The document discusses straw management practices in crop rotations. It provides tables comparing the effects of different straw management practices such as incorporation, removal, mulching and burning on soil properties, weed control, crop yields and water productivity in various crop rotations. Residue incorporation is found to increase soil organic matter and nutrient levels while maintaining higher crop yields compared to residue burning. Surface retention and mulching also improves soil health and yield.
A brief study on Integrated Nutrient Management (INM). This presentation has created by me after studying many articles and research papers regarding INM. Suggestions are kindly invited.
A brief study on Integrated Nutrient Management (INM). This presentation has created by me after studying many articles and research papers regarding INM. Suggestions are kindly invited.
Definition and introduction of fertilizer use efficiency , Causes for Low and Declining Crop Response to Fertilizers and FUE.Methods to increase fertilizer use efficiency.
Introduction
enlist of problematic soil
Salt affected soil
Characteristic of salt affected soil
Comparison between salt affected soil
Reclamation of Saline soils
Reclamation of sodic soils
Reclamation of saline-sodic soils
Acidic soils
Reclamation of acidic soil
Acid Sulphate soils and its management
Calcareous soil
Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production system that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while conserving the environment.
It is based on minimum tillage, crop residue retention, and crop rotations, has been proposed as an alternative system combining benefits for the farmer with advantages for the society.
Conservation Agriculture remains an important technology that improves soil processes, controls soil erosion and reduces production cost.
Conservation agriculture is based on maximizing yield and to achieve a balance of agricultural, economic and environmental benefits.
Conservation agriculture useful for meeting future food demands and also contributing to sustainable agriculture.
Conservation agriculture helps to minimizing the negative environmental effect and equally important to increased income to help the livelihood of those employed in agril. Production.
Introduction of conservation technologies (CT) was an important break through for sustaining productivity
Definition and introduction of fertilizer use efficiency , Causes for Low and Declining Crop Response to Fertilizers and FUE.Methods to increase fertilizer use efficiency.
Introduction
enlist of problematic soil
Salt affected soil
Characteristic of salt affected soil
Comparison between salt affected soil
Reclamation of Saline soils
Reclamation of sodic soils
Reclamation of saline-sodic soils
Acidic soils
Reclamation of acidic soil
Acid Sulphate soils and its management
Calcareous soil
Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production system that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while conserving the environment.
It is based on minimum tillage, crop residue retention, and crop rotations, has been proposed as an alternative system combining benefits for the farmer with advantages for the society.
Conservation Agriculture remains an important technology that improves soil processes, controls soil erosion and reduces production cost.
Conservation agriculture is based on maximizing yield and to achieve a balance of agricultural, economic and environmental benefits.
Conservation agriculture useful for meeting future food demands and also contributing to sustainable agriculture.
Conservation agriculture helps to minimizing the negative environmental effect and equally important to increased income to help the livelihood of those employed in agril. Production.
Introduction of conservation technologies (CT) was an important break through for sustaining productivity
Nutrient management in kharif fodder crops.pptxanju bala
Livestock production is the backbone of Indian agriculture and plays a vital role in the Indian economy. It contributes 4.11 per cent in gross domestic product (GDP) and 25.6 per cent of total Agriculture gross domestic product (GDP) (Anonymous 2016). In the country about two-third population depends on livestock and allied sectors for livelihood. Livestock provides nutrient rich food products, draught power, dung as organic manure and regular source of cash income for rural farm households. India houses a population of 535.78 million livestock which mainly comprises of 192.49 million cattle, 109.85 million buffaloes, 74.26 million sheep and 148.88 million goats and 9.06 million pigs (Anonymous 2019).
