Response of summer groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) to irrigation regimes and mulching

Authors

  • B.S. RASKAR
  • P.G. BHOl

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v48i3.3080

Keywords:

Summer groundnut, Irrigation regimes, Mulching, Yield and Economics

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during summer seasons of 1999 2001 at Rahuri, Maharashtra, to find out appropriate irrigation schedule for summer groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) and to evaluate the effect of mulch on crop performance in broad bed furrow method. Twenty four treatment combinations, comprising 4 irrigation re gimes based on cumulative pan evaporation (CPE), viz. 75, 100, 125 and 150 mm CPE, and 6 mulching treatment, viz. sugarcane trash 5 tonneslha and plastic film mulch (7 micron) with and without kaoline 8% and the control. Among all the irrigation regimes, irrigation scheduled at 75 mm CPE to summer groundnut recorded significantly higher yield parameters, dry pod yield (34.08 qlha) and net returns (Rs 32,012lha) in broad bed furrow (60 30 cm x 6.67 cm) than 100, 125 and 150 mm CPE. Mulching of plastic film with kaoline spray (8%) was found effective and registered highest pod yield (34.70 qlha) over rest of treatments. The net returns obtained owing to mulching with plastic film and sugarcane trash with and without kaoline spray were almost identical. The benefit : cost ratio indicated that the use of sugarcane trash 5 tonneslha was found economically feasible agronomic practice for summer groundnut. The total consumptive use of water (738 mm) was higher with minimum water use efficiency (4.61 kgtha mm) when irrigation was scheduled at 75 mm CPE. The water use efficiency was higher with use of plastic film mulch with kaoline (6.69 kglha mm) and was lowest with the control (3.49 kglha mm). On an average, the evapotranspiration losses were reduced to the extent of 25.77, 14.63 and 4.56% due to application of plastic film, sugarcane trash and kaoline spray, respectively.

References

Bhoi, P.G., Kohinkar, V.M., Firake, N. N. and Magar, S.S. 1984. Soil moisture pattern under varied crop width of broad bed furrow planting system in groundnut. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities. 19 (3) :466467.

Borole, R.D. 1986. Studies on effect of irrigation schedrlling on growth, yield and quality of summer groundnut, M Sc (Ag- riculture) thesis Mahatma Phule Krishi Kdyapeeth, Rahuri. Mahamshtra (India).

Dahatonde, B.N. 1978. Response of varying level of imgation and N and P fertilization on summer groundnut. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities. 3 (2): 137-1 38.

Mahakulkar, B.V., Bathkal, B.G. and Wanjari, S.S. 1990. Physi- ological response of summer groundnut Annals of plant Physiology. 4 (2) :154-158.

September 20031 GROUNDNUT RESPONSE TO IRRIGATION AND MULCHING

Nalwade, S.K. and More, S.D. 1993. Effect of land configuration on nut. Research bulletin Marathwada Agricultural University yield,and nutrient control by groundnut cultivars in medium 3(10) :131-132. black soils. Journal of Maharashtra Agriculture Universi- Shinde, U.R. and Firake N.N. 1998. Economic of summer chilli ties. 18 (3) :498499. production with mulching and micro irrigation. Journal of

Parihar S.S., Pandey D., Verma V.K., Shukla R.K. and Pandya K.S. Maharashtra Agricultural Universities 23 (1) :14-10. 1999. Scheduling of irrigation for summer groundnut. Shyam Sunder. 1990. Effect ofplastic film mulch, levels cf fertil- Indian Journal ofAgronomy 44 (1) :144-147. izers and foliar spray on growth and yield of summer

Downloads

Published

2001-10-10

Issue

Section

Research Paper

How to Cite

B.S. RASKAR, & P.G. BHOl. (2001). Response of summer groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) to irrigation regimes and mulching. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 48(3), 48_3 . https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v48i3.3080