Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T18:41:51.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of legume intercropping in conservation of fertilizer nitrogen in maize culture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

K. P. P. Nair ,
U. K. Patel ,
R. P. Singh  and
M. K. Kaushik
K. P. P. Nair
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India
U. K. Patel
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India
R. P. Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India
M. K. Kaushik
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Experiments made over a period of 2 years (1975–6) covering three crop seasons at Pantnagar, India, on the comparative utility of intercropping the principal maize crop with legumes in economizing fertilizer N requirements of the former, indicated that among soya bean, cowpea, pigeonpea and groundnut, soya bean was the most suitable. At 40 kg N/ha intercropping maize with soya bean gave 19·5% more yield than taking it as a pure crop. When the option to use adequate fertilizer N does not exist, as is invariably the case with the average Indian farmer, intercropping maize with legumes, such as soya bean, is the logical way out. All the intercropping treatments left sufficient residual fertility to significantly increase yield of a wheat crop given no fertilizer which followed maize.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 93 , Issue 1 , August 1979 , pp. 189 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Allison, L. E. & Moodie, C. D. (1965). Carbonate. In Methods of Soil Analysis, part 2 (ed. Black, C. A.), pp. 1379–1396. Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.Google Scholar
Anon. (1975). Annual Progress Report. G. B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar, India.Google Scholar
Jackson, M. L. (1958). Soil Chemical Analysis. India: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Kilmer, V. J. & Alexander, L. T. (1949). Methods of making mechanical analysis of soils. Soil Science 68, 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nair, K. P. P. & Sharma, V. P. (1976). Utility studies on controlled release nitrogenous fertilizers and nitrification retarders in maize. Proceedings of the IVth International Colloquium on the Control of Plant Nutrition, Ghent, Belgium, 2, 531–541.Google Scholar
Nair, K. P. P. & Singh, R. P. (1974). Correlative analysis of yield and its components in maize. Experimental Agriculture 10, 81–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, S. R. & Dean, L. A. (1965). Phosphorus. In Methods of Soil Analysis, part 2 (ed. Black, C. A.), pp. 1035–1049. Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. G. & Calvin, L. D. (1965). Sampling. In Methods of Soil Analysis, part 2 (ed. Black, C. A.), pp. 54–72. Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.: American Society of Agronomy, Inc.Google Scholar
Prasad, R., Rajale, G. B. & Lakhdive, B. A. (1971). Nitrification inhibitors and slow release nitrogen fertilizers. Advances in Agronomy 23, 337–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar