Thesis (051111)

RESPONSE OF MUNG BEAN (Vigna radiata L)

GENOTYPES TO NITROGEN APPLICATIONS AT

DIFFERENT GROWTH STAGES

Muhammad Nasir and Habib Akbar,

Department of Agronomy, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agricultural University,

Peshawar, Pakistan, November, 2011

ABSTRACT

Mung bean is among the most important pulses grown in Pakistan. An experiment entitled "Response of Mung Bean (Vigna radiata L) genotypes to nitrogen applications at different growth stages" was conducted at new developmental farm, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Agricultural University, Peshawar, during spring 2009, under normal irrigated conditions. The experiment was carried out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with split plot having four replications. Different nitrogen treatments were allotted to main plots, and varieties were designated to the sub plots. Three varieties of Mung bean (KM 1, AZRI 2006, and NIAB 2006) were sown with eight levels of nitrogen (T0: 0 Nitrogen, T1: 30 kg N ha-1 at time of sowing, T2: 30 kg ha-

1 at 30 DAS, T3: 30 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS , T4: 15 kg ha-1 at sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS, T5: 15 kg ha-1 at sowing, 15 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS, T6: 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS, T7: 10 kg ha-1 at sowing, 10 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS). Varieties had a significant (P < 0.05) on pods plant-1, biomass yield (kg ha-1), grain yield (kg ha-1) and harvest index (%). The effect of varieties were non-significant (P > 0.05) on emergence m-2 (m-2), days to flowering, LAI before flowering, LAI after flowering, CGR 15 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 30 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 45 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), seed pod-1 and 1000-grain weight (g). The effect of nitrogen fertilizer significantly (P < 0.05) increased emergence m-2 (m-2), days to flowering, LAI after flowering, CGR 15 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 30 DAS (g cm-1

day-1), CGR 45 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), pods plant-1, seed pod-

1, 1000-grain weight (g), biomass yield (kg ha-1), grain yield (kg ha-1) and harvest index (%). Throughout, variety KM 1 produced maximum pod plant -1 (14.8), highest biomass yield (2941 kg ha-1), maximum grain yield (672.8 kg ha-1), maximum harvest index (21.60 %). Overall, nitrogen fertilizer treatment T4 enhances emergence m-2 (19.13 m-2), days to flowering (43.17), LAI after flowering (0.03558), CGR 15 DAS (0.007667 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 30 DAS (0.03208 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 45 DAS (0.05050 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (0.2097 g cm-1 day-1), pods plant-1 (22.17), seed pod-1 (15.75), 1000-grain weight (61.42 g), biomass yield (4424 kg ha-1), grain yield (1175 kg ha-1) and harvest index (26.53 %).To conclude, variety KM 1 ranked first, whereas, nitrogen treatment T4

showed a significant increase in the studied parameters.

1

I. INTRODUCTION

Mung bean (Vigna radiata L. Wilczek) belongs to the family Leguminoseae and

sub family papilonaceae. It is one of the important pulse crops cultivated during

summer through in majority of Asian Countries and through out Pakistan. In Pakistan,

mung bean was cropped on about 217.8 thousand hectares, with a total production of

138.5 thousand tones and an average yield of 636 kg ha-1 during 2006-07. In N.W.F.P.

mung bean was cropped on about 9.5 thousand hectares, with a total production of 6.3

thousand tones and average yield of 663 kg ha-1 (Ministry of Food and Agriculture,

2006-07). The crop is potentially useful in improving cropping pattern as it can be

grown as a catch crop and inter crop due to its rapid growth and early maturing

characteristics. It can also fix atmospheric nitrogen through the symbiotic relationship

with rhizobia that have economical and environmental benefit (BBS, 2005). Mung bean

is one of an important and cheap source of vegetable proteins, containing 25 - 28 %

protein. In many countries it is used as source of protein in cereal based diets. The

seeds may be cooked and eaten as whole or split; fermented or parched; milled or

ground into flour. Whole or split are used to make soups and curries; added to various

spiced or fried dishes. The flour is used to make noodles and biscuits. Immature green

fruits are sometimes used as vegetables. Plants residues are used either as animal fodder

or chopped in to the soil as a green manure. Mung bean is also used as forage or as a

green manure.

Experimental work on varietal trials is continuously required for increasing

yield. Similarly research work on the application of nitrogen to mung bean especially

during different stages is very limited to base on. Literature on mung bean or other

crops have generated idea for the present study, is reviewed. Ling et al. (1987) studied

various genotypes of mung bean for their physiological efficiency to select the most

desirable genotypes. Significant difference was found in grain and biological yield of

different genotypes. Similarly Miah, 1981; Razaq, 1995; Hussain, 1996; Saeed, 1997

have found differences for yield and yield components in different mung bean varieties.

Asaduzzaman et al. (2008) evaluated the effect of nitrogen on yield of mung bean

(Vigna radiata L.) cv. BARI mung-5 during the period from March to May 2006. The

study revealed that application of 30 kg N ha-1 at flower initiation stage (35 DAS)

significantly improved dry matter accumulation. This greater dry matter production

2

eventually partitioned to pods per plant, seeds per plant and 1000-seed weight and

positive relationship was observed in pods per plant and seeds per plant. Ardeshana et

al. (1993) studied that, the management of fertilizer is the important one that greatly

affects the growth, development and yield of this crop. Pulses although fix nitrogen

from the atmosphere, it is evident that application of nitrogenous fertilizers becomes

helpful in increasing the yield.

Plant growth and yield is a function of a large number of physiological

processes, which are affected by environmental and genetic factors. In crop the growth

parameters like optimum leaf area index (LAI) at flowering and crop growth rate

(CGR) have been identified as the major determinants of yield (Sun et al., 1999).

Thakur and Patel (1998) reported that dry matter production, leaf area index, leaf area

duration (LAD), crop growth rate, net assimilation rate (NAR) and relative growth rate

(RGR) are ultimately reflected in higher grain yield. Meadley and Milbourn (1971)

stated that the major source of dry matter for pea yield was the photosynthate produced

during the post flowering period. Srivastava (1980) revealed comparatively higher

CGR in podding stage than in early growth stage in different varieties. Harvest index

and economic yield showed significant positive correlation value of (r = +0.595), while

negative correlation value of (r = -0.435) was observed between harvest index and

biological yield. Luis López et al., (2000) reported that dry matter accumulation, leaf

area index, and leaf area duration were directly correlated.

In Pakistan low yield may be attributed to lack of genetic potential of varieties

and lack appropriate production technology. Hence cultivars performing better in terms

of yield are required for improving the seed yield per unit area. Among the production

timely nutrients especially nitrogen availability is of prime importance. In Pakistan,

quantity of fertilizer nitrogen used is relatively less important than the balanced and

timely use of nitrogen. For this reason the present study will be therefore carried out to

investigate effect of nitrogen application at different stages on various cultivars of

Vigna radiata L. under irrigated land and observe differences in growth and yield

parameters that contribute to grain yield of mung bean.

3

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A lot of varietal research has been conducted on mung bean crop in Pakistan.

Similarly some experimental work has also conducted on nitrogen application to mung

bean. The majority of these previous studies are related only on yield components for

arid agriculture. Nearly all of that work has shown its own importance in practical life

but its use for planning fertilization program and for sustainable production of mung

bean is not appropriate. The experimental studies related to the present study on mung

bean or its closely related crops are reviewed as follows.

Braga et al. 1973 applied 0, 30, or 60 kg N ha1 in different combinations at

sowing time to cowpeas. In most cases response to nitrogen was positive and linear in

bean crops. Similarly application of 60 and 120 kg ha-1of P2O5 increased beans yield

over the yield from control plots. There was no response to applied potash.

Yazdi and Zali 1978 working with soybean cultivar Clark 63, grown with or

without rhizobium japonicum and given 0-180 kg ha-1 N found that the number of days

to flowering was increased by Nitrogen application.

Mahmoud et al. 1979 worked with soybean cultivar Harosoy when seeds were

inoculated with rhizobium japonicum strain E45 and 0-100 kg ha-1 N as ammonium

nitrate (31% N) or 0-500 kg ha-1 super phosphate were applied. Plants from

uninoculated seed with or with out fertilizers, formed no nodules. Inoculation + 75 kg

ha-1 N resulted in high nodulation and increased seed yield, and N content. Higher N

rates adversely affected N fixation and decreased yields.

Shahidullah and Hossain 1980 worked on different N fertilizer rates from 0 to

90 kg ha-1 and reported that 40 kg ha-1 N with no inoculation gave the greatest number

of pod plant-1 (57.5), number of branches plant-1 (3.4) number of pods plant-1 (5.94) and

seed yield of 749 g/3 x 1.25 m2 plot. Plant height was greatest (77.1 cm) with inoculum

+ 30 kg ha-1 N.

Chitrev et al. 1982 conducted a field trial on the effect of N fertilization of

green gram on symbiotic efficiency of Rhizobium inoculants. He used 14 Rhizobial

strains for inoculating the mung crop. Symbiotic efficiency in terms increased plant

4

growth and seed yield of 14 Rhizobial strains used for Vigna radiata seed inoculation

as affected by soil application of 25 kg ha-1 N, was studied. The strains were divided in

to three groups. Efficiency was increased in the respective strains, was not affected in

the adaptive strains and was decreased in sensitive strains.

