Exploring the Relative Economics of Mustard Plant under Various Treatments

Exploring the Relative Economics of Mustard Plant under Various Treatments | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Exploring the Relative Economics of Mustard Plant under Various Treatments Foumy N Rafeeq, Rohit Sharma This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4180732/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract All the major plant nutrients viz., nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium play important role in increasing the production of mustard. A major part of fertilizer nitrogen applied is lost as NH 3 through volatilization. The optimum supply of phosphorus to the plant stimulates root development and growth thereby helps to establish seedling quickly and also reduces the harmful effect of excess nitrogen in plants. Potassium helps in maintaining a normal balance between carbohydrates and proteins. Economics of each treatment in relation to fertilizers was worked out taking into account the current prices of produces, fertilizers and its expenditure involved in all kinds of operations as per treatment on per hectare basis in ha ₹-1 and the cost of cultivation is calculated where, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio was considered. Economic returns were worked out by calculating operational cost of individual treatment. A field experiment was initiated during rabi, 2021-22 at Research Farm, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with three replications comprising of three fertilizer treatments viz. (F1) 0 kg ha-1, (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1 and (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 as first factor. On the basis of experimental finding summarized, Marked improvement in growth, yield traits and yield, quality and nutrient uptake of mustard were observed with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1. On the basis of B: C ratio, application of F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha- 1 . Introduction India is the fourth largest rapeseed-mustard growing country in the world, occupying the fourth position in area and production after Canada, China and European Union. In India, among all the oilseed crops rapeseed-mustard occupying 6.69 million ha area and production of 10.11 million tonnes with average productivity of 1511 kg ha1 (Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, 2020 -21). Rajasthan is one of the major rapeseed and mustard producing state of India. It ranked first both in terms of area and production of rapeseed and mustard among states in India. The area, production and productivity of rapeseed-mustard in Rajasthan is 2.72 million ha, 4.51 million tonnes and 1659 kg ha-1 (AICRP-RM. 2008). All the major plant nutrients viz., nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium play important role in increasing the production of mustard. Nitrogen being a structural part of plant body which helps in synthesis of protein and important for photosynthetic activities in the plants (Grant et al., 1990). Further, a major part of fertilizer nitrogen applied is lost as NH 3 through volatilization. Likewise, the response to phosphorus is determined by soil phosphorus status, moisture availability and yield level attained. Phosphorus is the key element in the process of conservation of solar energy into chemical energy. The optimum supply of phosphorus to the plant stimulates root development and growth thereby helps to establish seedling quickly and also reduces the harmful effect of excess nitrogen in plants (Gangwal et al., 2011). Adequate potassium results in superior quality of the whole plant due to the improved efficiency of photosynthesis, increased resistance to some diseases and greater water use efficiency. Potassium helps in maintaining a normal balance between carbohydrates and proteins and it is thought to be essential for the formation and translocation of carbohydrates which needed in large quantities by most of the crops (Dawson et al., 2009 ). Economics of each treatment in relation to fertilizers was worked out taking into account the current prices of produces, fertilizers and its expenditure. A field experiment was initiated during rabi, 2021-22 at Research Farm, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur Materials and methods Cost of cultivation The cost of different operations was calculated for different treatments on the basis of existing market prices of inputs and operations and the total cost was calculated by adding the expenditure involved in all kinds of operations as per treatment on per hectare basis in ha ₹-1. Gross returns The gross returns were calculated by multiplying the total seed and stover yield with prevalent market prices of the items and then they were presented on rupees hectare-1 basis as per the treatments (AOAC, 1990 ). Net returns Treatment wise net returns were computed by deducting the total cost of cultivation from the gross returns (AOAC, 1990 ). Benefit: Cost Ratio Benefit: Cost ratio was calculated by dividing net returns with the cost of cultivation for each treatment (AOAC, 1990 ). Benefit: Cost ratio = \(\frac{Net returns (\text{₹}ha-1)}{Cost of cultivation (\text{₹}\text{h}\text{a}-1)}\) Results and Discussion Relative Economics Treatment wise, economic returns were worked out by calculating operational cost of individual treatment. The data obtained is presented in Table 1 . Table 1 Relative economics (₹ ha-1) of mustard as influenced by fertilizers Treatments Economics ((₹ ha-1) B:C ratio Cost of cultivation Gross returns Net returns Fertilizers (Kg ha-1) F1: 0 kg ha-1 15020 67324 52304 3.59 F2: 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1 18893 91927 73034 3.95 F3: 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 19236 100852 81616 4.33 SEm± - 2915 2440 0.12 LSD (p = 0.05) - 8745 7321 0.36 1.1 Cost of cultivation (ha ₹-1) A perusal of data in Table 1 and Fig. 1 indicate that maximum cost of cultivation (19236 ha ₹ -1) was recorded with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 followed by (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, minimum cost of cultivation was found under (F1) 0 kg ha-1. 1.2 Gross returns (ha ₹ -1) A perusal of data in Table 4.14 and Fig. 4.5 indicate that significantly higher gross returns (100852 ha ₹ -1) was recorded with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 followed by (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, minimum gross returns were found under (F1) 0 kg ha-1. 