Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp5 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Effect of nitrogen levels, plant growth regulators and cutting management on growth, yield and yield attributes of dual-purpose barley (Hordeum vulgare L.)

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.14009
Submitted
5 February 2026
Published
21-09-2026

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during the rabi seasons of 2023–24 and 2024–25 at Mandawa, Jhunjhunu district, Rajasthan, India, to evaluate the combined effects of nitrogen (N) levels, plant growth regulators (PGRs) and cutting management on growth, yield and yield attributes of dual-purpose barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) variety RD 2715. The experiment was laid out in a factorial randomised block design (FRBD) with 18 treatment combinations comprising three cutting schedules (40, 50 and 60 days after sowing (DAS)), 3 N levels (100, 125 and 150 % of recommended dose of nitrogen (RDN)) and two PGRs (chlormequat chloride (CCC) at 1.25 L ha-1 and ethephon (cerone) at 0.5 L ha-1), replicated thrice. Results revealed that cutting management significantly (p ≤ 0.05) influenced growth and yield parameters. Cutting at 60 DAS produced the highest green fodder yield, whereas cutting at 40 DAS recorded significantly higher grain yield, straw yield and yield-attributing traits, including effective tillers, spike length, grains per spike and test weight. Nitrogen application significantly improved growth parameters such as crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate (RGR), leaf area duration (LAD), chlorophyll content and flag leaf area. Application of 125 % RDN significantly enhanced most growth and yield attributes and remained statistically at par with 150 % RDN, indicating diminishing marginal returns beyond the optimum N level. Among PGRs, CCC at 1.25 L ha-1 proved superior to ethephon by significantly improving vegetative growth, tiller density, chlorophyll content and yield attributes, resulting in higher grain, straw and biological yields. Overall, integration of early fodder cutting (40 DAS), optimum N application (125 % RDN) and CCC application emerged as an effective agronomic strategy for maximising grain yield while maintaining adequate fodder production in dual-purpose barley under semi-arid conditions.

