Irrigation Water Management and Crops and Cropping Systems in Sriramsagar Project and Srisailam Right Branch Canal Command Area

1

2

AP III Irrigation Project

(1998-2004)

Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University

Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

July 2004

Correct citation: Reddy, M. D., Surender Reddy, K., Krishna, A., Sahadeva

Reddy, B., Padmaja, J., and Srinivas, A., (2004). Project

report on “Crops and cropping systems under Sri Ram

Sagar Project and Srisailam Right Bank Canal Command

area” ANGRAU, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

Published by :

Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

3

Foreword

Traditionally, India has been agriculture based economy. Hence, development of

irrigation to increase the agricultural production for making the country self sustained and

for poverty alleviation has been of crucial importance for the planners. The irrigated area

in the country was only 22.6 million ha in 1950-51 and it has increased to 70.33 million

ha in 2002-03. The ultimate irrigation potential is estimated as 140 Mha. It is worthy to

note in this context that, inspite of tremendous increase in the irrigated area over time, the

gap between the registered ayacut and the actual irrigated area is increasing at alarming

pace. Of the several possible reasons for this gap, adoption of water intensive cropping

systems coupled with poor water management practices; inefficient water distribution

systems in the canal command areas; unwillingness of the farmers, even in the tail-end

areas of the canals, to grow ID crops instead of rice can be stated as major ones.

Keeping these issues as major thrust areas, the AP-III project titled “Crops and

cropping systems under Sri Ram Sagar Project (SRSP) and Srisailam Right Bank Canal

Command (SRBC) area in Andhra Pradesh” was initiated and implemented over a period

of six years from 1998 to 2004. In this project several on-farm trials, OFDs of proven

efficient irrigation technologies, extension programs to popularize the findings were

carried out. The impact assessment studies made in the pilot areas showcased significant

positive changes in farmers attitudes towards water management, increased adoption of

improved water management technologies culminating in overall increase in Water Use

Efficiency.

This publication is a compilation of the results of the on-farm experiments and

demonstrations carried out in large areas, various outcomes suitable for different canal

command areas, lessons learnt in this project etc. This book will be a valuable tool in the

hands of policy makers, researchers, students, farmers and officers working in the

Agricultural Extension machinery of the state.

I acknowledge the financial support extended by the World Bank, support

extended by the University to successfully implement the project. And, I congratulate all

stake-holders in project implementation for their hard-work resulting in development of

actionable recommendations in the area of water management.

Hyderabad M. Devender Reddy

July, 2004 Nodal Officer, AP-III irrigation Project

Dr. M. Devender Reddy

Principal Scientist (Agro)

ANGRAU

Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad

4

Contents

Title Page No

Executive Summary 3

Introduction 8

Project Implementation 9

Description Of Components And Sub-Components 10

Implementation SRSP 12

Implementation SRBC 38

Achievements Of The Project Objectives 61

Sustainability Issues 66

Concerns And Further Recommendations 67

Constraints In Project Implementation 68

Strategy And Action Plan To Mainstream The Findings 70

Lessons Learnt In Project Implementation 73

Extension Activities 74

Publicity Materials 79

Papers Presented In Workshops / Symposium 81

Impact Assessment 82

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Under agriculture support services, applied demonstrations were conducted on

operational area basis at selected distributaries under Third A.P Irrigation Project (1998

to 2004) in SRSP command area at Karimnagar (DBM-89), Warangal (DBM-26) and

SRBC command area at Nandyal (Block-4).

Benchmark survey was conducted on the selected beneficiaries. Based on the

constraints, demonstrations were conducted under three categories.

1. Group A – Research Trials

2. Group B – Small Scale Demonstrations

3. Group C – Mass Spread of Proven Technology

A total of 2782 and 1054 demonstrations were conducted in SRSP and SRBC,

respectively. These activities were taken up at three reaches of distributory –upper (Reach

I), middle (Reach II), and lower (Reach III). The on-farm demonstrations/trials include

scheduling of irrigation in different crops, various methods of irrigation, testing of micro

irrigation technologies, selection of profitable cropping systems, production technology

of different crops, INM, IPM and other package intervention components, introduction of

crops such as vegetables in the system, conducting field days and trainings to line

department officials and farmers etc.

The salient results of activities under taken at ARS, Karimnagar and

Warangal under SRSP:

1. Scheduling of irrigation water at recommended intervals and methods required

less water and resulted in higher yield in maize, groundnut, blackgram and

redgram at ARS, Karimnagar and Warangal.

2. Check basin method for groundnut, furrow method for chillies and cotton, ridge &

furrow method for maize was found to improve water use efficiency.

3. Drip method of irrigation for cotton and chillies and sprinklers in vegetables and

groundnut was found to improve water use efficiency compared to flooding

method of irrigation. By adopting recommended practice, there was water saving

of 50-112 mm in maize, 50-112 mm in groundnut, 180-230 mm in cotton, 118

mm in pegionpea and 126 mm in blackgram as compared to farmers‟ practice.

4. In Warangal district, maize-groundnut-maize, Chilli-bhendi, turmeric-ridge gourd

and cotton-vegetable and in Karimnagar greengram-maize-bhendi, maize-

6

groundnut-greengram,maize-groundnut-vegetables were found to be profitable

cropping systems.

5. Introduction of rabi blackgram and redgram, maize in place of rabi rice was found

to be profitable with a saving in water and increase in net income

6. Introduction of high yielding varieties in maize, rice cotton, blackgram, redgram

and groundnut improved the yield and net income over conventional practices.

7. Introduction of superfine rice varieties like JGL 1798,JGL 384 and WGL 14

evolved from ANGRAU performed excellently with high yields. The farmers are

adopting seed village concept resulting in higher income generation through the

sale of seed among themselves and neighboring villages. The performance is

superior to locally popular BPT 5204.

8. Integrated pest management in cotton (stem application of monocrotophos,

growing of trap crops, spraying of NPV, erection of bird perches and monitoring

with pheromone traps) and in rice (leaving of 40cm alley ways after every 2m and

use of pheromone traps) resulted in higher income and reduce cost of cultivation.

9. Introduction of vegetables (flora beans, french beans and bhendi) after cotton and

rice have resulted in higher net returns during the summer season.

10. The practice of green manuring increased the yield of rice with reduction in cost

of cultivation on chemical fertilizers.

Agricultural extension services:

Under the agricultural extension services, field days, training programmes to

farmers and line department officials organized.

1. Ten field days were organized at demonstration site popularize the

technologies to other farmers the district.

2. Fifty four (twenty seven at each center) training programmes were conducted to

farmers. The trainings proved that more than 80% of the trainees were categorized

under medium to high knowledge group on crop technologies and water

management practices of different crops whereas rest of the farmers fall under low

category because of illiteracy or lack of awareness.

3. The trainings given to the line department officials of Agriculture, Horticulture

and engineers greatly sharpened their TOT (Transfer of Technology) skills in

irrigation management aspects. They were enlightened with the recent

7

technologies that need to be popularized in the command, which reduce water

requirement in different crops.

4. Workshop on Irrigation management was conducted with ANGRAU scientists,

Dept Officers and farmers. It was used as a platform for discussing the

possibilities and difficulties in adoption of technologies.

5. Agricultural information center and model irrigation block was established at

ARS, warangal and Karimnagar to train the famers.

The salient results of activities under taken at RARS, Nandyal under SRBC:

As water is not released in the canal so far, the ANGRAU has taken up water

management trails under bore wells at upper reach and other demonstration trials under

rainfed situations.

1. In sunflower and cotton, skip furrow and alternate furrow method of irrigation

recorded almost similar seed yield to that of ridge and furrow method of

irrigation.There was 50 % saving irrigation water in skip and alternate furrow

method of irrigation.

2. In chillies and cotton, drip fertigation recorded higher yield, 40-50% less water

requirement than ridge and furrow method of irrigation. In normal sown chickpea,

one irrigation through sprinklers at pod development stage gave 22% higher seed

yield than rain fed crop. Under late sown conditions also one irrigation through

sprinklers recorded 28% higher seed yield compared to rain fed crop.

3. In garden bean irrigating the crop during dry spells with family drip irrigation

(25000 l /ha) increases the yield considerably.

4. In kharif, NDLR-8 rice variety recorded 8% higher net returns compared to local

variety BPT-5204 and 38% higher net returns compared to local variety (RNR-

1446) (rabi). Cost of cultivation of fertilizers was reduced to Rs. 3043 ha-1

by

adopting recommended fertilizer doses compared to farmers practice. Closer

planting of seedlings recorded additional net returns of Rs. 2770 ha-1

compared to

farmer‟s practice of low plant population.

5. In rice green manuring + 75% recommended fertilizer dose recorded almost

similar yield to that of famers practice.

8

6. During kharif - 2003 in System of rice intensification (SRI) grain yield of 15774

kgha-1

was recorded with BPT 5204 compared to 5625 kg ha-1

in farmers practice.

7. Under irrigated conditions mungari cotton followed by chickpea and sorghum

recorded higher net returns. Rice followed by sunflower, sorghum, mustard and

blackgram recorded higher net returns.

8. Under rainfed conditions, green gram followed by chickpea cropping system

recorded a net return of Rs.3750 ha-1

compared to post rainy season chickpea

alone. Bitter gourd alone recorded higher net returns compared to ridge gourd

followed by chickpea and post rainy season chickpea alone.

9. In cotton, cultivars Aravinda ( Mungari cotton) and Narasimha (American cotton)

recorded 25-30% higher yields compared to local varieties. Adoption of IPM

recorded an additional net return of Rs. 466 to 2365 ha-1

compared to farmers

practice. By adoption of recommended fertilizer management practices cost of

cultivation was reduced to a tune of Rs. 1600 ha-1

compared to farmers practice.

10. In chickpea under low rainfall conditions Swetha and Kranti performed better as

compared to local variety. During good rainfall years, Kranti and Annegiri were

equally good and superior over Bharat. Integrated pest management practices

recorded higher seed yield, gross and net returns as well as benefit cost ratio

compared to farmers practice. By adopting recommended production technology

an additional net returns of Rs. 3500 ha-1

was recorded compared to farmers

practice.

11. In sunflower recommended spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm recorded higher seed yield,

gross and net returns over farmers practice of solid rows with no thinning.

Application of sulphur through Single super phosphate recorded higher yield

compared to farmers practice of complex fertilizer application.

12. Agricultural implements (urea applicator, row seeder and Ferti - cum seed drill)

and farm machinery (threshers) were demonstrated at all the reaches. . By sowing

chickpea with seed drill developed by RARS, Nandyal , 20 kg ha-1

seed was saved

with an yield advantage of 225 kg ha-1

than farmers practice.

9

Agricultural extension services:

1. Twenty seven two day trainings to farmers were conducted covering 16 blocks of

SRBC, three line department trainings (Agricultural officers, Assistant Directors

of Agriculture and I&CAD Engineers), five field days and one workshop was

organized.

2. To train the farmers about latest technologies in agriculture, a fully equipped

agricultural information center was established displaying different crop varieties,

pest and disease incidence laminations, soil profile boards, live specimens of crop

varieties grown in this zone and models of farm implements.

3. To demonstrate different methods of irrigation to the farmers, a model irrigation

block was established consisting of different types of drip and sprinkler irrigation,

rain guns, water measuring devices and surface methods of irrigation.

10

INTRODUCTION

The Third A.P. Irrigation project supported by the World Bank was under

implementation in SRSP & SRBC commands from 1998-2004 with a view to complete

the incomplete works and generation of additional irrigation potential there by achieving

higher agricultural productivity and socio-economic development in the project area. For

attaining the objective of higher agricultural production the farmers of the pilot operation

area were exposed to the improved farm and other technologies to achieve the following

objectives:

1. To evolve and demonstrate diversified cropping sequences for horticultural and

dry land crops under rotational water supply.

2. Improve productivity through on farm irrigation.

3. To improve command area extension services and participation, irrigation

management practices through development of crops.

Before the commencement of the project, the bench mark survey was conducted at

Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal with the objectives to

1. Provide necessary information to assess the current situation before significant

implementation of project at field level.

2. Establish database of project irrigation development, agricultural productivity,

performance indicators required to monitor and evaluate the success of the project

prior to its completion.

11

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

The Government of Andhra Pradesh under G O Ms No. 22, I&CAD[ PW-SRSP II

(2)] dated 6-3-98 has accorded sanction to Acharya N G Ranga Agricultural University,

Rajendranagar, Hyderabad for implementing the applied research on Irrigation

Agronomic progarmmes under AP III Irrigation Project in SRSP and SRBC commands

for a period of 5 years from 1998-99.

The Sreeram Sagar project is constructed across river Godavari near Balkonda

mandal of Nizamabad district to irrigate drought prone area of Telengana region under

Karimnagar, warangal, Nalgonda, Adilabad and Nizamabad districts. The irrigated areas

of Sreeram Sagar command are red soils with loamy sub soil (65 per cent) and light and

moderately deep to deep-black soils (35 percent).

The Srisailam right branch canal is designed to irrigate mainly Black Cotton soils

(80 %) of low rainfall areas of Rayalaseema regions in Kurnool and Kadapa districts by

drawing backwaters from Srisailam Project constructed across river Krishna near holy

town Srisailam in Kurnool district.

12

DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENTS AND SUB-COMPONENTS.

Under Agricultural Support Services, the main component is implementation of

applied research and demonstrations under irrigation agronomy programme under

Third A.P irrigation project at Sriramsagar Project (SRSP) and Srisailam right branch

canal (SRBC) command areas.

The sub-components under the programme are

a) Applied research and demonstration of irrigation practices and agronomy to

improve irrigation practices and crop yields.

b) Programme of applied research and demonstrations and extension to promote high

value horticulture crops and

c) Upgrading of Agricultural extension services in Sriramsagar Project area.

Objectives of the Sub-Components

Before the implementation of the project different objectives were formulated under sub-

components.

a) Applied research and demonstration of irrigation practices and agronomy to

improve irrigation practices and crop yields

i) Improved on farm agronomic practices and production parameters including

use of appropriate farm implements as well as cultivars, fertilizer, pest control

and other measures.

ii) Optimal crop planning under limited water availability to maximize

production and net returns

b) Programme of applied research and demonstrations and extension to promote high

value horticultural crops

i) Demonstrations/ evaluation of potential crops and crop sequences with

reference to water use and maximum returns.

ii) Introduction of new high value crops/potential horticultural crops that

can fit into the system for increased returns.

iii) To explore the potentiality of conjunctive use of surface and ground

water in improving water use efficiency and in increasing cropping

intensity ultimately leading to increase in production and net returns.

13

c) Upgrading of Agricultural extension services in Sriramsagar Project area Srisailam

right branch canal project area.

A total of 84 farmer training programmes, three trainings to agricultural

officers, three trainings to Assistant Directors of Agriculture and three trainings to line

department officers were given on improved irrigation management practices. Model

irrigation block and information centers were developed at three centers to facilitate faster

dissemination of advanced technology.

Details of the trials conducted in SRSP command

Year

Group-A Group –B Group-C

Karimnagar Warangal Karimnagar Warangal Karimnagar Warangal

Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi

98-99 -- 19 -- 45 -- 69 -- -- -- -- -- --

99-00 -- -- 51 -- 52 -- 84 -- 46 -- 142 --

00-01 23 39 33 35 23 36 107 16 86 104 149 11

01-02 14 58 38 38 25 72 30 18 148 202 175 26

02-03 56 43 24 9 18 36 33 10 111 129 149 2

03-04 18 19 -- 1 6 5 6 27 17 22 20 7

Total 111 178 146 128 124 218 260 71 408 457 635 46

Grand Total: 2782

A total of 2782 trials were conducted in SRSP command area at ARS,Warangal and

ARS, Karimnagar. Of these trails 563 trials were conducted under group – A. Under

group-b and group –C in total 673 and 1546 trials were conducted, respectively.

Details of the trials conducted in SRBC command

Y

ear

Group-A Group-B Group-C Total

Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi

1999-2000 2 - 38 - - - 40

2000-2001 5 7 9 13 5 8 47

2001-2002 7 14 59 76 63 96 315

2002-2003 20 32 48 104 98 93 395

2003-2004 23 30 33 52 39 80 257

Total 57 83 187 245 205 277 1054

14

IMPLEMENTATION

Sri Ram Sagar Project (SRSP)

I. Methodology

1.1 Site:

In the command area nearly 85 percent of the cultivators are marginal and small

farmers having less than 2 hectares. Since the primary objective of the project is to

generate additional irrigation potential there by achieving higher agricultural productivity

and socio-economic development of the farmers, it is proposed to conduct on-farm

research on water management in three locations covering an area of 120 ha. under D-89

distributory at Karimnagar and D-26 distributory in Warangal of SRSP command . Two

villages covering an area of 40 ha in each reach were selected for conducting the

demonstrations.

Karimnagar

1.1.1 Reach I (Upper Reach) : Nagnur, Rukmapur

1.1.2 Reach II (Middle Reach) : Cherlaboothkur, Irkula

1.1.3 Reach III (Lower Reach) : Narayanaraopally, Sambaipally

Warangal

1.1.1 Reach I (Upper Reach) : Palivelpula

1.1.2 Reach II (Middle Reach) : Pegadapally

1.1.3 Reach III (Lower Reach) : Seethanagaram

1.2 Soil type:

The soils in the command area are derived from two parent rocks, black soils of

granitic origin, which are popularly called as regurs (black cotton soils). They are

moderately deep and moderately alkaline in reaction with pH ranging from 8.0 to 9.0.

These soils are mostly suitable for crops like paddy, maize and cotton. Red soils of

sandstone origin, commonly termed as dubba and chalka soils, are neutral to less alkaline

in reaction with a pH ranging from 6.5 to 8.0. These soils are poor in nitrogen and

phosphorous. The ideal crops for these soils are redgram, greengram, maize, groundnut,

chillies and vegetables.

15

1.3 Climate:

The climate of the command area is tropical (semi - arid), characterized by hot

summer and dry winter. The mean daily maximum and minimum temperature in summer

is 41o and 28

o C, respectively. In winter, the mean daily maximum temperature is 30

o C

and the mean minimum temperature is 15o

C. The average annual rainfall in the command

area varies between 925 and 1025mm. About 80 percent of the annual rainfall is received

from South - West monsoon during June to September and the balance during the North -

East monsoon and summer months. The mean annual rainfall at Karimnagar is 1033 mm

(Annexure – I) and Warangal is 950 to 1000mm (Annexure – II)

1.4 .1 Hydraulic particulars: distributory -D-89 (Karimnagar)

1. Ayacut : 3718 ha (9295 acres)

2. Discharge : 110.62 cusecs

3. Bed width : 2.75 m

4. Full supply depth : 1.2 m

5. Free board : 0.6 m

6. Side slopes : 1.5 : 1 / ½ : 1

7. Value of “N” : 0.025

8. Bed fall : 1 in 3300

9. Velocity : 0.586 m / sec

10. Top width of banks (L/R) : 3.6 / 1.8 m

11. Distance from Karimnagar : 12 km

12. Soil type : Red and Black

13. Crops grown : Paddy, maize, groundnut, greengram

pigeonpea, sunflower and cotton etc.

14. Release of water : October to March

15. Total length of the distributory : 17.65 km. The distributory D-89 starts

at 129.55 km of Kakatiya Canal.

1.4.1.1 Hydraulic particulars of selected pipelines (Karimnagar)

Sl.

No. Item DP numbers

7 8 37 38 53 55 56

1. Diameter of

off-take pipe

(m)

0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30

2. Full supply

depth (m)

0.225 0.225 0.225 0.225 0.225 0.225 0.225

3. Bed width (m) 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30

4. Free board (m) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15

5. Value "N" 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025

16

6. Discharge

(cusecs)

-- -- 0.032 0.064 0.067 0.068 0.064

7. Salinity (%) <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2

8. Length of the

pipe line (m)

1298 -- -- -- 424.5 688 --

9. Bed fall 1 in 400 1 in 400 1 in 400 1 in 400 1 in 400 1 in 400 1 in 400

10. Total Ayacut

area (Acres)

97.11 60.33 43.09 86.13 93.00 98.29 83.00

1.4 .2 Hydraulic particulars: distributory D-26 (Warangal)

S. No Particulars 0-.400 0.400-1.1 1. Ayacut area (acres) 396 237

2. Discharge (acres) 13.06/.37 6.71/0.19

3. Bed width (m) 1.00 0.75

4. Full supply depth (FSD) 0.45 0.40

5. Free board (m) 0.45 0.45

6. Bed fall 1 in 1000 1 in 1000

7. Manning‟s const 0.025 0.025

8. Velocity (cm/sec (c) ) 0.540 0.443

9. Top bank in metres(both left/right) 1.8/1.20 0.9/0.9

10. Side slopes (inner /an) 1.5:1 1.5: 1

1.4.2.1 Hydraulic particulars of the selected pipelines (Warangal)

S. No Particulars Values 1. Ayacut area (acres) 40-100

2. Bed width (m) 0.30

3. Slope (fall) 1 in 500/750

4. Dise slopes 1.5:1

5. Dia (m) 0.225

6. Manning‟s const 0.018

17

1.5 Constraints identified

Based on the benchmark survey done before commencement of the project ,

the following constraints were identified in major crops grown in the beneficiary

villages.

1.5.1 Maize

1. Excessive irrigations are given due to free availability of canal water.

2. Chemical weed control is not practiced resulting in higher cost of cultivation and

delayed manual weeding.

3. Seed treatment was not done.

4. Excessive application of inorganic fertilizers with less usage of organic fertilizers.

5. Closer spacing against the recommended spacing of 75 cm x 20 cm.

1.5.2 Paddy

1.Wastage of irrigation water due to excessive irrigation.

2. Non-application of farmyard manure and green manure.

3.Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers without application of K

4.Chemical weed control not practiced

5.Cultivation of age-old local varieties.

1.5.3 Cotton

1.Indiscriminate use of pesticides and non-adoption of IPM practice.

2.Excessive use of irrigation water.

3.Inconsistent market prices.

4.Soils are not suitable for cotton cultivation.

1.5.4 Greengram

1. Growing of local varieties susceptible to YMV.

2. Application of no or insufficient quantity of fertilizers.

3. Chemical weed control not adopted.

4. Broadcast method of sowing.

18

1.5.5 Groundnut

1. Growing local varieties

2. Low plant stand

3. Non-application of Gypsum.


5. Over utilization of irrigation water.

1.5.6 Chilli

1. In Chilli dieback, leaf curl and viral diseases are common, which reduce the yield.

2. Most of the farmers practicing direct seeding which also reduce the plant canopy and

Growth.

3. In winter season, micronutrient deficiencies of Mg, Fe and B is a phenomenon due

to low temperature affecting uptake of nutrients.

1.5.7 Turmeric

1. Growing of long duration (9 months) local varieties susceptible to rhizome rot

2. Lack of awareness about the importance of seed treatment.

3. Monocropping of turmeric.

1.5.8 Cropping Systems

Mostly the cropping systems adopted before the implementation of project are

Greengram-Maize, Paddy-Maize, Paddy-Paddy.

1.5.9 Vegetable cultivation

Before the project was implemented, the farmers are not aware of cultivation of summer

vegetables.

19

1.6 Trials conducted to over come the constraints identified (Details in Annexure – III & IV

of Volume-II)

Constraints identified Trials conducted

Maize

1 Excessive irrigations Demonstration of irrigation schedules in

Maize (K& W)

2 Chemical weed control Demonstration of chemical weed control

techniques in Maize (W)

3 Excessive inorganic fertilizer

application

Demonstration of application of

recommended doses of fertilizers in Maize

(K&W)

4 Non adoption of seed treatment

optimum spacing & improved varieties

Popularization of new hybrids in Maize (K)

5 Irrigation by flooding Demonstration on methods of irrigations in

maize (W)

Paddy

1 Wastage of irrigation water Demonstration of intermittent irrigation

schedules in paddy (K)

Demonstration of improved puddler in

Paddy (K)

2 Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers Demonstration of application of

recommended doses of fertilizers in paddy

(K&W)


techniques in paddy (K)

4 Cultivation of local varieties Introduction of new varieties in paddy

(JGL-1798, 1853 and WGL-14) (K&W)

5 Method of planting Demonstration of direct seeding techniques

in paddy (K &W)

Cotton

1 Indiscriminate use of pesticides Demonstration of Integrated Pest

Management in Cotton (K &W)

2 Excessive use of irrigation water Demonstration of irrigation schedules in

Cotton (K&W)

Demonstration of drip irrigation system in

Cotton (K)

3. In efficient methods of irrigation Demonstration on methods of irrigation in

Cotton (W)

4. Suitability of soils Red chalka soils are not suitable for Cotton

cultivation thus farmers are advised not to

grow Cotton in those soils as both yield and

quality are effected (K)

Turmeric

1. No seed treatment Demonstration on management of rhizome

rot and leaf spot in Turmeric (W)

20

Demonstration on recommended production

technology in Turmeric (W)

Chilli

1 No micronutrient sprayings Management of yellow syndrome in chilli

(W)

2. Inefficient irrigation methods Demonstration on methods of irrigation in

chilli (W)

3. Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and

pesticides


technology in chilli (W)

Greengram

1 Growing local varieties, broadcasting

of seed, insufficient fertilization.

Popularization pf recommended production

technology in Green gram (K)


techniques in Green gram (K)

Groundnut

1 Growing local varieties Popularization of new variety of Groundnut

JL-24 (K)

2 Low plant stand and non-application

of gypsum

Popularization of recommended production

technology in Groundnu t(K&W)


techniques in Groundnut (K)

4 Excessive irrigation 1. Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation

system in Groundnut (W)

2. Demonstration of different irrigation

methods in Groundnut (K&W)

3.Demonstration on scheduling of irrigation

in Groundnut (W)

Cropping systems

1 Third crop is not cultivated 1. Demonstration of cultivation of

vegetables in Maize based cropping

system (W)

2. Demonstration of cultivation of

vegetables in Green gram based cropping

system (K)

3. Popularization of Green gram based

cropping system (K)

4. Popularization of Maize based cropping

system (W)

2 Mono-cropping of cotton and rice 1.Demonstration on cotton based cropping

systems (W)

2.Demonstration on rice based cropping

systems. (W)

Vegetables

1 Summer vegetables are not cultivated Introduction of vegetables in kharif (K&W)

21

1.7 Demonstrations conducted in different areas of crop production ( Karimnagar)

1.7.1 Irrigation trials

1) Irrigation Schedules in Maize

Treatments : 2

a) Irrigation at 18-20 days interval during Vegetative stage and 9-10 days

during reproductive stage.

b) Farmers practice (irrigation at 7-10 days interval).

2) Intermittent irrigation schedules in paddy.

Treatments: 3

a) Irrigation 24 hrs after disappearance of 5cm depth of water.

b) Irrigation 48 hrs after disappearance of 5cm depth of water.

c) Farmers practice

3) Irrigation Schedules in Groundnut.

Treatments: 2

a) Irrigation at 15 days interval.

b) Farmers practice (Irrigation at weekly interval).

4) Irrigation Schedules in rabi Pigeonpea.

Treatments : 2

a) Irrigation at 18-20 days interval during Vegetative stage and 9-10 days

during reproductive stage.


5) Irrigation Schedules in Blackgram.

Treatments : 2

a) Irrigation at 0, 25, 45 and 65 days after sowing.


6) Irrigation Schedules in Cotton.

Treatments : 2

a) Nine irrigations at an interval of 20 days (Irrigation stars from last

fortnight of September).

b) Farmers practice (Irrigation at 14-15 days interval).

7) Demonstration of Drip Irrigation System in Cotton

Treatments: 2

a) Irrigation with Drip system.

b) Farmers Practice (Flooding method).

8) Demonstration of Drip Irrigation System in Chillies

Treatments: 2

a) Irrigation with Drip system.


22

9) Demonstration of Sprinkler Irrigation System in Groundnut

Treatments: 2

a) Irrigation with Sprinkler system.


10) Demonstration of different irrigation methods in Groundnut.

Treatments : 3

a) Farmers Practice (Flooding method)

b) Check basin method.

c) Border strip method.

1.7.2 New implements

11) Demonstration of Direct seeding technique in Paddy.

Treatments: 2

a) Sowing of sprouted seed with Paddy drum seeder.

b) Farmers Practice of transplanting.

12) Demonstration of improved Puddler in Paddy.

Treatments: 2

a) Puddling with ANGRAU Puddler

b) Puddling with wooden plough.

1.7.3 Integrated pest management

13) Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton.

Treatments:2

a) Stem application of Monocrotophos, Pheramone traps, Light traps,

Trap crops, Bird perches, NPV spray etc.

b) Pest control with chemicals.

1.7.4 Integrated nutrient management

14) Demonstration of recommended doses of fertilizers in Paddy.

Treatments : 2

a) 120-60-50 N, P2O5 and K20 Kg /ha.

b) Imbalance fertilization.

15) Demonstration of recommended doses of fertilizers in Maize.

Treatments : 2

a) 120-60-40 N, P2O5 and K20 Kg /ha.

b) Imbalance fertilization.

23

1.7.5 Cropping systems

16) Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system.

Treatments: 2

a) Maize-Groundnut-Vegetable.

b) Maize-Groundnut-Fallow.

17) Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Greengram based cropping system.

Treatments: 2

a) Greengram-Maize-Vegetable.

b) Greengram-Maize-Fallow.

18) Popularization of Maize based cropping system.

Treatments: 2

a) Maize-Groundnut-Greengram.

b) Maize-Groundnut-Fallow.

19) Popularization of Greengram based cropping system.

Treatments: 2

a) Greengram-Maize-Greengram.

b) Greengram-Maize-Fallow.

1.7.6 Production technology

20) Demonstration of production technology in Greengram during Kharif.

Treatments: 2

a) Line sowing, YMV tolerant varieties (WGG-37), Weedicide

application (Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha).

b) Broadcasting, local variety, hand weeding.

21) Demonstration of production technology in Redgram during Rabi.

Treatments: 2

a) HYV with optimum dates of sowing.

b) Cultivation of local variety.

22) Demonstration of production technology in Blackgram .

Treatments: 2

c) Line sowing, LBG-20, Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg

a.i /ha) and blitox spray for the control of Powdery mildew.

d) Broadcasting, local variety, hand weeding.

23) Demonstration of production technology in Groundnut.

Treatments: 2

a) Seed treatment of HYV, optimum plant population (44 plants/sq.m) ),

Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and gypsum

application @ 500kg/ha.

b) Farmer practice

24

24) Demonstration of production technology in Maize during Rabi.

Treatments: 2

a) Weedicide application (Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha), Hybrids, irrigation

through ridge & furrow method.

b) Farmer practice.

25) Demonstration of production technology in Paddy during Kharif.

Treatments: 2

a) Recommended package of practices

b) Farmer practice

1.7.7 Weed control

26) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Greengram .

Treatments: 2

a) Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and inter-

cultivation at 25 DAS.

b) Two hand weedings without weedicide application

27) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Maize .

Treatments: 2

c) Weedicide application (Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and inter-cultivation

at 35 - 40 DAS.

d) Two hand weedings without weedicide application

28) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Blackgram .

Treatments: 2


cultivation at 25 DAS.


29) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Groundnut.

Treatments: 2


cultivation at 30 - 35 DAS.


30) Introduction of chemical weed control technique in Redgram .

Treatments: 2

a) Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha)


1.7.8 New varieties

31) Introduction of new varieties in Paddy .

Treatments: 2

a) JGL – 1798

b) IR – 64, Vijetha

25

1.7 Demonstrations conducted in different areas of crop production (Warangal)

1.7.1 Irrigation management trials

1) Scheduling of irrigation in maize

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Irrigation at 15 days interval

b) Farmers‟ practice: Irrigation at 12 days interval

2) Scheduling of irrigation in groundnut

Treatments : 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Irrigation at critical stages

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Irrigation at 15 days interval

3) Scheduling of Irrigation in Cotton

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Nine irrigations at an interval of 20

days(Irrigation starts from last fortnight of September.)

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Irrigation at 15 days interval.

4) Evaluation of Irrigation methods in Chilli

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: Furrow

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Flat bed method

5) Evaluation of irrigation methods in maize

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: Ridges & Furrow method

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Flat bed method

6) Evaluation of irrigation methods in cotton

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Check basin method

b) Farmers‟ practice: Flooding

7) Evaluation of Irrigation methods in groundnut

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Check basin method

b) Farmers‟ practice: Flooding in large plots

8) Demonstration of Sprinkler Irrigation system in groundnut

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Irrigation with Sprinkler system

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Flooding in large plots

9) Demonstration on direct seeding in rice

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Sowing of sprouted seed with paddy drum

seeder

b) Farmers‟ practice: Transplanting

26

1.7.2 Mass spread of proven technologies

10) Demonstration of IPM in cotton

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Use of pheromone traps, stem application of

monocrotophos, trap crops, light traps, bird perches.

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides

11) Demonstration on Integrated pest management for BPH in rice (Kharif &

Rabi)

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: Leaving alleyways of 40cm after every 2m.

b) Farmers‟ Practice: No alley ways

12) Demonstration on management of yellow syndrome in Chilli

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Micronutrient Spraying (Mg-0.5%, Fe-

0.5%, Zn-0.5%,B-0.1% + Urea

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Indiscriminate pesticide application.

13) Management of rhizome rot and leaf spot in turmeric

Treatments:2

a) Demonstration Practice: Seed treatment with Mancozeb

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Without seed treatment

14) Demonstration on stem application of monocrotophos

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice : Stem application of Monocrotophos :Water

(1:10) at 25 DAS and 40 DAS

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Sprayings in place of stem application

15) Demonstration on weed control in maize

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a. i/ha as pre emergence

spray + inter cultivation at 30-35 DAS

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Manual weeding + inter cultivation

1.7.3 Introduction of new varieties and crops 16) Introduction of short duration rice varieties and hybrids

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of new varieties like JGL-384,

JGL-1798, RDR-836, MTU-1010, WGL-14 in kharif and varieties

like WGL –14377 , JGL-1798 , in rabi.

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Use of local varieties

17) Introduction of suitable cotton varieties

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of new varieties like NA 1588,

NA1678

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Use of hybrids

18) Introduction of rabi redgram

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of varieties like ICPL 85063 and

ICPL 8719

27

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Monocropping of rice

19) Introduction of rabi blackgram

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of varieties like LBG 645 and

LBG 648

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Monocropping of rice

1.7.4 Demonstration on production technologies 20) Demonstration of production technology in cotton

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration Practice: N150 P60 K40 kg/ha + IPM practices

b) Farmers‟ Practice: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and

fertilizers

21) Demonstration of Production technology in Chilli

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: N 200P 60K 80 kg/ha + micronutrient spray+

IPM practices

b) Farmers‟ practice: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and

fertilizers

22) Demonstration of production technology in turmeric

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: N 190 P 75K125 kg/ha + Rhizome treatment

with carbendazim

b) Farmers‟ Practice : Higher fertilizer application with closer spacing

23) Demonstration of production technology in maize

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: N 120P 60K 40 kg/ha +chemical weed control

with recommended spacing

b) Farmers‟ practice: Higher fertilizer application with closer spacing

24) Demonstration of production technology in Rice in kharif

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: N 80 P 60 K 40 Kg/ha + green manuring with

Sesbania

b) Farmers‟ practice : Indiscriminate application of pesticides and

fertilizers

25) Demonstration of production technology in rice in rabi

Treatments: 2

a) Demonstration practice: N120 P 60K 40 kg/ha

b) Farmers‟Practice: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and

fertilisers

28

1.9 Results Of Trials And Demonstrations Conducted Under SRSP Command Area

(Warangal & Karimnagar (Data in Annexure V of volume - II ))

1.9.1 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in maize

Irrigating maize at critical stages (seedling, knee-high, tasseling, silking and cob

development stages) is important to get higher yield. Farmers generally irrigate maize crop

at 12 days interval coinciding with canal release. Among the 35 demonstrations conducted

at Warangal, irrigation at critical stages saved 100mm of irrigation water. The WUE was

higher in the demonstration plots (14.3 Kg/ha-mm). The average additional income in

demonstration plots was Rs.2593 /ha, Rs.2112/ha at reach II and I, respectively over

farmers‟ practice (Table-2 (Annex.V-Vol-II)).The yield and net returns obtained in

demonstration plots was significantly higher at reach II only (5.29t/ha and Rs.16421/ha).

A total of 52 demonstrations (Karimnagar) were conducted at all the three

reaches for five years. Water saved in the trial plot where irrigations were scheduled at 18-

20 days during the vegetative phase and 8-10 days during the reproductive phase ranged

between 105 to 113mm over farmer practice (Table –1(Annex.V-Vol-II)). Higher WUE

was recorded in the trial plots compared to the farmer plots at all the three reaches and

during all the three years. Significant increase in yield (7.09, 6.72 and 7.42 t/ha was

recorded in demonstration plot as against (6.93, 6.57 and 7.27 t/ha) that obtained in

farmers plot at reach I, II and III. Higher additional income of Rs.1913, 2280 and 2111

was obtained at reach I, II and III, respectively.

1.9.2 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in groundnut

At Karimnagar this trial was demonstrated in 28 farmers plots for a period of four

years. Excessive irrigations in groundnut were found to increase the vegetative growth,

which effects the peg penetration. Water saved with 15 days interval irrigation was found

to range between 86 to 106 mm (Table – 3 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). Significant higher pod

yield (1548, 1484 and 1818 kg/ha at upper, middle and lower reaches, respectively) was

recorded in demonstration plots compared to the farmers‟ plots (1424, 1339 and 1679

kg/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively). An additional income of Rs.3052, 2907 and

2521 was recorded at lower, upper and middle reaches, respectively.

A total of 12 demonstrations were conducted at Warangal. The average quantity

of water saved in the demonstration plots over that of farmer‟s practice was 100 mm

(Table – 4(Annex.V-Vol-II)). The water saved is coupled with significantly higher yields

and net returns(2.73 t/ha and 23536 Rs/ha) at reach II. The average WUE was higher in

demonstration plots (9.75Kg/ha-mm). The average additional income in demonstration

plots over farmers‟ practice was Rs.5065/ha.

1.9.3 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in blackgram

A total of 35 demonstrations (Karimnagar) were conducted at all the three reaches for

five years. Blackgram grown with four irrigations saved water up to 125 mm (Table –

5(Annex.V-Vol-II)) compared to that of farmer‟s plot where 7-8 irrigations were given.

WUE has also increased in trial plots due to reduction in the water applied and significant

29

increase in yields (1163 and 1447 kg/ha at reaches II and III) in trial plots than that of

farmers plots (1056 and 1333 kg/ha at reach I and III, respectively). There was no

significant difference in the cost of cultivation, thus additional yields in the trial plots was

mainly attributed to higher net returns.

1.9.4 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in pigeonpea

At Karimnagar this trial was demonstrated in 5 farmers fields for a period of

Three years. Significant difference was recorded in the total quantity of water applied

between trial plot and farmer plot. Water saved was 118 mm (Table 6(Annex.V-Vol-II)) in

the trial plot. Significant difference was not observed in yield, cost of cultivation, net

returns etc. because of heavy infestation of heliothis and indiscriminate spray of

pesticides in reach III and I. However, significant yield differences were observed in

reach II (1725 kg/ha) as compared to farmers practice (1592 kg/ ha).

1.9.5 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in cotton

This trial was conducted in 13 farmers fields only for one year during 2001-02 at

three reaches. Water saving of 80-90 mm (Table 7(Annex.V-Vol-II)) was observed.

1.9.6 Evaluation of irrigation methods in chilli

Farmers irrigate Chilli by flat bed resulting in heavy loss of water with low WUE.

The quantity of water saved in the 34 demonstration plots conducted at Warangal over

farmers‟ practice was 50 mm. Furrow method of irrigation gave significantly higher

yields at reach I and reach II (2.5 t/h and 3.76 t/ha) but not at reach III. The net returns

were significantly higher in reach I( Rs 51984 / ha) (Table-8 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). The WUE

was higher in all the three reaches. The additional income over farmers‟ practice was Rs.

9641/ha, Rs.10367/ha and Rs.14010 /ha at reaches I, II and III, respectively, which was

significant at reach I only.

1.9.7 Evaluation of irrigation methods in maize

Maize is sensitive to water logging. Maize irrigated through flat bed method was

frequently subjected to water logging resulting in low yields. Hence, farmers were

encouraged to irrigate maize by ridge and furrow method. Maize crop was irrigated

through ridge and furrow method in 16 demonstrations at Warangal recorded significantly

higher yields than the farmers‟ practice in all the reaches (5.2,5.56and 5.06 t/ha as against

farmers practice 4.78, 5.25 and 4.87 t/ha). The water use efficiency was higher in all the

three reaches. There was saving of 50mm water in the demonstration plots. The net

returns were significantly higher in reach I and reach II (Table-9 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). The

additional income over the farmers‟ practice was Rs.3613/ha, Rs.2,536/ha and

Rs.1,611/ha at reaches I,II and III, respectively.

1.9.8 Evaluation of irrigation methods in cotton

Excess irrigation in cotton leads to prolonged flowering and boll development and

water loss in the form of evaporation. Therefore 29 demonstrations were conducted on

evaluation of irrigation method in cotton at all the three reaches. Irrigation through

30

furrows gave significantly higher yields (2.85,2.69 and 2.61 t/ha) and net returns (Rs

41969,33716 and 35257 / ha) at all the three reaches. There was saving of 180 mm of

water in the demonstration plots. The WUE was higher in all the three reaches (Table-10

(Annex.V-Vol-II)). An additional income over the farmer‟s practice was Rs.4303 /ha,

Rs.7754/ha and Rs.7705/ha at reaches I, II and III, respectively.

1.9.9 Evaluation of irrigation methods in groundnut

Groundnut being a close spaced crop, check basin method of irrigation was

introduced (Warangal). This ensures uniform distribution of water and avoids excess

irrigations. Water is not uniformly distributed in flood irrigation due to lager plot size in

command area. The quantity of water saved in 12 demonstration plots taken up at

Warangal over that of farmers‟ practice was 50 mm. The water saved was coupled with

significantly higher yields (2.61 t/ha) and net returns (Rs 22094/ha) in reach II. (Table-

11(Annex.V-Vol-II)) The water use efficiency was higher in the demonstration plot (9.08

kg/ha-mm). The additional income over farmers‟ practice was Rs.4,718/ha at reach II.

A total of 3 demonstrations were conducted during 2002-2003 at reach II and III

in Karimnagar. Check basin and border strip methods of irrigation were found better as

compared to flooding method (farmer practice) of irrigation in terms of yields (Table –

12(Annex.V-Vol-II)). Yields and cost of cultivation were almost same in check basin and

border strip method of irrigation but for minor variation in water saved. It was more in

check basin method of irrigation (68, 49 mm at reach II and reach III, respectively

(Karimnagar)) compared to farmer practice and border strip method of irrigation.

1.9.10 Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton

This trial was conducted at Karimnagar for three years in lower reach only. The

total number of demonstrations conducted was three. Significant yield increase (3.35

t/ha) was recorded in the plots where drip irrigation system was formed compared to

farmer plot (2.4 t/ha), where flat bed method of irrigation was adopted (Table 13

(Annex.V-Vol-II)). The higher yields can be attributed to more number of bolls, larger size

of the boll and higher lint yield per boll. Cost of cultivation did not register significant

difference because the depreciation and maintenance costs were included

1.9.11 Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut

This trial was conducted for one year at lower reach in Karimnagar. Sprinkler

method of irrigation in groundnut was found to save water to the extent of 149 mm

(Table -14 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) over the farmers plot where flooding method of irrigation

was adopted. The water-use efficiency was also more in trial plot (4.58) compared to the

farmer plot (2.74). Higher yields were observed in trial plot (1.73 t/ha) as against (1.45

t/ha) that in farmers plot. Higher yields were done to higher pod number and

comparatively more pod weight.

In single demonstration conducted at Warangal through sprinkler method of

irrigation quantity of irrigation water saved was 130 mm (Table-15 (Annex.V-Vol-II))

and higher WUE (8.99Kg/ha-mm) was recorded in trial plot compared to farmers practice

31

(6.71 Kg/ha/mm). There was 6.38% increase in yield with an additional income of

Rs.2450/ha.

1.9.12 Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton

It was conducted at Karimnagar for three years in lower reach only. The total

number of demonstrations conducted was three. Significant yield increase was recorded

in the plots where drip irrigation system was installed (12 t/ha) compared to farmer plot

where flat bed method of irrigation was adopted (Table –13(Annex.V-Vol-II)). The

higher yields can be attributed to more number of bolls, larger size of the boll and higher

lint yield per boll. Cost of cultivation did not register significant difference because

depreciation and maintenance costs were included

1.9.13 Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut

This trial was conducted for one year at lower reach in Karimnagar and Warangal.

Sprinkler method of irrigation in groundnut was found to save water to the extent of 149

mm in Karimnagar (Table -14 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) and 130 mm at Warangal (Table-15

(Annex.V-Vol-II)) over the farmer plot where flooding method of irrigation was adopted.

The water-use efficiency was also more in trial plot (4.58) compared to the farmer plot

(2.74). Higher yields were recorded in trial plot (1.73 t/ha) as against 1.45 t/ha that

obtained in farmers plot. At Warangal, there was 6.38% increase in yield with additional

income of Rs.2450/ha.

1.9.14 Demonstration of drip irrigation system in chilli

Drip in Chillies was demonstrated during the year 2003-2004 at lower reach

(Karimnagar). Drip irrigation system installed in chillies was found to increase the yields

(33%) to the extent of 3 t/ha (Table-16 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) . The cost of cultivation in trial

plot was higher than control plot as the depreciation and maintenance costs were

included. In drip-irrigated plot 186 mm of water was saved over farmers practice of flat

bed method of irrigation.

1.9.15 Demonstration of Intermittent Irrigation Schedules in Paddy

In order to save the water in paddy intermittent irrigation schedules were

demonstrated in 25 farmer‟s fields for three years at all the three reaches in Karimnagar.

The quantity of water saved ranged between 250-350 mm (Table-17 (Annex.V-Vol-II)))

in trial plots compared to the farmer‟s plots. There was not much difference in the yields

at all the three reaches (5.51-6.04 t/ha). Water use efficiency was higher in 24 and 48

hours after disappearance of irrigation water compared to the farmers' practice of

continuous maintenance of 5 cm depth of water.

1.9.16 Demonstration of direct seeding in rice

This demonstration was included to prevent the transplantation of over aged

seedlings in case of late release of water in the canal or delayed rains. A total of 18

demonstrations during kharif and 30 during rabi were conducted at all the reaches for

32

three years at Karimnagar. Yield, net returns and gross returns were not significant.

Significant difference was recorded in cost of cultivation due to reduced cost of

cultivation on transplanting. Additional income recorded ranged between Rs.1848 to

3385/ha (Table 18 & 19 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). At Warangal this trial was conducted with

BPT-5204 and yield recorded in direct seeding was 6.2 t/ha, which was on par with the

yield obtained by transplanted rice (Table-20 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). This technology has

reduced the cost of cultivation by Rs. 1000 - 1500 per hectare and duration of the crop by

8-10 days.

1.9.17 Evaluation of cotton based cropping systems

Farmers generally harvest cotton crop in the month of March, which coincides

with pink bollworm infestation. Hence it is suggested to harvest the crop in the month of

January and grow vegetables. A total of 22 trials were conducted in Warangal with

sequence cropping of different vegetables after cotton.

Cotton-bendi cropping system gave significantly higher yields and net returns in

reach I (4.84 t/ha and Rs. 54,839/ha) and II (4.73 t/ha and Rs.41035/ha) compared to

cotton- fallow ((Table-27 (Annex.V).

Cotton- ridgegourd cropping system recorded significantly higher yields and net

returns in reach I (5.27 t/ha and Rs.52023 /ha) and reach II(4.86 t/ha and Rs. 37812 /ha)

(Table-28 (Annex.V) ) compared to cotton-fallow ( Reach I: 2.83 t/ha and Rs. 33013/ha

and Reach II: 3.93 t/ha and Rs.19848 /ha).

Cotton- bitter gourd cropping system gave significantly higher yields and net returns

in reach I (4.81 t/ha and Rs.50738 /ha) compared to cotton-fallow. (2.45 t/ha and,

Rs.17389 /ha) (Table-30 (Annex.V)).

Cotton-cluster bean cropping system gave significantly higher yields (5.02 t/ha) and

net returns (Rs. 55141/ha) as compared to cotton-fallow (2.97 t/ha and Rs. 30887 /ha)

(Table- 31(Annex.V).

1.9.18 Maize based cropping systems

Among the five demonstrations conducted in Warangal, Maize- groundnut

cropping system gave significantly higher net returns (Rs.34022 /ha) than maize-maize

cropping system (Rs.26577/ha) (Table-32 (Annex.V)). At Karimnagar, vegetable was

introduced as third crop to increase the income of farmer (Table-25 (Annex.V)). A total

of 18 demonstrations were conducted for three years at all the three reaches. In maize-

groundnut– bhendi cropping system, the maize equivalent yield obtained was 17400,

15835 and 16853 kg/ha as against 6710, 7440 and 7933 kg/ha in maize – groundnut

cropping system adopted in farmer plots at reach I, II and III respectively. The cost of

cultivation was higher in trial plots, compensated by the higher gross returns. Vegetable

cultivation has generated work for the agricultural labour in summer. An additional

income of Rs. 42291, 28838 and 31400 was generated in trial plots over the farmer plots.

Cultivation of greengram in summer was demonstrated in 25 trials where cultivation of

33

vegetable is not feasible. This cropping system has recorded a maize grain equivalent

yield of 8960, 9650 and 10043 kg/ha (Table-24 (Annex.V) in trial plots, which was

significantly higher than that of farmers plots. In trial plots, 31.4, 30.8 and 31.6 percent

increase in yield was observed over farmers practice. An additional income of Rs.9089

and 8921 /ha was recorded at reach II and III, respectively over farmers practice.

1.9.19 Chilli based cropping systems

1.9.20

At Warangal, Chilli-bhendi and chilli-ridgegoud cropping system gave

significantly higher yields (4.0 t/ha and 3.87t/ha) than sole chilli (2.45 t/ha) as practiced

by farmers (Table-34 & 35(Annex.V)).

1.9.20 Greengram based cropping systems

A total of 42 demonstrations were conducted for four years at all the three

reaches in Karimnagar on greengram based cropping system. Introduction of cultivation

of vegetables in greengram based cropping system has increased the yields (Table-26

(Annex.V)) by 177, 173 and 174 percent over over that of farmers practice (greengram-

maize) at reach I, II & III, respectively. An additional income over farmer practice was

Rs. 38744, 30653 & 33613 at reach I, II & III, respectively attributed mainly to the

income of vegetable crop.

In case of the farmers who cannot cope with the intensive labour required in the

cropping system where vegetable is involved, summer greengram crop was suggested.

Cultivation of summer crop facilitates the conjunctive use of canal and well water. In this

cropping system the greengram equivalent yields recorded in the trial plots was 2835,

2775 and 3005 kg/ha (Table-23 (Annex.V)), which was significantly higher than the

farmers plot yields.

1.9.21 Rice based cropping systems

1.9.22

In rice based cropping systems tested in Warangal, rice-bhendi recorded higher

rice equivalent yield (15.27 t/ha) and net returns (Rs 52078/ha) as compared with other

systems (Table 37).

1.9.23 Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize

Farmers in the command area are accustomed to the practice of application of higher

doses of nitrogenous fertilizers, especially complex fertilizers. Farmers also apply

phosphorus as top dressing and many of the farmers do not apply potassic fertilizers. To

correct these anomalies this trial was formulated and demonstrated. A total of 12

demonstrations during kharif and 12 during rabi were conducted for two years at

Karimnagar. The results of the demonstration indicate that there was no significant

difference in the yields (Table-38 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) between demonstration practice and

farmers practice. The cost of cultivation was reduced which reflected in the additional

income over the farmers practice.

34

1.9.23 Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy

In paddy higher doses of fertilizers are applied anticipating higher yields without

caring for the soil health. A trial on recommended doses of fertilizers was conducted on

the farmer‟s field and it illustrated that higher yields cannot be obtained with heavy

inorganic fertilization. A total of 12 demonstrations during kharif and 12 during rabi were

conducted for two years at Karimnagar. The yield data (Table-39 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) of

the trial also reveals the same results.

1.9.24 Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton

During the year 2001-2002 there was heavy infestation of Heliothis and other

pests on cotton, devastating the crop completely. Farmers have incurred heavy losses on

this crop. To educate the farmers on indiscriminate use of pesticides 15 demonstrations

were conducted at Karimnagar on IPM in cotton. As a part of the integrated pest

management, stem application of nuvacron, growing of trap crops, light traps, bird

perches, NPV spraying etc were demonstrated. The results (Table-40 (Annex.V-Vol-II))

indicate a significant decrease in the cost of cultivation reflecting positively on the net

returns. An additional income of Rs.7544 /ha and Rs.8718 /ha and Rs.9600/ha were

obtained at reach I, II and III, respectively. At Warangal, 87 demonstrations were

conducted at reach I, II and III during the period of 1999-2003 (Table-41(Annex.V-Vol-

II)). Adoption of IPM traits in cotton recorded significantly higher yields (2.84, 2.55 and

2.58 t/ha) at all 3 reaches in demonstration plots compared to farmers‟ practice. The net

returns recorded were also significantly higher ( Rs 37431, 30049 and 29273/ha) than

farmers‟ practice at reach II and III. By adoption of IPM practices, there was reduction in

cost of cultivation from Rs 2489 to 3084/ha. The percentage increase in yield over

farmers‟ practice was 7.57, 9.64 and 8.81 per cent at reach I, II and III respectively. The

additional income over farmers‟ practice was Rs.7,017/ha, Rs.7,377/ha and Rs.8,318/ha at

reach I, II and III respectively.

