Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

volume 37 issue 2 (april 2014) : 195-200,   Doi: 10.5958/j.0976-0571.37.2.029

INFLUENCE OF IRRIGATION AND CROP RESIDUE MULCHING ON YIELD AND WATER PRODUCTIVITY OF TABLE PURPOSE GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA) IN HUMID TROPICAL ISLAND

N
N. Ravisankar*
M
M. Balakrishnan
S
S.K. Ambast
R
R.C. Srivastava
N
N. Bommayasamy
T
T. Subramani
1Central Agricultural Research Institute, Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands-744 101, India
Cite article:- Ravisankar* N., Balakrishnan M., Ambast S.K., Srivastava R.C., Bommayasamy N., Subramani T. (2025). INFLUENCE OF IRRIGATION AND CROP RESIDUE MULCHING ON YIELD AND WATER PRODUCTIVITY OF TABLE PURPOSE GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA) IN HUMID TROPICAL ISLAND. Legume Research. 37(2): 195-200. doi: 10.5958/j.0976-0571.37.2.029.

ABSTRACT

Field experiment was conducted during dry season of 2008-10 at Andaman and Nicobar Islands to study the influence of irrigation at critical stages and mulching on yield and water productivity of table purpose groundnut under humid tropical conditions. Experiment was laid out in split plot design with three replications by assigning irrigation at critical stages (‘No irrigation’, ‘one irrigation at pegging’, ‘two irrigation at life and pegging’, ‘three irrigation at life, flowering and pegging’ and ‘four irrigation at life, flowering, pegging and pod development’) to main plot and crop residue mulching (‘Paddy straw’, ‘banana leaf’, and ‘Gliricidia leaf’ and ‘No mulch’) to subplots. Growth and yield attributes were significantly influenced by irrigation and mulching. Application of two irrigations at life (3 DAS) and pegging (55-60 DAS) resulted in higher pod yield (3 549 kg/ha) compared to three and four irrigations which registered 2.6 and 7.7% yield reduction. Higher net returns (Rs. 41 599/ha), B:C ratio (1:8), energy ratio (15.3) and lower specific energy (4.0 MJ/kg) was recorded with two irrigations . However, one irrigation at pegging registered higher water productivity of Rs. 66/m3. Among the crop residue mulches, paddy straw mulch registered higher pod yield (3 425 kg/ha), water productivity (Rs. 33/m3), net returns (Rs. 39 280/ha), B:C ratio (1:6) and energy ratio (15.0).

REFERENCES

  1. Abdrabbo A. Abou Kheira. (2009). Macromanagement of deficit irrigated peanut with sprinkler irrigation, Agri. Water Manage. 96: 1409-20.
  2. Arrora Sanjay and Bhatt Rajan. (2009). Impact of improved soil and in-situ water conservation practices on productivity in rainfed foot hill region of North-west India, S K Univerity of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Jammu p. 1-4.
  3. Ghosh, P K, Devi Dayal, Bandyopadhyay and Mohanty M.. (2006) Evaluation of straw and polythene mulch for enhancing productivity of irrigated summer groundnut, Field Crops Res. 99 :76-86.
  4. Hosmani M H and Janawade A D. (2007). Response of rabi groundnut (Aracis hypogaea L.) to irrigation schedules and integrated nutrient management in deep black soils of upper Krishna command, Karnataka J. of Agri. Sci. 20 : 453-456.
  5. Kathirvelan P and Kalaiselvan P. (2007). Studies on Agro Management Techniques for Confectionery Groundnut under Irrigated Condition. Res. J. of Agri. and Bio. Sci., 3: 52-58.
  6. Khade V N, Patil B P, Jadhav S N and Basale S S. (1997). Effect of irrigation schedules, planting layout and weed management on the yield of summer groundnut. J. of Maharashtra Agri. Uni. 22: 26-28.
  7. Mittal V K, Mittal J P and Dhawan K C. (1985). Research Project on Energy Requirements in Agricultural Sector, Coordinating Cell, College of Agricultural Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
  8. Patel G N, Patel P T and Patel P H. (2008). Yield water use efficiency and moisture extraction pattern of summer groundnut as influenced by irrigation schedules, sulfur levels and sources. An open access journal published by ICRISAT ( SAT e journal) 6: 1-4.
  9. Pramanik S C, Dubey R P, Ravisankar N and Nair A K. (2000). Development of water resources and irrigation potential in A&N Islands Yojana 44(6): 19-20, 32
  10. Ravisankar N, Balakrishnan M, Ghoshal Chaudhuri S, Ambast S K, Srivastava R C, Subramani T and Bommayasamy N. (2010). Evaluation of time, method of sowing and varieties for table purpose groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) under Island ecosystem, Indian J. of Agri. Sci. 80: 209-303.
  11. Singh H, Mishra D and Nahar N M. (2004) Energy use pattern in production agricuture of a typical village in arid zone-    Part III, Energy Conversion and Management 45(15-16):2453-72.
Published In
Legume Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    volume 37 issue 2 (april 2014) : 195-200,   Doi: 10.5958/j.0976-0571.37.2.029

