Introduction
Pakistan's agriculture sector plays a
pivotal role in its economic growth. Presently, it contributes 19% to Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) and employs 42% of the labor force. It is also one of
the biggest sectors for earning of foreign exchange and excites the growth of a
number of other sectors (Pakistan Economic Survey 2018). Pakistan’s agriculture
sector is expanding with the recent emergence of other allied sectors and
livestock sector is one of the biggest amongst these sectors. It has become
increasingly apparent that with a dwindling natural resource base coupled with
climate change scenario, the yield potential of crops will be adversely
affected. Hence, judicious use of the limited water resources is imperative to
enhance the production of fodder and other agronomic crops (Farooq et al. 2019).
Huge deficit
in demand and domestic production of green fodder exists that needs to be
abridged to cope with demand of a fast-growing livestock sector. Livestock
being an essential agriculture allied sector shares around 11% in GDP which is
60.54% of agriculture contribution to GDP (Pakistan Economic Survey 2019).
Currently, fodder crops are being cultivated on an area of 2.11 million
hectares in Pakistan with rich production of 45.77 million tons of green
fodder. Punjab contributes 39.20 million tons of fodder from an area of 1.81
million hectares. In Punjab, forage crops rank 3rd after wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)
(Pakistan Economic Survey 2019).
Although
fodder shortage is observed round the year; but it becomes more pronounced
during May and June, when winter fodders are ending. In November and December,
again a shortage is experienced because summer fodders are no longer available
at these times. Due to shortage as well as unavailability of good quality
fodder, animals remain undernourished with low production. Unawareness of the
farmers about high yielding fodder cultivars, unavailability of quality seed,
lack of adoption of improved production technologies are the core limitations
responsible for low yield of fodder in Pakistan (FRI 2018–2019). The
significant gap between demand and production of fodder compels for the
adoption of new cultivation techniques and high yielding cultivars to overcome
this gap.
Cultivation of
oat in Rabi season has the potential
to supply fresh fodder uninterruptedly for 60–70 days during scarcity period.
Oat fodder is soft, palatable, and high in crude protein (10–12%). Cultivation
of high yielding varieties of oat under improved sowing techniques can maximize
fodder production (Nawaz 2017). Mixture of oat and clover (berseem) supplies
balanced feed for domestic animals (Younis and Azam 2003). Planting techniques
affect the root development and growth of plants by modulating the interplant
competition, spatial distribution of plants and acquisition of resources
(Shahzad et al. 2016; Dabhi et al.
2017).
In Pakistan,
most of the cultivated area is canal irrigated, where farmers use conventional
flood or basin irrigation methods. Under the looming water crisis, flood or
basin irrigation is not recommended. Therefore, it is advocated to adopt
suitable water saving techniques like bed and furrow irrigation, sprinkler and
drip irrigation etc. Bed and furrow irrigation are considered efficient
techniques for cultivation fodder crops as these methods increase water use
efficiency and decrease water requirement in different cropping patterns
(Choudhury et al. 2007). These
techniques provide efficient drainage of water in waterlogged fields (Sayre and
Mreno-Ramos 1997). Raised bed and ridge planting
techniques of different crops could save 22% of irrigation water as compared to
flat sowing methods (Ali et al.
2012). Under the wheat productivity enhancement program (WPEP), it was found
that wheat planting on ridges increased yield by 23%. Likewise, 40% water
saving over conventional broadcast sowing was also recorded (Akhtar et al. 2014).
Present water
scarce situation, future prediction of severe water shortage and increased
demand of fodder by a fast-growing livestock warrants the need to appraise the
performance of improved fodder cultivars and optimize sowing techniques in
quest of productivity and profitability. Therefore, the current work has been
undertaken to study growth and yield performance of two oat cultivars under
three sowing methods.
Materials and Methods
Site
description and layout of experiment
The proposed experiment was conducted
during Rabi season 2014–2015 and 2015–2016
at Fodder Research Institute Sargodha. Climate of the area is temperate
characterized as extremely hot in summers and moderate cold in the winters. The
maximum temperature reaches 50°C (122°F) in the summer while the minimum
temperature recorded is as low as freezing point in the winter. Two fodder oat
cultivars i.e., Sgd oat-2011 and No-75525 were
sown using ridge, drill and broadcast methods. The experiment was laid out
following randomized complete block design (RCBD) with split plot arrangements.
Oat cultivars were kept in main plots; while, sowing methods were assigned to
sub plots. Experimental treatments were replicated five times with net plot
size of 20 m × 9 m.
Crop husbandry
At the commencement of Rabi season, a
field vacated by sorghum, was irrigated (10 cm) for pre-soaking of soil before
seed bed preparation. When field reached at field capacity (-0.03 MPa), the
seed bed was prepared by plowing the soil twice with a tractor mounted
cultivator, followed by planking each time. Both cultivars of oat were sown
under respective sowing methods as per experimental treatments during 3rd
week of October at a seed rate of 80 kg ha-1. For ridge sowing, the
oat seed was uniformly broadcasted over the entire field and ridges were made
with the help of tractor mounted ridger. For drill
sowing, sowing was done with the help of hand drill keeping line to line
distance of 30 cm. For broadcasting, the seed was uniformly broadcasted and
mixed in to the soil with cultivator. Fertilizer was applied at the rate of 57 kg N ha-1 and 57 kg P2O5
ha-1 using urea and di-ammonium phosphate as fertilizer source.
Whole of phosphorus was broadcasted at the time of seed bed preparation; while,
all nitrogen was applied with first irrigation after 30 days of sowing. After
first irrigation, broad leaved weedicide (bromoxynil + MCPA at 750 mL ha-1)
was sprayed at to keep crop free from weeds, and subsequent irrigations were
applied according to need of crop.
Procedure for
data collection
The data of all agronomic parameters
comprising plant height (cm),
stem thickness (cm), number of tillers (m-2) number of leaves per
tiller, dry matter yield (tons ha-1), number and time of irrigations
(min), crude protein and fodder yield (tons ha-1) were recorded
following standard procedures. All parameters expect fodder yield, crude
protein and dry matter was recorded at 50% flowering. Immediately after
harvesting, fresh forage samples from produce of each experimental unit were drawn and weighed thereof. All
samples were air dried followed by oven drying at 70°C until a constant weight
was obtained. After that fodder and dry matter yield was converted into tons ha-1
by unitary method. Then the dried samples were analyzed for crude protein by
standard analytical methods after AOAC (1990).
Quantity of
irrigation water applied to each treatment was calculated by recording the
number and time of total irrigations applied during the season under each
treatment. For each irrigation, a cutthroat flume (120 cm × 7.5 cm), installed
few meters upstream from the inlet of the experimental plots was used to
calculate the inflow rate. Flume readings and time was noted periodically until
the flow cutoff. For the purpose of applying the measured quantity of
irrigation water, each plot was irrigated independently. Number of plants per
unit area was recorded by averaging two randomly selected samples from the
middle of each experimental plot. Plant height from base of plant to the tip of
flag leaf was calculated by averaging the height of ten randomly selected
plants from each treatment. For stem diameter, ten plants from each treatment
were selected randomly and their stem diameters were measured with the help of
Vernier caliper and averaged thereof. Influence of various sowing methods and
oat cultivars on timing of occurrence of various biological events during the
entire crop growth period was investigated. Data on days to emergence and 50%
flowering after sowing were recorded and analyzed.
Statistical
and economic analysis
The recorded data were statistically
analyzed through Fisher’s analysis of variance technique using STATISTIX 8.1.
Least Significance Difference (LSD) tests were performed at 5% level of
probability (Montgomery 2013). Year effect was non-significant; therefore, data
of both years were pooled before analysis. Expenditure incurred on all inputs like seedbed preparation, acquisition of seed,
fertilizers, water and labor as well as the monetary returns from fresh fodder,
dry matter and yield were recorded and analyzed.
Results
Phenology
Significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) for days to emergence and 50% flowering in response
to sowing methods and oat cultivars were observed. Emergence of Sgd-oat-2011
and No -75525 occurred after 9 and 7.8 days of sowing, respectively under ridge
sowing, followed by drill sowing with 10.00 and 8.80 days, respectively, while
in broadcast method emergence of these cultivars was observed after 11.60 and
10.40 days, respectively (Table 1).
