Microsoft Word - 10 Bangladesh Agron. J. 2017, 20(2): 87-95 IMPROVEMENT OF POTATOIMPROVEMENT OF POTATOIMPROVEMENT OF POTATOIMPROVEMENT OF POTATO----JUTEJUTEJUTEJUTE----T.T.T.T.AMANAMANAMANAMAN CROPPING PATTERN CROPPING PATTERN CROPPING PATTERN CROPPING PATTERN THROUGH INCLUSION OF MUNGBEANTHROUGH INCLUSION OF MUNGBEANTHROUGH INCLUSION OF MUNGBEANTHROUGH INCLUSION OF MUNGBEAN A. K. Chowdhury, T.A. K. Chowdhury, T.A. K. Chowdhury, T.A. K. Chowdhury, T. ZahanZahanZahanZahan****, M. M. Anowar, M. K., M. M. Anowar, M. K., M. M. Anowar, M. K., M. M. Anowar, M. K. Islam, Islam, Islam, Islam, S.S.S.S. H. Molla and AH. Molla and AH. Molla and AH. Molla and A....SSSS....MMMM....MMMM.... Rahman KhanRahman KhanRahman KhanRahman Khan Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute, Gazipur, Bangladesh *Corresponding author, E-mail: taslimazahan_tzp@yahoo.com (ReceivedReceivedReceivedReceived: 4 December 2017, Accepted:Accepted:Accepted:Accepted: 15 January 2018) Keywords:Keywords:Keywords:Keywords: Four Cropping pattern, crop diversity, food nutrition, production efficiency, yield improvement AbstractAbstractAbstractAbstract Inclusion of mungbean in a cropping pattern not only increases the cropping intensity but also enriches soil health as well as ensures nutrition for the fast-growing population of Bangladesh. A study was conducted in farmers’ field of Domar, Nilphamari, Bangladesh during 2013-14 and 2014-15 to evaluate the performance of four-crop based cropping pattern Potato – Mungbean – Jute - T.Aman rice against the existing farmer’s pattern Potato-Jute-T.Aman rice. The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with six disperse replications. Two-year study revealed that inclusion of mungbean and practice of better management along with use of modern high yielding varieties in the existing cropping pattern increased rice equivalent yield of the whole pattern by 38.7% and economic profit by 73.1%. Moreover, land use efficiency and production efficiency of Potato – Mungbean – Jute -T.Aman pattern were higher than the existing pattern by 14.0 and 28.2%, respectively. Thus, the study suggests incorporation of mungbean in the existing Potato-Jute-T.Aman pattern could be a agronomically and economically profitable for the farmers as well as cropping intensity can be increased. IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction Agriculture plays a great role in national economy of Bangladesh and more than 70% of rural people are directly or indirectly involved with agriculture (BBS, 2016). This large sector engages nearly 45.6% of total labor force and contributes one sixth of gross national product of the country (BBS, 2016). Now-a-days, agricultural economy of Bangladesh is facing a great challenge to meet the food demand for the fast-growing population with its limit resources. Despite of decreasing the cultivable land by 0.87% per year, presently Bangladesh has achieved a remarkable increase in food production especially in case of rice production (BBS, 2016). The present cropping intensity of the country is 191%, but it needs to be increase significantly as the food requirement of the country people has projected to be doubled in the next 25 years. In Bangladesh, continuous growing of rice is considered as the main reason of declining soil fertility as well as for irrigation water crisis. In addition, rice monoculture also reduces production of non-rice crops, erodes biodiversity and creates nutritional imbalance (Hussain et al., 2001; Rahman, 2010). Potato – Jute – T. aman rice is a major cropping pattern of greater Rangpur region especially for medium high land (Elahi et al., 1999). This pattern can easily be improved by