EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE OF COWPEA (Vigna unguiculata L) VARIETIES IN AGRONOMY FARM OF LAMJUNG CAMPUS

1

2

EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE OF COWPEA (Vigna unguiculata L) VARIETIES IN AGRONOMY FARM OF LAMJUNG CAMPUS

Presented by: Presented By: Santosh Pathak

Project work 7th Sem, 2014 IAAS, Lamjung Campus Sundarbazar

3

INTRODUCTION

Cowpea ( Vigna unguiculata, Vigna sinensis)

Common name: Crowder pea, Black-eyed pea, Southern Pea

Family : leguminosaeOrigin : Probably from AfricaCrop types : Annual legumeClimate and soil: warm season crop,

thrives between 21-35 degree celcius, loamy soil

Nutritional value: Protein, Carbohydrates, vitamin and minerals etc

4

N fixation : 240 kg/ ha/yrEnhances the soil fertilityEconomic importance: In 2009, pulses (excluding soybean) export and import were of US$ 75,459,000 and US$ 29,184,000, respectively (FAO 2011). . Grain legumes are grown in 319,472 ha with production and productivity of 262,357 and 821 kg/ha, respectively (MoAC 2010).Total production of cowpea in the world is about 2.27million tons Other uses: Food, fodder, forage, fuel, shelter for animals etc

5

Objectives:

To study the growth, yield attributing characters and yield of cowpea genotypes.

6

MATERIAL AND METHODS

a. Site selection: Agronomy farm of lamjung campus(upland)

b. Field preparation: Deep Ploughed by tractor, all weeds, stones, bricks and harmful pests were removed and final field preparation was done after 1st ploughing .

c. Seed rate: Two seeds per spot

d. Method of sowing : Line sowing

Fig: Site selection

Fig: Field preparation

e. Plot size: 2m X 2m = 4m2

Gross plot: 4m2 (5 rows of 2m length) Net plot: 2.4 m2 by deducting one border row from each side

f. Spacing: 40 cm RR and 20 cm PP

g. Planting time :5th sept, 2014

Contd…..

Fig: Adjusting 4m2 plot size

Fig: Spacing 40X20 cm

8

Contd…….

h. Design: Random complete block design(RCBD) Replication: 4 Treatment: 6

Rep 4 T4 T1 T3 T6 T2 T5

Rep 3 T6 T3 T5 T1 T4 T2

Rep 2 T5 T6 T4 T2 T3 T1

Rep 1 T1 T5 T3 T4 T6 T2

Fig: RCBD framework at class

9

Contd…….....

List of genotypes as treatment Treatment Genotypes

T1 IT 99K- 573-2-1

T2 IT 86F-2062-5

T3 IT 93K-452-1

T4 IT 98K-205-8

T5 Prakash (Standard check)

T6 Malepatan(Local check)

10

Contd……………i. Manure and Fertilizer: 6

tons of FYM plus 20:40:20 kg NPK ha-1 ,

Half dose of urea was top dressed before planting and half after planting

j. Intercultural operation: Weeding and hoeing,1st

weeding was done on 19th sept and 3rd was on 11th

Oct.

Fig: Weed in our plot

Fig: Manual weeding

11

Contd………k. Plant protection: to control aphid and pod borer, Cypermethrin 2ml/l was sprayed on 2nd of Oct.

Diathene-M-45(SAAF) was sprayed on 2nd Oct for damping off.

For rodents, Ratonil was placed.

Fig:Fungicide application

12

Contd…….......

l. Irrigation: irrigation was done frequently about 15-20 days.

Sprinkler irrigation and pipe irrigation

Fig: Irrigating the plot

13

Contd……..

Sampling and data collection: Sampling on biomass and dry matter was started after one month and continued on 15 days interval (20th of Asoj, 5th kartik, 20th Kartik and 5th mangsir). Samples from each plot consists of 2 plants leaving boarder row and Plants were uprooted and fresh weight and dry weight of individual plant parts were taken in our lab.Datas on different parameters was taken and analysed by using MSTAT.

14

Result and Discussion

Plant height:

t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t60

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

PHT

PHT

Figure 1: Performance of genotypes on Plant Height

Highly significant • Early maturity genotypes;Dwarf plants, Late maturity: Highest plant ht• Cause : Difference in genotypes : Envtal. Fluctuation Ram et. al(1994) Plant ht reflects canopy of plant, contributing photosynthetic activity having indirect effect on seed yield

Cowpea plant decreased in height in relation to the progression in the volume of water supplied.( Science Daily 2008)

Higher effective nodules, with increasing vegetative growth

15

Contd…….