1.9.25 Integrated pest management for BPH in rice

Brown Plant Hopper is one of the major pests in rice. To protect from BPH, IPM traits

were developed. Adoption of integrated pest management traits comprising of leaving of

30 cm alleys after every 2m and need based plant protection measures recorded higher

yields. At Warangal 17 demonstration plots recorded significantly higher yields and net

returns at all the three reaches. The percentage increase in yield over farmer‟s practice

was 7.43, 5.63 and 6.34 per cent at reach I, II and III respectively (Table-42 (Annex.V-

Vol-II)). The additional income over the farmers‟ practice was Rs.3,210/ha, Rs.3,396/ha

and Rs.3,041/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively. The provision of alleyways has

facilitated good aeration and exposure to sunlight thus decreasing the pest incidence. It

has also facilitated to take up plant protection measures and even distribution of fertilizers

during top dressing. This technology is being widely adopted by most of the farmers.

1.9.26 Demonstration of production technology in greengram during kharif

Demonstrations on production technology in greengram during kharif were

conducted for five years at all the three reaches in 78 plots at Karimnagar (Table-44

35

(Annex.V-Vol-II)). Increase in the yields though statistically not significant, higher net

returns were recorded in trial plots compared to farmers practice at all three reaches as

farmers generally grow local varieties which are not resistant to YMV and they do not

adopt line sowing and chemical weed control (Pendimethalin @) 1.0 kg a.i. /ha). An

additional income of Rs.4548, 4423 and 3986/ha. was obtained at reach I, II and III,

respectively.

1.9.27 Demonstration of production technology in Redgram during rabi

Production technology in redgram was demonstrated in 16 farmers plots for three

years at reach I, II and III at Karimnagar (Table-45 (Annex.V)). The average yields in

trial plot were 1435 kg/ha at reach I followed by 1369 kg/ha at reach II and 1698 kg/ha at

reach III, which were significantly higher than the yields in farmers plots (923, 929 and

1153 kg/ha at reach I, II and III respectively). Increase in yield in trial plots over farmers‟

plots was 55, 47 and 47 per cent at upper, middle and lower reaches, respectively. The

increased yields was done to cultivation of medium, short duration varieties like LRG-30,

application of weedicide i.e. Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha, application of recommended doses

of fertilizers. On the other hand, the farmers cultivate local varieties with no chemical

weed control. Though significant difference was not recorded in the cost of cultivation,

significantly higher gross and net returns were recorded in demonstration plot due to

significant increase in yield.

1.9.28 Demonstration of production technology in blackgram during rabi

A total of 48 demonstrations on production technology in blackgram for four

years at all three reaches were taken up at Karimnagar. Cultivation of high yielding

varieties like LBG 20, adoption of chemical weed control, application of recommended

doses of fertilizers, line sowing and effective control of powdery mildew resulted in

increased yields in trial plots over that of farmers practice. The increase (Table-46

(Annex.V)) in yield was 40 percent at lower reach, 32 percent at middle reach and 36

percent at upper reach, which was significantly higher (1289, 1341 and 1507 kg/ha) over

the farmers plots. The additional income recorded in trial plots was Rs.7342/ha at lower,

Rs. 5918 at middle and Rs.6049 at upper reaches over that of farmers practice.

1.9.29 Demonstration of production technology in groundnut

Increased yields were obtained in trial plots by adoption of recommended

production technology in groundnut. A total of 21 demonstration during kharif and 28

during rabi were conducted for four years at Karimnagar. The percent increase in yield

was (Table-47 (Annex.V)) 44% at reach I, 42 % at reach II and 52 % at reach III in trial

plots as compared to that of farmers plots. The additional returns obtained in trial plots

were Rs.6520/-, 7041/- and 9301/ha. at I, II and III reaches, respectively. The increase in

yield can be attributed to adoption of chemical weed control with Alachlor @1.0 kg

a.i/ha, seed treatment with Dithane M-45 @ 3 g / kg seed, maintenance optimum plant

population( 44 plants per sq.m by adopting a spacing of 30 x 7.5 cm), application of

gypsum @ 500 kg/ha and effective management of pest and diseases on the other hand,

36

the farmers do not adopt chemical weed control, seed treatment, application of gypsum

and optimum plant population.

1.9.30 Demonstration of production technology in maize

Demonstration of production technology in maize during rabi was conducted at

upper and lower reaches in 28 farmers plots during 1998-99 and 1999-00 at Karimnagar.

Application of weedicide, growing of Hybrids, irrigations through ridge and furrow and

good nutrient management resulted in increased yields (Table-48 & 49 (Annex.V)) in trial

plots at all the reaches. The average yield increase was 10% at upper reach and 11% at

lower reach. The average additional income recorded in trial plots over the farmer‟s plot

was Rs.4029/ha and Rs.3202/ha at lower and upper reaches, respectively. .In Warangal,

significant higher yield (4.63, 5.59 and 5.05 t/ha at 3 reaches) was recorded over farmers

practice .The net returns were significantly higher at reach II and III only.

1.9.31 Demonstration of production technology in rice

Application of excess amount of nitrogenous fertilizers beyond the panicle

initiation stage, without use of organic fertilizers was one of the major problems in rice.

Hence, the farmers were educated regarding the importance of green manuring along with

recommended dose of inorganic fertilizers. In kharif, 75 demonstration plots organized

indicates significantly higher yields (Table-50 (Annex.V)) at reach I and III and net

returns in all the three reaches. The increase in yield over farmers‟ practice was 6.44, 7.28

and 5.99 percent at reach I, II and III respectively. The additional income over farmers‟

practice was Rs. 3,294/ha, Rs. 4,292/ha and Rs.3,0081 /ha. at reach I, II and III,

respectively. This practice increased the yield and reduced the cost on fertilizers.

In rabi (Table-51 Annex.V)), 11 demonstration plots recorded significantly higher

yields and net returns in reach II. The net returns in reach II (Rs. 23,350/ha) were

significantly higher over farmers‟ practice (Rs.19,816/ha) .The increase in yield over

farmers‟ practice was 7.3, 6.5 and 9.4 percent at reach I, II and III respectively.

Adoption of recommended production technology in paddy recorded significantly

higher yields in trial plots over the farmers plots. The percentage increase in yield over

farmer practice was 11.2, 11.9 and 12.5 percent at reach I, II and III, respectively. The

additional income over farmer practice was Rs.2078, 2272 and 2810/ha. at reach I,II and

III respectively.

1.9.32 Demonstration of production technology in cotton

Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides is one of the major problem in

cotton. Due to excess application of inorganic fertilizers there is antagonistic effect on

micro nutrient uptake and the crop is susceptible to pests and diseases. Due to excess use

of pesticides, some insects have developed resistance to pesticides. Therefore farmers

were educated on the deleterious effect of excess use of fertilizers. Application of

recommended dose (N150P60K40 kg/ha) and application of fertilizer split and adopting

recommended cost effective and eco friendly IPM traits (growing trap crops, pest

monitoring through pheromone traps, stem brushing of monocrotophos, application of

37

neem kernel extract, etc) with need based pesticide sprayings gave significantly higher

yields (2.81, 2.61 and 2.54 t/ha) and net returns ( Rs 40442, 29876 and 34591/ha) in all

the three reaches (Table-52 (Annex.V)). A total of 107 demonstrations were conducted in

Warangal. The yields were higher by 9, 8 and 11 percent in recommended technology at

reach I, II and III respectively. The average additional income over the farmers‟ practice

was Rs.7, 418/ha, Rs.7,521/ha and Rs.9,914 /ha at reach I, II and III respectively.

1.9.33 Demonstration of production technology in chilli

Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides is major problem in chilly. Due to

excess application of inorganic fertilizers, there is antagonistic effect on micro nutrient

uptake and the crop is susceptible to pests (thrips and mites) and diseases. To educate the

farmers on the deleterious effect of excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides 46 trials

were conducted for two years at Warangal. Application of recommended doses of

fertilizers (N200P60K80 kg/ha and gypsum 500 kg/ha and micronutrient sprays in winter

season) with recommended splits supplemented by IPM traits (growing trap crops, pest

monitoring through pheromone traps, application of neem kernel extract, etc) and need

based pesticide sprayings gave significantly higher yields( 2.68 and 2.88 t/ha) as

compared to farmers practice at reach I and reach III. The net returns obtained in

demonstration plots were significantly higher than farmers‟ practice at reach II and III

(Table-53 (Annex.V)). The average additional income over the farmer‟s practice was

Rs.17,015/ha, Rs.10,732/ha and Rs.10,117/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively.

1.9.34 Demonstration on production technology in turmeric

Application of higher doses of fertilizers, top dressing with complex fertilizers,

non-adoption of crop rotation, no rhizome treatment, indiscriminate pesticide application

are some of the major problems in turmeric cultivation. Therefore, 21 trials in farmers

fields were conducted at Warangal. Application of recommended doses of fertilizers

(N190P75K125 kg/ha), rhizome treatment with carbendazim/mancozeb, use of high yielding

variety (Duggirala red) in place of local variety, crop rotation with summer

pulses/vegetables to reduce the soil borne inoculums and need based sprayings to control

leaf spot recorded significantly higher yield (Table-54 (Annex.V)) at three reaches ( 2.03,

2.90 and 2.2 t/ha) which are 9.72%, 10.69% and 9.88% higher than farmers practice at

reach I, II and III, respectively. The additional income over the farmers‟ practice was Rs.

2,970/ha, Rs.10,261/ha and Rs.5307/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively . In the year

2000-2001 there was heavy reduction in the yield due to severe incidence of leaf blotch

and rhizome rot diseases.

1.9.35 Demonstration of chemical weed control in blackgram

In black gram, weed control trial was conducted at all the three reaches in 52

farmers plots for five years in Karimnagar. The results indicate significantly higher yields

in trial plots in reach III only (1512 kg/ha) over the farmer plots (Table-56 (Annex.V-

Vol-II)). The yield increase over farmers plot was 25.2, 27.7 and 29.1 percent at reach I,

38

II & III respectively. The additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.4287,

5434/- and 6665 at reach I, II and III respectively.

1.9.36 Demonstration of chemical weed control in groundnut (kharif and rabi)

A Total of 38 demonstrations during rabi and 7 demonstrations during kharif were

conducted for all the three years at all the reaches in Karimnagar. Significantly higher

yields (1750, 1643 and 2096 kg/ha) were recorded in the trial plots compared to the

farmer plots. There was 44.9, 21.03 and 31.30 (Table-57 (Annex.V percent increase in

yield over farmers plot at reach I, II and III respectively. Significant increase in the gross

and net returns coupled with significant reduction in cost of cultivation contributed to the

additional income over farmers plot to the extent of Rs.8630/-at reach I, Rs.4466/- at

reach II and Rs.7520/- at reach III.

1.9.37 Demonstration of chemical weed control in paddy (kharif and rabi)

Application of butachlor in paddy for control of weeds was found to be effective in

increasing the yields and reducing the cost of cultivation. A total of 71 demonstrations in

Kharif and 58 demonstrations in rabi were conducted at Karimnagar (Table-58

(Annex.V)). Higher yields were recorded in trial plots ( 4675, 4500 and 4870 kg/ha)

compared to the farmer‟s plot. An additional income in the trial plot over the farmers plot

were in the range of Rs 3532 – 4146/ha. At Warangal, on an average of 5330, 5505, 5960

kg/ha (Table-59(Annex.V)) of yield was recorded in trial plots as against 4870, 5095,

5600 kg/ha in farmers plot at reach I, II and III respectively.

1.9.38 Demonstration of chemical weed control in pigeonpea

A Total of 8 demonstrations were conducted at all the three reaches at

Karimnagar. The trial plots yields were in the range of 1490 to 1635 kg/ha at 3 reaches..

Application of pendimethalin @ 1.0kg a.i/ha recorded an additional income of Rs.6055/-

at reach I, Rs.3093/- at reach II and Rs.3920/- at reach III (Table-60 (Annex.V)). The

percent increase of grain yield was in the range of 13 to 32.

1.9.39 Demonstration of chemical weed control in greengram

Weed control using chemical was tested at all the three reaches for two years i.e

rabi 2000-01 and 2001-02 (22 demonstrations were conducted). Increased yields were

recorded in trial plot (845, 590 and 660 kg/ha) over the farmer‟s plot. The additional

income over the farmers practice was Rs.2152/-,1521/- and 1436/- per hectare (Table-

61(Annex.V)) at reach I,II and III respectively.

1.9.40 Demonstration of chemical weed control in maize

Weed infestation in the early stages of the crop growth was a major problem in the

maize crop. Manual weeding is costly, labour intensive and time consuming, application

of weedicide is congenial in situations where labour is scarce and costly. Application of

Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha as pre emergence spray followed by intercultivation at 30-35

DAS was tested at all the three reaches for three years during kharif in 84 and during rabi

39

in 79 demonstration plots at Karimnagar (Table-62 & 63(Annex.V)). Yield in trial plots

was to the tune of 4857, 5173 and 5623 kg/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively. An

additional income of Rs 2040/-, 3310/- and 3858/- was recorded at reach I, II and III,

respectively. During rabi, the cost of cultivation also reduced significantly in trial plots

over the farmers plot. Significant increase in net returns and significant reduction in cost

of cultivation has contributed to an additional income of Rs. 3662, 4177 and 3760/- at

reach I, II and III, respectively.

At Warangal, 13 demonstrations recorded significantly higher yields (5.37 and

5.05 t/ha) as well as net returns in reach II and reach III. The increase in yield (Table-64

(Annex.V)) was 4.5%, 8.8% and 5.6% at reach I, II and III respectively. On an average

Rs. 300-500/ha were reduced on weeding by application of herbicide.

1.9.41 Introduction of new varieties in paddy during kharif

New variety (JGL-1798) in paddy has recorded a yield of 4445, 4265 and 5718

kg/ha (Table-65 (Annex.V)) as against the local variety IR 64 or Vijetha (3985, 4190 and

5070 kg/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively) in 49 demonstrations conducted at

Karimnagar. The cost of cultivation was almost same in both the trial and farmer plots as

the practices adopted were almost same. An additional income of Rs. 5247, 4642 and

6086/- was recorded at reach I, II and III, respectively, which can be mainly attributed to

higher yields .In Warangal, JGL 384, JGL 1798 and WGL 14 during kharif recorded

significantly higher yield (6.38, 5.42 and 5.88 t/ha at 3 reaches; 5.82 and 6.07 t/ha at

reach I and II; 6.37 and 6.08 t/ha at reach I and II, respectively) as against local varieties

(BPT 5204 and Surekha). The farmers prefer fine grain varieties with higher yields.

1.9.42 Introduction of new varieties in paddy during rabi

Introduction and performance of new varieties in Paddy (JGL-1798, WGL-14)

was tested for 3 years at all three reaches. The average percent increase in yield in trial

plots when compared with that of farmers practice was 17.56,18.27 and 17.63at 3 reaches

respectively (Table-67 (Annex.V)). The farmers are preferring fine grain varieties with

higher yields. In warangal, (WGL 14377) recorded significantly higher yield (6.93, 5.78

and 6.48 t/ha at 3 reaches which was superior over Erramallelu. This culture matures in

100 days and suitable for tail end areas in the command.

1.9.43 Introduction of summer greengram

The average grain yield recorded was 1200 kg/ha. Net returns of Rs. 17300/ha

was recorded (Table-71(Annex.V)) with greengram as summer crop.

1.9.44 Demonstration of newly released varieties in groundnut

In groundnut, new varieties JL 24 and TG 26 were introduced. These varieties

produced higher yields (3046 and 3220 kg/ha) when compared with local. (Table-70

(Annex.V)).

40

SRBC

I. Methodology

1.1 Site :

1.2 Under the Maddur major distributory (Block-IV), three representative villages

Konidedu from upper reach, Bhupanapadu under middle reach and Maddur at lower reach

( tail end ) were selected for carrying out the envisaged programme. At each reach 40 ha

area was selected on either side of the canal for conducting demonstration trails.

1.1.1 Reach-I (Konidedu)

The major crops grown are rice, cotton, redgram, sorghum as sole crops and rice

– rice as double crop under bore wells. Farming situation is mainly deep black soils with

bore well irrigation.

1.1.2 Reach –II (Bhupanapadu)

The major crops grown are mungari and American cotton, chickpea and sunflower

as rainfed or as under tankfed irrigation. Though there is possibility for double cropping

under rainfed conditions, farmers were growing single crop. The farming situation is

mainly light black soils with tankfed irrigation.

1.1.3 Reach-III (Maddur )

Farmers are growing post rainy season chickpea and coriander under stored soil

moisture keeping the land fallow during kharif. The farming situation is completely rain

dependent deep black soils.

1.2 Soil type:

The soil samples collected at Konidedu village (upper reach) were subjected to

profile analysis and the results are furnished in table N:1. In general, the depth of soils

ranges from extremely shallow (10-25) to very deep (>150 cm). Most of the soils in the

district are moderately deep (75-100cm) to deep (100-150 cm) .The soils are nearly

leveled to gentle slope. The available water holding capacity of most of the soils in the

district are in the range of 100-200 mm/m depth of soil. The soils are calcareous in nature

ranging from slight to moderate. In general, nutrient status of the soils was low in

available nitrogen, available phosphorous and medium in available potassium.

1.3Climate:

During five years of study, (1999-2000 to 2003-04) only in 2000-01 and 2001-02,

26 % and 36 % excess rainfall was received as compared to decennial mean was received

. In remaining three years, the crops were severely affected due to drought conditions.

41

An amount of 29 %, 33% and 32 % deficit rainfall was recorded during 1999-2000, 2002-

03 and 2003 –04 respectively compared to decennial mean (Table N 2).

During 1999-2000, 2002-03 and 2003-04 cotton, sunflower and chickpea were

severely affected by drought conditions. During 2000-01 heavy rainfall during the month

of August (252.6mm) resulted inundation of cotton crop. Farmers puddle the cotton crop

and planted rice crop. However, the performance of rabi chick pea, mustard and

sunflower was satisfactory. In 2001-2002 due to late onset of monsoon, the paddy crop

was transplanted late with aged seedlings. The second crop after rice could not be taken

up due to poor recharge of bore wells at upper reach.

1.3 Technical programme of work

Before the initiation of the programme , bench mark survey of the selected

villages of three reaches was conducted and production constraints of crops and cropping

systems were identified. Based on these production constraints, technical programme of

work was formulated (Tables N 3,4 and 5).

1.4.1 Station Trials

Since scientific data is not available on water management in vertisols, keeping

in view the release of water in SRBC, four station trials were planned to generate

information pertaining to irrigation so that as and when water is released, the results

obtained can be transferred and demonstrated in the farmers fields at different reaches

under Block-IV of SRBC.

1.4.1.1 Water management studies in cotton

i) Treatments : 6

1. Methods of irrigation:3

a.Ridge and furrow irrigation

b.Skip furrow irrigation (Fixed furrows)

c.Alternate furrow irrigation

2. Scheduling of irrigation

a IW/CPE ratio of 0.6 and

b. IW/CPE ratio of 0.8

ii) Design : FRBD

iii) Replications : 4

iv) Plot size : 6.3 m x 5.4 m

v) Fertilizers applied : 120 N ; 60 P2O5 ; 60 K2O kg ha-1

vii) Variety : NHH- 44

1.4.1.2. Water management studies in rabi sunflower

i)Treatments : 9

42

Irrigation schedules :3

1.IW/CPE -0.6

2. IW/CPE -0.8

3.Critical stages (Budding, flowering and seed filling)

Methods of irrigation:3

1.Ridge and furrow

2.Alternate furrow

3.Skip furrow

ii) Design : F RBD


iv) Plot size : 6 m x 6 m

v) Fertilizers : 75-90-30 N,P2O5 and K2O kg ha-1

vi) Spacing : 60 cm x 30 cm

vii) Variety : KBSH-1

1.4.1.3 Drip irrigation system in Cotton

i)Treatments : Main : Irrigation interval

a: Daily

b: Once in two days

c: Once in three days

Subplot :Application rates

a: 1 l/hr b: 2 l /hr c. 4 l/hr

ii) Design :Split plot


iv) Plot size : 40 m2

v) Fertilizers applied : 120 N ; 60 P2O5 ; 60 K2O kg / ha

vi) Spacing : 90 cm x 60 cm

vii) Variety : NHH-44

1.4.1.4 Drip irrigation system in tomato

i)Treatments : 5

a. 1 l/hr ;

b. 2 l/hr;

c. 4 l/hr ;

d. Flood method

e. Furrow method

43

ii) Design : RBD


iv) Plot size : 7.65m x 4.2 m

v) Fertilizers applied : 120 N ; 60 P2O5 ; 60 K2O kg / ha

vi) Spacing : 60cm x 45 cm

vii) Variety : Pusa -Rubi

1.4.2 Demonstration Trails

At each reach on either side of canal 40 ha land at upper, middle and lower

reaches was selected for demonstration. As water is not released in the canal, the

demonstration trials were conducted under the existing conditions i.e., upper reach under

bore wells, middle reach under tankfed, rainfed and lower reach under rainfed The

technical programme of work was divided into three categories.

1.4.2.1 Group A: Research trials involving 2 to 3 treatments covering 5-10 ha at each

reach.

1.4.2.2Group B: Demonstration trials involving improved / recommended practices

comparing with farmers practice covering 10-20 ha at each reach.

1.4.2.3 Group C: Mass spread of proven technologies in large areas covering 20-30 ha. at

each reach.

Group-A (Research trials)

1. Varietal performance in rice( Kharif 2000 and 2001,rabi 2002 )

Treatments : 5

a. Local check (RNR-1446)

b. IR-64

c. Tellahamsa

d. MTU 1001

e. NDLR-8

2. Studies on rice based cropping systems (2002 and 2003)

Treatments : 4

Kharif Rabi

1.Rice Greengram

2.Rice Blackgram

3.Rice Mustard

4.Rice Sunflower

5.Rice Sorghum

3. Comparative performance of direct seeding vs transplanting (Rabi 2001-02, kharif 2002)

Treatments : 3

A) Broadcasting of sprouted seed with Butachlor application

B) Row seeding with drum seeder with Butachlor application

C) Transplanting with Butachlor application

Variety : IR-64 (rabi 2001-02) and NDLR-8 ( kharif 2002)

4. System of rice intensification (SRI) technique in rice( kharif, 2003)

Treatments :2

A) Raising rice through SRI technique

44

B) Farmers practice of raising rice

5.Varietal performance in chickpea ( 1999-03)

Treatments : 1. Local (Annegiri)

2. Swetha

3. Kranthi

4. ICCV-10

6.Sprinkler irrigation in chickpea. (2002 and 2003)

Treatments : 2

(a) Sprinkler irrigation.

(b) Rainfed crop.

Variety : ICCV-10 (normal sowing) and Annegiri (late sowing)

7.Studies on plant population in chickpea ( 2002 and 2003 )

Treatments : 2

(a) Seed rate – 80 kg ha-1

with improved seed drill

(b) Farmers practice (100 kg ha-1

)

8.Identification of suitable sorghum varieties (2002 and 2003)

Treatments : Local popular varieties (Vs) New varieties

( NJ 2401 and NTJ 2)

9. Optimum spacing for rainfed American cotton ( kharif, 2000 and kharif,2003 )

Treatments : 3 spacing

(a) 60cm x 45 cm (b) 90cm x 45 cm (c) 120 cmx 45 cm

(farmers practice)

Variety : Narasimha

10. Fertilizer management in rainfed / irrigated American cotton ( kharif, 2000 and

kharif,2003 )

Treatments : 3

Rainfed

a.Farmers practice (80 N : 60 P2O5: O K2O kg ha-1

)

b.Recommended practice (40 N :20 P2O5: 20 K2O kg ha-1

)

c.150 % of rec.dose (60 N :30 P2O5: 30 K2O kg ha-1

)

Irrigated

a.Farmers practice (180 N : 64 P2O5: 140 K2O kg ha-1

)

b.Recommended practice (120 N :60 P2O5: 60 K2O kg ha-1

)

c. 150 % of rec.dose (180 N :90 P2O5: 90 K2O kg ha-

Variety : Narasimha (rainfed) and NHH-44 (irrigated)

11. Water management for cotton (1999-03)

Treatments : 3 Hybrid :NHH-44

A) Skip furrow irrigation

B) Alternate furrow irrigation

C) Ridge and furrow irrigation

12. Studies on cotton based cropping systems ( kharif,2001)

Treatments : 3

(a) Mungari cotton sole crop

(b) Mungari cotton –Sorghum

(c) Mungari cotton –pulse crop (green gram/chickpea)

Variety : cotton –Aravinda, sorghum-NJ-2401 and chickpea-Annegiri

13. Drip irrigation chillies ( 2001) and cotton (2002)

Treatments : 2

45

(a) Drip irrigation with fertilizer application.

(b) Ridge and furrow method.

Variety : Chillies: X 235 and Cotton :NHH-44

Group„B‟ : Demonstrations

1.Varietal performance in rice ( kharif 2000-01)

Treatments : 2

1.Local check (BPT5204)

2.NDLR-8

2.Introduction of green manure crops preceding rice ( kharif,2001 and 2002 )

Treatments : 2

(a) Rice alone (b) Green manure-rice

Variety : BPT-5204

3. Demonstration of optimum plant population in rice (1999-2003 )

Treatments : 2

(a) Row planting (20 x15cm)-Kharif , 15 X 10 cm in rabi

(b) Farmers practice (24 hills /m2 –kharif , 25 hills / m

2 - rabi)

Variety : BPT-5204 (kharif) and RNR-1446 (rabi)

4. Demonstration of fertilizer management in rice (1999-2003 )

Treatments : 2

(a) Recommended fertilizer dose (kharif-160 N:80 P2O5: 80 K2O kg ha-1

Recommended fertilizer dose (rabi-120 N :60 P2O5: 60 K2O kg ha-1

)

(b) Farmers practice (300 N :170 P2O5: 75 K2O kg ha-1

)


5.Demonstration of chemical weed control in rice (1999-2003 )

Treatments : 2

(a) Pre emergence application of Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i.ha-1 +

one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting.

(b) Farmers practice of two hand weedings


6. Demonstration of IPM technology in chickpea (1999-2003 )

Treatments: Farmers practice (Vs) IPM

Components of IPM:

1. Seed treatment with Trichoderma viridae @ 5 g/kg seed.

2. Inter cropping with coriander.

3. Use of pheromone traps @ ha-1.

4. Two rounds of NPV spray

Variety : Annegiri

7. Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton (1999-2003 )

Treatments: Farmers practice (Vs) IPM

Variety : Narasimha

The following components of IPM was practiced.

1. Seed treatment with Imidachloprid

2. Inter cropping with maize (6:1)

3. Trap crop Castor around cotton

4. Monitoring the activity by placing pheromone traps

5. Erecting bird perches to facilitate the birds to feed on the caterpillars

8. Demonstration of chemical weed control in rainfed cotton( kharif,2000)

46

a) Pre emegence application of Pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg a.i.ha-1 +

intercultivation

(b)Farmers practice of intercultivation and weeding

Variety : Narasimha

9. Demonstration of improved Agricultural implements ( 2000-03)

Treatments : Threshing by machines ( Vs) Manual threshing

10. Demonstration of improved hybrid in sunflower (2000 )

Treatments: (a).Improved hybrid (MSFH-17/KBSH-1)

(b) Local hybrid

11. Demonstration of optimum spacing in sunflower (2000 )

Treatments:(a) Recommended spacing – 60 cm X30 cm

(b) Farmers practice of no thinning

Hybrid :KBSH-1

12. Demonstration of water management in sunflower (2001-03 )

Treatments: (a) Skip furrow irrigation

(b) Farmer‟s practice of ridge and furrow irrigation

Hybrid : KBSH-1

13.Demonstration of sulphur application in sunflower (2003 )

Treatments: a) Sulphur application through SSP

b) Farmers practice of complex fertilizer application

14.Demonstration of Boron application in sunflower (2003 )

Treatments: a) Boron Spray at ray floret spray

b) Control

15.Introduction of rabi redgram ( 2002 )

Treatments : 2

a. LRG 30 b. LRG 41 and c. ICPL 85063

16.Demonstration of Bio fertilizers in chickpea (20020

Treatments : 2

Rhizobium + PSB + recommended fertilzer dose (Vs) farmers

practice.

Group „C‟ : Mass spread of proven technology

1. Popularization of Narasimha variety of American cotton (2000)

2. Popularization of Aravinda variety of Mungari cotton (2000 )

3.Stem application of Monocrotophos in cotton (2000-03 )

4. Popularization of recommended production technology in rice(1999-03 )

Spacing: 20 cmx 10 cm ( kharif) and 15 cm x 10 cm ( rabi ).

Fertiliser dose: 180 N-80 P2O5 - 80 K2O ( kharif) and 120 N - 60 P2O5 and

60 K2O kg ha-1

(rabi)

Weed management: Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1

pre - emergence application +

one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting

Pest management : Integrated pest management practices

5. Popularization of production technology in cotton (1999-03)

Spacing: 90 cmx 45 cm (rainfed) and 120 cm x 60 cm (irrigated).

47

Fertilizers : 20 kg N ha-1

at seeding and 20 kg N ha-1

30 DAS + 20 kg P2O5 basal

for rainfed crop and 120 N - 60 P2O5 and 60 K2O kg ha-1

(irrigated crop)

Weed management: Hand weeding once + 2-3 harrowings.

Pest management: IPM practices followed.

6. Popularization of recommended production technology in rabi sunflower (2000-03 )

Spacing: 60 cm x 30 cm

Fertilizers: 60N- 60 P2O5 –30 K2O kg ha-1

Weed management: Hand weeding once + two harrowings.

Pest management: IPM practices

7.Popularisation of recommended production technology in Chickpea (1999-03 )

Spacing : 30 cmx10 cm. Fertilizers: 20N, 50 P2O5 kg ha-1 and IPM practices such

as intercropping of coriander, seed treatment with Trichoderma , pest monitoring

with pheromone traps and two rounds of NPV spray were followed.

8.Popularisation of recommended production technology in redgram (2003)

Recommended production technology of 10 kg ha-1

seed treated with 3 g of captan

kg-1

, 90 cm x 30 cm spacing, fertilizers dose of 20N+50 P2O kg ha-1

and IPM practices was demonstrated.

9.Popularisation of recommended production technology in sorghum (2003 )

Seed rate : 8 kg ha-1

, Spacing : 45 cm x 12 cm

Seed treatment : Seed treatment with 3 g kg-1

of captan.

Fertilizers : 60 N – 30 P2O5 – 30 k2O kg ha-1

Pest management : IPM practices

10.Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice (2002-03)

Weed management: Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1

as pre - emergence application.

The list of demonstrations conducted in different groups from 1999- 00 to 2003-

04 in different crops were presented in Appendix N–I to IX.

The abstract of all demonstrations in different groups from 1999 to 2004 was

presented in Table N 6

Table N 6: Abstract of all demonstrations in different groups from 1999 to 2004

Y

ear

Group-A Group-B Group-C Total

Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi

1999-2000 2 - 38 - - - 40

2000-2001 5 7 9 13 5 8 47

2001-2002 7 14 59 76 63 96 315

2002-2003 20 32 48 104 98 93 395

2003-2004 23 30 33 52 39 80 257

Total 57 83 187 245 205 277 1054

Trials were conducted on different crops with main emphasis on the following

aspects.

1. Evaluation of different crops and cropping systems to suit irrigation periods.

2. Identification of varieties in respect of important crops grown in the command.

3. Demonstration of recommended schedules and methods of irrigation in important

crops.

4. Demonstration of integrated weed, pest and nutrient management.

5. Demonstration of production technologies in important crops and cropping

systems.

6. The recommended production technologies were demonstrated in farmers fields in

comparison to farmers practice.

48

1.5 Economics of demonstrations

Mean data of demonstration trials were calculated and presented in tables N (12-

55). The total cost of cultivation ha-1

of crops was calculated for the individual treatments

on the basis of labour, inputs used and prevailing market prices. Gross monetary returns

were estimated by multiplying economic yields with prevailing non-seed market price of

grain. Net monetary returns were calculated by deducting cost of cultivation from gross

monetary returns for each treatment.

Benefit-cost (B:C) ratio was calculated by using the formula:

Benefit cost ratio = Gross returns (Rs. ha-1

)

Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1

)

1.6 Statistical analysis of demonstration trials

The statistical analysis was done by paired t-test. Statistical significance was

tested by „F‟ value at 0.05 level of probability. The statistical analysis was not done for

the demonstrations conducted for only one year.

1.7 Results

Under SRBC Command it was planned to release water for ID crops from

November to January. However, the water was not released in the first of the project

period, hence trails on water management for cotton and sunflower were conducted at

research farm RARS, Nandyal expecting the water to be released in the as subsequent

year the water was not released in the subsequent seasons hence trails/demonstrations

were conducted in the project site under existing conditions.

1.7.1 Station trials

1.7.1.1 Water management studies in cotton

Objectives : 1.Efficient utilization of water under limited water resources

2. To find out optimum irrigation schedule for cotton and sunflower

In both the years of study, methods of irrigation (ridge and furrow irrigation, skip

furrow irrigation and alternate furrow irrigation ) and scheduling of irrigation ( IW/CPE

ratio of 0.6 and 0.8) and their interaction did not exert any significant influence on kapas

yield (Table N 7). The skip furrow and alternate furrow methods required only 50% of

water compared to ridge and furrow method to produce similar kapas yield. Irrigation

scheduled at IW/CPE ratio of 0.6 required 20 to 25% less water to produce the same

kapas yield as that of irrigation scheduled at IW/CPE ratio of 0.8

49

1.7.1.2 Water management in sunflower

Objectives : 1.Efficient utilization of water under limited water resources

2. To find out optimum irrigation schedule for cotton and sunflower

During rabi (2001-02) 2 and 3 irrigations were given at IW/CPE of 0.6, 0.8, and

critical stages. However, during rabi 2002-03, only one irrigation at IW/CPE of 0.6 and

two irrigations at IW/CPE of 0.8 and critical stages were given. Different methods of

irrigation (ridge and furrow irrigation, skip furrow irrigation and alternate furrow

irrigation) and scheduling of irrigation (IW/CPE ratio of 0.6, 0.8 and critical stage

irrigation) and their interaction did not exert any significant influence seed yield during

both the years (Table N 8) . The skip furrow and alternate furrow methods require only

50% of water compared to ridge and furrow method to produce similar seed yield .

Drip irrigation

Due to low yielding of bore wells it is imperative to study drip irrigation for cotton

and vegetables during summer season.

Objectives : 1.Efficient and timely application of water

under limited water resources

2. To find out optimum application rate

1.7.1.3 Drip irrigation in cotton

In both the years of study, irrigation interval (daily , once in 2 days and once in 3

days) and dripper capacity ( 2 , 4 and 8 lt per hour) and their interaction did not exert any

significant influence on plant height and kapas yield of cotton ( Table N 9). It clearly

indicates that irrigation once in 3 days is sufficient to produce the same kapas yield with

66% water saving when compared to daily irrigation and 33% of water saving with once

in 2 days irrigation interval.

Dripper having capacity to deliver 1 litre of water per hour produced statistically

similar yields with dripper capacity of 2 litres per hour and 4 litres per hour with water

saving of 33% and 66% respectively in both the years of study. Drip irrigation is far

better than flat bed method in terms of yield and water saving.

1.7.1.4 Drip irrigation in tomato

During the crop growth period four irrigations were given in surface methods.

Drip irrigation was given for 50 days (alternate days) as per the treatments. In 1999-2000

different methods of irrigation did not exert any significant influence on fruit yield of

tomato. In 2000-01, drip method of irrigation with dripper capacity of 8 LPH recorded

significantly higher fruit yield compared to flat bed irrigation but it was comparable with

drippers with capacity 2 LPH, 4 LPH (Table N 10).

In both the years of study among all the methods of irrigation flat bed method

recorded the lowest fruit yield of tomato. The results indicated the dripper capacity of 2 litres

per hour is more economical as compared to 4 and 8 LPH.

50

1.7.2 Results of demonstrations conducted SRBC command ( IV block)

Group-A (Research trails)

Rice

Varietal performance in rice during kharif and rabi

Objective : To find out the performance and suitability of improved varieties of

rice in place of local varieties.

Field experiments were conducted during kharif seasons of 2000 and 2001at

upper reach of SRBC IV Block. The cultivars NDLR-8 recorded higher grain yield (7800

kg ha-1

and 6562 kg ha-1

) and additional net returns of Rs1750 ha -1

and Rs. 2639 ha-1

as

compared to BPT-5204 (7500 kg ha-1

and 6185 kg ha-1

) (Table N 11) during 2000 and

2001respectively. In addition, the NDLR-8 having tolerance to brown plant hopper and

blast disease.

Improved varieties like IR-64, Vijetha, NDLR-8, Tellahamsa, JGL-1853, were

introduced in comparison with local variety RNR-1446 during rabi, 02 (Table N 12 )..

Among all these varieties MTU-1001 (8100 kg ha-1

) and JGL-1853 (7870 kg ha-1

)

recorded higher grain yield and net returns than other varieties including RNR-1446

(local rabi variety) . Though the yield was low in NDLR-8, due to its higher price of

grain it has recorded higher net returns (Rs. 36208 ha-1

) and benefit cost ratio (3.26).

Effect of age of seedlings in rice (BPT-5204 - kharif)

Objective: To demonstrate the effect of age of seedlings on yield.

Among the different aged seedlings used for transplanting, 30-40 days old

seedlings recorded higher grain yield, but there was a slight yield reduction in yield was

observed in the crop planted with 80 days old seedlings (Table N 13 ).

Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice

Objective: To demonstrate direct seeding of rice in comparison with transplanted rice.

Direct seeding of soaked seed was done in rice with 8 row paddy seeder during

rabi 2001-02 and kharif 2002 at upper reach. Establishment of seedlings was better with

row seeder compared to broadcasting. Transplanted crop recorded higher grain yield, net

returns compared to direct seeding with row seeder and broadcasting (Table N 14 ).

Direct seeding with row seeder proved superior to broadcasting.

During kharif, 2002 direct seeding rice (NDLR-8) proved equally good to that of

transplanting (Table N 15).During kharif, 2003 direct seeding experiment was failed

due to drought conditions.

51

Rice based cropping system

Objective: To demonstrate ID crop instead of rice-rice cropping systems under bore

wells for ground water conservation.

A field study was conducted on performance of different rice based cropping

systems at upper reach during 2001. The three different rice based cropping systems rice-

rice, rice-mustard, rice alone were studied. In rice – mustard-cropping system, mustard

(Cv. pusa baisaki) seed was broadcasted 3 days before harvest of rice in the month of

December. Yield of the mustard crop was converted into rice grain equivalent yield.

Among the three rice based cropping systems, rice-rice cropping system recorded the

highest rice grain equivalent yield (13880 kg ha-1

) and gross returns (Rs. 74270 ha-1

).

However, benefit cost ratio (2.81) was higher with rice-mustard cropping system than rice

(2.65), rice-rice (2.16) cropping system. Rice followed by mustard relay crop sequence

recorded an additional net returns of Rs.7,500 ha-1

than rice alone. ( Table N 16 ).

Rice-black gram relay cropping was demonstrated at reach-II during rabi 2001-

2002. Relay cropping with black gram gave an additional net returns of Rs 7938 ha-1

with

an yield of 500 kg ha-1

than rice alone ( Table N 17).

During rabi 2002-03, under irrigated conditions sunflower , sorghum , mustard ,

black gram and green gram crops were raised after kharif rice. Sunflower recorded

higher net returns followed by sorghum (Table N 18). During 2003-04 irrigated dry crops

could not be raised due to drought conditions after rice crop.

SRI (System of Rice Intensification)

Objective: To demonstrate SRI technique of less water utilization.

The system of Rice Intensification (SRI), a less input technology was introduced

in farmers fields the first time in Andhra Pradesh during Kharif 2003-04. SRI –

cultivation demonstration was conducted under III A.P.Irrigation project (SRBC) in Kesi

Reddy Venkata Subba Reddy field in an area of 840 m-2

at Konidedu village.

The nursery was raised on raised beds. Young seedlings of 10 days old were

transplanted in the field at 20cm x 25 cm spacing with seed, mud and roots. The seedlings

thus planted established and produced large number of productive tillers/hill .The main

field is not flooded but kept moist by alternate wetting and drying. The rice plant roots

under continuous flooding were small and deteriorated compared to healthy, white, large

root system under SRI.

In SRI cultivation, grain yield of 15 774 kg ha-1

was recorded compared to

5625 kg ha-1

in farmers practice. Productive tillers, panicle length, no. of grains per

panicle and test weight were higher in SRI technique compared to farmers practice (Table

N 19 ) ( State second highest yield in SRI cultivation).

52

Cotton

Drip irrigation in cotton

Objective: To demonstrate water saving through drip irrigation in cotton

Demonstrated drip irrigation (in-line drip) system at upper reach for cotton

crop. Fertilisers were applied along with drip irrigation (fertigation). Drip irrigation

recorded higher kapas yield, gross returns and benefit cost ratio than ridge and furrow

irrigation (Table N 20 ). Water requirement was 45 % less as compared to ridge and

furrow irrigation.

Water management in cotton

Objective: To demonstrate water saving technologies in cotton in comparison to farmers

practice.

Water management study was conducted in cotton during kharif 1999 to 2003 in

farmers fields at upper reach. Kapas yield, gross and net returns in normal irrigation as

well as in skip furrow and alternate furrow methods of irrigation did not differ

significantly (Table N 21 ). In skip furrow and alternate furrow irrigation methods, almost

50 per cent saving of water was observed. Hence, farmers are interested to follow skip

furrow or alternate furrow irrigation. By adopting this irrigation practice, farmers can

save the irrigation water and additional area can be brought under irrigation.

Fertilizer management in irrigated hybrid cotton

Objective: To demonstrate recommended fertilizer dose for rice in comparison to farmers

practice of high fertilizer application

Fertiliser management trail was conducted for two years during kharif 2000 and

2003 at middle reach. Different fertilizer treatments were imposed at basal and top

dressing stages. The highest kapas yield of cotton was recorded with application of 150 %

recommended dose of fertilizer. Though highest kapas yield was recorded with this

treatment, the highest benefit cost ratio was recorded by recommended fertilizer dose

(Table N 22).

Optimum spacing in cotton

Objective: To demonstrate optimum spacing in rainfed cotton as the farmers are adopting

wider spacing.

During 1999 recommended spacing was demonstrated against farmers practice

of wider spacing. Due to drought conditions very low kapas yields were recorded in both

the treatments. However during 2000 (middle reach-rainfed ) and 2003 (upper reach-

irrigated) recommended spacing of 90 cm x 45 cm (rainfed) and 120X60 cm (irrigated)

53

recorded higher kapas yield (Table N 23) , gross , net returns and benefit cost ratio

compared to narrow (60 cm x 45 cm) and farmers practice. After demonstration farmers

are adopting recommended spacing of 90 cm x 45 cm under rainfed and 120X60 cm

under irrigation.

Studies on cotton based cropping system

Objective: .To demonstrate the growing of ID crops followed by cotton under bore wells

as the farmers are practicing early sowing of mungari cotton leaving the land

fallow in rabi.

Mungari cotton was sown on 7-5-2001 and harvested on 10-10-2001at upper

reach. It has recorded kapas yield of 1500 kg ha-1

with two irrigations. Sorghum,

greengram and chickpea were sown on 10-11-2001, 4-12-2001 and 5-12-2001,

respectively after removal of cotton crop. Among the different cotton (Mungari) based

cropping systems, mungari cotton followed by chickpea recorded the highest cotton crop

equivalent yield (2125 kg ha-1

) and gross returns (Rs.42495 ha-1

), followed by mungari

cotton-jowar, mungari cotton-blackgram and sole crop of mungari cotton. (Table N 24 ).

The highest benefit cost ratio was recorded with sole crop of mungari cotton Chickpea

Chickpea varietal performance

Objective: To demonstrate the performance of the chickpea varieties under low rainfall

conditions in the farmer‟s fields

Demonstration trials were laidout in the farmers fields of Konidedu, Bhupanapadu

and Maddur villages at upper, middle and lower reaches respectively during post rainy

season of 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02 to assess the relative performance chickpea

varieties . The varieties tested are Kranthi (ICCC-37) , Swetha (ICCV-2) , Bharat (ICCV-

10) in contrast to the existing variety Annegiri ( local variety). Due to low rainfall during

kharif and no rainfall during post rainy season of 1999 (killer year) Swetha and Kranthi

performed better compared to Annegiri. Swetha matured early and produced additional

net returns by virtue of its Kabuli type seed valued high in the market. However, during

good rainfall years (2000-01 and 2001-02) Swetha recorded lower yields compared to

Annegiri and Kranthi varieties (Table N 25 to 27).

During good rainfall years (2000-01 and 2001-02) the performance of Kranthi and

Annegiri varieties are equally good and superior over Bharath. In 1999-2000 and 2002-03

due to low rainfall during kharif and no rainfall during post rainy season, Swetha and

Kranthi varieties performed better compared to Annegeri.

Sprinkler irrigation in chickpea

Objective : To demonstrate Sprinkler irrigation in chickpea in comparison with rainfed

crop.

Irrigation with sprinkler was given to chickpea (ICCV-10 and Annegiri) for

normal and late sown crop at upper reach during rabi 2001-02 and 2003-04. In normal

54

sown chickpea, variety ICCV-10 with one irrigation through sprinkler recorded higher

seed yield, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio (Table N 28) . Under late sown

condition, Annegiri variety with one irrigation through sprinkler recorded the higher seed

yield (833 kg ha-1

), gross returns (Rs. 12495 ha-1

), net returns (Rs. 2843 ha-1

) and benefit

cost ratio (1.29).

Economics of sprinkler irrigation

When water is available farmers follow sprinkler irrigation for chickpea crop.

Generally two irrigations are recommended for chickpea crop ( first at 30 DAS and

second at 55-60 DAS ) . Farmers obtained higher yields (25 q ha-1

) compared to rainfed

crop ( 10 q ha-1

) in chickpea. Benefits of sprinkler irrigation was demonstrated for

chickpea crop at upper reach.

Total sprinkler installation cost - Rs 62500 ha-1

Irrigation cost for chickpea growing season

(Depreciation + Interest + Electricity charges + labour charges) - Rs.4180 ha-1

Cost of cultivation for rainfed crop - Rs.7800 ha-1

Cost of cultivation of chickpea in sprinkler irrigation - Rs.11980 ha-1

( Rs.4180 + Rs.7800 ha-1

)

Gross returns in sprinkler irrigation -Rs 40000 ha-1

Gross returns in farmers practice (rainfed crop) - Rs.16000 ha-1

Net returns in sprinkler irrigation -Rs 28020 ha-1

Net returns in farmers practice (rainfed crop) - Rs.8200 ha-1

By investing Rs 4180 ha-1

per one season of chickpea crop farmers will get

Rs 19820 ha-1

extra profit.

Optimum plant population in chickpea

Objective: To demonstrate the usage of improved seed drill in reducing the seed rate in

chickpea.

Farmers were adopting higher seed rate than the recommendation. Due to

terminal drought the crop failed. To reduce seed rate, improved seed drill developed

at RARS, Nandyal was demonstrated at upper and middle reach. By sowing with seed

drill 20 kg ha-1

seed was saved with a yield advantage of 225 kg ha-1

(Table N 29).

Demonstration of pulse crop before chickpea

In the middile reach (Bhupanapadu) and lower reach (Maddur) farmers are

raising only one crop under rainfed conditions either during kharif or rabi leaving

the land fallow during the preceding or succeeding season. There is a possibility of

raising short duration pulse crops like black gram and green gram during kharif.

55

During kharif, 2003 green gram was sown during July and harvested during October.

Immediately after harvest of green gram chickpea was sown and harvested during

January. The green gram resulted a yield of 500 kg ha-1

and chickpea 750 kg ha-1

.For middle and lower reaches green gram followed by chick pea cropping system is

profitable.

Vegetables

Studies on vegetable based cropping systems

Objective: .To demonstrate the possibility of growing two crops in a year as the farmers

are growing vegetables in kharif in evenly distributed rainfall years and

leaving the land fallow during rabi.

At middle reach, ridge gourd and bitter gourd were sown on 8-8-2001 as

preceding crops to chickpea. Chickpea was sown on 18-11-2001. Among the different

cropping systems tried on the black cotton soils (Reach-II of SRBC) under rainfed

conditions, ridge gourd followed by chickpea recorded highest yield and gross returns

(Rs. 24850 ha-1

), but the net returns and the benefit cost ratio were highest with sole crop

of bitter gourd (2.93) (Table N 30).

Drip irrigation in chillies

Objective: To demonstrate water saving with drip irrigation in chillies.

This demonstrated was carried at upper reach for chilli crop on drip irrigation

(on-line drip) at upper reach. Fertilisers were applied along with drip irrigation

(fertigation). There was saving of 34 per cent water in drip irrigation as compared to ridge

and furrow irrigation. Drip irrigation recorded higher green pod yield, net returns and

benefit cost ratio than ridge and furrow irrigation (Table N 31).

Economics drip irrigation for vegetable crop

Installation cost of drip system Rs.100000 ha-1

Drip irrigation cost for chillies growing season

( Depreciation + Interest + Electricity charges + labour charges) - Rs.18155 ha-1

Cost of cultivation for chillies in farmers practice - Rs.20850 ha-1

Cost of cultivation of chillies in drip irrigation - Rs.39005 ha-1

( Rs.18155 + Rs.20850 ha-1

)

Yield of dry chilli in drip irrigation 3800 kg ha-1

Yield of dry chilli in farmers practice 2280 kg ha-1

Gross returns in drip irrigation -Rs 95000 ha-1

Gross returns in farmers practice - Rs.57000 ha-1

Net returns in drip irrigation -Rs 55995ha-1

Net returns in farmers practice - Rs.36150 ha-1


per one season of chilli crop farmers will get

Rs 19845 ha-1

extra profit.

56

Family drip irrigation for garden beans

Objective: To save the crop during dry spells with family drip irrigation for garden beans.

Family drip irrigation equipment consists of 1000 l capacity sintex tank and drip

irrigation pipes (main and lateral ) for an area of 1500 m-2

. Family drip irrigation system

was demonstrated for garden bean crop at upper reach during kharif 2003. Garden bean

crop was given life saving irrigation during August and September months (dry spell).

Cost of family drip system Rs.10,000

Family drip irrigation cost for garden bean growing season

( Depreciation + Interest + Electricity charges + labour charges) - Rs.2100 ha-1

Cost of cultivation for garden bean I.D crop - Rs.18750 ha-1

Cost of cultivation of garden beans in drip irrigation - Rs.20850 ha-1

( Rs.2100 + Rs.18750 ha-1

)

Yield of beans in drip irrigation 175 q ha-1

Yield of beans in ridge and furrow irrigation 158 q ha-1

Gross returns in drip irrigation -Rs 105000ha-1

Gross returns in ridge and furrow irrigation - Rs. 94800ha-1

Net returns in drip irrigation -Rs 84150ha-1

Net returns in ridge and furrow irrigation - Rs.76050 ha-1


per one season of garden bean crop farmer realised Rs

8100 ha-1

profit by family drip irrigation over that of ridge and furrow irrigation.

Twenty Five thousand litres of water was given for an area of 1hectare.

Sorghum Identification of suitable sorghum varieties

Objective: To demonstrate the performance of sorghum varieties released by RARS,

Nandyal under low rainfall conditions in the farmer‟s fields

A field study was conducted on identification of suitable sorghum varieties at

middle reach of IV block during rabi, 2001-02 and 2002-03. Among the three varieties

(2 improved and one local) NJ 2401 has recorded higher grain yield (2350 and 1600 kg

ha-1

), gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio compared to NTJ-2 and local variety

(M-35-1) (Table N 32). Between NTJ-2 and local variety, NTJ-2 performed better than

compared to local variety.

Group-B : Demonstrations

Rice

Demonstration of improved nursery management

Objective: To demonstrate improved nursery management in comparison with farmers

practice.

57

This trial was conducted during kharif, 2002 at upper reach. The improved nursery

management practices - recommended rate of seeds per unit area and fertilizer dose,

control of iron chlorosis (most common in rice nurseries of this area) and plant protection

measures were practiced, which resulted in better growth of nursery in comparison with

farmers practice.

Demonstration of optimum plant population in rice

.Objective : To demonstrate optimum plant population in rice in comparison to farmers

practice

Field trials were conducted during kharif seasons of 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2003 at

upper reach to demonstrate the influence of optimum spacing in rice. In all the years of

study, adoption of 20 cm X 15 cm spacing recorded additional grain yield and net returns

significantly compared to farmers practice of zig zag planting (Table N 33).

Demonstration of fertilizer management rice

Objective : To demonstrate recommended fertilizer dose for rice in comparison to farmers

practice of high fertilizer application

Most of the rice growing farmers at upper reach apply very high doses of

fertilizers and complex fertilizer for top dressing (250N + 150P2O5 + 80K2O kg ha-1

)than

the recommended fertilizer dose (160N + 80P2O5 + 80 K2O kg-1

-Kharif and 120N +60

K2O kg ha-1

– rabi )

Demonstrations were conducted at upper reach on fertilizer management in rice.

The grain yields of rice with recommended fertilizer dose and farmers practice were

almost identical. . But, higher net returns were recorded with recommended dose of

fertilizer than farmers practice. Cost of cultivation was reduced to the tune of Rs. 3043

and 1757 ha-1

with adoption of recommended dose of fertilizer compared to farmers

practice during kharif and rabi seasons respectively. Adoption of recommended fertilizer

dose recorded an additional net returns of Rs.2012 and 364 ha-1

over farmers practice

during kharif and rabi seasons respectively ( Table N 34).

Integrated weed management in rice

Objective : To demonstrate chemical weed control + hand weeding in rice in comparison

to farmers practice of hand weeding .

Demonstrations were carried out in fields of upper reach during three consecutive

years i.e. 1999, 2000 and 2001. In all the years of study, application of butachlor @ 1.5

kg a.i ha-1

+ one hand weeding recorded an additional net returns of Rs. 1623, 1003 and

1154 ha-1

significantly over farmers practice of two hand weeding ( Table N 35).

