The experimental results of the two field trails were presented and discussed below. Plant height is a direct index for measuring plant vertical growth and vigour and it is associated with life cycle, seed mass and time to maturity. In this present investigation, plant height of kodomillet was measured at tillering and panicle initiation stages. The data in table (1) demonstrates that at tillering stage, the plant height showed a minimum variations between treatments and taller plants were seen in M4S2 during first year (31.47) and second year (33.90) which were statistically comparable (p < 0.05) to M4 S4, M5 S1, M5 S4, M S4, M5 S3, M4 S5, M5 S2, M4 S4 using the least significant difference of 4.41 and 2.66 for the respective years. At panicle initiation stage, M4S4 recorded the tallest plants (47.66) during first year and M3S4 during second year (78.86).
Table 1
Effect of Vrikshayurvedic farming practices on plant height (cm) in kodomillet
Treatments | Plant height at tillering stage | Plant height at panicle initiation stage |
| 20201-21 | 2021-22 | Mean | 20201-21 | 2021-22 | mean |
M1S1 | 21.62 | 30.35 | 26.0 | 35.18 | 77.5 | 38.1 |
M1S2 | 24.37 | 31.55 | 28.0 | 44.56 | 76.41 | 41.0 |
M1S3 | 15.47 | 31.95 | 23.7 | 40.69 | 71.99 | 36.8 |
M1S4 | 23.41 | 33.85 | 28.6 | 24.97 | 76.53 | 37.5 |
M1S5 | 26.57 | 28.85 | 27.7 | 43.02 | 77.86 | 40.8 |
M2 S1 | 29.19 | 32.30 | 30.7 | 44.27 | 74.25 | 42.2 |
M2 S2 | 29.10 | 31.90 | 30.5 | 42.15 | 76.68 | 42.1 |
M2 S3 | 20.42 | 32.20 | 26.3 | 33.98 | 72.02 | 37.0 |
M2 S4 | 20.52 | 29.05 | 24.8 | 29.5 | 72.14 | 35.2 |
M2 S5 | 14.42 | 31.05 | 22.7 | 40.58 | 75.93 | 36.9 |
M3 S1 | 21.74 | 30.50 | 26.1 | 38.06 | 70.57 | 37.4 |
M3 S2 | 29.11 | 32.60 | 30.9 | 30.75 | 75.56 | 39.8 |
M3 S3 | 26.56 | 31.80 | 29.2 | 41.96 | 73.9 | 40.7 |
M3 S4 | 30.37 | 32.05 | 31.2 | 41.41 | 78.86 | 42.8 |
M3 S5 | 27.39 | 31.50 | 29.4 | 36.92 | 71.19 | 39.3 |
M4 S1 | 28.33 | 28.10 | 28.2 | 29.2 | 70.49 | 36.9 |
M4 S2 | 31.47 | 33.90 | 32.7 | 24.29 | 69.08 | 38.3 |
M4 S3 | 27.74 | 32.55 | 30.1 | 23.66 | 73.8 | 37.6 |
M4 S4 | 31.04 | 29.50 | 30.3 | 47.66 | 66.19 | 40.9 |
M4 S5 | 30.63 | 30.85 | 30.7 | 28.05 | 70.34 | 38.1 |
M5 S1 | 29.48 | 28.90 | 29.2 | 33.02 | 74.47 | 39.0 |
M5 S2 | 30.77 | 34.30 | 32.5 | 37.76 | 69.95 | 41.1 |
M5 S3 | 30.38 | 28.20 | 29.3 | 29.87 | 67.49 | 37.0 |
M5 S4 | 30.29 | 28.65 | 29.5 | 31.6 | 67.39 | 37.5 |
M5 S5 | 29.19 | 32.95 | 31.1 | 39.62 | 71.84 | 40.9 |
L.S.D (p < 0.05) | 4.41 | 2.66 | | 8.66 | 2 | |
S.Ed | 2.13 | 5.55 | | 4.2 | 4.19 | |
Main plot: Tree leaf biomass: M1 – Albizia lebbek / M2 – Delonix regia/ M3 – Gliricidia sepium M4 – Peltophorum ferrugimeum/ M5 – Pongamia glabra; Sub plot: Foliar spray S- Aegle marmellos / S2 -Annona squamosa / S3 - Mangifera indica / S4 – Moringa oleifera / S5 - Morinda tinctoria |
The main plot, sub plot and also their interactions registered a statistically positive significant interaction for pant height of kodomillet at tillering and panicle initiation stages. Though there is a statistical significance among the main plot treatments for plant height at tillering stage, the differences were minimal and except for M5 and all the other four treatments were comparable. The height growth response was mixed between stages and years, because height is the reflection of soil and growth factors. However, the differences were statistically significant and though values are apart from each other, yet are comparable at harvest. Tallest plant (76.06 cm) was noticed in M1 while there is no statistical significance among subplot treatments. The interaction was significant at both stages of observations. At the outset, vertical growth of the crop was favourably influenced by main plot treatments viz., M1, M2 and M3. It confirms the decomposition of the applied leaf litter and release of nitrogen for plants to uptake, which in turn influenced height growth of kodomillet.
