Productivity, profitability and nutrient uptake in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)- based cropping systems under different nutrient-management practices

Authors

  • D.P. PACHARNE
  • A.D. TUMBARE
  • M.B. DHONDE

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v61i2.4363

Keywords:

Cropping systems, Nutrient management, Productivity, Profitability, Soil health

Abstract

A field experiment was carried out during 201112 to 201213 at Rahuri, Maharashtra, on sandy clay-loam soil, to evaluate the groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)-based diversified cropping systems, viz. groundnutonion (Allium cepa L), groundnutwheat [Triticum aestivum (L.) emend. Fiori & Paol.) and groundnutchickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), under 4 nutrient-management practices, viz. recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF), fertilizer dose as per soil test, fertilizer dose as per soiltest crop response (STCR) equations and control (main-plots), and 3 fer- tilizer levels, viz. 100% RDF, 75% RDF and 50% RDF as sub-plot treatments. This semi-arid tract with an annual rainfall received 527.8 mm and 424.0 mm during both years, respectively. The altitude varies from 495 to 569 m above mean sea-level. The yield target of 2.5 t/ha was achieved in rainy-season (kharif) groundnut by application of fertilizer as per STCR equation with less than 10% variation (5.8%) on pooled mean basis. Among the crop- ping systems, groundnutonion cropping system recorded significantly maximum total system productivity (7.82 t/ ha), production efficiency (35.1 kg/ha/day) and economic efficiency ( 842.5/ha/day) than rest of the cropping sys- tems. Similarly, groundnutonion cropping system obtained significantly maximum net monetary returns ( 188.0 103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.98 ) than rest of cropping systems. At the end of the 2 years cropping cycles, ap- plication of fertilizer as per STCR equation (2.5 t/ha) to kharif groundnut, followed by 75% RDF (75, 37.5, 37.5 N, P O , K O kg/ha) to onion during the winter (rabi) season found most remunerative proposition to achieve the 2 5 2 maximum yield and monetary benefits in groundnutrabi onion cropping system.

References

Dudhatra, M.G., Vaghani, M.N., Kachot, N.A. and Asodaria, K.B. 2002. Integrated input management in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)wheat (Triticum aestivium L.) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 47(4): 482486.

Hashim, M., Dhar, S.,Vyas, A.K., Ramesh, V. and Kumar, B. 2015. Integrated nutrient management in maize ( Zea mays L) wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 60(3): 352359.

Jain, N.K., Singh, H., Dashora, L.N. and Mundar, S.L. 2015. Maize (Zea mays L.)wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system: Intensification through introduction of pulses. Journal of Agronomy 60(3): 347351.

Jat, R.S., Dayal, D., Meena, H.N., Singh, V. and Gedia, M.V. 2011. Long term effect of nutrient management and rainfall on pod yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) in groundnut based

Table 4. Total uptake of nutrients, soil chemical properties and soil-available nutrients at the end of cropping systems

Treatment Total nutrient uptake Soil chemical properties Soil available nutrients(kg/ha/annum) pH EC Soil organic (kg/ha) N P K (dS/m) carbon (%) N P K

Cropping systemGroundnutonion 288.5 65.8 192.5 8.09 0.34 0.58 186.9 17.8 309.7 Groundnutwheat 350.3 70.9 338.3 8.11 0.31 0.55 185.3 17.7 262.0 Groundnutchickpea 437.2 64.8 248.3 7.92 0.27 0.59 192.0 18.0 270.2 SEm ---0.030.030.02 --CD (P=0.05) --0.09 NS NS --

Nutrient managementRecommended dose of fertilizer 384.5 70.4 281.9 8.08 0.31 0.56 204.8 19.8 302.7 Fertilizer dose as per soil test 421.5 78.6 301.8 8.03 0.27 0.59 194.4 19.7 285.1 Fertilizer dose as per STCR equation 480.3 93.4 338.4 8.06 0.26 0.58 186.4 18.9 279.9

Control (no fertilizers)

Downloads

Published

2001-10-10

Issue

Section

Research Paper

How to Cite

D.P. PACHARNE, A.D. TUMBARE, & M.B. DHONDE. (2001). Productivity, profitability and nutrient uptake in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)- based cropping systems under different nutrient-management practices. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 61(2), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v61i2.4363