• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Foreword
 Acknowledgement
 Table of Contents
 Summary
 Introduction
 Description of project area
 Results of On-Farm Trial
 Maize cultivation based on the...
 Maize cultivation survey
 Back Cover














Title: Maize on farm research project
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00080818/00001
 Material Information
Title: Maize on farm research project
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology
Publication Date: 1978
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00080818
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 187983283

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Foreword
        Foreword
    Acknowledgement
        Acknowledgement 1
        Acknowledgement 2
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents 1
        Table of Contents 2
    Summary
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Introduction
        Page 4
        Page 5
    Description of project area
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
    Results of On-Farm Trial
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
    Maize cultivation based on the observation of the research staff posted in the district
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
    Maize cultivation survey
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
    Back Cover
        Page 86
Full Text




MAIZE ON-FARM RESEARCH PROJECT 37
(1978 REPORT)


GOVIND BALLABH PANT UNIVERSITY
OF
AGRICULTURE & TECHNOLOGY
PANTNAGAR-263145
INDIA


DECEMBER 1978







MAIZE ON-FARM RESEARCH PROJECT
(1978 REPORT)


GOVIND BALLABH PANT UNIVERSITY
OF
AGRICULTURE & TECHNOLOGY
PANTNAGAR-263145
INDIA


DECEMBER 1978















FOREWORD


Maize occupies an important place in U.P. among kharif crops particularly in the
western region. There is a wide gap between the production levels at experiment
station and on the farmer's fields. Research is naturally being conducted under
optimum conditions which can not be repeated in farmer's fields. Consequently the
results obtained from experiment station have limited significance. There is a strong
need for extending research to farmer's fields for identifying the problems of
immediate importance and direct relevance in evolving a practical package deal
which is efficient and can be replicated.
I am happy to note that Pantnagar maize research group for the first time have
started work in this direction in Moradabad and Bulandshahr districts. I am parti-
cularly happy to note that both biological and social scientists (Agriculture Economist)
have come together in this integrated effort. This report contains the results obtained
during 1978 kharifseason. I trust it will prove useful for the research workers not
only in maize but this multidiciplinary approach and focussing attention to the
average farmer will be extended to other areas as well.

The active participation of CIMMYT experts has been both a source of
encouragement and help.


JANUARY 24, 1979 N.S. MATHUR
PANTNAGAR VICE CHANCELLOR















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


The results reported in the manuscript are based on the ON-FARM MAIZE
TRIALS & SURVEY conducted in Moradabad and Bulandshahr districts. All the
members of maize research group, Pantnagar have contributed in the programme at
one or the other stage. The financial support came from I.C.A.R. financed maize
project and International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre, Mexico and is
gratefully acknowledged.

Sincere gratitute is expressed to the Vice-Chancellor, Director Research, Dean
Agriculture and Head, Department of Agriculture Economics and Director Extension,
G.B. Pant Univ. of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar for their kind help and keen
interest in the project. My sincere thanks to Dr. Joginder Singh, Project Coordina-
tor (Maize), IARI, New Delhi, Projects Officer, Bulandshahr, District Agriculture
Officer, Moradabad and University Extension Staff located in the districts for their
keen interest and valuable suggestions. I am grateful to Dr. Earnest W. Sprague
Director, CIMMYT Maize Programme for his guidance, deep interest and valuable
suggestions. My special thank and gratitute to Drs. Takumi Izuno and Stephen D.
Biggs, CIMMYT Scientists located in India without whose help and encouragement it
would have not been possible to carry out the programme successfully, and to other
CIMMYT staff who visited the programme and gave valuable suggestions.

In the last, I am grateful to all the farmers who cooperated with the
programme.


B.D. AGRAWAL














MAIZE RESEARCH GROUP, PANTNAGAR


Agronomy


DR. B.D. AGRAWAL
DR. I.S. SINGH
MR. PHERU SINGH
MR. M. Z.K. WARS
MR. S.S. VERMA
MR. D. ROY


Entomology
1. DR. V.K. SHARMA
2. DR. K.R. KANAUJIA
3. MR. R.N. CHAUDHRY

Agricultural Economics'
1. MR. D. RAMAH KRISHNAIAH


1. DR. K. P.P. NAIR
2. MR. R.P. SINGH
3. MR. M.K. KAUSHIK


Pathology
DR. SANGAM LAL
MR. S.C. SAXENA


Soil Science

1. DR. T.A. SINGH

Extension
1. DR. CHHIDDA SINGH



Group Coordinator
Dr. B.D. Agrawal


Breeding















CONTENTS


Summary 1
Introduction 4
Description of project area 6
Results of On-Farm Trial 11

Varietal trial 11
Fertilizer trial 16
Verification trial 17
Production plots 19
Cost of production and return 20
Maize cultivation
Moradabad 24
Bulandshahr 25
Maize cultivation survey 28
Tables 33
Appendices I-VI 56






























































































I i










L. ~



































































I`








SUMMARY


Maize is a very important kharif crop in U.P. and 1.4 million hectare is
grown inspite of very low yields. This may be due to the fact that no better alternative
crop is available to farmer which can give more profit and food during that period.
In the future it is unlikely that the maize area will be drastically reduced inspite of
the low grain yields and high risk involved due to the weather in particular excessive
rains and lodging, It is also a fact that the maize yield per unit area has not changed
much during the last 25 years and farmers are still growing local varieties. The yield
levels reported at the experiment station and on the extension demonstrations in
farmers fields of released hybrids and composite varieties were far above the average
yields obtained by farmers with the local variety. This difference may be due to
inefficient transfer of technology from research station to rural areas or because the
technology developed at research station was not fully relevant to the circumstances
of maize farmers.
In 1978 a multi-disciplinary research effort was started by the Pantnagar
maize group in Bulandshahr and Moradabad. These are the two major maize grow-
ing districts in western U.P. The research involved not only the biological scientists
but also the social scientist. They were combined into an integrated ON-FARM
RESEARCH PROGRAMME. The major objective of the research, besides the
transfer of known technology, was to find out the constraints which limit the produc-
tion of maize on farmers fields and to fix.research priorities accordingly.
The on farm research in these districts were conducted in two parts.
1. Research trials in farmers field.
2. Survey.
The survey was included as an important part of the whole programme. It was
a method for generating data, of highlighting practical problems existing in farmer fields
and it contributed to the fixing of research priorities.
Four types of on-farm trials viz. varietal, fertilizer, verification and experimen-
tal production were conducted in both districts. The results of these trials are sum-
marised below. The crop in both the districts was badly affected by excessive rains
and floods.
1. No significant differences between farmer variety and varieties included in
the varietal trial-wvere- o-b-se d--74TI and D 742 gave theb'est' performance in
Bulaindshaahr and Moradabad, respectively. Tarun was the second best variety in both
districts.
2. No response to nitrogen or phosphorrs was observed in the fertilizer trials.
3. In the verification trials, no differences were observed between the farmer
variety and Tarun at all three levels of practice i Fisricts.
4. In Moradabad both farmer variety and Tarun with the extension fertilizer
practice (120 60-40) did not yield higher than our recommended practice (60-30-0).
This indicated that extension recommendation for fertilizer may be too high particu-
larly when the risk involved is high.










5. The yield levels in some of the production plots were three tonnes
(approximately) with the recommended fertility level of (60 kg N, and 30 kg P2Os/h)
indicating that Tarun variety has potential to yield three tonnes per hectare at
recommended fertility levels in farmer's fields.
6. The maturity of Tarun and D 741 is comparable with the farmer's variety
in the two districts.
Two surveys, one before planting the on-farm trials and another during the
crop season, were undertaken to fid out what are the problems aniconstraints facing
maize a~rmers and other aspects of maize cultivation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE ON-STATION RESEARCH
1. A strong research programme should be started at the Cotton Research
Station, Bulandshahr because it more closely represents the major maize area and
conditions of U.P. Uptil now most research has been conducted at the Pantnagar
station.
2. Emphasis should be given on the synchronisation of tasselling and silking
while making selections in order to minimise the problem of barrenness and incomplete
grain filling.
3. Maximum emphasis should be given to the development of varieties which
are of D 741/Tarun maturity as this maturity represent the maturity of the farmer's
variety.
4. Helminthosporium maydis leaf spot is one of the important disease in
this area and due attention should be paid in the future research programme for
developing resistance.
5. Research should be initiated to determine practical ways for minimising
yield losses in cases where conditions give rise to flood etc. by cultural practices.
6. Systematic research should be undertaken to find out the role of F.Y.M.
as source of nitrogen and other elements for the maize crop.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE ON-FARM RESEARCH
1. For both the varietal and fertilizer trials the number of replicatins should
be ede from ourtotree and the plot size increased subsequently from 18 m2
to 24 m.
2. The plant population in these trials should be reduced from 85,000 to
67,000 at the time of planting (Row distance 60 c.m., plant distance 25 c.m.).
3. The 0,N; 0,P; treatment in the fertilizer trials should be deleted as it was not
found practicable in farmer's fields. In place of this another treatment 120 N; 30 P;
may be included.
4. The number of options in the verification trial should be reduced from
six to three, as follows :
Farmer Variety-Farmer Practice
Improved Variety-Farmer Practice









Improved Variety-Recommended Practice
The plot size should be increased from 90 m2 to 120 m2.
5. In the survey farmers reported that they used chemical fertilizer in the
maize crop at the rate of 70 kg N/ha. As based upon verification data it was felt that
this rate was very high and that the actual usage of fertilizer by farmers should be
carefully investigated next year. This data will help in deciding suitable fertilizer
recommendation for the area.

IMPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSION RECOMMENDATION
1. The fertilizer recommendation by the extension department is 120: 60: 40
(NPK) for hybrid and 80 : 60 : 40 (NPK) for composite varieties. During the 1977
kharif season, an economic response up to 120 kg N/ha. was obtained in farmers' fields
in Moradabad (Appendix-lb). However, during 1978 kharif no response of nitrogen
or phosphorus was observed because of extreme adverse weather conditions. This
implies that though a farmer will get an economic response upto 120 kg. N in a good
crop year, he is likely to lose his money on fertilizer in adverse crop year. It is
strongly felt that fertilizer recommendation should be revised downwards to reflect
this risk factor faced by farmers. Soil tests conducted in these districts indicated that
there was no justification for recommending the application of potash.
2. It should be emphasized by the extension department that maize planting
should be done in the first fortnight of June in lines to get the best plant stand and
higher yields. This is especially important as most of the maize farmers in the two
districts have access to irrigation water and can plant maize before the monsoon with
pre-sowing irrigation.
3. In both the districts the damage due to stem borer or any other insect was
very small and even in some of the infested fields the percentage of dead heart was
not more than 1%. Therefore no blanket recommendation for the spraying of thiodan
or any other insecticide should be given.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE SURVEYS
1. A detailed survey on maize storage, utilization and marketing should be
undertaken during the winter months of 1978 (October-March) to investigate
amongst other things, storage losses, causes, and maize utilization patterns.
2. An innovator survey should be undertaken in the 1979 maize season to find
out the package of practices actually used by the best maize farmers in different parts
of U.P. This will help in identifying agronomy practices etc. which have been deve-
loped by farmers for increasing yield under the farmer's conditions.







INTRODUCTION


Maize is an important kharif crop in Uttar Pradesh. It is grown in 1.4
million hectare area, which accounts for 25% of the total maize area in India and
contribute 21% of the total national production of 6 million tonnes. Annual maize
production in U.P: has averaged 1 million tonnes during the last three years with
an average yie!d of 700 kg per hectare (fig. 1). The important maize growing districts
in U.P. which grow maize on more than 50,000 hectares, are Bulandshahr, Meerut,
Aligarh, Mainpuri, Etah, Farrukhabad, Jaunpur, Kheri, Gonda and Bahraich.

Fig. 1
AREA PRODUCTION AND AVERAGE YIELD
UTTAR PRADESH, 1974-75, 1976-77

2.0 AREA Mil. ha.
PRODUCTION Mil. Tons.
YIELD TONE/ha.






I.O







0 Ii
1974-75 1975-76 1976-77
YEARS
In India, intensive efforts on maize research were started in 1957 with the
establishment of the All India Co-ordinated Maize Improvement Project. At present
five research stations, namely, Pantnagar, Kanpur, Bahraich, Almora and Varanasi,
are engaged in maize research in U.P. under the co-ordinated project. During the
initial stages of the maize programme, emphasis was given to the development of
hybrid varieties with high yield potential and maturing in 100-110 days. In 1967, six
composite varieties were also added to the list of improved varieties. However, the
total area under such improved varieties is not more than 10% in the whole
country.
In U.P., the majority of maize farmers grow local varieties which mature in
about 80-90 days. This is in contrast to the released maize varieties which mature in









about 100-110 days. The improved varieties have demonstrated their yield superiority
at the experiment station and in different extension demonstrations over the local
variety under optimum inputs and management conditions. However, the improved
varieties are not extensively grown by the farmers. The reasons may be :
(i) The improved varieties were released on the basis of experiment station
data and extension demonstrations which were conducted under ideal
growing conditions and optimum input supply. The results are not
reproducible in the farmers' field under his growing conditions.
(ii) In releasing a variety all the emphasis was given to yield data. This
resulted in the selection of varieties which were high yielding but late
in maturity as compared to the local varieties. Some of the other
important characters like uniformity of the variety for maturity, plant
height and grain characters and reliability of the performance were com-
pletely over-looked.
In recent years attention has been given to incorporate the above mentioned
characters in the maize varieties being developed in the programme. One such variety,
named "Tarun". has been recommended for general cultivation in U.P.
For a successful research programme it is essential to study the farmers'
conditions and to find out the most important problems and constraints which are
limiting their production. The research programme should then be directed to solve
these problems. Also, to formulate the package of practices for optimum economic
yield, the data under farmer conditions should be taken into consideration, So far,
-our fertilizer recommendation and other agronomic practices are generally based on
experiment station data. Thus the research should not only be conducted on research
stations but should be extended to the farmers' fields. This will help the programme
in two ways:
(i) The information obtained from on-farm research trials will help to
determine the package of practices to be recommended for that area.
(ii) It will help research workers to fix their research priorities and concent-
rate on those problems which are relevant to the farmers.
With these objectives in mind, a small beginning was made in kharif 1977
in Moradabad district where three clusters of maize on-farm trials were conducted.
Each cluster consisted of varietal, fertilizer and insecticide trials (appendix-Ia,b,c).
Based on the experience gained in Moradabad, a comprehensive on-farm research
programme was under taken during the 1978 kharif season in two districts of U.P.,
namely, Moradabad and Bulandshahr.







DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT-AREA


Both Moradabad and Bulandshahr districts are part of the Indo-gangetic
plains. The location of the two districts in U.P. is given in fig. 2. The total
maize area in Bulandshahr is around 100,000 hectares and is the main crop in the
rainy season. In Moradabad the total maize area is around 30,000 hectares. (Fig. 3).
Besides, maize the other important rainy season crops in this district are paddy and
mentha.
I 1


LOCATIONS


Fig.2
OF MORADABAD & BULANDSHAHR
DISTRICTS IN U.P.


MAIZE
RESEARCH STATIONS
PANTNAGAR
KANPUR
BAHRAICH
VARANASI
ALMORA


Po~.7U


Climate
Both districts have a sub-tropical monsoon climate. The monsoon rains
start around the third week of June and bulk of the rainfall comes in July and August.


I












The rainfall pattern in these two districts during the maize growing months is given
in fig. 4 a,b,c. During the 1978 kharif season, the rainfall pattern was very unusual
and both districts experienced heavy rains, accompanied by floods throughout the
season. Fig. 5 shows the weekly distribution of rainfall in the two districts during the
1978 kharif season. It may be noted that heavy rains occurred during the flowering
and grain filling periods in both districts. To this may be ascribed the poor yield
obtained.
Fig. 3
DISTRIBUTION OF MAIZE AREA


100,000


0

W

w 50,000
N


SBULANDSHAHR
MORADABAD


1976


1977


1978


YEARS


Soils
Both districts have light soils generally classified as a loam to sandy loam.
Table 1 and 2 give the soil analysis of the fields where on-farm trials were conducted
in Bulandshahr and Moradabad districts, respectively.

