Section 3 (Crop Management)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Upland maize systems in Nepal with 5 and 10t manure/ha, and 10 and 20t manure/ha during 2000 and 2001 respectively. The gross plot size was 13.5m 2 (4.5 x 3.0m) and net harvested area was 6.75m 2 (3 x 2.25m) during 2000. Similarly the gross plot size was 9m 2 (3 x 3m) and net harvested area was 4.5m 2 (3m x 1.5m) during 2001. Maize planting was done in the third week of April and finger-millet crop was relayed with maize in the residual plant nutrients applied in maize crop in the third week of June in both the years. Composite soil samples were taken in order to know the bench mark status of soil. Mean soil pH, organic carbon, total N, available P and exchangeable. K in the bench mark soil sample of 2000 were 4.8 (very strongly acidic), 3.29%. (high), 0.32% (medium), 17.1 ppm (medium) and 0.07 me/100g (very low). Maize was planted in the third week of April and harvested in first week of September, while fingermillet was transplanted in third week of June and harvested in the third week of November during 2000 but fingermillet crop of 2001 could not be harvested because the whole crop was destroyed by the monkeys. Before applying manure, samples were taken and analysis was done for total N,P and K, which were 2.65%, 1.42% and 1.62% respectively. Maize and fingermillet crops were managed by following all the recommended practices. Farm yard manure, P and K fertilizers were applied at planting as indicated in treatment details. Post-harvested soil samples were taken from individual plots to find out the nutrient status in soil. The data were analysed by MSTATC. N, P and K limiting on maize Nitrogen, P and K limiting field trials on maize were carried out during 2000 at Bhakimli (high hill, Myagdi), Deurali (mid hill, Palpa), Pakuwa (low hill, Parbat) and Chambas (river basin, Tanahun). During 2001, field experiments were carried out at Bhakimli, Deurali and Chambas sites. There were 5 treatments in 2000 and six (one additional) treatments in 2001 in a randomized complete block design with 4 replicatious. The gross and net plot harvested was the same i.e. 13.5m 2 (4.5m63.0m) in both the years. The bench mark soil characteristics of 2000 and 2001 in different sites are indicated in Table 2. Maize was planted at Bhakimli, Deurali, Pakuwa and Chambas in the fourth week of March, April in two sites and first week of May and harvested in the fourth week in three sites and second week in one site respectively. All P and K fertilizer and half of N was applied at planting and remaining and N was top dressed in two splits, one at knee high stage and another one at earthing up stage of maize. All the other operations were performed regularly. The data was analyzed by MSTATC. Selection of acid soil tolerant germplasm of maize Two sets of maize germplasm (acid soil V-yellow and acid soil VI-yellow) were received from south American Regional maize program during 2000 and another two sets (acid soil-yellow and acid soilwhite) from the same program during 2001. The field experiments were carried out at Chambas Tar in both the years. The plot size was 5.625m 2 (2.5m x 2.25m) for both acid soil V-yellow and acid soil VIyellow in 2000 but 7.5m 2 (5m x 1.5m) for acid soil-yellow and acid soil-white in 2001. There were 28 entries for acid soil-V and 20 entries for acid soil VI with four replications planted in spilt plot design during 2000 while there were 12 entries for acid soil-yellow and 20 entries for acid soil-white with four replications during 2001. Bench mark soil characteristics of the two farmers field of chambas Tar are presented in Table 3. All four sets of trials were planted in the last week of April and harvested in the mid August in both the years (2000 and 2001). Manure was applied at the rat of 10 t/ha and chemical fertilizers were applied at 90:30: 30 kg N:P:K/ha. All the other operations were performed as recommended. The maize grain yield data analysis was performed by MSTATC. - 284 -
Results and Discussion Tripathi Maize-based system In low fertile and marginal rainfed uplands of excessive rainfall area (Lumle ) even high dose of chemical fertilizers alone gave very poor yields of maize and fingermillet. Application of 120 kg N/ha through organic sources or combination of 60 kg N/ha through organic + 60:30:20 kg/ha through inorganic sources produced 1.71 ton maize grain/ha (Table 4). Organic sources alone or combination of organic and inorganic sources produced better yield of relayed fingermillet (0.57 – 0.69 t/ha) in maize than inorganic fertilizers alone (0.36 – 0.44 t/ha). In medium fertility condition application of 120:60:40: kg N: P2o5: K2o/ha or 60 kg N/ha through FYM could give more than 6t maize grain/ha. Synchronizing N requirement During 2000, maize grain yield differed significantly but finger millet grain yield did not differ significantly among treatments. Application of 5 ton FYM plus 60 kg N at planting or 30 kg N at planting and 30 kg N at knee high stage or 10 ton FYM plus 30 kg N at knee high and 30 kg N at silking or 60 kg at knee high stage produced significantly low yields as compared to other treatment (Table 5). The results showed that 5 ton