Table (13) – (14) – (15) – (16) – (17) – (18)
IV. Chemical studies in hybrid rice
1. Nitrogen content (%) in hybrid rice grain and straw
Data regarding mean per cent nitrogen content in hybrid rice grain and straw as influenced by different treatments are presented in Table 13. The mean nitrogen content in grain and straw was 1.22 and 0.45 during 2000 and 1.26 and 0.48 during 2001, respectively.
|
Treatment |
2000 |
2001 |
|||||||
|
N content (%) |
N uptake (kg ha-1) |
N content (%) |
N uptake (kg ha-1) |
||||||
|
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
||
|
T1 |
1.08 |
0.39 |
38.92 |
13.25 |
1.15 |
0.40 |
41.18 |
14.25 |
|
|
T2 |
1.23 |
0.43 |
79.22 |
28.94 |
1.25 |
0.45 |
83.09 |
31.50 |
|
|
T3 |
1.26 |
0.47 |
84.27 |
32.04 |
1.29 |
0.50 |
88.90 |
35.51 |
|
|
T4 |
1.23 |
0.46 |
71.71 |
27.47 |
1.26 |
0.49 |
77.59 |
30.92 |
|
|
T5 |
1.31 |
0.45 |
71.35 |
25.29 |
1.31 |
0.48 |
73.62 |
27.44 |
|
|
T6 |
1.27 |
0.48 |
88.13 |
33.91 |
1.28 |
0.50 |
92.09 |
36.70 |
|
|
T7 |
1.23 |
0.46 |
84.14 |
32.15 |
1.27 |
0.48 |
90.29 |
35.88 |
|
|
T8 |
1.15 |
0.47 |
76.05 |
31.67 |
1.24 |
0.50 |
83.31 |
34.56 |
|
|
‘F’ test |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
|
|
S.Em. ± |
0.02 |
0.01 |
2.58 |
1.02 |
0.02 |
0.01 |
2.90 |
1.03 |
|
|
C.D. (5%) |
0.06 |
0.03 |
7.84 |
3.11 |
0.07 |
0.03 |
8.81 |
3.13 |
|
|
General Mean |
1.22 |
0.45 |
74.23 |
28.09 |
1.26 |
0.48 |
78.76 |
30.85 |
|
a. Nitrogen content in grain
During 2000, T5 registered significantly higher nitrogen content in grain than all the remaining treatments, except T6 and T3, where the differences were not significant. Similarly, T6 and T3 showed superiority over T8 and T1, while the differences between T6, T3, T2, T4 and T7 were of the similar order. On the other hand all the treatments behaved similarly with each other though these were superior to control during 2001.
b. Nitrogen content in straw
During 2000, T6, T3 and T8 noted significantly higher nitrogen content in straw over T2 and T1. T6, T3, T8, T4, T7 and T5, as well as T4, T7, T5 and T2 did not show significant variation. Similar trend was observed during 2001 except that T4 was superior to T2 and T1.
2. Nitrogen uptake by hybrid rice grain and straw (kg ha-1)
The data regarding mean nitrogen uptake by hybrid rice grain and straw as influenced by different treatments are summarized in Table 13 and depicted in Fig. 10. Data revealed that the mean uptake of nitrogen in grain and straw was 74.23 and 28.09 kg ha-1 for 2000 and 78.76 and 30.85 kg ha-1 for 2001, respectively.
a. Nitrogen uptake by grain
All the treatments were significantly superior over T1 (control) during both the years. T6 recorded significantly higher uptake of nitrogen than all the remaining treatments except T7 and T3, when the differences were not significant during 2000. Similarly, T7 proved its supremacy over T8, T4, T5 and T1, but T7, T3 and T2 behaved similarly with each other. The differences between T2, T8 and T4, as well as T8, T4 and T5 were of the similar order, though these treatments were superior over control.
