crop production agronomy, physiology and biochemistry - central institute for cotton...

D - 1

ICAR - All India Coordinated Research Project on Cotton – Annual Report (2017 – 18)

CROP PRODUCTION

AGRONOMY, PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY

The following trials were conducted during Kharif 2017-18 at various centers of AICRP on Cotton.

AGRONOMY

Agronomy IA Agronomic requirements of promising pre-release/ recently released G. hirsutum/G. arboreum genotypes / hybrids of Cotton

Agronomy 1B Evaluation of compact culture under HDPS with different nutrient levels

Agronomy II Weed Management in Cotton

Agronomy IIIA Improving use efficiency of inputs

Agronomy IIIB Enhancing Nitrogen use efficiency in Bt cotton

Agronomy IV Technology for Organic Cotton Production

Agronomy V Conservation agriculture

Agronomy VI Labour saving techniques in Cotton cultivation

Agronomy VII Canopy management in HDPS cotton

Agronomy VIII Testing of product developed from human hair by Bio- processing and Herbal Division of Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization

Agronomy IX Paid up trials

PHYSIOLOGY and BIOCHEMISTRY

PHY1 Screening of Cotton genotypes for abiotic stress tolerance

1a Screening genotypes for water stress tolerance

1b Screening genotypes for salinity stress tolerance

PHY2 Preparing for Climate Change: Effect of environment on crop phenology development & yield

PHY3 Evaluation of effect of nano fertilizer on growth and production of Cotton (HDPS)

Bio Chem. 1. Evaluation of cotton genotypes for seed oil, gossypol and protein

Bio Chem.2 Effect of PGRs on insect resistance in cotton

The trials conducted zone-wise were as follows:

North zone Faridkot, Bathinda, Sirsa (Hisar), Sriganganagar and Kanpur

Central Zone Surat, Akola, Rahuri, Nanded, Indore, Khandwa, Banswara, Junagarh and Bhawanipatna

South Zone Lam ( Guntur), Nandyal, Dharwad, Raichur, Chamrajanagar, Coimbatore and Srivilliputtur

D - 2


The project-wise findings and salient highlights of the research pertaining to North, Central and South zones are summarized below.

Agronomy IA: Agronomic requirements of promising pre-release/recently released G. hirsutum/G. arboreum genotypes/hybrids of cotton.

Growth and development of a plant is the result of the interaction of two major components viz. genetic potential of genotype and the environment. Among the improved agronomic practices, important yield contributing agro techniques are spacing and fertilizer application. Optimization of spacing and fertilizer requirement is the pre requisite for releasing of promising genotypes. The field experiments were conducted with graded levels of nutrient and spacing as per the required environment in multi location at different AICRP (cotton) centres. North Zone Bathinda

The agronomic requirement study for pre release hirsutum entry- HS 294 was conducted at Bathinda under irrigated condition. The study showed that the seed cotton yield was responsive to spacing and fertilizer levels. The increase in plant density from 67.5 x 75 cm to 67.5 x 60 cm, increased the seed cotton yield significantly. However, further increase of plant density from 67.5 x 60 cm to 67.5 x 45 cm did not improve seed cotton yield (Table 1). Seed cotton yield increased significantly with increase in fertilizer level from 75% of recommended to 100% of recommended level only. The interaction effect was not significant one. Thus, planting of 67.5 X 60 cm with 100 % RDF is recommended for HS 294 at Bathinda. Table 1: Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of promising pre-released hirsutum variety (HS294) as influenced by spacing and fertilizers levels at Bathinda in North Zone

Treatments S1: 67.5 x 45

cm S2: 67.5 x 60

cm S3: 67.5 x 75

cm Mean

(Fertilizers) Anova

CD (5%)

CV (%)

F1: 75 % RDF 2333 2329 2178 2280 Spacing 225

9.05 F2: 100 % RDF

2781 2644 2365 2597 Fertilize

rs 225

F3: 125 % RDF

2813 2593 2334 2580 S X F NS

Mean (spacing)

2643 2522 2292

Hisar

Seed cotton yield of genotype HS 294 was statistically at par in all three fertilizer levels at Hisar. However, number of bolls per square metre and seed cotton yield were significantly higher with closer spacing (67.5X30 cm) than wider spacing (67.5X45 cm). Thus, planting of 67.5 X 30 cm with 100 % RDF is recommended for HS 294 at Hisar under irrigated condition.

D - 3


Table 2: Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of promising pre-released hirsutum variety (HS294) as influenced by spacing and fertilizers levels at Hisar in North Zone

Treatments S1.67.5 X 45 S2.67.5X 30 Mean (Fertilizers) ANOVA SE (d) CD (5%)

F1.100% RDF 2078 2243 2160 Spacing 57 189.5

F2.125% RDF 2126 2373 2250 Fertilizers 78 NS

F3.150% RDF 2263 2456 2360 S X F 107 NS

Mean (spacing) 2156 2357

Central Zone

Surat Geometry and nutrient requirement of pre prelease hirsutum entry (GJHV 497) was tested

under irrigated condition at Surat with local check (GN Cot.22). The results revealed that spacing of S2 (120 x 30 cm) recorded significant higher number of bolls per square meter (69.1) as against S1

(120 x 40) (59.4) (Table 3). Boll weight was significantly influenced by genotypes. Genotype, G1- GJHV 497 recorded significantly higher boll weight (3.21 g) as compared to G2 –GN.Cot.22 (3.00 g). Seed cotton yield was found to differ significantly due to fertilizer levels. Fertilizer level, F3 (125 % RDF) recorded significant higher seed cotton yield of 1514 kg/ha as compared to F1 (1350), but was found at par with F2 (1483 kg/ha). The results indicated that existing recommended spacing of 120 X 45 cm with 100 % RDF (240:40:0 kg N, P2O5 & K2O/ha) was ideal for pre release variety (GJHV 497).

Table 3. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments G1.GJHV-497

G2.GN.Cot.22 (Local Check)

Mean (of Fertilizer)

S1.120 X 45 cm

S2. 120 x 30 cm

S1.120 X 45 cm

S2.120 X 30 cm

F1.75% RDF 1352 1374 1344 1330 1350

F2.100% RDF 1502 1496 1445 1488 1483

F3.125%RDF 1575 1549 1445 1486 1514

Interaction (two way)

S1.120 X 45 cm

S2. 120 x 30 cm

G1.GJHV-497

G2.GN.Cot.22(LC)

Interaction

G1.GJHV-497

G2.GN.Cot.22( LC)

F1.75%RDF 1348 1352 1363 1337 S1.120X45

cm 1476 1412

F2.100%RDF 1474 1492 1499 1466 S2.120X30

cm 1473 1435

F3.125%RDF 1510 1517 1562 1466 Mean 1475 1423

Mean 1444 1454 1475 1423 ANOVA Genotype Spacing Fertilizers GXS GXF GXSXF

SE d 29.308 29.308 35.889 41.438 50.752 71.773

CD (5%) NS NS 105 NS NS NS

D - 4


Rahuri

Seed cotton yield was influenced by spacing and nutrient levels and their interaction at Rahuri. Narrow geometry (90 X 30 cm) significantly resulted in the highest yield (1725 kg/ha) and comparable with planting of 90 X 60 cm (1671 kg/ha). Application of 125 % recommended level of fertiliser resulted in the highest seed cotton yield (1697 Kg/ha) though at par with recommended level (1641 Kg/ha) (Table 4). The results summarised that planting of 90 X 60 cm spacing with application of recommended level (80:40:40 N, P2O5 & K2O kg/ha) is considered for GJHV 497 under irrigated condition at Rahuri.

Table 4. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Rahuri in Central Zone

Treat ments

V1.GJHV -497 V2.RHC-0717

Grand Mean S1.90X30 cm

S2.90X60 cm

S3.90 X 90 cm

S1.90X30

cm

S2.90X60 cm

S3.90 X 90 cm

F1.75% 1762 1205 1192 1894 1419 1325 1466

F2.100% 1616 1845 1391 1703 1910 1379

1641

F3.125% 1519 1589 1605 1858 2061 1547

1697

Interaction

S1.90X30 cm

S2.90X60 cm

S3.90 X 90 cm

V1.GJHV -497

V2.RHC-0717

Mean Interac

tion V1.GJHV

-497

V2.RHC-

0717 Mean

F1.75% 1828 1312 1259 1387 1546 1828 S1 1632 1818 1725

F2. 100% 1659 1877 1385 1617 1664 1659

S2 1458 1797 1671

F3. 125% 1689 1825 1576 1571 1822 1689

S3 1521 1417 1407

Mean 1725 1671 1407 1525 1677 1725 Mean 1525 1677

ANOVA Genotyp

e Spacing

Fertilizers

GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 59 89 41 44 58 72 101 CD (5%) NS 289 121 NS NS 209 NS

Akola

The results revealed that seed cotton yield was significantly high with SCS 1061(1198 kg ha-1) but at par with local check (AKH 9916, 1109 kg/ha). Amongst spacing levels, seed cotton yield (1271 kg/ha) was significantly high with plant density (55,555 plants ha-1) i.e. with 60 x 30 cm. There was significant response to NPK levels in respect to seed cotton yield and the highest SCY (1207 kg ha-1) was recorded with 150 % RDF which was at par with 125% RDF (Table 7). The Interaction results revealed that highest seed cotton yield (1402 kg/ha) recorded with SCS 1061 planted at 60 x 30 cm with 150 % RDF (90:45:45 N, P2O5 & K2O kg/ha).

D - 5


Table 5. Seed Cotton Yield (Kg/ha) as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Akola

Treatments G1 SCS 1061 G2-AKH 9916 Mean (F)

Grand Mean

S1- 60 x15 cm

S2-60 x 30 cm

S3-60 x 45 cm

S1- 60 x15 cm

S2-60 x 30 cm

S3-60 x 45 cm

F1-100 % RDF 1060 1255 1078 1006 1229 885 1085 1154

F2-125 %RDF 1204 1260 1214 1191 1196 946 1169

F3-150 %RDF 1188 1402 1124 1175 1281 1073 1207

Interaction (Two way)

S1- 60 x15 cm

S2-60 x 30 cm

S3-60 x 45 cm

G1 SCS 1061

G2 AKH 9916

Interaction G1 SCS 1061

G2 AKH 9916

F1-100 % RDF 1033 1242 981 1131 1040 S1- 60 x15 1151 1124

F2-125 %RDF 1197 1228 1080 1226 1111 S2-60 x 30 1306 1235

F3-150 %RDf 1182 1341 1098 1238 1176 S3-60 x 45 1139 968

Mean 1137 1271 1053 1198 1109 1198 1109

ANOVA Geno Spac Fertil G x S G x F S x F G x S x

F

SE d 24 17 28 25 40 49 70

CD (5 %) 34 25 40 35 57 70 99

Bhawanipatna

The results revealed that seed cotton yield of the sponsored entry- SCS 1061 was affected by spacing and fertiliser levels at Bhawanipatna, under rainfed condition. The highest seed cotton yield (3171 kg/ha) was obtained with the spacing of S3 (90 cm x 30 cm) (Table 6). Application of F3 (125 % RDF) recorded the highest seed cotton yield (3298 kg/ha), which was on par with F2(100 % RDF). Thus geometry of 90 X 30 cm with 100 % RDF (90:45:45 N, P2O5 & K2O kg/ha) is found optimum.

Table 6. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre released culture of SCS 1061 as influenced by spacing levels and nutrient levels at Bhawanipatna.

Treatments S1- 90 x 60

cm S2- 90 cm x

45 cm S3- 90 cm x

30 cm Mean

(Fertilizers) Anova SE d

CD (5%)

F1.75 % RDF 2668 2881 3044 2864

Spacing

82.8 175.5

F2.100 % RDF 2592 3142 3408 3047

Fertilizers

82.8 175.5

F3.125%RDF 2881 3190 3441 3171

S X F 143.4

304.0

Mean (spacing) 2714 3071 3298

D - 6


Agronomic requirements of promising pre-released barbadense variety under different location of AICRP on Cotton in Central Zone Surat

The agronomic requirement study of pre-released barbadense variety (ARBB 1401) under irrigated condition at Surat revealed that yield attributes and Seed cotton yield differed significantly with change in spacing and fertilizer levels (Table 6). Spacing treatment, S2 (120 X 30 cm) recorded significant higher seed cotton yield (660 kg/ha) as compared to S1.120 X 45 cm (541 kg/ha). In case of fertilizer levels, both F2 (100 % RDF) and F3 (125 % RDF) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield of 633 kg/ha as compared to F1 (571 kg/ha). The results conclude that geometry of 120 X 30 cm with 100 RDF (240:40:0 N, P2O5 & K2O kg/ha) is recommended.

Table 7. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre-released barbadense variety (ARBB 1401) as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Surat

Treatments G1. ARBB-1401

G2.GSB-39 (Local Check)

Mean (Fertilizers) S1.120 X

45 cm S2. 120 x

30 cm S1.120 X

45 cm S2.120 X

30 cm

F1.75%RDF 527 639 519 601 571

F2.100%RDF 590 696 566 679 633

F3.125%RDF 606 690 538 699 633


S1.120 X 45 cm

S2. 120 x 30 cm

G1. ARBB-1401

G2.GSB-39 (LC)

Interaction

G1. ARBB-1401

G2.GSB-39 (LC)

F1.75%RDF 523 620 583 560 S1 575 541

F2.100%RDF 578 688 643 623 S2 675 660

F3.125%RDF 572 694 648 618 Mean 625 600

Mean 558 667 625 600 ANOVA Genotype Spacing Fertilizers GXS GXF GXSXF

SE d 14.90 14.90 18.25 21.08 25.81 36.50 CD (5%) NS 43.7 53.5 NS NS NS

Junagarh

The results with respect to spacing, fertiliser levels and their interaction were not significant with pre-released barbadense variety (ARBB 1401). The return calculation revealed that sowing with 120 x 30 cm and application of 125 % RDF fertilizer gave numerically higher gross return. Hence it is interpreted that recommended spacing of 120 X 45 cm with 75 % RDF (120-00-90 N, P2O5 & K2O kg/ha) is optimum for the genotype.

D - 7


Table 8. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre-released barbadense variety (ARBB 1401) as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Junagarh

Treatments S1.120 X 45 cm S2.120 X 30 cm Mean (Fertilizers) Anova SEd CD (5%)

F1.75%RDF 520 545 532 Spacing 17.35 NS

F2.100%RDF 561 562 561 Fertilizers 21.25 NS

F3.125%RDF 544 560 552 S X F 30.05 NS

Mean 542 555

Agronomic requirement of Promising pre-release Hirsutum x Barbadense (HxB ) hybrids at different locations of AICRP on Cotton in Central Zone.

Surat

The results revealed that number of bolls per sqm and boll weight (g) showed significant difference amongst various spacing levels. Spacing of 120 x 30 cm (S2) recorded significant higher number of bolls per sqm (78.4) than S1.120 X 45cm (67.5) (Table 9). On the contrary, boll weight (g) was found significantly higher in S1 (2.82 g) as compared to S2 (2.68 g). Seed cotton yield was found to vary significantly due to fertilizer levels only. Application of 125%RDF (F3) gave significant higher seed cotton yield (1557 kg/ha) as compared to 75 % RDF (1396 kg/ha), but was found at par with 100 % RDF (1514 kg/ha).The results indicated that existing geometry of 120 X 45 cm and 100 % RDF (240:40:0 kg N, P2O5 & K2O /ha) is optimum for the genotype at Surat under irrigated condition

Table 9. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre-released Hirsutum x Barbadense hybrids (RHB 1122) as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Surat

Treatments G1. RHB-1122

G2. G.Cot.Hy-102 (Local Check) Grand Mean

(Fertilisers) S1.120 X 45cm

S2. 120 x 30 cm

S2.120 X 30 cm

F1.75%RDF 1369 1451 1396 1412 1396

F2.100%RDF 1477 1554 1514 1552 1514

F3.125%RDF 1541 1586 1557 1583 1557


S1.120 X 45 cm

S2. 120 x 30 cm

G1. RHB-1122

G2. G.Cot.Hy-102 (LC)

Interaction

G1.RHB-1122

G2. G.Cot.Hy-102 (LC)

F1.75%RDF 1361 1431 1410 1383 S1 1462 1448

F2.100%RDF 1475 1553 1516 1512 S2 1530 1516

F3.125%RDF 1530 1584 1564 1550 Mean 1496 1482

Mean 1455 1523 1496 1482

ANOVA Genotype Spacing Fertilizer

s GXS GXF GXSXF

SE d 36.319 36.319 44.479 51.363 62.906 88.963

CD (5%) NS NS 130.5 NS NS NS

D - 8


Junagarh

Inter specific hybrid (H X B), RHB-1122 was evaluated for agronomic requirement at Junagarh (Table 10) under irrigated condition. Application of higher/lower level of 25 % of RDF from recommended level and plant geometries tested were not influenced seed cotton yield significantly. The return calculation revealed that sowing with 120 x 30 cm gave higher and profitable gross return, net return as well as B:C ratio. The trial recommended that 75 % RDF with spacing of 120 X 30 cm for RHB-1122.

Table 10. Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha) of pre-released HX B hybrid (RHB 1122) as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Junagarh

Treatments S1.120 X 45

cm S2.120 X 30

cm Mean

(Fertilizers) Anova SEd

CD (5%)

F1.75% RDF 991 1066 1029 Spacing 48.91 NS

F2.100%RDF 1172 1078 1125 Fertilizers 59.90 NS

F3.125%RDF 1115 1103 1109 S X F 84.71 NS

Mean (spacing)

1093 1082

Agronomic requirements of promising pre released arboreum variety under different location of AICRP on Cotton in Central Zone. Nanded

The plant geometry had significant influence on yield attributes. Number of bolls per sq.m was the highest in closer spacing of S1 : 45 x 15 cm ( 30.56), however boll weight (2.33 g) and yield per plant (5.37 g) were reduced in S1 : 45 x 15 cm . The seed cotton yield per ha remained statistically unaffected with respect to all spacing levels. Increasing fertilizer dose was found to increase plant growth, yield contributing characters and seed cotton yield. The significantly highest seed cotton yield (694 kg/ha) was registered with fertilizer dose of 125%RDF (F3) and was at par with 100% RDF (50 : 25 : 25 kg N, P2O5 & K2O /ha) (F2) but significantly superior over 75% RDF (F1).

Table 11. Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha) of pre-released arboreum variety (PA 785) as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Nanded

Treatments S1 : 45 x 15 cm

S2 : 45 x 22.5 cm

S3: 45 x 30 cm

Mean (Fertilizers)

Anova SE d CD

(5%)

F1.75% RDF 609 615 635 620 Spacing 9.9 N.S.

F2.100%RDF 667 682 650 666 Fertilizers 13.0 40.0

F3.125%RDF 733 697 652 694 S X F 22.6 N.S.

Mean (spacing)

670 665 646

D - 9


Akola

The significantly high seed cotton yield was recorded against local check, AKA 8 (741 kgha-1) as compared to PA 785 (643 kg/ha) and also with closer plant population (60x15 cm) (757 kg ha-1). Application of 150% RDF (747kg ha-1) recorded the highest seed cotton yield but at par with 125% RDF (50:25:25 kg N, P2O5 & K2O /ha, 703kg ha-1). The interaction results revealed that agronomic requirement of 60 x 15 cm with application of 125% RDF found optimum for both the genotypes under rainfed condition.

Table 12. Seed Cotton Yield (Kg/ha) at harvest as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Akola

Treatments

G1 PA 785

G2-AKA 8 Mean (F)

Grand Mean

S1- 60 x15

cm S2-60 x 30 cm

S1- 60 x15 cm

S2-60 x 30 cm

F1-100 % 558 615 772 620 641 697

F2-125 % 707 594 872 640 703

F3-150 % 764 679 867 676 747

Interaction 2 way

S1- 60 x15 S2-60 x

30 G1 PA

785 G2 AKA 8 Interaction

G1 PA 785

G2 AKA 8

F1-100 % 665 617 586 696 S1- 60 x15

cm 676 837

F2-125 % 790 617 651 756 S2-60 x 30

cm 629 646

F3-150 % 815 678 721 772

Mean 757 637 653 741 653 741

Anova Genotypes Spacing Fertilizers G x S G x F S x F G x S x F

SE d 14 23 26 32 37 37 53

CD (5 %) 62 63 56 90 NS NS NS

Agronomic requirements of promising pre-release/recently released hirsutum/arboreum genotypes/hybrids of cotton in South Zone

Lam

The field experiment on agronomic requirement of pre-released G. hirsutum cotton varieties (CCH-14-1 and GSHV 177) was conducted at RARS, Lam. The results of the study revealed that seed cotton yield recorded in GSHV 177 (2571 kg/ha) was significantly superior to CCH-14-1 (1302 kg/ha) (Table 13). The seed cotton yield was significantly superior with an increase of 13.1 per cent under closer spacing (90cm x 45 cm) as compared to normal spacing (105 X60 cm). Application of fertilizers, 25% more than RDF recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (2065 kg/ha) and was on a par with 50% more RDF (1916 kg/ha). Interactions were non significant.

D - 10


Table 13. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release hirsutum varieties as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at LAM

Treatments

G1. CCH 14-1 G2. GSHV 177 Grand Mean

S1- 90 X45cm S2- 105X60cm S1- 90X45cm S2- 105X60cm

F1:100 % RDF 1323 1216 2638 2131 1827

F2 : 125% RDF 1469 1318 2836 2638 2065

F3 : 150% RDF 1352 1132 2719 2434 1916


S1- 90 X45cm S2- 105X60cm G1. CCH 14-1 G2. GSHV 177 Interaction (two way)

G1 G2 Mean

F1: 100 %RDF 1981 1673 1269 2385 S1- 90 X45cm 1382 2731 2056

F2 : 125% RDF 2153 1978 1394 2737 S1- 90 X45cm

1222

2411 1817 F3 : 150% RDF 2036 1798 1241 2592

Mean 2056 1817 1301 2571

1302 2571

Anova Genotype Spacing Fertilizers GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 92 92 87 130 124 124 175

CD (5%) 225 225 185 NS NS NS NS

Srivilliputhur

The results found that GSH 177 (2015 kg/ha) registered the highest seed cotton yield; which was on par with TCH 0533 (1969 kg/ ha) and significantly higher than CCH 14-1 (1745 kg/ ha). Similarly, recommended spacing of 75 x 30 cm produced significantly higher yield (2002 kg/ha) than wider spacing of 75 x 45 cm (1819 kg/ha) (Table 14). Amongst fertilizer levels, application of 125 % RDF produced though highest seed cotton yield ( 2001 kg/ha) , it was on par with that of 100 % RDF (1921 kg/ha) and significantly higher than the lesser dose of 75 % RDF (1819 kg/ha). The interaction effect was found to be not significant Table 14. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels an d nutrient levels at Srivilliputhur in South Zone

Treatments

GSHV 177 CCH 14-1 TSH 0533 Grand Mean

S1.75 x 30

S2.75 X 45 S1.75 x

30 S2.75 X 45 S1.75 x 30 S2.75 X 45

F1.75 %RDF 2022 1749 1712 1635 1982 1735 1807

F2.100%RDf 2166 1896 1798 1679 2099 1866 1921

F3.125%RDF 2237 2008 1862 1763 2138 1950 2001


S1.75 x 30

S2.75 X 45 S1.75 x

30 S2.75 X 45

Interaction

GSHV 177

CCH 14-1

TSH 0533

F1.75 % 1905 1706 1888 1674 1859 S1.75 x 30 2142 1791 2073

F2.100% 2021 1814 2031 1749 1983 S2.75 X 45 1894 1693 1851

F3.125% 2079 1907 2125 1813 2065

Mean 2002 1809 2015 1745 1969

2015 1745 1969

ANOVA Genotype Spacing Fertilizers GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 70.1 57.7 68.3 101.

2 107.5 97.8 -

CD (5%) 194.2 141.2 140.1 NS NS 1.17 NS

D - 11


Agronomic requirement of Promising pre-release Hirsutum x Barbadense (HxB ) hybrids at different locations of AICRP on Cotton in South Zone

Raichur

The two inter-specific hybrids, DHB-1009 and RHB-1122 were evaluated at two levels of fertilizers and three spacing under irrigated conditions at Raichur. The inter-specific hybrids did not show significant difference with respect to seed cotton yield (kg/ha). Fertilizer dose of 125% of RDF recorded higher seed cotton yield (1804 kg/ha) but comparable to 100% RDF (1764 kg/ha) (Table 15). Amongst spacing, 90 X 60 cm resulted in significantly higher seed cotton yield (1896 kg/ha) than 90 X 75 cm (1729 kg/ha) and 120 X 60 cm (1731 kg/ha) spacing. Interaction found non-significant. Thus, spacing of 90 X 60 cm with 100 % RDF (90-45-45 kg N, P2O5 & K2O /ha) is recommended.

Table 15. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release Hx B hybrids as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at LAM

Treatments

G1.DHB-1009 G2.RHB-1122 Grand Mean (Fertilisers)

S1.90 x 60 cm

S2.90 X 75 cm

S3.120 X 60 cm

S1.90 x 60 cm

S2.90 X 75 cm

S3.120 X 60 cm

F1.100% 1875 1829 1855 1771 1667 1604 1767

F2.125% 2065 1796 1815 1872 1626 1649 1804


S1.90 x 60 cm

S2.90 X 75 cm

S3.120 X 60 cm

G1.DHB 1009

G2.RHB 1122

Interaction

G1.DHB 1009

G2.RHB

1122

F1.100% 1823 1748 1730 1853 1892 S1 1970 1822

F2.125% 1969 1711 1732 1681 1716 S2 1813 1647

Mean 1896 1729 1731 1872 1698 S3 1835 1627

ANOVA Genotyp

e Spacing Fertilizers GXS GXF SXF GXFXS

SE d 31 31 25 43 35 43 61

CD (5%) NS 90 NS NS NS NS NS

Coimbatore

The experimental results revealed that both the genotypes (DHB 1009 and RHB 1122) responded to spacing and fertilizer levels. Yield data revealed that both the genotypes viz., HB 1009 and RHB 1122 performed significantly better with the spacing of 90 x 60 cm by recording yield of 1702 and 1613 kg/ha respectively. Fertiliser response revealed that comparable yield was obtained with recommended dose of 120: 60:60 kg/ ha (DHB1009, 1467 kg/ha and RHB 1122, 1426 kg/ha) as compared 125 % RDF (150:75:75 kg/ha ) (DHB1009 , 1514 kg/ha and RHB 1122, 1502 kg/ha)(Table 16). Thus, 90 X 60 cm spacing with 100 % RDF is identified.

D - 12


Table 16. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release H X B hybrids as influenced by genotypes, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Coimbatore

Treatments

G1 (DHB 1009) G2 (RHB 1122)

Grand Mean (Fertilisers)

S1 – 90 x 60 cm

S2 – 120 x 60 cm

S3 – 150 x 60 cm

S3 – 150 x 60 cm

S3 – 150 x 60 cm

F1.75 % RDF 1535 1292 1287 1470 1190 1076 1287

F1: 100 %RDF 1824 1356 1447 1709 1435 1134 1447

F2 : 125% RDF 1853 1429 1508 1849 1487 1169 1508


S1 S2 S3 G1 G2

Interaction

G1 G2

F1.75 % RDF 1503 1241 1118 1329 1245

S1 1702 1613

F1: 100 %RDF 1766 1396 1178 1467 1426

S2 1366 1360

F2 : 125% RDF 1851 1458 1214 1514 1502

S3 1207 1108

Mean 1658 1363 1157 1425 1361

Mean

1425 1361

ANOVA Genotyp

e Spacing

Fertilizers

GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 62.5 76.9 80 108 117 143 185

CD (5%) 140 171.5* 164* 242 244 299 NS

Agronomic requirements of promising pre released G. arboreum variety under different location of AICRP on Cotton in South Zone Dharwad

The results indicated that there was no significant difference in seed cotton yield between two genotypes (AKA 2008-7 and DLSA 17). Planting geometry did not influence the yield significantly but the nutrient levels had significant effect on seed cotton yield. Fertiliser level of 60:30:30 NPK kg/ha (150% RDF) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield of 1594 kg/ha (Table 17). The interactions effects were non significant. The genotypes DLSa-17 and AKA-2008-7 with planting geometry of 90 x 30 cm and fertilizer levels of 150% RDF (60:30:30 NPK kg/ha) recommended as agronomic requirement of the genotypes for medium deep black soils under assured rainfall conditions at Dharwad

D - 13


Table 17. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release arboreum genotypes as influenced by , spacing levels and nutrient levels at Dharwad

Treatments

G1: AKA-2008-7 G2: DLSA-17 Grand Mean

S1:60 x 30 cm

S2: 75 x 30 cm

S3: 90 x 30 cm

S1:60 x 30 cm

S2: 75 x 30 cm

S3: 90 x 30 cm

F1:100 % RDF 1198 1381 1239 1150 1334 1328 1272

F2:125 % RDF 1491 1409 1395 1334 1572 1435 1439

F3:150%RD 1601 1466 1559 1594 1676 1670 1594

Mean 1430 1419 1397 1359 1527 1478 1435

Interaction S1:60 x 30 cm

S2: 75 x 30 cm

S3: 90 x 30 cm

G1: AKA-2008-7

G2: DLSA-17

Interaction G1: AKA-2008-7

G2: DLSA-

17

F1:100 % RDF 1174 1358 1284 1273 1271 S1 1430 1359

F2:125 % RDF 1412 1491 1415 1432 1447 S2 1419 1527

F3:150%RD 1597 1571 1614 1542 1647 S3: 1397 1478

Mean 1394 1473 1438 1415 1455

1415 1455

ANOVA Genotype (G)

Spacing (S)

Fertilizer Level (F)

G x S G x F S x F G x S x F

S.Em+ 45 37 20 53 28 35 49

C.D.( 0.05) NS NS 58 NS NS NS NS

Nandyal

The agronomic requirement study of the G. arboreum genotype (AKA-2008-7) at Nandyal under rainfed condition found that seed cotton yield did not differ significantly with spacing; but significant effect was observed with fertilizers levels. Higher seed cotton yield (1524 kg/ha) was recorded with 150% RDF which was on par with 125 % RDF (1394 kg/ ha). Between genotypes, significantly higher seed cotton yield was recorded with local check, Yaganti (1506 kg/ ha) than AKA-2008-7 (1348 kg/ ha) (Table 18).

Table 18. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release arboreum genotype as influenced by, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Nandyal

Treatments

V1. Yaganti V2. AKA-2008-7

Grand mean S1.60X30 cm

S2.60 X 20 cm

S1.60X30 cm

S2.60 X 20 cm

F1.100% 1327 1392 1334 1397 1362

F2.125% 1711 1677 966 1224 1394

F3.150% 1430 1502 1580 1587 1524


S1.60X30 cm

S2.60 X 20 cm V1.

Yaganti V2. AKA-2008-7


V1. Yaganti

V2. AKA-2008-7

F1.100% 1330 1394 1359 1365 S1.60X30 1489 1293

F2.125% 1338 1451 1694 1095 S2.60 X 20 1523 1403

F3.150% 1505 1544 1466 1583 Mean 1506 1348

Mean 1391 1463 1506 1348

ANOVA S F V SXF SXV FXV SXFXV

SE m+ 62.0 40.1 39.7 56.8 56.1 68.8 97.3

CD (5%) NS 131 122 NS NS 212 NS

D - 14


Agronomy 1B: Evaluation of compact cultures under High Density Planting System (HDPS) with different nutrient levels

Many cotton producing countries like Brazil, China, Australia, Spain, Uzbekistan, Argentina and Greece tested, proved and adopted HDPS as a tool to achieve higher productivity in cotton. High density planting system has been suggested as an alternative strategy to conventional for increasing yield in cotton. Mechanical picking ultimately warrant high density planting system with compact genotypes for its suitability. The trial was formulated with objective to assess performance of pre release genotypes under high density planting system, and also to find out optimum spacing and nutrient levels.

North Zone

Seed cotton yield was significantly influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Faridkot. Higher planting geometry (67.5 x 60 cm) resulted in significantly least yield (1860 kg/ha) than all other narrow geometries. However all narrow geometries exhibited at par seed cotton yield. Application of 150 % recommended level of nutrients resulted in the highest seed cotton yield (2331kg/ha) but at par with 125% RDF (2224 kg/ha). The interaction results revealed that RS2727 recorded the highest yield (2516kg/ha) at a spacing level of 80x 15 cm with 150 % RD level of nutrition. In contrast to that in Hisar, seed cotton yield was not significantly influenced by fertilizer levels and planting geometry. The recommended spacing of 67.5X15 cm recorded the numerically highest seed cotton yield. Application of higher level of nutrients had not favoured for the crop ; hence recommended level (90: 30: 00 kg/ha of N,P2O5 & K2O) of fertiliser optimum for the genotype at Hisar.

Table 19. Effect of compact culture [Cv.RS2727] under HDPS with different nutrient level in North Zone

Treatments S1(67.5 x

15) S2 (80 x15)

S3 (100 x 10)

S4 (67.5 x 60)

Mean (Fertilizers)

Anova CV(%) CD

(5%)

Faridkot

F1.100 % RDF

1894 2079 2155 1789 1979 Spacing 6.9 173

F2.125 % RDF

2375 2350 2300 1871 2224 Fertilize

rs 9.3 176

F3.150 % RDF

2428 2516 2460 1920 2331 S X F

NS

Mean (spacing)

2232 2315 2305 1860

Hisar

F1.100% RDF

2407 1728 2490 2655 2320 Spacing 263.8 NS

F2.125% RDF

2798 2160 1564 2798 2330 Fertilize

rs 153.9 NS

F3.150% RDF

2963 2448 2325 1996 2433 S X F 364.4 NS

Mean (spacing)

2723 2112 2126 2483

D - 15


Effect of compact culture under HDPS with different nutrient level in Central Zone Rahuri

The compact pre release variety GTHV-13/72 recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (1985 kg ha-1), average boll weight (5.29 g) and maximum yield plant-1 (168.45 g) than GISV-272 and RAHC- 1011. The 60 x 10 cm spacing recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (2074 kg ha-1) than 75 x 10 cm and 90 x 10 cm spacing’s. However 90 x 10 spacing recorded maximum average boll weight. Application of 150 % RDF (150:75:75 kg/ha of N,P2O5 & K2O ) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (1948 kg ha-1) and number of bolls/m2 (643.31) than 100 % and 125 % RDF fertilizer levels (Table 20). However it was at par with 125 % RDF fertilizer level. The results conclude that planting of 60 x 10 cm (2074 kg ha-1) and fertilizer level of 125 % RDF is recommended (125:62.5:62.5 kg/ha of N,P2O5 & K2O ) for the genotypes includes GTHV-13/72 , GISV 272 and RAHC 1011 except 100 % RDF for RAHC 1011.

Table 20. Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha) of pre-released compact cultures as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Rahuri

Treatments

G1.GTHV 13/32 G2.GISV 272 G3.RAHC1011 Grand Mean

(Fertilisers)

S1.60X10 cm

S2.75 X 10 cm

S3.90 X 10 cm

S1.60X10 cm

S2.75 X 10 cm

S3.90 X 10 cm

S1.60X10 cm

S2.75 X 10 cm

S3.90 X 10 cm

F1.100% 2094 2023 1750 1834 1711 1386 1766 1584 1547 1799

F2.125% 2166 1991 1653 2161 1739 1594 1749 1665 1594 1884

F3.150% 2018 2072 1711 2172 1923 1792 1593 1637 1565 1948


S1.60X10 cm

S2.75 X 10 cm

S3.90 X 10 cm

G1.GTHV 13/32

G2.GISV 272

G3.RAHC1011

Interaction

G1.GTHV 13/32

G2.GISV 272

G3.RAHC 1011

F1.100% 1956 1643 1632 1964 1867 1568 S1 2093 2056 1703

F2.125% 1937 1832 1669 2164 1865 1623 S2 2029 1791 1629

F3.150% 1933 1962 1598 2095 1997 1751 S3 1704 1590 1568

Mean 2074 1910 1647 1942 1812 1633

ANOVA Genoty

pe Spacing

Fertilizers

GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 36.4 31.3 22.7 54.2 39.4 39.4 68.2

CD (5%) 142.8 96.5 65.2 167.1 113.0 NS NS

Junagarh

The results revealed that compact genotypes significantly increased seed cotton yield. The genotype, GISV 272 (G2) gave significantly higher seed cotton yield (3329 kg/ha). Only Spacing treatments did not influence the growth parameter, yield parameter and seed cotton yield. Incremental increase in fertilizer rate (100%, 125% and 150% of RDF) resulted in a significant increase in seed cotton yield (Table 21). Application of 150 % RDF recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (3218 kg/ha) than other fertilizer treatments. The interaction results revealed that sowing with 90 x 10 cm with 125 % RDF is optimum for the genotypes .

D - 16


Table 21. Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha) of pre-released compact cultures as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Junagarh

Treatments

G1.GTHV 13/32 G2.GISV 272 G3.RAHC1011 Grand Mean

(Fertilsers)

S1.60X10

S2.75 X 10

S3.90 X 10

S1.60X10 S2.75 X

10 S3.90 X

10 S1.60X

10 S2.75 X 10

S3.90 X 10

F1.100%RDF 2789 2701 2869 2874 3157 3316 2938 2686 2766 2900

F2.125%RDF 2809 2737 3091 3130 3342 3484 2987 2769 3044 3044

F3.150%RDF 3163 2980 3197 3643 3483 3530 3083 2835 3045 3218


S1.60X10

S2.75 X 10

S3.90 X 10

G1.GTHV 13/32

G2.GISV 272

G3.RAHC1011

Interaction

G1.GTHV 13/32

G2.GISV 272

G3.RAHC1011

F1.100% RDf 2867 2848 2984 2786 3116 2797 S1 2921 3216 3003

F2.125% RDf 2976 2949 3206 2879 3319 2933 S2 2806 3327 2763

F3.150% RDf 3296 3099 3257 3114 3552 2988 S3 3052 3443 2952

Mean 3046 2966 3149 2926 3329 2906

2926 3329 2906

ANOVA Genot

ype Spacin

g Fertiliz

ers GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 81.44 53.78 58.51 93.15 101.35 101.35 175.54

CD (5%) 319.7 NS 167.97 NS NS NS NS

Nanded

The compact variety ANGC 1451 (1791 kg ha-1) out yielded significantly over ANGC 1452 (1639 kg ha-1) at Nanded under rainfed condition. The length of sympodial branches (10.48 cm) and number of bolls per sqm (85.72) were found more in closer spacing 45 x 10 cm The seed cotton yield of closer spacin (45 X 10 cm) was significantly superior over recommended spacing of 60 x 30 cm (1618 kg ha-1) (Table 22). But ANGC 1452 has recorded the highest yield under spacing 75 x 10 cm (1695 kg ha-1). However, all the closer spacing were on par with each other. Application of 150% RDF was at par with 125% RDF but superior significantly over 100% RDF.

D - 17


Table 22. Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha) of pre-released compact cultures as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Nanded

Treatments

G1 : ANGC 1451 G2 : ANGC 1452

Grand Mean

S1: 45 x 10

S2 : 60 x 10

S3 : 75 x 10

S4: 60 x 30

S1: 45 x 10

S2 : 60 x 10

S3 : 75 x 10

S4: 60 x 30

F1: 100 %RDF 1717 1764 1600 1456 1391 1517 1578 1501 1565

F2 : 125% RDF 1896 1907 1737 1619 1629 1694 1743 1686 1739

F3 : 150% RDF 1991 2029 2070 1708 1648 1782 1764 1736 1841


S1 S2 S3 S4 G1 G2 Interacti

on G1 G2

F1: 100 %RDF 1554 1640 1589 1479 1634 1497 S1 1868 1556

F2 : 125% RDF 1763 1800 1740 1653 1790 1688 S2 1900 1664

F3 : 150% RDF 1820 1906 1917 1720 1949 1733 S3 1802 1695

Mean 1712 1782 1749 1618 G1 G2 S4 1594 1641

ANOVA Genotyp

e Spacing

Fertilizers

G X S G X F S X F G X S X F 1791 1639

SE d 18.9 26.8 23.6 37.9 33.4 47.3 66.9

CD (5%) 57.4 81.2 65.4 114.9 N.S. N.S. N.S.

Khandwa

The genotypes did not show statistical significance with respect to seed cotton yield. The highest seed cotton yield (1232 Kg/ha) was recorded with S2 (60 x 10 cm), which was on par with S3 (1223 Kg/ha) and S1 (1208 Kg/ha), but it was found significantly superior to S4 (1134 Kg/ha).The fertilizers were found significant influence on seed cotton yield. The maximum seed cotton yield (1220 Kg/ha) was registered with F2 (125%) and the result was on par with F3 (1200 Kg/ha) . The interaction between genotypes x spacing x fertilizers also were found significant. The significantly highest seed cotton yield was obtained with the interaction of G2S2F2(1260 Kg/ha).The results conclude that 60 x 10 cm spacing and application of 125 % RDF is optimum for both the genotypes.

D - 18


Table 22. Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha) of pre-released compact cultures as influenced by spacing and nutrient levels at Khandwa

Treatments

G1. ANGC-1451 G2. ANGC- 1452 Grand

Mean

S1.45X10

S2.60 X 10

S3.75 X 10

S4.60x60

S1.45X10

S2.60 X 10 S3.75 X

10 S4. 60X60

F1.100%RDF 1138 1219 1236 1076 1186 1222 1173 1206 1182

F2.125%RDF 1241 1248 1230 1141 1236 1260 1250 1154 1220

F3.150%RDF 1237 1246 1211 1108 1212 1198 1237 1153 1200

Mean 1205 1238 1236 1108 1211 1217 1220 1171


S1.45X10

S2.60 X 10

S3.75 X 10

S4.60x60

G1.A NGC- 1451

G2. ANGC- 1452

Interaction

G1. ANGC-1451

G2. ANG

C- 1452

F1.100%RDF 1162 1220 1205 1141 1167 1197 S1.45X1

0 1205 1211

F2.125%RDF 1238 1254 1240 1147 1215 1225 S2.60 X

10 1238 1227

F3.150%RDF 1224 1222 1224 1131 1200 1200 S3.75 X

10 1226 1220

S4.60X

60 1108 1171

Mean 1208 1232 1223 1140 1194 1207 1194 1207

ANOVA G Spacing Fertilize

rs SXF GXF GXS GXSXF

SEd 9.3 13.1 11.4 22.8 16.1 18.58 32.18

CD (5%) NS 26.5 22.9 NS NS 37.40 64.79

Effect of compact culture under HDPS with different nutrient level in South Zone Coimbatore

The trial results revealed that spacing of 75 X 10 cm significantly produced higher seed cotton yield (2273 kg ha-1) followed by 60 X 10 cm (2114 kg ha-1) (Table 23). Application of 100 % of RDF of 100:50:50 kg/ha of N,P2O5 & K2O 1 produced significantly higher seed cotton yield (2028 kg /ha ) and it was comparable with 125 % RDF(Table 22) . The results indicate that both the genotypes (RAHC 1012 and TCH 1819),with a spacing of 75 x 10 cm and application of 100 % RDF ( 100:50:50 kg/ha of N,P2O5 & K2O ) was optimum.

D - 19


Table 23. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release compact genotypes as influenced by, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Coimbatore

Treatments

G1 (RAHC 1012) G2 (TCH 1819 (Check)

Grand Mean S1 – 60 x 10 cm

S2 – 75 x 10 cm

S3 – 90 x 10 cm

S1 – 60 x 10 cm

S2 – 75 x 10 cm

S3 – 90 x 10 cm

F1.75 % RDF 2087 1829 1729 1829 2543 1984 2000

F1: 100 %RDF 2220 2090 1759 2028 2561 2177 2139

F2 : 125% RDF 2280 2107 1786 2243 2676 2436 2255


S1 – 60 x 10 cm

S2 – 75 x 10 cm

S3 – 90 x 10 cm

G1 G2 Interacti

on G1 G2

F1.75 % RDF 1958 2186 1857 1882 2119 S1 2196 2033

F1: 100 %RDF 2124 2325 1968 2023 2255 S2 2009 2593

F2 : 125% RDF 2261 2392 2111 2058 2451 S3 1758 2199

Mean 2114 2273 1924

1987 2275

ANOVA Genotype Spacing Fertilizers GXS GXF SXF GXSXF

SE d 83.2 101 144 144 195 239 286

CD (5%) 185 227* 292* 321 403 494 NS

Raichur

The compact G. hirsutum variety, RAHC-1012 was evaluated at four levels of spacing and three fertilizer doses under irrigated conditions. Results indicated that spacing of 75 x 30 cm recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (2523 kg/ha) which was on par with spacing of 90 x 10 cm (Table 24). Amongst the fertilizer levels, significant difference was not recorded with respect to seed cotton yield. Hence spacing of 75 X 30 cm and 100 % RDF (80:40:40 kg /ha of N,P2O5 & K2O) is recommended for RAHC- 1012 at Raichur under irrigated condition

Table 24. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release compact genotype (RAHC-1012) as influenced by, spacing levels and nutrient levels at Raichur

Treatments G1.RAHC-1012

Grand Mean S1.60X10 cm S2.75 X 10 cm S3. 75 X 30 cm S4.90 X 10 cm

F1.100% RDF 2113 2238 2456 2368 2294

F2.125%RDF 2215 2286 2519 2427 2362

F3.150%RDF 2313 2340 2594 2520 2442

Mean 2214 2288 2523 2438

ANOVA Spacing Fertilizers S X F

SE d 62 88 157

CD (5%) 219 NS NS

D - 20


Nandyal

Seed cotton yield was showed response to spacing and fertiliser levels tested under rainfed condition at Nandyal with compact genotype (ANGC 1452) .The Significantly highest seed cotton yield (2954 kg /ha) was recorded with spacing of 60 x 10 cm and was on par with 60 x15 cm (2924 kg/ha) and 45 cm x 10 cm (2567 kg /ha) (Table 25). Higher kapas yield (2849 kg /ha) was recorded with application of 125% RDF and was on par with 150 % RDF (2795 kg/ha). Thus spacing of 60 X 10 cm and 125 % RDF (112.5:56.25:56.25 kg /ha of N,P2O5 & K2O ) is recommended for ANGC 1452 under rainfed condition.