Nagre 1982 conducted studies on seed inoculation and application of 10 or 20

kg N ha-1 for both green gram (Vigna radiata) and black gram (V.mungo). No

significant differences for yield were observed due to Nitrogen rates.

Srivastava and Rama 1982 reported that application of 15 kg ha-1 N to the soil

or seed inoculated with Rhizobium and applied with or without 0.5 kg Na molybdate

ha-1 increased plant dry weight, number of green leaves and branches plant-1 and seed

protein content of green gram with no effect on nodule weight.

Raju and Varma 1984 observed that seed inoculation and or application of 15-

60 kg ha-1 N significantly increased nodulation and seed yield of V.radiata. Inoculation

+ 15 kg ha-1 was the most effective treatment.

Patel and Parmar 1986 observed that increasing N application to Vigna radiata

cv. Gujrat 1 from 0 to 45 kg ha-1 increased average seed yield from 0.83 to 0.94 tons

ha-1, and increased protein content, plant height, number of branches and pods plant-

1and seed pod-1, pod length and 1000 grain weight.

Ling et al. 1987 studied the performance of 19 AVRDC varieties tested in

Jiangsu province during 1984-86. Most of the AVRDC varieties were earlier than the

controls, Yongning and Sihong, with VC 2719A, VC 1973, VCI 562A, VC1000C and

VC 3729 among the earliest. All the AVRDC varieties had larger seeds than the

controls. The largest seeds (a 1000-seed weight 76 g) were produced by VC 2775A and

the highest yield by VC 27688 (1520 kg ha-1) followed by VC 2768A (1411 kg ha-1).

No fertilizer was necessary on fertile soils but on soils with low fertility or in case of

late sowing or for high density of plants ha-1 application of 15.20 kg ha-1 of quick acting

nitrogen fertilizers during flowering and pod setting gave the best results.

Mand and Chahal 1987 found that inoculation at all levels of nitrate application

0, 10, 20, and 40 ppm N as KNO3 significantly increased nitrate reductase activity in V.

5

radiata. Shoot length and N uptake plant-1 were maximum at 40 ppm N, whereas

number and dry weight of nodules plant-1 as well as nodule nitrogenase activity were

maximum at 20 ppm N.

Buttery et al. 1987 studied that, nitrogen fertilization is sometimes needed to

achieve a substantial yield of legumes (e.g., soybean) when the symbiotic N2 fixation is

unable to provide enough nitrogen. However, fertilizer rates exceeding those exerting a

“starter nitrogen” effect generally reduce nodulation and N2 fixation.

Mahadkar and Saraf 1988 obtained results from field experiments during the

spring/summers and kharif seasons of 1984-85 and showed that both Vigna mungo and

Vigna radiata gave a significant response to N and P and rhizobium inoculation.

Maiti et al. 1988 worked on green gram and lentils and found that nitrogen and

seed inoculation increased the V.radiata seed yield by 15-20% and 5-10% respectively,

but had no significant effect on lentil seed yields.

Kucey 1989 studied the response of the Rhizobium-legume symbiosis to added

nitrogen fertilizer is definitely determined by time of application (growth stage), level

and form of N, and the legume species.

Basu and Bandyopadhyay 1990 inoculated Vigna radiata with Rhizobium strain

M-10 or JCa-1 applied with 0-40 kg ha-1 N. Inoculation increased number of pods plant-

1, seed pod-1 and 1000 grain weight and N uptake increased with increasing N rates up

to 30 kg ha-1 N.

Kaushik et al. 1995 studied the root system of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) was

poorly developed after application of fertilizer-N (up to 60 kg of N ha-1), and this also

affected other N2-fixing parameters, e.g., nodule number, nitrogenase activity, nodule

dry weight, shoot weight, and root and shoot nitrogen.

Muller et al. 1995 studied that nitrates are more inhibitory to nodulation than is

ammonia, especially if added shortly after planting. Application of fertilizer-N (25 mg

of N kg-1 of soil during sowing was less detrimental to N2 fixation by P. svulgaris than

during vegetative growth. Eaglesham have demonstrated Experiments to know that

NO3- inhibits nodule formation on legumes primarily as a root-localized effect rather

6

than as a function of whole-plant N nutrition. When NO3- levels were sufficiently high

to completely suppress nodulation on the original root (primary root), there were

profuse nodulation and significant nitrogenase activity (C2H2 reduction) on the

adventitious roots of soybean and nodules were formed on the lateral roots of V. faba

and P. sativum.

Ayub et al. 1999 studied the response of two mung bean cultivars namely NM-

54 and NM-92 to nitrogen levels of 0, 20, 40 and 60 kg ha-1 under field conditions. The

cultivar NM-92 gave significantly higher seed yield than cultivar NM-54 due to higher

number of pod bearing branches plant-1, number of pods plant-1 and number of seeds

pod-1. Yield and yield components were also influenced significantly by nitrogen levels.

The application of nitrogen at the rate of 60 kg ha-1 significantly depressed the seed

yield and yield components except number of pods plant-1 which were statistically

similar with nitrogen application of 40 kg ha-1. Maximum increase in seed yield,

recorded at 40 kg N ha-1, was about 31 percent higher of control. The increase in seed

yield with nitrogen application was related to higher number of pods plant-1, number of

seeds pod-1 and 1000-grain weight. Protein contents were also influenced significantly

by nitrogen application, being maximum (26.18%) at nitrogen level of 40 kg ha-1.

Nitrogen application at the rate of 40 kg ha-1 seems to be the optimum level for

harvesting higher yield of mung bean.

Elahi et al. 2004 compared two mungbean (Vigna radiata [L.] Wilczek)

cultivars, NM-51 and NM-92, for plant growth and root nodulation during development

at different nitrogen regimes (0, 2, 5 and 10 mM) in sand cultures. Dry weight of

plants, after 5, 8 and 10 weeks of sowing, increased in both cultivars at all the nitrate

levels. The maximum increase in dry weight, however, occurred at 5 mM nitrate for

NM-51 and at 2 mM nitrate for NM-92. The two cultivars were comparable in

reproductive growth since number of flowers per plant, number of pods per plant and

fresh weight of pods per plant generally increased with increasing nitrogen levels.

Nodule development in both the cultivars was stimulated in the presence of 2 mM

nitrate but was increasingly depressed by the higher levels of nitrate. Nitrate levels of 5

and 10 mM decreased nodule number and nodule fresh weight. Cultivar NM-92

showed increased growth and nodulation at all nitrate levels compared to NM-51. Also,

nodulation of NM-92 was more tolerant to nitrate compared with NM-51.

7

III. MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experiment on “response of mung bean (Vigna radiata L.) genotypes to

nitrogen application at different stages” was conducted at Agricultural Research Farm

of NWFP Agricultural University Peshawar, during fall 2009 under normal irrigated

condition. A basal dose of 60 kg ha-1 of P was applied while N will be applied

according to treatments. Source of fertilizer for N and P was urea and triple super

phosphate respectively. The experiment was laid out in RCB design with split plot

arrangements having four replications with a net plot size of 2.4 x 5 m2. Each subplot

consisted of 8 rows 5 m long, with row to row spacing of 30 cm.

The nitrogen treatments and varieties will be as follows;

I. Nitrogen Treatments (Main plots)

T0 = 0 Nitrogen

T1 = 30 kg N ha-1 at time of sowing

T2 = 30 kg ha-1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)

T3 = 30 kg ha-1 at 60 days after sowing (DAS)

T4 = 15 kg ha-1 at sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS

T5 = 15 kg ha-1 at sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS

T6 = 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS

T7 = 10 kg ha-1 at sowing, 10 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS

II. Varieties (Sub plots)

1. KM 1

2. Nayab 2006

3. Azri 2006

The following data will be recorded during the growth of crop;

1. Emergence m-2

2. Days to flowering

3. LAI at flowering stage

4. CGR for 15 days interval till maturity

8

5. Pods Plant-1

6. Seeds Pod-1

7. 1000 grain weight

8. Biomass yield

9. Grain yield

10. Harvest Index

Emergence m-2

Emergence will be recorded when no further emergence will be observed. For

this 2-5 representative sampling units will be selected with the help of length measuring

tape.

Area = # of rows x row length x row to row distance

Emergence-2 = [# of plants] / [Area (in m2)]

Days to flowering

Mean number of days to flowering will be recorded from date of sowing to time

of flowering.

Leaf Area Index (LAI) at start of flowering and end of flowering stages

Leaf area will be measured at above mentioned stages through leaf area

machine and then LAI will be calculated as follows.

LAI = LA GA

Crop Growth Rate (CGR)

CGR = 1/Ground area * (Δ weight/ Δ t)

Pods per plant

Number of pods per plant will be counted on five random selected plants in

each sub-plot and average will be worked out.

9

Seeds per pod

Seeds per pod will be recorded at maturity, taking 20 pods, randomly selected

from each sub-plot and dividing their sum by 20.

Grain yield (kg ha-1)

Four central rows (6 m2) in each subplot will be harvested, sun dried, threshed

and converted into grain yield per hectare according to the following formula:

Grain yield (kg ha-1) = GY/6 m2 X 10000 m2

Biological Yield (kg ha-1)

Two central rows will be harvested from each sub-plot; sun dried, weighed and

converted to hectare by procedure mentioned above for grain yield.

1000 grain weight

1000 grains will be taken from each sub-plot, weighed on electronic balance in

grams in the laboratory.

Harvest index

Harvest index will be calculated by dividing grain yield on biological yield

obtained from each sub-plot and multiplying with 100 according to formula as follows.

Harves t index = Grain yield x 100 Biological yield

10

ANOVA TABLE

Source of Variation Degree of Freedom

Replication (R) 4-1 = 3

Nitrogen Treatment (N) 8-1 = 7

Error (R-1)(N-1) 3x7 = 21

Varieties (V) 3-1 = 2

N x V 7x2 = 14

Error N(R-1)(V-1) 48 .

Total ( RxNxV-1) 96

11

SOWING PLAN

T1 T4 T6 T2

T5 T3 T7 T0

V2 V1 V3 V2 V1 V3 V2 V1

V3 V2 V1 V3 V2 V1 V3 V2

V1 V3 V2 V1 V3 V2 V1 V3

↕1m

V1 V2 V3 V2 V3 V2 V3 V2

V2 V3 V1 V3 V2 V1 V2 V1

V3 V1 V2 V1 V1 V3 V1 V3

V2 V3 V1 V2 V1 V3 V2 V1

V3 V1 V2 V3 V2 V1 V3 V2

V1 V2 V3 V1 V3 V2 V1 V3

V1 V2 V3 V2 V1 V3 V2 V2

V2 V3 V1 V3 V2 V2 V1 V1

V3 V1 V2 V1 V3 V1 V3 V3

12

2.4 m

T2 T0 T3 T6 T4 T1 T5 T7

T6 T7 T1 T5 T4 T2 T3 T0

T5 T0 T2 T4 T3 T1 T7 T5

5m

R1

R2

R4

R3

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

1. Emergence m-2

Data concerning emergence m-2 as affected by varieties and nitrogen levels is shown in table 1. Nitrogen levels showed significant influence (P < 0.05) on emergence m-2. T1 (30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing) bore best results yielding 20.76 plantlets m-

2. Whereas, T0 (0 Kg N ha-1) yielded lowest (13.73) number of plantlets m-2. Non-significant differences (P > 0.05) were observed for varieties as well as varietal interaction with nitrogen levels.

Table 1. Effect of different nitrogen levels on emergence m-2 of mung bean varietiesNitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 14.50 13.70 12.97 13.73d

T1 21.50 20.62 20.15 20.76a

T2 17.20 15.47 15.92 16.20cd

T3 17.17 14.87 15.90 15.98cd

T4 19.55 19.32 18.50 19.13ab

T5 19.50 19.40 18.22 19.04ab

T6 17.22 16.55 16.22 16.67bc

T7 17.92 17.75 17.50 17.73bc

Mean 18.07 17.21 16.92LSD value at 5% for nitrogen levels = 2.703Mean values followed by different letters are significantly different from each other

using LSD test at 0.05 level of probability.T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1

T1 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowingT2 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)T3 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST4 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAST5 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST6 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST7 = 10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1

at 60 DAS

2. Days to flowering

The influence of N levels on days to flowering is presented in table 2. Statistical analysis of data showed that days to flowering were significantly (P < 0.05) affected by N levels. T2 (30 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS) took maximum days to flowering (43.67), whereas, T1 (30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing) took least days to flowering (41.67).

13

However, varietal differences and their interaction with N levels showed non-significant (P > 0.05) differences with regard to days to flowering.

Table 2. Effect of different nitrogen levels on days to flowering of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 43.00 42.50 42.50 42.67bc

T1 41.00 41.50 42.50 41.67d

T2 44.00 43.50 43.50 43.67a

T3 43.00 43.00 42.50 42.83abc

T4 43.25 43.25 43.00 43.17abc

T5 42.50 42.25 43.50 42.42cd

T6 43.50 43.25 43.25 43.42ab

T7 43.25 43.25 43.00 43.17abc




at 60 DAS

3. Leaf area index before flowering

The impact of nitrogen levels on leaf area index (LAI) regarding different varieties is

presented in table 3. Statistical analysis of the data revealed that LAI was non-

significantly (P > 0.05) affected by different nitrogen levels and varieties.

Table 3. Effect of different nitrogen levels on leaf area index before flowering of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

14

(Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 0.038 0.037 0.037 0.037

T1 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.041

T2 0.040 0.040 0.039 0.039

T3 0.038 0.038 0.040 0.039

T4 0.042 0.042 0.041 0.041

T5 0.041 0.041 0.040 0.041

T6 0.039 0.039 0.038 0.038

T7 0.042 0.041 0.041 0.042

Mean 0.040 0.040 0.040T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


at 60 DAS

4. Leaf area index after flowering

Data regarding LAI after flowering as affected by varieties and nitrogen levels is shown in Table 4. Nitrogen levels had significant (P < 0.05) effect on LAI after flowering. Mean values of the data revealed that maximum LAI after flowering was observed both for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS) and T7 (10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS) that is 0.03558 and 0.03542, respectively. However, lowest LAI after flowering was observed for T0 (0 Kg N ha-1) bearing 0.03225 value. Varietal differences showed no statistical significant (P > 0.05) variation towards LAI after flowering.

Table 4. Effect of different nitrogen levels on leaf area index after flowering of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 0.033 0.032 0.031 0.03225e

T1 0.035 0.035 0.034 0.03475ab

T2 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.03358cd

T3 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.03308de

15

T4 0.036 0.036 0.035 0.03558a

T5 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.03425bc

T6 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.03333d

T7 0.035 0.036 0.035 0.03542a




at 60 DAS

5. Crop growth rate (g cm-1 day-1) 15 days after sowing

The influence of varieties and N levels on CGR 15 DAS has been shown in Table 5. Analysis of the data exhibited that CGR 15 DAS was significantly (P < 0.05) different for N levels. However, non-significant (P > 0.05) differences were observed for varieties. Mean values of the data indicated that maximum (0.007667 g cm -1 day-1) data was observed for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), whereas, minimum (0.006333 g cm-1 day-1) data was observed for T0 (0 Kg N ha-

1).

Table 5. Effect of different nitrogen levels on crop growth rate (g cm -1 day-1) 15 days after sowing of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006333c

T1 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006750bc

T2 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007250ab

T3 0.007 0.006 0.007 0.006833abc

T4 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007667a

T5 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007667a

T6 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006750bc

16

T7 0.008 0.007 0.008 0.007500ab




at 60 DAS


Data regarding CGR 30 DAS as affected by varieties and N levels has been shown in Table 6. Analysis of the data revealed that CGR 30 DAS was significantly (P < 0.05) affected by N levels, whereas, varieties were non-significantly (P > 0.05) affected. Maximum CGR 30 DAS was observed in case of T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS). However, T0 (0 Kg N ha-1) and T3 (30 Kg N ha-

1 at 60 DAS) showed least CGR 30 DAS.



T1 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.02425c

T2 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.02300d

T3 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.02117e

T4 0.034 0.032 0.031 0.03208a

T5 0.029 0.29 0.028 0.02858b

T6 0.023 0.022 0.023 0.02283d

T7 0.029 0.027 0.028 0.02775b

Mean 0.026 0.025 0.025LSD value at 5% for nitrogen levels = 0.0008490

17

Mean values followed by different letters are significantly different from each other using LSD test at 0.05 level of probability.

T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


at 60 DAS


The effect of varieties and N levels on CGR 45 DAS is given in Table 7. Analysis of the data showed that different N levels had a significant (P < 0.05) effect on CGR 45 DAS. Maximum value (0.05050 g cm-1 day-1) CGR at 45 DAS was obtained from T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), whereas, minimum value (0.03142 g cm-1 day-1) was obtained from T0 (0 Kg N ha-1). The varietal impact regarding CGR 45 DAS was found as non-significant (P > 0.05).


_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 0.034 0.030 0.030 0.03142h

T1 0.41 0.040 0.040 0.04050d

T2 0.040 0.039 0.038 0.03917e

T3 0.037 0.036 0.034 0.03600g

T4 0.052 0.050 0.049 0.05050a

T5 0.045 0.044 0.044 0.04425b

T6 0.039 0.038 0.037 0.03817f

T7 0.043 0.042 0.041 0.04233c



T1 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowingT2 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)T3 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST4 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAST5 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST6 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS

18

T7 = 10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS


Data concerning CGR 60 DAS as affected by varieties and N levels is shown in Table 8. Statistical analysis revealed that N levels had a significant (P < 0.05) effect on CGR 60 DAS. Mean values of the data showed that highest value (0.2097 g cm-1 day-1) was produced from the treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), whereas, lowest mean value (0.09500 g cm-1 day-1) was taken from T0 (0 Kg N ha-1). Varieties regarding CGR 60 DAS were observed as non-significant (P > 0.05).



