Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Katihar
Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur

Achievements of OFTS 2015-16

OFT-1

OFT Agronomy

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Agronomy

2.

Title

 Assessment of the   sowing time of rabi hybrid maize in Katihar District.

3.

Micro farming situation

Medium irrigated Land

4.

Production system

Rice-Wheat/Maize

5

Thematic area

Integrated crop management

6.

Problem

Sowing of  rabi maize in mid of October resulting grain setting problem

7.

Potential solution

In view of above Problem for getting good grain setting, the time of rabi maize sowing should be changed

8.

Source of technology

R.A.U, Pusa.

9.

Technology option

1.      Farmers practice (sowing of rabi maize between 15-25 October)

2.      Sowing of rabi maize in between  30 October to 5 November

3.      Sowing of rabi maize in between  10 - 15 November

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmers

8

12.

Critical input

Seed

13.

Perform indicator

Technical observations

No. of cob / plant, No of garins /cob, Grains Yeild

Economic Indicator

Gross return, Net return, BC ratio

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

Table:-1 Physico-chemical properties of experimental soil

Experimental Soil

Available nutrients (Kg ha-1)

N

P

K

Initial

202.5

28.4

186

Final

186.0

26.3

195

 

Table:-2 Yield and economics of maize under different treatments

Technology option

No. of trials

No. of grains per Cob

Yield

(q/ha)

Gross Cost (Rs/ha)

Gross return (Rs/ha)

Net return(Rs./ha)

BC ratio

TO1

8

122

68.70

28900

68700

39900

2.44

TO2

8

136

73.25

28200

73250

44850

2.59

TO3

8

141

74.79

28200

74790

46650

2.65

 

Result:-

Maxium yield 74.75 q/ha, net return Rs 46650/ha and B:C ration 2.65 was obtained when rabi maize was sown in between 10 to 15 Nov as comparision in to farmer practice ( sowing in between 15 to 25 oct) and sowing of rabi maize in between 30 oct to 05 Nov.

Recommendation:-

 Sowing of Rabi Maize from 10 to15 November gives the highest yield 74.79q/ha with a net return of Rs 46650/ha and  B: C ratio 2.65 in comparision than sowing of Rabi maize on 30 October to 05 November and 15 to 25 October.Thus Sowing of Rabi Maize in between 10 to 15 Nov. is beneficial for farmers .

OFT (Agronomy)

 

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Agronomy

2.

Title

 Assessment of wheat varieties in Katihar Districtin timely sown condition

3.

Micro farming situation

Medium to Low land

4.

Production system

Rice-Wheat/Maize

5

Thematic area

Integrated crop management

6.

Problem

Wheat is the major crop of Katihar district, but farmers were unaware about the recently developed varieties and they are dependent upon old varieties which results in low net return from the crop.

7.

Potential solution

Assessment of suitable varieties is the potential solution for getting higher net return from the wheat crop

8.

Source of technology

IARI,New Delhi

9.

Technology option

1. Farmers Practice(PBW 343 )

2 . HD – 2733

3.  HD- 2824

4. HD - 2967

5. HI -  1544

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmers

10

12.

Critical input

Seed

13.

Perform indicator

Observations Grain yield (q/ha),Gross return (Rs./ha), Net return (Rs./ha), B:C ratio

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

Table 1: Physico-chemical properties of experimental soil

Experimental Soil

Available nutrients (Kg ha-1)

N

P

K

Initial

182.6

37.0

133.8

Final

166.4

26.4

187.5

 

Table:-2 Yield and economics of timely sown wheat under different treatments

Technology options

Yield (q/ha)

Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha)

Gross return (Rs/ha)

Net return

(Rs./ha)

BC ratio

Farmer Practices (PBW 343)

38.76

17500

42636

21260

2.43

HD-2733

42.35

18500

46585

28850

2.51

HD- 2824

41.44

18500

45584

27084

2.46

HD- 2967

40.83

18500

44913

26413

2.42

HI -  1544

40.16

18500

44176

25676

2.35

 

 Result:- Among  five different varieties i.e. PBW 343, HD2733, HD2824 and HI 1544, maxium grain yield (42.35q/ha), net return (Rs 28,850/ha), and B:C ratio (2.57)was obtained in HD2733.