Table 25. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release compact genotype (ANGC 1452) as influenced by spacing levels and nutrient levels at Nandyal

Treatments S1.60 X

10 S2.45X

10 S3.75X

10 S4.60 X

15 Mean

(Fertilizers) Anova SE d

CD (5%)

F1.100%RDF 2736 2182 1953 2624 2374 Spacing 273 666

F2.125%RDF 3113 2754 2472 3057 2849 Fertilize

rs 187 397

F3.150%RDF 3016 2766 2306 3091 2795 S X F 264 NS

Mean (spacing)

2954 2567 2243 2924

Dharwad

The results of compact genotype experiment conducted under assured rainfall condition at Dharwad. Indicated that spacing and nutrient levels had significant effect on seed cotton yield. Planting geometry of 75 cm x 10 cm recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (3238 kg/ha) than 45 cm x 10 cm (2681 kg/ha) and 60 x 30 cm (2778 kg/ha). However, it was on par with 60 x 10 cm (3113 kg/ha). Fertiliser level of 60:30:30 NPK kg/ha (150% RDF) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield ( 3087 kg/ha) as compared to 125% RDF ( 2968 kg/ha), and 100 % RDF (2802 kg/ha) (Table 26).

Table 26. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of pre release compact cotton genotype (ANGC-1452 ) as influenced by planting geometry and nutrient levels at Dharwad Treatment

s S1- 45 x

10 cm S2- 60 x 10 cm

S3- 75 x 10 cm

S4 - 60 x 30 cm

Mean (Fertilizers)

Anova SE. m

CD at 5%

F1.100%RDF

2567 2962 3093 2586 2802 Spacin

g 84 292

F2.125%RDF

2692 3161 3253 2767 2968 Fertiliz

ers 38 115

F3.150%RDF

2784 3216 3367 2982 3087 S x F 77 NS

Mean (spacing)

2681 3113 3238 2778

D - 21


Agronomy II: - Weed Management in Bt Cotton Weed infestation in cotton leads to severe competition and causing yield reduction to the

extent of 85 per cent. Being a long-duration crop, weeds flourish in many flushes and compete with the crop for nutrients, moisture, light, space etc., and also harbour insects, pests and diseases. Now, selective post emergence weedicides are available for weed control in cotton. Glyphosate is non selective, cheaper, broad spectrum and systemic weedicide. The selectivity of the chemical was achieved by directed spray by using protected shield. Thus, effective and cheaper method of weeding in cotton is need of the hour. Central Zone

The results of weed control experiment conducted at Banswara and Indore revealed that poly mulch recorded significantly higher plant height, number of monopodia and Sympodia plant -1 followed by weed free check, whereas lowest under weedy check. The significantly high seed cotton yield of 4251 and 3023 kg/ha and weed control efficiency of 97.21 and 73.60 % was recorded with polymulch at Banswara and Indore respectively. The treatment polymulch recorded lower weed dry matter production and the maximum weed dry matter accumulation was noted under weedy check. The economic evaluation indicated that polymulch was found more remunerative by giving net returns of Rs 1,53,696 and 1,23,576 /ha respectively at Banswara and Indore (Table 27). Table 27. Seed cotton yield, weed control efficiency (%) and net return (Rs/Ha) as influenced by Weed Management practices in Bt Cotton in Central Zone

Treatments

Banswara Indore

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

T1.Pendimethalin @ 0.75 to 1.0 kg a.i/ha as Pre emergence or Pre-plant incorporation + one hoeing

2148 30.2 69067 1529 57.0 60334

T2.Tank mixture (Quizalofopethyl 50 g a.i/ha+ Pyrithiobac Sodium @ 62.5g a.i/ha at 2-4 leaf stage of weeds +one hoeing.

3111 70.6 108810 1778 60.0 71263

T3.Chlorimuron Ethyl @ 4.0g a.i/ha as at 2-4 leaf stage weed + one hoeing

2531 68.5 87254 1443 58.6 56547

T4.T1 + Cover crop with sunnhemp or sorghum should be sown 20 DAS of cotton

3346 69.6 110956 1180 61.2 41055

T5.T1+ Glyphosate @ 5 ml/litre as directed spray at 2-4 weed leaf stage (after hoeing)

1455 66.5 35951 1804 58.4 73495

T6.T1 + T2 3780 72.1 136303 2018 59.2 82887

T7.T1+ T3 2895 67.9 101043 1792 60.7 73824

T8.Plastic mulching 4251 97.2 153696 3023 73.6 123576

T9.Weedy check 944 0.0 25900 763 0.0 22318

T10.Weed Free check 4053 100.0 143207 2843 100.0 119853

SEd 242 1.3 10883 22.33 0.6 5669

CD (5%) 593 3.1 26689 66.34 1.90 16842

D - 22


South zone

Weed control experimental results at Nandyal revealed that higher weed control efficiency (59.1 %) was recorded at 90 DAS with plastic mulching (T8) followed by T5 i.e. Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha as Pre em followed by glyphosate @ 5 ml/lit as directed spray at 2-4 weed leaf stage+ one hoeing(57.1). Significantly higher seed cotton yield (3235 kg/ha) was recorded with T5 (2778 kg/ha) and T8 Plastic mulching (2748 kg/ha) . The highest Gross returns (Rs 145560/ha), net returns(Rs 85060/ha) and B: C ratio(2.4) was recorded with T5 i.e. Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha as Pre em followed by glyphosate @ 5 ml/lit as direct spray at 2-4 weed leaf stage+ one hoeing.

The results of Chamrajnagar found that among weed management practices (T8) plastic mulching recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (2048 kg/ha), weed control efficiency ( 85.8 % ) and gross return (Rs 118799/ha) which was on par with (T6) pre emergence application of Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha followed by Tank mixture (Quizalofopethyl 50 g a.i/ha+ Pyrithiobac Sodium @ 62.5g a.i/ha) at 2-4 weed leaf stage + one hoeing (1934 kg/ha); which registered seed cotton yield of 1934 kg/ha , weed control efficiency of 83.6 % and gross return of Rs112195/ha. The cost of laying plastic mulch was high (Rs. 33188/ha) hence the treatment had not been registered higher net return which was with T6 (Rs 72409/ha).

Table 28. Seed cotton yield, weed control efficiency (%) and net return (Rs/Ha) as influenced by weed Management practices in Bt Cotton in South Zone

Treatments

Nandyal Chamrajnagar

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)

Net Return (Rs/ha)


2203 27.5 46495 1279 56.3 36720


2232 52.0 45476 1618 81.4 55383


2309 25.5 52125 1084 58.3 26093


2061 42.8 39941 1284 68.8 35810


2778 57.1 72510 1725 81.5 61633

T6.T1 + T2 2702 33.6 65505 1934 83.6 72409

T7.T1+ T3 2255 35.7 48581 1497 72.2 48757

T8.Plastic mulching 2748 59.1 49660 2048 85.8 50985

T9.Weedy check 1641 0 - 635 - 2190

T10.Weed Free check 3235 92.8 - 2083 87.3 75395

SEd 259 117.96 - 6841.9

CD (5%) 544 247.83 - 14374.3

D - 23


Agronomy III a: Improving use efficiency of inputs (water) Effective management of moisture can help to increase the productivity of cotton. Different mulches with drip irrigation were attempted to conserve and increase the efficiency of water in central zone.

The results revealed that soil moisture conservation methods showed significant improvement in water use efficiency, at Junagarh, Akola, Banswara and Indore. Poly mulching gave significantly higher seed cotton yield of 2197, 4451 and 3140 kg/ha over other treatments and control recorded the lowest yield of 1564, 2679 and 2250 kg/ha at Junagarh , Banswara and Indore respectively. Economical point of view, net return was highest in application of water through drip at poly mulch(T2) as compare to remaining treatments at Junagarh (Rs. 31707 Rs/ha), Banswara (Rs. 114410/- ha ) and Indore (Rs. 163678/ha). The highest water use efficiency of 4.19, 13.20 and 3.15 kg/ha-mm and water productivity of Rs 41.93, 45.98 and 14.7 /m3 was recorded with poly mulch at Junagarh , Banswara and Indore, respectively.

The results at Akola revealed that significant seed cotton yield (2206 Kg/ha) was recorded with bio- mulching (Crop residue 5 ton ha-1 on Broad Bed Furrow (BBF) with drip), which was at par with poly mulching on BBF with drip irrigation treatment. The seed cotton yield increased by 37 % in crop residue mulching over control. The WUE (4.88 kg ha mm-1), water productivity (211 Rs m-

3), Gross return (Rs 95,300 ha-1), net return (Rs. 51,893 ha-1) and benefit cost ratio (2.20) were maximum with crop residue mulching on BBF (Table 29).

Table 29. Seed cotton yield and net return (Rs/ha) as influenced by mulches in Central Zone

Treatments

Junagarh Akola Banswara Indore

Seed

cotton yield (kg/ ha)

Net return

(Rs/ ha)

Seed

cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Net return

(Rs/ ha)

Seed

cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Net return (Rs/ha)

Seed

cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Net return (Rs/ha)

T1. Control 1564 19859 1613 28306 2679 89556 2250 90030

T2. Poly mulch 2197 29473 2088 21834 4451 163678 3140 114410

T3: Polymulch on ridges and furrow with drip

1912 30653

T4. News paper mulch 1777 27698

2932 99944 2520 102990

T5. Crop residue mulch (5t/ha)

2025 36449 2206 51893 3951 152778 2710 114680

T6. Dust mulch by hoeing

1699 22315 1836 36795 3539 111636 2430 101160

SEd 120 - 90 3890 110.3 4964 67.1 7059

CD (5%) 369 - 277 11984 278.0 12509 206.8 21750

D - 24


Agronomy III(b): Enhancing Nitrogen use efficiency in Bt cotton

Adoption of Bt hybrids enhanced fertilizer use by 2.3 times from 98 to 222 kg/ha. Amongst different nutrients, rate of nitrogen use increased more. Hence intensive research enhance nitrogen use efficiency, by identifying method of application and incorporation of suitable legumes component to increase nitrogen use efficiency is gaining momentum in Bt cotton cultivation. North Zone

The results of enhancing nitrogen use efficiency in Bt cotton at Faridkot and Bathinda revealed that significantly higher seed cotton yield recorded under 100 % of RDN+ Foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (T7) as compared all other treatments; However, it was at par with T5 (75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)) and T6 (T5 + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)). Significantly least seed cotton yield was found in control (T1). Almost similar trend was found for monetary parameters viz., gross returns, net returns and B:C ratio . The result indicated the possibility of reducing 25 % N application to Bt cotton by making Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development by 75 % RDF + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) (Table 30).

Table 30. Seed cotton yield and net return (Rs/ha) as influenced by different methods of nitrogen application in North Zone

Tre

atm

en

ts Faridkot Bathinda Hisar Sriganganagar

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE (Kg/Kg of N)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE (Kg/Kg of

N)

Seed cotton Yield (kg/

ha)

NUE (Kg/Kg of

N)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE (Kg/Kg of N)

T1. 2091 - 1808 - 787 - 2923 -

T2. 3016 20.0 2923 19.5 1524 8.7 4428 29.5

T3. 2771 24.5 2402 21.4 1110 8.5 3905 34.7

T4. 2894 25.6 2618 23.3 1115 8.5 3882 34.5

T5. 3058 27.1 2798 24.8 1085 8.3 4009 35.6

T6. 3099 29.4 2950 24.7 1769 12.5 4112 36.6

T7. 3317 23.9

22.4 1706 13.0

-

T8. 3604 - 3427 - 13.0 -

T8. -

- 1862 14.2 3951 35.1

SEd 232.4 - 211 1.7 126 - 111 -

CD (5%)

498 - 460 NS 273 - 233 -

T1.N0 Control T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) T3.75 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) T4.75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) T5.75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) T6.T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) T7. T5 +Foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) T8. 100 % of RDN (2 splits as per Univ. Recd) + Foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (4 times: at weekly intervals during Flowering and Boll development) T8. T5+raising of Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

D - 25


In Hisar, seed cotton yield was significantly higher with 75 % of RDN in spot application of 4 Split and raising of Sunnhemp between rows incorporated before flowering (T9) and was at par with 75 % of RDN in spot application in 4 Split with foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (T7) and 75 % of RDN in spot application in 4 Split with foliar application of 1 % urea (T6). At Sriganganagar the recommended doses of fertilizer in two splits ie., Basal and Flowering gave the highest seed cotton yield (4427.70kg/ha) which was significantly superior over rest of the treatments

Central Zone

The results of experiment on enhancing Nitrogen use efficiency revealed that the treatment T7 : 75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 splits at Basal, squaring, Flowering and boll development) + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: squaring, Flowering and boll development) + raising of Sunnhemp/fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield of 2641, 1619 and 3414 kg/ha respectively at Rahuri, Khandwa and Banswara (Table 32). The same method of application (T7) recorded , maximum gross returns of Rs. 1,26,784 and 72,855 ha-1, net return of Rs. 59,537 and 32,300 ha-1 and B:C ratio 1.88 and 1.79 respectively at Rahuri and Khandwa. However, the results of Junagarh revealed that the treatment T6: 75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 splits at Basal, squaring, Flowering and boll development) + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: squaring, Flowering and boll development) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (2456 kg ha-1), maximum gross returns (Rs. 1,15,445 ha-1), net returns (Rs. 63,116 ha-1) and B:C ratio (2.21).

Table 31. Seed cotton yield and net return (Rs/ha) as influenced by different methods of nitrogen application in Central Zone

Treatments

Rahuri Junagarh Khandwa Banswara

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

Seed cotton Yield (kg/ ha)

NUE(Kg/Kg of

N)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 1434 18280 1734 0.0 954 5700 1068

T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

2044 36028 2109 8.79 1400 23540 2799


1828 27394 2018 11.21 1350 21540 2010

T4.75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

2009 35032 2086 11.59 1383 22859 2229

T5.75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

2140 40211 2101 11.67 1390 23137 2598

T6.T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

2432 51863 2456 13.65 1485 26935 2868

T7. T6+raising of Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

2641 59537 2343 13.02 1619 32299 3414

SEd 91.21 111 - 49 164

CD (5%) 258.3 343 - 150 409

D - 26


South Zone

The experiment was conducted to enhancing the nitrogen use efficiency for the Bt cotton revealed that significant higher seed cotton yield was obtained with Treatment, T7 (75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development + Foliar application of 1 % urea 3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development + raising of Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering) which recorded 2417 and 1749 kg/ha respectively at Raichur and Dharwad. The same method of N application (T7) resulted in significantly higher net returns (Rs.27,938 /ha) and N-use efficiency (23.32 kg/kg N) at Dharwad. In LAM, the method of N application, T6 (75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 splits at Basal, squaring, Flowering and boll development) + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: squaring, Flowering and boll development)) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (3132 kg/ha), maximum gross returns (Rs. 1,35,315 ha-1), net returns (Rs. 55,409/ha) and B:C ratio (1.69) . The significantly higher seed cotton yield (3325 kg/ha), gross returns (Rs 1,49,610/ha), net return (Rs 89,110/ha) and B: C ratio(2.5) were recorded with application of 100 % of RDN (Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering ( T2) at Nandyal (Table 32).

Table 32. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and net return (Rs/ha) as influenced by different methods of nitrogen application in South Zone

Treatments

Raichur LAM Nandyal Dharwad

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE ( Kg/Kg

of N)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE ( Kg/Kg

of N)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE ( Kg/Kg

of N)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

NUE ( Kg/Kg

of N)

T1.N0 Control 1839 - 2145 - 2111 - 1202 -


1934 10.74 3022 20.15 3325 10.2 1692 16.9


1988 14.73 2618 23.27 2894 11.9 1640 21.8


2287 16.94 2654 23.59 2623 10.8 1645 21.9


2359 17.47 2673 23.75 2601 10.7 1665 22.2


2393 17.72 3132 27.84 2594 10.4 1680 22.4


2417 17.90 3109 27.64 2455 9.9 1749 23.3

SEd 63 169 285 68 0.9

CD (5%) 184 372

620

209 2.7

D - 27


Agronomy IV: Technology for organic cotton Production North Zone

The organic nutrient management packages including seed treatment, soil application of recommended bio fertilizers, foliar application of pink pigmented facultative methylotrops (PPFM) at flowering, soil application of Neem cake @ 250 kg/ha and raising of Sunnhemp between rows incorporated before flowering (T10) registered significantly higher seed cotton yield (1728 kg/ha) and organic carbon content (0.44 %) at Khanpur. However, higher net return (Rs36,084/ha) was calculated with T9 includes soil application of recommended bio fertilizers, foliar application of pink pigmented facultative methylotrops (PPFM) at flowering with raising of Sunnhemp between rows incorporated before flowering (Table 33). At Sriganganagar , application of 100 % RDF of nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis gave better yield ( 2222 kg/ha) over control and rest of the treatments except with seed treatment and soil applications of recommended bio fertilizers and foliar PPFM + neem cake @250 kg/ha ( 2082 kg/ha) (T8). Table 33.Seed cotton yield as influenced by organic nutrient management packages in North Zone

Treatment schedule Sriganganagar Kanpur

T1.Absolute control (No organic & Inorganic) 1333 1162

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 2041 1316

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 2222 1481

T4. Seed treatment and soil application of rec. bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM

1827 1460

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 1630 1460

T6.Raising of .Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

1794 1563

T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 1630 1501

T8.T4+T5 2082 1666

T9.T4+T6 1918 1728

T10.T4+T5+T6 1942 1728

T11: T4+ T5 + T7 1877 1563

SEd 110.6 114.7

CD at 5 % 217 240

Central Zone

The result of nutrient management through organics revealed that significantly higher seed cotton yield was recorded with package includes application of 100 % RDF of nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis (T3) at Banswara (2303 kg/ha), Akola (1775 kg/ha), Rahuri (1598 kg/ha), Bhawanipatna (1580 kg/ha) , Indore (1020 kg/ha) and Nanded (711 kg/ha). The same method realised higher net return at Rahuri (Rs 13,002/ha) and Bhawanipatna (Rs35,209/ha) and also improved organic carbon status (0.62%) at Bhawanipatna

D - 28


Soil application of recommended bio fertilizers, foliar application of pink pigmented

facultative methylotrops (PPFM) at flowering, soil application of Neem cake @ 250 kg/ha and raising of Sunnhemp between rows incorporated before flowering (T10) registered significantly higher seed cotton yield at Khandwa ( 1200 kg/ha) and maintained the higher organic carbon status (0.59 % ) at Indore. The packages including Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilizers, foliar application of pink pigmented facultative methylotrops (PPFM) at flowering, soil application of Neem cake 250 kg/ha and Intercropping with green gram / black gram / ground nut / soybean (T11) registered significantly higher seed cotton yield at Junagarh ( 1387 kg/ha) and Surat (836 kg/ha) (Table 34) .

Intercropping with green gram / black gram / ground nut / soybean alone (T7) was found to be the most profitable in terms of net return at Akola (Rs 54,127/ha), Indore (Rs 33,995/ha), Khandwa (Rs16,100) and Nanded (Rs 20,991/ha). Table 34. Seed cotton yield as influenced by organic nutrient management packages in CZ

Treatment schedule

Ako

la

Ban

swar

a

Bh

awan

i

pat

na

Ind

ore

Jun

agar

h

Kh

and

wa

Nan

de

d

Rah

uri

Sura

t

T1. 1090 436 924 690 1147 670 466 779 553

T2. 1645 2669 1614 1300 1162 1025 921 1673 1094

T3. 1775 2303 1580 1020 1365 900 711 1598 758

T4. 1347 1348 1066 850 1189 838 660 905 645

T5. 1400 1436 1169 860 1283 800 501 915 603

T6. 1427 1290 1113 910 1242 800 383 891 661

T7. 1267 1065 1010 800 1250 665 422 845 668

T8.T4+T5 1495 1938 1403 850 1304 900 702 1286 658

T9.T4+T6 1441 1717 1356 900 1301 951 404 1074 728

T10.T4+T5+T6 1543 2279 1434 860 1182 1200 432 1406 795

T11: T4+ T5 + T7 1293 2012 1341 855 1387 1010 476 1294 836

CD at 5 % 218.8 111.91 150.9 101.4 NS 74.2 117.7 254.9 161.0

T1.Absolute control (No organic & Inorganic) T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis T4. Seed treatment and soil application of rec. bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha T6.Raising of .Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean

D - 29


South Zone

The organic nutrient management packages including seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilizers, foliar application of pink pigmented facultative methylotrops (PPFM) at flowering, soil application of Neem cake @250 kg/ha and intercropping of black gram (T11) had registered significantly higher seed cotton yield at LAM (1228 kg/ha). The same package gave high net return (Rs 73,589/ha) at Dharwad (Table 35). The nutrient management method of application of recommended dose of nutrients through organics, based on P equivalent basis (T3) recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield (2172 kg/ha) than other organic treatments at Dharwad (2172 kg/ha) and Nandyal (888 kg/ha). Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM , application of neem cake 250 kg/ha and raising of sunnhemp between rows and incorporated before flowering (T10) recorded higher yield of 1067 and 1701 kg/ha, net return of Rs9600 and 31540/ha respectively in Coimbatore and Srivilliputhur. The same treatment maintained the higher organic carbon content (0.66 %) at Coimbatore. Table 35.Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by organic nutrient management packages in South Zone

Treatment schedule Dharwad LAM Nandyal Srivilliputtur Coimbatore

T1.Absolute control (No organic & Inorganic)

958 874 476 1222 689

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 2769 1535 903 1790 1865

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis

2172 1124 888 1496 965

T4. Seed treatment and soil application of rec. bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM

1785 893 795 1336 849

T5.Neem cake @250 kg/ha 1781 1112 675 1385 923

T6.Raising of .Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

1671 1068 568 1416 871

T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean

994

879 544 1311 842

T8.T4+T5 1910 1224 649 1427 963

T9.T4+T6 1733 1077 697 1451 905

T10.T4+T5+T6 2010 1210 641 1701 1067

T11: T4+ T5 + T7 1432

1228 823 1627 1001

CD at 5 % 388 251 144 173.3 145

D - 30


Agronomy V: Conservation agriculture in cotton based cropping system

The first year result of conservation treatments revealed that different conservation agriculture practices, permanent bed system + zero tillage with no residue management (T5) produced significantly higher seed cotton yield (2542 kg/ha) and stalk yield (5497 kg/ha) which was statistically at par with Permanent bed system + Zero tillage+ 50 % residue management (T6) in case of seed cotton yield. The highest gross return (Rs1,19,472/ha), net return (Rs62,153/ha) and B:C ratio (2.08) were observed in treatment T5 at Junagarh (Table 36). At Srivilliputhur, as this is the first crop of the cropping system, and there was no significant effect was observed on all the growth, yield parameters and seed cotton yield.

Table 36. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by conservation treatments at Junagarh

Treatments

Coimbatore Junagarh

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Gross return

(Rs/ ha)

Net Return

(Rs/ ha)

MBCR

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Gross return (Rs/ha)

Net Return (Rs/ha)

MBCR

T1.Conventional tillage+ No residue management

1882 86572 35772 1.70 2115 99391 43054 1.76

T2.Zero tillage+ No residue management

1915 88090 37290 1.73 1723 80988 29227 1.56

T3.Zero tillage+ 50 % residue management

1943 89378 38578 1.76 2074 97495 43890 1.82

T4.Zero tillage+ 100 % residue management

1974 90804 40004 1.79 2050 96359 42881 1.80

T5.Permanent bed system + Zero tillage + No residue management

2012 92552 40352 1.77 2542 119472 62153 2.08

T6.Permanent bed system + Zero tillage+ 50 % residue management

1995 91770 39570 1.76 2180 102482 47061 1.85


2028 93288 41088 1.79 2031 95472 40834 1.75

SEd 74.2

135 - - -

CD (5%) NS

416 - - -

Agronomy VI: Labour saving techniques in Cotton cultivation

Cotton is a labour intensive crop. Mechanization in Cotton cultivation is far behind in comparison to other crops like wheat, maize, sunflower, including rice. However, implements and machineries are developed and available for seed bed preparation, sowing, weeding, interculture and plant protection. The mechanization technologies available for cotton can be used in combination with chemicals for weeding and drip for irrigation to reduce the cost of cultivation and at the same time to alleviate the labour problem and hence, the same was attempted here.

D - 31


Central Zone

Labour saving trial results revealed that significantly higher seed cotton yield at Kanpur (1900 kg/ha), Akola (1580kg/ha), Surat (3745 kg/ha) and Nanded (2429kg/ha) were recorded with practice of having land shaping by machine with poly mulch under rainfed condition (T7) (Table 37). The same labour saving practice registered higher net return at Kanpur (Rs37,650/ha) and Akola(Rs22,443/ha). In Bhawanipatna, the results revealed that significantly higher seed cotton yield (3274 kg/ha) , net return (Rs 1,03,456/), B:C ratio (3.73) and least man days (126.7 man days/ha) required were reported with labour saving treatment T6 which has land shaping by machine, pre and post emergence weed control, intercultural operation by animal drawn and spraying by power sprayer .The same labour saving practice (T6) had lowest labour requirement at Surat , Akola (70 man days/ha) and Nanded (113 man days/ha) also. The highest net return was found in treatment T5 includes Land shaping by machine, pre and post emergence application and intercultural operation (harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn at Surat (Rs. 1,50,325/ha) and Nanded (Rs45,978/ha) (Table 37).

Table 37. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), labour used (Man days/ha) and Net return (Rs/ha) as influenced by Labour saving practices in Central Zone

Kanpur Surat Akola Bhawanipatna Nanded

Tre

atm

en

ts

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Labour used

(No./ha)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ ha)

Labour used (No./ ha)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ ha)


Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ ha)


T1. 1393 144 2943 866 87 2655 194.3 1697 157

T2. 1417 128 3198 993 91 2714 183.7 1829 162

T3. 1305 83 3225 1101 82 2738 165.7 1766 123

T4. 1578 86 3494 1162 71 2781 149.0 1916 133

T5. 1330 86 3685 1261 74 3216 132.0 1941 129

T6. 1355 84 3641 1325 70 3274 126.7 1899 113

T7. 1900 91 3745 1580 104 3112 162.3 2428 139

SEd 58.52 - 73.35 37 68.81 1.58 78.6 3.0

CD (5%)

127.51 - 226 113 211.9 4.88 238.5 8.0

T1.Control T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine T3.T2+ post emergence application T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application T5.T4+intercultural operation (harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn T6. T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers (operated by tractor/power tiller/others) T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre)

D - 32


South Zone

The results on labour saving techniques adoption in Coimbatore under irrigated condition found that adoption of drip fertigation with polymulch (T9) registered significantly higher seed cotton yield (2348 kg/ha), net return (Rs 60,204/ha) and less labour used as compared to control. Optimum labour saving techniques arrived for Bt cotton under rainfed condition found that the significantly higher seed cotton yield recorded at Raichur (2624 kg/ha) and Nandyal (3041 kg/ha) with land shaping by machine + Poly mulch (T7). The same practice ( T7) registered significantly highest net return (Rs 88961/ha ) and benefit cost ratio (2.69) at Raichur and least labour required (80 man days/ha) at Nandyal (Table 38). In LAM, labour saving treatment (T6) with land shaping by machine, pre and post emergence for weed control , intercultural operation by animal drawn with spraying by tractor/power tiller operated sprayer registered significantly higher seed cotton yield (2829 kg/ha) , net return (Rs 20379/), B:C ratio (1.84) and least man days (115 man days/ha) required for cotton cultivation.

Table 38. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), labour used (Man days/ha) and Net return (Rs/ha) as influenced by Labour saving practices

Coimbatore Raichur LAM Nandyal

Tre

atm

en

ts

SCY (kg/ ha)

NR (Rs/ ha)

SCY (kg/ ha)

NR (Rs/ ha)

Labour used

(No/ha)

SCY (kg/ ha)


NR (Rs/ ha)

SCY (kg/ ha)


NR (Rs/ ha)

T1. 2159 40632 2085 62637 124 2204 232 21212 2043 137 31450

T2. 1926 30948 2148 66275 122 2189 197 22676 2699 135 59970

T3. 1879 32192 2250 71940 99 2201 191 22605 2299 119 46947

T4. 1937 41476 2423 81725 80 2356 188 27459 2633 96 65860

T5. 2059 48832 2471 83481 80 2793 183 45629 2334 97 55412

T6. 1992 46116 2539 86153 73 2930 115 57877 2084 98 44170

T7.

2624 88961 102 2829 171 20379 3041 80 62860

T8. 2212 52676

-

T9. 2348 60204

-

SEd 123

88 4741 - 112 3.89 5500 239

CD (5%)

264

255 13781 - 349 8.57 12117 521

T1.Control T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine T3.T2+ post emergence application T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application T5.T4+intercultural operation (harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn T6. T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers (operated by tractor/power tiller/others) T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) T8.T6 + drip fertigation (only for irrigated centres) T9.Drip fertigation+ poly mulch (only for irrigated centres)

D - 33


Agronomy VII Canopy management in HDPS cotton under high fertility condition

North Zone The canopy management results revealed that mepiquat chloride application 20 g a.i./ha.

at 60 and 75 DAS (G3) registered significantly higher yield at Faridkot (2341 kg/ha ), Bathinda (2393 kg/ha), Hisar (2985 kg/ha) and Sriganganagar (3270 kg/ha) than control . The same treatment (G3) reduced the largest sympodial length (cm) @ 28.3, 22.2 and 16.2 per cent as compared to control respectively with Faridkot , Bathinda and Hisar. However, the effect was on par with mepiquat @20 g ai /ha at 60 days after sowing Faridkot , Bathinda , Hisar and Sriganganagar (Table 39).

Table 39.Largest sympodial length (cm) and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by growth retardant and nutrient levels in North Zone

Treatments

Largest sympodial length (cm) Seed cotton yield (kg/ha)

N1.100%RDF

N2.125%RDF

N3.150%RDF

Mean N1.

100% RDF

N2. 125% RDF

N3.150% RDF

Mean

Faridkot

G1.Control 74.2 85.6 89.6 83.1 2111 1898 1896 1968

G2.Mepiquat chloride application 20 g a.i./ha. at 60 DAS

60.3 63.1 72.6 65.3 2413 2249 1970 2211

G3.Mepiquat chloride application 20 g a.i./ha. at 60 and 75 DAS

51.6 61.6 65.3 59.5 2567 2427 2028 2341

Mean 62.0 70.1 75.8

2363 2191 1965

ANOVA GR N dose GRXN

GR N dose GRXN

CD (5%) 10.0 NS NS

187 187 NS

Bathinda

G1.Control 58 66 64 63 1963 2173 2105 2080


48 54 55 52 2169 2549 2314 2344


45 50 52 49 2221 2543 2416 2393

Mean 50 57 57

2118 2421 2278


GR N dose GRXN

CD (5%) 4 4 NS

235 235 NS

Hisar

G1.Control 32.2 23.3 31.7 29 2562 2667 2816 2682


30.7 30 29.8 30.1 2667 2911 2928 2835


23.7 23.5 25.9 24.3 2816 3000 3142 2985

Mean 28.8 25.6 29.1

2682 2931 2990


GR N dose GRXN

CD (5%) 2.8 2.8 4.8

108.9 108.9 188.7

Sriganganagar

G1.Control 20.62 19.65 20.19 20.15 3149 3012 2833 2998


21.61 20.63 20.83 21.02 2888 3393 3437 3239


19.48 21.66 19.78 20.30 3343 3201 3266 3270

Mean 20.57 20.64 20.26 20.57 3127 3202 3179


GR N dose GRXN

CD (5%) 0.19 0.19 0.57

39 39 118

D - 34


Agronomy VIII. Testing of product developed from human hair by Bio- processing and Herbal Division of Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization

The results revealed that application of human hair product under evaluation at either of the two doses could not give any significant impact on seed cotton yield and other growth and yield parameters at Faridkot, Bathinda , Sriganganagar, Bhawanipatna, Coimbatore and LAM. In contrary to that application of NPK at recommended dose + Spraying @ 9 ml/l of human hair product at two times on 65-70 and 80-90 days after sowing (T2) registered significantly increased seed cotton yield at Khandwa (1072 kg/ha) and Banswara (3385 kg/ha) as compared to control ( application of NPK at recommended dose). However, the effect was on par with application of NPK at recommended dose + Spray two times of human hair product at 65-70 and 80-90 days after sowing @ 6 ml/l (T1) both at Khandwa (1063 kg/ha) and Banswara (3210 kg/ha) (Table 40).

Table 40. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by spraying of human hair product in NZ Treatments T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 SE d CD (5%)

Faridkot 2834 2972 2933 2946

3224 2993 1879 192.3 419

Bathinda 3118 3254 3071 3159

3602 3303 1878 232 505

Sriganganagar 4533 4605 4239 4109 4554

4504 2951 356 747

Khandwa 1063 1072 969 971 980

983 686 7 20

Bhawanipatna 1733 2132 2075 2061 1923

1828 1064 109 335

Banswara 3210 3385 2593 2691 3012

2963 1141 187 465

Coimbatore 1961 1973 1952 1985 2118

2044 891 100.8 219

LAM 2967 3045 2896 3017 2871

3106 2103 220 484

T1.NPK + 2 Spray 65-70 and 80-90 DAS @ 6 ml/l T2. NPK + 2Spray 65-70 and 80-90 DAS @ 9 ml/l T3.NPK (control) T4.NPK + Water spray at 65-70 and 80-90 DAS T5.NPK + PGR’s two sprays at 65-70 and 80-90 DAS T6. NPK + 2% KNO3 (4 sprays at BD T7.NPK + Nutrient equivalent of Human hair by urea at 65-70 and 80-90 DAS T8. Control (no fertilizer)

Agronomy IX. Paid trial 1. Efficacy testing of Super absorbent ( UPDT ) trial- protocol of UPL limited

The experiment on efficacy testing of Super absorbent was conducted under rainfed condition in central zone at Surat, Akola, Nanded and Khandwa with two dose (12.5 and 18 kg/ha) of super absorbent in two times of deep placement (sowing and 30 DAS) and combined with moisture conservation methods (insitu and control). The results of the experiment revealed that the significantly higher seed cotton yield recorded with application super absorbent @ 18 kg/ha (S3) as compared to control (S1) at Akola ( 1504 kg/ha), Nanded (2033 kg/ha) and Khandwa (1104 kg/ha); However the result was on par with application of reduced dose of super absorbent@ 12.5 kg/ha (S2) at Akola ( 1431 kg/ha), Nanded (1935 kg/ha) and Khandwa (1082 kg/ha). Between times of application (sowing and 30 DAS) there were no significant differences observed in all three

D - 35


centres. In Surat, results indicated that growth and yield parameters did not improve significantly by application of super absorbent (Table 41).

Table 41.Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent in Central Zone

Treatments M1.Insitu soil moisture conservation M2.Control

M1 M2 T1 T2 Mean T1 Sowing T2 30 DAS T1 Sowing T230 DAS

Surat

S1 2045 2006 1906 1947 2025 1927 1976 1977 1976

S2 2191 2160 2062 1983 2176 2023 2127 2072 2099

S3 2339 2300 2011 2042 2320 2027 2175 2171 2173

Mean 2192 2155 1993 1991 2174 1992 2093 2073

ANOVA M T S MxT MxS SxT MxSxT

SE d 53.4 51.2 52.6 72.4 74.4 74.4 105.2

CD (5%) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

Akola

S1 1276 1280 1107 1139 1278 1123 1191 1209 1221

S2 1477 1605 1212 1431 1541 1321 1344 1518 1431

S3 1550 1655 1308 1504 1603 1406 1429 1580 1504

Mean 1434 1513 1209 1358 1474 1283 1321 1436 1385


SE d 36 48 56 67 79 79 112

CD (5%) 155 132 119 NS NS NS NS

Nanded

S1 1920 1954 1491 1694 1937 1593 1706 1824 1765

S2 2039 2135 1654 1910 2087 1782 1847 2023 1935

S3 2116 2182 1764 2070 2149 1917 1940 2127 2033

Mean 2025 2091 1637 1892 2058 1764 1831 1991 1911


SE d 9.6 23.2 33.9 32.9 47.9 47.9 67.7

CD (5%) 58.4 91.1 101.3 128.8 N.S. N.S. N.S.

Khandwa

S1 989 1227 799 847 1108 823 894 1037 989

S2 1082 1263 831 973 1173 902 956 1118 1082

S3 1104 1280 751 880 1192 816 927 1080 1104

Mean 1058 1257 794 900 1157 847 926 1079 1058


SE d 12.6 NS 20.9 4.8 48.3 NS NS

CD (5%) 54.4

44.3 13.4 102.3

S1. Super absorbent @0 kg/ha; S2.Super absorbent@ 12.5kg/ha; S3.Super absorbent@18 kg/ha

D - 36


PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY

PHY.1. Exp1: Screening of Cotton genotypes for abiotic stress tolerance Phy 1a: Screening of G. hirsutum cotton genotypes for drought tolerance Centre: Lam, GUNTUR

Amongst genotypes tested for drought tolerance, significant variation was noticed in number of sympodia per plant, number of bolls per plant, boll weight and seed cotton yield per plant. The entries viz; CPD 1602, GSHV 520, GSHV-523, L 604, SIMA-5 and TCH- 1199 recorded higher seed cotton yield under need based irrigated conditions, whereas the entries viz; CPD 1602, GSHV 520, GSHV-523, PH- 071, SIMA-5 and TCH-327 recoded higher seed cotton yield under rainfed conditions. From the experimental results, it is inferred that the entries viz; CPD 1602, GSHV 520, GSHV-523, PH- 071, SIMA-5 and TCH-327 have shown good performance under rain fed conditions with their inbuilt tolerance to drought having more than two contributing characters of drought tolerance in addition to yield attributing characters under low moisture conditions.

Table 42: Performance of genotypes under rainfed and need based irrigated conditions - LAM

Name of the Parameter

Need based irrigated conditions Rainfed conditions

Relative water content

CPD 1602, GSHV 520, GSHV-523, L 604, SIMA-5 and TCH- 1199.

CPD 1602, GSHV 520, GSHV-523, PH- 071, SIMA-5 and TCH-327.

Specific leaf weight (SLW)

CCH-16-1, CPD 1601, GSH 477, GSHV-523, L 604, L 799, RB 611, RB

617 and RHC 1202.

ARBH 1601, CCH-16-1, CPD 1601, GISV-185, GSH 477, GSHV-518, GSHV-523, PH

1071 and TSH 327.

Specific leaf Area (SLA)

CCH-16-1, CPD 1601, GSH 477, GSHV-523, L 604, L 799, RB 617 and

RHC 1202.

CCH-16-1, CPD 1601, GISV-185, GSH 497, GSHV-523, GSHV-518, PH 1071, RS 2835

and TSH 327.

SCMR CCH 16-1, CPD 1602, GSH 477,

GSHV 523 and SIMA-5. CCH 16-1, GSHV 497, L 1060 and RB 616.

Canopy Temperature

AR 1908, L 1384, L 604 and L 799 AKH 1301, AR 1908, GSH 477, GSHV 497,

GSHV 523, L 1060 and RB 610.

Chlorophyll Stability Index

AKH 1301, ARBH 1601, L 799, PH 1071, RB 611 and SIMA-5.

ARBH 1601, PH 1071, RB 611, RHC 1202, SIMA-5 and TCH-1199.

Seed cotton yield (Kg/ha)

GSHV477, GSHV 520, L 604, RB 610, RB 611 and RB 616.

ARBH 1601, CPD 1602, GSH 477 GSHV 520, RB 611 and RB 616.

UAS, Dharwad

Genotypes differed significantly for seed cotton yield across water regimes. The highest yield was recorded by CPD-1652 (1704 kg/ha) followed by Sahana (1597 kg/ha) and CPD-1651 (1556 kg/ha). The lowest yield was with RAH-1070 (677 kg/ha) followed by GIHV-520 (825 kg/ha), GJHV-497 ( (886 kg/ha), RB-611 (881 kg/ha) and GJHV497(886 kg/ha). Among the interaction effects, the highest yield recorded with CPD-1652 (1882 kg/ha) followed by Sahana (1848 kg/ha),

D - 37


ARBH-1651(1833 kg/ha) and CPD-1651 (1828 kg/ha) under rainfed and the lowest was with NDLH-1938 (514 kg/ha) under irrigated condition. Leaf relative water content (RWC) differed significantly for water regimes, genotypes and their interaction. Mean RWC was significantly more (76.43%) in irrigated compared to rainfed (69.42%) situation. Among the genotypes the highest RWC was with CPD-1652 (77.41%) followed by Suraj (76.42) and l-1060 (76.08%) and the lowest RWC was in ARBH-1651 (67.84%) followed by CPD-1651 (69.64%). Mean photosynthetic rate was significantly higher in irrigated compared to rainfed condition. Among the genotypes, significantly higher mean photosynthetic rate was recorded by Sahana (24.75 µmol m-2 sec-1) followed by RAH-1070 (23.9 µmol m-2 sec-1) and PH-1071 (23.7 µmol m-2 sec-1). The lowest was with AKH-1301 (15.59 µmol m-2 sec-1) followed by CPD-1652 (16.26 µmol m-2 sec-1) and RB-611 (16.53 µmol m-2 sec-1). Among the interaction effect, the highest photosynthetic rate was with RAH-1070 (28.36 µmol m-2 sec-1) and the lowest rate was with AKH-1301 (11.30 µmol m-2 sec-1) under rainfed condition (Table 43).

Among all the genotypes including checks, the three genotypes viz., CPD-1652, Sahana, CPD-1651 and ARBH-1651 recorded the highest seed cotton yield both under irrigated and rainfed conditions. The genotypes viz., NDLH-1938 (-152%), RB-610 (-150%), RB-611 (-121%) and CNH-09-77 (-120%) showed maximum yield reduction under irrigated compared rainfed condition. Based on biplot analysis for drought susceptibility index (DSI) and mean yield of genotypes, eight genotypes viz., CPD-1652, Sahana, CPD-1651, GJHV-523, RAH-1071, L-1060, CNH-7012 and NDLH-2027 are found to be drought tolerant genotypes.

D - 38


Table 43- Relative water content (%), Photosynthetic rate (µmol m-2 sec-1) and Seed cotton yield in cotton genotypes under different water regimes

Genotypes RWC (%)

Photosynthetic rate (µmol m-2 sec-1)

Seed Cotton Yield (kg/ha) % Yield Reduction

DSI

Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean

AKH-1301 83.9 59.3 71.6 19.9 11.3 15.6 769 1024 897 -33.2 0.56

RB-610 77.4 64.8 71.1 22.9 17.4 20.2 539 1347 943 -150.0 2.52

RB-611 79.3 66.3 72.8 17.6 15.5 16.5 548 1214 881 -121.4 2.04

CPD-1651 72.5 66.8 69.6 18.7 13.5 16.1 1284 1828 1556 -42.4 0.71

CPD-1652 82.0 72.8 77.4 19.3 13.2 16.3 1526 1882 1704 -23.3 0.39

ARBH-1651

66.5 69.2 67.8 23.0 18.7 20.9 1017 1833 1425 -80.3 1.35

L-1060 83.0 69.2 76.1 23.4 15.3 19.4 867 1194 1030 -37.8 0.64

PH-1071 76.0 65.9 70.9 22.5 24.9 23.7 848 1146 997 -35.1 0.59

NDLH-2027

81.9 67.7 74.8 20.8 18.3 19.6 895 1350 1123 -50.9 0.85

NDLH-2030-2

74.8 70.4 72.6 21.1 17.8 19.5 674 1181 927 -75.2 1.26

RAH-1070 75.8 67.0 71.4 19.4 28.4 23.9 626 727 677 -16.1 0.27

RAH-1071 75.5 68.3 71.9 21.1 22.2 21.6 891 1187 1039 -33.3 0.56

BGDS-1072

75.6 67.2 71.4 23.3 20.6 21.9 843 1595 1219 -89.3 1.50

CCH-16-3 72.8 72.9 72.9 25.9 11.9 18.9 1055 1777 1416 -68.5 1.15

Suraj (QC) 81.8 71.0 76.4 21.2 21.2 21.2 872 1502 1187 -72.3 1.21

NDLH-1938 (ZC)

76.3 73.4 74.8 23.3 12.9 18.1 514 1296 905 -152.4 2.56

Sahana (LC)

75.4 75.0 75.2 21.9 27.6 24.8 1346 1848 1597 -37.2 0.63

CNH-7012 71.7 69.7 70.7 21.2 21.2 21.2 876 1290 1083 -47.3 0.80

CNH-09-77 68.0 77.0 72.5 17.6 15.5 16.5 561 1236 898 -120.4 2.02

GJHV-497 78.5 69.5 74.0 21.1 17.8 19.5 699 1072 886 -53.2 0.89

GJHV-520 75.7 75.4 75.5 23.3 12.9 18.1 535 1115 825 -108.4 1.82

GJHV-523 77.0 68.6 72.8 20.8 18.3 19.6 894 1158 1026 -29.5 0.50

Mean 76.4 69.4 21.3 18.0 849 1355

SM(M

)

Gen

oty

pe(

S)

Inte

ract

ion

SM(M

)

Ge

no

typ

e(S

)

Inte

ract

ion

SM(M

)

Ge

no

typ

e(S

)

Inte

ract

ion

SEm 0.1 1.8 2.5 0.1 0.6 0.9 13.7 65.0 90.9

CD (5%) 0.5 5.0 7.0 0.7 1.7 2.4 83.1 182.8 255.5

HAU, Hisar

Screening of G. hirsutum cotton genotypes for drought tolerance found that proline content increased significantly in most of genotypes, whereas, the relative water content (RWC) and specific leaf weight (SLW) were found to decrease in moisture stress condition as compared to irrigated condition . The highest and lowest proline content was observed in H 1506 and H 1508 genotype, respectively, under moisture stress condition. The genotypes H 1489, H 1506 and H 1480 showed maximum increase in proline content under moisture stress condition as compared to

D - 39


irrigated control (Table 44). The relative water content and specific leaf weight was found to decline significantly in most of genotypes under moisture stress condition as compared to irrigated condition. However, least decline was observed in H 1489, H 1480, H 1506 and H 1524 genotypes for both the characters. Higher CSI was observed for genotypes H 1489, H 1480, H 1506 and H 1524. The genotypes H 1518 showed the highest seed cotton yield under both irrigated and moisture stress conditions, respectively.

Among the 17 genotypes screened for drought tolerance, H 1480 followed by H 1472, H

1523, H 1524, H 1489, HS 294 and H 1491 genotypes recorded significantly higher seed cotton yield under moisture stress condition. The genotypes, H 1489, H 1524 and H 1506 were known for drought tolerance because of high degree indices for YSI, CSI and proline content and very less reduction RWC, SLW and seed cotton yield under stress condition.