Holding sizes and other information
Table 3 reveals the percentage of different size of holdings in the western
region which includes both Moradabad and Bulandshahr. It may be noted that 88%
of the holdings are of 3 hectares size and below. Table 4 & 5 give the composition


I 1










8

of the rural population in the two districts. It may also be observed that in Morada-
bad the percentage of cultivators is higher (78%) than in Bulandshahr (61%).

Fig. 4 a Fig. 4 b
MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF
RAINFALL BULANDSHAHR RAINFALL MORADABAD
700 700

600- 600 ...... 1975
1976 1976
--- 1977 --- 1977
500. 1978 500 -__ 97




00. 200
_ / \\

00 / \ -\00 .oo
I "-^ \ .----""

1\ \0
00200 O ... -------..-.....ULAND\HAM




JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBE1 JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER

Fig. 4 c
TOTAL RAINFALL
1300

/
]1000


4 /
< / ---MORADABAD
50 / ---BULANDSHAHR





0 ---
1976 1977 1978 Upt Sept.
YEARS

Selection of the Farmers

A team of maize workers visited the two districts during the last week of May,
1978 and contacted the farmers. Each farmer was interviewed (survey questionnaire
in Appendix-II) and on the basis of the interview, the farmers were finally selected
for conducting on-farm trials. Following points were taken into consideration during
the selection :






9
(i) Only those farmers who had grown the maize in preceding years were
selected.
(ii) The fields of such selected farmers were visited and it was ensured that
maize could be grown in that field from the past history of that plot.
(iii) Care was taken to include both big and small farmers in the selected
list.
(iv) It was also ensured that the on-farm trials were distributed uniformly
throughout the maize growing areas in the district.
Fig. 5
RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION, 1978 KHARIF
300
,I 0
1 t BULADSHAHR
S o _--- MORADABAD
EII u

1 1i
S200 I I



< I I
SII

lm/ IA \ \
100 co \ /A,



S1 At

*v U ';Y


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 WEEKS
0



V-


0 1 II 42 IS 14 IS










Limitations
It was felt that selection of farmers was started too late this year and that, as
a result, a number of plots which were not ideal for maize cultivation were selected.
At the time of selection, it was not possible to judge the plot properly as the plots
were dried and no crop was standing. It was therefore decided to select the fields
and the farmers during the crop season itself for conducting on-farm trials in 1979
and a list of such farmers has been prepared for each district. These farmers will be
contacted again well in advance of the next maize growing season. It was also felt that
the sowing of on-farm trials this year started too late by atleast 7-10 days. With
above procedure it will be possible to start sowing well in time during the next year.
Organization
One research staff* in each district was deputed from Maize Research
Group, Pantnagar. They were provided with a motor-cycle for day to day supervision
of the trials. They were helped by the maize group during planting and harvesting of
the trials. Also trials were frequently visited by the maize team during the crop
season. However, the over-all responsibility for conducting these trials was given to
the person deputed in each district. It was felt that one person in each district was
able to supervise the trials efficiently.
*Bulandshahr: MR. S.S. VERMA
Moradabad : MR. S.C: SAXENA








RESULTS OF ON-FARM TRIALS


Four different types of trials were conducted on the farmers fields during
kharif 1978.
1. Varietal trial
2. Fertilizer trial
3. Verification trial
4. Production trial
Fig. 6 and 7 show the distribution of these trials in the two districts
(Table 6, 7).
The objective, experimental design, description of treatments and plot size
etc. of each trial is given in Appendix-Ill.

VARIETAL TRIAL
Bulandshahr
Five varietal trials were planted in the district. Out of these, only three were 'i '
harvested. Two trials were washed out by continuous rains and water logging condi-
tions. The following points emerged from the varietal trial :
(1) Farmer's yvaiety ranked highestin. yield.at all the three locations. On the e
average it gave 31% higher yield than thebest recommended
variety included in the trial. However, the difference between the two
varieties was not significant at any location (Table 8).
(ii) D 741, on the average yielded 18% more than Tarun and D 743.
(iii) D 765 and Pool 5 yielded significantly less than the farmer variety.
(iv) The weather conditions during the crop season were not very good and
the crop suffered badly from excess water at all three locations, which is
reflected in the general yield levels of the trial. It is apparent that under
such adverse conditions varieties included in the trials could not show
their yield potential.
(v) Comparing the moisture percentage at harvest and days to 50% silking,
it was observed that Tarun and D741 were 1-3 days later in maturity as
compared with farmer variety. D 743 took the maximum number of days
to 50% silk. (< /
Moradabad "
Only two trials out of five trials planted in this district were harvested. The
remaining three trials failed due to excess water and water logging conditions. Follow-
ing points emerged :
(i) No sinificant__difer~e&wereobserved between farmer variety and
D 742, D 743and Tarun. At one location, plant stand of D-7422was
only 60% of that of the farmer variety and when the yields were adjusted










12


forlant stand, theield of D 742 was higher than the farmer variety
(Table

(ii) On an average the Farmer variety yielded 18% more than D 742 and
Tarun.

Fig.6
LOCATIONS OF ON-FARM TRIALS

DISTRICT MORADABAD, 1978 KHARIF


INDEX
DISTRICT HEAD QUARTER
TEMSILS,
VILLAGE
RAILWAY LINt
ROADS
RIVER
DISTRICT OUNIRY
TENSUL BOUNDARY


TRIALS
VARIETAL
FERTILIZER
VERIFICATION
PRODUCTION


_FAHIMt--













(iii) D 741 which yielded 18% more than Tarun at Bulandshahr, yielded 11%
less than Tarun in Moradabad.
(iv) Comparing the moisture percentage at harvest and days to 50% silking
it was observed that at one location where farmer used the local variety,
there was no difference in maurity between farmer variety, Tarun and
D 741. However, D 742 took three days more to flower than the farmer
variety. At another location where farmer used Vijay as his own variety,
Tarun and D 741 took five days less to reach the 50% silking stage.


Fig.7

LOCATIONS OF ON-FARM TRIALS,
DISTRICT BULANDSHAHR, 1978 KHARIF


GURGAON
/"




INDEX
o DISTRICT HEAD OUARTEft
MAIN TOWNS
VILLAGE
4Inu RAILWAY LINE
s= ROADS
s RIVER
--. DISTRICT BOUNDARY
-.-. TEHSIL BOUNDARY
+ TEHSILS


TRIALS
X VARIETAL
* FERTILIZER
A VERIFICATION
* PRODUCTION


FAHIM 78j


Conclusions

1. The growing conditions both in Moradabad and Bulandshahr were not










favourable for the good maize crop and the varieties included in the trial could not
show their yield potential.
2. Under such adverse conditions no significant differences between farmer
variety and other varieties included in tne trial were observed.
3. In Bulandshahr D 741 gave the best performance. However, in Moradabad
D 742, a white flint variety, proved the best yielder. Tarun was the second best
variety at both locations.
4. The maturity of both D 741 and Tarun was comparable to that of the
farmer variety.
5. At all locations, the coefficient of variation was very high. This indicates
high plot to plot variation.
6. At the time of planting we aimed at the plant population 87,000 plants per
hectare (approximately). However, at harvest time the plant stand at Bulandshahr
ranged from 52-60% whereas in Moradabad the range was 28-63%.
7. Covariance analysis and adjustment for plant stand was done for all the
trials conducted in both districts. Comparison between adjusted yield data and
unadjusted yield data indicated that adjustment for plant stand did not change the
ranking of varieties included in the trial. Therefore, it was not necessary to adjust for
plant stand in analysing the data.

COMPARISON BETWEEN YIELD LEVELS OF DIFFERENT VARIETIES
AMONG VARIETAL TRIALS CONDUCTED ON FARMERS FIELD
AND TWO RESEARCH STATIONS PANTNAGAR AND
BULANDSHAHR

The varieties included in the on-farm varietal trials were tested at Crop
Research Centre, Pantnagar and Cotton Reserch Station, Bulandshahr in two different
trials. The trials at Bulandshahr station were planted ten days earlier than the ear-
liest planted on-farm trial. The plant stand was perfect but the crop growth was
affected by continuous rains and a high water table. The trials at Pantnagar were
planted on 20th July (one month later than the normal planting time). The general
growth of the crop was good. However, due to heavy rains immediately after planting
the stand was low and patchy. Table 10 gives the comparative performance of varie-
ties in different trials at different locations.

Conclusions
1. The average yields obtained on the farmers' field in the two districts were
lower than the yields obtained at the research stations. The reduction was minimum
with the farmers' variety (15%) followed by D 741 (18%) and was maximum in
D 765 (49%). This indicated that the farmer variety was more stable followed by
D 741.
2. D 765, the earliest maturing variety in the trial gave a very good perfor-
mance at Bulandshahr Station. However, in the farmers' field it was the lowest
yielding variety both in Bulandshahr and Moradabad.
3. Performance of D 741 at Bulandshahr station was inferior to D 765 and
Tarun. However, in the farmers' fields, it yielded higher than either.








4. The performance of varieties in Moradabad were similar to their perfor-
mance at Pantnagar ,in the advance trial except for the farmer variety. The two
highest yielding varieties, namely, D 742 and Tarun, in the advance trial were also
the two highest yielding varieties in Moradabad. The poor performance of the local
variety at Pantnagar may be attributed to its susceptibility to brown stripe downy
mildew. The local was also the earliest maturing variety in the advance trial.
5. From this year's data, it was not possible to establish any definite relation-
ship between the data obtained at the research stations and in the farmers' fields. It
may be kept in mind that the varietal trials on the farmers' field had suffered from
adverse weather conditions resulting in very high coefficient of variation. It will require
more data from trials grown urder better condition in order to gauge this relation-
ship.

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH
1. Emphasis should be placed on developing varieties of Tarun/D 741
maturity. Varieties earlier than Tarun may not have any advantage as the
farmer variety is not any earlier. Moreover if one has to sacrifice yield to obtain
reduced maturity, earlier maturity may not be acceptable to the farmers. Increasing
maturity over Tarun/D 741 has not shown any yield advantage in the farmers'
fields.
2. Due to adverse growing conditions it was observed that the gap between
tasseling and silking was more. In many places, pollen shedding was over when silks
were still emerging. This lead to barrenness or incomplete filling of grain. Therefore,
emphasis should be given to synchronization of tasseling and silklng in our selection
programme.
3. A plant population of 50-60 thousands may be considered optimum in the
farmers field under favourable crop management.
4. Variation in maturity within variety was high. It was more apparent this
year as the growing conditions were not good. More emphasis should be given to
develop varieties which are uniform in maturity and plant height.
5. A comprehensive varietal improvement programme should be started at
Cotton Research Station, Bulandshahr to develop varieties suitable for the region.
6. Emphasis should be given to develop varieties with resistance to H. maydis
as it was found to be an important disease.







FERTILIZER TRIAL


Out of 10 fertilizer trials planted, only 5 were harvested in both the districts.
The general growth of the crop was poor and the yield levels obtained were low due
to heavy rains during the crop season. Following were the results :

Bulandshahr
On the basis of average of three locations, no response of nitrogen or-phos-
phorus was observed. However, at one location 60-30leve yielded significantly higher
thatf6-0 level showing significant response to phosphorous. Similarly, at another-
location 90-0 treatment yielded significantly higher over 0-0. On the perusal of plant
stand data, it was observed that both the treatments had higher plant stand and signi-
ficant differences may be attributed to plant stand (Table 11).
Similar results were obtained from two fertilizer trials harvested from Morada-
bad (Table 12).
Conclusions
1. Under adverse weather conditions no response to nitrogen or phosphorus
was observed at all the five locations. Under these conditions farmer is justified to
delay his investment on fertilizer till he is assured fairly good maize crop.
2. No relationship between extractable phosphorus, organic carbon, soil
texture and pH could be established with the response to nitrogen and phosphorus
applied.
Implications
1. Both at Bulandahahr and Moradabad farm yard manure (FYM) is exten-
sively applied in the field either before maize or preceding rabi crop. The quantity
of FYM applied was about 13 tonnes per hectare. Research should be initiated to find
out the quantity of nitrogen and phosphorus available to maize crop by FYM.
2. Treatment 0-0 may be deleted from the trial because it is not possible
to maintain it in the farmer's fields. It was observed that farmers' tendency was to
put some fertilizer in this treatment without our knowledge. It is also not justified
when we know that farmers are putting about 70kg nitrogen per hectare in his own
maize crop.







VERIFICATION TRIALS


Bulandshahr
Out of 9 verification trials planted only 4 were harvested. Following are the
conclusions :
1. There was no difference in farmer variety and Tarun at all the three levels
of practices. Whatever the differences noted may be attributed to the difference in
plant population. Due to poor weather condition the genetic potential of Tarun variety
was not expressed (Table-13).
2. The farmer variety with farmer practice consistently gave lower plant stand
as compared to other practices. However, such relationship was not apparent in Tarun
variety.
3. Since farmer-practice include 74 kg.N/ha, there should not be any diffe-
rence between farmer practice and intermediate practice. However, farmer variety
with intermediate practice gave 53% higher yield than farmer variety with farmer
practice. A portion of this difference may be due to difference in plant population
where intermediate practice had 33% higher plant stand. With Tarun variety there was
no difference between farmer practice and intermediate practice. Both farmer variety
and Tarun with recommended practice gave 14% higher yield over intermediate
practice showing phosphorus response. However, in the Tarun variety, recommended
practice had 19% higher plant stand.
4. No difference was observed between the recommended practice and exten-
sion practice with farmer variety. However, in Tarun the extension practice gave 29%
higher yield over recommended practice indicating that the variety has potential to
respon i at higher level of fertility.
5. Farmer variety had 2% lower moisture at harvest as compared to Tarun
indicating that the farmer variety was 2-3 days earlier than Tarun.
6. The farmer variety with farmer practice may give an idea of average yield
the farmers are getting in the district. This year, due to adverse weather conditions,
farmer variety with farmer practice yielded only 11 quintals/ha.

Moradabad
Out of 11 trials planted, only five could be harvested. Following are the ("
conclusions:
1. Farmer variety with farmer practice gave 16% higher yield as compared to
Tarun with farmer practice (Table-14).
2. At the other two levels of practices there was no difference between farmer
variety and Tarun.
3. Since the farmer practices included line sowing by dibling, no difference in
plant population was observed between farmer practice and other practices except at
one location where planting was done behind the plough and the plant population
here was 76% higher than other practices.









4. Both farmer variety and Tarun yielded higher at intermediate practice as
compared to farmer-practice. The increase was 30% in case of Tarun and 14% in case
of farmer variety. However, the superiority of intermediate practice over farmer
practice can't be explained as the farmer practice included 74 kg N/ha.
5. Recommended practice gave 18% and 24% higher yield over intermediate
practice in farmer variety and Tarun, respectively. It indicated the response of phos-
phorus which was more apparent in Tarun than in farmer variety.
6. The economic response of N and P was not calculated as the yield levels
obtained were considered very low due to adverse weather conditions.
7. In both farmer variety and Tarun extension practice did not yield higher
over recommended practice. This indicated that extention recommendation of 120
N : 60 P : 40 K has no advantage particularly when the yield levels are low and risks
involved high.
8. At Moradabad farmer variety with farmer practice gave 16 quintals/ha
which may give an idea of the average yield obtained by the farmer this year.
Implications
1. The number of treatments in the verification trial may be reduced from
6 to 3 as follows :
Farmer variety+farmer practice.
Recommended variety+farmer practice.
Recommended variety+recommended practice.
2. It may be possible to increase the plot size of each treatment from 90m2
to 120m2 (20 rows x 10m x 0.60m) if the number of treatments are reduced.
3. If it is assumed that the farmer is applying 74kg N/ha as indicated by him,
the fertility level in recommended practice may be increased from 60-30 to 90-30.
However, this point may be further investigated and the actual amount of nitrogen
applied by the farmer may be found.









