1

AP III Irrigation Project (1998-2004)

Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

July 2004

Correct citation:

Reddy, M. D., Surender Reddy, K., Krishna, A., Sahadeva Reddy, B., Padmaja, J., and Srinivas, A., (2004). Project report on Crops and cropping systems under Sri Ram Sagar Project and Srisailam Right Bank Canal Command area ANGRAU, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

Published by : Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University

Rajendranagar, Hyderabad

Dr. M. Devender Reddy Principal Scientist (Agro) ANGRAU Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad Foreword Traditionally, India has been agriculture based economy. Hence, development of irrigation to increase the agricultural production for making the country self sustained and for poverty alleviation has been of crucial importance for the planners. The irrigated area in the country was only 22.6 million ha in 1950-51 and it has increased to 70.33 million ha in 2002-03. The ultimate irrigation potential is estimated as 140 Mha. It is worthy to note in this context that, inspite of tremendous increase in the irrigated area over time, the gap between the registered ayacut and the actual irrigated area is increasing at alarming pace. Of the several possible reasons for this gap, adoption of water intensive cropping systems coupled with poor water management practices; inefficient water distribution systems in the canal command areas; unwillingness of the farmers, even in the tail-end areas of the canals, to grow ID crops instead of rice can be stated as major ones. Keeping these issues as major thrust areas, the AP-III project titled Crops and cropping systems under Sri Ram Sagar Project (SRSP) and Srisailam Right Bank Canal Command (SRBC) area in Andhra Pradesh was initiated and implemented over a period of six years from 1998 to 2004. In this project several on-farm trials, OFDs of proven efficient irrigation technologies, extension programs to popularize the findings were carried out. The impact assessment studies made in the pilot areas showcased significant positive changes in farmers attitudes towards water management, increased adoption of improved water management technologies culminating in overall increase in Water Use Efficiency. This publication is a compilation of the results of the on-farm experiments and demonstrations carried out in large areas, various outcomes suitable for different canal command areas, lessons learnt in this project etc. This book will be a valuable tool in the hands of policy makers, researchers, students, farmers and officers working in the Agricultural Extension machinery of the state. I acknowledge the financial support extended by the World Bank, support extended by the University to successfully implement the project. And, I congratulate all stake-holders in project implementation for their hard-work resulting in development of actionable recommendations in the area of water management. Hyderabad M. Devender Reddy July, 2004 Nodal Officer, AP-III irrigation Project

Contents Title Executive Summary Introduction Project Implementation Description Of Components And Sub-Components Implementation SRSP Implementation SRBC Achievements Of The Project Objectives Sustainability Issues Concerns And Further Recommendations Constraints In Project Implementation Strategy And Action Plan To Mainstream The Findings Lessons Learnt In Project Implementation Extension Activities Publicity Materials Papers Presented In Workshops / Symposium Impact Assessment Page No 3 8 9 10 12 38 61 66 67 68 70 73 74 79 81 82

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under agriculture support services, applied demonstrations were conducted on operational area basis at selected distributaries under Third A.P Irrigation Project (1998 to 2004) in SRSP command area at Karimnagar (DBM-89), Warangal (DBM-26) and SRBC command area at Nandyal (Block-4). Benchmark survey was conducted on the selected beneficiaries. Based on the constraints, demonstrations were conducted under three categories. 1. Group A Research Trials 2. Group B Small Scale Demonstrations 3. Group C Mass Spread of Proven Technology A total of 2782 and 1054 demonstrations were conducted in SRSP and SRBC, respectively. These activities were taken up at three reaches of distributory upper (Reach I), middle (Reach II), and lower (Reach III). The on-farm demonstrations/trials include scheduling of irrigation in different crops, various methods of irrigation, testing of micro irrigation technologies, selection of profitable cropping systems, production technology of different crops, INM, IPM and other package intervention components, introduction of crops such as vegetables in the system, conducting field days and trainings to line department officials and farmers etc. The salient results of activities under taken at ARS, Karimnagar and Warangal under SRSP: 1. Scheduling of irrigation water at recommended intervals and methods required less water and resulted in higher yield in maize, groundnut, blackgram and redgram at ARS, Karimnagar and Warangal. 2. Check basin method for groundnut, furrow method for chillies and cotton, ridge & furrow method for maize was found to improve water use efficiency. 3. Drip method of irrigation for cotton and chillies and sprinklers in vegetables and groundnut was found to improve water use efficiency compared to flooding method of irrigation. By adopting recommended practice, there was water saving of 50-112 mm in maize, 50-112 mm in groundnut, 180-230 mm in cotton, 118 mm in pegionpea and 126 mm in blackgram as compared to farmers practice. 4. In Warangal district, maize-groundnut-maize, Chilli-bhendi, turmeric-ridge gourd and cotton-vegetable and in Karimnagar greengram-maize-bhendi, maize-

groundnut-greengram,maize-groundnut-vegetables were found to be profitable cropping systems. 5. Introduction of rabi blackgram and redgram, maize in place of rabi rice was found to be profitable with a saving in water and increase in net income 6. Introduction of high yielding varieties in maize, rice cotton, blackgram, redgram and groundnut improved the yield and net income over conventional practices. 7. Introduction of superfine rice varieties like JGL 1798,JGL 384 and WGL 14 evolved from ANGRAU performed excellently with high yields. The farmers are adopting seed village concept resulting in higher income generation through the sale of seed among themselves and neighboring villages. The performance is superior to locally popular BPT 5204. 8. Integrated pest management in cotton (stem application of monocrotophos, growing of trap crops, spraying of NPV, erection of bird perches and monitoring with pheromone traps) and in rice (leaving of 40cm alley ways after every 2m and use of pheromone traps) resulted in higher income and reduce cost of cultivation. 9. Introduction of vegetables (flora beans, french beans and bhendi) after cotton and rice have resulted in higher net returns during the summer season. 10. The practice of green manuring increased the yield of rice with reduction in cost of cultivation on chemical fertilizers. Agricultural extension services: Under the agricultural extension services, field days, training programmes to farmers and line department officials organized. 1. Ten field days were organized at demonstration site popularize the technologies to other farmers the district. 2. Fifty four (twenty seven at each center) training programmes were conducted to farmers. The trainings proved that more than 80% of the trainees were categorized under medium to high knowledge group on crop technologies and water management practices of different crops whereas rest of the farmers fall under low category because of illiteracy or lack of awareness. 3. The trainings given to the line department officials of Agriculture, Horticulture and engineers greatly sharpened their TOT (Transfer of Technology) skills in irrigation management aspects. They were enlightened with the recent

technologies that need to be popularized in the command, which reduce water requirement in different crops. 4. Workshop on Irrigation management was conducted with ANGRAU scientists, Dept Officers and farmers. It was used as a platform for discussing the possibilities and difficulties in adoption of technologies. 5. Agricultural information center and model irrigation block was established at ARS, warangal and Karimnagar to train the famers. The salient results of activities under taken at RARS, Nandyal under SRBC: As water is not released in the canal so far, the ANGRAU has taken up water management trails under bore wells at upper reach and other demonstration trials under rainfed situations. 1. In sunflower and cotton, skip furrow and alternate furrow method of irrigation recorded almost similar seed yield to that of ridge and furrow method of irrigation.There was 50 % saving irrigation water in skip and alternate furrow method of irrigation. 2. In chillies and cotton, drip fertigation recorded higher yield, 40-50% less water requirement than ridge and furrow method of irrigation. In normal sown chickpea, one irrigation through sprinklers at pod development stage gave 22% higher seed yield than rain fed crop. Under late sown conditions also one irrigation through sprinklers recorded 28% higher seed yield compared to rain fed crop. 3. In garden bean irrigating the crop during dry spells with family drip irrigation (25000 l /ha) increases the yield considerably. 4. In kharif, NDLR-8 rice variety recorded 8% higher net returns compared to local variety BPT-5204 and 38% higher net returns compared to local variety (RNR1446) (rabi). Cost of cultivation of fertilizers was reduced to Rs. 3043 ha-1 by adopting recommended fertilizer doses compared to farmers practice. Closer planting of seedlings recorded additional net returns of Rs. 2770 ha-1 compared to farmers practice of low plant population. 5. In rice green manuring + 75% recommended fertilizer dose recorded almost similar yield to that of famers practice.

6. During kharif - 2003 in System of rice intensification (SRI) grain yield of 15774 kgha-1 was recorded with BPT 5204 compared to 5625 kg ha-1 in farmers practice. 7. Under irrigated conditions mungari cotton followed by chickpea and sorghum recorded higher net returns. Rice followed by sunflower, sorghum, mustard and blackgram recorded higher net returns. 8. Under rainfed conditions, green gram followed by chickpea cropping system recorded a net return of Rs.3750 ha-1 compared to post rainy season chickpea alone. Bitter gourd alone recorded higher net returns compared to ridge gourd followed by chickpea and post rainy season chickpea alone. 9. In cotton, cultivars Aravinda ( Mungari cotton) and Narasimha (American cotton) recorded 25-30% higher yields compared to local varieties. Adoption of IPM recorded an additional net return of Rs. 466 to 2365 ha-1 compared to farmers practice. By adoption of recommended fertilizer management practices cost of cultivation was reduced to a tune of Rs. 1600 ha-1 compared to farmers practice. 10. In chickpea under low rainfall conditions Swetha and Kranti performed better as compared to local variety. During good rainfall years, Kranti and Annegiri were equally good and superior over Bharat. Integrated pest management practices recorded higher seed yield, gross and net returns as well as benefit cost ratio compared to farmers practice. By adopting recommended production technology an additional net returns of Rs. 3500 ha-1 was recorded compared to farmers practice. 11. In sunflower recommended spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm recorded higher seed yield, gross and net returns over farmers practice of solid rows with no thinning. Application of sulphur through Single super phosphate recorded higher yield compared to farmers practice of complex fertilizer application. 12. Agricultural implements (urea applicator, row seeder and Ferti - cum seed drill) and farm machinery (threshers) were demonstrated at all the reaches. . By sowing chickpea with seed drill developed by RARS, Nandyal , 20 kg ha-1 seed was saved with an yield advantage of 225 kg ha-1 than farmers practice.

Agricultural extension services: 1. Twenty seven two day trainings to farmers were conducted covering 16 blocks of SRBC, three line department trainings (Agricultural officers, Assistant Directors of Agriculture and I&CAD Engineers), five field days and one workshop was organized. 2. To train the farmers about latest technologies in agriculture, a fully equipped agricultural information center was established displaying different crop varieties, pest and disease incidence laminations, soil profile boards, live specimens of crop varieties grown in this zone and models of farm implements. 3. To demonstrate different methods of irrigation to the farmers, a model irrigation block was established consisting of different types of drip and sprinkler irrigation, rain guns, water measuring devices and surface methods of irrigation.

INTRODUCTION
The Third A.P. Irrigation project supported by the World Bank was under implementation in SRSP & SRBC commands from 1998-2004 with a view to complete the incomplete works and generation of additional irrigation potential there by achieving higher agricultural productivity and socio-economic development in the project area. For attaining the objective of higher agricultural production the farmers of the pilot operation area were exposed to the improved farm and other technologies to achieve the following objectives: 1. To evolve and demonstrate diversified cropping sequences for horticultural and dry land crops under rotational water supply. 2. Improve productivity through on farm irrigation. 3. To improve command area extension services and participation, irrigation management practices through development of crops. Before the commencement of the project, the bench mark survey was conducted at Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal with the objectives to 1. Provide necessary information to assess the current situation before significant implementation of project at field level. 2. Establish database of project irrigation development, agricultural productivity, performance indicators required to monitor and evaluate the success of the project prior to its completion.

10

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

The Government of Andhra Pradesh under G O Ms No. 22, I&CAD[ PW-SRSP II (2)] dated 6-3-98 has accorded sanction to Acharya N G Ranga Agricultural University, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad for implementing the applied research on Irrigation Agronomic progarmmes under AP III Irrigation Project in SRSP and SRBC commands for a period of 5 years from 1998-99. The Sreeram Sagar project is constructed across river Godavari near Balkonda mandal of Nizamabad district to irrigate drought prone area of Telengana region under Karimnagar, warangal, Nalgonda, Adilabad and Nizamabad districts. The irrigated areas of Sreeram Sagar command are red soils with loamy sub soil (65 per cent) and light and moderately deep to deep-black soils (35 percent). The Srisailam right branch canal is designed to irrigate mainly Black Cotton soils (80 %) of low rainfall areas of Rayalaseema regions in Kurnool and Kadapa districts by drawing backwaters from Srisailam Project constructed across river Krishna near holy town Srisailam in Kurnool district.

11

DESCRIPTION OF COMPONENTS AND SUB-COMPONENTS. Under Agricultural Support Services, the main component is implementation of applied research and demonstrations under irrigation agronomy programme under Third A.P irrigation project at Sriramsagar Project (SRSP) and Srisailam right branch canal (SRBC) command areas. The sub-components under the programme are a) Applied research and demonstration of irrigation practices and agronomy to improve irrigation practices and crop yields. b) Programme of applied research and demonstrations and extension to promote high value horticulture crops and c) Upgrading of Agricultural extension services in Sriramsagar Project area. Objectives of the Sub-Components Before the implementation of the project different objectives were formulated under subcomponents. a) Applied research and demonstration of irrigation practices and agronomy to improve irrigation practices and crop yields i) Improved on farm agronomic practices and production parameters including use of appropriate farm implements as well as cultivars, fertilizer, pest control and other measures. ii) Optimal crop planning under limited water availability to maximize production and net returns b) Programme of applied research and demonstrations and extension to promote high value horticultural crops i) ii) iii) Demonstrations/ evaluation of potential crops and crop sequences with reference to water use and maximum returns. Introduction of new high value crops/potential horticultural crops that can fit into the system for increased returns. To explore the potentiality of conjunctive use of surface and ground water in improving water use efficiency and in increasing cropping intensity ultimately leading to increase in production and net returns.

12

c) Upgrading of Agricultural extension services in Sriramsagar Project area Srisailam right branch canal project area. A total of 84 farmer training programmes, three trainings to agricultural officers, three trainings to Assistant Directors of Agriculture and three trainings to line department officers were given on improved irrigation management practices. Model irrigation block and information centers were developed at three centers to facilitate faster dissemination of advanced technology. Details of the trials conducted in SRSP command Group-A Year 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Total Karimnagar --23 14 56 18 111 19 -39 58 43 19 178 Warangal -51 33 38 24 -146 45 -35 38 9 1 128 Group B Karimnagar -52 23 25 18 6 124 69 -36 72 36 5 218 Warangal -84 107 30 33 6 260 --16 18 10 27 71 Group-C Karimnagar -46 86 148 111 17 408 --104 202 129 22 457 Warangal -142 149 175 149 20 635 --11 26 2 7 46

Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi

Grand Total: 2782 A total of 2782 trials were conducted in SRSP command area at ARS,Warangal and ARS, Karimnagar. Of these trails 563 trials were conducted under group A. Under group-b and group C in total 673 and 1546 trials were conducted, respectively. Details of the trials conducted in SRBC command

Y ear
1999-2000 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 Total

Group-A Kharif Rabi

2

Group-B Kharif Rabi 38 9 59 48 33 187 13 76 104 52 245

Group-C Kharif Rabi 5 63 98 39 205 8 96 93 80 277

Total

5 7 20 23 57

7 14 32 30 83

40 47 315 395 257 1054

13

IMPLEMENTATION

Sri Ram Sagar Project (SRSP)

I. Methodology 1.1 Site: In the command area nearly 85 percent of the cultivators are marginal and small farmers having less than 2 hectares. Since the primary objective of the project is to generate additional irrigation potential there by achieving higher agricultural productivity and socio-economic development of the farmers, it is proposed to conduct on-farm research on water management in three locations covering an area of 120 ha. under D-89 distributory at Karimnagar and D-26 distributory in Warangal of SRSP command . Two villages covering an area of 40 ha in each reach were selected for conducting the demonstrations. Karimnagar 1.1.1 Reach I (Upper Reach) : Nagnur, Rukmapur 1.1.2 Reach II (Middle Reach) : Cherlaboothkur, Irkula 1.1.3 Reach III (Lower Reach) : Narayanaraopally, Sambaipally Warangal 1.1.1 Reach I (Upper Reach) : Palivelpula 1.1.2 Reach II (Middle Reach) : Pegadapally 1.1.3 Reach III (Lower Reach) : Seethanagaram 1.2 Soil type: The soils in the command area are derived from two parent rocks, black soils of granitic origin, which are popularly called as regurs (black cotton soils). They are moderately deep and moderately alkaline in reaction with pH ranging from 8.0 to 9.0. These soils are mostly suitable for crops like paddy, maize and cotton. Red soils of sandstone origin, commonly termed as dubba and chalka soils, are neutral to less alkaline in reaction with a pH ranging from 6.5 to 8.0. These soils are poor in nitrogen and phosphorous. The ideal crops for these soils are redgram, greengram, maize, groundnut, chillies and vegetables.

14

1.3 Climate: The climate of the command area is tropical (semi - arid), characterized by hot summer and dry winter. The mean daily maximum and minimum temperature in summer is 41o and 28o C, respectively. In winter, the mean daily maximum temperature is 30 o C and the mean minimum temperature is 15o C. The average annual rainfall in the command area varies between 925 and 1025mm. About 80 percent of the annual rainfall is received from South - West monsoon during June to September and the balance during the North East monsoon and summer months. The mean annual rainfall at Karimnagar is 1033 mm (Annexure I) and Warangal is 950 to 1000mm (Annexure II) 1.4 .1 Hydraulic particulars: distributory -D-89 (Karimnagar) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Ayacut Discharge Bed width Full supply depth Free board Side slopes Value of N Bed fall Velocity Top width of banks (L/R) Distance from Karimnagar Soil type Crops grown Release of water Total length of the distributory : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 3718 ha (9295 acres) 110.62 cusecs 2.75 m 1.2 m 0.6 m 1.5 : 1 / : 1 0.025 1 in 3300 0.586 m / sec 3.6 / 1.8 m 12 km Red and Black Paddy, maize, groundnut, greengram pigeonpea, sunflower and cotton etc. October to March 17.65 km. The distributory D-89 starts at 129.55 km of Kakatiya Canal.

1.4.1.1 Hydraulic particulars of selected pipelines (Karimnagar)

Sl. No.

Item Diameter of off-take pipe (m) Full supply depth (m) Bed width (m) Free board (m) Value "N" 7 0.30 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025 8 0.30 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

DP numbers 37 38 0.30 0.30 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025

53 0.30 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025

55 0.30 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025

56 0.30 0.225 0.30 0.15 0.025

15

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Discharge (cusecs) Salinity (%) Length of the pipe line (m) Bed fall Total Ayacut area (Acres)

-<2 1298 1 in 400 97.11

-<2 -1 in 400 60.33

0.032 <2 -1 in 400 43.09

0.064 <2 -1 in 400 86.13

0.067 <2 424.5 1 in 400 93.00

0.068 <2 688 1 in 400 98.29

0.064 <2 -1 in 400 83.00

1.4 .2 Hydraulic particulars: distributory D-26 (Warangal) S. No 1. 2. 3.

Particulars
Ayacut area (acres) Discharge (acres) Bed width (m) Full supply depth (FSD) Free board (m) Bed fall Mannings const Velocity (cm/sec (c) ) Top bank in metres(both left/right) Side slopes (inner /an)

0-.400
396 13.06/.37 1.00 0.45 0.45 1 in 1000 0.025 0.540 1.8/1.20 1.5:1

0.400-1.1
237 6.71/0.19 0.75 0.40 0.45 1 in 1000 0.025 0.443 0.9/0.9 1.5: 1

4. 5.
6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

1.4.2.1 Hydraulic particulars of the selected pipelines (Warangal) S. No 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Particulars
Ayacut area (acres) Bed width (m) Slope (fall) Dise slopes Dia (m) Mannings const

Values
40-100 0.30 1 in 500/750 1.5:1 0.225 0.018

16

1.5 Constraints identified Based on the benchmark survey done before commencement of the project , the following constraints were identified in major crops grown in the beneficiary villages. 1.5.1 Maize 1. Excessive irrigations are given due to free availability of canal water. 2. Chemical weed control is not practiced resulting in higher cost of cultivation and delayed manual weeding. 3. Seed treatment was not done. 4. Excessive application of inorganic fertilizers with less usage of organic fertilizers. 5. Closer spacing against the recommended spacing of 75 cm x 20 cm. 1.5.2 Paddy 1.Wastage of irrigation water due to excessive irrigation. 2. Non-application of farmyard manure and green manure. 3.Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers without application of K 4.Chemical weed control not practiced 5.Cultivation of age-old local varieties. 1.5.3 Cotton 1.Indiscriminate use of pesticides and non-adoption of IPM practice. 2.Excessive use of irrigation water. 3.Inconsistent market prices. 4.Soils are not suitable for cotton cultivation. 1.5.4 Greengram 1. Growing of local varieties susceptible to YMV. 2. Application of no or insufficient quantity of fertilizers. 3. Chemical weed control not adopted. 4. Broadcast method of sowing.

17

1.5.5 Groundnut 1. Growing local varieties 2. Low plant stand 3. Non-application of Gypsum. 4. Chemical weed control not adopted. 5. Over utilization of irrigation water. 1.5.6 Chilli 1. In Chilli dieback, leaf curl and viral diseases are common, which reduce the yield. 2. Most of the farmers practicing direct seeding which also reduce the plant canopy and Growth. 3. In winter season, micronutrient deficiencies of Mg, Fe and B is a phenomenon due to low temperature affecting uptake of nutrients. 1.5.7 Turmeric 1. Growing of long duration (9 months) local varieties susceptible to rhizome rot 2. Lack of awareness about the importance of seed treatment. 3. Monocropping of turmeric. 1.5.8 Cropping Systems Mostly the cropping systems adopted before the implementation of project are Greengram-Maize, Paddy-Maize, Paddy-Paddy. 1.5.9 Vegetable cultivation Before the project was implemented, the farmers are not aware of cultivation of summer vegetables.

18

1.6 Trials conducted to over come the constraints identified (Details in Annexure III & IV of Volume-II)

Constraints identified Maize 1 2 3 4 5 Paddy 1 Excessive irrigations Chemical weed control Excessive inorganic fertilizer application Non adoption of seed treatment optimum spacing & improved varieties Irrigation by flooding Wastage of irrigation water

Trials conducted Demonstration of irrigation schedules in Maize (K& W) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Maize (W) Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizers in Maize (K&W) Popularization of new hybrids in Maize (K) Demonstration on methods of irrigations in maize (W) Demonstration of intermittent irrigation schedules in paddy (K) Demonstration of improved puddler in Paddy (K) Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizers in paddy (K&W) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in paddy (K) Introduction of new varieties in paddy (JGL-1798, 1853 and WGL-14) (K&W) Demonstration of direct seeding techniques in paddy (K &W) Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton (K &W) Demonstration of irrigation schedules in Cotton (K&W) Demonstration of drip irrigation system in Cotton (K) Demonstration on methods of irrigation in Cotton (W) Red chalka soils are not suitable for Cotton cultivation thus farmers are advised not to grow Cotton in those soils as both yield and quality are effected (K) Demonstration on management of rhizome rot and leaf spot in Turmeric (W)

2 3 4 5 Cotton 1 2

Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers Chemical weed control Cultivation of local varieties Method of planting Indiscriminate use of pesticides Excessive use of irrigation water

3. 4.

In efficient methods of irrigation Suitability of soils

Turmeric 1. No seed treatment

19

Demonstration on recommended production technology in Turmeric (W) Chilli 1 2. 3. No micronutrient sprayings Inefficient irrigation methods Management of yellow syndrome in chilli (W) Demonstration on methods of irrigation in chilli (W) Demonstration on recommended production technology in chilli (W) Popularization pf recommended production technology in Green gram (K) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Green gram (K) Popularization of new variety of Groundnut JL-24 (K) Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnu t(K&W) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Groundnut (K) 1. Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in Groundnut (W) 2. Demonstration of different irrigation methods in Groundnut (K&W) 3.Demonstration on scheduling of irrigation in Groundnut (W) 1. Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system (W) 2. Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Green gram based cropping system (K) 3. Popularization of Green gram based cropping system (K) 4. Popularization of Maize based cropping system (W) 1.Demonstration on cotton based cropping systems (W) 2.Demonstration on rice based cropping systems. (W) Introduction of vegetables in kharif (K&W)

Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides Greengram 1 Growing local varieties, broadcasting of seed, insufficient fertilization. 2 Chemical weed control Groundnut 1 Growing local varieties 2 3 4 Low plant stand and non-application of gypsum Chemical weed control Excessive irrigation

Cropping systems 1 Third crop is not cultivated

Mono-cropping of cotton and rice

Vegetables 1 Summer vegetables are not cultivated

20

1.7 Demonstrations conducted in different areas of crop production ( Karimnagar) 1.7.1 Irrigation trials 1) Irrigation Schedules in Maize Treatments : 2 a) Irrigation at 18-20 days interval during Vegetative stage and 9-10 days during reproductive stage. b) Farmers practice (irrigation at 7-10 days interval). 2) Intermittent irrigation schedules in paddy. Treatments: 3 a) Irrigation 24 hrs after disappearance of 5cm depth of water. b) Irrigation 48 hrs after disappearance of 5cm depth of water. c) Farmers practice 3) Irrigation Schedules in Groundnut. Treatments: 2 a) Irrigation at 15 days interval. b) Farmers practice (Irrigation at weekly interval). 4) Irrigation Schedules in rabi Pigeonpea. Treatments : 2 a) Irrigation at 18-20 days interval during Vegetative stage and 9-10 days during reproductive stage. b) Farmers practice (irrigation at 9-10 days interval). 5) Irrigation Schedules in Blackgram. Treatments : 2 a) Irrigation at 0, 25, 45 and 65 days after sowing. b) Farmers practice (irrigation at 9-10 days interval). 6) Irrigation Schedules in Cotton. Treatments : 2 a) Nine irrigations at an interval of 20 days (Irrigation stars from last fortnight of September). b) Farmers practice (Irrigation at 14-15 days interval). 7) Demonstration of Drip Irrigation System in Cotton Treatments: 2 a) Irrigation with Drip system. b) Farmers Practice (Flooding method). 8) Demonstration of Drip Irrigation System in Chillies Treatments: 2 a) Irrigation with Drip system. b) Farmers Practice (Flooding method).

21

9) Demonstration of Sprinkler Irrigation System in Groundnut Treatments: 2 a) Irrigation with Sprinkler system. b) Farmers Practice (Flooding method). 10) Demonstration of different irrigation methods in Groundnut. Treatments : 3 a) Farmers Practice (Flooding method) b) Check basin method. c) Border strip method.

1.7.2 New implements

11) Demonstration of Direct seeding technique in Paddy. Treatments: 2 a) Sowing of sprouted seed with Paddy drum seeder. b) Farmers Practice of transplanting. 12) Demonstration of improved Puddler in Paddy. Treatments: 2 a) Puddling with ANGRAU Puddler b) Puddling with wooden plough.

1.7.3 Integrated pest management

13) Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton. Treatments:2 a) Stem application of Monocrotophos, Pheramone traps, Light traps, Trap crops, Bird perches, NPV spray etc. b) Pest control with chemicals.

1.7.4 Integrated nutrient management

14) Demonstration of recommended doses of fertilizers in Paddy. Treatments : 2 a) 120-60-50 N, P2O5 and K20 Kg /ha. b) Imbalance fertilization. 15) Demonstration of recommended doses of fertilizers in Maize. Treatments : 2 a) 120-60-40 N, P2O5 and K20 Kg /ha. b) Imbalance fertilization.

22

1.7.5 Cropping systems 16) Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system. Treatments: 2 a) Maize-Groundnut-Vegetable. b) Maize-Groundnut-Fallow. 17) Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Greengram based cropping system. Treatments: 2 a) Greengram-Maize-Vegetable. b) Greengram-Maize-Fallow. 18) Popularization of Maize based cropping system. Treatments: 2 a) Maize-Groundnut-Greengram. b) Maize-Groundnut-Fallow. 19) Popularization of Greengram based cropping system. Treatments: 2 a) Greengram-Maize-Greengram. b) Greengram-Maize-Fallow. 1.7.6 Production technology 20) Demonstration of production technology in Greengram during Kharif. Treatments: 2 a) Line sowing, YMV tolerant varieties (WGG-37), Weedicide application (Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha). b) Broadcasting, local variety, hand weeding. 21) Demonstration of production technology in Redgram during Rabi. Treatments: 2 a) HYV with optimum dates of sowing. b) Cultivation of local variety. 22) Demonstration of production technology in Blackgram . Treatments: 2 c) Line sowing, LBG-20, Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and blitox spray for the control of Powdery mildew. d) Broadcasting, local variety, hand weeding. 23) Demonstration of production technology in Groundnut. Treatments: 2 a) Seed treatment of HYV, optimum plant population (44 plants/sq.m) ), Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and gypsum application @ 500kg/ha. b) Farmer practice

23

24) Demonstration of production technology in Maize during Rabi. Treatments: 2 a) Weedicide application (Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha), Hybrids, irrigation through ridge & furrow method. b) Farmer practice. 25) Demonstration of production technology in Paddy during Kharif. Treatments: 2 a) Recommended package of practices b) Farmer practice 1.7.7 Weed control 26) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Greengram . Treatments: 2 a) Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and intercultivation at 25 DAS. b) Two hand weedings without weedicide application 27) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Maize . Treatments: 2 c) Weedicide application (Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and inter-cultivation at 35 - 40 DAS. d) Two hand weedings without weedicide application 28) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Blackgram . Treatments: 2 a) Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and intercultivation at 25 DAS. b) Two hand weedings without weedicide application 29) Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in Groundnut. Treatments: 2 a) Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and intercultivation at 30 - 35 DAS. b) Two hand weedings without weedicide application 30) Introduction of chemical weed control technique in Redgram . Treatments: 2 a) Weedicide application (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) b) Two hand weedings without weedicide application 1.7.8 New varieties 31) Introduction of new varieties in Paddy . Treatments: 2 a) JGL 1798 b) IR 64, Vijetha

24

1.7 Demonstrations conducted in different areas of crop production (Warangal) 1.7.1 Irrigation management trials 1) Scheduling of irrigation in maize Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Irrigation at 15 days interval b) Farmers practice: Irrigation at 12 days interval 2) Scheduling of irrigation in groundnut Treatments : 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Irrigation at critical stages b) Farmers Practice: Irrigation at 15 days interval 3) Scheduling of Irrigation in Cotton Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Nine irrigations at an interval of 20 days(Irrigation starts from last fortnight of September.) b) Farmers Practice: Irrigation at 15 days interval. 4) Evaluation of Irrigation methods in Chilli Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: Furrow b) Farmers Practice: Flat bed method 5) Evaluation of irrigation methods in maize Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: Ridges & Furrow method b) Farmers Practice: Flat bed method 6) Evaluation of irrigation methods in cotton Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Check basin method b) Farmers practice: Flooding 7) Evaluation of Irrigation methods in groundnut Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Check basin method b) Farmers practice: Flooding in large plots 8) Demonstration of Sprinkler Irrigation system in groundnut Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Irrigation with Sprinkler system b) Farmers Practice: Flooding in large plots 9) Demonstration on direct seeding in rice Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Sowing of sprouted seed with paddy drum seeder b) Farmers practice: Transplanting

25

1.7.2 Mass spread of proven technologies 10) Demonstration of IPM in cotton Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Use of pheromone traps, stem application of monocrotophos, trap crops, light traps, bird perches. b) Farmers Practice: Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides 11) Demonstration on Integrated pest management for BPH in rice (Kharif & Rabi) Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: Leaving alleyways of 40cm after every 2m. b) Farmers Practice: No alley ways 12) Demonstration on management of yellow syndrome in Chilli Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Micronutrient Spraying (Mg-0.5%, Fe0.5%, Zn-0.5%,B-0.1% + Urea b) Farmers Practice: Indiscriminate pesticide application. 13) Management of rhizome rot and leaf spot in turmeric Treatments:2 a) Demonstration Practice: Seed treatment with Mancozeb b) Farmers Practice: Without seed treatment 14) Demonstration on stem application of monocrotophos Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice : Stem application of Monocrotophos :Water (1:10) at 25 DAS and 40 DAS b) Farmers Practice: Sprayings in place of stem application 15) Demonstration on weed control in maize Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a. i/ha as pre emergence spray + inter cultivation at 30-35 DAS b) Farmers Practice: Manual weeding + inter cultivation 1.7.3 Introduction of new varieties and crops 16) Introduction of short duration rice varieties and hybrids Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of new varieties like JGL-384, JGL-1798, RDR-836, MTU-1010, WGL-14 in kharif and varieties like WGL 14377 , JGL-1798 , in rabi. b) Farmers Practice: Use of local varieties 17) Introduction of suitable cotton varieties Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of new varieties like NA 1588, NA1678 b) Farmers Practice: Use of hybrids 18) Introduction of rabi redgram Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of varieties like ICPL 85063 and ICPL 8719

26

b) Farmers Practice: Monocropping of rice 19) Introduction of rabi blackgram Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: Introduction of varieties like LBG 645 and LBG 648 b) Farmers Practice: Monocropping of rice 1.7.4 Demonstration on production technologies 20) Demonstration of production technology in cotton Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration Practice: N150 P60 K40 kg/ha + IPM practices b) Farmers Practice: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers 21) Demonstration of Production technology in Chilli Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: N 200P 60K 80 kg/ha + micronutrient spray+ IPM practices b) Farmers practice: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers 22) Demonstration of production technology in turmeric Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: N 190 P 75K125 kg/ha + Rhizome treatment with carbendazim b) Farmers Practice : Higher fertilizer application with closer spacing 23) Demonstration of production technology in maize Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: N 120P 60K 40 kg/ha +chemical weed control with recommended spacing b) Farmers practice: Higher fertilizer application with closer spacing 24) Demonstration of production technology in Rice in kharif Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: N 80 P 60 K 40 Kg/ha + green manuring with Sesbania b) Farmers practice : Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers 25) Demonstration of production technology in rice in rabi Treatments: 2 a) Demonstration practice: N120 P 60K 40 kg/ha b) FarmersPractice: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilisers

27

1.9 Results Of Trials And Demonstrations Conducted Under SRSP Command Area (Warangal & Karimnagar (Data in Annexure V of volume - II )) 1.9.1 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in maize Irrigating maize at critical stages (seedling, knee-high, tasseling, silking and cob development stages) is important to get higher yield. Farmers generally irrigate maize crop at 12 days interval coinciding with canal release. Among the 35 demonstrations conducted at Warangal, irrigation at critical stages saved 100mm of irrigation water. The WUE was higher in the demonstration plots (14.3 Kg/ha-mm). The average additional income in demonstration plots was Rs.2593 /ha, Rs.2112/ha at reach II and I, respectively over farmers practice (Table-2 (Annex.V-Vol-II)).The yield and net returns obtained in demonstration plots was significantly higher at reach II only (5.29t/ha and Rs.16421/ha). A total of 52 demonstrations (Karimnagar) were conducted at all the three reaches for five years. Water saved in the trial plot where irrigations were scheduled at 1820 days during the vegetative phase and 8-10 days during the reproductive phase ranged between 105 to 113mm over farmer practice (Table 1(Annex.V-Vol-II)). Higher WUE was recorded in the trial plots compared to the farmer plots at all the three reaches and during all the three years. Significant increase in yield (7.09, 6.72 and 7.42 t/ha was recorded in demonstration plot as against (6.93, 6.57 and 7.27 t/ha) that obtained in farmers plot at reach I, II and III. Higher additional income of Rs.1913, 2280 and 2111 was obtained at reach I, II and III, respectively. 1.9.2 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in groundnut At Karimnagar this trial was demonstrated in 28 farmers plots for a period of four years. Excessive irrigations in groundnut were found to increase the vegetative growth, which effects the peg penetration. Water saved with 15 days interval irrigation was found to range between 86 to 106 mm (Table 3 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). Significant higher pod yield (1548, 1484 and 1818 kg/ha at upper, middle and lower reaches, respectively) was recorded in demonstration plots compared to the farmers plots (1424, 1339 and 1679 kg/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively). An additional income of Rs.3052, 2907 and 2521 was recorded at lower, upper and middle reaches, respectively. A total of 12 demonstrations were conducted at Warangal. The average quantity of water saved in the demonstration plots over that of farmers practice was 100 mm (Table 4(Annex.V-Vol-II)). The water saved is coupled with significantly higher yields and net returns(2.73 t/ha and 23536 Rs/ha) at reach II. The average WUE was higher in demonstration plots (9.75Kg/ha-mm). The average additional income in demonstration plots over farmers practice was Rs.5065/ha. 1.9.3 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in blackgram A total of 35 demonstrations (Karimnagar) were conducted at all the three reaches for five years. Blackgram grown with four irrigations saved water up to 125 mm (Table 5(Annex.V-Vol-II)) compared to that of farmers plot where 7-8 irrigations were given. WUE has also increased in trial plots due to reduction in the water applied and significant

28

increase in yields (1163 and 1447 kg/ha at reaches II and III) in trial plots than that of farmers plots (1056 and 1333 kg/ha at reach I and III, respectively). There was no significant difference in the cost of cultivation, thus additional yields in the trial plots was mainly attributed to higher net returns. 1.9.4 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in pigeonpea At Karimnagar this trial was demonstrated in 5 farmers fields for a period of Three years. Significant difference was recorded in the total quantity of water applied between trial plot and farmer plot. Water saved was 118 mm (Table 6(Annex.V-Vol-II)) in the trial plot. Significant difference was not observed in yield, cost of cultivation, net returns etc. because of heavy infestation of heliothis and indiscriminate spray of pesticides in reach III and I. However, significant yield differences were observed in reach II (1725 kg/ha) as compared to farmers practice (1592 kg/ ha). 1.9.5 Demonstration of irrigation schedules in cotton This trial was conducted in 13 farmers fields only for one year during 2001-02 at three reaches. Water saving of 80-90 mm (Table 7(Annex.V-Vol-II)) was observed. 1.9.6 Evaluation of irrigation methods in chilli Farmers irrigate Chilli by flat bed resulting in heavy loss of water with low WUE. The quantity of water saved in the 34 demonstration plots conducted at Warangal over farmers practice was 50 mm. Furrow method of irrigation gave significantly higher yields at reach I and reach II (2.5 t/h and 3.76 t/ha) but not at reach III. The net returns were significantly higher in reach I( Rs 51984 / ha) (Table-8 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). The WUE was higher in all the three reaches. The additional income over farmers practice was Rs. 9641/ha, Rs.10367/ha and Rs.14010 /ha at reaches I, II and III, respectively, which was significant at reach I only. 1.9.7 Evaluation of irrigation methods in maize Maize is sensitive to water logging. Maize irrigated through flat bed method was frequently subjected to water logging resulting in low yields. Hence, farmers were encouraged to irrigate maize by ridge and furrow method. Maize crop was irrigated through ridge and furrow method in 16 demonstrations at Warangal recorded significantly higher yields than the farmers practice in all the reaches (5.2,5.56and 5.06 t/ha as against farmers practice 4.78, 5.25 and 4.87 t/ha). The water use efficiency was higher in all the three reaches. There was saving of 50mm water in the demonstration plots. The net returns were significantly higher in reach I and reach II (Table-9 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). The additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.3613/ha, Rs.2,536/ha and Rs.1,611/ha at reaches I,II and III, respectively. 1.9.8 Evaluation of irrigation methods in cotton Excess irrigation in cotton leads to prolonged flowering and boll development and water loss in the form of evaporation. Therefore 29 demonstrations were conducted on evaluation of irrigation method in cotton at all the three reaches. Irrigation through

29

furrows gave significantly higher yields (2.85,2.69 and 2.61 t/ha) and net returns (Rs 41969,33716 and 35257 / ha) at all the three reaches. There was saving of 180 mm of water in the demonstration plots. The WUE was higher in all the three reaches (Table-10 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). An additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.4303 /ha, Rs.7754/ha and Rs.7705/ha at reaches I, II and III, respectively. 1.9.9 Evaluation of irrigation methods in groundnut Groundnut being a close spaced crop, check basin method of irrigation was introduced (Warangal). This ensures uniform distribution of water and avoids excess irrigations. Water is not uniformly distributed in flood irrigation due to lager plot size in command area. The quantity of water saved in 12 demonstration plots taken up at Warangal over that of farmers practice was 50 mm. The water saved was coupled with significantly higher yields (2.61 t/ha) and net returns (Rs 22094/ha) in reach II. (Table11(Annex.V-Vol-II)) The water use efficiency was higher in the demonstration plot (9.08 kg/ha-mm). The additional income over farmers practice was Rs.4,718/ha at reach II. A total of 3 demonstrations were conducted during 2002-2003 at reach II and III in Karimnagar. Check basin and border strip methods of irrigation were found better as compared to flooding method (farmer practice) of irrigation in terms of yields (Table 12(Annex.V-Vol-II)). Yields and cost of cultivation were almost same in check basin and border strip method of irrigation but for minor variation in water saved. It was more in check basin method of irrigation (68, 49 mm at reach II and reach III, respectively (Karimnagar)) compared to farmer practice and border strip method of irrigation. 1.9.10 Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton This trial was conducted at Karimnagar for three years in lower reach only. The total number of demonstrations conducted was three. Significant yield increase (3.35 t/ha) was recorded in the plots where drip irrigation system was formed compared to farmer plot (2.4 t/ha), where flat bed method of irrigation was adopted (Table 13 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). The higher yields can be attributed to more number of bolls, larger size of the boll and higher lint yield per boll. Cost of cultivation did not register significant difference because the depreciation and maintenance costs were included 1.9.11 Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut This trial was conducted for one year at lower reach in Karimnagar. Sprinkler method of irrigation in groundnut was found to save water to the extent of 149 mm (Table -14 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) over the farmers plot where flooding method of irrigation was adopted. The water-use efficiency was also more in trial plot (4.58) compared to the farmer plot (2.74). Higher yields were observed in trial plot (1.73 t/ha) as against (1.45 t/ha) that in farmers plot. Higher yields were done to higher pod number and comparatively more pod weight. In single demonstration conducted at Warangal through sprinkler method of irrigation quantity of irrigation water saved was 130 mm (Table-15 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) and higher WUE (8.99Kg/ha-mm) was recorded in trial plot compared to farmers practice

30

(6.71 Kg/ha/mm). There was 6.38% increase in yield with an additional income of Rs.2450/ha. 1.9.12 Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton It was conducted at Karimnagar for three years in lower reach only. The total number of demonstrations conducted was three. Significant yield increase was recorded in the plots where drip irrigation system was installed (12 t/ha) compared to farmer plot where flat bed method of irrigation was adopted (Table 13(Annex.V-Vol-II)). The higher yields can be attributed to more number of bolls, larger size of the boll and higher lint yield per boll. Cost of cultivation did not register significant difference because depreciation and maintenance costs were included 1.9.13 Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut This trial was conducted for one year at lower reach in Karimnagar and Warangal. Sprinkler method of irrigation in groundnut was found to save water to the extent of 149 mm in Karimnagar (Table -14 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) and 130 mm at Warangal (Table-15 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) over the farmer plot where flooding method of irrigation was adopted. The water-use efficiency was also more in trial plot (4.58) compared to the farmer plot (2.74). Higher yields were recorded in trial plot (1.73 t/ha) as against 1.45 t/ha that obtained in farmers plot. At Warangal, there was 6.38% increase in yield with additional income of Rs.2450/ha. 1.9.14 Demonstration of drip irrigation system in chilli Drip in Chillies was demonstrated during the year 2003-2004 at lower reach (Karimnagar). Drip irrigation system installed in chillies was found to increase the yields (33%) to the extent of 3 t/ha (Table-16 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) . The cost of cultivation in trial plot was higher than control plot as the depreciation and maintenance costs were included. In drip-irrigated plot 186 mm of water was saved over farmers practice of flat bed method of irrigation. 1.9.15 Demonstration of Intermittent Irrigation Schedules in Paddy In order to save the water in paddy intermittent irrigation schedules were demonstrated in 25 farmers fields for three years at all the three reaches in Karimnagar. The quantity of water saved ranged between 250-350 mm (Table-17 (Annex.V-Vol-II))) in trial plots compared to the farmers plots. There was not much difference in the yields at all the three reaches (5.51-6.04 t/ha). Water use efficiency was higher in 24 and 48 hours after disappearance of irrigation water compared to the farmers' practice of continuous maintenance of 5 cm depth of water. 1.9.16 Demonstration of direct seeding in rice This demonstration was included to prevent the transplantation of over aged seedlings in case of late release of water in the canal or delayed rains. A total of 18 demonstrations during kharif and 30 during rabi were conducted at all the reaches for

31

three years at Karimnagar. Yield, net returns and gross returns were not significant. Significant difference was recorded in cost of cultivation due to reduced cost of cultivation on transplanting. Additional income recorded ranged between Rs.1848 to 3385/ha (Table 18 & 19 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). At Warangal this trial was conducted with BPT-5204 and yield recorded in direct seeding was 6.2 t/ha, which was on par with the yield obtained by transplanted rice (Table-20 (Annex.V-Vol-II)). This technology has reduced the cost of cultivation by Rs. 1000 - 1500 per hectare and duration of the crop by 8-10 days. 1.9.17 Evaluation of cotton based cropping systems Farmers generally harvest cotton crop in the month of March, which coincides with pink bollworm infestation. Hence it is suggested to harvest the crop in the month of January and grow vegetables. A total of 22 trials were conducted in Warangal with sequence cropping of different vegetables after cotton. Cotton-bendi cropping system gave significantly higher yields and net returns in reach I (4.84 t/ha and Rs. 54,839/ha) and II (4.73 t/ha and Rs.41035/ha) compared to cotton- fallow ((Table-27 (Annex.V). Cotton- ridgegourd cropping system recorded significantly higher yields and net returns in reach I (5.27 t/ha and Rs.52023 /ha) and reach II(4.86 t/ha and Rs. 37812 /ha) (Table-28 (Annex.V) ) compared to cotton-fallow ( Reach I: 2.83 t/ha and Rs. 33013/ha and Reach II: 3.93 t/ha and Rs.19848 /ha). Cotton- bitter gourd cropping system gave significantly higher yields and net returns in reach I (4.81 t/ha and Rs.50738 /ha) compared to cotton-fallow. (2.45 t/ha and, Rs.17389 /ha) (Table-30 (Annex.V)). Cotton-cluster bean cropping system gave significantly higher yields (5.02 t/ha) and net returns (Rs. 55141/ha) as compared to cotton-fallow (2.97 t/ha and Rs. 30887 /ha) (Table- 31(Annex.V). 1.9.18 Maize based cropping systems Among the five demonstrations conducted in Warangal, Maize- groundnut cropping system gave significantly higher net returns (Rs.34022 /ha) than maize-maize cropping system (Rs.26577/ha) (Table-32 (Annex.V)). At Karimnagar, vegetable was introduced as third crop to increase the income of farmer (Table-25 (Annex.V)). A total of 18 demonstrations were conducted for three years at all the three reaches. In maizegroundnut bhendi cropping system, the maize equivalent yield obtained was 17400, 15835 and 16853 kg/ha as against 6710, 7440 and 7933 kg/ha in maize groundnut cropping system adopted in farmer plots at reach I, II and III respectively. The cost of cultivation was higher in trial plots, compensated by the higher gross returns. Vegetable cultivation has generated work for the agricultural labour in summer. An additional income of Rs. 42291, 28838 and 31400 was generated in trial plots over the farmer plots. Cultivation of greengram in summer was demonstrated in 25 trials where cultivation of

32

vegetable is not feasible. This cropping system has recorded a maize grain equivalent yield of 8960, 9650 and 10043 kg/ha (Table-24 (Annex.V) in trial plots, which was significantly higher than that of farmers plots. In trial plots, 31.4, 30.8 and 31.6 percent increase in yield was observed over farmers practice. An additional income of Rs.9089 and 8921 /ha was recorded at reach II and III, respectively over farmers practice. 1.9.19 Chilli based cropping systems 1.9.20 At Warangal, Chilli-bhendi and chilli-ridgegoud cropping system gave significantly higher yields (4.0 t/ha and 3.87t/ha) than sole chilli (2.45 t/ha) as practiced by farmers (Table-34 & 35(Annex.V)). 1.9.20 Greengram based cropping systems A total of 42 demonstrations were conducted for four years at all the three reaches in Karimnagar on greengram based cropping system. Introduction of cultivation of vegetables in greengram based cropping system has increased the yields (Table-26 (Annex.V)) by 177, 173 and 174 percent over over that of farmers practice (greengrammaize) at reach I, II & III, respectively. An additional income over farmer practice was Rs. 38744, 30653 & 33613 at reach I, II & III, respectively attributed mainly to the income of vegetable crop. In case of the farmers who cannot cope with the intensive labour required in the cropping system where vegetable is involved, summer greengram crop was suggested. Cultivation of summer crop facilitates the conjunctive use of canal and well water. In this cropping system the greengram equivalent yields recorded in the trial plots was 2835, 2775 and 3005 kg/ha (Table-23 (Annex.V)), which was significantly higher than the farmers plot yields. 1.9.21 Rice based cropping systems 1.9.22 In rice based cropping systems tested in Warangal, rice-bhendi recorded higher rice equivalent yield (15.27 t/ha) and net returns (Rs 52078/ha) as compared with other systems (Table 37). 1.9.23 Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize Farmers in the command area are accustomed to the practice of application of higher doses of nitrogenous fertilizers, especially complex fertilizers. Farmers also apply phosphorus as top dressing and many of the farmers do not apply potassic fertilizers. To correct these anomalies this trial was formulated and demonstrated. A total of 12 demonstrations during kharif and 12 during rabi were conducted for two years at Karimnagar. The results of the demonstration indicate that there was no significant difference in the yields (Table-38 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) between demonstration practice and farmers practice. The cost of cultivation was reduced which reflected in the additional income over the farmers practice.

