The statistics given in Fig 1 (A) showed that the plant height measured at harvest was significantly influenced due to different treatments it’s diverse from 41.18 to 52.24 cm. Maintenance of moisture between 100 and 75% availability at 0-30 cm soil depth gave significantly higher plant height (50.13, 54.35 and 52.24 cm). Whereas, combination P
3S
1M
1 showed significantly higher plant height as compared to other treatment combinations except P
1S
2M
0, P
1S
2M
1, P
2S
2M
1, P
3S
2M
1 which was at par with P
3S
1M
1, during both of the years and pooled results, respectively. Potato is the water lowing plant therefore under or over supply of irrigation water may affect growth, yield and quality of the crop. Both the productivity and quality of produce largely depend on a proper balance between soil air and soil moisture available in the plant root zone throughout the crop growth period, which can only be achieved by adopting a sound water management practices
(Singh et al., 2012). Potato crop is very sensitive to insufficient fertilizer doses and very responsive to higher doses of fertilizers. A perusal of data [Fig 1 (B)] revealed that the maintenance of moisture W1 level recorded significantly more number of tubers per plant over rest of treatments. Among the levels of P carriers with and without application of FYM, combination P
3S
1M
1 showed significantly higher number of tuber per plant (6.40, 7.34, and 6.87) as compared to other treatment combinations.
Maintenance of moisture between 100 and 25% availability at 0-30 cm soil depth (W
3) produced significantly more small size tuber (< 25 g) yield (14.45, 15.69 and 15.07 q/ha during 2017-18, 2018-19 and in pooled results, respectively) as compared to W
1 and W
3 moisture regimes [Fig 1(C)]. An adequate water supply is required from tuber initiation till the maturity for higher yield and good tuber quality. Moisture stress, especially at the most critical stages like stolen formation, tuber formation and tuber development, results sharp decline in potato productivity (
Saikia, 2011). The data [Fig 1 (C), (D) and (E)] on small size tuber yield of potato after harvest as affected by treatment combination P
3S
1M
1 (180 kg P
2O
5/ha + MAP + FYM @ 20 t/ha) was recorded significantly highest small (13.24, 15.25 and 14.24 q/ha), medium (34.28, 35.66 and 34.97 q/ha) and large (273.37, 276.15 and 274.76 q/ha) size tuber yield during 2017-18, 2018-19 and pooled result, respectively.
Among different treatments tested, maintenance of moisture W1 produced significantly higher total tuber yield of potato as compared to other moisture regimes. An increase in total tuber yield of potato due at W
1 moisture regimes was to the tune of 23.37% over W
3 moisture regime (Table 2). As far as the effect of different combinations of FYM and levels of P carriers on potato tuber yield was concerned, it was observed that yield of tuber with FYM and application of P @ 180 kg P
2O
5/ha in the form of MAP (P
3S
1M
1) was significantly higher (320.90, 327.06 and 323.98 q/ha during 2017-18, 2018-19 and pooled result, respectively) over all the treatment combinations except P
2S
2M
1 (310.57 q/ha) and P
3S
2M
1 (317.82 q/ha).
Among the regimes of moisture, moisture level W
1 and W
2 were significantly yielded more hau effect of different combinations of FYM and levels of P carriers on potato haulm yield was concerned [Fig 1 (F)], it was observed that yield of haulm with FYM and application of P @ 180 kg P
2O
5/ha in the form of MAP (P
3S
1M
1) was significantly higher (16.23, 18.09 and 17.16 q/ha during 2017-18, 2018-19 and pooled basis, respectively) as compare to allover treatment combinations. The similar results were also observed by
Singh and Agarwal (2005) with the application of FYM @ 10 and 20 t/ha and observed an increase in grain and straw yield of wheat, Response of FYM majored as kg grain was highest in wheat
(Mahapatra et al., 2007). Shahi et al., (2015) also observed the role of P levels and FYM on wheat crop. Application of P levels significantly augmented crop growth and yield of wheat. This might be due to moisture availability for a longer period to the crop along with positive effect of moisture and FYM on P availability in soil.
Shahi et al., (2015) and
Patel et al., (2020) also revealed in their studies that an application of P at a higher level in the form of MAP showed higher and significant response.