Skuastjr 19 1 010maizemechanization

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/315696714
Maize mechanization for hill Agriculture to enhance productivity and

proﬁtability
Article · January 2017
CITATIONS READS
5 3,858
3 authors:
Jagvir Dixit Junaid Khan

Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir
98 PUBLICATIONS 285 CITATIONS 43 PUBLICATIONS 259 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Rohitashw Kumar
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir
205 PUBLICATIONS 1,463 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
M.Tech research View project
Climate Change Impacts on Indus Basin View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Jagvir Dixit on 30 March 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SKUAST Journal of Research 19(1): 83-91; (2017) Research Paper
Maize mechanization for hill Agriculture to enhance productivity and profitability
Jagvir Dixit*, J.N. Khan and Rohitashw Kumar
Division of Agricultural Engineering, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology

of Kashmir, Shalimar, Srinagar-190 025, Jammu and Kashmir (India)
*e-mail: jagvirdixit@yahoo.com
(Received 22 November, 2016; accepted 03 February, 2017)
ABSTRACT
Farm mechanization plays a major role in enhancing the production and

productivity of different crops due to timeliness of operations, better quality
of operations and precision in the application of the inputs. Though there has
been increase in the use of farm machinery in Indian Agriculture yet use of
farm machineries is very limited in hill agriculture particularly in maize
cultivation. A number of suitable improved tools, implements and machinery
Downloaded From IP - 14.139.231.178 on dated 24-Mar-2017
were identified, procured/developed and evaluated by Division of Agricultural

Engineering, SKUAST-K, Srinagar to bridge the existing mechanization gap
for hilly regions of Jammu and Kashmir state. A package of improved farm
Members Copy, Not for Commercial Sale
equipment and machine for maize mechanization is presented along with

www.IndianJournals.com
results for the benefits of extension workers and users.
Key words: Capacity, hill mechanization, improved equipment, maize
Maize is the largest cereal crop of Jammu and Kashmir, which is grown in the high rainfall area with good
drainage. Maize is being cultivated in about 3.14x 10 8 ha area annually. The total production of maize in J&
K for the year 2012-13 was 5.12 x 105 M.T. in 0.31 m ha area thus giving the average yields of 16.48 q /ha
(Anonymous, 2013). About 60 % cultivated area is under canal irrigation (Dixit et al., 2016). To increase
food production, the productivity of land and labour need to be increased substantially which will require
both higher energy inputs and better management of food production systems. The total maize production
increased from 4.44x 105 during 1990-91 to 5.12x 105 in 2012-13. The increase in production of food grain
was possible as a result of increased irrigation, adoption of high yielding variety seeds, high dose of fertilizer
and plant protection chemicals and increased availability of farm power.
Main farm power sources are draft animals and human power in the region. Tractors are used in small
number mainly for primary tillage operations in plains which are near towns. Due to undulating topography
and poor economic condition of the farmer, most of the agricultural operations are performed manually with
the help of traditional hand tools and implements manufactured locally by the artisans and blacksmiths.
Output capacity of these implements is low and drudgery in its use is high. The local methods of maize
cultivation are labours intensive. High labours demand in each operation adversely affects the timeliness of
operations, thereby reducing the crop yield. The extent of farm mechanization is considered to be the
indicator of the quality of farm life. Mechanization of farms helps in reduction of human drudgery besides
ensuring the timeliness of operation and solving the problem of scarcity of labours during peak cropping
season (Thakur et al., 2016). It is an important means of increasing agricultural productivity through efficient
utilization of biological and chemical inputs besides helping to achieve timeliness of operations and
improving the quality of crop. Though modernizations and technology advancement is taking place at a rapid
pace, yet there exist a large mechanization gaps in the region. Due to undulating topography and
fragmentation of land in small pieces, the mechanization in Jammu and Kashmir State is very limited.
The changing socio-psychology and economy of the region are affecting the growth pattern of
agricultural/ horticultural crops and use of farm machinery in particular, which needs to be assessed. The
improved hand tools/ equipments try to achieve one or more of the following:
 Reduce drudgery & Increase utilization efficiency of inputs.
 Timeliness in operations and reduce turn around time for next crop.
84 Jagvir Dixit et al.
 Increase productivity of man- machine system & conserve energy.

