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

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/02/2020
Views (716)
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

Muscle type and meat quality of local chickens according to preslaughter transport conditions and sex in Benin

Assouan Gabriel Bonou*, Finagnon Josée Bernice Houéssionon, Kocou Aimé Edenakpo, Serge Gbênagnon Ahounou, Chakirath Folakè Arikè Salifou, Issaka Abdou Karim Youssao, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 241-250, December 2025.

Effects of micronutrients and timing of application on the agronomic and yield characteristics of cucumber (Cucumis sativus)

Princess Anne C. Lagcao, Marissa C. Hitalia*, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 214-240, December 2025.

Response of different soybean varieties to phosphorus fertilizer microdosing and rhizobium inoculation in the sub-humid zone of Northern Benin

Pierre G. Tovihoudji*, Kamarou-Dine Seydou, Lionel Zadji, Sissou Zakari, Valerien A. Zinsou, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 201-213, December 2025.

On-farm validation of black soldier fly larvae meal as a sustainable replacement for shrimp meal in rainbow trout diets in the mid hills of Nepal

Ishori Singh Mahato, Krishna Paudel*, Sunita Chand, Anshuka Bhattarai, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 189-200, December 2025.

Insect fauna associated with Cucumis sativus (Cucurbitales: Cucurbitaceae) in Parakou, A cotton-growing area of central Benin

Lionel Zadji*, Mohamed Yaya, Roland Bocco, Prudencia M. Tovignahoua, Abdou-Abou-Bakari Lassissi, Raphael Okounou Toko, Hugues Baimey, Leonard Afouda, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 175-188, December 2025.

First record of two hymenopteran species, Brachymeria excarinata Gahan (Chalcididae) and Pteromalus sp. (Pteromalidae), as hyperparasitoids of Diadegma insulare in Senegal

Babacar Labou*, Etienne Tendeng, Mamadou Diatte, El hadji Sérigne Sylla, Karamoko Diarra, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 167-174, December 2025.

Hepatoprotective and antinociceptive effects of terpinolene in streptozotocin-induced diabetic peripheral neuropathic rats

Ravishankar Sarumathi, Muthukumaran Preethi, Chandrasekaran Sankaranarayanan*, Int. J. Biosci. 27(6), 156-166, December 2025.