IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p5986-d815944.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Crop Establishment Methods and Microbial Inoculations on Augmenting the Energy Efficiency and Nutritional Status of Rice and Wheat in Cropping System Mode

Author

Listed:
  • Amit Anil Shahane

    (Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
    Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture under (CAU, Imphal), Kyrdemkulai, Ri-Bhoi 793 105, India)

  • Yashbir Singh Shivay

    (Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India)

  • Radha Prasanna

    (Division of Microbiology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India)

  • Dinesh Kumar

    (Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India)

  • Ram Swaroop Bana

    (Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India)

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted for two consecutive years with the aim to quantify the role of different nutrient management variables such as microbial inoculation, zinc (Zn) fertilization and optimal and sub-optimal fertilization of nitrogen and phosphorus on the energetic and nutritional status of the rice–wheat cropping system (RWCS). The said nutrient management variables were applied over six different crop establishment methods (CEMs) in RWCS viz. puddled transplanted rice (PTR), system of rice intensification (SRI) and aerobic rice system (ARS) in rice and conventional drill-sown wheat (CDW), system of wheat intensification (SWI) and zero-tillage wheat (ZTW) in wheat. Two microbial consortia viz. Anabaena sp. (CR1) + Providencia sp. (PR3) consortia (MC1) and Anabaena-Pseudomonas biofilmed formulations (MC2) were used in this study, while recommended dose of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) (RDN) (120 kg N ha −1 and 25.8 kg P ha −1 ), 75% RDN and Zn fertilization (soil applied 5 kg Zn ha −1 through zinc sulphate heptahydrate) were the other variables. The contribution of microbial consortia, Zn fertilization and RDN (over 75% RDN) to net energy production of RWCS was 12.9–16.1 × 10 3 MJ ha −1 , 10.1–11.0 × 10 3 MJ ha −1 and 11.7–15.3 × 10 3 MJ ha −1 . Among the CEMs, the highest gross and net energy production was recorded in ARS–ZTW with lowest energy required for production of one tonne of system yield (2366–2523 MJ). The system protein yield varies from 494.1 to 957.7 kg ha −1 with highest protein yield in 75% RDN + MC2 + Zn applied ARS–ZTW. Among micronutrients, the uptake of Zn and iron (Fe) is sensitive to all studied variables, while manganese (Mn) and cupper (Cu) uptake was found significantly affected by CEMs alone. The combination of 75% RDN + MC2 + Zn in ARS–ZTW was found superior in all respects with 288.3 and 286.9 MJ ha −1 net energy production and 2320 and 2473 MJ energy required for production of one tonne system yield in the first and second year of study, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Amit Anil Shahane & Yashbir Singh Shivay & Radha Prasanna & Dinesh Kumar & Ram Swaroop Bana, 2022. "Effect of Crop Establishment Methods and Microbial Inoculations on Augmenting the Energy Efficiency and Nutritional Status of Rice and Wheat in Cropping System Mode," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:5986-:d:815944
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/5986/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/5986/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bouman, B.A.M. & Hengsdijk, H. & Hardy, B. & Bindraban, P.S. & Tuong, T.P. & Ladha, J.K., 2002. "Water-wise Rice Production," IRRI Books, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), number 281822.
    2. Alwin Keil & Alwin D’souza & Andrew McDonald, 2017. "Zero-tillage is a proven technology for sustainable wheat intensification in the Eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains: what determines farmer awareness and adoption?," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(4), pages 723-743, August.
    3. Anonymous, 2013. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 243-243, December.
    4. Anonymous, 2013. "Introduction to the Issue," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 129-130, November.
    5. Parihar, C.M. & Jat, S.L. & Singh, A.K. & Majumdar, K. & Jat, M.L. & Saharawat, Y.S. & Pradhan, S. & Kuri, B.R., 2017. "Bio-energy, water-use efficiency and economics of maize-wheat-mungbean system under precision-conservation agriculture in semi-arid agro-ecosystem," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 245-256.