1.3 Net returns (ha ₹ -1) Among the treatments, application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha1 fetched maximum net returns ( ₹ 81616 ha-1) followed by (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha1. While, minimum net returns was obtained under (F1) 0 kg ha-1 during the experimentation. 1.4 Benefit: cost ratio Among the fertilizer treatments, the highest B: C ratio of the magnitude 4.33 was obtained with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 followed by (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, minimum B: C ratio was found under (F1) 0 kg ha-1. Conclusion A field experiment was initiated during rabi, 2021-22 at Research Farm, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur. The soil of experimental field was loamy sand in texture, slightly alkaline in reaction with EC in safe range, low in organic carbon and nitrogen but with medium phosphorus and potassium. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with three replications comprising of three fertilizer treatments viz. (F1) 0 kg ha-1, (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1 and (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 as first factor. Application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 recorded significantly higher plant height, number of branches plant-1 and dry matter accumulation plant-1 over rest of the treatments. Yield attributing characters such as number of siliquae (plant-1), number of seeds siliquae-1 and siliquae length (cm) improved significantly with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 over rest of the treatments. Application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 caused perceptible variation in seed yield (kg ha-1), stover yield (kg ha-1) and biological yield (kg ha-1) over rest of the treatments. Quantitatively, application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 recorded significantly higher oil yield, protein content and protein yield over rest of the treatments. Nutrient content in seed and stover could varied due to fertilizer application. Significantly higher nutrient content and uptake by seed and stover was noted under application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha- 1 . Application of application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 fetched highest gross returns, net returns and B:C ratio of mustard. On the basis of experimental finding summarized, Marked improvement in growth, yield traits and yield, quality and nutrient uptake of mustard were observed with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1. On the basis of B: C ratio, application of F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha- 1 . Declarations Author Contribution Foumy N. Rafeeq has written the introduction, research methodology and conclusionFoumy N. Rafeeq and Rohit sharma have compiled all the information and written results and discussion together References Agricultural Statistics at a Glance. 2020-21. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. AICRP-RM. 2008. Annual Progress Report of Directorate of Rapeseed Mustard Research, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, India, pp A6-7. AOAC, 1990. Official Methods of Analysis, eighteenth revised. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Virginia. USA. DAC. 2017-18. Annual Report, 2017-18. Agricultural Statistics, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture Cooperation and Farmer Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi. Dawson, Y. K. J., Kishanrao, Z. K., Dixit, P. M. and Khatkar, R. 2009. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur fertilization on growth and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea). International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5(2): 396–398. Grant, C. A and Bailey, L. D. 1990. Fertilizer management in canola production. Proceedings of National Canola Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, April 2–6, 1990, pp 122 – 59. Kumar, S., Verma, S. K., Singh, T. K. and Singh, S. 2011. Effect of nitrogen and sulphur on growth, yield and nutrient uptake by Indian Mustard (Brassica juncea) under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 81(2): 145–149. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4180732","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":290087332,"identity":"7b0d6278-ea00-487b-ae19-b7c3447efbc0","order_by":0,"name":"Foumy N Rafeeq","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Vivekananda Global University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Foumy","middleName":"N","lastName":"Rafeeq","suffix":""},{"id":290087335,"identity":"4fd0f1c9-f9a5-4c85-a0b1-62366c09646f","order_by":1,"name":"Rohit Sharma","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Vivekananda Global University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rohit","middleName":"","lastName":"Sharma","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-03-28 08:33:49","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4180732/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4180732/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":62556082,"identity":"8211bb23-800a-4839-bf0d-117cb88e7f14","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-15 19:29:30","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":261126,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4180732/v1/8c52c48e-769c-447a-83c6-362e289d6a82.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Exploring the Relative Economics of Mustard Plant under Various Treatments","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eIndia is the fourth largest rapeseed-mustard growing country in the world, occupying the fourth position in area and production after Canada, China and European Union. In India, among all the oilseed crops rapeseed-mustard occupying 6.69\u0026nbsp;million ha area and production of 10.11\u0026nbsp;million tonnes with average productivity of 1511 kg ha1 (Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e-21). Rajasthan is one of the major rapeseed and mustard producing state of India. It ranked first both in terms of area and production of rapeseed and mustard among states in India. The area, production and productivity of rapeseed-mustard in Rajasthan is 2.72\u0026nbsp;million ha, 4.51\u0026nbsp;million tonnes and 1659 kg ha-1 (AICRP-RM. 2008). All the major plant nutrients viz., nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium play important role in increasing the production of mustard. Nitrogen being a structural part of plant body which helps in synthesis of protein and important for photosynthetic activities in the plants (Grant et al., 1990). Further, a major part of fertilizer