effect of different mulches on soil moisture, growth and ... · sharma nk and ratnoo sd. evaluation...
TRANSCRIPT
83
Lavanya, P and Anamica M 2013. Assessment and correlates of dryland technologies adoption bu farmers in Namakkal district of Tamil Nadu. Indian Journal of Dryland Agricultural Research and Development 28(2): 61-64.
Meena ML. 2011. Farmers’ knowledge and adoption of improved practices of fenugreek production in arid zone of Rajasthan. Asian Journal of Extension Education, 29: 62-66.
Meena NR, Sisodia SS, Dangi KL, Jain HK and Chaturvedi D. 2011. Adoption of improved cluster bean cultivation practices by the farmers. Rajasthan Journal of Extension Education, 19: 104-109.
Saxena, DR, Gupta SC, Tikle AN, Nema KK, Yasin M, Singh RP and Saxena A. 2010. Souvenir, All India Group Meet of ICAR on Chickpe-2010, RAK College of Agriculture, Sehore. 25-31.
Sharma NK and Ratnoo SD. Evaluation of IPM and INM practices for enhancing of moth bean productivity in transitional plain of Luni Basin of Rajasthan. Indian Journal of Dryland Agricultural Research and Development 29(1): 110-111.
Sheoran P, Singh S, Bhushan B and Bawa SS. 2009. Impact assessment of chickpea frontline demonstrations. Indian Journal of Extension Education, 45(1&2): 115-117.
Singh B. 2011. Factors influencing the adoption of mung bean production technology in arid zone of Rajasthan. Rajasthan Journal of Extension Education 19: 178-181.
Tidke GR, Rathod MK and Mandve RP. 2012. Knowledge and adoption of farmers about the management of pod borer in pigeonpea. International Journal of Extension Education, 8: 71-76.
Wadaskar, RM, Bhalkare SK and Patil AN. 2013. Field efficacy of newer insecticides against pod bore complex of pigeonpea. Journal of Food Legume 26 (1&2): 33-37.
Received: October 2014; Accepted: January 2015
having full knowledge of practices. The partial knowledge could not be converted into adoption, if adopted partially it might not be effective against the pod borer. Therefore, it is concluded that intensive extension activities should be conducted in the area for continuous persuasion of farmers about the technical information.
Acknowledgement The author conveys whole hearted thanks to the technical and non-technical staff of Directorate of Research, SKRAU, Bikaner for providing the necessary service and materials during entire research work.
References Anonymous. 2013. Indian Economy, Govt. of India, New Delhi:
29-33.
Avinashlingam VNA and Singh G 2013. Adoption of improved practices of pigeonpea. Journal of Food Legume 26 (1&2): 93-95.
Bankadakatti JS. 2008. Impact of KVK trainings on use of bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides by Tur farmers in Gulbarg district. M. Sc. Thesis, UAS, Dharwar.
Chaudhary S and Yadav JP. 2012. Knowledge level of beneficiary and non-beneficiary farmers about improved mung bean production technology. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 12(2): 23-26.
Chauhan NM. 2012. Impact and yield gap analysis of training and FLDs regarding scientific practices of chickpea. International Journal of Extension Education, 8: 44-47.
Darling B, Suji DB and Vasanthakumar J. 2004. Knowledge and adoption of botanical pesticides. Journal of Extension Education 15(2&3): 3655-3658.
Effect of Different Mulches on Soil Moisture, Growth and Yield of Eureka Lemon (Citrus limon Burm) Under Rainfed Condition
Vijay Kumar1, A.K. Bhat2, Vikas Sharma3, Neeraj Gupta4, Priyanka Sohan5 and V.B. Singh6
1, 4 & 6 RRSS, Raya, S. K. University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Jammu-181 143, India2, 3 Division of Soil Science & Agricultural Chemistry, Chatha, S.K. University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology,
Jammu-180 009, India5 Department of food Science & technology, Govt. College Gandhi Nagar, University of Jammu, Jammu-180 004, India
Email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT: An experiment was conducted during 2009-2011 to assess the effect of different mulches (bajra straw, maize straw, grasses, brankad (Adhotada vassica), farmyard manure and black polyethylene) on soil moisture, weed reduction, growth and yield in Eureka lemon (Citrus limon Burm). Different organic and inorganic mulches significantly increased the soil moisture status in various soil depths. Black polyethylene mulch recorded the maximum moisture content followed by farmyard manure and brankad. The black polyethylene and farmyard manure were found to be more effective in producing maximum growth extension than rest of the treatments although the differences were non-significant among the treatments. Plots treated with black polyethylene mulch recorded highest yield (1848 kg/ha) followed by farmyard manure (1780 kg/ha) and brankad (1744 kg/ha). Poor aeration, non-decomposable nature and high cost are the constraints of using black polyethylene as mulch material. Among the organic mulches, the cost of brankad was less as the material is easily available in local areas followed by bajra straw, maize straw and grasses.
