Assessment of different sowing windows and crop geometry on fodder yield, quality and economics of dual-purpose sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)

YERRADODDI SINDHU  SREE; R  KARTHIKEYAN; K  BOOMIRAJ; M  DJANAGUIRAMAN; M  THIRUNAVUKKARASU; R AROCKIA INFANT  PAUL; N  JEEVAN; JAKKU  PRASANNA

doi:10.56093/ijas.v96i1.165132

Authors

YERRADODDI SINDHU SREE Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
R KARTHIKEYAN Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
K BOOMIRAJ Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
M DJANAGUIRAMAN Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
M THIRUNAVUKKARASU Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
R AROCKIA INFANT PAUL Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
N JEEVAN Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India
JAKKU PRASANNA Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 003 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v96i1.165132

Keywords:

Crop geometry, Crude protein, Dual-purpose sorghum, Green fodder, Quality, Sowing window, Yield

Abstract

Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] is inherently drought-tolerant, however, escalating climate variability, intensifying environmental stresses, and widening fodder shortages underscore the critical need to refine sowing time and crop geometry to enhance productivity. Therefore, field experiments were conducted during summer and rainy (kharif) 2022 and winter (rabi) 2022–2023 seasons at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu to evaluate the effect of sowing window and crop geometry on yield and quality of dual-purpose sorghum (grain + fodder). The experiment was laid out in strip plot design (SPD) with three replications. Treatments included date of sowing as Factor I, i.e. First fortnight (I FN) of February, March and April months during summer 2022 season, I FN of May, June, July months during kharif 2022 season and II FN of August, September and October during rabi 2022–2023 season and six different crop geometries as Factor II, viz. 45 cm × 15 cm (S₁); 45 cm × 10 cm (S₂); 45 cm × 5 cm (S₃); 30 cm ×15 cm (S₄); 30 cm × 10 cm (S₅) and 30 cm × 5 cm (S₆). Results revealed that the crop sown in I FN of April with spacing of 30 cm × 5 cm recorded significantly the highest green fodder yield (35.5 t/ha) with low crude fibre, high total digestible nutrients (TDN). The study affirmed clear shift in yield and quality across multiple seasons and helps farmers in selecting the most productive planting time and crop geometry across seasons. The benefit-cost ratio was highest (2.63) when sowing was taken during April I FN along with 30 cm × 5 cm spacing compared to all other sowing windows in respective seasons.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Agele S, Taiwo G and Akinseye M. 2025. Growth and yield responses of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] varieties to sowing time in a rainforest zone of Nigeria. Scientific Reports 15(1): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-14447-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-14447-5

Ahmad S, Khalid A, Picard M, Martin P, Ishtiaq U, Gull U and ul Haq M Z. 2025. Effects of planting dates on biomass and quality of sorghum and sorghum-sudangrass hybrids under semi-arid conditions. American Journal of Plant Sciences 16(5): 537–58. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2025.165040 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2025.165040

Ajaj H A, Mohammed Y A, Alrubaya A A and Addaheri A M. 2021. Effect of planting dates on the growth, yield and quality of three cultivars of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench). IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 904(1): 012019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/904/1/012019

Akinseye F M, Ajeigbe H A, Kamara A Y, Omotayo A O, Tofa A I and Whitbread A M. 2023. Establishing optimal planting windows for contrasting sorghum cultivars across diverse agro-ecologies of north-eastern Nigeria: A modelling approach. Agronomy 13(3): 727. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13030727 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13030727

Altman A W, Vanzant E S, McLeod K R and Harmon D L. 2022. In vitro measurements of true digestibility and products of digestion using multiple cultivars of non-extracted and CBD-extracted industrial hemp biomass (Cannabis sativa). Frontiers in Animal Science 3: 915916. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2022.915916 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2022.915916

Ammaiyappan A, Geethalakshmi V, Bhuvaneswari K, Kalarani M K, Thavaprakaash and Prahadeeswaran M. 2025. Influence of sowing dates and nitrogen levels on the performance of summer-irrigated sorghum in the western agroclimatic zone of Tamil Nadu. Plant Science Today 12(3): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7866 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7866

Avelino P M, Neiva J N M, de Araujo V L, Alexandrino E, Bomfim M A and Restle J. 2021. Chemical composition of silage sorghum hybrids grown at different densities. Revista Ciência Agronômica 42(1): 208–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-66902011000100026

Baghdadi A, Halim R A, Majidian M, Daud W N and Ahmad I. 2012. Forage corn yield and physiological indices under different plant densities and tillage systems. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 10 (3–4):707–12.