Similarly, 50% flowering in both cultivars i.e., Sgd-oat-2011
and No -75525 was observed after 116.8 and 98.2 days of sowing, respectively
under ridge sowing followed by drill sowing with 113.6 and 93.0 days,
respectively. Whereas, Sgd-oat-2011 and No-75525 required lowest number of days
to flowering i.e., 109.6 and 88.4 days, respectively when these were
sown using broadcast method (Table 1). Thus, it is concluded that minimum
number of days to emergence was observed in Cultivar No-75525 when sown on
ridges; while, maximum number of days to flowering was observed for cultivar
Sgd-oat-2011under same sowing method. It seems that ridge sowing is the best
method regarding cop phonological development, and cultivar No-75525 showed
early commencement of different phonological stages.
Growth
parameters
Interactive effect of sowing methods and oat cultivars
on growth, yield parameters and water saving were recorded during the course of
present studies. The results showed significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) among tested treatments
for all growth and yield parameters as well as irrigation water savings. Data
revealed that highest values of number of tiller (297.40 m-2), plant
height (112.2 cm), leaves per tiller (9.2) and stem thickness (0.82 cm) were
observed for plants of cultivar Sgd-oat-2011 sown under ridge sowing method,
followed by drill sowing method with values of 275 m-2, 103.4 cm,
135.94 cm2, 8.2 and 0.66 cm, respectively for aforementioned
parameters; whereas, lowest values were observed when both of the oat cultivars
were sown by broadcasting method (Table 2).
Yield and
quality traits
The results revealed that interactive effect of
treatments showed significant influence (P
≤ 0.05) on production of fresh biomass (fodder), dry matter and crude
protein (Table 3). Highest quantities of fresh fodder (83.3 t ha-1), dry matter,
(16.86 t ha-1), crude protein (2.59 t ha-1) and crude
protein contents (15.4%) were recorded for experimental plots of cultivar
Sgd-oat-2011 sown on ridges, followed by drill sown plots (77.92 t ha-1),
(15.64 t ha-1), (14.19 t ha-1) and (14.53%), respectively
of the same cultivar. The lowest yields were
observed under broadcasting sowing method (Table 3). For cultivar No-75525,
highest fresh fodder yield (66.31 t ha-1), dry matter (11.105 t ha-1)
and crude protein (1.56 t ha-1) were observed when it was sown
through ridge sowing and minimum fodder yield (55.60 t ha-1) was
recorded from fodder crop
sown under broadcasting method (Table 3).
Irrigation water
saving
While applying irrigation, constant discharging outlet
was used to divert irrigation water to each treatment. Only the time of
irrigation varied, thus irrigation opportunity was recorded for every
irrigation in each treatment. Total time of irrigation during entire crop
season to each treatment was noted (Table 4). It was found that 43.75 and
46.45% more time was recorded for irrigating the drill and broadcast sown plots
of oat, respectively as compared to the ridge sown plots. Thus, the ridge
sowing method saves irrigation water to the tune of 43.75 and 46.45% comparing
with drill sowing and broadcasting, respectively.
Economic
analysis
The economic analysis carried out on the basis of fresh
green fodder yield revealed that oat fodder crop sown under ridge sowing gave
maximum net return of Rs. 119225 ha1 followed by drill sowing (Rs.
99970 ha-1) and broadcasting (Rs. 92445 ha-1) (Table 5).
Benefit-cost ratio for ridge sowing was highest (2.75) followed by drill sowing
and broadcasting (Table 5).
