You are on page 1of 158

EFFECT OF FERTILIZER AND PANCHAGAVYA ON YIELD

AND QUALITY OF SUMMER GREENGRAM (Vigna


radiata L.) UNDER MIDDLE GUJARAT CONDITIONS

A
THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE
ANAND AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
IN PARTIAL FULFILENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE

OF

Master of Science
(AGRICULTURE)

IN

AGRONOMY

BY
PATEL VIPULBHAI YOGESHBHAI
B.Sc. (Hons.) Agri.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY
B. A. COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
ANAND AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
ANAND - 388 110 (GUJARAT, INDIA)

2016

Reg. No.: 04 - 2395 - 2014


Dedicated To

My Grandparents,

Parents

and

Respected Guide
Abstract
Effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer
greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under middle Gujarat conditions

Name of Student Major Advisor


Patel Vipulbhai Yogeshbhai Dr. K. M. Gediya

DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY
B. A. COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
ANAND AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY
ANAND – 388 110, GUJARAT

ABSTRACT

A field experiment was carried out on loamy sand soil at Bidi Tobacco

Research Station Farm, Anand Agricultural University, Anand, Gujarat to study

the “Effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer

greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under middle Gujarat conditions” during

summer season of the year 2015. The soil of the experimental field was loamy

sand in texture. The soil was low in organic carbon, medium in available nitrogen

and phosphorus and high in available potassium. Sixteen treatments combinations

comprising of four levels of fertilizers viz., F0 (0% RDF), F1 (50% RDF), F2

(75% RDF) and F3 (100% RDF) and four levels of panchagavya viz., P0 (Water

spray at flowering), P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation), P2

(Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering) and P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at

flowering) were tried under RBD with factorial concept with three replications.

The result revealed that different levels of fertilizer failed to reflect their

significant effect on plant population of greengram at initial and harvest.

i
Abstract

The growth and yield attributes viz., plant height (at 30, 45 DAS and at

harvest), weight of dry root nodules plant-1, number of branches plant-1, number of

pods plant-1, number of seeds pod-1, pod length and test weight were significantly

affected due to different treatments. Application of 100 % RDF

(20-40-00 NPK kg ha-1) recorded significantly higher values of all the growth and

yield attributes.

Application of 100 % RDF (20-40-00 NPK kg ha-1) recorded significantly

higher seed and stover yields over 50% RDF and control. However, harvest index

was non significantly affected due to different fertilizer levels.

Significantly higher protein content (%) was recorded under treatment F3

(100 % RDF) but it was remained at par with 75 % RDF (F2). While, significantly

lower protein content was observed under F0 (0 % RDF) treatment.

Treatment F3 (100 % RDF) recorded significantly higher N, P and K

content and uptake by seed and stover as well as available N, P and K status of

soil after harvest of crop.

Maximum value of net realization of 37083 ha-1 along with CBR value

of 1:2.17 was recorded under treatment F3 (100% RDF). On the contrary,

treatment F0 (0% RDF) recorded the minimum value of net realization of

23355 ha-1 with CBR value of 1:1.63.

Treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded

significantly higher values of all the growth attributes viz., plant height

(at 45 DAS and at harvest), weight of dry root nodules plant-1and number of

branches plant-1. While, treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) recorded lower

values of all the growth attributes.

With respect to improvement in yield attributes viz., number of pods

plant-1, number of seeds pod-1, pod length and test weight an application of
ii
Abstract

panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering (P3) being at par with treatment P2

(Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering) was emerged out as the best treatment.

Significantly higher seed and stover yields were recorded under

Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering (P3) which was remained at par with

treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). However, harvest index

was non significantly affected due to different panchagavya levels.

Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering (P3) recorded significantly higher

protein content (%). On the contrary, treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) had

lower values of protein content (%).

With regard to N, P and K uptake by seed and stover as well as available

these nutrients after harvest of the crop was recorded significantly higher under

panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering (P3) treatment, it was comparable with

treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering).

Maximum net realization of 38498 ha-1 was recorded under treatment

P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) followed by treatment P2

(Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering) and maximum CBR value of 1:2.43 was

registered under treatment P2, while the minimum net realization of

11291 ha-1 along with CBR value of 1:1.25 were recorded under treatment P1

(Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation).

In view of results obtained from the present invastigation, it could be

concluded that for higher yield and net profit/realization or return from summer

greengram Cv."Meha". The crop should be fertilized with 20 kg N ha-1 (43.5 kg

urea) and 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (250 kg Single Super Phosphate) as basal application

with spraying of "panchagavya"@ 6% at flowering stage under middle Gujarat

conditions.

iii
Dr. K. M. Gediya
Associate Research Scientist (Agron),
Bidi Tobacco Research Station,
Anand Agricultural University,
Anand- 388 110, Gujarat

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “Effect of fertilizer

and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer greengram

(Vigna radiata L.) under middle Gujarat conditions” submitted

by Patel Vipulbhai Yogeshbhai. Reg. No. 04-2395-2014 in partial

fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE (AGRICULTURE) in AGRONOMY of the

Anand Agricultural University, Gujarat is a record of bonafide

research work carried out by him under my personal guidance and

supervision. The thesis has not previously formed the basis for

award of any degree, diploma or other similar title.

Place: Anand (K. M. GEDIYA)

Date: /09/2016 Major Guide


DECLARATION

This is to certify that whole of the research work reported in the

thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the degree of Master

of Science (Agriculture) in the subject of Agronomy is the result of investigation

done by undersigned under the direct guidance and supervision of Dr. K. M. Gediya,

Associate Research Scientist (Agron.), Bidi Tobacco Research Station, Anand

Agricultural University, Anand-388110 and no part of the research work has been

submitted for any other degree so far.

Place: Anand

Date: /09/2016 (Vipul Y. Patel)

Counter signed by

(K. M. Gediya)
Associate Research Scientist (Agron.),
Bidi Tobacco Research Station,
Anand Agricultural University,
Anand-388 110
Gujarat
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Towards the end of my endeavour, it’s the right moment to prie-dieu to extol my
profound etiquette to all those who have directly or indirectly helped me to accomplish this job
because research work and their documentation cannot be a single person’s job, it needs
assistance from all quarters of scientific community to keep oneself updated. It is difficult to
mention all who were helpful to me and therefore, I start with expressing my indebtedness for
everyone who generously imparted their help without any faltering.
As an amateur investigator, it is a matter of great pride and pleasure to present this
thesis which is the climax of my dedication, devotion and ardor to my field of interest.
Sometimes words are not enough to express one’s emotions and expressions. At this
point of time, I am unable to express my gratitude and reverberated reverence to my guide
Dr. K. M. Gediya, Associate Research Scientist (Agronomy), Bidi Tobacco Research Station,
AAU, Anand. I am immensely self-satisfied to mention that he accorded all his intellectuality
and expertise towards his field which enabled me to design a painstaking plan and moving
forward to materialize that. All types of shortcomings proved too much short as compared to the
help and guidance provided by him. Hence, sincerely my first and foremost thank to him.
At this auspicious juncture, I am wordless to thank my advisory committee
members, Dr. G. J. Mistry, Assistant Research Scientist, Micronutrient Project (ICAR), AAU,
Anand, Dr. G. J. Patel, Research Scientist (Agronomy), T. R. C. T. C. Devgadh Baria and
Dr. V. B. Darji, Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Statistics, B. A. College of
Agriculture, AAU, Anand who have taken great care of mine in all ups and downs in my
research work.
I acknowledge with thanks for the facilities provided by Dr. H. R. Patel, Head of
Bidi Tobacco Research Station, AAU, Anand.
I owe my profoundest sense of gratitude and sincere thanks to Dr. K. P. Patel,
Principal, B. A. College of Agriculture, AAU, Anand, Dr. M. V. Patel, Professor and Head
(Department of Agronomy), Dr. V. R. Bhatt, Professor and Head (Department of Agricultural
Chemistry and Soil Science), Dr. M. R. Patel, Dr. B. D. Patel, Dr. A. C. Shadhu, Dr. A. S.
Bhanvadiya, Dr. S. N. Shah, Dr. P. M. Patel, Dr. M. B. Viradiya and other staff members for
Acknowledgement

their ever willing co-operation. I express my sincere thanks to Dr. J. C. Chavda, Research
Scientist (Physiology).
I am thankful to Jalpa Panchal, Chunibhai, Rambhai, Hajabhai, Harmanbhai and
other field staff of Bidi Tobacco Research Station Farm for providing me all necessary facilities
and kind co-operation during the period of investigation.
I cannot resist myself to homologate my enthusiastic senior Sagar Kadu, Gaurav
Karad, Aniket Umale, Manoj Dohat, Ravindra Prajapati and Bharat Chaudhary who were
with me throughout the course of my study and research work.
In this hour of affluence, I overwhelm with ardour to talk about my admirable,
good natured and good humoured pals Jayesh, Vaibhav, Siddharth, Shiddhav, Margesh, Anand,
Janak, Shakti, Kirthana, Mitresh, Jaymin, Velji, Pragnesh, Arjun, Sonaka, Nilesh, Nikhil and
Dilip because caring friends like them add so much ecstasy and exultation in day-to-day living. I
just wanted to let them know how grateful I am, for their moral encouragement and arousal in
many an area of life, has paved the way meanest shattering hurdles to materialize my notion.
I extend my special thanks to Pranav nayee, Nirav Vyas, Rahul Kharadi and
Mahendra Chaudhary.
I owe a deep and endless sense of reverence towards my Grandparents Late. Shri
Govindbhai, Late. Smt. Laliben my father Shri Yogeshbhai, mother Shardaben, my uncle
Kanubhai whose love, constant encouragement, their blessing and moral support and inspirational
guidance helped me immensely in realizing my goal.
I am overwhelmed with the love, care and affection showered on me by my sister
Anju, Janki and Kinjal,brothers Dharmesh, Jay, Raju, Rashmin, Harsh and Ayush, my bhabhi
Bhoomiben and Uravshiben, my cute newphew Priyansh who had done a lot to bring me to this
level are inexpressible in words.
Lastly, I am thankful to the “GOD” and “GOODNESS” and all who so ever have
helped in making this mission for the study a success.

Date: / 09/2016 (Vipul Y. Patel)


Place: Anand
CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE
NO. TITLE
NO.

I INTRODUCTION 1-4

II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 5-35

III MATERIALS AND METHODS 36-53

IV EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 54-83

V DISCUSSION 84-95

VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 96-100

REFERENCES I-XI

APPENDIX I-VI
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Title
No. No.
Meteorological data recorded during crop season for the year
3.1 38
2015-16 (Weekly mean)
3.2 Physico-chemical properties of the experimental field 39
3.3 Cropping history of the experimental site 39
3.4 Characteristics of greengram variety (Meha) 40
3.5 Details of treatment combinations 42
Calendar of important field operations and cultural operations
3.6 44
carried out during the course of investigation
3.7 Parameters studied during the field investigation 49
3.8 Plant chemical analysis 51
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on plant population of
4.1 55
summer greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on periodic plant height
4.2 57
of summer greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on weight of dry root
4.3 nodules plant-1 and number of branches plant-1 of summer 60
greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on number of pods
4.4 62
plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 of summer greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on pod length and test
4.5 65
weight of summer greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and harvest
4.6 68
index of summer greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on protein content of
4.7 70
summer greengram
Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on nutrient content in
4.8 73
seed and stover of summer greengram
4.9 Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on nutrient uptake by
75
seed and stover of summer greengram
4.10 Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on available nutrient
79
status of soil after harvest of summer greengram
4.11 Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on economic of summer
83
greengram
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure After
Title
No. page No.
Meteorological data recorded during crop season for the
3.1 38
year 2015-16 (Weekly mean)
3.2 Layout plan of field experiment 43

4.1 Periodical plant height of summer greengram as influenced 57


by different treatments
4.2 Weight of dry root nodules plant-1 of summer greengram as 60
influenced by different treatments
4.3 Number of branches plant-1 of summer greengram as 60
influenced by different treatments

4.4 Yield attributes of summer greengram as influenced by 65


different treatments
4.5 Seed yield and stover yield of summer greengram as 68
influenced by different treatments
4.6 Protein content of summer greengram as influenced by 70
different treatments
4.7 N, P and K contents in seed and stover of summer 73
greengram as influenced by different treatments
4.8 N, P and K Uptake by seed and stover of summer 75
greengram as influenced by different treatments
4.9 Available N, P and K status of soil after harvest of summer 79
greengram as influenced by different treatments
4.10 Net realization of summer greengram as influenced by 83
different treatments
LIST OF PLATES
After Page
Plate No. Title
No.
1 General view of the experimental field 43
Performance of summer greengram under control
2 68
condition
Performance of summer greengram under 75% 68
3
RDF + Panchagavya spray @ 6% at Flowering
Performance of summer greengram under 100% 68
4
RDF + Panchagavya spray @ 3% at Flowering
Performance of summer greengram under 100% 68
5
RDF + Panchagavya spray @ 6% at Flowering

LIST OF APPENDIX

Page
Sr. No. Title
No.
I Cost of cultivation of summer greengram and economics I-II
Analysis of variance for growth and yield attributes, quality
II parameter of summer greengram and chemical parameters of III-VI
plant and soil
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
/ Per
% Per cent
@ At the rate
0
C Degree Celsius
AAU Anand Agricultural University
Anon. Anonymous
BCR Benefit Cost Ratio
B. T. R. S. Bidi Tobacco Research Station
C. D. Critical Difference
C. V. Co-efficient of Variance
CV Cultivation
cm Centimeter
cm2 Square Centimeter
DAS Days After Sowing
dS m-1 Decisiemens per meter
EC Emulsifiable concentration
EC Enriched compost
EC Electrical conductivity
EMO’s Effective Micro-organisms
et al. Et allii; and co-workers
etc. Etcetera and rest, so on
Fig. Figure
G Gram
GA Gibberellic Acid
GLM Glyricidia Leaf Manure
Ha Hectare
hr. day-1 Hour per day
IAA Indole Acetic Acid
IIPR Indian Institute of Pulses Research

i
INM Integrated Nutrient Management
K Potash
km Kilometer
Km hr.-1 Kilometer Per hour
i. e. That is
K2 O Potassium oxide
Kg Kilogram
kg ha-1 Kilogram per hectare
L Liter
M Million
Max. Maximum
Min. Minimum
M Meter
Mg Milligram
Mm Millimeter
m2 Square meter
N Nitrogen
N North
No. Number
NS Non Significant
O.C. Organic Carbon
P Phosphorus
P = 0.05 Probability at 0.05 %
P2O5 Phosphorus pentaoxide
PB Pair of Bullock
PGPR Plant Growth Promoting Substances
pH Potential of hydrogen ion
Ppm Parts per million
PSB Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria
q ha-1 Quintal per hectare

ii
R.H. Relative humidity
RDF Recommended Dose of Fertilizer
Rupees
S. Em. Standard Error of mean
Sig. Significant
Spp. Species
SSP Single Super Phosphate
Sr. No. Serial number
Std. Met. week Standard Meteorological week
t Tone
viz. Namely

iii
Introduction
I. INTRODUCTION

Greengram (Vigna radiata L.) commonly known as “mung” or “mung bean”

is one of the most important and extensively cultivated pulse crop of the Indian sub-

continent. Pulses are important food crops occupying a unique position in every

known system of farming as main, catch, cover, green manure, intercrop and mix

crop. Its inclusion in the rotation keeps the soil alive and productive. Pulse crops

enrich the soil fertility adding organic matter and nitrogen through biological fixation

mediated by root nodule Rhizobium bacteria.

Greengram (Vigna radiata L.) is one of the important pulse crop and

cultivated in the India, since ancient times. Greengram is a native of India and central

Asia and grown in these regions since prehistoric times. It is widely cultivated

throughout the Asia, including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Thailand,

Laos, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia and South China. The cultivation of greengram

is mainly confined to the states viz. Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka,

Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Orissa covering 4.40, 2.30,

5.28, 6.71, 0.72, 10.60, 1.71 and 2.55 lakh hectares, respectively (Anon., 2014).

In Gujarat, greengram is mainly grown in the districts of Kutch,

Banaskantha, Mehsana and Panchmahal in kharif season under inadequate and erratic

rainfall. However, it is grown on large area during summer season in Kheda, Baroda

and Panchmahal districts. With the availability of irrigation water through Narmada

project, area under greengram increased in the middle and north Gujarat. Greengram

matures in 65 to 70 days and due to photo and thermo insensitivity, it can be grown

1
……………………………………………………………….…………………Introduction

during kharif, rabi and summer seasons. The yield level of summer greengram is

higher as compared to kharif crop because of minimum biotic and abiotic stresses

(Anon., 2004). Because of short duration of the crop and adjustability under different

cropping systems or situations, greengram has enormous potential for the future,

which needs to be capitalized.

Despite of significant importance of this crop, the yield is very low in india

as well as in Gujarat probably due to the fact that, its cultivation is mainly confined

under rainfed conditions and in poor fertility soils. To meet the increasing demand of

pulses, a time has come to give a serious thought for increasing either area or yield

per hectare of this crop.

Greengram is rich in protein as it contains about 24 per cent protein which is

almost three times that of cereals. Legume crops are not only used as human diet but

also for improving soil fertility through biological nitrogen fixation. Its seed is more

palatable, nutritive, digestible and non-flatulent than other pulses grown in the

country. Greengram is primarily consumed in the form of dal. Green pods are also

used as vegetable and haulms as green fodder. Its seeds contain 24% protein, 1.2%

fat and 62% carbohydrates. The lysine, methionine and cystine (mg g-1) are 436, 75

and 55, respectively. It is rich in vitamin A (Reddy, 2013)

Among the various factors affecting crop production, fertilizer plays a vital

role in increasing the greengram production. Optimum fertilizer application either in

the form of organic or inorganic is one of the best established techniques for

increasing crop production. Among the major nutrients, nitrogen plays key role for

plant growth. It imparts green colour to leaves/stem and enable to them for efficient

2
……………………………………………………………….…………………Introduction

photosynthesis. Nitrogen also plays vital role in symbiosis of chlorophyll as well as

amino acids which contribute to the building unit of protein and thus, growth of

plant. Greengram is a pulse crop, so required less amount of nitrogen and it can be

compensated by nitrogen fixing bacteria. Phosphorus promotes growth and enhances

the yield, it imparts hardiness to suit, improves grain quality, regulates the

photosynthesis, governs physico-chemical process and also helps in root

development/root nodulation and thereby, increasing nitrogen fixation.

Majority of Indian farmers who are mostly marginal and small are using

indigenous organic manures as sources of nutrients. Organic plays a major role in

maintaining soil health due to build-up of soil organic matter, beneficial microbes,

enzymes, besides improving soil physical and chemical properties. To achieve soil

fertility and productivity in a sustainable manner, the role of organic manures and

other nutrient management practices like use of fermented liquid organic nutrient

viz., panchagavya, jeevamrut, beejamrut, vermiwash etc. are very important. In

addition to nutrients, these fermented liquid organics have microbial load/count and

plant growth promoting substances (PGPR) which help in sustaining the plant

growth, yield, metabolic activity and resistance to pest and diseases. Presence of IAA

and GA besides beneficial soil micro-organisms viz., Rhizobium, Azotobacter,

Azospirillum and PSB in panchagavya could have created stimuli in the plant system

and increased the production of growth regulators in cell system and the action of

growth regulators in plant system stimulated the growth and development of crop

(Chaudhari et al. 2013).

Panchagavya, an organic product is the potential source to play the role for

3
……………………………………………………………….…………………Introduction

promoting growth and providing immunity in the plant system. Presence of naturally

occurring, beneficial, effective micro-organisms (EMO‟s) in panchagavya

predominantly, lactic acid bacteria, yeast, actinomycetes, photosynthetic bacteria and

certain fungi besides, beneficial and proven microorganisms such as Azotobacter,

Azospirillum and Phosphobacterium were detected which have the beneficial effect

especially in improving soil quality, growth and yield of crops (Xu and Xu, 2000).

Conventional agriculture has made an adverse impact on the health of soil

and plant. This eventually has led to high demand for organic farming to protect soil

and plant health. In India, organic farming was well developed and systemized

agricultural practice during the past such as „Vedas‟ which has specified the use of

„panchagavya‟ in agriculture. In Sanskrit, panchagavya means the blend of five

products obtained from cow viz., dung, urine, milk, curd and ghee (Sugha, 2005).

Keeping the above facts in view, the present experiment entitled “Effect of

fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer greengram (Vigna

radiata L.) under middle Gujarat conditions” was under taken during summer

2015 at Bidi Tobacco Research Station, Anand Agricultural University, Anand,

Gujarat, With the following objectives.

Objective:
1. To find out the effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on growth, yield and

quality of summer greengram.

2. To determine nutrient uptake (N, P and K) by greengram.

3. To find out the interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya on

growth, yield and quality parameters of summer greengram.

4
Review
of
Literature
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Fertilizer recommendation integrating organic, inorganic and bio-

fertilizers ensure sustainability of yield, maintenance of soil health and conservation

of natural resources. Keeping this in view the present study was planned to find out

the effect of recommended dose of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield of summer

greengram. The efforts are, therefore, being made here to review the research work

done so far on relevant aspects at different locations. The literature compiled is

narrated on the following major heads

2.1 EFFECT OF FERTILIZER

2.2 EFFECT OF PANCHAGAVYA

2.3 INTERACTION EFFECT OF FERTILIZER AND PANCHAGAVYA

2.1 EFFECT OF FERTILIZER

Chemical fertilizers have played a key role in ushering the green revolution.