PRODUCTION PLOTS


Bulandshahr 7 C0
In total 12 production plots were planted out of which only 9 could be har- ,
vested.
Conclusions
1. The yield of Tarun variety with 60-30 fertility level in the production plot
ranged from 405 kg to 2946 kg/ha with the average of 1436 kg/ha (Table 15).
2. The plant population in the production plots ranged from 12,000 to 55,000
plants per hectare with the average of 38,000 plants/ha.
3. The yield in two production plots was 4 and 6 quintals per hectare which
was due to very poor plant stand.
4. At one location the yield level was 29.5 quintals per hectare and at other
location where plant population was 20% lower than the first plot, the yield level was
22 quintals/ha. This indicates that the variety has potential to give 3 tonnes yield
per hectare at the recommended fertility level (60-30) if the growing conditions are
favourable.
5. On an average Tarun variety took 50 days for 50% silking and 85 days
from planting to harvesting indicating that the maturity of this variety was compar-
able with farmer variety.
6. The production plots were planted in between 16 June to 23rd July. Simi-
larly the harvesting date ranged from 9 Sep. to 29 September.
7. The size of production plots varied from 342m2 to 3806 m2 with the
average of 2378 m2.
Moradabad
Out of 11 production plots planted only 6 were harvested.
Conclusions
1. The yield of Tarun in production plots ranged from 295 kg to 2116 kg/
ha with average of 1262 kg/ha (Table 16).
2. The plant population ranged from 24,000 to 70,000 with the average of
50,000 plants/ha.
3. At one location very lower yield of 295 kg/ha was obtained, though the
plant population was 60,000/ha. The maize crop had badly suffered due to water
logging conditions resulting in very high percentage of barren plants. Similar explana-
tions may be given for another location where yield level was 793 kg per hectare.
4. While comparing location 4 and 5 belonging to the same village, it was
noted that at location 4, though the plant population was very low (24,000 per
hectare), the yield levels were comparable with location 5 (plant population 59,000).
It Indicates that low plant populations within a particular limit may not affect
yield adversely particularly when the yield levels are low.











5. The average days to 50% silking and days to harvest was 59 and 88 days,
respectively which was comparable with local variety.

6. Barrenness in the production plot ranged from 1% to 64%. However, no
relationship was observed between the barrenness in those plots which were affected
by water logging irrespective of plant population.
7. The average plot size of production plot was 2593m2, with the range of
720 m2 to 3044m2.
8. The planting date ranged from 14th June to 19th June whereas harvesting
date ranged from 11th September to 19th September.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN VARIETAL, FERTILIZER, VERIFICATION
AND PRODUCTION PLOTS

1. In Bulandshahr, Tarun yielded 5% lower in verification trials as compared
to yield obtained in varietal trial. The reduction in case of farmer variety was 16%
(Table 10).
2. In Moradabad the yield levels in verification trials were higher than
varietal trial for both Tarun and farmer variety. However, it may be mentioned that
the varietal trial yield data were the average of two locations out of which one location
had very poor yield levels.

3. While comparing the yield levels of Tarun in varietal, verification and
production plots, it was observed that the yield in production plots was 18% lower
than varietal trial at Bulandshahr, whereas in Moradabad the reduction was 23%.
The reduction from verification to production plot was 13 and 45% in Bulandshahr
and Moradabad, respectively. The reduction in yield from varietal to verification to
production plot may be attributed to difference in plot size in the three trials.

COST OF PRODUCTION AND RETURN FROM MAIZE BASED ON
PRODUCTION PLOTS DATA

Bulandshahr
In Bulandshahr farmers were classified as owner cultivater and share cropper.
In the later system the landowner plant the maize crop in the field and then give it to
the share cropper on the basis of 3/4 and 1/4 of the total produce to the farmer and
share cropper, respectively. Share cropper provides all the labour input involved dur-
ing the crop season. Land owner provides all the other inputs like fertilizer and
water.

Table 17 gives the detail breakdown of inputs and output for the land owner
and share cropper, respectively.
The data are based on the average of two farmers in each group. The yield
figures shown are the actual maize harvested by the farmers. The labour cost were
computed in both the groups at the rate of Rs. 6 per day as if it was hired from
outside.










Conclusions
1. Input Cost
A. Labour: This is a major input for maize production. In both the group,
labour accounts for about 60% of the total variable cost. In the first group farmer
himself cultivates the crop and the labour come from his own family. In the second
group share cropper provides all the labour required.
B. Fertilizer accounts for 23% and 27% of the total variable cost for group I
and group II, respectively. The difference was due to total variable cost in the two
groups.
C. Land preparation, Seed and Water : Seed account for 6-7% of total variable
cost assuming that it was purchased from the market. However, if the farmer uses
his owen seed, the cost of this input will be still lower (3-4%). Land preparation
accounts for 5-6% of the the total variable cost which may be considered as low as
compared to other crops like wheat and paddy. Water is generally not required during
the maize season except for pre-sowing irrigation and accounts for 2-6% of the total
variable cost.
It is very clear from the table that labour and fertilizer are the two main
components and account for 83-85% of the total variable cost. The total variable
cost for growing one acre maize was Rs. 491 and Rs. 571, in the case of share-
cropper and owner farmer, respectivley. Difference in labour input was the main
factor responsible for this difference.
2. Incomeloutput
The net income per acre from maize was Rs. 373.83 and Rs. 432.80 in group
I and II, respectively. However in group I, if the labour cost is not taken into account
as it was provided by the farmers family the net profit was Rs. 715.80. In group II,
the share cropper got Rs. 231.00 as his share from the net gross profits of Rs. 924.00.
However, his profit was 18% less as compared to amount of labour he had put with
the crop.
It is apparent from the comparison of the two groups that if the farmer is
small and can meet labour requirement by his family he is not likely to give his crop
on share basis. But if the farmer is not able to manage the labour from his family
because of large area planted or small family size, he would give his crop on share
basis.. The farmer also knows that labour input cost is high and he will have to hire
labour which sometime may not be available when required. He also passes the risk
to the share cropper, who provides the major input labour, in case the crop fails, as
well as ensure the supply of labour inputs. On the other hand the share cropper is
interested to grow the crop as it provides him and his family assured employment for
three months for which he is willing to take the risk.
Moradabad
In Moradabad the cost of cultivation was calculated in three production
plots grown by three farmers having different holding sizes. The holding size varied
from 4 acres to 10 acres.
Table 18 gives detail breakdown of inputs and outputs for the three farmers.
The yield figures shown in the table are the actual grain yield harvested by the farmer.










The labour cost computed at the prevailing rates of Rs. 6.00 per day for both family
as well as hired labour.
Conclusions
1. Input Cost
A. Labour : This constitutes the major input of the total variable cost and
ranges from 56 to 65 percent. In production plot I, out of the total 59% labour input,
13% was provided by farmer family and 46% was hired from outside. In case of
production plot II where the holding size was only 4 acre, out of the 65% of labour
input, 60% was provided by the farmer family and only 5% was hired from outside.
In production plot III were holding was some what large i.e. 10 acres, out of 56%
labour input, 27% was provided by family and 29% was hired from outside.
B. Fertilizer : Fertilizer constitutes 24-28% of the total variable cost. The
amount of fertilizer applied was same in all the three cases. The difference was
because of total variable cost.
C. Land preparation, seed and water : Seed accounts for 6-7% of total variable
cost assuming that it was purchased from the market. However, if the farmers' own
seeds is used the cost of this input will still be lower. Land preparation accounts for
5-6% of the total variable cost. No expenditure on water was incurred except in
one case, where it accounted for 7% of the total variable cost, indicating that it is
not important input for maize except for pre-sowing irrigation.
The total variable cost involved in growing one acre maize ranged from Rs.
479 to 573. Labour cost was largely responsible for this difference.
2. Output
The net income per acre from maize was calculated as Rs. 150, 318 and 243
for production plot 1, II and III, respectively. The difference in total income was
mainly due to difference in the yield levels obtained in the three plots.
In production plot I where the farmer hired labour for most of the field
operation, paid 35% of the gross income to the labours. In plot II, where most of
the field work was done by family labour, the net income without computing for
family labour was as high as Rs. 654. In production plot III, where 50% of the total
labour requirement was met by family labour and 50% were hired, the farmer paid
only 20% of the gross income for the hired labourers.
COMPARISON OF COST OF PRODUCTION IN BULANDSHAHR AND
MORADABAD DISTRICTS
1. The total variable cost was same in both the districts for growing one acre
of maize, which comes to Rs. 527.
2. The labour was largest input in both the district which accounted for 60%
of the total variable cost.
3. Fertilizer made the second largest input and accounted for 25% of total
variable cost in both the districts.
4. In Bulandshahr share-cropping in maize was found to be a common
practice. In Moradabad hired labourers were used whenever required. It implies
that labourers are easily available in Moradabad throughout the maize crop season.









COST OF PRODUCTION AND RETURN FROM MAIZE BASED ON
DATA COLLECTED FROM FARMERS FIELD
Five farmers in each district were selected in the same village where the
on-farm trials were conducted. The objectives were : (i) to collect information on
the cultivation practices used by the farmers and input applied; and (ii) based on
the above information to compute the cost of cultivation and compare it with
the production plot. The different field operation done and the inputs applied by
these farmers were recorded from time to time.
Due to failure of the crop the information could be collected only from three
farmers in Bulandshahr and one farmer in Moradabad and is summarised in
Table 19.
Conclusions
(i) The total cost of cultivation in both the districts was almost same and
was comparable with the production plot.
(ii) The major inputs were labourers and fertilizers which accounted for
86-88% of total variable cost.
(iii) The actual grain yield harvested by the farmers was 20 quintals per
hectare.
(iv) Other informations were similar to that obtained in the production plots.







MAIZE CULTIVATION BASED ON THE OBSERVATION OF THE RESEARCH
STAFF POSTED IN THE DISTRICT



I. MORADABAD

A. General
1. Maize is grown in about 30,000 hectares during kharifseason. The area
during kharif 1978 was estimated to be 33,000 ha.
2. The maize area has been reduced in the last 7-8 years. Some of the maize
area has been replaced by Mentha.
3. Seventy percent of maize aret is concentrated in Bilari, Sambhal and
Hussainpur tehsils.
4. More than ninety five percent area is planted by local variety which
matures in about 80-85 days.
5. Only four percent of the total area is planted with Ganga safed-2 hybrid.
6 Farmers have preference for white maize.
7. Majority of the farmers have irrigation sources (tubewells) or can buy
water from neighboring farmers.
B. Package of Practices
Rotation: Maize-wheat is the common rotation followed. Other rotations
followed by the farmers are maize-potato-wheat,
Land preparation: The field is prepared with two ploughing by bullocks followed
by one planking.
Date of planting : Maize is planted in the first fortnight of June with pre-
sowing irrigation. Normally one irrigation is required after planting before the onset
of monsoon.
Planting method and seed rate : Two common methods are : (i) Dibbling with
khurpi in lines with the help of marked rope (used when hybrid is planted) and (ii)
behind the plough. Broadcasting method is also used in certain areas. Seed rate used
is 16 kg per hectare.
Fertilizers: FYM is frequently used by maize cultivators. The common rate is
12 tonnes per hectare costing about Rs. 120/-. No chemical fertilizer is used as basal
application except in hybrid maize where farmer uses 105 kg DAP per hectare.
First top-dressing of urea is done after 15 days of sowing at the rate of 36 kg
nitrogen per hectare (80 kg urea). The fertilizer is placed near the plants. The second
top-dressing is done after 40 days of planting at the same rate.
Weedings: Two hand weedings by khurpi is the common practice. First weed-
ing is done after 15 days of planting prior to top-dressing. The second weeding is done
before 2nd top-dressing. The average number of persons required for first weeding is










20-25 man days per hectare whereas for second weeding only 15-20 man days/ha are
required.
Plant protection measures : No weedicide or insecticide is used by the
farmers. Very low incidence of stem borer attack (below 5%) has been observed in the
field inspite of early planting.
Plant population : Following is the plant population farmers have at the time
of harvesting with different sowing methods :
1. Dibbling with khurpi : 50-55,000 plants/ha.
2. Behind plough/broad casting method : 30-35,000 plants/ha.
Weak plants are thinned when the crop is one month old and used as fodder.
Bird-Watching : Bird-scaring is a problem, as no other crop is ready when
the maize matures. Usually one person is needed for twenty days for this purpose.
Harvesting: Harvesting starts when the husk cover becomes brown in
appearance. The common practice is either to cut whole plant or remove the ears
from the plants followed by de-husking.
The left-over plants are used for fodder. Husk, cob and dry plants are used
as fuel. 15 persons are required to harvest one hectare of maize.
Shelling: The cobs are dried in the sun for one week and are shelled by
sticks. On an average, 1 man-day is required to shell one quintal maize grain. The
un-shelled ears are saved for seed for next year planting.
Yield : Average yield reported by the farmers was 15-20 quintals per hectare.
This was well above the average yield reported for the district by the state statistical
department.
Storage, utilization and marketing : The farmers store enough quantity of maize
to meet his family requirements. Maize is consumed in the form of chapati during
whole winter season (Oct. to March).
The surplus maize is sold in the local market or is used for paying wages to
hired labourers. If the farmer is not able to produce enough maize for'his own needs
he buys it from the market.

II. BULANDSHAHR

A. General
1. Maize is an important kharifcrop in Bulandshahr district.
2. The farmers grow local mainly yellow varieties. However in some areas
white maize is also grown.
3. In most of the cases local variety is KT 41 or a selection from KT 41,
maturing in about 85 days.
4. The maize area in the district is almost constant during the last three years
(approx. 100,000 ha). However, during this year due to continuous rain at the time of
planting less area under maize was expected to be planted.










5. The majority of the farmers have irrigation sources (tubewell is most
common) or can buy water from neighboring farmers.
6. The farmers have milch animals providing good source of FYM.
7. The maize is mainly grown for grain. However, some farmers near the town
grow maize for green cobs and sell the green fodder after harvesting the cobs.
8. Share-cropping is very common with maize cultivation. The share-cropper
provides all the labour input for raising the crop after it is planted by land-owner.
The share-cropper gets one-fourth of the total produce. Seed, fertilizer and water are
provided by the land owner.
9. Maize is considered as less exhaustive crop than jowar and bajra. Farmar
feels that much better crop of potato and wheat is grown after maize than after jowar
or bajra.
B. Package of Practices
Rotation : Maize-wheat is common rotation followed in the district. Other
rotation followed by the farmer is maize-potato-wheat.
Land preparation : After wheat harvesting, the field is ploughed with bullock
drawn implements. Two ploughing and one planking is used for land preparation.
Date of planting : Maize is planted in first fortnight of June with pre-sowing
irrigation. However, few farmers plant maize after first monsoon showers.
Planting method and seed rate : Sowing behind deshi plough followed by plan-
king is common planting method. However, many farmers still plant maize by broad-
casting method. Seed rate used is 16 kg per hectare.
Fertilizers: No chemical fertilizer.is used at the planting time. However. due
to higher density of animals, FYM is commonly put in the field before maize or
before wheat crop. It is estimated that many farmers use about fifteen tonnes of FYM
per hectare every year or every alternate year depending upon the availability of the
manure
First top-dressing of urea is done after 10 to 15 days of planting at the rate
of 36. kg nitrogen per hectare (80 kg urea per hectare) Second top-dressing is done
after 35-40 days of planting at the same rate.
Weeding : Two weedings by khurpi are the common practice. Thinning is
done at the time of first weeding. Weeding is also dependent upon the rains and
many times only one weeding is possible because of continuous rains and the crop
suffers due to weeds.
Irrigation : Pre-sowing irrigation is most common. If the rain does not come
after germination, second irrigation is provided. After commencement of monsoon,
irrigation is generally not needed.
Plant protection measures : No weedicide or insecticide is used by the maize
farmers. In spite of early planting a very low percentage of stem borer attack has
been observed in the field (below 5%).
Plant population : With 16 kg per hectare seed rate farmers normally plant
50-60 thousands seeds per hectare. A very small number of plants is removed at first
thinning. At the time of flowering (after 45-50 days of planting) second thinning is









done. At this time, Farmer cuts all the weak plants which are not likely to bear a
cob. These cut plants are used as green fodder and fed to the animals. It has been
observed that at the time of harvesting about 35-40 thousand plants per hectare are
left.
Bird watching: Bird watching is required for 15-20 days. However, since
maize is grown in large area with the local variety maturing at the same time, bird
problem is not very serious.
Harvesting : Harvesting starts as soon as the husk cover in the plants becomes
brown. The common practice is to cut the whole plants and tie them into small
bundles and leave for drying. Picking of the cobs is done after two-three days of
harvesting. The moisture percentage in the grain at the time of harvesting is approxi-
mately 27 to 30 percent.
Shelling : The cobs are dried in the sun for about a week and then shelled by
beating the cobs with sticks. Very few farmers use power seller. The shelled grain
is dried again for a few days before storage.
Yield: Average grain yield reported by the farmers vary from 15 to 20
quintals per hectare. However, some farmers reported yield as high as 25 quintal per
hectare. The left over stalk is kept and used as dry fodder. A small portion of stalk
is also used as fuel in some cases.
Storage, utilization and marketing : Most of the farmers store sufficient maize
for home consumption. The surplus is disposed of in the market immediately after
harvesting. The most important method of maize storage is in the big earthen vessels.
No insecticide is used to protect the maize from stored grain pests.
Most of the maize produced is consumed by the farmer's family. Maize forms
the staple food during the winter season (October-March). The surplus grain is sold to
the neighboring farmers in that village or in the market.
During last week of September, 1978 rates in the Hapur Grain Market for
yellow and white maize were Rs. 105-109 and Rs. 103-107 per quintal, respectively.
This indicates slight preference for yellow maize over white. The maize pieces
reported in August of this year were Rs. 120 per quintal.








