Influence of microbial consortia mediated in-situ rice straw management options on yield, economics and energetics in rice-wheat cropping system
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v69i2.5495Keywords:
Aerobic rice, Economics, Energetics, Paddy Straw, Pusa decomposer, YieldAbstract
A field experiment was carried out during rainy and winter seasons of 2019–20 and 2020–21 at ICAR-IARI, New Delhi to study the effect of crop establishment methods and microbial consortia (Pusa decomposer) mediated in-situ rice straw management options on yield, economics and energetics of rice (Oryza sativa L) (cv. Pusa Basmati 1509) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (cv. HD 2967). The experiment was laid out in split-plot design with three replications. The main plot consisted of two treatments viz., aerobic rice (AR) and conventional transplanted (CT) rice in wet season and seven sub-plot treatments viz. clean cultivation (removal of paddy straw), paddy straw incorporation (PSI), paddy straw mulching (PSM), PSI + Pusa decomposer (PD), PSM + PD, PSI + urea @ 20 kg/ha, PSI + PD + urea @ 10 kg/ha in dry season. In rice, results showed that grain yield (4.23 and 4.42 t/ha), net return (`69,470 and `71,682/ha) and energy output (157361 and 160950 MJ/ha) were significantly superior in CT rice than AR in main plots during both the years of experiment. However, sub-plot treatments showed a non-significant difference on these parameters. In wheat, among in-situ rice straw management options, paddy straw incorporation+ Pusa decomposer + urea @ 10 kg/ha treatment significantly resulted in higher grain yield (4.86 and 4.92 t/ha), net return (`62697 and `64801 /ha) and energy output (174951 and 176730 MJ/ha) compared to other treatments and control (clean cultivation). However, in main plots, statistically similar results were obtained with AR-wheat and CT-wheat. Thus, conventional rice transplanting resulted in significantly higher productivity and profitability over aerobic rice, however, AR consumed less energy (18.95%) and water (31.73%). Whereas, paddy straw incorporation+ Pusa decomposer + Urea @ 10 kg/ha was found effective in-situ rice management options with higher productivity and energy output compared to control.
References
Cardoen, D., Joshi, P., Diels, L., Sarma, P.M. and Pant, D. 2015. Agriculture biomass in India: Part-1. Estimation and characterization. Resource Conservation and Recycling 102: 39–48. DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.06.003
Devasenapathy, P., Kumar, G.S and Shanmugam, P.M. 2009. Energy management in crop production. Indian Journal of Agronomy 54(1): 80–90. DOI: 10.59797/ija.v54i1.4771
Dotaniya, M.L. 2013. Impact of crop residue management practices on yield and nutrient uptake in rice-wheat system. Current Advances in Agricultural Sciences 5(2): 269–271.
Gouda, H.S. 2020. Impact of enriched organic nutrient sources and establishment methods on rice and their residual effects on zero till wheat. Ph.D. Thesis, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.
Hiloidhari, M., Das, D and Baruah, D.C. 2014. Bioenergy potential from crop residue biomass in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 32: 504–512. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.025
IARI, 2022. Pusa decomposer technology for agri-waste management of ICAR-IARI. https://www.iari.res.in/files/LatestNews/best_practice_on_PUSA_DECOMPOSTING_22112022.pdf
Kaur, P., Saini, K.S., Kaur, K., Singh, T. and Walia, S.S. 2023. Influence of organic amendments and different levels of nitrogen on production potential, economics and energetics of rice (Oryza sativa)-wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agronomy 68(3): 239–245. DOI: 10.59797/ija.v68i3.2801
Kausar, H., Ismail, M.R., Saud, H.M., Berahim Z., Habib, S.H., Othman, R. and Bhuiyan, S. H. 2016. Microbial Composting of Rice Straw for Improved Stability and Bioefficacy. In: Hakeem, K., Akhtar, M. and Abdullah, S. (eds) Plant, Soil and Microbes. Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-27455-3_14
Mandal, K.G., Misra, A., Kuntal, K., Hati, M., Bandyopadhyay, K., Ghosh, K. and Mohanty, M. 2004. Rice residue management options and effects on soil properties and crop productivity. Food Agriculture and Environment 2(1): 224–231.
Manu, S.M., Singh, Y.V., Shivay, Y.S. Shukla, L., Sharma, V.K., Saha, N.D., Shekhawat, K., Bandopadhyay, K.K. and Gouda, H.S. 2023. Nitrogen budgeting under the influence of in situ rice residue management options in rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 93(2): 151–156. DOI: 10.56093/ijas.v93i2.129506
Meena, R.K. 2015. Effect of residue and nitrogen management on productivity and soil health in aerobic Basmati rice (Oryza sativa L.)-wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system. Ph.D. Thesis, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.
Mitra, B. and Patra, K. 2023. Alternate tillage and crop-establishment techniques in rice (Oryza sativa)–wheat (Triticum aestivum) system for increased system productivity and profitability in eastern sub-Himalayan plains of India. Indian Journal of Agronomy 68(2): 152–157. DOI: 10.59797/ija.v68i2.346
Pandey, A.K., Gaind, S., Ali, A. and Nain, L. 2009. Effect of bioaugmentation and nitrogen supplementation on composting of paddy straw. Biodegradation 20: 293–306. DOI: 10.1007/s10532-008-9221-3
Poornima, S., Singh, Y.V., Shivay, Y.S. and Sharma, V.K. 2020. Effect of establishment methods and nutrient management on productivity and energetics of rice (Oryza sativa). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 90(8): 1599–1602. DOI: 10.56093/ijas.v90i8.105974
Prasad, R. 2011. Aerobic rice systems. Advances in Agronomy 111: 207–247. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-387689-8.00003-5.
Saha, S., Singh, Y.V., Kumar, D. and Gaind, S. 2017. Growth and profitability of aromatic rice under different production techniques and nitrogen management. Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences 8(1): 08–14.
