Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 57 issue 4 (august 2023) : 492-495

Influence of Protective Sprinkler Irrigation on Yield and Water Productivity of Kharif Grown Rain Fed Crops

V. Ramulu1, M. Devender Reddy2,*
1Water Technology Centre, Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University, Rajendranagar-500 030, Hyderabad, India.
2M.S. Swaminathan School of Agriculture, Centurion University of Technology and Management, Parlakahemundi-761 211, Odisha, India.
Cite article:- Ramulu V., Reddy Devender M. (2023). Influence of Protective Sprinkler Irrigation on Yield and Water Productivity of Kharif Grown Rain Fed Crops . Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 57(4): 492-495. doi: 10.18805/IJARe.A-5604.

ABSTRACT

Background: The food grain and non-food grain crops occupy 48 and 68% area respectively under rain fed condition. Due to uneven rainfall, the rainfed crop suffers for want of adequate soil moisture at critical growth stages. Under such situation, protective irrigation ensures adequate soil moisture which results higher production. Crops like tomato, maize, groundnut and red gram are predominantly grown during kharif as rain fed crops. Relieving the soil moisture stress during the critical crop growth stages with more efficient irrigation system assumes importance in rain fed farming. 

Methods: An experiment was conducted for three years during kharif 2008, 2009 and 2010 at the College Farm, Prof. Jayashankar Telangana State Agril. University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad on a sandy loam soil to study the yield advantage of protective sprinkler irrigation to kharif grown rain fed tomato, maize, groundnut and red gram crops. The trial was conducted in strip plot design with protective sprinkler irrigations as main plots and rainfed kharif crops as sub-plots and replicated thrice. The three main treatments comprised of - one protective sprinkler irrigation at flower/peg/tassel initiation, two protective sprinkler irrigations at flower and fruiting, tassel and grain filling, peg formation and pod filling and flowering and pod filling stages and rain fed (control). The sub treatments consisted of four crops- tomato, maize, groundnut and red gram. 

Result: There was an increase in yield with one and two protective sprinkler irrigations by 16.7 and 27.9; 17.7 and 44 5; 26.4 and 34.5 and 21.1 and 28.9% over their corresponding rain fed crops of tomato, groundnut, maize and red gram, respectively. There was an increase of 20.4 and 31.6% in Maize Equivalent Yield (MEY) with one and two protective irrigations as compared to rain fed crop. The water productivity was lower in all the crops grown under rain fed conditions (0.77 kg MEY m-3) as compared to that of one and two protective irrigations.

INTRODUCTION

Rain fed agriculture plays an important role in the Indian economy and nearly 48% area of food crops and 68% area of non food crops is grown under rain fed condition. Ensuring adequate soil moisture at critical growth stages of crops is essential to ensure reasonable crop production in rain fed areas. Provision of protective irrigation ensures adequate soil moisture that secures crops during the dry spells and increases production. Crops like tomato, maize, groundnut, cotton and red gram are predominantly grown during kharif as rain fed crops in Telangana. In the event of prolonged dry spells, the yield levels of these crops are drastically reduced as a result of soil moisture stress at critical stages of the crops (Ramulu et al., 2020). The chances of availability of abundant water supply for protective irrigation through surface methods of irrigation are very meagre in drought prone areas. Supplemental/protective irrigation is often proposed to increase yields of rain fed crops to mitigate soil moisture stress during dry periods (Brugere and Lingard, 2003; Fox and Rockstrom, 2000). Alleviating soil moisture stress during the critical crop growth stages and the application of limited available water more efficiently and economically through sprinkler irrigation assumes importance in rain fed farming. Hence, an experiment was conducted to see the possibility of increasing the yield of kharif  grown rain fed crops if one or two irrigations scheduled at critical growth stages through sprinklers in the event of moisture stress period. 