It has been established that there is a positive correlation between fertilizer usage and

agriculture productivity. Among all the nutrients, nitrogen has vital importance for

the highest production and good start of the crop growth and production.

It is fact that phosphorus promotes growth, root development and nodulation,

thereby increases the productivity of greengram crop. The results available on this

aspect are reported briefly as under.

2.1.1 Effect on growth attributes

Sarkar and Banik (1991) conducted an experiment during summer season of

the year 1991 at Experimental Farm, Culcutta University, Baruipur (West Bengal).

5
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

The results revealed that increasing levels of P 2 O 5 from 0 to 60 kg P 2 O 5 ha-1

increased number of root nodules of greengram.

A field experiment was conducted by Patel et al. (1992) during kharif season

of the year 1989 at Gujarat Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat), to

study the response of greengram to sulphur fertilization under different levels of

nitrogen and phosphorus. They found that application of nitrogen @ 20 kg N ha-1 and

phosphorus @ 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased number of branches plant-1

over control.

Ardeshna et al. (1993) conducted a field experiment during kharif season of

the year 1990 at Junagadh (Gujarat), to study the response of nitrogen and

phosphorus on growth and yield of green gram. The results revealed that significantly

higher plant height and branches plant-1 were obtained at 30 N kg ha-1 along with 60

P2O5 kg ha-1 over remaining treatments.

A field experiment was conducted on clay loam soil during kharif season of

the year 1991 at Dharwad (Karnataka) on pigeonpea Cv. DT-7. Chittarpur et al.

(1994) recorded higher plant height, number of branches plant-1 and leaves plant-1 by

application of 50 kg N and 30 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

An experiment was conducted by Sharma and Singh (1997) during summer

seasons of the year 1989 and 1990 at Instructional Farm of university, Faizabad (U.P)

to find out the response of greengram to phosphorus levels. They observed that

application of phosphorus @ 50 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly enhanced the plant height

and branches plant-1.

Bhadoria et al. (1997) conducted an experiment on cluster bean during kharif

seasons of the year 1992 and 1993 at Gwalior (U.P), with four levels of phosphorus
6
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

(0, 20, 40 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1). The results indicated that plant height and number of

branches plant-1 were increased significantly with application of phosphorus over

control. Application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 registered maximum values for plant height

and number of branches plant-1.

Akter et al. (1998) conducted an experiment to study the effect of nitrogen

(0, 20 and 40 kg ha-1) on cowpea at Regional Research Station, Gwalior, Madhya

Pradesh during the year 1989 and 1990 and they reported that application of 40 N

ha-1 increased nodulation and dry matter production.

Ram and Dixit (2000) carried out an experiment at Faizabad (U.P.) on silt

loam soil having pH 8.2 to evaluate the response of summer greengram to

phosphorus during summer season of the year 1987. They observed that application

of phosphorus @ 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased dry matter as compared to

control.

A field experiment on pigeonpea was conducted by Shivran and Ahlawat

(2000) at Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi during kharif seasons of

the year 1997-98 and 1998-99, to study the effect of fertilizer on sandy loam soil.

They reported that application of 75% of the recommended dose of fertilizer i.e.

13.5:34.5:15:15 kg N:P2O5:K2O:S ha-1 significantly enhanced the growth attributes

viz., plant height, number of branches plant-1 and leaf area index of pigeon pea.

Baboo and Mishra (2001) carried out a field experiment on sandy loam soil

at Agriculture Research Farm, A. S. College, Lakhoti (UP) on greengram during

spring season of the year1996-97. They found that each successive increase in

phosphorus level up to 90 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased plant height and

number of branches plant-1.


7
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

A field experiment was carried out by Rudreshappa and Halikatti (2002)

during rabi season of the year 1995-96 at University of Agricultural Sciences,

Dharwad (Karnataka) to study the response of nitrogen (0, 12.5 and 25 kg ha-1) and

phosphorus (0, 25, 50 and 75 kg ha-1) levels on green gram. The results indicated that

significantly higher total dry matter and leaf area index were realized with

application of 12.5 kg N ha-1 and 25 kg P ha-1 over the control.

A field experiment was conducted by Srinivas and Mohammad (2002) during

kharif season of the year 1999 on sandy loam soil at the Student's Farm, College of

Agriculture, Rajendranagar (A.P) to find out the response of phosphorus levels on

greengram. They found that application of 25 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased

plant height, branches plant-1 and leaves plant-1 over control.

Mishra (2003) conducted an experiment on cowpea during summer season of

the year 2003 at Agriculture Research Farm, Lakhoti (UP) and reported that

application of 20 kg N ha-1 increased the nodules plant-1, root length and dry weight

of root.

An investigation was carried out on effect of sources and levels of

phosphorus on greengram during kharif seasons of the year 1995 and 1996 at Central

Agricultural University, Imphal (Assam). The results revealed that plant height,

number of branches plant-1 and dry matter production were recorded maximum with

60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control (Luikham et al., 2005).

Yadav and Malik (2005) conducted an experiment on cowpea during kharif

season of the year 1999 at Hisar (Haryana). They reported that application of 20 kg N

ha-1 in the form of Urea at the time of sowing produced the tallest plants.

8
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

A field experiment on cowpea was conducted by Singh et al. (2007) at

Faizabad during kharif season of 2003-04. They observed that an application of 30 kg

nitrogen ha-1 recorded significantly higher plant height, number of nodules plant-1 and

dry weight of nodules plant-1 over control.

Sasode (2008) conducted a field experiment during kharif seasons of the year

1998 and 1999 at Research Farm of College of Agriculture, Gwalior (U.P) on

greengram and found that application of 37.5 N: 90 P2O5 :5.0 Zn kg ha-1 increased

plant height, number of branches plant-1 and dry matter production.

A field experiment was conducted by Choudhary et al. (2011) during kharif

season of the year 2009 at Agronomy farm, College of Agriculture, Jobner

(Rajasthan) to study the effect of organic sources and chemical fertilizers on kharif

greengram (RMG 268). The results revealed that an application of 0.7 t

vermicompost + 50% RDF ha-1 (10:20 kg NP ha-1) produced significantly higher dry

matter accumulation and number of branches plant-1.

Ahlawat et al. (2012) conducted an experiment in kharif season of the year

2004 and 2005 at Hisar (Haryana) and reported that 20 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (RDF)

significantly increased leaf area, number of branches plant-1 and dry matter

accumulation by greengram (Cv. Asha).

Application of 100 RDF (20:40 hg NP ha-1) to summer greengram on heavy

textured soil of Practical Crop Production Farm of Navsari Agricultural University,

Navsari (Gujarat) recorded significantly higher plant height, dry matter

accumulation, number of branches plant-1 and nodules plant-1 and nodule weight

plant-1 as compared to lower levels of RDF (Jat et al., 2012).

9
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

A field experiment was conducted by Mir et al. (2013) at Allahabad

Agricultural Institute- Deemed University, Allahabad (U.P) for two consecutive

years (2004and 2005) with blackgram to study the effect of levels of phosphorus on

growth, yield and nutrient content of blackgram. They reported that an application of

60 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave significantly higher plant height and number of leaves plant-1

over control.

Parvez et al. (2013) conducted a field experiment during October to January

of the year 2011 to find out the effect of different levels of phosphorus

(0, 20, 40, 60 kg P2O5 ha-1) on yield of mungbean at Mymensingh, Bangladesh.

They concluded that application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 recorded significantly higher

plant height and number of branches plant-1 over control.

Tomar et al. (2013) conducted field experiment during summer seasons of

the year 2007 and 2008 to find out the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on black

gram at Baraut (UP). They recorded significantly higher plant height, number of

branches plant -1, number of leaves plant-1 and dry matter under an application of

20 kg N ha-1 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

Manoj et al. (2014) conducted field experiment during summer season of the

year 2011 to evaluate the effect of irrigation and nitrogen applications on growth,

yield and quality of green gram (Vigna radiata L.). They found that application of

20 kg N ha-1 as basal and 20 kg N ha-1 as split + one irrigation at flower initiation

gave maximum number of plant m-2, plant height, number of branches plant-1 and

number of trifoliate leaves plant-1 over control.

An experiment was conducted by Medhi et al. (2014) during summer season

of the year 2011 to find out the effect of phosphorus on yield of green gram at
10
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Kalyani (WB). The results revealed that an application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave

significantly higher plant height and number of branches plant-1 over rest of the levels

of phosphorus.

Murade et al. (2014) conducted an experiment during kharif season of the

year 2011-12 to study the effect of spacing and fertilizer levels on growth and yield

of urdbean at Akola (Maharashtra). They observed that an application of 30:60 kg NP

ha-1 gave significantly higher plant height, number of branches plant-1 and total dry

matter plant-1 over control.

An experiment was conducted during kharif season of the year 2013 at

Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University (U.P), to evaluate the

growth, yield and nutrient content of mungbean in response to INM in Eastern Uttar

Pradesh. The results revealed that significant improvement in LAI, number of

trifoliate, SPAD value of green leaf chlorophyll and dry matter accumulation of

mungbean were recorded due to application of 75% RDF + 2.5 t ha-1 vermicompost

(VC) + Rhizobium (Rh)+ phosphorus solublizing bacteria (PSB), followed by 100%

RDF + 2.5 t ha-1 VC and 100% RDF + Rh + PSB (Dhakal et al., 2015).

A field experiment was conducted by Saini et al. (2015) during summer

season of the year 2013 at Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat), to find out the effect of

integrated nitrogen management on growth, yield and quality of greengram [Vigna

radiata (L) Wilczek] in north Gujarat. They observed that integrated application of

recommended dose of nitrogen (20 kg N ha-1) through organic and inorganic sources

of nitrogen like, 25% RDN from FYM +75% RDN from urea significantly enhanced

plant growth and growth attributes like, plant height, dry matter accumulation and

number of branches plant-1 over rest of the treatment.


11
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

The foregoing review on the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth of

greengram clearly indicated that application of nitrogen (20-30 kg ha-1) and

phosphorus (40-60 kg ha-1) significantly increased the plant height, number of

branches plant-1, dry matter production, number of root nodule plant-1 and number of

leaf plant-1 over control.

2.1.2 Effect on yield and yield attributes

From the result of field experiment, Subramanian et al. (1978) reported that

Cajanus cajan, Cv. Co-2 out yielded with an application of 12.5 kg N and 25 kg

P2O5 ha-1 as compared to no chemical fertilizer.

Patel et al. (1984) reported that application of 30 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 ha-1

produced significantly higher seed and stalk yields of arhar crop over 20 kg N + 40

kg P2O5 and 10 kg N + 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 at Navsari (Gujarat) during kharif season of

the year 1980.

A field experiment was conducted by Pal and Jana (1991) during summer

seasons of the year 1982 and 1984 at Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya,

Mohanpur (West Bengal). They found that significant increase in number of pods

plant-1, stover yield and test weight up to 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 whereas, number of seeds

pod-1 and seed yield of greengram were significantly increased up to 30 kg P2O5 ha-1

on clay loam soil.

Sarkar and Banik (1991) conducted an experiment during summer season of the

year 1991 at Experimental Farm, Calcutta University, Baruipur (West Bengal). The results

revealed that increasing levels of P 2 O 5 from 0 to 60 kg P 2 O 5 ha-1 brought successive

increase in seed and stover yield, pods plant-1, pod length, number of seeds pod-1 and test

weight of greengram.
12
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Rajkhowa et al. (1992) conducted an experiment during summer seasons of

the year 1989 and 1990 at Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat (Assam) to assess

the effect of sources and levels of phosphorus on summer greengram. They observed

that seed yield, pods plant-1 and 1000 seed weight were increased significantly upto

20 kg P2O5 ha-1.

Ardeshna et al. (1993) conducted a field experiment during kharif season of

the year 1990 at Junagadh (Gujarat) to study the response of nitrogen and phosphorus

on growth and yield of green gram. The results indicated that significantly higher

pods plant-1, seeds pod-1, test weight and seed yield were obtained at 30 kg N ha-1

along with 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over remaining treatments.

An experiment was conducted by Chovatia et al. (1993) during summer

season of the year 1989 at Navsari to ascertain the effect of phosphorus on summer

greengram. The yield attributes viz., number of pods plant-1, pod length, test weight,

seed and stover yields were significantly higher with 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 as compared to

0 and 20 kg P2O5 ha-1.

A field experiment was carried out on sandy loam soil at Dholi (Bihar)

during summer 1991 on greengram and blackgram. The different treatments were

seed inoculated and not inoculated by rhizobium associated with the treatments of 20

kg N ha-1, 20 kg N ha-1 + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 and 20 kg N ha-1+ 40 kg P2O5 ha-1+40 kg

K2O ha-1. Inoculation increased seed yield and N and P uptake. The maximum

number of pods plant-1, pod length, test weight, seed and stover yields were

obtained under the treatment 20 kg N ha-1 + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 + 40 kg K2O ha-1

(Singh et al., 1993).

13
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Chittarpur et al. (1994) conducted an experiment on clay loam soil during

kharif season of the year 1991 at Dharwad (Karnataka) on pigeonpea Cv. DT-7. The

results revealed that application of 50 kg ha-1 each of N and P2O5 gave maximum

number of pods plant-1, seed weight plant-1, test weight, seed and stalk yield as

compared to rest of the treatments.

Patel and Patel (1994) tried a field experiment at Navsari (Gujarat) during

summer seasons of the year 1990 and 1991. They concluded that the basal

application of 20 kg N ha-1+ 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 to greengram gave the highest seed yield

and found statistically equal to foliar spray of urea @ 1.5 %+ diammonium

phosphate @ 0.5 % twice at 30 and 40 days after sowing. Foliar applications of urea

and diammonium phosphate also increased the number of pods plant-1, seeds pod-1

and length of pod and ultimately, resulted in higher seed yield than the control.

Patil and Jadhav (1994) found out the response of phosphorus and Rhizobium

on greengram at Raigarh (Maharashtra) during summer seasons of the year 1986 and

1987. They concluded that application of 50 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased the

seed yield over 0 and 25 kg P2O5 ha-1 on medium black soils.

Bhalu et al. (1995) conducted an experiment during kharif season of the year

1990 at Junagadh (Gujarat) to study the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on yield of

blackgram. They observed significantly higher stover yield and seed yield at

30 kg N ha-1 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 along with Rhizobium inoculation over the

remaining treatments.

A field experiment was conducted by Saxena et al. (1996) during kharif

seasons of the year 1988 and 1989 at Kanpur (U.P) to study the effect of phosphorous

14
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

and potassium on greengram. They observed that Phosphorous @ 60 kg ha-1 and

20 kg K ha-1 gave higher seed yield.

An experiment was conducted by Sharma and Singh (1997) during summer

seasons of the year 1989 and 1990 at Instructional Farm of university, Faizabad (U.P)

to find out the response of greengram to phosphorus levels. They found that seed and

stover yields were significantly enhanced due to application of phosphorus @ 50 kg

P2O5 ha-1.

An experiment was conducted at Lakhoti (UP) during summer seasons of the

year 1992 and 1993 by Mishra and Baboo (1999) to study the effect of nitrogen on

cowpea. They reported that application of 20 kg nitrogen ha-1 significantly improved

the seed yield of cowpea over control.

An experiment was conducted during summer seasons of the year 1994 and

1995 on greengram to study the effect of phosphorous levels (0, 20 and 40 kg P2O5

ha-1). The results revealed that an application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 was significantly

superior to 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 and control in respect of seed yield (Soni and Gupta,

1999).

Ram and Dixit (2000) carried out an experiment on silt loam soil to study the

response of summer greengram to phosphorus during summer season of 1987. They

observed that application of phosphorus @ 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased

seed yield as compared to control.

Singha and Sharma (2001) carried out an experiment during summer season

of the year 2001 at Regional Agricultural Research Station, Diphu (Assam). The soil

was sandy clay loam with pH 6.1. They observed that application of 45 kg P 2O5 ha-1

significantly increased seed and stover yields of blackgram.


15
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

An experiment was carried out during summer season of the year 1999 and

2000 on sandy loam soil of Hisar (Haryana) by Rajendrakumar et al. (2002). The

treatments comprised two genotypes (MH-85-111 and T-44) of mung bean and four

levels of nitrogen (0, 10, 20 and 30 kg ha-1) as main plot treatment and four levels of

phosphorus (0, 20, 40 and 60 kg ha-1) as sub plot treatments in split plot design with

three replications. The interaction between N and P was found significant in pooled

analysis with all the levels of nitrogen; the seed yield was significantly increased up

to 40 kg P2O5 in response to their lower dose.

A field experiment was carried out by Rudreshappa and Halikatti (2002)

during rabi season of the year 1995-96 at University of Agricultural Sciences,

Dharwad (Karnataka) to study the response of nitrogen (0, 12.5 and 25 kg ha-1) and

phosphorus (0, 25, 50 and 75 kg ha-1) levels on green gram. The results indicated that

significantly higher number of pods plant-1, number of seeds pods-1, test weight, grain

yield and haulm yield were realized with application of 12.5 kg N ha-1 and 25 kg

P2O5 ha-1 over control.

Yakadri et al. (2002) conducted a field experiment on greengram at

Hyderabad during kharif season of the year 1999. They reported that application of

20 kg nitrogen ha-1 significantly increased leaf area ratio, number of pods plant-1 and

seed yield.

A field experiment was carried out by Patel and Thakur (2003) during kharif

seasons of the year 1997 to 1998. They observed significant increase in yield

attributes of greengram viz., length of pods, number of pods plant-1 and 100 seed

weight due to application of phosphorus @ 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

16
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

An experiment was conducted by Patel et al. (2003) during kharif seasons of

the year 2000 to 2002 at Main Pulses Research Station, Gujarat Agricultural

University, Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat). The scientists reported that application of 25

kg N ha-1 gave significantly higher seed and stover yields of cowpea being at par with

20 kg N ha-1.

Malik et al. (2003) conducted an experiment during the year 2001 at

Agronomic Research Area, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (Pakistan) to

determine the effect of different levels of nitrogen (0, 25 and 50 kg ha-1) and

phosphorus (0, 50, 75 and 100 kg ha-1) on yield and quality of mungbean. The results

revealed that fertilizer combination of 25-75 kg NP ha-1 gave significantly higher

seed yield, test weight, number of seeds pod-1 and number of pod plant-1 over control.

Singh et al. (2003) carried out an experiment during kharif seasons of the

year 1999 and 2000 on sandy loam soil having pH 8.3 to find out the effect of

phosphorus levels on greengram at Raja Balwant Singh College, Bichpuri, Agra

(U.P). The levels of phosphorus showed significant increase in seed yield over

control. The seed yield was increased by 12.5, 52.3 and 51.2 %, respectively with 30,

60 and 90 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

An experiment was conducted by Shivakumar and Sidramappa (2004) at

Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi. They observed that application of

30 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 resulted in to significantly higher seed yield of greengram

compared to no phosphorus application. The combination of broad bed and furrows

with phosphorus fertilization was found to be ideal for achieving higher productivity.

Luikham et al. (2005) investigated the effect of sources and levels of

phosphorus on greengram during kharif seasons of the year 1995 and 1996 at Central
17
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Agricultural University, Imphal (Assam). The results revealed that pods plant-1, pod

length, seeds pod-1 and seed yield were recorded maximum with 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over

control.

An experiment was carried out by Anjum et al. (2006) during spring season

of the year 2004 at Department of Agronomy, University of Arid Agriculture,

Rawalpindi (Pakistan) to study the effect of Rhizobium inoculation and nitrogen

fertilizer (15, 30, 45 kg N ha-1) on yield of mungbean. The researchers concluded

that the seed inoculation + 15 kg N ha-1 recorded significantly higher number of pods

plant-1, number of seeds pod-1, test weight and seed yield plant-1 over control.

A field experiment on cowpea was conducted by Singh et al. (2007) at

Faizabad (U.P) during kharif season of the year 2003-04. They reported that

application of 30 kg nitrogen ha-1 recorded significantly higher number of pods

plant-1, pod weight, pod length and seed index over control.

Sasode (2008) conducted a field experiment during kharif seasons of the year

1998 and 1999 at Research Farm of the College of Agriculture, Gwalior (U.P). They

found that application of 37.5N: 90 P2O5 : 5.0 Zn kg ha-1 increased number of pods

plant-1, pod length, number of seeds pod-1, seed and stover yield (kg ha-1) of

greengram.

Singh et al. (2011) conducted five multi-location experiments in Punjab

during summer season of the year 2007 on loamy sand soil and reported that

application of 12.5 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 produced higher number of pods plant-1,

seeds pod-1, 100-seed weight and seed yield of summer greengram var. (SML 668).

Kumar et al. (2012) conducted field experiment during kharif seasons of the

year 2009 and 2010 at Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University,
18
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Varanasi (U.P) to investigate the effect of phosphorus on yield attributes and yield of

mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek). They observed that 45 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave

significantly higher number of nodules plant-1, number of pods plant-1, 1000-grain

weight, seed yield and stover yield over control.

A field experiment was conducted by Mir et al. (2013) at Allahabad

Agricultural Institute- Deemed University, Allahabad (U.P) to study the effect of

levels of phosphorus on growth, yield and nutrient content of blackgram for two

consecutive years (2004 and 2005). They found maximum number of nodules plant-1,

seed yield and haulm yield under an application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

Parvez et al. (2013) conducted field experiment at Bangladesh Agricultural

University, Mymensingh during October to January, 2011 to find out the effect of

different levels of phosphorus (0, 20, 40, 60 kg P2O5 ha-1) on yield of mungbean.

