Nội dung

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 7 Number 11 (2018) Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.711.329 Nutrient Uptake under Inter-Cropping Systems of Ginger and Cowpea and Weed Management Practices A. Baruah1* and J. Deka2 1 Dow Agro Sciences India Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata-700157, West Bengal, India 2 Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat-785013, Assam, India *Corresponding author ABSTRACT Keywords Nutrient uptake, Intercropping, Weed management, Hand weeding, Metribuzin, Oxadiargyl, Rhizome Article Info Accepted: 22 October 2018 Available Online: 10 November 2018 A field experiment was conducted in Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat district, Assam, India to understand the effectiveness of inter-cropping system and chemical weed management on nutrient uptake by ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.), inter-crop and weeds, during 2013-14 and 2014-15. There were 16 numbers of treatment combinations, comprising of 4 inter-cropping systems and 4 weed management practices. Intercropping of Cowpea in between rows of Ginger and incorporated at 40 days after sowing (DAS) and treatment with Metribuzin 500 g ai ha -1 + hand weeding (HW) at 70, 100 and 140 days after planting (DAP) recorded better results in terms of crop yield and nutrient uptake by ginger and cowpea. On the contrary, weedy check recorded the highest nutrition uptake by weeds at almost all the considered time intervals. At the time of ginger harvest, treatments Ginger + Cowpea (2:1) and Cowpea incorporated at 40 DAS and Hand weeding (HW) at 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP recorded better results in terms of P 2O5 and K2O availability in soil. Introduction In India, Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.) is considered to be a high valued commercial crop due to its multipurpose uses. Also, India is one of the major producer and consumer of ginger, accounting for about 30-40% of the global share of production, followed by China, Nepal and Indonesia (Gracy et al., 2013). But ginger is an exhaustive crop, therefore nutrient availability and uptake is critical for its production. Due to wider spacing, it faces severe competition for nutrition from weeds. Growing of intercrops and application of preemergence herbicide can be an effective approach towards better nutrient uptake by ginger, its enhanced growth and yield due to effective weed management. The current study was undertaken with the intent to understand the impact of inter-crops and chemical weed management on nutrient uptake by crops and weeds and yield of ginger. Materials and Methods Soils characteristics Prior to initiating the experiment, representative soil samples were collected randomly and analysed for their chemical 2858 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 properties. The texture of the soil was found to be sandy loam with acidic in reaction. For both the years i.e. 2013-14 and 2014-15, available Nitrogen (N) and Potassium (K2O) were in medium range whereas Phosphorus (P2O5) was low. A detail description of chemical properties of the soil and methods used are presented in Table 1. plots at 60 and 100 DAP, except the Weedy plots. Need based plant protection measures were adopted to manage pests and diseases as per package and practices recommended by Assam Agricultural University. In both the years, cowpea was uprooted and incorporated in the soil on the 40th day after sowing and ginger crop was harvested on the 262nd day after planting in both the years. Treatment details Results and Discussion There were 16 treatment combinations comprising of 4 Cropping Systems viz., I1: Ginger + Cowpea (2:1); Cowpea incorporated at 40 DAS, I2: Ginger + Cowpea (3:1); Cowpea incorporated at 40 DAS, I3: Cowpea in between rows of Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS, I4: Cowpea in between alternate rows of Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS and 4 Weed Management Practices viz., W1: Weedy (Control), W2: Hand weeding at 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP, W3: Pre-emergence application of Oxadiargyl 90 g ai ha-1 + hand weeding at 70, 100 and 140 DAP and W4: Pre-emergence application of Metribuzin 500 g ai ha-1 + hand weeding at 70, 100 and 