T1 0.164 0.154 0.147 0.1551bcd

T2 0.147 0.144 0.144 0.1450cd

T3 0.138 0.128 0.117 0.1279de

T4 0.215 0.210 0.204 0.2097a

T5 0.192 0.192 0.181 0.1885ab

T6 0.141 0.137 0.132 0.1367cd

T7 0.171 0.170 0.164 0.1683bc




at 60 DAS

19

9. Pods plant-1

Data pertaining to pods plant-1 as affected by varieties and N levels is expressed

in Table 9. Statistical analysis of the data indicated that both varieties and N levels had

a significant (P < 0.05) effect on pods plant-1. Means values of the data indicated that

maximum pods plant-1 (22.17) was observed for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing

and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), whereas, minimum pods plant-1 (7.083) was observed for

T0 (0 Kg N ha-1). Similarly, regarding varieties maximum pods plant-1 was recorded for

KM 1 variety, whereas, AZRI 2006 produced least (13.63) pods plant-1. The combined

effect of varieties and N levels were observed as non-significant (P > 0.05) for pods

plant-1.

Table 9. Effect of different nitrogen levels on pods plant-1 of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 7.75 7.00 6.50 7.083g

T1 15.50 14.75 13.75 14.67d

T2 13.50 13.00 12.50 13.00de

T3 9.75 9.25 8.50 9.167fg

T4 22.75 22.25 21.50 22.17a

T5 20.50 20.00 19.00 19.83b

T6 11.50 11.00 10.50 11.00ef

T7 17.75 17.25 16.75 17.25c

Mean 14.88a 14.31ab 13.63bLSD value at 5% for nitrogen levels = 2.319LSD value at 5% for varieties = 0.7598Mean values followed by different letters are significantly different from each other



at 60 DAS

20

10. Seeds pod-1

Data concerning seed pod-1 as affected by varieties and N levels is presented in Table 10. Statistical analysis revealed that N levels had a significant (P < 0.05) effect on seed pod-1. Mean values of the data showed that highest seed pod-1 of 15.75 was produced from the treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS). Minimum seed pod-1 (6.667) was observed was recorded for the treatment T0

(0 Kg N ha-1). Varieties and their interactive effect with N levels had non-significant (P > 0.05) differences concerning seed pod-1.

Table 10. Effect of different nitrogen levels on seeds pod-1 of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean


T1 13.00 13.00 12.50 12.83bc

T2 12.50 11.00 10.25 11.25cd

T3 8.00 7.75 7.75 7.833e

T4 16.75 15.50 15.00 15.75a

T5 15.00 14.75 14.25 14.67ab

T6 9.75 9.00 8.50 9.083de

T7 14.25 14.25 13.50 14.00ab




at 60 DAS

11. 1000-grain weight (g)

The effect of varieties and nitrogen on 1000-grain weight is expressed in Table

11. Analysis of the data revealed that N levels had a significant (P < 0.05) effect on

1000-grain weight. Maximum 1000-grain weight of 61.42 g, 60.92 g, and 59.58 was

21

observed for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), T5

(15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS) and T7 (10 Kg N ha-1

at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS),

respectively. Minimum 1000-grain weight (49.42 g) was observed for control

treatment. Effect of varieties was found non-significant (P > 0.05) regarding 1000-grain

weight.

Table 11. Effect of different nitrogen levels on 1000-grain weight (g) of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean


T1 60.25 58.00 57.25 58.50abc

T2 57.75 56.50 56.50 56.92bcd

T3 54.00 53.50 52.00 53.17de

T4 61.50 61.50 61.25 61.42a

T5 61.25 61.00 60.50 60.92a

T6 56.25 55.50 54.25 55.33cd

T7 60.25 59.25 59.25 59.58ab




at 60 DAS

12. Biomass yield (kg ha-1)

Data pertaining Biomass yield as affected by varieties and N levels has been explored in Table 12. Statistical analysis of the data indicated that both varieties and N

22

levels had a significant (P < 0.05) effect on biomass yield. Mean value of the data indicated that maximum biomass yield (4424 kg ha-1) was produced from the treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS) in comparison with control treatment producing least (1665 kg ha-1) biomass yield. Similarly, KM 1 produced highest biomass yield of 2941 kg ha-1, whereas, AZRI 2006 produced lowest (2704 kg ha-1) biomass yield.

Table 12. Effect of different nitrogen levels on biomass yield (kg ha -1) of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 1679n 1660n 1657n 1665g

T1 2983h 2860h 2692i 2845d

T2 2241j 2150j 2077jk 2156e

T3 1738mn 1709n 1679n 1709g

T4 4858a 4218b 4197bc 4424a

T5 4145bcd 4047cde 4022de 4071b

T6 1937kl 1907l 1896lm 1913f

T7 3946e 3766f 3409g 3707c

Mean 2941a 2790b 2704cLSD value at 5% for nitrogen levels = 84.15LSD value at 5% for varieties = 58.38LSD value at 5% for interaction = 165.1Mean values followed by different letters are significantly different from each other



at 60 DAS

23

13. Grain Yield (Kg ha-1)

Data concerning grain yield as affected by varieties and N levels has been shown in Table 13. Statistical analysis revealed that varieties and N levels have a significant (P < 0.05) effect on grain yield. Mean value of the data showed that highest grain yield of 1175 kg ha-1 has been reported for treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), when compared to the lowest (321 kg ha-1) grain yield from control treatment. Similarly, KM 1 produced maximum (672.8 kg ha-1) and AZRI 2006 produced the lowest (588.4 kg ha-1) grain yield.

Table 13. Effect of different nitrogen levels on grain yield (Kg ha -1) of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 324.8lm 322.8lm 315.5lm 321.0f

T1 651.3g 613.3gh 566.3h 610.3d

T2 445.3i 419.3ij 399.8ijk 421.4e

T3 310.8lm 282.3mn 227.8n 273.6g

T4 1321a 1132b 1073bc 1175.0a

T5 1064c 1015cd 993.5d 1024.0b

T6 344.5klm 356.0jkl 351.0kl 350.5f

T7 920.8e 875.0e 780.5f 858.8c

Mean 672.8a 626.9b 588.4cLSD value at 5% for nitrogen levels = 36.36LSD value at 5% for varieties = 23.11 LSD value at 5% for interaction = 65.37 Mean values followed by different letters are significantly different from each other



at 60 DAS

24

14. Harvest index (%)

Data regarding harvest index as affected by varieties and N levels is presented in Table 14. Statistical analysis of the data indicated that varieties and N levels had a significant (P < 0.05) effect on harvest index. Mean values of the data showed that maximum harvest index (26.53 %) was observed for treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), while minimum harvest index (15.97 %) was observed for treatment T3 (30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS). Similarly, KM 1 showed maximum (21.60) while AZRI 2006 showed minimum (20.58 %) harvest index.

Table 14. Effect of different nitrogen levels on harvest index of mung bean varieties Nitrogen Levels Varieties Mean

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ (Kg ha-1) KM 1 NIAB 2006 AZRI 2006T0 19.34hi 19.43hi 19.04hij 19.27ef

T1 21.83ef 21.39f 21.03fg 21.41d

T2 19.88gh 19.50hi 19.25hi 19.54e

T3 17.89j 16.50k 13.53l 15.97g

T4 27.16a 26.82ab 25.60bc 26.53a

T5 25.15c 25.01c 24.69c 24.95b

T6 18.21ij 18.66hij 18.51ij 18.46f

T7 23.34d 23.23d 22.99de 23.18c

Mean 21.60a 21.32a 20.58bLSD value at 5% for nitrogen levels = 1.077LSD value at 5% for varieties = 0.4683 LSD value at 5% for interaction = 1.325Mean values followed by different letters are significantly different from each other



at 60 DAS

25

V. DISCUSSION

The results obtained on different parameters of the research under study

presented in the previous chapter are briefly discussed in the preceding paragraphs.

Emergence m-2 (Table 1.) revealed it was significantly (P < 0.05) affected by

Nitrogen levels. The probable reason may be the need for nitrogen to keep the soil

conditions optimum for germination. Varieties and their combined interaction with

Nitrogen levels have no significant effect on emergence m -2. This may be assumed that,

varietal differences show no preferences for the different N levels or on the other hand

N levels are not genotype specific. Our results regarding N application are in contrary

with the findings of Ashraf et al. (2003) who reported non-significant differences for

mung bean (Vigna radiata L.) plant population per unit area.

Days to flowering (Table 2) was significantly affected by N levels. T 4 (30 Kg N

ha-1 at 30 DAS) took maximum days to flowering (43.17), whereas, T1 (30 Kg N ha-1 at

the time of sowing) took least days to flowering (41.67). This might be due to the

differences in the application of nitrogen that generally enhance the vegetative growth

thereby the delay in flowering. However, varieties and their combinatorial effect with

nitrogen showed non-significant differences (P > 0.05) that might be evidence that

nitrogen application affect non-specifically with respect to genetic makeup.

LAI before flowering showed non-significant differences (P > 0.05) both for

nitrogen levels and varieties (Table 3).

Mean values of the data revealed that maximum LAI after flowering (Table 4)

was observed both for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30

DAS) and T7 (10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10

Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS) that is 0.03558 and 0.03542, respectively. It can be inferred from

the data in Table 4 that N applications split into doses from the time of sowing till

26

harvest. N application at the time of sowing and 30 DAS has maximum output

regarding LAI after flowering.

