Influence of foliar nutrition of boron, zinc and biofertilizer on economics of cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp] under agroclimatic conditions of Chhattisgarh plains

Introduction

Global warming and food security are urgent challenges facing agriculture both today and in the future. In this context, crops that are resilient to climate change and rich in nutrition are becoming more essential. Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) is also called the poor man's meat because it is a rich source of protein, minerals, and vitamins (Tharanathan RN & Mahadevamma 2003) [17] for the rural poor with minimal access to animal-based protein sources like meat and fish", it is also known for its drought tolerance (Carvalho et al., 2019; Fatokun et al., 2018) [8,11] . Originating from sub-Saharan Africa, where its greatest genetic diversity is found, cowpea is an important legume with significant economic value (Fatokun et al., 2018; Saxena and Rukam 2020) [11,16] . It also plays a key role in income generation for smallholder farmers in Asia and Africa (Boukar et al., 2016; Vavilapalli et al., 2013) [7,20] . Cowpea is a highly nutritious food, rich in protein (24%), dietary fiber (11%), and potassium (1112 mg/100 g), while being low in lipids (<2%) and sodium (16 mg/100 g) (Affrifah et al., 2022) [1] . Its high protein content makes it an excellent plant-based alternative to animal protein. Cowpea serves as both a vegetable and a grain, consumed by humans and animals alike (Avanza et al., 2013) [4] . Its young leaves are often eaten like spinach, and dried leaves are stored as a meat substitute during off-seasons (Enyiukwu et al., 2018). Moreover, cowpea contributes to sustainable agriculture by fixing atmospheric nitrogen, which boosts agroecosystem productivity (Namatsheve et al., 2020) [12] . In intercropping systems, cowpea fixes 17.8-22.8 kg/ha of nitrogen, compared to 54.9-55.2 kg/ha in monocropping systems (Binacchi et al., 2022) [5] . Globally, Niger leads in cowpea cultivation area (39%), followed by Nigeria (31%). However, Nigeria ranks first in production, contributing 42% of global output, while Niger is second with 29%, and Burkina Faso third with 8%. Among major producing countries, Ghana has the highest productivity (1662 kg/ha), followed by Nigeria (865 kg/ha) and Cameroon (818 kg/ha). In India it is cultivated on 310.81 thousand ha area and its production 2897.51 thousand MT.

In Chhattisgarh it is cultivated on 8.996 thousand ha and its production is 89.7 thousands MT.

Materials and Methods

The Rhizobium + Boron @, 0.2% Т3 4 Rhizobium + Boron @, 0.5% T4 5

Rhizobium + Zinc @ 0.2% T5 6

Rhizobium + Zinc @, 0.5% Т6 7 Rhizobium + Boron + Zinc @ 0.2% T7 8

Rhizobium + Boron + Zinc @ 0.5% T8

Economics 3.1 Cost of Cultivation:

The cost of cultivation (Rs. ha⁻¹) for each treatment was determined by factoring in the total input costs, cultivation practice expenses, labor charges, land costs, irrigation, fertilizers, and any other associated costs.

Gross Returns:

Gross returns refer to the total monetary value of both the main produce and byproducts obtained from the crop under different treatments. This is calculated based on the local market prices or sale value.

Net Returns:

Net returns (Rs. ha⁻¹) for each treatment were calculated by subtracting the average cultivation cost for each treatment from its respective gross returns. Net returns (Rs./ha) = Gross return-Cost of cultivation.

Benefit: Cost Ratio:

The benefit-cost ratio for each treatment was calculated by dividing the gross monetary returns by the corresponding cultivation cost. This ratio serves as an estimate of the farmer's benefit relative to their expenditure. Benefit-cost ratio = Gross return (Rs./ha) / Cost of cultivation (Rs./ha)

Results and Discussion

Cost of Cultivation

The total cost of each treatment was divided into two categories: general costs and treatment-specific costs. The general costs included field preparation, seed, seed treatment, sowing, weeding, insecticide spraying, irrigation, harvesting, and other miscellaneous expenses, all of which were consistent across treatments. The cultivation cost of Rs. 118, 000 was the same for all treatments, but the costs associated with the application of rhizobium and micronutrients varied between treatments. The highest total cultivation cost (Rs. 118, 814/ha) was observed in T 4 (Rhizobium + Boron @ 0.5%), compared to the control treatment (T 1 ), which had a cost of Rs. 118, 000/ha.

Gross income

The data presented in the table showed that the highest gross income of Rs. 249, 700/ha was achieved with the Rhizobium + Boron + Zinc @ 0.5% treatment (T 8 ). The other treatments ranked in the following order: T 7 (Rs. 244, 700), T 6 (Rs. 236, 400), T 4 (Rs. 228, 520), T 5 (Rs. 220, 700), T 3 (Rs. 216, 280), and T 2 (Rs. 208, 500), with the control treatment (T 1 ) yielding Rs. 200, 560.

Net income

The net income from seed treatment with rhizobium and foliar application of micronutrient treatments on cowpea ranged from Rs. 82, 560 to Rs. [15] , Ullah et al., (2017) [18] , and Blesseena et al., (2019) [6] .

Benefit: Cost ratio

The B: C ratio for rhizobium and foliar application of micronutrients treatments was ranging from 1.69 to 2.10 while maximum benefit: cost ratio obtained with T 8 (2.10) followed by T 7 (2.06), T 6 (1.99), T 4 (1.92), T 5 (1.86), T 3 (1.82) and T 2 (1.76) respectively against T 1 (1.69) similarly result found by Patle et al., (2021) [13] , Dhaliwal et al., (2021) [9] , Vasava et al., (2020) [19] and Rathore et al., (2020) [14] .