 Improve quality of work and also quality of produce.
 Enhance the quality of work life of agricultural workers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The various improved tools, farm equipment and machines procured/developed under ICAR cess fund
projects were evaluated under actual field conditions. The primary data collected from field evaluation and
some secondary data were also used.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The operation-wise field results of different farm equipment/machines for maize growing farming
community of hilly region are presented and discussed.
1. Field Preparation:
Seed bed preparation for sowing/ planting to different crops is done through primary and secondary tillage
operations. Loosening of soil is done to achieve a desired granular soil structure for a seed bed and to allow
rapid infiltration and good retention of moisture, to provide adequate air exchange capacity within the soil
and to minimize resistance to root penetration and shoot growth. After loosening of soil, smoothening of seed
bed is required for proper operation of sowing machine, better distribution of irrigation water and quick
disposal of excess rain water. The study conducted at CSKHPKV, Palampur showed that field prepared by
power tiller (28.88 q/ha) gave higher yield than field prepared by indigenous plough (22.78 q/ha) under
maize cultivation (Table 1.1). Hence soil pulverization played a very important role in enhancing
productivity of maize.
Table 1.1: Performance results of power tiller and bullock farming system for maize crop production
S. No. Parameters Treatments
T1 T2 T3
1 Size of equipment, mm 600 600 200
2 Soil M.C. at sowing time, % (db) 20.70 20.47 19.82
3 Bulk density, g/cc; Before operation 1.42 1.44 1.43
After operation 1.32 1.29 1.35
4 Percentage decrease in bulk density 7.04 10.42 5.59
5 Speed of operation, km/h 1.76 1.85 2.39
6 Depth of operation, mm 105.0 117.5 122.5
7 Mean soil clod diameter, mm 15.81 10.66 19.11
8 Effective field capacity, ha/h 0.075 0.085 0.026
9 Crop yield, q/ha 26.79 28.88 22.78
T1= Rota tilling once + planking once+ sowing by conventional method; T 2= Rota (Source: Anonymous, 2004)
tilling twice + planking once+ sowing by conventional method; T 3= Ploughing
twice by indigenous plough+ planking once+ sowing by conventional method.
1.1 Light Weight Rotary Tiller: The available conventional power
tillers in Indian market are slightly heavy for hilly region of the
Valley, which makes them difficult to operate at higher altitude.
Light weight power tiller weighs only 120 kg, having 5.5 hp petrol
start kerosene run engine as prime mover (Fig. 1.1). The power
tiller is light in weight, easy to operate and could be lifted from
one terrace to other. The depth of operation can be varied by the
adjustment provided in the rear side. It is suitable for tillage on
sloppy and valley land, intercultural operation around the trees,
weeding in orchards, vegetables and widely spaced crops, Fig. 1.1 : Field preparation using Light
pumping, sowing operation etc Weight Rotary Tiller
Mechanization of maize in hill agriculture 85
Performance results:
Operation Rotary Tilling
Working width, mm 480
Depth of operation, mm 45-81
Field capacity, ha/h 0.05
Field efficiency, % 67
Soil inversion, % 80.5
Cost of operation, Rs/ha 952
2. Sowing/ Planting Operation
The recommended row to row spacing, seed rate/ plant population, plant to plant spacing and depth of seed/
plant placement vary from crop and for different agro climatic conditions to achieve optimum yield. In hilly
areas, most of the farmers are using traditional methods i.e. broadcasting or seed dropping behind plough for
sowing maize, which affects germination due to non uniform placement of seeds at proper depth. Also
farmers apply 30-40 % higher seed rate than
recommended to ensure optimum plant population.
The placement of seed at proper depth is the most
important factor in sowing, which has significant role
in crop production particularly under rain fed

