Nội dung

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1972-1977 International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 10 Number 02 (2021) Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2021.1003.251 Effect of Subsurface Drip Irrigation-Fertigation Regimes on Yield and Economics of Compact Cotton in Sodic Soil D. G. Pavan1*, S. Somasundaram2, S. Avudaithai1 and S. Nithila1 1 Department of Agronomy, Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College and Research Institute, Tiruchirappalli-620 027, India 2 Cotton Research Station, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Veppanthattai, Perambalur621116, Tamil Nadu, India *Corresponding author ABSTRACT Keywords Compact cotton, Subsurface drip irrigation, Fertigation, Epan, Seed cotton yield, Sodic soil Article Info Accepted: 18 February 2021 Available Online: 10 March 2021 A field experiment was conducted at Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College and Research Institute, Tiruchirapalli during winter season of 2019 to study the effect of subsurface drip irrigation- fertigation regimes on stalk yield, seed cotton yield and economics of high density cotton cultivation in sodic soil. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with three replications. The treatments consisted of combination of two factors viz., four subsurface drip irrigation levels (I1 – 0.4 Epan,I2 – 0.6 Epan, I3 – 0.8 Epan and I4– 1.0 Epan) and three fertigation levels (N1 – 100% RDF, N2 – 125%, RDF and N3– 150% RDF). The results revealed that subsurface drip irrigation level of 1.0 Epan registered higher stalk yield as well as seed cotton yield and this was found comparable with 0.8 Epan for seed cotton yield alone. Among fertigation levels 150% RDF registered higher stalk yield but the seed cotton yield was found higher under fertigation of 125% RDF. Among interaction, combination of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF recorded higher gross return, net return and B:C ratio. The study shows that subsurface drip irrigation-fertigation of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF may be recommended for compact cotton varieties for better productivity and profitability in sodic soil condition. Introduction Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is one of major cash crop of India, supporting the country's largest organized industry, textile industry and recognised as "White Gold" for its contribution to the national economy in terms of foreign exchange earnings and employment generation. In India cotton is cultivated in an area of 126 lakh hectare with the production and productivity of 337 lakh bales and 451 kg ha-1 respectively. Cotton production in India cannot be measured without taking into account salt-affected soils, but increasing productivity in these soils is a difficult task. India contributes around 52 m 1972 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1972-1977 ha of salt affected land (Mandal et al., 2018).It is placed in the moderately salt tolerant group of plant species with the salinity threshold level of 7.7 ds m-1. Its growth and development was severely reduced at high salinity levels. Salinity of agricultural lands and irrigation water is the major constraint for crop growth and development in study area. Over the last three years, cotton production has been declining. The use of subsurface drip irrigation and precise nutrient application through fertigation can aid in increasing cotton productivity. Subsurface drip irrigation (SSDI) is one such tried and true process where it increases the productivity of water as well as nutrients. Cotton production is one of the largest usages of SSDI around the world, with its lower water use it can be an excellent crop in water-short areas when coupled with SSDI. According to Lamm (2016), combining irrigation and fertilization with subsurface drip irrigation will reduce nutrient and water requirements compared to regional fertilization practices. Application of fertilizers by subsurface drip irrigation lowers the production costs which also reduce groundwater contamination, avoiding ecosystem disruptions and health threats caused by nitrate leaching and accumulation in deeper layers. When fertilizer is applied through drip, it is observed that 30 per cent of the fertilizer could be saved as compared to broadcast or band placement. Keeping these considerations in view the present study was undertaken to estimate the effect of subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation regimes on yield and economics of compact cotton under high density planting system. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted at Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College and Research Institute, Tiruchirapalli during winter season of 2019. The soil type was sandy clay loam with initial N, P2O5 and K2O of the soil were 216 kg ha-1, 14.8 kg ha-1and 245.6 kg ha-1respectively. Factorial randomized block design was adopted with three replications. The treatments consisted of combination of two factors viz., four irrigation levels (I1 – 0.4 Epan,I2 – 0.6 Epan, I3 – 0.8 Epan and I4– 1.0 Epan) and three fertigation levels (N1 – 100% RDF, N2 – 125%, RDF and N3– 150% RDF). The cotton variety Co 17 was sown during 2019 by hand dibbling of seeds at 60 x 10 cm spacing. The observations were recorded at the time of harvest stage. The data collected from the experimental field were analyzed statistically following the procedure as described by Gomez (1984). Results and Discussion Stalk yield (kg ha-1) The subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation levels had significant influence on stalk yield (Table 1). Among irrigation levels 1.0 Epan significantly recorded higher stalk yield of 5416 kg ha-1 was followed by 0.8 Epan (4949 kg ha-1). This was perhaps due to increased available moisture content along the crop growth resulted in cell elongation and turgidity under subsurface drip irrigation as suggested by Cetin (2020). Among fertigation levels 150% RDF significantly recorded higher stalk yield and was followed by 125% RDF. This may be due to application of higher amount of fertilizers through subsurface drip fertigation, which gradually increases growth and development resulted in higher stalk yield. The interaction was found significant (Table 2). Higher stalk yield was obtained under the combination of 1.0 Epan + 150% RDF (6712 kg ha-1).This was followed by 0.8 Epan + 150% RDF (5785 kg ha-1). This may be due to continuous availability of requisite soil moisture and nutrients near the root zone resulted in higher nutrient uptake, greater cell 1973 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1972-1977 division and elongation as indicated by Govindan and Grace (2012). Seed cotton yield (kg ha-1) The seed cotton yield was significantly influenced by subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation regimes as depicted in Table 1. Irrigation level of 1.0 Epan recorded higher seed cotton yield of 2446 kg ha-1 and was found comparable with 0.8 Epan (2361 kg ha-1). This was followed by 0.6 Epan with a yield of 2172 kg ha-1.This could be due to better growth as a result of optimum soil moisture with lower EC throughout the life cycle associated with subsurface drip irrigation without any stress period which increased the assimilates from source to sink for both 1.0 and 0.8 Epan as reported by Sorensen et al., (2004).Among fertigation levels, 125% RDF registered significantly higher seed cotton yield of 2478 kg ha-1 followed by 150% RDF (2156 kg ha-1) and the lower seed cotton yield was obtained under 100% RDF (1942 kg ha-1). The higher fertigation of 150% RDF recorded lower seed cotton yield, due to higher vegetative growth and reduce yield parameters with imbalanced source sink relationship. This is in confirmation with Gormus et al., (2016). The interaction effect was found significant (Table 2). Higher seed cotton yield was obtained under the combination of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF (2805 kg ha-1) and was comparable with 0.8 Epan + 125% RDF (2698 kg ha-1).This