Conclusion

It can be concluded from the results that application of T 8 (Boric Acid @ 0.40%) was best among all other treatments. Total cost of cultivation was recorded maximum (Rs 118814/ha) under T 4 (Rhizobium + Boron @ 0.5%) and minimum (Rs 118000/ha) under T 1 Control (water spray). Maximum and minimum gross income was observed in T 8 (Rs 249700/ha) and T 1 (Rs 200560/ha) Control (water spray), respectively. Highest and lowest net income was recorded in T 8 (Rs 131166/ha) and T 1 (Rs 82560), respectively. Maximum B: C ratio was observed in T 8 (2.10) followed by T 7 (2.06) and minimum was recorded under T 1 (1.69).

Suggestions for Future Research Work

1. The experiment may be conducted with more combination of biofertilizers and micronutrients. 2. Studies need to be conducted on different agro climatic zone and different season along with biofertilizers and micronutrients.

Application of some other biofertilizers like

Azotobactor, PSB culture and micronutrients such as Cu, Mo, Fe, Mn at different concentration to assess its effectiveness on growth and yield of cowpea. 4. For attaining any definite recommendations, the same experiment can be repeated for one or more season.

References

1. Affrifah NS, Phillips RD, Saalia FK. Cowpeas: nutritional profile, processing methods and products-a review. Legume Science. 2022;4(3):e131.
2. Anonymous. https://agriportal.cg.nic.in/horticulture/HortiEn/Default. aspx. Accessed 17 Jun 2025, 3:55 PM.
3. Anonymous. https://agriwelfare.gov.in/en/StatHortEst. Accessed 17 Jun 2025, 3:58 PM.
4. Avanza M, Acevedo B, Chaves M, Añón M. Nutritional and anti-nutritional components of four cowpea varieties under thermal treatments: principal component analysis. LWT-Food Science and Technology. 2013;51(1):148-157.
5. Binacchi F, Rusinamhodzi L, Cadisch G. The potential of conservation agriculture to improve nitrogen fixation in cowpea under the semi-arid conditions of Kenya. Frontiers in Agronomy. 2022;4:988090.
6. Blesseena A, Deotale RD, Raut DA, Pise SE, Yellore SA, Hivare VS. Response of foliar application of tocopherol and micronutrient on morphological parameters and yield of chickpea. Journal of Soils and Crops. 2019;29(2):336-342.
7. Boukar O, Fatokun CA, Huynh BL, Roberts PA, Close TJ. Genomic tools in cowpea breeding programs: status and perspectives. Frontiers in Plant Science. 2016;7:757.
8. Carvalho M, Matos M, Castro I, Monteiro E, Rosa E, Lino-Neto T, Carnide V. Screening of worldwide cowpea collection to drought tolerant at a germination stage. Scientia Horticulturae. 2019;247:107-115.
9. Dhaliwal SS, Sharma V, Shukla AK, Verma V, Behera SK, Singh P, et al. Comparative efficiency of mineral, chelated and nano forms of zinc and iron for improvement of zinc and iron in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) through biofortification. Agronomy. 2021;11(12):2436.
10. Enyiukwu DN, Amadioha A, Ononuju C. Nutritional significance of cowpea leaves for human consumption. Greener Trends in Food Science and Nutrition. 2018;1:1-10.
11. Fatokun C, Girma G, Abberton M, Gedil M, Unachukwu N, Oyatomi O, et al. Genetic diversity and population structure of a mini-core subset from the world cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) germplasm collection. Scientific Reports. 2018;8(1):16035.
12. Namatsheve T, Cardinael R, Corbeels M, Chikowo R. Productivity and biological N₂-fixation in cerealcowpea intercropping systems in sub-Saharan Africa: A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2020;40(4):30.
13. Patle P, Tiwari P, Kushwaha HS. Effect of zinc and iron nutrition on productivity and profitability of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in Central India. Journal of Food Legumes. 2021;34(4):260-263.
14. Rathore DK, Kumar R, Singh M, Kumar P, Meena VK, Kumar U, et al. Economics analysis of phosphorus and zinc nutrition in fodder cowpea (Vigna unguiculata). Agricultural Science Digest. 2015;35(4):311-313.
15. Sathishkumar A, Sakthivel N, Subramanian E, Rajesh P. Productivity of field crops as influenced by foliar spray of nutrients: a review. Agricultural Reviews. 2020;41(2):146-152.
16. Saxena A, Rukam TS. Assessment of genetic diversity in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp.) through ISSR marker. Research Journal of Biotechnology. 2020;15(3).
17. Tharanathan RN, Mahadevamma S. Grain legumes-a boon to human nutrition. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 2003;14(12):507-518.
18. Ullah S, Jan A, Ali M, Ahmad A, Ullah A, Ahmad G, et al. Effect of phosphorous and zinc under different application methods on yield attributes of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of 2017;3(2):79-85.
19. Vasava A, Mahida A, Patel NK, Gadhiya D, Tandel BM. Effect of spacing and foliar spray of micronutrients on quality attributes and economics of cluster bean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba (L.) Taub.). International Journal of Chemical Studies. 2020;8(3):2749-2751.
20. Vavilapalli S, Celine VA, Duggi S, Padakipatil S, Magadum S. Genetic variability and heritability studies in bush cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.). Legume Genomics and Genetics. 2013;4(4).