conditions.
2.1 Rotary Dibbler: This equipment is a manually

operated push type for dibbling bold and medium

size seeds in rows at uniform spacing in well
prepared soil (Fig. 2.1). It consists of seed hopper,
seed delivery jaw, jaw operating lever, wooden roller,
handle, transport cum press wheel etc. The rotary
dibbler was evaluated for feasibility testing in maize
and rajmash crops. Fig. 2.1 Performance of rotary dibbler in maize
The performance of rotary dibbler was observed good for both the crops (Table 2.1). Although some
higher seed rate was observed in rajmash crop than actual seed rate of the crop. The germination of the both
crops was found good.
Table 2.1: Performance of rotary dibbler in maize and rajmash
Parameters Observed value
Crop sown Maize Rajmash
Seed rate, kg/ha 24 55
Variety C-15 Local
Speed of operation, km/h 2.5 2.56
Depth of planting, mm 17 17
Field capacity, ha/h 0.026 0.029
Field efficiency, % 72 65
Missing, % 7 3
Labour requirement, man-h/ha 38 34
Operating cost, Rs/ha 628.07 563.10
(Source: Dixit, 2007)
2.2 Multi crop planter: The machine consists of vertical rotor type seed metering mechanism, fluted roller
type fertilizer metering system and chisel type furrow openers (Fig. 2.2). The machine is provided with seed
hoppers for individuals furrows. Provision has been made for the adjustment of depth, spacing of furrow
openers and fertilizer rate. Rotors with different size cells are provided to meter various types of seeds. Depth
of seed placement was observed 5 to 6.5 cm.
Fig. 2.2 Multi Crop Planter Fig. 2.3 Maize planting by Tractor drawn raised
bed planter
2.3 Tractor drawn Raised Bed planter: The traditional method of maize sowing is on flat bed with row
spacing of 30-40 cm. Crust formation and failure of crops due to poor germination especially in dry farming
are common problems with the existing practices. Ridge furrow system of planting of maize crop offers wider
scope not only in rain fed areas but also under irrigated conditions. The FLD trials of tractor drawn raised bed
planter showed 5-10% increase in maize yield over conventional practice.
3. Weeding and Intercultural Operation

Weeding/ intercultural operations in maize crops are done manually. The
introduction of rotary dibbler/ multicrop planter has enabled maize planting
in rows. The newly developed wheel hand hoes can be used for efficient
weeding/ intercultural operations in rows. The field trials of manually
operated wheel hand hoe at Various Universities in India shows that the
implement reduces drudgery due to less time taken (50-55%) compared to
hand weeding. The use of equipment also results in saving of cost of
operation by 45 %. Farmers are of the opinion that wheel hand hoe
operation in standing position of operator allowed weeding without fatigue.
Due to shortage of labour for timeliness of operation, farmers liked the
equipment for enhancing productivity. The equipment proved socio-
economically viable and acceptable to women laborers for faster and higher
coverage. Fig 3.1Wheel hand hoe
3.1 Manually Operated wheel hand hoe: The PAU wheel hoe (Fig. 3.1) was evaluated in different
vegetables and maize crop and performance of this wheel hoe was found satisfactory at moisture content of
16-18% (Table 3.1). The wheel hoe does not work properly under low moisture content of soil particularly in
heavy soil.
Table 3.1: Performance of wheel hand hoe
Make PAU
Power used One man
Crop for which used Tomato, garlic, mustard, maize
Moisture content of soil, % 16-18
Damage of crops 0.5-5%
Speed of operation, km/h 2-3
Filed capacity, ha/hr 0.025-0.035
Weeding efficiency, % 65-70
Labor requirement, man-hr/ha 28-40
Cost of operation, Rs/ha 350-490
3.2 Sweep Cultivator: The sweep type cultivator can be used for first
and second interculture operations in crops having more than 30 cm
row to row spacing (Fig. 3.2). Depth can be adjusted by latch and
quadrant arrangement. It saves considerable human energy. The test
results of the machine indicated that weeding efficiency was 50-60%
in maize and soybean. The crop damage was observed 0.5-1.5% and
human energy requirement was 4.5 man-h/ha.
3.3 Power weeder: A power weeder developed at TNAU was tested
at the University farm in maize and orchards (Fig. 3.2). The power
weeder consists of 8.3 hp diesel engine, chassis, drive wheels and
weeding attachments. Engine power is transmitted to multi speed gear
box and then to ground wheels and rotary weeder. There is also
provision to adjust wheel settings according to the row-row spacing of
the crop. The feasibility testing of power weeder was carried out in
about 1.0 ha in orchards and maize. For the weeding of maize crops, Fig. 3.2: Sweep cultivator in
two sets of central tynes were removed. operation
Table 3.2: Performance results of power weeder