On the other hand, in 2001, T6 noted the highest nitrogen uptake, which was significantly more than all the remaining treatments, except T7, T3 and T8, where the differences were not up to the mark. T7 and T3 also showed their superiority over T4, T5 and T1. The differences between T7, T3, T8 and T2; T8 and T4 as well as T4 and T5 were not up to the level of significance.
b. Nitrogen uptake by straw
During 2000, T6 and T7 noted significantly more nitrogen uptake than all the remaining treatments except T3 and T8 where the differences were not significant. Similarly, T3 showed its superiority over T4, T5 and T1, but the differences between T3, T8 and T2 were of the similar order. T8 also proved significantly variation though these treatments were superior to control. Similar trend was also observed during 2001, except that the differences between T3 and T2 as well as T4 and T5 were significant.
3. Phosphorus content in hybrid rice grain and straw (%)
Data regarding mean per cent phosphorus content in hybrid rice grain and straw as influenced by different treatments are presented in Table 14. The mean phosphorus content in grain and straw was 0.33 and 0.11% during 2000 and 0.31 and 0.10% during 2001, respectively.
|
Treatment |
2000 |
2001 |
|||||||
|
P2O5 content (%) |
P2O5 uptake (kg ha-1) |
P2O5 content (%) |
P2O5 uptake (kg ha-1) |
||||||
|
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
||
|
T1 |
0.24 |
0.07 |
8.64 |
2.37 |
0.23 |
0.07 |
8.24 |
2.61 |
|
|
T2 |
0.31 |
0.11 |
20.62 |
7.35 |
0.35 |
0.09 |
23.30 |
6.86 |
|
|
T3 |
0.32 |
0.11 |
22.04 |
7.63 |
0.34 |
0.10 |
24.09 |
7.81 |
|
|
T4 |
0.38 |
0.10 |
22.15 |
6.09 |
0.28 |
0.09 |
17.10 |
5.91 |
|
|
T5 |
0.36 |
0.09 |
20.17 |
5.04 |
0.29 |
0.08 |
16.23 |
4.59 |
|
|
T6 |
0.36 |
0.15 |
24.99 |
10.73 |
0.39 |
0.14 |
27.86 |
10.29 |
|
|
T7 |
0.32 |
0.15 |
22.59 |
10.62 |
0.32 |
0.14 |
23.48 |
10.27 |
|
|
T8 |
0.28 |
0.12 |
18.51 |
8.20 |
0.29 |
0.10 |
19.49 |
7.62 |
|
|
‘F’ test |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
|
|
S.Em. ± |
0.01 |
0.004 |
0.86 |
0.32 |
0.01 |
0.006 |
1.03 |
0.41 |
|
|
C.D. (5%) |
0.03 |
0.01 |
2.62 |
0.97 |
0.04 |
0.01 |
3.12 |
1.27 |
|
|
General Mean |
0.33 |
0.11 |
19.97 |
7.26 |
0.31 |
0.10 |
19.97 |
6.99 |
|
a. Phosphorus content in grain
During 2000, T4, T5 and T6 registered significantly higher phosphorus content in grain than all the remaining treatments, but the differences between them were not up to the mark. T3 and T7 showed their superiority over T8 and T1, while the differences between T3, T7 and T2 as well as T2 and T8 were of the similar order. On the contrary, during 2001, T6 registered significantly higher phosphorus content in hybrid rice grain compared to all the remaining treatments except T2, where the differences was not up to the mark. T2 and T3 proved significantly superior to T5, T8, T4 and T1 while the differences between T2, T3 and T7 as well as T7, T5, T8 and T4 were found to be not significant, though these treatments were superior to control.
b. Phosphorus content in straw
T6 and T7 registered significantly higher phosphorus content in straw compared to all the other treatments, but the differences between former two treatments was not up to the mark during both the years. T8, T2 and T3 behaved similarly with each other during both the years. Similarly, T4 and T5 did not show any significant variation. T3 and T8 proved superior to T5 and T1.
