Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T23:57:31.279Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Mulches and Type of Seed Bed on Pearl Millet (Pennisetum Typhoides) under Semi-arid Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

Masood Ali  and
Rajendra Prasad
Masood Ali
Affiliation:
Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012
Rajendra Prasad
Affiliation:
Division of Agronomy, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A field experiment was conducted for two years to study the influence of type of seed bed and various mulcheson yield and nutrient uptake by pearl millet, and on moisture conservation, under the semi-arid conditions of Delhi. A flat seedbed stored more moisture, gave significantly higher yield of pearl millet, and increased the uptake of N, P and K, compared withridge and furrow beds. Mulches were effective in conserving moisture, with straw mulch significantly better than dust mulch inits effect on crop yield and nutrient uptake.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , October 1974 , pp. 263 - 272
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

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

Adams, J. E. (1970). Agron. J. 62, 785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dastane, N. G. (1967). A Practical Manual for Water Use Research in Agriculture. Poona: NavbharatPrakashan.Google Scholar
Greb, B. W., Smika, D. E. & Black, A. L. (1967). Proc. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. 31, 555.Google Scholar
Jacks, G. V., Brind, W. D. & Smith, R. (1955). Commonwealth Bur. Soil Sci. Tech. Comm. 49.Google Scholar
James, E. (1955). J. Am. Soc. Agron. 37, 945.Google Scholar
Jones, J. N., Moody, J. E. & Lillard, J. H. (1969). Agron. J. 61, 719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanitkar, N. V., Sirur, S. S. & Gokhale, D. H. (1960). Dry Farming in India. New Delhi: Indian Counc. Agric.Res.Google Scholar
Kolandaiswamy, S., Ranganathan, A. K. & Srinivasan, V. (1967). Madras Agric. J. 54, 195.Google Scholar
McCalla, T. M. & Army, T. J. (1961). Adv. Agron. 13, 126.Google Scholar
Roseau, H. (1948). C. r. Conf. Pedol. Medit. 389.Google Scholar
Sharma, J. P. (1970). Ph.D. Thesis, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Singh, G., Singhal, A. K. & Nambiar, K. K. M. (1967). J. Soil Water. Conserv., India 15, 102.Google Scholar
Waggoner, P. E., Miller, P. M. & De Rao, H. C. (1960). Connecticut Agric. Sta. Bull. 634.Google Scholar
Yowell, H. L. (1963). World Fmg 5 (3), 31.Google Scholar