Yield and economics as influenced by omission and addition of technologies from recommended soybean production technologies
YIELD AND ECONOMICS AS INFLUENCED BY RECOMMENDED SOYBEAN PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
92 / 2
Authors
-
R K VERMA
ICAR-Indian Institute of Soybean Research, Indore-452 001, Madhya Pradesh
-
N RAGHAVENDRA
ICAR-Indian Institute of Soybean Research, Indore-452 001, Madhya Pradesh
-
S D BILLORE
ICAR-Indian Institute of Soybean Research, Indore-452 001, Madhya Pradesh
-
A RAMESH
ICAR-Indian Institute of Soybean Research, Indore-452 001, Madhya Pradesh
-
NIKHILESH PANDYA
ICAR-Indian Institute of Soybean Research, Indore-452 001, Madhya Pradesh
-
NITA KHANDEKAR
ICAR-Indian Institute of Soybean Research, Indore-452 001, Madhya Pradesh
Keywords:
Differential yields, Economics, Partial factor productivity, Soybean, YieldsAbstract
The field experiment was conducted during kharif seasons of 2017 and 2018 to study the effect of deletion and addition of different agronomic practices from recommended package of practices on yield attributes and yield of soybean. The additional use of micronutrients (Zn, B and Mo) and secondary nutrient sulphur (S) along with recommended package of practices(RPP)showed significant positive effect on plant height, pods per plants, yields and harvest index. On pooled basis, the addition of micronutrients (Zn, B and Mo) and secondary nutrient sulphur as soil application with RPP increased the yield by 6.0 and 3.21% as compared to RPP, respectively. On the contrary, the deletion of any recommended practice from the RPP reduced the yield by 1.14 to 71.69% as compared to RPP. Similarly, the addition of micronutrients and secondary nutrients with RPP recorded higher harvest index as compared to deletion of individual recommended practice. Economics point of view, all the treatments differ significantly among themselves in respect to the cost of cultivation, significantly the highest cost of cultivation was associated with additional use of micronutrients (Zn, B and Mo) with RPP and lowest with control. Significantly the highest net returns were registered with RPP + Zn, B, Mo application and remained statistical identical with RPP + S application, RPP alone, 50% RDF (recommended dose of fertilizers) as basal + 2% urea spray at pod initiation stage and RPP + narrow row spacing (30 cm). In case of B: C ratio, significantly the highest B:C ratio was recoded with omission of RDF treatment and remained statistical identical with control treatment followed by 50% RDF as basal + 2% urea spray at pod initiation. Furthermore, when comparing yields and economics (except B:C ratio) of all the treatments with RPP in terms of positive and negative effect, the differential yields and economics both were positive with additional use of micro and secondary nutrients. Similarly, the negative trend was observed with the deletion of any practice from RPP except in case of 50% RDF + 2% urea spray where the yield showed negative trend and net income showed positive trend. Moreover, the highest positive partial factor productivity (PFP) registered with omission of RDF followed by control and then 50% RDF as basal + 2% urea spray. Whereas, other treatments exhibited negative trend in term of PFP the lowest negative values were registered with RPP + Zn, B, Mo and RPP + 25 kg S /ha.
Downloads
References
Balboa G R, Archontoulis S V, Salvagiotti F, Garcia F O, Stewart W M, Francisco E, Vara Prasad P V and Ciampitti I A 2019. A systems-level yield gap assessment of maize-soybean rotation under high- and low-management inputs in the Western US Corn Belt using APSIM. Agricultural Systems, 174:145-154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.04.008
Bhatia V S, Singh Piara, Wani S P, Chauhan G S, Rao Kesava A V R, Mishra A K, Srinivas K 2008. Analysis of potential yields and yield gaps of rainfed soybean in India using CROPGRO-Soybean model. Agricultural and Forest Meterology, 14 (8): 1252-12 65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2008.03.004
Billore S D and Srivastava S K 2014. Effect of Seed Rate and Row Spacing on Productivity of Soybean Varieties under Different Agro-climatic Zones of India. Soybean Research, 12(2):83-89.
Billore S D, Joshi O P and Dupare B U 2004. Impact of frontline demonstrations on augmenting the soybean (Glycine max L.) productivity. Journal of Oilseeds Research, 21:352-35.
Billore S D, Joshi O P and Ramesh, A 2006. Herbicidal effects on nodulation, yield and weed control in soybean (Glycinemax). The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 69(5):329-331.
Billore S D, Dupare B U, Purshottam Sharma, Verma R K, Raghvendra M 2020. Performance of Soybean Varieties under Frontline Demonstrations. Soybean Research, 5: 77.
