Technological impact of evident pigeon pea improved variety BDN 711 grown by small landholders in Aurangabad and Jalna districts

Introduction

Red gram (Cajanus cajan L.)) is a perennial legume from the family Fabaceaesince its domestication in the Indian subcontinent at least 3,500 years ago, its seeds have become a common food in Asia, Africa and Latin America. It is consumed on a large scale mainly in south Asia and is a major source of protein for the population of the Indian subcontinent. Red gram is the most important pulse crop widely cultivated in all tropical and subtropical regions. The total world acreage under pulses is about 93.18 (Mha) with production of 89.82 (Mt) at 964 kg/ha yields level. India, with >28 Mha pulses cultivation area, is the largest pulse producing country in the world. It ranks first in area and production with 31 percent and 28 percent respectively. During 2020-21 tur productivity at 885 kg/ha, has also increased significantly over last 05 year. In Maharashtra in 2022-23 area under Red gram was 12.7 lakh/ha., 13.3 lakh tonnes production and productivity was 1042 kg/ha. area under irrigation (1.59%) having. In India pigeon pea is cultivated in 14 percent of the gross cropped area under pulses providing 20 percent of the national pulse production (Siddayya et al., 2016) [26] . The crop is cultivated on 40.283 lakh ha and annual production of this pulse in India is about 29.295 lakh tonnes (Anonymous, 2016). This quantity is insufficient to meet the domestic needs; and hence a considerable amount (about 100,000 tonnes) of pigeon pea is imported each year (Saxena and Tikle, 2015) [23] . The important socioeconomic components are health and wellbeing, sustainable wildlife harvesting, land access and use, protection of heritage and cultural resources, business and employment opportunities, sustainability of population, services and infrastructure, ample sustainable income and lifestyle, etc. (Glasson, J. (2017) [15] , Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Guidelines).

Materials and Methods

Technological impact

The development of agrochemicals including fertilizers and pesticides have had a large impact on agricultural production. Agricultural technologies have negatively impacted the environment through soil degradation, air and water pollution, loss of biodiversity, and the disruption of food webs.

Results and Discussion

Mechanization in agriculture

Agricultural technologies have dramatically increased the carrying capacity of the land and have resulted in increased food production. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D. From table 1. shows that technological impact in farm mechanization agriculture of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to before cultivation (60.83%) and after cultivation increased (67.50%), low level of mechanization in agriculture before cultivation of red gram BDN 711 35.00% which decrease in 24.58%, followed by high level increased respondents before cultivation of BDN 711, 4.7% of them using the combine harvesters changed to 7.92% of them using the combine harvester. It was revealed that impact of red gram (BDN 711) about technological impact mechanization in agriculture impact, nearly more than half of respondents before cultivation (60.83%) and after cultivation more than half of respondents (67.50%) were belong to medium change category with (6.67) value. It could be concluded that, before cultivation of BDN 711, the main source of farmers from traditional crop cultivation like cereals, fodder by adopting mono cropping of local varieties or previous year seeds. But after cultivation of BDN 711 intercropping pattern or solo cropping of BDN 711, this is early variety which leads to maturity of whole crop at the same time hence with combine harvester can be used for harvesting, combine harvesting use than traditional harvesting practices like labour utilization increased cost of production and time consuming. While use of combine harvester its making benefit. For big farmers it is beneficial to harvest in one time with sole cropping pattern. But from research area mostly marginal farmers were used labour for harvesting also used residue as fodder as per requirement. However, mechanization in agriculture impact on the farmers before cultivation of BDN 711 was not enough to meet their basic needs of family and hence there was no scope for enough production, less income and sometimes they had to borrow to maintain their routine life. After cultivation of BDN 711, additional employment generated by farmers had made significant changes in the annual per capita income of the farmers after cultivation of BDN 711. It was observed from the above table that, drastic mechanization in agriculture changes observed after cultivation of BDN 711. The Z value mechanization in agriculture impact (23.46**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. This result revealed that the mechanization in agriculture i.e sowing with tractor and harvesting at same time due to maturation of all crop at one time ready to harvest. The similar findings with the result of Shetty et al. (2013) [25] , Gaur et al. (2012) [13] , Ghuge et al. (2019) [14] and Kumar et al. (2022) [18] .