They concluded that application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 recorded significantly higher

number of total pods plant-1, length of pod, number of seeds pod-1, seed weight

plant-1, 1000 seed weight, seed yield, stover yield and harvest Index (%) over

control.

A field experiment was conducted by Tomar et al. (2013) during summer

seasons of the year 2007 and 2008 to find out the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus

on black gram at Baraut (UP). They recorded significantly higher number of pods

plant-1, pod length, seed pod-1, 1000-seed weight, seed yield and stover yield under an

application of 20 kg N ha-1 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

A field experiment was carried out during summer season of the year 2011 to

evaluate the effect of irrigation and nitrogen applications on growth, yield and quality

of green gram (Vigna radiata L.). The results showed that 30 kg N ha-1 as basal + one
19
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

irrigation at flower initiation stage gave significantly higher number of pods plant-1,

number of seeds pod-1, yield plant-1 and seed yield over control (Manoj et al., 2014).

An experiment was conducted by Medhi et al. (2014) during summer the

year 2011 to find out the effect of phosphorus on yield of green gram at Kalyani

(WB). The results revealed that an application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave significantly

higher number of pods plant-1, 1,000 Seed weight, harvest index and yield over rest

of the levels of phosphorus.

Murade et al. (2014) conducted an experiment during kharif season of the

year 2011-12 to study the effect of spacing and fertilizer levels on growth and yield

of urdbean at Akola (Maharashtra). They observed that an application of 30:60 kg NP

ha-1 gave significantly higher seed yield and biological yield over control.

An experiment was conducted during kharif season of the year 2013 at

Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (U.P) to

evaluate the growth, yield and nutrient content of mungbean in response to INM in

Eastern Uttar Pradesh. The results revealed that the highest seed yield of mungbean

was obtained with an application of 75% RDF + 2.5 t ha-1 VC + Rh + PSB followed

by 100% RDF + 2.5 t ha-1 VC and 100% RDF + Rh+ PSB (Dhakal et al., 2015).

A field experiment was conducted by Saini et al. (2015) during summer

season of the year 2013 at Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat), to find out the effect of

integrated nitrogen management on growth, yield and quality of greengram [Vigna

radiata (L) Wilczek] in north Gujarat. They recorded significantly higher number of

pods plant-1, number of seeds pod-1, 1000-seeds weight, seed and stover yields over

other combinations and sole application of organic and inorganic sources of nitrogen.

20
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Based on the above literature on the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on

yield attributes of greengram it clearly shows that application of nitrogen

(20-30 kg ha-1) and phosphorus (40-60 kg P2O5 ha-1) significantly increased the

yield and yield attributing characters like, pods plant-1, seeds pod-1, test weight, pod

length, seed yield and stover yield over control.

2.1.3 Effect on quality

Bhalu et al. (1995) conducted an experiment during kharif season of the year

1990 at Junagadh (Gujarat) to study the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on yield

and quality, N and P uptake and economics of blackgram. They observed

significantly higher protein content at 30 kg N ha-1 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 along with

Rhizobium inoculation over the remaining treatments.

Singh et al. (1998) conducted a field trial at Lakhoti (U.P.) during the kharif

seasons of the year 1992 and 1993 on pigeon pea and reported that application of 30

kg N ha-1 and 80 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased the protein content of pigeon

pea as compared to control.

An experiment was conducted during summer seasons of the year 1994 and

1995 on greengram to study the effect of phosphorous levels (0, 20 and 40 kg P2O5

ha-1). Application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 was significantly superior to 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 and

control in respect of protein yield (Soni and Gupta, 1999).

Ram and Dixit (2000) carried out an experiment at Faizabad (U.P.) on silt

loam soil having pH 8.2 to evaluate the response of summer greengram to

phosphorus during summer season of the year 1987. They found that application of

phosphorus @ 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased protein content of summer

greengram.
21
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

A study was conducted at Faisalabad (Pakistan) to determine the effect of

varying levels of nitrogen (0, 25 and 50 kg ha-1) and phosphorus

(0, 50, 75 and 100 kg ha-1) on yield and quality of summer mungbean cv. NM-98 in

2001. A fertilizer combination of 25 kg N + 75 kg P2O5 ha-1 resulted in to the

maximum protein content (25.6 %) (Malik et al., 2003).

Sasode (2008) conducted a field experiment during kharif seasons of the year

1998 and 1999 at Research Farm of the College of Agriculture, Gwalior (U.P). They

found that application of 37.5N: 90 P2O5 : 5.0 Zn kg ha-1 increased protein content of

green gram.

Choudhary et al. (2011) conducted an experiment during kharif the year

2009 on loamy sand soil of Jobner (Rajasthan) and reported that protein content of

seed and protein yield of greengram (Cv. RMG 268) were increased significantly

with application of 0.7 t vermicompost along with 10:20 kg NP ha-1 (50% RDF).

A field experiment was conducted at five multi-locations in Punjab during

summer season of the year 2007 on loamy sand soil to study the effect of nitrogen

and phosphorus application on productivity of summer greengram (cv. SML 668).

The results revealed that significantly higher protein content was produced with

application of 12.5 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (Singh et al., 2011).

Bairwa et al. (2012) conducted an experiment during summer seasons of the

year 2010 and 2011 on sandy clay loam soil of Durgapur (Rajasthan) and reported

that fertilizer combination of 20 kg N + 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 recorded significantly higher

protein content in greengram seed (cv. SML 668).

A field experiment was conducted by Mir et al. (2013) at Allahabad

Agricultural Institute- Deemed University, Allahabad (U.P) to study the effect of


22
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

levels of phosphorus on growth, yield and nutrient content of blackgram for two

consecutive years (2004 and 2005). They found the highest protein content (22.64%)

under an application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

An experiment was conducted by Medhi et al. (2014) during summer season

of the year 2011 to find out the effect of phosphorus on yield of green gram at

Kalyani (WB). The results revealed that an application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave

significantly the highest protein content over rest of the other levels of phosphorus.

A field experiment was conducted by Saini et al. (2015) during summer

season of the year 2013 at Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat) to find out effect of integrated

nitrogen management on growth, yield and quality of greengram [Vigna radiata (L)

Wilczek] in north Gujarat. They observd that significantly higher seed protein

content over other combinations and sole application of organic and inorganic

sources of nitrogen.

The foregoing review on the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on quality

parameter of greengram clearly shows that application of nitrogen (20-40 kg N ha-1)

and phosphorus (40-75 kg P2O5 ha-1) significantly increased protein percentage and

protein yield ha-1 over control.

2.1.4 Effect on content and uptake of nutrients

Bhalu et al. (1995) conducted an experiment during kharif season of the year

1990 at Junagadh (Gujarat) to study the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on N and P

uptake and economics of blackgram. They observed significantly higher N and P

uptake by seed and stover at 30 kg N ha-1 and 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 along with Rhizobium

inoculation over the remaining treatments.

23
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

An experiment was carried out during rainy seasons of the year 1992 and

1993 at Lakhoti (U.P.) to study the response of pigeon pea to fertilizers. Rana et al.

(1998) reported that N and P content in seed and stover as well as their uptake were

significantly increased with an application of N (0-30 kg ha-1) and P2O5 (0-80 kg ha-1)

over control.

Ram and Dixit (2000) carried out an experiment at Faizabad (U.P.) on silt

loam soil having pH 8.2 to evaluate the response of summer greengram to

phosphorus during the year 1987. The results revealed that an application of 50 kg

P2O5 ha-1 significantly increased P uptake as compared to control.

A field experiment on pigeonpea was conducted by Shivran and Ahlawat

(2000) at Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi during the year 1997-98

and 1998-99. They reported that application of 100 % and 75 % of recommended

dose of fertilizer significantly increased the uptake of N, P, and K by pigeonpea crop.

Singha and Sharma (2001) concluded that all the levels of phosphorus (25,

35 and 45 kg) significantly increased N, P and K uptake by blackgram over control at

Assam.

A field experiment was carried out by Rudreshappa and Halikatti (2002)

during rabi season of the year 1995-96 at University of Agricultural Sciences,

Dharwad (Karnataka) to study the response of nitrogen (0, 12.5 and 25 kg ha-1) and

phosphorus (0, 25, 50 and 75 kg ha-1) levels on green gram. The results indicated that

nitrogen and phosphorus uptake was significantly higher with application of 12.5 kg

N ha-1 and 25 kg P2O5 ha-1 over control.

Singh et al. (2003) carried out an experiment during kharif seasons the year

1999 and 2000 on sandy loam soil at R. B. S. College Research Farm, Bichpuri, Agra
24
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

(U.P) on summer greengram with four levels of phosphorus (0, 30, 60 and 90 P2O5

ha-1). The results inferred that application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 increased N, P and K

uptake over 0, 30 and 90 kg P2O5 ha-1 in greengram crop.

A field experiment was conducted by Mandal et al. (2005) during summer

season of the year 2000 at West Bengal to evaluate the response of phosphorus to

greengram on clay loam soil. The results revealed that application of phosphorus @

60 kg P2O5 ha-1 recorded the highest N, P and K available in soil and uptake by

greengram.

Sasode (2008) conducted a field experiment during kharif seasons of the year

1998 and 1999 at Research Farm of College of Agriculture, Gwalior (U.P). They

found that application of 37.5 N: 90 P2O5: 5.0 Zn kg ha-1 increased N, P and K

content in soil and uptake by greengram.

Jat et al. (2012) conducted an experiment on heavy textured soil of Navsari

(Gujarat) during kharif seasons of the year 2008-09 and 2009-10 and reported that

application of 100% RDF (20:40 kg NP ha-1) significantly improved uptake of N and

P by greengram (Cv. CO 4) as compared to application of 75% RDF.

An experiment was conducted by Medhi et al. (2014) during summer season

of the year 2011 to find out the effect of phosphorus on yield of green gram at

Kalyani (WB). The results revealed that an application of 60 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave

significantly higher phosphorus uptake by green gram over rest of the other level of

phosphorus.

An experiment was conducted during kharif season of the year 2013 at

Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (U.P) to

evaluate the growth, yield and nutrient content of mungbean in response to INM in
25
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Eastern Uttar Pradesh. The results revealed that significant improvement in nutrient

content of mungbean was recorded due to application of 75% RDF + 2.5 t ha-1

vermicompost (VC) + Rhizobium (Rh)+ phosphorus solublizing bacteria (PSB) over

rest of the treatments (Dhakal et al., 2015).

Based on the above literature on the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on

nutrient uptake of greengram, it clearly indicates that application of nitrogen

(20-40 kg N ha-1) and phosphorus (40-60 kg P2O5 ha-1) significantly increased

nutrient content and nutrient uptake by seed and plant over control.

2.1.5 Economics

A field experiment was carried out during summer season of 1988 on

greengram on medium black clay soil of Junagadh using three levels of nitrogen

(0, 20 and 40 kg ha-1) and phosphorus (0, 40 and 80 kg ha-1). Experimental results

indicated that the applications of 20 kg N ha-1 and 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 was significantly

found the best for securing the highest net return (Tank, 1988).

A study was conducted at Faisalabad (Pakistan) to determine the effect of

varying levels of nitrogen (0, 25 and 50 kg ha-1) and phosphorus (0, 50, 75 and 100

kg ha-1) on yield and quality of summer mung bean, Cv. NM-98 in 2001. A fertilizer

combination of 25 kg N + 75 kg P2O5 ha-1 resulted in the highest net income of

Rs.21374.90. (Malik et al., 2004).

A field experiment was conducted at Model Farm, Gujarat Agricultural

University, Vadodara (Gujarat) on sandy loam soil during the summer seasons of

1995 to 1998 to specify the response of mung bean to date of sowing and levels of

fertilizers. Among the different treatment combinations, the highest net return

26
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

(Rs.18240 ha-1) was recorded when the crop was sown on 1st March and fertilized

with 20 kg N ha-1 and 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (Patel et al., 2004).

Response of greengram (Cv. K 851) to fertility levels was studied at Vidisha

(M.P.) by Sasode (2008). He reported that application of higher level of fertility

(37.5 kg N + 90 kg P2O5 ha-1) recorded higher net return and BCR over 25 kg N + 60

kg P2O5 ha-1).

Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus application on productivity of summer

mung bean (Cv. SML 668) was studied at five location of Punjab having loamy sand

soil during summer 2007. Singh et al., (2011) reported higher economic return with

application of 12.5 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1.

Jat et al., (2012) conducted an experiment at Navsari on heavy textured soil

during kharif 2008-09 and 2009-10 and reported that higher net return and BCR of

greengram (Cv. CO 4) was realized with application of 20 kg N + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1.

2.2 EFFECT OF PANCHAGAVYA

Presence of naturally occurring, beneficial, effective micro organisms

(EMO’s) in panchagavya predominantly, lactic acid bacteria, yeast, actinomycetes,

photosynthetic bacteria and certain fungi besides beneficial and proven fertilizers

such as Azotobacter, Azospirillum and Phosphobacterium were detected which have

the beneficial effect especially in improving soil quality, growth and yield of crops

(Xu and Xu, 2000). Balasubramanian et al. (2001) reported that dipping of rice

seedlings in panchagavya before transplanting enhanced the growth and yield.

2.2.1 Effect on growth attributes

Somasundaram et al. (2003) conducted a field experiment during kharif

season of the year 2002 at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore (T.N) to
27
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

study the response of greengram to varied concentrations of panchagavya through

foliar application. Among the treatments, spray of panchagavya @ 3% produced the

highest plant height and LAI at flowering.

A filed experiment was conducted by Britto and Girija (2006) during the year

2002-03 to investigate the effect of organic and inorganic farming method of black

gram and green gram at Palayamkottai (TN). They concluded that organic farming

(Panchagavya 3%) gave significantly higher plant height, number of leaves plant-1,

length of leaves, breadth of length, area of leaves and number of branches plant-1

over inorganic farming.

Kumaravelu and Kadamban (2009) conducted a field experiment at

Department of Botany, Puducherry during kharif season of the year 2008 to study the

effect of panchagavya (2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 %) on growth of greengram. They concluded

that foliar application of panchagavya @ 3 and 4% gave significantly higher lateral

root, number of nodules, fresh and dry mass of the plant over control.

Sangeetha and Thevanathan (2010) studied the effect of foliar application of

seaweed based panchagavya on leaves of seedling of the pulses viz., Vigna radiata,

Vigna mungo and Arachis hypogea. An application of panchagavya @ 3 % brought

increase in the root nodule formation.

A field experiment was conducted by Ali et al. (2011) at IRDM Faculty

Center, Ramkrishna Mission Vivekananda University, Kolkata (WB) to study the

effect of panchagavya and sanjibani on the yield of greengram. They found that

application of 3% panchagavya gave significant increase in plant height and

branches plant-1 of greengram over control.

28
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

A field experiment was conducted during summer season of the year 2011 at

Agronomy Farm, Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat) to study the response of summer

greengram to different concentrations of panchagavya. Matai (2012) reported that

higher plant height, number of branches plant-1 and dry matter production of

greengram were increased with application of 4 sprays of panchagavya @ 3% at

vegetative, pre-flowering, flowering and pod setting stages.

An experiment was conducted by Yadav and Tripathi (2013) during kharif

season of the year 2011 under irrigated condition at Kanpur (U.P) to study the effect

of foliar applied panchagavya with and without mixing leaf extracts of neem and

parthenium on the growth and yield of green gram. They observed that an application

of panchagavya + NLE recorded higher plant height, root nodules plant-1, dry root

nodules wieght plant-1, dry matter accumulation and branches plant-1 over control.

An investigation was carried out by Anuja and Vijayalakshmi (2014) during

season I (Jan-April 2012) and season II (Aug-Nov 2012) at the Department of

Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University (A.P) to find out the

effect of organic nutrients in vegetable cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp.] at

Annamalainagar (AP). The results revealed that plant height was favourably

enhanced by the treatment of FYM @ 25 t ha-1 + neem cake @ 5 t ha-1 +

panchagavya 3 %, whereas, number of branches plant-1 was favourably enhanced by

the treatment FYM @ 25 t ha-1 + vermicompost @ 5 t ha-1 + panchagavya 3%.

The foregoing review on the effect of panchagavya on growth of greengram

clearly indicates that foliar spray of panchagavya 3- 4% significantly increased plant

growth parameters like, plant height, number of branches plant-1, dry matter

accumulation and number of root nodule plant-1 over control.


29
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

2.2.2 Effect on yield and yield attributes

Somasundaram et al. (2003) conducted a field experiment during kharif

season of the year 2002 at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore (T.N)

to study the response of greengram to varied concentrations of panchagavya.

The results of study proved that panchagavya @ 3% spray ranked at top in respect to

number of seeds pod-1, 100 seed weight and seed yield of green gram.

A filed experiment was conducted by Britto and Girija (2006) during the year

2002-03 to investigate the effect of organic and inorganic farming method of black

gram and green gram at Palayamkottai (TN). They concluded that organic farming

(Panchagavya 3%) gave significantly higher number of flowers, number of clusters

plant-1, length of cluster and weight of 100 seed over inorganic farming.

A field experiment was conducted at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University,

Coimbatore (T.N). Manimekalai et al. (2010) to evaluate the efficacy of organic

invigorated seeds on field productivity in black gram (Vigna mungo (L.)). Among the

treatments, 4% foliar spray of panchagavya recorded higher seed yield than control.

A field experiment was conducted by Ali et al. (2011) at IRDM Faculty

Center, Ramkrishna Mission Vivekananda University, Kolkata (WB) to study the

effect of panchagavya and sanjibani on the yield of green gram. They found that

application of 3% panchagavya and 10% sanjibani gave significant increase in

number of pods plant-1, pod length, number of seeds plant-1 and yield plant-1 over

control.

A filed experiment was carried out during kharif season of the year 2006-07

on light textured soil of CAZRI, Jodhpur (Rajasthan) to study the effect of foliar

application of panchagavya and leaf extracts of neem, datura and tumba in 1:1 ration
30
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

on clusterbean. The results revealed that foliar application of panchagavya + neem

leaf extract at branching and flowering produced higher dry matter production, seed

and stover yields of clusterbean (Kumawat et al., 2011).

Matai (2012) conducted a field experiment at SDAU, Sardarkrushinagar

(Gujarat) during summer season of the year 2011 on loamy sand soil and reported

that four sprays of panchagavya @ 3% (vegetative, pre-flowering, flowering and pod

setting stage) recorded significantly higher pods plant-1, pod length, test weight as

well as seed and stover yield of greengram.

An experiment was conducted by Yadav and Tripathi (2013) during kharif

season of the year 2011 under irrigated condition at Kanpur (UP) to study the effect

of foliar applied panchagavya with and without mixing leaf extracts of neem and

parthenium on the growth and yield of green gram. They observed that an application

of panchagavya + NLE recorded higher number of pods plant-1, seeds pod-1, test

weight and seed yield of green gram as compare to control.

An investigation was carried out by Anuja and Vijayalakshmi (2014) during

season I (Jan-April 2012) and season II (Aug-Nov 2012) at the Department of

Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Annamalai University (A.P) to find out the

effect of organic nutrients in vegetable cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp.] at

Annamalainagar (AP). They observed that an application of FYM @ 25 t ha-1 +

vermicompost @ 5 t ha-1 + panchagavya 3 % gave significantly the highest seed

yield over control.

Desai et al. (2014) conducted a field experiment during summer season of

the year 2012 to study the effect of liquid bio-nutrients along with inorganic

fertilizers on yield, quality and uptake of nutrients by summer cowpea at


31
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat). They found that foliar spray of panchagavya @ 6% at

flowering + soil application of Jivamrut @ 500 l ha-1 at 20 DAS along with 75%

RDF gave significantly higher seed and stover yields over rest of the treatments.

Based on the above citrd review on effect of panchagavya on yield and yield

attributes of greengram clearly indicates that foliar spray of panchagavya 3-4% with

sanjibani 10% significantly increased yield attributes parameter like, number of pods

plant-1, number of seeds pod-1, pod length, plant yield, seed and stover yields over

control.

2.2.3 Effect on quality

A field experiment was conducted by Chaudhari et al. (2013) during summer

season of the year 2011 at Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat). They found that application

of RDN through vermicompost + soil application of panchagavya at 15 and 30 DAS

recorded significant improvement in protein content and protein yield of greengram.

Amareswari et al. (2014) conducted an experiment on the effect of different

organic supplements on ascorbic acid and riboflavin contents of French bean

(Phaseolus vulgaris). They observed higher ascorbic acid and riboflavin content

under an application of straw mulch, vermicompost and panchagavya together

followed by application of straw mulch, jeevamrutha and panchagavya.

Desai et al. (2014) conducted a field experiment to study the effect of liquid

bio-nutrients along with inorganic fertilizers on yield, quality and uptake of nutrients

by summer cowpea at Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat) during summer season of the year

2012. They found that foliar spray of panchagavya @ 6% at flowering + soil

application of Jivamrut @ 500 l ha-1 at 20 DAS along with 75% RDF gave

significantly higher protein content over rest of the treatment.


32
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

The foregoing review on the effect of panchagavya on quality parameter of

greengram clearly indicates that foliar spray of panchagavya 3-4% significantly

increased protein content and protein yield over control.

2.2.4 Effect on content and uptake of nutrients

A field experiment was conducted during summer season of the year 2011 at

Agronomy Farm, Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat) to study the response of summer

greengram to different concentrations of panchagavya. Matai (2012) reported that

higher N and P content in seed and stover as well as uptake of these nutrients by seed

and stover were recorded by application of four sprays of panchagavya @ 3%

(vegetative, pre-flowering, flowering and pod setting stage) to greengram.