In India the area under pastures and grasslands is 12 million ha (Roy and Singh 2013), and area under cultivated forages is 8.6 million ha (Kumar et al. 2012). All the forage resources are not sufficient to meet the fodder requirement of existing livestock population, hence in the country there is net deficit of 35.6 per cent green fodder, 10.95 per cent of dry fodder and 44 per cent concentrate feed ingredients (Anonymous 2013). Due to the shortage of feed and fodder the productivity of animals is adversely affected. The ever-increasing demand for feed and fodder to sustain the livestock production can be met through increasing the fodder productivity. There is a potential scope for increasing the fodder production in kharif season because irrigation becomes the limiting factor in rabi season. The fodder productivity can be improved by adequate and proper nutrient management. The application of nutrients not only increases the production but also improves the quality of the fodder crop. Therefore, to make the animal husbandry sector more viable and valuable, the efficient nutrient management in fodder crops is the key to improve the quantity as well as quality of the forages. The nitrogen management studies undertaken on sandy loam soils of Ludhiana revealed significant improvement in plant growth characters, green and dry fodder yields of pearl millet with increasing levels of nitrogen (Kaur and Goyal 2019). Kumar et al. (2016) found significantly better results in green and dry fodder yields of cowpea with the application of 60 kg/ha Phosphorus and 20 kg/ha zinc sulphate in Karnal (Haryana). A study conducted in sandy clay loam soils of Udaipur (Rajasthan) conclusively indicated that the application of 125 per cent of recommended dose of fertilizer (80:40:40::N:P2O5:K2O) resulted in better green fodder yield, dry fodder yield and protein content in sorghum (Gurjar et al. 2019). Jamil et al. (2015) observed significantly better growth parameters, fodder yields, crude protein content and nutrient uptake with the application of N @150 kg/ha+ Zn @10 kg/ha in clay loam soils of Bahawalpur, Pakistan.
By Dr. Md. Ataur Rahman (Wheat Research Centre, BARI)
Revitalizing the Ganges Coastal Zone Conference
21-23 October 2014, Dhaka, Bangladesh
http://waterandfood.org/ganges-conference/
restoring the soil physical structure and chemical fertility, improving soil organic C and therefore, sustaining the system productivity. Nitrogen fixers and phosphate solubilizer contribute through biological fixation of nitrogen, solubilization of fixed nutrients and enhanced uptake of plant nutrients (Gupta et al., 2003).
INM tries to reduce the need for chemical fertilizers by taking advantages of non-chemical sources of nutrients such as the manures, composts and bio-fertilizers (Gopalasundaram et al., 2012). Bio-fertilizers application not only increases plants growth and yield, but increase soil microbial population and activity; resulting in improved soil fertility (Ramesh et al., 2014). They include free-living bacteria which promote plant growth even in polluted soils. Azospirillum, Azotobacter, Pseudomonas, Bacillus and Thiobacillus are examples of these bacteria (Zahir et al., 2004). Niess (2002) reported that plant growth promoting bacteria reduced the toxicity of heavy metals and increased plant growth and yield.
Intercropping has been in practice for centuries to sustain yield, minimize risk, utilize the lag phase, and improve productivity (Rao, 2000). It reported that physico-chemical changes in soil under pure and alley cropping with Leucaena leucocephala (after six year) and found that alley cropping more suitable than pure crop (Gangwar et al., 2004).
The portion of a plant left in the field after harvest of the crop that is (straw, stalks, stems, leaves, roots) not used domestically or sold commercially”. The non – economical plant parts that are left in the field after harvest and remains that are generated from packing sheds or that are discarded during crop processing. Organic recycling has to play a key role in achieving sustainability in agricultural production. Multipurpose uses of crop residue include, but are not limited to, animal feeding, soil mulching, bio-manure, thatching of rural homes and fuel for domestic and industrial use. Thus, crop residues are of tremendous value to the farmers. Crop residue benefit the soil physically, chemically as well as biologically.
Read| The latest issue of The Challenger is here! We are thrilled to announce that our school paper has qualified for the NATIONAL SCHOOLS PRESS CONFERENCE (NSPC) 2024. Thank you for your unwavering support and trust. Dive into the stories that made us stand out!
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
A Strategic Approach: GenAI in EducationPeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Biological screening of herbal drugs: Introduction and Need for
Phyto-Pharmacological Screening, New Strategies for evaluating
Natural Products, In vitro evaluation techniques for Antioxidants, Antimicrobial and Anticancer drugs. In vivo evaluation techniques
for Anti-inflammatory, Antiulcer, Anticancer, Wound healing, Antidiabetic, Hepatoprotective, Cardio protective, Diuretics and
Antifertility, Toxicity studies as per OECD guidelines
Welcome to TechSoup New Member Orientation and Q&A (May 2024).pdfTechSoup
In this webinar you will learn how your organization can access TechSoup's wide variety of product discount and donation programs. From hardware to software, we'll give you a tour of the tools available to help your nonprofit with productivity, collaboration, financial management, donor tracking, security, and more.
