Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T13:39:06.263Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of farmyard manure and green manures on crop yields and nitrogen needs of potato-based cropping systems in Punjab

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. C. Sharma
Affiliation:
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla 171 001, India
P. M. Govindakrishnan
Affiliation:
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla 171 001, India
R. P. Singh
Affiliation:
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla 171 001, India
H. C. Sharma
Affiliation:
Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla 171 001, India

Summary

The results of a long-term field experiment conducted from 1977 to 1984 on alluvial (Ustochrept) soil of Jalandhar showed positive responses of the crops to N. The responses of potatoes to N were reduced by farmyard manure (FYM), green manure of dhaincha and moong and the responses to the organic manures were also reduced by N. The N responsesof potatoes were, however, not affected by the N applied to preceding maize. FYM was better than the green manures in augmenting total tuber yield, large-grade tuber yield and K concentration in the plants.

The N applied to the potatoes showed significant residual effect on succeeding wheat crops, reducing its optimum dose of N by about 50%. The residual effect of N on wheat was highly correlated with nitrate status of the soil. The organic manures applied to potatoes improved the yield of the succeeding wheat but did not differ from each other.

The fodder crop of pearl millet raised after 7 years also indicated the superiority of FYM to the green manures. There was a build-up of organic carbon, N, P and K in soil and the build-up was maximal with the use of FYM. The application of N had no effect on the organic carbon and nitrogen status of the soil. N improved the availability of P but decreased that of K.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

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

Jackson, M. L. (1967). Soil Chemical Analysis. New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.Google Scholar
Paauw, F. Van Der (1963). Residual effect of nitrogen fertilizer on succeeding crops in a moderate marine climate. Plant and Soil 19, 324331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, R. C. (1982). Single extraction procedure for determining NO3, P and K in soils. Annual Scientific Report, Central Potato Research Institute, Shimla, pp. 8788.Google Scholar
Sharma, R. C. (1986). Nitrogen management of potatoes in the presence of farmyard manure and PK fertilizer on acid hill soil of Shimla. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge 107, 1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, R. C.Sud, K. C. (1978). Rapid chromic acid procedure for determining nitrogen in plants. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 16, 13131315.Google Scholar
Sharma, R. C.Sud, K. C. (1980). An improved chromic acid method for determining total nitrogen in surface soils. Journal Indian Society of Soil Science 28, 232235.Google Scholar
Sharma, R. C.Sud, K. C. (1981). Note on rapid chromic acid method for determining the C:N ratio of soils. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 51, 462463.Google Scholar
Sinoh, R. P.Shabma, R. C. (1983). Effect of farmyard manure, green manure and preceding maize on nitrogen needs of potato and wheat.Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 53, 216224.Google Scholar
Subbiah, B. V.Asija, G. L. (1956). A rapid procedure for the estimation of available nitrogen in soils. Current Science 25, 259260.Google Scholar
Walkley, A.Black, I. A. (1934). An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37, 2938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, F. V.Penny, A. (1965). Experiments measuring the residual effect of nitrogen fertilizers. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 65, 195200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar