International Journal of Agriculture Sciences

ISSN: 0975-3710 & E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 11, Issue 2, 2019, pp.-7770-7772.
Available online at https://www.bioinfopublication.org/jouarchive.php?opt=&jouid=BPJ0000217

Research Article
YIELD GAP ANALYSIS IN KABULI CHICKPEA (CICER KABULI ANUM.) THROUGH FRONT LINE
DEMONSTRATION

SHUKLA A.K.*, MISHRA D.K., RAKESH JAIN R., PACHLANIYA N. AND SHUKLA K.
ICAR-Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kasturba Gandhi National Memorial Trust, Kasturabagram, Indore, 452020, Madhya Pradesh, India
*Corresponding Author: Email - arunpagarbhu@gmail.com

Received: January 04, 2019; Revised: January 23, 2019; Accepted: January 24, 2019; Published: January 30, 2019
Abstract: Chickpea (Cicer kabuli anum.) is a major pulse crop grown in Madhya Pradesh particularly in Indore district with 11.83 q/ha which is far below than its potential yield (20
q/ha). Therefore to enhance its production and productivity front line demonstration were carried out at Indore district during 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18. The interventions
imparted under front line demonstration were consisting Improve variety, {Phule G 0517 (Kripa)}, integrated nutrient management (20:60:20 kg N: P: K /ha + Rhizobium + P.S.B.@
5 ml per kg of seed), integrated pest management, Deep ploughing, seed treatment with Trichoderma viridi, Quinolphos @1.5 lt/ha+ Indoxacarb 3.3 lt/ha). Existing farmers practice
was treated as control. Full gap was observed in case of variety, seed rate, seed treatment, seed inoculation, while partial gap was observed in use of inorganic fertilizer and plant
protection measure followed by the farmers. 26.23 percent average yield enhancement was recorded with extension gap ranging between 3.1, 2.4 and 3.49 q/ha during the period
of study. The trends of technology gap (ranging between 5.4, 6.93 and 4.39 q/ha) reflected the farmer’s co-operation in carrying out such demonstration with encouraging results in
sequent year. Average technological index 14.8 % showed the feasibility of the evolved technology at the farmer’s field. Net return under recommended practices was recorded Rs
70553, 73220 and Rs 57847 while it was Rs 45593, 57228 and Rs 39525 under existing farmers practice. Benefit: cost ratio was ranged between 1: 3.47, 3.25 and 1:2.97.
Consequently it was clearly showed that the Front line demonstration can paved the way of minimizing the gap between actual yield of chick pea and its yield potential.
Keywords: Chickpea, Deep ploughing, Seed treatment
Citation: Arun Kumar Shukla, et al., (2019) Yield Gap Analysis in Kabuli Chickpea (Cicer kabuli anum.) Through Front line Demonstration. International Journal of
Agriculture Sciences, ISSN: 0975-3710 & E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp.- 7770-7772.
Copyright: Copyright©2019 Arun Kumar Shukla, et al., This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Introduction Materials and Methods:

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum Linn) is a major pulse crop occupies around 38 percent
areas under pulses and contributes around 50 percent of total production in India.
It is being grown throughout the country except on high altitude of northern, north
eastern regions & costal peninsula. Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Maharashtra,
Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, Haryana,
Bihar, Odisha, and West Bengal are the major chickpea producing state sharing
over 95 percent area. Pulses are the important source of proteins and essential
component of Indian diet. The area, production and productivity of the pulses in
the country is 29.46 million hectare, 22.95 million tonnes and 7.79 q/ha
respectively during 2016-17 [12]. Among the pulses Chickpea is the leading food
legume crop in India covering about of 9.93 Million ha with production and
productivity of 9.75 million tonnes and 9.73 q/ha respectively [12]. In Madhya
Pradesh it is being grown under in 2.63 million hectares with the production of
2.84 million tons and average productivity is 1082 kg ha. [12]. Indore is a major
chickpea producing district of Madhya Pradesh covering around 74 thousands
hectare area with production of 87 thousands tones and average productivity is
11.83 q/ha. [11]. Average productivity of chickpea in Madhya Pradesh was
reported 10.82 q/ha which is far below than its potential (20.00 q/ha) yield. Lower
productivity of chick pea with respect to its potential yield (20.00 q/ha) was
observed due to low adoption of recommended production technologies and biotic
and a biotic stress. Major a biotic stress under chickpea cultivation are soil
moisture, organic matter and terminal drought while biotic stresses are infestation
of gram pod borer causes 75 per cent pod damage in the crop [13]. To mitigate
the causes of yield loss and maximization of income from chick pea cultivation,
dissemination of recommended technologies through front line demonstration
were conducted and their yield and economics were analysed.
To enhance the yield and income from chick pea, 39 Front Line Demonstrations
were organised during three consecutive years i.e. 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18
in Indore district of Madhya Pradesh. As intervention superior technologies
included variety Kripa, integrated nutrient management (20:60:20 kg N:P:K /ha) ,
Rhizobium + P.S.B. @ 5ml per kg of seed, integrated pest management, Deep
ploughing , seed treatment with Trichoderma viridi, Pheromone trap 10/ha + bird
percher @ 50/ha + Quinolphos @1.5 lt/ha+Indoxacarb 3.3 lt/ha) were
demonstrated under recommended technologies. Prior to conducting front line
demonstrations specific skill trainings ware imparted to the selected farmers. All
other steps like site selection, farmer selection, layout, farmer’s participation etc
were followed as suggested by [3]. Along with demonstration plots, control plots
ware also laid out as farmer’s practice. All the crop production packages other
than interventions were applied similarly in both the recommended and control
plots. Difference in package of practices between recommended practice and
farmers practice are listed in [Table-1]. The data related to yield and economics
from both the demonstrations and control plots were collected and their
technology gap, extension gap, technology index and economics were analysed.
Results and Discussion
Gap between Recommended and Existing Farmers Practice - Data were collected
from both the demonstration and existing farmers plots (Control) about the major
packages of practices and presented in [Table-1]. Farmers in general were using
unidentified variety instead of improved variety of Kabuli chickpea. Farmers
followed narrow sowing (30 cm row to row and 5 cm plant to plant) against the
recommended 45 cm row to row and 5 cm plant to plant distance. Because of this
they applied higher seed rate (150 kg/ha) than the recommended (120 kg/ha).

International Journal of Agriculture Sciences

ISSN: 0975-3710&E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 11, Issue 2, 2019
|| Bioinfo Publications || 7770
 Yield Gap Analysis in Kabuli Chickpea (Cicer kabuli anum.) Through Front line Demonstration

Table-1 Difference between recommended and existing farmer practices under chickpea FLD
Crop Rotation Recommended practices Farmers practice Remarks
Variety PKV-4 Doller Unidentify Variety Fully gap
Seed rate (Kg/ha) 120 150 Fully gap
Seed treatment Carboxin 37.5%+Thiram 37.5% @ 3g/kg seed. Not Treated Fully gap
Seed Inoculation Rhizobium+PSB@5 ml/kg seed Not Treated Fully gap
Fertilizer dose (Kg/ha) 20:50:20:20 20:80:0 Partial gap
Sowing time 10-12 October 15-20 October Partial gap
Sowing method 45x10 cm Row to row and plant to plant 30x5 cm Row to row and plant to plant Fully gap
Plant protection IPM module (Pheromone trap (10) + Bird percher 50/ha + Quinolphos @1.5 lt/ha+ Indoxacarb 3.3 lt/ha Indoxacarb 3.3 lt/ha 2-3 spray of partial gap

Table-2 Productivity, Extension Gap, Technology gap and technology index of chickpea as grown under FLD and existing package of practices
Year Village Area Benificiary Potential Demons.Yield Local Yield % Extension gap Technology gap Technology Index
(ha) Yield q/ha q/ha Increase q/ha q/ha %
2015-16 Buranakhedi 5 13 20 14.06 10.96 28 3.1 5.4 15
2016-17 Aankya 5 13 20 13.07 10.67 22 2.4 6.93 12
2017-18 Panod 5 13 20 15.61 12.12 28.7 3.49 4.39 17.4
15 39 20 14.24 11.25 26.23 2.9 5.57 14.8

