Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T01:40:42.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluations of Alternate Cropping Systems for Alfisols of the Indian Semi-arid Tropics†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

M. S. Reddy  and
R. W. Willey
M. S. Reddy
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru PO 502 324, AP, India
R. W. Willey
Affiliation:
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru PO 502 324, AP, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A three-year experiment examined the possibility of increasing the cropping intensity of a medium-deep Alfisol (red soil) by using sequential, relay, ratoon or intercropping systems. It was found that a short-season mungbean (Vigna radiata) crop could be taken before the commonly-grown castor crop but that castor yields were reduced by the delayed sowing. If the castor was sown after the harvest of mungbean in a sequential system the profits were less than from a sole castor system. Relay-sowing the castor 20 days before the harvest of mungbean gave 9 $US ha−1 greater profit than sole castor, but this is probably not enough to justify the more intensive double crop system. On the other hand a reasonable yield of horsegram (Macrotyloma uniflorum) could be produced after an early pearl millet crop, giving a worthwhile extra profit of 21 $US ha−1 compared with sole pearl millet. Ratooning the sorghum gave ratoon yields that averaged only 14% of the first crop, so this system was not considered suitable for these lighter Alfisols.

Intercropping systems of pearl millet/groundnut, sorghum/pigeonpea and groundnut/pigeonpea gave average yield increases of 24, 47 and 46%, respectively, compared with both component crops grown separately. Compared with growing only the higher value sole crop, increases in profits were 16, 82 and 120 $US ha−1 for the same three systems, respectively. It is concluded that intercropping systems provide the best opportunity for increasing cropping intensity on medium-deep Alfisols.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , July 1985 , pp. 271 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Burnigh, P. (1982). Potentials on world soils for agricultural production. In Managing Soil Resources, Transaction of the 12th International Congress of Soil Science, 8–16 Feb. 1982, 33–41. New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
El-Swaify, S. A., Singh, S. & Pathak, P. (1983). Physical and conservation constraints and management components for SAT Alfisols. Paper presented at the Consultant's Workshop on the State-of-the-Art and Management Alternatives for Optimizing the Productivity of SAT Alfisols and Related Soils, ICRISAT, Patancheru P.O. 502 324, A.P., India, 12 1–3 (In press).Google Scholar
Natarajan, M. & Willey, R. W. (1981). Sorghum-pigeonpea intercropping and the effects of plant population density. 2. Resource use. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 95:59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Natarajan, M. & Willey, R. W. (1985). Effect of row arrangement on light interception and yield in sorghum-pigeonpea intercropping. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge (In press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rao, M. R. & Willey, R. W. (1980). Evaluation of yield stability in intercropping: Studies on sorghum/pigeonpea. Experimental Agriculture 16:105–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rastogi, B. K., Reddy, Y. V. R. & Annamalia, V. (1982). Economic dimensions of dry farming technology. In A Decade of Dryland Agriculture Research in India (1971–80), 181–198. Hyderabad, India: AICRPDA.Google Scholar
Reddy, M. S. & Willey, R. W. (1981). Growth and resource use studies in an intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut. Field Crops Research 4:13–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, M. S. & Willey, R. W. (1982). Improved cropping systems for the deep Vertisols of the Indian Semi-Arid Tropics. Experimental Agriculture 18:277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanghi, N. K. & Rao, S. B. P. (1982). Operational research in dryland agriculture. In A Decade of Dryland Agriculture Research in India (1971-1980), 212–231. Hyderabad, India: AICRPDA.Google Scholar
Virmani, S. M. (1979). Climatic approach to transfer of farming systems technology in the semi-arid tropics. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Development and Transfer of Technology for Rainfed Agriculture and the SAT Farmers, 93–101. Hyderabad, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Vorasoot, N. (1982). A biological study of the benefits of intercropping in England and India. PhD thesis, University of Reading, England.Google Scholar