Operation “Blue Star” is the only event in the history of Independent India where the state went into war with its own people. Even after about 40 years it is not clear if it was culmination of states anger over people of the region, a political game of power or start of dictatorial chapter in the democratic setup.
The people of Punjab felt alienated from main stream due to denial of their just demands during a long democratic struggle since independence. As it happen all over the word, it led to militant struggle with great loss of lives of military, police and civilian personnel. Killing of Indira Gandhi and massacre of innocent Sikhs in Delhi and other India cities was also associated with this movement.
2. Topic: Straw management in different
crop rotations
BHANUPRAKASH N
M.Sc. Agronomy
2017A12M
2
Credit Seminar
3. INTRODUCTION
STRAW
Straw is an agricultural byproduct consisting of the dry stalks of
cereal plants after the grain and chaff have been removed.
• It makes up about half of the yield of cereal crops such as rice,
wheat ,barley, rye and oats.
• Straw contains significant amounts of potassium and some amount
of nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur and magnesium. Potassium levels
of straw ranges from 0.75% to 2.86%.
• Straw containing mainly alkaloids, flavonoids, lignins, phenols,
and steroids etc.
3
9. RESIDUE BURNING
Advantages
It facilitate timely planting of
the following crops.
It clears the land quickly of
residues before the next crop.
It kills soil borne deleterious
pests and pathogens.
Disadvantages
It causes significantly air
pollution by releasing of Co2
,CH4,N2O etc.
Kills beneficial soil microbes and
insects.
Loss of soil organic matter.
Loss soil fertlity
Loss of soil nutrients etc.
Main hazardous to health.
9
10. CROP RESIDUE INCORPORATION
Incorporation of crop residue completely or partially into soil by
ploughing.
Above ground portion chopped into small size and can be
incorporated by power tiller.
Applied Nitrogen at 15-20 kg ha-1 as starter dose with straw
incorporation increases yield of wheat and rice compared to burning
(Krishna et al, 2014)
Incorporation of straw increase soil organic matter and soil N,P and K
content.
10
11. SURFACE RETENTION AND MULCHING
It is a practice that leaves straw residues from a previous crop on the soil
surface without any form of incorporation.
It helps to protect the fertile surface soil against wind and water erosion .This
method is prevalent in conservation tillage practice where at least 30% of
soil surface is covered with crop residue.
Surface retention of residues increases soil NO3 - by 46%, N uptake by 29%,
and yield by 37% compared to burning (Krishna et al, 2014).
11
12. BALING AND REMOVING THE STRAW
Used for
Livestock feed
Fuel
Livestock bedding
Mulching for orchard crops
12
14. Table 3: Effect of crop residue management in rice-wheat
rotation on physiochemical properties of the soils
(5 years)
Physiochemical
properties of soil
RESIDUE
Incorporated Removed Burnt
pH 7.7 7.6 7.6
EC (dsm-1) 0.18 0.13 0.13
Org.C (%) 0.75 0.59 0.69
Avail.N (kg ha-1) 154 139 143
Avail.P (kg ha-1) 45 38 32
Avail.K (kg ha-1) 85 56 77
Total N (kg ha-1) 2501 2002 1725
Total P (kg ha-1) 1346 924 858
Total K (kg ha-1) 40480 34540 38280
Krishna et al., 2004, MP
14
15. Table 4: Effect of tillage and crop establishment technique and
residue management options on soil bulk density(Mg m-3),soil
organic carbon(g kg-1) and yield of maize(Mg ha-1) in rice-maize
system (5 years)
Tillage and crop
establishment
technique
(TCE)
Residue management(R) Yield of maize
(Mg ha-1)Soil bulk density
(Mg m-3)
Soil organic carbon
(g kg-1)
-R +R Mean -R +R Mean -R +R Mean
CTTPR/CTM 1.53 1.48 1.50 4.3 5.18 4.74 7.62 7.90 7.76
CTDSR/CTM 1.46 1.43 1.45 4.32 5.31 4.82 8.32 8.72 8.52
ZTDSR/ZTM 1.45 1.42 1.44 4.85 5.92 5.38 8.55 9.17 8.86
Mean 1.48 1.44 4.49 5.47 8.16 8.60
Singh et al., 2016, UP
15
CTTPR - Conventional till transplanted rice
CTDSR - Conventional till direct seeded rice
ZTDSR - Zero till direct seeded rice
CTM - Conventional till maize
ZTM - Zero till maize
16. Table 5:Effects of residue management practices on bulk density
(Mg m-3), total porosity(%) and yield(t ha-1) of wheat under
rice-wheat rotation (5 years )
Treatments
Structural indices
Yield of wheat
(t ha-1)Bulk density
(Mg m-3)
Total porosity
(%)
Control 1.32 49.4 1.34
SI 1.25 51.9 1.76
SM 1.33 48.8 2.31
SB 1.32 49.2 1.84
FYM 1.20 53.8 2.38
SI+ FYM 1.18 54.6 2.77
LSD (0.05) 0.11 2.9 0.24
Krishna et al.,2004,MP
16
SI - straw incorporation, SM -straw mulch;
SB - straw burning;, FYM -farmyard manure.