FYM at planting plus 60 kg N/ha at earthing up or 10 ton FYM at planting plus 3 splits of N (20 kg at planting, 20 kg at knee high and 20 kg at silking) gave similar yields of maize grain (5.29 – 5.32 t/ha). During 2001, out of 14 treatments 8 treatments gave more than 4.50t maize grain/ha. Maize grain yield in the treatments of 10t FYM+60kg N/ha as top dressing at silking stage gave only 3.39t/ha and all the other treatment gave significantly high yield irrespective of organic and inorganic sources as well as different application dates (Table 5). N, P, K limiting Maize yield data of 2000 at Deurali and Pakuwa representing mid and low hills respectively were not representative and excluded in this report. Significant response of 100 kg N, 100 kg N + 100 kg P, 100 kg N + 100kg P + 100kg K /ha was not observed when compared with farmers’ practice (Table 6). However, above dose of NPK plus 5 ton lime/ha gave significantly high yield as compared to farmers’ practice and 100 kg N/ha at both sites during 2000. Yield trends were similar in both locations during 2000. During 2001, treatment difference was not observed at Bhakimli site but farmers practice gave significantly low yield as compared to other treatments at Deurali and Chambas sites (Table 6). Selection of Acid Soil Tolerant Germplasms Acid soil V-yellow Out of 28 genotypes, 16 genotypes (57%) produced 5.83 to 7.99 ton grain/ha which were at par but were significantly higher yielder than rest of the 12 genotypes (Figure 1). These ten genotypes (CLA 43 X (LASP2 X LASP3), CLA 28 X CLA 29, CLA 9 X CLA 10, CLA 15 X CLA 30, CLA 12 X CLA 13, CLA 37 X CLA 35, CLA 37 X CLA 40, CLA 41 X (LASP2 X LASP3), CLA 34 X CLA 35 and CLA 44 X (LASP2 X LASP3) are the top yielder and could tolerate acid soil condition. Acid soil Vi-yellow Out of 20 genotypes of maize, 11 genotypes (55%) which produced 4.67 to 6.97 ton grain/ha were at par but gave significantly higher yield as compared to rest of the genotypes including local check (Rampur composite) in the acidic soil of Chambas Tar (Figure 2). The ten genotypes Sikauni, Cimcali 97 B Achap 1A - 285 -
Page 1 and 2:
Section 3: Crop Management - 203 -
Page 3 and 4:
Proceedings of the 8 th Asian Regio
Page 5 and 6:
Maize in the rice-wheat rotation gr
Page 7 and 8:
Maize in the rice-wheat rotation Av
Page 9 and 10:
Maize in the rice-wheat rotation RW
Page 11 and 12:
Maize in the rice-wheat rotation Ta
Page 13 and 14:
Rajbhandari Extensively cited data
Page 15 and 16:
Rajbhandari There was a linear resp
Page 17 and 18:
Rajbhandari sole crop soybean was m
Page 19 and 20:
Table 3. Sample means for phosphoru
Page 21 and 22:
Rajbhandari Table 5. P use efficien
Page 23 and 24:
Appendix 1 a. Combined analysis of
Page 25 and 26:
Rajbhandari Appendix 2a. Combined a
Page 27 and 28:
Rajbhandari Appendix 2b. Combined a
Page 29 and 30:
Proceedings of 8 th Asian Regional
Page 31 and 32: Soil fertility in the hills of Nepa
Page 33 and 34: Soil fertility in the hills of Nepa
Page 35 and 36: Experimental Findings (Based on sta
Page 37 and 38: Quayyum treatment T2 i.e., maize no
Page 39 and 40: Table 1. Yield and yield components
Page 41 and 42: Table 5. Effect of different fertil
Page 43 and 44: Table 8. Cost & return analyses of
Page 45 and 46: Table 13. Cost-benefit analysis of
Page 47 and 48: Proceedings of 8 th Asian Regional
Page 49 and 50: Maize-wheat systems measured under
Page 51 and 52: Literature Cited Maize-wheat system
Page 53 and 54: Table 2. Growth and yield attributi
Page 55 and 56: Maize-wheat systems Table 4. Balanc
Page 57 and 58: grain yield and eff. tillers grain
Page 59 and 60: Proceedings of the 8 th Asian Regio
Page 61 and 62: Results and Discussion Maize in eas
Page 63 and 64: Maize in eastern hills of Nepal Tab
Page 65 and 66: Yield kg/ha 7000 6000 5000 4000 300
Page 67 and 68: Maize in eastern hills of Nepal App
Page 69 and 70: Pokharel et al. backgrounds, we hav
Page 73 and 74: Results and Discussion N-requiremen
Page 75 and 76: Rainfall (mm) 800 700 600 500 400 3
Page 77 and 78: N-requirement in maize/millet relay
Page 79 and 80: Appendix I. Weather Information rec
Page 81: Tripathi It is necessary to manage
Page 85 and 86: Literature Cited Tripathi App (Nepa
Page 87 and 88: Table 4. Treatment combinations and
Page 89 and 90: Table 6. Grain yield of maize (t/ha
Page 91 and 92: Maize grain (t/ha) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Page 93 and 94: Maize grain (t/ha) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3
Page 95 and 96: Labios et al. surface is left undis
Page 97 and 98: Labios et al. Figures 3 and 4 showe
Page 99 and 100: Labios et al. Labios R.V.; Robles,
Page 101 and 102: Figure 1. Farmers planting corn usi
Page 103 and 104: Figure 5a. Status of the field at p
Page 107 and 108: Maize-rice rotation in Thailand On-
Page 109 and 110: Maize-rice rotation in Thailand Fro
Page 111 and 112: Maize-rice rotation in Thailand Tab
Page 113 and 114: Maize-rice rotation in Thailand Tab
Page 115 and 116: Harris et al. humid, sub-tropical c
Page 117 and 118: Harris et al. In Pakistan, priming
Page 119 and 120: Table 2. Effect of priming duration
show all

Section 3 (Crop Management)

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?