Table 44. Stress indices and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes under different water regimes at Hisar

Genotypes Chlorophyll

stability index

RWC (%) Proline content

µmoles/gm tissue

Seed cotton yield (kg/ha)

SLW (mg/cm2)

IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A)

RF (A)

H 1480 93.24 73.83 73.06 1.40 2.89 1,920.71 1,890.39 7.84 7.36

H 1464 87.84 75.57 74.64 1.91 3.15 2,443.95 2,362.47 9.24 8.68

H 1471 74.08 72.48 70.59 1.60 2.30 1,960.14 1,771.55 8.34 7.38

H 1472 60.89 77.61 76.53 2.50 2.88 2,729.14 2,475.66 9.32 8.58

H 1489 95.40 75.78 75.41 1.12 2.68 2,444.87 2,428.17 9.13 8.79

H 1491 64.39 73.44 72.02 1.26 1.72 2,107.84 1,905.68 8.41 7.44

H 1506 93.48 72.39 71.89 1.80 3.32 2,061.85 2,032.37 8.84 8.46

H 1508 51.06 72.06 69.93 1.24 1.40 1,778.33 1,429.43 8.23 7.20

H1518 74.57 78.57 77.42 1.53 2.30 2,916.62 2,740.26 9.38 8.58

H1519 74.61 72.29 70.71 1.15 2.17 1,748.61 1,619.78 7.23 6.56

H1520 80.57 71.97 69.85 1.78 2.83 1,906.94 1,774.58 8.25 7.34

H 1521 86.70 71.08 68.93 1.91 3.08 1,666.80 1,574.56 7.70 6.71

H 1522 77.72 74.55 72.22 1.09 2.10 2,023.26 1,919.91 7.76 6.57

H 1523 81.69 77.26 75.28 1.40 2.12 2,628.03 2,517.43 9.29 8.41

H 1524 94.27 76.71 76.28 1.17 2.73 2,620.78 2,596.84 9.26 8.91

HS 294 64.76 74.98 72.41 1.85 2.20 2,359.46 2,097.18 8.64 7.37

H 1098i 76.64 75.32 74.04 1.34 1.90 2,206.84 1,961.62 8.43 7.71

Mean 74.46 73.01 1.53 2.45 2,207.30 2,064.58 8.55 7.77

A 1.42 0.03 NS 0.46

B 4.15 0.08 474.05 1.35

Factor (A X B) NS 0.12 NS NS

D - 40


Surat

Screening of G. hirsutum L. cotton genotypes for drought tolerance at Surat revealed that difference for relative water content (RWC), SLW (Specific Leaf weight) and SLA (Specific Leaf Area) were significant due to genotypes in both conditions. Seed cotton yield was the highest in genotypes GISV-319 and GSHV-199 followed by GJHV-497 in moisture stress and irrigated conditions. Photosynthesis rate, Conductance, Transpiration rate and SPAD value were significantly deviated among genotypes in both conditions. As well as total chlorophyll content and proline content were significant due to genotypes under drought and irrigated conditions. Reducing sugar was found high in genotype ARBB-1401(11.12 mg/g of tissue) and low in Suraj (3.30 mg/g of tissue) under rainfed condition whereas it was the highest in G.Cot-16 under irrigated condition. Chlorophyll stability and Protein Content were significantly differed among all genotypes in drought and irrigated conditions. Chlorophyll stability index was found significantly high in CPD-1702, RHC-1346 and GSHV-199 under drought condition and CPD-1702 and GJHV-523 under irrigated condition (Table 45).

Table 45. Chlorophyll stability index, Relative water content (%), Proline content (mg/gm tissue), SLW (mg/cm2) and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) in cotton genotypes under different water regimes at Surat

Genotypes Chlorophyll

stability index

RWC (%) Proline content

mg/gm tissue


SLW (mg/cm2)

IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A)

GJHV-497 88.68 85.93 92.23 0.78 0.93 2104 1614 1.00 1.00

GJHV-520 91.54 88.24 87.69 0.66 0.52 1994 1480 0.77 0.77

GJHV-523 91.39 90.97 87.18 0.65 0.30 1714 1288 0.73 0.73

CPD-1702 95.38 88.73 86.93 0.52 0.28 1962 1486 0.86 0.86

GISV-319 91.13 96.77 86.37 0.41 0.17 2572 1944 0.85 0.85

RHC-1346 94.68 89.74 85.92 0.62 0.38 1635 1209 0.63 0.63

GSHV-199 94.30 88.29 88.77 0.64 0.27 2453 1696 0.86 0.86

ARBB-1401 87.40 94.41 86.04 0.87 0.56 866 819 0.68 0.68

LRA-5166 85.19 92.30 87.94 0.82 0.20 1477 1109 0.73 0.73

G.Cot-16 92.78 88.81 82.00 0.57 0.23 1455 1428 0.77 0.77

Suraj 88.76 87.12 82.78 0.43 0.92 1101 948 0.58 0.58

SE d 1.41 0.95 1.37 0.023 0.020 260.2 208.7 0.012 0.01

CD (5%) 2.97 2.01 2.89 0.048 0.042 546.6 438.3 0.025 0.03

D - 41


Khandwa

The results of drought tolerance studies revealed that the significantly highest yield was recorded in genotype TCH-1199 (1969 kg/ha) and followed byTSH-327(1810 kg/ha.), AR-9108 (1746 kg/ha ), AR-9108 (1736 kg/ha), RCH-1217(1695 kg/ha),RHC-1202(1691 kg/ha) and RB-616 (1642 kg/ha). The Relative Water Content of the leaves gradually depleted as the crop growth advances with the decrease in soil moisture. The genotype TCH-1199 was superior with respect to RWC (65.87). The maximum Specific leaf weight (SLW) was found in TSH-327(0.0115mg/cm2. The highest SLA found in RHC-1217(112.38 cm2/ mg) and followed by RB-611(111.60) and GJHV-518(108.11). The highest root shoot ratio was found in RB-616 (0.84) and the lowest was (0.45) in PH-1071 and RS-2835.

The result on photosynthesis activity of different genotypes revealed that in the genotype TCH-1199 was found maximum (19.74µmol m²s-¹) and the minimum Photosynthesis activity performed by RB-610(11.52 µmol m²s-¹). The minimum stomatal conductance was found in AR-9108 (169.00 m mol m²s-¹). The maximum stomatal conductance was found in L-1060 (307.0mol m²s-¹) which was found inferior. On the basis of rate of transpiration, the superior genotype was found TSH-327 which have minimum rate of transpiration (10.71 m mol m²s-¹) followed by AR-9108 (11.27mmol m²s-¹) and RS-2835(12.11). The maximum rate of transpiration was found in RHC-1202 (16.88 m mol m²s-¹). Hence these genotypes were found superior for further screening. The maximum Chlorophyll stability was observed in the genotypes TSH-327(82.00 mg/gm of fresh leaves)) and followed by TSH-324(81.67) and TCH-1199(81.07) mg/gm of fresh leaves). Hence these genotypes were found superior for further screening. Screening of varieties for drought tolerance was done on the basis of proline content among the genotypes. The maximum proline content was observed in the genotypes TCH-1199(19.0 µ moles / gm tissue), followed by TSH-327(18.14), and AR-9108 (17.55) µ moles /gm tissue) (Table 46).

Out of 21 genotypes tested, Genotypes TCH-1199 (1969 Kg/ha) is having higher drought tolerance followed by TSH-327(1772.78 kg/ha), AR-9108(1745.48/ha), RCH-1217 (1695.37/ha), RCH-1202 (1689.44kg/ha) and RB-616 (1641.80kg/ha).

D - 42


Table 46. Stress indices and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha)in cotton genotypes under different water regimes at Khandwa

Ge

no

typ

es

RW

C

(%)

SLW

(mg/

cm2 )

SLA

(cm

2/ m

g)

Ph

oto

syn

the

sis

rate

(µ

mo

l m2

s-1)

Sto

mat

al

con

du

ctan

ce (

m

mo

l m2

s-

Tran

spir

atio

n r

ate

(m m

ol m

2 s

Ch

loro

ph

yll

stab

ility

mg/

gm o

f fr

esh

leav

es

Ro

ot

sho

ot

rati

o

See

d c

ott

on

yie

ld

(kg/

ha)

RS-2835 60.1 0.011 90.5 15.4 249.2 12.1 66.2 0.45 1511

GSHV-185 62.5 0.011 88.6 12.7 280.7 14.4 79.2 0.54 1549

GISV-310 61.7 0.011 88.3 13.8 256.0 15.6 79.6 0.6 1279

GJHV-518 60.8 0.009 108.1 14.9 237.8 13.9 77.6 0.55 1042

CPD-1601 62.9 0.011 92.9 14.8 203.3 15.3 78.7 0.79 1307

CPD-1602 60.4 0.012 87.3 15.9 289.3 14.8 76.9 0.46 1277

ARBH-1601 61.6 0.012 83.6 15.7 246.7 12.9 78.5 0.58 1186

TSH-324 62.5 0.011 90.9 17.9 234.3 14.6 81.7 0.76 913

TSH-327 64.6 0.012 87.7 19.7 252.7 10.7 82.0 0.52 1810

L-1060 62.4 0.011 95.4 17.7 307.0 15.6 76.7 0.59 973

L-1384 61.9 0.011 92.6 17.3 248.7 12.6 78.7 0.62 929

L-799 63.4 0.011 90.2 17.8 192.0 13.0 79.4 0.66 1085

PH-1071 61.6 0.011 89.2 14.3 250.0 14.7 75.8 0.45 1482

AR-9108 63.9 0.011 93.8 17.4 169.0 11.3 76.8 0.72 1745

RB-616 61.2 0.011 93.2 14.4 270.7 13.1 78.5 0.84 1642

RB-617 60.1 0.011 99.7 14.6 263.7 13.5 78.0 0.64 1292

RB-610 62.2 0.011 93.3 11.5 262.3 14.6 79.4 0.53 1262

RB-611 62.2 0.009 111.6 14.6 233.8 13.2 78.3 0.55 1045

RHC-1202 61.6 0.010 106.1 13.7 234.7 16.9 80.9 0.58 1691

RHC-1217 63.7 0.009 112.4 18.5 181.1 13.1 75.7 0.61 1695

TCH-1199 65.9 0.011 94.4 19.7 202.0 13.2 81.1 0.61 1969

S Em ± 0.7 0.000 1.7 0.3 6.4 0.3 1.1 0.02 60

CD 5% 2.1 0.011 4.8 0.9 18.2 0.9 3.1 0.07 170

Phy 1b: Screening of cotton genotypes for salinity tolerance Centre: Lam, GUNTUR

Salinity tolerance studies found that higher mean percent germination and seedling vigour were noticed in PA 528 followed by LHDP 2 and L 1060 at Guntur. Significantly, the highest mean dry matter production at harvest was recorded with PA 255 (49.81 g/pl) followed by L 1060 (44.84 g/pl) and GJHV 497 (44.27 g/pl) (Table 47). When soil EC increased beyond six, drastic reduction in mean dry matter production was noticed in all the entries. The highest harvest index was recorded in PA 528 (0.330) and L 1060 (0.330) followed by LHDP2 0.327) and L 604 (0.324). Not much deviation was noticed in harvest index due to different EC levels. In fact, the highest harvest index was recorded at 4 EC level (0.330) followed by 0 EC level (0.319). Regarding seed cotton yield per

D - 43


plant, significantly, higher mean seed cotton yield was noticed in PA 255 (22.01g/pl) followed by L 1060 (21.99 g/pl) and also not much variation was noticed at 4 EC level. When soil EC increased beyond six, drastic reduction in seed cotton yield was noticed in different entries under test. Based on the performance of the entries at lab and pot culture conditions PA 255, PA 528, L 1060, GSHV 497 and LHDP 2 can be considered as saline tolerant.

Table 47. Effect of different salinity levels on Seed Cotton Yield per plant (g) of cotton entries under Pot culture Conditions (2017-18)

Name of the entry

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

Control 4 EC 6 EC 8 EC

LHDP 2 25.24 21.37 15.07 11.20 18.22

L 1060 25.20 25.16 18.95 18.65 21.99

L 1384 21.64 18.06 10.21 7.68 14.40

P.Dhanwanthari 25.26 22.22 17.66 12.05 19.30

PA 528 24.11 23.32 15.55 11.09 18.52

PA 255 26.88 29.56 18.29 13.29 22.01

GSHV-497 22.60 26.82 17.14 11.11 19.42

GSHV-518 23.15 23.21 18.15 9.43 18.49

GSHV-520 26.26 22.56 16.93 9.75 18.88

L 604 29.31 20.15 16.88 12.51 19.71

Mean 24.98 23.23 16.58 11.67

Variety EC level Interaction (variety X EC level)

SEm+ 0.45 0.49 0.84

CD @ 0.05 2.02 1.35 2.34

Surat

The results of screening of cotton genotypes for salinity tolerance at Surat indicated that significant difference in physiological responses and seed cotton yield amongst genotypes was observed under saline condition. Higher germination (%) was recorded in genotype ARBB-1401 while GJHV-520 showed lower germination (%) under saline condition. Root & shoot length and Root/shoot ratio were found the highest in genotype ARBB-1401. Seedling vigour was found high in ARBB-1401 and low in GISV-319 and GSHV-199 under saline condition. Genotypes ARBB-1401 and GJHV-523 showed the highest seed cotton yield under salinity stress while it was the lowest in genotypes LRA-5166 and CPD-1702. Results of K/Na ratio was found the highest in genotypes ARBB-1401 and GJHV-497 (Table 48).

D - 44


Table 48. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by salinity level (12 dS/m ECiw) at Surat

Genotypes Germination

(%)

Root length (cm)

Shoot length (cm)

Root/ shoot ratio

Seedling vigour

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

K/Na

GJHV-497 80.0 41.0 110.0 0.38 8.0 863 12.4

GJHV-520 70.0 38.0 96.7 0.39 7.0 640 5.7

GJHV-523 80.0 40.0 123.3 0.33 8.0 983 10.6

CPD-1702 80.0 44.0 121.3 0.36 8.0 477 10.0

GISV-319 73.3 49.3 124.0 0.41 7.3 550 5.4

ARBB-1401 90.0 77.7 136.7 0.57 9.0 993 17.1

LRA-5166 73.3 38.0 83.3 0.46 7.7 437 5.6

G Cot-16 80.0 51.3 101.7 0.51 8.0 860 11.5

RHC-1346 80.0 58.7 103.3 0.57 8.0 697 8.5

GSHV-199 76.7 40.3 110.0 0.37 7.3 627 6.5

SURAJ 80.0 34.7 108.0 0.32 8.0 873 8.7

RHH-1007 80.0 47.3 100.0 0.47 8.0 977 9.5

SE d 2.32 2.21 9.86 0.04 0.22 98.43 1.79

CD (5%) 4.81 4.58 20.45 0.09 0.46 204.12 3.71

Hisar

Results of the trials on salinity tolerance found that average boll weight, boll number per plant and seed cotton yield under salt stress condition were differing significantly among the genotypes. The genotypes H 1518 showed the highest seed cotton yield followed by H 1523, H 1472 and H 1524 under salt stress condition. The genotypes H 1518, H 1523, H 1472 and H 1524 showed higher potassium to sodium ratio. Among the 17 genotypes screened for salt tolerance, H 1518 followed by H 1523 genotypes performed the best for higher seed cotton yield and potassium to sodium ratio under salt stress condition.

Phy.2 Preparing for climate change: Effect of environment on crop phenology, development, yield and fibre development

Climate change affects agriculture and crop production. Increase in temperature, CO2 concentration, decrease in rainfall with erratic distribution which may lead to frequent wet and dry spell with high demands of evapotranspiration are expected by climate change. The study is planned to face the effects of climate change in cotton. The different environments are simulated by making of different dates of sowing viz., under rainfed condition (normal, late by 15 and 30 days) and under irrigated condition (early, normal and late sowing). Cotton is known for drought tolerance that to diploid cotton is known for its tolerance level to extreme condition. In this study, the strong assumption is that the ill effect of climate change may be managed by inherent characters associated with cotton by selecting suitable genotypes. Hence the multi genotypes

D - 45


selected for the study were, 1 Bt hybrid + 3 hirsutum cotton varieties of different duration (Early, Medium and late) + 3 arboreum cotton varieties of different duration (Early, Medium and late). The arboreum varieties were planted in HDPS (60 X 10 cm).

Centre: Lam, GUNTUR

The total rainfall received during the crop period was 476.mm whereas the effective rainfall for normal sowing, late sowing (20 DAS) and late sowing (40 DAS) is 355, 269.3 and 227.8 mm respectively. The number of Growing Degree Days (GDD) required for hirsutum entries ranged from 2828 (LHDP 2) to 2919 (Jaadu BGII) in normal sowing, 2540 (LHDP 2 and L 1384) to 2594 (Jaadu BGII) in late sowing (20 DAS) and 2214 (Jaadu BGII) to 2280 (L1060) in late sowing (40 DAS) . The number of growing degree days required for arboreum entries ranged from 2457 (PA 528) to 2501 (Phule Dhanwanthari) in normal sowing, 2063 (PA 528) to 2221 (PA 255) in late sowing (20 DAS) and 1706 (PA 528) to 1957 (PA 255)) in late sowing (40 DAS) (Table 49).

The genotypes planted under changing climatic conditions revealed that the significantly

higher mean seed cotton yield was recorded under normal sowing compared to delayed sowing. Among the entries, the arboreum entries recorded significantly higher yield than hirsutum entries and Bt cotton hybrid at all the sowing dates. Phule Dhanwanthari, an arboreum entry recorded significantly superior yield at all dates of sowing (D1: 2760 kg/ha; D2: 2419 kg/ha and D3: 2075 kg/ha) when compared to other entries irrespective of the species tested.

Table 49. Performance of cotton genotypes (hirsutum , arboreum and Bt hybrids) under different environment at Lam

Tre

atm

en

ts Bt hybrid Hirsutum genotypes Arboreum genotypes

Me

an

AN

OV

A

S Ed CD

(5%)

Jaad

u B

GII

LHD

P 2

L 1

38

4

L 1

06

0

Ph

ule

D

han

wan

t

ari

PA

52

8

PA

25

5


D1 1540 1286 1362 965 2760 1917 2267 1728 G 58 161

D2 1223 1157 1454 1110 2419 1619 1586 1510 D 38 105

D3 1091 1183 1197 1133 2075 1976 1448 1443 GxD 101 310

Mean 1285 1209 1338 1069 2418 1837 1767 1560

GDD from sowing to harvest

D1 2919 2828 2841 2878 2501 2457 2549 2710 G --

D2 2594 2540 2540 2581 2156 2063 2221 2385 D --

D3 2214 2215 2215 2280 1801 1706 1957 2055 GxD --

Mean 2576 2528 2532 2580 2153 2075 2242 2384

D1.Normal Sowing; D2. Late sowing by 20 days; D3. Late sowing by 40 days

UAS, Dharwad

The experiment was conducted with three dates of sowing with nine genotypes. Seed cotton yield per hectare showed significant reduction with delay in sowing from D1 to D3, maximum yield (1901 kg/ha) with first sowing (D1) and the least yield (496 kg/ha) with last sowing

D - 46


(D3).The rate of yield reduction @ 66% from D2 to D3 compared to 22% reduction from D1 to D2. Among the genotypes, irrespective of date of sowing maximum yield recorded with hirsutum genotype , Sahana (1573 kg/ha ) closely followed by ARBH-813 (1561 kg/ha) and the least yield was with arboreum genotype, DAS-385 (1057 kg/ha) followed ARBC-19(1175 kg/ha) and ARBAS-131(1177 kg/ha) (Table 50). Among the interaction effects, Bt hybrid, First class recorded maximum yield (22.18 q/ha) followed by ARBH-813 (21.17) and ARBAS-131 (20.12) with first sowing (D1). The lowest yield was recorded with DAS-385 (2.65) and ARBAS-131 (2.67) in the last date of sowing (D3). The results conclude that first fortnight of June is best date for maximum yield and delay resulted in yield reduction. Two genotypes Sahana and ARBH-813 showed least reduction yield from D1 to D2 and could be suited for delayed sowing by 15 days but not beyond. Table 50. Performance of cotton genotypes (hirsutum , arboreum and Bt hybrids) under different environment at Dharwad

Tre

atm

en

ts

Hirsutum genotypes Arboreum genotypes Bt hybrids

Mean

ANOVA

SEd

CD (5%

)

G1. Sahan

a (G. h)

G2. ARBH-813

(G. h)

G3. ARBC

-19 (G. h)

G4. Gha

m-34 (G. h)

G5. DLSA-17 (G. a)

G6. DAS-385

(G. a)

G7. ARBAS-131 (G. a)

G8. Firstclass BG-II

(Bt)

G9. ATM

BG-II

(Bt)

Seed cotton yield (Kg /ha)

D1.Normal Sowing

1880 2117 1675 1612 1838 1884 2012 2218 187

3 1901 G 32 125

D2. Late sowing

by15 days 1957 1805 1456 1434 1568 1022 1250 1460

1353

1478 D 40 115

D3. Late sowing

by30 days 883 762 393 325 470 265 267 555 547 496 GXD 73 199

Mean 1573 1561 1175 1123 1292 1057 1177 1411 125

8

SPAD at 100 days

D1.Normal Sowing

42.3 39.8 41.8 39.8 39.9 42.1 42.6 40.2 40.4 41.0 G 0.3 1.2

D2. Late sowing

by15 days 39.6 38.6 39.7 39.3 38.4 43.0 41.0 39.1 40.7 39.9 D 0.3 0.9

D3. Late sowing

by30 days 39.7 37.9 38.9 36.5 35.6 39.7 39.8 37.9 38.2 38.2 GXD 0.6 1.5

Mean 40.5 38.8 40.1 38.5 38.0 41.6 41.1 39.1 39.8

Surat

The results revealed that seed cotton yield significantly deviated with date of sowing and the genotypes. The significantly higher seed cotton yield was recorded in early sown condition which was at par with normal sown whereas the lowest seed cotton yield was observed in late sown condition. The genotype G. Cot. Hy. 6 BGII was showed significantly higher seed cotton yield which was at par with G.Cot 19 (arboreum) whereas Deviraj (hirsutum) showed the lowest seed

D - 47


cotton yield. The yield reduction from early sowing to late sowing was calculated as 43.4 % with Bt hybrid (G. Cot. Hy. 6BGII ), and yield reduction range of 17.3 to 32.3 % with hirsutum genotypes (Table 51). However, enhanced yield level was observed under late sowing with arboreum genotypes because of higher stability. Interaction of genotypes and dates of sowing was significant. The genotype, G. Cot. Hy. 6BGII sown in early condition showed significantly the highest seed cotton yield followed by the same Bt hybrid sown in normal condition. However, under 30 days late sowing situations, arboreum genotypes (G.Cot- 15 (2240 kg/ha) and G.Cot-19(2377 kg/ha) performed well. Soil moisture content (%) was significantly deviated due to dates of sowing at 50DAS and 70 DAS. Deviraj was required significantly higher GDD and HTU for Days to flowering, days to boll opening while it was significantly higher for early sowing condition.

Table 51 . Performance of cotton genotypes (hirsutum , arboreum and Bt hybrids) under different environment at Surat

Treatments

Bt hybrid Hirsutum genotypes Arboreum genotypes

Me

an

AN

OV

A

SEd

CD

(5%

)

(Control) G. Cot. Hy.

6BGII G.C

ot-

10

G.N

.Co

t-

22

De

vira

j

G. C

ot-

15

G. C

ot-

19

Seed cotton yield(kg/ha)

D1.Early Sowing 2809 1785 1693 1508 2005 1998 1966 G 152.8 312.1

D2. Normal Sowing

2573 1509 1636 1526 1946 2187 1896 D 68.0 187.7

D3. Delay Sowing 1589 1476 1203 1021 2240 2377 1651 GxD 251.0 525.9

Mean 2324 1590 1511 1352 2064 2187 1838

GDD to Days to Boll opening

D1.Early Sowing 2241 2405 2370 2539 2200 2153 2318 G 27.3 55.6

D2. Normal Sowing

2206 2342 2322 2539 2240 2153 2300 D 19.3 39.1

D3. Delay Sowing 2087 2247 2160 2377 2100 2035 2168 GxD 47.4 N.S.

Mean 2178 2331 2284 2485 2180 2114 2262

Khandwa

The climate change management studies revealed that seed cotton yield of different genotypes was significantly influenced by different date of sowing. Among the different dates of sowing, normal sowing (D1) recorded consistently the highest Seed cotton yield (1458 kg/ha) over other dates of sowing includes late sowing by 15 days (D2)( 1054 kg/ha) and late sowing by 30 days (D3) (601 kg/ha). The control (Bt Hybrid) was recorded the highest seed cotton yield in all three dates of sowing (normal (1950 kg/ha), late by 15 days (1373 kg/ha) and late by 30 days (836 kg/ha). Amongst non Bt genotype G4 (JK-5) recorded the highest Seed cotton yield (1161kg/ha) followed by G6 (AKA-8) and G5 (Jawar Tapti) which were give 1140 and 982 kg/ha respectively (Table 52).

D - 48


Table 52. Performance of cotton genotypes (hirsutum, arboreum and Bt hybrids) under different environment at Khandwa

Treatments

Control Hirsutum Arboreum

Me

an

AN

OV

A

SEd

CD

-5%

G1

:

Ras

i-

65

9 B

G-I

I Bt

G2

: JK

-4

G3

:

Vik

rum

G4

: JK

-5

G5

: Ja

war

Tap

ti

G6

:AK

A-8

G7:JLA-505


D1 Normal Sowing 1950 1271 954 1661 1336 1478 1558 1458 G 252.8 389.9

D2. Late sowing by15 days 1373 801 862 1104 1027 990 1224 1054 D 24.7 48.7

D3. Late sowing by30 days 836 542 504 719 492 479 637 601 GxD 59.8 170.8

Mean 1387 871 774 1161 952 982 1140

112.4 203.1

Hisar

In climate change studies, three hirsutum genotypes (H 1098 i, H 1226, H 1300) and three arboreum genotypes ( HD 123, HD 324 and HD 432) were planted in three dates of sowing includes normal sowing, late sowing by 15 days and late sowing by 30 days under irrigated condition. The results revealed that the genotypes HD 324 was found earlier and was at par with HD 432 with respect to days to flowering and days to boll opening duration. The least duration of days from days to boll open was taken by genotypes under late sown by 30 days condition. GDD, HTU and PTU were found non- significant with respect to genotypes for day to flowering and days to boll opening in normal sowing. Under late by 15 days sown condition GDD, HTU and PTU were found high in both hirsutum (H 1226 and H 1300) and Desi (HD 432 and HD 324) cotton genotypes. The significantly higher seed cotton yield ( 3404 kg/ha) was observed for HD 123 genotype under normal condition which was at par with HD 432 in normal sowing and HD 123 and HD 432 genotype at the late by 15 days condition . Under late sown by 15 and 30 days conditions better performance was observed for the HD 432. Table 53. Performance of cotton genotypes (hirsutum and arboreum) under different environment at Hisar

Treatments

Hirsutum

AN

OV

A

SEd

CD

(5

%) Arboreum

AN

OV

A

SEd CD

(5%) G1.

H1098i

G2. H

1226

G3. H

1300

G4. HD 123

G5. HD 324

G6. HD 432


D1.Normal Sowing 2318 1957 3049 G 113 242 3404 2583 3296 G 102 218

D2. Late sowing by15 days

2261 1445 2090 D 113 242 3378 2825 3612 D 102 218


2070 1758 2564 GxD 196 418 3136 2239 3226 GxD 177 NS

Mean 2216 1720 2568

3306 2549 3378


D1.Normal Sowing 2529 2549 2494 G 15.7 NS 2536 2536 2569 G 14.08 NS


2602 2615 2634 D 15.7 33.7 2615 2615 2595 D 14.08 30.1


2258 2311 2271 GxD 27.2 NS 2338 2346 2357 GxD 24.39 NS

Mean 2463 2492 2466

2496 2499 2507

D - 49


Junagarh

The result of climate change studies under irrigated condition at Junagarh revealed that 20 days early sown (2756 kg/ha) and timely (2346 kg/ha) sown crop gave the significantly highest seed cotton yield as compared to 20 days late (1833 kg/ha) sown crop (Table 54). The selected Bt hybrid G. Cot. Hy -8 BG-II performed better than hirsutum and arboreum genotypes in all dates of sowing. The significantly highest mean seed cotton yield (2919 kg/ha) was produced by variety G. Cot. Hy -8 BG-II and it was at par with GTHH-49(2662 kg/ha, V4), G. Cot Hy-10(2538 kg/ha, V3) and G. Cot. Hy.-12(2410 kg/ha, V3) as compare to G. arboreum group G.cot-19(2028 kg/haV5), G.Cot.-824 (1194 kg/ha, V6) except G.Cot -15(2439 kg/ha, V7). Environmental influence on lint index, seed index and ginning percentage was not observed, but genotypic differences were found significant. Significantly more number of days was taken in early sown crop for 50% squaring, 50% boll formation to 50% boll opening and 50% boll opening to harvest as compared to normal and late sown crop. Early sown crop took more GDD to days to flowering & boll opening as compare to late sown crop. Same trend was shown in case of HTU and PTU. Early sown crop got total 2496 GDD (heat unit) with 207 days whereas normal sowing crop got 2213 heat unit with 187 days while late sown crop get minimum heat unit (1920) and less time (167 days) to develop their phenophase . Table 54. Performance of cotton genotypes (hirsutum, arboreum and Bt hybrids) under different environment at Hisar

Treatments

hirsutum arboreum

Mean ANOVA SEm CD

(5%)

Control (Bt

hybrid) (G.Cot.hy-

8 BG-II)

G1. (G.Cot.

Hy- 12)

G2. (G.Cot. hy-10)

G3. (GTHH

-49)

G4. (G.Cot.

-19)

G5. (G.Cot. -824)

G6. (G.

Cot. -15)


D1. Early Sowing

3447 2713 3009 2958 2688 1337 3138 2756 G 72.5 208.0

D2. Normal Sowing

3074 2469 2636 2881 2006 1273 2083 2346 D 66.5 261.3

D3. Late Sowing

2238 2019 1968 2148 1389 971 2096 1833 GxD 125.5 360.3

Mean 2919 2401 2538 2662 2028 1194 2439


D1. Early Sowing

1635 1647 1696 1525 1550 1933 1698 1669 G 13.60 39.04

D2. Normal Sowing

1408 1434 1543 1358 1307 1658 1543 1464 D 22.48 88.23

D3. Late Sowing

1399 1511 1593 1398 1383 1571 1527 1483 GxD 23.56 67.62

Mean 1481 1531 1611 1427 1413 1721 1589

D - 50


Phy 3. Effect of Nano Zinc and Nano-P on growth and Productivity of Cotton under high Density planting LAM, Guntur

The effect of Nano fertiliser on cotton found that higher seed cotton yield was recorded with recommended N,P,K + Foliar application of ZnSO4 @ 0. 2% at 45DAS & 60 DAS (T7) and it was on par with recommended N,P,K + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 10 litres of water at 45DAS & 60 DAS (T8), T6- (Recommended N,P,K + Soil application of Zn SO4 @ 25 kg/ha) and T9- (Recommended N,P,K + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 15 litres of water at 45DAS & 60 DAS) and all these treatments are significantly superior when compared to the other treatments under test (Table 55). The yield improvement ranged from 10 to 15 percent and the seed cotton yield was associated with higher number of sympodia per plant, higher number of bolls per plant and higher boll weight. The foliar application of phosphorous either in normal or nano form did not show any impact on growth and development of cotton.

Table 55.Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced Nano fertilizers

Treatments Plant

height (cm)

Number of sympodia

Number of bolls

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

T1. Rec NK 155 19.0 63.6 3.1 1307

T2.Rec NPK 153 18.7 68.7 3.0 1363

T3. T1 + Foliar application of KH2PO4 @ 2% at 45 & 60 DAS

166 20.8 72.3 3.1 1344

T4.T1 +Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 10 litres of water at 45 & 60 DAS

165 16.3 66.3 3.0 1345

T5. T1+Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 15 litres of water at 45 & 60 DAS

146 14.5 73.5 3.1 1370

T6. T2 + Soil application of Zn SO4 @ 25 kg/ha

161 16.2 78.0 3.2 1459

T7. T2 + Foliar application of ZnSO4 @ 0. 2% at 45 & 60 DAS

167 19.2 81.0 3.2 1531

T8.T2 + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 10 litres of water at 45 & 60 DAS

155 16.5 77.7 3.3 1447

T9. T2 + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 15 litres of water at & 60 DAS

155 15.6 75.9 3.2 1438

SE d 3.7 1.0 1.4 0.1 21.2

CD (5%) NS 2.9 4.3 NS 59.2

D - 51


UAS, Dharwad

The effect of Nano fertiliser on cotton revealed that significantly higher photosynthetic rate (30.02), stomatal conductance (0.0.35) and transpiration rate ( 4.37) at 100 DAS was recorded by (T8) i.e., recommended NPK+nano-Zn (2g 10 litre-1) spray over control (T2). There were no significant differences in yield and yield components recorded between with and without p fertilizers (T1 and T2) treatments possibly because of native high P sources. The results further added that neither foliar supplementation of nano-P (T3 and T4) and nano-Zn (T8 and T9) nor soil application of ZnSO4 (T6) could record significantly higher yield and yield parameters than control (T1 and T2) . The results conclude that foliar application of nano-P or nano-Zn did not have any significant effect on yield at Dharwad

Table 56. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and physiological parameters as influenced Nano fertilizers at Dharwad

Treatments

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

SPAD Value

Photosynthetic rate (umol.m-

2sec-1)

Conductance (umol.m-

2sec-1)

Transpiration rate

(umol.m-2sec-

1)

T1.Rec NK 1179 36.4 22.6 0.26 4.40

T2.Rec NPK 1292 35.5 26.9 0.25 3.71

T3.T1 + Foliar application of KH2PO4 @2% at 45DAS & 60

1118 37.2 28.2 0.24 3.56

T4.T1 +Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 10 litres of water at 45DAS & 60

1139 35.2 27.0 0.21 3.16

T5.T1+Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 15 litres of water at 45DAS & 60 DAS

1161 36.0 16.8 0.13 2.46

T6.T2 + Soil application of Zn SO4 @ 25 kg/ha

1118 37.4 26.7 0.20 3.31

T7.T2 + Foliar application of ZnSO4 @ 0. 2% at 45DAS & 60 DAS

1243 35.7 23.1 0.29 4.08

T8.T2 + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 10 litres of water at 45DAS & 60 DAS

1284 35.0 30.0 0.35 4.37


1316 34.7 24.4 0.27 4.17

SE d 90 1.0 0.8 0.01 0.28

CD (5%) NS NS 2.41 0.04 0.84

D - 52


BIO CHEMISTRY

Bio Chem1.Evaluation of Cotton genotypes for Seed oil, Fatty acid profile, Gossypol and Protein

Dharwad

Biochemical component including oil, protein and gossypol content were evaluated in 30 seed samples of cotton genotypes (Br02b). Oil content ranged between 15.13 to 28.49%, with maximum level observed in the genotypes, CNH 11-11, GBHV-187, NDLH 1938,RB 616,CPP-1751(> 26%) and least levels were measured in the genotypes, NDLH-2056, RAH 0604 and GSHV 191 (< 19%), rest of the genotypes fell in the category of moderate range of oil content (19 to 26%). The protein content was ranged from 14.88 to 34.37, with maximum levels were measured in the genotypes BS 3-17 , RB 605, CNH 12-4-2, CPD-1751,ZC (NH 615/ NDLH 1938), and RB 616 (> 20%) and lower levels were measured in the genotypes, GBHV-187, GSHV 191 and CNH 25-09 (< 16%), whereas the rest of the genotypes were observed to possess moderate levels of protein content (16-20%). Gossypol content was observed in the range of 0.237 to 0.632%, with maximum levels was measured in the genotypes, H 1480, IH 12-12, AKH-2012-8, and CNH 11-11 (> 0.6%), and minimum levels were measured in the genotypes, GSHV 191, RAH 0604 (< 0.3%).

Surat The seeds of 34 genotypes were analyzed for oil, gossypol and protein content. The results

showed significant variations amongst the genotypes. Significantly higher oil content was observed in entry ARBH 1701 (18.12%) followed by entry PBH 116 (18.04%) and entry RAH 0603 (18.00%). Gossypol content ranged from 37.47 to 156.49 (mg/100g of tissue) in different entries (Table 57). Lowest gossypol content was observed in entry CPD 1701 (37.47 mg/100g of tissue) followed by entry F 2662 & GISV 319 (39.3726 mg/100g of tissue) and entry PBH 139 (44.47 mg/100g of tissue). Higher gossypol content was found in entry PBH 116 and RB 607 (156.49 and 153.26 mg/100g of tissue respectively). The highest protein content was observed in entry SHJ 23 (23.72 mg/g of tissue) which was followed by entry HS 300 and F 2596 (23.08 and 21.94 mg/g of tissue respectively).

Hisar The seeds of test entries of Br 02 trial were evaluated for protein, oil and gossypol content

(Table 58). The highest protein content (24.09 %) was observed in Entry CSH 3419. However, the entries RB 607 and ZC (F 2228) were at par with the entry CSH 3419. The highest oil content (20.70%) was observed in entry H 1508, whereas, entries BS 2-17and TSH 325 were found at par with entry H 1508 for their oil content. The entry BGDS 0607 had the lowest total gossypol (0.045%). The trials Br 03, Br 06 CVT, Br 06 IET, Br 22, Br 24 Br 25 ZT and Br 25 NT grow at CCS HAU, Hisar centre were evaluated for oil content. Amongst genotypes tested in over all trials, the highest oil content was found in Br 06 IET trial entry BRCC 1601 (22.95 %) and Br 22 trial entry PBD 22 (22.70%), respectively.

D - 53


Table 57. Evaluation of cotton genotypes for seed oil, gossypol and protein content - Dharwad & Surat Dharwad Surat

Genotypes (Br 02b)

Oil content (%)

Protein (mg/g of tissue)

Total Gossypol

(%)

Genotypes (Entry code)

Oil content

(%)

Protein content (mg/g of tissue)

Total Gossypol

(mg/ 100g of tissue)

CNH 1126 22.63 18.88 0.510 RS 2906 17.50 17.18 72.36

CNH 09-70 20.01 17.78 0.484 BS 2-17 16.53 15.35 64.51

TVH 001 25.40 18.17 0.495 GJHV-520 17.87 15.10 118.13

IH 12-12 25.05 16.95 0.619 ARBH 1701 18.12 17.30 95.10

GBHV-193 22.89 17.07 0.467 RAH 0603 18.00 14.61 64.51

ARBH-1751 20.44 16.95 0.472 BGDS 0607 17.56 15.55 64.37

AKH-2012-8 25.36 17.75 0.618 GSHV 199 17.85 21.41 68.05

BS 3-17 20.08 34.37 0.452 PBH 139 17.32 20.51 44.47

LC 23.20 16.90 0.451 F 2662 17.45 17.47 39.37

CNCH 2050 23.00 16.13 0.479 CPD 1702 17.29 15.48 45.99

GBHV-187 27.59 14.88 0.574 RB 607 17.31 18.14 153.26

CNH 25-09 23.13 16.07 0.534 ZC 16.80 21.61 71.09

CNH 12-4-2 24.83 21.57 0.556 RS 2913 17.14 16.14 151.26

GSHV 191 9.71 15.40 0.237 GISV 319 17.50 12.39 39.37

RB 605 20.11 31.25 0.477 CSH 3419 17.51 12.67 44.86

NDLH 20511 21.93 16.87 0.535 F 2596 17.34 21.94 58.36

CNH 11-11 28.49 19.03 0.609 HS 300 17.26 23.08 45.35

CPD-1752 22.13 16.05 0.460 LC 17.24 21.78 48.51

BS 2-17 24.24 17.13 0.574 SHJ 23 17.02 23.72 61.04

RAH 0603 25.71 17.62 0.584 RB 608 17.22 19.63 57.86

CPD-1751 26.23 20.42 0.565 GJHV-523 16.82 13.57 61.73

ZC (NDLH 1938) 26.64 20.40 0.471 TSH 325 17.25 16.54 125.26

BGDS 0607 25.55 17.35 0.529 H 1488 17.23 13.70 46.89

AKH-13-71 23.77 17.65 0.475 CPD 1701 17.66 17.52 37.47

RAH 0604 19.31 19.50 0.282 RAH 0604 16.72 16.28 113.71

QC (Suraj) 21.71 18.97 0.440 PBH 116 18.04 16.83 156.49

H 1480 23.60 17.40 0.632 QC (Suraj) 17.21 16.42 49.32

NH 678 21.67 19.98 0.493 TCH 1828 17.28 15.24 57.93

NDLH 2056-3 15.13 16.33 0.363 TVH 001 17.22 18.29 61.76

RB 616 26.33 20.13 0.524 RHC 1346 16.76 18.12 126.84

Mean 23.20 18.83 0.500 H 1508 17.41 13.68 131.40

Range 15.13 - 28.49

14.88 - 34.37 0.237 - 0.632 BS 3-17 17.33 20.46 115.66

S.Em 0.87 0.43 0.03 CSH 1604 17.12 14.07 134.05

CD@5% 2.47 1.21 0.08 TSH 332 17.38 12.13 139.26

SE.d 0.043 0.273 1.65

CD@5% 0.086 0.546 3.30

D - 54


Table 58.Evaluation of cotton genotypes for seed oil, gossypol and protein (Bio chemistry)

Genotypes (Br 02a)

Oil content

(%)

Crude Protein

(%)

Total Gossypol

(%)

Genotypes (Br 03)

Oil content

(%)

Genotypes (Br 06 IET)

Oil content

(%)

Genotype (Br 22)

Oil content

(%)

RS 2906 19.35 21.06 0.176 PBH 47 17.30 H 1518 18.65 AKA 2013-

17 18.60

BS 2-17 20.45 17.53 0.173 F 2462 15.35 RAHC 1040 21.65 DWDa-1701

19.00

GJHV-520 18.40 22.57 0.104 ZC (F 2228) 15.25 PBH 115 21.45 RG - 876 18.55

ARBH 1701 18.40 24.76 0.086 LC 18.75 BRCC 1601 22.95 GAM 255 20.60

RAH 0603 19.80 21.06 0.079 HS 298 18.70 TSH 330 18.75 CISA 33-5 20.10

BGDS 0607 19.50 20.22 0.045 Shakti Sultan

(SSGR105) 18.65

RHC HD 1433

22.40 CNA 2016 19.40

GSHV 199 18.05 23.75 0.107 F 2453 18.90 CSH 1613 19.50 ZC 16.25

PBH 139 19.25 17.70 0.141 Quality Check 17.85 GISV 312 16.40 FDK 274 15.65

F 2662 15.65 19.88 0.104 PBH 42 20.75 CSH 3824 15.40 NDLA

3116-4 20.25

CPD 1702 18.55 18.87 0.086 RS 2765 15.50 TCH 1897 14.55 RG – 872 20.30

RB 607 19.75 23.24 0.139 S.ED 0.20 RHC HD

1314 15.20

DWDa-1702

21.00

ZC 19.50 23.24 0.093 CD@5% 0.46 RAHC 1039 18.35 HD 544 22.45

RS 2913 17.00 18.03 0.167 Genotypes

(Br 06)

Oil content

(%) Local Check 20.15 CISA 7 19.60

GISV 319 18.90 19.55 0.105 RS 2814 22.15 DSC 1701 17.75 PBD 29 20.05

CSH 3419 18.15 24.09 0.142 ZC 21.55 SHC-32 19.40 GAM 259 20.05

F 2596 19.75 17.19 0.147 F 2639 22.55 ZC 19.50 CNA1034 19.15

HS 300 18.50 20.22 0.094 CSH 31292 21.80 F 2382 16.95 PA 809 18.10

LC 18.65 19.55 0.054 Local Check 18.30 LHDP 2 17.40 AKA 2009-

6 17.15

SHJ 23 16.50 20.39 0.154 RS 2818 20.30 RHC HD

1420 15.20 CNA1033 19.30

RB 608 17.60 21.56 0.087 CSH 5640 18.65 RHC HD

1406 17.35 LC 18.65

GJHV-523 18.25 22.07 0.081 RS 2821 18.50 S.ED 0.31 HD 542 20.30

TSH 325 20.25 21.40 0.090 RS 2827 20.15 CD@5% 0.65 PA 835 18.30

H 1488 16.35 19.72 0.182 S.ED 0.24 Genotypes

Br 25 ZT

Oil content

(%) JLA 1226 18.45

CPD 1701 16.55 20.56 0.115 CD@5% 0.56 AAH 37 19.45 FDK 281 19.40

RAH 0604 18.45 21.90 0.143 Genotypes

(Br 24)

Oil content

(%) ZC (KR 64) 17.75 PBD 22 22.70

PBH 116 18.85 17.36 0.170 PA 812 19.25 AAH 38 14.70 CNA 2031 20.65

QC 20.15 15.01 0.083 QC (PA 255) 20.60 LC 17.25 NDLA 3086

18.30

TCH 1828 18.10 19.88 0.146 PA 781 19.35 KR-111 18.95 S.ED 0.26

TVH 001 19.70 19.21 0.186 LC 20.75 S.ED 0.34 CD@5% 0.53

RHC 1346 17.20 15.68 0.177 CISA 33-3 18.40 CD@5% 0.96 Genotypes

Br 25 NT

Oil content

(%)

H 1508 20.70 22.91 0.101 Phule

Dhanwantary 21.60

Genotypes Br 25 NT

Oil content

(%) AJCH 102 20.15

BS 3-17 19.35 17.36 0.161 JLA 1110 22.55 LC 18.80 CISAA 17-2 21.35

CSH 1604 19.85 18.37 0.101 ZC 21.20 GSGDH 543 19.90 SR 271 19.80

TSH 332 19.55 15.01 0.172 CISA 6-2 19.95 KR 121 18.60 KR 131 19.05

S.ED 0.26 0.62 0.010 PA 810 19.20 ZC 18.70 CISAA 17-1 19.65

CD@5% 0.53 1.26 0.021 S.ED 0.19 AAH 40 20.50 S.ED 0.17

CD@5% 0.45 NACH 556 16.75 CD@5% 0.39

D - 55


Biochem 2: Effect of Plant Growth Regulators (PGRs) on insect resistance in cotton Dharwad

The effect of Plant Growth Regulators on growth , yield and sucking pest population were evaluated . PGRs, α-naphthyl acetic acid (NAA) and mepiquat chloride (MC), individually, and in combination were sprayed as per the recommended dosages on two cotton genotypes viz., NDLS-1938 (leafhopper-resistant) and Suraj (leafhopper-susceptible). Application of mepiquat chloride@ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS significantly increased seed cotton yield (1339 kg/ha) than control (1137 kg/ha) and NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS (1210 kg/ha). The leafhopper population counted on 3rd and 7th day after PGR spray respectively found that the significantly least population of 1.85 and 1.51 /plant with application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS followed by MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS (S3) (Table 59). The PGR spray did not induce any significant increase in H2O2 content and lipid peroxidation indicating lack of toxicity to the plant at their recommended levels. Activity of catalase enzyme was also not affected and was correlating with that of the levels of H2O2. Levels of secondary metabolites like tannins, flavonoids and polyphenols and defensive enzymes, superoxide dismutase and peroxidase were found altered significantly due to the PGR sprays and also displayed a differential pattern of expression due to insecticides. Therefore, it may be concluded that the PGR spray induce significant changes in the levels of defensive compounds and related enzymes thereby affecting the infestation of sucking pests.