Key words: Soil moisture, mulching, Eureka lemon, black polyethylene, rainfed condition
Citrus (Citrus sp) generally requires good amount of water compared to other subtropical fruits because sap circulation never entirely ceases and transpiration takes place throughout the year as the crop is evergreen. Eureka lemon (Citrus limon Burm) has become the important fruit crop of arid and semi-arid region of the country because of its precocity, thornlessness and heavy bearing nature. In semi-arid soils the major constraints are moisture stress and inherently poor soil fertility. Conservation of soil moisture by application of mulches becomes essential for profitable cultivation of the crop under rainfed condition of semi-arid ecosystem. In spite of no assured irrigation in these regions, the moisture conservation technique is not in practice. Mulches not only conserve soil moisture but also impart manifold beneficial effects, like suppression of extreme fluctuation of soil temperature and reduction of water loss through evaporation, resulting in more stored soil moisture (Shirugure et al., 2003), maintenance of soil fertility (Slathia and Paul, 2012), suppression of weed growth (Ramakrishna et al., 2006), improvement in growth and yield (Chakraborty et al., 2008; Ban et al., 2009). The requirement of water through mulch can further be reduced by using locally available organic materials as mulches which not only save irrigation water but also conserves soil moisture. Various studies have indicated that in fruit crops like apple, sapota and acid lime, mulching improves soil moisture status, growth, yield and quality of these fruits, besides reducing weed growth (Shirugure et al., 2005, Abouziena et al., 2008). Organic mulching reduces soil temperature in summer and increases in winter season
which is beneficial for proper growth during winter and fruit development during summer months (Jiang Ping et al., 1997). Continuous uses of organic mulches are helpful in improving the physico-chemical properties microbial flora and soil aeration (Rao and Pathak, 1998). Moreover, mulching with plastic polyethylene is found effective in conserving the soil moisture and increasing the growth, yield and quality in different citrus cultivars (Lal et al., 2003, Shirugure et al., 2005). Considering the beneficial effect of mulching, this investigation was undertaken to assess the effect of organic and inorganic mulches on soil moisture, growth and yield of Eureka lemon in rainfed condition.
Materials and Methods A study was carried out on 2 years old plants of air layered Eureka lemon which were planted in 2007 at a spacing of 5 m x 5 m these plants were treated with different mulches at Rainfed Research Sub-station for sub-tropical fruits Raya, Sher-e- Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology Jammu during 2009-10 to 2010-11. The experiment was laid out in a randomized block design with 7 treatments and four replications. Different organic mulches viz bajra straw, maize straw, grasses, brankad (Adhotada vassica) and farmyard manure were imposed uniformly on the basin (10 cm thickness) during April. For inorganic mulching, 400 gauge black polyethylene was spread on plant basin. No mulch was applied in control plots. Other cultural practices adopted were similar for all treatments. Nutrient management and other horticultural operations were carried
Indian J. Dryland Agric. Res. & Dev. 2015 30(1) : 83-88 DOI 10.5958/2231-6701.2015.00013.5
84
out as per standard practices under rainfed conditions. The fruits were harvested in the month of August by three hand pickings. Moisture was determined by using gravimetric method.
Results and DiscussionSoil moisture
Increase in soil moisture content due to mulching was found significant at both depths of soil (0-15 cm and 15-30 cm). At 50 DAM, highest soil moisture content was observed with black polyethylene mulching during both the years of study upto 15 cm depth (9.14 and 10.16%, respectively). This was followed by the treatment where FYM was applied (8.52 and 9.52%, respectively) which in turn had higher moisture content than the treatment where Brankad was applied (7.84 and 8.84%, respectively) (Table 1&2). The least soil moisture content was recorded in the basins of control plots, which was significantly lower than all other treatments (Table 1&2). Similar trend was also observed for the sub-surface soil (15-30 cm). These findings are in agreement with the results of Singh et al. (2008). The higher soil moisture content due to mulching in various mulching treatments may be owing to reduction of water erosion, reduction in soil surface evaporation and suppression in extreme fluctuation of soil temperature (Pandey et al., 2005).
The trend among the treatments with respect to soil moisture content remained consistent over the different time intervals up to 290 DAM, with black polythene treatment reporting the maximum soil moisture content followed by FYM and the least being in control (Table 1&2). In general, during the months of low or no rainfall, black polyethylene mulching resulted in better soil moisture retention followed by other mulching materials. The polythene film prevented the thin film of water from the surface of the underneath and condensed it on its inner surface on cooling. Sharma and Arora (2008) observed that application of FYM in the kandi areas increased soil moisture storage and enhanced crop yield. FYM was followed by brankad with respect to moisture storage (Table 1&2). Brankad has been observed to be a cheap alternative as it grows locally around the fields and uncultivated places in kandi areas.
Grasses were relatively less efficient in retaining soil moisture which may be attributed to their early decomposable nature which would have favoured the adsorption of evaporated water from the surface of the soil and in turn allowed it to get evaporated from surface layer into the surrounding atmosphere. The organic and inorganic mulching provided
consistently higher available soil moisture in plant basin due to which the plant roots remained probably active throughout the irrigation season resulting in optimum availability of nutrients and proper translocation of food materials which accelerate the fruit growth and development in Eureka lemon.
