Assessments of the productivity and profitability of diverse crops and cropping systems as influenced by conservation agriculture practices under a semi-arid rainfed environment of western India

Year 2020, Volume: 35 Issue: 3, 469 - 482, 14.10.2020

Lal Prasad Amgaın

https://doi.org/10.7161/omuanajas.715749

Abstract

2010-11 ve 2011-12 yağmurlu ve kış mevsimlerinde Hindistan'ın Yeni Delhi kentinde koruma altındaki yağmurla beslenen yarı kurak bir ortamda çeşitli mahsullerin ve mahsul sistemlerinin ve kalıntı tutulmasının etkilerini değerlendirmek için arazi çalışmaları yapılmıştır. dokuz çift kırpma sisteminin sistem verimliliği ve karlılığı. Pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.), Küme fasulyesi (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.) ve greengram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek), kalıntı bırakmadan, mahsul artıkları altında ve Ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala) dallarında yetiştirildi. 2010 ve 2011 kış aylarında buğday (Triticum aestivum L.), nohut (Cicer arietinum L.) ve hardal (Brassica juncea L.) 2010-11 kışında ve 2011-12 yaz mahsullerinden sonra yetiştirilmiştir. Dört tekrarlı Randomize Tam Blok, Şerit ve Strip-plot tasarımları, farklı kalıntı yönetimi uygulamalarıyla dokuz yağmurla beslenen mahsul sisteminden gelen verileri analiz etmek için takip edildi. Leucaena dallarının altında buğday ve nohuttan sonra salkım fasulyesi ile önemli ölçüde daha yüksek (p ≤ 0.05) inci kılı eşdeğeri verim elde edildi, ardından inci kılıcı veya yeşilgramdan tortu tutuldu. Salkımdan sonra Leucaena dallarında hardal ile önemli ölçüde daha yüksek (p ≤ 0.05) buğday eşdeğer verimi (2010-11'de 4.15 t ha-1 ve 2011-12'de 3.77 t ha-1) elde edildi. Sistem karlılığı (net getiri ve B: C oranı), Leucaena dallı küme fasulyesi-hardal ve küme fasulyesi-buğday sistemlerinde daha yüksekti. Kuzeybatı Hindistan'ın yarı kurak ortamlarında Leucaena dallı küme fasulyesi-hardal, yeşilgram-buğday ve inci kılıcı-nohut sistemlerinin, sıfır işlenmiş yağmur suyu koşullarında en faydalı sistemler olduğu öne sürülmektedir.

Keywords

koruyucu toprak işleme, verimlilik, karlılık, kalıntı tutma

Assessments of the productivity and profitability of diverse crops and cropping systems as influenced by conservation agriculture practices under a semi-arid rainfed environment of western India

Abstract

Field studies were conducted under a conservation-tilled rainfed semi-arid environment in New Delhi, India, during the rainy- and winter-seasons of 2010-11 and 2011-12 to assess the effects of diverse crops and cropping systems and residue retention on system productivity and profitability of nine double-cropping systems. Pearlmillet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.), clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.) and greengram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) were grown under no-residue, crop residues, and Ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala) twigs during the rainy season in 2010 and 2011. Subsequently, wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), and mustard (Brassica juncea L.) were grown during winter of 2010-11 and 2011-12 after summer crops. Randomized Complete Block, Strip and Strip-plot designs with four replications were followed to analyze the data from the nine rainfed cropping systems with different residue management practices. Significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) pearlmillet-equivalent yield was obtained with clusterbean after wheat and chickpea under Leucaena twigs, followed by residue retention than pearlmillet or greengram. Significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) wheat-equivalent yield (4.15 t ha-1 in 2010-11, and 3.77 t ha-1 in 2011-12) was obtained with mustard under Leucaena twigs after clusterbean. The system profitability (net returns and B: C ratio) were higher under clusterbean–mustard and clusterbean–wheat systems with Leucaena twigs. It is suggested that the clusterbean–mustard, greengram–wheat and pearlmillet–chickpea systems with Leucaena twigs were the most beneficial systems under zero-tilled rainfed conditions in the semi-arid environments of north-western India.

Keywords

conservation tilage, productivity, profitability, rainfed crops and cropping systems, residueretention