33

1.9.23 Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy In paddy higher doses of fertilizers are applied anticipating higher yields without caring for the soil health. A trial on recommended doses of fertilizers was conducted on the farmers field and it illustrated that higher yields cannot be obtained with heavy inorganic fertilization. A total of 12 demonstrations during kharif and 12 during rabi were conducted for two years at Karimnagar. The yield data (Table-39 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) of the trial also reveals the same results. 1.9.24 Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton During the year 2001-2002 there was heavy infestation of Heliothis and other pests on cotton, devastating the crop completely. Farmers have incurred heavy losses on this crop. To educate the farmers on indiscriminate use of pesticides 15 demonstrations were conducted at Karimnagar on IPM in cotton. As a part of the integrated pest management, stem application of nuvacron, growing of trap crops, light traps, bird perches, NPV spraying etc were demonstrated. The results (Table-40 (Annex.V-Vol-II)) indicate a significant decrease in the cost of cultivation reflecting positively on the net returns. An additional income of Rs.7544 /ha and Rs.8718 /ha and Rs.9600/ha were obtained at reach I, II and III, respectively. At Warangal, 87 demonstrations were conducted at reach I, II and III during the period of 1999-2003 (Table-41(Annex.V-VolII)). Adoption of IPM traits in cotton recorded significantly higher yields (2.84, 2.55 and 2.58 t/ha) at all 3 reaches in demonstration plots compared to farmers practice. The net returns recorded were also significantly higher ( Rs 37431, 30049 and 29273/ha) than farmers practice at reach II and III. By adoption of IPM practices, there was reduction in cost of cultivation from Rs 2489 to 3084/ha. The percentage increase in yield over farmers practice was 7.57, 9.64 and 8.81 per cent at reach I, II and III respectively. The additional income over farmers practice was Rs.7,017/ha, Rs.7,377/ha and Rs.8,318/ha at reach I, II and III respectively. 1.9.25 Integrated pest management for BPH in rice Brown Plant Hopper is one of the major pests in rice. To protect from BPH, IPM traits were developed. Adoption of integrated pest management traits comprising of leaving of 30 cm alleys after every 2m and need based plant protection measures recorded higher yields. At Warangal 17 demonstration plots recorded significantly higher yields and net returns at all the three reaches. The percentage increase in yield over farmers practice was 7.43, 5.63 and 6.34 per cent at reach I, II and III respectively (Table-42 (Annex.VVol-II)). The additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.3,210/ha, Rs.3,396/ha and Rs.3,041/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively. The provision of alleyways has facilitated good aeration and exposure to sunlight thus decreasing the pest incidence. It has also facilitated to take up plant protection measures and even distribution of fertilizers during top dressing. This technology is being widely adopted by most of the farmers. 1.9.26 Demonstration of production technology in greengram during kharif Demonstrations on production technology in greengram during kharif were conducted for five years at all the three reaches in 78 plots at Karimnagar (Table-44

34

(Annex.V-Vol-II)). Increase in the yields though statistically not significant, higher net returns were recorded in trial plots compared to farmers practice at all three reaches as farmers generally grow local varieties which are not resistant to YMV and they do not adopt line sowing and chemical weed control (Pendimethalin @) 1.0 kg a.i. /ha). An additional income of Rs.4548, 4423 and 3986/ha. was obtained at reach I, II and III, respectively. 1.9.27 Demonstration of production technology in Redgram during rabi Production technology in redgram was demonstrated in 16 farmers plots for three years at reach I, II and III at Karimnagar (Table-45 (Annex.V)). The average yields in trial plot were 1435 kg/ha at reach I followed by 1369 kg/ha at reach II and 1698 kg/ha at reach III, which were significantly higher than the yields in farmers plots (923, 929 and 1153 kg/ha at reach I, II and III respectively). Increase in yield in trial plots over farmers plots was 55, 47 and 47 per cent at upper, middle and lower reaches, respectively. The increased yields was done to cultivation of medium, short duration varieties like LRG-30, application of weedicide i.e. Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha, application of recommended doses of fertilizers. On the other hand, the farmers cultivate local varieties with no chemical weed control. Though significant difference was not recorded in the cost of cultivation, significantly higher gross and net returns were recorded in demonstration plot due to significant increase in yield. 1.9.28 Demonstration of production technology in blackgram during rabi A total of 48 demonstrations on production technology in blackgram for four years at all three reaches were taken up at Karimnagar. Cultivation of high yielding varieties like LBG 20, adoption of chemical weed control, application of recommended doses of fertilizers, line sowing and effective control of powdery mildew resulted in increased yields in trial plots over that of farmers practice. The increase (Table-46 (Annex.V)) in yield was 40 percent at lower reach, 32 percent at middle reach and 36 percent at upper reach, which was significantly higher (1289, 1341 and 1507 kg/ha) over the farmers plots. The additional income recorded in trial plots was Rs.7342/ha at lower, Rs. 5918 at middle and Rs.6049 at upper reaches over that of farmers practice. 1.9.29 Demonstration of production technology in groundnut Increased yields were obtained in trial plots by adoption of recommended production technology in groundnut. A total of 21 demonstration during kharif and 28 during rabi were conducted for four years at Karimnagar. The percent increase in yield was (Table-47 (Annex.V)) 44% at reach I, 42 % at reach II and 52 % at reach III in trial plots as compared to that of farmers plots. The additional returns obtained in trial plots were Rs.6520/-, 7041/- and 9301/ha. at I, II and III reaches, respectively. The increase in yield can be attributed to adoption of chemical weed control with Alachlor @1.0 kg a.i/ha, seed treatment with Dithane M-45 @ 3 g / kg seed, maintenance optimum plant population( 44 plants per sq.m by adopting a spacing of 30 x 7.5 cm), application of gypsum @ 500 kg/ha and effective management of pest and diseases on the other hand,

35

the farmers do not adopt chemical weed control, seed treatment, application of gypsum and optimum plant population. 1.9.30 Demonstration of production technology in maize Demonstration of production technology in maize during rabi was conducted at upper and lower reaches in 28 farmers plots during 1998-99 and 1999-00 at Karimnagar. Application of weedicide, growing of Hybrids, irrigations through ridge and furrow and good nutrient management resulted in increased yields (Table-48 & 49 (Annex.V)) in trial plots at all the reaches. The average yield increase was 10% at upper reach and 11% at lower reach. The average additional income recorded in trial plots over the farmers plot was Rs.4029/ha and Rs.3202/ha at lower and upper reaches, respectively. .In Warangal, significant higher yield (4.63, 5.59 and 5.05 t/ha at 3 reaches) was recorded over farmers practice .The net returns were significantly higher at reach II and III only. 1.9.31 Demonstration of production technology in rice Application of excess amount of nitrogenous fertilizers beyond the panicle initiation stage, without use of organic fertilizers was one of the major problems in rice. Hence, the farmers were educated regarding the importance of green manuring along with recommended dose of inorganic fertilizers. In kharif, 75 demonstration plots organized indicates significantly higher yields (Table-50 (Annex.V)) at reach I and III and net returns in all the three reaches. The increase in yield over farmers practice was 6.44, 7.28 and 5.99 percent at reach I, II and III respectively. The additional income over farmers practice was Rs. 3,294/ha, Rs. 4,292/ha and Rs.3,0081 /ha. at reach I, II and III, respectively. This practice increased the yield and reduced the cost on fertilizers. In rabi (Table-51 Annex.V)), 11 demonstration plots recorded significantly higher yields and net returns in reach II. The net returns in reach II (Rs. 23,350/ha) were significantly higher over farmers practice (Rs.19,816/ha) .The increase in yield over farmers practice was 7.3, 6.5 and 9.4 percent at reach I, II and III respectively. Adoption of recommended production technology in paddy recorded significantly higher yields in trial plots over the farmers plots. The percentage increase in yield over farmer practice was 11.2, 11.9 and 12.5 percent at reach I, II and III, respectively. The additional income over farmer practice was Rs.2078, 2272 and 2810/ha. at reach I,II and III respectively. 1.9.32 Demonstration of production technology in cotton Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides is one of the major problem in cotton. Due to excess application of inorganic fertilizers there is antagonistic effect on micro nutrient uptake and the crop is susceptible to pests and diseases. Due to excess use of pesticides, some insects have developed resistance to pesticides. Therefore farmers were educated on the deleterious effect of excess use of fertilizers. Application of recommended dose (N150P60K40 kg/ha) and application of fertilizer split and adopting recommended cost effective and eco friendly IPM traits (growing trap crops, pest monitoring through pheromone traps, stem brushing of monocrotophos, application of

36

neem kernel extract, etc) with need based pesticide sprayings gave significantly higher yields (2.81, 2.61 and 2.54 t/ha) and net returns ( Rs 40442, 29876 and 34591/ha) in all the three reaches (Table-52 (Annex.V)). A total of 107 demonstrations were conducted in Warangal. The yields were higher by 9, 8 and 11 percent in recommended technology at reach I, II and III respectively. The average additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.7, 418/ha, Rs.7,521/ha and Rs.9,914 /ha at reach I, II and III respectively. 1.9.33 Demonstration of production technology in chilli Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides is major problem in chilly. Due to excess application of inorganic fertilizers, there is antagonistic effect on micro nutrient uptake and the crop is susceptible to pests (thrips and mites) and diseases. To educate the farmers on the deleterious effect of excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides 46 trials were conducted for two years at Warangal. Application of recommended doses of fertilizers (N200P60K80 kg/ha and gypsum 500 kg/ha and micronutrient sprays in winter season) with recommended splits supplemented by IPM traits (growing trap crops, pest monitoring through pheromone traps, application of neem kernel extract, etc) and need based pesticide sprayings gave significantly higher yields( 2.68 and 2.88 t/ha) as compared to farmers practice at reach I and reach III. The net returns obtained in demonstration plots were significantly higher than farmers practice at reach II and III (Table-53 (Annex.V)). The average additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.17,015/ha, Rs.10,732/ha and Rs.10,117/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively. 1.9.34 Demonstration on production technology in turmeric Application of higher doses of fertilizers, top dressing with complex fertilizers, non-adoption of crop rotation, no rhizome treatment, indiscriminate pesticide application are some of the major problems in turmeric cultivation. Therefore, 21 trials in farmers fields were conducted at Warangal. Application of recommended doses of fertilizers (N190P75K125 kg/ha), rhizome treatment with carbendazim/mancozeb, use of high yielding variety (Duggirala red) in place of local variety, crop rotation with summer pulses/vegetables to reduce the soil borne inoculums and need based sprayings to control leaf spot recorded significantly higher yield (Table-54 (Annex.V)) at three reaches ( 2.03, 2.90 and 2.2 t/ha) which are 9.72%, 10.69% and 9.88% higher than farmers practice at reach I, II and III, respectively. The additional income over the farmers practice was Rs. 2,970/ha, Rs.10,261/ha and Rs.5307/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively . In the year 2000-2001 there was heavy reduction in the yield due to severe incidence of leaf blotch and rhizome rot diseases.

1.9.35 Demonstration of chemical weed control in blackgram In black gram, weed control trial was conducted at all the three reaches in 52 farmers plots for five years in Karimnagar. The results indicate significantly higher yields in trial plots in reach III only (1512 kg/ha) over the farmer plots (Table-56 (Annex.VVol-II)). The yield increase over farmers plot was 25.2, 27.7 and 29.1 percent at reach I,

37

II & III respectively. The additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.4287, 5434/- and 6665 at reach I, II and III respectively. 1.9.36 Demonstration of chemical weed control in groundnut (kharif and rabi) A Total of 38 demonstrations during rabi and 7 demonstrations during kharif were conducted for all the three years at all the reaches in Karimnagar. Significantly higher yields (1750, 1643 and 2096 kg/ha) were recorded in the trial plots compared to the farmer plots. There was 44.9, 21.03 and 31.30 (Table-57 (Annex.V percent increase in yield over farmers plot at reach I, II and III respectively. Significant increase in the gross and net returns coupled with significant reduction in cost of cultivation contributed to the additional income over farmers plot to the extent of Rs.8630/-at reach I, Rs.4466/- at reach II and Rs.7520/- at reach III. 1.9.37 Demonstration of chemical weed control in paddy (kharif and rabi) Application of butachlor in paddy for control of weeds was found to be effective in increasing the yields and reducing the cost of cultivation. A total of 71 demonstrations in Kharif and 58 demonstrations in rabi were conducted at Karimnagar (Table-58 (Annex.V)). Higher yields were recorded in trial plots ( 4675, 4500 and 4870 kg/ha) compared to the farmers plot. An additional income in the trial plot over the farmers plot were in the range of Rs 3532 4146/ha. At Warangal, on an average of 5330, 5505, 5960 kg/ha (Table-59(Annex.V)) of yield was recorded in trial plots as against 4870, 5095, 5600 kg/ha in farmers plot at reach I, II and III respectively. 1.9.38 Demonstration of chemical weed control in pigeonpea A Total of 8 demonstrations were conducted at all the three reaches at Karimnagar. The trial plots yields were in the range of 1490 to 1635 kg/ha at 3 reaches.. Application of pendimethalin @ 1.0kg a.i/ha recorded an additional income of Rs.6055/at reach I, Rs.3093/- at reach II and Rs.3920/- at reach III (Table-60 (Annex.V)). The percent increase of grain yield was in the range of 13 to 32. 1.9.39 Demonstration of chemical weed control in greengram Weed control using chemical was tested at all the three reaches for two years i.e rabi 2000-01 and 2001-02 (22 demonstrations were conducted). Increased yields were recorded in trial plot (845, 590 and 660 kg/ha) over the farmers plot. The additional income over the farmers practice was Rs.2152/-,1521/- and 1436/- per hectare (Table61(Annex.V)) at reach I,II and III respectively. 1.9.40 Demonstration of chemical weed control in maize Weed infestation in the early stages of the crop growth was a major problem in the maize crop. Manual weeding is costly, labour intensive and time consuming, application of weedicide is congenial in situations where labour is scarce and costly. Application of Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha as pre emergence spray followed by intercultivation at 30-35 DAS was tested at all the three reaches for three years during kharif in 84 and during rabi

38

in 79 demonstration plots at Karimnagar (Table-62 & 63(Annex.V)). Yield in trial plots was to the tune of 4857, 5173 and 5623 kg/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively. An additional income of Rs 2040/-, 3310/- and 3858/- was recorded at reach I, II and III, respectively. During rabi, the cost of cultivation also reduced significantly in trial plots over the farmers plot. Significant increase in net returns and significant reduction in cost of cultivation has contributed to an additional income of Rs. 3662, 4177 and 3760/- at reach I, II and III, respectively. At Warangal, 13 demonstrations recorded significantly higher yields (5.37 and 5.05 t/ha) as well as net returns in reach II and reach III. The increase in yield (Table-64 (Annex.V)) was 4.5%, 8.8% and 5.6% at reach I, II and III respectively. On an average Rs. 300-500/ha were reduced on weeding by application of herbicide. 1.9.41 Introduction of new varieties in paddy during kharif New variety (JGL-1798) in paddy has recorded a yield of 4445, 4265 and 5718 kg/ha (Table-65 (Annex.V)) as against the local variety IR 64 or Vijetha (3985, 4190 and 5070 kg/ha at reach I, II and III, respectively) in 49 demonstrations conducted at Karimnagar. The cost of cultivation was almost same in both the trial and farmer plots as the practices adopted were almost same. An additional income of Rs. 5247, 4642 and 6086/- was recorded at reach I, II and III, respectively, which can be mainly attributed to higher yields .In Warangal, JGL 384, JGL 1798 and WGL 14 during kharif recorded significantly higher yield (6.38, 5.42 and 5.88 t/ha at 3 reaches; 5.82 and 6.07 t/ha at reach I and II; 6.37 and 6.08 t/ha at reach I and II, respectively) as against local varieties (BPT 5204 and Surekha). The farmers prefer fine grain varieties with higher yields. 1.9.42 Introduction of new varieties in paddy during rabi Introduction and performance of new varieties in Paddy (JGL-1798, WGL-14) was tested for 3 years at all three reaches. The average percent increase in yield in trial plots when compared with that of farmers practice was 17.56,18.27 and 17.63at 3 reaches respectively (Table-67 (Annex.V)). The farmers are preferring fine grain varieties with higher yields. In warangal, (WGL 14377) recorded significantly higher yield (6.93, 5.78 and 6.48 t/ha at 3 reaches which was superior over Erramallelu. This culture matures in 100 days and suitable for tail end areas in the command. 1.9.43 Introduction of summer greengram The average grain yield recorded was 1200 kg/ha. Net returns of Rs. 17300/ha was recorded (Table-71(Annex.V)) with greengram as summer crop. 1.9.44 Demonstration of newly released varieties in groundnut In groundnut, new varieties JL 24 and TG 26 were introduced. These varieties produced higher yields (3046 and 3220 kg/ha) when compared with local. (Table-70 (Annex.V)).

39

SRBC
I. Methodology 1.1 Site : 1.2 Under the Maddur major distributory (Block-IV), three representative villages Konidedu from upper reach, Bhupanapadu under middle reach and Maddur at lower reach ( tail end ) were selected for carrying out the envisaged programme. At each reach 40 ha area was selected on either side of the canal for conducting demonstration trails. 1.1.1 Reach-I (Konidedu) The major crops grown are rice, cotton, redgram, sorghum as sole crops and rice rice as double crop under bore wells. Farming situation is mainly deep black soils with bore well irrigation. 1.1.2 Reach II (Bhupanapadu) The major crops grown are mungari and American cotton, chickpea and sunflower as rainfed or as under tankfed irrigation. Though there is possibility for double cropping under rainfed conditions, farmers were growing single crop. The farming situation is mainly light black soils with tankfed irrigation. 1.1.3 Reach-III (Maddur ) Farmers are growing post rainy season chickpea and coriander under stored soil moisture keeping the land fallow during kharif. The farming situation is completely rain dependent deep black soils. 1.2 Soil type:

The soil samples collected at Konidedu village (upper reach) were subjected to profile analysis and the results are furnished in table N:1. In general, the depth of soils ranges from extremely shallow (10-25) to very deep (>150 cm). Most of the soils in the district are moderately deep (75-100cm) to deep (100-150 cm) .The soils are nearly leveled to gentle slope. The available water holding capacity of most of the soils in the district are in the range of 100-200 mm/m depth of soil. The soils are calcareous in nature ranging from slight to moderate. In general, nutrient status of the soils was low in available nitrogen, available phosphorous and medium in available potassium. 1.3Climate: During five years of study, (1999-2000 to 2003-04) only in 2000-01 and 2001-02, 26 % and 36 % excess rainfall was received as compared to decennial mean was received . In remaining three years, the crops were severely affected due to drought conditions.

40

An amount of 29 %, 33% and 32 % deficit rainfall was recorded during 1999-2000, 200203 and 2003 04 respectively compared to decennial mean (Table N 2). During 1999-2000, 2002-03 and 2003-04 cotton, sunflower and chickpea were severely affected by drought conditions. During 2000-01 heavy rainfall during the month of August (252.6mm) resulted inundation of cotton crop. Farmers puddle the cotton crop and planted rice crop. However, the performance of rabi chick pea, mustard and sunflower was satisfactory. In 2001-2002 due to late onset of monsoon, the paddy crop was transplanted late with aged seedlings. The second crop after rice could not be taken up due to poor recharge of bore wells at upper reach. 1.3 Technical programme of work

Before the initiation of the programme , bench mark survey of the selected villages of three reaches was conducted and production constraints of crops and cropping systems were identified. Based on these production constraints, technical programme of work was formulated (Tables N 3,4 and 5). 1.4.1 Station Trials Since scientific data is not available on water management in vertisols, keeping in view the release of water in SRBC, four station trials were planned to generate information pertaining to irrigation so that as and when water is released, the results obtained can be transferred and demonstrated in the farmers fields at different reaches under Block-IV of SRBC. 1.4.1.1 Water management studies in cotton i) Treatments : 6 1. Methods of irrigation:3 a.Ridge and furrow irrigation b.Skip furrow irrigation (Fixed furrows) c.Alternate furrow irrigation 2. Scheduling of irrigation a IW/CPE ratio of 0.6 and b. IW/CPE ratio of 0.8 ii) Design : FRBD iii) Replications iv) Plot size :4 : 6.3 m x 5.4 m : 120 N ; 60 P2O5 ; 60 K2O kg ha-1

v) Fertilizers applied vii) Variety

: NHH- 44

1.4.1.2. Water management studies in rabi sunflower i)Treatments : 9

41

Irrigation schedules :3 1.IW/CPE -0.6 2. IW/CPE -0.8 3.Critical stages (Budding, flowering and seed filling) Methods of irrigation:3 1.Ridge and furrow 2.Alternate furrow 3.Skip furrow ii) Design : F RBD iii) Replications iv) Plot size : 6mx6m :3

v) Fertilizers : 75-90-30 N,P2O5 and K2O kg ha-1 vi) Spacing vii) Variety : 60 cm x 30 cm : KBSH-1

1.4.1.3 Drip irrigation system in Cotton i)Treatments : Main : Irrigation interval a: Daily b: Once in two days c: Once in three days Subplot :Application rates a: 1 l/hr b: 2 l /hr c. 4 l/hr ii) Design :Split plot iii) Replications iv) Plot size : 40 m2 :3

v) Fertilizers applied : 120 N ; 60 P2O5 ; 60 K2O kg / ha vi) Spacing vii) Variety : 90 cm x 60 cm : NHH-44

1.4.1.4 Drip irrigation system in tomato i)Treatments :5 a. 1 l/hr ; b. 2 l/hr; c. 4 l/hr ; d. Flood method e. Furrow method

42

ii) Design : RBD iii) Replications :4 iv) Plot size : 7.65m x 4.2 m v) Fertilizers applied : 120 N ; 60 P2O5 ; 60 K2O kg / ha vi) Spacing : 60cm x 45 cm vii) Variety : Pusa -Rubi 1.4.2 Demonstration Trails At each reach on either side of canal 40 ha land at upper, middle and lower reaches was selected for demonstration. As water is not released in the canal, the demonstration trials were conducted under the existing conditions i.e., upper reach under bore wells, middle reach under tankfed, rainfed and lower reach under rainfed The technical programme of work was divided into three categories. 1.4.2.1 Group A: Research trials involving 2 to 3 treatments covering 5-10 ha at each reach. 1.4.2.2Group B: Demonstration trials involving improved / recommended practices comparing with farmers practice covering 10-20 ha at each reach. 1.4.2.3 Group C: Mass spread of proven technologies in large areas covering 20-30 ha. at each reach. Group-A (Research trials) 1. Varietal performance in rice( Kharif 2000 and 2001,rabi 2002 ) Treatments :5 a. Local check (RNR-1446) b. IR-64 c. Tellahamsa d. MTU 1001 e. NDLR-8 2. Studies on rice based cropping systems (2002 and 2003) Treatments :4 Kharif Rabi 1.Rice Greengram 2.Rice Blackgram 3.Rice Mustard 4.Rice Sunflower 5.Rice Sorghum 3. Comparative performance of direct seeding vs transplanting (Rabi 2001-02, kharif 2002) Treatments :3 A) Broadcasting of sprouted seed with Butachlor application B) Row seeding with drum seeder with Butachlor application C) Transplanting with Butachlor application Variety : IR-64 (rabi 2001-02) and NDLR-8 ( kharif 2002) 4. System of rice intensification (SRI) technique in rice( kharif, 2003) Treatments :2 A) Raising rice through SRI technique

43

B) Farmers practice of raising rice 5.Varietal performance in chickpea ( 1999-03) Treatments : 1. Local (Annegiri) 2. Swetha 3. Kranthi 4. ICCV-10 6.Sprinkler irrigation in chickpea. (2002 and 2003) Treatments : 2 (a) Sprinkler irrigation. (b) Rainfed crop. Variety : ICCV-10 (normal sowing) and Annegiri (late sowing) 7.Studies on plant population in chickpea ( 2002 and 2003 ) Treatments : 2 (a) Seed rate 80 kg ha-1 with improved seed drill (b) Farmers practice (100 kg ha-1) 8.Identification of suitable sorghum varieties (2002 and 2003) Treatments : Local popular varieties (Vs) New varieties ( NJ 2401 and NTJ 2) 9. Optimum spacing for rainfed American cotton ( kharif, 2000 and kharif,2003 ) Treatments : 3 spacing (a) 60cm x 45 cm (b) 90cm x 45 cm (c) 120 cmx 45 cm (farmers practice) Variety : Narasimha 10. Fertilizer management in rainfed / irrigated American cotton ( kharif, 2000 and kharif,2003 ) Treatments : 3 Rainfed a.Farmers practice (80 N : 60 P2O5: O K2O kg ha-1) b.Recommended practice (40 N :20 P2O5: 20 K2O kg ha-1 ) c.150 % of rec.dose (60 N :30 P2O5: 30 K2O kg ha-1) Irrigated a.Farmers practice (180 N : 64 P2O5: 140 K2O kg ha-1) b.Recommended practice (120 N :60 P2O5: 60 K2O kg ha-1 ) c. 150 % of rec.dose (180 N :90 P2O5: 90 K2O kg haVariety : Narasimha (rainfed) and NHH-44 (irrigated) 11. Water management for cotton (1999-03) Treatments : 3 Hybrid :NHH-44 A) Skip furrow irrigation B) Alternate furrow irrigation C) Ridge and furrow irrigation 12. Studies on cotton based cropping systems ( kharif,2001) Treatments :3 (a) Mungari cotton sole crop (b) Mungari cotton Sorghum (c) Mungari cotton pulse crop (green gram/chickpea) Variety : cotton Aravinda, sorghum-NJ-2401 and chickpea-Annegiri 13. Drip irrigation chillies ( 2001) and cotton (2002) Treatments :2

44

(a) Drip irrigation with fertilizer application. (b) Ridge and furrow method. Variety : Chillies: X 235 and Cotton :NHH-44 GroupB : Demonstrations 1.Varietal performance in rice ( kharif 2000-01) Treatments :2 1.Local check (BPT5204) 2.NDLR-8 2.Introduction of green manure crops preceding rice ( kharif,2001 and 2002 ) Treatments :2 (a) Rice alone (b) Green manure-rice Variety : BPT-5204 3. Demonstration of optimum plant population in rice (1999-2003 ) Treatments :2 (a) Row planting (20 x15cm)-Kharif , 15 X 10 cm in rabi (b) Farmers practice (24 hills /m2 kharif , 25 hills / m2 - rabi) Variety : BPT-5204 (kharif) and RNR-1446 (rabi) 4. Demonstration of fertilizer management in rice (1999-2003 ) Treatments :2 (a) Recommended fertilizer dose (kharif-160 N:80 P2O5: 80 K2O kg ha-1 Recommended fertilizer dose (rabi-120 N :60 P2O5: 60 K2O kg ha-1 ) (b) Farmers practice (300 N :170 P2O5: 75 K2O kg ha-1 ) Variety : BPT-5204 (kharif) and RNR-1446 (rabi) 5.Demonstration of chemical weed control in rice (1999-2003 ) Treatments :2 (a) Pre emergence application of Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i.ha-1 + one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting. (b) Farmers practice of two hand weedings Variety : BPT-5204 (kharif) and RNR-1446 (rabi) 6. Demonstration of IPM technology in chickpea (1999-2003 ) Treatments: Farmers practice (Vs) IPM Components of IPM: 1. Seed treatment with Trichoderma viridae @ 5 g/kg seed. 2. Inter cropping with coriander. 3. Use of pheromone traps @ ha-1. 4. Two rounds of NPV spray Variety : Annegiri 7. Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton (1999-2003 ) Treatments: Farmers practice (Vs) IPM Variety : Narasimha The following components of IPM was practiced. 1. Seed treatment with Imidachloprid 2. Inter cropping with maize (6:1) 3. Trap crop Castor around cotton 4. Monitoring the activity by placing pheromone traps 5. Erecting bird perches to facilitate the birds to feed on the caterpillars 8. Demonstration of chemical weed control in rainfed cotton( kharif,2000)

45

a) Pre emegence application of Pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg a.i.ha-1 + intercultivation (b)Farmers practice of intercultivation and weeding Variety : Narasimha 9. Demonstration of improved Agricultural implements ( 2000-03) Treatments : Threshing by machines ( Vs) Manual threshing 10. Demonstration of improved hybrid in sunflower (2000 ) Treatments: (a).Improved hybrid (MSFH-17/KBSH-1) (b) Local hybrid 11. Demonstration of optimum spacing in sunflower (2000 ) Treatments:(a) Recommended spacing 60 cm X30 cm (b) Farmers practice of no thinning Hybrid :KBSH-1 12. Demonstration of water management in sunflower (2001-03 ) Treatments: (a) Skip furrow irrigation (b) Farmers practice of ridge and furrow irrigation Hybrid : KBSH-1 13.Demonstration of sulphur application in sunflower (2003 ) Treatments: a) Sulphur application through SSP b) Farmers practice of complex fertilizer application 14.Demonstration of Boron application in sunflower (2003 ) Treatments: a) Boron Spray at ray floret spray b) Control 15.Introduction of rabi redgram ( 2002 ) Treatments :2 a. LRG 30 b. LRG 41 and c. ICPL 85063 16.Demonstration of Bio fertilizers in chickpea (20020 Treatments :2 Rhizobium + PSB + recommended fertilzer dose (Vs) farmers practice. Group C : Mass spread of proven technology 1. Popularization of Narasimha variety of American cotton (2000) 2. Popularization of Aravinda variety of Mungari cotton (2000 ) 3.Stem application of Monocrotophos in cotton (2000-03 ) 4. Popularization of recommended production technology in rice(1999-03 ) Spacing: 20 cmx 10 cm ( kharif) and 15 cm x 10 cm ( rabi ). Fertiliser dose: 180 N-80 P2O5 - 80 K2O ( kharif) and 120 N - 60 P2O5 and 60 K2O kg ha-1 (rabi) Weed management: Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 pre - emergence application + one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting Pest management : Integrated pest management practices 5. Popularization of production technology in cotton (1999-03) Spacing: 90 cmx 45 cm (rainfed) and 120 cm x 60 cm (irrigated).

46

Fertilizers : 20 kg N ha-1 at seeding and 20 kg N ha-1 30 DAS + 20 kg P2O5 basal for rainfed crop and 120 N - 60 P2O5 and 60 K2O kg ha-1 (irrigated crop) Weed management: Hand weeding once + 2-3 harrowings. Pest management: IPM practices followed. 6. Popularization of recommended production technology in rabi sunflower (2000-03 ) Spacing: 60 cm x 30 cm Fertilizers: 60N- 60 P2O5 30 K2O kg ha-1 Weed management: Hand weeding once + two harrowings. Pest management: IPM practices 7.Popularisation of recommended production technology in Chickpea (1999-03 ) Spacing : 30 cmx10 cm. Fertilizers: 20N, 50 P2O5 kg ha-1 and IPM practices such as intercropping of coriander, seed treatment with Trichoderma , pest monitoring with pheromone traps and two rounds of NPV spray were followed. 8.Popularisation of recommended production technology in redgram (2003) Recommended production technology of 10 kg ha-1 seed treated with 3 g of captan kg-1, 90 cm x 30 cm spacing, fertilizers dose of 20N+50 P2O kg ha-1 and IPM practices was demonstrated. 9.Popularisation of recommended production technology in sorghum (2003 ) Seed rate : 8 kg ha-1 , Spacing : 45 cm x 12 cm Seed treatment : Seed treatment with 3 g kg-1 of captan. Fertilizers : 60 N 30 P2O5 30 k2O kg ha-1 Pest management : IPM practices 10.Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice (2002-03) Weed management: Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 as pre - emergence application. The list of demonstrations conducted in different groups from 1999- 00 to 200304 in different crops were presented in Appendix NI to IX. The abstract of all demonstrations in different groups from 1999 to 2004 was presented in Table N 6 Table N 6: Abstract of all demonstrations in different groups from 1999 to 2004 Total Group-B Group-C Y Group-A Rabi Kharif Rabi Kharif Rabi ear Kharif
2 1999-2000 38 40 2000-2001 5 7 9 13 5 8 47 2001-2002 7 14 59 76 63 96 315 2002-2003 20 32 48 104 98 93 395 2003-2004 23 30 33 52 39 80 257 Total 57 83 187 245 205 277 1054 Trials were conducted on different crops with main emphasis on the following aspects. 1. Evaluation of different crops and cropping systems to suit irrigation periods. 2. Identification of varieties in respect of important crops grown in the command. 3. Demonstration of recommended schedules and methods of irrigation in important crops. 4. Demonstration of integrated weed, pest and nutrient management. 5. Demonstration of production technologies in important crops and cropping systems. 6. The recommended production technologies were demonstrated in farmers fields in comparison to farmers practice.

47

1.5 Economics of demonstrations Mean data of demonstration trials were calculated and presented in tables N (1255). The total cost of cultivation ha-1 of crops was calculated for the individual treatments on the basis of labour, inputs used and prevailing market prices. Gross monetary returns were estimated by multiplying economic yields with prevailing non-seed market price of grain. Net monetary returns were calculated by deducting cost of cultivation from gross monetary returns for each treatment. Benefit-cost (B:C) ratio was calculated by using the formula: Benefit cost ratio = Gross returns (Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1)

1.6 Statistical analysis of demonstration trials The statistical analysis was done by paired t-test. Statistical significance was tested by F value at 0.05 level of probability. The statistical analysis was not done for the demonstrations conducted for only one year. 1.7 Results Under SRBC Command it was planned to release water for ID crops from November to January. However, the water was not released in the first of the project period, hence trails on water management for cotton and sunflower were conducted at research farm RARS, Nandyal expecting the water to be released in the as subsequent year the water was not released in the subsequent seasons hence trails/demonstrations were conducted in the project site under existing conditions. 1.7.1 Station trials 1.7.1.1 Water management studies in cotton Objectives : 1.Efficient utilization of water under limited water resources 2. To find out optimum irrigation schedule for cotton and sunflower In both the years of study, methods of irrigation (ridge and furrow irrigation, skip furrow irrigation and alternate furrow irrigation ) and scheduling of irrigation ( IW/CPE ratio of 0.6 and 0.8) and their interaction did not exert any significant influence on kapas yield (Table N 7). The skip furrow and alternate furrow methods required only 50% of water compared to ridge and furrow method to produce similar kapas yield. Irrigation scheduled at IW/CPE ratio of 0.6 required 20 to 25% less water to produce the same kapas yield as that of irrigation scheduled at IW/CPE ratio of 0.8

48

1.7.1.2 Water management in sunflower Objectives : 1.Efficient utilization of water under limited water resources 2. To find out optimum irrigation schedule for cotton and sunflower During rabi (2001-02) 2 and 3 irrigations were given at IW/CPE of 0.6, 0.8, and critical stages. However, during rabi 2002-03, only one irrigation at IW/CPE of 0.6 and two irrigations at IW/CPE of 0.8 and critical stages were given. Different methods of irrigation (ridge and furrow irrigation, skip furrow irrigation and alternate furrow irrigation) and scheduling of irrigation (IW/CPE ratio of 0.6, 0.8 and critical stage irrigation) and their interaction did not exert any significant influence seed yield during both the years (Table N 8) . The skip furrow and alternate furrow methods require only 50% of water compared to ridge and furrow method to produce similar seed yield . Drip irrigation Due to low yielding of bore wells it is imperative to study drip irrigation for cotton and vegetables during summer season. Objectives : 1.Efficient and timely application of water under limited water resources 2. To find out optimum application rate 1.7.1.3 Drip irrigation in cotton In both the years of study, irrigation interval (daily , once in 2 days and once in 3 days) and dripper capacity ( 2 , 4 and 8 lt per hour) and their interaction did not exert any significant influence on plant height and kapas yield of cotton ( Table N 9). It clearly indicates that irrigation once in 3 days is sufficient to produce the same kapas yield with 66% water saving when compared to daily irrigation and 33% of water saving with once in 2 days irrigation interval. Dripper having capacity to deliver 1 litre of water per hour produced statistically similar yields with dripper capacity of 2 litres per hour and 4 litres per hour with water saving of 33% and 66% respectively in both the years of study. Drip irrigation is far better than flat bed method in terms of yield and water saving. 1.7.1.4 Drip irrigation in tomato During the crop growth period four irrigations were given in surface methods. Drip irrigation was given for 50 days (alternate days) as per the treatments. In 1999-2000 different methods of irrigation did not exert any significant influence on fruit yield of tomato. In 2000-01, drip method of irrigation with dripper capacity of 8 LPH recorded significantly higher fruit yield compared to flat bed irrigation but it was comparable with drippers with capacity 2 LPH, 4 LPH (Table N 10). In both the years of study among all the methods of irrigation flat bed method recorded the lowest fruit yield of tomato. The results indicated the dripper capacity of 2 litres per hour is more economical as compared to 4 and 8 LPH.

49

1.7.2 Results of demonstrations conducted SRBC command ( IV block) Group-A (Research trails) Rice Varietal performance in rice during kharif and rabi Objective : To find out the performance and suitability of improved varieties of rice in place of local varieties.

Field experiments were conducted during kharif seasons of 2000 and 2001at upper reach of SRBC IV Block. The cultivars NDLR-8 recorded higher grain yield (7800 kg ha-1 and 6562 kg ha-1) and additional net returns of Rs1750 ha -1 and Rs. 2639 ha-1 as compared to BPT-5204 (7500 kg ha-1 and 6185 kg ha-1) (Table N 11) during 2000 and 2001respectively. In addition, the NDLR-8 having tolerance to brown plant hopper and blast disease. Improved varieties like IR-64, Vijetha, NDLR-8, Tellahamsa, JGL-1853, were introduced in comparison with local variety RNR-1446 during rabi, 02 (Table N 12 ).. Among all these varieties MTU-1001 (8100 kg ha-1) and JGL-1853 (7870 kg ha-1) recorded higher grain yield and net returns than other varieties including RNR-1446 (local rabi variety) . Though the yield was low in NDLR-8, due to its higher price of grain it has recorded higher net returns (Rs. 36208 ha-1) and benefit cost ratio (3.26). Effect of age of seedlings in rice (BPT-5204 - kharif) Objective: To demonstrate the effect of age of seedlings on yield. Among the different aged seedlings used for transplanting, 30-40 days old seedlings recorded higher grain yield, but there was a slight yield reduction in yield was observed in the crop planted with 80 days old seedlings (Table N 13 ). Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice Objective: To demonstrate direct seeding of rice in comparison with transplanted rice. Direct seeding of soaked seed was done in rice with 8 row paddy seeder during rabi 2001-02 and kharif 2002 at upper reach. Establishment of seedlings was better with row seeder compared to broadcasting. Transplanted crop recorded higher grain yield, net returns compared to direct seeding with row seeder and broadcasting (Table N 14 ). Direct seeding with row seeder proved superior to broadcasting. During kharif, 2002 direct seeding rice (NDLR-8) proved equally good to that of transplanting (Table N 15).During kharif, 2003 direct seeding experiment was failed due to drought conditions.

50

Rice based cropping system Objective: To demonstrate ID crop instead of rice-rice cropping systems under bore wells for ground water conservation. A field study was conducted on performance of different rice based cropping systems at upper reach during 2001. The three different rice based cropping systems ricerice, rice-mustard, rice alone were studied. In rice mustard-cropping system, mustard (Cv. pusa baisaki) seed was broadcasted 3 days before harvest of rice in the month of December. Yield of the mustard crop was converted into rice grain equivalent yield. Among the three rice based cropping systems, rice-rice cropping system recorded the highest rice grain equivalent yield (13880 kg ha-1) and gross returns (Rs. 74270 ha-1). However, benefit cost ratio (2.81) was higher with rice-mustard cropping system than rice (2.65), rice-rice (2.16) cropping system. Rice followed by mustard relay crop sequence recorded an additional net returns of Rs.7,500 ha-1 than rice alone. ( Table N 16 ). Rice-black gram relay cropping was demonstrated at reach-II during rabi 20012002. Relay cropping with black gram gave an additional net returns of Rs 7938 ha-1 with an yield of 500 kg ha-1 than rice alone ( Table N 17). During rabi 2002-03, under irrigated conditions sunflower , sorghum , mustard , black gram and green gram crops were raised after kharif rice. Sunflower recorded higher net returns followed by sorghum (Table N 18). During 2003-04 irrigated dry crops could not be raised due to drought conditions after rice crop. SRI (System of Rice Intensification) Objective: To demonstrate SRI technique of less water utilization. The system of Rice Intensification (SRI), a less input technology was introduced in farmers fields the first time in Andhra Pradesh during Kharif 2003-04. SRI cultivation demonstration was conducted under III A.P.Irrigation project (SRBC) in Kesi Reddy Venkata Subba Reddy field in an area of 840 m-2 at Konidedu village. The nursery was raised on raised beds. Young seedlings of 10 days old were transplanted in the field at 20cm x 25 cm spacing with seed, mud and roots. The seedlings thus planted established and produced large number of productive tillers/hill .The main field is not flooded but kept moist by alternate wetting and drying. The rice plant roots under continuous flooding were small and deteriorated compared to healthy, white, large root system under SRI. In SRI cultivation, grain yield of 15 774 kg ha-1 was recorded compared to 5625 kg ha-1 in farmers practice. Productive tillers, panicle length, no. of grains per panicle and test weight were higher in SRI technique compared to farmers practice (Table N 19 ) ( State second highest yield in SRI cultivation).

51

Cotton Drip irrigation in cotton Objective: To demonstrate water saving through drip irrigation in cotton Demonstrated drip irrigation (in-line drip) system at upper reach for cotton crop. Fertilisers were applied along with drip irrigation (fertigation). Drip irrigation recorded higher kapas yield, gross returns and benefit cost ratio than ridge and furrow irrigation (Table N 20 ). Water requirement was 45 % less as compared to ridge and furrow irrigation. Water management in cotton Objective: To demonstrate water saving technologies in cotton in comparison to farmers practice.

Water management study was conducted in cotton during kharif 1999 to 2003 in farmers fields at upper reach. Kapas yield, gross and net returns in normal irrigation as well as in skip furrow and alternate furrow methods of irrigation did not differ significantly (Table N 21 ). In skip furrow and alternate furrow irrigation methods, almost 50 per cent saving of water was observed. Hence, farmers are interested to follow skip furrow or alternate furrow irrigation. By adopting this irrigation practice, farmers can save the irrigation water and additional area can be brought under irrigation. Fertilizer management in irrigated hybrid cotton Objective: To demonstrate recommended fertilizer dose for rice in comparison to farmers practice of high fertilizer application

Fertiliser management trail was conducted for two years during kharif 2000 and 2003 at middle reach. Different fertilizer treatments were imposed at basal and top dressing stages. The highest kapas yield of cotton was recorded with application of 150 % recommended dose of fertilizer. Though highest kapas yield was recorded with this treatment, the highest benefit cost ratio was recorded by recommended fertilizer dose (Table N 22). Optimum spacing in cotton Objective: To demonstrate optimum spacing in rainfed cotton as the farmers are adopting wider spacing. During 1999 recommended spacing was demonstrated against farmers practice of wider spacing. Due to drought conditions very low kapas yields were recorded in both the treatments. However during 2000 (middle reach-rainfed ) and 2003 (upper reachirrigated) recommended spacing of 90 cm x 45 cm (rainfed) and 120X60 cm (irrigated)

52

recorded higher kapas yield (Table N 23) , gross , net returns and benefit cost ratio compared to narrow (60 cm x 45 cm) and farmers practice. After demonstration farmers are adopting recommended spacing of 90 cm x 45 cm under rainfed and 120X60 cm under irrigation. Studies on cotton based cropping system Objective: .To demonstrate the growing of ID crops followed by cotton under bore wells as the farmers are practicing early sowing of mungari cotton leaving the land fallow in rabi. Mungari cotton was sown on 7-5-2001 and harvested on 10-10-2001at upper reach. It has recorded kapas yield of 1500 kg ha-1 with two irrigations. Sorghum, greengram and chickpea were sown on 10-11-2001, 4-12-2001 and 5-12-2001, respectively after removal of cotton crop. Among the different cotton (Mungari) based cropping systems, mungari cotton followed by chickpea recorded the highest cotton crop equivalent yield (2125 kg ha-1) and gross returns (Rs.42495 ha-1), followed by mungari cotton-jowar, mungari cotton-blackgram and sole crop of mungari cotton. (Table N 24 ). The highest benefit cost ratio was recorded with sole crop of mungari cotton Chickpea Chickpea varietal performance Objective: To demonstrate the performance of the chickpea varieties under low rainfall conditions in the farmers fields Demonstration trials were laidout in the farmers fields of Konidedu, Bhupanapadu and Maddur villages at upper, middle and lower reaches respectively during post rainy season of 1999-2000, 2000-01 and 2001-02 to assess the relative performance chickpea varieties . The varieties tested are Kranthi (ICCC-37) , Swetha (ICCV-2) , Bharat (ICCV10) in contrast to the existing variety Annegiri ( local variety). Due to low rainfall during kharif and no rainfall during post rainy season of 1999 (killer year) Swetha and Kranthi performed better compared to Annegiri. Swetha matured early and produced additional net returns by virtue of its Kabuli type seed valued high in the market. However, during good rainfall years (2000-01 and 2001-02) Swetha recorded lower yields compared to Annegiri and Kranthi varieties (Table N 25 to 27). During good rainfall years (2000-01 and 2001-02) the performance of Kranthi and Annegiri varieties are equally good and superior over Bharath. In 1999-2000 and 2002-03 due to low rainfall during kharif and no rainfall during post rainy season, Swetha and Kranthi varieties performed better compared to Annegeri. Sprinkler irrigation in chickpea Objective : To demonstrate Sprinkler irrigation in chickpea in comparison with rainfed crop.

Irrigation with sprinkler was given to chickpea (ICCV-10 and Annegiri) for normal and late sown crop at upper reach during rabi 2001-02 and 2003-04. In normal

53

sown chickpea, variety ICCV-10 with one irrigation through sprinkler recorded higher seed yield, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio (Table N 28) . Under late sown condition, Annegiri variety with one irrigation through sprinkler recorded the higher seed yield (833 kg ha-1), gross returns (Rs. 12495 ha-1), net returns (Rs. 2843 ha-1) and benefit cost ratio (1.29). Economics of sprinkler irrigation When water is available farmers follow sprinkler irrigation for chickpea crop. Generally two irrigations are recommended for chickpea crop ( first at 30 DAS and second at 55-60 DAS ) . Farmers obtained higher yields (25 q ha-1) compared to rainfed crop ( 10 q ha-1) in chickpea. Benefits of sprinkler irrigation was demonstrated for chickpea crop at upper reach. Total sprinkler installation cost - Rs 62500 ha-1 Irrigation cost for chickpea growing season (Depreciation + Interest + Electricity charges + labour charges) Cost of cultivation for rainfed crop Cost of cultivation of chickpea in sprinkler irrigation Gross returns in sprinkler irrigation Gross returns in farmers practice (rainfed crop) Net returns in sprinkler irrigation Net returns in farmers practice (rainfed crop) - Rs.4180 ha-1 - Rs.7800 ha-1 - Rs.11980 ha-1 ( Rs.4180 + Rs.7800 ha-1) -Rs 40000 ha-1 - Rs.16000 ha-1 -Rs 28020 ha-1 - Rs.8200 ha-1

By investing Rs 4180 ha-1 per one season of chickpea crop farmers will get Rs 19820 ha-1 extra profit. Optimum plant population in chickpea Objective: To demonstrate the usage of improved seed drill in reducing the seed rate in chickpea. Farmers were adopting higher seed rate than the recommendation. Due to terminal drought the crop failed. To reduce seed rate, improved seed drill developed at RARS, Nandyal was demonstrated at upper and middle reach. By sowing with seed drill 20 kg ha-1 seed was saved with a yield advantage of 225 kg ha-1 (Table N 29). Demonstration of pulse crop before chickpea In the middile reach (Bhupanapadu) and lower reach (Maddur) farmers are raising only one crop under rainfed conditions either during kharif or rabi leaving the land fallow during the preceding or succeeding season. There is a possibility of raising short duration pulse crops like black gram and green gram during kharif.

54

During kharif, 2003 green gram was sown during July and harvested during October. Immediately after harvest of green gram chickpea was sown and harvested during January. The green gram resulted a yield of 500 kg ha-1 and chickpea 750 kg ha-1 .For middle and lower reaches green gram followed by chick pea cropping system is profitable. Vegetables Studies on vegetable based cropping systems Objective: .To demonstrate the possibility of growing two crops in a year as the farmers are growing vegetables in kharif in evenly distributed rainfall years and leaving the land fallow during rabi. At middle reach, ridge gourd and bitter gourd were sown on 8-8-2001 as preceding crops to chickpea. Chickpea was sown on 18-11-2001. Among the different cropping systems tried on the black cotton soils (Reach-II of SRBC) under rainfed conditions, ridge gourd followed by chickpea recorded highest yield and gross returns (Rs. 24850 ha-1), but the net returns and the benefit cost ratio were highest with sole crop of bitter gourd (2.93) (Table N 30). Drip irrigation in chillies Objective: To demonstrate water saving with drip irrigation in chillies. This demonstrated was carried at upper reach for chilli crop on drip irrigation (on-line drip) at upper reach. Fertilisers were applied along with drip irrigation (fertigation). There was saving of 34 per cent water in drip irrigation as compared to ridge and furrow irrigation. Drip irrigation recorded higher green pod yield, net returns and benefit cost ratio than ridge and furrow irrigation (Table N 31). Economics drip irrigation for vegetable crop Installation cost of drip system Rs.100000 ha-1 Drip irrigation cost for chillies growing season ( Depreciation + Interest + Electricity charges + labour charges) - Rs.18155 ha-1 Cost of cultivation for chillies in farmers practice - Rs.20850 ha-1 Cost of cultivation of chillies in drip irrigation - Rs.39005 ha-1 ( Rs.18155 + Rs.20850 ha-1) Yield of dry chilli in drip irrigation 3800 kg ha-1 Yield of dry chilli in farmers practice 2280 kg ha-1 Gross returns in drip irrigation -Rs 95000 ha-1 Gross returns in farmers practice - Rs.57000 ha-1 Net returns in drip irrigation -Rs 55995ha-1 Net returns in farmers practice - Rs.36150 ha-1 -1 By investing Rs 18155 ha per one season of chilli crop farmers will get Rs 19845 ha-1 extra profit.

55

Family drip irrigation for garden beans Objective: To save the crop during dry spells with family drip irrigation for garden beans. Family drip irrigation equipment consists of 1000 l capacity sintex tank and drip irrigation pipes (main and lateral ) for an area of 1500 m-2 . Family drip irrigation system was demonstrated for garden bean crop at upper reach during kharif 2003. Garden bean crop was given life saving irrigation during August and September months (dry spell). Cost of family drip system Family drip irrigation cost for garden bean growing season ( Depreciation + Interest + Electricity charges + labour charges) Cost of cultivation for garden bean I.D crop Cost of cultivation of garden beans in drip irrigation ( Rs.2100 + Rs.18750 ha-1) Yield of beans in drip irrigation Yield of beans in ridge and furrow irrigation Gross returns in drip irrigation Gross returns in ridge and furrow irrigation Net returns in drip irrigation Net returns in ridge and furrow irrigation Rs.10,000 - Rs.2100 ha-1 - Rs.18750 ha-1 - Rs.20850 ha-1 175 q ha-1 158 q ha-1 -Rs 105000ha-1 - Rs. 94800ha-1 -Rs 84150ha-1 - Rs.76050 ha-1

By investing Rs 2100 ha-1 per one season of garden bean crop farmer realised Rs 8100 ha-1 profit by family drip irrigation over that of ridge and furrow irrigation. Twenty Five thousand litres of water was given for an area of 1hectare. Sorghum Identification of suitable sorghum varieties Objective: To demonstrate the performance of sorghum varieties released by RARS, Nandyal under low rainfall conditions in the farmers fields A field study was conducted on identification of suitable sorghum varieties at middle reach of IV block during rabi, 2001-02 and 2002-03. Among the three varieties (2 improved and one local) NJ 2401 has recorded higher grain yield (2350 and 1600 kg ha-1), gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio compared to NTJ-2 and local variety (M-35-1) (Table N 32). Between NTJ-2 and local variety, NTJ-2 performed better than compared to local variety.

Group-B : Demonstrations Rice Demonstration of improved nursery management Objective: To demonstrate improved nursery management in comparison with farmers practice.

56

This trial was conducted during kharif, 2002 at upper reach. The improved nursery management practices - recommended rate of seeds per unit area and fertilizer dose, control of iron chlorosis (most common in rice nurseries of this area) and plant protection measures were practiced, which resulted in better growth of nursery in comparison with farmers practice. Demonstration of optimum plant population in rice .Objective : To demonstrate optimum plant population in rice in comparison to farmers practice

Field trials were conducted during kharif seasons of 1999, 2001, 2002 and 2003 at upper reach to demonstrate the influence of optimum spacing in rice. In all the years of study, adoption of 20 cm X 15 cm spacing recorded additional grain yield and net returns significantly compared to farmers practice of zig zag planting (Table N 33). Demonstration of fertilizer management rice Objective : To demonstrate recommended fertilizer dose for rice in comparison to farmers practice of high fertilizer application

Most of the rice growing farmers at upper reach apply very high doses of fertilizers and complex fertilizer for top dressing (250N + 150P2O5 + 80K2O kg ha-1)than the recommended fertilizer dose (160N + 80P2O5 + 80 K2O kg-1 -Kharif and 120N +60 K2O kg ha-1 rabi ) Demonstrations were conducted at upper reach on fertilizer management in rice. The grain yields of rice with recommended fertilizer dose and farmers practice were almost identical. . But, higher net returns were recorded with recommended dose of fertilizer than farmers practice. Cost of cultivation was reduced to the tune of Rs. 3043 and 1757 ha-1 with adoption of recommended dose of fertilizer compared to farmers practice during kharif and rabi seasons respectively. Adoption of recommended fertilizer dose recorded an additional net returns of Rs.2012 and 364 ha-1 over farmers practice during kharif and rabi seasons respectively ( Table N 34). Integrated weed management in rice Objective : To demonstrate chemical weed control + hand weeding in rice in comparison to farmers practice of hand weeding .

Demonstrations were carried out in fields of upper reach during three consecutive years i.e. 1999, 2000 and 2001. In all the years of study, application of butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 + one hand weeding recorded an additional net returns of Rs. 1623, 1003 and 1154 ha-1 significantly over farmers practice of two hand weeding ( Table N 35).

57

Introduction of green manure crops preceding rice Objective : To demonstrate effect of green manure crops before rice

A field experiment was conducted during kharif, 2001 at upper reach of IV block of SRBC. Sesbania rostrata green manure crop was broadcasted during June and was incorporated at 50 per cent flowering stage. The green manuring resulted in higher grain yield( 6365 kg ha-1 )and net returns compared to in farmers practice of fertilizer application alone 6188 kg ha-1 (Table N 36) . A field experiment was conducted during kharif, 2002 at upper reach of IV block of SRBC with green manuring + 75 % recommended fertilizer dose (RDF) and green manuring + 100% RDF in comparison with farmers practice. Green manuring + 75 % RDF recorded lower grain yield and higher benefit cost ratio than farmers practice (Table N 37). By this farmers realized the benefit of 25 % saving of fertilizer by green manuring. Cotton Demonstration of improved variety in mungari cotton Objective: To demonstrate improved varieties of cotton in place of local varieties In both the reaches (upper and middle), Aravinda recorded the highest yields (1000 kg ha-1 R1 and 1025 kg ha-1 - R2 ) than local variety. Aravinda recorded additional net returns of Rs. 4180 ha-1 (R1) and Rs. 5625 ha-1 over local varieties (Jalgaon and Y1 varieties) (Table N 38). Demonstration of chemical weed control in rainfed cotton

Objective: To demonstrate the profitability of chemical weed control in cotton. Pre emergence application of pendimethalin @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 recorded additional net returns of Rs. 375 ha-1 over farmers practice (Table N 39). Chemical control of weeds in cotton was not economical due to repeated inter cultivation by the farmers. Demonstration of IPM in cotton Objective: To reduce the cost of plant protection measures and to maintain ecological balance and increase the net returns through IPM technology Integrated pest management was demonstrated against farmers practice of indiscriminate pesticide application during 1999, 2000 , 2001and 2002 both under rainfed and irrigated conditions . In all the years of study, adoption of integrated pest management recorded lower kapas yield, cost of cultivation and higher net returns compared to farmers practice except during 2002.During 2002, the pest incidence was very low and the effect of IPM was not significant. In all the years of study, integrated pest management recorded additional net returns ranging from Rs. 466 to 3825 ha-1 (Tables N 40 and 41).