Table 2
Effect of Vrikshayurvedic farming practices on Leaf Area Index in kodomillet
Treatments | LAI at tillering stage | LAI at panicle initiation stage |
| 2020-21 | 2021-22 | mean | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | mean |
M1S1 | 0.17 | 1.81 | 0.99 | 0.44 | 1.38 | 0.96 |
M1S2 | 0.18 | 1,69 | 0.18 | 0.66 | 2.17 | 0.80 |
M1S3 | 0.1 | 1.52 | 0.81 | 1.52 | 1.55 | 1.10 |
M1S4 | 0.38 | 1.74 | 1.06 | 0.27 | 1.56 | 1.00 |
M1S5 | 0.21 | 1.7 | 0.96 | 1.67 | 1.89 | 1.29 |
M2 S1 | 0.53 | 2.07 | 1.30 | 1.37 | 1.69 | 1.39 |
M2 S2 | 0.5 | 1.9 | 1.20 | 0.77 | 1.81 | 1.24 |
M2 S3 | 0.19 | 1.91 | 1.05 | 0.97 | 2.1 | 1.24 |
M2 S4 | 0.14 | 1.58 | 0.86 | 0.55 | 1.34 | 0.89 |
M2 S5 | 0.1 | 1.81 | 0.96 | 1.13 | 2.11 | 1.22 |
M3 S1 | 0.13 | 2.04 | 1.09 | 0.98 | 2.18 | 1.28 |
M3 S2 | 0.51 | 2.01 | 1.26 | 0.87 | 2.12 | 1.35 |
M3 S3 | 0.37 | 2.27 | 1.32 | 0.41 | 1.71 | 1.22 |
M3 S4 | 0.71 | 2.01 | 1.36 | 0.76 | 1.4 | 1.25 |
M3 S5 | 0.34 | 1.68 | 1.01 | 0.79 | 1.82 | 1.13 |
M4 S1 | 0.26 | 1.88 | 1.07 | 0.33 | 1.81 | 1.07 |
M4 S2 | 0.54 | 2.28 | 1.41 | 0.15 | 1.36 | 1.15 |
M4 S3 | 0.53 | 2.21 | 1.37 | 0.14 | 1.28 | 1.11 |
M4 S4 | 0.81 | 1.16 | 0.99 | 1.47 | 1 | 1.09 |
M4 S5 | 0.71 | 1.53 | 1.12 | 0.24 | 1.8 | 1.08 |
M5 S1 | 0.45 | 1.13 | 0.79 | 0.48 | 1.61 | 0.89 |
M5 S2 | 0.58 | 2.54 | 1.56 | 0.54 | 1.71 | 1.39 |
M5 S3 | 0.46 | 1.35 | 0.91 | 0.39 | 1.81 | 0.98 |
M5 S4 | 0.42 | 1.46 | 0.94 | 0.39 | 1.54 | 0.95 |
M5 S5 | 0.46 | 1.99 | 1.23 | 0.59 | 1.59 | 1.17 |
L.S.D (p < 0.05) | 0.31 | 0.04 | | 0.38 | 0.05 | |
S.Ed | 0.15 | 0.1 | | 0.19 | 0.1 | |
Main plot: Tree leaf biomass: M1 – Albizia lebbek / M2 – Delonix regia/ M3 – Gliricidia sepium M4 – Peltophorum ferrugimeum/ M5 – Pongamia glabra; Sub plot: Foliar spray: S1 – Aegle marmellos/ S2 – Annona squamosa/ S3 - Mangifera indica/ S4 – Moringa oleifera/ S5 - Morinda tinctoria |
The leaf area index (LAI) is a plant growth rate indicator that expresses the leaf area per unit ground area of a single plant. In the first year, LAI at tillering stage, a maximum LAI of 0.81 was observed in M4 S4 and it was on a par with half of the treatments except for a few. The minimum was noticed in M2S and M1S3. At panicle initiation stage, a maximum LAI of 1.67 was observed in M4 S4 and it was on a par with M2 S1, M1S5 and M1S3. In second year, main plot, sub plot and also their interactions registered a statistically positive significant interaction for LAI of kodomillet at tillering and panicle initiation stages. Among subplot treatments S2 had maximum LAI at tillering (2.08) and panicle initiation stage (1.83), which are statistically significant to other subplot treatments. Among main plots M3 had higher values at both the stages of observations. Considering the interactions, greatest LAI of 2.18 was recorded in M3S1 which is comparable to M3S2 at panicle initiation stage (Table 2).