Table 1: Effect of sowing methods on
number of days to emergence and 50% flowering of oat varieties (values are
means of two years)
Sowing methods/cultivars |
Days to emergence
(days) |
Days taken to 50%
flowering (days) |
||
Sgd.oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
|
Ridge sowing |
9.0 ± 0.71 c |
7.8 ± 0.84 d |
116.8 ± 2.39 a |
98.2 ± 2.39 d |
Drill sowing |
10.0 ± 0.71 b |
8.8 ± 0.84 c |
113.6 ± 2.7 b |
93.0 ± 2.24 e |
Broadcasting |
11.6 ± 0.5 a |
10.4 ± 0.55 b |
109.6 ± 2.4 c |
88.4 ± 2.30 f |
LSD at P ≤ 0.05 |
1.00 |
3.31 |
Means ±
standard deviation not sharing same letters, with in a column or row for each
trait, differ significantly from each other at P ≤ 0.05
Table 2: Effect of sowing methods on
growth parameters of forage oat varieties (values are means of two-year data)
Sowing
methods/cultivars |
Number of
tillers (m-2) |
Plant height
(cm) |
Number of
leaves per tiller |
Stem
diameter (cm) |
||||
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
|
Ridge sowing |
297.4 ± 10.69
a |
279.0 ± 9.62
b |
112.2 ± 3.35
a |
102.4 ± 3.78
b |
9.0 ± 0.84 a |
8.6 ± 1.14 ab |
0.82 ± 0.08 a |
0.78 ± 0.13 a |
Drill sowing |
275.0 ± 11.18
b |
261.0 ± 8.48
c |
103.4 ± 4.72
b |
98.6 ± 3.13
c |
8.2 ± 1.09 a-c |
8.0 ± 0.71 a-c |
0.66 ± 0.11 b |
0.60 ± 0.12 b |
Broadcasting |
248.2 ± 8.84
d |
234.2 ± 5.49
e |
99.0 ± 3.39 c |
93.8 ± 3.96
d |
7.6 ± 1.14 bc |
7.2 ± 0.84 c |
0.54 ± 0.09 c |
0.52 ± 0.08 c |
LSD at P ≤ 0.05 |
9.42 |
1.86 |
1.45 |
0.11 |
Means ±
standard deviation not sharing same letters, with in a column or row for each
trait, differ significantly from each other at P ≤ 0.05
Table 3: Effect of sowing methods on
fodder yield, dry matter, crude protein yield and contents of oat varieties
(values are means of two-year data)
Sowing
methods/cultivar |
Fodder yield
(t ha-1) |
Dry matter
yield (t ha-1) |
Crude
protein yield (tons ha-1) |
Crude protein
contents (%) |
||||
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
|
Ridge sowing |
83.3 ± 1.94 a |
66.3 ± 3.10 d |
16.9 ± 0.37 a |
11.1 ± 0.36 d |
2.59 ± 0.29 a |
1.56 ± 0.20 d |
15.4 ± 0.08 a |
14.1 ± 0.08 d |
Drill
sowing |
77.9 ± 1.67 b |
59.4 ± 1.4 e |
15.6 ± 0.38 b |
10.0 ± 0.38 e |
2.30 ± 0.25 b |
1.37 ± 0.20 e |
14.5 ± 0.1 b |
13.8 ± 0.1 e |
Broadcasting |
70.6 ± 2.1 c |
55.6 ± 1.95 f |
14.2 ± 0.5 c |
9.3 ± 0.31 f |
2.06 ± 0.31 c |
1.25 ± 0.27 f |
14.5 ± 0.03 c |
13.4 ± 0.1 f |
LSD at P ≤ 0.05 |
2.44 |
0.18 |
0.05 |
0.10 |
Means ±
standard deviation not sharing same letters, with in a column or row for each
trait, differ significantly from each other at P ≤ 0.05
Table 4: Effect of sowing methods on
time for irrigation to oat varieties (values are means of two years data)
Sowing methods |
Time for irrigation (min ha-1) |
Increase in time over ridge sowing (%) |
||
Sgd. oat-2011 No-75525 |
Sgd. oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
||
Ridge sowing |
255 ± 6.36 d |
254 ± 7.57 d |
- |
- |
Drill sowing |
368 ± 7.02 bc |
366 ± 6.91 c |
44.31 |
44.09 |
Broadcasting |
372 ± 8.80 a |
372 ± 5.07 ab |
45.88 |
46.46 |
LSD at P ≤ 0.05 |
4.24 |
|
|
Means ±
standard deviation not sharing same letters, with in a column or row for each
trait, differ significantly from each other at P ≤ 0.05
Table 5: Economic comparison of different
sowing methods
Treatments |
Cultivation
cost (Rs. ha-1) |
Gross
returns (Rs. ha-1) |
Net returns
(Rs. ha-1) |
Benefit:
cost ratio |
|||||
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
Sgd.
oat-2011 |
No-75525 |
||
Ridge sowing |
67925 |
67925 |
208250 |
165750 |
140325 |
97825 |
3.06 |
2.44 |
|
Drill sowing |
70395 |
70395 |
194750 |
148500 |
124355 |
78105 |
2.76 |
2.11 |
|
Broadcast
sowing |
65455 |
65455 |
176500 |
139000 |
111045 |
73545 |
2.69 |
2.12 |
|
Discussion
In the present study, two oat cultivars (Sgd-oat-2011 and
cultivar No-75525) were cultivated using three different sowing methods (i.e.,
ridge, drill and broadcast). Their interactive effect was evaluated for
optimizing fodder production and saving irrigation water. Statistical analysis
of data recorded on various agronomic and yield parameters and water use showed
significant variations. Significant effect of sowing techniques and cultivars
used under this experiment was observed on number of days to emergence, days to
50% flowering, growth and yield parameters and water saving. Differences in
days to emergence and 50% flowering, most probably and predominantly was due to
differences in genetic
makeup of the cultivars. However, it could be postulated that sowing techniques
had their own impact in providing favorable environment for root development
and nutrient acquisition for quick germination which resulted in early
commencement of seed germination and prolonged period of vegetative growth for
better production. Sowing techniques have been reported to influence nutrients acquisition and utilization and
provide a greater number of days for vegetative growth that positively affected
the growth attribute (Bakht et al.
2006, 2007, 2011). Oat cultivars took lowest number of days to 50% flowering
under broadcast sowing was mainly due to increase in intra-plant competition
and crowding between neighboring plants which is in full agreement with
findings of Ali et al. (2012). Some
earlier researchers indicated enhancement in crop growth and yield attributes
by ridge sowing method and cultivars (Kabesh et al. 2009; Ao et al. 2010; Belachew
and Abera 2010; Nawaz 2017). Under the current
investigation, ridge sowing improved the growth parameters like number of
tillers m-2, plant height (cm), number of leaves per tiller, stem
diameter (cm) etc., which is in full agreement with previous researches. This
might be due to improvement in soil structure that enhanced the aeration, water
and nutrient uptake, better growth environment and increased nutrients availability
and uptake (Arif et
al. 2001; Abdullah et al. 2008;
Khan et al. 2012). Increased fodder
yield, dry matter and crude protein yield with higher crude protein contents
were obtained in cultivar Sgd-oat-2011 as compared to No-75525 (Table 5 and 6).
This might be due to inherent differences and maximum vigor in growth
parameters (Jha et al. 2012; Ratan et al. 2016; Dabhi
et al. 2017). Improvement of fresh
fodder yield, dry matter and crude protein yield including crude protein
contents was presumably because of efficient light and nutrient utilization,
improved aeration and irrigation by plants as reported by Sharma and Bhunia (2001); Soomro et al.
(2009) and Hameed et al. (2014).
In context of above discussions and findings, ridge
sowing can be opted as an optimized and beneficial technique to achieve better
fodder, dry matter and crude protein yield of
oat cultivar Sgd-oat-2011. Comparison of cultivars indicated that Sgd-oat-2011
produced higher fodder, dry matter and crude protein yield as compared to
cultivar No-75525 due to genetic differences and maximum vigor in growth
parameters (Roshan et al. 2012; Godara et al.
2016).
Considering the irrigation water saving, it is obvious
that least time of irrigation was recorded for ridge sowing. This is due to the
fact that under this sowing technique, less surface area had to be soaked;
thus, less irrigation opportunity time was required to irrigate the reduced
surface area. On the other hand, water uptake is increased due to direct
application to the roots in the presence of loose fertile layer. Availability
of favorable moisture enhances the nutrient uptake required for development of
better root system which contributes towards high leaf area index (data not
given). Higher leaf area received more solar radiation used for
photo-assimilation, resulting in higher crop vigor and growth rate (CGR)
(Rasheed et al. 2003; Hussain et al. 2010). Ridge sowing method helps
to maximize water savings, increase water use efficiency, enhance yield, save
time of irrigation and reduced energy costs for water pumping (Ahmad and
Mahmood 2005; Majeed et al. 2015;
Hussain et al. 2018).
