HARYANA JOURNAL OF AGRONOMYharyanaagronomists.org/downloads/files/n53db5d1ec1bdb.pdf · 2014-08-01 · HARYANA JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY Volume 28 June & December 2012 No. 1 & 2 CONTENTS

HARYANA JOURNAL OF AGRONOMYVolume 28 June & December 2012 No. 1 & 2

CONTENTS

1-10

11-18

19-24

25-27

28-30

31-33

34-37

38-41

42-43

44-45

46-49

50-52

53-57

Weed control efficacy of trifluralin in cotton in N-W. India–Samunder Singh, S. S. Punia, Attar Singh and A. P. S. Brar

Growth and yield of baby corn (Zea mays L.) as influenced by sowing dates and weed managementpractices under temperate conditions–R. Kotru, Lal Singh, Parmeet Singh, Sameera Qayoom, K. N. Singh and Lateef Ahmad

Legume intercropping and in-situ green manuring as well as FYM application in maize along with inorganicfertilizers in wheat for sustainability of maize-wheat system under rainfed conditions–Vikas Gupta, Anil Kumar, B. C. Sharma, Mahender Singh and Jai Kumar

Effect of phosphorus and potassium application on yield, quality and potassium uptake by cotton in asandy loam soil–K. S. Grewal and B. S. Duhan

Effect of intercrops on yield and economics of maize based intercropping system–M. V. Singh, B. N. Misra and Neeraj Kumar

Productivity and economics of winter maize with Intercrops–M. V. Singh, Neeraj Kumar and B. N. Mishra

Effect of nitrogen levels and biofertilizer strains on dry matter production and attraction index in pearlmillet–Parveen Kumar, R. S. Hooda, Suresh Kumar and Karmal Singh

Effect of integrated nutrient management on yield and nutrients uptake by rice (Oryza sativa)–B. S. Duhan

On-farm performance of scented rice varieties under agro-climatic conditions of Hisar–O. P. Nehra

Performance of grain cowpea genotypes at the farmers’ fields–Vinita Jain and O. P. Nehra

Varietal performance of kharif and rabi crops under rainfed conditions in western parts of Haryana–P. K. Verma, S. B. Mittal, O. P. Nehra and S. K. Sharma

Effect of integrated nutrient management on crop productivity and soil health under cereal-cereal croppingsequence–Pawan Kumar, S. K. Yadav, Manoj Kumar and R. K. Nanwal

Bio-efficiency of Hizyme-G as source of essential nutrient for the improvement of physiological traits,yield and quality of Wheat–K. D. Sharma, A. Kumar and K. S. Patro

Published by Dr. Parvender Sheoran, Secretary, Haryana Agronomists Association (HAA), Department of Agronomy,CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India. Editor-in-Chief : Dr. Samunder Singh. Printed at Systematic Printers,Udaipurian Street, Near Video Market, Hisar, Ph.: (O) 01662-230467 (M) 92551-31387 (31 December, 2013)

Effect of sowing techniques on spring sunflower–assessment through front line demonstrations–O. P. Lathwal, K. S. Ahlawat, Parminder Singh and Renu Devi

Integrated nutrient management and weed control in wheat (Triticum aestivum L)–Rajesh Kumar Bhatia, V. P. Singh and Amarjeet

Effect of integrated nutrient management and weed control on yield and nutrient uptake by wheat (Triticumaestivum L) and weeds–Rajesh Kumar Bhatia, V. P. Singh and Amarjeet

Performance of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) as influenced by different varieties, row spacing and seedingrate–Hari Ram, Baljit Singh and Sarvjeet Singh

Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on Yield and Nutrient Uptake by Raya (Brassica juncea (L.)–B. S. Duhan and K. S. Grewal

Studies on weed management in berseem (Trifolium alexandrinum)–Samunder Singh

More rice with less water-resource conservation technologies in Indo Gangatic Plains.–Shweta and Manu Malik

Evaluation of pinoxaden in combination with metsulfuron against complex weed flora in barley (Hordeumvulgare L.)–Sanjeev Dhanda, Naresh Sangwan and S. S. Punia

Development of Insecticide Resistance and Cross-Resistance in Indoxacarb-Selected Strain of SpottedBollworm, Earias vittella (Fab.)–Tarun Verma, R. K. Saini and P. D. Sharma

Evaluation of gypsum application in irrigated groundnut and sesame crops at farmers’ fields–Vinita Jain and O. P. Nehra

Evaluation of Columbus, a new brand of clodinafop - propargyl 15 WP against Phalaris minor in wheatand its residual effect on succeeding sorghum crop–S. S. Punia, Dharambir Yadav, V. S. Hooda, Anil Dhaka and Yash Pal Malik

Performance of different wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties under irrigated conditions of rice-wheatcropping system–O. P. Lathwal, K. S. Ahlawat, Parminder Singh, Renu Devi, Hans Raj and Vikas Bhardwaj

58-60

61-65

66-70

71-73

74-76

77-80

81-83

84-87

88-90

91-92

93-96

97-98

Weed control efficacy of trifluralin in cotton in N-W. IndiaSAMUNDER SINGH, S. S. PUNIA, ATTAR SINGH1 AND A. P. S. BRAR2

Department of Agronomy, CCS HAU Hisar-125 004, India

Received on 15-07-12 Accepted on 18-09-12

ABSTRACT

Weeds are a major constraint in realizing the yield potential of cotton due to its slow initialgrowth and wide spacing. Hot and humid weather results in several flushes of weeds competing withcotton plants and mechanical methods are less suitable to due frequent rains. Early crop establishmentprovides an impetus to growth and lower losses by weed competition. Efficacy of soil incorporatedherbicides is greatly influenced by application methods. Field studies were carried out at 22 locations inHaryana and Punjab to assess the role of different factors viz. incorporation methods, soil types andcultivars on trifluralin efficacy. Rotavator incorporation of trifluralin was superior to its incorporation bydisc harrow or tine cultivator followed by planker. Multiple nozzle boom with flat fan nozzles was aseffective as tractor sprayer, but efficacy of hollow cone nozzles was less than flat fan nozzles. Trifluralinwas found more effective compared to pendimethalin against several cotton weeds. Soil types had nosignificant effect on weed control efficacy of trifluralin, but affected plant growth. Similarly, Bt cottonvarieties out yielded non-Bt varieties, but had no bearing on weed control efficacy of trifluralin. Due toincessant rains trifluralin efficacy was reduced significantly after 50 days of incorporation and integrationof manual/mechanical weeding provided better conditions for plant growth resulting in higher boll numbersand boll weight.

Key words : Trifluralin, rotavator, disc harrow, cultivator, weed control efficacy, yield parameters

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 1-10 (2012)

INTRODUCTION

Cotton is the most important fiber crop of theworld grown in 69 countries in an area of 30-35 m hawith annual production of 22-26 mt of lint. This is avital cash crop in India and with the adoption of Bt cottonin the last decade, area and productivity increasedsignificantly, along with lowering the use of insecticides,thus improving farmer’s health and environment. Today,India has one third of world cotton area, but the averageproductivity is less than two third. There is large gapbetween the average and potential yield of cotton. Thoughthere are several Indian farmers who are producing evengreater than world averages, but that is not replicatedby majority of cotton growers.

Increased row spacing and slow initial growthof cotton makes it most vulnerable to competition fromweeds which not only usurps essential fertilizer nutrientsand moisture, but also impede cotton growth. Poorcrop stand due to weed competition has been found to

lower production by 30-90% depending upon weedpressure. The first 30 to 60 days are more crucial inrealizing optimum yield of cotton. Weeds deplete nutrientsfrom 10-90% resulting in a loss of crop yield by 67-78% in northern India (Singh et al., 1988). Under Delhiconditions, Mani (1975) found that on average weedsdrained off 46.6 kg N, 12.1 kg P2O5 and 73.3 kg K2O.Under weedy conditions, every quintal of weed drymatter removed 0.81, 0.32 and 2.11 kg of N, P2O5 andK2O, respectively, causing drastic reduction (77%) ofcotton yield from 6.3 to 1.47 q/ha (Shanmugam andMeenakshisundaram, 1977). Singh and Malik (1993)reported that weeds reduced seed cotton yield by 38-50%. In another study, weeds in cotton were found tocorner 42, 18 and 100 kg/ha of N, P2O5 and K2O,respectively. Under weedy conditions the uptake ofnutrients by crop was also reduced from 43 to 14, 10 to4 and 58 to 17 kg/ha, respectively of N, P2O5 and K2Oreducing seed cotton yield from 11 to 6 q/ha (Singh andMalik, 1992). Jain et al. (1981) found that weeds

1KVK Bhiwani, CCS HAU.2RRS Bhatinda, PAU Ludhiana, Punjab.

removed 5 to 6 times N, 5 to 12 times P and 2 to 5 timesK than cotton crop at the early stages and diminishedcotton yields by 54 to 85%. Nakhte et al., (1992)observed only 7 kg/ha yield under weedy conditionscompared to 889 kg/ha seed cotton yield when herbicidewas integrated by hoeing in Maharashtra under rainfedconditions.

Herbicides offers a choice for effective weedcontrol; however, there are no efficient post emergenceherbicides under Indian conditions to take care of majorweeds infesting the long duration of cotton. Trianthemaportulacastrum and Cyperus species that emerge withthe crop pose a major threat for its establishment.Application of pre-plant incorporation (PPI) or pre-emergence (PRE) herbicides has been found effective(Rethinam and Sankaran, 1976; Chander el al., 1997;Singh and Malik, 1993) in controlling weeds andrecording good seed cotton yield, but herbicides alonewere less effective and required integration with hand/mechanical weeding. Some work has been done onplanting time/methods or formulation for crop safetyand increased herbicide efficacy (Rethinam andSankaran, 1976; Singh and Malik, 1993; Chauhan, 2007;Dong et al., 2008; Ali et al., 2010), but there is paucityof work on herbicide application methods, particularlyfor PPI/PRE herbicides. A fine seed bed preparation andproper application is required for optimizing the efficiencyof PPI or PRE herbicides. Keeping this in view, fieldtrials were conducted at farmer’s fields in differentlocations of Haryana and Punjab to assess the impact ofdifferent methods of application of PPI and PREherbicides and their soil incorporation on weed controlefficiency, crop growth and yield of cotton.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Field trials were conducted at 22 locationsspread over Haryana and Punjab states in the cottongrowing belt of North-West India during the kharifseason of 2008. Herbicides were sprayed from 27 Aprilto 26 May 2008 in plot sizes of 0.25 to 3 acres at differentlocations without replications. All agronomical practicesfor cotton were done by the farmers, except herbicideapplications. Trifluralin was sprayed at 1.0 kg/ha usingbackpack sprayer fitted with three flat fan nozzle boom,two backpack sprayer fitted with nine flat fan nozzleboom, tractor sprayer fitted with 21 flat fan nozzle boomand local tractor sprayer fitted with 16 hollow conenozzles, delivering 500 l water/ha. Soon after spraying

trifluralin was incorporated with either rotavator, discharrow or cultivator followed by planker. Pendimethalin0.75 and 1.5 kg/ha PRE was sprayed with backpacksprayer (flat fan nozzle) or local tractor sprayer with 16hollow cone nozzles (spray direction parallel to ground)delivering 500 l water volume/ha at four locations atfarmers and University research fields, respectively forcomparisons. One manual or mechanical weeding wasdone after 50 days of sowing to control later weedflushes. The trials fields were spread over large swathof area covering four districts of Haryana and two ofPunjab where cotton is a major crop. Soil samples werecollected and analyzed for soil types, pH, conductivityand nutrient status (Table 1). Though most of the fields(90%) had Bt cotton; comparisons were made for soiltype and Bt and not Bt cotton on different growthparameters and weed control efficiency. Observationswere recorded for visual control of infested weed species(periodically), plant height, number of branches per plant,boll number per plant (mean of five plants) and weightof five bolls per plant. Data was subjected to ANOVAusing locations as replications and presented in figures.Since pendimethalin was used at two rates and only fourlocations, no comparison data is presented withtrifluralin.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Weed flora

Weed flora was highly diverse due to differentsoil types and locations. The major infesting weeds arepresented in Table 2 as per locations. Trianthemaportulacastrum was the most dominant weed infestingall the fields. Dactyloctenium aegyptium in grasses,Cyperus rotundus among sedges and Digera arvensisamong broadleaf weeds were other major weeds infestingin the trial fields across the soil types. Many weedspecies were not visible at 45 DAS (Eragrostis tenella,Portulaca sp., Dinebra retroflexa, Echinochloa sp.,Leptochloa chinensis etc.), but become dominanttowards the crop maturity when T. portulacastrum wasmatured.

Effect of spraying methods on trifluralin efficacy

Trifluralin provided more than 75% control ofweeds over untreated plots (Fig. 1). Weed controlefficiency was significantly less when trifluralin was

2 Singh, Punia, Singh and Brar

Haryana Journal of Agronomy 3

Tabl

e 1.

Det

ails

of l

ocat

ions

and

soil

char

acte

rist

ics o

f tri

al fi

elds

S.Vi

llage

Farm

er’s

nam

eD

istri

ctSt

ate

Soil

type

pHSa

lt co

nc.

Org

anic

PK

(dS/

m)

carb

on (%

)(k

g/ha

)(k

g/ha

)

1.Si

wad

aH

awa S

ingh

Bhi

wan

iH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

7.7

0.34

0.37

1033

62.

Bad

wa

Jagd

ish S

ihag

Bhi

wan

iH

arya

naSa

nd7.

70.

340.

3710

336

3.Pu

rR

aja S

ansa

nwal

Bhi

wan

iH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

8.0

0.21

0.37

1736

54.

Bigh

adJa

spal

Sin

gh G

illFa

teha

bad

Har

yana

Loam

y sa

nd7.

90.

150.

34

321

5.D

hand

Vino

d B

huka

rFa

teha

bad

Har

yana

Sand

8.1

0.14

0.45

233

66.

Ada

mpu

rPa

wan

Kum

arFa

teha

bad

Har

yana

Sand

8.2

0.24

0.33

534

87.

Luda

sJa

sbir

Sing

hH

isar

Har

yana

Loam

y sa

nd8

0.23

0.3

833

68.

Muk

lan

Sube

Sin

ghH

isar

Har

yana

Sand

7.8

0.06

0.37

633

69.

CC

SHA

U H

isar

Agr

onom

y de

partm

ent

His

arH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

8.2

0.40

0.34

1539

010

.C

CSH

AU

His

arPl

ant B

reed

ing

depa

rtmen

tH

isar

Har

yana

Loam

y sa

nd8.

40.

450.

2812

360

11.

Panj

wan

aPa

rvee

n K

umar

Sirs

aH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

7.8

0.11

0.37

445

612

.C

CS

HA

U R

RS,

Sirs

aU

nive

rsity

Sirs

aH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

7.8

0.09

0.37

445

613

.Pa

njw

ana

Tars

hem

Sin

ghSi

rsa

Har

yana

Sand

8.3

0.29

0.23

236

514

.Pa

njw

ana

Diw

an S

ingh

Sirs

aH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

8.2

0.29

0.37

248

015

.Sa

llarp

urA

shok

Meh

taSi

rsa

Har

yana

Sand

80.

150.

4527

624

16.

Mad

Dad

duV

ippi

n K

umar

Sirs

aH

arya

naLo

amy

sand

8.1

0.12

0.37

236

517

.Sa

huw

ala

Balji

nder

Sin

ghSi

rsa

Har

yana

San

d7.

90.

080.

534

456

18.

Ghu

dde

Har

dev

Sing

hB

hatin

daPu

njab

Loam

y sa

nd7.

90.

120.

3720

624

19.

Baje

kBa

lbir

Sing

hB

hatin

daPu

njab

San

d8.

00.

090.

4312

436

20.

Kot

he D

ashm

esh

Nag

arG

urse

vak

Sing

hM

ukts

arPu

njab

Sand

7.9

0.08

0.3

1038

921

.C

hak

Mid

du S

ingh

Wal

lah

Jagr

up S

ingh

Muk

tsar

Punj

abLo

amy

sand

7.8

0.09

0.45

438

422

.C

hhat

iana

Mal

kiat

Sin

ghM

ukts

arPu

njab

Loam

y Sa

nd7.

80.

30.

4515

355


Tabl

e 2.

Maj

or w

eeds

infe

stin

g tr

ial f

ield

s in

wee

dy p

lots

at d

iffer

ent l

ocat

ions

Loca

tions

Wee

d Sp

ecie

s (in

ord

er o

f dom

inan

ce)

Siw

ada

Tria

nthe

ma

port

ulac

astr

um, D

iger

a ar

vens

is, D

acty

loct

eniu

m a

egyp

tium

, Con

volv

ulus

arv

ensi

s, C

yper

us ro

tund

usB

adw

aT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, Tri

bulu

s ter

rest

ris,

Cor

chor

us sp

., D

. arv

ensi

s, C

. rot

undu

s, D

. aeg

yptiu

m,

Cle

ome v

isco

sa, P

hylla

nthu

s niru

ri, P

ortu

laca

oler

acea

, Era

gros

tis te

nella

, Am

aran

thus

vir

idis

Pur

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, D

. aeg

yptiu

m, C

. arv

ensi

s, C

. rot

undu

s, E.

col

ona,

A. v

irid

is, T

. ter

rest

ris,

C. v

isco

sa, E

. ten

ella

, Cel

sosi

a ar

gent

ea,

Com

mel

ina

diffu

sa, V

erno

nia

cine

rea,

P. n

irur

i, Le

ucas

asp

era

Bigh

adT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, C. r

otun

dus,

Ipom

oea

pest

igri

dis,

Phys

alis

min

ima,

Cor

chor

us sp

., D

. arv

ensi

s, E.

tene

lla, D

igita

ria

sp.

Dha

ndT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, D. a

egyp

tium

, T. t

erre

stri

s, C

. rot

undu

s, I.

pest

igri

dis,

Ipom

oea

sp.,

E. te

nella

, P. m

inim

a, P

. ole

race

a, A

mar

anth

usgr

aciz

enb,

Dig

itari

a sp

. Par

then

ium

hys

tero

phor

usA

dam

pur

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, I

. pes

tigri

dis,

D. a

egyp

tium

, C. r

otun

dus,

Che

nopo

dium

alb

um, I

pom

oea

sp.,

P. m

inim

aLu

das

T. p

ortu

laca

strum

, Am

aran

thus

hyb

ridus

, D. a

rven

sis, C

. rot

undu

s, I.

pesti

grid

is, T

. ter

restr

is, D

igita

ria sp

., C

. visc

osa,

Por

tula

ca sp

., C

. visc

osa

Muk

lan

D. a

rven

sis,

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, C

. rot

undu

s, E.

tene

llaC

CSH

AU

His

arT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, C. r

otun

dus,

E. c

olon

a, D

. aeg

yptiu

m, P

. min

ima,

T. t

erre

stri

sC

CSH

AU

His

arC

. rot

undu

s,T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, T

. ter

rest

ris,

D. a

egyp

tium

, P. n

irur

i, P.

min

ima

Panj

wan

aT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, D. a

egyp

tium

, D. a

rven

sis,

P. n

irur

iH

AU

RR

S, S

irsa

T. p

ortu

laca

strum

, D. a

egyp

tium

, D. a

rven

sis, C

. rot

undu

s, P.

niru

ri, E

. Col

ona,

Cor

chor

us es

tuan

s, E.

tene

lla, L

epto

chlo

a ch

inen

sis, C

. arv

ensis

Panj

wan

aT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, D. a

rven

sis,

C. r

otun

dus,

D. a

egyp

tium

, E. t

enel

laPa

njw

ana

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, C

. rot

undu

s, D

. arv

ensi

s, D

. aeg

yptiu

m, E

. col

ona,

C. a

rven

sis,

Cor

chor

us s

p.Sa

llarp

urT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, C. r

otun

dus,

D. a

egyp

tium

, D. a

rven

sis

Mad

Dad

duT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, D. a

rven

sis,

T. te

rres

tris

, Citr

ullu

s col

ocyn

this

, E. t

enel

la, L

. chi

nens

is, E

chin

ochl

oa g

labr

esce

ns, D

ineb

ra re

trofle

xa,

Dig

itari

a sp

., C

. arv

ensi

s, P.

hys

tero

phor

us, P

. min

ima

Sahu

wal

aT.

por

tula

cast

rum

, D. a

egyp

tium

, C. r

otun

dus,

Port

ulac

a sp

, D. a

rven

sis,

Dig

itari

a sp

., P.

nir

uri,

A. v

irid

is, P

. hys

tero

phor

usG

hudd

eD

. arv

ensi

s, T.

por

tula

cast

rum

, D. a

egyp

tium

, Cor

chor

us tr

iden

s, Po

rtul

aca

sp, T

. ter

rest

ris,

C. r

otun

dus a

nd C

ucum

is sp

., E.

col

ona,

D.

retr

ofle

xa, L

. chi

nens

is, I

. pes

tigri

dis,

Dig

itari

a sp

.Ba

jek

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, C

. rot

undu

sK

othe

Das

hmes

h N

agar

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, C

. rot

undu

s, C

. arv

ensi

s, E.

col

ona,

T. t

erre

stri

s, P.

nir

uri,

D. a

egyp

tium

, E. t

enel

laC

hak

Mid

du S

ingh

Wal

lah

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, D

. arv

ensi

s, P.

nir

uri,

Ipom

oea

sp.,

Cor

chor

us sp

., C

ucum

is sp

., P.

hys

tero

phor

us, D

. aeg

yptiu

m, E

. col

ona,

E. t

enel

la,

Dig

itari

a sp

., Po

rtul

aca

sp.,

P. m

inim

aC

hhat

iana

T. p

ortu

laca

stru

m, E

. col

ona,

D. a

egyp

tium

, C. r

otun

dus,

P. m

inim

a, P

ortu

laca

sp.,

D. a

rven

sis,

D. r

etro

flexa

, L. c

hine

nsis

Fig. 1. Effect of spraying methods on percent weed control in cotton 45 DAS.

Fig. 2. Effect of trifluralin incorporation methods on cotton boll weight and weed control.


120

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

Rotavator Disc Cultivator Check

Pl. ht. (cm)

sprayed with local tractor sprayer fitted with hollowcone nozzles compared with other methods using flatfan nozzles. The efficacy of backpack sprayer fittedwith three nozzle boom, though was statistically similarto nine nozzle boom attached to two backpack sprayersand tractor sprayer with 21 nozzle boom; maximum weedcontrol efficacy was observed with tractor sprayers asthere were no missed areas between two runs due widecoverage area of nozzle swath. Poor efficacy of localtractor sprayer may be due to hollow cone nozzles andtheir spray directions as this kind of machine is usedmostly for insecticides or fungicides, though watervolume was same in all the spraying methods. Sincethis machine was locally devised and cheaper than astandard tractor mounted spray pump; farmers hire thisfor PRE spray of pendimethalin in cotton due to lowerrent and easy availability.

Efficacy of trifluralin (PPI) was 5-15% betterthan pendimethalin (PRE) though none was effectiveagainst D. arvensis, Convolvulus arvensis, C. rotundusand Ipomoea species (data not presented). Pendimethalinprovided 60 to 85% control at 1.0 and 1.5 kg/ha,respectively, but efficacy was lower than trifluralin.

Fig. 3. Effect of incorporation methods on plant height of cotton 150 DAS.


Effect of incorporation methods on trifluralinefficacy

Visual observations recorded 45 DAS revealedthat incorporation of trifluralin by rotavator was mosteffective against T. portulacastrum and other weedspecies when compared to disc harrow or cultivator(Fig 2). Though trifluralin provided good control of manyinfested weeds compared to weedy check; thedifferences among incorporation methods were moreglaring in the fields where T. portulacastrum was mostdominant weed.

Effect of trifluralin incorporation methods on growthand yield of cotton

Plant height was significantly affected bytrifluralin incorporation methods when recorded 150 DAS(Fig. 3). Mean plant height of 153 cm was recordedwith rotavator incorporation of trifluralin which wassimilar to disc harrow incorporation, but 7-12% morethan cultivator incorporation and no herbicide application,respectively. Similarly, main branches were significantly

aa

b

c

Fig. 4. Effect of trifluralin incorporation methods on main branches of cotton 150 DAS.

Fig. 5. Effect of trifluralin incorporation methods on bolls of cotton at maturity.


Fig. 6. Effect of soil type on trifluralin efficacy against weeds and growth parameters of cotton.


higher when trifluralin was incorporated by rotavatorcompared to other methods or control (Fig. 4).

Not only plant growth of cotton, but the bollsnumber were also significantly affected by trifluralinincorporation methods. Number of bolls/plant weresignificantly higher when trifluralin was incorporated byrotavator compared to cultivator incorporation or unsprayedplots (Fig. 5). Incorporation of trifluralin by disc harrowresulted in lower bolls/plant than rotavator, thoughdifferences were not statistically significant. Highest cottonboll weight was recorded with rotavator incorporation oftrifluralin compared to weedy check. Boll weight decreasedwith trifluralin incorporation by disc harrow and cultivatorcompared to rotavator incorporation; the differences;however, were statistically non-significant (Fig. 2).

Effect of soil type and cultivars on trifluralin efficacyand plant growth

There were no differences on the efficacy oftrifluralin in two soil types (sandy and sandy loam) withrespect to weed control, or boll weight; but number ofbolls were significantly more in sandy loam soil comparedto sandy soil when recorded at maturity (Fig. 6).Trifluralin had statistically similar weed control

irrespective of Bt or non-Bt cotton (Fig. 7). Similarlythere were no differences in the number of mainbranches and boll weight, though Bt cotton hadsignificantly higher plant height and total number of bollscompared to no-Bt cotton.

Early season weed control helps in better cropestablishment and reduced yield losses. Thind et al.(1995) reported that weed competition in initial 30 dayscaused 10.5% yield reduction compared to 57%reduction under Punjab conditions when weeds competedwith crop during the whole crop growth period. Keepingthe field free from weeds from 30 days onward increasedseed cotton yield from 18.9 to 30.21 q/ha. SimilarlyBalyan et. al. (1983) found initial 40-60 days most criticalfor cotton:weed competition. Muthusankaranarayananet al., (1988) reported that rainfed cotton in Tamilnadusuffered 30-75% losses when weeds were not removedduring the critical period of 30-60 days after planting.In the present study trifluralin was found to providegood control of weeds thus providing an advantage tocrop for first 40-50 days. There is limited choice of PPIor PRE herbicides for cotton which are safe to crop andeffective in controlling weeds. Rethinam and Sankaran,(1976) reported initial crop setback with alachlor PRE,though plants recouped latter on.

Fig. 7. Effect of cotton variety on trifluralin efficacy and yield parameters.


Trifluralin PPI was quite safe to cotton in thepresent study and more effective than pendimethalinPRE against several weeds; though season long weedcontrol can only be achieved when integrated with afollow up herbicide or mechanical weeding. Singh andMalik (1993) found pendimethalin 1.5 kg/ha PRE or itslower dose of 1.25 kg/ha plus one hoeing 45 DAS foreffective control of weeds and similar cotton yield toweed free plots. One dry hoeing 45 DAS followed bypendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha, though provided good controlof weeds till 90 DAS, but suffered in yield due tocompetition from weeds for initial 45 days. Under Punjabcondition, Brar et al., (1995) reported that pendimethalin1.5 kg/ha PRE followed by one hoeing 30 DAS waseffective against annual broad leaf and grassy weedsviz., T. portulacastrum and E. indica in cotton. Chanderel al., (1997) found that increased fertilizer dose (125%of recommended) and integration of chemical(pendimethalin PRE or trifluralin PPI) plus mechanicalweeding for highest seed cotton yield. Since trifluralinis sensitive to UV rays, its proper incorporation isrequired to achieve satisfactory weed control. Rotavatornot only provides proper mixing of trifluralin in the soil,

but also pulverize soil for better emergence and growthof cotton plants. Lower efficacy with other methods(disc harrow or cultivator) could be due to impropersoil mixing of trifluralin. In the absence of rotavator,disc harrow can be substituted to incorporate trifluralin.Similarly, a uniform spray using flat fan nozzles ensuresoptimum soil coverage and enhanced herbicide efficacycompared to hollow cone nozzles.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are thankful to Mr. YossiGoldschmidt, Eli Dagan and Ramesh Chandoliya,Makhteshim-Agan, Israel for providing free tractorsprayer, trifluralin and rotavator to the university andlogistic support for spraying herbicides and recordingobservations for field trials.

REFERENCES

Ali, Mushtaq , Liaqat Ali, Muhammad Sattar and M. A. Ali.2010. Response of seed cotton yield to variousplant populations and planting methods. J. Agric.Res. 48 : 163-169.


Balyan, R. S., V. M. Bhan and R. K. Malik. 1983. The effectof weed removal at different times on the yield ofcotton. Cotton. Dev. 13 : 9-10.

Chander, Subhash, R. S. Panwar, S. K. Katyal and MahendraSingh. 1997. Growth pattern of American cotton(Gossypium hirsutum) and weeds as affected byherbicides and fertility levels. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 29: 185-188.

Chauhan, S. K. 2007. Seeding technique under saline waterirrigation for cotton- wheat rotation. BhartiyaKrishi Anusandhan Patrika. 22 : 273-276.

Dong, H., W. Li, W. Tang and D. Zhang. 2008. Furrowseeding with plastic mulching increases standestablishment and lint yield of cotton in saline field.Agron. J. 100 : 1640-1646.

Jain, S. C., B.G. Iyer, H. C. Jain and N. K. Jain. 1981.Nutrient competition studies in cotton (Gossypiumhirsutum L.) under different weed control systemsin Madhya Pradesh. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 13 : 18-25.

Mani, V. S. 1975. Nutrient drain by weed growth in cropfields. Fert. News. 20 : 21-27.

Muthusankaranarayanan A., V. Chellamuthu, A.Rajamannar and J. Sunder Singh Rajapandian.1988. Effect of herbicides on the weed control inrainfed cotton- blackgram intercroppiog system.Ind. J. Weed Sci. 20 : 91-93.

Nakhate, C. S., O. K. Shelke and R. H. Bhosle. 1992.Economics of weed control in rainfed cotton. IndJ. Weed Sci. 24 : 89-91.

Rethinam, P. and S. Sankaran. 1976. Studies on theselectivity of alachlor formulations in cotton(Gosvpium hirsutum L.) under two systems ofplanting and adsorbent seed treatment. Ind. J. WeedSci. 8 : 74-77.

Shanmugam, K. and P. C. Meenakshisundaram. 1977.Effect of herbicides with manual weeding in cottonand their residual effect on sorghum. Pesticides.11 : 52-56.

Singh, Vireshwar, S. S. Verma and M. S. Kairon. 1988.Effect of weed control and nitrogen on weedgrowth and yield of cotton. Ind. J. Agron. 33 : 376-379.

Singh, Samunder and R. K. Malik. 1992. Weedmanagement and fertiliser utilisation. Fert. News.37 : 53-57.

Singh, Samunder and R. K. Malik. 1993. Influence of dateof planting and weed control method on the yieldof cotton. Haryana agric. Univ. J. Res. 23 : 215-219.

Thind, R. J. S., A. S. Brar and L S. Brar. 1995. WeedInterference in American Cotton (Gossypiumhirsutum L.). Ind. J. Weed Sci. 27 : 71-74.

Growth and yield of baby corn (Zea mays L.) as influenced by sowing dates andweed management practices under temperate conditions

R. KOTRU1, LAL SINGH2, PARMEET SINGH3, SAMEERA QAYOOM4, K. N. SINGH5 AND LATEEF AHMAD

Division of Agronomy, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agriculture Sciences and Technology of Kashmir 191 121

Received on : 8-2-2013 Accepted on : 12-6-2013

ABSTRACT

Baby corn having high remunerative value, provides opportunities for crop diversification,value addition and revenue regeneration. So there is need to standardize the agro techniques for itscultivation. In this context, an experiment was conducted during pre-kharif season on silty clay loam soilat Shalimar campus, under temperate conditions of Kashmir to evaluate the weed dynamics andproductivity of baby corn under varying sowing dates and weed management practices. The experimentwas laid out in split plot design replicated thrice with three dates of sowing viz, 30 April, 15 May and 30May in main plots and four weed management practices i.e. unweeded check, hand weeding, atrazineapplication and straw mulching in sub-plots. April 30 and May 15 sowing enhanced baby corn yield by17 and 14.5% in 2008 and 15.6 and 11.5% in 2009, respectively. Atrazine at par with hand weeding recorded29.2 and 33 % higher yield over weedy check, which registered higher benefit cost ratio, among all theweed management practices. Number of cobs appears to be the most sensitive parameter for baby cornyield as was severally influenced by weed competition.

Key words : Baby corn, relative economics, sowing dates, weed management

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 11-18 (2012)

INTRODUCTION

Living standard of people and shift in food itemfrom non-vegetarian to vegetarian in the world evolvedseveral vegetables, one such vegetable is called babycorn. The small sized fresh green cobs of maize, whenpicked within 36 hours of silk emergence, popularlyknown as baby corn has gained popularity in agricultureproduction, because of its high remunerative value. Babycorn production provides opportunities for cropdiversification, value addition and revenue generation andis becoming increasingly popular among farmers. Babycorn is a short duration crop. There is need to standardizethe agro techniques for its cultivation, so that it can beintroduced for cultivation by farming community ofKashmir. Maize being exhaustive crop requires highquantity of nutrients for its growth and development.Most of the nutrients provided to the crop are lost dueto severe competition posed by weeds for a prolongedperiod of growth under temperate conditions. Control

of diverse flora is one of the important aspects forrealizing higher productivity of baby corn. Hand weeding,though effective method of weed control is costescalative, time consuming and often limited, due toscarcity of labour, so use of herbicides provides betterestablishment and competitive ability. Mulching is anotheroption for effective weed control as it has smotheringeffect on the growth of weeds. Moreover the weatherchanges often results in affecting the growth and yieldof maize crop especially in the spring season (April-June) under temperate conditions of Kashmir. Keepingthis in view an experiment was laid at Research farmShalimar campus to evaluate right sowing time for babycorn and its effective weed management practice toovercome the menace of composite weed flora.


A field experiment was conducted undertemperate valley conditions (Fig. 1) at Shalimar campus

1Senior Scientist, Division of Agronomy, SKUAST of Kashmir.2,3,4Assistant Professors Agronomy, SKUAST of Kashmir.5Professor and Head, Division of Agronomy, SKUAST of Kashmir.Corresponding author : Dr. Lal Singh, Asstt. Professor, Division of Agronomy, SKUAST-K, Shalimar, Srinagar. 190 025(Jammu and Kashmir)

during kharif seasons of 2008 and 2009. Theexperimental soil was silty clay loam, pH 6.8 with organiccarbon 0.85%. Three dates of sowing i.e. 30 April (D1),15 May (D2) and 30 May (D3) were main plot treatmentsand four methods of weed management i. e. unweededcheck (W1), hand weeding 20 DAS and 55 DAS (W2),atrazine application @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha (W3) and mulchingwith paddy straw (W4) were taken as sub-plottreatments. There were 12 treatments combinationsreplicated three times in a split plot design. Maize wassown at a spacing of 60 x 20 cm with recommendedfertilizer package of 90 : 60 : 30 kg/ha of N : P2O5 : K2O,

respectively. Half of the nitrogen and full dose of P2O5and K2O were applied as basal and other half of N wasapplied in two equal splits at 20 DAS (first weeding)and 55 DAS (earthing up), respectively. Baby corn washarvested just after emergence of silk. Atrazine wassprayed a day after sowing in earmarked plots with knapsack sprayer using spray volume of 600 l/ha. Themulching was done with paddy straw just after theemergence of young seedling was completed. Howeversowing ridges were kept free from mulched materials.Weed population was recorded from an area of 0.5 m2

quadrate from three places in each plot and classified

Fig. 1. Meteorological observations recorded during both years of crop season

12 Kotru, Singh, Singh, Qayoom, Singh and Ahmad

into different species at 55 DAS. Data on weed countand weed dry weight were subjected to square roottransformations to normalize their distribution. Correlationand regression analysis were calculated by using SPSSstatistical software.


Effect of Sowing Dates

The growth of maize measured in terms of plantheight and baby corn number varied significantly underdifferent dates of sowing (Table 1) during both the years.Significant increase in baby corn number at sowing datesof 30 April and 15 May enhanced baby corn yield by17% and 14.6% in 2008 and by 15.6% and 11.5% in2009, respectively over the sowing date of 30 May(Table-2). With advanced dates of sowing, thetemperature correlated efficiently with the silking stage,thus producing higher baby corn number. Singh et al.(2009) also recorded higher baby corn number and cornyield with advanced date of sowing. Significant andconsistent increase in green fodder yield (Table 2) wasalso recorded with advanced date of sowing i. e. 30th

April to 15th May to 30th May, during both the years.This resulted into higher N uptake by fodder at earlierdates of sowing. The variations in the yield of maize atdifferent dates are attributed to the efficient use ofmoisture by the crop with earlier dates of sowing where

the moisture remained conserved within the soil profileduring winter months that resulted in producing morenumber of cobs as compared to late sowing date. Panday(2004) also recorded highest green fodder yield and babycorn number/plant, when the crop was sown in themonth of April and first week of May. Similar trend wasalso observed by Khan et al. (2002).

Effect of Weed management Practices

During the crop growth period, 4 weed specieswere found to be predominant that included, Cyperusrotundus L.; 41.2% and 42.7%; Digitaria sanguinalis21.5% and 20%, Echinichloa colona 9.2% and 9.4%,Partulaca oleracea 16.6% and 13.4% and others(Veronica spp, Ageratum conyzoides, Salanum nigrumand Amaranthus spp) 11.8% and 15%, during 2008 and2009, respectively (Table 3). Different dates of sowinghave significant influence on all the weed species exceptE. colona and others. All the weed management practicesinfluenced significantly the weed flora under study. Thethree weed management practices viz., hand weeding,atrazine application and straw mulching reducedpopulation and dry weight of major weed species (C.rotundus, D. sanguinalis, E. colona and Partulacaoleracea) significantly as compared to unweeded check.However, hand weeding and atrazin application provedmore effective as compared to straw mulching, becausein mulched plots the emerged weeds which were not

Table 1. Growth and yield attributes of baby corn as influenced by sowing dates and weed management practices

Treatment Plant height Baby corn Baby corn Dry matter Baby corn Baby corn(cm) length (cm) diameter (mm) accumulation (kg/ha) weight (g) no/m

2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009

Sowing datesD1 : 30th April 197.8 182.2 8.87 7.73 9.66 8.48 265 230 7.63 6.48 22.5 22.9D2 : 15th May 189.3 178.3 7.89 6.93 9.56 8.22 261 223 7.61 6.65 22.3 22.2D3 : 30 May 177.8 169.8 7.66 6.53 9.44 8.09 226 200 7.13 6.20 20.6 21.1S. Em± 2.72 1.04 0.15 0.35 0.37 0.2 4.12 3.13 0.10 0.26 0.14 0.24LSD (P=0.05) 10.64 4.07 0.60 NS NS NS 15.11 13.21 0.39 NS 0.54 0.95Weed management practicesW1 : Unweeded check 184.9 171.0 7.56 6.49 9.31 8.04 213 177 6.65 5.66 20.4 20.6W2 : Handweeding 194.6 182.0 9.06 7.81 9.97 8.69 283 256 8.04 7.33 22.6 22.9W3 : Atrazine @ 1 kg/ha 192.7 180.0 8.39 7.30 9.81 8.52 292 256 8.21 7.03 22.9 23.4W4 : Straw mulching 181.0 174.0 7.56 6.64 9.12 7.80 215 181 6.92 6.06 21.4 21.3S. Em± 2.05 2.76 0.15 0.21 0.25 0.19 5.12 3.21 0.14 0.14 0.22 0.20LSD (P=0.05) 6.09 8.19 0.44 0.62 NS 0.55 15.14 10.13 0.40 0.41 0.65 0.58

NS–Not Significant.


controlled grew vigorously due to less competition posedfrom other weeds and competed with crop for growthunder congenial environment.

Atrazine application and hand weedingsignificantly improved growth characters, yield attributes(viz., plant height, corn length, corn diameter, cornweight, corn number) baby corn yield and stover yield ascompared to straw mulching and unweeded check (Table1&2). However, all the three weed control methods i.e.atrazin application, hand weeding and mulching registeredan increase in baby corn yield by 29.2, 26.9 and 10.1%,respectively during 2008 and 33.0, 33.3 and 12.0% during2009. Khan et al. (2012) also recorded maximum yield ofmaize with the application of atrazin.

The interaction effects (Table 4 & 5), betweendates of sowing and weed management practices revealedthat, weed dry weight and consequently N removal byweeds were significantly higher in early sowing ascompared to late sowing. This is due to the fact that goodvigour during initial development stages expressed viagrowth characters and biomass formation could be thefactors that significantly affect the weed infestation level,although level is not permanent and varies depending onthe environmental conditions. Atrazine applicationsignificantly reduced weed biomass and N-removal byweeds as compared to mulching and unweeded check,but was at par with hand weeding. Superiority of atrazinein maize was also reported by Singh et al. (2006). Further

Table 2. Yield, N, Uptake and relative economics of baby corn as influenced by sowing dates and weed management practices

Treatment Baby corn Green fodder N uptake Total gross Net income B : Cyield (kg/ha) yield (kg/ha) by stover (kg/ha) income (Rs/ha) ratio

on dry weight basis (Rs/ha)

2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009

Sowing datesD1 : 30th April 1720 1490 29800 26500 65.5 58.1 1, 24, 400 1,08,450 94,274 78,324 3.13 2.60D2 : 15th May 1700 1450 27000 24500 59.8 52.8 1,20,500 1,04,250 90,374 74,124 3.00 2.46D3 : 30 May 1470 1300 23800 22300 51.8 48.3 1,04,650 93,800 74,524 63,674 2.47 2.11S. Em ± 24 21 360 430 0.77 0.96 - - - - - -LSD (P=0.05) 95 83 1400 1700 3.0 3.70 - - - - - -Weed management practicesW1 : Unweeded check 1330 1100 24000 20300 51.6 42.7 97,150 80,800 69,859 53,509 2.31 1.96W2 : Handweeding 1820 1650 29300 28100 65.5 62.0 1,29,400 1,18,850 97,609 87,059 3.07 2.73W3 : Atrazine @1 kg/ha 1880 1650 28500 27700 63.5 60.9 1,31,900 1,18,450 1,03,767 90,317 3.69 3.21W4 : Straw mulching 1480 1250 25800 22300 55.6 46.7 1,07,200 91,050 73,909 57,759 2.22 1.73S. Em± 32 21 500 580 1.04 1.29 - - - - - -LSD (P=0.05) 94 62 1500 1720 3.10 3.8 - - - - - -

atrazine and hand weeded plots registered significantlylower weed dry weight and N removal irrespective ofdates of sowing. These findings are in conformity withthe findings of Suresh and Reddy (2010).