58

Introduction of green manure crops preceding rice

Objective : To demonstrate effect of green manure crops before rice

A field experiment was conducted during kharif, 2001 at upper reach of IV block

of SRBC. Sesbania rostrata green manure crop was broadcasted during June and was

incorporated at 50 per cent flowering stage. The green manuring resulted in higher grain

yield( 6365 kg ha-1

)and net returns compared to in farmers practice of fertilizer

application alone 6188 kg ha-1

(Table N 36) .

A field experiment was conducted during kharif, 2002 at upper reach of IV block

of SRBC with green manuring + 75 % recommended fertilizer dose (RDF) and green

manuring + 100% RDF in comparison with farmers practice. Green manuring + 75 %

RDF recorded lower grain yield and higher benefit cost ratio than farmers practice (Table

N 37). By this farmers realized the benefit of 25 % saving of fertilizer by green manuring.

Cotton

Demonstration of improved variety in mungari cotton

Objective: To demonstrate improved varieties of cotton in place of local varieties

In both the reaches (upper and middle), Aravinda recorded the highest yields (1000 kg

ha-1

– R1 and 1025 kg ha-1

- R2 ) than local variety. Aravinda recorded additional net returns of

Rs. 4180 ha-1

(R1) and Rs. 5625 ha-1

over local varieties (Jalgaon and Y1 varieties) (Table N

38).

Demonstration of chemical weed control in rainfed cotton

Objective: To demonstrate the profitability of chemical weed control in cotton.

Pre emergence application of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1

recorded additional

net returns of Rs. 375 ha-1

over farmers practice (Table N 39). Chemical control of weeds

in cotton was not economical due to repeated inter cultivation by the farmers.

Demonstration of IPM in cotton

Objective: To reduce the cost of plant protection measures and to maintain ecological

balance and increase the net returns through IPM technology

Integrated pest management was demonstrated against farmers practice of

indiscriminate pesticide application during 1999, 2000 , 2001and 2002 both under rainfed

and irrigated conditions . In all the years of study, adoption of integrated pest

management recorded lower kapas yield, cost of cultivation and higher net returns

compared to farmers practice except during 2002.During 2002, the pest incidence was

very low and the effect of IPM was not significant. In all the years of study, integrated

pest management recorded additional net returns ranging from Rs. 466 to 3825 ha-1

(Tables N 40 and 41).

59

Chickpea

Demonstration of IPM in chickpea

Objective: To reduce the cost of plant protection measures and to maintain ecological

balance and increase the net returns through IPM technology

In both the reaches (R-II and R-III), integrated pest management gave higher seed

yield of 1250 and 1750 kg ha-1

, gross returns of Rs 18750 and 26250 ha-1

, net returns of

Rs.8832 and 16132 ha-1

and benefit cost ratio of 1.89 and 2.59 in R-II and R-III

respectively over farmers practice. During 2002-03 and 2003-04 the pest incidence was

very low and the effect of IPM was not significant (Tables N 42 and 43).

Demonstration of bio fertilizers in chickpea

Objective: To demonstrate low cost bio fertilizers in comparison with chemical fertilizers.

Method of application of Rhizobium and Phosphorous solublising bacteria were

demonstrated at all the three reaches. Farmers treated the seed with bio fertilizers and

sown the seed. The effect bio fertilizers did not influence the seed yield significantly due

drought conditions (Table N 44).

Redgram

Varietal performance in redgram

Objective: To demonstrate improved varieties of redgram in place of local varieties

Two varieties (LRG-41 and ICPL 85063) were tested against local variety (LRG-

30) in redgram during late kharif 2002 at upper reach. Improved varieties recorded higher

yields compared to local variety. One irrigation was given during pod development stage

to all the varieties (Table N 45). With one irrigation, an increase of 500 kg ha-1

was

recorded as compared to rainfed crop.

Sunflower

Demonstration of improved hybrid in sunflower (rainfed)

Objective: To demonstrate improved hybrids in sunflower.

Recommended hybrid MSFH-17 recorded an additional net returns of Rs. 425 ha-1

over local hybrid Ganga Kaveri ( Table N 46) at middle reach.

Thinning in sunflower

Objective: To demonstrate optimum plant population in sunflower in comparison with no

thinning.

60

Recommended spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm recorded the higher seed yield (875 kg

ha-1

) and gross and net returns over farmers practice of solid rows (700 kg ha-1

) with no

thinning at middle reach .

Water management in sunflower.

Objective : To demonstrate the water saving technology in sunflower

Sunflower crop was sown during rabi 2001-02 (middle reach) and 2002-03 (upper and

middle). Skip furrow irrigation was tried in comparison with farmers practice of ridge

and furrow irrigation. With skip furrow irrigation, there was water saving without much

reduction in seed yield as compared to furrow irrigation ( Table N 47 ). By adopting skip

furrow irrigation, farmers can save irrigation water and more area can be brought under

irrigation. In rice – sunflower sequence, skip furrow and alternate furrow methods of

irrigation to sunflower are more economical than ridge and furrow method of irrigation.

Wilt disease was more in ridge and furrow irrigation compared to skip furrow irrigation.

Demonstration of sulphur application in sunflower

Objective: To demonstrate effect of sulphur on yield of sunflower.

Generally oilseed crops respond to sulphur application as it is required for

biosynthesis of oils. Soils are deficient in available sulphur. Farmers apply complex

fertilizers which devoid of sulphur. Sulphur application through single super phosphate

was demonstrated (upper and middle reaches) in comparison with farmers practice of

complex fertilizers mostly as (di ammonium phosphate, DAP). Under irrigated conditions

yield advantage to the extent of 300 kg ha-1

was observed at both the reaches (Table N

48).

Demonstration of boron application in sunflower

Objective: To demonstrate beneficial effect of boron on sunflower.

Boron is required for better pollination and seed setting in sunflower. Hence 2%

borax application at ray floret stage was sprayed at upper and middle reaches. Seed

setting was good in borax applied treatment(2120 kg ha-1

) compared no borax application

(2000 kg ha-1

). An increase of 120 kg ha-1

was recorded by boron application compared to

control under irrigated conditions.

Vegetables

Introduction of tomato (rainfed)

Objective: To demonstrate profitability of tomato cultivation in comparison with cotton.

Tomato cultivation resulted in net returns of Rs. 10,300 ha-1

as compared to net

returns of Rs 16,234 ha-1

from cotton at middle reach (Table N 49) .

61

Agricultural implements

Demonstration of improved agricultural implements

Objective: To demonstrate use of threshers, urea applicator, ferti cum seed drill in

different crops.

Demonstrations were conducted during 2000-01 in chickpea and sunflower and on

chickpea (middle and lower reaches) and paddy (upper reach) during 2001-

2002. In both the years of study, mechanical threshing saved Rs. 375 ha-1

over

manual threshing. In sunflower mechanical threshing saved Rs. 250 ha-1

over

manual threshing. In paddy also mechanical method of threshing saved Rs.175

ha-1

over manual threshing (Table N 50).

Urea applicator, row seeder, paddy reaper cum harvester and ferti cum seed drill

were demonstrated.

Group-C : Large scale demonstrations

Objective: To demonstrate mass spread or large scale practice of proven technologies in

different crops.

Mass spread of cotton varieties Varietal trial was conducted in mungari and American cotton during 2001-02

kharif season ( rainfed ) at middle reach and 2001-2002 (irrigated) at upper reach.

Aravinda and Narasimha varities of cotton recorded higher yields than the local varieties

grown by the farmers. Farmer‟s preference was more towards Aravinda than Narasimha

(Table N 51).

Stem application of monocrotophos in cotton

Stem application of monocrotophos in 4:1 ratio was done at 15 days after sowing.

Sucking pest control was observed leading to reduction in regular sprayings.

Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice

Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1

was applied as pre emergence by mixing with sand in

rice. Weed density was low in herbicide-applied plots with saving of Rs.350 ha-1 over

farmers practice of two hand weedings.

Production technology of crops

Cotton : The recommended production technology of spacing of 90 cm x 45 cm

(rainfed) and 120 cm x 60 cm (irrigated) , fertilisers of 20 kg N ha-1

at seeding and 20 kg

N ha-1

30 DAS + 20 kg P2O5 basal, hand weeding once + 2-3 harrowing and IPM

practices was demonstrated.

Kapas yield, gross and net returns with recommended production technology was

higher compared to district average in cotton (Table N 52). Application of complex

62

fertilizers and use of indiscriminate pesticides can be avoided with recommended

production technology through applying recommended dose of fertilizers and need based

plant protection measures.

Rice : The recommended production technology of spacing of 20 cm x 10 cm (kharif)

and 15 cm x 10 cm ( rabi ), fertiliser dose of 180 N-80 P2O5 - 80 K2O ( kharif) and 120

N - 60 P2O5 and 60 K2O kg ha-1

(rabi) ,integrated weed management with butachlor @

1.5 kg a.i ha-1

pre - emergence application +

one hand weeding at 40 days after

transplanting and integrated pest management practices was demonstrated.

The grain yields of rice were higher by adopting recommended production

technology as compared to district average yields (Table N 53). In recommended

production technology, cost on fertilizers, weed control and plant protection were reduced

than that of farmers practice.

Sunflower: The recommended production technology of spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm ,

fertilizers dose of 60N- 60 P2O5 –30 K2O kg ha-1

, weed management through one hand

weeding + two harrowing IPM practices was demonstrated.

Recommended production technology including thinning at a spacing of 60 cm x

30 cm, application of fertilizers through straight fertilizers and need based plant

protection measures gave higher yields, gross and net returns than no thinning,

indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides (Table N 54).

Sorghum: Recommended production technology of 8 kg ha-1

seed treated with 3 g captan

for kg-1

seed of, 45 cm x 12 cm spacing , fertilizers dose of 60 N– 30 P2O5 – 30 k2O kg

ha-1


The grain yield of sorghum were higher by adopting recommended production

technology as compared to district average yields (Table N 54). With recommended

production technology, cost on fertilizers, and plant protection were reduced than farmers

practice.

Redgram: Recommended production technology of 10 kg ha-1

seed treated with 3 g of

captan kg-1

,90 cm x 30 cm spacing , fertilizers dose of 20N+50 P2O kg ha-1


The seed yield of redgram was higher by adopting recommended production

technology as compared to district average yields (Table N 54). In recommended

production technology, cost on fertilizers, weed control and plant protection were reduced

than farmers practice.

Chickpea: Demonstration of recommended production technology in chickpea through

application of 20 N + 50 P2O5 kg ha-1

through urea and single super phosphate and

integrated pest management practices such as inter cropping of coriander, seed treatment

with Trichoderma viridae , pest monitoring with phermone traps and two rounds of NPV

spray recorded the higher seed yield, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio as

compared to district average ( Table N 55).

63

ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES

To achieve the objectives of the project, trials and demonstrations were conducted under

SRSP and SRBC command area for five years at Warangal, Karimnagar and Nandyal.

The outstanding achievements are as follows.

1. Evolve and demonstrate diversified cropping sequences for horticultural and

dry crops under rotational water supply regime.

In place of monocropping of cotton, Chillies, turmeric, maize-maize and rice-rice

cropping systems followed by the farmers, profitable cropping systems like cotton-

vegetables, chilli-bittergourd, Maize-groundnut-vegetable and greengram-maize-

vegetable were identified for the SRSP command.

Due to non-release of water in canal in SRBC command, the cropping systems

could not be demonstrated under irrigation project during both kharif and rabi seasons.

During rabi, I.D crops like sunflower, sorghum, mustard and blackgram were introduced

in place of rice and chickpea/sorghum were introduced after mungari cotton under bore

wells. Under rainfed conditions greengram – chickpea found profitable than post rainy

season chickpea alone.

2. Improve Productivity through on farm irrigation agronomy (applied research and

demonstration of irrigation practices and crop management practices to improve

water use efficiency and crop yield)

Under SRSP scheduling of irrigation at critical stages (maize and groundnut) with

different methods of irrigation (furrow in chillies and cotton, ridge and furrow in maize

and check basin in groundnut) reduced irrigation water requirement and resulted in higher

WUE. In maize 39-42 %, cotton 15-21%, groundnut 24-31%, blackgram 20% and chillies

24% of farmers are adopting improved irrigation methods in Warangal district.

With drip irrigation in cotton, there was water saving of 170mm as compared to farmers‟

practice. This practice is not becoming popular due to high initial cost and availability of

water as per requirement through canal.

Demonstrations on recommended fertilizer application and Integrated Pest

Management in different crops were organized. The fertilizer consumption reduced from

34% to 23% in cotton, 43% to 29% in chilli and 15% to 9% in groundnut. The practice of

green manuring in rice has become popular in the command area and it has increased

from 12 to 42 %.

With adoption of IPM in cotton, rice and chilli, there was reduction in pesticide

consumption by 65% in cotton, 32% in maize, 52% in chillies, 41% in rice and 43% in

turmeric.

Under SRBC, sunflower and cotton skip furrow, alternate furrow method of

irrigation recorded almost similar seed yield to that of ridge and furrow method of

irrigation but 50 % irrigation water was saved in skip and alternate furrow method of

irrigation.

64

In chillies and cotton drip fertigation recorded higher yield, 40-50% less water

requirement than ridge and furrow method of irrigation. In chickpea one irrigation

through sprinklers at pod development stage gave 22% higher seed yield than rainfed

crop.

In rice kharif NDLR-8 rice variety recorded 8% higher netreturns compared to

local variety BPT-5204 and 38% higher net returns compared to local variety (RNR-

1446) (rabi). Cost of cultivation of fertilizers was reduced to Rs. 3043 ha-1

by adopting

recommended fertilizer doses compared to farmers practice. Closer planting of seedlings

recorded additional net returns of Rs. 2770 ha-1

compared to farmer‟s practice of low

plant population.

In rice, green manuring + 75% recommended fertilizer dose recorded almost

similar yield to that of famers practice.

In cotton Aravinda ( Mungari cotton) and Narasimha (American cotton) recorded

25-30% higher yields compared to local varieties. Adoption of IPM recorded an

additional net return of Rs. 466 to 2365 ha-1

compared to farmers practice. By adoption of

recommended fertilizer management practices cost of cultivation was reduced to a tune of

Rs. 1600 ha-1

compared to farmers practice. In chickpea, under low rainfall conditions,

Swetha and Kranti performed better as compared to local variety. During good rainfall

years, Kranti and Annegiri were equally good and superior over Bharat. Integrated pest

management practices recorded higher seed yield, gross and net returns as well as benefit

cost ratio compared to farmers practice. By adopting recommended production

technology an additional net returns of Rs. 3500 ha-1

was recorded compared to farmers

practice.

In sunflower recommended spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm recorded the higher seed

yield, gross and net returns over farmers practice of solid rows with no thinning.

In sunflower application of sulphur through Single super phosphate recorded

higher yield compared to farmers practice of complex fertilizer application.

3. Improve command area extension services and participatory irrigation

management practices through the development of water user associations

To create awareness among farmers on irrigation water conservation and

utilization, 81training programmes were conducted to the farmers of different mandals /

blocks in Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal during 2003-2004. Post training evaluation

indicate that more than 80% of farmers were placed in medium or high knowledge (crop

technologies and water management practice of different crops) category. Rest of the

farmers fall in low knowledge group because of illiteracy or lack of awareness.

Three training‟s at each center were given to the line departmental officers of

agriculture, horticulture and engineers, which greatly sharpened their TOT (Transfer of

Technology) skills in irrigation management aspects. Workshop on Irrigation

management was conducted with ANGRAU scientists, Departmental Officers and

farmers. Various aspects on irrigation water management were discussed.

The impact of the project can be seen from the medium to higher knowledge

gained by the farmers on agricultural production technology. Higher percentage of

adoption of improved technology, increase in labour employment potential, increase in

productivity of crops was achieved in beneficiary villages as compared to non-beneficiary

villages and pre-project.

65

SOIL NUTRIENT MAP OF KARIMNAGAR & WARANGAL (SRSP) AND

KURNOOL (SRBC) DISTRICTS

SRSP

A) Karimnagar

Soils of the district:

Karimnagar district is having 57 mandals with a geographical area of 11.88

lakh.ha . Out of 57 mandals 25 mandals are in SRSP Command area and 32 mandals in

Non- Command area. (Soil nutrient maps enclosed)

Soil of Karimnagar district have very gentle slope and moderately eroded.

The hydro geomorphology is peninsular genesis and granite soil texture class was red

sandy loam to black clay soils .The effective root zone depth was red extremely shallow

(below 25Cm) to deep black soils (above 200 cm). The major groups of soils are red soils

(73%) and black soils (23%). The soil colour is reddish brown to grey brown in red soils

and in black soils it is grey to dark brown in colour. The water holding capacity range

from 50 to150mm/mt in 65.3% of the total area. According to the land capability classes

47.87 percent of the geographical area is moderately good cultivable land and 26.57

percent is good cultivatable land. The length of the growing season period is below 150

days in 61.01 percent and above 150 days in 36.28 percent of the net area sown (394087

ha).

Nutrient status for different mandals of Karimnagar district:

S.No. Number mandals

Low Medium High

Organic Carbon

Command 16 8 -

Non Command 15 18

Available Phosphorus

Command - 23 1

Non Command - 31 2

Available Potassium

Command - 14 10

Non Command - 24 9

Nitrogen:

Among 57 mandals, 31 and 26 mandals are low and medium category in the

district. In command area, 16 and 8 mandals fall under low and medium category,

respectively. In non-command area 15 mandals fall in low and 18 mandals in medium

category.

Phosphorus:

The phosphorus status of district was medium to high. Out of 57 mandals, 54

mandals fall under medium and 3 mandals fall in high phosphorus category.

66

Potassium:

The available potash status is high in Karimnagar district. Of 57 mandals, 24

mandals fall under medium and 33 mandals fall under low category.

Critical Limits for Micro-Nutrients:

S.No Micro- Nutrient Critical Levels (ppm)

Red Soil Black Soil

1 Zinc 0.65 0.80

2 Iron 4.0 5.0

3 Copper 0.2 0.3

4 Manganese 2.0 3.0

Micro- Nutrient Status in Karimnagar District:

S.NO Nutruient Total number

of samples

Percentage of sample

below CL

Percentage of sample

above CL

1 Zinc 2711 73.6 26.4

2 Copper 2711 1.5 98.5

3 Iron 2711 26.2 73.8

4 Managanese 2711 21.0 79.0

B) Warangal

1. Major soil groups in the district are red loamy (21%), red clay (17.1%), deep

black soil (8.7%) and saline sodic soils (13.7%).

1. In general the depth of the soils ranges from extremely shallow (10-25 cm) to very

deep (>150 cm). In Warangal district, most of the soils are moderately deep (75-

100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm).

2. The soils are nearly leveled (0-1%) to gentle slope (3-8%).

3. The available water holding capacity is very low (<50 mm/m of soil) to medium

(100-150 mm/m of soil).

4. Most of the soils in the district are non-calcarious in nature.

5. Nitrogen status is low in entire district (soil nutrient maps enclosed)

6. Phosphorus status in the district is low (<20 kg/ha of p2o5) to medium (20-50

kg/ha of p2o5).

7. Potassium status is medium (150-300 kg/ha of k2o) to high (> 300 kg/ha of k2o) in

entire district except in Parkal mandal where potassium status is low ( < 150 kg/ha

of k2o).

8. Zinc status is marginal (0.5-0.7 ppm) to adequate (0.75 to 1.5 ppm).

67

SRBC Kurnool

The important soil orders (USDA Classification) in Kurnool district are

Alfisols,Entisols, Inceptisols and Vertisols. The important soil groups are (Soil fertility

maps enclosed)

1.Black cotton soils, which are heavy and deep to very deep belonging to

Vertisols-36.2%.

2. Red earths with clayey sub soil (association of Alfisols and Inceptisols)- 12.6%.

3. Red earths with loamy sub soil i.e., chalkas (association of Inceptisols and

Alfisols)- 31.1%.

4. Red sandy loam soils i.e., Dubbas and Chalkas (associations of Entisols, Inceptisols

and Alfisols)-5.3%.

5.Problem soils (saline/sodic)-10.2%

6.Rock land and others- 4.6%

In general the depth of soils ranges from extremely shallow (10-25) to very

deep(>150 cm). Most of the soils in the district are moderately deep(75-100cm) to deep

(100-150 cm) .The soils are nearly leveled to gentle slope. The available water holding

capacity of most of the soils in the district is in the range of 100-200 mm/m depth of soil.

The soils are calcareous in nature ranging from slight to moderate.

The soils of the entire district are low in available nitrogen .The

phosphorous content of the soils is low in all the mandals of the district except in

yemmiganur where it is medium. The available potassium is medium in Pathikonda

,Bandiatmakur, Gospadu , Sirivel, Dornipadu, Rudravaram ,and Chalagalamarri mandals

where as it is high in rest of the mandals of the district. The status of available major

nutrients in soils is classified as low, medium and high as detailed below:

Available nutrient

(k g ha-1

)

Low Medium High

N <250 250-500 >500

P <11 11-25 >25

K <120 120-280 >280

About 67.7% of the soils in the district are having marginal available Zinc

status. The available Zinc status is low in some parts of Kosigi, Chippagiri, Maddikera,

Kurnool, Dhone, Peapuly, Owk, Sanjamala, Dornipadu, Allagadda, Banaganapalli,

Panyam, Pamulapadu and Atmakur mandals.

Recommendation

The recommendations of nutrients as per soil test values is done such that, if the status is

low, the recommended dose is increased by ¼ th of the recommended dose, and reduced

by ¼ of the recommended dose if the status is high. If the status is medium then the

recommended dose as such is recommended for application.

68

SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES

The sustainability of the new technologies introduced in A.P III irrigation project

in SRSP and SRBC command can be estimated and judged through the findings of the

project impact survey. To have an over all picture on sustainability the survey was

conducted in the non-beneficiary villages where, the technology has been disseminated

from the pilot area without considerable intervention of the scientists. The review of the

impact survey report indicates that the technologies will be accepted and adopted by the

farmers in due course of time. The technologies with good adoption and higher predicted

sustainability are mentioned below.

1. Reduced number of irrigations in maize is accepted by the farmers as they have

realised that excessive irrigations do not give high yields. This practice may be

further continued without any technical support as water released in the canal is

also regulated limiting the water availability.

2. Ridge & furrow method of irrigation in maize and check basin method in

groundnut is either practiced by the farmers or adopted by the farmers mainly due

to easy management of water in these methods. Thus this technology is well

established and highly sustainable requiring no further demonstrations. 3. In case of advance methods of irrigations like sprinkler and drip, the adoption

and in turn the sustainability is very low due to higher initial cost and ample

supply of irrigation water. 4. Introduction of summer vegetable in maize based and greengram based cropping

systems is accepted by the farmers and mostly sustainable only with small farmers

where family labour is available.

5. New varieties introduced of various crops like blackgram, greengram, paddy have

already reached the neighboring villages and these new varieties will be cultivated

by the farmers for a long period.

6. Green manuring practice in rice was adopted by the farmers and will be sustained

even in the post-project period as government is also encouraging green manuring

by providing subsidized seed.

7. Integrated pest management practices were introduced in paddy, cotton and

chillies. Of all the IPM practices, stem application of monocrotophos and trap

cropping in cotton, alleyways in paddy are most sustainable practices.

8. Herbicide application especially in maize and paddy is well accepted by the

farmers and the farmers in the neighboring villages are also applying herbicides.

9. Sustained higher yields can be realized in post-project period also as the higher

yields are mainly attributed to implementation of advance production technology.

10. In place of complex fertilizers, straight fertilizers are now being applied as top

dressing reducing cost of fertilizers.

11. Sprinkler irrigation will enhance the area under SRBC command by increased

water use efficiency.

69

CONCERNS AND FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS

The technologies popularized in the project needs support by Government

and extension agencies for further continuation after the project. These /issues are

discussed below.

1. The water should be made available in the canal for giving scheduled

irrigations to different crops.

2. Different vegetables tested in cotton, maize, chilli and greengram based

cropping systems are cultivated on a limited scale by farmers. These require

Government support for marketing for their expansion.

3. The practice like greenmanuring has become popular in the project command

area. This requires support from agricultural department for further spread to

other farmers.

4. The practice of IPM technology should be adopted on the community basis for

getting maximum benefit. This needs further popularization and various

components of IPM should be made available in the market for more adoption.

5. The field channels in the command area are to be maintained by water users

association members. These channels require to be maintained by the farmers

to get sufficient water to their fields.The training and visit to demonstrations

by more number of farmers with the help of extension agencies involving

water users associations will disseminate the technologies identified in the

project

70

CONSTRAINTS IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

A.P III Irrigation project conceived during the year 1998-1999 and was under

implementation for the past five years. In the process of implementation of the project

few but considerable constraints were encountered in acceptance and implementation of

improved new technology by the farmers. The technology introduced to the farmers at

times was not accepted in Toto but with few modifications to suit the local conditions.

The constraints and failures in the project implementation are discussed in detail below.

SRSP:

1) Introduction of ID crops in place of rice to achieve the equitable distribution

of water to the farmers was not well accepted by the farmers of the upper

reach as they have water through canal as per requirement. Comparatively,

farmers at the tail end have accepted cultivation of the ID crops in place of

paddy and are cultivating these crops.

2) The low acceptance rate of the ID crops by the farmers of the SRSP command

area is due to easy management of rice and assured returns from the crop

compared to the ID crops introduced like blackgram, redgram, groundnut etc.

3) Cultivation of pulse crop in crop rotation for maintaining the soil health is well

understood by the farmers but practiced to the certain extent due to higher pest

and disease infestation and fluctuations in the yield and market price of the

produce in comparison to the problem free Maize crop.

4) In case of redgram during the year 2001-2002, there was heavy infestation of

Heliothis devastating the crop. It could not be controlled with any of the

chemicals or IPM practices. As a result of this many of the farmers who have

accepted and cultivated redgram have given up cultivation of redgram.

5) With the project implementation most of the farmers are enlightened on

greenmanuring but very few farmers grow green manure crop due to one or

more of the following reasons like non-availability of seed and late onset of

monsoon or late release of water in the cannals.

6) More spacing and low seed rate is practiced by some of the farmers in case of

pulses like blackgram and greengram and oilseed like groundnut due to non-

availability of suitable intercultivation implements.

7) Availability of improved variety seed in case of pulses is a constraint coming

in the way of large-scale cultivation of pulses, as farmers still are not

practicing the seed village concept to the extent required. The farmers do not

preserve the seed for the next season.

8) Acceptance of different water management practices by the farmers including

reduced number of irrigations and improved methods of irrigation is slow and

require lot of training and guidance as ample amount of water is available in

71

canal especially in case of upper reach farmers compared to the tail end

farmers.

9) In case of micro-irrigation systems, in spite of demonstrations, training and

field days in association with the government subsidies, the farmers are not

ready to purchase and install the drip and sprinkler irrigation systems in their

fields as they feel the initial cost is too high. In the present situation where

sufficient water is available in the canals and wells, farmer is not realizing the

importance of water saving.

SRBC;

1. Due to non release of water in canal in SRBC command, the cropping systems

could not be demonstrated under irrigation project during both kharif and rabi

seasons.

2. The demonstration site that is being demarcated to 40 ha in each reach where

inputs were supplied to conduct trails/ demonstrations had became a point of

conflict. As majority of farmers are resource poor in the project area, after two

years they started demanding inputs by comparing with the beneficiary

farmers in their respective reaches which created problems for the scientists to

carry the trails / demonstrations.

72

STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN TO MAINSTREAM THE FINDINGS

The technologies developed in Third A. P Irrigation Project implemented

from 1998 to 2004 will be discussed in the zonal meetings and ZREAC meetings to

be held in August, 2004. The findings recommended for incorporation in the package

of practices are given below.

I. Technologies for Adoption (Recommendations communicated to different

extension agencies)

SRSP

Maize:

1. Irrigating maize at 15-17 days interval during vegetative stage and 8-10

days interval during reproductive stage was sufficient to achieve the

optimum yields in rabi.

2. Irrigating at critical stages saves about 100mm in rabi.

3. Ridge and furrow method for irrigation during rabi is recommended.

Paddy:

1. Irrigating paddy 24 hours after disappearance of 5cm of water.

2. Application of butachlor or pertilachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha 3-5 days after

transplanting

3. Growing of JGL-1798, JGL-1853 and WGL-14 during Kharfi.

4. Incorporation of the greenmanure (dhiancha) crop was found to increase the

yields in Paddy.

5. Planting with 40 cm alleyways after every 2m and need based plant protection

to reduce the incidence of BPH.

6. Under late sown conditions in kharif, direct seeding of rice gives on par yield

with that of transplanted rice.

Blackgram:

1. Cultivation of improved Blackgram varieties with prophylactic control of

powdery mildew during rabi was found to be remunerative and thus can be

recommended in the fields where occasional water stagnation is not a

problem in SRSP command.

2. For rabi Blackgram scheduling of irrigation at 0, 25, 45 and 65 days after

sowing.

73

Cotton

1. Furrow method of irrigation saves about 180mm of water compared to flood

irrigation.

2.IPM including stem application of monocrotophos (!:10), growing of trap

crops, fixing of pheromone traps, use of NSK extract and need based plant

protection measures reduces the cost of cultivation and increases the yield .

3. Under rainfed and limited irrigated conditions, short duration straight varieties

like NA 1678, NA 1588 and Narsimha performs better than hybrids.

Groundnut

1. Groundnut irrigated at critical stages through check basin method gives higher

pod yield with a saving of 100mm of water .

2. Groundnut irrigated through sprinklers (except at flowering) require less water

over farmers irrigation practice.

Turmeric

1. Application of NPK @ 190:75:120 Kg/ha and seed treatment with

carbendazim/mancozeb.

Cropping Systems

1. Cultivation of summer vegetable or green gram to facilitate conjunctive use of

canal and well water.

2. Cultivation of maize or black gram in rabi after kharif rice.

3. Maize-groundnut in maize based, rice-vegetable instead of rice mono-cropping

and cotton-vegetable instead of cotton mono-cropping is recommended.

SRBC

1. In sunflower and cotton skip furrow, alternate furrow method of irrigation is

recommended in place of ridge and furrow method of irrigation.

2. In chickpea, one irrigation through sprinklers at pod development stage.

3. In kharif and rabi NDLR-8 rice variety is recommended to local variety.

4. Application of recommended fertilizer dose in rice (160–80 – 80 NPK kg ha-1

)

5. In rice transplanting optimum seedlings (33 hills in kharif and 66hills in rabi )

compared to farmer‟s practice of low plant population.

6. Growing of green manure crop before rice and application of 75%

recommended fertilizer dose and formation of alleyways at 2 m interval.

7. Rice followed by raising sunflower, sorghum and mustard.

8. In cotton Aravinda ( Mungari cotton) and Narasimha (American cotton) were

recommended to local varieties.

9. Adoption of IPM in cotton, chickpea and redgram.

10. In cotton adoption of recommended fertilizer management (120-60-60 NPK

kg ha-1

) practices.

11. In chickpea sowing with seed drill developed by RARS, Nandyal.

12. In chickpea under low rainfall conditions Swetha and Kranti are

recommended. During good rainfall years Kranti and Annegiri varieties

perform better.

74

13. Application of single super phosphate for pulses (chickpea and redgram) and

oilseed crop (sunflower) in place of complex fertilizer application These

recommendations will be incorporated in package of practices after discussion

in the meetings.

II.Technologies that needs further testing and refinement

1.Drip fertigation in chillies and cotton

2.Direct seeding in rice

3.Introduction of suitable crops before post rainy season chickpea

III.Information:

1.In garden bean crop irrigation through family drip during dry spells

increases the income by Rs 8100 ha-1

as compared to rainfed crop.

2.Under irrigated conditions mungari cotton followed by chickpea and

sorghum is profitable.

Model irrigation block:

The irrigation block designed and developed at ARS Warangal, ARS

Karimnagar and RARS, Nadyal will be utilized for conducting different

experiments` involving advanced irrigation methods like drip, sprinkler in

comparision to conventional irrigation methods. It will be utilized as a model for

giving training to the farmers and line departmental officers. One training each for

the farmers and departmental officers will be organized during rabi every year as

the irrigation trials can be effectively conducted and demonstrated during this

season. The model irrigation block will also be utilized for the farmers trainings

by FTC‟s and KVK‟s. Different departments involved in farmer trainings are

using the irrigation block for training. This practice will be continued in future

also.

Agricultural Information Centers:

Strengthened the agricultural information center at ARS warangal, ARS

Karimnagar and RARS Nandyal for dissemination of information on advanced

agricultural technology to the farming community.

75

LESSONS LEARNT IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

The problems encountered and lessons learnt in the process of implementation of

Third A.P Irrigation project are as follows

SRSP

1. Cultivation of blackgram during rabi in rice fallows was promising when

supplemented with the powdery mildew control measures. Cultivation of pulses

should be advocated keeping in view the price fluctuations in the market.

2. Water supply in the canal is the main deciding factor in adoption of the technology by

the farmer. Based on irrigation water availability, the farmers decide the crop. For

adoption of ID crops, the water availability should be explained to the farming

community in advance of crop-growing season.

3. To enable widespread and sustained cultivation of any crop varieties, seed village

concept should be developed.

4. Cultivation of summer vegetables in maize, greengram and cotton based cropping

systems is well accepted by the farmer due to high economic returns. This practice is

restricted to small areas as marketing is a problem. Establishment of the vegetable

processing units with high intake capacity would not only solve the marketing

problem but also stabilize the prices.

5. Farmers cultivate paddy, supplementing canal with well irrigation even if small area

of their holding is cultivated instead of ID crops to meet the food requirements.

6. The drip and sprinkler irrigation methods are accepted by the farmers due to increased

yields and reduced water requirement. However, the initial cost and supply of

required water through canal is coming in way of large-scale adoption.

7. Training programmes scheduled and conducted to the Assistant Directors of

Agriculture would be more fruitful if they are conducted to the officers who have

minimum of 5 years of service as most of Assistant Directors of Research are retiring

in one or two years from active service.

SRBC

1. The command is characterized by farmers of whom majority were financially weak

and dependent on subsistence farming. During dispersion of inputs to beneficiary

farmers in the three reaches other farmers forced the project-implementing agency to

get the share in input supply. Because of their inherent trend in financial weakness

any benefit whether monetary or physical certainly effect the project implementation

and this aspect has to be taken care before technological intervention as it will have

drastic effect on the rural social set-up of command where the project is being

implemented.

2. The demonstrations and training components should be dealt by a single agency for

clarity and success.

76

EXTENSION ACTIVITIES

Training programmes and field days

1. Training programmes to farmers

Three training programmes at each center for two days duration were conducted for

head, middle and tail-end reach farmers in the beneficiary villages in block IV (SRBC),

DBM-59 (Karimnagar) and DBM-29 (Warangal) of SRSP. Four one day training

programmes at each centers were conducted for Rythu club members of four villages. At

each center 24 training programmes of two days duration were conducted covering 16 blocks

in six mandals at RARS, Nandyal, ARS, Warangal and ARS,Karimnagar from December

2003 to April,2004 (Table-56). The detailed schedule and list of villages covered in training

programmes were presented in Annexure N-X, K-VI and W-VII. Forty farmers from rythu

club members were trained during two days per training programme. The main aim is to

impart technologies developed under III A.P.Irrigation project, water and crop management

practices. The scientists from ANGRAU have dealt on various topics concerning SRBC

ayacut, water releases and Agricultural aspects. The following topics were covered during

training programme.

Water management for I.D. Crops.

Water management for horticultural crops.

Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation.

Rice cultivation with special reference to “system of rice intensification” (SRI)

Technologies developed under III A.P.Irrigation project (SRBC)

Suitable crops and cropping systems for SRBC command area.

Importance of soil testing and Integrated Nutrient Management.

Improved package of practices to increase water use efficiency for all major crops.

Integrated Pest Management.

The farmers were asked to give their opinions on the impact of training programme

every day. In all the trainings, farmers expressed full satisfaction on the lectures and they

have rated them as very impressive. The technology advocated is most useful and can easily

be implemented in the command area also. All the farmers requested more number of such

training programmes covering larger areas, which benefit the farming community in a better

way. All the farmers visited the information center and model irrigation block, which was

developed with the financial assistance provided under III A.P. Irrigation Project (SRBC).

Table 56:Training programmes and field days organized at SRSP and SRBC

Trainings to No Duration

Training programmes (SRSP and SRBC) Farmers 81 Two days

Farmers 12 One day

Agricultural officers 3 Two days

Assistant Directors of Agriculture 3 Two days

I & CAD Engineers 3 Two days

Workshop 3 Two days

Field days (SRBC) 1.Field day on rice and cotton

77

2.Field day on cotton and chickpea

3.Field day on rice 4.Field day on chickpea

5.Awareness meeting on I.D.crops

6.Field day on SRI cultivation

Field days (SRSP)

1. Field day on chillies (Karimnagar)

2. Field day on IPM in cotton (Karimnagar)

3. Field day on drip irrigation in cotton (Karimnagar)

4. Field day on sprinkler irrigation in groundnut (Karimnagar)

5.Field day on introduction of Narasimha cotton variety (Warangal)

6. Field day on cotton based cropping systems (Warangal)

7. Field day on IPM cotton (Warangal)

8. Field day on rice (Warangal)

9. Field day on chillies (Warangal)

10. Field day on summer groundnut (Warangal)

Training to line departments

1.Agricultural Officers

A two day training programme on water management was conducted for 20

Agricultural Officers working with command areas of SRSP and SRBC. Special topics on

water management, water use efficiency, water requirements for different crops and cropping

systems including Integrated pest and nutrient management aspects were covered by

specialists of ANGRAU.

2.Assisstant Directors of Agriculture

A two day training programme on water management was conducted for 20 ADA s

working in FTC s , different sub divisions in Warangal , Karimnagar and Kurnool districts at

ARS,Warangal,ARS,Karimnagar and RARS, Nandyal, respectively. Lectures on water

management in ID crops, conjunctive use of surface and ground water, quality of irrigation

water, ways and means to increase water use efficiency, Micro irrigation techniques (drip and

sprinkler), water requirements for different crops and cropping systems including Integrated

Pest and Nutrient Management aspects were dealt by Scientists from ANGRAU. The

feedback from ADAs at the end of the programme was positive and were of the opinion

that the topics that were dealt were relevant, informative and are feasible to transfer the

techniques to farmers fields.

3.Irrigation and command area engineers (I&CAD)

A two day training programmes at each centre on water management was conducted

for 20 I&CAD Engineers working in command areas of SRSP and SRBC. Lectures on water

management in ID crops, conjunctive use of surface and ground water, quality of irrigation

water, ways and means to increase water use efficiency, Micro irrigation techniques (drip and

sprinkler), water requirements for different crops and cropping systems and less water rice

cultivation-System of rice intensification (SRI) aspects were dealt by Scientists ANGRAU.

The feedback from I& CAD Engineers at the end of the programme was positive and opined

that the topics were relevant, informative and are feasible to transfer to farmers fields.

78

STATE LEVEL WORKSHOP ON IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT

A workshop on Irrigation Management, Crops and Cropping systems under projects

commands (AP III Irrigation Projects) was conducted 15-16 October, 2003 at Acharya N.G.

Ranga Agricultural University Auditorium, Rajendranagar.

Conclusions and recommendations

I. Irrigation

The irrigation water management for agriculture must be on agricultural water

demand management rather than on supply management

Integrated water resource management of all sectoral uses should include river basin

water (rainwater, surface water and groundwater).

Development of basin wise database for natural resources and water balance – land,

water, source of irrigation, extent of cropped area, crops, cropping systems, weather

parameters, ET and soil water relationships.

As the water management is site specific and for effective transfer the research

findings to the cultivators fields, on-farm participatory research on irrigation water

management practices in relation with crops, cropping systems, agronomic techniques

is needed.

Need to develop appropriate cropping systems related to the source of irrigation

(tanks, canal, wells, tanks supported by wells and river lifts) and soil type.

Surface drainage water recycling in Krishna and Godavari deltas for reducing the

surface water demand through irrigation canals.

There is a need for additional technical interaction both at planning stage and season‟s

operation of the irrigation system.

II. Ground water

Considerable quantity of groundwater resource is available in major irrigation

commands (60%) of the state which constitute 20% of geographical area of the state.

Therefore, suitable groundwater exploitation strategy need to be developed by

balancing between recharge and discharge.

The groundwater exploitation in command area has to be augmented in relation to

canal water supply so that canal water can be distributed to larger area to attain equity

and social justice.

Adoption of highly efficient micro irrigation techniques in non-command areas where

the groundwater was exploited to critical or above critical limit.

Adoption of sprinkler and drip and other efficient surface irrigation systems has to be

maintained for longer period. Discourage cultivation of lowland paddy by using

groundwater.

Micro irrigation has to be adopted for seasonal crops like cotton, sugarcane and close

growing vegetables. Awareness on its quality, cost competitiveness and maintenance

aspects have to be given due attention.

79

III. Crops

Extensive research and developmental activities on water saving rice technologies like

aerobic rice, rotational irrigation, SRI cultivation need to be carried and suitable

niches and conditions on which they can be adopted need to be identified and

popularized.

By adopting rotational irrigation in rice, the duty increased from 70 to 108 acres in

Krishna delta in 2002-03 and this can be adopted in other major irrigation projects on

a regular basis.

Data on components of water losses in rice and basin wise water balance information

has to be generated.

Establishing the crops with the onset of monsoon and allowing growing as rainfed

crop till the irrigation water is available under different surface irrigation water

sources.

Extensive on-farm, participatory research on crop diversification, suitable N crops,

cropping systems need to be conducted and technologies have to be identified and

advocated to the farmers.

IV. Capacity building

Capacity building at different levels – scientists – departmental officers, farms etc on

irrigation management is required.

An apex scientific institution to be created to serve as resource center for water

management to state and to carry out location specific on farm research,

demonstrations, development of technologies besides advising state govt. on

integrated water resource management in rice and other crops.

Infra structure for participatory irrigation water management under site specific

conditions need to be provided.

V. Policy

In the context of large-scale violation of cropping patterns, a policy on localization of

irrigated wet and irrigated dry needs attention as the current practice of localization

has failed to achieve its planned objectives.

Encourage paddy in low lying areas only where no other crop can be grown

successfully due to excessive moisture during crop growing season.

Crop diversification adopting irrigated dry crops sown with onset of rainfall in

medium and upland topographies in place of paddy to increase the water productive

efficiency.

The watershed management programmes such as contour trenches, gully plugs,

percolation tanks and check dams besides adoption of dry land in-situ moisture

conservation technologies taken up in the state for last few years appears to have

resulted in under-functioning of the existing surface water resources. Hence, there is

a need to have critical review of watershed management strategies, soil and moisture

conservation practices in the years to come.

To sustain agricultural production and ecological balance, appropriate land use act for

optimal utilization of land and water resources has to be enacted.

Contingency crop plans as well as water distribution during short falls of reservoir

inflows need to be developed.

80

VI. Regional workshops

A workshop was conducted on “crops, cropping systems and irrigation management

under project command areas ” at each centre under III A.P.Irrigation Project at

ARS,Warangal, ARS, Karimnagar and RARS, Nandyal. The workshop was conducted

involving scientists from Northern telangana zone (SRSP)and Scarce rainfall zone (SRBC),

officials of Department of Agriculture , I& CAD engineers and progressive farmers. The

technologies developed under III A.P.Irrigation project was discussed in the workshop.

81

PUBLICITY MATERIALS

Dr. Michael C. Macklin, World Bank consultant during his visit of Eighth

Supervisory Mission of World Bank in February, 2001 proposals have been submitted to the

heads of SRSP and SRBC sub-projects for sanction of Rs. 30.00 lakhs for production of

publicity materials and organizing training programmes for beneficiaries of SRBC and SRSP

sub-projects under III A.P. Irrigation project in coordination with the Department of

Agriculture.

Based on the above, funds have been released to a tune of Rs. 30.00 lakhs by the I &

CAD Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, through respective Chief Engineers of

SRSP and SRBC sub-projects i.e., Rs. 10.00 lakhs each for Agricultural Research Station,

Warangal and Agricultural Research Station, Karimnagar (SRSP) and Regional Agricultural

Research Station, Nandyal (SRBC).

Under III A.P.Irrigation project SRSP and SRBC, the following works has been taken

up under publicity materials.

1. Agricultural Information Centre (AIC)

A fully equipped agricultural information center was developed at three centres.

Different crop varieties, pest and disease incidence laminations, live specimens of crop

varieties grown in this zone and soil profile board is also displayed. The models of tractor and

bullock drawn agricultural implements were displayed. Number of farmers visited

agricultural information center and expressed satisfaction about the information displayed.

Feed back: Majority of the farmers who visited the AIC shown keen interest in adopting

latest varieties, water management practices and IPM.

2. Model Irrigation Block

To demonstrate different methods of irrigation to the farmers, a model block was

established with different types of drip and sprinkler irrigation, rain guns, water measuring

devices and surface methods of irrigation.

Feed back: As the research station lies in scarce rainfall zone, majority of the farmers who

visited model irrigation block expressed keen interest in drip, sprinkler and surface methods

of irrigation. Most of them decided to purchase rain guns for giving life saving irrigation as

power is a constraint to irrigate entire farm during critical stages of crop growth.

3. Modern Farm Implement – Rotavator

To demonstrate modern farm implements to farmers during training programmes,

rotovator has been purchased. It is useful for efficient land preparation.

Feed back: Most of the farmers were much impressed with the churning and pulverizing of

soil by the rotavator and they wanted to buy it.

4. LCD Projector

The LCD projector is useful to train the farmers and extension personnel of the

Command Area.

82

Feed back: Majority of the trainee farmers were illiterates and had never been exposed to

training environment .LCD projector because of its excellent production of lively images

created the effective training environment as it best suited trainees and made the job easy and

effective on the part of the trainer.

4. Laminations

Laminations of size 21x24 inches were prepared mainly on water management,

agronomic practices, pests and diseases, deficiency symptoms etc., and displayed in the

information center.

Feed back: Trainee farmers were impressed by the laminated photographs on different

aspects and asked many queries and clarified their doubts by going through them.

6. Training Programmes

Four day training programme under III A.P. Irrigation Project on water management

for SRSP & SRBC farmers was organized at three centers for the benefit of 200 progressive

farmers @ 50 farmers per day. Due importance was given to the cropping pattern to be

adopted for effective management of water under command areas of SRSP & SRBC. With

the objective to have more acreage under command area profitable crops, which require less

irrigation have been identified and recommended in place of rice. Special lectures were

arranged to educate farmers on cultivation aspects, efficient irrigation water management and

plant protection measures for successful growing of crops under irrigated dry conditions.

VISITS

SRSP-ARS,Karimanagar

S.No Date Name of the Visitor Designation

1 28-10-1998 Dr.A. Venkata Raman World bank consultant

2 17-04-1999 Dr.A. Venkata Raman and

Sri A. Bandopadhyaya

World bank consultants

3 3-2-2001 Dr. Michael.C.Maclean World Bank Consultant

4 12-11-2003 Dr M.Bala subramanian World Bank Consultant

SRSP-ARS,Warangal




3 2-2-2001 Dr. Michael.C.Maclean World Bank Consultant

4 6-8-2001 Dr.A.S.Siddhu World Bank Consultant

5 7-2-2002 Dr.A. Venkata Raman World Bank Consultant

SRBC-RARS, Nandyal


1 2-2-2001 Dr. Macklin and Dr. Pathak World bank consultant

2 9-2-2002 Dr.A. Venkata Raman World bank consultants

3 11-11-2003 Dr. M. Balasubramanyam World Bank Consultant

4 5-6-2004 Dr. M. Balasubramanyam World Bank Consultant

83

PAPERS PRESENTED IN WORKSHOPS / SYMPOSIUM

1.Sahadeva Reddy B.Sridhar V and Rami Reddy K.V.S.2000 Production technology for rice

under Srisailam Right Branch Canal command area. Proceedings of symposium on

“Challenges in Agronomic crop management in early 21st century” organized by

society of Agronomists, ANGRAU and Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University

, Hyderabad, May 24-25, 2000.

2. Sahadeva Reddy B.Sridhar V and Rami Reddy K.V.S.2000 Performance of chickpea

varieties in scarce rainfall zone of Andhra Pradesh. Proceedings of symposium on

“Challenges in Agronomic crop management in early 21st century” organized by

society of Agronomists, ANGRAU and Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural

University, Hyderabad, May 24-25, 2000.

3. Surendar Reddy .K Krishna.A , Srinivas .A, Sahadeva Reddy. B and Raghu Vardhan

Reddy S 2001 Impact of on farm water management under SRSP and SRBC

command areas. Paper presented at the state level work shop on capacity Building “

Agricultural Water demand Management ” held at Hyderabad from November 28-30,

2001.

4. Sahadeva Reddy B and Sridhar V 2002 Technology transfer for improving the productivity

of cotton in scarce rainfall zone of Andhra Pradesh. Paper presented at NIRD

foundation day seminar on “Rural technology for poverty alleviation” organized by

NIRD, Hyderabad , January 2-3, 2002.

5.Sahadeva Reddy B, Madhusudhan Reddy S and Sujathamma P 2002 Low input and profit

maximizing production and protection technology in chickpea. Paper presented in

symposium on low cost production technologies to meet global challenges on May

13-14, 2002 at Rajendranagar, Hyderabad.

6.Sahadeva Reddy B, Sujathamma P and Madhusudhan Reddy S 2002 Low Cost fertilizer

and weed management practices of rice in SRBC command area. Paper presented in

symposium on low cost production technologies to meet global challenges on May13-

14, 2002 at Rajendranagar, Hyderabad.

7.Sahadeva Reddy B, Sujathamma P and Madhusudhan Reddy S 2002. An assessment and

refinement of production technologies specific to micro-ecological variables.

Extended summaries Vol.2: 2nd

International Agronomy Congress , November 26-30

,2002 ,New Delhi,India.PP:1488-1489.

8.Sahadeva Reddy B, Madhusudhan Reddy S and Sujathamma P 2003 Water

management in sunflower. Paper presented in National Seminar on “ Stress

management in oil seeds for attaining self reliance in vegetable oils” January 28-30,

2003 PP 481.

9.Sahadeva Reddy B, Sujathamma P and Madhusudhan Reddy S 2003 Effect of rainy season

residual moisture on productivity of post rainy season chickpea in vertisols of

Kurnool district. Paper presented at NIRD foundation day seminar on “Management

of natural resources for sustainable livelihoods and poverty alleviation” organized by

NIRD, Hyderabad, January 29-30, 2003.

10.K.Surender Reddy & A.Krishna 2002 Effect of greenmanuring and production technology

on yield and economics in rice. Proceeding of symposium on low cost production

technologies to meet global challenges, May-13-14, 2002 pp 5-7.

84

Impact assessment

85

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

To increase the area under irrigation in SRSP and SRBC command areas, III A.P

irrigation project supported by World Bank was taken up and was under implementation

for five years. At ARS, Warangal, ARS, Karimnagar and RARS, Nandyal applied

research and demonstrations in one or two villages each at upper, middle and lower

reaches of the distributory were conducted. In this programme, extension activities like

laying demonstrations and field trails, conducting field days, training programmes,

provision of inputs were taken up which convinced the farmers to adopt latest agricultural

production technology and there by increased yields and reducing the irrigation water

applied. The present study is aimed to evaluate the impact of the project by conducting

economic survey in the beneficiary villages and comparing it with the farmers from non-

beneficiary villages and benchmark survey. The summary of the report is as follows.

Project impact

SRSP

1. Project impact survey report revealed that there is reduction in the number of

irrigations given to maize, blackgram, paddy, cotton and chillies. The percent farmers

adopting the reduced number of irrigations ranged between 15 and 42. The water

saved by reduced irrigations can be utilized for irrigating more area.

2. Improved technology like seed treatment, alleyways in paddy, IPM in cotton and

chillies, line sowing in greengram and greenmanuring in paddy are well accepted by

the farmers.

3. Cropping systems including vegetables resulted in higher net returns to the farmers.

Large-scale cultivation of vegetables require good marketing and processing facilities.

4. Project has positive impact on crop productivity, crop production, net returns, level of

education, employment potential, cropping intensity and method of marketing.

SRBC

1. Due to impact of the project the percentage of the farmers adopted recommended

spacing in different crops in project villages was high ranging from 24-65 per cent as

against 19-25 per cent in non-project villages.

2. The impact of the project on seed rate, revealed higher percentage of adoption of

recommended seed rate both in irrigated and rainfed crops in beneficiary villages than

non-beneficiary villages.

3. Adoption of seed treatment was more distinct in beneficiary villages in paddy,

sorghum, red gram and bengalgram under irrigation and it was still higher in rainfed.

4. Due to impact of the project, the shift of varieties was observed in paddy, bengalgram,

redgram and sunflower. The percentage of adoption of improved varieties was 85 in

sorghum, 90 in sunflower, 88 in redgram and 92 in bengalgram in beneficiary villages

under irrigation as against 45, 32,28 and 48 per cent respectively in non-beneficiary

villages. Similar trend was noticed in rainfed villages also.

5. Most of the farmers applied organic manures but it was less than half the

recommendation. But due to impact of the project, the beneficiary farmers applied

higher quantities ranging from 3.7-4.9 t/ha as against 2.0-4.2 t/ha in pre-project and

2.6-3.7 t/ha in non-beneficiary farmers.

6. The impact of the project showed, reduced use of chemical fertilizers in post-project

period compared to pre-project as well as from non-beneficiary to beneficiary

86

villages. The percentage adoption of recommended fertilizers was higher from 21-36

in beneficiary villages as against 16-21 in non-beneficiary villages for different crops.

7. The impact of the project envisaged reduction of pesticide use in beneficiary farmers

especially 25 per cent in hybrid cotton, 32 per cent in paddy and 19 per cent in

redgram.

8. The man workdays required for an average size of the farm in beneficiary village and

non-beneficiary village were 415 and 334 respectively indicating an additional

employment of 81 man workdays in beneficiary village due to impact of the project.

9. The impact of the project resulted an additional net return of Rs 32232 per holding

and Rs. 8030 per hectare in beneficiary villages.

10.The benefit cost ratio was 1:0.91 in beneficiary villages and 1:0.35 in non-

beneficiary villages indicating higher net profits due to impact of the project in

beneficiary villages.

