Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Safflower

2,443 views

Published on

Important Oilseed crop, Cool crop, Thorny Oilseed crop,

Published in: Education
  • Login to see the comments

Safflower

  1. 1. PROFESSOR JAYASHANKAR TELANGANA STATE AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE , RAJENDRA NAGAR Safflower BY SHAIKH WASIM CHAND RAM / 15-13
  2. 2.  BN:- Carthamus tinctorius  Family:- Compositae  Origin : according to, Vavilov = India, Afghanistan, Ethiopia Decondole = Arabia  Chromosome no. : 2n = 24 Cultivated spp. May have originated from two related spp. 1. Carthamus oxycanthus (wild safflower) 2. Carthamus lanatus (saffron thistle)
  3. 3. 1. Plant habit 2. Flowering branch 3.Detail of head 4. Lower part of flower 5.Upper part of f lower (opened) 6. Seed
  4. 4. Plant and Petal Flower and Seed
  5. 5. Area, Production and Productivity • India ranks first in area and production in the world. Area : 0.29 Mha Production : 0.18 Mt Productivity : 0.632 t/ha • In India Maharashtra ranks first in area(0.19 Mha) and production(0.11 Mt) • Karnataka ranks first in productivity(0.735 Mt). • Andhra Pradesh contains: Area (0.04 Mha), Production (0.06 Mt) and Productivity (0.571 t/ha)
  6. 6. Importance of Safflower • More or less Day neutral crop but thermo-sensitive so grown as a rabi crop. • Tolerant to salinity but sensitive to water logging conditions. • Self pollinated crop with out crossing of 5% to 40% due to the action of honey bees. • 100 seed weight varies from 2.5 to 8 g. • Both oil and protein content decreases with increased altitude. • A pest deterring crop. • A drought tolerant crop. • A tool for managing problem weeds.
  7. 7. Economic uses of safflower  Crop can be grown as guard crop because of spiny nature.  Suitably dried flowers used to treat circulatory, inflammation and muscular problems.  Dye extracted from petal is used for dyeing purposes.  It is a drying oil.  It contain 24-35 % oil.  It is rich in poly unsaturated fatty acids as linoleic acid (78 %) which reducing cholesterol content and also good for heart patients.  It is used in manufacturing of soaps and varnishes.
  8. 8.  The oil is used for preparation of Roghan.  Safflower oil is the healthiest oil of all vegetable oil.  Safflower was recognized as it remedies Rheumatism.  Safflower seed contain 50 % hull and its pale yellow in colour. Fatty acid composition : Linoleic acid = 70-80 % Oleic acid = 6-8 % Stearic acid = 2-3 % Palmitic acid = 5-8 %
  9. 9. Soil and Climate • It is day neutral plant. • It is mainly rabi crop. • Temperature requirement. For seed germination = 15-16 ⁰C For flowering = 24-32 ⁰C • Rainfall requirement : 500-600 mm. • Safflower required fertile, fairly deep and well drained soil for optimum yield. • Spacing : 45x20 cm
  10. 10. Seed rate and Spacing State Seed rate (kg/ha) Spacing (cm) Andhra Pradesh 7.5-10 45x20 Maharashtra 10-12 45x20 Karnataka 7.5 60x30 Madhya Pradesh 20 45x25 Tamilnadu 10 45x20 Uttar Pradesh 12-15 45x20
  11. 11. Nutrient Management • Safflower crop removes 60-65 kg N, 30 kg P2O5 and 20-30 K2O. • One tonn of seed removes about 45 kg N. • FYM @ 5-10 t/ha. • P2O5 half as basal application and response is 7-8 kg seed per kg P2O5 applied. • K2O as basal recommended in K deficient soil. • In rainfed condition entire fertilizer is applied by drilling at sowing. • In irrigated condition half N and whole P & k are applied at sowing and another half N is top dressed 5 WAS.
