integrated nutrient management on productivity and soil fertility in rice based cropping

Download integrated nutrient management on productivity and soil fertility in rice based cropping

Post on 23-Jan-2018

807 views

Category:

Education

1 download

TRANSCRIPT

  1. 1. Integrated Nutrient Management on Productivity and Soil Fertility in Rice-based Cropping System Presented By Biplab choudhari M.Sc. (Agril.) final year. AAU Jorhat-13 DEPARTMENT OF SOIL SCIENCE AAU JORHAT -13
  2. 2. Introduction Maintenance of soil health is an essential prerequisite for sustaining crop productivity. Intensive agriculture with high nutrient turn over in soil plant system coupled with low and imbalanced fertilizer use results in deterioration of soil fertility and crop production. In order to overcome this problem, alternative strategies are needed so that soil degradation as well as soil fertility level can be managed for sustainable productivity. It is widely recognized that neither use of organic manures alone nor chemical fertilizers can achieve the sustainability of crop yield at desired level under the modern intensive farming
  3. 3. The integrated plant nutrient-supply system is emerging as the most logical concept for managing long-term soil fertility and productivity. Integrated use of organic manures and chemical fertilizers has been found promising in arresting the decline in productivity through the correction of marginal deficiencies of some secondary and micronutrient elements and their beneficial inf1uence on the physical and biological properties of the soil. Integrated nutrient-management system can bring about an equilibrium between degenerative and restorative activities in the soil environment Hence adoption of integrated plant nutrient management strategies for enhancing soil quality, input use efficiency and crop productivity is extremely important for food and nutritional security in Indian agriculture.
  4. 4. Integrated Nutrient Management is a practice where all sources of nutrients namely organic ,inorganic (chemical fertilizer), biofertilizer can be combined and applied to soils so that crop growth is enhanced and we can get good yield with quality product . In INM it integrates/combines the objectives of production with ecology and environment, that is, optimum crop nutrition, optimum functioning of the soil health, and minimum nutrient losses or other adverse effect on the environment. Integrated Nutrient Management (INM) has to be considered an integral part of any sustainable agricultural system. WHAT IS INM
  5. 5. The basic concept of INM system is the maintenance of plant nutrients supply to achieve a given level of crop production by optimizing the benefits from all possible sources of plant nutrients in an integrated manner, appropriate to each cropping system and farming situation (Mahajan and Sharma, 2005; Subba Rao, A. and Sammi Reddy, A. 2005). One major task of INM system will be to at least stop the ongoing loss of surface or top soil nutrients (Mahajan and Sharma, 2005) Concept of INM
