RESPONSE OF LENTIL VARIRTIES ON YIELD AND YIELD CONTRIBUTING CHARACTER AS INFLUENCE BY DEFICIT IRRIGATION
RESPONSE OF LENTIL VARIRTIES ON YIELD AND YIELD CONTRIBUTING CHARACTER AS INFLUENCE BY DEFICIT IRRIGATION.
Abdur Razzak, Rahman Md. Rashedur Tanvir, P. K. M. Golam Rahman, Islam Md. Robiul, Nilufer Yeasmin*
Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi, Bangladesh
| A R T I C L E I N F O
Article Type: Research Received: 21, October. 2021. Accepted: 21, January. 2022. Published: 21, January.2022.
|
A B S T R A C T
The field experiment was conducted at the Agronomy Field Laboratory, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, University of Rajshahi, during the period from 2nd December, 2018 to 21th March, 2019 to find out the effect of deficit irrigation schedule for lentil, which was measured on the basis of field capacity. The field experiment was set up using split plot experimental design including two lentil varieties (BARI masur-3 & BARI masur-6) and four irrigation regimes viz. T1 (irrigation based on 125% of field capacity), T2 (irrigation based on 100% of field capacity), T3 (irrigation based on 75% of field capacity) and T4 (irrigation based on 50% of field capacity). Considering different phyto-physiological responses as well as yield components, and yield of lentil, it was found that different irrigation regimes differed significantly and most of the cases highest performance was noted for maximum irrigation treatment (T1) which reduced gradually with the reduction of irrigation amount. Highest grain yield (1.17 t ha-1) was observed in the treatment T1 which was statistically identical to the T2 (1.03 t ha-1). However, grain yield reduced significantly by 23.93% and 34.18% for T3 and T4 respectively, but water use efficiency (WUE) was higher in T4 (2.82 kg ha-1 mm-1) and the lower (2.18 kg ha-1 mm-1) in T3. The lentil varieties differ significantly; overall performance was good in V2 (BARI masur-6). Highest grain yield (1.29 t ha-1) was obtained from combination of V2T1, which was more or less similar to combination of V2T2. Based on my result, it was seemed that, irrigation amount equivalent to 100% of field capacity can produce nearly same amount of yield of lentil with 25 % less irrigational water compared with T1. Therefore, it is suggested that irrigation amount equivalent to 100% of field capacity would be the best practices for lentil cultivation that achieves an acceptable grain yield and allows for reductions in irrigation water consumption.
|
| Keywords:
Field capacity, water consumption, Deficit irrigation, phyto-physiological responses
|
REFERENCES
Ahmed, F. S., Killham, K., & Alexander, I. (2006). Influences of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus mosseae on growth and nutrition of lentil irrigated with arsenic contaminated water. Plant and soil, 283(1), 33-41.
BARC (Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council). (1997). Fertilizer Recommendation Guide. 1997. Bangladesh Agril. Res. Council, Farmgate, New Airport Road, Dhaka.p.15.
BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics). 2008. Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics.Ministry of planning, Govt. of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, p. 200.
BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics). 2018. Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics.Ministry of planning, Govt. of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, p. 75.
BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics).(2009). Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh.Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics.Ministry of planning, Govt. of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, p. 59.0
Costa, J. M., Ortuño, M. F., & Chaves, M. M. (2006). Deficit irrigation as a strategy to save water: physiology and potential application to horticulture. Journal of integrative plant biology, 49(10), 1421-1434.
Gomez, K. A., & Gomez, A. A. (1984). Statistical procedures for agricultural research.John Wiley & Sons.
Islam, M. N., Rahman, M. S., Alom, M. S., & Akhteruzzaman, M. (2015). Performance of different crops productivity enhancement through adaptation of crop varieties at charland in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, 40(4), 629-640.
Jia, D-Y., et al. “Assessment of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grown under alternate furrow irrigation in northern China: Grain yield and water use efficiency.” Canadian Journal of Plant Science 94.2 (2014): 349-359.
Khakwani, A. A., Dennett, M. D., Munir, M., & Abid, M. (2012). Growth and yield response of wheat varieties to water stress at booting and anthesis stages of development. Pak. J. Bot, 44(3), 879-886.
Khan, M. A. A. (1981). The effect of CO2 enrichment on the pattern of growth and development in pulse and mustard. Ph.D. Dissertation. Royal Vet. Agril Univ. Copenhagen. p. 104.
Kirda, C., &Kanber, R. (1999). Water, no longer a plentiful resource, should be used sparingly in irrigated agriculture. Crop yield response to deficit irrigation, 1-20.
Mugabe, F. T., &Nyakatawa, E. Z. (2000).Effect of deficit irrigation on wheat and opportunities of growing wheat on residual soil moisture in southeast Zimbabwe. Agricultural water management, 46(2), 111-119.
Oladir, G., Saeed, M., & Cheerna, M. A. (1999). Effect of water stress on growth and yield performance of four wheat cultivars. Pak. J. Biol. Sci.
Sadasivam, R., Natarajaratnam, N., Chandra Babu, R., Muralidharan, V., &Rangasamy, S. S. (1988). Response of mungbean cultivars to soil-moisture stress at different growth phases (No. RESEARCH).AVRDC.
Tekwa, I. J., &Bwade, E. K. (2011). Estimation of irrigation water requirement of maize (zea-mays) using pan evaporation method in Maiduguri, Northeastern Nigeria. Agricultural Engineering International: the CIGR Journal, 13(1), 1-5.
Wang, Z., Zhang, W., Beebout, S. S., Zhang, H., Liu, L., Yang, J., & Zhang, J. (2016). Grain yield, water and nitrogen use efficiencies of rice as influenced by irrigation regimes and their interaction with nitrogen rates. Field Crops Research, 193, 54-69.
Zhang, H., & Oweis, T. (1998).Water–yield relations and optimal irrigation scheduling of wheat in the Mediterranean region. Agricultural Water Management, 38(3), 195-211.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.