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

Nitrogen-driven improvement of biomass yield and forage quality in sustainable year-round fodder systems

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.12587
Submitted
4 November 2025
Published
07-01-2026

Abstract

A consistent supply of nutritious fodder is vital for sustaining livestock productivity and reducing dependence on external feed resources. To bridge the fodder deficit, year-round sustainable fodder production systems with efficient nitrogen management are essential for enhancing biomass yield and forage quality. To address this need, the field experiment was conducted during the rabi (October-February), summer (March-May) and kharif (June-October) season of 2023-24 and 2024-25 at the ZARS, V. C. Farm, Mandya, Karnataka. The primary objective of this research was to identify the most productive cereal-legume cropping system with optimizing nitrogen levels, that enhances quantity and quality of biomass production while reducing the gap between the supply and demand of quality fodder throughout the year. Among cropping systems evaluated, Fodder Oats + Cowpea (3:1) - Fodder Sorghum + Cowpea (3:1) - Fodder Maize + Cowpea (3:1) recorded significantly higher green forage yield (977 q ha-1 year-1), dry matter yield (204 q ha-1 year-1), crude protein yield (28.23 q ha-1 year-1), total carbohydrate yield (150.6 q ha-1 year-1), land equivalent ratio (1.34) and economic profitability (B:C ratio 2.81). Likewise, application of 125 % Recommended Dose of Nitrogen (RDN) significantly increased green forage yield (998 q ha-1 year-1), dry matter yield (214 q ha-1 year-1), crude protein content (14.13 %) and profitability (B:C ratio 2.86). Hence, adopting a diverse fodder cropping system integrated with intercrop cowpea in cereal fodder crops and applying 125 % RDN ensures sustainable year-round fodder production with enhanced yield, nutritive quality and profitability, offering viable strategy for livestock-intensive farming.

