- Open Access
- Authors : Vinuta M Betageri , S. V. Kottiswaran , K. Nagarajan , T. Saraswathi
- Paper ID : IJERTV10IS020141
- Volume & Issue : Volume 10, Issue 02 (February 2021)
- Published (First Online): 20-02-2021
- ISSN (Online) : 2278-0181
- Publisher Name : IJERT
- License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Influence of Mulching and Pressurized Irrigation System on Cost Economics of Grafted Brinjal (Solanum. melongena L.)
Vinuta M Betageri1, S. V. Kottiswaran2, K. Nagarajan3 And T. Saraswathi4
1 Ph D Scholar (SWCE), College of Agricultural Engineering, Raichur. UAS Raichur, Karnataka
2 Professor (SWCE) Agriculture Engineering College and Research Institute, TNAU Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
2 Professor (SWCE) Water Technology Center, TNAU Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
4 Professor & Head (Vegetable Science) Horticulture College & Research Institute, TNAU Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
Abstract:- Field studies were conducted at PFDC farm, of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore to evaluate the influence of plastic mulching on cost economics (returns from the field interms of yield) of grafted brinjal under drip irrigation. The experiments were laid in Strip Plot Design with twenty seven treatments which included three mulching levels such as 25 Âµ thickness plastic mulch, 50 Âµ thickness plastic mulch and control; three Irrigation levels at 60 per cent ET0, 80 per cent ET0 and 100 per cent ET0 and three fertigation levels with 80 per cent, 100 per cent and 120 per cent RDF which were replicated thrice. Daily water requirement was calculated based monthly average evaporation the results showed that total water requirement for the growth period under drip irrigation has saved 16.17 per cent of water with mulch compared to without mulch condition. Its observed that the highest yield of 83.3 t.ha-1 under 25 Âµ thickness plastic mulch at 80 per cent ET0 level and 100 per cent RDF with benefit cost ratio of
compared to all other treatments and lowest yield of 18.1 t.ha-1 in control plot with 60 per cent ET0 and 80 per cent RDF. It can be concluded that the advance irrigation technologies like drip irrigation combined with mulch can play a important role in increasing the productivity hence the net returns can be increased.
Key words: Drip irrigation, Mulching, Fertigation, Benefit cost ratio.
Water is considered as liquid gold and land is one of the platforms for survival of many living things for performing several activities. Both are the important factors for the survival of life. Agriculture is the source for the Indian belly and its productivity and value is dependent on health of land/soil and timely availability of water source which are declining day by day in very rapid rate at the same time demand interms of crop yield is growing for every second. So it is necessary to go for the adaptation of technologies which puts hand in conserving and managing scarce resources in agriculture by giving more importance to production quality as well as quantity. To achieve this with available scarce quantity of water it is necessary to increase the water use efficiency which can be achieved through the adaptation of micro irrigation system.
Micro irrigation technology is rapidly expanding all over the world, especially in the water scarce areas of developed countries. Due to the decreasing availability of water resources and increasing competition for water between different users, improving agricultural water use efficiency is vitally important in many parts of the world that have limited water resources. It has been estimated that the irrigated area in the world is 253 m ha. The gross irrigated area of India in 2005-2006 had increased to 82.6 m ha from 22.6 m ha in 1951-52 and increase being more than 250 per cent during the last five decades. Efficient use of water through scientific irrigation management is of utmost importance in providing the best insurance against weather induced fluctuations in food production (Agarwal and Khanna, 1983). Drip irrigation is an effective tool for conserving water resources and studies have revealed significant water saving ranging between 40 per cent and 70 per cent by drip irrigation compared with surface irrigation (Sidhu et al., 2007; Kubota, 2008; Rouphael et al., 2010 and Frank et al., 2010).).
Productivity can be increased by adopting improved package of practices, particularly in situ moisture conservation applying plastic mulch by achieving earlier and larger yields of commercial vegetables (Ilyas, 2001). The notable advantage of the use of plastic mulch is its impermeability which prevents direct evaporation of moisture from the soil and thus cuts down the water losses so that soil moisture is preserved and consumed by the crop (Akbari et al., 2009, Ashworth and Harrison, 1983). Sweet corn, tomatoes, cucumber, straw berry, lettuce, watermelon, okra, and grapes are the primary crop target to plastic mulch. Fertigation offers the best solution for intensive and economical crop production where both water and fertilizers are delivered to crop through drip system and through fertigation 40 to 50 per cent of nutrient could be saved.
Brinjal (Solanum melongena L.) is a staple vegetable also known as Eggplant (Kantharajah and Golegaonkar, 2004). India is the second largest producer of brinjal after China with the production of 11.89 million tons production from an area of
0.68 m ha. So, the study was conducted on Grafted Brinjal was explained.
