{ÉÆSÉ´ÉÉÌ¹ÉEò ºÉ¨ÉÒIÉÉ ]õÒ¨É EòÒ Ê®ú{ÉÉä]Çõ · Executive Summary...

For Official use only

{ÉÆSÉ´ÉÉÌ¹ÉEò ºÉ¨ÉÒIÉÉ ]õÒ¨É EòÒ Ê®ú{ÉÉä]Çõ

REPORT OF THE QUINQUENNIAL REVIEW TEAM

(2002-2006)

®úÉ¹]ÅõÒªÉ EòÉVÉÚ +xÉÖºÉÆvÉÉxÉ Eåòpù B´ÉÆ

+ÊJÉ±É ¦ÉÉ®úiÉÒªÉ ºÉ̈ ÉÎx´ÉiÉ EòÉVÉÚ +xÉÖºÉÆvÉÉxÉ {ÉÊ®úªÉÉäVÉxÉÉ NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE FOR CASHEW

AND ALL INDIA CO-ORDINATED RESEARCH PROJECT ON

CASHEW

JANUARY 2008

¦ÉÉ®úiÉÒªÉ EÞòÊ¹É +xÉÖºÉÆvÉÉxÉ {ÉÊ®ú¹ÉnÂù xÉ<Ç Ênù±±ÉÒ

INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH NEW DELHI, 110 001

NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE FOR CASHEW AND

ALL INDIA CO-ORDINATED RESEARCH PROJECT ON CASHEW

QUINQUENNIAL REVIEW REPORT (2002-2006)

Chairman

Dr. S.S. Magar

Members

Dr. L.V. Kulwal

Dr. P.L. Tandon

Dr. P.C. Lenka

Dr. C.T. Devadas

Dr. C.K. Nair

Secretary

Dr. K.V. Nagaraja

INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH NEW DELHI – 110 001

Published by

Dr. M. Gopalakrishna Bhat Director National Research Centre for Cashew Puttur 574 202, DK, Karnataka Tel No : 08251– 231530 (O); 233490 (R), 230992 (R) EPABX : 230902, 236490 Fax : 08251 – 234350 Gram : CAJUKENDRA E-mail : [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] NRCC Website : http://www.nrccashew.org/ AICRP Cashew : http://www.nrccashew.org/index1.htm January 2008 Secretary

Dr. K.V. Nagaraja Principal Scientist (Biochemistry) NRC-Cashew, Puttur-574 202 Word processed by

Mr. R. Muthuraju

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Chairman and the members of Quinquennial Review Team are extremely thankful to Dr. Mangala Rai, Secretary, Department of Agricultural Research and Education and Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi for providing them an opportunity to evaluate the research programmes, achievements, functioning with related to Terms of References (TOR) for NRC-Cashew, Puttur and All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew consisting of eight main centres and one supporting centre for the period 2002-07.

The team would like to place on record its sincere thanks to Dr. H.P. Singh, Deputy Director General (Hort.), ICAR for his valuable guidance regarding the mandate of team in the first meeting. The team would like to appreciate his research and development views in context with Liberalization, Globalization and Privatization of cashew policy in the country.

The team is also extremely thankful to Dr. V.B. Mehta, VC, DR. BSKKV, Dapoli; Dr. C.R. Hazra, VC, IGKV, Raipur; Dr. D.P. Ray, VC, OUAT, Bhubaneswar; Dr. C. Ramaswamy, VC, TNAU, Tamil Nadu; Dr. P. Chengappa, UAS, Bangalore; Mr. Vishwanathan, I.A.S, VC, KAU, Kerala for their technical support and State Development Cashew R&D Vision statement during interaction meetings. Participation of Dr. R.C. Srivastava, Director, CARI, Port Blair and Prof. W. Ingo Meiti is highly appreciated and acknowledged. The contributions and participation of Director of Research of concerned Universities are worth appreciated and acknowledged.

The team also would like to appreciate the full fledged co-operation, coordination and personal contributions rendered by Dr. M.G. Bhat, Director, National Research Centre for Cashew (NRCC), Puttur, Karnataka. The report would not have been an excellent document if Director might have not addressed the task and extended his valuable technical, secretarial and logistic support. He has personally paid attention to the QRT for making the stay and visits comfortable and professionally fruitful during the review process.

Our special thanks are due to the Agriculture and Horticulture Departments of the State Govt. of Maharashtra, Orissa, Chattisgarh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Karnataka and Kerala States. The team is also thankful to the Cashew Growers Federation of Bhubaneswar, Orissa and the Karnataka Cashew Manufacturers Association, Mangalore, Karnataka as well as progressive cultivators from Vengurla and Bhubaneswar for their active participation and valuable suggestions.

The team would like to extend its thanks to all the programme leaders and scientists of NRC-Cashew for presentation of research results, providing material and information sought by the team participation in discussion and field visits with their colleague scientists. The team expresses its thanks to all the Assoc. Directors of Research, Head of the Centres, Sr. Scientists and Scientists of AICRP on Cashew Centres for their active participation in the review meetings, presentation of research achievements and providing required information.

The help rendered by the Ministerial and Technical Staff Members of NRC-Cashew in providing secretarial assistance in data consolidations and report preparation is thankfully acknowledged. The last but not the least, the QRT members are thankful to all those who have contributed directly or indirectly in documenting this QRT Report.

Chairman

Quinquennial Review Team NRC Cashew & AICRP Cashew

INDIAN COUNCIL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH KRISHI ANUSANDHAN BHAVAN-II, PUSA,

NEW DELHI – 110 012 F.No.13(1)/2007-IA-V Dated: April 11, 2007

OFFICE ORDER The Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research has been pleased to constitute the Quinquennial review team to review the work done during 1.1.2002 to 31.12.2006 in respect of National Research Centre for Cashew and All India Co-ordinated Research Project on Cashew, Puttur:-

Composition

i) Dr. S.S. Magar Former Vice Chancellor Dr. BSKKV, 17, Runanbandh Cooperative Society Near Kotbhagi Hospital, Aundh PUNE – 411 007 (Maharashtra)

: Chairman

ii) Dr. L.V. Kulwal Formerly Head, Department of Horticulture & Formerly Director of Extension Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidhyapeeth Girinagar, RTO Office Road, Behind Rachana Colony AKOLA – 444 004 (Maharashtra)

: Member

iii) Dr. P.C. Lenka Associate Director of Research Orrisa University of Agriculture & Technology P.O. Ranital, BADRAK District (Orissa)

: Member

iv) Dr. P.L.Tandon Principal Scientist (Agri. Entomology) Project Directorate of Biological Control, Hebbal BANGALORE – 560 024 (Karnataka)

: Member

v) Dr. C.T. Devadas Professor & Head Food & Agricultural Process Engineering Agricultural Engineering College & Research Institute Tamil Nadu Agricultural University COIMBATORE – 641 003 (Tamil Nadu)

: Member

vi) Dr. C.K. Nair Principal Scientist CEPC Laboratory & Technical Division Cashew Export Promotion Council of India Ponnamma Chamber-II, 5thFloor, Hospital Road KOLLAM – 691 001 (Kerala)

: Member

vii) Dr. K.V. Nagaraja Principal Scientist (Biochemistry) National Research Centre for Cashew PUTTUR – 574 202, Dakshina Kannada (Karnataka)

: Secretary

The team shall conduct the review of the work done at NRC (Cashew) as well as AICRP (Cashew) located at Puttur keeping in view the guidelines and submit its report to the Council within 6 months (six months) at the latest for submission to the Governing Body of the ICAR. PROCEDURE The Chairman of the Review Team will initiate action to convene the meeting of the team as early as possible. The Chairman will also inform the Director and Project Co-ordinator (Cashew) to furnish the information required by the team with regard to the work done / proposed to be done etc. by the Institute and AICRP (Cashew) as may be required for conducting the review. The T.A. of the Non-Official members of the QRT will be borne by the Institute and will be met out of the sanctioned budget of the Institute. The Directors of the Institute are empowered to grant Air Travel permission to Non-Official members of the QRT. An Honorarium will be paid to the Chairman and Members of QRT in addition to TA / DA admissible to them as per ICAR norms. Sd/-

(Shashi Prabha Razdan) Under Secretary (Horticulture)

DISTRIBUTION:-

1. All Members of the QRT 2. The Director, NRC (Cashew), Puttur 3. Project Co-ordinator, AICRP (Cashew), Puttur 4. PS to DDG(H), ICAR

CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Chapter-1 Introduction 1 – 7

1.1 National perspective in cashew production 1 – 3

1.2 Composition of team 3

1.3 Terms of reference 4 – 5

1.4 Visits 6

1.5 Action taken on recommendations of last QRT (1997-2001) 7

Chapter-2 Objectives, organisation, resources and functions 8 – 11

2.1 Objectives and mandate (NRC-Cashew & AICRP on Cashew) 8

2.2 Organisation, resources and functions 9 – 11

Chapter-3 Management – administrative and financial aspects 12 – 23

3.1 NRC-Cashew 12 – 18

3.2 AICRP on Cashew 19 – 23

Chapter-4 Policies, priorities, strategies and programmes 24 – 36

4.1 Policy issues 24 – 27

4.2 Priorities and strategies 28 – 35

4.3 SWOT anlaysis 35 – 36

Chapter-5 Research achievements 37 – 62

5.1 NRC-Cashew 37 – 57

5.2 AICRP on Cashew 57 – 62

Chapter-6 Transfer of Technology 63 – 65

6.1 Modus of operandi 63

6.2 Knowledge technology transfer ways and means 63 – 65

Chapter-7 Interactions and linkages 66 – 67

7.1 Need 66

7.2 Existing interactions 66 – 67

7.3 Analysis of present linkages 67

Chapter-8 Future projections and programmes 68 – 69

8.1 Institutional upscaling 68

8.2 Strengthening of human resources 69

8.3 Research programmes 69

Chapter-9 Recommendations 70 – 80

9.1 Policy issues 70 – 73

9.2 Scientific recommendations 74 – 80

LIST OF TABLES

Sl. No.

Table No.

Particulars Page No.

1. 1.1 State-wise area, production and productivity of cashew in India during 2006-07

2

2. 1.2 Trade analysis on cashew – 2005-06 & 2006-07 2 3. 2.1 Staff position as on 31-12-2007 9 4. 2.2 Discipline wise scientific and technical vacancy positions on the

establishment of NRC-Cashew as on 31-12-2007

5. 2.3 Staff position of AICRP on Cashew 11 6. 3.1 Institute Research Committee meetings 12 7. 3.2 Research Advisory Committee meetings 13 8. 3.3 Institute Management Committee meetings 13 9. 3.4 Institute Joint Staff Committee meetings 14 10. 3.5 Details of expenditure during the period 1-1-2002 to 31-12-2006 –

PLAN – at NRC-Cashew 15

11. 3.6 Details of expenditure during the period 1-1-2002 to 31-12-2006 – NON-PLAN – at NRC-Cashew

16

12. 3.7 Details of expenditure under Ad-hoc, DBT and NATP projects from 2002 to 2006 at NRC-Cashew

17

13. 3.8 Details of year-wise allocation and expenditure for the years 2002-03 to 2006-07

17-18

14. 3.9 Details of X Plan allocation and expenditure – AICRP on Cashew 19 15. 3.10 Budgetary provision and actual expenditure during 2002-03 20 16. 3.11 Budgetary provision and actual expenditure during 2003-04 21 17. 3.12 Budgetary provision and actual expenditure during 2004-05 22 18. 3.13 Budgetary provision and actual expenditure during 2005-06 23 19. 4.1 Potential region for cashew area expansion 28 20. 5.1 Nutrient status of vermicompost 42 21. 5.2 Colony forming units of microorganisms in vermicompost 42 22. 6.1 Thematic campaigns conducted during 2002-06 54 23. 6.2 Annual Cashew field days conducted during 2002-06 55 24. 6.3 Training programmes conducted during 2002-06 55 27. 6.4 Details of training imparted by NRC-Cashew during 2002-06 64 28. 6.5 Details of training imparted by AICRP on Cashew during 2002-06 65 29. 7.1 Details of organizations and area of collaboration at NRC-Cashew 66 30. 7.2 Details of organizations and area of collaboration at AICRP on

Cashew Centres 67

LIST OF ANNEXURES

Sl. No.

Annexure No.

Particulars Page No.

1. 1.1 Global production of cashew for the year 2005 81

2. 1.2 Cashew in India 82

3. 1.3 Proceedings of the preliminary meeting of QRT held on 25.4.2007 in the chamber of DDG (Hort), ICAR, KAB-II, Pusa, New Delhi

83 - 84

4. 2.1 Equipments purchased during 2002-2006 65

5. 2.2 List of National and International Journals subscribed during the review period.

6. 5.1 List of concluded and on-going research projects 86 - 87

7. 5.2 Publications of NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew (2002-2006)

88

8. 6.1 Publications referred during preparation of QRT Report 89

LIST OF FIGURES

Sl. No.

Figure No. Particulars Page No.

1. 4.1 Flow chart for hierarchy of policies, strategies and programmes

2. 4.2 Current area under cashew

3. 4.3 Identified potential area for cashew cultivation

4. 6.1 Cashew grafts sold under ICAR revolving fund scheme during last 5 years

5. 6.2 Cashew grafts sold under DCCD regional nursery scheme during last 5 years

6. 9.1 Existing, recommended full fledged and co-operating research centres

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AICRP on Cashew All Indian Co-ordinated Research Project on Cashew

Dr.BSKKV Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Viswavidyalay

CARI Central Agricultural Research Institute

CEPCI Cashew Export Promotion Council of India

CFTRI Central Food Technological Research Institute

CPCRI Central Plantation Crops Research Institute

CSIR Council of Scientific & Industrial Research

CSRB Cashew Stem and Root Borer

DCCD Directorate of Cashew and Cocoa Development

ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research

IGKV Indira Gandhi Krishi Viswavidyalay

IMC Institute Management Committee

MPKV Mahatma Pule Krishi Viswavidyalay

NARP National Agricultural Research Project

NBPGR National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NRC-Cashew National Research Centre for Cashew

OUAT Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology

PDBC Project Directorate on Biological Control

PDKV Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Viswavidyalay

QRT Quinquennial Review Team

RAU Rajendra Agricultural University

RRTTS Regional Research and Transfer of Technology Station

SAU State Agricultural University

SSD Sub surface drainage

TNAU Tamil Nadu Agricultural University

TOT Transfer of Technology

TMB Tea Mosquito Bug

UAS University of Agricultural Sciences

WHS Water Harvesting Structures

WSDP Water Shed Development Programmes

QRT-CASHEW

i

QUINQUENNIAL REVIEW REPORT (2002-2006) ON NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE FOR CASHEW AND

ALL INDIA CO ORDINATED RESEARCH PROJECT ON CASHEW

Executive Summary

The Indian Council of Agricultural Research constituted a Quinquennial Review Team (QRT) vide order F.No.13(1)/2007-IA-V dated 11-4-2007 to review the work of the National Research Centre for Cashew and the All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew for the period from 1.1.2002 to 31.12.2006 under the Chairmanship of Dr. S.S. Magar. The QRT had Dr. L.V. Kulwal, Dr. P.L.Tandon, Dr. P.C. Lenka, Dr. C.T. Devadas and Dr. C.K. Nair as members. Dr. K.V. Nagaraja, Principal Scientist, NRC-Cashew was the Secretary. The team had its planning meeting with Dr. H.P. Singh, Deputy Director General (Hort.), ICAR on 25-4-2007 and visited the NRC-Cashew and all the centres of the AICRP on Cashew except Bapatla, Jhargram and Pilicode. The review of these Centres was undertaken between 20th May 2007 and 31st October 2007. The report was drafted and finalized at NRC-Cashew between 26th and 29th December 2007. The team critically reviewed the results of research and other on-going programmes for the relevant period. The team interacted with the scientists and administrators at the NRC-Cashew and AICRP Centres. Discussions were also held with the representatives of processing industry and the farmers involved in field demonstrations / on-farm research. During the visit to the AICRP on Cashew Centres the team held discussions with the Vice-Chancellors, Directors of Research and Zonal Assoc. Directors of the SAUs, concerned. The team evaluated the achievements made by the NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew Centres. While prioritizing the future lines of work, earlier QRT’s recommendations, on-going research programmes and Vision-2025 – Perspective Plan were also considered.. A. Background Information

The scenario of cashew production, productivity and area reveals that there is

an ample scope for area expansion under cashew and enhancement of productivity. The research findings and demonstration on the farmers field showed the productivity range of 2.5 to 3.0 t/ha as against national productivity of 0.82 t/ha.