MAIZE CULTIVATION SURVEY


The survey was conducted in September 1978 with the main objective of
gaining insights into the actual agronomic practices and other farm circumstances
under which a cultivator grows his maize crop. The survey was undertaken in the two
districts-Bulandshahr and Moradabad-where the maize on-farm research is being
conducted. No farmer who is connected with on-farm trials was considered for this
special purpose survey. The details of the questionnaire used in this survey appear in
Appendix IV.
Sampling : Initially, it was proposed to select 12 maize growing villages at
random in each district and to interview 4 farmers from each village randomly by the
interviewer. But, because of the non-availability of the required number of maize
growing farmer for interview in some villages, and the unusual flood situation this
year, 47 and 40 farmers were interviewed in 13 and 10 villages in Bulandshahr and
Moradabad district respectively. The sample villages were selected randomly from
the list of maize growing villages in each district. Then in each village a list of only
those farmers whose maize crop was still standing in the field was drawn and four
farmers were selected at random for interviewing. Information was collected from
each farmer with reference to only a single plot of maize that was selected by the
interviewer for the purpose of the survey. As far as possible the biggest maize plot
with the selected farmer was taken for collecting information.
Methodology: Keeping in view the objective of the study, simple tabular
analysis was done to derive a synthetic farm situation in each district under which an
average farmer grows his maize crop. All the items in the questionnaire were tabulated
on per hectare basis for all the farmers, separately for each district. Then a frequency
table was constructed for all the agronomic practices of growing maize and other
pertinent operations to know the number and percentage of farmers performing a
particular field operation.
A comparative analysis of the maize growing practices in Bulandshahr and
Moradabad districts is presented in the following paragraphs. Wherever necessary
intra-district comparisons are also made with respect to marginal, small and large
farmers*. (Table 20, 21)
Limitations of the Survey: 1. The survey was conducted in the second and
third week of September. Therefore, it was not possible to include those maize
farmers who had planted the crop in early June and harvested before the survey
work was undertaken.
2. The crop both at Bulandshahr and Moradabad suffered badly from
excessive rains and floods. The data collected from the survey shall be interpreted
with due caution.
3. The question of share cropping was not raised in the schedule and it was
not possible to find out its importance in the overall production system in both the
districts.

* Marginal farms : Operational holdings less than 1 hectare
Small farms : Operational holdings from 1 to 3 hectares
Large farms : Operational holdings more than 3 hectares:










4. It was not possible to find out the effect of floods or water logging to the
maize crop as no record was kept of those farmers which were selected but not
interviewed as their crop failed due to waterlogging or floods.
Results of the survey & Discussion :
Planting time: 1. About 75% farmers in Bulandshahr district and all the
farmers in Moradabad district had sown their maize crop during the month of June.
In both the districts planting was done mainly during 2nd, 3rd and 4th weeks of
June. However in Bulandshahr about 25% of the farmers had sown the seed even in
early July.
2. When asked whether their planting dates were the best, about 70% and
50% farmers in Bulandshahr and Moradabad districts, respectively answered in
affirmative. About 30% farmers in Bulandshahr and 50% in Moradabad thought
their crop was late.
3. The main reason given for late sowing by those farmers who thought their
sowing was late (14 farmers in Bulandshahr and 20 in Moradabad) were-heavy
rains at the time of planting (64% in Bulandshahr and 45% in Moradabad). The
other reasons were that the previous crop was standing in the field and lack of
irrigation water. Shortage of draft power or labour was not a reason for late
sowing.
Irrigation : 1. 55% of the farmers in Bulandshahr and 50% in Moradabad
have their own pump irrigation facilities.
2. About 40% of the Bulandshahr and Moradabad farmers buy irrigation
water meaning thereby that the majority of those who do not own a pumping set
can buy water for irrigation purposes.
3. As much as 89% of the farmers in Bulandshahr had not given any pre-
sowing irrigation. Even those who have pump irrigation facilities have not done
this in this district. This may be because of the sufficient rains received during
planting time. On the other hand, about 53% of the farmers in Moradabad district
had done presowing irrigation. Almost all the farmers who have pump irrigation
had done the pre-sowing irrigation, and a small percentage of those who do not own
any pump set bought water for this purpose. This may be one of the main reasons
for timely planting in Moradabad district as compared to Bulandshahr.
Planting method: The planting method used by majority of farmers in both
the districts was behind the plough. The corresponding percentages are 87% and
75% in Bulandshahr and Moradabad districts, respectively. The other planting
method used by few farmers is broadcasting. In Moradabad, line sowing was also
used by some of the farmers (about 18%). In this case lines were formed with a
rope and sowing was done with Khurpi dibblingg). This method is mainly practiced
by the marginal farmers and those who planted hybrid seed.
Seed : 1. All the sample farmers in Bulandshahr planted desi maize where as
only 50% of the sample farmers planted desi maize in Moradabad. The rest had
planted hybrid maize in this district. Large area as shown by the survey under hybrid
maize in Moradabad is unusual. The hybrid maize area in 1977 was 3% of the total and
the target for 1978 Kharif was 6%. It may be because the survey was started late
which resulted in disproportionate selection of those farmers who planted late
varieties (Appendix V.) In this district a majority of marginal and small farmers had










sown hybrid maize (67% and 53% respectively) whereas the percentage was only
37% in case of large farmers.
2. About 92% of the farmers in Bulandshahr used their own seed for sowing
purposes, and only 8% of the farmers had to buy seed from the market. On the
contrary, 65% of the sample farmers in Moradabad bought seed from the market,
and only 28% of them used home seed for sowing.
Inter-cropping
1. Intercropping was done in 32% of the sample farms in Bulandshahr as
against 83% in Moradabad district.
2. In Bulandshahr district urd (Phaseolus mungo) is the main inter-crop with
maize (73% cases) followed by sunnhemp (Crotolaria juncea) and arhar (Cajanus
cajan). In Moradabad district the main intercrop in sunnhemp (43% cases) followed
by urd+sunnhemp (30%), Til (Sesamum) and urd.
Plant density at harvest
1. The average plant density on the sample farms in Bulandshahr was about
36 000 plants per hectare out of which about 1,000 were barren (3%) and about
3,500 were damaged by birds (10%). In Moradabad, the plant density was consi-
derably higher, which came to about 52,000, out of which about 5,300 were barren
(10%) and 3200 bird damaged (6%). However, yields were the same.
2. Understandably, over 10% of the farmers in Bulandshahr felt that the
plant density on their plots was lower and preferred higher densities. In Moradabad
over 82% of the sample farmers felt that the plant density on their plots was about
right. Only about 13% of the farmers preferred high densities and 5% lower densities
in this district.
3. High density at Moradabad may be related with line sowing and planting
of hybrid varieties as compared to Bulandshahr.
Harvesting
1. In both the districts, harvesting commenced in the first week of September
and continued upto the first week of October. But in most of the cases harvesting
was completed by the third week of September. In both the districts about 75% of
the farmers had harvested their crop before the survey was undertaken.
2. About 92% of the sample farmers in Bulandshahr district reported that
they used some plants from the maize plot for feeding the farm animals. This may
be the reason for the low plant density and less incidence of barren plants in this
district as compared to Moradabad district. On the other hand ony 13% of the
sample farmers in Moradabad used plants from their maize plots as fodder still
reporting a higher plant density and higher incidence of barren plants.
Expected use of maize : In Bulandshahr all the farmers used their maize for
home consumption and seed purposes, and about 58% of them also sold a part of
their crop in market. On the contrary, 95% of the farmers in Moradabad district
used their maize for consumption purposes. As little as 5% of the farmers used their
maize as seed, and only about 13% of them sold maize in the market. It is shown
that 50% of the farmers are planting local varieties in Moradabad indicates that even
majority of the farmers planting local varieties buy it from the market at the time of
planting.









2. Maize is consumed in the farmers home from October to March-April both
at Bulandshahr (100%) and Moradabad (83%),
Crop rotation : The main crop rotation in Bulandshahr seems to be maize
followed by wheat. About 60% farmers had sown maize in the preceding kharif and
about an equal number of farmers had planted wheat in the preceding rabi. More
than 70% of the farmers expect to plant wheat in the following rabi. Only about
18% of the maize area is followed by potato. The same crop rotation seems to be
prevalent in Moradabad also, though about 33% of the maize growers had sugarcane
in the preceding kharif. Only 30% of the maize growers planted maize in the
preceding kharif.
Wage rate : There seems to be no significant difference between the wage
rates in Bulandshahr and Moradabad districts. The average wage rate per man-day
works out to be roughly about Rs. 6.30 both in Bulandshahr and Moradabad.
In some cases, a part of their wages are paid in grain.
Use of inputs in maize cultivation
Farm Yard Manure : The use of farm yard manure shows an increasing trend between
kharif 1977 and kharif 1978 in both Bulandshahr aud Moradabad districts. However,
the use of FYM is significantly higher (almost double) in Bulandshahr district than
in Moradabad. This may be because of the higher number of farm animals kept by
a farmer in Bulandshahr than in Moradabad.
2. When FYM use was considered within the district among different sizes
of farms, it was found in Bulandshahr that marginal and small farmers are using
consistently higher doses of manure for soil fertilization than the large farmers. Thii
may be because of the fact that marginal and small farmers supplement their farm
incomes (which are relatively low in absolute terms) by milk sale and hence produce
more manure per acre as compared to large farmers (whose main source of income
is from farming). In Moradabad district also small farmers are using higher doses of
FYM as compared to large and marginal farmers for the same reasons.
Chemical fertilizers : The use of chemical fertilizers in Bulandshahr and
Moradabad district is about the same. In Bulandshahr an average farmer was found
to spend about Rs. 248/-on fertilizers per hectares whereas in Moradabad the figure
was Rs. 241/-. In both the districts marginal farmers were found to spend more on
fertilizers (Rs. 292/- in Moradabad & Rs. 287/- in Bulandshahr) followed by small and
large farmers.
Weeding: Two to three weedings were found to be common in both the
districts. In Morodabad labour used for weeding purposes on an average was observed
to be relatively higher in comparison with Bulandshahr. Further, in both the districts
family labour forms a major proportion of the total labour used for weeding opera-
tions. On an average hired labour is roughly 1/6 of the total labour used in both
districts.
Both in Bulandshahr and Moradabad marginal farmers are putting the
maximum labour for weeding followed by small and large farmers. This is because
of the fact that all the family members of a marginal farmer (and of the small farmer
to a considerable extent) are working on their small plot of land throughout the
cropping season. That is why, it can be seen that the proportion of hired labor is
increasing with increasing size of the farm holding. Also the crop yields are increasing









with increasing farm size with higher labour intensity on small and marginal farms. This
also shows that with low yields and high labour intensity small and marginal farms
have low labour productivity.

Yield : The average yield per hectare worked out to be 13 quintals in both
Bulandshahr and Moradabad districts. On an average marginal and large farms
reported higher yields in Bulandshahr than in Moradabad.
Summary
1. Majority of the farmers who grow maize have access to irrigation water
and can plant maize before monsoon with pre-sowing irrigation.

2. Local variety is predominantly grown. In Bulandshahr most farmers save
their own seed whereas in Moradabad the farmers buy the seed from the market.
3. Plant density in Bulandshahr was lower than in Moradabad, which may
be attributed to line sowing and cutting less number of plants for fodder purposes in
Moradabad. 45000-50000 plants at harvest may be the optimum plant density for
both the districts.

4. A major portion of the maize produced is consumed at home in the form
of chapatis in between October and April.

5. Maize is not grown as fodder crop in the kharif season. Only weak and
barren plants are used as fodder.
6. Maize-wheat is the most common rotation followed.
7. F.Y.M. is extensively applied in the field. Marginal and small farmers use
more F.Y.M. in their field as compared to large farmers.

8. Chemical fertilizer is also used in the maize crop and accounts for about
20-25% of the total inputs.

9. Two-three weedings are done during the crop season. Most of the labour
used comes from farmers family and only 1/6 of the total labour is hired which
increase with the increase in the size of the holding.
10. Small and marginal farmers have low labour productivity. It is desirable
to divert a part of their labour input to other production occupation if available
without affecting yields.

11. The average yield reported was 13q/ha. It may be kept in mind that
this year the weather conditions were bad for maize. The yield in the normal years
are expected to be higher.









Table 1. Soil Analysis, Bulandshahr, 1978, Kharif

Sample Name of the pH Extractable Extractable Organic Texture Free Co,
No. village PO25 kg/ha KzOkg/ha carbon Reaction


1. Gaina 8.0 34 470.4 0.51 L Nil
2. Alawa 8.0 50 504.0 0.84 S
3. Azizabad 8.0 36 423.3 0.60 SL
4. A. Gighauri 7.5 90 315.8 1.20 L
5. Shiwali 7.8 20 638.4 0.27 SL
6. Bilsuri 8.5 40 268.8 0.75 L
7. Kamalpur 7.7 20 672.0 0.72 SL
8. Chitson 8.0 180 672.0 0.96 L
9. Bilsuri 9.0 20 672.0 0.96 L
10. Gaina 8.5 40 554.3 1.11 L
11. Junedpur 8.3 36 477.1 0.75 L
12. Junedpur 8.5 30 672.0 1.20 SL
13. Halpura 8.2 40 504.0 0.93 L
14. Salimpur 7.7 247.2 504.0 0.75 L
15. Chitson 8.4 193.5 389.1 0.60 L
16. Shiwali 8.4 32.2 403.2 0.78 L

*Sandy-S, Loamy Sand-LS, Sandy Loam-SL, Loam-L

Table 2. Soil Analysis, Moradabad, 1978, Kharif

Sample Name of the pH Extractable Extractable Organic Texture Free CO3
No. village P2 05 kg/ha NH4 O/ carbon reaction
K2Okg/ha %

1. Bhawanipur 7.3 44.0 302.4 0.60 S Nil
2. Mahmoodpur 7.2 44.0 255.3 1.29 SL
3. Bhikampur 7.0 48.0 490.5 1.44 SL
4. Nuria Sarai 7.0 130.0 446.2 1.41 SL
5. Mahmoodpur 7.0 90.0 423.3 0.30 SL
6. Mahmoodpur 6.8 30.0 369.6 0.60 S
7. Bhawanipur 6.5 40.0 409.9 1.05 SL
8. Faridpur 6.8 36.0 208.3 0.30 S

*Sandy-S, Loamy Sand-LS, Sandy Loam-SL, Loam-L









Table 3. Percentage Distribution of Operational Holdings : Western
Region1, Uttar Pradesh, 1971
Size of holding (ha) Percentage
upto 1 59
1 to 3 29
3 to 10 11
over 10 1
Total 100
1. Includes the districts of Moradabad and Bulandshahr.
Source : Uttar Pradesh, Government of (Board of Revenue) Agricultural Census in
Uttar Pradesh 1970-71.