Vegetative growth
The crop vegetative growth was significantly influenced by various mulching treatments maximum except plant girth (Table 3&4). The increase in plant height, spread and girth size was maximum highest (51 cm, 35 cm and 2.2 cm) in black polyethylene, followed by farmyard manure (45 cm, 31 cm and 1.9 cm) and brankad (adhotada vassica) (37 cm, 24 cm and 1.2 cm) respectively. The increase in growth of plant was due to increase in availability of soil moisture, nutrients and moderate evaporation from soil surface (Shirugure et al., 2005). The lowest growth of plant was recorded under control (no mulch), followed by grasses owing to high evaporation and less nutrient availability. Mulching with maize straw, bajra straw, grasses were found to be intermediate in their influence on plant growth. The positive response of most of the mulches on various growth characteristics may be attributed to improve. These findings are in close conformity with the results of Rao and Pathak (1998) in aonla. The higher soil moisture availability, addition of nutrients and less weed growth associated with organic mulches can be attributed to higher extension of root growth under mulching treatment. These results are in conformity with the findings of Lal et al. (2003), Pande et al. (2005) and Singh et al. (2008).
Fruit yield
The fruit yield and quality parameters were influenced by different mulches (Table 5). Plants treated with various mulches produced higher fruit yield compared with control. The increase in yield was mainly attributed to increase in availability of soil moisture for longer duration. Mulching with black polyethylene and farmyard manure recorded highest growth (Table 5) resulting in increased yield. The highest fruit yield was recorded with black polyethylene (4.62 kg/plant) followed by farmyard manure (4.45 kg/plant) and brankad (adhotada vassica) (4.36 kg/plant). Similar results of increased yield due to mulch were reported in citrus and other crops (Shirugure et al., 2003; Neilsen et al., 2006 and Singh et al., 2008). The beneficial effect of mulching was found to be through increase in individual weight and size (length and diameter) of fruits.
Tabl
e 1
: Soi
l moi
stur
e co
nten
t bel
ow so
il su
rfac
e (0
-15
cm) u
nder
diff
eren
t mul
ches
DA
M:
Day
s afte
r mul
chin
g; Y
1: 20
09-1
0; Y
2: 20
10-1
1
Trea
tmen
t
Soil
moi
sture
cont
ent (
%)
50 D
AM80
DAM
110
DAM
140
DAM
170
DAM
200
DAM
230
DAM
260
DAM
290
DAM
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Cont
rol
5.82
6.82
6.11
7.12
9.12
10.1
213
.53
14.1
212
.67
13.5
39.
2210
.12
8.03
9.12
6.99
7.45
6.04
7.04
Bajra
stra
w7.
608.
607.
658.
6511
.91
13.9
315
.52
16.5
214
.76
15.5
212
.03
12.9
310
.42
11.9
19.
0610
.03
8.11
9.11
Maiz
e stra
w7.
058.
057.
278.
2511
.50
13.5
015
.04
16.0
414
.22
15.0
411
.46
12.5
010
.02
11.5
08.
809.
558.
858.
85
Gras
ses
6.58
7.58
7.11
8.12
11.0
413
.04
14.6
115
.92
13.9
514
.61
11.0
312
.04
9.93
11.0
48.
039.
028.
088.
08
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)
7.84
8.84
8.13
9.13
13.5
114
.10
16.1
817
.18
15.5
116
.18
12.3
913
.10
10.8
613
.51
9.58
10.2
28.
639.
63
FYM
8.52
9.52
8.63
9.63
14.1
415
.09
17.0
518
.05
16.1
417
.05
12.7
214
.09
11.2
214
.14
9.95
10.7
29.
0010
.00
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e9.
1410
.16
9.52
10.5
215
.52
16.0
418
.17
19.1
717
.52
18.1
713
.12
15.0
311
.97
15.5
210
.36
11.2
29.
4110
.41
SEm
±0.
110.
210.
180.
270.
160.
220.
150.
220.
230.
120.
140.
160.
120.
150.
120.
140.
110.
12
CD (P
=0.0
5)0.
330.
630.
540.
830.
500.
680.
450.
680.
700.
360.
420.
480.
370.
460.
360.
430.
330.
37
Vijay Kumar et al. Effect of Different Mulches on Yield of Eureka Lemon
85
out as per standard practices under rainfed conditions. The fruits were harvested in the month of August by three hand pickings. Moisture was determined by using gravimetric method.
Results and DiscussionSoil moisture
Increase in soil moisture content due to mulching was found significant at both depths of soil (0-15 cm and 15-30 cm). At 50 DAM, highest soil moisture content was observed with black polyethylene mulching during both the years of study upto 15 cm depth (9.14 and 10.16%, respectively). This was followed by the treatment where FYM was applied (8.52 and 9.52%, respectively) which in turn had higher moisture content than the treatment where Brankad was applied (7.84 and 8.84%, respectively) (Table 1&2). The least soil moisture content was recorded in the basins of control plots, which was significantly lower than all other treatments (Table 1&2). Similar trend was also observed for the sub-surface soil (15-30 cm). These findings are in agreement with the results of Singh et al. (2008). The higher soil moisture content due to mulching in various mulching treatments may be owing to reduction of water erosion, reduction in soil surface evaporation and suppression in extreme fluctuation of soil temperature (Pandey et al., 2005).