    INFLUENCE OF IRRIGATION AND CROP RESIDUE MULCHING ON YIELD AND WATER PRODUCTIVITY OF TABLE PURPOSE GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA) IN HUMID TROPICAL ISLAND

    N
    N. Ravisankar*
    M
    M. Balakrishnan
    S
    S.K. Ambast
    R
    R.C. Srivastava
    N
    N. Bommayasamy
    T
    T. Subramani
    1Central Agricultural Research Institute, Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands-744 101, India
    Cite article:- Ravisankar* N., Balakrishnan M., Ambast S.K., Srivastava R.C., Bommayasamy N., Subramani T. (2025). INFLUENCE OF IRRIGATION AND CROP RESIDUE MULCHING ON YIELD AND WATER PRODUCTIVITY OF TABLE PURPOSE GROUNDNUT (ARACHIS HYPOGAEA) IN HUMID TROPICAL ISLAND. Legume Research. 37(2): 195-200. doi: 10.5958/j.0976-0571.37.2.029.

    ABSTRACT

    Field experiment was conducted during dry season of 2008-10 at Andaman and Nicobar Islands to study the influence of irrigation at critical stages and mulching on yield and water productivity of table purpose groundnut under humid tropical conditions. Experiment was laid out in split plot design with three replications by assigning irrigation at critical stages (‘No irrigation’, ‘one irrigation at pegging’, ‘two irrigation at life and pegging’, ‘three irrigation at life, flowering and pegging’ and ‘four irrigation at life, flowering, pegging and pod development’) to main plot and crop residue mulching (‘Paddy straw’, ‘banana leaf’, and ‘Gliricidia leaf’ and ‘No mulch’) to subplots. Growth and yield attributes were significantly influenced by irrigation and mulching. Application of two irrigations at life (3 DAS) and pegging (55-60 DAS) resulted in higher pod yield (3 549 kg/ha) compared to three and four irrigations which registered 2.6 and 7.7% yield reduction. Higher net returns (Rs. 41 599/ha), B:C ratio (1:8), energy ratio (15.3) and lower specific energy (4.0 MJ/kg) was recorded with two irrigations . However, one irrigation at pegging registered higher water productivity of Rs. 66/m3. Among the crop residue mulches, paddy straw mulch registered higher pod yield (3 425 kg/ha), water productivity (Rs. 33/m3), net returns (Rs. 39 280/ha), B:C ratio (1:6) and energy ratio (15.0).

    REFERENCES

    1. Abdrabbo A. Abou Kheira. (2009). Macromanagement of deficit irrigated peanut with sprinkler irrigation, Agri. Water Manage. 96: 1409-20.
    2. Arrora Sanjay and Bhatt Rajan. (2009). Impact of improved soil and in-situ water conservation practices on productivity in rainfed foot hill region of North-west India, S K Univerity of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Jammu p. 1-4.
    3. Ghosh, P K, Devi Dayal, Bandyopadhyay and Mohanty M.. (2006) Evaluation of straw and polythene mulch for enhancing productivity of irrigated summer groundnut, Field Crops Res. 99 :76-86.
    4. Hosmani M H and Janawade A D. (2007). Response of rabi groundnut (Aracis hypogaea L.) to irrigation schedules and integrated nutrient management in deep black soils of upper Krishna command, Karnataka J. of Agri. Sci. 20 : 453-456.
    5. Kathirvelan P and Kalaiselvan P. (2007). Studies on Agro Management Techniques for Confectionery Groundnut under Irrigated Condition. Res. J. of Agri. and Bio. Sci., 3: 52-58.
    6. Khade V N, Patil B P, Jadhav S N and Basale S S. (1997). Effect of irrigation schedules, planting layout and weed management on the yield of summer groundnut. J. of Maharashtra Agri. Uni. 22: 26-28.
    7. Mittal V K, Mittal J P and Dhawan K C. (1985). Research Project on Energy Requirements in Agricultural Sector, Coordinating Cell, College of Agricultural Engineering, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana.
    8. Patel G N, Patel P T and Patel P H. (2008). Yield water use efficiency and moisture extraction pattern of summer groundnut as influenced by irrigation schedules, sulfur levels and sources. An open access journal published by ICRISAT ( SAT e journal) 6: 1-4.
    9. Pramanik S C, Dubey R P, Ravisankar N and Nair A K. (2000). Development of water resources and irrigation potential in A&N Islands Yojana 44(6): 19-20, 32
    10. Ravisankar N, Balakrishnan M, Ghoshal Chaudhuri S, Ambast S K, Srivastava R C, Subramani T and Bommayasamy N. (2010). Evaluation of time, method of sowing and varieties for table purpose groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) under Island ecosystem, Indian J. of Agri. Sci. 80: 209-303.
    11. Singh H, Mishra D and Nahar N M. (2004) Energy use pattern in production agricuture of a typical village in arid zone-    Part III, Energy Conversion and Management 45(15-16):2453-72.
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Legume Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)