Impact of nutrient management through different bulky manures and their combination on growth, yield and economics of wheat-mustard intercropping in Bundelkhand

Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (2𝑛 = 42) is one of the most important cereal crops cultivated worldwide. It is an allohexaploid species with three genomes, A, B and D (AABBDD), comprising 21 pairs of chromosomes. Bread wheat originated through hybridization between tetraploid wheat (Triticum turgidum, AABB) and the diploid wild species Aegilops tauschii (DD). The A genome is mainly related to Triticum urartu, while the B and D genomes are associated with Aegilops speltoides and Aegilops tauschii, respectively. Wheat was domesticated in the Fertile Crescent and later spread to diverse agro-climatic regions worldwide (Dub-covsky and Dvorak, 2007; Matsuoka, 2011) [1] .

Mustard (Brassica juncea L. Czern. & Coss.) (2𝑛 = 36) is an important oilseed crop belonging to the family Brassicaceae. It is an allotetraploid species with an AABB genome constitution, originating through interspecific hybridization between Brassica rapa (AA) and Brassica nigra (BB), followed by chromosome doubling. Indian mustard is widely cultivated in the Indian subcontinent and is valued mainly for its edible oil, condiment and vegetable uses. It is also well adapted to relatively dry and heat-prone environments, making it an important crop for diverse agro-climatic conditions. Wheat-mustard intercropping is an important rabi cropping system widely practiced in India, particularly under irrigated and rainfed conditions. The combination of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L. Czern. & Coss.) facilitates efficient utilization of land, sunlight, water, nutrients and other environmental resources due to differences in their growth habit, rooting pattern, canopy structure and duration. Intercropping can increase total productivity per unit area, improve land-use efficiency, reduce production risk and provide additional economic returns compared with sole cropping. However, the performance of wheat-mustard intercropping is influenced by row ratio, planting geometry, plant population, sowing time, cultivar, nutrient management and competition between component crops. Therefore, identification of suitable row arrangements and management practices is essential for achieving higher productivity, resource-use efficiency and profitability under Indian conditions (Francis et al., 1976; Willey, 1979; Mead and Willey, 1980) [2,3] .

Material and methods

The present investigation was conducted during the The observations recorded on different growth, yield and economic parameters of wheat and mustard under the wheat -mustard intercropping system were subjected to statistical analysis to assess the effects of different organic nutrient management treatments. The growth and yield observations included plant height (cm), number of leaves plant -1 , leaf length (cm), fresh weight plant -1 (g), dry weight plant -1 (g), biological yield plant -1 (g), seed yield plant -1 (g) and harvest index (%). In wheat, number of tillers plant -1 , ear length (cm) and number of grains ear -1 were additionally recorded, whereas in mustard, number of primary branches plant -1 , siliqua length (cm) and number of seeds siliqua -1 were recorded at the appropriate stages of crop growth and at maturity. The recorded data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) appropriate for an RBD following the statistical procedure described by Cochran and Cox (1950). The significance of treatment effects was determined on the basis of the F-test. Wherever the treatment effects were found significant, treatment means were compared using Critical Difference (CD) at the 5% level of significance. Standard Error of Mean S.Em ± Standard Error of Difference S.Ed ± and Coefficient of Variation (CV%) were also calculated to assess the precision and variability of the experimental data. For economic evaluation of the intercropping system, cost of cultivation (₹ ha -1 ), wheat gross return (₹ ha -1 ), mustard gross return (₹ ha -1 ), total gross return (₹ ha -1 ), net return (₹ ha -1 ) and benefit-cost ratio were calculated for each treatment. Net return was obtained by deducting the cost of cultivation from the total gross return, while the benefit-cost ratio was calculated as the ratio of total gross return to the cost of cultivation.

Results and discussion

The present investigation was conducted to evaluate the effect of different bulky organic manures and their combinations on the growth, development, yield attributes, yield and economic performance of wheat-mustard intercropping under the agro-climatic conditions of Bundelkhand. The experiment was conducted during the rabi season of 2025-26 at the Organic Research Farm, Department of Agronomy, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi. The results revealed that organic nutrient management treatments considerably influenced the growth and yield performance of both wheat and mustard. Among the eight treatments, T 8: FYM 33% + Green Manure 33% + Compost 33% consistently recorded the highest values for most of the characters studied, whereas the lowest values were generally observed under T 1: Control.

