Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, 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

Full Research Article

Growth Attributes, Yield Attributes and Yield of Groundnut as Influenced by Intensification Through Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)- Sweet Corn (Zea mays var. saccarata) Intercropping System 

P.N. Parmar1,*, H.M. Virdia1, V.P. Patel2, K.J. Khatana2
1Department of Agronomy, N.M. College of Agriculture, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari-396 450, Gujarat, India.
2Regional Rice Research Station, Navsari Agricultural University, Vyara-394 652, Gujarat, India.

ABSTRACT

Background: Second-generation issues facing by Indian agriculture today are changing water tables, nutrient and disease imbalances, contamination of the environment and declining output from agriculture so there is a urgent need to enhance crop productivity to ensure food security.

Methods: In this field study, groundnut and sweet corn were used as a test material under ten treatments, including sole groundnut; sole sweet corn; groundnut + sweet corn in 1:1; 2:1 and 3:1 row ratio in both replacement and additive series; mix sowing of groundnut 80% + sweet corn 20% and groundnut + sweet corn in (2:1) with paired row (30-60-30 cm) at Regional Rice Research Station, Navsari Agricultural University, Vyara, Gujarat (India) during the summer season of the year 2020-21 and 2021-22. Data on growth attributes, yield attributes and yield of both the crops were recorded.

Result: The results showed that significant reduction in growth, yield attributes and yield of groundnut were observed under mix/intercropping systems as compared to sole groundnut. Among the mix/ intercropping systems, intercropping of groundnut + sweet corn in (2:1) with paired row (30-60-30 cm) was found superior in terms of the pod yield as well as haulm yield, the productivity and biological efficiency of these systems in terms of groundnut pod equivalent yield (3221 kg/ha), land equivalent ratio (1.88) and area time equivalent ratio (1.75). Crop intensification through groundnut + sweet corn in (2:1) with paired row (30-60-30 cm) or groundnut + sweet corn in (3:1) in additive series could be adopted for obtaining higher groundnut pod equivalent yield.

INTRODUCTION

Grown in more than 100 nations across the world’s tropics and subtropics, groundnuts are a crop of global significance. China ranks first in groundnut production with 18.36 million tonnes followed by India 10.24 million tonnes, Nigeria 4.61 lakh tonnes, United States of America 2.90 million tonnes and Sudan 2.36 million tonnes (Anonymous, 2021). India’s agricultural economy is based primarily on groundnuts, which have long been an essential oilseed crop. India produced 10.11 million tonnes of groundnuts on 5.75 million hectares of land, with a productivity of 1759 kg/ha (Anonymous, 2022). 
       
In order to compete globally in a variety of agricultural commodities, India’s agriculture must overcome new obstacles in the evolving global agricultural scenario. Second-generation issues facing by Indian agriculture today are changing water tables, nutrient and disease imbalances, contamination of the environment and declining output from agriculture. The national agrarian distress that began in 1990 was primarily caused by the low level of absolute income and the growing income disparity between farmers and non-agricultural workers, which has gotten even worse in recent years. In light of this, doubling farmers’ income by 2022-2023 may prove to be a crucial goal for advancing farmer welfare, easing agrarian hardship and establishing wage parity between farmers and non-farmers.
       
The primary factors driving growth in the agricultural sector are increases in productivity, resource efficiency or cost savings in production; moreover, intensification and crop diversification toward high-value crops to support increased farm income and profitability are also important.
       
Increasing the yield from a given area by growing two or more crops on the same field in a single year is known as crop intensification. Through crop intensification, one can maximize crop output per unit area and time while ensuring food security, self-sufficiency, crop failure insurance and resource efficiency.
       