inclusion of a short duration legume crop like mungbean. The inclusion of mungbean in a cropping system 88 Molla & Khan not only improves production of all crops grown in a rotation compared with monoculture systems (Murray et al., 1987) but also reduces fertilizer requirement by fixing nitrogen in soil, improves soil health, increases potential yield with increased cropping intensity, greater productivity per unit time and space, and higher net returns (Ali et al., 2012; Naresh et al., 2013; Hossain et al., 2015). Therefore, the study had taken to evaluate the performance of the four-crop based cropping pattern and compare with farmers exiting pattern at Domar, Nilphamari. Materials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsMaterials and MethodsMaterials and Methods The experiment was conducted at the farmers’ field during 2013-14 and 2014-15 to compare the performance of the improved cropping pattern (Potato - Mungbean – Jute - T. aman) against the existing cropping pattern (Potato-Jute-T. aman) in the Domar, Nilphamari (Latitude: 26005.778 N, Longitude: 088050.41 E and Altitude: 34 m). The experimental land was high land with sandy loam textured soil having pH 5.1. Before starting the experiment, the land was neutralized by addition of Dolomite @ 1 t ha-1. Nutrient status of the initial soil and the post-harvest soil at completion of two years study has given in Table 1. The experimental site received 1907.9 mm total rainfall in the year of 2013, 1635.0 mm in 2014 and 2417.0 mm in 2015 (Figure 1a). Monthly averaged maximum temperatures were ranged between 22.5-33.3° C in 2013, 22.2-34.3° C in 2014 and 22.4-32.3° C in 2015. The minimum temperatures were ranged from 9.1-26.8° C in 2013, 12.0-26.8° C in 2014 and 12.0-26.6° C in 2015. The lowest temperature was prevailed in the month of January during all the years of study whereas the temperature was at the peak in the month of June during 2013, in April during 2014 and in October during 2015 (Fig. 1b). Table 1. Nutrient status of initial and post-harvest soil under Potato-Mungbean-Jute-T.aman rice cropping pattern at Domar, Nilphamari Nutrient status Initial soil Post-harvest soil pH 5.1 5.7 Organic matter (%) 1.37 1.43 Total N (%) 0.07 0.08 P (µg g-1 of soil) 27.2 31.6 S (µg g-1 of soil) 15.7 16.1 K (meq. per 100 g of soil) 0.11 0.10 Zn (µg g-1 of soil) 0.9 1.04 B (µg g-1 of soil) 0.15 0.17 The experiment was laid out in Randomized Complete Block design with 6 dispersed replications (one farmer represents one replication). The unit area for each farmer was 400 m2. Data of the existing pattern were collected from the neighbor farmer’s practiced land of each replication. All agronomic management practices including dates of sowing/ transplanting and harvesting, seed rate, plant spacing, fertilizer management etc. were in Table 2. In the existing pattern, farmers used potato var. BARI Alu-8 , Jute var. Indian Tosa and T. Aman var. Swarna whereas BARI Alu-25, 0-9897 and BRRI dhan56 were used as potato, jute and T.Aman rice varieties in the improved pattern (Table 2). Crop-wise recommended fertilizer packages were applied (FRG, 2012). Appropriate application methods of fertilizer were used for all the crops. Irrigation, pest managements and other intercultural operations were done as 89 Improvement of Potato-Jute-T.Aman Cropping Pattern and when necessary. All field operations and management practices for both improved and existing patterns were closely monitored and recorded. Aphid infestation was observed in potato field which was controlled by spraying Acephate @ 1.5 g L−1 of water during 30 days after planting. Dithane M-45 @ 4 g L−1 of water was applied for 5 times started from 