Effect of row ratios and organic nutrient management on productivity and economics of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) plus chickpea (Cicer arietinum) intercropping system

被引:1
作者
Tripathy, Sasmita [1 ]
Meena, S. L. [1 ]
Dhar, Shiva [1 ]
Paul, Sangeeta [1 ]
Singh, Sachin [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] ICAR Indian Agr Res Inst, New Delhi, India
[2] Janta Ved Coll, Bagpat, Uttar Pradesh, India
[3] Chaudhary Charan Singh Univ, Meerut, India
来源
INDIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES | 2023年 / 93卷 / 10期
关键词
Economics; Equivalent yield; Nutrient management; Row ratios;
D O I
10.56093/ijas.v93i10.140083
中图分类号
S [农业科学];
学科分类号
09 ;
摘要
A field experiment was conducted during winter (rabi) seasons of 2021-22 and 2022-23 at the research farm of Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi to find out the suitable cropping system with optimum row ratio and nutrient management practice in Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czern.] + chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) intercropping system. Cropping systems i.e. mustard sole; chickpea sole; mustard + chickpea 2:5; mustard + chickpea 5:2 was taken as main plots. Nutrient management practices i.e. control; 60 kg Nitrogen/ha; 20 kg Nitrogen through farmyard manure + leaf manure; 20 kg Nitrogen through farmyard manure + leaf manure + microbial consortia were taken as sub-plots to attain a higher degree of precision. It was observed that though the crop yields of individual crops of mustard and chickpea were the highest in sole crop, but yield of intercropping system in terms of mustard equivalent yield was found to be the highest for mustard + chickpea 5:2 row ratio. Yields of both mustard and chickpea were observed to be the highest in the plots treated with combination of organic manures and microbial consortia i.e. 20 kg nitrogen through farmyard manure + leaf manure @4 t/ha + microbial consortia. Highest gross returns, net returns and benefit-cost ratio were found in mustard + chickpea 5:2 row ratio. Analysis of intercropping indices revealed the highest intercropping advantage in mustard + chickpea 5:2 row ratio when treated with organic manures and microbial consortia. Intercropping systems had land equivalent ratio more than unity, depicting advantage. Aggressivity values showed mustard crop was dominant over chickpea.
引用
收藏
页码:1067 / 1072
页数:6
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
Bhattacharjee R, 2012, African Journal of Microbiology Research, V8, P2332
[2]   Assessment of nutrient competition and nutrient requirement in soybean/sorghum intercropping system [J].
Ghosh, P. K. ;
Tripathi, A. K. ;
Bandyopadhyay, K. K. ;
Manna, M. C. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY, 2009, 31 (01) :43-50
[3]  
Gomez K A, 1984, Statistical Producers for Agricultural Research, V1, P372
[4]  
Hegde Y, 2020, Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, V10, P1
[5]  
Lal B., 2019, Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, V18, P61, DOI [10.1016/j.jssas.2017.01.001, 10.1016/j.jssas.2017.01.001]
[6]   A staggered maize-legume intercrop arrangement robustly increases crop yields and economic returns in the highlands of Central Kenya [J].
Mucheru-Muna, Monicah ;
Pypers, Pieter ;
Mugendi, Daniel ;
Kung'u, James ;
Mugwe, Jayne ;
Merckx, Roel ;
Vanlauwe, Bernard .
FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2010, 115 (02) :132-139
[7]   Ecosystem Network Analysis in a Smallholder Integrated Crop-Livestock System for Coastal Lowland Situation in Tropical Humid Conditions of India [J].
Paramesh, Venkatesh ;
Sreekanth, Giri Bhavan ;
Chakurkar, Eaknath B. ;
Kumar, H. B. Chethan ;
Gokuldas, Parappurath ;
Manohara, Kallakeri Kannappa ;
Mahajan, Gopal Ramdas ;
Rajkumar, Racharla Solomon ;
Ravisankar, Natesan ;
Panwar, Azad Singh .
SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (12)
[8]   Connecting Bio-Priming Approach with Integrated Nutrient Management for Improved Nutrient Use Efficiency in Crop Species [J].
Sarkar, Deepranjan ;
Rakshit, Amitava ;
Al-Turki, Ahmad, I ;
Sayyed, R. Z. ;
Datta, Rahul .
AGRICULTURE-BASEL, 2021, 11 (04)
[9]  
Singh V, 2019, International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, V8, P236, DOI 10.20546/ijcmas.2019.801.027
[10]  
Viswanathan PK, 2020, Review of Development and Change, V25, P169, DOI [10.1177/0972266120966211, 10.1177/0972266120966211, DOI 10.1177/0972266120966211]