Maximum benefit-cost ratio recorded for ridge sowing was
due to high yield and less cost of production including saving of water as
compared to drill sowing and broadcasting methods (Hussain et al. 2015).
Conclusion
Fodder oat cultivar Sgd.oat-2011 sown
on ridges gave the best quality fresh fodder with the highest economic returns.
Ridge sowing method increases water use efficiency, nutrient uptake, saves
irrigation water and improves drainage while heavy rain fall during late oat
sowing season. Education and awareness of farming community is required to
adopt oat cultivar Sgd.oat-2011 for better productivity and economic returns;
while, ridge sowing technique should be promoted to save irrigation water, to
increase water use efficiency and to enhance nutrient uptake by the crop.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of
Fodder Research Institute Sargodha for providing finances and space to conduct
the experiment. Contributions of coauthors are highly admired.
Author Contributions
MRG and AH conceived idea, planned and
executed the experiment, AR, AM and AH collected and recorded data, WN
statistically analyzed the data and made illustration, MRG, MSH and AH drafted
the manuscript, SAR interpreted the results, reviewed the contents and finalized
the manuscript in its present shape.
References
Abdullah, G Hassan,
IA Khan, SA Khan, H Ali (2008). Impact of planting methods and herbicides on
weed biomass and some agronomic traits of maize. Pak J Weed Sci Res 14:121‒130
Ahmad N, N Mahmood
(2005). Impact of raised bed technology on water productivity and logging of
wheat. Pak J Water Resour
90:7‒15
Akhtar M, M Aslam, HM
Nasrullah, B Ali, MA Khan (2014). Effect of ridge sowing methods on wheat yield
in cotton-wheat cropping system of southern Punjab. J Rur Dev
45:29‒39
Ali M, L Ali, MQ
Waqar, MA Ali (2012). Bed planting: A new crop establishment method for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
in cotton-wheat cropping system of Southern Punjab.
Intl J Agric Appl Sci 4:8‒14
Ao J,
J Fu, J Tian, X Yan, H Liao (2010). Genetic variability for root
morph-architecture traits and root growth dynamics as related to phosphorus
efficiency in soybean. Funct Plant Biol 37:304‒312
AOAC (1990). Official Methods of Analysis,
Association of official analytical chemists, 15th edn. Arlington, Virginia, USA
Arif M,
I Ullah, S Khan, F Ghani, HK Yousafzai (2001).
Response of maize varieties to different planting methods. Sarhad J Agric 17:159‒163
Bakht J,
M Shafi, H Rehman, R Uddin, S Anwar (2011). Effect of planting
methods on growth, phenology and yield of maize varieties. Pak J Bot 43:1629‒1633
Bakht J,
MF Siddique, M Shafi, H
Akbar, M Tariq, N Khan, M Zubair, M Yousef (2007). Effect of planting methods
and nitrogen levels on the yield and yield components of maize. Sarhad J Agric 23:553‒559
Bakht J, S Ahmad, M
Tariq, H Akbar, M Shafi (2006). Response of maize to
planting methods and fertilizer nitrogen. J
Agric Biol Sci 1:8‒14
Belachew T,
Y Abera (2010). Response of maize (Zea mays L.) to tied ridges and planting
methods at Goro, Southeastern Ethiopia. Amer Euroas J Agron 3:21‒24
Choudhury
BU, B Bouman, A Singh (2007). Yield and water
productivity of rice-wheat on raised beds at New Delhi, India. Field Crops Res 100:229‒239
Dabhi MS,
MR Patel, CR Chaudhari, VN Patel, PM Patel (2017). Response of oat (Avena sativa L.) varieties to methods of
sowing and nitrogen levels on forage yield and quality. Intl J Chem Stud 5:683‒686
Farooq M, M Hussain,
S Ul-Allah, KHM Siddique (2019). Physiological and agronomic approaches for
improving water-use efficiency in crop plants. Agric Water Manage 219:95‒108
FRI (2018–2019). Annual Report, Fodder Research Institute, Sargodha, 2018‒2019.