References

  1. 1. Roy AK, Agrawal RK, Bhardwaj NR, Mishra AK, Mahanta SK. Revisiting national forage demand and availability scenario. Jhansi, India: ICAR–AICRP on Forage Crops and Utilization; 2019:1-21.
  2. 2. Patel M, Sharma H, Verma R. Perennial fodder systems for year-round livestock feeding. J Sustain Agric. 2021;12(3):214-30.
  3. 3. Anonymous. Annual Report. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, New Delhi; 2023:1-244.
  4. 4. Anonymous. 20th Livestock Census Report. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, New Delhi; 2019:1-162.
  5. 5. Anonymous. Fodder Deficit Estimation Report. National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, Bengaluru, India; 2022.
  6. 6. Manoj KN, Shekara BG, Sridhara S, Jha PK, Prasad PVV. Biomass quantity and quality from different year-round cereal–legume cropping systems as forage or fodder for livestock. Sustainability. 2021;13(16):9414. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169414
  7. 7. Chaudhary DP, Ashwani K, Sapna SM, Srivastava P, Kumar RS. Maize as fodder? An alternative approach. New Delhi: Directorate of Maize Research; 2012:32.
  8. 8. Iqbal A, Iqbal MN, Akbar N, Waseem M, Khan HZ, Abbas RN. Performance of pearl millet forage grown with legumes under different sowing techniques. Custose Agrone Aocio Online. 2013;9:257-69.
  9. 9. Marer SB, Lingaraju BS, Shashidhara GB. Productivity and economics of maize and pigeon pea intercropping under rainfed northern transitional zone of Karnataka. Karnataka J Agric Sci. 2007;20:1-3.
  10. 10. Tamta A, Kumar R, Ram H, Meena RK, Meena VK, Yadav MR, et al. Productivity and profitability of legume–cereal forages under different planting ratios and nitrogen fertilization. Legume Res. 2019;42:102-7.
  11. 11. Reza ZO, Allahdadi I, Mazaheri D, Akbari GA, Jahanzad E, Mirshekari M. Effect of planting proportions and nitrogen fertilizer in intercropping forage sorghum and lima bean. Afr J Agric Res. 2013;8:6488-98.
  12. 12. Ali MA, Khan FH, Ali RS, Afzal Z, Saleem MT, Azeem M. Effect of intercropping pearl millet and cluster bean on forage quality and quantity. J Entomol Zool Stud. 2016;4:397-400.
  13. 13. Sudarshan Reddy A, Palled YB. Effect of intercropped fodder cowpea on maize and system productivity in maize + fodder cowpea intercropping systems. J Farm Sci. 2016;29:265-7.
  14. 14. Singh HN, Kumar MR, Magan S, Rakesh K, Hardev R, Kumar MV, et al. Evaluation of kharif forage crops for biomass production and nutritional parameters in Indo-Gangetic plains. Indian J Anim Nutr. 2019;36:25-9. https://doi.org/10.5958/2231-6744.2019.00004.5
  15. 15. Hindoriya PS, Meena RK, Rakesh K, Singh M, Ram H, Meena VK, et al. Productivity and profitability of cereal–legume forages and their effect on soil nutrients in Indo-Gangetic Plains. Legume Res. 2019;42:812-7. https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-4147
  16. 16. Iqbal M, Iqbal Z, Farooq M, Ali L, Fiaz M. Impact of nitrogen fertilizer on yield and quality of oat. Pak J Sci. 2013;65:1-4.
  17. 17. Horrocks RD, Vallentine JF. Harvested Forages. London: Academic Press; 1999:17-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012356255-5/50024-9
  18. 18. Kumar M, Singh SR, Jha SK, Shamna A, Mazumdar SP, Singh A, et al. System productivity, profitability and resource use efficiency of jute (Corchorus olitorius) based cropping systems in the eastern Indo-Gangetic plain. Indian J Agric Sci. 2014;84:209-13. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v84i2.38033
  19. 19. Gupta R, Mehta A, Yadav L. Sustainable fodder production through cropping systems and soil–water management. Indian J Agric Sci. 2020;90(3):112-20.
  20. 20. Singh AK, Verma S, Choudhary R. Role of legumes in improving soil health and nutrient availability in intercropping systems. Agric Rev. 2019;40(2):159-66.
  21. 21. Shinde VS, Tudu AK, Palai JB, Shankar T, Adhikary R, Mondal T, Nath S. Effect of integrated nutrient management on growth, yield, nutrient uptake and economics of rabi sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench). Int J Environ Clim Change. 2023;13(10):4239-47. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2023/v13i103101
  22. 22. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 10th ed. Washington DC; 2000:744-5.
  23. 23. Gomez AA, Gomez AA. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1984.
  24. 24. Singh P, Kumar A, Das A. Resource use efficiency and nitrogen dynamics in cereal–legume cropping systems. Field Crops Res. 2020;249:107742.
  25. 25. Meena RS, Ghosh PK, Lal R. Sustainable intensification of forage-based cropping systems through legume integration. Agron J. 2022;114(3):1125-38.
  26. 26. Sutar MS, Jadhav PA, Patil RD. Response of forage maize to nitrogen levels and sources on yield and quality parameters. J Crop Weed. 2020;16(3):128-34.
  27. 27. Patel VK, Thakur R, Singh A. Evaluation of cereal–legume fodder intercropping systems under different nitrogen regimes. Grass Forage Sci. 2021;76(2):315-24.
  28. 28. Naik PV, Reddy CN, Shankar R. Influence of intercropping and nitrogen on biomass composition in fodder maize systems. Forage Res. 2023;49(2):76-82.
  29. 29. Kumar S, Singh R, Sharma R. Productivity and quality of cereal–legume forage systems under varying nutrient regimes. Indian J Agron. 2019;64(4):621-7.