Patel (2012) conducted an experiment at SDAU, Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat)

on loamy sand soil during summer season of the year 2011 and reported higher N and

P content and uptake of both the nutrients by cowpea (GC 5) crop with foliar spray of

panchagavya @ 3% at 20 and 40 DAS.

Chaudhari et al. (2013) conducted a field experiment during summer 2011 at

Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat) on loamy sand soil and reported that application of RDN

through vermicompost + soil application of panchagavya at 15 and 30 DAS recorded

higher total N, P and K uptake by greengram crop. It also improved the N status of

the soil after harvest of the crop.

Desai et al. (2014) conducted a field experiment during summer season of

the year 2012 to study the effect of liquid bio-nutrients along with inorganic

fertilizers on yield, quality and uptake of nutrients by summer cowpea at

Sardarkrushinagar (Gujarat). They found that foliar spray of panchagavya @ 6% at

flowering + soil application of Jivamrut @ 500 l ha-1 at 20 DAS along with 75%
33
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

RDF improved N and P content in seeds and stover and total uptake of N and P by

summer cowpea.

The foregoing review on the effect of panchagavya on nutrient upake of

greengram clearly indicates that foliar spray of panchagavya 3-4% significantly

increased nutrient content and nutrient uptake by seed and stover over control.

2.1.5 Economics

Swaminathan et al., (2007) reported that application of panchgavya at 3% as

foliar spray on 15, 25 and 40 DAS on black gram under irrigated condition recorded

the highest net return and B.C. ratio.

Field experiment was conducted during summer 2011 at Sardarkrushinagar

(Gujarat) on loamy sand soil. Chaudhari (2012) reported that application of RDN

(20:40 kg NP ha-1) through vermicompost + soil application of panchgavya at 15 and

30 DAS recorded higher net realization and BCR of greengram (Cv. GM 4).

Matai (2012), from an experiment conducted on greengram with varied

concentrations of panchgavya reported higher net realization and CBR by application

of four foliar spray of panchgavya @ 3% at 15, 25, 40 and 50 DAS.

2.3 INTERACTION EFFECT OF FERTILIZER AND PANCHAGAVYA

Chandrakala (2008) conducted a field experiment during kharif season of the

year to study the effect of FYM and fermented liquid manures on yield and quality of

chilli (Capsicum annuum L.). The results revealed that interaction effect of manures

and liquid manures did not show significant at all the stages of crop growth and all

yield attributes.

34
……………………………………………………………….…………Review of literature

A field experiment was conducted by Patil et al. (2012) to study the effect of

organics on growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in vertisols. They

found that interaction effects of organic manures and liquid organic manures

compared with control treatments had shown significant influence of growth

parameters on chickpea. The combined soil application of 100 per cent RDN with EC

1/3 + VC 1/3 + GLM 1/3 and foliar spray of panchagavya @ 3% at flower initiation

and 15 days after flowering (OM2LM1) recorded significantly higher plant height,

number of branches, LAI, TDM production, number of root nodules at 40 and 60

DAS, dry weight of root nodule, higher seed and haulm yield, number of pods plant-1

and 100-seed weight as compared to RDF, water spray and other treatment.

35
Materials
and
Methods
III. MATERIALS AND METHODS

The field experiment entitled “Effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on

yield and quality of summer greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under middle

Gujarat conditions” was carried out during summer season of the year 2015. The

description of materials used and methodology adopted during the course of the

present investigation are presented in this chapter.

3.1 EXPERIMENTAL SITE

In order to achieve the pre set objectives of the present investigation, a field

experiment was conducted in plot No. 7 A at Bidi Tobacco Research Station, Anand

Agricultural University, Anand (Gujarat) during summer season of the year 2015.

3.2 CLIMATE AND WEATHER

Geographically, Anand is situated at 220 – 35‟ N latitude, 720 – 55‟ E

longitude at an elevation of about 45.1 metres above the mean sea level. Anand is

about 70 km away from the Arabian Sea Coast and hence this region enjoys a

typical sub-tropical climate with dry and hot summer, fairly cold and dry winter and

moderately humid monsoon. Generally, monsoon commences by the middle of June

and retreats by the middle of September with an average annual rainfall of 864.5

mm which is realized entirely from the South-West monsoon currents. The July and

August are the months of heavy rainfall. Winter is fairly cold and continues till the

middle of February. There is particularly no rainfall during the winter season

except, occasional sporadic light showers. December and January are the coldest

months, while April and May are the hottest months of the year. The temperature

starts decline in beginning of November.

36
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

The observations recorded for meteorological parameters during the

experimental period at meteorological observatory of the Anand Agricultural

University, Anand (Gujarat) are presented in Table 3.1 and graphically depicted in

Fig. 3.1. The data showed that the maximum temperature ranged from 32.2 0C to

42.5 0C and minimum temperature ranged between 16.0 0C and 28.0 0C during the

crop season of the year 2015. There was unseasonal rainfall received during the

crop season. Due to the normal season, no attack of any disease and pest was

observed on the crop. The other weather parameters were normal during the year of

experimentation.

3.3 SOIL CHARACTERISTICS

The experimental fields were having gentle slope and good drainage. The soil was

representative of the soils of the region popularly known as “Goradu” soil. The

Goradu soil is of alluvial in origin and belongs to the Entisols. The texture of the

soil is loamy sand. The soil is very deep and fairly moisture retentive. The soil

responds well to manuring and irrigation. It is suitable to a variety of crops of

tropical and sub tropical regions. The composite soil samples were collected from

the experimental plots to a depth of 0-30 cm before sowing of the crop and they

were analyzed for determining the physical properties as well as chemical

parameters of the soil, details of which are given in Table 3.2.

3.4 CROPPING HISTORY OF THE EXPERIMENTAL SITE

The details regarding the cropping history in respect of crop grown and

fertilizer applied to the experimental plot (7- A) for preceding three years are

summarized in Table 3.3.

37
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

Table 3.1: Meteorological data recorded during crop season for the year 2015-
16 (Weekly mean)

Std. Temperature Bright Wind Mean


°C Rainfall
Months Met. Sunshine velocity Humidity
(mm)
Week Max. Min. (Hours) (Km hrs-1) (%)
March 10 32.2 16.0 9.7 0.0 3.1 57.9
2015
11 32.8 16.8 9.0 3.6 3.7 61.9

12 38.3 19.0 10.3 0.0 2.4 47.65

13 38.7 21.6 8.3 0.0 3.4 55.65

April 14 36.2 21.5 8.7 0.0 4.4 62.5


2015
15 36.0 21.8 9.2 18.8 4.1 67.5

16 40.1 23.4 10.2 0.0 3.1 48.6

17 39.4 23.1 10.7 0.0 5.0 57.15


May 18 41.1 24.9 10.4 0.0 5.0 60.3
2015
19 40.6 26.2 10.6 0.0 4.9 48.5

20 42.5 26.7 11.2 0.0 5.5 46.5

21 40.8 27.8 10.8 0.0 8.1 59.95


June 22 41.2 28.0 11.0 0.0 7.2 59.45
2015
23 40.2 26.3 8.4 0.0 5.6 55.6

38
Temperature °C (Max) Temperature °C (Min) BrightSunshine

Wind velocity (Km hrs-1) Rainfall Relative humidity


50 80

Wind velocity, Rainfall and Relative humidity


45
70
Temperature and Bright sunshine .

40
60
35

50
30

25 40

20
30

15
20
10

10
5

0 0
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Standarad Week

Fig. 3.1: Meteorological data recorded during crop season for the year 2015-16 (Weekly mean)
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

Table 3.2 Physical properties of the experimental plot


Value at soil depth
Particulars Method of analysis
(0 - 30 cm.)
1. Mechanical composition
I. Coarse sand (%) 0.85 International pipette
Method (Piper, 1966)
II. Fine sand (%) 82.18
III. Silt (%) 11.85
IV. Clay (%) 5.12
V. Textural class Loamy sand
2. Chemical parameters
I. Soil PH 7.5 Potentiometric method
(1:2.5, Soil: Water) (Jackson,1973)
II. EC (dSm-1 ) 0.12 Conductometric method
(1:2.5, Soil: Water (Jackson,1973)
at 25 °C)
III. Organic Carbon (%) 0.39 Wet oxidation method
(Walkley & Black, 1934)
IV. Available N (kg ha-1) 337 Alkaline permanganate method,
(Subbaiah & Asija,1956)
V. Available P2O5 31 Spectrophotometric method
(kg ha-1) (Olsen et al., 1954)
VI. Available K2O 328 Flame Photometry Method
(kg ha-1) (Jackson, 1973)

Table 3.3 Cropping history of the experimental site

Fertilizer (kg ha-1)


Year Season Crop
N P2O5 K2O
Summer Culcutti Tobacco (seed) 200 50 00
2013-14
Kharif Fallow -- -- --

Rabi Sorghum 80 40 00

Summer Sorghum 80 40 00
2014-15
Kharif Fallow -- -- --

Rabi Sorghum 80 40 00
2015-16 Summer Present investigation As per treatment

39
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.5 CROP CULTIVAR

The present investigation was carried out on green gram cv. “Meha”

(IPM 99-125) which was released from Indian Institute of Pulses Research (IIPR),

Kanpur (U.P) and introduced in Gujarat by Regional Research Station, Anand

Agricultural University, Anand (Gujarat). This variety is cross of plant mung-2 X

AMP 36. It is a yellow mosaic virus resistant, shiny seed luster, seeds dark in colour

and yields about 14 q ha-1. This variety having the following important characters

are given as under Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Characteristics of greengram variety Meha

Sr. No Characters Meha


1. Year of release 2009

2. Plant height (cm) 45-50 cm

3. Days to 50% flowering 45-50 days

4. Number of branches plant-1 5-6

5. Number of pods plant-1 25-30

6. Seed colour Green

7. Length of pod 6-7 cm

8. Maturity days 80-85


9. Seed yield (kg ha-1) 1300-1400 kg ha-1

10. 1000-seed weight 35-37g

11. Protein (%) 22-24

40
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.6 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

In order to study the “Effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and

quality of summer greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under middle Gujarat

conditions”, present experiment was planned with four levels of fertilizer F0

(0% RDF), F1 (50% RDF), F2 (75% RDF) and F3 (100% RDF) and four levels of

Panchagavya P0 (Water spray at flowering), P1 (Panchagavya drenching

(500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation), P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering) and P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) during summer season of the year 2015.

The experimental details are given as below.

3.7 TREATMENTS

3.7.1 Treatment details

Sixteen treatment combinations involving four levels each of fertilizer and

panchagavya were incorporated in the study. Details of the treatments with their

symbols are given as under.

A) Level of fertilizer (F) : Four levels


I. F0 : 0% RDF
II. F1 : 50% RDF
III. F2 : 75% RDF
IV. F3 : 100% RDF
B) Level of panchagavya (P) : Four levels
I. P0 : Water spray at flowering
II. P1 : Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation
III. P2 : Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering
IV. P3 : Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering
Note - RDF 20-40-00 NPK kg ha-1

41
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.7.2 TREATMENT COMBINATIONS

There were sixteen treatment combinations as shown in Table 3.5

Table 3.5 Details of treatment combinations

Treatment combinations
Sr. Symbol Fertilizer (kg ha-1)
No. Panchagavya
Nitrogen Phosphorus
1. F0 P0 00 00 Water spray at flowering
Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1)
2. F0 P1 00 00
at first irrigation
Panchagavya spray @ 3% at
3. F0 P2 00 00
flowering
Panchagavya spray @ 6% at
4. F0 P3 00 00
flowering
5. F1 P0 10 20 Water spray at flowering
Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1)
6. F1 P1 10 20
at first irrigation
Panchagavya spray @ 3% at
7. F1 P2 10 20
flowering
Panchagavya spray @ 6% at
8. F1 P3 10 20
flowering
9. F2 P0 15 30 Water spray at flowering
Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1)
10. F2 P1 15 30
at first irrigation
Panchagavya spray @ 3% at
11. F2 P2 15 30
flowering
Panchagavya spray @ 6% at
12. F2 P3 15 30
flowering
13. F3 P0 20 40 Water spray at flowering
Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1)
14. F3 P1 20 40
at first irrigation
Panchagavya spray @ 3% at
15. F3 P2 20 40
flowering
Panchagavya spray @ 6% at
16. F3 P3 20 40
flowering

42
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.7.3 Crop and variety : 1. Crop: Green gram


2. Variety: Meha

3.7.4 Experimental design : RBD (Factorial)

3.7.5 Replications : 3

3.7.6 Total number of plots : 48

3.7.7 Plot size: a. Gross plot : 3.00 m x 4.50 m

b. Net plot : 1.80 m x 3.50 m

3.7.8 Spacing : 30 cm between two rows

3.7.9 Method of sowing : Drilling

3.7.10 Seed rate : 25 kg ha-1

3.8 CULTURAL OPERATIONS

After the harvest of the previous crop, the experimental field was cultivated

with tractor-drawn cultivator in cross-wise directions. Stubbles of the previous crop

were collected and removed and the field was leveled. The sequences of operations

carried out in the field during crop season are presented in Table 3.6.

3.9 LAYOUT OF FIELD EXPERIMENT

The experiment was laid out in this investigation was Randomized Block

Design (Factorial) with three replications. The treatments were assigned at random

to each plot in each replication. The plan of layout is depicted in Fig. 3.2 and field

view of the experimental site in Plate -1.

3.10 APPLICATION OF FERTILIZERS

The greengram crop was fertilized with four levels of fertilizer applied

through Urea and Single super phosphate (SSP) in basal application and four levels

of Panchagavya in dreanching at first irrigation and foliar spray at flowering time.

The fertilizers were applied in each plot as per treatment in opened furrows as basal.

43
24 m2 N
3m
R-III
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
4.5 m

F1P1 F3P0 F2P3 F1P2 F0P0 F3P3 F0P2 F2P1


M
a
1m

Sub irrigation channel


i
40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33
n
F3P2 F0P3 F2P0 F3P1 F1P0 F0P1 F1P3 F2P2
I
r
r
Road R-I i
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 g
a
F2P0 F3P3 F1P0 F2P1 F0P2 F2P2 F3P1 F1P3 t
i
o
33 m2

Sub irrigation channel n


24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17
C
F3P0 F0P0 F3P2 F0P1 F1P1 F2P3 F0P3 F1P2 h
a
n
n
Road R-I
e
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 l

F0P3 F3P2 F1P3 F0P2 F2P1 F1P1 F2P2 F0P1

Sub irrigation channel


8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

F1P0 F2P3 F3P1 F0P0 F1P2 F3P0 F2P0 F3P3

Fig. 3.2: LAYOUT PLAN OF FIELD EXPERIMENT


Plate- 1: General view of the experimental field
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

Table 3.6: Calendar of important field operations and cultural operations


carried out during the course of investigation

Sr.
Name of operations Frequency Date
No.
1. Pre-sowing operations
a) Tractor cultivation (cross-wise) 1 06-03-2015
b) Soil sampling to the depth of 0-30 cm 1 09-03-2015
c) Field layout 1 09-03-2015
d) Preparation of beds and irrigation 1 10-03-2015
channels and opening furrows
e) Application of fertilizers in opened 1 11-03-2015
furrows
2. Sowing and post-sowing operations
a) Sowing 1 11-03-2015
b) Thinning 1 23-03-2015
c) Inter culturing (One) 1st 06-04-2015
d) Hand weeding (Two) 1st 07-04-2015
2nd 18-04-2015
e) Irrigation (Five) 1st 11-03-2015
2nd 31-03-2015
3rd 22-04-2015
4th 10-05-2015
5th 25-05-2015
3. Application of panchagavya
a) Drenching of panchgavya 1 31-03-2015
b) Spraying of panchgavya 2 28-04-2015
19-05-2015
4. Plant protection measures

a) Dimethoate 30% EC 2 25-03-2015


10-04-2015
b) Trizophos Spray 40% EC 1 14-04-2015
c) Quinalphos Spray 25% EC 1 01-05-2015
d) Pyriproxifen Spray 10% EC 1 22-05-2015
5. Harvesting 2 17-05-2016
05-06-2015
6. Threshing and winnowing - 08-06-2015

44
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.11 PREPARATION OF PANCHAGAVYA

Panchagavya is a special preparation made from five products of cow along

with certain other ingredients (as given below) incubated for specific duration in an

earthen and wide plastic container.

Ingerdients for preparation of panchagavya are,


Sr. No Materials
1) Fresh cow dung 5 kg
2) Cow urine 3 lit
3) Cow milk 2 lit
4) Cow curd 2 lit
5) Cow ghee 1 kg
6) Sugarcane juice 3 lit
7) Tender coconut water 3 lit
8) Ripped banana 12 Nos
9) Water 10 lit (Natarajan, 2008)
Sugarcane juice and coconut water were used to accelerate fermentation.

3.11.1 FLOW SHEET FOR PREPARATION OF PANCHAGAVYA

Mixed thoroughly fresh cow dung (5 kg) + cow ghee (1 kg)

Incubated for 2 days

Added cow urine (3lit) + 10 lit water

Stired properly (morning and evening, daily for 1 week)

Added sugarcane juice (3 lit)

Cow milk (2 lit)

Cow curd (2 lit)

Coconut water (3 lit)

12-Ripped banana

45
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

The ingredients were incubated for twenty five days, after that preparation

was filtered through double-layered muslin cloth and stored in transparent bottles in

a refrigerator.

3.11.2 CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF

PANCHAGAVYA

Chemical composition
Ph : 5.45
EC dSm2 : 10.22
Total N (ppm) : 229
Total P (ppm) : 209
Total K (ppm) : 232
IAA (ppm) : 8.5
GA (ppm) : 3.5
Microbial load (CFU ml-1)
Fungi : 38800 ml-1
Bacteria : 1880000 ml-1
Lactobacillus : 2260000 ml-1
Totalanaerobes : 10000 ml-1
Acidformers : 360 ml-1
Methanogen : 250 ml-1

3.12 Application of panchagavya

Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) and foliar spray of panchagavya

(3 and 6%) were given at first irrigation and at flowering stage, respectively. Water

spray also was done at flowering stage. Panchagavya solution of required

concentration was prepared using stock solution of panchagavya.

3.13 SOWING

The seeds were evenly dry sown by line sowing (drilling) in opened

furrows of 30 cm of two rows with seed rate @ 25 kg ha-1. Later, seeds were

46
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

covered with soil by the help of light wooden rake.

3.14 THINNING

After twelve days of sowing, thinning was carried out to maintain intra row

spacing and optimum plant stand in each experimental plots.

3.15 IRRIGATION

The first irrigation was given immediately after dry sowing and remaining

irrigations were given as and when required (Table 3.6).

3.16 WEEDING AND INTERCULTURING

Two hand weedings and one inter culturing were carried out in the field

with objective to keep the crop free from weed infestation during the early crop

growth stage (Table 3.6).

3.17 PLANT PROTECTION MEASURE

Dimethoate 30% EC was sprayed for control of sucking pest. While,

Trizophos 40% EC and Quinalphos 25% EC were sprayed for control of caterpillar

and pod borer. Pyriproxifen 10% EC was sprayed for control of mite. (Table 3.6)

3.18 HARVESTING AND THRESHING

After the maturity of the crop, five randomly-selected plants, previously

tagged from each net plot were first harvested for recording necessary biometric

observations and then the produce was added to the respective net plots. The border

lines were harvested first and were removed from the experimental area. Then the

net area was harvested separately. The harvested produce was weighed just before

threshing to record the biological yield. Thereafter, threshing was carried out in the

afternoon by manually. Seeds per net plot thus collected were winnowed, cleaned

and weighed and converted on hectare basis.

47
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.19 BIOMETRIC OBSERVATIONS

The biometric observations were recorded from five randomly selected and

tagged plants within each net plot. The details of various growth characters, yield

attributes and quality parameters studied during the course of investigation are

given in Table 3.7 along with the size of samples and time of recording. Details of

the techniques employed for recording observations are described below

3.20 PLANT POPULATION AND GROWTH PARAMETERS

After the establishment of the plants, five plants was selected randomly and

tagged from the net plot area of each plot for studying all the individual plant

characters in the present study. The details of the procedure followed for recording

different observations are presented in Table 3.7.

3.20.1 Plant population

Plant population was recorded per meter row length from each net plot and

counted in the initial stage and recorded separately. Final plant population per meter

row length per each net plot was also recorded before harvesting of crop.

3.20.2 Plant height

For this observation, the height of the main stem from randomly selected

and tagged five plants was measured from ground level to top of the main shoot in

centimeter. The mean plant height was calculated and recorded at 30, 45 DAS and

at harvest. The selected plants were also used for other observations.

3.20.3 Number of branches plant-1

All the effective branches from the selected five plants in each plot were

recorded at harvest and average value was worked out and recorded separately.