Table 4. Composition of Rural Population by Occupation and Sex :
Moradabad District1, 1971 Census
Occupation Male No. Female No. Total No. %
1. Cultivators 426,388 5,969 432,357 (78)
2. Agricultural labourers 63,763 1,486 65,249 (12)
3. Livestock, etc2 1,933 78 2,011
4. Mining and quarrying Manu-
facturing, etc 33 33
5. (a) Household 15,460 1,137 16,597 (3)
6. (b) Other than household 7,933 194 8,127 (1)
7. Construction 2,369 54 2,423
8. Trade and Commerce 6,821 82 6,903 (1)
9. Transport, etc4 2,947 3 2,950/ (1)
10. Other services 19,186 1,258 20.444 (4)
11. Total 546,833 10,261 557,094 (100)
Notes:
1. The urban working population of 153,362 makes up 22% of the District's
total working population of 710,456. The number of non-workers in
Moradabad district is 1,718,515. This gives an overall total population of
2,428,971.
2. Livestock, Forestry, Fishing, Hunting and Planting, Orchards and allied
activities.
3. Manufacturing, processing, servicing, repairs,
(a) Household industry and
(b) Other than household industry.
4. Transport, storage and communications.
Source ;.Censqs of India, Uttar Pradesh, Series 21, Part II-B (0, EcorQqnic Tables.








35

Table 5: Composition of Rural Population by Occupation and Sex :
Bulandshahr District', 1971 Census


Occupation Male No. Female No. Total No. %

1. Cultivators 290,191 3,869 294,060 (61)
2. Agricultural labourers 84,804 2,589 87,393 (18)
3. Livestock, etc2 4,238 352 4,590 (1)
4. Mining and quarrying Manu-
facturing, etc3 138 5 143

5. (a) Household 19,582 853 20,438 (4)
6. (b) Other than household 9,664 213 9,877 (2)
7. Construction 2,402 14 2,416 (1)
8. Trade and Commerce 9,944 168 10,112 (2)

9. Transport, etc4 2,161 28 2,189 (1)

10. Other services 45,291 3,049 48,340 (10)
11. Total 468,415 11,140 479,555 (100)



Notes :
1. The urban, working population of 72,201 makes up 13% of the Districts'
total working population of 551,756. The number of non-wokers in
Bulandshahr District is 1,521,587. This gives an overall total population of
2,073,393.
2. Livestock, Forestry, Fishing, Hunting and Planting, Orchards and allied
activities.
3. Manufacturing, processing, servicing and repairs
(a) Household industry and
(b) Other than household industry.
4. Transport, storage and communications.

Source : Census of India, Uttar Pradesh, Series 21, part II-B (i), Economic Tables.








36

Table 6. Distribution of various on-farm trials in District Bulandshahr, 1978 K

Trials
Location No.-of Farmers Varietal Fertilizer Verification Production
Junedpur two 1 1 1 1

Alipura Gijhauri one 1 1 1 1
Kamalpur one 1
Shiwali three 1 1 1
1 -

Gainna two 1 1 1

Chitson one 1 1
Salimpur one 1 1 1 1
Halpura one 1 1
Alawa Rahimpur one I
Dhamera one 1
Azizabad one 1
Total 5 5 9 12

Table 7. Distribution of On-farm Maize Experiments in Moradabad, 1978 K
Trials
Location No. of Farmers Varietal Fertilizer Verification Production
Faridpur one 1 1 1 1
Bhikampur two 1 1 1
1 1 1
Mahamoodpur four 1 1 1

1 1 1 1
1 1
Sirsi two 1
1 1
Nuria Sarai three 1



Bhawanipur two 1 1 1 1
1 1

Total 5 5 11 11







Table 8. Varietal Trials, Bulandshahr, 1978 K


LOCATIONS


ALIPUR-GIJHAURI


SHIWALI


AVERAGES


Varieties Yield Stand/ Days M% Yield Stand Days M% Yield Stand Days M% Yield Stand Days M%


Kg/ plot to
ha flower
50%


Kg/ plot
ha


to
flower
50%


Kg/ plot
ha


flower
50%


Kg/ plot to
ha flower
50%


1. D 765 1943 56
(2318)
2. Tarun 2233 62
(2179)
3. D 741 2555 66
(2221)
4. Pool 5 1731 56
(2110)
5. D 743 2524 67
(2157)
6. Farmer 3078 65
variety (2785)
CCV (%) 2340
CD: (5%) 867
Average 62
Stand


49 30.6 886 47
(1087)
52 31.2 1220 52
(1241)
55 30.6 1800 61
(1511)
52 30.4 1534 59
(1316)
55 30.7 1082 43
(1428)
52 29.2 2394 60
(2142)
31.1
741
54


49 30.4 1798 64
(1251)
48 30.8 1784 59
(1588)
51 32.4 1841 60
(1743)
48 30.3 1168 46
(1935)
55 32.6 1816 53
(2044)
46 28.5 2678 59
(2465)
28.2
1008


52 32.5 1542 56
(1552)
53 30.0 1746 58
(1669)
54 32.2 2065 62
(1825)
55 34.2 1478 54
(1787)
54 31.8 1797 54
(1876)
51 33.4 2717 61
(2464)


50 31.2

51 31.3

53 31.7

52 31.6

55 31.7

50 30.4


GAINA


Note : The yield figures given under bracket are yields adjusted for stand with covariance analysis.
M=Moisture








Table 9. Varietal Trials, Moradabad, 1978 K

LOCATIONS
BHAWANIPUR FARIDPUR AVERAGES
Varieties Yield. Stand/ Days to M% Yield Stand/ Days to M% Yield Stand/ Days to M%
Kg/ha Plot 50% Kg/ha Plot 50% Kg/ha Plot 50%
flowering flowering flowering

1. D 765 1949 28 52 21.0 290 60 55 20.9 1120 44 53 21.0
(2035) (578) (1307)
2. Tarun 2109 32 55 20.8 1158 66 58 20.8 1634 49 56 20.8
(1864) (1082) (1473)
3. D741 1764 28 55 21.0 1187 69 58 21.3 1476 48 56 21.1
(1875) (983) (1429)
4. D 742 2099 23 59 21.2 1241 68 59 21.0 1670 46 59 21.1
(2597) (1053) (1825)
5. D 743 2111 30 58 23.0 939 61 57 22.4 1525 45 57 22.7
(2019) (1178) (1599)
6. Farmer 2699 36 56 21.4 1250 68 63 22.1 1975 52 60 21.2
Variety (2070) (1062) (1566)
Name LOCAL VIJAY
CCV: (%) 42.4~ 42.1
CDI (5%)- 1435 823
Average 29 65
Stand

Note: The yield figures given under bracket are yields adjusted for stand with covariance analysis.
M= Moisture









Table 10. Maize Yields (KG/HA) at Research Stations and Farmer's Fields in Moradabad and
Bulandshahr, 1978 K.

STATION TRIALS Average ON FARM TRIALS
Varieties Advance trial Trial 301 Varietal Verification Production
Pantnagar* B. Shahr Pantnagar Bulandshahr Pant- B. Buland Morada- Buland Mora- Buland Mora-
Station Nagar Shahr Shahr bad Shahr dabad Shahr dabad

D 765 3666 3200 2664 2806 3165 3003 1542 1120 -
D 741 4407 2607 4339 2444 4373 2525 2065 1476 -
PK 5465 2474 4209 3201 4837 2837 1746 1634 1659 2279 1436 1262
D 742 5415 3067 3119 3028 4267 3047 1670 -
D 743 4032 2326 4032 2326 1797 1525 -
Farmer 1870 2993 3066 3388 3190 2717 1975 2281 2204 -
Variety Farru- KT 41 KT 41 KT 41
Name khabad
Local
CV. 11.8% 37.4% 15.1%

* The trial was un-replicated but the stand was perfect.
Notes: 1. Fertility level in varietal, verification and production plot in the farmers field was
60 Kg N + 30 Kg P2 Os/hectare.
2. Fertility level at research stations was 80 Kg N + 60 Kg PO, per hectare.













Table 11. Fertilizer Trials, Bulandshahr, 1978 K.


LOCATIONS
GAINA ALIPUR-GIJHAURI SHIWALI AVERAGE
Treatments stand/ Yield stand/ Yield stand/ Yield stand/ Yield
N!' P Plot (Kg/ha) Plot (Kg/ha) Plot (Kg/ha) Plot (Kg/ha)

.0 0 48 1650 (1946) 44 1123(1335) 58 2191(2230) 50 1655(1837)
30 0 61 2557(2198) 52 1374 (1482) 62 2210 (2003) 58 2047 (1894)
60 0 48 1627 (1907) 55 1715(1607) 54 2071 (2315) 52 1804 (1943)
90 0 49 2271(2506) 60 1948 (1686) 60 2388 (2433) 56 2202 (2208)
60 30 63 2802 (2343) 56 1677 (1543) 62 2401 (2206) 60 2293 (2031)
90 30 60 2537 (2258) 52 1432 (1417) 61 2419 (2304) 58 2129 (1993)
CV: (%) 24.2 26.6 23.3
CD: (5%) 1050 660 850
Average Stand 55 52 59

Note: The yield figures given under bracket are yields adjusted for stand with covariance analysis.


0.
CD











Table 12. Fertilizer Trial, Moradabad, 1978 K


LOCATIONS
BHAWANIPUR FARIDPUR AVERAGE

Treatment Stand/plot Yield, (Kg/ha) Stand/plot Yield, (Kg/ha) Stand/plot Yield, (Kg/ha)

N P


-0
- 0
-0
- 0
- 30
- 30
CV: (%)
CD: (5%)
Average Stand


2197 (2053)
2774 (2692)
2024 (1917)
2009 (2043)
1788(1585)
1548 (1787)
26.5
874
31


624 (639)
617 (601)
498 (429)
800 (812)
739 (730)
493 (478)
41.5
713
70


1411 (1346)
1696 (1647)
1261(1173)
1405 (1428)
1264 (1158)
1021 (1133)


Note : The yield figures given under bracket are yields adjusted for stand with covariance analysis.









TABLE 13. Verification Trials, Bulandshahr, 1978 K

LOCATIONS AVERAGE
I II III IV A B
A B
Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Av. Mois-
Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ ture %
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

FARMER VARIETY
Farmer Practice 726 14 1258 60 1387 20 1325 25 992 37 1356 23 29.1
(74,0)
Intermediate
-Practice (60,0) 1862 44 1165 53 1514 49 -
Recommend
practice (60,30) 1884 45 1580 54 2774 43 2885 43 1732 50 2830 43 29.7
Extension Practice 2530 35 2851 42 2691 39 -
(80,60,40)

TARUN
Farmer Practice 1503 39 953 43 2188 43 1105 34 1228 41 1647 39 31.3
Intermediate 1267 32 1029 40 1148 36 -
Practice
Recommended 1565 46 1062 30 2215 38 1791 46 1314 43 2003 42 31.3
Practice
Extension Practice 2433 40 .2731 49 2582 45 -
Fnarmr PraFticra (1\ SnwinrC Rehind the nlounh


pH
Extractable P205
(Kg/ha)
Organic carbon %
Texture


(2) Nitrogen applied @ 74 Kg N/ha in two top dressings.
'.5 8.2 7.7 8.0
90 40 20 34


1.20
Loam


0.93 0.72 0.51
Loam Sandy loam Loam






Table 14. Verification Trial, Moradabad, 1978 K


LOCATIONS
I II III IV V Average
Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Yield Stand Mois. Barr.
Kg/ OCO/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ OCO/ Kg/ 000/ Kg/ 000/ % %
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha


FARMER VARIETY
Farmer Practice 745
(74,0)
Intermediate
Practice (60,0) 1273
Recommended
Practice (60,30) 1678
Extension Practice 1598
(120,60,40)
TARUN
Farmer Practice 681
(74,0)
Intermediate 909
Practice
Recommended 1209
Practice
Extension Practice 1263
pH 6.8
Extractable P205 36
Kg/ha
Organic carbon % 0.30
Texture Sandy


52 2002 35 1949 36 921

39 1805 42 2649 31 1310

47 1778 38 2669 25 2470
48 -


100 2577 57 1639

60 2290 53 1865

65 2423 55 2204


53 2240 36 1558 30 626 108 1964 53 1414

52 2377 38 2928 30 761 62 2202 55 1835

46 2876 43 2989 33 1819 58 2500 59 2279


44 -
7.8
44

0.60
Sandy


56 20.6 25.1

45 20.5 20.8

46 21.0 23.5
- 49.0


56 20.3 35.6

47 20.6 28.8

48 20.6 17.3


- 33.2
33.2
6.5 7.0
40 130
not avail-
1.05 able 1.41
Sandy loam Sandy loam
Farmer Practice: 74 Kg N/ha applied in two top dressing










Table 15. Production Plot, Bulandshahr, 1978 Kharif
Variety: Tarun
Fertility : 60 kg N+30 kg POj/ha


Location Yield
kg/ha
1. 2946
II. 2199
III. 1273
IV. 1476
V. 1639
VI. 957
VII. 405
VIII. 623
IX. 1404


Stand.
000/ha
50
39
50
45
40
55
15
12
40


Days to
flower
51
48
52
49
51
47
49
56
51


Days to
harvest
88
84
88
86
84
84
82
88
85


Date of
planting
16.6.78
21.6.78
18.6.78
22.6.78
16.6.78
22.6.78
19.6.78
3.7.78
16.6.78


Date of
harvesting
12.9.78
13.9.78
12.9.78
14.9.78
12.9.78
14.9.78
9.9.78
29,9.78
9.9.78


Average 1436 38 50 85



Table 16. Production Plot, Moradabad, 1978 Kharif
Variety : Tarun
Fertility : 60 kg N+30 kg P205/ha

Location Yield Stand Days to Days to Barren Date of Date of
kg/ha 000/ha flower harvest % planting harvesting


I. 793 55 57 .87 28.9 19.6.78 14.9.78
II. 1507 70 58 87 18.3 17.6.78 11.9.78
III. 295 66 58 86 64.2 14.6.78 11.9.78
IV. 1852 24 56 88 3.6 16.6.78 12.9.78
V. 2116 59 66 96 1.0 16.6.78 19.9.78
VI. 1009 55 62 89 14.6.78 12.9.78

Average 1262 55 59 88 23.2







Table 17. Cost of Production (for one acre), Bulandshahr, 1978
(Based on Production Plot Data)
Group I Group II
Owner cultivator Share cropper
Inputs Unit/area Cost/Unit Cost/area Unit/area Cost/Unit Cost/area


Land Preparation:
Ploughing 2
Planking 2
Sowing
Seed
Labour (F)
(H)/S.C.
Fertilizer
F.Y.M.
Urea
S.S.P.
Labour (F)
(H)/S.C.
Irrigation :
Water (Pre sowing)
Labour (F)
(H)/S.C.
Weeding
1st weeding (F)
(H)/S.C.
2nd weeding (F)
(H)/S.C.


2 bpd
1 bpd

8 kg.
3 pd




52 kg
80 kg
1 pd


6 hours
1 pd


9 pd

9 pd


Rs.
10.00
10.00


Rs.
20.00
10.00


4.00 32.00
6.00 18.00


1.60
0.60
6.00


83.20
48.00
6.00


6.00 36.00
6.00 6.00


6.00 54.00

6.00 54.00


2 bpd
1 bpd

8 kg
1 pd
1 pd



52 pd
80 pd

1 pd

canal

1 pd


9 pd

9 pd


10.00
10.00

4.00
6.00
6.00



1.60
0.60

6.00




6.00

6.00


20.00
10.00

32.00
6.00
6.00



83.20
46.00
;-
6.00

10.00

6.00

54.00

54.00








Bird watching (F)
(H)/S.C.
Harvesting
(F)
(H)/S.C.
Shelling (F)
(H)/S.C.
Total variable cost
Labour (F)
(H)/S.C.
Fertilizer
Seed
Land Preparation
Water
Output
Grain
Net Income
Net Income without computing
for family labour


15 pd



10 pd

9 pd


6.00 90.00



6.00 60.00

6.00 54.00

571.20
342.00
00.00
131.20
32.CO
30.00
36.00


9 quintal 105 945.00
373.80

715.80


10 pd



10 pd

6 pd


6.00



6.00

6.00


100%
60%
00%
23%
6%
5%
6%


Share cropper Income


bullock per day.
person per day.
Family Labour.
Hired Labour.
Share Cropper.


