i
“EFFECT OF LEVELS AND SOURCES OF
POTASSIUM ON YIELD AND QUALITY OF KHARIF
GROUNDNUT (Arachis hypogaea L.) IN ENTISOL.”
By
Miss. Bornali Borah
(Reg.No.-K-015/108)
A thesis submitted to the
Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Rahuri- 413 722 Dist. Ahmednagar,
Maharashtra (India)
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (Agriculture)
in
SOIL SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY
DIVISION OF SOIL SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY,
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, KOLHAPUR - 416 004
MAHARASHTRA (INDIA)
2017
ii
“EFFECT OF LEVELS AND SOURCES OF
POTASSIUM ON YIELD AND QUALITY OF KHARIF
GROUNDNUT (Arachis hypogaea L.) IN ENTISOL.”
By
Miss. Bornali Borah
(Reg.No.-K-015/108)
A thesis submitted to the
Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Rahuri- 413 722 Dist. Ahmednagar,
Maharashtra (India)
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree
of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (Agriculture)
in
SOIL SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY
Approved by
Dr. D. S. Patil
(Chairman and Research Guide)
Dr. G. G. Khot
(Committee member)
Prof. A. B. Mohite
(Committee member)
Dr. R. B. Pawar
(Committee member)
Prof. M. R. Shewale
(Committee member)
DIVISION OF SOIL SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE,
KOLHAPUR - 416 004
MAHARASHTRA (INDIA)
2017
iii
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this thesis or part there of
has not been submitted by me or any other
person to any other University or
Institute for Award of a Degree
or Diploma
Place: A. C. Kolhapur
Date:
/
/ 2017
Miss. Bornali Borah
iv
Dr. D. S. Patil
Professor,
Soil Science and Agril. Chemistry,
College of Agriculture, Kolhapur
Maharashtra state (India)
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that, the thesis entitled “EFFECT OF
LEVELS AND SOURCES OF POTASSIUM ON YIELD AND
QUALITY OF KHARIF GROUNDNUT (Arachis hypogaea L.)
IN ENTISOL.” submitted to the Faculty of Agriculture, Mahatma
Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar, Maharashtra
State in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (Agriculture) in SOIL SCIENCE AND
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY,
piece of
bona-fide
embodies the results of a
research carried out by Miss. BORNALI
BORAH, under my guidance and supervision and that no part of
this thesis has been submitted for any other degree or diploma in
other form.
The assistance and help received during the course of this
investigation
and
sources
of
reference
have
been
acknowledged.
Place: A.C. Kolhapur
Dr. D. S. Patil
Date:
Research Guide
/
/2017
duly
v
Dr. G. G. Khot,
Associate Dean,
College of Agriculture,
Kolhapur- 416 004.
Maharashtra State (India)
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “EFFECT OF
LEVELS AND SOURCES OF POTASSIUM ON YIELD AND
QUALITY OF KHARIF GROUNDNUT (Arachis hypogaea L.)
IN ENTISOL.” submitted to the faculty of Agriculture, Mahatma
Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth, Rahuri, Dist. Ahmednagar, Maharashtra
State, India in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER
OF
SCIENCE
(AGRICULTURE)
in
SOIL
SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY, embodies the
results of a piece of bona-fide research work carried out by Miss
BORNALI BORAH, under the guidance and supervision of Dr. D.
S. PATIL, Professor of Soil Science and Agril. Chemistry, College of
Agriculture, Kolhapur and that no part of this thesis has been submitted
for any other degree or diploma in any other form.
Place: A. C. Kolhapur
Dr. G. G. Khot
Date: / /2017
Associate Dean
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I avail this opportunity to acknowledge my sincere, humble
indebtedness and deepest sense of gratitude to my honourable guide Dr. D.S.Patil
Professor of Soil Science and Agril. Chemistry, College of Agriculture, Kolhapur,
whose insight, unfailing interest, constructive critism, inspiring guidance, infinite
patience were as asset throughout the course of investigation, providing necessary
facilities and valuable help in conducting the studies. The words are inadequate to
thank him for the painstaking efforts, he has taken during the research work in the
preparation of manuscript and final shaping of the thesis in present form.
I sincerely thanks to Dr. G. G. Khot, Associate Dean, College of
Agriculture, Kolhapur for providing necessary facilities for successful completion of
research work.
I enroll my esteem and inestimable gratitude with great respect to the
Advisory Committee Dr.R.B.Pawar, Assistance Professor of Soil Science and Agril.
Chemistry, Prof. M. R. Shewale, Assistant professor of Statistics and Mathematics
and Prof.A. B. Mohite , Associate Professor Agronomy , College of Agriculture,
Kolhapur for their valuable suggestions during the course of present investigation.
I wish to place on record my heartful thanks to Dr. R. V. Kulkarni, Prof.
S. M. Jagtap, Dr. B. S. Kadam, and Dr. P. C. Bhosale madam for their valuable
support, help and co-operation throughout the course of study.
I owe my heartful gratitude to Shri. Mukund M. Patil, Shri. Randive shri.
Nikam, Shri. Sankpal, and Shri. Devappa for their timely help and co-operation.
Indeed, the words at my command are inadequate in capacity as well
as spirit to convey the depth of my heartful feeling which spring in the every core
of the heart for my beloved father Shri. Khagen ch. Borah, Mother Smt.
Hemoprova Borah, my brother Rupam Borah and my sisters Rituparna Borah and
Swapnali Borah for their continuous moral support and heartiest blessing which
was the source of constant inspiration throughout my educational career.
vii
I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my Departmental
colleagues Hemanth, Madhuri, Shital pawar, Sayali and Shital jadhwar for their help
during course of time. I also thank to my juniors Kalyan, Sumit, Sai Dharma, ketki,
Rohini, Utkarsha and all other junior friends for their kind co-operation and
support.
I would like to thank my seniors Swati, Ushashri, Manpreet, Mukesh, kiran
for their valuable help and support for the investigation.
I am deeply greatful to all the authors, past and present whose literature has
been cited.
Place : Kolhapur
Date :
/ /2017
(Miss. Bornali Borah)
viii
CONTENTS
CHAPTERS
PAGE
NO.
CANDIDATE’S DECLARATION
iii
CERTIFICATES:
i) Research Guide
iv
ii) Associate Dean
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
vi
LIST OF TABLES
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
xiv
LIST OF PLATES
xv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
xvi
ABSTRACT
xix
1. INTRODUCTION
1-5
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on growth
6-20
6
and growth parameters of kharif groundnut.
2.2
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and
10
yield attributes of kharif groundnut.
2.3
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on nutrients
17
and potassium uptake by groundnut.
3. MATERIAL AND METHODS
3.1
21-39
Experimental materials
21
3.1.1 Experimental site
21
3.1.2 Soil of the experimental field
21
3.1.3 Climate conditions and location
23
3.1.4 Cropping history of the experimental field
25
ix
3.2
Experimental details
25
3.2.1 Experimental layout
25
3.2.2 Treatment details
27
3.3
Preparatory tillage
29
3.4
Fertilizer application
29
3.5
Seeds and sowing
29
3.5.1 Seeds and selection of variety
29
3.5.2 Sowing:
29
3.5.3 Gap filling
30
3.6
Irrigations
30
3.7
Harvesting
30
3.8
Biometric observations
32
3.8.1 Post harvest studies
33
Methods
33
3.9.1 Soil Analysis
34
3.9.2 Plant analysis
36
3.9.3 Uptake of nutrients by the crop
39
3.10
Quality analysis of seed
39
3.11
Statistical analysis
39
3.9
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and
40-68
40
yield attributes of groundnut.
4.1.1 Dry Pod yield
40
4.1.2 Kernel yield
43
4.1.3 Haulm yield
44
4.1.4 Shelling percentage
45
4.1.5 filled and unfilled pods plant-1
46
x
4.2
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil content
49
and oil yield of groundnut.
4.3
4.2.1 Oil content
49
4.2.2 Oil yield
50
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on nutrients
52
and potassium uptake by groundnut.
4.4
4.3.1 Total Nitrogen uptake
53
4.3.2 Total Phosphorus uptake
54
4.3.3 Total potassium uptake
55
4.3.4 Total Calcium uptake
58
4.3.5 Total Sulphur uptake
59
4.3.6 Total Boron uptake
60
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on chemical
61
properties and nutrient status of soil.
5.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
6.
LITERATURE CITED
7.
VITA
69-71
72-83
84
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
PAGE
NO.
1.
TITLE
NO.
Initial soil properties of the experimental field.
22
2.
Weather data recorded during experimental period.
24
3.
Cropping history of experimental field.
25
4.
Treatment details and their symbols used.
27
5.
Schedule of field operations carried out in the
31
experimental plot during kharif 2016.
6.
Details of plant observations.
32
7.
Methods of Soil Analysis.
34
8.
Methods used for plant analysis.
37
9.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on dry pod,
42
kernel, haulm yield and shelling percent of
groundnut.
10.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on dry pod
43
yield of groundnut.
11.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on kernel
44
yield of groundnut.
12.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on haulm
45
yield of groundnut.
13.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on shelling
Percentage of groundnut.
46
xii
14.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on filled and
47
unfilled pods plant-1 of groundnut.
15.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on number of
48
filled pod plant-1 of groundnut.
16.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on number
48
of unfilled pod plant-1 of groundnut.
17.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil content
49
and yield of groundnut.
18.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil
50
content of groundnut.
19.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil yield
51
of groundnut.
20.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total
52
uptake of primary nutrients by groundnut.
21.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total
53
uptake of nitrogen by groundnut at harvest.
22.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total uptake
55
of phosphorus by groundnut at harvest.
23.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total uptake
56
of potassium by groundnut at harvest.
24.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total
57
uptake of secondary nutrients by groundnut.
25.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total
58
uptake of calcium by groundnut at harvest.
26.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total
59
uptake of sulphur by groundnut at harvest.
27.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on total uptake
of boron by groundnut at harvest.
60
xiii
28.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on chemical
62
properties and nutrient status of soil at harvest of
groundnut.
29.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil pH at
63
harvest of groundnut.
30.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil EC at
63
harvest of groundnut.
31.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil organic
64
carbon at harvest of groundnut.
32.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on per cent
64
CaCO3 equivalent at harvest of groundnut.
33.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
65
available nitrogen at harvest of groundnut.
34.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
65
available phosphorus at harvest of groundnut.
35.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
66
available potassium at harvest of groundnut.
36.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
66
available sulphur at harvest of groundnut.
37.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
67
exchangeable calcium at harvest of groundnut.
38.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
67
exchangeable magnesium at harvest of groundnut.
39.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
exchangeable sodium at harvest of groundnut.
68
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIG.NO.
TITLE
Between
page
1.
Plan of layout of the experiment.
28-29
2.
(a): Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
45-46
dry pod, kernel and haulm yield of
groundnut.
(b): Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
45-46
shelling percentage of groundnut.
3.
Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
48-49
number of filled and unfilled pods plant-1 of
groundnut.
4.
(a): Effect of levels and sources of potassium
50-51
on oil content of groundnut.
(b): Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
51-52
oil yield of groundnut.
5.
(a): Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
56-57
total uptake of N, P and K by groundnut at
harvest.
(b): Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total uptake of Ca, S and B by groundnut at
harvest.
60-61
xv
LIST OF PLATES
PLATE
TITLE
NO.
1.
General view of the experimental field
Between
page
39-40
2.
Comparative performance of groundnut in
LOS3 (0 kg K2O ha-1 -bagasse ash) and L4S2 (40
kg K2O ha-1- SOP)
39-40
3.
Comparative performance of groundnut in
L4S1 (40 kg K2O ha-1 - MOP) and L4S4 (40 kg
K2O ha-1- Schoenite)
39-40
xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
%
: Per cent
0C
: Degree Celsius
@
: At the rate of
Agric.
: Agriculture
a.i.
: Active ingredient
Agron.
: Agronomy
A.O.A.C.
: Analytical and Organic Agricultural Chemistry
Anal.
: Analysis
Anon.
: Anonymous
Appl.
: Applied
Biotech.
: Biotechnology
BA
: Bagasse ash
C.D.
: critical difference
Chem.
: Chemistry
Conc.
: Concentration
cm
: Centimeter (s)
cm2
: Centimeter square
Curr.
: Current
DAS
: Days after sowing
dm2
: Decimeter square
et al.
: et alli (and others)
Ecol.
: Ecology
Environ.
: Environment
Fig.
: Figure
FYM
: Farm Yard Manure
xvii
Fertil.
: Fertilizer
g
: gram
ha
: hectare
i.e.
: id est (that is)
IISS
: Indian Institute of Soil Science
Int.
: International
J.
: Journal
K
: Potassium
K2O
: Potash (potassium oxide)
kg
: Kilogram (s)
Know.
: Knowledge
m
: meter
mm
: millimeter
max
: maximum
min
: minimum
m2
: meter square
mg
: milligram
MOP
: Muriate of potash
N
: Nitrogen
NARP
: National Agriculture Research Project
N.S.
: Non-significant
No.
: Number
P
: Phosphorus
Pl.
: Plant
P2O5
: Phosphorus penta oxide
pH
: Soil reaction
Qual.
: Quality
xviii
PSB
: Phosphorus solubilizing bacteria
q
: quintal
RDF
: Recommend dose of fertilizers
RDN
: Recommend dose of Nitrogen
Res.
: Research
Rs.
: Rupees
S
: Sulphur
Sci.
: Science
SCH
: Schoenite
SOP
: Sulphate of potash
S.S.P.
: Single super phosphate
S.E. ±
: Standard error
Sig.
: Significant
t
: tones
Tradit.
: Traditional
Trop.
: Tropical
Univ.
: University
var.
: Variety
Viz.
: Namely
wt.
: weigh
xix
ABSTRACT
“Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and quality
of kharif groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in Entisol.)”
by
Miss. Bornali Borah
A candidate for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (AGRICULTURE)
in
SOIL SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTRY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, KOLHAPUR
MAHARASHTRA (INDIA)
2017
Research Guide : Dr. D. S. Patil
Department
: Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry
An experiment entitled, “Effect of levels and sources of
potassium on yield and quality of kharif groundnut (Arachis
hypogaea L.) in Entisol” was conducted during kharif, 2016 at PG
Research Farm, College of Agriculture, Kolhapur. The objectives of
experiment were to study the effect of levels and sources of
potassium on response and yield, quality and uptake of nutrients of
groundnut. The experiment was laid out in a Factorial Randomized
Block Design with two replications comprising of five levels (0, 10,
20, 30, 40 kg K2O ha-1) and four sources (Muriate of potash,
Sulphate of potash, Bagasse ash and Schoenite) of potassium.
Abstract contd…..
