Evaluation of productive and profitable cropping sequences for crop diversification under Kymore Plateau and Satpura Hills Zone of Madhya Pradesh

Introduction

The Kymore Plateau and Satpura Hills zone of Madhya Pradesh, located in central India, is one of the important rainfed agro-climatic regions of the country. The region is marked by undulating hills, plateau lands, and fertile valleys, with soils ranging from black cotton (Vertisols) and red soils to alluvial deposits. Agriculture here is largely dependent on the southwest monsoon, which contributes the majority of the annual rainfall. Traditional rice-based monocropping systems have dominated the area for decades due to their adaptability and role in ensuring food security. However, these systems are increasingly becoming unsustainable owing to declining soil fertility, reduced water-use efficiency, lower productivity, and greater vulnerability to climatic variability. Such limitations not only restrict farm profitability but also threaten long-term agricultural sustainability in the region. Crop diversification has been widely recognized as a potential solution to address these constraints and to achieve sustainable intensification of agriculture. By incorporating multiple crops within a cropping cycle-through practices such as crop rotation, intercropping, mixed cropping, and sequential croppingfarmers can improve the efficiency of resource use while restoring soil fertility and reducing environmental degradation. Diversified systems exploit complementarities among crops in terms of rooting patterns, canopy structure, and nutrient requirements, thereby enhancing land productivity and ecological resilience. Global and national studies have consistently shown that diversification improves yield stability, enhances biological nitrogen fixation, increases soil organic carbon, and strengthens microbial activity, all of which contribute to better soil health (Sharma et al., 2023; Meena et al., 2024). [35,23] From an economic standpoint, crop diversification reduces production risks and offers greater profitability. The inclusion of pulses, oilseeds, and shortduration vegetables in rice-and maize-based systems provides multiple harvests in a year, thereby improving labor utilization and distributing income across seasons. Patel et al. (2022) [27] reported that intercropping maize with pigeon pea not only improved net returns by over 30% but also enhanced the benefitcost ratio compared to monocropped maize. In addition, diversification helps reduce dependence on costly external inputs by lowering the need for chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Nutritional security is another major advantage of diversified farming systems. Diets in rural Madhya Pradesh remain cerealdominated, often deficient in protein and micronutrients. The integration of pulses such as chickpea, pigeon pea, and lentil along with vegetables and oilseeds can significantly enrich household diets with proteins, vitamins, and minerals. Patel et al. (2021) [24] demonstrated that rice-based systems diversified with pulses enhanced dietary protein availability, while Dubey et al. (2024) [8] highlighted the role of integrated cropping with vegetables in addressing hidden hunger, particularly among women and children. Such evidence suggests that diversification is not only important for farm economics but also for improving food and nutritional security. Livestock production also benefits from crop diversification. Fodder-based sequences including cowpea, sorghum, and berseem ensure a year-round supply of quality green fodder, which reduces dependency on purchased feeds and improves milk yields. Yadav et al. (2023) [46] found that the incorporation of fodder legumes into diversified systems enhanced feed quality and directly supported smallholder dairy farming. In this way, diversification strengthens crop-livestock integration and boosts overall farm resilience. Resource-use efficiency, particularly water productivity, is another critical dimension in rainfed zones such as Madhya Pradesh. Monocropping accelerates soil moisture depletion, whereas diversified systems improve water-use efficiency through complementary root systems, better ground cover, and enhanced infiltration. Jha et al. (2022) [12] reported that ricepulse and maize-soybean intercropping systems achieved significantly higher water productivity than monocultures. Similarly, diversified systems have been shown to lower the energy footprint of farming by reducing irrigation and fertilizer requirements (Sharma et al., 2022; Banerjee et al., 2024) [34,4] . Although the benefits of crop diversification are welldocumented, systematic evaluations of diversified cropping systems under the specific agro-climatic conditions of the Kymore Plateau and Satpura Hills are limited. Given the dominance of rice-based monocropping in this region, there is a pressing need to explore and promote alternative sequences that incorporate pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, and fodder crops. Such an evaluation is particularly important to identify cropping systems that not only maximize productivity and profitability but also improve soil and water health, nutritional outcomes for households, and fodder availability for livestock. Keeping these considerations in view, the present investigation entitled "Evaluation of Cropping System for Crop Diversification under Kymore Plateau and Satpura Hills Zone of Madhya Pradesh" was undertaken to systematically assess the performance of diversified cropping systems with special emphasis on their potential to enhance productivity, profitability, and human as well as animal nutrition.

Materials and Methods

A field experiment was conducted during 2023-24 and 2024-25 at the Instructional Research Farm, Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India. The soil series adjoining to Jabalpur district of Mahakoshal region of Madhya Pradesh are classified as 'Vertisol' as per US classification of soil it swells by wetting and shrinks by drying. In general, the soils of the region are medium to deep in depth and black in colour with sandy loam in texture and neutral in reaction. All common practices like harrowing and leveling of soil done before the sowing of crops in Kharif, Rabi and Zaid. The experiment was laid out in a randomized block design with 12 treatments of rice-based cropping systems replicated thrice: T₁: rice-wheat-greengram, T₂: rice-chickpea-greengram, T₃: soybean-chickpea-greengram, T₄: arhar + soybean (2:4)sesame, T₅: rice-cabbage-greengram, T₆: rice-mustard-cowpea (vegetable), T₇: maize (fodder)-berseem (fodder)-sorghum (fodder), T₈: ricebean (fodder)-berseem (fodder)-sorghum (fodder), T₉: arhar + soybean (2:4) -greengram, T₁₀: kodo + arhar (4:2) -maize (cob), T₁₁: cowpea (vegetable)-cabbage-okra, and T₁₂: okra-brinjal-Amaranthus. The row spacing was maintained at 20 cm for rice and wheat; 30 cm for chickpea, cowpea, greengram, sorghum, soybean, ricebean, arhar, and kodo; 45 cm for mustard and cabbage; 60 cm for maize (cob) and brinjal; and 15 cm for Amaranthus, while berseem was sown by broadcasting. All crops in Kharif, Rabi, and Zaid seasons were grown under irrigated conditions following recommended packages of practices.