D - 56


Table 59. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) , Sucking pest population (No/plant) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators

Treatments

MI - Protected M2 - Unprotected

M1 M2 NDLS-1938

Suraj

Mean of sub-

sub plots

NDLS-1938

Suraj NDLS-1938

Suraj


S1 865 1771 776 1428 1318 1102 820 1600 1210

S2 1016 1912 851 1578 1464 1215 934 1745 1339

S3 992 1904 898 1566 1448 1232 945 1735 1340

S4 832 1674 679 1362 1253 1021 756 1518 1137

Mean 926 1815 801 1483 1371 1142 864 1649 1257

ANOVA M G S MxG MxS SxG MxSxG -- --

SE d 33.4 45.7 30.5 64.6 43.1 43.1 61.0 -- --

CD (5%) 203.2 179.4 89.0 NS NS NS NS -- --

No. of leafhopper nymphs/3 leaves after 3rd day of PGR spray

S1 1.65

(2.73) 1.88

(3.53) 1.78

(3.20) 2.20

(4.87) 1.76

(3.13) 1.99

(4.03) 1.72

(2.97) 2.02

(4.20) 1.88

(3.58)

S2 1.97

(4.00) 1.98

(4.00) 2.03

(4.13) 2.60

(6.80) 1.97

(4.00) 2.32

(5.47) 2.00

(4.07) 2.27

(5.40) 2.14

(4.73)

S3 1.63

(2.67) 1.86

(3.47) 1.75

(3.07) 2.16

(4.80) 1.75

(3.07) 1.95

(3.93) 1.69

(2.87) 2.27

(4.13) 1.85

(3.50)

S4 2.20

(4.93) 2.29

(5.27) 2.45

(6.00) 2.84

(8.07) 2.25

(5.10) 2.64

(7.03) 2.33

(5.47) 2.56

(6.67) 2.45

(6.07)

Mean 1.86

(3.58) 2.00

(4.07) 2.00

(4.10) 2.45

(6.13) 1.93

(3.83) 2.23

(5.12) 1.93

(3.84) 2.28

(5.10) 2.08

(4.47)


SE d 0.04 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.14 -- --

CD (5%) 0.22 0.02 0.21 0.03 NS NS NS -- --

No. of leafhopper nymphs/3 leaves after 7th day of PGR spray

S1 1.15

(1.33) 1.68

(2.83) 1.73

(3.00) 1.79

(3.20) 1.42

(2.08) 1.76

(3.10) 1.44

(2.17) 1.73

(3.02) 1.59

(2.59)

S2 1.68

(2.83) 1.88

(3.80) 1.79

(3.20) 1.84

(3.40) 1.78

(3.32) 1.82

(3.30) 1.74

(3.02) 1.86

(3.60) 1.80

(3.31)

S3 1.18

(1.40) 1.45

(2.13) 1.65

(2.73) 1.75

(3.07) 1.31

(1.77) 1.70

(2.90) 1.42

(2.07) 1.60

(2.60) 1.51

(2.33)

S4 1.71

(2.92) 2.05

(4.20) 2.42

(5.87) 2.69

(7.27) 1.88

(3.56) 2.56

(6.57) 2.06

(4.39) 2.37

(5.73) 2.22

(5.06)

Mean 1.43

(2.12) 1.76

(3.24) 1.90

(3.70) 2.02

(4.23) 1.60

(2.68) 1.96

(3.97) 1.66

(2.91) 1.89

(3.74) 1.78

(3.32)


SE d 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.10 -- --

CD (5%) 0.34 0.17 0.15 NS 0.20 NS NS -- --

S1- NAA @20ppm at 60 DAS; S2 – MC @50ppm at 90 DAS; S3 – NAA @20ppm at 60 DAS & MC @50ppm at 90 DAS; S4– Control (No PGR )

D - 57


Surat

The effect of PGR revealed that seed Cotton yield was significantly differed for genotypes in protected and unprotected condition and non significant amongst application of PGRs. Sucking pest population before the day of PGR spray was significant between Genotypes DHY-286 and DCH-32 under protected and unprotected condition. Sucking pest population on 3rdday after PGR spray was non significant between treatments while it was significantly deviated between genotypes and protected and unprotected conditions. Sucking pest population on 7th day after PGR spray was significantly deviated between genotype, PGR sprays and protected and unprotected conditions. Sucking pest population on 7th day after PGR spray found the lowest with application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS followed by MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS (S3) under unprotected condition in DHY-286 (resistant).

Secondary metabolites (Tannin and Phenol) production as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators. Tannin content was significantly different between genotypes DHY-286 and DCH-32 and PGR treatments while non significant under protected and unprotected condition. Polyphenol content was significantly differed between DHY-286 (Resistant) and DCH-32 (Susceptible) under protected and unprotected condition in all PGR treatments. MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS showed the highest tannin content in DHY-286 and the lowest in application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS (S1) under unprotected condition in DCH-32.

Secondary metabolite (flavonoids) and antioxidative enzymes (superoxide dismutase) were significantly differed between DHY-286 (Resistant) and DCH-32 (Susceptible) under protected and unprotected condition in all PGR treatments. Application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS followed by MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS (S3) showed the highest superoxide dismutase activity and lowest with application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS (S1) in DCH-32 under protected condition while in unprotected condition, MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS (S2) showed the lowest activity in DCH-32 and the highest in DHY-286 in application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS ( S1). Antioxidant enzymes activity was significantly differed between DHY-286 (Resistant) and DCH-32 (Susceptible) under protected and unprotected condition in all the treatments. Among the treatments, MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS (S2) showed the highest activity of catalase under protected condition. Peroxidase activity was found the highest with application of NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS followed by MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS (S3) under protected condition.H2O2 production was significantly differed among genotypes under protected and unprotected condition in all treatments while lipid peroxidation was non significantly differed between treatments.

D - 58


Table 60. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) , sucking pest population (No/plant) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat

Treatments


M1 M2

DH

Y-2

86

(Le

af

ho

pp

er-

resi

stan

t)

DC

H -

32

(Le

afh

op

pe

r-

susc

ep

tib

le)

Mean of GR

DH

Y-2

86

(Le

af

ho

pp

er-

resi

stan

t)

DC

H -

32

(Le

afh

op

pe

r-

susc

ep

tib

le)

DH

Y-2

86

(Le

afh

op

pe

r-

resi

stan

t)

DC

H -

32

(Le

afh

op

pe

r-

susc

ep

tib

le)


S1 1309 1168 973 889 1239 931 1141 1029 1085

S2 1414 1226 1109 863 1320 986 1261 1044 1153

S3 1426 1225 988 893 1326 941 1207 1059 1133

S4 1351 1238 945 855 1295 900 1148 1046 1097

Mean 1375 1215 1004 875 1295 939 1189 1045 1117


SE d 17.8 17.8 8.9 8.9 4.5 4.5 2.2 -- --

CD (5%) 134.6 134.0 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. -- --


S1 1.80 5.13 3.73 7.87 3.47 5.80 2.77 6.50 4.6

S2 1.27 6.07 1.93 6.67 3.67 4.30 1.60 6.37 4.0

S3 1.67 8.00 3.07 7.27 4.83 5.17 2.37 7.63 5.0

S4 2.67 6.80 4.67 14.53 4.73 9.60 3.67 10.67 7.2

Mean 1.85 6.50 3.35 9.08 4.18 6.22 2.60 7.79

ANOVA M G S MxG MxS SxG MxSxG

SE d 0.41 0.41 0.29 0.50 0.35 0.35 0.25

CD (5%) 0.59 0.59 N.S. 0.83 1.18 1.18 1.67


S1 2.07 6.27 3.80 9.40 4.17 6.60 2.93 15.67 9.3

S2 1.60 5.60 1.93 9.20 3.60 5.57 1.77 7.40 4.6

S3 1.87 5.60 2.67 10.73 3.73 6.70 2.27 8.17 5.2

S4 2.27 7.27 4.47 15.20 4.77 9.83 3.37 11.23 7.3

Mean 1.95 6.18 3.22 11.13 4.07 7.18 2.58 10.62 9.3


SE d 0.50 0.50 0.36 0.62 0.44 0.44 0.31

CD (5%) 0.73 0.73 1.03 1.03 1.46 1.46 N.S.

S1- NAA @20ppm at 60 DAS; S2 – MC @50ppm at 90 DAS; S3 – NAA @20ppm at 60 DAS& MC @50ppm at 90 DAS; S4– Control (No PGR)

D - 59


Title of Experiments - 2017-18

AGRONOMY

Agronomy IA Agronomic requirements of promising pre-release/ recently released hirsutum/arboreum genotypes / hybrids of Cotton.

Agronomy 1B Evaluation of compact culture under HDPS with different nutrient levels.

Agronomy II Weed Management in Cotton.

Agronomy IIIA Improving Input use efficiency (water)

Agronomy III B Enhancing Nitrogen use efficiency in Bt cotton

Agronomy IV Technology for Organic Cotton Production.

Agronomy V Conservation agriculture.

Agronomy VI Labour saving techniques in Cotton cultivation.

Agronomy VII Canopy management in HDPS cotton

Agronomy VIII Testing of product developed from human hair by Bio- processing and Herbal Division of Mahatma Gandhi Institute for Rural Industrialization

Agronomy IX Paid up trials.

PHYSIOLOGY and BIOCHEMISTRY

PHY1 Screening of Cotton genotypes for abiotic stress tolerance.

1a Screening genotypes for water stress tolerance.

1b Screening genotypes for salinity stress tolerance.

PHY2 Preparing for Climate Change: Effect of environment on crop phenology development & yield.

PHY3 Evaluation of effect of nano fertilizer on growth and production of Cotton (HDPS).

Bio Chem. 1. Evaluation of cotton genotypes for seed oil, gossypol and protein

Bio Chem.2 Effect of PGRs on insect resistance in cotton

D - 60


AGR II 1.Growth characters and weed population (No/m2) as influenced by weed control treatments at Banswara under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Plant height (cm)

at harvest

No. of monopodia at harvest

No. of sympodia at harvest

No. of Bolls/Pla

nt

Weed count (No/m2) at harvest

Grasses

Broad leaved weeds

Sedges


117.7 2.0 11.6 27.3 365 113 26


133.3 3.0 23.7 52.3 154 46 14


127.7 2.4 20.7 46.7 164 49 12


128.3 2.7 23.0 51.0 159 50 11


106.3 2.0 7.3 16.7 21 7 5

T6.T1 + T2 135.3 3.3 25.3 54.3 146 45 10

T7.T1+ T3 119.7 2.0 15.3 32.3 167 51 8

T8.Plastic mulching 137.7 3.7 36.7 73.3 14 5 1

T9.Weedy check 98.0 2.0 7.7 18.0 522 159 37

T10.Weed Free check 139.0 3.7 30.8 68.0 0 0 0

SEd 3.5 0.3 2.2 2.7 15.73 3.43 2.02

CD (5%) 8.6 0.8 5.3 6.6 38.58 8.41 4.96

D - 61


AGR II 2.Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), weed parameters and economics as influenced by weed control treatments at Banswara under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Boll weight (g)

Weed DMP

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)

Cost of weeding (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR


2148 4.7 3795 30.16 27600 96667 69067 2.50


3111 5.3 1601 70.62 31190 140000 108810 3.49


2531 4.8 1716 68.46 26635 113889 87254 3.28


3346 5.4 1649 69.62 39600 150556 110956 2.80


1455 4.3 1823 66.49 29512 65463 35951 1.22

T6.T1 + T2 3780 5.5 1517 72.10 33790 170093 136303 4.03

T7.T1+ T3 2895 5.3 1747 67.86 29235 130278 101043 3.46

T8.Plastic mulching 4251 5.8 150 97.21 37600 191296 153696 4.09

T9.Weedy check 944 4.1 5440 0.0 16600 42500 25900 1.56

T10.Weed Free check 4053 5.8 0 100 39200 182407 143207 3.65

SEd 242 0.2 93.38 1.27

10883 10883 0.40

CD (5%) 593 0.4 229 3.11

26689 26689 0.97

D - 62


AGR II 3. Growth characters and weed population (No/m2) as influenced by weed control treatments at Nandyal under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments

Plant height (cm)

at harvest



No. of Bolls/SQ

M

Grasses (No/M2)

after treatment

Broad leaved weeds

(No/m2) after treatment

Sedges (No/m2)

after treatment


146.7 1.3 14.8 47.0 3.7 13.3 2.0


132.0 1.2 15.5 46.0 7.4 39.0 6.0


137.7 1.3 16.3 44.4 8.3 35.0 6.3


143.3 1.1 17.3 53.5 4.7 14.7 2.7


144.7 1.3 18.0 61.0 4.3 9.7 4.7

T6.T1 + T2 136.3 1.0 16.7 56.7 4.7 11.3 2.7

T7.T1+ T3 132.0 1. 15.7 52.1 4.7 12.0 4.0

T8.Plastic mulching 137.3 1.0 17.5 63.5 2.7 7.7 2.0

T9.Weedy check 89.3 1.3 13.0 43.6 8.0 36.0 5.7

T10.Weed Free check 156.3 1.3 19.0 67.8 0.0 0.0 0.0

SEd 12.3 0.11 1.2 5.0 0.5 1.7 0.4

CD (5%) 25.8 NS 2.5 10.4 1.0 3.6 0.9

D - 63


AGR II 4. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), weed parameters and economics as influenced by weed control treatments at Nandyal under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments Seed cotton yield (kg/ha)

Boll weight

(g)

Germination (%)

Phytotoxicity grade

Weed DMP

(kg/ha)

Weed control efficiency

(%)



Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR


2203 4.37 89.7 0

510 27.5

6125 99120 46495 1.9


2232 4.02 92.3 0

225 52.0

8475 100451 45476 1.8


2309 4.02 91.0 0

591 25.5

5270 103895 52125 2.0


2061 4.33 91.3 0

317 42.8

6325 92766 39941 1.8


2778 4.43 92.0 0

178 57.1

6000 125010 72510 2.4

T6.T1 + T2 2702 4.37 91.0

0 427

33.6 9600 121605 65505 2.2

T7.T1+ T3 2255 3.92 92.3

0 407

35.7 6395 101476 48581 1.9

T8.Plastic mulching 2748 4.38 92.7

0 161

59.1 0 123660 49660 1.7

T9.Weedy check 1641 2.97 87.7

0 968

0 0 73837 27337 1.6

T10.Weed Free check 3235 4.60 90.7

0 0

92.8 14000 145560 85060 2.4

SEd 259 0.41 3.0

35

CD (5%) 544 0.86 NS

75

D - 64


AGR II 5. Growth, yield and yield contributing characters as influenced by weed control treatments at Indore under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Plant height (cm) at harvest



No. of Bolls/SQ

M

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Boll weight

(g)

Germi nation

(%)


78.8 2.8 13.8 45.5 1529 2.7 99.7


81.4 2.9 14.2 51.4 1778 2.9 99.7


79.3 2.7 15 44.6 1443 2.7 99.3


77.6 2.7 15.9 41.6 1180 2.8 98.7


78.2 3.0 16.8 54.5 1804 2.8 99.7

T6.T1 + T2 83.1 2.9 19.2 53.2 2018 2.9 100

T7.T1+ T3 79.2 2.9 16 49.3 1792 2.8 99.3

T8.Plastic mulching 103 3.2 20 93.6 3023 3.1 99.3

T9.Weedy check 77.3 2.8 12.7 24.9 763 2.6 98

T10.Weed Free check 91.7 3.1 19.2 80.8 2843 3.1 100

S Em + 1.42 0.2 0.56 1.63 22.33 0.0 0.48

CD (5%) 4.22 0.7 1.68 4.83 66.34 0.1 1.42

D - 65


AGR II 6. Weed population (No./M2) and dry matter production as influenced by weed control treatments at Indore under rainfed at Central Zone

Treatments Weed DMP

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)

Grasses (No/M2) Broad leaved

weeds (No/M2) Sedges

(No/M2)

Before After Before After Before After

T1-.Pendimethalin @ 0.75 to 1.0 kg a.i/ha as Pre emergence or Pre-plant incorporation + one hoeing

680 57.0 60 18 40 18 20 8

T2-Tank mixture (Quizalofopethyl 50 g a.i/ha+ Pyrithiobac Sodium @ 62.5g a.i/ha at 2-4 leaf stage of weeds +one hoeing.

632 60.0 55 17 48 14 26 11

T3-Chlorimuron Ethyl @ 4.0g a.i/ha as at 2-4 leaf stage weed +one hoeing 654 58.6 53 18 48 13 25 10 T4-T1 + Cover crop with sunnhemp or sorghum should be sown 20 DAS of cotton

613 61.2 57 19 42 16 18 7

T5-T1+ Glyphosate @ 5 ml/litre as directed spray at 2-4 weed leaf stage (after hoeing)

591 58.4 51 14 47 12 31 13

T6- T1 + T2 645 59.2 62 19 41 13 32 12 T7- T1+ T3 621 60.7 59 15 53 15 26 11 T8- Plastic mulching 417 73.6 48 8 39 10 23 6 T9- Weedy check 1580 0.0 62 69 44 49 35 41

T10- Weed Free check 0 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S Em + 3.02 0.6 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.1 CD (5%) 8.98 1.9 4.7 4.2 3.9 3.6 4.2 3.1

D - 66


AGR II 7. Economic evaluation of different weed control treatments at Indore under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments Cost of

weeding ( Rs/ha)

Cost of Cultivation

(Rs./ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

B: C Ratio


1700 26819 87153 60334 3.24


2500 29723 101346 71263 3.41

T3.Chlorimuron Ethyl @ 4.0g a.i/ha as at 2-4 leaf stage weed + one hoeing 1500 25704 82251 56547 3.20


1000 26205 67260 41055 2.56


1100 29333 102828 73495 3.50

T6.T1 + T2 2500 32139 115026 82887 3.57

T7.T1+ T3 2150 28320 102144 73824 3.60

T8.Plastic mulching 2700 48730 172311 123576 3.53

T9.Weedy check 000 21173 43491 22318 2.05

T10.Weed Free check 4000 42198 162051 119853 3.84

S Em + -- 1402.1 5519.0 5668.64 0.01

CD (5%) --- 4136.2 16397. 16842.4 0.03

Prevailing market rate (2017-18) :

1. Sell price of seed cotton : Rs. 57/ kg , N/P/K:Rs.12.35/25.15/20 per kg respectively, Price of cotton seed :Rs. 1760/- ( @ 800/- per pkt. Per 450gm) (Required qty. 2kg/ha), Cost of Hand weeding Rs. 4000/- ha/ weeding (3 hand weeding)

2. Pendimethalin @ Rs. 390/lit., Quizalofopethyl @ Rs. 1250/lit, Pyrithiobac sodium @ Rs. 2666/lit, Glyphosate @ Rs. 330/lit and Chlorimuron Ethyl @ Rs. 150/15 g

D - 67


AGR II 8. Growth characters and weed population (No/M2) as influenced by weed control treatments at Chamrajnagar under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments Plant height

(cm) at harvest



No. of Bolls/S

QM

Grasses (No/M2) Broad leaved

weeds(No/M2) Sedges(No/M2)

Before After Before Before After Before


135.0 1.6 26.1 204.4 2.15

(4.67) 2.89

(8.33) 2.94

(8.67) 2.88

(8.33) 2.44

(6.00) 2.94

(8.67)


148.2 1.8 29.0 215.0 2.08

(4.33) 1.52

(2.33) 2.43

(6.00) 1.72

(3.00) 1.82

(3.33) 1.38

(2.00)


131.1 1.5 23.3 194.9 2.16

(4.67) 2.64

(7.00) 2.88

(8.33) 2.16

(4.67) 2.51

(6.33) 1.52

(2.33)


140.7 1.6 26.9 210.8 2.23

(5.00) 2.44

(6.00) 2.76

(7.67) 2.08

(4.33) 2.16

(4.67) 1.41

(2.00)


154.2 2.0 29.2 232.2 1.82

(3.33) 1.63

(2.67) 2.70

(7.33) 1.63

(2.67) 1.91

(3.67) 1.52

(2.33)

T6.T1 + T2 158.1 1.8 30.1 249.2 1.52

(2.33) 1.14

(1.33) 3.00

(9.00) 1.52

(2.33) 1.99

(4.00) 1.28

(1.67)

T7.T1+ T3 151.3 1.7 28.4 221.8 2.08

(4.33) 1.99

(4.00) 2.77

(7.67) 2.31

(5.33) 2.08

(4.33) 1.82

(3.33)

T8.Plastic mulching 165.0 2.2 33.1 254.4 1.00

(1.00) 1.28

(1.67) 1.00

(1.00) 1.52

(2.33) 1.00

(1.00) 1.63

(2.67)

T9.Weedy check 124.2 1.4 20.4 163.0 2.88

(8.33) 3.55

(12.67) 3.87

(15.00) 4.24

(18.00) 3.05

(9.33) 3.99

(16.00)

T10.Weed Free check 161.4 2.2 32.6 257.7 1.14

(1.33) 1.00

(1.00) 1.91

(3.67) 1.00

(1.00) 1.52

(2.33) 1.00

(1.00)

SEd 8.60 0.17 2.21 12.13 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.13 0.13 0.18

CD (5%) 18.06 0.36 4.65 25.48 0.32 0.32 0.34 0.28 0.27 0.37

Note: Figures in Parenthesis are original values

D - 68


AGR II 9. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), weed parameters and economics as influenced by weed control treatments at Chamrajnagar under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Boll weight

(g)

Germination (%)

Phytotoxicity grade

Weed DMP

(kg/ha)

Weed control

efficiency (%)



Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.Pendimethalin @ 0.75 to 1.0 kg a.i/ha as Pre emergence or Pre-plant

incorporation + one hoeing 1279 3.20 99 0 387.3 56.3 2813 74159 36720 1.98

T2.Tank mixture (Quizalofopethyl 50 g a.i/ha+ Pyrithiobac Sodium @ 62.5g

a.i/ha at 2-4 leaf stage of weeds +one hoeing.

1618 3.30 100 0 165.0 81.4 3860 93869 55383 2.44


1084 3.13 99 0 369.7 58.3 2125 62845 26093 1.71

T4.T1 + Cover crop with sunnhemp or sorghum should be sown 20 DAS of

cotton 1284 3.30 98 0 276.3 68.8 3433 74499 35810 1.93

T5.T1+ Glyphosate @ 5 ml/litre as directed spray at 2-4 weed leaf stage

(after hoeing) 1725 3.57 97 2 163.7 81.5 3768 100027 61633 2.61

T6.T1 + T2 1934 3.93 99 0 145.7 83.6 5160 112195 72409 2.82

T7.T1+ T3 1497 3.33 98 0 246.3 72.2 3425 86809 48757 2.28

T8.Plastic mulching 2048 3.97 100 0 126.0 85.8 33188 118799 50985 1.75

T9.Weedy check 635 2.80 98 0 887.0 - - 36816 2190 1.06

T10.Weed Free check 2083 4.17 99 0 112.7 87.3 10800 120822 75395 2.66

SEd 117.96 0.21 1.65 - 44.39 - -

CD (5%) 247.83 0.45 NS - 93.27 - -

D - 69


AGR IIIA 1. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by mulches at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm)

No. of monopodia

No. of sympodia

No. of Bolls/ sq m

Boll weight (g)

Seed Cotton

yield (kg/ha)

Root volume (cc)

T1. Control 90 1.65 13.50 69 3.30 1564 1661

T2. Poly mulch 114 1.80 14.65 86 3.87 2197 1996

T3. News paper mulch 100 1.80 13.95 70 3.43 1777 1718

T4. Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) 107 1.70 14.45 80 3.58 2025 1753

T5. Dust mulch by hoeing 97 1.70 13.40 71 3.39 1699 1704

SEd 4.90 0.06 0.65 3.91 0.16 120 78

CD (5%) 15.10 NS NS 12.04 NS 369 NS

AGR III A 2. Water parameters and economics as influenced by mulches at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments Water use efficiency

(kg/ha-mm)

Water productivity

(Rs/M3)

Cost of

Cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross

return

(Rs/ha)

Net return

(Rs/ha) BCR

T1.Control 2.99 29.85 53662 73521 19859 1.37

T2.Poly mulch 4.19 41.93 73784 103257 29473 1.40

T3.News paper mulch 3.39 33.92 55830 83527 27698 1.50

T4.Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) 3.86 38.64 58704 95153 36449 1.62

T5.Dust mulch by hoeing 3.24 32.41 57517 79832 22315 1.39

SEd - - - - - -

CD (5%) - - - - - -

D - 70


AGR IIIA 3. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by mulches under drip at Banswara in Central Zone


(cm) at harvest No. of monopodia

at harvest No. of

sympodia at harvest No. of Bolls/

Plant Boll

weight (g)

Seed Cotton yield

(kg/ha)

T1. Control 99.8 1.9 17.3 34.3 4.1 2679

T2. Poly mulch 149.3 3.3 26.5 57.5 5.5 4451

T3. News paper mulch 107.5 1.6 21.8 42.0 4.1 2932

T4. Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) 138.0 2.4 24.8 53.0 4.9 3951

T5. Dust mulch by hoeing 121.3 1.7 22.5 48.8 4.7 3539

SEd 2.8 0.4 1.1 1.9 0.3 110.3

CD (5%) 7.0 1.0 2.7 4.7 0.7 278.0

AGR IIIA 4. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), water parameters and economics as influenced by mulches under drip at Banswara in Central Zone

Treatments Consumptive

use (mm)

Quantity of water

used (mm)

Water saving (mm)

Water use efficiency

(kg/ha-mm)

Water productivity

(Rs/m3)

Cost of Cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.Control 509 643 0 4.21 13.93 31000 120556 89556 2.89

T2.Poly mulch 222 356 287 13.20 45.98 36600 200278 163678 4.47

T3.News paper mulch 488 612 31 4.76 16.33 32000 131944 99944 3.12

T4.Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) 355 495 148 8.44 30.86 25000 177778 152778 6.11

T5.Dust mulch by hoeing 386 516 127 7.14 21.63 47600 159236 111636 2.35

SEd 3.45

0.92 1.07

4964 4964 0.16

CD (5%) 8.69

2.31 2.69

12509 12509 0.41

D - 71


AGR IIIA. 5 Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by mulches at Akola under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments Plant

Height (cm)

No of Monopodia

plant-1

No of Sympodia

plant-1

No of Bolls m-2

Boll Weight

(g)

SCY (Kg ha-1)

T1 : Control (No mulch on flat bed with drip) 120.6 1.0 20.1 61.0 3.40 1613

T2: Polymulch on BBF with drip 133.1 0.7 24.2 70.0 4.13 2088

T3: Polymulch on ridges and furrow with drip 126.4 0.7 23.3 68.3 3.95 1912

T4 : Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) on BBF with drip 136.6 0.8 24.6 77.3 4.20 2206

T5: Dust mulch by hoeing 121.3 0.7 22.8 62.3 3.78 1836

S.E d 4.9 0.3 1.1 2.5 0.18 127

CD at 5% 10.7 NS 2.6 5.6 0.39 277

AGR IIIA 6. Plant and water parameters and economics as influenced by mulches at Akola in Central Zone Treatments WUE

(Kg/ha mm-1)

Water productivity

(Rsm-3)

Cost of mulching (Rs/ha)

GMR (Rs/ha)

NMR (Rs/ha)

B:C ratio

T1 : Control (No mulch on flat bed with drip) 3.57 154 0 69700 28306 1.68

T2: Polymulch on BBF with drip 4.62 200 31800 90200 21834 1.32

T3: Polymulch on ridges and furrow with drip 4.23 183 16260 82600 30653 1.59

T4 : Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) on BBF with drip 4.88 211 4450 95300 51893 2.20

T5: Dustmulch by hoeing 4.06 175 1800 79300 36795 1.87

S.E d 0.28 13 5500 5500

CD at 5% 0.61 27 11984 11984

D - 72


AGR IIIA 7. Growth characters and soil temperature as influenced by mulches at Indore under rainfed condition in Central Zone


(cm) at harvest



No. of Bolls /

sq M

Boll weight (g)


T1.Control 98.4 2.5 15.2 64.0 2.87 2250

T2.Poly mulch 105.6 3.1 17.1 67.7 4.41 3140

T3.News paper mulch 99.2 2.9 16.4 59.0 3.10 2520

T4.Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) 85.8 2.8 14.5 69.0 3.45 2710

T5.Dust mulch by hoeing 102.4 3.1 15.3 54.0 2.83 2430

S Em + 0.54 0.13 0.34 1.02 0.05 67.12

CD (5%) 1.67 0.41 1.04 3.16 0.16 206.82

AGR IIIA 8. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), water parameters and economics as influenced by mulches at Indore (Rainfed - Central Zone)

Treatments Consumptive

use (mm)

Water use efficiency

(kg/ha-mm)

Water productivity

(l / kg)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net return (Rs /ha)

B: C Ratio

T1.Control 1086 2.07 82.9 38220 128250 90030 3.36

T2.Poly mulch 998 3.15 114.7 64570 178980 114410 2.77

T3.News paper mulch 1005 2.51 102.5 40650 143640 102990 3.53

T4.Crop residue mulch (5t/ha) 1000 2.71 114.7 39790 154470 114680 3.88

T5.Dust mulch by hoeing 1041 2.33 97.2 37350 138510 101160 3.71

S Em + 18.74 0.07 4.1 1469.13 7216.9 7059 0.11

CD (5%) 57.75 0.23 12.5 4526.83 22237.4 21750 0.34

Prevailing market rate (2017-18) :

1 Sell price of seed cotton : Rs. 57/ kg 2. N/P/K : Rs. 12.35/25.15/20 per kg respectively, 3 Price of cotton seed :Rs. 1760/- ( @ 800/- per pkt. Per 450gm) (Required qty. 2kg/ha)

D - 73


AGR.IIIB 1. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Faridkot under irrigated condition in North Zone


(cm) at harvest


No. of sympodi

a at harvest

No. of Bolls/

m2

Boll

weight (g)

Seed

cotton

Yield (kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 142.7 0.88 14.0 73.0 3.39 2091

T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 181.1 1.42 25.7 120.7 3.99 3016


T4.75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 178.3 1.22 24.2 117.4 3.61 2894


171.6 1.22 22.5 115.4 3.51 3058


169.4 1.22 25.7 132.1 3.59 3099

T7. T5 +Foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

176.1 1.22 24.2 139.3 3.95 3317

T8. 100 % of RDN (2 splits as per Univ. Recd) + Foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (4 times: at weekly intervals during Flowering and Boll development)

184.4 1.44 28.1 147.2 4.08 3604

CV (%) 6.0 29.0 14.6 10.6 7.3 9.5

SEd 8.44 0.29 2.80 5.22 0.22 232.4

CD (5%) 18.2 NS 6.0 22.1 NS 498

D - 74


AGR. IIIB. 2. Economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Faridkot under irrigated condition in North Zone

Treatments SCY/Kg of N

fertilizer

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

B:C

T1.N0 Control - 33538 93729 60190 1.78

T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 20.0 41298 135186 93887 2.26


T4.75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 25.6 40123 129711 89587 2.22


27.1 41204 137072 95867 2.32

T6.T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 27.4 41651 138920 97268 2.33

T7. T5 +Foliar application of 2 % KNO3 (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 29.4 43850 148664 104813 2.38


23.9 46159 161515 115356 2.49

CV (%) - 4.1 9.5 11.9 8.2

SEd 1388 10415 9026 0.15

CD (5%) - 2978 22338 19359 0.32

D - 75


AGR. IIIB. 3.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Bathinda under irrigated condition in North Zone


(cm) at harvest


No. of sympodia at

harvest

No. of Bolls/

m2

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 117 1.27 16.3 76 3.21 1808

T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 152 2.13 26.5 115 4.06 2923



153 2.20 23.1 106 3.57 2618


155 2.33 25.6 112 3.76 2798


164 2.20 24.5 119 4.10 2950


157 2.27 27.4 130 4.17 3427

CV (%) 6.68 14.00 14.81 11.58 7.51 9.57

SE (d) 8.0 0.23 2.9 10.2 0.23 211

CD (5%) 17.5 0.51 6.3 22 0.51 460

D - 76


AGR. IIIB. 4.N use efficiency and economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Bathinda under irrigated condition in North Zone

Treatments NUE

(SCY kg/ N kg)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

B:C

T1.N0 Control - 32646 81380 48733 1.49



T4.75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 23.28 38509 117827 79318 2.05


24.88 39897 125927 86030 2.15

T6.T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 24.68 40688 132752 92064 2.26


22.39 44725 154191 109465 2.45

CV (%) 8.96 4.29 9.56 12.06 7.95

SEd 1.7 1372 9502 8129 0.14

CD (5%) NS 2990 20703 17712 0.29

D - 77


AGR IIIB.5. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Hisar under irrigated condition in North Zone


(cm) at harvest


No. of sympodia

at harvest

No. of Bolls/ squaremetre

Boll weight

(g)

Seed Cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 90 1.08 12 36 3.9 787

T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 101 1.08 12 50 3.6 1524

T3.75 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 106 1.41 13 38 4.2 1110


95 1.25 11 40 3.4 1115


88 1.25 11 40 3.9 1085


100 1.16 11 57 3.8 1769

T7. T5+Foliar application of 2 % KNo3 (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

105 1.08 10 53 3.6 1706


95 1.16 10 60 3.7 1862

SEd 9.9 0.16 0.9 3 0.23 126

CD (5%) NS NS NS 6.6 NS 273

D - 78


AGR III B.6. Growth, yield parameters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Rahuri under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm)

Number of bolls plant-1

No. of Sympodial branches/

plant

No. of

Bolls/M2

Average boll

weight (g)

Average Yield

plant-1 (g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg ha-1 )

T1 Control 97.3 35.4 20.0 141.8 4.1 144.8 1434

T2 100% of RDN (Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

101.1 38.1 21.1 152.5 4.9 191.3 2044

T3 75% of RDN (Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

97.4 37.7 20.3 151.0 4.6 172.1 1828

T4 75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

100.9 37.6 20.8 150.2 4.7 179.0 2009

T5 75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 splits at Basal, squaring, Flowering and boll development)

102.2 37.9 21.1 151.6 5.1 192.0 2140

T6 T5 + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: squaring, Flowering and boll development)

105.8 39.3 21.7 157.3 5.2 203.3 2432

T7 T6 = raising of Sunnhemp/fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

114.1 45.3 21.7 181.3 5.4 241.4 2641

SE ± 5.3 3.4 1.3 15.1 0.3 22.9 91.2

C.D. at 5% 15.0 9.8 3.8 42.7 0.9 64.7 258.3

D - 79


AGR III B.7. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and its economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Rahuri under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Seed cotton yield

(q ha-1)

Gross monetary

returns (Rs ha-1)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs ha-1)

Net monetary

returns (Rs ha-1)

B:C Ratio

T1 Control 1434 68832 50552 18280 1.36

T2 100% of RDN (Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 2044 98112 62083 36028 1.58

T3 75% of RDN (Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 1828 87760 60366 27394 1.45

T4 75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 2009 96448 61415 35032 1.57

T5 75% of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 splits at Basal, squaring, Flowering and boll development)

2140 102720 62509 40211 1.64

T6 T5 + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: squaring, Flowering and boll development)

2432 116736 64873 51863 1.80

T7 T6 = raising of Sunnhemp/fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

2641 126784 67247 59537 1.88

SE ± 91.21 4378 - - -

C.D. at 5% 258.33 12400 - - -

D - 80


AGR III B. 8. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central Zone


(cm) at harvest

No. of monopodia at

harvest

No. of sympodia at

harvest

No. of Bolls/square

metre

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield (kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 99 1.5 12.1 70.7 3.7 1734


128 1.7 15.3 80.7 3.9 2109


114 1.5 14.0 72.1 3.8 2018


120 1.6 14.7 76.7 3.8 2086


125 1.7 15.1 79.8 3.9 2101


137 1.9 16.2 82.1 4.1 2456

T7.T6+raising of Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

130 1.8 15.9 80.7 4.0 2343

SEd 6.9 0.1 0.8 4.4 0.2 111

CD (5%) 21.5 0.3 2.4 NS NS 343

D - 81


AGR III. 9. Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) , availability (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by by N application methods in Bt cotton at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments N use effi(kg/kg).

Nutrient uptake (kg/ha)

Nutrient availability (kg/ha)

Treat. Cost

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR N P K N P2O5 K2O

T1.N0 Control 0.00 4671 659 4307 269 38 248 46114 81516 35402 1.77


8.79 5814 787 5125 276 37 243 51316 99135 47818 1.93


11.21 5483 807 4965 272 40 246 50030 94859 44829 1.90


11.59 5689 800 5174 273 38 248 50388 98059 47671 1.95


11.67 5737 869 5239 273 41 249 50466 98766 48300 1.96


13.65 6452 1015 6133 263 41 250 52329 115445 63116 2.21


13.02 6607 898 5678 282 38 242 51735 110117 58383 2.13

SEd - 199 47 231 10 2 11 - - - -

CD (5%) - 613 145 712 NS NS NS - - - -

D - 82


AGR IIIB. 10. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm) at harvest

No. of monopodi

a at harvest


No. of Bolls/squar

emetre

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 95.3 0.1 21.7 58.8 2.9 954




115.1 0.1 24.7 71.3 4.0 1383


112.9 0.2 26.2 60.8 3.1 1390


105.4 0.1 24.1 65.7 4.0 1486


109.5 0.1 26.5 85.9 4.0 1619

SEm 3.6 0.0 1.2 4.8 0.2 49

CD (5%) 10.9 NS NS 14.7 0.7 151

D - 83


AGR IIIB. 11. Economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments Cost of

cultivation (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.N0 Control 37230 42930 5700 1.15

T2.100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 39460 63000 23540 1.59

T3.75 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 39210 60750 21540 1.54

T4.75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 39376 62235 22859 1.58

T5.75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 39412 62550 23138 1.58

T6.T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 39890 66825 26935 1.67

T7.T6+raising of Sunnhemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering 40555 72855 32300 1.79

AGR IIIB. 12. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha), as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton (Banswara-Irrigated)


(cm) at harvest



No. of Bolls/ Plant

Boll weight

(g)


T1.N0 Control 92 1.8 10.3 23 3.94 1068




115 2.0 13.5 29 4.58 2229


119 2.0 13.3 31 4.73 2598


129 2.7 19.0 45 4.89 2868


133 3.0 25.7 52 4.92 3414

SEd 3.58 0.2 1.3 1.30 0.23 164

CD (5%) 8.91 0.6 3.2 3.24 0.57 409

D - 84


AGR IV 13. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and yield parameters of Bt cotton hybrids as influenced by N application methods under irrigated

conditions at Raichur in south zone

Treatments No. of

Monopodia/ plant

No. of Sympodia

/ plant

No. of Bolls/ m2

Boll Weight

(g)

Plant Height (cm)

Seed Cotton yield (g/pl)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

T1: N0 Control 1.3 16.0 72.4 4.43 107.0 101.1 1839

T2: 100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

1.6 19.8 100.7 4.51 109.5 109.0 1934


1.6 20.7 119.0 4.55 110.9 113.4 1988

T4: 75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

1.7 21.7 124.7 4.58 111.7 117.5 2287

T5: 75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

2.0 22.2 128.3 4.69 120.1 121.9 2359

T6: T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

2.1 24.4 133.6 4.74 121.7 125.1 2393

T7: T6+ raising of fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

2.4 25.9 137.8 4.79 123.0 130.2 2417

S.Em+ 4.4 0.9 4.4 0.17 4.7 5.9 63

C. D at 5% 12.8 2.5 12.8 0.49 13.6 17.2 184

CV % 18.6 16.9 16.2 15.6 17.5 18.2 12.5

D - 85


AGR IIIB. 14. Economics of Bt cotton as influenced by different Nitrogen management practices at Raichur (SZ) – Irrigated Conditions

Treatments Gross

Returns (Rs/ha)

Net Returns (Rs/ha)

B : C Ratio

T1: N0 Control 99288 49161 1.98

T2: 100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 104436 52507 2.01

T3: 75 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 107352 55978 2.09

T4: 75 % of RDN +Placement(Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering) 123480 71506 2.38

T5: 75 % of RDN + Placement (Spot application in 4 Splist: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 127368 75094 2.44

T6: T5+Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development) 129204 76158 2.44

T7: T6 + raising of fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering 130500 75854 2.39

S.Em+ 3419 3419 0.07

C. D at 5% 9939 9939 0.19

CV % 12.5 12.5 12.5

AGR IIIB.15. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton (Lam – Rainfed)

Treatments Plant height No. of No. of No. of Boll Seed cotton

D - 86


(cm) at harvest

monopodia at harvest

sympodia at harvest

Bolls/squaremetre

weight (g)

Yield (kg/ha)

T1.N0 Control 171 2.9 14.4 71.5 4.7 2145


183 2.7 18.3 96.9 5.0 3022


189 2.3 16.4 84.0 5.0 2618


190 3.0 17.0 84.8 4.9 2654


182 3.1 16.7 84.7 4.9 2673


185 2.3 18.1 97.8 5.0 3132


183 2.6 18.4 96.5 5.2 3109

SEd 4.87 0.3 0.9 5.0 0.2 169

CD (5%) 10.73 0.6 1.9 11.0 NS 372

D - 87


AGR IIIB.16.Nutrient uptake (kg/ha), N use efficiency (kg/kg ) and economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton under rainfed conditions at LAM in south zone

Treatments

N use efficiency

(kg of kapas/ kg

of N)

Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) Treatment

Cost (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR N P K

T1.N0 Control - 28.3 9.0 25.5 5217 92654 28957 1.45


20.15 45.0 14.4 40.5 8282 130560 56339 1.76


23.27 42.4 13.5 38.1 7517 113096 43076 1.61


23.59 42.1 13.4 37.8 8956 114651 42887 1.60


23.75 42.0 13.4 37.7 11832 115451 40653 1.54


27.84 44.1 14.1 39.6 13032 135315 55409 1.69


27.64 44.3 14.1 39.8 14032 134337 53624 1.66

SEd 1.46 1.39 0.45 1.25 - 7305 5868 0.07

CD (5%) 3.21 3.07 0.98 2.76 - 16,093 1292 0.15

D - 88


AGR IIIB. 17. Growth characters , Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton under rainfed conditions at Nandyal in south zone

Treatments




No. of Bolls/ sq.m

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.N0 Control 93.3 1.3 11.5 44.7 3.0 2111 58545 94985 36440 1.6


145.0 1.3 18.5 78.0 4.5 3325 60500 149610 89110 2.5


140.3 1.7 15.4 58.3 4.4 2894 60012 130242 70230 2.2


135.3 1.7 15.7 54.2 4.3 2623 60012 118037 58025 2.0


135.9 1.7 14.9 54.0 4.3 2601 60813 117046 56233 1.9


132.3 1.7 14.4 60.9 4.0 2594 62104 116719 54615 1.9

T7.T6+raising of fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

114.9 1.3 11.9 55.4 3.9 2455 61500 110484 48984 1.8

SEd 11.2 0.16 1.5 5.3 0.37 285

CD (5%) 24.5 0.36 3.2 11.6 0.81 620

D - 89


AGR IIIB.18. Growth, yield parameters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by N application methods in Bt cotton under rainfed conditions at Dharwad in south zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm)

No. of

monopodia

Per plant

No. of

sympodia per

plant

No. of Bolls/s

q.m

Boll weight (g)

Seed cotto

n Yield (kg/h

a)

N use efficie

ncy (kg of

kapas/ kg of

N)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1: No nitrogen ( Control) 101.5 1.9 15.8 88.3 4.70 1202 0.00 59028 62487 3458 1.06

T2 :100 % of RDN(Band application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

116.9 3.0 20.3 120.3 5.52 1692 16.92 62533 87984 25451 1.41


111.2 2.5 18.9 109.7 5.32 1640 21.87 61951 85297 23347 1.38

T4 : 75 % of RDN + Spot application in 2 splits at Basal & Flowering)

110.7 2.8 18.1 107.7 5.33 1645 21.94 61976 85557 23582 1.38

T5 : 75 % of RDN + (Spot application in 4 Split: Basal, Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

116.3 2.5 19.7 118.3 5.37 1665 22.20 62074 86580 24506 1.39

T6 :T5 + Foliar application of 1 % urea (3 times: Squaring, Flowering, Boll development)

121.3 3.0 20.9 120.3 5.58 1680 22.40 62647 87343 24695 1.39

T7 :T6 + raising of Sunnhemp between rows incorporated before flowering

124.0 3.1 21.5 128.7 5.62 1749 23.32 62992 90931 27938 1.44

SE.m 2.2 0.2 0.7 5.8 0.24 68 0.87 340 3533 3193 0.05

C.D. at 5% 6.7 0.5 2.0 18.0 NS 209 2.69 1047 10885 9839 0.15

D - 90


AGR IV.1. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha), economics and organic carbon (%) status as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Kanpur in North Zone

Treatments

Plant Height (cm) at harvest

No. of monopo

dia at harvest

No. of sympo

dia at

harvest

No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield (kg/ ha)

Treatment Cost (Rs/ ha)

Gross return

(Rs/ ha)

Net Return

(Rs/ ha)

BCR

Organic carbon (%)

Init

ial

Fin

al

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 186.6 3.2 14.3 88.72 1.88 1162 34418 53080 18662 1.54 0.38 0.32

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 213.6 2.8 14.2 115.03 2.13 1316 38004 60740 22736 1.59 0.38 0.33


219.6 3.0 16.5 152.47 2.40 1481 37418 67640 30222 1.86 0.38 0.41

T4.Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM

215.6 2.5 16.6 147.96 2.36 1460 36256 66500 30244 1.83 0.38 0.41

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 212.6 2.6 16.3 139.68 2.37 1460 39418 66500 27082 1.68 0.38 0.42