30 DAP and continued up to 70 DAP at 10 days interval to control late blight disease of potato . Mungbean field was sprayed with Dimethoate @ 2ml L−1 of water at 3 days after emergence to control stem fly and Emamectin Benzoate was sprayed @ 2 ml L−1 of water to control pod borer. In T. aman rice, Chlorpyrifos was applied @ 80 g ha-1 to control stem borer and Tebuconazole (25%) was sprayed @ 2ml per L of water at 65 DAT for controlling leaf blight. Crop yield was recorded from the central 100 m2 area of each replication and converted into t ha-1. Fig. 1. (a) Monthly and yearly total rainfall and (b) monthly average temperature (maximum and minimum) of the experimental site of Domar, Niphamari during 2013-15 The collected data were analyzed statistically by following ‘ANOVA’ technique and means were compared by DMRT using statistical package program MSTAT-C. Economic analysis was done on the basis of prevailing local market price of the commodities. Productivity of different cropping systems was compared in terms of rice equivalent yield (REY). Rice equivalent yield (REY) was computed as yield of individual crop multiplied by market price of that crop divided by market price of rice. Rice equivalent yield (t ha-1yr-1) = rice of priceMarket crop that of pricemarket crop individual of Yield × Land use efficiency (LUE):Land use efficiency (LUE):Land use efficiency (LUE):Land use efficiency (LUE): It is worked-out on total duration of crops in an individual cropping pattern divided by 365 days (Tomer and Tiwari, 1990). It was calculated by the following formula: 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec R a in fa ll ( m m ) 2015 2014 2013 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec T e m p e r a tu r e ( o C ) Max. 2013 Max. 2014 Max. 2015 Min. 2013 Min. 2014 Min. 2015 Total in 2013: 1907.9 mm Total in 2014: 1635.0 mm Total in 2015: 2417.0 mm (a) (b) 90 Molla & Khan LUE (%) = × 100 Where, d1= duration of 1st crop of the pattern d2 = duration of 2nd crop of the pattern d3 = duration of 3rdcrop of the pattern d4= duration of 4thcrop of the pattern Production efficiency (PE):Production efficiency (PE):Production efficiency (PE):Production efficiency (PE): It values in terms of kg ha-1 day-1 was calculated by total main product in a cropping pattern divided by total duration of crops in that pattern (Tomer and Tiwari, 1990). It was calculated by the following formula: PE (%) = × 100 Where, y1= Yield of 1stcrop of the pattern y2= Yield of 2nd crop of the pattern y3= Yield of 3rd crop of the pattern y4= Yield of 4th crop of the pattern d1= Duration of 1st crop of the pattern d2= Duration of 2nd crop of the pattern d3= Duration of 3rd crop of the pattern d4= Duration of 4th crop of the pattern The cost and return analysis included gross return, gross margin and marginal benefit cost ratio (MBCR). The output and inputs were valued at existing market prices. The MBCR of the farmer’s prevalent pattern and any replacement for it can be computed as the marginal value product (MVP) over the marginal value cost (MVC). The Marginal of prevalent pattern (F) and any potential replacement (E) for it was computed as (CIMMYT, 1988). Marginal Benefit Cost Ratio (MBCR) = MVC MVP = (F) TVC - (E) TVC (F)return Gross - (E)return Gross Results and DiscussionResults and DiscussionResults and DiscussionResults and Discussion Nutrient status of soilNutrient status of soilNutrient status of soilNutrient status of soil Soil nutrient analysis results demonstrated that no big change in amount of nutrient elements after completion of two-year cropping cycle (Table 1). The study found a slight positive change in soil pH, OM, N, P, S, Zn and B. This positive