58

Chickpea Demonstration of IPM in chickpea Objective: To reduce the cost of plant protection measures and to maintain ecological balance and increase the net returns through IPM technology In both the reaches (R-II and R-III), integrated pest management gave higher seed yield of 1250 and 1750 kg ha-1, gross returns of Rs 18750 and 26250 ha-1, net returns of Rs.8832 and 16132 ha-1 and benefit cost ratio of 1.89 and 2.59 in R-II and R-III respectively over farmers practice. During 2002-03 and 2003-04 the pest incidence was very low and the effect of IPM was not significant (Tables N 42 and 43). Demonstration of bio fertilizers in chickpea Objective: To demonstrate low cost bio fertilizers in comparison with chemical fertilizers. Method of application of Rhizobium and Phosphorous solublising bacteria were demonstrated at all the three reaches. Farmers treated the seed with bio fertilizers and sown the seed. The effect bio fertilizers did not influence the seed yield significantly due drought conditions (Table N 44). Redgram Varietal performance in redgram Objective: To demonstrate improved varieties of redgram in place of local varieties Two varieties (LRG-41 and ICPL 85063) were tested against local variety (LRG30) in redgram during late kharif 2002 at upper reach. Improved varieties recorded higher yields compared to local variety. One irrigation was given during pod development stage to all the varieties (Table N 45). With one irrigation, an increase of 500 kg ha -1 was recorded as compared to rainfed crop. Sunflower Demonstration of improved hybrid in sunflower (rainfed) Objective: To demonstrate improved hybrids in sunflower. Recommended hybrid MSFH-17 recorded an additional net returns of Rs. 425 ha-1 over local hybrid Ganga Kaveri ( Table N 46) at middle reach. Thinning in sunflower Objective: To demonstrate optimum plant population in sunflower in comparison with no thinning.

59

Recommended spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm recorded the higher seed yield (875 kg ha ) and gross and net returns over farmers practice of solid rows (700 kg ha -1) with no thinning at middle reach .
-1

Water management in sunflower. Objective : To demonstrate the water saving technology in sunflower Sunflower crop was sown during rabi 2001-02 (middle reach) and 2002-03 (upper and middle). Skip furrow irrigation was tried in comparison with farmers practice of ridge and furrow irrigation. With skip furrow irrigation, there was water saving without much reduction in seed yield as compared to furrow irrigation ( Table N 47 ). By adopting skip furrow irrigation, farmers can save irrigation water and more area can be brought under irrigation. In rice sunflower sequence, skip furrow and alternate furrow methods of irrigation to sunflower are more economical than ridge and furrow method of irrigation. Wilt disease was more in ridge and furrow irrigation compared to skip furrow irrigation. Demonstration of sulphur application in sunflower Objective: To demonstrate effect of sulphur on yield of sunflower. Generally oilseed crops respond to sulphur application as it is required for biosynthesis of oils. Soils are deficient in available sulphur. Farmers apply complex fertilizers which devoid of sulphur. Sulphur application through single super phosphate was demonstrated (upper and middle reaches) in comparison with farmers practice of complex fertilizers mostly as (di ammonium phosphate, DAP). Under irrigated conditions yield advantage to the extent of 300 kg ha-1 was observed at both the reaches (Table N 48). Demonstration of boron application in sunflower Objective: To demonstrate beneficial effect of boron on sunflower. Boron is required for better pollination and seed setting in sunflower. Hence 2% borax application at ray floret stage was sprayed at upper and middle reaches. Seed setting was good in borax applied treatment(2120 kg ha-1) compared no borax application (2000 kg ha-1). An increase of 120 kg ha-1 was recorded by boron application compared to control under irrigated conditions. Vegetables Introduction of tomato (rainfed) Objective: To demonstrate profitability of tomato cultivation in comparison with cotton. Tomato cultivation resulted in net returns of Rs. 10,300 ha-1 as compared to net returns of Rs 16,234 ha-1 from cotton at middle reach (Table N 49) .

60

Agricultural implements Demonstration of improved agricultural implements Objective: To demonstrate use of threshers, urea applicator, ferti cum seed drill in different crops. Demonstrations were conducted during 2000-01 in chickpea and sunflower and on chickpea (middle and lower reaches) and paddy (upper reach) during 20012002. In both the years of study, mechanical threshing saved Rs. 375 ha-1 over manual threshing. In sunflower mechanical threshing saved Rs. 250 ha-1 over manual threshing. In paddy also mechanical method of threshing saved Rs.175 ha-1 over manual threshing (Table N 50). Urea applicator, row seeder, paddy reaper cum harvester and ferti cum seed drill were demonstrated. Group-C : Large scale demonstrations Objective: To demonstrate mass spread or large scale practice of proven technologies in different crops. Mass spread of cotton varieties Varietal trial was conducted in mungari and American cotton during 2001-02 kharif season ( rainfed ) at middle reach and 2001-2002 (irrigated) at upper reach. Aravinda and Narasimha varities of cotton recorded higher yields than the local varieties grown by the farmers. Farmers preference was more towards Aravinda than Narasimha (Table N 51). Stem application of monocrotophos in cotton Stem application of monocrotophos in 4:1 ratio was done at 15 days after sowing. Sucking pest control was observed leading to reduction in regular sprayings. Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice Butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 was applied as pre emergence by mixing with sand in rice. Weed density was low in herbicide-applied plots with saving of Rs.350 ha-1 over farmers practice of two hand weedings. Production technology of crops Cotton : The recommended production technology of spacing of 90 cm x 45 cm (rainfed) and 120 cm x 60 cm (irrigated) , fertilisers of 20 kg N ha-1 at seeding and 20 kg N ha-1 30 DAS + 20 kg P2O5 basal, hand weeding once + 2-3 harrowing and IPM practices was demonstrated. Kapas yield, gross and net returns with recommended production technology was higher compared to district average in cotton (Table N 52). Application of complex

61

fertilizers and use of indiscriminate pesticides can be avoided with recommended production technology through applying recommended dose of fertilizers and need based plant protection measures. Rice : The recommended production technology of spacing of 20 cm x 10 cm (kharif) and 15 cm x 10 cm ( rabi ), fertiliser dose of 180 N-80 P2O5 - 80 K2O ( kharif) and 120 N - 60 P2O5 and 60 K2O kg ha-1 (rabi) ,integrated weed management with butachlor @ 1.5 kg a.i ha-1 pre - emergence application + one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting and integrated pest management practices was demonstrated. The grain yields of rice were higher by adopting recommended production technology as compared to district average yields (Table N 53). In recommended production technology, cost on fertilizers, weed control and plant protection were reduced than that of farmers practice. Sunflower: The recommended production technology of spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm , fertilizers dose of 60N- 60 P2O5 30 K2O kg ha-1 , weed management through one hand weeding + two harrowing IPM practices was demonstrated. Recommended production technology including thinning at a spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm, application of fertilizers through straight fertilizers and need based plant protection measures gave higher yields, gross and net returns than no thinning, indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides (Table N 54). Sorghum: Recommended production technology of 8 kg ha-1 seed treated with 3 g captan for kg-1 seed of, 45 cm x 12 cm spacing , fertilizers dose of 60 N 30 P2O5 30 k2O kg ha-1 and IPM practices was demonstrated. The grain yield of sorghum were higher by adopting recommended production technology as compared to district average yields (Table N 54). With recommended production technology, cost on fertilizers, and plant protection were reduced than farmers practice. Redgram: Recommended production technology of 10 kg ha-1 seed treated with 3 g of captan kg-1 ,90 cm x 30 cm spacing , fertilizers dose of 20N+50 P2O kg ha-1
and IPM practices was demonstrated.

The seed yield of redgram was higher by adopting recommended production technology as compared to district average yields (Table N 54). In recommended production technology, cost on fertilizers, weed control and plant protection were reduced than farmers practice. Chickpea: Demonstration of recommended production technology in chickpea through application of 20 N + 50 P2O5 kg ha-1 through urea and single super phosphate and integrated pest management practices such as inter cropping of coriander, seed treatment with Trichoderma viridae , pest monitoring with phermone traps and two rounds of NPV spray recorded the higher seed yield, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio as compared to district average ( Table N 55).

62

ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES To achieve the objectives of the project, trials and demonstrations were conducted under SRSP and SRBC command area for five years at Warangal, Karimnagar and Nandyal. The outstanding achievements are as follows. 1. Evolve and demonstrate diversified cropping sequences for horticultural and dry crops under rotational water supply regime. In place of monocropping of cotton, Chillies, turmeric, maize-maize and rice-rice cropping systems followed by the farmers, profitable cropping systems like cottonvegetables, chilli-bittergourd, Maize-groundnut-vegetable and greengram-maizevegetable were identified for the SRSP command. Due to non-release of water in canal in SRBC command, the cropping systems could not be demonstrated under irrigation project during both kharif and rabi seasons. During rabi, I.D crops like sunflower, sorghum, mustard and blackgram were introduced in place of rice and chickpea/sorghum were introduced after mungari cotton under bore wells. Under rainfed conditions greengram chickpea found profitable than post rainy season chickpea alone. 2. Improve Productivity through on farm irrigation agronomy (applied research and demonstration of irrigation practices and crop management practices to improve water use efficiency and crop yield) Under SRSP scheduling of irrigation at critical stages (maize and groundnut) with different methods of irrigation (furrow in chillies and cotton, ridge and furrow in maize and check basin in groundnut) reduced irrigation water requirement and resulted in higher WUE. In maize 39-42 %, cotton 15-21%, groundnut 24-31%, blackgram 20% and chillies 24% of farmers are adopting improved irrigation methods in Warangal district. With drip irrigation in cotton, there was water saving of 170mm as compared to farmers practice. This practice is not becoming popular due to high initial cost and availability of water as per requirement through canal. Demonstrations on recommended fertilizer application and Integrated Pest Management in different crops were organized. The fertilizer consumption reduced from 34% to 23% in cotton, 43% to 29% in chilli and 15% to 9% in groundnut. The practice of green manuring in rice has become popular in the command area and it has increased from 12 to 42 %. With adoption of IPM in cotton, rice and chilli, there was reduction in pesticide consumption by 65% in cotton, 32% in maize, 52% in chillies, 41% in rice and 43% in turmeric. Under SRBC, sunflower and cotton skip furrow, alternate furrow method of irrigation recorded almost similar seed yield to that of ridge and furrow method of irrigation but 50 % irrigation water was saved in skip and alternate furrow method of irrigation.

63

In chillies and cotton drip fertigation recorded higher yield, 40-50% less water requirement than ridge and furrow method of irrigation. In chickpea one irrigation through sprinklers at pod development stage gave 22% higher seed yield than rainfed crop. In rice kharif NDLR-8 rice variety recorded 8% higher netreturns compared to local variety BPT-5204 and 38% higher net returns compared to local variety (RNR1446) (rabi). Cost of cultivation of fertilizers was reduced to Rs. 3043 ha-1 by adopting recommended fertilizer doses compared to farmers practice. Closer planting of seedlings recorded additional net returns of Rs. 2770 ha-1 compared to farmers practice of low plant population. In rice, green manuring + 75% recommended fertilizer dose recorded almost similar yield to that of famers practice. In cotton Aravinda ( Mungari cotton) and Narasimha (American cotton) recorded 25-30% higher yields compared to local varieties. Adoption of IPM recorded an additional net return of Rs. 466 to 2365 ha-1 compared to farmers practice. By adoption of recommended fertilizer management practices cost of cultivation was reduced to a tune of Rs. 1600 ha-1 compared to farmers practice. In chickpea, under low rainfall conditions, Swetha and Kranti performed better as compared to local variety. During good rainfall years, Kranti and Annegiri were equally good and superior over Bharat. Integrated pest management practices recorded higher seed yield, gross and net returns as well as benefit cost ratio compared to farmers practice. By adopting recommended production technology an additional net returns of Rs. 3500 ha-1 was recorded compared to farmers practice. In sunflower recommended spacing of 60 cm x 30 cm recorded the higher seed yield, gross and net returns over farmers practice of solid rows with no thinning. In sunflower application of sulphur through Single super phosphate recorded higher yield compared to farmers practice of complex fertilizer application. 3. Improve command area extension services and participatory irrigation management practices through the development of water user associations To create awareness among farmers on irrigation water conservation and utilization, 81training programmes were conducted to the farmers of different mandals / blocks in Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal during 2003-2004. Post training evaluation indicate that more than 80% of farmers were placed in medium or high knowledge (crop technologies and water management practice of different crops) category. Rest of the farmers fall in low knowledge group because of illiteracy or lack of awareness. Three trainings at each center were given to the line departmental officers of agriculture, horticulture and engineers, which greatly sharpened their TOT (Transfer of Technology) skills in irrigation management aspects. Workshop on Irrigation management was conducted with ANGRAU scientists, Departmental Officers and farmers. Various aspects on irrigation water management were discussed. The impact of the project can be seen from the medium to higher knowledge gained by the farmers on agricultural production technology. Higher percentage of adoption of improved technology, increase in labour employment potential, increase in productivity of crops was achieved in beneficiary villages as compared to non-beneficiary villages and pre-project.

64

SOIL NUTRIENT MAP OF KARIMNAGAR & WARANGAL (SRSP) AND KURNOOL (SRBC) DISTRICTS

SRSP A) Karimnagar
Soils of the district: Karimnagar district is having 57 mandals with a geographical area of 11.88 lakh.ha . Out of 57 mandals 25 mandals are in SRSP Command area and 32 mandals in Non- Command area. (Soil nutrient maps enclosed) Soil of Karimnagar district have very gentle slope and moderately eroded. The hydro geomorphology is peninsular genesis and granite soil texture class was red sandy loam to black clay soils .The effective root zone depth was red extremely shallow (below 25Cm) to deep black soils (above 200 cm). The major groups of soils are red soils (73%) and black soils (23%). The soil colour is reddish brown to grey brown in red soils and in black soils it is grey to dark brown in colour. The water holding capacity range from 50 to150mm/mt in 65.3% of the total area. According to the land capability classes 47.87 percent of the geographical area is moderately good cultivable land and 26.57 percent is good cultivatable land. The length of the growing season period is below 150 days in 61.01 percent and above 150 days in 36.28 percent of the net area sown (394087 ha). Nutrient status for different mandals of Karimnagar district: S.No. Low Organic Carbon Command Non Command Available Phosphorus Command Non Command Available Potassium Command Non Command 16 15 Number mandals Medium 8 18 23 31 14 24 High 1 2 10 9

Nitrogen: Among 57 mandals, 31 and 26 mandals are low and medium category in the district. In command area, 16 and 8 mandals fall under low and medium category, respectively. In non-command area 15 mandals fall in low and 18 mandals in medium category. Phosphorus: The phosphorus status of district was medium to high. Out of 57 mandals, 54 mandals fall under medium and 3 mandals fall in high phosphorus category.

65

Potassium: The available potash status is high in Karimnagar district. Of 57 mandals, 24 mandals fall under medium and 33 mandals fall under low category. Critical Limits for Micro-Nutrients:

S.No
1 2 3 4 Zinc Iron Copper Manganese

Micro- Nutrient

Critical Levels (ppm) Red Soil Black Soil 0.65 0.80 4.0 5.0 0.2 0.3 2.0 3.0

Micro- Nutrient Status in Karimnagar District: S.NO 1 2 3 4 Nutruient Total number Percentage of sample Percentage of sample of samples below CL above CL Zinc 2711 73.6 26.4 Copper 2711 1.5 98.5 Iron 2711 26.2 73.8 Managanese 2711 21.0 79.0

B) Warangal 1. Major soil groups in the district are red loamy (21%), red clay (17.1%), deep
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. black soil (8.7%) and saline sodic soils (13.7%). In general the depth of the soils ranges from extremely shallow (10-25 cm) to very deep (>150 cm). In Warangal district, most of the soils are moderately deep (75100 cm) to very deep (>150 cm). The soils are nearly leveled (0-1%) to gentle slope (3-8%). The available water holding capacity is very low (<50 mm/m of soil) to medium (100-150 mm/m of soil). Most of the soils in the district are non-calcarious in nature. Nitrogen status is low in entire district (soil nutrient maps enclosed) Phosphorus status in the district is low (<20 kg/ha of p2o5) to medium (20-50 kg/ha of p2o5). Potassium status is medium (150-300 kg/ha of k2o) to high (> 300 kg/ha of k2o) in entire district except in Parkal mandal where potassium status is low ( < 150 kg/ha of k2o). Zinc status is marginal (0.5-0.7 ppm) to adequate (0.75 to 1.5 ppm).

66

SRBC Kurnool
The important soil orders (USDA Classification) in Kurnool district are Alfisols,Entisols, Inceptisols and Vertisols. The important soil groups are (Soil fertility maps enclosed) 1.Black cotton soils, which are heavy and deep to very deep belonging to Vertisols-36.2%. 2. Red earths with clayey sub soil (association of Alfisols and Inceptisols)- 12.6%. 3. Red earths with loamy sub soil i.e., chalkas (association of Inceptisols and Alfisols)- 31.1%. 4. Red sandy loam soils i.e., Dubbas and Chalkas (associations of Entisols, Inceptisols and Alfisols)-5.3%. 5.Problem soils (saline/sodic)-10.2% 6.Rock land and others- 4.6% In general the depth of soils ranges from extremely shallow (10-25) to very deep(>150 cm). Most of the soils in the district are moderately deep(75-100cm) to deep (100-150 cm) .The soils are nearly leveled to gentle slope. The available water holding capacity of most of the soils in the district is in the range of 100-200 mm/m depth of soil. The soils are calcareous in nature ranging from slight to moderate. The soils of the entire district are low in available nitrogen .The phosphorous content of the soils is low in all the mandals of the district except in yemmiganur where it is medium. The available potassium is medium in Pathikonda ,Bandiatmakur, Gospadu , Sirivel, Dornipadu, Rudravaram ,and Chalagalamarri mandals where as it is high in rest of the mandals of the district. The status of available major nutrients in soils is classified as low, medium and high as detailed below: Available nutrient (k g ha-1) N P K Low <250 <11 <120 Medium 250-500 11-25 120-280 High >500 >25 >280

About 67.7% of the soils in the district are having marginal available Zinc status. The available Zinc status is low in some parts of Kosigi, Chippagiri, Maddikera, Kurnool, Dhone, Peapuly, Owk, Sanjamala, Dornipadu, Allagadda, Banaganapalli, Panyam, Pamulapadu and Atmakur mandals. Recommendation The recommendations of nutrients as per soil test values is done such that, if the status is low, the recommended dose is increased by th of the recommended dose, and reduced by of the recommended dose if the status is high. If the status is medium then the recommended dose as such is recommended for application.

67

SUSTAINABILITY ISSUES The sustainability of the new technologies introduced in A.P III irrigation project in SRSP and SRBC command can be estimated and judged through the findings of the project impact survey. To have an over all picture on sustainability the survey was conducted in the non-beneficiary villages where, the technology has been disseminated from the pilot area without considerable intervention of the scientists. The review of the impact survey report indicates that the technologies will be accepted and adopted by the farmers in due course of time. The technologies with good adoption and higher predicted sustainability are mentioned below. 1. Reduced number of irrigations in maize is accepted by the farmers as they have realised that excessive irrigations do not give high yields. This practice may be further continued without any technical support as water released in the canal is also regulated limiting the water availability. 2. Ridge & furrow method of irrigation in maize and check basin method in groundnut is either practiced by the farmers or adopted by the farmers mainly due to easy management of water in these methods. Thus this technology is well established and highly sustainable requiring no further demonstrations. 3. In case of advance methods of irrigations like sprinkler and drip, the adoption and in turn the sustainability is very low due to higher initial cost and ample supply of irrigation water. 4. Introduction of summer vegetable in maize based and greengram based cropping systems is accepted by the farmers and mostly sustainable only with small farmers where family labour is available. 5. New varieties introduced of various crops like blackgram, greengram, paddy have already reached the neighboring villages and these new varieties will be cultivated by the farmers for a long period. 6. Green manuring practice in rice was adopted by the farmers and will be sustained even in the post-project period as government is also encouraging green manuring by providing subsidized seed. 7. Integrated pest management practices were introduced in paddy, cotton and chillies. Of all the IPM practices, stem application of monocrotophos and trap cropping in cotton, alleyways in paddy are most sustainable practices. 8. Herbicide application especially in maize and paddy is well accepted by the farmers and the farmers in the neighboring villages are also applying herbicides. 9. Sustained higher yields can be realized in post-project period also as the higher yields are mainly attributed to implementation of advance production technology. 10. In place of complex fertilizers, straight fertilizers are now being applied as top dressing reducing cost of fertilizers. 11. Sprinkler irrigation will enhance the area under SRBC command by increased water use efficiency.

68

CONCERNS AND FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS The technologies popularized in the project needs support by Government and extension agencies for further continuation after the project. These /issues are discussed below. 1. The water should be made available in the canal for giving scheduled irrigations to different crops. 2. Different vegetables tested in cotton, maize, chilli and greengram based cropping systems are cultivated on a limited scale by farmers. These require Government support for marketing for their expansion. 3. The practice like greenmanuring has become popular in the project command area. This requires support from agricultural department for further spread to other farmers. 4. The practice of IPM technology should be adopted on the community basis for getting maximum benefit. This needs further popularization and various components of IPM should be made available in the market for more adoption. 5. The field channels in the command area are to be maintained by water users association members. These channels require to be maintained by the farmers to get sufficient water to their fields.The training and visit to demonstrations by more number of farmers with the help of extension agencies involving water users associations will disseminate the technologies identified in the project

69

CONSTRAINTS IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION A.P III Irrigation project conceived during the year 1998-1999 and was under implementation for the past five years. In the process of implementation of the project few but considerable constraints were encountered in acceptance and implementation of improved new technology by the farmers. The technology introduced to the farmers at times was not accepted in Toto but with few modifications to suit the local conditions. The constraints and failures in the project implementation are discussed in detail below.
SRSP:

1) Introduction of ID crops in place of rice to achieve the equitable distribution of water to the farmers was not well accepted by the farmers of the upper reach as they have water through canal as per requirement. Comparatively, farmers at the tail end have accepted cultivation of the ID crops in place of paddy and are cultivating these crops. 2) The low acceptance rate of the ID crops by the farmers of the SRSP command area is due to easy management of rice and assured returns from the crop compared to the ID crops introduced like blackgram, redgram, groundnut etc. 3) Cultivation of pulse crop in crop rotation for maintaining the soil health is well understood by the farmers but practiced to the certain extent due to higher pest and disease infestation and fluctuations in the yield and market price of the produce in comparison to the problem free Maize crop. 4) In case of redgram during the year 2001-2002, there was heavy infestation of Heliothis devastating the crop. It could not be controlled with any of the chemicals or IPM practices. As a result of this many of the farmers who have accepted and cultivated redgram have given up cultivation of redgram. 5) With the project implementation most of the farmers are enlightened on greenmanuring but very few farmers grow green manure crop due to one or more of the following reasons like non-availability of seed and late onset of monsoon or late release of water in the cannals. 6) More spacing and low seed rate is practiced by some of the farmers in case of pulses like blackgram and greengram and oilseed like groundnut due to nonavailability of suitable intercultivation implements. 7) Availability of improved variety seed in case of pulses is a constraint coming in the way of large-scale cultivation of pulses, as farmers still are not practicing the seed village concept to the extent required. The farmers do not preserve the seed for the next season. 8) Acceptance of different water management practices by the farmers including reduced number of irrigations and improved methods of irrigation is slow and require lot of training and guidance as ample amount of water is available in

70

canal especially in case of upper reach farmers compared to the tail end farmers. 9) In case of micro-irrigation systems, in spite of demonstrations, training and field days in association with the government subsidies, the farmers are not ready to purchase and install the drip and sprinkler irrigation systems in their fields as they feel the initial cost is too high. In the present situation where sufficient water is available in the canals and wells, farmer is not realizing the importance of water saving. SRBC; 1. Due to non release of water in canal in SRBC command, the cropping systems could not be demonstrated under irrigation project during both kharif and rabi seasons. 2. The demonstration site that is being demarcated to 40 ha in each reach where inputs were supplied to conduct trails/ demonstrations had became a point of conflict. As majority of farmers are resource poor in the project area, after two years they started demanding inputs by comparing with the beneficiary farmers in their respective reaches which created problems for the scientists to carry the trails / demonstrations.

71

STRATEGY AND ACTION PLAN TO MAINSTREAM THE FINDINGS The technologies developed in Third A. P Irrigation Project implemented from 1998 to 2004 will be discussed in the zonal meetings and ZREAC meetings to be held in August, 2004. The findings recommended for incorporation in the package of practices are given below. I. Technologies for Adoption (Recommendations communicated to different extension agencies) SRSP Maize: 1. Irrigating maize at 15-17 days interval during vegetative stage and 8-10 days interval during reproductive stage was sufficient to achieve the optimum yields in rabi. 2. Irrigating at critical stages saves about 100mm in rabi. 3. Ridge and furrow method for irrigation during rabi is recommended. Paddy: 1. Irrigating paddy 24 hours after disappearance of 5cm of water. 2. Application of butachlor or pertilachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i /ha 3-5 days after transplanting 3. Growing of JGL-1798, JGL-1853 and WGL-14 during Kharfi. 4. Incorporation of the greenmanure (dhiancha) crop was found to increase the yields in Paddy. 5. Planting with 40 cm alleyways after every 2m and need based plant protection to reduce the incidence of BPH. 6. Under late sown conditions in kharif, direct seeding of rice gives on par yield with that of transplanted rice. Blackgram: 1. Cultivation of improved Blackgram varieties with prophylactic control of powdery mildew during rabi was found to be remunerative and thus can be recommended in the fields where occasional water stagnation is not a problem in SRSP command. 2. For rabi Blackgram scheduling of irrigation at 0, 25, 45 and 65 days after sowing.

72

Cotton 1. Furrow method of irrigation saves about 180mm of water compared to flood irrigation. 2.IPM including stem application of monocrotophos (!:10), growing of trap crops, fixing of pheromone traps, use of NSK extract and need based plant protection measures reduces the cost of cultivation and increases the yield . 3. Under rainfed and limited irrigated conditions, short duration straight varieties like NA 1678, NA 1588 and Narsimha performs better than hybrids. Groundnut 1. Groundnut irrigated at critical stages through check basin method gives higher pod yield with a saving of 100mm of water . 2. Groundnut irrigated through sprinklers (except at flowering) require less water over farmers irrigation practice. Turmeric 1. Application of NPK @ 190:75:120 Kg/ha and seed treatment with carbendazim/mancozeb. Cropping Systems 1. Cultivation of summer vegetable or green gram to facilitate conjunctive use of canal and well water. 2. Cultivation of maize or black gram in rabi after kharif rice. 3. Maize-groundnut in maize based, rice-vegetable instead of rice mono-cropping and cotton-vegetable instead of cotton mono-cropping is recommended. SRBC
1. In sunflower and cotton skip furrow, alternate furrow method of irrigation is

recommended in place of ridge and furrow method of irrigation. 2. In chickpea, one irrigation through sprinklers at pod development stage. 3. In kharif and rabi NDLR-8 rice variety is recommended to local variety. 4. Application of recommended fertilizer dose in rice (16080 80 NPK kg ha-1) 5. In rice transplanting optimum seedlings (33 hills in kharif and 66hills in rabi ) compared to farmers practice of low plant population. 6. Growing of green manure crop before rice and application of 75% recommended fertilizer dose and formation of alleyways at 2 m interval. 7. Rice followed by raising sunflower, sorghum and mustard. 8. In cotton Aravinda ( Mungari cotton) and Narasimha (American cotton) were recommended to local varieties. 9. Adoption of IPM in cotton, chickpea and redgram. 10. In cotton adoption of recommended fertilizer management (120-60-60 NPK kg ha-1) practices. 11. In chickpea sowing with seed drill developed by RARS, Nandyal. 12. In chickpea under low rainfall conditions Swetha and Kranti are recommended. During good rainfall years Kranti and Annegiri varieties perform better.

73

13. Application of single super phosphate for pulses (chickpea and redgram) and

oilseed crop (sunflower) in place of complex fertilizer application These recommendations will be incorporated in package of practices after discussion in the meetings. II.Technologies that needs further testing and refinement 1.Drip fertigation in chillies and cotton 2.Direct seeding in rice 3.Introduction of suitable crops before post rainy season chickpea III.Information: 1.In garden bean crop irrigation through family drip during dry spells increases the income by Rs 8100 ha-1 as compared to rainfed crop. 2.Under irrigated conditions mungari cotton followed by chickpea and sorghum is profitable. Model irrigation block: The irrigation block designed and developed at ARS Warangal, ARS Karimnagar and RARS, Nadyal will be utilized for conducting different experiments` involving advanced irrigation methods like drip, sprinkler in comparision to conventional irrigation methods. It will be utilized as a model for giving training to the farmers and line departmental officers. One training each for the farmers and departmental officers will be organized during rabi every year as the irrigation trials can be effectively conducted and demonstrated during this season. The model irrigation block will also be utilized for the farmers trainings by FTCs and KVKs. Different departments involved in farmer trainings are using the irrigation block for training. This practice will be continued in future also. Agricultural Information Centers: Strengthened the agricultural information center at ARS warangal, ARS Karimnagar and RARS Nandyal for dissemination of information on advanced agricultural technology to the farming community.

74

LESSONS LEARNT IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION The problems encountered and lessons learnt in the process of implementation of Third A.P Irrigation project are as follows SRSP 1. Cultivation of blackgram during rabi in rice fallows was promising when supplemented with the powdery mildew control measures. Cultivation of pulses should be advocated keeping in view the price fluctuations in the market. 2. Water supply in the canal is the main deciding factor in adoption of the technology by the farmer. Based on irrigation water availability, the farmers decide the crop. For adoption of ID crops, the water availability should be explained to the farming community in advance of crop-growing season. 3. To enable widespread and sustained cultivation of any crop varieties, seed village concept should be developed. 4. Cultivation of summer vegetables in maize, greengram and cotton based cropping systems is well accepted by the farmer due to high economic returns. This practice is restricted to small areas as marketing is a problem. Establishment of the vegetable processing units with high intake capacity would not only solve the marketing problem but also stabilize the prices. 5. Farmers cultivate paddy, supplementing canal with well irrigation even if small area of their holding is cultivated instead of ID crops to meet the food requirements. 6. The drip and sprinkler irrigation methods are accepted by the farmers due to increased yields and reduced water requirement. However, the initial cost and supply of required water through canal is coming in way of large-scale adoption. 7. Training programmes scheduled and conducted to the Assistant Directors of Agriculture would be more fruitful if they are conducted to the officers who have minimum of 5 years of service as most of Assistant Directors of Research are retiring in one or two years from active service. SRBC 1. The command is characterized by farmers of whom majority were financially weak and dependent on subsistence farming. During dispersion of inputs to beneficiary farmers in the three reaches other farmers forced the project-implementing agency to get the share in input supply. Because of their inherent trend in financial weakness any benefit whether monetary or physical certainly effect the project implementation and this aspect has to be taken care before technological intervention as it will have drastic effect on the rural social set-up of command where the project is being implemented.
2. The demonstrations and training components should be dealt by a single agency for

clarity and success.

75

EXTENSION ACTIVITIES Training programmes and field days 1. Training programmes to farmers Three training programmes at each center for two days duration were conducted for head, middle and tail-end reach farmers in the beneficiary villages in block IV (SRBC), DBM-59 (Karimnagar) and DBM-29 (Warangal) of SRSP. Four one day training programmes at each centers were conducted for Rythu club members of four villages. At each center 24 training programmes of two days duration were conducted covering 16 blocks in six mandals at RARS, Nandyal, ARS, Warangal and ARS,Karimnagar from December 2003 to April,2004 (Table-56). The detailed schedule and list of villages covered in training programmes were presented in Annexure N-X, K-VI and W-VII. Forty farmers from rythu club members were trained during two days per training programme. The main aim is to impart technologies developed under III A.P.Irrigation project, water and crop management practices. The scientists from ANGRAU have dealt on various topics concerning SRBC ayacut, water releases and Agricultural aspects. The following topics were covered during training programme. Water management for I.D. Crops. Water management for horticultural crops. Drip and Sprinkler Irrigation. Rice cultivation with special reference to system of rice intensification (SRI) Technologies developed under III A.P.Irrigation project (SRBC) Suitable crops and cropping systems for SRBC command area. Importance of soil testing and Integrated Nutrient Management. Improved package of practices to increase water use efficiency for all major crops. Integrated Pest Management.

The farmers were asked to give their opinions on the impact of training programme every day. In all the trainings, farmers expressed full satisfaction on the lectures and they have rated them as very impressive. The technology advocated is most useful and can easily be implemented in the command area also. All the farmers requested more number of such training programmes covering larger areas, which benefit the farming community in a better way. All the farmers visited the information center and model irrigation block, which was developed with the financial assistance provided under III A.P. Irrigation Project (SRBC). Table 56:Training programmes and field days organized at SRSP and SRBC Trainings to No Training programmes (SRSP and SRBC) Farmers 81 Farmers 12 Agricultural officers 3 Assistant Directors of Agriculture 3 I & CAD Engineers 3 Workshop 3 Field days (SRBC) 1.Field day on rice and cotton Duration Two days One day Two days Two days Two days Two days

76

2.Field day on cotton and chickpea 3.Field day on rice

4.Field day on chickpea

5.Awareness meeting on I.D.crops 6.Field day on SRI cultivation Field days (SRSP) 1. Field day on chillies (Karimnagar) 2. Field day on IPM in cotton (Karimnagar) 3. Field day on drip irrigation in cotton (Karimnagar) 4. Field day on sprinkler irrigation in groundnut (Karimnagar) 5.Field day on introduction of Narasimha cotton variety (Warangal) 6. Field day on cotton based cropping systems (Warangal) 7. Field day on IPM cotton (Warangal) 8. Field day on rice (Warangal) 9. Field day on chillies (Warangal) 10. Field day on summer groundnut (Warangal) Training to line departments 1.Agricultural Officers A two day training programme on water management was conducted for 20 Agricultural Officers working with command areas of SRSP and SRBC. Special topics on water management, water use efficiency, water requirements for different crops and cropping systems including Integrated pest and nutrient management aspects were covered by specialists of ANGRAU. 2.Assisstant Directors of Agriculture A two day training programme on water management was conducted for 20 ADA s working in FTC s , different sub divisions in Warangal , Karimnagar and Kurnool districts at ARS,Warangal,ARS,Karimnagar and RARS, Nandyal, respectively. Lectures on water management in ID crops, conjunctive use of surface and ground water, quality of irrigation water, ways and means to increase water use efficiency, Micro irrigation techniques (drip and sprinkler), water requirements for different crops and cropping systems including Integrated Pest and Nutrient Management aspects were dealt by Scientists from ANGRAU. The feedback from ADAs at the end of the programme was positive and were of the opinion that the topics that were dealt were relevant, informative and are feasible to transfer the techniques to farmers fields. 3.Irrigation and command area engineers (I&CAD) A two day training programmes at each centre on water management was conducted for 20 I&CAD Engineers working in command areas of SRSP and SRBC. Lectures on water management in ID crops, conjunctive use of surface and ground water, quality of irrigation water, ways and means to increase water use efficiency, Micro irrigation techniques (drip and sprinkler), water requirements for different crops and cropping systems and less water rice cultivation-System of rice intensification (SRI) aspects were dealt by Scientists ANGRAU. The feedback from I& CAD Engineers at the end of the programme was positive and opined that the topics were relevant, informative and are feasible to transfer to farmers fields.

77

STATE LEVEL WORKSHOP ON IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT A workshop on Irrigation Management, Crops and Cropping systems under projects commands (AP III Irrigation Projects) was conducted 15-16 October, 2003 at Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University Auditorium, Rajendranagar. Conclusions and recommendations I. Irrigation The irrigation water management for agriculture must be on agricultural water demand management rather than on supply management Integrated water resource management of all sectoral uses should include river basin water (rainwater, surface water and groundwater). Development of basin wise database for natural resources and water balance land, water, source of irrigation, extent of cropped area, crops, cropping systems, weather parameters, ET and soil water relationships. As the water management is site specific and for effective transfer the research findings to the cultivators fields, on-farm participatory research on irrigation water management practices in relation with crops, cropping systems, agronomic techniques is needed. Need to develop appropriate cropping systems related to the source of irrigation (tanks, canal, wells, tanks supported by wells and river lifts) and soil type. Surface drainage water recycling in Krishna and Godavari deltas for reducing the surface water demand through irrigation canals. There is a need for additional technical interaction both at planning stage and seasons operation of the irrigation system.

II. Ground water Considerable quantity of groundwater resource is available in major irrigation commands (60%) of the state which constitute 20% of geographical area of the state. Therefore, suitable groundwater exploitation strategy need to be developed by balancing between recharge and discharge. The groundwater exploitation in command area has to be augmented in relation to canal water supply so that canal water can be distributed to larger area to attain equity and social justice. Adoption of highly efficient micro irrigation techniques in non-command areas where the groundwater was exploited to critical or above critical limit. Adoption of sprinkler and drip and other efficient surface irrigation systems has to be maintained for longer period. Discourage cultivation of lowland paddy by using groundwater. Micro irrigation has to be adopted for seasonal crops like cotton, sugarcane and close growing vegetables. Awareness on its quality, cost competitiveness and maintenance aspects have to be given due attention.

78

III. Crops Extensive research and developmental activities on water saving rice technologies like aerobic rice, rotational irrigation, SRI cultivation need to be carried and suitable niches and conditions on which they can be adopted need to be identified and popularized. By adopting rotational irrigation in rice, the duty increased from 70 to 108 acres in Krishna delta in 2002-03 and this can be adopted in other major irrigation projects on a regular basis. Data on components of water losses in rice and basin wise water balance information has to be generated. Establishing the crops with the onset of monsoon and allowing growing as rainfed crop till the irrigation water is available under different surface irrigation water sources. Extensive on-farm, participatory research on crop diversification, suitable N crops, cropping systems need to be conducted and technologies have to be identified and advocated to the farmers.

IV. Capacity building Capacity building at different levels scientists departmental officers, farms etc on irrigation management is required. An apex scientific institution to be created to serve as resource center for water management to state and to carry out location specific on farm research, demonstrations, development of technologies besides advising state govt. on integrated water resource management in rice and other crops. Infra structure for participatory irrigation water management under site specific conditions need to be provided.

V. Policy In the context of large-scale violation of cropping patterns, a policy on localization of irrigated wet and irrigated dry needs attention as the current practice of localization has failed to achieve its planned objectives. Encourage paddy in low lying areas only where no other crop can be grown successfully due to excessive moisture during crop growing season. Crop diversification adopting irrigated dry crops sown with onset of rainfall in medium and upland topographies in place of paddy to increase the water productive efficiency. The watershed management programmes such as contour trenches, gully plugs, percolation tanks and check dams besides adoption of dry land in-situ moisture conservation technologies taken up in the state for last few years appears to have resulted in under-functioning of the existing surface water resources. Hence, there is a need to have critical review of watershed management strategies, soil and moisture conservation practices in the years to come. To sustain agricultural production and ecological balance, appropriate land use act for optimal utilization of land and water resources has to be enacted. Contingency crop plans as well as water distribution during short falls of reservoir inflows need to be developed.

79

VI. Regional workshops A workshop was conducted on crops, cropping systems and irrigation management under project command areas at each centre under III A.P.Irrigation Project at ARS,Warangal, ARS, Karimnagar and RARS, Nandyal. The workshop was conducted involving scientists from Northern telangana zone (SRSP)and Scarce rainfall zone (SRBC), officials of Department of Agriculture , I& CAD engineers and progressive farmers. The technologies developed under III A.P.Irrigation project was discussed in the workshop.

80

PUBLICITY MATERIALS Dr. Michael C. Macklin, World Bank consultant during his visit of Eighth Supervisory Mission of World Bank in February, 2001 proposals have been submitted to the heads of SRSP and SRBC sub-projects for sanction of Rs. 30.00 lakhs for production of publicity materials and organizing training programmes for beneficiaries of SRBC and SRSP sub-projects under III A.P. Irrigation project in coordination with the Department of Agriculture. Based on the above, funds have been released to a tune of Rs. 30.00 lakhs by the I & CAD Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, through respective Chief Engineers of SRSP and SRBC sub-projects i.e., Rs. 10.00 lakhs each for Agricultural Research Station, Warangal and Agricultural Research Station, Karimnagar (SRSP) and Regional Agricultural Research Station, Nandyal (SRBC). Under III A.P.Irrigation project SRSP and SRBC, the following works has been taken up under publicity materials. 1. Agricultural Information Centre (AIC) A fully equipped agricultural information center was developed at three centres. Different crop varieties, pest and disease incidence laminations, live specimens of crop varieties grown in this zone and soil profile board is also displayed. The models of tractor and bullock drawn agricultural implements were displayed. Number of farmers visited agricultural information center and expressed satisfaction about the information displayed. Feed back: Majority of the farmers who visited the AIC shown keen interest in adopting latest varieties, water management practices and IPM. 2. Model Irrigation Block To demonstrate different methods of irrigation to the farmers, a model block was established with different types of drip and sprinkler irrigation, rain guns, water measuring devices and surface methods of irrigation. Feed back: As the research station lies in scarce rainfall zone, majority of the farmers who visited model irrigation block expressed keen interest in drip, sprinkler and surface methods of irrigation. Most of them decided to purchase rain guns for giving life saving irrigation as power is a constraint to irrigate entire farm during critical stages of crop growth. 3. Modern Farm Implement Rotavator To demonstrate modern farm implements to farmers during training programmes, rotovator has been purchased. It is useful for efficient land preparation. Feed back: Most of the farmers were much impressed with the churning and pulverizing of soil by the rotavator and they wanted to buy it. 4. LCD Projector The LCD projector is useful to train the farmers and extension personnel of the Command Area.

81

Feed back: Majority of the trainee farmers were illiterates and had never been exposed to training environment .LCD projector because of its excellent production of lively images created the effective training environment as it best suited trainees and made the job easy and effective on the part of the trainer. 4. Laminations Laminations of size 21x24 inches were prepared mainly on water management, agronomic practices, pests and diseases, deficiency symptoms etc., and displayed in the information center. Feed back: Trainee farmers were impressed by the laminated photographs on different aspects and asked many queries and clarified their doubts by going through them. 6. Training Programmes Four day training programme under III A.P. Irrigation Project on water management for SRSP & SRBC farmers was organized at three centers for the benefit of 200 progressive farmers @ 50 farmers per day. Due importance was given to the cropping pattern to be adopted for effective management of water under command areas of SRSP & SRBC. With the objective to have more acreage under command area profitable crops, which require less irrigation have been identified and recommended in place of rice. Special lectures were arranged to educate farmers on cultivation aspects, efficient irrigation water management and plant protection measures for successful growing of crops under irrigated dry conditions. VISITS SRSP-ARS,Karimanagar S.No Date Name of the Visitor 1 28-10-1998 Dr.A. Venkata Raman 2 17-04-1999 Dr.A. Venkata Raman and Sri A. Bandopadhyaya 3 3-2-2001 Dr. Michael.C.Maclean 4 12-11-2003 Dr M.Bala subramanian SRSP-ARS,Warangal S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Date 27-10-1998 19-7-2000 2-2-2001 6-8-2001 7-2-2002 Name of the Visitor Dr.A. Venkata Raman Dr.A. Venkata Raman Dr. Michael.C.Maclean Dr.A.S.Siddhu Dr.A. Venkata Raman Designation World bank consultant World bank consultant World Bank Consultant World Bank Consultant World Bank Consultant

Designation World bank consultant World bank consultants World Bank Consultant World Bank Consultant

SRBC-RARS, Nandyal S.No Date Name of the Visitor 1 2-2-2001 Dr. Macklin and Dr. Pathak 2 9-2-2002 Dr.A. Venkata Raman 3 11-11-2003 Dr. M. Balasubramanyam 4 5-6-2004 Dr. M. Balasubramanyam

Designation World bank consultant World bank consultants World Bank Consultant World Bank Consultant

82

PAPERS PRESENTED IN WORKSHOPS / SYMPOSIUM 1.Sahadeva Reddy B.Sridhar V and Rami Reddy K.V.S.2000 Production technology for rice under Srisailam Right Branch Canal command area. Proceedings of symposium on Challenges in Agronomic crop management in early 21st century organized by society of Agronomists, ANGRAU and Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University , Hyderabad, May 24-25, 2000. 2. Sahadeva Reddy B.Sridhar V and Rami Reddy K.V.S.2000 Performance of chickpea varieties in scarce rainfall zone of Andhra Pradesh. Proceedings of symposium on Challenges in Agronomic crop management in early 21st century organized by society of Agronomists, ANGRAU and Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad, May 24-25, 2000. 3. Surendar Reddy .K Krishna.A , Srinivas .A, Sahadeva Reddy. B and Raghu Vardhan Reddy S 2001 Impact of on farm water management under SRSP and SRBC command areas. Paper presented at the state level work shop on capacity Building Agricultural Water demand Management held at Hyderabad from November 28-30, 2001. 4. Sahadeva Reddy B and Sridhar V 2002 Technology transfer for improving the productivity of cotton in scarce rainfall zone of Andhra Pradesh. Paper presented at NIRD foundation day seminar on Rural technology for poverty alleviation organized by NIRD, Hyderabad , January 2-3, 2002. 5.Sahadeva Reddy B, Madhusudhan Reddy S and Sujathamma P 2002 Low input and profit maximizing production and protection technology in chickpea. Paper presented in symposium on low cost production technologies to meet global challenges on May 13-14, 2002 at Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. 6.Sahadeva Reddy B, Sujathamma P and Madhusudhan Reddy S 2002 Low Cost fertilizer and weed management practices of rice in SRBC command area. Paper presented in symposium on low cost production technologies to meet global challenges on May1314, 2002 at Rajendranagar, Hyderabad. 7.Sahadeva Reddy B, Sujathamma P and Madhusudhan Reddy S 2002. An assessment and refinement of production technologies specific to micro-ecological variables. Extended summaries Vol.2: 2nd International Agronomy Congress , November 26-30 ,2002 ,New Delhi,India.PP:1488-1489. 8.Sahadeva Reddy B, Madhusudhan Reddy S and Sujathamma P 2003 Water management in sunflower. Paper presented in National Seminar on Stress management in oil seeds for attaining self reliance in vegetable oils January 28-30, 2003 PP 481. 9.Sahadeva Reddy B, Sujathamma P and Madhusudhan Reddy S 2003 Effect of rainy season residual moisture on productivity of post rainy season chickpea in vertisols of Kurnool district. Paper presented at NIRD foundation day seminar on Management of natural resources for sustainable livelihoods and poverty alleviation organized by NIRD, Hyderabad, January 29-30, 2003. 10.K.Surender Reddy & A.Krishna 2002 Effect of greenmanuring and production technology on yield and economics in rice. Proceeding of symposium on low cost production technologies to meet global challenges, May-13-14, 2002 pp 5-7.

83

Impact assessment

84

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY To increase the area under irrigation in SRSP and SRBC command areas, III A.P irrigation project supported by World Bank was taken up and was under implementation for five years. At ARS, Warangal, ARS, Karimnagar and RARS, Nandyal applied research and demonstrations in one or two villages each at upper, middle and lower reaches of the distributory were conducted. In this programme, extension activities like laying demonstrations and field trails, conducting field days, training programmes, provision of inputs were taken up which convinced the farmers to adopt latest agricultural production technology and there by increased yields and reducing the irrigation water applied. The present study is aimed to evaluate the impact of the project by conducting economic survey in the beneficiary villages and comparing it with the farmers from nonbeneficiary villages and benchmark survey. The summary of the report is as follows. Project impact 1. SRSP Project impact survey report revealed that there is reduction in the number of irrigations given to maize, blackgram, paddy, cotton and chillies. The percent farmers adopting the reduced number of irrigations ranged between 15 and 42. The water saved by reduced irrigations can be utilized for irrigating more area. Improved technology like seed treatment, alleyways in paddy, IPM in cotton and chillies, line sowing in greengram and greenmanuring in paddy are well accepted by the farmers. Cropping systems including vegetables resulted in higher net returns to the farmers. Large-scale cultivation of vegetables require good marketing and processing facilities. Project has positive impact on crop productivity, crop production, net returns, level of education, employment potential, cropping intensity and method of marketing.

2. 3. 4.

SRBC 1. Due to impact of the project the percentage of the farmers adopted recommended spacing in different crops in project villages was high ranging from 24-65 per cent as against 19-25 per cent in non-project villages. 2. The impact of the project on seed rate, revealed higher percentage of adoption of recommended seed rate both in irrigated and rainfed crops in beneficiary villages than non-beneficiary villages. 3. Adoption of seed treatment was more distinct in beneficiary villages in paddy, sorghum, red gram and bengalgram under irrigation and it was still higher in rainfed. 4. Due to impact of the project, the shift of varieties was observed in paddy, bengalgram, redgram and sunflower. The percentage of adoption of improved varieties was 85 in sorghum, 90 in sunflower, 88 in redgram and 92 in bengalgram in beneficiary villages under irrigation as against 45, 32,28 and 48 per cent respectively in non-beneficiary villages. Similar trend was noticed in rainfed villages also. 5. Most of the farmers applied organic manures but it was less than half the recommendation. But due to impact of the project, the beneficiary farmers applied higher quantities ranging from 3.7-4.9 t/ha as against 2.0-4.2 t/ha in pre-project and 2.6-3.7 t/ha in non-beneficiary farmers. 6. The impact of the project showed, reduced use of chemical fertilizers in post-project period compared to pre-project as well as from non-beneficiary to beneficiary

85

villages. The percentage adoption of recommended fertilizers was higher from 21-36 in beneficiary villages as against 16-21 in non-beneficiary villages for different crops. 7. The impact of the project envisaged reduction of pesticide use in beneficiary farmers especially 25 per cent in hybrid cotton, 32 per cent in paddy and 19 per cent in redgram. 8. The man workdays required for an average size of the farm in beneficiary village and non-beneficiary village were 415 and 334 respectively indicating an additional employment of 81 man workdays in beneficiary village due to impact of the project. 9. The impact of the project resulted an additional net return of Rs 32232 per holding and Rs. 8030 per hectare in beneficiary villages. 10.The benefit cost ratio was 1:0.91 in beneficiary villages and 1:0.35 in nonbeneficiary villages indicating higher net profits due to impact of the project in beneficiary villages. 11.The impact of the project on productivity in beneficiary villages was high by 53 percent in paddy, 35 in sorghum, 120 in sunflower, 56 in redgram and 28 in hybrid cotton over pre-project.
12.The impact of the project created number of other benefits such as establishment of Agricultural Information Centre, Model Irrigation Block, Automatic Weather Station, popularization of SRI cultivation, purchase of important and costly equipments like Rotavator, LCD projector, Profile Moisture Probe etc., Training impact SRSP Training evaluation results revealed that66.5 percent of the farmers fall under the medium category at Karimnagar and 67.7 percent of the farmers fall under medium category in Warangal. SRBC

Evaluation test of the training programmes revealed 77 per cent of the trainees were elevated to middle and high knowledge category in agriculture due to training programmes and the rest of the trainees could not grasp the subject due to their inherent defects like illiteracy, lack of interest and lack of innovativeness.