  12. 12. Water Management • The is generally grown as rainfed in residual soil moisture. • The have crops have the ability to extract moisture from deeper layer of the soil. • Water deficit during rosette stage, elongation and branching, flowering and seed filling results in poor yield. • Rosette stage is the most critical stage of safflower. • Total water requirement varies from 600-1200 mm. • High water use occurs at flowering stage. • WUE varies between 5-6 Kg/ha/mm.
  13. 13. Weed Management • Safflower can not compete with weeds up to 60 DAS. • The critical period of crop growth competition is Rosette stage to Flowering stage. • Two harrowing at 25-30 and 45-50 DAS depending on the length of rosette period and manual weeding in between can effectively check the weed growth. • Uses of Herbicides like, • PPI : EPTC (2.0-3.0) Trifluralin (1.5-2.0) • PRE-Em Herbicide : Alachlor (1.5-2.0) Nitralin (1.5-2.0) Metaxuron (2.5-3.0)
  14. 14. Cropping System Intercropping : • AP : Chick pea + safflower (3:1 or 2:1) Coriander + safflower (3:1 or 2:1) • KN : Chick pea + safflower (3:1) Coriander + safflower (3:1) • MH : Wheat + safflower (3:1 or 2:1) • MP : Chick pea + safflower (6:2 or 4:2) • Eastern UP : Chick pea + safflower (3:1) Barley + safflower (3:1)
  15. 15. Sequence Cropping : • It is profitable in Andhra Pradesh where rainfall is 700-800 mm. • Northern Telangana zone : Maize – safflower Sorghum – safflower Sesame – safflower Green gram– safflower • Scarce Rainfall zone : Green gram – safflower Sesame – safflower Soybean – safflower
  16. 16. Varieties • Hybrids : NARI-NH-1, NARI-H-15, MRSH-521, DSH129, MKH1 • Varieties : Parbhani kusum, Phule kusum, TSF1, PBNS40, NARI 6, NARI 38, SSF 658, Manjeera, Bhima, Sagar muthyalu. Harvesting : • The crop mature within 110-120 days. • The leaves and most of the bracteoles except a few of last formed become brown and seeds are dried and easily separated from the head. • The yield varies from 18-20 qt/ha.
  17. 17. Case study
  18. 18. Table 1. Yield attributing characters and yield of Safflower as influenced by irrigation schedules Treatments Wt/capitul um (g) No. of seeds/capit ulum Seed wt./plant (g) Petal yield/plan t (g) WUE (kg/mm/ ha) No. of irrigatio n Seed yield (kg/ha) Petal yield (kg/ha) HI (%) Oil yield (kg/ha) T₁- control 34.7 18.3 12.0 1.24 - - 859 96.0 23.05 240 T₂- irrigation at rosette 56.3 22.5 21.1 2.45 13.72 1 1334 121.0 29.98 388 T₃-irrigation at branching (B) 55.8 21.8 20.5 2.40 11.51 1 1119 119.5 26.11 318 T₄- irrigation at flowering (F) 36.8 19.0 14.8 1.34 9.23 1 898 103.8 29.83 255 T₅- irrigation at R+B 72.6 29.8 35.7 3.80 8.91 2 1734 213.5 26.25 510 T₆- irrigation at R+F 65.6 26.2 26.3 2.71 7.52 2 1463 175.4 27.32 428 T₇- irrigation at B+F 62.7 25.0 24.4 2.36 7.44 2 1447 162.9 27.43 422 T₈- irrigation R+B+F 73.0 31.6 36.4 3.90 6.32 3 1843 214.3 26.70 546 T₉- irrigation at T₈ + seed development stage 76.1 32.6 38.6 4.00 5.34 4 2077 233.2 28.70 625 SEm± 1.3 0.7 1.1 0.32 80.8 4.19 0.65 28.0 CD (P=0.05) 4.1 2.3 3.5 1.00 241.9 14.8 2.00 84.1 Suryavanshi et al. (2006)