11.The impact of the project on productivity in beneficiary villages was high by 53

percent in paddy, 35 in sorghum, 120 in sunflower, 56 in redgram and 28 in hybrid

cotton over pre-project. 12.The impact of the project created number of other benefits such as establishment of

Agricultural Information Centre, Model Irrigation Block, Automatic Weather Station,

popularization of SRI cultivation, purchase of important and costly equipments like

Rotavator, LCD projector, Profile Moisture Probe etc.,

Training impact

SRSP

Training evaluation results revealed that66.5 percent of the farmers fall under the medium

category at Karimnagar and 67.7 percent of the farmers fall under medium category in Warangal.

SRBC

Evaluation test of the training programmes revealed 77 per cent of the trainees were

elevated to middle and high knowledge category in agriculture due to training

programmes and the rest of the trainees could not grasp the subject due to their

inherent defects like illiteracy, lack of interest and lack of innovativeness.

87

INTRODUCTION

The Third A.P. Irrigation project supported by the World Bank was under

implementation in SRSP & SRBC commands from 1998-2004 with a view to complete the

incomplete works and generation of additional irrigation potential there by achieving higher

agricultural productivity and socio-economic development in the project area. For attaining

the objective of higher agricultural production the farmers of the pilot operation area were

exposed to the improved farm and other technologies to achieve the following objectives:

1. To evolve and demonstrate diversified cropping sequences for horticultural

and dry land crops under rotational water supply.

2. Improve productivity through on farm irrigation.

3. To improve command area extension services and participation, irrigation

management practices through development of crops.

Before the commencement of the project the Bench mark survey was conducted at

Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal with the objectives to

1.Provide necessary information to assess the current situation before

significant implementation of project at field level.

2.Establish database of project irrigation development, agricultural

productivity, performance indicators required to monitor and evaluate the

success of the project prior to its completion.

After the implementation of the project for five years to estimate the impact of the

A.P. III Irrigation Project, implemented at Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal, on the

agricultural production and the socio-economic conditions of the beneficiary village farmers

and non-beneficiary village farmers, a survey was conducted from 28th

March to 5th

May,

2004 at Karimnagar, 15th

March to 30th

March, 2004 at Warangal and 3rd

April to 6th

May,

2004 at Nandyal. A full-fledged interview schedule was developed and utilized for the

purpose (Annexure – 1). For assessing the impact of the project, 40 farmers from each of the

beneficiary villages (Nagnur & Rukmapur -Upper reach, Cherlaboothkur & Irkula-Middle

reach and Narayanaraopally & Sambiapally-Lower reach) and 60 farmers from the non-

beneficiary villages were surveyed in Karimnagar district. In Warangal 40 farmers from each

reach (Palivelpula-Upper reach, Pegadapalli -Middle reach and Seethanagaram-Lower reach)

and 60 farmers from non-beneficiary villagers were surveyed. At Nandyal 40 farmers from

each of the beneficiary village (Konidedu-Upper reach, Bhupanapaddu-Middle reach and

Maddur-Lower reach and equal number from non-beneficiary villages were surveyed. The

scope of the study consisted the identification of performance indicators and subsequent

estimation during the pre-project period and comparing them with post-project period. The

identified performance indicators under the component of the study consisted the following

effect on

a) Crop yields, cropping intensity and cropping pattern

b) Crop inputs like varieties, fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation etc.

c) Package of practices in major crops like spacing, seed rate, seed treatment,

plant population, weeding etc.

d) Socio-economic conditions like employment potential, farm income,

literacy levels, savings etc.

The impact of the project was evaluated and presented in the following categories.

I. Impact on crop inputs.

II. Impact on package of practices in major crops.

III. Crop economics.

IV. Socio-economic conditions.

88

CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED

Based on the benchmark survey done before the project implementation, the

following constraints were identified in major crops grown in the beneficiary villages of

Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal

.

Maize

1. Excessive irrigations are given due to free availability of canal water.

2. Chemical weed control is not practiced resulting in higher cost o cultivation and

delayed manual weedi

3. Seed treatment was not done.. Excessive application of inorganic fertilizers

with less usage of organic

fertilizers .

4. Closer spacing was followed against the recommended spacing of 75x20 cm.

Paddy

1. Wastage of irrigation water due to excessive irrigation.

2. Application of farmyard manure and green manure was not followed.

3. Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers without application of K

4. Chemical weed control not practiced

5. Cultivation of age-old local varieties susceptible to BPH, Gallmidge and Bacterial

leaf blight.

6. Direct seeding was not practiced.

7. Micronutrient deficiencies not corrected.

Cotton

1. Indiscriminate use of pesticides and non-adoption of IPM practice.

2. Excessive use of irrigation water.

3. Inconsistent market prices.

4. Soils are not suitable for cotton cultivation.

5. Failure of Southwest monsoon at critical stages of crop growth (Terminal drought).

6. Use of F2 seed, which have no certification.

7. Adoption of wider spacing against the recommended spacing of 90x45cm.

Greengram 1. Growing of local varieties susceptible to YMV.

2. Application of no or insufficient quantity of fertilizers.


4. Broadcast method of sowing.

Groundnut

1. Growing local varieties

2. Low plant stand

3. Non-application of Gypsum.

4. Non-adoption of chemical weed control.

5. Excessive irrigation.

Chilli (Waranagal)

1. In Chilli dieback, leaf curl and viral diseases are common, which reduce

the yield.

2. Most of the farmers practicing direct seeding which also reduce the plant

canopy and growth.

3. In winter season, micronutrient deficiencies of MG, Fe, and B is a

phenomenon due to low temperature affecting uptake of nutrients.

89

Turmeric (Warangal)

1. Growing of long duration (9 months) local varieties susceptible to rhizome

rot

2. Lack of awareness about the importance of seed treatment.

3. Monocropping of turmeric.

Chickpea (Nandyal)

1. Growing local varieties.

2. Failure of Southwest monsoon resulting in less residual soil moisture and

low rainfall in October (Terminal drought).

3. Farmyard manure is not applied.

4. Excess dose of nitrogen and under dose of Phosphorus.

5. Pest menace especially Heliothis.

Sunflower (Nandyal)

1. Non availability of certified seed and straight varieties.

2. Frequent failure of Southwest monsoon at critical stages of crop growth

(Terminal drought).

3. Thinning is not practiced.

4. Imbalanced application of fertilizers.

5. Hand pollination not practiced.

Cropping Systems

Mostly the cropping systems adopted before the implementation of the project are

Greengram-Maize, Paddy-Maize, Paddy-Paddy, Maize-Maize, Cotton-fallow,

Chickpea-fallow, Fallow-Sunflower etc.

Vegetable cultivation

Before the implementation of project the farmers were not aware of cultivation of

summer vegetables.

90

TRIALS CONDUCTED TO OVER COME THE CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED AT

KARIMNAGAR (K), WARANGAL (W) AND NANDYAL (N)

Constraints identified Trials conducted

Maize 1 Excessive irrigations Demonstration of irrigation schedules in Maize

(K& W)

2 Chemical weed control Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques

in Maize (W)

3 Excessive inorganic fertilizer

application

Demonstration of application of recommended doses

of fertilizers in Maize (K&W)

4 Non adoption of seed treatment

optimum spacing & improved

varieties

Popularization of new hybrids in Maize. (K)

5 Irrigation by flooding Demonstration on methods of irrigations in maize.

(W)

Paddy 1 Wastage of irrigation water Demonstration of intermittent irrigation schedules in

paddy (K)

Demonstration of improved puddler in paddy (K)

Demonstration of System of Rice Intensification (N)

2 Higher doses of inorganic

fertilizers

Demonstration of application of recommended doses

of fertilizers in paddy (K&W)

Demonstration of fertilizer management in rice (N)

3 Chemical weed control Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques

in paddy (K & N)

4 Cultivation of local varieties Introduction of new varieties in paddy (JGL-1798,

JGL-1853 and WGL-14) (K&W)

5 Method of planting Demonstration of direct seeding techniques in paddy

(K &W).

Cotton 1 Indiscriminate use of pesticides Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in

Cotton (K ,W & N)

Stem application of Monocrotophos in cotton (N).

Production technology in cotton (N).

2 Excessive use of irrigation water Demonstration of irrigation schedules in Cotton

(K&W)

Demonstration of drip irrigation system in Cotton (K)

3. In efficient methods of irrigation Demonstration on methods of irrigation in Cotton (W)

4. Suitability of soils Red chalka soils are not suitable for Cotton cultivation

thus farmers are advised not to grow Cotton in those

soils as both yield and quality are effected.(K)

5. Application of higher doses of

chemical fertilizers

Demonstration of fertilizer management in rainfed and

irrigated cotton (N)

6. Wider spacing (100x 60cm)

against recommended spacing of

90 x 45cm.

Demonstration of optimum spacing of American

cotton (N).

7. Use of F2 seed from unreliable

sources.

Introduction of improved straight varieties like

Narasimha and Aravinda in place of hybrids (N).

91

Turmeric

1. No seed treatment Demonstration on management of rhizome rot and leaf

spot in Turmeric (W)


technology in Turmeric (W)

Chilli 1 No micronutrient sprayings Management of yellow syndrome in chilli (W).

2. Inefficient irrigation methods Demonstration on methods of irrigation in chilli (W).

3. Indiscriminate use of fertilizers

and pesticides


technology in chilli. (W).

Greengram 1 Growing local varieties,

broadcasting of seed, insufficient

fertilization.

Popularization pf recommended production

technology in Green gram (K)

2 Chemical weed control Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in

Green gram (K)

Chickpea 1. Growing local varieties Demonstration of improved varieties like Swetha and

Kranthi (N).

2. Failure of Southwest monsoon

resulting in less residual

moisture associated with low

rainfall in October.

Demonstration of recommended water management

schedules after release of water. Presently uses of

sprinklers were demonstrated (N).

3. Indiscriminate use of pesticides

and poor management practices.

Demonstration of production technology in chickpea

(N)

Sunflower 1. Frequent Failure of Southwest

monsoon during critical stages of

crop growth.

Water management studies after release of water (N).

2. Use of high seed rate and

thinning not practiced.

Demonstration of optimum plant population in

sunflower (N).

3. Imbalance fertilizer application Demonstration of production technology in Sunflower

(N)

4. Use of F2 seed from unreliable

sources.

Demonstration of new sunflower hybrids (N).

Groundnut 1 Growing local varieties Popularization of new variety of Groundnut JL-24.(K)

2 Low plant stand and non-

application of gypsum


technology in Groundnut (K&W)

3 Chemical weed control Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in

Groundnut (K)

4 Excessive irrigation Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in

Groundnut (W).

Demonstration of different irrigation methods in

Groundnut (K&W).

Demonstration on scheduling of irrigation in

92

Groundnut (W).

Cropping systems 1 Third crop is not cultivated Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize

based cropping system. (W)

Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Green

gram based cropping system. (K)

Popularization of Green gram based cropping system

(K)

Popularization of Maize based cropping system.(W)

2 Moncropping of cotton and rice Demonstration on cotton based cropping systems (W)

Demonstration on rice based cropping systems. (W)

Vegetables 1 Summer vegetables are not

cultivated

Introduction of vegetables in Kharif (K&W).

93

SRSP

I. Impact of crop inputs (a) Irrigation

Water is a precious limited resource and needs efficient utilization, which

assumes special significance for increasing the productivity in agriculture.

This can be achieved only through efficient soil and water management. The irrigation potential created by the SRSP has not been fully utilized due to the various

reasons, leaving a wide gap between the potential created and actual utilized. Excessive irrigation in

the upper regions of canal system existed side by side with non-availability of water to the tail end

users. As the irrigation water is available in surplus (canal & well) farmers in the command area are

accustomed to give more number of irrigations. As a result of extensive demonstrations conducted for

five years 15-36 percent of farmers are adopting reduced number of irrigations in different crops

(Table-1). Percent of farmers who are not aware of technology indicate that further extensive training

is required for extensive adoption associated with limited water use.

Table-1: Impact of the project in reducing the number of irrigation‟s given to the

crops.

Crop % of the farmers

adopting reduced

number of irrigations

% of the farmers

aware of

technology but

not adopting

% of the farmers

not aware of

technology

Maize 36(K)

42(W)

23(K)

37(W)

41(K)

21(W)

Paddy 15(K) 30(K) 55(K)

Groundnut 25(K)

31(W)

28(K)

44(W)

47(K)

25(W)

Blackgram 20(K) 38(K) 42(K)

Cotton 15(K)

21(W)

25(K)

51(W)

60(K)

28(W)

Chilli 24(W) 44(W) 32(W)

K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

Table-2: Estimated additional area that can be brought under irrigation by

adopting reduced number of irrigation‟s in Karimnagar and Warangal.

Crop

% increase in area to net cultivated area

Warangal Karimnagar

Maize 26 22

Paddy -- 36

Cotton 15 8.9

Groundnut 39 20

Chilli 22 --


Large-scale on-farm demonstrations have revealed that, reducing the irrigations to different

crops (Table-2) can increase the irrigation potential. In Karimnagar, in case of maize reducing the

number of irrigations by 2-3 nearly 100 mm can be saved. By adopting this method of irrigation

around 19,200 ha of land can be brought under irrigated maize cultivation. This accounts to 22 and 26

percent of the net cultivated area in Karimnagar and Warangal respectively under maize. In paddy,

land preparation with puddler followed by intermittent irrigation methods saved nearly 450 mm of

water. This saved water can be used for other crops or cultivating paddy in 92,880 hectares, resulting

in 36 percent increase area to the net cultivated area under paddy.

In cotton by irrigating the crop at 20 days interval against 15 days interval has resulted in 80

mm water saving. The saved water can be utilized for irrigating 7,470 ha (Karimnagar) and 1,73,670

ha (Warangal) of cotton crop resulting in 8.9 and 15 percent increase in area to the net cultivated area

94

in the districts. In groundnut irrigating the crop at 15 days interval instead of 7 days interval has

resulted in 100 mm of water saving. 20 percent increase in area to net cultivated area (30,000 ha) can

be attained in Karimnagar if same practice is adopted through out the district.

(b) Fertilizers

(i) Inorganic fertilizers Table-3: Impact of the project on usage of inorganic fertilizers

Crop Post-project Pre-project

% Farmers

applying over

and above

recommended

dose

% Farmers

applying below

the

recommended

dose

% Farmers

applying over

and above

recommended

dose

% Farmers

applying

below the

recommended

dose

Maize 31(K)

27(W)

2(K)

62(K)

46(W)

7(K)

Paddy 27(K)

31(W)

9(K)

46(K)

52(W)

11(K)

Groundnut --

9(W)

17(K)

23(W)

--

15(W)

56(K)

44(W)

Blackgram -- 24(K) -- --

Greengram -- 51(K) -- 74(K)

Cotton 19(K)

23(W)

-- --

34(W)

--

Chilli 29(W) -- 43(W) -- K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

Among the agricultural inputs, fertilizer is consumed in bulk compared to other inputs like

seed and pesticides. Due to non-availability of sufficient quantity of organic manures, the farmers are

applying higher doses of in-organic fertilizers. Incase of maize and paddy, all the farmers both in

beneficiary and non-beneficiary are accustomed to use higher doses of fertilizers. In case of

greengram and groundnut lower doses of fertilizes are applied. During pre-project period 62 and 46

percent farmers applied higher doses of fertilizers to maize and paddy, respectively. With

implementation of project only 31 and 27 percent of the farmers are applying more than the

recommended dosage of fertilizer. Incase of groundnut and greengram the percent farmers applying

lower fertilizers was reduced to 17 and 51, respectively.

(ii) Organic manures:

Green manuring: Green manure is an important practice in increasing the fertility as well as improving the

physical conditions of the soil.

Table-4: Impact of the project on growing green manure crop

Detail Post-project Pre-project Percent farmers who are growing green manure crop 43 (K),42(W)

12(W)

Percent farmers who aware of green manure but not

growing the crop

36(K), 58(W)

34(K), 28(W)

Percent farmers who are not aware of green manure 21(K)

66(K),60(W)


Before the implementation of the project the farmers were not applying green manure. After the

project was implemented 43 and 42 percent of farmers in Karimnagar and Warangal districts are

growing green manure crop. 36 and 58 percent farmers in Karimnagar and Warangal districts are

95

aware of the advantages of green manure crop but not raising it because of various constraints like

non-availability of the green manure seed, non-availability of water due to late onset of monsoon. In

Karimnagar district even now 21 percent farmers, mostly small farmers without supplementary

irrigation are not aware of green manure crop .

Table-5: Impact of the project on application of organic fertilizers

Detail Post-project Pre-

project Percent of farmers

applying organic fertilizers

98(K) & 90(W)

(Manure is applied in rotation or to commercial

crops as sufficient quantity is not available)

81(K)

82(W)

Percent of farmers

applying FYM

74(K) & 62(W)

(Mostly 50 percent of farmers go for poultry

manure in Karimnagar)

62(K)

50(W)

Percent farmers applying

sheep or poultry manure

63(K) & 58(W)

45(K)

48(W)

Percent farmers aware of

organic fertilizer but not

applying to the complete

holding

86(K) & 90(W) 83(K)

80(W)


Application of FYM is an age-old practice adopted by most of the farmers and known to all

the farmers. Thus, there is not much impact of project implementation. In Karimnagar 98 and in

Warangal 90 percent farmers are applying FYM during post-project period as against 81 percent

(Karimnagar) and 82 percent (Warangal) during pre-project period. The FYM is not applied to the

complete holding, it is applied in rotation due to lack of sufficient quantity of FYM. Farmers are well

versed with utility of poultry and sheep manure also, but only 63 percent farmers are applying the

poultry or sheep manure due to higher cost. In Warangal, only 58 percent of the farmers are applying

poultry or sheep manure to commercial crops.

(c) Pesticides:

Table-6: Impact of the project on pesticide usage

Crop % of farmers reduced pesticide usage

Karimnagar Warangal

Maize 12 32

Paddy 48 41

Groundnut 70 35

Cotton 52 65

Chilli -- 52

Turmeric -- 43


Andhra Pradesh occupies the first place in consumption of pesticides contributing 36 percent

of country's consumption. According to the statistics available there is steady decline in the usage of

pesticides from 1998-99 to 2000-01 in Karimnagar and Warangal districts. In case of maize, very less

number and quantity of pesticides are used both during the pre-project and post-project period. In case

of paddy, formation of alleys have to certain extent reduced excessive usage of pesticide for control of

brown plant hopper which is a serious pest necessitating indiscriminate use of pesticides. In case of

greengram, the pesticides used are sometimes below the recommended levels. Cotton is the major

crop consuming higher share of pesticides. In beneficiary villages, nearly 52 (Karimnagar) and 65

(Warangal) percent farmers have reduced the pesticide usage in cotton by adopting IPM.

96

(d) Herbicide/ Weedicide usage:

Table-7: Impact of the project on usage of weedicide

Crop

% of farmers using weedicide for control of

weeds

Post-project Pre-project

Maize 84 (K)

90(W)

--

Paddy 65(K)

78(W)

--

Groundnut 23(K)

65(W)

--

Blackgram 20(K) --

Greengram 5(K) --

Cotton 10(K)

45(W)

--

Chilli 39(W)


Before the project was implemented, the farmers did not know the utility of herbicides

completely. As a result of project implementation, 84 and 90 percent of maize, 65 and 78 percent of

paddy, 23 and 65 percent of groundnut, 10 and 45 percent of cotton farmers are using recommended

herbicides in Karimnagar and Warangal districts, respectively. In Karimnagar, 20 percent of

blackgram farmers are using recommended herbicides. In case of greengram, very few farmers are

using herbicides for the control of weeds. The usage of herbicides (identified as one of the constraint

for low yields in command area) has increased the yield of the crops. In case of non-beneficiary

villages also few farmers are applying herbicides as per the advice of the agrochemical vendors.

Usage of herbicides helped farmers to overcome labour problem.

97

II. Impact of package of practices (a)Varieties:

Table-8: Impact of the project on crop varieties cultivated at Karimnagar and

Warangal

Crop

Post-project

Pre-project

% of farmers shifted towards

improved variety

Adopted

village

Other

village

Maize Hybrids Hybrids -- --

Paddy

WGL-14, JGL-1798,

JGL-1853, MTU-1001,

JGL-384

Erramallelu,

IR-64,

Swarna,

MTU-1001,

1010,BPT-

5204

60(K)

67(W)

21(K)

32(W)

Groundnut ICGS-44, JL-24, TG-26,

JCG-88 Sand local

Local 72(K)

12(W)

--

--

Blackgram LBG-20, WBG-26 and

LBG-645

-- 100(K) --

Greengram Local, WGG-37 Local 95(K) 15(K)

Cotton Bunny, Brahma, Arjun,

NA-1588, NA-1678,

WCH-I, WCH-II and

Tulasi

Hybrids -- --

Turmeric Duggirala red Local 70(W) 24(W)

Chillli Hybrids Hybrids -- -- K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

Implementation of the AP III Irrigation Project had an outstanding impact on

changing the crop varieties from local varieties to the improved varieties

incase of paddy, groundnut, greengram and turmeric. In case of Maize the

farmers are cultivating the private hybrids like Paras, ProAgro, Pioneer etc

even before the implementation of the project. They are reluctant for any

change of hybrids as they are harvesting good yields with private hybrids. In

case of paddy, during the pre-project period the major varieties ruling the

beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages were IR-64, Swarna, MTU-1001 etc.

At present 60 percent of the farmers from beneficiary villages and 21 percent

of the farmers from non-beneficiary villages have shifted to the varieties like

JGL-1798 in Kharif and JGL-1853 & WGL-14 in Rabi. In case of cotton some

farmers in Warangal shifted from hybrids to straight varieties, as they are

drought resistant, pest resistant and short duration varieties. In case of groundnut, very little area was present under the local varieties during the pre-

project period. Area under groundnut has increased and 72 percent of the farmers in the beneficiary

villages are cultivating the improved varieties like JL-24, TG-26 and ICGS-44 in Karimnagar as

against 12 percent farmers growing JCG-88 in Warangal. Incase of the non-beneficiary villages, still

they are cultivating the local varieties only. Large area is under local greengram cultivation during the

pre-project period. About 95 percent of the farmers in the beneficiary villages are cultivating WGG-

37, an improved variety of greengram with the implementation of the project.

Turmeric cultivation is limited to only a small area. Prior to the project farmers

cultivated only local varieties. After the implementation of the project, Duggirala red was

98

introduced which the farmers accepted and 70 percent of the farmers are cultivating the

improved variety

(b) Spacing:

Table -9: Impact of the project on spacing adopted in major crops

Crop

Post-project

Pre-project

% farmers in

beneficiary

villages adopting

recommended

spacing

% farmers of

non-beneficiary

villages adopting

recommended

spacing

Maize 75 x 20 cm

65-75x20-25cm

50-60 x 25 cm

50-60x25

11(K)

43(W)

--

Paddy 20 x 10 cm

15 x 15 cm

15 x 10 cm

Zig Zag

22(K)

30(W)

--

13(W)

Groundnut 30 x 10 cm 45 x 10 cm 74 (K)

67(W)

9(K)

--

Blackgram 30 x 10 cm -- -- --

Greengram 30 x 10 cm (line

sowing)

Broadcasting 88(K) 31(K)

Cotton 90-100 x 45x60

cm

90 x 90 cm --

15(W)

--

6(W)

Chilli 60-90x 60cm Line sowing 48(W) 8(W)

Turmeric 30x15 cm 45x15 cm 75(W) -- K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

During the pre-project period lower spacing in case of paddy, higher spacing incase of

groundnut and broadcasting in greengram was adopted. Incase of maize inter-row spacing was less

and intra-row spacing was more, but there was not much difference as far as the crop stand. With the

implementation of the project 11, 22,74 and 88 percent farmers from beneficiary villages adopted the

recommended spacing in maize, paddy, groundnut and greengram crops, respectively. Incase of

greengram, still the farmers are adopting broad casting as some of them do not have the cattle pair and

plough. Further 12 percent of the farmers who are not adopting line sowing are also aware of

advantages of line sowing but are not in a position to go in for line sowing.

(c) Seed Rate

Table -10: Impact of the project on seed rate (Kg/ha) adopted in major crops

Crop

Post-

project

Pre-project

% farmers in

beneficiary villages

adopting

recommended seed

rate

% farmers of

non-beneficiary

villages

adopting

recommended

seed rate

Maize 18(K&W) 18-20(K)

20-25(W)

9(K)

62(W)

--

35(W)

Paddy 60(K)

50-65(W)

75-80(K)

75-85(W)

15(K)

68(W)

--

36(W)

Groundnut 100-120

(K&W)

80-90(K)

80-100(W)

58(K)

42(W)

21(K)

12(W)

Blackgram -- -- -- --

Greengram 12(K) 8-10(K) 75(K) 45(K)

99

Cotton --

2(Hybrid)

4(Straight

variety)

--

3-4(Hybrid)

5-6(Straight

Variety

--

56(W)

--

28(W)

Chilli 1-1.5 2-3 42(W) 20(W)

Turmeric 2000-2500 1800-2000 59(W) 32(W)


Higher seed rate in maize, paddy and chillies and lower seed rate in groundnut, greengram

and turmeric was adopted by the farmers during the pre-project period. There are 9, 15, 58 and 75

percent farmers from the beneficiary villages adopting the recommended seed rate in maize, paddy,

groundnut and greengram, respectively after the implementation of the project. In Warangal, 42-68

percent of the farmers of the beneficiary village are adopting recommended seed rate in different

crops after implementation of the project.

(d) Seed Treatment: Table-11: Impact of the project on the adoption of seed treatment

Crop

% of farmers going for seed treatment


Maize 55(K) --

Paddy 62(K) 75(W) 12(W)

Groundnut 80(K) 82(W) 9(W)

Blackgram 84(K) --

Greengram 64(K) --

Cotton Treated seed is available Treated seed is available

Chilli 68(W) 19(W)

Turmeric 90(W) -- K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

Seed treatment is an important practice in controlling the seed borne diseases as well as

protecting the plant from diseases during the initial stages. During the pre-project period no seed

treatment was done. As a result of the impact of the project 55, 62, 80, 84, 64 and 90 percent of the

farmers growing maize, paddy, groundnut, blackgram, greengram and tumeric (W), respectively, are

practicing the seed treatment. In case of cotton and vegetables pre-treated seed is available in the

market. Most of the farmers who are not adopting seed treatment are aware of it, but not practicing

due to non-availability of small quantity of chemical.

(e) Plant Population: In Warangal, after the implementation of the project the farmers knew the importance of seed

rate and spacing and thus maintained the optimum plant population.

Table-12: Impact of the project on the maintenance of optimum plant population

Crop

% of farmers maintaining optimum plant

population


Maize (Almost optimum) 95(K) 89(K) 80(K) 84(W)

Paddy (More) 75(K) 75(W) 90(K) 93(W)

Groundnut (Less) 60(K) 63(K) 100(K) 100(W)

Greengram 79(K) 100(K)

Cotton (More) 70(K) 68(W) 100(K) 100(W)

Chilli (More) 72(K) 100(W)

Turmeric (Less) 93(K) 100(W) K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

100

In case of maize though the spacing adopted deviates from the recommended spacing, plant

population maintained is almost same. Thus there is not much variation in percentage of farmers

maintaining optimum plant population during the post-project and pre-project period. In case of

groundnut due to higher spacing, low plant population was maintained.

(f) Method of Sowing: Table-13: Impact of the project on method of sowing of different crops

Crop Method of sowing % of farmers adopting the

specified method of sowing


Maize Ridge & furrow 95(K)

89(W)

80(K)

72(W)

Paddy Direct sowing 15(K)

2(W)

--

--

Green gram Line sowing 87(K) 5(K) K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

Method of sowing also influences the yield and the efficiency of the management practices

adopted. In case of maize even before the implementation of the project 80 (K) and 72 (W) percent of

farmers used to adopt ridge & furrow method of sowing, which has increased to 95 (K) and 89 (W)

percent during the post-project period. Mechanization is a crucial input in crop production

management. In agricultural sector it has assumed greater significance because of its potential to

enhance productivity by ensuring timely agricultural operations more effectively and reducing human

drudgery. It also gives relief from increase labour cost, labour unrest at crucial hours, which hampers

timely operations. In case of paddy, direct seeding with paddy drum seeder was introduced in the

beneficiary villages. Direct seeding technique was accepted by the farmers and are planning to

purchase the drum seeder. Only few farmers have adopted this practice, as it is completely new one.

Line sowing in greengram is an important practice and nearly 87 percent of farmers in the beneficiary

villages are going for line sowing. The advantage of line sowing is identified by 13 percent farmers

but not adopting due to lack of bullock pair and plough.

III) Impact on crop economics

(a) Crop Productivity

Table-14: Impact of the project in increasing the productivity of the major crops in

the beneficiary villages of Karimnagar district.

Crop

Productivity % Increase in

productivity over the

pre-project period Post- project (kg/ha) Pre-project (kg/ha)

Maize 5910(K)

5010(W)

3500(K)

2800(W)

68.9(K)

78.9(W)

Paddy 5130(K)

5460(W)

2400(K)

2920(W)

113.75(K)

86.9(W)

Groundnut 1740(K)

2610(W)

1250(K)

1210(W)

39.2(K)

115.7(W)

Blackgram 1390(K) -- --

Greengram 585(K) 300(K) 95(K)

Cotton 2280(K)

2620(W)

1200(K)

1300(W)

90(K)

101.5(W)

Chilli 2390(W) 2200(W) 8.6(W)


Implementation of the project has an outstanding effect on the productivity of the crop in the

beneficiary village. It was found that maize productivity has increased by 68.9(K) and 78.9 (W)

percent compared to the pre-project period. This can be attributed mostly to the improved cultural

practices and change in the varieties. Productivity in paddy, groundnut and greengram has increased

101

by 113.75, 39.2 and 95 percent, respectively. The yields of the beneficiary villages (post-project) as

compared with the average yields of the command area and Karimnagar district are presented in the

table - 14.

Table-15: Comparative crop productivity in Karimnagar district, command area

and beneficiary villages.

Crop

Productivity (kg/ha)

Karimnagar Command area Beneficiary villages

Maize 3103 4199 5910

Paddy 2777 3106 5130

Groundnut 243 786 1370

Blackgram 251 320 585

Greengram 659 1200 2250

Cotton 881 1613 1740

A large margin between productivity in beneficiary village, command area and the district

exists ( Table-15 & 16). Thus it can be concluded that, if the same cultural practices are adopted

through out the district, production of the major crops can be increased to a greater extent as presented

in table - 17.

Table-16: Comparative crop productivity in Warangal district, command area and

beneficiary villages.

Crop

Productivity (kg/ha)

Warangal Command area Beneficiary villages

Maize 2800 4199 5010

Paddy 2920 3106 5450

Groundnut 1210 786 2610

Cotton 1300 1613 2620

Chilli 2200 -- 2390

Table-17: Area and production of major crops for Karimnagar & Warangal

Crop Area (ha) Production (t)

Maize 96000(K)

62800(W)

269472(K)

169730(W)

Paddy 258000(K)

184000(W)

607074(K)

655000(W)

Greengram 39000(K) 13026(K)

Cotton 84000(K)

155000(W)

136164(K)

200720(W)

Groundnut 30000(K)

53000(W)

25770(K)

60190(W)

Chilli 33100(W) 72820(W)


(b) Cost of Cultivation and Net income The effect of the project on cost of cultivation during the post-project period in comparison with pre-

project period is presented in the table - 18. It was found that the cost of cultivation was reduced in

case of paddy and maize during post-project period compared to pre project period as the excessive

dosage of fertilizers applied were cut down to great extent and weedicides were used for control of

weeds. In case of greengram and cotton the cost of cultivation has increased due to the adoption of

cost intensive improved management practices.

Table-18: Impact of the project on cost of cultivation and net income in beneficiary

Villages of Karimnagar and Warangal districts.

102

Crop

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Net income (Rs/ha) % increase in net

income Pre-project Post-

project

Pre-project Post-

project Maize 15000(K)

10604(W)

10460(K)

9850(W)

12000(K)

9377(W)

22450(K)

11961(W)

87(K)

27.6(W)

Paddy 17000(K)

14844(W)

10690(K)

13531(W)

8000(K)

21125(W)

20190(K)

24727(W)

152(K)

17.1(W)

Greengram 1600(K) 4120(K) 2200(K) 8560(K) 289(K)

Cotton 13000(K)

25466(W)

17460(K)

22659(W)

7000(K)

23621(W)

23740(K)

33295(W)

239(K)

41(W)

Chilli 26200(W) 24030(W) 22416(W) 29962(W) 33.7(W)

Groundnut 10665(W) 9883(W) 20118(W) 25016(W) 24.3(W)


The project has an out standing impact in increasing the net returns. It was found that there

was 87, 152, 289 and 239 percent increase in net income in case of maize, paddy, greengram and

cotton, respectively. This increase can be attributed to improved management practices associated

with assured supply of irrigation water.

Table-19: Impact of the project on cost of cultivation and net income compared to

rest of command area in Karimnagar district.

Crop

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Net income (Rs/ha) % increase in net

income in

beneficiary

villages

Command

area (99-

2000)

Beneficiary

village

Command

area (99-

2000)

Beneficiary

village

Maize 11124 11690 16380 20190 23.3

Paddy 7294 10460 16208 22450 38.5

Greengram 6615 8615 10185 12340 21.2

Cotton 23039 17460 21961 23740 8.1

The impact of the project on cost of cultivation and net income in beneficiary villages

compared to the entire command area indicate that 23.3, 38.5, 21.2 and 8.1 percent increase in net

income was registered in beneficiary villages against the command area in crops like paddy, maize,

groundnut and cotton, respectively (Table-19). In cotton, the cost of cultivation was reduced by

judicious usage of the pesticides supplemented with integrated pest management practices.

IV. Impact on socio-economic conditions:

One of the components of the baseline survey for the pre-project period and impact survey

during the post-project period was the estimation of socio-economic characteristics for the project

beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The socio-economic conditions such as literacy, land holding

pattern, income and expenditure pattern, savings etc. were considered.

(a) Level of education among the farmers:

The level of education in both the beneficiary and non-beneficiary farmers is almost similar

with few changes in education levels of the children in villages. The literacy rate in beneficiary and

non-beneficiary villages is 55 and 59 percent respectively. Majority of the illiterates are from the

small farmers both in the beneficiary villages and other villages.

(b) Occupation of farmers:

The occupation of majority of occupants in both beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages is

agriculture. Further agricultural labour is a secondary occupation for about 47 percent of the farmers

in beneficiary villages and 41 percent of the farmers in the non-beneficiary villages. This difference

can be attributed to increased cropping intensity and changed cropping pattern in the beneficiary

village, providing work in their farm itself. The farmers with other farm business were very few both

in the beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages.

(c) Land holding patterns:

Marginal farmers own majority of the land in the non-beneficiary villages, where as the

medium and big farmers‟ own major part of the cultivable land in the beneficiary village. The land

holdings have increased by 18 percent in the beneficiary village when compared to the holding during

103

the pre-project period. This increase is mainly in the case of progressive farmers in the villages. There

is not much difference in the holdings of the farmers from the non-beneficiary villages.

(d) Cropping Pattern: There is an outstanding difference in the cropping pattern between the beneficiary and non-

beneficiary villages. In non-beneficiary villages, major crops grown are paddy and maize with less

area under pulses and negligible area under summer vegetables. In beneficiary village 85-90 percent

of the farmers are growing greengram-maize cropping system before the implementation of the

project. After project is implemented around 40 percent of the farmers have shifted from the

traditional cropping system to the improved cropping system including vegetables. The accepted

cropping systems in the beneficiary village are maize-groundnut-greengram, greengram-maize-

greengram, maize-groundnut-vegetable and greengram-maize-vegetable. Many of the farmers are

interested in growing vegetable during summer through conjunctive use of canal and well irrigation.

(e) Cropping intensity: Cropping intensity is an important yardstick for measuring the impact of any agricultural

project. Cropping intensity has increased to greater extent as the third crop (summer crop) was

introduced and readily accepted by the farmers in the beneficiary villages. Mostly vegetables are

cultivated in summer through conjunctive use of canal and well irrigation.

(f) Employment potential: Employment potential in village mirrors the financial and social status of the village. In the

beneficiary village the employment potential has increased due to increased cropping potential.

Labour from the non-beneficiary is also working in the beneficiary villages. Thus if the same practice

of cultivating third crop is adopted in entire command area (2.53 lakh hectares) employment potential

can be increased to a greater extent, which in turn would increase socio-economic conditions of the

farmers.

(g) Method of marketing:

Method and time marketing depends on the socio-economic status of the farmers. Before the

implementation of the project, nearly 95 percent of the farmers use to sell the produce immediately

after harvesting. They could not wait for better price in the market due to various financial

commitments. This at times has resulted in lower net income to the farmers. After the implementation

of the project, nearly 35 percent farmers are withholding the produce for better prices. This highlights

the increased financial stability in the farmers of the beneficiary villages.

(h) Indebtedness: All the categories of beneficiaries are taking crop loans ranging from Rs. 5000 to 30000

depending on land holdings from primary agriculture co-operative society, which will be repaid after

the crop season. Most of the beneficiaries are shareholders in the society. Various inputs like

fertilizers, seeds etc. are purchased with this crop loans. Apart from crop loan very few farmers have

also taken loans for purchase of tractor and other farm implements.

104

SRBC I. Impact of the project due to demonstrations, trials and other extension

activities

The Agro-climagtic conditions of both beneficiary and non –beneficiary villages were similar.

The crops grown were also more or less similar. The crops grown were rice, sorghum, sunflower,

redgram, hybrid cotton, mungari cotton, bengalgram and coriander. Irrigated land exists in both the

situations. But 80 per cent of irrigated land was provided with only one or two irrigations through

kundu river or bore wells if water and power were available. So this type of land was also included

under irrigated land, otherwise most of the lands were dry lands in both beneficiary and non-

beneficiary villages. Thus the agricultural situation was similar in both types of villages and mainly it

was rainfed cultivation. In beneficiary villages intensive training programmes, trails, demonstrations,

field days, provision of required inputs were made which enhanced the knowledge of the farmers in

beneficiary villages and facilitated to apply required inputs resulting increased yields. So the impact

of the project was measured by comparing the adoption of improved package of practices in both

beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages.

The climatic conditions were not favourable since 5 years due to lack of sufficient rainfall.

The rainfall data were furnished in Table-2.An amount 29, 37 and 32 per cent deficit rainfall was

received during 1999-2000, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 respectively compared to decennial average.

During these years cotton, sunflower and bengalgram were severely affected by drought conditions.

The rainfall received in 2000-2001and 2001-2002 was good and was excess by 26 and 36 percent

respectively compared to decennial average. Due to low recharge of bore wells and overall drought

conditions, farmers did not take up second crop after rice. During 2003-2004 the rainfall received

from June-October was 379.6 mm in 30 rainy days. In November and December, rainfall was not

received which affected the rabi crops.

105

II.Impact on adoption of package of practices

Many of the farmers both in beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages were sowing with gorru

and non-accustomed for dibbling. Only 10 per cent of farmers in hybrid cotton and eight per cent of

farmers adopted dibbling in sunflower in beneficiary villages. Most of the farmers were aware of the

advantage of dibbling but due to the problem of labour and evaporation of moisture in the soil, they

were reluctant for this practice. After gorru sowing the farmers were doing thinning operation to

maintain required plant population and spacing in some of crops like hybrid cotton, hybrid sorghum,

redgram etc., Due to impact of the project the percent of farmers adopting recommended spacing in

beneficiary villages was more than non-beneficiary villages as shown in Table-20. In beneficiary

villages the percentage of farmers adopted recommended spacing was 32 in paddy, 27 sorghum, 24

sunflower, 45 redgram, 65 hybrid cotton as against 19 to 25 per cent in non-beneficiary villages. In

bengalgram and coriander all the farmers were adopting almost the recommended spacing.

Table-20: Impact of project on spacing adopted in major crops

Crops

Post - project

Pre - project

% farmers in

beneficiary

villages

adopting

recommended

spacing

% farmers in

non-beneficiary

villages

adopting

recommended

spacing

Paddy 25 cm x 20 cm 30 cm x 20 cm 32 21

Sorghum 30 cm x 10 cm 30 cm x 10 cm 27 24

Sunflower 60-80 cm x 30 cm 60 cm x 20 cm 24 19

Redgram 90-140 cm x 20cm 140 cm x 20 cm 45 25

Hybrid cotton 60-110 cm x 45cm 110 cm x 45 cm 65 -

Bengalgram 30 x 10 cm 30 x 10 cm 100 100

Coriander 30 x 10 cm 30 x 10 cm - 100

(a) Seed Rate

Optimum seed rate contributes the considerable increase in the yield. In general if the seed

rate is increased, the plant population increases correspondingly. In paddy, even though the farmers

used higher seed rate, the plant population was lees than recommendation due to wider planting. But

after conducting demonstrations in paddy in the beneficiary villages, the farmers followed less

spacing from hill to hill. In beneficiary villages in paddy 52 per cent of farmers adopted recommended

seed rate against 35 per cent in non-beneficiary villages. Similarly higher percentage of farmers

adopted recommended seed rate that is 59, 86, 26 in sorghum, sunflower, redgram in beneficiary

villages as against 40, 80, 6 in non-beneficiary villages respectively. Similar trend noticed in rainfed

crops also. The details were furnished in Table-21.

Table-21: Impact of project on seed rate in different crops

Crops

Average seed rate adopted in % of farmers adopted

recommended seed rate

Beneficiary

villages

(kg/ha)

Non-beneficiary

villages (kg/ha)

Beneficiary

villages

Non-beneficiary

villages

Irrigated

Paddy 65.5 59.0 52 35

Sorghum 10.0 12.0 59 40

Sunflower 5.2 4.5 86 80

106

Redgram 6.0 5.0 26 6

Hybrid cotton 2.5 - 40 -

Bengalgram 80.0 - 12 -

Rainfed

Mungari cotton 9.0 15.0 44 18

Sorghum 12.0 11.0 11 25

Sunflower 5.5 - 80 -

Redgram 6.0 - 50 -

Bengalgram 85.0 88.0 29 26

Coriander - 33.75 - 0

(b) Seed treatment

Seed treatment helps in controlling the seed borne diseases and avoiding one or two sprayings

at the early stages will reduce expenditure on plant protection. Mostly for hybrids and improved

varieties purchased from companies, the seed was already treated before packing. In case of hybrid

sunflower and hybrid cotton, the seed was already treated. Due to impact of the demonstrations higher

percentage of farmers adopted seed treatment in beneficiary villages in paddy (40), sorghum (68),

redgram (73) and bengalgram (80) than the non –beneficiary villages under irrigation. In rainfed, the

seed treatment was still more under beneficiary villages than non-beneficiary villages as furnished

inTable-22. Before inception of the project that is 4-5 years back, the farmers were not adopting the

seed treatment.

Table-22: Impact of Seed treatment in different crops

Crops

% of farmers treating the seed

Post project Pre-project

Beneficiary village Non-beneficiary village

Irrigated

Paddy 40 25 -

Sorghum 68 21 -

Sunflower 100 100 Treated

Redgram 73 35 -

Hybrid cotton 100 - Treated seed

Bengalgram 80 - -

Rainfed

Mungari cotton 33 0 -

Sorghum 60 8 -

Bengalgram 86 12 -

Sunflower 100 - -

Redgram 43 - -

II. Impact of the project on input utilization

(a) Varieties

Improved varieties and hybrids play an important role to increase the productivity upto 30-35

per cent in any crop. In this project number of demonstrations were conducted in beneficiary villages,

which resulted spectacular, increase in the adoption of improved varieties. In paddy the farmers

switched on from BPT-5204 to NDLR-8. Similarly, redgram farmers shifted from local to ICPL-

85063, LRG-30, and LRG-41 in beneficiary villages. In bengalgram the shift of varieties was from

local and Annegiri to Kranti and KAK-2. In paddy all the farmers in both beneficiary and non-

beneficiary were cultivating improved variety considering BPT-5204 is an improved one. The

107

percentage of adoption of improved varieties in sorghum (85), sunflower (90), redgram (88) and

bengalgram (92) was high in beneficiary villages as against non-beneficiary villages with percentages

as 45, 32, 28, 48 respectively. Similar trend was noticed in rainfed also. The details of varieties and

percentage of adoption were furnished in Table-23.

(b) Organic manures

Use of organic manures enriches the soil fertility. All the farmers were well aware of the

benefits of it but due to lack of sufficient quantities, farmers apply it in rotation (once in 2-3 years) to

all the fields. Many farmers applied farm yard manure (FYM) except four per cent who applied sheep

penning, but the quantities applied were less than recommendation. Due to constant training

programmes in beneficiary villages, the per cent of farmers applied FYM in these villages was high

ranging from 61 to 93 as against 43 to 83 in non beneficiary villages in different crops under irrigation

as shown in Table-25. But all the farmers in both categories applied less than half the

recommendation. But due to impact of the project the beneficiary farmers applied higher quantities of

FYM ranging from 3.7 to 4.9 t/ha which was higher than pre-project (2.0-4.2) and non-beneficiary

villages (26-3.7) under irrigation as detailed in Table-24.

Table-23: Impact of project on crop varieties

Crops

Farmers growing varieties/hybrids in % of farmers adopting improved

varieties/hybrids in

Beneficiary

village

Non-beneficiary

village Beneficiary

villages

Non-beneficiary

villages

Irrigated

Paddy BPT-5204

NDLR-8

BPT-5204 100 100

Sorghum Mahindra Raichur, Mahindra 85 45

Sunflower Ganga kaveri,

Cargil-177

Cargil-177, Ganga-

kaveri, local

90 32

Redgram ICPL-85063,

LRG-30, LRG-41

LRG-30, Local 88 28

Hybrid cotton Brahma, NHH-

44, Bunny

- 100 -

Bengalgram Annegiri, KAK-

2, Kranthi

Annegiri, Local 92 48

Rainfed

Mungari

cotton

Aravinda,Y-1 Jalagam, Local 95 35

Sorghum Mahindra,

Raichur, local.

Mahindra, Raichur,

Local

65 22

Sunflower Cargil-177 - 61 -

Redgram LRG-30, LRG-41 - 70 -

Bengalgram Annegiri, Kranthi Annegiri, Local 90 45

Coriander CS-4 Local - 41

Table-24: Application of organic manures in different crops

Crops

% of farmers applying organic manures

Beneficiary villages Non-beneficiary villages

Irrigated

Paddy 83 83

Sorghum 93 50

Sunflower 71 43

108

Redgram 65 60

Hybrid cotton 49 -

Bengalgram 61 -

Rainfed

Mungari cotton 40 71

Sorghum 60 53

Bengalgram 66 28

Sunflower 42 -

Redgram 38 -

Coriander - 25

Table-25: Details on quantities of organic manures applied (t/ha)

Crops

Pre-project

Post-project

Beneficiary villages Non-beneficiary

villages

Irrigated

Paddy 4.2 4.9 3.0

Sorghum 3.5 4.2 3.5

Sunflower 3.0 3.7 3.0

Redgram 2.0 3.7 2.6

Hybrid cotton 2.5 3.9 -

Bengalgram 2.8 4.3 -

Rainfed

Mungari cotton 2.5 3.0 2.9

Sorghum 3.1 4.3 3.3

Bengalgram 2.8 4.0 3.1

Sunflower 2.9 3.7 -

Redgram 2.1 3.1 -

Coriander 1.9 - 2.3

( c) Inorganic fertilizers

Inorganic fertilizers account 20-25 per cent of total work of cultivation in crops like paddy,

hybrid cotton commercial crops etc., So, it should be applied judiciously to reduce the cost of

cultivation Keeping this in view demonstrations were conducted in beneficiary villages which resulted

to reduction of fertilizer compared to pre-project in many crops. In paddy and hybrid cotton the

reduction was noticed from 210+180+95 to 163+67+91 and 92+78+82 to 86+61+78 NPK kg/ha

respectively. The reduction of fertilizers was also observed from non-beneficiary to beneficiary

villages. The details were furnished in Table-26. The impact of the project revealed high per cent of

farmers applied recommended fertilizers ranging from 21 to 36 in beneficiary villages as against 16 to

21 in non-beneficiary villages in different crops as presented in Table-26 and 10.. In general farmers

were applying more than recommended dose of fertilizer for irrigated crops.

Table-26: Application of chemical fertilizers in different crops (N P K kg/ha)

Crops

Pre-project Post-project

N

P

K

Beneficiary village Non-beneficiary village

N P K N P K

Irrigated

Paddy 210 180 95 163 67 91 205 166 56

Sorghum 72 41 55 65 35 40 75 65 56

Sunflower 82 71 52 70 82 50 61 56 55

Redgram 51 60 45 40 62 30 52 71 35

109

Hybrid

cotton

92 78 82 86 61 78 ---- --- ----

Bengal-

gram

31 39 41 35 42 46 ---- --- ----

Rainfed Mungari

cotton

32 29 28 30 35 25 52 57 45

Sorghum 65 46 40 71 43 45 80 47 37

Bengal-

gram

31 42 46 25 47 75 35 36 ---

Sunflower 52 62 41 65 72 38 --- ---- ---

Redgram 36 51 25 32 54 --- --- ---- ----

Coriander 41 31 28 --- ---- --- 30 28 21

Table-27: Impact of the project on the use of chemical fertilizers

Crops

Per cent of farmers adopting recommended

fertilizers in

Beneficiary Village Non-beneficiary village

Irrigated

Paddy 31 16

Sorghum 29 18

Sunflower 32 21

Redgram 28 16

Hybrid cotton 36 ---

Bengalgram 21 ---

Rainfed

Mungari cotton 31 11

Sorghum 18 7

Bengal gram 10 2

Sunflower 16 3

Redgram 42 13

Coriander ---- 10

(d) Irrigation

Farmers in beneficiary village adopting practice of skip furrow and alternate furrow irrigation

during periods of limited water availability in cotton, sunflower and redgram. The micro irrigation

methods had become very popular because they will overcome the problem of water scarcity and

power shortages being taught in the training programmes conducted by RARS, Nandyal. Another

factor responsible for their popularity was the subsidy offered by the Government of A.P. Sprinkler

and raingun irrigation methods in chickpea were more popular in chickpea growing areas as life

saving irrigation given during critical stages of crop growth period doubles the yield. Family drip

irrigation was demonstrated for garden bean crop at upper reach during dry spells and it is gaining

prominence among the farmers.

(e) Pesticides

The cost of pesticides contributes significant part in the total cost of cultivation and excessive

use also reduced the quality of the product besides environmental pollution. So, lot of emphasis was

there to reduce the pesticides usage. More quantities of pesticides were applied in hybrid cotton,

110

paddy, redgram and bengalgram. Integrated pest management (IPM) was demonstrated in beneficiary

villages. During pre-project period, farmers used to spray 25-28 times to hybrid cotton, 5-6 sprays to

paddy, 6-8 sprays to improved varieties of redgram. Due to impact of the project, the number of

spraying were reduced to 12-14 in hybrid cotton and 2-3 spraying in paddy and 3-4 for redgram. This

was observed in 25 per cent in hybrid cotton, 32 per cent in paddy and 19 per cent in redgram. The

reduced usage was noticed in all the crops in beneficiary villages.

III. Impact on crop economics

(a) Cropping pattern

The average size of sampled farmers in beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages was 3.939 ha

and 3.768 ha respectively. The irrigated and rainfed crops were 2.407 ha and 1.532 ha in beneficiary

and 1.532 ha and 2.236 in non-beneficiary villages respectively. The crops grown were more or less

similar except very few changes. The detailed areas of these crops were presented in Annexure-V &

VI. Two crops were grown in both villages, but they were negligible and frequent failures or poor

yields were observed due to lack of power and irrigation water.

(b) Costs and returns

Costs and returns for all the crops grown in average size of holding in both beneficiary and

non-beneficiary villages were computed and presented in detail in Annexure-V & VI. Per hectare of

average size of holding was also assessed. The gross returns and gross costs of average holding in

beneficiary villages were Rs. 95332 and Rs. 49933 as against Rs. 50468 and Rs. 37301 in non-

beneficiary villages respectively. The net returns were Rs. 45399 in beneficiary and Rs. 13167 in non-

beneficiary villages. The impact of the project resulted, per holding, an additional net returns of Rs.

32232 in beneficiary villages compared to non-beneficiary villages (Table-28).

Table-28: Costs and returns for holding and per hectare (in rupees)

Details

Beneficiary villages Non-beneficiary villages

Per holding Per hactare Per holding Per hactare

Gross returns 95332 24202 50468 13394

Gross costs 49933 12677 37301 9899

Net returns 45399 11525 13167 3495

Benefit cost ratio 1:0.91 1:0.91 1:0.35 1:0.35

Per hectare net returns were Rs. 11525 in beneficiary villages and Rs. 3495 in non-beneficiary

villages indicating an additional net returns of Rs. 8030 due to impact of the project.

Benefit cost ratio was arrived by dividing net returns with gross costs. It will be same both for

average holding and per hectare. The higher benefit cost ratio indicates ore profits. The benefit cost

ratio of beneficiary farmers was 1:0.91 as against 1:0.35 of non-beneficiary farmers. The benefit cost

ratio of different crops in beneficiary villages was high than the non-benefit villages (Annexure-V &

VI)

(c ) Productivity of different crops

The impact of the project on productivity of different crops was very distinct in beneficiary

villages compared to pre-project and non-beneficiary villages due to adoption of improved

varieties/hybrids, and other package of practices. Productivity of paddy, sunflower and hybrid cotton

was 6500, 1850, 2300 kg/ha in beneficiary villages as against 4225, 840, 1795 kg/ha in pre-project.

The percentage increase of productivity in beneficiary villages over pre-project was higher by 53 in

paddy, 35 in sorghum, 120 in sunflower, 56 in redgram and 28 in hybrid cotton. But it was less in

non-beneficiary villages as shown in Table-29 under irrigation.

