Paper presented at PAU, LUdhiana, 2012 describing nutrient transformation in rice based cropping system following zero tillage vs conventional tillage.

1. Effect of Minimum Tillage andEffect of Minimum Tillage and
Mulching on Nutrient TransformationMulching on Nutrient Transformation
in Rice-Based Cropping Systemin Rice-Based Cropping System
Department of Agril. Chemistry and Soil Science
Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya,
Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal, India
E-mail: pabitramani@gmail.com, Website: www.bckv.edu.in
H.K. Tarafder; P.K. Mani; M. Ray;
T. Mitran; and D.
Mazumdar

2. To study the performance of different
cropping sequences in terms of yieldyield under
tillage and mulching conditiontillage and mulching condition.
To monitormonitor the changes in soil physicalphysical
properties.properties.
To monitomonitor the changes in nutrientnutrient
transformationstransformations in soils under different
cropping systems.
Objectives:

3. Item Characteristics
Geographical location Lat.- 220
58'
20''
N, Long.- 880
30'
11''
E
Altitude - 9.75 m (msl)
Year of Experiment 2011-12
Soil Aeric Haplaquept, Texture –clay loam
Agro-ecological zone 15.1
Design of experiment Split plot Design, with 3 replications
Cropping system Rice-Rice,
 Rice-Potato-Jute,
 Rice-Potato-Maize
Recommended
fertilizer dose
 Kharif Rice - N : P : K :: 80 : 40: 40
Summer rice- N : P : K :: 120:60:60
Potato - N : P : K :: 200 : 150: 150
Jute- N : P : K :: 80:40:40
Maize- N : P :K :: 80:40:40
Experimental sites

4. Treatment details of the experiment :
(A) Main plots (Tillage × Cropping Systems) – 6
(a) Tillage – 2
T1
: Minimum tillage/SRI in rice,
T2
: Conventional tillage
(b) Cropping Systems -3
CS1
: Rice-Rice
CS2
: Rice-Potato-Jute
CS3
: Rice-Potato-Maize
(B) Sub plots (Mulch × Fertilizer) – 4
(a) Mulch – 2
M1
: No mulch,
M2
: Crop residue mulch ( Rice straw 5 t/ha)
(b)Fertilizer -2
F1
: Recommended dose of fertilizer
F2
: 75% RDF and 25% N through VermicompostVermicompost

5. Meteorological observations during the entire crop
sequence

6. Effect of CS, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on pH of the soil
CS-1 (Rice-Rice)
F T1 T2 Mean
M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean
1 7.33 7.37 7.35 7.30 7.37 7.32 7.37 7.31 7.34
2 7.30 7.37 7.33 7.23 7.40 7.27 7.38 7.28 7.33
Mean 7.32 7.37 7.34 7.27 7.38 7.29 7.38 7.30 7.34
CS-2 (Rice-Potato-Jute)
1 7.40 7.37 7.38 7.47 7.37 7.42 7.43 7.37 7.40
2 7.30 7.37 7.33 7.33 7.40 7.37 7.32 7.38 7.35
Mean 7.35 7.37 7.36 7.40 7.38 7.39 7.38 7.38 7.38
CS-3:(Rice-Potato-Maize)
1 7.47 7.33 7.40 7.30 7.33 7.32 7.38 7.33 7.36
2 7.27 7.17 7.22 7.23 7.37 7.30 7.25 7.27 7.26
Mean 7.37 7.25 7.31 7.27 7.35 7.31 7.32 7.30 7.31
CS T M F CS×T CS×M CSxF TxM T×F M×F CSxTxM CS×T×F CS×M×F T×M×F CS×T×M×F
C.D.
(5%) NS NS NS
0.0
6 NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

7. CS1 (Rice-Rice)
F T1 T2 Mean
M1 M2 Mean M1 M1 Mean M1 M2 Mean
1 0.71 0.79 0.75 0.56 0.78 0.67 0.63 0.78 0.71
2 0.81 0.86 0.83 0.62 0.81 0.72 0.72 0.84 0.78
Mean 0.76 0.82 0.79 0.59 0.80 0.69 0.67 0.81 0.74
CS2 (Rice-Potato-Jute)
1 0.75 0.80 0.78 0.74 0.80 0.77 0.75 0.80 0.77
2 0.75 0.83 0.79 0.81 0.84 0.83 0.78 0.84 0.81
Mean 0.75 0.82 0.78 0.78 0.82 0.80 0.76 0.82 0.79
CS3:(Rice-Potato-Maize)
1 0.74 0.86 0.80 0.78 0.72 0.75 0.76 0.79 0.78
2 0.62 0.83 0.73 0.77 0.85 0.81 0.69 0.84 0.77
Mean 0.68 0.85 0.76 0.78 0.79 0.78 0.73 0.82 0.77
Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
Organic C(%) of the soil
CS T M F
CS×
T
CS×
M CSxF TxM T×F M×F
CSxT
xM
CS×T
×F
CS×
M×F
T×M
×F
CS×T×
M×F
C.D.
(5%)
0.02
1
0.02
1
0.03
0 0.030 0.03 NS NS NS NS NS
0.07
3 NS NS NS NS

8. Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
Available N (kg ha-1
) of the soil
CS-1 (Rice-Rice)
F T1 T2 Mean
M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean
1 268 308 228 247 247 247 257 277 267
2 285 312 298 277 277 277 281 294 287
Mean 277 310 293 262 261 262 269 286 277
CS-2 (Rice-Potato-Jute)
1 278 307 292 276 247 261 277 277 277
2 278 308 293 248 278 263 263 293 278
Mean 278 308 293 262 262 262 270 285 277
CS-3:(Rice-Potato-Maize)
1 276 293 284 282 247 265 279 270 274
2 309 308 308 293 277 285 301 293 297
Mean 292 300 296 288 262 275 290 281 285
CS T M F
CS
×T
CS
×M
CS
xF
Tx
M
T×
F
M
×F
CS
xTxM
CS
×T×F
CS
×M×F
T×
M×F
CS
×T×
M×F
CD.
(5%) 4.074 3.326 3.426 3.426 5.761 5.934 5.39 4.84 NS 4.845 NS 8.32
8.32 NS 11.86

9. CS-1 (Rice-Rice)
F T1 T2 Mean
M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean
1 45.3 58.0 51.6 44.0 52.3 48.1 44.6 55.2 49.9
2 55.6 64.6 60.1 49.0 59.0 54.0 52.3 61.8 57.0
Mean 50.5 61.3 55.9 46.5 55.6 51.1 48.5 58.5 53.5
CS-2 (Rice-Potato-Jute)
1 57.0 66.6 61.8 43.7 42.7 43.2 50.3 54.7 52.5
2 65.7 75.7 70.7 49.0 49.0 49.0 57.3 62.3 59.8
Mean 61.3 71.2 66.3 46.3 45.8 46.1 53.8 58.5 56.2
CS-3:(Rice-Potato-Maize)
1 55.7 66.7 61.2 43.3 43.0 43.2 49.5 54.8 52.2
2 60.7 75.3 68.0 48.7 49.7 49.2 54.7 62.5 58.6
Mean 58.2 71.0 64.6 46.0 46.3 46.2 52.1 58.7 55.4
Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
Available P (kg ha-1
) of the soil
CS T M F CS×T CS×M CSxF TxM T×F M×F
CSxT
xM
CS×T
×F
CS×M
×F
T×M×
F
CS×T
×M×F
C.D.
(5%) NS 1.924 1.278 1.278 3.333 2.214 NS 1.808 NS NS 3.132 NS NS NS NS

10. Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
Available K (kg ha-1
) of the soil
CS-1(Rice-Rice)
F T1 T2 Mean
M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean M1 M2 Mean
1 174 181 177 161 165 163 167 173 170
2 181 190 185 173 182 178 177 186 182
Mean 178 185 181 167 174 170 172 179 176
CS-2 (Rice-Potato-Jute)
1 239 289 264 269 286 227 254 237 245
2 272 305 288 266 261 264 269 283 276
Mean 255 297 267 267 223 245 261 260 261
CS-3:(Rice-Potato-Maize)
1 260 250 255 235 208 222 248 229 238
2 272 292 282 235 239 237 253 266 259
Mean 266 271 268 235 224 229 251 247 249
CS T M F CS×T CS×M CSxF TxM T×F M×F
CSxTx
M
CS×T
×F
CS×M
×F
T×M×
F
CS×T
×M×F
C.D.
(5%) 5.515 4.503 NS 3.03 7.80 5.25 5.25 4.28 NS 4.28 7.42 7.24 7.24 6.06 10.49

11. Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
bulk density (Mg m-3
) of the soil

12. Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
Mean Weight Diameter (MWD) of the soil

13. Treatments Kharif
rice
(kg ha-1
)
Summer
rice
(kg ha-1
)
Potato
(kg ha-1
)
Jute
(kg ha-1
)
Maize
(kg ha-1
)
T1M1F1 2618 6313 17284 4094 4185
T1M1F2 2199 6409 14613 3731 4620
T1M2F1 2653 8406 19889 4500 5921
T1M2F2 2198 6409 15798 4020 4316
T2M1F1 2346 7071 17989 3852 4527
T2M1F2 2048 6521 15958 3457 3996
T2M2F1 2389 6723 19474 3844 5150
Mean Yield data of each component crop of the
cropping sequence

14. Effect of Cropping system, tillage, mulch and fertilizer on
System Rice Equivalent Yield (SREY) of the soil

15. Step-backward multiple regression equation
Variable
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 11019.17 4730.89 2.33 0.02
ORG_C 6445.96 3732.02 0.21 1.73 0.089
AV_K -49.85 27.73 -0.21 -1.80 0.077
MWD -9141.16 5092.29 -0.36 -1.80 0.077
Dependent Variable: SREY
R R Sq. Adj. R Sq. SE(est)
0.63 0.397** 0.33 2460.02
Step-backward multiple regression equation as a data
reduction technique, results in best fitted equation where only
significant predictors are included to explain system rice
equivalent yield (SREY). O.C having positive contribution on
SREY, at the same time MWD and Available K are having
negative impact on SREY

16. A comparison between Observed System Rice Equivalent
Yield (SREY) and Predicted SREY.
Mean unstandardised SREY values were calculated on the basis of these
best fitted equation .Though observed SREY was highest for all Treatment
combination 11(CS2, T1, M2 and F1) but the most probable highest SREY
values will be the treatment combination 15(i.e.,CS2, T2, M2 and F1)

17. ConclusionConclusion
 Rice-potato-juteRice-potato-jute (CS2) is the better identified
cropping system than rice-potato-maize and rice-rice
cropping system in terms yield and nutrient status.
 Minimum tillage(T1)Minimum tillage(T1) is better than conventional tillage
as minimum tillage conserve more nutrient and
maintained greater soil aggregates.
 MulchingMulching (paddy straw@ 5t ha-1
) of crop improve the
soil aggregates and maintained a higher organic
carbon content of the soil as well as other nutrients.
75% RDF+ 25%N through vermicompost improve the
soil nutrient status. But a significantly higher SREY,
were recorded in 100%RDF.