Assessment of Cropping System 1.Rice Equivalent Yields

The economic yield of crop components in all the ten crop sequences were converted into rice grain yield (REY) as suggested by Yadav and Newaj (1990) [45] and Verma and Mudgal (1983) [44] . For this study, the value of yields obtained from different crops was converted into rice yields with the help of existing market price of produce in the locality. After this, REY of all crops in a particular crop sequence was summed up, as REY of that particular crop sequence. The values of REY of all treatments were statistically analysed.

Where REY denotes rice equivalent yield, Yi= yield of different crops, Pi = Price of respective crops, P (r) = Price of rice.

System productivity of different rice-based cropping systems was obtained by dividing the system yield with 365 days and was expressed in (Chuang 1973) [7] , system productivity.

The production efficiency of each crop sequence was worked out treatment wise with the help of following formula (Tomar and Tiwari 1990) [42] .

Land use efficiency (LUE)

Land use efficiency was calculated as total duration of a cropping system in the field expressed as percentage of number of days in a year (Tomar and Tiwari 1990; Singh et al., 1990) [42,39] .

Where, TND denotes the total number of days field remained occupied under different crops (i=1….n)

The cost of cultivation of various sequences was worked out based on prevailing market rate of inputs.

The yield of different component crops in the sequence were converted into gross returns in rupees based on minimum support price/prevailing market price of crop.

After this, NMR per hectare under each treatment was determined by subs tracting the cost of cultivation of a particular treatment from the GMR of the same treatment.

Benefit: cost ratio

To estimate the benefits obtained from different treatment for each rupee of expenditure incurred. B:C ratio of each treatment was calculated as below:

Results and Discussion

A field experiment was carried out in three season of kharif, rabi and zaid as per the cropping sequence during 2023 -24 and 2024 -25 to study the "Evaluation of Cropping System for Crop Diversification under Kymore Plateau and Satpura Hills Zone of Madhya Pradesh" at Instructional Research Farm, Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, (Madhya Pradesh). Data recorded on yield under different cropping sequences were computed for determining the REY, production efficiency, input energy, output energy etc. The subsequent effect of various cropping sequences on soil properties with respect to soil physical, chemical and biological properties were studied. Recorded data were statistically analyzed and presented with the help of table and figures under different sub heads.

Rice Equivalent Yield

Rice equivalent yield (REY) varied significantly among the cropping sequences (Table 4.1). Among the income enhancement systems, Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (T11: 57.30 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) recorded the maximum REY, followed by Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (T12: 46.54 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹). Purpose-wise comparisons revealed that in the check system, Rice-Wheat-Greengram (T1: 9.82 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) was marginally superior to Rice-Chickpea-Greengram. For soil health improvement, inclusion of legumes in Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram (T3: 8.06 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) proved more beneficial. In family nutrition systems, Rice-Cabbage-Greengram (T5: 25.65 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) and Rice-Mustard-Cowpea vegetable (T6: 25.54 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) were statistically comparable. For livestock nutrition (green fodder), Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (T7: 13.72 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) outperformed Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum, while in concentrate feed systems, Kodo + Arhar-Maize (T10: 6.42 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) surpassed Arhar + Soybean-Greengram

System productivity

Data in relation to system productivity (kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) was computed based on the yield obtained from different component crops under various cropping sequences over two years of experimentation. The data presented in Table 4.2 showed considerable variation in system productivity among the cropping sequences under study. The highest significant system productivity was recorded under Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (T11: 156.99 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹), followed by Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (T12: 127.51 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹), which belonged to the vegetable-based systems. Within the family nutrition systems, Rice-Cabbage-Greengram (T5: 70.29 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) and Rice-Mustard-Cowpea vegetable (T6: 69.98 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) were statistically at par, indicating similar productivity. In the fodder-based systems, Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (T7: 37.59 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) outperformed Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum. Among the check systems, Rice-Wheat-Greengram (T1: 26.91 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) was numerically higher than Rice-Chickpea-Greengram. In the soil health systems, Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram (T3: 22.09 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) was numerically superior to Arhar + Soybean-Sesame (T4: 10.09 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹). For the concentrate feed systems, Kodo + Arhar-Maize (T10: 17.60 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) performed better than Arhar + Soybean. The lowest system productivity was observed in Arhar + Soybean-Sesame (T4: 10.09 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹).

Land use efficiency

Land use efficiency was estimated and presented in Table 4. Data presented in table indicated the variation the cropping sequences during both the years as well as pooled data.

Land use efficiency varied significantly among the cropping sequences. The highest land use efficiency was recorded in Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum (T8: 81.85%), followed by Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (T7: 77.50%), whereas the lowest was observed in Arhar + Soybean-Greengram (T9: 54.10%). For the check system, Rice-Wheat-Greengram (T1: 74.71%) outperformed Rice-Chickpea-Greengram, while under soil health systems, Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram (T3: 62.40%) was marginally higher than Arhar + Soybean-Sesame. In family nutrition systems, Rice-Mustard-Cowpea (T6: 70.03%) remained superior to Rice-Cabbage-Greengram, both performing better than the soil health-based sequences.For livestock nutrition (green fodder), Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum (T8: 81.85%) surpassed Maize-Berseem-Sorghum, reflecting the highest efficiencies across all treatments. In concentrate feed systems, Kodo + Arhar-Maize (T10: 61.54%) marginally outperformed Arhar + Soybean-Greengram, though both were relatively less efficient. Among income enhancement systems, Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (T12: 62.19%) exceeded Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra, but these remained much lower compared to fodder-based systems.