Borah B.
xx
The increasing levels of potassium showed significant effect on
dry pod, kernel and haulm yield. Significantly highest dry pod and
kernel yield (31.69 and 22.13 q ha-1, respectively) were obtained
with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1, while among sources sulphate
of potash (SOP) recorded highest yields (27.70 and 19.26 q ha-1,
respectively) which was significantly superior over S3 (bagasse ash)
but at par with rest of potassium sources. Significantly highest
haulm yield was observed with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 (38.94
q ha-1) which was at par with 30 kg K2O ha-1 (37.67q ha-1) but
significantly superior over rest of K2O levels. The effect of different
sources and interaction were found non-significant in relation to
haulm yield. Shelling percentage was found non-significant for the
effect of levels and sources of potassium and their interactions.
The highest number of filled pods plant-1 (38.89) was recorded
by application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 which was at par with 30 kg K2O
ha-1 ( 36.21) but significantly superior over rest of K2O levels.
Among sources S2 (SOP) recorded highest filled pods plant-1 (37.10)
which was significantly superior over rest of K2O sources but
interactions were found non-significant. Significantly lowest unfilled
pods plant-1 was recorded with L4-40 kg K2O ha-1 (7.88) and S2-SOP
(7.90).
Oil content of groundnut was influenced by different levels of
potassium and L4 (40 kg K2O ha-1) showed highest oil content
(47.59 %) which was significantly superior over L0 - 0 kg K2O ha-1
(44.58 %). While no significant difference was recorded among K2O
sources and interactions in relation to oil content. Highest oil yield
Abstract contd…..
Borah B.
xxi
(1053.71 kg ha-1) was recorded with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1.
Among the sources SOP obtained significantly highest oil yield
(914.55 kg ha-1).
The nutrient uptake of groundnut was found to be increased
significantly with increase in levels of potassium. Significantly
highest total uptake of N, P, K, Ca, S and B
(130.07, 19.81, 82.53, 56.92 and 18.40 kg ha-1 and 44.46 g ha-1,
respectively) were recorded by application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 than
rest of potassium levels. Amongst different sources S2 -SOP
recorded with highest total N (114.32 kg ha-1), Ca (53.24 kg ha-1)
and S (15.55 kg ha-1) uptake while highest total P (17.86 kg ha-1), K
(75.49 kg ha-1) and B (42.84 g ha-1) uptake were observed with S1
(MOP).
Different levels and sources of potassium and their interactions
showed non-significant effect on pH, EC, organic carbon, per cent
calcium carbonate equivalent and available N, P, K, S and
exchangeable Ca and Mg of soil after harvest of groundnut.
The
results
of
the
present
investigation
indicated
that
application of potassium @ 40 kg ha-1 with sulphate of potash
significantly increased yield, quality and nutrient uptake of
groundnut.
Page No.1- 84
1
1. INTRODUCTION
Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is a unique and
important legume-oilseed crop of Indian agricultural system. It
contributes about 40 per cent of area and 30 per cent of the
production of oilseed crops in India. It is the 13th most
important food crop, 4th important source of vegetable oil and
3rd main source of vegetable protein in the world. As regards
the nutritional value of groundnut, its seed contains about 4050 per cent oil, 20-30 per cent protein and 10-20 per cent
carbohydrates (Okello et al., 2010). At present, India ranks 2nd
after China with 33 per cent of world’s total production, but
the productivity is far below than the countries like China,
Israel and USA because the crop is traditionally grown in dry
land belt of India characterized by poor soil fertility, erratic
rainfall and low input levels.
Groundnut alone contributes 70 per cent of the total
edible oil production. It is a money yielding crop for marginal
farmers which is largely grown during summer and kharif
season. In India, area under groundnut is 5.29 M ha, with the
annual production of 6.65 M tonnes and productivity of 1243
kg ha-1 (Anonymous, 2013). Groundnut crop can be grown
under wide range of climatic conditions best suited in
temperature
range
between
220 to
370C.
However,
in
Maharashtra area under groundnut was 2.43 lakh ha and
production was 2.53 lakh tonnes with an average productivity
of 1037 kg ha-1 in kharif season (2014-15), while in summer
season (2014-15) area was 0.82 lakh ha and production was
2
1.2 lakh tonnes with an average productivity of 1521 kg ha-1
(Anonymous 2015).
Groundnut is widely cultivated by farmers of the Submontane Zone. The recommended dose of fertilizer for
groundnut is 25:50 (N: P2O5 kg ha-1). The soils of the submontane Zone region are widely reported to be low in
potassium status. The crop can remove 100 to 200 kg K2O
ha-1 during a growing season. This is usually far in excess of
that released from slowly exchangeable sources in soils low in
available K. Under conditions of low K availability, the
quantity of non exchangeable K in the soil, its rate of release
into the soil solution and the extent to which the K release
from this fraction is able to match the K demand of the crop,
are important factors relating to K nutrition of crop plants
(Darunsontaya et al., 2012; Srinivasarao and Surekha, 2012).
Potassium
is
a
multifunctional
versatile
nutrient,
indispensable for plants. Among the three major nutrients,
potassium (K) has a special position as evident by its role in
increasing the crop yield by adding tolerance to various biotic
and abiotic stresses (Yadav, et al., 2003 and Read, et al.,
2006). The potassium application improves the kernel size of
the
groundnut,
test
weight
and
shelling
percentage.
Groundnut crop response well for potassium and play role in
maintaining balance in enzymatic, stomatal activity (water
use), transport of sugars, water and nutrient and synthesis of
protein,
photosynthesis
and
starch
thus
K
application
increases growth and yield attributes in groundnut (Krauss
and Jiyun 2000 ; Rathore et al. 2014). Enhanced nitrogen
3
metabolism
results
due
to
potassium
application.
The
application of K along with existing recommendation of N and
P increased the groundnut production.
Potassium is one of the 3 main pillers of balanced
fertilizer use, alongwith nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P). Out
of large percentage of area in India, very little or no potassium
(K) fertilizers are being applied and therefore it mainly comes
from potassium reserves of the soil.
Potassium fertilizers are one commodity for which
country depends solely on import. India largely depends upon
the import of potassium fertilizers at the expense of heavy
foreign exchange. The country imported 3380 thousand
tonnes of k during 2008-2009. Indigenously the process of
production of Sulphate of potash (K2SO4) and Schoenite
(K2SO4.MgSO4) from sea bittern has been developed by Central
Salt and Marine Chemical Research Institute, Bhavnagar,
Gujarat (Rathore et al. 2014). Relative effect of indigenously
produced Sulphate of potash and Schoenite on groundnut
was, therefore studied in present investigation.
Among common potassic fertilizers, Sulphate of potash,
is mostly favoured by the majority of growers since it’s low salt
index,
nonhygroscopic
and
chlorine
free
K-fertilizer
in
comparison with muriate of potash, which is a cheaper source
of K-fertilizer but requires specific soil physical properties and
some arrangements with irrigation to avoid toxic effect of
chlorine.
4
Another important source of potassium as plant nutrient
is bagasse ash. Bagasse ash is a type of organic waste which
is obtained from sugar industry during the process of sugar
production. Research considers bagasse ash as a good source
of micronutrients like Fe, Mn, Zn and Cu (Anguissola et al.
1999). It can also be used as soil additives in agriculture
farming having its capacity to supply the plants with small
amount of nutrients (Carlson and Adriano 1993). Bagasse ash
contain no N, but there are commonly high concentration of K
and P. Therefore, it’s use in agriculture for crop production
will be proved more beneficial.
India is the largest producer and consumer of sugar in
the world. Among the several industries sugar industry is the
most important which produces annually 7.4 Mt bagasse ash
(FAI 2011) which can be use as organic amendment which
having favourable effect on soil water holding capacity and
aeration (Singh et al; 2002). Thus, application of bagasse ash
for crop production is a useful practice for reducing the cost of
fertilizer application and safe disposal of the waste.
The potassium deficiency symptoms have been observed
in the fields of groundnut crop. There are various imported
and indigenously produced and organic sources of potassium
available, relative efficiency in crops like groundnut need to be
evaluated. Keeping this in view the present investigation is
planned to find out the response of groundnut to sources and
levels of potassium with the following objectives.
5
Objectives:
i) To study the response of groundnut to different levels
and sources of potassium application.
ii) To study it’s effect on yield, quality and uptake of
nutrients.
6
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Groundnut is a heavy feeder of potassium and an
adequate supply of this nutrient is indispensable to harvest a
good crop of groundnut. India is the world’s largest producer
of
groundnut
where
nutritional
disorders
cause
yield
reduction to the extent of 30-70 per cent depending upon soil
types. Thus it is time to look into the mineral nutrition aspects
of groundnut for achieving high yield and advocate the
suitable fertilizer recommendation for optimization of yield
(Singh, 2004). Hence, in order to have an upto date idea on
the potassium nutrition of groundnut the available literature
has been reviewed briefly under the following heads.
2.1 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on growth and
growth parameters of kharif groundnut.
2.2 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and yield
attributes of kharif groundnut.
2.3 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on nutrients and
potassium uptake by groundnut .
2.1 Effect of levels and sources of potassium application
on
growth
and
growth
parameters
of
Kharif
groundnut:
Jadav and Matkhede (1982) reported that groundnut
recorded higher dry matter accumulation, leaf area per plant
and leaf area index with the application of 60 kg and 90 kg
K2O ha-1 when compared to the control.
7
Laxminarayana and Subbaiah (1992) conducted a field
experiment during rabi season to study the effect of different
levels of potassium on sandy soil on yield attributes and
nutrient composition of groundnut and observed that number
of filled pods per plant, number of kernels per pod, test
weight, shelling percentage, pod yield, haulm yield and crude
protein content were significantly increased with the addition
of potassium to a low potassium sandy soil.
Khalak and Kumar Swamy (1993) observed that increased
number of nodules per plant, nodule dry weight and nodule
density with the application of 50:100:150 kg NPK ha-1 as
compared to control at Bangalore.
Patra et al. (1995) observed that application of 45 kg K2O
ha-1 increased pod yield by 25.9 per cent over control (No
potassium).
Further,
application
of
50
kg
K2O
ha-1
significantly increased growth attributes (plant height, leaf
area index and dry matter production), pod and oil yield as
compared to control.
Singh and Chaudhari (1996) reported that application of
potassium @ 100 kg ha-1 significantly increased the plant
height, nodule weight, pod number, pod and haulm yield of
peanut and also increased the concentration of K and S at 45
days after emergence and their uptake by peanut at harvest.
Ghatak et al. (1997) revealed that plant height and dry
matter at harvest increased with
increased rate of K
application and pod yield increased significantly with up to 30
kg K2O ha-1.
Subrahmaniyan et al. (2000) observed, linear response of
confectionery groundnut varieties viz., ICGV 86564 and B 95
8
to NPK fertilizers. Increased dose of NPK fertilizers up to 150%
of the RDF (26:51:81 kg NPK ha-1) recorded significantly
higher plant height, more number of matured pods plant-1,
higher 100 kernel weight, shelling percentage, sound matured
kernel percentage and pod yield of groundnut.
Viradiya et al. (2003) carried out 70 experiments during
the year 1997-2000 at Junagadh (Gujarat) with K2O (40,
80and 120 kg ha-1) on low, medium and high available soil
potassium. The pod yield increased to 23, 12 and 21 per cent
at 80 kg K2O ha-1 in low, medium and high productive soils,
respectively with maximum at 80 kg K2O ha-1 treatment. In
medium available K soils pod yield increased up to 17 per cent
under 80 kg K2O ha-1. Whereas, in high available K soils, pod
yield increased by 18 percent due to 80 kg K2O ha-1.
Singh (2007) reported that the main shoot height, number
of branches plant-1, kernel pod-1 increased with application of
60 kg K2O + 45 kg S + 60 kg Ca ha-1.
Bala et al. (2011) reported that application of N/P fertilizer
ratio of 0.76 (20 kg N + 26 kg P2O5 + 26 kg K2O ha-1) increased
canopy spreads significantly. The widest canopy spread in
2005 resulted from the application of N/P fertilizer ratio of
0.76 (30 kg N + 26 kg P2O5 + 26 kg K2O ha-1) to mid-June
sown crop.
Reddy et al. (2011) reported that the export oriented
groundnut produced significantly more number of filled pods
plant-1 with higher shelling percentage and test weight by the
application of 75 K2O kg ha-1 compared to the high dose of
100 K2O kg ha-1. Eventually, the pod and haulm yield were
9
also significantly more at 75 K2O kg ha-1 than the high level of
K2O.
Salve and Gunjal (2011) reported that application of 30
and 45 kg K2O ha-1 were found to be at par with each other
but significantly increased number of branches plant-1, dry
matter production plant-1, root nodules and their weight
plant-1 at flowering and pod development stages, protein and
oil content in kernel and their yields as compared to
application of 15 kg K2O ha-1.
Alireza et al. (2012) carried out experiment with 0, 30, 60
and 90 kg ha-1 of potassium. The shelling per cent didn’t affect
by potassium levels. Oil content was non-significantly differed
due to potassium, however interaction effects of potassium
and calcium showed significant influence on oil content.
Rathore et al. (2014) reported that among schoenite
levels, 60 kg ha-1 results in the maximum increase in number
of branches plant-1 at 90 DAS, number of plants m-2 and
number of pods plant-1 at harvest. The highest total number of
pegs plant-1, 1000 seed weight and maximum shelling
percentage was recorded with 60 kg K2O ha-1 through
schoenite as compared to different levels of sulphate of
potash.
Sharma (2016) carried out a pot culture experiment by
applying sugarcane industry bagasse ash to Brassica juncia @
20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% of weight of soil. The results
showed that yield and yield components of Brassica juncia
increased due to bagasse ash application. Although the dry
weight of plant parts were found to increase in the ratio of
bagasse ash as observed in T4 (80%) with a further increase in
10
the ratio of bagasse ash at T3, T2 ,T1 and control a decline in
the dry weight of plant parts were observed.
Sharma and Rajwar (2016) conducted an experiment to
study the effect of bagasse ash and mixed biochar on growth
and productivity of soybean (Glysine max L.). Results showed
that
the
growth,
pigment
and
productivity
increased
significantly in bagasse biochar treatment followed by mixed
biochar treatment.
2.2 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and
yield attributes of kharif groundnut:
Devaranjan and Kothandaraman (1982) reported from
their studies carried out on P and K nutrition on peanut, that
the application of phosphorus and potassium significantly
increased the yield of pods and shelling percentage, however
the highest pod yield was obtained by combined application of
60 kg P2O5 and 90 kg K2O ha-1.
Rana et al. (1984) studied the response of peanut to
fertilizer application, revealed that application of increased
dose of NPK (20:60:40 kg ha-1) fertilizers alone or in
combination significantly increased the pod yield of peanut.
Successive increase in their rates results in significant
increase in pod yield.
Davide et al. (1986) reported that SOP is the preferred K
source mainly because of the adverse effects of Cl, which is
supplied in appreciable quantities in MOP. S has been
reported to improve the quality of oil crops, hence SOP is
preferred.