may be due to superior performance of all yield attributing parameters at better availability of soil moisture with optimum nutrients which was reflected in seed cotton yield. These findings are in close conformity with Shivakumar et al., (2010). Harvest index (HI) Harvest index was significantly influenced by subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation levels (Table 1). The subsurface drip irrigation level of 0.8 Epan recorded higher harvest index of 0.33 and was found comparable with 1.0 Epan (0.32) and 0.6 Epan (0.32). Among fertigation levels 125% RDF registered higher harvest index (0.35) and was followed by 100% RDF. Similar result was reported by Venugopalan (2019), who reported that the cotton planted under HDPS needs an additional fertilizer of 25 percent above the recommendation, which will increase the nutrient absorption under high density planting condition which was reflected in higher seed cotton yield. Interaction was found significant (Table 3). The combination of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF registered higher harvest index of 0.36 and was found comparable with 0.8 Epan + 125% RDF (0.36), 0.6 Epan + 125% RDF (0.35), I4N1 (0.34) and I3N1 (0.34). This may be due to higher seed cotton yield obtained under the combination of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF. Economic analysis It is evident from data that subsurface drip irrigation level of 1.0 Epan recorded higher cost of cultivation (Rs. 62201),gross return (Rs. 1,29,627), net return (Rs. 67,426) and B:C ratio (2.08). This may be due to increased moisture content under subsurface drip irrigation which boosted the plant growth and resulted in higher seed cotton yield which is reflected in the net return and B:C ratio. Among fertigation levels150% RDF registered higher cost of cultivation (Rs. 62555) while the gross return (Rs. 1,31,342), net return (Rs. 69,741) and B:C ratio (2.13) were found higher at 125% RDF. This may be due to balanced application of essential nutrients from vegetative stage to boll formation stage in split doses through subsurface drip irrigation increased the seed cotton yield which is responsible for higher economic benefit. These confirmations are in agreement with Basavanneppa and Biradar (2003). 1974 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1972-1977 Table.1 Effect of irrigation and fertigation regimes on stalk yield (kg ha-1), seed cotton yield (kg ha-1) and harvest index Treatments Irrigation regimes I1 – 0.4 Epan I2 – 0.6 Epan I3 – 0.8 Epan I4 – 1.0 Epan SEd CD (p=0.05) Fertigation regimes N1 – 100% RDF N2 – 125% RDF N3 – 150% RDF SEd CD (p=0.05) Interaction Stalk yield (kg ha-1) Seed cotton yield (kg ha-1) Harvest index 4038 4530 4949 5416 188 389 1790 2172 2361 2446 53 110 0.30 0.32 0.33 0.32 0.009 0.02 4140 4659 5400 162 337 S 1942 2478 2156 45 95 S 0.32 0.35 0.29 0.007 0.02 S Table.2 Interaction of irrigation and fertigation regimes on stalk and seed cotton yield (kg ha-1) Treatments Irrigation regimes I1 – 0.4 Epan I2 – 0.6 Epan I3 – 0.8 Epan I4 – 1.0 Epan Mean IxN SEd CD (p=0.05) N1 – 100% RDF 3979 4091 4164 4327 4140 I 188 389 Stalk yield (kg ha-1) Fertigation regimes N2 – N3 – 125% 150% RDF RDF 4021 4113 4508 4992 4899 5785 5209 6712 4659 5400 N IxN 162 325 337 675 Mean 4038 4530 4949 5416 1975 N1 – 100% RDF 1627 1864 2109 2170 1942 I 53 110 Seed cotton yield(kg ha-1) Fertigation regimes N2 – N3 – 125% 150% RDF RDF 1901 1843 2508 2145 2698 2275 2805 2362 2478 2156 N IxN 45 91 95 189 Mean 1790 2172 2361 2446 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1972-1977 Table.3 Interaction effect of irrigation and fertigation regimes on harvest index Treatments Irrigation regimes I1 – 0.4 Epan I2 – 0.6 Epan I3 – 0.8 Epan I4 – 1.0 Epan Mean IxN SEd CD (p=0.05) N1 – 100% RDF 0.29 0.31 0.34 0.34 0.32 I 0.009 0.02 Harvest index Fertigation regimes N2 – 125% N3 – 150% RDF RDF 0.32 0.30 0.35 0.30 0.36 0.29 0.36 0.27 0.35 0.29 N IxN 0.007 0.016 0.02 0.03 Mean 0.30 0.32 0.33 0.33 Table.4 Effect of irrigation and fertigation regimes on economics Treatments Cost of cultivation (Rs.) Net return (Rs.) B:C 60049 61001 61955 60449 61401 62355 60849 61801 62755 61249 62201 63155 Gross return (Rs.) 86231 100753 97679 98792 132924 113685 111830 143011 120575 115010 148683 125190 I1N1 I1N2 I1N3 I2N1 I2N2 I2N3 I3N1 I3N2 I3N3 I4N1 I4N2 I4N3 Irrigation regimes I1 – 0.4 Epan I2 – 0.6 Epan I3 – 0.8 Epan I4 – 1.0 Epan Fertigation regimes N1 – 100% RDF N2 – 125% RDF N3 – 150% RDF 26182 39752 35724 38343 71523 51330 50981 81210 57820 53761 86482 62035 1.44 1.65 1.58 1.63 2.16 1.82 1.84 2.31 1.92 1.88 2.39 1.98 61001 61401 61801 62201 94887 115133 125138 129627 33886 53732 63336 67426 1.55 1.87 2.02 2.08 60649 61601 62555 102965 131342 114282 42316 69741 51727 1.69 2.13 1.82 1976 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2021) 10(03): 1972-1977 The interaction between irrigation and fertigation regimes found economically benefit with the combination of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF (Table 4) due to the enhanced yield as reported by Soni and Asoka (2017). From the results of the experiment it was concluded that the subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation of 1.0 Epan + 125% RDF may be recommended for higher productivity and profitability under high density cotton cultivation with compact cotton varieties in sodic soil condition. References Basavanneppa, MA, and DP Biradar. 2003. "Productivity and profitability of split application of NPK nutrients on hybrid cotton." Madras Agricultural Journal 90 (1/3):86-90. Cetin, O. 2020. "Response of some physiological components of cotton to surface and subsurface drip irrigation using different irrigation water levels." International Journal of Agriculture Environment and Food Sciences 4(3):244-254. Dagdelen, N, H Başal, E Yılmaz, T Gürbüz, and S Akcay. 2009. "Different drip irrigation regimes affect cotton yield, water use efficiency and fiber quality in western Turkey." Agricultural Water Management 96(1): 111-120. Gomez, KA, Gomez. Statistical procedures for agricultural research (2nd ed).1984. Intl. Rice. Res. Int., P.O.Box. Manila Philippines and John Wiley and Sons, New York, USA. Gormus, O, A El-Sabagh, and MS Islam. 2016. "Optimizing yield and fiber quality of cotton under Mediterranean environment: managing nitrogen and potassium nutrition." Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences 4 (5 Suppl.): 572-580. Govindan, R, and TM Grace. 2012. "Influence of drip fertigation on growth and yield of rice varieties (Oryza sativa L.)." Madras Agricultural Journal, 99 (4/6): 244-247. Lamm, Freddie R. 2016. "Cotton, tomato, corn, and onion production with subsurface drip irrigation: A review." Transactions of the ASABE 59(1): 263-278. Mandal, S, R Raju, A Kumar, P Kumar, and PC Sharma. 2018. "Current Status of Research, Technology Response and Policy Needs of Salt-affected Soils in India–A Review." J. Indian Soc. Coastal Agric. Res 36(2): 40-53. Shivakumar, MC, BK Pugashetti, DG Naik, SV Hosamani, and VS Kulkarni. 2010. "Effect of Feeding Treated and Untreated Cotton Seed Hull Diet on Growth and Digestibility in Calves." Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 18 (1). Soni, JK, and RN Asoka. 2017. "Performance of groundnut (Arachishypogaea L.) under drip and micro sprinkler fertigation system." Vegetos: An International Journal of Plant Research 30(2): 137151. Sorensen, RB, MJ Bader, and EH Wilson. 2004. "Cotton yield and grade response to nitrogen applied daily through a subsurface drip irrigation system." Applied Engineering in Agriculture 20 (1):13. Venugopalan, MV. 2019. "Avenues to Improve Farm Income from Cotton under Changing Climatic Scenario." SS Narkhede, AD Rane, GD Shirke, VG More, MC Kasture 43:1. How to cite this article: Pavan, D. G., S. Somasundaram, S. Avudaithai and Nithila, S. 2021. Effect of Subsurface Drip Irrigation-Fertigation Regimes on Yield and Economics of Compact Cotton in Sodic Soil. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 10(03): 1972-1977. doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2021.1003.251 1977