National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS)
|
PRINT ISSN : 2319-7692
Online ISSN : 2319-7706 Issues : 12 per year Publisher : Excellent Publishers Email : editorijcmas@gmail.com / submit@ijcmas.com Editor-in-chief: Dr.M.Prakash Index Copernicus ICV 2018: 95.39 NAAS RATING 2020: 5.38 |
Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is the most important cash crop and there is a demand for simultaneous increase in the productivity of cotton, edible oilseeds and fodders to fulfil the diversified needs of growing population. For this purpose, cotton-based intercropping seems to be a promising strategy. Short duration legume fodders are potential sources of nutrients during summer especially atmospheric nitrogen fixing which are supplement of inorganic fertilizers. A field experiments was conducted to investigate the relative performance of legume fodder intercropping system on productivity of Bt cotton with different fertilizer levels during the Kharif season of 2015-2016 and 2016-2017. The experiment was laid out in split plot design with five main plots (C1-Cotton; C2-Cotton+Fodder Cowpea; C3- Cotton+ Horse gram; C4-Cotton+Moth bean; C5-Cotton+Pillipesara) and three subplots (F1-100% RDF (120:60:60 kg NPK ha-1); F2-125% RDF (150:75:75 kg NPK ha-1); F3-150% RDF (180:90:90 kg NPK ha-1). Bt cotton + moth bean (C4) fodder intercropping system recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield during both years (2029 kg ha-1 and 1507 kg ha-1) followed by Bt cotton + horse gram (C3) with 1909 kg ha-1 and 1422 kg ha-1 during both years. Among legume fodder, fodder cowpea intercropped with Bt cotton with 150% RDF (C2F3) produced higher green fodder yield 17,407 and 14,431 kg ha-1 during first and second year study. Highest net income of 98888 and 65922 ha-1 was recorded in Bt cotton + fodder cowpea (C2) system and was followed by Bt cotton + moth bean (C4) and Bt cotton + horse gram (C3) intercropping system. But the highest benefit cost ratio was in Bt cotton + moth bean (C4) of 2.55 and 2.14 followed by Bt cotton + fodder cowpea (C2) of 2.52 and 2.04 during first and second year, respectively.
Citations |
 |
 |
 |
 |