  19. 19. Table 2. Economics of Safflower as influenced by irrigation schedules Treatments Gross return (Rs/ha) Cost of production (Rs/ha) Net return (Rs/ha) B:C ratio T₁- control 19908 13720 6188 1.45 T₂- irrigation at rosette 28108 15720 12388 1.78 T₃-irrigation at branching (B) 25373 15611 9762 1.62 T₄- irrigation at flowering (F) 21126 14516 6640 1.45 T₅- irrigation at R+B 42158 22445 19713 1.87 T₆- irrigation at R+F 35091 19774 15371 1.77 T₇- irrigation at B+F 33654 18903 14751 1.78 T₈- irrigation R+B+F 43546 22751 20795 1.91 T₉- irrigation at T₈ + seed development stage 47249 24327 22922 1.94 SEm± 1370 0.39 CD (P=0.05) 4120 1.17 Suryavanshi et al. (2006)
  20. 20. Table 3. Growth yield attributes, yield and economics of Safflower as influenced by intercropping and weed management practice Treatment DM accumulati on (g/plant) branche s/plant Capitulum /plant Seeds/capi tulum 100 seed weight Seed yield (kg/ha) Stover yield (kg/ha) Net return B:C ratio Intercropping Safflower sole 21.6 13 20 18 6.0 1624 3530 2481 0.49 Safflower + Chickpea (4:3) 18.8 13 19 18 5.9 1025 2563 8633 1.12 Safflower + Linseed (4:3) 18.5 13 17 17 5.9 986 1983 5715 0.72 CD (P=0.05) 0.36 NS 0.77 NS NS 74 129 - - Weed management Unweeded check 15.8 11 15 15 5.2 875 2383 1653 0.23 Hand weeding (25 and 45 DAS) 22.7 16 20 19 6.2 1659 2917 7431 0.81 Alachlor @ 2.0 kg/ha as pre- em. 18.4 13 18 17 5.9 1110 2856 254 0.03 Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg/ha as pr-em. 23.0 16 22 20 6.5 1824 3492 2989 0.34 CD (P=0.05) 0.30 0.9 0.27 1.09 0.42 173.23 280.28 - - Kumar et al. (2002)
  21. 21. Table 4. Effects of levels and sources of sulphur on seed oil yield of Safflower (Patel et al. 2001) Treatments Seed yield (kg/ha) Oil yield (kg/ha) 1996 1997 1998 Pooled 1997 1998 Pooled Control vs. Sulphur Control 1338 598 753 896 161 203 182 Sulphur 1631 986 1116 1244 269 310 290 F- test NS S S S S S S Sulphur level (kg/ha) (L) 15 1528 903 1027 1153 246 284 265 30 1667 986 1092 1248 269 303 286 45 1698 1068 1230 1332 293 342 317 SEm± 86 25 24 31 7 7 5 CD (P=0.05) NS 74 72 87 19 20 13 Sources of sulphur (S) Ammonium Sulphate 1784 1137 1269 1397 313 354 333 SSP 1561 931 1087 1193 255 302 278 Elemental Sulphur 1584 946 1053 1194 258 291 275 Gypsum 1594 929 1056 1193 252 292 272 SEm± 99 29 28 36 8 8 5 CD (P=0.05) NS 85 83 101 22 23 15 L x S interaction NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