86

INTRODUCTION The Third A.P. Irrigation project supported by the World Bank was under implementation in SRSP & SRBC commands from 1998-2004 with a view to complete the incomplete works and generation of additional irrigation potential there by achieving higher agricultural productivity and socio-economic development in the project area. For attaining the objective of higher agricultural production the farmers of the pilot operation area were exposed to the improved farm and other technologies to achieve the following objectives: 1. To evolve and demonstrate diversified cropping sequences for horticultural and dry land crops under rotational water supply. 2. Improve productivity through on farm irrigation. 3. To improve command area extension services and participation, irrigation management practices through development of crops. Before the commencement of the project the Bench mark survey was conducted at Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal with the objectives to 1.Provide necessary information to assess the current situation before significant implementation of project at field level. 2.Establish database of project irrigation development, agricultural productivity, performance indicators required to monitor and evaluate the success of the project prior to its completion. After the implementation of the project for five years to estimate the impact of the A.P. III Irrigation Project, implemented at Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal, on the agricultural production and the socio-economic conditions of the beneficiary village farmers and non-beneficiary village farmers, a survey was conducted from 28th March to 5th May, 2004 at Karimnagar, 15th March to 30th March, 2004 at Warangal and 3rd April to 6th May, 2004 at Nandyal. A full-fledged interview schedule was developed and utilized for the purpose (Annexure 1). For assessing the impact of the project, 40 farmers from each of the beneficiary villages (Nagnur & Rukmapur -Upper reach, Cherlaboothkur & Irkula-Middle reach and Narayanaraopally & Sambiapally-Lower reach) and 60 farmers from the nonbeneficiary villages were surveyed in Karimnagar district. In Warangal 40 farmers from each reach (Palivelpula-Upper reach, Pegadapalli -Middle reach and Seethanagaram-Lower reach) and 60 farmers from non-beneficiary villagers were surveyed. At Nandyal 40 farmers from each of the beneficiary village (Konidedu-Upper reach, Bhupanapaddu-Middle reach and Maddur-Lower reach and equal number from non-beneficiary villages were surveyed. The scope of the study consisted the identification of performance indicators and subsequent estimation during the pre-project period and comparing them with post-project period. The identified performance indicators under the component of the study consisted the following effect on a) Crop yields, cropping intensity and cropping pattern b) Crop inputs like varieties, fertilizers, pesticides, irrigation etc. c) Package of practices in major crops like spacing, seed rate, seed treatment, plant population, weeding etc. d) Socio-economic conditions like employment potential, farm income, literacy levels, savings etc. The impact of the project was evaluated and presented in the following categories. I. Impact on crop inputs. II. Impact on package of practices in major crops. III. Crop economics. IV. Socio-economic conditions.

87

CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED Based on the benchmark survey done before the project implementation, the following constraints were identified in major crops grown in the beneficiary villages of Karimnagar, Warangal and Nandyal . Maize 1. Excessive irrigations are given due to free availability of canal water. 2. Chemical weed control is not practiced resulting in higher cost o cultivation and delayed manual weedi 3. Seed treatment was not done.. Excessive application of inorganic fertilizers with less usage of organic fertilizers . 4. Closer spacing was followed against the recommended spacing of 75x20 cm. Paddy 1. Wastage of irrigation water due to excessive irrigation. 2. Application of farmyard manure and green manure was not followed. 3. Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers without application of K 4. Chemical weed control not practiced 5. Cultivation of age-old local varieties susceptible to BPH, Gallmidge and Bacterial leaf blight. 6. Direct seeding was not practiced. 7. Micronutrient deficiencies not corrected. Cotton 1. Indiscriminate use of pesticides and non-adoption of IPM practice. 2. Excessive use of irrigation water. 3. Inconsistent market prices. 4. Soils are not suitable for cotton cultivation. 5. Failure of Southwest monsoon at critical stages of crop growth (Terminal drought). 6. Use of F2 seed, which have no certification. 7. Adoption of wider spacing against the recommended spacing of 90x45cm.

Greengram
1. Growing of local varieties susceptible to YMV. 2. Application of no or insufficient quantity of fertilizers. 3. Chemical weed control not adopted. 4. Broadcast method of sowing. Groundnut 1. Growing local varieties 2. Low plant stand 3. Non-application of Gypsum. 4. Non-adoption of chemical weed control. 5. Excessive irrigation. Chilli (Waranagal) 1. In Chilli dieback, leaf curl and viral diseases are common, which reduce the yield. 2. Most of the farmers practicing direct seeding which also reduce the plant canopy and growth. 3. In winter season, micronutrient deficiencies of MG, Fe, and B is a phenomenon due to low temperature affecting uptake of nutrients.

88

Turmeric (Warangal) 1. Growing of long duration (9 months) local varieties susceptible to rhizome rot 2. Lack of awareness about the importance of seed treatment. 3. Monocropping of turmeric. Chickpea (Nandyal) 1. Growing local varieties. 2. Failure of Southwest monsoon resulting in less residual soil moisture and low rainfall in October (Terminal drought). 3. Farmyard manure is not applied. 4. Excess dose of nitrogen and under dose of Phosphorus. 5. Pest menace especially Heliothis. Sunflower (Nandyal) 1. Non availability of certified seed and straight varieties. 2. Frequent failure of Southwest monsoon at critical stages of crop growth (Terminal drought). 3. Thinning is not practiced. 4. Imbalanced application of fertilizers. 5. Hand pollination not practiced. Cropping Systems Mostly the cropping systems adopted before the implementation of the project are Greengram-Maize, Paddy-Maize, Paddy-Paddy, Maize-Maize, Cotton-fallow, Chickpea-fallow, Fallow-Sunflower etc. Vegetable cultivation Before the implementation of project the farmers were not aware of cultivation of summer vegetables.

89

TRIALS CONDUCTED TO OVER COME THE CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED AT KARIMNAGAR (K), WARANGAL (W) AND NANDYAL (N)

Constraints identified Maize

1 2 3 4 5 Excessive irrigations Chemical weed control Excessive inorganic fertilizer application Non adoption of seed treatment optimum spacing & improved varieties Irrigation by flooding

Trials conducted
Demonstration of irrigation schedules in Maize (K& W) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Maize (W) Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizers in Maize (K&W) Popularization of new hybrids in Maize. (K) Demonstration on methods of irrigations in maize. (W) Demonstration of intermittent irrigation schedules in paddy (K) Demonstration of improved puddler in paddy (K) Demonstration of System of Rice Intensification (N) Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizers in paddy (K&W) Demonstration of fertilizer management in rice (N) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in paddy (K & N) Introduction of new varieties in paddy (JGL-1798, JGL-1853 and WGL-14) (K&W) Demonstration of direct seeding techniques in paddy (K &W). Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton (K ,W & N) Stem application of Monocrotophos in cotton (N). Production technology in cotton (N). Demonstration of irrigation schedules in Cotton (K&W) Demonstration of drip irrigation system in Cotton (K) Demonstration on methods of irrigation in Cotton (W) Red chalka soils are not suitable for Cotton cultivation thus farmers are advised not to grow Cotton in those soils as both yield and quality are effected.(K) Demonstration of fertilizer management in rainfed and irrigated cotton (N) Demonstration of optimum spacing of American cotton (N). Introduction of improved straight varieties like Narasimha and Aravinda in place of hybrids (N).

Paddy
1 Wastage of irrigation water

2 3 4 5

Higher doses of inorganic fertilizers Chemical weed control Cultivation of local varieties Method of planting

Cotton
1 Indiscriminate use of pesticides

2 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Excessive use of irrigation water In efficient methods of irrigation Suitability of soils Application of higher doses of chemical fertilizers Wider spacing (100x 60cm) against recommended spacing of 90 x 45cm. Use of F2 seed from unreliable sources.

90

1.

Turmeric No seed treatment

Demonstration on management of rhizome rot and leaf spot in Turmeric (W) Demonstration on recommended production technology in Turmeric (W)

1 2. 3.

Chilli No micronutrient sprayings Inefficient irrigation methods Indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides

Management of yellow syndrome in chilli (W). Demonstration on methods of irrigation in chilli (W). Demonstration on recommended production technology in chilli. (W).

Greengram
1 2 Growing local varieties, Popularization pf recommended production broadcasting of seed, insufficient technology in Green gram (K) fertilization. Chemical weed control Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Green gram (K) Growing local varieties Demonstration of improved varieties like Swetha and Kranthi (N). Failure of Southwest monsoon Demonstration of recommended water management resulting in less residual schedules after release of water. Presently uses of moisture associated with low sprinklers were demonstrated (N). rainfall in October. Indiscriminate use of pesticides Demonstration of production technology in chickpea and poor management practices. (N) Frequent Failure of Southwest monsoon during critical stages of crop growth. Use of high seed rate and thinning not practiced. Imbalance fertilizer application Water management studies after release of water (N).

Chickpea
1. 2.

3.

Sunflower
1. 2. 3. 4.

Demonstration of optimum plant population in sunflower (N). Demonstration of production technology in Sunflower (N) Use of F2 seed from unreliable Demonstration of new sunflower hybrids (N). sources. Growing local varieties Low plant stand and nonapplication of gypsum Chemical weed control Excessive irrigation Popularization of new variety of Groundnut JL-24.(K) Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnut (K&W) Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Groundnut (K) Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in Groundnut (W). Demonstration of different irrigation methods in Groundnut (K&W). Demonstration on scheduling of irrigation in

Groundnut
1 2 3 4

91

Groundnut (W).

Cropping systems
1 Third crop is not cultivated Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system. (W) Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Green gram based cropping system. (K) Popularization of Green gram based cropping system (K) Popularization of Maize based cropping system.(W) Demonstration on cotton based cropping systems (W) Demonstration on rice based cropping systems. (W) Introduction of vegetables in Kharif (K&W).

Moncropping of cotton and rice

Vegetables
1 Summer vegetables are not cultivated

92

SRSP I. Impact of crop inputs

(a) Irrigation

Water is a precious limited resource and needs efficient utilization, which assumes special significance for increasing the productivity in agriculture. This can be achieved only through efficient soil and water management.
The irrigation potential created by the SRSP has not been fully utilized due to the various reasons, leaving a wide gap between the potential created and actual utilized. Excessive irrigation in the upper regions of canal system existed side by side with non-availability of water to the tail end users. As the irrigation water is available in surplus (canal & well) farmers in the command area are accustomed to give more number of irrigations. As a result of extensive demonstrations conducted for five years 15-36 percent of farmers are adopting reduced number of irrigations in different crops (Table-1). Percent of farmers who are not aware of technology indicate that further extensive training is required for extensive adoption associated with limited water use. Table-1: Impact of the project in reducing the number of irrigations given to the crops.

Crop

% of the farmers adopting reduced number of irrigations 36(K) 42(W) 15(K) 25(K) 31(W) 20(K) 15(K) 21(W) 24(W)

Maize Paddy Groundnut Blackgram Cotton Chilli

% of the farmers % of the farmers aware of not aware of technology but technology not adopting 23(K) 41(K) 37(W) 21(W) 30(K) 55(K) 28(K) 47(K) 44(W) 25(W) 38(K) 42(K) 25(K) 60(K) 51(W) 28(W) 44(W) 32(W)

K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Table-2: Estimated additional area that can be brought under irrigation by adopting reduced number of irrigations in Karimnagar and Warangal. % increase in area to net cultivated area Crop Warangal Karimnagar Maize 26 22 Paddy -36 Cotton 15 8.9 Groundnut 39 20 Chilli 22 -K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Large-scale on-farm demonstrations have revealed that, reducing the irrigations to different crops (Table-2) can increase the irrigation potential. In Karimnagar, in case of maize reducing the number of irrigations by 2-3 nearly 100 mm can be saved. By adopting this method of irrigation around 19,200 ha of land can be brought under irrigated maize cultivation. This accounts to 22 and 26 percent of the net cultivated area in Karimnagar and Warangal respectively under maize. In paddy, land preparation with puddler followed by intermittent irrigation methods saved nearly 450 mm of water. This saved water can be used for other crops or cultivating paddy in 92,880 hectares, resulting in 36 percent increase area to the net cultivated area under paddy. In cotton by irrigating the crop at 20 days interval against 15 days interval has resulted in 80 mm water saving. The saved water can be utilized for irrigating 7,470 ha (Karimnagar) and 1,73,670 ha (Warangal) of cotton crop resulting in 8.9 and 15 percent increase in area to the net cultivated area

93

in the districts. In groundnut irrigating the crop at 15 days interval instead of 7 days interval has resulted in 100 mm of water saving. 20 percent increase in area to net cultivated area (30,000 ha) can be attained in Karimnagar if same practice is adopted through out the district. (b) Fertilizers (i) Inorganic fertilizers Table-3: Impact of the project on usage of inorganic fertilizers

Crop

Maize Paddy Groundnut Blackgram Greengram Cotton Chilli

Post-project % Farmers % Farmers applying over applying below and above the recommended recommended dose dose 31(K) 2(K) 27(W) 27(K) 9(K) 31(W) -17(K) 9(W) 23(W) -24(K) -51(K) 19(K) -23(W) 29(W) --

Pre-project % Farmers % Farmers applying over applying and above below the recommended recommended dose dose 62(K) 7(K) 46(W) 46(K) 11(K) 52(W) -56(K) 15(W) 44(W) ---74(K) --34(W) 43(W) --

K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Among the agricultural inputs, fertilizer is consumed in bulk compared to other inputs like seed and pesticides. Due to non-availability of sufficient quantity of organic manures, the farmers are applying higher doses of in-organic fertilizers. Incase of maize and paddy, all the farmers both in beneficiary and non-beneficiary are accustomed to use higher doses of fertilizers. In case of greengram and groundnut lower doses of fertilizes are applied. During pre-project period 62 and 46 percent farmers applied higher doses of fertilizers to maize and paddy, respectively. With implementation of project only 31 and 27 percent of the farmers are applying more than the recommended dosage of fertilizer. Incase of groundnut and greengram the percent farmers applying lower fertilizers was reduced to 17 and 51, respectively. (ii) Organic manures:

Green manuring:
Green manure is an important practice in increasing the fertility as well as improving the physical conditions of the soil. Table-4: Impact of the project on growing green manure crop Detail Percent farmers who are growing green manure crop Percent farmers who aware of green manure but not growing the crop Percent farmers who are not aware of green manure K: Karimnagar W: Warangal

Post-project
43 (K),42(W) 36(K), 58(W) 21(K)

Pre-project
12(W) 34(K), 28(W) 66(K),60(W)

Before the implementation of the project the farmers were not applying green manure. After the project was implemented 43 and 42 percent of farmers in Karimnagar and Warangal districts are growing green manure crop. 36 and 58 percent farmers in Karimnagar and Warangal districts are

94

aware of the advantages of green manure crop but not raising it because of various constraints like non-availability of the green manure seed, non-availability of water due to late onset of monsoon. In Karimnagar district even now 21 percent farmers, mostly small farmers without supplementary irrigation are not aware of green manure crop . Table-5: Impact of the project on application of organic fertilizers Detail Post-project Percent of farmers applying organic fertilizers Percent of applying FYM farmers 98(K) & 90(W) (Manure is applied in rotation or to commercial crops as sufficient quantity is not available) 74(K) & 62(W) (Mostly 50 percent of farmers go for poultry manure in Karimnagar) 63(K) & 58(W) 86(K) & 90(W)

Preproject
81(K) 82(W) 62(K) 50(W) 45(K) 48(W) 83(K) 80(W)

Percent farmers applying sheep or poultry manure Percent farmers aware of organic fertilizer but not applying to the complete holding

K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Application of FYM is an age-old practice adopted by most of the farmers and known to all the farmers. Thus, there is not much impact of project implementation. In Karimnagar 98 and in Warangal 90 percent farmers are applying FYM during post-project period as against 81 percent (Karimnagar) and 82 percent (Warangal) during pre-project period. The FYM is not applied to the complete holding, it is applied in rotation due to lack of sufficient quantity of FYM. Farmers are well versed with utility of poultry and sheep manure also, but only 63 percent farmers are applying the poultry or sheep manure due to higher cost. In Warangal, only 58 percent of the farmers are applying poultry or sheep manure to commercial crops. (c) Pesticides: Table-6: Impact of the project on pesticide usage Crop % of farmers reduced pesticide usage Karimnagar Warangal Maize 12 32 Paddy 48 41 Groundnut 70 35 Cotton 52 65 Chilli -52 Turmeric -43 K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Andhra Pradesh occupies the first place in consumption of pesticides contributing 36 percent of country's consumption. According to the statistics available there is steady decline in the usage of pesticides from 1998-99 to 2000-01 in Karimnagar and Warangal districts. In case of maize, very less number and quantity of pesticides are used both during the pre-project and post-project period. In case of paddy, formation of alleys have to certain extent reduced excessive usage of pesticide for control of brown plant hopper which is a serious pest necessitating indiscriminate use of pesticides. In case of greengram, the pesticides used are sometimes below the recommended levels. Cotton is the major crop consuming higher share of pesticides. In beneficiary villages, nearly 52 (Karimnagar) and 65 (Warangal) percent farmers have reduced the pesticide usage in cotton by adopting IPM.

95

(d) Herbicide/ Weedicide usage: Table-7: Impact of the project on usage of weedicide

Crop Maize Paddy Groundnut Blackgram Greengram Cotton Chilli

K: Karimnagar

% of farmers using weedicide for control of weeds Post-project Pre-project 84 (K) -90(W) 65(K) -78(W) 23(K) -65(W) 20(K) -5(K) -10(K) -45(W) 39(W)
W: Warangal

Before the project was implemented, the farmers did not know the utility of herbicides completely. As a result of project implementation, 84 and 90 percent of maize, 65 and 78 percent of paddy, 23 and 65 percent of groundnut, 10 and 45 percent of cotton farmers are using recommended herbicides in Karimnagar and Warangal districts, respectively. In Karimnagar, 20 percent of blackgram farmers are using recommended herbicides. In case of greengram, very few farmers are using herbicides for the control of weeds. The usage of herbicides (identified as one of the constraint for low yields in command area) has increased the yield of the crops. In case of non-beneficiary villages also few farmers are applying herbicides as per the advice of the agrochemical vendors. Usage of herbicides helped farmers to overcome labour problem.

96

II. Impact of package of practices

(a)Varieties: Table-8: Impact of the project on crop varieties cultivated at Karimnagar and Warangal Crop Maize Paddy Post-project Hybrids WGL-14, JGL-1798, JGL-1853, MTU-1001, JGL-384 % of farmers shifted towards improved variety Adopted Other village village Hybrids --Erramallelu, 60(K) 21(K) IR-64, 67(W) 32(W) Swarna, MTU-1001, 1010,BPT5204 Local 72(K) -12(W) --100(K) -Pre-project Local Hybrids 95(K) -15(K) --

Groundnut Blackgram Greengram Cotton

Turmeric Chillli

ICGS-44, JL-24, TG-26, JCG-88 Sand local LBG-20, WBG-26 and LBG-645 Local, WGG-37 Bunny, Brahma, Arjun, NA-1588, NA-1678, WCH-I, WCH-II and Tulasi Duggirala red Hybrids
W: Warangal

Local Hybrids

70(W) --

24(W) --

K: Karimnagar

Implementation of the AP III Irrigation Project had an outstanding impact on changing the crop varieties from local varieties to the improved varieties incase of paddy, groundnut, greengram and turmeric. In case of Maize the farmers are cultivating the private hybrids like Paras, ProAgro, Pioneer etc even before the implementation of the project. They are reluctant for any change of hybrids as they are harvesting good yields with private hybrids. In case of paddy, during the pre-project period the major varieties ruling the beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages were IR-64, Swarna, MTU-1001 etc. At present 60 percent of the farmers from beneficiary villages and 21 percent of the farmers from non-beneficiary villages have shifted to the varieties like JGL-1798 in Kharif and JGL-1853 & WGL-14 in Rabi. In case of cotton some farmers in Warangal shifted from hybrids to straight varieties, as they are drought resistant, pest resistant and short duration varieties.
In case of groundnut, very little area was present under the local varieties during the preproject period. Area under groundnut has increased and 72 percent of the farmers in the beneficiary villages are cultivating the improved varieties like JL-24, TG-26 and ICGS-44 in Karimnagar as against 12 percent farmers growing JCG-88 in Warangal. Incase of the non-beneficiary villages, still they are cultivating the local varieties only. Large area is under local greengram cultivation during the pre-project period. About 95 percent of the farmers in the beneficiary villages are cultivating WGG37, an improved variety of greengram with the implementation of the project.

Turmeric cultivation is limited to only a small area. Prior to the project farmers cultivated only local varieties. After the implementation of the project, Duggirala red was

97

introduced which the farmers accepted and 70 percent of the farmers are cultivating the improved variety (b) Spacing: Table -9: Impact of the project on spacing adopted in major crops Crop Post-project % farmers in beneficiary villages adopting recommended spacing 50-60 x 25 cm 11(K) 50-60x25 43(W) 15 x 10 cm 22(K) Zig Zag 30(W) 45 x 10 cm 74 (K) 67(W) --Broadcasting 88(K) Pre-project 90 x 90 cm Line sowing 45x15 cm -15(W) 48(W) 75(W) % farmers of non-beneficiary villages adopting recommended spacing --13(W) 9(K) --31(K) -6(W) 8(W) --

Maize Paddy Groundnut Blackgram Greengram Cotton Chilli Turmeric

75 x 20 cm 65-75x20-25cm 20 x 10 cm 15 x 15 cm 30 x 10 cm 30 x 10 cm 30 x 10 cm (line sowing) 90-100 x 45x60 cm 60-90x 60cm 30x15 cm

K: Karimnagar W: Warangal During the pre-project period lower spacing in case of paddy, higher spacing incase of groundnut and broadcasting in greengram was adopted. Incase of maize inter-row spacing was less and intra-row spacing was more, but there was not much difference as far as the crop stand. With the implementation of the project 11, 22,74 and 88 percent farmers from beneficiary villages adopted the recommended spacing in maize, paddy, groundnut and greengram crops, respectively. Incase of greengram, still the farmers are adopting broad casting as some of them do not have the cattle pair and plough. Further 12 percent of the farmers who are not adopting line sowing are also aware of advantages of line sowing but are not in a position to go in for line sowing. (c) Seed Rate Table -10: Impact of the project on seed rate (Kg/ha) adopted in major crops

Crop

Postproject

Pre-project

% farmers in beneficiary villages adopting recommended seed rate 9(K) 62(W) 15(K) 68(W) 58(K) 42(W) -75(K)

Maize Paddy Groundnut Blackgram Greengram

18(K&W) 60(K) 50-65(W) 100-120 (K&W) -12(K)

18-20(K) 20-25(W) 75-80(K) 75-85(W) 80-90(K) 80-100(W) -8-10(K)

% farmers of non-beneficiary villages adopting recommended seed rate -35(W) -36(W) 21(K) 12(W) -45(K)

98

Cotton

Chilli Turmeric K: Karimnagar

-2(Hybrid) 4(Straight variety) 1-1.5 2000-2500

-3-4(Hybrid) 5-6(Straight Variety 2-3 1800-2000 W: Warangal

-56(W) 42(W) 59(W)

-28(W) 20(W) 32(W)

Higher seed rate in maize, paddy and chillies and lower seed rate in groundnut, greengram and turmeric was adopted by the farmers during the pre-project period. There are 9, 15, 58 and 75 percent farmers from the beneficiary villages adopting the recommended seed rate in maize, paddy, groundnut and greengram, respectively after the implementation of the project. In Warangal, 42-68 percent of the farmers of the beneficiary village are adopting recommended seed rate in different crops after implementation of the project. (d) Seed Treatment: Table-11: Impact of the project on the adoption of seed treatment

Crop Maize Paddy Groundnut Blackgram Greengram Cotton Chilli Turmeric

% of farmers going for seed treatment Post-project Pre-project 55(K) -62(K) 75(W) 12(W) 80(K) 82(W) 9(W) 84(K) -64(K) -Treated seed is available Treated seed is available 68(W) 19(W) 90(W) --

K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Seed treatment is an important practice in controlling the seed borne diseases as well as protecting the plant from diseases during the initial stages. During the pre-project period no seed treatment was done. As a result of the impact of the project 55, 62, 80, 84, 64 and 90 percent of the farmers growing maize, paddy, groundnut, blackgram, greengram and tumeric (W), respectively, are practicing the seed treatment. In case of cotton and vegetables pre-treated seed is available in the market. Most of the farmers who are not adopting seed treatment are aware of it, but not practicing due to non-availability of small quantity of chemical. (e) Plant Population: In Warangal, after the implementation of the project the farmers knew the importance of seed rate and spacing and thus maintained the optimum plant population. Table-12: Impact of the project on the maintenance of optimum plant population

Crop Maize (Almost optimum) Paddy (More) Groundnut (Less) Greengram Cotton (More) Chilli (More) Turmeric (Less)
K: Karimnagar

% of farmers maintaining optimum plant population Post-project Pre-project 95(K) 89(K) 80(K) 84(W) 75(K) 75(W) 90(K) 93(W) 60(K) 63(K) 100(K) 100(W) 79(K) 100(K) 70(K) 68(W) 100(K) 100(W) 72(K) 100(W) 93(K) 100(W)

W: Warangal

99

In case of maize though the spacing adopted deviates from the recommended spacing, plant population maintained is almost same. Thus there is not much variation in percentage of farmers maintaining optimum plant population during the post-project and pre-project period. In case of groundnut due to higher spacing, low plant population was maintained. (f) Method of Sowing: Table-13: Impact of the project on method of sowing of different crops

Crop Maize Paddy Green gram

Method of sowing Ridge & furrow Direct sowing Line sowing

W: Warangal

% of farmers adopting the specified method of sowing Post-project Pre-project 95(K) 80(K) 89(W) 72(W) 15(K) -2(W) -87(K) 5(K)

K: Karimnagar

Method of sowing also influences the yield and the efficiency of the management practices adopted. In case of maize even before the implementation of the project 80 (K) and 72 (W) percent of farmers used to adopt ridge & furrow method of sowing, which has increased to 95 (K) and 89 (W) percent during the post-project period. Mechanization is a crucial input in crop production management. In agricultural sector it has assumed greater significance because of its potential to enhance productivity by ensuring timely agricultural operations more effectively and reducing human drudgery. It also gives relief from increase labour cost, labour unrest at crucial hours, which hampers timely operations. In case of paddy, direct seeding with paddy drum seeder was introduced in the beneficiary villages. Direct seeding technique was accepted by the farmers and are planning to purchase the drum seeder. Only few farmers have adopted this practice, as it is completely new one. Line sowing in greengram is an important practice and nearly 87 percent of farmers in the beneficiary villages are going for line sowing. The advantage of line sowing is identified by 13 percent farmers but not adopting due to lack of bullock pair and plough.

III) Impact on crop economics

(a) Crop Productivity Table-14: Impact of the project in increasing the productivity of the major crops in the beneficiary villages of Karimnagar district. Productivity % Increase in Crop productivity over the Post- project (kg/ha) Pre-project (kg/ha) pre-project period Maize 5910(K) 3500(K) 68.9(K) 5010(W) 2800(W) 78.9(W) Paddy 5130(K) 2400(K) 113.75(K) 5460(W) 2920(W) 86.9(W) Groundnut 1740(K) 1250(K) 39.2(K) 2610(W) 1210(W) 115.7(W) Blackgram 1390(K) --Greengram 585(K) 300(K) 95(K) Cotton 2280(K) 1200(K) 90(K) 2620(W) 1300(W) 101.5(W) Chilli 2390(W) 2200(W) 8.6(W) K: Karimnagar W: Warangal Implementation of the project has an outstanding effect on the productivity of the crop in the beneficiary village. It was found that maize productivity has increased by 68.9(K) and 78.9 (W) percent compared to the pre-project period. This can be attributed mostly to the improved cultural practices and change in the varieties. Productivity in paddy, groundnut and greengram has increased

100

by 113.75, 39.2 and 95 percent, respectively. The yields of the beneficiary villages (post-project) as compared with the average yields of the command area and Karimnagar district are presented in the table - 14. Table-15: Comparative crop productivity in Karimnagar district, command area and beneficiary villages. Productivity (kg/ha) Crop Karimnagar Command area Beneficiary villages Maize 3103 4199 5910 Paddy 2777 3106 5130 Groundnut 243 786 1370 Blackgram 251 320 585 Greengram 659 1200 2250 Cotton 881 1613 1740 A large margin between productivity in beneficiary village, command area and the district exists ( Table-15 & 16). Thus it can be concluded that, if the same cultural practices are adopted through out the district, production of the major crops can be increased to a greater extent as presented in table - 17. Table-16: Comparative crop productivity in Warangal district, command area and beneficiary villages. Productivity (kg/ha) Crop Warangal Command area Beneficiary villages Maize 2800 4199 5010 Paddy 2920 3106 5450 Groundnut 1210 786 2610 Cotton 1300 1613 2620 Chilli 2200 -2390 Table-17: Area and production of major crops for Karimnagar & Warangal Crop Area (ha) Production (t) Maize 96000(K) 269472(K) 62800(W) 169730(W) Paddy 258000(K) 607074(K) 184000(W) 655000(W) Greengram 39000(K) 13026(K) Cotton 84000(K) 136164(K) 155000(W) 200720(W) Groundnut 30000(K) 25770(K) 53000(W) 60190(W) Chilli 33100(W) 72820(W) K: Karimnagar W: Warangal (b) Cost of Cultivation and Net income The effect of the project on cost of cultivation during the post-project period in comparison with preproject period is presented in the table - 18. It was found that the cost of cultivation was reduced in case of paddy and maize during post-project period compared to pre project period as the excessive dosage of fertilizers applied were cut down to great extent and weedicides were used for control of weeds. In case of greengram and cotton the cost of cultivation has increased due to the adoption of cost intensive improved management practices. Table-18: Impact of the project on cost of cultivation and net income in beneficiary Villages of Karimnagar and Warangal districts.

101

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Crop Maize

Net income (Rs/ha)

Pre-project

Postproject

Pre-project

Postproject

% increase in net income

15000(K) 10460(K) 12000(K) 22450(K) 87(K) 10604(W) 9850(W) 9377(W) 11961(W) 27.6(W) Paddy 17000(K) 10690(K) 8000(K) 20190(K) 152(K) 14844(W) 13531(W) 21125(W) 24727(W) 17.1(W) Greengram 1600(K) 4120(K) 2200(K) 8560(K) 289(K) Cotton 13000(K) 17460(K) 7000(K) 23740(K) 239(K) 25466(W) 22659(W) 23621(W) 33295(W) 41(W) Chilli 26200(W) 24030(W) 22416(W) 29962(W) 33.7(W) Groundnut 10665(W) 9883(W) 20118(W) 25016(W) 24.3(W) K: Karimnagar W: Warangal The project has an out standing impact in increasing the net returns. It was found that there was 87, 152, 289 and 239 percent increase in net income in case of maize, paddy, greengram and cotton, respectively. This increase can be attributed to improved management practices associated with assured supply of irrigation water. Table-19: Impact of the project on cost of cultivation and net income compared to rest of command area in Karimnagar district. Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Net income (Rs/ha) % increase in net Crop income in Command Beneficiary Command Beneficiary beneficiary area (99village area (99village villages 2000) 2000) Maize Paddy Greengram Cotton 11124 7294 6615 23039 11690 10460 8615 17460 16380 16208 10185 21961 20190 22450 12340 23740 23.3 38.5 21.2 8.1

The impact of the project on cost of cultivation and net income in beneficiary villages compared to the entire command area indicate that 23.3, 38.5, 21.2 and 8.1 percent increase in net income was registered in beneficiary villages against the command area in crops like paddy, maize, groundnut and cotton, respectively (Table-19). In cotton, the cost of cultivation was reduced by judicious usage of the pesticides supplemented with integrated pest management practices.

IV. Impact on socio-economic conditions:

One of the components of the baseline survey for the pre-project period and impact survey during the post-project period was the estimation of socio-economic characteristics for the project beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. The socio-economic conditions such as literacy, land holding pattern, income and expenditure pattern, savings etc. were considered. (a) Level of education among the farmers: The level of education in both the beneficiary and non-beneficiary farmers is almost similar with few changes in education levels of the children in villages. The literacy rate in beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages is 55 and 59 percent respectively. Majority of the illiterates are from the small farmers both in the beneficiary villages and other villages. (b) Occupation of farmers: The occupation of majority of occupants in both beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages is agriculture. Further agricultural labour is a secondary occupation for about 47 percent of the farmers in beneficiary villages and 41 percent of the farmers in the non-beneficiary villages. This difference can be attributed to increased cropping intensity and changed cropping pattern in the beneficiary village, providing work in their farm itself. The farmers with other farm business were very few both in the beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages. (c) Land holding patterns: Marginal farmers own majority of the land in the non-beneficiary villages, where as the medium and big farmers own major part of the cultivable land in the beneficiary village. The land holdings have increased by 18 percent in the beneficiary village when compared to the holding during

102

the pre-project period. This increase is mainly in the case of progressive farmers in the villages. There is not much difference in the holdings of the farmers from the non-beneficiary villages. (d) Cropping Pattern: There is an outstanding difference in the cropping pattern between the beneficiary and nonbeneficiary villages. In non-beneficiary villages, major crops grown are paddy and maize with less area under pulses and negligible area under summer vegetables. In beneficiary village 85-90 percent of the farmers are growing greengram-maize cropping system before the implementation of the project. After project is implemented around 40 percent of the farmers have shifted from the traditional cropping system to the improved cropping system including vegetables. The accepted cropping systems in the beneficiary village are maize-groundnut-greengram, greengram-maizegreengram, maize-groundnut-vegetable and greengram-maize-vegetable. Many of the farmers are interested in growing vegetable during summer through conjunctive use of canal and well irrigation. (e) Cropping intensity: Cropping intensity is an important yardstick for measuring the impact of any agricultural project. Cropping intensity has increased to greater extent as the third crop (summer crop) was introduced and readily accepted by the farmers in the beneficiary villages. Mostly vegetables are cultivated in summer through conjunctive use of canal and well irrigation. (f) Employment potential: Employment potential in village mirrors the financial and social status of the village. In the beneficiary village the employment potential has increased due to increased cropping potential. Labour from the non-beneficiary is also working in the beneficiary villages. Thus if the same practice of cultivating third crop is adopted in entire command area (2.53 lakh hectares) employment potential can be increased to a greater extent, which in turn would increase socio-economic conditions of the farmers. (g) Method of marketing: Method and time marketing depends on the socio-economic status of the farmers. Before the implementation of the project, nearly 95 percent of the farmers use to sell the produce immediately after harvesting. They could not wait for better price in the market due to various financial commitments. This at times has resulted in lower net income to the farmers. After the implementation of the project, nearly 35 percent farmers are withholding the produce for better prices. This highlights the increased financial stability in the farmers of the beneficiary villages. (h) Indebtedness: All the categories of beneficiaries are taking crop loans ranging from Rs. 5000 to 30000 depending on land holdings from primary agriculture co-operative society, which will be repaid after the crop season. Most of the beneficiaries are shareholders in the society. Various inputs like fertilizers, seeds etc. are purchased with this crop loans. Apart from crop loan very few farmers have also taken loans for purchase of tractor and other farm implements.

103

SRBC I. Impact of the project due to demonstrations, trials and other extension activities
The Agro-climagtic conditions of both beneficiary and non beneficiary villages were similar. The crops grown were also more or less similar. The crops grown were rice, sorghum, sunflower, redgram, hybrid cotton, mungari cotton, bengalgram and coriander. Irrigated land exists in both the situations. But 80 per cent of irrigated land was provided with only one or two irrigations through kundu river or bore wells if water and power were available. So this type of land was also included under irrigated land, otherwise most of the lands were dry lands in both beneficiary and nonbeneficiary villages. Thus the agricultural situation was similar in both types of villages and mainly it was rainfed cultivation. In beneficiary villages intensive training programmes, trails, demonstrations, field days, provision of required inputs were made which enhanced the knowledge of the farmers in beneficiary villages and facilitated to apply required inputs resulting increased yields. So the impact of the project was measured by comparing the adoption of improved package of practices in both beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages. The climatic conditions were not favourable since 5 years due to lack of sufficient rainfall. The rainfall data were furnished in Table-2.An amount 29, 37 and 32 per cent deficit rainfall was received during 1999-2000, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 respectively compared to decennial average. During these years cotton, sunflower and bengalgram were severely affected by drought conditions. The rainfall received in 2000-2001and 2001-2002 was good and was excess by 26 and 36 percent respectively compared to decennial average. Due to low recharge of bore wells and overall drought conditions, farmers did not take up second crop after rice. During 2003-2004 the rainfall received from June-October was 379.6 mm in 30 rainy days. In November and December, rainfall was not received which affected the rabi crops.

104

II.Impact on adoption of package of practices

Many of the farmers both in beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages were sowing with gorru and non-accustomed for dibbling. Only 10 per cent of farmers in hybrid cotton and eight per cent of farmers adopted dibbling in sunflower in beneficiary villages. Most of the farmers were aware of the advantage of dibbling but due to the problem of labour and evaporation of moisture in the soil, they were reluctant for this practice. After gorru sowing the farmers were doing thinning operation to maintain required plant population and spacing in some of crops like hybrid cotton, hybrid sorghum, redgram etc., Due to impact of the project the percent of farmers adopting recommended spacing in beneficiary villages was more than non-beneficiary villages as shown in Table-20. In beneficiary villages the percentage of farmers adopted recommended spacing was 32 in paddy, 27 sorghum, 24 sunflower, 45 redgram, 65 hybrid cotton as against 19 to 25 per cent in non-beneficiary villages. In bengalgram and coriander all the farmers were adopting almost the recommended spacing. Table-20: Impact of project on spacing adopted in major crops % farmers in beneficiary Crops Post - project Pre - project villages adopting recommended spacing Paddy 25 cm x 20 cm 30 cm x 20 cm 32 Sorghum 30 cm x 10 cm 30 cm x 10 cm 27 Sunflower 60-80 cm x 30 cm 60 cm x 20 cm 24 Redgram 90-140 cm x 20cm 140 cm x 20 cm 45 Hybrid cotton 60-110 cm x 45cm 110 cm x 45 cm 65 Bengalgram 30 x 10 cm 30 x 10 cm 100 Coriander 30 x 10 cm 30 x 10 cm % farmers in non-beneficiary villages adopting recommended spacing 21 24 19 25 100 100

(a) Seed Rate Optimum seed rate contributes the considerable increase in the yield. In general if the seed rate is increased, the plant population increases correspondingly. In paddy, even though the farmers used higher seed rate, the plant population was lees than recommendation due to wider planting. But after conducting demonstrations in paddy in the beneficiary villages, the farmers followed less spacing from hill to hill. In beneficiary villages in paddy 52 per cent of farmers adopted recommended seed rate against 35 per cent in non-beneficiary villages. Similarly higher percentage of farmers adopted recommended seed rate that is 59, 86, 26 in sorghum, sunflower, redgram in beneficiary villages as against 40, 80, 6 in non-beneficiary villages respectively. Similar trend noticed in rainfed crops also. The details were furnished in Table-21. Table-21: Impact of project on seed rate in different crops Average seed rate adopted in Crops Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower Beneficiary villages (kg/ha) 65.5 10.0 5.2 Non-beneficiary villages (kg/ha) 59.0 12.0 4.5 % of farmers adopted recommended seed rate Beneficiary Non-beneficiary villages villages 52 59 86 35 40 80

105

Redgram Hybrid cotton Bengalgram Rainfed Mungari cotton Sorghum Sunflower Redgram Bengalgram Coriander

6.0 2.5 80.0 9.0 12.0 5.5 6.0 85.0 -

5.0 15.0 11.0 88.0 33.75

26 40 12 44 11 80 50 29 -

6 18 25 26 0

(b) Seed treatment Seed treatment helps in controlling the seed borne diseases and avoiding one or two sprayings at the early stages will reduce expenditure on plant protection. Mostly for hybrids and improved varieties purchased from companies, the seed was already treated before packing. In case of hybrid sunflower and hybrid cotton, the seed was already treated. Due to impact of the demonstrations higher percentage of farmers adopted seed treatment in beneficiary villages in paddy (40), sorghum (68), redgram (73) and bengalgram (80) than the non beneficiary villages under irrigation. In rainfed, the seed treatment was still more under beneficiary villages than non-beneficiary villages as furnished inTable-22. Before inception of the project that is 4-5 years back, the farmers were not adopting the seed treatment. Table-22: Impact of Seed treatment in different crops Crops Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower Redgram Hybrid cotton Bengalgram Rainfed Mungari cotton Sorghum Bengalgram Sunflower Redgram % of farmers treating the seed Post project Beneficiary village Non-beneficiary village 40 68 100 73 100 80 33 60 86 100 43 25 21 100 35 0 8 12 Pre-project Treated Treated seed -

II. Impact of the project on input utilization

(a) Varieties Improved varieties and hybrids play an important role to increase the productivity upto 30-35 per cent in any crop. In this project number of demonstrations were conducted in beneficiary villages, which resulted spectacular, increase in the adoption of improved varieties. In paddy the farmers switched on from BPT-5204 to NDLR-8. Similarly, redgram farmers shifted from local to ICPL85063, LRG-30, and LRG-41 in beneficiary villages. In bengalgram the shift of varieties was from local and Annegiri to Kranti and KAK-2. In paddy all the farmers in both beneficiary and nonbeneficiary were cultivating improved variety considering BPT-5204 is an improved one. The

106

percentage of adoption of improved varieties in sorghum (85), sunflower (90), redgram (88) and bengalgram (92) was high in beneficiary villages as against non-beneficiary villages with percentages as 45, 32, 28, 48 respectively. Similar trend was noticed in rainfed also. The details of varieties and percentage of adoption were furnished in Table-23. (b) Organic manures Use of organic manures enriches the soil fertility. All the farmers were well aware of the benefits of it but due to lack of sufficient quantities, farmers apply it in rotation (once in 2-3 years) to all the fields. Many farmers applied farm yard manure (FYM) except four per cent who applied sheep penning, but the quantities applied were less than recommendation. Due to constant training programmes in beneficiary villages, the per cent of farmers applied FYM in these villages was high ranging from 61 to 93 as against 43 to 83 in non beneficiary villages in different crops under irrigation as shown in Table-25. But all the farmers in both categories applied less than half the recommendation. But due to impact of the project the beneficiary farmers applied higher quantities of FYM ranging from 3.7 to 4.9 t/ha which was higher than pre-project (2.0-4.2) and non-beneficiary villages (26-3.7) under irrigation as detailed in Table-24. Table-23: Impact of project on crop varieties Farmers growing varieties/hybrids in Crops Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower Redgram Hybrid cotton Bengalgram Rainfed Mungari cotton Sorghum Sunflower Redgram Bengalgram Coriander Beneficiary village BPT-5204 NDLR-8 Mahindra Ganga kaveri, Cargil-177 ICPL-85063, LRG-30, LRG-41 Brahma, NHH44, Bunny Annegiri, KAK2, Kranthi Aravinda,Y-1 Mahindra, Raichur, local. Cargil-177 LRG-30, LRG-41 Annegiri, Kranthi CS-4 Non-beneficiary village BPT-5204 Raichur, Mahindra Cargil-177, Gangakaveri, local LRG-30, Local Annegiri, Local Jalagam, Local Mahindra, Local Raichur, % of farmers adopting improved varieties/hybrids in Beneficiary Non-beneficiary villages villages 100 85 90 88 100 92 95 65 61 70 90 100 45 32 28 48 35 22 45 41

Annegiri, Local Local

Table-24: Application of organic manures in different crops Crops Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower % of farmers applying organic manures Beneficiary villages Non-beneficiary villages 83 93 71 83 50 43

107

Redgram Hybrid cotton Bengalgram Rainfed Mungari cotton Sorghum Bengalgram Sunflower Redgram Coriander

65 49 61 40 60 66 42 38 -

60 71 53 28 25

Table-25: Details on quantities of organic manures applied (t/ha) Post-project Beneficiary villages Non-beneficiary villages 4.9 4.2 3.7 3.7 3.9 4.3 3.0 4.3 4.0 3.7 3.1 3.0 3.5 3.0 2.6 2.9 3.3 3.1 2.3

Crops Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower Redgram Hybrid cotton Bengalgram Rainfed Mungari cotton Sorghum Bengalgram Sunflower Redgram Coriander

Pre-project 4.2 3.5 3.0 2.0 2.5 2.8 2.5 3.1 2.8 2.9 2.1 1.9

( c) Inorganic fertilizers
Inorganic fertilizers account 20-25 per cent of total work of cultivation in crops like paddy, hybrid cotton commercial crops etc., So, it should be applied judiciously to reduce the cost of cultivation Keeping this in view demonstrations were conducted in beneficiary villages which resulted to reduction of fertilizer compared to pre-project in many crops. In paddy and hybrid cotton the reduction was noticed from 210+180+95 to 163+67+91 and 92+78+82 to 86+61+78 NPK kg/ha respectively. The reduction of fertilizers was also observed from non-beneficiary to beneficiary villages. The details were furnished in Table-26. The impact of the project revealed high per cent of farmers applied recommended fertilizers ranging from 21 to 36 in beneficiary villages as against 16 to 21 in non-beneficiary villages in different crops as presented in Table-26 and 10.. In general farmers were applying more than recommended dose of fertilizer for irrigated crops. Table-26: Application of chemical fertilizers in different crops (N P K kg/ha)

Pre-project
Crops

N Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower Redgram 210 72 82 51

P 180 41 71 60

K 95 55 52 45

Beneficiary village N P K 163 65 70 40 67 35 82 62 91 40 50 30

Post-project Non-beneficiary village N P K 205 75 61 52 166 65 56 71 56 56 55 35

108

Hybrid cotton Bengalgram

92 31

78 39

82 41

86 35

61 42

78 46

-------

-----

-------

Rainfed
Mungari cotton Sorghum Bengalgram Sunflower Redgram Coriander 32 65 31 52 36 41 29 46 42 62 51 31 28 40 46 41 25 28 30 71 25 65 32 --35 43 47 72 54 ---25 45 75 38 ----52 80 35 ----30 57 47 36 ------28 45 37 -------21

Table-27: Impact of the project on the use of chemical fertilizers Crops Irrigated Paddy Sorghum Sunflower Redgram Hybrid cotton Bengalgram Mungari cotton Sorghum Bengal gram Sunflower Redgram Coriander
(d) Irrigation Farmers in beneficiary village adopting practice of skip furrow and alternate furrow irrigation during periods of limited water availability in cotton, sunflower and redgram. The micro irrigation methods had become very popular because they will overcome the problem of water scarcity and power shortages being taught in the training programmes conducted by RARS, Nandyal. Another factor responsible for their popularity was the subsidy offered by the Government of A.P. Sprinkler and raingun irrigation methods in chickpea were more popular in chickpea growing areas as life saving irrigation given during critical stages of crop growth period doubles the yield. Family drip irrigation was demonstrated for garden bean crop at upper reach during dry spells and it is gaining prominence among the farmers. (e) Pesticides The cost of pesticides contributes significant part in the total cost of cultivation and excessive use also reduced the quality of the product besides environmental pollution. So, lot of emphasis was there to reduce the pesticides usage. More quantities of pesticides were applied in hybrid cotton,

Per cent of farmers adopting recommended fertilizers in Beneficiary Village Non-beneficiary village 31 29 32 28 36 21 Rainfed 31 18 10 16 42 ---11 7 2 3 13 10 16 18 21 16 -----

109

paddy, redgram and bengalgram. Integrated pest management (IPM) was demonstrated in beneficiary villages. During pre-project period, farmers used to spray 25-28 times to hybrid cotton, 5-6 sprays to paddy, 6-8 sprays to improved varieties of redgram. Due to impact of the project, the number of spraying were reduced to 12-14 in hybrid cotton and 2-3 spraying in paddy and 3-4 for redgram. This was observed in 25 per cent in hybrid cotton, 32 per cent in paddy and 19 per cent in redgram. The reduced usage was noticed in all the crops in beneficiary villages.

III. Impact on crop economics

(a) Cropping pattern The average size of sampled farmers in beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages was 3.939 ha and 3.768 ha respectively. The irrigated and rainfed crops were 2.407 ha and 1.532 ha in beneficiary and 1.532 ha and 2.236 in non-beneficiary villages respectively. The crops grown were more or less similar except very few changes. The detailed areas of these crops were presented in Annexure-V & VI. Two crops were grown in both villages, but they were negligible and frequent failures or poor yields were observed due to lack of power and irrigation water. (b) Costs and returns Costs and returns for all the crops grown in average size of holding in both beneficiary and non-beneficiary villages were computed and presented in detail in Annexure-V & VI. Per hectare of average size of holding was also assessed. The gross returns and gross costs of average holding in beneficiary villages were Rs. 95332 and Rs. 49933 as against Rs. 50468 and Rs. 37301 in nonbeneficiary villages respectively. The net returns were Rs. 45399 in beneficiary and Rs. 13167 in nonbeneficiary villages. The impact of the project resulted, per holding, an additional net returns of Rs. 32232 in beneficiary villages compared to non-beneficiary villages (Table-28). Table-28: Costs and returns for holding and per hectare (in rupees) Beneficiary villages Non-beneficiary villages Details Per holding Per hactare Per holding Per hactare Gross returns 95332 24202 50468 13394 Gross costs 49933 12677 37301 9899 Net returns 45399 11525 13167 3495 Benefit cost ratio 1:0.91 1:0.91 1:0.35 1:0.35 Per hectare net returns were Rs. 11525 in beneficiary villages and Rs. 3495 in non-beneficiary villages indicating an additional net returns of Rs. 8030 due to impact of the project. Benefit cost ratio was arrived by dividing net returns with gross costs. It will be same both for average holding and per hectare. The higher benefit cost ratio indicates ore profits. The benefit cost ratio of beneficiary farmers was 1:0.91 as against 1:0.35 of non-beneficiary farmers. The benefit cost ratio of different crops in beneficiary villages was high than the non-benefit villages (Annexure-V & VI)

(c ) Productivity of different crops

The impact of the project on productivity of different crops was very distinct in beneficiary villages compared to pre-project and non-beneficiary villages due to adoption of improved varieties/hybrids, and other package of practices. Productivity of paddy, sunflower and hybrid cotton was 6500, 1850, 2300 kg/ha in beneficiary villages as against 4225, 840, 1795 kg/ha in pre-project. The percentage increase of productivity in beneficiary villages over pre-project was higher by 53 in paddy, 35 in sorghum, 120 in sunflower, 56 in redgram and 28 in hybrid cotton. But it was less in non-beneficiary villages as shown in Table-29 under irrigation.

110

Table-29: Impact of project on productivity of different crops ( kg/ha) Per cent increase in Post-project beneficiary villages over Crops Preproject Beneficiary NonPrenonvillages beneficiary project beneficiary villages villages Irrigated Paddy 4225 6500 5575 53 31 Sorghum 2789 3575 2925 35 4 Sunflower 840 1850 875 120 4 Redgram 816 1275 875 56 7 Hybrid cotton 1795 2300 2025 28 12 Rainfed Mungari cotton 498 800 575 60 15 Sorghum 756 1050 950 38 25 Bengalgram 495 750 563 33 13

IV. Impact of the project Socio-economic conditions

The SRBC project benefited to the farming community in many ways besides transfer of the technology. The important aspects were furnished below:

(a) Employment potential

Adoption of improved technology, intensive cultivation, use of hybrids/improved varieties creates more employment compared to tradition method of cultivation of crops. In the beneficiary villages, the farmers shifted from traditional to improved varieties in paddy, bengalgram, redgram and sunflower. A few of the farmers were grown two crops in an year in a limited extent. The man work day required to an average size of holding in beneficiary village and non-beneficiary village was estimated and found that 415 and 334 man work day respectively (Annexure-IV). The impact of the project on employment potential was 81 man work days additional in beneficiary villages for an average size of holding.

V. General impact
(a)Agricultural Information Centre Agricultural Information Centre was set up at RARS, Nandyal with SRBC funds is an exemplary and a model center in ANGRAU. It was equipped with different crop varieties, pest and disease incidence laminations, live specimens of crop varieties, soil profile board, specimens of tractor, bullock drawn agricultural implements etc., Number of farmers are visiting the center and the farmers are enlightened about the latest agricultural technologies. (b ) SRI Cultivation The System of Rice Intensification (SRI) was demonstrated in beneficiary villages. Farmers attended for training progammes visited the demonstration and few farmers started cultivation. The

111

demonstration in one of the beneficiary village (Konidedu) got highest yield in the state as per the announcement of Director of Extension in REAC meeting and the concerned farmer was honoured. Thus this aspect helped tremendously for increasing the productivity in paddy in this region. (c)Model Irrigation Block A model block has been established at RARS farm to demonstrate different methods of irrigation to the farmers. It consists of different types of drip and sprinkler irrigation, rain guns, water measuring devices and surface methods of irrigation. Many farmers visited this and appreciated regarding rain guns and a few of them inclined to purchase. (d)Rotavator It is useful for efficient land preparation and it was demonstrated to number of farmers. Many farmers appreciated and wanted to purchase. (e) LCD Projector Number of training programmes were conducted at RARS, Nandyal and in beneficiary villages. The LCD Projector helped to conduct the training programmes efficiently. (f) Equipment Due to this project, costly equipments like Automatic Weather Station, Profile Moisture Probe, Pressure Plate Apparatus, Power tiller etc., were purchased which helped in many ways to the scientists of the farm and farmers of this region. (g) Pamphlets and booklets Number of pamphlets and book lets were printed regarding package of practices and latest technologies of different crops which helped the farming community to adopt the same. (h) Development of seed drill Bengalgram seed drill was developed at RARS, Nandyal which is useful for sowing optimum seed rate. Yield advantage of 225 kg/ha was also noticed. Many farmers were using this seed drill. (i) Line departments There is a good impact on line departments due to conducting training programmes and workshops to Agricultural Officers, Assistant Directors of Agriculture, I & CADA Engineers.