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experiment was conducted for three years during kharif 2008, 2009 and 2010 at the College Farm, Prof. Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad to study the yield advantage of protective sprinkler irrigation to tomato, maize, groundnut and red gram crops grown as rain fed crops. The experimental soil was sandy loam in texture with low in nitrogen, medium in phosphorous and potassium. The water holding capacity of the soil was 20%. The experiment was conducted in strip plot design with three replications. The main treatments (irrigations) constituted of two levels of protective sprinkler irrigations (one protective irrigation each of 30 mm by sprinkler to tomato at fruiting, maize at tasseling, groundnut at peg formation and red gram at flowering; two protective sprinkler irrigations one each of 30 mm to tomato at flower initiation and fruiting; maize at tasseling and grain filling; groundnut at peg formation and pod filling and red gram at flowering and pod filling stages)  and  rain fed.  The sub treatments consisted of four crops - tomato, maize, groundnut and red gram. The varieties/hybrids viz.Laxmi, DEKLAB 900M, TMV2 and LRG-41 were used for tomato, maize, groundnut and red gram, respectively in the experiment. The red gram, maize and groundnut crops were hand dibbled on 23rd, 9th and 13th July in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively whereas, 35-40 days tomato seedlings were transplanted on 20th, 10th and 23rd August in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. The university recommended fertilizer doses viz. 160:60:50 kg N, P2O5 and K2O ha-1 for maize, 20:50 kg N and K2O ha-1 for redgram, 20: 40: 50 kg N, P2O5  and K2O ha-1 for groundnut and 150: 100 :50 kg N, P2O5 and K2O ha-1 for tomato were applied. The entire level of recommended fertilizers of respective crops was applied in the form of urea, single super phosphate and murate of potash near the seed/seedling as per the recommended split doses of the respective crops.

The total rain fall received during June to October was 911, 601 and 948 mm in 38, 33 and 55 rainy days in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. In 2008, the tomato crop failed due to heavy rains at the initial seedling stage of crop. The measured quantity of irrigation water was applied to each plot through sprinklers. The effective rainfall was estimated by using CRIWAR method. In 2009, to save the crop from the prevailing dry spell in the month of August, an amount of 27 mm of water was applied uniformly through sprinklers to all the treatments and in 2010 as no dry spell was prevailed during growing period and the soil was near field capacity (F.C.) at full bloom stage in Tomato, Maize and Groundnut, hence protective irrigation was skipped at this stage.

Data was recorded on yield, water applied and to make the comparative study of protective irrigation, the individual crop yields were converted into Maize Equivalent Yields (MEY) and analyzed statistically.
                                                                                          
 
 
For calculation of maize equivalent yields, the price per 100 kg economic produce considered were Rs.900/-, 2800/-, 3500/- and 500/- for maize, groundnut, red gram and tomato, respectively in 2009 and 2010. Whereas, in 2008 it was Rs.787/-, 2700/-, 3143/- and 500/- per 100 kg of economic produce of maize, groundnut, red gram and tomato, respectively.
 
The water productivity (WP) i.e kg maize equivalent yield m-3 of water was calculated by
 
        WP=   Y/ WA(IR+ER)
Where
Y= maize equivalent yield (kg ha-1).
WA (total water used) = IR (irrigation) + ER (effective rainfall).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Yield

The grain/ seed yield of individual crops was less under rain fed condition as compared to crops grown with one or two protective sprinkler irrigations applied at critical stages. The mean tomato fruit yield was 8.03 t ha-1 under rain fed cultivation which was 16.7 and 27.9% less than that observed with one and two protective sprinkler irrigations applied, respectively (Table 1). Similarly, the percent mean yield increase noticed with one and two protective sprinkler irrigations over rain fed crop was 17.7 and 44.5 in groundnut, 26.4 and 34.5 in maize and 21.1 and 28.9% in red gram, respectively.

Table 1: Maize Equivalent Yield (MEY) of kharif grown rain fed crops (t ha-1) as influenced by protective sprinkler irrigations (Mean of 2008, 2009 and 2010).


 
Maize equivalent yield
 
The MEY was significantly higher with two protective sprinkler irrigations over that of one protective sprinkler irrigation applied in different crops studied. The calculated MEY in these two treatments was significantly higher than that grown under rain fed condition (Table 1). The increase in mean MEY with one and two protective sprinkler irrigations was 20.4 and 31.6% as compared to rain fed crops. The MEY was higher with red gram and tomato crops followed by maize and the lowest MEY was observed with groundnut crop.
 
