This presentation highlights both input as well as output energy used for growing maize crop. It tells that how energy in as different parameters.

1. PRESENTED BY
SIDHARTHA SHANKAR BARAL
REG. NO – 04-3282-2017
M.TECH (FMPE) 1ST YEAR

2. CONTENTS
 INTRODUCTION
 OBJECTIVE
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
 CONCLUSION

3. INTRODUCTION
 Due to increasing fuel prices, energy efficiency in crop production has
become an increasing awareness.
• Energy has been a key input of agriculture since the age of subsistence
agriculture.
• It uses large quantities of locally available noncommercial energy, such
as seed, manure and animate energy as well as commercial energy,
directly and indirectly in the form of diesel, fertilizer for plant protection,
chemicals, irrigation water and machinery.
• Efficient use of these energies helps to achieve increase in production and
productivity contributes to the profitability and competitiveness for
agriculture sustainability, in rural living (Singh et al. 2002).
• It is important therefore, to analyze cropping systems in energy terms and
to evaluate alternative solutions especially for arable crops, which
account for more than half of the primary sector energy consumption
(Sartori et al. 2005).

4.  Maize is most important cereal crop of the world.
 It is used for three main purposes as human food, feed for poultry and
livestock.
 Maize being the highest yielding cereal crop in the world is of
significant importance for countries like Pakistan, where rapidly
increasing population has already out stripped the available food
supplies.
 In Pakistan maize is third important cereal after wheat and rice.
• Pakistan grows maize on about 1.11 million hectares with annual
production of 4.04 million tons of grain with average yield of 3.62 t ha-1
(GOP, 2009).

5. OBJECTIVE
 To evaluate the energy indices and maize grain yield under
different tillage methods and different fertility treatments for
sustainable farming systems with an impact on succeeding
maize crop.

6. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Experimental Site
• The experimental site was at National Agriculture Research Center
(NARC), Islamabad, Pakistan, in spring 2009.
• The site is located at Latitude 33° 40′ North and Longitude 73° 08′ East.
• The climate data were taken during the spring season i.e. the rainfall
average 0-125.8 mm, temperature 9°C-44°C, and humidity 22.5% -
95%.

7. Experimental Design and Treatment Application
• Plots were divided into sub-plots measuring equally to 7 m × 10 m with 1
m path left between each plot.
• Deep tillage, conventional tillage and zero tillage with fertilizer rates of
control was carried out.
• Seed was dibbled at 5 cm depth, keeping row to row at a distance of 75 cm
and seed to seed distance of 20 cm.
• Maize was sown at the rate of 10 kg per acre and the complete dose of
NPK was applied in it.
• Irrigation was applied and different agronomical observations were
recorded.

8. • The amounts of inputs use in the production of maize were specified in
order to calculate the energy equivalences.
• Energy inputs include human labour, diesel fuel, chemical fertilizer, farm
yard manure (FYM) and seed amount.
• Output yields include grains of maize.
• The direct energy use per hectare for each field operation was computed
by the following equation (Moerschner and Gerowitt, 2000)
𝐸𝐷 = ℎ × 𝐴𝐹𝑈 × 𝑃𝐸𝑈 × 𝑅𝑈
where ED = Specific direct energy use (fuel) , MJ ha-1
h = Specific working hours per run, h ha-1
AFU = Average fuel use per working hour, L h-1
PEU = Specific energy value per litre of fuel, MJ L-1
RU = Runs, number of applications in the considered field operation

9. • The indirect energy per unit area for other production inputs such as
fertilizer and seed was expressed as :
𝐸𝐼𝐷 = 𝑅𝐴𝑇𝐸 × 𝑀𝐴𝑇𝐸𝑁𝐹
where EID = indirect energy input, MJ ha-1
RATE = application rate of input, kg ha-1
MATENF = energy factor of material used, MJ kg-1
• The labour energy input (MJ ha-1) at every stage in the production process
was estimated by the following equation:
𝐿𝐴𝐵𝐸𝑁 =
𝐿𝐴𝐵𝑂𝑈𝑅 × 𝑇𝐼𝑀𝐸 × 𝐿𝐴𝐵𝐸𝑁𝐹
𝐴𝑅𝐸𝐴
where LABEN = labour energy, MJ ha-1
LABOUR = number of working labourers
TIME = operating time, h
AREA = operating area, ha
LABENF = labour energy factor, MJ h-1

10. Net energy gain was calculated by the following equation :-
𝑁𝑒𝑡 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛 = 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡
𝑀𝐽
ℎ𝑎 − 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡
𝑀𝐽
ℎ𝑎
Table I – Energy equivalents of inputs and outputs in maize production
Input Unit Energy equivalent
(MJ/unit)
Reference
Human Labor h 2.3 Yaldiz et al, 1990
Fuel (Diesel) L 47.8 Cervinka, 1980
Chemical
fertilizer
kg
Nitrogen 61.53 Pimentel and Pimentel 1979
Phosphorous 12.56 Pimentel and Pimentel 1979
Potassium 6.70 Pimentel and Pimentel 1979
Cow manure 3.8 Green 1987
Seed 14.7 Panesar 2002
Output kg
Grain maize 14.7 Panesar 2002

11. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Fuel Consumption
• The diesel fuel consumption and energy for the various systems are shown
in Table II.
• The results on depth, width, fuel consumption and effective field capacity
and fuel energy of implements were recorded.
Table II – Average depth, width, fuel consumption and fuel energy of
various implements
Implements Depth
(cm)
Width
(cm)
Lit hr-1 Lit ha-1 EFC
(ha hr-1)
Energy
(MJ ha-1)
Sub-soiler 27.350 a 1.133 e 6.966 a 24.140 a 0.294 1724.8
M.B Plow 21.333 b 1.766 c 6.693 b 21.250 b 0.318 1519.6
Disc Harrow 10.867 c 2.603 b 4.018 d 7.520 d 0.543 585.7
Cultivator 6.917 d 2.800 a 3.771 e 7.660 d 0.505 506.5
Zero-tillage 4.738 e 1.688 d 5.171 c 13.583 c 0.376 640.1
SE 0.1803 0.0232 0.0509 0.0779 -- --
LSD 0.4121 0.0483 0.1061 0.1625 -- --

12. Plant Height
• The effect of tillage as well as fertilizer levels on plant height, although
higher plant height were found in deep tillage followed by conventional
tillage and zero tillage.
• Our results are in agreement with Gill et al (1996) who observed greater
plant heights in case of deep tillage.
• The interactive effect of tillage X fertilizer on plant height, the highest
value was observed in deep tillage (190.33 cm) where combination of
NPK + FYM as compared to alone NPK (189.0 cm), FYM (163.0 cm) and
lowest in control where no fertilizer was applied.
• The increase in plant height in response to higher levels of nitrogen has
been confirmed by the previous findings of Akbar et al (2002).

13. Number of grain per cob
• The effect of tillage as well as fertilizer levels on grains per cob, although
maximum grains per cob were found in deep tillage followed by
conventional tillage and zero tillage.
• The interactive effect of tillage X fertilizer on grains per cob, the highest
value was observed in deep tillage (248.0) where combination of NPK +
FYM as compared to NPK (231.0), FYM (188.0) alone and lowest in
control where no fertilizer was applied.
• These results are in line with the findings of Rowe and Johnson (1995).

14. 1000-grain weight
• The effect of tillage as well as fertilizer levels on 1000-grain weight,
although maximum 1000-grain weight was found in deep tillage followed
by conventional tillage and zero tillage.
• The interactive effect of tillage X fertilizer on 1000-grain weight, the
highest value was observed in deep tillage (377.0 g) where combination of
NPK + FYM as compared to NPK (367.33 g), FYM (274.0 g) alone and
lowest in control where no fertilizer was applied.
• These results have been in agreement with the findings of Khaliq et al
(2004) who observed that the use of fertilizer and organic manure gave
maximum 1000-grain weight in case of maize.

15. Grain yield
• The effect of tillage as well as fertilizer levels on grain yield, although
maximum grain yield were found in deep tillage followed by conventional
tillage and zero tillage.
• The interactive effect of tillage X fertilizer on grain yield, the highest
value was observed in deep tillage (6116.0 kg ha-1) where combination of
NPK + FYM as compared to NPK (6110.0 kg ha-1), FYM (4169.7 kg ha-1)
alone and lowest in control where no fertilizer was applied.
• These results are in agreement with studies conducted by Shata et al
(2007), Sial et al (2007) and Adeniyan and Ojeniyi (2005) who reported
that application of chemical and organic manure (FYM) improved maize
grain yield.

16. Table III – Effect of organic and inorganic fertilizers on maize crop production

17. Input-output energy
• The input and output energy values used in maize production are detailed
in Table IV.
• The total input energy in each operation was maximum in deep tillage
followed by conventional tillage and low in zero tillage.
• The interaction of tillage X fertilizer the results revealed that the maximum
input energy in deep tillage (52837.9 MJ ha-1) where combined NPK +
FYM followed by conventional tillage (50685.7 MJ ha-1) and low at zero
tillage (50049.6 MJ ha-1).
• The results indicated that more energy was used in NPK + FYM followed
by FYM and NPK alone and less energy used in control where no fertilizer
was applied.

18. • The output energy was gained in deep tillage where combined NPK +
FYM were applied and lowest energy gained in control plots.
• The net energy gain was found maximum where alone NPK fertilizer
applied in deep tillage (74979.1 MJ ha-1) followed by conventional tillage
(70423.7 MJ ha-1) and low in zero tillage (63445.2 MJ ha-1).
• The results indicated that the net energy gained in NPK alone followed by
control, NPK + FYM and lowest net energy gained was in FYM alone, as
detailed in Table V.

19. Table IV – The energy output/input relationship for maize production

20. Table V – Net energy gain (MJ ha-1) of various tillage methods for spring maize

21. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
• The combined NPK + FYM fertilizer level gave highest grain yield in
deep tillage against conventional tillage and low grain yield in zero tillage.
• The deep tillage used high energy as compared to conventional and zero
tillage.
• Farmers are recommended to use conventional tillage for growing maize
crop successfully and economically.

22. • Memon, S.Q., M.S. Mirjat, A.Q. Mughal and N. Amjad.2012. Evaluation
of inputs and outputs energy for maize grain yield. Sarhad J. Agric.
28(3):387-394
• Rowe, B.A. and D.E. Johnson. 1995. Residual benefit of limestone and
superphosphate on barley yield and soil water deficits on a kransnozem in
north western Tasmania. Austr. J. Exper. Agric. 35(5):611-617
• Pimentel, D. and M. Pimentel. 1979. Food, Energy and Society. Resource
& Envir. Sci. Series, Edward Arnold, London.
• Khaliq, T., T. Mehmmod., J. Kamal and A. Masood. 2004. Effectiveness of
farmyard manure, poultry manure and Nitrogen for Corn (Zea mays)
productivity. Int’l. J. Agric. Boil. 6(2): 260-263.
REFERENCES