Int.]. ecotoxicol. agric. tee/mol. 1(3) : 113-119, September 2011

PERFORMANCE OF WHEAT-LENTIL MIXED CROPPINGUNDER DIFFERENT SEED RATE RATIO

M. M. Badsha', M. J. Ullah2, M. H. A1i2, S. M. Masurrr'\Assistant Farm Superintendents, Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural University; 2 Professor, Dept. of Agronomy,

Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural University; JLecturer, Dept. of Agronomy, Sher-e-Bangia AgriculturalUniversity, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh

ABSTRACTAn experiment on the performance of wheat - lentil mixed cropping under different seed rates of both wheat andlentil (100%, 90%, 80%, 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%, 30%, 20% and 10%, respectively) was conducted at theAgronomy Field, Sher-e-Bangia Agricultural University, Dhaka-I 207 during the period from November, 2006 toMarch, 2007. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design with three replications. Resultsshowed that significantly higher yields of wheat (3.14, 2.92, 2.88 and 2.84 t ha', respectively) were obtained withthe treatment of sole wheat, wheat 90% + lentil 10%, wheat 80% + lentil 20% and wheat 70% + lentil 30%.Significantly the highest combined yield of3.21 t ha-\ was obtained with the treatment of wheat 70% + lentil 30%.It was concluded that lentil may be intercropped with wheat using the combination of 70% wheat seed rate + 30%lentil seed rate.

Key words: Wheat, lentil, intercropping, seed rate

INTRODUCTIONBangladesh is an agriculture based country. Most of the people of this country are involved withthis activity. The land area of this country is very limited compared to it's large population.Increasing agricultural production per unit area of land is becoming most important step to copewith the present population growth in Bangladesh. In recent years, multiple cropping has beengaining importance as a means of more crop production in limited land area particularly in the

. countries with small size farm holdings.Intercropping is a conception of a great production per unit area for the compensation of landdecreasing causes. By the practice of intercropping system, people can improve theirsocio-economic condition of their family. All the intercropping systems give substantiallyhigher total yield equivalent than that of the sole crop (Nazir et al., 1997).Intercropping is an excellent crop production technique. It increases total production and reduceschemical use, the risk of total crop failure and stabilizes yield. Intercropping is proved to be anexcellent production system to increase total yield, higher monetary return and greater resourceutilization and fulfill the diversified need of the farmers (Singh et al., 1996). Intercropping is alsoconsidered as a well recognized practice for better land use system along with substantial yieldadvantages compared to sole cropping. These advantages may be especially important becausethey are achieved not by means of costly inputs but also by the simple expedient of growing cropstogether (Willey, 1979). Practicing intercropping lentil with wheat, fanners can obtain wheat andpulse at the same time from the same land. Higher equivalent yields are obtained withintercropping. Yields of the component crops in mixed cropping may be influenced by seed rate.The present study was, therefore, undertaken to evaluate the productivity and performance ofwheat and lentil under mixed cropping condition and to increase in the total productivity per unitland area.

Badsha et al.

-e- MATERIALS AND METHODSThe study was carried out at the Agronomy research farm of Sher-e-Bangla AgriculturalUniversity (SAU) during the period from November, 2006 to March, 2007. The wheatvariety Kanchan and lentil variety BAR! musur-3 were used as experimental plantingmaterials. Twelve treatments were included in the study as follows, TI = Sole wheat withrecommended seed rate (WIOO),T2 = Sole lentil with recommended seed rate (LIOO),T3 = 90%wheat seed rate and 10% Lentil seed rate (W90LIO),T4 = 80% wheat seed rate and 20% Lentilseed rate (Wso L2o),T5 =70% wheat seed rate and 30% Lentil seed rate (W70L3o),T6 = 60% wheatseed rate and 40% Lentil seed rate (W60L40),T7= 50% wheat seed rate and 50% Lentil seed rate(W50L5o),Tg = 40% wheat seed rate and 60% Lentil seed rate (W40L60), T9 = 30% wheat seedrate and 70% Lentil seed rate (W30L7o),Tlo= 20% wheat seed rate and 80% Lentil seed rate (W20Lgo), TII = 10% wheat seed rate and 90% Lentil seed rate (WIO~o), TI2 = 100% wheat seed rateand 100% Lentil seed rate (WIOOLlOo). The experiment was laid out in a randomizedcomplete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Twelve treatments wererandomly assigned in each replication. There were 36 unit plots in the experiment andthe size of each unit plot was 3.0 m x 4.0 m. Plots having wheat were treated withrecommended fertilizer dose of wheat as follows: Compost = 8000 - 10000 Kg ha",Urea=180 Kg ha", TSP = 140 Kg ha', MP= 40 Kg ha", Gypsum= 110 Kg ha'. Likewise,plots having sole lentil were treated with recommended fertilizer dose of lentil asfollows: Compost = 4000 - 5000 Kg ha", Urea=50 Kg ha", TSP=90 Kg ha", MP =40Kg ha", Two third e/3) amount of urea, whole amount of TSP and MP were applied at thetime of final land preparation. Rest amount of urea (1/3) were applied as top dressing atthe time of 1st irrigation. Seeds were sown by hand on November 18, 2006. Wheat seedsand lentil seeds were mixed proportionately according to the treatment and sown by-broadcasting method. Seeds were then covered properly with soil. A wheat seed wasrequired 120 kg ha-I and lentil seeds rate was 35 kg ha-I, respectively. Lentil washarvested on March 9,2007 and wheat was harvested on March 27,2007 plot wise whenboth crops were reached at the proper maturity stage. The data collected on differentparameters were statistically analyzed using the MST AT computer package programmedeveloped by Russel (1986). Least Significant Difference (LSD) technique at 5% level ofsignificance was used to compare the mean differences among the treatments (Gomezand Gomez, 1984).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONPerformance of wheat sole and as mixed cropped with lentil under different seed rates