17. Table 6: Effect of residue retention on weeds in wheat
under rice-wheat system
Treatments
Weed dry weight (g m-2) Wheat yield
(t ha-1)
P. minor Medicago
denticulata
Rumex dentatus
ZT + RR 291.0 215.1 297.3 0.75
ZT + 2.5 t ha-1 residue 304.6 175.4 310.1 1.05
ZT + 5 t ha-1 residue 214.8 130.1 214.6 2.58
ZT + 7.5 t ha-1 residue 190.9 123.4 134.6 2.46
ZT + RR + sulfosulfuron @25g ha-1
+ metsulfuron at 3 g ha-1
2.9 0.0 0.0 5.48
LSD (p=0.05) 75.6 50.5 66.4 0.37
Chhokar, 2009,Karnal
17
ZT-Zero tillage
RR-Residue removal
18. Table 7: Effect of tillage and mulch treatments on grain
yield of maize and wheat (3 years)
Mulch
management
Grain yield of maize (kg ha-1) Grain yield of wheat (kg ha-1)
Tillage treatments Tillage treatments
CT MT NT RB Mean CT MT NT RB Mean
No mulch 1370 1365 1246 1256 1308 1080 1063 930 1025 1024.5
Straw mulch 2020 1990 1776 1896 1920 1410 1430 1210 1335 1346.45
Polythene mulch 2183 2137 1930 2007 2065 1505 1510 1360 1450 1456.25
Soil mulch 1890 1860 1730 1851 1832 1320 1360 1110 1265 1263.75
Mean 1865 1837 1670 1752 1328.7 1340 1152 1268.7
Sharma et al.,2011, J&K
18
CT- Conventional tillage
MT- minimum tillage
NT- No tillage
RB – Raised bed
19. Table 8:Effects of tillage and crop residue management
practices on yield attributes and yield(kg ha-1) in summer
greengram under maize based cropping system
Treatments
Yield attributes
Yield
(kg ha-1)
Pod plant-1 Grains pod-1 1000 seed
weight (g)
Cropping system
Maize-mustard-greengram 15.20 8.10 42.17 844.3
Maize-chickpea-greengram 15.23 8.13 44.61 899.2
Maize-linseed-greengram 12.53 8.03 46.48 694.7
Maize-wheat-greengram 14.65 7.95 44.17 769.2
SEm ± 0.598 0.04 1.458 32.15
CD (p=0.05) NS 0.14 NS 111
Tillage and residue treatment
CT - R 14.17 8.08 43.61 752.7
CT + R 16.00 8.19 44.77 1062.2
ZT - R 13.65 7.99 44.30 602.7
ZT + R 13.80 8.00 44.76 789.7
SEm ± 0.62 0.03 0.87 34.73
CD (p=0.05) 1.80 0.09 NS 101.3
Meena et al.,2015, Newdelhi
19
CT- Conventional tillage -R – without residue
ZT- Zero tillage +R – with residue
20. 20
Table 9: Effect of residue incorporation and mineral N application
on grain yield (Mg ha-1) of rice and of a succeeding wheat crop
Treatments Rice (Mg ha-1) Wheat (Mg ha-1)
1999-2000
(2000-2001)
Nitrogen (kg/ha) Nitrogen (kg/ha)
0 60 120 Mean 0 60 120 Mean
Control 3.2(3.2) 4.0(3.9) 4.7(4.9) 4.0(4.0) 2.9(4.2) 3.2(4.4) 3.3(4.6) 3.1(4.4)
Wheat residue(WR) 3.4(4.4) 4.2(4.7) 4.7(5.2) 4.1(4.8) 2.9(4.3) 3.3(4.6) 3.5(4.8) 3.2(4.6)
Sesbania green
manure(SGM)
4.4(4.8) 4.5(4.9) 4.7(4.9) 4.5(4.9) 3.6(4.7) 3.8(4.8) 3.9(4.9) 3.8(4.8)
SGM+WR 4.7(5.4) 4.9(5.7) 5.1(5.8) 4.9(5.6) 3.5(4.8) 3.8(5.1) 4.0(5.2) 3.8(5.0)
Mungbean
residue(MBR)
4.6(4.8) 4.8(5.0) 4.9(5.1) 4.8(5.0) 3.6(4.8) 3.8(5.1) 4.0(5.2) 3.8(5.0)
MBR+WR 4.4(4.8) 4.8(5.1) 5.2(5.4) 4.8(5.1) 3.6(4.7) 3.9(5.1) 4.1(5.2) 3.9(5.0)