The trend among the treatments with respect to soil moisture content remained consistent over the different time intervals up to 290 DAM, with black polythene treatment reporting the maximum soil moisture content followed by FYM and the least being in control (Table 1&2). In general, during the months of low or no rainfall, black polyethylene mulching resulted in better soil moisture retention followed by other mulching materials. The polythene film prevented the thin film of water from the surface of the underneath and condensed it on its inner surface on cooling. Sharma and Arora (2008) observed that application of FYM in the kandi areas increased soil moisture storage and enhanced crop yield. FYM was followed by brankad with respect to moisture storage (Table 1&2). Brankad has been observed to be a cheap alternative as it grows locally around the fields and uncultivated places in kandi areas.
Grasses were relatively less efficient in retaining soil moisture which may be attributed to their early decomposable nature which would have favoured the adsorption of evaporated water from the surface of the soil and in turn allowed it to get evaporated from surface layer into the surrounding atmosphere. The organic and inorganic mulching provided
consistently higher available soil moisture in plant basin due to which the plant roots remained probably active throughout the irrigation season resulting in optimum availability of nutrients and proper translocation of food materials which accelerate the fruit growth and development in Eureka lemon.
Vegetative growth
The crop vegetative growth was significantly influenced by various mulching treatments maximum except plant girth (Table 3&4). The increase in plant height, spread and girth size was maximum highest (51 cm, 35 cm and 2.2 cm) in black polyethylene, followed by farmyard manure (45 cm, 31 cm and 1.9 cm) and brankad (adhotada vassica) (37 cm, 24 cm and 1.2 cm) respectively. The increase in growth of plant was due to increase in availability of soil moisture, nutrients and moderate evaporation from soil surface (Shirugure et al., 2005). The lowest growth of plant was recorded under control (no mulch), followed by grasses owing to high evaporation and less nutrient availability. Mulching with maize straw, bajra straw, grasses were found to be intermediate in their influence on plant growth. The positive response of most of the mulches on various growth characteristics may be attributed to improve. These findings are in close conformity with the results of Rao and Pathak (1998) in aonla. The higher soil moisture availability, addition of nutrients and less weed growth associated with organic mulches can be attributed to higher extension of root growth under mulching treatment. These results are in conformity with the findings of Lal et al. (2003), Pande et al. (2005) and Singh et al. (2008).
Fruit yield
The fruit yield and quality parameters were influenced by different mulches (Table 5). Plants treated with various mulches produced higher fruit yield compared with control. The increase in yield was mainly attributed to increase in availability of soil moisture for longer duration. Mulching with black polyethylene and farmyard manure recorded highest growth (Table 5) resulting in increased yield. The highest fruit yield was recorded with black polyethylene (4.62 kg/plant) followed by farmyard manure (4.45 kg/plant) and brankad (adhotada vassica) (4.36 kg/plant). Similar results of increased yield due to mulch were reported in citrus and other crops (Shirugure et al., 2003; Neilsen et al., 2006 and Singh et al., 2008). The beneficial effect of mulching was found to be through increase in individual weight and size (length and diameter) of fruits.
Tabl
e 1
: Soi
l moi
stur
e co
nten
t bel
ow so
il su
rfac
e (0
-15
cm) u
nder
diff
eren
t mul
ches
DA
M:
Day
s afte
r mul
chin
g; Y
1: 20
09-1
0; Y
2: 20
10-1
1
Trea
tmen
t
Soil
moi
sture
cont
ent (
%)
50 D
AM80
DAM
110
DAM
140
DAM
170
DAM
200
DAM
230
DAM
260
DAM
290
DAM
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Cont
rol
5.82
6.82
6.11
7.12
9.12
10.1
213
.53
14.1
212
.67
13.5
39.
2210
.12
8.03
9.12
6.99
7.45
6.04
7.04
Bajra
stra
w7.
608.
607.
658.
6511
.91
13.9
315
.52
16.5
214
.76
15.5
212
.03
12.9
310
.42
11.9
19.
0610
.03
8.11
9.11
Maiz
e stra
w7.
058.
057.
278.
2511
.50
13.5
015
.04
16.0
414
.22
15.0
411
.46
12.5
010
.02
11.5
08.
809.
558.
858.
85
Gras
ses
6.58
7.58
7.11
8.12
11.0
413
.04
14.6
115
.92
13.9
514
.61
11.0
312
.04
9.93
11.0
48.
039.
028.
088.
08
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)
7.84
8.84
8.13
9.13
13.5
114
.10
16.1
817
.18
15.5
116
.18
12.3
913
.10
10.8
613
.51
9.58
10.2
28.
639.
63
FYM
8.52
9.52
8.63
9.63
14.1
415
.09
17.0
518
.05
16.1
417
.05
12.7
214
.09
11.2
214
.14
9.95
10.7
29.
0010
.00
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e9.
