Agricultural Reviews

  • Chief EditorPradeep K. Sharma

  • Print ISSN 0253-1496

  • Online ISSN 0976-0741

  • NAAS Rating 4.84

Frequency :
Quarterly (March, June, September & December)
Indexing Services :
AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Agricultural Reviews, volume 24 issue 3 (september 2003) : 175-182

RESPONSE OF SULPHUR NUTRITION IN MUSTARD - A REVIEW

R.S. Chandel, P.C. Sudhakar, Kalyan Singh
1Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi - 221 005, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Chandel R.S., Sudhakar P.C., Singh Kalyan (2024). RESPONSE OF SULPHUR NUTRITION IN MUSTARD - A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 24(3): 175-182. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Sulphur is an essential nutrient for all the plants. It is constituent of essential amino acids (cysteine, cystine and methionine), several coenzymes (biotin, coenzyme A, thiamine pyrophosphate, lipoic acid and thioredoxin) and sulpholipids. Application of sulphur fertilizers to rapeseed and mustard can lead to increased glucosinolate content in seed which leads to higher content its cake that harmful as animal feed. It has important role in improving the quality and marketability of produce (seed & oil). The quality decides the market price and output of the end product i.e. oil per unit of economic yield. Sulphur application increases glucosinolate, protein and glucoside. Increase in seed yield of rapeseed and mustard have been reported due to varying levels of sulphur fertilization depending upon its deficiency in soil. Besides other benefits adequate sulphur is required for reduction of nitrate, in nitrogen metabolism and increased chlorophyll content in leaf. Sulphur application increases plant height, leaves plant −1, dry matter production besides increasing yield attributes and yield of mustard. Oil content, protein content and nutrient uptake increases with increasing sulphur application depending upon the sulphur status of the soil. Residual effect of sulphur is more pronounced at higher levels of sulphur application in mustard based cropping system.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Ahmad, A. et a/. (1998). Indian J. Agron., 43: 667-669.
    2. Ankineedu, G. eta/. (1983). Feitil NewS, 28: 76-90.
    3. Arora,A eta/. (1994). J. Oi/seedsRes., 11: 273-276.
    4. Aulakh, M.S. eta/. (1977).lndianJ. Agric. Sci., 47:249-253.
    5. Aulakh, M.S. eta/. (1980). J. Agric. Sci. (U.K.), 94: 545-549
    6. Aulakh, M.S. eta/. (1985).lndianJ. Ecol, 12:238-242.
    7. Bahl, G.S. et a/. (1990). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 60: 556-558.
    8. Bhagwan Singh eta/. (1996)lndianJ. Agron., 41: 286-289.
    9. Biswas, D.R. eta/. (1995). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. , 43: 280-281.
    10. Chakraborty, A. et a/. (1994). Indian J. Agron., 39: 327-329. .
    11. Chandel R. S. et a/. (2002). Indian J. Agric. Sci., 72: 229-231.
    12. Chatterjee, B.N. eta/. (1985).lndianJ. Agron., 30: 76-78.
    13. Chaubey, A.K. and Dwivedl, KN. (1995); J. Indian Soc. Soil$d., 43: 72-75.