Correlation and Regression

Baby corn yield was defined by growth andyield attributes and strongly correlated with each other(Table 7). The statistical model for predicting baby cornyield is {Y=-4968+26.78 Cob Length+92.04 Cobdiameter+10.49 Plant height and 140.79 Cob Number}.Coefficient of determination revealed that theseparameters contribute 95 % of baby corn yield. Furtherpartial regression coefficient revealed that theseparameters contribute 21.25, 5.39, 11.37 and 57.50%,respectively. Thus number of cobs appears to be mostimportant yield attributing character and is severelyaffected when crop is sown late and without properweed management practices. The adverse influence ofweed competition on cob number and ultimately babycorn yield was also reported by Hussein et al. (2008).

Nitrogen Dynamics

The interaction effect on N uptake by bay corn(Table 6 & Fig. 2) revealed that uptake increasedsignificantly when the crop was sown on 30 April and


Tabl

e 3.

Wee

d po

pula

tion

as i

nflu

ence

d b

y di

ffere

nt d

ates

of

sow

ing

and

wee

d m

anag

emen

t pr

actic

es

Tre

atm

ents

Cyp

erus

Dig

itari

aE

chin

ochl

oaPo

rtul

aca

Oth

ers

Tota

lro

tund

ussa

ngui

nalis

colo

naol

erac

ea

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

Sow

ing

date

sD

1 : 3

0th A

pril

12.9

(17

)12

.1 (

150)

10.4

(10

9)9.

55 (

92)

4.97

(28

)4.

72 (

24)

7.39

(59

)7.

31 (

58)

7.54

(57

)7.

87 (

63)

20.3

(42

3)19

.4 (

385)

D2

: 15th

May

13.5

(18

5)12

.1 (

150)

10.3

(10

9)9.

28 (

87)

5.27

(30

)7.

82 (

25)

7.51

(61

)6.

34 (

41)

8.07

(65

)8.

88 (

79)

21 (

450)

19.4

(38

0)D

3 : 3

0 M

ay11

.5 (

136)

10.9

(12

1)9.

5 (1

08)

7.89

(62

)4.

66 (

24)

5.01

(28

)5.

98 (

40)

6.16

(38

)8.

09 (

66)

7.56

(59

)18

.7 (

355)

16.9

(29

3)S.

Em

±0.

390.

200.

430.

240.

260.

220.

210.

610.

280.

260.

200.

43LS

D

(P=0

.05)

1.5

0.77

NS

0.93

NS

NS

0.80

NS

NS

NS

0.76

1.7

Wee

d m

anag

emen

t pr

acti

ces

W1:

Unw

eede

d ch

eck

15.5

(24

1)14

.56

(213

)11

.1 (

126)

9.9

(100

)7.

31 (

54)

6.82

(47

)9.

79 (

967)

8.04

(67

)8.

32 (

69)

8.59

(75

)24

.13

(584

)22

.2 (

497)

W2:

Han

dwee

ding

10.5

(11

2)9.

81 (

96)

9.3

(87)

8.59

(74

)3.

55 (

12)

3.26

(10

)5.

23 (

29)

6.17

(39

)7.

32 (

54)

7.68

(60

)17

.08

(292

)16

.7 (

279)

W3:

Atra

zine

@ 1

kg/

ha11

.2 (

127)

10.2

2 (1

06)

9.7

(93)

8.33

(71

)3.

19 (

9.8)

3.63

(13

)5.

16 (

27)

5.69

(32

)7.

26 (

53)

7.47

(57

)17

.57

(309

)16

.6 (

278)

W4:

Stra

w m

ulch

ing

13.2

(17

5)12

.11

(147

)10

.3 (

106)

8.81

(77

)5.

82 (

34)

5.68

(32

)7.

65 (

60)

6.50

(44

)8.

7 (7

5)8.

67 (

76)

21.0

8 (4

51)

18.7

(35

5)S.

Em

±0.

460.

440.

420.

450.

24 (

)0.

360.

460.

350.

450.

360.

450.

45LS

D (

P=0.

05)

1.4

1.31

1.25

NS

0.73

1.06

1.37

1.04

1.34

1.07

1.35

1.33

NS–

Not

Sig

nific

ant.

*Dat

a is

sub

ject

ed t

o sq

uare

roo

t tra

nsfo

rmat

ion

(SQ

RT o

f x+

1)*V

alue

s w

ithin

the

par

enth

esis

are

orig

inal

val

ues


Table 4. Weed dry weight (g/m) as influenced by sowing dates and weed management practices

Treatments 2008 2009

D1 D2 D3 Mean D1 D2 D3 Mean

W1 27.2 25.6 24.0 25.6 26.3 24.1 21.9 24.1W2 14.5 13.8 14.0 14.1 14.6 13.2 12.6 13.5W3 14.8 14.1 13.9 14.3 15.5 14.3 14.1 14.6W4 24.1 21.8 19.6 21.7 23.4 20.5 18.0 20.6Mean 20.1 18.8 17.8 19.9 18.1 16.7

Date of sowing Weed control Date of Sowing Weed controlS. Em± 0.15 0.31 0.25 0.32LSD (P=0.05) 0.57 0.93 0.99 0.96Inertraction W within D D within W W within D D within WS. Em± 0.766 0.695 0.793 0.774LSD (P=0.05) 1.61 1.50 1.66 1.74

Transformed values =(X+1).

Table 5. N removal by weeds (kg/ha) as influenced by sowing dates and weed management practices



W1 30.1 26.7 23.4 26.73 28.3 24.2 19.9 24.14W2 8.7 8.1 8.1 8.32 9.0 7.5 6.8 7.76W3 9.3 8.3 8.1 8.55 10.3 8.88 8.3 9.13W4 24.0 19.8 15.2 19.66 22.9 17.7 13.4 17.98Mean 18.04 15.70 13.71 17.63 14.54 12.09

Date of sowing Weed control Date of Sowing Weed controlS. Em± 0.26 0.54 0.39 0.47LSD (P=0.05) 1.03 1.61 1.53 1.38Inertraction W within D D within W W within D D within WS. Em± 0.94 0.86 0.81 0.8LSD (P=0.05) 2.8 2.62 2.4 2.6


Table 6. Influence of date of sowing and weed management on N-uptake by baby corn (kg/ha)



W1 3.12 2.95 2.50 2.86 2.60 2.41 2.14 2.38W2 5.16 4.94 3.79 4.63 4.39 4.30 3.31 4.0W3 5.29 5.10 3.73 4.71 4.36 4.25 3.30 3.97W4 3.42 3.57 2.74 3.25 2.97 2.67 2.31 2.65Mean 4.25 4.14 3.19 3.58 3.41 2.77

Date of sowing Weed control Date of Sowing Weed controlS. Em ± 0.07 0.09 0.04 0.06LSD (P=0.05) 0.26 0.28 0.16 0.17Interaction W with in D D with in W W with in D D with in WS. Em ± 0.16 0.15 0.10 0.09LSD (P=0.05) 0.48 0.49 0.29 0.29



Table 7. correlation among growth, yield attributes and yield of baby corn

Baby corn yield (kg/ha) Cob length (cm Cob diameter (cm) Con number/m2 Plant height (cm)

Baby corn yield (kg/ha) 1.00 0.773** 0.761** 0.960** 0.889**Cob length (cm) 0.773** 1.00 0.626* 0.746** 0.689*Cob dimater (cm) 0.761** 0.626* 1.00 0.711** 0.604*Con number/m2 0.960** 0.711** 0.711** 1.00 0.859**Plant height (cm) 0.889** 0.604* 0.604* 0.859** 1.00

**correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.* correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.

Fig. 2. Relation of weed population, weed dry weight and Weed N removal on baby corn yield. (Average of two years).

15 May in comparison to late sowing. Similarly N uptakeenhanced significantly in plants where atrazine wasapplied, which was at par with handweeding. Higher Nuptake by baby corn in atrazine applied and hand weededplots was achieved because weed growth was checkedeffectively. Due to less competition transportation ofphotosynthates to the sink portion was in abundance ascompared to unweeded plots. Irrespective of sowingdates, N uptake by baby corn increased where N removalby weeds was comparatively low. In early dates ofsowing N uptake by crop and N removal by weeds washigher irrespective of weed management practices. Thuscompetition becomes more severe with early dates ofsowing. The worst scenario of crop-weed competitionfor N was noticed in unweeded control. This might bedue to more favourable conditions for both crop andweeds under temperate Kashmir. Bahar et al. (2009)also reported similar findings for maize in temperateKashmir Regression analyses (Fig 3), further revealedthat N removal by weeds reduced ability of the crop touptake N very drastically. Thus proper weed managementpractice is imperative to boost N uptake which in turnincreases yield of baby corn.

Relative Economics

The highest net returns (Rs 94, 274 and Rs 78,324) and benefit cost ratio (3.13 and 2.60) for the year2008 and 2009, respectively, were recorded under 30April sowing followed by 15 May sowing. Similarlyhigher net returns and benefit cost ratio were obtainedwith the application of atrazine @ 1.0 kg/ha as compared

Fig. 3. N uptake relation between weeds and crop


to other weed control methods. It was mainly due tolow cost required for the purchase of atrazine, reducingcompetition by weeds and less labour involvementsimultaneously. Similar findings were also reported byPawar (2009). Thus it was concluded that baby cornproductivity can be maximized by sowing the cropbetween 30 April and 15 May and appling of atrazine aspre emergence herbicide @ 1.0 kg/ha under temperatevalley conditions.

REFERENCES

Bahar, F. A., Singh, K. N., and Malik, M. A. 2009. Integratedweed management in maize under different nitrogenlevels. Indian J. Agri. Sci. 10 : 13-19

Hussein, F., Abouziena, J. M., Netwaly, E. L. and Desoki, E.R. 2008. Effect of plant spacing and weed controltreatments on maize yield and associated weeds insandy soils. American-Eurosian J. Agri. andEnviron. Sci. 4 : 48-52.

Khan, N., Khan, N. W., Khan, S. A., Khan, M. A. andMarawat, K. B. 2012. Combined effect of nitrogenfertilizers and herbicides upon maize productionin Peshawar. The J.Ani. and Pl. Sci. 22 : 12-17.

Khan, N., Qasim, M., Ahmad, F., Naz, F. and Khan, R. 2002.Effect of sowing dates on yield of maize underagroclimatic conditions of Kangan Valley. Asian J.Plant Sci. 1 : 146-147.

Pandey, A. K. 2004. Production potential and economics ofdifferent sowing dates for babycorn (Zea mays)production under mid-hill conditions of North-western Himalayas. Ind. J. Agron. 49 : 179-181.

Pawar, M. K. 2009. Economics of weed control measures inwinter maize (Zea Mays). J. Agron. 45 : 344-348.

Singh, M., Kumar, P., Sairam, C. V. and Kumar, A. 2009.Evaluation of different weed management practicesin rainfed maize in farmers field. Pakistan J. WeedSci. Res. 15 : 183-189.

Singh, P., Singh, P. and Dawson, J. 2006. Correlation andRegression Studies of winter maize and weedinteractions. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 39 : 21-23.

Suresh, G., Reddy, B. N. 2010. Effect of weed controlpractices and weed dry matter productionpotential and nutrient uptake of sunflower(Helianthus annus) in vertisols. Ind. J. Agri. Sci.80 : 33-37.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 19-24 (2012)

Legume intercropping and in- situ green manuring as well as FYM applicationin maize along with inorganic fertilizers in wheat for sustainability of maize-

wheat system under rainfed conditionsVIKAS GUPTA, ANIL KUMAR*, B. C. SHARMA*, MAHENDER SINGH AND JAI KUMAR

AICRP for Dryland Agriculture, DLRSS, Rakh Dhiansar, Bari Brahmana, Samba, J&K-181133*Division of Agronomy, SKUAST-J, Main Campus, Chatha, Jammu-180009


ABSTRACT

A three year field experiment consisting of seven treatment combinations applied during kharifseason and 3 levels of fertilizer doses was conducted during 2002-03 to 2004-05 at Research Farm ofSKUAST-J, Chatha to study the effect of FYM application and legume intercropping, green manuring-GM and grain crop-GC in maize crop during kharif and their residual effects on succeeding wheat crop inrabi season. The treatments consists of pure maize (without FYM), pure maize (FYM @ 5t/ha),maize+cowpea (GM), maize+cowpea (GC), maize+soybean (GM), maize+soybean (GC) and maize+Sunhemp (GM). The growth parameters, grain yield and dry matter production of maize were found significantlysuperior when FYM @ 5t/ha was applied in pure maize crop. However, yield attributes of maize and wheatcrop were found maximum in the same treatment combination but couldn’t reach the significant level. Thegrain yield and dry matter production of wheat was significantly superior in treatment where FYM @ 5t/ha was applied in previous maize crop in main plots. In sub-plots the yield trend increased with increasein RFD level i.e. from 50 to 150%, respectively. The maximum net returns, net return/rupee invested andmaize equivalent yield was maximum in treatment maize+soybean (GC) followed by the treatmentmaize+cowpea (GC) which was mainly due to the extra income through the yield of intercrops. The NPKbalance improved in all the intercropping treatments and FYM applied plots; however, the highest build-up of soil N (213.7 kg/ha), P (18.5 kg/ha) and F (122.3 kg/ha) was recorded in treatment pure maize+FYM@ 5 t/ha. The intercropping treatments and 3 levels of RFD had a non-significant effect on pH, E. C. andO. C. content; moreover, organic carbon increased by 9.6% in FYM applied plots and it further decreasedby 3.2% in pure maize-wheat rotation plots.

Key words : Maize, intercropping, soybean, cowpea, sunhemp, FYM

INTRODUCTION

To make the maize-wheat system moresustainable, association of kharif legumes with maizenot only helps in utilization of nitrogen being fixed bylegumes in the current growing season, but also helps inresidual build up of soil (Sharma and Choubey, 1991).On the other hand, these crops add to the substance ofsmall and marginal farmers. The symbolic associationbetween leguminous plants and root nodule bacteria hasbeen estimated to fix approximately 80% of thebiologically fixed nitrogen in agricultural areas, with theremainder being contributed by adversity of othersymbolic system, non-symbolic associations betweennitrogen fixing bacteria and roots, and freemicroorganisms (Vance, 1997). The legume crops like

dhaincha (Sesbania aculeata), Sunhemp (Crotolariajuncea), cowpea (Vigna sinesis), etc. when grown asgreen manure crops not only fix atmospheric nitrogenin the soil but also provide considerable amount of organicmatter when incorporated into the soil (Heichel andBarner, 1984). Rye, Maize and Wheat produced higheryield after green manured crops than after summerfallow (Reddy et al., 1986). Intercropping is a potentialagronomics system for maximizing crop production inrainfed conditions over space and time in subsistancefarming situation besides effective utilization of naturalresources (Willey, 1979). Inclusion of legumes as greenmanuring crops in the cropping system contributes asmuch as 50-60 kg N ha-1 to the succeeding crop as wellas benefiting the present crop (Sharma et al., 2006).Use of green manuring of legumes in crop rotation

reduces the leaching and gaseous losses of N, thusincreasing the efficiency of applied plant nutrients (Rajuand Rao, 2004).

Hence, in this study an attempt was made toevaluate the biological productivity of legumes grownas intercrops and in-situ green manuring crops alongwith FYM application in maize crop in a sub-tropicalenvironment subject to short seasonal dry spells in amaize-wheat cropping system under rainfed conditions.


A field experiment was conducted at AgronomyResearch Farm of Sher-e-Kashmir University ofAgricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu, forthe years starting from kharif 2002 to rabi 2004-05 inrandomized block design in maize and split plot designin wheat with three replications under rainfed conditions.The total rainfall received during maize growing seasonwas 667, 1087.2 and 525.2 mm, during kharif 2002,2003 and 2004 whereas, 237.1, 142.2 and 376.8 mmrainfall was received during wheat growing season inrabi 2002-03, 2003-04 and 2004-05, respectively. Thesoil of the experimental site was sandy loam in texturewith pH 8.1, low in available N (188.2 kg/ha), mediumin available phosphorus (16.2 kg/ha) and low in availablepotassium (103.2 kg/ha). The maize crop was sownwith FYM application and intercrops meant for greenmanuring (GM) as well as grain crops (GC) with thefollowing treatment combinations; viz., T1 : pure maize(without FYM), T2 : pure maize (FYM @ 5 t/ha), T3 :maize+cowpea (GM), T4 : maize+cowpea (GC), T5 :maize+soybean (GM), T6 : maize+soybean (GC) and T7: maize+sumhemp (GM). Maize ‘Pioneer’ was plantedwith spacing 75 x 20 cm; however, soybean, cowpeaand sunhemp crops were sown in 2 : 2 ratio (2 rows ofintercrops between maize rows) as additive series with25 cm row spacing and plant to plant 20 cm. Therecommended dose of fertilizers-RFD (NPK 60 : 40 : 20kg/ha) was applied to all the treatments uniformly. Halfdose of N along with full dose of P and K was drilled atthe time of sowing, while the remaining half nitrogenwas top dressed in 2 splits, at knee high and tasselingstages. Green manuring and grain crops were sown alongwith the main crop, the GM crops were incorporated inthe same plots 30-35 days after sowing (DAS) dependingupon the proper moisture conditions (Batter) and thecrops meant for grain purpose were harvested on theirrespective maturity.

In the following respective rabi seasons, threedoses 50, 100 and 150% RFD (N : P : K 80 : 40 : 25 kg/ha) of inorganic fertilizers were tested in split plot designfor wheat ‘PBW 343’ with 22.5 cm row to row spacing.Half dose of N and full doses of P and K was drilled atsowing, whereas the remaining half N was top dressedat CRI and maximum tillering stages in 2 splits. N, P andK were applied through urea, diammonium phosphate(DAP) and muriate of potash (MOP), respectively inboth maize and wheat crops.

Yield and yield attributes of maize and wheatcrops were recorded at harvesting. Intercrops yield wasrecorded and maize equivalent yield (MEY) and netmonetary returns of sequence were computed on thebasis of sale prices prevailing at completion of the studyin the respective years.


Maize yield attributes and yield

Variations in plant height and yield attributes dueto intercropping were non-significant except for grainscob-1 character, which was significantly increased dueto intercropping and treatment T2 produces maximumnumber of grains cob-1 (Table 3) followed by statisticallysimilar treatments T5 and T3. All the intercroppingtreatments significant by enhanced in maize grain yieldand dry matter production in all the 3 years of study(Table 1). Application of FYM 5 t/ha (T2) in sole maizecrop recorded higher productivity in terms of grain (2242kg/ha) and dry matter production (6017 kg/ha) after 3years of study. The T2 treatment (pure maize+FYM @5 t/ha) along with RFD have supplied the adequate andcontinuous amount of nutrients at different stages dueto release of significant amount of nutrients bymineralization at a constant level that resulted in highestplant growth and ultimately the grain yield. The findingsof Saragoni and Poss (2000) and Pathak et al. (2002)confirmed these results.

Intercrops and maize equivalent yield

The grain yield and dry matter production ofmaize crops was higher than sole maize crop whenintercrop was grown for grain purpose. On mean basis,the intercropping with cowpea and soybean as graincrops yielded 782 and 907 kg/ha as grain yields,respectively (Table 1). The synergistic effect of these

20 Gupta, Kumar, Sharma, Singh and Kumar

Table 1. Effect of FYM, legume intercropping for green manuring and grains on grain yield, dry matter production and equivalentyields of maize

Treatments Grain yield (kg/ha) Dry matter production (kg/ha) Maize Equivalent yield (kg/ha)

2002 2003 2004 Mean 2002 2003 2004 Mean 2002 2003 2004 Mean

T1 1540 1515 1635 1563 4460 4536 4598 4531 1540 1515 1635 1563T2 2110 2272 2345 2242 5790 6085 6176 6017 2110 2272 2345 2242T3 1940 2090 2133 2054 5104 5481 5557 5383 1940 2090 2133 2054T4 1690 1793 1838 1773 4700 4883 4939 4843 4310 4741 4750 4600

(720) (810) (818) (782)T5 2020 2180 2222 2140 5630 5909 5958 5832 2020 2180 2222 2140T6 1760 1861 1901 1840 5090 5233 5281 5202 5412 5997 6158 5856

(830) (940) (951) (907)T7 1890 1980 2012 1960 5210 5363 5398 5323 1890 1980 2012 1960LSD (P=0.05) 208 210 260 64 361 381 435 117 360 389 324 243

Data in parenthesis is the yield value of intercrops.

intercrop may due to some favorable soil conditions andalso increased the availability of nutrients resulting inbetter growth and biomass accumulation which mighthave boosted the grain and dry matter yield (Mohamedet al., 2006). The maize equivalent yield (MEY) wassignificantly superior to sole maize and MEY values ofT4 and T6 were 194.3 and 274.6% higher over control(sole maize crop).

Wheat

Plant height of wheat was affected by

intercropping treatments in maize, but the effect wasstatistically non-significant in main plots and in sub-plotsdifferent inorganic fertilizers level affected the height ofwheat crop significantly. Intercropping green manuringtreatments applied during rainy season brought outsignificant variation in grain yield and dry matterproduction of succeeding wheat crop (Table 2) in all thethree years of study. Grain yield and dry matterproduction in plots where FYM was applied in kharifseason was statistically superior than control plot;however, the plot which were intercropped with cowpea/soybean for green manuring grain crops in maize were

Table 2. Grain yield, dry matter production and relative economics of wheat crop as affected by different levels of inorganic fertilizersand residual effects of maize crop treatments

Treatments Grain yield Dry matter production Relative Economics of system(kg/ha) (kg/ha) (mean of 3 years)

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Mean 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Mean Net returns Net return(Rs./ha) rupee

invested (Rs.)

Main plotsT1 2746 2875 3036 2886 7429 7750 7446 7542 4178 1.17T2 3123 3288 3407 3273 8080 8441 8359 8293 5181 1.18T3 2986 2911 3037 2978 7868 7848 7570 7762 7329 1.29T4 2850 2770 2896 2839 7610 7465 7362 7479 18077 1.73T5 3113 3176 3305 3198 8034 8168 8058 8087 6471 1.24T6 2903 3023 3145 3024 7726 7991 7573 7763 22712 1.87T7 2796 2822 3009 2876 7654 7777 7469 7633 5392 1.21LSD (P=0.05) 160 183 278 103 128 172 218 236Sub-plots50% RFD 2662 2807 2951 2807 7276 7544 7275 7365100% RFD 3018 2984 3152 3051 7934 7941 7711 7862150% RFD 3193 3149 3297 3215 8189 8273 7958 8140LSD (P=0.05) 65 72 67 103 88 102 108 127


statistically at plots in all the three years of study.Mean data for grain yield and dry matter

production (Table 2) revealed that grain yield increasedby 8.9 and 14.5% dry matter increased by 6.8 and10.5%, respectively, measured under lowest level offertilizers (50 % RFD) and also the effect was significant(Ameta and Sharma, 2002).

Mean data of yield attributes of wheat crop(Table 4) revealed that the treatments imposed in maizecrop in previous kharif season failed to affect the yieldattributes of wheat crop significantly in main plots, exceptthe character number of effective tillers m-2 and no. ofgrains ear-1 but the trend of performance of treatmentswas more or less same as in maize crop. However, in

sub-plots, yield attributes under different recommendeddose of fertilizers (RFD) treatments differentsignificantly. On mean basis, no. of effective tillers m-2

increased by 5.3 and 9.1%, number of grain increasedby 12.6 and 23.42%, respectively, measured underlowest level of fertilizers.

Nutrient studies

Soil pH, EC and organic carbon (O.C) contentsvaried with different intercropping treatments (Table 5),but the effect was statistically non–significant. Aftercompletion of the study, the plots having pure maize-wheat rotation, showed a decline in soil organic carbonto the tune of 3.2%, while maize+FYM 5 t/ha treatmentshowed an increase of 9.7% in organic carbon afterthree years of study. Nitrogen, phosphorus and potashcontent increased significantly with differentintercropping treatments in main plots and in sub plotsdifferent levels of RFD has also statistically significanteffect on NPK availability. The highest NPK availabilitywas noticed in T2 treatment where FYM 5t ha-1 wasapplied in kharif season in main plots whereas, in subplots, highest NPK availability was noticed when 150%RFD was applied in wheat crop. This increase in NPKavailability might be due to the decay of nodules oflegumes and contribution of atmospheric N fixation bydifferent legumes intercrops meant for both greenmanuring and grain purpose. Similar findings were alsoreported by Singh and Bajpai (1991).

Economics

The mean data of three years regarding relative economicsof maize-wheat system under intercropping revealed that

Table 4. Effect of different levels of inorganic fertilizers andresidual effects of maize crop treatments on growth andyield attributes of wheat crop (mean data of three years)

Treatment Plant No. of Length No. of Testheight effective of ear grains/ weight(cm) tillers/m (cm) ear (g)

Main PlotsT1 78.4 201 14.2 26.1 38.6T2 89.1 237 17.6 37.3 44.2T3 85.8 226 16.5 34.0 41.9T4 80.6 205 14.7 28.5 39.1T5 87.2 232 17.1 35.7 43.3T6 81.9 213 15.1 30.2 39.7T7 83.6 220 15.8 32.4 40.6LSD (P=0.05) NS 8.9 NS 2.28 NSSub-plots50% RFD 77.9 209 14.8 28.6 39.9100% RFD 84.1 220 15.6 32.2 41.1150% RFD 89.4 228 17.2 35.3 42.2LSD (P=0.05) 0.84 5.0 0.69 1.22 NS

Table 3. Effect of legume intercropping and in-situ green manuring on growth and yield attributes of maize (mean data of three years)

Treatment Plant height No. of cobs/ Cob length Cob girth Grains Test-weight(cm) plant (cm) (cm) cob (g)

T1 155.3 1.21 7.0 8.0 145 200.6T2 177.4 1.45 9.8 9.8 212 212.0T3 167.4 1.37 8.8 9.1 193 209.2T4 159.4 1.25 7.4 8.1 158 202.3T5 172.0 1.40 9.2 9.5 198 210.4T6 161.5 1.29 7.9 8.4 171 204.9T7 164.9 1.33 8.3 8.8 186 207.3LSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS 19.27 NS


the highest net returns to the tune of Rs. 22712/ha wasrecorded with treatment T6 maize+soybean (GC)registering an increase of Rs. 18534/ha over treatmentT1 : pure maize. The treatment T6 was; however, closelyfollowed by T4 treatment where cowpea was grown asintercrop-GC registering a value of Rs. 18077/ha.

The net return rupee-1 invested was highest withtreatment T6 followed by T4 with values 1.87 and 1.73,respectively. These higher values were due to the incomegenerated by the intercrops. The lowest values of netreturns and net return rupee-1 invested were in thetreatments T1: pure maize to the tune of Rs. 4178/haand 1.17, respectively.

On the basis of results of three years pooleddata, it can be concluded that intercropping of soybean/cowpea and application of FYM 5 t/ha along with RFDto maize followed by wheat was found superior in respectof productivity; economics, NPK availability and organiccarbon build up in soil.

REFERENCES

Ameta, G. S. and Sharma, S. K. 2002. Sustainability of maize-wheat cropping system by different legumeintercropping treatments and nitrogen levels. In :Proc. 8th Asian Regional Maize Workshop,Bangkok, Thialand, August 5-8, 2002.

Heichel, G. H. and Barner, D. K. 1984. Opportunities formeeting crop nitrogen needs from symbolic

Table 5. Effect of intercropping and in-situ green manuring in maize and different levels of inorganic fertilizers on soil fertility statusafter 3rd maize-wheat crop-cycle

Treatment pH EC (dsm2) O. C. (%) Available N Available P Available K(kg/ha) (kg/ha) (kg/ha)

Main plotsT1 8.1 0.12 0.32 195.6 16.92 108.2T2 8.2 0.10 0.34 213.73 18.54 122.3T3 7.98 0.11 0.32 203.5 17.51 117.2T4 7.95 0.12 0.32 198.27 17.31 111.6T5 8.25 0.11 0.32 213.07 17.85 122.6T6 8.26 0.13 0.33 198.20 17.73 116.1T7 8.3 0.10 0.32 202.37 17.97 120.2LSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS 3.32 1.19 2.21Sub Plots50 % Rec. NPK 8.1 0.12 0.31 190.68 17.08 111.78100 % Rec. NPK 8.3 0.11 0.32 202.06 17.59 116.28150 % Rec. NPK 8.2 0.13 0.33 212.71 18.39 122.58LSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS 1.36 0.77 1.86

nitrogen fixation. In : Organic Farming: CurrentTechnology and its Role in a SustainableAgriculture (eds. D. F. Dezdicere, J. F. Power, D. R.Keeny and M. J. Wright), Madeson : 49-59.American Soc. of Agron., Crop Sci. Soc. of Americaand Soil Sci. Soc. of America.

Mohamed, A. M., Vaiyupuri, K., Alagesan, A.,Somasundaran, E., Satyamourths, K. andPazhanivelan, S. 2006. Effect of intercropping andorganic manures on the yield and biologicalefficiency of Cassava intercropping system.(Manihot esculente Crantz.). Res. J. Agri. Biol.Sci. 2 : 201-208.

Pathak, S. K., Singh, S. B. and Singh S. N. 2002. Effect ofintegrated nutrient management on growth yieldand economics of maize. Zea maize- wheat(Triticum aestivum) cropping pattern. Ind. J. Agron.47 : 325-332.

Raju Sreenivasan, A. and Rao, K. J. 2004. Recent effortson integrated nutrient management for sustainableAgriculture in Andhra Pradesh. 69th AnnualConvention of the Society of Soil Science andNatural Semi. on Devel. in Soil Sci.

Reddy, K. C., Soffer, A. R. and Prine, G. M. 1986. Tropicallegumes for green manure I. Nitrogen productionand the effects on succeeding crop yields. Agron.J. 78 : 1-4.


Saragoni, H. and Poss, R. (2000. Vegetative productionand mineral uptake of maize. Southern Togo-Agronomic-Tropical, 46 : 185-201.

Sharma, P., Abrol, V. and Sharma, V. 2006. Integratednutrient management in Dryland Agriculture. APerspective. In : Eds. Arora, S. and Sharma, V.Resource Management for SustainabilityAgriculture, SCSI Jammu Chapter, SKUAST-Jammu.

Sharma, R. S. and Choubey, S. D. 1991. Effect of maize (Zeamays) legume intercropping system on nitrogeneconomy and nutrient status of soil. Ind. J. Agron.36 : 743-745.

Singh, V. K. and Bajpai, R. P. 1991. Intercropping in maize(Zea mays) under rainfed conditions. Ind. J. Agron.36 : 398-399.

Vance, C. P. 1997. Enhanced agricultural sustainabilitythrough biological nitrogen fixation. In : BiologicalFixation of Nitrogen for Ecology and Sustainabilityin Agriculture (Eds A. Legocki, H. Bothe & A.Puhler) : 179-186, Berlin : Springer-Verlag.

Willey, R. N. 1979. Intercropping its importance andresearch needs, part-I. Competition and yieldadvantage. Fields Crops Abst. 32 : 1-10.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 25-27 (2012)

Effect of phosphorus and potassium application on yield, quality and potassiumuptake by cotton in a sandy loam soil

K. S. GREWAL AND B. S. DUHANDepartment of Soil Science, CCS HAU, Hisar-125004


ABSTRACT

An investigation was carried out at the Soil Research Farm of Chaudhary Charan Singh HaryanaAgricultural University, Hisar to study the effect of P and K application on yield, quality and uptake of Kby cotton. The experiment had three levels of phosphorus (0, 30 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1) and four levels ofpotassium (0, 30, 60 and 90 kg K2O ha-1) laid out in a split plot design with three replications. The resultsindicated that application of both P and K, in general, increased the yield of various components ofcotton over their respective control; the response was; however, significant with respect to phosphorusapplication only. No significant response of potassium was observed in any of the yield components aswell as on fiber quality. This may be attributed to the fact that the available K status of the experimentalsoil was in high category. Like the yield data, no significant differences of K removal were observedunder different treatments; however, application of potassium @ 90 kg K2O ha-1 resulted in higher Kremovals as compared to control due to yield increase. The highest concentration of K was observed incotton leaf followed by stem, seed and least by lint.

Key words : Cotton yield, fiber quality, nutrient removal, soil deficiency

INTRODUCTION

Tremendous progress has been made in Indiaboth in fertilizer use and in agricultural production.However, higher production of food, fiber and othercrops has also resulted in much higher removal ofnutrients from the soils. The nutrient removals by cropshave continued to exceed nutrient additions throughfertilizers. This gap is estimated to be 8-10 mt. ofN+P2O5+K2O every year. Indian soils are already deficientin several nutrients with the result that medium to heavyyields are possible only if soil fertility is supplementedwith nutrient additions through fertilizers and manuresin a systematic, pre-planned manner.

Phosphorus (P) is an important element in plantnutrition; it comes at second rank next to nitrogen. It isan important constituent of phosphorylase and variousenzymes, a constituent of ATP (adenosine tri-phosphate),ADP (adenosine diphosphate) and AMP (adenosinemonophosphate), which supply energy for the variousreactions in the degradation of sugar to carbon dioxideand water. Phosphorus plays an important role in theformation of hormones, and it induces root proliferation.Also, the application of potassium (K) in Haryana hadbeen scanty and the main reason of this is a belief that

Haryana soils are very rich in potassium content due toillite dominated clay minerals in these soils.

Under intensive cropping system withoutpotassium fertilization, the continuous cropping leads todepletion of potassium from the soil due to its releasefrom fixed forms, and a soil which is initially moderateor high in exchangeable potassium becomes potentiallypotassium responsive. Cotton is one of the main cashcrop in Haryana and grown on a larger area especially inthe districts of Sirsa, Hisar, Bhiwani, Jind, Mahendergarh,Rewari etc. The crop is nutrient exhaustive and needsspecial attention towards balanced fertilization. Keepingall the above mentioned facts in consideration, the presentstudy was conducted to study the effect of phosphorusand potassium addition under intensive cropping systemto cotton crop.


The present investigation was conductedcontinuously for three years at the Soil Research Farmof CCS HAU, Hisar. The experimental site is located inIndo-Gangetic alluvium plain at 29º 10' North latitudeand 75 º 46’ East longitudes at an altitude of 215.2 mabove the MSL, having a semi-arid subtropical climate.

The experiment had three levels of phosphorus (0, 30and 60 kg P2O5/ha) and four levels of potassium, (0, 30,60 and 90 kg K2O/ha) laid out in a split plot design withthree replications. The experimental soil was alkaline (pH8.2) in nature, low in organic carbon content (0.34 %),non-saline (EC 0.40 dS/m) and sandy loam in texture.The values of available N, P and K were 132.2, 15.7 and390 kg/ha, respectively. The non-exchangeable potassiumwas found to be 1260 kg/ha. The cotton crop (cv H-1098) was raised to maturity following all therecommended package and practices. The yield ofvarious components of cotton i.e. main root, stem, leaves,lint and seed were recorded and the plant samples wereanalyzed for K concentration and fiber quality. Total Kin different cotton parts viz., seed, lint, main root, stemand dry leaves was analysed by using flame photometerand total P analysed by vanadomolybdo phosphoricyellow color method (Koenig and Johnson, 1942).


The data on effects of application of differentlevels of P and K treatments on yield components of

cotton crop are presented in Table 1. Application of Pand K increased the yield of various components ofcotton over their respective control. Devraj et al. (2012)also reported that the seed cotton yield was significantlyincreased with application of N and P. Gokhale et al.(2012), Nehra and Yadav (2012) and Solunke and Fatak(2011) also reported significant increase in seed cottonyield with the application of N, P and K. Significantresponse of P and not of K was observed in all the yieldcomponents of cotton crop. Devraj et al. (2009) alsoreported that the effect of K application on seed cottonyield and ancillary characters was non-significant.

Table 2 summarizes the effect of addition ofdifferent levels of phosphorus and potassium on theuptake of potassium by different cotton parts viz., seed,lint, main root, stem and dry leaves. In general the uptakeof potassium increased with increasing levels ofphosphorus and potassium. Devraj et al. (2012) alsoreported that the application of N, P and K significantlyincreased the uptake of N, P and K by cotton crop. Theinteraction effect was found non significant, hence onlymean data are presented. The highest removal of K wasobserved by cotton stem followed by dry leaves and

Table 1. Yield of various parts of cotton (q/ha) under different treatments

Treatment Kapas Seed Lint Main Root Stem Dry leaves

P0 18.51 12.37 6.08 7.88 57.95 11.08P30 19.61 13.09 6.49 8.77 58.53 11.92P60 20.17 13.36 6.81 9.16 58.57 12.13K0 19.05 12.60 6.45 8.39 58.06 11.43K30 19.46 13.01 6.42 8.45 58.16 11.69K60 19.66 13.13 6.46 8.77 58.61 11.83K90 19.54 13.02 6.51 8.79 58.56 11.89CD (5%) P= 0.26 0.19 0.17 0.23 0.47 0.21 K= NS NS NS NS NS NS

Table 2. Uptake of phosphorus and potassium (kg/ha) by different cotton parts

Treatment Seed Lint Main root Stem Dry leaves

P K P K P K P K P K

P0 4.05 7.28 0.24 2.55 0.74 5.27 5.03 67.83 2.08 17.29P30 4.38 9.66 0.26 2.70 0.77 5.60 5.34 67.25 2.33 21.16P60 4.39 8.46 0.28 2.87 0.84 6.07 5.95 74.32 2.58 20.50K0 4.13 6.78 0.24 2.57 0.74 5.40 5.31 63.15 2.58 18.30K30 4.25 8.06 0.27 2.71 0.76 5.33 5.72 68.83 2.10 20.81K60 4.31 9.74 0.26 2.69 0.81 5.68 5.85 70.93 2.53 20.47K90 4.40 9.31 0.26 2.86 0.82 6.17 4.87 76.28 2.50 19.03CD (5%) P= NS 0.12 0.15 0.07 0.63 NS NS NS NS NS K= NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

26 Grewal and Duhan

least by lint. The uptake of these nutrients increasedwith their increasing levels irrespective of the presenceor absence of the other.

As, in case of potassium uptake, general theuptake of phosphorus increased with increasing levelsof phosphorus and potassium (Table 2). Devraj et al.(2012) also reported that the application of N, P and Ksignificantly increased the uptake of N, P and K by cottoncrop. The interaction effect was found non significant,hence only mean data are presented. The highest removalof P was observed by cotton stem followed by seed andleast by lint.

As such no statistically significant response ofP or K alone or in combination was observed on fiberquality of cotton, however the values were numericallyhigher at higher level of nutrient application (Table 3).

The total uptakes of P and K by cotton crop are

presented in Fig. 1. The uptake of these nutrientsincreased with their increasing levels irrespective of thepresence or absence of the other.

REFERENCES

Devraj Kumari, P., Bhattoo, M. S. and Duhan, B. S. 2009.Effect of potassium application on yield, potassiumuptake and fiber quality of cotton (Gossypiumhisutum L.). J. Cotton Res. Dev. 23 : 247-250.

Devraj Kumari, P., Bhardwaj, K. K., Sheoran, P., Antil, R.S., Duhan, B. S. and Singh, G. 2012. Direct residualeffect of integrated nutrient management onproductivityand fertility status of cotton wheatcropping system. J. Cotton Res. Dev. 26 : 176-180.

Gokhale, D. N., Chavan, A. S. and Raskar, S. K. 2012.Influence of in situ soil moisture conservation andINM techniques on yield and economics of rainfedBt cotton. J. Cotton Res. Dev. 26 : 190-193.

Koenig, R. A. and Johnson, C. R. 1942. Colorimetricdetermination of P in biological materials. Ind. Eng.Anal. 14 : 155-156.

Nehra, P. L. and Yadav, P. S. 2012. Effect of spacing andfertilizer levels on hirsutum cotton variety H 1300in canal command area of nort west Rajasthan. J.Cotton Res. Dev. 26 : 207-208.

Solunke, P. S. and Fatak, S. U. 2011. Influence of organicand inorganic sources of nutrients on productionof desi cotton under different plant protectionmeasures. J. Cotton Res. Dev. 25 : 42-45.

Table 3. Quality parameters of cotton as affected by different Pand K treatments

Treatments 2.5% Span Micronaire Tenacity atLength (mm) value (mv) 3.2 mm (g/tex)

P0 26.49 5.10 18.41P30 27.23 5.06 18.32P60 27.00 4.96 18.55K0 26.70 5.10 18.80K30 26.93 5.03 18.55K60 27.08 5.07 17.72K90 26.92 4.96 18.65CD (5%) P= NS NS NS K= NS NS NS


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 28-30 (2012)

Effect of intercrops on yield and economics of maize based intercropping systemM. V. SINGH, B. N. MISRA AND NEERAJ KUMAR

Crop Research Station, Bahraich -271801 (U. P.)


ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted at Crop Research Station, Bahraich (U. P.) during kharifseasons of 2007-08 and 2008-09 to find out the feasibility of intercrops with kharif maize. The resultsindicated that maize+groundnut intercrops in 1 : 2 row was high yielding (maize 59.73 q/ha and groundnut10 q/ha) among different intercrops. The maize equivalent yield of 110.15 q/ha along with higher net profitof Rs. 45745/ha was recorded under this treatment. Maize+cowpea was second best producing maizeequivalent yield of 94.37 q/ha. The higher nutrient uptake of (N 195.7, P 40.6 and K 158.6 kg/ha) wasrecorded under maize+groundnut intercrops system followed by maize+cowpea (1:2) (N 188.7, P 37.4 andK 145.3 kg/ha) More nutrients balance (N 244.5, P 30.4 and K 278.27 kg/ha) was found under themaize+groundnut intercrops system.

Key words : Intercrops, yield, economics, kharif maize

INTRODUCTION

Maize being widely spaced crop provides ampleopportunity for raising short dyration varieties of urd,moong, cowpea, groundnut and guar as intercrops. Thesuitable intercrops system might increase the totalproduction through efficient utilization of productionfactors like space, water, nutrient etc. Plant populationand spacing management in intercrops have importanteffect on the competition between the component cropsand their productivity ( Faroda et. al., 2007). Intercropsof oil seed and pulse crops is one of the ways to increasetheir production because intercrops remainsadvantageous than sole cropping of either and thesecrops (Sarkar et. al., 2003, Pandhi and Panigrahi, 2006).Intercrop also improves soil fertility due to leguminouscrop. Keeping these views in mind the present experimentwas undertaken to study the feasibility of leguminousintercrop with rainy season maize at crop research stationBahraich (U. P.)


Field experiments were conducted during thekharif seasons of 2007-08 and 2008-09 at the CropResearch Station, Bahraich. The experimental soil hadavailable nitrogen of 0.40 kg, P 15.2 kg and K 240 kg/ha with pH 7.2. Treatments were T1–maize sole crop,T2–maize+urd, T3–maize+moong bean, T4–maize+

cowpea, T5–maize+groundnut and T6–maize+guar (1 :2). The experiment was laid out in randomized blockdesign with three replications in plot size of 5.0 x 4.0 m.Proagro-4212 maize was shown on 20th June duringboth the years and intercrops were sown just after sowingof maize crop. Maize was fertilized with 150 : 60 : 60 kgNPK/ha whereas intercrops were given NPK as perrecommendation. The growth and yield attributes wererecorded at full growth stage of maize as well asintercrop. The yield data was recorded after harvestingand threshing of maize and intercrops. Data wassubjected to ANOVA. The economics was calculatedbased on the nearest market price of the produce. N, Pand K were determined as per standard proceduresadopted by Jackson (1973).


Growth and yield attributes

Maize+groundnut 1 : 2 row ratio recordedsignificantly higher plant height (150.8 cm) as comparedto other treatments which could be due to positive effecton growth of maize by groundnut. The higher coblength (16.85 cm), cob girth (12.08 cm), grains row/cobs (13.15), grains/row (29.45) and test weight(250.74 g) were recorded under the intercrops ofmaize+groundnut ( Table 1). Which was foundsignificantly superior than rest of the intercrops.

Maize+cowpea 1 : 2 row ratio was found second bestin respect of growth and yield attributes. The growthand yield attributes of maize crop under intercrops withurd, moong, cowpea, groundnut and guar were superiorcompared with sole crop of maize. Similar result werereported in sugarcane based intercropping (Rana et.al., 2006b) and maize based intercropping (Rana et.al., 2006a).

Yield and equivalent yield of maize

Grain yield of maize as maize equivalent yieldrevealed that intercrops maize+groundnut gavesignificantly higher grain yield of maize over the solecrop as well as intercrop of urd, moongbean, guar andcowpea. However, the yield of intercrop cowpeaproduced 25.32 q/ha which was significantly superiorthan all other intercrops. Maize+groundnut produced59.73 q/ha grain yield which was 6.55, 3.34, 1.75, 0.91and 3.75% higher than maize sole, maize+urd,maize+moong, maize+cowpea, and maize+guar,respectively. Similar results were obtained by (Rana et.al., 2006a). The highest maize equivalent yield (110.15q/h) was obtained under the intercrop ofmaize+groundnut which was 67.62, 38.57, 31.63, 17.38,

33.5% higher over maize sole, maize+urd, maize+moong, maize+cowpea, and maize+guar.

ECONOMICS

All the intercrops systems were moreremunerative than sole crop of maize giving higher netmonetary returns and benefit cost ratio. Among theintercropping systems maize+groundnut gave maximumnet returns of Rs. 35413/ha over sole crop of maizewith B : C ratio 2.55 (Table 2). The higher net returnsRs. 45745 was also recorded with intercrops patternsof maize+groundnut (1:2) and which was 77.41, 42.96,34.06, 16.80 and 38.30% higher over the maize sole,maize+urd, maize+moong bean, maize+cowpea andmaize+guar, respectively.

NUTRIENT UPTAKE

Higher nutrient uptake (N 195.75, P 40.65 andK 158.62 kg/ha) was recorded in maize+groundnut.Maize+cowpea (1 : 2) resulted into the uptake of 188.7N, 37.4 P and 145.3 kg K/ha (Table 2). The highernutrient balance 244.52 N, 30.42 P and 278.72 kg K/hawas recorded under maize+groundnut (1 : 2).

Table 1. Effect of intercropping on growth, yield attributes and yield of maize and intercrops (Pooled data of two year)

Treatments Plant Cob Cob Grain Grain/ 1000-grain Grain Intercrop Maize Stoverheight length girth row/ row weight yield yield equivalent yield(cm) (cm) (cm) cobs (g) (q/ha) (q/ha) (q/ha) (q/ha)

T1 –Maize Sole Crop 140.0 14.45 8.25 8.45 25.75 245.65 48.76 - 48.76 60.58T2 –Maize+urd (1:2) 140.5 15.25 9.45 9.35 28.64 246.72 54.13 4.20 (Urd) 75.13 75.75T3 –Maize+moong (1:2) 148.0 15.75 10.15 11.25 28.84 248.95 56.80 4.79 (Moong) 81.43 78.64T4–Maize+cowpea(1:2) 140.33 16.45 11.45 12.45 28.95 249.64 58.20 25.32 (Cowpea) 94.37 80.65T5–Maize+groundnut (1:2) 150.83 13.852 12.08 18.15 29.45 250.74 59.73 12.00 (Groundnut) 110.15 77.45T6 –Maize+guar (1:2) 137.45 15.15 9.35 9.25 26.75 244.55 53.45 15.31 (Guar) 79.69 72.35LSD (P=0.05) 3.25 0.25 0.15 0.17 0.26 0.14 2.45 - 7.5 6.75

Table 2. Effect of intercropping on nutrient uptake and economics (Pooled data of two years)

Treatments Net B : C Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) Nutrient balance (kg/ha)Profit ratio(Rs./ha Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium

T1–Maize Sole Crop 10332.00 1:1.41 157.4 30.4 90.8 215.7 18.6 245.2T2–Maize+urd (1:2) 26091.00 1:1.93 175.2 35.7 110.4 235.6 24.3 255.7T3–Maize+moong (1:2) 30161.00 1:2.05 182.4 37.4 115.6 240.7 26.4 265.3T4–Maize+cowpea(1:2) 38059.00 1:2.28 188.7 37.4 145.3 238.4 28.4 272.4T5–Maize+groundnut (1:2) 45745.00 1:2.53 195.7 40.6 158.6 244.5 30.4 278.7T6–Maize+guar (1:2) 28223.00 1:1.97 178.6 34.6 105.7 235.1 26.3 248.7LSD (P=0.05) 1168.75 0.42 4.5 2.5 3.5 5.8 2.25 5.65


REFERENCES

Jackson, M. L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis, Practice Hallof India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

Padhi, A. K. and Panigrahi, R. K. 2006. Effect of intercropsand crop geometry on productivity, economics andsoil fertility status of maize (Zea mays) basedintercrops systems. Ind. J. Agron. 51 : 174-177.

Parroda, A. S., Joshi, N. L., Singh, Raj and Saxena. 2007.Resource management of sustainable cropproduction in arid zone A–review. Ind. J. Agron.52 : 181-193.

Rana, K. S., Shivram, R. K. and Ashok Kumar. 2006. Effect

of moisture conservation practice on productivityand water use in maize (Zea mays) basedintercropping system under rainfed condition. Ind.J. Agron. 51 : 24-26.

Rana, N. S., Sanjay Kumar and Saini, S. K. 2006.Production potential and profitability of autumnsugarcane based intercropping system asinfluenced by intercrop and row spacing. Ind. J.Agron. 51 : 31-33.

Sarkar, R. K., Goswami, S. and Pal, P. K. 2003. Productionpotential and economics feasibility of sunflowerand pigeon pea intercropping system in uplandcondition. Ind. J. Agron. 40 : 263-266.

30 Singh, Misra and Kumar

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 31-33 (2012)

Productivity and economics of winter maize with IntercropsM. V. SINGH, NEERAJ KUMAR AND B. N. MISHRA

Crop Research Station, Bahraich -271801 (U. P.)

Received on 13-08-2012 Accepted on 20-12-2012

ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted at the crop research station, Bahraich (U.P.) during rabiseasons of 2009-10 and 2010-11 to find out feasibility of intercrops with rabi maize. Results indicated thatmaize + garlic 1:2 row ratio increased growth and yield attributes in maize crop as well as in garlic. Maizefield 84.18 q and garlic 11.93 q/ha with maize equivalent yield of 119.97 q/ha. The higher net profit of Rs.68970 /ha and B:C ratio 2.40 was also recorded under this treatment which was significantly better thanother treatments. Maize + garlic 1:1 row ratio was next best. The higher uptake of N (225.6 kg/ha), P (40.4kg/ha) and K (175.4 kg/ha) was noted under maize sole crop.

Key words : Intercrop yield , economics, winter maize

INTRODUCTION

Maize (Zea mays L.) is one or other of theimportant crop of winter season because of its higheryield compared to wheat, oil seeds and pulses. Its yieldsis almost double than that of rainy- season maize and isalso more than that of the summer crops. Therefore,area under winter maize is increasing at a faster rate,specially in eastern U.P.. The winter rabi crop sown inOct.-Nov. makes little growth till mid-Feb., leavingenough scope for intercropping during this period. It isplanted in rows 60 cm apart and takes three months topick up growth. In view of such eco-situation, there isan ample scope to utilize the vacant wider inter-rowspace during its initial slow growth period by introducingsome compatible intercrop for increase productivity.Hence, short duration crops like garlic, onion, tarnip,potato, radish and carrot have ample scope to grow withwinter maize. Plant population and spatial arrangementin intercropping have an important effect on competitionbetween the component crops and their productivityFaroda et. al. (2007). Padhi and Panigrahi (2006) alsoreported oil seed and pulses have a ample scope to growwith winter maize. Therefore, an attempts was made toanalyse the feasibility of rabi vegetable and spices withwinter maize at crop research station Bahraich ( U. P.)


A field experiment was conducted during therabi season of 2009-10 and 2010-11 at the crop research

station, Bahraich. The experimental soil had with availablenitrogen 145 kg, P 15.8 kg and K 250 kg/ha with pH7.2, had nine treatments viz., T1–maize sole crop, T2–maize+garlic 1 : 1, T3–maize+garlic 1 : 2, T4 –maize+onion 1 : 1, T5–maize+onion 1 : 2, T6–maize+saljam 1 : 1, T7–maize+saljam 1 : 2, T8–maize+carrot 1 : 1, T9–maize+carrot 1 : 2. Theexperiment was laid out in randomized block design withthree replications with a plot size of 5.0 x 3.0 m. Seedtech-2324 was sown in the first week of Nov. during boththe years and intercrop were sown after sowing of maizeas per treatments. The maize was fertilized with 250:60:40kg NPK/ha and intercrops as per recommendations. Allthe agronomical practices were adopted as perrequirement of maize and intercrops. The growth andyield attributes were recorded at full growth stage ofmaize as well as intercrops. Yield was recorded afterharvesting and threshing of crops. Maize equivalent yieldand economics was calculated on the basis of prevailingmarket price. Nutrient uptake N, P and K were determindby the standard procedure as adopted by Jackson (1973).


Growth and yield attributes

Data on growth and yield attributes (Table 1)revealed that higher plant height (142.5 cm) was recordedunder maize sole crop which was at par with T2, T3 andT4. The yield attributes of maize viz. cob length (18.72cm), cob girth (12.45 cm), grains row/cobs (13.45)

grains/row (29.65) and 1000/seed weight (258.75 g)were recorded in maize sole crop and it was significantlysuperior to rest of the treatments. In intercrop sequence,maize + garlic (1:1) proved superior in respect of allgrowth attributes. All the intercrops caused adverseeffect on maize crop resulting in reduced yield attributesof maize. Among all intercropping patterns maize + garlic(1:1) and maize + garlic (1:2) recorded higher plant heightand yield attributes because garlic was less competitiveas compared to onion, turnip and carrot to maize crop.

Yield and equivalent yield of maize

Data (Table 1) indicated that higher grain yieldof maize 93.74 q/ha under maize sole which was superiorby 3.3, 14.4, 25.8, 25.8, 42.4, 46.5, 56.8, 71.0 % thanT2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 and T9, respectively. Maize+garlic (1:1) also produced 90.63 q/ha of maize yieldwhich was significantly superior than other intercropping

patterns. Maize + garlic (1:2) produced 84.18 q/ha ofmaize grain yield as well as 11.93 q of garlic yield (maizeequivalent yield 119.97 q/ha). It was found superior by21.8, 1.5, 16.9, 9.0, 2.0, 4.7, 38.8, 35.7 % over T1, T2,T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 and T9, respectively. Garlic wasmore suitable than all other intercrops mainly owing toadditional yield advantage of intercropping as well ashigher market price of garlic than that of other intercropsand maize crop Sarkar et .al. (2003) reported similarresults in sunflower, pigeonpea intercropping system andKumar et. al. (2002) in clustersbean based intercropping.

ECONOMICS

Cropping system economics was calculatedcropping system based on the nearest market price ofinput and output. Data (Table 2) indicated that highernet profit of Rs. 68970 was recorded under the croppingpattern of maize + garlic (1:2) which was 30.78, 1.24,

Table 1. Effect of intercropping on growth yield attributes and yield of maize and intercrop (Pooled data of two years)

Treatments Plant Cob Cob Grain Grain/ 10000-grain Grain Intercrop Maizeheight length girth row/cobs row weight yield yield equivalent(cm) (cm) (cm) (g) (q/ha) (q/ha) yield (q/ha)

T1–Maize Sole 142.5 18.72 12.45 13.45 29.65 258.75 93.74 – 93.74T2–Maize+garlic (1:1) 141.6 18.5 12.35 13.25 29.35 256.35 90.63 9.16 118.11T3–Maize+garlic (1:2) 141.3 17.75 11.45 12.45 27.56 252.42 84.18 11.93 119.97T4–Maize+onion(1:1) 140.6 16.42 9.35 11.25 24.25 248.75 69.52 60.25 99.64T5–Maize+onion (1:2) 138.7 16.25 9.25 11.15 24.15 248.46 69.52 79.13 109.08T6–Maize+saljam (1:1) 136.5 15.75 8.45 10.58 22.25 238.75 53.97 83.3 95.62T7–Maize+saljam (1:2) 134.8 14.45 8.25 10.46 21.45 235.74 50.11 128.28 114.25T8–Maize+carrot (1:1) 131.7 12.25 7.42 9.42 18.42 225.42 40.42 65.80 73.32T9–Maize+carrot (1:2) 130.8 8.15 6.25 7.25 15.45 215.38 27.10 99.96 77.08LSD (P=0.05) 4.35 0.5 0.25 0.14 0.24 0.18 8.5 – 5.75

Table 2. Effect of intercropping on economics and nutrient uptake under different treatments (Pooled data of two years)

Treatments Net Profit B : C ratio Nutrient uptake (kg/ha)(Rs./ha )

Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium

T1–Maize sole 47740 1:2.03 225.6 40.4 175.4T2–Maize+garlic (1:1) 68110 1:2.36 215.4 38.7 172.2T3–Maize+garlic (1:2) 68970 1:2.40 212.3 37.4 168.3T4–Maize+onion (1:1) 51640 1:2.07 210.3 36.2 165.4T5–Maize+onion (1:2) 58080 1:2.13 208.4 36.1 168.7T6–Maize+saljam (1:1) 48620 1:2.03 200.2 35.2 158.2T7–Maize+saljam (1:2) 66750 1:2.30 198.4 34.2 155.4T8–Maize+carrot (1:1) 25320 1:1.49 185.3 28.1 145.5T9–Maize+carrot (1:2) 28080 1:1.57 174.8 28.1 140.2LSD (P=0.05) 2190.5 0.037 18.42 2.68 5.2

32 Singh, Kumar and Mishra

25.12, 15.78, 29.50, 3.26, 63.28, 59.28% higher overT1, T2, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 and T9, respectively. Thecropping pattern of maize +garlic (1:1) next highest inrespect of net profit. The minimum net return of Rs.25320/ha was recorded under the maize + carrot (1:1)which was due to lower yield of maize and maizeequivalent yield. All the intercropping system maize +carrot were more remunerative than sole crop of maizegiving higher net monetary returns and benefit cost ratio.

NUTRIENT UPTAKE

Data (Table 2) indicated that higher nutrientuptake was observed under maize sole crop (225.6 N ,40.4 P and 175.4 kg K/ha ) closely followed by maize +garlic (1:1) (215.4 N, 38.7 P and 172.2 K kg/ha). Theminimum nutrient uptake was recorded under maize +carrot (1:2).

REFERENCES

Jackson, M. L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis, Prentice Hallof India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.

Kumar, S. 2002. Effect of planting patterns and fertilizermanagement on costor-based intercroppingsystem. Ind. J. Agron. 47 : 355-360.

Padhi, A. K. and Panigrahi, R. K. 2006. Effect ofintercropping and crop geometry on productivity,economics and soil fertility status of maize (Zeamays) based intercropping systems. Ind. J. Agron.51 : 174-177.

Sarkar, R. K., Goswami, S. and Pal, P. K. 2003. Productionpotential and economics feasibility of sunflowerand pigeonpea intercropping system in rainfedupland condition. Ind. J. Agron. 40 : 263-266.


Effect of nitrogen levels and biofertilizer strains on dry matter production andattraction index in pearl millet

PARVEEN KUMAR, R. S. HOODA, SURESH KUMAR AND KARMAL SINGHDepartment of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004, India

(e-mail : [email protected])


ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted to study the effect of different nitrogen levels [75, 100 and 125% of recommended dose of nitrogenous fertilizer, (RDN)] and biofertilizers [Azotobacter, Azospirillum,phosphate solubilizing bacteria, (PSB)] and their mix inoculation (Biomix)] on dry matter production andattraction index in pearl millet. Significantly higher leaf area, higher dry matter accumulation per plant andattraction index (%) was recorded with 125% RDN which was at par with 100% RDN+Biomix.

Key words : Pearl millet, nitrogen, bio-fertilizers, dry matter production, attraction index

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 34-37 (2012)

INTRODUCTION

Being an important dual-purpose Kharif crop,pearl millet may continue to play a dominant role in theintegrated agricultural and animal husbandry economy ofthe drier region of the state. The average yield at farmer’sfield is low due to poor plant stand, low moisture andpoor soil fertility. Both quantity and quality of pearl milletcan be improved with the application of nitrogen (Upasaniand Sharma, 1980). Nitrogen (inert gas N2) constitutesabout 78% of atmospheric gases in elemental form;however, as such it is not useful for higher plants. Hence,nitrogen demand of the plant is generally met by the useof chemical fertilizers. Poor economic conditions of thefarmers prevent them to use costly fertilizers. Moreover,continuous and sole use of chemical fertilizers has resultedin numerous problems like micronutrients deficiencies,nutrient imbalance in soil and plant system, pest infestation,environmental degradation and deterioration of soil health.The bio-fertilizers may play important role in minimizingthe dependence on inorganic nitrogenous fertilizers.Inoculation of these bacteria has synergic and additiveeffects on plant growth besides reducing the cost ofcultivation. Hence, it is imperative to popularize the useof bio-fertilizers which is a low-cost input technology toreduce the dependence of fertilizer and to contribute topollution-free atmosphere which is the need of the day.


A field experiment was conducted during kharif

seasons of 2003 and 2004 on sandy loam soil, low inorganic carbon (0.19%) and available nitrogen (170 kg/ha), medium in available phosphorous (18 kg/ha) andhigh in potassium (278 kg/ha) with slightly alkaline inreaction (pH 8.1) at the Research Farm of ChaudharyCharan Singh Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar. Thetreatments consisted of 75% recommended dose ofnitrogen (RDN), 100% RDN (40kg/ha), 75%RDN+Azotobacter, 100% RDN+Azotobacter, 75%RDN+PSB, 100% RDN+PSB, 75% RDN+Azospirillum,100% RDN+Azospirillum, 75% RDN+Biomix, 100%RDN+Biomix,125% RDN and absolute control. Thetreatments were tested in randomized block design withthree replications. A uniform dose of phosphorous (20kg/ha P2O5) through single super phosphate and half ofthe nitrogen as per treatments was drilled at the time ofsowing and remaining half dose of nitrogen was topdressed after thinning and gap filling as per treatments.Three plants were randomly selected and tagged in eachplot for periodical growth studies. The observations wererecorded at 30 days after sowing (DAS) and thereafterat 15 days interval till harvesting. The observations weresummed up and the average of three plants was takenfor each character. Periodical changes in dry matteraccumulation were recorded by taking three plantsrandomly from sample rows in each plot. The sampleswere first dried in sun and then in oven at 70oC forabout 24 hours or more until constant weight wasattained and then averaged. The leaf area of the leafblade of plant taken for dry matter accumulation was

Tabl

e 1.

Effe

ct o

f diff

eren

t nitr

ogen

leve

ls a

nd b

iofe

rtili

zers

stra

ins o

n le

af a

rea

and

dry

mat

ter p

rodu

ctio

n pe

r pla

nt in

pea

rlm

illet

Trea

tmen

tsLe

af A

rea

Leaf

Are

a (cm

2 )D

ry m

atte

rD

ry m

atte

r(c

m2 )

(cm

2 )pr

oduc

tion

(g/p

lant

)pr

oduc

tion

(g/p

lant

)

Kha

rif 2

003

Kha

rif 2

004

Kha

rif 2

003

Kha

rif 2

004

3045

60A

t30

4560

At

3045

60A

t30

4560

At

DA

SD

AS

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

DA

SD

AS

harv

est

DA

SD

AS

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

DA

SD

AS

harv

est

Abs

olut

e co

ntro

l10

5.3

576.

715

80.7

1163

.390

.056

3.3

1466

.710

30.0

20.5

32.0

55.8

80.6

18.0

27.5

50.4

77.0

75%

RD

N11

3.3

608.

019

95.0

1519

.310

8.0

628.

018

20.0

1454

.722

.535

.268

.310

7.3

20.1

31.1

65.2

102.

510

0% R

DN

127.

364

3.3

2259

.719

67.3

117.

769

2.7

2136

.717

93.3

24.5

38.1

73.8

117.

422

.233

.870

.411

0.6

75%

RD

N+A

zoto

bact

er12

0.3

632.

020

71.7

1760

.711

2.7

710.

019

60.0

1543

.323

.236

.070

.411

2.0

21.1

31.8

67.7

106.

510

0% R

DN

+Azo

toba

cter

134.

364

9.3

2647

.321

65.3

129.

773

0.0

2230

.018

15.3

25.0

38.7

76.8

120.

722

.234

.472

.411

5.0

75%

RD

N+P

SB12

4.7

635.

324

45.3

1826

.712

0.3

642.

021

30.0

1750

.022

.636

.172

.711

3.0

21.8

32.2

69.5

108.

910

0% R

DN

+PSB

135.

365

3.3

2747

.322

21.7

124.

773

8.0

2307

.319

96.7

24.3

38.4

76.9

118.

522

.533

.574

.811

7.6

75%

RD

N+A

zosp

irill

um13

0.7

626.

727

59.3

2063

.312

6.3

693.

326

40.0

1850

.023

.336

.373

.011

3.1

20.6

32.0

70.5

110.

010

0% R

DN

+Azo

spir

illum

136.

370

8.3

3389

.325

13.3

132.

074

2.3

2960

.022

23.3

24.8

39.6

80.1

121.

321

.833

.676

.411

9.6

75%

RD

N+B

iom

ix14

0.3

727.

735

57.7

2448

.013

5.3

756.

731

30.0

2333

.322

.938

.179

.611

8.0

21.0

32.7

76.6

120.

410

0% R

DN

+Bio

mix

145.

080

4.3

3625

.727

74.3

142.

076

2.0

3393

.325

06.7

24.6

40.0

88.2

130.

522

.734

.585

.712

9.5

125%

RD

N15

0.0

819.

036

84.3

2937

.014

4.0

768.

034

20.0

2636

.725

.840

.889

.713

1.6

23.7

35.8

87.3

131.

5LS

D (P

=0.0

5)5.

2922

.52

80.8

933

3.63

3.02

42.5

299

.84

281.

431.

822.

313.

752.

81N

.S.

2.15

3.73

2.09


measured by LI-3000 leaf area metre at 30, 45, 60 DASand at harvest before putting them for drying in an oven.Attraction index was calculated as the ratio of grain yieldand straw yield in per cent. The data were statisticallyanalysed by the standard method of analysis of varianceas described by Panse and Sukhatme (1978).


Leaf area per plant

In general, the leaf area per plant increasedprogressively with the advancement of age of crop (Table1). During both the years of experimentation 125% RDNbeing at par with 100% RDN+Biomix recordedsignificantly highest leaf area per plant at all theobservation stages i. e. 30, 46, 60 DAS and at harvest.However, the treatments with 100% RDN+PSB, 100%RDN+Azospirillum and 75% RDN+Biomix did not differsignificantly in respect of leaf area per plant. Moreover,the differences among 100% RDN+Azotobacter and 75%RDN+Azospirillum as well as 100% RDN and 75%RDN+PSB in respect of leaf area per plant were notsignificant. Significantly lowest leaf area per plant wasrecorded with absolute control at all the stages. Adequatesupply of nitrogen (125, 100 and 75% of RDN) resultedin better utilization of carbohydrates in the synthesis ofmore protoplasm and other cellular materials rather thantheir deposition resulting in thickening of cell well. Theplant cells produced under adequate supply of nitrogentend to be large in size with thin walls and increased inplant height, photosynthetic area (leaf size).

Dry matter production

The dry matter per plant increased progressivelywith the advancement of age of crop (Table1). Duringboth the years, highest dry matter accumulation per plantwas recorded with 125% RDN which; however, didnot differ significantly from 100% RDN, 100%RDN+Azotobacter, 100% RDN+PSB, 100%RDN+Azospirillum and 100% RDN+Biomix at differentstages of observation i. e. 30, 46, 60 DAS and at harvest,except at 30 DAS during 2004, where the varioustreatments did not bring about any significant variationin the dry matter accumulation per plant. The treatmentinvolving 75% RDN, 75% RDN+Azotobacter, 75%RDN+PSB, 75% RDN+Azospirillum and 75%RDN+Biomix did not differ significantly in terms of dry

matter accumulation per plant. Lowest dry matteraccumulation per plant was recorded with absolutecontrol. Adequate supply of nitrogen (125 and 100 % ofRDN) resulted in increased photosynthetic area (leafsize), which ultimately produced higher dry matter. Anoverall improvement in the growth of pearlmillet cropdue to the application of nitrogen in combination withbiofertilizers have also been reported by Kohire et al.,1996; Sheoran et al., 1991; Jadhav et al., 1991; Maneet al., 2000; Rathore et al., 2003.

Attraction index

In kharif 2003, significantly highest attractionindex was recorded with 100% RDN+Biomix whichdiffered significantly from rest of the treatments except75% RDN+Biomix and 125% RDN. Application of 100%RDN, 75% RDN+Azotobacter, 100% RDN+Azotobacter,75% RDN+PSB, 100% RDN+PSB, 75% RDN+Azospirillum and 100% RDN+Azospirillum did not differsignificantly. Lowest attraction index was observedunder absolute control (Table 2).

Table 2. Effect of different nitrogen levels and biofertilizers strainson attraction index in bajra

Treatments Attraction Index (%)

Kharif 2003 Kharif 2004

Absolute control 24.66 21.7375% RDN 24.99 25.44100% RDN 27.24 27.0975% RDN+Azotobacter 27.86 25.22100% RDN+Azotobacter 27.95 26.2875% RDN+PSB 28.39 28.08100% RDN+PSB 27.67 28.5175% RDN+Azospirillum 27.66 25.98100% RDN+Azospirillum 27.79 29.0575% RDN+Biomix 30.17 29.82100% RDN+Biomix 32.26 31.54125% RDN 32.25 31.86LSD (P=0.05) 2.20 2.02

In kharif 2004, highest attraction index wasrecorded with 125% RDN which differed significantlyfrom rest of the treatments except 100% RDN+Biomix.Application of 75% RDN, 100% RDN, 75%RDN+Azotobacter, 100% RDN+Azotobacter and 75%RDN+Azospirillum as well as 100% RDN+Azospirillumand 75% RDN+Biomix did not differ significantly inrespect of attraction index.

36 Kumar, Hooda, Kumar and Singh

REFERENCES

Jadhav, A. S., Shaikh, A. A. and Harinarayana, G. 1991.Response of rainfed pearlmillet(Pennisetumglaucum) to inoculation with nitrogen fixingbacteria. Ind. J. Agril. Sci. 61 : 268-271.

Kohire, O. D., Raut, R. S., Deshmukh, R. G., Malewar, G. U.and Mane, S. S. 1996. Nature and Biosphere 1 :58.

Mane, S. S., Hadgaonkar, A. K., Suryawanshi, A. P. andSalunke, S. D. 2000. Response of pearlmillet toinoculation of phosphate solubilizing bacteria andAzosirillum. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 48 : 617-619.

Panse, V. G. and Sukhatme, P. V. 1978. Statistical methods

for agricultural workers, ICAR, New Delhi.

Rathore, B. S., Singh, V. P., Hooda, R. S., Shekhawat, Kapilaand Kumar, Rakesh. 2003. Effect of mixed bio-fertilizers and nitrogen levels on growth, yieldattributes and yield of pearlmillet. Har. J. Agron.19 : 148-149.

Sheoran, R. S., Yadav, B. D. and Ram, S. 1991. Effect of bio-fertilizers (Mycorrhiza) and nitrogen on forage yieldand quality of sorghum and bajra. Int. J. Trop.Agric. 9 : 306-308.

Upasani, R. K. and Sharma, H. C. 1980. Response ofpearlmillet to nitrogen fertilization under rainfedconditions. Ind. J. Agron. 25 : 727-728.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 38-41 (2012)

Effect of integrated nutrient management on yield and nutrients uptake by rice(Oryza sativa)

B. S. DUHANDepartment of soil Science, CCSHAU, Hisar-125004, India


ABSTRACT

Application of nitrogen up to 150 kg N and 60 kg P2O5/ha increased significantly the grain andstraw yield of rice. The over all residual effect of organic manures on rice grain and straw yields wasfound in the order of Green Manure (GM) > FYM > Fallow. The uptake of N significantly increased withthe application of N up to the level of 200 kg N/ha by grain and straw of rice. However, uptake of P and Ksignificantly increased with the application of N up to the level of 150 N kg/ha by grain and straw of rice.Application of 60 kg P2O5/ha also increased significantly P and K uptake in grain and straw of rice. Therewas no significant effect of P on N uptake by rice grain and straw. The total N and P uptake by rice cropwas significantly more with GM, than FYM and fallow treatments. A significant and positive interactionwas observed between nitrogen and organic manures with respect to rice yield.

Key words : Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, grain and straw yield, N, P and K uptake

INTRODUCTION

With the introduction of improved agro-techniques, high yielding varieties of cereals, pulsesoilseed, fruit and vegetable crops, demand for chemicalfertilizers increased many fold. However, farmers areharvesting bumper field crops there by mining a hugeamount of nutrients from the soil without applyingsufficient dose of fertilizes. That is why soil fertilitydeclined and ultimately soil became deficient almost 100%in N, more than 50% in P, K, Zn and S. Moreover, wehave to import the fertilizers to meet the growing demandof crop production that is very costly affair and involveda huge amount of foreign currency. The high cost offertilizers and unsustainable crop production call forsubstituting part of inorganic fertilizers by locallyavailable low cost organic sources viz., manures, greenmanures, biofertilizers etc. in a integrated manner forsustainable production and to maintain soil health(Acharya 2002). In addition to nutrients supply, organicmanure may improve the physical condition of soil.Supplementary and complementary use of organicmanures and inorganic chemical fertilizers augment theefficiency of both the substances to maintain high levelof soil productivity (Thakuria et al. 1991). Integrateduse of organics and fertilizers for improving long termproductivity of rice –wheat system was reported by

Bhandary et al. (2002). The INM technology not onlyincreases the productivity of various cropping systemsbut also maintain the soil fertility (Antil and Narwal 2007).Continuous recycling of green manures with organicamendments enhances the organic matter content andalso supplements the nutrient pool of the soil (Kumar etal. 2008). Application of organic manures may alsoimprove availability of native nutrients in soil as well asthe efficiency of applied fertilizers (Swarup, 2010). Dueto slow release of nutrients from organic manures theymay have residual effect on the succeeding crops.Among organic manure, green manure and FYM arecommonly used in India.


Field experiment was conducted to study theeffect of integrated nutrient management (INM) on yieldand nutrients uptake by rice at the research farmDepartment of Soil Science, CCSHAU, Hisar. Soil ofexperimental site was sandy loam in texture having pH(1:2) 7.8, EC (1:2) 0.34 dS/m, available N P K and OCwere 197, 11.3, 298.0 and 0.31%, respectively. Therewere five levels of N (0, 50, 100, 150 and 200 kg N/ha),two levels of P (0 and 60/ha) and three levels organicmanures viz. control (Fallow), FYM (10 t/ha) and greenmanure, dhaincha (Sesbania spp.). Three replications

were kept by following split-split plot design. Greenmanure and FYM were applied one week before thetransplanting of kharif paddy crop. Thirty kg K and 25kg ZnSo4 were also applied as a basal dose. All the P, K,ZnSo4 and half of the N were applied at the time oftransplanting and remaining half of N dose was appliedin two splits first at 21 and 42 days after transplanting(DAT). All the field operations such as weeding, irrigationetc. were done as and when required. Crop washarvested at maturity. Grain and straw yields wererecorded separately from each plot. Grain and strawsamples were taken from each plot. Plant samples (grainand straw) were analysed by following standardprocedure in the laboratory.


Grain and straw yield

Application of nitrogen significantly increasedthe grain and straw yield of rice with each successivedose of N up to the level of 150 kg N/ha and extent ofincrease was 21.6 and 28.5 q/ha respectively over control(Table 1). Lal et al. (2012), Kumar et al. (2012), Dattaand Singh (2010) and Kumar and Singh (2010) alsoreported the similar results. Data further indicated thatapplication of phosphorus @ 60 kg/ha also increasedthe grain and straw yields of rice significantly from 44.2

to 47.1 and from 54.1 ton 58.5 q/ha respectively overcontrol. Laxminarayana (2011) also reported increase indry matter yield of rice with the application of P. Asignificant and positive interaction was observed betweennitrogen and organic manures with respect to rice yield.In the presence of nitrogen application these differentorganic manures found in the order of : GM (50.1 and61.6 q/ha) followed by FYM (44.5 and 55.1 q/ha) andleast by Fallow (42.3 and 52.3 q/ha). Singh et al. (2011),Kumar and Singh (2010) also reported similar results.

Nutrients uptake

Nitrogen

Application of N significantly increased the Nuptake by rice grain and straw with each successivedose of N up to the level of 200 kg N/ha and increasewas observed from 31.1 to 64.0 and 15.6 to 33.5 kg/ha,respectively over control (Table 2). Weijabhandra et al.(2011) also reported increase in N uptake by rice withthe application of NPK. Data further indicated that theeffect of P application was non significant with respectto N uptake by wheat grain from 12.8 to 46.4 q/ha overcontrol. Kumar et al. (2012) also reported increase in Nuptake with the application of N and P. Regarding theorganic manures treatments, data indicated that theapplication of green manure recoded highest N uptakeby rice grain and straw (56.7 and 30.7 kg/ha) followedby FYM (49.8 and 25.6 kg/ha) and fallow (45.4 and21.9 kg/ha). Kumar et al. (2012) also reported similarresults. Data (Table 3) indicate that interactive effectbetween organic manures and nitrogen was significantand positive with respect to total N uptake by rice crop.

Phosphorus

Application of N significantly increased the Puptake by rice grain and straw with each successivedose of N up to the level of 150 kg N/ha and increasewas observed from 9.1 to 18.5 and from 4.1 to 8.6 kg/ha, respectively over control (Table 2). Kumar et al.(2012) also reported increase in P uptake with theapplication of N and P. Application of P also increasedthe P uptake significantly by rice grain and straw from12.8 to 17.0 kg/ha and from 6.0 to 8.1 kg/ha, respectivelyover control (Table 2). Laxminarayana (2011) alsoreported increase in P uptake by rice crop with theapplication of P. Regarding the uptake of P by rice grain

Table 1. Effect of integrated nutrient management on grain andstraw yield of rice (q/ha)

Treatments Yield (q/ha)

Grain Straw

N Levels (kg/ha)0 31.9 37.450 40.2 50.3100 48.6 61.2150 53.6 65.8200 53.3 66.9LSD (P=0.05) 1.99 2.76Levels (kg/ha)0 44.2 54.160 47.1 58.5LSD (P=0.05) 2.21 2.03Pre- kharifFallow 42.3 52.3FYM 44.5 55.1G M 50.1 61.6LSD (P=0.05) 3.14 3.32


and straw with the application of organic manures, theyfollowed the similar trend as in case of N uptake by ricegrain and straw. Green manure recorded the highest Puptake by rice grain and straw (18.0 and 9.3 kg/ha),followed by FYM (14.8 kg/ha and 7.0 kg/ha) and fallow(11.9 and 4.9 kg/ha), respectively (Table 2 ). Kumar etal. (2012) also reported the similar results. Data (Table4) indicated that interactive effect between organicmanures and nitrogen was observed significant andpositive with respect to total P uptake by rice crop.

Potassium

Application of N also increased K uptakesignificantly by rice grain and straw with eachsuccessive dose of N up to the level of 150 kg N/ha andincreased from 22.3 to 37.5 and from 52.3 to 92.1 kg/ha, respectively over control (Table 2). Laxminarayanaand Patiram (2006) also reported the increase in N uptakewith the application of N.

Application of P also increased K uptakesignificantly by rice grain and straw from 30.9 to 33.0kg/ha and from 75.7 to 81.9 kg/ha, respectively overcontrol (Table 2). Laxminarayana and Patiram (2006)reported the increase in K uptake with the application ofN, and P.

Among the different organic manure treatments,

Table 2. Effect of integrated nutrient management on nutrients uptake by rice (kg/ha)

Treatments Nutrients uptake (kg/ha)

N P K

Grain Straw Grain Straw Grain Straw

N Levels (kg/ha)0 31.1 15.6 9.1 4.1 22.3 52.350 42.8 21.9 11.8 5.9 28.3 70.4100 54.3 28.1 16.1 7.6 34.0 85.7150 60.5 30.4 18.5 8.6 37.5 92.1200 64.0 33.5 19.1 9.0 37.3 93.7LSD (P=0.05) 2.2 1.6 1.03 0.78 1.74 4.7Levels (kg/ha)0 49.3 25.3 12.8 6.0 30.9 75.760 52.1 26.9 17.0 8.1 33.0 81.9LSD (P=0.05) NS NS 0.96 0.45 1.66 3.89Pre- kharifFallow 45.4 21.9 11.9 4.9 29.6 73.2FYM 49.856.7 25.6 14.8 7.0 31.2 77.1G M 4.4 30.7 18.0 9.3 35.1 86.2LSD (P=0.05) 1.2 1.47 1.53 1.8 4.33

Table 3. Interaction of organic manures and N levels on total Nuptake by rice (kg/ha)

N Levels Organic manures Mean(kg/ha)

Fallow FYM G M

0 40.3 45.9 54.0 46.750 57.8 65.3 71.1 64.8100 69.2 78.7 98.6 82.2150 83.6 86.3 102.9 90.9200 86.3 96.0 110.4 97.6Mean 67.4 74.4 87.4LSD (P=0.05) N=3.44, OM5.8, NxOM 5.97

Table 4. Interaction of organic manures and N levels on total Puptake by rice (kg/ha)

N Levels Organic manures Mean(kg/ha)

Fallow FYM G M

0 10.5 12.8 16.4 13.250 13.4 17.3 22.0 17.6100 17.5 23.1 30.4 23.7150 21.0 28.5 33.0 27.5200 21.4 28.5 34.2 28.0Mean 16.8 22.0 27.2LSD (P=0.05) N= 1.45, OM 2.11, NxOM 2.52

40 Duhan

green manure recorded highest N uptake by rice grainand straw (35.1 kg/ha and 86.2 kg/ha), followed byFYM (31.2 kg/ha and 77.1 kg/ha) and Fallow (29.6 kg/ha and 73.2 kg/ha), respectively (Table 2 ). Kumar et al.(2012) also reported the similar results.

REFERENCES

Acharya, C. L. 2002. Integrated input management forsustainable crop production in rainfed agro-ecosystem. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 50 : 398-413.

Antil, R. S. and Narwal, R. P. 2007. Integrated nutrientmanagement for sustainable soil health and cropproductivity. Ind. J. Fert. 3 : 111-121.

Bhandari, A. L., Ladha, J. K., Pathak, H., Padre, A. T., Dave,D. and Gupta, R. K. 2002. Yield and soil nutrientchanges in a long term rice-wheat rotation in India.Soil Sci. Soc. America J. 66 : 162-170.

Datta, M. and Singh, N. P. 2010. Nutrient management inrice-based cropping systems as influenced byapplying cattle manure alone or in combinationwith fertilizers in upland acid soils of Tripura. J.Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 58 : 94-98.

Kumar, B., Gupt, R. K. and Bhandary, A. L. 2008. Soil fertilitychanges after long-term application of organicmanures anf crop residues under rice-wheatsystem. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 56 : 80-85.