There is certainly increasing trend of cashew cultivation in India,

however, low productivity in different agroclimatic zones is a major concern. Konkan region of Maharashtra has highest productivity of 1.5 t/ha against lowest of 0.7 t/ha in Tamil Nadu. The total production of 5.5 lakh tons of raw cashew nuts needs to be increased for meeting the raw cashew requirement

QRT 2002-06

ii

of about 1.2 million tonnes of Indian Cashew Industry. India exported 0.119 million tonnes of cashew kernels earning a foreign exchange of Rs. 25140 millions during 2005-06.

B. Main Recommendations of QRT

1. Upgradation of NRCC to Project Directorate on Cashew Research

In view of the growing demand for quality cashew kernels in the International and domestic markets and enhanced research needs on several new and emerging areas namely, Biotechnology, Bio-informatics, Processing and value addition and Market intelligence, there is a strong need to upgrade the NRC-Cashew to the Project Directorate. In this regard, the first and second QRT also recommended the upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate.

2. Establishment of Cashew Research Centres in North Eastern Hilly

Region, Gujarat and Bihar States

In view of suited agroclimatic conditions for cashew plantation crop, QRT recommends after thorough discussion with scientists of the region that three regions need to be considered for establishment of full-fledged centres. The region and location details are as follows.

a) West Tripura - ICAR Research Complex for NEH, Tripura Centre, Lembucherra

b) South Gujarat Region - Paria under Navasari Agricultural University c) South Bihar Region - Rajendra Agricultural University (RAU), Pusa,

Samastipur

3. Establishment of Co-operating Centres

Presently AICRP on Cashew has eight centres and one sub-centre. Cashew needs to be introduced to non-traditional area and plains region. In this regard, QRT felt the need for establishment of co-operating centres to meet the region specific research and TOT activities. The proposed co-operating centres are as follows.

a) Kolhapur – (Shendapark), NARP, MPKV – District Kolhapur, MS b) Sindewahi (NARP, PDKV – District Chandrapur, MS

c) Koraput (RRTTS, OUAT), Orissa

QRT-CASHEW

iii

d) Arabhavi (UAS-Dharwad), District Belgaum, Karnataka

e) Jamshedpur (NARP), Birsa Agricultural University, Jharkand

f) Ela, Old Goa, ICAR Research Complex for Goa, Goa

g) Barapani, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Meghalaya

Concerned SAUs should provide land, water and laboratory infrastructure including one Horticulturist and one Entomologist and supporting staff. ICAR may provide requisite contingency funds for funding of experiments.

4. Creation of independent post of Project Coordinator (Cashew)

Project Coordinator post for Cashew was existing earlier. However,

as NRC-Cashew & AICRP on Cashew are dealing with a single crop, it was thought by ICAR to abolish the post of Project Coordinator and entrusting the job of Project Co-ordinator to Director, NRC-Cashew itself. In the current scenario, the responsibility of the Director has enhanced so much and that too with limited scientific staff available at headquarters, it has become difficult for the Director of NRC Cashew to look after the duties of Project Coordinator (Cashew) effectively.

5. Additional scientific manpower requirement for NRC-Cashew and AICRP

on Cashew

Three plant pathologists’ posts be provided at NRC-Cashew and for Madakkathara and Vengurle centres of AICRP on Cashew. There is a need for addressing the pathological problems such as blossom blight, twig blight, dieback and anthracnose by a pathologist.

Work on development of value added products has been going on at

two centres of AICRP on Cashew, namely, Madakkathara and Vengurle. Madakkathara centre has established a plant which can produce about 500 bottles of cashew apple syrup. Similarly, Dr. BSKKV at Vengurle and Dapoli has developed number of products from cashew apple. In order to strengthen these two centers and to develop alternate technologies for cashew apple, testa, and cashew shell, there is a need for Biochemist / Post Harvest Technologist. QRT recommends providing of one post of Microbiologist at NRC-Cashew and one post each of Biochemist at Madakkathara and Vengurla centre of AICRP on Cashew.

QRT 2002-06

iv

6. Frequent transfer of scientific personnel The research work at some of the centres of AICRP on Cashew is adversely affected by frequent transfers of trained scientific personnel by the State Agricultural University concerned. In the case of inevitable transfer, immediate posting of a suitable substitute should be done.

7. Grafts as planting material

Quinquennial Review Team strongly recommends that only cashew grafts are to be planted in developmental programmes taken up by development department and agencies. Cashew seedlings should not be planted. Further QRT recommends that grafts standards developed by NRC-Cashew should be followed.

8. Strengthening the laboratory facilities at NRC-Cashew and AICRP on

Cashew

a. Research on nutraceuticals from cashew at NRC-Cashew needs to be strengthened.

b. Strengthening work on cashew apple wine, juice and syrup at NRC-

Cashew, Madakkathara and Vengurle Centres of AICRP on Cashew.

c. Establishment of homescale processing model units at all the centres of AICRP on Cashew for demonstration and imparting training to farmers.

C. General Recommendations

a. Shantigodu NRC-Cashew Experimental farm land under lease from State Forest Department should be permanently transferred to NRC-Cashew (ICAR) to achieve and fulfil the mandate. Alternately, the lease of the said land may be extended for a period of 99 years.

b. Emphasis on development of water resources at NRC-Cashew at Puttur

and AICRP on Cashew should be given on priority by implementing principles of micro-watershed techniques. Such costly water resources be utilized by micro-irrigation. AICRP on Cashew Centres at Vengurle, Chintamani and Jhargram. Special funds for construction of WHS should be provided.

c. Research on organic farming of cashew should be intensified. Strong

linkages need to be established with IFOAM, APEDA and CEPCI.

QRT-CASHEW

v

d. NRC-Cashew should develop strong knowledge database in digital

format on integrated natural resources, HRD and R&D. This will help in identification of hot spots for R&D and working on remedies.

e. Active participation in Public Private Partnership (PPP) to join the R&D

particularly in post-harvest technology, processing and global marketing of cashew should be promoted.

f. Present programme of NRC-Cashew should be strengthened by

incorporating research component of semi-auto processing, packing and market intelligence.

g. A high tech technology park where all visible technology showcased

needs to be established in NRC-Cashew, Puttur. h. Remote sensing technique should be utilized for cashew area and

production estimation. i. Nursery act be enacted at national level to prevent spurious planting

material being sold to the farmers.

Dr. S.S. Magar CHAIRMAN

Dr. L.V. Kulwal MEMBER

Dr. P.L. Tandon MEMBER

Dr. C.T. Devadas MEMBER

Dr. P.C. Lenka MEMBER

Dr. C.K. Nair MEMBER

Dr. K.V. Nagaraja SECRETARY

QRT-CASHEW

1

CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 National perspective in cashew production

Cashew is a very important foreign exchange earning horticultural crop of our country. This crop was introduced into India by the Portuguese travellers in the 16th Century. The potential of this crop as a source of edible kernels for international trade was first realized by India in the early part of the 20th Century. India was the first country to exploit the international trade of cashew through the export of cashew kernels. Now India has the largest area in cashew and it is also the largest producer, consumer and exporter of cashew in the world. Global scenario on cashew area and production is presented in Annexure-1.1.

In India presently cashew is grown on an area of 0.855 million ha

(productive area 0.627 million ha) with an annual production of 0.573 million tons of raw cashewnuts. The productivity ranges from 710 to 865 kg/ha. India exported 0.114 million tons of cashew kernels fetching a foreign exchange of Rs. 25140 millions during the year 2005-2006. Data on area, production, and productivity of cashew over the last 50 years are presented in Annexure-1.2.

State-wise data on area, production and productivity of cashew in India for the year 2006-07 is presented in Table 1.1.

Over 4.5 lakh workers, mostly women, are employed in cashew processing factories with a total installed capacity of ten lakh tons of raw cashewnuts for processing. Cashew processing started as a small cottage industry and has now developed into a highly organized labour intensive industry. India is importing raw cashewnuts from African countries to meet the demand of the cashew factories since the quantity of raw cashewnut produced in the country is not adequate. Trade analysis on cashew for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07 is presented in Table 1.2.

The African countries are now establishing their own processing units

and hence it is likely that in the years to come the availability of raw nuts for importing by India may decline or even stop altogether. There is an urgent need to increase the production and productivity of cashew to keep our supremacy in international trade and to make the prices of Indian cashew competitive. This would ensure continued employment of a large work force for most part of the year.

QRT 2002-06

2

Table 1.1: State-wise area, production and productivity of cashew in India during 2006-07

State Area (ha) Production

(Tons) Productivity

(Kg/ha) Kerala 80,000 72,000 900

Karnataka 1,02,000 52,000 700 Goa 55,000 29,000 690

Maharashtra 1,64,000 1,97,000 1,500 Tamil Nadu 1,23,000 60,000 670

Andhra Pradesh 1,71,000 99,000 890 Orissa 1,25,000 84,000 860

West Bengal 10,000 10,000 1,000 Gujarat 4,000 4,000 900

NE States 15,000 11,000 700 Others 5,000 2,000 500 TOTAL 8,54,000 6,20,000 820

Table 1.2: Trade Analysis on cashew – 2005-06 & 2006-07

Particulars 2005-06 2006-07

Processing units About 1800 Nos About 1800 Nos

Import of raw cashewnuts (quantity)

5.65 lakh tons 5.92 lakh tons

Import of raw cashewnuts (value) Rs. 2163 Crores Rs. 1812 Crores

Export of cashew kernel (quantity)

1.14 lakh tons 1.19 lakh tons

Export of cashew kernel (value) Rs. 2515 Crores Rs. 2455 Crores

Export of CNSL (quantity) 6405 tons 5589 tons

Export of CNSL (value) Rs. 7 Crores Rs. 9.20 Crores

Foreign exchange earning (Kernel + CNSL)

Rs. 2522 Crores Rs. 2464 Crores

Net foreign exchange earning Rs. 359 Crores Rs. 652 Crores

Cashew research in India was initiated in the year 1951 by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research through ad hoc research schemes. These schemes were initiated at Kottarakkara (Kerala) in 1952, Ullal (Karnataka) in 1953, Bapatla (Andhra Pradesh) in 1955, Deragaon (Assam) in 1956 and Vengurle (Maharashtra) in 1957. The programmes in these ad hoc schemes included introduction and evaluation of germplasm, production and evaluation of hybrids, floral biology studies and propagation

QRT-CASHEW

3

trials. With the establishment of the Central Plantation Crops Research Institute (CPCRI) at Kasaragod (Kerala) in 1970 and the All India Co-ordinated Spices and Cashewnut Improvement Project (AICS & CIP) in 1971 by the ICAR, cashew research was further strengthened in the country. Cashew was also included as one of the mandatory crops of the CPCRI and systematic research was initiated during the same year at CPCRI Regional Station, Vittal (Karnataka) through collection of cashew germplasm. During the VII Plan period, the project on spices and cashew (AICS & CIP) was bifurcated into two - one on cashew and the other on spices. The headquarters of the independent cashew project, namely, All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew (AICRP on Cashew) was shifted to the newly established National Research Centre for Cashew, Puttur (Karnataka) in 1986. The implementation of the World Bank aided Multi State Cashew Project (MSCP) from 1982 to 1986 in four states and the establishment of the National Research Centre for Cashew at Puttur (Karnataka) in 1986 gave cashew research the much needed impetus. A total of 40 cashew varieties have been released for commercial cultivation in the country from different Agricultural Universities and ICAR Institutes.

The All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew (AICRP on

Cashew) has now eight main centres and one sub-centre located in eight different cashew growing states of the country. At the inception of the project in 1971, there were only four centres, namely, Bapatla in Andhra Pradesh, Anakkayam (later shifted to Madakkathara) in Kerala, Vengurle in Maharashtra and Vridhachalam in Tamil Nadu. During the V Plan period one centre at Bhubaneswar in Orissa and during the VI plan one centre each at Jhargram in West Bengal and Chintamani in Karnataka (plains region) were added. During the VIII Plan, one centre at Jagdalpur in Chattisgarh state and a sub centre at Pilicode in Kerala were started. Each centre / sub centre directly functions under the respective Agricultural University of the state.

1.2 Composition of the team

The Indian Council of Agricultural Research constituted a common Quinquennial Review Team (QRT) to review the work at the National Research Centre for Cashew, Puttur and the All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew for the period January 2002 to December 2006 (vide office order F.No.13(1)/2007-IA.V dated 11-4-2007). The team consisted of Dr. S.S. Magar (Chairman), Drs. L.V. Kulwal, P.C. Lenka, P.L. Tandon, C.T. Devadas and C.K. Nair (Members). Dr. K.V. Nagaraja was Secretary.