Involvement in seed production

Seed production plays a vital role in increasing the sown area. For every season, the timely availability of seeds is required. Red gram BDN 711variety is very popular in Aurangabad and Jalna, where the gross cropped area is under pigeon pea in draught area. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D. From table 1. shows that the involvement of BDN 711 growers in seed production of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to low level at before cultivation (53.33%) and medium level at after cultivation increased (52.50%), followed by high level of seed production increasing 10.83% before cultivation of BDN 711 any other local seeds production to 19.17% of seed production enhanced after cultivation of red gram BDN 711. Through increased in production and productivity farmers involvement enhanced in seed production. It was detected that technological impact of red gram (BDN 711) on involvement in seed production, less one sixth of the respondents before cultivation (35.83%) and after cultivation more than half of the respondents (52.50%) were belong to medium change category with (16.67) value. It could be concluded that, before cultivation of BDN 711, cultivation through local varieties or previous year seeds which leads to decrease production or sterility observed in plants. But after cultivation of BDN 711 intercropping pattern or solo cropping of BDN 711, this is early variety which leads to highest production achieved than other red gram variety in drought prone area. Increased seed production and saving cost on seeds for next three years benefit. BDN-711 is escape terminal drought than different varieties of pigeon pea. BDN 711 choose mostly due to taste and well-cooked also easy to mixed. BDN-711 seeds are in white in colour. However, involvement in seed production impact on the farmers before cultivation of BDN 711 was not enough to meet their basic needs of family and hence there was no scope for enough production, less income and sometimes they had to borrow to maintain their routine life. After cultivation of BDN 711, additional employment generated by farmers by selling seeds to the farmer to farmer had made significant changes in the annual per capita income of the farmers after cultivation of BDN 711. It was observed from the above table that, drastic involvement in seed production observed after cultivation of BDN 711. The Z value involvement in seed production (18.14**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. The similar findings with the result of Zade et al. (2020) [31] and Gowda et al. (2013) [16] .

Source of seed availability (BDN 711)

The data collected on the basis of seed availability on Last year produce / use variety, University, KVK, Purchased from market, Purchased from farmers, Gifted by farmers, Received from relatives, etc. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D. Data 1.1 shows that sources of seed availability of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to before cultivation (26.75%) and after cultivation increased (35.61%), 57.50% low level of sources of seed availability to farmers before cultivation while changed to 22.50% followed by high level before cultivation of BDN711 15.00% percent changed to 18.75% after cultivation of BDN711. It was perceived that impact of red gram (BDN 711) on sources of seed availability, less than one seventh of the respondents before cultivation (27.50%) and after cultivation more than half of the respondents (58.75%) were belong to medium change category with (31.25) impact change value. In fact, seed saving is an important crop management and livelihood strategy for the poor farmers but it limits their access to technological improvements embodied in seed. It could be concluded that, before cultivation of BDN 711, cultivation through local varieties or previous year seeds which leads to decrease production or sterility observed in plants. But after cultivation of BDN 711 intercropping pattern or solo cropping of BDN 711, this is early variety which leads to highest production achieved than other red gram variety in drought prone area. Increased seed production and saving cost on seeds for next three years benefit. However, sources of seed availability increased impact on the farmers before cultivation of BDN 711 was not enough to meet their basic needs of family and hence there was no scope for enough production, less income. After cultivation of BDN 711, additional employment generated by farmers by selling seeds to the farmer to farmer had made significant changes in the annual per capita income of the farmers after cultivation of BDN 711. It was observed from the above table that, drastic sources of seed availability increased production observed after cultivation of BDN 711. The Z value sources of seed availability (21.94**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. The main issue in resolving access to quality seed would be a thorough understanding and critical assessment of the status of existing seed sector (both formal and informal), their bottlenecks and comparative advantages and complementarity. It was found in the study that majority of the farmers were not purchasing seeds from the market instead of using own home saved seeds or exchanging with fellow farmers, from before cultivation of BDN 711 low 57.50 percent changed to medium level of category 58.75 percent of after cultivation of BDN 711 which also reflects imperfection in the seed market. The other important sources of seed purchases were government agencies and private seed dealers. The similar findings with the result of Reddy, A Amarender, (2007) [20] , Rubyogo et al. (2011) [22] , Gowda CLL et al. (2013) [16] , Kumar et al. (2022) [18] , Labeyrie et al (2023) [19] .

