Physiological response of mungbean for grain yield and yield components under normal and late planting conditions

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/02/2020
Views (728)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Physiological response of mungbean for grain yield and yield components under normal and late planting conditions

Muhammad Imran Khan, Amina Batool, Waheed Arshad, Ali Nawaz, Muhammad Zeeshan, Shiraz Ali, Manzoor Hussain, Ghulam Nabi, Saadia
Int. J. Biosci. 16(2), 40-44, February 2020.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2020; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

Mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) is a leguminous crop having capability of fixing atmospheric nitrogen through specific bacteria present in nodulated roots. To study the physiological response of mung bean ( Vigna radiata L. ), an experiment was conducted at Barani Agricultural Research Station, Fatehjang to examine five Mungbean genotypes viz., AZRI Mung 2006, NM 2006, Chakwal Mung 2006, Chakwal Mung 97 and NCM 209 under normal and late sowing dates. Data on mungbean growth, development and grain yield were recorded from twenty randomly selected plants. Among all these varieties, AZRI-Mung 2006 ranked first in terms of yield (715.28 kg/ha) followed by Chakwal Mung 2006 (678.12 kg/ha), NM-2006 (632.45 kg/ha), Chakwal Mung 97 (598.11 kg/ha) and NCM-209 (537.29 kg/ha). Maximum grain yield 687.11 kg/ha was obtained under normal condition as compared to 411.43 kg/ha under late sowing condition. AZRI-Mung 2006 was found consistent under both planting condition while NCM-209 showed sensitivity under late sowing condition.

Ali M, Gupta S. 2012. Carrying capacity of indian agriculture: Pulse crops. Current Science 102, 874-881.

Algan N, Celen AE. 2011. Evaluation of mungbean (Vignaradiata L.) as green manure in Aegean conditions in terms of soil nutrition under different sowing dates. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 1744-1749. http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/AJAR10.486

Brar NS, Kumar A, Kumar B. 2017. Performance of summer mungbean (Vignaradiata L.) under different sowing time at farmersfield. International Journal Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 6(8), 2211-2219. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.608.260

Farz RA, Iqbal J, Bakhsh MAAHA. 2006. Effect of sowing dates and planting pattern on growth and yield of mungbean (Vignaradiata L.). Cv. M-6. International Journal Agriculture and Biology 8, 63-65.

Miah MAK, Anwar MP, Begum M, JuriamiAS Islam MA. 2009. Influence of sowing date on growth and yield of summer mungbean varieties. Journal Agriculture & Social Science 5, 73-76.

Patil BL, Hegde VS, Saliath PM. 2003.Studies on genetic divergence over stress and non-stress environment in mungbean. Indian Journal of Geneticsand Plant Breeding 63, 76-77.

Reddy AA. 2009. Pulses production technology. Status and way forward. Economic & Political Weekly 44, 73-80.

Sadeghipour O. 2008. Response of mungbean varieties to different sowing dates. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 11, 2048-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/pjbs.2008.2048.2050

Sarkar MAR, Kabir MH, Begum M, Salam MA. 2004. Yield performance of mungbean as affected by planting date, variety and plant density. Journalof Agronomy 3, 18-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ja.2004.18.24

Singh, Guriqbal, Sekhan HS, Hari Ram, Gill KK, Sharma P. 2010. Effect of date of sowing on nodulation, growth, thermal requirement and grain yield of kharifmungbean genotypes. Journal of Food Legumes 23, 132-134.

Singh AK, Kumar P, Chandra N. 2013. Studies on seed production of mungbean (Vignaradiate) sown at different dates. Journal of Environmental Biology 34, 1007-1011.

Soomro NA. 2003. Response of mungbean genotypes to different dates of sowing in kharif season under rainfed condition. Asian Journalof Plant Sciences 2, 377-379. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2003.377.379

Related Articles

Sensory evaluation of horn snail (Telescopium telescopium) patty

Ma. Isabel P. Lanzaderas, Gilbert P. Panimdim, Proceso C. Valleser Jr.*, Int. J. Biosci. 28(2), 7-16, February 2026.

Two years evolution of deltamethrin, malathion and pirimiphos-methyl resistance in Aedes aegypti from urban in peri urban sites of Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Hyacinthe K. Toe*, Moussa W. Guelbeogo, Soumananaba Zongo, Aboubacar Sombie, Athanase Badolo, Int. J. Biosci. 28(2), 1-6, February 2026.

Physicochemical characterization of annatto seeds (Bixa orellana) sold in Ouagadougou and their oils extracted using chemical processes

Mah Alima Esther Traoré*, Adama Lodoun, Pingdwindé Marie Judith Samadoulougou-Kafando, Nestor Beker Dembélé, Kiswendsida Sandrine Léticia Dayamba, Charles Parkouda, Int. J. Biosci. 28(1), 169-178, January 2026.

Inventory of african yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst. ex A. Rich.) Harms) diversity in some Yoruba areas of Benin

Orobiyi Azize*, Faton Manhognon Oscar Euloge, Zongo Élisabeth Aboubié, Sossou Kpèdé Nicodème, Houngbo Marcel, Dossou Pierre Fourier, Ogoudjobi Ladékpo Sylvain, Balogoun Ibouraïman, Dansi Alexandre, Lokoyêyinou Laura Estelle, Int. J. Biosci. 28(1), 161-168, January 2026.

A severe case of human hepatic fascioliasis mimicking an oncological disease in Azerbaijan

Aygun A. Azizova*, Int. J. Biosci. 28(1), 155-160, January 2026.

Combined effect of irrigation frequency and leaf harvesting intensity on soil water content and productivity of baobab (Adansonia digitata) seedlings in vegetable production

Sissou Zakari, Imorou F. Ouorou Barrè, Mouiz W. I. A. Yessoufou*, Colombe E. A. E. Elegbe, Amamath S. Boukari, P. B. Irénikatché Akponikpè, Int. J. Biosci. 28(1), 143-154, January 2026.

Develop sustainable coffee-based farming model using cash crops production

Maribel L. Fernandez, Roje Marie C. Rosqueta*, Diosa G. Alasaas, Boyet C. Pattung, Jaylord Dalapo, Janette Empleo, Int. J. Biosci. 28(1), 134-142, January 2026.

Animal anthrax in northern Tanzania (2015-2025): Epidemiological trends and frontline response capacity

Yohana Michael Kiwone*, Beatus Lyimo, Rowenya Mushi, Joram Buza, Int. J. Biosci. 28(1), 123-133, January 2026.