Recommendation:-

wheat varieties HD-2733 yield higher  (42.35 q/ha),  along with higher net return (Rs28850 ) and B:C Ratio (2.51) than other newly released varieties i.e. HD2567, HD2824 and HI 1544 and farmers variety PBW-343. Thus sowing of HD- 2733 is more economical for farmers of Katihar.

ON FARM TRIAL (Agronomy)

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Agronomy

2.

Title

Integrated weed management in Jute

3.

Micro farming situation

Medium to Low land

4.

Production system

Rice-Wheat

5

Thematic area

Weed management

6.

Problem

Jute crop is heavily infested with common weeds during the crop growth period resulting in to poor crop growth and loss in yield of crop.

7.

Potential solution

The integrated method of weed management practices through chemical and mechanical ways helps in reducing weed population and also reduces cost of cultivation.

8.

Source of technology

CRIJAF, Kolkata

9.

Technology option

1 Farmers Practice (Hand weeding at  30 DAS)

2  Hand weeding at 15 and 35 DAS

3 Pretilachlore @ 0.9 kg a.i./ha as pre emergence

4 Quizalofop ethyl @60 gm a.i /ha at 25 DAS

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmers

10

12.

Critical input

Seed, Weedicide

13.

Perform indicator

Technical observations

Crop: Plant height, Basal diameter, Green weight of Plant, Weed biomass, fibre  yield

Economic Indicator

Gross return, Net return, BC ratio

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

                            

Table 1: Yeild attributes and yield of Jute (Corchorous olitorius) as influences by different treatments

Treatments

Fibre Yield (q/ha)

Green weight of Plant (qt/ha)

Basal diameter

(cm)

Plant Height (Cm)

TO1

23.72

259.17

1.49

268

TO2

28.84

303.28

1.86

256

TO3

26.15

252.87

1.71

272

TO4

27.27

280.16

1.82

285

 

Table 2:Weed biomass (q/ha) of Jute (Corchorous olitorius) as influences by different treatments

Treatments

15 DAS

35DAS

TO1

2.48

3.24

TO2

2.41

2.10

TO3

1.07

2.94

TO4

2.22

2.42

 

Table 3: Economics of Jute (Corchorous olitorius) as influences by different treatments

Treatments

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross income

(Rs/ha)

Net Income

(Rs/ha)

B:C ratio

TO1

26800

52184

25384

1.94

TO2

31300

63448

32148

2.03

TO3

27250

57530

30280

2.11

TO4

27500

59994

32494

2.18

 

Result: Maximum fibre  yield (28.84 q/ha), Green Weight(303.28 q/ha), Basal Diameter (1.86 Cm), Plant Height(296 Cm), was reported in hand weeding at 15  and 35 days after sowing but higher net return (Rs 32494/ha) and B:C ratio (2.18) was observed after application of  quizalfop ethyl @ 60 gm a.i./ha at 25 DAS.

Recommendation:-

Application of quizalop ethyl @ 60 gm a.i./ha at 25 days after sowing is the better means of weed management as it gives higher net return (Rs 32434/ha) and B:C ratio (2.18)

 

OFT (Agronomy)

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Agronomy

2.

Title

 To assess the performance of late sown wheat variety under irrigated medium land condition.

3.

Micro farming situation

Medium to Low land

4.

Production system

Rice-Wheat/Maize

5

Thematic area

Crop Production

6.

Problem

 Farmers of Katihar district were unaware about best suited variety of wheat under late sown condition which results in low productivity of wheat.

7.

Potential solution

In the view of above problem selection and culviation of proper/ suitable varities of prime importance.

8.

Source of technology

IARI, Pusa, New Delhi

9.

Technology option

TO1  =    Farmers practice (Local Wheat seed)

 TO2  =   HW- 2045

TO3  =    HI- 1563

TO4  =    HD- 2985

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmer

07

12.

Critical input

Seed

13.

