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

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp2 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Performance of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) as influenced by varietal selections and land configurations under trans gangetic plains of Punjab (India)

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.12183
Submitted
9 October 2025
Published
12-05-2026

Abstract

This research was conducted during kharif season of 2024 in the agricultural research farm of Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, to evaluate the effects of varietal selection and planting geometry on the growth and production of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) in Punjab region. The experiment was formulated in factorial randomized block design (FRBD) where by 3 types of the seeds (V1 - ML 2056,     V2 - MH 421 and V3 - SML 1827) were utilised and three landscape arrangements (S1 - Flat sowing, S2 - Raised bed sowing and S3 - Ridge furrow sowing) were multiplicated thrice. It was discovered that variety SML 1827 grown under raised bed sowing resulted in a marked increase in growth, physiological traits, yield traits and economics. Seed yield of raised bed sowing was found 9.9 % higher than seed yield of flat sowing and SML 1827 seed yield was found 6.7 % higher than that of ML 2056. Variety V3 (SML 1827) and planting geometry S2 (Raised bed sowing) had the highest seed yield (1089.40 kg ha-1) and Variety V1 (ML2056) and planting geometry S1 (Flat sowing) had the lowest seed yield (1020.89 kg ha-1). It was observed that SML 1827 achieved the highest yield with a higher number of pods per plant (33.3) and a higher amount of dry matter accumulation (25.8 g). The highest gross ₹ 94863 ha-1 net returns B:C ratio (2.10) were achieved with SML 1827 in the raised beds, with the highest net returns of  ₹68261 ha-1. Overall Variety V3 (SML 1827) under planting geometry S2 (Raised bed sowing) obtained higher growth, crop productivity and economic in kharif green gram. The conclusion is that, a higher productivity and profitability of kharif green gram in Punjab environment may be enhanced provided that the raised bed sowing technique is implemented using better varieties.

References

  1. 1. Samanta S, Saha A, Mandal D, Pandit P, Dey P. Optimization of planting geometry can manifest performance, energy balance and marketability of table potato. Potato Res. 2025;68:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11540-024-09841-x
  2. 2. Kumar N, Mrunalini K, Patnaik GP, Behera B. Efficient diversified cropping systems of field and horticultural crops for livelihood security. In: Integrated pest management in diverse cropping systems. Oakville: Apple Academic Press; 2023. p. 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003304524-1
  3. 3. Pratap A, Dhaliwal I, Singh CM, Mahalingam A, Manivannan N, Basavaraja T, et al. Biofortification of mungbean. In: Biofortification of staple crops. Singapore: Springer; 2022. p. 295–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3280-8_12
  4. 4. Huppertz M, Kachhap D, Dalai A, Yadav N, Baby D, Khan MA, et al. Exploring the potential of green gram: from domestication and traditional selection to modern genetic and genomic technologies in a changing world. J Agric Food Res. 2023;14:100786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2023.100786
  5. 5. Mohan Naik G, Abhirami P, Venkatachalapathy N. Green gram. In: Pulses: processing and product development. New Delhi: Springer; 2020. p. 213–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41376-7_12
  6. 6. Nasir M, Sidhu JS, Sogi DS. Processing and nutritional profile of green gram, black gram, pigeon pea, lupin, moth bean and Indian vetch. In: Dry beans and pulses: production, processing and nutrition. Hoboken: Wiley; 2022. p. 431–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119776802.ch17
  7. 7. Rajput A, Panhwar QA, Babar H. Role of leguminous crops in enhancing soil fertility and plant nutrition. Sustain Agric Rev. 2024;58:101–20. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.1006827
  8. 8. Vishwakarma K. Molecular characterization of green gram (Vigna radiata L.) genotypes for yellow mosaic virus resistance using SSR markers [MSc thesis]. Jabalpur: Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya; 2021.
  9. 9. Anonymous. Annual report (2019–20): pulses revolution from food to nutritional security. New Delhi: Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India; 2021.
  10. 10. Triyanti T, Suciaty T. Effect of plant planting geometry and type of manure on growth and yield of green bean (Vigna radiata L.) cultivar Vima I. J Agrosci. 2024;1(3):129–44. https://doi.org/10.62885/agrosci.v1i3.176
  11. 11. HanumanthaRao B, Nair RM, Nayyar H. Salinity and high temperature tolerance in green gram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) from a physiological perspective. Front Plant Sci. 2016;7:957. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.00957
  12. 12. Yadav GS, Datta M, Babu S. Influence of land configuration and varieties on growth and productivity of mungbean under irrigated conditions. Indian J Agron. 2018;63(1):52–7.
  13. 13. Minolta Camera Co. Chlorophyll meter SPAD-502 instruction manual. Osaka: Minolta Camera Co.; 1989.
  14. 14. Watson DJ. Comparative physiological studies on the growth of field crops. Ann Bot. 1947;11(41):41–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083148
  15. 15. Blackman VH. The compound interest law and plant growth. Ann Bot. 1919;33:353–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a089727
  16. 16. Gregory FG. The effect of climatic conditions on the growth of barley. Ann Bot. 1926;40:1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a090007
  17. 17. Arnon DI. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts: polyphenoloxidase in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol. 1949;24:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.24.1.1
  18. 18. Watson DJ. The physiological basis of variation in yield. Adv Agron. 1952;4:101–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60307-7
  19. 19. Ihsanullah, Khalil IA, Taj FH, Khan N. Effect of row planting geometry on growth and yield of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.). Asian J Plant Sci. 2002;1(4):328–30. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2002.328.329
  20. 20. Singh G, Sekhon HS, Sharma P. Effect of sowing methods and varieties on growth, yield and water productivity of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.). J Food Legumes. 2016;29(1):38–42.
  21. 21. Gangwar RK, Singh RK, Kumar S. Effect of varieties on growth, yield and yield attributes of urdbean (Vigna mungo L.). Legume Res. 2012;35(2):137–40.
  22. 22. Evans JR. Photosynthesis and nitrogen relationships in leaves of C3 plants. Oecologia. 1989;78:9–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00377192
  23. 23. Jiotode DJ, Sonune DG, Mohod AR, Parlawar ND, Khawale VS. Effect of weather parameters on kharif green gram (Vigna radiata L.) varieties under different sowing dates. J Agrometeorol. 2017;19(2):143–7.
  24. 24. Dash SR, Rautaray BK. Growth parameters and yield of green gram varieties (Vigna radiata L.) in east and south-east coastal plain of Odisha. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2017;6(10):1517–23. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.610.181
  25. 25. Singh AK, Tripathi PN, Kumar R. Effect of planting geometry on productivity and profitability of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.). Legume Res. 2014;37(5):521–5.
  26. 26. Donald CM, Hamblin J. The biological yield and harvest index of cereals as agronomic and plant breeding criteria. Adv Agron. 1976;28:361–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60559-3
  27. 27. Tehulie NS, Fikadu T, Purba JH. Response of green gram (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) varieties to plant planting geometry under irrigation at Gewane, northeastern Ethiopia. Agro Bali Agric J. 2021;4(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.37637/ab.v0i0.613

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.