1410
.16
9.52
10.5
215
.52
16.0
418
.17
19.1
717
.52
18.1
713
.12
15.0
311
.97
15.5
210
.36
11.2
29.
4110
.41
SEm
±0.
110.
210.
180.
270.
160.
220.
150.
220.
230.
120.
140.
160.
120.
150.
120.
140.
110.
12
CD (P
=0.0
5)0.
330.
630.
540.
830.
500.
680.
450.
680.
700.
360.
420.
480.
370.
460.
360.
430.
330.
37
Vijay Kumar et al. Effect of Different Mulches on Yield of Eureka Lemon
86
Tabl
e 2
: Soi
l moi
stur
e co
nten
t bel
ow so
il su
rfac
e (1
5-30
cm
) und
er d
iffer
ent m
ulch
es
DA
M:
Day
s afte
r mul
chin
g; Y
1: 20
09-1
0; Y
2: 20
10-1
1
Trea
tmen
t
Soil
moi
sture
cont
ent
50 D
AM80
DAM
110
DAM
140
DAM
170
DAM
200
DAM
230
DAM
260
DAM
290
DAM
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Cont
rol
6.40
7.12
7.74
8.24
11.3
712
.32
15.2
616
.26
12.3
513
.57
9.32
10.3
29.
2010
.02
8.09
9.08
7.04
7.99
Bajra
stra
w9.
0310
.03
9.08
10.0
812
.83
14.5
817
.86
18.9
113
.83
15.8
312
.05
13.0
511
.56
12.8
310
.83
11.2
19.
1110
.73
Maiz
e stra
w8.
729.
788.
819.
8112
.32
14.3
216
.92
17.7
713
.32
15.3
211
.61
12.6
311
.1112
.40
10.4
310
.92
8.85
10.3
3
Gras
ses
8.22
9.22
8.31
9.31
12.0
414
.04
16.2
017
.28
13.0
415
.04
11.0
912
.12
11.4
211
.94
10.0
210
.22
8.08
9.92
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)
9.12
10.1
29.
2210
.22
13.5
115
.50
18.0
419
.04
14.5
116
.51
12.2
213
.22
12.0
213
.00
11.1
211
.22
9.63
11.0
2
FYM
9.83
10.8
39.
9610
.71
14.1
415
.94
19.3
220
.32
15.1
417
.14
13.7
413
.94
12.4
313
.99
11.7
211
.62
10.0
011
.62
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e10
.83
11.8
310
.98
11.9
815
.52
16.5
220
.52
21.5
016
.22
18.5
213
.74
14.7
413
.22
14.9
312
.22
12.1
710
.41
12.1
2
SEm
±0.
250.
270.
210.
220.
220.
240.
250.
370.
220.
230.
170.
230.
160.
180.
140.
170.
120.
14
CD (P
=0.0
5)0.
750.
830.
650.
680.
660.
730.
751.
110.
670.
710.
500.
690.
490.
550.
420.
520.
370.
40
Tabl
e 3
: Veg
etat
ive
grow
th (p
lant
hei
ght,
plan
t gir
th) o
f Eur
eka
lem
on u
nder
diff
eren
t mul
ches
Tabl
e 4
: Veg
etat
ive
grow
th (p
lant
spre
ad (E
-W a
nd N
-S) u
nder
diff
eren
t mul
ches
NS;
Non
sign
ifica
nt
NS;
Non
sign
ifica
nt
Trea
tmen
t
Plan
t heig
ht (c
m)
Plan
t gir
th (c
m)
June
Oct
ober
Mar
chJu
neO
ctob
erM
arch
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
Cont
rol
6.40
7.12
7.74
8.24
11.3
712
.32
15.2
616
.26
12.3
513
.57
9.32
10.3
2
Bajra
stra
w9.
0310
.03
9.08
10.0
812
.83
14.5
817
.86
18.9
113
.83
15.8
312
.05
13.0
5
Maiz
e stra
w8.
729.
788.
819.
8112
.32
14.3
216
.92
17.7
713
.32
15.3
211
.61
12.6
3
Gras
ses
8.22
9.22
8.31
9.31
12.0
414
.04
16.2
017
.28
13.0
415
.04
11.0
912
.12
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)9.
1210
.12
9.22
10.2
213
.51
15.5
018
.04
19.0
414
.51
16.5
112
.22
13.2
2
FYM
9.83
10.8
39.
9610
.71
14.1
415
.94
19.3
220
.32
15.1
417
.14
13.7
413
.94
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e10
.83
11.8
310
.98
11.9
815
.52
16.5
220
.52
21.5
016
.22
18.5
213
.74
14.7
4
SEm
±0.
250.
270.
210.
220.
220.
240.
250.
370.
220.
230.
170.
23
CD (P
=0.0
5)0.
750.
830.
650.
680.
660.
730.
751.
110.
670.
710.
500.