QRT 2002-06

4

1.3 Terms of Reference

The terms of reference for the Quinquennial Review Team (QRT) were:

a) The QRT has to review the work of the NRC Cashew and the Centres of the AICRP on Cashew and examine and identify the research achievements of NRC for Cashew and the Centres of All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew vis a vis sectoral programme and critically evaluate these programmes covering the period from 1-1-2002 to 31-12-2006.

b) Commensurate with the objectives, mandates and resources of the

organization, the socio-economic impact of research on farmers / beneficiaries and transferability of the results to farmers through extension should be critically reviewed by the QRT.

c) To examine the objectives, scope and relevance of the research

programmes and the budget of the institute for the next five years in relation to over all / regional / national plans, policies and long and short-term priorities.

d) The team may also draw its attention to the EFC / SFC Memo in

relation to recommendations of the previous QRT and also the Perspective Plan and Vision 2025 document of the institute. To examine the policies, priorities, strategies and procedures adopted by the institute and the system in relation to Perspective Plan.

e) To examine whether the research programmes of the past and

proposal for future are in harmony with the vision of the ICAR (HQ), SAUs and related centres of research etc.

f) To examine the kinds of linkages established with the clients and the

end users of research results i.e. Farmers and the extent of interest displayed in conducting “on-farm research” on farmers’ fields and in organising demonstrations / training courses for the transfer of technology to the extension agencies.

g) To examine whether any changes in the organisational set up are

called for to achieve an improved and effective working. The team may also examine and draw attention to any imbalance in the staffing pattern consistent with the scientific, technical and administrative needs as well as the allocation of research funds towards capital works, establishment and research contingencies. The team may also examine the resource generation efforts and assess the problems and prospects of the same. The progress and problems of implementing Project Based Budgeting may also be highlighted. While proposing

QRT-CASHEW

5

major changes in organisation and functioning, their feasibility in relation to ICAR rules etc. need to be kept in view.

h) To examine whether the organisational structure of the institute is

conducive to efficient functional / working autonomy, decentralization and delegation of authority in day to day working. The team may also critically examine the status of implementation of the Organisation and Management (O & M) reforms as introduced by the ICAR from time to time and suggest ways and means to implement them at the institute level.

i) To examine constraints hindering the institute in achievement of its

objectives and implementation of its programme and goals and to recommend ways and means of minimising or eliminating them.

j) To look into any other points considered relevant by the committee or

referred to it by the ICAR, the Institute Director or the Management Committee in respect of future project development, research prioritisation and management changes.

k) To analyse the growth of manpower, number of cooperating centres,

both in terms of funds as well as staff resources in AICRPs. l) Research achievements of the AICRP on Cashew with reference to

focus on national programme, multilocation testing, inter-institutional and inter- disciplinary linkages, healthy competition in annual workshops and professional challenge etc. be examined by the team

m) To examine the budget of the co-ordinating centre as a part of the total

budget of the SAU and of the ICAR. To suggest any O & M reforms of AICRP.

n) The QRT should conduct the review work and submit the report on

NRC for Cashew and AICRP on Cashew within 6 months to the ICAR for submission to the Governing Body.

1.4 Visits

The first meeting (Preliminary Planning Meeting) of the Quinquennial

Review Team was held in the chamber of Deputy Director General (Hort.), Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan-II, New Delhi on 25-4-2007. The main agenda of the meeting was interaction of QRT members with DDG (Hort.) and

QRT 2002-06

6

discussion among the QRT members about the work plan for review of NRCC and AICRP on Cashew Centres by the QRT and also tentatively fixing itinerary for visits by QRT to different centers. Proceedings of the meeting is appended in Annexure-1.3.

The review of work of NRCC and AICRP on Cashew was done in six

phases:-

Phase Date Centre Purpose First May 29 – 30

2007 NRC-

Cashew, Puttur

Review & visit to Experimental plots,

Demonstration plots and Laboratory. Inspection of

Infrastructure Second Jun. 25 – 26

2007 Vengurle Review & field visit to on-

going experimental plots

Third Aug. 9-11 2007

Jagdalpur Review & field visit to on-going experimental plots

(9.8.07) Bhubaneswar Review & field visit to on-

going experimental plots (10 & 11.8.2007)

Jhargram

Fourth Sept. 15 2007 Chintamani Review & field visit to on-going experimental plots

Fifth Oct. 29 & Oct. 31

2007

Vridhachalam Review & field visit to on-going experimental plots

expect Bapatla (29.10.07) Bapatla

Madakkathara Review & field visit to on-going experimental plots

except Pilicode (31.10.07) Pilicode

Sixth Dec. 26 – 29 2007

NRC-Cashew Finalization of QRT report, Interaction Meeting with

KCMA and visit to Cashew Processing Industries.

Seventh Jan. 30th 2008 NRC-Cashew Presentation of QRT recommendations to IMC of

NRC-Cashew

The Chairman and all the members of QRT attended all the review

meetings except Dr. C.K. Nair who could not attend the review meeting and field visits at Jagdalpur, Bhubaneswar and Chintamani due to unavoidable reasons. Dr. L.V. Kulwal and Dr. P.C. Lenka did not attend the review meetings at Vridhachalam and Madakkathara due to pre-occupation. Dr. K.V. Nagaraja, Secretary, QRT did not attend the Preliminary Planning

QRT-CASHEW

7

meeting with DDG (Hort) at New Delhi on 25th April 2007 due to pre-occupation. Besides the team, Dr. M.G. Bhat, Director, NRCC attended all the review meetings.

1.5 Action taken on the recommendations of the last QRT (1997-2001)

Most of the decisions taken by the previous QRT (1997-2001) with respect to NRCC and AICRP Cashew were implemented. The QRT has expressed its satisfaction for the actions taken on the recommendation of earlier QRT. The decisions which were not implemented are given below, with reasons thereof and further actions, if any: NRC-Cashew

Out of 45 QRT recommendations only the following recommendations are not complied for the reasons mentioned below:

Recommendation Reasons for non compliance 1) Strengthening of scientific

cadre strength. Strengthening of scientific cadre was not implemented during Xth Plan period. Posts sanctioned during Xth Plan period but not created have been reiterated in the XIth Plan EFC document.

2) Constitution of TOTAC It was discussed in IMC and it was deferred.

3) Filling up of vacant Plant Physiologist post

The post is still to be filled up. Concerned authorities are being persuaded from time to time.

4. Posting of scientist in Plant Physiology discipline in essential to conduct research on physiological aspects, especially on flowering and fruiting vis a vis weather factors the knowledge of which is very crucial for increasing productivity of cashew.

The matter is pending with ICAR (ASRB) inspite of persuation.

5. Since only 17% of the cashew area in Andhra Pradesh is represented by the soil type of Bapatla, it is desirable to identify another location in the

Inspite of persuation, ANGRAU has not taken decision due to state policy.

QRT 2002-06

8

state representing the major cashew growing area for laying out new trials, preferably in the red soil region of northern districts of Andhra Pradesh. The proposed station may be located in Srikakulam in the Agriculture College campus where infrastructure facilities are existing.

6. Studies on identification of genes for specific characters such as bold nuts, dwarfing and other important characters using molecular markers and biotechnological techniques may be initiated.

Experiments are in progress and results are awaited.

AICRP Cashew

Out of 31 QRT recommendations only the following recommendations are not complied with for the reasons mentioned below:

Recommendation Reasons for non compliance 1) Shifting of Bapatla centre to a

region in Andhra Pradesh representing typical cashew growing area in Srikakulam district.

The matter is yet to be decided by ANGRAU, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh

2) Establishment of Bio-control lab at Chintamani centre.

UAS, Bangalore has just started the work.

3) Providing additional area at Pilicode centre.

The University authority is taking steps to provide additional area at Pilicode centre.

4) At present there is no institutional arrangement for training the cashew workers and also for producing planting material in eastern and North- eastern regions. It is suggested to create this facility by establishing a “Centre for training and production of planting material” at the CRS, Bhubaneswar.

Inspite of persuation the action is pending with OUAT, Bhubaneswar.

QRT-CASHEW

9

5) A small laboratory-cum-insect rearing building, a sump and overhead storage tank and drip irrigation facility may be created in the Ranasingpur farm. A part of the money generated under the revolving fund may be allocated for this purpose.

Inspite of persuation the action is pending with OUAT, Bhubaneswar.

6) As an area of 40,000 ha is to be brought under cashew in Bastar area, there is an urgent need to intensify the nursery activities. The centre may organise a training programme in collaboration with development departments to enhance the nursery activity of the region. Necessary training modules on cashew production technology may be developed in consultation with NRCC.

Training modules are being developed.

7) The centre (Jhargram) has established only one demonstration plot and the number of grafts produced for sale decreased over the years. The situation needs to be improved.

Constant persuation with BCKV was done and demonstration plots establishment and number of grafts produced have been improved.

8) This station has qualified staff and facility to take up Post Graduate Research work. The station may be given recognition for conducting research for M.Sc. and Ph.D. programmes. The Associate Director of Research may send proposals to Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli.

Dr. BSKKV, Dapoli was persuaded. However, Unversity has intimated that Ph.D. recognition has been given to the centre.

QRT 2002-06

10

CHAPTER-2

OBJECTIVES, ORGANISATION, RESOURCES AND FUNCTIONS

2.1 Objectives and Mandates (NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew)

The National Research Centre for Cashew was conceived to undertake mission oriented research projects with the mandate of evolving high yielding varieties of cashew with high protein, lysine and other desirable parameters and also with resistance / tolerance to pests such as tea mosquito bug; standardization of agrotechiques for achieving higher production and productivity with sustainability in view, and transfer of technology to the farmers and extension agencies on improved production techniques through training, demonstration and extension literature.

The mandate of the All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew is to increase cashew production and productivity through: evolving high yielding varieties with good kernel quality and tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses, standardizing agro-techniques for the cashew crop under different agro-climatic conditions, and evolving cost effective and efficient pest and disease management practices. As the Director of the National Research Centre for Cashew also monitors the AICRP on Cashew, mandate for cashew research as a whole under the National Research Centre for Cashew and the All India Coordinated Research Project on Cashew is reoriented:-

- To conduct mission-oriented research on all aspects of cashew for improving productivity and quality with special reference to export.

- To serve as a national repository for cashew germplasm and a

clearing house for research information on cashew. - To act as a centre for training in research methodologies and

technology updating of cashew and to coordinate national research projects.

- To provide consultancy regarding cashew production technology. - To generate quality planting material. - To collaborate with national and international agencies for achieving

the mandate.

QRT-CASHEW

11

2.2 Organization, resources and functions 2.2.1 NRC Cashew

National Research Centre for Cashew is located with its headquarters at Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka. The main campus at Kemminje is situated 5 Km away from Puttur town (12.45° N latitude, 75.4° E longitude and 90 m above MSL). The main campus having an area of 69 ha accommodates laboratory-cum-administrative block, other basic research facilities, field experiments and also staff quarters. Besides this, Experimental Station at Shantigodu which is located 13 Km away from the main campus with an area of 80 ha and having laboratory buildings, field experiments and staff quarters also forms part of the National Research Centre for Cashew.

¹ Human Resources The Centre is headed by a Director with a total staff strength of 19 Scientific, 23 Technical, 15 Administrative and 42 Supporting staff. Details are furnished in Table 2.1. The discipline wise scientific and technical vacancy position on the establishment of NRC-Cashew with their pay scales as on 31-12-2007 are reported in Table 2.2.

Table 2.1: Staff position as on 31.12.2007 (NRC-Cashew)

Category

NON-PLAN PLAN TOTAL

San

ctio

ned

Fill

ed

Vac

ant

San

ctio

ned

Fill

ed

Vac

ant

No

. of

Po

sts

No

. fill

ed

No

.

Vac

ant

Scientific 19* 12 7 (37) - - - 19 12 7 (37)

Technical 19 17 2 (10) 4 - 4 23 17 4 (17)

Administrative 14 14 - 1 - 1 15 14 1 (7)

Supporting 42 40 2 (5) - - - 42 40 2 (5)

Total 94 83 11 (12) 5 - 5 99 83 16 (16)

*Including the post of Director. Figures within parantheses indicate % of vacant posts.

QRT 2002-06

12

Table 2.2: Discipline wise scientific and technical vacancy position on

establishment of NRC-Cashew as on 31-12-2007

Cadre Name of the Post

Pay Scale (Rs.)

Division No. of Vacant

Position

Date since vacant

Scientific Principal Scientist

16400-22400

Soil Science – Soil Physics and

Soil & Water Conservation

1

31.5.2006

Sr. Scientist 12000-18300

Gen and Cytogenetics

1

31.5.2006

Horticulture 1

29.9.2005

Scientist 8000-13500

Agriculture Extension

1 24.12.2006

Plant Physiology 1 7.7.1997

Horticulture 1 21.2.2000

Gen & Cytogenetics

1 10.3.2005

Technical Technical Asst. (T-III)

4500-7000 --

1 3.4.2007

Technical Asst. (T-1)

3200-4900

-- 1 1.2.2007

The QRT felt that there is certainly set back for research activities due to paucity of these scientific and technical manpower. The purpose of plans scheme did not serve as four sanctioned positions have not been filled in excluding an administrative post. The list of existing staff as on 31-12-2007 is given in Annexure 2.1.

QRT-CASHEW

13

¹ Infrastructural facilities

During the period under report, the Centre has completed the construction of Library-cum-Conference Hall, Engineering Workshop and Compound wall and renovated the old farm office at Shantigodu. The Centre has purchased equipments worth Rs. 79 lakhs (Annexure-2.2). An amount of Rs. 83 lakhs and 31 lakhs has been spent for civil works and library towards purchase of books, journals, CDS, Softwares and Hardwares. The Centre is subscribing 33 Indian and 14 International Journals. The list of National and International journals subscribed during the review period are furnished in Annexure 2.3. Farm machineries have been procured under Mega Seed Project with budget provision of Rs. 2.4 millions. An amount of 1.4 million has been spent in improving the nursery facilities including digging of borewells.

2.2.2 AICRP on Cashew

Presently, there are eight coordinating centres and one sub-centre, four in the East coast viz., Bapatla (Andhra Pradesh), Bhubaneswar (Orissa), Jhargram (West Bengal) and Vridhachalam (Tamil Nadu), three in the West coast viz., Madakkathara (Kerala), Pilicode (Kerala), Vengurle (Maharashtra) and one in plains parts of Karnataka – Chintamani and the other in Chattisgarh – Jagdalpur. Most of the centres have adequate land for experimentation. A few centres, however, are facing shortage of land for planting large number of hybrids that are produced. The temporary shortage of land can be mitigated if cashew trees of discontinued / concluded experiments are replaced with new planting with the prior permission of the respective universities. Jagdalpur centre is situated in the water logged area and the land is not suitable for growing cashew. New area should be selected for conducting experiments which will be beneficial to the farmers. However, the sub surface drainage (SSD) needs to be taken on priority basis.