Perform indicator

Yield(q/ha)

Cost of cultivation(Rs/ha)

Gross return(Rs/ha)

Net return(Rs/ha)

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

Table 1:Physico-chemical properties of experimental soil

Experimental Soil

Available nutrients (Kg ha-1)

N

P

K

Initial

188.4

32.6

172.0

Final

172.0

28.3

203.0

 

Table 2:Effect of late sown wheat variety under irrigated medium land condition

Technology option

Yield (q/ha)

Cost of cultivation(Rs./ha)

Gross return (Rs/ha)

Net return (Rs./ha)

BC ratio

 
 

Farmers practice

26.31

16300

28941

12641

1.78

 

HW- 2045

31.79

17100

34569

17869

2.04

 

HI- 1563

33.82

17100

37202

20102

2.18

 

HD- 2985

32.63

17100

35893

18793

2.04

 

 

RESULT:-

                The On farm Trial for asses the performance of late sown Wheat varities under irrigated medium land condition revealed that the variety HI -1563 perform better among all trialed varieties with grain yield 33.82 q/ha, net return Rs 20102/ha and  the B:C ratio is was  2.18.

Recommendation:-

Among four variety farmess local variety Hw-2045, HI-1563 and HD-2985 maxium Yield (33.82 q/ha), Net return (Rs 20102/ha) and B:C ration (2.18) was found in wheat variety HI 1563 . Thus HI 1563 is the best suited variety for late sown condition than other three varieties.

 

ON FARM TRIAL (Soil Science)

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Soil Science

2.

Title

To assess the effect of integrated   nutrient management practices on Yield and economics of Jute (Corchorous olitorius) production.

3.

Micro farming situation

Low land

4.

Production system

Rice-wheat

5

Thematic area

INM

6.

Problem

Low yield of Jute due to Inadequate and Imbalance Nutrient management practices followed by farmers.

7.

Potential solution

Increase the yield and economics of jute

8.

Source of technology

JRS, Katihar

9.

Technology option

TO1 :  Farmers practice (40:20:20, N:P:K kg/ha)

TO2 :  60:30:30, N:P:K kg/ha(RDF)

TO3 : RDF+OM (5 t/ha F.Y.M)+ biofertilizer (azotobacter+psb  for seed treatment)

TO4:  N:P:K kg/ha (75%) + FYM(25%)  (amount/dose of nutrients requirement of crop  is recommended based on nutrient status of soil)

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmer

10

12

Critical input

Seed, organic and inorganic fertilizers, biofertilizers, chemicals etc

13.

Perform indicator

Technical observation

Plant height, Plant diameter, Green weight of Plant, Fiber Yield

 

 

Economic Indicators

Gross return, Net return, B C ratio

 

 

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

Table 1: Initial physico-chemical Properties of experimental Soil

Treatments

pH

(1:2.5)

ECe

(dSm-1)

     O.C.

(%)

Available Nutrients

(kg/ha)

N

P

K

TO1(Farmer Practice)

6.78

0.0922

0.296

190.7

22.5

236.1

TO2  (RDF:: 60:30:30, N:P:K kg/ha)

6.79

0.0942

0.303

191.7

22.3

234.9

TO3 (RDF+OM (5t/ha)+ azotobacter + PSB)

6.84

0.0995

0.322

192.2

21.8

239.7

TO4 {N:P:K kg/ha (75%) + FYM (25%)}

6.82

0.089

0.31

190

22

238

 

Table 2: Final physico-chemical Properties of experimental Soil

Treatments

pH

(1:2.5)

ECe

(dSm-1)

     O.C.

(%)

Available Nutrients

(kg/ha)

N

P

K

TO1(Farmer Practice)

6.81

0.0897

0.297

151.6

17.6

212.1

TO2  (RDF:: 60:30:30, N:P:K kg/ha)

6.81

0.1002

0.363

168.5

20.6

229.1

TO3(RDF+OM (5t/ha)+ azotobacter + PSB)

6.92

0.1078

0.382

172.2

20.1

234.7

TO4 {N:P:K kg/ha (75%) + FYM (25%)}

6.9

0.106

0.37

172

20.2

231.5

 

Table 3: Yield attributing characters of Jute (Corchorous olitorius) as influences by different treatments

Treatments

Plant height

(cm)

Basal diameter

(cm)

Green weight of Plant (qt/ha)

Fiber Yield

(q/ha)

TO1(Farmer Practice)

275

1.41

262.74

22.75

TO2  (RDF:: 60:30:30, N:P:K kg/ha)

305

1.77

282.21

26.88

TO3(RDF+OM (5t/ha)+ azotobacter + PSB)

314

1.84

302.64

32.35

TO4 {N:P:K kg/ha (75%) + FYM (25%) }

307

1.79

276.85

30.14

 

Table 4: Economics of Jute (Corchorous olitorius) as influences by different treatments