11
Jana et al. (1990) reported that addition of K upto 49.8 kg
ha-1 had increased the number of pods plant-1, number of
seeds pod-1, 100 seed weight, pod and oil yield. However, pod
yield and haulm yield of peanut increased significantly with
application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 over lower dose and further
increase beyond this level did not increase the yield.
Devi and Reddy (1991) recorded significantly higher oil
content of 47.93 % with the application of 40 kg N, 17.5 kg
P2O5 and 20 kg K2O ha-1 over the control.
Deshmukh et al. (1992) reported that the pod and haulm
yield of groundnut increased significantly with application of
40 kg K2O ha-1 over lower dose and further increase beyond
this level did not increase the yield. Oil content in kernel was
increased with graded levels of K and the higher effect was
marked at 60 kg K2O ha-1. However, increase in protein
content and protein yield was only up to application of 40 kg
K2O ha-1.
Bale Rao et al. (1993) observed higher oil content of 48.3
per cent in groundnut kernels with the application of 37.5 kg
N, 75 kg P2O5 and 45 kg K2O ha-1 when compared to 47.2 %
with the application of 25 kg N, 50 kg P2O5 and 30 kg K2O
ha-1.
Hameed Ansari et al. (1993) reported that increasing
fertilizer dose up to 50:75:30 kg N, P2O5 and K2O ha-1
increased seed yield and oil content of groundnut and further
increment of fertilizer did not have economical effect on seed
yield and oil content. Application of potassium up to 45 kg
ha-1 significantly improved the pod yield (3392 kg ha-1) and its
12
contributing characters compared to lower dose of 15 and 30
kg ha-1.
Thimmegowda (1993) obtained significantly higher oil yield
of 1606 kg ha-1 with the N/P fertilizer ratio of 0.33 (25 kg N,
75 kg P2O5 and 37.5 kg K2O ha-1) as compared to control.
Deshmukh et al. (1994) reported that the highest soybean
yield and oil content was obtained with an application of 60 kg K2O
ha-1 at Amravati and 90 kg K2O ha-1 at Akola in Maharashtra
State.
Patra et al. (1995) reported that N/K fertilizer ratio of 0.89
(40 kg N and 45 kg K2O ha-1) gave the highest number of pods
plant-1, shelling percentage and 100 kernel weight. Oil content
increased up to the application of 60 kg N and 60 kg K2O ha-1.
Pod and oil yield increased with N and K2O up to 40 and 45 kg
ha-1, respectively. Application of 40 kg N ha-1 increased pod
yield by 18.5 % and oil yield by 29.9% while the corresponding
increasing from 45 kg K2O were 26.6 % and 38 %.
Ponnuswamy et al. (1996) reported that 150 per cent of the
recommended dose of K (79 kg ha-1) applied in two equal splits
viz., 50 per cent at basal and remaining 50 per cent at 40 DAS
gave significantly higher dry pod yield of groundnut (2383 kg
ha-1).
Balasubramanian (1997) reported that application of N,
P2O5 and
K2O at 17, 34 and 54 kg ha-1 respectively, was
sufficient for optimum production of groundnut in red sandy
loam soil.
Umar et al. (1999) reported that
increase in number of
pods plant-1 and 1000 kernel weight were obtained with
increased level of potassium upto 60 kg ha-1 and pod yield by
13
84% and oil content increased by 51.5% over control. Foliar
spray of K improves groundnut quality regarding protein and
oil contents of seeds, the improvement was better with
potassium sulphate (K2SO4) probably due to the positive effect
of sulphate in enhancing the protein and oil contents in crops.
Shinde et al. (2000) reported that the N/P fertilizer ratio of
0.50 (25 kg N, 50 kg P2O5 and 00 kg K2O ha-1) recorded higher
protein content (21.58 %), oil content (51.70 %) and oil yield
(15.82 q ha-1) as compared to control.
Vinod Kumar et al. (2000) reported that application of 30
kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 30 kg K2O ha-1 (N/P fertilizer ratio of
0.50) significantly increased in pod yield (2,849 kg ha-1) as
compared to lower levels of NPK i.e., 10 kg N, 20 kg P2O5 and
10 kg K2O ha-1 (1,611 kg ha-1) to 20 kg N, 40 kg P2O5 and 20
kg K2O ha-1 (1,878 Kg ha-1) respectively.
Tiwari et al. (2001) conducted a long term field experiment
on vertisol at Jabalpur (MP) to see the effect of potassium
nutrition on yield and quality improvement of soybean and
revealed that application of 30 kg N ha-1, 80 kg P ha-1 and 100
kg K ha-1 recorded significantly higher seed yield.
Mandal et al. (2002) reported that on an average,
groundnut required 160 to 180 kg of N, 20-25 kg of P and 80
to 100 kg of K to produce 2.0 to 2.5 t ha-1 of economic yield.
Umar and Moinuddin (2002) reported from the field
experiment
conducted at Junagadh (Saurashtra, Gujarat)
with highly calcareous vertic ustocherpt soil and erratic
rainfall conditions that the genotype GAUG-1 responded the
best to 25 kg K2O ha-1, while GAUG-10 to 50 kg K2O ha-1
through MOP. Application of 25 and 50 kg K2O ha-1 increased
14
the pod yield by 31% and 35% in GAUG-1 and GAUG-10,
respectively.
Chitdeshwari et al. (2003) reported that application of
34:64:108 kg NPK ha-1 as three splits of N and K at basal (50%
N & K), flowering (25% N & K) and peg formation stage (25% N
& K) and 100% P as basal were found to be the optimum dose
for getting the highest pod yield.
Viradiya et al. (2003) carried out 70 experiments during
the year 1997-2000 at Junagadh (Gujarat) with K2O (40,
80and 120 kg ha-1) on low, medium and high available soil
potassium. The pod yield increased to 23, 12 and 21 per cent
at 80 kg K2O ha-1 in low, medium and high productive soils,
respectively with maximum at 80 kg K2O ha-1 treatment. In
medium available K soils pod yield increased up to 17 per cent
under 80 kg K2O ha-1. Whereas, in high available K soils, pod
yield increased by 18 per cent due to 80 kg K2O ha-1.
Munda et al. (2004) observed increased branches plant-1
from 9.9 to 10.1 and number of pods plant-1 from 9.2 to 12.3
when 20:60:40 kg N, P2O5 and K2O ha-1 was applied to
groundnut as compared to control.
Hadwani and Gundalia (2005) reported that application of
potassium significantly increased pod, haulm, oil and protein
yield over control. The application of K increased the pod and
haulm yield by 52.0 and 64.2 and 37.6 and 46.7% with the
application of K50 and K100, respectively over control .The
application of highest K level (100 kg K2O ha-l) produced the
highest oil and protein yield.
Chandra et al. (2006) reported from the field experiment
conducted in 2002 at Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya
15
under New Alluvial Zone of West Bengal that application of
potassium @ l80 kg ha-1 gave highest yield but were
statistically at par with 120 kg K2O ha-1 or even 60 kg K2O
ha-1. The yield attributes like pod plant-1, kernel pod-1,100
kernel weight and shelling percentage increased significantly
with the increased level of K up to 120 kg ha-1. However, its
economic dose was 96.3 kg K2O ha-1.
Umar (2006) conducted an experiment on alleviating
adverse effects of water stress on yield of groundnut by
Potassium application. The maximum yields were recorded at
K50 which was at par with K75. The per cent variation in seed
yield, biomass and harvest index was 44.2 %, 26.3 % and 14.3
%, respectively at K50 in comparison to K0 under normal
conditions.
Singh (2007) carried out a field experiment at Mainpuri,
Kanpur (U.P.) which revealed that, summer groundnut
responded to application of 60 kg K2O ha-1 which was
registered significantly higher pod yield (29.02 q ha-1) over 45
kg K2O ha-1 (23.90 q ha-1).
Thorave and Dhonde (2007) reported that application of
25 kg N, 50 kg P2O5 and 00 kg K2O ha-1 gave the highest plant
height and total dry matter plant-1 at harvest and yield also
increased.
Elayaraja and Singaravel (2009) observed that higher pod
yield (2196 kg ha-1) and haulm yield (2930 kg ha-1) were
noticed with the application of 150 % NPK level ha-1 compared
to control, 100 % NPK level and 125 % NPK level.
Karunakaran et al. (2009) conducted an experiment to
study the effect of integrated nutrient management on the
16
growth and yield of groundnut at Karaikal, Pondicherry. The
results revealed that application of 125% RDF i.e. 17-34-54 kg
N-P-K ha-1 (75, 100 and 125%)] + 5 t ha-1 enriched compost
increased
growth
and
yield
attributes
that
led
to
its
significantly higher productivity (2.25 and 5.00 tonne ha-1 of
mean pod and haulm yield) and nutrient uptake of
groundnut besides enriching soil available nutrients after
harvest of groundnut over control(no organics or fertilizer).
Veeramani and Subrahmaniyan (2011) reviewed that, the
pod and haulm yields of groundnut increased significantly
with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 over lower dose and further,
increase beyond this level did not increase the yield. Oil
content in kernel increased with graded levels of K and effect
was marked to the higher at 60 kg K2O ha-1. However,
increase in protein content and protein yield was only upto
application of 40 kg K2O ha-1.
Srinivasarao
(2013)
reported
that
groundnut
yield
increased from 0.54 mt ha-1 (control) to 0.75mt ha-1 with 60
kg K ha-1 through muriate of potash; a 33 per cent increase
over the control. Similarly, straw yield was significantly
increased by 11 per cent at 60 kg K ha-1.
Rathore et al. (2014) reported that maximum dry pod yield,
harvest index and oil yield was recorded in 60 kg ha-1 potash
through schoenite during both experimental year (2006-08).
However, the effect of schoenite and sulphate of potash @ 60
kg potash ha-1 was found statistically at par on dry pod yield.
Application of 60 kg potash through schoenite increased dry
pod yield by 22.5 to 68.2 % over control (10 kg K2O ha-1).
There was a sharp increase in dry pod yield from 40 kg potash
17
ha-1 through schoenite + sulphate of potash and 40 kg potash
ha-1 through sulphate of potash to 60 kg K2O ha-1 through
only schoenite. But effect of various treatments on shelling
percentage was not-significant.
Kulkarni and Upperi (2015) conducted a field experiment
during 2012-13 in red soil to study the response of groundnut
to different levels of potassium. Results indicated that
RDF+12.5 kg K2O+1% K foliar spray at 45 DAS recorded
significantly higher pod yield of groundnut (1545 kg ha-1) and
yield parameters like number of pods plant-1 (24) was also
significantly superior with this treatment compared to the all
other combinations.
2.3 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on nutrients
and potassium uptake by groundnut:
Reddy et al. (1982) reported that the application of 20 kg
N, 10 kg P2O5 and 25 kg K2O ha-1 as basal dose and 20 kg N
ha-1 at 30 days after sowing resulted in higher uptake of N
(114 kg ha-1), P (17 kg ha-1) and K (58 Kg ha-1).
Dubey and Shinde (1986) reported that application of
fertilizer K increased uptake of nutrients by groundnut.
Removal of N, P and K were highest when full dose of K was
applied at sowing and the next best treatment was application
of 75 percent K at sowing and 25 per cent at flowering stage.
Patel and Patel (1988) reported that application of K at 60
kg ha-1 increased N and K content, which altered the yield of
groundnut. Application of K, in general increased N, P and K
content of all the plant parts at harvest stage.
18
Deshmukh et al. (1993) reported that application of K, in
general increased N, P and K content in all the plant parts at
harvest stage. On an average 137.31, 16.6 and 63.34 kg N, P
and K ha-1, respectively were removed by groundnut crop.
Thimmegowda (1993) stated that application of 25 kg N, 75
kg P2O5 and 37.5 kg K2O ha-1 recorded higher uptake of N, P,
K and micronutrients over the control.
Yakadri and Sathyanarayana (1995) reported that during
the rainy season of 1989 at Hyderabad, AP, groundnut cv.
TMV-2 recorded higher uptake of N, P and K with N/P fertilizer
ratio of 0.50 (30 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 60 kg K2O ha-1).
Khamparia (1996) reported that application of potassium
from K0 to K20 successfully influenced the uptake of nitrogen,
phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and sulphur
except P uptake at 50 DAS and Mg uptake in flowering stage.
Balasubramanian
(1997)
observed
numerically
higher
uptake of NPK (89.8:17.52: 34.6 kg ha-1) by groundnut with
the application of 25.5 kg N, 51 kg P2O5 and 81 kg K2O ha-1 as
compared to the application of 17 kg N, 34 kg P2O5 and 54 kg
K2O ha-1 .
Selva kumari et al .(1999) inferred that integration of fly
ash alone and with other components of the nutrient supply
system ,because of synergistic effects, results in better
nutrient uptake, higher yield and improved maintenance of
soil fertility in groundnut cultivation.
Vinod kumar et al. (2000) reported that the application of
30 kg N, 60 kg P2O5 and 30 kg K2O ha-1 recorded significantly
the maximum uptake of NPK (121.12, 10.14, 34.89 kg ha-1) as
compared to the 10 kg N, 40 kg P2O5 and 10 kg K2O ha-1.
19
Dutta et al. (2003) reported that potassium content both in
kernel and haulm was significantly affected by the different
levels of potassium and maximum was observed with
application of 50 kg K2O ha-1.Application of graded levels of
potassium produced significant difference in uptake of N, P
and K and significantly increased due to higher doses of
potassium application (50 kg K2O ha-1).
Hadwani and Gundalia (2005) observed that application of
potassium significantly increased the total uptake of N, P and
K by groundnut. The highest level of K (K100) recorded the
highest total uptake of N (139.4 kg ha-l), P (11.4 kg ha-1) and K
(27.0 kg ha-1). In presence of potassium, the increase in N
uptake could be attributed to enhancing vigour of crop growth
with increased N utilization and translocation into the plant,
resulting in the enhancement of yield.
Rajeev (2012) reported that the concentration of K in all
parts is directly related to the supply as it increased gradually
with an increase in K supply from 0.5 to 16 mM through KCl.
However, the concentration of K was more pronounced in
leaves (0.27 to 2.37%) than seeds (0.41 to 1.78%).
Nathiya and Sanjivkumar (2014) conducted a pot culture
experiment to study the effect of combined use of organic
manures with inorganic fertilizers on uptake of available
nutrients and yield of groundnut crop at Tamil Nadu
Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai during
kharif season of 2008-2009.The results revealed that highest
nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium uptake of 1.01, 0.96 and
0.80 g pot-1 was recorded in the treatment that received 75 kg
K2O ha-1 and
20
Pressmud @ 5 t ha-1.
Rathore et al. (2014) reported that increasing levels of K
significantly influenced the nutrient uptakes except for Ca in
seed, straw, shell and P in straw and shell of the groundnut.