    14. Chaudhury, A.K and Sharma, J.C. (1986). Indian Frog., 35: 12.
    15. Cheema, M.s. and Arora, C.L. (1984). Fertil News, 29: 28-31.
    16. Das, KN. and Das, K (1995).lndianJ. Agron., 40: 329-331.
    17. De, M.K. and Nad, B.K. (1993. J. Nuclear. Agric Biol, 22: 80-83.
    18. Desai, N.H. eta/. (1991). GujaratAgric. Univ. Res. J., 16: 76-78.
    19. Dev, G. eta/. (1981). J.lndianSoc. Soil Sci. , 29: 397-399.
    20. Dhankar, J.S. eta/. (1993). Agrochemica., 37: 316-329.
    21. Dubey, O.P. and Khan, RA (1993)./ndiaflJ. Agron., 38: 582-587.
    22. Dubey, O.P.etal (1994).lndianJ. Agron, 39: 49-53.
    23. GiU, A.S. and Palaskar, M.S. (1992). Agric. xl Digest(KarnaO. 12: 95-96.
    24. Girl, G. and Saran, G. (1987). Abst. Symp. On Alternate Farming System, Indian Society of Agronomy at JARI,
    25. New Delhi. Feb. 21-23 (1987).
    26. Golakiya, BA and Poalara, J.V. (1993). Farmer Parliament, 28: 9-10.
    27. Jaggi, R.C. (1994). J.lndian Soc. Soil Sci.,42: 281-283.
    28. Jaggi, R.C. (1998). IndianJ. Agron., 43: 129~132.
    29. Jain G.L. and Saxena, S. (1991). Ferfil News, 36: 43-47,
    30. Jain, G.L. eta/. (1984). Proc. FAllNR Seminar, Jalpur, pp. 147·174
    31. Jain, N.K. eta/. (1995). Ann. Agric. Res., 16: 389-390.
    32. Jain, N.K. et a/. (1996). Indian J. Agric. sq., 66: 539-540.
    33. Joshi, D.C. et a/. (1973). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. , 21: 167-172.
    34. Kachroo, D. and Kumar, A. (1997).lndianJ.Agron., 42: 145-147.
    35. Vol. 24,No.3, 2003 181
    36. Khan, N. and Karan Hussain (1999). Adv. PlantSci, 12: 115-118,
    37. Khanpara, V.D. etal. (1993).lndianJ. Agron., 38: 266-269.
    38. Kharbade, V.J. etal. (1995). Ann. PI Physio/., 9: 130-132.
    39. Kiepa, H. (1950). 38 (1906 bis 1944) Diss. Univ. Bonn.l..andw. Fak. 1950 C.EI.P.I.Ban.
    40. Kumar, K (1995). Ann. Agric. Res., 16: 36-39.
    41. Lakkineni, KC. and Abrol, Y.P. (1992). J. Agron. Crop Sci, 169: 281-285.
    42. Mahal, S.S. etal. (1997).lndianJ. Agron., 42: 67Q.674:
    43. Mahapatra, AK and Chandra Jee, R (1992). Indian J. Agron., 37: 201-203.
    44. Mahapatra, S. et al. (1999). J. lnt Acad., 3: 162-167.
    45. Malewar, G.U. et al. (2000). Proc. TSI/FAI/IFA Workshop held on Feb. 7-8, 2000, New Delhi. pp.87-94.
    46. Mazid, SA (1986). Proc.lnt. Symp., Dhaka, Bangladesh, April 20-22, 1986. pp. 18-45.
    47. Mehta, V.S. and Singh, V. (1988). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci, 36: 190-191.
    48. Mohan, K and Sharma, H.C. (1992).lndianJ. Agron., 37: 748-754.
    49. Narang, A.S. etal. (1993). Ferfil News, 38: 27-33.
    50. Narwal, RP. etal (1991). J.lndianSoc. Sou. Sci, 39: 324-327.
    51. Nepalia, V. (1990). Indian Agriculturist, 34: 235-238.
    52. Nepalia, V. and Saroha, M.S. (1992). Ann. Aridzone., 31: 78-79.
    53. Patel, J.R and SheIke, V.B. (1998). lndianJ. Agron., 43: 713-717.
    54. Patgiri, OK and Baruah, T.C. (1993). J.lndianSoc. Sou. Sci, 42: 391-392.
    55. Pathak, RK and Tripathi, R.D. (1979).lndianJ. Agric. Chern., 12: 151-156.
    56. Pradhan, A.C. and Sarkar, SK (1993). Indian Agriculturist, 37: 21-26.
    57. Prasad, EM. and Singh, D.C. (1989). J. Maharashtra. Agric. Univ., 14: 228-230.