Intercultural Operations

The data collected on the basis of the intercultural operations increased or decreased which needs to be done before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D.

From table 1. shows that intercultural operations of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to before cultivation (65.83%) and after cultivation increased (76.25%). Followed by low level at intercultural operations before 29.17% to 10.42% changed. At high level of respondents changed 5.00 percent intercultural operations to before cultivation of BDN 711 to 13.33 percent after cultivation of BDN 711. This variety had given good performance after intercultural operations. It was perceived that impact of red gram (BDN 711) on intercultural operations, more than one fourth of respondents before cultivation (65.83%) and after cultivation nearly one third of the respondents (76.25%) were belong to medium change intercultural operations category with (10.42) impact change value. It conclude that the intercultural operations before cultivation of BDN 711 was increased but after cultivation the intercultural practices reduced due to height of plant. Intercultural operations are easier due to appropriate growth of plants, BDN-711 is superior for intercrop. For BDN-711 if use BBF technology has been increases production also followed university recommended sowing distance for BDN-711. After cultivation of BDN 711, additional labour cost saved after timely spraying which significant changes in the annual per capita income of the farmers after cultivation of BDN 711. It was observed from the above table that, drastic changes in source of income intercultural operations increased production observed after cultivation of BDN 711. The Z value intercultural operations (24.98**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. The similar findings with the result of Gowda CLL. et al. (2013) [16] , Keshvareddy et al. (2018) [17] .

Location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice

The respondent's used location specific in-situ moisture conservations practices developed which leads to enhance production cultivation of BDN 711 variety. The respondents response score calculated by summing the difference obtained by the subtracting the value of after cultivation from before cultivation of BDN 711 about location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D. From table 1. shows that Location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to before cultivation (42.33%) and after cultivation increased (70.02%). Low level of 27.08% Location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice changed to 14.58% followed by high level at 5.00% to 14.58% changed. This variety is indeterminate hence might provide retaining moisture due to height of plant. It was observed that impact of red gram (BDN 711) on location specific in situ moisture conservations practice, more than half of the respondents before cultivation (67.92%) and after cultivation nearly one third of the respondents (70.83%) were belong to medium change category with (2.92) impact change value. It conclude that the intercultural operations before cultivation of BDN 711 was increased but after cultivation the Location specific insitu moisture conservations practice reduced due to more intercultural operations. Location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice helps due to BDN 711 can overcome the effect of dry spells during vegetative and or reproductive stages of crops resulting in increased rainwater use efficiency, better performance of crops and additional net returns. Farmers have continuity in utilization of recommended cropping pattern. After cultivation of BDN 711, additional labour cost saved after timely spraying which significant changes in the annual per capita income of the farmers after cultivation of BDN 711. It was observed from the above table that, drastic changes in location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice increased production observed after cultivation of BDN 711. The Z value location specific in situ moisture conservations practice (22.03**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. The similar findings with the result of Saxena et al. (2015) [23] , Brithal (2014) [6] and Ayenan (2017) [3] .

Transfer of Technology

The respondents response score calculated by summing the difference obtained by the subtracting the value of after cultivation from before cultivation of BDN 711 about transfer of technology impact. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D. Table 1. shows that transfer of technology of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to before cultivation (60.83%) and after cultivation increased (76.25%), from low level to 35.00% changed after cultivation of BDN 711 upto 10.42%, followed by high level increased from before cultivation 4.17% to after cultivation of BDN 711 upto 13.33%. Due to better transfer of technology through extension workers and farmers to farmer was increased as benefit increased per hectare area. It was observed that impact of red gram (BDN 711) on transfer of technology, majority of growers before cultivation (60.83%) and after cultivation (76.25%) were belong to medium change category with (15.42) impact change value. It is concluded that before cultivation BDN 711TOT from WhatsApp cultivation groups, University, KVK increases awareness about BDN-711 as good alternative for higher production in Marathwada region, government organized awareness programmes through farmers rally, farmers fair, group discussion etc., Agricultural service centre works as technical guidance, Learn through Videos on YouTube, Through opinion leaders in village farmers following the traditional seeds and practices but after cultivation of BDN 711 while practicing it they get acquainted with the technology through progressive farmers and KVK. After cultivation of BDN 711, additional labour cost saved after timely spraying which significant changes in the annual per capita income of the farmers after cultivation of BDN 711. It was observed from the above table that, drastic changes in transfer of technology increased production observed after cultivation of BDN 711. The Z value location specific in situ moisture conservations practice (22.03**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. The similar findings with the result of Chinchmalatpure et al. (2011) [9] , Anonymous (2013-A) [1] and Zade et al. (2020) [31] .

Yield

Grain yield

The respondents response score calculated by summing the difference obtained by the subtracting the value of after cultivation from before cultivation of BDN 711 from grain yield impact. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S.D. Data table 1 shows that yield in grain production of majority of the BDN 711 growers were changed to before cultivation (52.50%) and after cultivation increased (60.83% The similar findings with the result of Sheldrake and Naryanan, (1979) [24] , Wallace et al. (1993) [29] , Chauhan et al. (1995) [7] , Chavhan et al. (2019) [8] , David et al. (2002) [10] , Rimal N.S. (2014) [21] , Sivasankar, S. et al. (2018) [28] , Singh, A et al. (2020) [27] , Zade et al. (2020) [31] .

Stalk yield

The data collected on the respondents response score calculated by summing the difference obtained by the subtracting the value of after cultivation from before cultivation of BDN 711 stalk yield changed hence the as also changed in stalk yield impact. The respondents' use of stalk yield as income source considered. The total score the respondents were obtained and they were categorized into three groups on the basis of mean ± S. The Z value yield measured in stalk, (22.99**) of before cultivation and after cultivation of BDN 711 was found significant at 0.01 percent level of probability, which indicate that there was highly significant difference among them. The biomass production among pigeon pea varieties varies considerably due to a number of agronomic and production factors. These include climatic conditions, cropping systems, duration and plant population, and this has resulted in a wide variety of yields being observed. This similar findings with the result of Faris D. G. and Singh U. (1990) [12] , Wani (2006) [30] , Ding et al. (2016) [11] , Ayenan (2017) [3] , Blazos A. K. and Belski R.,(2016) [5] , Sivasankar et al. (2018) [28] .

Conclusion

The technological impact studied with different component such as farm mechanization in agriculture, involvement seed production, sources of seeds availability, intercultural operations, location specific in-situ moisture conservations practice, and transfer of technology1. Grain yield, 2. Stalk yield, etc. Total technological impact change percentage divided by the overall percentage of each component of before cultivation impact was found 17.41%. Hence, it conclude that after cultivation of BDN 711 the farmers has established 17.41% technological impact.