111

Table-29: Impact of project on productivity of different crops ( kg/ha)

Crops

Pre-

project

Post-project

Per cent increase in

beneficiary villages over

Beneficiary

villages

Non-

beneficiary

villages

Pre-

project

non-

beneficiary

villages

Irrigated

Paddy 4225 6500 5575 53 31

Sorghum 2789 3575 2925 35 4

Sunflower 840 1850 875 120 4

Redgram 816 1275 875 56 7 Hybrid cotton 1795 2300 2025 28 12

Rainfed Mungari cotton 498 800 575 60 15

Sorghum 756 1050 950 38 25

Bengalgram 495 750 563 33 13

IV. Impact of the project Socio-economic conditions

The SRBC project benefited to the farming community in many ways besides transfer of

the technology. The important aspects were furnished below:

(a) Employment potential

Adoption of improved technology, intensive cultivation, use of hybrids/improved varieties

creates more employment compared to tradition method of cultivation of crops. In the beneficiary

villages, the farmers shifted from traditional to improved varieties in paddy, bengalgram, redgram

and sunflower. A few of the farmers were grown two crops in an year in a limited extent. The man

work day required to an average size of holding in beneficiary village and non-beneficiary village was

estimated and found that 415 and 334 man work day respectively (Annexure-IV). The impact of the

project on employment potential was 81 man work days additional in beneficiary villages for an

average size of holding.

V. General impact

(a)Agricultural Information Centre

Agricultural Information Centre was set up at RARS, Nandyal with SRBC funds is an

exemplary and a model center in ANGRAU. It was equipped with different crop varieties, pest and

disease incidence laminations, live specimens of crop varieties, soil profile board, specimens of

tractor, bullock drawn agricultural implements etc., Number of farmers are visiting the center and the

farmers are enlightened about the latest agricultural technologies.

(b ) SRI Cultivation

The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) was demonstrated in beneficiary villages. Farmers

attended for training progammes visited the demonstration and few farmers started cultivation. The

112

demonstration in one of the beneficiary village (Konidedu) got highest yield in the state as per the

announcement of Director of Extension in REAC meeting and the concerned farmer was honoured.

Thus this aspect helped tremendously for increasing the productivity in paddy in this region.

(c)Model Irrigation Block

A model block has been established at RARS farm to demonstrate different methods of

irrigation to the farmers. It consists of different types of drip and sprinkler irrigation, rain guns, water

measuring devices and surface methods of irrigation. Many farmers visited this and appreciated

regarding rain guns and a few of them inclined to purchase.

(d)Rotavator

It is useful for efficient land preparation and it was demonstrated to number of farmers.

Many farmers appreciated and wanted to purchase.

(e) LCD Projector

Number of training programmes were conducted at RARS, Nandyal and in beneficiary

villages. The LCD Projector helped to conduct the training programmes efficiently.

(f) Equipment

Due to this project, costly equipments like Automatic Weather Station, Profile Moisture

Probe, Pressure Plate Apparatus, Power tiller etc., were purchased which helped in many ways to the

scientists of the farm and farmers of this region.

(g) Pamphlets and booklets

Number of pamphlets and book lets were printed regarding package of practices and latest

technologies of different crops which helped the farming community to adopt the same.

(h) Development of seed drill

Bengalgram seed drill was developed at RARS, Nandyal which is useful for sowing

optimum seed rate. Yield advantage of 225 kg/ha was also noticed. Many farmers were using this

seed drill.

(i) Line departments

There is a good impact on line departments due to conducting training programmes and

workshops to Agricultural Officers, Assistant Directors of Agriculture, I & CADA Engineers.

113

TRAININGS IMPACT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A perusal of knowledge test conducted at the end of training programmes in three centres i.e.,

Nandyal, Karimnagar and Warangal clearly indicated that majority of trainee farmers lie in medium

knowledge category followed by low and high knowledge categories. The findings generally followed

normal distribution. The results were coded, tabulated and statistically analyzed using SPSS package

for drawing meaningful conclusions.

INTRODUCTION

Farming community is the target group where all the research results find their best

application. Improvement in farmers‟ knowledge about various new cultivation techniques is attained

through training programmes. Imparting of research findings in irrigation water management is

adapted by the scientists in A.P III Irrigation project in order to achieve the set objective of training

the farmers in the different reaches of the distributory.

The farmers invited to the training programmes are those who will effectively absorb and are

pro active to implement the trial results. Improving the knowledge of the progressive farmers about

the new techniques is aimed keeping in view the social and cultural influence they would have on the

implementation of the newly evolved technology.

This attempt to improve the farmers‟ knowledge about various aspects in crop irrigation is

achieved through the training programmes conducted in various mandals under SRBC and SRSP

command areas. Trainings conducted during the last year of the project would enable the farmers to

understand the intricacies of developing a recommendation thus enhancing the possibility of

achieving sustainable yields.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the impact of training programmes conducted to the farmers

3. To examine the impact on adoption of package of practices of major crops

4. To estimate the impact of input use in major crops due to demonstrations

4. To study the economics of different crops due to impact of the project

5. To explore the employment potential due to impact of the project.

METHODOLOGY

SRSP

A total of 1739 farmers were given intensive training in SRSP command comprising of 960

from 24 mandals in Karimnagar and 779 from 16 mandals in Warangal centres. The training

programme is conducted for two days covering all aspects of water management and latest

innovations in technology. A knowledge test was conducted at the end of training session to find out

the impact of the training programme on the knowledge level of the farmers.

SRBC

The command area was divided into 16 blocks covering five mandals viz., Panyam,

Banaganapalli, Koilakuntla, Owk and Sanjamala From these mandals all the villages covering under

SRBC ayacut were selected. From the selected villages, farmers from Rythu Mitra groups were

selected and given intensive training programmes at RARS, Nandyal on different topics relating to

adoption pattern of technology on major crops and water management practices. Totally 960 farmers

114

attended from 50 villages of the command area. All the trained farmers were subjected to knowledge

test at the end of the training programme. For this purpose a knowledge test was developed

comprising of 26 test questions covering all the topics of training programmes (entire cognitive

domain).The possible minimum and maximum scores are 0 and 26 respectively. The questions were

framed in a fixed alternative manner as majority of the trainee farmers were can read only category.

The results were coded, tabulated and statistically analysed for interpretation of the findings.

To draw the meaningful conclusions, the farmer trainees were divided into three categories viz., Low

knowledge, and Medium knowledge, High knowledge based on mean and standard deviation in the

following manner.

Category Criteria

▪ Low knowledge ≥ Mean + Standard deviation

▪ Medium knowledge Mean ± Standard deviation

▪ High knowledge ≤ Mean – Standard deviation

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

SriSailam Right Bank Canal (SRBC)

After completion of the training programmes, evaluation was made by dividing the farmers

into three categories viz., low knowledge, medium knowledge and high knowledge based on mean

and standard deviation and the results were furnished in Table-30.

Table 30: Distribution of trainee farmers according to their knowledge levels

(Nandyal)

S.No. Category Frequency Percentage

1 Low knowledge 219 22.81

2 Medium knowledge 566 58.95

3 High knowledge 175 18.22

Total 960 100

Mean : 12.82 S.D : 6.18

SriRam Sagar project (SRSP)

Table31: Distribution of trainee farmers according to their knowledge levels

( Karimnagar) Mean:7.6 S.D:3.4





Total 960 100

Table 32: Distribution of trainee farmers according to their knowledge levels

(Warangal) Mean: 9.9

S.D: 3.1





Total 779 100

115

It is evident from the Table 30 that 18.22 per cent of the trainee farmers fell under high

knowledge category, followed by 58.95 per cent in medium knowledge and 22.81 per cent in low

knowledge categories.

It is evident from the Table 31 that 18.2 per cent of the trainee farmers fell under low

knowledge category, followed by 66.5 per cent in medium knowledge and 15.3 per cent in high

knowledge categories.

It is evident from the Table 32 that 19.5 per cent of the trainee farmers fell under low

knowledge category, followed by 67.7 per cent in medium knowledge and 12.4 per cent in high

knowledge categories

Hence, it is clear from table-32, 59 per cent of trainee farmers were in medium and 18 percent

in high knowledge categories indicating the effectiveness of the training programme given. A sum of

741 accounting 77 per cent of the total farmers for which training is being given were in medium and

high knowledge categories. From table 32 & 33 it clear that majority of the trainee farmers fell under

medium category i.e, 66.5 per cent in Karimnagar and 67.7 per cent in Warangal in medium

knowledge category, fowolled by 18.2 and 19.5 percents in low knowledge categories and 15.3 and

12.7 in high knowledge categories in Karimnagar and Warangal centers respectively.

The trainee farmers in low knowledge category can be attributed as the training programme

could not have any influence on their cognitive domain i.e knowledge part, not due to the very reason

that the training programme is not effective, but due to the inherent defects on the part of the trainee

farmers viz., illiteracy, lack of interest and lack of innovativeness and achievement motivation. Any

extension technique (whether training in Knowledge or Skill or Application in Cognitive or

Psychomotor or Affective domains respectively) need not necessarily have impact on cent percent of

trainee farmers as many other extraneous variables were also influencing the training environment,

trainee, trainer and training module developed for the training. In lieu of the above aspects,

considering that 3/4th of the trainee farmers were elevated to medium and high knowledge categories,

it is concluded that the training programme had tremendous impact in enhancing the knowledge of

the trainee farmers in adoption pattern of technology on major crops and water management practices.

116

SRSP

117

Annexure I:Weather Data for the project period (Karimnagar)

Year Month Mean Temperature 0C Rainfall

(mm)

Relative

Humidity (%) Maximum Minimum

1999 January 29.4 12.4 -- 71

Feb 33.6 18.1 -- 73

March 37.5 20.8 -- 59

April 41.0 23.8 -- 58

May 39.3 27.4 19.6 62

June 34.5 25.7 57.2 70

July 32.1 24.0 173.4 80

August 30.4 23.8 174.0 83

Sep 31.0 24.0 69.6 86

Oct 34.3 23.7 8.4 79

Nov 32.9 18.3 -- 71

Dec 31.7 14.6 -- 66

2000 January 32.6 16.7 -- 68

Feb 33.8 21.0 -- 72

March 39.4 21.2 -- 66

April 43.4 27.7 -- 65

May 40.9 28.6 41.8 53

June 35.4 27.2 261.4 70

July 33.8 26.2 153.0 70

August 33.7 25.8 283.5 74

Sep 35.2 27.7 102.6 74

Oct 36.4 20.1 37.7 64

Nov 34.7 18.6 -- 65

Dec 33.7 13.6 -- 54

2001 January 31.7 17.8 -- 64

Feb 35.2 18.9 -- 53

March 37.5 23.5 22.0 62

April 41.0 25.8 31.8 64

May 44.7 30.8 -- 43

June 38.2 27.2 82.0 67

July 34.5 26.7 91.9 70

August 32.3 25.6 146.0 75

Sep 36.0 26.0 114.4 68

Oct 35.9 24.6 56.0 71

Nov 36.4 20.3 -- 68

Dec 33.3 16.2 -- 66

118

2002 January 32.8 18.6 22.0 70

Feb 34.2 20.1 -- 75

March 35.4 22.4 -- 77

April 39.6 26.4 -- 71

May 40.3 28.2 15.2 61

June 35.5 26.2 82.0 84

July 34.7 25.8 124.0 85

August 30.4 23.7 233.0 99

Sep 33.9 23.3 23.0 96

Oct 32.2 22.1 60.0 95

Nov 29.7 16.6 -- 89

Dec 30.4 15.0 -- 90

2003 January 33.1 18.0 -- 91

Feb 32.6 21.1 1.8 88

March 35.79 22.6 36.8 79

April

May

June 38.73 27.83 86.1 75.7

July 32.17 24. 64 173.2 98.61

August 31.57 24. 25 194.3 99.77

September 32.78 24. 38 81.5 99.3

October 31.1 21. 8 103.7 99.2

November 30.4 16. 99 --

December 14.73 28.32 --

2004 January 15.8 28.4 18.0

February 20.0

119

Annexure II: Weather Data for the project period (Warangal) Month Mean temperature 0 C Rainfall (mm) No. of rainy

days Max. Min.

1998 June 37.6 27.6 160.1 8

July 32 24.6 288.7 15

August 30.9 24.5 296.2 14

September 30.6 34.2 207.8 11

October 30.6 23.5 134 7

November 29.5 19.8 16.6 1

December 28 12.8 0 0

1999

Jan 28.7 13.4 - -

Feb 32.5 19.7 - -

2000 January 31 15.3 - -

February 30.3 20.1 9.4 1

March 35.1 22.5 - -

April 40.4 25.2 17.4 1

May 37.9 24.8 31.2 1

June 32.2 25.2 239.0 13

July 32.1 24.0 238.4 11

August 30.3 23.9 290.8 11

September 32.1 24.2 93.4 3

October 33.7 23.0 - -

November 32.3 19.5 - -

December 29.3 13.5 - -

2001 January 29.2 16.4 - -

February 33.2 18.3 - -

March 35.4 22.3 - -

April 39.3 25.1 - -

May 42.6 26.3 - -

June 33.9 18.26 141.4 8

July 31.81 16.96 84.6 11

August 29.4 15.89 168.8 11

September 32.41 19.24 117.4 8

October 31.7 18.0 78.2 7

November 30.96 16.53 2.0

December 29.37 14.16 - -

2002 January 29.58 17.54 8 1

February 32.50 21.00 - -

March 35.77 24.09 - -

April 39.20 27.50 - -

120

May 40.70 29.60 - -

June 35.86 26.36 25 3

July 33.59 26.48 51 7

August 29.27 24.52 252.4 13

September 32.49 26.23 19.4 2

October 31.57 31.23 123.2 6

November 27.66 17.83 - -

December 30.13 15.52 - -

2003 January 30.09 16.36

February 32.98 15.61

March 35.67 21.89 2.8 1

8.54April 39.78 25.10

May 44.7 27.4

June 37.02 27.8 57.8 8

July 30.31 24.2 294.1 16

August 30.26 24.38 129.2 9

September 31.6 23.7 126.1 3

October 30.11 23.2 109.4 8

November 29.42 18.54

December 27.09 14.87 12 2

2004 January 27.5 16.92 75.2 4

February 30.12 20.12 22 4

March 36.5 22.8

121

Annexure III: DETAILS OF DEMONSTRATIONS CONDUCTED FOR

FIVE YEARS (Karimnagar)

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif/Rabi 1998-99

Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Group - A (Research Trials)

Introduction of rabi pigeonpea 3 3 2 2 3 3

Introduction of summer

greengram

-- -- -- -- 2 2

Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations)

Introduction of Blackgram

during rabi

3 3 2 2 4 4

Group - C (Mass Spread of Proven Factors of Production)

Production technology of Maize 6 6 6 6 14 14

Introduction of chemical weed

control techniques in maize

6 6 6 6 14 14


control techniques in rabi

pigeon pea

3 3 2 2 3 3


control techniques in

blackgram during rabi

3 3 2 2 4 4

Total (A+B+C) 24 24 20 20 44 44

Total demonstrations proposed : 88

Total demonstrations conducted : 88

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif/Rabi 1999-00


Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated


Irrigation schedules in maize 3 -- 3 -- 5 --

Irrigation schedules in

groundnut.

3 -- 3 -- 3 --

Irrigation schedules in rabi

pigeonpea.

3 -- 3 -- 3 --

Irrigation schedules in

blackgram.

1 -- 1 -- 1 --

Irrigation schedules in cotton. 1 -- 1 -- 1 --

122


Production technology of

groundnut to increase yield by

application of gypsum

1 -- 2 -- 2 --

Production technology of cotton 1 -- 1 -- 1 --

Production technology of rice 2 2 1 1 2 2

Popularization of greengram

based cropping system

2 -- 6 -- 8 8

Popularization of maize based

cropping system

2 2 2 -- 2 2


Chemical weed control

techniques in Groundnut

1 -- 2 -- 5 --


techniques in Paddy

2 -- 2 -- 2 --


techniques in Maize

3 3 2 -- 2 10


techniques in Greengram

5 -- 5 -- 5 --


techniques in Blackgram

1 -- 1 -- 2 2

Demonstration of newly

varieties in Rice

2 2 1 1 2 2


varieties in Greengram

4 4 7 7 10 10


varieties in groundnut

2 -- 2 -- 5 5


varieties in Pigeon pea

1 -- 1 -- 1 --


varieties in Blackgram

1 -- 1 -- 2 --

Total (A+B+C) 41 13 47 9 64 41



List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif 2000-2001

Title of the Demonstration

Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated


Production technology in

green gram based cropping

systems

3 4 3 5 3 4

Production technology in maize

based cropping systems

3 4 3 2 3 4

123


Demonstration of production

technology in paddy. 5 3 5 5 5 8


technology in groundnut. 5 -- 5 -- 5 7


technology in greengram 5 6 5 10 5 8

Demonstration of chemical weed

control techniques in maize 5 5 5 4 5 6


control techniques in paddy 5 5 5 8 5 11

Total 31 27 31 34 31 48



List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Rabi 2000-

2001


Propo

sed

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated


Irrigation schedules in maize 3 3 3 3 3 3

Intermittent irrigation schedules

in paddy. 2 2 2 2 2 2

Irrigation schedules in groundnut. 2 2 2 2 2 2

Irrigation schedules in rabi

pigeonpea. 2 2 2 2 2 2

Irrigation schedules in blackgram. 2 1 2 1 2 1

Irrigation schedules in cotton. 1 -- 1 -- 1 --

Monitoring of physico-chemical

changes in soils and water in

distributory 89 of SRSP canal.

3 3 3 3 3 3


Production technology in greengram


2 2 2 8 2 8

Production technology in maize

based cropping systems

2 3 2 5 2 10



technology in paddy. 2 1 2 2 2 2


technology in groundnut. 2 2 2 2 2 2


technology in rabi pigeonpea. 3 2 3 1 3 3

124


technology in blackgram

during rabi.

5 4 5 3 5 5


control techniques in groundnut 5 4 5 3 5 9


control techniques in maize. 5 5 5 5 5 9


control techniques in blackgram. 5 4 5 5 5 5


control techniques in paddy 5 8 5 13 5 15

Total 51 48 51 60 51 81



List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif

2001-2002


Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated


Demonstration of irrigation

schedules in Cotton

3 5 3 3 3 5

Demonstration of Drip

irrigation system in Cotton

1 -- 1 -- 1 1


Demonstration of cultivation of

vegetables in maize based

cropping system

3 4 3 2 3 4


vegetables in maize based

cropping system

3 4 3 6 3 5


Popularization of green gram


5 4 5 5 5 5

Popularization of maize based

cropping system

5 4 5 5 5 5

Popularization of new variety

JGL-1798 in Paddy

5 2 5 3 5 7

Popularization of recommended

production technology in

greengram

5 5 5 6 5 5



groundnut

5 -- 5 2 5 3

Demonstration of chemical

weed control techniques in

groundnut

5 -- 5 2 5 7

125



Paddy

5 6 5 11 5 9



maize

5 5 5 3 5 4



greengram

5 5 5 8 5 6

Popularization of new varieties

in groundnut

5 -- 5 2 5 6

Introduction of vegetables in

Kharif

-- 2 -- 4 -- 6

Total (A+B+C) 60 46 60 58 60 78



List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Rabi

2001-2002

Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III Proposed Demons

trated

Proposed Demons

trated

Proposed Demons

trated

Group – A (Research Trials)

Demonstration of Sprinkler

Irrigation system in groundnut

1 -- 1 -- 1 2

Demonstration of improved

puddler in Paddy

1 2 1 3 1 4

Demonstration of different

irrigation methods in Groundnut

3 -- 3 3 3 3

Demonstration of Direct seeding

technique in Paddy

3 4 3 7 3 10


schedules in Cotton

3 3 3 3 3 6

Demonstration of Drip Irrigation

system in Cotton

1 -- 1 -- 1 1



schedules in Maize

5 5 5 3 5 5

Demonstration of intermittent

irrigation schedules in Paddy

5 5 5 6 5 5


schedules in Blackgram

5 1 5 4 5 5


schedules in Groundnut

5 1 5 4 5 4


schedules in Pigeonpea

3 -- 3 1 3 1

126


vegetables in Maize based

cropping system (maize-

groundnut-vegetables)

3 1 3 2 3 3


vegetables in Green gram based

cropping system (green gram-

groundnut-vegetables)

3 1 3 6 3 5

127

Group – C (Mass Spread of proven factors in production)

Popularization of Green gram

based cropping system. (Green

gram-Maize-Green gram)

5 7 5 9 5 8

Popularization of Maize based

cropping system.

(Maize-Groundnut-Green gram)

5 -- 5 5 5 5



Groundnut

5 1 5 6 5 6

Demonstration of new variety of

pigeonpea (ICPL-85063)

5 -- 5 1 5 1


technology in Blackgram during

rabi (introduction of HYV LBG-

20, Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and

control of powdery mildew.

5 1 5 8 5 6


control techniques in Groundnut

(Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and

inter cultivation at 30-35DAS).

5 1 5 6 5 5


control techniques in Paddy

(Butachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and

inter cultivation at 35-40 DAS).

5 5 5 7 5 7


control techniques in

Maize(Attrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha

and inter cultivation at 35-40

DAS).

5 8 5 10 5 11


control techniques in Blackgram

(Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha

and inter cultivation at 25DAS) .

5 1 5 5 5 8

Popularization of new variety of

Groundnut JL-24.

5 -- 5 2 5 5


Blackgram (LBG-20).

5 1 5 6 5 5

Popularization of new hybrids in

maize (PRO-AGRO-4640, Paras

&Pioneer).

5 7 5 7 5 8

Introduction of New variety

(JGL - 1853) in Paddy

3 4 3 7 3 10

Total (A+B+C) 104 59 104 123 104 139



128

List of Demonstrations proposed and Demonstrated during

Kharif 2002-2003


trated

Proposed Demons

trated

Proposed Demons

trated

Group – A (Research Trials)

Demonstration of Integrated Pest

Management in Cotton

1 3 1 2 1 6

Demonstration of drip irrigation

system in cotton

1 -- 1 -- 1 1

Demonstration of direct seeding

techniques in paddy

3 -- 3 3 3 12


recommended doses of fertilizer in

Maize

3 3 3 3 3 3



Paddy

3 3 3 3 3 3

Introduction of new variety of

Paddy (WGL-14).

2 2 2 2 2 2




cropping system

3 3 3 3 3 3


vegetables in Greengram based

cropping system

3 3 3 3 3 3

Group – C (Mass Spread of proven factors in production)

Popularization of Greengram

based cropping system.

(Greengram-Maize-Greengram)

5 5 5 5 5 4


cropping system.

(Maize-Groundnut-Greengram)

5 2 5 5 5 5



Groundnut

5 -- 5 2 5 4

Demonstration of recommended


Greengram.

5 4 5 5 5 5


control techniques in Groundnut.

5 -- 5 2 5 4


control techniques in Paddy.

5 5 5 6 5 7


control techniques in Maize.

5 5 5 5 5 5

129


control techniques in Green

gram.

5 -- 5 -- 5 --


Groundnut JL-24.

5 -- 5 2 5 4

Popularization of New variety

(JGL-1798) in Paddy

5 5 5 6 5 7

Introduction of vegetables

during Kharif

-- -- -- -- -- 7

Total (A+B+C) 69 43 69 57 69 85



List of Demonstrations proposed and Demonstrated during Rabi 2002-2003


trated

Proposed Demons

trated

Proposed Demons

trated

Group– A (Research Trials)



1 3 1 2 1 6

Demonstration of drip irrigation

system in cotton

1 -- 1 -- 1 1

Demonstration of different

irrigation methods in groundnut

3 -- 3 2 3 1

Demonstration of improved

puddler in paddy

3 -- 3 1 3 3


techniques in paddy

3 -- 3 1 3 5



Maize

3 3 3 3 3 3



Paddy

3 3 3 3 3 3



schedules in maize

5 5 5 6 5 5


schedules in black gram

5 -- 5 5 5 5


schedules in groundnut

5 -- 5 2 5 2



cropping system

3 -- 3 2 3 1


vegetables in Green gram based

cropping system

3 -- 3 1 3 1

Grou – C (Mass Spread of proven factors in production)

130

Popularization of Greengram

based cropping system.

(Greengram-Maize-Greengram)

5 6 5 7 5 6


cropping system.

(Maize-Groundnut-Greengram)

5 -- 5 2 5 1



Groundnut

5 1 5 3 5 2



blackgram

5 -- 5 6 5 6

Demonstration of new varieties

in groundnut

5 -- 5 2 5 2


control techniques in Groundnut.

5 1 5 4 5 2


control techniques in Paddy.

5 4 5 5 5 8


control techniques in Maize.

5 8 5 10 5 9


control techniques in Blackgram.

5 -- 5 7 5 6

Introduction of maize in paddy-

paddy cropping system

-- -- -- 8 -- 8

Introduction of blackgram in

paddy-paddy cropping system

-- -- -- 1 -- --

Total 45 20 45 55 45 50

Total (A+B+C) 83 34 83 83 83 86

Total trials proposed : 249

Total trials conducted : 203

131

List of demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif

2003-2004


Propos

ed

Demon

strated

Propos

ed

Demonst

rated

Propose

d

Demonst

rated



1 1 1 1 2 2


cotton

-- -- -- -- 1 1


techniques in paddy

1 1 1 1 2 2


recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize

1 1 1 1 1 1


recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy

1 1 1 1 1 1

Comparative evaluation of new varieties

of Paddy WGL-14, JGL-1798, JGL-1853.

1 1 1 1 1 1

Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables

in Maize based cropping system

-- -- 1 1 1 1


in Greengram based cropping system

1 1 1 1 1 1

Popularization of Greengram based

cropping system. (Greengram-Maize-

Green gram)

1 1 1 1 1 1

Popularization of Maize based cropping

system. (Maize-Groundnut-Greengram)

-- -- 1 1 1 1


production technology in Groundnut

1 1 1 1 1 1


production technology in Greengram.

1 1 1 1 1 1

Demonstration of chemical weed control

techniques in Paddy.

1 1 1 1 1 1


techniques in Maize.

1 1 1 1 1 1

Demonstration of Drip irrigation system in

Chillies

-- -- -- -- 1 1

Total 11 11 13 13 17 17

Total Proposed : 41

Total Conducted : 41

132

List of demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Rabi

2003-2004

Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III Propos

ed

Demo

nstrate

d

Propos

ed

Demons

trated

Propose

d

Demons

trated



1 1 1 1 1 2


cotton

-- -- -- -- 1 1

Demonstration of direct seeding techniques

in paddy

1 1 1 1 1 1

Demonstration of irrigation schedules in

maize

1 1 1 1 1 1

Demonstration of irrigation schedules in

black gram

1 1 1 1 1 1


recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize

1 1 1 1 1 1


recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy

1 1 1 1 1 1

Comparative evaluation of new varieties of

Paddy WGL-14, JGL-1798, JGL-1853.

1 1 1 1 1 1


in Maize based cropping system

-- -- 1 1 1 1


in Greengram based cropping system

1 1 1 1 1 1

Popularization of Greengram based

cropping system. (Greengram-Maize-Green

gram)

1 1 1 1 1 1

Popularization of Maize based cropping

system. (Maize-Groundnut-Greengram)

-- -- 1 1 1 1


technology in Groundnut

1 1 1 1 1 1

Demonstration of recommended production

technology in blackgram

1 1 1 1 1 1


techniques in Paddy.

1 1 1 1 1 1


techniques in Maize.

1 1 1 1 1 2

Demonstration of Paddy based Maize -- -- -- 1 -- 1

Total 13 13 15 15 16 18

Total Proposed : 44

Total Conducted : 46

133

Annexure IV: DETAILS OF DEMONSTRATIONS CONDUCTED

FOR FIVE YEARS (Warangal)

S. No Title

No. of

demonstrations T

otal R

I R II R III

1998-1999

1

A

Evaluation of rice

varieties for season 3 4 1 8

1B Irrigation intervals in

paddy 3 4 1 8

2 Irrigation intervals in

cotton post rainy season 4 3 4 10


chilli post rainy season 3 2 2 7

4

Irrigation intervals in

turmeric post rainy

season

2 2 2 6


maize - 6 - 6

Total 45

1999-2000

Group A

1 Scheduling of irrigation

in groundnut - 3 - 3

2

Evaluation of cropping

systems under canal

irrigation SRSP

5 16 - 21


in maize 12 3 3 18

4 Management of yellow

syndrome in chilies 1 8 - 9

Group B

1 Integrated pest

management in cotton 9 15 4 28

2

Integrated pest

management for BPH in

rice Kharif

2 1 - 3

3

Efficacy of granular

insecticides in rice

nursery

7 10 - 17

134

4

Identification of suitable

rice varieties for kharif

and rabi seasons

a. Kharif 2 6 - 8

b. Rabi 3 6 2 11

5

Management of rhizome

rot and leaf spot in

turmeric

6 2 3 11

Group C

Conjunctive use of canal

and ground water in ID

crops

1 Cotton 15 20 30 65

2 Chilli 13 19 12 44

3 Turmeric 6 11 16 33

Total 142

2000-2001

Group A (Kharif)

1

Evaluation of different

cropping systems under

canal irrigation of SRSP

1 8 - 9

2 Identification of suitable

rice varieties 5 6 2 13

3 Evaluation of cotton

based cropping systems 6 5 - 11

Rabi

1 Introduction of new crops

like sesame/redgram - 2 - 2

2 Evaluation of irrigation

methods in Chilli 5 3 - 8


methods in maize 2 4 1 7


methods in Cotton 6 4 - 10


methods in groundnut - 1 - 1

6

Introduction of short

duration varieties/hybrids

in rice

1 3 3 7

Group B (Kharif)

1 IPM cotton 6 5 6 17

2 IPM for BPH in rice 4 3 4 11


syndrome in Chilli 3 4 4 11

4 Efficacy of granular 4 5 4 13

135


5



turmeric

4 4 7 15

Rabi


in groundnut - 1 -0 1


in maize - 4 - 4


Group C (Kharif)

1

Demonstration of


cotton 16 15 10 41

2

Demonstration of


Chilli 4 7 5 16

3

Demonstration of


turmeric 4 6 5 15

4

Demonstration of


rice 4 5 6 15

5

Demonstration of


maize 2 6 4 12

6

Demonstration on stem

application of

monocrotophos in cotton 6 8 10 24

7

Demonstration on

chemical weed control in

maize - 4 2 6

Rabi

1

Demonstration of


rice 4 2 5 11

Total 291

2001-2002

Group A (Kharif)

1


cropping systems under

canal irrigation of

SRSP

a. Turmeric based 2 2 - 4

b. Chilli based 2 2 3 7

2 Identification of suitable 2 4 2 8

136

rice varieties for Kharif

3 Cotton based cropping

systems 4 5 2 11

4

Evaluation of direct

seeding of rice under

puddle condition in

farmers fields

2 3 - 5

5

Chemical weed control in

Turmeric + maize

intercropping 1 1 1 3

Rabi


rice varieties in Rabi - 1 3 4

2


methods of irrigation

(Sprinkler) in vegetables 1 1 1 3

3

Introduction of new crops

like blacakgram/ sesame/

redgram 2 2 1 5


methods in Chilli 4 5 2 11


methods in maize - 1 - 1


methods in cotton 4 5 2 11


methods in groundnut - 2 - 2

Group B (Kharif)

1

Demonstration of

suitable rice varieties for

Kharif 2 4 2 8

2

Maize based cropping

systems under canal

irrigation of SRSP - 4 2 6


syndrome in Chillies 4 4 3 11

4



turmeric 2 3 - 5

Rabi

1

Demonstration of


rabi 4 5 3 12


in groundnut - 2 1 3

3 Scheduling of irrigation - 1 2 3

137

in maize

Group C (Kharif)

1 IPM in cotton 8 8 6 22

2 IPM in

rice 5 4 4 13

3

Popularization of

recommended production

technology in Cotton 10 10 10 30

4

Popularization of


technology in Chillies 3 4 3 10

5

Popularization of


technology in turmeric 2 3 - 5

6

Popularization of


technology in maize - 2 2 4

7

Popularization of


technology in rice 6 6 6 18

8



nursery 8 4 4 16

9

Demonstration of stem

application of

monocrotophos in cotton 10 10 10 30

10 Chemical weed control in

maize - 4 3 7

Rabi

1

Popularization of


technology in rice 4 4 6 14

2



nursery 4 4 4 12

Total 305

2002-2003

Group A (Kharif)


rice varieties for Kharif 4 4 3 11

2

Evaluation of direct

seeding of rice under

puddle conditions in

farmers fields

- - - -

3 Chemical weed control in

Turmeric+ Maize inter - - 1 1

138

cropping

4

Performance of rice

varieties under dry

conditions - 1 - 1


cotton varieties/hybrids 4 5 2 11

Rabi

1


methods of irrigation in

vegetables - - - -


methods in Chilli 2 2 2 6

3 Evaluation irrigation

methods in groundnut 1 2 - 3

Group B (Kharif)

1

Demonstration of


Kharif 10 6 3 19


syndrome in Chilli 4 4 10

3



turmeric 2 1 1 4

Rabi


in groundnut - 2 - 2


methods in cotton 2 2 2 6


methods in maize - 2 - 2

Group C (Kharif)

1 IPM in cotton 8 6 6 20


3

Popularization of


technology in Cotton 10 10 10 30

4

Popularization of


technology in Chillies 5 6 3 14

5

Popularization of


technology in turmeric 2 1 2 5

6

Popularization of


technology in maize 1 2 3 6

7 Popularization of 10 6 9 25

139


technology in rice

8

Maize based cropping

system under canal

irrigation of SRSP 1 2 2 5

Rabi


in maize - 2 - 2

Total 197

2003-2004

Group A (Kharif)

1

Demonstration on rice

under irrigated dry

conditions - - -

Rabi

1 Demonstration on drip

irrigation in cotton - - - -

2

Demonstration on

Sprinkler irrigation in

Groundnut 0 1 0 1

Group B (Kharif)

1 Demonstration on cotton

based cropping system - - - -

2 Demonstration on rice

based cropping system - - - -

3 Demonstration on maize

based cropping system 2 2 2 6

Rabi

1

Demonstration on

irrigation methods in

Chilli 3 3 3 9

2

Demonstration on


maize 3 3 0 6

3

Demonstration o n


groundnut 0 3 3 6

4

Demonstration on


cotton 2 2 2 6

Group C (Kharif)

1

Popularization of


technology in Cotton

2 2 2 6

2 Popularization of

recommended production 2 2 2 6

140

technology in Chillies

3

Popularization of


technology in turmeric

1 0 0 1

4

Popularization of


technology in maize

2 2 0 4

5

Popularization of


technology in rice

1 2 0 3

Rabi

1

Demonstration on

scheduling of irrigation

in groundnut

0 3 0 3

2

Demonstration on

scheduling of irrigation

in maize

2 2 0 4

Total 89

141

Table -1 : Demonstration of irrigation schedules in maize (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Wat.

Sav.

over

FP

(mm)

Yield

(kg/ha)

Add

l. yl

over

FP

(kg/

ha)

WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Add

linco

over

FP

(Rs/

ha)

TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I 99-00 450 545 95 7280 7170 110 16.2 13.2 8500 10250 26936 26529 18436 16279 2157

00-01 441 543 102 7350 7250 100 16.7 13.2 8750 10550 27562 27187 18812 16637 2175

01-02 484 589 105 6430 6250 180 13.3 10.7 11200 11920 35365 34375 24165 22445 1900

02-03 460 545 135 7110 6940 170 15.5 11.6 11567 12194 39105 38170 27538 25976 1562

03-04 439 526 87 7290 7050 240 16.6 13.4 10750 11500 36814 35602 26064 24102 1962

Avg 455 550 105 7092 6932 160 15.7 12.4 10153 11283 33156 32373 23003 21090 1913

II 99-00 465 549 84 6950 6870 80 14.9 12.6 7575 9950 25715 25419 18140 15469 2671

00-01 458 551 93 7000 6900 100 15.2 12.5 7975 10450 26250 25875 18275 15425 2850

01-02 493 595 102 5940 5780 160 12.0 9.7 11270 12450 38610 37570 27340 25120 2220

02-03 490 612 122 6760 6570 190 13.8 10.7 11946 12948 37180 36135 25234 23187 2047

03-04 454 585 131 6950 6740 210 15.3 11.5 11350 11900 35098 34037 23748 22137 1611

Avg 472 578 106 6720 6572 148 14.2 11.4 10023 11540 32571 31807 22547 20267 2280

III 99-00 455 556 101 7660 7540 120 16.8 13.6 8645 10500 28342 27898 19697 17398 2299

00-01 449 561 112 7750 7600 `150 17.3 13.5 8950 11125 28875 28500 19925 17375 2550

01-02 475 584 109 6360 6120 240 13.4 10.5 10240 11250 34980 33660 24740 22410 2330

02-03 474 607 133 7880 7740 140 16.6 12.8 11331 12052 43340 42570 32009 30518 1491

03-04 465 574 109 7450 7325 125 16.0 12.8 10250 11500 37623 36991 27373 25491 1882

Avg 464 576 113 7420 7265 155 16.0 12.6 9883 11285 34632 33924 24749 22638 2111

TP : Trial plot (Irrigation at 18-20 days during vegetative stage and 9-10 days during reproductive stage)

FP : Farmers practice

142

Anova Table

Reach Character T(stat)

Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I WA 23.97 2.78 *

Yield 6.28 2.78 *

WUE 14.69 2.78 *

Cost of Cultivation 4.27 2.78 *

Gross Returns 2.69 2.78 *

Net Returns 15.87 2.78 *

II WA 12.09 2.78 *

Yield 5.88 2.78 *

WUE 10.07 2.78 *




III WA 21.00 2.78 *

Yield 7.07 2.78 *

WUE 18.78 2.78 *




Significant

143

Table – 2 : Scheduling of irrigation in maize (Warangal)

Reach Year

Total qty. of

water

applied

Water

saved

over FP

(mm)

Yield (t/ha) WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP) DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP

I 1999-00 350 450 100 3.75 3.68 10.71 8.18 7,170 7,500 12,500 11,020 5,330 3,500 1,830 0.74

2003-04 350 450 100 4.9 4.6 14 10.2 7,475 8,840 25,740 24,150 18,265 15,310 3,355 2.38

T cal=1.27

T tab=3.18

T cal=3.13

T tab=3.18

Average 350 450 100 4.33 4.14 12.37 9.2 7323 8170 19120 17585 11798 9405 2593 1.56

II 1999-00 350 450 100 4.30 4.12 12.3 9.16 6,405 7,141 20,338 19,756 13,933 12,615 1,318 1.7

2000-01 400 500 100 5.4 5.2 13.50 10.40 7,550 7,725 20,125 19,512 12,575 11,787 788 1.7

2001-02 350 450 100 5.0 4.7 14.3 10.4 9,100 10,750 25,000 23,500 15,900 12,750 3,150 1.74

2002-03 400 500 100 6.0 5.75 15.0 11.5 12,960 14,150 33,000 31,625 20,040 17,475 2,565 1.54

2003-04 350 450 100 5.75 5.4 16.4 12 10,532 11,932 30,187 28,350 19,655 16,417 3,237 1.89

*T cal=2.21

T tab=2.13

*T cal=4.99

T tab=2.13

Average 370 470 100 5.29 5.03 14.3 10.7 9309 10340 25730 24549 16421 14219 2112 1.71

DP: Irrigation at 15 days interval FP: Irrigation at 12 days interval

144

Table – 3 : Demonstration of irrigation schedules in groundnut (Karimnagar)

Reach Year

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Wat.

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield

(kg/ha)

Addl

yield

over FP

(kg/ha)

WUE

(kg/ha/m

m)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

(Rs/ha)


I 99-00 415 510 95 1620 1490 130 3.9 2.9 8650 9875 22680 20860 14030 10985 3045

00-01 398 507 109 1650 1500 150 4.2 2.9 8790 10250 23925 21750 15135 11500 3635

01-02 414 528 114 1375 1282 93 3.3 2.4 6800 7700 16844 15704 10044 8004 2040

Avg 409 515 106 1548 1424 124 3.8 2.8 8080 9275 21150 19438 13070 10163 2907

II 99-00 408 470 62 1430 1250 180 3.5 2.7 8670 9250 20020 17920 11350 8670 2680

00-01 392 463 71 1450 1290 150 3.7 2.8 8950 9550 21025 18777 12075 9227 2848

01-02 454 548 94 1450 1326 124 3.2 2.4 7370 8270 17762 16273 10392 8003 2389

02-03 422 546 124 1605 1490 115 3.8 2.7 9177 9965 19260 17880 10083 7915 2168

Avg 419 508 88 1484 1339 142 3.6 2.7 8542 9259 19517 17713 10975 8454 2521

III 99-00 405 450 45 1970 1850 120 4.9 4.1 10750 12160 27580 25900 16830 13740 3090

00-01 387 445 58 2020 1870 150 5.2 4.2 11050 12750 29362 27183 18312 14433 3879

01-02 401 517 116 1580 1449 131 3.9 2.6 8220 9120 19335 17750 11135 8630 2485

02-03 414 539 125 1702 1545 157 4.1 2.8 9057 9925 20460 18540 11403 8615 2752

Avg 402 488 86 1818 1679 140 4.5 3.4 9769 10989 24184 22343 14420 11355 3052

TP :Trial plot (Irrigation at 15 days interval)

FP :Farmers practice (weekly interval)

145

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I WA 18.64 4.302 *

Yield 7.44 4.302 *

WUE 8.76 4.302 *




II WA 6.34 3.18 *

Yield 9.49 3.18 *

WUE 12.72 3.18 *




III WA 4.26 3.18 *

Yield 16.39 3.18 *

WUE 8.98 3.18 *




Significant

146

Table – 4 : Scheduling of irrigation in groundnut (Warangal)

Reach Year

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield (t/ha) WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP)

DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP

II 1999-00 250 350 100 2.8 2.4 11.2 6.86 9,295 10,475 22,436 22,853 13,141 12,378 763 0.64

2000-01 300 400 100 3.0 2.8 10.0 7.0 8,200 8,970 18,000 17,100 9,800 8,130 1,670 1.1

2001-02 250 350 100 2.75 2.35 11.0 6.71 9,525 10,850 37,020 31,630 27,495 20,780 6,715 2.88

2002-03 300 400 100 2.5 2.0 8.33 5.00 10,270 11,050 52,500 42,000 42,230 30,950 11,280 4.11

2003-04 300 350 100 2.61 2.35 8.70 6.71 9,883 10,665 34,900 30,850 25,016 20,118 4,898 2.46

*T cal=6.68

T tab=2.23

*T cal=6.68

T tab=2.23

Average 280 380 100 2.73 2.38 9.75 6.26 9435 10,402 32,971 28,887 23,536 18,471 5,065 2.24

DP: Irrigation at critical stages

FP: Irrigation at 15 days interval

147

Table – 5 : Demonstration irrigation schedules in blackgram (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield

(kg/ha)

Addl

yield

over

FP

(kg/ha)

WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

(Rs/ha)


I 01-02 287 375 88 1205 1110 95 4.2 3.0 6845 7340 19882 18314 13037 10974 2062

03-04 265 352 87 1125 1045 80 4.25 2.97 7350 8250 14625 13585 7275 5335 1940

Average 276 364 87.5 1165 1078 87.5 4.23 2.99 7098 7795 17254 15950 10156 8155 2001

II

01-02 304 412 108 1158 1053 105 3.8 2.6 7245 7725 19107 17374 11862 9649 2213

02-03 282 394 112 1262 1127 135 4.47 2.86 7192 8085 17668 15778 10476 7693 2783

03-04 276 398 122 1070 988 82 3.87 2.48 7475 9255 13910 12844 6435 3589 2846

Average 287 401 114 1163 1056 107 4.05 2.63 7304 8355 16895 15332 9591 6977 2614

III

99-00 280 405 125 1610 1570 40 5.7 3.9 7890 8915 29785 29045 21895 20130 1765

00-01 261 400 139 1625 1575 50 6.22 3.9 7945 8970 30875 29450 22930 20480 2450

01-02 264 382 118 1368 1233 135 5.2 3.2 6535 7050 22572 20344 16037 13294 2743

02-03 262 384 122 1355 1192 163 5.17 3.18 6959 7875 18970 16688 12011 8813 3198

03-04 255 374 119 1275 1095 180 5.0 2.93 6800 7375 16575 14235 9775 6860 2915

Average 264 389 125 1447 1333 114 5.48 3.43 7226 8037 23755 21952 16529 13915 2614

TP :Trial plot (Irrigation at 0, 25, 45, 65 days after sowing)

FP :Farmers practice (Irrigation at 9-10 days interval) Cont.

148

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I WA 17.5 12.7 *

Yield 11.66 12.7 *

WUE 31.0 12.7 *

Cost of Cultivation 3.4 12.7 NS

Gross Returns 4.9 12.7 NS


II WA 27.3 4.30 *

Yield 6.99 4.30 *

WUE 11.81 4.30 *




III WA 32.77 2.78 *

Yield 3.92 2.78 *

WUE 24.25 2.78 *




Significant

149

Table – 6 : Demonstration irrigation schedules in pigeonpea (Karimnagar)

Reach Year

Total qty. of

water

applied (mm)

water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield

(kg/ha)

Addl.

yield

over FP

(kg/ha)

WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl

income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)


II 01-02 570 695 125 1557 1490 67 2.8 2.1 7959 9227 26469 25330 18150 16103 2407

III 99-00 540 645 105 1730 1640 90 3.2 2.5 9200 9500 32870 31110 23670 21610 2060

00-01 526 643 117 1820 1702 108 3.5 2.9 9950 10280 34675 32775 24725 22495 2230

01-02 547 680 133 1625 1434 191 3.0 2.1 7709 9131 27625 24378 19916 15247 4669

Avg 538 656 118 1725 1592 133 3.2 2.4 8953 9637 31723 29421 22770 19784 2986

TP : Trial plot (Irrigation at 18-20 days interval during vegetative stage and 9-10 days during reproductive stage)

FP : Farmers practice (Irrigation at 9-10 days interval) Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value Inference

I WA 18.3 15.9 *

Yield 5.5 15.9 NS

WUE 9.3 15.9 NS



Net Returns 4.9 15.9 NS

II WA 41.59 4.302 *

Yield 4.42 4.302 *

WUE 8.31 4.302 *




150

Table – 7: Demonstration of irrigation schedules in cotton (Karimnagar)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

in yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Netreturns

(Rs/ha)

Addl

income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)

Total

qty. of

water

applied

(mm)

Water

Saved

over

FP

(mm)

WUE


I 01-02 1.59 14.67 8.5 17335 17485 27064 25965 9729 8480 1249 755 849 94 2.11 1.73

II 01-02 1.5 13.65 6.3 16870 17025 24650 23188 7780 6163 1617 776 860 84 1.87 1.59

III 01-02 1.9 17.65 7.6 17340 17600 32300 30005 14960 12404 2556 752 838 86 2.53 2.11

TP: Nine irrigations at an interval of 20 days (irrigation starts from last fortnight of September)

FP: Irrigation at an interval of 14-15 days

151

Table –8 : Evaluation of irrigation methods in chilli (Warangal)

Reach Year

Total qty.

of water

applied

water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield (t/ha) WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 00-01 700 750 50 2.26 2.10 3.22 2.8 24,416 28,435 40,788 40,032 16,372 11,597 4,775 0.86

01-02 650 700 50 2.40 2.21 3.69 3.16 23,027 26,900 52,800 48,620 29,773 21,720 9,053 1.29

02-03 700 750 50 2.50 2.05 3.57 2.73 23,016 24,610 75,000 61,500 51,984 36,890 15094 2.25

*T cal=3.50

T tab=2.8

*T cal=3.50

T tab=2.23

Avg 683 733 50 2.39 2.12 3.50 2.89 23,486 26,648 56,196 50051 32,710 23,402 9641 3.0

II 00-01 700 750 50 3.30 3.16 4.71 4.21 30,169 32,660 60,034 57,264 29,865 24,599 5,266 0.90

01-02 650 700 50 3.12 2.74 4.8 3.91 24,775 28,319 68,640 60,280 43,865 31,961 11,904 1.78

02-03 700 750 50 3.76 3.40 5.37 4.53 25,660 28,057 112035 100500 86,375 72,443 13932 3.35

*T cal=4.20

T tab=2.36

T cal=0.65

T tab=2.36

Avg 683 733 50 3.39 3.10 4.99 4.23 26,868 29679 80236 72,861 55,368 43,001 10,367 2.01

III 01-02 650 700 50 2.46 2.23 3.78 3.19 22,294 25,281 54,413 48,767 32,119 23,485 8,634 1.42

02-03 700 750 50 3.15 2.45 4.5 3.27 24,880 27,765 90,000 73,500 65,120 45,735 19385 2.59

T cal=3.86

T ab=12.71

T cal=9.17

T tab=12.71

Avg 675 725 50 2.81 2.34 4.16 3.23 23,587 26523 72207 61,134 48,620 34,610 14010 2.01

DP: Furrow method

FP: Flat bed method

152

Table – 9 : Evaluation of irrigation methods in maize(Warangal)

Reach Year

Total qty. of

water

applied

water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield (t/ha) WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 00-01 400 450 50 4.6 4.3 11.50 9.55 6,900 6,750 13,489 11,254 7,089 4,204 2,885 1.1

03-04 350 400 50 5.8 5.26 16.6 13.15 11,991 13,453 31,320 28,440 19,328 14,986 4,341 1.54

Avg 375 425 50 5.2 4.78 13.9 11.25 9446 10102 22,405 19,847 13,209 9595 3613 1.32

*T cal=6.88

T tab=2.78

*T cal=4.9

T tab=2.26

II 00-01 400 450 50 5.4 5.2 13.50 11.55 7,550 7,725 20,125 19,512 12,575 11,787 788 1.7

01-02 350 400 50 5.5 5.25 15.7 13.13 9,410 10,830 27,500 26,250 18,010 15,420 2,590 1.92

02-03 400 450 50 5.8 5.3 14.50 11.77 12,892 14,375 31,900 29,150 19,007 14,775 4232 1.48

03-04 350 400 50 5.9 5.4 14.86 13.5 9,868 11,041 30,975 28,511 21,106 17,308 3,798 2.21

Avg 375 425 50 5.56 5.25 14.83 12.35 9,950 10,976 26,508 24,970 16,530 13,994 2,536 1.7

*T cal=4.65

T tab=2.26

*T cal=5.43

T tab=2.78

III 00-01 400 450 50 6.0 5.75 15.00 12.77 7,350 8,125 15,352 13,972 8,002 5,847 2,155 1.1

01-02 350 400 50 4.12 3.99 11.78 9.98 10,083 10,500 20,600 19,950 10,517 9,450 1,067 1.04

Avg 325 425 50 5.06 4.87 15.57 11.46 8,716 9,312 10,976 16,691 9,259 7,648 1,611 1.07

*Tcal=12.7

T tab=3.16

T cal=2.96

T tab=12.71

153

Table – 10 : Evaluation of irrigation methods in cotton (Warangal)

Reach Year

Total qty.

of water

applied

Water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield (t/ha) WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 00-01 600 780 180 3.2 3.0 5.33 3.84 22,952 24,690 76,792 76,120 53,840 51,430 2,410 2.3

01-02 540 720 180 2.77 2.58 5.13 3.58 21,241 24,860 49,860 46,440 28,619 21,580 7,039 1.34

02-03 600 780 180 2.62 2.35 4.36 3.01 24,700 26,138 60,375 54,050 35,675 27,911 7,764 1.44

03-04 480 660 180 2.82 2.61 5.88 3.95 23,450 26,175 73,190 67,730 49,740 41,555 8,185 2.12

Avg 555 735 180 2.85 2.64 5.14 3.59 23086 25466 65054 61085 41969 35619 4303 1.8

T cal=3.76*

T tab=2.11

T cal=10.65*

T tab=2.11

II 00-01 600 780 180 2.5 2.4 4.16 3.07 22,682 24,057 51,100 49,318 28,417 24,761 3,656 1.30

01-02 540 720 180 2.51 2.27 4.65 3.15 22,023 26,052 45,180 40,950 23,157 14,898 8,259 1.04

02-03 600 780 180 2.57 2.23 4.28 2.85 22,624 24,279 58,580 50,800 35,956 26,520 9,436 1.60

03-04 480 660 180 2.69 2.45 5.60 3.71 22,734 26,160 700,70 63,830 47,335 37,670 9,665 2.08

T cal=5.67*

T tab=2.23

T cal=8.09*

T tab=2.23

Avg 555 735 180 2.57 2.34 4.63 3.18 22516 25137 56233 51225 33716 25962 7754 1.51

III 01-02 540 720 180 2.38 2.2 4.41 3.06 20,899 25,158 42,900 39,570 22,001 14,442 7,559 1.05

02-03 600 780 180 2.75 2.5 4.58 3.20 24,750 27,475 61,500 57,500 36,750 30,025 6,725 1.45

03-04 480 660 180 2.69 2.46 5.60 3.73 23,050 25,900 70,700 64,090 47,020 38,190 8830 2.03

Avg 540 720 180 2.61 2.39 4.83 3.32 22900 26178 58367 53720 35257 27552 7705 1.51

T cal=3.68*

T tab=3.18

T cal=5.31*

T tab=3.18

DP: Irrigation in furrows

FP: Irrigation by flooding

154

Table – 11: Evaluation of Irrigation methods in Groundnut (Warangal)

Reach

Year

Total qty. of

water applied

Water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

Yield (t/ha) WUE

(kg/ha/mm)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP)

DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP

II 00-01 300 350 50 2.8 2.5 9.33 7.14 8,425 8,960 22,500 18,750 14,075 9,590 4,485 1.67

01-02 250 300 50 2.8 2.55 11.2 8.5 10,325 10,835 33,600 30,600 23,275 19,765 3,510 2.25

02-03 300 350 50 2.25 2.00 7.50 5.71 10,900 12,200 48,600 43,200 37,700 31,000 6,700 3.45

03-04 300 350 50 2.60 2.30 8.88 6.38 10,675 10,950 24,000 20,100 13,325 9,150 4,175 1.25

*T cal=9.29

T tab=2.36

*T cal=5.17

T tab=2.36

Avg 287.5 337.5 50 2.61 2.34 9.08 6.93 10081 10736 32175 28163 22094 17376 4718 2.16

III 03-04 300 350 50 2.76 2.36 9.22 6.74 11,555 13,036 24,900 21,300 13,345 8,263 5,081 1.16

DP: Check basin method

FP: Flooding in large plots

155

Table-12: Demonstration of different irrigation methods in Groundnut (Karimnagar).