T6.Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

215.6 3 16.6 139.01 2.53 1563 38696 70320 31624 1.81 0.38 0.44


206 2.8 16.3 136.37 2.43 1501 39398 68200 28802 1.73 0.38 0.43

T8.T4+T5 227 2.7 16.8 138.04 2.70 1666 41258 74490 33232 1.80 0.38 0.44

T9.T4+T6 220.6 2.8 17.6 136.41 2.80 1728 40536 76620 36084 1.89 0.38 0.44

T10.T4+T5+T6 224 2.6 18.8 182.43 2.83 1728 47378 76920 29542 1.62 0.38 0.44

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 220.6 2.4 18.6 173.24 2.53 1563 46238 70320 24082 1.52 0.38 0.45

SEd 11.98 - - 10.27 0.186 114.78 - - - - - -

CD (5%) NS - - 21.44 0.388 239.52 - - - - - -

D - 91


AGR IV.2. Growth characters , Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Akola under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Plant height (cm)

Sympodia plant-1

Mono- podia plant-1

No of picked bolls

plant-1

Boll weight

(g)

Boll No. (m2)

Seed cotton yield

(kg ha-

1)

Yield of

Inter crop (kg

ha-1)

Seed cotton equi. yield

(kg ha-

1)

GMR (Rs

ha-1)

NMR (Rs

ha-1)

B:C ratio

T1: Absolute control (No organic & inorganic)

120.3 15.87 0.67 11.13 2.47 55.0 1090 - 1090 46870 30635 2.89

T2: Control (RDF through inorganic). 123.7 18.00 0.67 18.40 2.97 93.3 1645 - 1645 70723 45576 2.81

T3: RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis (12.5 t/ha FYM)

133.0 19.93 1.00 20.00 2.97 98.3 1775 - 1775 76325 4400 1.06

T4: Seed treatment and soil application of rec. Biofertilizers and foliar application of PPFM @1% at flowering and BDS

135.3 19.60 0.73 14.10 2.72 71.0 1347 - 1347 57921 33532 2.37

T5: Neem cake 250 kg ha-1 128.7 18.73 0.67 15.60 2.56 72.3 1400 - 1400 60200 35030 2.39

T6:Raising of sunnhemp between rows incorporated before flowering (12 t/ha)

120.3 16.53 0.73 14.67 2.62 73.7 1427 - 1427 61357 38476 2.68

T7:Intercropping with black gram and cropresidue application after pod plucking (1.5 t/ha)

120.7 17.93 0.67 15.50 2.72 77.0 1267 616 1882 80937 54127 3.02

T8: T4 + T5 112.3 18.47 0.89 14.40 2.47 72.7 1495 - 1495 46870 30635 2.89

T9 : T4 + T6 133.7 16.87 0.73 16.50 2.55 93.3 1441 - 1441 70723 45576 2.81

T10: T4 + T5 + T6 124.3 18.00 0.67 17.60 2.82 88.6 1543 - 1543 76325 4400 1.06

T11 : T4 + T5 + T7 129.1 19.07 0.73 13.80 2.87 69.7 1293 686 1979 57921 33532 2.37

SE d 5.86 1.51 0.09 1.41 0.16 8.34 116.28

CD @5 % 12.23 NS NS 3.00 0.35 17.5 242.57

D - 92


AGR IV.3. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Banswara under irrigated condition in North Zone

Treatments


No. of monopod

ia at harvest


No. of Bolls

/plant

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Organic carbon (%)

Init

ial

Fin

al

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 93 2.71 15.67 36 2.04 436 0.56 0.47

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 169 4.40 26.67 68 3.73 2669 0.56 0.52


154 4.00 23.33 65 3.67 2303 0.56 0.67


138 3.78 23.00 51 3.11 1348 0.56 0.54

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 141 3.67 23.00 54 3.13 1436 0.56 0.63


137 3.60 22.00 52 2.93 1290 0.56 0.70


129 2.93 21.67 49 2.30 1065 0.56 0.66

T8.T4+T5 141 4.13 23.00 54 3.47 1938 0.56 0.64

T9.T4+T6 140 3.67 21.00 52 3.00 1717 0.56 0.69

T10.T4+T5+T6 151 4.20 26.00 60 3.60 2279 0.56 0.72

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 144 3.57 25.33 62 3.57 2012 0.56 0.68

SEd 4.71 0.30 1.59 1.81 0.30 111.91 0.00 0.03

CD (5%) 11.48 0.74 3.87 4.41 0.73 273 0.072

D - 93


AGR IV.4. Nutrient availability (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Banswara under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Nutrient availability (kg/ha) Cost of cultivati

on (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR Initial Final

N P2O

5 K2O N P2O5 K2O

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 262 26 384 180 17 256 12000 20355 8355 0.63

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 262 26 384 232 21 298 15000 120244 105244 6.98

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 262 26 384 281 28 369 15000 99995 84995 5.85


262 26 384 258 26 333 13000 62021 49021 3.42

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 262 26 384 270 27 355 16500 63100 46600 2.87


262 26 384 304 31 401 15000 58873 43873 2.64


262 26 384 295 29 392 17000 48895 31895 1.85

T8.T4+T5 262 26 384 285 28 368 17500 88270 70770 4.11

T9.T4+T6 262 26 384 287 30 397 18000 78452 60452 3.25

T10.T4+T5+T6 262 26 384 316 32 417 20500 99245 78745 3.87

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 262 26 384 308 30 404 22500 92230 69730 3.01

SEd

11.48

1.11 15.17

0.00 3830 3830 0.14

CD (5%)

28 2.71 37

9344 9344 0.33

D - 94


AGR IV.5. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Bhawanipatna under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments




No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Organic carbon (%)

Init

ial

Fin

al

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 62.9 1.8 9.5 21.0 2.2 924 0.48 0.49

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 100.5 1.6 14.9 37.3 3.8 1614 0.59 0.64

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 96.5 1.6 13.3 30.8 3.7 1580 0.59 0.62


64.5 1.9 10.6 22.3 2.7 1066 0.50 0.54

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 72.2 1.8 11.3 23.9 2.9 1169 0.52 0.58


68.3 1.8 10.5 23.2 2.8 1113 0.49 0.56


66.8 1.8 10.5 22.1 2.4 1010 0.51 0.55

T8.T4+T5 77.7 1.7 12.9 26.9 3.4 1403 0.51 0.55

T9.T4+T6 53.1 1.8 11.3 25.9 3.2 1356 0.56 0.58

T10.T4+T5+T6 79.5 1.7 12.8 27.0 3.5 1434 0.52 0.58

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 74.2 1.8 10.9 24.9 3.1 1341 0.52 0.56

SEd 7.0 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.10 51.15 0.02 0.02

CD (5%) 20.8 0.1 1.1 1.7 0.28 150.88 0.05 0.05

D - 95


AGR IV.6 Nutrient availability (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Bhawanipatna under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Nutrient availability (kg/ha) Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR Initial Final

N P2O5 K2O N P2O5 K2O

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 262 26 384 180 17 256 12000 20355 8355 0.63

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 262 26 384 232 21 298 15000 120244 105244 6.98

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 262 26 384 281 28 369 15000 99995 84995 5.85


262 26 384 258 26 333 13000 62021 49021 3.42

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 262 26 384 270 27 355 16500 63100 46600 2.87


262 26 384 304 31 401 15000 58873 43873 2.64


262 26 384 295 29 392 17000 48895 31895 1.85

T8.T4+T5 262 26 384 285 28 368 17500 88270 70770 4.11

T9.T4+T6 262 26 384 287 30 397 18000 78452 60452 3.25

T10.T4+T5+T6 262 26 384 316 32 417 20500 99245 78745 3.87

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 262 26 384 308 30 404 22500 92230 69730 3.01

SEd

11.5 1.1 15.27 0.00 3830 3830 0.14

CD (5%)

28 2.7 37

9344 9344 0.33

D - 96


AGR IV.7. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Indore under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments



No. of sympodia

at harvest

No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Organic carbon (%)

Init

ial

Fin

al

T1.Absolute control (No Organic & inorganic)

109.5 3.11 12.80 27.10 1.70 690 0.52 0.54



96.5 3.22 17.20 32.50 1.80 1020 0.55 0.57


100.4 3.55 13.43 30.20 1.73 850 0.54 0.59

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 94.1 2.44 14.20 29.90 1.65 860 0.55 0.59


96.9 3.00 15.50 31.20 1.70 910 0.56 0.59


95.5 2.33 15.30 29.50 1.90 800 0.57 0.57

T8.T4+T5 90.4 2.78 13.20 28.70 1.95 850 0.58 0.58

T9.T4+T6 89.5 3.67 15.13 31.10 1.98 900 0.55 0.58

T10.T4+T5+T6 106.2 3.44 14.87 29.20 1.97 860 0.54 0.59

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 95.2 3.11 14.70 30.20 1.96 855 0.57 0.57

S Em + 6.23 0.35 0.49 0.81 0.08 34.4 -- --

CD (5%) 18.39 1.01 1.46 2.38 0.22 101.4 -- --

D - 97


AGR IV.8. Economic evaluation of different organic nutrient managements at Indore under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments Cotton

Equivalent Yield (kg/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross return

(Rs./ha)

Net return (Rs./ha)

B:C Ratio (Rs./ha)

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 690 18000 34500 16500 1.91

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 1300 21200 65000 43800 3.06


1020 30150 51000 20850 1.69


850 20425 42500 22075 2.08

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 860 23301 43000 19690 1.84


910 21200 45500 24300 2.14


1082 20105 54100 33995 2.69

T8.T4+T5 850 24395 42500 18105 1.74

T9.T4+T6 900 22155 45000 22845 2.03

T10.T4+T5+T6 860 26835 43000 16165 1.60

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 1135 25790 56750 30960 2.02

S Em + 50.00 931.30 1228.2 393.3 0.034

CD (5%) 147.50 2747.33 3623.0 1160.3 0.10

D - 98


AGR IV.9. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central zone

Treatments


No. of monopodia at

harvest


No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Organic carbon (%)

Init

ial

Fin

al

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 76 1.7 8.1 34 3.72 1147 0.70 0.70

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 80 1.7 9.1 34 3.75 1162 0.71 0.73


82 1.7 9.1 35 3.84 1365 0.72 0.76

T4.Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilizers and foliar application of PPFM

82 1.7 9.3 36 3.87 1189 0.74 0.78

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 83 1.7 10.0 40 3.89 1283 0.70 0.82

T6.Raising of Sun hemp between rows incorporated before flowering

83 1.7 10.5 40 3.82 1242 0.71 0.80

T7.Intercropping with black gram 85 1.9 10.8 41 3.90 1250 0.73 0.78

T8.T4+T5 87 1.9 10.6 44 4.01 1304 0.70 0.82

T9.T4+T6 86 1.8 10.7 44 3.97 1301 0.72 0.79

T10.T4+T5+T6 89 2.1 11.1 47 4.08 1182 0.73 0.83

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 89 2.1 11.5 50 4.19 1387 0.74 0.81

SEd 4.98 0.1 0.6 2.16 0.21 83.69 - -

CD (5%) NS NS 1.7 6.37 NS NS - -

AGR IV.10. Nutrient uptake (kg/ha), nutrient availability (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central Zone

D - 99


Treatments


Nutrient availability (kg/ha) Treat. Cost (Rs/ ha)

Gross return

(Rs/ ha)

Net Return

(Rs/ ha)

BCR Initial Final

N

P2

O 5

K2

O

N

P2

O 5

K2

O

N P K

T1. Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 2803 413 2178 257 38 193 244 36 190 27824 51595 23771 1.85

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 2915 418 2335 259 37 209 251 36 201 33049 52270 19221 1.58


3626 537 2825 261 42 211 266 39 207 34115 61413 27297 1.80


3037 452 2508 261 40 215 255 38 211 28886 53496 24610 1.85

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 3323 509 2489 264 41 198 259 40 194 30116 57742 27626 1.92


3417 476 2507 271 41 203 275 38 202 30217 55909 25691 1.85


3333 512 2500 263 43 204 267 41 200 31726 56242 24516 1.77

T8.T4+T5 3520 495 2738 272 39 214 270 38 210 31065 58675 27610 1.89

T9.T4+T6 3644 495 2551 278 39 201 280 38 196 31368 58559 27191 1.87

T10.T4+T5+T6 3169 473 2281 266 42 203 268 40 193 32317 53175 20857 1.65

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 3737 499 2690 269 37 196 269 36 194 34866 62405 27539 1.79

SEd 136 25 119 11.0 2.29 10.1 10.8 1.99 9.48 - - - -

CD (5%) 400 74 350 NS NS NS NS NS NS - - - -

AGR IV.11.Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone

D - 100


Treatments


No. of monopo

dia at harvest


No. of Bolls

/Sq M

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Seed cotton equivalent

yield (kg ha-1)

T1 - Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 139.5 0.7 19.9 34.7 1.3 466 466

T2 - Control (RDN through inorganic) 153.9 0.8 23.7 54.0 1.7 921 921

T3 - RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 161.5 0.5 23.6 43.3 1.6 711 711

T4 - Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM

150.3 0.7 19.5 39.7 1.4 660 660

T5 - Neem cake 250 kg/ha 135.9 0.5 19.7 31.0 1.5 501 501

T6 - Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

113.0 0.5 12.9 20.3 1.3 383 383

T7 - Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean

102.9 0.3 10.1 24.3 1.4 422 910

T8 - T4+T5 143.5 0.7 20.1 38.7 1.6 702 702

T9 - T4+T6 112.0 0.4 14.9 23.3 1.4 404 404

T10 - T4+T5+T6 113.4 0.4 13.6 25.0 1.5 432 432

T11 - T4+ T5 + T7 101.5 0.4 14.5 32.3 1.5 476 1025

SEd 5.8 0.1 0.7 1.6 0.1 39.9 41.4

CD (5%) 17.0 0.2 N.S. 4.8 0.2 117.7 122.2

D - 101


AGR IV.12. Economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments Treatment

Cost (Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation (Rs.ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1 - Absolute control (No organic & inorganic) - 28300 25936 -2364 0.92

T2 - Control (RDN through inorganic) 3325 34309 51253 16944 1.49

T3 - RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 28875 58646 39582 -19064 0.67

T4 - Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM

2230 31697 36757 5060 1.16

T5 - Neem cake 250 kg/ha 6250 34760 27877 -6882 0.80

T6 - Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

3530 29350 21295 -8055 0.72

T7 - Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 3581 29638 50630 20991 1.71

T8 - T4+T5 8480 38198 39008 810 1.02

T9 - T4+T6 5760 31709 22445 -9264 0.71

T10 - T4+T5+T6 12010 38126 23986 -14139 0.63

T11 - T4+ T5 + T7 12061 38443 56980 18537 1.48

SEd - 239 2305 2099 0.06

CD (5%) - 706 6799 6191 0.17

D - 102


AGR IV 13. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Rahuri under Irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments



No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1 Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 69.7 17.2 142.7 2.8 779

T2 Control (RDN through inorganic) 99.1 24.6 238.7 3.6 1673

T3 RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 95.8 24.0 234.7 3.5 1598

T4 Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilizers and foliar application of PPFM

86.0 21.7 194.7 2.9 905

T5 Neem cake 250 kg/ha 86.3 22.8 201.3 3.0 915

T6 Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

80.3 21.6 177.3 2.9 891

T7 Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 76.2 20.1 168.0 2.8 845

T8 T4+T5 91.1 23.6 222.7 3.1 1286

T9 T4+T6 90.8 22.0 212.0 3.1 1074

T10 T4+T5+T6 95.0 24.0 233.4 3.3 1406

T11 T4+ T5 + T7 92.7 23.8 226.7 3.2 1294

SEd 6.71 6.7 1.5 12.9 0.2

CD (5%) 19.01 19.0 4.3 36.5 0.6

D - 103


AGR IV 14. Economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Rahuri under Irrigated condition in Central Zone


Cost (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1 Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 43038 37375 -5663 0.87 T2 Control (RDN through inorganic) 52573 80310 27737 1.53 T3 RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 63701 76703 13002 1.20

T4 Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM

45473 43438 -2035 0.95

T5 Neem cake 250 kg/ha 48361 43925 -4435 0.91

T6 Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

47399 42785 -4613 0.90

T7 Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 52867 40574 -12294 0.77 T8 T4+T5 52213 61772 9509 1.18 T9 T4+T6 50159 51551 1391 1.03 T10 T4+T5+T6 56617 67496 10879 1.19 T11 T4+ T5 + T7 61710 62096 395 1.00

SEd - 4148 5363 0.06

CD (5%) - 11748 15189 0.19

D - 104


AGR V 15. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Surat under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments




No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Initial Organic carbon

(%)

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 86.8 0.78 11.5 47.5 3.11 553 0.42

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 107.9 1.06 13.9 63.3 2.98 1094 0.49


97.3 1.02 13.6 56.9 3.18 758 0.55


87.0 1.09 13.7 53.5 3.03 645 0.48

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 89.7 0.94 11.1 51.5 3.06 603 0.57


86.9 0.94 12.7 55.9 3.08 661 0.63

T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 89.9 1.01 10.5 49.4 3.18 668 0.59

T8.T4+T5 87.5 1.02 10.6 51.7 2.80 658 0.57

T9.T4+T6 93.9 0.93 11.7 51.9 2.85 728 0.71

T10.T4+T5+T6 93.7 0.93 13.2 53.7 2.93 795 0.69

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 99.7 1.01 13.9 55.7 3.02 836 0.64

SEd 2.911 0.060 0.923 1.739 0.167 39.8 0.03

CD (5%) 11.71 NS NS 5.13 NS 161 0.10

D - 105


AGR IV 16. Nutrient availability (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Surat under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments

Initial Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR N P2O5 K2O

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 207.6 36.6 392.4 33638 91190 57551 1.71

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 267.0 40.2 403.4 35947 180577 144630 4.02

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 250.1 45.9 403.0 48233 125079 76846 1.59


237.0 39.3 487.0 34338 106383 72044 2.10

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 238.5 36.2 458.6 36988 99485 62497 1.69


242.9 35.9 482.4 39788 108995 69207 1.74


241.6 35.2 459.2 34888 110221 75332 2.16

T8.T4+T5 247.6 40.5 559.6 37688 108610 70921 1.88

T9.T4+T6 258.5 43.0 459.1 40488 120168 79680 1.97

T10.T4+T5+T6 249.7 39.2 481.5 43838 131246 87408 1.99

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 241.6 37.6 506.5 38938 137933 98995 2.54

SEd 8.229 3.34 32.76

CD (5%) 24.3 NS NS

D - 106


AGR V 17. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments




No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 131.5 0.6 18.2 71.9 1.2 670

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 143.3 1.3 31.2 127.4 2.0 1025

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 133.1 0.8 27.9 92.0 1.4 900


120.6 0.4 25.1 78.9 1.7 838

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 121.9 0.6 23.9 82.9 1.9 800


114.8 0.4 20.4 88.0 1.3 800

T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 123.8 0.5 25.3 97.3 1.6 665.0

(314.8)

T8.T4+T5 118.6 0.4 20.7 89.1 2.0 900

T9.T4+T6 130.5 0.8 23.3 103.5 1.7 951

T10.T4+T5+T6 124.9 0.5 35.2 138.8 2.2 1200

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 126.7 0.6 24.9 86.1 1.5 1010.4 (316.1)

SEm 2.6 0.2 1.3 4.8 0.1 25.2

CD (5%) 7.6 NS 3.9 14.3 0.3 74.2

Note- Yield of inter crop (Soybean) shown in brackets in T7 and T11

D - 107


AGR IV 18. Economics as influenced by organic methods of cultivation at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone


Cost (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 27500 30105 2605 1.09

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 32837 46125 13288 1.40

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 38611 40500 1889 1.40


32121 37665 5544 1.17

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 33063 36000 2937 1.08

T6.Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering 33794 36000 2206 1.06

T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 32665 48765 16100 1.49

T8.T4+T5 37689 40500 2811 1.07

T9.T4+T6 37448 42750 5302 1.14

T10.T4+T5+T6 43962 54000 10038 1.22

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 42828 64410 21582 1.50

Seed cotton yield @ Rs. 4500/quintal

D - 108


AGR IV. 19. Growth parameters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Dharwad under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm)

No. of monopod

ia per plant

No. of sympod

ia per plant

No. of Bolls/S

q.m

Boll weight (g)

Seed Cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Cost of Cultivation (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1 : Absolute control (No organic & inorganic) 75.3 0.8 11.8 87.3 3.90 958 37788 49791 12003 1.32

T2 : Control (RDN through inorganic) 105.9 1.8 18.5 138.0 4.50 2769 63455 143986 80531 2.27

T3 : RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis

92.0 1.7 17.7 127.7 4.47 2172 62359 112939 50579 1.81

T4 : Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM at flowering and Boll Development Stage

88.7 1.4 17.1 114.0 4.30 1785 53526 92830 39304 1.73

T5 : Neem cake 250 kg/ha 87.9 1.3 16.9 113.7 4.28 1781 57403 92592 35189 1.61

T6 : Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

86.1 1.1 16.0 112.7 4.10 1671 53754 86882 33128 1.62

T7 : Intercropping with Green gram and crop residue application after harvest of pods

84.8 1.0 13.1 98.3 3.95 994

*(2003) 51171

51694 (104150)

524 (52979)

1.01 (2.04)

T8 : T4 + T5 90.1 1.5 17.3 119.0 4.38 1910 58651 99327 40676 1.69

T9 : T4 + T6 87.0 1.1 16.3 111.7 4.10 1733 54667 90139 35472 1.65

T10 T4 + T5 + T6 90.6 1.7 17.5 123.3 4.42 2010 57550 104521 46971 1.82

T11 : T4 + T5 + T7 85.1 1.0 15.3 110.7 4.03

1432 *(2482)

55461 74477

(129045) 19015

(73583) 1.34

(2.33)

SE.m 4.4 0.1 1.0 7.0 0.19 131

(134) --

6835 (6968)

6835 (6968)

0.12 (0.11)

C.D.at 5% 13.0 0.3 3.0 20.6 NS 388

(395) --

20164 (20556)

20164 (20556)

0.35 (0.36)

* T7 and T11 Figures in parenthesis indicates cotton equivalent yield of the intercropping system cotton + greengram . Greengram yield : T7: 874 kg ha-1 T11: 909 kg ha-1 Green gram price: Rs. 60/kg Seed cotton price : Rs. 52/kg

D - 109


AGR IV 20. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) , yield parameters and economics as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Dharwad under rainfed condition in South Zone (mean of 2016 and 2017)

Treatments No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

SCY/ plant

SCY (kg/ha)

Treatment Cost (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1 : Absolute control (No organic & inorganic) 70.2 3.85 22.6 778 34588 41183 6596 1.18

T2 : Control (RDN through inorganic) 126.8 4.42 47.6 2117 57356 111903 54547 1.91

T3 : RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 114.5 4.37 40.6 1667 56999 88159 31160 1.52

T4 : Seed treatment and soil application of recommended bio fertilisers and foliar application of PPFM at flowering and Boll

Development Stage

101.0 4.20 36.6 1458 49053 77239 28186 1.56

T5 : Neem cake 250 kg/ha 100.3 4.18 35.7 1434 52830 75909 23078 1.42

T6 : Raising of Sun hemp / fodder cowpea between rows incorporated before flowering

98.2 4.08 33.9 1362 49309 72157 22848 1.45

T7 : Intercropping with Green gram and crop

residue application after harvest of pods 81.2 3.91 27.2

836 (1699)* 47435

44329 (90097)

-3106 (42661)

0.93 (1.89)

T8 : T4 + T5 100.2 4.22 35.7 1473 53627 77887 24260 1.43

T9 : T4 + T6 100.0 4.11 37.1 1435 50274 76057 25783 1.50

T10 T4 + T5 + T6 106.3 4.30 39.7 1575 52472 83317 30845 1.56

T11 : T4 + T5 + T7 89.3 4.01 29.3 1225

(2163)* 51477 64945

(114758) 13468

(63281) 1.25

(2.22)

SE.m 4.3 0.10 1.6 87

(90) --

4591 (4750)

4591 (4750)

0.08 (0.09)

C.D.at 5% 12.7 0.31 4.8 257

(266) --

13544 (14013)

13544 (14013)

0.25 (0.26)

* T7 and T11 Figures in parenthesis indicates cotton equivalent yield

D - 110


AGR IV 21. Growth characters, Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic methods of cultivation at LAM under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments




No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Organic carbon (%)

Initial

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 141.1 2.1 13.5 47.2 3.2 874 0.15

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 162.7 2.4 19.9 90.9 3.5 1535 0.25


155.5 2.2 17.3 69.1 3.4 1124 0.32


143.9 2.1 18.6 55.5 3.3 893 0.26

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 151.3 2.1 17.6 67.2 3.4 1112 0.23


154.8 1.9 17.7 63.4 3.3 1068 0.29


150.4 1.6 17.9 52.0 3.5 879 0.22

T8.T4+T5 151.9 2.0 16.6 75.9 3.3 1224 0.31

T9.T4+T6 156.1 1.7 17.8 66.4 3.3 1077 0.25

T10.T4+T5+T6 154.3 2.1 17.7 72.5 3.4 1210 0.28

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 147.8 2.1 17.1 74.9 3.5 1228 0.23

CD (5%) N/A N/A 2.4 13.1 N/A 251

SEm+ 5.8 0.3 0.8 4.4 0.1 85

SEd 8.2 0.4 1.1 6.2 0.1 120

D - 111


AGRI V 22. Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) and economics as influenced organic methods of cultivation at LAM under rainfed condition in South Zone

Treatments Nutrient uptake

(kg/ha)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

N P K

T1.Absolute control (No org& inorg) 11.71 4.36 12.30 0 37,762 6,832 1.22

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 21.82 8.14 22.93 5400 66,339 24,386 1.58

T3.RD of Nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis 17.95 6.69 18.87 8000 48,581 7,522 1.18


12.77 4.76 13.42 2000 38,579 5,488 1.16

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 17.92 6.68 18.83 5000 48,050 10,096 1.26


17.23 6.42 18.11 1500 46,131 12,054 1.35

T7.Intercropping with green gram/black gram/ ground nut/soybean 12.58 4.69 13.22 1500 37,966 5,496 1.17

T8.T4+T5 18.98 7.07 19.95 7000 52,867 11,965 1.29

T9.T4+T6 16.48 6.15 17.32 3500 46,539 10,382 1.29

T10.T4+T5+T6 18.32 6.83 19.26 8500 52,255 9,973 1.23

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 17.82 6.65 18.73 8500 53,071 10,629 1.25

SEd 0.75 0.28 0.79 - 5171 4154 0.11

CD (5%) 1.58 0.59 1.67 - 10862 8725 0.22

D - 112


AGRIV.23. Growth attributes and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by organic nutrient managements at Srivilliputhur under irrigated condition in South Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm) No.of

Monopodia No.of

sympodia Bolls/m2

Boll weight (g)


T1- Absolute control (No organic & inorganic) 104.9 1.1 13.0 64.3 3.3 1222

T2 – Control (RDN through inorganic) 126.8 1.5 17.5 79.3 3.7 1790

T3- RD of nutrient through organic based on P equivalent basis

116.7 1.2 15.9 71.6 3.6 1496

T4 – Seed treatment & soil application of bio-fertilizers & foliar application of PPFM

113.0 1.1 15.2 69.8 3.6 1336

T5- Neem cake 250 kg/ha 113.5 1.2 14.9 68.7 3.6 1385

T6 – Raising of sunnhemp & inc. before flowering 114.5 1.2 15.8 70.2 3.5 1416

T7 – Intercropping with green gram 112.7 1.1 14.7 68.2 3.5 1311

T8 – T4 + T5 117.4 1.3 16.2 72.6 3.7 1427

T9 - T4 + T6 120.0 1.3 16.5 73.2 3.7 1451

T10 - T4 + T5 + T6 124.5 1.4 17.1 76.3 3.7 1701

T11 - T4 + T5 + T7 122.3 1.4 17.0 75.0 3.7 1627

SEd. 7.51 0.1 0.8 4.3 0.2 76.2

CD(P=0.05) 16.97 0.3 0.9 9.7 NS 173.3

CV % 9.2 11.1 7.0 7.4 6.3 10.5

D - 113


AGRIV.24. Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and organic carbon (%) as influenced by organic methods of cultivation at Coimbatore under irrigated Condition in South Zone

Treatments




No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

Organic carbon (%)

Initial Final

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 76.6 1.6 9.7 46.7 3.3 689 0.61 0.61



88.0 1.4 10.6 55.0 4.0 965 0.62 0.62


81.1 1.4 9.4 55.7 4.0 849 0.62 0.62

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 86.7 1.7 10.4 58.0 4.1 923 0.62 0.62


83.7 1.1 9.3 49.3 4.0 871 0.62 0.63


89.4 1.4 11.9 58.0 3.9 842 0.62 0.64

T8.T4+T5 80.6 1.1 9.8 56.0 4.0 963 0.63 0.65

T9.T4+T6 78.8 1.2 10.8 53.7 4.1 905 0.63 0.64

T10.T4+T5+T6 86.1 1.1 10.1 65.7 4.4 1067 0.63 0.66

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 93.6 1.6 12.9 63.3 4.1 1001 0.63 0.66

SEd 5.9 0.3 2.0 5.1 3.1 69 0.09 0.10

CD (5%) 12.323 0.643 4.255 10.663* 6.405 145* NS NS

D - 114


AGR IV.25. Nutrient uptake (kg/ha), nutrient availability (kg/ha) and economics as influenced organic methods of cultivation at Coimbatore under irrigated Condition in South Zone

Treatments Nutrient uptake

(kg/ha)

Nutrient availability (kg/ha) Cost of

cultivation (Rs/ha)

Gross return

(Rs/ ha)

Net Return

(Rs/ ha)

BCR Initial Final

N P2O5 K2O N P2O5 K2O N P K

T1.Absolute control (No organic& inorganic) 65 16 68 201 18.5 213 171 14.3 198 39000 34450 -4550 0.88

T2.Control (RDN through inorganic) 98 24 97 200 18.3 221 232 18.4 282 49600 93250 43650 1.88


73 17 68 204 18.6 218 224 17.3 254 40150 48250 8100 1.20


69 14 62 205 18.4 215 201 13.1 213 41360 42450 1090 1.03

T5.Neem cake 250 kg/ha 72 15 89 207 18.2 217 198 12.2 198 43200 46150 2950 1.07

T6.Raising of Sun hemp 70 14.5 63 206 18.5 220 201 13.7 214 42300 43550 1250 1.03

T7.Intercropping with cowpea 69 14 61 210 18.1 221 198 13.5 207 42250 42100 -150 1.00

T8.T4+T5 79 16 85 207 17.9 217 207 13.9 211 42950 48150 5200 1.12

T9.T4+T6 74 16 85 208 18.3 215 211 14.4 213 42350 45250 2900 1.07

T10.T4+T5+T6 84 18 82 210 18.2 221 214 14.9 220 43750 53350 9600 1.22

T11.T4+ T5 + T7 81 18 92 213 18.6 218 216 16.5 221 44400 50050 5650 1.14

D - 115


AGR V.1. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by conservation treatments at Junagarh (irrigated condition)

Treatments




No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.Conventional tillage+ No residue management 113 1.7 16.0 99.0 3.5 2115

T2.Zero tillage+ No residue management 116 1.7 17.1 101.0 3.8 1723

T3.Zero tillage+ 50 % residue management 120 1.9 17.3 101.0 3.3 2074

T4.Zero tillage+ 100 % residue management 123 1.9 16.7 103.0 3.8 2050

T5.Permanent bed system + Zero tillage + No residue management 128 2.3 17.6 114.0 3.9 2542

T6.Permanent bed system + Zero tillage+ 50 % residue management 125 2.1 18.4 112.0 3.9 2180

T7.Permanent bed system + Zero tillage+ 100 % residue management 126 2.3 17.5 112.0 3.9 2031

SEd 7.35 0.1 1.1 6.4 0.1 135

CD (5%) NS NS NS NS 0.4 416

AGR V.2. Bulk density and economics as influenced by conservation treatments at Junagarh under irrigated condition in Central Zone

Treatments Bulk density Quantity of

irrigation water used (cm)


Cost of Cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

MBCR 0-15 cm

16-30 cm

T1. Conventional tillage+ No residue management 1.62 1.64 52.4 2400 56336 99391 43054 1.76

T2. Zero tillage+ No residue management 1.60 1.58 52.4 0 51761 80988 29227 1.56

T3.Zero tillage+ 50 % residue management 1.59 1.58 52.4 0 53605 97495 43890 1.82

T4.Zero tillage+ 100 % residue management 1.60 1.59 52.4 0 53478 96359 42881 1.80

T5.Permanent bed system + Zero tillage + No residue management

1.60 1.58 52.4 1200 57320 119472 62153 2.08


1.58 1.56 52.4 1200 55421 102482 47061 1.85


1.60 1.57 52.4 1200 54639 95472 40834 1.75

D - 116


AGR V.3. Growth, yield attributes and economics as influenced by conservation treatments at Srivilliputhur under irrigated condition in South Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm)

No.of Monopodia

No.of sympodia

Bolls/m2 Boll

weight (g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ ha)

Gross Income (Rs/ ha)

Net Income (Rs/ ha)

BCR

T1 - Conventional tillage+ No residue management

109.8 1.39 12.50 77.30 4.33 1882 50800 86572 35772 1.70

T2 Zero tillage + No residue management

111.3 1.41 11.25 75.43 4.27 1915 50800 88090 37290 1.73

T3 Zero tillage + 50 % residue management

113.7 1.43 11.08 72.90 4.21 1943 50800 89378 38578 1.76

T4 Zero tillage + 100 % residue management

109.6 1.45 12.33 75.07 4.11 1974 50800 90804 40004 1.79

T5 Permanent bed system + Zero tillage + No residue management

115.2 1.58 11.50 76.13 4.25 2012 52200 92552 40352 1.77

T6 Permanent bed system + Zero tillage + 50 % residue management

117.5 1.57 11.67 78.77 4.31 1995 52200 91770 39570 1.76

T7 Permanent bed system + Zero tillage + 100 % residue management

119.1 1.53 12.25 74.80 4.06 2028 52200 93288 41088 1.79

SEd. 6.08 0.14 1.05 3.41 0.21 74.2

CD(P=0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS

CV% 9.17 8.07 8.25 9.37 7.29 7.71

D - 117


AGR VI 1. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Kanpur under rainfed condition in North Zone


(cm) at harvest



No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton

Yield (kg/ha)

T1.Control 212.6 1.8 16.6 276.1 4.17 1393

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 213.3 2.0 18 277.9 4.19 1417

T3.T2+ post emergence application 215.0 1.8 18.8 295.8 4.16 1305

T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application 212.3 1.6 18.0 267.6 4.18 1578

T5.T4+intercultural operation( harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn

215.1 2.2 18.0 313.8 4.17 1330

T6.T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers (operated by tractor/power tiller/others)

218.3 2.0 18.4 301.5 4.16 1355

T7.T6 + drip fertigation (only for irrigated centres) - - - - -- -

T8.Drip fertigation+ poly mulch (only for irrigated centres) - - - - - -

T9.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 213.6 1.6 19.2 297.6 4.25 1900

SEd 3.15 - - 46.21 0.24 58.5

CD (5%) NS - - NS NS 127.5

D - 118


AGR VI 2. Labour used, and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Kanpur under rainfed condition in North Zone

Treatments Labour

used (No./ha)


Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.Control 144 - 37848 57755 19907 1.52

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 128 2500 34738 58895 24157 1.69

T3.T2+ post emergence application 83 1272 26414 54975 28561 2.08

T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application 86 3246 29184 64830 35646 2.22

T5.T4+intercultural operation (harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn

86 1600 30784 56150 25366 1.82

T6. T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers (operated by tractor/power tiller/others)

84 5000 33488 57025 23537 1.70

T7.T6 + drip fertigation (only for irrigated centres) - - - - -

T8.Drip fertigation+ poly mulch (only for irrigated centres) - - - - -

T9.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 91 13500 38450 76100 37650 1.97

AGR VI 3. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Surat in Central Zone

D - 119



(cm) at harvest

No. of monopodia at

harvest

No. of sympodia at

harvest

No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight (g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.Control 113.3 2.65 20.5 56.5 3.72 2943

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 114.4 2.95 22.3 65.2 3.74 3198




130.7 3.02

22.5 72.9 3.76 3685


121.7 2.82

20.1 65.9 3.85 3641

T7.T2+ Poly mulch 121.5 2.97 22.3 74.6 3.82 3745

SEd 3.120 0.23 0.65 3.24 0.08 73.4

CD (5%) 9.61 NS NS NS NS 226

AGR VI 4. Labour used and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments Labour used

(No./ha) Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.Control 126 28239 65963 161860 95897 1.45

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 78 20745 58469 175878 117409 2.01




32 13607 52331 202656 150325 2.87


30 11819 50543 200241 149698 2.96

T7.T2+ Poly mulch 56 43445 82169 205968 123799 1.51

D - 120


AGR VI 5.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Akola under rainfed condition in Central Zone


(cm) at harvest

No. of monopodia at

harvest

No. of sympodia at

harvest

No. of Bolls

/SQM

Boll weight

(g)


T1.Control 85.4 0.5 13.0 45.0 2.70 866





97.3 0.5 14.9 55.0 3.17 1261


102.3 1.1 16.2 59.7 3.30 1325


SE d 4.7 0.3 0.8 4.4 0.26 52

CD (5%) 10.2 NS 2.0 9.6 0.60 113

D - 121


AGR VI 6. Bulk density, labour used, and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Akola under rainfed condition in central zone

Treatments

Bulk density (g/cc)

Labour used

(No/ha)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

B:C ratio 0-15

cm 16-30

cm

T1.Control 1.61 1.63 87 12060 30220 37425 7205 1.24

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 1.59 1.61 91 13060 31854 42910 11055 1.35

T3.T2+ post emergence application 1.59 1.61 82 12210 31545 47576 16032 1.51

T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application 1.58 1.61 71 12520 32160 50213 18053 1.56


1.57 1.60 74 12160 32291 54455 22164 1.69


1.58 1.60 70 14660 35113 57243 22130 1.63

T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 1.60 1.62 104 24100 45830 68273 22443 1.49

SE d 0.01 0.01 2260 2260

CD (5%) NS NS

4903 4903

D - 122


AGR VI 7. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Bhawanipatna (rainfed condition)

Treatments Plant height (cm)

at harvest No. of monopodia

at harvest No. of sympodia

at harvest No. of

Bolls/SQM Boll

weight (g) Seed cotton Yield (kg/ha)

T1.Control (recommended practice) 97.0 1.8 13.3 45.4 4.6 2655




T5.T4+ earthing up by animal drawn plough 101.8 1.7 14.6 64.0 4.9 3216

T6.T5+ Power sprayer 104.7 1.6 15.0 65.6 4.9 3274


SEd 1.18 0.0 0.2 1.6 0.1 68.8

CD (5%) 3.62 0.1 0.7 4.8 0.2 211.9

AGR VI 8. Bulk density, labour used, and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Bhawanipatna under rainfed condition

Treatments Bulk density

(g/cc) Labour used

(No./ha)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR 0-15 cm 16-30 cm

T1.Control 1.56 1.64 194.3 0 45467 114677 69211 2.52

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 1.48 1.59 183.7 2507 47633 117245 69611 2.46

T3.T2+ post emergence application 1.51 1.59 165.7 3500 44100 118260 74160 2.68

T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application 1.51 1.63 149.0 5017 41917 120125 78208 2.87

T5.T4+intercultural operation(harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn

1.43 1.47 132.0 6233 40100 138917 98817 3.47

T6.T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers(operated by tractor/power tiller/others)

1.40 1.50 126.7 6517 37967 141422 103456 3.73

T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 1.51 1.57 162.3 22467 62500 134453 71953 2.15

SEd 0.01 0.02 1.58 61.3 408.3 2972.4 3135.2 0.09

CD (5%) 0.04 0.05 4.88 188.9 1257.9 9157.6 9659.0 0.27

D - 123


AGR VI 9.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone


(cm) at harvest

No. of monopodia at

harvest

No. of sympodia at

harvest

No. of Bolls / Sq

M

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1 - Control 149.1 1.4 23.9 59.3 3.1 1697

T2 - T1 +Land shaping by machine 152.6 1.5 26.9 62.3 3.2 1829

T3 - T2+ post emergence application 156.0 1.5 26.5 59.5 3.2 1766

T4 - T3+ pre and post emergence application 158.1 1.3 24.9 63.2 3.2 1916

T5 - T4+intercultural operation(harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn

159.7 1.5 26.0 63.8 3.3 1941

T6 - T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers (operated by tractor/power tiller/others)

162.1 1.5 25.7 62.7 3.2 1899

T7 - T2+ poly mulch (rainfed centres) 166.2 1.7 30.9 71.9 3.4 2428

T8 - T1 + Land shaping by animals, PE weedicide, interculture by animals

155.3 1.4 26.1 63.4 3.2 1858

SEd 5.5 0.1 0.9 2.3 0.2 78.6

CD (5%) N.S. N.S. 2.8 7.0 N.S. 238.5

D - 124


AGR VI 10. Labour used and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Nanded under rainfed condition in central Zone


(No./ha) Treatment

Cost (Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1 - Control 157 12955 51036 85971 34935 1.68

T2 - T1 +Land shaping by machine 162 14700 53574 92667 39093 1.73

T3 - T2+ post emergence application 123 10270 48775 89506 40731 1.83

T4 - T3+ pre and post emergence application 133 12595 51995 97068 45073 1.86

T5 - T4+intercultural operation(harrowing/junior hoe/earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn

129 12835 52389 98364 45976 1.88

T6 - T5+ Boom sprayer /Others sprayers (operated by tractor/power tiller/others)

113 12376 51675 96210 44536 1.86

T7 - T2+ poly mulch (rainfed centres) 139 44093 86568 123031 36464 1.42

T8 - T1 + Land shaping by animals, PE weedicide, interculture by animals

132 12360 51413 94136 42723 1.83

SEd 3 - 472 3984 3512 0.06

CD (5%) 8 - 1431 12085 10654 0.18

D - 125


AGR VI 11.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Coimbatore under irrigated condition in South Zone

Treatments

Plant height (cm)at harvest

No. of monopodia at

harvest


No. of Bolls/SQ

M

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton Yield

(kg/ha)

T1.Control 120.5 0.9 18.1 99.0 5.1 2159





122.2 1.0 18.4 96.7 5.1 2059


123.3 1.2 18.2 95.0 5.1 1992

T7.T6 + drip fertigation (only for irrigated centres) 131.7 1.0 18.9 110.3 5.4 2212

T8.Drip fertigation+ poly mulch (only for irrigated centres) 133.9 1.0 18.1 115.0 5.4 2348

SEd 8.2 0.3 2.1 6.9 0.3 123

CD (5%) 17.6 0.6 4.4 14.7 0.7 264

D - 126


AGR VI. 12. Bulk density, labour used, and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Coimbatore under irrigated condition


(g/cc) Labour

used (No./ha)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR 0-15 cm 16-30 cm

T1.Control 1.21 1.32 91 18000 63000 103632 40632 1.64





1.19 1.28 35 9700 50000 98832 48832 1.97


1.10 1.27 30 11000 49500 95616 46116 1.93

T7.T6 + drip fertigation (only for irrigated centres) 1.18 1.28 14 13000 53500 106176 52676 1.98

T8.Drip fertigation+ poly mulch (only for irrigated centres) 1.18 1.20 10 15000 52500 112704 60204 2.14

AGR VI 13.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Raichur under rainfed condition




at harvest No. of

Bolls/SQM Boll weight

(g) Seed cotton Yield (kg/ha)

T1.Control 122.0 1.7 18.0 77.2 4.62 2085





135.1 2.1 24.1 135.9 4.88 2471


136.7 2.3 26.3 139.5 4.93 2539

T7.T2+ Poly mulch 137.7 2.5 28.1 144.2 4.97 2624

SEd 4.7 0.1 0.8 4.3 0.17 88

CD (5%) 13.6 0.3 2.4 12.5 0.51 255

D - 127


AGR VI . 14 . Bulk density, labour used, and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Raichur under rainfed condition in South Zone


(g/cc) Labour

used (No./ha)

Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR 0-15 cm 16-30 cm

T1.Control 1.24 1.46 124 10542 49935 112572 62637 2.25





1.16 1.44 80 12689 49935 133416 83481 2.67


1.15 1.43 73 13461 50935 137088 86153 2.69

T7.T2+ Poly mulch 1.22 1.44 102 15061 52735 141696 88961 2.69

SEd - - - - - 4741 4741 0.09

CD (5%) - - - - - 13781 13781 0.27

D - 128


AGR VI 15.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at LAM under rainfed condition in South Zone


(cm)at harvest

No. of monopodia at

harvest

No. of sympodia at

harvest

No. of Bolls/S

QM

Boll weight (g)


T1.Control 189 1.9 17.5 72.5 4.7 2204

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 190 2.3 18.3 72.7 4.3 2189

T3.T2+ post emergence application 192 2.2 17.5 71.4 4.6 2201

T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application 190 2.9 17.5 71.2 4.4 2356


190 2.7 23.9 86.3 4.2 2793


194 2.6 23.2 88.8 4.5 2930

T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 189 2.7 23.7 87.9 4.5 2829

CD (5%)

2.4 12.8

349

SEm+ 2.93 0.3 0.8 4.1 0.1 112

SEd 4.15 0.4 1.1 5.8 0.2 159

D - 129


AGR VI 16. Labour used, and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at LAM under rainfed condition in South Zone


(No./ha) Treatment Cost

(Rs/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)


Net Return (Rs/ha)

BCR

T1.Control 232 55282 74,020 95,232 21,212 1.28

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 197 53282 71,889 94,565 22,676 1.31

T3.T2+ post emergence application 191 53782 72,494 95,098 22,605 1.31

T4.T3+ pre and post emergence application 188 54282 74,305 1,01,764 27,459 1.37


183 51282 75,021 1,20,650 45,629 1.61

T6.T5+ Others sprayers(operated by tractor/power tiller/others)

115 43782 68,684 1,26,561 57,877 1.84

T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 171 77782 1,01,827 1,22,206 20,379 1.19

CD (5%) 8.57

2,968 15,085 12,117 0.13

SEm+ 2.75

953 4,842 3,889 0.04

SEd 3.89

1,347 6,848 5,500 0.06

D - 130


AGR VI 17.Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by labour saving methods at Nandyal under rainfed condition




at harvest No. of

Bolls/SQM

Boll weight

(g)


T1.Control 170.1 1.8 17.6 39.6 3.63 2043





172.3 2.0 20.0 46.4 4.82 2334


173.0 1.7 21.1 45.3 4.98 2084


SEd 10.7 0.17 1.4 4.5 0.4 239

CD (5%) NS NS 3.0 9.9 0.9 521

AGR VI 18. Labour used and economics as influenced by labour saving methods at Nandyal under rainfed condition in South Zone


(No./ha) Treatment

Cost (Rs/ha) Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha) Gross return

(Rs/ha) Net Return

(Rs/ha) B:C

Ratio

T1.Control 137 14000 60,500 91950 31450 1.5

T2.T1 +Land shaping by machine 135 15000 61,500 121470 59970 2.0



T5.T4+intercultural operation(harrowing/junior hoe/ earthing up) by animal/tractor drawn

97 3125 49625 105037 55412 2.1


98 3125 49625 93795 44170 1.9

T7.T2+ Poly mulch (rainfed centre) 80 27500 74000 136860 62860 1.8

D - 131


AGR IX 1.Growth characters as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Akola (rainfed condition) Treatments

M1 In situ Soil Moisture

Conservation M2 Control

M1 M2 T1 T2 Mean (Super

Absorbent) T1 Sowing T2 30 DAS T1 Sowing T2 30 DAS

Plant Height (cm)

S1 – Super Absorbent @ 0 kg /ha 102.0 99.3 97.2 92.9 100.7 95.0 99.6 96.1 97.9

S2- Super Absorbent @ 12.5 kg /ha 106.9 103.3 104.7 98.2 105.1 101.4 105.8 100.8 103.3

S3- Super Absorbent @ 18 kg /ha 108.5 108.8 103.0 99.3 108.6 101.2 105.7 104.1 104.9

Mean 105.8 103.8 101.6 96.8 104.8 99.2 103.7 100.3

Anova M T S M X T M X S S x T M x S X T

SE d 3.5 1.3 3.7 1.9 5.2 5.2 7.4

CD (5 %) 15.0 3.6 NS NS NS NS NS

No of Sympodia at harvest




Mean 17.5 19.6 15.8 16.7 18.5 16.3 16.6 18.2 0


SE d 0.5 0.5 0.9 0.8 1.3 1.3 1.9

CD (5 %) 2.2 1.5 2.0 NS NS NS NS

No. of Bolls /SQ M




Mean 59.8 62.0 53.2 57.2 60.9 55.2 56.5 59.6 54.2


SE d 1.0 0.9 2.1 1.2 2.9 2.9 4.1

CD (5 %) 4.2 2.4 4.4 NS NS NS NS

D - 132


AGR IX 2.Bolls weight (g), Seed Cotton Yield (kg/ha) and germination (%) as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Akola under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments

M1 In situ Soil Moisture Conservation

M2 Control M1 M2 T1 T2

Mean (Super


Bolls weight (g)




Mean 3.7 3.6 3.4 3.3 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.4


SE d 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3

CD (5 %) 0.7 NS 0.3 NS NS NS NS

Seed Cotton Yield (kg/ha)

S1 – Super Absorbent @ 0 kg /ha 1276 1280 1107 1139 1278 1123 1191 1209 1200

S2- Super Absorbent @ 12.5 kg /ha 1477 1605 1212 1431 1541 1321 1344 1518 1430

S3- Super Absorbent @ 18 kg /ha 1550 1655 1308 1504 1603 1406 1429 1580 1504

Mean 1434 1513 1209 1358 1474 1283 1321 1436


SE d 36 48 56 67 79 79 112

CD (5 %) 155 132 119 NS NS NS NS

Germination percent (%)




Mean 99.4 98.1 97.5 99.4 98.8 98.5 98.5 98.8


SE d 0.3 1.2 0.9 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.9

CD (5 %) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

D - 133


AGR IX 3.Soil moisture Content (%) and Water use Efficiency (kg ha mm-1) as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Akola under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments

M1 In situ Soil Moisture Conservation

M2 Control M1 M2 T1 T2

Mean (Super


Soil moisture content (%) at 45 DAS




Mean 31.9 32.3 30.9 31.1 32.1 31.0 31.4 31.7


SE d 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4

CD (5 %) 0.4 NS 0.5 NS NS 0.6 NS





Mean 22.7 22.9 22.0 22.4 22.8 22.2 22.4 22.7


SE d 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5

CD (5 %) 0.5 NS NS NS NS 0.7 NS

Water use Efficiency (kg ha mm-1)




Mean 4.0 4.2 3.4 3.8 4.1 3.6 3.7 4.0


SE d 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3

CD (5 %) 0.4 0.4 0.3 NS NS NS NS

D - 134


AGR IX 4.Germination percent (%) and Soil moisture content (%) at 30 & 60 DAS as influenced by moisture conservation, times of application and super absorbent levels at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments M1.Insitu soil moisture

conservation M2.Control M1

(In situ) M2

(Control) T1

(Sowing) T2

(30 DAS)

Mean (Super

Absorbent) T1.Sowing T2.30 DAS T1.Sowing T2.30 DAS

Germination percentage

S1. Super absorbent @ 0 kg/ha 98.89 99.44 99.44 98.89 99.17 99.17 99.17 99.17 99.2

S2.Super absorbent @ 12.5kg/ha 99.44 98.89 99.44 98.89 99.17 99.17 99.44 98.89 99.2

S3.Super absorbent @ 18 kg/ha 99.44 99.44 99.44 99.44 99.44 99.44 99.44 99.44 99.4

Mean 99.26 99.26 99.44 99.07 99.26 99.26 99.35 99.17 99.3

ANOVA M T S M x T M x S S x T MxSxT

SE d 0.00 0.13 0.35 0.19 0.50 0.50 0.71

CD (5%) N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.