Kumar, V. and Singh, A. P. 2010. Long term effect of greenmanuring and farmyard manure on yield and soilfertility status in rice-wheat cropping system. J.Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 58 : 409-412.

Kumar, M., Yaduvansi, N. P. S. and Singh, Y. V. 2012. Effectof integrated nutrient management on rice yield,

nutrient uptake and soil fertility status in reclaimedsodic soils. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 60 : 132-137.

Lal, B., Tiwari, D. D., Misra, J. and Gupta B. R. 2012.Effect of integrated nutrient management on yield,microbial population and changes in soil propertiesunder rice-wheat crooping system in sodic soil. J.Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 60 : 326-329.

Laxminarayana, K. and Patiram. 2006. Effect of Integrateduse of inorganic, Biological and organic manureson rice productivity and soil fertility in ultisols ofMizoram. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 54 : 213-220.

Laxminarayana, K. 2011. Response of rice to phosphorusin acid soils of Meghalaya in relation to it formsand availability. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 59 : 304-307.

Sawrup, A. 2010. Integrated plant nutrient supply andmanagement strategies for enhancing soil fertility,input use efficiency and crop productivity. J. Ind.Soc. Soil Sci. 58 : 25-30.

Singh, R. N., Singh, S., Prasad, S. S., Singh, V. K. andKumar, P. 2011. Effect of Integrated nutrientmanagement on soil fertility, Nutrient uptake andyield of rice-pea cropping system on an uplandacid soil of Jharkhand. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 59 :158-163.

Thakuria, K., Borgohain, B., and Sharma, K. K. 1991.Effect of organic and inorganic sources ofnitrgenwith and without phosphate on fiber yieldofwhite jute (Corchorus capsularis). Ind. J. Agric.Sci. 61 : 49-50.

Weijabhandra, D. M. D. I., Dasog, G. S., Patil, P. L. andHebbar, M. 2011. Effect of nutrient levels on rice(Oryza sativa L.) and traditional method ofcultivation. J. Ind. Soc. Soil Sci. 59 : 67-73.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 42-43 (2012)

On-farm performance of scented rice varieties under agro-climatic conditions ofHisar

O. P. NEHRADepartment of Dryland Agriculture, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125004, India


ABSTRACT

On-farm trials conducted through Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sadalpur (Hisar) during Kharif, 2006with two scented rice varieties viz., HBC-19 and CSR-30 on loam to clay loam soils at 16 locations atfarmers fields in 13 villages in four rice growing blocks in Hisar district to find out the productivity andeconomic viability in comparison with local check under two transplanting dates during 1st and 3rd weekof July, 2006. The results revealed that scented rice variety CSR-30 (2817 kg/ha) recorded 35.5 % highergrain yield over HBC-19 (2079 kg/ha). An economic evaluation revealed that CSR-30 was superior (Rs.56394/ha, Rs. 25065/ha, Rs.14094/ha and 1.80) to HBC- 19 (Rs. 42300/ha, Rs.10971/ha and 1.35, respectively)in respect of gross monetary return, net returns, net gain and benefitcost ratio. Decrease in averagegrain yield of all varieties of rice was noticed under transplanting done during 3rd week of July.

Key word : Planting time, yield, economics, variety

After the identification and release of varieties,it becomes very imperative to make comparativeassessment of grain yields under different dates oftransplanting. Hari Om et al. (1997) observed significantdifference in grain yield of rice due to change in plantingdates. Lathwal et al. (2007) recorded 30 varieties andhybrids of rice being grown by the farmers inKurukshetra district. Amongst basmati rice varieties, theyobserved the farmers preference in descending order asCSR-30 and HBC-19 due to higher monetary returnsper unit area. None-the-less, quite a good number ofvarieties of rice are being raised by the farmers ofHisar district. But the information on the productivity oftwo tall scented basmati rice varieties viz., HBC-19 andCSR-30 under agro-climatic conditions of Hisar wasnot known. The farmers are compelled to transplantrice late for the reasons beyond their control. Keepingthe above points in view, the present investigation wasundertaken to evaluate the performance of these varietiesunder two dates of transplanting at the farmers’ fields inthe realistic agro-climatic conditions of Hisar district.

On- farm trials at small, medium and largefarmers’ fields through Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sadalpurof CCS HAU, Hisar were conducted on HBC-19 andCSR-30 elite varieties of scented rice at 16 locations in13 villages in rice growing 4 blocks under semi-aridclimate of Hisar district during Kharif 2006 season to

evaluate the productivity and economic viability of boththe varieties in comparison with local check variety. Thesoils of demonstrations sites were loam to clay loam intexture, medium in organic carbon, nitrogen andphosphorous and medium to high in potash with slightlyalkaline pH ranging from 7.9-8.1. The plot size for eachdemonstration was kept as 0.4 ha. The selected farmerswere provided quality seeds @ 20 kg/ha of both thevarieties along with nitrogenous fertilizer i.e. urea @125kg/ha. With the onset of monsoon, about 25-30 daysold seedlings of both the varieties having 5-6 leaves andabout 20 cm in height were manually transplanted 2-3cm deep on well prepared and leveled fields at 20 X 15cm spacing using 2-3 seedlings/hill under two dates oftransplanting i.e. during 1st week and 3rd week of July.All the recommended package of practices of CCS HAU,Hisar was more or less timely and uniformly performedin demonstrations plots. In comparison, most suitablelocal variety of rice was raised as check. Assuredirrigation supply was made through both canal and tube-wells. In addition, about 244 mm rainfall was receivedduring the whole crop season. The harvesting of thevarieties of rice was started at physiological maturityduring 2nd fortnight of October to 1st fortnight ofNovember. The harvested crop was left in the field for2-3 days for gradual sun drying. The data on grain,straw and biological yields were recorded at 14%

moisture level at harvest and harvest index (H.I. %) wascomputed. The information regarding all inputs usedand output gained on per ha bases were collected fromthe farmers of each demonstration site. The cost ofcultivation, economic returns and benefit cost ratios werecalculated to draw valuable inferences.

The data on production and profitabilityfurnished in Table 1 revealed superiority of scented ricevariety CSR-30 over HBC-19 variety. Variety CSR-30(2817 kg/ha) registered 35.5% higher grain yield overHBC-19 (2079 kg/ha). Average grain yield of local checkvariety was found to be 2688 kg/ha. Harvest index wasfound to be 0.54 less under CSR-30 (48.96) than HBC-19 (49.50). Comparative economic analysis indicatedthat scented rice variety CSR- 30 fetched more gross(Rs 56394/ha) and net returns (Rs 25065/ha) whereasthese values were found to be Rs. 42300/ha and Rs.10971/ha, respectively under scented rice variety HBC-19. More net gain of Rs 14094/ha along with higherB : C (1.80) under CSR-30 was found over HBC-19(1.35). The differences were accrued upon due to highergrain yield under CSR-30. CSR-30 was more potentialin terms of production and monetary returns than HBC-19.These results are in conformity with those of Dhimanet al. (1997); Gangwar and Sharma (1997); Hari Om etal. (1999); Kumar et al. (1998); Singh et al.(1993); Taoet al.(1999) and Thakur et al.(1996).

REFERENCES

Dhiman, S. D. Nandal, D. P. and Hari Om. 1997. Performanceof scented dwarf rice (Oryza sativa) varieties underdifferent time of planting. Indian J. Agron. 42 :253-55.

Gangwar, K. S. and Sharma, S. K. 1997. Influence ofplanting dates on productivity of traditionalscented rice varieties. Int. Rice Res. Notes 22 : 42.

Hari Om, Katyal, S. K. and Dhiman, S. D. 1997. Effect oftime of transplanting of rice (Oryza sativa) hybridson growth and yield. Indian J. Agron. 42 : 261-64.

Hari Om, Katyal, S. K., Dhiman, S. D. and Sheoran, O. P.1999. Physiological parameters and grain yield asinfluenced by time of transplanting rice (Oryzasativa) hybrids. Ind. J. Agron. 44 : 696-700.

Kumar, R. Mahender, Subbaiah, S. V. and Pillai, K. G. 1998.Response of hybrids to different dates of plantingin Vertisols of Andhra Pradesh, India. Oryza 35 :285-87.

Lathwal, O. P., Malik, R. K. and Dhukia, R. S. 2007.Adoption pattern of rice varieties and hybrids indistrict Kurukshetra (Haryana). Haryana J. Agron.23 : 53-55.

Singh, S. P., Pillai, K. G., Patel, D. and Rani, N. S. 1993.Influence of time of planting on grain yield andquality of dwarf scented rice varieties. Oryza 30 :285-88.

Tao, L. X., Wang, X., Zhang, S. Q. and Kini, A. V. 1999.Yield potential comparison of Chinese and Indianrice. Oryza 36 : 347-50.

Thakur, R. B., Pandey, S. B. and Dwivedi, P. K. 1996. Effectof time of transplanting on performance of scentedrice. Oryza 33 : 107-09.

Table1. Mean yield performance and economic returns from elite scented rice varieties

Variety Date of Yield(kg/ha) H. I. Cultivation Total Net B : Ctransplan- (%) cost returns returns

ting Grain Straw Biological (Rs./ha) (Rs./ha) (Rs./ha)

HBC -19 July 1st week 2394 2430 4824 49.63 31329 48700 17371 1.55CSR-30 do 3204 3332 6536 49.02 do 64150 32821 2.05Local (C ) do 2900 - - - do 37700 6371 1.20HBC-19 July 3rd week 1764 1810 3574 49.36 do 35900 4571 1.15CSR-30 do 2430 2540 4970 48.90 do 48638 17309 1.55Local ( C ) do 2476 - - - do 32188 859 1.03AverageLocal (C) 2688 - - - do 34944 3615 1.11HBC -19 2079 2121 4200 49.50 do 42300 10971 1.35CSR-30 2817 2936 5753 48.96 56394 25065 1.80


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 44-45 (2012)

Performance of grain cowpea genotypes at the farmers’ fieldsVINITA JAIN* AND O. P. NEHRA**

*Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sadalpur, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125052, India**Department of Dry land Agriculture, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125004, India


ABSTRACT

Studies carried out at 19 locations at farmers’ fields in 10 villages in 5 blocks of Hisar district tofind out the productivity of newly identified grain cowpea genotype HC 98-46 in comparison with bestcheck GC-3 under two sowing dates viz., 3rd and 5th week of July, 2007 revealed that HC 98-46 (561 kg/ha)gave 19.11 % higher seed yield than GC-3 (471 kg/ha). It matured 3-5 days earlier than GC-3. Sowing doneduring 3rd week of July (550 kg/ha) resulted 12.37% higher seed yield than sowing done during 5th week ofJuly, 2007(482 kg/ha).

Key words : Cultivars, planting time, soil type, yield

Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) is raisedfor grains, green pods, forage, green manure and covercrop mainly in the semi-arid region of the tropics. It isa short duration crop of about 2.5 months. The farmerssometimes become late in its sowing due to busy insowing of main kharif crops. For getting informationon the performance of its newly identified genotype HC98-46 in comparison with best check GC-3 for seedyield at farmers’ fields under 2 dates of sowing, thepresent study was undertaken.

On- Farm trials at farmers’ fields through KrishiVigyan Kendra, Sadalpur of CCS HAU, Hisar wereconducted at 19 locations in 10 villages in 5 blocks ofHisar district during Kharif, 2007 season to evaluatethe productivity of newly identified genotype HC 98-46of cowpea in comparison with GC-3 (best check). Thesoils of the farmers’ fields ranged from alluvial sandyloam to loam in texture. These soils were low in nitrogen,medium in phosphorous and medium to high in potashwith pH ranging from 7.7 to 7.9 and good moistureholding capacity. Plot size for each trial was kept as

0.05 ha. Each selected farmer was provided quality seedof newly identified genotype viz., HC 98-46 (@ 20 kg/ha) along with best check GC-3 (@ 20 kg/ha). Timelyrainfall received in 3rd and 5th week of July permittedsowing of crop without pre-sowing irrigation. Linesowing of both the genotypes was done on wellprepared fields on individual plot size of 125 sq.m.at45x15 cm spacing at 2 dates of sowing by pora methodi.e. during 3rd and 5th week of July.

All the recommended agronomical culturalpractices were timely and uniformly followed for raisinga good crop. About 207 mm (in 12 rainy days) rainfallwas received during the entire crop period. The farmershad to apply one need based light irrigation under longdry spell situation during last week of August /first weekof September. The harvesting of crop was done in the3rd - 4th week of October as per the physiological maturityof the pods. The harvested crop was left in the field for3-5 days for gradual sun drying. At harvest, observationson growth parameters (plant height and branches/plant)and yield attributes (pods/plant, seeds/pod and pod length)

Table 1. Effect of dates of sowing on growth, yield contributing characters and seed yield of cowpea genotypes at farmers’ fields

Genotype Date of Plant Branches/ Days taken to Pod length Pods/plant Seeds/pod Seed yieldsowing height (cm) plant (No.) maturity (No.) (cm) (No.) (No.) (kg/ha)

HC 98-46 GC-3 (C) 3rd week of July 118.8 4.9 69 11.7 22.8 10.8 600126.0 4.6 72 11.8 18.0 10.0 500

HC 98-46 GC-3 (C) 5thweek of July 117.0 4.3 75 11.2 18.4 10.2 522120.6 4.2 80 11.3 16.4 9.0 442

Average 120.6 4.5 74 11.5 18.9 10.0 516

and seed yield of both the genotypes were recorded andevaluated.

It is evident from Table 1 that sowing doneduring July 3rd week gave higher seed yield (550kg/ha)as compared to July 5th week sowing (482kg/ha). Onaverage basis, genotype HC 98-46 performed better (561kg/ha) and gave 19.11% higher seed yield over GC-3(471 kg/ha). This was mainly due to better yieldparameters viz., more number of pods/plant and numberof seeds /pod in HC 98-46. The decrease in yield due todelayed sowing can be attributed to short growing periodavailable to crop for its growth and development. Therewas reduction in plant height, branches/plant, pods/plant,pod length and seeds/pod in sowing conducted from 3rd

week to 5th week of July. The physiological maturity ofpods ranged from 69 to 80 DAS under both dates ofsowing. The genotype HC 98-46 matured earlier thanGC-3(C). Results of higher seed yield in early sowingas compared to late sowing have also been reported byKurubetta et al. (2007).

REFERENCE

Kurubetta, K. D., Alagundagi, S. C., Mansur, C. P. andHosmani, S. V. 2007. Effect of time of sowing,spacing and seed rate on yield and proximatecomposition of fodder cowpea seeds. Forage Res.33 : 125-26.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 46-49 (2012)

Varietal performance of kharif and rabi crops under rainfed conditions inwestern parts of Haryana

P. K. VERMA, S. B. MITTAL, O. P. NEHRA AND S. K. SHARMADepartment of Dryland Agriculture, CCS HAU, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana), India


ABSTRACT

Varietal demonstration on different field crops (9 kharif and 4 rabi crops) conducted for fiveconsecutive years (2005-06 to 2009-10) at Dryland Research Area, Hisar under rainfed conditions revealedthat during kharif amongst different released varieties/hybrids tested, HHB-146 and HHB-197 of pearlmillet; RGC-936 and HG-563 of cluster bean; K-851 and Satya of mung bean; DCH-32 and DCH-7 ofcastor; RMO-225 and RMO-257 of moth bean; HC-46 of cowpea; DSH-5 of sunhemp; HT-1 of til/sesamerecorded the higher seed yield over others. During rabi season, RB-50 and RH-30 of raya; HC-5 and HC-3 of chickpea; BH-902 and BH-87 of barley were the top yielders over other varieties. Average rainfallpattern was 361 mm and 50 mm in comparison to normal 320 mm and 60 mm during kharif and rabiseasons, respectively.

Key words : Conserved soil moisture, rainfall pattern, rainfed condition, seed/grain yield, water use efficiency

INTRODUCTION

Rain-water is the one of the most vital gifts ofnature to all the living beings on this earth. It is the mostimportant input factor for raising crops in dry land areas.Rainfall and its distribution pattern has considerable effecton the productivity of these crops. Several varieties/hybrids/composites of both kharif viz., pearl millet,clusterbean, mungbean, mothbean, urdbean, cowpea,castor, sunhemp and til; and rabi crops viz., mustard/raya, chickpea, barley and taramira have been evolvedand released for commercial cultivation so far by theuniversity for Haryana state. These crops vary geneticallyin their rooting characteristics and canopy cover andeach crop/variety has its own water requirements.Edapho-climatic conditions affect the genetic potentialof the genotype and,hence, wide fluctuations inproduction exist. It is utmost important that cropgrowing period of about 6-12 weeks should very wellfit into the rain-water availability period of about 7-9weeks. Erratic rainfall (CV around 50%) sometimescauses the productivity of these crops dismally low.Though the technologies of cultivation of these cropshave been perfected, yet little attempt was made to assesstheir varietal production potential under varied rainfallpattern. Therefore, an attempt was made to evaluate thevarietal performance of these crops under rainfedconditions of Hisar.


The present field investigation comprised ofseveral released crop varieties/hybrids of both kharifand rabi season tested consecutively for five years(kharif, 2005 to rabi, 2009-10) at the Dryland ResearchFarm of CCS HAU, Hisar (74 27 28 East longitude, 2730 North latitude, 215.2 m altitude) to evaluate varietalperformance of nine kharif and four rabi crops underrainfed conditions. The surface soils (0-15 cm) of thedemonstration sites were sandy loam (Typic Ustochrepts),low in organic carbon (0.21- 0.27%), low in N, mediumin P and medium to high in K, having slightly alkalinepH (7.7-8.1), free from salts (EC1:2<0.27 d S/m), bulkand particle density(1.43-1.65 g/cc and 2.43-2.70 g/cc,respectively), field capacity (15-42%) and wilting point(3-10%). The soil consisted of 70.2-73.8% sand, 14.4-16.2% silt and 10.0-15.4% clay on 0-30 cm profile.With the onset of monsoon rains, sowing of varieties/hybrids/composites of all the nine kharif crops (Table1) was done in rows spaced at 45 cm apart during July-August in a larger plot size and raised followingrecommended Package of Practices. The respective cropwas harvested at its physiological maturity duringSeptember-October months and seed/grain yield datawere recorded for each variety. Varieties of all the fourrabi crops (Table 2) were sown during October-November months and raised on conserved soil moisture

Table 1. Mean performance and rain water use efficiency of different kharif crops varieties (2005-2009)

Crop Variety/Hybrid Mean seed yield RWUEand rank (kg/ha) (kg/ha/mm)

Pearl millet[Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.] HHB-67 1968 (3)-4 5.04

HHB-67( Improved) 2126 (4)-3 6.13HHB-94 1715 (4)-5 4.95 4.95HC-10 1600 (5)-7 4.43HC-20 1683 (5)-6 4.66HHB-197 2258 (3)-2 5.78HHB-146 2275 (1)-1 7.58

Cowpea(Vigna unguiculata) Charodi 221 (1)-3 0.53

GC-3 235 (1)-2 0.56HC-46 603 (5)-1 1.67

Sunhemp (Crotalaria sp.) DSH-5 533 (3) 1.36Clusterbean/Guar [Cyamopsis tetragonoloba(L.) Taub.] RGC-936 1434 (3)-1 3.67

HG-365 1095 (5)-3 3.03HG-563 1190 (5)-2 3.29HG-870 1083 (5)-4 3.00HG-2-20 964 (2)-5 2.51

Mungbean[Vigna radiata (L.)Wilczek] K-851 837 (3)-1 2.14

S-9 739 (2)-3 1.92Muskan 725 (5)-4 2.01Asha 720 (4)-5 2.08Satya 743 (2)-2 1.93

Mothbean(Vigna aconitifolia) RMO-40 654 (4)-3 1.89

RMO-257 660 (4)-2 1.90RMO-225 677 (4)-1 1.95HM-61 642 (4)-4 1.85

Urdbean[Vigna mungo(L.) Hepper] T-9 820 (5) 2.27Til(Sesamum indicum L.) HT-1 139 (5) 0.38Castor(Ricinus communis L.) CH-1 607 (4)-3 1.75

DCH-7 690 (3)-2 1.77DCH-32 833 (3)-1 2.13

Values in parenthesis indicate number of testing years.

following recommended cultural practices on a largeplot size. Respective crop was harvested at its fullmaturity during March-April and seed/grain yield datawere recorded for each variety. Both the demonstrationfields were kept fallow during preceding seasons andthe rainwater was conserved by adopting mono-croppingunder recommended practices. Rainfall pattern duringdifferent years is described in Table 3.


The results of different crop varieties of kharifseason with regard to mean seed yield and rain wateruse efficiency (RWUE) are presented in Table 1.

Pearl millet: Newly evolved hybrids of pearlmillet i.e. HHB-146 (2275 kg/ha) and HHB-197 (2258


kg/ha) were better over HHB-67 Improved (2126 kg/ha) with maximum RWUE of 7.58, 5.78 and 6.13 kg/ha/mm, respectively, whereas the other hybrids werepoor yielders with relatively low RWUE.

Cowpea: The recently released variety HC-46(603 kg/ha) was found to be the best in seed yield andmost water use efficient genotype (1.67 kg/ha/mm) incomparison with other two varieties.

Clusterbean: Variety RGC-936 (1434 kg/ha)recorded the highest seed yield (based on 3 yearsperformance), followed by HG-563 (1190 kg/ha), HG-365 (1095 kg/ha) and HG-870 (1083 kg/ha) with RWUEof 3.67, 3.29, 3.03 and 3.00 kg/ha/mm, respectively.

Mungbean: Variety K-851 (837 kg/ha) recordedthe highest seed yield and was found to be most wateruse efficient genotype (2.14 kg/ha/mm), followed byAsha (2.08 kg/ha/mm) and Muskan (2.01 kg/ha/mm).

Mothbean: Varieties RMO-225 (677 kg/ha),RMO-257 (660 kg/ha) and RMO-40 (654 kg/ha) wereslightly better over the local check HM-61(642 kg/ha),while relative RWUE was at par.

Castor: Hybrid DCH-32 (833 kg/ha) recordedthe highest seed yield as well as RWUE (2.13 kg/ha/mm), followed by DCH-7 (690 kg/ha) and local checkCH-1 (607 kg/ha).

On the other hand, the seed yield performanceof single variety of sunhemp (DSH-5, 533 kg/ha),urdbean (T-9, 820 kg/ha), til (HT-1,139 kg/ha) wasrecorded under rainfed conditions with RWUE of 1.36,2.27 and 0.38 kg/ha/mm, respectively.

Similarly, the results of different crop varietiesof rabi season with regard to mean seed yield and rainwater use efficiency (RWUE) are presented in Table 2and discussed as below:

Raya: Out of eight varieties tested, variety RB-50 (1875 kg/ha) recorded the highest seed yield, followedby RH-30 (1795 kg/ha), RH-819 (1736 kg/ha) and RH-8812 (Laxmi) in desending order. At the same time, RB-50 (50.68 kg/ha/mm) was also found to be the mostrain water use efficient genotype, followed by RH-9901and RB-24.

Chickpea: Based on five years performance,

variety HC-5 (954 kg/ha) was found to be the best inseed yield, followed by HC-3 (929 kg/ha), HC-1(901kg/ha), H-208 (857 kg/ha) and C-235 (852 kg/ha). TheRWUE was also in that order among these genotypes.

Barley: Variety BH-902 (1312 kg/ha), BH-87(1254 kg/ha) and BH-393 (1238 kg/ha) performed indesending order. Based on single year rainfall, BH-902and BH-885 were found to be more water efficient incomparison to other varieties.

Table 2. Mean performance and rain water use efficiency of differentrabi crops varieties (2005-06 to 2009-10)

Crop Variety Mean seed RWUEyield and (kg/ha/mm)rank (kg/ha)

Mustard/Raya RH-30 1795 (5)-2 35.90[Brassica juncea (L.) RH-819 1736 (5)-3 34.72Czern and Coss] RH-8812 1659 (5)-4 33.18

RH-9304 1496 (5)-7 29.92RH-9801 1430 (5)-8 28.60RH-9901 1542 (2)-5 41.68RB-24 1535 (2)-6 41.49RB-50 1875 (2)-1 50.68

Taramira (Eruca sativa) T-27 560 (5) 11.20Chickpea (Cicer H-208 857 (5)-4 17.14arietinum L.) C-235 852 (5)-5 17.04

HK-1 667 (5)-6 13.34HC-1 901 (5)-3 18.02HC-3 929 (5)-2 18.58HC-5 954 (5)-1 19.08

Barley (Hordeum BH-393 1238 (5)-3 24.76vulgare L.) BH-75 1027 (5)-5 20.54

BH-87 1254 (4)-2 23.22BH-885 1230 (1)-4 102.50BH-902 1312 (1)-1 109.33

Values in parenthesis indicate number of testing years.

Table 3. Rainfall pattern in kharif and rabi seasons during differentyears

Year Kharif season Rabi seasonrainfall (mm) rainfall (mm)

2005-06 419 (Above average) 34 (Below average)2006-07 215 (Below average) 128 (Above average)2007-08 403 (Above average) 14 (Below average)2008-09 469 (Above average) 62 (Average)2009-10 300 (Average) 12 (Below average)

*Average rainfall of Dryland Research Area: Kharif season = 320mm, Rabi season = 60 mm

48 Verma, Mittal, Nehra and Sharma

Taramira: Single variety namely, T-27 recorded560 kg/ha mean seed yield over the last five years with11.20 kg/ha/mm of RWUE.

Corroborative findings on variability in seed/grain yield of different varieties of pearlmillet (Choudharyet al. 2004; Hooda et al. 2004; Singh et al. 2006),clusterbean (Yadav et al. 2004; Singh et al. 2005),moongbean (Singh et al. 2005; Karwasra et al. 2006);mothbean (Kandpal et al. 2006; Ram et al. 2007; Sharmaet al. 2012); castor( Sutaria et al. 1998; Chaudhary andSadhu, 2010) Bajwa and Sardana, 2006; mustard/ raya(Singh and Agarwal, 2004; chickpea (Gupta et al. 2000;Mathur et al. 2006; Sharma and Pannu, 2006 ); barley(Sharma et al. 2007) under different agro-climaticconditions have been made for dryland situation.

REFERENCES

Bajwa, J. S. and Sardana, Virender. 2006. Productivityand economics of seven winter crops grown underdryland conditions in the sub-mountain of Punjab.Har. J. Agron. 22 : 42-44.

Chaudhary, M. H. and Sadhu, A. C. 2010. Response of semirabi castor (Ricinus communis L.) cv. GCH-5 tonitrogen and phosphorus levels under middleGujarat conditions. Har. J. Agron. 26 : 45-46.

Choudhary, Rampratap, Singh, Harphool and Singh, Man.2004. Prospect of pearlmillet [Pennisetumglaucum (L.)] production under moisture stressconditions of north-western India. Har. J. Agron.20 : 31-32.

Gupta, S. C., Rathore, A. K., Sharma, S. N. and Saini, R. S.2000. Response of chickpea cultivars to waterstress. Ind. J. Plant Physiol. 5 : 274-76.

Hooda, R. S. Khippal, Anil and Narwal, R. P. 2004. Effect offertilizer application in conjunction with bio-fertilizers in sole and inter cropping systems ofpearlmillet under rainfed condition. Har. J. Agron.20 : 29-30.

Kandpal, B. K., Kumawat, R. N. and Mehra, R. S. 2006.Agronomic evaluation of promising genotype ofmothbean under hyper arid condition of Jerusalem.J. Arid Legume 3 : 1-10.

Karwasra, R. S., Kumar, Y. and Yadav, Abhey Singh. 2006.

Effect of phosphorus and sulphur on greengram(Phaseolus radiatus). Har. J. Agron. 22 : 164-65.

Mathur, Khyati, Nanwal, R. K. and Pannu, R. K. 2006. Effectof drought environments on phenology, growthand productivity of chickpea (Cicer arietinum)genotypes. Har. J. Agron. 22 : 63-67.

Ram, Babu, Yadav, B. D., Nanwal, R. K. and Satyajeet. 2007.NPK content and uptake studies in mothbean(Vigna aconitifolia) as influenced by varieties, rowspacing and seed rate under rainfed conditions insemi-arid environment. Har. J. Agron. 23 : 87-90.

Sharma, K. D. and Pannu, R. K. 2006. Evaluating waterefficient chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypesusing physiological traits under rainfed fieldcondition. Har. J. Agron. 22 : 107-09.

Sharma, S. K., Singh, Jagdev and Midha, L. K. 2007.Response of barley (Hordeum vulgare) to fertilitylevels with and without green manuring underconserved soil moisture conditions. Har. J. Agron.23 : 18-20.

Sharma, S. K.,Yadav, I. S., Singh, Jagdev and Jhorar, B. S.2012. Inter-cropping in mothbean (Vignaaconitifolia) for sustainable productivity indrylands. Abstracts: National Seminar on“Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security:Challenges in Changing Climate” held at CCSHAU, Hisar on March, 27-28. pp. 268-69.

Singh, Ishwar and Agarwal, S. K. 2004. Moisture use ofmustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern & Coss] asinfluenced by weed control and fertility levels underdryland conditions. Har. J. Agron. 20 : 82-85.

Singh, Jagdev, Kumar, Anil and Singh, Bikram. 2006.Integrated nutrient management in pearlmillet(Pennisetum glaucum) under rainfed conditionsof southern Haryana. Har. J. Agron. 22 : 119-21.

Sutaria, G. S., Hirpara, D. S., Akbari, K. N., Khokhani, M.N. and Yusufzai, A. S. 1998. Response of castor tonitrogen and phosphorus fertilization under dryfarming conditions. Ind. J. Agric. Res. 32 : 185-89.

Yadav, G. L., Kumawat, P. D. and Singh, Mahendra. 2004.Effect of thiourea seed treatment and spray onyield of clusterbean [Cyamopsis tetragonoloba(L.) Taub.] Har. J. Agron. 20 : 18-20.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 50-52 (2012)

Effect of integrated nutrient management on crop productivity and soil healthunder cereal-cereal cropping sequence

PAWAN KUMAR, S. K. YADAV, MANOJ KUMAR AND R. K. NANWALDepartment of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004, India


ABSTRACT

Field experiments were conducted for two consecutive years i. e. 2007-08 and 2008-09 to studythe effect of integrated nutrient management on productivity, OC, pH and EC in pearl millet-wheatcropping system. The grain yield was at par with 100% recommended NPK in both crops (T5) and thetreatment where nitrogen was substituted through FYM to the tune of 50% in pearl millet followed by100% recommended NPK in wheat equivalent yield as well as system productivity. The OC, pH and ECvalues generally decreased after 2 years of experiment, irrespective of the treatments.

Key words : System productivity, cropping system, soil health

INTRODUCTION

Pearl millet wheat cropping system is a populardouble cropping system in arid and semi-arid areas.Integrated use of organic and inorganic sources ofnutrients plays an important role for sustaining theproductivity of soil and crops in an intensive croppingsystem in north-western India. The nature of both thecrops poses a great challenge for sustainable productivityof these crops. Since pearlmillet and wheat are exhaustivecrops for soil nutrients, replenishment of nutrients onregular basis becomes important aspect of managementfor sustainability. Research in India has indicated theneed of integrated use of organic and inorganic manuresfor sustaining the productivity of soil and crop in anintensive cropping system (Nambiar and Abrol, 1989).This approach restores and sustains soil health andproductivity in the long run besides meeting the nutritionaldeficiencies. Present study was, therefore, undertakento assess the effect of integrated nutrient managementsystem (INM) on crop productivity and soil health underpearl millet-wheat cropping system in semi-aridecosystem of Haryana.


The field experiments were carried out inpermanent laid out research plots in Agronomy ResearchArea at CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisarduring 2007-08 and 2008-09. The soil of the

experimental site was sandy loam in texture, havingpH 7.3, poor in available nitrogen (207 kg/ha),low inphosphorus (14.2 kg/ha) and rich in potassium (278kg/ha). The experiment was laid out in randomizedblock design with 12 treatment combinations replicatedfour times. The treatments were: T1–Control (nofertilizer); T2–50% recommended NPK to pearl milletand wheat; T3–50% recommended NPK to pearl milletand 100% recommended NPK to wheat; T4–75%recommended NPK to pearl millet and wheat; T5–100%recommended NPK to pearl millet and wheat; T6–50%NPK+50% N (farmyard manure) to pearl millet and100% NPK to wheat; T7–75% NPK+25% N (farmyardmanure) to pearl millet and 75% NPK to wheat; T8–50% NPK+50% N (wheat straw) to pearl millet and100% NPK to wheat; T9–75% NPK+25% N (wheatstraw) to pearlmillet and 75% NPK to wheat; T10–50%NPK+50% N (Sesbania spp.) to pearl millet and 100%NPK to wheat; T11–75% NPK+25% N (Sesbania spp.)to pearl millet and 75% NPK to wheat and T12–farmers’practice i.e.N:P:FYM (33.0 : 16.5 kg/ha : 7.5 q/hainpearlmillet and N;P:K;ZNSO4:FYM (138 : 54 : 3 : 4 kg/ha : 20 q/ha

The recommended levels of nitrogen andphosphorus were 125 and 62.5 kg/ha for pearl milletand 150 and 60 kg/ha for wheat. The pearl millet varietyused was HHB 67 with 5 kg seed/ha, keeping rowspacing of 45 cm. In wheat, variety PBW 343 was sownwith 125 kg seed/ha keeping row spacing of 20 cm.Pearl millet was sown on 05.07.2007 and 26.06.2008

and was harvested on 19.09.2007 and 06.09.2008 duringfirst and second year, respectively. Similarly, wheat wassown on 08.11.2007 and 04.11.2008 and was harvestedon 12.04.2008 and 07.04.2009 during first and secondyear, respectively. The nitrogen content in differentorganic materials was determined each year and theamount of these materials required for substituting aspecified amount of nitrogen as per the treatment wascalculated. The organic sources of nutrients viz., FYM,green manure of Sesbania and wheat straw wereincorporated in soil at 32, 38 and 30 days, respectively,before sowing of pearl millet crop. The recommendednitrogen and phosphorus were applied through urea andDAP, respectively. Two post sowing irrigations wereapplied during both the years to pearl millet. Similarly,in wheat five irrigations were applied each year.Recommended package of practices were followed inboth the crops for other agronomic operations.

The mean grain yield of both pearl millet andwheat were calculated by taking average of two years(2007-08 and 2008-09) and system productivity of thepearl millet- wheat cropping system was calculated bydividing the mean wheat equivalent yield by 365 (Katyalet al. 1999), respectively. The soil health parameters vizorganic carbon, pH and EC were determined at the startand end of the experiment at 0-30 cm soil depth. TheOC, pH and EC were determined by Walkly and Blacksmethod, glass electrode pH meter and conductivity meter,respectively.


Productivity

Mean grain yield (Table 1) of pearl millet fortwo years depicted that treatment T5 i.e. 100%recommended NPK in both crops and T6 i.e. 50%recommended NPK+50% N through FYM in pearl milletand 100% recommended NPK in wheat were at par andT6 was significantly superior to rest of the treatments.Similar observations were recorded by Singh et a!.(1999) in pearl millet-wheat cropping sequence. Thedata for mean grain yield of wheat for the two yearsrevealed that treatment T5 i.e. 100% recommended NPKin both crops was at par with T6 i.e. 50% recommendedNPK+50% N through FYM in pearl millet and 100%recommended NPK in wheat except T10. The resultsindicated that 50% N can be supplemented through FYMin pearl millet in pearl millet-wheat cropping system and

these results are in confirmation to the findings of Katyalet al. (2002). Wheat equivalent yield (Table 1) at 100%recommended NPK in both crops (T5) and the treatmentwhere nitrogen was substituted through FYM to the tuneof 50% in pearl millet followed by 100% recommendedNPK in wheat (T6) was 8230 and 8508 kg ha. Thismight be attributed to the availability of nitrogen for entiregrowing season due to slow mineralization of organicnitrogen from FYM in pearl millet-wheat croppingsequence. Tandon (1997) also reported similar type ofresults. Among organic treatments wheat equivalent yieldranged between 5177 to 8508 kg/ha, being highest where50 percent N was substituted by FYM in pearlmillet(T6).

System productivity (Table 1) was also highestin T6 (23.31 kg/ha/day) followed by T5 (22.55 kg/ha/day). Among chemical fertilizers system productivityranged between 10.90 to 22.55 kg/ha/day, being highestwhere 100 percent recommended dose of fertilizer wasapplied to pearlmillet and wheat both (T5) and lowestwhere 50 percent recommended dose of fertilizers wasapplied to both crops(T2) Among the treatments wherechemical fertilizer was integrated with organic sources,the system productivity ranged between 19.88 to23.31kg/ha/day, being highest where 50 percent N throughFYM was applied in pearlmillet (T6) and lowest where25 percent N was applied through wheat straw (T9)

Table 1. Mean grain yield of pearlmillet-wheat cropping sequenceunder different treatments

Treatments Grain yield (kg/ha)

Pearlmillet Wheat Wheat Systemequivalent productivity

yield (kg/ha/day)

T1 11.36 1326 2113 5.79T2 2248 3982 5558 10.90T3 2376 5474 7140 19.57T4 2815 4829 6786 18.59T5 3407 5850 8230 22.25T6 3583 6007 8508 23.31T7 3373 5116 7472 20.47T8 2729 5587 7486 20.51T9 2987 5177 7258 19.88T10 3180 5769 7994 21.90T11 3281 5340 7933 21.73T12 2862 5312 7326 20.07LSD (P=0.05) 212 284 - -


Soil health

Organic carbon : The OC contents (Table 2),in general were higher at the start of the–experiment(2007-08) and decreased at the end of the experiment(2008-09) This might be due to exhaustive nature ofboth crops and of cereal- cereal cropping system.Nambiar et al. (1989) reported decrease in organiccarbon content of soil by 30% and 38% at Barrackporeand Pantnagar, respectively, in 16 years of sequentiallygrowing of rice and wheat.

pH : Soil pH was not influenced markedly bychemical fertilizers alone or in integration with organicsources of nutrients.

Electrical conductivity : The electricalconductivity values decreased from start of theexperiment in 2007-08 to end of experiment in 2008-09. Similar findings were reported by Rao and Dakhore(1994) who observed decrease in EC values due to

Table 2. Effect of different treatments on sol health

Treatments OC (%) pH EC (dS/m)

2007 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008-08 -09 -08 -09 -08 -09

T1 0.39 0.40 7.2 7.4 0.16 0.18T2 0.43 0.45 7.3 7.4 0.18 0.18T3 0.51 0.49 7.2 7.5 0.19 0.19T4 0.53 0.50 7.3 7.7 0.22 0.18T5 0.50 0.52 7.2 7.4 0.25 0.19T6 0.59 0.55 7.2 7.3 0.21 0.19T7 0.58 0.51 7.2 7.3 0.19 0.18T8 0.57 0.50 7.2 7.2 0.22 0.18T9 0.55 0.51 7.2 7.3 0.21 0.19T10 0.57 0.51 7.3 7.3 0.20 0.18T11 0.56 0.52 7.4 7.3 0.18 0.17T12 0.52 0.50 7.3 7.5 0.23 0.18

continuous application of organic manures along withchemical fertilizers.

REFERENCES

Katyal, V., B. Gangwar and K. S. Gangwar. 2002. Yieldtrends and soil fertility changes in pearl millet–wheat cropping system under long term integratednutrient management. Ann. agric. Res. (New Series)23 : 201-05.

Nambiar, K. K. M. and I. P. Abrol. 1989. Long term fertilizerexperiments in India–An overview. Fert. News. 34: 11-20, 26.

Nambiar, K. K. M., P. M. Soni, M. R. Vats, D. K. Sehgal and D.K. Mehta. 1989. Annual Report 1985-86/1986-87. AllIndia Coordinated Research Project on Long TermFertililizer Experiments. ICAR, New Delhi, pp. 50.

Rao, K. J. and R. C. Dakhore. 1994. Nutrient changes in avertisol under sorghum- wheat rotation for fiveyears. J. Soil Crops 4 : 108-12.

Singh, R. P., M. C. Mundra, S. C. Gupta and S. K. Agarwal.1999. Effect of integrated nutrient managementon productivity of pearl millet (Pennisetumglaucum)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) croppingsystem. Ind. J. Agron. 44 : 250-55.

Tandon, H. L. S. 1997. Bulky Organic Manures and CropResidues. Fertilizer. Organic Manures, RecyclableWastes and Biofertilizers–Components ofIntegrated Plant Nutrition. Binny Printers, NewDelhi. pp. 47.

Katyal, V., Gangwar, B. and Gangwar, K. S. 1999. Longterm effect integrated nutrient supply on yield,stability and soil health under pearlmillet–wheatcropping system. J. Maharashtra Agri. Univ. 24 :143-46.

72 Kumar, Yadav, Kumar and Nanwal

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 53-57 (2012)

Bio-efficiency of Hizyme-G as source of essential nutrient for the improvementof physiological traits, yield and quality of Wheat

K. D. SHARMA*, A. KUMAR AND K. S. PATRO*Crop Physiology Lab., Department of Agronomy,

CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar 125 004, India*Hindustan Pulverising Mills, New Delhi 110 033

*(e-mail : [email protected])


SUMMARY

Hizyme-G, a bio-organic extraction of growth regulators and nutrients in the granular form wasevaluated for the improvement of wheat quality and yield. The Hizyme-G was applied in three differentdosage viz., 15.0, 20.0 and 25.0 kg/ha at three different application times in full and splits doses. Theapplication of Hizyme-G with standard recommended dose of fertilizers significantly improved the growthand vigour, grain yield and quality of wheat. The application of Hizyme-G leads to significant increase ofvegetative growth such as plant height, profuse tillering and dry matter accumulation. The treatment ofbio-regulator caused marked improvement in gaseous exchange and transpirational cooling. The grainyield and its components like number of spikelets per spike, effective tillers and test weight were enhancedsignificantly by application of Hizyme G in combination with inorganic fertilizers over control. The bio-regulator also significantly increased protein and wet gluten percentage of grains. The most economicand efficient treatment was found to be 20.0 kg/ha dose applied full at sowing followed by 20.0 kgHizyme-G applied ½ at sowing and ½ at 30 days after sowing in terms of crop growth, yield and qualityof grain.