  30. 30. Prajapati B, Prajapati J, Kumar K, Shrivastava A. Determination of relationships between quality parameters and yields of fodder obtained from intercropping systems by correlation analysis. Forage Res. 2019;45(3):219-24.
  31. 31. Kar S, Singh M, Kumar P, Kumar R, Makarana G. Evaluation of sugargraze (Sorghum bicolor), fodder maize (Zea mays) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) under different sources of nitrogen. Indian J Agron. 2017;62(2):236-8. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v62i2.4290
  32. 32. Parameshnaik C, Kalyana Murthy KN, Hanumanthappa DC, Seenappa C, Reddy YAN, Prakasha HC. Nitrogen management through nano-fertilizers: plant height, leaf area and related growth parameters of maize. Mysore J Agric Sci. 2024;58(1):211-21.
  33. 33. Tamta S, Yadav RL, Singh A. Effect of intercropping and nitrogen management on green and dry fodder yield in cropping systems. Indian J Agron. 2019;64(3):287-92.
  34. 34. Deore SM, Patel MR, Patel PM, Patel HK, Patel UJ. Production potential of forage maize (Zea mays L.)–cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) intercropping system as influenced by row ratios. Adv Res J Crop Improv. 2013;4(2):110-2.
  35. 35. Zhao J, Yin B, Xie Y, Li J, Yang Z, Zhang G. Legume–cereal intercropping improves forage yield, quality and degradability. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(12):0144813. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144813
  36. 36. El-Karamany MF, Bakry BA, Elewa. Integrated action of mixture rates and nitrogen levels on quantity and quality of forage mixture from Egyptian clover and barley in sandy soil. Agric Sci. 2014;5:1539-46. https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2014.514165
  37. 37. Ginwal DS, Kumar R, Ram H, Meena RK, Kumar U. Quality characteristics and nutrient yields of maize and legume forages under changing intercropping row ratios. Indian J Anim Sci. 2019;89(3):281-6. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v89i3.88079
  38. 38. Liu H, Struik PC, Zhang Y, Jing J, Stomph TJ. Forage quality in cereal/legume intercropping: a meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 2023;304:109174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2023.109174
  39. 39. Yadav K, Verma A, Yadav MK, Choudhary M, Choudhary KM. Effect of fertilizer levels on fodder productivity and quality of multi-cut sorghum genotypes. Int J Bioresour Stress Manag. 2019;10(2):119-23. https://doi.org/10.23910/IJBSM/2019.10.2.1966
  40. 40. Mallikarjun H, Ram H, Kumar R, Meena RK, Ginwal D. Yield and chemical composition of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) fodder as affected by tillage practices and nitrogen management. Indian J Anim Nutr. 2018;35(3):333-8. https://doi.org/10.5958/2231-6744.2018.00050.6
  41. 41. Praveen Kumar MB, Verma R, Hanumanthappa DC, Murthy MM. Fodder grass productivity and silvi-pastoral systems: a study from Southern Dry Zone of Karnataka. Mysore J Agric Sci. 2025;59(1):244-55.
  42. 42. Shekara BG, Chikkarugi NM. Enhancing the productivity and quality of fodder maize (Zea mays L.) through nano-nitrogen under Southern Dry Zone of Karnataka. Mysore J Agric Sci. 2025;58(4):312-19.
  43. 43. Naveen K, Navell C, Sunil K. Production efficiency and profitability of forage-based cropping systems under mid hills of north-western Himalayas. Himachal J Agric Res. 2014;40:126-31.
  44. 44. Jha SK, Tiwari N. Evaluation of intensive fodder cropping systems for year-round green fodder production in Chhattisgarh. Forage Res. 2018;44:115-8.
  45. 45. Anil L, Park J, Phipps RH. The potential of forage–maize intercrops in ruminant nutrition. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2000;85:157-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(00)00176-0
  46. 46. Shekara BG, Mahadevu P, Chikkarugi NM, Manasa N. Green forage yield, nutritional value and economics of fodder oat genotypes as influenced by nitrogen levels. Mysore J Agric Sci. 2022;56(2):339-44.
  47. 47. Sharma P, Singh R, Yadav MK. Effect of maize–legume intercropping on soil fertility, nutrient uptake and productivity. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2020;9(3):2560-71.
  48. 48. Franzluebbers AJ, Stuedemann JA. Pasture and crop residue management to enhance soil–atmosphere carbon exchange in the southeastern USA. Soil Tillage Res. 2014;143:49-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2013.05.009
  49. 49. Sulc RM, Franzluebbers AJ. Exploring integrated crop–livestock systems in different ecoregions of the United States. Eur J Agron. 2014;57:21-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2013.10.007
  50. 50. Paul BK, Groot JCJ, Maass BL, Notenbaert AM, Herrero M, Tittonell P. Improved forage and crop management practices enhance soil organic carbon and reduce erosion in mixed crop–livestock systems of East Africa. Agron Sustain Dev. 2020;40(2):1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-020-00626-3
  51. 51. Thornton PK, Herrero M. Adapting to climate change in the mixed crop and livestock farming systems in sub-Saharan Africa. Nat Clim Change. 2015;5(9):830-6. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2754

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.