change might be related to the supplementary supply of required amount of nutrients as fertilizers that were applied properly to achieve high yield goal. On the other hand, results showed a slight negligible decrease in total K after two years. Field durationField durationField durationField duration The study demonstrated that existing farmer’s pattern occupies the field for 303 days in 2013- 14 and 298 days in 2014-15 leaving 61 days and 64 days as turnaround time, respectively (Table 2). On the other hand, field duration of the improved cropping pattern was longer (341 days in 2013-14 and 344 days in 2014-15) than the existing pattern. However, four-crop base improved pattern reduced the turnaround time by 40 days in 2013-14 and 44 days in 2014-15 because of using short duration BARI Alu-25 and BRRI dhan56 as potato and T.Aman rice d1+d2+ d3+d4 365 y1+y2+ y3+y4 d1+d2+ d3+d4 91 Improvement of Potato-Jute-T.Aman Cropping Pattern varieties. These two varieties helped to save 21-27 days and therefore it was easy to fit a short duration mungbean var.BARI mung-6 within the improved pattern. Yield performanceYield performanceYield performanceYield performance Result showed that seed yield of potato in potato-mungbean-jute-T.Aman cropping pattern (IP) was higher by 64.3% than that of in the existing farmer’s potato-jute-T.Aman pattern (FP) (Table 3). The average yield of potato in IP was 24.32 t ha-1 whereas it was only 14.80 t ha-1 in FP. It might be related to use of high yielding modern potato variety in IP along with improved management practices. On the other hand, the study revealed that fiber yield of jute and grain yield of T.Aman rice were little bit lower in IP compared to FP. This might be happened due to use of short duration varieties of jute and T.Aman rice. However, total yield of the whole pattern in IP was higher than FP by 42.1% in 2013-14 and 50.4% in 2014-15 as the additional yield of mungbean was obtained from the improved pattern (0.59 and 0/69 t ha- 1 in 2013-14 and 2014-15). Rice equivalent yield (REY) of the improved cropping pattern (26.72 t ha-1yr-1) was also higher than the existing pattern (19.27 t ha-1yr-1) by 39% because high yield of potato and additional yield of mungbean with high market price helped the improve pattern to have higher REY over the existing pattern. Production efficiency Production efficiency Production efficiency Production efficiency Higher production efficiency was calculated from four-crop base improved cropping pattern (24.40 kg ha-1 day-1) over the farmer’s existing three-crop based cropping pattern (19.03 kg ha-1 day-1) (Figure 2). Improved management practices and use of modern varieties lead the improved cropping pattern for higher production efficiency over the existing cropping pattern. Production efficiency in farmers’ pattern was lower due to lack of modern management practices and local varieties. Similar result was also found in the previous study of potato-rice base improved cropping patter (Nazrul et al., 2013). Land use efficiency Land use efficiency Land use efficiency Land use efficiency Land use efficiency depends on crop duration and number of crops cultivated during a cropping season. Therefore, land use efficiency (LUE) of the improved pattern (IP) was 93.84% whereas it was 82.33% in the existing pattern (FP). IP had higher LUE than FP by 28.2% because total field duration of potato – mungbean – jute -T.Aman pattern per year was longer (344 days) than potato-jute-T.Aman pattern (291 days) (Table 2). Inclusion of mungbean in improved pattern helped to increase land use efficiency as it occupied field for 64-65 days. Cost and return analysis Cost and return analysis Cost and