Mean 27.86 24.40 26.58 24.63 26.13 25.61 27.22 24.51 25.9


SE d 0.21 0.43 0.62 0.61 0.87 0.87 1.24

CD (5%) N.S. 1.69 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.





Mean 29.16 30.06 28.14 30.66 29.61 29.40 28.65 30.36 29.5


SE d 0.61 0.76 0.81 1.08 1.14 1.14 1.63


D - 135


AGR IX 5. Soil moisture content (%) at 90, 120 and 150 DAS as influenced by moisture conservation, times of application and super absorbent levels at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments M1. Insitu soil moisture

conservation M2.Control

M1 (In

situ)

M2 (Control)

T1 (Sowing)

T2 (30

DAS)

Mean (Super






Mean 22.80 23.03 20.35 20.90 22.92 20.63 21.58 21.97 21.8


SE d 0.29 0.14 0.44 0.19 0.62 0.62 0.87

CD (5%) 1.73 N.S. 1.31 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.





Mean 13.94 14.03 10.24 11.47 13.98 10.85 12.09 12.75 12.4


SE d 0.01 0.15 0.38 0.21 0.54 0.54 0.76

CD (5%) 0.59 0.58 1.13 1.13 N.S. N.S. N.S.





Mean 4.77 5.16 4.46 5.19 4.97 4.82 4.61 5.18 4.9


SE d 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.20 0.20 0.29

CD (5%) N.S. 0.45 0.43 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.

D - 136


AGR IX 6. Plant height (cm), No. of sympodia and No. monopodia at harvest as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone



M1 (In

situ)

M2 (Control)

T1 (Sowing)

T2 (30

DAS)

Mean (Super


Plant height (cm)




Mean 177.42 180.31 175.23 180.11 178.87 177.67 176.33 180.21 178.3


SE d 2.15 1.93 3.07 2.73 4.34 4.34 6.14


No.of sympodia at harvest




Mean 33.58 32.31 29.80 33.76 32.94 31.78 31.69 33.03 32.4


SE d 1.00 0.82 0.92 1.16 1.31 1.31 1.86


No.of monopodia plant-1 at harvest




Mean 1.51 1.44 1.51 1.40 1.48 1.47 1.51 1.42 1.5


SE d 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.03 0.07 0.07 0.09

CD (5%) N.S. 0.08 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.

D - 137


AGR IX 7.Boll weight (g), Bolls / Sqm and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by moisture conservation, times of application and super absorbent levels at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone


conservation M2.Control M1

(In situ) M2

(Control) T1

(Sowing)

T2 (30

DAS)

Mean (Super


Boll weight (g)




Mean 3.99 3.96 3.41 3.72 3.98 3.57 3.70 3.84 3.8


SE d 0.09 0.06 0.13 0.09 0.13 0.13 0.18


No. Bolls /SQM




Mean 54.22 58.00 47.67 49.44 56.11 48.56 50.94 53.72 52.3


SE d 0.26 1.06 1.12 1.49 1.59 1.59 2.25

CD (5%) 1.57 N.S. 3.36 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.


S1. Super absorbent @ 0 kg/ha 1920 1954 1491 1694 1937 1593 1706 1824 1765

S2.Super absorbent @ 12.5kg/ha 2039 2135 1654 1910 2087 1782 1847 2023 1935

S3.Super absorbent @ 18 kg/ha 2116 2182 1764 2070 2149 1917 1940 2127 2034

Mean 2025 2091 1637 1892 2058 1764 1831 1991 1911


SE d 9.60 23.24 33.85 32.86 47.87 47.87 67.70

CD (5%) 58.35 91.08 101.32 128.81 N.S. N.S. N.S.

D - 138


AGR IX 8. Economics as influenced by moisture conservation, times of application and super absorbent levels at Nanded under rainfed condition in Central Zone



M1 (In

situ)

M2 (Control)

T1 (Sowing)

T2 (30 DAS)

Mean (Super


GMR (Rs./ha)




Mean 102590 105930 82924 95847 104260 89386 92759 100890 96825

ANOVA M T S M x T M x S S x T MxSxT

SE d 489 1178 1716 1665 2427 2427 3432

CD (5%) 2970 4616 5136 6528 N.S. N.S. N.S.

NMR (Rs./ha)




Mean 42763 45706 26412 37771 44234 32092 34588 41738 38163


SE d 431 1038 1513 1468 2140 2140 3025

CD (5%) 2619 4069 4528 5754 N.S. N.S. N.S.

B : C ratio




Mean 1.72 1.76 1.47 1.65 1.74 1.56 1.59 1.71 1.65


SE d 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04

CD (5%) 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.09 N.S. N.S. N.S.

D - 139


AGR IX 9.Germination percent (%) and Soil moisture content (%)at 45 & 90 DAS as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments M1. Insitu soil moisture




Germination percentage

S1. Super absorbent @0 kg/ha 90.00 93.33 93.33 91.33 91.67 92.33 91.67 92.33 92.0

S2.Super absorbent@ 12.5kg/ha 90.00 89.33 89.33 94.67 89.67 92.00 89.67 92.00 90.8

S3.Super absorbent@18 kg/ha 93.33 90.00 94.67 92.00 91.67 93.33 94.00 91.00 92.5

Mean 91.11 90.89 92.44 92.67 91.00 92.56 91.78 91.78 91.8


SE d NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

CD (5%)

Soil moisture content (%)at 45 DAS




Mean 24.31 32.85 20.84 23.77 28.58 22.31 22.58 28.31 25.4


SE d 0.67 0.23 1.44 0.11 3.33 NS NS

CD (5%) 2.90 0.65 3.06 0.31 7.06





Mean 19.16 29.05 16.84 18.22 24.10 17.53 18.00 23.63 20.8


SE d 0.65 0.77 1.08 0.37 NS 2.49 NS

CD (5%) 2.80 2.15 2.29 1.01 5.28

D - 140


AGR IX 10. Soil moisture content (%) at 120 and 150 DAS and plant height as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone

Treatments M1.Insitu soil moisture conservation M2.Control







Mean 23.19 25.30 17.04 22.73 24.24 19.89 20.11 24.02 22.1


SE d NS 1.29 1.00 NS 2.30 NS NS

CD (5%)

3.58 2.11

4.88





Mean 15.82 16.65 10.41 12.18 16.24 11.30 13.12 14.41 13.8


SE d 0.19 0.20 0.56 NS 1.28 NS NS

CD (5%) 0.82 0.56 1.18

2.72

Plant height (cm)




Mean 110.44 104.94 101.25 107.50 107.69 104.38 105.85 106.22 106.0


SE d NS NS 2.99 NS NS 6.90 13.80

CD (5%) 6.33 14.63 29.26

D - 141


AGR IX 11. Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by moisture conservation, times of sowing and super absorbent at Khandwa under rainfed condition in Central Zone


conservation M2.Control T2.30

DAS M1 M2 T1 T2

Mean (Super

Absorbent)

T1.Sowing T2.30 DAS T1.Sowing

No.of sympodia at harvest




Mean 25.27 25.1 21.02 22.89 25.19 21.96 23.15 24 23.6


SE d 0.58 NS 1.49 NS NS NS 6.87

CD (5%) 2.48

3.15

14.57

Boll weight (g)




Mean 3.59 3.53 2.95 3.34 3.56 3.15 3.27 3.44 3.4


SE d 0.03 NS 0.04 0.03 0.1 0.1 0.19

CD (5%) 0.14

0.09 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.41


S1. Super absorbent @0 kg/ha 988.69 1227.47 799.3 847.06 1108.08 823.18 894 1037.26 965.6


S3.Super absorbent@18 kg/ha 1103.62 1279.67 751.35 880.32 1191.64 815.84 927.48 1080 1003.7

Mean 1058.04 1256.79 793.9 900.27 1157.41 847.09 925.97 1078.53 1002.3


SE d 12.63 NS 20.89 4.83 48.25 NS NS

CD (5%) 54.35

44.3 13.4 102.3

D - 142


PHY 1A 1. Growth characters and Stress indices genotypes under irrigated and rainfed condition at Hisar in North Zone

Genotypes Plant height (cm) at harvest Boll weight (g) Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) RWC (%) SLW (mg/cm2)

IR (A) RF(A) IR (A) RF(A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A)

H 1480 188.33 186.67 3.61 2.92 1,921 1,890 73.83 73.06 7.84 7.36

H 1464 183.33 182.33 3.46 2.85 2,444 2,362 75.57 74.64 9.24 8.68

H 1471 186.67 185.33 2.92 2.67 1,960 1,772 72.48 70.59 8.34 7.38

H 1472 191.67 190.33 3.08 2.58 2,729 2,476 77.61 76.53 9.32 8.58

H 1489 186.67 186.00 3.13 3.15 2,445 2,428 75.78 75.41 9.13 8.79

H 1491 185.00 184.00 3.32 2.91 2,108 1,906 73.44 72.02 8.41 7.44

H 1506 183.33 182.67 3.52 2.87 2,062 2,032 72.39 71.89 8.84 8.46

H 1508 188.33 186.67 3.89 2.67 1,778 1,429 72.06 69.93 8.23 7.20

H1518 181.67 181.00 2.54 2.92 2,917 2,740 78.57 77.42 9.38 8.58

H1519 165.00 150.00 2.69 2.60 1,749 1,620 72.29 70.71 7.23 6.56

H1520 181.67 181.00 2.93 2.48 1,907 1,775 71.97 69.85 8.25 7.34

H 1521 178.33 176.67 3.00 2.74 1,667 1,575 71.08 68.93 7.70 6.71

H 1522 193.33 192.67 3.07 2.60 2,023 1,920 74.55 72.22 7.76 6.57

H 1523 181.67 180.67 3.07 3.28 2,628 2,517 77.26 75.28 9.29 8.41

H 1524 183.33 182.00 3.22 3.04 2,621 2,597 76.71 76.28 9.26 8.91

HS 294 185.00 183.67 3.52 3.18 2,359 2,097 74.98 72.41 8.64 7.37

H 1098i 183.33 182.67 2.71 2.45 2,207 1,962 75.32 74.04 8.43 7.71

Mean 183.92 182.02 3.16 2.82 2,207 2,065 74.46 73.01 8.55 7.77

CD (5%)

A 1.78 0.20 NS 1.42 0.46

B 5.20 NS 474.05 4.15 1.35

Factor(A X B) NS NS NS NS NS

D - 143


PHY 1A 2.Biochemical param eters of water stress tolerance genotypes under irrigated and rainfed condition at Hisar in North Zone

Genotypes Reducing Sugar (mg/g of tissue)

Chlorophyll stability index Protein (mg/g of tissue) Proline content µmoles/gm tissue

IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A) IR (A) RF (A)

H 1480 0.78 0.83 93.24 2.06 2.02 1.40 2.89

H 1464 0.53 0.59 87.84 3.11 3.04 1.91 3.15

H 1471 0.59 0.63 74.08 2.54 2.50 1.60 2.30

H 1472 0.74 0.78 60.89 2.57 2.54 2.50 2.88

H 1489 0.82 0.88 95.40 2.70 2.66 1.12 2.68

H 1491 0.92 0.98 64.39 2.73 2.68 1.26 1.72

H 1506 0.86 0.93 93.48 2.91 2.88 1.80 3.32

H 1508 0.98 1.03 51.06 2.87 2.84 1.24 1.40

H 1518 0.48 0.53 74.57 3.01 2.97 1.53 2.30

H 1519 0.63 0.67 74.61 2.37 2.33 1.15 2.17

H 1520 0.87 0.92 80.57 2.98 2.96 1.78 2.83

H 1521 0.94 1.01 86.70 2.74 2.72 1.91 3.08

H 1522 0.61 0.66 77.72 2.54 2.52 1.09 2.10

H 1523 0.68 0.71 81.69 2.51 2.49 1.40 2.12

H 1524 0.88 0.91 94.27 2.45 2.42 1.17 2.73

HS 294 1.15 1.17 64.76 2.81 2.76 1.85 2.20

H 1098i 0.91 0.93 76.64 2.81 2.81 1.34 1.90

Mean 0.79 0.83

2.69 2.65 1.53 2.45

CD (5%)

7.35

A 0.04 - NS 0.03

B 0.11 - 0.16 0.08

Factor(A X B) NS - NS 0.12

D - 144


PHY 1A.3.Growth characters, Stress indices and soil moisture (%) of genotypes at Surat in Central Zone (rainfed condition)

Genotypes

Plant height (cm)

at harvest


Bolls per sq meter

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

RWC (%)

SLW (mg/cm2)

SLA (cm2/mg)

Soil moisture (%)

50 DAS

70 DAS

90 DAS

110 DAS

130 DAS

GJHV-497 109.2 20.8 66.9 2.8 1614 92.23 1.00 1.00 19.1 20.9 22.3 32.4 20.4

GJHV-520 131.5 21.8 69.3 2.6 1480 87.69 1.30 0.77 19.7 21.3 21.6 31.4 18.9

GJHV-523 130.0 24.2 63.1 2.4 1288 87.18 1.36 0.73 19.5 22.0 22.2 32.0 21.2

CPD-1702 127.5 20.7 60.4 2.9 1486 86.93 1.16 0.86 19.9 20.9 22.5 31.7 19.4

GISV-319 144.5 24.2 73.1 3.1 1944 86.37 1.17 0.85 19.2 22.1 21.9 33.1 20.0

RHC-1346 100.0 18.7 51.1 2.8 1209 85.92 1.59 0.63 19.5 20.9 21.5 30.9 20.6

GSHV-199 135.7 24.3 73.2 2.8 1696 88.77 1.16 0.86 20.2 21.0 21.5 31.4 20.0

ARBB-1401 127.7 22.0 44.9 2.2 819 86.04 1.47 0.68 19.4 20.0 21.2 32.4 18.6

LRA-5166 118.3 21.8 50.7 2.6 1109 87.94 1.37 0.73 19.3 22.2 21.5 33.8 20.8

G.Cot-16 103.0 18.5 61.0 2.7 1428 82.00 1.30 0.77 19.7 21.1 22.6 33.4 19.3

Suraj 112.5 19.2 46.4 2.4 948 82.78 1.71 0.58 20.0 21.6 22.0 32.3 20.1

SE d 9.08 2.30 6.64 0.23 208.7 1.37 0.02 0.012 0.54 0.7 0.6 0.74 0.6

CD (5%) 18.902 NS 13.95 NS 438.3 2.89 0.05 0.025 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.

D - 145


PHY 1A.4. Growth characters, Stress indices and soil moisture (%)of genotypes (Irrigated Condition) at Surat in Central Zone

Genotypes

Plant height (cm)

at harvest


Bolls per sq meter

Boll weight (g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

RWC (%)

SLW (mg/cm2)

SLA (cm2/mg)

Soil moisture (%)

50 DAS

70 DAS

90 DAS

110 DAS

130 DAS

GJHV-497 124 25.2 88.5 2.8 2104 85.93 1.05 0.64 19.25 20.91 23.84 32.41 24.44

GJHV-520 139 24.8 85.9 2.8 1994 88.24 1.01 0.67 20.59 20.07 23.86 34.14 25.11

GJHV-523 135 23.7 81.1 2.5 1714 90.97 1.07 0.63 19.53 22.48 23.72 32.42 23.61

CPD-1702 129 22.2 84.0 2.8 1962 88.73 1.10 0.61 19.33 20.16 21.87 32.73 24.48

GISV-319 154 24.8 98.5 3.0 2572 96.77 0.95 0.69 19.34 21.20 22.06 34.28 22.41

RHC-1346 104 18.8 62.1 3.2 1635 89.74 0.99 0.67 20.43 20.19 21.98 34.37 23.57

GSHV-199 144 24.7 92.3 3.1 2453 88.29 1.09 0.61 20.40 22.06 22.75 33.62 22.01

ARBB-1401 141 23.0 46.9 2.2 866 94.41 1.26 0.53 19.64 20.41 21.53 32.87 22.85

LRA-5166 127 22.5 73.2 2.4 1477 92.30 0.90 0.74 19.33 20.49 23.64 33.96 23.42

G.Cot-16 112 22.2 71.7 2.4 1455 88.81 1.04 0.64 20.35 22.40 23.75 34.61 22.75

Suraj 125 21.2 53.7 2.5 1101 87.12 1.02 0.65 20.33 21.02 22.55 34.06 21.38

SE d 6.503 2.042 10.19 0.215 260.194 0.95 0.028 0.012 0.47 0.67 0.62 0.79 0.78

CD (5%) 13.661 NS 18.902 0.452 546.57 2.01 0.059 0.024 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.

D - 146


PHY 1A.5.Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and nutrient uptake (kg/ha) of genotypes (Rainfed Condition) at Surat in Central Zone


(%)

Root length (cm)

Shoot length (cm)/Plant height(cm)

Total Dry Matter

Production (g/Plant)

Root/shoot ratio

Seedling vigour

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)


N P K

GJHV-497 88.13 28.0 109.2 374.9 0.112 8.3 1614 188.4 37.9 156.3

GJHV-520 80.70 25.2 131.5 339.4 0.097 7.9 1480 167.9 29.1 138.8

GJHV-523 91.73 23.3 130.0 332.0 0.086 8.1 1288 161.5 32.6 137.6

CPD-1702 85.80 29.7 127.5 334.1 0.099 7.9 1486 166.5 35.7 138.1

GISV-319 84.80 28.5 144.5 395.3 0.148 8.3 1944 203.5 43.9 168.9

RHC-1346 84.40 24.7 100.0 342.1 0.085 8.0 1209 165.2 33.6 137.8

GSHV-199 91.66 30.7 135.7 390.6 0.115 8.3 1696 194.1 41.9 171.4

ARBB-1401 93.41 28.2 127.7 238.0 0.152 8.1 819 120.5 22.5 101.9

LRA-5166 93.53 27.7 118.3 321.4 0.116 7.8 1109 158.6 28.7 129.4

G.Cot-16 90.56 24.5 103.0 310.3 0.094 8.0 1428 158.8 31.8 129.6

Suraj 89.66 27.0 112.5 365.2 0.092 7.9 948 182.4 33.3 157.0

SE d 3.12 1.944 8.998 4.16 0.007 0.10 208.7 3.03 1.25 2.88

CD (5%) 6.56 4.085 18.902 8.74 0.015 0.21 438.3 6.37 2.63 6.06

D - 147


PHY 1A.6.Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and nutrient uptake (kg/ha) of genotypes (Irrigated condition) at Surat in Central Zone


(%)

Root length (cm)

Shoot length (cm)/Plant height(cm)

Total Dry Matter Production

(g/Plant)

Root/shoot ratio

Seedling vigour

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)


N P K

GJHV-497 91.3 30.3 124.0 471.8 0.074 8.2 2104 237.1 47.7 196.7

GJHV-520 86.6 23.8 139.0 418.2 0.105 7.9 1994 206.8 35.9 171.0

GJHV-523 92.9 24.0 135.0 410.7 0.100 8.1 1714 199.8 40.3 170.2

CPD-1702 88.3 29.7 129.0 388.0 0.089 8.2 1962 193.3 41.4 160.3

GISV-319 86.3 32.3 154.0 486.0 0.082 8.2 2572 250.2 53.9 207.7

RHC-1346 84.6 28.8 104.0 422.2 0.100 8.2 1635 203.9 41.4 170.0

GSHV-199 91.2 34.0 144.0 491.0 0.089 8.2 2453 244.0 52.7 215.5

ARBB-1401 92.5 28.7 141.0 385.8 0.096 8.1 866 195.4 36.4 165.1

LRA-5166 92.4 24.5 127.0 448.5 0.073 8.0 1477 221.3 40.1 180.6

G.Cot-16 91.3 23.2 112.0 492.6 0.089 8.0 1455 252.1 50.4 205.6

Suraj 90.7 26.2 125.0 482.6 0.086 8.1 1101 241.0 44.0 207.4

SE d 1.4 1.0 6.5 3.43 0.004 0.11 260.194 2.77 1.46 3.39

CD (5%) 2.8 2.092 13.7 7.21 0.008 N.S. 546.57 5.83 3.07 7.12

D - 148


PHY 1A.7. Physiological parameters as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes (Rainfed condition) at Surat in Central Zone

Genotypes Photosynthesis (µmol m-2 sec-1)

Conductance (µmol m-2 sec-1)

Transpiration (mmol m-2 sec-1)

SPAD Values Total Chlorophyll

mg/gm of fresh leaves Proline content mg/gm tissue

GJHV-497 27.85 483.30 5.65 51.8 11.49 0.93

GJHV-520 23.82 435.07 3.24 57.3 17.13 0.52

GJHV-523 24.99 461.37 4.17 55.6 16.63 0.30

CPD-1702 26.00 463.23 3.96 55.2 12.36 0.28

GISV-319 25.73 429.90 5.88 56.0 13.00 0.17

RHC-1346 24.00 434.33 4.14 50.1 10.52 0.38

GSHV-199 26.40 488.13 5.96 52.2 11.33 0.27

ARBB-1401 24.95 447.47 4.65 48.8 9.63 0.56

LRA-5166 24.34 433.07 4.70 42.4 6.97 0.20

G.Cot-16 23.24 438.87 5.35 51.4 11.32 0.23

Suraj 24.03 433.67 5.15 56.5 13.34 0.92

SE d 0.64 2.30 0.036 0.73 0.10 0.020

CD (5%) 1.35 4.84 0.075 1.54 0.22 0.042

PHY 1A.8. Physiological parameters as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes (Irrigated condition) at Surat in Central Zone

D - 149


Genotypes Photosynthesis (µmol m-2 sec-1)

Conductance (µmol m-2 sec-1)

Transpiration (mmol m-2 sec-1)

SPAD Values

Total Chlorophyll mg/gm of

fresh leaves

Proline content mg/gm tissue

Reducing Sugar

(mg/g of tissue)

Chlorophyll stability

index (%)

Protein (mg/g of tissue)

GJHV-497 28.01 519.20 5.75 41.9 5.41 0.78

GJHV-520 25.04 514.60 3.41 41.2 4.09 0.66 8.77 88.68 5.30

GJHV-523 24.92 521.30 4.57 48.8 8.28 0.65 7.65 91.54 4.61

CPD-1702 25.97 545.03 4.07 49.6 9.37 0.52 6.19 91.39 5.41

GISV-319 26.21 490.70 5.40 45.9 6.34 0.41 9.25 95.38 6.21

RHC-1346 24.45 515.03 4.86 48.0 7.38 0.62 11.03 91.13 3.44

GSHV-199 26.91 595.73 6.04 56.1 16.71 0.64 4.48 94.68 5.35

ARBB-1401 25.18 527.57 4.83 54.7 13.79 0.87 6.37 94.30 4.73

LRA-5166 24.25 523.33 4.93 54.1 11.31 0.82 11.12 87.40 5.71

G.Cot-16 24.35 490.80 5.45 52.2 12.35 0.57 3.87 85.19 8.44

Suraj 24.62 487.20 5.26 51.1 11.25 0.43 5.99 92.78 5.46

SE d 0.61 2.22 0.041 0.58 0.089 0.023 3.30 88.76 5.64

CD (5%) 1.28 4.68 0.086 1.23 0.187 0.048 0.36 1.41 0.15

PHY 1A.9. Growth characters, stress indices and soil moisture (%) influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at Khandwa

Genotype

Height(cm) harvesting

Sympodia at

harvest Boll/SQM

Boll weight

(g).

Seed cotton yield

RWC (%)

SLW (mg/cm2)

SLA (cm2/

mg)

Soil moisture ( % )

150DAS 90DAS 120DAS 150DAS average

D - 150


(kg/ha)

RS-2835 141.5 23.0 51.6 2.8 1511 60.05 0.0111 90.53 23.3 20.2 15.4 10.2 17.3

GSHV-185 135.1 26.5 76.4 3.7 1549 62.52 0.0114 88.64 21.0 18.0 17.3 13.6 17.5

GISV-310 141.0 22.9 65.7 3.2 1279 61.70 0.0113 88.34 24.3 21.5 14.6 9.8 17.5

GJHV-518 130.3 25.2 61.1 3.2 1042 60.82 0.0093 108.11 27.3 22.3 19.2 13.4 20.6

CPD-1601 124.0 23.2 74.7 2.7 1307 62.90 0.0107 92.92 23.4 19.5 17.1 12.2 18.1

CPD-1602 96.3 24.3 75.0 3.2 1277 60.39 0.0115 87.33 24.3 21.1 18.1 13.2 19.1

ARBH-1601 113.9 25.6 57.4 3.2 1186 61.64 0.0120 83.57 22.0 21.7 18.4 14.3 19.1

TSH-324 146.3 29.0 67.9 3.0 913 62.51 0.0110 90.93 22.4 17.1 15.7 10.8 16.5

TSH-327 128.8 30.6 83.4 3.7 1810 64.55 0.0115 87.67 24.8 22.2 19.2 13.4 19.7

L-1060 142.0 27.3 73.4 2.7 973 62.42 0.0105 95.41 22.0 21.3 18.3 14.3 19.2

L-1384 142.2 24.6 73.8 3.1 929 61.85 0.0109 92.61 24.4 20.2 18.3 13.4 19.1

L-799 124.8 26.2 76.8 2.9 1085 63.36 0.0112 90.15 23.5 18.3 16.3 13.6 17.9

PH-1071 144.5 26.0 74.3 3.6 1482 61.57 0.0112 89.22 22.0 18.4 17.3 14.2 18.0

AR-9108 135.6 29.7 81.1 2.8 1745 63.93 0.0107 93.77 22.3 16.5 19.2 14.3 18.1

RB-616 115.4 23.9 66.1 2.9 1642 61.18 0.0107 93.23 23.8 18.3 15.6 14.2 18.0

RB-617 136.8 21.9 70.7 2.9 1292 60.09 0.0107 99.67 22.1 20.3 16.4 11.5 17.6

RB-610 131.4 27.2 66.6 3.0 1262 62.19 0.0107 93.30 22.7 16.3 15.8 10.9 16.4

RB-611 137.5 25.3 55.3 3.0 1045 62.15 0.0091 111.60 23.4 16.5 16.1 11.2 16.8

RHC-1202 131.2 23.4 56.5 3.4 1691 61.58 0.0097 106.13 24.4 19.2 17.3 12.4 19.2

RHC-1217 136.3 29.4 80.0 3.5 1695 63.67 0.0091 112.38 24.8 22.7 18.9 13.4 19.0

TCH-1199 135.4 31.7 100.7 3.5 1969 65.87 0.0110 94.42 23.4 19.6 17.3 12.8 18.3

S Em ± 3.0 0.4 0.7 0.1 59.59 0.72 0.000 1.66 0.50 0.45 0.36 0.20 0.38

CD 5% 8.6 1.2 2.0 0.3 170.32 2.06 0.011 4.76 1.43 1.28 1.02 0.58 1.08

PHY 1A.10. Growth characters, stress indices and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes (Khandwa)

D - 151


Genotype

Germination (%)

Root lengt

h (cm) 60DA

S

Shoot lengt

h (cm) 60DA

S

Total dry matter

production (g)

Seedling vigor index

Root shoo

t ratio

Photosynthesis rate (µmol

m2 s-1)

Stomatal conductance ( m mol

m2 s-

Transpiration rate( m mol m2 s


fresh leaves

Chlorophyll stability mg/gm of

fresh leaves

Proline content

µmoles/gm tissue

RS-2835 96.7 19.2 41.1 94.4 3511.7 0.5 15.4 249.2 12.1 2.5 66.2 14.6

GSHV-185 90.7 16.1 29.5 115.2 3130.3 0.5 12.7 280.7 14.4 2.2 79.2 16.9

GISV-310 94.7 16.5 27.3 64.4 3740.7 0.6 13.8 256.0 15.6 2.4 79.6 15.7

GJHV-518 96.0 17.1 30.4 81.3 4124.7 0.6 14.9 237.8 13.9 2.2 77.6 16.0

CPD-1601 93.3 21.2 26.2 107.5 3708.6 0.8 14.8 203.3 15.3 2.4 78.7 16.7

CPD-1602 86.7 15.3 32.6 86.6 2668.9 0.5 15.9 289.3 14.8 2.5 76.9 14.4

ARBH-1601 86.7 13.1 22.5 64.3 2642.0 0.6 15.7 246.7 12.9 2.1 78.5 15.0

TSH-324 94.7 19.5 25.3 80.9 3575.5 0.8 17.9 234.3 14.6 2.3 81.7 15.1

TSH-327 92.0 18.5 35.5 60.3 2989.7 0.5 19.7 252.7 10.7 3.1 82.0 18.1

L-1060 87.3 17.3 29.4 115.2 2810.6 0.6 17.7 307.0 15.6 2.0 76.7 14.4

L-1384 93.3 19.0 30.3 67.2 3379.7 0.6 17.3 248.7 12.6 2.0 78.7 15.5

L-799 86.0 15.5 23.2 67.6 2982.1 0.7 17.8 192.0 13.0 2.5 79.4 14.9

PH-1071 82.7 14.5 31.5 134.6 2087.3 0.5 14.3 250.0 14.7 2.4 75.8 17.0

AR-9108 86.0 17.9 24.4 67.6 3381.7 0.7 17.4 169.0 11.3 2.9 76.8 17.6

RB-616 82.7 17.4 25.4 92.5 3265.1 0.8 14.4 270.7 13.1 2.5 78.5 14.7

RB-617 86.7 19.2 29.5 69.8 2629.5 0.6 14.6 263.7 13.5 2.4 78.0 16.9

RB-610 90.7 14.7 27.5 63.5 2532.7 0.5 11.5 262.3 14.6 2.5 79.4 14.3

RB-611 88.0 15.7 27.7 60.4 2814.9 0.6 14.6 233.8 13.2 2.5 78.3 15.0

RHC-1202 92.7 17.4 29.4 132.2 2683.2 0.6 13.7 234.7 16.9 2.6 80.9 16.1

RHC-1217 93.3 16.2 26.3 73.1 2826.9 0.6 18.5 181.1 13.1 2.8 75.7 17.0

TCH-1199 95.3 21.1 28.5 133.7 3119.1 0.6 19.7 202.0 13.2 3.3 81.1 19.0

S Em ± 1.7 0.2 0.8 1.6 83.6 0.0 0.3 6.4 0.3 0.1 1.1 0.5

CD 5% 4.8 0.6 2.3 4.7 239.1 0.1 0.9 18.2 0.9 0.3 3.1 1.4

D - 152


PHY 1A.11.Growth characters, Stress indices and soil moisture (%) as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at Junagarh in Central Zone

Genotype

Plant height (cm)

at harvest


Boll per sq meter

Boll weight

(g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

RWC (%)

SLW (mg/cm2)

SLA (cm2/mg)

Soil moisture (%)

10 DAS

45 DAS

90DAS 120DAS 150DAS

CPD 1702 99.3 18.7 68 2.8 823 46.3 8.76 0.114 38.0 32.51 28.4 4.10 3.7

GSHV 199 101.0 18.6 69 3.4 1350 41.4 7.53 0.133 37.9 32.41 25.9 4.17 3.8

GIHV 319 98.3 18.9 73 2.8 1057 40.2 5.52 0.181 39.8 33.58 20.5 4.61 2.4

GJHV 520 105.9 18.6 49 3.7 569 38.3 7.67 0.130 38.3 32.77 24.9 3.88 3.4

GJHV 523 98.3 18.5 70 3.8 911 34.2 8.17 0.122 39.9 33.10 29.7 4.83 3.4

GJHV-497 94.3 18.7 69 3.2 1003 49.1 7.72 0.130 38.5 32.99 30.1 3.31 3.2

RAH 0603 106.0 19.3 72 3.6 1209 35.5 7.64 0.131 38.5 32.40 23.0 6.01 3.1

RAH 0604 111.3 19.8 58 3.0 437 47.5 6.90 0.145 38.9 32.19 22.1 5.05 3.7

BGDS 0607 105.3 19.8 72 3.3 1389 51.2 7.63 0.131 39.6 35.67 24.8 4.75 2.0

TSH 325 101.0 18.9 68 3.4 926 32.5 5.94 0.168 38.9 32.19 25.4 4.68 3.7

TSH 332 108.3 19.6 61 3.1 875 34.0 7.47 0.134 39.0 33.54 27.6 4.90 4.2

Suraj (ZC) 113.7 21.9 81 4.1 1749 56.8 7.37 0.136 38.3 35.15 33.7 9.58 9.0

GN.Cot.22 (LC)

110.7 21.6 87 3.8 2058 52.8 7.36 0.136 38.9 36.14 36.3 9.74 7.9

SE d 3.54 0.57 2.83 0.1 82 0.46 0.07 0.001 1.0 1.2 0.87 0.53 0.41

CD (5%) 10.34 1.66 8.28 0.4 239 1.35 0.19 0.004 NS NS 2.55 1.55 1.19

CV% 5.9 5.1 7.1 7.1 13 1.9 1.5 1.73 4.5 6.1 5.6 17.1 17.2

D - 153


PHY 1A.12. Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and stress indices as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at Junagarh

Genotype Germination

(%)

Root length (cm)

Shoot length (cm)

Total Dry Matter

Production (g)

Root/shoot ratio

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

SPAD Values


fresh leaves

Chlorophyll -a

Chlorophyll -b

CPD 1702 99.0 17.7 112 192 0.070 823 20.54 0.887 0.615 0.273

GSHV 199 98.0 21.7 121 169 0.121 1350 20.54 0.576 0.336 0.240

GIHV 319 98.7 18.3 111 171 0.073 1057 20.96 0.706 0.434 0.272

GJHV 520 99.0 24.3 127 208 0.121 569 22.50 0.879 0.579 0.300

GJHV 523 98.3 15.3 104 216 0.091 911 22.18 0.486 0.285 0.201

GJHV-497 98.0 19.3 113 296 0.075 1003 21.14 0.558 0.353 0.205

RAH 0603 99.0 16.7 102 257 0.079 1209 22.15 0.881 0.601 0.280

RAH 0604 98.7 23.0 122 232 0.106 437 20.62 0.940 0.645 0.295

BGDS 0607 98.3 21.7 101 204 0.060 1389 21.75 1.255 0.905 0.350

TSH 325 98.3 25.7 115 292 0.068 926 22.10 0.714 0.463 0.251

TSH 332 99.3 19.0 93 209 0.104 875 23.51 0.562 0.290 0.272

Suraj (ZC) 99.2 21.7 138 273 0.069 1749 26.63 0.989 0.656 0.333

GN.Cot. 22 (LC) 99.1 25.0 139 352 0.0472 2058 27.84 1.632 1.170 0.462

SE d 0.70 1.18 1.8 3.91 0.003 82 1.3 0.03 0.023 0.016

CD (5%) NS 3.46 5.4 11.42 0.008 239 3.9 0.08 0.066 0.046

CV% 1.2 9.9 2.8 2.9 5.5 13 10.3 5.3 6.9 9.5

D - 154


PHY 1A.13.Physiological parameters as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at Junagarh in Central Zone

Genotype Lint Yield (kg/ha)

Ginning %

Seed Index

Lint Index

No of Bolls

/plant LAI

SPAD Values


fresh leaves

Chlorophyll -a Chlorophyll -b

CPD 1702 269 32.7 8.2 3.9 37 1.72 20.54 0.887 0.615 0.273

GSHV 199 445 33.0 8.0 3.9 37 1.49 20.54 0.576 0.336 0.240

GIHV 319 356 33.6 8.0 4.1 39 2.19 20.96 0.706 0.434 0.272

GJHV 520 172 30.2 7.7 3.3 27 2.10 22.50 0.879 0.579 0.300

GJHV 523 291 32.0 9.2 4.3 38 1.78 22.18 0.486 0.285 0.201

GJHV-497 315 31.3 7.6 3.5 37 2.74 21.14 0.558 0.353 0.205

RAH 0603 391 32.4 10.0 4.8 39 1.97 22.15 0.881 0.601 0.280

RAH 0604 130 29.7 9.5 4.0 31 1.96 20.62 0.940 0.645 0.295

BGDS 0607 477 34.3 8.8 4.6 39 1.86 21.75 1.255 0.905 0.350

TSH 325 297 32.2 8.9 4.2 37 1.99 22.10 0.714 0.463 0.251

TSH 332 283 32.4 8.0 3.8 33 2.38 23.51 0.562 0.290 0.272

Suraj (ZC) 602 34.5 12.2 6.4 44 4.14 26.63 0.989 0.656 0.333

GN.Cot. 22 (LC) 661 32.2 10.3 4.9 47 4.93 27.84 1.632 1.170 0.462

SE d 25.7 0.41 0.27 0.14 1.53 0.20 1.3 0.03 0.023 0.016

CD (5%) 75.2 1.20 0.80 0.41 4.47 0.59 3.9 0.08 0.066 0.046

CV% 12.4 2.2 5.3 5.6 7.1 14.7 10.3 5.3 6.9 9.5

PHY 1A.14. (a) Growth characters, Stress indices and soil moisture (%) as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at LAM

Genotypes Plant height (cm) at harvest No of Sympodia at harvest Boll per plant Boll weight (g) Seed cotton yield (kg/ha)

D - 155


AKH-1301 120 16.5 20.9 2.6 641

AR-1908 123 16.4 20.5 3.6 777

ARBH-1601 132 14.8 18.6 2.8 803

CCH-16-1 146 16.8 27.1 2.9 906

CCH-163 164 19.6 17.8 3.1 588

CPD-1601 129 17.1 23.6 3.6 959

CPD-1602 150 17.0 22.6 3.8 930

GISV-185 150 17.8 20.8 3.3 733

GISV-310 131 16.6 24.5 2.6 822

GSH-477 152 19.3 21.9 3.3 972

GSHV-497 160 17.6 23.8 2.6 643

GSHV-518 140 15.5 18.9 2.5 806

GSHV-520 131 18.4 24.4 3.1 1131

GSHV-523 92 17.4 20.9 3.3 879

L-1060 143 16.7 23.1 3.2 668

L-1384 133 16.2 19.9 3.2 534

L-604 146 19.3 27.4 3.1 997

L-799 105 16.2 23.2 3.1 816

PH-1071 151 18.0 21.9 3.0 579

RB-610 138 16.2 21.9 3.0 898

RB-611 134 18.2 23.0 3.0 981

RB-616 146 19.1 29.5 3.0 974

RB-617 142 17.2 20.5 2.9 851

RHC-1202 125 17.4 23.2 3.1 705

RHC-1217 104 13.7 22.5 3.0 587

RS-2835 137 17.1 23.0 3.0 781

SIMA-5 147 17.9 19.8 2.8 576

TCH-1199 152 17.9 27.8 2.6 910

TSH-324 146 19.3 27.4 3.1 668

TSH-327 105 16.2 23.2 3.1 534

Sem 1.81 0.1 0.3 0.0 35

CD (5%) NS 0.3 5.0 0.1 52

PHY 1A.14. (b) Growth characters, Stress indices and soil moisture (%) as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at LAM

Genotypes Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) RWC (%)

SLW (mg/cm2)

SLA (cm2/mg)

Soil moisture (%)

10DAS 45 DAS 90DAS 120DAS 150DAS

D - 156


AKH-1301 641 68.30 6.91 145 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

AR-1908 777 65.75 7.20 139 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

ARBH-1601 803 65.55 7.33 136 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

CCH-16-1 906 64.77 8.42 119 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

CCH-163 588 67.56 6.79 147 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

CPD-1601 959 74.69 8.42 119 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

CPD-1602 930 75.72 7.91 126 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GISV-185 733 74.74 6.84 146 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GISV-310 822 67.42 6.45 155 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GSH-477 972 68.96 8.68 115 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GSHV-497 643 67.99 7.66 131 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GSHV-518 806 69.19 6.98 143 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GSHV-520 1131 77.27 7.81 128 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

GSHV-523 879 76.37 8.05 124 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

L-1060 668 61.04 7.29 137 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

L-1384 534 66.48 7.52 133 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

L-604 997 70.15 8.04 124 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

L-799 816 66.61 7.75 129 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

PH-1071 579 69.21 7.35 136 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RB-610 898 66.98 7.25 138 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RB-611 981 72.64 7.34 136 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RB-616 974 66.53 7.43 135 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RB-617 851 66.92 7.95 126 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RHC-1202 705 66.23 7.55 132 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RHC-1217 587 64.08 7.32 137 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

RS-2835 781 68.85 7.53 133 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

SIMA-5 576 77.26 7.87 127 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

TCH-1199 910 71.28 7.33 136 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

TSH-324 668 66.98 7.75 129 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

TSH-327 534 72.64 7.35 136 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

Sem 35 0.31 0.02 0.20 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

CD (5%) 52 5.75 0.35 2.37 34.5 20.3 11.2 7.4 7.4

PHY 1A.15. Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and stress indices as influenced by water stress tolerance genotypes at LAM

Genotypes SPAD

Reading CSI

Total Dry Matter Production (g)


Nutrient uptake (kg/ha) RWC(%) SLW(mg/cm2) SLA(cm2/mg)

