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

Biometric and yield response of redgram (Cajanus cajan (L.)) under strip intercropping and land configurations in a rain-fed environment

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.7189
Submitted
12 January 2025
Published
21-04-2025 — Updated on 27-04-2026
Versions

Abstract

Strip intercropping is practiced for efficient resource utilization, mechanization and increased productivity per unit area. In India, no studies have evaluated the suitability of strip intercropping system for redgram. The growth and yield performance of redgram with different component crops in strip intercropping remains unknown. To address this knowledge gap, field experimentation was conducted at Institute of Agriculture, TNAU, Kumulur during 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 using split plot design to explore the redgram-based strip intercropping system and land configurations under rain-fed condition. In this, 3 land configurations and 7 strip intercropping systems were kept as main plot and sub plot treatments with 3 reproductions. On average, strips of blackgram (S1), greengram (S2) and groundnut (S4) intercropped redgram produced higher plant height (32%), leaf area index (8.7%) and dry matter production (138%) over redgram intercropped with cotton strips (S6). Growth functions viz., relative growth rate (RGR), crop growth rate (CGR) and biomass duration (BMD) of redgram were increased in average of 94%, 67% and 42.5% respectively in treatments S1, S2 and S4 over pure redgram (S7). Grain yield of redgram was increased as on average 621 kg/ha in S1,S2 and S4 treatments over redgram yield (286 kg/ha) in S6. S6 gave higher crop equivalent yield (CEY) of 954 kg/ha and 975 kg/ha during 2020-21 and 2021-22 respectively. In 2023-24, S2 produced higher CEY of 1054 kg/ha. From AMMI, it was observed that redgram with blackgram/greengram strip intercropping under compartmental bunding was more stable than any other system.