Growth parameters

Plant height

Plant height of both wheat and mustard was significantly influenced by different organic nutrient management treatments. In wheat, plant height ranged from 67.60 to 92.90 cm. The minimum plant height of 67.60 cm was recorded under T 1 (Control), whereas the maximum height of 92.90 cm was recorded under T 8 (FYM 33% + Green Manure 33% + Compost 33%). T 6 (FYM 50% + Compost 50%) ranked second with 89.97 cm, followed by T 4 (Compost 100%) with 87.53 cm. Similarly, in mustard, plant height varied from 127.50 to 181.23 cm, with the minimum under T 1 and maximum under T 8 . T 6 and T 4 recorded 175.77 and 170.57 cm, respectively.

Number of leaves plant-1

The number of leaves plant -1 showed significant variation among the nutrient management treatments. In wheat, the number of leaves ranged from 10.20 to 17.33 plant -1 . The lowest value (10.20) was recorded under T 1 , whereas the highest value (17.33) was obtained under T 8 . T 6 recorded 16.60 leaves plant -1 , followed by T 4 with 15.76 leaves plant -1 . In mustard, the number of leaves ranged from 32.39 to 76.23 plant -1 . The maximum number of leaves (76.23) was recorded under T 8 , followed by T 6 (71.83) and T 4 (66.57), while the minimum (32.39) was observed under T 1 .

Leaf length

Leaf length was also significantly affected by different organic nutrient management treatments. In wheat, leaf length ranged from 16.34 to 25.96 cm, with the minimum value under T 1 and maximum under T 8 . T 6 recorded 24.77 cm, followed by T 4 with 23.90 cm. In mustard, leaf length ranged from 14.03 to 22.90 cm. The highest leaf length (22.90 cm) was recorded under T 8 , followed by T 6 (22.00 cm) and T 4 (21.13 cm), while the minimum was recorded under T 1 .

Biomass production

Fresh weight plant-1

Fresh weight plant -1 was significantly influenced by the different organic nutrient management treatments. In wheat, fresh weight ranged from 33.76 to 69.27 g plant -1 , with the minimum value under T 1 and maximum under T 8 . T 6 and T 4 recorded 65.13 and 61.53 g plant -1 , respectively. In mustard, fresh weight varied from 81.57 to 168.97 g plant -1 , with the highest value under T 8 , followed by T 6 (158.87 g) and T 4 (149.73 g).

Dry weight plant-1

Dry weight plant -1 also differed significantly among the treatments. In wheat, dry weight increased from 8.60 g under T 1 to 19.33 g under T 8 , while in mustard it increased from 17.60 to 39.86 g plant -1 . T 6 recorded the second-highest dry weight in both crops, with 18.10 g in wheat and 37.27 g in mustard, followed by T 4 .

Yield attributes

Number of tillers plant-1 in wheat

The number of tillers plant -1 was significantly influenced by organic nutrient management. The number of tillers increased from 2.77 under T 1 to 6.01 plant -1 under T 8 . T 6 recorded the next highest value, followed by T 4 . Greater tiller production provided a larger number of productive shoots, contributing to increased grain yield.

Ear length

Ear length of wheat increased from 7.63 cm under T 1 to 12.50 cm under T 8 . The superior ear length under T 8 may be attributed to better plant vigour and greater nutrient availability during reproductive development.

Number of grains ear-1

The number of grains ear -1 increased from 28.10 under T 1 to 50.40 under T 8 . The higher number of grains ear -1 under T 8 indicates better reproductive development and efficient assimilate supply to the de veloping ear. Similar findings have been reported by Chaudhry et al. (2017) [4] for wheat under integrated nutrient management.

Number of primary branches plant-1 in mustard

The number of primary branches plant -1 in mustard increased from 3.50 under T 1 to 7.70 under T 8 . The greater branching under T 8 may have resulted from improved nutrient availability and enhanced vegetative growth. Similar positive effects of nutrient management on mustard growth and yield attributes have been reported by Bhanuwanti et al. (2022) [5] and Awasthi et al. (2024) [6] .