4. Phosphorus uptake by hybrid rice grain and straw (kg ha-1)
The data regarding mean phosphorus uptake by hybrid rice grain and straw as influenced by different treatments are summarized in Table 14 and depicted in Fig. 11. Data revealed that the mean uptake of phosphorus in grain and straw were 19.97 and 7.26 during 2000 and 19.97 and 6.99 kg ha-1 during 2001, respectively.
a. Phosphorus uptake by grain
During 2000, T6 showed constantly its superiority regarding phosphorus uptake by grain compared to all the remaining treatments except T7 where the differences was not up to the level of significance. T7, T4, T3, T2 and T5 behaved similarly with each other. T7, T4 and T3 proved superior to T8 and T1. T8 was also superior to T1. On the other hand, T6 registered significantly higher phosphorus in grain than all the remaining treatments during 2001. T3, T7 and T2 showed their superiority over T8, T4, T5 and T1, but the differences between former three treatments were of the similar magnitude. T8 and T4 as well as T4 and T5 did not show any significant variation though superior over T1.
b. Phosphorus uptake by straw
During 2000, T6 and T7 noted significantly higher phosphorus uptake than the remaining treatments, while the difference between former two levels was not up to the mark. Similarly, T8, T3 and T2 proved significantly superior to T4, T5 and T1, but the differences between former three treatments were not significant. T4 also proved its superiority over T5 and T1. Similarly, T5 was also superior to T1. Similar trend of results was observed during 2001, except that the difference between T2 and T4 was not up to the mark.
5. Potassium content in hybrid rice grain and straw (%)
Data regarding mean per cent potassium content in hybrid rice grain and straw as influenced by different treatments are presented in Table 15. It was observed that potassium content in grain and straw were 0.17 and 1.60 during year 2000 and 0.16 and 1.61% during year 2001, respectively.
|
Treatment |
2000 |
2001 |
|||||||
|
K2O content (%) |
K2O uptake (kg ha-1) |
K2O content (%) |
K2O uptake (kg ha-1) |
||||||
|
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
Grain |
Straw |
||
|
T1 |
0.13 |
1.50 |
4.69 |
50.93 |
0.12 |
1.50 |
4.18 |
53.36 |
|
|
T2 |
0.17 |
1.65 |
10.96 |
108.32 |
0.16 |
1.65 |
10.67 |
113.40 |
|
|
T3 |
0.16 |
1.65 |
10.70 |
112.48 |
0.15 |
1.65 |
11.05 |
117.85 |
|
|
T4 |
0.15 |
1.58 |
8.75 |
94.45 |
0.14 |
1.59 |
8.57 |
100.37 |
|
|
T5 |
0.15 |
1.52 |
8.29 |
83.34 |
0.14 |
1.53 |
7.84 |
87.19 |
|
|
T6 |
0.20 |
1.69 |
13.89 |
119.35 |
0.19 |
1.69 |
13.83 |
123.88 |
|
|
T7 |
0.19 |
1.63 |
13.02 |
113.71 |
0.18 |
1.64 |
13.06 |
119.97 |
|
|
T8 |
0.18 |
1.56 |
11.90 |
105.00 |
0.17 |
1.57 |
11.44 |
108.34 |
|
|
‘F’ test |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
|
|
S.Em. ± |
0.005 |
0.006 |
0.44 |
2.09 |
0.006 |
0.008 |
0.48 |
1.99 |
|
|
C.D. (5%) |
0.01 |
0.01 |
1.35 |
6.36 |
0.01 |
0.02 |
1.45 |
6.03 |
|
|
General Mean |
0.17 |
1.60 |
10.26 |
98.45 |
0.16 |
1.61 |
10.08 |
103.05 |
|
a. Potassium content in grain
During both the years, T6 registered significantly higher potassium content in hybrid rice grain compared to all the remaining treatments, except T7, where difference was of the similar order. Similarly, T7 proved its superiority over the remaining treatments except T8, where the difference was not up to the mark. The order of superiority was T8, T2, T3, T4 and T5 over control. The differences between T8 and T2, T2 and T3 as well as T3, T4 and T5 were not up to the level of significance.
b. Potassium content in straw
During 2000, T6 recorded significantly higher potassium content than all the remaining treatments. T2 and T3 also proved significantly superior over the remaining treatments, but the difference between former two treatments was of the similar order. The response was well marked and the differences between T7, T4, T8 and T5 were significant over T1 in that descending order. On the other hand in 2001, T6 proved significantly superior over all the remaining treatments. T2, T3 and T7 showed their superiority over the remaining treatments, but the differences between former three treatments were not up to the mark. T4 and T8 were superior to T5 and T1, but both these treatments behaved similarly with each other while T5 was superior to T1.