Key words : Hizyme G, photosynthesis, quality, wheat, yield

INTRODUCTION

Wheat (Triticum aestivum) being a secondimportant staple food in India plays an important role inthe food economy. The yield level of different cerealsmainly wheat has reached a plateau or started decliningin different wheat growing regions of the country.Among the major factors is maximum use of inorganicfertilizer alone resulting in environmental pollution andhealth hazards. The role of organic matter wellestablished that not only it improves the crop productivity,but also helps in improving physico-chemical propertiesof soil (Abd El-Wahed et al. 2006). Since the availabilityof farm yard manure (FYM) is limited, the attention hasto be focused on bio-organic technology for increasingagricultural production, to limit the use of chemicalfertilizers and pollution to environment through seedinoculation by different means (Hegazi et al. 1998, Ameret al. 2002). To overcome this problem, some bio-organic sources are also available which are rich inessential growth regulators and nutrients can be used to

substitute the use of FYM. The integrated nutrientmanagement (INM) with the combination of inorganicand organic source may prove to be boon for enhancingthe production and productivity of wheat. The combineduse of fertilizers with organic sources (bio-organicmaterials) not only improve the productivity but alsohelpful in improving the soil properties. Therefore, thepresent trial was conducted on wheat to evaluate thebio-efficiency of Hizyme-G as source of essential nutrientsupplement for the improvement of crop quality andyield.


A field experiment was conducted during rabi2008-09 at Crop Physiology Research Area, Departmentof Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University,Hisar (29o-10’N latitude, 75o-46’ E longitude and 215 maltitude), India. The available soil moisture was 13.8 cmin 1.0 m profile. The experiment was laid out inrandomized block design with three replications in a net

plot size of 3.6 m x 5.0 m. Prior to sowing a commonpre-sowing irrigation of 7.0 cm depth was applied in theexperimental field to obtain a uniform crop stand. Thecrop was sown in the first week of November, 2008 inrows with 22.5 cm spacing. The soil of the field wassandy loam in texture with low in organic carbon (0.38%), alkaline in reaction (pH 8.0) and medium in fertility(available N 146 kg/ha, available P2O5 21.5 kg/ha andavailable K2O 476 kg/ha). All other agronomical practiceswere followed as per recommended package of practices.The Hizyme-G was applied as soil application alongwithrecommended dose of fertilizers (a basal application of75 kg N/ha and 60 kg P2O5/ha and 25 kg ZnSO4/ha wasgiven before sowing. Nitrogen at the rate 75 kg/ha wasalso given before first irrigation as mentioned days aftersowing (DAS) as per the treatments (Table 1).

The observations were recorded for cropgrowth and vigour at 60 and 96 DAS and canopytemperature depression at anthesis with Infraredthermometer (Telatemp Corp., Fullerton, CA, USA). Thephotosynthetic rate and transpiration was measured onflag leaf using Infra-red Gas Analyzer (IRGA, CIRAS-1, PP Systems, UK.). The yield and yield attributes wererecorded at harvest, grain quality were estimated by GrainAnalyser (Foss Analytica Ltd, Sweden) for protein,starch and wet gluten content. Visual observations wererecorded on frost damage, deficiency symptoms ofnutrients and phyto-toxicity. The data were statistically

analyzed for analysis of variance using online StatisticalAnalysis Package (OPSTAT, Computer Section, CCSHaryana Agricultural University, Hisar, India).


The crop growth and vigour was higher withthe treatment of Hizyme G over control (Table 1). Earlyestablishment of crop was better when Hizyme-G wasapplied at the time of sowing. At 60 DAS, the plant height,number of productive tillers and total plant biomass washighest in T5 (20 kg/ha applied full at sowing) followedby T9 (25 kg/ha applied full at sowing), T7 (20 kg/ha ½at sowing + ½ at 30 DAS) and T11 (25 kg/ha ½ at sowing+ ½ at 30 DAS). These treatments showed significanthigher values over the control but were statistically atpar among themselves. Similar response in crop growthwas observed at 96 DAS among different treatments.The response of applied Hizyme-G in T5 and T9 wassignificantly higher in terms of crop growth over thecontrol treatment. The increase in growth and vigourcould be due to enhanced nutrient use efficiency in thepresence of bio-organic fertilizer, a good source of macroand micro nutrients (Rizwan et al. 2007)

The physiological traits i.e., canopy temperaturedepression (CTD), transpiration, stomatal conductanceand photosynthetic efficiency were found to be higherin Hizyme-G over control treatment (Table 2). The

Table 1. Effect of Hizyme G on crop growth and vigour of wheat

Treatments 60 DAS 96 DAS

Dose Plant No. of Total dry Plant No. of Total dry(kg/ha) height tillers/ weight height tillers/ weight

(cm) m.r.l (g) (cm) m.r.l (g)

T1–Full at sowing 15.0 49.0 97.5 105.6 87.2 106.4 323.0T2–Full at 30 DAS 15.0 42.0 85.0 101.7 85.6 98.0 269.0T3–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 15.0 43.0 90.0 91.8 86.3 106.4 284.8T4–½ at 30 DAS+½ at 50 DAS 15.0 40.0 77.5 88.2 83.5 95.2 260.8T5–Full at sowing 20.0 46.0 105.0 131.4 88.7 117.6 330.3T6–Full at 30 DAS 20.0 43.0 95.0 112.5 86.4 114.8 274.3T7–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 20.0 45.0 100.0 117.3 87.5 116.2 302.0T8–1/2 at 30 DAS+1/2 at 50 DAS 20.0 41.0 92.5 108.6 85.4 112.0 261.5T9–Full at sowing 25.0 47.0 100.0 123.3 88.6 112.0 327.0T10–Full at 30 DAS 25.0 43.0 97.5 106.5 86.2 106.4 275.5T11–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 25.0 45.0 100.0 118.8 87.8 112.0 293.8T12–½ at 30 DAS+½ at 50 DAS 25.0 42.0 90.0 111.6 85.1 106.4 270.5T13–Biozyme - Full at 30 DAS 20.0 43.0 87.5 116.1 86.0 106.4 316.0T14–Control (RDF) 39.0 87.5 112.2 85.6 100.8 313.0LSD (P=0.05) 2.46 6.74 7.23 2.15 5.12 9.65

54 Sharma, Kumar and Patro

response of these traits was higher in treatment T5 (20kg/ha applied full at sowing) followed by T7 (20 kg/haapplied ½ at sowing + ½ at 30 DAS), T9 (25 kg/haapplied full at sowing) and T11 (25 kg/ha applied ½ atsowing + ½ at 30 DAS). This might be due to theapplication of Hizyme G at sowing and at first irrigationthat enhanced the plant water status which helped theplants to perform various physiological processes likephotosynthesis, CTD and biochemical metabolism moreefficiently at later stages of growth. Cooler canopy mightbe associated with better water uptake/efficient rootsystem and water status for longer period, resulting instomata being open, therefore, maintenance of hightranspiration rate (Kumar and Tripathi, 1991). Besidethis Hizyme-G treatment rich in many bio-organic growthregulators and nutrients treated wheat responded betterfor CO2 assimilation or photosynthetic activities resultingin increased dry matter production and grain yield overcontrol treatment. No significant increase in quality ofgrain was observed with the application of Hizyme-Gover the control except the treatment T5 (Table 2).However, among the Hizyme-G treatments there was asignificant difference in the quality characters. Maximumprotein (%) and wet gluten (%) was observed in T5 (20kg/ha applied full at sowing) followed by T9 for proteinand T7 for wet gluten. The starch content (%) didn’trespond significantly among different treatments ofHizyme-G over control. Application of Hizyme G at thetime of sowing is more effective compared with late

application in increasing grain protein content. Theincrease in grain protein percentage may be due to anincrease in soluble proteins (Warraich et al. 2002). Therange of protein among different treatments was 11.6-12.6% which was considered to be good for chapattimaking quality of wheat.

Yield and its attributes were higher in Hizyme-G treatments over control (Table 3). Highest grain yield(58.2 q/ha) was obtained in T5 (20 kg/ha applied full atsowing) followed by T9 (25 kg/ha applied full at sowing),T7 (20 kg/ha applied ½ at sowing + at ½ 30DAS) andT11 (25 kg/ha applied ½ at sowing + ½ at 30 DAS).These treatments had significantly higher yield, whereasother treatments with Hizyme-G were statistically at parirrespective of doses and time of application. The higheryield with Hizyme-G was because of more number ofproductive tillers, number of spikelets/spike and testweight. These attributes were statistically at par whenHizyme G was applied at the time of sowing irrespectiveof doses; however, the differences were significant withthe time of application of Hizyme-G. The increase ingrain yield and its attributes by use of bio-regulatorscould be attributed to efficient mobilization of assimilatesfor an extended period of grain filling (Abd El- Wahed etal. 2006, Verma et al. 2009).

The grain yield had positive significant linearassociation with physiological traits i.e. stomatalconductance and photosynthesis (Fig. 1a, b). This mightbe possible because of abundant moisture available for

Table 2. Effect of Hizyme G on gaseous exchange and grain quality of wheat

Treatments Dose Canopy Transpiration Stomatal Photosynthesis Protein Starch Wet(kg/ha) temperature (m mol m-2 s-1) conductance (µ mol m-2 s-1) (%) (%) Gluten

depression (oC) (m mol m-2 s-1) (%)

T1–Full at sowing 15.0 -0.3 2.3 72.5 13.9 12.1 66.8 33.0T2–Full at 30 DAS 15.0 0.0 2.3 78.5 13.1 12.0 66.9 32.9T3–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 15.0 -0.3 2.5 83.5 13.7 12.3 67.3 33.9T4–½ at 30 DAS+½ at 50 DAS 15.0 -0.2 2.5 80.5 11.4 12.3 66.7 33.2T5–Full at sowing 20.0 -0.5 2.7 112.5 17.0 12.6 67.1 34.6T6–Full at 30 DAS 20.0 -0.3 2.3 91.0 13.7 12.0 66.9 33.1T7–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 20.0 -0.4 2.2 95.3 15.3 12.0 67.0 34.3T8–1/2 at 30 DAS+1/2 at 50 DAS 20.0 -0.2 1.7 75.0 11.8 11.6 66.8 33.9T9–Full at sowing 25.0 -0.3 2.6 84.8 14.5 12.4 67.0 33.5T10–Full at 30 DAS 25.0 0.1 2.2 70.0 13.1 12.2 67.0 32.9T11–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 25.0 -0.3 2.5 81.3 14.0 12.2 66.7 33.4T12–½ at 30 DAS+½ at 50 DAS 25.0 -0.3 2.3 80.3 13.5 12.1 67.2 32.5T13–Biozyme - Full at 30 DAS 20.0 -0.2 2.4 70.0 12.1 12.1 66.9 33.1T14–Control (RDF) -0.2 2.2 69.3 11.7 12.0 66.9 33.2LSD (P=0.05) 0.19 0.39 15.6 1.6 0.18 NS 1.74


Table 3. Effect of Hizyme G on yield and its attributes of wheat

Treatments Dose Plant Ear No. of No. of Biomass Grain Test(kg/ha) height length spikelets/ tillers/ yield yield weight

(cm) (cm) spike m.r.l (kg/ha) (kg/ha) (g)

T1–Full at sowing 15.0 103.1 8.8 17.6 112.3 14519 5369.6 39.7T2–Full at 30 DAS 15.0 101.5 9.0 16.9 110.7 14722 5378.9 39.0T3–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 15.0 101.2 9.1 17.1 116.0 14704 5477.2 40.3T4–½ at 30 DAS+½ at 50 DAS 15.0 100.3 8.6 16.7 107.0 14463 5352.4 39.3T5–Full at sowing 20.0 104.2 9.5 18.2 114.7 16296 5818.5 42.1T6–Full at 30 DAS 20.0 102.8 9.1 17.3 111.3 15852 5518.5 40.7T7–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 20.0 103.5 9.1 17.5 113.7 16111 5626.1 42.0T8–½ at 30 DAS+1/2 at 50 DAS 20.0 102.2 9.0 17.1 107.7 14444 5409.8 41.3T9–Full at sowing 25.0 103.6 9.2 18.2 113.0 15370 5678.9 41.3T10–Full at 30 DAS 25.0 101.4 9.3 17.1 111.0 15000 5436.3 41.0T11–½ at sowing+½ at 30 DAS 25.0 101.8 9.2 17.3 112.7 15148 5580.4 41.7T12–½ at 30 DAS+½ at 50 DAS 25.0 101.5 9.1 17.0 109.0 14537 5444.4 41.0T13–Biozymes - Full at 30 DAS 20.0 102.0 9.1 17.0 109.7 14352 5492.6 40.3T14–Control (RDF) 101.6 9.0 16.9 106.7 14111 5392.6 39.0LSD (P=0.05) NS NS 1.03 5.31 356.2 125.4 1.4

Fig. 1. Relationship between (a) leaf stomatal conductance, (b) photosynthetic rate, (c) number of tillers and (d) test weight with grainyield. Stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rate recorded at anthesis stage and seed yield and its attributes recorded at harvestwere used for establishing the relationships. *P<0.05, **P<0.01.

56 Sharma, Kumar and Patro

the basic process of photosynthesis and higher nutrientuptake because of their increased availability was alsoreported by Reynolds et al. 1998. The grain yield showedsignificant association with number of productive tillersand test weight (Fig. 1 c, d).

Other visual observations recorded no incidenceof frost damage and deficiency symptom of any nutrientsin the crop during the growing season. There was alsono phyto-toxicity incidence to the crop due to theapplication of Hizyme- G at different doses and time ofapplication.

On the basis of this experiment it may beconcluded that application of Hizyme-G withrecommended dose of fertilizers enhanced the cropgrowth and vigour, gaseous exchange, grain yield andquality of wheat. The application of Hizyme G, a bio-organic extraction of growth regulators and nutrientswas considered as a promising supplement of mineralnutrition and growth promoting substance. The mosteconomic and efficient treatments were found to be T5(20 kg/ha Hizyme-G applied full at sowing) followed byT7 (20 kg/ha applied ½ at sowing + ½ at 30 DAS) interm of crop growth, yield and quality of grain.

REFERENCES

Abd El-Wahed, M. S. A., Amin, A. A. and Rashad, E. 2006.Physiological effect of some bioregulators onvegetative growth, yield and chemical constituentsof yellow maize plant. World J. Agric. Sci. 2 : 149-55.

Amer, M. M., Swelim, M. A., Bouthaina F., Abd El-Ghanyand Omar, Amal M. 2002. Effect of N2 fixing

bacteria and actinomycetes as biofertilizers ongrowth and yield of cucumbers in sandy soil inEgypt. Egyptian J. Desert Res. 52 : 113-26.

Hegazi, N. A., Fayez, M., Amin, G., Hamza, M. A., Abbas, M.,Youssef, H. l. Monib, M. and Malik, K. A. 1998.Diazotrophs associated with non-legumes grownin sandy soils. Proc : 7th Int. Symp. on NitrogenFixation with Non-legumes, Faisalabad, Pakistan,16-21, October 1998. pp. 209-22.

Kumar, A. and Tripathi, R. P. 1991. Relationship betweenleaf water potential, canopy temperature andtranspiration in irrigated and rainfed wheat. J.Agron. Crop Sci. 166 : 19-23.

Reynolds, M. P., Singh, R. P., Ibrahim, A., Ageeb, O. A. A.,Larque-Saavedra, A. and Quick, J. S. 1998.Evaluating physiological traits to complementempirical selection for wheat in warmenvironments. Euphytica 100 : 85-94.

Rizwan A., Shahzad, S. M., Khalid, A., Ashad, M. andMahmood, K. 2007. Growth and yield response ofwheat and maize to nitrogen and L-tryptophanenriched compost. Pakistan J. Bot. 39 : 541-49.

Verma, A., Malik, C. P., Sinsinwar, Y. K. and Gupta, V. K.2009. Yield parameters responses in a spreading(cv. M-13) and semi-spreading (cv. Girnar-2) typesof groundnut to six growth regulators American-Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 6 : 88-91.

Warraich, E. A., Basra, S. M. A., Ahmad, N., Ahmed, R. andAftab, M. 2002. Effect of nitrogen on grain qualityand vigour in wheat. Intl. J. Agric. Biol. 4 : 517-20.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 58-60 (2012)

Effect of sowing techniques on spring sunflower–assessment through front linedemonstrations

O. P. LATHWAL, K. S. AHLAWAT, PARMINDER SINGH AND RENU DEVICCSHAU Krishi Vigyan Kendra Kurukshetra – 136118, India



ABSTRACT

In order to demonstrate the effect of sowing methods on productivity of spring sunflower, 76 front linedemonstrations were conducted at farmers’ fields during the years 2008 to 2012 in district Kurukshetra (Haryana).Among three methods of sowing, placement of seed (dibbling) either on ridges or on flat fields at a planting geometryof 60 X 30 cm2 enhanced seed yield by 8.8 to 15 % compared to broadcast sowing on flat fields on average basis offive years study. An edge of 3.6 to 7.9 % in yield gain was recorded under ridge dibbling method of sowing over thedibbling done on flat fields. Cultivation cost of sunflower increased (9 to 12 %) every year (2008 to 2012) due toinflation but the net returns decreased over the years due to fluctuating price of the produce. Market rates ofproduce and sowing techniques influenced the net returns during all the years of investigation. Additional expendituredone on ridge formation and manual seed placement increased the cost of cultivation by 10.9 and 5.3 % under ridgedibbling method over flat dibbling and flat broadcast sowings, respectively. Dibbling on flat fields also incurred 5.3% higher costs than broadcast method of sowing. On an average, maximum returns (Rs. 29928/ha) were obtainedfrom the crop grown with ridge dibbling method which was 17.2 and 5.3 % higher than the returns obtained from thecrop raised with flat dibbling and flat broadcast sowing techniques, respectively.

Key words : Methods of sowing, ridge and flat beds, broadcast, dibbling, seed yield, economics

INTRODUCTION

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) is animportant oilseed commercial crop grown throughoutthe year in southern parts and during spring season innorth-western parts (Punjab and Haryana) of India. Thesunflower kernels are good source of health benefittingnutrients, minerals, antioxidants, vitamins and edible oil.The seeds of sunflower are rich in poly-unsaturated fattylinoleic acid and its oil is free from cholesterol for whichit is considered one of the best among different cookingoils. Indian vegetable oil economy is fourth largest inthe world and India is deficient in cooking oils whichusually needs to import 40% of its consumptionrequirements. In order to cut the import, the governmenthas initiated several schemes to augment the oilseedsproduction in the country. On the same line, IndianCouncil of Agricultural Research (ICAR) has undertakenthe initiative in the form of front line demonstrations(FLDs) through its Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVK), thetransfer of technology centers, to promote the oilseedsand pulses production.

Sunflower gained importance in early nineties

in Haryana and after that it became the part of the multiplecropping systems due to its short duration characteristicparticularly in north eastern districts of the state. It fitswell in potato and sugarcane based cropping systemsand is very common in district Kurukshetra. For its allapparent importance, KVK Kurukshetra conducted FLDson sunflower. Among different components of cropproduction method of sowing plays significant role indetermining the plant density and its consequent effecton productivity. There are opportunities to show theworth of various sowing techniques through FLDs atfarmers’ fields involving them directly. Therefore, thepresent investigation was aimed to assess and show theimpact of sowing methods on seed yield of sunflowerthrough FLDs at farmers’ fields.


Through farmers participatory approach FLDson spring sunflower were undertaken at farmers’ fieldsin district Kurukshetra of Haryana (India) during theyears 2008 to 2012. A total of 76 FLDs were organizedin an area of 38.8 ha scattered in the district randomly.

The demonstrations were conducted using three methodsof sowing viz. ridge dibbling (dibbling of seeds onridges), flat broadcast (broadcast of seed in flat fields)and flat dibbling (dibbling of seed in flat fields). Placementof seed by hands called dibbling was done at plantinggeometry of 60 X 30 cm2 under ridge and flat dibblingmethods of sowing. As per convenience and resourcesof the farmers 60, 28 and 12% demonstrations werecarried out under ridge dibbling, flat broadcast and flatdibbling sowings methods, respectively during the years2008 to 2012 on aggregate basis. The detail of thedemonstrations conducted under different sowingtechniques during different years is given in Tables 1.

dibbling methods of sowing, respectively irrespectiveof the years from 2008 to 2012. The quantum of yieldadvantage under ridge dibbling sowing varied from 8.8to 26.6 % over flat broadcast method during differentyears of study. There was an increase of 3.6 to 7.9%seed yield under ridge sowing when compared with flatdibbling method. The difference of mere dibbling on flatfields also exhibited the effect on seed yield during theyears 2008, 2010 and 2011. Flat dibbling sowing realized1.6 to 13.5% more seed yield than the flat broadcastmethod of sowing.

Table 1. Detail of front line demonstrations (FLDs) on springsunflower

Years Number Area Number of FLDs underof FLDs (ha) different methods of sowing

Ridge Flat Flatdibbling broadcast dibbling

2008 17 6.8 8 5 42009 9 4.0 7 2 -2010 17 8.0 9 5 32011 15 10.0 8 5 22012 18 10.0 14 4 -Total 76 38.8 46 21 9

The crop was grown on clay loam soils ofmedium fertility with recommended Package of Practicesexcept the variations in sowing techniques. The data onseed yield were recorded.


Effect on seed yield

Average seed yield over the years (2008-2012)ranged between 20.0 and 24.5 q/ha, irrespective of thesowing techniques (Table 2). The variations in seed yieldduring a span of five years could be attributed tocorresponding weather conditions and the sowing ofdifferent hybrids (selection of sunflower hybrids at thefarmers’ wisdom) along with quality of seed sown duringdifferent years. Methods of sowing influenced theproductivity of sunflower during all the years (2005-2012) under investigation (Table 2). On an average, ridgesowing recorded highest seed yield (22.2 q/ha) whichwas 15 and 8.8% higher than flat broadcast and flat

Table 2. Effect of sowing methods on seed yield of spring sunflower

Years Average seed yield (q/ha)

Ridge Flat Flat Averagedibbling broadcast dibbling

2008 25.8 23.0 24.8 24.52009 23.8 18.8 - 21.32010 20.0 17.0 19.3 18.82011 20.5 18.7 19.0 19.42012 21.0 19.0 - 20.0Average 22.2 19.3 21.0 20.8

Placement of seed at optimum seeding geometryand at proper depth as under dibbling methodsirrespective of ridge or flat field conditions enhancedthe seed germination resulting in more number of plantsper unit area in comparison to seed sown by broadcastmethod. Dibbling almost ensured the emergence ofseedlings and required plant population which ultimatelyimproved the productivity. Proper placement of plantsover a given area makes plant canopy more effective inintercepting radiant energy and shading weeds (Saeed,1994) and this could be the possible explanation forrealizing yield gain under ridge and flat dibbling methodsof sowing. Our results corroborate with the findings ofEsechie et al (1996), Ahmad et al (2000) and Saleem etal (2007) who reported that ridge sown sunflower hadhigher seed yield than furrow or flat patterns of sowing.

Effect on costs and returns

There was consistent increase in cultivation costof sunflower crop over the years from 2008 to 2012.Due to hike in cost of inputs and other farm operationsthe cost of cultivation raised by 49.9, 50.0 and 51.4 %from the year 2008 to 2012 under ridge dibbling, flat


broadcast and flat dibbling methods of sowing,respectively. The gradual rise in cost of cultivationoccurred to the tune of 10.2 - 11.3, 8.7 - 11.2, 12.3 -13.6 and 9.0 - 9.2 % from the year 2008 to 2009, 2009to 2010, 2010 to 2011 and 2011 to 2012, respectivelyirrespective of sowing methods (Table 3). Maximumhike in cost of cultivation was observed from the year2010 to 2011 due to increase in cost of phosphaticfertilizers. Methods of sowing influenced the cost ofcultivation during all the years of study. Highestcultivation cost was recorded under ridge dibblingmethod followed by flat dibbling and flat broadcast

sowing techniques (Table 3) over all the years of study.On an average of five years, ridge dibbling methodinvolved 10.9 and 5.3 % more cost of cultivation incomparison to flat broadcast and flat dibbling methodsof sowing, respectively. Similarly, flat dibbling methodalso realized 4.2-6.4 % higher cultivation cost than flatbroadcast method during different years of investigation.The higher cost of cultivation under ridge dibbling sowingtechnique was due to the additional expenditure incurredon ridge formation and seed placement (dibbling) incomparison to sowing methods adopted in flat fields.Dibbling even in flat fields increased the average cost of

Table 3. Cost of cultivation and returns under FLDs on spring sunflower

Years Rate of Cost of cultivation(Rs./q) Net returns (Rs./q)produce(Rs./q) Ridge Flat Flat Ridge Flat Flat

dibbling broadcast dibbling dibbling broadcast dibbling

2008 2500 17823 16072 16822 46677 41428 451782009 2000 19642 17893 18642 27958 19707 -2010 1900 21822 19448 20698 16178 12852 159722011 2800 24500 22100 23375 26750 24650 241252012 2500 26725 24125 25475 32075 29075 -

cultivation by 5.3 % over the broadcast method of sowingduring the years from 2008 to 2012.

Maximum returns were obtained during the year2008 followed by the years 2012, 2009, 2011 and 2010.The variations in net returns during different years weredue to differences in seed yield and price of the producein corresponding years. Higher seed yield coupled withhigher market rates of produce during the years 2008,2011 and 2012 resulted in more returns in comparisonto 2010 and 2011. It is evident from the Table 3 thatmethod of sowing influenced the net returns during allthe years. Ridge dibbling method of sowing recordedhighest returns which were 17.2 and 5.3% more thanthe returns obtained under flat broadcast and flat dibblingsowing method, respectively due to corresponding seedyield on average basis of five years study. On the sameline, dibbling in flat fields also resulted in 11.3% morereturns than the broadcast method of sowing in flat fieldsfor the obvious reason of difference in seed yield.

REFERENCES

Ahmad, G., Quresh, Z. and Ullah, H. 2000. Effect of differentsowing methods on the performance of sunflower.Pakistan J. Biol. Sci. 3 :1829-30.

Esechie, H. A., Elias, S., Rodriguez, V. and Al-Asmi, H. S.1996. Response of sunflower (Helianthus annuusL.) to planting pattern and population density in adesert climate. J. agric. Sci. (Camb.) 126 : 455-61.

Saeed, M. 1994. Crop water requirements and irrigationsystems. Pages 48-83 ion E. Bashir and R. Bantel,eds. Crop Production. National Book Foundation,Islamabad, Pakistan.

Saleem, M. F., Ma, B. L., Malik, M. A., Cheema, M. A. andWahid, M. A. 2007. Yield and quality response ofautumn-planted sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.)to sowing dates and planting patterns. Can. J.Plant Sci. 88 :101-09.

60 Lathwal, Ahlawat, Singh and Devi

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 61-65 (2012)

Integrated nutrient management and weed control in wheat (Triticum aestivum L)RAJESH KUMAR BHATIA, V. P. SINGH AND AMARJEET1

Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004, India


ABSTRACT

The field experiment was carried out to study the effect of integrated nutrient management (INM) andweed control on weed control efficiency and yield of wheat during rabi 2000-01 and 2001-02 at research farm ofCCS Haryana Agricultural University Hisar, India. Among INM recommended dose of fertilizers (150 kg N+60 KgP2O5+30 kg K2O/ha)+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha gave highest grain (4605 and 4960 kg/ha) and straw yield (7086 and7578 kg/ha ) during 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. Amongst different weed control treatments both herbicidesi. e. metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha proved equally effective against broad leaf weeds and resultedinto 64-67% weed control efficiency and higher grain yield than weedy check during both the years.

Key words : Wheat (Triticum aestivum), weed control efficiency, metsulfuron, chlorsulfuron

1District Extension Specialist (Agronomy) Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Bhiwani, India

INTRODUCTION

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is one of the mostimportant staple cereals and occupies a notable positionamong food grains not only in terms of area andproduction but in versatility in adaptation to wide rangeof agro climatic conditions world over. In India, duringlast four decades the wheat production and productivityincreased many folds (23.83 m.t. and 1307 kg/ha in1970-71 to 85.93 m.t. and 2938 kg/ha in 2010-11) withthe help of high input technologies viz. high yieldingvarieties, chemical fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation andlabour saving but energy intensive farm machinery.However, we have been facing many problems likedeclining nutrient use efficiency, multiple nutrientimbalance, shift in weed flora, development of resistancein weeds against various herbicides, adverse change inphysic-chemical properties of soil, environmentalpollution etc. to sustain our agricultural production.

Integrated nutrient management (INM) with theuse of organic manures like vermi-compost is animportant tool to cope up with problems related to soilhealth and fertility. Vermi-compost plays an importantrole in alleviating nutrient imbalance, to combatenvironmental pollution and bridging the gap betweenfertilizer consumption and production in the country.

Severe weed infestation is also an importantconcern for wheat production. Depending upon intensityand distribution of weed flora weeds may cause 12 to

72% yield reductions. Continuous use of some chemicalseither developed resistance in weeds against a particularherbicide or shifted weed flora. In wheat, only broadleaf weeds may lead to 7-50% yield reduction (Kurchaniaet al, 2000). Metsulfuron and chlorsulfuron have shownpromising results against broad leaf weeds. Keeping inview the above mentioned facts the present study wascarried out to study effects of INM and weed controlon weed control efficiency and yield of wheat.


Field experiments were conducted at theResearch Farm of Chaudhary Charan Singh HaryanaAgricultural University, Hisar, India during rabi seasonsof 2000-01 and 2001-02. The soil of experimental fieldwas sandy loam in texture, low in available N, mediumin P2O5 and high in K2O with slightly alkaline in reaction(pH 7.65-7.71). The experiment was laid out in splitplot design keeping INM treatments (F0: control, F1 :150 kg N+60 kg P2O5+ 30 kg K2O/ha recommendeddose of fertilizers, F2 : vermicompost @ 10 t/ha, F3 :F1+vermicompmost @ 5 t/ha, F4 : 100 kg N+Vermi-compmost @ 10 t/ha , F5 : 150 kg N+vermicompmost@ 10 t/ha) in main plot and four weed control treatments(W0 : weed free, W1 : weedy check, W2: metsulfuron @4 g/ha , W3 : chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha) in sub plots.

Wheat variety PBW-343 was sown @ 100 kg/ha with the help of seed drill in rows 22 cm apart on

13.12.2000 and 05.12.2001 during first and second yearof experimentation, respectively. The recommended doseof nutrients was supplied through urea, DAP & MOP.Half dose of nitrogenous fertilizer i. e. urea, full dose ofphosphatic fertilizer and full dose of potasic fertilizer wasapplied as basal dose at the time of sowing and remainingdose of urea was top dressed in two equal split dosesduring both the seasons. Both herbicides were applied 35days after sowing (DAS) of wheat as per treatments withthe help of knap sack sprayer fitted with flat fan nozzlewith a spray volume of 600 litres of water per hectare.

Weed studies

Weed population of dominant weeds wascounted by quadrant (0.25 m2) placed at random in eachplot at 30 DAS and before harvest. Later on weedpopulation was expressed as per square meter area. Thevalue thus observed were subjected to square roottransformation v x+1for statistical analysis. The samplescollected for weed density were utilized for dry matteraccumulation studies. These samples were first sun driedand then oven dried at 70±20C till a constant weightwas achieved. The final dry weight of weeds wasexpressed in g m-2. The weed control efficiency wascalculated at harvesting stage using following formula :-

WCE = (DWC-DWT)/DWC*100Where,

WCE : Weed control efficiency (%)DWC : Dry weight of weeds (g/m2) in weedy checkDWT : Dry weight of weeds (g/m2) in treated plot

Crop studies

The crop from net plot was harvested manuallywith the help of sickle on April 28th 2000 and April 20th

2001 during first and second year of experimentation,respectively. Before threshing biological yield(grain+straw) was recorded using portable spring balance.The crop was threshed plotwise using plot thresher andgrain yield was recorded. The straw yield was recordedby subtracting grain yield from biological yield.


Weed studies

Behaviour of weeds as influenced by the

treatments was studied in terms of population of weeds(no./m2) and dry weight of weeds (g m-2) at differentstages of crop growth. The dominant weed flora in theexperimental field comprised of Anagallis arvensis L(Krishan neel), Rumex dentatus L (Jangli palak), Melilotusindica L (Metha), Phalaris minor Retz. (Kanki), andMiscellaneous weeds i.e. Fumaria parviflora (Gajri),Convolvulus arvensis (Hiran Khuri), Chenopodiumalbum L (Bathu), Circium arvense L. Scap (Kandai) andAvena fatua L. (Wild oat). Perusal of Table 1 revealsthat A. arvensis was the most prominent weed duringboth the years. The population of all weed species presentwas highest at 30 DAS and it significantly differed withINM treatments during 2000-01. However, no trend wasobserved thus it may be attributed to the seed bank presentin the soil. During 2001-02 INM treatments had nosignificant effect on population of any weed exceptRumex dentatus and miscellaneous weeds at harvest.

Among different weed control treatmentsmetsulfuron @ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/hacontrolled A. arvensis, R. dentatus and M. indicacompletely during both the years. Similar findings havealso been reported by Balyan and Panwar (1997) at Hisarand Walia et al (2000) at Ludhiana. No significant effectof INM treatments was observed on the population ofP. minor in either year. As both the herbicides used werefor the control of broad leaf weeds, they had no effecton P. minor as it was statistically at par with weedycheck during both the years. Miscellaneous weedscomprised of various weed species as mentioned in Table1 were present in lesser number as compared to otherweeds discussed here. The population of thesemiscellaneous weeds varied significantly with theapplication of INM treatments during both the years atharvest.

During 2001-02, the population of miscellaneousweeds was statistically at par among all the treatmentsexcept vermicompost @ 10 t/ha which recorded lowestmiscellaneous weed population. During 2000-01 thepopulation of miscellaneous weeds was lowest in controlwhich was statistically at par with F1, F2 and F4.

Differentweed control treatments reduced significantly thepopulation of these weeds over weedy check. Thenumber of miscellaneous weeds observed was 12.99and 14.99; 12.55 and 14.10 in the plots treated withmetsulfuron @ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha,respectively, as compared to 23.33 and 28.09 in theweedy check at harvest during 2000-01 and 2001-02,respectively.

62 Bhatia, Singh and Amarjeet

Tabl

e 1.

Wee

d de

nsity

(nu

mbe

rs m

-2)

as i

nflu

ence

d by

int

egra

ted

nutr

ient

man

agem

ent

and

wee

d co

ntro

l tr

eatm

ents

Trea

tmen

tsPo

pula

tion

of w

eeds

(no

./m2 )

2000

-01

2001

-02

Ana

gall

isR

umex

Mel

ilot

usP

hala

ris

Mis

cell

aneo

usA

naga

llis

Rum

exM

elil

otus

Pha

lari

sM

isce

llan

eous

arve

nsis

dent

atus

indi

cam

inor

wee

dsar

vens

isde

ntat

usin

dica

min

orw

eeds

30A

t30

At

30A

t30

At

30A

t30

At

30A

t30

At

30A

t30

At

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

harv

est

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

harv

est

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

harv

est

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

harv

est

DA

Sha

rves

tD

AS

harv

est

F 0: C

ontr

ol7.

992.

224.

391.

923.

411.

742.

743.

083.

542.

927.

181.

924.

992.

053.

211.

813.

172.

984.

113.

66(8

0.33

)(8

.66)

(25.

16)

(5.6

6)(1

2.99

)(2

.02)

(7.6

6)(1

0.16

)(1

4.33

)(8

.99)

(84.

88)

(5.3

3)(4

1.33

)(6

.66)

(11.

33)

(4.5

0)(1

0.83

)(9

.49)

(19.

66)

(15.

83)

F 1: 15

0 kg

N+6

0 kg

7.67

2.16

4.41

2.10

3.58

1.81

3.19

3.50

4.22

3.11

6.36

1.82

5.51

2.25

3.79

1.89

2.99

2.71

3.33

3.71

P2O

5+30

kg

K2O

/ha (R

D)

(73.

99)

(8.0

0(2

4.83

)(6

.33)

(14.

83)

(2.2

7)(1

1.99

)(1

3.83

)(2

0.99

)(1

0.50

)(6

6.66

)(5

.00)

(49.

77)

(9.0

0)(1

6.66

)(5

.16)

(9.8

3)(7

.83)

(12.

33)

(15.

66)

F 2 :

Verm

icom

post

@ 1

0 t/h

a7.

602.

515.

022

2.02

3.56

1.79

3.24

3.53

3.61

3.02

6.02

1.81

5.15

1.72

3.81

1.87

3.20

3.00

3.40

2.99

(72.

33)

(11.

16)

(33.

16)

(6.3

3)(1

4.66

)(2

.20)

(11.

33)

(13.

83)

(14.

99)

(10.

16)

(60.

44)

(5.0

0)(4

3.77

)(3

.66)

(15.

83)

(4.8

3)(1

1.16

)(9

.66)

(14.

16)

(13.

10)

F 3 :

F 1+Ve

rmic

ompo

st @

5 t

/ha

7.65

2.02

6.79

1.74

3.43

1.69

3.62

3.93

5.13

3.82

5.06

1.56

6.78

2.56

3.38

1.61

3.76

3.70

3.87

3.88

(73.

41)

(6.5

0)(6

1.49

)(3

.58)

(13.

16)

(1.8

5)(1

4.49

(16.

83)

(31.

66)

(16.

99)

(34.

66)

(2.6

6)(7

4.21

)(1

3.00

)(13

.16)

(2.8

3)(1

6.33

)(16

.33)

(17.

83)

(16.

66)

F 4 :

100

kg N

+Ver

mic

ompo

st6.

641.

904.

371.

774.

871.

753.

263.

573.

763.

065.

202.

144.

412.

133.

671.

813.

083.

003.

844.

08 @

10

t/ha

(55.

66)

(5.1

6)(2

4.5)

(4.0

0)(2

7.83

)(2

.06)

(11.

99)

(14.

66)

(16.

16)

(10.

16)

(44.

00)

(7.6

6)(3

1.33

)(7

.50)

(20.

66)

(4.3

3)(1

0.66

)(10

.16)

(16.

66)

(19.

66)

F5 :

150

kg

N+V

erm

icom

post

7.04

2.32

4.84

1.95

3.83

1.82

2.43

3.07

4.70

3.80

5.14

1.69

5.13

2.06

3.70

1.55

3.84

3.54

4.11

3.62

@ 1

0 t/h

a(7

6.44

)(9

.66)

(30.

66)

(5.8

3)(1

6.49

)(2

.31)

(8.9

9)(1

0.16

)(2

5.83

)(1

6.50

)(3

7.55

)(3

.66)

(43.

10)

(6.8

3)(1

5.66

)(2

.33)

(16.

9)(1

4.33

)(2

0.16

)(2

0.22

)LS

D (

P=0.

05)

0.59

70.

281.

34N

S0.

649

NS

NS

NS

NS

0.66

NS

NS

NS

0.37

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

0.6

W1

: Wee

d Fr

ee1.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

001.

00(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)(0

.00)

(0.0

0)W

1 :

Wee

dy C

heck

9.08

5.69

6.26

4.68

5.34

4.08

3.94

4.23

5.43

4.87

7.36

4.31

7.10

5.54

4.34

4.04

4.02

3.85

5.02

5.76

(78.

99)

(32.

59)

(44.

22)

(21.

33)

(27.

66)

(15.

64(1

4.66

)(1

7.55

)(3

0.77

)(2

3.33

)(5

5.99

)(19

.55)

(50.

88)

(31.

10)(

18.5

5)(1

5.99

)(1

5.99

)(14

.44)

(25.

88)

(28.

09)

W2:

Met

sulf

uron

@ 4

g/h

a9.

541.

076.

161.

004.

491.

003.

834.

325.

163.

667.

141.

005.

941.

004.

441.

004.

153.

854.

64.

02(9

1.77

)(0

.22)

(42.

44)

(0.0

0)(1

9.88

)(0

.00)

(14.

66)

(18.

55)

(26.

88)

(12.

99)

(53.

99)

(0.0

0)(3

6.22

)(0

.00)

(19.

22)

(0.0

0)(1

7.44

)(14

.44)

(21.

10)

(14.

99)

W3:

Chl

orsu

lfur

on @

30

g/ha

10.1

11.

006.

451.

004.

341.

003.

754.

245.

063.

637.

811.

007.

281.

004.

601.

004.

183.

924.

493.

84(1

05.1

1)(0

.00)

(46.

55)

(0.0

0)(1

9.16

)(0

.00)

(14.

55)

(16.

88)

(24.

99)

(12.

55)

(59.

88)

(0.0

0)(5

4.66

)(0

.00)

(20.

99)

(0.0

0)(1

7.33

)(15

.44)

(20.

21)

(14.

1)LS

D (

P=0.

05)

0.63

90.

360.

920.

330.

841

0.25

60.

300.

370.

490.

220.

690.

490.

600.

260.

453

0.26

10.

420.

440.

470.