Table 3
Effect of Vrikshayurvedic farming practices in kodomillet
| Grain yield (kg/ha) | Straw yield (kg/ha) |
treatments | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | mean | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | mean |
M1S1 | 645 | 755 | 700.0 | 1932 | 2260 | 1258.4 |
M1S2 | 600 | 702 | 651.0 | 1724 | 2017 | 1138.8 |
M1S3 | 700 | 819 | 759.5 | 1945 | 2275 | 1299.7 |
M1S4 | 801 | 937 | 869.0 | 2164 | 2531 | 1460.4 |
M1S5 | 698 | 817 | 757.5 | 1865 | 2182 | 1263.9 |
M2 S1 | 758 | 887 | 822.5 | 1978 | 2314 | 1351.9 |
M2 S2 | 725 | 848 | 786.5 | 1965 | 2299 | 1324.7 |
M2 S3 | 585 | 684 | 634.5 | 1595 | 1866 | 1072.9 |
M2 S4 | 535 | 626 | 580.5 | 1489 | 1742 | 994.5 |
M2 S5 | 717 | 839 | 778.0 | 1845 | 2158 | 1267.4 |
M3 S1 | 632 | 739 | 685.5 | 1797 | 2102 | 1191.1 |
M3 S2 | 898 | 1050 | 974.0 | 2661 | 3113 | 1739.2 |
M3 S3 | 835 | 977 | 906.0 | 2485 | 2907 | 1622.0 |
M3 S4 | 698 | 816 | 757.0 | 1842 | 2155 | 1253.6 |
M3 S5 | 798 | 934 | 866.0 | 2085 | 2439 | 1424.4 |
M4 S1 | 408 | 477 | 442.5 | 1412 | 1652 | 878.3 |
M4 S2 | 825 | 965 | 895.0 | 2763 | 2362 | 1562.0 |
M4 S3 | 448 | 524 | 486.0 | 1714 | 1465 | 927.4 |
M4 S4 | 432 | 505 | 468.5 | 1687 | 1442 | 906.9 |
M4 S5 | 570 | 667 | 618.5 | 2763 | 1482 | 1220.1 |
M5 S1 | 418 | 489 | 453.5 | 1638 | 1400 | 879.7 |
M5 S2 | 862 | 1008 | 935.0 | 2962 | 2532 | 1659.8 |
M5 S3 | 594 | 694 | 644.0 | 1971 | 1685 | 1117.6 |
M5 S4 | 575 | 672 | 623.5 | 1737 | 1485 | 1018.5 |
M5 S5 | 465 | 544 | 504.5 | 1698 | 1452 | 932.7 |
L.S.D(p < 0.05) | 27.72 | 32.4 | | 75.42 | 88.2 | |
S.Ed | 13.79 | 16.1 | | 37.5 | 43.9 | |
Main plot: Tree leaf biomass: M1 – Albizia lebbek / M2 – Delonix regia/ M3 – Gliricidia sepium M4 – Peltophorum ferrugimeum/ M5 – Pongamia glabra; Sub plot: Foliar spray: S1 – Aegle marmellos/ S2 – Annona squamosa/ S3 - Mangifera indica/ S4 – Moringa oleifera/ S5 - Morinda tinctoria
With respect to economic output of kodomillet presented in table (3), during first year, grain yield of kodomillet ranged between 408 to 898 kg ha− 1 and a statistically significant (p < 0.05), greatest grain yield (898 kg ha− 1) was realized from treatment M3S2 i.e. leaf biomass transfer of Gliricidia sepium and foliar spraying of leaf extracts of Annona squamosa four times during crop growth. It was followed by M5S2 (863 kg ha − 1), which is comparable to M3S3. In second year, grain yield ranged between 477 and 1050 kg ha− 1 with a statistically significant (p < 0.05), highest grain yield (1050 kg ha− 1) was realized from treatment M3S2 i.e. leaf biomass transfer of Gliricidia sepium and foliar spraying of leaf extracts of Annona squamosa four times during crop growth. It was followed by M5S2 (1008 kg ha − 1), which is comparable to M3S3 (977 kg ha− 1).