69
Trea
tmen
t
Plan
t spr
ead
(Eas
t-Wes
t) (c
m)
Plan
t spr
ead
(Nor
th-S
outh
) (cm
)
June
Oct
ober
Mar
chJu
neO
ctob
erM
arch
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
Cont
rol
8114
195
160
138
176
8414
810
016
214
217
9
Bajra
stra
w84
146
104
171
146
190
8515
011
417
514
819
3
Maiz
e stra
w86
149
108
173
150
194
8715
211
617
815
219
8
Gras
ses
8313
998
168
141
186
8414
511
117
114
518
8
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)88
155
113
177
153
200
8915
711
818
115
620
4
FYM
8916
311
718
016
220
790
163
123
183
165
210
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e91
170
120
184
167
211
9216
812
018
517
021
5
SEm
±1.
991.
693.
533.
843.
584.
251.
351.
823.
383.
543.
423.
91
CD (P
=0.0
5)5.
965.
0610
.58
11.5
210
.73
12.7
24.
065.
4710
.13
10.6
210
.24
11.7
1
Vijay Kumar et al. Effect of Different Mulches on Yield of Eureka Lemon
87
Tabl
e 2
: Soi
l moi
stur
e co
nten
t bel
ow so
il su
rfac
e (1
5-30
cm
) und
er d
iffer
ent m
ulch
es
DA
M:
Day
s afte
r mul
chin
g; Y
1: 20
09-1
0; Y
2: 20
10-1
1
Trea
tmen
t
Soil
moi
sture
cont
ent
50 D
AM80
DAM
110
DAM
140
DAM
170
DAM
200
DAM
230
DAM
260
DAM
290
DAM
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Y1Y2
Cont
rol
6.40
7.12
7.74
8.24
11.3
712
.32
15.2
616
.26
12.3
513
.57
9.32
10.3
29.
2010
.02
8.09
9.08
7.04
7.99
Bajra
stra
w9.
0310
.03
9.08
10.0
812
.83
14.5
817
.86
18.9
113
.83
15.8
312
.05
13.0
511
.56
12.8
310
.83
11.2
19.
1110
.73
Maiz
e stra
w8.
729.
788.
819.
8112
.32
14.3
216
.92
17.7
713
.32
15.3
211
.61
12.6
311
.1112
.40
10.4
310
.92
8.85
10.3
3
Gras
ses
8.22
9.22
8.31
9.31
12.0
414
.04
16.2
017
.28
13.0
415
.04
11.0
912
.12
11.4
211
.94
10.0
210
.22
8.08
9.92
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)
9.12
10.1
29.
2210
.22
13.5
115
.50
18.0
419
.04
14.5
116
.51
12.2
213
.22
12.0
213
.00
11.1
211
.22
9.63
11.0
2
FYM
9.83
10.8
39.
9610
.71
14.1
415
.94
19.3
220
.32
15.1
417
.14
13.7
413
.94
12.4
313
.99
11.7
211
.62
10.0
011
.62
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e10
.83
11.8
310
.98
11.9
815
.52
16.5
220
.52
21.5
016
.22
18.5
213
.74
14.7
413
.22
14.9
312
.22
12.1
710
.41
12.1
2
SEm
±0.
250.
270.
210.
220.
220.
240.
250.
370.
220.
230.
170.
230.
160.
180.
140.
170.
120.
14
CD (P
=0.0
5)0.
750.
830.
650.
680.
660.
730.
751.
110.
670.
710.
500.
690.
490.
550.
420.
520.
370.
40
Tabl
e 3
: Veg
etat
ive
grow
th (p
lant
hei
ght,
plan
t gir
th) o
f Eur
eka
lem
on u
nder
diff
eren
t mul
ches
Tabl
e 4
: Veg
etat
ive
grow
th (p
lant
spre
ad (E
-W a
nd N
-S) u
nder
diff
eren
t mul
ches
NS;
Non
sign
ifica
nt
NS;
Non
sign
ifica
nt
Trea
tmen
t
Plan
t heig
ht (c
m)
Plan
t gir
th (c
m)
June
Oct
ober
Mar
chJu
neO
ctob
erM
arch
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
Cont
rol
6.40
7.12
7.74
8.24
11.3
712
.32
15.2
616
.26
12.3
513
.57
9.32
10.3
2
Bajra
stra
w9.
0310
.03
9.08
10.0
812
.83
14.5
817
.86
18.9
113
.83
15.8
312
.05
13.0
5
Maiz
e stra
w8.
729.
788.
819.
8112
.32
14.3
216
.92
17.7
713
.32
15.3
211
.61
12.6
3
Gras
ses
8.22
9.22
8.31
9.31
12.0
414
.04
16.2
017
.28
13.0
415
.04
11.0
912
.12
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)9.
1210
.12
9.22
10.2
213
.51
15.5
018
.04
19.0
414
.51
16.5
112
.22
13.2
2
FYM
9.83
10.8
39.
9610
.71
14.1
415
.94
19.3
220
.32
15.1
417
.14
13.7
413
.94
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e10
.83
11.8
310
.98
11.9
815
.52
16.5
220
.52
21.5
016
.22
18.5
213
.74
14.7
4
SEm
±0.
250.
270.
210.
220.
220.
240.
250.
370.
220.
230.
170.
23
CD (P
=0.0
5)0.
750.
830.
650.
680.
660.
730.
751.
110.