umber of spikes plant" of wheat was significantly affected by the intercropping system atdifferent days after sowing (Table 1.). At harvest, the highest number of spikes plant" wasrecorded 6.17 in T I.T3 and T5 showed the similar results but those were lesser than T I. TreatmentT4 and Treatment T6 - T II showed gradually decreased number of spikes plant" and T II showedthe lowest number of spikes plant" at all the stages in comparison with TI. Different fertilizerdoses and different seed rate combinations might be responsible for this type of variation. Singh etal. (1996) reported that there was no significant effect of spike number of wheat withintercropping system. They also reported that number of spike depended on the effective tiller inmost cases.

114

-----------------

Performance of wheat-lentil 011 seed rate ratio

Spike length of wheat was significantly affected by the intercropping systems (Table 1). Spikelength increased with the advancement of age. TI showed significantly the highest spike length.However, T3 _ T6 and T3 _ T, showed spike length, which were significantly similar to TI atharvest, respectively. Treatment T7 - TII and Treatment T6 - TII showed gradually decreasedspike length, respectively and TII showed the shortest of spike length. The treatment TI2 showedspike lengths which were statistically similar with TII at all growth stages. Ghanbari et al. (2002)and Nargis et al. (2004) reported significant effect on spike length of wheat by intercroppingsystem. They reported that proper fertilization under intercropping system increased spike lengthof wheat.Number of seeds spike" was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 1). At the timeof harvest, the highest number of seeds spike" was recorded (15.12) in TI. The highest number ofseeds spike" in sole wheat might be attributed to the lack of competition with lentil. Treatment T3- T, gaye 14.61- 14.85 which statistically similar with TI. Treatment T6- TI2 showed graduallydecreased number of seeds spike" and among them TI2 gave the lowest number of seeds spike"(7.92). Ashok et al. (2001) reported grain weight spike" of wheat intercropped with cowpeawhich was not significantly lower from sole crop.Thousand grain weight of wheat was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 1). T Isole wheat produced the maximum 1000 grain weight (43.73 g). T3 - T, gave 1000 grain weightswhich were statistically similar to TI. T 6 - T II showed gradual decreased values and T II gave thelowest 1000 seed weight (37.40 g) which was statistically similar to Tlo. Treatment TI2 gave theresult (39.67 g) which was statistically similar to T9 (40.50 g). The variation in lOOO-seed weightamong the treatments might be attributed to the competition for resources with the lentil underintercropping system. Nargis et al. (2004) reported that 1000-seed weight did not significantlyvary with intercropping. Likewise, Cheng et al. (2003) reported that higher nitrogen applicationunder wheat + blackgram intercropping system, 1000-seed weight was greater than monocroppedwheat.

Table 1. Yield contributing characters and yield of wheat sole and as mixed cropped withlentil under different seed rates

TreatmentsNumber of Spike length Number of 1000 grain Yield Harvest

spikes plant" (em) seeds spike" weight (g) (t ha') Index (%)TI 6.17 12.74 15.12 43.73 3.14 44.41T3 5.40 12.14 14.85 42.90 2.92 43.26T4 5.03 12.11 14.73 42.63 2.88 41.32T5 5.28 12.09 14.61 42.87 2.84 44.48T6 4.13 10.45 12.42 41.47 1.96 39.36T7 4.04 9.75 10.80 41.37 1.39 36.29Ts 3.80 9.51 10.86 41.10 1.29 35.14T9 3.48 9.34 9.28 40.50 0.93 33.53Tlo 2.88 9.14 9.12 38.47 0.94 31.64TII 2.73 8.81 8.24 37.40 0.61 30.72TI2 3.09 8.97 7.920 39.67 0.97 29.68LSDo05 1.60 0.933 1.276 2.024 0.696 4.931

Here,TI = Sole wheat, T3 = W90 LIO, T4 = Wso L20, T5 = W70 L30, T6 = W60 L40, T7 = W50 L50, Ts = W40L60, T9 = W30 L70, Tro = W20 Lso, TII = WIO L90, TI2 = WIOO Lloo

115

Badsha et at.