Economics

On the basis of average prevailing market price gross returns, net returns and benefit: cost ratio were numerically calculated and data have been presented in Table 6 Cost of cultivation Data pertaining to cost of cultivation (₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) were estimated for both the years 2023-24 and 2024-25 and are presented in Table 4.19. On average, the highest cost of cultivation (208.32 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) was recorded under T11 (Cowpea -Cabbage -Okra), followed by T12 (Okra -Brinjal -Amaranthus, 178.99 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹). In contrast, the lowest cost of cultivation (58.96 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) was observed under T9 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Green gram). Within the check sequences, T1 (Rice -Wheat -Green gram, 116.85 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) recorded slightly higher cost o culivation than T2 (Rice -Chickpea -Green gram), primarily due to the higher seed and fertilizer requirements for wheat. For the soil health sequences, T3 (Soybean -Chickpea -Green gram, 104.93 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) incurred higher cultivation cost, whereas T4 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame) required comparatively lower investment. Among family nutrition sequences, T6 (Rice -Mustard -Cowpea, 148.86 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) recorded higher cost of cultivation, while T5 (Rice -Cabbage -Green gram). For green fodder production, T7 (Maize -Berseem -Sorghum, 117.01 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) had higher cultivation cost, whereas T8 (Rice bean -Berseem -Sorghum) required lower investment. In the concentrate feed sequences, T10 (Kodo + Arhar -Maize, 65.50 ₹ × 10³ ha⁻¹) recorded higher cost of cultivation, while T9 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Green gram) incurred the lowest investment

Benefit cost ratio

The benefit-cost ratio, representing the return per rupee investment, was computed for both years of experimentation (2023-24 and 2024-25), and the mean values are presented in Table 4.22.

The highest B: C ratio (6.33) was recorded under T11 (Cowpea -Cabbage -Okra), followed by T12 (Okra -Brinjal -Amaranthus, 5.98) and T5 (Rice -Cabbage -Green gram, 4.26). This trend revealed that sequences integrating high-value vegetables achieved superior economic efficiency, driven by elevated system productivity (REY) and substantial net returns. Similarly, T6 (Rice -Mustard -Cowpea, 3.95) found high profitability, attributed to the contribution of cowpea and enhanced system productivity.

Within the check sequences, T1 (Rice -Wheat -Green gram, 1.93) recorded slightly higher B: C ratio than T2 (Rice -Chickpea -Green gram), reflecting marginally better net returns from wheat. For soil health sequences, T3 (Soybean -Chickpea -Green gram) revealed moderate profitability, whereas T4 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame) recorded the lowest B: C ratio, consistent with lower net returns and REY. Among green fodder sequences, T7 (Maize -Berseem -Sorghum) recorded higher profitability than T8 (Rice bean -Berseem -Sorghum), highlighting the influence of maize-based productivity. In concentrate feed sequences, T10 (Kodo + Arhar -Maize, 2.26) achieved moderate B: C ratio, while T9 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Green gram) recorded the lowest, reflecting relatively lower net returns. Overall, the edaphic conditions were conducive to supporting intensive and diversified cropping systems. However, the low phosphorus levels necessitated integrated nutrient management strategies, particularly in phosphorus-demanding cropping sequences. The inclusion of legume crops and balanced fertilization practices appeared to have positively influenced both nutrient status and microbial properties of the soil.

Weather Conditions

The experiment was conducted under the typical climatic conditions of Kymore Plateau and Satpura Hills Zone, a subhumid (dry) agro-ecological region classified as zone 10.1 by the National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning (NBSS&LUP), Nagpur. The region experiences three distinct seasons: Kharif (mid-June to September), Rabi (October to March), and Zaid (April to mid-June). During the experimental period, the average annual rainfall recorded was 1680.9 mm in 2023-24 and 1237.9 mm in 2024-25, with 73 and 39 rainy days, respectively. Although the second year experienced belowaverage rainfall compared to the regional norm (1350 mm), the distribution was fairly uniform during the crop growth stages, which supported favorable crop establishment and development.

The temperature range during the crop seasons varied from a minimum of 5.8°C in winter to a maximum of 42.4°C in summer in the first year, and 6.1°C to 39.7°C in the second year.

Relative humidity remained high during the Kharif season (up to 96%) and dropped during the Rabi and Zaid seasons (as low as 20%). Evapotranspiration ranged from 1.0 to 9.4 mm across the seasons, while sunshine hours ranged from 0.8 to 10.80 hours per day, with a total of 340.3 hours in 2023-24 and 295.1 hours in 2024-25. Despite the variations in annual rainfall, the climatic conditions remained within the favorable range for most crops, particularly in diversified cropping systems that included moisture-efficient and drought-resilient crops. For instance, the moisture-retaining capacity of Vertisols benefited water-sensitive crops like rice during Kharif, while the periodical dry spells during maturity stages reduced the incidence of lodging and pest infestation. Similarly, winter legumes and oilseeds performed well under the moderate Rabi temperature and humidity conditions. Thus, the agro-climatic conditions during both years were largely favorable for evaluating the performance of diversified cropping systems, especially in terms of crop productivity, resource use efficiency, and soil health sustainability.

Rice Equivalent Yield

Rice equivalent yield (REY) is a comprehensive measure that allows comparison of productivity across different crops by converting their yields into rice equivalents based on prevailing market prices. This approach is particularly useful for evaluating diversified cropping systems against traditional cereal-based sequences.