Parameters Observed values
Types of soil Silty loam Silty loam

Crop High density Apple, pears Maize
Row spacing, cm 400 40

Plant to plant spacing, cm 200 20

Types of weed grass Small and broad leaves,
Bulk density, g/ cm3; Before use 1.34 1.29
After use 1.28 1.23
Working depth, mm 40-50 45-50
Working width, mm 470 470
Actual field capacity, ha/h 0.11 0.10
Weeding efficiency, % 78.57 65.5
Plants damaged, % nil 5.0
Fuel consumption, l/h 1.3 1.2
Operating cost, Rs/ha 711.18 758.30
Labor requirement, man-hr/ha 10 10
Labor saving over manual weeding, % 67 67
4. Plant Protection Equipments
Chemical are widely used for controlling diseases, insects and weeds
in the maize crop. They need to be applied on plants and soil in the
form of spray, dust or mist. Duster and sprayers are generally used
for applying chemicals. Dusting, the simpler method of applying
chemicals is best suited to vegetables and is usually requires simple
equipment. But it is less efficient than spraying, because of low
retention of the dust. High volume spraying to some extent
overcomes the failings of each of the above two methods while
retaining the good points of both. A sprayer that delivers droplets
large enough to wet the surface readily should be used for proper
application. Spraying techniques are classified as high volume (HV),
low volume (LV) and ultra low volume (ULV), according to the total
volume of liquid applied per unit of ground area. Initially high
volume spraying technique was used for pesticide application but Fig. 3.3 TNAU Power weeder
with the advent of new pesticides, the trend is to use least amount of operation in maize
carrier or diluents liquid. Different designs of spraying equipment

have been developed for different types of application and field and
crop condition. Knapsack sprayer, foot sprayer and duster are
especially suitable for spray application in maize crop.
4.1 Knapsack Sprayer: These are very common sprayer used by

small and marginal farmers across the country. These are manually
operated and mounted on the back of the operator (Fig. 4.1). It is
suitable for all the crops having standing height up to 1.0 m. It saves
72.8 % labour and 48 % cost over the manual spreading of chemicals
(Table 4.1). These are commercially available. Fig. 4.1 Knapsack Sprayer
Table 4.1: Performance results of Knapsack sprayer
Dimensions (l x b x h), cm 55 x 25 x 60
Tank capacity, lit 8-10
Weight (without liquid), kg 3.5-4.5
Field capacity, ha/h 0.07
Nozzle Type flood/ hollow cone
Operating pressure, kg/sq cm 1.5-1.7

Length of operator’s handle, cm 50-70
Material of construction -
Cylinder Brass
Tank Plastic
Handle Iron/ Aluminum
Cost, Rs. 1500-2000
5. Harvesting Operation
Maize crop is harvested after normal maturity with the objective to take out maize cob and straw without
loss. Harvesting of maize crop is traditionally done by manual methods of using local sickle. The traditional
sickle involves drudgery and is labour intensive. Rapid harvest facilitates extra days for land preparation and
early planting of next crop. The use of improved tools or machine can help to harvest at proper stage of crop
maturity and reduce drudgery and operation time.
Table 5.1: Performance results of serrated sickle
Overall dimension (l x w x h), mm 350 x 110 x 45
Length of cutting edge, mm 255
Width of cutting edge, mm 26
Radius of curvature (Inner & outer), mm 195 & 207
No. of teeth per cm 5
Weight, gm 160
Cost, Rs 30
Performance results
Crop Rice, Maize and Beans
Field capacity, ha/h 0.009 to 0.020
Labour requirement, man-h/ha 50- 109
Cost of operation, Rs/ha 437 - 953
5.1 Serrated Sickle: It has a serrated