Mean 4.1(4.6) 4.5(4.9) 4.9(5.2) 3.3(4.6) 3.6(4.9) 3.8(5.0)
Residue (R) 0.49(0.79) 0.55(0.37)
Nitrogen (N) 0.42(0.39) 0.39(0.20)
R X N 1.02(1.19) NS
Sharma and Prasad,2008,New Delhi
21. 21
Table 10:Grain yield (t ha-1) of wheat and maize as influenced by
crop residue management practices (13 years)
Crop residue
treatments
Wheat Maize
N applied (kg/ha) N applied (kg/ha)
0 45 90 Mean 0 45 90 Mean
Burned 1.92 3.21 4.20 3.11 1.08 1.45 1.64 1.39
Removed 1.69 3.46 4.03 3.06 1.45 1.52 1.86 1.61
Incorporated 2.59 3.92 4.23 3.57 1.88 2.03 2.33 2.08
LSD(P=0.05)
Residue (R) 0.11 3.86
Nitrogen (N) 0.15 1.28
R X N 0.27 NS
Krishna et al.,2004,MP
22. Table 11: Impacts of tillage, bed planting and residue management
practices on water productivity of wheat (kg grain ha-1mm-1) and
economics under irrigated cotton-wheat system
Treatments
Mean of two years Mean of two years
Total water
applied
(mm)
water productivity
(kg grain ha-1 mm-1)
Total cost
(Rs ha-1)
Net returns
(Rs ha-1)
CT 1374 8.52 68397 100666
PNB 1253 10.33 65397 120990
PNB+ R 1232 11.24 75547 125114
PBB 1210 10.96 65797 126885
PBB+ R 1176 12.58 75547 136774
ZT 1280 11.14 65197 129587
ZT+ R 1349 10.13 74947 130810
Das et al.,2014, Newdelhi
22
CT-conventional tillage without residue recycling ,PBB –Zero tilled permanent broad-bed sowing
without residue , PBB + R – Zero tilled permanent broad-bed sowing with residue , PNB – Zero tilled
permanent narrow-bed sowing without residue ,ZT -zero tilled flat bed sowing without residue ,
ZT + R -zero tilled flat bed sowing with residue
23. Table 12: Effect of weed management treatments on yield
and economics in sugarcane ratoon (pooled mean)
TREATMENTS Cane
yield
(t ha-1)
Total
cost
(Rs ha-1)
Gross
returns
(Rs ha-1)
Net
returns
(Rs ha-1)
B:C
Weedy check 66.64 35930 73425 37495 2.04
Three hoeings (1st ,4th and 7th weeks after ratoon initiaton) 93.99 39821 103435 63614 2.60
Atrazine @2kg a.i ha-1 PE + 2,4-D @1kg a.i ha-1 at hoeing at
45 Days after ratoon initiation (DARI)
76.94 39007 84762 45755 2.17
Atrazine @2kg a.i ha-1 PE + one hoeing at 45 DARI 82.94 39437 91305 51868 2.31
Metribuzin @1kg a.i ha-1 PE + one hoeing at 45 DARI 91.56 40349 101030 60681 2.50
Glyphosate @ 0.4kg a.i ha-1 at 3 weeks stage as directed
spray + one hoeing at 60 DARI
79.16 38417 87827 49409 2.29
Trash mulching in alterative rows + hoeings at 1st and 6th
WARI
95.28 39009 104850 65841 2.69
Trash mulching between all rows with recommended
practice
98.00 38112 107831 69719 2.83
SE ± 1.68 - -
CD at 5% 4.99 - -
Chaudhari et al ,2016,Maharastra 23
24. HAPPY SEEDER
• ‘Happy Seeder’ has been developed in the last few years that can plant the
wheat seed without getting jammed by the rice straw. The Happy Seeder is a
tractor-mounted machine that cuts and lifts rice straw, sows wheat into the
bare soil, and deposits the straw over the sown area as mulch.
