Agricultural Science Digest

  • Chief EditorArvind kumar

  • Print ISSN 0253-150X

  • Online ISSN 0976-0547

  • NAAS Rating 5.52

  • SJR 0.156

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Agricultural Science Digest, volume 36 issue 2 (june 2016) : 126-129

On farm testing: An effective way of transfer of technology of yard long bean [Vigna unguiculata ssp. sesquipedalis (L.) Verde.]  in Ernakulam district of Kerala, India

Vijendra Kumar Meena*, N.V. Shoji Joy Edison, K. Simta
1<p>ICAR-CMFRI, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Ernakulam-682 018, India.</p>
Cite article:- Meena* Kumar Vijendra, Edison Joy Shoji N.V., Simta K. (2016). On farm testing: An effective way of transfer of technology of yard longbean [Vigna unguiculatassp.sesquipedalis(L.) Verde.] inErnakulam district of Kerala, India . Agricultural Science Digest. 36(2): 126-129. doi: 10.18805/asd.v36i2.10633.

On Farm Testing (OFT) of Yard long bean variety Arka Mangla and Lola were conducted at KVK Ernakulum during 2014-15 with five farmers in area of one ha. The OFT were conducted with active participation of farmer’s to disseminate improved technology of Yard long bean to achieve production potential. The improved technologies consisting the use of modern variety, seed treatment, balance fertilizer application and integrated pest management. On Farm Testing data were recorded with respect to green pods yield as compared to farmer’s local practice. The results of suggested that improved technology recorded higher green pods yield 50.7 q/ha, 45.6 q/ha and 40.7 q/ha, in Arka Magala and Lola and Local variety, respectively. In addition to high in yield of Arka Mangla, lower values of technology gap, extension gap and index existed. The improved technology gave higher gross return, net return with higher benefit cost ratio Yard long bean as compare to farmer’s practices. 

  1. Dhaka. B.L., Meena, B.S. and Suwalka, R.L. (2010). Popularization of improved maize production technology through frontline demonstration in south eastern Rajasthan. Journal of Agricultural Science 1:39-42

  2. Dhruw, K.S., Sengar. R.S. and Yadav. K.N. (2012). Level of knowledge and adoption about recommended maize production technology. Agriculture Udaipur.7: 311-315.

  3. Hiremath S.M., Nagaraju M.V., Shashidhar K.K. (2007). Impacof front line demonstrations on onion productivity infarmers field. Paper presented In: Nation SemAppropriate Extn Strat Manag Rural Resources,Univ. Agric.Sci., Dharwad, December 18-20, p.100

  4. Kumar, R. (2014a). Crop technology demonstration: an effective communication approach for dissemination of wheat production technology. Agricultural Science Digest 34:131-134.

  5. Kumar, R. (2014b). Assessment of technology gap and productivity gain through Crop technology demonstration in chickpea. Indian J. Agric. Res.., 48: 162-164.

  6. Kumar, R. (2013). Evaluation of Crop technology demonstration of mustard crop in Transitional plain of Inland Drainage Zone of Rajasthan. International Journal of Agricultural and Statistical Sciences 9:657-660.

  7. Sawardekar, S.V., Dhane, S.S. and Jadhav, B.B. (2003) Front-line demonstration performance of salt tolerant rice variety in coastal saline soils. IRRN. 28: 73-74.

  8. Sreelakshmi, C.H., Sameer Kumar, C.V. and Shivani, D. (2012). Productivity enhancement of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L.) through improved production technology. Madras Agricultural Journal, 99:248-250.

  9. Meena V.K., Edison S. and Subramani S. (2015) a. Frontline demonstration an effective way of popularization of system of rice intensification (SRI). Agric. Sci. Digest., 35: 215-217.

  10. Meena V.K., Subramannian S., Anjlo P. and Dipti N. V. (2015b). Populerization of maize among the small farmers of Ernakulam district of Kerala through front line demonstration. Indian J. Agric. Res., 49: 558-561.

  11. Mukharjee, N. (2003). Participatory Learning and Action. Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi, India. Pp. 63- 65.

  12. Hassan, R.M., Onyango, R. And Rutto, J.K. (1998). Relevance of Maize research in Kenya to Maize production problem Perceived by Farmers. In: RM Hassan(Ed): A GIS Application for Reseach Planning in Kenya CAB international, Oxon.

  13. Ouma, J.H., De Groote and Gethi, M.(2002). Focused Participatory Rural Appraisal of Farmers perception of maize variety and production constraints in the moist transitional Zone in Eastern Kenya. IRMA Socio- Economic Working paper no. 02-01. Nairobi. Kenya: CIMMYT and KARI.

  14. Ranawat, Y., Ram H., Sisodiya, S.S. and Punjabi. N.K.(2011). Adoption of improved maize cultivation practices by trained and untrained farmers of KVK. Udaipur, Rajasthan Journal of Extension Education. 19: 144-147.

  15. Katare, Subhas, S. K. Pandey and Mohd. Mustafa (2011). Yield gap analysis of rapeseed- mustard through front line demonstration. Agric. Update. 6:5-7.

  16. Yadav K.S., Yadava H.S., and Naik M.L., (2004), Gene action governing the inheritance of pod yield in cowpea, Legume Res., 27: 66-69

Editorial Board

View all (0)