MATERIAL AND METHODS:
The experiment was conducted to study the influence of plastic mulching along with pressuiresed irrigation system (Drip irrigation) on yield thereby on cost economics of grafted brinjal (Solanum. melongena L.). The materials used, crop and experimental techniques and analytical methods adopted in the investigations are enumerated.
The experiment was conducted at PFDC research farm in the Eastern block of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore at 11.01830 N latitude and 76.97250 E longitude with mean altitude of 426 m above the mean sea level, topography of the experimental plot was uniform.
Crop : Grafted brinjal (Solanum. melongena L.)
Species : S. torvum (Turkey berry)
Rootstock : COBH2
Scion : Ravaiya
Spacing : 1.2 m x 1.2 m
Gross plot size : 583.2 m2
Design : Strip Plot Design
The data were analyzed in AGRESS package for Strip Plot Design (SPD) for crop grown in various experimental plots. Wherever the treatment differences were found significant (F test) critical differences were worked out at 5 per cent probability level and the values are furnished.
The factor and level details are as below.
Factor I – Mulching with three levels M1 with 25 micron thickness LLDPE, M2 with 50 micron thickness LLDPE and M3 with no mulch.
Factor II – Irrigation with three levels I1 at 60 per cent ET0, I2 at 80 per cent ET0 and I3 at100 per cent ET0.
Factor III – Fertigation with three levels F1 at 80 per cent RDF, F2 at100 per cent RDF and F3 at 120 per cent RDF.
T1- 25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 80 % RDF T2-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 100 % RDF T3-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 120 % RDF T4-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 80 % RDF. T5-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 100 % RDF. T6-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 120 % RDF. T7-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 80 % RDF. T8-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 100 % RDF. T9-25 Âµ plastic mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 120 % RDF. T10-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 80 % RDF T11-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 100 % RDF T12-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 120 % RDF T13-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 80 % RDF. T14-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 100 % RDF. T15-50 Âµ plasti mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 120 % RDF. T16-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 80 % RDF.
T17-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 100 % RDF. T18-50 Âµ plastic mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 120 % RDF. T19- No mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 80 % RDF
T20- No mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 100 % RDF T21- No mulch @ 60 % ET0 + 120 % RDF T22- No mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 80 % RDF T23- No mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 100 % RDF T24- No mulch @ 80 % ET0 + 120 % RDF
T25- No mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 80 % RDF T26- No mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 100 % RDF T27- No mulch @ 100 % ET0 + 120 % RDF
Economics of grafted brinjal production under plastic mulching with drip irrigation system was worked out in terms of total expenditure. The total cost of cultivation was calculated which is the sum of mulching sheet cost, irrigation drip lines cost, land preparation and management and other input cost like fertilizer, harvesting, planting material cost etc. The net returns per hectare were worked out for all treatments by subtracting the cost of cultivation from the gross returns. The return per rupee invested (B: C) ratio was also calculated as follows.
Gross income ha-1
Benefit Cost Ratio = … (3.1)
Total cost of cultivation ha-1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
In order to study the feasibility of cultivation of grafted brinjal under plastic mulching cost of cultivation, fixed cost, net income and Benefit Cost ratio for different treatments were worked out and the results of the stated objective are discussed here.
The life of the pipe materials were taken as five years. Interest at twelve per cent of fixed cost was taken into consideration to work out the cost economics. The used 25 Âµ plastic sheet has degraded within one crop season and 50 Âµsheet was good even after the crop period so it can be used for the next crop, so it is taken for two crop use. The economics of the system of mulching and fertigation under study was worked out in Rs ha-1 and Benefit-cost ratio for treatments is calculated by using equation
3.1. It can be seen from the results that among all the treatments the highest benefit was obtained from treatment T5 i.e., 25 Âµ mulch at 80 per cent ET0 with 100 RDF with highest water use efficiency and yield per hectare followed by the treatment T6 and the lowest net return was obtained in control treatment without mulch i.e., T19 at 60 per cent ET0 with 80 per cent RDF are shown in figure 1 and figure 2. In terms of benefit: cost ratio which fallowed the same trend was highest in treatment T5 (8.68) and lowest in Treatment T19 (1.41) as presented in the figure 3. All the drip irrigation treatments with mulch recorded higher cost benefit ratio (7.78 to 8.68) compared to without mulch treatments (1.41 to 2.41) are presented in Table 1.
The performance of mulch and without mulch under drip irrigation system can be valued both in terms of biological and economical returns (Sakata et a.l, 2007; Lee et al., 2010; Dimitrios et al., 2010). However, it was important that a technically feasible proposal should be financially complete for its successful adoption (Bletsos et al., 2003; Khah et al., 2011). One of the main constraints under mulch and drip irrigation was its high initial investment. Mulch require plastic sheet and drip irrigation requires mains, sub mains, laterals, filter, and other accessories to design the unit. The economic analysis of grafted brinjal crop under mulch and without mulch with drip irrigation was made by considering fixed cost, cost of cultivation, water used and yields obtained.
