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

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp9 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Productive, profitable and energy-efficient Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. based vegetable intercropping system under Northern Telangana zone

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.15607
Submitted
18 May 2026
Published
05-11-2026

Abstract

Brassica juncea (L.) Czern. based intercropping systems offer considerable scope for improving productivity, profitability and resource-use efficiency (RUE) under sustainable agricultural production systems. An experiment was conducted in rabi season 2022 at the Agricultural Research Station, Adilabad, Telangana to test the efficiency of intercropping different vegetables in mustard with different row ratios. A total of 13 treatments comprising sole crops such as mustard, sole root vegetables (radish, beetroot, carrot and potato) and their combination under 2 : 2 and 3 : 3 row ratios were considered in the randomised block design (RBD) of the experiment. It was found that the highest total economic yield (24212 kg ha-1), mustard equivalent yield (5775 kg ha-1), gross returns (₹338968 ha-1), net returns (₹264526 ha-1) and benefit-cost ratio (B : C) ratio (4.55) were obtained from the monocropping of radish. While among intercropping combinations, mustard with radish under 3 : 3 row ratio yielded the highest total economic yield (13515 kg ha-1), mustard equivalent yield (3964 kg ha-1), mustard oil yield (351 kg ha-1), gross returns (₹216033 ha-1), net returns (₹160966) and B : C ratio (3.92). These results were statistically comparable with mustard with radish at ratio 2 : 2. An energetic efficiency analysis concluded that the performance of the mustard with radish (3 : 3 and 2 : 2) was favourable with respect to high energy productivity (0.60 and 0.61 kg MJ-1) and low specific energy (1.66 and 1.63 MJ kg-1) among the intercropping methods. Therefore, mustard intercropping with radish at 3 : 3 and 2 : 2 row ratios could be considered the most beneficial and lucrative intercropping method in northern Telangana. Further multi-season and multi-location studies are required to validate the findings before making broader recommendations.