  22. 22. Table 5. Effect of maturity stages and irrigation methods in Safflower Treatments Moisture (%) 100 seed weight Protein (%) Crude fibre (%) Total lipids (%) Fresh (g) Dry (g) Fresh (%) Dry (%) Maturity stages S1 (15 DAF) 64.3 7.6 2.7 13.6 44.7 3.6 10.1 S2 (30 DAF) 28.0 7.1 5.1 30.1 40.2 17.0 23.7 S3 (45 DAF) 5.5 5.4 5.1 23.7 36.2 32.0 33.9 SEm± 0.18 0.1 0.04 0.09 0.1 0.05 0.09 CD (P= 0.05) 0.51 0.1 0.012 0.24 0.22 0.15 0.24 Irrigation method M1 (Furrow) 32.7 6.7 4.3 22.5 40.3 17.4 22.4 M2 (Floor) 32.5 6.7 4.3 22.5 40.4 17.4 22.7 SEm± CD (P=0.05) 0.15 NS 0.0 NS 0.0 NS 0.07 NS 0.06 NS 0.04 0.13 0.10 0.20 Momin et al. (2001)
  23. 23. Table 6. Irrigation schedules in Safflower Treatments Moisture (%) 100 seed weight Protein (%) Crude fibre (%) Total lipids (%) Fresh (g) Dry (g) Fresh (%) Dry (%) Irrigation schedules I0 31.6 6.4 4.2 21.5 41.2 16.0 20.2 I1 33.0 6.6 4.3 21.5 41.3 17.0 21.6 I2 32.3 6.8 4.4 21.5 40.8 17.5 22.3 I3 33.2 6.9 4.3 21.5 40.7 17.9 23.3 I4 32.9 6.7 4.2 22.0 40.5 17.9 22.8 I5 33.0 6.6 4.2 22.9 39.9 17.9 23.2 I6 32.1 6.7 4.4 24.3 9.5 17.9 23.2 I7 32.7 6.9 4.4 24.6 38.9 18.6 24.0 SEm± 3.3 0.08 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.14 CD (P=0.05) 0.83 0.23 0.40 0.40 0.37 0.25 0.40 CV (%) 3.9 5.2 2.7 2.7 1.1 2.1 2.6 I0= no irrigation I4= irrigation at branching and flowering I1= irrigation at branching I5= irrigation at branching and seed development I2= irrigation at flowering I6= irrigation at flowering and seed development I3= irrigation at seed development I7= irrigation at branching, flowering and seed development (Momin et al. 2001)
  24. 24. Table 7. Effect of P & S levels on seed yield, Biomass production and Harvest Index Treatments Seed yield (q/ha) Biomass yield (q/ha) Harvest index (%) A B Pooled A B Pooled A B Pooled P (kg/ha) 0 23.36 26.26 24.31 118.75 125.67 122.21 16.62 22.00 19.31 8.8 24.13 27.78 29.95 124.42 133.33 128.87 17.12 23.16 20.14 17.6 25.44 29.91 26.67 136.08 134.92 135.50 17.57 23.92 20.74 26.4 26.01 31.95 28.98 139.50 139.42 139.46 18.41 23.83 21.12 CD (P= 0.05) 1.08 3.38 1.70 8.16 4.45 4.65 0.92 1.17 0.75 S (kg/ha) 0 21.92 25.67 23.79 122.67 126.50 124.58 16.00 21.92 18.96 20 25.82 28.84 27.33 126.75 131.33 129.04 17.57 23.25 20.41 40 26.03 31.30 28.66 133.08 136.67 134.87 18.46 23.58 21.02 60 24.28 31.08 27.68 136.25 138.83 137.54 17.69 24.17 20.93 CD (P=0.05) 1.08 3.38 1.70 8.16 4.45 4.65 0.92 1.17 0.75 Abbas et al. (1995)
  25. 25. Table 8. Effect of P & S levels on growth and yield attributes in Safflower Treatments Plant height (cm) Branches/plant Capitulum/plant Test weight (g) A B Pooled A B Pooled A B Pooled A B P (kg/ha) 0 96.42 98.50 97.56 7.84 7.33 7.58 29.67 28.08 28.87 4.15 4.08 8.8 96.92 102.05 99.49 9.25 8.08 8.66 36.33 31.67 34.00 4.42 4.30 17.6 99.25 105.67 102.46 9.64 8.75 9.19 38.92 32.00 35.46 4.49 4.58 26.4 100.50 106.92 103.84 10.95 9.00 9.97 40.83 32.42 36.62 4.51 4.58 CD (P= 0.05) 3.38 5.98 3.47 1.76 0.83 0.98 3.23 3.52 2.40 S (kg/ha) 0 95.28 98.91 97.08 7.75 7.50 7.62 31.50 26.33 28.91 4.17 4.21 20 97.92 101.92 99.92 9.12 8.25 8.68 36.17 31.42 33.79 4.35 4.31 40 100.50 106.08 103.29 10.41 8.75 9.58 38.41 33.25 35.83 4.49 4.52 60 99.83 106.25 103.04 10.39 8.67 9.53 39.67 33.17 36.42 4.57 4.50 CD (P=0.05) 3.38 5.98 3.47 1.76 0.83 0.98 3.23 3.52 2.40 Abbas et al. (1995)