return analysis Cost and return analysis Results of the economic analysis showed that total variable cost (Tk.2,96,530 ha -1 ) was higher in the improved pattern than the existing pattern (Tk.2,22,650 ha -1 ) because of additional cost involvement of mungbean cultivation. However, gross return (Tk.4,40,805 ha -1 ) and gross margin (Tk.1,64,975 ha -1 ) of the improved cropping pattern were higher than the existing pattern (gross return: Tk.3,17,950 ha -1 and gross margin: Tk.95,300 ha -1 ). Moreover, MBCR of the improved pattern was calculated 1.66 indicates that inclusion of mungbean was 66% more economic beneficial than the existing farmer’s pattern. Farmers’ opinionFarmers’ opinionFarmers’ opinionFarmers’ opinion Farmers opined their satisfaction observing overall better performance of this improved pattern over existing cropping pattern but they needs favourable marketing environment. 92 Molla & Khan Table 2. Agronomic management practices of the existing cropping pattern and improved cropping pattern at Domar, Nilphamari during 2013-14 and 2014-15 Pattern Year Existing cropping pattern Improved cropping pattern Crop Potato Jute T. aman Potato Mungbean Jute T. aman Variety BARI Alu-8 Indian Tosa Swarna BARI Alu-25 BARI Mung-6 O-9897 BRRI dhan56 Spacing 60cm×x 25cm Broadcast 20cm×x 15cm 60cm×x25cm 30 cm Broadcast 20cm×x 15cm Fertilizer dose (N-P-K-S-Zn- B Kg ha-1) 120-50-110- 22-8-1 120-15-30- 10-0-0 114-9.88- 12.35-4-4-0 120-50-110- 22-8-1 45-90-30-4- 1-1.19-0 90-15-30- 10-0-0 115-0-40- 15-0-2-0 Date of sowing/ transplanting 2013-14 24 Nov. to 08 Dec. 2013 13 to 24 April 2014 21 to 28 July 2014 17 to 19 Nov. 2013 20 to 26 Feb. 2014 02 to 06 May 2014 12 to 16 Aug. 2014 2014-15 20 Nov. to 05 Dec. 2014 08 to 19 April 2015 26 July to 07 Aug. 2015 16 to 21 Nov. 2014 21 to 27 Feb. 2015 03 to 07 May 2015 10 to 13 Aug. 2015 Field duration 2013-14 94 94 115 87 64 99 91 2014-15 92 99 107 89 65 98 93 Turnaround time 2013-14 11 45 5 6 8 4 3 2014-15 10 46 8 3 8 5 4 Harvesting date 2013-14 26 Feb. to 04 Mar. 2014 16 to 25 July 2014 13 to 21 Nov. 2014 12 to 17 Feb. 2014 27 to 29 April 2014 09 to 13 Aug. 2014 11 to 15 Nov. 2014 2014-15 20 Feb. to 06 Mar. 2015 18 to 23 July 2015 10 to 20 Nov. 2015 13 to 15 Feb. 2015 27 to 30 April 2015 06 to 10 Aug. 2015 11 to 16 Nov. 2015 93 Improvement of Potato-Jute-T.Aman Cropping Pattern Table 3. Yield, variable cost, gross margin and marginal benefit cost ratio of the improved pattern and the existing pattern at Domar, Nilphamari during 2013-14 and 2014-15 Pattern Existing cropping pattern Improved cropping pattern Crop Year Potato Jute T. aman Potato Mungbean Jute T. aman Grain or seed or fiber yield (t ha-1) 2013- 14 15.1 2.28 3.68 23.73 0.59 2.21 3.39 2014- 15 14.5 2.36 3.82 24.91 0.69 2.17 3.31 Mean 14.80 2.32 3.75 24.32 0.64 2.19 3.35 Straw or stick yield (t ha-1) 2013- 14 - 5.78 4.23 - - 5.78 4.23 2014- 15 - 5.16 4.05 - - 5.24 3.97 Mean - 5.47 4.14 - - 5.51 4.10 REY (t ha-1yr-1) 2013- 14 8.78 5.58 3.87 15.22 2.21 5.89 3.58 2014- 15 9.16 7.02 4.13 14.26 2.45 6.21 3.62 Mean 8.97 6.30 4.00 14.74 2.33 6.05 3.60 REY of the whole pattern (t ha-1yr-1) 19.27 26.72 Gross return (Tk. ha-1) 148000 103950 66000 243210 38400 99820 59375 Total variable cost (Tk. ha-1) 120630 57420 44600 146560 36100 62650 51220 Gross margin (Tk. ha-1) 27370 46530 21400 96650 23000 37170 8155 Whole pattern GM (Tk. ha-1) 95300 164975 MBCR (Whole pattern) 1.66 Price (Tk. kg-1): Urea-16, TSP-22, MP-15, Gypsum-10, Zinc Sulphate-150, Boric acid-160, Rice grain-16.50, Rice straw-1, Jute fiber-33, Jute stick-5, mungbean-60 and Potato-10 REY: rice equivalent yield, MBCR: marginal benefit cost ratio, GM: gross margin 94 Molla & Khan Fig. 2. Land use