    6. Dobermann, A., 2004. "A critical assessment of the system of rice intensification (SRI)," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 261-281, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ranjana Raghunathan, 2022. "Everyday Intimacies and Inter-Ethnic Relationships: Tracing Entanglements of Gender and Race in Multicultural Singapore," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 27(1), pages 77-94, March.
    2. Songsore, Emmanuel & Buzzelli, Michael, 2014. "Social responses to wind energy development in Ontario: The influence of health risk perceptions and associated concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 285-296.
    3. Tapsuwan, Sorada & Polyakov, Maksym & Bark, Rosalind & Nolan, Martin, 2015. "Valuing the Barmah–Millewa Forest and in stream river flows: A spatial heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent (SHAC) approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 98-105.
    4. Bertschek, Irene & Kesler, Reinhold, 2022. "Let the user speak: Is feedback on Facebook a source of firms’ innovation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Gigi Foster, 2020. "The behavioural economics of government responses to COVID-19," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S3), pages 11-43, December.
    6. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.
    7. Audoly, Richard & Vogt-Schilb, Adrien & Guivarch, Céline & Pfeiffer, Alexander, 2018. "Pathways toward zero-carbon electricity required for climate stabilization," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 884-901.
    8. Gerards, Ruud & Welters, Ricardo, 2016. "Impact of financial pressure on unemployed job search, job find success and job quality," ROA Research Memorandum 008, Maastricht University, Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market (ROA).
    9. Vasile-Daniel Păvăloaia & Elena-Mădălina Teodor & Doina Fotache & Magdalena Danileţ, 2019. "Opinion Mining on Social Media Data: Sentiment Analysis of User Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-21, August.
    10. Cailong Xu & Ruidong Li & Wenwen Song & Tingting Wu & Shi Sun & Shuixiu Hu & Tianfu Han & Cunxiang Wu, 2021. "Responses of Branch Number and Yield Component of Soybean Cultivars Tested in Different Planting Densities," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, January.
    11. Caitlin Robinson & Stefan Bouzarovski & Sarah Lindley, 2018. "Underrepresenting neighbourhood vulnerabilities? The measurement of fuel poverty in England," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(5), pages 1109-1127, August.
    12. Michaela Haase & Emmanuel Raufflet, 2017. "Ideologies in Markets, Organizations, and Business Ethics: Drafting a Map: Introduction to the Special Issue," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(4), pages 629-639, June.
    13. Rafael Alcadipani & Cíntia Rodrigues Oliveira Medeiros, 2020. "When Corporations Cause Harm: A Critical View of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Corporate Crimes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(2), pages 285-297, November.
    14. Mansoora Ahmed & Sun Zehou & Syed Ali Raza & Muhammad Asif Qureshi & Sara Qamar Yousufi, 2020. "Impact of CSR and environmental triggers on employee green behavior: The mediating effect of employee well‐being," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5), pages 2225-2239, September.
    15. Licsandru, Tana Cristina & Cui, Charles Chi, 2018. "Subjective social inclusion: A conceptual critique for socially inclusive marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 330-339.
    16. Giger, Markus & Mutea, Emily & Kiteme, Boniface & Eckert, Sandra & Anseeuw, Ward & Zaehringer, Julie G., 2020. "Large agricultural investments in Kenya’s Nanyuki Area: Inventory and analysis of business models," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    17. Alex Bryson & Christine Erhel & Zinaïda Salibekyan, 2017. "The Effects of Firm Size on Job Quality: A Comparative Study for Britain and France," DoQSS Working Papers 17-08, Quantitative Social Science - UCL Social Research Institute, University College London.
    18. Carnes, Christina Matz & Gilstrap, Frank E. & Hitt, Michael A. & Ireland, R. Duane & Matz, Jack W. & Woodman, Richard W., 2019. "Transforming a traditional research organization through public entrepreneurship," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 437-449.
    19. Tajvidi, Mina & Richard, Marie-Odile & Wang, YiChuan & Hajli, Nick, 2020. "Brand co-creation through social commerce information sharing: The role of social media," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 476-486.
    20. Margherita, Alessandro & Elia, Gianluca & Klein, Mark, 2021. "Managing the COVID-19 emergency: A coordination framework to enhance response practices and actions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:5986-:d:815944. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.