• The average cost of preparing the field for sowing wheat using the Happy
Seeder was Rs. 6,225/ha while it was Rs. 7,288/ha using conventional
methods. Thus, farmers save, on average, Rs. 1,000/ha by cultivating plots
with Happy Seeder.
• Currently the Happy Seeder machine costs about Rs. 1.3 lakh with a subsidy
of 33%
24
25. Turbo seeder
25
• Turbo-Seeder can place high
rates of cover crops and small
grains such as oats, wheat, rice
and barley.
• Uniform sowing
• Very low loss of seeds while
sowing
• Turbo-Seeder offers a cost
effective, highly productive
method.
• Price of the machine about 7
lakh rupees.
26. 26
Table 13: Effect of different no-till techniques on soil
physical properties
No- till techniques Soil bulk density (g/cm3) Total porosity(cm3 cm-3)
Turbo seeder 1.55 c 0.41 a
Happy seeder 1.63 b 0.39 b
Zone disk tiler 1.69 a 0.36 c
Figures sharing the same letter in a column do not differ significantly at
p≤0.05
Rafiq et al.,2017,Pakistan
27. Rafiq et al.,2017,Pakistan 27
Table 14: Total cost, net return and benefit cost ratio as influenced
by sowing of wheat with different no-till techniques in combine
harvested rice field with various stubble heights
Treatments yield
(Mg/ha)
Gross income
(Rs. lakh/ha)
Total cost
(Rs. lakh/ha)
Net return
(Rs. lakh/ha)
B:C
Grain Straw
Turbo seeder
S1(15cm)
S2(30cm)
S3(45cm)
S4(60cm)
4.7
4.9
5.5
5.2
7.4
7.6
8.5
8.0
2.14
2.19
2.48
2.33
1.03
1.02
1.03
1.00
1.11
1.17
1.45
1.32
2.08
2.15
2.41
2.32
Happy seeder
S1(15cm)
S2(30cm)
S3(45cm)
S4(60cm)
4.4
4.7
5.2
5.1
7.2
7.5
8.1
7.9
2.02
2.13
2.34
2.28
1.04
1.04
1.04
1.02
0.97
1.09
1.29
1.25
1.94
2.05
2.24
2.22
Zone disk tiller
S1(15cm)
S2(30cm)
S3(45cm)
S4(60cm)
3.5
3.7
4.3
4.1
5.4
5.8
6.6
6.2
1.57
1.68
1.93
1.83
0.95
0.97
0.97
0.96
0.61
0.71
0.95
0.87
1.64
1.73
1.98
1.91
28. • A baler is a machine used
to compress straw into
bales for easy transport and
storage
• It compress the straw into
compact 25-30kg
rectangular/round bundles.
• It takes 35-40 minutes to
cover an acre giving 25-
27q of straw.
28
Round baler machine
30. CONCLUSION
Trash mulching between all rows with recommended practice is
effective weed management practices which gives higher cane
yield (t ha-1) and higher net income.
Straw mulch with different tillage practices records higher yields
in both maize and wheat crop than no mulch and soil mulch.
Sowing of wheat with turbo seeder in loose straw with anchored
stubbles (45cm height) results in higher net returns and B-C ratio.
Application of FYM along with straw incorporation which
maintains soil structural indices and increases the wheat yield
compared to other treatments.
30
