Sustainability assessment of cotton based intercropping systems for productivity and profitability using different quantitative indices under semi-arid vertisols
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v59i4.4574Keywords:
Competition indices, Cotton-based intercropping systems, Rainwater use efficiency, Sustainability Yield Index, Semi-arid VertisolsAbstract
Field experiments were conducted to evaluate cotton (Gossypium spp.)-based intercropping systems with greengram [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilezek], blackgram [Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper], pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] maize (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill.] as intercrops in semi-arid (moist) Vertisols at Khedbrahma (Gujarat) and soybean and pigeonpea as intercrops in semi-arid (moist) Vertisols at Akola during rainy seasons of 200809, 200910 and 201011. The intercropping systems were evaluated for superiority based on cotton equivalent yield (CEY), rainwater use efficiency (RWUE), monetary returns, sustainability yield in- dex (SYI) and three competition indices, viz. land equivalent ratio (LER), relative crowding coefficient (RCC) and competition ratio (CR). At Khedbrahma, cotton + blackgram (1:1) was found to be an efficient system with signifi- cantly higher mean CEY (983 kg/ha), net returns ( 18,893/ha), benefit: cost ratio (2.68), RWUE (2.23 kg/ha-mm), higher SYI (70.4) and LER (1.44) and lower total CR (2.17). At Akola, cotton + soybean (1:1) was found to be effi- cient with significantly higher mean CEY (1,609 kg/ha) besides higher net returns ( 35,177/ha), benefit: cost ratio (2.94), RWUE (3.68 kg/ha-mm), higher SYI (34.1) and LER (1.31) and lower total CR (2.19). Further, the multi-tier system of cotton + soybean + pigeonpea + soybean (3:2:2:2) was the second best with higher productivity, ben- efit: cost ratio and RWUE. Cotton + blackgram (1:1) at Khedbrahma and cotton + soybean (1:1) at Akola were identified as efficient intercropping systems and could be adopted under similar agro-ecological settings in the re- spective domains.References
Aal, S.M. 1991. Studies on the response of some soybean varieties to intercropping with cotton. Annuals Agricultural Science Moshtohor 29: 3750.
Aasim Muhammad., Ejaz Muhammad Umer and Abdul Karim. 2008. Yield and Competition Indices of Intercropping Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) using different planting patterns. Tarim Bililimleri Dergisi 288 14(4): 32633.
Banik, P., Sasmal, T., Ghosal, P.K. and Bagchi, D.K. 2000. Evaluation of mustard (Brassica campestris var.Toria) and legume intercropping under1:1 and 2:1 row-replacement series systems. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Sciences 185: 914.
De Wit, C.T. 1960. On competition. VerslagLandbouw-Kundige Onderzoek 66: 128.
Dhima, K.V., Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B. and Doras, C.A. 2007. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Research 100: 249 56.
Ghosh, P.K., Mohanty, M., Bandyopadhyay, K.K. and Manna, M.C. 2006. Growth, competition, yield advantage and economics in soybean/ pigeonpea intercropping system in semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research 96: 8089.
Gomez, K.A., and Gomez, A.A. 1984. Statistical procedures for agricultural research wiley publications Inc., New York.
Khan, M.B., Akhtari, M. and Khaliq, A. 2001. Some competitive functions and economics of different cotton-based intercropping systems. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 3(4): 42831.
Maruthi Sankar, G.R., Subramanian, V., Sharma, K.L., Mishra, P.K., Jyothimani, S., Bhaskar, K., Jawahar, D., Rajeswari, M., Raghavan, T., Ravindra Chary, G., Renuka Devi, A., Gopinath, K.A., Venkateswarlu, B. and Kusuma Grace, J. 2012. Modeling of interactive effects of rainfall, evaporation, soil temperature and soil fertility for sustainable productivity of sorghum + cowpea and cotton + blackgram intercrops under rotation trials in a rainfed semi-arid Vertisol. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 43(5): 75687.
Mead, R. and Willey, R.W. 1980. The concept of a land equivalent ratio and advantages in yields for intercropping. Experimental Agriculture 16: 21728.
Midya, A, A., Bhattacharjee, K., Ghose, S., Banik, P.P. 2005. Deferred seeding of black gram (Phaseolus mungo L.) in rice (Oriza sativa L.) field on yield advantage and smothering of weeds. Journal of Agronomy and Crops Science 191: 195
Mohammed, M.K., El-din, G.M.S. and Hosny, A.A. 1994. Evaluating three patterns of intercropping cotton and cowpeas. Annuals Agricultural Science Moshtohor 29: 1,269824.
Rana, K.S., Shivran, R.K. and Kumar Ashok. 2006. Effect of moisture conservation practices on productivity and water use in maizebased intercropping systems under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal Agronomy 51(1): 2426.
Rao, J.V., Khan, I.A. and Sujatha (Eds.). 2003. Critical Review of Research on Intercropping Systems in Rainfed Regions of India. National Agricultural Technology Project, Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture, Hyderabad, India. pp. 1100.
Ravindra Chary, G., Venkateswarlu, B., Sharma, S.K., Mishra, J.S., Rana, D.S. and Ganesh Kute. 2012. Agronomic Research in dryland farming in India: An Overview. Indian Journal of Agronomy 57(3rd IAC special issue): 15767.
Rockstrom, J., Barron, J. and Fox, P. 2003. Water productivity in rainfed agriculture: Challenges and opportunities for small-holder farmers in drought-prone tropical agro-ecosystems. (In:) Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement (Eds W. Kijne, R. Barker and D. Molden). Wallingford: CAB International, pp.145162.
Sayeed, M., Shahid, Jabar, A., Ullah, E. and Khan, M.B.1999. Agro-economic assessment of different cotton based inter-relay cropping systems in two geometrical patterns. International Journal of Agricultural Biology 4: 23437.
Vittal, K.P.R., Singh, H.P., Ravindra Chary, G., Maruthi Sankar, G.R., Prasad, Y.G., Srinivasa Rao., Samra, J.S. and Gurbachan Singh. 2003. Improved agronomic practices for Dryland crops in India. Technical bulletin, AICRP for Dry-land Agriculture, CRIDA, Hyderabad. 210.
Willey, R.W. 1979. Intercropping Its importance and research needs. Part I- Competition and yield advantages. Field Crops Abstract 32(1): 110.