6. Potassium uptake by hybrid rice grain and straw (kg ha-1)
Data pertaining to mean potassium uptake by hybrid rice grain and straw as influenced by different treatments are summarized in Table 15 and depicted in Fig. 12. It was noticed that the mean uptake of potassium in grain and straw were 10.26 and 98.45 kg ha-1 during 2000 and 10.08 and 103.05 kg ha-1 during 2001, respectively.
a. Potassium uptake by grain
During both the years, T6 and T7 noted significantly higher potassium uptake than the remaining treatments, except that the difference between T7 and T8 was of the similar order in 2000. T8, T2 and T3 behaved similarly with each other, but found superior over T4, T5 and T1. T4 and T5 did not show significant variation, while both these treatments proved their superiority over T1.
b. Potassium uptake by straw
During both the years, T6 and T7 recorded significantly higher potassium uptake in hybrid rice straw than all the remaining treatments, except that the difference between T7 and T8 was not significant. T3, T2 and T8 proved significantly superior to T4, T5 and T1, but the differences between T3 and T2 as well as T2 and T8 were not significant in both the years. T4 proved its superiority over T5 and T1. Similarly T5 was also superior to T1.
V. Physical properties and chemical composition of soil after harvest of hybrid rice
Data pertaining to the mean changes in physical properties and chemical composition of soil as influenced by different treatments after harvest of hybrid rice are summarized in Table 16 and depicted in Fig. 13.
Table 16. Bulk density (Mg m-3), water holding capacity (%) and organic carbon (%) of soil after harvest of hybrid rice as influenced by different treatments.
|
Treatment |
2000 |
2001 |
|||||
|
Bulk density (Mg m-3) |
Water holding capacity (%) |
Organic carbon (%) |
Bulk density (Mg m-3) |
Water holding capacity (%) |
Organic carbon (%) |
||
|
T1 |
1.52 |
54.79 |
1.43 |
1.54 |
54.25 |
1.38 |
|
|
T2 |
1.49 |
52.65 |
1.96 |
1.50 |
51.88 |
1.75 |
|
|
T3 |
1.40 |
56.32 |
1.95 |
1.43 |
58.12 |
1.98 |
|
|
T4 |
1.44 |
53.63 |
1.75 |
1.45 |
54.33 |
1.72 |
|
|
T5 |
1.38 |
59.98 |
2.15 |
1.40 |
61.48 |
2.36 |
|
|
T6 |
1.54 |
55.32 |
1.99 |
1.55 |
53.78 |
1.87 |
|
|
T7 |
1.49 |
57.83 |
2.03 |
1.52 |
58.30 |
2.19 |
|
|
T8 |
1.51 |
52.63 |
1.86 |
1.53 |
51.38 |
1.72 |
|
|
‘F’ test |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
|
|
S.Em. ± |
0.03 |
0.50 |
0.01 |
0.004 |
0.69 |
0.01 |
|
|
C.D. (5%) |
0.10 |
1.53 |
0.05 |
0.01 |
2.10 |
0.05 |
|
|
GM |
1.47 |
55.39 |
1.89 |
1.49 |
55.44 |
1.87 |
|
|
Initial value |
1.42 |
54.78 |
1.30 |
1.42 |
54.78 |
1.30 |
|
1. Changes in bulk density of soil (Mg m-3)
The data on bulk density showed that the effect of T6 was very much conspicuous than the remaining treatments resulting in higher bulk density during both the years, while application of 10 t ha-1 gliricidia alone (T5) to hybrid rice improved the physical condition of soil by noting its lowest bulk density during both the years followed by T4, T3 and T7 indicating improvement in physical properties of soil. This indicated that the combined use of manures and fertilizers are necessary for maintaining the soil health.
2. Changes in water holding capacity of soil (%)
Data showed that T5 registered significantly higher value of water holding capacity as compared to all the remaining treatments during both the years. Similarly, T7 and T3 showed their superiority over the remaining treatments, but the difference between these two treatments was not up to the mark. T3, T6 and T1 as well as T4, T2 and T8 behaved similarly with each other. The differences between T4, T1 and T6 as well as T6 and T2 were of similar order.