¹ Human Resources

The project has its headquarters at the NRC for Cashew, Puttur. The Director, NRC for Cashew monitors the implementation of the project at nine centres. The total staff strength in the different centres of the AICRP on Cashew is 48. All the sanctioned posts have been filled at Bhubaneswar, Chintamani, Jagdalpur, Pilicode, Vengurle and Vridhachalam Centres. At the other Centres (Bapatla, Jhargram and Madakkathara) posts of scientific and technical totalling 7 are lying vacant (Table 2.3). The discipline wise scientific and technical vacancy position on the establishment of AICRP on Cashew with their pay scales as on 31-12-2007 are reported in Table 2.4.

QRT 2002-06

14

¹ Infrastructural facilities

The required infrastructure and building facilities to house the AICRP centres are provided by the respective State Agricultural Universities. However, certain centres need field store facilities and laboratory-cum-insect rearing facilities, irrigation facilities for agronomical experiments and nursery. The ICAR provides finance to the Centres at 75 : 25 ratio (ICAR : State).

Table 2.3: Staff position of AICRP on Cashew

Centres Category

Scientific Technical Supporting Total

Bapatla 3 (1)* 2 1 6 (1)*

Bhubaneswar 3 2 1 6

Chintamani 3 2 1 6

Jagdalpur 2 1 (1)* 1 4 (1)*

Jhargram 3 (1)* 2 1 6 (1)*

Madakkathara 3 (1)* 2 1 (1)* 6 (2)*

Pilicode 1 1 (1)* 0 2 (1)*

Vengurle 3 2 0 5

Vridhachalam 3 2 1 6

Total 24 (12)** 16 (12)** 7 (14)** 47 (13)**

* Figures within parantheses indicate the vacant posts.

** Figures within parantheses indicate % of vacant posts.

QRT-CASHEW

15

Table 2.4: Discipline wise scientific and technical vacancy position on establishment of AICRP on Cashew as on 31-12-2007

Cadre Name of the

Centre Name of the Post

Pay Scale (Rs.)

Division No. of Vacant

Position

Date since vacant

Scientific Cashew Research Station, Bapatla

Sr. Scientist

12000-420-

18300 (UGC)


Regional Research Station, Jhargram (BCKVV)

Sr. Scientist

12000-420-

18300 (UGC)


Cashew Research Station, Madakkathara (KAU)

Scientist 8000-275-

13500 (UGC)

Entomology 1 3.1.2007

Technical College of Agr. & Research Station, Jagdalpur (IGAU)

Sr. Technical Assistant

4500-7000 (State Govt.)

-- 1 13.9.2003

Regional Agrl. Research Station, Pilicode (KAU)

Jr. Technical Assistant

7990-12930 (State Govt.)

-- 1 1.12.2006

Supporting Cashew Research Station, Madakkathara (KAU)

Grafter 4300-5930 (State Govt.)

-- 1 11.9.2003

QRT 2002-06

16

CHAPTER-3

MANAGEMENT – ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL ASPECTS

3.1 NRC-Cashew

The administrative head of the Research Centre is the Director. Different committees such as Institute Management Committee and Research Advisory Committee (RAC) assist the Director in formulating priorities for taking up research. Research programmes are discussed in the RAC in its annual meeting and it guides and recommends priority areas keeping in view of the mandate of the Institute. The technical programmes of the research projects including adhoc schemes are formulated in the Institute Research Committee (IRC) meetings based on the suggestions of RAC. New research programmes are presented and discussed in the IRC meetings for approval. Details of meetings of IRC, RAC, IMC and IJC are furnished in Tables 3.1-3.4.

Table 3.1: Institute Research Committee meetings held Meeting Date of Meeting Outside Experts

15th Annual IRC May 30-31, 2002 Dr. Bengali Baboo, Dr. H.H. Khan,Dr. Devasahayam, Dr. E. Mohan, Dr. T.R. Guruprasad, Dr. D. Balasimha, Dr. A.A. Sukumaran, Dr. Mariamma Daniel, Mr. K. Vijaya Kumar

16th Annual IRC May 29-30, 2003 Dr. V.J. Korikanthimath, Dr. K.P. Gopalakrishna Rao, Dr. T.R. Guruprasad

Dr. E. Mohan, Dr. D. Balasimha, Dr. V. Rajagopal, Dr. Mariamma Daniel, Dr. P.M. Kumaran, Mr. K. Vijaya Kumar

17th Annual IRC June 28-29, 2004 Dr. V.A. Parthasarathy, Dr. D.P. Kumar, Dr. Gavi Gowda, Dr. P.G. Adsule, Dr. S. Arulraj, Dr. D. Balasimha, Dr. Mariamma Daniel, Mr. K. Vijaya Kumar

18th Annual IRC June 7-8, 2005 Dr. K.R.M. Swamy, Dr. B.P. Patil, Dr. B. Mallik, Dr. S.N. Moorthy, Dr. K.R. Jayaram, Dr. Mariamma Daniel, Mr. K. Vijaya Kumar

19th Annual IRC June 7-8, 2006 Dr. R.V. Nair, Dr. George V. Thomas, Dr. K.V. Kasturi Bai, Dr. D. Rajagopal, Mr. Venkatesh N. Hubballi, Mr. Vijaya Kumar

QRT-CASHEW

17

Table 3.2: Research Advisory Committee meetings held

Meeting Date of Meeting

Chairman Members Member Secretary

6th Meeting (3rd meeting of 2nd RAC)

March 18-19, 2002

Dr. K.V.A. Bavappa

Dr. R.T. Gunjate, Prof. A. Regupathy, Mr. P.P. Balasubramanian, Dr. B.R. Hegde, Dr. R.N. Pal, Dr. E.V.V. Bhaskara Rao

Dr. K.R.M. Swamy

7th Meeting (1st meeting of 3rd RAC)

March 10-11, 2003

Dr. M.V. Rao

Dr. K.V. Ramana, Dr. A.N. Maurya, Dr. America Singh, Prof. M. Udaya Kumar, Dr. V.C. Patil, Dr. P.M. Haldankar, Mr. G.K. Naidu, Dr. M.G. Bhat

Dr. K.V. Nagaraja

8th Meeting (2nd meeting of 3rd RAC)

June 3, 2004

Dr. M.V. Rao


Dr. K.V. Nagaraja

9th Meeting (3rd meeting of 3rd RAC)

Feb. 20-21, 2005

Dr. M.V. Rao


Dr. K.V. Nagaraja

10th Meeting (1st meeting of 4th RAC)

Apr. 19-20, 2006

Dr. M.K. Nair

Prof. D.P. Ray, Dr. M.S. Kuruvinashetty, Dr. G. Gajendran, Dr. A.G. Appu Rao, Dr. K.V. Ramana, Mr. G.K. Naidu, Dr. P.M. Haldankar, Dr. M.G. Bhat

Dr. N. Yadukumar

Table 3.3: Institute Management Committee meetings held

Meeting Date of Meeting

Chairman Members Member Secretary

17th IMC Mar. 20, 2002

Director

ADG (PC), Dr. K.R.M. Swamy, Dr. M.G. Bhat, Dr. T.N. Raviprasad, Mrs. Shirly Raichal Anil, Dr. K.R. Jayaram, Mr. P. Sadashiva Rao, Dr. T.R. Guruprasad, Fin. & Accn. Officer (CIBA), Mr. G.K. Naidu

AAO, NRCC 18th IMC Nov. 25,

2002

19th IMC Jun. 7, 2003

20th IMC Mar. 25, 2004

Director

ADG (PC), Dr. B.M.C. Reddy, Dr. K.R. Jayaram, Mr. P. Sadashiva Rao, Dr. T.R. Guruprasad, Fin. & Accn. Officer (CIBA), Dr. N. Yadukumar, Dr. D. Sundararaju, Dr. M.G. Nayak, Mr. G.K. Naidu, Dr. P.M. Haldankar

AAO, NRCC

21st IMC Dec. 9, 2004

22nd IMC Mar. 22, 2005

23rd IMC Aug. 19, 2005

24th IMC Mar. 23, 2006

Director

ADG (H), Dr. S. Rajan, Dr. J. Venkatesha, Sr. Fin. & Accn. (CPCRI), Dr. D. Balasimha, Dr. K.V. Nagaraja, Dr. Thimmappaiah, Dr. Mrs. R. Rejani, Dr. P.M. Haldankar, Mr. Cyriac John

AAO, NRCC 25th IMC Aug. 30, 2006

QRT 2002-06

18

Table 3.4: Institute Joint Staff Committee meetings held Meeting Date of

Meeting Chairman Members

Official Side Staff Side

V IJSC (11

meetings)

22.3.2002

25.6.2002

25.9.2002

25.4.2003

24.6.2003

24.9.2003

27.7.2003

29.3.2004

26.6.2004

30.9.2004

10.12.2004

Dr. E.V. V. Bhaskara Rao

Dr. N. Yadukumar,

Dr. M.G. Nayak,

Mr. A.K. Shabaraya, Mr. K. Sanjeeva,

Sri. D. Balasubramanian

(Secretary)

Mr. K.R. Padmanabhan, (Secretary),

Mr. K. Umanath (CJSC Member),

Mr. B. Chennappa,

Mr. V. Sundara,

Mr. K. Narayana,

Mr. K. Umashankar,

Mrs. B. Jayashree

VI IJSC (8 meetings)

26.3.2005

28.6.2005

29.9.2005

27.12.2005

21.3.2006

30.6.2006

27.9.2006

18.12.2006

Dr. M. Gopalakrishna Bhat

Dr. K.V. Nagaraja

Dr. P.Shivarama Bhat.

Mr. K. Sanjeeva,

Mr. H. Ganesha

Dr. R. Venkattakumar (Secretary)

Mr. Lakshmipathi (Secretary),

Mr. K.V. Ramesh Babu (CJSC Member),

Mr. K.M. Lingaraja,

Mr. Balappa Gowda,

Mr. Ammu Gowda,

Mr. K. Narayana

3.1.1 Budget

The funds are provided by the ICAR for meeting the expenditure of the Institute. A total of Rs. 425.53 lakhs (Recurring Rs. 220.1 lakhs, Non-Recurring Rs. 205.43 lakhs) has been spent as Plan Funds during the period from 1-1-2002 to 31-12-2006 (Table 3.5). The Non-Plan expenditure was Rs. 729.27 lakhs (Table 3.6). The total revenue receipt from January 2002 to December 2006 was Rs. 117.19 lakhs In addition to Plan and Non-Plan allocation, additional financial support under ad-hoc projects, sponsored projects (DBT and NATP) comes to a total of Rs. 38.17 lakhs during the period from 2002-2006 (Table 3.7).

QRT-CASHEW

19

Table 3.5: Details of Expenditure during the period from 1-1-2002 to 31-12-2006 – PLAN at NRC-Cashew

(Rs. in lakhs)

Budget Head

2001-02 Jan 02 to Mar 02

2002-03 April 02

to Mar 03

2003-04

April 03 to Mar

04

2004-05 April 04

to Mar 05

2005-06 April 05

to Mar 06

2006-07 April 06

to Dec 06

Total for 5 years

A. Recurring Pay and Allowance

- - - - - - -

TA 0.34 2.46 2.93 2.50 2.30 2.93 13.46 Contingency 9.91 38.16 34.79 42.14 48.64 31.63 205.27 HRD - - 0.25 - 0.54 0.58 1.37 Total “A” 10.25 40.62 37.97 44.64 51.48 35.14 220.10 B. Non-Recurring Equipment / Furnitures / Fixture

2.76 14.20 13.55 15.12 29.56 3.91 79.10

Works - 31.99 20.41 8.16 3.33 19.48 83.37 Land - - 8.90 - - - 8.90 Vehicle - - - - - - - Library books 2.11 3.14 5.58 6.23 7.71 6.45 31.19 Others (Petty Works)

2.87 -- -- -- -- -- 2.87

Total “B” 7.74 49.33 48.41 29.51 40.60 29.84 205.43 Total (A + B) 17.99 89.95 86.38 74.15 92.08 64.98 425.53

QRT 2002-06

20

Table 3.6: Details of Expenditure during the period from 1-1-2002 to 31-12-2006 –

NON-PLAN at NRC-Cashew

(Rs. in lakhs)

Budget Head

2001-02 Jan 02 to Mar 02

2002-03 April 02

to Mar 03

2003-04

April 03 to Mar

04

2004-05 April 04

to Mar 05

2005-06 April 05

to Mar 06

2006-07 April 06

to Dec 06

Total for 5 years

A. Recurring Pay and Allowance

16.95 112.40 114.68 120.50 132.03 117.27 613.83

TA 0.14 2.68 3.59 3.00 3.20 1.64 14.25 Contingency 2.59 16.96 21.42 14.05 9.52 6.97 71.51 HRD - - - - - - - Total “A” 19.68 132.04 139.69 137.55 144.75 125.88 699.59 B. Non-Recurring Equipment / Furnitures / Fixture

- - - - - - -

Works - - - - - - - Land - - - - - - - Vehicle - - - - - - - Library books - - - - - - - Others (Petty

Works) - 8.94 6.76 4.64 7.01 2.33 29.68

Total “B” - 8.94 6.76 4.64 7.01 2.33 29.68 Total (A + B) 19.68 140.98 146.45 142.19 151.76 128.21 729.27

Details of Revenue

Receipts for the period Jan 02 to Dec. 06

9.89 25.67 20.06 23.17 28.14 30.26 117.19

QRT-CASHEW

21

Table 3.7: Details of Expenditure under Ad-hoc, DBT and NATP projects from

2002 to 2006 at NRC-Cashew

Projects Amount (Rs)

Ad-hoc Research Projects (3) 9,82,177

DBT Research Project (2) 2,20,254

NATP Research Project (1) 26,15,123

Total 38,17,554

Details of year-wise allocation and expenditure for the years 2002-03 to 2006-07 are furnished in Table 3.8.

Table 3.8: Details of year-wise allocation and expenditure for the years 2002-03 to 2006-07

(Rupees in Lakh) 2002-03

PLAN NON-PLAN Sl. No.

Head of Account Allocation Expenditure Allocation Expenditure

1. Pay & Allowance -- -- 112.40 112.40 2. TA 2.50 2.46 2.70 2.68 3. Works 32.00 31.99 -- -- 4. Equipments 14.00 14.20 -- -- 5. Others 41.50 41.30 25.90 25.90

Total 90.00 89.95 141.00 140.98

2003-04




Total 87.00 86.38 146.70 146.45

QRT 2002-06

22

2004-05




Total 75.00 74.15 152.00 142.18

2005-06




Total 120.00 92.08 187.00 151.76

2006-07



1. Pay & Allowance -- -- 145.10 141.27 2. TA 3.50 3.50 2.50 2.38 3. Works 25.00 23.19 -- - 4. Equipments 37.89 -- - 5. Others 66.50 50.57 28.40 28.39

Total 127.00 115.15 176.00 172.04

2002-03 to 2006-07



1. Pay & Allowance -- 620.88 2. TA 13.69 14.85 3. Works 87.08 - 4. Equipments 110.33 - 5. Others 246.61 117.68

Total 568.00 457.71 802.70 753.41

QRT-CASHEW

23

3.2 AICRP Cashew

The Director, NRC for Cashew co-ordinates and monitors the implementation of the research programme of the project at nine centres. Each centre is under the administrative control of the respective Agricultural University of the State. Two biennial National Group meetings of Scientists of AICRP on Cashew have been held at NRCC, Puttur (4-6 June, 2004) and KAU (28-30 Nov., 2005) between 2002 and 2006.

