Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T09:03:05.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planting date and density effects on six pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) cultivars at three Nigerian Savanna locations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. O. Akinola  and
B. A. Oyejola
J. O. Akinola
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ahmadu Bello University, PMB 1044, Zaria, Nigeria
B. A. Oyejola
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, Faculty of Science, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

An experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of planting pigeonpea in May, June or July at Mokwa and June or July at Shika and Kano, Nigeria at population densities of 18·5×103, 27·8×103, 55·5×103, 111×103, 222×103 and 444×103 plants/ha on dry matter (DM) and seed yields of cultivars Local, UQ50, 3D8103, 3D8104, 3D8111 and 3D8112 in the 1974/75 season. Planting in May had no above-ground DM yield advantage over planting in June at Mokwa. Planting in June gave higher yields than planting in July irrespective of site, except for the short, early maturing, soya-type cultivar 3D8103 at Shika. Cultivar responses to density were inconsistent between sites and also between dates at Shika and Kano. Cultivars Local, UQ50 and 3D8104 showed the highest DM yield at all sites. Leaf DM yield tended to decline as planting was delayed but was highest at densities of 111×103 or 222×103 plants/ha for May and June-planted cultivars Local, UQ50, 3D8104 and 3D8112, which showed potential as feed supplements for poultry. Reasons were advanced for the variability in pod yield responses to planting date and density between the different pigeonpea cultivars. Root DM yields were proportional to above-ground DM yield but, over all cultivars, root yield was unaffected by planting date at Shika.

Seed yield was highest from the June sowing, cv. 3D8104 was the most productive and the optimum densities were 27·8×103 plants/ha for the larger-sized cultivars Local and UQ50, 55·5×103 plants/ha for the medium-sized cultivars 3D8104, 3D8111 and 3D8112, and 444×10 3 for cv. 3D8103. A complementary study over 13 years showed that the seed yield of intermediate and late maturing pigeonpeas was strongly and linearly related to total annual rainfall.

Type
Crops and Soils
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 123 , Issue 2 , October 1994 , pp. 233 - 246
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

Ahlawat, I. P. S. & Saraf, C. S. (1981). Response of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.) to plant density and phosphorus fertilizer under dryland conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 97, 119–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akinola, J. O. & Whiteman, P. C. (1975 a). Agronomic studies on pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.). I. Field responses to sowing time. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 26, 43–56.Google Scholar
Akinola, J. O. & Whiteman, P. C. (1975 b). Agronomic studies on pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.). II. Responses to sowing density. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 26, 57–66.Google Scholar
Akinola, J. O., Whiteman, P. C. & Wallis, E. S. (1975). The Agronomy of Pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan). Review Article Series no. 1/1975. Hurley: Commonwealth Bureau of Pastures and Field Crops.Google Scholar
Association Of Official Analytical Chemists (1970). Official Methods of Analysis. (11th Edn). Washington, DC: AOAC.Google Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1967). Systematic designs for spacing experiments. Experimental Agriculture 3, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouyoucos, G. J. (1951). A recalibration of the hydrometer method for making mechanical analysis of soils. Agronomy Journal 43, 434–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, R. H. & Kurtz, L. T. (1945). Determination of total, organic and available forms of P in soil. Soil Science 59, 39–45.Google Scholar
Bremner, J. M. (1960). Determination of nitrogen in soil by the Kjeldahl method. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 55, 11–33.Google Scholar
Chapman, H. D. (1965). Cation-exchange capacity. In Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2 (Ed. Black, C. A.), pp. 891–901. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Gooding, H. J. (1960). Some problems of pigeonpea improvement. Journal of the Agricultural Society of Trinidad 60, 321–338.Google Scholar
International Crops Research Institute For The Semiarid Tropics (1984). Pigeonpea for West Africa: a Pulse Crop with Great Potential. Patancheru, India: ICRISAT.Google Scholar
Klinkenberg, K. & Higgins, G. M. (1968). An outline of northern Nigerian soils. Nigerian Journal of Science 2, 91–116.Google Scholar
Krauss, F. G. (1932). The pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan); its improvement, culture and utilization in Hawaii. Hawaii Agricultural Experimental Station, Bulletin 64.Google Scholar
Morton, J. F. (1976). The pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan Millsp.), a high-protein, tropical bush legume. HortScience 11, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, M. J. T., Searle, P. G. E., Dankittipakul, N., Ingram, K. C. & Baskoro, J. De B. (1980). Evaluation of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) as an autumn forage for coastal New South Wales. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 20, 55–62.Google Scholar
Riollano, A., Perez, A. & Ramos, C. (1962). Effects of planting date, variety, and plant population on the flowering and yield of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan L). Journal of Agriculture, University of Puerto Rico 45, 127–134.Google Scholar
Walkley, A. & Black, C. A. (1934). An examination of the Degtjareff method of determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37, 27–38.Google Scholar
Wallis, E. S., Saxena, K. B., Brauns, C., Byth, D. E. & Whiteman, P. C. (1983). Short-season pigeonpea – a cropping system with high yield potential. International Pigeonpea Newsletter 2, 5–8.Google Scholar