References

  1. 1. Birthal PS. Towards sustainable transformation of agri-food system in India: challenges and policy imperatives. Agric Econ Res Rev. 2025;38(1):7–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/09713441251389677
  2. 2. Foley JA, Ramankutty N, Brauman KA, Cassidy ES, Gerber JS, Johnston M, et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature. 2011;478(7369):337–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10452
  3. 3. Bhattacharyya R, Ghosh BN, Mishra PK, Mandal B, Rao CS, Sarkar D, et al. Soil degradation in India: challenges and potential solutions. Sustainability. 2015;7(4):3528–70. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7043528
  4. 4. Lithourgidis AS, Dordas CA, Damalas CA, Vlachostergios DN. Annual intercrops: an alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture. Aust J Crop Sci. 2011;5(4):396–410.
  5. 5. ICAR-Directorate of Rapeseed-Mustard Research. Vision 2050. Bharatpur: ICAR-Directorate of Rapeseed-Mustard Research; 2015.
  6. 6. Kumar V, Sharma AK, Yogi RK, Singh VV. Rapeseed-mustard cultivation in India: national overview and regional insights with reference to Madhya Pradesh. J Oilseeds Brassica. 2025;16(2):149–57. https://doi.org/10.56093/job.v16i2.172304
  7. 7. United States Department of Agriculture. Oilseeds: world markets and trade. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture; 2023.
  8. 8. Madhukar P, Rao PM, Srikanth T, Thirupathi I, Reddy KM, Karthik D, et al. Impact analysis of front-line demonstrations on mustard crop in northern zone of Telangana, India. Plant Arch. 2025;25(2):260912. https://doi.org/10.51470/PLANTARCHIVES.2025.v25.supplement-2.331
  9. 9. Rhaman MS, Awal MA, Shelley IJ. Interception and use of solar radiation in mustard/grass pea intercropping. Int J Plant Soil Sci. 2016;12(6):1–3. https://doi.org/10.9734/IJPSS/2016/27936
  10. 10. Brooker RW, Bennett AE, Cong WF, Daniell TJ, George TS, Hallett PD, et al. Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. New Phytol. 2015;206(1):107–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13132
  11. 11. Li C, Hoffland E, Kuyper TW, Yu Y, Zhang C, Li H, et al. Syndromes of production in intercropping impact yield gains. Nat Plants. 2020;6(6):653–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-020-0680-9
  12. 12. Martin-Guay MO, Paquette A, Dupras J, Rivest D. The new green revolution: sustainable intensification of agriculture by intercropping. Sci Total Environ. 2018;615:767–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.024
  13. 13. Ramakrishna K, Kumari CP, Chauhan S, Prakash TR. Growth and yield attributes of mustard as influenced by mustard-based vegetable intercropping systems. Int J Environ Clim Change. 2023;13(10):3340–6. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2023/v13i103002
  14. 14. Singh RJ, Pande KK, Sachan VK, Singh NK, Sahu RP, Singh MP. Productivity, profitability and energy consumption of potato-based intercropping systems. Int J Veg Sci. 2016;22(2):190–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/19315260.2014.1003632
  15. 15. Shao Z, Hu S, Fan C, Meng Z, Yan X, Ji W, et al. Optimizing row ratio configurations for enhanced productivity and resource-use efficiency in maize-alfalfa intercropping. Plants. 2025;14(24):3846. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14243846
  16. 16. Mucheru-Muna M, Pypers P, Mugendi D, Kung'u J, Mugwe J, Merckx R, et al. Staggered maize-legume intercrop arrangement robustly increases crop yields and economic returns in the highlands of Central Kenya. Field Crops Res. 2010;115(2):132–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2009.10.013
  17. 17. Shyamsunder B, Menon DS, Walia DU, Prasanna T, Raju GS, Nawabpet P. Effect of intercropping wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with mustard (Brassica juncea) on yield and economics under organic system of cultivation. Int J Environ Agric Biotechnol. 2024;9(2):218–23. https://doi.org/10.22161/ijeab.92.24
  18. 18. Pretty J, Benton TG, Bharucha ZP, Dicks LV, Flora CB, Godfray HC, et al. Global assessment of agricultural system redesign for sustainable intensification. Nat Sustain. 2018;1(8):441–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0114-0
  19. 19. Mandal KG, Saha KP, Ghosh PK, Hati KM, Bandyopadhyay KK. Bioenergy and economic analysis of soybean-based crop production systems in central India. Biomass Bioenergy. 2002;23(5):337–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(02)00058-2
  20. 20. Biswas S, Das R, Jana K, Puste A. Integrated nutrient management on oat+grasspea intercropping system: an evaluation of system productivity, economics, energetics and carbon footprint. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):19414. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-66107-9
  21. 21. Piper CS. Soil and plant analysis. New York: International Science Publisher; 1966. p. 47–9.
  22. 22. Jackson ML. Soil chemical analysis. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited; 1973. p. 400–3.