Treatments

Cost of cultivation

(Rs/ha)

Gross income

(Rs/ha)

Net Income

(Rs/ha)

B:C ratio

TO1(Farmer Practice)

26910

50050

23140

1.86

TO2 (RDF)

29645

59136

29491

1.99

TO3(RDF+OM (5t/ha)+ azotobacter + PSB)

30930

71170

40240

2.30

TO4 {N:P:K kg/ha (75%) + FYM (25%) }

31250

66308

35058

2.12

 

Result:

It is observed that integration of chemical fertilizers with organic manures and bio fertilizers recorded higher net return and B:C ratio as compared to other treatments. Hence, it can be inferred that the integrated nutrient management can improve the soil nutrient status after the harvest of jute and also gate higher net return and B:C ratio. Application of Recommended Doses of Fertilizers with organic manures 5t/ha and seed treatment with azoto bacter and PSB was the most suitable and profitable combination.

Recommendation:- TO3

ON FARM TRIAL (Soil Science) 

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Soil Science

2.

Title

Assess the Effect of Brown Manuring and Real Time Nitrogen Management in Paddy

3.

Micro farming situation

Micro farming situation

4.

Production system

Paddy-wheat

5

Thematic area

INM

6.

Problem

Indiscriminate uses of fertilizer, No use of FYM

7.

Potential solution

Application of brown manuring (if standing water is not available), basal doses of fertilizers application and Use of Customized Leaf Colour Chart for real time nitrogen application

8.

Source of technology

CRRI, Cuttack (Odisa)

9.

Technology option

TO1 – Farmer Practices (80:40: 20 :: N:P:K Basal + 50 kg N at 25 DAT+ 50 kg N at 50 DAT)

TO2 – RDF (Basal 60:60:40 kg N: P: K + 45 kg N at 30 DAT+ 45 kg N at 60 DAT) + knock down of Dhaincha by 2,4-D at 25-30 DAS.

TO3 – RDF (Basal 60:60:40 NPK + Real Time Application of balance N by using Customised Leaf Colour Chart) + knock down of Dhaincha by 2, 4-D at 25-30 DAS. 

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmer

10

12

Critical input

Seed, Fertilizers, chemical

13.

Perform indicator

Technical observations

Initial and final soil analysis, Plant height, No of tiller, No of grains per panicle, grain and straw yield

 

 

Economic Indicator

Net return, B:C ratio

 

 

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

Table 1: Physico-chemical properties of experimental soil

Experim-ental Soil

pH

(1:2.5)

ECe

(dSm-1)

OC

(%)

Available nutrients

(Kg ha-1)

Available micronutrients

(ppm)

N

P

K

Zn

Cu

Fe

Mn

B

Initial

6.09

0.094

0.55

245.98

37.62

198.78

2.08

5.09

49.98

51.67

0.62

Final

6.07

0.12

0.56

213.84

27.87

203.99

2.61

5.43

50.36

49.28

0.71

 

Table 2:  Effect of Brown Mannuring on growth attributes of rice

               

Treatments

Plant height (cm)

Tillers /plant

Panicle length (cm)

Kernels /plant

Filled kernels /plant

Productive tillers (m-2)

1000-kernel weight (g)

TO1

92.77

7.80

19.60

116.70

105.90

165.30

16.14

TO2

102.96

10.30

25.10

142.40

129.87

236.50

17.39

TO3

108.01

11.91

27.20

153.70

141.20

254.20

18.02

Table 3:- Effect of Brown Mannuring on yield performance and economic of rice

 
               

Treatments

Paddy yield (t/ha)

Straw yield (t/ha)

Cost of cultivation (Rs)

Gross Return (Rs)

Net Return (Rs)

B C ratio

 

TO1

2.83

3.45

23160

48165.00

25005.00

2.08

 

TO2

5.34

5.59

23870

80305.00

56435.00

3.36

 

TO3

6.47

7.15

24550

101635.00

77085.00

4.14

 
               
                 

Result:

                It is clear from the data presented in table that benefit cost ratio of technological option 3 (RDF (Basal 60:60:40 NPK + Real Time Application of balance N by using Customised Leaf Colour Chart) + knock down of Dhaincha by 2, 4-D at 25-30 DAS ) was found superior over farmer practices.

Recommendation:

Therefore, said on farm trial conducted in second year for conformity of result.