Goering H K and Van Soest P J. 1970. Forage Fibre Analyses (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures, and Some Applications). US Agricultural Research Service, Washington DC.

Gomez K A and Gomez A A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, 2nd edn, pp. 639. John Willey and Sons, New York.

Herrera D M, Peixoto W M, Abreu J G D, Reis R H D, Cabral C E, Barros L V D, Klein V A and Passos E F D. 2024. Sorghum densification with changes in plant spacing arrangement: Productivity and qualitative characteristics of silage material. Agronomy 14(2): 358. https://doi.org/10.3390/ agronomy14020358 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy14020358

Humphries E. 1956. Mineral components and ash analysis. (In) Modern Methods of Plant Analysis, Vol. 1, pp. 468–502. Springer, Berlin. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-80530-1_17

Kim M and Sung K. 2023. Assessment of weather events impacts on forage production trend of sorghum-sudangrass hybrid. Journal of Animal Science and Technology 65(4): 792. https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2023.e3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2023.e3

Mahalle G, Chorey A, Darekar N and Dangore S. 2022. Influence of various sowing dates on growth, yield and economics of different fodder sorghum genotypes. The Pharma Innovation Journal 11(4): 2110–12.

Mahmood A and Honermeier B. 2012. Effect of row spacing and cultivar on biomass yield and quality of Sorghum bicolor L. Moench. Journal of Cultivated Plants 64(7): 250.

Prasad V R, Govindaraj M, Djanaguiraman M, Djalovic I, Shailani A, Rawat N, Singla-Pareek S L, Pareek A and Prasad P V. 2021. Drought and high temperature stress in sorghum: physiological, genetic, and molecular insights and breeding approaches. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 22(18): 9826. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22189826 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22189826

Pupo M R, Wallau M O and Ferraretto L F. 2022. Effects of season, variety type, and trait on dry matter yield, nutrient composition, and predicted intake and milk yield of whole-plant sorghum forage. Journal of Dairy Science 105(7): 5776–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2021-21706

Redfearn D D, Zhang H and Caddel J L. 2004. Forage Quality Interpretations. Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma.

Satpal, Satyajeet, Kumar S, Neelam, K K Bhardwaj and Anil K. 2024. Sowing date, crop geometry and fertilizer levels influenced yield, productivity and economics of fodder maize. Forage Research 50(3): 278–83.

Shivprasad M and Singh R. 2017. Effect of planting geometry and different levels of nitrogen on growth, yield and quality of multicut fodder sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Monech]. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 6(4): 896–99.

Sivakumar S D, Karthikeyan R and Babu C. 2022. Effect of spacing and fertilizer levels on growth, yield and economics of fodder maize pre-release culture TNFM 131-9. Journal of Current Crop Science and Technology 109: 25–30. https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.000664 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29321/MAJ.10.000664

Sree Y S, Karthikeyan R, Sivakumar S D, Djanaguiraman M, Thirunavukkarasu M, Boomiraj K and Sangeetha S P. 2023. Performance of dual-purpose sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) under different sowing windows and crop geometry. Journal of Applied and Natural Science 15(3): 1276–81. https://doi. org/10.31018/jans.v15i3.4827 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v15i3.4827

Umesh M R, Angadi S, Begna S and Gowda P. 2022. Planting density and geometry effect on canopy development, forage yield and nutritive value of sorghum and annual legumes intercropping. Sustainability 14(8): 4517. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084517 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084517

Upadhyaya H D, Vetriventhan M and Azevedo V C. 2021. Variation for photoperiod and temperature sensitivity in the global mini core collection of sorghum. Frontiers in Plant Science 12: 571243. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.571243 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.571243

Widodo S, Indriatama W M, Anggraeny Y N, Sholikin M M, Jayanegara A and Wahyono T. 2025. Forage biomass and nutrient quality in brown midrib (BMR) compared to conventional sorghum: A meta-analysis approach. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research 12(1): 157. https://doi.org/10.5455/javar.2025.l883 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/javar.2025.l883