|
|
|
|
Studies on the influence of agro-ecological interventions for fall armyworm management in maize Sivamurugan AP*, Ravikesavan R Department of Millets, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore641003Tamil Nadu, India *Email for correspondence: apacsivamurugan@gmail.com
Online Published on 07 May, 2022. Abstract Field experiment was carried out at the Department of Millets, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu during kharif 2020 to study the influence of agro-ecological interventions for fall armyworm (FAW) management involving different intercrops in maize. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with the five treatments viz T1- Maize + Tephrosia, T2 - Maize + fenugreek, T3- Maize + coriander, T4- Maize + marigold and T5- Maize alone, replicated thrice. A row of C:N hybrid grass was planted in the brim of the field. It was found that among the intercropping systems in maize, maize + marigold was found to be superior for the management of FAW in maize which recorded higher maize equivalent yield of 6,215 kg/ha, net return of Rs 47,181.00/ha and B-C ratio of 1.87. Top Keywords Maize, Intercrops, FAW, Infestation, Yield. Top | Introduction Maize (Zea mays L) is one of the most important cereal crops in India after rice and wheat with respect to area and production. It is cultivated round the year in almost all parts of India due to its wide ecological adaptability. The productivity of maize is very low owing to aberrant weather situations, improper application of organic manures and fertilizers, weed infestation, widespread occurrence of pests and diseases etc. Among the pests, fall armyworm (FAW), Spodoptera frugiperda, an invasive pest damages more than 80 host species (Goergen et al 2016, Witt et al 2017). Maize is one among the crops in which the incidence of FAW is higher (Hassanali et al 2008) compared to other crops thus leading to severe decline in productivity. Intercropping systems are found to reduce the incidence of FAW in maize thus favouring the productivity (Seran and Brintha 2010). Hence a study was conducted to find out the influence of agro-ecological interventions for FAW management involving different intercrops in maize. |
Top Material and Methods Field experiment was carried out at the Department of Millets, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu during kharif 2020. The soil was sandy clay loam and low in available N (173 kg/ha), medium in available P (16.2 kg/ha) and high in available K (501 kg/ha) with a pH of 8.21. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with five treatments viz T1- Maize + Tephrosia, T2 - Maize + fenugreek, T3- Maize + coriander, T4- Maize + marigold and T5- Maize alone, replicated thrice. A row of C:N hybrid grass was planted in the brim of the field. Sowing of maize hybrid CO H(M) 6 and intercrops viz Tephrosia, fenugreek, coriander and marigold was done. The cultural operations were carried out as per Anon (2020). Observations on per cent plant infestation were recorded at 20, 30 and 40 DAS and tassel damage and yield were recorded. The data were statistically analyzed as per Gomez and Gomez (1984). |
Top RESULTS and Discussion Effect of various intercroppings on incidence of FAW in maize The data given in Table 1 show that plant infestation at 20, 30 and 40 days ranged from 57.8 to 70.0, 55.5 to 78.9 and 80.0 to 90.0 per cent respectively. The tassel damage was from 50.0 to 67.8 per cent. Davies scale value at 20, 30 and 40 days ranged from 4.6 to 5.9, 4.0 to 5.8 and 5.4 to 6.6 respectively. The range of cob damage score at harvest was 1.8 to 2.8. However there were no significant differences among the various treatments for these traits. Influence of intercropping on yield and economics of maize The data on influence of intercropping on yield and economics of maize are given in Table 2. The maize grain yield was maximum in T4 (Maize + marigold) (4,578 kg /ha) and T1 (Maize + Tephrosia) (4,206 kg/ ha) the two being at par. The yield of intercrop was maximum in T4 (4,913 kg/ha). Equivalent yield of intercrop and equivalent yield of maize + intercrop was again maximum in T4 (1,637 and 6,215 kg/ha respectively). Equivalent yield of maize + intercrop was lowest in T5 (Maize alone) (3,671 kg/ha) and T2 (Maize + fenugreek) (4,166 kg/ha) the two being at par. Maximum maize stover yield was recorded in T4 (7,921 kg/ha) and T1 (7,324 kg/ha) which were at par and significantly superior to other three treatments. There were no significant differences among the treatments for 100-seed weight. Maximum net return and B-C ratio were recorded in T4 (Rs 47,181.00 and 1.87 respectively) as compared to minimum in T5 (Rs 21,097.00 and 1.52 respectively). The increase in grain yield was ascribed to lower incidence of FAW in maize owing to different intercropping systems. The results are in accordance with the findings of Hailu et al (2018) and Midega et al (2015). Top Conclusion Based on the results it is concluded that among the intercropping systems in maize, maize + marigold was found to be superior for the management of FAW in maize which recorded higher maize equivalent yield (6,215 kg/ha), net return (Rs 47,181/ha) and B-C ratio (1.87). |
Top Tables | Table 1.: Effect of various intercroppings on incidence of FAW in maize
| | Treatment | Plant infestation after (DAS) (%) | Tassel damage (%) | Davis scale after (DAS) | Cob damage score at harvest | | 20 | 30 | 40 | 20 | 30 | 40 | | T1 | 57.8 | 55.5 | 85.6 | 53.3 | 4.6 | 4.0 | 6.6 | 2.1 | | T2 | 65.5 | 62.2 | 80.0 | 61.1 | 4.8 | 4.0 | 5.4 | 2.3 | | T3 | 60.0 | 62.2 | 88.9 | 60.0 | 4.6 | 5.4 | 6.3 | 2.2 | | T4 | 61.1 | 64.4 | 80.0 | 50.0 | 5.3 | 5.1 | 5.5 | 1.8 | | T5 | 70.0 | 78.9 | 90.0 | 67.8 | 5.9 | 5.8 | 6.5 | 2.8 | | CD | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
| T1- Maize + Tephrosia, T2 - Maize + fenugreek, T3- Maize + coriander, T4- Maize + marigold, T5- Maize alone | | | Table 2.: Influence of various intercroppings on yield and economics of maize
| | Treatment | Maize grain yield (kg/ha) | Yield of intercrop (kg/ha) | Equivalent yield of intercrop (kg/ha) | Equivalent yield of maize + intercrop (kg/ha) | Maize stover yield (kg/ha) | 100-seed weight (g) | Net return (Rs/ha) | B-C ratio | | T1 | 4,206 | 74 | 740 | 4,946 | 7,324 | 38.7 | 37,348.00 | 1.85 | | T2 | 3,852 | 118 | 314 | 4,166 | 6,552 | 38.8 | 25,721.00 | 1.60 | | T3 | 3,961 | 173 | 346 | 4,307 | 6,774 | 38.4 | 27,635.00 | 1.63 | | T4 | 4,578 | 4,913 | 1,637 | 6,215 | 7,921 | 38.6 | 47,181.00 | 1.87 | | T5 | 3,671 | 0 | 0 | 3,671 | 6,158 | 39.2 | 21,097.00 | 1.52 | | CD0.05 | 581 | 229 | 111 | 553 | 1,001 | NS | - | - |
|
| T1- Maize + Tephrosia, T2- Maize + fenugreek, T3- Maize + coriander, T4- Maize + marigold, T5- Maize alone | |
| | |
|
|
|