The results of experiments / trials of previous two years are presented

and technical programmes are formulated for the subsequent two years in the meetings. In these biennial meetings, a technical session on "Development Programmes and Transfer of Technology" was included in which officers of development departments also participated in addition to the scientists for an effective interaction between development departments and the research institutions.

3.2.1 Budget

The X Plan allocation from 2002-03 to 2006-07 was Rs. 606.00 lakhs, out of which, the ICAR share was Rs. 454.45 lakhs. The expenditure during the above period was Rs. 539.24 lakhs (ICAR:Rs. 404.323 State : Rs. 134.788 lakhs) (Table 3.9). Details of year-wise allocation and expenditure for different centres are presented in Tables 3.10 - 3.13.

Table 3.9: Details of X plan allocation and expenditure – AICRP on Cashew

(Rs. In Lakhs) CENTRE X PLAN

ALLOCATION Actual Expenditure during X Plan Period (Yearwise)

Total ICAR Share

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07 Total ICAR Share

State Share

BAPATLA 81.85 61.38 16.18 10.02 20.29 17.35 13.86 77.70 58.275 19.420

BHUBANESWAR 86.78 65.08 15.91 14.98 14.90 21.18 17.16 84.13 63.097 21.030

CHINTAMANI 77.95 58.46 13.11 11.34 17.17 20.64 17.33 79.59 59.692 19.900

JAGDALPUR 45.01 33.75 6.30 4.85 5.95 6.16 6.75 30.01 22.507 7.500

JHARGRAM 54.66 40.99 6.60 6.80 8.48 8.09 9.98 39.95 29.962 9.987

ADAKKATHARA 77.09 57.81 12.58 14.70 48.96 17.15 17.65 81.04 60.780 20.260

PILICODE 35.30 26.47 3.44 3.97 4.89 6.80 4.57 23.67 17.750 5.910

VENGURLE 75.78 56.83 13.40 9.47 10.84 11.52 9.60 54.83 41.120 13.701

VRIDHACHALAM 71.58 53.68 7.62 9.47 13.31 15.25 22.67 68.32 51.240 17.080

TOTAL 606.00 454.45 95.14 85.60 114.79 124.14 119.57 539.21 404.423 134.788

QRT 2002-06

24

Table 3.10: Budgetary provision and actual expenditure during 2002-03 ALLOCATION

(Rs. In lakhs)

Centre

Details of sanctioned provision ICAR share Pay and

Allowances TA

Recurring contingency

Non- Recurring

contingency

Grand Total

Bapatla 12.00 0.30 1.20 - 13.50 10.13

Bhubaneshwar 12.75 0.30 1.20 - 14.25 10.69

Chintamani 11.50 0.30 1.20 - 13.00 9.75

Jagdalpur 5.25 0.25 0.80 - 6.30 4.73

Jhargram 9.50 0.30 1.20 - 11.00 8.25

Madakkathara 14.00 0.30 1.20 - 15.50 11.63

Pilicode 4.61 0.20 0.40 - 5.21 3.91

Vengurle 11.90 0.30 1.20 - 13.40 10.05

Vridhachalam 13.00 0.30 1.20 - 14.50 10.88

Total 94.51 2.55 9.60 - 106.66 80.00

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE (Rs. in lakhs)

Centre Pay and

Allowances TA


Non-recurring

contingency Total

ICAR Share

Bapatla 14.79 0.19 1.2 - 16.18 12.14

Bhubaneshwar 14.55 0.16 1.2 - 15.19 11.93

Chintamani 11.79 0.12 1.2 - 13.11 9.83

Jagdalpur 5.25 0.25 0.8 - 6.30 4.73

Jhargram 5.34 0.08 1.18 - 6.60 4.95

Madakkathara 11.56 0.06 0.96 - 12.58 9.44

Pilicode 2.99 0.03 0.42 - 3.44 2.58

Vengurla 11.9 0.3 1.2 - 13.40 10.05

Vridhachalam 6.24 0.18 1.2 - 7.62 5.72

Total 84.41 1.37 9.36 - 95.41 71.36

QRT-CASHEW

25


(Rs. In lakhs)

Centre

Details of sanctioned provision ICAR share Pay and

Allowances TA


Non- Recurring

contingency

Grand Total

Bapatla 12.00 0.23 1.20 - 13.43 10.07

Bhubaneshwar 12.00 0.23 1.20 - 13.43 10.07

Chintamani 11.68 0.23 1.20 - 13.11 9.83

Jagdalpur 5.00 0.15 0.80 - 5.95 4.46

Jhargram 9.50 0.23 1.20 - 10.93 6.20

Madakkathara 12.40 0.20 1.20 - 13.80 10.35

Pilicode 4.60 0.15 0.40 - 5.15 3.86

Vengurle 12.00 0.23 1.20 - 13.43 10.07

Vridhachalam 12.00 0.23 1.20 - 13.43 10.07

Total 91.18 1.88 9.60 - 102.66 77.00


Centre Pay and

Allowances TA


Non-recurring

contingency Total

ICAR Share

Bapatla 8.59 0.21 1.20 - 10.00 7.50

Bhubaneshwar 13.69 0.15 1.14 - 14.98 11.23

Chintamani 9.99 0.14 1.20 - 11.33 8.50

Jagdalpur 3.89 0.15 0.80 - 4.84 3.63

Jhargram 5.51 0.16 1.12 - 6.79 5.10

Madakkathara 13.52 0.15 1.02 - 14.69 11.02

Pilicode 3.52 0.09 0.31 - 3.92 2.94

Vengurla 7.99 0.23 1.19 - 9.41 7.06

Vridhachalam 8.92 0.20 1.20 - 10.32 7.74

Total 75.62 1.48 9.18 - 86.38 64.78

QRT 2002-06

26

Table 3.12: Budgetary provision and actual expenditure during 2004-05

ALLOCATION (Rs. In lakhs)

Centre

Details of sanctioned provision ICAR share

State share Pay and

Allowances TA


Non- Recurring

contingency

Grand Total

Bapatla 12.45 0.30 2.40 7.40 22.55 16.91 5.64

Bhubaneshwar 11.35 0.30 2.40 2.00 16.05 12.04 4.01

Chintamani 12.43 0.30 2.40 2.00 17.13 12.85 4.28

Jagdalpur 3.80 0.20 1.60 0.67 6.27 4.70 1.57

Jhargram 6.55 0.30 2.40 -- 9.25 6.94 2.31

Madakkathara 13.30 0.30 2.40 2.67 18.67 14.00 4.67

Pilicode 4.00 0.10 0.80 -- 4.90 3.67 1.23

Vengurle 8.23 0.30 2.40 -- 10.93 8.20 2.73

Vridhachalam 11.55 0.30 2.40 -- 14.25 10.69 3.56

Total 83.66 2.40 19.20 14.74 120.00 90.00 30.00


Centre Pay and

Allowances TA


Non-recurring

contingency Total

ICAR Share

Bapatla 12.71 0.17 2.40 5.01 20.29 15.22

Bhubaneshwar 12.43 0.30 1.85 0.32 14.90 11.17

Chintamani 12.66 0.11 2.40 2.00 17.17 12.88

Jagdalpur 3.80 0.14 1.60 0.41 5.95 4.46

Jhargram 5.94 0.14 2.40 -- 8.48 6.36

Madakkathara 13.71 0.25 2.33 2.67 18.96 14.22

Pilicode 4.30 0.05 0.54 -- 4.89 3.67

Vengurla 8.23 0.30 2.31 -- 10.84 8.13

Vridhachalam 10.63 0.30 2.38 -- 13.31 9.98

Total 84.41 1.76 18.21 10.41 114.79 86.09

QRT-CASHEW

27


(Rs. In lakhs)

Centre

Details of sanctioned provision ICAR share

State share Pay and

Allowances TA


Non- Recurring

contingency

Grand Total

Bapatla 11.00 0.45 2.40 2.00 15.85 11.89 3.96

Bhubaneshwar 12.00 0.45 2.40 5.40 20.25 15.19 5.06

Chintamani 13.00 0.45 2.40 1.33 17.18 12.89 4.30

Jagdalpur 4.03 0.30 1.60 0.0 5.93 4.45 1.48

Jhargram 5.90 0.45 2.40 0.0 8.75 6.56 2.19

Madakkathara 12.00 0.45 2.40 1.20 16.05 12.04 4.01

Pilicode 3.50 0.15 0.80 2.00 6.45 4.84 1.61

Vengurla 8.50 0.45 2.40 2.67 14.02 10.50 3.51

Vridhachalam 12.00 0.45 2.40 0.67 15.52 11.64 3.88

Total 81.93 3.60 19.20 15.27 120.00 90.00 30.00


Centre Pay and

Allowances TA


Non-recurring

contingency Total

ICAR Share

Bapatla 12.87 0.09 2.39 2.00 17.35 13.01

Bhubaneshwar 13.21 0.28 2.40 5.29 21.18 15.89

Chintamani 16.83 0.08 2.40 1.33 20.64 15.48

Jagdalpur 4.45 0.13 1.58 0.00 6.16 4.62

Jhargram 5.50 0.19 2.40 0.00 8.09 6.07

Madakkathara 13.73 0.09 2.14 1.19 17.15 12.86

Pilicode 4.15 0.07 0.58 2.00 6.80 5.10

Vengurla 8.41 0.38 2.35 0.38 11.52 8.64

Vridhachalam 11.73 0.45 2.40 0.67 15.25 11.44

Total 90.88 1.76 18.64 12.86 124.14 93.11

QRT 2002-06

28

CHAPTER-4

POLICIES, PRIORITIES, STRATEGIES AND PROGRAMMES

4.1 Policy Issues

4.1.1 Scope

Cashew (Anacardium occidentale L) is an important cash crop of India. Since 16th century, the area under its cultivation has been steadily increasing in the country. India has been the leading cashew producer in the world. Recently; the cashew crop and cashew industry have received sever threat from Vietnam and African countries in the world market. The African countries are new establishing their own processing units. Hence, it is likely that in the years to come the availability of raw ntus from African countries to our cashew industry would be very critical and decline drastically. There is an urgent need to increase the production and productivity to maintain our supremacy in international trade and to maintain the prices of Indian cashew competitive. Therefore, the cashew source needs to be planned, developed, conserved and managed in an integrated manner and on an environmentally sound and sustainable basis. Growth and expansion of economic activities in India inevitably lead to increasing demands of cashew kernels, CNSL and other buy-products. Main goal of NRC-Cashew, is to develop and transfer ecofriendly, economically viable and socially acceptable improved packages for optimum utilization of available resources, land and water for sustainable cashew production. The policy calls for strengthening the existing set-up through Inter-institutional frame-work, Inter-departmenal collaborative research and TOT programmes with SAU’s and cashew processing industries in the region.

¹ Policy statements

· The research and development mechanism in the country may be geared up to increase the production of raw nuts from the current level of 5 MT per annum to 10 to 12 MT per annum within the next five years.

· Research facilities in terms of human resources, infrastructure and

training requirements may be strengthened to improve the productivity level from 0.85 MT per hectare to 2.0 MT per hectare at the farm level.

· Developmental activities may be strengthened to take up further

expansion in area under cashew to the tune of 10 per cent per annum, by extending the crop to non-traditional areas.

· Farmers’ may be motivated by enhancing farm income with the

utilization of cashew apples for production of cashew wine,

QRT-CASHEW

29

neutraceuticals etc., and also by ensuing stabilized price for quality raw material.

· Consumption of cashew kernels may be enhanced by advocating the

healthy aspects of cashew nut consumption and a sustainable Indian market may be created to ensure support prices to Indian farmers.

· Import – export policies of cashew nuts may be streamlined based on

the ability of the cashew industry to generate direct and indirect employment to 15 to 20 lakh semiskilled and unskilled workers.

4.1.2 Emerging issues in cashew self sufficiency

a) The agricultural research pertaining to cashew production was aiming at marginal improvement in productivity and consequent even small increment in incomes of farmers through judicious and optimized use of small additional resources. In future larger increase in productivity through the precision farming would have to be planned.

b) The cashew crop is no doubt rainfed farming but it responds quickly to

water, enhancing the productivity significantly. The issue of optimal irrigation through micro-irrigation need to be focused.

c) The cashew crop starts yielding economical gains after about 3-5years,

grown, under rainfed condition. However, the major issue of cashew intercropping system needs to be tackled for maximization of land equivalent ratio.

d) Trends in agricultural cashew production vis-à-vis Indian economic growth

indicate that in future, consumption of cashew kernels is likely to be increased. Hence research is needed for planning and optimizing cashew productivity, for enhancing cashew based farming system.

e) Cashew plantation has special added advantages of reducing soil erosion

on slopy and hilly areas of coastal states and the environment protection through carbon trading and nutrients utilization.

f) The likelihood of global climate change would need cashew plantation on

large scale to withstand increased variability in rainfall.

g) The proportion of India’s population and the number of the people that depend on agriculture use of land would have to be reduced or diverted. Unless the policies and strategies are adjusted to this goal economic

QRT 2002-06

30

growth could get constrained. This would be possible through population movement to cashew processing industry sector.

4.1.3 Upgradation of research capability

The research needs not to be driven by the past experience and current problem alone but should address long term future concerns. Moreover, it should not aim at problem solving alone but assist policy evolution. It ought to be encompass not only science and technology but socio-economic-environmental and policy dimensions also. New research programmes have to be directed to emerging issues and problems.

QRT for NRC-Cashew, Puttur has strong feeling that unless the research capability and competence of scientists, technologists are uplifted above goals and mandates could not be achieved. It is necessary to raise the status of NRC Cashew to Project Directorate Status in view of long term policy.

4.1.4 Financial support for infrastructural development Overall development goals are achieved only with sound base science and technology, self sufficient excellent infrastructure laboratories, equipments and machinery and high quality trained human resource. Unless requisite financial support under Plan and Non-Plan heads are provided, the high quality research achievements could not be achieved.

4.1.5 Human resource development. Superb quality research talent is now available in the country. The selection and encouragement to the young talented scientists and technocrafts could be achieved but basic training, research psychology devotion and consistency in the research work need be integrated amongst them through short and medium duration training. The academic proficiency does not serve the purpose of laboratory and field working which are acquired through experience under the guidance of trained person. Hence, periodical short training and work experience opportunities need to be provided.