Table-3 Economic analysis of demonstration and farmers practices

Year COC Gross return Net return Additional Cost Additional B:C Ratio
RP FP RP FP RP FP Net return RP FP
2015-16 28564 26149 99117 71743 70553 45593 2415 24960 3.47 2.74
2016-17 32510 29147 105730 86376 73220 57228 3363 15992 3.25 2.96
2017-18 29400 28242 87247 67768 57847 39525 1158 18322 2.97 2.39
30158 27846 97364 75295 67206 47448 2312 19758 3.23 2.69

No Seed treatment and seed inoculation in chickpea were followed by the farmers,
hence full gap was observed. Partial gap was observed in use of recommended
Fertilizers and plant protection measure which was definitely the reason of not
achieving its potential yield. Similar findings were also reported by [7].
Yield Gap
The yield of chickpea obtained over the year under improved technology as well
as local check are presented in [Table-2]. The yield of chickpea ranged between
13.07 to 15.61 q/ha with mean yield of 14.24 q/ha under recommended
technology as against 10.96 to 12.12 q/ha with mean yield of 11.25 q/ha under
control plots i.e. farmers practice. Overall 22 to 28.7 percent yield increase was
recorded over farmers practice under Front Line Demonstration programme.
Higher productivity under both recommended and farmers practice were recorded
during 2017-18, which might be due Microclimate situation, market price, social
and cultural practices of the particular year. The higher yield of chickpea under
recommended practices was due to the use of latest high yielding variety,
integrated nutrients and pest management. Similar results have been reported by
[10] and [14].
Extension gap: The extension gap is difference between demonstration yield and
farmers yield (2.9) showed an increasing trend. Extension gap range between
2.45 to 3.49 q/ha during the period of study, and it emphasizes the need to
educate the farmers through various means for the adoption of improved
agriculture production technology to reverse the trend of wide extension gap.
Technology gap: The technology gap is difference between potential yield and
yield of demonstration plot (5.57). It was recorded 5.40, 6.93 and 4.39 during the
year 2015 -16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively. Average technology gap under
three year of front line demonstration programme was recorded 5.57. The trends
of technology gap (ranging between 4.39 –6.93 (q/ha) reflected the farmers co-
operation in carrying out such demonstration with encouraging results in
subsequent year. The technology gap observed may be attributed to the
dissimilarity in Soil fertility status and weather conditions. Similar findings were
reported by [2] and [6] in different crops.
demonstrated technology in this region. These results confirm the findings of crop
technology demonstration on oilseed and pulses.
Economics: The economic analysis of front line demonstration was presented in
[Table-3]. The input and output prices of commodities prevailed during each year
of demonstration were taken for calculating cost of cultivation, net return and
benefit cost ratio [Table-3]. The net return from recommended practices was Rs
57847 to Rs 73220 while it was Rs 39525 to Rs 57228 under farmer practices. It
means that net return from demonstration plots were higher than the farmer
practices. The additional cost Rs 1158 to 241 incurred due to intervention gave
additional net return of Rs Rs15992 to Rs 24960 per ha. Benefit: cost ratio. Was
presented in [Table-3] it was recorded highest under demonstration plots against
control plots (Farmers Practice) during the all the years of front line programme.
Average benefit: cost ratio was recorded 3.23 under demonstration plot while it
was 2.69 under control plots. Thus it was clearly showed that the demonstration of
chickpea with full package was better than farmer’s practices. Similar result has
been reported by earlier by [9].
Conclusion
From the above findings it can be concluded that the use of recommended
practices of chickpea cultivation can reduce the yield gap to a considerable extent
this leading to increase the productivity of chickpea in the district. Moreover
extension agencies in the district need to provide proper technical support to the
farmers through different educational and extension methods to reduce the
extension gap for better pulse production.
Application of research: Present states and Impact study of front line
demonstrations on chickpea cultivation endow with the estimation and mechanism
for reducing the yield gap among the farmers.
Research Category: Technology dissemination and Yield gap analysis
Abbreviation: q/ha (quintal/hectare), lt/ha (litter/hectare), B:C (benefit and cost),
FLDs (front line demonstration), KVK (Krishi Vigyan Kendra)