  6. 6. Concept and principles of INM
  7. 7. COMPONENTS OF I.N.M.
  8. 8. Organic source: By products of farming and allied industries F.Y.M. droppings ,crop waste , residues , sewage ,sludge industrial waste .
  9. 9. Biological source: Microbial inoculants substitute 15-40 kg N/hac. Biofertilizers Rhizobium Azotobacter Azospirillum
  10. 10. OBJECTIVES OF INM To maintain or enhance soil productivity through balanced use of mineral fertilizers with organic and biological sources of plant nutrient. Encouragement of the judicious use of chemical fertilizers, Green leaf manures and biofertilizers for higher productivity. Environmentally safe and eco friendly sustainable agriculture To improve physical, chemical and biological conditions of soil.
  11. 11. WHY TO ADOPT INTEGRATED NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT Multiple nutrient deficiencies Inorganic sources insufficient for nutritional needs of high yielding varieties Optimal use of available nutrient sources( crop residues cow dung, green manuring crops etc) Promote sustainable agriculture Imbalance in the ratio of NPK consumption. Deterioration of soil health. Pollution hazards of chemical fertilizers. Deterioration in biological activity.
  12. 12. Promising treatments Grain yield (t/ha) 1984-87 1990-93 1996-99 2000-03 Rice Control 2.00 1.54 1.20 1.25 R100W100 3.94 4.37 3.96 3.43 R50+50FYMW100 2.99 4.47 4.27 3.53 R50+50WCS W100 3.41 4.19 3.47 3.04 R50+50GM W100 3.23 4.34 3.89 3.25 Wheat Control 1.30 0.74 0.64 0.71 R100 W100 3.42 3.25 3.53 3.64 R50+50FYM W100 3.41 3.45 3.88 3.71 R50+50WCS W100 3.04 2.99 3.26 3.21 R50+50GM W100 3.16 3.03 3.47 3.50 Table 1 . Effect of integrated nutrient management on grain yield (kg/ha) of rice and wheat grown in a sequence (average data of 3 consecutive years) 100 % NPK=120 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 40 kg K2O/ha Yadav et al., 2009
  13. 13. Treatments pH (1:2.5) EC (1:2.5) (dS/m) ESP BD (Mg/m3) Org. C (Mg/kg) CEC (c.mol (p+)/kg Control 8.4 0.36 17 1.51 2.9 15.9 R75 W75 8.2 0.33 21 1.46 4.2 16.5 R100 W100 8.0 0.32 18 1.43 4.6 17.4 R50+50FYMW100 7.7 0.25 12 1.35 5.7 18.9 R50+50WCS W100 7.8 0.28 16 1.36 5.4 18.3 R50+50GM W100 7.6 0.22 9 1.33 5.8 19.5 Initial status in 1984 8.8 0.50 27 1.38 3.7 17.1 Table 2. Effect of integrated nutrient management on micronutrients (after 18 cycles) and soil-physical properties (after 20 cycles) of rice -wheat system Yadav et al 2009
  14. 14. Treatments Grain yield of Rice (t /ha) Seed yield of Niger (t /ha) Control 2.52 0.13 100% RDF 3.04 0.22 Biofertilizer based INM package 3.13 0.31 50% RDF+ 50% N FYM 3.56 0.35 75% RDF + 25% N FYM 3.83 0.38 50% N (inorganic) + 50% N FYM + PK (inorganic and adjusted) 3.79 0.33 75% N (inorganic) + 25% N FYM + PK (inorganic and adjusted) 2.81 0.26 S.Ed () 0.242 0.030 CD (P=0.05) 0.528 0.067 CV (%) 9.16 13.21 Table 3. Yield of Rice and Niger as affected by integrated nutrient management Singh et al 2009