efficiency and production efficiency of improved cropping pattern and the existing farmer’s pattern during 2013-14 and 2014-15 at Domar, Nilphamari ConclusionConclusionConclusionConclusion Cultivation of four-crop based potato – mungbean – jute -T.Aman pattern is more profitable than the existing potato – jute - T.Aman pattern considering yield, financial benefit and also soil health. AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsAcknowledgements Principle author would like to acknowledge the funding authority BCCT (Climate Change Trust Fund, Bangladesh) for supporting this research. ReferencesReferencesReferencesReferences Ali, R. I., T. H. Awan, M. Ahmed, M. U. Saleem and M. Akhtar. 2012. Diversification of rice-based cropping systems to improve soil fertility, sustainable productivity and economics. J. Animal Plant Sci. 22(1): 108-112. BBS. 2016. Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh. 35th edition, Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Statistics Division, Ministry of Planning, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. pp. 49-144. BJRI. 1990. Pater Unnata Jatshomuha, A booklet in Bangla. Bangladesh Jute Research Institute, Manik Mia Avenue, Dhaka-1207. CIMMYT. 1988. From Agronomic Data to Farmer Recommendation, An Economics Training Manual. Mexico, D.F. Elahi, N. E., A. H. Khan, M. R. Siddique, A. Saha, M. Nasim, M. I. U. Mollah and S. M. Shahidullah. 1999. Existing cropping patterns of Bangladesh, potential technologies and strategies for improving systems productivity. In: Proceedings of the workshop of modern rice cultivation in Bangladesh, 14-16 February 1999. pp. 107-170. FRG (Fertilizer Recommended Guide). 2012. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council, Farmgate, Dhaka-1215. Hossain, M. M., M. Begum, M. M. Rahman and A. Hashem. 2015. Response of t. aman and boro rice to residue retention under strip tillage system. Bangladesh Agron. J. 18(2): 39-44. 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 2013-14 2014-15 L a n d u se e ff ic ie n c y ( % ) IP FP 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2013-14 2014-15 P r o d u c ti o n e ff ic ie n c y (k g h a -1 d a y -1 ) 95 Improvement of Potato-Jute-T.Aman Cropping Pattern Hussain, A. M. M., M. Hossain and A. Janaiah. 2001. Hybrid rice adoption in Bangladesh: Socio- economic assessment of farmers’ experiences. BRAC Research Monograph, Series No. 18, BRAC, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Murray, G. A., K. D. Kephart, L. E. O’Keeffe, D. L. Auld and R. H. Callihan. 1987. Dry pea, lentil and chickpea production in northern Idaho. Coop. Ext. Serv. Bulletin 664. Moscow, ID: University of Idaho College of Agriculture. 15p. Naresh, R. K., Purshottam and A. H. Nanher. 2013. Improving income and nutrition by incorporating mungbean in the presence of surface retained residues in rice-wheat cropping system. Int. J. Life Sci. Biotech. Pharma Res. 2(2): 158-164. Nazrul, M. I., Shaheb, M. R., Khan, M. A. H. and A. S. M. M. R. Khan. 2013. On-Farm evaluation of production potential and economic returns of potato-rice based improved cropping system. Bangladesh Agron. J. 16(2): 41-50. Rahman, A. 2010. Promoting financial inclusion for poverty reduction with inclusive growth. In: 17th biennial conference on ‘The economy at the golden jubilee of war of liberation: what type of Bangladesh we would like to see?’ organized by Bangladesh Economic Association held on 8 – 10 April, 2010, Osmani Memorial Auditorium and Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh Dhaka. Tomer, S. S. and A. S. Tiwari. 1990. Production potential and economics of different crop sequences. Indian J. Agron. 35(1&2): 30-35.