In the present investigation, REY values varied significantly among different cropping systems. The highest system REY was recorded under Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (57.30 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹), followed by Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (46.54 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹), establishing the superiority of vegetable-based diversified sequences. The remarkable performance of these systems may be attributed to their higher biological productivity, shorter crop duration that permitted multiple harvests within a year, and the premium market prices of vegetables such as cabbage, okra, and brinjal, which substantially enhanced the system REY.In purpose-wise evaluation, differences among the check and targeted systems were also evident. Among the check sequences, Rice-Wheat-Greengram proved marginally superior, while Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram exhibited higher productivity under soil health systems, largely due to the positive influence of legumes on soil fertility and nitrogen balance.

System productivity

System productivity (kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) is an important indicator that reflects the efficiency of land use and the integrated performance of different component crops over time. In the present study, considerable variation was recorded among the cropping sequences. The highest system productivity was obtained under Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (156.99 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹), followed by Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (127.51 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹), both belonging to vegetable-based systems. Their superiority is attributed to the shorter growth duration of vegetables, higher biological productivity, and premium market value, which enabled multiple crops per year and enhanced returns per unit time. Within the family nutrition systems, Rice-Cabbage-Greengram (70.29) and Rice-Mustard-Cowpea vegetable (69.98) were statistically comparable, ensuring balanced productivity along with nutritional diversity. Among fodder-based systems, Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (37.59) performed better due to its high fodder yield potential. In the check systems, Rice-Wheat-Greengram (26.91) proved superior to Rice-Chickpea-Greengram, while in soil health systems, Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram (22.09) outperformed Arhar + Soybean-Sesame, owing to the beneficial role of legumes in biological nitrogen fixation and soil fertility improvement. For concentrate feed systems, Kodo + Arhar-Maize (17.60) recorded higher productivity, whereas the lowest system productivity was observed under Arhar + Soybean-Sesame. These findings are in close agreement with earlier reports and are supported by Raj et al. (2015) [30] , Dwivedi et al. (2020), Kushwaha et al. (2020) [19] , and Ahirwar & Sharma (2021) [2] , who confirmed the superiority of vegetable-and legume-based systems in terms of productivity and sustainability.

Production efficiency

Production efficiency is an important index that measures the output obtained per unit area per unit time, generally expressed as kilogram yield per hectare per day. It reflects the intensity of resource utilization and helps to assess the comparative advantage of different cropping systems. A higher production efficiency indicates that the system is able to produce more yield within a shorter duration, thereby maximizing land use efficiency and ensuring better economic returns. This makes production efficiency a crucial parameter in evaluating the sustainability and profitability of diversified cropping systems. The results presented in Table 4.3 and illustrated in Figure 4.3 revealed significant differences among the evaluated cropping sequences during both the years of experimentation as well as in pooled data. The highest production efficiency was recorded in Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (280.89 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹), followed by Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (202.35 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹), whereas the lowest was observed in Arhar + Soybean-Sesame (15.35 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹). The superior performance of Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra can be attributed to the inclusion of short-duration and high-yielding vegetable crops which not only provided higher biomass output but also completed their growth cycles quickly, thereby ensuring a greater return on a daily basis. Purpose-wise evaluation of systems further highlighted these trends. Within the check system, Rice-Chickpea-Greengram (37.62 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) recorded higher production efficiency compared to Rice-Wheat-Greengram, due to the better productivity and shorter duration of chickpea and greengram compared with wheat. Under soil health-based systems, Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram (35.05 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) outperformed Arhar + Soybean-Sesame, which can be explained by the sequential legume-based cropping sequence contributing to better soil fertility and efficient time utilization. For family nutrition systems, Rice-Cabbage-Greengram (104.71 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) and Rice-Mustard-Cowpea (100.17 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) performed statistically at par, reflecting the advantage of incorporating vegetables and pulses which ensured higher daily productivity. In livestock nutrition systems, particularly green fodder-based, Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (48.14 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) recorded higher efficiency compared to Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum, owing to the inclusion of high biomass-producing fodder crops like sorghum. Similarly, in concentrate feed systems, Kodo + Arhar-Maize (32.11 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) surpassed Arhar + Soybean-Greengram because of the relatively better productivity of maize as a component crop. Among income enhancement systems, Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (280.89 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) stood out distinctly superior over Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus, thus reaffirming the role of vegetable-based intensive cropping systems in achieving the highest production efficiency across all categories. These findings are in close conformity with earlier reports, wherein several researchers have emphasized the superiority of vegetable-and legume-based intensive systems in enhancing production efficiency and ensuring sustainability. Similar results were reported by Raj et al. (2015) [30] , Dwivedi et al. (2020) [9] , Kushwaha et al. (2020) [19] , and Ahirwar and Sharma (2021) [2] , who confirmed that diversified systems involving vegetables and pulses provide higher daily productivity as compared to cerealbased sequence