3. Changes in organic carbon content of soil (%)
T5 noted significantly higher organic carbon content compared to all the remaining treatments during both the years. T7 and T6 as well as T6, T2 and T3 behaved similarly with each other, but were superior to T8, T4 and T1. The order of superiority was T5, T7, T3 and T6 in that descending order.
VI. Changes in available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in soil after hybrid rice (kg ha-1)
The data regarding changes in available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in soil after harvest of hybrid rice (kg ha-1) is given in Table 17 and depicted in Fig. 14.
Table 17. Available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (kg ha-1) and its balance (average of two years) in soil after harvest of hybrid rice as influenced by different treatments.
|
Treatment |
2000 |
2001 |
Balance (average of two years) |
|||||||
|
Avail. N |
Avail. P2O5 |
Avail. K2O |
Avail. N |
Avail. P2O5 |
Avail. K2O |
Avail. N |
Avail. P2O5 |
Avail. K2O |
||
|
T1 |
249.08 |
5.96 |
76.51 |
206.25 |
4.83 |
41.89 |
-56.12 |
-7.78 |
-22.11 |
|
|
T2 |
275.17 |
7.11 |
104.49 |
322.04 |
14.71 |
99.72 |
+14.83 |
-2.26 |
+20.80 |
|
|
T3 |
322.04 |
12.06 |
120.4 |
342.97 |
19.88 |
121.33 |
+48.73 |
+2.80 |
+39.56 |
|
|
T4 |
285.95 |
10.82 |
96.73 |
277.02 |
7.83 |
101.28 |
-2.29 |
-3.85 |
+17.70 |
|
|
T5 |
310.55 |
13.7 |
114.74 |
293.16 |
23.33 |
107.78 |
+18.08 |
+5.35 |
+29.95 |
|
|
T6 |
281.35 |
15.17 |
99.62 |
358.99 |
21.89 |
99.2 |
+36.39 |
+5.36 |
+18.10 |
|
|
T7 |
317.47 |
17.78 |
134.01 |
363.84 |
22.17 |
141.57 |
+56.88 |
+6.81 |
+56.48 |
|
|
T8 |
303.2 |
10.23 |
102.71 |
294.56 |
10.73 |
109.31 |
+15.10 |
-2.69 |
+24.70 |
|
|
‘F’ test |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Sig. |
Initial values |
|||
|
S.Em. ± |
2.26 |
0.61 |
0.88 |
2.67 |
0.75 |
0.92 |
||||
|
C.D. (5%) |
6.86 |
1.86 |
2.69 |
8.10 |
2.28 |
2.79 |
283.78 |
13.17 |
81.31 |
|
|
General Mean |
293.10 |
12.35 |
106.15 |
307.60 |
16.54 |
102.76 |
+16.45 |
+0.47 |
+23.15 |
|
1. Available nitrogen in soil (kg ha-1)
During 2000, T3 and T7 noted significantly higher available nitrogen in soil than the remaining treatments, while the difference between former two treatments was not up to the mark. Similarly, T5 proved significantly superior to T8, T4, T6, T2 and T1. The difference between T4 and T6 as well as T6 and T2 was of the similar order. On the other hand during 2001, T7 and T6 noted significantly higher available nitrogen in soil than the remaining treatments, while the difference between former two treatments was of similar magnitude. T3 proved significantly superior to the remaining treatments followed by T2, T8, T5, T4 and T1.
The data showed that maximum gain of nitrogen in soil after hybrid rice was due to Fertilizers 75:75:75 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia (56.88 kg ha-1) followed by Fertilizers 50:50:50 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia (T3) (48.73 kg ha-1) and Fertilizers 150:75:75 kg ha-1 (T6) (36.39 kg ha-1) while it was only 18.08 kg ha-1 due to 10 t ha-1 gliricidia alone (T5), 15.10 kg ha-1 due to 90 kg UB-DAP ha-1 (T8) and 14.83 kg ha-1 due to Fertilizers 100:50:50 kg ha-1 (T2). Hybrid rice crop without fertilization (T1) showed negative balance of 56.12 kg ha-1 followed by 60 kg UB-DAP ha-1 (T4) (2.29 kg ha-1).