Present set up of staff provided for cashew research was on the basis of previously requirement and the earlier problems. Since then may advances have taken up in research methodology and approaches. Thus the need for human resource development. Many new aspect specially related to biotechnological, use of finger printing and molecular markers, microbiologies processing need to be attended for cashew industry to be served.

QRT-CASHEW

31

Considering the magnitude of the cashew industry, present situation and further scope it is absolutely necessary to upgrade the status of NRCC to Project Directorate.

4.1.6 Hierarchy of policies, strategies and programmes Inter-relation, co-ordination administrative channel, financial flow are implement through certain channel. Various terms like policies, strategies, priorities, thrust areas, programmes, objectives etc are used in different documents of the institute. The schematic flow chart for effective implementation with specific hierarchy is depited in Fig.4.1.

Fig. 4.1: Flow chart for hierarchy of Policies, Strategies and Programmes

National Development Policy

Cashew Processing Policy

Environment policy

Socio economic policy

Cashew Production Policy

ICAR

PD NRCC

Mandate

Thrust Areas Priority Res. Areas

Programmes Strategies

Researchable Issues

Research schemes experiments with objectives

TOT

Monitoring the efficacy of Research

Identification Constraints

State Policy

SAU’s

AICRP Centre

Research Program

SAU

SAU Research Scheme

QRT 2002-06

32

4.2 Priorities and Strategies

Priority or thrust areas for cashew research in India for the next 10 years are as follows:

4.2.1 Enhancement of cashew production under waste land development

programme

The present area under cashew cultivation in the country is 0.85 million ha. The average yields need to be increased to meet the growing demands of rawnuts. QRT had discussion with development, forest department and universities. Many potential new pockets are suggested for cashew plantation programme. Thus it is possible to increase the acreage by another 0.7 million ha. Details of newer potential areas are given in Table 4.1 and also depited in Fig.4.2.

Table 4.1: Potential regions for cashew showing specific locations.

States Existing area (‘000 x ha) (2006-07)

Potential Region

Kerala 80 Kasaragod, Kannur, Malapuram, Trissur, Palakkad, Kollam

Karnataka 102 Coastal districts, Belgaum, Bidar, Shimoga, Chikkamagalur, Mysore, Chamarajanagar, Kolar

Goa 55 North and South Goa Maharashtra 164 Chandrapur, Kolhapur, Gadchiroli, Gondia

and Igatpuri, NARP zone. Tamil Nadu 123 Cuddalore, Pudukottai, Perambadur,

Kanchipuram, Villupuram, Theni, Kanyakumari, Thirunelveli, Dindigal

Andhra Pradesh 171 Srikakulam, West Godavari, Prakasam, Visakapatnam

Orissa 125 Koraput region consisting Malkanagiri, Rayagada, Navarangpur, Mayurganj and Koraput

West Bengal 10 Purolia, Paschim Medinapur, Bankura, Birbhun, Parts of Bundwan

Gujarat 4 Navsari and Dang North Eastern States 12 Assam, Tripura, Manipur, Meghalaya,

Mizoram Chattisgarh Raigarh, Jagdalpur, Bastar Andaman & Nicobar Islands 0.8 Area under coconut which have become

senile is available for cashew planting. Jharkand - Jamshedpur and Singhbhumi East,

Singhbhumi West and Sadaikala Total 849.8

QRT-CASHEW

33

QRT 2002-06

34

QRT-CASHEW

35

4.2.2 Enhancement of cashew productivity

It is necessary to diagnose the causes for the low productivity of cashew cultivation in India. It is evident from data that the productivity ranged between 2-3 tons/ha either on the experimental farm or demonstration farm. This indicates the gap between potential yield and average yield realized by the farmers. Diagnostic analysis for the low productivity is as follows:

¹ Diagnostic analysis for low productivity

· Lack of varietal breakthrough in cashew breeding programme. · Cashew is considered as one of the major rainfed crops and it does not

require any water management practices. However, cashew is very responsive to water under optimal irrigation condition.

· Cashew is a neglected crop for timely nutritional nourishment under

IPNM conditions. Requisite NPK requirements of cashew is neither supplied with inorganic or organic form.

· From the reconnance survey it was observed that majority of the

farmers are not providing fertilizer doses or organic matters in any form.

· It was noticed that timely plant protection measures for TMB are not followed by majority of the farmers resulting in major setback in production.

· Lack of following of orchard management practices like pruning, training

and canopy management.

· There is a tendency of harvesting premature nuts due to lack of awareness on the quality of kernels.

· Old gardens are exhibiting the deficiency symptoms of micronutrients

especially Zinc, Boron, Sulphur. ¹ Proposed remedies for enhancement of productivity

· It is necessary to develop resistant varieties for TMB. · Emphasis may be given to biotechnology tools.

· State department of agriculture and horticulture needs to be persuaded

QRT 2002-06

36

to undertake IPNM through TOT programme effectively. The same is also applicable to plant protection measures in cashew production.

· There is a need to undertake indepth studies on integrated water

management either by AICRP Cashew centers or SAUs. The emphasis needs to be given for optimal and deficit irrigation as well as micro irrigation depending upon water availability and socio-economic conditions.

· There should be close interaction in organizing campaigns on proper

harvesting techniques for farmer and local traders between cashew processors, development departments and research institutes.

4.2.2.1 Crop improvement

· Collection, conservation, evaluation and cataloguing of both exotic and indigenous germplasm accessions with high yield and tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses (including from non-traditional areas).

· Molecular characterization of germplasm and varieties through DNA

(RAPD / ISSR / SSR) and isozyme markers. Identification of molecular markers linked to economic characters in cashew and construction of genetic maps.

· Development of dwarf and compact cashew varieties and developing

dwarf rootstocks suitable for high density planting and its multiplication. · Development of plant ideotype concept for cashew · Establishment of long-term conservation field block of germplasm. · Standardization of micropropagation techniques for multiplication of

cashew elite lines/root stocks. · Genetic transformation studies for insect resistance and testing and

evaluation of transgenics.

4.2.2.2 Crop management

· Integrated Plant Nutrient Management (IPNM) including nutrient budgeting, orchard management, weed management, irrigation management, micronutrient deficiencies management, selective nutrient uptake studies and soil and water conservation techniques for achieving targeted yield.

QRT-CASHEW

37

· Micro irrigation studies related to daily net irrigation requirement in terms of litres per plant, design, operation and maintenance and reduction in capital cost.

· Physiology of flowering and off-season flowering including studies on

hormones. · Canopy management for rejuvenation of old cashew plantations /

orchards and architecturing and management for different plant densities and system of planting.

· Detailed studies on high density planting system to increase

productivity of cashew. · Organic farming research including certification. · Integrated cashew based farming system research. · Studies on role of pollinators in cashew for enhancing yield. · Estimation of cost of cultivation and its reduction.

4.2.2.3 Crop protection

· Studies on kairomones and pheromones for effective and economic control of Tea Mosquito Bug (TMB) and Cashew Stem and Root Borer (CSRB) – Network project.

· Development of eco-friendly IPM strategies including Entomo

Pathogenic Nematodes (EPN) for control of major insect pests. · Standardization of mass rearing of CSRB, flower and fruit pests and

their natural enemies. Standardization of Semi-synthetic diet (SSD) for rearing of CSRB.

· Etiology and transmission studies on yellow leaf spot disease and

investigations on panicle drying (in absence of TMB). · Analysis of pesticide residues in cashew produce and cashew

ecosystem to address concerns of food quality standards. · Validation of pest forecasting models already developed.

QRT 2002-06

38

· Life table studies of key pests for critical mortality factor.

· Development of weather – pest – disease models. 4.2.2.4 Post harvest technology

· Designing and development of low cost, small scale machinery for cashew processing such as mini cashew processing unit, for raw nut, shell cutter, steamer and dryer.

· Developing technologies for alternative use of byproducts of cashew

processing industry such as cashew kernel rejects for extraction of oil, Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL) as a source of nutraceuticals, cashew shell cake for preparation of briquettes, cashew kernel testa for tannin as source of antioxidants and cashew apple pomace as source of nutraceuticals for development of food / feed mixes.

· Extraction of nutraceuticals from cashew apple pomace such as

natural colours, flavours, pectin and nutritionally beneficial compounds. · Assessment of bioavailability of nutritionally important minerals in

cashew apple powder / pomace / cashew kernel. · Economic production of wine, industrial alcohol / bio-fuel from cashew

apple. · Energy auditing in cashew processing industry.

4.2.2.5 Transfer of technology and database

· Utilizing and standardizing mass media based Transfer of Technology (TOT).

· Development of farmers participatory technology programme. · Impact of cashew production technology on increase in area and

productivity of cashew. · Analysis of socio-economic impact of cashew cultivation. · Case studies on profitable cashew based intercropping systems for

popularization. ·

QRT-CASHEW

39

· Organizing demonstration plots, village adoption, and trainers training programmes.

· Creating data base / info base on cashew leading to knowledge base. · Development of CD package on production and protection

technologies and sustainability of cashew cultivation and success stories.

4.3 SWOT Analysis

4.3.1 NRC-Cashew

4.3.1.1 Strengths

§ Well established laboratory for cashew research. Emphasis on mechanization and processing technology.

§ Well laidout field trails. Long term experiments on high density

plantation and pruning techniques.

§ Availability of trained scientific and technical staff. Existence of multidisciplinary staff working in an integrated manner having excellent interaction amongst scientists from different disciplines.

§ Very well furnished library.

§ Good linkage between KCMA, development departments, NGOs and

farmers. 4.3.1.2 Weaknesses

a) Cadre strength of scientific and technical staff is inadequate. Thus the technical work suffers.

b) Renewal of Shantigodu land lease for 99 years or permanent transfer

of land from Forest Department.

c) Inadequate irrigation facility inspite the fact that micro irrigation could bring radical change.

d) Watershed development components with special reference to ridge to

valley are not sufficiently developed.

i) Land development , terrace-water harvesting pits

QRT 2002-06

40

ii) Water harvesting structures – concrete water storage structure near cashew nursery is necessary as it is most ideal location for percolation tank.

iii) Ground water exploitation is very limited.

e) Biotechnology facility is inadequate. f) Canteen (staff welfare activity) facility should be created.

g) Laboratory facilities, NABL

h) Farm mechanization at both farms are very weak. Inter culturing and

grass cutting machines are not available.

i) Acute slope – TCM, mild slope – CCT, gully plugging and micro water shed approach to each cashew plant under National Watershed Development Programme at Shantigodu is necessary.

j) Replacement of old vehicles. Quick and timely mobility is not available.

Old vehicle of Director, NRC-Cashew need to be replaced. The maintenance cost is high. Existing vehicles are not at all comfortable.

4.3.1.3 Opportunities

a) Growing demand for cashew both in the national and international market.

b) Greater opportunity for expansion of research centre to meet the challenges ahead.

4.3.1.4 Threats

a) Fast advancement in the frontier areas of cashew research in African countries as well as Vietnam.

4.3.2 AICRP Cashew

4.3.2.1 Strengths

§ Well laidout field trails. Productivity of demonstration plots ranged from 2.5 to 3.0 t/ha.

§ Availability of trained scientific and technical staff.

§ Monitoring and system support from Agricultural University.

QRT-CASHEW

41

§ Good linkage between development departments, NGOs and farmers. TOT programme are effective in Maharashtra, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka states.

4.3.2.2 Weaknesses

a) Frequent transfer of scientific staff and keeping the post vacant for long time by university administration.

b) Land problem in Jagdalpur and Pilicode. Non implementation of sub

surfaced drainage programme at Jagdalpur.

c) Inadequate water harvesting system at Vengurle. Acute water shortage in the month of May at Vengurle.

d) Shifting of the AICRP Centre at CARS, Bapatla to other coastal belt of

Andhra Pradesh.

e) Inadequate farm structure, drying yard and field laboratory and temporary roads at Bhubaneswar.

4.3.2.3 Opportunities

a) Growing demand for cashew both in the national and international market. Organic cashew cultivation is promising.

b) Greater opportunity for expansion of research centre to meet the

challenges ahead. Expansion of area and doubling the productivity are real challenges.

4.3.2.4 Threats

a) Non control of TMB and CSRB under cultivation of organic cashew. b) Imported cashew nuts are cheaper than Indian cashew.

QRT 2002-06

42

CHAPTER-5

RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS 5.1 NRC-Cashew

During the period under review, 30 institute projects, 3 ad-hoc schemes, one DBT project, one NATP project and one Revolving Fund Scheme were in operation. A total of 14 research projects were concluded. List of concluded projects (14), on-going projects (22) and Externally Funded Project (2) from 2002 to 2006 is given in Annexure-5.1.

5.1.1 Crop improvement

A total of 30 variable cashew types identified have been added to the National Cashew Field Gene Bank (NCFGB) thus, raising the total germplasm accessions conserved in National Cashew Field Gene Bank to 506.

Accessions (77) which completed 6th annual harvest were evaluated and characterized for 68 different characteristics. 9 accessions have been registered with NBPGR, New Delhi for their unique characteristics.

The non-traditional areas of cashew cultivation such as northern parts of Karnataka (Belgaum, Bidar and Dharwad districts) and parts of NEH states such as Assam, Meghalaya and Tripura were covered under germplasm survey. Brazilian dwarf CPP-009 seedling progeny raised from the seeds collected from Mozambique is clonally multiplied and added to gene bank for evaluation.

A germplasm conservation block for 320 evaluated cashew germplasm accessions has been established by planting four grafts for each accessions in a closer spacing of 4m x 4m.

Two promising hybrids H-46 and H 32/4, are under evaluation in

KCDC plantation and the H 32/4 is under evaluation in farmers field also. Hybrid 1250 (VRI-2 X VTH 40/1) and H 2438 (BLA 139-1 X VTH

711/4) were found promising under medium nut size category on single plant basis for annual yield as well as cumulative yield.

QRT-CASHEW

43

Two hybrids, namely, H-66 and H-43 yielded more than 5 kg in the second annual harvest with above 8 kg cumulative yield and more than 8 g nut weight.

Under the in vitro micropropagation study per cent callus and mean

callus growth varied with media. Embryogenesis was observed in 3 varieties, namely, Ullal-3, Goa-11/6 and Kanaka. With suspension culture it was possible to scale up somatic embryos. Maturation and germination of somatic embryos resulted in good differentiation of root and poor development of shoot. Two sets of micropropagated plants were also evaluated in field based on morphological, flowering and yield characters. Micropropagated plants had more plant height than grafts.

Nodal cultures were established from shoot-explants of cashew root-

stock and elite varieties. Establishment varied with season and variety. Treatments to stock plants like hormone spray and covering with black alkathene sheets had no effect on establishment. Axillary shoot-bud proliferation and elongation were observed but rooting was poor and limited. Nucellus cultures were established in several elite varieties but embryogenesis was successful in only two varieties. Somatic embryos were scaled up by suspension culture. Somatic embryos were germinated successfully after maturation in ABA medium.

