Wheat productivity is strongly influenced by nutrient availability and weed competition, both of which affect crop growth, nutrient acquisition, and yield formation. Integrating mineral fertilisers with farmyard manure may improve nutrient availability and utilisation, while effective weed management can reduce competition for essential resources. However, the combined effects of contrasting fertility regimes and weed-management practices on wheat productivity and nutrient acquisition require further evaluation. A field experiment was conducted during the rabi season of 2019–20 to evaluate the effects of integrated fertility and weed management on wheat productivity and nutrient acquisition. The experiment used a 4 × 4 factorial randomised block design with three replications, comprising four fertility regimes and four weed-management practices. Among the fertility treatments, 125% RDF-IF with 25% of the nutrient requirement supplied through farmyard manure (FYM) produced the highest grain yield (47.97 q ha⁻¹), straw yield (71.05 q ha⁻¹), and biological yield (119.01 q ha⁻¹). This treatment also recorded the highest grain N, P, and K uptake of 119.98, 23.15, and 120.48 kg ha⁻¹, respectively. Weed management markedly influenced crop performance. Maintaining the crop weed-free up to 60 days resulted in the highest grain yield (51.28 q ha⁻¹), straw yield (75.54 q ha⁻¹), and biological yield (126.81 q ha⁻¹), together with grain N, P, and K uptake of 127.00, 25.38, and 130.22 kg ha⁻¹, respectively. Nutrient concentrations in grain and straw varied comparatively little across fertility treatments, indicating that the greater nutrient uptake was mainly associated with increased biomass production. Overall, the findings show that combining mineral nutrient supply with FYM and effectively suppressing early-season weed competition can improve wheat productivity and nutrient acquisition under the conditions of this experiment.
H. Mishra, Suneel Kumar, Devesh Pathak· Asian Journal of Soil Scienc...· 0 citations
Carbon farming has moved from a soil-management concept to a prominent climate-policy proposition, yet the agronomic value of building soil organic carbon and the credibility of soil carbon as a durable climate-removal pathway are not identical questions. This critical narrative review evaluates carbon farming as an integrated strategy for soil carbon sequestration, nutrient management and climate resilience. The literature was selected from accessible scholarly indexes and disciplinary databases, supplemented by citation chaining and authoritative source verification, with emphasis on field experiments, long-term trials, meta-analyses, mechanistic soil-carbon studies and work on measurement, reporting and verification. Evidence indicates that practices which increase carbon inputs, reduce avoidable carbon losses and improve biological nutrient cycling can rebuild depleted soil organic carbon, particularly where initial stocks are low and management constraints are substantial. Cover crops, diversified rotations, organic amendments, agroforestry and context-appropriate biochar generally show stronger or more interpretable carbon benefits than simple claims based on reduced tillage alone. Benefits for nutrient retention, aggregation, rooting conditions and yield stability are plausible and often observed, but vary with climate, soil texture and mineralogy, baseline fertility, water regime, residue availability and the duration of management. Carbon gains are finite, reversible and vulnerable to sampling artefacts; transferring manure or crop residues between locations can also create apparent project gains without equivalent net atmospheric removal. Credible carbon farming therefore requires whole-system greenhouse-gas accounting, explicit treatment of additionality and permanence, consistent soil-depth and bulk-density protocols, and conservative crediting. The strongest case for carbon farming is consequently not as a universal substitute for emissions reduction, but as a geographically targeted form of soil restoration that can deliver climate mitigation alongside agronomic and resilience co-benefits when carbon accounting is rigorous and nutrient trade-offs are managed.
Suneel Kumar, Devesh Pathak, Navneet Kumar Mishra et al.· Archives of Current Research...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