Reach Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

in yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha)

Additional

income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

Total qty. of

water applied

(mm)

Water

saved over

FP (mm)

WUE kg/ha/mm

FP CBM

BS

M

CB

M

BS

M FP

CB

M

BS

M FP

CB

M BSM FP CBM BSM

CB

M

BS

M FP

CB

M

BS

M

CB

M

BS

M FP

CB

M BSM

II 13.65 1.42

14.

15

4.1

0

3.6

6

851

2

774

0

765

1

1672

1

1740

7

1733

4

820

9 9667 9683

145

8

147

4 492 424 478 68 14

2.7

7

3.3

5 2.96

III 14.72 1.54

15.

15

4.7

5

3.1

5

857

5

779

2

770

5

1803

2

1888

9

1855

9

945

7 11097 10854

164

0

139

7 476 423 465 49 11

3.0

9

3.6

5 3.25

FP : Farmers practice (flooding method)

CBM: Check basin method

BSM: Border strip method

156

Table – 13: Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield

(t/ha)

%

Yield

increa

se in

yield

over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Wat

save

over

FP

(mm)

WUE


III 01-02 3.35 2.37 37.13 17310 17460 55250 40290 37940 22830 15110 392 602 213 8.29 3.92

02-03 2.95 2.08 41.82 16725 14250 67850 47840 51125 33590 17535 425 618 193 6.94 3.36

03-04 3.75 2.75 36.36 20080 16480 90000 66000 69920 49520 20400 421 529 108 8.9 5.2

Average 3.35 2.40 38.44 18038 16063 71033 51377 52995 35313 17682 413 583 171 8.04 4.11

TP: Irrigation with Drip system

FP: Farmers Practice (flooding method)

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

III WA 5.3 4.30 *

Yield 23.5 4.30 *

WUE 15.78 4.30 *




157

Table-14: Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increa

se in

yield

over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl

Incom

e over

FP

(Rs/ha

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

WUE


III 01-02 1.73 1.45 19.75 *11929 11416 21217 17226 9288 5810 3478 379 527 149 4.58 2.74

* Depreciation and maintenance are included.

TP: Irrigation by Sprinkler system

FP: Farmers practice

Table-15: Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

in yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl

incom

e over

FP

(Rs/ha

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Wat

esav

eove

r FP

(mm

)

WUE


II 03-04 2.5 2.35 6.38 10200 10850 30000 28200 19800 17350 2450 220 350 130 8.99 6.71

TP: Irrigation by sprinkler

FP: Irrigation by checkbasin

158

Table 16: Demonstration of drip irrigation system in chillies (Karimnagar)

Reach

Yield

(t/ha)

%

increase

in yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

Total qty.

of water

applied

(mm)

Water

saved

over

FP

(mm)

WUE


III 12 9 33.3 47676* 41416 102000 76500 54324 35084 19240 342 528 186 3.5 1.7

* Depreciation and maintenance cost included.

TP: Irrigation with Drip system.

FP: Flatbed method of irrigation

159

Table 17: Demonstration of intermittent irrigation schedules in paddy (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Total qty. of water applied

(mm)

Water saved

over FP (mm)

Yield (t/ha) Addl. Yield

over FP t/ha

Water use efficiency

TP* TP **

Farmers

practice

(FP)

TP* TP** TP* TP

**

Farmers

practice

(FP)

TP* TP ** TP* TP **

Farmers

practice

(FP)

I 99-00 1135 1020 1410 275 390 5.65 5.50 5.30 0.35 0.20 4.98 5.39 3.76

00-01 1125 1009 1416 291 407 5.83 5.56 5.32 0.51 0.24 5.18 5.51 3.77

01-02 1138 -- 1421 283 -- 5.23 -- 4.75 0.48 -- 4.59 -- 3.34

Average 1133 1014 1416 283 398 5.57 5.53 5.12 0.45 0.22 4.92 5.45 3.62

II 1999-00 1170 1060 1380 210 320 5.53 5.49 5.41 0.12 0.08 4.73 5.18 3.92

2000-01 1164 1051 1385 221 334 5.60 5.51 5.42 0.18 0.09 4.71 5.24 3.91

2001-02 1162 -- 1411 249 -- 5.62 -- 4.98 0.64 -- 4.84 -- 3.53

Average 1165 1056 1392 227 327 5.58 5.50 5.27 0.31 0.08 4.76 5.21 3.78

III 1999-00 1160 1065 1400 240 335 6.00 5.95 5.75 0.28 0.20 5.17 5.59 4.11

2000-01 1153 1056 1405 252 349 6.30 6.12 5.77 0.53 0.35 5.46 5.80 4.10

2001-02 1176 -- 1440 264 -- 6.54 -- 5.85 0.69 -- 5.56 -- 4.06

Average 1163 1060 1415 252 342 6.28 6.04 5.71 0.5 0.28 5.39 5.69 4.09

TP* 24 hrs after disappearance of 5 cm depth of water

TP* * 48 hrs after disappearance of 5 cm depth of water

FP : Farmers practice

Cont.

160

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Water Applied(mm)* 61.27 4.30 *

Water Applied(mm)** 46.88 12.7 *

Yield* 9.09 4.30 *

Yield** 11.0 12.7 *

WUE* 21.93 4.30 *

WUE** 30.6 12.7 *

II Water Applied(mm)* 19.5 4.30 *


Yield* 1.9 4.30 NS

Yield** 17.0 12.7 *

WUE* 5.78 4.30 *

WUE** 37.0 12.7 *

III Water Applied(mm)* 19.52 4.30 *


Yield* 3.81 4.30 NS

Yield** 3.67 12.7 NS

WUE* 10.07 4.30 *

WUE** 14.45 12.7 *

161

Table – 18: Demonstration of direct seeding technique in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

(Rs/ha) TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I

2003-04 5.3 5.0 11470 12965 31800 30000 20330 17035 3295

Average 5.3 5.0 11470 12965 31800 30000 20330 17035 3295

II

2002-03 5.14 4.95 12381 13791 35980 34650 23599 20859 2740

2003-04 5.5 5.1 11320 12875 33000 30600 21680 17725 3955

Average 5.32 5.03 11851 13333 34445 32625 22640 19292 3348

III

2002-03 5.14 4.92 12785 13855 35980 34440 23195 20585 2610

2003-04 5.4 5.2 11285 13005 32400 31200 21115 18195 2920

Average 5.27 5.06 12035 13430 34145 32800 22155 19390 2765

TP: Sowing of sprouted seed with Paddy Drum Seeder

FP: farmers practice of transplanting

Anova Table Reach Character T(stat)

Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 13.6 12.70 *




II Yield 2.81 12.70 NS




III Yield 21.0 12.70 *




162

Table – 19: Demonstration of direct seeding technique in paddy during rabi (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

in yield

over FP

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 2001-02 5.1 4.3 18.6 13920 14810 28560 24080 14640 9270 5370

2003-04 5.9 5.8 1.7 14200 14950 38350 37700 24150 22750 1400

Average 5.5 5.05 8.9 14060 14880 33455 30890 19395 16010 3385

II 2001-02 5.51 4.95 11.3 14006 15025 30850 27720 16844 12695 4149

2002-03 5.65 5.42 4.2 12895 13825 31075 29810 18180 15985 2195

2003-04 5.6 5.9 -5.08 13400 14550 36400 38350 23000 23800 -800

Average 5.59 5.42 3.13 13434 14467 32775 31960 19341 17493 1848

III 2001-02 6.68 6.02 10.9 14780 15520 37408 33712 22628 18192 4436

2002-03 5.99 5.79 3.4 12616 13761 32945 31845 20329 18084 2245

2003-04 6.4 5.9 8.4 12850 13700 41600 38350 28750 24650 4100

Average 6.36 5.9 7.7 13415 14327 37318 34646 23903 20309 3594

TP: Sowing of sprouted seed with Paddy Drum Seeder

FP: Farmers practice of transplanting

163

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 3.6 15.9 NS








III Yield 1.86 12.70 NS




164

Table – 20: Demonstration of direct seeding technique in paddy during kharif (Warangal)

Reach

Yield

T/ha %

increase

over FP

in yield

Cost of cultivation

Rs/ha

%

increa

se in

COC

over

DP

Gross returns

Rs/ha

Net returns Rs/ha

BC

ratio

DP

DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP

II 6.2 6.0 3.33 12742 13695 16.63 36250 35080 23507 21385 1.84

DP: Direct Seeding FP: Transplanting

165

Table – 21: Studies on Greengram based cropping system (1999-2000) (Karimnagar)

Reach

III

Yield

(kg/ha)

Gross

income

(Rs.)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs.)

Net

Income

(Rs.)

Total

Gross

income

(Rs.)

Total cost

of

cultivation

(Rs.)

Total

net

income

(Rs.)

Greengram(K) -

Maize(R)

1400

5953

25200

29766

5840

6235

19360

23531

54966

12075

42891

Greengram(K)-

Groundnut(R)

1400

3028

25200

46705

5305

8357

19901

38347

71905

13663

58332

Greengram(K) -

Redgram(R)

950

1004

34280

15060

5491

3624

23297

11436

32160

9115

23084

Table – 22: Studies on maize based cropping system (1999-2000) (Karimnagar)

Reach III

Yield

(kg/ha)

Gross

income

(Rs.)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs.)

Net

Income

(Rs.)

Total

Gross

income

(Rs.)

Total cost

of

cultivatio

n

(Rs.)

Total net

income (Rs.)

Maize(K) 4850 24250 6315 18000 43673 14365 29108

Groundnut(R)

1369 19173 8050 11123

166

Table – 23: Popularization of Greengram based cropping system (Karimnagar)

Reach Year

Greengram

equivalent

yield (kg/ha)

%

increase

in eql

yield over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns (Rs/ha) Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I 2002-03 2910 2390 21.7 19312 15132 50397 41175 31085 26043 5042

2003-04 2760 2250 22.67 20300 16400 45540 37125 25240 20725 4515

Average 2835 2320 22.19 19806 15766 47969 39150 28163 23384 4779

II 2002-03 2870 2350 22.1 18791 15721 49732 40491 30941 24770 6171

2003-04 2680 2240 19.6 18900 15400 44220 36960 25320 21560 3760

Average 2775 2295 20.9 18846 15561 46976 38726 28131 23165 4966

III 2002-03 3040 2460 23.6 19177 15027 52945 42597 33768 27570 6198

2003-04 2970 2650 12.08 18200 16300 49005 43725 30805 27425 3380

Average 3005 2555 17.61 18689 15664 50975 43161 32287 27498 4789

FP: Greengram-Maize-Fallow

TP: Greengram-Maize-Greengram

167

Table – 24: Popularization of maize based cropping system (Maize-Groundnut-Greengram) (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Maize

equivalent

yield (kg/ha)

%

increase

in eqlnt.

Yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns (Rs/ha) Net returns

(Rs/ha) Addl.

income

over FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

I 2002-03 8960 6820 31.4 20523 16401 47030 35600 26507 19199 7308

II 2001-02 9530 7010 35.9 18530 15835 48212 34765 29682 18930 10752

2002-03 9780 7470 30.9 20882 17082 51290 38970 30408 21888 8520

2003-04 9640 7650 26.01 19750 16800 53020 42075 33270 25275 7995

Average 9650 7377 30.81 19721 16572 50841 38603 31120 22031 9089

III 2001-02 9840 6870 43.2 18270 15830 49624 34082 31394 18252 13142

2002-03 10040 7440 34.87 21825 16937 52800 38780 30975 21843 9132

2003-04 10250 8570 19.6 20950 16200 56375 47138 35425 30935 4490

Average 10043 7627 31.67 20348 16322 52933 39999 32958 23677 8921

FP: Maize – Groundnut

TP: Maize - Groundnut – Greengram Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value Inference

II Yield 23.0 12.70 *




III Yield 15.05 12.70 *




168

Table – 25: Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in maize based cropping system

{Maize-Groundnut-Vegetables} (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Maize

equivalent

yield (kg/ha)

%

increase

in eq.l

yield over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns (Rs/ha) Addl.

income

over FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

I 2001-02 17400 6710 159 32542 16703 98317 33187 58775 16484 42291

II 2001-02 18900 6950 172 33583 16910 99615 34636 66032 17726 48306

2002-03 13760 7130 92.9 32486 17514 75064 39215 42578 21701 20877

2003-04 14900 8240 80.83 37800 18500 81950 45320 44150 26820 17330

Average 15853 7440 113.07 34623 17641 85543 39724 50920 22082 28838

III 2001-02 19600 7050 178 34757 16825 103489 34985 68721 18160 50561

2002-03 14860 7900 88.1 31453 17074 81118 43472 49665 26398 23267

2003-04 16100 8850 81.9 36450 16950 88550 48675 52100 31725 20375

Average 16853 7933 112.44 34220 16950 91052 42377 56828 25428 31400

FP : Maize - Groundnut-Fallow

TP : Maize - Groundnut – Bhendi Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference









169

Table – 26: Demonstration of cultivation of vegetable of greengram based cropping system

(Greengram-Maize-Vegetables) (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Greengram

equivalent

yield (q/ha)

%

increase

in eq.

yield

over FP

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns (Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

I 2000-01 4765 2084 128 23950 11510 82375 34687 58425 23177 35248

2001-02 5100 1550 229 29821 12430 87450 24085 57629 11665 45964

2003-04 4850 1670 190.4 31200 31750 80025 27555 68825 13805 35020

Average 4905 1768 177.4 28234 12563 83283 28776 54960 16216 38744

II 2000-01 4510 2026 123 22595 11775 77562 33750 54967 21975 32992

2001-02 5180 1380 275 29540 12840 83546 21714 54006 8874 45132

2002-03 3116 1330 134.2 27752 12780 54672 22593 26920 9813 17107

2003-04 3970 1410 181.6 28950 14100 65505 23265 36545 9165 27380

Average 4194 1537 172.8 27209 12874 70321 25331 43110 12457 30653

III 2000-01 5116 2260 126 25160 11825 88560 37500 63402 25675 37727

2001-02 5850 1550 277 33148 13770 93783 24216 60635 10446 50189

2002-03 3345 1390 140.6 27739 12515 58691 23749 30952 11234 19718

2003-04 4235 1580 168.9 30740 13750 69878 26070 39138 12320 26818

Average 4637 1695 173.5 29197 12965 77728 27884 48532 14919 33613

TP: Greengram-Maize-Vegetables

FP: Greengram-Maize-Fallow Cont.

170

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 7.17 12.70 NS




II Yield 4.55 4.30 *




III Yield 4.44 4.30 *




171

Table – 27:Cotton-Fallow compared with Cotton-Bhendi (Warangal)

Reach Year Eqv.Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

I 2000-01 DP FP DP FP

I 2000-01 2.8 2.3 32978 51760

I 2000-01 3.45 3.36 40897 51540

I 2000-01 2.85 3.43 37228 54320

I 2000-01 4.4 2.4 57787 31700

I 2000-01 5.17 2.83 56525 28440

I 2000-01 5.63 3.06 66095 32180

I 2000-01 5.45 3.03 58161 32040

I 2000-01 6.69 2.8 75707 18700

I 2000-01 5.5 2.8 53632 20500

I 2000-01 5.73 2.1 59639 17343

I 2000-01 5.65 2.7 64584 22900

Average 4.84 2.8 54839 32857

II 2000-01 *T cal=4.71

T tab=2.23

*T cal=3.10

T tab=2.20

II 2000-01 4.91 2.5 40788 23380

II 2000-01 4.41 2.5 39068 31095

II 2000-01 4.03 2.5 39020 23360

4.01 2.1 45510 25662

5.06 2.27 40788 23380

Average 4.73 2.67 41035 25375

*T cal=9.59

T tab=2.78

*T cal=6.97

T tab=2.78 4.79 2.74 47937 29116

DP: Cotton-Bhendi cropping system FP: Cotton-Fallow cropping system

172

Table – 28 : Cotton-Ridgegourd compared with Cotton-Fallow (Warangal)

Reach Year Eqv.yield( t/ha) Net returns( Rs/ha)

DP FP DP FP

I 2000-01 3.45 3.6 45708 60800

I 2000-01 11.7 3.24 60223 49670

I 2000-01 3.00 2.59 35334 35660

I 2000-01 3.38 2.88 50656 38532

I 2000-01 5.45 2.80 59586 18700

I 2000-01 4.81 2.10 51331 20500

I 2000-01 6.42 2.70 72651 17343

I 2000-01 3.91 2.70 40696 22900

Average 5.27 2.83 52023 33013

*T cal=2.48

T tab=2.36

*T cal=2.37

T tab=2.36

II 2000-01 3.18 2.35 34484 26510

II 2000-01 4.5 2.7 39294 21920

II 2000-01 4.01 2.15 37088 14950

II 2000-01 4.49 2.25 40383 16010

*T cal=5.60

T tab=3.18

*

T tab=3.18

Average 4.86 3.93 37812 19848

DP :Cotton-Ridgegourd

FP: Cotton-Fallow

173

Table – 29:Cotton-Tomato compared to Cotton-Fallow (Warangal)

R

e

a

c

h

Y

ea

r

E

qv.Yi

eld

t/ha

Net

Returns

Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP

I 2000-01 2.4 1.85 28267 14775

I 2000-01 3.2 2.4 47958 25850

I 2000-01 3.95 2.5 36534 19240

I 2000-01 4.64 2.1 41732 12200

T cal=3.01

T tab=3.18

*T cal=5.96

T tab=3.18

Average 3.55 2.21 38623 18016

DP: Cotton-Tomato

FP: Cotton-Fallow

Table – 30:Cotton-Bitter Gourd compared to Cotton-Fallow (Warangal)

R

e

a

c

h

Y

e

a

r

E

qv.Yield

t/ha

Net

Returns

Rs/Ha

D

P

F

P

D

P

F

P I 2000-01 3.63 2.8 45062 18700

I 2000-01 6.49 2.8 76191 20500

I 2000-01 5.8 2.1 65635 17343

174

I 2000-01 2.97 2.7 28961 22900

I 2000-01 4.9 2.07 42797 10860

I 2000-01 5.09 2.2 45779 14930

*T cal=3.95

T tab=2.57

*T cal=4.66

T tab=2.57

Average 4.81 2.45 50738 17389

DP: Cotton-Bittergourd

FP: Cotton-Fallow.

Table – 31:Cotton-Cluster Bean compared to Cotton-Fallow (Warangal)

Reach Year Eqv.Yieldt/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP

I 2000-01 4.92 2.83 53791 28440

I 2000-01 5.01 3.06 53465 32180

I 2000-01 5.14 3.03 58166 32040

*T cal=40.73

T tab=4.30

*T cal=16.15

T tab=4.30

Average 5.02 2.97 55141 30887

DP: Cotton-Clusterbean

FP: Cotton-Fallow

175

Table – 32:Maize-Ground Nut compared to Maize-Maize. (Warangal) Reach Year Eqv. Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP

II 00-01 11.13 12.8 25741 27835

II 01-02 8.00 5.78 36173 29322

II 01-02 7.43 5.78 35235 25524

II 02-03 8.00 9.00 33547 16277

II 03-04 13.15 10.43 37745 28335

II 03-04 13.01 8.10 35692 32170

T cal=1.47

T tab=2.57

*T cal=2.80

T tab=2.57

Average 10.12 8.65 34022 26577

DP: Maize-Groundnut

FP Maize-Maize

176

Table – 33:Maize –Chilli compared to Maize-Maize (Warangal)

Reach Year Eqv. Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP

I 2003-04 17.2 10.43 61490 28335

II 2003-04 17.68 8.10 58446 32170

T cal=5.82

T tab=12.71

T cal=8.64

T tab=12.71

Average 17.44 9.27 59968 30253

DP :Maize Chilli cropping system.

FP: Maize-Maize cropping system

Table – 34: Chilli-Bhendi compared to sole Chilli (Warangal)

Reach

Year

Eqv. Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP

I 2001-02 4.64 3.2 60355 41640

I 2001-02 3.73 2.2 37300 23000

I 2001-02 4.66 2.1 55216 20420

I 2000-01 2.97 2.3 18230 14000 *T cal=3.99

T tab=3.18 T cal=2.83

T tab=3.18

Average 4.0 2.45 42775 24765

DP: Chili –Bhendi cropping system.

FP: Sole Chili .

177

Table – 35: Chilli-Ridgegourd compared to soleChilli (Warangal)

Reach

Year

Eqv. Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP

II 2001-02 4.99 3.45 76721 46435

II 2001-02 2.68 2.1 26800 20420

II 2001-02 3.93 2.73 46567 33960

*T cal=3.99

T tab=3.18

*T cal=3.99

T tab=3.18

Avg. 3.87 2.76 50029 33605

DP Chilli –Ridge gourd cropping system.

FP: Sole Chilli

Table – 36:Turmeric based cropping system(Warangal)

Reach Year System

Turmeric

equivalent

yield (t/ha)

Cost of

Cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross

returns

(Rs./ha)

Net Returns

(Rs./ha)

B:C

Ratio

(DP)

I 01-02 Turmeric-bitter

gourd 4.02 47805 96480 48675 2.02

II 00-01 Turmeric-

ridgegourd 4.25 58253 63750 5497 1.09

178

III 01-02 Turmeric-bitter

gourd 4.17 33128 96076 62948 1.86

Average 4.21 45691 79913 34223 1.20

Table – 37:Rice based cropping system (Warangal)

S.No. System

Rice

equivalen

t yield

(t/ha)

Cost of

Cultivation

(Rs./ha)

Gross

returns

(Rs./ha)

Net Returns

(Rs./ha)

B:C Ratio

(DP)

1 Rice –Rice 12.5 24658 67500 42842 2.74

2 Rice-Bhendi 15.27 33380 82458 52078 2.47

3 Rice-Cucumber 14.9 29392 80460 51068 2.74

4 Rice-Bitter gourd 8.79 17438 47466 30028 2.72

5 Rice-ridge gourd 13.24 26266 71496 45230 2.72

6 Rice-bottle gourd 8.64 17,141 46650 29509 2.72

7 Rice-Palak 8.79 17,438 47466 30028 2.72

179

Table -: 38 Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increas

e in

yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 02-03 4.21 3.95 6.5 6758 7378 21050 19750 14292 12372 1920

03-04 4.8 4.3 11.63 6485 7350 24240 21715 17755 14365 3390

Average 4.505 4.125 9.2 6622 7364 22645 20733 16024 13369 2655

II 02-03 4.89 4.29 13.9 7100 7437 24450 21450 17350 14013 3337

03-04 4.2 4.0 5.0 6750 7625 21210 20200 14460 12575 1885

Average 4.55 4.15 9.65 6925 7531 22830 20825 15905 13294 2611

III 02-03 4.96 4.58 8.2 6338 7171 24800 22900 18462 15729 2733

03-04 5.1 4.4 15.91 7225 7950 25755 22220 18530 14270 4260

Average 5.03 4.49 12.06 6782 7561 25278 22560 18496 15000 3496

RABI

I 02-03 6.13 5.83 5.1 11488 12686 33715 32065 22227 19379 2848

03-04 7.06 6.89 2.47 11250 12800 35653 34795 24403 21995 2408

Average 6.595 6.36 3.69 11369 12743 34684 33430 23315 20687 2628

II 02-03 6.08 5.72 6.2 11723 13085 33440 31460 21717 18375 3342

03-04 6.8 6.2 9.68 12025 13900 34340 31310 22315 17410 4905

Average 6.44 5.96 8.05 11874 13493 33890 31385 22016 17892 4124

III 02-03 6.62 6.20 6.7 11491 12917 36410 34100 24919 21183 3736

03-04 7.54 7.12 5.9 10950 11450 38077 35956 27127 24506 2621

Average 7.08 6.66 6.3 11221 12184 37244 35028 26023 22844 3179

TP: Trial plot (120 N, 60 P2 O5 and 50 K2O)

FP: Farmers plot

180

Table –39: Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy (Karimnagar)

Kharif

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increas

e in

yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

incom

e over

FP

(Rs/ha

) TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I 02-03 5.12 4.95 3.4 11950 13165 28672 27720 16722 14555 2167

03-04 5.4 5.3 1.89 11835 13065 32400 31800 20565 18735 1830

Average 5.26 5.125 2.63 11893 13115 30536 29760 18644 16645 1999

II 02-03 5.17 4.70 9.9 11830 13061 28952 26336 17122 13275 3847

03-04 5.7 5.1 11.76 11675 12875 34200 30600 22525 17725 4800

Average 5.435 4.9 10.83 11753 12968 31576 28468 19824 15500 4324

III 02-03 5.42 5.07 6.9 11637 12890 30352 28392 18715 15502 3213

03-04 5.8 5.4 7.41 11920 13065 34800 32400 22880 19335 3545

Average 5.61 5.235 7.16 11779 12978 32576 30396 20797 17418 3379

Rabi

I 02-03 6.43 6.06 6.10 12779 13814 35365 33330 22586 19516 3070

03-04 6.6 6.1 8.19 12850 14100 42900 39650 30050 23330 4500

Average 6.52 6.08 7.15 12815 13957 39133 36490 26318 22533 3785

II 02-03 5.10 4.73 7.8 12670 14113 28050 26015 15380 11902 3478

03-04 5.8 5.5 5.45 12250 13900 37700 35750 25450 21850 3600

Average 5.45 5.12 6.55 12460 14007 32875 30883 20415 16875 3539

III 02-03 6.47 6.14 5.3 12823 14431 35585 33770 22762 19339 3423

03-04 6.8 6.3 7.9 13100 14250 49200 40950 31100 26700 4400

Average 6.64 6.22 6.67 12962 14341 39893 37360 26931 23020 3911

181

Table –40: Demonstration of integrated pest management in cotton (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (q/ha)

%

increase

in yield

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 02-03 17.54 14.62 19.9 12269 14030 40342 33626 28073 19596 8477

03-04 22.1 19.7 12.2 15600 16450 53040 47280 37440 30830 6610

Average 19.82 17.16 15.5 13934 15240 46691 40453 32757 25213 7544

II 02-03 17.06 14.31 19.2 12187 14427 39238 32913 27051 18486 8565

03-04 21.7 18.4 17.9 16100 17050 52080 44160 35980 27110 8870

Average 19.38 16.36 18.46 14144 15738 45659 38536 31515 22798 8718

III 02-03 18.17 15.27 19.0 12151 14382 41791 35121 29640 20739 8901

03-04 23.5 19.5 20.5 15550 16250 56400 46800 40850 30550 10300

Average 20.84 17.39 19.8 13851 15316 49095 40960 35245 25645 9600

TP: Stem application of Monocrotophos, Pheramone traps, Light traps, Trap crops, Bird perches and NPV spray.

FP: Pest control with chemicals.

182

Table 41:Integrated pest management in cotton (Warangal)

Reach Year Yield (t/ha)

% increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP) DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP

I 1999-00 3.01 2.84 5.9 21,241 25,148 60,200 56,800 38,959 31,652 7,307 1.87

2000-01 2.70 2.60 5.6 22,716 24,688 65,663 63,073 42,947 38,385 4,562 1.89

2001-02 3.04 2.85 8.5 22,574 27,591 54,720 51,300 32,146 23,709 8,437 1.42

2002-03 2.62 2.35 10.30 24,700 26,138 60,375 54,050 35,675 27,911 7,764 1.44

Average 2.84 2.66 7.57 22,807 25,891 60,239 56,305 37,431 30,414 7,017 1.65

*T cal=-6.5

T tab=2.08

T cal=-0.99

T tab=2.26

II 1999-00 2.45 2.24 9.3 21,705 24,565 48,691 44,876 26,986 20,311 6,675 2.33

2000-01 2.60 2.40 5.78 23,201 24,858 55,254 51,694 32,054 26,835 5,219 1.38

2001-02 2.61 2.37 10.29 21,850 25,637 47,052 42,660 25,202 17,023 8,179 1.15

2002-03 2.57 2.23 13.22 22,624 24,279 58,580 50,800 35,956 26,520 9,436 1.60

Average 2.55 2.31 9.64 22,345 24,834 52,394 47,507 30,049 22,672 7,377 1.61

*T cal=-9.7

T tab=2.1

*T caL=9.22

T tab=2.1

III 1999-00 2.65 2.44 8.7 21,345 23,423 47,700 43,572 26,355 21,149 5,206 2.51

2000-01 2.50 2.30 7.55 22,778 24,485 54,708 50,795 31,929 26,306 5,623 1.41

2001-02 2.42 2.22 9.9 21,463 25,630 43,524 40,020 22,061 14,390 7,671 1.01

2002-03 2.75 2.50 9.09 24,750 27,475 61,500 49,450 36,750 21,975 14,775 1.45

Average 2.58 2.36 8.81 22,584 25,253 51,858 45,959 29,273 20,955 8,318 1.60

*T cal=8.51

T tab=2.11

*T cal=12.89

T tab=2.08

DP: with IPM traits

FP: without IPM traits

183

Table-42: Integrated pest management for bph in kharif rice (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha) % increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 1999-00 5.20 4.75 9.40 11,087 12.207 27,040 24,700 15,953 12,493 3,460 1.43

2000-01 6.50 6.20 6.90 11,017 12.200 35,694 33,630 24,677 21,430 3,247 2.20

2001-02 6.26 5.76 8.60 12,763 13.171 37,918 34,888 25,155 21,717 3,438 1.97

2002-03 6.2 5.9 4.83 14,980 15,275 49,600 47,200 34,620 31,925 2,695 2.31

Average 6.04 5.65 7.43 12,461 13,213 37,563 35,104 25,101 21,891 3,210 1.97

*T cal=6.93

T tab=4.3

*T cal=18.01

T tab=3.18

II 1999-00 5.50 5.20 5.70 10,080 11,450 26,400 24,960 16,320 13,510 2,810 1.58

2000-01 6.30 6.00 5.16 10,140 11,340 31,566 30,683 21,426 19,343 2,083 2.10

2001-02 6.75 6.37 5.18 11,957 14,323 38,325 36,250 26,368 21,927 4,441 2.20

2002-03 6.31 5.90 6.49 14,043 14,995 50,500 47,200 36,456 32,205 4,251 2.6

Average 6.21 5.87 5.63 11,555 13,027 36,697 34,773 25,142 21,746 3,396 2.12

*T cal=12.37

T tab=3.18

*T cal=5.96

T tab=3.18

III 2000-01 6.10 5.80 5.17 11,271 12,400 30,500 29,000 19,229 16,600 2,629 1.70

2001-02 5.65 5.27 7.20 11,421 12,411 36,725 34,287 25,304 21,876 3,428 2.21

2002-03 5.25 4.90 6.66 13,750 14,015 42,000 39,200 28,250 25,185 3,065 2.05

Average 5.67 5.32 6.34 12,147 12,942 36,408 34,162 24,261 21,220 3,041 1.98

*T cal=14.71

T tab=4.3

*T cal=13.16

T tab=4.3

184

Table –43: Integrated pest management for bph in rabi rice (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha) %

increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 1999-00 5.38 5.05 2.5 11,071 11,775 25,824 24,240 14,753 12,465 2,288 1.33

2000-01 6.5 6.1 5.7 12,025 13,500 30,841 28,750 18,816 15,250 3,566 1.60

2001-02 7.1 6.98 1.7 17,980 12,362 38,340 37,692 26,360 25,330 1,030 2.20

2002-03 5.74 5.30 7.56 12,881 14,321 45,405 41,943 32,058 27,621 4437 2.48

Average 6.18 5.86 4.37 13,489 12,990 35,103 33156 22997 20,167 2830 5.5

*T cal=4.53

T tab=3.18

*T cal=3.80

T tab=3.18

II 1999-00 5.9 5.5 7.2 9,833 10,843 20,338 19,756 10,505 8,913 1,592 1.50

2000-01 6.1 5.7 7.5 11,795 13,100 27,844 26,498 16,049 13,398 2,651 1.40

2001-02 6.9 6.4 7.8 11,740 13,010 38,985 36,160 27,845 23,150 4,695 2.32

2002-03 6.33 5.83 7.98 13,322 14,270 51,460 46,640 38,138 32,370 5768 2.86

Average 6.31 5.86 7.62 11,673 12,806 34,679 32,264 20,772 19,458 3677 2.02

T cal=3.18

T tab=18.27

*T cal=3.87

T tab=3.18

III 2000-01 6.3 5.8 8.6 12,637 14,412 27,435 25,393 14,708 10,981 3,727 1.2

2002-03 5.84 5.42 7.0 12,219 13,080 46,720 43,480 34,500 30,575 3925 2.82

Average 6.07 5.61 7.8 12,428 13,746 37,078 34,437 24,604 20778 2061 2.01

T cal=0.03

T tab=12.7

T cal=3.86

T tab=12.7

185

Table -: 44 Demonstration of production technology in greengram during kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

%

increase

over FP

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 1999-00 1266 570 122.10 5466 5700 22788 10260 17323 4560 12762

2000-01 1050 800 31.25 3613 4200 11550 8800 7937 4600 3337

2001-02 660 350 88.57 3600 3750 8580 4550 4980 800 4180

2002-03 275 268 2.6 2545 2756 5225 5092 2680 2336 344

2003-04 520 410 26.83 3450 3750 8580 6765 5130 3015 2115

Average 754 480 54.27 3735 4031 11345 7093 7610 3062 4548

II 1999-00 1200 600 100 5100 5808 21600 10800 16500 4995 11505

2000-01 450 350 28.57 2520 2830 4950 3850 2430 1020 1410

2001-02 700 400 75.00 3800 4000 9100 5200 5300 1200 4100

2002-03 290 272 6.6 3723 3990 5510 5168 1787 1178 609

2003-04 670 530 26.42 3680 3870 11055 8745 7375 4875 4500

Average 662 430 47.3 3765 4100 10443 6753 6678 2654 4423

III 1999-00 1362 750 82.00 5340 5562 24516 13500 19176 7938 11238

2000-01 650 500 30.00 3263 3695 7150 5500 3887 1805 2082

2001-02 660 410 60.97 3840 4140 8580 5330 4740 1190 3550

2002-03 345 326 5.8 2688 2875 6555 6194 3867 3319 548

2003-04 590 450 31.11 3560 3760 9735 7425 6175 3665 2510

Average 721 487 42.00 3738 4006 11307 7590 7569 3583 3986

TP: Trial plot (Introduction of line sowing, YMV tolerant varieties (WGG-37) and weedicide application (Alachlor @ 1.0 kg

a.i./ha)

FP: Farmers‟ practice

186

Cont.

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 2.33 2.77 NS












187

Table –45: Demonstration of recommended production technology in redgram during rabi

(Karimnagar)

Reach Year

Yield

(kg/ha)

%

Yield

increas

e over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income over

FP (Rs/ha)

TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I 98-99 1500 975 53.8 5272 4775 21000 13650 15728 8875 6853

00-01 1370 870 57.14 5840 3985 22000 14000 16160 10015 6145

Average 1435 923 55.47 5556 4380 21500 13825 15944 9445 6499

II 98-99 1300 935 39.0 4550 4320 18200 13090 13650 8770 4880

00-01 1250 690 0.81 5485 3055 20000 11120 14515 8065 6450

01-02 1557 1163 23.88 8519 9227 26469 18029 17950 8799 9151

Average 1369 929 47.36 6185 5534 21556 14079 13572 8545 6827

III 98-99 1600 985 62.43 5500 5320 22400 13790 16900 8470 8430

00-01 1870 1250 50.0 7795 4250 30000 20000 22250 15750 6455

01-02 1625 1225 32.65 8269 9131 27625 18987 19356 9856 9500

Average 1698 1153 47.23 7188 6234 26675 17592 19487 1136 8128

TP : Trial plot (Introduction of HYV during rabi with optimum dates of sowing)

FP : Farmers practice (growing of local varieties)

188

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 41.0 12.7 *




II Yield 7.23 4.3 *




III Yield 7.51 4.3 *




189

Table -46: Demonstration of production technology in blackgram (Karimnagar)

Reach Year Yield (kg/ha)

%

Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 98-99 1333 925 44.10 5230 4920 18662 12950 12432 8030 5402

00-01 1180 830 42.17 6362 5687 22420 15770 16057 9407 6650

01-02 1355 1094 23.86 5735 7525 22357 18051 16622 10526 6096

Average 1289 950 35.68 5776 6044 21146 15590 15270 9321 6049

II 98-99 1350 930 34.16 5157 4875 18900 13020 13743 8145 5518

00-01 1500 930 61.29 8450 7135 28500 17670 20050 10535 9515

01-02 1313 1101 19.26 6320 8075 21961 18166 15641 10091 5550

02-03 1200 1050 14.3 6736 7725 16800 14700 10064 6975 3089

Average 1341 1003 32.3 6666 6953 21540 15889 14875 8936 5918

III 98-99 1500 980 53.0 6124 5600 21000 13720 14875 8120 6755

00-01 1650 1070 53.46 8500 7840 31350 20425 22850 12585 10265

01-02 1488 1161 28.17 5970 7825 24552 19156 18580 11331 7248

02-03 1390 1100 26.8 6645 7685 19460 15400 12815 7715 5100

Average 1507 1078 40.35 6810 7238 24091 17175 17280 9938 7342

TP: Trial plot (LBG-20, weed control (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha), Blitox (powdery mildew control), line sowing (30 x 10 cm.)).

FP: Farmers‟ plot

190

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value Inference

I Yield 7.95 4.30 *




II Yield 3.50 3.18 *




III Yield 6.03 3.18 *




191

Table –47: Demonstration of recommended production technology in groundnut (Karimnagar)

Reach Year

Yield (kg/ha)

%

Yield

increas

e over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl. income

over FP (Rs/ha)


I 00-01 1750 1050 67.0 7540 6750 25447 15225 17907 8475 9432

01-02 1526 1145 33.28 7800 8210 18692 14026 10893 5816 5077

02-03 1475 1010 21.9 8675 9050 17700 12120 9025 3070 5955

03-04 1390 1070 29.9 9935 10750 20850 16050 10915 5300 5615

Average 1535 1069 43.59 8488 8690 20672 14355 12185 5665 6520

II 00-01 1850 1120 64.4 8150 7460 26825 16312 18675 8852 9823

01-02 1704 1242 37.2 8205 9150 20874 15214 12669 6064 6605

02-03 1577 1140 38.3 8908 9825 18924 13680 10016 3855 6161

03-04 1480 1150 28.67 9875 10500 22200 17250 12325 6750 5575

Average 1652 1163 41.83 8785 9234 22206 15614 13421 6380 7041

III 00-01 2770 1450 56.9 9880 9340 32987 21025 23107 11685 11422

01-02 1626 1176 38.27 7615 8570 19918 14406 12303 5836 6467

02-03 1610 1150 40 9050 10015 19320 13800 10270 3785 6485

03-04 1610 1220 31.97 10220 11200 24150 18300 13930 7100 6830

Average 1904 1249 52.44 9191 9781 24094 16883 14903 7102 7801

TP: Trial plot (Seed treatment of HYV, optimum plant population (44 plants / sq.m), weedicide application

(Pendimethalin@ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and Gypsum application @500 kg/ha).

FP: Farmers‟ practice

192

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 5.59 3.18 *




II Yield 5.75 3.18 *








193

Table -: 48 Demonstration of production technology in maize during rabi (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

%

Yield

increas

e over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 1998-99 7366 6500 13.32 5425 6628 29464 26000 24029 19972 4057

1999-00 6075 5700 6.5 6115 6740 30375 27000 24260 20260 4000

Average 6721 6100 9.90 5770 6684 29920 26500 24145 20116 4029

II 1998-99 5883 4802 21 5125 5978 23532 19368 18407 13390 5017

III 1998-99 6064 5200 16.0 5120 6389 24256 20800 18530 14411 4119

1999-00 5980 5600 6.0 6300 6685 28000 23600 21315 2285 2285

Average 6022 5400 11.00 5710 6537 26128 22200 19923 8384 3202

TP: Trial plot (Application of weedicide, growing of Hybrids, irrigations through ridges and furrow method )

FP: Farmers plot

Anova Table Reach Character T(stat)

Value

T(table)

Value

Inference









194

Table-49: Demonstration of production technology in maize (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 4.6 4.2 8.5 6,400 6,750 13,489 11,200 7,089 4,450 2,639 1.1

2002-03 4.3 3.9 9.30 13,150 14,015 23,650 21,450 10,500 7,435 3,065 0.79

2003-04 5.0 4.5 10.16 8,475 8,840 26,250 23,640 17,775 14,800 2975 2.09

Average 4.63 4.2 9.32 9342 9868 21130 18763 11788 8,895 2,893 1.33

*T cal=3.18

T tab=2.4

T cal=2.34

T tab=3.18

II 2000-01 5.7 5.5 4.5 7,550 7,725 20,125 19,512 12,575 11,787 788 1.7

2001-02 5.1 4.65 9.67 9,035 10,405 22,950 20,925 13,915 10,520 3,395 1.54

2002-03 5.8 5.3 8.62 12,892 14,375 31,900 29,150 19,007 14,775 4,232 1.48

2003-04 5.75 5.4 6.56 10,532 11,932 30,187 28,350 19,655 16,417 3,237 1.89

Average 5.59 5.21 7.34 10002 11,109 26,290 19890 16288 10875 2913 1.65

*T cal=5.93

T tab=2.20

*T cal=6.07

T tab=2.20

III 2000-01 5.9 5.7 9.37 7,350 8,125 20,650 19,950 13,300 11,825 1,475 1.8

2002-03 4.2 3.8 9.52 12,550 13,065 23,100 20,900 10,550 7,835 2,715 0.84

Average 5.05 4.75 9.45 9,950 10,59 21,875 20,425 11,925 9830 2095 1.32

*T cal=5.50

T tab=2.30

*T cal=4.63

T tab=2.45

DP: N120P60K40 Kg/ha +chemical weed control with recommended spacing.

FP: Higher fertilizer application with closer spacing.

195

Table-50: Demonstration of production technology in rice in kharif (Warangal)


% increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gros returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 7.40 7.1 4.20 12,297 14,232 37,264 36,873 24,967 22,640 2,327 2.00

2001-02 6.06 5.6 7.10 12,914 13,565 36,023 33,802 23,100 20,237 2,863 1.70

2002-03 6.03 5.6 7.13 16,085 17,085 48,280 44,800 32,195 27,715 4,480 1.99

2003-04 6.01 5.6 7.32 13,700 14,950 33,055 30,800 19,355 15,850 3,505 1.41

Average 6.38 5.98 6.44 13,749 14,958 38,656 36,569 24904 21611 3294 1.78

*T cal=6.02

T tab=2.09

*T cal=7.13

T tab=2.09

II 2000-01 6.4 6.2 3.20 12,392 13,260 32,106 31,420 19,714 18,160 1,554 1.60

2001-02 6.2 5.9 5.08 11,898 14,077 38,387 36,100 26,488 22,022 4,466 2.22

2002-03 6.0 5.2 13.33 16,450 18,200 48,000 41,600 31,549 23,400 8,149 1.93

2003-04 5.89 5.48 7.49 13,000 13,743 32,367 30,112 19,367 16,369 2,998 1.49

Average 6.12 5.70 7.28 13,435 14,820 37,715 34,808 24780 19988 4292 2.56

*T cal=1.09

T tab=2.16

*T cal=5.87

T tab=2.16

III 2000-01 6.30 6.0 5.00 11,571 12,400 31,563 30,060 19,992 17,660 2,332 1.72

2001-02 5.80 5.3 9.70 11,500 12,800 31,320 28,620 19,820 15,820 4,000 1.72

2002-03 5.17 5.0 3.28 16,678 17,980 41,400 40,000 24,722 22,020 2,702 1.48

Average 5.76 5.43 5.99 13,250 14,393 34,761 32893 24780 18500 3008 1.64

*T cal=9.49

T tab=2.09

*T cal=6.82

T tab=2.09

DP: N80P60K40 kg/ha + green manuring with Sesbania

FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

196

Table-51: Demonstration of production technology in rice in rabi (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 7.0 6.2 12.9 10,750 11,600 34,288 28,800 23,538 17,200 6,338 2.18

2001-02 7.1 6.98 1.7 11,980 12,362 38,340 37,692 26,360 25,330 1,030 2.20

Average 7.05 6.59 7.3 11,365 11,981 36,314 33,246 24949 21,265 3,684 2.19

T cal=2.18

T tab=3.18

T cal=2.68

T tab=2.68

II 2000-01 6.2 5.7 8.39 10,795 11,701 30,841 28,750 20,046 17,066 2,980 1.90

2001-02 6.8 6.5 4.61 11,752 13,885 38,410 36,450 26,654 22,565 4,089 2.26

Average 6.5 6.1 6.5 11,274 12,793 34,625 32,600 23,350 19,816 3535 2.08

*T cal=12.12

T tab=3.18

*T cal=14.23

T tab=3.18

III 2000-01 5.9 5.2 13.5 10,817 12,255 26,122 23,732 15,305 11,477 3,828 1.42

2001-02 6.36 6.04 5.29 12,374 14,200 34,344 32,616 21,970 18,416 3,554 1.77

Average 6.13 5.62 9.40 11,595 13,228 30,233 28,174 18,638 14,947 3691 1.60

T cal=-0.99

T tab=2.26

T cal=0.98

T tab=2.26

DP: N120P60K40 kg/ha FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

197

Table-52: Demonstration of production technology in cotton (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 3.2 2.6 6.66 23,895 26,938 75,807 61,593 51,912 34,655 4,776 2.20

2001-02 2.89 2.60 11.15 21,650 26,172 52,020 46,800 30,370 20,628 9,742 1.40

2002-03 2.33 2.08 10.72 23,442 24,776 53,666 47,916 30,224 23,140 7,084 1.27

2003-04 2.81 2.59 8.49 23,800 26,150 73,060 60,734 49,260 41,190 8,070 2.07

Average 2.81 2.47 9.23 23192 26009 63638 54261 40442 24696 7418 1.74

*T cal=6.311

T tab=2.03

*T cal=13.92

T tab=2.03

II 2000-01 2.8 2.6 4.76 22,519 24,111 64,400 59,800 41,881 35,689 6,192 1.90

2001-02 2.68 2.31 16.01 21,843 25,645 48,240 41,580 26,397 15,935 10,462 1.20

2002-03 2.26 2.07 8.40 23,708 25,388 51,350 47,512 27,245 22,117 5,128 1.11

2003-04 2.70 2.50 8.0 22,519 25,620 70,200 65,000 47,681 39,380 8,301 2.12

Average 2.61 2.37 8.25 17897 25191 58548 53473 29876 29023 7521 1.56

*T cal= 7.3

T tab= 2.02

*T cal=9.09

T tab=2.02

III 2000-01 2.7 2.5 8.0 22,056 23,986 62,100 52,500 40,044 28,513 11,531 1.80

2001-02 2.38 2.11 12.29 20,852 24,754 42,900 38,100 22,047 13,342 8,705 1.03

2002-03 2.37 2.00 15.61 23,966 27,426 53,500 46,000 29,534 18,574 10,960 1.22

2003-04 2.69 2.48 8.47 23,200 26,200 69,940 64,480 46,740 38,280 8,460 2.01

Average 2.54 2.27 11.01 22518 25591 57110 50270 34591 24677 9914 1.56

*T cal=8.88

T tab=2.04

*T cal=11.64

T tab=2.04

DP: N150P60K40 kg/ha + IPM practices FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

198

Table-53: Demonstration of production technology in chilli (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 2.2 2.0 10.0 22,050 24,312 40,005 36,620 17,955 9,307 8,648 0.80

2001-02 2.6 2.34 13.0 24,470 25,833 57,200 51,480 32,730 25,647 7,083 1.31

2002-03 2.58 Results are awaited 2.11 18.06 23,285 25,186 77,500 63,500 54,214 38,313 15901 2.32

2003-04 3.35 2.89 15.91 27,825 35775 76935 66,585 49,110 35765 13345 1.76

Average 2.68 2.34 14.53 24408 27777 62910 54546 38502 21487 17015 1.55

*T cal=5.03

T tab=3.18

T cal=1.3

T tab=3.18

II 2000-01 3.2 3.0 6.7 26,820 29,441 57,943 54,857 31,123 23,044 2,379 1.20

2001-02 3.37 3.11 8.3 24,868 28,893 74,140 68,420 49,272 39,527 9,745 1.98

2002-03 2.75 2.33 14.19 23,303 25,089 80,300 67,997 56,996 42,906 14090 2.40

2003-04 3.05 2.7 12.96 28,170 31,017 70,265 62,100 42,095 31,082 11013 1.49

Average 3.09 2.79 10.75 25790 28610 70662 63344 44872 34140 10732 1.77

T cal=2.61

T tab=3.18

*T cal=8.44

T tab=3.18

III 2000-01 2.6 2.4 8.0 23,187 23,618 47,060 43,440 23,873 19,822 4,051 1.02

2001-02 2.6 2.39 9.4 22,806 25,116 57,566 52,800 34,759 27,683 7,076 1.48

2002-03 2.75 2.25 16.38 23,036 25,617 80,000 67,700 56,963 42,149 14814 2.42

2003-04 3.56 3.1 14.8 27085 30887 81,995 71,300 54,910 40,412 14498 2.02

Average 2.88 2.54 13.39 24029 26310 66653 58810 42626 32449 10177 1.74

*T cal=4.29

T tab=3.18

*T cal=3.74

T tab=3.18

DP: N200P60K80 kg/ha + micronutrient spray + IPM practices FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

199

Table-54: Demonstration of production technology in turmeric (Warangal)


% increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 2.20 1.93 13.9 29,275 31,545 24,805 24,090 - 4,470 - 7455 Nil 0.85-

2001-02 1.87 1.78 5.55 20,600 21,500 43,010 40,940 22,410 19440 2,970 1.09

Average 2.03 1.85 9.72 24,937 26,522 32,515 8970 5993 - 0.97

*T cal=3.54

T tab=2.57

II 2000-01 2.48 2.21 12.2 30,059 32,570 27,355 24,288 - 2,724 - 8282 Nil 0.91

2001-02 3.33 3.05 9.18 23,029 26,850 76,590 70,150 53,561 43300 10,261 2.33

Average 2.90 2.63 10.69 26,544 29,710 51,972 47,219 25419 17509 10,261 1.62-

*T cal=5.73

T tab=2.36

III 2000-01 0.45 0.40 12.5 25,410 27,505 19,712 17,275 - 5,697 - 10,232 Nil 0.78

2001-02 2.6 2.41 7.36 21,814 24,175 59,800 56,045 37,986 31,376 6,610 1.74

2002-03 2.00 1.75 12.5 21,862 23,240 50,000 43,750 28,138 20,510 7628 1.28

2003-04 3.75 3.5 7.15 25600 29,840 41250 38500 15650 8661 6989 0.61

Average 2.2 2.02 9.88 23672 26190 42691 38893 19019 12579 5307 1.10

*T cal=3.92

T tab=3.12

*T cal=23.81

T tab=4.3

DP: N190P75K125 kg/ha + Rhizome treatment with carbendazim.

FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers without rhizome treatment.

200

Table –55: Demonstration of production technology in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

% Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns (Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 99-00 6290 5850 7.0 7050 6975 37740 35100 30690 38125 2565

00-01 3470 3010 15.4 12065 11355 17201 14899 5136 3544 1592

Average 4880 4430 11.2 9558 9165 27470 25000 17913 20834 2078

II 99-00 6070 5600 8.0 6825 6600 36420 33600 29595 27000 2595

00-01 4030 3480 15.9 12170 11912 19973 17226 7263 5314 1949

Average 5050 4540 11.9 9768 9256 28197 25413 18429 16157 2272

III 99-00 6700 6280 6.0 6900 6750 40200 37680 33300 30930 2370

00-01 6070 5100 19.0 13815 12265 30046 25245 16231 12980 3251

Average 6385 5690 12.5 10358 9508 35123 31463 24765 21955 2810

TP: Trial plot. FP: Farmers‟ plot

Anova Table

Reach Character T(stat) Value T(table) Value Inference

I Yield 45.0 12.7 *




II Yield 12.75 12.7 *








201

Table-56: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in blackgram (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

%

Yield

increas

e over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 98-99 1400 1060 32.0 5900 5410 19600 14840 13700 9430 4270

00-01 1220 850 44.1 5740 6545 23275 16150 17535 9605 7930

01-02 1206 1145 5.3 6815 7970 19899 18892 13084 10922 2162

Average 1275 1018 25.2 6152 6642 20925 16627 14773 9986 4287

II 98-99 1285 950 35.0 5278 5710 17990 13300 12712 7510 5202

00-01 1470 920 59.4 7675 8840 28025 17575 20350 8735 11615

01-02 1217 1174 3.6 6824 8035 20080 19371 13256 11336 1920

02-03 1229 1090 12.7 7352 7985 17206 14840 9854 6855 2999

Average 1300 1033 27.7 6782 7643 20825 16272 14043 8609 5434

III 98-99 1475 1185 24.0 5900 6325 20650 16590 14750 10265 4485

99-00 1800 1200 50.0 5284 5700 32400 21600 27116 15900 11216

00-01 1650 1100 50.0 7325 8570 31350 20900 24025 12330 11695

01-02 1332 1243 7.1 6715 7810 21978 20509 15263 12619 2564

02-03 1303 1140 14.3 7165 8250 18242 15960 11077 7710 3367

Average 1512 1174 29.1 6478 7331 24924 19112 18446 11765 6665

TP: Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Pendimethalin and inter-cultivation at 25 days after sowing)

FP: Farmers plot (Two hand weedings without weedicide)

Cont

202

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference









III Yield 3.34 2.77 *




203

Table-57: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in groundnut in kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

% Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

(Rs/ ha)


I 00-01 1750 1250 44.9 9870 11250 25375 18125 15505 6875 8630

II 00-01 1650 1330 23.59 10700 11770 23925 19357 13225 7587 5637

01-02 1870 1520 18.70 10125 10755 20570 16720 10445 5965 4480

02-03 1410 1167 20.8 6882 7247 16920 14004 10038 6757 3281

Average 1643 1339 21.03 9236 9924 20472 16694 11236 6770 4466

III 99-00 2300 1800 27.7 8655 9300 41200 32400 32745 23100 9645

00-01 2150 1350 59.25 11500 11975 31175 19575 19675 7600 12075

01-02 2580 2240 13.1 9865 10975 28380 24640 18515 13665 4865

02-03 1355 1082 25.2 6423 6641 16260 12984 9837 6343 3494

Average 2096 1618 31.3 9111 9723 29254 22400 20193 12677 7520

TP: Trial plot(1.0 kg. a.i./ha of Pendimethalin and inter-cultivation at 30-35 DAS).