Land use efficiency

Land use efficiency (LUE) indicates the proportion of total available time effectively utilized for crop production, reflecting how well a cropping system exploits land and resources over the year. Higher LUE signifies better land utilization, allowing more crops to be grown per year and maximizing productivity. The results showed significant variation among cropping sequences. The highest LUE was recorded in Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum (81.85%), followed by Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (77.50%), due to the continuous growth of highbiomass fodder crops throughout the year. Sequences with longduration crops like Arhar, such as Arhar + Soybean-Greengram (T9: 54.10%), showed the lowest efficiency, as the extended crop growth limited the number of possible cropping cycles per year. Among check systems, Rice-Wheat-Greengram (74.71%) outperformed Rice-Chickpea-Greengram, reflecting better synchronization of crop durations. Family nutrition sequences integrating short-duration crops and legumes, such as Rice-Mustard-Cowpea (70.03%), also showed higher LUE compared to vegetable-only sequences. Vegetable-based income enhancement sequences like Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (62.19%) and Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (56.54%) achieved moderate efficiency because shorter-duration vegetables leave gaps between crops. These findings align with previous studies confirming that sequential fodder or legume-based systems achieve higher LUE than cereal-or vegetable-dominated sequences ( Raj et al., 2015; Dwivedi et al., 2020; Kushwaha et al., 2020; Ahirwar & Sharma, 2021) [30,9,19,2] . Additionally, research by Brahimi and Pérez-Bernal supports the notion that intercropping legumes and cereals increases resource use efficiency, leading to higher LUE. Furthermore, studies by Blanc and Yadav have demonstrated that legume-based intercropping systems promote beneficial interactions between crops, enhancing overall productivity and land use efficiency.

Water Productivity

Water productivity (WP) is a key measure of how efficiently a cropping system converts water into economic yield, reflecting the optimization of water use in agriculture. The present study revealed significant differences among cropping sequences. Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (T₁₁) recorded the highest WP (24.44 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹), followed by Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (T₁₂: 20.73 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹). The superior performance of these sequences can be attributed to the integration of legumes and vegetables, which enhance soil structure, improve water infiltration, and reduce non-beneficial water losses. Additionally, short-duration and deep-rooted crops in these sequences allow efficient extraction of available soil moisture, minimizing wastage and increasing water use efficiency.Moderate WP was observed in sequences such as Rice-Mustard-Cowpea (T₆: 8.53 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹) and Rice-Chickpea-Greengram (T₂: 3.37 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹). These systems benefit from legume inclusion, which improves soil fertility and indirectly enhances water use by supporting better crop growth. In contrast, sequences dominated by long-duration crops, such as Arhar + Soybean-Sesame (T₄: 2.38 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹), showed the lowest WP, as prolonged crop cycles limit the number of cropping opportunities per year and increase non-productive water consumption. For livestock-based systems, Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (T₇: 5.19 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹) outperformed Rice bean-Berseem-Sorghum, demonstrating that crop selection and growth characteristics strongly influence WP in fodder systems. Income-oriented sequences also mirrored this trend, with vegetable-and legumebased systems achieving both high WP and economic returns. These findings are consistent with previous research. Timsina and Connor (2001) [40] emphasized that legumes and vegetables improve WP through better soil structure and reduced water loss. Kijne et al. (2003) [15] and Zwart and Bastiaanssen (2004 [48] Bouman et al. (2007) [5] and Punia et al. (2020) [29] . Recent studies by Ahirwar et al. (2023) [2] further confirm that soybeanchickpea-green gram sequences enhance WP by optimizing irrigation and biomass harvest.

Economic Analysis 5.8.1 Cost of Cultivation

The cost of cultivation varied significantly among the cropping sequences, reflecting differences in crop composition, input intensity, and management practices. The highest cost was observed in T11: Cowpea -Cabbage -Okra (208.32 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹), followed by T12: Okra -Brinjal -Amaranthus (178.99 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) and T5: Rice -Cabbage -Green gram (163.40 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹). These sequences involved high-value vegetables requiring intensive labor, fertilizers, irrigation, and plant protection measures. In contrast, low-input sequences such as T9: Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Green gram (58.96 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) and T4: Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame (78.86 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) incurred minimal costs due to lower external input requirements. Pulse-and oilseed-based systems are inherently more input-efficient and cost-effective. Among the check sequences, T1: Rice -Wheat -Green gram (116.85 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) had slightly higher costs than T2: Rice -Chickpea -Green gram, primarily due to higher seed and fertilizer requirements for wheat. For soil health sequences, T3: Soybean -Chickpea -Green gram (104.93 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) required moderate investment, while T4: Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame required lower input. Green fodder sequences (T7: Maize -Berseem -Sorghum, 117.01 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) and concentrate feed sequences (T10: Kodo + Arhar -Maize, 65.50 × 10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) showed intermediate costs. These findings align with the results of Kumar and Rathore who observed that inclusion of vegetable crops significantly increases cost of cultivation, whereas pulsebased systems tend to be more input-efficient and cost-effective. Similarly, Patel reported higher input costs in vegetable-based sequences due to intensive management practices.

Gross Monetary Returns

Gross monetary returns differed considerably among the evaluated cropping sequences, reflecting the strong influence of crop choice and market value. The income enhancement generation system T11 (Cowpea -Cabbage -Okra) recorded the maximum gross monetary returns (₹ 1317.96 × 10³ ha⁻¹), primarily due to the high market value of cabbage and okra combined with multiple harvests in a year. This was closely followed by T12 (Okra -Brinjal -Amaranthus, ₹ 1070.43 × 10³ ha⁻¹), further highlighting the profitability potential of vegetablebased systems. In contrast, the lowest returns were noted in T4 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame, ₹ 84.71 × 10³ ha⁻¹), reflecting the limited economic potential of pulse-dominated systems owing to lower productivity and restricted market demand. Among the check sequences, T1 (Rice -Wheat -Green gram) gave higher returns (₹ 225.92 × 10³ ha⁻¹) compared to T2 (Rice -Chickpea -Green gram), which can be attributed to the greater productivity and market price of wheat. Within soil health-oriented sequences, T3 (Soybean -Chickpea -Green gram, ₹ 185.43 × 10³ ha⁻¹) outperformed T4, indicating that inclusion of multiple pulses ensured moderate profitability. For family nutrition sequences, T5 (Rice -Cabbage -Green gram) generated higher returns (₹ 590.04 × 10³ ha⁻¹) compared to T6 (Rice -Mustard -Cowpea), signifying the positive contribution of high-value vegetables. Among fodder systems, T7 (Maize -Berseem -Sorghum, ₹ 315.55 × 10³ ha⁻¹) was superior to T8 (Rice bean -Berseem -Sorghum) due to the higher productivity and market demand of maize. Similarly, in concentrate feed sequences, T10 (Kodo + Arhar -Maize, ₹ 147.72 × 10³ ha⁻¹) registered higher returns than T9 (Arhar + Soybean -Green gram), reaffirming the importance of maize in enhancing monetary benefits. These results are in close agreement with the findings of Meena et al. (2020) [22] , Singh et al. (2018) [36] , Patel et al. (2021) [24] , Choudhary et al. (2019) [39] , Rathore et al. (2019) [31] , and Sharma et al. (2021) [2] , who also reported that diversification with high-value crops such as vegetables and maize substantially enhances profitability compared to conventional cereal-pulse systems.