Grain yield was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 1). T I gave the maximumyield (3.14 t ha') and T3 - T4 gave results (2.92, 2.88 and 2.84 t ha", respectively) which were notsignificantly different from that of T I. T 6 - T" gave gradual! y decreased yields and T" gave thelowest yield (0.61 t ha-I). However, TI2 showed yields (0.97 t ha") which was statistically similarto T9 (0.93 t ha"). Similar result was also reported by Singh et al. (1996). They reported that the

• yield of wheat or lentil individually under wheat + lentil intercropping system was significantlyhigher but lower from combined yield. The application of increased increased grain yield ofwheat which was not significantly higher than that obtained under recommended dose.Harvest index (%) was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 1). Among thetreatments, T, gave the highest harvest index (44.48%) which statistically similar to TI (44.41%),T3 (43.26%) and T4 (41.32%), respectively. TI2 gave the lowest harvest index (29.68%).Treatments T 6 - T" were at par in respect of harvest index values which were significantly lowerfrom that of T" T3 and Ts. Islam (2006) found that harvest index of wheat was significantlyaffected by intercropping systems.

Performance of lentil sole and as mixed cropped with wheat under different fertilizer dosesand seed rates

umber of pods plant" of lentil was significantly affected by the intercropping systems (Table 2).At harvest, it was observed that the highest values of number of pods plant" (39.77) were found inthe treatment T2. It was also observed that treatment T3 - T" showed gradual increased in thenumber of pods plant" and T3 showed the lowest value (10.67). Howlader (2006) reported thatnumber of pods plant" of bushbean was si¥nificantly affected by intercropping patterns. Heshowed that the highest number of pods plant was found where there was no or less competition

• for space light, water and nutrients.Pod weight plant" was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 2). At the time ofharvest, the highest pod weight plant" was recorded (1.75 g) in T2. The highest pod weight plant"in sole lentil might be attributed to the lack of competition with wheat. T II also gave the highervalue (1.55 g) which was significantly different from that of T2.T3- TII showed gradual increasedresult and the lowest pod weight plant" was (0.47 g) in the treatment T3 which was notsignificantly different from T4 (0.52 g). TI2 gave the result (0.95 g) which was not significantlydifferent from T9 (0.97 g) and Tlo (0.98 g). Such results might be due to differential nutrientuptake where different plant population resulted in nutrient competition.Thousand seed weight of lentil was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 2). T2produced the highest 1000-seed weight (23.20 g). T" also gave higher 1000-seed weight (22.41 g)but this was significantly different from that of T2. T3 - T" gave 1000-seed weights whichincreased gradually and among them T3 gave the lowest 1000 seed weight (19.20 g) but this wasnot significantly different from that of T4• Treatment TI2 gave the result (20.82 g) which was notsignificantly different from T7 (20.80 g). The variation in 1000 seed weight among the treatmentsmight be attributed to the competition for resources with the wheat under intercropping system.

argis et al. (2004) reported that 1000-seed weight did not significantly different underintercropping system. But Cheng et al. (2003) reported that under higher nitrogen applicationunder wheat + blackgram intercropping system, 1000-seed weight was greater than monocroppedwheat or blackgram.

116

l__ .J

Performance of wh eat-len til 011 seed rate ratio

Table 2. umber of pods plant" of lentil sole and as mixed cropped with wheat underdifferent fertilizer doses and seed rates

Treatments Number of pods Pod weight 1000 Seed Wt Yield Harvestplant" plant" (g) (g) (t ha") Index (%)

T2 39.77 1.75 23.20 1.04 38.89T) 10.67 0.47 19.20 0.09 27.33'T4 11.06 0.52 19.22 0.16 28.38T5 15.24 0.62 19.80 0.37 31.25T6 17.02 0.71 20.40 0.39 31.46T7 22.03 0.74 20.80 0.43 32.29T8 23.25 0.86 22.00 0.52 32.14T9 26.51 0.97 22.21 0.66 35.53T,o 27.38 0.98 22.22 0.76 35.64