N P K I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean

AKH-1301 30.67 61.04 1840 641 12.70 3.86 9.20 69.98 66.62 68.30 6.52 7.30 6.91 153 137 145

D - 157


AR-1908 28.93 60.57 2230 777 15.39 4.68 11.15 68.99 62.50 65.75 7.10 7.30 7.20 141 137 139

ARBH-1601 29.99 62.92 2305 803 15.90 4.84 11.53 68.99 62.10 65.55 6.59 8.07 7.33 152 124 136

CCH-16-1 39.83 60.78 2600 906 17.94 5.46 13.00 69.09 60.44 64.77 8.24 8.60 8.42 121 116 119

CCH-163 34.54 55.71 1688 588 11.65 3.54 8.44 68.99 66.13 67.56 6.52 7.06 6.79 153 142 147

CPD-1601 38.06 57.09 2752 959 18.99 5.78 13.76 74.91 74.47 74.69 8.13 8.72 8.42 123 115 119

CPD-1602 38.39 55.38 2669 930 18.42 5.60 13.35 75.15 76.29 75.72 6.75 9.06 7.91 148 110 126

GISV-185 36.55 57.58 2104 733 14.52 4.42 10.52 74.70 74.77 74.74 5.55 8.12 6.84 180 123 146

GISV-310 36.34 55.39 2359 822 16.28 4.95 11.80 70.47 64.36 67.42 6.07 6.83 6.45 165 147 155

GSH-477 38.90 53.65 2790 972 19.25 5.86 13.95 74.41 63.51 68.96 8.53 8.83 8.68 117 113 115

GSHV-497 38.42 54.46 1910 643 13.18 4.01 9.55 70.96 65.02 67.99 7.32 8.00 7.66 137 125 131

GSHV-518 36.50 53.76 2394 806 16.52 5.03 11.97 71.46 66.93 69.19 5.55 8.41 6.98 180 119 143

GSHV-520 32.97 56.14 3359 1131 23.18 7.05 16.80 76.24 78.30 77.27 7.27 8.36 7.81 138 120 128

GSHV-523 39.79 61.06 2611 879 18.02 5.48 13.06 75.89 76.84 76.37 7.61 8.48 8.05 131 118 124

L-1060 34.83 53.74 1984 668 13.69 4.17 9.92 61.50 60.59 61.04 6.92 7.66 7.29 144 131 137

L-1384 31.55 56.49 1586 534 10.94 3.33 7.93 69.19 63.77 66.48 7.27 7.77 7.52 138 129 133

L-604 34.50 56.96 2961 997 20.43 6.22 14.81 76.14 64.16 70.15 7.89 8.19 8.04 127 122 124

L-799 32.04 59.91 2424 816 16.73 5.09 12.12 68.50 64.72 66.61 7.50 8.00 7.75 133 125 129

PH-1071 33.62 61.66 1720 579 11.87 3.61 8.60 62.59 75.83 69.21 6.35 8.36 7.35 157 120 136

RB-610 33.32 58.59 2667 898 18.40 5.60 13.34 68.99 64.96 66.98 7.39 7.12 7.25 135 141 138

RB-611 29.85 62.94 2874 981 19.83 6.04 14.37 68.99 76.29 72.64 7.56 7.12 7.34 132 141 136

RB-616 38.49 57.89 2854 974 19.69 5.99 14.27 68.99 64.06 66.53 7.10 7.77 7.43 141 129 135

RB-617 30.39 58.81 2493 851 17.20 5.24 12.47 69.69 64.16 66.92 7.96 7.95 7.95 126 126 126

RHC-1202 33.98 60.95 2066 705 14.26 4.34 10.33 68.45 64.01 66.23 7.56 7.54 7.55 132 133 132

RHC-1217 33.37 58.91 1720 587 11.87 3.61 8.60 67.27 60.90 64.08 7.10 7.54 7.32 141 133 137

RS-2835 34.80 58.09 2288 781 15.79 4.80 11.44 70.43 67.27 68.85 7.13 7.93 7.53 140 126 133

SIMA-5 38.89 64.72 1688 576 11.65 3.54 8.44 77.36 77.17 77.26 6.73 8.02 7.87 149 111 127

TCH-1199 32.88 60.59 2666 910 18.40 5.60 13.33 76.14 66.42 71.28 6.94 7.72 7.33 144 130 136

TSH-324 32.04 56.49 1957 668 13.50 4.11 9.79 68.99 64.96 66.98 7.50 8.00 7.75 133 125 129

TSH-327 33.62 56.96 1565 534 10.80 3.29 7.83 68.99 76.29 72.64 6.35 8.36 7.35 157 120 136

Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS

Sem 0.19 0.39

35

0.31 1.28 0.82 0.02 0.15 0.09 0.20 3.01 2.45

CD (5%) NS 1.26

52

5.75 3.53 2.85 0.35 0.43 0.31 2.37 7.89 6.78

PHY 1A.16. Screening of cotton entries for Physiological parameters related to drought tolerance at Lam in South Zone

Name of the entry CSI SCMR Canopy Temperature(0C) Plant Height (cm)

I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean I1 I1 I1

D - 158


AKH-1301 67.65 54.43 61.04 35.61 26.47 30.67 32.85 38.19 35.52 138 102 120

AR-1908 66.89 54.25 60.57 33.57 24.98 28.93 36.46 39.17 37.81 149 97 123

ARBH-1601 68.00 57.85 62.92 35.34 25.35 29.99 34.78 37.42 36.10 137 128 132

CCH-16-1 66.34 55.22 60.78 46.63 33.99 39.83 33.06 37.42 35.24 151 139 146

CCH-163 59.73 51.69 55.71 43.68 26.22 34.54 34.78 35.15 35.24 164 164 164

CPD-1601 63.40 50.78 57.09 44.91 32.15 38.06 33.36 35.40 34.38 143 114 129

CPD-1602 60.12 50.64 55.38 45.23 32.47 38.39 33.48 38.14 35.81 159 142 150

GISV-185 62.54 52.63 57.58 42.09 31.90 36.55 34.25 36.57 35.41 149 151 150

GISV-310 61.90 48.88 55.39 43.09 30.46 36.34 34.97 35.66 35.31 134 128 131

GSH-477 61.59 45.70 53.65 45.36 33.38 38.90 34.96 37.93 36.44 159 155 152

GSHV-497 58.06 50.86 54.46 41.14 36.63 38.42 34.32 37.93 36.12 162 158 160

GSHV-518 59.76 47.76 53.76 41.77 32.10 36.50 33.52 35.15 34.34 155 127 140

GSHV-520 64.16 48.12 56.14 36.10 30.63 32.97 34.52 34.82 34.66 134 128 131

GSHV-523 64.95 57.16 61.06 47.04 33.51 39.79 34.78 38.58 36.68 157 153 155

L-1060 60.88 46.61 53.74 37.06 33.42 34.83 34.91 38.14 36.52 159 144 143

L-1384 58.22 54.75 56.49 36.15 27.70 31.55 36.13 37.03 36.58 142 125 133

L-604 64.32 49.60 56.96 38.92 30.91 34.50 36.25 36.44 36.36 158 133 142

L-799 68.20 51.62 59.91 39.82 25.02 32.04 35.17 37.35 36.25 118 93 105

PH-1071 67.09 56.23 61.66 39.60 28.44 33.62 33.94 37.42 35.68 144 159 151

RB-610 63.64 53.52 58.59 36.29 31.16 33.32 34.97 37.81 36.39 158 119 138

RB-611 67.17 58.71 62.94 35.38 25.02 29.85 34.00 37.35 35.68 132 137 134

RB-616 63.84 51.94 57.89 43.41 34.49 38.49 33.86 36.31 35.09 143 148 146

RB-617 63.13 54.50 58.81 36.38 25.15 30.39 35.69 36.19 35.94 150 134 142

RHC-1202 65.31 56.60 60.95 40.05 28.73 33.98 34.59 35.92 35.26 125 127 125

RHC-1217 63.69 54.14 58.91 36.38 31.16 33.37 33.38 37.09 35.24 115 94 104

RS-2835 63.62 52.56 58.09 40.47 29.96 34.80 34.54 36.99 35.76 142 132 137

SIMA-5 67.17 62.27 64.72 47.67 31.04 38.89 32.88 35.11 34.00 144 148 147

TCH-1199 63.13 58.06 60.59 38.06 28.51 32.88 34.57 36.19 36.50 153 143 152

TSH-324 58.22 54.75 56.49 39.82 25.02 32.04 35.17 37.35 36.25 159 158 146

TSH-327 64.32 49.60 56.96 39.60 28.44 33.62 33.94 37.42 35.68 118 93 105

Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS

SEm+ 0.39 0.69 0.39 2.53 0.49 0.33 0.19 0.53 0.36 1.81 4.01 2.55

[email protected] 6.98 1.89 1.26 8.12 1.43 0.89 NS 1.51 1.08 NS 11.13 7.38

PHY 1A.17. Screening of cotton entries for Yield parameters related to drought tolerance at Lam in South Zone

Name of the entry Sympodia Boll Number Boll wt (g) SCY (kg/ha)

I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean I1 I0 Mean

D - 159


AKH-1301 19.00 13.96 16.48 24.31 17.41 20.87 2.83 2.31 2.57 721 517 641

AR-1908 19.24 13.48 16.36 23.71 17.19 20.45 3.87 3.25 3.55 956 538 777

ARBH-1601 14.78 14.78 14.78 21.12 16.01 18.56 3.23 2.34 2.79 918 631 803

CCH-16-1 16.98 16.56 16.77 31.37 22.83 27.10 2.97 2.72 2.85 895 793 906

CCH-163 18.49 20.80 19.64 21.41 14.11 17.77 3.56 2.57 3.07 734 396 588

CPD-1601 21.52 12.67 17.09 25.65 21.45 23.55 4.10 3.12 3.61 918 942 959

CPD-1602 16.80 17.21 17.01 25.16 20.12 22.64 4.18 3.31 3.75 974 824 930

GISV-185 18.60 17.05 17.82 24.68 16.98 20.83 3.66 2.90 3.28 885 524 733

GISV-310 18.65 14.45 16.55 30.68 18.29 24.49 2.82 2.29 2.55 961 623 822

GSH-477 23.03 15.59 19.31 23.73 20.13 21.93 3.54 2.96 3.26 1017 864 972

GSHV-497 20.00 15.11 17.55 26.96 20.57 23.76 2.82 2.34 2.59 692 552 643

GSHV-518 14.78 16.24 15.51 20.64 17.20 18.92 2.74 2.19 2.46 857 701 806

GSHV-520 21.52 15.27 18.39 28.35 20.44 24.39 3.38 2.76 3.07 1243 942 1131

GSHV-523 22.52 12.34 17.43 23.54 18.28 20.91 3.71 2.97 3.34 974 722 879

L-1060 17.48 15.93 16.70 27.46 18.67 23.06 3.54 2.84 3.19 791 496 668

L-1384 14.45 17.88 16.16 22.42 17.30 19.87 3.56 2.77 3.16 579 453 534

L-604 18.31 20.31 19.31 30.66 24.17 27.41 3.47 2.77 3.12 1144 779 997

L-799 19.00 13.32 16.15 25.60 20.76 23.18 3.44 2.80 3.12 918 658 816

PH-1071 14.78 21.13 17.96 23.72 20.08 21.89 3.37 2.55 2.96 663 453 579

RB-610 16.98 15.43 16.21 23.77 19.98 21.88 3.26 2.70 2.98 1078 651 898

RB-611 17.99 18.36 18.17 23.77 22.18 22.98 3.26 2.70 2.98 1074 821 981

RB-616 15.97 22.25 19.11 33.39 25.62 29.50 3.36 2.69 3.02 1059 822 974

RB-617 17.48 16.90 17.19 21.21 19.76 20.48 3.38 2.48 2.93 869 779 851

RHC-1202 17.99 16.73 17.36 25.39 21.08 23.23 3.42 2.81 3.12 806 553 705

RHC-1217 14.95 12.51 13.73 24.78 20.30 22.54 3.31 2.70 3.00 799 326 587

RS-2835 18.01 16.24 17.12 25.36 20.59 22.98 3.39 2.70 3.04 878 628 781

SIMA-5 17.99 17.88 17.93 19.73 19.79 19.77 3.24 2.27 2.75 605 510 576

TCH-1199 18.10 17.68 17.89 30.68 24.89 27.79 2.82 2.29 2.55 961 798 910

TSH-324 18.31 20.31 19.31 30.66 24.17 27.41 3.47 2.77 3.12 791 496 668

TSH-327 19.00 13.32 16.15 25.60 20.76 23.18 3.44 2.80 3.12 579 453 534

Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS Main Sub MXS

SEm+ 0.07 0.67 0.37 0.28 0.87 0.57 0.02 0.08 0.05 7 62 35

[email protected] 1.27 1.84 1.55 4.96 2.40 3.67 0.07 0.24 0.16 125 171 152

PHY 1A.18. Growth characters of genotypes as influenced by soil moister stress at Dharwad in South Zone Plant height (cm) No. of sympodia/plant No. of bolls/plant

D - 160


Genotypes Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean

AKH-1301 130.89 110.67 120.78 21.00 18.11 19.56 9.11 8.11 8.61

RB-610 139.11 112.22 125.67 23.11 17.22 20.17 7.89 15.33 11.61

RB-611 140.56 105.89 123.22 22.67 20.33 21.50 8.00 13.00 10.50

CPD-1651 134.67 101.22 117.94 20.89 19.89 20.39 11.44 13.78 12.61

CPD-1652 130.56 97.44 114.00 22.11 19.33 20.72 14.00 15.11 14.56

ARBH-1651 127.11 92.11 109.61 19.67 19.33 19.50 12.11 17.11 14.61

L-1060 131.33 100.22 115.78 22.33 20.33 21.33 10.22 12.44 11.33

PH-1071 133.78 104.22 119.00 22.56 19.44 21.00 10.78 13.78 12.28

NDLH-2027 133.33 108.67 121.00 19.89 20.33 20.11 13.11 12.11 12.61

NDLH-2030-2 127.67 106.89 117.28 22.89 19.11 21.00 10.78 15.56 13.17

RAH-1070 147.00 111.44 129.22 23.00 18.67 20.83 8.11 7.67 7.89

RAH-1071 134.44 111.22 122.83 21.89 19.00 20.44 10.22 10.11 10.17

BGDS-1072 134.44 102.44 118.44 22.89 20.78 21.83 10.44 16.11 13.28

CCH-16-3 138.56 99.22 118.89 21.44 19.67 20.56 9.22 15.33 12.28

Suraj (QC) 125.56 92.00 108.78 22.00 20.00 21.00 8.67 13.78 11.22

NDLH-1938 (ZC) 133.44 104.11 118.78 18.78 18.11 18.44 5.00 13.22 9.11

Sahana (LC) 139.33 98.89 119.11 20.56 20.33 20.44 11.33 14.11 12.72

CNH-7012 131.11 101.11 116.11 20.00 16.56 18.28 10.33 10.00 10.17

CNH-09-77 133.89 100.56 117.22 20.11 19.56 19.83 8.78 13.89 11.33

GJHV-497 133.78 103.22 118.50 21.33 19.67 20.50 9.22 16.33 12.78

GJHV-520 131.44 100.00 115.72 20.44 20.22 20.33 7.89 12.33 10.11

GJHV-523 128.33 104.89 116.61 22.00 18.33 20.17 7.22 12.44 9.83

Mean 133.65 103.12 21.43 19.29 9.72 13.26

SM(M) Genotype(S) Interaction SM(M) Genotype(S) Interaction SM(M) Genotype(S) Interaction

SEm 2.194 1.837 3.355 0.459 0.580 0.923 0.210 0.817 1.149

CD (5%) 13.35 5.17 9.43 NS 1.63 2.60 1.28 2.30 3.23

PHY 1A.19. Yield and yield parameters as influenced by soil moister stress and genotypes in cotton at Dharwad in South Zone Genotypes Boll Weight (g) Seed Cotton Yield (g/plant) Seed Cotton Yield (kg/ha) % Yield DSI

D - 161


Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean Reduction

AKH-1301 4.75 5.03 4.89 31.00 29.33 30.17 768.98 1024.30 896.64 -33.20 0.557

RB-610 4.23 4.53 4.38 27.56 27.39 27.47 538.89 1347.21 943.05 -150.00 2.518

RB-611 4.62 4.72 4.67 15.83 39.89 27.86 548.26 1213.65 880.96 -121.36 2.038

CPD-1651 4.39 4.80 4.60 38.11 54.39 46.25 1283.79 1827.53 1555.66 -42.35 0.711

CPD-1652 5.33 4.88 5.10 43.06 34.00 38.53 1526.38 1882.40 1704.39 -23.32 0.392

ARBH-1651 5.98 5.16 5.57 30.50 51.83 41.17 1016.66 1833.32 1424.99 -80.33 1.349

L-1060 4.83 4.88 4.85 41.00 33.50 37.25 866.66 1194.21 1030.43 -37.79 0.635

PH-1071 4.69 4.58 4.64 24.00 28.44 26.22 848.37 1145.83 997.10 -35.06 0.589

NDLH-2027 4.00 4.09 4.05 31.61 37.94 34.78 894.90 1350.22 1122.56 -50.88 0.854

NDLH-2030-2 4.48 4.57 4.53 30.33 52.00 41.17 673.72 1180.55 927.14 -75.23 1.263

RAH-1070 4.62 3.45 4.03 24.67 31.83 28.25 626.15 726.85 676.50 -16.08 0.270

RAH-1071 5.44 4.69 5.07 28.78 39.00 33.89 890.50 1186.57 1038.54 -33.25 0.558

BGDS-1072 4.75 5.18 4.97 39.22 61.50 50.36 842.59 1594.67 1218.63 -89.26 1.499

CCH-16-3 4.94 4.85 4.90 42.72 46.93 44.83 1054.85 1777.30 1416.08 -68.49 1.150

Suraj (QC) 5.07 4.82 4.94 19.28 38.00 28.64 871.75 1502.31 1187.03 -72.33 1.214

NDLH-1938 (ZC) 5.35 4.84 5.10 28.06 36.72 32.39 513.65 1296.29 904.97 -152.37 2.558

Sahana (LC) 4.61 4.60 4.60 32.11 45.44 38.78 1346.29 1847.67 1596.98 -37.24 0.625

CNH-7012 5.26 4.73 4.99 32.44 38.11 35.28 875.69 1290.27 1082.98 -47.34 0.795

CNH-09-77 5.08 4.94 5.01 28.72 41.00 34.86 560.76 1236.10 898.43 -120.43 2.022

GJHV-497 5.15 4.26 4.70 21.22 41.11 31.17 699.42 1071.75 885.58 -53.24 0.894

GJHV-520 4.64 4.53 4.59 29.28 38.50 33.89 534.72 1114.58 824.65 -108.44 1.821 GJHV-523 4.63 4.65 4.64 30.61 36.89 33.75 894.21 1157.86 1026.04 -29.48 0.495

Mean 4.86 4.67 30.46 40.17 848.96 1354.61


SEm 0.020 0.063 0.089 0.484 2.462 3.435 13.656 65.012 90.859

CD (5%) 0.12 0.18 0.25 2.94 6.92 9.66 83.09 182.84 255.53

PHY 1A.20. Leaf relative water content (RWC) and SPAD value as influenced by soil moister stress and genotypes in cotton at Dharwad Genotypes RWC (%) SPAD Value

D - 162


Irrigated Rainfed Mean Irrigated Rainfed Mean

AKH-1301 83.90 59.29 71.59 34.37 34.50 34.43

RB-610 77.43 64.79 71.11 35.53 33.90 34.72

RB-611 79.34 66.34 72.84 35.17 34.00 34.58

CPD-1651 72.48 66.81 69.64 35.03 35.03 35.03

CPD-1652 82.02 72.79 77.41 37.07 35.17 36.12

ARBH-1651 66.51 69.17 67.84 36.33 35.10 35.72

L-1060 83.00 69.16 76.08 35.23 34.83 35.03

PH-1071 76.00 65.88 70.94 36.67 35.17 35.92

NDLH-2027 81.89 67.70 74.79 35.40 35.10 35.25

NDLH-2030-2 74.83 70.35 72.59 32.97 34.30 33.63

RAH-1070 75.75 66.99 71.37 35.17 34.87 35.02

RAH-1071 75.54 68.27 71.91 36.97 35.10 36.03

BGDS-1072 75.62 67.17 71.40 36.43 34.90 35.67

CCH-16-3 72.81 72.92 72.86 36.00 34.57 35.28

Suraj (QC) 81.83 71.02 76.42 36.90 35.73 36.32

NDLH-1938 (ZC) 76.28 73.37 74.82 35.47 35.77 35.62

Sahana (LC) 75.44 75.00 75.22 35.30 33.97 34.63

CNH-7012 71.70 69.74 70.72 36.27 35.17 35.72

CNH-09-77 67.99 76.95 72.47 35.40 34.90 35.15

GJHV-497 78.51 69.45 73.98 35.20 35.13 35.17

GJHV-520 75.66 75.41 75.54 34.77 34.37 34.57

GJHV-523 77.03 68.64 72.83 34.10 34.27 34.18

Mean 76.43 69.42 35.53 34.81

SM(M) Genotype(S) Interaction SM(M) Genotype(S) Interaction

SEm 0.080 1.791 2.476 0.107 0.301 0.429

CD (5%) 0.49 5.04 6.96 0.65 0.85 1.21

PHY 1A.21. Physiological parameters as influenced by soil moister stress and genotypes in cotton at Dharwad in South Zone Genotypes Photosynthetic rate (µmol m-2 sec-1) Leaf conductance (µmol m-2 sec-1) Transpiration rate (µmol m-2 sec-1)

D - 163



AKH-1301 19.87 11.30 15.59 0.29 0.08 0.18 6.48 2.50 4.49

RB-610 22.94 17.36 20.15 0.34 0.12 0.23 7.10 3.41 5.26

RB-611 17.62 15.45 16.53 0.13 0.14 0.13 4.19 3.74 3.96

CPD-1651 18.69 13.46 16.08 0.17 0.13 0.15 4.64 3.73 4.19

CPD-1652 19.30 13.23 16.26 0.16 0.11 0.14 4.36 3.14 3.75

ARBH-1651 22.97 18.73 20.85 0.38 0.12 0.25 7.24 3.29 5.26

L-1060 23.44 15.29 19.36 0.40 0.16 0.28 7.53 3.79 5.66

PH-1071 22.50 24.89 23.70 0.38 0.20 0.29 6.07 4.33 5.20

NDLH-2027 20.83 18.26 19.55 0.24 0.17 0.21 4.68 4.26 4.47

NDLH-2030-2 21.11 17.79 19.45 0.19 0.16 0.17 4.07 3.89 3.98

RAH-1070 19.44 28.36 23.90 0.23 0.32 0.28 4.54 5.19 4.86

RAH-1071 21.12 22.17 21.64 0.36 0.19 0.28 6.42 4.31 5.37

BGDS-1072 23.30 20.58 21.94 0.23 0.18 0.21 4.87 4.45 4.66

CCH-16-3 25.89 11.91 18.90 0.30 0.14 0.22 6.38 3.57 4.97

Suraj (QC) 21.17 21.15 21.16 0.19 0.09 0.14 4.46 2.38 3.42

NDLH-1938 (ZC) 23.32 12.86 18.09 0.34 0.10 0.22 7.42 2.90 5.16

Sahana (LC) 21.89 27.60 24.75 0.24 0.30 0.27 6.44 6.01 6.23

CNH-7012 21.17 21.15 21.16 0.24 0.32 0.28 4.54 5.19 4.86

CNH-09-77 17.62 15.45 16.53 0.19 0.19 0.19 6.42 4.31 5.37

GJHV-497 21.11 17.79 19.45 0.23 0.18 0.21 4.87 4.45 4.66

GJHV-520 23.32 12.86 18.09 0.36 0.14 0.25 6.38 3.57 4.97

GJHV-523 20.83 18.26 19.55 0.23 0.09 0.16 4.46 2.38 3.42

Mean 21.34 18.00 0.27 0.16 5.62 3.85


SEm 0.108 0.613 0.854 0.005 0.005 0.009 0.104 0.090 0.162

CD (5%) 0.66 1.72 2.40 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.63 0.25 0.46

PHY 1A. 22. Biochemical parameters as influenced by soil moister stress and genotypes in cotton at Dharwad in South Zone Genotypes Leaf carbohydrate (mg/g of tissue) Leaf protein (mg/g of tissue) Leaf proline (umol.g-1 of tissue)

D - 164



AKH-1301 43.81 38.68 41.25 16.40 31.83 24.12 0.40 2.71 1.56

RB-610 54.12 39.75 46.94 17.40 40.07 28.73 0.46 3.12 1.79

RB-611 57.82 27.20 42.51 26.64 39.77 33.21 0.17 2.92 1.54

CPD-1651 46.59 68.52 57.55 29.53 56.13 42.83 0.49 2.85 1.67

CPD-1652 48.63 28.37 38.50 27.22 45.00 36.11 0.54 3.00 1.77

ARBH-1651 47.55 35.43 41.49 25.20 62.70 43.95 0.58 2.31 1.45

L-1060 23.27 41.99 32.63 18.37 53.67 36.02 0.61 2.11 1.36

PH-1071 50.72 53.60 52.16 26.70 66.30 46.50 0.56 2.30 1.43

NDLH-2027 27.72 55.84 41.78 23.27 71.53 47.40 0.54 2.33 1.44

NDLH-2030-2 35.79 64.81 50.30 25.73 53.83 39.78 0.71 2.14 1.42

RAH-1070 70.28 46.58 58.43 29.28 51.50 40.39 0.41 2.82 1.62

RAH-1071 74.13 68.26 71.20 17.48 53.23 35.36 0.68 3.80 2.24

BGDS-1072 74.60 59.62 67.11 17.93 52.50 35.22 0.60 3.13 1.87

CCH-16-3 52.33 38.39 45.36 13.55 35.20 24.38 0.62 2.91 1.77

Suraj (QC) 75.06 71.54 73.30 21.95 61.50 41.73 0.84 3.40 2.12

NDLH-1938 (ZC) 57.69 34.40 46.04 21.32 30.03 25.68 0.75 3.09 1.92

Sahana (LC) 57.00 34.12 45.56 25.97 47.23 36.60 0.60 2.44 1.52

CNH-7012 49.87 29.55 39.71 25.12 36.13 30.63 0.72 2.46 1.59

CNH-09-77 67.20 40.31 53.76 20.75 45.87 33.31 0.83 2.17 1.50

GJHV-497 32.19 72.97 52.58 25.70 75.03 50.37 0.53 2.14 1.34

GJHV-520 54.83 43.13 48.98 15.50 74.07 44.78 0.73 2.10 1.41

GJHV-523 36.76 47.79 42.28 14.82 57.27 36.04 0.65 2.96 1.81

Mean 51.72 47.31 22.08 51.84 0.59 2.69


SEm 1.591 3.027 4.475 0.026 0.650 0.899 0.012 0.047 0.066

CD (5%) NS 8.51 12.58 0.16 1.83 2.53 0.07 0.13 0.18

PHY 1b. 1 .Growth characters and seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by salinity level (12 dS/m EC iw) at Surat - CZ Genotypes Germination (%) Root length (cm) Shoot length (cm) Root/shoot ratio Seedling vigour Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) K/Na

D - 165


GJHV-497 80.0 41.0 110.0 0.38 8.0 863 12.4

GJHV-520 70.0 38.0 96.7 0.39 7.0 640 5.7

GJHV-523 80.0 40.0 123.3 0.33 8.0 983 10.6

CPD-1702 80.0 44.0 121.3 0.36 8.0 477 10.0

GISV-319 73.3 49.3 124.0 0.41 7.3 550 5.4

ARBB-1401 90.0 77.7 136.7 0.57 9.0 993 17.1

LRA-5166 73.3 38.0 83.3 0.46 7.7 437 5.6

G Cot-16 80.0 51.3 101.7 0.51 8.0 860 11.5

RHC-1346 80.0 58.7 103.3 0.57 8.0 697 8.5

GSHV-199 76.7 40.3 110.0 0.37 7.3 627 6.5

SURAJ 80.0 34.7 108.0 0.32 8.0 873 8.7

RHH-1007 80.0 47.3 100.0 0.47 8.0 977 9.5

SE d 2.32 2.21 9.86 0.04 0.22 98.43 1.79

CD (5%) 4.81 4.58 20.45 0.09 0.46 204.12 3.71

D - 166


PHY 1b 2. Effect of different salinity levels on root length (mm) and Percent of Germination at laboratory conditions at LAM

Name of the entry

Root length (mm) Germination per cent

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

Control 4 EC 6 EC 8 EC Control 4 EC 6 EC 8 EC

LHDP 2 8.49 9.06 7.72 7.04 8.08 72.36 71.27 63.99 52.32 64.99

L 1060 7.70 8.72 9.18 8.65 8.56 73.09 74.66 62.51 49.23 64.87

L 1384 7.25 6.89 7.59 6.57 7.08 69.58 60.06 55.95 52.83 59.61

P.Dhanwanthari 8.27 8.71 7.90 7.08 7.99 67.37 71.90 60.52 50.58 62.59

PA 528 7.94 8.68 8.77 6.45 7.96 65.28 71.69 62.51 63.02 65.63

PA 255 6.66 7.36 6.49 6.26 6.69 62.89 62.39 65.70 51.75 60.68

GSHV-497 8.78 7.81 7.63 7.24 7.87 64.71 63.79 58.35 47.60 58.61

GSHV-518 9.67 10.41 7.99 7.90 8.99 58.61 53.23 50.77 50.77 53.35

GSHV-520 9.30 8.25 8.39 7.10 8.26 47.13 40.52 51.91 34.79 43.59

L 604 8.63 7.99 9.88 6.46 8.24 57.36 57.73 54.64 49.41 54.79

Mean 8.27 8.39 8.13 7.08 63.84 62.72 58.69 50.60

Variety EC level Interaction (variety X EC level) Interaction (variety X EC level)

SEm+ 0.0738 0.1968 0.3362 1.4678

CD @ 0.05 0.3198 0.5412 0.9266 4.0754

D - 167


PHY 1b 3. Effect of different salinity levels on shoot length (mm) and total dry matter production (g) of Cotton entries at laboratory conditions at LAM in South Zone

Name of the entry

Shoot length (mm) Total Dry Matter Production (g)

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

EC in mmhos/cm Mean


LHDP 2 13.99 12.91 11.28 11.93 12.53 1.66 1.32 1.03 0.75 1.19

L 1060 15.47 11.76 12.70 12.32 13.06 1.57 1.37 1.22 1.19 1.34

L 1384 11.48 11.41 11.47 9.69 11.01 1.30 1.06 1.01 1.04 1.10

P.Dhanwanthari 14.18 12.62 12.20 12.07 12.77 1.31 1.25 1.08 1.11 1.19

PA 528 14.74 12.41 11.53 11.40 12.52 1.30 1.22 1.07 1.00 1.15

PA 255 9.96 10.59 11.07 11.69 10.83 0.93 1.07 0.93 1.06 1.00

GSHV-497 14.37 12.54 13.70 14.01 13.66 1.27 1.05 1.16 0.98 1.12

GSHV-518 12.36 11.51 11.55 12.08 11.88 1.17 1.25 1.04 1.28 1.19

GSHV-520 12.14 12.22 11.94 12.15 12.11 1.23 1.52 1.11 1.10 1.24

L 604 13.95 13.96 13.23 12.14 13.32 1.66 1.38 1.37 1.28 1.42

Mean 13.26 12.19 12.06 11.95 1.34 1.25 1.10 1.04

Variety EC level Interaction (variety X EC level) Variety EC level Interaction (variety X EC level)

SEm+ 0.21 0.24 0.41 0.017 0.037 0.064

CD @ 0.05 0.94 0.66 1.14 0.079 0.103 0.177

D - 168


PHY 1b 4. Effect of different salinity levels on Seedling length (mm) and Root Shoot ratio of Cotton entries at 25 DAS under Pot culture Conditions at LAM in South Zone

Name of the entry

Seedling length (mm) Root Shoot ratio

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

EC in mmhos/cm Mean


LHDP 2 22.47 21.97 19.00 18.96 20.60 0.552 0.641 0.641 0.537 0.593

L 1060 23.17 20.47 21.89 20.97 21.63 0.453 0.675 0.675 0.640 0.611

L 1384 18.73 18.30 19.06 16.25 18.09 0.575 0.550 0.550 0.616 0.573

P.Dhanwanthari 22.44 21.33 20.10 19.16 20.76 0.531 0.629 0.629 0.535 0.581

PA 528 22.67 21.10 20.30 17.84 20.48 0.490 0.636 0.636 0.517 0.570

PA 255 16.62 17.94 17.56 17.95 17.52 0.609 0.633 0.633 0.488 0.591

GSHV-497 23.15 20.35 21.34 21.25 21.52 0.559 0.568 0.568 0.470 0.541

GSHV-518 22.02 21.93 19.53 19.98 20.87 0.714 0.828 0.828 0.597 0.742

GSHV-520 21.43 20.47 20.16 19.25 20.33 0.696 0.615 0.615 0.532 0.615

L 604 22.57 21.95 23.11 18.61 21.56 0.560 0.521 0.521 0.485 0.522

Mean 21.53 20.57 20.20 19.02 20.33 0.574 0.630 0.630 0.541


SEm+ 0.21 0.31 0.54 0.012 0.018 0.018

CD @ 0.05 0.98 0.86 1.50 0.053 0.050 0.050

D - 169


PHY 1b 5. Effect of different salinity levels on Seedling vigour and Harvest index of Cotton entries at 25 DAS under Pot culture Conditions at LAM in South Zone

Name of the entry

Seedling vigour Harvest index

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

EC in mmhos/cm Mean


LHDP 2 2200 2118 2118 1440 1969 0.337 0.331 0.294 0.344 0.327

L 1060 2291 2068 2068 1393 1955 0.322 0.331 0.317 0.350 0.330

L 1384 1764 1488 1488 1161 1475 0.327 0.314 0.275 0.291 0.302

P.Dhanwanthari 2047 2076 2076 1310 1877 0.315 0.323 0.338 0.300 0.319

PA 528 2003 2048 2048 1522 1905 0.348 0.339 0.322 0.309 0.330

PA 255 1414 1514 1514 1258 1425 0.284 0.330 0.316 0.293 0.306

GSHV-497 2027 1757 1757 1370 1728 0.299 0.328 0.304 0.271 0.301

GSHV-518 1747 1580 1580 1373 1570 0.324 0.329 0.321 0.290 0.316

GSHV-520 1365 1122 1122 908 1129 0.330 0.337 0.297 0.305 0.317

L 604 1753 1714 1714 1244 1606 0.315 0.333 0.323 0.325 0.324

Mean 1861 1748 1748 1298 0.319 0.330 0.313 0.309


SEm+ 30.9 32.5 32.5

CD @ 0.05 139.9 90.2 90.2

D - 170


PHY 1b 6. Effect of different salinity levels on Seed Cotton Yield per plant (g) and Total dry matter production (g) at Harvest of Cotton entries under Pot culture Conditions

Name of the entry

Seed Cotton Yield per plant (g) Total dry matter production (g)

EC in mmhos/cm Mean

EC in mmhos/cm Mean


LHDP 2 25.24 21.37 15.07 11.20 18.22 49.57 43.17 36.23 21.39 37.59

L 1060 25.20 25.16 18.95 18.65 21.99 53.08 50.83 40.78 34.68 44.84

L 1384 21.64 18.06 10.21 7.68 14.40 44.60 39.45 26.93 18.72 32.43

P.Dhanwanthari 25.26 22.22 17.66 12.05 19.30 54.98 46.67 34.55 28.08 41.07

PA 528 24.11 23.32 15.55 11.09 18.52 45.26 45.54 32.73 24.84 37.09

PA 255 26.88 29.56 18.29 13.29 22.01 67.61 59.92 39.56 32.13 49.81

GSHV-497 22.60 26.82 17.14 11.11 19.42 52.87 54.99 39.31 29.90 44.27

GSHV-518 23.15 23.21 18.15 9.43 18.49 48.35 47.38 38.43 23.14 39.33

GSHV-520 26.26 22.56 16.93 9.75 18.88 53.42 44.37 40.09 22.17 40.01

L 604 29.31 20.15 16.88 12.51 19.71 63.86 40.27 35.44 26.01 41.40

Mean 24.98 23.23 16.58 11.67 53.36 47.27 36.41 26.08


SEm+ 0.45 0.49 0.84 0.32 0.90 1.54

CD @ 0.05 2.02 1.35 2.34 1.45 2.46 4.26

PHY 2. 1. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Hisar in North Zone

D - 171


Treatments G1.

H1098i G2.

H 1226 G3.

H 1300 ANOVA SEd

CD (5%)

G4. HD 123

G5. HD 324

G6. HD 432

ANOVA SEd CD

(5%)


D1.Normal Sowing 182.42 182.00 180.83 Genotypes 0.72 NS 194.87 194.60 196.00 Genotypes 0.73 NS


178.83 179.00 179.08 Dates of sowing

0.72 1.54 190.73 190.87 191.00 Dates of sowing

0.73 1.56


171.25 170.17 172.33 GxD 1.24 NS 185.27 185.67 184.80 GxD 1.26 NS

Boll weight (g)

D1.Normal Sowing 3.81 3.57 3.77 Genotypes 0.12 0.25 2.44 2.62 2.25 Genotypes 0.03 0.07


3.57 2.98 3.20 Dates of sowing

0.12 0.25 2.42 2.27 2.58 Dates of sowing

0.03 0.07


3.57 2.62 3.24 GxD 0.20 0.43 2.26 2.22 2.02 GxD 0.06 0.12


D1.Normal Sowing 2318 1957 3049 Genotypes 1.13 242 3404 2583 3296 Genotypes 1.02 218


2261 1445 2090 Dates of sowing

1.13 242 3378 2825 3612 Dates of sowing

1.02 218


2070 1758 2564 GxD 1.96 418 3136 2239 3226 GxD 1.77 NS

D - 172


PHY 2. 2 Phonological stages as influenced by genotypes and dates of sowing at Hisar in North Zone

Treatments G1.

H1098i G2.

H 1226 G3.

H 1300 ANOVA SEd

CD (5%)

G4. HD 123

G5. HD 324

G6. HD 432

ANOVA SEd CD (5%)

Days to flowering (Days)


D2. Late sowing by15 days 63.13 63.40 63.27 Dates of sowing

0.65 1.39 69.73 69.87 70.00 Dates of sowing 0.72 1.53

D3. Late sowing by30 days 66.53 66.00 65.00 GxD 1.12 NS 73.87 73.60 75.00 GxD 1.24 NS

Days to boll opening (Days)



0.75 1.61 120.47 120.20 119.60 Dates of sowing 0.69 1.47

D3. Late sowing by30 days 108.00 110.80 108.73 GxD 1.30 NS 112.07 112.20 113.13 GxD 1.19 NS

PHY 2. 3. Biochemical analysis (mg/g of tissue) of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition at Hisar - North Zone

Treatments G1.

H1098i G2.

H 1226 G3.

H 1300 ANOVA SEd

CD (5%)

G4. HD 123

G5. HD 324

G6. HD 432

ANOVA SEd CD (5%)

Reducing sugar


D - 173



NS 0.022 0.650 0.680 0.689 Dates of sowing NS 0.011

D3. Late sowing by30 days 0.754 0.757 0.982 GxD NS 0.039 0.673 0.693 0.725 GxD NS 0.026

Total Chlorophyll



0.14 0.07 2.04 1.85 1.99 Dates of sowing 0.10 0.05


Chlorophyll a



0.10 0.05 1.60 1.45 1.55 Dates of sowing 0.07 0.03


Chlorophyll b



0.05 0.02 0.44 0.39 0.44 Dates of sowing 0.03 0.01


D - 174


PHY 2 .4 GDD, HTU and PTU for different phonological stage of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition at Hisar in North Zone

Treatments G1.

H1098i G2.

H 1226 G3.

H 1300 ANOVA SEd

CD (5%)

G4. HD 123

G5. HD 324

G6. HD 432

ANOVA SEd CD (5%)

GDD to Days to flowering

D1.Normal Sowing 1,240 1,247 1,278 G 16 NS 1,434 1,447 1,424 G 17 NS

D2. Late sowing by15 days 1,420 1,463 1,458 D 16 35 1,574 1,581 1,589 D 17 36

D3. Late sowing by30 days 1,422 1,408 1,381 GXD 28 NS 1,562 1,555 1,591 GXD 29 NS





HTU to Days to flowering




HTU to Days to Boll opening




PTU to Days to flowering




PTU to Days to Boll opening




D - 175


PHY 2.5. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Junagadh (Irrigated)

Treatments

Control (Bt

hybrid) (G.Cot.hy-

8 BG-II)

G1. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. Hy- 12)

G2. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. hy-10)

G3. Hirsutum

(GTHH -49)

G4. Arboreum

(G.Cot. -19)

G5. Arboreum

(G.Cot. -824)

G6. Arboreum

(G. Cot. -15) Mean ANOVA SEm

CD (5%)

CV %


D1. Early Sowing 111 129 136 150 189 198 200 159 G 2.16 6.19 4.35

D2. Normal Sowing 106 120 135 128 172 176 189 147 D 2.37 9.32 7.32

D3. Late Sowing 101 118 123 126 162 169 182 140 G X D 3.73 NS

Mean 106 123 131 135 174 181 190


D1. Early Sowing 18.7 17.0 19.6 18.3 17.8 18.0 20.5 18.6 G 0.579 1.66 9.68

D2. Normal Sowing 16.0 18.2 18.4 17.3 15.5 17.7 17.5 17.2 D 0.593 NS 15.2

D3. Late Sowing 16.6 17.5 19.7 18.9 17.5 16.5 19.3 18.0 G X D 1.002 NS

Mean 17.1 17.6 19.2 18.2 16.9 17.4 19.1

No. of Bolls/squaremetre

D1. Early Sowing 116.2 91.9 104.0 98.5 94.2 86.9 125.1 102.4 G 2.06 5.91 6.5

D2. Normal Sowing 107.2 92.3 92.1 99.4 90.7 84.6 97.5 94.8 D 0.97 3.82 4.7

D3. Late Sowing 89.4 80.2 83.3 79.5 104.2 75.6 97.7 87.1 G X D 3.57 10.24

Mean 104.2 88.1 93.1 92.5 96.4 82.3 106.8

Boll weight (g)

D1. Early Sowing 4.06 4.04 4.43 4.04 2.36 2.87 2.57 3.48 G 0.11 0.32 9.9



Mean 3.97 4.03 4.31 3.95 2.31 2.85 2.57


D1. Early Sowing 3447 2713 3009 2958 2688 1337 3138 2756 G 72.5 208.0 9.4

D2. Normal Sowing 3074 2469 2636 2881 2006 1273 2083 2346 D 66.5 261.3 13.2

D3. Late Sowing 2238 2019 1968 2148 1389 971 2096 1833 G X D 125.5 360.3

Mean 2919 2401 2538 2662 2028 1194 2439

D - 176


PHY 2. 6. Lint yield (kg/ha) and quality parameters of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing under Irrigated condition at Junagarh in Central Zone

Treatments

Control (Bt hybrid) (G.Cot.hy-

8 BG-II)

G1. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. Hy- 12)

G2. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. hy-10)

G3. Hirsutum

(GTHH -49)

G4. Arboreum

(G.Cot. -19)

G5. Arboreum

(G.Cot. -824)

G6. Arboreum

(G. Cot. -15) Mean ANOVA SEm

CD (5%)

CV %

Lint yield(kg/ha)

D1. Early Sowing 1171 919 944 1042 878 383 1012 907 G 24.6 70.5 9.8

D2. Normal Sowing 1001 789 843 979 625 360 648 749 D 22.1 86.8 13.5

D3. Late Sowing 766 656 643 735 417 276 637 590 G X D 42.5 122.1

Mean 979 788 810 919 640 340 766

Seed Index

D1. Early Sowing 8.53 9.30 8.33 7.90 5.30 7.93 6.07 7.62 G 0.18 0.51 6.8



Mean 8.42 9.61 8.93 8.29 5.80 7.73 5.94

Lint Index

D1. Early Sowing 4.43 4.80 3.80 4.30 2.60 3.20 2.90 3.72 G 0.09 0.25 7.1



Mean 4.27 4.70 4.18 4.37 2.64 3.08 2.70

Ginning %

D1. Early Sowing 34.0 33.9 31.4 35.2 32.7 28.7 32.3 32.6 G 0.30 0.86 2.8



Mean 33.6 32.8 31.9 34.5 31.3 28.4 31.2

D - 177


PHY 2. 7. Soil moisture content (%) at different growth stages as influenced by dates of sowing at Junagarh in Central Zone

Treatments

Control (Bt hybrid) (G.Cot.hy-8

BG-II)

G1. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. Hy- 12)

G2. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. hy-10)

G3. Hirsutum

(GTHH -49)

G4. Arboreum (G.Cot. -

19)


824)

G6. Arboreum (G. Cot. -

15)

Mean ANOVA SEm CD

(5%) CV %

Soil moisture content (%) 10 DAS

D1. Early Sowing 37.2 37.1 37.0 37.2 37.6 37.4 37.1 37.3 G 0.46 NS 3.5

D2. Normal Sowing 41.6 40.9 41.1 40.7 41.6 40.3 41.6 41.1 D 0.42 1.64 4.8


Mean 39.8 40.1 39.7 40.0 40.5 39.9 40.4


D1. Early Sowing 39.5 38.4 40.7 39.9 38.3 40.9 40.8 39.8 G 0.73 NS 6.0

D2. Normal Sowing 34.7 32.9 35.9 34.5 34.4 33.6 34.9 34.4 D 0.68 2.68 8.6


Mean 35.5 35.3 37.2 36.7 36.2 36.8 37.2


D1. Early Sowing 27.7 25.7 30.0 28.4 26.0 29.2 29.1 28.0 G 0.61 1.75 6.6


D3. Late Sowing 24.3 26.3 26.7 27.3 30.1 27.6 27.6 27.1 G X D 1.06 3.04

Mean 26.7 25.8 29.0 27.6 27.7 27.7 29.2


D1. Early Sowing 28.6 27.5 22.1 27.5 23.5 16.6 19.2 23.6 G 1.33 3.82 17.4



Mean 27.5 24.0 24.2 24.0 22.9 18.7 19.7


D1. Early Sowing 18.5 15.4 15.1 11.0 19.2 15.7 16.7 15.9 G 0.39 1.13 6.9

D2. Normal Sowing 21.2 19.5 13.6 19.7 20.6 17.8 18.8 18.7 D 0.48 1.88 12.7

D3. Late Sowing 19.5 18.9 17.1 17.8 11.8 16.5 17.7 17.1 G X D 0.68 1.96

Mean 19.7 17.9 15.3 16.2 17.2 16.6 17.7

D - 178


PHY 2.8. Required days to attain phonological stages as influenced by genotypes and dates of sowing under irrigated condition at Junagarh in Central Zone

Treatments

Control (Bt hybrid) (G.Cot.hy-8

BG-II)

G1. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. Hy- 12)

G2. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. hy-10)

G3. Hirsutum

(GTHH -49)


19)


824)

G6. Arboreum (G. Cot. -

15)

Mean ANOVA SEm CD

(5%) CV %

Days Required for Sowing to 50% squaring

D1. Early Sowing 34.7 34.0 38.3 29.7 29.3 40.3 38.7 35.0 Genotypes 0.58 1.68 5.4

D2. Normal Sowing 33.0 32.3 36.3 27.7 30.7 37.3 34.7 33.1 Dates 0.21 0.83 3.0

D3. Late Sowing 28.7 30.3 30.3 27.0 26.3 33.0 30.3 29.4 GxD 1.01 NS

Mean 32.1 32.2 35.0 28.1 28.8 36.9 34.6

Days Required for 50% squaring to 50% flowering


D2. Normal Sowing 19.3 19.3 21.7 18.7 17.7 22.3 23.3 20.3 Dates 0.50 NS 11.5

D3. Late Sowing 18.0 19.3 20.7 16.3 17.7 20.0 19.7 18.8 GxD 0.61 1.75

Mean 19.0 20.0 21.1 17.9 18.2 22.4 20.6

Days Required for 50% flowering to 50% boll formation


D2. Normal Sowing 13.0 12.7 14.3 11.3 10.7 14.7 13.0 12.8 Dates 0.28 NS 10.2


Mean 12.0 12.1 14.1 11.0 11.2 14.6 13.3

Days Required for 50% boll formation to 50% boll Opening



D3. Late Sowing 48.3 55.7 59.3 52.7 50.7 54.7 54.7 53.7 GxD 1.30 3.74

Mean 49.2 52.2 53.8 51.4 49.1 56.2 52.3

Days Required for 50% boll Opening to Harvest




Mean 74.3 70.1 62.7 77.4 79.3 58.4 65.9

D - 179


PHY 2.9. Biochemical analysis (mg/g of tissue) of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition under irrigated condition at Junagarh in Central Zone

Treatments

Control (Bt

hybrid) (G.Cot.hy-

8 BG-II)

G1. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. Hy- 12)

G2. Hirsutum

(G.Cot. hy-10)

G3. Hirsutum

(GTHH -49)


19)


824)


15)

Mean ANOVA SEm CD

(5%) CV %

Total Chlorophyll



D3. Late Sowing 1.546 1.169 1.666 1.093 1.157 1.015 0.837 1.212 GxD 0.046 0.131

Mean 1.051 1.175 1.262 1.169 1.093 1.002 0.845

Chlorophyll a



D3. Late Sowing 1.093 0.798 1.117 0.795 0.839 0.719 0.571 0.847 GxD 0.050 0.143

Mean 0.696 0.820 0.853 0.776 0.768 0.701 0.575

Chlorophyll b



D3. Late Sowing 0.454 0.371 0.549 0.298 0.318 0.296 0.267 0.365 GxD 0.016 0.047

Mean 0.355 0.355 0.409 0.393 0.325 0.301 0.270

D - 180


PHY 2.10.GDD, HTU and PTU for different phonological stage of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition under Irrigated condition at Junagarh in Central Zone

Treatments Control

(Bt hyb. BG-II) (G.Cot.hy-8I)

G1. Hirsutum (G.Cot. Hy

- 12)

G2. Hirsutum (G.Cot.hy-10)

G3. Hirsutum

(GTHH-49)

G4. Arboreum (G.Cot.-19)

G5. Arboreum

(G.Cot-824)

G6. Arboreum

(G. Cot -15) Mean ANOVA SEm

CD (5%)

CV %


D1. Early Sowing 789 800 846 719 723 923 823 803 Genotypes 8.79 25.24 3.7

D2. Normal Sowing 690 683 761 613 639 783 761 704 Dates 8.02 31.47 5.1

D3. Late Sowing 618 658 675 575 585 699 662 639 GxD 15.23 NS

Mean 699 714 761 636 649 802 749




D3. Late Sowing 1399 1511 1593 1398 1383 1571 1527 1483 GxD 23.56 67.62

Mean 1481 1531 1611 1427 1413 1721 1589

HTU to Days to flowering



D3. Late Sowing 725 848 877 617 652 901 862 783 GxD 28.22 81.0

Mean 1358 1398 1465 1280 1307 1522 1458

HTU to Days to Boll opening



D3. Late Sowing 6154 7195 7927 6143 5993 7732 7327 6924 GxD 215.7 619.2

Mean 5376 5881 6779 4897 4681 7561 6408


D1. Early Sowing 10549 10699 11295 9625 9679 12272 10992 10730 Genotypes 111 319 3.6

D2. Normal Sowing 9119 9027 10015 8142 8478 10295 10014 9299 Dates 101 395 5.0

D3. Late Sowing 7494 7977 8184 6967 7077 8457 8033 7741 GxD 192 NS

Mean 9054 9234 9831 8244 8411 10341 9679


D1. Early Sowing 21227 21418 22703 19845 20092 24765 22021 21724 Genotypes 159 458 2.4

D2. Normal Sowing 17987 18352 19765 17394 16785 21085 19757 18732 Dates 221 866 5.2

D3. Late Sowing 17383 18688 19619 17371 17193 19371 18857 18355 GxD 276 793

Mean 18866 19486 20696 18203 18023 21741 20212

D - 181


PHY 2. 11. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments (Control)

G. Cot. Hy. 6BGII G.Cot-10 G.N.Cot-22 Deviraj G. Cot-15 G. Cot-19 ANOVA SEd

CD (5%)


D1.Early Sowing 116.7 138.5 169.2 132.5 201.7 216.5 Genotypes 7.88 16.11

D2. Normal Sowing 128.0 121.3 143.3 110.3 224.2 208.3 Dates 1.39 3.84

D3. Delay Sowing 99.2 115.0 90.8 91.7 162.0 181.3 GxD 12.5 25.74




D3. Delay Sowing 16.0 18.0 14.8 14.2 19.3 24.7 GxD 2.44 NS



D2. Normal Sowing 95.2 70.0 77.4 63.7 182.8 188.3 Dates 5.37 NS


Boll weight (g)


D2. Normal Sowing 2.8 2.2 2.4 2.5 1.1 1.2 Dates 0.077 NS






D - 182


PHY 2.12. Soil moisture content (%) at different growth stages as influenced by dates of sowing at Surat in Central Zone



CD (5%)


D1.Early Sowing 30.94 27.16 27.46 27.83 29.85 32.03 Genotypes 0.87 N.S.