In regard to the myriad issues confronting modern agriculture and the urgent need to boost crop output in order to guarantee food security for all, sustainable crop intensification techniques like intercropping and mixed cropping must be encouraged. Monocropping systems have minimum benefits which lead to low crop production and a higher probability of crop failure (Prakash et al., 2024).  Intercropping is an age old practice in India, especially under rainfed conditions, which aims to increase total productivity per unit area and to equitably and judiciously utilize land resources and farming inputs including labour (Mohapatra et al., 2013 and Sharmili et al., 2021). By utilizing all available resources to the fullest extent that a single crop could not, legume-based intercropping seeks to increase yield from a unit area (Zhang et al., 2011).
       
In this area, crop diversity is necessary and should be both profitable and providing feed. A groundnut and sweet corn intercropping strategy is perfect. Sweet corn has the advantage of producing green fodder and being harvested 80-90 days after seeding, increasing the intensity of annual cropping overall.
       
If small and marginal farmers in this area have access to information about the best groundnut-based inter/mix cropping systems, crop intensification could result in stabilized production and profits. Thus, a thorough investigation of crop intensification using groundnut + sweet corn intercropping systems was suggested.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Crop cultivars
       
The groundnut variety Gujarat Groundnut-5 (GG-5) was used for this study as base crop, while sweet corn variety Sugar-75 as intercrops.
 
Experimental location and design
 
In the tropical, warm and humid climate zone (South Gujarat Heavy Rainfall Zone-I, Agro Ecological Situation III), at the coordinates of 21.12oN and 73.4oE, the experiment was carried out on clayey texture soil at the Regional Rice Research Station, Navsari Agricultural University, Vyara, Gujarat during the summer season of the year 2020-21 and 2021-22. The experiment soil was medium in organic carbon (0.75 and 0.74%), available nitrogen (296.3 and 307.1 kg/ha), available phosphorus (32.3 and 34.3 kg/ha), available potash (289.3 and 293.4 kg/ha) and neutral in reaction with pH (7.26 and 7.55) and EC (0.31 and 0.32 dS/m). The trial was set up in a randomized block design following three replications with 10 treatments.
 
Experiment setup
 
In this experiment, the both replacement and additive series of intercropping were used. There were ten treatments including sole groundnut (T1), sole sweet corn (T2), groundnut + sweet corn in 1:1 (T3), 2:1 (T4) and 3:1 (T5) row ratio in replacement series; groundnut + sweet corn in 1:1 (T6), 2:1 (T7) and 3:1 (T8) row ratio in additive series; mix sowing of groundnut 80% + sweet corn 20% (T9) and groundnut + sweet corn (2:1) with paired row (30-60-30 cm) (T10). There were 3 plots for each treatment and a total of 30 plots in this experiment. In addition, the row spacing of groundnut and sweet corn were all 45 cm but hill spacing of groundnut and sweet corn were 10 cm and 20 cm, respectively; groundnut each hole one plant, sweet corn each hole two plants. Moreover, gross plot size of 5.4 m x  6.0 m and their respective net plot size of 3.6 m x 5.2 m for sole groundnut; sole sweet corn; groundnut+ sweet corn (1:1) in replacement series and (1:1) and (2:1) in additive series and mix sowing of 80% groundnut+ 20% sweet corn, net plot size of 2.7 x 5.2 m for groundnut+ sweet corn (2:1) in replacement series and 4.2 x 5.2 m for groundnut+ sweet corn (2:1) in paired row (30-60-30 cm) whereas, gross plot size of 5.85 m ´ 6.0 m and net plot size of 4.05 m x 5.2 m for groundnut+ sweet corn (3:1) in replacement series and additive series, respectively and there was 1.0 m spacing between neighboring plots. After the previous crop was harvested, the experimental land was tractor-plowed, harrowed once to break up any clods, then planked to a fine tilth before seeding. To keep the field prepared for seeding, furrows were opened and the field was divided into plots in accordance with the layout. In the form of urea and diammonium phosphate, the full recommended dosages of fertilizer (25-50-00 NPK kg/ha) for groundnut as per sole and intercrops based on area occupied were applied as basal application. Just prior to seeding in the furrows, urea, diammonium phosphate and muriate of potash were given as a basal application for sweet corn, whereas the full dose of potassium, phosphorus and half of the nitrogen dose (50-50-50  NPK kg/ha) were given to intercrops based on area occupied. At 30 days after sowing (DAS), the remaining half of the nitrogen dosage (50 kg/ha) was top-dressed with urea.
               