140 DAP. Planting/sowing operations and inter-cultural The ginger variety ‘Nadia’ pre-treated with Mancozeb were planted in a spacing of 60 cm between two rows and 25 cm between rhizomes. The number of ginger rows was as per the row ratios in the cropping system treatments. A short duration fodder variety of cowpea ‘UPC-278’ was sown as an inter-crop as per the treatment requirement. The herbicides, Metribuzin and Oxadiargyl were applied with a spray volume of 500 l ha-1 on the 3rd day after planting of ginger rhizomes. The plots were mulched with rice straw @ 4 t ha-1 in two splits, one immediately after planting of ginger and second at 70 DAP. Light earthing up of ginger was done in all the Effect on yield of crops In 2013-14 and 2014-15, treatment Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS recorded significantly higher fresh biomass weight of cowpea whereas weed management with Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP recorded significantly higher fresh biomass weight of cowpea in both the years (Table 2). Intercropping of Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS recorded highest ginger yield of 7542 kg ha-1in 2013-14 and 8633 kg ha-1 in 2014-15. It was statistically at par with the treatment Cowpea in alternate rows and incorporated at 40 DAS. Application of Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP recorded significantly higher ginger yield of 7817and 9340kg ha-1 in 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively as compared to other weed management treatment (Table 2). Effect on nutrient uptake by crops In both the years of experimentation, highest Nitrogen (N) uptake of 98.8 kg ha-1 (2013-14) and 114.7 kg ha-1 (2014-15) by ginger was recorded in the treatment Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS. It was statistically at par with the treatment Cowpea in alternate rows and incorporated at 40 DAS. Highest Phosphorus (P) uptake by ginger was 2859 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 also recorded in the treatment Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS, which recorded uptake of 11.5 kg ha-1 in 2013-14 and 13.3 kg ha-1 in 2014-15, but it was statistically at par with the treatment Cowpea in alternate rows and incorporated at 40 DAS. A similar trend was also observed in respect of Potassium (K) uptake by ginger. Inter-cropping system Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS recorded the highest K uptake of 108.5 and 118.4 kg ha1 in 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively which was at par with the treatment Cowpea in alternate rows and incorporated at 40 DAS (Table 3). Thus, in both the years, intercropping treatment Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAP recorded highest nutrient uptake by ginger. Better biomass production by ginger under this intercropping system due to better weed smothering at the critical stage of competition and N fixation by legume cowpea and its incorporation might have increased the nutrient uptake (Willey, 1979). Amongst the weed management practices, Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em + HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP recorded significantly higher N uptake of 106.8 kg ha-1 in 2013-14 and 128.1 kg ha-1 in 2014-15 by ginger. This treatment also recorded significantly higher P uptake of 12.4 and 14.9 kg ha-1 in 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively as compared to other weed management treatments. K uptake of 113.2 and 121.7 kg ha-1 in 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively by ginger was also recorded in Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em + HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP (Table 3), which was significantly higher than other weed management. Nutrient uptake in Metribuzin treated plots were followed by the treatment Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em + HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP. Metribuzin application followed by 3 hand weeding created a sustained competition free environment for better growth of ginger finally contributing towards increased nutrient uptake by the crop. Similar, results are reported by Sathiyavani and Prabhakaran (2015) also in turmeric. Intercropping of Cowpea in between Ginger and incorporated at 40 DAS, recorded