670.
710.
500.
69
Trea
tmen
t
Plan
t spr
ead
(Eas
t-Wes
t) (c
m)
Plan
t spr
ead
(Nor
th-S
outh
) (cm
)
June
Oct
ober
Mar
chJu
neO
ctob
erM
arch
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
2009
2010
2009
2010
2010
2011
Cont
rol
8114
195
160
138
176
8414
810
016
214
217
9
Bajra
stra
w84
146
104
171
146
190
8515
011
417
514
819
3
Maiz
e stra
w86
149
108
173
150
194
8715
211
617
815
219
8
Gras
ses
8313
998
168
141
186
8414
511
117
114
518
8
Bran
kad
(Adh
otad
a va
ssica
)88
155
113
177
153
200
8915
711
818
115
620
4
FYM
8916
311
718
016
220
790
163
123
183
165
210
Blac
k po
lyeth
ylen
e91
170
120
184
167
211
9216
812
018
517
021
5
SEm
±1.
991.
693.
533.
843.
584.
251.
351.
823.
383.
543.
423.
91
CD (P
=0.0
5)5.
965.
0610
.58
11.5
210
.73
12.7
24.
065.
4710
.13
10.6
210
.24
11.7
1
Vijay Kumar et al. Effect of Different Mulches on Yield of Eureka Lemon
88
Table 5 : Effect of mulches on fruit yield and cost of mulching (summer season-2010)
Treatment Yield/plant (kg) Yield (kg/ha) Cost of mulching (`/tree) Cost (`/ha)
Control 3.90 1560 - -Bajra straw 4.25 1700 12 4,800Maize straw 4.30 1720 12 4,800Grasses 4.20 1680 6 2400Brankad 4.36 1744 2 800(Adhotada vassica)FYM 4.45 1780 15 6,000Black polyethylene 4.62 1848 36 14,400SEm ± 0.02 11.50 - -CD (P=0.05) 0.08 34.4 - -
Received: March 2013; Accepted: April 2015
ConclusionThe study reveals that black polythene is the best option for conserving soil moisture, followed by FYM and brankad (Adhotada vassica). The increase in soil moisture has resulted in increased yields. However, due to moisture stress and poor yields this is a resource poor region. Investing in black polythene sheets may not be a viable option for local farmers. Due to limited population of domestic animals in the kandi area, availability of FYM is also limited. The locally available FYM may not be sufficient for mulching. Considering the economics of the treatment, availability and biodegradable nature, mulching of Eureka lemon plant with locally available material like brankad (Adhotada vassica) is a viable option under rainfed condition for enhancing soil moisture storage, growth and yield of fruit crops.
ReferencesAbouziena HF, Hafez OM, El-Metwally IM, Sharma SD & Singh M.
2008. Comparison of weed suppression and mandarin fruit yield and quality obtained with organic mulches, synthetic mulches, cultivation, and glyphosate. Hort. Science, 43(3), 795-799.
Ban D, Žanić K, Dumičić G, Čuljak TG and Ban SG. 2009. The type of polyethylene mulch impacts vegetative growth, yield, and aphid populations in watermelon production. Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment, 7, 543-550.
Chakraborty D, Nagarajan S, Aggarwal P, Gupta VK, Tomar RK, Garg RN, Sahoo RN, Sarkar A, Chopra UK, Sundara Sarma KS and Kalra N. 2008. Effect of mulching on soil and plant water status, and the growth and yield of wheat (Triticumaestivum L.) in a semi-arid environment. Agricultural water management, 95(12), 1323-1334.
Jiang Ping, Zhao Xiang Xong, Zhang RenRong and Wang Yuansheng. 1997. Effect of mulching in hillside citrus orchards. South China fruits, 26(3): 7-18.
Lal H, Samra JS and Arora YK. 2003. Kinnow mandarin in Doon Valley. 2. Effect of irrigation and mulching on water use, soil temperature, weed population and nutrient losses. Indian Journal of soil Conservation, 31(3): 281-286.
Neilsen GH, Hogue EJ, Forge T and Neilsen D. 2006. Mulches and biosolids affect vigour, yield and leaf nutrition of fertigated high density apple. Hort. Science, 38(11): 41-45
Pande KK, Dimn DC and Prashant Kamboj. 2005. Effect of various mulches on growth, yield and quality of apple. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 62: 145-147.
Ramakrishna A, Tam HM, Wani SP, & Long TD. 2006. Effect of mulch on soil temperature, moisture, weed infestation and yield of groundnut in northern Vietnam. Field Crops Research, 95(2), 115-125.
Rao VK and Pathak,R.K.1998. Effect of mulches on Aonla (Emblica Officinalies Gaertn) orchard in sodic soil. Indian journal of Horticulture, 55(1): 27-32.
Sharma V and Arora S. 2008. Effect of balanced fertilization on moisture storage and yield in maize-wheat system under rainfed conditions. Proceedings of National Seminar on Policy Interventions for promotion of Balanced Fertilization and Integrated Nutrient Management. April 10-11, Palampur. pp. 93-94.