The initial cost of installing the plastic sheet and drip irrigation system for vegetable crops was high but over a period of time the cost could be recovered and the benefits derived would be higher interms of increased yield from the field with high quality products as shown in plate 1. Even during the first year itself the drip irrigation system showed maximum net returns. Similar results of increase in net returns with saved water for brinjal crop under drip irrigation with different ET levels were in line with Bhogi et al. (2011).
Fig. 1 Water Use Efficiency under different treatments
Fig. 2 Yield per hectare under different treatments
Fig. 3 Benefit cost Ratio under different tretments
Plate. 1 Yield of Grafted Brinjal under mulching and drip irrigation system
Table 1 Cost benefit ratio for grafted brinjal cultivation under different treatments
Total cost of cultivation
Revenue from the field (consider cost of Grafted brinjal at rs. 20/ kg)
Net income (@Rs.
BC ratio (@ Rs.
Revenue from the field (consider cost of Grafted brinjal at rs.25/ kg)
Net income (@Rs.
BC ratio (@ Rs.
(consider cost of Grafted Brinjal at rs.30/ kg)
Net income (@Rs.30/ kg)
(b + d) =C
(e x 20) =R
(e x 25) =R
(e x 30)
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:
The cultivation under drip irrigation system with mulching has increased the water use efficiency (reducing the volume of water utilized) by reducing the water evaporation losses hence, thereby increased the yield per unit area. The treatment T5 registered the highest gross income of Rs. 2240784.00 at the rate of Rs.30 kg-1 and cost- benefit ratio was also higher 8.68 compared to all other treatments. So T5 is recommended for the farmers. Among all the mulching, Irrigation and fertigation treatments, the best performance was observed in treatment T5 under 25 Âµ thickness mulching at 80 per cent ET0 with 100 per cent RDF in terms of growth, yield, water use efficiency, fertilizer use efficiency and higher benefit in terms of cost economics.
Agarwal, M.G. and S.S.,Khanna. 1983. Efficient soil and water management in Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar. Bull., pp. 118.
Akbari, M., H. Dehghanisanij and S. M. Mirlatifi. 2009. Impact of irrigation scheduling on agriculture water productivity. Iranian J. Irrigation and Drainage, 1: pp. 69-79.
Ashworth, S. and H. Harrison.1983. Evaluation of mulches for use in the home garden.
J. of Hort. Sci., 18: pp. 180-182.
Bhogi. B. H., B. S. Polisgowdar, and M. G. Patil. 2011. Effectiveness and cost economics of fertigation in brinjal (Solanum melongena L.) under drip and furrow irrigation. Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 24 (3): pp. 417 419.
Bletsos, F., C. Thanassoulopoulos and D. Roupakias. 2003. Effect of grafting on growth, yield, and Verticillium wilt of eggplant. Hort. Sc., 38: pp. 183-186.
Dimitrios, S., G. Colla., R. Youssef and S. Dietmar. 2010. Amelioration of heavy metal and nutrient stress in fruit vegetables by grafting. Sc. Hort., 127: pp. 156-161.
Frank, J. L., C.L. Rivard and C. Kubota. 2010. Grafting fruiting vegetables to manage soil borne pathogens, foliar pathogens, arthropods and weeds. Sc. Hort., 127: pp. 127-146.
Ilyas, S. M. 2001. Present status of plastics in agriculture lecture note delivered in summer school on application of plastics in agriculture. CIPHET, Ludhiana.
Kantharajah A.S. and P.G. Golegaonkar. 2004. Somatic embryogenesis in eggplant. Rev. J. Sci. Hortic., 99: pp. 107-117.
Khah, E.M., N. Katsoulas, M. Tchamichian and C. Kittas. 2011. Effect of grafting on eggplant leaf gas exchange under Mediterranean greenhouse conditions. Int. J. Pl. Prod., 5 (2): pp. 121-134.
Kubota, C. 2008. Use of grafted seedlings for vegetable production in North America. Acta Hort., 770: pp. 21-26.
Lee, J.M., C. Kubotab, S.J. Tsaoc, Z. Bied, P.H. Echevarriae, L. Morraf and M. Oda. 2010. Current status of vegetable grafting: Diffusion, grafting techniques, automation. Sc. Hort., 127: pp. 93105.
Rouphael, Y., S. Dietman, K. Angelika and G. Colla. 2010. Impact of grafting on product quality of fruit vegetables. Sc. Hort., 127: pp. 172-179.
Sakata, Y., T. Ohara and M. Sugiyama. 2007. The history and present state of the grafting of cucurbitaceous vegetables in Japan. Acta Hort., 73: pp. 159-169.
Sidhu, A.S. and A.S. Dhatt. 2007. Current Status of Brinjal Research in India. Acta Hort., 752: pp. 243-247.