The higher level of potash from 60 kg ha-1 through schoenite
has increased the N uptake of groundnut in seed, straw and
shell respectively, though maximum uptake of N was at 40 kg
ha-1 through schoenite but it was statistically at par with 60
kg ha-1 schoenite. The uptake of P, K, S, Ca and Mg was
maximum at 60 kg ha-1 through schoenite which was
statistically at par at 60 kg ha-1 through sulphate of potash.
The K uptake was exceptionally higher in straw and this trend
was similar in case of uptake of Ca and Mg.
21
3. MATERIAL AND METHODS
The present field investigation was carried out during
kharif season of 2016-17 to study the “Effect of levels and
sources of potassium on yield and quality of kharif groundnut
(Arachis hypogaea L.) in Entisol.” The details regarding the
materials used and methods followed during the course of
present investigation are described below.
3.1 Experimental materials
3.1.1 Experimental site
The experiment was laid out in plot number „4C‟ during
kharif season of the year 2016-17 at the Post Graduate
Research Farm, College of Agriculture, Kolhapur. The site was
selected on the basis of suitability of soil for raising
groundnut. The topography of the experimental field was fairly
uniform and leveled.
3.1.2 Soil of the experimental field
The soil samples from 0-22.5 cm depth were randomly
collected from the experimental plot before sowing. These
samples were mixed together and a representative soil sample
was
prepared
for
determining
physical
and
chemical
properties of the soil. The initial sol properties of the
experimental field are presented in Table1. The soil of the
experimental plot was sandy clay loam with 90 cm depth, low
in available N (150.25 kg ha-1), and moderately high P2O5
(21.37 kg ha-1) and K2O (252.75 kg ha-1). The status of organic
carbon content (0.45 %) was moderate and moderately
calcareous with 4.87 per cent CaCO3 equivalent. The pH, EC
values were 7.60 and 0.27 dS m-1, respectively.
22
Table 1: Initial soil properties of the experimental field
Sr. No.
Parameters
Value
A)
Physical properties
1
Sand (%)
56.70
2
Silt (%)
18.70
3
Clay (%)
24.60
B)
Chemical properties
1
pH (1:2.5)
2
EC (dS m-1)
0.27
3
Organic Carbon (%)
0.45
4
Per cent calcium carbonate equivalent
4.87
5
Available Nitrogen
7.6
150.25
(kg ha-1)
6
Available Phosphorus
21.37
(kg ha-1)
7
Available Potassium
252.75
(kg ha-1)
8
Available Sulphur
10.35
(mg kg-1)
9
Exchangeable Ca { cmol(p+) kg-1 }
20.90
10
Exchangeable Mg { cmol(p+) kg-1}
7.48
11
Exchangeable Na { cmol(p+) kg-1}
1.93
12
Fe (mg kg-1)
16.60
13
Mn (mg kg-1)
8.60
14
Zn (mg kg-1)
1.98
15
Cu (mg kg-1)
2.40
23
3.1.3 Climatic conditions and location:
3.1.3.1 General:
The Kolhapur is situated on an elevation of 548 meters
above the mean sea level on 160 42‟ North latitude and 740 14‟
East longitude and comes under the sub montane zone of
NARP. The average annual rainfall is 1057 mm, with 84 rainy
days, which are received mostly from South-West monsoon.
Out of the total annual precipitation about 80 per cent is
received from June to September (South-West monsoon), while
the remaining quantity is received from North-East monsoon
in the months of October and November.
The annual mean maximum temperature range between
340C and 400C while, the annual mean minimum temperature
varies from 60C to 100C. The mean humidity percentage
during summer season ranges between 78 to 95 per cent.
3.1.3.2 Climatic conditions:
From the weather data presented in Table 2, it is
observed that the total rainfall received during the period of
field experiment was 1056.50 mm in 63 rainy days. The
relative humidity during the crop period was in the range of 70
to 91 per cent at morning and 48 to 90 per cent at evening.
The minimum temperature varied from 10.60C to 21.50C,
while maximum temperature was in the range of 25.30C to
31.90C.
The
evaporation
during
experimentation
ranges
between 1.4 mm to 5.7 mm per day. The climatic conditions
were more or less favourable for the growth of groundnut crop.
24
Table 2: Weather data recorded during experimental
period
Temp. (0C)
Relative
Humidity (%)
No.
of
rainy
days
Evapora
-tion
(mm
day-1)
Wind
velocity
(kmh-1)
Max.
Min.
Morn.
Even.
Rainfall
(mm)
25-01 June
26.3
19.7
85
85
42.9
6
2.3
7.2
27
02-08 July
26.1
19.6
87
86
75.5
7
1.6
28
09-15 July
25.3
19.3
86
87
381.5
7
1.4
29
16-22 July
26.3
19.8
83
87
24.4
5
1.9
30
23-29 July
26.9
18.7
85
81
20.5
4
2.2
31
30-05 Aug.
25.8
18.5
88
90
166.7
7
1.8
7.0
7.7
5.3
5.0
7.8
32
06-12 Aug.
29.8
19.0
90
86
100.4
6
1.7
33
13-19 Aug.
26.7
19.3
88
88
16.7
4
2.9
8.6
8.5
34
20-26 Aug.
27.2
18.2
88
85
27.1
3
2.6
5.6
35
27-02 Sep.
28.1
19.1
85
83
-
-
3.5
6.7
36
03-09 Sep.
28.5
18.0
86
69
-
-
3.0
2.5
37
10-16 Sep.
26.3
19.7
90
86
17.9
3
3.5
2.5
38
17-23 Sep.
26.0
18.7
91
86
44.0
4
2.4
12.2
39
24-30 Sep.
29.1
19.1
81
76
-
-
3.2
4.2
40
01-07 Oct.
28.5
17.5
80
72
2.7
1
4.1
4.1
41
08-14 Oct.
30.7
17.8
78
67
29.0
2
2.9
4.4
42
15-21
Oct
31.9
17.2
80
54
-
-
4.8
50
-
-
5.6
1.9
Meteoro-logical
Week
Date
June, 2016
26
July, 2016
August, 2016
September, 2016
October, 2016
1.3
43
22-28 Oct
31.7
14.9
79
44
29-4 Oct
31.8
14.2
70
58
-
-
5.7
1.9
31.2
10.6
68
48
-
-
5.4
1.8
November, 2016
45
4-11 Nov
25
3.1.4 Cropping history of the experimental field
The cropping history of the experimental plot for previous
three years is presented in Table 3.
Table 3: Cropping history of experimental field
Year
Kharif
Rabi
Summer
2014-2015
Soybean
Wheat
Maize
2015-2016
Groundnut
Wheat
Maize
2016-2017
Groundnut
---
---
(experimental)
3.2 Experimental details
3.2.1 Experimental layout
The experiment was laid out in the factorial randomized
block design. The treatments consisted of five levels of
potassium viz.0, 10, 20, 30 and 40 kg ha-1 which were
supplied
through
four
different
potassium
sources
viz
muriate of potash, sulphate of potash, bagasse ash and
schoenite. The treatment details are presented in Table 4 and
the plan of layout is depicted in Fig. 1.
26
Experimental details:
1) Crop
: Groundnut
2) Variety
: Phule Warna (KDG 128)
3) Design
: Factorial Randomized
Block Design.
4) No. of replications
:2
5) No. of treatments
: 20
6) Season
: Kharif, 2016
7) Date of sowing
:28.06.2016
8) Seed rate
:100 kg ha-1
9) Spacing
:30 cm x 15 cm
10) Date of Harvesting
: 9.11.2016
11) Plot size
: Gross- 5.40 m x 2.40 m
Net -5.10 m x 1.80 m
12) Location
: PG Research Farm,
College of Agriculture,
Kolhapur.
27
3.2.2 Treatment details
Table 4: Treatment details and their symbols used
Table 4(a): Potassium levels
Treatment No.
Levels of Potassium(kg ha-1)
LO
0
L1
10
L2
20
L3
30
L4
40
Table 4(b): Potassium sources
Treatment No.
Sources of Potassium
Content of K2O
S1
Muriate of potash
60%
S2
Sulphate of potash
52%
S3
Bagasse ash
0.02%
S4
Schoenite
22-24%
28
Table 4(c): Treatment combinations
Treatment No.
Treatment combinations
T1
L0S1(MOP 0)
T2
L1S1(MOP10 )
T3
L2S1( MOP 20 )
T4
L3S1(MOP 30 )
T5
L4S1(MOP 40 )
T6
L0S2(SOP 0 )
T7
L1S2(SOP 10)
T8
L2S2(SOP 20 )
T9
L3S2(SOP 30 )
T10
L4S2 (SOP 40 )
T11
L0S3(Bagasse ash 0 )
T12
L1S 3(Bagasse ash 10)
T13
L2S3(Bagasse ash 20 )
T14
L3S3(Bagasse ash 30 )
T15
L4S3( Bagasse ash 40 )
T16
L0S4(schoenite 0 )
T17
L1S4 (schoenite 10 )
T18
L2S4(schoenite 20 )
T19
L3S4 (schoenite 30 )
T20
L4S4(schoenite 40 )
 Recommended dose of N and P2O5 (25:50 kg ha-1) was
applied to all treatments through Urea and Single super
phosphate.
29
 Plan of layout of experiment
N
R-I
R-II
2.4 m
5.4 m
1m
T1
T10
T9
T2
T15
T11
T13
T4
T14
T16
T20
T10
T4
T14
T1
T6
T3
T8
T5
T16
T7
T15
T18
T9
T5
T12
T7
T19
T6
T17
-
T8
T18
T2
T12
T19
Fig. 1: Plan of layout of the experiment
T20
T13
-
T17
T3
T11
29
3.3 Preparatory tillage:
The land was ploughed about 30 cm deep with tractor. It
was subsequently harrowed twice with common blade harrow
to achieve loose and friable seed bed and leveled. After
attaining desired tilth field was laid out as per plan and kept
ready for sowing.
3.4 Fertilizer application:
Recommended dose of fertilizers i.e. 25: 50: 00 kg N, P2O5,
and K2O per hectare were applied as basal dose through Urea,
Single Super Phosphate to all the treatments.
3.5 Seeds and sowing
3.5.1 Seeds and selection of variety
The seeds of recently developed genotype KDG 128 (phule
warna) was obtained from Agriculture Research Station,
Gadhinglaj. The maturity period of this variety varied from
115-120 days. The potential yield of the cultivar is 25-30
q ha-1 under kharif condition. Plants of this variety are semispreading
type
with
medium
green
leaflets.
Shelling
percentage is 69 and average oil content is 50 percentage for
this variety. The seeds were treated first with thirum @ 2.5 g
kg-1 followed by Rhizobium and PSB @ 250 g 10 kg-1 seed,
dried in shade and then used for sowing.
3.5.2 Sowing:
Sowing was carried out by dibbling two seed per hill with
spacing of 30×15 cm. The seeds were covered immediately
after sowing.
30
3.5.3 Gap filling
The gap observed in the experimental plots were filled 10
days after sowing to maintain uniform plant population.
3.6 Irrigations
Irrigations were given during the crop period as per
requirements considering rainfall and crop growth stages i.e.
flowering, pegging and pod development.
3.7 Harvesting
The maturity of the crop was judged by examining the
colour of the kernel and development of black impressions on
inner side of pod shell.
31
Table 5: Schedule of field operations carried out in the
experimental plot during kharif 2016
Sr.
No.
1
Frequency
Date of operation
Ploughing
1
2
Harrowing
2
3
4
5
Preparation of field layout
Application of FYM
Pre sowing irrigation
Seed treatment with
fungicide and Rhizobium
and PSB
1
1
1
27.05.2016
02.06.2016
04.06.2016
06.06.2016
15.06.2015
24.06.2016
1
28.06.2016
7
Sowing, covering the seed
and application of basal
dose (25:50:00) N, P2O5
and K2O kg ha-1.
1
28.06.2016
8
Application of fertilizers
(Treatment wise)
1
28.06.2016
6
Name of operations
9
Irrigation
3
17.7.2016
28.8.2016
26.9.2016
10
Gap filling
1
15.07.016
11
Hand weeding
1
12
Harvesting
1
26.07.2016
09.11.2016
 After experimental layout Bagasse ash was applied as
per the treatments well in advance before dibbling of
groundnut seeds and well mixed in surface soil.
32
3.8 Biometric observations
The details of various biometric and observations recorded
during the course of investigation are given in Table 6.
Table 6: Details of plant observations
Sr. No.
A.
1.
Particulars
Period of
observations
Growth studies
Number of pods plant-1 i.e.
filled and unfilled
At harvest
2.
Pod yield (q ha-1)
At harvest
3.
Kernel yield (q ha-1)
At harvest
4.
Straw yield (q ha-1)
At harvest
5.
Shelling percentage
At harvest
6.
Oil content( %) and oil yield
(kg ha-1)
B.
At harvest
Plant analysis
Total uptake of N, P, K, S,
Ca and B
After harvest
33
3.8.1 Post harvest studies
A) Number of pods plant-1
The total number of filled and unfilled pods plant-1 were
counted from five randomly selected plants from each net plot
at the time of harvest and average of filled pods was recorded
as number of matured pods plant-1.
B) Pod yield
The pods from the plants uprooted from each net plot were
separated into pods and haulm. The soil and were removed
from the plants. Pods were air dried and then weighted.
Weight of pods plot-1 was recorded in kilogram and expressed
in q ha-1.
C) Haulm yield
The plants after removal of pods were kept in the field for
some period for air drying. The dried plants were then tied in
to bundle and weighed. Weight of haulm plot-1 was recorded in
kilogram and expressed in q ha-1.
D) Kernel yield
The weight of kernels from 100 g pods plot-1 were taken
after thorough drying of pods and expressed in q ha-1.
E) Shelling percentage
The hundred grams of sun dried pods from sample of each
plots was shelled manually and the shelling percentage was
calculated by dividing the weight of kernels to weight of pods
taken and expressed in percentage.
3.9 METHODS
The analytical work was done in the research laboratory of
Division of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry, College of
34
Agriculture, Kolhapur during the academic year 2016-2017.
The analytical method employed are mentioned in the Table 7.
3.9.1 Soil Analysis
Before sowing and after harvest of crop representative soil
samples were collected from 0-22.5 cm depth, processed and
analysed by following methods.
Table 7: Methods of Soil Analysis
Parameters
Methods used
References
pH(1:2.5; Soil :Water)
Potentiometry
Jackson (1973)
2.
EC(1:2.5; Soil :Water)
Conductometry
Jackson (1973)
3.
Organic Carbon
Wet oxidation
4.
Rapid Titration
4.
Per cent CaCO3
equivalent
Available Nitrogen
Nelson and
Sommer (1982)
Piper (1966)
5.
Available Phosphorus
6.
Available Potassium
7
Available Sulphur
Sr.
No.
1.
8.
9.
