Assessment of yield gaps and technology adoption in mustard through CFLDs in Chitrakoot, Uttar Pradesh

Introduction

Mustard (Brassica juncea L.) is an important part of edible oilseed crops. Indian farming system, its role is significant for oilseed security. In 2024-25 total production is 126.04 lakh metric tonnes, and net sown area is around 92.15 lakh hectares in India (PIB, 2025). Uttar Pradesh ranks 3rd in mustard production at a national level, but the particular Bundelkhand region faces several problems, such as poor adoption of improved technologies, erratic rainfall, and low soil fertility. and yield per ha compares low to other states' production. Mustard is a good income-generating crop because in 2025-26 the government decided the MSP is 5,950 Rs./Quintal, and if a cluster-based approach is used, farmers can change the mustard through processing and change the oil recovery to 36-46%, and the profit increase can compare to direct seed selling. The Cluster Front Line Demonstration (CFLD) programme, implemented through Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), aims to demonstrate improved crop production technologies at farmers' fields under real conditions. CFLDs are effective in bridging the gap between recommended practices and farmers' practices, thereby enhancing productivity and income. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of CFLDs on mustard in the Chitrakoot district with the objectives: To assess yield gaps between demonstration and farmers' practices, evaluate economic benefits of improved technologies and study the extent of technology adoption among farmers.

Materials and Methods Study Area & number of demos

The study was conducted in three blocks (

Data Collection and Analysis

Data on yield and economics were collected from demonstration and farmers' fields. The following indicators were calculated: Extension Gap (q/ha) = Demonstration Yield-Farmers' Yield Technology Gap (q/ha) = Potential Yield-Demonstration Yield Technology Index (%) = (Technology Gap)/(Potential Yield)×100 (Potential yield assumed = 25 q/ha)

Economic parameters

Gross cost: Total Fixed Cost + Total Variable Cost Gross return: (Total Output)/(Market Price per Unit) Net return: Gross return-Gross cost Benefit-Cost (B:C) ratio: (Gross return)/(Gross Cost)

Results and Discussion

In our experiment, we distributed the 2022-23 PM-30 variety and its potential yield of 18-24 q/ha, and in 2024-25, we distributed DRMR-1165, whose potential yield is reported as 23-26 q/ha. As per the variety's nature, our research yield is also under the given potential yields' average yield.

a. Yield Performance

The results revealed that demonstration plots recorded significantly higher yield compared to farmers' practice. Show the Table 1. [2] .

b. Yield Gap Analysis 1. Extension Gap

Indicates the need for wider dissemination of improved technologies among farmers. During 2022-23, 3.09 q/ha and 2024-25, 4.07 q/ha, the yield increased, covering the wider spread of the extension gap, similar to a similar report that found the extension gap observed in farmers' practices (Hooda et al., 2024; Sarkar et al., 2025) [2,4] .

Technology Gap

The reduction in yield can be reasoned in terms of the technology gap, which reflects the difference between the demo inputs plot and what is actually implemented in the field. In 2022-23, the yield was 8.41 q/ha, while in 2024-25 it decreased to 7.51 q/ha. This change indicates the adoption of technology. Reducing this technology gap extension extent like tools likes awareness and training, Knowledge of improved inputs can help improve yields in the future year, similar to the better yield gain after reducing the technology gap reported (Vishal et al., 2022) [5] .

Technology Index

The technology index decreased from 33.64% in 2022-23 to 30.04% in 2024-25, indicating an improvement in the performance of demonstrated technologies under farmers' field conditions. A lower technology index showcases the smaller gap between potential yield and actual yield; however, improvement may be better attributed to understanding, increased ground-field experience and its acceptance of the improved technologies.

c. Economic Analysis

In 2022-23, local farmer practices' grass cost is Rs. 25,500 and front-line demonstration grass cost is Rs. 29,300, but net return is higher in demonstration (Rs. 63,621) than farmers' practices (Rs. 50,100). The B:C ratio is also higher, 3.17, compared to farmers' practices, [2,4] . Fig. 2 show the economical trend both years.

d. Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis shows that demo yield (17.04 q/ha) is higher than local farmers' practices' yield (13.46 q/ha).

Variability is slightly higher in demon plots; both have low CV, indicating stable performance on the yield.

Parameter

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors express sincere gratitude to the Deendayal Research Institute, Krishi Vigyan Kendra Chitrakoot, District Administration Chitrakoot, Department of Agriculture Uttar Pradesh, KVK team members, Abhay Kumar (Technology Agent), and all participating farmers for their valuable support and cooperation in conducting the demonstrations.

References

1. Balai LP, Singh N, Sharma DR. Impact on cluster frontline demonstrations on the productivity of mustard (Brassica juncea). Int J Bio-resource Stress Manag. 2021;12(4):295-302.
2. Hooda V, Kumar S, Singh SK. Estimation of gap and economic analysis of CFLD mustard crop. 2024.
3. Press Information Bureau, Government of India. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers' Welfare releases third advance estimates of production of major agricultural crops for 2024-25. 2025 May 28.
4. Sarkar S, Padaria RN, Burman RR, Gurung N, Barma P. Evaluating the performance of Cluster Frontline Demonstration (CFLD) on mustard in North Bengal. Indian J Ext Educ. 2025;61(1):42-47.
5. Vishal M, Ahirwar RP, Sahare KV, Pandre NK, Ketki D, Minakshi M. Impact of cluster frontline demonstrations (CFLD) oil seeds on yield enhancement of mustard (Brassica juncea) in tribal district of Mandla, Madhya Pradesh. The Pharma Innovation. 2022;11(1):118-123.