60.00


60.00

36.00
491.20
6.00
282.00
131.20
32.00
30.00
10.00

924.00
432.80

231.00


100%
1%
57%
27%
7%
6%
2%


bpd:
pd:
F:
H:
S.C.:







Table 18. Cost of Production (For one acre), Moradabad, 1978
(Based on Production Plot Data)


Kewal Singh (6.5 acres)
Unit/ Cost/ Cost/
acre unit acre


Balwant Singh (4 acres)
Unit/ Cost/ Cost/
acre unit acre


R.P. Singh (10 acres)


Unit/
acre


Cost/ Cost/
unit acre


Land Preparations :
Ploughing 2
Planking 2(1+1)
Ridging (Labour)
Sowing
Seed
Labour (Family)
(Hired)
Fertilizer
FYM
Urea
DAP
Labour (Family)
(Hired)
Irrigation
Water
Labour


Weeding
Ist weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding


2 bpd
1 bpd
6 pd

8 kg.

3 pd



52 kg.
26 kg.


Rs.
10.00
10.00
6.00

4.00

6.00


Rs.
20.00
10.00
36.CO

32.00

18.00


1.60 83.20
2.00 52.00


Hired 10 pd 6.00
,, 10 pd 6.00


2 bpd
1 bpd



8 kg.
2 pd
2 pd



52 kg.
26 kg.


60.00 Family 9 pd
60.00 ,, 7 pd
,, 6 pd


Rs.
10.00
10.00



4.00
6.00
6.00



1.60
2.00


6.00
6.00
600


Rs.
20.00
10.00



32.00
12.00
12.00



83.20
52.00


54.00
42.00
36.00


2 bpd
1 bpd



8 kg.

4 pd



52 kg.
26 kg.




6 hrs
1 pd


10 pd
7 pd


Rs. Rs.
10.00 20.00
10.00 10.00


4.00

6.00


32.00

24.00


1.60 83.20
2.00 52.00




6.00 36.00
6.00 6.00


6.00
6.00


60.00
42.00


Inputs








Bird Watching (Family) 20 pd
Harvesting ,(Family) -
(Hired) 6 pd
Shelling (Family) -
(Hired) 2 pd
Total Variable Cost
Labour (Family)
(Hired)
Fertilizer
Seed
Land Preparatiou
Water


Output
Grain
Net Income
Net income without
computing for family
labour


3.00 60.00

6.00 36.00 "

6.00 12.00
479.20
60.00
222.00


,, 20 pd
4 pd
3 pd
8 pd


100%
13%
46%


135.00 28%
32.00 7%
30.00 6%


6 qtls. 105 630/-
150.80


8.4 qtls. 105


882.00
318.80


6.00
6.00
6.00
6.00


120.00
24.00
18.CO
40.80


20 pd

5 pd
3 pd


563.20
336.00
30.00


6.00 120.00

6.00 30.00
6.00 18.00


100%
60% -
5%


135.20 24%
32.00 6%
30.00 5%



7.4 qtls. 100/-


210.80 654.80


533.20
144.00
156.00


100%
27%
29%


135.20 25%
32.00 6%
30.00 6%
36.00 7%


777.00
243.80


387.80


__







Table 19. Cost of Production (based on farmer's plot data)

Moradabad (One farmer) Bulandshahr (Average of three farmers)
Input Unit/acre Cost/unit Cost/acre Unit/acre Cost/unit Cost/acre


Land Preparation
Ploughing 2
Planking 2
Sowing
Seed
Labour

Fertilizer
FYM
Urea
Irrigation
Water
Labour
Weeding
II
II
Bird Watching :
Labour
Harvesting
Labour


2 bpd
1 bpd


8 kg.**
4 pd


45 Q.
52 kg.


15 pd
8 pd


20 pd


10 pd


10.00
10.00


5.00
6.00


1.00
1.60


6.00
6.00


20.00
10.00


40.00
24.CO


45.00
83.20


90.00
48.00


6.00 120.00


2 bpd
1 bpd


6 kg.
4 pd


40 Q.
54 kg.


6 hours
1 pd


10 pd
10 pd


22 pd


6.00 60.C0 5 pd


10.00
10.00


2.00
6.00


20.00
10.00


12.CO
24.00


1.00 40.CO
1.60 86.40


6.00
6.00


6.00
6.03


36.00
6.00


60.00
60.00


6.00 132.00


6.00 30.00









Shelling
SLabour 4 pd 6.00 24.00 8 pd 6.03 48.30
Total variable cost 564.20 1CO% 564.00 100%
Labour* 366.00 65% 360.00 64%
Fertilizer 128.00 23% 126.00 22%
Seed 40.00 7% 12.00 2%/
SLand preparation 30.00 5% 30.00 5%
Water 36.CO 6%
)Output
Grain 8 Q. 105.00 840.00 8.5 Q. 105.00 892.50
Net Income 275.80 328.50

Almost all the labour came from farmers' family.
bpd : Bullock per day
pd : Person per day
Q : Quintal
** : Ganga 2 seed was purchased.










Table 20. Special Purpose Survey

Sl. Particular Bulandshahr Moradabad
No. (47 farmers) (40 farmers)
Number Percentage Number Percentage


1. Date of sowing :
June 1st week
June 2nd week
lune 3rd week
June 4th week
July Ist week
July 2nd week
2. Is this the best time to plant ?



3. Reasons for late sowing


Yes 33
No 14


21.27
21.27
31.91
23.40
2.12


70.21
29.78


2.50
50.00
30.00
17.50



50.00
50.00


(i) Shortage of power
(ii) Soil condition did not
permit
(iii) Shortage of water
(iv) Heavy rains
(v) Shortage of labour
(vi) Preceeding crop standing
in the plot
(vii) Other
4. Do you have pump irrigation ?


7.14


64.28


4 28.57


15.00
35.00
30.00
5.00


3 15.00


5. Can you buy irrigation water ?



6. Pre-sowing irrigation done


7. Planting method
(i) Behind plough
(ii) Broadcasting
(iii) Dibbling
8. Variety planted
Desi
Hybrid


Yes 26
No 21


Yes 19
No 28


Yes 5
No 42


55.31
44.68


40.42
59.57


10.63
89.36


87.23
12.76


47 100.00


50.00
50.CO


40.00
60.00


52.50
47.50


75.00
7.50
17.50


50.00
50.00










9. Source of seed
Home 43 91.48 26 65.00
Market 4 8.51 11 27.50
Other 3 7.50

10. Inter-cropping done
Yes 15 31.91 33 82.50
No 32 68.08 7 17.50
11. Names of intercrops
(i) Urd 11 73.33 2 5.00
(ii) Arhar 1 6.66 -
(iii) Sunnhemp 2 13.33 17 42.50
(iv) Urd+Sunnhemp 1 6.66 12 30.00
(v) Til+Sunnhemp 2 5.00

12. Plant density
(i) about right 14 29.78 33 82.50
(ii) Prefer higher density 33 70.21 5 12.50
(iii) Prefer lower density 2 5.00

13. Plot water logged
Yes 7 14.89 13 32.50
No 40 85.10 27 67.50

14. If water logged
(i) Severely 1 14.29 7 53.84
(ii) Slightly 6 85.71 6 46.16

15. Date of harvesting
Sept. Ist week 12 25.53 1 2.50
Sept. 2nd week 12 25.63 12 30.00
Sept. 3rd week 10 21.27 18 45.00
Sept. 4th week 7 14.89 7 17.50
Oct. 1st week 6 12.86 2 5.00

16 Some plants from the plot
used as fodder
Yes 43 91.49 5 12.50
No 4 8.51 35 87.50

17. Expected use of maize
Home consumption 47 100.00 38 95.00
Seed 47 100.00 2 5.00
Animal feed 2 5.00
Sale 27 57.44 5 12.50











18. Crop Rotation
Proceeding Kharif
(i) Maize 28 59.57 12 30.00
(ii) Sugarcane 5 10.63 13 32.50
(iii) Jowar 3 6.38 8 20.00
(iv) Bajra 3 7.50
(v) Arhar, Paddy, Chillies etc. 11 23.40 4 10.00
19. Proceeding Rabi
(i) Wheat 29 61.70 27 67.50
(ii) Potato 8 17.02 1 2.50
(iii) Sugarcane 2 4.25 7 17,50
(iv) Other 8 17.02 5 12.50
20. Following Rabi
(i) Wheat 33 70.21 32 80.00
(ii) Potato 9 19.14 3 7.50
(iii) Sugarcane 1 2.50
(iv) Other 5 10.63 4 10.00



Table 21. Special Purpose Survey

SI. Particulars Bulandshahr Moradabad
No.

1. Plant density per hectare
Marginal farms:
Total Plants 37210 48810
Barren plants 850 7590
Bird damage 1800 3030
Small farms:
Total plants 34930 53660
Barren plants 790 3570
Bird damage 2120 3390
Large farms:
Total Plant 34900 52720
Barren plants 1500 4680
Bird damage 6660 3140
2. Plant density per hectare
(average of all farmers)
Total plants 35680 51730
Barren plants 1047 5280
Bird damage 3527 3187











3. FYM use per hectare (Qtls.) :
Marginal farms:
Kharif '77 328.36
Rabi '77 328.19 169.59
Kharif '78 257.30 48.77
Small farms:
Kharif '77 306.00 223.92
Rabi '77 267.70 135.30
Kharif '78 534.60 263.35
Large farms:
Kharif '77 88.9Q 146.63
Rabi '77 154.08 93.95
Kharif '78 234.18 148.74
4. FYM use p r hectare (Qtls.)
(Average of all farmers)
Kharif '77 241.11 123.51
Rabi '77 24899 133.06
Kharif '78 342.02 153.61
5. Expenditure on chemical
fertilizers per hectare (Rs.)
Marginal farms 286.53 291.85
Small farms 234.32 223.89
Large farms 222.16 206.31
Average-for all farmers 247.67 240.68
6. Labour use in weeding :
(mandays per hectare)
Marginal farms:
Total labour: 1st weeding 39.00 52.00
2nd weeding 39.00 43.00
3rd weedidg 20.00 25.00
Family labour : 1st weeding 33.00 50.00
2nd weeding 34.00 41.00
3rd weeding 16.00 23.00
Hired labour: 1st weeding 6.00 2.00
2nd weeding 6.00 2.00
3rd weeding 3.00 2.00

Small farms:
Total labour : 1st weeding 32.00 51.00
2nd weeding 25.00 49.00
3rd weeding 6.00 2200








Family labour: 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
Hired labour : 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
Large farms :
Total labour : 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
Family labour : 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
Hired labour: 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
7. Labour use in weeding :
(average for all farmers)
(mandays per hectare)
Total labour : 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
Family labour : 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
Hired labour : 1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
8. Expected yield (Qtls./ha)
Marginal farms
Small farms
Large farms
Average for all farms
9.; Wage rate (Rs.)
July
August


25.00
1900
5.00
7.00
6.00
1.00

25.00
15.00
2.00
14.00
4.00

12.00
11.00
2.00


47.00
43.00
16.00
4.CO
6.00
6.00

40.00
35.00
9.00
21.00
19.00
8.00
19.00
16.00
I.CO


3200
26.00
9.00
24.CO
19.00
7 CO
8.00
7.00
2.00


12.70
8.22
17.16
12.95


48.00
42.00
18.CO
39.00
3400
16.00
8.00
8.00
3.00


11.05
13164
14.41
13.03


6.28
6.39


6.44
6.44






56

Appendix-I(a)
VARIETAL TRIAL, MORADABAD, 1977 K

Variety Location I Location II Average
Yield Stand/ Mois- Yield Stand Mois- Yield Stand Mois-
kg/ha ha (000) ture% (000) ture% (000) ture
Ganga 2 3640 47 27.5 2726 39 29.2 3183 43 28.4
J 603 2858 -44 27.7 1730 32 27.9 2294 38 27.8
Tarun 3598 46 24.4 2712 38 29.2 3155 42 26.8
Local 2823 50 25.1 1644 33 29.7 2234 42 27.4
C.D. 5% 377 492
C.V.% 11.8 21.6
Plot size : 48 me
Fertility : 69 kg N/ha

Appendix-I(b)
FERTILIZER TRIAL, MORADABAD, 1977 K

Fertility level Yield kg/ha Average Per cent Return
kg/ha Location I Location II (kg) increase (Rs)
ON 1819 1472 1646 100 1729
60 N 2561 2552 2556 158 2527
120 N 3108 360 .3358 204 3106
C.V. (%) 9.3 12.1
C.D. (5%) 37.6 53.6
Plot size : 36 m2.
Variety :Tarun


Appendix-I(c)
INSECTICIDE TRIAL, MORADABAD, 1977 K

Treatment Yield kg/ha Average
Location I Location II

Insecticide used 2593 2502 2548
Control 2750 2880 2815
Plot size 30 m2
Variety Tarun
Fertility 60 kg N/ha







Appendix II
MAIZE CULTIVATION SURVEY EXPLORATORY QUESTIONNAIRE


This exploratory questionnaire is part of analysis to establish maize research
priorities and to allocate scarce research resources in a cost effective way. Because
the questionnaire is to be used at the initial stages of research together a broad range
of information, it is long. It is designed to obtain information so that an understand-
ing is obtained of a wide range of farmer problems, so that priorities can be given
to where the highest pay-offs may be to more detailed and specific work.
Sample : At this stage it is proposed that farmers of large, medium and small
holding size be interviewed in two villages in different locations which should be
defined by agro-climatic and by economic-institutional criteria Farmers selected
should be representative of the various sizes of holding group.
There is nothing final or definitive about this questionnaire. As soon as it is
used and tested it will become clear that some questionnaire unclear, irrelevant or
inappropriate. This is to be expected because the major point of the research at
this stage is to set in motion a process of dialogue and feedback between farmers and
researchers and between scientists of different disciplines as well as with extension
agents. After this investigation stage more focused surveys arid analysis may be
undertaken.

Objectives : The purposes of the research are to :
(a) understand the agro-climatic and socio-economic environment in which
different types of cultivators take decisions to produce, use or market
T, maize grain or other plant material;
(b) gather data for establishing maize research priorities: What are the
constraints on farmer production ? What resources are not being used
Sufficiently ? What are the reasons ? Is it a plant breeding problem ? Is
S it due to a lack of draft power or control over water ? Is it an agricultural
engineering problem ? Is it an economic problem ? Which are the top
priority problems where applied research will have the highest pay-offs
for maize farmers ?
(c) establish a process by which biological and other technical scientists can
conduct collaborative research with economists and other social scientists
oriented towards addressing farmers problems ?
(d) bring research scientists in direct contact with farmers and other
village people ;
(e) learn from farmers and other rural people about local innovations and
changes already taking place in maize production and usage practices;
(f) provide bench mark data on current production and usage practices,
including the identification, measurement and economic evaluation of all
inputs and maize products.
Important : In some situations it may be better (and advisable in the cases
where your key informant may be distracted or put off by the papers) to leave the
questionnaire behind and fill it up when not with the farmer. However this should bc










done very soon after the interview as specific details and new impressions are easily
forgotten.