Siliqua length

Siliqua length of mustard increased from 3.70 cm under T 1 to 6.04 cm under T 8 . The greater siliqua length under T 8 may be attributed to improved plant nutrition and enhanced assimilate availability during reproductive development.

Number of seeds siliqua-1

The number of seeds siliqua -1 increased from 10.40 under T 1 to 16.63 under T 8 . The maximum seed number under T 8 suggests improved reproductive efficiency under the combined application of FYM, green manure and compost. Adequate nutrient availability during flowering and siliqua development may have promoted better fertilization and seed filling.

Yield parameters

Seed yield plant-1

Seed yield plant -1 was considerably improved by organic nutrient management. In wheat, seed yield increased from 6.00 g under T 1 to 15.20 g plant -1 under T 8 , while in mustard it increased from 7.70 to 22.03 g plant -1 . T 6 ranked second with 13.93 g in wheat and 20.13 g in mustard, followed by T 4 .

Wheat yield

Wheat yield ranged from 21.33 to 54.04 q ha -1

. The minimum yield was recorded under T 1 (Control), whereas the maximum yield (54.04 q ha -1

) was recorded under T 8 . T 6 ranked second with 49.54 q ha -1 , followed by T 4 . The increase in wheat yield under T 8 was associated with the improvement in growth and yield-contributing attributes, particularly tillers plant -1 , ear length, grains ear -1 and seed yield plant -1 .

Mustard yield

Mustard seed yield also showed a marked response to organic nutrient management. The maximum mustard yield was recorded under T 8 (6.53 q ha -1 ), followed by T 6 (5.97 q ha -1 ), whereas the minimum yield was recorded under T 1 .

Harvest index

Harvest index was influenced by the different organic nutrient management treatments. In wheat, harvest index ranged from 36.89 to 42.82%, with the highest value under T₈ and the lowest under T₁. T₆ recorded 42.06%, while T₄ recorded 41.33%. In mustard, harvest index ranged from 22.35 to 28.34%, with the maximum value under T₈ and minimum under T₁. Similar improvement in yield efficiency under suitable nutrient management has been reported in wheat and mustard by Chaudhry et al. (2017) [4] , Bhanuwanti et al. (2022) [5] and Awasthi et al. (2024) [6] .

Economic parameters

Wheat gross return

Wheat gross return varied significantly among the treatments. The minimum gross return of ₹55,146.67 ha -1 was recorded under T 1 , whereas the maximum gross return of ₹1,39,702.02 ha -1 was ob-tained under T 8 . T 6 ranked second with ₹1,28,060.90 ha -1 , followed by T 4 with ₹1,17,031.57 ha -1 . The higher gross return under T 8 was primarily due to the higher wheat productivity obtained under this treatment.

Mustard gross return

Mustard gross return ranged from ₹14,136.00 ha -1 under T 1 to ₹40,465.33 ha -1 under T 8 . T 6 recorded ₹36,993.33 ha -1 , followed by T 4 with ₹33,314.67 ha -1 . The higher return from mustard under T 8 was a direct consequence of its higher seed productivity.

Total gross return

The total gross return of the wheat-mustard intercropping system ranged from ₹69,282.67 to ₹1,80,167.35 ha -1 . The lowest total gross return was recorded under T 1 , whereas the highest value (₹1,80,167.35 ha -1 ) was obtained under T 8 . T 6 ranked second with ₹1,65,054.23 ha -1 .

Net return

Net return varied from ₹25,115.63 ha -1 under T 1 to ₹1,23,701.77 ha -1 under T 8 . T 6 recorded the second-highest net return of ₹1,04,935.10 ha -1 . The higher net return under T 8 indicates that the additional expenditure associated with organic nutrient inputs was compensated by the substantial increase in crop productivity and gross income.

Benefit-cost ratio

The benefit-cost ratio ranged from 1.57 to 3.19. The highest B ratio of 3.19 was obtained under T 8 , followed by T 6 with 2.75, whereas the lowest ratio (1.57) was recorded under T 1 . The higher B ratio under T 8 demonstrates the superior economic efficiency of the integrated organic nutrient management treatment. Similar improvements in economic returns from wheat-mustard intercropping through suitable nutrient management have been reported by Kondaguri and Sudha (2020) [7] , Sudha et al. (2020) [8] , Shyamsunder et al. (2024) [9] and Kumbhare et al. (2025) [10] .