48
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

Table 3.7 Parameters studied during the field investigation

Sr. Characters Sample size Time of recording


No
A. Growth parameters
1. Plant population Per row meter length At 20 DAS and at
harvest
2. Plant height (cm) Five plants from net plot At 30, 45 DAS and
at harvest
3. Dry weight of root Five plants from net plot At 30 to 40 DAS
-1
nodules plant
B. Yield and yield parameters
4. Number of branches Five Selected and tagged At harvest
-1
plant plants from net plot
-1
5. Number of pods plant Five Selected and tagged At harvest
plants from net plot
-1
6. Number of seed pod Five Selected and tagged At harvest
plants from net plot
7. Pod length (cm) Five Selected and tagged At harvest
plants from net plot
-1
8. Seed yield (kg ha ) Net plot After harvest
-1
9. Stover yield (kg ha ) Net plot After harvest
10. Test weight (g) 1000 seeds of mungbean After harvest
11. Harvest index (%) ----- After harvest
C. Quality parameter
12. Protein content (%) Composite seed sample After harvest
from each net plot
D. Chemical parameters
13. N, P and K uptake by Composite seed and stover After harvest
crop(kg ha-1) sample from net plot
14. Available N, P2O5 and As per procedure After harvest
-1
K2O (kg ha ) mentioned

49
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

3.20.4 Dry weight of root nodules plant-1

From the roots of five plants uprooted, nodules were removed and dried at

room temperature for 4 days. Dry weight of root nodules was recorded in milligram

and averaged out per plant for each treatment.

3.21 YIELD AND YIELD ATTRIBUTING CHARACTERS

Five randomly tagged and selected plants from each plot were used for

recording observation of yield attributes.

3.21.1 Number of pods plant-1

The total numbers of pods picked from five tagged plants were counted and

average value per plant was worked out and recorded from each treatment.

3.21.2 Number of seed pods-1

Developed seeds from each pod were counted from five tagged plants and

then the average number of seeds per pod was worked out and recorded for each

treatment.

3.21.3 Pod length

The length of pod (cm) from five randomly selected plants from each plot

was measured from the base to tip of the pods. The mean pod length for each

treatment was worked out and recorded separately.

3.21.4 Test weight

A sample was drawn from the seed yield of each plot after winnowing and

one thousand seeds were counted by seed counter and their weight was recorded in

gram.

3.21.5 Seed yield

The produce from each net plot area was threshed separately. After

threshing and winnowing, seeds from each net plot were weighed separately and

50
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

recorded as seed yield in kg per net plot. Thereafter, the yield was converted in to

hectare basis.

3.21.6 Stover yield

Stover, a part left after removal of seeds from the harvested plants was also

weighed and recorded in kg per net plot separately for each treatment. It was

converted to stover yield per hectare.

3.21.7 Harvest index

Harvest index (%) is the ratio of economic yield to the biological yield per

plot. It was calculated by using following formula (Donald and Hamblin, 1976).

Economic yield (kg ha-1)


Harvest index (%) = x 100
-1
Biological yield (kg ha )

3.22 PLANT ANALYSIS

3.22.1 Determination of nutrients in plant samples

Methods are used for chemical analysis of plant samples for total nitrogen,

phosphorus and potash are presented in Table 3.8.

Table 3.8 Plant chemical analysis

Sr. Estimation of constituent Method followed


No
1. Nitrogen content in seeds and stalks Micro Kjeldahls method
(Jackson, 1973)
2. Phosphorus content in seeds and stalks Vandomolybdo phosphoric
yellow colour method
(Jackson, 1973)
3. Potash content in seeds and stalks Flame Photometry Method
(Jackson, 1973)

3.22.2 Content and uptake of nutrient

Representative samples of seed and stover were drawn from each net plot

for chemical studies. They were oven dried at 70 oC for 24 hour and were powdered

51
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

in a willey. Samples prepared were analyzed for nitrogen, phosphorus and potash

content. Seed and stover samples were digested by Micro Kjeldahls method and

nitrogen was estimated by the method of Jackson (1973). For estimation of

phosphorus and potash, the digestion of plant samples was done and phosphorus

was determined by Vandomolybdo phosphoric yellow colour method

(Jackson, 1973). Potash was determined by Flame Photometry Method

(Jackson, 1973).

Uptake values of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash by greengram seed and

stover ha-1 were calculated by using the following formula. The uptake of nitrogen

was computed by the following formula:

Nutrient content x Seed/Stover yield


Nutrient uptake (%) in seed/stover (kg ha-1)
(N kg ha-1) =
100

3.23 QUALITY PARAMETER

3.23.1 Protein content

The protein content in seed was calculated by multiplying nitrogen content

of seed (%) with the conversion factor of 6.25.

Protein content (%) = Nitrogen content (%) x 6.25

3.24 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Data on different aspects of green gram crop were subjected to statistical

analysis as per the procedure of Randomized Block Design (in factorial nature) at

Department of Agricultural Statistics, B. A. College of Agriculture, AAU, Anand

(Gujarat). Significance of difference between means for different factors was tested

52
……………………………………………………………….……………Materials and methods

through „F‟ test and least significant differences were calculated whenever variance

ratio was found significant at 5 percent level for treatment effect. The value of

SEm± and CD and co-efficient of variation (CV %) were also calculated.

3.25 ECONOMICS

In order to evaluate the effectiveness of each individual treatment, the

relative economics of each treatment and different treatment combinations was

worked out in terms of net profit, so that the most effective and remunerative

treatment combinations could be found out.

The CBR was calculated on the basis of the formula given below:

Gross income ( /ha)


CBR =
Gross expenditure ( /ha)

53
Experimental
Results
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

The present investigation was conducted to find out the “Effect of fertilizer

and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer greengram (Vigna radiata

L.) under middle Gujarat conditions” during summer season of the year 2015 at

Bidi Tobacco Research Station, Anand Agricultural University, Anand (Gujarat).

The experimental results relevant to the response of different treatments on growth

and yield attributes and yield of greengram are presented in this chapter along with

statistical interferences. The data pertaining to growth and yield attributes, yield,

quality and chemical parameters were subjected to statistical analysis in order to test

the significance of the results. The data on all mean effects and only significant

interactions are presented in the succeeding paragraphs, depicting the results

graphically wherever necessary.

4.1 Effect of different treatments on growth of greengram

4.2 Effect of different treatments on yield and yield attributes of greengram

4.3 Effect of different treatments on quality parameter of greengram

4.4 Effect of different treatments on chemical analysis of plant and soil

4.5 Effect of different treatments on economics

4.1 EFFECT OF TREATMENTS ON GROWTH

4.1.1 Plant population at initial at 20 DAS and at harvest

A perusal of data provided in Table 4.1, the results indicated that different

treatments tried in this experiment did not exert their significant effect on plant

population recorded at 20 DAS and at harvest.

54
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.1: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on plant population of


summer greengram

Plant population per


Treatments (Row meter length)
Initial At harvest
Levels of Fertilizer (F)- Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 8.96 8.79

F1: 50% RDF 9.22 8.96

F2: 75% RDF 9.33 9.12

F3: 100% RDF 9.42 9.26

SEm ± 0.14 0.15

CD (0.05) NS NS
Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 9.12 8.90


P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at
9.24 9.02
first irrigation
P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 9.28 9.09

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 9.29 9.12

SEm ± 0.14 0.15

CD (0.05) NS NS

Interaction (F x P) NS NS

CV % 5.35 5.76

55
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.1 revealed that interaction effect

between fertilizer and panchagavya on plant population of summer greengram

recorded at initial and harvest was non significant.

4.1.2 Periodical plant height

The mean data on plant height (cm) recorded at 30, 45 DAS and at harvest

as affected by different treatments are presented in Table 4.2 and graphically

illustrated in Fig 4.1.

4.1.2.1 Plant height at 30 DAS

Data furnished in Table 4.2 indicated that fertilizer application showed its

significant effect on plant height recorded at 30 DAS. Treatment F3 (100 % RDF)

recorded significantly higher plant height (18.10 cm) at 30 DAS. However, it was

remained at par with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). While treatment F0 (0 % RDF)

recorded the lowest plant height (14.15 cm).

With respect to panchagavya application, it did not exert its significant

effect on plant height recorded at 30 DAS.

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.2 results revealed that interaction

effect between fertilizer and panchagavya on plant height recorded at 30 DAS was

non significant.

4.1.2.2 Plant height at 45 DAS

Examination of data given in Table 4.2 indicated that fertilizer

application showed its significant influence on plant height recorded at 45 DAS.

56
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.2: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on periodic plant height of


summer greengram

Plant height (cm)


Treatments
30 45 At
DAS DAS harvest
Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 14.15 31.21 36.23

F1: 50% RDF 15.72 32.66 38.43

F2: 75% RDF 17.24 36.57 43.50

F3: 100% RDF 18.10 38.11 45.85

SEm ± 0.34 0.63 0.86

CD (0.05) 0.99 1.81 2.48


Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 15.56 33.29 38.92

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


16.20 34.43 40.77
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 16.55 34.95 41.64

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 16.90 35.88 42.67

SEm ± 0.34 0.63 0.86

CD (0.05) NS 1.81 2.48

Interaction (F x P) NS NS NS

CV % 7.26 6.26 7.25

57
30 DAS 45 DAS At harvest
50

45

40
Perodical plant height (cm)

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.1: Periodical plant height of summer greengram as influenced by different treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Treatment F3 (100 % RDF) produced significantly taller plants (38.11 cm)

but it was remained at par with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). Whereas, shorter plants

(31.21 cm) were recorded due to treatment F0 (0 % RDF) which was remained at

par with treatment F1 (50 % RDF).

With regard to panchagavya application, treatments P3 (Panchagavya spray

@ 6% at flowering) and P0 (Water spray at flowering) recorded significantly taller

(35.88 cm) and shorter (33.29 cm) plants of greengram, respectively. Even though

both the treatments were remained at par with treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching

(500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation) and P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering)

treatments.

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.2 results revealed that interaction

effect between fertilizer and panchagavya on plant height recorded at 45 DAS was

non significant.

4.1.2.3 Plant height at harvest

Data presented in Table 4.2 revealed that fertilizer application showed its

significant influence on plant height at harvest. Treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded

significantly higher plant height (45.85 cm). However, it was remained at par with

treatment F2 (75 % RDF). While lower plant height (36.23 cm) was recorded under

treatment F0 (0 % RDF) which was statistically at par with treatment F1 (50% RDF).

An appraisal of data exhibited in Table 4.2 indicated that panchagavya

application showed its significant effect on plant height at harvest. Treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded significantly higher plant height

(42.67 cm) as compared to treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering). Whereas,

treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) registered significantly lower plant height


58
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

(38.92 cm) but it was remained at par with treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching

(500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation).

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.2 revealed that plant

height recorded at harvest was not influenced significantly due to interaction effect

between fertilizer and panchagavya application.

4.1.3 Weight of dry root nodules plant-1

The mean data on weight of dry root nodules plant-1 (mg plant-1) as affected

by different levels of fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.3 and

graphically presented in Fig 4.2.

The results revealed that treatment F3 (100% RDF) registered significantly

higher weight of dry root nodules plant-1 (34.98 mg) as compared to treatment

F0 (0 % RDF). Whereas, significantly lower weight of dry root nodules plant-1

(32.17 mg) was registered under treatment F0 (0 % RDF).

With regard to panchagavya application, treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray

@ 6% at flowering) recorded significantly higher weight of dry root nodules plant-1

(34.90 mg) only over treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering). Whereas, lower

weight of dry root nodules plant-1 (32.48 mg) was registered under treatment P0

(Water spray at flowering) which was remained at par with P1 and P2 treatments.

Data illustrated in Table 4.3 revealed that interaction effect between

fertilizer and panchagavya could not exert their significant effect on weight of dry

root nodules plant-1.

59
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.3: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on weight of dry root


nodules plant-1 and number of branches plant-1 of summer
greengram

Weight of dry Number of


Treatments root nodules branches
plant-1 (mg) plant-1
Levels of Fertilizer (F)- Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 32.17 3.72

F1: 50% RDF 32.80 4.34

F2: 75% RDF 33.87 5.56

F3: 100% RDF 34.98 5.78

SEm ± 0.61 0.11

CD (0.05) 1.75 0.33


Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels
P0: Water spray at flowering 32.48 4.48

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


32.97 4.68
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 33.48 5.03

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 34.90 5.21


SEm ±
0.61 0.11
CD (0.05)
1.75 0.33
Interaction (F x P)
NS NS
CV %
6.27 8.16

60
weight
Weightofof
dry root
dry nodules
root per
nodules plant
plant -1 (mg)

35.5

35
weight of dry root nodules per plant

34.5

34

33.5

33

32.5

32

31.5

31

30.5
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.2: Weight of dry root nodules plant-1 of summer greengram as influenced by different
treatments
Number of branches plant¯¹
7

6
Number of branches plant-1

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.3: Number of branches plant-1 of summer greengram as influenced by different treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

4.1.4 Number of branches plant-1

The data pertaining to effect of different levels of fertilizer and

panchagavya on number of branches plant-1of greengram are presented in Table 4.3

and graphically showed in Fig 4.3.

The results set out in Table 4.3 indicated that there was an increase in

number of branches plant-1 with increase in levels of fertilizer application. Wherein,

treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded significantly higher number of branches plant-1

(5.78).However, it was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). Wheresas,

the lowest number of branches plant-1 was recorded under treatment F0 (0 % RDF).

From the results, it was indicated that significantly higher number of

branches plant-1 (5.21) was recorded under treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6%

at flowering). However, it was remained at par with the treatment P2 (Panchagavya

spray @ 3% at flowering). On the contrary, treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering)

recorded significantly lower number of branches plant-1 (4.48) but it was

statistically at par with treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first

irrigation).

Data presented in Table 4.3 showed that interaction effect between fertilizer

and panchagavya on number of branches plant-1 was non-significant.

4.2 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT TREATMENTS ON YIELD AND YIELD

ATTRIBUTES OF GREENGRAM

4.2.1 Number of pods plant-1

The mean data on number of pods plant-1as affected by fertilizer and

panchagavya application are presented in Table 4.4 and depicted graphically in

Fig.4.4.
61
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.4: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on number of pods plant-1


and number of seeds pod-1 of summer greengram

Number of Number of
Treatments
pods plant-1 seeds pod-1
Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 36.42 5.80

F1: 50% RDF 40.97 6.35

F2: 75% RDF 46.38 7.24

F3: 100% RDF 48.12 7.48

SEm ± 1.02 0.14

CD (0.05) 2.95 0.41


Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels
P0: Water spray at flowering 39.48 6.24

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


42.49 6.58
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 43.94 6.96

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 45.99 7.09

SEm ± 1.02 0.14

CD (0.05) 2.95 0.41

Interaction (F x P) NS NS

CV % 8.23 7.25

62
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

The results summarized in Table 4.4 indicated that treatment F3

(100% RDF) produced significantly higher number of pods plant-1 (48.12) but it

was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF). While lower number of pods

plant-1 (36.42) was recorded under treatment F0 (0 % RDF) which was remained at

par with treatment F1 (50% RDF).

Perusal of data presented in Table 4.4 indicated that treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded significantly higher number of

pods plant-1 (45.99). However, it was statistically at par with treatment P2

(Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). On the contrary lower number of pods

plant-1 (39.48) was recorded under treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) which

was remained at par with treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first

irrigation).

Data illustrated in Table 4.4 showed that number of pods plant-1 was non

significantly influenced due to interaction effect between fertilizer and

panchagavya application.

4.2.2 Number of seeds pod-1

The mean data on number of seeds pod-1 as affected by fertilizer and

panchagavya treatments are presented in Table 4.4 and presented graphically in

Fig.4.4.

A perusal of data given in Table 4.4 showed that there was an increase in

number of seeds pod-1with increase in levels of fertilizer application. Wherein,

treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded significantly higher number of seeds pod-1

(7.48) it’s having at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF). While treatment F0

(0 % RDF) produced the lowest number of seeds pod-1 (5.80).


63
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

The results revealed that treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at

flowering), being at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering)

registered significantly higher number of seeds pod-1 (7.09). While, significantly the

lowest number of seeds pod-1 (6.24) was noted with treatment P0 (Water spray at

flowering).

Data illustrated in Table 4.4 revealed that interaction effect between

fertilizer and panchagavya could not exert their significant effect on number of

seeds pod-1.

4.2.3 Pod length

The mean data of pod length as affected by fertilizer and

panchagavya are presented in Table 4.5 and graphically illustrated in Fig.4.4.

The results showed that there was an increase in pod length with increase in

levels of fertilizer application. Wherein, treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded

significantly higher pod length (6.02 cm). However, it was statistically at par with

treatment F2 (75% RDF). Whereas, significantly the lowest pod length (4.14 cm)

was noted under treatment F0 (0 % RDF).

Data presented in Table 4.5 revealed that treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray

@ 6% at flowering) registered significantly higher pod length (5.61 cm) but it was

remained at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering).

Significantly the lowest pod length (4.83 cm) was noted under treatment P0 (Water

spray at flowering).

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.5 indicated that interaction effect

between fertilizer and panchagavya could not exert their significant effect on pod

length of greengram.
64
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.5: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on pod length and test
weight of summer greengram

Pod length Test weight


Treatments
(cm) (g)
Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 4.14 30.74

F1: 50% RDF 4.98 33.81

F2: 75% RDF 5.87 34.82

F3: 100% RDF 6.02 35.78

SEm ± 0.11 0.60

CD (0.05) 0.32 1.73


Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 4.83 32.51

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


5.12 33.54
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 5.45 34.14

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 5.61 34.97

SEm ± 0.11 0.60

CD (0.05) 0.32 1.73

Interaction (F x P) NS NS

CV % 7.31 6.15

65
No. of pods per plant No. of seeds per plant Pod length (cm) Test weight (g)
60

50

40
Yield attributes

30

20

10

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.4: Yield attributes of summer greengram as influenced by different treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

4.2.4 Test weight

The mean data on test weight as affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are

presented in Table 4.5 and depicted graphically in Fig.4.4.

Data given in Table 4.5 indicated that test weight was remarkably

influenced due to different treatments. Different levels of fertilizer produced

significant effect on test weight of green gram. Among the different levels of

fertilizer, treatment F3 (100% RDF) registered significantly higher test weight

(35.78 g) but it was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF). Whereas,

treatment F0 (0 % RDF) recorded significantly the lowest test weight (30.74 g).

Examination of data presented in Table 4.5 revealed that treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded significantly higher test weight

(34.97 g) only over treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering). Whereas, lower test

weight (32.51 g) was registered under treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) as

compared to P3 treatments.

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.5 revealed that test

weight was influenced non significantly due to interaction effect between fertilizer

and panchagavya .

4.2.5 Seed yield

Data pertaining to seed yield (kg ha-1) of greengram influenced by different

treatments are presented in Table 4.6 and showed graphically in Fig.4.5.

The results showed that seed yield was increased with increase in levels of

fertilizer application. Wherein, treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded maximum seed

yield (1030 kg ha-1). However, it was statistically at par with treatment F2

66
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

(75% RDF). It was increased to the tune of (43.8%) over control. Whereas, the

lowest seed yield (716 kg ha-1) was recorded under treatment F0 (0 % RDF).

Examination of data summarized in Table 4.6 showed that treatment

P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) being at par with treatment

P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering) produced significantly higher seed

yield (982 kg ha-1). It was increase to the tune of (30.9%) over control. Where

significantly the lowest seed yield (750 kg ha-1) was recorded under treatment P0

(Water spray at flowering).

Data presented in Table 4.6 showed that seed yield of summer greengram

was non significantly influenced due to interaction effect between fertilizer and

panchagavya .

4.2.6 Stover yield

Data pertaining to stover yield (kg ha-1) as influenced due to different levels

of fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.6 and presented graphically

in Fig.4.5.

Results revealed that different levels of fertilizer had significant effect on

stover yield. Treatment F3 (100% RDF) being at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF)

produced significantly higher stover yield (1808 kg ha-1). While, treatment F0

(0 % RDF) produced the lowest stover yield (1330 kg ha-1).

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.6 showed that treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) produced significantly higher stover yield

(1758 kg ha-1). However, it was statistically at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya

spray @ 3% at flowering). While significantly the lowest stover yield (1367 kg ha-1)

of summer greengram was produced due to treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering).


67
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.6: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and harvest index
of summer greengram
Treatments Yield (kg ha-1) Harvest
index
Seed Stover (%)

Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels


F0: 0 % RDF 716 1330 34.96

F1: 50% RDF 808 1489 35.23

F2: 75% RDF 966 1713 36.25

F3: 100% RDF 1030 1808 36.28

SEm ± 26 50 1.07

CD (0.05) 74 143 NS

Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 750 1367 35.43

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


852 1535 35.71
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 936 1681 35.76

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 982 1758 35.80

SEm ± 26 50 1.07

CD (0.05) 74 143 NS

Interaction (F x P) NS NS NS

CV % 10.12 10.85 10.43

68
Seed yield (kg ha¯¹) Stover yield(kg ha¯¹)
2000

1800

1600

1400
Yield (kg ha-1)

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.5: Seed and stover yields of summer greengram as influenced by different treatments
Plate 2. Performance of summer greengram under control condition

Plate 3. Performance of summer greengram under 75% RDF + Panchagavya


spray @ 6% at Flowering
Plate 4.Performance of summer greengram under 100% RDF + Panchagavya
spray @ 3% at Flowering

Plate 5. Performance of summer greengram under 100% RDF + Panchagavya


spray @ 6% at Flowering
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Data illustrated in Table 4.6 revealed that interaction effect between

fertilizer and panchagavya could not exert their significant effect on stover yield of

greengram.

4.2.7 Harvest index

The mean data on harvest index of greengram as affected by fertilizer and

panchagavya are presented in Table 4.6.

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.6 indicated that fertilizer and

panchagavya did not exert their significant effect on harvest index of summer

greengram.

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.6 indicated that

interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya could not exert their

significant effect on harvest index of greengram.