Data concerning CGR 15 DAS (Table 5.) were non-significantly (P > 0.05)

affected by varieties and their interaction with N levels. In the case of N levels a

significant (P < 0.05) effect was observed for the parameter. Mean values of the data

indicated that maximum (0.007667 g cm-1 day-1) data was noticed for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1

at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), and T5 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of

sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS) followed by T7 (10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of

sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS). However, minimum

(0.006333 g cm-1 day-1) data were observed for T0 (0 Kg N ha-1). It can be accomplished

from the data regarding CGR 15 DAS (Table 5) that N application at the time of

sowing has favorable effects with respect to 0 N applications.

CGR 30 DAS was significantly affected by N levels (Table 6). Maximum data

was observed for the treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1

at 30 DAS). Conversely, T0 (0 Kg N ha-1) and T3 (30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS) showed least

CGR 30 DAS. It can be extracted from the data in Table 6 that N application split at the

time of sowing and 30 DAS (i.e. T4) improves the growth well in comparison with zero

application till the data been taken (i.e. T0 and T3).

Maximum value (0.05050 g cm-1 day-1) CGR at 45 DAS was obtained from T4

(15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), whereas, minimum

value (0.03142 g cm-1 day-1) was obtained from T0 (0 Kg N ha-1). This may be due to

the reason that N applied in split doses has a positive effect leading towards good CGR

in comparison with zero N application.

Data collected on CGR 60 DAS showed significant (P < 0.05) variation due to

application of urea fertilizer as a N source. Genotypic variation (varieties) bears no

statistical differences with respect to CGR 60 DAS. It was observed that the effect of

15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS (T4) was higher as

compared to control treatment.

27

Data regarding Pods plant-1 (Table 9) was significantly (P < 0.05) affected by

varieties as well as N levels. It can be seen from the data that maximum pods plant -1

(22.17) was observed for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30

DAS), whereas, minimum pods plant-1 (7.083) was observed for T0 (0 Kg N ha-1).

Similarly, regarding varieties maximum pods plant-1 was recorded for KM 1 variety,

whereas, AZRI 2006 produced least (13.63) pods plant-1. The probable reason might be

due to the fact that N application split in doses applied at the time of sowing and 30

DAS has very promising effect on pods plant-1. Similarly, genetic makeup also imparts

its role paving towards statistical significance. Assaduzaman et al. (2008), Ashraf et al.

(2003), Ali et al. (2000) and Malik et al. (1990) reported same results on pods plant-1.

Similar results were also reported by Paikera et al. (1989) regarding N application on

different growth parameters of soybean (Glycine max L.).

Data concerning seed pod-1 (Table 10) were non-significantly (P > 0.05)

affected by varieties. In case of N levels a significant (P < 0.05) effect was observed on

seed pod-1. Maximum seed pod-1 of 15.75 was produced from the treatment T4 (15 Kg N

ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS) when compared with control

treatment that produced minimum seed pod-1 (6.667). Our significant N application

effect on seed pod-1 is in contrary to the findings of Asaduzzaman et al. (2008) who

reported no impact of N application.

Effect of varieties was found non-significant (P > 0.05), whereas, N levels has

significant (P < 0.05) differences, regarding 1000-grain weight (Table 11). Maximum

1000-grain weight of 61.42 g was observed for T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing

and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS). Minimum 1000-grain weight (49.42 g) was observed for

control treatment. Our results were also confirmed by Patel et al. (1988) who reported

increased Mung bean grain-weight with the application of N application.

Data regarding biomass yield (Table 12) was significantly affected by varieties

and N levels. It can be observed from the data that maximum biomass yield (4424 kg

ha-1) was produced from the treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg

N ha-1 at 30 DAS) in comparison with control treatment producing least (1665 kg ha-1)

biomass yield. Similarly, KM 1 produced highest biomass yield of 2941 kg ha-1,

whereas, AZRI 2006 produced lowest (2704 kg ha-1) biomass yield. The probable

28

reason might be due to the fact that split nitrogen doses and selective genotype have

positively interacted with other climatic factors to enhance photosynthesis, thereby

producing more vegetative growth. And, thus results in more biomass yield.

Grain yield (Table 13) was recorded from the plot sown with KM 1, NIAB 2006

and AZRI 2006. KM 1 produced maximum (672.8 kg ha-1) and AZRI 2006 produced

the lowest (588.4 kg ha-1) grain yield. The data also showed that highest grain yield of

1175 kg ha-1 has been reported for treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and

15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS), when compared to the lowest (321 kg ha-1) grain yield from

plot with no nitrogen application. Our results are in parity with the results Basu and

Bandyopadhyay (1990) who reported that N application increases the grain yield in

comparison with zero N application.

Data presented in Table 14 indicated N levels and varieties had a significant

effect on harvest index. Mean values of the data showed that maximum harvest index

(26.53 %) was observed for treatment T4 (15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg

N ha-1 at 30 DAS), while minimum harvest index (15.97 %) was observed for treatment

T3 (30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS). Similarly, KM 1 showed maximum (21.60) while AZRI

2006 showed minimum (20.58 %) harvest index. This could be due to the differences in

the genetic makeup of these varieties and the differences in N levels that contribute

towards grain yield which increased the harvest index.

VI. SUMMARY

The results presented and discussed in the earlier chapters are summarized as

follows:

To study the response of Mung Bean (Vigna radiata L) genotypes to nitrogen

applications at different growth stages, an experiment was conducted at New

Developmental Farm, KPK Agricultural University Peshawar, during fall 2009, under

normal irrigated conditions. Three varieties of Mung bean (KM 1, AZRI 2006, and

NIAB 2006) were sown with eight levels of nitrogen (T0: 0 Nitrogen, T1: 30 kg N ha-1 at

time of sowing, T2: 30 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS, T3: 30 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS , T4: 15 kg ha-1 at

sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS, T5: 15 kg ha-1 at sowing, 15 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS, T6: 15

29

kg ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS, T7: 10 kg ha-1 at sowing, 10 kg ha-1 at 30

DAS and 10 kg ha-1 at 60 DAS). The experiment was carried out in randomized

complete block design (RCBD) with split plot having four replications. Different

nitrogen treatments were allotted to main plots, and varieties were designated to the sub

plots. Observations were recorded on emergence m-2 (m-2), days to flowering, LAI

before flowering, LAI after flowering, CGR 15 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 30 DAS (g

cm-1 day-1), CGR 45 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), pods plant-1, seed

pod-1, 1000-grain weight (g), biomass yield (kg ha-1), grain yield (kg ha-1) and harvest

index (%).

Statistical analysis of the data showed that emergence m-2 (m-2), days to

flowering, LAI before flowering, LAI after flowering, CGR 15 DAS (g cm -1 day-1),

CGR 30 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 45 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (g cm-1 day-1),

seed pod-1 and 1000-grain weight (g) showed non-significant (P > 0.05) regarding

varieties. However, genotypic (varietal) significant (P < 0.05) effect was observed on

pods plant-1, biomass yield (kg ha-1), grain yield (kg ha-1) and harvest index (%). Mean

values of the data showed that variety KM 1 produced maximum pod plant -1 (14.8),

highest biomass yield (2941 kg ha-1), maximum grain yield (672.8 kg ha-1), and

maximum harvest index (21.60 %). However, AZRI 2006 was found to be least

promising variety producing minimum pod plant -1 (13.63), lowest biomass yield (2704

kg ha-1), minimum grain yield (5884 kg ha-1), and minimal harvest index (20.58 %), as

revealed by least significant data.

Similarly, nitrogen fertilizer non-significantly (P > 0.05) affected LAI before

flowering, however, it significantly (P < 0.05) affected emergence m-2 (m-2), days to

flowering, LAI after flowering, CGR 15 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 30 DAS (g cm-1 day-

1), CGR 45 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (g cm-1 day-1), pods plant-1, seed pod-1,

1000-grain weight (g), biomass yield (kg ha-1), grain yield (kg ha-1) and harvest index

(%). Nitrogen fertilizer treatment T4 enhances emergence m-2 (19.13 m-2), days to

flowering (43.17), LAI after flowering (0.03558), CGR 15 DAS (0.007667 g cm-1 day-

1), CGR 30 DAS (0.03208 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 45 DAS (0.05050 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60

DAS (0.2097 g cm-1 day-1), pods plant-1 (22.17), seed pod-1 (15.75), 1000-grain weight

(61.42 g), biomass yield (4424 kg ha-1), grain yield (1175 kg ha-1) and harvest index

(26.53 %). Minimal emergence m-2 (13.73 m-2), LAI after flowering (0.03225), CGR 15

DAS (0.00633 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 30 DAS (0.02092 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 45 DAS

30

(0.03142 g cm-1 day-1), CGR 60 DAS (0.09500 g cm-1 day-1), pods plant-1 (7.083), seed

pod-1 (6.667), 1000-grain weight (49.42 g), and biomass yield (1665 kg ha -1) were

recorded in the plot with zero nitrogen application (T0). Minimum days to flowering

(41.67) were recorded for nitrogen application treatment T1. However, minimum grain

yield (273.6 kg ha-1), and harvest index (15.97 %) was observed for T3. To sum up in

the light of above statements, variety KM 1 ranked first, whereas, nitrogen treatment T 4

showed a significant increase in the studied parameters.