Net Monetary Returns

Net monetary returns are an important economic indicator that reflect the profitability of cropping systems after accounting for cost of cultivation. In the present investigation, substantial variation in net monetary returns was observed among the tested sequences, clearly demonstrating the influence of crop choice and market value on overall system profitability. sAmong the evaluated sequences, the income enhancement system T11 (Cowpea -Cabbage -Okra) attained the maximum net monetary returns (₹ 1109.64 × 10³ ha⁻¹), followed by T12 (Okra -Brinjal -Amaranthus, ₹ 891.44 × 10³ ha⁻¹) and T5 (Rice -Cabbage -Green gram, ₹ 451.63 × 10³ ha⁻¹). The outstanding performance of these sequences may be attributed to the inclusion of highvalue vegetable crops, which not only ensured greater system productivity but also fetched higher market prices, thereby substantially improving profitability. Similarly, T6 (Rice -Mustard -Cowpea, ₹ 438.63 × 10³ ha⁻¹) registered appreciable returns, mainly due to the contribution of cowpea as a vegetable crop. Within the check sequences, T1 (Rice -Wheat -Green gram, ₹ 109.07 × 10³ ha⁻¹) realized slightly higher net returns compared to T2 (Rice -Chickpea -Green gram), primarily because of the greater profitability associated with wheat. Under soil health-oriented systems, T3 (Soybean -Chickpea -Green gram) exhibited moderate profitability, whereas T4 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame, ₹ 20.80 × 10³ ha⁻¹) recorded the lowest returns of all sequences, which may be attributed to the limited market value and yield potential of pulses and oilseeds.In case of green fodder systems, T7 (Maize -Berseem -Sorghum, ₹ 198.53 × 10³ ha⁻¹) proved superior to T8 (Rice bean -Berseem -Sorghum) owing to the higher productivity and profitability contribution of maize. Similarly, within concentrate feed systems, T10 (Kodo + Arhar -Maize, ₹ 82.22 × 10³ ha⁻¹) produced higher returns compared to T9 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Green gram, ₹ 58.86 × 10³ ha⁻¹), reaffirming the role of maize in enhancing overall profitability. These findings are in close agreement with the results of Choudhary et al. (2022) [6] , Verma et al. (2021) [43] , Patel et al. (2020) [26] , Yadav et al. (2018) [36] , and Jat et al. (2015) [11] , who also reported that diversified cropping systems involving highvalue vegetables substantially improve farm profitability compared to traditional cereal-pulse-based sequences.

Benefit-Cost Ratio

Benefit-cost ratio serves as a crucial economic measure to assess the efficiency of investment in cropping systems. In the present study, considerable variation was observed across the sequences, largely influenced by the inclusion of high-value crops and their relative market potential.The maximum B:C ratio was registered under the income enhancement system T11 (Cowpea -Cabbage -Okra, 6.33), closely followed by T12 (Okra -Brinjal -Amaranthus, 5.98) and T5 (Rice -Cabbage -Green gram, 4.26). The superior performance of these sequences was attributed to the combined advantage of higher system productivity (REY) and elevated net monetary returns from vegetables, which ensured greater returns per unit of investment. Similarly, T6 (Rice -Mustard -Cowpea, 3.95) achieved relatively high profitability, mainly due to the contribution of cowpea and improved system productivity.Within the check sequences, T1 (Rice -Wheat -Green gram, 1.93) recorded a slightly higher B:C ratio compared to T2 (Rice -Chickpea -Green gram), owing to the better profitability realized from wheat. In soil health-oriented systems, T3 (Soybean -Chickpea -Green gram) exhibited moderate profitability, whereas T4 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Sesame) registered the lowest B:C ratio, which corresponded with its poor net returns and relatively low REY.Among green fodder-based systems, T7 (Maize -Berseem -Sorghum) outperformed T8 (Rice bean -Berseem -Sorghum), highlighting the positive influence of maize on both productivity and economic efficiency. Likewise, in concentrate feed systems, T10 (Kodo + Arhar -Maize, 2.26) showed moderate returns over investment, while T9 (Arhar + Soybean (2:4) -Green gram) remained least remunerative due to limited market value and productivity. These findings are in conformity with the reports of Tiwari et al. (2017) [41] , Mandal et al. (2016) [21] , Patel et al. (2020) [26] , Yadav et al. (2018) [36] , and Verma et al. (2021) [43] , who also emphasized that horticulture-based sequences ensure higher economic returns per rupee investment, whereas cereal-pulse systems, though stable, provide limited profitability.