Chaitra M C and Hebsur N S 2018. Growth and Yield of Soybean (Glycine max L.) as Influenced by Boron Nutrition in a Vertisol. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Ap p l i ed Sc i enc es, 7(11): 3293-3300. doi : https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.711.380 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.711.380
Dupare B U, Billore S D, Joshi O P and Verma S K 2011. Adoption of improved soybean production technology in Madhya Pradesh: a critique. Journal of Oilseeds Research, 28(2), 125-130.
Gomez K A and Gomez A A 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, 2 nd Edition.John Wiley& Sons, New York. Pp.657.
Hellal F A and Abdelhamid M T 2013.Nutrient management practicesfor enhancing soybean (Glycinemax L.) production. Acta Biológica Colombiana, 18(2):239-250.
Jones D L, Cross P, Withers P J A, DeLuca T H, Robinson D A, Quilliam R S, Harris I M, Chadwick D R and Edwards-Jones G. 2013. Nutrient stripping: the global disparity between food security and soil nutrient stocks. Journal of Applied Ecology, 50:851-862. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12089
Kumar A, Rathod M K and Kalantri L B 2012. Behaviour of farmers in adoption of recommended technology for soybean. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, Special issue (II), 223-227.
Lacerda J J de J, Lopes L O, Rambo T P, Marafon G, Silva A de O, Lira D N de Souza, Hickmann C, Dias K G de Lima and Bottan A J 2017. Soybean Yield Responses to Micronutrient Fertilizers. Licensee in Tech. http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/67157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/67157
Madar R, Singh Y V, Meena M C, Das T K, Gaind S and Verma R K 2020. Potassium and Residue Management Options to Enhance Productivity and Soil Quality in Zero Till Maize-Wheat Rotation. CLEAN-Soil, Air, Water, 48(3), p.1900316. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/clen.201900316
Mbanya Wuni 2011. Assessment of the Constraints in Soybean Production: A Case of Northern Region, Ghana. Journal of Developments in Sustainable Agriculture, 6: 199-214.
Nahatkar S B, Sharma H O and Patidar M 2005. Soybean production across different agro-climatic zones of Madhya Pradesh. An appraisel. JNKVV Research Journal, 39:46-52.
Ngo Q B, Dao T H, Nguyen H C, Tran X T, Van Nguyen T, Khuu T D and Huynh T H 2014. Effects of nanocrystalline powders (Fe, Co and Cu) on the germination, growth, crop yield and product quality of soybean (Vietnamese species DT-51). Advances in Natural Sciences: Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, 5:015016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2043-6262/5/1/015016
Priester J H, Ge Y, Mielke R E, Horst A M and Moritz S C 2012. Soybean susceptibility to manufactured nanomaterials with evidence for food quality and soil fertility interruption. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109:2451-2456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1205431109
Raghavendra M, Billore S D, Singh Y V, Ramesh A, Verma Rakesh K, Hanamant M Halli, Veeresh Hatti, Goud B R 2020. Weed management in conservation agriculture-based soybean-wheat cropping system. Indian Farming, 70(06); 7-10
Raghuveer and Keeerti 2017. Nutrient management in soybean: A review. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, SP1:137-142.
Randhawa N S and Tandon H L S. 1982. Advances in soil fertility and fertiliser use research in India. Fertiliser News, 27:11-26.
Reddy K S, Mohanty M, Rao D L N, Subba Rao A, Blamey F P C, Dalal R C, Dixit S K, Pandey M and Menzies N W 2010. Development of farmers' participatory integrated nutrient management technology using the Mother - Baby Trial approach. In World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a Changing World. p. 87. 1-6 August 2010, Brisbane, Australia.
Sharma H O, Patidar M and Nahatkar S B 2006. Constraints of soybean production technology in Vindhyan Plateau agro-climatic region of Madhya Pradesh. Research on Crops, 7(1): 100-110.
Singh M, Dwivedi A P, Mishra A, Singh R P, Singh D, Singh S R K and Chand P 2013. Adoption level and constraints of soybean production technology in Sagar district of Madhya Pradesh. Journal of Community Mobilisation and Sustainable Development, 8(1), 94-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073730
Tandon H L S and Tiwari K N. 2011. Fertiliser use in Indian agriculture - an eventful half century. Better Crops India, 1,3-5.
Tomar L S and Sharma B P 2002. Yield and technological knowledge gap in soybean cultivation in arid region of Madhya Pradesh. JNKVV Research Journal, 36 (1/2), 115-117.
Tiwari S P and Tiwari S P 2023. The Indian soybean revolution- Ascertaining the determinants and the tipping point. Journal of Oilseeds Research, 40(1& 2): 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56739/30ffp555