  15. 15. Treatments Rice N P K Niger N P K Control 151.9 21.5 50.0 131.7 18.3 42.7 100% RDF 163.8 23.6 52.0 140.8 20.8 51.1 Biofertilizer based INM package 170.2 24.8 55.9 150.9 21.5 54.7 50% RDF+ 50% N FYM 188.9 29.5 53.5 169.4 27.8 51.3 75% RDF + 25% N FYM 190.9 28.5 55.0 171.8 27.9 52.8 50% N (inorganic) + 50%N FYM + PK (inorganic adjusted) 166.5 26.2 52.5 165.2 24.0 51.0 (less present in FYM) 163.8 24.8 52.3 145.8 22.2 46.4 CD (P=0.05) 14.4 3.1 2.4 13.8 2.6 3.6 Table 4. Effect of integrated nutrient management on available primary nutrients(NPK kg /ha) of soil in rice-niger sequence . Singh et al 2009
  16. 16. Treatments 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Mean Control 1901 2338 3137 2442 2455 50% NPK 4003 3476 5198 4130 4202 50% NPK 4364 3761 5350 4415 4473 75% NPK 4832 3832 5979 5058 4925 100% NPK 5643 5851 6505 5504 5876 50% NPK + 50% N(FYM) 6060 6263 6353 4722 5850 75% NPK + 25% N (FYM) 5609 6166 6578 5409 5941 50% NPK + 50% N (Paddy Straw) 6543 5791 6644 4620 5900 75% NPK + 25% N (Paddy Straw) 5671 6171 7017 5329 6047 50% NPK + 50% N (Glyricidia) 5921 5838 6557 4985 5825 75% NPK + 25% N (Glyricidia) 5680 5941 6966 5738 6081 Farmers Practice(85:50:30kg NPK/ha & FYM 2 t/ha) 4569 4381 5811 5234 4999 S Em 240 206 268.30 101.36 - CD@5% 691 593 773.0 305.44 - Table 5 : Yield of kharif Rice (Kg/ha) as influenced by integrated nutrient management in Rice-Maize cropping sequence (2003-2008). Satish et al 2011
  17. 17. Treatments 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 Mean Control 782 988.30 2387 1263.5 1355 50% NPK 2040 2065.79 3186 3556.8 2712 100% NPK 3559 2722.22 4049 4329.3 3665 75% NPK 3353 2463.45 3893 4189.0 3475 100% NPK 3798 3260.23 4740 4362.3 4040 100% NPK 4000 3748.54 4915 4943.0 4402 75% NPK 3581 2878.65 4014 4040.5 3629 100% NPK 3819 3630.12 4360 4535.0 4086 75% NPK 3641 3012.43 3837 4710.8 3800 100% NPK 3793 3187.87 4334 4223.8 3885 75% NPK 3581 2783.63 3706 4038.0 3527 Farmers Practice (75:37.5:38.75 kg NPK/ha ) 3490 2467.84 3278 3775.3 3253 S Em 123 173.57 321.37 321.86 - CD @5% 353 499.78 918.52 926.7 - Table 6: Yield of Smmer Maize (Kg/h) as influenced by integrated nutrient management in rice-maize cropping sequence (2003-2008) Satish et al 2011
  18. 18. TREATMENT pH EC(ds/m) OC% P (kg/ha) K (kg/ha) T1 5.28 0.16 0.62 10.97 125.80 T2 5.56 0.22 0.65 18.06 163.05 T3 5.42 0.21 0.65 18.85 183.80 T4 5.43 0.22 0.62 17.84 187.26 T5 5.57 0.24 0.67 21.92 185.67 T6 5.81 0.22 0.72 22.01 188.81 T7 5.62 0.16 0.70 20.55 184.41 T8 5.38 0.17 0.72 20.60 181.30 T9 5.61 0.15 0.73 21.96 187.79 T10 5.49 0.22 0.72 21.62 184.15 T11 5.72 0.19 0.70 21.40 182.64 T12 5.95 0.22 0.64 18.90 141.75 Initial 6.64 0.13 0.68 12.40 211.4 S Em 0.015 0.012 0.014 0.13 0.84 CD @5% 0.042 0.04 0.04 0.30 2.43 Satish et al 2011 Table 7 : Soil properties and available nutrients as influenced by different cropping systems at the end of summer maize crop, 2007-08
  19. 19. Treatments Rice grain yield kg/ha Pea Pod yield kg/ha T1:10 kg N+2 t FYM/ha 991 393 T2:100%RDF OF NPK 2092 1185 T3:50%RDF+5 t FYM/ha 1590 1073 T4:50%RDF +5 t FYM /ha+250 kg lime/ha 1924 1510 T5:50%RDF+5 t FYM+250 Kg lime+20 kg S /ha+1 kg B /ha 2117 1678 T6:50%RDF+5 t FYM+250 Kg lime+20 kg S /ha 2120 1810 CD(P=0.05) 332 240 Table 8-Effect of INM treatments on the productivity of rice pea system Singh et al 2011