As regards straw yield, during first year, it ranged between 1400 to 2661 kg ha− 1 and a statistically significant (p < 0.05) and a maximum yield of 2661 kg ha− 1 was realized from the treatment M3S2. It was followed by M5S2 (2532 kg ha − 1), which is comparable to M3S3. During second year, it ranged between 1638 to 3113 kg ha− 1, however, a statistically significant (p < 0.05) and greatest grain yield of 3113 kg ha− 1 was realized from the treatment M3S2. It was followed by M5S2 (2962 kg ha − 1), which is comparable to M3S3 (2907 kg ha − 1).
Table 4
Kodomillet performance under CPG and Zero input.
Particulars | 2020-21 | 2021-22 |
CPG | Zero Input | CPG | Zero Input |
Grain yield | 945 kg ha− 1 | 195 kg ha− 1 | 1087 kg ha− 1 | 215 kg ha− 1 |
Straw yield | 2885 kg ha− 1 | 807 kg ha− 1 | 3181 kg ha− 1 | 887 kg ha− 1 |
Panicle length | 8.01 cm | 4.68 cm | 9.01 cm | 4.78 cm |
No. of panicles | 13.68 | 7.00 | 15.68 | 7.90 |
Plant height at harvest | 71.02 cm | 51.55 cm | 72.08 cm | 57.55 cm |
The plants grown under conventional scientific method (CPG practices) produced an estimated grain yield of 945 kg ha− 1and a straw yield of 2885 kg ha − 1, while zero input had yielded just about 195 kg of grains and 807 kg of straw in a hectare of land during first year and an estimated grain yield of 1087 kg ha− 1and a straw yield of 3181 kg ha − 1, while zero input had yielded about 215 kg of grains and 887 kg of straw in a hectare of land during second year.
Pooled analysis of grain yield
Vrikshayurvedic farming practices significantly influenced yields and yield parameters (Figs. 1&2). A positive and significant influence on grain and straw yields were evident from the study. The pooled analysis on grain yield reflected that, the incorporation of tree leaf biomass of Gliricidia sepium six weeks before sowing of kodomillet and four time foliar spraying of Annona squamosa leaf extract at 5% concentration gave a pooled maximum mean grain yield of 974 kg ha− 1. The next best foliar spray is Mangifera indica 5% leaf extract with a grain yield of 906 kg ha− 1. The same combo performed better in terms of straw yields also with 2887 and 2696 kg ha− 1, respectively.
Observations on soil nutrient status
Table (5,6) demonstrate that the inference from the analysis of soil available nutrients has been, in general, the application of tree Biomass had comparatively higher available nitrogen and SOC in soil than CPG recommendations. However, the available phosphorus and potassium contents were higher than the tree biomass applied soil during the initial experiment.