FP: Two hand weedings.

Cont.

204

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value Inference

I Yield 3.39 2.77 *




II Yield 9.55 4.30 *




III Yield 4.07 3.18 *




205

Table-58: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

%

Yield

increas

e over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)


I 00-01 5400 4400 22.7 11162 12037 26730 21786 15568 9743 5825

01-02 3240 2860 11.64 10663 11825 17172 15158 6509 3333 3176

02-03 4920 4450 11.9 11209 12720 27888 24920 16679 12200 4479

03-04 5140 4820 6.6 11760 12350 33410 31330 21650 18980 2670

Average 4675 4133 13.11 11199 12233 26300 23299 15102 11064 4038

II 00-01 4600 3700 24.3 10972 11394 22770 18135 11798 6921 4877

01-02 3390 3010 11.2 10919 11654 17967 15953 7050 4299 2750

02-03 5080 4560 11.4 11478 13037 28672 26152 17194 13115 4079

03-04 4930 4650 6.02 11380 11980 32045 30225 20665 18245 2420

Average 4500 3980 13.06 11187 12016 25364 22616 14177 10645 3532

III 00-01 5100 4200 21.4 11372 11988 25245 20790 13873 8802 4455

01-02 3970 3250 18.3 11225 11965 21040 17225 9816 5260 4556

02-03 5070 4620 9.8 11091 12806 28420 25872 17329 13066 4263

03-04 5340 5042 5.9 11950 12705 34710 32773 22760 20068 2692

Average 4870 4278 13.8 11410 12366 27354 24165 15945 11799 4146

TP: Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Butachlor and inter-cultivation at 35-40 days after sowing

FP: Farmers plot

206

Table-59: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in paddy during rabi (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

% Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns (Rs/ha)

Addl. income

over FP (Rs/ha)


I 00-01 5350 5000 7.00 12050 13500 28087 26250 16037 12750 3287

01-02 5310 4740 12.0 14350 14450 29736 26544 15386 12094 3292

03-04 5920 5640 4.96 14760 14570 38480 36660 23720 22090 1630

Average 5527 5127 7.8 13720 14173 32101 29818 18381 15645 2736

II 00-01 5200 5070 2.56 11725 13650 27300 26617 15575 12967 2607

01-02 5810 5120 13.5 14560 14610 32536 28672 17976 14062 3914

03-04 6020 5820 3.4 13900 14360 39130 37830 25230 23480 1750

Average 5677 5337 6.37 13395 14203 32989 31040 19594 16837 2757

III 00-01 5200 5050 2.96 11970 14375 26300 26512 15329 12137 3191

01-02 6720 6150 9.3 15010 15125 37632 35000 22622 19875 2747

03-04 6830 6520 4.7 14200 15100 43095 42380 28895 27280 1615

Average 6250 5907 5.8 13727 14867 35676 34631 22282 19764 2518

TP: Application of 1.0 kg a.i /ha of Butachlor and intercultivation at 35-40 DAS

FP: Farmers practice of no weedicide application

207

Table-60: Introduction of chemical weed control technique in rabi pigeon pea (1998-99) (Karimnagar)

Reach

Yield

(Kg/ha)

% Yield

Increase

Over FP

Cost Of

Cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

Over FP


I 1585 1200 32 5475 6140 22190 16800 16715 10660 6055

II 1490 1250 13 5635 6278 20860 18410 15225 12132 3093

III 1635 1390 17 6010 6500 22890 19460 16880 12960 3920

TP: Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Pendimethalin)


Table-61: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in greengram(Karimnagar)

R

e

a

h

year

yield

(Kg/ha)

Yield

increase

Over FP

Cost Of

Cultivation (Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

((Rs/ha)

Net Returns (Rs/ha)

Addl. Income

Over FP (Rs/ha)


I 00-01 1020 800 27.5 3938 4401 11220 8800 7282 4399 2883

01-02 670 580 15.5 3550 3800 8710 7540 5160 3740 1420

Average 845 690 21.5 3744 4101 9965 8170 6221 4070 2152

II 00-01 350 270 29.6 2708 2755 3850 2970 1142 215 927

01-02 830 690 20.3 3720 4015 10790 8970 7070 4955 2115

Average 590 480 24.9 3214 3385 7320 5970 4106 2585 1521

III 00-01 660 520 34.6 3345 3626 7260 5720 3915 2094 1821

01-02 660 600 10.0 3650 3920 8580 7800 4930 3800 1050

Average 660 560 22.3 3498 3773 7920 6760 4423 2947 1436

TP: Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Pendimethalin and inter-cultivation at 25 days after sowing)


208

Table-62: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in maize during kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

%

Yield

increas

e over

FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 01-02 4050 3720 8.8 7820 8075 18825 16740 10405 8665 1740

02-03 4570 4180 9.3 6944 7357 22850 20900 15906 13543 2363

03-04 5950 5460 9.0 7920 7240 32725 30630 24805 22790 2015

Average 4857 4453 9.07 7561 7557 24800 22557 17039 14999 2040

II 01-02 4660 4110 13.38 8010 8270 20970 18950 12960 10680 2280

02-03 4730 4270 10.7 7384 7679 23650 21350 16266 13671 2595

03-04 6130 5340 14.8 7460 8170 33715 29370 26255 21200 5055

Average 5173 4573 13.12 7618 8043 26112 23223 18494 15184 3310

III 01-02 5200 4250 22.35 8150 8450 23400 19125 15250 10675 4575

02-03 4830 4420 9.27 7043 7566 24150 22100 17107 14534 2573

03-04 6840 6120 11.76 7560 8025 37620 33660 30060 25635 4425

Average 5623 4930 14.05 7584 8014 28390 24962 20806 16948 3858

TP: Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Atrazine and inter-cultivation at 35-40 days after sowing.

FP: Farmers‟ plot

209

Table-63: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in maize during rabi (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

% Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP


I 98-99 7366 6900 6.0 6540 6890 36830 34500 29840 27710 2130

99-00 6075 5700 6.5 6115 6740 30375 27000 24260 20260 4000

00-01 6950 5600 24.1 9570 10250 26062 21000 16592 10750 5842

01-02 6390 6020 6.1 10680 11910 35145 33110 24465 21200 3265

02-03 6690 6320 5.85 11703 12958 36795 34760 25092 21802 3290

03-04 6740 6250 7.84 12540 13290 37070 34375 24530 21085 3445

Average 6702 6132 9.29 9525 10340 33706 30791 24130 20468 3662

II 98-99 5883 4970 18.0 6185 6500 29415 24850 23230 18350 4880

00-01 7050 5400 29.63 9975 10745 26250 20250 16275 9505 6770

01-02 6010 5670 6.00 10275 11800 39065 36855 28790 25055 3735

02-03 6440 6050 6.44 11821 12871 35420 33275 23599 20404 3195

03-04 6820 6630 2.9 12520 13780 37510 36465 24990 22685 2305

Average 6441 5744 12.1 10155 1139 31532 30339 23377 19200 4177

III 98-99 6064 5700 6.0 6176 6535 30320 28500 24144 21965 2179

99-00 5980 5600 6.5 6300 6685 29900 28000 23600 21315 2285

00-01 7200 5800 27.59 10170 11975 27000 21750 16830 9775 7055

01-02 6420 6010 6.83 10020 11375 35310 33055 25290 21680 3610

02-03 6920 6420 7.78 11688 12565 38060 35310 26372 22745 3627

03-04 7210 6740 7.0 12450 13670 39655 37070 27205 23400 3805

Average 6632 6045 9.7 9464 10468 33374 30613 23907 20147 3760

TP: Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Atrazine and inter-cultivation at 35-40 days after sowing).

FP: Farmers plot

210

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value

Inference

I Yield 3.05 2.78 *








III Yield 3.07 2.78 *




211

Table-64: Demonstration of chemical weed control in maize (Warangal)

Reach Year

Yield (t/ha)

%

increase

over

farmers

practice

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over

FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio


I 2000-01 4.6 4.4 4.5 6,400 6,650 14,489 12,254 8,089 5,604 2,485 1.30

II 2000-01 5.75 5.46 5.3 7,550 7,725 20,124 19,512 12,574 11,787 787 1.70

2001-02 5.0 4.45 12.37 10,083 10,500 22,500 20,025 12,417 9,525 2,892 1.23

Average 5.37 4.95 8.83 8,816 9,112 21,312 19,768 12,495 10,656 1,839 1.40

*T cal=5.3

T tab=2.36

*T cal=4.74

T tab=2.36

III 2000-01 5.9 5.65 6.2 7,906 8,156 23,581 22,138 15,675 13,982 1,693 1.90

2001-02 4.2 4.0 5.0 9,285 10,437 18,900 18,000 9,625 7,563 2,062 1.03

Average 5.05 4.82 5.6 8,595 9,296 21,240 20,069 12,650 10,772 1,877 1.46

*T cal=4.00

T tab=3.18

*T cal=10.06

T tab=3.18

DP: Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha as pre emergence spray + intercultivation at 30-35 DAS

FP: Manual weeding + intercultivation

212

Table-65: Introduction of new varieties (JGL-1798) in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns (Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

over FP

(Rs/ha)


I 2000-01 3470 3010 12065 11355 17201 14899 5136 3544 1592

2001-02 3250 2910 11750 12225 18200 14841 6450 2616 3834

2002-03 5160 5420 12450 13835 36120 30352 23670 16517 7153

2003-04 5900 4600 12265 12875 35400 27600 23135 14725 8410

Average 4445 3985 12133 12573 26730 21923 14598 9351 5247

II 2000-01 4030 3480 12710 11912 19973 17226 7263 5314 1949

2001-02 3750 3100 12395 12625 21000 15810 8605 3185 5420

2002-03 5280 5680 12337 12735 36960 31808 24623 18073 6550

2003-04 5200 4500 12650 13100 31200 27000 18550 13900 3251

Average 4265 4190 12523 12593 27283 22961 14760 10118 4642

III 2000-01 6070 5100 13815 12265 30046 25245 16231 12980 3251

2001-02 4330 3500 12637 13162 24248 17850 11611 4688 6923

2002-03 5470 5880 11845 12933 38325 32928 26480 19995 6485

2003-04 7000 5800 12775 13260 42000 34800 29225 21540 7685

Average 5718 5070 12768 12905 33655 27706 20887 14801 6086

TP: Introduction of new variety JGL-1798

FP: Farmers practice (IR-64 & Vijetha)

Cont.

213

Anova Table


Value

T(table)

Value Inference













214

Table-66: Identification of suitable rice varieties for Kharif season (Warangal)

Variety Reach Year Yield (t/ha)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP)

JGL-384 DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP

I 1999-00 5.9 4.9 10140 10500 29500 25480 19360 14980 4380 2.91

2000-01 7.05 6.12 12177 13103 35270 31890 23093 19193 3900 2.90

2001-02 6.44 5.35 12771 13305 38610 34775 25889 21470 4419 3.02

2002-03 6.12 5.77 12518 14525 47736 45006 32488 30481 2007 3.81

Mean 6.38 5.54 11902 12858 37779 34288 25208 21531 3677 3.16

II 1999-00 4.5 4.0 8900 9810 24300 21600 15400 11790 3610 3.96

2000-01 6.34 6.14 10018 10952 31710 30120 21710 19668 2042 3.17

Mean 5.42 5.07 9459 10381 28005 25860 18555 15729 2826 3.57

III 2000-01 4.88 4.64 11231 11850 25050 23125 13819 11275 2544 2.23

*T cal=4.27

T tab=2.44

*T cal=8.19

T tab=2.44

215


Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP)


JGL 1798 I 2002-03 5.82 5.41 12317 14249 44747 41570 30716 27322 3394 3.63

II 1999-00 5.85 5.5 8940 9875 33250 29950 31000 21075 9925 3.72

2000-01 6.23 6.00 10050 11070 32390 31304 22346 20234 2112 3.22

2002-2003 6.12 5.77 13128 14172 48960 46160 35832 31988 3844 3.73

*T cal=8.87

T tab=3.18

*T cal=2.77

T tab=3.18

Avg 6.07 5.76 10706 11706 38200 35805 29726 24432 5294 3.56

RDR 836 II 1999-00 6.3 6.02 8690 9780 32740 32400 23550 22620 930 3.77

MTU 1010 I 2001-02 6.9 5.6 11242 12565 37260 36400 26018 23835 2183 3.31

II 2001-02 7.2 6.8 12332 13760 38400 36720 26548 22960 3588 3.11

T cal=1.88

T tab=12.7

T cal=4.11

T tab=12.7

Cont.

216


Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C ratio

(DP)


WGL 14 I 2002-03 6.37 5.99 12991 14948 50944 47940 37953 32991 4962 3.92

II 2001-02 5.8 5.2 11574 12940 37700 33880 26126 20860 5266 3.26

2002-2003 6.36 5.77 13889 14275 50880 46133 36990 31858 5132 3.66

*T cal=7.30

T tab=4.3

*T cal=58.2

T tab=4.3

Mean 6.08 5.49 12732 13608 44290 40007 31558 26359 5120 3.61

217

Table-67: Introduction of new varieties (jgl-1798) in paddy during rabi (karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

% Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns (Rs/ha)

Addl.

income over

FP (Rs/ha)


I 1999-00 6600 5700 15.78 7200 7085 39600 34200 32400 27115 5285

2000-01 5660 4370 29.51 11395 9285 29715 22968 18320 13683 4637

2001-02 5250 4680 12.2 14105 15002 29400 26208 15295 11206 4089

2003-04 5460 4790 13.98 14860 15670 35490 31135 20630 15465 5165

Average 5743 4885 17.56 11890 11761 33551 28628 21661 16867 4794

II 1999-00 6900 6000 15.00 7306 7000 41400 36000 34094 29000 5094

2000-01 5600 4200 25.00 11165 9875 29400 22050 18235 12175 6060

2001-02 5750 5020 12.5 14250 15112 32000 28112 17750 13000 4750

2003-04 5570 4920 13.2 13940 14850 36205 31980 22265 17130 5135

Average 5955 5035 18.27 11665 11709 34751 29536 23086 17826 5260

III 1999-00 7000 5579 25.00 7190 7145 42000 33474 34810 26329 8481

2000-01 5800 4550 27.47 11516 9625 30450 23887 18934 14262 4672

2001-02 6860 6130 11.9 14850 15725 38416 34328 23566 18603 4963

2003-04 7050 6450 9.3 14760 15650 45825 41925 31065 26275 4790

Average 6678 5677 17.63 12079 12036 39173 33404 27094 21367 5727

TP: Introduction of new variety JGL-1798

FP: Farmers practice (IR-64 & Vijetha)

218

Table-68: Introduction of new varieties in paddy during rabi (warangal)


Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP)


WGL

14377 I 1999-2000 5.8 5.3 10200 11000 29000 25440 18800 14440 4360 2.84

2000-2001 8.06 6.4 10750 11600 36288 28800 25538 17200 8338 3.38

Average 6.93 5.85 10475 11300 32644 27120 22169 15820 6349 3.11

II 2000-2001 5.78 5.38 9640 10170 26588 24288 16948 14118 2830 2.76

III 1999-2000 5.95 5.6 10350 11250 29750 26880 19400 15630 3770 2.87

2000-2001 7.01 6.34 14408 15192 28350 25725 13942 10533 3409 1.97

*T cal=2.95

T tab=2.77

*T cal=5.37

T tab=2.77

Average 6.48 5.97 12379 13221 29050 26303 16671 13082 3336 2.53

JGL 384 I 1999-2000 5.6 5.2 9670 10600 28000 24960 18330 14360 3970 2.90

JGL

1798 I 2001-02 7.2 6.8 12800 13000 43200 36720 30400 23720 6680 3.38

II 1999-00 6.17 5.97 7936 8978 35235 35780 27292 23632 3660 4.44

T cal=3.0

T tab=12.71

T cal=3.42

T tab=12.71

219

Table-69: Identification of suitable cotton varieties (warangal)

Variety Reach Year Yield (t/ha) Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross Returns

(Rs/ha)

Net Returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

Income

over FP

(Rs/ha)

B:C

ratio

(DP)


NA 1588 I 2002-2003 2.3 2.5 23570 26880 52900 57500 29330 30620 - 2.24

II 2001-02 2.30 2.05 20334 22112 41472 36900 21138 14788 6350 2.04

2002-2003 2.50 2.70 24825 29640 57500 62100 32675 32460 215 2.32

T cal=0.33

T tab=4.3

T cal=0.75

T tab=4.3

Average 2.4 2.38 22580 25876 49486 49500 26907 23624 3283 2.18

NA 1678 I 2001-02 2.8 2.6 18400 22300 46800 50400 28400 28100 300 2.54

II 2.05 1.97 20142 21572 36000 36360 15858 14788 1070 1.79

T cal=2.33

T tab=12.71

T cal=1.78

T tab=12.71

220

Table-70:Demonstration of newly released varieties in groundnut during rabi (1999-2000) (Karimnagar)

Reach

Yield (kg/ha)

% Yield

increase

over FP

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns (Rs/ha)

Addl.

income over

FP (Rs/ha)


III JL-24

3046

Local

1694 180 9170 8600 54828 30492 45658 21892 23766

TG-26

3220

Local

1923 167 9470 8765 57960 34614 48490 25849 22641

Table-71: Introduction of summer greengram during 1998-99 (Karimnagar)

Reach yield kg/ha Cost of cultivation

(Rs./ha) Gross returns (Rs./ha) Net returns(Rs./ha)

II 200 4300 21600 17300

Table-72: Demonstration of improved puddler in Paddy (Karimnagar)

221

Reach

Total qty. of water

applied (mm)

Water

saved over

FP

Yield (t/ha)

Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

N

et

returns

(Rs/ha)

A

d

dl.

in

co

m

e

(R

s/

ha

)

TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I 1221 1446 225 5.78 5.24 15002 15962 32368 29344 17366 13382 3984

II 1269 1483 214 6.31 5.81 15145 14945 35336 32536 20191 17591 2600

III 1216 1475 259 7.03 6.45 15685 16425 39368 36120 23683 19695 3988

TP: Puddling with ANGRAU Puddler

FP: Farmer practice of wooden Puddler

222

LIST OF TABLES

N1 Soil profile properties and nutrient status

N2 Monthly rainfall (mm) at panyam mandal during 1999-2004

N3 Constraints identified and demonstrations/research trails

conducted in rice


conducted in cotton


conducted in chickpea , sunflower and cropping systems

N6 Abstract of all demonstrations in different groups conducted

from 1999-2004.

N7 Effect of methods and scheduling of irrigation in cotton

N8 Water management in rabi sunflower

N9 Effect of drip irrigation treatments on yield attributes and yield of cotton

N10 Effect of drip and surface methods of irrigation in Tomato

N11 Yield and economics of varietal perforamance in rice –

Reach - I

N12 Yield and economics of yield and economics varietal

performance in rabi rice at upper reach during 2001-2002

N13 Effect of age of seedlings on grain yield of rice

N14 Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during

rabi 2001-2002

N15 Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during

kharif 2002

N16 Performance of relay crop of mustard in comparision with

monocropping of rice

N16.1 Rice equivalents and economics of cropping system

N17 Rice equivalents of rice-blackgram and rice alone at reach-II

N18 Yield and economics of rice based cropping systems

N19 Demonstration of “System of rice intensification-Reach-I”

N20 Yield and economics of drip irrigation in cotton

N21 Yield and economics of water management in cotton

N22 Yield and economics of fertiliser management in cotton

N23 Yield and economics of optimum spacing in cotton

N24 Yield and economics of mungari cotton followed by different

crops.

N25 Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea-

Reach-II


Reach-III


Reach-I.

223

N28 Yield and economics of sprinkler irrigation in chickpea

N29 Yield and economics of optimum plant population in chickpea

N30 Yield and Economics of vegetable based cropping systems at

reach-II

N31 Yield and economics of drip irrigation in chillies

N32 Yield and economics of varietal performance in sorghum –

Reach – II

N33 Yield and economics of optimum plant population in rice –

Reach-I

N34 Yield and economics of fertiliser management in rice – Reach

– I

N35 Yield and economics of weed management in rice – Reach – I

N36 Yield and economics of green manuring in rice

N37 Yield and economics of green manuring in rice

N38 Yield and economics of improved variety in mungari cotton

N39 Yield and economics of chemical weed control in rainfed

cotton

N40 Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton.

Reach-II

N41 Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton.

Reach-I

N42 Yield and economics of integrated pest management in

chickpea. Reach-II

N43 Yield and economics of integrated pest management in chickpea. Reach-III

N44 Effect of bio fertilizers in chickpea

N45 Yield and economics of varietal performance in redgram

N46 Yield and economics of improved hybrid in sunflower

N47 Yield and economics of water management in sunflower

Reach-II

N48 Yield and economics of sulphur application insunflower

N49 Yield and economics of tomato and cotton at reach-II

N50 Economics of improved agricultural implements

N51 Yield and economics of cotton varieties

N52 Yield and economics of production technology in cotton

N53 Yield and economics of production technology of rice

N54 Yield and economics of production technology of sunflower,

sorghum and redgram

N55 Yield and economics of production technology in chickpea

N56 Number of training programmes and field days organized

224

Table N 1: Soil profile properties and nutrient status

S.No Properties Profile depth (cm)

0-30 30-130 >130

1 Bulk density (g cm-3

) 1.37 1.58 1.62

2 Coarse sand (%) 27.4 20.2 15.8

3 Fine sand (%) 12.5 12.9 10.1

4 Silt (%) 17.0 17.5 19.3

5 Clay(%) 41.75 48.75 55.5

6 pH 8.85 9.25 9.35

7 EC (m mhos cm-1

) 0.76 - -

8 Organic carbon (%) 0.29 0.34 0.46

9 Available N (Kg ha-1

) 103 91 88

10 Available P (Kg ha-1

) 5.6 6.1 4.3

11 Available K (Kg ha-1

) 200 204 210

12 Available Sulphur (ppm) 19 31 92

13 Exchangeable Calcium(m.eq.100-1

g) 24 16.8 18.4

14 Exchangeable Magnesium (m.eq.100-1

g) 8.4 9.6 11.6

15 Exchangeable Sodium (m.eq.100-1

g) 4.2 8.7 9.9

16 Lime (per cent) 14.9 18.0 24.6

17 Hydraulic conductivity (cm hr-1

) 3.0 - -

18 Max.water holding capacity (%) 60 64 66

19 Field capacity (%) 24.0 29.7 34.3

20 Permanent wilting point (%) 12.9 15.1 16.6

225

Nutrient status of soils during kharif 1999

S.No. Properties Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III

1 PH 8.0-8.5 7-8.3 7-8.3

2 EC (m mhos cm-1

) 0.35-0.45 0.6-0.72 0.64-0.73

3 Organic carbon (%) Low Low Low

4 Available N (kg ha-1

) 100-120 120 -130 130-140

5 Available P (kg ha-1

) 5-6.5 6-15 11-17

6 Available K (kg ha-1

) 150-200 150-200 150-200

226

Table N 2 : Monthly rainfall (mm) at Panyam mandal during 1999-2004

TableN 7 :Effect of methods and scheduling of irrigation in cotton

S.No Treatment

Kapas yield (kg ha-1

) Water requirement (mm)

2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003

Irrigation methods

1 Ridge and furrow 636 274 406 210 150 210

Month 1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Decennial

mean

rainfall

Rainfall

Rainy

days

Rainfall

Rainy

days

Rainfall

Rainy

days

Rainfall

Rainy

days

Rainfall

Rainy

days

June 29.4 3 177.6 12 4.2 - 81.8 7 84.8 5 51

July 69.8 4 99.0 8 43.2 7 47.6 5 39.8 5 131 August 245.8 13 252.6 13 46.8 4 139 10 79.8 7 111

September 50 6 72.0 5 214.6 11 31.8 3 42.6 4 124 October 0.6 -- 97.8 8 447.4 12 69.4 8 132.6 9 117 November 1.2 4.8 -- 7.0 2 3.4 1 -- -- 19 December -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6

Total 396.8 26 705.0 46 763.4 36 373.0 34 379.6 30 559

227

2 Skip furrow 522 306 407 105 60 105

3 Alternate furrow 534 282 382 105 60 105

S.Em ± 46 33 9 -- --

CD(0.05) NS NS NS -- --

Scheduling of irrigation

1 IW/CPE : 0.6 541 290 367 120 80 120

2 IW/CPE : 0.8 587 285 436 160 100 160

S.Em ± 38 27 21 -- --

CD(0.05) NS NS NS -- --

229

Table N 8: Water management in rabi sunflower

Treatments Seed yield (Kg ha-1


2001-2002 2002-2003 2001-2002 2002-2003

1. Ridge and furrow 1605 820 150 100

2.Alternate furrow 1606 819 75 50

3. Skip furrow 1460 817 75 50

S.Em ± 78 2.7 -- --

CD (0.05%) NS NS -- --

1. IW/CPE : 0.6 1497 817 80 40

2. IW/CPE : 0.8 1660 817 120 80

3. Critical stages 1513 822 120 80

S.Em± 78 2.8 -- --

CD(0.05%) NS NS -- --

TableN 9 :Effect of drip irrigation treatments on yield attributes and

yield of cotton

Treatments Plant height

(cm)

Kapas yield

(kg ha-1

)

Water requirement

(mm)

2K-2K1 2K1-2K2 2K-2K1 2K1-2K2 2K-2K1 2K1-2K2

Irrigation Interval

Daily (I1) 116.1 116.5 1193 1262 130 273

Once in 2 days (I2) 116.0 117.5 1202 1280 65 136

Once in 3 days (I3) 115.2 114.6 1375 1274 42 91

S Em ± 2.84 0.90 100. 12 -- --

CD(0.05) NS NS NS NS -- --

Dripper capacity

1LPH (C1) 111.2 112.4 1175 1192 34 71

2LPH (C2) 119.0 117.2 1269 1337 68 143

4LPH (C3) 117.2 119.2 1327 1287 136 286

S Em ± 1.77 1.10 67 12 -- --

CD(0.05) 5.4 3.3 NS 38 -- --

Flat bed method 106.2 108.9 1035 1069 180 250

Interaction NS NS NS -- --

230

Table N 10 :Effect of drip and surface methods of irrigation in

Tomato

S.No

Treatments

Yield (t ha-1


1999-2K 2K-2K1 1999-2K 2K-2K1

1 1 LPH 9.8 13.0 110 110

2 2 LPH 11.7 13.7 160 160

3 4 LPH 11.2 13.8 260 260

4 Flat bed method 9.9 9.3 420 420

5 Furrow method 8.5 11.7 360 360

S Em ± 1.3 0.9 -- --

CD (0.05) NS 2.83 -- --

TableN 11: Yield and economics of varietal performance in rice –

Reach –I

Year Local NDLR-8

Grain yield (kg ha-1

)

2000 7500 7800

2001 6185 6562

t – value (cal.) -8.79*

Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1

)

2000 48750 50550

2001 45045 47684

t – value (cal.) -5.29*

Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1

)

2000 18273 18273

2001 17860 17860

t – value (cal.) -- --

Net returns (Rs ha-1

)

2000 30477 32227

2001 27185 29824

t – value (cal.) -4.94*

Benefit cost ratio

2000 2.66 2.76

2001 2.52 2.67

t – value (cal.) -5.00*

* indicates significant at 5 % level

231

Table N 12 : Yield and economics of varietal performance in rice

during rabi 2001-02 - Reach -I

Variety Duration Yield

(kg ha-1

)

Gross

returns

(Rs. ha-1

)

Net

returns

(Rs ha-1

)

Benefit

cost

ratio

1. RNR-1446 (Local ) 126 7500 42250 26250 2.64

2. JGL-1853 135 7870 56016 40016 3.50

3. IR-64 132 7500 42250 26250 2.64

4. NDLR-8 139 7310 52208 36208 3.26

5. MTU-1001 140 8100 45430 29430 2.83

6. Tellahamsa 135 6190 35307 19307 2.20

Cost of Cultivation : Rs. 16,000 ha-1

Except NDLR-8 and JGL-1853 all other varieties : Rs. 5.30 kg-1

JGL-1853 and NDLR-8 :Rs. 6.80 kg-1

Straw : Rs. 2500 ha

-1

Table N 13: Effect of age of seedlings on grain yield of rice at reach-I

Age of seedlings (days) Grain yield ( kg ha-1

)

30-40 6419

50-60 6250

70-80 6125

90-100 5672

TableN 14: Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during

rabi 2001-02 at reach-I Variety: IR-64

TREATMENTS Broadcasting Direct seeding

with Row seeder

Transplanting


) 5000 5900 7250

Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1

) 26500 31270 38425


) 15500 15650 16000

Net Returns (Rs. ha-1

) 11000 15620 22425

Benefit cost ratio 1.71 1.99 2.40

Price: Grain Rs. 5.00 kg-1

232

TableN 15: Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during

kharif 2002 at reach-I Variety: BPT 5204

Parameters Direct seeding

with Row seeder

Transplanting

Grain Yield (kg ha-1

) 6563 6750

Gross returns (Rs. ha-1

) 64723 66425


) 18600 19400

Net returns (Rs. ha-1

) 46123 47025

Price: Grain Rs. 9.10 kg-1

and straw Rs.5000 ha-1

Table N 16: Performance of relay crop of mustard in comparision with mono

cropping of rice at reach-I

Treatments Rice fb

rabi Rice

Rice fb

rabi Mustard

Parameters


) 6380 500


) 25520 10000


) 16000 2500


) 9520 7500

Additional Net Returns (Rs. ha-1

) 2020 --

Benefit cost ratio 1.59 4.00

Cost of paddy grain: Rs.4 kg-1

Mustard: Rs.20 kg-1

Table N 16.1: Rice equivalents and economics of cropping system

Treatments Rice-

Rice

Rice -

Mustard Rice

Parameters


) 13880 9040 7500


) 74270 58750 48750


) 34375 20875 18375


) 39895 37875 30375

Additional Net Returns (Rs ha-1

)

Over rice fallow

9520 7500 --


Price : Rice grain : Rs. 6.30 kg –1

(kharif) and Rs.3.70 kg –1

(rabi) Straw :Rs. 1750

ha-1

Blackgram : Rs 20 kg -1

233

Table N 17 : Rice equivalents of rice -blackgram and rice alone at reach-II

Treatments Rice –Blackgram Rice alone

Parameters


) 8174 6000


) 37600 29350


) 17062 15000

Net Returns (Rs ha-1

) 20538 14350

Additional Net Returns over

rice fallow (Rs ha-1

)

7938 --


Price : Grain : Rs. 4.60 kg –1

Straw :Rs. 1750 ha-1

Blackgram : Rs

20 kg –1

Table N 18: Yield and economics of rice based cropping systems

Treatments Sorghum Sunflower Mustard G

ree

ngr

am

Blackgram


) 2100 750 320 320 270

Gross returns (Rs ha-1

) 8200 12000 6400 5440 3780

Cost of cultivation

(Rs ha-1

)

4600 7200 4200 3600 3600


) 3600 4800 2200 1840 180

Price: Sunflower : Rs. 16 kg-1.

Greengram :Rs. 17kg-1

Mustard:Rs.20 kg-1

Blackgram : Rs. 14 kg-1.

Sorghum : Rs. 4 kg-1

.

Table N 19 :Demonstration of “System of rice intensification ,Reach- I

S.No Operation Farmers method SRI

1 Variety BPT-5204 BPT-5204

2 Date of sowing 22-6-2003 19-7-2003

3 Date of planting 31-7-2003 28-7-2003

4 Date of harvesting 10-12-2003 10-12-2003

5 Productive tillers (No. m-2

) 510 1040

6 Panicle length (cm) 17.2 20.2

7 Test weight (g) 18.8 21.10

8 No.of filled grains /panicle 105 202

9 No.of illfilled grains /panicle 5 3

10 Grain yield (Kg ha-1

) 5625 15774

11 Cost of cultivation (Rs.ha-1

) 16250 18000

234

Table N 20: Yield and economics of drip irrigation in cotton at reach-I

Treatments Ridge and furrow

irrigation

Drip irrigation


) 1860 2254


) 37200 45080

Water requirement (mm) 460 250


) 20185 23685


) 17015 21395


Price: Kapas ;Rs. 20 kg-1

Table N 21: Yield and economics of water management in cotton at reach-I

Year Farmers

practice

Skip furrow

irrigation

Alternate furrow

irrigatio


)

1999 925 910 -

2001 1680 1580 1620

2002 1860 1780 1810

2003 2125 2100 2150

t – value (cal.) 3.04 1.05


)

1999 16650 16380 -

2001 25200 23700 24300

2002 37200 35600 36200

2003 55250 54600 55900

t – value (cal.) 4.14 0.78


)

1999 12850 12500 -

2001 16500 16000 16000

2002 20185 19900 19900

2003 20600 20450 20450

t – value (cal.) -1.87 -1.87


)

1999 3880 3880 -

2001 7700 7700 8300

2002 17015 15700 16300

2003 34650 34150 35450

t – value (cal.) 3.96 0.28

Benefit cost ratio

1999 1.29 1.31 --

2001 1.53 1.48 1.52

2002 1.84 1.78 1.82

2003 2.68 2.67 2.73

t – value (cal.) 2.6 - 0.31

Water requirement (mm)

1999 120 60 --

235

2001 240 120 120

2002 240 120 120

2003 120 60 60

t – value (cal.) 3.98 3.98

Table N 22: Yield and economics of fertiliser management in cotton

Year Farmers

practice

100 % RDF 150 % RDF


)

2000 2050 1875 2000

2003 2200 2250 2300

T – value (cal.) -0.2 -3.0


)

2000 40950 39375 42000

2003 57200 58500 59800

T – value (cal.) 0.09 - 1.00


)

2000 20403 18796 20194

2003 20600 18950 20346

T – value (cal.) -1.02 -0.99


)

2000 20547 20579 21806

2003 36600 39550 39454

t – value (cal.) -1.02 -1.00

Benefit cost ratio

2000 2.00 2.09 2.07

2003 2.78 3.09 2.94

t – value (cal.) -1.81 -2.56

Table N 23: Yield and economics of optimum spacing in cotton

Parameters Spacing(cm)

60 X 45 cm 90X 45cm (rainfed)

120X60cm (irrigated)

100 X 45 cm

(Farmers practice)

Year 2000

(rainfed)

2003

(irrigated)

2000

(rainfed)

2003

(irrigated)

2000

(rainfed) 2003

(irrigated)

R-II R-I R-II R-I R-II R-I

Kapas yield

(kg ha-1

)

975 1920 1050 2340 1025 2260

Gross Returns

( Rs. ha-1

)

20475 49920 22050 60840 21525 58760

Cost of cultivation

(Rs. ha-1

)

15366 19700 15266 18950 15166 18950

Net Returns(Rs. ha-1

) 5309 30220 6784 41890 6159 39810

Benefit cost ratio 1.33 2.53 1.44 3.21 1.41 3.10

Price: Rs. 21 kg-1

(2000) and Rs 26 kg-1

236

Table N 24 : Yield and economics of mungari cotton followed by different crops

Treatments Sole

Mungari

Cotton

Mungari

cotton -

Sorghum

Mungari

cotton -

Blackgram

Mungari

Cotton-

Chickpea


) 1500 1500+1062 1500+294 1500+833


) 30000 40623 37350 42495


) 10320 14875 15440 19980


) 19680 25748 21910 22514

Cotton equivalents (Kg ha-1

) 1500 2031 1868 2125

Benefit cost ratio 2.91 2.73 2.42 2.13

* Price: Cotton : Rs. 20 kg-1.

Chickpea : Rs. 15 kg-1.

Blackgram : Rs. 25 kg-1.

Sorghum : Rs. 10 kg-1

.

Table N 25: Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea

(Reach –II) Year Kranthi Swetha Annegiri (Local)

Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2001 1400 725 1438

2002 1300 625 1250

2003 1125 863 875

2004 938 1025 875

t – value (cal.) 1.34 -1.38


)

2001 21000 18125 21570

2002 19500 18750 18750

2003 16875 17260 13125

2004 15008 24600 14000

t – value (cal.) 1.36 0.94


)

2001 9805 10965 9875

2002 10268 10718 10248

2003 9050 10050 9050

2004 8600 9350 8600

t – value (cal.) -0.64 5.94


)

2001 11195 7160 11695

2002 9233 8032 8503

2003 7825 7210 4075

2004 6408 15250 5400

t – value (cal.) -1.39 -0.65

Benefit cost ratio

2001 2.14 1.65 2.18

2002 1.89 1.75 1.83

2003 1.86 1.72 1.45

2004 1.75 2.27 1.63

t – value (cal.) -1.42 -0.30

237

Table N 26:Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea (Reach–III)

Year Kranthi Swetha Annegiri (Local)

Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2000 563 575 480

2001 1450 850 1500

2003 625 -- 538

2004 1062 -- 950

t – value (cal.) 0.25 -0.75


)

2000 8445 14375 7200

2001 21750 21250 22500

2003 9375 -- 8070

2004 16992 -- 15200

t – value (cal.) 0.25 0.70


)

2000 7162 7862 6112

2001 9875 10672 9932

2003 7600 -- 7600

2004 8600 -- 8600

t – value (cal.) 0.90 2.5


)

2000 1283 6513 1088

2001 11875 10578 12568

2003 1775 -- 470

2004 8392 -- 6600

t – value (cal.) -0.56 0.46

Benefit cost ratio

2000 1.17 1.82 1.17

2001 2.20 1.99 2.26

2003 1.23 -- 1.06

2004 1.98 -- 1.77

t – value (cal.) -1.0 0.40

238

Table N 27:Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea (Reach –I)

Year Kranthi Swetha Annegiri (Local)

Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2003 1250 875 938

2004 1000 1025 980

t – value (cal.) 1.13 -0.17


)

2003 18750 17500 14070

2004 16000 24600 15680

t – value (cal.) 1.14 2.25


)

2003 9050 10050 9050

2004 8600 9350 8600

t – value (cal.)


)

2003 9700 7450 5020

2004 7400 15250 7080

t – value (cal.) 1.14 1.85

Benefit cost ratio

2003 2.07 1.74 1.55

2004 1.86 1.61 1.82

t – value (cal.) 1.16 -0.05

239

Table N 28: Yield and economics of sprinkler irrigation in chickpea

Year Sprinkler irrigation Without sprinkler

Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2001-2002 1250 1025

2003-2004 2250 1000

t – value (cal.) 1.44


)

2001-2002 18750 15375

2003-2004 36000 16000



)

2001-2002 11267 9877

2003-2004 11980 7800



)

2001-2002 7483 5498

2003-2004 24020 8200


Water requirement (mm )

2001-2002 100 --

2003-2004 200 --

t – value (cal.)

Benefit cost ratio

2001-2002 1.66 1.56

2003-2004 3.01 2.05


240

Table N 29: Yield and economics of optimum plant population in chickpea

Parameter Farmers practice Seed drill

Seed rate (kg ha-1

) 100 80

Cost of seed (Rs ha-1

) 2000 1650

Plant population (no m-2

) 58 40

Seed yield ( kg ha-1

) 1375 1600 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha

-1) 7800 8600


) 20625 24750 Net returns (Rs ha

-1) 12825 16150

Table N30: Yield and Economics of vegetable based cropping systems at

reach – II

Treatments ole

Chickpea

Ridge gourd -

Chickpea

Ridge

gourd

itter

gourd

Yield (kg ha-1

) 1250 1510+650 1510 2023

Gross returns

(Rs. ha-1

)

18750 24850 15100 20230

Cost of cultivation

(Rs. ha-1

)

9918 15501 6213 6900

Net returns

(Rs. ha-1

)

8833 9350 8888 13325


Price: Chickpea: Rs. 15 kg-1

.

Ridge & Bitter gourds: Rs. 10 kg-1

Table N 31: Yield and economics of drip irrigation in chillies at reach-I

Treatments Ridge and furrow

irrigation

Drip irrigation

Pod yield (kg ha-1

) 2050 2250

Water requirement (mm) 365 240


) 51250 56250


) 23965 21665


) 27285 34585


Price: Rs. 25 kg-1

(pod)

241

Table N 32: Yield and economics of varietal performance in sorghum

– Reach II

Year Local NTJ 2401 NTJ-2

Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2001 2080 2350 2220

2002 1360 1600 1540

t – value (cal.) -17.0* -8.0*


)

2001 14560 16450 15540

2002 7480 8800 8470

t – value (cal.) -5.63* -197.0*


)

2001 7500 7500 7500

2002 5800 5800 5800

t – value (cal.)


)

2001 7060 8950 8040

2002 1680 3000 2670

t – value (cal.) -5.63* -197.0*

Benefit cost ratio

2001 1.94 2.19 2.07

2002 1.29 1.52 1.46

t – value (cal.) -24.0* -7.5*

* Indicates significant at 5 % level

242

Table N 33 : Yield and economics of optimum plant population in

rice – Reach-I


Year Farmers practice Recommended population


)

1999 5907 6282

2001 6375 6938

2002 6750 7125

2003 6562 6938

t – value (cal.) -9.00*


)

1999 39192 41442

2001 46375 50316

2002 66425 69838

2003 64058 67442

t – value (cal.) -9.11*


)

1999 18230 18480

2001 17860 18260

2002 19400 19700

2003 16950 17270

t – value (cal.)


)

1999 20962 22962

2001 28515 32056

2002 47025 50138

2003 47108 50172

t – value (cal.) -8.31*

Benefit cost ratio

1999 2.14 2.24

2001 2.60 2.76

2002 3.42 3.85

2003 3.77 3.90

t – value (cal.) -10.61*

243

Table N 34: Yield and economics of fertiliser management in rice –

Reach –I

Year Kharif (1999 & 2001) Rabi (2001 & 2002)

Farmers

practice

Recommended

practice

Farmers

practice

Recommended

practice


)

1999/2000 6188 6094 6500 6180

2001/2002 6750 6562 7300 7000

t – value (cal.) 3.00 31.00*


)

1999/2000 40878 40314 24267 23072

2001/2002 49000 40878 41190 39600

t – value (cal.) 1.14 7.05*


)

1999/2000 21125 18375 16776 14858

2001/2002 21195 17860 16000 14405

t – value (cal.)


)

1999/2000 19753 21759 7491 8214

2001/2002 27805 29824 25190 25195

t – value (cal.) -309.00* -1.00

Benefit cost ratio

1999/2000 1.93 2.19 1.90 2.12

2001/2002 2.31 2.67 2.57 2.75

t – value (cal.) -6.20* -10.00*


244

Table N 35: Yield and economics of weed management in rice –

Reach-I


Table N 36: Yield and economics of green manuring in rice

Treatments Green manuring Farmer‟s practice


) 6365 6188


) 46305 45066


) 18523 18273


) 27782 26793


Cost of grain :Rs. 7 kg-1

and Straw : Rs.1750 ha-1

Year Farmers practice Recommended

practice


)

1999 6000 6188

2000 6848 6938

2001 6378 6560

t – value (cal.) -4.83*

Gross returns (Rs.ha-1

)

1999 39750 40878

2000 44838 45378

2001 23800 24491

t – value (cal.) -4.45*


)

1999 18930 18435

2000 18659 18196

2001 16858 16395

t – value (cal.)


)

1999 20820 22443

2000 26179 27182

2001 6942 8096

t – value (cal.) -6.75*

Benefit cost ratio

1999 2.09 2.21

2000 2.40 2.49

2001 1.41 1.49

t – value (cal.) -8.04*

245

Table N 37: Yield and economics of green manuring in rice

Parameters

GM +75% RDF GM+ 100% RDF FP

(200N-140-80)

Grain Yield (kg ha-1

) 6938 7125 7218


) 68136 69838 70684

Cost of cultivation

(Rs. ha-1

)

18650 19600 20750


) 49486 50238 49934


Price : Grain :Rs. 9.1 kg-1

and Straw : Rs.5000 ha-1

Table N 38: Yield and economics of improved variety in mungari cotton

Parameters Treatments REACH - I REACH – II

ARAVINDA LOCAL ARAVINDA LOCAL


) 1000 780 1025 750

Gross returns ( Rs. ha-1

) 19000 14820 19475 14250

Cost of cultivation

(Rs. ha-1

)

4688 4688 4688 4688

Net returns (Rs. Ha-1

) 14312 10132 15187 9562

Additional net returns

(Rs. ha-1

)

4180 -- 5625 --


Price: Rs. 19 kg ha-1

Table N 39: Yield and economics of chemical weed control in rainfed

cotton

Parameters Treatments

Pendimethalin Farmer‟spractice


) 1400 1375


) 2940 28875


) 15416 15266


) 13984 13609


Price: Rs. 19 kg ha-1

246

Table N 40 : Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton .

Reach-II


Year Farmers practice IPM


)

2000-2001 1125 1050

2003-2004 1950 1975



)

2000-2001 23625 22050

2003-2004 50700 51350



)

2000-2001 15266 10766

2003-2004 17750 14050



)

2000-2001 8359 11284

2003-2004 32950 37300

t – value (cal.) -5.10*

Benefit cost ratio

2000-2001 1.54 2.04

2003-2004 2.85 3.65

t – value (cal.) -2.46

247

Table N 41: Yield and economics of integrated pest management in

cotton . Reach-I



)

2001-2002 1875 1750

2002-2003 2125 2188

2003-2004 2250 2350



)

2001-2002 28125 26250

2002-2003 42500 43760

2003-2004 58500 61100



)

2001-2002 25885 20185

2002-2003 20185 19960

2003-2004 20250 18750



)

2001-2002 2240 6065

2002-2003 22315 23800

2003-2004 38250 42350


Benefit cost ratio

2001-2002 1.08 1.30

2002-2003 2.10 2.19

2003-2004 2.88 3.25


248

Table N 42 : Yield and economics of integrated pest management in chickpea .

Reach-II


Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2001-2002 1125 1250

2002-2003 875 890

2003-2004 938 1000



)

2001-2002 16875 18750

2002-2003 13125 13350

2003-2004 15008 16000



)

2001-2002 11550 10917

2002-2003 9050 8730

2003-2004 8100 7860

t – value (cal.)


)

2001-2002 5325 7833

2002-2003 4075 4620

2003-2004 6908 8140


Benefit cost ratio

2001-2002 1.46 1.89

2002-2003 1.45 1.52

2003-2004 1.85 2.03


249

Table N 43: Yield and economics of integrated pest management in

chickpea . Reach-III

Table N 44 : Effect of bio fertilizers in chickpea

Parameters Seed yield (kg ha-1)

Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III Fertilisers alone ( Farmers practice) 1175 1125 438

Fertilisers+ Rhizobium +PSB 1220 1225 450

Table N 45 : Yield and economics of varietal performance in redgram

Treatments LRG-41 ICPL 85063 Local ( LRG-) Seed yield (kg ha

-1) 1625 1590 1580


) 24375 23850 23700

Cost of cultivation

(Rs. ha-1

)

6475 6475 6475


) 17900 17375 17225



Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2001-2002 1625 1750

2002-2003 538 540

2003-2004 875 910



)

2001-2002 24375 26250

2002-2003 13125 8100

2003-2004 14000 14560



)

2001-2002 11750 11117

2002-2003 7600 7240

2003-2004 7910 7760

t – value (cal.)


)

2001-2002 12625 15133

2002-2003 470 860

2003-2004 6090 6800


Benefit cost ratio

2001-2002 2.07 2.59

2002-2003 1.06 1.11

2003-2004 1.76 1.87


250

Table N 46: Yield and economics of improved hybrid in sunflower (rainfed)

Treatments MSFH-17 GANGA KAVERI

(Local Hybrid)

Seed yield (q. ha-1

) 8.75 8.25


) 7438 7013


) 5633 5633


) 1805 1380

Additional Net Returns (Rs. ha-1

) 425 --


Table N 47: Yield and economics of water management in sunflower

Reach-II


Year Farmers practice (Ridge

and furrow irrigation )

Skip furrow irrigation

Seed yield (kg ha-1

)

2000-2001 1625 1560

2002-2003 1750 1670

t – value (cal.) 9.67*


)

2000-2001 24375 23400

2002-2003 28000 26720



)

2000-2001 6250 6150

2002-2003 6600 6450



)

2000-2001 18125 17250

2002-2003 21400 20270


Water requirement (mm )

2000-2001 180 90

2002-2003 200 100

t – value (cal.) 19.00*

Benefit cost ratio

2000-2001 3.9 3.8

2002-2003 4.2 4.1

t – value (cal.) -- --

251

Table N 48: Yield and economics of sulphur application in sunflower

Parameters Treatments

Sulphur application Farmer‟spractice

Seed yield (kg ha-1

) 2250 1950


) 33750 29250


) 9950 10337


) 23800 18913


Table N 49 :Yield and economics of tomato and cotton at reach-II

Treatments Tomato Cotton

Yield (kg ha-1

) 5000 1500

Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1

) 20000 31500


) 9700 15266


) 10,300 16234

Additional Net Returns (Rs ha-1

) -- 5934


Table N 50:Economics improved agricultural implements

Crop 2000-2001 2001-2002

Mechanical

( harvesting)

Manual

(harvesting)

Mechanical

( harvesting)

Manual

(harvesting)

Chickpea Rs.750 ha-1

Rs.1125 ha-1

Rs. 750 ha-1

Rs. 1125 ha-1

Cost Saving Rs.375 ha-1

-- Rs. 375 ha-1

--

Paddy -- -- Rs. 700 ha-1

Rs.1875 ha-1

Cost Saving -- -- Rs. 1175 ha-1

--

Sunflower Rs.1000 ha-1

Rs.1250 ha-1

-- --

Cost Saving Rs.250 ha-1

-- -- --

Table N 51 : Yield and economics of cotton varieties

Varieties ARAVINDA NARASIMHA

2000-2001 2001-2002 2000-2001

REACH-I REACH-II REACH-I REACH -II


) 1025 1050 1500 1500

Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1

) 19475 19950 30000 31500

Cost of cultivation

(Rs ha-1

)

4688 4688 10320 15266


) 15187 15262 19680 16234


Area covered (ha) 1 5 5 5

252

Table N 52: Yield and economics of production technology in cotton

Parameter Cotton

R-II

Cotton

R-II

Cotton

R-I

Cotton

R-II

(Rainfed)

2000-01 2001-2002 2003-2004 2003-04

Yield (kg ha-1

) 1450 1575 2500 500

Dist. Average

yields (kg ha-1

)

228 254 268 268

Gross Returns

( Rs ha-1

)

30450 23625 65000 13000

Cost of cultivation

(Rs ha-1

)

15266 20185 31013 9800

Net Returns

(Rs ha-1

)

15184 3440 33987 3200


Area covered (ha) 2 4

253

Table N 53 : Yield and economics of production technology of rice

Reach Reach-I Reach-I Reach-I Reach-I Reach-II Reach-I

Year 2000-2001

(rabi)

2001-2002

(kharif)

2001-2002

(rabi)

2002

Kharif

2002

Kharif

2003

Kharif

Yield (kg ha-1

) 6750 6562 7000 7125 6938 6125

Dist. average yields (kg ha-1

) 2738 3299 2738 3299 3299 2597

Gross returns ( Rs ha-1

) 29500 47684 39600 69838 68136 56875


) 16000 17860 14405 19700 19700 17000


) 13500 29824 25195 50138 48436 39875

Benefit cost ratio 1.84 1.67 2.75 3.55 3.46 3.34

Area covered (ha) 12ha 20ha 20ha 30 ha 10 ha 10 ha

254

Table N 54 : Yield and economics of production technology of sunflower , sorghum and redgram

Crops Sunflower R-II

2000-01

Sunflower

R-II

2001-2002

Sunflower

R-II

2002-2003

Sunflower

R-I

2003-2004

Sunflower

R-II

2003-2004

Sorghum

R-I

2003-2004

Sorghum

R-II

2003-2004

Redgram

R-I

2003-2004

Yield (kg ha-1

) 800 1625 1750 1750 750 5500 2000 2250

Dist. Average yields

(kg ha-1

)

645 916 916 855 855 1341 1341 420

Gross Returns

( Rs ha-1

)

6800 24375 28000 26250 11250 27500 10000 33750

Cost of cultivation

(Rs ha-1

)

5633 6250 6600 7955 7772 10805 7600 9779

Net Returns

(Rs ha-1

)

1167 18125 21400 18295 3478 16695 2400 23971

Benefit cost ratio 1.21 3.9 4.24 3.29 1.44 2.54 1.31 1.40

Area covered (ha) 1 5 5 5 3 22 3 10

255

Table N 55: Yield and economics of production technology in chickpea

Crop Chickpea Chickpea Chickpea Chickpea

R-II R-III R-II R-II R-II R-III R-II R-III

2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004

Yield (kg ha-1) 1500 1625 1250 1750 890 540 780 750

Dist. Average yields (kg ha-1) 872 872 953 953 356 356 450 450

Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1) 22500 24375 18750 26250 13350 8100 11700 11250

Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 7675 7875 9917 10117 7730 6240 7865 7865

Net Returns (Rs ha-1) 14825 16500 8832 16132 5620 1860 3835 3385

Benefit cost ratio 2.93 3.09 1.89 2.59 1.72 1.30 1.48 1.43

Area covered (ha) 20 30 30 35 35 35 21 26

256

Table N 5: Constraint identified and demonstrations / research trails conducted in chickpea and sunflower

Crop

Identified constraints

Research trials/demonstrations conducted

Ri

Rice

1.Farmers are growing susceptible variety to BPH like

BPT 5204.