References

  1. 1. El-Hashash EF, El-Absy KM. Hordeum vulgare L. breeding. In: Advances in Plant Breeding Strategies: Cereals. Vol. 5. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p. 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23108-8_1
  2. 2. Mittal S. Wheat and barley production trends and research priorities: A global perspective. In: New Horizons in Wheat and Barley Research: Global Trends, Breeding and Quality Enhancement. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2022. p. 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4449-8_1
  3. 3. Vasan A, Mani M, Boora P. Barley foods and health: Opportunities ahead. In: Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Intelligent Agriculture (IPCBEE). Singapore: IACST Press; 2014. Vol. 63. p. 88–93.
  4. 4. Kumar D, Narwal S, Virani S, Verma RP, Gyawali S, Singh GP. Barley grain beta glucan enrichment: Status and opportunities. In: Wheat and Barley Grain Biofortification. Woodhead Publishing; 2020. p. 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818444-8.00012-2
  5. 5. Raj R, Shams R, Pandey VK, Dash KK, Singh P, Bashir O. Barley phytochemicals and health promoting benefits: A comprehensive review. J Agric Food Res. 2023;14:100677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100677
  6. 6. Singh SK, Kumar S. Advances in wheat and barley production technologies. In: Advances in Crop Production and Climate Change. CRC Press; 2023. p. 27–59. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003281948-2
  7. 7. Rasane P, Singh J, Kaur S, Gunjal M, Kumar V, Assouguem A. Barley. In: Cereals and Nutraceuticals. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2024. p. 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-2542-7_2
  8. 8. Anonymous. Progress Report of All India Coordinated Wheat and Barley Improvement Project 2015-16. Karnal: ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research; 2019.
  9. 9. Choudhary J, Mohsin M. Effect of row spacing on growth, yield and economics of barley genotypes under sub humid agro-climatic zone of Rajasthan. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2019;8(6):2188–91.
  10. 10. Bassi N. Appraisal of AquaCrop model for barley crop production under semi-arid conditions in Haryana [PhD dissertation]. Hisar: CCS HAU; 2023.
  11. 11. Lal MA, Bhatla SC. Nitrogen metabolism. In: Plant Physiology, Development and Metabolism. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore; 2023. p. 295–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-5736-1_11
  12. 12. Leghari SJ, Wahocho NA, Laghari GM, Hafeez Laghari A, Mustafa Bhabhan G, Hussain Talpur K, et al. Role of nitrogen for plant growth and development: A review. Adv Environ Biol. 2016;10(9):209–19.
  13. 13. Sabagh AE, Mbarki S, Hossain A, Iqbal MA, Islam MS, Raza A, et al. Potential role of plant growth regulators in administering crucial processes against abiotic stresses. Front Agron. 2021;3:648694. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2021.648694
  14. 14. Peltonen-Sainio P, Rajala A, Simmons S, Caspers R, Stuthman DD. Plant growth regulator and daylength effects on preanthesis main shoot and tiller growth in conventional and dwarf oat. Crop Sci. 2003;43(1):227–33. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2003.2270
  15. 15. Rademacher W. Chemical regulators of gibberellin status and their application in plant production. In: Annual Plant Reviews: Gibberellins. Vol. 49. 2016. p. 359–404. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119210436.ch12
  16. 16. Fahad S, Hussain S, Bano A, Saud S, Hassan S, Shan D, et al. Potential role of phytohormones and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria in abiotic stresses: Consequences for changing environment. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2015;22(7):4907–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3754-2
  17. 17. Pirasteh Anosheh H, Emam Y, Khaliq A. Response of cereals to cycocel application. Iran Agric Res. 2016;35(1):1–2.
  18. 18. Dhillon BS, Uppal RS, Goyal M. Forage quality and productivity of Hordeum vulgare L. as influenced by cutting management under staggered sowing in North-West India. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 2020;66(9):1244–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2019.1663507
  19. 19. Pathan SH, Damame SV, Sinare BT. Effect of different cutting management on growth, yield, quality and economics of dual purpose oat, barley and wheat. Forage Res. 2020;46(2):182–6.
  20. 20. Bokado K, Devi HS. Effect of varying lopping schedules and stump heights on growth, fodder yield and quality of dual-purpose barley (Hordeum distichon L.). Indian J Agric Res. 2025;59(10):1570. https://doi.org/10.18805/IJARe.A-6397
  21. 21. Patel DM, Patel AG, Chaudhary MM, Chaudhary BJ, Dhakar RL. Response of nitrogen levels and cutting management on growth and yield of dual-purpose barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). Plant Arch. 2024;24(1):1609–16. https://doi.org/10.51470/PLANTARCHIVES.2024.v24.no.1.225
  22. 22. Royo C, Lopez A, Serra J, Tribó F. Effect of sowing date and cutting stage on yield and quality of irrigated barley and triticale used for forage and grain. J Agron Crop Sci. 1997;179(4):227–34.
  23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.1997.tb00521.x
  24. 23. Moustafa ES, El-Sobky ES, Farag HI, Yasin MA, Attia A, Rady MO, et al. Sowing date and genotype influence on yield and quality of dualpurpose barley in a salt-affected arid region. Agronomy. 2021;11(4):717. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11040717
  25. 24. Atıs İ, Akar M. Grain yield, forage yield and forage quality of dual purpose wheat as affected by cutting heights and sowing date. Turk J Field Crops. 2018;23(1):38–48. https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.419124
  26. 25. Shirdelmoghanloo H, Chen K, Paynter BH, Angessa TT, Westcott S, Khan HA, et al. Grain-filling rate improves physical grain quality in barley under heat stress conditions during the grain-filling period. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:858652. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.858652
  27. 26. Croft H, Arabian J, Chen JM, Shang J, Liu J. Mapping within-field leaf chlorophyll content in agricultural crops for nitrogen management using Landsat-8 imagery. Precis Agric. 2020;21(4):856–80.
  28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-019-09698-y
  29. 27. Noor H, Ding P, Ren A, Sun M, Gao Z. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer on photosynthetic characteristics and yield. Agronomy. 2023;13(6):1550. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13061550
  30. 28. Fageria NK, Baligar VC, Li YC. The role of nutrient efficient plants in improving crop yields in the twenty first century. J Plant Nutr. 2008;31(6):1121–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904160802116068
  31. 29. Sinha D, Tandon PK. An overview of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium: Key players of nutrition process in plants. In: Sustainable Solutions for Elemental Deficiency and Excess in Crop Plants. 2020. p. 85–117.
  32. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8636-1_5
  33. 30. Ding J, Li F, Xu D, Wu P, Zhu M, Li C, et al. Tillage and nitrogen managements increased wheat yield through promoting vigor growth and production of tillers. Agron J. 2021;113(2):1640–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20562
  34. 31. Dordas C. Variation in dry matter and nitrogen accumulation and remobilization in barley as affected by fertilization, cultivar, and source-sink relations. Eur J Agron. 2012;37(1):31–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2011.10.002

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.