Shirugure PS, Sonkar RK, Singh S and Panighrah P. 2003. Effect of different mulches on soil moisture, weed reduction, growth and yield of drip irrigated Nagpur mandarin (Citrus reticulata). Indian journal of Agricultural Sciences, 73: 148-52.
Shirugure PS, Singh S, Panighrah P and Sonkar RK. 2005. Evaluation of mulches for improving bearing acid lime. Indian journal of Soil Conservation, 33(1): 62-66.
Singh AK, Singh S, Apparao VV and Meshram DT. 2008. Effect of mulching on soil properties, growth and yield of ‘NA-7’ aonla (Emblica Officinalies) in semi arid ecosystem. Indian journal of Agricultural Sciences, 78(3): 193-197.
Slathia PS and Paul N. 2012. Traditional practices for sustainable livelihood in Kandi belt of Jammu. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge. 11(3): 548-552.
Physicochemical Profiling for Selection of Promising Annona Genotypes
Y.S. Saitwal1*, A.M. Musmade1, V.S. Supe1, V.R. Joshi1 and C.A. Nimbalkar2
1Department of Horticulture, MPKV, Rahuri, Dist., Ahmednagar-413 722, Maharashtra2Department of Agricultural Statistics, MPKV, Rahuri Dist., Ahmednagar-413 722, Maharashtra
Email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT: Annona is one of the favourite dry land fruit of Maharashtra, because it is hardy in nature and drought tolerant. One of the important bottlenecks to increase the area under production is unavailability of suitable and improved varieties. Among 101 genotypes collected from Western Maharashtra; twenty two genotypes were found superior for physicochemical characteristics. On the basis of two year data (2011 and 2012); the highest fruit pulp percentage was found in Island Gem (61.72) and SG-8 (60.46), but genotype SG-8 was superior for other fruit quantitative and biochemical characters. Dendrogram using average linkage on the basis of physicochemical characteristics revealed that genotype SG-8, Island Gem and Pink Mammoth formed distinct cluster from other genotypes. The Annona is highly perishable fruit, so shelf life is an important trait. The genotype SG-8 showed highest (five days) shelf life among selected genotypes. Hence, the genotypes collected from various regions had significant variation for various traits and can be evaluated physicochemically and promising one can be selected for further improvement programme.
Key words: Annona genotype, quantitative and biochemical characteristics, dendrogram
Annonaceous fruits are the most important delicious fruits and widely grown in India. Adaptability to varied soil and climatic conditions, freedom from pests and diseases, hardy nature and escape from animal damage are the positive features of the Annona. Owing to these features, custard apple has become naturalized in many tropical and subtropical parts of the world. In India, custard apple is grown in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh. Out of them, Andhra Pradesh ranks first in the production. In Maharashtra, the area is mainly concentrated in dry hilly regions and wastelands of the Aurangabad, Pune, Dhule, Beed and Nagpur districts. Among the breeding method, seedling selection is a handy method of improving majority of fruit crops as these are perennial in nature. Orchards raised from seeds present an excellent opportunity for seedling selection, because of wide genetic variations. Cheema (1928) observed that the seedling selection method offers a considerable scope for improvement by taking advantage of genetic variations among the natural hybrids. Due to heterozygosity and cross pollination nature of Annona, there is a large genetic variation in leaf, inflorescence and fruit characters. All these factors offer a great scope for improvement through seedling progeny selection hence the present investigation was undertaken with a objective to select promising genotypes for further crop improvement.
Materials and MethodsExploration: During this study, the exploration of four districts of Maharashtra (Ahmednagar, Aurangabad, Beed and Pune) were carried out and ninety (90) elite types were collected on the basis of morphological characters. Eleven promising genotypes were selected from the existing germplasm available at All India Coordinated Research
Project on Arid Zone Fruits, Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri for evaluation and comparison with collected genotypes.
Observations: All the genotypes presented in Table 1, were screened for selection of promising genotypes. All quantitative and biochemical characters were recorded for two seasons during year 2011 and 2012 as per Bioversity International and CHERLA (2008) i.e.descriptors for Cherimoya. Ten fully expanded and healthy leaves and ten flowers collected from marked and identified trees at bloom period and ten physiologically mature representative fruits at harvest were collected and observed for this study.
Data analysis: Two season data for fruit quantitative and biochemical characters were pooled and subjected to statistical analysis (Panse and Sukhatme, 1985). The cluster analysis was done as per Sneath and Sokal (1973) and Dendrogram was drawn using Average Linkage between groups; SPSS software packages were used to analyze the data.
Results and DiscussionOn the basis of pulp percentage and shelf life, twenty two superior genotypes were selected from among 101 genotypes for further analysis. Pooled data of twenty two Annona genotypes for year 2011 and 2012 (Table 2) shows considerable variations between genotypes for quantitative and biochemical characters. Characters showing a greater quantity of range had higher coefficient of variation (CV), meaning a higher selection possibility for those characters for further selection procedure.
Quantitative and qualitative characters: The Island Gem, SG-8 and Arka Sahan showed highest pulp percentage (Figure 2) with low seed values i.e. seed percentage and
Vijay Kumar et al.