References

  1. 1. Sarkar S, Panda S, Yadav KK, Kandasamy P. Pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) an important food legume in Indian scenario-A review. LR-An Int J. 2020;43(5):601?10. https://10.18805/LR-4021
  2. 2. Kakade SU, Deshmukh JP, Parlawar ND, Goud VV. Response of split application of nutrients through fertigation in pigeonpea. LR-An Int J. 2023;46(6):713?20. https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-4410
  3. 3. Loganathan V, Latha KR. Effect of drip fertigation on nutrient uptake and seed yield of pigeonpea [Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.] under western agroclimatic zones of Tamil Nadu. Legume Res-An Intern J. 2016;39(5):780?85. https://doi.org/10.18805/lr.v0iOF.9487
  4. 4. Andrews DJ. Intercropping with sorghum in Nigeria. Exp Agric. 1972;8(2):139?50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S001447970000510X
  5. 5. Saxena KB. A resilient crop for the Philippine drylands. Intern Crops Res Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics; 2010. Available from: http://oar.icrisat.org/id/eprint/3557
  6. 6. Rao MR, Ong CK, Pathak P, Sharma MM. Productivity of annual cropping and agroforestry systems on a shallow Alfisol in semi-arid India. Agrofor Syst. 1991;15:51?63. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00046278
  7. 7. Sajjan AS. Response of redgram cultivars to transplanting and planting geometry under rainfed conditions of Northern dry zone of Karnataka. Indian J Agric Res. 2018;52(5):518?23. https://doi.org/10.18805/IJARe.A-5007
  8. 8. Yu Y, Stomph TJ, Makowski D, van Der Werf W. Temporal niche differentiation increases the land equivalent ratio of annual intercrops: a meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 2015;184:133?44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2015.09.010
  9. 9. Asmamaw DK. A critical review of the water balance and agronomic effects of conservation tillage under rain-fed agriculture in Ethiopia. Land Degrad Dev. 2017;28(3):843?55. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.2587
  10. 10. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University. Crop production guide. Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India; 2020 Available from: https://agritech.tnau.ac.in/pdf/AGRICULTURE.pdf
  11. 11. Hughes G, Keatinge JD, Scott SP. Pigeon pea as a dry season crop in Trinidad, West Indies, 2: Interception and utilization of solar radiation [Cajanus cajan]. Trop Agric (Trinidad and Tobago). 1981;58(3):191–99. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19810723818
  12. 12. Enyi BA. Comparative growth-rates of upland and swamp rice varieties. Ann Bot. 1962:467?87. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083807
  13. 13. Watson DJ. The dependence of net assimilation rate on leaf-area index. Ann Bot. 1958;22(1):37?54. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083596
  14. 14. Hozumi K. Biomass duration in growth models. J Plant Res. 1989;102:75?83. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02488114
  15. 15. Verma SP, Modgal SC. Production potential and economics of fertilizer application as resource constraint in maize-wheat crop sequence. Himachal J Agric Res. 1983;9(2):89?92. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19840767094
  16. 16. Willey RW, Osiru DS. Studies on mixtures of maize and beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with reference to plant population. J Agric Sci. 1972;79(3):517?29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600025909
  17. 17. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research. John Wiley and Sons; 1984 Available from: https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNAAR208.pdf
  18. 18. Gabriel KR. The biplot graphic display of matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika. 1971;58(3):453?67. https://doi.org/10.2307/2334381
  19. 19. Yan W, Kang MS, Ma B, Woods S, Cornelius PL. GGE biplot vs. AMMI analysis of genotype-by-environment data. Crop Sci. 2007;47(2):643?53. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2006.06.0374
  20. 20. Yan W, Hunt LA, Sheng Q, Szlavnics Z. Cultivar evaluation and mega-environment investigation based on the GGE biplot. Crop Sci. 2000;40(3):597?605. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.403597x
  21. 21. Deshmukh SP, Patel JG. Influence of non-monetary and lowcost input in sustainable summer pearlmillet (PennisetumGlaucum L.) production. Int J of Agric and Food Sci Tec. 2013;4(6):579?88.
  22. 22. Karimvand PN, Nejad TS, Shokohfar AR. The effects of basin, ridge and furrow planting methods on yield components of cowpeas at different irrigation levels. Int J of Agric and Crop Sci. 2013;6(20):1407?12. http://ijagcs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/1407-1412.pdf
  23. 23. Ambika V, Yadahalli GS, Chittapur BM, Kulkarni S, Yadahalli VG, Malakannavar S. Influence of land configurations and nutrient levels on growth, yield and economics of Bt cotton. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2017;6(12):3095?102. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.612.361
  24. 24. Bhople K, Kubde KJ, Tijare B, Gaikwad G. Impact of land configurations and nutrient levels on growth and yield of sunflower under rainfed condition. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2018;7(1):363?68. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.701.041
  25. 25. Kumar S, Singh RC, Kadian VS. Production potential of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) and greengram (Phaseolus radiatus) intercropping patterns in semi-arid tract of Haryana. Indian J Agron. 2003;48(4):48?54. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v48i4.3092
  26. 26. Patil BH, Pongde SM, Suryapujary SM, Chorey AB. Effect of mulching and land configuration on moisture use, moisture use efficiency and yield of soybean (Glycine max L.). Asian Sci. 2010;5(1):1?4.
