Chief Editor:

V. Geethalakshmi

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Coimbatore, INDIA

Frequency:Monthly

Indexing:

BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Go...

POPULATION DYNAMICS AND NUTRIENT SPRAY ON THE YIELD AND ECONOMICS OF DIRECT SOWN AND TRANSPLANTED HYBRID COTTON TCHB 213

D. Rajakumar, S. Gurumurthy, B.J. Pandian, G. Thiyagarajan

Affiliations

¹Water Technology Centre Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 641 003, India

Submitted|
First Online |
doi

Cite article:- Rajakumar D., Gurumurthy S., Pandian B.J., Thiyagarajan G. (2025). POPULATION DYNAMICS AND NUTRIENT SPRAY ON THE YIELD AND ECONOMICS OF DIRECT SOWN AND TRANSPLANTED HYBRID COTTON TCHB 213. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 44(3): 206 - 210. doi: .

ABSTRACT

A field experiment was conducted during 2002 to study the influence of planting methods
(direct sowing and polybag seedling planting), three plant densities (13,888; 11,111 and 9,259
plants ha-1) and nutrient spray on the growth, yield and economics of hybrid cotton TCHB-213
revealed that though the plant height was more with transplanted cotton at squaring stage, it
conversed at the later stages. Dry matter production was higher under 13,888 plant population
(T1, T2, T5 and T6) than 11,111 plants (T3 and T7) and 9,259 plants ha-1 (T4 and T8). The lowest
plant population (T4) produced more number of monopodia (1.18 and 1.42 plant-1) than the
highest plant population (1.13 plant-1). But the trend got reversed when compared on per unit
area basis (per m2). The beneficial effect of added Mg, Zn, Cu and B in influencing the growth,
yield attributes and yield of hybrid cotton was observed in the study. Among the various treatment
combinations, planting with polybag seedlings at a population of 13,888 plants ha-1 with the
application of magnesium and micronutrients (T6) produced higher seed cotton yield (22.53 q
ha-1). Though transplanting of polybag seedlings of cotton (T2 and T6) recorded more yield
(17.93 and 22.52 q ha-1) than the conventional direct sowing (T1 and T5), it resulted only in
marginal increase in gross return with more associated cost of cultivation.

KEYWORDS

REFERENCES

Bednarz,C.W. et al. (2000). Agron. J. 92:128–135
CICR, (2008). CICR in Nutshell (http://www.cicr.org.in/)
Gopalaswamy, N. (1982). Ph.D. Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, India.
Gormus, O. (2005). Turk. J. Agric. 29: 51-59
Govindan, S. (1989). Ph.D. Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, India.
Kuppusamy, G. (1993). Ph. D. Thesis, Annamalai Univ., Annamalai Nagar, India.
Namdeo, K.N. et al. (1992). Crop Res. 5 (3): 451-455.
Seshadri, V. (1989). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 59 (2): 107-109.
Sharma, R.K. and Gupta V.K. (1989). Agric. Sci. Digest 9 (3): 130-132.

Disclaimer :

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Copyright :

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.