24

Figu

res

in t

he p

aren

thes

is i

ndic

ate

the

orig

inal

dat

a w

hich

hav

e be

en s

ubje

cted

to

the

squa

re r

oot

? x+

1tra

nsfo

rmat

ion

RD

: R

ecom

men

ded

dose

of

ferti

lizer

sN

S: N

on s

igni

fica

nt


Tabl

e 2. D

ry w

eigh

t of w

eeds

, wee

d co

ntro

l effi

cien

cy, g

rain

yiel

d, st

raw

yiel

d an

d ha

rves

t ind

ex o

f whe

at a

s inf

luen

ced

by IN

M a

nd w

eed

cont

rol t

reat

men

ts

Trea

tmen

tsD

ry w

eigh

t of

Wee

d co

ntro

lG

rain

yie

ldSt

raw

yie

ldH

arve

st in

dex

wee

ds (g

/m2 )

effic

ienc

y (%

)(k

g/ha

)(k

g/ha

)(%

)

2000

-01

2001

-02

2000

-20

01-

2000

-20

01-

2000

-20

01-

2000

-20

01-

0102

0102

0102

0102

30 D

AS

At h

arve

st30

DA

SA

t har

vest

F 0 : C

ontro

l13

.04

56.7

014

.79

59.4

659

.55

60.9

737

9838

5058

2058

8539

.49

39.4

9F 1

: 150

kg

N+6

0 kg

P2O

5+30

kg

K2O

/ha (R

.D)

12.9

260

.55

17.3

165

.01

59.6

858

.15

4520

4717

6952

7239

39.4

539

.41

F 2 : V

erm

icom

post

@ 1

0 t/h

a16

.80

60.9

419

.90

67.2

060

.38

57.2

340

4842

6161

9265

1539

.46

39.5

3F 3 :

F1 +

Ver

mic

ompo

st @

5 t/

ha18

.68

69.6

323

.44

75.5

357

.77

55.5

846

0549

6070

8675

7839

.55

39.4

0F 4 :

100

kg

N+V

erm

icom

post

@ 1

0 t/h

a13

.89

65.7

020

.18

70.7

558

.26

56.8

242

9547

4366

1271

6539

.91

39.3

9F 5

: 15

0 kg

N+V

erm

icom

post

@ 1

0 t/h

a16

.90

64.3

721

.96

71.2

156

.99

56.0

744

7748

0068

7473

3739

.56

39.4

6LS

D P

=0.0

5)1.

32N

S3.

327.

81N

SN

S16

825

425

957

3N

SN

SW

1 : W

eed

Free

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

100.

0010

0.00

4574

4862

7022

7424

39.6

539

.45

W1 :

Wee

dy C

heck

20.0

115

2.67

28.9

615

9.79

0.00

0.00

3934

4187

6048

6374

39.6

339

.43

W2:

Met

sulfu

ron

@ 4

g h

a-120

.91

50.7

625

.25

57.5

267

.32

64.4

243

5046

1266

6570

8639

.40

39.5

0W

3: C

hlor

sulfu

ron

@ 3

0 g

ha-1

20.5

748

.51

24.2

255

.48

67.7

865

.46

4304

4559

6623

6929

39.6

739

.40

LSD

P=0

.05)

1.23

26.

622.

295.

593.

072.

3712

410

118

817

2N

SN

S

RD

: Rec

omm

ende

d do

se o

f fer

tiliz

ers,

NS

: Non

sign

ifica

nt


The dry weight of weeds was significantlyaffected by INM treatments during both the years exceptat harvest in 2000-01. The highest dry weight of weedswas recorded in F3 (75.53 g m-2) at harvest in 2001-02which was statistically at par with F4 and F5 (70.75 and71.21 g m-2) and statistically higher than F0, F1 and F2(59.46, 65.01 and 67.20 g m-2). Enhanced dry matterproduction under INM treatments could be ascribed tothe increased availability of nutrients in balanced formand improved physico-chemical properties of the soil.The dry matter reduction of weeds was significantamong herbicidal treatments. Metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha andchlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha resulted in significant dry matterreduction and results obtained under herbicidal treatmentswere statistically at par with each other. The reductionin dry matter of weeds was because of effective controlof broad leaf weeds by these herbicides. Weed controlefficiency is good index to evaluate the effectiveness ofa weed control treatment for controlling weeds. Weedcontrol efficiency (WCE) of 67.32 and 64.42 and 67.78and 65.46 was observed with application of metsulfuron@ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha in that order during2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. Almost similar resultswere obtained by Balyan and Panwar (1997) andKurchania et al (2000).

Grain yield

The grain yield increased significantly with theapplication of INM treatments over control during boththe years. The highest yield 4960 kg/ha was obtainedunder F3 which was followed by 4800 kg/ha under F5,4743 kg/ha under F4 and 4717 ka/ha under F1 during 2001-02. These were significantly at par with each other andsignificantly higher than F2 i.e. 4261 kg/ha. Similarlyduring 2000-01the highest yield 4605 kg/ha was obtainedunder F3 followed by 4520 kg/ha in F2 , and 4477 kg/haunder F5 which statistically at par with each other andsignificantly higher than other treatments. Amongdifferent weed control treatments highest grain yield(4574 and 4862 kg/ha) was recorded under weed freesituations, which were significantly higher than yieldobtained with metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha (4350 and 4612kg/ha), chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha (4304 and 4559 kg/ha)and weedy check (3934 and 4187 kg/ha) in 2000-01and 2001-02, respectively. The herbicidal treatments inrespect of grain yield were statistically at par with eachother but significantly higher than weedy check during

both the years. The better performance of thesetreatments may be attributed to reduced crop weedcompetition. Similar to these results Malik et al. (1999)reported up to 57% reduction in grain yield of wheatdue to weeds. Uncontrolled weeds caused 31% reductionin grain yield of wheat (Chopra et al., 1999).

Straw yield

The data indicates that straw yield increasedsignificantly over control with the application of INMtreatments. The highest straw yield was recorded underF3 (7086 and 7578 kg/ha) followed by F5 (6874 and 7337kg/ha) during 2000-01 and 2001-02. Among different weedcontrol treatments weed free treatment produced higheststraw yield (7022 and 7424 kg/ha) in both years and itsignificantly higher than all other treatments. Metsulfuron@ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha also gavesignificantly higher straw yield than weedy check. Theharvest index was neither affected by INM nor by weedcontrol treatments during both years.

Among INM treatments recommended dose offertilizers (150 kg N+60 kg P2O5+30 kg K2O/ha)+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha recorded higher yield duringboth years. Metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @30 g/ha proved effective against broad leaf weeds.

REFERENCES

Balyan, R. S. and Panwar R. S. 1997. Herbicidal control ofbroad leaf weeds in wheat. Har. J. Agron. 13 : 33-38.

Chopra, N., Singh, H. and Tripathi, H. P. 1999. Critical periodfor crop weed competition in wheat (Triticumaestivum L.) Ind. J. Weed Sci. 31 : 151-54.

Kurchania, S. P., Bhalla, C. S. and Paradkar, N. R. 2000.Bio-efficacy of metsulfuron methyl and 2,4-Dcombinations for broad leaf weed control in wheat.Ind. J. Weed Sci. 32 : 67-69.

Malik, R. S., Yadav, A., Malik, R. K. and Panwar, R. S.1999. Efficacy of isoproturon, Diclofopmethyl andtralkoxydim alone in mixture against weeds inwheat. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 31 : 64-66.

Walia, U. S., Kaur, L. and Brar, L. S. 2000. Control of broadleaf weeds in wheat with sulfonyl urea herbicides.J. Res. Punjab Agric. Univ. 37 : 176-80.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 66-70 (2012)

Effect of integrated nutrient management and weed control on yield andnutrient uptake by wheat (Triticum aestivum L) and weeds

RAJESH KUMAR BHATIA, V. P. SINGH AND AMARJEET1

Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004, Haryana, India


ABSTRACT

The field experiments were carried out to study effect of integrated nutrient management (INM)and weed control on yield and nutrient uptake by wheat and associated weeds during rabi 2000-01 and2001-02 at research farm of CCS Haryana Agricultural University Hisar, India. The highest N uptake byweeds (18.49 and 21.19 kg/ha), P uptake by weeds (2.06 and 2.34 kg/ha) and K uptake by weeds (14.62and 16.62 kg/ha) was observed under F3 i.e. recommended dose of fertilizers+vermicompost @ 5 t/haduring 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. The percent increase in N, P and K uptake in F3 was 39 and 52,35 and 53, 31 and 47 in grain and 38 and 50, 48 and 66, 37 and 48 in straw over control in that order during2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. Weed control measures significantly increased uptake of N, P and Kover weedy check. Maximum uptake of N, P and K was recorded in weed free plots showing 17 and 18, 17and 10, 18 and 18% increase in grain and 17 and 19, 21 and 20, 17 and 18% increase in straw in N, P andK uptake over weedy check plots during 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. The highest grain and strawyield was recorded under F3 i.e. recommended dose of fertilizers+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha (4605 and 4960,7086 and 7578 kg/ha grain and straw in 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively) which was statistically at parwith grain and straw yield under F1: 150 kg N+60 Kg P2O5+ 30 kg K2O/ha (R.D) and F5 : 150 kgN+vermicompost @ 10 t/ha during both the years. The highest protein yield in grain and straw wasrecorded under F3 i.e. recommended dose of fertilizers+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha resulting in 39 and 52%increase in protein yield in grain and 38 and 50% increase in protein yield in straw during 2000-01 and2001-02, respectively. Maximum protein yield was recorded under weed free plots followed by metsulfuron@ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha which were significantly higher than weedy check in grain as wellas straw during both the years. Metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha produced 4350, 4612and 4304, 4559 kg/ha grain yield and 6665, 7086 and 6623, 6929 kg/ha straw yield during 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively which was significantly higher than grain and straw yield under weedy check andsignificantly lower than grain and straw yield under weed free treatments.

Key words: Wheat, INM, weed control, vermicompost, metsulfuron, chlorsulfuron

1District Extension Specialist (Agronomy) Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Bhiwani-127 021, India

INTRODUCTION

The yield of any crop is directly related to itsnutrient uptake and fertility level of the soil. With theadoption of intensive agriculture, the cereal crops’ yieldshave reached to the plateau even with the recommendeddose of fertilizers. Therefore, in the event of nutrientturn over in the soil plant system being considerablyhigher under intensive farming; neither chemical fertilizernor the organic source alone can achieve productionsustainability. Secondly weeds not only reduce the cropgrowth and yield but also act as silent robbers of scarceand essential nutrients. They deplete soil fertility more

particularly nitrogen within four to six weeks of cropgrowth (Gautam et al, 1974). The uncontrolled weedsdepleted an average of 45.6, 11.3 and 45.6 kg N, P andK/ha, respectively, when allowed to grow with crop upto harvest whereas use of herbicides increased nutrientuptake by wheat and decreased nutrient uptake by weeds(Malik et al, 1999).

INM is the approach which aims at efficientand judicious use of all the major sources of plantnutrients in an integrated manner so as to get themaximum economic yield without any deleterious effecton physical, chemical and biological properties of soil.Vermicompost is an important component of INM. It

contains more amount of NPK and other essentialnutrients as compared to FYM and helps in rectifyingnutrient imbalances and soil health to sustain theproductivity. Weed flora is also changing with more useof herbicides. 2,4-D is showing poor efficacy againsthardy broad leaf weeds like Jangli palak, Canada thistleand Field bind weeds etc. therefore new herbicides arebeing tested against broad leaf weeds in wheat. Keepingin view these facts present experiment was conductedto study the effect of INM and weed control on NPKuptake by weeds and wheat.


The field experiment was conducted at ResearchFarm of Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana AgriculturalUniversity, Hisar, India during rabi seasons of 2000-01and 2001-02. The soil of experimental field was sandyloam in texture, low in available N, medium in P2O5 &high in K2O with slightly alkaline in reaction (pH 7.65-7.71). The experiment was laid out in split plot designkeeping INM treatments (F0: Control, F1: 150 kg N+60Kg P2O5+30 kg K2O/ha (recommended dose of fertilizers)F2 : vermicompost @ 10 t/ha, F3 : F1+vermicompmost@ 5 t/ha, F4 : 100 kg N+vermicompmost @ 10 t/ha , F5: 150 kg N+vermicompmost @ 10 t/ha) in main plot andfour weed control treatments (W0 : weed free, W1 :weedy check, W2 : metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha, W3 :chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha) in sub plots.

Wheat variety PBW-343 was sown @ 100 kg/ha with the help of seed drill in rows 22 cm apart on13.12.2000 and 5.12.2001 during first and second yearof experimentation, respectively. The recommended doseof nutrients was supplied through urea, DAP & MOP.Half dose of nitrogenous fertilizer i. e. urea, full dose ofphosphatic fertilizer i.e. DAP and full dose of potasicfertilizer i.e. MOP was applied as basal dose at the timeof sowing and remaining dose of urea was top dressedin two equal split doses during both the seasons. Bothherbicides were applied at 35 DAS of wheat as pertreatments with the help of knap sack sprayer fitted withflat fan nozzle with a spray volume of 600 litres of waterper hectare.

The crop from net plot was harvested manuallywith the help of sickle on April 28th 2000 and April 20th

2001 during first and second year of experimentation,respectively. Before threshing biological yield(grain+straw) was recorded using portable springbalance. The crop was threshed plot wise using plot

thresher and grain yield was recorded. The straw yieldwas recorded by subtracting grain yield from biologicalyield.

Plant analysis

Oven dried grounded grain and straw samplesweighed 0.2 and 0.5 g, respectively were digested in di-acid mixture of H2SO4 and HClO4 (9:1) for determinationof N, P and K contents. After digestion a known volumeof mixture was made with distilled water and stored inwell washed plastic bottles after filtration throughWhatman filter paper no. 42. All the estimations in thealiquot were made according to the following procedure:

N, P and K content in grain and straw of wheatand weed plants was determined by Nesslers reagentmethod (Linder, 1944), vanadomolybdo phosphoric acidyellow colour method (Koening and Johnson, 1942) andflame photometer method (Jackson, 1973), respectively.The nutrient uptake by wheat was calculated bymultiplying respective nutrient contents in grain and strawin different treatments with grain and straw yield in thattreatment. The nutrient uptake by weeds was calculatedby multiplying dry matter of weeds at 120 DAS withNPK contents. The protein yield in grain and straw wasestimated by multiplying N content (%) with 6.25.


The data presented in Table 1 revealed thatnutrient (N, P and K) uptake by weeds was significantlyaffected by INM treatments during both the years. Thehighest N uptake by weeds (18.49 and 21.19 kg/ha), P(2.06 and 2.34 kg/ha) and K (14.62 and 16.62 kg/ha)was observed under F3 i.e. recommended dose offertilizers+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha during 2000-01 and2001-02, respectively. Increased removal of nutrientsby weeds with increasing fertility status of soil has alsobeen reported by Pandey et al. (2000). Among differentweed control treatments the removal of N, P and K wasmaximum in weedy check and minimum in weed freeplots. The herbicides controlled the weeds effectivelyand therefore resulted in significantly lower nutrientremoval than weedy check (Table 1). Among theherbicidal treatments the removal of nutrients wasstatistically at par because both herbicides were equallyeffective against broad leaf weeds. These results are inline with the findings of Pandey et al. (2000) and Sharmaand Pahuja (2001).


Application of all INM treatments increased nitrogen,phosphorus and potassium uptake by wheat grain andstraw significantly over control during both the years(Table 2). Among different INM treatments F3 i.e.recommended dose of fertilizers+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha and F2: vermicompost @ 10 t/ha recorded maximumand minimum uptake of N, P and K, respectively. Thepercent increase in N, P and K uptake in F3 was 39 and52, 35 and 53, 31 and 47 in grain and 38 and 50, 48 and66, 37 and 48 in straw over control in that order during2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively. While F1 i.e.recommended dose of fertilizers recorded an increaseof 33 and 41, 26 and 35, 25 and 32% N, P and K in grainand 29 and 39, 31 and 36, 30 and 34% in straw during2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively in comparison tocontrol (Table 2). The removal of K was very high incomparison to N particularly by cereal crops.Unfortunately, application of K did not receive dueattention for most of the Indian soils which wereconsidered adequate in native K supply. But intensiveagriculture led to occurrence of K deficiency in soil andthereby low uptake of K by crops. Application ofvermicompost increases the exchangeable K status ofthe soil and it also contains higher number of N fixerand other beneficial microbes which have helped thecrop to take up more nutrients for its development (Kaleet al, 1991). The higher uptake of N, P and K withapplication of vermicompost have also been reported byAhlawat (2002). N, P and K contents in wheat was

statistically at par under different herbicidal treatmentsduring both the years. However, weed control measuressignificantly increased uptake of N, P and K over weedycheck. Maximum uptake of N, P and K was recorded inweed free plots showing 17 and 18, 17 and 10, 18 and18% increase in grain and 17 and 19, 21 and 20, 17 and18% increase in straw in N, P and K uptake over weedycheck plots during 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively(Table 2). The higher uptake of nutrients by crops underweed control treatments was due to effective control ofweeds and more availability of nutrients to the crop.Similar findings have been reported by Singh and Malik(1992).

Grain, straw and protein yield were significantlyincreased with the application of INM treatments (Table3). The highest grain and straw yield was recorded underF3 i.e. recommended dose of fertilizers+vermicompost@ 5 t/ha (4605 and 4960, 7086 and 7578 kg/ha grain andstraw in 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively) which wasstatistically at par with grain and straw yield under F1:150 kg N+60 Kg P2O5+ 30 kg K2O/ha (R.D) and F5 : 150kg N+vermicompost @ 10 t/ha during both the years.The protein yield in grain as well as straw was alsosignificantly increased with application of INM treatments.The highest protein yield in grain and straw was recordedunder F3 i.e. recommended dose of fertilizers+vermi-compost @ 5 t/ha resulting in 39 and 52% increase inprotein yield in grain and 38 and 50% increase in proteinyield in straw during 2000-01 and 2001-02, respectively.

Table 1. Effect of integrated nutrient management and weed control treatments on N, P, K uptake (kg/ha) by weeds

Treatments Nutrient uptake (kg/ha)

2000-01 2001-02

N P K N P K

F0: Control 12.85 1.12 10.05 15.16 1.48 11.10F1: 150 kg N+60 kg P2O5+30 kg K2O/ha (R.D) 16.05 1.65 11.73 17.78 1.82 13.80F2 : Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 15.98 1.65 12.51 18.25 1.88 14.30F3 : F1+Vermicompost @ 5 t/ha 18.49 2.06 14.62 21.19 2.34 16.65F4 : 100 kg N+Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 16.86 1.73 12.99 19.03 1.96 14.69F5 : 150 kg N+Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 17.24 1.87 13.31 19.50 2.13 15.18S.Em± 0.87 0.10 0.689 1.01 0.07 0.618LSD (P=0.05) 2.77 0.33 2.171 3.18 0.22 1.947W1 : Weed Free 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00W1 : Weedy Check 38.80 4.02 29.51 43.26 4.48 33.49W2: Metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha 13.58 1.39 10.67 15.62 1.64 12.12W3: Chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha 12.61 1.31 9.97 15.07 1.62 11.56LSD (P=0.05) 2.124 0.242 1.784 1.90 0.156 1.081


Table 2. N, P, K uptake (kg/ha) by wheat as influenced by integrated nutrient management and weed control treatments

Treatments N uptake (kg/ha) P uptake (kg/ha) K uptake (kg/ha)

By grain By straw By grain By straw By grain By straw

2000- 2001- 2000- 2001- 2000- 2001- 2000- 2001- 2000- 2001- 2000- 2001-01 02 01 02 01 02 01 02 01 02 01 02

F0: Control 63.42 62.93 30.13 30.05 12.40 12.14 5.93 5.85 16.28 16.02 90.94 91.25F1: 150 kg N+60 kg P2O5+ 84.37 88.44 38.77 41.74 15.59 16.33 7.75 7.93 20.42 21.16 118.38 122.70 30 kg K2O/ha (R.D)F2 : Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 73.54 78.45 33.69 36.30 13.61 14.68 6.43 7.16 17.80 18.96 101.37 109.11F3 : F1+Vermicompost @ 5 t/ha 88.14 95.86 41.45 45.08 16.77 18.55 8.78 9.69 21.37 23.54 124.31 134.60F4 : 100 kg N+Vermicompost 78.90 88.45 36.92 40.72 14.46 16.34 7.18 8.19 19.05 21.45 113.41 124.03@ 10 t/haF5 : 150 kg N+vermicompost 84.30 91.49 39.19 41.51 15.54 16.98 8.08 9.16 20.42 22.36 118.41 127.54@ 10 t/haLSD (P=0.05) 3.02 4.14 1.20 2.65 0.50 0.98 0.65 0.65 0.88 1.12 5.19 9.7W1 : Weed Free 84.46 90.63 39.25 42.39 15.80 16.00 8.05 8.63 20.66 22.12 118.57 126.90W1 : Weedy Check 71.90 76.87 33.50 35.55 13.46 14.49 6.64 7.17 17.45 18.70 101.45 107.45W2: Metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha 80.00 85.36 37.28 40.09 14.92 15.99 7.46 8.18 19.45 20.84 112.35 120.69W3: Chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha 78.86 84.22 36.74 38.90 14.73 15.87 7.28 7.99 19.33 20.66 111.87 117.78LSD (P=0.05) 1.60 1.99 0.92 1.47 0.30 0.36 0.29 0.22 0.57 0.50 3.14 2.93

Table 3. Grain yield, Straw yield and Protein Yield of wheat as influenced by integrated nutrient management and weed control treatments

Treatments Grain yield Straw yield Protein yield Protein yield(kg/ha) (kg/ha) (grain) (kg/ha) (Straw) (kg/ha)

2000-01 2001-02 2000-01 2001-02 2000-01 2001-02 2000-01 2001-02

F0: Control 3798 3850 5820 5885 396.35 393.30 188.30 187.79F1: 150 kg N + 60 Kg P2O5+ 30 kg K2O/ha (R.D) 4520 4717 6952 7239 527.30 552.80 242.32 260.87F2 : Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 4048 4261 6192 6515 459.62 490.34 210.56 226.91F3 : F1 + Vermicompost @ 5 t/ha 4605 4960 7086 7578 550.87 599.10 259.09 281.73F4 : 100 kg N + Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 4295 4743 6612 7165 493.11 552.84 230.78 254.56F5 : 150 kg N + Vermicompost @ 10 t/ha 4477 4800 6874 7337 526.90 571.84 244.94 265.70LSD (P=0.05) 168 254 259 573 18.89 25.87 7.50 16.58W1 : Weed Free 4574 4862 7022 7424 528.01 566.09 245.33 263.08W1 : Weedy Check 3934 4187 6048 6374 449.49 480.89 209.41 225.29W2: Metsulfuron @ 4 g/ha 4350 4612 6665 7086 500.03 533.47 233.03 25056W3: Chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha 4304 4559 6623 6929 491.76 526.35 229.61 243.10LSD (P=0.05) 124 101 188 172 10.03 12.46 5.72 9.19

RD: Recommended dose of fertilizers

The increase in protein yield produced was caused byincreased N uptake by grain and straw and higher grainand straw yield of wheat. Similar results have been reportedby Patel and Upadhyay (1993). Different weed controltreatments had significant effect on protein yield producedby grain and straw of wheat. Maximum protein yield wasrecorded under weed free plots followed by metsulfuron@ 4 g/ha and chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha which were

significantly higher than weedy check in grain as well asstraw during both years. The % increase in protein yieldunder weed free plots was 17 and 18% in grain and 17and 17% in straw over weedy check during 2000-01 and2001-02, respectively. This increase in protein yield inweed control treatments was due to higher grain and strawyield in weed control treatments. Metsulfuron @ 4 g/haand chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha produced 4350, 4612 and


4304, 4559 kg/ha grain yield and 6665, 7086 and 6623,6929 kg/ha straw yield during 2000-01 and 2001-02,respectively which was significantly higher than grainand straw yield under weedy check and significantly lowerthan grain and straw yield under weed free treatments.

In order to achieve higher yield levels, betterquality (higher protien content) and to maintain soilfertility status for sustainable agriculture the integratednutrient management practices should be adopted inwheat. In the present study recommended dose offertilizers (150 kg N+60 Kg P2O5+ 30 kg K2O/ha)+vermicompost @ 5 t/ha gave highest yield and proteincontent of wheat crop. The weeds compete with thecrop for nutrients therefore maximum nutrient removalwas observed in weedy check plots thereby reducingyield levels. The herbicides i.e. metsulfuron @ 4 g/haand chlorsulfuron @ 30 g/ha may be applied in wheatfor effective control of broad leaf weeds. However, thestudy may be repeated for confirmation of results.

REFERENCES

Ahlawat, J. S. 2002. Effect of organic manures andherbicides on wheat and associated weeds. Ph. D.thesis, submitted to CCSHAU, Hisar.

Gautam, K. C., Mani, V. S. and Das, B. 1974. Note oneconomizing nitrogenous fertilization in wheatthrough chemical weed control. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 6: 121-23.

Jackson, M. L. 1973. Soil chemical analysis. Prentice Hallof India Pvt. LTd, New Delhi. pp. 498.

Kale, R. D., Bano, K. and Satyavati, G. P. 1991. Influence ofvermicompost application on growth and yield ofcereals, vegetables and ornamental plants. Finalreports of KSCST project No. 67-04/Verma/34B(3478), Banglore PP:87.

Koening, R. A. and Johnson, C. R. 1942. Colorimetricdetermination of phosphorous in biologicalmaterials. Indian Eng. Chem. (Analyt.) 14 : 155-56.

Linder, R. C. 1944. Rapid analytical methods for some ofthe more common inorganic constituents of planttissues. Pl. Physiol. 19 : 76-78.

Malik, R. S., Yadav, A., Malik, R. K. and Panwar, R. S.1999. Efficacy of isoproturon, Diclofopmethyl andtralkoxydim alone in mixture against weeds inwheat. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 31 : 64-66.

Pandey, I. B., Mishra, S. S., Singh Harendra and Prasad,N. 2000. Nutrient uptake by wheat (Triticumaestivum L.) and associated weeds as influencedby fertilizer levels and weed management. Ind. J.Weed Sci. 32 : 31-34.

Patel, R. M. and Upadhayay, P. N. 1993. Response of wheatto varying levels of nitrogen and phosphorus. Ind.J. Agron. 32 : 113-14.

Sharma, Rajvir and Pahuja, S. S. 2001. Effect of weedcontrol measures on nutrient uptake by crop andweeds in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Ind. J. WeedSci. 33 : 174-76.

Singh, S. and Malik, R. K. 1992. Weed management andfertilizer utilization. Fert. News. 37 : 59-63.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 71-73 (2012)

Performance of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) as influenced by different varieties,row spacing and seeding rate

HARI RAM, BALJIT SINGH AND SARVJEET SINGHDepartment of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Punjab Agricultural University Ludhiana 141 004 Punjab

Received on: 15.08.12, Accepted on 28.12.12

ABSTRACT

Barley yield can be increased with the new varieties and their matching agronomy. A field experiment wasconducted at Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana during 2008-09 to 2009-10 with two barley varieties (PL807 and PL 426), two row spacing (15 and 20 cm) and three seeding dates (75, 87.5 and 100 kg/ha). Barley grainyield and effective tillers m-2 of variety PL 807 were significantly higher than PL 426. The grain yield of PL 807 was8.34-8.67% higher than PL 426. The effective tillers m-2 and grain yield recorded in the 20 cm row spacing weresignificantly higher than 15 cm row spacing. The grain yield of 57.48 and 56.88 q/ha in 2007-08 and 2008-09,respectively were recorded in 87.5 kg/ha seed rate was significantly higher than 75 kg/ha seed rate but statisticallyon par with 100 kg seed rate/ha. The net returns were higher in variety PL 807, row spacing of 20 cm and seed rateof 87.5 kg/ha.

Key words : Barley, economics, grain yield, row spacing, seed rate and varieties

INTRODUCTION

Barley is an important rabi crop which isgrown on an area of 0.65 m ha with productivity of24.8 q/ha (Anon. 2012). This crop is being grownfor many purposes like feed, fodder, malt purposesetc. The yield potential of this crop is low. The reasonsfor low barley productivity are low potential varieties,soil, climate and Package of Practices followed bythe farmers. It grows successfully on a wider rangeof climatic conditions with low water availability thanany other cereal crop. As grain crop in Punjabconditions, its potential is less as compared to wheatcrop but it performs well under rainfed conditionsdepending upon the rainfall. Cultivation trend of barleyis declining among Punjab farmers due to lack of highyielding varieties and lower net returns than wheatcrop. Weeds are also a big nuisance in the absence ofa suitable herbicide for barley as not all wheatherbicides have selectivity for barley (Singh and Punia,2007). Matching seed rate and row spacing to theprevailing weather conditions for different barleyvarieties is also an important factor to maximize theyield of barley. So, an experiment was planned to studythe effect of seed rate and row spacing on productivityof different varieties of barley under Punjabconditions.


A field experiment was conducted at PunjabAgricultural University, Ludhiana during 2008-09 and2009-10. The experimental site (30o 56’N, 75o 52’E;247 m ASL), was having deep alluvial loamy sand, lowin organic carbon (3.3 g C/kg) and slightly alkaline (pH7.5). The region has a sub-tropical climate having cooland dry winters in the crop season. The field experimentwas conducted with three replications in factorialrandomized block design keeping two barley varietiesPL 807 and PL 426 as factor A, two row spacing of 15an 20 cm as factor B and three seed rates 75, 87.5 and100 kg/ha as factor C.

The crop was sown using seed rate and rowspacing as per treatments. The nitrogen dose of 75 kgand phosphorus dose of 30 kg/ha were applied at thetime of sowing. The total rainfall of 100.4 mm and 68.4mm was received during 2008-09 and 2009-10,respectively. The crop received two irrigations at 40and 105 days after sowing (DAS) in the study. Theherbicides (isoproturon @ 1 kg/ha + 2,4-D @ 0.62 kg/ha) was applied as tank mix application after firstirrigation to control wild oats and other broad leaf weeds.The crop was harvested manually at maturity andthreshed with engine operated thresher.

The plant stand and ear density were recorded

from one metre row length at two spots per plot.Randomly ten ear heads were collected from the plotand threshed manually to calculate grains/ear. Duringthreshing, 1000-grains sample was collected from eachplot to determine the 1000-grain weight. Theobservations on yield attribute, biomass and grain yieldwere recorded at the time of harvesting. The economicanalysis was done using prevailing prices of inputs andoutputs. The data were analyzed using standard methodof ANOVA for factorial randomized design.


Yield attributes and grain yield

Effect of varieties

The effective tillers/m-2, grain yield and biologicalyield recorded in the PL 807 variety was significantlyhigher than barley variety PL 426 during both the yearsof study (Table 1). Thousand grains weight and grains

per ear head were not significantly influenced by thebarley varieties. The increase in grain yield in variety PL807 ranged from 8.34% in 2007-08 to 8.67% in 2008-09 over variety PL 426. The higher grain yield in varietyPL 807 might be due to higher effective tillers andbiological yield. The differential grain yield in differentvarieties was also reported by Ram et al. (2010).

Row spacing

The effective tillers/m-2, grain yield and biologicalyield recorded in the 20 cm row spacing weresignificantly higher than 15 cm row spacing during boththe years of study. However, thousand grains weightwas non-significant and grains per ear head weresignificantly higher in 15 cm row spacing than 20 cmrow spacing during 2007-08. The higher grain yield in20 cm row spacing might be due to higher effectivetillers/m-2 due to more space provided which might haveintercepted more solar radiation and resulted in robustgrowth.

Table 1. Effect of genotypes, spacing and seed rate on effective tillers, test weight, grains/ear head, grain and biological yield of barley

Treatment Effective Thousand grain Grains/ear Grain yield Biological yieldtillers/m2 weight (g) (q/ha) (q/ha)

2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10

VarietiesPL 807 375.4 369.4 36.73 35.79 44.23 44.23 60.85 58.30 140.63 133.71PL 426 349.0 331.3 35.97 34.36 44.77 47.15 56.15 53.65 130.16 122.38LSD (P=0.05) 3.1 4.5 NS NS NS NS 2.3 1.3 2.11 1.75Row spacing (cm)15 336.6 330.2 35.93 34.94 45.08 45.74 54.45 52.55 125.91 119.4720 387.8 370.5 36.77 35.20 43.91 45.64 62.55 59.40 144.88 136.62LSD (P=0.05) 3.1 4.5 NS NS 0.51 0.62 2.3 1.3 2.11 1.75Seed rate (kg/ha)75 344.9 331.3 37.75 36.17 43.11 44.85 56.15 53.60 130.31 122.8587.5 370.1 356.5 36.35 35.60 44.20 44.91 59.48 56.88 137.72 129.87100 371.7 363.2 34.95 33.45 46.18 47.31 59.88 57.45 138.17 131.41LSD (P=0.05) 2.7 5.6 1.12 1.01 1.02 2.03 2.9 1.7 3.21 3.57

Seed rate

The highest effective tillers/m-2 recorded in theseed rate of 100 kg/ha were significantly higher thanother seed rate except 87.5 kg/ha in 2007-08. Theeffective tillers recorded with seed rate of 87.5 kg/hawere significantly higher than recorded with seed rateof 75 kg/ha in both the years of study. Thousand grains

weight in 75 kg/ha seed rate which was significantlyhigher than other seed rate in both the years of studyexcept in 2008-09 where it was statistically similar with87.5 kg/ha seed rate. The grains/ear head were highestin 100 kg/ha seed rate which were significantly higherthan 87.5 and 75 kg/ha seed rate. The seed rates of 87.5and 75 kg/ha were statistically non-significant for grains/ear head. The grain yield of 57.48 and 56.88 q/ha in

72 Ram, Singh and Singh

Table 2. Effect of genotypes, spacing and seed rate on economics of barley

Treatment Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Gross income (Rs/ha) Net income (Rs/ha)

2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10 2008-09 2009-10

VarietiesPL 807 11875 12838 47531 48693 35656 35856PL 426 11875 12838 43899 44730 32024 31892LSD (P=0.05) - - 2150 2234 1560 1682Row spacing (cm)15 11875 12838 42539 43764 30664 3092720 11875 12838 48891 49658 37016 36821LSD (P=0.05) - - 2150 2234 1560 1682Seed rate (kg/ha)75 11750 12575 43913 44758 32163 3218387.5 11875 12838 46483 47434 34608 34597100 12000 13100 46748 47941 34748 34841

- - 2321 2236 1676 1697

2007-08 and 2008-09, respectively were recorded in87.5 kg/ha seed rate which was significantly higher than75 kg/ha seed rate but statistically on par with 100 kgseed rate/ha.

The highest biological yield recorded in 100 kg/ha seed rate was significantly higher than 75 kg/ha seedrate but statistically on par with 87.5 kg seed rate/ha.

Economics

The highest gross return and net reruns recordedin variety PL 807 was significantly higher than PL 426during both the years of study (Table 2). The higherincome (Rs 35656-35856) in this variety might be dueto higher grain yield but similar cost of cultivation. Ram

et al. (2010) also reported higher net returns in varietyPL 807. Similarly, the gross returns and net returns in20 cm row spacing were significantly higher in boththe years than in row spacing of 15 cm. This mightbe due to higher grain yield recorded in 20 cm rowspacing. The seed rate of 87.5 kg/ha recorded thegross and net returns significantly higher than 75 kg/h seed rate but statistically on par with 100 kg/haseed rate. The higher returns in 87.5 kg/ha seed ratemight be due to higher grain yield than that recordedin 75 kg/ha seed rate.

It can be concluded that for getting higher grainyield and returns in barley, sow variety PL 807 at row torow spacing of 20 cm with 87.5 kg/ha seed rate.

REFERENCES

Anonymous 2012. Progress Report of All India CoordinatedWheat and Barley Improvement Project 2011-12.Directorate of Wheat Research, Karnal 4 : 325.

Ram, H., Singh, B. and Sharma, A. 2010. Effect of time ofsowing on the field performance of barley(Hordeum vulgare L.) in Punjab. J. Res. Punjabagric. Univ. 47 : 132-35.

Singh, Samunder and S. S. Punia 2007. Sensitivity ofbarley (Hordeum vulgare) to herbicides of differentmodes of action. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 39 : 205-10.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 74-76 (2012)

Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on Yield and Nutrient Uptake byRaya (Brassica juncea (L.)

B. S. DUHAN AND K. S. GREWALDepartment of soil Science, CCSHAU, Hisar-125004


ABSTRACT

Application of recommended dose of N and P recorded significantly higher grain (19.59 q/ha) and straw(95.43 q/ha) yields of raya over control and other treatments of organic manures combination. Application ofdifferent organic manures in all the combination recorded significantly higher grain and straw yield of raya overcontrol. Treatment receiving 80 kg N through FYM recoded highest grain (15.54 q/ha) and straw (60.86 q/ha) yieldof raya amongst different organic manures combination, but differences between all these organic manures were nonsignificant with respect to grain and straw yields of raya. Application of recommended dose of N and P alsorecorded the significantly higher N, P and K uptake by grain (30.13, 6.39 and 3.65 kg/ha) and straw (13.25, 2.65 and53.21 kg/ha) respectively over control and other treatments of organic manures combination. As in case of raya grainand straw yield, nutrients uptake by raya grain and straw also followed the similar trend and all these organicmanures recorded almost on a par N, P and K uptake but significantly higher over control. .

Key words : Raya, grain yield, straw yield, NP and K uptake.

INTRODUCTION

India is the fourth largest in oilseed economyworld over. Among the seven edible oilseeds cultivatedin India, rapeseed-mustard contributes 28.6% in thetotal oilseeds production and ranks second aftergroundnut sharing 27.8% in the India’s oilseedeconomy (Anon. 2010). In India rapeseed-mustard isgrown on an area of 5.53 m/ha with production andproductivity of 6.41 MT and 1157 kg/ha, respectively.(Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2010). Therapeseed-mustard group includes brown sarson, raya,and toria crops. Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.)is predominantly cultivated in Rajasthan, UP, Haryana,Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat. It is also grown undersome non-traditional areas of South India includingKarnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh. The cropcan be raised well under both irrigated and rainfedconditions. Being more responsive to fertilizers, itgives better return under irrigated condition. Effectivemanagement of natural resources, integrated approachof nutrient management and extension of rapeseed-mustard cultivation to newer areas under differentcropping systems will play a key role in furtherincreasing and stabilizing the productivity andproduction of rapeseed-mustard.


Field experiment was conducted at researchfarm, Department of Soil Science, CCSHAU, Hisarto study the effect of recommended dose of N and Pand combination of different source of organicmanures on yield and nutrient uptake by raya. Soil ofexperimental site was sandy loam in texture, havingpH 8.05, EC (1:2) 0.51 dSm-1, OC 0.35%, available NP and K were 144, 17.0 and 280.0 kg/ha respectively.In all nine treatments were maintained as given inTable 1. RBD keeping three replications. All the P andhalf of the N was applied through urea and SSP at thetime of sowing, remaining half of N was applied atthe time of first irrigation. Different sources of organicmanures were applied at time of sowing. All the fieldoperations such as weeding, irrigation etc were doneas and when required. Crop was harvested at maturity.Grain and straw yields were recorded separately fromeach plot. Plant samples (grain and straw) wereanalysed by following standard procedure in thelaboratory. Total N in grain and straw analysed bycolorimetric (Nessler’s reasent) method (Lindner,1944) and total P analysed by vanadomolybdophosphoric yellow color method (Koenig and Johnson,1942).


Application of recommended dose of N and Precorded significantly higher grain (19.59 q/ha) and straw(95.43 q/ha) yields of raya over control and othertreatments of organic manures combination (Table 2).

Khan and Aziz (1993) also reported 15.8% increase inyield of raya over control with the application of N andP. Kumpawat (2004) also reported increase in yield ofraya when 100% recommended NP applied in the winterseason through inorganic fertilizers. AICRP-RM, (2007)results indicated that sole application of organic manuresrecorded 29.9% less yield of raya over RDF. Data furtherindicated that application of different organic manuresin all the combination recorded significantly higher grainand straw yield of raya over control. Pareek and Yadav(2011) also reported significant increase in grain andstraw yields of raya with the application of FYM, poultrymanure and vermicompost over control. Treatmentreceiving 80 kg N through FYM recoded highest grain(15.54 q/ha) and straw (60.86 q/ha) yield of rayaamongst different organic manures combination, butdifferences between all these organic manures were nonsignificant with respect to grain and straw yields of raya.

Nutrients uptake

Application of recommended dose of N and Precorded significantly higher N, P and K uptake by rayagrain (30.13, 6.39 and 3.65 kg/ha) and straw (13.25,2.65 and 53.21 kg/ha), respectively over control andother treatments of organic manures combination (Table3). Bishnoi and Singh (1982) also reported similar results.Ram and Pareek (2000) also reported that application ofP significantly increased the N and P uptake by raya. As,in case of raya grain and straw yield, nutrients uptakeby raya grain and straw also followed the similar trendand all these organic manures recorded almost on a parN, P and K uptake but significantly higher N, P and Kuptake by raya grain and straw over control. However,

Table 1. Experimental treatments on INM in raya

Treatment no Treatments

T1 Control (no fertilizers and Manure)T2 Recommended dose of N and P through

fertilizers (RDF)T3 N 80 through Farm Yard Manure (FYM)T4 N 80 through vermicompost (VC)T5 N 80 through neem cake (NC)T6 N 80 1/3 FYM + 1/3 VC+ 1/3 NCT7 50% N through phosphocompost + 50 % VCT8 50 % N through phosphovermicompost +

50% through FYMT9 75 % N Recommended dose of N through VC

+ Bio fertilizer (Azotobacter)

Table 2. Effect of integrated nutrient management on grain andstraw yield of raya

Treatment Grain yield (q/ha) Straw yield (q/ha)

T1 9.13 44.17T2 19.59 95.43T3 15.54 60.86T4 14.88 59.88T5 14.14 60.42T6 14.18 58.51T7 14.39 58.81T8 14.26 60.20T9 13.82 57.20LSD (P=0.05) 4.23 7.88

Table 3. Effect of integrated nutrient management on nutrient uptake (q/ha) by grain and straw of raya crop

Treatments N uptake (q/ha) P uptake (q/ha) K uptake (q/ha)

Grain Straw Grain Straw Grain Straw

T1 30.13 13.25 6.39 2.65 3.65 53.21T2 67.65 31.88 14.77 6.68 7.98 114.52T3 51.29 18.56 10.88 3.65 6.35 73.13T4 49.10 17.85 10.42 3.59 6.03 71.96T5 46.66 18.23 9.95 3.57 5.87 72.63T6 46.99 17.65 9.97 3.89 5.94 70.36T7 47.68 17.81 10.17 3.53 5.99 70.87T8 47.21 18.16 10.05 3.61 5.85 72.44T9 45.77 17.36 9.77 3.43 5.43 68.84LSD (P=0.05) 6.95 2.43 2.71 0.49 1.09 9.68


treatment receiving 80 kg N through FYM recodedhighest N, P and K uptake by raya grain (51.29, 10.88and 6.35 kg/ha) and straw (18.56, 3.65 and 73.13 kg/ha) respectively over control and all other organicmanures combination,

REFERENCES

Anonymous, 2010. Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. India.Directorate of Economics and Statistics,Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Department ofAgricultural and cooperation. Ministry ofAgriculture, Government of India, 2010.