4.3 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT TREATMENTS ON QUALITY

PARAMETER OF GREENGRAM

4.3.1 Protein content

Data pertaining to protein content (%) as influenced due to different levels

of fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.7 and depicted graphically in

Fig.4.6.

It is clearly seen from the data presented in Table 4.7 that treatment F3

(100% RDF) produced significantly higher protein content (21.43 %). However, it

was statstically at par with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). Whereas, significantly lower

protein content (19.55%) was obtained under treatment F0 (0 % RDF) which was

remained at par with treatment F1 (50% RDF).

69
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.7: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on protein content of


summer greengram

Treatments Protein content (%)


Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 19.55

F1: 50% RDF 19.94

F2: 75% RDF 21.15

F3: 100% RDF 21.43

SEm ± 0.42

CD (0.05) 1.22
Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 19.72

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


20.18
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 20.75

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 21.42

SEm ± 0.42

CD (0.05) 1.22

Interaction (F x P) NS

CV % 7.12

70
Protein (%)
22

21.5

21
Protein (%)

20.5

20

19.5

19

18.5
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertlizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.6: Protein content of summer greengram as influenced by different treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.7 showed that treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) registered significantly higher protein

content (21.42 %) as compared to P0 (Water spray at flowering) and P1

(Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation) treatments. On the contrary

lower protein content (19.72%) was recorded under treatment P0 (Water spray at

flowering) as compared to treatment P3.

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.7 revealed that protein

content (%) was not influenced significantly due to interaction effect between

fertilizer and panchagavya.

4.4 EFFECT OF DIFFERENT TREATMENTS ON CHEMICAL

ANALYSIS OF PLANT AND SOIL

4.4.1 Nitrogen content in seed and stover

The mean data on nitrogen content in seed and stover of greengram as

affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.8 and graphically

illustrated in Fig.4.7.

Data presented in Table 4.8 indicated that treatment F3 (100% RDF)

registered higher nitrogen content in seed and stover (3.43 and 0.85%, respectively).

However, it was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF). Whereas,

treatment F0 recorded significantly lower nitrogen content in seed and stover

(3.13 and 0.65%, respectively).

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.8 indicated higher nitrogen

content in seed (3.43%) whereas, in stover nitrogen content was recorded non

significant under treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering), its being

statistically at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering).


71
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Whereas, treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) recorded significantly lower

nitrogen content in seed (3.16%) which was statistically at par with treatment P1

(Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation).

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.8 revealed that nitrogen

content in seed and stover was not influenced significantly due to the interaction

effect between fertilizer and panchagavya .

4.4.2 Phosphorus content by seed and stover

The mean data on phosphorus content in seed and stover of greengram as

affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.8 and graphically

showed in Fig.4.7.

Data presented in Table 4.8 indicated that phosphorus content in seed and

stover of greengram was increased with increasing fertilizer levels

(0 to 100% RDF). Wherein, treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded significantly higher

phosphorus content in seed and stover (0.46 and 0.24%, respectively) only over F0

(0 % RDF) treatment.

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.8 indicated that fertilizer and

panchagavya did not exert their significant effect on phosphorus content in seed and

stover of summer greengram.

Data presented in Table 4.8 indicated that application of fertilizer and

panchagavya simultaneously could not exert its significant effect on phosphorus

content in seed and stover of summer greengram.

72
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.8: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on nutrient content in seed


and stover of summer greengram.
Treatments Nutrient content (%)
Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
Seed Stover Seed Stover Seed Stover
Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 3.13 0.65 0.32 0.15 0.46 1.31

F1: 50% RDF 3.19 0.74 0.34 0.18 0.51 1.37

F2: 75% RDF 3.38 0.84 0.46 0.22 0.56 1.49

F3: 100% RDF 3.43 0.85 0.46 0.24 0.57 1.54

SEm ± 0.07 0.012 0.010 0.005 0.008 0.019

CD (0.05) 0.19 0.035 0.027 0.015 0.022 0.055


Levels of panchgavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray 3.16 0.75 0.37 0.19 0.51 1.39


P1: Panchagavya drenching
(500 lit ha-1) at first 3.23 0.76 0.39 0.19 0.52 1.42
irrigation
P2: Panchgavya spray @ 3% at
flowering 3.32 0.77 0.40 0.20 0.54 1.45
P3: Panchgavya spray @ 6% at
flowering 3.43 0.80 0.41 0.21 0.54 1.46

SEm ± 0.07 0.012 0.010 0.005 0.008 0.019

CD (0.05) 0.19 NS NS NS NS NS

Interaction (F x P) NS NS NS NS NS NS

CV % 7.12 5.42 8.34 9.33 4.98 4.59

73
N content Seed (%) P content Seed (%) K content Seed (%)
N content Stover (%) P content Stover (%) K content Stover (%)
4

3.5

3
Nutrient Content (%)

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya

Fig. 4.7: N, P and K content in seed and stover of summer greengram as influenced by different
treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

4.4.3 Potash content by seed and stover

The mean data on potash content in seed and stover of greengram as

affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.8 and graphically

illustrated in Fig.4.7.

Data presented in Table 4.8 indicated that treatment F3 (100% RDF)

registered significantly higher potash content in seed and stover (0.57 and 1.54%,

respectively) but it was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF). Whereas,

treatment F0 (0 % RDF) recorded significantly the lowest potash content in seed and

stover (0.46 and 1.31%, respectively).

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.8 indicated that fertilizer and

panchagavya did not exert their significant effect on potash content in seed and

stover of summer greengram.

Data pertaining in Table 4.8 regarding potash content in seed and stover

indicated that interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya did not showed

their significant effect.

4.4.4 Nitrogen uptake by seed and stover

The mean data on nitrogen uptake by seed and stover of greengram as

affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.9 and graphically

showed in Fig.4.8.

Data presented in Table 4.9 indicated that treatment F3 (100% RDF)

registered higher nitrogen uptake by seed and stover (35.44 and 15.44 kg ha-1,

respectively). However, it was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF).

Whereas, treatment F0 recorded the lowest nitrogen uptake by seed and stover

(22.48 and 8.68 kg ha-1, respectively).


74
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.9: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on nutrient uptake by seed


and stover of summer greengram
Treatments Nutrient uptake (kg ha-1)
Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
Seed Stover Seed Stover Seed Stover
Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 22.48 8.68 2.28 2.03 3.27 17.37

F1: 50% RDF 25.81 11.06 2.76 2.68 4.17 20.46

F2: 75% RDF 32.76 14.41 4.46 3.75 5.45 25.71

F3: 100% RDF 35.44 15.44 4.80 4.27 5.87 27.80

SEm ± 1.00 0.45 0.15 0.11 0.17 0.83

CD (0.05) 2.88 1.30 0.43 0.33 0.48 2.41


Levels of panchgavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 23.74 10.34 2.87 2.57 3.88 19.03

P1: Panchagavya Drenching


27.73 11.87 3.43 3.01 4.46 21.90
(500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation
P2: Panchgavya spray @ 3% at
31.17 13.17 3.84 3.45 5.07 24.53
flowering
P3: Panchgavya spray @ 6% at
33.85 14.20 4.16 3.70 5.35 25.89
flowering
SEm ± 1.00 0.45 0.15 0.11 0.17 0.83

CD (0.05) 2.88 1.30 0.43 0.33 0.48 2.41

Interaction (F x P) NS NS NS NS NS NS

CV % 11.86 12.59 14.47 12.27 12.33 12.66

75
N uptake by seed (kg ha¯¹) P uptake by seed (kg ha¯¹) K uptake by seed (kg ha¯¹)
N uptake by stover (kg ha¯¹) P uptake by stover (kg ha¯¹) K uptake by stover (kg ha¯¹)
40

35
Nutrient Uptake (kg ha-1)

30

25

20

15

10

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertlizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.8: N, P and K Uptake by seed and stover of summer greengram as influenced by different
treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.9 indicated that higher nitrogen

uptake by seed and stover (33.85 and 14.20 kg ha-1, respectively) was recorded

under treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering), its being statistically at

par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Whereas, treatment

P0 (Water spray at flowering) recorded significantly the lowest nitrogen uptake by

seed and stover (23.74 and 10.34 kg ha-1, respectively).

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.9 revealed that nitrogen

content in seed and stover was not influenced significantly due to the interaction

effect between fertilizer and panchagavya.

4.4.5 Phosphorus uptake by seed and stover

The mean data on phosphorus uptake by seed and stover of greengram as

affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.9 and graphically

despite in Fig.4.8.

Data presented in Table 4.9 indicated that phosphorus uptake by seed and

stover of greengram was increased with increasing fertilizer levels

(0 to 100% RDF). Wherein, treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded significantly higher

phosphorus uptake by seed and stover (4.80 and 4.27 kg ha-1, respectively) as

compared to F0 (0 % RDF) and F1 (50% RDF) treatments.

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.9 indicated that higher phosphorus

uptake by seed and stover (4.16 and 3.70 kg ha-1, respectively) was recorded under

treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) which was remained at par

with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Whereas, treatment P0

(Water spray at flowering) recorded significantly the lowest phosphorus uptake by

seed and stover (2.87 and 2.57 kg ha-1, respectively).


76
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Data presented in Table 4.9 indicated that application of fertilizer and

panchagavya simultaneously could not exert its significant effect on phosphorus

uptake by seed and stover of summer greengram.

4.4.6 Potash uptake by seed and stover

The mean data on potash uptake by seed and stover of greengram as

affected by fertilizer and panchagavya are presented in Table 4.9 and graphically

despite in Fig.4.8.

Data presented in Table 4.9 indicated that treatment F3 (100% RDF)

registered significantly higher potash uptake by seed and stover (5.87 and 27.80

kg ha-1, respectively) but it it was statistically at par with treatment F2 (75% RDF).

Whereas, treatment F0 (0 % RDF) recorded significantly the lowest potash uptake

by seed and stover (3.27 and 17.37 kg ha-1, respectively).

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.9 indicated that higher potash

uptake by seed and stover (5.35 and 25.89 kg ha-1, respectively) was recorded under

treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6 % at flowering). However, it was statistically

at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Treatment P0

(Water spray at flowering) recorded significantly the lowest potash uptake by seed

and stover (3.88 and 19.03 kg ha-1, respectively).

Data pertaining in Table 4.9 regarding potash uptake (kg ha-1) by seed and

stover indicated that interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya did not

showed their significant effect.

77
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

4.4.4 Available nitrogen status of soil after harvest of crop

The data pertaining to effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on available

nitrogen status of the soil after crop harvest are presented in Table 4.10 graphically

despite in Fig.4.9.

It is discerning from the Table 4.10 that available nitrogen status of the soil

after crop harvest was increased with increase in each level of fertilizer. It is also

observed from the Table 4.10 that significantly higher value of available nitrogen

(353 kg ha-1) in the soil was registered under treatment F3 (100% RDF). However, it

was remained at par with the treatment F2 (75% RDF). On the contrary treatment F0

(0 % RDF) recorded significantly the lowest available nitrogen in soil after harvest

the crop.

From the data presented in Table 4.10 indicated that higher value

of available nitrogen (346 kg ha-1) was registered under treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6 % at flowering) but it was remained at par with treatment

P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Whereas, lower available nitrogen

(318 kg ha-1) in the soil was noted under treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering)

which was remained at par with treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1)

at first irrigation).

A perusal of data presented in Table 4.10 revealed that interaction effect

between fertilizer and panchagavya on available nitrogen status of soil after harvest

of crop was non significant.

78
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.10: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on available nutrient


status of soil after harvest of summer greengram
Available nutrient (kg ha-1)
Treatments
N P2 O 5 K2O
Levels of Fertilizer (F) - Four levels
F0: 0 % RDF 304 30 271

F1: 50% RDF 325 34 282

F2: 75% RDF 345 39 305

F3: 100% RDF 353 40 313

SEm ± 5.38 0.60 4.57

CD (0.05) 15.53 1.73 13.19


Levels of panchagavya (P) - Four levels

P0: Water spray at flowering 318 34 283

P1: Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first


324 35 288
irrigation

P2: Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering 338 36 296

P3: Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering 346 37 305

SEm ± 5.38 0.60 4.57

CD (0.05) 15.53 1.73 13.19

Interaction (F x P) NS NS NS

CV % 5.62 5.84 5.40

79
Available N (kg ha¯¹) Available P (kg ha¯¹) Available K (kg ha¯¹)

400

350

300
Available Nutrients (kg ha-1)

250

200

150

100

50

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya
Fig. 4.9: Available N, P and K status of soil after harvest of summer greengram as influenced by
different treatments
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

4.4.5 Available phosphorus status of soil after harvest of crop

The data pertaining to the effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on available

P, status of the soil after crop harvest are presented in Table 4.10 and graphically

showed in Fig.4.9.

The data presented in Table 4.10 indicated that available phosphorus status

of the soil after crop harvest was increased with increasing fertilizer levels.

Treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded significantly higher available phosphorus

(40 kg ha-1) in soil after crop harvest. However, it was statistically at par with

treatment F2 (75% RDF). While, treatment F0 (0 % RDF) recorded significantly the

lowest available phosphorus (30 kg ha-1) in soil after crop harvest.

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.10 indicated that higher available

phosphorus (37 kg ha-1) in soil after crop harvest was registered under treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) only over treatment P0. Whereas, lower

available phosphorus (34 kg ha-1) in the soil was recorded under treatment P0

(Water spray at flowering) as compared to treatment P3.

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.10 revealed that

available phosphorus status of soil after crop harvest was not influenced

significantly due to interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya.

4.4.6 Available potash status of soil after harvest of crop

The data pertaining to the effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on available

potash, status of the soil after crop harvest are presented in Table 4.10 and

graphically illustrated in Fig.4.9.

The data presented in Table 4.10 indicated that available potash status of

the soil after crop harvest was increased with increasing fertilizer levels. Treatment
80
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

F3 (100% RDF) recorded significantly higher available potash (313 kg ha-1) in soil

after crop harvest. However, it was statistically at par with treatment F2

(75% RDF). While, treatment F0 (0 % RDF) recorded significantly lower available

potash (271 kg ha-1) in soil after crop harvest but it was statistically at par with

treatment F1 (50% RDF).

Examination of data furnished in Table 4.10 indicated that higher available

potash (305 kg ha-1) in soil after crop harvest was registered under treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) but it was remained at par with treatment

P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Whereas, lower available phosphorus

(283 kg ha-1) in the soil was noted under treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering)

which was statistically at par with treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching

(500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation).

Statistical analysis of the data presented in Table 4.10 revealed that

available potash in soil after crop harvest was not influenced significantly due to

interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya.

4.7 Economics

The data on economics of different levels of fertilizer and panchagavya for

summer greengram crop are presented in Table 4.11 and graphically despite in

Fig.4.10.

Fertilizer

A perusal of data given in Table 4.11 revealed that maximun net realization

of 37083 ha-1 along with CBR value of 1:2.17 were recorded under treatment F3

(100% RDF) followed by treatment F2 (75% RDF) . On the contrary, treatment F0

81
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

(0 % RDF) recorded minimum net realization of 18452 ha-1 with CBR value of

1:1.63.

Panchagavya

It is clearly seen from the data presented in Table 4.11 that treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded maximum net realization of

38498 ha-1 followed by treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering)

and maximum CBR value of 1:2.43 was registered under treatment P2. Whereas,

minimum net realization of 11291 ha-1 along with CBR value of 1:1.25 were

recorded under treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first

irrigation).

82
……..……………………………………………………………….………….Experimental Results

Table 4.11: Influence of fertilizer and panchagavya on economic of summer


greengram
Seed Stover Gross Common Treatment Total
Net
Treat Yield yield income cost cost cost
realization CBR
-ment (kg (kg (Rs (Rs (Rs (Rs
(Rs ha-1)
ha-1) ha-1) ha-1) ha-1) ha-1) ha-1)
A Fertilizer
F0 716 1330 47881 21226 8203 29429 18452 1:1.63
F1 808 1489 54034 21226 9429 30655 23379 1:1.76
F2 966 1713 64564 21226 9963 31189 33376 1:2.07
F3 1030 1808 68805 21226 10496 31722 37083 1:2.17
B Panchagavya
P0 750 1367 50154 21226 3220 24446 25709 1:2.05
P1 852 1535 56958 21226 24441 45666 11291 1:1.25
P2 936 1681 62568 21226 4550 25776 36792 1:2.43
P3 981 1758 65604 21226 5880 27106 38498 1:2.42
-1 -1
Sale price of greengram produce Seed : 65.05 kg Stover : 1.00 kg

83
Net realization (Rs ha¯¹)

45000

40000

35000
Net realization(Rs ha-1)

30000

25000

20000

15000

10000

5000

0
F₀ F₁ F₂ F₃ P₀ P₁ P₂ P₃
Fertilizer Panchagavya

Fig. 4.10: Net realization of summer greengram as influenced by different treatments


Discussion
V. DISCUSSION

The present study was conducted to find out the optimum levels of fertilizer

and panchagavya whereby a farmer can harvest good greengram yield as much as

possible.

During the course of presentation of the results of experiment entitled

“Effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer

greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under middle Gujarat conditions” in the

preceding chapter; many significant variations were recorded in growth, yield

attributes, yield, quality parameters and soil chemical properties under the influence

of different treatments. It has been attempted to establish their cause and effect

relationship based on the results of the present investigation duly supported by

scientific evidences and relevant literature.

For the better convenience in the discussion, this chapter has been divided

under following subheads.

5.1 Effect of weather parameters and soil

5.2 Effect of fertilizer

5.3 Effect of panchagavya

5.4 Interaction effect of fertilizer and panchagavya

5.5 Economics of different treatments

5.1 EFFECT OF WEATHER PARAMETERS AND SOIL

Among the various factors responsible for affecting the crop yield and its

performance, the weather conditions play a key role. The various weather parameters

84
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

pertaining during the crop season of the year 2015 are presented in Table 3.1 and

graphically depicted in Fig. 3.1. It is evident from the data that all the meteorological

parameters were congenial for normal crop growth and development. The maximum and

minimum temperature was also normal. As a result, the crop growth was normal and

hence the entire effects of the crop were assigned to the treatment effect only.

The overall soil conditions (Table 3.3) at the time of sowing of seeds were

favourable for good establishment of plants. None of the treatments had significant

influence on establishment of plants. This indicated that whatever differences observed in

growth and yield attributes were mainly due to the treatment effects.

5.2 EFFECT OF FERTILIZER

5.2.1 Plant population

Initial and final plant population (at harvest) was not affected due to

different treatments (Table 4.1). It is ascertained from the data that the population in

all the treatments indicating that variations in growth and yield attributes as well as

yield were obtained due to treatment effects and not due to plant population.

5.2.2 Effect on growth attributes

The data furnished in Table 4.2 showed that application of fertilizer

increased the periodical plant height with increasing levels from 0 to 100% RDF.

Treatment F3 (100% RDF) recorded higher plant height at 30 DAS, 45 DAS and at

harvest to the tune of 18.10, 38.11 and 45.85 cm as against 14.15, 31.21 and 36.23

cm under 0% RDF, respectively. The performance of the treatments ranged F0< F1<

F2< F3 in case of plant height. The increase in plant height could be attributed to

better proliferation of root and increased nodulation due to better availability of

85
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

nutrients due to increasing fertilizer levels. Fertilizer (N and P) encourages

formation of new cells, promotes plant vigour and hastens leaf development which

attributes toward higher plant height. These findings are in accordance with those

reported by Jat et al. (2012).

The data analysed in Table 4.3 indicated that dry weight of root nodules

plant-1 was increased by fertilizer application. Increasing level of fertilizer

application brought corresponding improvement in nodules weight. Higher dry

weight of nodules plant-1 was noted with treatment F3 (100% RDF). Phosphorus

increases nitrogenase activity of root nodules, which results in to improved

biological N fixation and also higher number of nodules plant-1at higher levels of

fertilizer application and might be stemmed from better root growth, which

facilitated more root surface area for nodule formation. Similar results were

observed by Mishra (2003), Singh et al. (2007) and Jat et al. (2012).

It is apparent from the data (Table 4.3) indicated that fertilizer application

remarkably increased the number of branches plant-1 of greengram over control.

Significantly higher number of branches plant-1 (5.78) was observed under

treatment F3 (100% RDF). This showed increasing trend in number of branches

with successive increase in fertilizer level. Application of fertilizers might have

helped in uptake of nitrogen and other nutrients from the soil which in turn, might

have increased number of branches plant-1. These results are in agreement with the

findings of Shivran and Ahlawat (2000) and Jat et al. (2012).

86
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

5.2.3 Effect on yield and yield attributes

The statistical analysis of the data (Table 4.4) results revealed that fertilizer

application increased the number of pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1. Higher

and the lowest values of number of pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 were

observed under treatments F3 (100% RDF) and F0 (0% RDF), respectively. Thus,

higher fertilizer level F3 showed its superiority over control. Response of fertilizer

on this trait is contributed to enhancement of number of branches plant-1 (Table 4.3)

and also chlorophyll content which encourages better photosynthesis and

preparation of more photosynthetic which contribute towards the formation of pod

in good number. These findings corroborate the reports of), Singh et al. (1993),

Patel and Patel (1994), Rudreshappa and Halikatti (2002) and Singh et al. (2011).