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On the basis of findings obtained in this research study, it is concluded that:

1. Variety KM 1 produced maximum pod plant -1, biomass yield, grain yield, and

harvest index.

2. Nitrogen treatment T4 (15 kg ha-1 at sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS) produced

maximum emergence m-2, days to flowering, LAI after flowering, CGR 15

DAS, CGR 30 DAS, CGR 45 DAS, CGR 60 DAS, pods plant -1, seed pod-1,

1000-grain weight, biomass yield, grain yield, and harvest index.

Recommendations

On the basis of results discussed above, the following recommendations can be

endorsed:

1. Mung bean variety KM 1 may be ranked first, and recommended for promising

expression.

2. Nitrogen doze T4 (15 kg ha-1 at sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS) showed better

response.

3. For promising results, KM 1 variety with nitrogen application with 15 kg ha-1 at

sowing and 15 kg ha-1 at 30 DAS may be recommended.

31

VIII. LITERATURE CITED

Ali, A., M.A. Chaudhry, and A. Tanveer. 2000. Response of Mungbean (Vigna radiata

L.) genotypes of Rhizobium culture. Pak. J. Agril. Sci. 37: 80-82.

Ardeshana, R.B., M.M. Modhwadia, V.D. Khanparal and J.C. Patel, 1993. Response of

greengram (Phaseoulus radiatus) to nitrogen, phosphorus and Rhizobium

inoculation. Indian J. Agron., 38(3): 490-492.

Asaduzzaman M., M. Fazlul Karim, M.J. Ullah and M. Hasanuzzaman. 2008. Response

of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) to nitrogen and irrigation management.

American-Eurasian J. Sci. Research 3 (1): 40-43.

Ashraf, M., M. Mueen-ud-din, and N.H. Warraich. 2003. Production efficiency of

Mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) as affected by seed inoculation and NPK

application. Int. J. Agril. and Biol. 5 (2): 179-180.

Ayub, M., A. Tanveer, M.A. Choudhry, M.M.Z. Amin, and G. Murtaza 1999. Growth

and yield response of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) cultivars to varying levels

of nitrogen. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2(4): 1378-1380.

BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics). 2005. Monthly Statistical Bulletin. Statistics

Division, Ministry of Planning. Government of the Peoples’ Republic of

Bangladesh. Dhaka., pp: 57.

Basu, TK and S. Bandyopadhyay. 1990. Effect of rhizobium inoculation and nitrogen

application on some yield attributes of moong. Enviroment and Ecology. 8: 2,

650-654.

32

Braga, J.M., B.V. Defilipo, C. Vieira, and L.A.N. Fontes. 1973. Twenty trails of NPK

application to bean crop, in Zona da mata revistacers. Pesquessa Agropeccuria

Brassilectra Agronmica 20(3):370-380. Field Crop Abst. 27(11): 5754-1974.

Buttery, B.R., and V.A. Dirks. 1987. The effect of soybean cultivar, Rhizobium strain

and nitrate on plant growth, nodule mass and acetylene reduction rate. Pl. Soil

98:285–293.

Chitrev, A.J., P.D.Vengikas, and G. Bombe. 1982. Effect of nitrogen fertilization on

green gram (Vigna radiata wilczek) on symbiotic efficiency of Rhizobium

inoculants. Indian J. Agron. 15(3): 280-84, India.

Eaglesham, A.R.J. 1989. Nitrate inhibition of root nodule symbiosis in doubly rooted

soybean plants. Crop Sci. 29:115–119.

Elahi, N.N., W. Akhtar and J.I. Mirza. 2004. Effect of combined nitrogen on growth

and nodulation of two mungbean (vigna radiata Wilczek) cultivars. J. Res.

Sc.15(1): 67-72.

Hussain, T. 1996. Effect of sowing dates on growth and yield of four spring sown

cultivars of Mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. of Agron. Univ.

Agric., Faisalabad.

Kaushik, U.K., R.C. Dogra, and S.S. Dudeja. 1995. Effects of fertilizer N on

nodulation, acetylene-reducing activity, and N uptake in pigeon pea (Cajanus

cajan). Trop. Agric. 72:76–79.

Kucey, R.M.N. 1989. The influence of rate and time of mineral N application on yield

and N fixation by field bean. Can. J. Plant Sci. 69:427–436.

Ling, Y.L., H.P. Gu., C.L. Liu, and L.Y. Sun. 1987. Mung bean production in China

and AVRDC’S variety performance in Jiangsu province. In Mung bean

Proceeding of the Second International Symposium held at Bangkok

Shamugasundaram, Mclean, B.T. Tapei, Taiwn AVRDC 580-585.

33

Luis L.B., F. Mariano and E.C. Juan. 2000. Growth and yield of white lupin under

mediterranean conditions. Agron. J. 92: 200-205.

Mahadkar, and Araf. 1988. Effect of various inputs on fertilizer nitrogen utilization and

yield of black gram and green gram and their residual effect on succeeding

fodder sorghum. Fertilizer News, 33(2): 43-46.

Maiti, S.C.L., D.B.N. Chatterjee, and K. Sengupta. 1988. Response of green gram and

lentil to rhizobium inoculation. Indian J. Agron. 33(1): 92 -94.

Malik, M.A., A. Tanvir, A. Ali, and M.A. Hayee. 1990. Yield and Quality of Mash

been (Vigna Mungo) as influenced by seed inoculation and NPK application.

Pak. J. Agril. Res. 27: 273-275.

Mand, S., and V.I. Chahal. 1987. Effect of nitrate application and rhizobium

inoculation on symbiosis effectively in Vigna radiata. Annals of Biology 3(1):

92-96.

Mahmoud, S.A.Z, A.A.M. Makwi, and A.M. Naseer. 1979. Studies on nodulation of

soybean in Egypt. Inoculation and application of fertilizers. Egyptian J.

Microbiol. 14 (1-2): 71-77.

Meadley, J.T., and G.M. Milbourn. 1971. The growth of vining peas III. The effect of

shading on abscission of flowers and pods. J. Agric. Sci. 77(1): 103-108.

Miah, M.Z.I., and V.R. Carangal. 1981. Yield of 10 mungbean cultivars evaluated in

intensive rice based cropping system. Intl. Rice Res. Newsl. 6(4): 27.

Muller, S.H., and P.A.A. Pereira. 1995. Nitrogen fixation of common bean (Phaseolus

vulgaris L.) as affected by mineral nitrogen supply at different growth stages.

Plant Soil 177: 55–61.

Nagre K.T. (1982). Effect of rhizobium and nitrogen on the yield of green gram and

black gram. Agril. Sci. Digest 2(1): 27-28.

Patel, J.S., and M.T. Parmar 1986. Response of green gram to varying levels of

nitrogen and phosphorus. Madras Agril. J. 73(6): 355-356.

34

Patel, R.R., V.V. Sonani, and Sasani. 1988. Effect of inoculation, N and P fertilization

on yield and yield attributes of green gram var. Gujrat Agril. Univ. Res. J. 14

(1): 17-22.

Paikera, A., M. Mishra, and S.N. Mishra. 1989. A note on effect of varying levels of N

and P on yield attributes and yield of soybean. Orissa J. Agril. Res. 2 (1): 68-69.

Razaq, M. 1995. Effect of sowing dates on growth and yield of fou r Mungbean (Vigna

radiata L.) varieties. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Agron., Univ. Agric., Faisalabad.

Raju, M.S. and S.C. Varma. 1984. Response of green gram to rhizobium inoculation in

relation to fertilizer nitrogen. Legume Res. Banaras Hindu Univ. India 7(2): 73-

76.

Saeed, F. 1997. Response of spring and autumn sown Mung bean (Vigna radiata L.)

genotypes to different dozes of nitrogen. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. of Agron. Univ.

Agric., Faisalabad.

Shahullah, M and M.T. Hossain 1980. Effect of inoculum and nitrogen on soybean.

Bangladesh J. Agril. Res. 5 (2): 9-12.

Srivastava, B.K., and R.P. Singh. 1980. Morpho-physiological response of garden pea

(Pisum sativum L.) to sowing dates. II- Growth analysis. Indian J. of Hort. Pp:

382-389.

Srivastava, S.N.L., and S.C. Varma. 1982. Effect of bacterial and inorganic fertilization

on the growth nodulation and quality of green gram. Indian J. Agril. Res. 16(4):

223-229.

Sun Y.F., J.M. Liang, J. Ye, and W.Y. Zhu. 1999. Cultivation of super-high yielding

rice plants. China Rice. 5: 38–39.

Thakur D.S., and S.R. Patel. 1998 Growth and sink potential of rice as influenced by

the split application of potassium with FYM in inceptisols of Eastern Central

India. J. Potassium Res. 14(1/4): 73–77.

35

Yazdi Samadi, B, and A.A. Zali. 1978. Effect of nitrogen and inoculum on soybean.

Iranian J. Agril. Res. 6(2): 117-121.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX – A

Table 15. Analysis of variance for emergence m-2 as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.

