Agricultural Engineering INTRODUCTION \ Vasantdada Sugar Institute, Manjari (Bk.) Haveli, Pune , India

Transcription

1 Agricultural Engineering,,,, EFFECT OF SUB-SOILING IN SOILS WITH EXCESS I, I: WATER, OR WITH A HARD PAN, ON SOIL PROPERTIES I AND SUGARCANE QUALITY AND YIELD I!, 3 '> 1 R.B. Jagtap, S.D. Kamathe, V.R Athare, B.B. Gunjal,,, I *R.V. Pawar and D.G. Hapase Vasantdada Sugar Institute, Manjari (Bk.) Haveli, Pune , India Field experiments using sub-soilers were conducted on waterlogged fields at Warna Sugar Mill, District Kolpahur, India. The soil was loosened to depths of cm and laterally to about 3b cm each side of the time. Sub-soiling was performed at different spacings as well as all passes being either in line with the planting rows, or crosswise. There iwere significant difference; between treatments with sub-soiling at 2 m spacing crosswise being the best. Yield was increased by 15 t/ha (45%) and sugar recovery was increased by 1.5 units, compared with no sub-soiling. There were significant decreases in bulk density and significant increases in infiltration rate. There were (non-significant) improvements in organic carbon and available INTRODUCTION \ Sugarcane is a long duration crop and its irrigation requirement is also large. The monotony of the cropping pattern (i.e. sugarcane after sugarcane), intensive cultivation practices and excess irrigation, result in the development of soil compaction, leading to poor drainage ant accumulation of salts. Ultimately a hard pan is developed at the root zone level which creats water logged conditions in fields4. The net effect is high bulk density, poor infiltration rate, drainage problems, deterioration of soil fertility, poor uptake of nutrients by the roots3, and reduction in yield. This condition is found: in a wide variety of soils in India, including those affected by salinelalkaline conditions2. 267

2

3 / wb! JAGTAP ET AL. TABLE 1. Inputs in the experimental field. Stage Input items Quantity (kgha) Planting a) IFFCO 10:26: ) Ormichem ' 15, c) Vipul Granules 10 d) Devisulpher 20 I I e) Devi microshakti 10 f) Lindane 10 Ammonium sulphate 500 urea 50 9) IFFCO 10:26: b) Urea 150 I, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION -. cessed with the help of a computerized RBD show that there were significant differences in means of treatment effect for plant 'growth parameters such as germination count, tiller count, average millable height, average girth and average number of internodes. The treatments were ranked in order of superiority as: T3>T1 >T2>T4 Table 3 shows antincrease in iverage cane yield of 5 t/ha (in treatment n), 10 Vha (in treatment TI), 15 t/ha (in treatment T3) and an increase in sugar recovery by unit (in treatment T2), unit (in treatment TI) and 1.58 unit (in treatment T3) over the control. I I 269

4 AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING TABLE 2. Means of treatments, SE and CD values against each plant parameter. Plant parameter TreatmentGermination Tillering Average Average girth Average number of (cm) internodes * significant at 5% le TABLE 3. Means of treatments, SE and CD values against each of harvest data. Plant parameter Treatment Average T * significant at 5% level.

5 was found to be best and the order was T3 > T1 > T2 > T4. The value of density was less in the 0-15 cm layer of soil compared with the cm ts which were sub-soiled.!;rft, cc 4,286,, r p.270, EC 0-15 cm , EC cm , B.D cm B.D cm , Infiltration rate?j53k!, 1 At the time of sub-soiling the tractor speed was recorded to average 3 km/hr. and the hourly working cost for a 50 HP tractor worked out as Rs For the best treatmentl (sub-soiling the field at 2 m spacing crosswise) the expenditure on alone was Rs,. 420/ha,,ne, increase in,yield was 15 t/ha and in sugar rewyery, 1.5 units. Assuming the average,price of sugarcane to be Rs. 300 per ton, the additional gross income to the farmer >was, Rs. 4,5001ha. Deducting the expendi-

6 TABLE 5. Root growth studies (average root spread per stoo AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING No. Plot Length' Width :, Depth Volume z (~m)~i(cm) >. (cm)o ~'~,~\('cm~)~,i:-~ dl 1. Sub-soiled plots, 65 ' % ~ ),in % ; r s l l : ~ \(0.1716M3) \,,45: ,95400 i lil + ture of sub-soi Sub-soiling is expected to have the following beneficial effects on soil. 1) Loosening of soil up to depth of cm and improvement in the sodium on the clay particles. 4) It may be an alternative, to some extent, to field drains. Cost of sub- ;'s >, r * 5) Sub-soiling is expected to have long term beneficial effects on subsequent crops and further studies in the persistance of these beneficial effects should be carried out. It will be especially iqteresting+ to elucidate the relative importance of nutrient uptake, root extension: soil aiitwater iatios, etc., in increasing the dry matter production. 8 ' i(,,, I> "1! The authors are thankful to Hofi. Shri' Tatyasaheb ore, Chairman; ~Warna, Sdgar Mill Ltd., Warnanagar, District Kolhapur, Maharashtrii {State, India, foi' 'extending all facilities for the above experiment.'-thanks are also due to the.agric. Department of Warna Sugar Mill Ltd., for thek doperatidn in conducting the experiment. ' ' ' 1

7 ual Progress Report of the Emiritus Scientists Scheme. (1989). Soil physical uptake, yield and quality of sugarcane crop in rent crop rotqtions in coastal Andhra Pradesh. Reg. Agri. Res. Station., Agric. University, Anakapalle, India. d Palmer, C.J. (1986). Effect of subsoiling on oils. Canadian J. Soil Science 66 pov~ell, J. L., Barnhisel, R. I. and Thom, W.O. (1987). Reclamation of prime soil physical' parameters of. J. Soil and Fertilizers UBSOLEOENSUELOSCON CESO DE HUMEDAD 0 CON UNA SEGUNDA CAPA (HARDPAN) DURA, EN SUS PROPIENDADES FISICAS Y, CALIDAD Y RENDIMIENTO EN GMA DE AZUCAR 3!!',,,."', RESUMEN! a r > Setgllevaron 'a efecto e~pe~imentos de campo en el Ingenio Warna, distrito de Kolpahur, India, usarido la pr6ctica de subsoleo en campos anegados. El subsoleo se hizo a distintos espaciamientos y direcciones. Hubo ventajas significativas entre 10s.espaciamientos a 2 m y atravesados en comparacidn con las otras. Se aumentd el rendimielito en 45 ;Vha (45%) 9 la recuperacidn de &car aumentada en 1.5 unidades, comparado con e1,no subsoleo. Disminuy6 la densidad total y aumentd el poder de infilttacidn' de '10s suelos subsoleados. No hub0 diferencias sinnificatives en el contenido de C orglnico otnitr6geno disponible. I, : 1 9, ( 0,, ' Palabras claves: Subsoleo, desarrollo de la cosecha, calidad de caiia, drenaje, caiia I L / a ~~d~&cai..~, I. $.,,, 1% ', ' 1 ) \ ' ).J,I!