Conclusion

Based on the results of the present investigation, it may be concluded that organic nutrient management treatments significantly influenced the growth, yield and economic performance of wheat-mustard intercropping under the agro-climatic conditions of Bundelkhand. Among the organic nutrient management treatments evaluated, T 8: FYM @ 33% + Green Manure @ 33% + Compost @ 33% proved to be the most effective treatment, followed by T 6: FYM @ 50% + Compost @ 50%. Treatment T 8 recorded the highest performance for major growth parameters, biomass production, yield attributes, seed yield and harvest index in both wheat and mustard. The treatment recorded maximum plant height of 92.90 cm in wheat and 181.23 cm in mustard, along with the highest seed yield plant -1 of 15.20 g and 22.03 g, respectively. Similarly, the highest wheat yield (54.04 q ha -1

) and mustard yield (6.53 q ha -1

) were obtained under T 8 . The superior biological performance of T 8 was also reflected in economic parameters, recording the highest total gross return (₹1,80,167.35 ha -1 ), net return (₹1,23,701.77 ha -1 ) and benefit-cost ratio (3.19). Therefore, the application of FYM @ 33% + Green Manure @ 33% + Compost @ 33% may be recommended as an effective organic nutrient management practice for improving growth, productivity and profitability of wheat-mustard intercropping under the agro-climatic conditions of Bundelkhand.

Effect of different bulky manures and their combinations on total gross return under intercropping condition (₹ ha -1

Effect of different bulky manures and their combinations on net return under intercropping condition (₹ ha -1

Treatments

References

1. Dubcovsky J, Dvorak J. Genome plasticity a key factor in the success of polyploid wheat under domestication. Science. 2007;316:1862-1866.
2. Francis CA, Flor CA, Temple SR. Adapting varieties for intercropped systems in the tropics, in Multiple Cropping. American Society of Agronomy. 1976;27:235-253.
3. Mead R, Willey RW. The concept of a "Land Equivalent Ratio" and advantages in yields from intercropping. Experimental Agriculture. 1980;16:217-228.
4. Chaudhry S, Khan N, Singh UP, Pyare R, Singh YK, Srivastav AK, Verma VK, Chauhan GV. Effect of integrated nutrient management on productivity and economics of wheat (Triticum aestivum). Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2017;62(4):476-480.
5. Bhanuwanti, Gill HS, Kaur P. Effect of integrated nutrient management on timely sown crop of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal of Agronomy. 2022;67(4):454-457.
6. Awasthi S, Singh R, Maurya DK, Pal RK, Yadav N. Integrated nutrient management on growth and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea L.) in central alluvial tract of Uttar Pradesh. International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2024;7(6S):567-571.
7. Kondaguri Shivappa, Sudha T. Nutrient Management in Wheat - Mustard Intercropping System with Different Row Proportion. J. Farm Sci. 2020;33(4):452-456.
8. Sudha T, Shivappa K. Enhancing the productivity of wheat + mustard intercropping system with different row proportions and nutrient management practices. Journal of Oilseeds Research. 2020;37(Special Issue).
9. Shyamsunder B, Menon S, Walia US, Prasanna T, Raju GSK, Nawabpet P. Effect of intercropping wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with mustard (Brassica juncea L.) on yield and economics under organic system of cultivation. International Journal of Environment and Agriculture Research. 2024;9(2):218-223.
10. Kumbhare Rahul, Mishra PK, Sahu RP, Gupta Vikas, Patel Raghav, Singh Kirti. Effect of Different Management Practices on Yield Attributes and Productivity of Wheat + Mustard Intercropping System. International Journal of Plant & Soil Science. 2025;37(1):550-563.
11. Cochran WG, Cox GM. Experimental designs. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1957.
12. How to cite this article: Rawat K, Pandey S, Pal Y, Kumar P, Jha A. Impact of nutrient management through different bulky manures and their combination on growth, yield and economics of wheat-mustard intercropping in Bundelkhand. International Journal of Research in Agronomy. 2026;9(9):1400-1411. doi: htt ps://www.doi.org/10.33545/2618060X.2026.v9.i9s.6709