AICRP-RM 2007. Annual Progress Report of All IndiaCoordinated Research Project on R a p e s e e d -Mustard, pp. A1–22, 2007.

Bishnoi, K. C. and Singh, K. 1982. Effect of sowing time,varieties and nitrogen levels on N, P and K uptakeby raya. Ind. J. Agron. 27 : 64-70

Khan, N. A. and Aziz, S. O. 1993. Response of mustard toseed treatment with pyridoxine and basal and foliar

application of nitrogen and phosphorus. J. PlantNutrition 16 : 1651-59.

Koenig, R. A. and Johnson, C. R. 1942. Colorimetricdetermination of P in biological materials. Ind. Eng.Anal. 14 : 155-56.

Kumpawat, B. S. 2004. Integrated nutrient management formaize-mustard cropping system. Ind. J. Agron. 49: 4-7.

Llndner, R. C. 1944. Rapid analytical method for some ofthe more common inorganic constituents of planttissues. Plant Physiol. 19 : 76-89.

Pareek, N. and Yadav, B. L. 2011. Effect of organic manureson soil physicochemical properties, soil microbialbiomass and yield of mustard under irrigation ofdifferent residual sodium carbonate waters. J.Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 59 : 336-42.

Ram, B. and Pareek, R. G. 2000. Effect of phosphorus,sulphur and phosphorus solubiling bacteria onyield, oil content and nutrient uptake by mustard(Brassica juncea L.) Agric. Sci. Digest 24 : 241-43.

76 Duhan and Grewal

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 77-80 (2012)

Studies on weed management in berseem (Trifolium alexandrinum)SAMUNDER SINGH

Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004 (Haryana), India(e-mail : [email protected])

(Received on : 21.12.12 Accepted on : 12.05.13)

ABSTRACT

Trifolium alexandrinum (Egyptian clover or berseem) is the most important forage crop ofwinter season in India. Weeds not only cause significant reduction in the yield of berseem, but also lowerits quality. Field studies were carried out for two years at CCS HAU Hisar to assess crop selectivity andweed control efficacy of atrazine (0.1 and 0.2 kg/ha), pendimethalin and trifluralin (0.25, 0.5 and 0.75 kg/ha), oxyfluorfen (0.05 and 0.1 kg/ha), isoproturon (0.5 and 0.75 kg/ha and bentazone (0.5 and 0.75 kg/ha)and compared with weed free and weed check treatments. All the herbicides were applied seven daysafter sowing (DAS) except bentazone which was applied 35 DAS. Isoproturon, atrazine and oxyfluorfenhad most deleterious effect on berseem and caused 77 to 100% crop injury, 9 days after treatment (DAT).Though plants had some recovery in these treatments after 2-3 months, but resulted in lowest forageyield. Bentazone had no crop injury, but weed control efficacy was not satisfactory for Lathyrus aphaca,Cichorium intybus and Coronopus didymus (<70%), though berseem yield was statistically similar toweed free check. Weeds caused 60% reduction in forage yield compared to trifluralin 0.75 kg/ha applied7 DAS and weed free check.

Key words : Crop pyhtotoxicity, weed control efficacy, Cichorium intybus, Coronopus didymus

INTRODUCTION

Trifolium alexandrinum L. (berseem) as a fastgrowing annual legume which has comparative feed valueto alfalfa (Medicago sativa), but unlike alfalfa seldomcause bloat. Berseem thrives well in a wide range ofsoils, though grows better in fertile (loamy to clay) soilwith mild acidic to alkaline (pH 6.5-8) conditions, hasgood cold tolerance, short drought and flooding and mildtolerance to salinity. It provides high quality green foragewhich is rich in protein (15-25%), minerals (11-19%and carotene (Sharma and Murdia, 1974). Berseem isthe most dominant winter season forage crop grown in1.9 m ha area in India with a productivity of 60-110 t/ha(ICAR, 2012). Being a winter season crop several weedsinfest berseem crop; dominant being Cichorium intybus,Coronopus didymus, Spergula arvensis, Melilotus indica,Medicago denticulata, Rumex dentatus, Lathyrus aphacaamong broadleaf weeds and Phalaris minor, Polypogonmonspeliensis and Poa annua among the grassy weeds.Due to several cuttings it can suppress many weeds,but some weeds like C. intybus, C. didymus and P. minorsurvive and compete to reduce its growth and also lowerthe quality. C. intybus is very competitive, has lower

protein content and is less palatable due to high silicacontent and crude fiber, thus adversely affecting thequality of berseem forage (Relwani, 1979). Similarly,presence of C. didymus in the forage provides anoffensive smell which is repulsive to animals. Being adense crop (broadcast seeding) manual weeding is notpracticable in removing weeds. Herbicides offer a scopeto control weeds, but not all herbicides are selective toberseem and effective against infesting weed species.Keeping the above factors in view a field study wasconducted using different pre and post emergenceherbicides in berseem to evaluate their efficacy on weedsand crop selectivity.


Field studies were carried out at AgronomyResearch farm of CCS Haryana Agricultural University,Hisar for two consecutive years in a randomized blockdesign with three replications. The soil of theexperimental field was sandy loam in texture, low inavailable nitrogen (16.5 kg/ha), medium in phosphorus(398 kg/ha) and high in potash (417 kg/ha) and a pH of8.3. Berseem was planted on 14 Nov. 1999 (04 Nov.

2000, repeat) in a plot size of 5 m X 2.4 m (5 m X 2.2 mduring the second year) for 16 weed control treatments.Atrazine 0.10 and 0.20 kg/ha, pendimethalin and trifluralinat 0.25, 0.50 and 0.75 kg/ha each, oxyfluorfen 0.05 and0.10 kg/ha and isoproturon 0.50 and 0.75 kg/ha weresprayed seven days after berseem seeding using backpack sprayer fitted with two nozzle flat fan boom,delivering 500 l water/ha. Bentazone was sprayed fiveweeks after seeding at 0.50 and 0.75 kg/ha. Weed freeand weedy check plots were compared with herbicideson crop injury, percent weed control and yield ofberseem, periodically. Herbicide phytotoxicity wasrecorded 9, 35 and 65 days after spraying on a 0-100scale, where 0=no injury and 100=complete mortality.Similarly, percent weed control was observed for majorinfesting weeds (C. intybus, L. aphaca, P. minor and C.didymus), 60 DAS, before first cut. Three cuts ofberseem were harvested before seed setting. Similartrend was recorded during both the years; hence datafrom both experiments was pooled and subjected toANOVA using SPSS.


Crop phytotoxicity

Except bentazone, all the herbicides provedphytotoxic to berseem when observed 30 DAT (Fig. 1).

Even after nine days of spraying isoproturon, oxyfluorfenand atrazine exhibited 77 to 100% crop injury. Amongthe dinitroaniline herbicides, trifluralin was less phytotoxicto berseem as the crop injury was less than 20%, nineDAT at its highest concentration (0.75 kg/ha) and againthe plants recovered after 35 DAT and only 20% injurywas recorded 60 DAT compared to 93% by thecorresponding rates of pendimethalin. The lowest doseof pendimethalin (0.25 kg/ha) was also phototoxic tocrop as it caused 90 % injury 35 DAT which recoveredto 70% by 60 DAT.

Effect on weeds

Atrazine provided good control of C. intybus,but was poor on C. didymus and L. aphaca (Fig. 2).None of the herbicide was effective against C. didymus;isoproturon at 0.75 kg/ha provided only 65% control.Similarly bentazone checked the growth of C. didymusand Spergula arvensis, a week after spray, but controlat its highest use rate (0.75 kg/ha) was no more than65% when recorded 60 DAS (25 days after spraying).Bentazone was not found promising against the otherinfesting weeds, though checked the growth of C.intybus and Asphodelus tenuifolius, but was poor againstRumex dentatus, Melilotus indica and P. minor.Pendimethalin and trifluralin (0.75 kg/ha), thoughprovided 65 to 70% control of P. minor, respectively;

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

ATR 10

0 g 7

DAS

ATR 20

0 g 7

DAS

PEN 0.25

kg 7

DAS

PEN 0.5 k

g 7 D

AS

PEN 0.75

kg 7

DAS

TFN 0.25

kg 7

DAS

TFN 0.5 k

g 7 D

AS

TFN 0.75

kg 7

DAS

OXN 50 g

7 DAS

OXN 100 g

7 DAS

BTN 50

0 g 40

DAS

BTN 75

0 g 40

DAS

IPU 0.5 k

g 7 D

AS

IPU 0.75

kg 7

DAS

Weedy

Weed f

ree

Cro

p ph

ytot

oxic

ity (%

)

Crop injury 9 DAT Crop injury 35 DAT Crop injury 60 DAT

Fig. 1. Effect of different herbicides on crop phytotoxicity at different intervals (ATR=atrazine, PEN=pendimethalin,TFN=trifluralin, OXN=oxyfluorfen, BTN=bentazone and IPU=isoproturon). Error bars indicate SEm.

78 Singh

effect was lower on C. intybus (60-65%) and L. aphaca(30-40%) and not much activity against C. didymus (Fig.2). Oxyfluorfen was found effective against L. aphaca,but efficacy was lower against other weeds (C. intybusand C. didymus).

Effect on forage yield

Herbicide phytotoxicity significantly affectedberseem growth and its forage yield. Lowest forageyield was recorded with isoproturon followed by atrazine,oxyfluorfen and pendimethalin (Fig. 3). Highest yieldwas recorded with trifluralin 0.75 kg/ha which wasstatistically similar to weed free, bentazone and lowerrates of trifluralin. Weedy plot resulted in 60% lowerforage yield compared to trifluralin 0.75 kg/ha appliedseven DAS. Similarly, pendimethalin 0.25 and 0.75 kg/ha treated plot resulted in 61 and 62% lower yield ofberseem as compared to trifluralin 0.75 kg/ha (Fig. 3).

Pathan and Kamble (2013) reported thatoxyfluorfen 0.1 kg/ha PRE followed by imazethapyr 0.1kg/ha immediately after first cut provided lowest weeddry weight and highest B:C ratio. However, in the present

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

ATR 10

0 g 7

DAS

ATR 20

0 g 7

DAS

PEN 0.25

kg 7

DAS

PEN 0.5 k

g 7 D

AS

PEN 0.75

kg 7

DAS

TFN 0.25

kg 7

DAS

TFN 0.5 k

g 7 D

AS

TFN 0.75

kg 7

DAS

OXN 50 g

7 DAS

OXN 100 g

7 DAS

BTN 50

0 g 40

DAS

BTN 75

0 g 40

DAS

IPU 0.

5 kg 7

DAS

IPU 0.75

kg 7

DAS

Weedy

Wee

d free

Perc

ent w

eed

mor

talit

y

Cichorium Lathyrus Phalaris Coronopus

Fig. 2. Effect of different herbicides on percent weed control 60 DAS. (ATR=atrazine, PEN=pendimethalin, TFN=trifluralin,OXN=oxyfluorfen, BTN=bentazone and IPU=isoproturon) Error bars indicate SEm.

study, oxyfluorfen alone at 0.10 kg/ha was not foundeffective against weeds, and also caused 40% crop injury(35 DAT) that resulted in lower forage yield (Fig. 1 &3). Adverse effect of herbicides on berseem wasdecreased in April as some yield was recorded in plotswhere herbicide caused more than 90% phytotoxicity(Fig 1 and 3). This could be because of degradation ofapplied herbicides as the half like of some herbicideswas less than 60 days. Tiwana et al. (2002) reportedthat butachlor 2.0 kg/ha PRE was more effective inmanaging weeds in berseem compared to trifluralin andfluchloralin. In the present study, trifluralin was lessinjurious to crop compared to pendimethalin and otherused herbicides (Fig. 1), whereas Tiwana et al. 2002observed its phytotoxic effect on berseem; which couldbe due to application stage as in the present studytrifluralin was applied seven days after sowing. Trifluralininjury was less than 20% at 60 DAT and also it recordedhighest forage yield compared to other treatments (Fig.3). In another study, Tamrakar et al. (2002) reportedbutachlor 2.0 kg/ha PRE more effective against C. intybusand other weeds infesting berseem. Similarly, Singh etal. (2010) also found butachlor 2.0 kg/ha effective in


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100AT

R 100

g 7 D

ASATR

200

g 7 D

AS

PEN 0.

25 kg

7 DAS

PEN 0.

5 kg 7

DAS

PEN 0.

75 kg

7 DA

S

TFN

0.25 k

g 7 D

ASTF

N 0.5

kg 7

DAS

TFN 0.

75 kg

7 DAS

OXN 50 g

7 DAS

OXN 100 g

7 DA

SBT

N 500

g 40 D

AS

BTN 75

0 g 4

0 DAS

IPU 0.

5 kg

7 DAS

IPU 0.

75 kg

7 DAS

Wee

dyW

eed f

ree

Ber

seem

yie

ld (q

/ha)

controlling weeds and achieving higher berseem yield;though alachlor 2.0 kg/ha was more effective againstweeds. Kumar and Dhar (2008) evaluated butachlor,trifluralin, fluchloralin and imazethapyr and reported thatimazethapyr 0.10 and 0.15 kg /ha PRE was mosteffective against C. intybus with 74% weed controlefficiency and 88 t/ha forage yield and higher benefitcost ratio of 1.86 compared to other treatments. Noneof the evaluated herbicides in the present study providedsatisfactory control of the most harmful weeds ofberseem with ample crop safety.

REFERENCES

Indian Council of Agricultural Research. 2012. Handbookof Agriculture. ICAR New Delhi, pp. 1346.

Kumar, Sunil and Dhar, Shiva. 2008. Influence of differentherbicides on weed suppression, forage yield andeconomics of berseem (Trifolium alexandrinum).Ind. J. Agril. Sci. 78 : 954-956.

Pathan, S. H. and Kamble, A. B. 2013. Chemical Weed control

Fig. 3. Effect of different herbicides on total forage yield, mean of two years (three cuts). (ATR=atrazine, PEN=pendimethalin,TFN=trifluralin, OXN=oxyfluorfen, BTN=bentazone and IPU=isoproturon) Error bars indicate SEm.

in berseem (Trifolium alexandrinum L.) ForageRes. 39 : (in press).

Relwani, L. L. 1979. Fodder Crops and Grasses. ICAR.New Delhi.

Sharma, V. V. and Murdia, P. C. 1974. Utilization of berseemhay by ruminants. J. Agri. Sci. 83 : 289-293.

Singh, Dheer, Joshi, Y. P., Singh, Virpal and Sachan, H. K.2010. Chemical weed management in berseem(Trifolium alexandrium L.) Pantnagar J. Res. 8 (1):5-7.

Tamrakar, M. K., Kewat, M. L., Agrawal, S. B. and Shukla,V. K. 2002. Efficacy of Herbicides againstCichorium intybus in Berseem (Trifoliumalexandrinum L.), Ind. J. Weed Sci. 34 : 333-334.

Tiwana U. S., Puri, K. P., Tiwana, M. S. and Walia, U. S.

2002. Effect of butachlor, trifluralin and fluchloralinon chicory (Cichorium intybus) and berseemfodder. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 34 : 251-253.

80 Singh

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 81-83 (2012)

More rice with less water- resource conservation technologies in Indo GangaticPlains.

SHWETA AND MANU MALIKDepartment of Agronomy:College of Agriculture,G.B.P.U.A.&T. ,Pantnagar U.S.Nagar, Uttarakhand

(email: [email protected])


ABSTRACT

Rice and wheat together contribute more than 70% of total cereal production. Rice cultivation isundergoing various types of changes and one such change has been the shift from transplanting of riceto direct seeding. The conventional rice growing techniques are major cause of delayed harvesting andmore water requirement. Many resource conserving technologies for rice production have recently beendeveloped for growing rice with comparatively less water. The adoption of direct seeding rice technologyhas shown promising results for conservation of water, non water inputs and thus ensuing increase inproductivity of land, water and energy resources. In view of conservation of natural resources; moreemphasis is needed to accelerate the adoption of cost effective and environment friendly crop managementpractices such as direct dry seeding, puddle direct seeding using drum seeder and mechanical transplanting.To ameliorate the ill effect of traditional rice-wheat cropping system efforts have been made to developseveral resource conservation technologies. The field experiment was conducted at the experimental plotof the Crop Research Centre at Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar(Udham Singh Nagar) Uttarakhand during Kharif season of 2004-05 to Rabi season of 2005-06 Thetreatment consisting of 4 rice establishment methods (direct seeding, wet sprouted rice, hand transplantingand machine transplanting) in main strip and 4 wheat establishment methods (Conventional, bed planted,strip tilll drill and zero till drill) in sub-strip were replicated thrice in strip plot design. Significantly highergrain yield (5340 kg/ha) of rice was obtained under direct dry seeding than puddle treatments. There wasno significant effect of wheat sowing methods on rice yield.

Key Words : Rice-wheat system, direct seeding, wet sprouted, hand & machine transplanting

1Assistant scientist (Agronomy), Deptt. of Horticulture, CCSHAU, Hisar, 2 Seed Production Officer, NSC, New Delhi

One of the critical challenges of the early 21st

century will be the resolution of water crisis. This crisisis defined by scarcity of water, water-driven ecosystemdegradation and malnutrition. Crop water productivitymeans raising crop yields per unit of water consumed.Over the past three decades, this has been achieved largelythrough higher crop yields/ha. But, with the decliningcrop-yield, attention has turned to the potential offeredby improved management of water resources.

The area under direct-seeded rice in India,Pakistan and Bangladesh is 14.2 m/ha of the total ricearea of 55.5 m ha (Gangwar and Singh, 2010). Theslogan “Rice is Life” is most appropriate for India asthis crop plays a vital role in national food security. It iswell documented that initial plant stand contributessubstantially in our productivity as a low cost technology

(Yadav et al., 2010). Rice is extensively grown, mainlyby practicing conventional puddling method that requires5-10 cm of standing water throughout the growingseason resulting into consumption of more water thanactually required. Rice is one of the must staple food tofeed ever increasing population and it is grown in varyingenvironments in different parts of the World. It is grownon more than 30 % irrigated land which accounts for 50% irrigation water. About 75% of the rice productioncomes from 79 m ha of irrigated lowlands, whereasrest 25% rice production comes from 45% of the globalrice area under rain fed ecosystem. (Sikka et al., 2006).A shift in rice production system from transplanted riceto direct seeding is testimony of the resourceconservation technologies (Gupta et al., 2006).

The conventional rice growing techniques are

major cause of delayed harvesting. Water, a preciouscommodity, is now being quantified as crop per drop, cashper drop and even job per drop. This alarming situationnecessitates promotion and adoption of more efficient cropestablishment technologies that involves less water for highdelta crops like rice. Many resource conservingtechnologies for rice production have recently beendeveloped for growing rice with comparatively less water.

The adoption of resource conservationtechnologies have shown promising results forconservation of water, non water inputs and thusensuring increase in productivity of land water andenergy resources. The objectives of our study was toevaluate the effects of various tillage and seeding methodson productivity, irrigation requirement and water useefficiency and soil physical properties in rice-wheatsystem of the IGP.

A field experiment was conducted at CropResearch Center of G.B.P.U.A.&T. Pantnagar, U.S. Nagar,Uttaranchal during Kharif and Rabi season of 2004-05and 2005-06. The climate of the area is sub-humid, withan average annual rainfall of 1364 mm. Sixteentreatments involving 4 rice establishment methods and4 tillage were evaluated in rice-wheat rotation during2004-05 and 2005-06 using a strip-strip plot design with3 replications. In all, there were 12 main plots of 3.6 mx 42.5 m and 64 sub plots of 3.6 m x 10 m size each.The rice establishment methods were; Direct seeding ofdry seed, Direct seeding of sprouted rice , Handtransplanting and Machine transplanting. The wheattillage methods wheat establishment conventional tillagewheat (CTW), bed planting wheat (BPW), strip till drill

wheat (STW) and zero tillage wheat (ZTW). Each plotwhere rice was sown in kharif season was divided intofour parts for wheat sowing as sub plot treatments.

Rice cv. Narendra-359 was sown in all foursystems having 23 cm inter row spacing. The wheatvariety PBW-343 was sown on 20 November in 2005.The experimental crops of rice and wheat were fertilizedby 150 kg N/ha through urea, 60 kg P2O5/ha throughSSP, 40 kg K2O/ha through MOP and zinc was appliedat the rate of 25 kg/ha through ZnSO4. At maturity, riceand wheat were harvested manually at 15 cm above theground level. Grain moisture was determined immediatelyafter weighing.

Straw weight was determined after oven-dryingat 700 C to constant weight and expressed on an overdry-weight basis. The bulk density of the soil wasdetermined from core-ring samples taken at 0-15 cmdepth at seeding/transplanting. The data on differentattributes were analysed by using the analysis of variance(ANOVA) technique as suggested by Gomez and Gomez(1984). Critical difference and standard error of meanwere calculated as under:

S.Em± = Error mean sum of square / numberof replications

C.D. at 5 % = S.Em± X v2 X t table value aterror degree of freedom In direct dry seeded rice water use during cropgrowth was high due to the heavy demand from the drysoil right after crop emergence and throughout plant growth(Table 1). Water productivity was higher in all treatmentsmostly because of the difference in grain yield. These resultwere also supported by Pasuquin et al. (2006).

Table 1. Water use efficiency (WUE) and soil physical properties as affected by different establishment methods in rice-wheat croppingsystem

Treatments Grain yield Water use WUE Infiltration rate Bulk density(kg/ha) (cm) (kg/ha-cm) (mm/hr) (Mg/m)

Rice cropDirect dry seeding 5340 157.8 33.84 5.60 1.45Wet sprouted 4740 149.2 31.77 1.45 1.47Manual transplanting 4440 145.6 30.50 1.42 1.48Machine transplanting 4740 149.2 31.77 1.41 1.48LSD (P=0.05) 330 - - NS NSWheat cropConventional 4680 42.37 110.46 3.64 1.45 Bed planting 4550 41.13 110.62 3.20 1.47 Strip tillage 4940 42.16 117.17 3.15 1.47Zero tillage 5040 40.96 123.05 2.95 1.48LSD (P=0.05) NS - - NS NS

82 Shweta and Malik

In case of wheat crop, maximum water usewas in conventional system while higher water useefficiency was observed under zero tillage followed bystrip tillage, because of higher grain yield.

Infiltration rate of water measured before riceplanting revealed higher infiltration rate under direct dryseeding compared to transplanted (manual and machine)or sprouted seeding. Higher infiltration rate underconventional system followed by bed planting, strip tillageand minimum in zero tillage system .

The bulk density of wet sprouted field (1.47Mg m-3), hand transplanted field (1.48 Mg m-3) andmachine transplanted (1.4 Mg m-3) rice field was higherthan that of direct seeded rice field (1.42 Mg m-3). Thehigher bulk density in wet sprouted rice field was due toloss of soil aggregates. The puddle soil on drying shrinksand becomes compact and hard resulting in higher bulkdensity. Conventional tillage system has minimum bulkdensity and highest bulk density was observed underzero tillage system.

REFERENCE

Gupta, R., Jat, M. L., Singh, S., Singh,V. P. and Sharma, R.K. 2006. Resource conservation technologies for

rice production. Ind. fmg. 56 : 42-45.

Gangwar, K. S. and Singh, H. R. 2010. Effect of rice (Oryzasativa) crop establishment technique onsucceeding crops. Ind. J. Agricl. Sci. 80 : 24-28.

Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Proceduresfor Agricultural Research (2nd ed.) John Wiley andSons, New York. 680p.

Pasuquin, E., Lafarge, T. and Magbanua, R. 2006. Cropestablishment, water management and plant typecharacteristics : moving towards more productivecultural practices. 2nd International Rice Congress,Oct. 9-13, 2006, New Delhi. pp 362-363.

Sikka, A. K., Upadhyaya, A., Singh, S. S. and Gupta, Raj. K.2006. Exploring opportunities for enhancing waterproductivity of rice in Indo-Gangetic Plains. 2nd

International Rice Congress, Oct. 9-13, 2006, NewDelhi. pp. 359.

Yadav, Vivek, Singh, Lekhraj and Singh, Rajendra 2010.Effect of crop establishment methods and weedmanagement practices on protein content, nutrientuptake and yield of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Pak. J.Weed Sci. Res. 16 : 379-385.


the problem of isoproturon resistant P. minor. Alternativerecommended herbicides viz. clodinafop-propargyl,sulfosulfuron and fenoxaprop-p-ethyl, which areeffective against resistant P. minor, are not safe to barelycrop (Singh and Punia, 2007). A new post emergenceherbicide pinoxaden at 40-60 g/ha is very effective againstA. ludoviciana and resistant population of P. minorwithout any phytotoxicity to barely crop. For broadleaf weeds, metsulfuron alone is being widely used, butfor the control of isoproturon resistant population of P.minor and A. ludoviciana (major grassy weeds) farmershave to use both herbicides sequentially which involvesapplication in two rounds, resulting in enhancing thecost. Mixing two different herbicides and applying themsimultaneously widens the spectrum of weed-control,saves time and application cost and impact herbicideperformance (Green, 1987; Singh 2009).

Keeping this in view, the present investigationto evaluate the bioefficacy of pinoxaden 5 EC incombination with metsulfuron against complex weedflora in barely was conducted during winter (rabi) seasonof 2008-09 at Agronomy Research Farm of CCS HaryanaAgricultural University Hisar. The experimental soil wassandy loam (Typic Ustochrepts) with 61% sand, 22.1 %silt and 19.1 % clay, medium in fertility with 0.29 %organic carbon and pH of 8.2. Wheat variety BH-393was drilled on November 18, 2008 in a plot size of 7.0 x

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 84-87 (2012)

Evaluation of pinoxaden in combination with metsulfuron against complex weedflora in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)

SANJEEV DHANDA, NARESH SANGWAN AND S. S. PUNIADepartment of Agronomy, CCS HAU Hisar-125004 (Haryana), India

Received on: 12.08.12, Accepted on:15.12.12

ABSTRACT

An experiment to evaluate the bioefficacy of pinoxaden 5 EC in combination with metsulfuronmethyl for control of complex weed flora in barley conducted at Agronomy Research Area of CCS HAUHisar during rabi season of 2008-09 revealed that application of pinoxaden at 40, 45 and 50 g/ha aloneprovided excellent control of grassy weeds without any phytotoxicity to barley crop. Tank mixing ofpinoxaden + metsulfuron at 45 + 4 and 50 + 4 g/ha caused complete mortality of all grassy as well asbroadleaf weeds. Sequential application of metsulfuron either 7 days before or after spraying pinoxadenalso provided excellent (95-100%) control of both grassy as well as broadleaf weeds without any phytotoxiceffect on crop.

Key words : A. ludoviciana, P. minor, Rumex dentatus, Fumaria parviflora, herbicide mixture, sequential application

Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) is an importantwinter cereal grown largely for feed and industrialpurposes is mainly grown in the South - western districtsof Haryana. Now with the availability of high yieldingvarieties, more remunerative prices, increases govt.emphasis on crop diversification and scarcity of irrigationwater; area under barely crop has increased in North-eastern Haryana also. This crop in Haryana is infestedwith both grassy and broadleaf weeds viz. Phalarisminor, Avena ludoviciana, Asphodelus tenuifolius,Chenopodium album, Trigonella polycerata, C. muraleand Fumaria parviflora (Punia et al., 2009). Competitionfrom weeds throughout the crop season reduces yieldby 10 to 38 % depending upon time and intensity ofweed infestation (Agaronyan, 1989; Balyan and Malik,1994). In south-western Haryana, infestation of A.ludoviciana is increasing at an alarming rate in barelycrop due to adoption of improved production technologyinvolving high inputs like fertilizers and irrigations. Innorth-eastern Haryana, barley is mainly grown after riceand crop is infested with P. minor along with broadleafweeds such as R. dentatus, Anagallis arvensis and C.album. So there is urgent need for broad spectrumherbicides which can provide effective control of bothgrassy and broadleaf weeds in barely crop.

Further, the continuous adoption of rice-wheatcropping system and application of isoproturon led to

2.1 m2, by using a seed rate of 100 kg/ha. The studywas arranged in randomized block design and wasreplicated thrice. Recommended dose of fertilizers andirrigations were applied uniformly. The treatmentscomprising of pinoxaden (5 EC) at 40, 45 and 50 g /haalone and in combination with metsulfuron at 4 g/haeither as tank mixture or their sequential application 7days before or after pinoxaden was applied at 35 and42 DAS by flat fan nozzle delivering 375 L/ha volume.Observations for weed population and their dry matteraccumulation was recorded at 30 DAT with the help ofrandom quadrat (0.5 x 0.5 m) at four places in a plotand then converted in to per m2. This data was subjectedto square root (v x + 1) transformation to normalizetheir distribution before analysis. Data on percent visualcontrol by herbicides on 0-100 scale was transformedby using arc sin transformation method and data on yieldattributes and grain yield of barley was recorded atharvest which was statistically analyzed using analysisof variance. To study the residual carry over effect ofpinoxaden on succeeding sorghum, plots treated withdifferent doses of pinoxaden were slightly disked afterharvest of barley. Sorghum crop as per recommendedpackage of practices were planted in the same layoutwithout any disturbance. Data on plant height, plantpopulation and fodder yield of sorghum was recorded

to assess the residual effect of different treatmentsapplied in barley.

The experimental field was infested with naturalpopulation of grassy (35.8%) and broadleaf weeds (74.2%). The dominant weeds were little seed P. minor andA. ludoviciana among grassy weeds and C. album L.(40.8%) and R. dentatus L. (13.3%), other weed species(10%) were present as broadleaf weeds.

The density and dry mater of weeds decreasedsignificantly due to the different herbicide treatments ascompared to untreated check at 30 days after treatment(DAT). Although pinoxaden at the all application ratesprovided excellent control of grassy weeds but did notshow any efficacy against broadleaf weeds as shownby density and dry weight of weeds (Table 1).Metsulfuron at 4 g/ha provided 100 % control ofbroadleaf weeds. Tank mix application of pinoxaden withmetsulfuron in various combinations proved significantlyeffective in reducing density and biomass of weeds andgave 100 % control of broadleaf and 97 % control ofgrassy weeds. Tank mixing of pinoxaden + metsulfuronat 45 + 4 and 50 + 4 g/ha caused complete mortality ofall grassy as well as broadleaf weeds. Sequentialapplication of metsulfuron either 7 days before or afterpinoxaden application, also provided excellent (95-100%)control of both grassy as well as broadleaf weeds without

Table 1. Effect of different treatments on weed density, dry weight and percent control of weeds in barley

Treatment Dose Weed density(no./m2) at 60 DAT Weed dry wt. g/m2 Visual weed control (%)(g/ha)

P. A. C. Rumex Grassy BLW Grassy BLWminor ludoviciana album dentatus

Pinoxaden 40 0.0 0.0 30.0 4.0 0.0 32.07 100 0Pinoxaden 45 0.0 0.0 26.0 4.7 0.0 24.93 100 0Pinoxaden 50 0.0 0.0 28.7 3.3 0.0 24.80 100 0Pinoxaden + MSM 40 + 4 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.28 0.00 97 100Pinoxaden + MSM 45 + 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 100 100Pinoxaden + MSM 50 + 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 100 100MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 40 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.00 95 100MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 45 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.56 0.00 98 100MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 50 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 100 100Pinoxaden fb MSM 40 & 4 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.29 1.61 97 97Pinoxaden fb MSM 45 & 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.5 100 95Pinoxaden fb MSM 50 & 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 100 0MTS 4 19.3 3.3 0.0 0.0 38.3 0.00 0 100Weed free - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 100 100Weedy check - 26.7 4.7 20.7 9.3 31.8 37.47 0 0LSD (P=0.05 ) 2.8 1.5 4.9 1.6 4.8 6.5 - -

*MSM–Metsulfuron methyl.


any phytotoxic effect on crop. Excellent efficacy ofpinoxaden as tank mixture or sequential application with2,4-D for control of complex weed flora in barley wasreported by Kumar et al., 2010. Ram and Singh (2009)in a study at Ludhiana, also reported feasibility of tankmixing of metsulfuron with isoproturon without anytoxicity to barley crop.

Number of effective tillers, spike length, plantheight, number of grains per panicle and grain yield weresignificantly affected due to various herbicide treatments.Maximum number of effective tillers/ m2 (428) were

recorded with pinoxaden + metsulfuron at 50+4 g ha-1

which were statistically at par with weed free and allpinoxaden treatments and significantly higher thanmetsulfuron alone and weedy check treatments. Numberof grains per spike. spike length and plant height werealso maximum with use of pinoxaden+ metsulfuron astank mixture at 50+4 g/ha. All the herbicide treatmentsregistered significantly higher crop yield over weedycheck. Maximum grain yield (4913 kg/ha) was recordedin pinoxaden+ metsulfuron at 50+4 g/ ha which wasstatistically at par with weed free and all treatments

Table 2. Effect of weed control treatments on grain yield and yield attributes of barley

Treatment Dose Plant height No of effective No. of grains/ Spike length Grain yield(g/ha) (cms) tillers/m2 earhead (cms) (kg/ha)

Pinoxaden 40 104 420 72 9.2 4635Pinoxaden 45 103 419 71 9.3 4650Pinoxaden 50 104 417 73 9.2 4680Pinoxaden + MSM 40 + 4 106 423 76 9.5 4860Pinoxaden + MSM 45 + 4 105 426 75 9.1 4864Pinoxaden + MSM 50 + 4 107 428 78 9.6 4913MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 40 105 418 76 9.5 4857MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 45 107 421 77 9.5 4887MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 50 106 421 78 9.4 4890Pinoxaden fb MSM 40 & 4 105 424 75 9.1 4885Pinoxaden fb MSM 45 & 4 105 427 76 9.1 4822Pinoxaden fb MSM 50 & 4 105 422 78 9.5 4845MTS 4 106 383 73 8.1 4162Weed free - 106 427 76 9.3 4900Weedy check - 103 372 73 8.3 3950LSD (P=0.05 ) NS 18.3 2.4 0.8 112


Table 3. Residual effect of different herbicides applied in wheat on succeeding sorghum crop at 30 DAS

Treatment Dose (g/ha) No. of plants/m2 Plant height (cms) Green fodder yield(q/ha)

Pinoxaden 40 23 129 372Pinoxaden 45 24 132 374Pinoxaden 50 23 129 370Pinoxaden + MSM 40 + 4 24 130 369Pinoxaden + MSM 45 + 4 24 129 370Pinoxaden + MSM 50 + 4 25 131 368MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 40 25 130 368MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 45 26 129 371MTS fb pinoxaden 4 & 50 24 131 370Pinoxaden fb MSM 40 & 4 22 129 369Pinoxaden fb MSM 45 & 4 23 128 3769Pinoxaden fb MSM 50 & 4 25 128 380MTS 4 24 129 371Weed free - 25 128 370Weedy check - 23 131 368LSD (P=0.05)


86 Dhanda, Sangwan and Punia

involving pinoxaden and metsulfuron (Table 2). Bettercrop yields with tank mixtures of pinoxaden withmetsulfuron or sequential application of both herbicideswas owing to excellent control of grassy as well asbroadleaf weeds, which resulted in to reduced weedcompetition with crop. Presence of weeds throughoutthe growing season brought about 19.4 % reduction ingrain yield as compared to weed free check.

There was no residual phyto-toxicity of the newherbicides viz., pinoxaden and metsulfuron applied inbarley on succeeding crop of sorghum. Plant height,number of sorghum plants/m.r.l. and sorghum yield wassame in pinoxaden and metsulfuron treated and untreatedcontrol plots (Table 3). Punia and Yadav, 2010 alsoreported no residual phytotoxicity of pinoxaden in riceand sorghum crop planted in succession after wheat ina study at Karnal and Hisar. Hence, this herbicide issafe for use in barley – rice and barley-sorghum-cottoncropping sequences followed in the state.

REFERENCES

Andreasen, C., Streibig, J. C. and Hass, H. 1991. Soilproperties affecting the distribution of 37 weedspecies in Danish fields. Weed Res. 31 : 181-87.

Agaronyan, A. G. 1989. Lontreal on cereal crops. ZahehitaRastenii 4 : 15.

Balyan, R. S. and Malik, R. K. 1994. Chemical weed controlstudies in barley (Hordeum vulgare). Ind. J. Weed

Sci. 26 : 1-5.

Green, J. M. 1987. Herbicide antagonism at the whole plantlevel. Weed Technol. 3 : 316-17.

Ram, Hari and Singh, Anupam. 2009. Studies on efficacyof tank mix herbicides for the control of weeds inirrigated barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Ind. J. WeedSci. 41 : 167-71.

Kumar, Sunil, Bhatoo, M. S., Punia, S. S. and Singh,Samunder. 2010. Evaluation of pinoxaden incombination with 2, 4-D against complex weed florain barley. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 42 : 120-22.

Punia, S. S. and Yadav, Dharambir. 2010. Bioefficacy ofpinoxaden against little seed canary grass in wheatand residual effect on succeeding crops. Ind. J.Weed Sci. 41 : 148-53.

Punia, S. S., Singh, Samunder, Yadav, Dharambir andKumar, Sunil. 2009. Distribution of weed flora ofbarley (Hordeum vulgare. L.) in south-westernHaryana. Har. J. Agron. 25 : 91-93.

Singh, Samunder and S. S. Punia. 2007. Sensitivity ofbarley (Hordeum vulgare) to herbicides of differentmodes of action. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 39 : 205-10.

Singh, Samunder. 2009. Synergy of tank mix application ofherbicides on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense)under non-cropped situation. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 41: 88-95.


Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 88-90 (2012)

Development of Insecticide Resistance and Cross-Resistance in Indoxacarb-Selected Strain of Spotted Bollworm, Earias vittella (Fab.)

TARUN VERMA, R. K. SAINI AND P. D. SHARMA*Department of Entomology, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar 125 004, India


ABSTRACT

First-instar Earia vittella (Fab.) larvae were exposed to different concentration of indoxacarbfor 15 successive generations in the laboratory at 28+1oC to develop the selected strain. The resultsindicated that the insect developed 3.07-fold resistance to indoxacarb. Studies on cross-resistanceindicated that the indoxacarb-selected strain developed low level of cross resistance for endosulfan(3.60-fold), cypermethrin (3.13-fold) and chlorpyriphos (3.05-fold). The strain, however, did not manifestcross-resistance to other organophosphorus insecticides (quinalphos and monocrotophos), syntheticpyrethroids (fenvalerate), carbamate (carbaryl) and readymix formulation of chlorpyriphos + cypermethrin.

Spotted bollworm, Earias vittella (Fab.) is aserious pest of cotton and okra in India. A number ofinsecticides have proved effective against this insect inthe field but their continuous and indiscriminate useagainst this pest may result in the development ofresistance. Kranthi et al. (2002) reported low tomoderate level of insecticide resistance in E. vittella (inSirsa and Sriganganagar strains). Indoxacarb (Avaunt)(belonging to oxadiazine group) has been reported to beeffective against a number of lepidopterous pests viz.Pectinophora gossypiella (Albuquerque et al., 1999;Papa et al., 1999), Spodoptera frugiperda (Allen et al.,1999), Spodoptera exigua (Kharboutli et al., 1999),Helicoverpa zea and Heliothis virescens (Sanchis et al.,1999), Mamestra brassicae, Pieris brassicae andHelicoverpa armigera (Sanchis et al., 1999a), Lobesiabotrana, Eupoecilia ambiguella, Spoganothis pillerianaand Empoasca vitis (Ambegaonkar and Bilapate, 1984)attacking different crops. Since farmers of Haryana areusing indoxacarb against bollworms in cotton, thereexists the possibility of development of resistance inthem. Therefore, experiments were conducted during2001 to study the potential of development of resistancein E. vittella to indoxacarb.

Rearing of test insect

A culture of E. vittella was initiated bycollecting larvae from cotton and okra fields from theresearch farm of CCS Haryana Agricultural University,Hisar and farmers’ field around Hisar. The larvae so

collected were kept in glass battery jars (15x10cm) andplaced in the BOD at 28+1oC. The culture was raised inthe laboratory on 2.5 cm cut pieces of green, unripeokra fruit. The choice of this food medium was basedon earlier findings that development time was the shorteston this food. The moths thus emerged were transferred(8-10 pairs/jar) to larger (20x15cm) battery jars andprovided with 10% sugar solution as food. Eight to tentender okra fruits were kept in each jar as ovipositionsites. These fruits were removed the next day to newjars and observed for hatching of eggs. The first-instarlarvae were provided with cut pieces of okra fruits tosustain the culture. After three generations of rearing,the population was segregated into two groups. The firstgroup served as an untreated control and was thereafterreferred to as the ‘parental strain’. The second groupwas used for giving selection pressure of indoxacarb atdifferent doses/concentrations. The parental strain wasutilized for making comparisons.