    58. Prasad, F.M. etal. (1991). NewAgricuJturist, 2: 199-202.
    59. Purakayastha, T.J. and Nad, BK (1996). J. NuclearAgric. Bioi., 25: 159-163.
    60. Rajput, RL. et al (1993). Bhartiya-Krishi-Anusandhan Patrlka, 8: 185-188.
    61. Rathore, P.S. and Manohar, S.S. (1989). Farming System, 5: 29-32.
    62. Rathore, P.S. and Manohar, S.S. (1990). Indian J. Agron., 35: 361"363.
    63. Sahadev, S. and Saran, G. (l993).lndianJ. Agron., 38: 417-421.
    64. Saran G. and Giri, G. (1990).lndianJ. Agron., 35: 131-136.
    65. Sarkar, AK et aI. (2000). Proc. TSI/FAl/lFAWorkshop held on Feb. 7-8, 2000, New Delhi. pp.65-72.
    66. Sewarker, N.J. et aI. (1987). J. Oilseeds Res., 4:227-229.
    67. Sen, P. and Chatterjee, S.D. (1994). Indian AgricuJturist, 38: 281-285.
    68. Sharma,A.K. etal. (1994). Agric. Sci. DfBest(Karnal), 14: 63-67.
    69. Sharma, D.N. etal.(1992). Crop. Res. (Hisar), 5: 50-53.
    70. Sharma, U.C. etal. (1990). J.lndianSoc. Soil Sci., 38: 696-701.
    71. Sharma, VK and Kamath, MK (1991). J. NuclearAgric. Bioi., 29: 123-127.
    72. Shukla, M.P. et al. (1983). J. Indian. Soc. Soil Sci, 31: 517-520.
    73. Singh, AL. (1999). Adv. PI. Physiol Vol. 2: 201-226 (Hemantranjan, A. 00.) Scientific Publishers, Jodhpur, India.
    74. Singh, B. etal. (1986). Cun-Agric., 10: 61-64.
    75. Singh, B.P. (1984). MadrasAgric. J., 71: 163-170.
    76. Singh, B.P. and Singh, H.G. (1983). Forage Res., 9: 37-41.
    77. Singh, H.G. and Sahu, M.P. (1986). Fertil. News, 31: 23-30.
    78. Singh, Ketal (2002). Ferlil News, 47: 47..51.
    79. Singh, KS. and Bairathi, R.C. (1980). Ann. AridZone, 19: 197-202.
    80. Singh, O. and Singh, a. (1984). lndianJ. PI Physiol, 27: 172-176.
    81. Singh, S. and Saran, G. (1987). IndianJ. Agron., 32: 474-476.
    82. Singh, S. et al. (1991). J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci, 39: 328-331.
    83. Singh, V. etal. (1998).lndianJ. Agron., 43: 721-724.
    84. Singh, VK and Sharma, H.C.(1996). CrociIeraeNewsI., 18: 138-139.
    85. Singh, V.L. et al. (1988). Indian J. Agric. Sci, 58: 754-756.
    86. Solanki, N.S. etal. (1998). IndianJ. Agron., 43: 718-720.
    87. Srivastava, AK and Srivastava, a.p. (1996). Oryza, 33: 55-58.
    88. Steffenson, E. (1954). Expt. ceORes., 6: 554.
    89. Stuckmeyer, B.E. and Weddin, W.E. (1958). PI. Physiol, 33: 133-139.
    90. Tandon, H.L.S. (1991). Sulphur Research and Agricultural Production in India. 3rd ed. The Sulphur Institutes,
    91. Washington, D.C. USA. pp. 140.
    92. 182 AGRICULTURAL REVIEWS
    93. Tiwari, KN. (1989). CSAUAT Bulletin Kanpur, 46p.
    94. Trivedi, SK etal (1995). Crop Res. Hisar, 10: 265-270.
    95. Upasani, RK and Sharma, H.C. (1986).lndianJ. Agron., 31: 222-228.
    96. Verma, N.N. and Sawarkar, KC. (1988)./ndianJ. Agric. Chern., 21: 51-56.
    97. Walker, KC. and Booth, E:J. (1994). NorwegionJ.Agric. Sci., 15:97-104.
    98. Yadav, D.S. et al (2000). Proc. TSI/FAI/IFA Workshop held on Feb. 7-8, 2000, New Delhi. pp. 55-63.
    99. Yadav, R.L et al (2000). Field Crops Res., 65:11).30.
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)