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

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp1 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Low-density sowing of jute and jute-green gram intercropping: Enhancing farm economy, reducing labour bottlenecks

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.11087
Submitted
4 August 2025
Published
10-01-2026

Abstract

Jute (Corchorus olitorius L.) is a natural fibre crop of economic and ecological importance. However, jute farming is highly labour-intensive. Prevalent practice of broadcast high-density sowing (HDS) with a seed rate of 6.0 kg/ha results in overcrowding (240 plants/m²) and high labour input. This study probed into the reduction of labour input vis-à-vis cost of cultivation through sowing density moderations in sole jute and jute-green gram intercropping at Eastern India and verified at farmers’ fields of West Bengal, India, in 2020 and 2021. Low density sowing (LDS) of jute with 1.50-2.60 kg/ha seed rate in sole crop and intercropping with green gram (10.0 kg/ha) reduced labour input on major operations by 43 %-48 % (115-129 man-days/ha) over HDS. It achieved germination density of 60-103 plants/m2 and eased in establishing 30-40 plants/m2 at harvest. LDS produced a comparable fibre yield of 36.5-38.0 q/ha, enhanced net profit by 6.75 %-11.84 % and cost of cultivation reduced by Rs. 28208– Rs. 33500/ha over HDS. LDS of jute opened the scope of crop diversification. Jute-green gram intercrop generated 29.5 q/ha fibre, 5.0 q/ha green gram seed, reduced 108 man-days/ha, recorded a B:C ratio of 1.81 and improved soil health. In farmers’ fields, with a jute seed rate of 2.25-2.60 kg/ha, 33-45 q/ha fibre yield was recorded, reduced labour by 70-100 man-days/ha and reduced cost up to Rs. 25000/ha. Farmers are rapidly adopting these friendly practices.

References

  1. 1. CEIC Data. Related indicators of cost of cultivation: Fibres: Jute: West Bengal: Operating Cost. 2020.
  2. 2. Houck M. Conservation planting methods for native and introduced species. Alexandria (LA): USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2009.
  3. 3. Griepentrog HW, Olsen JM, Weiner J. The influence of row width and seed spacing on uniformity of plant spatial distributions. In: Proceedings of the 67th International Conference on Agricultural Engineering (AgEng 2009) — Innovations to meet future challenges; 2009 Nov 6–7; Hanover, Germany. Düsseldorf (Germany): VDI-Verlag; 2009. p. 265–70.
  4. 4. Islam MM. Thinning: An important crop management practice for maintaining plant population in jute field. The Guardian. 2014;24(7):26–9.
  5. 5. Ghorai AK, Chakraborty AK. Low density jute sowing to minimise cost of different operations in integrated weed management system. In: Proceedings of the International Seminar on Agriskills for Convergence in Research, Industry and Livelihood (AGRIL); Kalyani, West Bengal, India. 2019. p. 110.
  6. 6. Ghorai AK, Chakraborty AK. Economy of Low Density Sowing in Jute (Corchorus olitorius L.). Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9(09):292-300. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2020.909.037
  7. 7. Roy TK. Growth of Agricultural labourers in West Bengal with special reference to Uttar Dinajpur district since independence. Econ Aff. 2021;66(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.46852/0424-2513.1.2021.1
  8. 8. Vaishnavi P, Manisankar G. Labour scarcity in agriculture: A review. Pharma Innov J. 2022;11(4):2087-90.
  9. 9. Gowri Shankar R, Malaisamy A, Balasubramaniam M, Ragavan T, Prabakaran K, Balaji R, et al. Labour migration in Indian agriculture: Patterns, drivers and consequences—A systematic review. Plant Sci Today. 2025;12(3):1-13. https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.6109
  10. 10. Girdziute L, Besuspariene E, Nausediene A, Novikova A, Leppala J, Jakob M. Youth's (Un)willingness to work in agriculture sector. Front Public Health. 2022;10:937657. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.937657
  11. 11. Chakraborty AK, Ghorai AK, Alam NM, Roy S, Saha R. Effect of spatial arrangements on yield and competition of jute (Corchorus olitorius L.) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L. wilczek) in intercropping. SAARC J Agric 2021;19(2):137-155. https://doi.org/10.3329/sja.v19i2.57677
  12. 12. Ghorai, AK, Kumar M, Kar CS. Weed smothering in jute with green gram intercropping. Indian J Weed Sci. 2016;48(3):343-44. https://doi.org/10.5958/0974-8164.2016.00088.5
  13. 13. Ghorai AK, Kumar M, Roy S. Low cost and ecofriendly weed management techniques for jute. In: Proceedings of Indian Society of Weed Science Golden Jubilee International Conference on Weeds and Society: Challenges and Opportunities held at Jabalpur, India. 2018. p 243.
  14. 14. Ghorai AK. Agricultural weeder with nail assembly for weed control, soil moisture conservation, soil aeration and increasing crop productivity. Curr Sci. 2023;124(5):635–40. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v124/i5/635-640
  15. 15. Subbiah BV, Asija GL. A rapid procedure for assessment of available nitrogen in soils. Curr Sci. 1956;31:196–260.
  16. 16. Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA. Estimation of available phosphorus in soil by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. Washington (DC): US Department of agriculture; 1954. Circular 939:1-19.
  17. 17. Hanway JJ, Heidel H. Soil analyses methods as used in Iowa state college soil testing laboratory. Iowa Agric. 1952;57:1–31. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajwr-7-1-5
  18. 18. Walkley AJ, Black CA. An estimation of the Digestion method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934;37:29-38. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003
  19. 19. Hall J, Bhattarai SP, Midmore DJ. Effect of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) planting density on weed suppression, crop growth, physiological responses and fibre yield in the subtropics. Renew Bioresour. 2014;2(1):1-14. https://doi.org/10.7243/2052-6237-2-1
  20. 20. Amaducci S, Zatta A, Pelatti F, Venturi G. Influence of agronomic factors on yield and quality of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) fibre and implication for an innovative production System. Field Crops Res. 2008;107:161-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2008.02.00
  21. 21. Oxner, MD, Dillon CR, Keisling TC, Counce P. An agronomic and economic evaluation of commonly used wheat planting methods in the lower Mississippi River Delta. J Prod Agric. 1997;10(4):613–8. https://doi.org/10.2134/jpa1997.0613
  22. 22. Dhar NS. Surplus labour in crop production: Evidence from select villages in India. Rev Agrar Stud. 2022;11(2):1-16. https://doi.org/10.25003/RAS.11.02.0002

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.