During the Rabi season of 2021 and 2022, groundnut and sweet corn were sown on December 27th and January 1st, respectively, with a seed rate of 100 and 10 kg/ha. The groundnut seeds were treated with Mancozeb at a rate of 3 g/kg seed, placed at a depth of 5 cm, with the interrow spacing maintained in accordance with the treatment and lightly covered with soil. At 15-20 DAS, the seedlings were thinned to maintain the intrarow spacing and necessary plant population. Wherever there was a gap, gap filling operation was also completed concurrently. Throughout both seasons, a single hand weeding was done. To keep the experimental field free of weeds for both years, a single interculturing operation carried out at 28 DAS. Emamectin benzoate 1.9% EC @ 20 ml/15 litre was sprayed in the experiment plots once in 2020-21 and twice in 2021-22 to suppress fall Armyworm in sweet corn crop.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Effect of intercropping on growth attributes
 
The data on growth attributes of groundnut are presented in Table 1. An appraisal of data revealed that growth attributes of groundnut were significantly influenced by mix/intercropping system in pooled results of both the years 2020-21 and 2021-22.

Table 1: Growth attributes of groundnut as influenced by groundnut based mix/intercropping systems.


       
Among the different treatments, sole groundnut (T1) had recorded significantly the highest growth attributes of groundnut viz., final plant population (22.26 plants/m2), number of branches/plant (7.97), dry matter production/plant (37.37 g) and number (80.9) and fresh weight (3.75 g) of root nodules/plant. Whereas, significantly highest plant height (67.84 cm) was recorded with intercropping systems of groundnut + sweet corn (1:1) in additive series (T6) and maximum leaf area/plant (2911.4 cm2) and leaf area index (6.470) of groundnut at harvest was recorded in paired row sowing of groundnut + sweet corn (2:1) at 30-60-30 cm (T10) in pooled results. Intercropping treatments did not show their significantly effected on plant spread.
       
In additive intercropping systems final plant populations were comparably reduced over the sole cropping. This might be due to competition for sunlight, space and nutrients between the groundnut and sweet corn in additive intercropping systems as compared to sole groundnut. In replacement intercropping systems final plant populations were comparably reduced over the sole groundnut due to groundnut row replaced by intercrop based on row proportions (Konlan et al., 2013 and Baishya et al., 2021).
       
Significantly lowest number of branches per plant, reduced leaf area, dry matter as well as leaf area index of groundnut was recorded under intercropping systems of groundnut + sweet corn (1:1) in additive series (T6) might be severe competition for resources by intercrop with groundnut, which made poor utilization of sunlight, space and nutrients between the groundnut and sweet corn in the intercropping system, consequently growth was suppressed owing to reduced photosynthesis and partitioning of photosynthates (Polthanee and Vidhaya, 2003; Ghosh, 2004; Inal et al., 2007; Mandal et al., 2014 and Konlan et al., 2015). Sweet corn has a significant effect on groundnut nitrogen fixation traits in intercropping systems (Zhang et al., 2024). Poor nodulation in groundnuts may be the result of less light owing to shade (Nambiar et al., 1982). By limiting photosynthesis and the energy supply to roots, this decreased light energy impacts N2 fixation. This lowers nodulation and nodule size, which in turn results in lower fresh weight of root nodules per plant in intercropping regimens.
       
The height of the plant was significantly highest under intercropping systems of groundnut + sweet corn (1:1) in additive series (T6) might be due to shading imposed on the groundnut by the sweet corn leads to lengthening of the groundnut internodes in order to capture sunlight. The taller groundnut plants observed in the groundnut-sweet corn association were probably a consequence of light and space competition with the sweet corn (Musthapha  et al., 2016).
 