  27. 27. Mehrpooyan M, Faramarzi A, Jafari A, Siami K. The effects of ridge and furrow planting and basin planting on two beans cultivars in three different planting dates. J Iran Legumes Res. 2010;1(1):9?17.
  28. 28. Hadvani RG. Effect of different methods of sowing and levels of sulphur on growth and yield of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). [MSc Thesis]. Gujarat: N M College of Agriculture, Gujarat Agricultural University, Gujarat, India; 1990
  29. 29. Somasundaram E, Ali AJ, Manoharan ML, Arokiaraj A. Response of crops to different land-management practices under sodic soil conditions. Indian J Agron. 2000;45(1):92?96. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20013105188
  30. 30. Parihar CM, Rana KS, Kantwa SR. Nutrient management in pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)-mustard (Brassica juncea) cropping system as affected by land configuration under limited irrigation. Indian J Agron. 2010;55(3):191?96. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v55i3.4750
  31. 31. Nejad TS. Effect of drought stress on stomata resistance changes in corn. J American Sci. 2011;7(9):27?31.
  32. 32. Yadav AK. Effect of tillage and integrated nutrient management on sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) productivity. [MSc Agri. Thesis]. Udaipur: Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India; 2010
  33. 33. Kumar A. Growth, yield and water use efficiency of different maize (Zea mays)-based cropping systems under varying planting methods and irrigation levels. Indian J Agric sci. 2008;78(3):244?47.
  34. 34. Yavuz D, K?l?ç E, Seymen M, Dal Y, Kayak N, Kal Ü, Yavuz N. The effect of irrigation water salinity on the morph-physiological and biochemical properties of spinach under deficit irrigation conditions. Sci Hortic. 2022;304:111272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2022.111272
  35. 35. Shivran DR. Effect of cropping systems and fertilizers on pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) in pigeon pea-wheat sequence. Indian J Agron. 2000;45(4):669?75. https://doi.org/10.59797/ija.v45i4.3428
  36. 36. Daisy M. Effect of annual legume forage intercrops on productivity of Bt cotton (G. hirsutum L.) with different fertilizer levels. [PhD Thesis]. Coimbatore: Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India; 2017
  37. 37. Srichandan S, Mangaraj AK. Growth, yield and yield attributes of pigeon pea in rainfed uplands of western central table land zone of Odisha. Int J Res. 2015;10.
  38. 38. Soniya T. Evaluation of different crops and intercropping systems alternate to cotton in rainfed alfisols. [MSc Agri. Thesis]. Hyderabad: Acharya NG Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad; 2014
  39. 39. Verdelli D, Acciaresi HA, Leguizamón ES. Corn and soybeans in a strip intercropping system: crop growth rates, radiation interception and grain yield components. Int J Agron. 2012;2012(1):980284. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/980284
  40. 40. Malik JK, Singh R, Thenua OV, Kumar A. Response of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan)+ mungbean (Phaseolus radiatus) intercropping system to phosphorus and biofertilizers. LR-An Int J. 2013;36(4):323?30.
  41. 41. Chaudhary SK, Thakur SK. Productivity of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajanus)-based intercrops. The Indian J Agric Sci. https://doi.org/2005;75(8): 496–97.
  42. 42. Singh RA, Singh AK. Comparative performance of different intercropping systems with pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) under rainfed conditions of the Vindhyan region. Indian J Agron. 1994;39(4):613?14. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/19950707831
  43. 43. Prasad K, Yadav CB. Intercropping studies of pigeon pea and soybean with varying phosphorus doses under rainfed conditions of central Uttar Pradesh. Crop Res-Hisar. 2001;21(3):290?94. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20013096632
  44. 44. Rathod P. Intercropping studies in pigeon pea with short duration pulses and oilseeds. [MSc Agri. Thesis]. Dharwad: University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka, India; 2002
  45. 45. Prakash V, Kundu S, Srivastava AK. Production potential and monetary returns of pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) + groundnut (Arachis hypogacea) intercropping under rainfed conditions in mid-hills of North-western Himalayas. The Indian J Agric Sci. 2005;75(12):797–99. https://epubs.icar.org.in/index.php/IJAgS/article/view/9313
  46. 46. Dudhade DD, Deshmukh GP, Harer PN, Patil JV. Studies on intercropping of pulse crops with pigeonpea under rainfed condition. Legume Res-An Int J. 2009;32(3):215?17.
  47. 47. Prakash OP, Bhushan LS. Productivity and economics of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) and castor (Ricinus communis) based intercropping systems. Indian J of Soil Cons. 2000;28(2):147?50. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20013101000
  48. 48. Patil S. Response of rabi sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) to tillage, moisture conservation practices, organics and nitrogen in vertisols of semi-arid tropics. [PhD Agri. thesis]. Dharwad: University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, Karnataka; 1998
  49. 49. Murphy SE, Lee EA, Woodrow L, Seguin P, Kumar J, Rajcan I, Ablett GR. Genotype× environment interaction and stability for isoflavone content in soybean. Crop Sci. 2009;49(4):1313?21. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2008.0
  50. 50. Katyal JC. Moisture conservation structures in rainfed farming. Rainfed Agric Res Newsletter. 1992;1:15?20.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.