DNA was extracted from more than 200 accessions of cashew

germplasm. PCR optimization for RAPD, ISSR and SSR markers were standardized. By screening 105 random primers (RAPD) 55 primers were found to show polymorphism. Using RAPD primers, 42 elite varieties of cashew including released varieties were characterized. Extraction and staining procedure in isozyme of 15 enzymes were standardized. Isozyme pattern in 10 enzymes were used to characterize the varieties. 110 ISSR primers were also screened for amplification and polymorphism. About 50 of these were found to sho amplification. Similarly, 21 pairs of SSR primers were screened observed bands in 18 and polymorphism in 15 of them.

5.1.2 Crop management

i) Planting systems and spacing trials

High-density planting system with 384 trees/ha by adopting hedgerow system (6.5x4m) of planting is ideal for getting maximum yield and profit under typical laterite soil of Dakshina Kannada District unto 14 years after planting. High density planting has the definite advantage

QRT 2002-06

44

of increased yield over normal density planting system. In the long run the soil fertility has also improved due to considerable deposits of leaf litter (dry leaves) even to the tune of 10 tonnes /ha per year 13 years after planting. High density [planting has also increased soil moisture content and reduced soil temperature during the peak summer season compared to normal density planting system

ii) Fertilizer application and pruning trials in high-density plantation

The experiment was laid out in 2001 with three densities as main plot treatments and three fertilizer doses as sub plot treatments. The tree densities are 200 (S1), 416 (S2) and 500 (S3) plants/ha, respectively and three fertilizer doses are 75 kg N, 25 kg each of P205 and K2O (M1), 150 kg N, 50 kg each of P205 and K2O (M2), 225 kg N, 75 kg each of P205 and K2O/ha (M3).

iii) Canopy management studies in cashew

Canopy management by shape pruning in the initial years and annual pruning for shape maintenance helped in improved performance of plantations. Rejuvenation by limb pruning or heading back helped to improve the performance of old exhausted or canopy crowded plantations in the second season of pruning. In the third season after pruning the yield increment is more than double than that of unpruned trees.

iv) Efficacy of soil and water conservation techniques coupled with organic and inorganic manuring in cashew garden grown in slope areas

With aim to develop suitable soil and water conservation techniques to boost cashew yield, a field experiment was laid out in 2000 and continued up to 2004 at National Research Center for Cashew, Puttur, Karnataka on ten year old cashew grafts of VRI-1 variety. Main plot treatments consisted of (1) terrace with catch pit, (2) terrace with crescent bund, (3) staggered trenches between trees and (4) control plot. Sub-plot treatments consisted of a) recommended doses of fertilizers, b) recommended doses of fertilizers+10 kg poultry manure and c) application of only 20 kg poultry manure/tree/year.

It was found that with proper soil and water conservation

techniques like individual tree terracing with crescent bund treatment increased the soil moisture significantly (14.7% dry basis compared to

QRT-CASHEW

45

11.5% dry basis in control), reduced the peak runoff (4.6 l/s/ha compared to 5.1 l/s/ha in control), reduced the soil loss (0.77 t/ha/year compared to 1.54 t/ha/year in control plot) and resulted an increase in the cashew yield (around 50% more than control) and the net profit (Rs.40966/ha compared to Rs.24813/ha in control). It was also found that the aforesaid treatment coupled with the application of 20kg poultry manure resulted in the maximum yield. Cost involved per tree for this structure is Rs.30 at the present rates of wages under Dakshina Kannada conditions.

v) Adhoc project : Efficacy of fertigation on yield and quality of

cashew

¹ Fertigation

Under high density planting system application of 1/4th dose of fertilizer nutrients applied through fertigation through drippers at 20 litres /day/tree, and the remaining 1/4th applied in the form of castor cake has similar effect on yield compared to full dose of fertilizers applied to soil(500 gN, 125 g P205 and 125 g K20. With fertigation quantity of nutrients (through fertilizers and organic manure) to be applied can be reduced to half of the quantity of recommended nutrients. With fertigation the yield can be increased to 2 t /ha/year in 5 to 7 years old cashew grafts. The yield potential per hectare can be increased from 1 t/ha in the case of high density planting (625 trees/ha) with out irrigation to 2 tonne /ha with fertigation of 1/4th of the recommended fertilizer nutrients and remaining 1/4th applied to soil in the form of castor cake.

Water soluble fertilizers like diammonium phosphate, urea and muriate of potash are used for fertigation through drip lines from December to March and application of 2 kg castor cake to soil during August. Fertigation is done once in a week from December to March. Under high density planting system a nut yield of 2 tonne /ha can be achieved by adopting fertigation. Although fertilizer application is 16 times as it is applied by fertigation through drip system, this is cost effective resulting in increased fertilizer use efficiency.

¹ Vermicomposting of organically recyclable cashew biomass

Vermicompost chambers of 1.5 m height, 5 m length and 1.5 m width were constructed. Around this a cement channel was constructed externally to fill water for preventing entry of ants. The chamber should

QRT 2002-06

46

be shaded during summer and protected from rain during rainy season by covering with shaded nets and silpauline sheet or any local thatching materials like coconut or areca nut leaves. For drainage of vermiwash a hole should be provided at the base of the chamber which is connected to a tank with PVC pipes so that the vermiwash can be utilized as liquid manure.

Cashew leaf litter and apples are allowed to decompose for 20

days after mixing with 15 % cow dung slurry. Earthworms that were reared previously in plastic buckets on cow dung can be released into this partially decomposed material. Sufficient quantity of water was sprinkled onto this material as and when moisture level reduces below 40 per cent, approximately once in 4 days so that the biomass is always in wet condition. The process of vermicomposting was complete by 120 – 150 days. Watering of this material was stopped and the earthworms move down to the lower layers, the upper layers are heaped for a day and this is later removed and sieved. Egg cases of the earthworms should be transferred to the vermicompost pit. Percent recovery of vermicompost will be approximately 65 per cent. Composition of vermicompost is furnished below (Table 5.1 and 5.2).

Table 5.1: Nutrient status of vermicompost

Nutrient Values Organic carbon (%) 11.91

Nitrogen (%) 1.21 C/N Ratio 9.86

Phosphorus (%) 0.90 Potassium (%) 0.59 Calcium (%) 2.75

Magnesium (%) 0.82 Zinc (ppm) 29.66

Manganese (ppm) 24.26 Copper (ppm) 12.33

Iron (ppm) 161.91

Table 5.2: Colony forming units of microorganisms in vermicompost

Microrganisms Cfu/g of compost Bacteria 39 x 106

Fungi 38.83 x 105 Actinomycetes 28.16 x 105

Azospirillum spp. 0.516 x 104 3.5 tons of vermicompost can be produced per ha of adult cashew garden per year. Annual cost of production for one tonne of vermicompost from

QRT-CASHEW

47

organically recyclable cashew biomass is Rs. 4,350 / 3.5 tons including depreciation value of Rs. 500 of fixed cost of Rs. 5,000 for chamber.

vi) Externally funded projects during tenth plan: NATP on Cashew

The nutrient requirement in high density planting of cashew was evaluated. Application of 1/3 rd, 2/3 rd and full doses of recommended NPK was tried . Highest leaf and apple biomass was recorded in treatment of application of fertilizers in full doses at Puttur. The yield increased significantly in fertilizer-applied plot compared to control plot. Among the fertilizer-applied plot, there was no difference in yield suggesting lower dose of Fertilizer is sufficient to meet the nutrient requirement. Similar trend was observed in Bhubaneshwar and Vridhachalam centres. In Vengurle significantly higher yield was recorded in trees receiving full dose of fertilizers.

The organically recyclable biomass available in cashew garden

was found to contain 33.7 kg N, 3.27 kg P and 5.73 K / ha in treatment plots receiving full dose of fertilizers. Organically recyclable canopy biomass serves as good source of nutrients, which can be effectively recycled to the system.

The field trials under organic farming technology trials were laid

out with the objective to develop viable method for generating green biomass to enrich nutrients in soil. It was found that dry matter production of green biomass obtained from Glyricidia was 5.75 t/ha whereas it was 6 t/ha in the case of sesbania. Glyricidia contributed maximum green biomass, which is equal to 186 kg N, 40.8 kg P and 67.8 kg K/ha. In Vengurle, Sesbania and cowpea contributed maximum green biomass contributing 73 to 75 kg N, 9.3 to 10 kg P and 14 kg K /ha /year. In Vridhachalam Sesbania produced maximum green biomass contributing 127kg N /ha. In another trial of intercropping with cashew, at Puttur, turmeric was found to be the best intercrop recording 3.35 t/ha of harvested rhizomes fetching total income of Rs. 67,000/ha. Among vegetable crops tried as intercrops at Vengurle, cucumber recorded highest yield and profit (Yield-5.67t and Rs.33659/ha) and followed by ridgegourd (Luffa acutungla, yield-4.86t and Rs.21,793/ha). In Bhubaneshwar Pineapple and turmeric turned out to be the most profitable intercrop fetching net profit of Rs.15,500 and 13,690/ha, respectively. In Vridhachalam highest yield and profit were observed in the case of groundnut as intercrop in cashew garden (111945 kg and Rs.20842, respectively). In organic farming trials the treatment of biofertilizer-Azospirillum with compost of organically recyclable biomass

QRT 2002-06

48

available in Cashew garden recorded highest yield followed by 50 and 75 % recommended dose of N applied in inorganic form and remaining applied in the form of composted organically recyclable biomass available in cashew garden. In Vengurle combination of poultry manure and inorganic manure gave highest yield and in Vridhachalam 75%N applied in the form of inorganic manure and remaining applied in the form of composted organically recyclable biomass available in cashew garden recorded highest yield fetching maximum profit.

A trial on composting was laid out to develop a suitable and

viable method of composting organically recyclable biomass available in the cashew garden. It was observed that six months after imposing treatments the treatment of recyclable biomass + 20% cow dung slurry and recyclable biomass + urea (0.5%) + 1.25 kg rock phosphate gave minimum C: N ratio of 10 and 11.16 compared to 16.13 to 21.76 in other treatments. P concentrations were twice in treatments receiving rock phosphate compared to other treatments without rock phosphate. Maximum colony forming units (cfu) of bacteria (21 x 106) were observed in treatment recyclable biomass + 20% cow dung slurry. Minimum was in recyclable biomass alone (13 x 106). Maximum cfu of fungi (23 x 104) was found in treatment recyclable biomass + rock phosphate and minimum in recyclable biomass + urea + rock phosphate (22 x 104). Maximum cfu of actinomycetes (12 x 105) was found in recyclable biomass + rock phosphate treatment. The above nutrients are sufficient to meet nutrient requirements of adult cashew trees. The recovery of compost out of cashew leaf litter collected ranged from 60-65%. In an adult plantation cashew biomasses collected is in the range of 5.0 to 5.5 t /ha. Considering the above 60-65% recovery total mature compost will be to the tune of 3.5 to 3.7t/ha. This means 46 to 69% N, 25 to 87% P and 13% K of nutrient requirements of adult cashew orchard can be met from the compost of available cashew litter. Thus in a plantation, if entire quantity of the bio-waste materials could be used for composting, the consequent organic manure produced can substantially substitute the inorganic fertilizer demand of cashew thus making the plantation system economically and ecologically sustainable. The addition of cow dung slurry, urea and phosphorous solublizer are quite useful in enhancing the decomposition of biomass within a short period of six months.

A trial was laid out at Puttur, to explore possibility of producing vermicompost from recyclable biomass. Nutrient of vermicompost prepared from recyclable cashew biomass treated with 15% cowdung was found to be high when compared to the vermicompost prepared from recyclable biomass fallout of cashew treated with 5 and 10 per cent cowdung slurry. It was observed that maximum colony forming

QRT-CASHEW

49

units of bacteria, fungi, actinomycetes and Azospirillum were found in treatment receiving 15 per cent cow dung slurry. Recyclable biomass from cashew garden when treated with cow dung slurry (15% of total weight) could be converted into vermicompost within three months by earthworm (Eudrilus sp). Two tons of organically recyclable biomass could be converted into 1.3 tons of vermicompost with net recovery of 65 %. Vermicompost thus produced was rich in N (1.2%), P (0.9%), K (0.6%), Ca (2.75%), Mg (0.80%) and micronutrients like Fe (162 pip), Mn (24.5 ppm), Cu (12.4 ppm) and Zn (29.7 ppm).

vii) Efficacy of soil and moisture conservation techniques coupled with organic and inorganic manuring in cashew garden grown in slopy areas (2002-2006)

Runoff and soil loss

Annual runoff from terrace with catch pit, crescent bund, staggered trench and control plots were 756, 722, 782 and 850 mm (30% of the annual rainfall) and the peak runoff from these plots was 4.6, 4.6, 5.0 and 5.1 litres/ha, respectively. Annual soil loss from terrace with catch pit and crescent bund treatments was 0.77 t/ha/year, staggered trench plot was 1.16 t/ ha /yr and control plot was 1.54 t/ha/year. The first two treatments have considerably reduced the annual runoff (15% of control), peak runoff (10% of control) and soil loss (50% of control).

¹ Soil moisture content

During 2002-06, it was found that individual tree base terracing with crescent bund resulted in a significant increase in the mean soil moisture content (SMC) over the control (13.51% dry basis compared to 10.9% dry basis in control in March). The catch pit and staggered trench treatments had increased the SMC to 12.5% and 11.9% dry basis respectively. Compared to January, the mean SMC in February and March was reduced from 16.6% dry basis to 14.2% and 13.5% dry basis in the case of crescent bund with terrace treatment, and from 13.0% to 11.7% and 10.7% dry basis in control plot respectively. The available soil moisture ranged from 12 to 22 % dry basis.

QRT 2002-06

50

¹ Nut Yield

Soil conservation measures like terrace with crescent bund resulted in significantly higher production of nuts (707.3, 1157.7, 1192 and 1543 kg/ha, respectively) than the rest of the treatments including control (439, 650, 668, 1030 kg/ha) during 2003 – 2006. The mean yield data over five years indicated that terrace with crescent bund resulted in significantly higher production of nuts (986 kg/ha- 163 % of control) than rest of the treatments including control (602 kg/ha). Crescent bund treatment coupled with the application of 10kg poultry manure and recommended doze of fertilizer and 20 kg poultry manure alone resulted in the maximum yield (1173 and 1109 kg/ha compared to 950 kg/ha in control).