  26. 26. Table 9. Effect of irrigation and doses and time of N application on seed yield of Safflower Treatments Seed yield (q/ha) 1990-91 1991-92 Irrigation No irrigation 14.1 22.0 1 irrigation (rosette termination) 14.0 24.1 1 irrigation (flowering) 15.6 23.8 2 irrigation 1 each at rosette termination + flowering 14.9 26.6 CD (P=0.05) NS 2.1 N application 0 12.1 20.6 40 kg/ha, sole 13.7 22.8 80 kg/ha. sole 15.8 24.8 40 kg/ha, split 15.6 25.1 80 kg/ha, split 16.2 26.0 CD (P= 0.05) 1.5 2.2 Gajendra Giri (1995)
  27. 27. Table 10. Seed yield and oil production as influenced by irrigation and phosphorus in Safflower Treatments Seed yield (q/ha) Oil contents (%) Oil production (q/ha) 1991-92 1992-93 Mean Irrigation Control 10.40 9.41 9.91 29.3 2.90 Rosette stage 13.25 10.93 12.02 29.7 3.59 Flowering stage 14.06 10.52 12.29 29.8 3.66 Seed setting stage 13.87 10.88 12.38 30.5 3.78 Rosette stage + flowering 18.87 16.95 17.91 30.0 5.37 Rosette + Seed setting stage 18.50 17.23 17.87 30.3 5.41 Flowering + Seed setting 15.93 13.32 14.62 30.1 4.40 Rosette stage + flowering + Seed setting stage 19.68 17.27 18.48 30.0 5.54 CD (P=0.05) 0.85 0.66 NS P (kg/ha) Control 13.24 11.78 12.51 29.4 3.68 30 15.45 13.79 14.63 30.2 4.42 60 18.01 14.38 16.20 30.3 4.91 CD (P=0.05) 0.35 0.43 0.39 0.33 Singh et al. (1995)
  28. 28. Table 11. Effect of P management on productivity of Safflower based cropping system Hegde (2001)
  29. 29. Table 12. Seed yield of Mungbean and Safflower as influenced by Integrated Fertilizer Management Sr.no Treatments Mungbean (kg) Safflower (kg) Mungbean Safflower 2002-03 2003-04 2002-03 2003-04 1. N N 503 211 2070 1876 2. NP NP 453 209 2000 1983 3. NK NK 455 184 2080 1764 4. NPK NPK 517 220 2332 2057 5. NPK (DAP) NPK (DAP) 522 246 2493 2052 6. NPK 50 % NPK 510 220 2195 2006 7. NPK + 5 t FYM/ha NPK 520 261 2386 1904 8. 50 % NPK 50 % NPK 434 196 2105 2116 9. NPK 50 % N + PK + Azospirillum 464 238 2188 1735 10. NO FERTILIZER NO FERTILIZER 514 201 2189 1608 Mean 489 219 2204 1910 SEm± 38.7 10.2 192 159 CD (0.05) NS 30.2 NS NS CV (%) 13.7 7.9 17.2 14.5 Padmavathi (2005)
  30. 30. Table 13. Effect of Phosphorus management on Grain and Straw yield (q/ha) of Greengram and Safflower Mali et al. (2012)
  31. 31. Table 14. Comparison of different methods of weed control in Safflower Treatment Seed yield (kg/ha) Straw yield (kg/ha) Harvest index (%) Plant height (cm) Weedy check 880 2250 26 85 Weed-free check 1470 5580 21 97 Herbicide 1630 4770 27 95 Inter row cultivation 1090 451 19 85 Delay planting + Inter row cultivation 990 3940 19 90 Delay planting 1340 4490 22 92 SEm± 214 551 1.8 2.9 Yau et al (2001)

×