The results presented in Table 4.5 showed the similar trends that obtained

from number of pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 (Table 4.4). Wherein,

significantly higher pod length (6.02 cm) and test weight (35.78 g) were obtained

due to treatment F3 (100% RDF). On the other hand, treatment F0 (0% RDF)

registered the lowest pod length (4.14 cm) and test weight (30.74 g). Increase in

levels of fertilizer increased growth and nodulation resulting into profuse growth

which resultantly contributed for development of bold seeds. Present results are in

conformity with those reported by Singh et al. (1993), Patel and Patel (1994),

Rudreshappa and Halikatti (2002) Malik et al. (2003), Patel and Thakur (2003),

Tomar et al. (2013) and Saini et al. (2015).

With regard to yield presented in Table 4.6 it was indicated that different

levels of fertilizer gave significant effect on seed and stover yield (Table 4.6) of

87
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

greengram. Seed and stover yields were remarkably enhanced due to fertilizer

application. Significantly higher seed (1030 kg ha-1) and stover yields (1808 kg ha-1)

were found with treatment F3 (100% RDF). The seed and stover yields advantage

was contributed due to positive association with growth and yield attributes viz.,

plant height (Table 4.2), number of branches plant-1 (Table 4.3), pods plant-1

(Table 4.4), seeds pod-1 (Table 4.4), pod length (Table 4.5) and test weight

(Table 4.5). Greengram yield was also increased due to better availability of

nutrients which had also provided higher uptakes of nutrients (Table 4.9). These

results are conformity with those of Patel and Patel (1994), Rudreshappa and

Halikatti (2002) and Singh et al. (2011).

The mean data on harvest index presented in Table 4.6 indicated that

various levels of fertilizer tried in this experiment did not exert their significant

effect on harvest index.

5.2.4 Effect on quality parameters

The results presented in Table 4.7 showed that protein content of greengram

was increased with increase in fertilizer levels. Wherein, treatment F3 recorded

significantly higher protein content as compared to F0 (0% RDF) and F1 (50%

RDF). This could be attributed to enhance the uptake of nutrients (Table 4.9) and

increasing nitrogen content in the crop which increased protein content of

greengram (Table 4.8). These results are in conformity with those of Bhalu et al.

(1995), Soni and Gupta (1999), Malik et al., (2003) and Saini et al., (2015).

88
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

5.2.5 Effect on chemical parameters

An increase in content and uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash by

crop was observed with fertilizer application (Table 4.8 and 4.9). Significantly

higher uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash were noted with treatment F3

(100% RDF). An enhancement of number of branches plant-1 (Table 4.3), plant

height (Table 4.2) as well as seed and stover yields (Table 4.6) were increased due

to fertilizer application. Improvement of nutrient availability had also provided

higher uptake of nutrients (Table 4.9). These findings are in accordance with those

reported by Rana et al. (1998), Singha and Sharma (2001), Rudreshappa and

Halikatti (2002) and Jat et al., (2012).

With regard to available nutrients, similar results also obtained as that of

recorded for nutrient uptake by greengram. Wherein, treatment F3 (100% RDF)

recorded higher amount of available N, P and K after harvest of greengram

(Table 4.10). Application of fertilizer provide higher quantity of nutrient for the

crop which might be resulted into higher concentration of nutrient in the soil

ultimately resulted into high availability of the nutrients.

5.3 EFFECT OF PANCHAGAVYA

5.3.1 Plant population

The data presented in Table 4.1 indicated that Initial and final plant

population (at harvest) of greengram due to different treatments were non

significant.

89
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

5.3.2. Effect on growth attributes

Mean plant height was influenced by panchagavya treatments at 45 DAS

and at harvest of crop. Plant height was increased with increase in panchagavya

levels (Table 4.2). Treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded

higher plant height of 35.88 and 42.67 cm at respective stages which was remained

at par with treatments P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation)

and P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). An increase in plant height might

be due to application of nutrients through foliar spray of panchagavya enhanced

with the growth due to improvement in biochemical properties of the soil and

increased the activities of beneficial micro-organisms which ultimately resulted in

to production of growth promoting substances and improved nutrient availability for

longer period and thus, beneficial effects on growth parameters of greengram.

Similar findings have been reported by Somasundaram et al. (2003), Ali et al.

(2011), Kumar et al. (2011) and Matai (2012).

Amongst the different treatments tried in experiment, treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded significantly higher number of

dry weight of nodules plant-1 (34.90 mg) over treatment P0 (Water spray at

flowering). An increase in dry weight of nodules plant-1 might be due to better

availability of nutrients. Higher weight of nodules with foliar spray was attributed to

increased crop growth and translocation of more carbohydrates towards developing

root nodules. Increased allocation of food materials to roots in turn enhances the

root volume and thereby weight of nodules increased concomitantly. These finding

are in accordance with reported by Yadav and Tripathi (2013).

90
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

Data presented in Table 4.3 indicated that there was significant difference

in number of branches plant-1 due to application of panchagavya. Among different

treatments, treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) showed its

superiority by registering higher number of branches plant-1 (5.21) but it was

remained at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). An

increase in number of branches plant-1 could be attributed due to panchagavya and

enhanced the growth due to increase in activities of beneficial micro-organisms

which ultimately resulted in production of growth promoting substances and

nutrient availability for longer period and thus beneficial effects on growth

parameters of greengram. These findings are in line with those obtained by

Avudaithai et al. (2010), Kumar et al. (2011) and Matai (2012).

5.3.3 Effect on yield and yield attributes

Significant variations were observed due to panchagavya application in

number of pods plant-1 and seeds pod-1 (Table 4.4). Wherein treatment, P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) ranked top registering maximum values of

both these attributes. Foliar spray of panchagavya spray @ 3% or 6% at flowering

registered increase in pods plant-1and seeds pod-1 over treatment P0 (Water spray at

flowering). An increase in number of pods plant-1 and seeds pod-1 was attributed due

to better availability of nutrients. It might be due to application of organic sources

like, panchagavya which might have improved the biochemical properties of the

soil and increased the activities of beneficial micro-organisms and resulted in

production of growth promoting substances and improved nutrient availability for

longer period and thus, beneficial effects on growth and yield parameters of

91
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

greengram. The overall improvement of crop growth reflected into better source-

sink relationship, which in turn to enhance the yield attributes. The present findings

are in accordance with those reported by Somasundarm et al. (2003), Kumawat et

al. (2009), Avuduithai et al. (2010), Ali et al. (2011), Kumar et al. (2011), Matai

(2012) and Chaudhari et al. (2013).

Significantly higher pod length and test weight of greengram (Table 4.5)

were noticed under treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) over

treatment P0. Treatment P3 behaved equally well as treatment P2 (Panchagavya

spray @ 3% at flowering) in case of pod length and test weight. Application of

organic sources like, panchagavya might have improved the biochemical properties

of the soil and increased the activities of beneficial micro-organisms which resulted

in to production of growth promoting substances and improved nutrient availability

for longer period and thus, beneficial effects on growth and yield parameters of

greengram. The overall improvement of crop growth reflected into better source-

sink relationship, which in turn to enhance the yield attributes.The present findings

are in accordance with those earlier reported by Somasundarm et al. (2003),

Avuduithai et al. (2010), Ali et al. (2011), Kumar et al. (2011) and Matai (2012).

Crop yield is the complex function of physiological processes and

biochemical activities which modify plant anatomy and morphology of the growing

plants. Seed and stover yields of greengram were significantly influenced by

different treatments of panchagavya (Table 4.6). Treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray

@ 6% at flowering) produced higher seed (982 kg ha-1) and stover yields

(1758 kg ha-1) over treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering). Higher yield with

92
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) is contributed due to

improvement in plant height (Table 4.2), number of branches plant-1 (Table 4.3),

dry weight of root nodules plant-1 (Table 4.3), pods plant-1 (Table 4.4), seeds pod-1

(Table 4.4), test weight (Table 4.5) and pod length (Table 4.5) having significant

positive association with seed yield. These findings are in line with those reported

by Somasundaram et al. (2003), Avudaithai et al. (2010), Manimekalai et al.

(2010), Kumar et al. (2011), Matai (2012) and Desai et al. (2014).

The results presented in Table 4.6 showed that treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) registered higher harvest index than

treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering), but could not reach the level of

significance.

5.3.4 Effect on quality parameters

Data presented in Table 4.7 indicated that protein content of greengram

increased with increase in panchagavya levels. Wherein, treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded higher protein content (21.42%)

over P0 (Water spray at flowering) and P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at

first irrigation) treatments. This might be due to supply of the phyto hormones with

foliar sources might have increased the NR activity in functional leaves of the plants

by increasing the synthesis of enzyme or protein by affecting the basic processes of

translation favourably. Similar findings have been reported by Kumawat et al.

(2009) and Desai et al. (2014).

93
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

5.3.5 Effect on chemical parameters

Data presented in Table 4.9 showed that nutrient uptake was increased with

increase in panchagavya levels. Wherein, treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6%

at flowering) recorded higher uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash over

treatments P0 (Water spray at flowering) and P1 (Panchagavya drenching (500 lit

ha-1) at first irrigation) treatments. This might be due to quick build up of soil micro

flora and fauna which has consequently increased the enzymatic activity and helped

in mineralization, solubilization of native and applied nutrients and making them

available in the soil for plant uptake. The present findings are accordance with those

earlier reported by Kumawat et al. (2009), Matai (2012), Patel (2012) and Desai et

al. (2014)

The data analyzed in Table 4.10 indicated that available soil nutrient viz.,

nitrogen, phosphorus and potash remarkably improved by different treatments.

Treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) registered higher nitrogen,

phosphorus and potash status over treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering).

Effective microorganisms (EMO) are the mixed culture of naturally occurring

beneficial microbes predominatly lactic acid bacteria (lactobacillus), yeast

(Saccharomyces), actinomycetes (Streptomyces), photosystnthetic bacteria

(Rhodopsyedomonous) certain fungi (Aspergillus) which were found to be present

in panchagavya improved the soil quality. These findings are in line with earlier

results reported by (Xu and Xu, 2000).

94
……….……………………………………………………………….……….Discussion

5.4 INTERACTION EFFECT OF FERTILIZER AND PANCHAGAVYA

The interaction effect between fertilizer and panchagavya was not observed

on growth and yield attributes, yield as well as quality and chemical parameters.

5.5 ECONOMICS

The data on economics presented in Table 4.11, the results revealed that

treatment F3 (100% RDF) resulted in maximum profit 37083 ha-1 along with

CBR value of 1:2.17 than that of obtained under rest of all the three levels. This

might be due to higher seed yield under the treatment F3 (100% RDF) (Table 4.6).

Contrarily, the lowest profit 18452 ha-1 as well as CBR value of 1:1.63 was

recorded under level F0 (0% RDF) as compared to all other levels. There was no

application of fertilizer under the treatment F0 resulting into the lowest seed yield

(Table 4.6) and ultimately the lowest profit and CBR. than all other fertilizer levels.

Among the panchagavya levels, the treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @

6% at flowering) recorded the highest net realization 38498 ha-1 followed by

treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering) with net realization of

36792 ha-1 over an application of panchagavya drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first

irrigation (P1) with the lowest values of 11291 ha-1 as well as CBR value of

1:1.25, respectively. Its might be due to high treatment cost of panchagavya

drenching resulting into the lowest CBR than all other treatments.

95
Summary
and
Conclusion
VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
A field experiment was conducted on loamy sand soil at Bidi Tobacco

Research Station Farm, Anand Agricultural University, Anand (Gujarat) to study

the “Effect of fertilizer and panchagavya on yield and quality of summer

greengram (Vigna radiata L.) under middle Gujarat conditions” during summer

season of the year 2015.

The experiment was laid out in RBD design with factorial concept and

replicated three times. Sixteen treatment combinations comprising of four levels of

fertilizers viz., F0 (0% RDF), F1 (50% RDF), F2 (75% RDF) and F3 (100% RDF) and

four levels of panchagavya viz., P0 (Water spray at flowering), P1 (Panchagavya

drenching (500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation), P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at

flowering) and P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) were tested.

The results which have been presented and discussed in the preceding

chapters are summarized here in brief under following heads.

6.1 Effect of fertilizer


6.2 Effect of panchagavya
6.1 EFFECT OF FERTILIZER

Results revealed that plant population initial and at harvest of greengram

did not influenced significantly due to different levels of fertilizer.

Treatment F3 (100 % RDF) recorded significantly higher plant height at 30,

45 DAS and at harvest but it was remained at par with application of 75% RDF (F2).

Whereas, significantly shorter plant was recorded under F0 (0% RDF) treatment.

96
.….………………………………………………………………. …Summary and conclusion

Results revealed that weight of dry root nodules plant-1 and number of

branches plant-1 were affected due to different treatments. Treatment F3

(100 % RDF) registered significantly higher weight of dry root nodules plant-1 and

number of branches plant-1. However, it was comparable with treatment F2

(75 % RDF). On the contrary, treatment F0 (0% RDF) recorded lower weight of dry

root nodules plant-1 and number of branches plant-1.

Among the different fertilizer levels, 100 % RDF (F3) level emerged out

superior effect on number of pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 but it was

statistically at par with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). Whereas, the lowest number of

pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 recorded under treatment F0 (0% RDF).

With regard to fertilizer application, treatment F3 (100 % RDF) recorded

significantly higher pod length and test weight. However, it was statistically at par

with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). While, treatment F0 (0% RDF) registered the lowest

pod length and test weight.

Higher seed and stover yields were produced by treatment F3

(100 % RDF). However, it was comparable with treatment F2 (75 % RDF). On the

contrary, treatment F0 (0% RDF) recorded the lowest seed and stover yields.

Results revealed that harvest index (%) was not affected due to different

fertilizer treatments.

Higher protein content (%) was recorded under treatment F3 (100 % RDF)

but it was statically at par with treatment 75 % RDF (F2). While, significantly lower

protein content was counted under F0 (0% RDF) treatment.

Treatment F3 (100 % RDF) recorded significantly higher N, P and K

content and uptake by seed and stover as well as available N, P and K status in the
97
.….………………………………………………………………. …Summary and conclusion

soil after harvest of crop. However, it was statistically at par with treatment F2

(75 % RDF). While, significantly the lowest N, P and K content and uptake by seed

and stover as well as available N, P and K status in the soil after harvest of crop was

recorded under F0 (0% RDF) treatment.

The maximum value of net realization of 37083 ha-1 along with CBR

value of 1:2.17 was recorded under treatment F3 (100% RDF). On the contrary,

treatment F0 (0% RDF) recorded the lowest value of net realization of

18452 ha-1 with CBR value of 1:1.63.

6.2 EFFECT OF PANCHAGAVYA

Plant population initial (20 DAS) and at harvest of greengram did not vary

significantly due to different levels of panchagavya.

Treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) recorded

significantly higher plant height at 45 DAS and at harvest. However, it was

remained at par with P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). On the contrary,

treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering) recorded lower values of all growth

attributes.

Results revealed that treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering)

recorded significantly higher weight of dry root nodules plant-1 and number of

branches plant-1 which was remained at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray

@ 3% at flowering). On the contrary, treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering)

recorded lower weight of dry root nodules plant-1 and number of branches plant-1.

Foliar spray of panchagavya @ 6% at flowering (P3) registered higher

number of pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 but it was remained at par with

treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Whereas, lower number of


98
.….………………………………………………………………. …Summary and conclusion

pods plant-1 and number of seeds pod-1 were noted under treatment P0 (Water spray

at flowering).

Recorded significantly higher pod length and test weight were under

treatment P3 (Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) as compared to treatment P0

(Water spray at flowering).

Significant increased in seed and stover yields were achieved by

panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering (P3). It was comparable with treatment P2

(Panchagavya spray @ 3% at flowering). Whereas, significantly the lowest seed

and stover yields were recorded under P0 (water spray at flowering).

Results revealed that harvest index (%) was not affected due to different

panchagavya treatments.

Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering (P3) recorded significantly higher

protein content (%) but it was remained at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya

spray @ 3% at flowering). On the contrary, treatment P0 (Water spray at flowering)

recorded the lower values of protein content (%).

N, P and K content in greengram seed and stover remained unaffected due

to different panchgavya treatments.

Higher N, P and K uptake as well as available N, P and K status in the soil

after harvest of the crop was recorded by panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering

(P3) treatment. But, it was remained at par with treatment P2 (Panchagavya spray @

3% at flowering).

Higher net realization ( 38498 ha-1) was recorded under treatment P3

(Panchagavya spray @ 6% at flowering) followed by treatment P2 (Panchagavya

spray @ 3% at flowering) and maximum CBR value of 1:2.43 registered under


99
.….………………………………………………………………. …Summary and conclusion

treatment P2. While, the minimum net realization of 11291 ha-1 along with CBR

value of 1:1.25 were recorded under treatment P1 (Panchagavya drenching

(500 lit ha-1) at first irrigation).

CONCLUSION

From foregoing discussion, it can be concluded that for getting higher yield

and net profit/realization or return from summer greengram Cv."Meha". The crop

should be fertilized with 20 kg N ha-1 (43.5 kg urea) and 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (250 kg

Single Super Phosphate) as basal application with spraying of "panchagavya"@ 6%

at flowering stage under middle Gujarat conditions.

FUTURE LINE OF WORK

1. The experiment should be repeated for two or three seasons for evaluating

consistency and application of treatments to arrive at conclusive

recommendations

2. Such studies should also be conducted under different agro-climatic

conditions in different soils with different levels of fertilizer and

panchagavya.

100
References
VII. REFERENCES

Ahlawat, K. S., Singh, M. K., Avtar Singh, Lathwal, O. P. and Singh, V. K. (2012).
Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus levels on physiological, biochemical
parameters and economics of greengram in eucalyptus based
agrisilviculture system. Journal of Progressive Agriculture, 3 (1): 33-37.

Akter, S., Farid, A. T. M., Shil, N. C. and Rahman, A. (1998). Effect of different
fertilizers on nodulation and yield of cowpea. Legume Research, 21 (2):
74-78.

Ali, M. N., Ghatak, S. and Ragul, T. (2011). Biochemical analysis of panchagavya


and sanjibani and their effect on crop yield and soil health. Journal of
Crop and Weed, 7 (2): 84-86

Amareswari, Uma and Sujathamma, P. (2014). A study on the effect of different


organic supplements on the ascorbic acid and riboflavin content of
French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). International Journal of Emerging
Technologies in Computational and Applied Sciences, 8 (3): 269-271

Anjum, M. S., Ahmed, Z. I. And Rauf, CH. A. (2006). Effect of Rhizobium


inoculation and nitrogen fertilizer on yield and yield components of
Mungbean. International Journal of Agriculture & Biology, 8 (2): 238-
240.

Anonymous, (2004). Indian Harvest Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy Pvt.
Ltd., Mumbai.

Anonymous, (2014). http://agropedia.iitk.ac.in/ content/area-production-and prodct


-ivity major-pulses

Anuja, S. and Vijayalakshmi, C. N. (2014). Effect of organic nutrients on growth and


yield of vegetable cowpea. The Asian Journal of Horticulture, 9 (1): 136-
139

I
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Ardeshna, R. B., Modhwadia, M. M., Khanpara, V. D. and Patel, J. C. (1993).


Response of green gram (Phaseolus radiatus) to nitrogen, phosphorus
and Rhizobium inoculation. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 38 (3): 490-
492.

Baboo, R. and Mishra, S. K. (2001). Growth and pod production of cowpea (Vigna
sinesis Savi.) as affected by inoculation, nitrogen and phosphorus.
Annals of Agriculture Research, 22 (1): 104-106.

Bairwa, R. K, Nepalia, V., Balai, C. M., Chauhan, G. S. and Baldev Ram (2012).
Effect of phosphorus and sulphur on growth and yield of summer
mungbean. Journal of Food Legumes, 25 (3): 211-214.

Balasubramanian, A. V., Vijayalakshmi, K., Sridhar, S. and Armugusamy S. (2001).


Vrukshayurveda experiments linking ancient texts and farmers practices.
COMPAS Magazine, March 2001 pp: 36-39.

Bhadoria, R. B. S., Tomar, R. A. S., Khan, S. and Sharma, M. K. (1997). Effect of


phosphorus and sulphur on yield and quality of clusterbean (Cymopsis
tetragonoloba L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 42 (1): 131-134.

Bhalu, V. B., Sadaria, S. G., Kaneria, B. B. and Khanpara, V. D. (1995). Effect of


nitrogen, phosphorus and Rhizobium inoculation on yield and quality, N
and P uptake and economics of black gram (Phaseolus mungo). Indian
Journal of Agronomy, 40 (2): 316-318.

Britto, A. J. and Girija, L. S. (2006). Investigation on the effect of organic and


inorganic farming methods on blackgram and greengram. Indian Journal
of Agriculture Research, 40 (3): 204-207

Chandrakala M. (2008). Effect of FYM and fermented liquid manures on yield and
quality of chilli (Capsicum annuum L.) M.Sc.thesis, University of
Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad.

II
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Chaudhari, I. R. (2012). Effect of different organic sources on growth and yield of


summer greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek.). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis,
S.D.A.U., Sardarkrushinagar.

Chaudhari, I. R., Patel, D. M., Patel, G. N. and Patel, S. M. (2013). Effect of various
organic sources of nutrients on growth and yield of summer greengram
[Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek] Crop Research 46 (1, 2 & 3): 70-73 (2013).

Chittarpur, B. M., Kulkarni, B. S., Hiremath. S. M. and Hosmani, M. H. (1994).


Influence of nitrogen and phosphorus on growth and yield of short-
duration pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Mill sp.). Indian Journal of
Agronomy, 39 (4): 657-659.