2. Available phosphorus in soil (kg ha-1)
Data showed that the maximum available phosphorus in soil was recorded due to T7, which was significantly superior over all other treatments during 2000. Similarly, T6 showed its superiority over the remaining treatments. The differences between T6 and T5 as well as T5 and T3 were not up to the mark. T3, T4 and T8 were superior to T2 and T1 while later two treatments behaved similarly with each other. During 2001, T5 and T7 recorded significantly higher available phosphorus in soil than the remaining treatments, except T6, where the differences were not well marked. T6 also proved significantly superior to T2, T8, T4 and T1. The order of merit was T3, T2, T8 and T4 in that descending order. It was observed that maximum gain of available phosphorus after hybrid rice was due to combined use of Fertilizers 75:75:75 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia (T7) (6.81 kg ha-1) followed by T6 (5.36 kg ha-1) and T5 (5.35 kg ha-1) while it was only 2.80 kg ha-1 due to T3. T1 showed net negative balance of 7.78 kg ha-1 followed by T4 (-3.85 kg ha-1), T8 (-2.69 kg ha-1) and T2 (-2.26 kg ha-1).
3. Available potassium in soil (kg ha-1)
It was observed that T7 recorded the significantly higher available potassium in soil followed by T3, T5 and T2. The difference between T2 and T8 was of similar magnitude during 2000. Similar trend was observed in 2001, but the differences between T8 and T5 as well as T4, T2 and T6 were of similar order. In the case of potassium status, it was noted that the maximum gain after hybrid rice was due to T7 (56.48 kg ha-1) followed by T3 (39.56 kg ha-1), T5 (29.95 kg ha-1), T8 (24.70 kg ha-1), T2 (20.80 kg ha-1); T6 (18.10 kg ha-1) and T4 (-17.70 kg ha-1). Hybrid rice grown without fertilizer application showed a net negative balance to the extent of 22.11 kg ha-1.
VII. Economics of hybrid rice cultivation
The data regarding economics of hybrid rice cultivation as influenced by different treatments are presented in Table 18 and depicted in Fig. 15.
|
Treatment |
Gross
returns |
Cost
of cultivation |
Net
returns |
B:C ratio |
|
|
T1 |
No Fertilizers (Control) |
23625.60 |
26219.48 |
-2593.88 |
0.90 |
|
T2 |
Fertilizers 100:50:50 kg ha-1 |
43216.20 |
29779.00 |
13437.20 |
1.45 |
|
T3 |
Fertilizers 50:50:50 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia |
44927.40 |
29997.78 |
14929.62 |
1.50 |
|
T4 |
60 kg UB-DAP ha-1 |
39501.00 |
27835.62 |
11665.38 |
1.42 |
|
T5 |
10 t ha-1 gliricidia alone |
39359.40 |
28507.58 |
10851.82 |
1.38 |
|
T6 |
Fertilizers 150:75:75 kg ha-1 |
46527.00 |
31558.76 |
14968.24 |
1.47 |
|
T7 |
Fertilizers 75:75:75 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia |
46083.00 |
31777.13 |
14305.87 |
1.45 |
|
T8 |
90 kg UB-DAP ha-1 |
44079.60 |
28327.43 |
15752.17 |
1.56 |
It was observed that 90 kg UB-DAP ha-1 and Fertilizers 150:75:75 kg ha-1 proved highly remunerative compared to all other treatments recording a net returns of Rs. 15752.17 ha-1 and Rs. 14968.24 ha-1, respectively followed by Fertilizers 50:50:50 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia (Rs. 14929.62), Fertilizers 75:75:75 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia (Rs. 14305.87), Fertilizers 100:50:50 kg ha-1 (Rs. 13437.20) and 60 kg UB-DAP ha-1 (Rs. 11665.38) in that descending order. The lowest net profit was noted due to 10 t ha-1 gliricidia alone (Rs. 10851.82), while loss was recorded by control (Rs. -2593.88). The highest benefit cost ratio of 1.56 was found in 90 kg UB-DAP ha-1 followed by 1.50 in Fertilizers 50:50:50 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia, 1.47 in Fertilizers 150:75:75 kg ha-1 and 1.45 in Fertilizers 100:50:50 kg ha-1 and Fertilizers 75:75:75 kg ha-1 + 5 t ha-1 gliricidia.