ON FARM TRIAL (Soil Science) 

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Soil Science

2.

Title

Assess the Effect of Zn and Application Method of Fertilizers in Rabi Maize

3.

Micro farming situation

Micro farming situation

4.

Production system

Paddy-maize/wheat

5

Thematic area

INM

6.

Problem

Indiscriminate method of fertilizer application

7.

Potential solution

Application of required fertilizers at proper time

8.

Source of technology

SKUAST Jammu

9.

Technology option

TO1 – Farmer Practices (60:0: 0 :: N:P:K Basal + 50:40:20 N:P:K at 30 DAS+ 30 kg N at 60 DAS)

TO2 –RDF (Basal 60:60:40 :: N:P:K + 40 kg N at 30 DAS+40 kg N at 60 DAS)

TO3 –  RDF (Basal 60:60:40:25 :: N:P:K:Zn + 40 kg N at 30 DAS + 40 kg N at 60 DAS)

10.

Plot Size

0.10 ha

11

No of farmer

10

12

Critical input

Seed, Fertilizers

13.

Perform indicator

Technical observations

Initial and final soil analysis, Plant height, No of grains per cob, grain and straw yield

 

 

Economic Indicator

Net return, B:C ratio

 

 

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

 

 Result: Awaited            

Field Study Report Report -1

a)            Title                                       : Impact of major training programmes conducted by KVK, Katihar

b)            Specific Objectives          :

1.       To study the training effectiveness

2.       To study the training satisfaction

3.       To study the impact of training

c)            Locale                                   :               Katihar

e)            Sampling Plan                    :               Population Study (150 trainees)

 

f)             Results:

Table 1 : On Campus Trainings and trainees:

Sl. No.

Name of the Training

Duration

Date

Number of trainees

01

Entrepreneurship development through Mushroom production

03 days

15-18.09.2015

24

02

Entrepreneurship development through Bee Keeping

03 days

9-7-2014

25

03

Seed Production of wheat

03 days

15-18.12.2015

25

04

Production Technique of Bio-Fertilizers

04 days

18-21.01.2016

25

05

Vermi composting for income generation

03 days

13-16.10.2015

25

06

Seed Prodcution technique of Paddy

04 days

21-24.09.2015

26

                 Total

150

 

Table 2 : Percent change in knowledge and attitude:

Sl. No.

Indicators

Participants

Knowledge score obtained in percent

Percent change over before

A

Training

Total

Before

after

01

Entrepreneurship development through Mushroom production

24

6.85

9.56

39.56

02

Entrepreneurship development through Bee Keeping

25

6.65

11.63

74.89

03

Seed Production of wheat

25

6.51

10.65

63.59

04

Production Technique of Bio-Fertilizers

25

5.95

8.52

43.19

05

Vermi composting for income generation

25

9.36

13.52

44.44

06

Seed Prodcution technique of Paddy

26

4.56

7.89

73.03

 

 

150

39.88

61.77

54.89

 Mean

6.64

10.29

54.97

 

Table 3 : Profile of the respondents:

S. No.

Profile

Number (N=150)

Percent

1

Education

 

Illiterate

12

18

 

Functionally literate

6

9

 

Primary

13

20

 

Middle School

20

30

 

High School

39

59

 

Intermeadiate

19

29

 

Graduate and above

27

41

2

Experience

 

Up to 3 years

49

32.67

 

3 to 5 years

54

36.00

 

5 years and above

47

31.33

3

Farm Size

 

No Land

0

0.00

 

Marginal

56

37.33

 

Small

29

19.33

 

Medium

59

39.33

 

Large

6

4.00

4

Annual income

 

Upto 50000

58

38.66

 

50001 to 100000

16

10.66

 

100001 to 150000

22

14.66

 

151001 to 200000

8

5.33

 

200001 to 250000

13

8.66

 

250001 to 300000

7

4.66

 

300001 and above

26

17.33

5

 

Socio Economic Status

Very low

0

0.00

 

Low

50

34.67

 

Moderate

56

37.33

 

High

20

13.33

 

Very High

24

16.00

 

Table 7 : Rating of Training Effectiveness:

S. No.

Training satisfaction indicators

Rating Score /5

Overall Rating

01

Topics covered

4.15

4.44/05

02

Utility topics

4.05

03

Relevance of lectures

3.85

04

Fulfillment of expectation

3.95

05

Practical orientation

3.42

06

Relevance of study material

3.10

07

Quality of training

4.13

 

