TRALOKI SINGH, A. S. TETARWAL, RAHUL DEV, PANKAJ NAUTIYAL AND K. B. ANAND
ICAR-CSSRI Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Sandila, Hardoi-241 203 (U. P.), India
ICAR-CAZRI, Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Pali-306 401 (Rajasthan), India
ICAR-VPKAS Almora-263 601 (Uttarakhand), India
Udai Pratap Collage, Varanasi-212 011 (Uttar Pradesh), India
*(e-mail: Arvind.tetarwal@icar.gov.in)
(Received : 5 June 2024; Accepted : 28 June 2024)
SUMMARY
Oat is a crucial fodder crop that supports small and marginal farmers in the Kachchh region by providing more fodder in saline conditions and increasing income. It is a good source of protein, fiber, and minerals in their green forage, and produce high-quality silage, hay, and excellent grazing when grown with improved practices. To promote improved oat cultivation technology with high- yielding varieties JHO 822 and JHO 2010-1, KVK Bhuj conducted 30 Frontline Demonstrations (FLDs) across 12 hectares from Rabi 2020-21 to 2022-23 at different location of Kachchh Gujarat. The three years’ data revealed that the average yield of JHO 2010-1 increased by 12.60%, from 254 q/ha (existing practice) to 286 q/ha (improved practice). The average technology gap, extension gap, and technology index for JHO 2010-1 were 20 q/ha, 32 q/ha, and 6.54%, respectively. For JHO 822, the yield increased by 10.82% in demo plots over conventional practice with an average technology gap, extension gap, and technology index of 59 q/ha, 40.67 q/ha, and 12.30%, respectively. Economically, the demonstrations showed an increased net return of Rs. 35,900/ha with a benefit- cost ratio (BCR) of 2.03 for JHO 2010-1, compared to Rs. 29,166.67/ha and a BC ratio of 1.85 under local practices. For JHO 822, the net return increased to Rs. 68,066.67/ha with a BC ratio of 2.89, compared to Rs. 59,466.67 /ha and a BC ratio of 2.73 for local practices. By conducting these FLDs, the yield potential of the oat crop and the income level of the farming community can be significantly improved.
Key words: Oat (Avena sativa L.), frontline demonstration (FLD), adoption, economics, technology gap, technology index