Exchangeable Ca and
Mg
Exchangeable Na
10. DTPA extractable
Micronutrients (Fe,
Mn, Zn, Cu.)
Alkaline
permanganate
Olsen (0.5 M sodium
bicarbonate) (pH-8.5)
Flame photometry,
1N neutral ammonium
acetate (pH-7.0)
Turbidimetric
Versenate titration
Subbiah and Asija
(1956)
Olsen et al.
(1965)
( Jackson ,1973)
Williams and
Steinberg (1959).
(Page, et al.,1982)
Flame photometry
(Page, et al.,1982)
Atomic Absorption
Sectrophotometer
Lindsay and Norvell
(1978)
35
1) Soil reaction (pH)
The pH of soil was measured with the help of pH meter
having glass electrod and calomel electrod using 1:2.5 soil:
water ratio as described by Jackson (1973).
2) Electrical conductivity (dS m-1)
It was determined in 1:2.5 soil: water suspension with the
help of conductivity meter as described by Jackson (1973).
3) Organic carbon (%)
Organic carbon in soil (0.5 mm sieved) was determined by
wet oxidation method as described by Nelson and Sommer
(1982).
4) Per cent Calcium carbonate equivalent (%)
The per cent CaCO3 equivalent of soil was determined by
rapid titration method using phenolphthalein indicator as
described by Piper (1966).
5) Available nitrogen (kg ha-1)
Available nitrogen was estimated by alkaline potassium
permanganate (0.32% KMnO4) method as described by
Subbiah and Asija (1956).
6) Available phosphorus (kg ha-1)
It was estimated by adopting Olsen‟s method using 0.5 M
NaHCO3 extractant at pH 8.5. The soil: extractant ratio was
1:20 and the shaking time was 30 minutes. The phosphorus
in the extract was determined colorimetrically at 660 nm
wavelength by using spectrophotometer (Olsen et al.1965).
7) Available potassium (kg ha-1)
The available potassium content in soil was extracted with
neutral normal ammonium acetate (pH= 7.0). The potassium
36
in the extract was determined by flame photometer as
described by Jackson (1973).
8) Available Sulphur (mg kg-1)
Available Sulphur was determined by Turbidimetric method
using Morgan‟s (sodium acetate and acetic acid) extracting
solution.
Sulphur
in
the
extract
was
determined
colorimetrically by using spectrophotometer at 420 nm
wavelength as described by Williams and Steinberg (1959).
9) Exchangeable Calcium and Magnesium {cmol (p+) kg-1}
Exchangeable calcium and magnesium was estimated by
using neutral normal ammonium acetate extract of the soil by
titration with standard versenate solution using murexide and
EBT indicators for calcium and calcium plus magnesium,
respectively. The difference between the value of calcium plus
magnesium and calcium gives the amount of exchangeable
magnesium (Page, et al., 1982).
10) Exchangeable Sodium {cmol (p+) kg-1}
The exchangeable sodium content in soil was extracted
with neutral normal ammonium acetate (pH= 7.0) and
determined by flame photometer (Page, et al., 1982).
11) Available micronutrients (mg kg-1)
Micronutrients from soil samples were determined by
Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer using DTPA extract as
described by Lindsay and Norvell (1978).
3.9.2 Plant analysis
The treatment wise pod and haulm samples collected at
harvest were cleaned, chopped and then dried in hot air oven
at 650C ± 50C. Further, these samples were milled to
37
considerable fineness in a willey mill and stored in plastic
bags for further analysis.
Table 8: Methods used for plant analysis
Sr.
No.
1.
Parameters
Methods
Total Nitrogen
References
2.
Microkjeldhal
(Diacid Digestion)
Total Phosphorus Vanadomolybdate Yellow
colour in Nitric acids
system (Triacid Digestion)
Parkinson & Allen
(1975)
Jackson (1973)
3.
Total Potassium
Flame photometry
(Triacid Digestion)
Chapman & Pratt
(1973)
4.
Total Sulphur
Turbidimetric
Tabatabai and
Bremner (1970)
5.
Total Calcium
Versenate Titration
6.
Total Boron
Spectrophotometric
7.
Oil content
Soxhlet Ether Extract
Cheng and Bray
(1951)
Hatcher and Wilcox
(1950)
A.O.A.C.(2002)
1) Total Nitrogen (kg ha-1)
The powdered 0.5 g plant sample was digested with
concentrated H2SO4 (5 mL), and H2O2 (5 mL) digestion mixture
(CuSO4 + K2SO4 + selenium powder). The volume was made to
100 mL with distilled water after digestion. The nitrogen of
aliquot was determined by Micro Kjeldahl method (Parkinson
and Allen, 1975).
2) Total Phosphorus (kg ha-1)
The plant samples (0.5 g each) were wet digested with nitric
acid, sulphuric acid, and perchloric acid in ratio 9:4:1. The
volume was made to 100 mL with distilled water after
38
digestion. and phosphorus content in aliquot was estimated
by vanado-molybdate phosphoric yellow colour method in
nitric acid medium and the colour intensity was measured at
420 nm wave length as described by Jackson (1973).
3) Total Potassium (kg ha-1)
The total potassium was determined from known quantity
of triacid digested extract by flame photometer (Chapman and
Pratt, 1982).
4) Total Sulphur (kg ha-1)
Finely ground plant samples (0.5 g each) were digested in
concentrated HNO3 and HClO4 in the ratio of 9:4. The volume
was made to 100 mL with distilled water after digestion and
was used for determination of sulphur which was estimated
colorimtrically
by
using
spectrophotometer
at
420
nm
wavelength (Tabatabai and Bremner, 1970).
5) Total Calcium (kg ha-1)
The total calcium was determined from known quantity of
triacid digested extract by using EDTA Complexometric
(versenate) Titration method as described by Cheng and Bray
(1951).
6) Total Boron (g ha-1)
The plant sample test solution was prepared by dry ashing
procedure. The finely ground plant samples were first ignited
in burner and residues were ignited in a muffle furnace at
5500C .The boron in residue was dissolved in measured
volume of 0.1 N HCl. The suspension was filtered to obtain a
clear solution. The boron dissolved in HCl was reacted with
curcumine to form coloured complex for the colorimetric
39
determination of boron by spectrophotometer at 540 nm
wavelength (Hatcher and Wilcox, 1950).
3.9.3 Uptake of nutrients by the crop
The uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium,
sulphur and boron was worked out by multiplying the
percentage of these nutrients with the corresponding yield of
respective constituent.
3.10 Quality analysis of kernel
3.10.1 Oil percentage
Oil percentage from groundnut kernel was estimated by
Soxhlet method of oil extraction.
3.10.2 Oil yield
The oil yield (kg ha-1) was worked out by multiplying the per
cent kernel oil content with the corresponding kernel yield of
groundnut.
3.11 Statistical analysis
The experimental data were analysed statistically by
applying the
techniques
of
“Analysis
of variance” and
significance was tested by variance ratio i.e. F value at 5 per
cent
level
of
significance
as
described
by
Panse
and
Sukhatme, (1967). Standard error of mean (S.Em.) and critical
difference (CD) was worked out to evaluate differences between
treatment means.
40
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of a field experiment on “Effect of levels and
sources of potassium on yield and quality of kharif Groundnut
(Arachis hypogaea L.) in Entisol” are presented and discussed
under the following heading:
4.1 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and
yield attributes of groundnut.
4.2 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil
content and oil yield of groundnut.
4.3 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on nutrient
uptake of groundnut.
4.4 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on chemical
properties and nutrient status of soil.
4.1 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on yield and
yield attributes of groundnut:
The data in respect of dry pod, kernel, haulm yield and
shelling percentage influenced by levels and sources of
potassium is presented in table 9 to 13 and graphically
depicted in fig 2 (a & b), respectively.
4.1.1 Dry pod yield:
The data presented in table 9 & 10 and graphically
presented in fig 2 (a) indicated that the increasing levels of
potassium
showed
significant
effect
on
dry
pod
yield.
Significantly highest dry pod yield (31.69 q ha-1) was obtained
with the application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 than rest of the
potassium levels. While among the sources of potassium S2 –
SOP recorded significantly highest dry pod yield (27.70 q ha-1)
which was statistically superior over S3 -bagasse ash (25.07 q
41
ha-1) but at par with S1 -MOP (26.69 q ha-1) and S4(Schoenite )
(26.6 q ha1).
The highest yield obtained with SOP might be attributed to
its sulphur content.
Interaction effects of different levels and sources of
potassium were found non-significant in relation to dry pod
yield. Potassium play vital role in maintaining balance in
enzymatic, stomatal activity (water use), transport of sugars,
water and nutrients and synthesis of protein, starch and
photosynthesis, thus K application increased growth and yield
attributes in groundnut. The results are in close conformity
with the observations recorded by Davide et al. (1986) and
Vinod Kumar et al. (2000).
42
Table 9: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on pod,
kernel, haulm yield and shelling percentage of
groundnut
Treatments
Dry pod yield
Kernel yield
haulm yield
(q ha-1)
(q ha-1)
(q ha-1)
Shelling %
Levels of potassium (kg ha-1)
L0 (0)
21.74
14.71
33.93
67.63
L1(10)
23.68
16.28
35.05
68.73
L2(20)
26.25
18.15
35.23
69.08
L3(30)
29.26
20.27
37.67
69.26
L4(40)
31.69
22.13
38.94
69.90
S.E.±
0.57
0.38
0.56
0.52
CD at 5%
1.69
1.14
1.67
NS
Sources of potassium
S1(MOP)
26.69
18.48
36.58
69.19
S2(SOP)
27.70
19.26
36.64
69.46
S3(BA)
25.07
17.06
35.49
67.89
S4(SCH)
26.63
18.44
35.94
69.13
S.E.±
0.51
0.34
0.50
0.47
CD at 5%
1.51
1.02
NS
NS
Interaction (L x S)
S.E.±
1.14
0.77
1.13
1.06
CD at 5%
NS
NS
NS
NS
43
Table 10: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on dry
pod yield of groundnut.
Sources of potassium
Dry pod yield (q ha-1)
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
21.79
23.93
26.49
29.90
31.73
26.69
S2
22.32
24.48
27.43
31.36
32.89
27.70
S.E.
0.57
0.51
1.14
L
S
LXS
S3
21.24
22.63
24.70
26.25
30.53
25.07
CD at 5%
1.69
1.51
NS
S4
21.61
23.67
26.36
29.90
31.61
26.63
Mean
21.74
23.68
26.25
29.26
31.69
26.52
4.1.2 Kernel yield:
The data regarding kernel yield of groundnut presented
in table 9 & 11 and graphically depicted in fig 2 (a). From the
data it is observed that the significantly highest kernel yield
(22.13 q ha-1) was obtained due to application of 40 kg K2O
ha-1 which was statistically superior over rest of K2O levels.
While
among
sources
of
potassium
S2
(SOP)
showed
significantly highest kernel yield (19.26 q ha-1) which was
statistically superior over S3 (bagasse ash) but at par with rest
of K2O sources.
In relation to kernel yield interaction effects of different
levels and sources of potassium was found non-significant.
Similar results were obtained by Davide et al. (1986) and
Vinod Kumar et al. (2000).
44
Table 11: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
kernel yield of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
Kernel yield (q ha-1)
S1
S2
S3
S4
14.85 15.33
14.01
14.66
16.47 16.96
15.26
16.44
18.70 19.34
16.63
17.91
21.13 21.58
18.12
20.26
22.11 23.09
21.26
22.08
18.65 19.26
17.06
18.27
S.E. CD at 5%
L
0.38
1.14
S
0.34
1.02
L X S 0.77
NS
Mean
14.71
16.28
18.15
20.27
22.13
18.31
4.1.3 Haulm yield:
The
data pertaining to haulm yield of groundnut
presented in table 9 &12 and graphically depicted in fig 2 (a).
Significantly
highest
haulm
yield
was
recorded
with
application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 (38.94 q ha-1 ) which was at par
with 30 kg K2O ha-1 (37.67q ha-1) and significantly superior
over rest of K2O levels. Effect of different sources and
interaction were found non-significant in relation to haulm
yield. Similar results were obtained by Hadwani and Gundalia
(2005) and Veramani and Subrahmaniyan (2011) who also
reported response of groundnut to the applied potassium.
45
Table 12: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
haulm yield of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
33.12
35.44
36.59
38.88
38.87
36.58
L
S
LXS
Haulm yield ( q
S2
S3
33.49
32.92
36.00
33.64
37.69
34.35
39.44
36.15
39.59
37.95
36.64
35.49
S.E.
CD at 5%
0.56
1.67
0.50
NS
1.13
NS
ha-1)
S4
33.20
35.14
35.30
36.19
39.34
35.94
Mean
33.93
35.05
35.23
37.67
38.94
36.16
4.1.4 Shelling percentage:
The data presented in table 9 &13 and graphically
depicted in fig 2 (b) showed that, shelling percentage was not
much more influenced by the different levels and sources of
potassium and it was found non-significant. The highest
shelling percentage was recorded in L4- 40 kg K2O ha-1 (69.90
%) and among the sources S2- MOP was recorded 69.46 per
cent. Similar findings have been reported by Rathore et al.
(2014).
46
Table13: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
shelling percentage of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
68.09
68.92
70.65
68.58
69.73
69.19
L
S
LXS
Shelling percentage
S2
S3
S4
68.59
65.93
67.90
69.22
67.40
69.40
70.47
67.31
67.89
68.79
69.07
70.59
70.25
69.74
69.89
69.46
67.89
69.13
S.E. CD at 5%
0.53
NS
0.47
NS
1.06
NS
Mean
67.63
68.73
69.08
69.26
69.90
68.92
4.1.5 Filled and unfilled pods plant-1:
The data in respect of filled pods plant-1 presented in
table 14 & 15 and graphically depicted in fig 3. From the data
it is observed that the filled pods plant-1 was significantly
affected
by
different
levels
and
sources
Significantly highest number of filled pods
of
potassium.
plant-1 (38.89)
were recorded by application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 which was at
par with 30 kg K2O ha-1 (36.21) and significantly superior over
rest of K2O levels. Among the sources S2 (SOP) recorded
significantly highest filled pods plant-1 (37.10) than all other
sources of potassium.
The number of unfilled pods plant-1 was decreased
considerably with graded levels of potassium. Significantly
lowest unfilled pods plant-1 was recorded with L4-40 kg K2O
47
ha-1 (7.88) than the all other levels of potassium. Among the
sources,
significantly
lowest
unfilled
pods
plant-1
were
recorded with S2-SOP (7.90) than the all other sources of
potassium.
However, interaction effects were found non-significant in
relation to number of filled and unfilled pods plant-1. The
results are in close aggrement with the findings reported by
Singh and Chaudhari (1996), Reddy et al. (2011) and Nathiya
and
Sanjivkumar
(2014)
who
also
reported
superior
performance of groundnut to the SOP and levels of potassium.