Effect of intercropping on yield attributes and yield
 
An appraisal of data on yield attributes and yield are presented in Table 2 indicated that which was significantly influenced by various mix/intercropping systems in pooled results of both the year of 2020-21 and 2021-22.

Table 2: Yield attributes of groundnut as influenced by groundnut based mix/intercropping systems.


       
The sole groundnut (T1) had significantly the highest 100-kernel weight (41.0 g), shelling percentage (70.32%), number of pods/plant (20.9), pod yield (1831 kg/ha) and haulm yield (3478 kg/ha) and which was remain statistically at par with treatments intercropping of groundnut + sweet corn (2:1) in replacement series (T4), groundnut + sweet corn (3:1) in replacement series (T5), groundnut + sweet corn (3:1) in additive series (T8) and paired row sowing of groundnut + sweet corn (2:1) at 30-60-30 cm (T10) (Except, treatment T4 in 100-kernel weight, treatments T4 and T8 in number of pods/plant and treatments T4 and T5 in pod and haulm yield) which may be due to sole crop enjoyed higher availability of nutrient, moisture, light, space etc. and improved yield attributes and finally gave higher crop yield (Baishya et al., 2021). Overall yield reduction of groundnut was observed under mix/intercropping situation when compared with sole cropping. Whereas, harvest index (35.21), groundnut pod equivalent yield (3221 kg/ha), land equivalent ratio (1.88) and area time equivalent ratio (1.75) were recorded significantly the highest under paired row sowing of groundnut + sweet corn (2:1) at 30-60-30 cm (T10) and which was remain statistically at par with treatments T8 in pooled results (Table 2). The land equivalent ratio of 1.88 signifies that a sole cropping system would need 88% more space to achieve the yield of an intercropping system. Additionally, it indicates that mix/intercropping systems are more biologically sustainable than sole cropping. Because area time equivalent ratio takes into account the variation in time utilized by the component crops of different mix/intercropping systems, it offers a more realistic comparison of the yield benefit of intercropping over that of sole cropping than does LER. The groundnut + sweet corn intercropping system’s ATER was greater than one under all treatments (treatments T2, T3 and T6) indicating the benefit of mix/intercropping systems. On the other hand, the ATER was less than one, indicating that the intercropping system did not maximize the use of all resources (Kathmale et al., 2014; Rajaii and Dahmardeh, 2014; Sutharsan and Srikrishnah, 2015; Musthapha et al., 2016; Kithan and Longkumer, 2017; Telkar et al., 2018; Chovatia et al., 2020 and Baishya et al., 2021).
       
The presence of groundnut in the paired row system probably had more synergistic effect as compared to antagonistic effect as well as more space available to groundnut plant which increase photosynthetic activities and resulted in higher growth and yield attributes which ultimately reflected in yield of groundnut (Jana and Saren, 1998; Polthanee and Vidhaya, 2003; Ghosh, 200, Bhagat et al., 2007; Dutta and Bandyopadhyay, 2006; Konlan et al., 2013; Mandal et al., 2014; Shwethanjali et al., 2018; Sepat et al., 2019; Das et al., 2020;  Baishya et al., 2021 and Abba et al., 2024).
       
The relationship between the pod yield of groundnut and other important growth, yield attributes and haulm yield has been studied. The data on correlation (r) are graphically shown in Fig 1 and 2.

Fig 1: Correlation between growth attributes of groundnut with pod yield.



Fig 2: Correlation between yield attributes and haulm yield of groundnut with pod yield.


       
Result revealed that growth attributes viz., number of root nodules per plant and yield attributes viz., 100-kernel weight and number of pods per plant and haulm yield of groundnut showed positive and highly significant correlation with pod yield of groundnut. While plant height at harvest shown their negative correlation with pod yield in pooled result.