curved blade and a wooden handle
(Fig. 5.1). The handle of improved
sickle has a bend at the rear for better
grip and to avoid hand injury during
operation. Serrated blade sickles cut
the crop by friction cutting like in saw
blade. The crop is held in one hand
and the sickle is pulled along arc for
cutting. The average field capacity for
different crops is 0.015 ha/hr. which Fig.5.1: Serrated Sickle in operation
is 40%more than traditional sickle (Table 5.1). It weighs 160 gm, which is very less as compared to
traditional sickle & reduces muscular stress. It is made up of spring steel and hence it does not require
frequent sharpening of blade. It costs Rs. 30/-
6. Shelling operation
Maize shelling is based on the principle that when
some impact or pounding is given on cob, the grains
are separated from cobs. Most of the farmers are
using conventional method of maize shelling like
extraction of grain from the cob with the help of

fingers or beating with the stick, which are slow and
labour consuming process. Ergonomically, these

methods of maize shelling create drudgery to the

users. With the increase of mechanism, different
types of manual or power operated maize shellers
have been developed to improve quality of work and
produce. Fig. 6.1: Maize shelling by Tubular Maize Sheller
6.1 Tubular Maize Sheller: CIAE Octagonal tubular maize sheller (Fig. 6.1) was tested at the research farm
and the capacity of sheller was found 13.5 – 16.9 kg/hr, which was about 2-times more than traditional
method. Also little force was required to shell the grain. It is clear from the Table 6.1 that moisture content
of the grain affected the capacity of maize Sheller to a great extent.
[[
Table: 6.1: Field performance of tubular maize sheller

Moisture Shelling Labor Shelling Damage Cleaning Operating cost,
content of capacity, requirement, efficiency (%) efficiency, % Rs/q
grain (%) kg/hr man-hr/kg (%)
22.3 13.5 0.074 96.4 4.1 100 86.33
20.5 14.1 0.071 98.5 3.2 100 82.83
18.5 16.5 0.061 99.5 1.2 100 71.16
16.5 16.9 0.059 99.6 nil 100 68.83
Average 15.25 0.066 98.5 2.12 100 77.28
Damage of grain was observed negligible, when the moisture of grain was less than 18%. The dimensions of
the cob also affected the performance of maize sheller. It was observed that dimensions of cob (length x
diameter) less than 85 x 35 mm, was difficult to shell by this Sheller.
6.2 Foot operated Maize Cob Sheller: This is foot operated standing type maize cob sheller. In this maize
sheller user has to feed continuously a cob in feeder by one hand and rotating the maize shelling unit
continuously with the help of foot to shell the maize cob (Fig. 6.2). Two persons are required for pedaling
and inserting the cobs in four octagonal maize shelling units. Due to forward and backward twist, the grains
from the cobs get detached. Maize grains obtained after shelling were collected in a bin through an outlet.
The tapered fins of the shellers provided a frictional force over the grain layers. The shelling capacity of the
equipment was 24.27 q/hr with shelling efficiency of 97.32 % and grain damage of 5.31 %
(Dixit et al. 2012).
Fig. 6.3: Maize dehusker cum sheller in Fig. 6.2: Foot operated maize sheller
operation
6.3 Maize dehusker cum sheller
Maize is manually dehusked and subsequently sun dried before being shelled. All these operations are time
consuming and arduous resulting in huge losses in quality and quantity. Manually operated rotary maize
shellers are suitable for small to medium farmers. Multicrop threshers are able to shell maize cobs but
dehusking was a prerequisite. PAU, Ludhiana has developed peg type maize dehusker cum sheller having
capacity 450 to 650 kg/h at different moisture content (Fig. 6.3). Shelling efficiency was found 98-99.5 %
and the maximum percentage of broken grains was 2.0% (Table 6.2).
Table 6.2: Performance results of maize dehusker cum sheller
Parameters Observations Parameters Observations
Crop variety Sheetal Grain straw ration 4.2
m. c. of grain 12.1-18.5 Cylinder speed, rpm 670-750
Broken grain, % 1-3 Unthreshed grain, % 0.74
Threshing efficiency, % 98-99.5 Cleaning efficiency,% 90-95
Grain output capacity, q/h 4.5-6.5 Blown kernel,% 1-3
Labour requirement, man-h/ha 5 Labour saving in comparison 50-60
to traditional shelling, %
(Source: Anonymous, 2004)
Conclusion: The improved tools and machines play a very important role in the development of agriculture.
But the points which the extension engineer has to keep in mind are that of helping the farmers to make the
selection of tools according to requirements and perceived constraints. All the farmers will not require the
same tools or the machines. The capacity of farmers to buy the tools is also important. Some times the
institutional support in the introduction of technology and mechanization is to be encouraged. The banks play
a very vital role in providing the finances but they are mostly interested in the capacity of farmer to pay back
the loan. The companies are, to sale the product and many times they want their products should be
subsidized by developmental agencies. Hence as professional, they have to provide support to the farmers to
make the right choice and selections for the tools and machines. As most of the hill farmers are small and
marginal, they will mostly depend on the manually operated tools and equipments. Therefore the tools which
are scientifically designed, tested and useful must be introduced. Many times the work capacity of farmers do
not match the operational requirements, resulting in rejection of technology after it is introduced. Hence
application of socioeconomic and human considerations in agricultural tools and machines play a very vital
role and it should be given due consideration in introduction of technology in order to achieve the
development of hill agriculture.
REFERENCES
Anonymous. 2004. Annual Report and Proceedings of XXV workshop of AICRP on FIM held at PAU,
Ludhiana , February 10-13, 2004.
Anonymous. 2013. Digest of Statistics. Government of Jammu and Kashmir.