Table 5
Soil nutrient status of the experimental field (Initial and end values)- 2020-21
| Soil Available N (kg ha− 1) | Soil available P (kg ha− 1 | Soil available K(kg ha− 1 | SOC g kg− 1 |
Leaf biomass | Time Zero value | End value | Time Zero value | End value | Time Zero value | End value | Time Zero value | End value |
M1 | 216* | 232.3 | 19 | 18.2 | 260 | 270.2 | 6.0 | 6.4 |
M2 | 216 | 236.4 | 19 | 17.6 | 260 | 253.4 | 6.0 | 6.8 |
M3 | 216 | 242.3 | 19 | 19.3 | 260 | 248.3 | 6.0 | 7.0 |
M4 | 216 | 238.8 | 19 | 18.9 | 260 | 295236.4 | 6.0 | 6.3 |
M5 | 216 | 248.4 | 19 | 17.9 | 260 | 222.6 | 6.0 | 6.6 |
CPG | 216 | 252.2 | 19 | 12.8 | 260 | 281 | 5.4 | 5.2 |
*data not statistically analyzed |
Main plot: Tree leaf biomass: M1 – Albizia lebbek / M2-Delonix regia / M3-Gliricidia sepium / M4- Peltophorum ferrugimeum / M5-Pongamia glabra
Table 6
Soil nutrient status of the experimental field (Initial and end values)- 2021-22
| Soil Available N (kg ha− 1) | Soil available P (kg ha− 1) | Soil available K (kg ha− 1) |
Leaf biomass | Time Zero value | End value | Time Zero value | End value | Time Zero value | End value |
M1 | 223.8 | 240.7 | 15.2 | 14.6 | 246.7 | 256.4 |
M2 | 223.8 | 244.9 | 15.2 | 14.1 | 246.7 | 240.4 |
M3 | 223.8 | 251.0 | 15.2 | 15.4 | 246.7 | 235.6 |
M4 | 223.8 | 247.4 | 15.2 | 15.1 | 246.7 | 224.3 |
M5 | 223.8 | 257.4 | 15.2 | 14.3 | 246.7 | 211.2 |
CPG | 223.8 | 261.3 | 15.2 | 10.2 | 246.7 | 266.6 |
*data not statistically analyzed |
Main plot: Tree leaf biomass: M1 – Albizia lebbek / M2-Delonix regia / M3-Gliricidia sepium / M4- Peltophorum ferrugimeum / M5-Pongamia glabra
From Table (7) it is inferred that in general, the application of tree leaf biomass had comparatively higher available nitrogen and SOC in soil than CPG recommendation. As regards available phosphorus and potassium the treatments showed a mixed influence and tree leaf biomass applied soil could sustain soil P compared to CPG but the soil K level showed a dismal change.
Table 7
Soil microbial status of the experimental field
| Bacteria population | Fungi | Actinomycetes population |
Leaf biomass | Time Zero value# | End value | Time Zero value# | End value | Time Zero value# | End value |
M1 | 35.4 | 44.2 | 34.4 | 36.2 | 29.4 | 30.3 |
M2 | 39.3 | 52.4 | 31.7 | 33.4 | 32.2 | 33.2 |
M3 | 43.7 | 53.3 | 31.5 | 33.2 | 33.3 | 34.3 |
M4 | 45.0 | 56.3 | 29.1 | 30.6 | 30.7 | 31.6 |
M5 | 30.6 | 43.1 | 30.7 | 32.3 | 31.4 | 32.4 |
*data not statistically analyzed |
# Same treatments were adopted for previous crop, hence variations in values among treatments
Main plot: Tree leaf biomass: M1 – Albizia lebbek / M2-Delonix regia / M3-Gliricidia sepium / M4- Peltophorum ferrugimeum / M5-Pongamia glabra
Nevertheless, the SOC has been increased by the incorporation of tree leaf biomass despite the source of litter. It clearly demonstrates that to enhance SOC it is essential to add organic matter, especially tree leaf biomass which undergo decomposition and also influence soil microbial counts as seen from the Table 7. Generally, the bacterial population changed greatly than other two organisms. Instead of only feeding the plants, effective organic fertility management should focus on providing long-term nourishment for the soil's microbial life. Crop diversity and the inclusion of a legume crop in the annual rotation are necessary for increasing the amount of organic carbon in the soil, along with the use of the proper source of biomass, such as the leaves of legume trees, to deliver nutrients through the soil. Soil organic carbon stocks act as an energy source for active proliferation of microorganisms in soil and increasing nutritional availability to crops (Swaminathan et al 2023).