112

TRAININGS IMPACT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A perusal of knowledge test conducted at the end of training programmes in three centres i.e., Nandyal, Karimnagar and Warangal clearly indicated that majority of trainee farmers lie in medium knowledge category followed by low and high knowledge categories. The findings generally followed normal distribution. The results were coded, tabulated and statistically analyzed using SPSS package for drawing meaningful conclusions. INTRODUCTION Farming community is the target group where all the research results find their best application. Improvement in farmers knowledge about various new cultivation techniques is attained through training programmes. Imparting of research findings in irrigation water management is adapted by the scientists in A.P III Irrigation project in order to achieve the set objective of training the farmers in the different reaches of the distributory. The farmers invited to the training programmes are those who will effectively absorb and are pro active to implement the trial results. Improving the knowledge of the progressive farmers about the new techniques is aimed keeping in view the social and cultural influence they would have on the implementation of the newly evolved technology. This attempt to improve the farmers knowledge about various aspects in crop irrigation is achieved through the training programmes conducted in various mandals under SRBC and SRSP command areas. Trainings conducted during the last year of the project would enable the farmers to understand the intricacies of developing a recommendation thus enhancing the possibility of achieving sustainable yields.

OBJECTIVES 1. To assess the impact of training programmes conducted to the farmers 3. To examine the impact on adoption of package of practices of major crops 4. To estimate the impact of input use in major crops due to demonstrations 4. To study the economics of different crops due to impact of the project 5. To explore the employment potential due to impact of the project. METHODOLOGY SRSP A total of 1739 farmers were given intensive training in SRSP command comprising of 960 from 24 mandals in Karimnagar and 779 from 16 mandals in Warangal centres. The training programme is conducted for two days covering all aspects of water management and latest innovations in technology. A knowledge test was conducted at the end of training session to find out the impact of the training programme on the knowledge level of the farmers. SRBC The command area was divided into 16 blocks covering five mandals viz., Panyam, Banaganapalli, Koilakuntla, Owk and Sanjamala From these mandals all the villages covering under SRBC ayacut were selected. From the selected villages, farmers from Rythu Mitra groups were selected and given intensive training programmes at RARS, Nandyal on different topics relating to adoption pattern of technology on major crops and water management practices. Totally 960 farmers

113

attended from 50 villages of the command area. All the trained farmers were subjected to knowledge test at the end of the training programme. For this purpose a knowledge test was developed comprising of 26 test questions covering all the topics of training programmes (entire cognitive domain).The possible minimum and maximum scores are 0 and 26 respectively. The questions were framed in a fixed alternative manner as majority of the trainee farmers were can read only category. The results were coded, tabulated and statistically analysed for interpretation of the findings. To draw the meaningful conclusions, the farmer trainees were divided into three categories viz., Low knowledge, and Medium knowledge, High knowledge based on mean and standard deviation in the following manner. Category Low knowledge Medium knowledge High knowledge RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SriSailam Right Bank Canal (SRBC) After completion of the training programmes, evaluation was made by dividing the farmers into three categories viz., low knowledge, medium knowledge and high knowledge based on mean and standard deviation and the results were furnished in Table-30. Table 30: Distribution of trainee farmers according to their knowledge levels (Nandyal) S.No. Category Frequency Percentage 1 Low knowledge 219 22.81 2 Medium knowledge 566 58.95 High knowledge Total Mean : 12.82 S.D : 6.18 SriRam Sagar project (SRSP) Table31: Distribution of trainee farmers according to their knowledge levels ( Karimnagar) Mean:7.6 S.D:3.4 S.No. Category Frequency Percentage 1 Low knowledge 175 18.2 2 Medium knowledge 638 66.5 3 High knowledge Total 147 960 15.3 100 3 175 960 18.22 100 Criteria Mean + Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation Mean Standard deviation

Table 32: Distribution of trainee farmers according to their knowledge levels (Warangal) S.No. 1 2 3 Category Low knowledge Medium knowledge High knowledge Total Frequency 153 529 97 779 Mean: 9.9 S.D: 3.1 Percentage 19.5 67.7 12.7 100

114

It is evident from the Table 30 that 18.22 per cent of the trainee farmers fell under high knowledge category, followed by 58.95 per cent in medium knowledge and 22.81 per cent in low knowledge categories. It is evident from the Table 31 that 18.2 per cent of the trainee farmers fell under low knowledge category, followed by 66.5 per cent in medium knowledge and 15.3 per cent in high knowledge categories. It is evident from the Table 32 that 19.5 per cent of the trainee farmers fell under low knowledge category, followed by 67.7 per cent in medium knowledge and 12.4 per cent in high knowledge categories Hence, it is clear from table-32, 59 per cent of trainee farmers were in medium and 18 percent in high knowledge categories indicating the effectiveness of the training programme given. A sum of 741 accounting 77 per cent of the total farmers for which training is being given were in medium and high knowledge categories. From table 32 & 33 it clear that majority of the trainee farmers fell under medium category i.e, 66.5 per cent in Karimnagar and 67.7 per cent in Warangal in medium knowledge category, fowolled by 18.2 and 19.5 percents in low knowledge categories and 15.3 and 12.7 in high knowledge categories in Karimnagar and Warangal centers respectively. The trainee farmers in low knowledge category can be attributed as the training programme could not have any influence on their cognitive domain i.e knowledge part, not due to the very reason that the training programme is not effective, but due to the inherent defects on the part of the trainee farmers viz., illiteracy, lack of interest and lack of innovativeness and achievement motivation. Any extension technique (whether training in Knowledge or Skill or Application in Cognitive or Psychomotor or Affective domains respectively) need not necessarily have impact on cent percent of trainee farmers as many other extraneous variables were also influencing the training environment, trainee, trainer and training module developed for the training. In lieu of the above aspects, considering that 3/4th of the trainee farmers were elevated to medium and high knowledge categories, it is concluded that the training programme had tremendous impact in enhancing the knowledge of the trainee farmers in adoption pattern of technology on major crops and water management practices.

115

SRSP

116

Annexure I:Weather Data for the project period (Karimnagar)

Year 1999

Month January Feb March April May June July August Sep Oct Nov Dec January Feb March April May June July August Sep Oct Nov Dec January Feb March April May June July August Sep Oct Nov Dec

2000

2001

Mean Temperature 0C Maximum Minimum 29.4 12.4 33.6 18.1 37.5 20.8 41.0 23.8 39.3 27.4 34.5 25.7 32.1 24.0 30.4 23.8 31.0 24.0 34.3 23.7 32.9 18.3 31.7 14.6 32.6 16.7 33.8 21.0 39.4 21.2 43.4 27.7 40.9 28.6 35.4 27.2 33.8 26.2 33.7 25.8 35.2 27.7 36.4 20.1 34.7 18.6 33.7 13.6 31.7 17.8 35.2 18.9 37.5 23.5 41.0 25.8 44.7 30.8 38.2 27.2 34.5 26.7 32.3 25.6 36.0 26.0 35.9 24.6 36.4 20.3 33.3 16.2

Rainfall (mm) ----19.6 57.2 173.4 174.0 69.6 8.4 ------41.8 261.4 153.0 283.5 102.6 37.7 ----22.0 31.8 -82.0 91.9 146.0 114.4 56.0 ---

Relative Humidity (%) 71 73 59 58 62 70 80 83 86 79 71 66 68 72 66 65 53 70 70 74 74 64 65 54 64 53 62 64 43 67 70 75 68 71 68 66

117

2002

2003

2004

January Feb March April May June July August Sep Oct Nov Dec January Feb March April May June July August September October November December January February

32.8 34.2 35.4 39.6 40.3 35.5 34.7 30.4 33.9 32.2 29.7 30.4 33.1 32.6 35.79 38.73
32.17 31.57 32.78 31.1 30.4

18.6 20.1 22.4 26.4 28.2 26.2 25.8 23.7 23.3 22.1 16.6 15.0 18.0 21.1 22.6 27.83
24. 64 24. 25 24. 38 21. 8 16. 99

22.0 ---15.2 82.0 124.0 233.0 23.0 60.0 ---1.8 36.8 86.1
173.2 194.3 81.5 103.7 --

70 75 77 71 61 84 85 99 96 95 89 90 91 88 79 75.7
98.61 99.77 99.3 99.2

14.73 15.8

28.32 28.4

-18.0 20.0

118

Annexure II: Weather Data for the project period (Warangal)

Month Mean temperature 0 C Max. Min. Rainfall (mm) No. of rainy days 8 15 14 11 7 1 0 -

1998
June July August September October November December 37.6 32 30.9 30.6 30.6 29.5 28 28.7 32.5 27.6 24.6 24.5 34.2 23.5 19.8 12.8 13.4 19.7 160.1 288.7 296.2 207.8 134 16.6 0 -

1999
Jan Feb

2000
January February March April May June July August September October November December 31 30.3 35.1 40.4 37.9 32.2 32.1 30.3 32.1 33.7 32.3 29.3 15.3 20.1 22.5 25.2 24.8 25.2 24.0 23.9 24.2 23.0 19.5 13.5 16.4 18.3 22.3 25.1 26.3 18.26 16.96 15.89 19.24 18.0 16.53 14.16 17.54 21.00 24.09 27.50 9.4 17.4 31.2 239.0 238.4 290.8 93.4 141.4 84.6 168.8 117.4 78.2 2.0 8 1 1 1 13 11 11 3 8 11 11 8 7 1 -

2001
January February March April May June July August September October November December 29.2 33.2 35.4 39.3 42.6 33.9 31.81 29.4 32.41 31.7 30.96 29.37

2002
January February March April 29.58 32.50 35.77 39.20

119

May June July August September October November December

40.70 35.86 33.59 29.27 32.49 31.57 27.66 30.13

29.60 26.36 26.48 24.52 26.23 31.23 17.83 15.52 16.36 15.61 21.89 25.10 27.4 27.8 24.2 24.38 23.7 23.2 18.54 14.87 16.92 20.12 22.8

25 51 252.4 19.4 123.2 -

3 7 13 2 6 -

2003
January February March 8.54April May June July August September October November December 30.09 32.98 35.67 39.78 44.7 37.02 30.31 30.26 31.6 30.11 29.42 27.09 2.8 57.8 294.1 129.2 126.1 109.4 12 75.2 22 1 8 16 9 3 8 2 4 4

2004
January February March 27.5 30.12 36.5

120

Annexure III: DETAILS OF DEMONSTRATIONS CONDUCTED FOR

FIVE YEARS (Karimnagar) List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif/Rabi 1998-99
Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Propose d Group - A (Research Trials) Introduction of rabi pigeonpea 3 3 Introduction of summer --greengram Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Introduction of Blackgram 3 3 during rabi Group - C (Mass Spread of Proven Factors of Production) Production technology of Maize 6 6 Introduction of chemical weed 6 6 control techniques in maize Introduction of chemical weed 3 3 control techniques in rabi pigeon pea Introduction of chemical weed 3 3 control techniques in blackgram during rabi Total (A+B+C) 24 24 Total demonstrations proposed : 88 Total demonstrations conducted : 88 2 -2 6 6 2 2 20 2 -2 6 6 2 2 20 3 2 4 14 14 3 4 44 3 2 4 14 14 3 4 44 Demons trated Reach-II Propose d Demons trated Reach-III Propose d Demons trated

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif/Rabi 1999-00

Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Propose d Group - A (Research Trials) Irrigation schedules in maize Irrigation schedules in groundnut. Irrigation schedules in rabi pigeonpea. Irrigation schedules in blackgram. Irrigation schedules in cotton. 3 3 3 1 1 -----3 3 3 1 1 -----5 3 3 1 1 -----Demons trated Reach-II Propose d Demons trated Reach-III Propose d Demons trated

121

Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Production technology of 1 -groundnut to increase yield by application of gypsum Production technology of cotton 1 -Production technology of rice 2 2 Popularization of greengram 2 -based cropping system Popularization of maize based 2 2 cropping system Group - C (Mass Spread of Proven Factors of Production) Chemical weed control 1 -techniques in Groundnut Chemical weed control 2 -techniques in Paddy Chemical weed control 3 3 techniques in Maize Chemical weed control 5 -techniques in Greengram Chemical weed control 1 -techniques in Blackgram Demonstration of newly 2 2 varieties in Rice Demonstration of newly 4 4 varieties in Greengram -Demonstration of newly 2 varieties in groundnut -Demonstration of newly 1 varieties in Pigeon pea -Demonstration of newly 1 varieties in Blackgram Total (A+B+C) 41 13 Total demonstrations proposed Total demonstrations conducted : 152 : 63

2 1 1 6 2 2 2 2 5 1 1 7 2 1 1 47

--1 -------1 7 ---9

2 1 2 8 2 5 2 2 5 2 2 10 5 1 2 64

--2 8 2 --10 -2 2 10 5 --41

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif 2000-2001

Reach-I Propose d Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Production technology in 3 green gram based cropping systems Production technology in maize 3 based cropping systems Title of the Demonstration Demons trated 4 4 Reach-II Propose d 3 3 Demons trated 5 2 Reach-III Propose d 3 3 Demons trated 4 4

122

Group - C (Mass Spread of Proven Factors of Production) Demonstration of production 3 5 technology in paddy. Demonstration of production -5 technology in groundnut. Demonstration of production 6 5 technology in greengram Demonstration of chemical weed 5 5 control techniques in maize Demonstration of chemical weed 5 5 control techniques in paddy 31 Total 27 Total demonstrations proposed : 93 Total demonstrations conducted : 109

5 5 5 5 5 31 10

5 --

5 5 5

8 7 8 6 11 48

4 8 34

5 5 31

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Rabi 20002001

Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Propo sed Demons trated Reach-II Propose d 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 Demons trated 3 2 2 2 1 -3 Reach-III Propose d 3 2 2 2 2 1 3 Demons trated 3 2 2 2 1 -3

Group - A (Research Trials) Irrigation schedules in maize 3 3 Intermittent irrigation schedules 2 2 in paddy. Irrigation schedules in groundnut. 2 2 Irrigation schedules in rabi 2 2 pigeonpea. Irrigation schedules in blackgram. 1 2 Irrigation schedules in cotton. -1 Monitoring of physico-chemical 3 3 changes in soils and water in distributory 89 of SRSP canal. Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Production technology in greengram 2 2 based cropping system Production technology in maize 2 3 based cropping systems Group - C (Mass Spread of Proven Factors of Production) Demonstration of production 1 2 technology in paddy. Demonstration of production 2 2 technology in groundnut. Demonstration of production 2 3 technology in rabi pigeonpea.

2 2 2 2 3

8 5 2 2 1

2 2 2 2 3

8 10 2 2 3

123

Demonstration of production technology in blackgram during rabi. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in groundnut Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in maize. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in blackgram. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in paddy Total Total demonstrations proposed Total demonstrations conducted

5 5 5 5 5 51 : 153 : 179

4 4 5 4 8 48

5 5 5 5 5 51

3 3 5 5 13 60

5 5 5 5 5 51

5 9 9 5 15 81

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif 2001-2002

Title of the Demonstration Reach-I Propose d Demons trated Reach-II Propose d 3 1 3 3 Demons trated 3 -2 6 Reach-III Propose d 3 1 3 3 Demons trated 5 1 4 5

Group - A (Research Trials) Demonstration of irrigation 3 5 schedules in Cotton Demonstration of Drip 1 -irrigation system in Cotton Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Demonstration of cultivation of 3 4 vegetables in maize based cropping system Demonstration of cultivation of 3 4 vegetables in maize based cropping system Group - C (Mass Spread of Proven Factors of Production) Popularization of green gram 5 4 based cropping system Popularization of maize based 5 4 cropping system Popularization of new variety 5 2 JGL-1798 in Paddy Popularization of recommended 5 5 production technology in greengram Popularization of recommended 5 -production technology in groundnut Demonstration of chemical 5 -weed control techniques in groundnut

5 5 5 5 5 5

5 5 3 6 2 2

5 5 5 5 5 5

5 5 7 5 3 7

124

Demonstration of chemical 5 weed control techniques in Paddy Demonstration of chemical 5 weed control techniques in maize Demonstration of chemical 5 weed control techniques in greengram Popularization of new varieties 5 in groundnut Introduction of vegetables in -Kharif Total (A+B+C) 60 Total demonstrations proposed : 180 Total demonstrations conducted : 182

6 5 5 -2 46

5 5 5 5 -60

11 3 8 2 4 58

5 5 5 5 -60

9 4 6 6 6 78

List of Demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Rabi 2001-2002

Title of the Demonstration

Reach-I
Proposed Demons trated -2 -4 3 -5 5 1 1 --

Reach-II
Proposed 1 1 3 3 3 1 5 5 5 5 3 Demons trated -3 3 7 3 -3 6 4 4 1

Reach-III
Proposed 1 1 3 3 3 1 5 5 5 5 3 Demons trated 2 4 3 10 6 1 5 5 5 4 1

Group A (Research Trials) Demonstration of Sprinkler 1 Irrigation system in groundnut Demonstration of improved 1 puddler in Paddy Demonstration of different 3 irrigation methods in Groundnut Demonstration of Direct seeding 3 technique in Paddy Demonstration of irrigation 3 schedules in Cotton Demonstration of Drip Irrigation 1 system in Cotton Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Demonstration of irrigation 5 schedules in Maize Demonstration of intermittent 5 irrigation schedules in Paddy Demonstration of irrigation 5 schedules in Blackgram Demonstration of irrigation 5 schedules in Groundnut Demonstration of irrigation 3 schedules in Pigeonpea

125

Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system (maizegroundnut-vegetables) Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Green gram based cropping system (green gramgroundnut-vegetables)

126

Group C (Mass Spread of proven factors in production) Popularization of Green gram 5 7 5 based cropping system. (Green gram-Maize-Green gram) Popularization of Maize based 5 -5 cropping system. (Maize-Groundnut-Green gram) 5 1 5 Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnut 5 -5 Demonstration of new variety of pigeonpea (ICPL-85063) Demonstration of production 5 1 5 technology in Blackgram during rabi (introduction of HYV LBG20, Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and control of powdery mildew. Demonstration of chemical weed 5 1 5 control techniques in Groundnut (Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and inter cultivation at 30-35DAS). Demonstration of chemical weed 5 5 5 control techniques in Paddy (Butachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and inter cultivation at 35-40 DAS). Demonstration of chemical weed 5 8 5 control techniques in Maize(Attrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and inter cultivation at 35-40 DAS). Demonstration of chemical weed 5 1 5 control techniques in Blackgram (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i/ha and inter cultivation at 25DAS) . Popularization of new variety of 5 -5 Groundnut JL-24. Popularization of new variety of 5 1 5 Blackgram (LBG-20). Popularization of new hybrids in 5 7 5 maize (PRO-AGRO-4640, Paras &Pioneer). Introduction of New variety 3 4 3 (JGL - 1853) in Paddy Total (A+B+C) 104 59 104 Total demonstrations proposed : 312 Total demonstrations conducted : 321

9 5 6

5 5 5

8 5 6

1 8

5 5

1 6

10

11

2 6 7 7 123

5 5 5 3 104

5 5 8 10 139

127

List of Demonstrations proposed and Demonstrated during Kharif 2002-2003

Title of the Demonstration

Reach-I
Proposed Demons trated

Reach-II
Proposed Demons trated 2 -3 3 3 2 3 3

Reach-III
Proposed Demons trated 6 1 12 3 3 2 3 3

Group A (Research Trials) Demonstration of Integrated Pest 1 3 1 Management in Cotton Demonstration of drip irrigation 1 -1 system in cotton Demonstration of direct seeding 3 -3 techniques in paddy Demonstration of application of 3 3 3 recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize Demonstration of application of 3 3 3 recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy Introduction of new variety of 2 2 2 Paddy (WGL-14). Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Demonstration of cultivation of 3 3 3 vegetables in Maize based cropping system Demonstration of cultivation of 3 3 3 vegetables in Greengram based cropping system Group C (Mass Spread of proven factors in production) Popularization of Greengram 5 5 5 based cropping system. (Greengram-Maize-Greengram) Popularization of Maize based 5 2 5
cropping system.

1 1 3 3 3 2 3 3

5 5 2

5 5 5

4 5 4

(Maize-Groundnut-Greengram) Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnut Demonstration of recommended production technology in Greengram. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Groundnut. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Paddy. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Maize. 5 -5

5 5 5 5

4 -5 5

5 5 5 5

5 2 6 5

5 5 5 5

5 4 7 5

128

Demonstration of chemical weed 5 control techniques in Green gram. Popularization of new variety of 5 Groundnut JL-24. Popularization of New variety 5 (JGL-1798) in Paddy Introduction of vegetables -during Kharif Total (A+B+C) 69 Total demonstrations proposed : 207 Total demonstrations conducted : 185

--5 -43

5 5 5 -69

-2 6 -57

5 5 5 -69

-4 7 7 85

List of Demonstrations proposed and Demonstrated during Rabi 2002-2003

Title of the Demonstration

Reach-I
Proposed Demons trated

Reach-II
Proposed 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 Demons trated 2 -2 1 1 3 3

Reach-III
Proposed 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 Demons trated 6 1 1 3 5 3 3

Group A (Research Trials) Demonstration of Integrated Pest 1 3 Management in Cotton Demonstration of drip irrigation 1 -system in cotton Demonstration of different 3 -irrigation methods in groundnut Demonstration of improved 3 -puddler in paddy Demonstration of direct seeding 3 -techniques in paddy Demonstration of application of 3 3 recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize Demonstration of application of 3 3 recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy Group - B (Small Scale Demonstrations) Demonstration of irrigation 5 5 schedules in maize Demonstration of irrigation 5 -schedules in black gram Demonstration of irrigation 5 -schedules in groundnut Demonstration of cultivation of 3 -vegetables in Maize based cropping system Demonstration of cultivation of 3 -vegetables in Green gram based cropping system Grou C (Mass Spread of proven factors in production)

5 5 5 3 3

6 5 2 2 1

5 5 5 3 3

5 5 2 1 1

129

Popularization of Greengram based cropping system. (Greengram-Maize-Greengram)

Popularization of cropping system. Maize based

5 5 5

6 -1

5 5 5

7 2 3

5 5 5

6 1 2

(Maize-Groundnut-Greengram) Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnut Demonstration of recommended production technology in blackgram Demonstration of new varieties in groundnut Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Groundnut. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Paddy. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Maize. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Blackgram. Introduction of maize in paddypaddy cropping system Introduction of blackgram in paddy-paddy cropping system Total Total (A+B+C) Total trials proposed : Total trials conducted :

5 5 5 5 5 5 --45 83 249 203

--1 4 8 ---20 34

5 5 5 5 5 5 --45 83

6 2 4 5 10 7 8 1 55 83

5 5 5 5 5 5 --45 83

6 2 2 8 9 6 8 -50 86

130

List of demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Kharif 2003-2004

Title of the Demonstration Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton Demonstration of direct seeding techniques in paddy Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy Comparative evaluation of new varieties of Paddy WGL-14, JGL-1798, JGL-1853. Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Greengram based cropping system Popularization of Greengram based cropping system. (Greengram-MaizeGreen gram) Popularization of Maize based cropping system. (Maize-Groundnut-Greengram) Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnut Demonstration of recommended production technology in Greengram. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Paddy. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Maize. Demonstration of Drip irrigation system in Chillies Total
Total Conducted : 41

Reach-I
Propos ed 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 -11 Demon strated 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 -11
: 41

Reach-II
Propos ed 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -13 Demonst rated 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -13

Reach-III
Propose d 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 Demonst rated 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17

Total Proposed

131

List of demonstrations proposed and demonstrated during Rabi 2003-2004

Title of the Demonstration

Reach-I
Propos ed 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 Demo nstrate d 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1

Reach-II
Propos ed 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Demons trated 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15

Reach-III
Propose d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -16 Demons trated 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 18

Demonstration of Integrated Pest Management in Cotton Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton Demonstration of direct seeding techniques in paddy Demonstration of irrigation schedules in maize Demonstration of irrigation schedules in black gram Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy Comparative evaluation of new varieties of Paddy WGL-14, JGL-1798, JGL-1853. Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Maize based cropping system Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in Greengram based cropping system Popularization of Greengram based cropping system. (Greengram-Maize-Green gram) Popularization of Maize based cropping system. (Maize-Groundnut-Greengram) Popularization of recommended production technology in Groundnut Demonstration of recommended production technology in blackgram Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Paddy. Demonstration of chemical weed control techniques in Maize. Demonstration of Paddy based Maize Total

---13 13 15 Total Proposed : 44 Total Conducted : 46

132

Annexure IV: DETAILS OF DEMONSTRATIONS

FOR FIVE YEARS (Warangal)

CONDUCTED

S. No

Title

No. of demonstrations R R II R III I

1998-1999 rice 3 3 4 3 2 1999-2000 4 4 3 2 2 6 1 1 4 2 2 -

T otal

A
1B 2 3 4 5 Total

Evaluation of 1 varieties for season

8 8 10 7 6 6 45

Irrigation intervals in paddy Irrigation intervals in cotton post rainy season Irrigation intervals in chilli post rainy season Irrigation intervals in turmeric post rainy season Irrigation intervals in maize

Group A
1 2 3 4 Scheduling of irrigation in groundnut Evaluation of cropping systems under canal irrigation SRSP Scheduling of irrigation in maize Management of yellow syndrome in chilies 5 12 1 3 16 3 8 3 3 21 18 9

Group B
1 2 3 Integrated pest management in cotton Integrated pest management for BPH in rice Kharif Efficacy of granular insecticides in rice nursery 9 2 7 15 1 10 4 28 3 17

133

Identification of suitable rice varieties for kharif and rabi seasons a. Kharif b. Rabi Management of rhizome rot and leaf spot in turmeric

2 3 6

6 6 2

2 3

8 11 11

Group C
Conjunctive use of canal and ground water in ID crops Cotton Chilli Turmeric

1 2 3

15 13 6

20 19 11

30 12 16

65 44 33 Total 142

1 2 3

2000-2001 Group A (Kharif) Evaluation of different cropping systems under 1 canal irrigation of SRSP Identification of suitable 5 rice varieties Evaluation of cotton 6 based cropping systems

8 6 5

2 -

9 13 11

Rabi
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 Introduction of new crops like sesame/redgram Evaluation of irrigation 5 methods in Chilli Evaluation of irrigation 2 methods in maize Evaluation of irrigation 6 methods in Cotton Evaluation of irrigation methods in groundnut Introduction of short duration varieties/hybrids 1 in rice Group B (Kharif) IPM cotton 6 IPM for BPH in rice 4 Management of yellow 3 syndrome in Chilli Efficacy of granular 4 2 3 4 4 1 3 5 3 4 5 1 3 6 4 4 4 2 8 7 10 1 7 17 11 11 13

134

insecticides in rice Management of rhizome 5 rot and leaf spot in turmeric Rabi Scheduling of irrigation 1 in groundnut Scheduling of irrigation 2 in maize 3 IPM for BPH in rice Group C (Kharif) Demonstration of 1 production technology in cotton Demonstration of 2 production technology in Chilli Demonstration of 3 production technology in turmeric Demonstration of 4 production technology in rice Demonstration of 5 production technology in maize Demonstration on stem 6 application of monocrotophos in cotton Demonstration on 7 chemical weed control in maize Rabi Demonstration of 1 production technology in rice 2001-2002 Group A (Kharif) Evaluation of different cropping systems under 1 canal irrigation of SRSP a. Turmeric based b. Chilli based 2 Identification of suitable

15

4 16 4 4 4 2 6 -

1 4 3 15 7 6 5 6 8 4

-0 4 10 5 5 6 4 10 2

1 4 11 41 16 15 15 12 24 6

11 Total 291

2 2 2

2 2 4

3 2

4 7 8

135

rice varieties for Kharif Cotton based cropping 3 systems Evaluation of direct seeding of rice under 4 puddle condition in farmers fields Chemical weed control in 5 Turmeric + maize intercropping Rabi Identification of suitable 1 rice varieties in Rabi Evaluation of different 2 methods of irrigation (Sprinkler) in vegetables Introduction of new crops 3 like blacakgram/ sesame/ redgram Evaluation of irrigation 4 methods in Chilli Evaluation of irrigation 5 methods in maize Evaluation of irrigation 6 methods in cotton Evaluation of irrigation 7 methods in groundnut Group B (Kharif) Demonstration of 1 suitable rice varieties for Kharif Maize based cropping 2 systems under canal irrigation of SRSP Management of yellow 3 syndrome in Chillies Management of rhizome 4 rot and leaf spot in turmeric Rabi Demonstration of 1 suitable rice varieties for rabi Scheduling of irrigation 2 in groundnut 3 Scheduling of irrigation

4 2

5 3

2 -

11 5

1 2 4 4 -

1 1 2 5 1 5 2

3 1 1 2 2 -

4 3 5 11 1 11 2

2 4 2

4 4 4 3

2 2 3 -

8 6 11 5

4 -

5 2 1

3 1 2

12 3 3

136

in maize Group C (Kharif) 1 IPM in cotton 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IPM in rice Popularization of recommended production technology in Cotton Popularization of recommended production technology in Chillies Popularization of recommended production technology in turmeric Popularization of recommended production technology in maize Popularization of recommended production technology in rice Efficacy of granular insecticides in rice nursery Demonstration of stem application of monocrotophos in cotton Chemical weed control in maize Rabi Popularization of recommended production technology in rice Efficacy of granular insecticides in rice nursery

8 5 10 3 2 6 8 10 -

8 4 10 4 3 2 6 4 10 4

6 4 10 3 2 6 4 10 3

22 13 30 10 5 4 18 16 30 7

1 2

4 4

4 4

6 4

14 12 Total 305

2002-2003 Group A (Kharif) Identification of suitable 1 4 rice varieties for Kharif Evaluation of direct seeding of rice under 2 puddle conditions in farmers fields Chemical weed control in 3 Turmeric+ Maize inter

4 -

3 1

11 1

137

cropping Performance of rice 4 varieties under dry conditions Identification of suitable 5 cotton varieties/hybrids Rabi Evaluation of different 1 methods of irrigation in vegetables Evaluation of irrigation 2 methods in Chilli Evaluation irrigation 3 methods in groundnut Group B (Kharif) Demonstration of 1 suitable rice varieties for Kharif Management of yellow 2 syndrome in Chilli Management of rhizome 3 rot and leaf spot in turmeric Rabi Scheduling of irrigation 1 in groundnut Evaluation of irrigation 2 methods in cotton Evaluation of irrigation 3 methods in maize Group C (Kharif) 1 IPM in cotton 2 IPM for BPH in rice Popularization of 3 recommended production technology in Cotton Popularization of 4 recommended production technology in Chillies Popularization of 5 recommended production technology in turmeric Popularization of 6 recommended production technology in maize 7 Popularization of

1 5

1 11

2 1

2 2

2 -

6 3

10

6 4

3 4 1

19 10 4

2 8 6 10 5 2 1 10

2 2 2 6 4 10 6 1 2 6

2 6 4 10 3 2 3 9

2 6 2 20 14 30 14 5 6 25

138

recommended production technology in rice Maize based cropping system under canal irrigation of SRSP Rabi Scheduling of irrigation in maize

2 Total 197

2003-2004 Group A (Kharif) Demonstration on rice 1 under irrigated dry conditions Rabi Demonstration on drip 1 irrigation in cotton Demonstration on 2 Sprinkler irrigation in Groundnut Group B (Kharif) Demonstration on cotton 1 based cropping system Demonstration on rice 2 based cropping system Demonstration on maize 3 based cropping system Rabi Demonstration on 1 irrigation methods in Chilli Demonstration on 2 irrigation methods in maize Demonstration o n 3 irrigation methods in groundnut Demonstration on 4 irrigation methods in cotton Group C (Kharif) Popularization of 1 recommended production technology in Cotton Popularization of 2 recommended production

3 3 0 2

3 3 3 2

3 0 3 2

9 6 6 6

2 2

2 2

2 2

6 6

139

3 4 5

1 2

technology in Chillies Popularization of recommended production technology in turmeric Popularization of recommended production technology in maize Popularization of recommended production technology in rice Rabi Demonstration on scheduling of irrigation in groundnut Demonstration on scheduling of irrigation in maize

1 2 1

0 2 2

0 0 0

1 4 3

0 2

3 2

0 0

3 4 Total 89

140

Table -1 : Demonstration of irrigation schedules in maize (Karimnagar) Total qty. of water applied (mm) Wat. Sav. over FP (mm) Add l. yl over FP (kg/ ha) WUE (kg/ha/mm) Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Gross returns (Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha) Add linco over FP (Rs/ ha) 2157 2175 1900 1562 1962 1913 2671 2850 2220 2047 1611 2280 2299 2550 2330 1491 1882 2111

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha)

TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP 99-00 450 545 95 7280 7170 110 16.2 13.2 8500 10250 26936 00-01 441 543 102 7350 7250 100 16.7 13.2 8750 10550 27562 01-02 484 589 105 6430 6250 180 13.3 10.7 11200 11920 35365 02-03 460 545 135 7110 6940 170 15.5 11.6 11567 12194 39105 03-04 439 526 87 7290 7050 240 16.6 13.4 10750 11500 36814 Avg 455 550 105 7092 6932 160 15.7 12.4 10153 11283 33156 II 99-00 465 549 84 6950 6870 80 14.9 12.6 7575 9950 25715 00-01 458 551 93 7000 6900 100 15.2 12.5 7975 10450 26250 01-02 493 595 102 5940 5780 160 12.0 9.7 11270 12450 38610 02-03 490 612 122 6760 6570 190 13.8 10.7 11946 12948 37180 03-04 454 585 131 6950 6740 210 15.3 11.5 11350 11900 35098 Avg 472 578 106 6720 6572 148 14.2 11.4 10023 11540 32571 III 99-00 455 556 101 7660 7540 120 16.8 13.6 8645 10500 28342 00-01 449 561 112 7750 7600 `150 17.3 13.5 8950 11125 28875 01-02 475 584 109 6360 6120 240 13.4 10.5 10240 11250 34980 02-03 474 607 133 7880 7740 140 16.6 12.8 11331 12052 43340 03-04 465 574 109 7450 7325 125 16.0 12.8 10250 11500 37623 Avg 464 576 113 7420 7265 155 16.0 12.6 9883 11285 34632 TP : Trial plot (Irrigation at 18-20 days during vegetative stage and 9-10 days during reproductive stage) FP : Farmers practice I

FP 26529 27187 34375 38170 35602 32373 25419 25875 37570 36135 34037 31807 27898 28500 33660 42570 36991 33924

TP 18436 18812 24165 27538 26064 23003 18140 18275 27340 25234 23748 22547 19697 19925 24740 32009 27373 24749

FP 16279 16637 22445 25976 24102 21090 15469 15425 25120 23187 22137 20267 17398 17375 22410 30518 25491 22638

141

Anova Table Reach I Character WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Significant T(stat) Value 23.97 6.28 14.69 4.27 2.69 15.87 12.09 5.88 10.07 3.94 4.36 10.28 21.00 7.07 18.78 5.22 4.21 11.18 T(table) Value 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 Inference * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

II

III

142

Table 2 : Scheduling of irrigation in maize (Warangal)

Total qty. of water applied DP FP 350 350 450 450 Water saved over FP (mm) 100 100 Yield (t/ha) DP 3.75 4.9 FP 3.68 4.6 WUE (kg/ha/mm) DP 10.71 14 FP 8.18 10.2 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP FP 7,170 7,475 7,500 8,840 Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 12,500 25,740 FP 11,020 24,150 Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 5,330 18,265 FP 3,500 15,310 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 1,830 3,355 B:C ratio (DP) 0.74 2.38

Reach I

Year 1999-00 2003-04

T cal=1.27 T tab=3.18 Average II 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 350 350 400 350 400 350 450 450 500 450 500 450 100 100 100 100 100 100 4.33 4.30 5.4 5.0 6.0 5.75 4.14 4.12 5.2 4.7 5.75 5.4 12.37 12.3 13.50 14.3 15.0 16.4 9.2 9.16 10.40 10.4 11.5 12 7323 6,405 7,550 9,100 12,960 10,532 8170 7,141 7,725 10,750 14,150 11,932 19120 20,338 20,125 25,000 33,000 30,187 17585 19,756 19,512 23,500 31,625 28,350

T cal=3.13 T tab=3.18 11798 13,933 12,575 15,900 20,040 19,655 9405 12,615 11,787 12,750 17,475 16,417 2593 1,318 788 3,150 2,565 3,237 1.56 1.7 1.7 1.74 1.54 1.89

*T cal=2.21 T tab=2.13 Average 370 470 100 5.29 5.03 14.3 10.7 9309 10340 25730 24549

*T cal=4.99 T tab=2.13 16421 14219 2112 1.71

DP: Irrigation at 15 days interval

FP: Irrigation at 12 days interval

143

Table 3 : Demonstration of irrigation schedules in groundnut (Karimnagar)

Reach

Year

Total qty. of water applied (mm)

Wat. saved over FP (mm)

Yield (kg/ha) FP 1490 1500 1282 1424 1250 1290 1326 1490 1339 1850 1870 1449 1545 1679

Addl yield over FP (kg/ha) 130 150 93 124 180 150 124 115 142 120 150 131 157 140

WUE (kg/ha/m m) TP 3.9 4.2 3.3 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.2 3.8 3.6 4.9 5.2 3.9 4.1 4.5 FP 2.9 2.9 2.4 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.7 2.7 4.1 4.2 2.6 2.8 3.4

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 8650 8790 6800 8080 8670 8950 7370 9177 8542 10750 11050 8220 9057 9769 FP 9875 10250 7700 9275 9250 9550 8270 9965 9259 12160 12750 9120 9925 10989

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 22680 23925 16844 21150 20020 21025 17762 19260 19517 27580 29362 19335 20460 24184 FP 20860 21750 15704 19438 17920 18777 16273 17880 17713 25900 27183 17750 18540 22343

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 14030 15135 10044 13070 11350 12075 10392 10083 10975 16830 18312 11135 11403 14420 FP 10985 11500 8004 10163 8670 9227 8003 7915 8454 13740 14433 8630 8615 11355

Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 3045 3635 2040 2907 2680 2848 2389 2168 2521 3090 3879 2485 2752 3052

TP FP TP I 99-00 415 510 95 1620 00-01 398 507 109 1650 01-02 414 528 114 1375 Avg 409 515 106 1548 II 99-00 408 470 62 1430 00-01 392 463 71 1450 01-02 454 548 94 1450 02-03 422 546 124 1605 Avg 419 508 88 1484 III 99-00 405 450 45 1970 00-01 387 445 58 2020 01-02 401 517 116 1580 02-03 414 539 125 1702 Avg 402 488 86 1818 TP :Trial plot (Irrigation at 15 days interval) FP :Farmers practice (weekly interval)

144

Anova Table Reach I Character WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Significant T(stat) Value 18.64 7.44 8.76 7.36 5.63 6.24 6.34 9.49 12.72 9.32 8.32 16.67 4.26 16.39 8.98 6.01 13.85 10.84 T(table) Value 4.302 4.302 4.302 4.302 4.302 4.302 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 Inference * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

II

III

145

Table 4 : Scheduling of irrigation in groundnut (Warangal) Total qty. of water applied (mm) DP II 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 250 300 250 300 300 FP 350 400 350 400 350 100 100 100 100 100 Water saved over FP (mm) Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 9,295 8,200 9,525 10,270 9,883 FP 10,475 8,970 10,850 11,050 10,665 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) B:C ratio (DP)

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha)

WUE (kg/ha/mm) DP 11.2 10.0 11.0 8.33 8.70 FP 6.86 7.0 6.71 5.00 6.71

Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 22,436 18,000 37,020 52,500 34,900 FP 22,853 17,100 31,630 42,000 30,850

Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 13,141 9,800 27,495 42,230 25,016 FP 12,378 8,130 20,780 30,950 20,118

DP 2.8 3.0 2.75 2.5 2.61

FP 2.4 2.8 2.35 2.0 2.35

763 1,670 6,715 11,280 4,898

0.64 1.1 2.88 4.11 2.46

*T cal=6.68 T tab=2.23

*T cal=6.68 T tab=2.23

Average

280

380

100

2.73

2.38

9.75

6.26

9435

10,402

32,971

28,887

23,536

18,471

5,065

2.24

DP: Irrigation at critical stages FP: Irrigation at 15 days interval

146

Table 5 : Demonstration irrigation schedules in blackgram (Karimnagar) Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP FP 287 375 265 352 276 364 304 412 282 394 276 398 287 401 280 405 261 400 264 382 262 384 255 374 264 389 water saved over FP (mm) 88 87 87.5 108 112 122 114 125 139 118 122 119 125 Addl yield over FP (kg/ha) 95 80 87.5 105 135 82 107 40 50 135 163 180 114 WUE (kg/ha/mm) TP 4.2 4.25 4.23 3.8 4.47 3.87 4.05 5.7 6.22 5.2 5.17 5.0 5.48 FP 3.0 2.97 2.99 2.6 2.86 2.48 2.63 3.9 3.9 3.2 3.18 2.93 3.43 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 6845 7350 7098 7245 7192 7475 7304 7890 7945 6535 6959 6800 7226 FP 7340 8250 7795 7725 8085 9255 8355 8915 8970 7050 7875 7375 8037 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 19882 14625 17254 19107 17668 13910 16895 29785 30875 22572 18970 16575 23755 FP 18314 13585 15950 17374 15778 12844 15332 29045 29450 20344 16688 14235 21952 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 13037 7275 10156 11862 10476 6435 9591 21895 22930 16037 12011 9775 16529 FP 10974 5335 8155 9649 7693 3589 6977 20130 20480 13294 8813 6860 13915 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 2062 1940 2001 2213 2783 2846 2614 1765 2450 2743 3198 2915 2614

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha) TP 1205 1125 1165 1158 1262 1070 1163 1610 1625 1368 1355 1275 1447 FP 1110 1045 1078 1053 1127 988 1056 1570 1575 1233 1192 1095 1333

01-02 03-04 Average 01-02 II 02-03 03-04 Average 99-00 00-01 III 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average I

TP :Trial plot (Irrigation at 0, 25, 45, 65 days after sowing) FP :Farmers practice (Irrigation at 9-10 days interval)

Cont.

147

Anova Table Reach I Character WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Significant T(stat) Value 17.5 11.66 31.0 3.4 4.9 32.54 27.3 6.99 11.81 2.74 6.18 12.98 32.77 3.92 24.25 7.31 5.74 10.69 T(table) Value 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 Inference * * * NS NS * * * * NS * * * * * * * *

II

III

148

Table 6 : Demonstration irrigation schedules in pigeonpea (Karimnagar) Total qty. of water applied (mm) water saved over FP (mm) Addl Yield (kg/ha) Addl. yield over FP (kg/ha) WUE (kg/ha/mm) Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Gross returns (Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha) income over FP (Rs/ha) TP 18150 23670 24725 19916 22770 FP 16103 21610 22495 15247 19784 2407 2060 2230 4669 2986

Reach

Year

TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP II 01-02 570 695 125 1557 1490 67 2.8 2.1 7959 9227 26469 25330 III 99-00 540 645 105 1730 1640 90 3.2 2.5 9200 9500 32870 31110 00-01 526 643 117 1820 1702 108 3.5 2.9 9950 10280 34675 32775 01-02 547 680 133 1625 1434 191 3.0 2.1 7709 9131 27625 24378 Avg 538 656 118 1725 1592 133 3.2 2.4 8953 9637 31723 29421 TP : Trial plot (Irrigation at 18-20 days interval during vegetative stage and 9-10 days during reproductive stage) FP : Farmers practice (Irrigation at 9-10 days interval) Anova Table
Reach I Character WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 18.3 5.5 9.3 9.8 9.6 4.9 41.59 4.42 8.31 1.8 4.86 3.54 T(table) Value 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 4.302 4.302 4.302 4.02 4.302 4.302 Inference * NS NS NS NS NS * * * NS * NS

II

149

Table 7: Demonstration of irrigation schedules in cotton (Karimnagar) Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP 755 776 752 FP 849 860 838

Yield (t/ha) Reach Year TP I II III 01-02 01-02 01-02 TP: FP: 1.59 1.5 1.9 FP 14.67 13.65 17.65

% increase in yield over FP 8.5 6.3 7.6

Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha) TP 17335 16870 17340 FP 17485 17025 17600

Gross returns (Rs/ha)

Netreturns (Rs/ha)

TP 27064 24650 32300

FP 25965 23188 30005

TP 9729 7780 14960

FP 8480 6163 12404

Addl income over FP (Rs/ha) 1249 1617 2556

Water Saved over FP (mm) 94 84 86

WUE

TP 2.11 1.87 2.53

FP 1.73 1.59 2.11

Nine irrigations at an interval of 20 days (irrigation starts from last fortnight of September) Irrigation at an interval of 14-15 days

150

Table 8 : Evaluation of irrigation methods in chilli (Warangal) Total qty. of water applied DP I 00-01 01-02 02-03 700 650 700 FP 750 700 750 water saved over FP (mm) 50 50 50 Yield (t/ha) DP FP WUE (kg/ha/mm) DP 3.22 3.69 3.57 FP 2.8 3.16 2.73 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 24,416 23,027 23,016 FP 28,435 26,900 24,610 Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 40,788 52,800 75,000 FP 40,032 48,620 61,500 Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP FP Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 4,775 9,053 15094 B:C ratio (DP) 0.86 1.29 2.25

Reach

Year

2.26 2.10 2.40 2.21 2.50 2.05 *T cal=3.50 T tab=2.8 2.39 2.12 3.30 3.16 3.12 2.74 3.76 3.40 *T cal=4.20 T tab=2.36 3.39 3.10 2.46 2.23 3.15 2.45 T cal=3.86 T ab=12.71 2.81 2.34

16,372 11,597 29,773 21,720 51,984 36,890 *T cal=3.50 T tab=2.23 32,710 23,402 29,865 24,599 43,865 31,961 86,375 72,443 T cal=0.65 T tab=2.36 55,368 43,001 32,119 23,485 65,120 45,735 T cal=9.17 T tab=12.71 48,620 34,610

Avg II 00-01 01-02 02-03 Avg 01-02 02-03 Avg

683 700 650 700 683 650 700 675

733 750 700 750 733 700 750 725

50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

3.50 4.71 4.8 5.37 4.99 3.78 4.5 4.16

2.89 4.21 3.91 4.53 4.23 3.19 3.27 3.23

23,486 30,169 24,775 25,660 26,868 22,294 24,880 23,587

26,648 32,660 28,319 28,057 29679 25,281 27,765 26523

56,196 60,034 68,640 112035 80236 54,413 90,000 72207

50051 57,264 60,280 100500 72,861 48,767 73,500 61,134

9641 5,266 11,904 13932 10,367 8,634 19385 14010

3.0 0.90 1.78 3.35 2.01 1.42 2.59 2.01

III

DP: Furrow method FP: Flat bed method

151

Reach

Year

Total qty. of water applied DP FP 450 400 425

00-01 03-04 Avg

400 350 375

Table 9 : Evaluation of irrigation methods in maize(Warangal) water Cost of WUE Gross Returns saved Yield (t/ha) cultivation (kg/ha/mm) (Rs/ha) over (Rs/ha) FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP (mm) 50 4.6 4.3 11.50 9.55 6,900 6,750 13,489 11,254 50 50 5.8 5.26 16.6 13.9 13.15 11.25 11,991 9446 13,453 10102 31,320 22,405 28,440 19,847 5.2 4.78 *T cal=6.88 T tab=2.78 5.4 5.2 5.5 5.8 5.9 5.25 5.3 5.4

Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 7,089 19,328 FP 4,204 14,986

Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 2,885 4,341 3613

B:C ratio (DP) 1.1 1.54 1.32

II

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Avg

400 350 400 350 375

450 400 450 400 425

50 50 50 50 50

13.50 15.7 14.50 14.86 14.83

11.55 13.13 11.77 13.5 12.35

7,550 9,410 12,892 9,868 9,950

7,725 10,830 14,375 11,041 10,976

20,125 27,500 31,900 30,975 26,508

19,512 26,250 29,150 28,511 24,970

13,209 9595 *T cal=4.9 T tab=2.26 12,575 11,787 18,010 19,007 21,106 15,420 14,775 17,308

788 2,590 4232 3,798 2,536

1.7 1.92 1.48 2.21 1.7

III

00-01 01-02 Avg

400 350 325

450 400 425

50 50 50

5.56 5.25 *T cal=4.65 T tab=2.26 6.0 5.75 4.12 3.99 5.06 4.87 *Tcal=12.7 T tab=3.16

15.00 11.78 15.57

12.77 9.98 11.46

7,350 10,083 8,716

8,125 10,500 9,312

15,352 20,600 10,976

13,972 19,950 16,691

16,530 13,994 *T cal=5.43 T tab=2.78 8,002 5,847 10,517 9,450 9,259 7,648 T cal=2.96 T tab=12.71

2,155 1,067 1,611

1.1 1.04 1.07

152

Table 10 : Evaluation of irrigation methods in cotton (Warangal) Total qty. Water Cost of WUE of water saved Yield (t/ha) cultivation (kg/ha/mm) Reach Year applied over (Rs/ha) FP DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP (mm) I 00-01 600 780 180 3.2 3.0 5.33 3.84 22,952 24,690 01-02 540 720 180 2.77 2.58 5.13 3.58 21,241 24,860 02-03 600 780 180 2.62 2.35 4.36 3.01 24,700 26,138 03-04 480 660 180 2.82 2.61 5.88 3.95 23,450 26,175 Avg 555 735 180 2.85 2.64 5.14 3.59 23086 25466 T cal=3.76* T tab=2.11 II 00-01 600 780 180 2.5 2.4 4.16 3.07 22,682 24,057 01-02 540 720 180 2.51 2.27 4.65 3.15 22,023 26,052 02-03 600 780 180 2.57 2.23 4.28 2.85 22,624 24,279 03-04 480 660 180 2.69 2.45 5.60 3.71 22,734 26,160 T cal=5.67* T tab=2.23 Avg 555 735 180 2.57 2.34 4.63 3.18 22516 25137 III 01-02 540 720 180 2.38 2.2 4.41 3.06 20,899 25,158 02-03 600 780 180 2.75 2.5 4.58 3.20 24,750 27,475 03-04 480 660 180 2.69 2.46 5.60 3.73 23,050 25,900 Avg 540 720 180 2.61 2.39 4.83 3.32 22900 26178 T cal=3.68* T tab=3.18 DP: Irrigation in furrows FP: Irrigation by flooding

Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 76,792 49,860 60,375 73,190 65054 51,100 45,180 58,580 700,70 56233 42,900 61,500 70,700 58367 FP 76,120 46,440 54,050 67,730 61085 49,318 40,950 50,800 63,830 51225 39,570 57,500 64,090 53720

Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP FP

Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 2,410 7,039 7,764 8,185 4303 3,656 8,259 9,436 9,665 7754 7,559 6,725 8830 7705

B:C ratio (DP) 2.3 1.34 1.44 2.12 1.8 1.30 1.04 1.60 2.08 1.51 1.05 1.45 2.03 1.51

53,840 51,430 28,619 21,580 35,675 27,911 49,740 41,555 41969 35619 T cal=10.65* T tab=2.11 28,417 24,761 23,157 14,898 35,956 26,520 47,335 37,670 T cal=8.09* T tab=2.23 33716 25962 22,001 14,442 36,750 30,025 47,020 38,190 35257 27552 T cal=5.31* T tab=3.18

153

Table 11: Evaluation of Irrigation methods in Groundnut (Warangal) Water saved over FP (mm) 50 50 50 50 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 4,485 3,510 6,700 4,175

Reach

Year

Total qty. of water applied DP FP 350 300 350 350

Yield (t/ha) DP 2.8 2.8 2.25 2.60 FP 2.5 2.55 2.00 2.30

WUE (kg/ha/mm) DP 9.33 11.2 7.50 8.88 FP 7.14 8.5 5.71 6.38

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 8,425 10,325 10,900 10,675 FP 8,960 10,835 12,200 10,950

Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 22,500 33,600 48,600 24,000 FP 18,750 30,600 43,200 20,100

Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 14,075 23,275 37,700 13,325 FP 9,590 19,765 31,000 9,150

B:C ratio (DP)

II

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04

300 250 300 300

1.67 2.25 3.45 1.25

*T cal=9.29 T tab=2.36 Avg III 03-04 287.5 300

DP: Check

*T cal=5.17 T tab=2.36 9.08 9.22 6.93 6.74 10081 11,555 10736 13,036 32175 24,900 28163 21,300 22094 13,345 17376 8,263 4718 5,081 2.16 1.16

337.5 350

50 50

2.61 2.76

2.34 2.36

basin method FP: Flooding in large plots

154

Table-12: Demonstration of different irrigation methods in Groundnut (Karimnagar).

% increase in yield over FP CB BS M M 4.1 3.6 0 6 4.7 3.1 5 5 Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha) FP 851 2 857 5 CB M 774 0 779 2 BS M 765 1 770 5 Gross returns (Rs/ha) FP 1672 1 1803 2 CB M 1740 7 1888 9 BSM 1733 4 1855 9 Additional income over FP (Rs/ha) CB BS M M 145 147 8 4 164 139 0 7 Total qty. of water applied (mm) FP 492 476 CB M 424 423 BS M 478 465 Water saved over FP (mm) CB M 68 49 BS M 14 11

Reach FP II III

Yield (t/ha) CBM 1.42 1.54 BS M 14. 15 15. 15

Net returns (Rs/ha) FP 820 9 945 7 CBM 9667 11097 BSM 9683 10854

WUE kg/ha/mm FP 2.7 7 3.0 9 CB M 3.3 5 3.6 5 BSM 2.96 3.25

13.65 14.72

FP : Farmers practice (flooding method) CBM: Check basin method BSM: Border strip method

155

Table 13: Demonstration of drip irrigation system in cotton (Karimnagar) % Yield increa se in yield over FP 37.13 41.82 36.36 38.44 Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha) TP 17310 16725 20080 18038 FP 17460 14250 16480 16063 Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP 392 425 421 413 FP 602 618 529 583 Wat save over FP (mm) 213 193 108 171

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha) TP FP 2.37 2.08 2.75 2.40

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 55250 67850 90000 71033 FP 40290 47840 66000 51377

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 37940 51125 69920 52995 FP 22830 33590 49520 35313

Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 15110 17535 20400 17682

WUE TP 8.29 6.94 8.9 8.04 FP 3.92 3.36 5.2 4.11

III

01-02 02-03 03-04 Average

3.35 2.95 3.75 3.35

TP: FP:

Irrigation with Drip system Farmers Practice (flooding method) Anova Table Reach Character III WA Yield WUE Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 5.3 23.5 15.78 1.78 7.52 11.57 T(table) Value 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 Inference * * * NS * *

156

Table-14: Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut (Karimnagar) % increa se in yield over FP 19.75 Addl Incom e over FP (Rs/ha 3478 Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP 379 FP 527 149 Water saved over FP (mm)

Yield (t/ha) Reach Year TP III * 01-02 1.73 FP 1.45

Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha) TP *11929 FP 11416

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 21217 FP 17226

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 9288 FP 5810

WUE TP 4.58 FP 2.74

Depreciation and maintenance are included.

TP: Irrigation by Sprinkler system FP: Farmers practice Table-15: Demonstration of sprinkler irrigation system in groundnut (Warangal) Addl incom e over FP (Rs/ha 2450 Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP 220 FP 350 Wat esav eove r FP (mm ) 130

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha) TP 2.5 FP 2.35

% increase in yield over FP 6.38

Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha) TP 10200 FP 10850

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 30000 28200

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 19800 FP 17350

WUE TP 8.99 FP 6.71

II

03-04

TP: Irrigation by sprinkler FP: Irrigation by checkbasin

157

Table 16: Demonstration of drip irrigation system in chillies (Karimnagar) % increase in yield over FP 33.3 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 47676* FP 41416 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 19240 Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP 342 FP 528 Water saved over FP (mm) 186

Reach

Yield (t/ha) TP 12 FP 9

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 102000 FP 76500

Net Returns (Rs/ha) TP 54324 FP 35084

WUE TP FP 3.5 1.7

III

* Depreciation and maintenance cost included. TP: Irrigation with Drip system. FP: Flatbed method of irrigation

158

Table 17: Demonstration of intermittent irrigation schedules in paddy (Karimnagar) Total qty. of water applied (mm) Farmers TP* TP ** practice (FP) 1135 1020 1410 1125 1009 1416 1138 -1421 1133 1014 1416 1170 1060 1380 1164 1051 1385 1162 -1411 1165 1056 1392 1160 1065 1400 1153 1056 1405 1176 -1440 1163 1060 1415 Water saved over FP (mm) TP* 275 291 283 283 210 221 249 227 240 252 264 252 TP** 390 407
--

Yield (t/ha) TP* 5.65 5.83 5.23 5.57 5.53 5.60 5.62 5.58 6.00 6.30 6.54 6.28 TP ** 5.50 5.56 -5.53 5.49 5.51 -5.50 5.95 6.12 -6.04 Farmers practice (FP) 5.30 5.32 4.75 5.12 5.41 5.42 4.98 5.27 5.75 5.77 5.85 5.71

Addl. Yield over FP t/ha TP* 0.35 0.51 0.48 0.45 0.12 0.18 0.64 0.31 0.28 0.53 0.69 0.5 TP ** 0.20 0.24 -0.22 0.08 0.09 -0.08 0.20 0.35 -0.28

Water use efficiency TP* 4.98 5.18 4.59 4.92 4.73 4.71 4.84 4.76 5.17 5.46 5.56 5.39 TP ** 5.39 5.51 -5.45 5.18 5.24 -5.21 5.59 5.80 -5.69 Farmers practice (FP) 3.76 3.77 3.34 3.62 3.92 3.91 3.53 3.78 4.11 4.10 4.06 4.09

Reach I

Year
99-00 00-01 01-02 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 Average

II

III

398 320 334 -327 335 349 -342

TP* 24 hrs after disappearance of 5 cm depth of water TP* * 48 hrs after disappearance of 5 cm depth of water FP : Farmers practice

Cont.

159

Anova Table Reach I Character Water Applied(mm)* Water Applied(mm)** Yield* Yield** WUE* WUE** Water Applied(mm)* Water Applied(mm)** Yield* Yield** WUE* WUE** Water Applied(mm)* Water Applied(mm)** Yield* Yield** WUE* WUE** T(stat) Value 61.27 46.88 9.09 11.0 21.93 30.6 19.5 46.7 1.9 17.0 5.78 37.0 19.52 48.85 3.81 3.67 10.07 14.45 T(table) Value 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 4.30 12.7 Inference * * * * * * * * NS * * * * * NS NS * *

II

III

160

Table 18: Demonstration of direct seeding technique in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar) Cost of cultivation Gross returns Net returns Reach Year Yield (t/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) TP I 2003-04 FP TP FP TP 31800 31800 35980 33000 34445 35980 32400 34145 FP 30000 30000 34650 30600 32625 34440 31200 32800 TP 20330 20330 23599 21680 22640 23195 21115 22155 FP 17035 17035 20859 17725 19292 20585 18195 19390 5.3 5.0 11470 12965 5.3 5.0 11470 12965 Average 2002-03 5.14 4.95 12381 13791 2003-04 5.5 5.1 11320 12875 II Average 5.32 5.03 11851 13333 2002-03 5.14 4.92 12785 13855 2003-04 5.4 5.2 11285 13005 III Average 5.27 5.06 12035 13430 TP: Sowing of sprouted seed with Paddy Drum Seeder FP: farmers practice of transplanting Anova Table
Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 13.6 5.8 7.6 5.5 2.81 20.44 3.48 5.51 21.0 4.29 8.05 4.6 T(table) Value 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70

Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 3295 3295 2740 3955 3348 2610 2920 2765

Inference * NS NS NS NS * NS NS * NS NS NS

II

III

161

Table 19: Demonstration of direct seeding technique in paddy during rabi (Karimnagar) % increase in yield over FP 18.6 1.7 8.9 11.3 4.2 -5.08 3.13 10.9 3.4 8.4 7.7 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 13920 14200 14060 14006 12895 13400 13434 14780 12616 12850 13415 FP 14810 14950 14880 15025 13825 14550 14467 15520 13761 13700 14327 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 5370 1400 3385 4149 2195 -800 1848 4436 2245 4100 3594

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha) TP 5.1 5.9 5.5 5.51 5.65 5.6 5.59 6.68 5.99 6.4 6.36 FP 4.3 5.8 5.05 4.95 5.42 5.9 5.42 6.02 5.79 5.9 5.9

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 28560 38350 33455 30850 31075 36400 32775 37408 32945 41600 37318 FP 24080 37700 30890 27720 29810 38350 31960 33712 31845 38350 34646

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 14640 24150 19395 16844 18180 23000 19341 22628 20329 28750 23903 FP 9270 22750 16010 12695 15985 23800 17493 18192 18084 24650 20309

I II

III

2001-02 2003-04 Average 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average

TP: FP:

Sowing of sprouted seed with Paddy Drum Seeder Farmers practice of transplanting

162

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 3.6 5.8 7.6 5.5 2.39 21.89 2.35 3.29 1.86 4.65 1.84 3.04 T(table) Value 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 12.7 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 Inference NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS

II

III

163

Table 20: Demonstration of direct seeding technique in paddy during kharif (Warangal) Cost of cultivation Reach Yield T/ha DP II 6.2 FP 6.0 % increase over FP in yield 3.33 Rs/ha % increa se in COC over DP 16.63 Gross returns Rs/ha Net returns Rs/ha

BC ratio DP

DP 12742

FP 13695

DP 36250

FP 35080

DP 23507

FP 21385 1.84

DP: Direct Seeding

FP: Transplanting

164

Table 21: Studies on Greengram based cropping system (1999-2000) (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) 1400 5953 1400 3028 950 1004 Gross income (Rs.) 25200 29766 25200 46705 34280 15060 Cost of cultivation (Rs.) 5840 6235 5305 8357 5491 3624 Net Income (Rs.) 19360 23531 19901 38347 23297 11436 Total Gross income (Rs.) 54966 71905 32160 Total cost of cultivation (Rs.) 12075 13663 9115 Total net income (Rs.) 42891 58332 23084

Reach III Greengram(K) Maize(R) Greengram(K)Groundnut(R) Greengram(K) Redgram(R)

Table 22: Studies on maize based cropping system (1999-2000) (Karimnagar) Gross income (Rs.) 24250 19173 Cost of cultivation (Rs.) 6315 8050 Net Income (Rs.) 18000 11123 Total Gross income (Rs.) 43673 Total cost of cultivatio n (Rs.) 14365

Reach III Maize(K) Groundnut(R)

Yield (kg/ha) 4850 1369

Total net income (Rs.) 29108

165

Table 23: Popularization of Greengram based cropping system (Karimnagar) Greengram equivalent yield (kg/ha) TP I II III 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2910 2760 2835 2870 2680 2775 3040 2970 3005 FP 2390 2250 2320 2350 2240 2295 2460 2650 2555 % increase in eql yield over FP 21.7 22.67 22.19 22.1 19.6 20.9 23.6 12.08 17.61 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 19312 20300 19806 18791 18900 18846 19177 18200 18689 FP 15132 16400 15766 15721 15400 15561 15027 16300 15664

Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 50397 45540 47969 49732 44220 46976 52945 49005 50975 FP 41175 37125 39150 40491 36960 38726 42597 43725 43161

Reach

Year

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 31085 25240 28163 30941 25320 28131 33768 30805 32287 FP 26043 20725 23384 24770 21560 23165 27570 27425 27498

Addl. income over FP 5042 4515 4779 6171 3760 4966 6198 3380 4789

FP: Greengram-Maize-Fallow TP: Greengram-Maize-Greengram

166

Table 24: Popularization of maize based cropping system (Maize-Groundnut-Greengram) (Karimnagar) Maize Cost of Net returns % equivalent cultivation Gross returns (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) increase yield (kg/ha) (Rs/ha) in eqlnt. Reach Year Yield over FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP I 2002-03 8960 6820 31.4 20523 16401 47030 35600 26507 19199 II 2001-02 9530 7010 35.9 18530 15835 48212 34765 29682 18930 2002-03 9780 7470 30.9 20882 17082 51290 38970 30408 21888 2003-04 9640 7650 26.01 19750 16800 53020 42075 33270 25275 Average 9650 7377 30.81 19721 16572 50841 38603 31120 22031 III 2001-02 9840 6870 43.2 18270 15830 49624 34082 31394 18252 2002-03 10040 7440 34.87 21825 16937 52800 38780 30975 21843 2003-04 10250 8570 19.6 20950 16200 56375 47138 35425 30935 Average 10043 7627 31.67 20348 16322 52933 39999 32958 23677

Addl. income over FP 7308 10752 8520 7995 9089 13142 9132 4490 8921

FP: Maize Groundnut TP: Maize - Groundnut Greengram

Anova Table
Reach II Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 23.0 5.87 22.8 8.63 15.05 2.99 19.4 5.55 T(table) Value 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 Inference * NS * NS * NS * NS

III

167

Table 25: Demonstration of cultivation of vegetables in maize based cropping system {Maize-Groundnut-Vegetables} (Karimnagar) Maize % Cost of Gross returns Net returns (Rs/ha) equivalent increase cultivation (Rs/ha) yield (kg/ha) in eq.l (Rs/ha) Reach Year yield over FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP I 2001-02 17400 6710 159 32542 16703 98317 33187 58775 16484 II 2001-02 18900 6950 172 33583 16910 99615 34636 66032 17726 2002-03 13760 7130 92.9 32486 17514 75064 39215 42578 21701 2003-04 14900 8240 80.83 37800 18500 81950 45320 44150 26820 Average 15853 7440 113.07 34623 17641 85543 39724 50920 22082 III 2001-02 19600 7050 178 34757 16825 103489 34985 68721 18160 2002-03 14860 7900 88.1 31453 17074 81118 43472 49665 26398 2003-04 16100 8850 81.9 36450 16950 88550 48675 52100 31725 16853 7933 112.44 34220 16950 91052 42377 56828 25428 Average

Addl. income over FP 42291 48306 20877 17330 28838 50561 23267 20375 31400

FP : Maize - Groundnut-Fallow TP : Maize - Groundnut Bhendi

Anova Table
Reach II Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 3.49 18.6 3.46 2.55 3.49 9.09 3.43 2.70 T(table) Value 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 Inference NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS

III

168

Table 26: Demonstration of cultivation of vegetable of greengram based cropping system (Greengram-Maize-Vegetables) (Karimnagar) Greengram equivalent yield (q/ha) Reach I Year 2000-01 2001-02 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average TP 4765 5100 4850 4905 4510 5180 3116 3970 4194 5116 5850 3345 4235 4637 FP 2084 1550 1670 1768 2026 1380 1330 1410 1537 2260 1550 1390 1580 1695 % increase in eq. yield over FP 128 229 190.4 177.4 123 275 134.2 181.6 172.8 126 277 140.6 168.9 173.5 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) Gross returns (Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha) Addl. income over FP TP 23950 29821 31200 28234 22595 29540 27752 28950 27209 25160 33148 27739 30740 29197 FP 11510 12430 31750 12563 11775 12840 12780 14100 12874 11825 13770 12515 13750 12965 TP 82375 87450 80025 83283 77562 83546 54672 65505 70321 88560 93783 58691 69878 77728 FP 34687 24085 27555 28776 33750 21714 22593 23265 25331 37500 24216 23749 26070 27884 TP 58425 57629 68825 54960 54967 54006 26920 36545 43110 63402 60635 30952 39138 48532 FP 23177 11665 13805 16216 21975 8874 9813 9165 12457 25675 10446 11234 12320 14919 35248 45964 35020 38744 32992 45132 17107 27380 30653 37727 50189 19718 26818 33613

II

III

TP:

Greengram-Maize-Vegetables FP: Greengram-Maize-Fallow

Cont.

169

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 7.17 6.0 7.08 7.57 4.55 8.11 5.3 3.9 4.44 8.95 5.18 4.06 T(table) Value 12.70 12.70 12.70 12.70 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 Inference NS NS NS NS * * * NS * * * NS

II

III

170

Table 27:Cotton-Fallow compared with Cotton-Bhendi (Warangal) Reach Year Eqv.Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha I 2000-01 DP FP DP FP I 2000-01 2.8 2.3 32978 51760 I 2000-01 3.45 3.36 40897 51540 I 2000-01 2.85 3.43 37228 54320 I 2000-01 4.4 2.4 57787 31700 I 2000-01 5.17 2.83 56525 28440 I 2000-01 5.63 3.06 66095 32180 I 2000-01 5.45 3.03 58161 32040 I 2000-01 6.69 2.8 75707 18700 I 2000-01 5.5 2.8 53632 20500 I 2000-01 5.73 2.1 59639 17343 I 2000-01 5.65 2.7 64584 22900 Average 4.84 2.8 54839 32857 *T cal=4.71 *T cal=3.10 II 2000-01 T tab=2.23 T tab=2.20 II 2000-01 4.91 2.5 40788 23380 II 2000-01 4.41 2.5 39068 31095 II 2000-01 4.03 2.5 39020 23360 4.01 2.1 45510 25662 5.06 2.27 40788 23380 Average 4.73 2.67 41035 25375 *T cal=9.59 *T cal=6.97 T tab=2.78 T tab=2.78
4.79 2.74 47937 29116

DP: Cotton-Bhendi cropping system

FP: Cotton-Fallow cropping system

171

Table 28 : Cotton-Ridgegourd compared with Cotton-Fallow (Warangal) Reach I I I I I I I I Year 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 Eqv.yield( t/ha) DP FP 3.45 3.6 11.7 3.24 3.00 2.59 3.38 2.88 5.45 2.80 4.81 2.10 6.42 2.70 3.91 2.70 5.27 2.83 *T cal=2.48 T tab=2.36 3.18 2.35 4.5 2.7 4.01 2.15 4.49 2.25 *T cal=5.60 T tab=3.18 4.86 3.93 Net returns( Rs/ha) DP FP 45708 60800 60223 49670 35334 35660 50656 38532 59586 18700 51331 20500 72651 17343 40696 22900 52023 33013 *T cal=2.37 T tab=2.36 34484 26510 39294 21920 37088 14950 40383 16010 * T tab=3.18 37812 19848

Average
II II II II 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 Average DP :Cotton-Ridgegourd FP: Cotton-Fallow

172

Table 29:Cotton-Tomato compared to Cotton-Fallow (Warangal)

R e a c h
I I I I

Y ea r
2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 2000-01

E qv.Yi eld t/ha

Net Returns Rs/ha

Average DP: Cotton-Tomato FP: Cotton-Fallow Table 30:Cotton-Bitter Gourd compared to Cotton-Fallow (Warangal)

DP FP 2.4 1.85 3.2 2.4 3.95 2.5 4.64 2.1 T cal=3.01 T tab=3.18 3.55 2.21

DP FP 28267 14775 47958 25850 36534 19240 41732 12200 *T cal=5.96 T tab=3.18 38623 18016

e a c h
I I I

R e a r

E qv.Yield t/ha D P P
2.8 2.8 2.1 45062 76191 65635

Net Returns Rs/Ha F P

18700 20500 17343

D P

2000-01 2000-01 2000-01

3.63 6.49 5.8

173

I I I

2000-01 2000-01 2000-01 Average

2.97 2.7 4.9 2.07 5.09 2.2 *T cal=3.95 T tab=2.57 4.81 2.45

28961 22900 42797 10860 45779 14930 *T cal=4.66 T tab=2.57 50738 17389

DP: Cotton-Bittergourd FP: Cotton-Fallow. Table 31:Cotton-Cluster Bean compared to Cotton-Fallow (Warangal) Reach Year Eqv.Yieldt/ha Net Returns Rs/ha DP FP DP FP I 2000-01 4.92 2.83 53791 28440 I 2000-01 5.01 3.06 53465 32180 I 2000-01 5.14 3.03 58166 32040 *T cal=40.73 *T cal=16.15 T tab=4.30 T tab=4.30 Average 5.02 2.97 55141 30887 DP: Cotton-Clusterbean FP: Cotton-Fallow

174

Table 32:Maize-Ground Nut compared to Maize-Maize. (Warangal)

Reach II II II II II II Year 00-01 01-02 01-02 02-03 03-04 03-04 Eqv. Yield t/ha DP FP 11.13 12.8 8.00 5.78 7.43 5.78 8.00 9.00 13.15 10.43 13.01 8.10 T cal=1.47 T tab=2.57 10.12 8.65 Net Returns Rs/ha DP FP 25741 27835 36173 29322 35235 25524 33547 16277 37745 28335 35692 32170 *T cal=2.80 T tab=2.57 34022 26577

Average

DP: Maize-Groundnut FP Maize-Maize

175

Table 33:Maize Chilli compared to Maize-Maize (Warangal) Reach I II Year 2003-04 2003-04 Average Eqv. Yield t/ha DP FP 17.2 10.43 17.68 8.10 T cal=5.82 T tab=12.71 17.44 9.27 Net Returns Rs/ha DP FP 61490 28335 58446 32170 T cal=8.64 T tab=12.71 59968 30253

DP :Maize Chilli cropping system. FP: Maize-Maize cropping system

Table 34: Chilli-Bhendi compared to sole Chilli (Warangal)

Reach I I I I Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 2000-01 Average Eqv. Yield t/ha DP FP 4.64 3.2 3.73 2.2 4.66 2.1 2.97 2.3
*T cal=3.99 T tab=3.18

Net Returns Rs/ha DP FP 60355 41640 37300 23000 55216 20420 18230 14000
T cal=2.83 T tab=3.18

4.0

2.45

42775

24765

DP: Chili Bhendi cropping system. FP: Sole Chili .

176

Table 35: Chilli-Ridgegourd compared to soleChilli (Warangal)

Reach II II II Year 2001-02 2001-02 2001-02 Eqv. Yield t/ha Net Returns Rs/ha

DP FP DP FP 4.99 3.45 76721 46435 2.68 2.1 26800 20420 3.93 2.73 46567 33960 *T cal=3.99 *T cal=3.99 T tab=3.18 T tab=3.18 Avg. 3.87 2.76 50029 33605 DP Chilli Ridge gourd cropping system. FP: Sole Chilli

Table 36:Turmeric based cropping system(Warangal)

Reach I II Year 01-02 00-01 System Turmeric-bitter gourd Turmericridgegourd Turmeric equivalent yield (t/ha) 4.02 4.25 Cost of Cultivation (Rs./ha) 47805 58253 Gross returns (Rs./ha) 96480 63750 Net Returns (Rs./ha) 48675 5497 B:C Ratio (DP) 2.02 1.09

177

III

01-02

Turmeric-bitter gourd Average

4.17 4.21

33128 45691

96076 79913

62948 34223

1.86 1.20

Table 37:Rice based cropping system (Warangal) Rice equivalen t yield (t/ha) 12.5 15.27 14.9 8.79 13.24 8.64 8.79

S.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

System Rice Rice Rice-Bhendi Rice-Cucumber Rice-Bitter gourd Rice-ridge gourd Rice-bottle gourd Rice-Palak

Cost of Cultivation (Rs./ha) 24658 33380 29392 17438 26266 17,141 17,438

Gross returns (Rs./ha) 67500 82458 80460 47466 71496 46650 47466

Net Returns (Rs./ha) 42842 52078 51068 30028 45230 29509 30028

B:C Ratio (DP) 2.74 2.47 2.74 2.72 2.72 2.72 2.72

178

Table -: 38 Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Maize Year Reach % increas e in yield TP FP over FP 4.21 3.95 6.5 4.8 4.3 11.63 4.505 4.125 9.2 4.89 4.29 13.9 4.2 4.0 5.0 4.55 4.15 9.65 4.96 4.58 8.2 5.1 4.4 15.91 5.03 4.49 12.06 Yield (t/ha) Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 6758 6485 6622 7100 6750 6925 6338 7225 6782 7378 7350 7364 7437 7625 7531 7171 7950 7561 RABI 12686 12800 12743 13085 13900 13493 12917 11450 12184 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 21050 24240 22645 24450 21210 22830 24800 25755 25278 33715 35653 34684 33440 34340 33890 36410 38077 37244 FP 19750 21715 20733 21450 20200 20825 22900 22220 22560 32065 34795 33430 31460 31310 31385 34100 35956 35028 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 14292 17755 16024 17350 14460 15905 18462 18530 18496 22227 24403 23315 21717 22315 22016 24919 27127 26023 FP 12372 14365 13369 14013 12575 13294 15729 14270 15000 19379 21995 20687 18375 17410 17892 21183 24506 22844 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 1920 3390 2655 3337 1885 2611 2733 4260 3496 2848 2408 2628 3342 4905 4124 3736 2621 3179

02-03 03-04 Average 02-03 II 03-04 Average 02-03 III 03-04 Average I I 02-03 03-04

6.13 5.83 5.1 11488 7.06 6.89 2.47 11250 Average 6.595 6.36 3.69 11369 02-03 6.08 5.72 6.2 11723 II 03-04 6.8 6.2 9.68 12025 Average 6.44 5.96 8.05 11874 02-03 6.62 6.20 6.7 11491 III 03-04 7.54 7.12 5.9 10950 Average 7.08 6.66 6.3 11221 TP: Trial plot (120 N, 60 P2 O5 and 50 K2O) FP: Farmers plot

179

Table 39: Demonstration of application of recommended doses of fertilizer in Paddy (Karimnagar) Kharif % increas e in yield over FP 3.4 1.89 2.63 9.9 11.76 10.83 6.9 7.41 7.16 6.10 8.19 7.15 7.8 5.45 6.55 5.3 7.9 6.67 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 28672 32400 30536 28952 34200 31576 30352 34800 32576 35365 42900 39133 28050 37700 32875 35585 49200 39893 FP 27720 31800 29760 26336 30600 28468 28392 32400 30396 33330 39650 36490 26015 35750 30883 33770 40950 37360 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 16722 20565 18644 17122 22525 19824 18715 22880 20797 22586 30050 26318 15380 25450 20415 22762 31100 26931 FP 14555 18735 16645 13275 17725 15500 15502 19335 17418 19516 23330 22533 11902 21850 16875 19339 26700 23020 Addl. incom e over FP (Rs/ha ) 2167 1830 1999 3847 4800 4324 3213 3545 3379 3070 4500 3785 3478 3600 3539 3423 4400 3911

Yield (t/ha) Reach I Year TP 02-03 03-04 Average II 02-03 03-04 Average III 02-03 03-04 Average 02-03 03-04 Average II 02-03 03-04 Average III 02-03 03-04 Average I FP

5.12 4.95 5.4 5.3 5.26 5.125 5.17 4.70 5.7 5.1 5.435 4.9 5.42 5.07 5.8 5.4 5.61 5.235 6.43 6.6 6.52 5.10 5.8 5.45 6.47 6.8 6.64 6.06 6.1 6.08 4.73 5.5 5.12 6.14 6.3 6.22

11950 13165 11835 13065 11893 13115 11830 13061 11675 12875 11753 12968 11637 12890 11920 13065 11779 12978 Rabi 12779 13814 12850 14100 12815 13957 12670 14113 12250 13900 12460 14007 12823 14431 13100 14250 12962 14341

180

Table 40: Demonstration of integrated pest management in cotton (Karimnagar) Year Reach I Average 02-03 03-04 02-03 03-04 02-03 03-04 Yield (q/ha) TP 17.54 22.1 19.82 17.06 21.7 19.38 18.17 23.5 20.84 FP 14.62 19.7 17.16 14.31 18.4 16.36 15.27 19.5 17.39 % increase in yield over FP 19.9 12.2 15.5 19.2 17.9 18.46 19.0 20.5 19.8 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 12269 14030 15600 16450 13934 15240 12187 14427 16100 17050 14144 15738 12151 14382 15550 16250 13851 15316 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 40342 53040 46691 39238 52080 45659 41791 56400 49095 FP 33626 47280 40453 32913 44160 38536 35121 46800 40960 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 28073 37440 32757 27051 35980 31515 29640 40850 35245 FP 19596 30830 25213 18486 27110 22798 20739 30550 25645 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 8477 6610 7544 8565 8870 8718 8901 10300 9600

II
Average

III
Average

TP: Stem application of Monocrotophos, Pheramone traps, Light traps, Trap crops, Bird perches and NPV spray. FP: Pest control with chemicals.

181

Table 41:Integrated pest management in cotton (Warangal)

Reach I Year 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average Yield (t/ha) DP FP 3.01 2.84 2.70 2.60 3.04 2.85 2.62 2.35 2.84 2.66 *T cal=-6.5 T tab=2.08 2.45 2.24 2.60 2.40 2.61 2.37 2.57 2.23 2.55 2.31 *T cal=-9.7 T tab=2.1 2.65 2.44 2.50 2.30 2.42 2.22 2.75 2.50 2.58 2.36 *T cal=8.51 T tab=2.11 % increase over farmers practice 5.9 5.6 8.5 10.30 7.57 9.3 5.78 10.29 13.22 9.64 8.7 7.55 9.9 9.09 8.81 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP FP 21,241 25,148 22,716 24,688 22,574 27,591 24,700 26,138 22,807 25,891 21,705 23,201 21,850 22,624 22,345 21,345 22,778 21,463 24,750 22,584 24,565 24,858 25,637 24,279 24,834 23,423 24,485 25,630 27,475 25,253 Gross returns (Rs/ha) DP 60,200 65,663 54,720 60,375 60,239 48,691 55,254 47,052 58,580 52,394 47,700 54,708 43,524 61,500 51,858 FP 56,800 63,073 51,300 54,050 56,305 44,876 51,694 42,660 50,800 47,507 43,572 50,795 40,020 49,450 45,959 Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP 38,959 31,652 42,947 38,385 32,146 23,709 35,675 27,911 37,431 30,414 T cal=-0.99 T tab=2.26 26,986 20,311 32,054 26,835 25,202 17,023 35,956 26,520 30,049 22,672 *T caL=9.22 T tab=2.1 26,355 21,149 31,929 26,306 22,061 14,390 36,750 21,975 29,273 20,955 *T cal=12.89 T tab=2.08 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 7,307 4,562 8,437 7,764 7,017 6,675 5,219 8,179 9,436 7,377 5,206 5,623 7,671 14,775 8,318 B:C ratio (DP) 1.87 1.89 1.42 1.44 1.65 2.33 1.38 1.15 1.60 1.61 2.51 1.41 1.01 1.45 1.60

II

III

DP: with IPM traits FP: without IPM traits

182

Table-42: Integrated pest management for bph in kharif rice (Warangal)

Yield (t/ha) Reach I Year DP 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average FP 5.20 4.75 6.50 6.20 6.26 5.76 6.2 5.9 6.04 5.65 *T cal=6.93 T tab=4.3 5.50 5.20 6.30 6.00 6.75 6.37 6.31 5.90 6.21 5.87 *T cal=12.37 T tab=3.18 6.10 5.80 5.65 5.27 5.25 4.90 5.67 5.32 *T cal=14.71 T tab=4.3 % increase over farmers practice 9.40 6.90 8.60 4.83 7.43 5.70 5.16 5.18 6.49 5.63 5.17 7.20 6.66 6.34 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 11,087 11,017 12,763 14,980 12,461 10,080 10,140 11,957 14,043 11,555 11,271 11,421 13,750 12,147 FP 12.207 12.200 13.171 15,275 13,213 11,450 11,340 14,323 14,995 13,027 12,400 12,411 14,015 12,942 Gross returns (Rs/ha) DP 27,040 35,694 37,918 49,600 37,563 26,400 31,566 38,325 50,500 36,697 30,500 36,725 42,000 36,408 FP 24,700 33,630 34,888 47,200 35,104 24,960 30,683 36,250 47,200 34,773 29,000 34,287 39,200 34,162 Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 3,460 3,247 3,438 2,695 3,210 2,810 2,083 4,441 4,251 3,396 2,629 3,428 3,065 3,041 B:C ratio (DP) 1.43 2.20 1.97 2.31 1.97 1.58 2.10 2.20 2.6 2.12 1.70 2.21 2.05 1.98

II

III

15,953 12,493 24,677 21,430 25,155 21,717 34,620 31,925 25,101 21,891 *T cal=18.01 T tab=3.18 16,320 13,510 21,426 19,343 26,368 21,927 36,456 32,205 25,142 21,746 *T cal=5.96 T tab=3.18 19,229 16,600 25,304 21,876 28,250 25,185 24,261 21,220 *T cal=13.16 T tab=4.3

183

Table 43: Integrated pest management for bph in rabi rice (Warangal) Yield (t/ha) Reach I Year DP 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Average III 2000-01 2002-03 Average FP 5.38 5.05 6.5 6.1 7.1 6.98 5.74 5.30 6.18 5.86 *T cal=4.53 T tab=3.18 5.9 5.5 6.1 5.7 6.9 6.4 6.33 5.83 6.31 5.86 T cal=3.18 T tab=18.27 6.3 5.8 5.84 5.42 6.07 5.61 T cal=0.03 T tab=12.7 % increase over farmers practice 2.5 5.7 1.7 7.56 4.37 7.2 7.5 7.8 7.98 7.62 8.6 7.0 7.8 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 11,071 12,025 17,980 12,881 13,489 9,833 11,795 11,740 13,322 11,673 12,637 12,219 12,428 FP 11,775 13,500 12,362 14,321 12,990 10,843 13,100 13,010 14,270 12,806 14,412 13,080 13,746 Gross returns (Rs/ha) DP 25,824 30,841 38,340 45,405 35,103 20,338 27,844 38,985 51,460 34,679 27,435 46,720 37,078 FP 24,240 28,750 37,692 41,943 33156 19,756 26,498 36,160 46,640 32,264 25,393 43,480 34,437 Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP Addl. Income B:C over ratio FP (DP) (Rs/ha) 2,288 1.33 3,566 1.60 1,030 2.20 4437 2.48 2830 5.5 1,592 2,651 4,695 5768 3677 3,727 3925 2061 1.50 1.40 2.32 2.86 2.02 1.2 2.82 2.01

II

14,753 12,465 18,816 15,250 26,360 25,330 32,058 27,621 22997 20,167 *T cal=3.80 T tab=3.18 10,505 8,913 16,049 13,398 27,845 23,150 38,138 32,370 20,772 19,458 *T cal=3.87 T tab=3.18 14,708 10,981 34,500 30,575 24,604 20778 T cal=3.86 T tab=12.7

184

Table -: 44 Demonstration of production technology in greengram during kharif (Karimnagar) Reach I Year 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average Yield (kg/ha) TP 1266 1050 660 275 520 754 1200 450 700 290 670 662 1362 650 660 345 590 721 FP 570 800 350 268 410 480 600 350 400 272 530 430 750 500 410 326 450 487 % increase over FP 122.10 31.25 88.57 2.6 26.83 54.27 100 28.57 75.00 6.6 26.42 47.3 82.00 30.00 60.97 5.8 31.11 42.00 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 5466 5700 3613 4200 3600 3750 2545 2756 3450 3750 3735 4031 5100 5808 2520 2830 3800 4000 3723 3990 3680 3870 3765 4100 5340 5562 3263 3695 3840 4140 2688 2875 3560 3760 3738 4006 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 22788 10260 11550 8800 8580 4550 5225 5092 8580 6765 11345 7093 21600 10800 4950 3850 9100 5200 5510 5168 11055 8745 10443 6753 24516 13500 7150 5500 8580 5330 6555 6194 9735 7425 11307 7590 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 17323 4560 7937 4600 4980 800 2680 2336 5130 3015 7610 3062 16500 4995 2430 1020 5300 1200 1787 1178 7375 4875 6678 2654 19176 7938 3887 1805 4740 1190 3867 3319 6175 3665 7569 3583 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 12762 3337 4180 344 2115 4548 11505 1410 4100 609 4500 4423 11238 2082 3550 548 2510 3986

II

III

TP: FP:

Trial plot (Introduction of line sowing, YMV tolerant varieties (WGG-37) and weedicide application (Alachlor @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha) Farmers practice

185

Cont. Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 2.33 2.16 1.96 2.10 2.25 3.49 1.96 2.05 2.31 5.90 1.97 2.12 T(table) Value 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 Inference NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS * NS NS

II

III

186

Table 45: Demonstration of recommended production technology in redgram during rabi (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) TP I II 98-99 00-01 Average 98-99 00-01 01-02 Average 98-99 00-01 01-02 Average 1500 1370 1435 1300 1250 1557 1369 1600 1870 1625 1698 FP 975 870 923 935 690 1163 929 985 1250 1225 1153 % Yield increas e over FP 53.8 57.14 55.47 39.0 0.81 23.88 47.36 62.43 50.0 32.65 47.23 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 5272 5840 5556 4550 5485 8519 6185 5500 7795 8269 7188 FP 4775 3985 4380 4320 3055 9227 5534 5320 4250 9131 6234 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 21000 22000 21500 18200 20000 26469 21556 22400 30000 27625 26675 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 15728 16160 15944 13650 14515 17950 13572 16900 22250 19356 19487 FP 8875 10015 9445 8770 8065 8799 8545 8470 15750 9856 1136 6853 6145 6499 4880 6450 9151 6827 8430 6455 9500 8128 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha)

Reach

Year

FP
13650 14000 13825 13090 11120 18029 14079 13790 20000 18987 17592

III

TP : Trial plot (Introduction of HYV during rabi with optimum dates of sowing) FP : Farmers practice (growing of local varieties)

187

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 41.0 1.7 23.6 18.35 7.23 0.69 6.28 5.47 7.51 0.71 19.79 9.27 T(table) Value 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 Inference * NS * * * NS * * * NS * *

II

III

188

Table -46: Demonstration of production technology in blackgram (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) TP 1333 1180 1355 1289 1350 1500 1313 1200 1341 1500 1650 1488 1390 1507 FP 925 830 1094 950 930 930 1101 1050 1003 980 1070 1161 1100 1078 % Yield increase over FP 44.10 42.17 23.86 35.68 34.16 61.29 19.26 14.3 32.3 53.0 53.46 28.17 26.8 40.35 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 5230 4920 6362 5687 5735 7525 5776 6044 5157 4875 8450 7135 6320 8075 6736 7725 6666 6953 6124 5600 8500 7840 5970 7825 6645 7685 6810 7238 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 18662 12950 22420 15770 22357 18051 21146 15590 18900 13020 28500 17670 21961 18166 16800 14700 21540 15889 21000 13720 31350 20425 24552 19156 19460 15400 24091 17175 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 12432 8030 16057 9407 16622 10526 15270 9321 13743 8145 20050 10535 15641 10091 10064 6975 14875 8936 14875 8120 22850 12585 18580 11331 12815 7715 17280 9938 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 5402 6650 6096 6049 5518 9515 5550 3089 5918 6755 10265 7248 5100 7342

Reach I

Year 98-99 00-01 01-02 Average 98-99 00-01 01-02 02-03 Average 98-99 00-01 01-02 02-03 Average

II

III

TP: FP:

Trial plot (LBG-20, weed control (Pendimethalin @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha), Blitox (powdery mildew control), line sowing (30 x 10 cm.)). Farmers plot

189

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 7.95 0.34 8.16 8.45 3.50 0.42 2.99 0.66 6.03 0.69 4.63 6.81 T(table) Value 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 Inference * NS * * * NS NS NS * NS * *

II

III

190

Table 47: Demonstration of recommended production technology in groundnut (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) Reach I Year TP 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 1750 1526 1475 1390 1535 1850 1704 1577 1480 1652 2770 1626 1610 1610 1904 FP 1050 1145 1010 1070 1069 1120 1242 1140 1150 1163 1450 1176 1150 1220 1249 % Cost of Yield cultivation increas (Rs/ha) e over TP FP FP 67.0 7540 6750 33.28 7800 8210 21.9 8675 9050 29.9 9935 10750 43.59 8488 8690 64.4 8150 7460 37.2 8205 9150 38.3 8908 9825 28.67 9875 10500 41.83 8785 9234 56.9 9880 9340 38.27 7615 8570 40 9050 10015 31.97 10220 11200 52.44 9191 9781 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 25447 18692 17700 20850 20672 26825 20874 18924 22200 22206 32987 19918 19320 24150 24094 FP 15225 14026 12120 16050 14355 16312 15214 13680 17250 15614 21025 14406 13800 18300 16883 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 17907 10893 9025 10915 12185 18675 12669 10016 12325 13421 23107 12303 10270 13930 14903 FP 8475 5816 3070 5300 5665 8852 6064 3855 6750 6380 11685 5836 3785 7100 7102 9432 5077 5955 5615 6520 9823 6605 6161 5575 7041 11422 6467 6485 6830 7801 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha)

II

III

TP: FP:

Trial plot (Seed treatment of HYV, optimum plant population (44 plants / sq.m), weedicide application (Pendimethalin@ 1.0 kg a.i /ha) and Gypsum application @500 kg/ha). Farmers practice

191

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 5.59 0.58 4.79 6.60 5.75 1.16 5.01 7.4 2.9 1.5 4.5 6.0 T(table) Value 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 Inference * NS * * * NS * * NS NS * *

II

III

192

Table -: 48 Demonstration of production technology in maize during rabi (Karimnagar)

% Yield increas e over FP 13.32 6.5 9.90 21 16.0 6.0 11.00 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 5425 6115 5770 5125 5120 6300 5710 FP 6628 6740 6684 5978 6389 6685 6537 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 29464 30375 29920 23532 24256 28000 26128 FP 26000 27000 26500 19368 20800 23600 22200 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 24029 24260 24145 18407 18530 21315 19923 FP 19972 20260 20116 13390 14411 2285 8384 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 4057 4000 4029 5017 4119 2285 3202

Reach

Year

Yield (kg/ha) TP FP 6500 5700 6100 4802 5200 5600 5400

I II III

1998-99 1999-00 Average 1998-99 1998-99 1999-00 Average

7366 6075 6721 5883 6064 5980 6022

TP: FP:

Trial plot (Application of weedicide, growing of Hybrids, irrigations through ridges and furrow method ) Farmers plot Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 0.95 3.16 76.84 141.35 2.57 1.87 8.32 1.85 T(table) Value 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 Inference NS NS * * NS NS * NS

Anova Table

III

193

Table-49: Demonstration of production technology in maize (Warangal)

Yield (t/ha) Reach I Year DP 2000-01 2002-03 2003-04 Average 4.6 4.3 5.0 4.63 FP 4.2 3.9 4.5 4.2 % increase over farmers practice 8.5 9.30 10.16 9.32 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 6,400 13,150 8,475 9342 FP 6,750 14,015 8,840 9868 Gross returns (Rs/ha) DP 13,489 23,650 26,250 21130 FP 11,200 21,450 23,640 18763 Net returns (Rs/ha) DP 7,089 10,500 17,775 11788 FP 4,450 7,435 14,800 8,895 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 2,639 3,065 2975 2,893 B:C ratio (DP) 1.1 0.79 2.09 1.33

II

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2002-03 Average

III

*T cal=3.18 T tab=2.4 5.7 5.5 5.1 4.65 5.8 5.3 5.75 5.4 5.59 5.21 *T cal=5.93 T tab=2.20 5.9 5.7 4.2 3.8 5.05 4.75
*T cal=5.50 T tab=2.30

4.5 9.67 8.62 6.56 7.34 9.37 9.52 9.45

7,550 9,035 12,892 10,532 10002 7,350 12,550 9,950

7,725 10,405 14,375 11,932 11,109 8,125 13,065 10,59

20,125 22,950 31,900 30,187 26,290 20,650 23,100 21,875

19,512 20,925 29,150 28,350 19890 19,950 20,900 20,425

T cal=2.34 T tab=3.18 12,575 11,787 13,915 10,520 19,007 14,775 19,655 16,417 16288 10875 *T cal=6.07 T tab=2.20 13,300 11,825 10,550 7,835 11,925 9830
*T cal=4.63 T tab=2.45

788 3,395 4,232 3,237 2913 1,475 2,715 2095

1.7 1.54 1.48 1.89 1.65 1.8 0.84 1.32

DP: N120P60K40 Kg/ha +chemical weed control with recommended spacing. FP: Higher fertilizer application with closer spacing.

194

Table-50: Demonstration of production technology in rice in kharif (Warangal)

Yield (t/ha) % increase over farmers practice 4.20 7.10 7.13 7.32 6.44 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP FP 12,297 14,232 12,914 13,565 16,085 17,085 13,700 14,950 13,749 14,958 13,260 14,077 18,200 13,743 14,820 12,400 12,800 17,980 14,393 Gros returns (Rs/ha) DP 37,264 36,023 48,280 33,055 38,656 32,106 38,387 48,000 32,367 37,715 31,563 31,320 41,400 34,761 FP 36,873 33,802 44,800 30,800 36,569 31,420 36,100 41,600 30,112 34,808 30,060 28,620 40,000 32893 Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP 24,967 22,640 23,100 20,237 32,195 27,715 19,355 15,850 24904 21611 *T cal=7.13 T tab=2.09 19,714 18,160 26,488 22,022 31,549 23,400 19,367 16,369 24780 19988 *T cal=5.87 T tab=2.16 19,992 17,660 19,820 15,820 24,722 22,020 24780 18500 *T cal=6.82 T tab=2.09 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 2,327 2,863 4,480 3,505 3294 1,554 4,466 8,149 2,998 4292 2,332 4,000 2,702 3008
B:C ratio (DP) 2.00 1.70 1.99 1.41 1.78

Reach I

Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average

DP FP 7.40 7.1 6.06 5.6 6.03 5.6 6.01 5.6 6.38 5.98 *T cal=6.02 T tab=2.09 II 2000-01 6.4 6.2 3.20 12,392 2001-02 6.2 5.9 5.08 11,898 2002-03 6.0 5.2 13.33 16,450 2003-04 5.89 5.48 7.49 13,000 Average 6.12 5.70 7.28 13,435 *T cal=1.09 T tab=2.16 III 2000-01 6.30 6.0 5.00 11,571 2001-02 5.80 5.3 9.70 11,500 2002-03 5.17 5.0 3.28 16,678 Average 5.76 5.43 5.99 13,250 *T cal=9.49 T tab=2.09 DP: N80P60K40 kg/ha + green manuring with Sesbania FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

1.60 2.22 1.93 1.49 2.56

1.72 1.72 1.48 1.64

195

Table-51:

Demonstration of production technology in rice in rabi (Warangal)

Yield (t/ha) % increase over farmers practice 12.9 1.7 7.3 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 10,750 11,980 11,365 FP 11,600 12,362 11,981 Gross returns (Rs/ha) DP 34,288 38,340 36,314 FP 28,800 37,692 33,246 Addl. Income B:C over ratio FP (DP) DP FP (Rs/ha) 23,538 17,200 6,338 2.18 26,360 25,330 1,030 2.20 24949 21,265 3,684 2.19 T cal=2.68 T tab=2.68 Net returns (Rs/ha) 20,046 17,066 26,654 22,565 23,350 19,816 *T cal=14.23 T tab=3.18 15,305 11,477 21,970 18,416 18,638 14,947 T cal=0.98 T tab=2.26 2,980 4,089 3535 1.90 2.26 2.08

Reach I

Year DP 2000-01 2001-02 Average FP 7.0 6.2 7.1 6.98 7.05 6.59 T cal=2.18 T tab=3.18 6.2 5.7 6.8 6.5 6.5 6.1 *T cal=12.12 T tab=3.18 5.9 5.2 6.36 6.04 6.13 5.62 T cal=-0.99 T tab=2.26

II

2000-01 2001-02 Average

8.39 4.61 6.5

10,795 11,752 11,274

11,701 13,885 12,793

30,841 38,410 34,625

28,750 36,450 32,600

III

2000-01 2001-02 Average

13.5 5.29 9.40

10,817 12,374 11,595

12,255 14,200 13,228

26,122 34,344 30,233

23,732 32,616 28,174

3,828 3,554 3691

1.42 1.77 1.60

FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

DP: N120P60K40 kg/ha

196

Table-52: Demonstration of production technology in cotton (Warangal)

Reach I Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average % Cost of Gross returns Net returns increase cultivation (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) over (Rs/ha) farmers DP FP DP FP DP FP DP FP practice 3.2 2.6 6.66 23,895 26,938 75,807 61,593 51,912 34,655 2.89 2.60 11.15 21,650 26,172 52,020 46,800 30,370 20,628 2.33 2.08 10.72 23,442 24,776 53,666 47,916 30,224 23,140 2.81 2.59 8.49 23,800 26,150 73,060 60,734 49,260 41,190 2.81 2.47 9.23 23192 26009 63638 54261 40442 24696 *T cal=6.311 *T cal=13.92 T tab=2.03 T tab=2.03 2.8 2.6 4.76 22,519 24,111 64,400 59,800 41,881 35,689 2.68 2.31 16.01 21,843 25,645 48,240 41,580 26,397 15,935 2.26 2.07 8.40 23,708 25,388 51,350 47,512 27,245 22,117 2.70 2.50 8.0 22,519 25,620 70,200 65,000 47,681 39,380 2.61 2.37 8.25 17897 25191 58548 53473 29876 29023 *T cal= 7.3 *T cal=9.09 T tab= 2.02 T tab=2.02 2.7 2.5 8.0 22,056 23,986 62,100 52,500 40,044 28,513 2.38 2.11 12.29 20,852 24,754 42,900 38,100 22,047 13,342 2.37 2.00 15.61 23,966 27,426 53,500 46,000 29,534 18,574 2.69 2.48 8.47 23,200 26,200 69,940 64,480 46,740 38,280 2.54 2.27 11.01 22518 25591 57110 50270 34591 24677 *T cal=8.88 *T cal=11.64 T tab=2.04 T tab=2.04 Yield (t/ha) Addl. B:C Income ratio over FP (DP) (Rs/ha) 4,776 2.20 9,742 1.40 7,084 1.27 8,070 2.07 7418 1.74 6,192 10,462 5,128 8,301 7521 11,531 8,705 10,960 8,460 9914 1.90 1.20 1.11 2.12 1.56 1.80 1.03 1.22 2.01 1.56

II

III

DP: N150P60K40 kg/ha + IPM practices

FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

197

Table-53: Demonstration of production technology in chilli (Warangal) % Cost of Gross returns Yield (t/ha) increase cultivation (Rs/ha) Reach Year over (Rs/ha) farmers DP FP DP FP DP FP practice I 2000-01 2.2 2.0 10.0 22,050 24,312 40,005 36,620 2001-02 2.6 2.34 13.0 24,470 25,833 57,200 51,480 2002-03 2.58 2.11 18.06 23,285 25,186 77,500 awaited Results are 63,500 2003-04 3.35 2.89 15.91 27,825 35775 76935 66,585 Average 2.68 2.34 14.53 24408 27777 62910 54546 *T cal=5.03 T tab=3.18 II 2000-01 3.2 3.0 6.7 26,820 29,441 57,943 54,857 2001-02 3.37 3.11 8.3 24,868 28,893 74,140 68,420 2002-03 2.75 2.33 14.19 23,303 25,089 80,300 67,997 2003-04 3.05 2.7 12.96 28,170 31,017 70,265 62,100 Average 3.09 2.79 10.75 25790 28610 70662 63344 T cal=2.61 T tab=3.18 III 2000-01 2.6 2.4 8.0 23,187 23,618 47,060 43,440 2001-02 2.6 2.39 9.4 22,806 25,116 57,566 52,800 2002-03 2.75 2.25 16.38 23,036 25,617 80,000 67,700 2003-04 3.56 3.1 14.8 27085 30887 81,995 71,300 Average 2.88 2.54 13.39 24029 26310 66653 58810 *T cal=4.29 T tab=3.18

Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP

Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 8,648 7,083 15901 13345 17015 2,379 9,745 14090 11013 10732 4,051 7,076 14814 14498 10177

B:C ratio (DP) 0.80 1.31 2.32 1.76 1.55 1.20 1.98 2.40 1.49 1.77 1.02 1.48 2.42 2.02 1.74

17,955 9,307 32,730 25,647 54,214 38,313 49,110 35765 38502 21487 T cal=1.3 T tab=3.18 31,123 23,044 49,272 39,527 56,996 42,906 42,095 31,082 44872 34140 *T cal=8.44 T tab=3.18 23,873 19,822 34,759 27,683 56,963 42,149 54,910 40,412 42626 32449 *T cal=3.74 T tab=3.18

DP: N200P60K80 kg/ha + micronutrient spray + IPM practices

FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers

198

Table-54: Demonstration of production technology in turmeric (Warangal)

Reach Year Yield (t/ha) % increase over farmers practice 13.9 5.55 9.72 Cost of Gross returns cultivation (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) DP FP DP FP 29,275 31,545 24,805 24,090 20,600 21,500 43,010 40,940 24,937 26,522 32,515 Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP - 4,470 - 7455 22,410 19440 8970 5993 - 2,724 53,561 25419 - 8282 43300 17509 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) Nil 2,970 Nil 10,261 10,261 Nil 6,610 7628 6989 5307 B:C ratio (DP) 0.851.09 0.97 0.91 2.33 1.620.78 1.74 1.28 0.61 1.10

DP FP I 2000-01 2.20 1.93 2001-02 1.87 1.78 Average 2.03 1.85 *T cal=3.54 T tab=2.57 II 2000-01 2.48 2.21 12.2 30,059 32,570 27,355 24,288 2001-02 3.33 3.05 9.18 23,029 26,850 76,590 70,150 Average 2.90 2.63 10.69 26,544 29,710 51,972 47,219 *T cal=5.73 T tab=2.36 III 2000-01 0.45 0.40 12.5 25,410 27,505 19,712 17,275 2001-02 2.6 2.41 7.36 21,814 24,175 59,800 56,045 2002-03 2.00 1.75 12.5 21,862 23,240 50,000 43,750 2003-04 3.75 3.5 7.15 25600 29,840 41250 38500 Average 2.2 2.02 9.88 23672 26190 42691 38893 *T cal=3.92 T tab=3.12 DP: N190P75K125 kg/ha + Rhizome treatment with carbendazim. FP: Indiscriminate application of pesticides and fertilizers without rhizome treatment.

- 5,697 - 10,232 37,986 31,376 28,138 20,510 15650 8661 19019 12579 *T cal=23.81 T tab=4.3

199

Table 55: Demonstration of production technology in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar) % Yield Cost of Gross returns Reach Year Yield (kg/ha) increase cultivation (Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha) over FP (Rs/ha) TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP I 99-00 6290 5850 7.0 7050 6975 37740 35100 30690 38125 00-01 3470 3010 15.4 12065 11355 17201 14899 5136 3544 Average 4880 4430 11.2 9558 9165 27470 25000 17913 20834 II 99-00 6070 5600 8.0 6825 6600 36420 33600 29595 27000 00-01 4030 3480 15.9 12170 11912 19973 17226 7263 5314 Average 5050 4540 11.9 9768 9256 28197 25413 18429 16157 III 99-00 6700 6280 6.0 6900 6750 40200 37680 33300 30930 00-01 6070 5100 19.0 13815 12265 30046 25245 16231 12980 Average 6385 5690 12.5 10358 9508 35123 31463 24765 21955 TP: Trial plot. FP: Farmers plot Anova Table Reach Character T(stat) Value T(table) Value Inference I Yield 45.0 12.7 * Cost of Cultivation 1.23 12.7 NS Gross Returns 14.6 12.7 * Net Returns 0.64 12.7 NS II Yield 12.75 12.7 * Cost of Cultivation 14.6 12.7 * Gross Returns 76.26 12.7 * Net Returns 7.03 12.7 NS III Yield 2.53 12.7 NS Cost of Cultivation 1.21 12.7 NS Gross Returns 3.21 12.7 NS Net Returns 6.38 12.7 NS

Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 2565 1592 2078 2595 1949 2272 2370 3251 2810

200

Table-56: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in blackgram (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) Reach I Year TP 98-99 00-01 01-02 Average 98-99 00-01 01-02 02-03 Average 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 Average 1400 1220 1206 1275 1285 1470 1217 1229 1300 1475 1800 1650 1332 1303 1512 FP 1060 850 1145 1018 950 920 1174 1090 1033 1185 1200 1100 1243 1140 1174 % Yield increas e over FP 32.0 44.1 5.3 25.2 35.0 59.4 3.6 12.7 27.7 24.0 50.0 50.0 7.1 14.3 29.1 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 5900 5740 6815 6152 5278 7675 6824 7352 6782 5900 5284 7325 6715 7165 6478 FP 5410 6545 7970 6642 5710 8840 8035 7985 7643 6325 5700 8570 7810 8250 7331 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 19600 23275 19899 20925 17990 28025 20080 17206 20825 20650 32400 31350 21978 18242 24924 FP 14840 16150 18892 16627 13300 17575 19371 14840 16272 16590 21600 20900 20509 15960 19112 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 13700 17535 13084 14773 12712 20350 13256 9854 14043 14750 27116 24025 15263 11077 18446 FP 9430 9605 10922 9986 7510 8735 11336 6855 8609 10265 15900 12330 12619 7710 11765 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 4270 7930 2162 4287 5202 11615 1920 2999 5434 4485 11216 11695 2564 3367 6665

II

III

TP: FP:

Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Pendimethalin and inter-cultivation at 25 days after sowing) Farmers plot (Two hand weedings without weedicide) Cont

201

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 2.61 0.97 2.41 2.84 2.37 4.43 2.13 2.50 3.34 4.76 2.89 3.38 T(table) Value 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 Inference NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS * * * *

II

III

202

Table-57: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in groundnut in kharif (Karimnagar)

Yield (kg/ha) Reach I II Year 00-01 00-01 01-02 02-03 Average 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 Average TP 1750 1650 1870 1410 1643 2300 2150 2580 1355 2096 FP 1250 1330 1520 1167 1339 1800 1350 2240 1082 1618 % Yield increase over FP 44.9 23.59 18.70 20.8 21.03 27.7 59.25 13.1 25.2 31.3 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 9870 10700 10125 6882 9236 8655 11500 9865 6423 9111 FP 11250 11770 10755 7247 9924 9300 11975 10975 6641 9723 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 25375 23925 20570 16920 20472 41200 31175 28380 16260 29254 FP 18125 19357 16720 14004 16694 32400 19575 24640 12984 22400 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 15505 13225 10445 10038 11236 32745 19675 18515 9837 20193 FP 6875 7587 5965 6757 6770 23100 7600 13665 6343 12677 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ ha) 8630 5637 4480 3281 4466 9645 12075 4865 3494 7520

III

TP: Trial plot(1.0 kg. a.i./ha of Pendimethalin and inter-cultivation at 30-35 DAS). FP: Two hand weedings.

Cont.

203

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 3.39 5.63 4.34 8.9 9.55 3.34 7.89 6.56 4.07 3.25 3.39 3.73 T(table) Value 2.77 2.77 2.77 2.77 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 Inference * * * * * NS * * * * * *

II

III

204

Table-58: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar) Reach Year Yield (kg/ha) % Yield increas e over FP 22.7 11.64 11.9 6.6 13.11 24.3 11.2 11.4 6.02 13.06 21.4 18.3 9.8 5.9 13.8 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 11162 10663 11209 11760 11199 10972 10919 11478 11380 11187 11372 11225 11091 11950 11410 FP 12037 11825 12720 12350 12233 11394 11654 13037 11980 12016 11988 11965 12806 12705 12366 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 26730 17172 27888 33410 26300 22770 17967 28672 32045 25364 25245 21040 28420 34710 27354 FP 21786 15158 24920 31330 23299 18135 15953 26152 30225 22616 20790 17225 25872 32773 24165 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 15568 6509 16679 21650 15102 11798 7050 17194 20665 14177 13873 9816 17329 22760 15945 FP 9743 3333 12200 18980 11064 6921 4299 13115 18245 10645 8802 5260 13066 20068 11799 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 5825 3176 4479 2670 4038 4877 2750 4079 2420 3532 4455 4556 4263 2692 4146

II

III

00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average

TP 5400 3240 4920 5140 4675 4600 3390 5080 4930 4500 5100 3970 5070 5340 4870

FP 4400 2860 4450 4820 4133 3700 3010 4560 4650 3980 4200 3250 4620 5042 4278

TP: FP:

Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Butachlor and inter-cultivation at 35-40 days after sowing Farmers plot

205

Table-59: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in paddy during rabi (Karimnagar)
% Yield increase over FP 7.00 12.0 4.96 7.8 2.56 13.5 3.4 6.37 2.96 9.3 4.7 5.8 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 12050 13500 14350 14450 14760 14570 13720 14173 11725 13650 14560 14610 13900 14360 13395 14203 11970 14375 15010 15125 14200 15100 13727 14867 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 28087 26250 29736 26544 38480 36660 32101 29818 27300 26617 32536 28672 39130 37830 32989 31040 26300 26512 37632 35000 43095 42380 35676 34631 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 3287 3292 1630 2736 2607 3914 1750 2757 3191 2747 1615 2518

Yield (kg/ha) Reach I Year 00-01 01-02 03-04 Average 00-01 01-02 03-04 Average 00-01 01-02 03-04 Average TP 5350 5310 5920 5527 5200 5810 6020 5677 5200 6720 6830 6250 FP 5000 4740 5640 5127 5070 5120 5820 5337 5050 6150 6520 5907

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 16037 15386 23720 18381 15575 17976 25230 19594 15329 22622 28895 22282 FP 12750 12094 22090 15645 12967 14062 23480 16837 12137 19875 27280 19764

II

III

TP: FP:

Application of 1.0 kg a.i /ha of Butachlor and intercultivation at 35-40 DAS Farmers practice of no weedicide application

206

Table-60: Introduction of chemical weed control technique in rabi pigeon pea (1998-99) (Karimnagar)
Cost Of Yield Cultivation Gross Returns (Kg/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) TP FP TP FP TP FP 1585 1200 32 5475 6140 22190 16800 1490 1250 13 5635 6278 20860 18410 1635 1390 17 6010 6500 22890 19460 Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Pendimethalin) Farmers plot (Two hand weedings without weedicide) % Yield Increase Over FP Yield increase Over FP FP Net Returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 16715 10660 15225 12132 16880 12960 Addl. Income Over FP (Rs/ha) 6055 3093 3920

Reach I II III TP: FP: year

Table-61: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in greengram(Karimnagar)

R e a h I II III TP: FP: yield (Kg/ha) TP Cost Of Gross Returns Cultivation (Rs/ha) ((Rs/ha) TP FP TP FP Net Returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 2883 1420 2152 927 2115 1521 1821 1050 1436 Addl. Income Over FP (Rs/ha)

00-01 1020 800 27.5 3938 4401 11220 8800 7282 4399 01-02 670 580 15.5 3550 3800 8710 7540 5160 3740 Average 845 690 21.5 3744 4101 9965 8170 6221 4070 00-01 350 270 29.6 2708 2755 3850 2970 1142 215 01-02 830 690 20.3 3720 4015 10790 8970 7070 4955 Average 590 480 24.9 3214 3385 7320 5970 4106 2585 00-01 660 520 34.6 3345 3626 7260 5720 3915 2094 01-02 660 600 10.0 3650 3920 8580 7800 4930 3800 Average 660 560 22.3 3498 3773 7920 6760 4423 2947 Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Pendimethalin and inter-cultivation at 25 days after sowing) Farmers plot (Two hand weedings without weedicide)

207

Table-62: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in maize during kharif (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) Reach Year TP I 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 01-02 02-03 03-04 Average 4050 4570 5950 4857 4660 4730 6130 5173 5200 4830 6840 5623 FP 3720 4180 5460 4453 4110 4270 5340 4573 4250 4420 6120 4930 % Yield increas e over FP 8.8 9.3 9.0 9.07 13.38 10.7 14.8 13.12 22.35 9.27 11.76 14.05 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 7820 6944 7920 7561 8010 7384 7460 7618 8150 7043 7560 7584 8075 7357 7240 7557 8270 7679 8170 8043 8450 7566 8025 8014 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 18825 22850 32725 24800 20970 23650 33715 26112 23400 24150 37620 28390 16740 20900 30630 22557 18950 21350 29370 23223 19125 22100 33660 24962 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 10405 15906 24805 17039 12960 16266 26255 18494 15250 17107 30060 20806 8665 13543 22790 14999 10680 13671 21200 15184 10675 14534 25635 16948 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 1740 2363 2015 2040 2280 2595 5055 3310 4575 2573 4425 3858

II

III

TP: FP:

Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Atrazine and inter-cultivation at 35-40 days after sowing. Farmers plot

208

Table-63: Demonstration of chemical weed control technique in maize during rabi (Karimnagar) Cost of % Yield cultivation Gross returns Net returns Reach Year increase (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) over FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP I 98-99 7366 6900 6.0 6540 6890 36830 34500 29840 27710 99-00 6075 5700 6.5 6115 6740 30375 27000 24260 20260 00-01 6950 5600 24.1 9570 10250 26062 21000 16592 10750 01-02 6390 6020 6.1 10680 11910 35145 33110 24465 21200 02-03 6690 6320 5.85 11703 12958 36795 34760 25092 21802 03-04 6740 6250 7.84 12540 13290 37070 34375 24530 21085 Average 6702 6132 9.29 9525 10340 33706 30791 24130 20468 II 98-99 5883 4970 18.0 6185 6500 29415 24850 23230 18350 00-01 7050 5400 29.63 9975 10745 26250 20250 16275 9505 01-02 6010 5670 6.00 10275 11800 39065 36855 28790 25055 02-03 6440 6050 6.44 11821 12871 35420 33275 23599 20404 03-04 6820 6630 2.9 12520 13780 37510 36465 24990 22685 Average 6441 5744 12.1 10155 1139 31532 30339 23377 19200 III 98-99 6064 5700 6.0 6176 6535 30320 28500 24144 21965 99-00 5980 5600 6.5 6300 6685 29900 28000 23600 21315 00-01 7200 5800 27.59 10170 11975 27000 21750 16830 9775 01-02 6420 6010 6.83 10020 11375 35310 33055 25290 21680 02-03 6920 6420 7.78 11688 12565 38060 35310 26372 22745 03-04 7210 6740 7.0 12450 13670 39655 37070 27205 23400 Average 6632 6045 9.7 9464 10468 33374 30613 23907 20147 TP: Trial plot (Application of 1.0 kg a.i./ha of Atrazine and inter-cultivation at 35-40 days after sowing). FP: Farmers plot Yield (kg/ha) Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 2130 4000 5842 3265 3290 3445 3662 4880 6770 3735 3195 2305 4177 2179 2285 7055 3610 3627 3805 3760

209

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 3.05 4.6 5.13 6.05 2.70 3.60 3.96 5.87 3.07 3.41 4.39 4.25 T(table) Value 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 2.78 2.78 2.78 2.78 Inference * * * * NS * * * * * * *

II

III

210

Table-64: Demonstration of chemical weed control in maize (Warangal) Yield (t/ha) Reach
I II

Year DP 2000-01 2000-01 2001-02 Average 2000-01 2001-02 Average FP 4.6 4.4 5.75 5.46 5.0 4.45 5.37 4.95 *T cal=5.3 T tab=2.36 5.9 5.65 4.2 4.0 5.05 4.82 *T cal=4.00 T tab=3.18

% increase over farmers practice 4.5 5.3 12.37 8.83 6.2 5.0 5.6

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 6,400 7,550 10,083 8,816 7,906 9,285 8,595 FP 6,650 7,725 10,500 9,112 8,156 10,437 9,296

Gross returns (Rs/ha) DP 14,489 20,124 22,500 21,312 23,581 18,900 21,240 FP 12,254 19,512 20,025 19,768 22,138 18,000 20,069

Net returns (Rs/ha) DP FP

III

8,089 5,604 12,574 11,787 12,417 9,525 12,495 10,656 *T cal=4.74 T tab=2.36 15,675 13,982 9,625 7,563 12,650 10,772 *T cal=10.06 T tab=3.18

Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 2,485 787 2,892 1,839 1,693 2,062 1,877

B:C ratio (DP) 1.30 1.70 1.23 1.40 1.90 1.03 1.46

DP: Atrazine @ 1.0 kg a.i./ha as pre emergence spray + intercultivation at 30-35 DAS

FP: Manual weeding + intercultivation

211

Table-65: Introduction of new varieties (JGL-1798) in paddy during kharif (Karimnagar) Yield (kg/ha) Reach I Year 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Average TP 3470 3250 5160 5900 4445 4030 3750 5280 5200 4265 6070 4330 5470 7000 5718 FP 3010 2910 5420 4600 3985 3480 3100 5680 4500 4190 5100 3500 5880 5800 5070 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP 12065 11750 12450 12265 12133 12710 12395 12337 12650 12523 13815 12637 11845 12775 12768 FP 11355 12225 13835 12875 12573 11912 12625 12735 13100 12593 12265 13162 12933 13260 12905 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP 17201 18200 36120 35400 26730 19973 21000 36960 31200 27283 30046 24248 38325 42000 33655 FP 14899 14841 30352 27600 21923 17226 15810 31808 27000 22961 25245 17850 32928 34800 27706 Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 5136 6450 23670 23135 14598 7263 8605 24623 18550 14760 16231 11611 26480 29225 20887 FP 3544 2616 16517 14725 9351 5314 3185 18073 13900 10118 12980 4688 19995 21540 14801 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 1592 3834 7153 8410 5247 1949 5420 6550 3251 4642 3251 6923 6485 7685 6086

II

III

TP: FP:

Introduction of new variety JGL-1798 Farmers practice (IR-64 & Vijetha)

Cont.

212

Anova Table Reach I Character Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns Yield Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns Net Returns T(stat) Value 1.43 1.02 3.89 3.37 1.44 0.24 7.54 4.74 1.79 0.24 11.19 6.23 T(table) Value 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 3.18 Inference NS NS * * NS NS * * NS NS * *

II

III

213

Table-66: Identification of suitable rice varieties for Kharif season (Warangal)

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 10140 12177 12771 12518 11902 8900 10018 9459 11231 FP 10500 13103 13305 14525 12858 9810 10952 10381 11850 Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 29500 35270 38610 47736 37779 24300 31710 28005 25050 FP 25480 31890 34775 45006 34288 21600 30120 25860 23125 Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 19360 23093 25889 32488 25208 15400 21710 18555 13819 FP 14980 19193 21470 30481 21531 11790 19668 15729 11275 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 4380 3900 4419 2007 3677 3610 2042 2826 2544 B:C ratio (DP) 2.91 2.90 3.02 3.81 3.16 3.96 3.17 3.57 2.23

Variety JGL-384

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha) DP 5.9 7.05 6.44 6.12 6.38 4.5 6.34 5.42 4.88 FP 4.9 6.12 5.35 5.77 5.54 4.0 6.14 5.07 4.64

II

1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 Mean 1999-00 2000-01 Mean 2000-01

III

*T cal=4.27 T tab=2.44

*T cal=8.19 T tab=2.44

214

Variety

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha) DP 5.82 5.85 6.23 6.12 FP 5.41 5.5 6.00 5.77

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 12317 8940 10050 13128 FP 14249 9875 11070 14172

Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 44747 33250 32390 48960 FP 41570 29950 31304 46160

Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 30716 31000 22346 35832 FP 27322 21075 20234 31988

Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 3394 9925 2112 3844

B:C ratio (DP) 3.63 3.72 3.22 3.73

JGL 1798

I II

2002-03 1999-00 2000-01 2002-2003

RDR 836 MTU 1010

II I II

Avg 1999-00 2001-02 2001-02

*T cal=8.87 T tab=3.18 6.07 5.76 6.3 6.02 6.9 5.6 7.2 6.8 T cal=1.88 T tab=12.7

10706 8690 11242 12332

11706 9780 12565 13760

38200 32740 37260 38400

35805 32400 36400 36720

*T cal=2.77 T tab=3.18 29726 24432 23550 22620 26018 23835 26548 22960 T cal=4.11 T tab=12.7

5294 930 2183 3588

3.56 3.77 3.31 3.11

Cont.

215

Variety

Reach

Year

Yield (t/ha) DP FP 5.99 5.2 5.77

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 12991 11574 13889 FP 14948 12940 14275

Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 50944 37700 50880 FP 47940 33880 46133

Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 37953 26126 36990 FP 32991 20860 31858

Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) 4962 5266 5132

B:C ratio (DP)

WGL 14

I II

2002-03 2001-02 2002-2003

6.37 5.8 6.36

3.92 3.26 3.66

*T cal=7.30 T tab=4.3

*T cal=58.2 T tab=4.3

Mean

6.08

5.49

12732

13608

44290

40007

31558

26359

5120

3.61

216

Table-67: Introduction of new varieties (jgl-1798) in paddy during rabi (karimnagar)

% Yield increase over FP 15.78 29.51 12.2 13.98 17.56 15.00 25.00 12.5 13.2 18.27 25.00 27.47 11.9 9.3 17.63 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) TP FP 7200 7085 11395 9285 14105 15002 14860 15670 11890 11761 7306 7000 11165 9875 14250 15112 13940 14850 11665 11709 7190 7145 11516 9625 14850 15725 14760 15650 12079 12036 Gross returns (Rs/ha) TP FP 39600 34200 29715 22968 29400 26208 35490 31135 33551 28628 41400 36000 29400 22050 32000 28112 36205 31980 34751 29536 42000 33474 30450 23887 38416 34328 45825 41925 39173 33404 Addl. income over FP (Rs/ha) 5285 4637 4089 5165 4794 5094 6060 4750 5135 5260 8481 4672 4963 4790 5727

Reach I

Year 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2003-04 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2003-04 Average 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2003-04 Average

II

III

Yield (kg/ha) TP FP 6600 5700 5660 4370 5250 4680 5460 4790 5743 4885 6900 6000 5600 4200 5750 5020 5570 4920 5955 5035 7000 5579 5800 4550 6860 6130 7050 6450 6678 5677

Net returns (Rs/ha) TP 32400 18320 15295 20630 21661 34094 18235 17750 22265 23086 34810 18934 23566 31065 27094 FP 27115 13683 11206 15465 16867 29000 12175 13000 17130 17826 26329 14262 18603 26275 21367

TP: FP:

Introduction of new variety JGL-1798 Farmers practice (IR-64 & Vijetha)

217

Table-68: Introduction of new varieties in paddy during rabi (warangal) Variety Reach Year Yield (t/ha) DP WGL 14377 I 1999-2000 2000-2001 Average II III 2000-2001 1999-2000 2000-2001 5.8 8.06 6.93 5.78 5.95 7.01 FP 5.3 6.4 5.85 5.38 5.6 6.34 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 10200 10750 10475 9640 10350 14408 FP 11000 11600 11300 10170 11250 15192 Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 29000 36288 32644 26588 29750 28350 FP 25440 28800 27120 24288 26880 25725 Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 18800 25538 22169 16948 19400 13942 FP 14440 17200 15820 14118 15630 10533 4360 8338 6349 2830 3770 3409 2.84 3.38 3.11 2.76 2.87 1.97 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) B:C ratio (DP)

*T cal=2.95 T tab=2.77

*T cal=5.37 T tab=2.77

Average JGL 384 JGL 1798 I I II 1999-2000 2001-02 1999-00

6.48 5.6 7.2 6.17

5.97 5.2 6.8 5.97

12379 9670 12800 7936

13221 10600 13000 8978

29050 28000 43200 35235

26303 24960 36720 35780

16671 18330 30400 27292

13082 14360 23720 23632

3336 3970 6680 3660

2.53 2.90 3.38 4.44

T cal=3.0 T tab=12.71

T cal=3.42 T tab=12.71

218

Table-69: Identification of suitable cotton varieties (warangal) Variety Reach Year Yield (t/ha) DP NA 1588 I II 2002-2003 2001-02 2002-2003 2.3 2.30 2.50 FP 2.5 2.05 2.70 Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha) DP 23570 20334 24825 FP 26880 22112 29640 Gross Returns (Rs/ha) DP 52900 41472 57500 FP 57500 36900 62100 Net Returns (Rs/ha) DP 29330 21138 32675 FP 30620 14788 32460 6350 215 2.24 2.04 2.32 Addl. Income over FP (Rs/ha) B:C ratio (DP)

T cal=0.33 T tab=4.3

T cal=0.75 T tab=4.3

Average NA 1678 I II 2001-02

2.4 2.8 2.05

2.38 2.6 1.97

22580 18400 20142

25876 22300 21572

49486 46800 36000

49500 50400 36360

26907 28400 15858

23624 28100 14788

3283 300 1070

2.18 2.54 1.79

T cal=2.33 T tab=12.71

T cal=1.78 T tab=12.71

219

Table-70:Demonstration of newly released varieties in groundnut during rabi (1999-2000) (Karimnagar) Cost of Addl. % Yield cultivation Gross returns income over Yield (kg/ha) increase (Rs/ha) (Rs/ha) Net returns (Rs/ha) FP (Rs/ha) Reach over FP TP FP TP FP TP FP TP FP JL-24 Local III 180 9170 8600 54828 30492 45658 21892 23766 3046 1694 TG-26 Local 167 9470 8765 57960 34614 48490 25849 22641 3220 1923

Table-71: Introduction of summer greengram during 1998-99 (Karimnagar) Reach II yield kg/ha 200 Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha) 4300 Gross returns (Rs./ha) 21600 Net returns(Rs./ha) 17300

Table-72: Demonstration of improved puddler in Paddy (Karimnagar)

220

Total qty. of water applied (mm) Reach TP FP Water saved over FP

Yield (t/ha)

Cost of cultivation (Rs/ha)

Gross returns (Rs/ha)

N et returns (Rs/ha)

A d dl. in co m e (R s/ ha ) 3984 2600 3988

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

TP

FP

I II III TP: FP:

1221 1269 1216

1446 1483 1475

225 214 259

5.78 6.31 7.03

5.24 5.81 6.45

15002 15145 15685

15962 14945 16425

32368 35336 39368

29344 32536 36120

17366 20191 23683

13382 17591 19695

Puddling with ANGRAU Puddler Farmer practice of wooden Puddler

221

LIST OF TABLES
N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 N7 N8 N9 N10 N11 N12 N13 N14 N15 N16 N16.1 N17 N18 N19 N20 N21 N22 N23 N24 N25 N26 N27 Soil profile properties and nutrient status Monthly rainfall (mm) at panyam mandal during 1999-2004 Constraints identified and demonstrations/research trails conducted in rice Constraints identified and demonstrations/research trails conducted in cotton Constraints identified and demonstrations/research trails conducted in chickpea , sunflower and cropping systems Abstract of all demonstrations in different groups conducted from 1999-2004. Effect of methods and scheduling of irrigation in cotton Water management in rabi sunflower
Effect of drip irrigation treatments on yield attributes and yield of cotton

Effect of drip and surface methods of irrigation in Tomato Yield and economics of varietal perforamance in rice Reach - I Yield and economics of yield and economics varietal performance in rabi rice at upper reach during 2001-2002 Effect of age of seedlings on grain yield of rice Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during rabi 2001-2002 Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during kharif 2002 Performance of relay crop of mustard in comparision with monocropping of rice Rice equivalents and economics of cropping system Rice equivalents of rice-blackgram and rice alone at reach-II Yield and economics of rice based cropping systems Demonstration of System of rice intensification-Reach-I Yield and economics of drip irrigation in cotton Yield and economics of water management in cotton Yield and economics of fertiliser management in cotton Yield and economics of optimum spacing in cotton Yield and economics of mungari cotton followed by different crops. Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpeaReach-II Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpeaReach-III Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpeaReach-I.

222

N28 N29 N30 N31 N32 N33 N34 N35 N36 N37 N38 N39 N40 N41 N42 N43 N44 N45 N46 N47 N48 N49 N50 N51 N52 N53 N54 N55 N56

Yield and economics of sprinkler irrigation in chickpea Yield and economics of optimum plant population in chickpea Yield and Economics of vegetable based cropping systems at reach-II Yield and economics of drip irrigation in chillies Yield and economics of varietal performance in sorghum Reach II Yield and economics of optimum plant population in rice Reach-I Yield and economics of fertiliser management in rice Reach I Yield and economics of weed management in rice Reach I Yield and economics of green manuring in rice Yield and economics of green manuring in rice Yield and economics of improved variety in mungari cotton Yield and economics of chemical weed control in rainfed cotton Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton. Reach-II Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton. Reach-I Yield and economics of integrated pest management in chickpea. Reach-II
Yield and economics of integrated pest management in chickpea. Reach-III

Effect of bio fertilizers in chickpea Yield and economics of varietal performance in redgram Yield and economics of improved hybrid in sunflower Yield and economics of water management in sunflower Reach-II Yield and economics of sulphur application insunflower Yield and economics of tomato and cotton at reach-II Economics of improved agricultural implements Yield and economics of cotton varieties Yield and economics of production technology in cotton Yield and economics of production technology of rice Yield and economics of production technology of sunflower, sorghum and redgram Yield and economics of production technology in chickpea Number of training programmes and field days organized

223

Table N 1: Soil profile properties and nutrient status

S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Properties Bulk density (g cm-3) Coarse sand (%) Fine sand (%) Silt (%) Clay(%) pH EC (m mhos cm-1) Organic carbon (%) Available N (Kg ha-1) Available P (Kg ha-1) Available K (Kg ha-1) Available Sulphur (ppm) Exchangeable Calcium(m.eq.100-1g) Exchangeable Magnesium (m.eq.100-1g) Exchangeable Sodium (m.eq.100-1g) Lime (per cent) Hydraulic conductivity (cm hr-1) Max.water holding capacity (%) Field capacity (%) Permanent wilting point (%) Profile depth (cm) 0-30 30-130 >130 1.37 1.58 1.62 27.4 20.2 15.8 12.5 12.9 10.1 17.0 17.5 19.3 41.75 48.75 55.5 8.85 9.25 9.35 0.76 0.29 0.34 0.46 103 91 88 5.6 6.1 4.3 200 204 210 19 31 92 24 16.8 18.4 8.4 9.6 11.6 4.2 8.7 9.9 14.9 18.0 24.6 3.0 60 64 66 24.0 29.7 34.3 12.9 15.1 16.6

224

S.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6

Nutrient status of soils during kharif 1999 Properties Reach-I Reach-II H P 8.0-8.5 7-8.3 -1 EC (m mhos cm ) 0.35-0.45 0.6-0.72 Organic carbon (%) Low Low -1 Available N (kg ha ) 100-120 120 -130 Available P (kg ha-1) 5-6.5 6-15 -1 Available K (kg ha ) 150-200 150-200

Reach-III 7-8.3 0.64-0.73 Low 130-140 11-17 150-200

225

Table N 2 : Monthly rainfall (mm) at Panyam mandal during 1999-2004 Month

June

1999-2000
Rainfall 29.4 69.8 245.8 50 0.6 1.2 -396.8 Rainy days 3 4 13 6 -26

2000-2001
Rainfall 177.6 99.0 252.6 72.0 97.8 4.8 -705.0 Rainy days 12 8 13 5 8 --46

2001-2002
Rainfall
4.2 43.2 46.8 214.6 447.4 7.0 -763.4

2002-2003
Rainfall
81.8

2003-2004
Rainfall
84.8

Rainy days
7 4 11 12 2 -36

Rainy days
7

Rainy days
5

Decennial mean rainfall

51

July August September October November December Total

47.6
139

5
10

39.8
79.8

5
7

131
111

31.8 69.4 3.4

-373.0

3 8 1
-34

42.6 132.6 --379.6

4 9 --30

124 117 19
6 559

TableN 7 :Effect of methods and scheduling of irrigation in cotton S.No Treatment Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 636 274 406 Water requirement (mm) 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003
210 150 210

Irrigation methods 1 Ridge and furrow

226

2 3

Skip furrow Alternate furrow S.Em CD(0.05) Scheduling of irrigation 1 IW/CPE : 0.6 2 IW/CPE : 0.8 S.Em CD(0.05)

522 534 46 NS 541 587 38 NS

306
282

33 NS 290 285 27 NS

407 382 9 NS 367 436 21 NS

105 105 --120 160 ---

60 60 --80 100 ---

105 105

120 160

227

Table N 8: Water management in rabi sunflower

Treatments 1. Ridge and furrow 2.Alternate furrow 3. Skip furrow S.Em CD (0.05%) 1. IW/CPE : 0.6 2. IW/CPE : 0.8 3. Critical stages S.Em CD(0.05%) Seed yield (Kg ha-1) 2001-2002 2002-2003 1605 820 1606 819 1460 817 78 2.7 NS NS 1497 817 1660 817 1513 822 78 2.8 NS NS Water requirement (mm) 2001-2002 2002-2003 150 100 75 50 75 50 ----80 40 120 80 120 80 -----

TableN 9 :Effect of drip irrigation treatments on yield attributes and yield of cotton
Treatments Irrigation Interval Daily (I1) Once in 2 days (I2) Once in 3 days (I3) S Em CD(0.05) Dripper capacity 1LPH (C1) 2LPH (C2) 4LPH (C3) S Em CD(0.05) Flat bed method Interaction Plant height (cm) 2K-2K1 2K1-2K2 116.1 116.0
115.2

Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 2K-2K1 2K1-2K2

1193

Water requirement (mm) 2K-2K1 2K1-2K2 130 65 42 --34 68 136 --180 -273

2.84 NS 111.2 119.0

117.2

116.5 117.5 114.6 0.90 NS 112.4 117.2 119.2 1.10 3.3 108.9 NS

1202 1375 100. NS 1175 1269 1327 67 NS 1035

1262 1280 1274 12 NS 1192 1337 1287 12 38 1069 NS

136 91 --71 143 286 --250

--

1.77 5.4 106.2 NS

229

Table N 10 :Effect of drip and surface methods of irrigation in Tomato

S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Treatments 1 LPH 2 LPH 4 LPH Flat bed method Furrow method S Em CD (0.05)
Yield (t ha-1) Water requirement (mm)

1999-2K 9.8 11.7 11.2 9.9 8.5 1.3 NS

2K-2K1 13.0 13.7 13.8 9.3 11.7 0.9 2.83

1999-2K 110 160 260 420 360 ---

2K-2K1 110 160 260 420 360 ---

TableN 11: Yield and economics of varietal performance in rice Reach I

Year 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 t value (cal.) Local Grain yield (kg ha-1) 7500 6185 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 48750 45045 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 18273 17860 -Net returns (Rs ha-1) 30477 27185 Benefit cost ratio 2.66 2.52 NDLR-8 7800 6562 -8.79* 50550 47684 -5.29* 18273 17860 -32227 29824 -4.94* 2.76 2.67 -5.00*

2000 2001 t value (cal.) * indicates significant at 5 % level

230

Table N 12 : Yield and economics of varietal performance in rice during rabi 2001-02 - Reach -I
Variety 1. RNR-1446 (Local ) 2. JGL-1853 3. IR-64 4. NDLR-8 5. MTU-1001 6. Tellahamsa Duration 126 135 132 139 140 135 Yield (kg ha-1) 7500 7870 7500 7310 8100 6190 Gross returns (Rs. ha-1) 42250 56016 42250 52208 45430 35307 : : Net returns (Rs ha-1) 26250 40016 26250 36208 29430 19307 Benefit cost ratio 2.64 3.50 2.64 3.26 2.83 2.20

Cost of Cultivation Except NDLR-8 and JGL-1853 all other varieties JGL-1853 and NDLR-8 Straw

Rs. 16,000 ha-1 Rs. 5.30 kg-1 :Rs. 6.80 kg-1 : Rs. 2500 ha-1

Table N 13: Effect of age of seedlings on grain yield of rice at reach-I

Age of seedlings (days) 30-40 50-60 70-80 90-100

Grain yield ( kg ha-1) 6419 6250 6125 5672

TableN 14: Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during rabi 2001-02 at reach-I Variety: IR-64 TREATMENTS Broadcasting Direct seeding Transplanting with Row seeder Grain yield (kg ha-1) 5000 5900 7250 -1 Gross Returns ( Rs. ha ) 26500 31270 38425 Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) 15500 15650 16000 -1 Net Returns (Rs. ha ) 11000 15620 22425 Benefit cost ratio 1.71 1.99 2.40
Price: Grain Rs. 5.00 kg-1

231

TableN 15: Comparison of direct seeding with transplanting in rice during kharif 2002 at reach-I Variety: BPT 5204 Parameters Grain Yield (kg ha-1) Gross returns (Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net returns (Rs. ha-1) Direct seeding with Row seeder 6563 64723 18600 46123 Transplanting 6750 66425 19400 47025

Price: Grain Rs. 9.10 kg-1 and straw Rs.5000 ha-1

Table N 16: Performance of relay crop of mustard in comparision with mono cropping of rice at reach-I Treatments Parameters Grain yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) Additional Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Cost of paddy grain: Rs.4 kg-1 Mustard: Rs.20 kg-1 Table N 16.1: Rice equivalents and economics of cropping system Treatments Parameters Grain yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) Additional Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Over rice fallow Benefit cost ratio 13880 74270 34375 39895 9520 2.16 9040 58750 20875 37875 7500 2.81 7500 48750 18375 30375 -2.65 RiceRice Rice Mustard 6380 25520 16000 9520 2020 1.59 500 10000 2500 7500 -4.00 Rice fb rabi Rice Rice fb rabi Mustard

Rice

Price : Rice grain : Rs. 6.30 kg 1 (kharif) and Rs.3.70 kg 1 (rabi) Straw :Rs. 1750 ha-1 Blackgram : Rs 20 kg -1

232

Table N 17 : Rice equivalents of rice -blackgram and rice alone at reach-II Treatments Parameters Grain yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Additional Net Returns over rice fallow (Rs ha-1) Benefit cost ratio 8174 37600 17062 20538 7938 2.20 6000 29350 15000 14350 -1.95 Rice Blackgram Rice alone

Price : Grain : Rs. 4.60 kg 1 Straw :Rs. 1750 ha-1 20 kg 1

Blackgram : Rs

Table N 18: Yield and economics of rice based cropping systems Treatments Sorghum Sunflower Mustard

Blackgram G

Grain yield (kg ha-1) Gross returns (Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net returns (Rs ha-1) Price: Sunflower Blackgram

ree ngr am
2100 8200 4600 3600 750 12000 7200 4800 320 6400 4200 2200 320 5440 3600 1840 270 3780 3600 180

: Rs. 16 kg-1. Greengram : Rs. 14 kg-1. Sorghum :

:Rs. 17kg-1 Mustard:Rs.20 kg-1 Rs. 4 kg-1.

Table N 19 :Demonstration of System of rice intensification ,Reach- I S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Operation
Variety Date of sowing Date of planting Date of harvesting Productive tillers (No. m-2) Panicle length (cm) Test weight (g) No.of filled grains /panicle No.of illfilled grains /panicle Grain yield (Kg ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs.ha-1)

Farmers method BPT-5204 22-6-2003 31-7-2003 10-12-2003 510 17.2 18.8 105 5 5625 16250

SRI BPT-5204 19-7-2003 28-7-2003 10-12-2003 1040 20.2 21.10 202 3 15774 18000

233

Table N 20: Yield and economics of drip irrigation in cotton at reach-I Treatments Ridge and furrow Drip irrigation irrigation Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 1860 2254 -1 Gross returns (Rs. ha ) 37200 45080 Water requirement (mm) 460 250 -1 Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha ) 20185 23685 -1 Net returns (Rs. ha ) 17015 21395 Benefit cost ratio 1.84 1.90 -1 Price: Kapas ;Rs. 20 kg Table N 21: Yield and economics of water management in cotton at reach-I Year 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 Farmers Skip furrow practice irrigation Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 925 910 1680 1580 1860 1780 2125 2100 3.04 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 16650 16380 25200 23700 37200 35600 55250 54600 4.14 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 12850 12500 16500 16000 20185 19900 20600 20450 -1.87 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 3880 3880 7700 7700 17015 15700 34650 34150 3.96 Benefit cost ratio 1.29 1.31 1.53 1.48 1.84 1.78 2.68 2.67 2.6 Water requirement (mm) 120 60 Alternate furrow irrigatio 1620 1810 2150 1.05 24300 36200 55900 0.78 16000 19900 20450 -1.87 8300 16300 35450 0.28 -1.52 1.82 2.73 - 0.31 --

234

2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.)

240 240 120

120 120 60 3.98

120 120 60 3.98

Table N 22: Yield and economics of fertiliser management in cotton

Year 2000 2003 T value (cal.) 2000 2003 T value (cal.) 2000 2003 T value (cal.) 2000 2003 t value (cal.) 2000 2003 t value (cal.) Farmers 100 % RDF practice Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 2050 1875 2200 2250 -0.2 -1 Gross retuns (Rs.ha ) 40950 39375 57200 58500 0.09 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 20403 18796 20600 18950 -1.02 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 20547 20579 36600 39550 -1.02 Benefit cost ratio 2.00 2.09 2.78 3.09 -1.81 150 % RDF 2000 2300 -3.0 42000 59800 - 1.00 20194 20346 -0.99 21806 39454 -1.00 2.07 2.94 -2.56

Table N 23: Yield and economics of optimum spacing in cotton Spacing(cm) Parameters 60 X 45 cm 90X 45cm (rainfed) 120X60cm (irrigated) Year 2000 2003 2000 2003 (rainfed) (irrigated) (rainfed) (irrigated) R-II R-I R-II R-I Kapas yield 975 1920 1050 2340 -1 (kg ha ) Gross Returns 20475 49920 22050 60840 -1 ( Rs. ha ) Cost of cultivation 15366 19700 15266 18950 -1 (Rs. ha ) Net Returns(Rs. ha-1) 5309 30220 6784 41890 Benefit cost ratio 1.33 2.53 1.44 3.21 Price: Rs. 21 kg-1 (2000) and Rs 26 kg-1

100 X 45 cm (Farmers practice) 2000 2003 (rainfed) (irrigated) R-II R-I 1025 2260 21525 15166 6159 1.41 58760 18950 39810 3.10

235

Table N 24 : Yield and economics of mungari cotton followed by different crops Treatments Grain yield (kg ha-1) Gross returns (Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net returns (Rs ha-1) Cotton equivalents (Kg ha-1) Benefit cost ratio * Price: Cotton Blackgram : : Sole Mungari Cotton 1500 30000 10320 19680 1500 2.91 Mungari cotton Sorghum 1500+1062 40623 14875 25748 2031 2.73 Mungari cotton Blackgram 1500+294 37350 15440 21910 1868 2.42 Rs. 15 kg-1. Rs. 10 kg-1. Mungari CottonChickpea 1500+833 42495 19980 22514 2125 2.13

Rs. 20 kg-1. Chickpea : Rs. 25 kg-1. Sorghum :

Table N 25: Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea (Reach II)
Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2001 2002 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2001 2002 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2001 2002 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2001 2002 2003 2004 t value (cal.) Kranthi Swetha -1 Seed yield (kg ha ) 1400 725 1300 625 1125 863 938 1025 1.34 -1.38 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 21000 18125 19500 18750 16875 17260 15008 24600 1.36 0.94 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 9805 10965 10268 10718 9050 10050 8600 9350 -0.64 5.94 -1 Net returns (Rs ha ) 11195 7160 9233 8032 7825 7210 6408 15250 -1.39 -0.65 Benefit cost ratio 2.14 1.65 1.89 1.75 1.86 1.72 1.75 2.27 -1.42 -0.30 Annegiri (Local) 1438 1250 875 875 21570 18750 13125 14000 9875 10248 9050 8600 11695 8503 4075 5400 2.18 1.83 1.45 1.63

236

Table N 26:Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea (ReachIII)

Year 2000 2001 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2000 2001 2003 2004 t value (cal.)

Kranthi Swetha -1 Seed yield (kg ha ) 563 575 1450 850 625 -1062 -0.25 -0.75 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 8445 14375 21750 21250 9375 -16992 -0.25 0.70 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 7162 7862 9875 10672 7600 -8600 -0.90 2.5 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 1283 6513 11875 10578 1775 -8392 --0.56 0.46 Benefit cost ratio 1.17 1.82 2.20 1.99 1.23 -1.98 --1.0 0.40

Annegiri (Local) 480 1500 538 950 7200 22500 8070 15200 6112 9932 7600 8600 1088 12568 470 6600 1.17 2.26 1.06 1.77

237

Table N 27:Yield and economics of varietal performance in chickpea (Reach I) Year 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2003 2004 t value (cal.) 2003 2004 t value (cal.) Kranthi Swetha Seed yield (kg ha-1) 1250 875 1000 1025 1.13 -0.17 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 18750 17500 16000 24600 1.14 2.25 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 9050 10050 8600 9350 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 9700 7450 7400 15250 1.14 1.85 Benefit cost ratio 2.07 1.74 1.86 1.61 1.16 -0.05 Annegiri (Local) 938 980 14070 15680 9050 8600 5020 7080 1.55 1.82

238

Table N 28: Yield and economics of sprinkler irrigation in chickpea

Year 2001-2002 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2003-2004 t value (cal.) Sprinkler irrigation Seed yield (kg ha-1) 1250 2250 1.44 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 18750 36000 1.40 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 11267 11980 2.00 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 7483 24020 1.29 Water requirement (mm ) 100 200 Benefit cost ratio 1.66 3.01 1.23 Without sprinkler 1025 1000 15375 16000 9877 7800 5498 8200 --1.56 2.05

239

Table N 29: Yield and economics of optimum plant population in chickpea Parameter Seed rate (kg ha-1) Cost of seed (Rs ha-1) Plant population (no m-2) Seed yield ( kg ha-1)
Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Gross returns (Rs ha-1) Net returns (Rs ha-1)

Farmers practice 100 2000 58 1375 7800 20625 12825

Seed drill
80

1650 40 1600 8600 24750 16150

Table N30: Yield and Economics of vegetable based cropping systems at reach II
Treatments

ole Chickpea
1250 18750 9918 8833 1.89

Ridge gourd Chickpea 1510+650 24850 15501 9350 1.60

Ridge gourd
1510 15100 6213 8888 2.43

itter gourd
2023 20230 6900 13325 2.93

Yield (kg ha-1)

Gross returns (Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio

Price: Chickpea: Rs. 15 kg-1. Ridge & Bitter gourds: Rs. 10 kg-1 Table N 31: Yield and economics of drip irrigation in chillies at reach-I Treatments Ridge and furrow Drip irrigation irrigation Pod yield (kg ha-1) 2050 2250 Water requirement (mm) 365 240 -1 Gross returns (Rs. ha ) 51250 56250 -1 Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha ) 23965 21665 Net returns (Rs. ha-1) 27285 34585 Benefit cost ratio 2.14 2.59 Price: Rs. 25 kg-1(pod)

240

Table N 32: Yield and economics of varietal performance in sorghum Reach II

Year 2001 2002 t value (cal.) 2001 2002 t value (cal.) 2001 2002 t value (cal.) Local NTJ 2401 Seed yield (kg ha-1) 2080 2350 1360 1600 -17.0* Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 14560 16450 7480 8800 -5.63* Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 7500 7500 5800 5800 NTJ-2 2220 1540 -8.0* 15540 8470 -197.0* 7500 5800 8040 2670 -197.0* 2.07 1.46 -7.5*

Net returns (Rs ha-1) 2001 7060 8950 2002 1680 3000 t value (cal.) -5.63* Benefit cost ratio 2001 1.94 2.19 2002 1.29 1.52 t value (cal.) -24.0* * Indicates significant at 5 % level

241

Table N 33 : Yield and economics of optimum plant population in rice Reach-I

Year 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) 1999 2001 2002 2003 t value (cal.) Farmers practice Recommended population -1 Grain yield (kg ha ) 5907 6282 6375 6938 6750 7125 6562 6938 -9.00* Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 39192 41442 46375 50316 66425 69838 64058 67442 -9.11* Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 18230 18480 17860 18260 19400 19700 16950 17270 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 20962 28515 47025 47108 Benefit cost ratio 2.14 2.60 3.42 3.77 22962 32056 50138 50172 -8.31* 2.24 2.76 3.85 3.90 -10.61*

* indicates significant at 5 % level

242

Table N 34: Yield and economics of fertiliser management in rice Reach I

Year Kharif (1999 & 2001) Rabi (2001 & 2002) Farmers Recommended Farmers Recommended practice practice practice practice Grain yield (kg ha-1) 6188 6094 6500 6180 6750 6562 7300 7000 3.00 31.00* Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 40878 40314 24267 23072 49000 40878 41190 39600 1.14 7.05* -1 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha ) 21125 18375 16776 14858 21195 17860 16000 14405 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 19753 21759 27805 29824 -309.00* Benefit cost ratio 1.93 2.19 2.31 2.67 -6.20* 7491 25190 1.90 2.57 8214 25195 -1.00 2.12 2.75 -10.00*

1999/2000 2001/2002 t value (cal.) 1999/2000 2001/2002 t value (cal.) 1999/2000 2001/2002 t value (cal.) 1999/2000 2001/2002 t value (cal.) 1999/2000 2001/2002 t value (cal.)