Dixit, J., Ali, M., Mashhad, S. and Bashir, B. 2016. Design and development of bicycle powered portable
irrigation pump for marginal land holdings. SKUAST Journal of Research, 18: 24-31.
Dixit, J., Lohan, S.K., Parray, R.A. and Malla, M.A. 2012. Design, development and performance evaluation
of a foot operated maize cob sheller. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America,
43:32-38.
Dixit, J. 2007. Annual Report of ICAR Adhoc Project “Prototype feasibility testing of farm implements and
machinery in selected regions of Jammu and Kashmir”. Division of Agricultural Engineering,
SKUAST-K, Srinagar.
Sahay, J. 2014. Elements of Agricultural Engineering, Standard Publishers Distributors, Nai Sarak, Delhi-
110006.
Thakur, S.S., Chandel, R. and Narang, M.K. 2016. Joint farm machinery ownership in Indian agriculture-
need of the time. SKUAST Journal of Research, 18:1-11.
View publication stats

Skuastjr 19 1 010maizemechanization

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Skuastjr 19 1 010maizemechanization

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Maize mechanization for hill Agriculture to enhance productivity and

Article · January 2017

Jagvir Dixit Junaid Khan

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

M.Tech research View project

Climate Change Impacts on Indus Basin View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Maize mechanization for hill Agriculture to enhance productivity and profitability

Jagvir Dixit*, J.N. Khan and Rohitashw Kumar

Division of Agricultural Engineering, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology

(Received 22 November, 2016; accepted 03 February, 2017)

Farm mechanization plays a major role in enhancing the production and

were identified, procured/developed and evaluated by Division of Agricultural

equipment and machine for maize mechanization is presented along with

results for the benefits of extension workers and users.

Key words: Capacity, hill mechanization, improved equipment, maize

 Increase productivity of man- machine system & conserve energy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

in crop production particularly under rain fed

2.1 Rotary Dibbler: This equipment is a manually

operated push type for dibbling bold and medium

3. Weeding and Intercultural Operation

Table 3.2: Performance results of power weeder

Types of soil Silty loam Silty loam

Row spacing, cm 400 40

Plant to plant spacing, cm 200 20

carrier or diluents liquid. Different designs of spraying equipment

4.1 Knapsack Sprayer: These are very common sprayer used by

Operating pressure, kg/sq cm 1.5-1.7

5.1 Serrated Sickle: It has a serrated

extraction of grain from the cob with the help of

labour consuming process. Ergonomically, these

methods of maize shelling create drudgery to the

Table: 6.1: Field performance of tubular maize sheller

Anonymous. 2013. Digest of Statistics. Government of Jammu and Kashmir.

View publication stats

You might also like