Effect of irrigation scheduling, conjunctive use of water sources and fertilizer levels on yield and water productivity of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)

Authors

  • O.P. VERMA
  • M. DAS
  • A. KUMAR
  • R.R. SETHI
  • R.B. SINGANDHUPE
  • S.K. RAUTARAY
  • K.G. MANDAL

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v60i4.4495

Keywords:

Conjunctive use, Groundnut, Nutrient sources, Water sources, Water use, Water-use effi- ciency

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted for 2 consecutive years 200809 and 200910 at Deras, Mendhasal, Odisha, to study the effect of conjunctive use of water sources and fertilizer levels on yield and water use of winter (rabi) season groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). The treatments included 3 levels of conjunctive use of water [C 1 (2 irrigations through canal water only, C 2 irrigations with canal water + 1 irrigation with ground water and C 2 2 3 irrigations with canal and 2 irrigations with ground water)] and 5 fertilizer treatments, [(F , no NPK; F , 100% NPK 0 1 (20, 40 and 40 kg/ha as N, P O and K O), F , sugarcane trash bio-compost (STBC) alone (1 t/ha); F , 75% NPK + 2 5 2 2 3 sugarcane trash bio-compost (0.25 t/ha) and F , 50% NPK+ sugarcane trash bio-compost (0.50 t/ha)]. Pod and 4 haulm yields of groundnut were significantly increased with conjunctive-use of water sources (ground and canal water) compared to canal water irrigation alone. The increase in pod yield was 45.3% and haulm yield 40.3% with conjunctive use of 2 irrigations through canal and 2 irrigations through ground water over 2 irrigations with canal water. This treatment also gave the maximum gross returns ( 47,714/ha), net returns ( 35,166/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.80). With application of 75% NPK + STBC (0.25 t/ha) 70.3% and 73.4% increase in pod and haulm yields was observed compared to the control (no fertilizer application). The highest water use (434 mm), water-use efficiency (5.06 kg/ha-mm) and benefit: cost ratio (3.11) were recorded with application of 75% NPK + STBC (0.25 t/ha).

References

DES. 2012. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Co-operation. Government of India. pp_CIT_259_CIT_Hosamani, M.H. and Janawade, A.D. 2007. Response of Rabi Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) to Irrigation Schedules and Integrated Nutrient Management in Deep Black Soils of Upper Krishna Command. Karnataka Journal of Agricul- tural Sciences. 20(3) : 45356_CIT_Patra, P.S and Sinha, A.C. 2012. Studies on organic cultivation of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea). Indian Journal of Agronomy 57(4) : 38689_CIT_Raskar, S.K., Deshmukh, L.S. and Jadhav, A.S. 2009. Effect of ir- rigation and mulching on yield and monetery returns of groundnut. Annals of Plant Physiology 23(1): 8082_CIT_Reddy, T.Y. and Sulochanamma, B.N. 2008. Effect of minimal amount of supplemental irrigation during drought stress on yield and quality of groundnut. Legume Research 31(2): 11821_CIT_Sethi, L.N., Panda, S.N. and Nayak, M.K. 2006. Optimal crop plan- ning and water resources allocation in a coastal ground wa- ter basin, Odisha, India. Agricultural Water Management 83: 20920_CIT_Shinde, S.H., Kaushik, S.S. and Bhilare, R.L. 2000. Effect of plas- tic film mulch, levels of fertilizer and foliar sprays on yield and quality of summer groundnut. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities 25(2): 22729_CIT_Taha, M. and Gulati, J.M.L. 2001. Influence of irrigation on yield and moisture utilization of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)_CIT_Indian Journal of Agronomy 46(3): 52327_CIT_Zagade, M.V. and Chavan, S.V. 2009. Response of irrigation re- gimes, polythene mulch and plant densities on yield and uptake of major nutrients by rabi groundnut. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities 34(1): 1417.

Downloads

Published

2001-10-10

Issue

Section

Research Paper

How to Cite

O.P. VERMA, M. DAS, A. KUMAR, R.R. SETHI, R.B. SINGANDHUPE, S.K. RAUTARAY, & K.G. MANDAL. (2001). Effect of irrigation scheduling, conjunctive use of water sources and fertilizer levels on yield and water productivity of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 60(4), 576-580. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v60i4.4495