Table 14: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
filled and unfilled pods plant-1 of groundnut
Treatments
Filled pods Plant-1
Unfilled pods Plant-1
Levels of potassium (kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
S.E.±
CD at 5%
Sources of potassium
S1(MOP)
S2(SOP)
S3(BA)
S4(SCH)
S.E.±
CD at 5%
Interaction (L X S)
S.E.±
CD at 5%
24.24
29.71
33.04
36.21
38.89
1.04
3.08
9.88
9.25
8.25
8.13
7.88
0.37
1.10
32.79
37.10
28.77
31.00
0.93
2.76
8.60
7.90
9.40
8.80
0.33
0.98
2.08
NS
0.74
NS
48
Table15: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
number of filled pods plant-1 of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
24.50
29.00
36.05
37.04
37.35
32.79
L
S
LXS
Filled pods plant-1
S2
S3
S4
26.00
22.35
24.10
36.50
26.15
27.20
34.50
29.60
32.00
43.50
29.25
35.04
45.00
36.50
36.70
37.10
28.77
31.01
S.E.
CD at 5%
1.04
3.09
0.93
2.76
2.08
NS
Mean
24.24
29.71
33.04
36.21
38.89
32.42
Table16: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
number of unfilled pods plant-1 of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
9.00
9.47
8.50
8.00
8.00
8.60
L
S
LXS
Unfilled pods plant-1
S2
S3
S4
9.50
10.50
10.48
8.50
9.50
9.48
7.50
8.50
8.50
7.50
9.50
7.50
6.50
9.00
8.00
7.90
9.40
8.80
S.E. CD at 5%
0.37
1.10
0.33
0.98
0.74
NS
Mean
9.88
9.25
8.25
8.13
7.88
8.68
49
4.2 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil
content and oil yield of groundnut:
4.2.1 Oil content:
From the data presented in table 17 & 18 and graphically
depicted in fig. 4(a) revealed that significantly highest
percentage oil content was recorded in potassium level L4- 40
kg K2O ha-1 (47.59 %) than the Lo- 0 kg K2O ha-1 (44.58%) but
it was at par with rest of K2O levels, while there was no
significant difference among K2O sources and interactions in
relation to oil content.
Table 17: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil
content
and yield of groundnut
Treatments
Oil content %
Levels of potassium (kg ha-1)
L0
44.58
L1
45.64
L2
45.92
L3
47.06
L4
47.59
S.E.±
0.67
CD at 5%
1.98
Sources of potassium
S1(MOP)
46.24
S2(SOP)
47.27
S3(BA)
44.99
S4(SCH)
46.13
S.E.±
0.60
CD at 5%
NS
Interaction (L x S)
S.E.±
1.34
CD at 5%
NS
Oil yield (kg ha-1)
655.16
743.69
835.45
955.29
1053.71
21.27
62.95
856.90
914.55
769.13
854.07
19.02
56.30
42.53
NS
50
Table 18: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil
content of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
45.17
45.65
46.00
46.89
47.48
46.24
L
S
LXS
Oil content
S2
S3
45.19
42.67
46.53
44.80
46.94
45.33
48.55
45.84
49.14
46.30
47.27
44.99
S.E.
CD at 5%
0.67
1.98
0.60
NS
1.34
NS
(%)
S4
45.30
45.57
45.40
46.95
47.44
46.13
Mean
44.58
45.64
45.92
47.06
47.59
46.15
4.2.2 Oil yield
The data reported in table17 & 19 and graphically
depicted in fig 4 (b) showed that oil yield of groundnut is
enhanced due to increasing levels of potassium. The results
indicated that, significantly highest oil yield (1053.71 kg ha-1)
was recorded by application of L4 (40 kg K2O ha-1) which was
significantly superior over rest of K2O levels. Among sources
S2 (SOP) recorded significantly highest oil yield (914.55 kg
ha-1) than the rest of K2O sources. However, the interaction
effects were found non- significant in relation to oil yield.
51
Balanced use of nutrients might have improved the
yield attributing characteristics like root and plant growth,
nutrient uptake, physical, chemical and biological activities
which ultimately results in higher kernel and oil yield.
Increased oil yield was due to the reason that, sulphur might
be associated with accelerated formation of acetyl Co- A, a
precursor of fatty acids synthesis and enzyme activities of
potassium. Umar et al. (1999) and Rathore et al. (2014) have
reported similar findings in relation to oil content and oil yield
of groundnut.
Table19: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on oil
yield of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Oil yield (kg
Levels of
S1
S2
S3
potassium (kg ha-1)
L0
670.05 691.97 595.08
L1
752.08 788.25 684.63
L2
861.82 909.48 755.31
L3
950.91 1048.17 828.25
L4
1049.62 1134.89 982.39
Mean
856.90 914.55 769.13
CD at
S.E.
5%
S
21.27
62.95
K
19.02
56.30
SXK
42.53 125.89
ha-1)
S4
Mean
663.54 655.16
749.82 743.69
815.20 835.45
993.83 955.29
1047.95 1053.71
854.07 848.66
52
4.3 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on nutrient
uptake of groundnut.
Table 20: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total
Treatments
uptake of primary nutrients by groundnut
Total N uptake
kg ha-1
Levels of potassium (kg ha-1)
90.39
L0
96.89
L1
106.59
L2
119.76
L
3
Total P uptake
kg ha-1
Total K uptake
kg ha-1
14.55
53.21
15.61
63.82
16.64
71.09
18.05
77.17
L4
130.07
19.81
82.53
S.E. ±
1.17
0.25
1.37
CD at 5%
3.47
0.74
4.06
17.86
75.49
17.81
69.31
16.23
64.81
16.72
67.87
0.22
1.23
0.66
3.64
2.34
0.50
2.75
NS
NS
NS
Sources of potassium
109.33
S1(MOP)
114.32
S2(SOP)
102.90
S3(BA)
108.40
S4(SCH)
1.05
S.E. ±
CD at 5%
3.10
Interaction (L x S)
S.E. ±
CD at 5%
53
4.3.1 Total Nitrogen uptake
The data presented in table 20 & 21 and graphically
depicted in fig 5(a) revealed that, the total uptake of nitrogen
was significantly affected by different levels and sources of
potassium. Significantly highest total N uptake was recorded
by application of 40 kg ha-1 K2O (L4) and with SOP (S2) (130.07
and 114.32 kg ha-1, respectively) and it was superior over all
other levels and sources of potassium. However, for total N
uptake interaction effects were found non-significant.
The added nutrients and synergetic effect N and S might
have enhanced the microbial activities resulting in higher
nitrogen fixation, profuse plant and root growth which
ultimately increased total uptake of nitrogen. The results are
in close aggrement with the findings reported by Dutta et al.
(2003) and Rathore et al. (2014).
Table 21: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total
uptake of nitrogen by groundnut at
harvest
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
89.30
99.36
108.30
120.98
128.74
109.33
L
S
LXS
Total N uptake (kg ha-1)
S2
S3
S4
93.44
87.15
91.67
99.63
92.38
96.19
113.92
99.52
104.63
126.64
109.64
121.77
137.98
125.81
127.75
114.32
102.90
108.40
S.E.
CD at 5%
1.17
3.47
1.05
3.10
2.34
NS
Mean
90.39
96.89
106.59
119.76
130.07
108.74
54
4.3.2 Total Phosphorus uptake
The total uptake of phosphorus by groundnut was
significantly affected by different levels and sources of
potassium. The significantly highest total P uptake (19.81 kg
ha-1) was found with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 than the
other levels of potassium. Among sources significantly highest
total P uptake (17.86 kg ha-1) was recorded with S1-MOP
which was at par with S2-SOP (17.81 kg ha-1) than the rest of
potassium sources. Interaction effects of different levels and
sources of potassium were found non- significant in relation to
total P uptake.
The increased root and plant growth might have increased
higher total uptake of P. Again, the presence of other nutrients
in different potassium sources might have increased the
availability of phosphate solubilizing bacteria which improved
total P uptake. The results are in close conformity with the
findings reported by Dutta et al. (2003) and Hadwani and
Gundalia (2005).
55
Table 22: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total uptake of phosphorus by groundnut at
harvest
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
14.74
16.06
17.88
18.89
21.73
17.86
L
S
LXS
Total P uptake (kg ha-1)
S2
S3
S4
Mean
14.92
14.00
14.52 14.55
16.23
14.62
15.53 15.61
17.75
14.87
16.08 16.64
19.42
16.54
17.37 18.05
20.73
18.90
17.91 19.81
17.81
16.23
16.72 16.93
S.E. CD at 5%
0.25
0.74
0.22
0.66
0.50
NS
4.3.3 Total potassium uptake
From the data presented in table 20 & 23 and
graphically depicted in fig 5(a), it was found that significantly
highest total K uptake was with the application of 40 kg K2O
ha-1 (82.53 kg ha-1) and MOP (75.49 kg ha-1) than the rest of
levels and sources of potassium. Interaction effects of different
levels and sources of potassium were found non- significant in
relation to total K uptake.
The increased uptake of potassium might be due to
added potassium and profuse growth of root and plant as a
result of added nutrients. Similar finding were reported by
Dutta et al. (2003) and Hadwani and Gundalia (2005.)
56
Table 23: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total uptake of potassium by groundnut at
harvest
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
53.28
72.67
79.41
86.19
89.76
75.49
L
S
LXS
Total K uptake (kg ha-1)
S2
S3
S4
53.97
52.68
52.91
61.91
60.37
60.34
69.66
64.89
70.37
76.45
71.85
74.19
84.56
74.26
81.55
69.31
64.81
67.87
S.E. CD at 5%
1.37
4.06
1.23
3.64
2.75
NS
Mean
53.21
63.82
71.09
77.17
82.53
69.56
57
Table 24: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total uptake of secondary nutrients by
groundnut
Total Ca uptake
Total S uptake
Total B uptake
kg ha-1
kg ha-1
g ha-1
Treatments
Levels of potassium (kg ha-1)
L0
48.59
13.57
40.21
L1
50.66
14.77
41.32
L2
51.27
16.01
42.67
L3
55.07
16.73
43.63
L4
56.92
18.40
44.46
S.E. ±
0.81
0.26
0.36
CD at 5%
2.39
0.76
1.08
Sources of potassium
S1(MOP)
52.88
15.55
42.84
S2(SOP)
53.24
16.72
42.59
S3(BA)
51.50
15.33
41.64
S4(SCH)
52.40
15.89
42.77
S.E. ±
0.72
0.23
0.33
CD at 5%
NS
0.68
NS
S.E. ±
1.61
0.51
0.73
CD at 5%
NS
NS
NS
Interaction (L x S)
58
4.3.4 Total Calcium uptake
The data presented in table 24 & 25 and graphically
depicted in fig. 5(b) revealed that, total uptake of calcium by
groundnut was found significantly highest (56.92 kg ha-1) at L4
-K 40 but it was at par with L3-K 30 (55.07 kg ha-1). The effect
of sources and interaction effects of different levels and
sources of potassium were found non- significant in relation to
total Ca uptake.
The increased potassium levels associated with profuse
growth of plant and roots and thus increased total Ca uptake
by groundnut. The results are in close conformity with the
findings reported by Rathore et al. (2014).
Table 25: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total uptake of calcium by groundnut at harvest
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
47.73
51.36
52.90
57.35
55.04
52.88
L
S
LXS
Total Ca uptake (kg ha-1)
S2
S3
S4
47.88
46.94
51.82
52.04
50.83
48.40
50.11
51.86
50.22
57.78
51.92
53.23
58.36
55.94
58.32
53.24
51.50
52.40
S.E. CD at 5%
0.81
2.39
0.72
NS
1.61
NS
Mean
48.59
50.66
51.27
55.07
56.92
52.50
59
4.3.5 Total Sulphur uptake
From the data presented in table 24 & 26 and graphically
depicted in fig 5(b) revealed that, the total uptake of sulphur
was significantly highest (18.40 ha-1) at L4 (K 40) which was
significantly superior over rest of potassium levels. Among
sources highest total S uptake (16.72 kg ha-1) was recorded
with S1 (MOP) which was significantly superior over rest of
potassium sources. However, interaction effects of different
levels and sources of potassium were found non-significant in
relation to total S uptake.
The added sulphur by Sulphate of potash and schoenite
might have increase the pool available sulphur in soil and
improved activities of sulphur oxidizing microbs might have
helped for oxidation of elemental sulphur to SO4. Similar
findings was reported by Rathore et al. (2014)
Table 26: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total
uptake
of
sulphur
by
groundnut
at
harvest
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
13.25
14.69
15.82
16.18
18.32
15.65
L
S
LXS
Total S uptake (kg ha-1)
S2
S3
S4
14.16
13.35
13.54
15.64
14.03
14.74
16.98
15.43
15.80
17.95
15.95
16.85
18.87
17.91
18.52
16.72
15.33
15.89
S.E.
CD at 5%
0.25
0.76
0.23
0.68
0.51
NS
Mean
13.57
14.77
16.01
16.73
18.40
15.90
60
4.3.6 Total Boron uptake
The data presented in table 24 & 27 and graphically
depicted in fig 5(b) revealed that, total uptake of boron by
groundnut was significantly highest (44.46 g ha-1) at L4- K 40
but it was at par with L3-K 30 (43.63 g ha-1). The effect of
sources and interaction effects of different levels and sources
of potassium were found non-significant in relation to total B
uptake.
Table 27: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on
total uptake of boron by groundnut at harvest
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
40.67
41.43
43.47
43.95
44.68
42.84
L
S
LXS
Total B uptake (g ha-1)
S2
S3
S4
40.71
39.53
39.94
41.67
40.95
41.22
42.79
41.59
42.84
43.92
42.55
44.10
43.85
43.61
45.73
42.59
41.64
42.77
S.E.
CD at 5%
0.36
1.08
0.33
NS
0.73
NS
Mean
40.21
41.32
42.67
43.63
44.46
42.46
61
4.4 Effect of levels and sources of potassium on chemical
properties and nutrient status of soil after harvest of
groundnut:
The data in respect of effect of potassium levels and
sources on different chemical properties and nutrient status of
soil after harvest of groundnut crop is presented in table 28 to
39.
From the data it was revealed that effect of different levels
and sources of potassium and their interactions were nonsignificant on soil chemical properties i.e. pH, EC, OC, per
cent CaCO3 equivalent of soil at harvest. However, pH was
slightly decreased with potassium sources containing sulphur.
The data given (Table 28) showed that, the available (N, P, K,
S) and exchangeable (Ca, Mg, Na) nutrients in soil after
harvest of groundnut were not much more influenced by the
different levels and sources of potassium and were found nonsignificant.
62
Table 28: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on chemical properties and nutrient
status of soil at harvest of groundnut
Treatments
pH
(1:25)
EC
(dS
m-1)
OC
(%)
per cent
CaCO3
equivalent
Available nutrients
N
P
K
S
(kg
Levels of potassium (
L0
759.