The technology index: The technology index showed the viability of the evolved Acknowledgement / Funding: Authors are thankful to ICAR-Krishi Vigyan
technology at the farmer’s field. The lesser value of technology index more is the Kendra, Kasturba Gandhi National Memorial Trust, Kasturabagram, Indore,
feasibility of the technology demonstrated. As such reduction in technology index 452020, Madhya Pradesh, India. Authors are very thankful to the farmers of
from 17.4% during 2017-18 to 15% during 2015-16 exhibited the feasibility of the adopted villages for providing their cooperation for conducting the experiments.

International Journal of Agriculture Sciences

ISSN: 0975-3710&E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 11, Issue 2, 2019
|| Bioinfo Publications || 7771
 Shukla A.K., Mishra D.K., Rakesh Jain R., Pachlaniya N. and Shukla K.

*Principal Investigator or Chairperson of research: Arun Shukla

Institute: ICAR-Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Kasturba Gandhi National Memorial Trust,
Kasturabagram, Indore, 452020, Madhya Pradesh, India
Research project name or number: Frontline Demonstration

Author Contributions: All authors equally contributed

Author statement: All authors read, reviewed, agreed and approved the final
manuscript. Note-All authors agreed that- Written informed consent was obtained
from all participants prior to publish / enrolment

Conflict of Interest: None declared

Study area / Sample Collection: Data collection from farmer’s field

Cultivar / Variety name: Phule G 0517 (Kripa)

Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with human
participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Ethical Committee Approval Number: N/A

References
[1] Tomar R.K.S., Sharma P. and Yadav L.N. (1999) Int. Chickpea
Pigeonpea News Lelt. 6, 22-23.
[2] Sharma O.P. (2003). Agric. Extn. Rev., 15(5),11-13.
[3] Kirar B.S., Mahajan S.K. and Nashine R. (2004) Indian Res. J. Ext.
Edu., 5(1),15-17.
[4] Yadav D.B., Kamboj B.K. and Garg R.B. (2004) Haryan J. Agron,
20,33-35.
[5] Krishna Kant, Kanaujia K.R. and Kanaujia S. (2007) Annual Plant
Protection Sciences, 15, 303-306.
[6] Mishra D.K., Paliwal D.K., Tailor R.S. and Alok Deswal (2009) Indian
Res. J Extn, Edu., 9(3), 26-28.
[7] Burman, Roy R., Singh A.K. and Singh A.K. (2010) Indian Res. J Extn,
Edu., 10(1),99 -104.
[8] Lathwal O.P. (2010) Annals of Agriculture Research. 31, 24-27.
[9] Tomar R.K.S. (2010) Indian Journal of Natural Products and
Resources, 1,515-517.
[10] Verma Deependra Praksh (2013) M.Sc. (Ag.)Thesis, Jawahar lal
Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur M.P.
[11] Anonymous (2015-16) www.mpkrishi.net.in.
[12] Anonymous (2017) Pulses in India, Restrospect & Prospect DES,
Ministry of Agri. & FW (DAC&FW), Govt. of India.
[13] Matharu K.S. and Tanwar P.S. (2018) Agric. Update, 13(1),62.66.
[14] Shukla A.K., Pachlaniya Nitin, Mishra D.K. and Deswal Alok (2018)
Agric. Update, 13(1,77-80)

International Journal of Agriculture Sciences

ISSN: 0975-3710&E-ISSN: 0975-9107, Volume 11, Issue 2, 2019
|| Bioinfo Publications || 7772