CONCLUSION

The study of summer groundnut-based mix/intercropping systems results that led to in the clayey soil of the heavy rainfall zone in south Gujarat, crop intensification could be achieved by either intercropping groundnut and sweet corn in paired row (30-60-30 cm) (2:1) or in additive series (3:1) to increase groundnut pod equivalent yield.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

REFERENCES


  1. Abba, A.B., Abdulrahman, L., Muhammad, H.A. and Fatima, B.Z. (2024). Weed competition and performance of sorghum and groundnut intercrop as influenced by row orientation and arrangement. Bhartiya Krishi Anusandhan Patrika. 39(2): 154-160. doi: 10.18805/BKAP717.

  2. Anonymous. (2021). Groundnut Outlook (2024). Agricultural Market Intelligence Centre, PJTSAU. Available at http://agrimarketing. telangana.gov.in. 

  3. Anonymous. (2022). Agricultural Statistics at a Glance (2022). Area, production and yield along with coverage under Irrigation. directorate of economics and statistics, Department of Agriculture and Farmers welfare, Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers welfare, New Delhi. Available at http://www.agricoop.nic.in.

  4. Baishya, L.K., Jamir, T., Walling, N. and Rajkhowa, D.J. (2021). Evaluation of maize (Zea mays L.) + legume intercropping system for productivity, profitability, energy budgeting and soil health in hill terraces of Eastern Himalayan region. Legume Research- An International Journal. 44(11): 1343-1347. doi: 10.18805/LR-4190.

  5. Bhagat, S.B. (2007). Effect of levels of fertilizer and row proportion on sweet corn and groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) intercropping. Ph.D. (Agril.) Thesis (Unpublished), Dr. B. S. Konkan Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri, Maharashtra. (Available in krishikosh).

  6. Chovatia,V.P., Mathukia, R.K., Chhodavadia, S.K. and Sagarka, B.K. (2020). Crop diversification and intensification through groundnut + sweet corn mix/inter cropping systems for enhancing farmer’s income. Journal of Eco-friendly Agriculture. 15(1): 10-13.

  7. Das, N., Desai, B.K., Koppalkar, B.G., Ananda, N. and Garnayak, L.M. (2020). Effect of nutrient management practices on yield and yield attributes of groundnut and available nutrient status in soil after harvest in groundnut + baby corn intercropping system under changing climate. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 9(3): 1702-1708. 

  8. Dutta, D. and Bandyopadhyay, P. (2006). Production potential of intercropping of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) with pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) and maize (Zea mays L.) under various row proportions in rainfed Alfisols of West Bengal. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 51(2): 103-106.

  9. Ghosh, P.K. (2004). Growth, yield, competition and economics of groundnut-cereal fodder intercropping systems in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research. 88(2004): 227-237.

  10. Inal, A., Gunes, A., Zhang, F. and Cakmak, I. (2007). Peanut-maize intercropping induced changes in rhizosphere and nutrient concentrations in shoots. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry. 45(1): 350-356.

  11. Jana, P.K. and Saren, B.K. (1998). Dry matter accumulation, yield attributes and yields of summer maize (Zea mays) and groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)  intercropping systems as influenced by irrigation. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 43(1): 18-22.

  12. Kathmale, D.K., Dhadge, S.M., Satpute, N.R., Patil, S.V., Chary, R.C., Rao, C.H., Jadhav, J.D. and Kadam, J.R. (2014). Evaluation of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) based intercropping systems under Semi-Arid Vertisol in Scarcity Zone of Maharashtra. Indian Journal of Dryland Agricultural Research and Development. 29(1): 27-34.

  13. Kithan, L. and Longkumer, L.L. (2017).  Economics of maize (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max L.) intercropping. International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management. 8(3): 401-404.

  14. Konlan, S., Sarkodie, A. J., Kombiok, M. J., Asare, E. and Bawah, I. (2013). Yield response of three groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) varieties intercropped with maize (Zea mays L.) in the Guinea Savanna Zone of Ghana. Journal of Cereals and Oilseeds. 6(32): 76-84.