L1
7.63
L2
7.65
L3
7.67
L4
7.67
S.E.±
0.03
CD at 5%
NS
sources of potassium
S1(MOP)
7.65
S2(SOP)
7.63
S3(BA)
7.66
S4(SCH)
7.63
S.E.±
0.29
CD at 5%
NS
Interaction (L x S)
S.E.±
0.08
CD at 5%
NS
ha-1)
Exchangeable
cations
{ cmol (p+) kg-1}
(mg
kg-1)
Ca
Mg
Na
kg ha-1)
0.25 0.44
0.26 0.45
0.27 0.48
0.25 0.46
0.29 0.48
0.005 0.01
NS
NS
4.55
4.62
4.65
4.72
4.90
0.08
NS
153.74
155.70
157.18
162.27
165.03
2.89
NS
21.23
21.36
21.88
22.24
22.42
0.33
NS
243.89
245.32
247.82
250.99
253.86
2.55
NS
9.74
10.14
10.43
10.48
11.01
0.36
NS
20.53
20.88
21.11
21.36
21.85
0.31
NS
7.30
7.34
7.38
7.45
7.50
0.07
NS
1.95
1.97
2.01
2.04
2.18
0.05
NS
0.27
0.24
0.29
0.25
0.004
NS
0.46
0.47
0.45
0.46
0.01
NS
4.73
4.66
4.69
4.67
0.07
NS
159.35
159.87
157.86
158.05
2.58
NS
21.90
21.92
21.67
21.82
0.29
NS
250.54 10.22
249.19 10.62
245.73 9.95
248.04 10.65
2.28
0.32
NS
NS
21.11
21.49
20.79
21.27
0.28
NS
7.42
7.39
7.32
7.44
0.06
NS
2.03
2.04
2.01
2.04
0.05
NS
0.01
NS
0.02
NS
0.16
NS
5.77
NS
0.65
NS
5.11
NS
0.72
NS
0.62
NS
0.13
NS
0.11
NS
63
Table 29: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
pH at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
7.61
7.65
7.68
7.66
7.73
7.65
S2
7.53
7.63
7.63
7.65
7.66
7.63
S.E.
L
0.03
S
0.03
L X S 0.06
Soil pH
S3
7.55
7.69
7.68
7.73
7.77
7.66
CD at 5%
NS
NS
NS
S4
7.52
7.61
7.65
7.69
7.68
7.64
Mean
7.59
7.63
7.65
7.67
7.67
7.65
Table 30: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
EC at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
0.23
0.26
0.31
0.25
0.30
0.28
S2
0.28
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.29
0.27
S.E.
L
0.01
S
0.01
L X S 0.02
EC (dS m-1)
S3
S4
0.28
0.24
0.24
0.26
0.25
0.25
0.26
0.24
0.29
0.28
0.26
0.25
CD at 5%
NS
NS
NS
Mean
0.25
0.26
0.27
0.25
0.29
0.26
64
Table 31: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
organic carbon at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
0.45
0.46
0.47
0.41
0.46
0.45
L
S
LXS
S2
0.47
0.46
0.47
0.46
0.49
0.47
S.E.
0.01
0.01
0.02
OC (%)
S3
0.40
0.44
0.52
0.47
0.44
0.45
CD at 5%
NS
NS
NS
S4
0.47
0.43
0.46
0.46
0.46
0.46
Mean
0.45
0.45
0.48
0.45
0.46
0.46
Table 32: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on per
cent CaCO3 equivalent at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
per cent CaCO3 equivalent
S1
S2
S3
S4
Mean
4.41 4.71
4.58
4.50 4.55
4.69 4.53
4.69
4.58 4.62
4.84 4.56
4.57
4.63 4.65
4.71 4.70
4.78
4.69 4.72
5.01 4.81
4.84
4.95 4.90
4.73 4.66
4.69
4.67 4.69
S.E. CD at 5%
L
0.08
NS
S
0.07
NS
L X S 0.16
NS
65
Table 33: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
available nitrogen at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of
potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
153.73
157.66
158.67
163.69
163.01
159.35
L
S
LXS
Available N (kg
S2
S3
155.14
152.66
155.89
153.10
157.93
155.99
165.11
160.72
165.30
166.83
159.87
157.86
S.E.
CD at 5%
2.89
NS
2.58
NS
5.77
NS
ha-1)
S4
153.44
156.15
156.11
159.57
165.01
158.05
Mean
153.74
155.70
157.18
162.27
165.03
158.78
Table 34: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
available phosphorus at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
21.60
21.60
21.93
21.95
22.44
21.90
L
S
LXS
Available P (kg
S2
S3
21.24
20.90
21.56
21.01
22.01
21.89
22.38
22.25
22.44
22.28
21.92
21.67
S.E. CD at 5%
0.33
NS
0.29
NS
0.65
NS
ha-1)
S4
21.18
21.28
21.70
22.39
22.54
21.82
Mean
21.23
21.36
21.88
22.24
22.42
21.83
66
Table 35: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
available potassium at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
246.05
248.05
251.71
252.73
254.15
250.54
L
S
LXS
Available K (kg
S2
S3
244.60 242.35
246.12 243.15
250.58 244.14
251.43 248.71
253.23 250.30
249.19 245.73
CD at
S.E.
5%
2.55
NS
2.28
NS
5.11
NS
ha-1)
S4
242.56
243.94
244.83
251.11
257.76
248.04
Mean
243.89
245.32
247.82
250.99
253.86
248.37
Table 36: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
available sulphur at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
S1
9.75
10.98
10.31
9.93
10.14
10.22
L
S
LXS
Available S (mg kg-1)
S2
S3
S4
10.01
9.23
9.99
10.08
9.62
9.90
10.64
10.04
10.74
10.76
10.09
11.14
11.64
10.75
11.51
10.62
9.95
10.65
S.E. CD at 5%
0.36
NS
0.32
NS
0.72
NS
Mean
9.74
10.14
10.43
10.48
11.01
10.36
67
Table 37: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
exchangeable calcium at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
exchangeable Ca { cmol (P+) kg-1}
S1
S2
S3
S4
Mean
20.15 20.88
20.15
20.93 20.53
21.10 21.27
20.22
20.95 20.88
20.97 21.39
20.39
21.69 21.11
21.33 21.80
21.32
20.99 21.36
21.99 22.10
21.88
21.45 21.85
21.11 21.49
20.79
21.27 21.15
S.E. CD at 5%
L
0.31
NS
S
0.28
NS
L X S 0.62
NS
Table 38: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
exchangeable magnesium at harvest of
groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
exchangeable Mg { cmol (P+) kg-1}
S1
S2
S3
S4
Mean
7.32
7.29
7.20
7.38
7.30
7.39
7.32
7.23
7.42
7.34
7.43
7.37
7.29
7.43
7.38
7.47
7.46
7.40
7.48
7.45
7.50
7.53
7.47
7.52
7.50
7.42
7.39
7.32
7.44
7.39
S.E. CD at 5%
L
0.07
NS
S
0.06
NS
L X S 0.13
NS
68
Table 39: Effect of levels and sources of potassium on soil
exchangeable sodium at harvest of groundnut
Sources of potassium
Levels of potassium
(kg ha-1)
L0
L1
L2
L3
L4
Mean
exchangeable Na { cmol
S1
S2
S3
2.08 1.93
1.80
2.09 2.02
2.01
2.00 2.10
1.95
1.80 2.06
2.05
2.19 2.11
2.24
2.03 2.04
2.01
S.E.
CD at 5%
L
0.05
NS
S
0.04
NS
L X S 0.10
NS
(P+) kg-1}
S4
Mean
2.00 1.95
1.78 1.97
2.00 2.01
2.25 2.04
2.17 2.18
2.04 2.03
69
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The present investigation entitled “Effect of levels and
sources of potassium on yield and quality of kharif Groundnut
(Arachis hypogaea L.) in Entisol.” was undertaken during
kharif
season
2016-17
at
Agronomy
Farm,
College
of
Agriculture, Kolhapur. The experiment was laid out in a
Factorial Randomized Block Design with twenty treatments
and two replications. The important findings of the present
investigation are summarized below:
1. The yield of dry pod, kernel and haulm of groundnut
were increased significantly with increasing levels of
potassium and highest yields (31.69, 22.13, and 38.94 q
ha-1, respectively) were recorded by application of 40 kg
K2O ha-1. Amongst sources highest yields (27.70, 19.26
and 36.64 q ha-1, respectively) were recorded with S2 SOP.
2. Significantly highest number of filled pods plant-1 (38.89)
were recorded with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 and S2 –
SOP (37.10)
and significantly lowest unfilled pods
plant-1 were recorded with L4-40 kg K2O ha-1 (7.88) and
S2-SOP (7.90).
3. The oil content of groundnut was significantly highest
(47.59 %) with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1 but effect of
sources and interactions were found non- significant.
4. Oil yield was increased significantly with increasing
levels of potassium and highest oil yield (1053.71
kg ha-1) was recorded with application of 40 kg K2O ha-1
70
and among sources, S2 –SOP (914.55 kg ha-1) recorded
significantly highest yield.
5. The application of potassium significantly increased the
uptake of N, P, K, Ca, S and B. The highest uptake of
these nutrients (130.07, 19.81, 82.53, 56.92 and 18.40
kg ha-1 and 44.46 g ha-1, respectively) were recorded with
application of 40 kg K2O ha-1. Amongst different sources
S2 -SOP recorded highest total N (114.32 kgha-1), Ca
(53.24 kg ha-1) and S (16.72 kg ha-1) uptake while
highest total P (17.86 kg ha-1), K (75.49 kg ha-1) and B
(42.84 g ha-1) uptake were observed with S1 (MOP).
6. Different levels and sources of potassium and their
interactions showed non-significant effect on pH, EC,
organic
carbon
and
per
cent
calcium
carbonate
equivalent of soil after harvest of groundnut.
7. The available N, P, K, S and exchangeable Ca, Mg and Na
in soil were not significantly affected by different levels
and sources of potassium. The interaction effects were
also found non- significant for soil nutrient status in the
investigation.
71
CONCLUSIONS
i.
Pod, kernel and haulm yield, oil content and oil
yield of groundnut was significantly increased due
to the application of increasing levels of potassium
i.e. 40 kg K2O ha-1 over control and with application
of sulphate of potash.
ii.
The application of potassium significantly increased
the uptake of N, P, K, S, Ca and B.
iii.
The availability of nutrients in soil after harvest
were found non-significant with different levels and
sources of potassium.
72
6. LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous, 2013. Directorate of Economic and statistics,
Department
of
Agriculture
and
Cooperation,
Government of India, New Delhi.
Anonymous, 2015. Ministry of Finance, Government of India.
Economic survey 2014-2015.
A.O.A.C. 2002. Official Methods of Analysis Association of
Official Agricultural Chemists Washington, D.C.
Alireza, H.G., Vishekaei, M.N.S. and Hosseinzadeh, M.H. 2012.
Effect of potassium and calcium application on yield,
yield components and qualitative characteristics of peanut
(Arachis hypogaea L.) in uilan province Iran. World Appl.
Sci. J. 16 (4): 540-546
Anguissola, S., Silva, Botteschi, G. 1999. Effect of fly ash on
the availability of Zn, Cu, Ni and Cd to chi-cory. Agri.
Ecosystem and Environ. 72:159-163.
Bala, H. M. B., Ogunlela, V. B., Tanimu, B. and Kuchinda,
N.C., 2011. Response of two groundnut (Arachis
hypogaea L.) varieties to sowing date and NPK fertilizer
rate in a semi-arid environment: growth and growth
attributes. Asian J. Crop Sci. 1-10.
Balasubramanian, P. 1997. Integrated nutrient management
in
irrigated groundnut. Indian J. Agron. 42(4): 683-
687.
Bale Rao, P. N., Jadhao, P. N. and Fulzele, G. R. 1993.
Response of
promising genotypes to fertilizer levels
during summer. Indian J. Agron. 38 (3): 505-507.
73
Carlson, C.L. and Adriano, D.C. 1993. Environmental impacts
of coal combustion on residues. J. Environ. Qual.
22:227-47.
Chandra, Pradyut., Samui, R.C. and Bordolui, S.K. 2006.
Growth, yield attributes and yield of different cultivars
of groundnut as affected by potassium application. J.
Crop. Weed. 2(1): 37-39.
Chapman, H.D. and Pratt, P.F. (1982). Methods of analysis for
soils,
plants and water. University of California,
Division of Agric. Sci.,
USA.
Cheng, K.L. and Bray, R.H. 1951. Determination of calcium,
magnesium in soil and plant material. Soil Sci. 72:42
Chitdeshwari, Selvaraj, T.P.K. and Shanmugam, P.M. 2003.
Influence
of
levels
and
fertilizers on the yield and
split
application
of
nutrient
uptake
by
groundnut. Agril. Sci. Dig. 27(2):91-94.
Darunsontaya, T.A., Suddhiprakarn, I., Kheoruenromne, N.
Prakongkep, and Gilkes, R.J. 2012. The Forms and
availability to plants of Potassium as related to
Mineralogy for Upland Oxisols and Ultisols from
Thailand, Geoderma. 170:11-24.
Davide, J.G., Nabhan, H., Tahir Saleem, M. and Nisar Ahmad.
1986. Potash fertilizers in Pakistan: Sulphate and
muriate of potash. National Fertilizer Development
Centre, Planning & Development
Division,
Govt.
of
Pakistan, Islamabad. pp. 52
Deshmukh, V. N., Atre, A. H., Rangacharya, R. P., Rewatkar,
S.
S.1993.
Effect
of
phosphorus
and
potassium
74
application on growth,
yield,
quality
and
nutrient
uptake by groundnut. J. Potassium Res. 9 (1): 72-75.
Deshmukh, V. N., Rangacharya, R. P., Rewatkar, S. S.
and Solanke,
B. U. 1994. Response of soybean to
phosphorus and potassium application in Vertisol. J.
Potassium Res. 10(4): 332-337.
Deshmukh, V.N., Warokar, R.T. and Kanakpure, B.T. 1992.
Yield, quality and nutrient uptake by groundnut as
influenced
by
potash
fertilization
and
time
of
application. J. Potassium Res. 8 (4): 367-370.
Devaranjan, L. and Kothandaraman, G. V. 1981 Studies on
the influence of phosphorus and potassium on the
protein, oil
content and quality of oil in groundnut.
Madras Agric. J. 68: 537- 545.
Devi, T. C. C. and Reddy, M. G. R. 1991. Effect of gypsum, N
and P fertilizer on groundnut. Indian J. Agron., 36
(2):265-266.
Dubey, S. K., Laghati, P. K. and Shinde, D. A. 1991. Response
of
groundnut
to
phosphorus
and
potassium
fertilization. J. Agric. Res. 6 (1): 114-118.