T" 30.77 1.55 22.41 0.91 38.41

T'2 30.55 0.95 20.82 0.37 29.68LSDo.05 1.009 0.076 0.132 0.076 3.808

Here,T2 = Sole lentil, T3 = W90 LIO, T4 = Wso L20, Ts = W70 L30, T6 = W 60 L40" T7 = Wso Lso. Ts = W40L60. T9 = W30 L70. T '0 = W 20 Lso, T'I = WI 0 L90•T 12= WI 00 L 100

Grain yield was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 2). T2 gave the best result(1.04 t ha"). TII also gave higher grain yield (0.91 t ha") but it was significantly different fromthat of T 2. T3 - T II gave the result which increased gradually and among them T 3 gave the lowestgrain yield (0.09 t ha") but this was not significantly different from that of T4 (0.16 g). TreatmentT'2 gave the result (0.37 t ha") which was not significantly different from that of T, (0.327 t ha"),The variation in seed yield among the treatments might be attributed to the competition forresources with wheat under intercropping system.Harvest index was significantly affected by intercropping system (Table 2). Among thetreatments, T2 gave the highest harvest index (38.89%) which was not significantly similar to T"(38.41 %), T9 (35.53%) and TIO (35.64%), respectively. T3 gave the lowest harvest index (27.33)which was similar with T4 (28.38%), Ts (31.25%) and Tn (29.68%), respectively. Lower valuesof T 6 - T 8 were at par showing harvest index values which were significantly different from that ofT2 and TII.

Combined yieldThe combined yield of wheat and lentil was significantly influenced by different intercroppingsystems (Fig. 1). The highest combined yield (3.21 t ha') was found in T5. Treatment, T 3 and T 4

showed higher combined yield of 3.01 and 3.04 t ha", respectively but these were significantlydifferent from T 5. Treatments T 6 - T '2 showed lower combined yields which were significantlylower than that of Tx. The lowest combined yield (1.34 t ha") was obtained from T12. Similarresult was also obtained by Singh et a!. (1996). They reported that the combined yield of wheatand lentil under wheat-lentil intercropping system was significantly higher than that of the solecrop.

117

Badsha et al.

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5

0.5

oT3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 no T11 T12

Fig. 1. Combined yields of wheat and lentil in mixed cropping systemunder different seed rates (LSDoo5 = 0.133)

Here,T3 = W90 LIO, T4 = Wso Lzo, Ts = W70 L30, T6 = W60 L40, T7 = Wso Lso. 'r, = W40 L60. T9 = W30 L70.TIO = Wzo Lso. TII = WIOL90. Tlz = W 100LlOo

Thus the results obtained from this study exhibited that the mixed cropping system gaveencouraging results in respect of yield productivity performance. Considering wheat as the maincrop, intercropping treatment of 70% wheat + 30% lentil emerged out as the promisingintercropping system

REFERENCESAshok, K., Balyan, J. S. and Kumar, A. 2001. Indian J Agron. Indian Agril. Res. Ins. ew Delhi,

India.pp.410-415.

Cheng, G. H.; Huang, G. B. and Jiang, H. 2003. Effect ofN level on the quality of monocroppedand intercropped wheat/maize. PI. Nutri. Fert. Sci. 9(3): 280 -283.

Ghanbari, B. A. and Lee, H. C. 2002. Intercropped field beans (Viciafaba) and wheat (Triticumaestivum) for whole crop forage: effect of nitrogen on forage yield and quality. J Agric. Sci.138(3): 311-315.

Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (2nd

edition). Intemational Rice Research Institute, John Willey and Sons, Inc. Singapore, pp.139-240.

Howlader, S. 2006. Performance of wheat - bushbean intercropping under different row ratio.M.S. Thesis. SAU, Bangladesh. Dhaka. p. 44.

118

Performance of wheat-lentil 011 seed rate ratio

Islam, M. E. 2006. Intercropping fodder grasspea with at different fertilizer doses and seedingratios. M.S. Thesis. SAU, Dhaka. Basngladesh.

argis, A., Alim, M. A., Islam, M. M., Zabun, N., Maksuder, R. and Hossain, A. S. M. I.2004. Evaluation of mixed cropping and intercropping of lentil and wheat. J Agron.3(1): 48 - 51.

azir, M. S., Elahi. E., Jabbar.A., Saeed, M. and Ahmad, R. 1997. Bio-econornicassessment of different wheat based intercropping systems. Pakistan J Agric. Sci.34(1-4): 62 - 64.

Russell, D. F. 1986. MSTAT-C package programme. Crop and Soil Science Dept. Michigan StateUniv. USA.

Singh, R. K., Ganga, S. and Saran, G. 1996. utrient management in wheat-lentil intercroppingsystem under dry land conditions. Annals oj Agric. Res. 17(3): 272 - 280.

Willey, R. W. 1979. Intercropping: Its importance and research needs Part II. Agronomy ResearchApproach. Field crop abst. 32: 73 - 78.

119