Field Study Report Report -2

 

Attributes and impact of technology intervened through Front Line Demonstration(FLD)

 

1)         Title                                   : Attributes and impact of technology intervened through

                                            Front   Line Demonstration(FLD)

2)         Specific Objectives           :  1. To study the perceived attributes of the

                                             technology  intervened through FLD

                                              2. To study the Impact of the FLD demonstrated by

                                                      KVK, Katihar

3)         Research design                : Exploratory and diagnostic

 

 

Table 1 :Profile of the FLD:

S. No.

Crop

Technology demonstrated

No. of farmers / demonstration

01

Lentil

Seed, Biofertliser&chemicals

69

02

Pea

Seed, Biofertliser&chemicals

57

03

Green Gram

Seed

13

04

Mustard

Seed, &chemicals

84

Total

223

 

Table 2 : Profile of the respondents:

S. No.

Profile

Number (N=223)

01

Education

 

Illiterate

43

 

Primary

29

 

Middle School

26

 

High School

52

 

Intermediate

40

 

Graduate and above

33

02

Experience

 

Up to 5 years

46

 

6 to 10 years

95

 

11 years and above

82

03

Farm size

 

Marginal

72

 

Small

81

 

Medium

56

 

Large

14

04

Annual income

 

Upto 50000

33

 

50001 to 100000

46

 

100001 to 150000

82

 

151001 to 200000

36

 

300001 and above

26

05

Socio-economic status

 

Very low

63

 

Low

56

 

Moderate

36

 

High

49

 

Very high

19

06

Innovativeness

 

Low

13

 

Moderate

87

 

High

123

07

Scientific orientation

 

Low

55

 

Moderate

92

 

High

76

08

Economic motivation

 

Low

43

 

Moderate

89

 

High

91

09

Risk preference

 

Low

56

 

Moderate

78

 

High

89

 

Table 3: Impact of technology intervened through FLD's:

S.  No.

Indicators

Beneficiaries

Knowledge score obtained

Percent change over before

A

Crop

Total

Before

After

 

1.

Lentil

69

36

49

36.11

2.

Pea

57

64

76

18.75

3.

Green Gram

13

57

71

24.56

4.

Mustard

84

58

64

10.34

 

Table 4:Yield Enhancement through FLD

 

Sl.No.

Crop

Yield of Demonstration

Yield of Check

% Change in yield

1.

Lentil

13.82

10.16

36.02

2.

Pea

14.52

10.85

33.82

3.

Green Gram

4.5

2.75

63.64

4.

Mustard

7.65

5.62

36.12

 

 

ON FARM TRIAL (Horticulture) 

SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Horticulture

2.

Title

Management and economic analysis of shoot borer  in Brinjal for koshi region in Bihar

3.

Micro farming situation

Micro farming situation

4.

Production system

Vegetable-vegetable

5

Thematic area

Plant protection

6.

Problem

Fruit and shoot borer highly infested the crop and farmer faces marketable losses

7.

Potential solution

Uses of Insecticides

8.

Source of technology

BAU, Sabour

9.

Technology option

TO1 – Farmer Practices (Use of Rogar)

TO2 – Trizophos + Delta methrin @ 2ml/l water

TO3 -  Emainmectin benzoate 5% @ 0.4 gm/lit

TO4 – Spinosad 45 SC  @ ½ ml/l water

10.

Plot Size

40 sq mt

11

No of farmer

6

12

Critical input

Seed, chemicals

13.

Perform indicator

Technical observations

Initial and final soil analysis, shoot damage %, fruit damage on weight and number basis (%), marketable fruit yield.

 

 

Economic Indicator

Net return, B:C ratio

 

 

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

Topic – Management and Economic analysis of shoot and fruit borer in Brinjal

Effect of insecticide on Brinjal fruit & Shoot borer

Treatment

Shoot Damage (%)

Fruit Damage (%)

Total Fruit Yield (Q/ha)

Total Healthy Fruit (Q/ha)

TO1 – Farmer Practices (Use of Rogar)

37.95

39.45

310.80

188.18

TO2 – Trizophos + Delta methrin @ 2ml/l water

18.43

26.13

336.93

248.90

TO3- Emainmectin benzoate 5% @ 0.4 gm/lit

19.35

23.91

351.75

267.66

TO4 – Spinosad 45 SC  @ ½ ml/l water

16.74

21.10

383.06

302.5

 