nitrogen applied is lost as NH\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e through volatilization. Likewise, the response to phosphorus is determined by soil phosphorus status, moisture availability and yield level attained. Phosphorus is the key element in the process of conservation of solar energy into chemical energy. The optimum supply of phosphorus to the plant stimulates root development and growth thereby helps to establish seedling quickly and also reduces the harmful effect of excess nitrogen in plants (Gangwal et al., 2011). Adequate potassium results in superior quality of the whole plant due to the improved efficiency of photosynthesis, increased resistance to some diseases and greater water use efficiency. Potassium helps in maintaining a normal balance between carbohydrates and proteins and it is thought to be essential for the formation and translocation of carbohydrates which needed in large quantities by most of the crops (Dawson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Economics of each treatment in relation to fertilizers was worked out taking into account the current prices of produces, fertilizers and its expenditure. A field experiment was initiated during rabi, 2021-22 at Research Farm, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCost of cultivation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe cost of different operations was calculated for different treatments on the basis of existing market prices of inputs and operations and the total cost was calculated by adding the expenditure involved in all kinds of operations as per treatment on per hectare basis in ha ₹-1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eGross returns\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe gross returns were calculated by multiplying the total seed and stover yield with prevalent market prices of the items and then they were presented on rupees hectare-1 basis as per the treatments (AOAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eNet returns\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment wise net returns were computed by deducting the total cost of cultivation from the gross returns (AOAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenefit: Cost Ratio\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenefit: Cost ratio was calculated by dividing net returns with the cost of cultivation for each treatment (AOAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenefit: Cost ratio =\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cspan class=\"InlineEquation\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"mathinline\"\u003e\\(\\frac{Net returns (\\text{₹}ha-1)}{Cost of cultivation (\\text{₹}\\text{h}\\text{a}-1)}\\)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eRelative Economics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment wise, economic returns were worked out by calculating operational cost of individual treatment. The data obtained is presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRelative economics (₹ ha-1) of mustard as influenced by fertilizers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomics ((₹ ha-1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB:C ratio\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCost of cultivation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGross returns\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNet returns\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFertilizers (Kg ha-1)\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF1: 0 kg ha-1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15020\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e67324\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52304\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF2: 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5 ha-1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18893\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e91927\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e73034\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF3: 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19236\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100852\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e81616\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSEm\u0026plusmn;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2915\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2440\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8745\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7321\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.1 Cost of cultivation (ha ₹-1)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA perusal of data in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e and Fig.\u0026nbsp;1 indicate that maximum cost of cultivation (19236 ha ₹ -1) was recorded with application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 followed by (F2) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, minimum cost of cultivation was found under (F1) 0 kg ha-1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2 Gross returns (ha ₹ -1)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA perusal of data in Table\u0026nbsp;4.14 and Fig.\u0026nbsp;4.5 indicate that significantly higher gross returns (100852 ha ₹ -1) was recorded with application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 followed by (F2) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, minimum gross returns were found under (F1) 0 kg ha-1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.3 Net returns (ha ₹ -1)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the treatments, application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha1 fetched maximum net returns ( ₹ 81616 ha-1) followed by (F2) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5 ha1. While, minimum net returns was obtained under (F1) 0 kg ha-1 during the experimentation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.4 Benefit: cost ratio\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmong the fertilizer treatments, the highest B: C ratio of the magnitude 4.33 was obtained with application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 followed by (F2) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5 ha-1. However, minimum B: C ratio was found under (F1) 0 kg ha-1.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eA field experiment was initiated during rabi, 2021-22 at Research Farm, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur. The soil of experimental field was loamy sand in texture, slightly alkaline in reaction with EC in safe range, low in organic carbon and nitrogen but with medium phosphorus and potassium. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with three replications comprising of three fertilizer treatments viz. (F1) 0 kg ha-1, (F2) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5 ha-1 and (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 as first factor. Application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 recorded significantly higher plant height, number of branches plant-1 and dry matter accumulation plant-1 over rest of the treatments. Yield attributing characters such as number of siliquae (plant-1), number of seeds siliquae-1 and siliquae length (cm) improved significantly with application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 over rest of the treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eApplication of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 caused perceptible variation in seed yield (kg ha-1), stover yield (kg ha-1) and biological yield (kg ha-1) over rest of the treatments. Quantitatively, application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 recorded significantly higher oil yield, protein content and protein yield over rest of the treatments. Nutrient content in seed and stover could varied due to fertilizer application. Significantly higher nutrient content and uptake by seed and stover was noted under application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e. Application of application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1 fetched highest gross returns, net returns and B:C ratio of mustard.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn the basis of experimental finding summarized, Marked improvement in growth, yield traits and yield, quality and nutrient uptake of mustard were observed with application of (F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-1. On the basis of B: C ratio, application of F3) 60 kg N\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;30 kg P2O5\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;20 kg K2O ha-\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFoumy N. Rafeeq has written the introduction, research methodology and conclusionFoumy N. Rafeeq and Rohit sharma have compiled all the information and written results and discussion together\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAgricultural Statistics at a Glance. 2020-21. Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAICRP-RM. 2008. Annual Progress Report of Directorate of Rapeseed Mustard Research, Bharatpur, Rajasthan, India, pp A6-7.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAOAC, 1990. Official Methods of Analysis, eighteenth revised. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, Virginia. USA.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDAC. 2017-18. Annual Report, 2017-18. Agricultural Statistics, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture Cooperation and Farmer Welfare, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmer Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDawson, Y. K. J., Kishanrao, Z. K., Dixit, P. M. and Khatkar, R. 2009. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and sulphur fertilization on growth and yield of mustard (Brassica juncea). International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5(2): 396\u0026ndash;398.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrant, C. A and Bailey, L. D. 1990. Fertilizer management in canola production. Proceedings of National Canola Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, April 2\u0026ndash;6, 1990, pp 122\u0026thinsp;\u0026ndash;\u0026thinsp;59.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKumar, S., Verma, S. K., Singh, T. K. and Singh, S. 2011. Effect of nitrogen and sulphur on growth, yield and nutrient uptake by Indian Mustard (Brassica juncea) under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 81(2): 145\u0026ndash;149.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4180732/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4180732/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eAll the major plant nutrients viz., nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium play important role in increasing the production of mustard. A major part of fertilizer nitrogen applied is lost as NH\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e through volatilization. The optimum supply of phosphorus to the plant stimulates root development and growth thereby helps to establish seedling quickly and also reduces the harmful effect of excess nitrogen in plants. Potassium helps in maintaining a normal balance between carbohydrates and proteins. Economics of each treatment in relation to fertilizers was worked out taking into account the current prices of produces, fertilizers and its expenditure involved in all kinds of operations as per treatment on per hectare basis in ha ₹-1 and the cost of cultivation is calculated where, gross returns, net returns and benefit cost ratio was considered. Economic returns were worked out by calculating operational cost of individual treatment. A field experiment was initiated during rabi, 2021-22 at Research Farm, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur. The experiment was laid out in factorial randomized block design with three replications comprising of three fertilizer treatments viz. (F1) 0 kg ha-1, (F2) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 ha-1 and (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1 as first factor. On the basis of experimental finding summarized, Marked improvement in growth, yield traits and yield, quality and nutrient uptake of mustard were observed with application of (F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-1. On the basis of B: C ratio, application of F3) 60 kg N + 30 kg P2O5 + 20 kg K2O ha-\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Exploring the Relative Economics of Mustard Plant under Various Treatments","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-04-16 05:12:27","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4180732/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d57b9722-c404-447f-996d-e61d2b62c5f0","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 16th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-08-15T19:29:33+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-04-16 05:12:27","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4180732","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4180732","identity":"rs-4180732","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}