Conclusion

The highest rice equivalent yield (REY) was recorded under T11: Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (57.30 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹), followed by T12: Okra-Brinjal-Amaranthus (46.54 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹), indicating superior productivity of vegetable-based sequences. System productivity and production efficiency were also maximum in T11 (156.99 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹; 280.89 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹) and T12 (127.51; 202.35 kg ha⁻¹ day⁻¹). Among conventional cereal-based sequences, T1: Rice-Wheat-Greengram showed moderate REY (9.82 t ha⁻¹ year⁻¹) and system productivity, whereas soil health sequences like T3: Soybean-Chickpea-Greengram performed better among legumes. Economic analysis revealed T11 had the highest cost (208.32 ×10³ ₹ ha⁻¹), gross returns (1317.96 ×10³ ₹ ha⁻¹), net returns (1109.64 ×10³ ₹ ha⁻¹) and B:C ratio (6.33), followed by T12, confirming the economic viability of vegetablebased systems over cereal-or pulse-dominated sequences. Legume-and vegetable-based sequences significantly contributed to human and livestock nutrition. T5: Rice-Cabbage-Greengram (25.65 t ha⁻¹ REY) and T6: Rice-Mustard-Cowpea (25.54 t ha⁻¹) enhanced family nutrition by providing proteinrich pulses and nutrient-dense vegetables. Fodder-based sequences, particularly T7: Maize-Berseem-Sorghum (13.72 t ha⁻¹) and T10: Kodo + Arhar-Maize (6.42 t ha⁻¹), supported livestock feed effectively, highlighting the dual role of cropping sequences in ensuring human and animal nutrition. Water productivity was maximum in T11: Cowpea-Cabbage-Okra (24.44 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹), followed by T12 (20.73 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹), while Arhar + Soybean-Sesame (T4: 2.38 kg ha⁻¹ mm⁻¹) had the lowest. Land use efficiency (LUE) was highest in T8: Ricebean-Berseem-Sorghum (81.85%) and T7 (77.50%), indicating efficient resource utilization in fodder systems.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementAuthors greatly acknowledge, JNKVV Jabalpur, to provide all necessary facilities for conduction of research trial.