D2. Normal Sowing 18.67 23.25 27.14 18.67 20.85 19.45 Dates of sowing 0.61 1.25


















D - 183


PHY 2. 13.Phenological stages as influenced by genotypes and dates of sowing at Surat in Central Zone



CD (5%)

sowing to 50% squaring


D2. Normal Sowing 52.0 53.7 56.3 60.7 51.7 50.0 Dates of sowing 1.0 NS


50% squaring to 50% flowering

D1.Early Sowing 19.3 18.0 18.7 15.3 16.3 17.3 Genotypes 1.7 NS



50% flowering to 50% boll formation




50% flowering to 50% boll Opening




50% boll formation to 50% boll opening




D - 184


PHY 2. 14.Biochemical analysis (mg/g of tissue) of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition at Surat in Central Zone



CD (5%)

Reducing sugar




Total Chlorophyll




Chlorophyll a




Chlorophyll b




Carotenoid


D2. Normal Sowing 0.40 0.45 0.43 0.30 0.34 0.19 Dates of sowing 0.048 N.S.

3. Delay Sowing 0.30 0.22 0.34 0.32 0.27 0.36 GxD 0.11 N.S.

D - 185


PHY 2. 15.GDD, HTU and PTU for different phonological stage of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition at Surat in Central Zone



CD (5%)




D3. Delay Sowing 1249.7 1300.8 1323.4 1492.5 1192.6 1186.7 GxD 28.96 N.S.





HTU to Days to flowering (Values presented in table is in lac)



D3. Delay Sowing 3.12 3.23 3.39 4.23 2.78 2.83 GxD 13444.31 N. S.

HTU to Days to Boll opening (Values presented in table is in lac)












D - 186


PHY 2. 16. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Khandwa in Central Zone

Treatments Control

(Bt hybrid) G1.

Hirsutum G2.

Hirsutum G3.

Hirsutum G4.

Arboreum G5.

Arboreum G6.

Arboreum Date of sowing

ANOVA SEd CD-5%


D1 Normal Sowing 178.00 152.67 150.00 144.00 200.67 203.33 204.67 176.19 Genotypes 31.38 49.89

D2. Late sowing by15 days 158.00 111.67 124.67 127.67 145.00 162.67 173.00 143.24 Dates of sowing 2.1 6.95

D3. Late sowing by30 days 75.67 75.67 74.00 83.33 81.00 82.00 93.33 80.71 GxD NS

Genotypes 137.22 113.34 116.22 118.33 142.22 149.33 157.00

No. of Bolls/plant

D1.Normal Sowing 26.33 24.56 33.33 31.45 36.67 32.67 29.56 30.65 Genotypes 2.58 6.01 D2. Late sowing by15 days 13.78 16.89 18.33 16.22 12.00 15.22 12.67 15.02 Dates of sowing 0.59 1.95

D3. Late sowing by30 days 19.33 16.67 17.00 17.33 19.89 17.33 9.22 16.68 GxD 1.85 5.29

19.81 19.37 22.89 21.67 22.85 21.74 17.15

Boll weight (g)

D1.Normal Sowing 3.73 2.56 3.02 2.65 2.23 2.24 2.70 2.73 Genotypes 0.49 1.14 D2. Late sowing by15 days 3.17 2.28 2.57 2.83 2.11 2.32 2.47 2.54 Dates of sowing 0.03 0.09

D3. Late sowing by30 days 2.96 2.53 2.44 2.66 1.99 1.94 2.00 2.36 GxD NS

3.29 2.46 2.68 2.71 2.11 2.17 2.39


D1 Normal Sowing 1950 1271 954 1661 1336 1478 1558 1458 Genotypes 253 390

D2. Late sowing by15 days 1373 801 862 1104 1027 990 1224 1054 Dates of sowing 25 49

D3. Late sowing by30 days 836 542 504 719 492 479 637 601 GxD 60 171

Genotypes 1387 871 774 1161 952 982 1140

112 203

D - 187


PHY 2.17.Biochemical analysis (mg/g of tissue) of cotton genotypes under early, normal and delay sowed condition at Khandwa in Central Zone

Treatments Control G1.

Hirsutum G2.

Hirsutum G3.

Hirsutum G4.

Arboreum G5.

Arboreum G6.

Arboreum Date of sowing

ANOVA SEd CD-5% (Bt hybrid)

Total chlorophyll

D1 Normal Sowing 2.63 2.52 2.03 2.08 2.21 2.01 2.35 2.26 Genotypes 0.28 0.66



Genotypes 2.35 2.13 1.92 1.75 1.78 1.72 1.92

Chlorophyll (a)

D1.Normal Sowing 1.3 1.25 0.98 0.99 1.12 0.93 1.11 1.10 Genotypes 0.08 0.19



1.13 1.10 0.92 0.97 1.01 0.94 1.05

chlorophyll (b)

D1.Normal Sowing 1.4 1.34 1.21 1.16 1.15 1.15 1.31 1.25 Genotypes 0.07 0.16



1.24 1.21 1.14 1.12 1.10 1.12 1.20

D - 188


PHY 2.18. Growth characters of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments G1. Sahana

(G. h)

G2. ARBH-813 (G.

h)

G3. ARBC-19 (G.

h)

G4. Gham-34 (G.

h)

G5. DLSA-

17 (G. a)

G6. DAS-385

(G. a)

G7. ARBAS-131 (G.

a)

G8. Firstclass

BG-II (Bt)

G9. ATM BG-II (Bt)

Mean ANOVA SEd CD

(5%)


D1.Normal Sowing 125.9 127.7 142.7 137.8 123.1 152.3 140.7 119.6 133.0 133.6 G 1.8 7.1


141.8 149.2 140.8 147.9 126.9 167.3 154.7 141.0 149.9 146.6 D 3.7 10.5


142.9 143.2 145.8 140.8 147.2 148.9 151.3 168.3 151.2 148.9 GxD 6.3 18.2

Mean 136.9 140.0 143.1 142.1 132.4 156.2 148.9 143.0 144.7

No. of sympodia/plant at harvest

D1.Normal Sowing 24.3 26.6 23.0 21.7 24.2 25.4 27.6 22.8 25.2 24.5 G 0.4 1.4


23.8 25.8 25.1 22.2 21.6 24.3 24.6 25.7 24.7 24.2 D 0.6 1.7


21.1 23.4 20.8 20.9 20.6 24.0 24.1 20.9 20.1 21.8 GXD 1.1 NS

Mean 23.1 25.3 23.0 21.6 22.1 24.6 25.4 23.1 23.3

No. of Bolls/plant

D1.Normal Sowing 13.1 15.6 12.6 9.8 12.3 12.4 12.2 29.6 23.0 15.6 G 0.2 0.9


11.6 6.9 11.0 8.9 9.0 5.8 4.3 22.6 19.1 11.0 D 0.6 1.8


6.4 6.3 5.7 2.9 6.2 3.2 3.2 20.9 19.3 8.2 GXD 1.0 3.0

Mean 10.4 9.6 9.7 7.2 9.2 7.1 6.6 24.3 20.5

D - 189


PHY 2 .19. Seed cotton yield of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments G1.

Sahana (G. h)

G2. ARBH-

813 (G. h)

G3. ARBC-

19 (G. h)

G4. Gham-

34 (G. h)

G5. DLSA-

17 (G. a)

G6. DAS-385 (G. a)

G7. ARBAS-

131 (G. a)

G8. Firstclass BG-II (Bt)

G9. ATM BG-II (Bt)

Mean ANOVA SEd CD

(5%)

Boll weight (g/boll)

D1.Normal Sowing 4.90 4.78 4.57 5.10 4.86 3.27 2.99 5.98 5.80 4.69 G 0.04 0.14

D2. Late sowing by15 days 5.06 5.08 5.26 5.48 5.86 2.98 3.02 5.80 5.63 4.91 D 0.06 0.17

D3. Late sowing by30 days 5.15 4.98 4.89 4.93 5.03 2.94 2.98 5.58 5.66 4.68 GXD 0.10 0.29

Mean 5.04 4.95 4.91 5.17 5.25 3.06 2.99 5.79 5.69

Seed cotton yield (g /plant)

D1.Normal Sowing 50.9 38.0 30.4 40.1 23.3 21.5 27.7 137.8 93.1 51.4 G 1.1 4.4



Mean 36.7 34.3 23.3 27.7 21.6 12.5 18.3 81.4 67.1

Seed cotton yield (q/ha)

D1.Normal Sowing 18.80 21.17 16.75 16.12 18.38 18.84 20.12 22.18 18.73 19.01 G 0.32 1.25



Mean 15.73 15.61 11.75 11.23 12.92 10.57 11.77 14.11 12.58

D - 190


PHY 2.20. Phenological stages and SPAD values of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments G1. Sahana

(G. h)

G2. ARBH-

813 (G. h)

G3. ARBC-19 (G.

h)

G4. Gham-34 (G.

h)

G5. DLSA-

17 (G. a)

G6. DAS-385

(G. a)

G7. ARBAS-131 (G.

a)

G8. Firstclass

BG-II (Bt)

G9. ATM BG-II (Bt)

Mean ANOVA SEd CD

(5%)

Sowing to 50% squaring

D1.Normal Sowing 42.7 42.7 44.3 45.0 45.0 46.3 46.3 46.7 47.0 45.1 Genotype 0.5 1.8


42.7 43.0 43.7 44.7 45.3 46.7 47.0 45.3 45.7 44.9 DOS 0.4 1.2

D3. Late sowing by30 days 41.3 41.7 41.3 40.3 41.7 45.3 45.3 43.3 41.0 42.4 GXD 0.8 NS

Mean 42.2 42.4 43.1 43.3 44.0 46.1 46.2 45.1 44.6

Sowing to 50% flowering



76.7 74.7 75.3 76.3 78.0 79.0 79.0 76.7 77.3 77.0 DOS 0.5 1.5


Mean 76.1 74.7 74.8 76.1 78.0 77.9 78.3 77.1 76.9




34.0 31.7 31.7 31.7 32.7 32.3 32.0 31.3 31.7 32.1 DOS 0.7 NS


Mean 33.9 32.2 31.7 32.8 34.0 31.8 32.1 32.0 32.3

SPAD at 100 days



39.6 38.6 39.7 39.3 38.4 43.0 41.0 39.1 40.7 39.9 DOS 0.3 0.9


Mean 40.5 38.8 40.1 38.5 38.0 41.6 41.1 39.1 39.8

D - 191


PHY 2.21. Growth characters and Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at LAM in South Zone

Treatments Jaadu BGII LHDP2 L 1384 L 1060 Phule Dhanwanthari PA 528 PA 255 ANOVA SEd CD

(5%)


D1.Normal Sowing 153 93 147 105 183 177 193 G 3.1 8.7

D2. Late sowing by 20 days 83 68 91 80 138 142 149 D 2.1 5.7

D3. Late sowing by 40 days 68 55 75 69 101 94 107 GxD 5.4 16.78


D1.Normal Sowing 21.33 19.67 18.33 21.33 17.67 18.67 20.67 G 0.46 1.26

D2. Late sowing by 20 days 23.00 19.33 18.67 20.67 18.33 22.00 21.33 D 0.70 1.93

D3. Late sowing by 40 days 20.67 18.33 18.67 19.00 16.67 17.00 17.00 GxD 1.21 NS


D1.Normal Sowing 42.67 35.00 37.33 28.00 109.67 82.00 97.67 G 1.72 4.75


D3. Late sowing by 40 days 31.33 29.33 33.00 28.33 79.33 81.67 63.33 GxD 2.97 9.15

Boll weight (g)

D1.Normal Sowing 4.48 3.80 4.41 3.65 2.90 2.75 2.49 G 0.19 0.53

D2. Late sowing by 20 days 4.22 3 .73 3.98 3.76 2.81 2.72 2.37 D 0.13 NS

D3. Late sowing by 40 days 4.19 3.59 4.12 3.50 2.89 2.69 2.31 GxD 0.33 NS


D1.Normal Sowing 15.40 12.86 13.62 9.65 27.60 19.17 22.67 G 0.58 1.61


D3. Late sowing by 40 days 10.91 11.83 11.97 11.33 20.75 19.76 14.48 GxD 1.01 3.10

D - 192


PHY 2.22. Soil moisture content (%) at different growth stages as influenced by dates of sowing at LAM in South Zone


(5%)


D1.Normal Sowing 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 34.5 G -- --

D2. Late sowing by 20 days 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 D -- --

D3. Late sowing by 40 days 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7 GxD -- --


D1.Normal Sowing 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 20.3 G -- --




D1.Normal Sowing 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2 G -- --




D1.Normal Sowing 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 G -- --




D1.Normal Sowing 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 G -- --

D2. Late sowing by 20 days -- -- -- -- -- -- -- D -- --

D3. Late sowing by 40 days -- -- -- -- -- -- -- GxD -- --

D - 193


PHY 2.23. Phenological stages (days required) of genotypes as influenced by dates of sowing at LAM in South Zone


(5%)


D1.Normal Sowing 38 35 37 36 33 34 33 G -- --

D2. Late sowing by 20 days 35 34 36 34 34 35 35 D -- --

D3. Late sowing by 40 days 35 34 32 34 32 32 32 GxD -- --


D1.Normal Sowing 52 51 48 51 48 49 48 G -- --




D1.Normal Sowing 108 109 107 112 106 107 106 G -- --



50% boll formation to 50% boll bursting

D1.Normal Sowing 147 144 147 143 126 118 124 G -- --



Sowing to harvesting

D1.Normal Sowing 166 159 165 163 136 133 139 G -- --



D - 194


PHY 2.24. GDD of cotton genotypes at different growth stages as influenced by dates of sowing at LAM in South Zone


(5%)


D1.Normal Sowing 743 681 642 702 642 661 642 G -- --




D1.Normal Sowing 279 321 301 300 220 244 301 G -- --




D1.Normal Sowing 1025 1063 1088 1118 1071 1069 1071 G -- --



50% boll formation to 50% boll bursting

D1.Normal Sowing 608 555 624 487 341 196 311 G -- --



50% boll bursting to picking

D1.Normal Sowing 251 193 236 258 14 230 223 G -- --



GDD from sowing to harvest

D - 195


D1.Normal Sowing 2919 2828 2841 2878 2501 2457 2549 G -- --

D2. Late sowing by15 days 2594 2540 2540 2581 2156 2063 2221 D -- --

D3. Late sowing by30 days 2214 2215 2215 2280 1801 1706 1957 GxD -- --

PHY3.1.Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha), as influenced Nano fertilizers at Lam in South Zone


(cm) Number of sympodia

Number of bolls per plant

Boll weight (g)

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

T1. Rec NK 155 19.01 63.60 3.12 1307

T2.Rec NPK 153 18.74 68.70 3.02 1363

T3. T1 + Foliar application of KH2PO4 @ 2% at 45 & 60 DAS 166 20.77 72.30 3.14 1344

T4.T1 +Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 10 litres of water at 45 & 60 DAS

165 16.28 66.30 3.04 1345

T5. T1+Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 15 litres of water at 45 & 60 DAS

146 14.52 73.50 3.07 1370

T6. T2 + Soil application of Zn SO4 @ 25 kg/ha 161 16.19 78.00 3.16 1459

T7. T2 + Foliar application of ZnSO4 @ 0. 2% at 45 & 60 DAS 167 19.18 81.00 3.16 1531

T8.T2 + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 10 litres of water at 45 & 60 DAS

155 16.54 77.70 3.25 1447

T9. T2 + Foliar application of Nano Zinc @ 2 g per 15 litres of water at & 60 DAS

155 15.58 75.90 3.22 1438

SE d 3.7 0.98 1.39 0.12 21.2

CD (5%) NS 2.93 4.27 NS 59.2

17.1 11.56 12.06 6.63 11.4

D - 196


PHY 3. 2.Growth characters, seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and physiological parameters as influenced Nano fertilizers at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments Plant

height (cm) Sympodia

No. Bolls/ plant

Boll wt (g)

Seed cotton yield

(g /plant )

Seed cotton yield

(kg/ha)

SPAD Value

Photosynthetic rate (umol.m-

2sec-1)

conductance (umol.m-2sec-

1)

Transpiration rate

(umol.m-2sec-1)

T1.Rec NK 114.4 20.8 10.0 5.40 44.94 1178.62 36.43 22.63 0.26 4.40

T2.Rec NPK 109.0 23.0 11.4 5.76 34.28 1292.12 35.47 26.86 0.25 3.71

T3.T1 + Foliar application of KH2PO4 @2% at 45DAS & 60

116.4 22.8 10.1 5.44 36.94 1118.43 37.23 28.23 0.24 3.56

T4.T1 +Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 10 litres of water at 45DAS & 60

119.7 21.7 9.4 5.42 34.44 1139.19 35.17 26.98 0.21 3.16

T5.T1+Foliar application of Nano P @ 2g per 15 litres of water at 45DAS & 60 DAS

117.9 23.2 13.8 5.52 42.00 1161.26 36.03 16.80 0.13 2.46

T6.T2 + Soil application of Zn SO4 @ 25 kg/ha

126.0 23.0 11.4 5.24 42.07 1117.83 37.40 26.65 0.20 3.31

T7.T2 + Foliar application of ZnSO4 @ 0. 2% at 45DAS & 60 DAS

110.3 20.3 11.9 5.71 37.06 1243.43 35.67 23.07 0.29 4.08


110.3 22.7 10.9 5.51 43.50 1283.71 35.03 30.02 0.35 4.37


111.0 22.0 14.0 5.57 44.29 1315.67 34.73 24.42 0.27 4.17

Mean

D - 197


SE d 3.6 0.9 0.7 0.09 3.49 90.25 1.04 0.81 0.01 0.28

CD (5%) NS NS 2.0 0.26 NS NS NS 2.41 0.04 0.84

BIO 2. 1. Plant height(cm) and number of sympodia (No/plant) of genotypes at harvest under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments

MI - Protected M2 – Unprotected

M1 M2 NDLS-1938

Suraj Mean (PGR)

NDLS-1938

Suraj NDLS-1938 Suraj

Plant height (cm)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 144.11 124.22 132.11 119.33 134.17 125.72 138.11 121.78 129.94

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 130.89 112.11 128.22 110.44 121.50 119.33 129.56 111.28 120.42

S3 – NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS+ MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS

134.44 118.00 134.22 106.56 126.22 120.39 134.33 112.28 123.31

S4– Control 156.44 128.00 141.44 115.78 142.22 128.61 148.94 121.89 135.42

Mean 141.47 120.58 134.00 113.03 131.03 123.51 137.74 116.81 127.27


SE d 11.53 1.42 2.93 2.01 4.15 4.15 5.87 -- --

CD (5%) NS 5.59 8.56 NS NS NS NS -- --


S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 21.44 23.33 20.89 20.22 22.39 20.56 21.17 21.78 21.47

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 22.33 21.89 21.89 19.75 22.11 20.82 22.11 20.82 21.47


24.67 25.56 22.78 19.78 25.11 21.28 23.72 22.67 23.19

S4– Control 20.56 22.67 18.33 20.33 21.61 19.33 19.44 21.50 20.47

Mean 22.25 23.36 20.97 20.02 22.81 20.50 21.61 21.69 21.65


D - 198


SE d 0.68 0.15 0.36 0.21 0.51 0.51 0.73 -- --

CD (5%) NS NS 1.06 0.82 NS 1.50 NS -- --

BIO 2. 2. No of bolls per plant and boll weight (g) of genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments

MI - Protected M2 – Unprotected

M1 M2 NDLS-1938

Suraj Mean (PGR)

NDLS-1938

Suraj NDLS-1938 Suraj

No. of bolls/plant

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 10.78 17.44 9.56 12.44 14.11 11.00 10.17 14.94 12.56

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 13.78 14.33 10.93 11.00 14.06 10.97 12.36 12.67 12.51

S3 – NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS+ MC @ 50 ppm at 90

DAS 15.78 16.44 10.11 17.11 16.11 13.61 12.94 16.78 14.86

S4– Control 14.67 13.78 9.08 12.11 14.22 10.60 11.87 12.94 12.41

Mean 13.75 15.50 9.92 13.17 14.63 11.54 11.83 14.33 13.08


SE d 0.13 0.22 0.37 0.30 0.53 0.53 0.75 -- --

CD (5%) 0.81 0.85 1.09 NS NS 1.54 2.18 -- --

Boll weight (g)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 5.23 5.68 5.03 5.34 5.46 5.19 5.13 5.51 5.32

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 5.26 5.63 5.08 5.34 5.44 5.21 5.17 5.48 5.33

S3 – NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS+ MC @ 50 ppm at 90

DAS 5.38 5.43 5.08 5.33 5.40 5.21 5.23 5.38 5.30

S4– Control 5.23 5.53 5.02 5.38 5.38 5.20 5.13 5.45 5.29

Mean 5.28 5.56 5.05 5.35 5.42 5.20 5.16 5.46 5.31


D - 199


SE d 0.01 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.09 -- --

CD (5%) 0.09 0.24 NS NS NS NS NS -- --

BIO.2.3. Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and sucking pest population (No/plant) before the day of PGR spray as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments MI - Protected M2 - Unprotected

M1 M2 NDLS-1938 Suraj Mean (PGR) NDLS-1938 Suraj NDLS-1938 Suraj


S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 865 1771 776 1428 1318 1102 820 1600 1210

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 1016 1912 851 1578 1464 1215 934 1745 1339


992 1904 898 1566 1448 1232 945 1735 1340

S4– Control 832 1674 679 1362 1253 1021 756 1518 1137

Mean 926 1815 801 1483 1371 1142 864 1649 1257


SE d 33.40 45.69 30.48 64.61 43.10 43.10 60.95 -- --

CD (5%) 203.23 179.39 88.95 NS NS NS NS -- --

No. of leafhopper nymphs/3 leaves before the day of PGR spray

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 2.00 (4.00) 2.16 (4.67) 2.50 (6.33) 2.69 (7.27) 2.08 (4.33) 2.60 (6.80) 2.25 (5.17) 2.43 (5.97) 2.34 (5.57)

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 2.11 (4.80) 2.25 (5.07) 2.55 (6.53) 2.70 (7.33) 2.18 (4.93) 2.63 (6.93) 2.33 (5.67) 2.47(6.20) 2.40 (5.93)


2.19 (4.80) 2.31 (5.33) 2.56 (6.60) 2.75 (7.60) 2.25 (5.07) 2.66 (7.10) 2.38 (5.70) 2.53(6.47) 2.45 (6.08)

S4– Control 1.98 (4.00) 2.31 (5.33) 2.59 (6.73) 2.87 (8.27) 2.14 (4.67) 2.73 (7.50) 2.28 (5.37) 2.59(6.80) 2.44 (6.08)

Mean 2.07 (4.40) 2.26 (5.10) 2.55 (6.55) 2.76 (7.62) 2.16 (4.75) 2.65 (7.08) 2.31 (5.48) 2.51(6.36) 2.41 (5.92)


SE d 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.14 -- --

CD (5%) 0.22 NS NS NS NS NS NS -- --

* Values in parenthesis indicate the mean values of the respective treatment.

D - 200


BIO.2.4. Sucking pest population (No/plant) before 3rd and 7th day of PGR spray as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments


M1 M2 NDLS-1938

Suraj Mean (PGR)

NDLS-1938

Suraj NDLS-1938

Suraj


S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 1.65 (2.73) 1.88

(3.53) 1.78 (3.20)

2.20 (4.87)

1.76 (3.13)

1.99 (4.03)

1.72 (2.97) 2.02

(4.20) 1.88 (3.58)

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 1.97 (4.00) 1.98

(4.00) 2.03 (4.13)

2.60 (6.80)

1.97 (4.00)

2.32 (5.47)

2.00 (4.07) 2.27

(5.40) 2.14

(4.73)


1.63 (2.67) 1.86

(3.47) 1.75 (3.07)

2.16 (4.80)

1.75 (3.07)

1.95 (3.93)

1.69 (2.87) 2.27

(4.13) 1.85

(3.50)

S4– Control 2.20 (4.93) 2.29

(5.27) 2.45 (6.00)

2.84 (8.07)

2.25 (5.10)

2.64 (7.03)

2.33 (5.47) 2.56

(6.67) 2.45

(6.07)

Mean 1.86

(3.58) 2.00

(4.07) 2.00

(4.10) 2.45

(6.13) 1.93

(3.83) 2.23

(5.12) 1.93

(3.84) 2.28

(5.10) 2.08

(4.47)


SE d 0.04 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.10 0.10 0.14 -- --

CD (5%) 0.22 0.02 0.21 0.03 NS NS NS -- --


S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 1.15 (1.33) 1.68

(2.83) 1.73 (3.00)

1.79 (3.20)

1.42 (2.08)

1.76 (3.10)

1.44 (2.17) 1.73

(3.02) 1.59

(2.59)

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 1.68 (2.83) 1.88

(3.80) 1.79 (3.20)

1.84 (3.40)

1.78 (3.32)

1.82 (3.30)

1.74 (3.02) 1.86

(3.60) 1.80

(3.31)


1.18 (1.40) 1.45

(2.13) 1.65 (2.73)

1.75 (3.07)

1.31 (1.77)

1.70 (2.90)

1.42 (2.07) 1.60

(2.60) 1.51

(2.33)

S4– Control 1.71 (2.92) 2.05

(4.20) 2.42 (5.87)

2.69 (7.27)

1.88 (3.56)

2.56 (6.57)

2.06 (4.39) 2.37

(5.73) 2.22

(5.06)

Mean 1.43

(2.12) 1.76

(3.24) 1.90

(3.70) 2.02

(4.23) 1.60

(2.68) 1.96

(3.97) 1.66

(2.91) 1.89

(3.74) 1.78

(3.32)


SE d 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.10 -- --

CD (5%) 0.34 0.17 0.15 NS 0.20 NS NS -- --

* Values in parenthesis indicate the mean values of the respective treatment.

D - 201


BIO.2.5. Secondary metabolite (tannin & polyphenols) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone



Tanins (mg/g tissue)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 13.79 13.58 12.23 13.91 13.68 13.07 13.01 13.74 13.38

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 12.94 11.85 11.38 12.09 12.39 11.73 12.16 11.97 12.06

S3 – NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS+ MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 13.48 12.82 11.92 14.53 13.15 13.23 12.70 13.68 13.19

S4– Control 10.76 9.45 9.20 6.85 10.11 8.02 9.98 8.15 9.06

Mean 12.74 11.92 11.18 11.84 12.33 11.51 11.96 11.88 11.92


SE d 0.10 0.10 0.16 0.14 0.23 0.23 0.33 -- --

CD (5%) 0.62 NS 0.48 0.55 0.68 0.68 0.96 -- --

Polyphenols (mg/g tissue)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 3.81 3.02 2.56 2.69 3.42 2.63 3.19 2.86 3.02

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 2.37 2.73 1.76 2.25 2.55 2.01 2.07 2.49 2.28


S4– Control 2.68 2.37 1.43 1.56 2.53 1.50 2.06 1.97 2.01

Mean 3.08 2.82 2.11 2.29 2.95 2.20 2.60 2.55 2.58


SE d 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.07 -- --

CD (5%) 0.13 NS 0.11 0.24 0.15 0.15 0.22 -- --

D - 202


BIO.2.6. Secondary metabolite (flavonoids) and antioxidative enzymes (superoxide dismutase) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments MI – Protected M2 - Unprotected


Flavonoids (mg of catechin eq./g tissue)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 27.65 25.31 25.45 20.83 26.48 23.14 26.55 23.07 24.81

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 19.83 14.63 17.63 15.77 17.23 16.70 18.73 15.20 16.97


S4– Control 16.36 14.75 14.16 13.36 15.56 13.76 15.26 14.06 14.66

Mean 23.37 19.84 21.17 18.20 21.61 19.69 22.27 19.02 20.65


SE d 0.39 0.46 0.84 0.66 1.19 1.19 1.68 -- --

CD (5%) NS 1.82 2.45 NS NS NS NS -- --

Superoxide dismutase (U/mg protein)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 25.07 19.86 21.58 22.84 22.47 22.21 23.33 21.35 22.34

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 20.94 17.93 19.80 17.10 19.44 18.45 20.37 17.51 18.94


S4– Control 17.65 17.47 18.23 16.24 17.56 17.24 17.94 16.85 17.40

Mean 22.05 19.88 20.61 20.35 20.96 20.48 21.33 20.11 20.72


SE d 0.27 0.40 0.31 0.56 0.43 0.43 0.61 -- --

CD (5%) NS NS 0.90 NS NS 1.27 1.79 -- --

D - 203


BIO.2.7.Antioxidative enzymes (catalase & peroxidase) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone



Catalase (U/mg protein)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 7.97 5.47 7.86 5.35 6.72 6.60 7.91 5.41 6.66

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 8.49 5.99 8.10 5.47 7.24 6.78 8.29 5.73 7.01


S4– Control 7.55 5.05 7.86 5.36 6.30 6.61 7.70 5.20 6.45

Mean 8.06 5.56 7.93 5.39 6.81 6.66 7.99 5.47 6.73


SE d 0.16 0.01 0.18 0.02 0.26 0.26 0.37 -- --

CD (5%) NS 0.05 NS NS NS NS NS -- --

Peroxidase (U/mg protein)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 53.60 43.10 48.60 41.21 48.35 44.90 51.10 42.15 46.63

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 32.18 34.78 31.37 34.94 33.48 33.16 31.77 34.86 33.32


S4– Control 22.09 16.83 24.93 15.75 19.46 20.34 23.51 16.29 19.90

Mean 40.60 33.99 38.62 33.92 37.29 36.27 39.61 33.95 36.78


SE d 0.30 0.75 0.82 1.06 1.15 1.15 1.63 -- --

CD (5%) NS 2.94 2.38 NS NS 3.37 NS -- --

D - 204


BIO.2.8. Oxidative stress parameters (H2O2 & lipid peroxidation) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Dharwad in South Zone

Treatments MI – Protected M2 – Unprotected


H2O2 (µmoles/mg protein)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 3.76 2.79 2.54 2.31 3.27 2.43 3.15 2.55 2.85

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 3.34 2.62 2.61 2.33 2.98 2.47 2.97 2.48 2.73


S4– Control 3.33 3.08 2.56 2.44 3.20 2.50 2.95 2.76 2.85

Mean 3.40 2.89 2.53 2.38 3.15 2.45 2.97 2.63 2.80


SE d 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 -- --

CD (5%) 0.07 0.04 NS 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.06 -- --

Lipid peroxidation (µmoles of MDA/mg protein)

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm at 60 DAS 0.94 0.78 0.60 0.45 0.86 0.52 0.77 0.61 0.69

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm at 90 DAS 0.92 0.74 0.62 0.52 0.83 0.57 0.77 0.63 0.70


S4– Control 0.94 0.76 0.65 0.38 0.85 0.51 0.79 0.57 0.68

Mean 0.92 0.73 0.63 0.46 0.82 0.55 0.78 0.59 0.68


SE d 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.04 -- --

CD (5%) 0.04 0.04 NS NS 0.08 NS NS -- --

D - 205


BIO.2.9.Plant height (cm) and no of sympodia of genotypes at harvest under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments

MI – Protected M2 - Unprotected

M1 M2 G1 G2 Mean (PGR)

DHY-286 (Leafhopper-

resistant)

DCH -32 (Leafhopper-susceptible)


resistant)



S1- NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS

96.2 118.3 93.7 113.5 107.3 103.6 94.9 115.9 105.4

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS

92.0 100.7 89.2 93.5 96.3 91.3 90.6 97.1 93.9

S3 – NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS followed by MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS

93.3 115.7 92.0 97.8 104.5 94.9 92.7 106.8 99.8

S4– Control (No PGR foliar sprays) 94.8 116.7 90.0 98.3 105.8 94.2 92.4 107.5 100.0

Mean 94.1 112.8 91.2 100.8 103.5 96.0 92.6 106.8 99.7

ANOVA M G S MxG MxS SxG MxSx

G

SE m 0.56 0.56 0.28 0.28 0.14 0.14 0.07

CD (5%) 4.254 5.67 NS NS NS NS NS



13.8 15.8 13.7 20.0 14.8 16.8 13.8 17.9 15.9


17.2 18.2 18.7 19.2 17.7 18.9 17.9 18.7 18.3


16.2 19.3 18.0 15.5 17.8 16.8 17.1 17.4 17.3


Mean 16.4 18.5 17.0 17.8 17.4 17.4 16.7 18.1 17.4

ANOVA M G S MxG MxS SxG MxSx

G

SE m 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.02

CD (5%) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

D - 206


BIO.2.10. No of Bolls per plant and boll weight (g) of genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments

MI – Protected M2 - Unprotected



resistant)



resistant)

DCH -32

(Leafhopper-

susceptible)

Bolls per plant

S1- NAA @ 20 ppm foliar spray at 60 DAS 31.1 38.3 23.1 28.4 34.7 25.8 27.1 33.4 30.3

S2 – MC @ 50 ppm foliar spray at 90 DAS 30.8 36.0 25.5 27.1 33.4 26.3 28.2 31.5 29.9


31.1 37.3 26.1 28.0 34.2 27.1 28.6 32.6 30.6


Mean 31.1 37.1 24.5 27.5 34.1 26.0 27.8 32.3 30.1


SE m 0.38 0.38 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.10 0.05

CD (5%) 2.906 3.935 NS NS NS NS NS

Boll weight (g)




2.6 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.1 2.3 2.1 2.2


Mean 2.4 2.1 2.3 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.1 2.3


SE m 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.005 0.005 0.002

CD (5%) NS 0.111 NS NS NS NS NS

D - 207


BIO.2. 11.Seed cotton yield (kg/ha) and sucking pest population (No/plant ) before the day of PGR spray as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments




resistant)


DHY-286

(Leafhopper-

resistant)


Seed cotton yield (kg/ha).




1426.0 1225.3 988.3 892.9 1325.7 940.6 1207.1 1059.1 1133.1


Mean 1374.8 1214.5 1003.7 874.6 1294.6 939.1 1189.2 1044.6 1116.9


SE m 17.80 17.80 8.90 8.90 4.45 4.45 2.23

CD (5%) 134.6 133.95 N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.

Sucking pest population before the day of PGR spray (No. of leafhopper nymphs/3 leaves)




2.20 5.73 4.27 9.53 3.97 6.90 3.24 7.63 5.4


Mean 2.40 5.75 3.89 11.07 4.08 7.48 3.14 8.41 5.8


SE m 0.39 0.39 0.27 0.48 0.34 0.34 0.24

CD (5%) 0.57 0.57 0.80 N.S. N.S. N.S. 1.61

D - 208


BIO2.12.Sucking pest population (No/plant ) before 3rd and 7thday of PGR spray as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments

MI – Protected M2 – Unprotected

M1 M2 G1 G2

Me

an

(PG

R)


resistant)



resistant)


Sucking pest population 3rd day after PGR spray (No. of leafhopper nymphs/3 leaves)




1.67 8.00 3.07 7.27 4.83 5.17 2.37 7.63 5.0


Mean 1.85 6.50 3.35 9.08 4.18 6.22 2.60 7.79 5.2


SE m 0.41 0.41 0.29 0.50 0.35 0.35 0.25

CD (5%) 0.59 0.59 N.S. 0.83 1.18 1.18 1.67

Sucking pest population 7th day after PGR spray (No. of leafhopper nymphs/3 leaves)




1.87 5.60 2.67 10.73 3.73 6.70 2.27 8.17 5.2


Mean 1.95 6.18 3.22 11.13 4.07 7.18 2.58 10.62 6.6


SE m 0.50 0.50 0.36 0.62 0.44 0.44 0.31

CD (5%) 0.73 0.73 1.03 1.03 1.46 1.46 N.S.

D - 209


BIO 2.13.Secondary metabolite(tannin & polyphenols) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments




resistant)


DHY-286 (Leafhopper-resistant)


Secondary metabolites (Polyphenols-mg/g of tissue)




15.43 17.68 18.36 14.39 16.56 16.38 16.90 16.04 16.5


Mean 18.91 18.15 20.72 16.60 18.53 18.66 19.82 17.38 18.6


SE m 0.13 0.13 0.095 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.08

CD (5%) N.S. 0.19 0.27 0.27 0.38 0.38 0.55

Secondary metabolites (tannin-g/100g of tissue)




3.59 3.86 16.76 27.70 3.73 22.23 10.18 15.78 13.0


Mean 6.16 13.05 18.88 14.03 9.60 16.45 12.52 15.54 14.0


SE m 0.081 0.081 0.057 0.1 0.070 0.070 0.050

CD (5%) 0.112 0.112 0.15 0.15 0.22 0.22 0.31

D - 210


BIO 2. 14. Secondary metabolite (flavonoids) and antioxidative enzymes (superoxide dismutase)as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments




resistant)



resistant)


Secondary metabolites (Flavanoid-mg/g of tissue)




6.34 3.68 6.07 6.72 5.01 6.40 6.21 5.20 5.7


Mean 10.77 6.75 6.90 6.36 8.76 6.63 8.83 6.56 7.7


SE m 0.040 0.040 0.028 0.050 0.035 0.035 0.025

CD (5%) 0.061 0.061 0.086 0.086 0.122 0.122 0.172

Antioxidant enzymes (Superoxide dismutase-Unit/g of tissue)




1.42 1.95 1.62 1.46 1.69 1.54 1.52 1.70 1.6


Mean 1.55 1.54 1.87 1.39 1.55 1.63 1.71 1.76 1.7


SE m 0.08 0.08 0.057 0.1 0.070 0.070 0.05

CD (5%) 0.021 0.021 0.029 0.029 0.042 0.042 0.059

D - 211


BIO2.15. Antioxidative enzymes (catalase& peroxidase) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments


M1 M2 G1 G2

Me

an

(PG

R)


resistant)



resistant)


Antioxidant enzymes (Catalase-Unit/mg of protein)




2.28 5.50 1.21 1.09 3.89 1.15 1.74 3.30 2.5


Mean 6.59 3.88 2.29 0.73 5.23 1.51 4.44 2.30 3.4


SE m 0.070 0.070 0.05 0.086 0.06 0.061 0.043

CD (5%) 0.100 0.100 0.141 0.141 0.19 0.191 0.282

Antioxidant enzymes (Peroxidase-Unit/g of tissue)




9.23 9.17 0.60 1.37 9.20 0.98 4.92 5.27 5.1


Mean 5.79 7.12 1.07 1.97 6.45 1.52 3.43 5.78 4.6


SE m 0.1 0.1 0.070 0.122 0.08 0.086 0.061

CD (5%) 0.147 0.147 0.207 0.207 0.29 0.293 0.415

D - 212


BIO 2.16.Oxidative stress parameters (H2O2&lipid peroxidation) as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments




resistant)



resistant)


Oxidative stress parameter (H2O2 µg /100g of tissue)




4.17 3.07 6.46 5.16 3.62 5.81 5.32 4.11 4.7


Mean 3.92 2.68 5.02 5.38 3.30 5.20 4.47 4.03 4.3


SE m 0.040 0.040 0.028 0.05 0.035 0.035 0.025

CD (5%) 0.044 0.044 0.062 0.062 0.088 0.088 0.124

Oxidative stress parameter(Lipid Peroxidation-mg/g of tissue)




0.35 0.82 0.35 0.86 0.58 0.60 0.35 0.84 0.6


Mean 0.45 1.04 0.39 1.00 0.75 0.69 0.42 1.16 0.8


SE m 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.086 0.061 0.061 0.043

CD (5%) 0.017 0.017 N.S. 0.025 0.035 0.035 0.049

D - 213


BIO 2.17. Protein content as influenced by genotypes under protected and unprotected condition with growth regulators at Surat in Central Zone

Treatments




resistant)



resistant)


(Protein-mg/g of tissue)


15.04 12.65 16.59 6.34 13.85 11.47 15.81 9.50 12.7


17.25 20.52 24.80 7.15 18.88 15.97 21.02 13.83 17.4


12.61 16.70 7.72 6.87 14.66 7.30 10.16 11.79 11.0


Mean 15.56 17.37 16.20 6.93 16.46 11.56 15.88 12.15


SE m 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.132 0.094 0.094 0.066

CD (5%) 0.159 0.159 0.224 0.224 0.317 0.317 0.448

crop production agronomy, physiology and biochemistry - central institute for cotton...

Documents