significantly higher uptake of N, P and K by cowpea as compared to all other cropping systems (Table 4). This might be due to the closer row spacing which created an ideal weed free condition. It contributed towards better biomass production leading to higher nutrient uptake by cowpea. Weed management with Metribuzine 500 g ha1 pre-em + HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP recorded significantly higher uptake of N, P and K by cowpea than rest of the weed management treatments (Table 4). It was followed by the treatment Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em + HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP. Preemergence application of those two herbicides resulted effective weed control during the critical phases, thus helping better nutrient uptake by the inter-crop cowpea. Table.1 Chemical properties of surface soil at experimental site Particular(s) (kg ha -1) Value(s) Method adopted 2013-14 2014-15 Available N Available P2O5 Available K2O 388.0 17.8 239.4 369.40 13.8 252.3 Kjeldahl Method (Jackson, 1973) Bray-I Method (Jackson, 1973) Flame Photometric Method (Jacson,1973) 2860 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.2 Fresh biomass weight of cowpea and rhizome yield of ginger (kg ha-1) Treatment Cowpea biomass weight (kg ha-1) 2013-14 2014-15 Ginger rhizome yield (kg ha-1) 2013-14 2014-15 Cropping system I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 4679 4523 5846 6175 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 3656 3729 5925 6454 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 14333 10158 7542 8633 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS 9229 7458 7338 8505 CDP=0.05 448 305 419 635 W1: Weedy 7796 6196 5021 4825 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 7563 6108 6533 7396 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 8043 6606 7279 8208 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP CDP=0.05 8497 6958 7817 9340 448 305 338 635 Weed management G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2861 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.3 Nutrient (N, P and K) uptake by ginger (kg ha-1) N (kg ha-1) P (kg ha-1) K (kg ha-1) 201314 2014-15 201314 2014-15 201314 201415 I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 66.7 71.1 8.2 8.7 72.2 76.7 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 67.6 74.1 8.3 9.1 73.2 80.0 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 98.8 114.7 11.5 13.3 108.5 118.4 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS 96.1 113.0 11.2 13.1 105.6 116.5 CDP=0.05 4.3 2.4 0.5 0.3 4.6 4.5 W1: Weedy 40.1 38.5 5.5 5.3 52.7 50.7 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 83.2 94.4 9.8 11.1 88.7 100.7 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 99.1 111.9 11.5 13.0 105.0 118.5 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 106.8 128.1 12.4 14.9 113.2 121.7 CDP=0.05 4.3 4.1 0.5 0.3 4.6 4.5 Treatments Cropping system Weed management G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2862 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.4 Nutrient (N, P and K) uptake by cowpea (kg ha-1) N (kg ha-1) Treatments P (kg ha-1) K (kg ha-1) 201314 2014-15 201314 2014-15 201314 201415 I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 44.0 41.5 6.7 6.4 54.0 52.3 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 34.3 35.1 5.2 5.3 42.0 43.0 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 160.3 111.2 21.9 15.6 195.0 137.2 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS 106.7 82.8 14.1 11.2 127.1 100.2 4.4 2.6 0.4 0.5 3.9 3.6 W1: Weedy 79.8 63.0 11.5 9.1 94.4 74.5 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 79.0 62.1 11.1 9.0 91.6 73.5 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 90.1 70.7 12.3 10.1 114.8 91.1 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 94.7 74.7 12.9 10.7 119.4 94.8 CDP=0.05 4.4 2.6 0.4 0.5 3.9 3.6 Cropping system CDP=0.05 Weed management G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2863 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.5 Nitrogen (kg ha-1) uptake by weeds Treatments 2013-14 2014-15 40 70 DAP DAP 100 DAP 130 DAP 160 DAP 40 70 100 DAP DAP DAP 130 DAP 160 DAP Cropping system I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 23.2 55.2 72.5 84.5 87.4 20.7 49.7 66.9 78.7 