References

1. Aher, S. B., Waghmare, A. B., & Bhagat, S. B. (2016). Cropping system diversification for improving land use efficiency and soil health in Vertisols. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 61(2), 225-230.
2. Ahirwar, R. K., & Sharma, S. K. (2021). Effect of legumes and short-duration vegetables on productivity and sustainability of rice-based cropping systems. International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 13(3), 102-108.
3. Ahirwar, R. K., Singh, M., & Patel, R. (2023). Enhancing water productivity and production efficiency through diversified cropping systems in central India. Legume Research, 46(6), 725-732.
4. Banerjee, A., Singh, R., & Kumar, P. (2024). Energy footprint reduction and water productivity enhancement through diversified cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 69(2), 101-110.
5. Bouman, B. A. M., Feng, L., Tuong, T. P., Lu, G., Wang, H., & Feng, Y. (2007). Exploring options to grow rice under water-short conditions in northern China using a modelling approach: II. Quantifying yield, water balance components, and water productivity. Agricultural Water Management, 88(1-3), 23-33.
6. Choudhary, R., Singh, P., & Meena, H. (2022). Profitability analysis of diversified rice-based cropping systems under irrigated conditions. Journal of AgriSearch, 9(1), 1-7.
7. Chuang, H. L. (1973). System productivity and crop yield stability under multiple cropping. Experimental Agriculture, 9(1), 1-9.
8. Dubey, P., Sharma, R., & Tiwari, S. (2024). Integrated cropping with vegetables for nutritional security in rural households. Journal of Food and Nutrition Security, 15(1), 55-66.
9. Dwivedi, A., Dev, I., Kumar, V., Yadav, R. S., Yadav, M., Gupta, D., Singh, G. P. (2020). Diversification of rice with vegetable pea and green gram enhances productivity, profitability and resource use efficiency. Experimental Agriculture, 56(1), 67-79.
10. Ghosh, P. K., Tripathi, A. K., Bandyopadhyay, K. K., & Manna, M. C. (2010). Assessment of cropping system diversification on system productivity and resource-use efficiency in Indo-Gangetic Plains. Experimental Agriculture, 46(4), 435-452.
11. Jat, M. L., Singh, Y., Saharawat, Y. S., Gupta, R., Sharma, S. K., & Parihar, C. M. (2013). Diversified cropping systems improve productivity and resource-use efficiency in irrigated north-western Indo-Gangetic Plains. Field Crops Research, 144, 14-28.
12. Jha, A. K., Mehta, R., & Verma, A. (2022). Enhancing water productivity in rice-pulse and maize-soybean intercropping systems. Agricultural Water Management, 264, 107502.
13. Joshi, R., Sharma, R., & Meena, R. (2017). Intensification of cropping systems with short-duration legumes for higher land use efficiency. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 62(3), 329-334.
14. Kalita, P., Deka, N., & Bhuyan, B. (2015). Evaluation of rice-based cropping systems under irrigated condition in Assam. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 60(3), 394-398.
15. Kijne, J. W., Barker, R., & Molden, D. (2003). Water productivity in agriculture: Limits and opportunities for improvement. Wallingford: CABI Publishing.
16. Kumar, A., Meena, R. S., Jat, R. K., & Singh, A. (2015). Impact of crop diversification on productivity and profitability of rice-based systems. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 61(13), 1771-1785.
17. Kumar, S., Singh, V., & Pandey, A. (2008). Effect of vegetable-based diversification on rice equivalent yield under irrigated ecosystem. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 53(1), 45-49.
18. Kumar, V., Singh, R., & Yadav, R. (2021). Economic evaluation of diversified cropping systems in central India. Indian Journal of Economics and Development, 17(3), 489495.
19. Kushwaha, U. K. S., Singh, P., & Kumar, A. (2020). Role of pulses and vegetables in enhancing system productivity and sustainability. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 9(7), 1165-1173.
20. Lakaria, B. L., Jha, P., & Singh, R. (2020). Performance of diversified cropping systems in relation to productivity and resource-use efficiency in rainfed regions of central India. Journal of AgriSearch, 7(3), 140-146.
21. Mandal, K. G., Ghosh, P. K., Hati, K. M., & Bandyopadhyay, K. K. (2016). Crop diversification towards high-value horticultural crops improves farm profitability in irrigated systems. Agricultural Systems, 143, 122-130.
22. Meena, R. S., Kumar, S., & Bohra, J. S. (2020). Economic analysis of fodder-based cropping systems under irrigated ecosystems. Indian Journal of Animal Nutrition, 37(2), 188194.
23. Meena, R. S., Kumar, S., & Singh, A. (2024). Crop diversification and soil health restoration under cereal-based systems. Soil Use and Management, 40(1), 12-24.
24. Patel, A., Singh, H., & Sharma, P. (2021). Role of pulsebased diversification in improving dietary protein availability under rice-based systems. Legume Research, 44(5), 525-531.
25. Patel, D., Singh, A., & Verma, A. (2017). Cropping system intensification with oilseeds and vegetables for higher system productivity. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 62(4), 439-445.
26. Patel, H. R., Meena, R. S., & Kumar, V. (2020). Comparative assessment of vegetable-based and pulsebased cropping systems in terms of economics and sustainability. Legume Research, 43(5), 607-613.
27. Patel, J., Tiwari, R., & Yadav, M. (2022). Economic evaluation of maize-pigeon pea intercropping in central India. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development, 11(3), 233-240.
28. Patra, S., Das, A., Lal, R., & Mandal, B. (2021). Vegetablebased crop diversification for improving rice equivalent yield and soil health. Agronomy Journal, 113(3), 25402551.
29. Punia, S. S., Singh, H., & Mehta, R. (2020). Crop water productivity and economics of diversified systems in Haryana. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 65(2), 178-184.
30. Raj, A. D., Patel, J. C., & Patel, B. B. (2015). Diversified rice-based cropping systems for enhancing productivity and profitability under irrigated conditions. Green Farming, 6(5), 1055-1058.
31. Rathore, R. S., Sharma, P., & Patel, R. (2019). Comparative economics of pulse-and vegetable-based cropping systems in Madhya Pradesh. International Journal of Agricultural and Statistical Sciences, 15(1), 313-318.
32. Ravisankar, N., Pramanik, S. C., & Singh, R. (2015). Rice equivalent yield and system productivity as influenced by diversification with vegetables and pulses. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 60(2), 210-216.
33. Saxena, A., Sharma, R., & Chauhan, R. (2015). Land use efficiency in intensive vegetable-based crop sequences. Indian Journal of Horticulture, 72(4), 495-500.
34. Sharma, S., Singh, R., & Babu, S. (2022). Resource-use efficiency and reduced input dependence in diversified cropping systems. Sustainability, 14(18), 11539.
35. Sharma, V., Rathore, R. S., & Tripathi, S. (2023). Soil fertility and microbial dynamics under diversified crop rotations: A meta-analysis. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 43(2), 25.
36. Singh, B., Yadav, R. K., & Pal, M. (2018). Economic performance of diversified cropping systems with highvalue crops. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 31(1), 71-78.
37. Singh, J., Choudhary, A. K., & Rana, D. S. (2019). Productivity and profitability of diversified cropping systems in irrigated ecosystems. Legume Research, 42(2), 205-211.
38. Singh, R., Kumar, P., & Sharma, A. (2015). Land use efficiency under different diversified cropping systems in central India. Journal of Farming Systems Research & Development, 21(2), 159-164.
39. Singh, S. P., Verma, R. S., & Yadav, K. (1990). Land use efficiency and sustainability under intensive cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 35(2), 30-35.
40. Timsina, J., & Connor, D. J. (2001). Productivity and management of rice-wheat cropping systems: Issues and challenges. Field Crops Research, 69(2), 93-132.
41. Tiwari, U. S., Verma, S. C., & Dubey, S. K. (2017). Economic viability of horticultural crop sequences compared to cereal-based systems. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 72(2), 215-225.
42. Tomar, S. S., & Tiwari, A. S. (1990). Productivity and economics of different cropping sequences in Madhya Pradesh. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 35(1-2), 30-35.
43. Verma, R., Singh, S., & Patel, R. (2021). Profitability analysis of diversified cropping sequences under irrigated ecosystem. International Journal of Agricultural Economics, 76(4), 389-397.
44. Verma, S. C., & Mudgal, V. D. (1983). Evaluation of rice equivalent yields for diversified cropping patterns. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 28(2), 115-118.
45. Yadav, J. S. P., & Newaj, R. (1990). Methodology for converting yield data into rice equivalent yields for comparative analysis of cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 35(2), 27-30.
46. Yadav, R., Singh, M., & Chauhan, S. (2023). Livestock integration and fodder-based cropping sequences for enhancing dairy productivity. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences, 93(7), 745-752.
47. Zhang, F., Li, L., & Tang, C. (2016). Crop rotation with legumes improves light interception, water use efficiency, and system productivity. Plant and Soil, 404(1-2), 1-14.
48. Zwart, S. J., & Bastiaanssen, W. G. M. (2004). Review of measured crop water productivity values for irrigated wheat, rice, cotton and maize. Agricultural Water Management, 69(2), 115-133.