IOSR-JAVS   Volume-2 ~ Issue-4 ~ MAR-APR-2013

ABSTRACT: Sorghum hybrids like CSH-14 and CSH-16 were sown on different dates with weekly interval. Lowest larval population was recorded at flowering stage (1.16 larvae/earhead), when crop was sown during 12th and 19th June 2010. CSH-14 hybrid recorded (2.00 larvae/earhead) low larval load on 12th June, 2010 date of sowing. Per cent earhead damage was minimum (11.33%) and maximum grain yield was recorded (39.81 q/ha) when CSH-14 was sown on 12th June 2010. As sowings were delayed larval count and per cent earhead damage increased whereas grain yield decreased.

Keywords – earhead, grain, hybrid, sown, yield

[1] Anonymous, Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, 2009, 90-92.
[2] Kulkarni, K. A, Thontadharya, T. S, Jotwani, M. G, and Parameshwarappa, R, Present status of earhead caterpillars on sorghum and
their management. Presented at the All India Sorghum Workshop, Coimbatore, India, 12-14 May, 1980.
[3] Patil, S. B, Studies on the biology and control of tussock caterpillar, Euproctis subnotata Walker (Lepidopera : Lymantriidae) on
sorghum, M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences Dharwad, Karnataka, India, 1985
[4] Srivastava, A. S. and Singh, Y. P, Control of Heliothis armigera Hub. (Noctuidae : Lepidoptera) attacking sorghum. Curr. Sci., 42,
1973, 865-867.
[5] Kongwad, S. B, Bio-ecology and management of sorghum earhead caterpillar with special reference to Cryptoblabes gnidiella
(miller), M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences Dharwad, Karnataka, India, 2000.
[6] Shivanand, Bio-ecological management of Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.) on sorghum, M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of
Agricultural Sciences Dharwad, Karnataka, India, 2002.

ABSTRACT: A field experiment was conducted at the Teaching and Research Farm of the Department of Agricultural Technology, Federal polytechnic, Bali, Taraba State to study the performance of five varieties of soybean (TGX 1951, TGX 1448-2E, TGX1740, TGX 1485-1D and TGX1904 under rain fed and soil conditions of Bali Local Government Area of Taraba State in northern guinea savanna zone of Nigeria. The experiment was arranged in split plot suited to completely randomized block design and was replicated three times in 2012 cropping season. Parameters measured at different growth stages include germination count at 3 days after sowing (DAS), plant height at 6 and 8 weeks after sowing (cm), number of leaves per plant at 6 and 8 weeks after sowing, number of branches per plant at 6 weeks after sowing and days to 50% germination. The results showed that there were significant differences (p = 0.01) among the five varieties of soybean tested for germination count. Variety TGX 1448-2E had the highest germination count of 40.89 while the lowest germination count was observed for TGX 1951 (2.27).

Keywords: Soybean Varieties, Performance, Ecological Zone.

[1] Adamu, R.S. and Amatobi C.I., (2001). Field evaluation of soybeans genotypes for susceptibility to stinkbug damage at Samaru, Zaria, Tropical Oil Seed Journal, 7: 74-83.
[2] Adeniyan, O.N. and Ayoola, O.T. (2006). African Journal of Biotechnology, vol. 5(20), pp. 1886-1889.
[3] Adetiloye, P.O., Okeleye, K.A. and Tayo, T.O. (2000). Effects of seed innoculation with Bradyrhizobium japonicum on nodulation,
growth and yield of soybean. In Tropical Oil Seeds Journal, 5: 22-29.
[4] Akparobi S.O. (2009), Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 4(1): IDOSI publications, 2009.
[5] Atlas, (2006). Macmillan Nigerian Secondary Atlas. Macmillan Nigerian Publishers LTD. Pp 22-25.
[6] Carlson, J.B.; and Lersten, N.R. (1987). Reproductive Morphology. In Wilcox J.R. (ed): Improvement, production and Uses (2nd ed; pp 95-134). Madison WI: American Society of Agronomy.
[7] Dada, F.O.A., Garba, M.J., Ijeoma, A. (2006). In Macmillan Nigeria Secondary Atlas. Macmillan Nigeria Publishers Ltd. ISBN 978-
978-081-355-4. Pp 22-25.
[8] Endress, J. (2001) – Product Characteristics Multinational Aspects and Utilization Campaign IL: AOCS Press.
[9] Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), 1989. Soybean Production in the Tropics. Annual Report, pp: 14-16.
[10] Gomez, A.A. and Gomez K.A. (1984). Statistical procedure for Agricultural Research. Pp. 680.

ABSTRACT: This paper studies the futures markets for maize and wheat in India in order to determine their efficiencies. Cointegration and error correction models are used to determine the presence of cointegration and short-run equilibrium relationship between the futures and spot prices. The convergence of the futures and spot price series suggests that futures markets play the expected roles of price discovery and risk management. Although the futures market is found to be an unbiased predictor of future spot price, it is weakly inefficient for both commodities because past futures and spot prices had significant impact on the current spot prices. Also, price volatility clustering is not found in the price series which is an indication that price movements are due to normal fundamentals of demand and supply. On the basis of price discovery and risk management, the study advocates for more participation in the futures market and the formulation of policies that would enhance greater working efficiency of the futures markets.

Key words: Futures, efficiency, maize, wheat, volatility, India and cointegration.

[1] A.M. Chakriya, and A.M. Husain, Forecasting commodity prices: Futures versus judgment. IMF Working Paper, WP/04/41, 2004. [2] N.L. Ahuja, Commodity derivatives market in India: Development, regulation and future prospects. International Research. Journal of Finance and Economics 2, 2006, 154-162.

[3] J.A.Wiseman, M.A. Darroch, and G.F. Ortmann, Testing the efficiency of the South African futures market for white maize. Agrekon, 38(3), 1999, 321-335.

[4] A.M. McKenzie, and M.T. Holt, Market efficiency in agricultural futures markets. Applied Economics 34(12), 2002, 1519-1532. [5] S.A.. Hosseini-Yekan , M. Zibaei, and D.E. Allen, The initial specification of viable futures contracts: The use of a new computational method of value at risk in Iranian agricultural commodities market. Journal of Agricultural Science Technology,12, 2010, 535-548.

[6] T.A. Kofi, A framework for comparing the efficiency of futures markets. American Journal Agricultural Economics, 55, 1973, 584-59.

[7] R.M. Leuthold, The price performance on the futures market of a non -storable commodity: Live beef cattle. American Journal
Agricultural Economics. 56, 1974, 271-279.

[8] M.T. Shihabudheen, and P. Padhi, Price discovery and volatility spill over effect in Indian commodity market. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65(1), 2010, 101-117.

[9] FAO, IFAD, IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, WFP, World Bank, the WTO, IFPRI, UN HLTF, Price volatility in food and agricultural markets: policy responses. Policy Report, 2 June, 2011.

[10] J. Yang, R.B. Balyeat, and D.J. Leatham, Futures trading activity and commodity cash price volatility. Journal of Business Finance & Account. 32(1) &(2), 2005, 297-323.