Pods per plant:

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T60

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

PPP

PPP

Figure 2: Performance of genotypes on Pods Per Plant

Significant, T1 max(18.50),T4 min(12.25)

Phenotypic traits with high contributions to genetic variability in legumes. E.g. Grass pea Turk et al 2007, pigeon pea Upadhya et. Al 2007, Black gram Singh et. al 2010

16

Contd……..

Seeds per pods

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T611.2

11.4

11.6

11.8

12

12.2

12.4

12.6

12.8

13

SPP

SPP

Figure 3: Performance of genotypes on Seeds Per Pod

Insignificant, max T2 (12.75), min T4 (11.75)

Larger pods with maximum no. of seed, while shorter less . Causes: Different genotypes or Envtl condition promote early maturity(min time available for seed setting for development) Muhammad et al 1994, Amanullah et al. 2000

Plant height affects seed per pod ( Thiyagarajan and rajasekaran 1993, Damarany 1994)

17

Contd…………Pod length

t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t60

5

10

15

20

25

PLT

PLT

Figure 4: Performance of genotypes on Pod Length

Highly significant, max T2 (21.00cm) min T1 (14.69cm) 6 different genotypes under medium rainfall condition , reported significant variation for pod length.(Muhammad 1994)

18

Contd…….Grain yield:

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T60

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

GYD (Ton/ha)

GYD (Ton/ha)

Figure 5: Performance of genotypes on Grain Yield

Highly significant, max T5(1.125 cm) ,min T1 (0.5075cm)

Peculiarity of genotypes with variation in yield attributed to climatic diversity and genetic make up.

Significant difference in seed yield and showed positive relationship with seed per pod, seed wt, plant height and pod length(Amanullah 2000, muhammad 1994), Ram et al,1994)

19

Contd…..

Biological yield

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T60

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

BYD (Ton/ha)

BYD (Ton/ha)

Fig6: Performance of genotypes on biological yield

Significant , T4 max(4.40),min T2(3.575)

20

Contd…..Test wt

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T60

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

TWT(gm)

TWT(gm)

Figure 7: Performance of genotyped on Test Weight.

Highly significant,T6 Max(182.2 gm),T2 min(124.5)

Difference in seed wt: time factor for accumulation of assimilates, Different genetic makeup Amanullah et.al 2000

21

Contd……

Biomass yield

T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T60

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

BMYD (Ton/ha)

BMYD (Ton/ha)

Figure8 : performance of genotypes on Bio-mass Yield

Insignificant, T6 Malepatan Max (3.580), T5 Prakash Min (2.953)

Vegetative plant phase useful for development of optimum canopy for high yield. Increase in days to flowering allows for proper vegetative growth leading more number of peduncles, flowers and other yield traits per plant Ishiyaku and Singh, 2003

22

Contd……Harvest index

t1 t2 t3 t4 t5 t60

5

10

15

20

25

30

HI

HI

Fig 9: Performance of genotypes on HI

HI= Economic yield/ biological yieldSignificant, T5 max(27.86%), T1 min( 12.55%)

T2 and T3 are statistically at par.

23

Conclusion

Able to know the performance of the various genotypes compared to the released variety Prakash and Malepatan.-T1 is superior : pods/plant and plant ht- T2 is superior : Pod length- T4 is superior : Biological yield -T5 is superior: Grain yield- Test weight: T6 (max) T2(min)We concluded that the released variety Prakash and Malepatan are superior in various parameters but some genotypes also performed well due to genotypic, environmental and G*E interaction

24

Recommendation

Based on farmers preference with respect to the production traits of various genotypes in Sundarbazar locality:-For seeds production : Prakash (T5)-For Vegetable purpose: Malepatan and IT 99K- 573-2-1 (T1)

-For forage purpose: IT 98K-205-8 (T4)

25

Acknowledgement

Thankful to our respected teachers Dr. B.B Adhikari, Dr. L.P. Amgain,Dr. Madhav Neupane and Mr. Roshan subedi for their supervison and

guidance during the Project work research. Thanks for our lab technician, friends, Helping

hands for their Co-ordination Last but not the least the authors, researchers

and their co-workers on legume crops.

26

Thank you for your kind attention

Any queries......????.