Effect of insecticide against Brinjal fruit & Shoot borer on yield and economics of Brinjal

Treatment

Yield (Q/ha)

Production cost (Rs/ha)

Gross return

Net Profit

B:C Ratio

TO1 – Farmer Practices (Use of Rogar)

188.18

63500.75

15999.63

94889.88

1.45

TO2 – Trizophos + Delta methrin @ 2ml/l water

248.90

63350.00

211614.78

148264.78

2.34

TO3 -  Emainmectin benzoate 5% @ 0.4 gm/lit

267.66

63400.75

227564.53

164164.08

2.58

TO4 – Spinosad 45 SC  @ ½ ml/l water

302.50

64200.75

257185.50

192985.00

3.00

 

Result- The Observation of recorded data showed that Technical Option-IV (Spinosad 45 SC  @ ½ ml/l water) performed better in management of fruit & Shoot borer in Brinjal over farmers practices. It was also found that minimum shoot damage (16.75%) and fruit damage (21.10%) and maximum healthy fruit yield (302.50 q/ha) recorded with the application spinosad (TO4) which was significantly superior over control where as   maximum shoot damage (37.95%), fruit damage (39.45%) and minimum healthy  fruit yield (188.18 q/ha) found in farmers practices, the economical observation showed that spinosad (TO4) treated plant having maximum B:C Ration (3.00) over control (1:45)

Recommendations: Spinosad provides effective control widely on moths, cutter pillars, beetle and thrips group of insect. Spinosad is a bacterial product and safer for human being up to sum extend. Spinosad also found economically viable and reach to farming community. It was also found significantly superior than other treatment.

 

OFT (Horticulture)

                       SN

       Particulars

                   Description  

1.

Intervention

Horticulture

2.

Title

Effect of chemicals and PGR on pollination and fruit set for better yield on Mango.

3.

Micro farming situation

Medium and Up land

4.

Production system

Fruit Cultivation

5

Thematic area

Crop Improvement

6.

Problem

Excess fruit drop in initial steg

7.

Potential solution

To control the fruit drop percentage with the application of chemical and PGR.2.Increase the furit set % with the help of polliantion

8.

Source of technology

BAU,Sabour

9.

Technology option

Opt. I-Farmers practice(use insecticide)

Opt. II-  Calcium nitrate (0.06%)+Boric acid(0.02%).

Opt.III- Calcium nitrate (0.06%)+Sorbitol(2.0%).

Opt.IV- Boric acid(0.02%)+Sorbitol(2.0%).

Opt.V- NAA 50 ppm

10.

Plot Size

25 (plant)

11

No of farmer

05

12

Critical input

Chemical & PGR

13

Performance indicator

1)Fruit sting  2) Fruit drop (at 15 day interval till maturity)  3) Fruit Weight 4) Fruit yield (q/Plant)  5) Size of Fruit (mm) 6) TSS and  7) Acidity

 

Economic Indicator

B C ratio

 

 

Farmers' reaction/ feedback

 

   Result: Awaited            

OFT(2016-17)  

Name of P.C./SMS

Discipline

Title of OFT

Smt. Basanti Kumari

SMS(Home Science)

Assessment of different artificial ripening on post harvest quality of Banana

Performance of different bagging material for quality banana.

Dr. Sushil Kr. Singh

SMS(Agronomy)

Integrated weed management in Jute

Assessment of fertilizer dose on Productivity of paddy through Crop Manager in Paddy – wheat cropping system

Sri Ajay Kr. Das

SMS(Horticulture)

Effect of chemicals and PGR on pollination and fruit set for better yield on Mango.

Management and economic analysis of shoot borer  in Brinjal for koshi region in Bihar

Sri Pankaj Kumar

SMS(Ext. Education)

Impact of KVK Training Programme on knowledge and   adoption of INM in Maize.

Impact of frontline Demonstration on farmer’s adoption rate.

Dr. Rama Kant Singh

SMS(Soil Science)

To Assess the fertilizer doses on Productivity and Profitability of the Paddy through Crop Manager in Paddy – Maize Cropping System.

Assess the effect of Zn and application method of Fertilizers in Rabi maize.

Assess the Effect of Brown Manuring and real time nitrogen management in Paddy