Dutta, R., Gogoi, P.K. and Deka, N.C. 2003. Effect of levels of
Lime and potassium on nutrient uptake and residual
soil fertility in groundnut. J. Crop Res. 26(3): 420-423.
Elayaraja, D. and Singaravel, R. 2009. Effect of organic wastes
and NPK levels on nutrient uptake and yield of
groundnut in coastal sandy soil. Madras Agric. J. 96 (712):362-364.
FAI 2011. Fertilizer statistics 2010–11, 56th edn. Fertilizer
Association of India, New Delhi.
75
Ghatak, S., Sounda, G., Maitra, S., Roy, D.K., Panda, P.K. and
Saren, B.K. 1997. Effect of irrigation and potassium on
yield attributes and yield of summer groundnut. Indian
Agriculturist. 41:203-207.
Hadwani ,G.J. and Gundalia, J.D. 2005. Effect of N, P and K
levels on yield, nutrient content, uptake and quality of
summer groundnut. J. Indian Soc. Soil Sci. 53(1):125128.
Hameed Ansari, A., Qayym, S.M. and Usman Usmanikhail, M.
1993. Impact of row spacing and NPK fertilizer levels
on the growth, seed yield and oil content in pea nut. Oil
crops Newsletter. 10: 50-53.
Hatcher, J.J. and L.V. Wilcox, L.V. 1950. Colorimetric
determination of boron using Carmine. Anal. Chem.
22:250-252.
Isha Sharma and Rajwar, G.S. 2016. Effect of bagasse and
mixed biochar on growth and productivity of Glycine
max (L) Merril Int. J. Appl. Res. 2(5): 220-225
Jackson, M.L. 1973. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of
India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi: 256-260.
Jadav, A.S. and Matkhede, R.N. 1982. Pattern of dry matter
accumulation in groundnut as influenced by nitrogen
and phosphorus fertilization. Madras Agric. J. 89(1):
756-759.
Jana, P.K., Ghatak, S., Barik, A. and Biswas, B.C.1990.
Response of summer groundnut to nitrogen and
potassium. Indian J. Agron.
35: 137-143
76
Karunakaran, V., Rammohan, J., Chellamuthu, V. and
Poonghauzhalan, R. 2009. Effect of integrated nutrient
management on the growth and yield of groundnut
(Arachis hypogaea L.) in coastal region of Karaikal.
Indian J. Agron. 55(2):128-132.
Khalak, A. and Kumar Swamy, A.S. 1993. Effect of irrigation
and residual fertility on nodulation of groundnut in
potato based
cropping system. Curr. Res. 27(11-12):
152-153.
Khamparia, N. K. 1996. Effect of increasing levels of
phosphorus and potassium and their interaction on
yield and nutrition of groundnut in sandy loam soil. J.
Soils Crops. 6: 20-23.
Krauss, A. and Jin Jiyun. 2000. Strategies for improving
balanced fertilization. IFA Production and International
Trade Conference, 17-19 October, Shanghai, China.
Kulkarni, S. and Upperi, S.N. 2015. Response of groundnut
(Arachis hypogea L.) to different levels of potassium in
red soil. Environ. Ecol. 33 (2A): 914-916.
Laxminarayana, K., and Subbaiah, G. V. 1992. Effect of
mixing of sandy soil with clay vertisol and potassium on
yield and nutrient uptake by groundnut. J. Indian Soc.
Soil Sci. 43(4):691-696.
Lindsay, W. L. and Norvell, W. A. (1978). Development of DTPA
soil test for Zn, Fe, Mn and Cu. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 42:
421-426.
77
Mandal, K. G., Ghosh, P. K., Wanjari, R. H., Hati, K. M.,
Bandyopadhyay, K. K. and Misra, A. K. 2002. Practical
implication of nutrient x Nutrient interaction to boost
oilseeds productivity in India. Fert. Res. 47(7): 13-18.
Munda, G. C., Patel, D. P. and Islam, M. 2004. Effect of macro
and micronutrients on growth and yield of groundnut.
Ann. Plant Physiol. 18 (1): 9-12.
Nathiya, K. V. and Sanjivkumar, V. 2014. Combined effect of
different plant nutrients of organic and inorganic
sources on nutrient uptake and yield of groundnut
crop. J. Appl. Natural Sci. 1(6): 463-466.
Nelson, D.W. and Sommer, L.E. 1982. Total carbon and
organic matter. In methods of soil analysis, Part – II,
Page, A.L. (Ed.) Am. Soc. Agron. Inc. Soil Sci. Soc. Am.
Inc Madison, Wisc.USA.
539- 577.
Okello, D. K., Biruma, M. and Deom, C. M. 2010. Overview of
groundnut research in Uganda: Past, present and
future. African J. Biotech. 9:6448-59.
Olsen, S. R., Cole, C. V. Watanabe, F. S. and Dean, L.
A.,(1965) Estimation of available P in soils by extraction
with
NaHCO3
USDA
Circular
No.939.
USDA,
Washington, DC.
Page, A. L. (Ed). 1982. Methods of soil analysis Agronomy
Monograph No-9.Pt.2. American Soc. of Agron. Inc. Soil
Sci Soc. of Amer. Inc. Publ. Medison, Wisconsin, USA.
Panse, V.G. and Sukhatme, P.V. 1967. Statistical methods for
Agricultural Workers, ICAR, New Delhi, pp. 347.
78
Patra, A. K., Tripathy, S. K. and Vyas, R. 1995. Response of
groundnut to potassium with varying levels of nitrogen
and phosphorus. J. Oilseeds Res. 12(1): 83-86.
Parkinson, J.A. and Allen, S. E.1975.Analysis of nitrogen,
phosphorus
and potash from plant. Short Commn.
Soil Sci. Plant Analysis.
6(1):6-11.
Patel, G. R. and Patel, R. B. 1988. Nutrient interaction in
groundnut. J. Oilseeds Res. 5 (1):49-53.
Piper, C. S.1966. Soil and plant analysis, Hans publishers
Bombay, 135-136.
Ponnuswamy, K., Balakrishnan, V. K. and Santhi. P. 1996.
Exploiting the production potential of groundnut by
improved nutrient management in the lower Bhavani
project
area,
Tamil
Nadu,
India.
Int.
Arachis
Newsletter.16: 50-52.
Rajeev Gopal. 2012. Impact
of Variable
Potassium on
Metabolism, Oil, and Seed Quality of Groundnut, Comm.
Soil Sci. Pl. Anal. 43(19):2504-2511.
Rami Reddy, S. R., Chalam, P. S., Reddy, G. H. S. and Raju, A.
P.1982. Effect of Irrigation frequency and nitrogen on
groundnut yield and nutrient uptake. Plant Soil.
65:257-263.
Rana, D.S., Kalsi, H.S., Kapur, M.L. and Bhanari, A.L. 1984.
Response of groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) and raya
(Brasica juncea L.) to fertilizer application. Indian J.
Agron. 29(1): 122-124.
Rathore,S.S. and Chaudhary, D.R.,Vaisya L.K., Shekhawat
Kapila and
Bhatt
B.P.
2014.
Schoenite
and
79
Potasium Sulphate: indigenous potassic fertilizer for
rainfed groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.).Indian J. tradit.
Know. 13(1):222-226.
Read, J. J., Raja Reddy, K. and Jenkins, J. J. 2006. Yield and
fiber quality of Upland cotton as influenced by nitrogen
and potassium nutrition. Euro. J. Agron. 24: 282-290.
Reddy, S.T., Reddy, D.S. and Reddy, G.P. 2011. Fertilize
management
for
maximizing
productivity
profitability of export oriented groundnut
and
(Arachis
hypogaea L.) J. Res. Angrau. 39(4)83-85.
Salve ,Y.V. and Gunjal, B. S. 2011. Effect of different levels of
phosphorus and potassium on summer groundnut
(Arachis hypogaea L.). Int. J. agric.Sci.7 (2):352-355.
Selva kumari, G., Baskar, M., Jayanthi, D. and Mathan, K.K.
1999. Fly ash in integrated plant nutrient system and
its impact on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptake
of groundnut. Madras Agri. J. 36: 556-561.
Sharma, B.M., and J.S.P. Yadav. 1997. Availability of
phosphorus to grain
as
influenced
by
phosphatic
fertilization and irrigation regimes. Indian J. Agric. Sci.
46: 205-210.
Sharma, I. and Rajwar, G. S. 2016. Effect of bagasse and
mixed biochar on growth and productivity of Glycine
max (L) Merril Int. J. Appl. Res. 2(5): 220-225.
Sharma , S.K. 2016. Impact of Bagasse ash abatement soil on
growth and production of Mustard (Brassica juncia).
2(11) May 59 E: ISSN NO.: 2455-0817.
80
Shinde, S .H., Kaushik, S.S. and Bhilare, R.L. 2000.Effect of
Plastic mulch, levels of fertilizers and foliar spray on
yield and quality of summer groundnut. J. Maharashtra
Agric. Univ. 25(2):227-29.
Singh,
A.L.
2004.
Mineral
nutrient
disorders and remedies
in
requirement,
groundnut.
Research in India, National
Research
their
Groundnut
Centre
for
Groundnut, Junagadh, India. pp. 137-159.
Singh, A.L., and Vidya Chaudhari. 1996. Interaction of
sulphur with phosphorus and potassium in groundnut
nutrition in calcareous soil. Indian J. Plant Physiol. New
series (1): 21-27.
Singh, C.B., Oswal, M.C. and Grewal, K.S. 2002. Impact of fly
ash application
on
consumptive
and
water
use
efficiency in wheat (Triticum aestivum) under different
soils. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 72:396-9.
Singh, R.A. 2007. Effect of variable doses of potassium,
sulphur and calcium on Pod yield of short duration
summer groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) Int. J. Agric.
Sci. 3(1):196-198.
Srinivasarao,
Ch.
2013.Impact
Productivity, Use
of
Potassium
On-Station
Crop
Efficiency, Uptake and Economics
of some Rainfed Crops in Andhra
India:
on
and
Pradesh,
On-Farm
Southern
Experiences.
International Potash Institute, Switzerland. p. 33.
Srinivasarao, Ch., and Surekha, K.
Fertilizer and
Management
2012. Soil Potassium
Strategies
in
Pradesh Agriculture. Indian J. Fertil 8(10):40-59.
Andhra
81
Subbiah, B. V. and Asija, G. L. 1956. A rapid procedure for
estimation of available Nitrogen in soil. Curr. Sci.
25:256-260.
Subrahmaniyan, K., Kalaiselvan, P. and Arulmozhi, N. 2000.
Studies
on the effect of nutrient spray and graded
level of NPK fertilizers on the growth and yield of
groundnut. Int. J.Trop. Agric. 18(3): 287-290.
Thimmegowda, S. 1993. Effect of fertilizer levels on growth
and yield of groundnut after kharif rice. J. Res. 21 (42):
36-38.
Thorave, D. S., and Dhonde, M. B. 2007. Morphological
indices and yield attributes as influenced by integrated
nutrient management in summer groundnut. Ann. Plant
Physiol 21(2): 186-188.
Tiwari, S.P., Joshi, O.P. and Billore, S.D. 2001. Realisable
yield potential of soybean varieties at farm level in
India. In: Souvenir “Harnessing the soy potential for
health and wealth”, India Soy Forum. SOPA, India. pp
108-112.
Tabatabai,
M.A.
turbidimetric
and
Bremmer,
J.M.
1970.
Simple
method of determination of total sulphur
in plants. Agron. J. 62:
805-808.
Trivedi, K.K., Sisodia, R.I., Sharma, R.K., Tiwari, P.N., Thakur,
S.S. And Singh, T. 2001. Effect of phosphorus and PSB
culture on yield and economics of groundnut in
Western region of Madhya Pradesh. Bharatiya Krishi
Anusandhan Patrika. 16(1&2): 72-75.
82
Umar, S. 2006. Alleviating adverse effects of water stress on
yield of sorghum, mustard and groundnut by potassium
application. Pak J. Bot. 38(5):196-198.
Umar, S., Bansal, S. K., Patricia, I. and Magen, H. 1999. Effect
of foliar fertilization of potassium on yield, quality, and
nutrient uptake
of
groundnut.
J.
Plant
Nutr.
22
(11):1785-1795.
Umar, S. and Moinuddin, 2002. Genotypic differences in yield
and quality of groundnut as affected by potassium
nutrition under erratic rainfall conditions. J. Plant
Nutr., 25: 1549-1562.
Veeramani,
P.
and
management
Subrahmaniyan,
sustainable
K.
2011.
groundnut
India – A review. Int. J. Engg.
Sci.
Nutrient
productivity
Technol.
in
3:8138-
8147.
Vinod Kumar, B.C., Ghose, Ravibhat and Karmakar, S. 2000.
Effect of irrigation and fertilizer on yield, water- use
efficiency and nutrient uptake of summer groundnut.
Indian J. Agron. 45(4):756-762.
Viradiya, M.B., Marsonia, P.J. and Golankiya, B.A. 2003.
Modelling the yield response of groundnut to potassium.
J. Potassium Res. 19 : 82-87.
William, C.H. and Steinberg, A. 1959. Soil sulphur fraction as
chemical indices of available sulphur in some Australian
soil. Aus. J. Agric. Res. 10: 340-352.
83
Yadav, R. L., Sen, N. L. and Yadav, B. L. 2003. Response of
onion to nitrogen and potassium fertilization under semiarid condition of Rajasthan. Indian J. Hort. 60:176-178.
Yakadri,
M.
and
Satyanarayana,
V.
1995.
Dry
matter
production and uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and
potassium in rainfed groundnut. Indian J. Agron. 40(2):
325-327.
84
7. VITA
MISS. BORNALI BORAH
A candidate for the degree
Of
MASTER OF SCIENCE (AGRICULTURE)
In
SOIL SCIENCE AND AGRICULTURE CHEMISTRY
2017
Title of thesis
Major Field
: Effect of levels and sources of
potassium on yield and quality of
kharif groundnut (Arachis
hypogaea L.) in Entisol.
: Soil Science and Agricultural
chemistry.
Biographical information
Personal
: Born :Vill- No.1 Karunabari ,
Dist- Lakhimpur, Assam on
27th april, 1993 Daughter of Mr.
Khagen Ch. Borah and
Hemoprova Borah.
Educational
: Passed Primary and High School
with first division (Star mark)
from Laluk Higher Secondary
School, Laluk, Lakhimpur,
District.(Assam) in 2009.
: Passed H.S.C. from North
Lakhimpur College,Lakhimpur,
Dist. in 2011.
: Received B.Sc. (Agriculture)
degree from Assam Agricutural
Universiy in 2015 with first
division with distinction.
Address
: Vill: No.1 Karunabari, PO: laluk,
Dist: Lakhimpur, Pin: 784160,
Assam
E-mail
: bornaliborah1993@gmail.com