EFFECT OF INTEGRATED CROP MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THROUGH FRONT LINE DEMONSTRATIONS ON RICE YIELD AND ECONOMICS IN COASTAL KARNATAKA

HARISH SHENOY¹*
¹ICAR-Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, 575002, Karnataka Veterinary Animal and Fisheries Sciences University, Bidar, 575419 Karnataka, India
* Corresponding Author : harish.shenoy1@gmail.com

Received : 02-10-2019     Accepted : 26-10-2019     Published : 30-10-2019
Volume : 11     Issue : 10       Pages : 1715 - 1717
Int J Microbiol Res 11.10 (2019):1715-1717

Keywords : FLD, Crop management, Rice, Technology gap, Technology Index
Academic Editor : Dr Ranjana Hawaldar, Marcos Antonio Pesquero, Dr Dibyajyoti Talukda, V. Krishnasree, Ravindra Raosaheb Rakh, Ibeh Nnanna Isaiah, Dr Sharada T. Rajan, Maria L. Castrillo, Divyanshu Gupta, Srinivas Sathapathy, Dr H.V. Pandya
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Author is thankful to ICAR-Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore, 575002, Karnataka Veterinary Animal and Fisheries Sciences University, Bidar, 575419 Karnataka, India and ICAR- Agricultural Technology Application Research Institute, Zone-XI, Bengaluru, 560024, Karnataka. India
Author Contribution : Sole Author

Wilt Front Line Demonstrations (FLD) in rice were conducted to demonstrate the production potential and economic benefit of adoption of scientific crop management practices over existing traditional practice during kharif season of 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 in the field of 30 farmers in Dakshina Kannada district of Coastal Karnataka. Each FLD was laid out in an area of 0.4 ha with farmers practice as check. The technology comprised of seed treatment, INM and IPDM. The results indicated that adoption of integrated crop management practices in rice recorded a yield of 42.8 q per ha compared farmers practice (35.6q per ha) an increase by 20 percent over a period of three years. The average technology gap and technology index was 7.2 and 14.3 respectively in demonstration plots. There were additional net returns gain by Rs.11851/- in demonstration plots compared to check.

1. Anonymous (2017) Agricultural Statistics at a Glance GOI, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture and farmer welfare DACFW GOI, 36.
2. Anonymous (2015) Vision 2050 ICAR Indian Institute of Rice Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, 13-15.
3. Kamlesh Meena, Anuradha Ranjan Kumari, R P Sharma and R Srivatsava (2018) International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 7(1), 328-331.
4. Anonymous (2018) FAO- Rice Market Monitor, 21, 1-2.
5. Depeng Wang, Jianling Huang, Lixiao Nie, Fei Wang, Xiaoxia Ling, KehuiCui, Yong Li and Shaobing Peng (2018) Nature /scientific reports, 7 article number 38982.
6. Beigh M.A., Rufaida Mir S.Z.A., Matoo J.M. and Sibat F.K (2015) Academic Journals-Scientific Research and Essays, 10(14), 449-455.
7. Sharma R.N. and Sharma K.C. (2004) Maharashtra Journal of Extension Education, 7, 72-75.
8. Bhargava M.K., Singh Pushpendra Kumar Puneet and Singh Surendra (2019) International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 11(1), 7715-7716.
9. Mandavkar P.M., Sawant P.A. and Mahadik (2012) Rajasthan Journal of Extension Education, 20, 4-6.
10. Suthar J.V., Chawda S.K., Patel A.T., Pastagia J.J. and Patel B.B. (2016) Journal of Bio innovation, 5(4), 588-593.
11. Sunitha khuswah, Kumara Sharda and Raghubar Sahu (2015) International Journal of Extension Education, 11, 59-61.
12. Samant T.K. (2014) Agriculture Update, 9(3), 311-315.
13. Karabhantanal S., Vastrad S.M., Patil H.B. and Wali S.Y. (2015) Pest management in Horticultural Systems, 21(1), 42-45.
14. Morwal B.R., Pradeep Pagaria, Kantwa S.L. and Shayam Das (2018) Journal of Krishi Vigyan, 6(2), 176-17.
15. Mitra B. and Samajdar T. (2010) Agricultural Extension Review, 22, 16-17.
16. Bhowate R.T. and Olambe A.P. (2017) Journal of Krishi Vigyan, 6(1), 138-140.
17. Raj D., Yadav V. and Rathod J.H. (2014) Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5(1), 94-96.