A. Identification and Location :
Name of cultivator Village
Household Income Block
Major Source District
Other Sources Date of Interview
(specify)

Note : All measurements should be given in the weights and measures used by
the farmer ;
all yields and working rates should be clearly identified i.e. maunds per acre, seers
per bigha, number of ploughings, man hours per acre;
- all prices, wage rates, etc. must be clearly identified e.g. rupees per quintal, cash
wages in kind per day;
- as village weights and measures may differ between locations, conversions of
village weights and measures to standard units should be given in each question-
naire.
Conversions of local weights and measures



B. Farmer Resources :
Total Land
Status : Share cropper or Share paid
owner cultivator or
other (specify)
Size of household : Adults over 15 children below 15
Total family members engaged regularly on holding
Males over 15 Females over 15
Males under 15 Females under 15
Number of family members who help occasionally
Number of bullocks : Working:

S Other
' Machinery and Equipment (specify) l
e.g. irrigation equipment, ploughs :










C. Cropping patterns (on this holding) :
Major Crop Rotations

Give details of the important time constraints, i.e. which crops follow one another
in a tight rotation:

Minor Crop Rotations :
Note important time constraints :
Which crops receive fertilizer : Manure
Chemical fertilizers

Which crops are irrigated
Total area under maize in current year :

Season Year Area No. of plots Yield

D. Maize cultivation (These questions should relate to a single plot of maize) :
Variety What other varieties are known
Area of plot Variety Name Reason not
grown

Have you changed varieties in the last 5 years ? YES/NO
If YES, give reasons:

Status on plot :

Share-cropper
Owner cultivator
If share-cropper give details of share paid and what contribution the landlord makes
to input costs :

Soil : Sandy Loam Clay
Upland Lowland
Was the plot flooded At what stage of growth
For how long was it flooded
Was this a normal flooding If not, explain
How much did this reduce the yield
Is the plot well drained
Is the plot acid or alkaline
Is the plot saline
(There may be local knowledge which are indicators of these characteristics).









Seed : Source of seed : own purchased
Purchased from farmer merchant
From how far away did seed come
How was information of the seed obtained ? Farmer
merchant other (specify)
Was credit obtained for seed ? YES/NO
Comments on the availability, reliability, prices, etc.
seeds :


other (specify)






of local and improved


Cropping Pattern :
Previous crop
Yield
Following crop
Expected yield
Expected price.
Other crops in cycle
Is this a normal patt<
If no, give reasons :
Land preparation and sowing
Starting date


fertilizer applied
Date of Sale Price
expected harvest date
Expected date of sale


(Yes/No)


Reasons


Was this-earlier than normal
-normal
-later than normal
Number of ploughings
Number of plankings


Interval between ploughings
Interval between plankings


Method
Bullock pair other methods (specify)
Operation Rates of: Rates of: Rates of:
Working Hiring Working Hiring Working Hiring

Ploughing
Planking
Seed bed
preparation
Other operations (specify)


harvest date










Sowing : Date
Seed rate : Farmers estimate
Actual count (Count on a measured area)
Method of sowing (give details of method and labour inputs etc.)
Seed dressing used
Was there a healthy stand at plant emergence stage (Yes/No)
If no, give reasons :
Comments
Weeds : Incidence this year : Higher than normal
Normal
Lower than normal
What does the farmer give as the major weeds
minor weeds
Which weeds are used for forage etc.
Name of herbicide Date of application
Dates of hand weeding
Dates of other weed control methods (specify)
Work rate/
Weed control method application rate Wage or price
Hand weeding
Animal cultivation
Chemicals (specify)
Other (specify)
What criteria does the farmer use to decide that a weeding is necessary:
Insects: Incidence this year : Higher than normal Comments
Normal
Lower than normal
What does the farmer give as-the major insects
-the minor insects
Control of insects
Chemical date
Application rate, cost (per unit)
Method used work rate









Diseases : Incidence this year :


Higher than normal Comments
Normal
Lower than normal


Major diseases
Minor diseases


Methods of control


Work rate


Forage and thinning :


Date Part of
the plant


Qty. If sold,
price red.


Use
cattle compost discarded


Fertilizer : Does the former use manure or chemical fertilizer ?


YES/NO


If he does not apply any fertilizer ask for the reasons (e.g. does not consider
it worth applying, no supplies available when wanted, price too high):

If he does apply fertilizer, fill in the following :

Type of Source of Application Cost Date of Stage of Comments
fertilizer fertilizer rate (per applica- plant growth
(include unit) tion when applied
manure)


Explain how the fertilizer was applied (e.g. broadcast or in lines) and the
work rates, e.g, if broadcast by hand, how long for one bigha :
Ask why he applies fertilizer at these rates rather than at lower or higher
rates, or at different stages of plant growth. For example, he may be using rates
because they were recommended by an extension agent, or he may have experimented
in, previous seasons, or the rates are current local practice :


When was the last fertilizer shortage


days after
sowing










Comments
Rains : Incidence this year : Higher than normal
Normal
Lower than normal
Give details if the rains were untimely or unusual in any way this year :
Irrigation :
Was the plot irrigated ? YES/NO
Irrigations (include pre-sowing)

Date Stage of Depth of Source of Do you If water is pur-
growth water water own the chased, price
equipment
(Yes/No)
1st
2nd
3rd

Irrigation Equipment:
Give details of the type, capacity and running costs of the farmers irrigation
equipment :
Comments on the availability, reliability, price, etc. of irrigation water,
equipment, pump fuel etc.
Other cultural practices if not already included :

Operation Days after Labour Bullock Hiring Comments
sowing rate rate rate






Harvest : Date Stage of growth (green, completely
ripe, etc.)
If harvested early give reasons :


Farmer estimate


Grain yield
Time taken for harvest
Harvested by-own labour
-hired labour


Measured yield


(e.g. people per acre)

Wage paid
(If a share or in kind put in details)









Drying : Was the crop dried after harvest
Is drying a problem ? YES/NO
What methods are used for drying
Shelling: Date after harvest
Method used
Time taken (e.g. per seer)
Shelled by-own labour
-hired labour


Wage rate


Storage : Type of store Cost Life
Other crops for which it is used
Is grain for seed stored differently from main crop ?
What losses does the farmer expect in storage
What are the major pest and disease problems.
What methods are used to control pests and disease :
E. Use of Maize Amount
(i) GRAIN Household consumption
(total Meals to labours
for this
season) grain to labours
Selling : date price
Other uses (specify)


Give detail :












place


Total grain
Consumption Habits
How is maize eaten
Amount of time taken in grinding and other food preparation
Is more or less fuel needed than for cooking rice
(ii) OTHER PLANT MATERIALS (items not included earlier)

Use Quantity If sold,
price per
unit
Cobs
Stalks
Other (specify)










F. Labour Use and Constraints :


(i) Labour


~XJW~,n ~ra~nar~n ., in .vn 1~0 ~r~rnA ,.nfn nra ArlnnF ht,~


*. Vl43aL U.L U ILl l1 ai luuuVLiuii a1| uW.r. uy -
Men Women Male Female
children children






Who takes care of storage of the main maize crop (men or women)
seeds (men or women)
What are the peak labour use periods for maize ?
Do wages rise at that time ? (give details) :
Does a shortage of household workers or agricultural labourers at certain
times of the year prevent more maize from being grown ? If yes, give
details :
G. Working Capital Constraints and Production Credit:
Has credit been obtained for seeds, fertilizer, etc. in growing maize during
the current year ? YES/NO
Give details :

Terms
.Credit Season Amount Source. Date Interest Period Repaid Comments
for YES/NO






Note : Include full details of all loan transactions, e.g. when repayments of loans
are a quantity of the crop. give the details.
Is a lack of working capital and production credit a major constraint on growing
maize? YES/NO .if yes, explain at what time of year and for what
input costs :
Details of other production and consumption loan system : e.g. when food is scare
in some environments one mound of paddy is loaned until the next crop is harvest-
ed and two mounds of paddy is given to pay off the debt.
H. Constraints and Farmer behaviour:
What are the major constraints on this farmers maize production, and how
could they be Fmoycd, e.g. l i pf improved seeds, lack of fertilizer, lack of









irrigation water, low market price, etc. (try and list in order of importance) :
(a) Farmer's opinion NOTES (Farmers'
perception of problems,
reasons, etc.):
1 st
2nd
3rd
(b) Surveyor's opinion* Farmers' reply to surveyor's
opinion
1st
2nd .

I. Innovations and relevance of interview to research objectives:
List innovations observed, or new insights gained from this interview. These
notes should relate to the objectives of this analysis as given on the first page
For example, what objectives for a breeding, program would appear to flow
from these farmer problems. What priority problems can be investigated by
on-farm varietal and agronomy trials. What innovations have been seen
which could be useful to other farmers if extention agents and maize improve-
ment staff knew about them (e.g. his application rates of fertilizer or his
methods of obtaining timely irrigation water may be more relevant to his
economically Viable maize production practices than presently recommended
practices) :
J. Questionnaire:
Note down how the questionnaire might be improved :

[*In this section the researcher should discuss with the farmer different ways in
which the researcher feels constraints could be broken, production risks reduced
-or economic yields to constraining scare resources could be increased. For
example, on a small holding there m ty be plenty of household labour available
(with little or no alternative productive employment) which could be used for
more effective weeding or water management methods and thereby increase
S yields or reduce risks].





" -' ... *. '-,








Appendix III
MAIZE ON-FARM TRIALS, 1971 KHARIF


G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology '
Pantnagar, Nainital, U.P.
Objectives
Farmers' yields generally are far below the best possible obtained on experi-
ment stations. A number of improved early maturing varieties with high degree of
disease resistance are now available from the breeding programme of Pantnagar.
These show greater yield potential under experiment station conditions. However,
data on their performance under farm conditions are needed. Similarly data on
economic levels of fertilizer use is needed for future recommendations to the farmers.
The results obtained from on-farm trials will be used to refine package of agronomic
practices (particularly rates of fertilizer application).
Location of trials
In 1978, trials will be conducted at Bulandshahr and Moradabad districts.
Maize grown in these districts is 126,000 and 65,000 hectares, respectively,
Type of trials
Following are the type and number of trials to be taken up in the two
districts 1978.

Bulandshahr Moradabad
1. Varietal Trial 5 5
2. Fertilizer Trial 5 5 ,.
3. Verification Trial 10 10
4. Production 10 10

No replicated insecticide trial will be conducted. However four border rows
will be planted with varietal trial and will be left untreated: The data on insect
incidence will be recorded in these border rows and compared with the treated rows
of varietal trial.
General list of items needed for planting on Farm Trials
1.- Wooden stakes .
2.1 Strings
3. Measuring tapes
4. Fertilizer (S.S.P., urea etc.)
5.: Insecticide (Furadan granules 5%)
6. Lime (for marking)
7. Tags
8. Buckets for fertilizer
67







68

9. Sets of measuring cups for the fertilizer
10. Seed
11. Hand planter
12. Hoes
13. Field books
14, Pencils
15. Stapler
16. Drinking water
17. Scales if needed
Varietal Trial
Objective : To compare early maturing composites with the farmers variety.
Varieties : (Treatment)


Grain Type

orange. bo!d flint
orange yell, flint
yell, semiflint
orange yell, flint
yell, semiflint


Bulandshahr
1. Farmer's variety
2. Tarun
3. D74
4. D765
5. D743
6. PoolS


Moradabad
Farmer's variety
Tarun
D741
D765
D743
D742 (white flint)


Maturity

90 days
90 days
85 days
95 days
90 days


oi (2 FV
f!iill .


D741
(23)


i-" D741 FV *
Al (12) (11)


S0D743
M (1)


I Poo4/D7z21


Tarun D765
(22) (21)


Tarun PooU/L4t
(10)


D741
(3)


D743
(20)


D765
(8)


Tarun FV
(4) 15)
21.6 m
Fertilizer Trial


l-p--P-- liI m
It 5m
II t
0.5m

D765 i .
(18) : m

0.5m 5 e

D743
(7) 5m

0.5m

D765 5m
(6) 5m


Fig. 1. Plant to border rows along each side of the experiment using the
same variety as in the adjoining plot.


Sowing plan


_ 1


__


I _










Experimental Design : Randomized complete block design with four: replica-
tions. Total number of plots=24. The layout plan is shown in figure 1....
Plot size : 6 rows of 5m. each with 0.60m. between. rows. .Plapt to plant
distance will be 20cm. This will give 156 plants per plot (85,000, lants/a). Each
trial will occupy 464.4 m2.
Seed requirement: Each variety requires 2 seeds x 26 hills 6 rows -x 4
replications=1248 seeds=400 gms approx: per trial.
Land Preparation : This should be the best possible under the conditions on
each individual farm.

; Fertilizer Applications @ 60'kg N+30 kg P20s/ha.
All the phosphatic fertilizer (9.375 kg of S.S.P.) will be applied before plant-
ing. Phosphatic fertilizer should be broadcast on the experiment area (464.4 sq. m.)
after the pre-planting irrigation. Then it may be incorporated by the cultivator
immediately prior to planting.
The nitrogenous fertilizer (Urea should be applied as a split application-
half the nitrogen per plot (117 gms urea for 18 sq.m) should be applied as a side
dressing (banded by the side of the lines of plants) at the time the first insecticide
granules are applied (about 2-3 weeks after planting). The other half (117 gms urea)
of the nitrogen should be applied as a side dressing after about 6-weeks of planting.
It is suggested that the fertilizer for each plot be weighed and a. container
marked with the volumes of these amounts. Then these volume measures can be used
for the field applications.
Sowing : Sow in the early morning before the sun is high in the sky and the
temperature is high. The importance of sowing in proper moisture can not be over-
emphasized.
Insecticide Application: The principal pest of.maize in the kharif season is
the borer. Effective control of the stem borer can be achieved by applying furadan
granules in the leaf whorls. The granules may be applied at five to six leaf stage
(10-15 days after sowing) @ 15 kg/ha.
Irrigation: If monsoon is delayed, first irrigation after planting should be
made after about 13 days. Subsequent irrigations should be timed to prevent mois-
ture stress which is characterized by wilting (rolling of the leaves). Over watering
should always be avoided. As far as possible drainage should be provided in the
experimental plot at the time of sowing.
Weeding : Hand weeding will be carried out when necessary. One weeding
operation should be timed immediately before the first fertilizer side dressing.
Thinning : Two seeds are planted per hill at the time of sowing. Therefore it
is very important that thinning be carried out to one plant per hill. Perfect plant
stand should give 26 plants per row or 156 plants/plot. Thinning should be carried
out before the plants are one foot high.
Harvesting : When grains are hard, the husks are dry and brown, harvesting
can be carried out. Harvesting should be done in the centre four rows leaving one
border row on each side.








70

Data to be recorded :
1. Name of the farmer
2. Name of the village
3. Name of the district
4. Previous crop
5. Land preparation (number of ploughing etc.)
6. Manure (FYM) used
7. Type and quantity of fertilizer applied before sowing and as side dressing (with
dates of applications)
8. Dates of irrigations before and after sowing. On all sites, record dates of rainfall
and some indication of amount of rainfall
9. Date of sowing
10. Method of sowing
11. Date of germination
12. Date of thinning
13. Date of insecticide application
14. Borer attack (% main shoot killed)-record before flowering
15. Dates of weedings
16. Plant population (from centre four rows). Take count between flowering and
harvest
17. Disease attack (BSDM/Stalk rot)
18. At harvest time : Date of harvest

Plot Entry Plot size No. of No. of cobs Wt. of moisture flowering
No. name harvested plants in harvested fresh cob % at date 50%
harvested sample in kg. harvest silking)


2.
3.
4.

6.
7'
'8.
9.
10. .

12.
13 .
14. -










15.
16.
.17.
18.
19.:
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.

Calculation of Yield in maize
Yield/ha. in terms of kg of grain at 15% moisture
yield FWPxDMxSxMxF
where FWP = fresh weight/plot
DM = % dry matter= 100-moisture % in the harvested sample at
harvest
S = shelling % =80
100
M moisture factor. At 15%= -- 1.176
85
F = factor to convert kg/plot in kg/ha=10,00/12*=853.33
* harvested area=4 rows x0.60 x 5m= 12 m2.
FERTILIZER TRIAL
Objective
To Find out the most economic levels of fertilizers.
Treatment

N (kg/ha) P20s (kg/ha)
1. 0 0
2. 30 0
3. 60 0
4. 90 0
5. 60 30
6. 90 30

Experimental design : Randomized complete block design with four replica-
tions. Total No. of Plots=24. The layout plan is shown in figure 2.
Plot size: 6 rows of 5m. each with 0.60m. between ro\~/. Plant to plant
distance will be 20 cm. This will give 156 plants per plot (85,000 plants/ha). Each
trial will-occupy 464.4 m2,
V variety : D174.