References

• Acharya, C.L., O.C. Kapur, and S.P. Dixit. 1998. Moisture conservation for rainfed wheat production with alternative mulches and conservation tillage in hills of north-west India. Soil and Tillage Research 46:153–163.
• Amgain, L.P., A.R. Sharma, J. Timsina, and P. Wagle. 2019. Water, nutrient, and energy use efficiencies of no-till rainfed cropping systems with or without residue retention in a semi-arid dryland area. Global J. Agriculture and Allied Sciences. Nepalese Agricultural Professionals in America1 (1): 30-42.
• Casida, L.E.J., D. A. Klein, and T. Santaro. 1964. Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Science 98: 371–376.
• Dhyani, S. K., R. Newaj, and A.R. Sharma. 2009. Agroforestry: its relation with agronomy, challenges and opportunities. Indian Journal of Agronomy 54(3): 259–266.
• Erenstein, O., and V. Laxmi. 2008. Zero tillage impacts in India’s rice–wheat systems: a review. Soil Tillage Research, 100, 1–14.
• Gill, M.S., and I.P.S. Ahlawat. 2006. Crop diversification - its role towards sustainability and profitability. Indian Journal of Fertilizers 2(9): 125–138.
• Gomez, K.A., and A.A. Gomez. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. John Willley and Sons, NY. Green, V.S., D.E. Ctott, and M. Diack. 2006. Assay of fluorescein diacetate hydrolytic activity- optimization of soil samples. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 38: 693–701.
• Jones, R. B., J.W. Wendt, W.T. Bunderson, and O.A. Itimu. 1996. Leucaena-maize alley cropping in Malawi. Part I: Effects of N, P and leaf application on maize yields and soil properties. Agroforestry Systems 33 (3): 281–294.
• Lal, M., D.S. Bhati, and A.K. Nag. 2004. Economics and production potential of different cropping sequence on farmers’ field. Journal of Eco-Physiology 7(3/4): 143–145.
• Lehria, S.K., S.V. Bali, and B. Singh. 2006. Effect of green leaf manure of subabul (Leucaena leucocephala Lam. De Wit.) on maize crop and its residual effect on wheat crop, pp. 316–319. In: Proceedings of the IUFROS-ISTS l-UHF International Conference on World Perspective on Short-rotation Forestry for Industrial and Rural Development. Eds. Verma, K.S., Khurana, D.K and Christersson, I. Nauni, Solan, India.
• Meena, S. L., M. Shamsudheen, and D. Dayal. 2008. Productivity of clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba) and sesame (Sesamum indicum) intercropping system under different row ratio and nutrient management in arid region. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 79(11): 901–905.
• Nunan, N., M.A. Morgan, and M. Herlihy. 1998. Ultraviolet absorbance (280 nm) of compounds released from soil during chloroform fumigation as an estimate of the microbial biomass. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 30(12): 1599–1603.
• Pandit, M.C., R.P. Singh, and R. Kumar. 2010. Economic analysis of adoption of zero tillage technology in wheat cultivation in trans-gangetic plains of India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 80(12): 1092–1094.
• Pittelkow, C.M., X. Liang, B.A. Linquist, K.J. . Groenigen, J. Lee, M.E. Lundy, N.V. Gestel, J. Six, R.T. Venterea, and C.V. Kessel. 2014. Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature13809.
• Prasad, C., and P.C. Bhatia. 2007. Farming system research and extension approaches. In: Suraj Bhan, Karale, R.L. Singh S., Bharati, K. and Subramaniyan, S. (Eds.), Conservation Farming, pp. 429–445. Soil Conservation Society of India, New Delhi.
• Reddy, T.V., K.R. Reddy, M.S. Rajan, and G.S. Reddy. 1981. Production potential of seed clusterbean genotypes as sequence crop in dryland. Indian Journal of Agronomy 26: 89–90.
• Saxena, A., D.V. Singh, and N.L. Joshi. 1997. Effects of tillage and cropping systems on soil moisture balance and pearlmillet yield. Journal Agronomy and Crop Science 178: 251–257.
• Saxena, M.C. 2012. Challenges and opportunities for food legume research and development. Paper presented on the 6th M.S. Swaminathan Award Lecture at IARI, Pusa, New Delhi, January 25, 2012.
• Sharma, A.R., and U.K. Behera. 2009. Nitrogen contribution through Sesbania green manure and dual-purpose legumes in maize–wheat cropping system: agronomic and economic considerations. Plant and Soil 325(1/2): 289–304.
• Sharma, A.R., R. Singh, S.K. Dhyani, and R.K. Dube. 2010. Moisture conservation and nitrogen recycling through legume mulching in rainfed maize (Zea mays)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 87(2): 187–197.
• Sharma, A.R., R. Singh, S.K. Dhyani, and R.K. Dube. 2011. Agronomic and economic evaluation of mulching on rainfed-maize-wheat cropping system on the western himalayan region of India. Journal of Crop Improvement 25(4): 392–408.
• Sharma, P.K., and C.L. Acharya. 2000. Carry-over of residual soil moisture with mulching and conservation tillage practices for sowing of rainfed wheat (Triticum aestivum) in north-west India. Soil and Tillage Research 57: 43–52.
• Sidhu, H.S., M. Singh, E. Humphreys, Yadvinder-Singh, J. Blackwell, and S. Singh. 2007. The Happy Seeder enables direct drilling of wheat into rice stubble. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47: 844–854.
• Singh, R., B. Singh, and M. Patidar. 2008. Effect of preceding crops and nutrient management on productivity of wheat (Triticum aestivum)–based cropping system in arid region. Indian Journal of Agronomy 53(4): 267–272.
• Singh, V., S.K. Sharma, D. Ram, R.K. Siag, and B.L. Verma. 1998. Performance of different crops sequences under various irrigation levels. Indian Journal of Agronomy 35: 287–296.
• Singh, Y., B. Singh, and J. Timsina. 2005. Crop residue management for nutrient cycling and improving soil productivity in rice-based cropping systems in the tropics. Advances in Agronomy 85: 269–407.