82.9 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 23.3 47.0 62.0 71.7 75.8 20.9 42.3 57.2 66.8 70.8 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 13.5 28.4 38.6 47.4 50.3 12.1 24.9 37.1 43.6 46.1 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS 15.0 31.6 41.8 49.5 52.3 13.6 28.1 36.1 45.6 48.4 CDP=0.05 2.0 1.4 2.6 2.2 2.7 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.9 3.4 Weed management W1: Weedy 35.1 103.6 131.3 150.5 155.0 29.1 96.3 123.6 142.6 148.5 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 20.8 21.1 30.1 37.0 39.5 30.0 17.9 26.8 33.6 36.2 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 11.0 19.4 27.5 33.7 36.5 9.9 16.1 24.2 30.5 33.2 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 8.0 18.1 26.0 31.8 34.7 6.9 14.8 22.8 27.9 30.4 CDP=0.05 2.0 1.4 2.6 2.2 2.7 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.9 3.4 G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2864 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.6 Phosphorus (kg ha-1) uptake by weeds Treatments 2013-14 2014-15 40 70 100 130 160 40 70 100 130 160 DAP DAP DAP DAP DAP DAP DAP DAP DAP DAP Cropping system I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 3.27 7.4 9.8 11.5 12.1 3.0 6.6 9.0 10.7 11.3 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 3.50 6.4 8.5 9.8 10.4 3.0 5.7 7.7 9.1 9.7 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 2.00 3.8 5.2 6.4 6.8 1.8 3.3 4.8 5.7 6.2 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS 2.16 4.1 5.6 6.7 7.0 2.0 3.7 4.8 6.1 6.5 CDP=0.05 0.28 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 W1: Weedy 4.13 12.2 15.4 17.7 18.4 3.5 11.3 14.4 16.8 17.4 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 3.53 3.6 5.1 6.2 6.8 3.7 3.0 4.5 5.6 6.1 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 1.76 3.1 4.4 5.4 5.8 1.5 2.5 3.9 4.8 5.3 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 1.51 2.9 4.0 5.1 5.4 1.4 2.4 3.5 4.5 4.9 CDP=0.05 0.28 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 Weed management G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2865 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.7 Potassium (kg ha-1) uptake by weeds Treatments 2013-14 2014-15 40 70 DAP DAP 100 DAP 130 DAP I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 28.8 66.9 87.6 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 29.4 55.4 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 17.4 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS CDP=0.05 160 DAP 40 70 DAP DAP 100 DAP 130 DAP 160 DAP 103.2 108.6 25.8 60.3 81.4 96.2 101.6 73.6 85.4 89.6 26.2 49.8 67.4 79.3 84.4 34.7 46.6 58.5 61.2 15.6 30.5 45.3 53.7 56.1 19.4 37.3 53.4 61.0 63.7 17.6 32.7 43.8 55.4 59.1 2.5 1.6 3.4 2.8 2.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 3.0 4.3 Cropping system Weed management W1: Weedy 37.4 110.1 139.7 159.9 164.6 28.9 102.4 131.4 151.6 157.8 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 30.7 31.0 44.3 54.4 58.1 30.1 26.1 39.3 49.4 53.2 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 15.5 27.4 39.8 48.0 51.5 14.0 23.1 34.3 43.3 47.2 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 11.3 25.8 37.4 45.9 48.9 9.7 21.7 32.9 40.4 43.1 CDP=0.05 2.5 1.6 3.4 2.8 2.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 3.0 4.3 G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2866 Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2018) 7(11): 2858-2870 Table.8 Available nutrients (kg ha-1) in the soil at the time of cowpea incorporation N (kg ha-1) Treatments P (kg ha-1) K (kg ha-1) 201314 2014-15 201314 2014-15 201314 201415 I1: G*+C* (2:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 264.2 266.3 35.9 37.2 83.9 91.3 I2: G+C (3:1); C incorp. 40 DAS 255.5 270.4 29.3 30.7 76.2 82.0 I3: C in between G; incorp. 40 DAS 280.0 282.2 20.7 22.0 54.1 65.3 I4: C in alternate rows; incorp. 40 DAS 272.6 276.2 23.3 24.6 64.3 74.3 NS NS 3.6 3.7 5.4 3.9 W1: Weedy 265.0 267.8 26.0 27.4 67.6 76.0 W2: HW 40, 70, 100 and 140 DAP 270.8 278.7 28.7 30.0 72.4 80.8 W3: Oxadiargyl 90 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 268.5 276.2 27.8 29.1 69.7 78.6 W4: Metribuzine 500 g ha-1 pre-em+ HW 70, 100 and 140 DAP 267.9 272.5 26.7 28.0 68.7 77.5 NS NS NS NS NS NS Cropping system CDP=0.05 Weed management CDP=0.05 G*=Ginger, C* Cowpea, pre-em=Pre-emergence 2867