Seed requirement : Each plot requires=2 seeds x 26 hills x 6 rows=312 seeds.
Total requirement=312 seeds x 24 plots=7488 seeds=2.4 kg.
Field preparation: This should be the best possible under the conditions on
each individual farm.
Fertilizer applications : Following will be the fertilizer requirement for diffe-
rent treatments per plot.
Note : Plant two border rows along each side of the experiment.


Treatment
1. 0 0
2. 30 0
3. 60 0


Urea
0
120 gms.
240 gms.


4. 90 0 ; :::,.. 360 fns. .


5. 60 30
6. 90 30


240 gms.
360 gms.


S.S.P.
0
0
0
0
300 gmins.
300 gms.


All the phosphatic fertilizer will be band placed in the row before planting.
Alitbhe ph osphat i.c fertilizer will be. band placed in the row before planting.


60,30
W II (24)
i i' .


H I1 60:0
. nII (13)
* Si


2:0o
(23)


S90:0
(14)


:60:0
(22)


90:30
(az)


0:0 90:30
(15) (16)


1 90o0 90:30 30:0 60:30 0:0 60o 0
I (12) (11) (10) (9) (8) (7)


0:0 300
(1) (2)


60:0
(3) -. .


90:0
(4)


60:30
(5)


0.5aS

90:30 m '
(6)
(6) 1
--- '^^


21.6 n.


The nitrogen fertilizer should be applied 'as a split application-halfthe
nitrogen per plot should be applied as a side dressing (banded by the sides of the
lines of plants) at the time the first insecticide granules are applied, The other half of


p I I I------


30:0.
(20)'


90:0
(19)


I:T
II,
* 5m
'*^


0.5m


6030
(17.)


H
0
a


30:0
(18)


I.5m


I!


I
WI
O
n.r
I


1% a


K------


I


.. .. 1


I 1 .


----


I


I I i ,


I


!


i


I







73

the nitrogen should be applied as a side dressing when the plants are about 6 weeks
old.
SIt is suggested that the fertilizer for each plot be weighed (urea and S.S.P.)
and a container marked with the volumes of these amounts. Then these volume
measures can be used for the field applications.
Sowing: Sow in the early morning before the sun is high in the sky and the
temperature is high. The importance of sowing in proper moisture cannot be over-
emphasized.
Isnecticide Application, irrigation, weeding and thinning : Same as in varietal
trial.
Harvesting : When grains are hard and the husks are dry and brown, harvest-
ing can be carried out. Harvesting will be done in the centre four rows leaving one
border row on each side.
Data to be recorded
1. Name of the farmer
2. Name of village
3. Name of district
4. Previous crop
5. Land preparation (number of ploughing etc.)
6. Manure (FYM) used
7. Type and quantity of fertilizer applied before sowing and as side dressing
(with dates of application)
8. Dates of irrigations before and after sowing. On all sites record dates of
rainfall and some indication of amount of rainfall.
9. Date of sowing
10. Method of sowing
11. Date of germination
12. Date of thinning
13. Date of insecticide application
14. Borer attack (% main shoot killed)-record before flowering
15. Dates of weeding
16. Plant population (from centre four rows). Take count between flowering
and harvest.
17. Disease attack (BSDM/Stalk rot)
18. At harvest time : date of harvest










Plot Treat- Plot size No. of No. of Wt. of Moisture No. of
No. ment harvested plants cobs in fresh % at plants after
harvested harvested cob in harvest flowering
sample kg.


Calculation of yield in maize : Same as is varietal trial.

VERIFICATION TRIAL
Objectives
(1) To compare the farmers' variety and cultural practices with an improved
variety and improved practices.
(2) To demonstrate to the farmer.in his own field.that improved variety and
cultural practices would increase his yields and net income.
Design: Six plots side by side, of which two will be planted by the farmer
and four by the university group,










Treatments:

1. Farmer variety planted with farmers practices.
2. Improved variety (Tarun) planted with farmers practices.
3. Farmer variety with intermediate package of practices. Fertilizer : 60N;
0 P205
4. Improved variety (Tarun) with intermediate package of practices. Fertilizer
60 N ; 0 P206
5. Farmer variety with appropriate package of practices. Fertilizer 60N;
30 P205.
6. Improved variety (Tarun) with appropriate package of practices. Fertilizer
60N; 30 P20s.

Plot size: 15 rows, 10 m. long. In treatment 3, 4, 5 and 6 the distance
between rows will be 0.60 m. and plant to plant distance will be 0.20 m.
Plot size= 15x0.6x10=90 ni'.

Seed requirement: 15x51x2= 1530 seedsjplot. Total seed requirement for three
plots=4590 seeds
(of Tarun)= 1.6 kg.

Fertilizer applications : Following will be the fertilizer requirement for diffe-
rent treatments per plot.

Treatment Urea S.S.P.
1. FV+FP FV= Farmer variety
2. IV+FP IV=Tarun
3. FV+IP 1.2 kg. 0 FP= Farmer practice
4. IV+IP 1.2 kg. 0 P=Intermediate practice
5. FV+AP 1.2 kg. 1.5 kg. AP=Appropriate practice
6. IV+AP 1.2 kg. 1.5 kg.
All the phosphatic fertilizers will be broadcast uniformly on the 1/3 of the
experiment area after the pre-planting irrigation.
The nitrogen fertilizer should be applied as a split application-half the
nitrogen per plot should be applied as a side dressing (banded by the side of the lines
of plants) at the time when plants are about 3-4 weeks old. The other half of the
nitrogen should be applied as a side dressing when the plants are about 6
weeks old.










Sowing, irrigation, weeding and thinning : same as in varietal trial.
Field plan for verification plot.

Farmer Farmer Farmer
variety Tarun variety Tarun variety Tarun
+ + +. + + +
Inter Appro- Appro.
Farmer Farmer Inter practice practice practice
practice practice practice (60.0) (60.30) (60.30) 10m
(60.0)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

----------- 54.0 m. -----------------

Harvesting : When the crop is mature, organise a field day for the farmers.
With the farmers, harvest the entire area within each treatment. Weigh the ears and
quickly estimate the moisture and shelling percentage for each plot. Present to the
farmers the yields and costs of input for each treatment and generate discussion on
the economic returns obtained from the various levels of improved technologies.

Data to be recorded

1. Name of the farmer
2. Name of the village
3. Name of district
4. Previous crop and levels of chemical fertilizer and FYM applied
5. Land preparation (number of ploughing etc.)
6. Manure (FYM) used
7. Type of fertilizer applied with dates of application
8. Date of irrigations and quantity of water applied
9. Date of sowing
10. Method of sowing
11. Date of germination
12. Date of thinning
13. Date of weeding
14. Borer attack
15. Disease attack










At harvest time : Date of harvest

No. of
Plot Plot size plants Wt. of
No. Treatment harvested harvested fresh cob Moisture %
1. FV+FP
2. IV+FP
3. FV+IP
4. IV+IP
5. FV+AP
6. IV+AP


Calculation of yield : Same as in varietal trial.
PRODUCTION PLOT
Objective :
1. To demonstrate to the farmer in his own field, the yield potential of
improved variety and improved practices.
2. To increase the seed of the variety for further distribution in the area.
Treatment : Variety : Tarun
Fertilizer : @ 60 kg. N+30 kg. PsOs/ha.
Plot size : one acre (approximately)
Seed requirement : Tarun->8 kg.
Fertilizer application : @ 60 kg. N+30 kg. P20(/ha. following will be the
fertilizer requirement:
Urea : 52 kg.
S. S. P. : 75 kg.
All the phosphatic fertilizer will be broadcast uniformly on the experiment
area after the pre-sowing irrigations.
The nitrogen fertilizer will be applied as a split application-half the nitrogen
will be applied as a side dressing when plants are about 3-4 weeks old. The other
half of the nitrogen will be applied as a side dressing when the plants are about 6
weeks old.
Sowing, irrigation, weeding and thinning : Same as in varietal trial.
Harvesting : When the crop is mature, organise a field day for the farmers,
harvest the entire area. Weight the ears and quickly estimate the moisture and shell-
ing percentage. Present to the farmers the yield and cost of input and generate
discussion on the economic returns obtained from the plot.
Data to be recorded
1. Name of the farmer
2. Name of the village









3. Name of district
4. Previous crop and the levels of chemical fertilizer and FYM applied
5. Land preparation (number of ploughing etc.)
6. Manure (FYM) used
7. Type of fertilizer applied with dates of application
8. Date of irrigations and quantity applied
9. Date of sowing
10. Method of sowing
11. Date of germination
12. Date of thinning and number of people used
13. Date of weeding and number of people used for
14. Borer attack
15. Disease attack
16. Date of harvesting
17. Plot size harvested
18. Weight of fresh cob
19. Moisture % at harvest
20. Yield/ha.
FARMER INTERVIEWS
Objectives : (a) ennumerate all inputs and outputs for one plot of maize;
(b) record all costs of inputs and prices received;
(c) Determine the reasons for farmers' maize production, consumption
and disposal practices.
Sample : A farmer should be contacted close to the cluster of on-farm trails.
He should not be a farmer who has had extensive previous contact with researchers,
extension agents etc.
Procedure : The researcher should visit the farmer as frequently as possible
and at least once every two weeks. The interviewer should complete the attached
crop log sheet by asking the farmer what has been done on the plot since the pre-
vious interview. It is important to list all inputs, whether case was paid or not, and
to record all output from the plot. This would include, for example, the amount of
maize taken out during thinnings and fed to cattle. Whenever possible the researcher
should try and obtain an accurate measurement of the actual quantities, wage rates,
manhours, womenhours etc. used on this single plot. Figures should related to
actual quantities for this plot and not be converted to a per hectare or per acre basis.
The researcher should ask the farmer why he does or does not do specific
things. For example he may not be following recommended levels of fertilizer
application. Why ? If he applies fertilizers, whether chemical manure, why these
rates rather than some other rates. In another case he may weed on a certain date.
What criteria did the farmer use to decide to weed at that time ?
For this one plot the crop log should enable us to, amongst other things,
estimate costs and returns to purchased inputs and marketed sales. It should also










give us details of all inputs and' maize crop output (grain, cobs, forage) which is not
bought or sold in the market. Finally, it should give us the reasons for why the
farmer did what he did on this plot during this specific kharifseason.
The crop log should start with brief details of the previous crop and
continue through all operations until all the grain and plant fibre produce has been
disposed of. It should include therefore all details of harvesting, post harvest opera-
tions, storage and crop consumption and sales.

CROP LOG SHEET


Father's name :
Plot size
Previous crop :
Yield
Expected next crop :
fertilizer to be applied
expected harvest date
Kharif maize crop
Variety


Village
Soil type
Fertilizer applied
Price received
planting date
expected price


Expected yield


District

Harvest date


Expected price


Date of inter- Details of actual opera- Reasons and comments on
viewer's Date of tions, application rates, timing of operations,
visit operation people used, yields, intensity of operations etc.
sales, prices etc.







Appendix IV
SPECIAL PURPOSE SURVEY
MAIZE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT


G:B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology
Name of the farmer : Village :
Tehsil: District:
Name of interviewer :
Important Note: The questions in this questionnaire are to be answered with
reference to the single plot that is being selected for the purpose of
this survey.
May June July
1. Planting date : 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 (week)
(tick one)




2. Do you think this is the best time to plant ? YES/NO
3. If 'No' why were you not able to plant earlier ?
(i) Preceeding crop standing in the plot
(ii) Shortage of power
(iii) Shortage of labour
(iv) Soil condition did not permit (specify)
(v) Other (specify)
4. (i) Do you have pump irrigation ? YES/NO
(ii) Can you buy irrigation water ? YES/NO
5. Was pre-sowing irrigation done on this plot ? YES/NO
6. Planting method you used :
(i) Behind plough
(ii) Dibbling
(iii) Broadcasting
(iv) Other (specify)
7. Maize variety planted on this plot:
8. Variety is yellow/white
9. Source of seed :
10. Fertilizer use on this plot:
Kharif '77 Rabi '77 Kharif '78
(i) Amount of FYM










(ii) Inorganic Fertilizer :


11. Size of this maize plot
12. Was weeding done on this plot ? YES/NO
Man days/plot Hired or family labour
1st weeding
2nd weeding
3rd weeding
13. Was inter-cropping done on this field ? YES/NO
Crops inter-cropped: ,
Plant density:
No. of plants Barren plants No. of plants affected
sby bird damage
I1st sample
2nd sample
3rd sample
15. Is this approximately the density you wanted ?
Prefer higher density
Density about right
Prefer lower density
Expected yield from this plot
16. Was your maize water-logged ? YES/NO
Severely slightly
17. Harvest date : Actual
Expected
18. Did you use some plants from this plot as fodder ? YES/NO
19. Expected use of maize.
(i) Home consumption
(ii) Seed
(iii) Animal feed
(iv) Selling
20. Crop rotation for this plot:
Proceeding kharif crop :
Preceeding rabi crop :
Following rabi crop :
21. Daily wage rate : in July Rs. In August Rs.
22. In what month do you normally last consume your own maize ?
23. Total cultivated area of your farm;


Type


Amount








Appendix V
MAIZE AREA IN MORADABAD BLOCKS


Sl. 1977 (Ha) 1978 (Target) (Ha)
No. Name of Block Hybrid Other Hybrid Other
1. Moradabad 44 196 60 300
2. Munda Pandey 139 578 100 400
3. Bhagatpur Tanda 52 116 50 50
4. Thakurdwar 0 199 60 150
5. Dhilari 4 458 20 100
6. Bilari 0- 2463 150 1200
7. Kudarki 0 1845 160 1600
8. Chandausi 0 635 150 1900
9. Amroha 17 973 600 1200
10. Joya 13 2655 800 1450
11. Chajlet 5 360 100 200
12. Sambhal 64 1781 800 4500
13. Bahjoi 80 1101 300 1700
14. Asmoli 0 699 550 1750
15. Panwasa 0 1640 300 2000
16. Hussainpur 189 2950 200 2200
17. Bhanora 43 1483 250 2250
18. Gajrola 29 1847 200 2400
19. Gangeshwari 156 2284 50 1650
Total 835 24272 4900 27000


Source : District Agriculture Office,


Moradabad.








Appendix VI
MAIZE STORAGE AND UTILIZATION SURVEY


Farmer's name :
Village :
Date of interview :
I. Storage :
1. How do you store your grain ? (Explain)
2. How much storage capacity do you have ?
3. How much grain do you usually store ?
4. How much grain did you store this season ?
5. Reasons for storing more/less grain this year. (Explain)
6. Do you have any storage problems ? Yes/No
7. If 'Yes'-specify : Insects
Take one sample Rodents
(100 gms) of the
grain from each Weather
storage bin/farmer
and label it. Other
8. Do you use any chemicals to check storage loss ? Yes/No
9. If 'Yes'


Type of chemical
used


Approx.% damaged
if


Amount of
chemical


10. Who recommended the use of chemicals in storage ?
11. Are you satisfied with the way you store the grain ? Yes/No
12. If 'No' what improvements do you need for effective storage (Explain)
II. Maize Utilization:
13. How much maize did you harvest this year : Qtls.
14. Do you consume all the grain you store ? Yes/No
15. Do you buy grain for consumption ? Yes/No.
16. If'Yes' how much Qtls.
17. How do you usually consume maize ?
18. When do you usually consume maize : from to
19. Any preference for grain colour. White/Yellow.
83







84

III. Marketing :
20. Do you usually sell maize? Yes/No
21. How much did you sell this year ?
22. How often do you sell maize in a season ?
Once
monthly
other (specify)
23. To whom did you sell maize ?
24. What price did you get ? Rs.
25. Name of the nearby market
Retail price
Whole-sale price


per quintal.




-U


C4,W_


',4(


Local farmers observing ears of maize variety 'TARUN' harvested from a Production Plot, Bulandshahr 1978 season


'a rs
-"P


! c































































PRINTED BY : Sunil Composing Co. at S.P. Printers, 1067 Ajay Palace, Naraina
NEW DELHI-110028




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs