RESPONSE OF RELATIVE LEAF WATER CONTENT, CHLOROPHYLL STABILITY INDEX, PROLINE, AND YIELD OF COTTON TO THE APPLICATION OF BIOCHAR, MULCH AND PPFM SPRAY UNDER DIFFERING MOISTURE REGIMES

V. KANNAN¹*, G. SRINIVASAN², R. BABU³, S. THIYAGESWARI⁴, T. SIVAKUMAR^5
1Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625104
²Department of Agronomy, Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College and Research Institute, Muthukkulam, Navalurkottapattu, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu 620009
³Department of Farm Management, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625104
⁴Department of Soils & Environment, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu 625104
⁵Department of Crop Physiology, TamilNadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, 641003
* Corresponding Author : vkannanagri@gmail.com

Received : 04-05-2017     Accepted : 25-09-2017     Published : 30-09-2017
Volume : 9     Issue : 45       Pages : 4753 - 4756
Int J Agr Sci 9.45 (2017):4753-4756

Keywords : Moisture Stress, Chlorophyll stability index, Biochar, Cotton
Academic Editor : Jagroop Kaur, Dr Smritikana Sarkar, Dr Sunil C. M., Shubham Lamba
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : It is a great pleasure to express my heart felt gratitude and respect to the chairman of the advisory committee Dr. G. Srinivasan, Professor and Head, Dept. of Agronomy, ADAC & RI, Trichy for his help and transcendent suggestions during investigation and for critical perusal of manuscript. We would like to thank the UGC, New Delhi, for awarding a Rajiv Gandhi National Fellowship to the Corresponding author
Author Contribution : Kannan V, Ph.D. Scholar in the Dept. of Agronomy, AC & RI, Madurai. He has doing research work in stress management of cotton

A Field experiment was conducted at Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai during Winter Irrigated Cotton Season of 2016-17 with the test variety SVPR − 4. To study the effect of moisture regimes on physiological parameters of Relative Leaf Water Content (RLWC), Chlorophyll Stability Index (CSI), Proline and Seed cotton yield. Experiment was laid out in split plot design with three replications. Moisture regimes were assigned to the main plots viz., Irrigation at IW/CPE ratio to 0.4 (I1) and 0.8 (I2). The subplot comprises with moisture management practices with Biochar application viz., B1-Cotton stalk biochar @ 5 t ha -1, B2-Cotton stalk biochar @ 5 t ha-1 + Crop residue mulch @ 5 t ha-1, B3-Cotton stalk biochar @ 5 t ha-1 + Crop residue mulch @ 5 t ha-1+ PPFM @ 500 ml ha-1 on 75 and 90 DAS, B4- Prosopis biochar @ 5 t ha-1, B5- Prosopis biochar @ 5 t ha-1 + Crop residue mulch @ 5 t ha-1, B6 - Prosopis biochar @ 5 t ha-1+ Crop residue mulch @ 5 t ha-1 + PPFM @ 500 ml ha-1 on 75 and 90 DAS and B7 − Control. The results of this study showed that RLWC, CSI of Cotton were recorded higher and lower values of Proline were recorded under irrigation at IW/CPE to 0.8 (I2) and Prosopis biochar @ 5 t ha-1+ Crop residue mulch @ 5 t ha-1 + PPFM @ 500 ml ha-1 on 75 and 90 DAS (B6) . The same treatments registered for higher values of crop yield.

1. CAB. (2017) Cotton Advisory Board, http://www.cotcrop.gov.in retrieved on 24.04.2017
2. Steinbeiss S., Gleixner G. and Antonietti M. (2009) Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 41, 1301–1310.
3. Downie A., Crosky A. and Munroe P. (2009) Physical Properties of Biochar. In: Lehmann, J. and Joseph, S., Eds., Biochar for Environmental Management: Science and Technology, Earthscan, London, pp 13-32.
4. Hatfield J. L., Sauer T. J. and Prueger J. H. (2001) Agronomy Journal, 93, 271-280
5. Madhaiyan M., Poonguzhali S., Sundaram S.P. and T.M. Sa. (2006) Environmental and Experimental Botany, 57, 168-176.
6. Gadallah M. A. A. (1995) Journal of Arid Environment, 30, 315–325.
7. Yancey P. H., Clark M. E., Hand S. C., Bowlus R. D. and G. N. Somero (1982) Science, 217,1214–1222.
8. El-Sharkawi H. M. and Salama F. M. (1997) Plant and Soil, 46, 423–437.
9. Alizadeh A. (2002) Soil, Water and Plants Relationship. 3rd Edn., Emam Reza University Press, Mashhad, Iran, ISBN: 964-6582-21-4.
10. Sampathkumar T. (2003) Evaluation of Drip and Surface Irrigation Methods with Rice Straw Mulching in Cotton. M.Sc thesis, Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, TNAU, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India.
11. Kar M., Patro B.B., Sahoo C.R. and Hota B. (2004) Indian Journal of Plant Physiology. 4, 377–380.
12. Blackman S.A., Obendorf R.L. and Leopold A.C. (1995) PhysiologiaPlantarum, 93, 630–638.
13. Barrs H.D. and Weatherly P.E. (1962) Aust. J. Biol. Sci., 15, 413-428.
14. Murty K. S. and Majumder S. K. (1962) Current Sci., 31, 470–471.
15. Bates L. S., Waldren R. P. and I. D. Teare. (1973) Plant Soil, 39,205–207.
16. Gomez K.A. and Gomez A.A. (2010) Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research (2nd ed), John Wiley and Sons, New York, U.S.A.
17. Kumar J., Basu P. S., Srivastava E., Chaturvedi S. K., Nadarajan N.and Kumar S. (2012) Crop and Pasture Science, 63,547–554
18. Ananthi K., Vijayaraghavan H., Karuppaiya M.and Anand T. (2013) Insight Botany 3 (1), 1—5.
19. Sampathkumar T., Pandian B.J., Jayakumar P. and Manickasundaram P. (2014) Expl Agric., 50 (3), 407-425.
20. Liang B., Lehmann J., Solomon D., Kinyangi J., Grossman J., O’Neill B., Skjemstad J.O., Thies J., Luizao F. J ., Petersen J.and Neves E. G. (2006) Soil Science Society America J. , 70, 1719–1730.
21. Bhatt R. and Khera K.L. (2006) Soil and Tillage Res. 88, 107-115.
22. Din. J, Khan S. U., Ali I. and Gurmani A. R. (2011) The J. of Animal and Plant Sci., 21, 78 - 83.
23. Ashraf M. and Fooland M. R. (2007) Environmental and Experimental Botany, 59(2), 206-216.
24. Lobato A. K. S., Oliveira Neto C. F., Costa R. C. L., Santos, Filho G., Cost R. C. L., Cruz F. J. R., Neves H. K. B. and Lopes M. J. S. (2008) Australian Journal of Crop Science. 2,25–32.
25. Krishnaprabu. N, Swaminathan C., Swaminathan V., Balakrishnan K. and Baskar K.(2016) Natural and Social Sciences, 4(6), 99-108.