995; 54:69-116. 19. Dodge AD. The mode of action and metabolism of herbicides.pp.201215. In: Weed control handbook: principles. R.J. Hance &K. Holly (eds.).8th edn., British Crop Protection Council, Blackwell scientific publications, Oxford, U.K, 1990, 582. 20. Fernold ML. Gray’s manual of botany. 8th edn., New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co, 1970. 21. Fryer JD, Evans SA. Weed control handbook. Principles. 5th edn., Blackwell scientific publications, Oxford, U.K. 1970; 1:494. 22. Goss WL. The vitality of buried seed. Journal of Agricultural Research. 1924; 29:349-362. 23. Gunsolus JL. Herbicide resistant weeds. North central region extension publication, 1998, 468. 24. Gupta OP. Weed management: principles and practices. Agrobotanica publishers, Bikaner, India, 1993, 270. 25. Gupta OP. Modern Weed Management, Agro Botanica Publishers, Bikaner, India, 1998, 488. 26. Hance RJ, Holly K. Weed Control Handbook: Principles. 8th editions. Blackwell scientific publications, Oxford, U.K, 1990. 27. Hanf Martin. Weeds and their seedlings. Agricultural Division, Ipswich, England: BASF United Kingdom Ltd, 1977, 348. 28. Holt JS, Powles SB, Holtum JAM. Mechanism and agronomic aspects of herbicide resistance. Weed tech. 1993; 4:141-149. 29. Indian Society of Agronomy. Agronomic terminology, 5th revised edn, 2009, 263-281. 30. King LJ. Weeds of the world: biology and control. Interscience publishers, New York, 1996, 1-48. 31. Monaco TJ, Weller SC, Ashton FM. Weed Science-Principles and Practices. 4th edn., John Wiley and Sons Mcgraw-Hill Inc. New York, USA, 2002, 671. 32. Muller CH. Allelopathy as a factor in ecological process, 1969; 18:348357. Page | 174
33. Muzik TJ. Weed biology and control, 1970, 273. 34. Putnam AL. Phytotoxicity of plant residues, In: P.W. Unger (ed.). Managing Agricultural Residues. Lewis pubs., CRC press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1994, 285-314. 35. Radosevich SR, Holt JS. Weed ecology: implications for management. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1984, 265. 36. Rao VS. Principles of Weed Science. (Published in 1983; 2nd printing in 1987; 3rd printing in 1988). Oxford & IBH publishing Co. pvt. ltd., New Delhi, 1988, 540. 37. Reddy TY, Reddi GHS. Principles of Agronomy. Kalyani publishers, Ludhiana, India, 1992. 38. Rosenthal et al. Biological methods of weed control. Monograph, California Weed conference. 1984; 130:1:88. 39. Santapau H. Botanical collector’s manual. Ministry of natural resources and scientific research, New Delhi, 1955. 40. Saraswat VN. Project Coordinator’s Report (1.1.1989-31.12.1989). All India Coordinated Research Programme on Weed Control. Jabalpur, India, 1989, 218. 41. Sharma A. Numerical agronomy. Kalyani publications, New Delhi, 2014, 57-59. 42. Stroller EW, Wax MM. Periodicity of germination and emergence of some annual weeds. Weed science. 1973; 21:574-580. 43. Stroud A, Parker C. A weed identification guide for Ethiopia. Fao, Rome, 1989, 278. 44. Swarbrick JT, Mercado BL. Weed science and weed control in Southeast Asia. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper, FAO, Rome, 1987, 203. 45. Thurston JM. Dormancy in weed seeds. In: J.D. Harper (ed.).Biology of weeds. Blackwell scientific pub., Oxford, 1959, 69-82. 46. Tull Jethro. Horse-hoeing husbandry. Berkshire, MDCC 33, 1731. 47. Unger J. Principles and practices of weed management. College of agriculture, Alemaya, Addis Ababa University, Addis baba, Ethiopia, 1984, 185. 48. Winburne JN. A dictionary of agricultural and allied terminology. Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, 1962. Page | 175
49. Yaduraju NT, Mani VS. Indian farming. 1980; 29(3):16-25. 50. Yenish JP. Effect of tillage on vertical distribution and viability of weed seeds in soil. Weed science. 1992; 40(3):429-433. 51. Zimdahl RL. Fundamentals of weed science. 2nd edn., Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1999, 556.
Page | 176