COMPARISON OF THREE DIFFERENT PRACTICES
Comparison of kodomillet yields in three systems is presented in Fig. (3). Two- year mean grain yield under CPG practice is 1016 kg ha− 1 while, zero input practice yielded 40 percent less of CPG practice. But, best performing Vrikshayurvedic farming practice, Gliricidia sepium as tree leaf biomass and Annona squamosa as seed fortifier and foliar spray, showed a yield reduction of 4.13% than CPG and 55% increase than zero input farming. It clearly demonstrated that reduction in yield was meagre. Mangifera indica foliar spray also performed better with 55.3% yield increase over do-nothing practice and 10.3% decrease compared to CPG practice yield. The next best tree leaf biomass was Albizia lebbek. Generally, grain yield showed an increasing trend from first crop to second crop. However, in future, yield would show an increasing trend from third season/year onwards and, in a span of 3–4 years yield from any organic way of crop production should match and even overtake conventional production system yield on sustainable manner. As regards straw yield, the same performance was noted in kodomillet. Greatest pooled straw yield of 2887 kg ha− 1 was recorded in the Gliricidia sepium and Annona squamosa combo.
ECONOMICS
The cost cultivation, gross returns and net returns were calculated for the three systems of cultivation namely Vrikshayurvedic farming, CPG and zero input. The economics of the pooled data were used for considering the returns.
Table 8. Pooled analysis for economics in terms of Net returns – Descending order
Treatments
|
Grain yield
(kg ha-1)
|
Straw yield
(kg ha-1)
|
Gross returns
(Indian Rs.)
|
Cost of cultivation (Indian Rs.)
|
Net returns
(Indian Rs.)
|
M3S2
|
974
|
2887
|
54292
|
17700
|
36592
|
M5S2
|
935
|
2747
|
52112
|
17700
|
34412
|
M3S3
|
906
|
2696
|
50504
|
17700
|
32804
|
M4S2
|
895
|
2563
|
49866
|
17700
|
32166
|
M1S4
|
869
|
2348
|
48382
|
17700
|
30682
|
M3S5
|
866
|
2262
|
48196
|
17700
|
30496
|
M2S1
|
822
|
2146
|
45747
|
17700
|
28047
|
M2S2
|
787
|
2132
|
43818
|
17700
|
26118
|
CPG
|
1016
|
3033
|
56638
|
30756
|
25882
|
M2S5
|
778
|
2002
|
43291
|
17700
|
25591
|
M1S3
|
760
|
2110
|
42328
|
17700
|
24628
|
M1S5
|
757
|
2024
|
42141
|
17700
|
24441
|
M3S4
|
757
|
1999
|
42135
|
17700
|
24435
|
M1S1
|
700
|
2096
|
39024
|
17700
|
21324
|
M3S1
|
686
|
1950
|
38218
|
17700
|
20518
|
M1S2
|
651
|
1871
|
36273
|
17700
|
18573
|
M5S3
|
644
|
1828
|
35877
|
17700
|
18177
|
M2S3
|
635
|
1731
|
35358
|
17700
|
17658
|
M5S4
|
624
|
1611
|
34723
|
17700
|
17023
|
M4S5
|
618
|
1608
|
34392
|
17700
|
16692
|
M2S4
|
581
|
1616
|
32359
|
17700
|
14659
|
M5S5
|
505
|
1575
|
28169
|
17700
|
10469
|
M4S3
|
486
|
1590
|
27128
|
17700
|
9428
|
M4S4
|
469
|
1565
|
26186
|
17700
|
8486
|
M5S1
|
453
|
1519
|
25295
|
17700
|
7595
|
M4S1
|
443
|
1532
|
24748
|
17700
|
7048
|
ZI
|
205
|
847
|
11487
|
5250
|
5937
|
*Cost of grains Rs.55/kg ; Straw cost Rs. 0.25/kg
M1- Albizia lebbek; M2- Delonix regia; M3- Gliricidia sepium; M4- Peltophorum ferrugineum; M5- Pongamia pinnata
|
S1- Aegle marmellos; S2- Annona squamosa; S3- Mangifera indica; S4- Moringa oleifera; S5- Morinda tinctoria
|