S.O.V. D.F S.S M.S F.value Prob

Replication 3 302.406 100.802 9.9452 0.0003

Nitrogen levels (N) 7 414.540 59.220 5.8427 0.0007

Error A 21 212.850 10.136

Varieties (V) 2 22.789 11.395 1.6658 0.1998

N x V 14 11.557 0.826 0.1207 0.0543

Error B 48 328.347 6.841Total 95 1292.489Coefficient of variation = 15.03 %

Table 16. Analysis of variance for days to flowering as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


Replication 3 234.750 78.250 74.4113 0.000

Nitrogen levels 7 33.667 4.180 4.5736 0.0031

36

Error A 21 22.083 1.052

Varieties 2 0.250 0.125 0.0957

N x V 14 7.083 0.506 0.3875

Error B 48 62.667 1.306 Total 95 360.500Coefficient of variation = 2.66 %

Table 17. Analysis of variance for leaf area index before flowering as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 0.002 0.001 40.3090 0.0000

Nitrogen levels 7 0.000 0.000 1.9660 0.1090

Error A 21 0.000 0.000

Varieties 2 0.000 0.000 0.6236

NxV 14 0.000 0.000 0.5546 0.0851


Table 18. Analysis of variance for leaf area index after flowering as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 0.001 0.000 92.3690 0.0000

Nitrogen levels 7 0.000 0.000 3.3634 0.0100

Error A 21 0.000 0.000

Varieties 2 0.000 0.000 1.7347 0.1873

V x N 14 0.000 0.000 0.1759


37

Table 19. Analysis of variance for crop growth rate (g cm-1 day-1) 15 days after sowing as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


Replication 3 0.000 0.000 4.2477 0.0171

Nitrogen levels 7 0.000 0.000 3.1822 0.0186

Error A 21 0.000 0.000

Varieties 2 0.000 0.000 1.2243 0.3030

N x V 14 0.000 0.000 1.5394 0.1332


Table 20. Analysis of variance for crop growth rate (g cm-1 day-1) 30 days after sowing as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 0.002 0.001 14.2732 0.0000

Nitrogen levels 7 0.001 0.000 4.9304 0.0020

Error A 21 0.001 0.000

Varieties 2 0.000 0.000 0.5211

V x N 14 0.000 0.000 0.1099




Replication 3 0.002 0.001 8.4133 0.0007

38

Nitrogen levels 7 0.003 0.000 6.5231 0.0004

Error A 21 0.001 0.000

Varieties 2 0.000 0.000 1.1953 0.3115

V x N 14 0.000 0.000 0.0698




Replication 3 0.002 0.001 0.4361

Nitrogen levels 7 0.108 0.015 9.2999 0.0000

Error A 21 0.035 0.002

Varieties 2 0.003 0.001 1.0791 0.3480

V x N 14 0.001 0.000 0.0575


Table 23. Analysis of variance for pods plant-1 as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 88.209 29.403 3.9423 0.0224

Nitrogen levels 7 2308.125 329.732 44.2099 0.0000

Error A 21 156.625 7.458

Varieties 2 25.083 12.542 5.4894 0.0071

V x N 14 1.250 0.089 0.0391


39

Table 24. Analysis of variance for seed pod-1 as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 29.365 9.788 1.1416 0.3553

Nitrogen levels 7 945.906 135.129 15.7605 0.0000

Error A 21 180.052 8.574

Varieties 2 22.583 11.292 1.8668 0.1657

V x N 14 9.750 0.696 0.1151


Table 25. Analysis of variance for 1000-grain weight as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 100.115 33.372 1.5934 0.2209

Nitrogen levels 7 1424.240 203.463 9.7151 0.0000

Error A 21 439.802 20.943

Varieties 2 49.188 24594 1.3170 0.2774

V x N 14 30.479 2.177 0.1166


40

Table 26. Analysis of variance for biomass yield as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 79374.031 26458.010 2.6929 0.0722

Nitrogen levels 7 105086473.823 15012353.403 1527.9856 0.0000

Error A 21 206323.552 9824.931

Varieties 2 922703.250 461351.625 34.2006 0.0000

N x V 14 1077249.583 76946.399 5.7041 0.0000

Error B 48 647499.167 13489.566Total 95 108019623.406Coefficient of variation = 4.13 %Table 27. Analysis of variance for grain yield (kg ha-1) as affected by different nitrogen

levels and mung bean varietiesS.O.V. D.F S.S M.S F.value Prob

Replication 3 1273.208 424.403 0.2313

Nitrogen levels 7 10192839.458 1456119.923 793.7533 0.0000

Error A 21 38523.958 1834.474

Varieties 2 114186.583 57093.292 27.0034 0.0000

N x V 14 104516.417 7465.458 3.5309 0.0005

Error B 48 101486.333 2114.299 Total 95 10552825.958Coefficient of variation = 7.31 %

41

Table 28. Analysis of variance for harvest index as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties


Replication 3 6.187 2.062 1.2817 0.3065

Nitrogen levels 7 1052.407 150.344 93.4293 0.0000

Error A 21 33.793 1.609

Varieties 2 17.672 8.836 10.1793 0.0002

VxN 14 30.719 2.194 2.5278 0.0087


42

APPENDIX – B

Table 29. Original replicated data on emergence m-2 as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.

Varieties Replications _______________N levels (kg ha -1 )_________________

T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 09.7 25.9 17.6 14.8 17.0 23.8 13.1 16.8

2 14.5 19.1 14.2 17.4 18.2 18.6 17.4 21.1

3 19.6 23.3 19.4 18.9 23.2 16.1 20.8 16.1

4 14.2 17.7 17.1 17.6 19.8 19.5 17.6 17.7

NIAB 2006 1 11.2 20.9 15.7 10.6 19.2 21.1 11.2 14.4

2 11.3 19.4 8.6 15.8 17.2 17.1 20.1 19.4

3 18.6 24.1 22.5 18.5 24.1 20.2 18.4 19.6

4 13.7 18.1 15.1 14.6 16.8 19.2 16.5 17.6

AZRI 2006 1 09.8 22.6 12.8 14.2 17.2 14.6 11.1 10.6

2 13.5 15.3 19.1 14.1 19.9 18.6 12.9 16.6

3 15.4 22.2 16.1 19.6 20.8 21.6 24.5 25.2

4 13.2 20.5 15.7 15.7 16.1 18.1 16.4 17.6T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


43


Table 30. Original replicated data on days to flowering as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 42 35 42 41 41 42 43 42

2 43 43 45 43 44 42 43 43

3 44 45 45 45 45 44 45 45

4 43 41 44 43 43 42 43 43

NIAB 2006 1 39 40 41 41 42 41 41 40

2 44 42 44 44 44 43 44 44

3 45 43 46 44 44 44 46 46

4 42 41 43 43 43 42 43 43

AZRI 2006 1 40 38 43 39 41 37 40 41

2 44 45 44 44 45 44 44 44

3 44 45 44 45 43 46 46 44

4 42 42 43 42 43 42 43 43T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


44


Table 31. Original replicated data on leaf area index before flowering as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.

Varieties Rep(s) _____________________N levels (kg ha -1 )_________________

T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0.046 0.043 0.041 0.045 0.051 0.047 0.044 0.051

2 0.037 0.041 0.041 0.036 0.042 0.041 0.038 0.039

3 0.033 0.037 0.037 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.035 0.037

4 0.038 0.041 0.039 0.038 0.042 0.041 0.039 0.042

NIAB 2006 1 0.043 0.048 0.045 0.044 0.051 0.051 0.043 0.051

2 0.034 0.039 0.041 0.036 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.041

3 0.033 0.035 0.034 0.035 0.033 0.032 0.032 0.032

4 0.036 0.041 0.041 0.038 0.041 0.041 0.038 0.041

AZRI 2006 1 0.041 0.049 0.039 0.041 0.051 0.048 0.041 0.052

2 0.035 0.038 0.045 0.041 0.037 0.039 0.041 0.036

3 0.036 0.036 0.032 0.037 0.033 0.033 0.032 0.036

4 0.037 0.041 0.038 0.039 0.041 0.041 0.037 0.041T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


45


Table 32. Original replicated data on leaf area index after flowering as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.