Demonstration of improved variety NDLR-8 Vs BPT-5204 (Group-B)

2.Application of improper, untimely and high dose of NPK

fertilizers ( 250N+100P2O5 + 80 K2O kg ha-1

) than

recommended doses ( 160N + 80 P2O5 + 80 K2O kg ha-1

-

kharif ) and (120N + 60 P2O5 + 60 K2O kg ha-1

-rabi )

and micronutrient deficiencies .

Demonstration of fertilizer management in Rice

(Group-B)

Production technology in rice (Group-C)

3.Non maintenance of optimum plant population (20-24

hills m-2

) against recommended population

(33 hills m-2

).

Spacing/row planting technology in rice (Group-B)

4.Weed menace due to improper water management during

initial stages of crop growth

1.Demonstration of integrated weed management (Butachlor

@1.25 Kg a.i.ha-1

+ one hand weeding at 40 days after

transplanting) in rice (Group-B and C)

2.Demonstration of “System of Rice Intensification” (SRI) (Group-A).

5.Growing of green manure crop is not practiced in the

existing system to improve the status of organic matter

content of the soil

1.Demonstration on insitu green manuring (Sesbania sp.) in rice

(Group-B)

6.Farmers keeping the land fallow after kharif rice 1.Rice – followed by sorghum, sunflower , mustard and

blackgram cropping system was demonstrated (Group-A)

257

Appendix N-I:Technical programme of workdone for the year 1999-2000

GROUP -A

S.No

Title

No. of demonstrations conducted

Total

Executed/Not executed

Reach –I Reach–II Reach-III

1 Water management in lowland rice -- -- -- -- Not executed

2 Studies on rice based cropping systems -- -- -- -- Not executed

3 Varietal performance in chickpea -- -- 2 2 Executed

Total demonstrations conducted 2

GROUP –B

4 Water management in cotton 1 -- -- 1 Executed

5 Demonstration of improved variety in

mungari cotton

-- 3 3 6 Executed & Failed

6 Demonstration of improved variety in

American cotton

-- 2 2 4 Executed & Failed

7 Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton -- 3 -- 3 Executed

8 Fertilizer management in American cotton 1 3 2 6 Executed and failed at lower reach

9. Optimum spacing for American cotton -- 3 -- 3 Executed

10 Planting techniques in lowland rice 4 2 -- 6 Executed and failed at middle reach

11 Chemical weed control in lowland rice 4 -- -- 4 Executed

12 Fertilizer management in lowland rice 4 -- -- 4 Executed

13 Varietal performance in tobacco -- -- -- -- Not executed

14 Fertilizer management in tobacco -- -- -- -- Not executed

15 Fertilizer management in chickpea -- -- -- -- Not executed

16 Hybrid performance in sunflower -- 1 -- 1 Executed and failed

17 Optimum spacing for sunflower -- -- -- -- Not executed

Total demonstrations conducted 38

258

Appendix N-II:Technical programme of workdone for the year kharif 2000 GROUP -A

S.No

Title

No. of demonstrations proposed

Total

No. of demonstrations

conducted

Total

R –I R –II R -III R –I R –II R -III

1 Optimum spacing for cotton 1 2 2 5 - 1 - 1

2 Fertilizer management in American

cotton

1 2 2 5 - 1 - 1

3 Studies on rice based cropping

systems

3 - - 3 3 - - 3

Total 5 4 4 13 3 2 - 5

GROUP- B

4 Demonstration of improved variety

in mungari cotton

1 3 2 6 1 1 - 2

5 Demonstration of improved variety

in American cotton

2 3 2 7 1 - - 1

6 Demonstration of IPM technology

in cotton

1 5 6 12 - 1 - 1

7 Demonstration of chemical weed

control in cotton

2 2 2 6 - 1 - 1


control in rice

2 -- -- 2 2 - - 2

9 Demonstration of improved rice

variety (NDLR 8)

1 - - 1 1 - - 1

10 Introduction of vegetable- tomato - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1

Total 9 14 12 35 5 4 - 9

GROUP C

11 Popularization of Narasimha variety 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 3

(30ha)

- 1(10ha) - 1(10ha

)

12 Popularization of Aravinda variety 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 3

(30ha)

1(10ha) 1(10ha) - 2(20ha

)

13 Stem application monochrotophos

in cotton

1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 3 (30ha) - 1(10ha) - 1(10ha)

259

14 Popularisation of production

technology in cotton

1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 3 (30ha) - 1(10ha) - 1(10ha)

Total 4 (40ha) 4 (40ha) 4

(40ha) 12 1(10ha) 4

(40ha)

- 5 (50ha)

Grand Total 60 19

Appendix N-III:Technical programme of workdone for the year rabi 2000-2001

GROUP -A

S.No

Title

No. of demonstrations proposed

Total

No. of demonstrations

conducted

Total

R –I R –II R -III R –I R –II R -III

1 Varietal performance in chickpea - 1 2 3 - 2 2 4

2 Identification of suitable sorghum

varieties

- 2 2 4 - - - -

3 Studies on rice based cropping

systems

3 - - 3 3 - - 3

Total 3 3 4 10 3 2 2 7

GROUP- B

4 Demonstration of optimum spacing

for sunflower

- 2 2 4 - 1 - 1

5 Demonstrastion of improved hybrid

in sunflower

- 2 1 3 - 1 - 1

6 Demonstration of Improved

Agricultural implements.

1 2 2 5 - 2 1 3

7 Introduction of rabi redgram - 1 1 2 - 1 - 1


control in rice

2 -- -- 2 2 - - 2

9 Demonstration of fertilizer

management in rice

5 - - 5 5 - - 5

Total 8 7 6 21 7 5 1 13

260

GROUP C


technology in sunflower

1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 3

(30ha)

-- 1 (10ha) -- 1

(10ha)


technology in chick pea

1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 3

(30ha) -- 1 (20ha) 1 (30ha) 2

(50ha)


technology in rice

1 (10ha) - - 1

(10ha)

1 (20ha) - - 1

(20ha)

Total 3 (30ha) 2 (20ha) 2

(20ha)

7(70ha

)

1 (20ha) 2

(30ha)

1(30ha

)

4(80ha

)

Grand Total 38 24

Appendix N-IV:Technical programme of work done for the year kharif 2001

S.No Title No. of Demonstrations Total Demonstrations conducted

R-1 R-II R-III R-I R-II R-III Total

Group – A

1 Studies on rice based cropping systems 3 1 - 4 3 - - 3

2 Comparative performance of direct

seeding Vs transplanting

4 2 - 6 1 - - 1

3 Water management in cotton 2 2 1 5 1 - - 1

4 Studies on Cropping systems 1 1 1 3 - 2 - 2

Total 18 7

Group – B

5 Varietal performance in rice 2 1 - 3 1 - - 1

6 Demonstration of IPM technology in

cotton

1 5 6 12 2 3 - 5

7 Demonstration of Chemical weed

control in cotton

2 2 2 6 1 - - 1

8 Demonstration of improved agricultural

implements

1 2 2 5 3 - - 3

9 Demonstration of Fertilizer

management in rice

5 2 - 7 10 - - 10

261

10 Demonstration of improved nursery

management

4 1 - 5 25 - - 25

11 Demonstration of optimum plant

population in rice

4 2 - 6 4 - - 4

12 Introduction of green manure crops

preceding rice

4 1 - 5 8 - - 8

13 Introduction of vegetables before

Bengalgram

- 2 2 4 - 2 - 2

Total 53 59

Group – C 14 Popularisation of Narasimha

variety in cotton

- 4 ha 4 ha 8 ha - 4 ha - 4ha

15 Popularisation of Aravinda

variety in cotton

4 ha 4 ha 4 ha 12 ha 5ha 2ha - 7ha

16 Stem application of

monochrotophos in cotton

- 4 ha 4 ha 8 ha 1ha 5ha - 6ha

17 Popularisation of recommended

production technology in cotton

4 ha 4 ha 4 ha 12 ha 1ha 5ha 6ha


production technology in rice

10 ha 1 ha -

11ha

20ha - - 20ha

19 Popularisation of chemical weed

control in rice

5 ha 1 ha -- 6 ha 20ha - - 20ha

Total 57ha 63ha

262

Appendix N-V:Technical programme of workdone for the year rabi 2001-2002 S.No. Title No. of demonstrations Total Demonstrations conducted


Group – A

1 Identification of suitable sorghum

varieties

0 2 2 4

1 1 - 2

2 Performance of direct seeding Vs

transplanting

4 2 - 6 1 - - 1

3 Studies on cotton based cropping

systems

1 -- -- 1

4 Varietal performance in rice -- - - -- 10 - - 10

Total 10 14

Group – B

6 Demonstration of varities in

chickpea

- 2 4 6 1 3 2 6

7 IPM technology in chick pea 1 5 6 12 3 30 30 63 8 Improved Agricultural implements 1 2 2 5 4 - - 4 9 Introduction of vegetable crop

before chickpea

0 2 2 4 - 1 - 1

10 Water management in sunflower 1 1 1 3 - 2 - 2 Total 30 76

Group – C

11 Production technology in sunflower - 1ha 1 ha 2 ha -- 5ha -- 5ha 12 Production technology in chickpea - 10ha 10 ha 20 ha 1ha 30ha 35ha 66ha 13 Recommended spacing for

sunflower

-- 2ha 1 ha 3 ha - 5ha - 5ha

14 Production technology in rice 20 ha -- -- 20 ha 20 ha -- -- 20 ha

Total 45ha 96ha

263

Appendix N-VI: Technical programme of workdone for the year kharif 2002 S.No Title No. of demonstrations Total Demonstrations conducted


Group - A

1 Studies on rice based cropping systems 3 1 -- 4 12 2 - 14

2 Comparative performance of direct seeding Vs

transplanting

4 2 -- 6 2 - - 2


4 Drip irrigation in cotton 1 1 -- 2 1 - - 1

17 20

Group – B

5 Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton 1 5 6 12 2 - - 2

6 Demonstration of improved Agricultural implements 1 2 2 5 4 - - 4

7 Demonstration of optimum population in rice 4 2 -- 6 26 5 - 31

8 Introduction of green manure crop preceding to rice 4 1 -- 5 10 - - 10

9 Demonstration of Bio-fertilizers in chickpea 4 2 2 8 1 - - 1

36 48

Group – C 10 Popularisationof Aravinda variety 1(4 ha) 1(4ha) 1(4ha) 3 (12 ha) 5 (8ha) 1 (4 ha) - 6(12ha)

11 Popularisation of production technology in cotton 1 (4

ha)

1 (4ha) 1(4ha) 3 (12 ha) 4 (5ha) - - 45ha)

12 Popularisation of recommended production technology in

rice

1(10

ha)

1(1ha) -- 2 (11 ha) 30 (40ha) 10(10ha) - 40 (10ha)

13 Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice 1(5 ha) 1(1ha) -- 2 (6 ha) 32 (50ha) 6 (8ha) 38(58ha)

14 Popularisation of NDLR-8 rice variety 1 (4

ha)

1 (4ha) -- 2 (8ha) 10 (5ha) - - 10(5ha)

Total 12 (49

ha)

98 (90

ha)

264

Appendix N-VII:Technical programme of work done for the year - rabi (2002-2003)

S.No Title No. of Demonstrations Total Demonstrations conducted


Group – A

1 Identification of suitable sorghum varieties 0 2 2 4 -- 2 - 2 2 Studies on plant population in chickpea 2 2 3 7 2 2 1 5

3 Studies on rice based cropping systems 3 1 -- 4 23 2 - 25

Total 15 32

Group – B

4 Demonstration of varities in chickpea - 2 4 6 1 3 2 6 6 Improved Agricultural implements 1 2 2 5 4 5 - 9 7 Water management in sunflower 1 1 1 3 2 2 - 4 8 Demonstration of Bio-fertilizers in chickpea 4 2 2 8 7 33 40 80 9 Introduction of rabi redgram 0 1 1 2 2 3 -- 5

Total 24 104

Group – C

10 Production technology in sunflower - 1ha 1 ha 2 ha 5ha 5ha -- 10ha 11 Production technology in chickpea - 10ha 10 ha 20 ha 3ha 35ha 35ha 73ha 12 Recommended spacing for sunflower -- 2ha 1 ha 3 ha 5ha 5ha - 10ha

Total 25ha 93ha

Appendix N-VIII:Technical programme of workdone for the year – kharif 2003 GROUP –A

S.No Title No. of demonstrations proposed Total No. of demonstrations conducted Total

Reach –I Reach –II Reach-III Reach –I Reach –II Reach-III

1 Optimum spacing for American cotton 1 2 2 5 1 - - 1

2 Fertilizer management in American cotton 1 2 2 5 1 1 - 2

3 Varietal performance in rice 2 1 - 3 1 - - 1

4 Studies on rice based cropping systems 3 1 - 4 8 - - 8

5 Comparative performance of direct seeding

Vs transplanting

1 1 - 2 1 - - 1

265


7 System of rice intensification (SRI) 2 1 - 3 2 - - 3

8 Drip irrigation in field beans 1 1 - 2 5 - - 5

Total 29 23

GROUP-B

9 Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton 1 5 6 12 4 1 - 5

10 Demonstration of optimum population in

rice

4 2 - 6 16 - - 16

11 Introduction of green manure crops

preceding rice

4 1 - 5 12 - - 12

Total 23 Total 33

GROUP-C

13 Popularisationof Aravinda variety 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 3

(12 ha)

1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) - 2 (8ha)

14 Stem application of monochrotophos in

cotton

- 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 2

(8 ha)

1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) - 2 (8ha)


production technology in cotton

1(4 ha) 1

(4 ha)

1(4 ha) 3

(12 ha)

1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) - 2 (8ha)


production technology in redgram

- 15

(15 ha)

5

(10 ha)

20

(25 ha)

10 (10 ha) 3 (4 ha) - 13

(14ha)


production technology in rice

25

(30 ha)

10

(10 ha)

- 35

(40 ha)

15 (10 ha) - - 15 (10ha)

18 Popularisation of chemical weed control in

rice

20

(15 ha)

10

(1 ha)

-- 30

(16 ha)

5 (10 ha) - - 5 (10ha)

Total Total 39 (58ha)

266

Appendix N-IX:Technical programme of workdone for the year - rabi (2003-2004) GROUP –A

S.No Title No. of demonstrations proposed Total No. of demonstrations conducted Total

Reach –I Reach –II Reach-III Reach –I Reach –II Reach-III

1 Sprinkler irrigation in chick pea 2 1 - 3 5 2 4 11

2 Studies on optimum plant population in chickpea - 2 1 3 7 3 10

3 Varietal demonstrations in chickpea - 2 4 6 4 2 2 8

4 Demonstration of pulse crop before chickpea 1 1 1 3 - 1 - 1

Total 15 30

GROUP-B

4 Demonstration of IPM in chick pea 1 5 6 12 4 12 13 29

5 Demonstration of improved Agricultural

implements

1 2 2 5 2 3 2 7

6 Demonstrations on application of sulphur in

sunflower

3 4 - 7 4 3 - 7

7 Demonstrations on application of Boron in

sunflower

4 6 - 10 4 5 - 9

Total 34 52

GROUP-C

8 Popularisation of recommended production

technology in sunflower

4(2 ha) 4(2ha) 4(1 ha) 12

(5 ha)

5(5 ha) 3(4 ha) - 8 (9ha)


technology in chickpea

- 30(30 ha) 30(30 ha) 60

(60 ha)

-- 21(23 ha) 26(28 ha) 47

(53ha)


technology in sorghum

2(4 ha) 3 (6 ha) -- 5(10 ha) 22(30

ha)

3 (6ha) - 25 (36

ha)

Total 80 (87

ha)

Total 80 (98

ha)

267

Appendix N – X: Schedule and list of villages covered under trainings programmes

S.NO DATE NAME OF THE

VILLAGE

MANDAL

1 13-14, December, 2000 Bhupanapadu Panyam

2 15-16, December, 2000 Konidedu Panyam

3 18-19, December, 2000 Madduru Panyam

4 28, May, 2003 Tangaturu Banaganapalli

5 29-May, 2003 Appalapuram Banaganapalli

6 30-May, 2003 Annavaram Owk

7 31-May, 2003 Munagala and Polur Nandyal

8 8-9, December, 2004 Gorakallu and

Kondajuturu

Panyam

9 10-11, December, 2004 Panyam Panyam

10 12-13, December, 2004 Kowlur and Neravada Panyam

11 19-20, December, 2004 Alamur and Gonavaram Panyam

12 22-23, December, 2004 Togarchedu and Maddur Panyam

13 29-30, December, 2004 Nandivargam and

Thimmapuram

Banaganapalli

14 7-8, January, 2004 Nandavaram Banaganapalli

15 9-10,January, 2004 Cheruvupalli and Palukur Banaganapalli

16 12-13,January, 2004 Illurukothapeta and

Ghulamnabipeta

Banaganapalli

17 5-6,February, 2004 Bijinavemula Koilakuntla

18 7-8,February, 2004 Peddakopperla and

M.govindinne

Koilakuntla

19 9-10,February, 2004 Gulladurthy Koilakuntla

268

20 11-12,February, 2004 Vallampadu and

Chinnakopperla

Koilakuntla

21 13-14,February, 2004 Kapulapalli and

Tamadapalle

Banaganapalli

22 16-17,February, 2004 Pandlapuram and

Sankalapuram

Banaganapalli

23 19-20,March, 2004 Owk,mettupalle and

Ramavaram

Owk

24 22-23,March, 2004 Chennampalle,Sivavaram

and Singanapalle

Owk

25 24-25,March, 2004 Sangapatnam,

Chanugondla,Sunkesula

and Kasipuram

Owk

26 6-7 April,2004 Sanjamala, Kanala , Giddaluru

and Mangapalli Sanjamala

27 8-9 April, 2004 Alvakonda Sanjamala

28 10-11 April, 2004 Akumalla Sanjamala

29 12-13April, 2004 Mukkamalla , Yeggoni

and Mutchalapuri

Sanjamala

30 14-15 April, 2004 Mudigedu , Kamalapuri

Vasanthapuram and

Natlakotturu

Sanjamala

31 16-17 April, 2004 Alluru and

Tudumaladinne

Uyyalawada

269

Appendix N XII-List of equipments purchased (SRBC)

S

.

N

o

Particulars Quantity

1 Hydraulic conductivity apparatus 1

2 Moisture cans with lids 100

3 Hot air oven 1

4 Phoenix electronic weighing balance 1

5 a)Infiltrometer ring

b) Point gauge 75 cm long

c) Metal plate for hammering

1

1

1

6 Water meter size 1 ½” 5

7 Water meter size 2” 2

8 Electronic stop watch 5

9 Dumpy level 1

10 Cross staff 1

11 Prismatic compass 1

12 Screw auger 3

13 Tube auger 3

14 V- Notches 24

15 Post hole auger 1

16 Ranging rods 1” diameter 4

17 Measuring chain(30 m) 1

18 Stage level recorders 6

19 Parshall flumes 24

20 Guntaka cum levelling blade with palugu 1

21 Nine tyned rigid cultivator(Heavy duty type) 1

22 Philips two-in-one 1

23 UPA 750 Amplifier 1

24 AHUJA SCM 30 T column speakers 2

25 ACM 66 Microphones TM 2

26 ASM 580 XLR Microphone 2

27 Collar Microphone 1

28 G.N.Stands 2

29 Emergency light (Twin lights) 2

30 Direct Projector Plus Model 1

31 BPL 29” Colour TV 1

32 BPL VCR Model 810 1

33 Video Camera(Panasonic) 1

34 Indu-60- Audio Casette 4

35 Phillips Halogen bulb(For video light) 1

270

36 Video cassette 2

37 Video light 1

38 Photo phone Slide projector(Model AF-100) with spare lamp,

carrying case, laser pointer, slide viewer, circular tray

1

39 Photophone overhead Projector Model MKIIIT with tripod

stand , screen dust cover, IC controlled stabilizer

1

40 Mahindra tractor B275 DI 1

41 Computer (Compaq Presario) 1

42 UPS on Line 1

43 HP Laser jet printer 1

44 HP Desk jet printer 1

45 Software 5

46 HP Scanjet 5200 C 1

47 Nikon camera 1

48 Hakims Data Name plates 10

49 Hakims data press board (2 sizes) 2

50 Hakims data press letters 300

51 Hakims tricolour display board 1

52 Hakims combination board 1

53 Hakims Key board 1

54 Hakims notice board 1

55 Hakims translides 2

56 Hakims multipanel kit 1

57 Hakims newspaper stands 2

58 Soil hydrometer 1

59 Soil colour chart 1

60 Keen cups 1

61 Digital pH meter 1

62 Digital conductivity meter 1

63 Avery counter balance 1

63 Tensiometers 5

64 Bulk density kit 1

65 Rapid moisture meter 1

66 Field density test apparatus 1

67 Spring balances (10 and 50 kgs) 6

68 Hot plate 1

69 Shaking machine 1

70 Keen boxes 6

71 Samsung air conditioner 1

72 Stabiliser 1

73 Portable Genset 1

271

74 104 office table 1

75 T9 tables with two side drawers(Godrej Make) 2

76 Steel Almirah size (78”x36” x 18”) 18 gauge 8

77 S Type chair with flat arms 16 gauge 25

78 Computer chair model PCH-7021 (Godrej make) 1

79 Godrej computer table (Monitor desk) 1

80 4 ½ x2 ½ x office table with decolam top 7

81 6x18” x36” Racks 4

82 Field boards (small) 100

83 Field boards (big) 30

84 Working tables 3

85 Seed drums 4

86 Revolving chairs 2

Glass Door Storewel 3

87 Godrej 4 drawer filing cabinet 1

88 False Roofing and partitioning

89 Fertilizer Broadcaster 1

90 Tyres & tubes 8.25 x 20 size ( isuued for tractor trailer & water

tanker)

1

91 Water tank (4500 lit) 1

92 Three furrow ridger (tractor drawn) 1

93 8 tyned seed drill 1

94 Spike tooth harrow 1

95 Green Manure trampler 1

96 Tractor trailor tipping model ( without tyres) 1

97 Puddler with cage wheels 1

98 Multi crop thresher 1

99 Ploughing unit with 3 MB plough 1

100 Off disk harrow mounted type 7 + 7 gangs 1

101 Luthron digital Lux meter 1

102 Electronic calculator 1

103 Salinity bridge measuring instrument 1

104 Soil thermometer 2

105 Metalic tape –30m 1

106 Metalic tape-50m 1

107 Soil Ph /Soil moisture meter 1

108 Soil and chemical analysis kit 1

109 Hand lens 6

110 Rectangular notch 3

111 Modi Xerox machine 1

112 Copier stand 1

113 Refrigerator with stabilizer &fibre stand 1

114 Vaccum cleaner 1

115 Dot matrix printer 1

272

116 Kjeltek 1

117 Non recording rain gauge 2

118 EPABX system (8 phones) 1 unit

119 EPABX system (8 phones) 1 unit

120 Micro oven 1

121 Spectronic – 20D 1

122 Bullock cart sprayer 1

123 Microphotography equipment 1

124 Trinocular Microscope 1

125 Hakims Display in minutes 1

126 Hakims Deflex 1

127 Hakims White board 1

128 Hakims Chalk board 1

129 Hakims Fixograph letters and figures 640

130 Measuring tapes with well whistle 2

131 Laboratory pH meter 1

132 Voice pro unit 2

133 Philips cardless microphone 2

134 Philips 20 W megaphone 1

135 Philips 250 W Amplifier 1

136 Printer sharers 2

137 Shree lipi gem 1

138 Leaf area meter and image analysis system 1

139 Plant canopy analyzer 1

140 Theta probe with datalogger 1

141 Automatic weather station 1

142 Air Circulators 2

143 Pumpsets 3 H.P 1

144 Pump set 5 HP 1

145 Water cooler 1

146 Type writer 1

147 Handy cam 1

Plant sample grinder 1

148 Centrifuse 1

149 CD Writer 1

150 ISM Publisher Multi Scripts 1

151 HP Deskjet 640 printer 1

152 Seed cabinets 2

153 High speed stirrers 1

154 Deionisation water plant 1

155 Magnetic stirrer 1

156 B.O.D Incubator 1

157 Flame photometer 1

273

158 Laminar flow chamber 1

159 Power tiller &Accessories 1

160 Water analysis kit 1

161 Binocular Micriscope 1

162 Two wheeled trailor with ADY 7*19types 1

163 Cage wheels set 1

164 Skid (Float) 1

165 Hitch Bracket Assembly 1

166 5 Tyne Cultivator 1

167 Lugged wheels 1

168 Paddy Reaper 1

169 Two Furrow-Single Furrow Plough with special wheels 1

170 Alternator Suitable for Tiller 1

171 Wheel Changer 1

172 Fan 1

173 Laptap Computer 1

174 Chaff Cutters 2

175 Photosynthesis system 1

176 Automatic Seed Counter 1

177 Steady state Porometer 1

178 Profile Moisture probe 1

179 Tube Solarimeter 1

180 Gel Electrophoresis ETC 1

181 Pressure membrane and pressure plate apparatus 1

182 Oil Engine and accessories 1

183 Spiral machine 1

184 Family drip system 1

185 Manual cono weeder 4

186 LCD Projector 1

187 Ceiling fans 3

188 Pedastal fans 2

189 Exhaust fans 2

190 Rotavator 1

191 Model Irrigation block items

Rain gun with stand –1 acre

Raingun with stand-1/2 acre

Sand filter

Fertiliser tank

Popup sprinklers

0.25HP Electric motor

PVC accessories

1

1

1

1

3

1

192 24”X20” laminations 73

274

Appendix N XI- Staff particulars (SRBC) Staff particulars from the inception under III - A.P. Irrigation Project (SRBC) at RARS, Nandyal.

Sl.

No.

Name Designation From To

1 Dr. G. Bhoji Reddy Sr. Scientist (Agro.) 14-10-1998 29-02-2000

2 Dr.V.Sridhar Sr. Scientist (Agro.)i/c 11-12-1999 16-6-2001

3 Dr. B. Sahadeva Reddy Sr. Scientist (Agro.)i/c 17-6-2001 Till to date

4 Dr. B. Sahadeva Reddy Scientist (Agro.) 11-11-1998 Till to date

5 Sri T. Siva Sankar Rao Agril. Officer 26-02-1999 07-02-2000

6 Sri R. V.Venkateswara Rao Asst. Director (Hydro.) 09-12-1998 08-12-1999 7 Sri K. Venugopal Asst. Director(Hydro.) 18-08-2000 09-04-2002

8 Sri P.V. Ramana Rao Asst. Director (Hydro.) 11-09-2002 20-6-2003 9 Sri K.V.S. Rami Reddy Research Associate 15-12-1998 07-04-2001

10 Dr. P. Sujathamma Research Associate 07-03-2001 30-6-2003

11 Sri S. Madhusudhan Reddy Research Associate 08-10-2001 15-02-2003

12 K.Ashok kumar Research Associate 23-6-2003 3-1-2004

13 A.Ravishankar Research Associate 25-6-2003 16-12-2003

14 M. Venu Madhav Research Associate 15-7-2003 20-12-2003

15 Dr.T.S. Prasad Reddy Research Associate 24-1-2004 Till to date

16 P. Madhavi Latha Research Associate 31-1-2004 Till to date

11 G. Narayana Swamy Research Associate 27-1-2004 31-3-2004 12 Sri K. Sankar A.E.O 04-12-1998 16-06-2000

13 Sri M. Lachiram Naik A.E.O 17-06-2000 Till to date

14 Sri B. Mallaiah J.A.C.T 02-05-2000 Till to date

15 Sri D. Vijaya Anand Data Recorder 31-12-1998 Till to date

16 Sri B. Sreenivasulu Data Recorder 27-01-1999 31-01-2001 17 Sri K. Prakash Babu Data Recorder 08-03-2001 06-09-2002 18 Sri M. Phani Chandra Data Recorder 29-11-2002 Till to date 19 Sri P.Ramaiah Senior Research fellow 20-4-2004 Till to date

275

Annexure-VI: Training programmes conducted during 2003-2004 under SRSP

Warangal:

S.No. Na

me of the

mandal

No. of

Training

programmes

Date

1 Hanamkonda 2 14 th

-&5 th

Nov.03

17 th

&18 th

Nov.03

2 Hasanparthy 2 19 th

&20 th

N0v.03

21 st &22

nd Nov.03

3 Wardhannapet 1 24 th

&25 th

Nov.03

4 Parvathagiri 2 27 th

&28 th

Nov.03

29 th

Nov. & 1 st Dec.03

5 Sangem 2 2 nd

&3 rd

Dec.03

4 th

&5 th

Dec.03

6 Geesugonda 2 6 th&

8 th

Dec

9 th

& 10 th

Dec

7 Dharmasagar 2 2 nd

& 3 rd

Jan.04

6 th

& 7 th

Jan.04

8 Ghanpur 1 8 th

&9 th

Jan 04.

9 Duggondi 1 20 th

& 21 st Jan.04

10 Narsampet 1 22 nd

& 23 rd

Jan.04.

11 Shayampet 2. 13 th

& 14 th

Feb.04

19 th

& 20 th

Feb.04

12 Athmakur 1 16 th

& 17 th

Feb.04

13 Parkal 2 23 rd

& 24 th

Feb.04

25 th

& 26 th

Feb.04

14 Mogullapally 1 3 rd

& 4 th

Mar.04

15 Regonda 1 24 th

&25 th

Mar.04

16 Nallabelly 1 26 th

& 27 th

Mar.04

276

Karimnagar

S No Mandal Date 1 Karimnagar 9 & 10-12-2003

2 Sultanabad 11 & 12-12-2003

3 Peddapalli 17 & 18-12-2003

4 Sankarapatnam 19 & 20-12-2003

5 Manakondur 21 & 22-12-2003

6 Julapalli 23 & 24-12-2003

7 Srirampur 30 & 31-12-2003

8 Jammikunta 2 & 3-1-2004

9 Huzurabad 5 & 6-1-2004

10 Veenavanka 12 & 13-1-2004

11 Odela 19 & 20-1-2004

12 Jagtial 21 & 22-1-2004

13 Choppadandi 23 & 24-1-2004

14 Peddapalli 30 & 31-1-2004

15 Gollapally 10 & 11-2-2004

16 Dharmaram 12 & 13-2-2004

17 Metpalli 25 & 26-2-2004

18 Ramagundam 4& 5-3-2004

19 Raikal 8& 9-3-2004

20 Kamalapur 10 & 11-3-2004

21 Velgatoor 12 & 13-3-2004

22 Elkathurthy 15 & 16-3-2004

23 Mallail 17 & 18-3-2004

24 Kamanpur 19 & 20-3-2004

277

Annexure – VII: STAFF POSITION IN A.P. III IRRIGATION PROJECT

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, KARIMNAGAR

!998-99

S.No. Name of the post No. of posts Name of the incumbent

1. Asst. Agronomist 1 Dr. A. Srinivas

2. Asst.Soil

Physist/Agril.Engineer

1 Vacant

3. Research Associates 2 Vacant

4. Agril. Extension Officer 1 Sri G. Srinivas

5. Data Recorders 2 Sri P. Ramakrishna

Kum. A. Manjula

1999-00

S.No. Name of the post No.

of

posts

Name of the incumbent Date of

Joining

1. Scientist (Agronomy) 1 Sri P. Venkata Rao 27-1-2000

2. Scientist (Soil Science) 1 Sri G. Srinivasa Rao 24-2-2000

3. Research Associates 2 Vacant

4. Agril. Extension Officer 1 Sri G. Srinivas 01-5-1999

5. Data Recorders 2 Sri P. Ramakrishna 24-6-1999

Kum. A. Manjula 28-6-1999

2000-01

S.No. Name of the post No.

of

posts


Joining

1. Scientist (Agronomy) 1 Sri P. Venkata Rao 27-1-2000

2. Scientist (Soil Science) 1 Sri G. Srinivasa Rao 24-2-2000

3. Research Associates 2 Smt. T. Naga Laxmi 27-6-2000

Sri N. Mogilaiah 28-6-2000

4. Agril. Extension Officer 1 Sri G. Srinivas 01-5-1999

5. Typist 1 Kum. G. Madhavi 26-6-2000

6. Data Recorders 2 Sri P. Ramakrishna 24-6-1999


278

2001-02

S. No.

Name of the project No. of

posts


Joining

1. Scientist(Soil

Science)

1 Sri G. Srinivas Rao 24-2-2000

2. Scientist(Agronomy) 1 Smt J. Padmaja 7-11-2001

3. Research Associates 2 Sri. N. Mogilaiah 28-6-2000

Kum. G. Sree Vani 4-1-2002

4. Agril. Extension

Officer

1 Sri G. Srinivas 1-5-1999

5. Data recorders 2 Sri P. Ramakrishna 24-6-1999


2002-03

S. No.


posts


Joining

1. Scientist(Soil

Science)



3. Research Associates 2 Sri. N. Mogilaiah 28-6-2000

4. Agril. Extension

Officer


5. Data recorders 2 Kum. A. Manjula 28-6-1999

2003-04

S. No.


posts


Joining

1. Scientist(Soil

Science)



3. Research Associates 2 Sri. R.Preetham Goud 10-10-2003

4. Agril. Extension

Officer


5. Data recorders 2 Sri Ramesh

279

Annexure – VIII: Staff Particulars of ARS, Warangal

S. No Name Designation Employment period

From To

1

Dr. K.

Surender

Reddy

Principal

Scientist(Agronomy) Aug.1998 Till today

2 Dr. A . Krishna Senior Scientist(Agronomy) Aug.1998 Till today

3 Mrs . Clarence Research Associate Aug.2000 July 2001

4 Mrs. A .Sailaja Research Associate Aug.2000 Sep.2001

5 Mr. A. Ramanjaneyulu Research Associate Feb.2001 Dec.2001

6 Mr. V. Krian Kumar Research Associate Dec.2001 Oct.2003

7 Mr. N. Ravinder Research Associate Feb.2002 Oct.2003

8 Mr. Balaji Naik Research Associate Nov.2003 Dec.2003

9 Ms. P. Ushasri Research Associate Nov.2003 Till today

10 Mrs. G. Sunitha Research Associate Feb.2004 Till today

11 Miss. D. Veena Vani Data Recorder Feb,2000 Sep.2002

12 Miss. A. Indira Data Recorder March,2003 Sep.2002

13 Mr. A. Hari Krishna Data Recorder March, 2003 Sep.2003

14 Mr. Srinivas JACT July,1998 Till today

15 Mr. K. Sudhakar A.E.O July,1998 Till today

280

Annexure – Ix:List Of Equipment Purchased Under A.P. Iii Irrigation Project At

Agricultural Research Station, Karimnagar

S.No. Name of the item No.

of

units

Price per

unit (Rs.)

Total

Amount

(Rs.)

Agronomy Equipment

1. Spring balance a) 10 kg capacity 4 671-00 2684-00

b) 50 kg capacity 2 732-00 1464-00

2. Avery counter balance 5 kg capacity 1 13100-00 13100-00

3. Tulaman counter balance 15 kg. 2 11750-00 23500-00

4. Multigrain moisture meter 2 20000-00 40000-00

5. AFCOSET Electronic Precision Balance

Model : EK-200, capacity 200 gm

1 20762-00 20762-00

6. V-Notch 3 1365-00 4095-00

7. Parshall flumes 75 mm in size 10 8025-00 80250-00

8. Water meter a) Size 1.5” 3 3620-00 10860-00

b) Size 2.0” 3 3760-00 11280-00

9. Water current meter 1 18000-00 18000-00

10. Rectangular Notch 3 1647-00 4941-00

11. Seed cabinet 2 7198-00 14396-00

12. Alluminium self support ladder with flat

steps 6 feet

1 2280-00 2280-00

13. Alluminium single ladder with flat steps-

20 feet

1 3200-00 3200-00

Total 271332-00

Meteorological Equipment

1. Infrared thermometer 1 16000-00 16000-00

2. FRP Non-Recording rain guage 3 4270-00 12810-00

3. SDN-5260 1 725-00 725-00

4. Pyranometer sensor 1 233-00 233-00

5. Anemometer 1 419-00 419-00

6. Windvane 1 450-00 450-00

7. Rain guage 1 390-00 390-00

8. Solar Hog-Solar Power Source 1 232-00 232-00

9. Automatic weather station 1 217730-00 217730-00

Total 248989-00

Soil Science Equipment

1. Hot air oven 1 44100-00 44100-00

2. Infrared moisture meter 1 10000-00 10000-00

3. Microwave oven 1 11625-00 11625-00

4. Hand lens (handle)

a) 75 mm 2 130-00 260-00

b) 100mm 2 195-00 390-00

c) 65 x 90 mm 1 315-00 315-00

d) Illuminated magnifier 1 300-00 300-00

281

5. Tensiometers 5 2230-00 11150-00

6. Kjeldhal apparatus

a) Kjeldhal distillation unit 1 9974-00 9974-00

b) Kjeldhal digestion unit 1 19175-00 19175-00

7. Soil and chemical analysis kit 1 4575-00 4575-00

8. Salinity bridge measuring instrument 1 8625-00 8625-00

9. Lux meters 1 8024-00 8024-00

10. Soil thermometer (Digital) 1 7080-00 7080-00

11. Munsel soil colour chart (imported) 1 26718-00 26718-00

12. Incubator 1 37843-00 37843-00

13. Digital photo calorie meter 1 11723-00 11723-00

14. Double ring infiltrometer 1 17568-00 17568-00

15. Bulk density kit 1 12658-00 12658-00

16. Rapid moisture meter 1 6100-00 6100-00

17. Liquid density motorized 1 5971-00 5971-00

18. Field density test apparatus 1 1739-00 1739-00

19. Hot plate rectangular 1 9959-00 9959-00

20. pH meter (Digital pen type) 1 4956-00 4956-00

21. Laboratory shaking machine sieves

a) Fine Series (20 sizes) 20 603-00 12078-00

b) Coarse Sieve of 30 cm (29 sizes) 29 457-00 13267-00

22. Sieves shaker gyratory electric 1 17523-00 17523-00

23. Soil analysis kit 1 27300-00 27300-00

24. Keen boxes 6 1500-00 9000-00

25. PF determination set 1

26. Soil moisture meter 1 8250-00 8250-00

27. Laboratory shaking machine 1 22184-00 22184-00

28. Radiation screen 1 25415-00 25415-00

29. Constant head hydraulic conductivity unit 1 3900-00 3900-00

30. Soxlett apparatus 1 9394-00 9394-00

31. Deionation water plant 1 19360-00 19360-00

32. High speed stirrer 1 6944-00 6944-00

33. Humidifier 1 10360-00 10360-00

34. Trinocular microscope 1 38480-00 38480-00

35. Theta probe with data logger 1 263130-00 263130-00

36. Plant canopy analyzer 1 155260-00 155260-00

37. Kjeltek digestion & distillation unit 1 203100-00 203100-00

38. Leaf area & image analysis system

including software

1 274050-00 274050-00

39. Spectronic 20 genesis spectrophotometer 1 106080-00 106080-00

40. Resistance gypsum blocks 6 180-00 1080-00

41. LPG gas connection with all accessories 1 4349-00 4349-00

Total 1501332-00

Engineering & Farm Machinery Equipment

1. Dumpy levelling instrument 1 2250-00 2250-00

282

2. Levelling staff 1 750-00 750-00

3. Land measuring chain (30 mtrs.) 1 375-00 375-00

4. Land measuring chain (20 mtrs.) 1 300-00 300-00

5. Arrows 20 6-00 120-00

6. Ranging rods 3 mtrs. Length 5 100-00 500-00

7. Ranging rods 2 mtrs. Length 5 70-00 350-00

8. Metalic tapes 2 188-00 376-00

9. Plastic tapes 2 250-00 500-00

10. Cross staff 5 190-00 950-00

11. Prismatic compass 1 750-00 750-00

12. Plane table set 1 1500-00 1500-00

13. Drip irrigation unit 2 -- 99235-00

14. Mahindra tractor 1 305169-00 305169-00

15. Off set disc harrow 1 19750-00 19750-00

16. 9 tyne spring loaded cultivator 1 13750-00 13750-00

17. 8 feet Levelling blade 1 14250-00 14250-00

18. Tyres and tubes 2 6750-00 13500-00

19. 4500 ltrs. Water tank mounted on 2 wheel

trailor chassis without tyres & tubes

1 49300-00 49300-00

20. 1 HP water pumping system 1 7931-00 7931-00

21. Measuring tape 30 m 1 915-00 915-00

22. Measuring tape 50 m 1 1190-00 1190-00

23. Sprinkler irrigation system 2 39619-00 79238-00

24. Sand filter 2 8200-00 16400-00

25. Rotavator 1 47000-00 47000-00

Total 677539-00

Extension Equipment & Audio Visual Aids

1. Hakims key board 3 x 2 ft 1 2200-00 2200-00

2. Notice board 1 2810-00 2810-00

3. Data name plates

a) Senior 5 335-00 1675-00

b) Large 5 495-00 2505-00

4. Data Press letters

a) 1.5” size 100 5-00 500-00

b) 1.0” size 100 4-50 450-00

c) 0.75” size 100 4-25 425-00

5. News paper stand

a) Single sided 1 1650-00 1650-00

b) Double sided 1 3850-00 3850-00

6. Data press board 3 x 2 ft 1 5405-00 5405-00

7. Data press board 3 x 4 ft 1 8260-00 8260-00

8. Tricolour display board 1 5635-00 5635-00

9. Combination board 4 x 3 ft 1 3760-00 3760-00

10. Transilates

a) 10 x 12 inch 1 11150-00 11150-00

283

b) 12 x 12 inch 1 12000-00 12000-00

11. Multi panel kit 1 23540-00 23540-00

12. G.I boards

a) 2‟x1.6‟ 15 175-00 2625-00

b) 1.5‟x1.0‟ 15 120-00 1880-00

c) 1.5‟ x 6” 10 75-00 750-00

d) 3.0‟ x 2.0‟ 3 425-00 1275-00

13. Public address system

a) Voice pro unit 2 28350-00 56700-00

b) Cardless microphone 2 21360-00 42720-00

c) 250 W amplifier 1 12190-00 12190-00

d) Hand held mic 1 1100-00 1100-00

e) Card leveler mic 1 1925-00 1925-00

f) Megaphone with twist mic 20 W 1 6220-00 6220-00

g) 10 W megaphone 2 5200-00 10400-00

h) 3 in 1 tape recorder 1 6150-00 6150-00

i) Microphone table stand 1 450-00 450-00

j) Ghoose neck mic 1 3215-00 3215-00

k) 100 W speaker 2 8175-00 16350-00

l) Speaker cable 1 650-00 650-00

14. Micro photographic equipment 1 27500-00 27500-00

15. Handy cam 1 49575-00 49575-00

16. Cassettes for handy cam 6 275-00 1650-00

17. Digital camera 1 45150-00 45150-00

20. Direct projector 1 83250-00 83250-00

21. Video cassette recorder 1 18060-00 18060-00

22. Television (29”) 1 26973-00 26973-00

23. Photo copying machine 1 135881-00 135881-00

24. Video cassette 1 150-00 150-00

Total 1035089-00

Office furniture, Computer & Accessories

1. Computer system 1 242760-00 242760-00

2. Printer & UPS 1 207049-00 207049-00

3. HP Scanner 1 5950-00 5950-00

4. 1.4 MB diskettes (Boxes) 5 160-00 800-00

5. Computer printer ribbon 1 120-00 120-00

6. Electronic calculators 2 1090-00 2180-00

7. Godrej Chair CH-7 20 1124-00 22488-00

8. Godrej Table T-9 6 6111-00 36667-00

9. Godrej Table T-108 1 13438-00 13438-00

10. Godrej PCH-7001 D Chair 1 7497-00 7497-00

11. Godrej Personnal lock unit with 6 doors 1 4990-00 4990-00

12. Godrej sliding door unit 1 6362-00 6362-00

13. Godrej store well plain 4 6788-00 27152-00

14. Godrej monitor desk 1 3226-00 3226-00

284

15. Godrej store well model No.2 1 7726-00 7726-00

16. Godrej glass door store well 1 7930-00 7930-00

17. Godrej computer work station 1 4634-00 4634-00

18. Godrej sliding door unit 2 4885-00 9770-00

19. Godrej 4 door filing cabinet 1 7124-00 7124-00

20. Godrej 185 ltrs. Double door refrigerator 1 14200-00 14200-00

21. Godrej electronic type writer 1 19105-00 19105-00

22. Godrej 6‟ steel rack with 6 shelves 1 1850-00 1850-00

23. Godrej visa files 80 21-00 1680-00

24. Linex EPA box 1 15500-00 15500-00

25. BPL 5490 instrument 8 640-00 5120-00

26. BPL 3610 instrument 1 1220-00 1220-00

27. PVC cable RMT 1000 14-00 14000-00

28. Constant voltage transformer 1 3400-00 3400-00

29. Sanyo cardless phone 1 3950-00 3950-00

30. Sintex water tank 1000 ltrs. 1 5000-00 5000-00

31. Extension board material 1 493-00 493-00

32. Bajaj ceiling fans 49” 2 1380-00 2760-00

33. Steel cabinets 3 4234-00 12702-00

34. Storage racks 2 3451-00 6902-00

35. Mobile computer chairs 2 4407-00 8814-00

36. Contour visitor chair without arms 5 2587-00 12934-00

37. Computer accessories

a) Toner catridge for laser printer 1 4990-00 4990-00

b) Printer sharer (1:3) 1 1750-00 1750-00

c) Printer sharer (1:20) 1 600-00 600-00

d) Dotmatrix printer 1 13400-00 13400-00

e) ISN Publisher multi script 1 5500-00 5500-00

f) HP Scanner 3200 C 1 5450-00 5450-00

g) DAX 56.6 modem internal 1 1250-00 1250-00

h) DAX 56./6 modem external 1 2900-00 2900-00

i) HP Deskjet – 640 C 1 5990-00 5990-00

Total 789373-00

Grand Total 4523654-00

1. Ultra compact portable photosynthesis

system

1 721800 721800-00

2. Profile moisture probe 1 147100 147100-00

3. Tube Solarimeter 1 53400 53400-00

4. Tube Netradiometer 1 120700 120700-00

5. Automatic Seed Counter 1 190700 190700-00

6. LCD projector 1 219350 219350-00

7. Laptop 1 137550 137550-00

Total 1590600-00

Grand Total 6114254-00

285

Annexure – X :LIST OF EQUIPMENT PURCHASED UNDER III

IRRIGATION PROJECT. ARS, WARANGAL

S. No Name of the equipment Cost (Rs)

I Computer & its accessories

1) Computer with printer (UPS etc.,) 1,55,130

2 ) Computer catridge, scanner & floppy 9,700

3) Printer sahrer (1:3) 1,750

4) Printer sharer (1:2) 600

5) Toner catridge for laser printer 4,990

6) Dot matrix printer (TVS MSP – 34524) 13,400

7) ISM publisher multi scripts 5,500

8) DAX 56.6 modem internal 1,250

9) DAX 56.6 modem external 2,900

Total 1,95,220

II 1) Plus direct projector 83,250

2) Video camer 70,985

3) VCR 18,060

4) Colour TV 22,744

5) Digital camera (Sony MVC FD 73 model) 49,665

6) Handycam 49,575

7) Cassettes for handycam ( 6 No) 1,650

Total 2,95,929

III Photocopier 1,35,881

IV Furniture & Refrigerator 1, 93,184

V Soil moisture equipment

1) V. Notch

2) Parshall flumes

3) Water meter

4) Water current meter 1,82,791

5) Soil moisture meter

6) Resistance blocks gypsum

7) Soil analysis kit

8) Rectangular notches 4,941

Total 1,87,732

VI Multi grain portable moisture meter 20,700

VII Farm equipment

1) Tractor, trailer & tractor drawn implements 4, 09,467

2) Water tank mounted on two wheel trailer

chassis with tyres & tubes

62,800

3) KG wheel set & puddler 12,000

4) Rice polisher (Portable) 42,588

5) Rotovator 47,000

286

6) Rice huller 77,805

7) Power tiller with dry land accessories 2,06,5000

8) 3HP motor including accessories (2 No) 25, 328

9) 5 HP motor including accessories (1 No) 14,250

10/) Gestetner rotary duplicator 43,135

Total 9,40, 873

VII Lab equipment

1) Micro oven

2)Hot air oven

3) Soil thrermometer

4) Measuring tapes

5) Moisture cans 1,32, 798

6) Lutheren infrared thermometer

7) Infra red moisture balance

8) Soil p H meter

9) Hand lens

10) Lutheren digital lux meter

11) Barigo digital thermo hygrometer

12) Barigo altimeter 22,744

13) Barigo barometer

14) FRP non recording rainguage

15) Lutheren digital animometer 29,603

16) Detek Stevenson screen

17) Detek wind vane

18) Electronic top holding balance

19) Electronic weighing balance

20) Soil penetro meter

21) Double ring infiltrometer set

22) Tensiometer 1,71,529

23) Hydraulic conductivity apparatus

24) Keen cup

25) Munsell soil colour chart (imported)

26) Digital p H

meter (pen type)

27) Digital conductivity meter (pen type)

28) Bio gas soil hydrometer (imported) 28,060

29) Avary counter balance

30) Tulaman counter balance 40.095

31) Weighman counter balance

32) Dumpy level

33) Alluminium leveling staff

34) Hand measuring chain

35) Ranging rod 22,373

36) Prismatic compass

37) Platic measuring tape

38) Plain table

287

39) Electronic scientific calculator

40) Kjeldahl digestion unit

41) Kjeldahl distillation unit 42,169

42) Soil& chemical analysis kit

43) Salinity bridge measuring instrument

44) Digital photo calorimeter

45) Bulk density kit

46) Rapid moisture meter

47) Liquid device motorized 1,04,012

48) Field density apparatus

49) Different size shaking machine sieves

50) Sieve hake gyrator (electric)

51) Constant hydraulic conductivity with

accessories

5,400

52) Keen boxes

53) Kjeltek with all accessories 2,03,100

54) Spectronic 20 1,06,080

55) Soxlett apparatus 9,394

56) Deionisation water plant 19, 360

57) Micro photographic equipment 27,500

58) BOD incubator 42,900

59) Laminar flow 39,600

60) Seed cabinet 7,198

61) High speed stirrer 6,955

62) p H

meter 7,788

63) Laboratory autoclave 650 x 450 mm 36,880

64) Plant sample grinder 27,500

65) Humidifier 10,360

66) Trinoculor microscope 38,480

67) Sand filter 116,400

68) Calculator (2 Nos) 2,832

Total 12,01,99

IX Official Use

Hakims data press board

Hakims data name plate

Hakims data press letters (Coloured)

Hakims tri colour display board

Hakims combination board

Hakims key board 94,363

Hakims notice board with lock & key

Hakims translies

Hakims multi panel kit model MPK- 3

Hakims new paper stand

Display system in minutes 19,203

288

Display system-deflux 11,218

White board 3,550

Chalk board wall type 3,904

Hakims easel stand 1,842

Fixo graph letters- 1.5 “ –320 Nos. 1,952

Fixo graph letters- 0.75 “ –320 Nos. 1,664

30 KVA diesel generator 2,22,780

Usha EPABX system

Telephone , voltage transformer, internal telephone

wiring , under ground jelly filled cabling,

installation and commission charges

14,880

Total 4,10,356

X Irrigation equipment

Drip irrigation set with accessories 97,235

Sprinkler irrigation system with accessories (2 sets) 79,238

Total 1,76,473

XI Miscellaneous

Field boards 23,750

Field display boards 5,400

Steel cabinets (3 No) 12,702

Storage racks (2 N0.) 6,902

Bajaj ceiling fans 49” ( 5 No) 6,900

Total 55,654

XII 1) Theta probe data logger ( STG 3904) 2,73,280

2) Plant canopy analyzer model (Delta) (STG

2218)

1, 55,260

3) Leaf area and image analysis system(UK 3915) 2,74,150

4) Automatic weather station (UKP 2749) with all

accessories and taxes

2,17, 730

Total 9,20,420

XIII 1) Profile moisture probe ( STG 1954) model PR

1/6d -02

1,47,152

2) Automatic/ Steady state porometer

( STG 3749) Model AP 4

2,54,932

3) Tube solarimeter( EURO 1335) Model u metos 53,400

4) Tube net radio meter (STG 1775) NR 2- 07 1,20,700

5) Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer( DM

40,100) Model AAS 6 vario flame

8,42,100

Total 14,18,304

XIV 1) Germination cabinet/plant growth chamber (DM

10987) Model KBW –240

2,30,727

2) Gel electrophorosis – Vertical /Horizontal(

EURO 3193) Model Vertical E- 90693; power

1,27,720

289

pack E 835 ;Horizontal E 90390

3) Automatic seed counter ( DM 9079) Model

Contador

!,90,659

4) Freezer for fresh plant samples ( GBP 5000)

Model MDF- U 38086 S

3, 50,000

Total 8,99,106

I-XIV Grand Total 70,50, 911.

290

Table-66: Demonstration of improved puddler in Paddy (Karimnagar)

TP: Puddling with ANGRAU Puddler

FP: Farmer practice of wooden Puddler

Reac

h

Total qty. of

water applied

(mm)

Wate

r

saved

over

FP

Yield (t/ha) Cost of

cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross returns

(Rs/ha)

Net returns

(Rs/ha)

Addl.

income

(Rs/ha)

TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP

I 1221 1446 225 5.78 5.24 15002 15962 32368 29344 17366 13382 3984

II 1269 1483 214 6.31 5.81 15145 14945 35336 32536 20191 17591 2600

III 1216 1475 259 7.03 6.45 15685 16425 39368 36120 23683 19695 3988

Irrigation Water Management and Crops and Cropping Systems in Sriramsagar Project and Srisailam Right Branch Canal Command Area

Documents

p irrigation project

project report

area of water management

project titled crops

scheduling of irrigation

srsp command area

srbc command area

development of irrigation