* Indicates significant at 5 % level

243

Table N 35: Yield and economics of weed management in rice Reach-I

Year 1999 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 1999 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 1999 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 1999 2000 2001 t value (cal.) 1999 2000 2001 t value (cal.) Farmers practice Grain yield (kg ha-1) 6000 6848 6378 Gross returns (Rs.ha-1) 39750 44838 23800 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 18930 18659 16858 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 20820 26179 6942 Benefit cost ratio 2.09 2.40 1.41 Recommended practice 6188 6938 6560 -4.83* 40878 45378 24491 -4.45* 18435 18196 16395 22443 27182 8096 -6.75* 2.21 2.49 1.49 -8.04*

* Indicates significant at 5 % level

Table N 36: Yield and economics of green manuring in rice

Treatments Grain yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio

Green manuring 6365 46305 18523 27782 2.49

Farmers practice 6188 45066 18273 26793 2.46

Cost of grain :Rs. 7 kg-1 and Straw : Rs.1750 ha-1

244

Table N 37: Yield and economics of green manuring in rice Parameters Grain Yield (kg ha-1) Gross returns (Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio GM +75% RDF 6938 68136 18650 49486 3.65 GM+ 100% RDF 7125 69838 19600 50238 3.56 FP (200N-140-80) 7218 70684 20750 49934 3.41

Price : Grain :Rs. 9.1 kg-1 and Straw : Rs.5000 ha-1

Table N 38: Yield and economics of improved variety in mungari cotton Parameters Kapas yield (kg ha ) Gross returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net returns (Rs. Ha-1) Additional net returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Price: Rs. 19 kg ha-1 Table N 39: Yield and economics of chemical weed control in rainfed cotton Parameters Treatments Pendimethalin Kapas yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Price: Rs. 19 kg ha-1 1400 2940 15416 13984 2.1 Farmerspractice 1375 28875 15266 13609 1.89
-1

Treatments
REACH - I ARAVINDA LOCAL REACH II ARAVINDA LOCAL

1000 19000 4688 14312 4180 4.05

780 14820 4688 10132 -3.16

1025 19475 4688 15187 5625 4.15

750 14250 4688 9562 -3.03

245

Table N 40 : Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton . Reach-II Year 2000-2001 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2003-2004 t value (cal.) Farmers practice Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 1125 1950 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 23625 50700 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 15266 17750 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 8359 32950 Benefit cost ratio 1.54 2.85 * indicates significant at 5 % level IPM 1050 1975 0.50 22050 51350 0.46 10766 14050 1.98 11284 37300 -5.10* 2.04 3.65 -2.46

246

Table N 41: Yield and economics of integrated pest management in cotton . Reach-I
Year 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) Farmers practice Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 1875 2125 2250 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 28125 42500 58500 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 25885 20185 20250 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 2240 22315 38250 Benefit cost ratio 1.08 2.10 2.88 IPM 1750 2188 2350 -0.18 26250 43760 61100 -0.50 20185 19960 18750 1.08 6065 23800 42350 -3.80 1.30 2.19 3.25 0.12

247

Table N 42 : Yield and economics of integrated pest management in chickpea . Reach-II Year 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) Farmers practice Seed yield (kg ha-1) 1125 875 938 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 16875 13125 15008 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 11550 9050 8100 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 5325 4075 6908 Benefit cost ratio 1.46 1.45 1.85 IPM 1250 890 1000 -2.11 18750 13350 16000 -2.16 10917 8730 7860 7833 4620 8140 -2.48 1.89 1.52 2.03 -2.12

248

Table N 43: Yield and economics of integrated pest management in chickpea . Reach-III
Year 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 t value (cal.) Farmers practice Seed yield (kg ha-1) 1625 538 875 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 24375 13125 14000 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 11750 7600 7910 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 12625 470 6090 Benefit cost ratio 2.07 1.06 1.76 IPM 1750 540 910 -1.47 26250 8100 14560 0.41 11117 7240 7760 15133 860 6800 -1.18 2.59 1.11 1.87 -1.54

Table N 44 : Effect of bio fertilizers in chickpea Parameters Seed yield (kg ha-1) Reach-I Reach-II Reach-III Fertilisers alone ( Farmers practice) 1175 1125 438 Fertilisers+ Rhizobium +PSB 1220 1225 450 Table N 45 : Yield and economics of varietal performance in redgram ICPL 85063 Treatments LRG-41 Local ( LRG-) -1 Seed yield (kg ha ) 1625 1590 1580 -1 Gross returns (Rs. ha ) 24375 23850 23700 Cost of cultivation 6475 6475 6475 (Rs. ha-1) Net returns (Rs. ha-1) 17900 17375 17225 Benefit cost ratio 3.76 3.68 3.66

249

Table N 46: Yield and economics of improved hybrid in sunflower (rainfed) Treatments MSFH-17 GANGA KAVERI (Local Hybrid) -1 Seed yield (q. ha ) 8.75 8.25 Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) 7438 7013 Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) 5633 5633 -1 Net Returns (Rs. ha ) 1805 1380 Additional Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) 425 -Benefit cost ratio 1.32 1.24

Table N 47: Yield and economics of water management in sunflower Reach-II

Year 2000-2001 2002-2003 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2002-2003 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2002-2003 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2002-2003 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2002-2003 t value (cal.) 2000-2001 2002-2003 t value (cal.) Farmers practice (Ridge and furrow irrigation ) Seed yield (kg ha-1) 1625 1750 Gross retuns (Rs.ha-1) 24375 28000 Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) 6250 6600 Net returns (Rs ha-1) 18125 21400 Water requirement (mm ) 180 200 Benefit cost ratio 3.9 4.2 -Skip furrow irrigation 1560 1670 9.67* 23400 26720 7.40* 6150 6450 5.00* 17250 20270 7.87* 90 100 19.00* 3.8 4.1 --

* indicates significant at 5 % level

250

Table N 48: Yield and economics of sulphur application in sunflower

Parameters Treatments Sulphur application Farmerspractice Seed yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs. ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs. ha-1) Net Returns (Rs. ha-1) Benefit cost ratio 2250 33750 9950 23800 3.39 1950 29250 10337 18913 2.82

Table N 49 :Yield and economics of tomato and cotton at reach-II Treatments Yield (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Additional Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Tomato 5000 20000 9700 10,300 -2.06 Cotton 1500 31500 15266 16234 5934 2.06

Table N 50:Economics improved agricultural implements Crop 2000-2001 2001-2002 Mechanical Manual Mechanical Manual ( harvesting) (harvesting) ( harvesting) (harvesting) Chickpea Rs.750 ha-1 Rs.1125 ha-1 Rs. 750 ha-1 Rs. 1125 ha-1 Cost Saving Rs.375 ha-1 -Rs. 375 ha-1 --1 Paddy --Rs. 700 ha Rs.1875 ha-1 -1 Cost Saving --Rs. 1175 ha -Sunflower Rs.1000 ha-1 Rs.1250 ha-1 ---1 Cost Saving Rs.250 ha ---Table N 51 : Yield and economics of cotton varieties Varieties ARAVINDA 2000-2001 REACH-I REACH-II Kapas yield (kg ha-1) 1025 1050 -1 Gross Returns ( Rs ha ) 19475 19950 Cost of cultivation 4688 4688 -1 (Rs ha ) Net Returns (Rs ha-1) 15187 15262 Benefit cost ratio 4.15 4.25 Area covered (ha) 1 5 NARASIMHA 2000-2001 REACH -II 1500 31500 15266 16234 2.06 5

2001-2002 REACH-I 1500 30000 10320 19680 2.91 5

251

Table N 52: Yield and economics of production technology in cotton

Parameter

Cotton R-II
-1

Cotton R-II 2001-2002 1575 254 23625 20185 3440 1.17 4

Cotton R-I 2003-2004 2500 268 65000 31013 33987 2.09

Cotton R-II (Rainfed)

2003-04 500

Yield (kg ha ) Dist. Average yields (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Area covered (ha)

2000-01 1450 228 30450 15266 15184 1.99 2

268 13000 9800 3200 1.32

252

Table N 53 : Yield and economics of production technology of rice Reach Year Yield (kg ha-1) Dist. average yields (kg ha-1) Gross returns ( Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net returns (Rs ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Area covered (ha) Reach-I 2000-2001 (rabi) 6750 2738 29500 16000 13500 1.84 12ha Reach-I 2001-2002 (kharif) 6562 3299 47684 17860 29824 1.67 20ha Reach-I 2001-2002 (rabi) 7000 2738 39600 14405 25195 2.75 20ha Reach-I 2002 Kharif 7125 3299 69838 19700 50138 3.55 30 ha Reach-II 2002 Kharif 6938 3299 68136 19700 48436 3.46 10 ha Reach-I 2003 Kharif 6125 2597 56875 17000 39875 3.34 10 ha

253

Table N 54 : Yield and economics of production technology of sunflower , sorghum and redgram Crops Yield (kg ha-1) Dist. Average yields (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Area covered (ha) Sunflower
R-II 2000-01

800 645 6800 5633 1167 1.21 1

Sunflower Sunflower R-II R-II 2001-2002 2002-2003 1625 1750 916 916 24375 6250 18125 3.9 5 28000 6600 21400 4.24 5

Sunflower R-I 2003-2004 1750 855 26250 7955 18295 3.29 5

Sunflower R-II 2003-2004 750 855 11250 7772 3478 1.44 3

Sorghum R-I 2003-2004

5500

1341 27500 10805 16695 2.54 22

Sorghum R-II 2003-2004 2000 1341 10000 7600 2400 1.31 3

Redgram R-I 2003-2004 2250 420 33750 9779 23971 1.40 10

254

Table N 55: Yield and economics of production technology in chickpea

Crop Yield (kg ha-1) Dist. Average yields (kg ha-1) Gross Returns ( Rs ha-1) Cost of cultivation (Rs ha-1) Net Returns (Rs ha-1) Benefit cost ratio Area covered (ha) Chickpea R-II R-III 2000-2001 1500 1625 872 872 22500 24375 7675 7875 14825 16500 2.93 3.09 20 30 Chickpea R-II R-II 2001-2002 1250 1750 953 953 18750 26250 9917 10117 8832 16132 1.89 2.59 30 35 Chickpea R-II R-III 2002-2003 890 540 356 356 13350 8100 7730 6240 5620 1860 1.72 1.30 35 35 Chickpea R-II R-III 2003-2004 780 750 450 450 11700 11250 7865 7865 3835 3385 1.48 1.43 21 26

255

Table N 5: Constraint identified and demonstrations / research trails conducted in chickpea and sunflower

Crop Ri Rice

Identified constraints

Research trials/demonstrations conducted

1.Farmers are growing susceptible variety to BPH like Demonstration of improved variety NDLR-8 Vs BPT-5204 (Group-B) BPT 5204. 2.Application of improper, untimely and high dose ofDemonstration of fertilizer management in Rice NPK fertilizers ( 250N+100P2O5 + 80 K2O kg ha-1) than (Group-B) recommended doses ( 160N + 80 P2O5 + 80 K2O kgProduction technology in rice (Group-C) ha-1kharif ) and (120N + 60 P2O5 + 60 K2O kg ha-1-rabi ) and micronutrient deficiencies . 3.Non maintenance of optimum plant population (20-24 Spacing/row planting technology in rice (Group-B) hills m-2) against recommended population (33 hills m-2). 4.Weed menace due to improper water management during 1.Demonstration of integrated weed management (Butachlor initial stages of crop growth @1.25 Kg a.i.ha-1+ one hand weeding at 40 days after transplanting) in rice (Group-B and C) 2.Demonstration of System of Rice Intensification (SRI) (Group-A). 5.Growing of green manure crop is not practiced in the 1.Demonstration on insitu green manuring (Sesbania sp.) in rice existing system to improve the status of organic matter (Group-B) content of the soil 6.Farmers keeping the land fallow after kharif rice 1.Rice followed by sorghum, sunflower , mustard and blackgram cropping system was demonstrated (Group-A)

256

Appendix N-I:Technical programme of workdone for the year 1999-2000

GROUP -A S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. of demonstrations conducted Title Reach I ReachII Reach-III Water management in lowland rice ---Studies on rice based cropping systems ---Varietal performance in chickpea --2 Total demonstrations conducted GROUP B Water management in cotton 1 --Demonstration of improved variety in -3 3 mungari cotton Demonstration of improved variety in -2 2 American cotton Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton -3 -Fertilizer management in American cotton 1 3 2 Optimum spacing for American cotton -3 -Planting techniques in lowland rice 4 2 -Chemical weed control in lowland rice 4 --Fertilizer management in lowland rice 4 --Varietal performance in tobacco ---Fertilizer management in tobacco ---Fertilizer management in chickpea ---Hybrid performance in sunflower -1 -Optimum spacing for sunflower ---Total demonstrations conducted Executed/Not executed Total --2 2 1 6 4 3 6 3 6 4 4 ---1 -38 Not executed Not executed Executed Executed Executed & Failed Executed & Failed Executed Executed and failed at lower reach Executed Executed and failed at middle reach Executed Executed Not executed Not executed Not executed Executed and failed Not executed

257

Appendix N-II:Technical programme of workdone for the year kharif 2000 GROUP -A No. of demonstrations proposed No. of demonstrations S.No Title conducted Total Total R I R II R -III R I R II R -III 1 Optimum spacing for cotton 1 2 2 5 1 1 2 Fertilizer management in American 1 2 2 5 1 1 cotton 3 Studies on rice based cropping 3 3 3 3 systems Total 5 4 4 3 2 13 5 GROUP- B 4 Demonstration of improved variety 1 3 2 6 1 1 2 in mungari cotton 5 Demonstration of improved variety 2 3 2 7 1 1 in American cotton 6 Demonstration of IPM technology 1 5 6 12 1 1 in cotton 7 Demonstration of chemical weed 2 2 2 6 1 1 control in cotton 8 Demonstration of chemical weed 2 --2 2 2 control in rice 9 Demonstration of improved rice 1 1 1 1 variety (NDLR 8) 10 Introduction of vegetable- tomato 1 1 1 1 9 14 12 5 4 Total 35 9 GROUP C 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 11 Popularization of Narasimha variety 1(10ha) 3 1(10ha (30ha) ) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 12 Popularization of Aravinda variety 3 1(10ha) 2(20ha (30ha) ) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 3 (30ha) 1(10ha) 1(10ha) 13 Stem application monochrotophos in cotton

258

14

Popularisation of technology in cotton Total

production

1(10ha) 4 (40ha)

1(10ha) 4 (40ha)

1(10ha)

3 (30ha)

1(10ha)

1(10ha)

1(10ha)

4 (40ha)

12

4 (40ha)

S.No 1 2 3 Total

Title

Grand Total 60 Appendix N-III:Technical programme of workdone for the year rabi 2000-2001 GROUP -A No. of demonstrations proposed No. of demonstrations conducted Total Total R I R II R -III R I R II R -III 3 3 1 2 3 2 2 4 3 4 3 10 3 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 7

5 (50ha) 19

Varietal performance in chickpea Identification of suitable sorghum varieties Studies on rice based cropping systems

4 5 6 7 8 9 Total

GROUP- B Demonstration of optimum spacing for sunflower Demonstrastion of improved hybrid in sunflower Demonstration of Improved Agricultural implements. Introduction of rabi redgram Demonstration of chemical weed control in rice Demonstration of fertilizer management in rice

1 2 5 8

2 2 2 1 -7

2 1 2 1 -6

4 3 5 2 2 5 21

2 5 7

1 1 2 1 5

1 1

1 1 3 1 2 5 13

259

11 12 13 Total

GROUP C Popularisation of production technology in sunflower Popularisation of production technology in chick pea Popularisation of production technology in rice Grand Total

1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 3 (30ha)

1 (10ha) 1 (10ha) 2 (20ha)

1 (10ha) 1 (10ha)

2 (20ha)

3 (30ha) 3 (30ha) 1 (10ha) 7(70ha ) 38

--

1 (10ha) 1 (20ha)

-1 (30ha)

-1 (20ha)

2 (30ha)

1(30ha )

1 (20ha)

1 (10ha) 2 (50ha) 1 (20ha) 4(80ha ) 24

Appendix N-IV:Technical programme of work done for the year kharif 2001
S.No Title No. of Demonstrations R-1 R-II R-III 3 4 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 1 2 2 1 1 5 2 2 2 1 1 6 2 2 Total R-I 4 6 5 3 18 3 12 6 5 7 3 1 1 1 2 1 3 10 Demonstrations conducted R-II R-III Total 2 3 3 1 1 2 7 1 5 1 3 10 Group A 1 Studies on rice based cropping systems 2 Comparative performance of direct seeding Vs transplanting 3 Water management in cotton 4 Studies on Cropping systems Total Group B 5 Varietal performance in rice 6 Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton 7 Demonstration of Chemical weed control in cotton 8 Demonstration of improved agricultural implements 9 Demonstration of Fertilizer management in rice

260

10 11 12 13 Total

Demonstration of improved nursery management Demonstration of optimum plant population in rice Introduction of green manure crops preceding rice Introduction of vegetables before Bengalgram

4 4 4 -

1 2 1 2

5 6 5 4 53

25 4 8 -

25 4 8 2 59

Group C
14 15 16 17 18 19

Popularisation of Narasimha variety in cotton Popularisation of Aravinda variety in cotton Stem application of monochrotophos in cotton Popularisation of recommended production technology in cotton Popularisation of recommended production technology in rice Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice
Total

4 ha 4 ha 10 ha 5 ha

4 ha 4 ha 4 ha 4 ha 1 ha 1 ha

4 ha 4 ha 4 ha 4 ha --

8 ha 12 ha 8 ha 12 ha

5ha 1ha 1ha 20ha

4 ha 2ha 5ha 5ha -

4ha 7ha 6ha 6ha

20ha 20ha 63ha

11ha 6 ha 57ha

20ha

261

Appendix N-V:Technical programme of workdone for the year rabi 2001-2002

S.No. 1 2 3 4 Title Group A No. of demonstrations R-1 R-II R-III Total R-I Demonstrations conducted R-II R-III Total

Identification of suitable sorghum varieties Performance of direct seeding Vs transplanting Studies on cotton based cropping systems
Varietal performance in rice Total

0 4

2 2

2 -

4 6

1 1 1

1 --

--

2 1 1
10 14

-in 1 1 0 1 -20 ha

2 5 2 2 1 1ha 10ha 2ha --

4 6 2 2 1
Group C

-10

10

3 30 1 2 5ha 30ha 5ha --

2 30 -35ha --

Group B

6
7 8 9 10

Demonstration of varities chickpea IPM technology in chick pea

Improved Agricultural implements

6 12 5 4 3
30

1 3 4 -1ha 20 ha

6 63 4 1 2
76

Introduction of vegetable crop before chickpea Water management in sunflower

Total

11 12 13 14

Production technology in sunflower Production technology in chickpea Recommended spacing for sunflower Production technology in rice

1 ha 10 ha 1 ha --

2 ha 20 ha 3 ha 20 ha
45ha

5ha 66ha 5ha 20 ha

96ha

Total

262

Appendix N-VI: Technical programme of workdone for the year kharif 2002
S.No Title Group - A No. of demonstrations R-1 R-II R-III Total

R-I
4 6 5 2
17 12 2 3 1

Demonstrations conducted R-II R-III Total 2 14 2 3 1 20 2 4 31 10 1 48

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Studies on rice based cropping systems Comparative performance of direct transplanting Water management in cotton Drip irrigation in cotton
Group B

seeding

Vs

3 4 2 1 1 1 4 4 4

1 2 2 1 5 2 2 1 2

--1 -6 2 --2

Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton Demonstration of improved Agricultural implements Demonstration of optimum population in rice Introduction of green manure crop preceding to rice Demonstration of Bio-fertilizers in chickpea

12 5 6 5 8
36

2 4 26 10 1

5 -

Group C
10 11 12 13 14 Popularisationof Aravinda variety Popularisation of production technology in cotton 1(4 ha) 1 (4 ha) Popularisation of recommended production technology in 1(10 rice ha) Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice 1(5 ha) Popularisation of NDLR-8 rice variety 1 (4 ha) Total 1(4ha) 1 (4ha) 1(1ha) 1(1ha) 1 (4ha) 1(4ha) 1(4ha) ---3 (12 ha) 3 (12 ha) 2 (11 ha) 2 (6 ha) 2 (8ha) 12 ha) (49 5 (8ha) 4 (5ha) 30 (40ha) 32 (50ha) 10 (5ha) 1 (4 ha) 10(10ha) 6 (8ha) 6(12ha) 45ha) 40 (10ha) 38(58ha) 10(5ha) 98 ha) (90

263

Appendix N-VII:Technical programme of work done for the year - rabi (2002-2003)
S.No Group A 1 2 Title No. of Demonstrations R-1 R-II R-III Total R-I Demonstrations conducted R-III R-II
Total

3 4
6 7 8 9

Identification of suitable sorghum varieties Studies on plant population in chickpea Studies on rice based cropping systems
Total

0 2 3 1 1 4 0 --

2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1
Group C

2 3 -4 2 1 2 1 1 ha 10 ha 1 ha

4 7 4
15

-2
23

2 2
2

1
-

2 5
25 32

Group B

Demonstration of varities in chickpea

Improved Agricultural implements

Water management in sunflower Demonstration of Bio-fertilizers in chickpea Introduction of rabi redgram

Total

6 5 3 8 2
24

1 4 2 7 2 5ha 3ha 5ha

3 5 2 33 3 5ha 35ha 5ha

2 40 --35ha -

6 9 4 80 5
104

10 11 12

Production technology in sunflower Production technology in chickpea Recommended spacing for sunflower

1ha 10ha 2ha

2 ha 20 ha 3 ha
25ha

10ha 73ha 10ha

93ha

Total
GROUP A No. of demonstrations proposed Reach I Reach II Reach-III Optimum spacing for American cotton 1 2 2 Fertilizer management in American cotton 1 2 2 Varietal performance in rice 2 1 Studies on rice based cropping systems 3 1 Comparative performance of direct seeding 1 1 Vs transplanting Title

Appendix N-VIII:Technical programme of workdone for the year kharif 2003

S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Total 5 5 3 4 2 No. of demonstrations conducted Reach I Reach II Reach-III 1 1 1 1 8 1 Total 1 2 1 8 1

264

6 7 8 9 10 11

Water management in cotton System of rice intensification (SRI) Drip irrigation in field beans Demonstration of IPM technology in cotton Demonstration of optimum population in rice Introduction of green manure crops preceding rice

2 2 1 1 4 4

2 1 1 Total GROUP-B 5 2 1 Total

1 6 -

5 3 2 29 12 6 5 23

2 2 5 4 16 12

1 Total

2 3 5 23 5 16 12 33

13 14 15 16 17 18

Popularisationof Aravinda variety Stem application of monochrotophos in cotton Popularisation of recommended production technology in cotton Popularisation of recommended production technology in redgram Popularisation of recommended production technology in rice Popularisation of chemical weed control in rice Total

1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 25 (30 ha) 20 (15 ha)

GROUP-C 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 1 (4 ha) 15 (15 ha) 10 (10 ha) 10 (1 ha) 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 5 (10 ha) --

3 (12 ha) 2 (8 ha) 3 (12 ha) 20 (25 ha) 35 (40 ha) 30 (16 ha)

1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 10 (10 ha) 15 (10 ha) 5 (10 ha) Total

1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 1(4 ha) 3 (4 ha) -

2 (8ha) 2 (8ha) 2 (8ha) 13 (14ha) 15 (10ha) 5 (10ha) 39 (58ha)

265

Appendix N-IX:Technical programme of workdone for the year - rabi (2003-2004)

S.No 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 Total 8 9 10 Popularisation of recommended technology in sunflower Popularisation of recommended technology in chickpea Popularisation of recommended technology in sorghum Total production 4(2 ha) production production 2(4 ha) GROUP-C 4(2ha) 4(1 ha) 30(30 ha) 3 (6 ha) 30(30 ha) -Title Sprinkler irrigation in chick pea Studies on optimum plant population in chickpea Varietal demonstrations in chickpea Demonstration of pulse crop before chickpea Total Demonstration of IPM in chick pea Demonstration of improved Agricultural implements Demonstrations on application of sulphur in sunflower Demonstrations on application of Boron in sunflower GROUP A No. of demonstrations proposed Reach I Reach II Reach-III 2 1 2 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 GROUP-B 5 2 4 6 6 2 34 12 (5 ha) 60 (60 ha) 5(10 ha) 80 ha) 5(5 ha) -3(4 ha) 21(23 ha) 3 (6ha) 26(28 ha) Total 3 3 6 3 15 12 5 7 10 No. of demonstrations conducted Reach I Reach II Reach-III 5 2 4 7 3 4 2 2 1 4 2 4 4 12 3 3 5 13 2 Total 11 10 8 1 30 29 7 7 9 52 8 (9ha) 47 (53ha) 25 (36 ha) 80 (98 ha)

22(30 ha) (87 Total

266

Appendix N X: Schedule and list of villages covered under trainings programmes S.NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 DATE
13-14, December, 2000

NAME OF THE VILLAGE

Bhupanapadu

MANDAL Panyam Panyam Panyam Banaganapalli Banaganapalli Owk Nandyal Panyam Panyam Panyam Panyam Panyam Banaganapalli Banaganapalli Banaganapalli Banaganapalli Koilakuntla Koilakuntla Koilakuntla

15-16, December, 2000 18-19, December, 2000 28, May, 2003 29-May, 2003 30-May, 2003 31-May, 2003 8-9, December, 2004
10-11, December, 2004

Konidedu Madduru Tangaturu

Appalapuram

12-13, December, 2004 19-20, December, 2004 22-23, December, 2004 29-30, December, 2004 7-8, January, 2004 9-10,January, 2004 12-13,January, 2004 5-6,February, 2004 7-8,February, 2004 9-10,February, 2004

Annavaram Munagala and Polur Gorakallu and Kondajuturu Panyam Kowlur and Neravada Alamur and Gonavaram Togarchedu and Maddur Nandivargam and Thimmapuram Nandavaram Cheruvupalli and Palukur Illurukothapeta and Ghulamnabipeta Bijinavemula Peddakopperla and M.govindinne Gulladurthy

267

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

11-12,February, 2004 13-14,February, 2004 16-17,February, 2004 19-20,March, 2004 22-23,March, 2004 24-25,March, 2004 6-7 April,2004 8-9 April, 2004 10-11 April, 2004 12-13April, 2004 14-15 April, 2004 16-17 April, 2004

Vallampadu and Chinnakopperla Kapulapalli and Tamadapalle Pandlapuram and Sankalapuram Owk,mettupalle and Ramavaram Chennampalle,Sivavaram and Singanapalle Sangapatnam, Chanugondla,Sunkesula and Kasipuram
Sanjamala, Kanala , Giddaluru and Mangapalli

Koilakuntla Banaganapalli Banaganapalli Owk Owk Owk Sanjamala Sanjamala Sanjamala Sanjamala Sanjamala Uyyalawada

Alvakonda Akumalla Mukkamalla , Yeggoni and Mutchalapuri Mudigedu , Kamalapuri Vasanthapuram and Natlakotturu Alluru and Tudumaladinne

268

Appendix N XII-List of equipments purchased (SRBC)

. N o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

S Particulars

Quantity

Hydraulic conductivity apparatus Moisture cans with lids Hot air oven Phoenix electronic weighing balance a)Infiltrometer ring b) Point gauge 75 cm long c) Metal plate for hammering Water meter size 1 Water meter size 2 Electronic stop watch Dumpy level Cross staff Prismatic compass Screw auger Tube auger V- Notches Post hole auger Ranging rods 1 diameter Measuring chain(30 m) Stage level recorders Parshall flumes Guntaka cum levelling blade with palugu Nine tyned rigid cultivator(Heavy duty type) Philips two-in-one UPA 750 Amplifier AHUJA SCM 30 T column speakers ACM 66 Microphones TM ASM 580 XLR Microphone Collar Microphone G.N.Stands Emergency light (Twin lights) Direct Projector Plus Model BPL 29 Colour TV BPL VCR Model 810 Video Camera(Panasonic) Indu-60- Audio Casette Phillips Halogen bulb(For video light)

1 100 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 5 1 1 1 3 3 24 1 4 1 6 24 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 4 1

269

36 37 38 39

Video cassette Video light Photo phone Slide projector(Model AF-100) with spare lamp, carrying case, laser pointer, slide viewer, circular tray Photophone overhead Projector Model MKIIIT with tripod stand , screen dust cover, IC controlled stabilizer Mahindra tractor B275 DI Computer (Compaq Presario) UPS on Line HP Laser jet printer HP Desk jet printer Software HP Scanjet 5200 C Nikon camera Hakims Data Name plates Hakims data press board (2 sizes) Hakims data press letters Hakims tricolour display board Hakims combination board Hakims Key board Hakims notice board Hakims translides Hakims multipanel kit Hakims newspaper stands Soil hydrometer

2 1 1 1

40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 10 2 300 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 6 1 1 6 1 1 1

Soil colour chart

Keen cups Digital pH meter Digital conductivity meter Avery counter balance Tensiometers Bulk density kit Rapid moisture meter Field density test apparatus Spring balances (10 and 50 kgs) Hot plate Shaking machine Keen boxes Samsung air conditioner Stabiliser Portable Genset

270

74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115

104 office table T9 tables with two side drawers(Godrej Make) Steel Almirah size (78x36 x 18) 18 gauge S Type chair with flat arms 16 gauge
Computer chair model PCH-7021 (Godrej make)

Godrej computer table (Monitor desk) 4 x2 x office table with decolam top 6x18 x36 Racks Field boards (small) Field boards (big) Working tables Seed drums Revolving chairs Glass Door Storewel Godrej 4 drawer filing cabinet False Roofing and partitioning Fertilizer Broadcaster Tyres & tubes 8.25 x 20 size ( isuued for tractor trailer & water tanker) Water tank (4500 lit) Three furrow ridger (tractor drawn) 8 tyned seed drill

1 2 8 25 1 1 7 4 100 30 3 4 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 6 3 1 1 1 1 1

Spike tooth harrow

Green Manure trampler Tractor trailor tipping model ( without tyres) Puddler with cage wheels Multi crop thresher Ploughing unit with 3 MB plough

Off disk harrow mounted type 7 + 7 gangs

Luthron digital Lux meter Electronic calculator Salinity bridge measuring instrument Soil thermometer

Metalic tape 30m Metalic tape-50m

Soil Ph /Soil moisture meter Soil and chemical analysis kit Hand lens Rectangular notch Modi Xerox machine Copier stand Refrigerator with stabilizer &fibre stand Vaccum cleaner Dot matrix printer

271

116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157

Kjeltek Non recording rain gauge EPABX system (8 phones) EPABX system (8 phones) Micro oven Spectronic 20D Bullock cart sprayer Microphotography equipment Trinocular Microscope Hakims Display in minutes Hakims Deflex Hakims White board Hakims Chalk board Hakims Fixograph letters and figures Measuring tapes with well whistle Laboratory pH meter Voice pro unit Philips cardless microphone Philips 20 W megaphone Philips 250 W Amplifier Printer sharers Shree lipi gem Leaf area meter and image analysis system Plant canopy analyzer Theta probe with datalogger Automatic weather station Air Circulators Pumpsets 3 H.P Pump set 5 HP Water cooler Type writer Handy cam Plant sample grinder Centrifuse CD Writer ISM Publisher Multi Scripts HP Deskjet 640 printer Seed cabinets High speed stirrers Deionisation water plant Magnetic stirrer B.O.D Incubator Flame photometer

1
2

1 unit 1 unit 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 640 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

272

158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191

Laminar flow chamber Power tiller &Accessories Water analysis kit Binocular Micriscope Two wheeled trailor with ADY 7*19types Cage wheels set Skid (Float) Hitch Bracket Assembly 5 Tyne Cultivator Lugged wheels Paddy Reaper Two Furrow-Single Furrow Plough with special wheels Alternator Suitable for Tiller Wheel Changer Fan Laptap Computer Chaff Cutters Photosynthesis system Automatic Seed Counter Steady state Porometer Profile Moisture probe Tube Solarimeter Gel Electrophoresis ETC Pressure membrane and pressure plate apparatus Oil Engine and accessories Spiral machine Family drip system Manual cono weeder LCD Projector Ceiling fans Pedastal fans Exhaust fans Rotavator Model Irrigation block items Rain gun with stand 1 acre Raingun with stand-1/2 acre Sand filter Fertiliser tank Popup sprinklers 0.25HP Electric motor PVC accessories 24X20 laminations

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 73

192

273

Appendix N XI- Staff particulars (SRBC)

Staff particulars from the inception under III - A.P. Irrigation Project (SRBC) at RARS, Nandyal.

Sl. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
7

Name Dr. G. Bhoji Reddy Dr.V.Sridhar Dr. B. Sahadeva Reddy Dr. B. Sahadeva Reddy Sri T. Siva Sankar Rao Sri R. V.Venkateswara Rao Sri K. Venugopal Sri P.V. Ramana Rao Sri K.V.S. Rami Reddy Dr. P. Sujathamma Sri S. Madhusudhan Reddy K.Ashok kumar A.Ravishankar M. Venu Madhav Dr.T.S. Prasad Reddy P. Madhavi Latha G. Narayana Swamy Sri K. Sankar Sri M. Lachiram Naik Sri B. Mallaiah Sri D. Vijaya Anand Sri B. Sreenivasulu Sri K. Prakash Babu Sri M. Phani Chandra Sri P.Ramaiah

Designation Sr. Scientist (Agro.) Sr. Scientist (Agro.)i/c Sr. Scientist (Agro.)i/c Scientist (Agro.) Agril. Officer Asst. Director (Hydro.) Asst. Director(Hydro.)
Asst. Director (Hydro.)

From 14-10-1998 11-12-1999 17-6-2001 11-11-1998 26-02-1999 09-12-1998 18-08-2000 11-09-2002 15-12-1998 07-03-2001 08-10-2001 23-6-2003 25-6-2003 15-7-2003 24-1-2004 31-1-2004 27-1-2004 04-12-1998 17-06-2000 02-05-2000 31-12-1998 27-01-1999 08-03-2001 29-11-2002 20-4-2004

To 29-02-2000 16-6-2001 Till to date Till to date 07-02-2000 08-12-1999 09-04-2002 20-6-2003 07-04-2001 30-6-2003 15-02-2003 3-1-2004 16-12-2003 20-12-2003 Till to date Till to date 31-3-2004 16-06-2000 Till to date Till to date Till to date 31-01-2001 06-09-2002 Till to date Till to date

8
9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11
12

Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate

Research Associate

13 14 15 16
17 18 19

Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate A.E.O A.E.O J.A.C.T Data Recorder Data Recorder Data Recorder Data Recorder Senior Research fellow

274

Annexure-VI: Training programmes conducted during 2003-2004 under SRSP Warangal: S.No.

Na me of the mandal
Hanamkonda Hasanparthy Wardhannapet Parvathagiri Sangem Geesugonda Dharmasagar Ghanpur Duggondi Narsampet Shayampet Athmakur Parkal Mogullapally Regonda Nallabelly

No. of Training programmes 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2. 1 2 1 1 1

Date

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

14 th -&5 th Nov.03 17 th &18 th Nov.03 19 th &20 th N0v.03 21 st &22 nd Nov.03 24 th &25 th Nov.03 27 th &28 th Nov.03 29 th Nov. & 1 st Dec.03 2 nd &3 rd Dec.03 4 th &5 th Dec.03 6 th&8 th Dec 9 th & 10 th Dec 2 nd & 3 rd Jan.04 6 th& 7 th Jan.04 8 th &9 th Jan 04. 20 th & 21 st Jan.04 22 nd & 23 rd Jan.04. 13 th & 14 th Feb.04 19 th & 20 th Feb.04 16 th & 17 th Feb.04 23 rd & 24 th Feb.04 25 th & 26 th Feb.04 3 rd & 4 th Mar.04 24 th &25 th Mar.04 26 th & 27 th Mar.04

275

Karimnagar

S No
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Mandal
Karimnagar Sultanabad Peddapalli Sankarapatnam Manakondur Julapalli Srirampur Jammikunta Huzurabad Veenavanka Odela Jagtial Choppadandi Peddapalli Gollapally Dharmaram Metpalli Ramagundam Raikal Kamalapur Velgatoor Elkathurthy Mallail Kamanpur

Date
9 & 10-12-2003 11 & 12-12-2003 17 & 18-12-2003 19 & 20-12-2003 21 & 22-12-2003 23 & 24-12-2003 30 & 31-12-2003 2 & 3-1-2004 5 & 6-1-2004 12 & 13-1-2004 19 & 20-1-2004 21 & 22-1-2004 23 & 24-1-2004 30 & 31-1-2004 10 & 11-2-2004 12 & 13-2-2004 25 & 26-2-2004 4& 5-3-2004 8& 9-3-2004 10 & 11-3-2004 12 & 13-3-2004 15 & 16-3-2004 17 & 18-3-2004 19 & 20-3-2004

276

Annexure VII: STAFF POSITION IN A.P. III IRRIGATION PROJECT AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION, KARIMNAGAR !998-99 S.No. Name of the post 1. Asst. Agronomist 2. Asst.Soil Physist/Agril.Engineer 3. Research Associates 4. Agril. Extension Officer 5. Data Recorders 1999-00 S.No. Name of the post 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Scientist (Agronomy) Scientist (Soil Science) Research Associates Agril. Extension Officer Data Recorders No. of posts 1 1 2 1 2 Name of the incumbent Sri P. Venkata Rao Sri G. Srinivasa Rao Vacant Sri G. Srinivas Sri P. Ramakrishna Kum. A. Manjula Date Joining 27-1-2000 24-2-2000 01-5-1999 24-6-1999 28-6-1999 of No. of posts 1 1 2 1 2 Name of the incumbent Dr. A. Srinivas Vacant Vacant Sri G. Srinivas Sri P. Ramakrishna Kum. A. Manjula

2000-01 S.No. Name of the post 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Scientist (Agronomy) Scientist (Soil Science) Research Associates Agril. Extension Officer Typist Data Recorders No. of posts 1 1 2 1 1 2 Name of the incumbent Sri P. Venkata Rao Sri G. Srinivasa Rao Smt. T. Naga Laxmi Sri N. Mogilaiah Sri G. Srinivas Kum. G. Madhavi Sri P. Ramakrishna Kum. A. Manjula Date Joining 27-1-2000 24-2-2000 27-6-2000 28-6-2000 01-5-1999 26-6-2000 24-6-1999 28-6-1999 of

277

2001-02 Name of the project S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 2002-03 Name of the project S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 2003-04 Name of the project S. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Scientist(Soil Science) Scientist(Agronomy) Research Associates Agril. Extension Officer Data recorders No. of posts 1 1 2 1 2 Name of the incumbent Sri G. Srinivas Rao Smt J. Padmaja Sri. R.Preetham Goud Sri G. Srinivas Sri Ramesh Date of Joining 24-2-2000 7-11-2001 10-10-2003 1-5-1999 Scientist(Soil Science) Scientist(Agronomy) Research Associates Agril. Extension Officer Data recorders No. of posts 1 1 2 1 2 Name of the incumbent Sri G. Srinivas Rao Smt J. Padmaja Sri. N. Mogilaiah Sri G. Srinivas Kum. A. Manjula Date of Joining 24-2-2000 7-11-2001 28-6-2000 1-5-1999 28-6-1999 Scientist(Soil Science) Scientist(Agronomy) Research Associates Agril. Extension Officer Data recorders No. of posts 1 1 2 1 2 Name of the incumbent Sri G. Srinivas Rao Smt J. Padmaja Sri. N. Mogilaiah Kum. G. Sree Vani Sri G. Srinivas Sri P. Ramakrishna Kum. A. Manjula Date of Joining 24-2-2000 7-11-2001 28-6-2000 4-1-2002 1-5-1999 24-6-1999 28-6-1999

278

Annexure VIII: Staff Particulars of ARS, Warangal

S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Name Designation Principal Scientist(Agronomy) Senior Scientist(Agronomy) Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Research Associate Data Recorder Data Recorder Data Recorder JACT A.E.O Employment period From To Aug.1998 Aug.1998 Aug.2000 Aug.2000 Feb.2001 Dec.2001 Feb.2002 Nov.2003 Nov.2003 Feb.2004 Feb,2000 March,2003 March, 2003 July,1998 July,1998 Till today Till today July 2001 Sep.2001 Dec.2001 Oct.2003 Oct.2003 Dec.2003 Till today Till today Sep.2002 Sep.2002 Sep.2003 Till today Till today

Dr. K. Surender Reddy

Dr. A . Krishna Mrs . Clarence Mrs. A .Sailaja Mr. A. Ramanjaneyulu Mr. V. Krian Kumar Mr. N. Ravinder Mr. Balaji Naik Ms. P. Ushasri Mrs. G. Sunitha Miss. D. Veena Vani Miss. A. Indira Mr. A. Hari Krishna Mr. Srinivas Mr. K. Sudhakar

279

Annexure Ix:List Of Equipment Purchased Under A.P. Iii Irrigation Project At

Agricultural Research Station, Karimnagar Name of the item No. Price per of unit (Rs.) units Agronomy Equipment 1. Spring balance a) 10 kg capacity 4 671-00 b) 50 kg capacity 2 732-00 2. Avery counter balance 5 kg capacity 1 13100-00 3. Tulaman counter balance 15 kg. 2 11750-00 4. Multigrain moisture meter 2 20000-00 5. AFCOSET Electronic Precision Balance 1 20762-00 Model : EK-200, capacity 200 gm 6. V-Notch 3 1365-00 7. Parshall flumes 75 mm in size 10 8025-00 8. Water meter a) Size 1.5 3 3620-00 b) Size 2.0 3 3760-00 9. Water current meter 1 18000-00 10. Rectangular Notch 3 1647-00 11. Seed cabinet 2 7198-00 12. Alluminium self support ladder with flat 1 2280-00 steps 6 feet 13. Alluminium single ladder with flat steps1 3200-00 20 feet Total Meteorological Equipment 1. Infrared thermometer 1 16000-00 2. FRP Non-Recording rain guage 3 4270-00 3. SDN-5260 1 725-00 4. Pyranometer sensor 1 233-00 5. Anemometer 1 419-00 6. Windvane 1 450-00 7. Rain guage 1 390-00 8. Solar Hog-Solar Power Source 1 232-00 9. Automatic weather station 1 217730-00 Total Soil Science Equipment 1. Hot air oven 1 44100-00 2. Infrared moisture meter 1 10000-00 3. Microwave oven 1 11625-00 4. Hand lens (handle) a) 75 mm 2 130-00 b) 100mm 2 195-00 c) 65 x 90 mm 1 315-00 d) Illuminated magnifier 1 300-00 S.No. Total Amount (Rs.) 2684-00 1464-00 13100-00 23500-00 40000-00 20762-00 4095-00 80250-00 10860-00 11280-00 18000-00 4941-00 14396-00 2280-00 3200-00 271332-00 16000-00 12810-00 725-00 233-00 419-00 450-00 390-00 232-00 217730-00 248989-00 44100-00 10000-00 11625-00 260-00 390-00 315-00 300-00

280

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41.

Tensiometers Kjeldhal apparatus a) Kjeldhal distillation unit b) Kjeldhal digestion unit Soil and chemical analysis kit Salinity bridge measuring instrument Lux meters Soil thermometer (Digital) Munsel soil colour chart (imported) Incubator Digital photo calorie meter Double ring infiltrometer Bulk density kit Rapid moisture meter Liquid density motorized Field density test apparatus Hot plate rectangular pH meter (Digital pen type) Laboratory shaking machine sieves a) Fine Series (20 sizes) b) Coarse Sieve of 30 cm (29 sizes) Sieves shaker gyratory electric Soil analysis kit Keen boxes PF determination set Soil moisture meter Laboratory shaking machine Radiation screen Constant head hydraulic conductivity unit Soxlett apparatus Deionation water plant High speed stirrer Humidifier Trinocular microscope Theta probe with data logger Plant canopy analyzer Kjeltek digestion & distillation unit Leaf area & image analysis system including software Spectronic 20 genesis spectrophotometer Resistance gypsum blocks LPG gas connection with all accessories

5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20 29 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 1 1

2230-00 9974-00 19175-00 4575-00 8625-00 8024-00 7080-00 26718-00 37843-00 11723-00 17568-00 12658-00 6100-00 5971-00 1739-00 9959-00 4956-00 603-00 457-00 17523-00 27300-00 1500-00 8250-00 22184-00 25415-00 3900-00 9394-00 19360-00 6944-00 10360-00 38480-00 263130-00 155260-00 203100-00 274050-00 106080-00 180-00 4349-00 Total 2250-00

11150-00 9974-00 19175-00 4575-00 8625-00 8024-00 7080-00 26718-00 37843-00 11723-00 17568-00 12658-00 6100-00 5971-00 1739-00 9959-00 4956-00 12078-00 13267-00 17523-00 27300-00 9000-00 8250-00 22184-00 25415-00 3900-00 9394-00 19360-00 6944-00 10360-00 38480-00 263130-00 155260-00 203100-00 274050-00 106080-00 1080-00 4349-00 1501332-00 2250-00

Engineering & Farm Machinery Equipment 1. Dumpy levelling instrument

281

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25.

Levelling staff Land measuring chain (30 mtrs.) Land measuring chain (20 mtrs.) Arrows Ranging rods 3 mtrs. Length Ranging rods 2 mtrs. Length Metalic tapes Plastic tapes Cross staff Prismatic compass Plane table set Drip irrigation unit Mahindra tractor Off set disc harrow 9 tyne spring loaded cultivator 8 feet Levelling blade Tyres and tubes 4500 ltrs. Water tank mounted on 2 wheel trailor chassis without tyres & tubes 1 HP water pumping system Measuring tape 30 m Measuring tape 50 m Sprinkler irrigation system Sand filter Rotavator

1 1 1 20 5 5 2 2 5 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 5 5 100 100 100 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

750-00 375-00 300-00 6-00 100-00 70-00 188-00 250-00 190-00 750-00 1500-00 -305169-00 19750-00 13750-00 14250-00 6750-00 49300-00 7931-00 915-00 1190-00 39619-00 8200-00 47000-00 Total 2200-00 2810-00 335-00 495-00 5-00 4-50 4-25 1650-00 3850-00 5405-00 8260-00 5635-00 3760-00 11150-00

750-00 375-00 300-00 120-00 500-00 350-00 376-00 500-00 950-00 750-00 1500-00 99235-00 305169-00 19750-00 13750-00 14250-00 13500-00 49300-00 7931-00 915-00 1190-00 79238-00 16400-00 47000-00 677539-00 2200-00 2810-00 1675-00 2505-00 500-00 450-00 425-00 1650-00 3850-00 5405-00 8260-00 5635-00 3760-00 11150-00

Extension Equipment & Audio Visual Aids 1. Hakims key board 3 x 2 ft 2. Notice board 3. Data name plates a) Senior b) Large 4. Data Press letters a) 1.5 size b) 1.0 size c) 0.75 size 5. News paper stand a) Single sided b) Double sided 6. Data press board 3 x 2 ft 7. Data press board 3 x 4 ft 8. Tricolour display board 9. Combination board 4 x 3 ft 10. Transilates a) 10 x 12 inch

282

11. 12.

13.

14. 15. 16. 17. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

b) 12 x 12 inch Multi panel kit G.I boards a) 2x1.6 b) 1.5x1.0 c) 1.5 x 6 d) 3.0 x 2.0 Public address system a) Voice pro unit b) Cardless microphone c) 250 W amplifier d) Hand held mic e) Card leveler mic f) Megaphone with twist mic 20 W g) 10 W megaphone h) 3 in 1 tape recorder i) Microphone table stand j) Ghoose neck mic k) 100 W speaker l) Speaker cable Micro photographic equipment Handy cam Cassettes for handy cam Digital camera Direct projector Video cassette recorder Television (29) Photo copying machine Video cassette

1 1 15 15 10 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 2 20 6 1 1 1 1 4 1

12000-00 23540-00 175-00 120-00 75-00 425-00 28350-00 21360-00 12190-00 1100-00 1925-00 6220-00 5200-00 6150-00 450-00 3215-00 8175-00 650-00 27500-00 49575-00 275-00 45150-00 83250-00 18060-00 26973-00 135881-00 150-00 Total 242760-00 207049-00 5950-00 160-00 120-00 1090-00 1124-00 6111-00 13438-00 7497-00 4990-00 6362-00 6788-00 3226-00

12000-00 23540-00 2625-00 1880-00 750-00 1275-00 56700-00 42720-00 12190-00 1100-00 1925-00 6220-00 10400-00 6150-00 450-00 3215-00 16350-00 650-00 27500-00 49575-00 1650-00 45150-00 83250-00 18060-00 26973-00 135881-00 150-00 1035089-00 242760-00 207049-00 5950-00 800-00 120-00 2180-00 22488-00 36667-00 13438-00 7497-00 4990-00 6362-00 27152-00 3226-00

Office furniture, Computer & Accessories 1. Computer system 2. Printer & UPS 3. HP Scanner 4. 1.4 MB diskettes (Boxes) 5. Computer printer ribbon 6. Electronic calculators 7. Godrej Chair CH-7 8. Godrej Table T-9 9. Godrej Table T-108 10. Godrej PCH-7001 D Chair 11. Godrej Personnal lock unit with 6 doors 12. Godrej sliding door unit 13. Godrej store well plain 14. Godrej monitor desk

283

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37.

Godrej store well model No.2 Godrej glass door store well Godrej computer work station Godrej sliding door unit Godrej 4 door filing cabinet Godrej 185 ltrs. Double door refrigerator Godrej electronic type writer Godrej 6 steel rack with 6 shelves Godrej visa files Linex EPA box BPL 5490 instrument BPL 3610 instrument PVC cable RMT Constant voltage transformer Sanyo cardless phone Sintex water tank 1000 ltrs. Extension board material Bajaj ceiling fans 49 Steel cabinets Storage racks Mobile computer chairs Contour visitor chair without arms Computer accessories a) Toner catridge for laser printer b) Printer sharer (1:3) c) Printer sharer (1:20) d) Dotmatrix printer e) ISN Publisher multi script f) HP Scanner 3200 C g) DAX 56.6 modem internal h) DAX 56./6 modem external i) HP Deskjet 640 C Ultra compact portable photosynthesis system Profile moisture probe Tube Solarimeter Tube Netradiometer Automatic Seed Counter LCD projector Laptop

1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 80 1 8 1 1000 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

7726-00 7930-00 4634-00 4885-00 7124-00 14200-00 19105-00 1850-00 21-00 15500-00 640-00 1220-00 14-00 3400-00 3950-00 5000-00 493-00 1380-00 4234-00 3451-00 4407-00 2587-00

7726-00 7930-00 4634-00 9770-00 7124-00 14200-00 19105-00 1850-00 1680-00 15500-00 5120-00 1220-00 14000-00 3400-00 3950-00 5000-00 493-00 2760-00 12702-00 6902-00 8814-00 12934-00 4990-00 1750-00 600-00 13400-00 5500-00 5450-00 1250-00 2900-00 5990-00 789373-00 4523654-00 721800-00 147100-00 53400-00 120700-00 190700-00 219350-00 137550-00 1590600-00 6114254-00

1.

4990-00 1750-00 600-00 13400-00 5500-00 5450-00 1250-00 2900-00 5990-00 Total Grand Total 1 721800 1 1 1 1 1 1 147100 53400 120700 190700 219350 137550

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Total Grand Total

284

Annexure X :LIST OF EQUIPMENT PURCHASED UNDER III IRRIGATION PROJECT. ARS, WARANGAL S. No

Name of the equipment

Computer & its accessories 1) Computer with printer (UPS etc.,) 2 ) Computer catridge, scanner & floppy 3) Printer sahrer (1:3) 4) Printer sharer (1:2) 5) Toner catridge for laser printer 6) Dot matrix printer (TVS MSP 34524) 7) ISM publisher multi scripts 8) DAX 56.6 modem internal 9) DAX 56.6 modem external Total 1) Plus direct projector 2) Video camer 3) VCR 4) Colour TV 5) Digital camera (Sony MVC FD 73 model) 6) Handycam 7) Cassettes for handycam ( 6 No) Total Photocopier Furniture & Refrigerator Soil moisture equipment 1) V. Notch 2) Parshall flumes 3) Water meter 4) Water current meter 5) Soil moisture meter 6) Resistance blocks gypsum 7) Soil analysis kit 8) Rectangular notches Total Multi grain portable moisture meter Farm equipment 1) Tractor, trailer & tractor drawn implements 2) Water tank mounted on two wheel trailer chassis with tyres & tubes 3) KG wheel set & puddler 4) Rice polisher (Portable) 5) Rotovator

Cost (Rs)
1,55,130 9,700 1,750 600 4,990 13,400 5,500 1,250 2,900 1,95,220 83,250 70,985 18,060 22,744 49,665 49,575 1,650 2,95,929 1,35,881 1, 93,184

II

III IV V

1,82,791

VI VII

4,941 1,87,732 20,700 4, 09,467 62,800 12,000 42,588 47,000

285

VII

6) Rice huller 7) Power tiller with dry land accessories 8) 3HP motor including accessories (2 No) 9) 5 HP motor including accessories (1 No) 10/) Gestetner rotary duplicator Total Lab equipment 1) Micro oven 2)Hot air oven 3) Soil thrermometer 4) Measuring tapes 5) Moisture cans 6) Lutheren infrared thermometer 7) Infra red moisture balance 8) Soil p H meter 9) Hand lens 10) Lutheren digital lux meter 11) Barigo digital thermo hygrometer 12) Barigo altimeter 13) Barigo barometer 14) FRP non recording rainguage 15) Lutheren digital animometer 16) Detek Stevenson screen 17) Detek wind vane 18) Electronic top holding balance 19) Electronic weighing balance 20) Soil penetro meter 21) Double ring infiltrometer set 22) Tensiometer 23) Hydraulic conductivity apparatus 24) Keen cup 25) Munsell soil colour chart (imported) 26) Digital p H meter (pen type) 27) Digital conductivity meter (pen type) 28) Bio gas soil hydrometer (imported) 29) Avary counter balance 30) Tulaman counter balance 31) Weighman counter balance 32) Dumpy level 33) Alluminium leveling staff 34) Hand measuring chain 35) Ranging rod 36) Prismatic compass 37) Platic measuring tape 38) Plain table

77,805 2,06,5000 25, 328 14,250 43,135 9,40, 873

1,32, 798

22,744 29,603

1,71,529

28,060 40.095

22,373

286

39) Electronic scientific calculator 40) Kjeldahl digestion unit 41) Kjeldahl distillation unit 42) Soil& chemical analysis kit 43) Salinity bridge measuring instrument 44) Digital photo calorimeter 45) Bulk density kit 46) Rapid moisture meter 47) Liquid device motorized 48) Field density apparatus 49) Different size shaking machine sieves 50) Sieve hake gyrator (electric) 51) Constant hydraulic conductivity with accessories 52) Keen boxes 53) Kjeltek with all accessories 54) Spectronic 20 55) Soxlett apparatus 56) Deionisation water plant 57) Micro photographic equipment 58) BOD incubator 59) Laminar flow 60) Seed cabinet 61) High speed stirrer 62) p H meter 63) Laboratory autoclave 650 x 450 mm 64) Plant sample grinder 65) Humidifier 66) Trinoculor microscope 67) Sand filter 68) Calculator (2 Nos) Total

42,169

1,04,012

5,400 2,03,100 1,06,080 9,394 19, 360 27,500 42,900 39,600 7,198 6,955 7,788 36,880 27,500 10,360 38,480 116,400 2,832 12,01,99

IX

Official Use
Hakims data press board Hakims data name plate Hakims data press letters (Coloured) Hakims tri colour display board Hakims combination board Hakims key board Hakims notice board with lock & key Hakims translies Hakims multi panel kit model MPK- 3 Hakims new paper stand Display system in minutes

94,363

19,203

287

Display system-deflux White board Chalk board wall type Hakims easel stand Fixo graph letters- 1.5 320 Nos. Fixo graph letters- 0.75 320 Nos. 30 KVA diesel generator Usha EPABX system Telephone , voltage transformer, internal telephone wiring , under ground jelly filled cabling, installation and commission charges Total Irrigation equipment

11,218 3,550 3,904 1,842 1,952 1,664 2,22,780 14,880 4,10,356

XI

Drip irrigation set with accessories 97,235 Sprinkler irrigation system with accessories (2 sets) 79,238 Total 1,76,473 Miscellaneous Field boards Field display boards Steel cabinets (3 No) Storage racks (2 N0.) Bajaj ceiling fans 49 ( 5 No) 23,750 5,400 12,702 6,902 6,900 55,654 2,73,280 1, 55,260 2,74,150 2,17, 730 9,20,420 1,47,152 2,54,932 53,400 1,20,700 8,42,100 14,18,304 2,30,727 1,27,720

XII

Total 1) Theta probe data logger ( STG 3904) 2) Plant canopy analyzer model (Delta) (STG 2218) 3) Leaf area and image analysis system(UK 3915) 4) Automatic weather station (UKP 2749) with all accessories and taxes Total 1) Profile moisture probe ( STG 1954) model PR 1/6d -02 2) Automatic/ Steady state porometer ( STG 3749) Model AP 4 3) Tube solarimeter( EURO 1335) Model u metos 4) Tube net radio meter (STG 1775) NR 2- 07 5) Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer( DM 40,100) Model AAS 6 vario flame Total 1) Germination cabinet/plant growth chamber (DM 10987) Model KBW 240 2) Gel electrophorosis Vertical /Horizontal( EURO 3193) Model Vertical E- 90693; power

XIII

XIV

288

I-XIV

pack E 835 ;Horizontal E 90390 3) Automatic seed counter ( DM 9079) Model Contador 4) Freezer for fresh plant samples ( GBP 5000) Model MDF- U 38086 S Total Grand Total

!,90,659 3, 50,000 8,99,106 70,50, 911.

289

Reac h

Total qty. of water applied (mm) TP FP 1221 1269 1216

I II III

Wate Yield (t/ha) Cost of Gross returns r cultivation (Rs/ha) saved (Rs/ha) over TP FP TP FP TP FP FP 1446 225 5.78 5.24 15002 15962 32368 29344 1483 214 6.31 5.81 15145 14945 35336 32536 1475 259 7.03 6.45 15685 16425 39368 36120 Table-66: Demonstration of improved puddler in Paddy (Karimnagar) TP: FP: Puddling with ANGRAU Puddler Farmer practice of wooden Puddler

Net (Rs/ha) TP 17366 20191 23683

returns Addl. income (Rs/ha) FP 13382 17591 19695 3984 2600 3988

290