References

1. Ayenan MAT, Danquah A, Ahoton LE, et al. Utilization and farmers' knowledge on Pigeonpea diversity in Benin, West Africa. J Ethnobiology Ethnomedicine. 2017;13:37.
2. Blazos AK, Belski R. Health benefits of legumes and pulses with a focus on Australian sweet lupins. Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2016;25:1-17. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Birthal P, Khan MT, Negi D, Agarwal S. Impact of Climate Change on Yields of Major Food Crops in India: Implications for Food Security. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 2014;27:145.
4. Chauhan Y, Johansen C, Saxena K. Physiological Basis of Yield Variation in Short-duration Pigeonpea Grown in Different Environments of the Semi-Arid Tropics. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 1995;174:163171. 10.1111/j.1439-037X.1995.tb01099.x.
5. Chavhan PN. Impact of mobile-based agro advisory services by state department of agriculture in Marathwada region. Ph.D. (Agri.) Thesis, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani. 2019.
6. Chinchmalatpure UR, Bhugul MK, Rajput SN. Technological gap in adoption of Dr. PDKV recommended dry land technology. Journal of Global Communication. 2011;4(2):131-137.
7. David S, Mukandala L, Mafuru J. Seed availability, an ignored factor in crop varietal adoption studies: a case study of beans in Tanzania. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. 2002;21:5-20.
8. Ding Y, Liu Y, Liu S, et al. Biochar to improve soil fertility. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2016;36:36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-016-0372-z
9. Gaur PM, Sivakumar C, Thudi M, Krishnamurthy L, Nayak S, Kimurto P, et al. Marker-assisted breeding for drought avoidance root traits in chickpea. Plant and Animal Genomes XIX Conference, January 15-19, 2011, San Diego, CA, USA. Available at http://www.indpag.org/19/abstracts/W20_PAGXIX_14 3.html.
10. Ghuge GV, Jadhav KT, Chavan AS. Response of Irrigation Scheduling on Yield Attributes, Productivity and Economics of Pigeonpea (Cajanus Cajan L.). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2019;8(10):1644-1651. Doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.810.191
11. Glasson J. Socio-economic impacts 1: overview and economic impacts. Methods of Environmental and Social Impact Assessment. 2017;475-514.
12. Keshavareddy G, Kamala Bai S, Nagaraj KH, Ranganath SC. Impact of Front Line Demonstration on Yield and Economics of Pigeon Pea, Cajanus Cajan in the District of Ramanagara, Karnataka, India. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2018;7(01):472-478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.701.056
13. Kumar A, Sahu KK, Sangode PK. Socio-economic Analysis of Soybean Growers with Reference to Cost of Cultivation and Income in Rajnandgaon District of Chhattisgarh. The Pharma Innovation Journal. 2022;SP11(3):27-31.
14. Labeyrie V, Friedman R, Donnet S, Faye N, Cobelli O, Baggio J, et al. Linking seed networks and crop diversity contributions to people: A case study in smallscale farming systems in Sahelian Senegal. Agricultural Systems. 2023;211. 10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103726.
15. Reddy AA. Materne and Reddy Commercial Cultivation And Profitability, S.S. Yadav et al. (eds.), Lentil: An Ancient Crop for Modern Times. 2007;173186.
16. Saxena KB, Tikle AN. Believe it or not, hybrid technology is the only way to enhance pigeonpea yields. Internat. J Scientific & Res. Publications. 2015;5(6):1-7.
17. Sheldrake AR, Narayanan A. Comparisons of Earlierand Later-formed Pods of Pigeonpeas (Cajanus Cajan (L.) Millsp.). Annals of Botany. 1979;43(4):459-466. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a085656
18. Siddayya, Anilkumar D, Kumar, Shivanand K. Adoption pattern of improved pigeonpea varieties in Gulbarga district, Karnataka, India. Agric. Sci. Digest. 2016;36(4):255-260.
19. Singh A, Fromm I, Jha GK, Venkatesh P, Tewari H, Padaria R, et al. Understanding pigeon pea (Cajanus Cajan) production conditions, stakeholders' preferences for varietal traits and their implications for breeding programmes in India, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Division of Agricultural Economics, New Delhi, India, Bern University of Applied Sciences, School of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, Zollikofen, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.08.139832; c2020.
20. Wallace DH, Yourstone KS, Masaya PN, Zobel RW. Photoperiod gene control over partitioning between reproductive and vegetative growth. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. 1993;86:6-16.
21. Zade K, Pawar S, Irfan S. Performance and economic impact of Pigeon pea-(BDN-711) under drought condition in NICRA Village of Marathwada region of Maharashtra. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2020;Sp9(5):207-209.