Available at: aari.punjab.gov.pk
Godara
AS, Satpal, BS Duhan, SK Pahuja (2016). Effect of different nitrogen levels on
forage yield, quality and economics of oat (Avena sativa L.) genotypes. Forage
Res 41:233‒236
Hameed S,
M Ayub, M Tahir, S Khan, M
Bilal (2014). Forage yield and quality response of oat cultivar to different
sowing techniques. Intl J Mod Agric
3:25‒33
Hussain I, A Ali, A
Ahmed, H Nasrullah, BD Khokar,
S Iqbal, AM Aulakh, AU
Khan, J Akhtar, G Ahmed (2018). Impact of ridge-furrow planting in Pakistan: Empirical
evidence from the farmers’ field. Intl J Agron 2018; Article 3798037
Hussain M,
MMQ Baig, MF Iqbal, MQ Waqar, A
Bashir, MA Ali (2015). Ridge sowing technique: A new crop establishment
technique for wheat in rice-wheat cropping system of northern Punjab. Intl J Adv Multidiscip Res 2:14‒18
Hussain M,
M Farooq, K Jabran, A Wahid
(2010). Foliar application of glycine betaine and salicylic acid improves
growth, yield and water productivity of hybrid sunflower planted by different
sowing methods. J Agron
Crop Sci 196:136‒145
Jha AK, A
Shrivastava, NS Raghuvanshi, JK Sharma (2012). Relative performance of new
single oat genotypes to different nitrogen levels under agro-climatic condition
of kymore plateau zone of Madhya Pradesh. JNKVV Res J 46:44‒46
Kabesh MO,
MF El-kramany, GA Sary, HME
Naggar, SH Bakhoum (2009).
Effect of sowing methods and some bio-organic fertilization
treatments on yield and yield components of wheat. Res J Agric Biol Sci 5:97‒102
Khan MB, F Yousaf, M Hussain, MW Haq, DJ Lee, M Farooq (2012). Influence of planting methods
on root development, crop productivity and water use efficiency in maize hybrids. Chil J Agric Res 72:556‒563
Majeed A, A Muhmood, A Niaz, S Javid, ZA Ahmad, SSH
Shah, AH Shah (2015). Bed planting of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
improves nitrogen use efficiency and grain yield compared to flat planting. Crop J 3:118‒124
Montgomery DC (2013).
Design and analysis of experiments, 8th
Edition, pp:8‒100. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New
York, USA
Nawaz MQ (2017).
Effect of different sowing methods and nitrogen levels on fodder yield of oat
in salt affected soil. Pak J Agric Res
30:323‒328
Pakistan Economic
Survey (2019). Economic Advisor's Wing, Finance Division. Government of
Pakistan, Islamabad
Pakistan Economic
Survey (2018). Economic Advisor's Wing, Finance Division. Government of Pakistan,
Islamabad
Rasheed M, A Hussain,
T Mahmood (2003). Growth analysis of hybrid maize as influenced by planting
techniques and nutrient management. Intl
J Agric Biol 5:169‒171
Ratan N, UN Singh, HC
Pandey (2016). Yield and quality of oat (Avena sativa L.) as influenced by nitrogen and varieties in Bundelkhand region. Agric Sci Res J 6:27‒30
Roshan PK, KR Naik, S
Nayak (2012). Response of promising varieties of single cut forage oat to
different nitrogen levels. JNKVV Res J 46:59‒61
Sayre KD, OHM Ramos
(1997). Application of Raised Bed Planting System to Wheat. In: Wheat Program Special Report No 31 CIMMYT Mexico DF Mexico
Shahzad M,
M Farooq, K Jabran, M Hussain (2016). Impact of different crop rotations and
tillage systems on weed infestation and productivity of bread wheat. Crop Prot
89:161‒169
Sharma SK, SR Bhunia (2001). Response of oat (Avena sativa L.) to cutting management method of sowing and nitrogen. Ind J Agron
46:567‒567
Soomro
UA, MU Rahman, EA Odhano, S
Gul, AQ Tareen (2009).
Effects of sowing method and seed rate on growth and yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.).
World J Agric Sci 5:159‒162
Younis M, M Azam
(2003). Response of different levels of N and P on the forage yield of oat. Pak J Soil Sci 22:64‒66