Choudhary, H. R., Sharma, O. P., Yadav, L. R. and Choudhary, G. L. (2011). Effect


of organic sources and chemical fertilizer on productivity of mungbean.
Journal of Food Legumes, 24 (4): 324-326.

Chovatia, P. K., Ahlawat, R. P. S. and Trivedi, S. J. (1993). Growth and yield of


summer greengram (Vigna radiata L.) as affected by different dates of
sowing, Rhizobium inoculation and levels of phosphorus. Indian Journal
of Agronomy, 38 (3): 492-494.

Desai, C. M., Patel, G. N., Patel, D. M., Desai, C. K. And Mistry, B. I. (2014). Effect
of liquid bio-nutrients in conjuction with inorganic fertilizers on yield,
quality and nutrient uptake by summer cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.)
Walp.] Crop Research, 48 (1, 2 & 3): 42-46

Dhakal, Y., Meena, R. S., De, N., Verma, S. K. and Singh, A. (2015). Growth, yield
and nutrient content of mungbean (Vigna radiata l.) In response to INM
in eastern uttar pradesh, India. Bangladesh Journal of Botany, 44 (3):
479-482.

Donald, C. M. and Hamblin, J. (1976). The biological yield and harvest index of
cereals as agronomic and plant breeding criteria. Adv. Agron., 28 : 301-
364.
III
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Jackson, M. L. (1973). Soil Chemical Analysis, Prentice Hall of India Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, pp. 498.

Jat, R. A., Arvadia, M. K., Tandel, B., Patel T. U. and Mehta, R. S. (2012). Response
of saline water irrigated greengram (Vigna radiata) to land configuration,
fertilizer and farm yard manure in Tapi command area of South Gujarat.
Indian Journal of Agronomy, 57 (3): 270-274.

Kumar, R., Singh, Y. V., Singh, S., Latare, A. M., Mishra, P. K. and Supriya (2012).
Effect of phosphorus and sulphur nutrition on yield attributes, yield of
mungbean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek). Journal of Chemical and
Pharmaceutical Research, 4 (5): 2571-2573.

Kumaravelu, G. and Kadamban, D. (2009). Panchagavya and its effect on the green
gram cultivar K-851. International Journal of Plant Science, 4 (2): 409-
414.

Kumawat, R. N., Mahajan, S. S. and Mertia, R. S. (2011). Growth and yield of


clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonaloba) grown on light textured soils
with foliar application of fermented panchagavya. Indian Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, 81 (3): 230-35.

Luikham, E., Lhungdiam, J. and Singh, A. I. (2005). Influence of sources and levels
of phosphorus on growth and yield of greengram (Vigna radiata L.).
Legume Research, 28 (1): 59-61.

Malik, M. A., Saleem, M. F., Asghar, Ali and Ijaz Mahmood (2003). Effect of
nitrogen and phosphorus application on growth, yield and quality of
mungbean. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Science, 40 (3/4):133-136.

Mandal, S., Biswal, K. C. and Jana, P. K. (2005). Yield, economics, nutrient uptake
and consumptive use of water by summer greengram (Vigna radiata L.)
as influenced by irrigation and phosphorus application. Legume
Research, 28 (2): 131-133.

IV
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Manimekalai, C., Renganayaki, P. R. and Lakshmi, S. (2010). Efficacy of organic


invigourated seed on field productivity in black gram (Vigna mungo).
Green Farming, 1 (4): 363-365.

Manoj, Singh, R. K., Singh, A. N., Ram, H. and Prasad, S. R. (2014). Growth, yield
attributes and quality of summer greengram (Vigna radiata L.) as
influenced by nitrogen and irrigation levels. Annals of Agriculture
Research. New Series, 35 (1): 47-53

Matai, P. D. (2012). Response of summer greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek) to


varied concentrations of panchagavya. M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, S.D.A.U.,
Sardarkrushinagar.

Medhi, A. K., Dhar, S. and Roy, A. (2014). Effect of different growth regulators and
phosphorus levels on nodulation, yield and quality components in green
gram. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 19 (1):74–78

Mir, A. H., Lal, S. B., Salmani, M., Abid, M. and Khan, I.(2013). Growth, yield and
nutrient content of blackgram (vigna mungo) as influenced by levels of
phosphorus, sulphur and phosphorus solubilizing bacteria. SAARC
Journal of Agriculture, 11 (1): 1-6

Mishra, S. (2003). Effect of rhizobium inoculation, nitrogen and phosphorus on root


nodulation and nutrient uptake in cowpea (Vigna sinensissavi). Annals
of Agricultural Research, New series, 24 (1): 139-144.

Mishra, S. and Baboo, R. (1999). Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and seed inoculation
on cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.]. Indian Journal of Agronomy,
44 (2): 373-376.

Murade, N. B., Patil, D. B., Jagtap, H. D. and More, S. M. (2014). Effect of spacing
and fertilizer levels on growth and yield of urdbean. An International
Quarterly Journal of Life Sciences, 9 (4): 1545-1547

Natarajan, K. (2008). Book on panchagavya. pp 7-8.

V
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Olsen, S. R., Cole, V. C., Wetananle, F. S. and Dean, L. A. (1954).Estimation of


avaialble phosphorus in soil by extraction with sodium
bicarbonate.USDA, Circular No. 939.

Pal, A. K. and Jana, P. K. (1991). Effect of phosphorus, Rhizobium inoculation and


summer greengram (Vigna radiata L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 36
(4): 536-540.

Parvez, M. T., Paul, S. K. and Sarkar, M. A. R. (2013). Yield and yield contributing
characters of mungbean as affected by variety and levels of phosphorus.
Journal of Agroforestry and Environment, 7 (1): 115-118

Patel, I. C., Patel, M. M., Patel, B. S. and Tikka, S. B. S. (2003). Effect of row
spacing and fertilizer does on growth and yield attributing charaters of
cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] under rainfed conditions. GAU
Research Journal, 28 (1) :37-39.

Patel, L. R., Salvi, N. N. and Patel, R. H. (1992). Response of greengram (Vigna


radiata L.) varieties to sulphur fertilization under different levels of
nitrogen and phosphorus. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 37 (4): 831-833.

Patel, J. R, and Patel, I. G. (1994). Effect of foliar fertilization of nitrogen and


phosphorus on growth and yield of summer greengram (Phaseolus
radiatus). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 39 (4): 578-580.

Patel, J. J., Mevada, K. D. and Chotaliya, R. L. (2004). Response of summer


mungbeen to date of sowing and levels of fertilizer. Indian Journal of
Pulses Research 17(2):143-144.

Patel, M. M. (2012). Effect of panchagavya on growth and yield of cowpea (Vigna


unguiculata (L.) Walp.). M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, S.D.A.U.,
Sardarkrushinagar.

VI
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Patel, R. G., Patel, M. P., Patel, H. C. and Patel, R. B. (1984). Response of arhar
varieties to varying row spacing and levels of fertilizers under clayey
soils of south Gujarat. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 29 (1): 135-136.

Patel, S. R. and Thakur, D. S. (2003). Response of black gram (Phaseolus mungo) to


levels of phosphorus and phosphate solubilizing bacteria. Annals of
Agricultural Research, 24 (4): 819-823.

Patil, B. P. and Jadhav, M. S. (1994). Effect of fertilizer and Rhizobium on yield of


greengram on medium black soils of Konkan. Journal of Indian Society
of Coastal Agricultural Research, 12 (1&2): 103-104.

Patil, S. V., Halikatti, S. I., Hiremath, S. M., Babalad, H. B., Sreenivasa, M. N.,
Hebsur, N. S. And Somanagouda, G. (2012). Effect of organics on
growth and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in vertisols.
Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science, 25 (3): 326-331

Piper, C. S. (1966). Soil and Plant Analysis. Hans Publishers, Bombay.

Rajendrakumar, Singh, V. P. and Singh, S. N. (2002). Momentary analysis of N and


P fertilization to moong bean during summer season. Annals of Biology
19(2):123-127.

Rajkhowa, D. J., Thakuria, K. and Baroova, S. R. (1992). Response of summer


greengram (Vigna radiata L.) varieties to source and levels of
phosphorus. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 37 (3): 589-590.

Ram, S. N. and Dixit, R. S. (2000). Effect of dates of sowing and phosphorus on


nodulation, uptake of nutrient and yield of summer greengram [Vigna
radiata (L.) Wilczek.]. Crop Research, 19 (3): 414-417.

Rana, N. S., Singh, G. V. and Ahlawat, I. P. S. (1998). Effect of nitrogen, Rhizobium


inoculation and phosphorus on root nodulation, dry matter, yield and
nutrient uptake in pigeonpea. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 43 (1): 102-
105.

VII
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Reddy, S. R. (2013). Agronomy of field crops. pp 325-329.

Rudreshappa, T. S. and Halikatti, S. I. (2002). Response of greengram to nitrogen


and phosphorus levels in paddy fallows. Karnataka Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, 15 (10): 4-7.

Saini, L. H., Chaudhari, , P. P. and Saini, A. K. (2015). Effect of integrated nitrogen


management on growth, yield and quality of greengram [Vigna radiata
(L) Wilczek] in north Gujarat. GAU Research Journal, 40 (2): 74-77

Sangeetha, V. and Thevanathan, R. (2010). Effect of foliar application of seaweed


based panchagavya on the antioxidant enzymes in crop plants. The
Journal of American Science, 6 (2): 185-188.

Sarkar, R. K. and Banik, P. (1991). Response of greengram to nitrogen, phosphorus and


molybdenum. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 36 (1): 91-94.

Sasode, D. S. (2008). Response of greengram (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek) to


fertility levels and sulphur sources application. Agricultural Science
Digest, 28 (1):18-21.

Saxena, K. K., Verma, H. R. and Saxena, H. K. (1996). Effect of phosphorus and


potassium on greengram. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 41 (1): 84-87.

Sharma, M. P. and Singh, R. (1997). Effect of phosphorus and sulphur on greengram


(Vigna radiata L.). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 42 (4): 650-652.

Shivakumar, R. and Sidramappa, P. (2004). Influence of sources and levels of


phosphorus with and without phosphorus solubilizing bacteria (PSB)
seed treatment on growth and yield of soybean (Glycine max L.). Annals
of Agricultural Research, 25 (2): 333-334.

Shivran, D. R. and Ahlawat, I. P. S. (2000). Effect of cropping system and fertilizers


on pigeonpea and wheat in pigeonpea-wheat sequence. Indian Journal of
Agronomy, 45 (4): 669-676.

VIII
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Singh, A. K., Choudhary, A. K. and Roysharma, R. P. (1993). Effect of inoculation


and fertilizer levels on yield, yield attributes and nutrient uptake of
greengram and black gram. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 38 (4): 663-
665.

Singh, A., Tripathi, P. N. and Singh, R. (2007). Effect of Rhizobium inoculation,


nitrogen and phosphorus level on growth, yield and quality of kharif
cowpea. Crop Research, 33 (1, 2 and 3): 71-73.

Singh, B., Singh, C. P. and Singh, M. (2003). Response of summer moong (Vigna
radiata L.) to levels of phosphorus and PSB inoculation in sandy loam
soil. Annals of Agricultural Research, 24 (4): 860-866.

Singh, G. V., Rana, N. S. and Ahlawat, I. P. S. (1998). Effect of nitrogen, rhizobium


inoculation and phosphorus on growth and yield of pigeon pea (Cajanus
cajan ). Indian Journal of Agronomy, 42 (3): 358-361.

Singh, G., Hari Ram, Sekhon, H. S., Aggarwal, N., Mahesh Kumar, Parminder
Kaur, Jagmohan Kaur and Poonam Sharma (2011). Effect of nitrogen
and phosphorus application on productivity of summer mungbean sown
after wheat. Journal of Food Legumes, 24 (4): 327-329.

Singha, D. D. and Sharma, A. (2001). Response of black gram (Phaseolus mungo) to


phosphorus fertilization and Rhizobium inoculation in the hill soils of
Assam. Annals of Agricultural Research, 22 (1): 151-153.

Somasundarm, E., Sankaran, N., Meena, S., Thiyagarajan, T. M., Chandaragi, K. K.


and Panneerselvam, S. (2003). Response of greengram to varied
concentration of panchagavya (organic nutrition) foliar application.
Madras Agricultural Journal, 90 (1-3): 169-172.

Soni, K. C. and Gupta, S. C. (1999). Effect of irrigation schedule and phosphorus on


yield, quality and water use efficiency of summer greengram. Indian
Journal of Agronomy, 44 (1): 130-133.

IX
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Srinivas, M. and Mohammad, S. (2002). Effect of Rhizobium inoculation and


different, levels of nitrogen and phosphorus on yield and economics of
greengram [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek.]. Crop Research, 42 (3): 463-
466.

Subbiah, B. B. and Asija, G. L. (1956). A rapid procedure for the determination of


available nitrogen in soils. Current Science, 25: 259-260.

Subramanian, A., Palaniappan, S., Thirunavakkarasu, R. and Venkataehalal, C.


(1978). A note on fertilizer and spacing requirement of red gram (Co. 2).
Madras Agricultural Journal, 65 (1): 52-53.

Sugha, S. K. (2005). Antifungal potential of panchagavya. Plant disease research


Ludhiana, 20: 156-158

Swaminathan, C., Swaminathan, V. and Vijayalakshmi, K., 2007. Panchgavya -


Boon to Organic Farming. International Book Distributing Co., India.

Tank, U.N. (1988). Response of summer greengram to irrigation scheduling based on


cumulative evaporation under varing levels of nitrogen and phosphorus.
M.Sc (Agri) Thesis, Gujarat Agricultural University, Sardarkrushinagar.

Tomar, T. S., Kumar S. and Tomar, S. (2013). Effects of plant density, nitrogen and
phosphorus on black gram (Vigna mungo L. hepper). Annals of
Agriculture Research. New Series, 34 (4): 374-379

Walkley, A. J. and Black, I. A. (1934).An examination of the Degtjareff method for


determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the
chromic acid titration method.Soil Science,37: 29 – 38.

Xu, Hui Lian and Xu, H. L. (2000). Effects of a microbial inoculants and organic
fertilizers on the growth, photosynthesis and yield of sweet corn. Journal
of Crop Production, 3 (1):183-214.

X
…………………………………………………………………….…………References

Yadav, P. and Tripathi, A. K. (2013). Growth and yield of green gram (Vigna radita)
under foliar application of panchagavya and leaf extracts of endemic
plants. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 58 (4): 618-621.

Yadav, R. D. and Malik, C. V. S. (2005). Effect of Rhizobium inoculation and


various sources of nitrogen on growth and yield of cowpea. Legume
Research, 28 (1): 38-41.

Yakadri, M., Ramesh Tharikunta and Rao, L. M. (2002). Effect of nitrogen and
phosphorus on growth and yield of greengram (Vigna radiata L.
Wilczek). Legume Research, 25 (2): 139-141.

XI
Appendix
APPENDIX

Appendix-I
Cost of cultivation of summer greengram and economical details
Appendix-I (A): Details of common cost of cultivation practices of summer
greengram
Sr. No. Particulars Cost ( ha-1)
(A) COMMON COST
A. Land preparation
1. Tractor cultivation (2hrs.) 1000
2. Harrowing and planking (1 PB, 2 L) 750
3. Field layout and opening of furrows (4 L) 600
4. Bunds and channel preparation (3 L) 450
B. Greengram sowing
5. Cost of seed (25 kg) 3750
6. Cost of sowing 375
C. After care
7. Irrigation charges : 5 irrigation (10 L) 3000
8. Thinning (2 L) 300
9. Weeding two time ( 14 L) 2100
10. Interculturing 750
D. Plant protection measures
11. Dimethoate 30 % EC (1 liter) 320
12. Dimethoate application charge (4 L) 1200
13. Triazophos 40 % EC (1 liter) 430
14. Triazophos application charge (4 L) 600
15. Quinalphos 25% EC(1 liter) 430
16. Quinalphos application charge (4 L) 600
17. Pyriproxifen 10 % EC (0.25 lit) 500
18. Pyriproxifen application charge (4 L) 600
E. Harvesting (15 L) 2250
F. Land revenue @ 300/ha/annum 100
Total common cost (A to F) 20105
G. Supervision charges @ 10 % (for four months) 503
H. Interest on working capital @ 12 % 618
Total common cost 21226
Note: L= Labour; PB= Pair of bullock

I
APPENDIX

Appendix-I (B): Rate/price of different products and inputs taken into


consideration for calculation of economics
Sr. No. Particulars Rate
( )
A) PRICE OF INPUTS
1. Tractor cultivation ( /hr) 500
2. Irrigation charges ( /ha) 300
3. Pair of bullock ( /day) 450
4. Labour charges ( /day) 150
5. Seed ( /kg) 150
6. Urea ( /kg) 6.26
7. SSP( /kg) 7.00
8. Panchagavya( /lit) 42
9. Dimethoate 30% EC( /lit) 320
10. Triazophos 40% EC( /lit) 430
11. Quinalphos 25% EC( /lit) 430
12. Pyriproxifen 10% EC( /lit) 2000
(B) SALE PRICE OF OUTPUT (Greengram)
1. Seed ( /kg) 65.05
2. Stalk ( /kg) 1.00

Details of cost of fertilizer and Panchagavya


Application Total cost of
Quantity Required Cost
-1 -1 charges treatments
Treatment (kg ha ) ( ha ) -1 -1
( ha ) ( ha )
Fertilizer (F)
F0 00 (NPK) 00 00 00
F1 10-20-00 (NPK) 1011 150 1161
F2 15-30-00 (NPK) 1517 150 1667
F3 20-40-00 (NPK) 2022 150 2172

Panchagavya (P)
P0 500 lit 00 1800 1800
P1 500 lit 21000 900 21900
P2 15 lit 1260 1800 3060
P3 30 lit 2520 1800 4320

II
APPENDIX

APPENDIX – II (A)

Analysis of variance for growth and yield attributes and yield of summer greengram
Source of Degree Mean sum of square
variance of
freedom Plant population Plant height Weight of dry No of branches
root nodules plant-1

At 30 At 45 At
Initial Final At 30 to 40 DAS At harvest
DAS DAS Harvest

Replication 2 0.120 0.070 3.443 0.320 3.191 0.040 0.095


Factor F 3 0.467 0.498 36.287* 126.093* 236.525* 18.285* 11.613*
Factor P 3 0.068 0.120 3.909 13.982* 30.258* 13.088* 1.328*
FxP 9 0.010 0.035 0.333 0.685 0.479 0.337 0.036
Error 30 0.244 0.271 1.403 4.702 8.839 4.394 0.157
Total 47 - - - - - - -

* Significant at 5 % level of significance

III
APPENDIX

APPENDIX – II (B)

Analysis of variance for yield attributes, yield and quality parameters of summer greengram

Mean sum of square

Pods Seeds Pod Test Seed Stover Harvest Protein


Source Degree plant-1 pod-1 length Weight Yield yield index content
of of
variance freedom
At At At At At At At At
harvest harvest harvest Harvest Harvest harvest harvest Harvest

Replication 2 3.831 0.478 0.412 0.217 254.98 444.40 0.500 0.031

Factor F 3 340.012* 7.344* 9.085* 57.229* 248601.84* 561155.45* 5.599* 9.990*


Factor P 3 89.758* 1.764* 1.484* 12.857* 124481.97* 356980.82* 0.334* 6.451*

FxP 9 2.961 0.109 0.111 0.409 6383.02 23575.79 4.025 0.046


Error 30 12.508 0.237 0.148 4.324 7916.97 29558.73 13.843 2.134

Total 47 - - - - - -

* Significant at 5 % level of significance

IV
APPENDIX

APPENDIX – II (C)

Analysis of variance for chemical parameters of plant


Mean sum of square

Nitrogen Phosphorus Potash


Source Degree
Content Content content
of of
variance freedom
Seed Stover Seed Stover Seed Stover

Replication 2 0.0008 0.0021 0.0006 0.0011 0.0002 0.0029


Factor F 3 0.2553* 0.1067* 0.0713* 0.0169* 0.0330* 0.1355*
Factor P 3 0.1650* 0.0048 0.0030 0.0009 0.0020 0.0123
FxP 9 0.0012 0.0004 0.0005 0.0001 0.0001 0.0016
Error 30 0.0547 0.0017 0.0011 0.0003 0.0007 0.0043
Total 47 - - - - - -

* Significant at 5 % level of significance

V
APPENDIX

Analysis of variance for chemical parameters of plant and soil

Mean sum of square

Degree Available Available Available


Source of Nitrogen uptake Phosphorus uptake Potash uptake
of N P2O5 K
variance
freedom After After
After harvest Harvest
Seed Stover Seed Stover Seed Stover
harvest

Replication 2 0.36 0.52 0.14 0.37 0.0038 1.28 343.76 4.067 118.66
Factor F 3 432.93* 115.62* 18.49* 12.31* 17.015* 273.23* 5639.77* 282.02* 4673.37*
Factor P 3 230.01* 33.54* 3.71* 2.98* 5.1343* 110.25* 1918.01* 15.78* 1155.69*
FxP 9 9.40 1.59 0.25 0.21 0.25037 8.91 24.05 0.45 49.43
Error 30 11.92 2.43 0.27 0.15 0.3342 8.36 347.50 4.33 250.26
Total 47 - - - - - - - - -

* Significant at 5 % level of significance

VI
CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that I have no objection for supplying to any

scientist one copy of any part of this thesis for rendering reference service in a library

of documentation centre

Place: Anand

Date: / 09/2016 (Vipul Y. Patel)

You might also like