Water productivity
 
The total water productivity was 1.02 kg of MEY m-3 in the crop that received two protective sprinkler irrigations was 10% higher over that of one protective sprinkler irrigation (0.93 kg m-3). The water productivity was lower under rain fed conditions (0.77 kg MEY m-3). The increase in water productivity with one and two protective sprinkler irrigations over that of rain fed crop was 21 and 32%, respectively (Table 2). The results of the 3 year study indicates that application of one or two protective sprinkler irrigations to the kharif grown rain fed crops at critical moisture stages has enhanced the crop yield and water productivity over its respective rain fed crop.

Table 2: Water productivity of kharif grown crops as influenced by protective sprinkler irrigation (Mean of 2008, 2009 and 2010).



Agossou Gadedjisso-Tossou et al. (2018) reported that under rain fed conditions, supplementary irrigation (150 mm) improved the maize yield considerably. Saraf and Ahlawat (1975) emphasized that one life saving irrigation before flowering in red gram is very critical to realize higher yields under north Indian conditions. Application of three supplementary irrigations doubled the seed yields of pigeon pea in alfisols (Chauhan, 1990). These results were further confirmed that depending on water stress, supplementary irrigation was helpful in up-scaling grain yield (Praharaj et al., 2017 and Ramulu et al., 2020). The results obtained in the present experiment are also in conformity with the findings of Rao et al., (1983) and Khanna et al., (1980). 

CONCLUSION

In this 3 years study it can be concluded that high variability in rainfall during the kharif season leads to considerable variability in the expected yields of rain fed crops and provision of one or two protective irrigations through sprinkler irrigation to kharif grown rain fed crops viz. red gram, tomato, maize and groundnut at critical moisture stages improve the yield and water productivity over its respective rain fed crops.

REFERENCES


  1. Agossou Gadédjisso, T., Tamara, A. and Niels, S. (2018). Potential of Deficit and Supplemental Irrigation under Climate Variability in Northern Togo, West Africa. Water. 10: 1803; doi: 10.3390/w10121803.

  2. Brugere, C. and Lingard, J. (2003). Irrigation deficits and farmers’ vulnerability in Southern India. Agricultural Systems. 77: 65-88.

  3. Chauhan, Y.S. (1990). A ready-reckoner to help pigeon pea researchers determine plant population. International Pigeonpea Newsletter. 11: 14-15. ISSN 0255-786X.

  4. Fox, P. and Rockstrom, J. (2000). Water harvesting for supplemental irrigation of cereal crops to overcome intra-seasonal dry-spells in the Sahel. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Part B Hydrology, Oceans and Atmosphere. 25(3): 289-296.

  5. Khanna,C.R., Koundal, K.R. and Sinha, S.K. (1980). Response of pigeon pea to water availability. In: Proc. of Legumes Trop. Univ. Pertamian Malaysia. pp. 227-230.

  6. Praharaj, C.S., Singh, U., Singh, S.S. and Kumar, N. (2017). Micro-Irrigation in Rainfed Pigeonpea-Upscaling Productivity under Eastern Gangetic Plains with Suitable Land configuration, Population Management and Supplementary Fertigation. Current Science. DOI: 10.18520/cs/v112/i01/95-107. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312591658.

  7. Ramulu, V., Devender Reddy, M. and Avilkumar, K. (2020). Supplemental Irrigation through drip in Kharif maize + redgram Intercropping system. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci. 9(5): 3014-3020.

  8. Rao, I., Madhusudana, V.N., Venkataratnam, N., Faris, D.G. and Sheldrake, A.R. (1983). Response to irrigation in post rainy-season pigeonpea. International Pigeonpea Newsletter. 2: 35-36.

  9. Saraf, C.S. and Ahlawat, I.P.S. (1975). Review of recent and pulse crops, water management practices. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 9(1): 1-6.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)