PERFORMANCE OF CUCURBITS IN DRY LAND ECO-SYSTEM OF UTTAR PRADESH, INDIA

RAJIV KHAIWAL¹*, K.P. SINGH², V.B. JAISWAL^3
1Vegetable Research Station, C.S. Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kalyanpur, Kanpur, 208 024, India
²Vegetable Research Station, C.S. Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kalyanpur, Kanpur, 208 024, India
³AICRP (Tobacco), C.S. Azad University of Agriculture and Technology Campus Araul, Kanpur Nagar, India
* Corresponding Author : rajiv.agro69@gmail.com

Received : 18-03-2018     Accepted : 28-03-2018     Published : 30-03-2018
Volume : 10     Issue : 6       Pages : 5576 - 5580
Int J Agr Sci 10.6 (2018):5576-5580

Keywords : Cucurbits demonstrations, Cucurbits productivity and profitability, Technology gap analysis
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Author thankful to Diversified Agriculture Support Project (DASP), Government of U.P., Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur, 208002, Uttar Pradesh. Author thankful to Dr R.K. Tomer, Nodal Officer, PIU, Horticulture, Lucknow for their continued support throughout the study.
Author Contribution : All author equally contributed

Integrated Crop Technology (ICT) based demonstrations were conducted on cucurbits with improved technologies against farmers practices on farmer’s fields during 2009-10 to 2011-12 in Hamirpur district of Bundelkhand zone of Uttar Pradesh. Full package of practices was followed. The demonstrations were conducted on bottle gourd (329), bitter gourd (254), sponge gourd (381) and cucumber (199). The results showed that improved techniques increased yield over farmers practices by the margins of 84.94 q ha-1 or 55.33 % in bottle gourd, 42.06 q ha-1 or 48.85 % in bitter gourd, 58.08 q ha-1 or 55.72 % in sponge gourd and 55.86 q ha-1 or 67.66 % in cucumber. Net profit o ₹ 73088 ha-1 in sponge gourd followed by ₹ 52092 ha-1 in bottle gourd and ₹ 45140 ha-1 in bitter gourd realized by farmers. Lowest of ₹ 25316 ha-1 net profit was increased in cucumber. There was wide technology gap, which need to bridge by promoting the scientific production and protection technologies of cucurbits crops in Hamirpur district of Uttar Pradesh.

1. Anonymous (2011) District Census 2011.
2. Anonymous (2008) Statistical Abstract, U.P. Economics & Statistical Division State Planning Institute, U.P.
3. Rajiv (2014) Indian Journal of Applied Research, 4, 46-48.
4. Samui S.K., Maitra S., Roy D.K., Mondal A.K. and Saha D. (2000) J. Indian. Soc. Coa. Agri. Res., 18, 180-183.
5. Balai C.M., Jalwania R., Verma L.N., Bairwa R.K., Regar P.C. and Ram M. (2014) Agriculture Update, 9(1), 67-72.
6. Kikon Wondangbeni and Angadi J.G. (2012) Internat. J. agric. Sci., 8, 267-270.
7. Singh R.K., Singh V.B., Nayak R., Singh A.K. and Kannaujia S.K. (2014) Agriculture Update, 9(1), 41-43.
8. Dhaka B.L., Meena B.S. and Suwalka R.L. (2010) Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 1, 39-42.
9. Kumar A., Kumar R., Yadav V.P.S. and Kumar R. (2010) Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 10, 105-108.
10. Hiremath S.M. and Nagaraju M.V. (2009) Karnataka J. Agric. Sci., 22(5), 1092-1093.
11. Mishra D.K., Paliwal D.K., Tailor R.S. and Deshwal A.K. (2009) Indian Research Journal of Extension Education, 9(3), 26-28.
12. Kokate K.D., Singh A.K. and Singh Lakhan (2013) Harnessing Pulses Productivity. Published by Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR, New Delhi.
13. Singh D.K. (2000) Ann. Agric. Res., 21(4), 572-574.
14. Chaturvedi D., Meena O.P. and Sharma O.P. (2014) Agriculture Update, 9(1), 48-50.
15. Rajiv and Singh Lakhan (2014) Indian Journal of Applied Research, 4(3), 01-03.
16. Tomar R.K.S. (2010) Indian Journal Natural Products and Resources, 1, 515-517.
17. Singh S.K., Roy Burmon R., Ansari M.S., Chaudhary R.G. and Singh K.K. (2004) Farm Science Journal, 13(1), 32- 35.
18. Jeengar K.L., Panwar P. and Pareek O.P. (2006) Current. Agriculture, 30, 115-116.
19. Chauhan N.M. (2012) J. Krishi Vigyan, 1(1), 46-48.
20. Katare S., Pandey S.K. and Mustafa M. (2011) Agriculture Update, 6(2), 5-7.