  23. 23. Walkley A, Black IA. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Sci. 1934;37(1):29–38. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003
  24. 24. Subbiah BV, Asija GL. A rapid procedure for the estimation of available nitrogen in soils. Curr Sci. 1956;25(8):259–60.
  25. 25. Olsen SR, Cole CV, Watanabe FS, Dean LA. Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture; 1954. USDA Circular 939.
  26. 26. Muhr GR. Soil testing in India. New Delhi: US Agency for International Development, Mission to India; 1963.
  27. 27. Tiwari PN, Gambhir PN, Rajan TS. Rapid and nondestructive determination of seed oil by pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance technique. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 1974;51(3):104–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00000023
  28. 28. Singh T, Rana KS, Satapathy BS. Productivity, compatibility and economics of mustard (Brassica juncea) and lentil (Lens esculenta) intercropping system as influenced by moisture conservation practices and fertility levels under rainfed conditions. Indian J Agric Sci. 2014;84(6):770–3. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v84i6.41486
  29. 29. Ramakrishna K, Pragathi Kumari C, Chauhan S, Ram Prakash T, Inuganti K, Vijay Kumar S, et al. Evaluation of intercropping indices in mustard-based vegetable intercropping systems. Plant Arch. 2026;26(1):2208–12. https://doi.org/10.51470/PLANTARCHIVES.2026.v26.no.1.305
  30. 30. Tripathy S, Meena SL, Dhar S, Paul S, Singh S. Effect of row ratios and organic nutrient management on productivity and economics of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) + chickpea (Cicer arietinum) intercropping system. Indian J Agric Sci. 2023;93(10):1067–72. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijas.v93i10.140083
  31. 31. Ramarao, Chandranath HT, Babalad HB, Hegde Y. Growth, yield and oil quality of mustard in chickpea (Cicer arietinum) and mustard (Brassica juncea L.) intercropping system under different row ratio in northern transition zone of Karnataka. Indian J Agric Res. 2020;54(3):322–8. https://doi.org/10.18805/IJARe.A-5453
  32. 32. Hosseinifarahi M, Abdipour M, Keladary A, Rashidi L. Evaluation of some morphological traits, essential oil content and land equivalent ratio in different intercropping patterns of mustard (Brassica nigra L.) with lavender (Lavandula angustifolia L.). Iran J Hortic Sci Technol. 2021;22(3):227–42.
  33. 33. Kaur M, Sardana V, Sharma P. Impact of intercropping of canola oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and Ethiopian mustard (Brassica carinata) with Indian rape (Brassica rapa var. toria) on productivity, economics and competitive indices. J Oilseeds Res. 2016;33(1):26–32. https://doi.org/10.56739/jor.v33i1.139035
  34. 34. Kumawat R, Shivran AC, Bijarnia A, Yadav BD, Choudhary HS. Yield, nutrient concentration, uptake and quality of mustard (Brassica juncea) and lentil (Lens esculenta) intercropping system influenced by different fertility levels. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2020;9:777–80.
  35. 35. Favacho FS, Lima JSS, Bezerra F, Silva JN, Barros AP. Productive and economic efficiency of carrot intercropped with cowpea-vegetable resulting from green manure and different spatial arrangements. Rev Cienc Agron. 2017;48:337–46. https://doi.org/10.5935/1806-6690.20170039
  36. 36. Kumar P, Siddiqui MZ, Prajapati SK, Singh S, Kumar A, Rawat DK. Study of the most suitable combination of intercropping systems of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) with chickpea, lentil, linseed and field pea. Int J Environ Clim Change. 2023;13(11):3777–89. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2023/v13i113557
  37. 37. Choudhary SK, Singh RN, Upadhyay PK, Singh RK, Choudhary HR, Vijay P. Effect of vegetable intercrops and planting pattern of maize on growth, yield and economics of winter maize (Zea mays L.) in Eastern Uttar Pradesh. Environ Ecol. 2014;32(1):101–5.
  38. 38. Singh UK, Gangwar B, Srivastava H. Effect of mustard based intercropping systems on yield and profitability under organic management in Bundelkhand region. Indian J Ecol. 2023;50(3):627–30.
  39. 39. Meena LR, Kumar D, Meena SR, Kochewad SA, Meena AK. Energy budgeting of different cropping sequences in the Indian Upper Gangetic Plains. Indian J Agric Res. 2024;58(Special Issue):1053–62. https://doi.org/10.18805/IJARe.A-6320
  40. 40. Sahoo DC, Muralidharan P. Energy budgeting of different land management practices under common vegetable crops in the Nilgiris of South India. Indian J Soil Conserv. 2017;45(2):130–5.
  41. 41. Monshi MH, Mouri MH, Mim MR, Hossain S, Alom J, Hossain MS. Productivity and profitability analysis of cauliflower as sole and intercropping with red amaranth and radish leafy vegetable. Trop Agric Res Ext. 2023;26(4):303–17. https://doi.org/10.4038/tare.v26i4.5686

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.