Selection procedure

Commercial formulations of differentinsecticides, namely, quinalphos (Ekalux 25EC, M/sNovartis India Limited), monocrotophos (Monocil36WSC, M/s De-Nocil Crop Protection Limited),chlorpyriphos (Dursban 20EC, M/s De-Nocil CropProtection Limited), carbaryl (Sevin 50WP, M/sAventis India Limited), endosulfan (Endocel 35EC,M/s Excel Industries Limited), fenvalerate (Fenval20EC, M/s Searle (India) Limited), sypermethrin

(Cyperkill 25EC, M/s Novartis India Limited),indoxacarb (Avaunt 14.5SC, M/s DuPont AgriculturalProducts) and readymix formulation (Cannon) ofchlorpyriphos 50+cypermethrin 5, M/s VijayalakshmiInsecticides & Pesticides Limited) were used toexpose E. vittella larvae. The dry film technique ofGupta and Rawlins (1966) was used to expose thefirst-instar larvae to different insecticides. Theinsecticide films were applied to rimless glass testtube (20x2.5cm) using acetone as solvent. Six tubeswere prepared for each concentration of aninsecticide. First-instar (6 to 18 h old) larvae wereexposed to the insecticide films to ensure the contactof the insecticide to the insect. The upper one thirdof each tube was covered with black carbon paper toensure that the larvae remained on the treated surfacefor a period of 4 hours. Fifteen larvae were releasedin each tube and the tubes were kept in an incubatorat 28+1oC with provision for circulation of fresh air.Larvae which did not respond to repeated proddingswith a camel hair brush after 4 h exposure wereconsidered as dead. To facilitate the early developmentof insecticide resistance, concentrations producing60-85% kill were used at each exposure. For thispurpose, 3-4 concentrations were selected whichgave mortalities ranging from 65-85%. For the firstgeneration, the selection pressure applied atconcentrations of 0.0001, 0.0002, 0.0003, 0.0004 and

0.0005 g litre-1 provided the required range of mortality.In subsequent generations, selected concentrationswere gradually increased as the tolerance increased.The surviving larvae from each concentration werereared separately on okra fruits. The adults from eachinsecticidal treatment were mixed to rear the nextgeneration. Such selections were made for 15successive generations.

Analysis of data

Mortality data were subjected to probit analysis(Finney, 1971) to obtain LC50

values for each insecticide.Insecticide resistance in each generation was expressedas a resistance ratio obtained by dividing the LC50 valuefor a specified generation (Fx) by the LC50 value for thefirst generation (F1). Cross-resistance patterns ofindoxacarb-selected strain was determined by dividingthe LC50 value of an insecticide for the indoxacarb-selected strain by the corresponding LC50 value for theparental strain in the same generation.

Development of resistance to indoxacarb

There was no detectable increase in LC50 valuesfor indoxacarb upto the 12th generation (Table 1). Thismight have been due to the population not having becomesufficiently homozygous up to the 12th generation forresistance factor(s) to effect significant changes in LC50values. After that resistance developed slowly upto 15th

generation (3.07-fold). The slope of the calculatedregression line for the 15th generation indicated that thepopulation had not become sufficiently homozygous forthe resistance factor(s) and it could develop higherresistance if further selection were made.

Cross-resistance to other insecticides

The indoxacarb-selected (IR) strain did notexhibit cross-resistance to other insecticides used in thepresent studies, except for a low level of cross-resistanceto endosulfan (3.60-fold), cypermethrin (3.13-fold) andchlorpyriphos (3.05-fold) (Table 2). However, noinformation is available in this regard in the availableliterature.

It was concluded from the studies that E.vittella had potential for development of resistanceagainst indoxacarb if the pest population is selected withthis insecticide over the years.

Table 1. LC50 values and resistance ratio of indoxacarb againstfirst-instar Earias vittella larvae for different generations

Generation LC50 Resistance Slope+SEratio*

F1 0.0000022616 - 0.5157 + 0.1962F2 0.0000097557 0.4314 0.4489 + 0.3050F3 0.0000010964 0.4845 0.3311+0.4170F4 0.0000059818 0.2645 0.3156+0.5170F5 0.0000056491 0.2498 0.4502+0.3540F6 0.0000072932 0.3225 0.3091+0.5160F7 0.0000087757 0.3880 0.4844+0.2030F8 0.0000060192 0.2661 0.5347+0.3090F9 0.0000060791 0.2688 0.5990+0.2790F10 0.0000030123 0.1332 0.5148+0.4430F11 0.0000042635 0.1885 0.5979+0.3480F12 0.0000015228 0.6733 0.5931+0.1850F13 0.0000037823 1.6724 0.8352+0.1690F14 0.0000046465 2.0545 0.6170+0.1980F15 0.0000069158 3.0715 0.6797+0.1742

* Resistance ratio = LC50 of Fx / LC50 of F1,


REFERENCES

Albuquerque, F. A. de, Pattaro F. C., Borges L. M., MartorelliD. T. and de Albuquequen, F. A. 1999. Control ofpink bollworm Pectinophora gossypiella(Saunders, 1844) using indoxacarb and methomylas sprays. In : Anais II Congresso Brasileiro deAlgodao : O algodao no seculo XX, perspectivaepara o seculo XXI, Ribeirao Preto, SP, Brasil, 5-10Septembro 1999, 227-229, 6 ref.

Allen, C. T., Kharboutli, M. S., Capps, C. Jr., Earnest, L.and Oosterhuis, D. M. 1999. Steward R : newinsecticide for the new millennium. In : Proc. 1999cotton research meeting. Special report ArkansasAgric. Exp. Stn. 193 : 56-64.

Ambegaonkar, J. K. and Bilapate, G. G. 1984. Growth,development and biometrics of Earias vittella(Fab.) on cotton and okra. J. Mah. agric. Univ. 9 :254-56.

Finney, D. J. 1971. Probit analysis, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge. pp. 333.

Gupta, D. S. and Rawlins, W. A. 1966. Persistence of twosystemic carbamate insecticides in three types ofsoils. Ind. J. Ent. 28 : 482-93.

Kharboutli, M. S., Allen, C. T., Capps, C. Jr., Earnest, L.and Oosterhuis, D. M. 1999. Steward R : newinsecticide for the new millennium. In : Proc. 1999cotton research meeting. Special report ArkansasAgric. Exp. Stn. 193 : 209-13.

Kranthi, K. R., Jadhav, D. R., Kranthi, S., Wanjari, R. R.,Ali, S. S. and Russell, D. A. 2002. Insecticide

Table 2. Relative cross-resistance of indoxacarb-selected Earias vittella larvae to different insecticides

S. No. Insecticide LC50 Resistance ratio*** Slope+SE

1 Quinalphos 0.0000282470 1.5257 0.4825+0.19892 Monocrotophos 0.0002186919 1.2069 1.2015+0.07403 Chlorpyriphos 0.0000313159 3.0482 0.4944+0.18684 Endosulfan 0.0000603404 3.6030 0.5647+0.15935 Carbaryl 0.0001441593 1.5325 0.7914+0.10096 Fenvalerate 0.0001229866 1.4672 0.5445+0.15007 Cypermethrin 0.0004644367 3.1359 0.9269+0.10608 *Chlorpyriphos+cypermethrin 0.0000047568 2.4740 0.7922+0.0962

*Formulation tested as readymix, *** Resistance ratio = LC50 of Fx / LC50 of F1

resistance in five major insect pests of cotton inIndia. Crop Protn. 21 : 449-60.

Papa G., Almeida, F. J. de, Tomquelski, G. and de Almeida, F.J. 1999. Effect of new insecticide (Avaunt 150) forthe control of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera:Noctuidae) on cotton. In : Anais II CongressoBrasileiro de Algodao : O algodao no seculo XX,perspectivae para o seculo XXI, Ribeirao Preto,SP, Brasil, 5-10 Septembro 1999, 282-284, 4 ref.

Sanchis P., Harder, H. H., Riley, S. L., Cann M. C. andIrving, S. N. 1999b. Indoxacarb–a novel insecticidefor the control of Lepidoptera infesting vegetables.In : Proceedings of the fifth Internation Conferenceon Pests in Agriculture, Part 1, Montpellier, France,7-9 December, 1999, 227-234; 3 ref.

Sanchis P., Harder H. H., Riley S. L., Cann M. C. and IrvingS. N. 1999a. Indoxacarb – a new insecticide forthe control of Lepidoptera infesting grapevines.In : Proceedings of the fifth Internation Conferenceon Pests in Agriculture, Part 1, Montpellier, France,7-9 December, 1999, 377-384; 3 ref.

Senapati B., Satpathy J. M. and Khan S. R. 1978.Comparative growth and development of Eariasvittella Fab. on cotton and okra. Ind. J. agric. Sci.48 (11) : 666-669. Hiremath I.G. 1984. Hostpreference to spotted bollwroms, Earias spp.(Lepidoptera:Noctuidae). Entomon, 9(3) : 185-188.

Vishwapremi K. K. C. and Krishna, S. S. 1974. Variationsin the development program of Earias fabia rearedon whole or excised fruits of okra or on theircomponents. Ann. Ent. Soc. Am. 67 : 147-148.

90 Verma, Saini and Sharma

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 91-92 (2012)

Evaluation of gypsum application in irrigated groundnut and sesame crops atfarmers’ fields

VINITA JAIN* AND O. P. NEHRA***Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sadalpur, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125052, India

**Department of Dry land Agriculture, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125004, India

Received : 20-8-2012 Accepted : 18-2-2013

ABSTRACT

Front line demonstrations conducted through Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sadalpur of CCS HaryanaAgricultural University, Hisar during kharif 2007 season on groundnut cv. HNG-10 at 13 locations inModa Khera (Hisar) and sesame cv. HT-1 at 3 locations in Chuli Khurd (Hisar) on sandy loam to loam soilsat farmers fields revealed 12.5 % higher pod yield of groundnut (16.2 q/ha) by application of 250 kggypsum /ha over no gypsum application (14.4q/ha). Incurring additional cost of Rs 450/ha on gypsum,additional returns, effective gain and Incremental Benefit Cost Ratio (IBCR) were found to be Rs. 3960/ha, Rs. 3510/ha and 8.8, respectively. The increase in grain yield of sesame was found to be 14.3 % due to250 kg gypsum/ha (6.4 q/ha) over no gypsum application (5.6 q/ha). Incurring additional cost of Rs. 750/ha on gypsum and quality seed, additional returns, effective gain and IBCR were recorded to be Rs. 2400/ha, Rs.1650/ha and 3.2, respectively.

Key words : h

Both groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) and sesame(Sesamum indicum L.) crops have the ability to adapt tothe diverse agro-climatic conditions. Sulphur is an essentialnutrient for plant metabolism, synthesis of protein and oilsin oilseed crops. Its deficiency in soils affects the plantgrowth, yield and quality of pods/grains and oil content.Gypsum is a natural source of sulphur which is readilyavailable. There is good scope for productivity enhancementof the aforesaid crops per unit of land.

Mandatory frontline demonstrations at small,medium and large farmers’ fields through Krishi VigyanKendra, Sadalpur of CCS HAU, Hisar were conductedon groundnut at 13 locations in Moda Khera village andon sesame at 3 locations in Chuli Khurd village duringKharif 2007 season to evaluate the productivity andeconomic viability of these crops with and withoutgypsum application. The soil of demonstrations siteswas alluvial sandy loam to loam in texture, poor inorganic carbon, low in nitrogen, medium in phosphorousand medium to high in potash with slightly alkaline pHranging from 7.9-8.1. The plot size for eachdemonstration was 0.4 ha in groundnut. The identifiedfarmers were provided finely grounded gypsum @ 250kg/ha. In sesame crop, the plot size for demonstrationswere 0.4, 0.4 and 0.2 ha. The selected farmers were

provided gypsum @ 250 kg/ha and quality seed of HT-1 @ 5 kg/ha. Gypsum was added to the soil at 5 cmbelow seeding depth before sowing. After pre-sowingirrigation, line sowing groundnut cv. HNG-10 on wellprepared fields was done at 30 X 15 cm spacing from25th June to 6th July by using thiram treated seeds @ 80kg/ha. With the late onset of monsoon, sowing of sesamecv. HT-1 was done on 21st-22nd July by pora methodat 30 X 15 cm spacing by using treated seeds @ 5 kg/ha. All the recommended Package of Practices of CCSHAU, Hisar were timely followed in demonstrations plots.In comparison, each of the selected farmer raised thesecrops without application of gypsum on 0.4 ha area.About 270 and 165 mm rainfall was received in the cropseason in 22 and 16 days in Moda Khera and Chuli Khurdvillages, respectively. The farmers applied 3 and 1 needbased post sowing irrigations in groundnut and sesame,respectively. The harvesting of the crops was done from27th October to 8th November for groundnut and 5th -6th

October for sesame. The pod/grain yields were obtainedand data on input and output/ha were collected bothfrom frontline demonstrations and local checks (LC).The cost of cultivation, economic returns and incrementalbenefit cost ratio (IBCR) were calculated as given below:

Additional returns (Rs/ha)=(Demonstration yield

– Local check yield) x Sale priceEffective gain (Rs/ha)=Additional returns –Additional costIncremental benefit cost ratio (IBCR)=Additional returns/Additional cost of cash inputsThe per cent increase in pod /grain yield with

gypsum application over local checks both for groundnutand sesame are presented in Table 1. In groundnut, thepod yields ranged from12.6 q/ha to19.8 q/ha. The averagepod yield (16.2 q/ha) with gypsum application indemonstration plots was found to be 12.5% higher overplots without gypsum application (14.4 q/ha). Enhancedpod yield might have been due to beneficial effect ofsulphur on growth and development of groundnut plants.Rao and Shaktawat (2002), Rathore et al. (2006) andVenkatesh et al. (2006) have also documented similarfindings. The higher pod yield gave higher returns.Additional returns of Rs 3960/ha and effective gain of Rs3510/ha were recorded by incurring additional cost of Rs450/ha on gypsum. Average IBCR was found to be 8.8.

In sesame, the grain yield ranged from 6.0 q/hato 7.0 q/ha. The average grain yield (6.4 q/ha) with gypsumapplication in demonstration plots was found to be 14.3%higher over plots without gypsum application (5.6 q/ha).Enhanced grain yield might have been due to beneficialeffect of sulphur in growth and development of sesameplants. Earlier studies conducted by Duary and Mandal(2006), Duhoon et al. (2005) and Nagavani et al. (2001)have close association with present work. The higher grainyield gave higher returns. Additional returns of Rs 2400/haand effective gain of Rs 1650/ha were recorded by incurringadditional cost of Rs 750/ha on gypsum and quality seed.Average IBCR was found to be 3.2.

Therefore, it is summarized that gypsum @250

kg/ha be applied for obtaining higher pod/grain yield,economic returns and B : C of both the test crops.

REFERENCES

Duary, B. and Mandal, S. 2006. Response of summer sesame(Sesame indicum L.) to varying levels of nitrogenand sulphur under irrigated condition. J. OilseedsRes. 23 : 109-12.

Duhoon, S. S., Deshmukh, M. R., Jyotishi, A. and Jain. H.C. 2005. Effect of sources and levels of sulphuron seeds and oil yield of sesame (Sesamumindicum L.) under different agro-climatic situationsof India. J. Oilseeds Res. 22 : 199-200.

Nagavani, A.V., Sumathi,V. Chandrika,V. and Muneendra,Babu 2001. Effect of nitrogen and sulphur on yieldand oil content of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.).J.Oilseeds Res. 18 : 73-74.

Rao, S. S. and Shaktawat, M. S. 2002. Effect of organicmanure, phosphorus and gypsum on groundnut(Arachis hypogaea) production under rainfedconditions. Indian J. Agron. 47 : 234-41.

Rathore, M. S. Chandawat, M. S. and Singh, I. 2006.Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) todates of sowing, application of gypsum andmicronutrients in western Rajasthan. J. OilseedsRes. 23 : 101-02.

Venkatesh, M. S., Majumdar, B. Kumar, Kailash and Patiram2006. Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)to sulphur, boron and FYM doses in an UlticHapludalf of Meghalaya. J. Oilseeds Res. 23 : 52-54.

Table.1. Productivity and economic returns of groundnut and sesame crops

Crop Range of yield (q/ha) Av. Pod/grain Cost of Additional Total returns Additional Effective BCRyield (q/ha) cultivation cost of (Rs./ha) returns gain

(Rs./ha) critical (Rs./ha)input (Rs./ha)

Demo. LC Demo. LC Demo. LC Demo. LC

Groundnut 12.6 to 19.8 10.5 to 18.3 16.2 14.4 13500 13050 450 35640 31680 3960 3510 8.8Sesame 6.0 to 7.0 5.3 to 5.8 6.4 5.6 9900 9150 750 19200 16800 2400 1650 3.2

Sale price of groundnut@ Rs. 2200/q and of sesame@ Rs 3000/q.

92 Jain and Nehra

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 93-96 (2012)

Evaluation of Columbus, a new brand of clodinafop - propargyl 15 WP againstPhalaris minor in wheat and its residual effect on succeeding sorghum cropS. S. PUNIA, DHARAMBIR YADAV, V. S. HOODA, ANIL DHAKA AND YASH PAL MALIK

Department of Agronomy, CCS HAU Hisar-125004 (Haryana), India


Little seed canary grass (Phalaris minor), whichis a very serious weed of wheat in rice-wheat croppingsystem in N-W India has developed resistance againstisoproturon (Malik and Singh 1995). To tackle theresistance problem, clodinafop, fenoxaprop andsulfosulfuron have been recommended during 1997 andstill provide excellent control of grassy weeds in wheat(Chhokar and Malik, 2002). In the present experiment,new brand of clodinafop manufactured by BharatInsecticides Pvt. Ltd. was evaluated against grassy weedsin wheat and compared with Topik, Moolah, Topple andPoint brands of clodinafop already recommended forHaryana state.

A field experiment consisting 12 treatments(Table 1) replicated thrice was conducted in arandomized block design at CCS HAU, Hisar during Rabi2010-2011. Soil of the experimental field was sandy loamin texture, low in available N, medium in P2O5 and highin available K2O, with slightly alkaline in reaction (pH8.2). Wheat variety PBW 343 was sown on 10th

December, 2010 using a seed rate of 125 kg /ha keepingrow-row distance of 18 cms, in a plot size of 9.5 x 2.5m. All the herbicidal treatments were implied at 35 DASwith the help of knap sack sprayer fitted with flat fannozzle using a spray volume of 500 l/ha. The crop wasraised as per recommended Package of Practices ofwheat for Haryana state. The data on density and dryweight of weeds was recorded at 30 and 60 DAT (daysafter treatment) by randomly placing two quadrate (0.5x 0.5 m) per plot and computed to per square meter.The dry weight of weeds was recorded by sun dryingthe counted weeds from each plot and then keeping themin oven at 700 C till constant weight was achieved. Basedon dry weight of P. minor, weed control efficiency(WCE) was calculated.

Crop phytotoxicity (visual) in terms ofyellowing/chlorosis, stunting and necrosis each wasrecorded at 15, 30 and 60 days after spray by using thescale of 0-10, where 0 means no phytotoxicity and 10means 91-100% phytotoxicity on crop. Data on plant

height, number of effective tillers/m2, 1000 - grain weightand grain yield of wheat was recorded at harvest. Residualeffect of these herbicides applied in wheat was studiedthrough bioassay studies by planting sorghum var. SSG-Hara chara in the same plots by giving slight diskingwithout disturbing the original layout. Data on plantpopulation, plant height and green fodder yield wasrecorded 30 days after planting sorghum.

Performance of Columbus 15 % WP at 60 g/hawas also compared with other already recommendedthree brands (Topik, Point, Moolah and Topple) ofclodinafop each at 60 g/ha applied 35 DAS in wheatusing spray volume of 375 litres/ha at 17 locations indifferent districts of Haryana during 2010-11. Theselocations were viz., Kurukshetra (1), Karnal (2), Jind(2), Fatehabad (3), Sirsa (2), Ambala (2), Yamuna Nagar(2) and Hisar (3). Percent control of weeds and grainyield of wheat were recorded at harvest.

P. minor was the only grassy weed constituting65% of the total weed population in addition to otherbroadleaf wedds viz. Chenopodinum album, Rumexdentatus, Melilotus indica and Coronopus didymus.Data presented in Table 1 revealed that lower dose (45g/ha) of clodinafop (Colombus) was not effective inarresting growth of P. minor providing only 71.2 %control but its higher doses i.e. 60, 75, 90 & 120 g/habeing at par provided 100% control of P. minor asshown by density of P. minor and WCE of differenttreatments (Table1). Singh et al. (2002) also observedthat P. minor was controlled effectively due toapplication of clodinafop-propargyl at 50 and 60 g/hato that of 40 g/ha. Higher doses i.e. 75, 90 & 120 g/hadid not cause any phytotoxic effect in terms ofyellowing, stunting and necrosis on wheat plants. Noyellowing and stunting of wheat leaves was observedeven at double the recommended dose. Punia et al.(2007) also reported no phytotoxicity symptoms inwheat at any stage of crop growth when clodinafoppropargyl 15% WP was applied even at higher dose at90 g/ha. So, Columbus, a new brand of clodinafop

manufactured by Bharat Insecticides India Ltd wasequally effective to already recommended Topik, Point,Moolah and Topple brands in arresting growth ofgrassy weeds particularly P. minor in wheat. Maximumdry weight of weeds was recorded in weedy checkplots, which was significantly higher over othertreatments.

Number of effective tillers, number of grainsper spike and grain yield (Table 2) varied significantlyamong different treatments but it was at par amongdifferent doses of clodinafop (Columbus) except 45 g/ha. Grain yield and number of effective tillers/m2 among

the treatments of clodinafop (Columbus) at 60, 75, 90& 120 g/ha were at par with Topik, Moolah and Pointbrands of clodinafop used at 60 g/ha (Table 2). Maximumgrain yield (4513 kg/ha) was recorded in weed free plotswhich was at par with clodinafop (Columbus) at 60 g/ha and all other herbicidal treatments except isoproturon,clodinafop at 45 g/ha and weedy check. Grain yield intreatment of clodinafop (Columbus) at 60 g/ha was 9.38and 13.4% higher than treatments of isoproturon at 1000g/ha and weedy check, respectively. Presence of weedsthroughout the crop season caused 13.9% reduction ingrain yield of wheat. No crop phytotoxicity in terms of

Table 1. Effect of clodinafop 15 WP (Columbus) on density and dry weight of P. minor at 30 and 60 days after treatment

Treatment Dose Density (No./m2) Dry wt. of (g/m2) WCE (%) at(g /ha) 60 DAT

30 DAT 60 DAT 30 DAT 60 DAT

Clodinafop (Topik) 60 1.3 (1) 1.66(2. 7) 4.2 47.7 86.5Clodinafop (Point)) 60 1(0) 1.41(2.0) 0 39.0 88.9Isoproturon 75 WP 1000 4.4(18.7) 3.49(12) 39.8 163.7 53.7Clodinafop (Columbus) 45 1.96(3.3) 2.33(5.3) 3.9 102.0 71.2Clodinafop (Columbus) 60 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Clodinafop (Columbus) 75 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Clodinafop (Columbus) 90 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Clodinafop (Columbus) 120 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Clodinafop (Topple) 60 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Clodinafop (Moolah) 60 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Weed free - 1(0) 1(0) 0 0.0 100Weedy check - 6.4(40) 6.99(48) 88 354.0 0C.D. (P=0.05) 0.66 0.93 7.1 49.8 -

*Transformed values (v x + 1), original values are given in parenthesisDAT: Days after treatment

Table 2. Effect of clodinafop 15 WP (Columbus) on plant height, number of effective tillers, gains/ear head and grain yield of wheat

Treatment Dose Plant height (cm) No .of effective No. of grains/ Test weight Grain yield(g/ha) at harvest tillers/m2 /ear head (g) (kg/ha)

Clodinafop (Topik) 60 103 423 43 41.2 4436Clodinafop (Point)) 60 102 421 48 42.6 4447Isoproturon 75 WP 1000 104 397 45 42.8 4064Clodinafop (Columbus) 45 105 399 44 42.1 4025Clodinafop (Columbus) 60 103 431 48 41.7 4485Clodinafop (Columbus) 75 102 429 47 42.0 4377Clodinafop (Columbus) 90 103 429 48 40.9 4324Clodinafop (Columbus) 120 105 426 49 41.7 4439Clodinafop (Topple) 60 104 424 47 42.0 4399Clodinafop (Moolah) 60 103 426 46 40.9 4398Weed free - 104 434 48 41.6 4513Weedy check - 104 370 44 42.1 3883C.D. (P=0.05) NS 19.1 1.8 NS 281

94 Punia, Yadav, Hooda, Dhaka and Malik

Table 3. Crop phytotoxicity rating on 0-10 scale

Treatments Dosage Yellowing (Days Stunting (Days Necrosis (Days(g/ha) after application) after application) after application)

15 30 60 15 30 60 15 30 60

Clodinafop (Topik) 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Point)) 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Isoproturon 75 WP 1000 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Columbus) 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Columbus) 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Columbus) 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Columbus) 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Columbus) 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Topple) 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Clodinafop (Moolah) 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Weed free - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Weedy check - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 4.Residual effects of different herbicides applied in wheat on succeeding sorghum crop at 30 DAS

Treatment Dose No. of Plant height Green fodder(g/ha) plants/m2(cms) yield (q/ha)

Clodinafop (Topik) 60 23 119 386Clodinafop (Point)) 60 22 121 390Isoproturon 75 WP 25 22 124 380Clodinafop (Columbus) 1000 23.2 122 384Clodinafop (Columbus) 45 22.5 119 392Clodinafop (Columbus) 60 20 118 390Clodinafop (Columbus) 75 22.4 124 388Clodinafop (Columbus) 90 23 124 387Clodinafop (Topple) 60 21.8 123 384Clodinafop (Moolah) 60 22.6 120 388Weed free - 22 123 388Weedy check - 21.8 122 388CD (P= 0.05) NS NS NS

Table 5. Performance of Columbus 15 WP in wheat at farmers’ fields* during 2010-11 (*17 locations)

Treatment No. of Percent Weed Control Grain yieldlocations (kg/ha)

P. minor Broadleaf weeds

Clodinafop at 60 g/ha (Columbus) 17 88.5 0 4605Clodinafop at 60 g/ha (Topik, Moolah and Topple) 17 87.6 0 4590

*Kurukshetra (1), Karnal (2), Jind (2), Fatehbad (3), Sirsa (2), Ambala (2), Yamuna Nagar (2), Hisar (3) districts.

yellowing/chlorosis, stunting and necrosis was recordedat 15, 30 and 60 days after spray due to any of theformulations of clodinafop. Even higher dose (75 & 90g/ha) of clodinafop (Columbus brand) supplied by BharatInsecticides Ltd. did not cause any yellowing andstunting of wheat plants and grain yield of wheat in these

treatments was at par with recommended dose of 60 g/ha clodinafop. Results of 17-dnfarm trials conducted indifferent districts of state reveal that Colombus provided88.5% control of P. minor as against 87.6 % achievedby use of Topik, Moolah and Point brands of clodinafopwith 15 kg/ha higher grain yield (Table 5). Residues of


clodinafop (Columbus) applied in wheat even at twicethe recommended dose, did not cause any adverse effecton crop growth and germination of succeeding crop ofsorghum (Table 4). Plant height of sorghum, no. ofplants/m2 and green fodder yield was statistically similarin clodinafop treated plots as well as untreated control.

Based on bio-efficacy studies at Research farmas well at farmers’ fields, it was realized that post-emergence use of Columbus 15 WP, a new brand ofclodinafop at 60 g/ha is very effective to control P.minor in wheat without any residual carry over onsucceeding sorghum crop and its efficacy was at parwith Topik, Topple, Point and Moolah brands ofclodinafop already recommended and being used by thefarmers.

REFERENCES

Malik, R. K. and Singh, S. 1995. Little seed canary grass

(Phalaris minor Retz.) resistance to isoproturonin India. Weed Technol. 9 : 419-25.

Chhokar, R. S. and Malik, R. K. 2002. Isoproturonresistance Phalaris minor and its response toalternate herbicides. Weed Technol. 16 : 116-23.

Punia, S. S., Singh, Samunder and Sindhu, Vinay. 2007.Bioefficacy of Rakshak Plus, a new brand ofclodinafop 15 WP in wheat and its residual effecton succeeding sorghum crop. Har. J. Agron. 22 :190-91.

Singh, Govindra, Singh, Mahendra, Singh, V. P. 2002.Effect of clodinafop-propargyl on weeds andwheat yield. Ind. J. Weed Sci. 34. 165-67.

96 Punia, Yadav, Hooda, Dhaka and Malik

Haryana J. Agron. 28 (1 & 2) : 97-98 (2012)

Performance of different wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties under irrigatedconditions of rice-wheat cropping system

O. P. LATHWAL, K. S. AHLAWAT, PARMINDER SINGH, RENU DEVI, HANS RAJ AND VIKAS BHARDWAJCCSHAU Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kurukshetra-136118, India



Rice-wheat cropping pattern is the mostcommon in north eastern part of Haryana for the lastfour decades. Wheat is the first preference of farmersduring rabi season for its obvious merits of assuredoutput and facilities of procurement at minimum supportprice. For this reason, the area, production andproductivity of wheat has increased by 3.4, 12.3 and3.6 times from 1966-67 to 2011-12. The changes invarietals’ adoption are usually noticed due to increasingawareness among farmers. Generally, the farmers growa broad spectrum of wheat varieties irrespective of theirrecommended zones for cultivation. Eight or morevarieties of wheat were grown by the farmers of northeastern of Haryana during the years 2005 and 2007(Lathwal et al, 2008). There was a fall in productivityof wheat during the year 2010-11 due to one or otherreasons in the north eastern parts of the state. Thus, thepresent investigation was planned to assess theperformance of different wheat varieties under irrigatedconditions so that the farmers can be apprised aboutthese to harvest higher productivity.

A field experiment was conducted during rabiseason of 2011-12 at the farm of Krishi Vigyan Kendra(KVK), Kurukshetra (Haryana). The soil of experimentalsite was clay loam in texture, slightly alkaline in reaction,low in available nitrogen, medium in available phosphorusand rich in available potassium. The experiment waslaid out in a randomized block design with 10 treatmentsusing wheat varieties viz. WH 542, PBW 343, WH 711,HD 2851, HD 2687, PBW 550, HD 2967, DBW 17,DPW 621-50 and HD 2733 replicated thrice. The cropwas sown on November 12, 2011 with seed-cum-fertilizer drill using 100 kg seed/ha in well pulverizedsoil keeping 20 cm row to row distance. The gross andnet plot sizes were 4.4 x 10.0 m2 and 3.6 x 8.0 m2,respectively.

The whole recommended dose of phosphorus(60 kg/ha) was drilled and half of recommended doseof nitrogen (75 kg/ha) was applied at the time of sowing.

Remaining half dose of nitrogen was top dressed at thetime of first irrigation. Grassy and broad leaved weeds(Phalaris minor) were controlled using clodinafop andmetsulfuron at recommended doses, respectively. Inorder to control yellow rust, the recommended dose offungicide (propiconazole) was applied on firstappearance of yellow rust in some varieties and the cropremained devoid of rust till maturity. The crop washarvested on April 23, 2012. The data on plant height,yield contributing characters, grain and straw yield wererecorded at harvest. The data were computed usingstandard methods of statistical analysis.

The varieties HD 2967 and HD 2851 registeredmaximum (112 cm) and minimum (76 cm) average plantheight, respectively which differed significantly fromrests of the varieties (Table 1).Varieties PBW 343, HD2733, HD 2687, WH 542 and DPW 621-50 werestatistically at par in respect of plant height (95-101 cm).Similarly, non- significant differences in plant height (85-92cm) were recorded among WH 711, PBW 550 andDBW 17 varieties. Highest number of effective tillersper m2 (409) were produced by the variety WH 542followed by PBW 343 and HD 2851 showing non-significant differences among themselves but significantlymore than other varieties. Statistically more number ofeffective tillers was found in HD 2967, PBW 17 andDPW 621-50 varieties than HD 2687, PBW 550 and HD2733 varieties. However, variety WH 711 was better inproducing effective tillers than PBW 550, HD 2733 andHD 2687 but differences were non-significant.

The varieties PBW 550, HD 2967, WH 542,DPW 621-50 and HD 2687 produced significantly longerspikes (10.3-10.8 cm) than others. Non-significantdifferences in spike length were observed in HD 2851,WH 711, PBW 343, HD 2733 and DBW 17 varieties.Maximum number of spikelets (20.8) in the spike wasrecorded in WH 542 being at par with DPW 621-50,HD 2967 and HD 2687 varieties which were significantlysuperior to other varieties. Minimum number of spikelets

(15.9) per spike was found in PBW 343 which wasstatistically at par with HD 2733, DBW 17, WH 711 andHD 2851. Various varieties, in respect of number of grainsper spike, behaved in the corresponding manner ofnumber of spikelets per spike. Due to smaller size ofgrains the 1000 grains weight (test weight) was lowest(37.0 g) in WH 542 which was significantly lesser thanall other varieties. Almost similar sized grains were foundin PBW 343, HD 2733, WH 711 and HD 2851 whichwere significantly bolder than HD 2687, DBW 17, PBW550 and HD 2967 varieties. Significant differences inplant height, ear length and number of grains per earhave been reported by Mattas et al (2011) wheat.

Maximum grain yield was recorded in HD 2967(64.8 q/ha) being statistically at par with DPW 621-50but significantly higher than rests of the varieties due tocombined effect of comparatively improved yieldcontributing characters. The third best yielding varietywas WH 542 for its higher number of effective tillers,spikelets per spike, grains per spike but it could not outyield HD 2967 and DPW 621-50 due to smaller size ofgrains (lowest test weight). The grain yield of WH 711and PBW 550 was statistically at par but significantlyhigher than HD 2687, HD 2851, PBW 343, DBW 17and HD 2733.

Due to taller plants the variety HD 2967 gavemaximum straw yield (75.5 q/ha) followed by DPW621-50 and PBW 343 which were statistically at par. Inmost of the varieties the straw production was in

accordance with the plant height with some variationsin foliage cover observed in various varieties. Higherharvest indices in WH 542, PBW 343 and HD 2851 weredue to their lower straw yield in comparison to othervarieties. Such varietals differences in grain yield, strawyield and harvest index have been reported by Abad etal. (2004), and Ali et al (2010) also in wheat crop.

REFERENCES

Abad, A., Lloveras, J. and Michlena, A. 2004. Nitrogenfertilization and foliar urea effects on durum wheatyield and quality and on residual soil nitrate inirrigated Mediterranean conditions. Field cropsRes. 87 : 257-69.

Ali, M.A., Ali, M., Sattar, M. and Ali, L. 2010. Sowing dateeffect on yield of different wheat varieties. J. agric.Res. 48 : 157-62.

Lathwal, O. P., Garg, R., Malik, R. K., Goyal, S. P., Dhukia,R. S., Chauhan, R. S., Singh, S. and Om, H. 2008.Produtivity realization of rice- wheat croppingsystem.Technical bulletin (24). Directorate ofExtension Education, CCS Haryana AgricuturalUniversity, Hisar, India. pp. 32.

Mattas, K. K., Uppal, R. S. and Singh, R. P. 2011. Effect ofvarieties and nitrogen management on the growth,yield and nitrogen uptake of durum wheat. Res. J.agric. Sci. 2 : 376-80.

Table1. Effect of wheat varieties on yield and yield attributing characters

Treatments Plant Effective Spikelets/ Spikelets/ Grains/ 1000-grains Grain Straw Harvestheight tillers/ m2 length spike spike weight (g) yield yield index(cm) (cm) (g) (q/ha) (q/ha) (%)

WH 542 95.0 409.0 10.5 20.8 51.7 37.0 57.2 57.2 50.0PBW 343 101.0 406.0 9.1 15.9 34.1 48.8 51.0 69.0 42.6WH 711 85.0 339.0 9.3 16.7 37.7 47.7 55.4 55.4 50.1HD 2851 76.0 396.0 9.7 16.8 36.2 46.8 51.8 53.2 49.4HD 2687 95.0 331.0 10.3 19.3 48.2 39.4 53.2 66.7 44.4PBW 550 85.0 328.0 10.8 17.3 47.1 44.6 56.2 58.9 48.8HD 2987 112.0 370.0 10.7 19.4 44.4 45.5 64.8 75.5 46.2DBW 17 92.0 365.0 8.8 16.2 38.1 44.6 50.0 55.9 47.2DPW 621-50 97.0 361.0 10.4 19.5 45.8 46.3 62.4 71.3 46.7HD 2733 101.0 336.0 8.9 16.0 37.6 48.5 48.8 56.5 46.4LSD (P=0.05) 8.4 21.8 1.0 1.5 4.8 1.8 2.6 5.9 3.9

98 Lathwal, Ahlawat, Singh, Devi, Raj and Bhardwaj

HARYANA JOURNAL OF AGRONOMYAuthor Index

Vol. 28 June & December 2012 No. 1 & 2


Ahlawat, K. S. 58, 97

Ahmad, Lateef 11

Amarjeet, 61, 66

Bhardwaj, Vikas 97

Bhatia, Rajesh Kumar 61, 66

Brar, A. P. S. 1

Devi, Renu 58, 97

Dhaka, Anil 93

Dhanda, Sanjeev 84

Duhan, B. S. 25, 38, 74

Grewal, K. S. 25, 74

Gupta, Vikas 19

Hooda, R. S. 34

Hooda, V. S. 93

Jain, Vinita 44, 91

Kotru, R. 11

Kumar, A. 53

Kumar, Anil 19

Kumar, Jai 19

Kumar, Manoj 50

Kumar, Neeraj 28, 31

Kumar, Parveen 34

Kumar, Pawan 50

Kumar, Suresh 34

Lathwal, O. P. 58, 97

Malik, Manu 81

Malik, Yash Pal 93

Mishra, B. N. 31

Misra, B. N. 28

Mittal, S. B. 46

Nanwal, R. K. 50

Nehra, O. P. 42, 44, 46, 91

Patro, K. S. 53

Punia, S. S. 1, 84, 93

Qayoom, Sameera 11

Raj, Hans 97

Ram, Hari 71

Saini, R. K. 88

Sangwan, Naresh 84

Sharma, B. C. 19

Sharma, K. D. 53

Sharma, P. D. 88

Sharma, S. K. 46

Shweta, 81

Singh, Attar 1

Singh, Baljit 71

Singh, K. N. 11

Singh, Karmal 34

Singh, Lal 11

Singh, M. V. 28, 31

Singh, Mahender 19

Singh, Parmeet 11

Singh, Parminder 58, 97

Singh, Samunder 1, 77

Singh, Sarvjeet 71

Singh, V. P. 61, 66

Verma, P. K. 46

Verma, Tarun 88

Yadav, Dharambir 93

Yadav, S. K. 50

Form IV(See Rule 8)

Statement about the ownership and other particulars of the Haryana Journal of Agronomy

Place of Publication Hisar

Periodicity of Publication Half Yearly

Printer’s Name Systematic Printers

Whether Citizen of India? Yes

Address Systematic PrintersUdaypurian Street, Near Video Market,Hisar-125 001, India

Publisher’s Name Dr. Parvender Sheoran

Whether Citizen of India ? Yes

Address Secretary, Haryana Agronomists Association (HAA),Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana AgriculturalUniversity, Hisar-125 004

Editor-in-Chief Dr. Samunder Singh

Whether Citizen of India? Yes

Address Haryana Agronomists Association (HAA), Departmentof Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University,Hisar-125 004

Name and address of individuals, who own Haryana Agronomists Association (HAA),the newspaper and partners or share-holders Department of Agronomy,holding more than one per cent of the total CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004capital

I, Dr. Parvender Sheoran, hereby declare that particulars given above are true to the best of myknowledge and belief.

Dated : 31 December, 2013 Sd/-

(Dr. Parvender Sheoran)

HARYANA AGRONOMISTS ASSOCIATION(Regn. No. 447/84-85)

(All members of Executive Council are members of Editorial Board)Haryana Journal of Agronomy is the official publication of Haryana Agronomists Association and is published halfyearly, i. e. in June and December. This periodical publishes original research and methodology in Agronomy and alliedfields. The contribution in the Journal is open to all interested persons.

MEMBERSHIP AND JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTION

Individuals Rs. 500 (India) and US $ 50 (Foreign)Libraries & Institutions Rs. 2000 (India) and US $ 150 (Foreign)Donor membership for Institutions and Individuals Rs. 10000 (India) and US $ 1000 (Foreign)Life membership for Individuals Rs. 2000 (India) and US $ 200 (Foreign)

ADVERTISEMENT RATES

Black and white ColouredInner Half Page Rs. 1500 Rs. 4000Inner Full Page Rs. 3000 Rs. 8000Back Cover Page Rs. 4000 Rs. 10000

(Advt. material may be provided on a CD for better printing of logo, etc.)

All remittances should be made by Cash or M. O. or Bank Drafts to the Treasurer, Haryana AgronomistsAssociation, Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004, India. Backvolumes are available at 50% discount.

All correspondence and enquiries may please be addressed to the Secretary, Haryana AgronomistsAssociation, Department of Agronomy, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125 004, India.

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

President Dr. R. K. Pannu Secretary Dr. Parvender SheoranEx-President Dr. A. S. Dhindwal Joint Secretary Dr. Parveen KumarVice-President Dr. Jagdev Singh Treasurer Dr. Anil Kumar Dhaka

COUNCILLORS

Andhra Pradesh Dr. S. Mohammad Assam Dr. Latu SaikiaBihar Dr. R. P. Sharma Delhi Dr. Rajbir SharmaGujarat Dr. A. M. Patel Haryana Dr. Attar SinghHimachal Pradesh Dr. Naveen Kumar J & K Dr. B. C. SharmaJharkhand Dr. V. C. Srivastava Karnataka Dr. S. L. PatilMadhya Pradesh Dr. R. S. Sharma Maharashtra Dr. N. D. ParlawarOrissa Dr. P. K. Roul Punjab Dr. Virender SardanaRajasthan Dr. O. P. Gill Tamil Nadu Dr. R. M. KathiresanUttrakhand Dr. O. P. S. Khola Uttar Pradesh Dr. R. K. SinghUttar Pradesh Dr. Manoj Singh West Bengal Dr. M. Ghosh

Editorial Board(Editor-in-Chief : Dr. Samunder Singh)

Editors

Dr. K. S. Grewal Dr. K. D. Sharma Dr. Samar Singh

Vol. 28 June & December 2012 No. 1 & 2

Documents

HARYANA JOURNAL OF AGRONOMYharyanaagronomists.org/downloads/files/n53db5d1ec1bdb.pdf · 2014-08-01 · HARYANA JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY Volume 28 June & December 2012 No. 1 & 2 CONTENTS