  15. Konlan, S., Sarkodie, A. J., Kombiok, M. J., Asare, E. and Bawah, I. (2015). Effect of intercropping on nitrogen fixation of three groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) genotypes in the Guinea Savanna Zone of Ghana. Insternational. Journal of Plant and Soil Science. 5(1): 1-9.

  16. Mandal, M.K., Bannerjee, M., Bannerjee, H., Alipatra, A. and Malik, G.C. (2014). Productivity of maize (Zea mays L.) based intercropping system during kharif season under Red and Lateritic tract of West Bengal. The Bioscan. 9(1): 31-35.

  17. Mohapatra, A.K., Mishra, P.J. and Das, L.K. (2013). Fertilizer requirement in ragi (Eleusine coracana) + soybean (Glycine max L.) intercropping system under rainfed condition. Annals of Agricultural Research. 22(3): 323-328.

  18. Musthapha, M., Salifu, G. and Napoleon, A. (2016). Influence of spatial arrangement on agronomic performance of maize (Zea mays L.) - groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) intercropping. The International Journal of Science and Technoledge. 4(1): 78-89.s

  19. Nambiar, P.C.T., Rao, M.R., Reddy, M.S., Floyd, C.P.J., Dart and Willey, R.W. (1982). Nitrogen fixation by groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) in intercropped and rotational systems. BNF Technology for Tropical Agriculture. 647.

  20. Polthanee, A. and Vidhaya, T.G. (2003). Growth, yield and land use efficiency of corn and legumes grown under intercropping systems. Journal of Plant Production Science. 6(2): 139-146.

  21. Prakash, V., Ashraf, A.M., Sivagamy, K. and Begam, S.N. (2024). Influence of pulses intercropping on growth and productivity of maize (var. Co-1) in delta region of Tamil Nadu. Agricultural Science Digest. doi: 10.18805/ag.D-6040.

  22. Rajaii, M. and Dahmardeh, M. (2014). The evaluation of corn and peanut intercropping on efficiency of use the environmental resource and soil fertility. Journal of Agricultural Science. 6(4): 99-108.

  23. Sepat, S., Bana, R.S., Meena, S. and Rana, D.S. (2019). Assessment of conservation agriculture and intercropping practices for enhanced productivity and profitability in maize (Zea mays). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 89(4): 714-720. 

  24. Sharmili, K., Yasodha, M. and Rajesh, P. (2021). Millet and pulses based intercropping: A Review. Agricultural Reviews. 42(2): 230-234. doi: 10.18805/ag.R-1981.

  25. Shwethanjali, K.V.,  Naik, A. H., Naik, T.B. and Kumar, M.D.  (2018). Effect of groundnut + millets intercropping system on yield and economic advantage in central dry zone of karnataka under rainfed condition. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 7(9): 2921-2926.

  26. Sutharsan, S. and Srikrishnah, S. (2015). Effect of different spatial arrangements on the growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) and groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) intercrop in the Sandy Regosol of Eastern region of Sri Lanka. Research Journal of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences. 3(2): 16-19.

  27. Telkar, S.G., Singh, A.K. and Kant, K. (2018). Determination of effective spatial arrangement for intercropping of maize+soybean using dry matter yield and competition interaction. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 7(4): 2239-2245.

  28. Zhang, G., Yang, Z. and Dong, S. (2011). Interspecific competitiveness affects the total biomass yield in an alfalfa and corn intercropping system. Field Crop Research. 124(1): 66-73.

  29. Zhang, Y., Zhao, F., Feng, C., Bai, W., Zhang, Z., Cai, Q., Sun, Z. and Feng, L. (2024). Effects of maize/peanut intercropping and nitrogen fertilizer application on soil fungal community structure. Agronomy. 14(5): 1053.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)