Varieties Rep(s) _______________N levels (kg ha -1 )_______________________

T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0.037 0.041 0.041 0.038 0.045 0.043 0.037 0.044

2 0.034 0.034 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.034 0.034 0.034

3 0.028 0.031 0.028 0.031 0.031 0.028 0.032 0.029

4 0.033 0.035 0.033 0.032 0.035 0.035 0.034 0.035

NIAB 2006 1 0.035 0.039 0.043 0.039 0.043 0.041 0.038 0.043

2 0.031 0.035 0.031 0.031 0.036 0.033 0.031 0.033

3 0.031 0.031 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.031 0.032

4 0.032 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.036

AZRI 2006 1 0.038 0.041 0.034 0.038 0.042 0.035 0.036 0.043

2 0.029 0.034 0.038 0.031 0.033 0.034 0.034 0.034

3 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.032 0.031 0.032 0.028 0.028

4 0.031 0.034 0.033 0.031 0.035 0.033 0.032 0.035T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1

T1 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowingT2 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)T3 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST4 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAST5 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS

46

T6 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST7 = 10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1

at 60 DAS

Table 33. Original replicated data on crop growth rate (g cm-1 day-1) 15 days after sowing as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0.007 0.006 0.008 0.009 0.008 0.009 0.008 0.006

2 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.006 0.009

3 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.008 0.009

4 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.007 0.008

NIAB 2006 1 0.007 0.006 0.008 0.006 0.007 0.009 0.006 0.006

2 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.006 0.011 0.006 0.007 0.007

3 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.009 0.008 0.007

4 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.007 0.006

AZRI 2006 1 0.007 0.009 0.006 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.008

2 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.008

3 0.006 0.006 0.009 0.008 0.009 0.008 0.007 0.008

4 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.008T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1

T1 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowingT2 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)T3 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST4 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS

47

T5 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST6 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST7 = 10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1

at 60 DAS



T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0.026 0.028 0.022 0.022 0.046 0.029 0.032 0.031

2 0.018 0.021 0.018 0.021 0.016 0.017 0.013 0.026

3 0.021 0.024 0.031 0.021 0.041 0.041 0.024 0.029

4 0.021 0.024 0.023 0.021 0.034 0.029 0.023 0.028

NIAB 2006 1 0.025 0.024 0.022 0.029 0.045 0.035 0.024 0.031

2 0.015 0.024 0.021 0.016 0.021 0.013 0.022 0.023

3 0.023 0.025 0.026 0.019 0.029 0.038 0.022 0.027

4 0.021 0.024 0.023 0.021 0.031 0.028 0.022 0.027

AZRI 2006 1 0.022 0.025 0.024 0.025 0.039 0.042 0.032 0.037

2 0.016 0.023 0.017 0.016 0.015 0.022 0.013 0.017

3 0.022 0.025 0.027 0.022 0.037 0.021 0.024 0.022

4 0.021 0.024 0.022 0.021 0.031 0.028 0.023 0.035T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


48


at 60 DAS



T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0.032 0.031 0.034 0.036 0.046 0.041 0.049 0.029

2 0.029 0.034 0.036 0.045 0.047 0.032 0.034 0.051

3 0.041 0.058 0.048 0.031 0.065 0.061 0.034 0.051

4 0.033 0.041 0.041 0.037 0.052 0.044 0.039 0.043

NIAB 2006 1 0.027 0.035 0.038 0.033 0.052 0.044 0.038 0.036

2 0.028 0.043 0.035 0.035 0.047 0.027 0.032 0.041

3 0.036 0.042 0.045 0.042 0.051 0.062 0.045 0.051

4 0.031 0.041 0.035 0.036 0.051 0.044 0.038 0.042

AZRI 2006 1 0.032 0.029 0.032 0.033 0.033 0.043 0.031 0.038

2 0.023 0.046 0.033 0.035 0.061 0.037 0.046 0.038

3 0.042 0.045 0.051 0.035 0.053 0.052 0.035 0.047

4 0.023 0.041 0.038 0.034 0.048 0.044 0.037 0.041T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


49


at 60 DAS



T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0.046 0.222 0.133 0.129 0.161 0.238 0.155 0.144

2 0.121 0.151 0.117 0.144 0.279 0.185 0.167 0.227

3 0.163 0.121 0.192 0.142 0.205 0.154 0.102 0.141

4 0.111 0.164 0.147 0.138 0.215 0.192 0.141 0.171

NIAB 2006 1 0.066 0.201 0.114 0.161 0.281 0.164 0.111 0.124

2 0.073 0.121 0.129 0.115 0.161 0.201 0.171 0.136

3 0.141 0.141 0.189 0.109 0.188 0.211 0.129 0.251

4 0.093 0.153 0.144 0.128 0.209 0.192 0.136 0.171

AZRI 2006 1 0.106 0.141 0.111 0.098 0.211 0.148 0.089 0.151

2 0.064 0.157 0.174 0.183 0.247 0.201 0.181 0.113

3 0.075 0.168 0.147 0.071 0.132 0.137 0.127 0.228

4 0.081 0.121 0.143 0.117 0.228 0.239 0.132 0.163T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1

T1 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowingT2 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 30 days after sowing (DAS)T3 = 30 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAS

50

T4 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAST5 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST6 = 15 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 15 Kg N ha-1 at 60 DAST7 = 10 Kg N ha-1 at the time of sowing and 10 Kg N ha-1 at 30 DAS and 10 Kg N ha-1

at 60 DAS

Table 37. Original replicated data on pods plant-1 as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 09 20 16 09 24 21 15 20

2 08 15 13 10 21 19 11 20

3 08 16 12 09 23 22 09 17

4 06 11 13 11 23 20 11 14

NIAB 2006 1 09 18 15 10 23 22 09 19

2 07 18 11 09 24 17 12 20

3 06 12 14 08 21 23 12 15

4 06 11 12 10 21 18 11 15

AZRI 2006 1 07 16 12 10 24 21 11 16

2 09 16 14 09 22 15 11 19

3 05 12 11 06 19 22 08 19

4 05 11 13 09 21 18 12 13T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


51


at 60 DAS

Table 38. Original replicated data on seed pod-1 as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 11 14 15 09 16 17 09 16

2 09 19 15 07 19 12 11 16

3 07 09 10 07 19 15 09 12

4 03 10 10 09 13 16 10 13

NIAB 2006 1 08 15 09 05 20 11 07 16

2 08 11 13 11 15 12 06 16

3 07 12 11 09 16 18 11 12

4 05 14 11 06 11 18 12 13

AZRI 2006 1 04 12 07 10 17 19 11 16

2 06 14 13 07 12 09 06 13

3 07 11 12 09 15 13 11 12

4 05 13 09 05 16 06 06 13T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


52


at 60 DAS

Table 39. Original replicated data on 1000-grain weight as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 53 52 54 53 57 63 53 51

2 51 63 64 51 63 62 53 63

3 48 67 53 58 65 59 63 67

4 51 59 60 54 61 61 56 60

NIAB 2006 1 51 62 55 54 57 61 53 53

2 49 51 54 57 63 65 55 64

3 52 61 61 50 67 57 53 62

4 50 58 56 53 59 61 61 58

AZRI 2006 1 42 48 63 57 60 67 49 61

2 48 67 57 52 61 62 61 57

3 51 57 50 47 63 53 53 65

4 47 57 56 52 61 60 54 54T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


53


Table 40. Original replicated data on biomass yield as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 1651 2842 2115 1754 5100 4320 1963 3960

2 1670 3155 2403 1763 4832 4020 1823 4010

3 1695 2944 2122 1721 4800 4245 1985 3919

4 1698 2992 2322 1713 4701 3995 1975 3895

NIAB 2006 1 1644 3095 2217 1722 4000 4122 2009 3790

2 1681 2727 2083 1717 4000 3995 1985 3740

3 1663 2824 2201 1703 4500 4080 1813 3842

4 1653 2795 2097 1695 4370 3990 1822 3692

AZRI 2006 1 1670 2901 2021 1652 4332 4020 1975 3580

2 1643 2520 2133 1705 4031 4102 2002 3242

3 1655 2723 2043 1683 4300 3982 1801 3515

4 1661 2623 2109 1677 4125 3982 1807 3298T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


54


Table 41. Original replicated data on grain yield (kg ha-1) as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 0321 0643 0422 0307 1444 0955 0352 0896

2 0319 0705 0463 0310 1323 1109 0320 0927

3 0323 0627 0425 0303 1220 1008 0369 0940

4 0336 0630 0471 0323 1295 1085 0337 0921

NIAB 2006 1 0319 0633 0435 0295 1085 1002 0385 0870

2 0335 0601 0412 0296 1025 1040 0363 0881

3 0322 0614 0422 0273 1198 0920 0343 0891

4 0315 0605 0408 0265 1220 1098 0333 0858

AZRI 2006 1 0319 0603 0401 0213 0959 0905 0374 0823

2 0317 0523 0407 0223 1113 1059 0363 0744

3 0317 0595 0382 0255 1125 0985 0340 0810

4 0309 0544 0409 0220 1094 1025 0327 0745T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


55


Table 42. Original replicated data on harvest index (%) as affected by different nitrogen levels and mung bean varieties.


T0 T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7

KM 1 1 19.42 22.62 19.95 17.51 28.31 22.11 17.93 22.62

2 19.11 22.34 19.26 17.58 27.37 27.58 17.55 23.11

3 19.05 21.29 20.02 17.61 25.41 23.74 18.58 23.98

4 19.78 21.05 20.28 18.85 27.54 27.15 18.77 23.64

NIAB 2006 1 19.41 20.45 19.62 17.13 27.12 24.31 19.16 22.95

2 19.92 22.03 19.77 17.23 25.62 26.03 18.28 23.55

3 19.36 21.42 19.17 16.00 26.62 22.54 18.91 23.19

4 19.05 21.64 19.45 15.63 27.91 27.15 18.27 23.23

AZRI 2006 1 19.11 20.78 19.84 12.81 22.13 22.51 18.93 22.98

2 19.29 20.75 19.08 13.07 27.61 25.81 18.13 22.94

3 19.15 21.85 18.69 15.15 26.16 24.73 18.87 23.04

4 18.61 20.73 19.39 13.11 26.52 25.71 18.09 22.58T0 = 0 Kg N ha-1


56


at 60 DAS

57

Date post:	29-Nov-2014
Category:	Documents
Upload:	abdus-salam
View:	307 times
Download:	0 times

Thesis (051111)

Documents