  20. 20. Treatments Rice(nutrient uptake kg/ha) N P K S Pea(nutrient uptake kg/ha) N P K S T1:10 kg N+2 t FYM/ha 15.7 3.52 27.2 2.36 16.3 1.70 11.1 1.67 T2:100%RDF OF NPK 38.8 9.97 60.5 5.54 49.7 7.51 32.7 5.05 T3:50%RDF+5 t FYM/ha 26.0 6.15 44.1 5.02 44.4 7.04 28.3 4.61 T4:50%RDF +5 t FYM /ha+250 kg lime/ha 33.4 8.56 54.9 7.06 62.4 11.42 38.3 6.49 T5:50%RDF+5 t FYM+250 Kg lime+20 kg S /ha+1 kg B /ha 37.6 9.87 59.2 8.94 70.9 13.37 42.1 8.01 T6:50%RDF+5 t FYM+250 Kg lime+20 kg S /ha 37.1 9.82 59.1 8.94 79.0 14.70 44.3 8.51 CD(P=0.05) 5.5 1.78 8.5 1.44 9.2 2.44 5.6 1.04 Table 9Effect of INM treatment on nutrients uptake by rice pea sequence. Singh et al 2011
  21. 21. Treatments Rice Grain yield (t /ha) Wheat Grain yield (t /ha) N0P0K0 2.50 1.42 N120P0K0 4.33 3.28 N120P26k0 5.15 4.55 N120P26K42 5.31 4.73 N60P13K21 4.20 3.44 N60P13K21 +GM 5.76 4.06 N120P26K42 + GM 6.26 5.20 N60P13K21 + FYM 5.38 3.92 N120P26K42 + FYM 6.14 5.13 N180P39K63 5.96 4.72 CD (P=0.05) 0.52 0.49 Table 10. Effect of different fertilizer treatments on rice and wheat yield (mean of 1994 to 2005) Yaduvanshi et al 2013
  22. 22. Fig.Effect of integrated nutrient management on trend of wheat yield in a gypsum-amended sodic soil over a period of 12 years from 1994-95 to 2005-06 Yaduvanshi et al 2013
  23. 23. Fig. . Effect of integrated nutrient management on trend of wheat yield in a gypsum- amended sodic soil over a period of 12 years from 1994-95 to 2005-06
  24. 24. Treatments pH Organic C (g /kg) Bulk density (Mg/m-3) Available nutrient kg/ha N P K N0P0K0 8.50 2.10 1.43 92 7.6 162 N120P0K0 8.41 2.10 1.42 141 6.1 155 N120P26K0 8.41 2.30 1.42 169 14.3 157 N120P26K42 8.40 2.30 1.42 168 15.0 273 N60P13K21 8.45 2.40 1.42 135 10.8 228 N60P13K21 +GM 8.12 3.70 1.38 178 18.7 290 N120P26K42 + GM 8.15 4.10 1.38 204 20.6 311 N60P13K21 +FYM 8.20 4.20 1.38 175 19.5 297 N120P26K42 + FYM 8.20 4.20 1.38 201 21.8 304 N180P39K63 8.41 2.60 1.42 206 25.3 320 CD (P=0.05) 0.09 0.06 0.005 9.7 0.78 12.3 Table 11. Soil pH, organic carbon, bulk density and available N, P and K status after 12 years (1994 to 2006) of continuous rice-wheat cropping system as influenced by different treatments of integrated nutrient management Yaduvanshi et al 2013
  25. 25. Nutrient management Treatments Bulb yield of Onion (t /ha) Rice Grain Yield (t/ ha) Pod Yield Of Cow Pea t/ha 100% RD of NPK through inorganic 19.95 3.90 6.06 75% RD of NPK + 25% N through Biomax 24.06 4.35 7.36 75% RD of NPK + 25% N through Biomas 22.91 4.30 6.93 75% RD of NPK + 25% N through Enmite 23.25 4.40 7.13 75% RD of NPK + 25% N through Neematex 25.12 4.55 7.54 75% RD of NPK + 25% N through FYM 24.47 4.45 7.46 75% RD of NPK + incorporation of crop residues of each crop in sequence 21.21 4.00 6.60 75% RD of NPK + in-situ incorporation with sesbania to rice 22.17 4.25 7.09 CD (P

Recommended

View more >