¹ Economics

From 2002 to 2006 data, it was found that the highest net profit of Rs. 124815/ha (173% of control) was realized from plot receiving terrace with crescent bund treatment. The profit from control plot without soil and water conservation structure was Rs. 71859/ha. Among the sub-plots, application of recommended doses through inorganic fertilizers and 10 kg poultry manure fetched highest profit of Rs. 129460/ha. The combination of terrace with crescent bund and poultry manure application alone resulted in a net profit of Rs. 128706/ha compared to rest of the treatment combinations and control (Rs.84678/ha).

viii) Evaluation of different soil and water conservation measures in

relation to soil moisture availability and yield of cashew plantations grown in steep slopes (2003 – 2008)

Contour survey was conducted and contour map was plotted to get the slope of the land. The slope of the treatments ranges from 4 to 43%. The 4 replications were laid on 4-15% slope, 18-23% slope, 25-33% slope and 34-43% slope. The field capacity of the soil was determined as 22%. The average maximum infiltration rate was 43.9 cm/h and constant infiltration rate was 11.0 cm/h. The four conservation structures described above and control plots were laid on representative slopes along the contour with Madakkathara-2 variety cashew grafts.

QRT-CASHEW

51

¹ Determination of runoff, soil loss and nutrient loss

Minimum runoff was observed in the case of modified crescent bund (25% of annual rainfall), coconut husk burial (19% of annual rainfall) and reverse terrace treatments (27% of annual rainfall) compared to control plot (37% of annual rainfall). The annual rainfall recorded during this period was 3110 mm. The nutrient loss was also less from treatment plots compared to control. Minimum soil loss was also observed in the case of modified crescent bund (2.75 t/ha/yr), coconut husk burial (2.31 t/ha/yr) and reverse terrace treatments (3.41 t/ha/yr) compared to control plot (4.0 t/ha/yr).

¹ Determination of soil moisture content

The soil samples at three depths were collected from base of the plant at 1.5 m radius during December to May in all the three years (2003-06) and analysed. It was found that modified crescent bund treatment and staggered trenches with coconut husk burial treatments has resulted a significant increase in the mean soil moisture content (SMC) over the control (15.6 and 16.1% dry basis compared to 11.5% dry basis in control in March). The reverse terrace and catch pit treatments have increased the SMC to 14.5 and 12.9% dry basis, respectively. The available soil moisture ranges from 12 to 22 % dry basis.

¹ Growth and nut yield

A trend of increased yield in the first harvest was also observed in the case of staggered trenches with coconut husk burial (0.39 tons/ha), modified crescent bund (0.355 tons/ha) and reverse terrace treatments (0.34 tons/ha) compared to control (0.262 tons/ha) plot. A trend of increased stem girth and canopy spread were also observed in these treatments compared to control.

QRT 2002-06

52

5.1.3 Crop protection

i) Studies on determination of insecticide residues in cashew kernels

Protocols have been standardized for the detection of residues of endosulfan, carbaryl, lindane and chlorpyriphos from the cashew kernels.

Residues of endosulfan and carbaryl, the commonly used

insecticides for the management of tea mosquito bug (TMB) and lindane and chlorpyriphos, recommended / insecticides for the management of cashew stem and root borers (CSRB) were not detected in the kernels of the nuts collected from the treated plots

The residues of endosulfan, carbaryl, chlorpyriphos, and lindane

were not detected in the kernels extracted from rawnuts collected from maidan parts of Karnataka, Sindhudurg district of Maharashtra, Bapatla in Andhra Pradesh and Vridhachalam in Tamil Nadu.

ii) Studies on pheromone of tea mosquito bug Helopeltis antonii

The response of 4 day old male antenna ranged from - 0.563 to –0.978 mv. This was in comparison to –0.143 mv, -0.169 mv and –0.178 mv for dichloromethane alone showed by 3 day, 4 day and 5-day-old male antennae. GCMS analysis of abdomen extract of virgin female (3 and 5 days) in dichloromethane indicated the presence of cyclohexanol, delta.3-carene, dodecane, beta–pinene, 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, pentadecane, heptadecane, octadecane, trans-geraniol 2,6 octadien-1-0, 1-beta pinene bicylclo, 4-tert-butyl-1,2 benzenedithiol, and tetra deconoic acid methyl ester.

iii) Evaluation of newer insecticides against tea mosquito bug

Helopeltis antonii

The damage rating was least in fenpropathrin which was on par with the recommended insecticide λ-cyhalothrin (0.003%). The damage rating was higher in the case of Phalini (0.66) and spray oil 1 and 2 per cent (0.71 and 0.43, respectively) than in the case of trees treated with λ-cyhalothrin (0.003%) with damage grade of 0.25. Fenpropathrin was found effective under field condition in the trial undertaken during 2005 flushing- fruiting season. This insecticide was found to cause 100% mortality of the nymphs and adults even at very low concentration of 0.02 per cent under laboratory evaluations

QRT-CASHEW

53

iv) Chemical control of tea mosquito bug (TMB) and their effect on

predatory fauna

A method for testing the ovicidial and residual action of insecticides was refined. Carbaryl (0.1%), monocrotophos (0.05%) and lambda cyhalothrin (0.003-0.005%) had shown maximum residual action out of nine insecticides tested and not affected insect pollination. As such, under outbreak situation, the above insecticides on timely application could only rescue the crop from the ravages of this pest. Further, l- cyhalothrin(0.003%) had shown highest cost benefit ratio of 4.5 in the large plot trial. All plant products especially neem based commercial formulations, Dillapiole and GB(garlic based formulation) were found to be ineffective against this pest. Effect of insecticides on general predatory fauna was assessed and the recommended insecticidal spray schedule had caused least depression in its population.

Weather factors favourable for natural enhancement of

population of egg parasitoids of TMB were studied. Minimum temperature exerted significant positive influence.

v) Yield loss due to lepidopterans pests

Studies were conducted for three years on yield loss due to lepitopteran flower and fruit pests. From yield loss studies, it was found that in the absence of TMB attack, with timely control of lepitoperan flower pests alone could lead to two to three fold increase in yield. The protected panicle recorded an yield of 3.85 to 4.6 g nuts per panicle whereas, the unprotected panicles in the absence of TMB recorded an yield of 0.98 to 1.66 nuts/panicle. Thereby the percentage of yield loss due to lepidopterans pests ranged from 61.7 to 74.6.

vi) Bioecology and management of lepidopteran flower and fruit pests

of cashew

In order to find out the exact species composition damaging cashew flowers and fruits, a survey was conducted at coastal Karnataka and Tamil Nadu for three years (2000-04 to 2005-06). Based on the nature of damage, they were classified as major and minor pests. Two insecticides (lambda-cyhalothrin 0.003% and carbaryl 0.1%) reported promising against TMB were evaluated against these flower pests. Lambda-cyhalothrin can very well be recommended for management of

QRT 2002-06

54

all the above mentioned pests (TMB and lepidopteran flower and fruit pests), as it had also shown highest cost benefit ratio.

vii) Foraging behaviour of pollinators of cashew

The results indicated that 4 - 7 species of pollinators constantly visited cashew flowers in both coastal Karnataka (Pseudapis oxybeloides, Lasioglossum sp., Braunsapis sp., Ceratina heiroglyphica, Pithitis smargdula and Halictus sp.) and coastal Tamil Nadu (Homalictus sp., Braunsapis sp., P. smargdula and P. oxybeloides). Even though, honeybees visited cashew flowers they collected nectar only. The stingless bees (Trigona irridipennis) collected both nectar and pollen grains. But, the pollen grains were loaded in the form of slimy mass.

The extent of pollination was assessed for the three seasons

on seven varieties (V-1, V4, NRCC-2, Bhaskara, Ullal-3, Dhana, & VRI-3) and it ranged from 16.9 to 49.5 per cent, and in coastal Tamil Nadu, pollination deficit (pollination less than 25.0%) was observed.

Immediately after first, second and third round of spray,

mortality of honey bees was assessed by drop cloth method. Even after six hours of spray, no dead bees were observed on the drop cloth. Further, the apiaries near the vicinity of sprayed plots were also observed for mortality of bees and no mortality of honeybees could be seen.

viii) Chemical and biological control of cashew stem and root borers

(CSRB)

Chlorpyriphos (0.2%), monocrotphos (0.2%), lindane (0.2%) and carbaryl (1.0%) were evaluated as post prophylaxis treatments wherein the CSRB grubs and other stages were extracted physically from infested trees and the damaged portions were swabbed with these insecticidal solutions. Chlorpyriphos (0.2%) could lead to maximum number of treated trees without reinfestation during different years viz., (2001- 82.52%), (2002-77.8%).The physical parameters of infested and recovered trees indicated that in most infested trees the preferred zone of attack was collar and root, distance form severely infested tree was 8-16m, and recovery was better when <50.0% of the stem bark circumference was damaged and the leaf canopy was not yellowed. Metarhizium anisxopliae was found to be ineffective as a prophylactic treatment against incidence of CSRB.

QRT-CASHEW

55

ix) Developing integrated production pakages for enhancing productivity of cashew – entomology aspects

Adoption of phytosanitation by uprooting the dead and severely infested trees, as well as treating the infested trees with Post Extraction Prophylaxis treatments could lead to lowering the number of freshly infested trees as well as lesser number of CSRB grubs per infested tree during the subsequent years. The mated female beetles showed highest response to volatile concentrates of all the host plant materials tested, such as freshly exuded gum, fresh frass, infested bark and healthy bark indicating the presence of a strong ovipositional attractant. Further the virgin female beetles responded strongly to extracts of different body parts. In large plot trials also the mean percentage of treated tress having no CSRB reinfestation was maximum in (96.43) with chlorpyriphos (0.2%) treatment.

x) Integrated pest management of cashew stem and root borers

(CSRB) – Phase II

The trials on residual toxicity of insecticides; chlorpyriphos (0.2%) and monocrotophos (0.2%) indicated that egg hatch and grub survival was normal from 7th day after treatment. Chlorpyriphos (0.2%) led to the minimum egg laying of 3.37 /female beetle indicating maximum ovipositional deterrence.

The recovery levels of CSRB infested trees was maximum with

chlorpyriphos (0.6%) wherein 96 per cent of the treated trees were without reinfestation.

xi) Investigations on insect pest fauna associated with stored

cashewnuts / kernels

A questionnaire was developed to collect information about the pest incidence in different processing units and surveys undertaken in this regard indicated the presence of Tribolium castaneum and Ephestia cautella in most of the processing units. However the damage inflicted by these pests was very minimal. Maintenance of clean production practices like cleaning the work plates and brushing the walls and mopping the floor by these firms was instrumental in checking outbreaks of these pests.

QRT 2002-06

56

5.1.4 Post harvest technology i) Nutraceuticals from cashew

Cashew apple pomace based blends with cereals and pulses have been characterized for protein, starch, sugars, crude fibre, tannin and in vitro digestibility of carbohydrate and protein. Cashew apple pomace could be blended upto 10% with cereals and pulses flour without affecting in vitro digestibility. Water absorption capacity of cashew apple pomace was higher compared to ragi, wheat and rice flours. Significant varietal variation has been observed with respect to mineral composition of defatted cashew kernel flour, testa and cashew apple pomace. Mineral composition of cashew apple pomace could be improved by blending with defatted cashew or almond flours.

Cashew apple powder could be prepared by autoclaving at 16

PSI for 10 min followed by drying in a cabinet dryer at 70°C for 2 days. Treatment with sodium chloride before drying helped in getting cashew apple powder with lower tannin content. The antioxidant properties in cashew apple powder could be attributed to tannins, vitamin C, sugars, amino acids and phenols. Pectin extracted from cashew apple powder has been characterized and it is low ash and methoxyl type. Cashew apple powder is rich in unsaturated fatty acids (C18:1). Blending of cashew apple powder with cereal flours (rice, ragi and wheat) up to 20% enhances the crude fibre and antioxidant activities. Cashew apple powder contains cellulose, hemicellulose A & B and pectin. The insoluble fibre content (cellulose and hemicellulose A & B) is higher compared to pectin (soluble fibre).

ii) Optimization of processing parameters of small-scale cashewnut

processing

Critical parameters influencing the whole kernel recovery for steam boiler i.e. steam pressure and period of exposure and for kernel drier i.e. hot air, temperature and duration were optimized. Product value method was attempted to evaluate the cashew nut processing units. Data revealed that the nuts could be conditioned at 70 to 75 PSI for 13 to 15 minutes in small-scale steam boiling unit for maximum recovery of whole kernels in shelling. In the same way, extracted kernels could be exposed in hot air in electrically operated tray-dryer maintained at temperature in the range of 70 to 75ºC for 6 to 7 hours to yield high value end product.

QRT-CASHEW

57

iii) Improvement in small-scale cashewnut processing system

A rectangular platform is designed and fabricated with handle and four wheels suitable for steam boiler (40 kg capacity) to move from one place to another. A detachable type LPG gas burner is fitted to steam boiler as thermal source. Experimental results with LPG burner revealed that the nut conditioning could be completed in half the time required in comparison to fire wood as a source of heat energy with less expense. Moreover, replacing with appropriate nozzle in burner assembly, bio-gas could also be used.

iv) Economic feasibility study of cashew nut processing units

a) Kolar, Karnataka

Economic feasibility of on-farm or non-farm level small-scale cashew nut processing in Kolar district of Karnataka has beens worked out and the economics are projected. Comparative economic feasibility of existing method and small-scale processing revealed that based on the production of raw cashew nuts in this region, about 79 units could be started with existing system of processing set up with the utilized capacity up to 64 TPA i.e. operational capacity of 320 Kg per day. Introducing small-scale processing units can increase the number of units to 635, generating employment to 3177 personnel which is twice more than the employment generation with the exiting set up for the total raw nut production. As the production efficiency at various stages of operation in the current system is inferior, in spite of higher capacity utilization i.e. 64 TPA, the unit weight value addition is worked out to be Rs 9.55 / kg of raw nuts against Rs. 11.05 / kg in the case of small-scale processing system with operational capacity of 8 TPA.

b) Sindudurg, Maharashtra

The growth of tiny units (322 nos.) having processing capacity between 2-12 MT per season indicated the technology adoption. Among the steam boilers being used in this region, indirect heat vertical type is gaining importance owing to easy operation and less floor space requirement. The financial support by the government machineries and the systematic training offered by NGO are the key factors for the promotion of this sector in this region. Value addition to unit weight of raw cashew nut is around Rs. 22 and the economic returns during season are worked out to be approximately Rs 15,000 per moth. The relative merits of small-scale cashew nut processing

QRT 2002-06

58

over large-scale industries justifies that it ideally suits for farm level / homestead processing.

v) Preparation of plant layout and installation of processing units

A pilot plant was designed and small-scale cashew nut processing units had been installed in NRC for cashew. It was prepared according to the process flow principles. Care was taken to maintain cleanliness on account of product quality and consumer preference. It is planned that the model developed could be used to train farming community to develop skills at various stages of processing.

5.1.5 Achievements

§ A total of 77 accessions after completion of 9 years, characterized as

per IPGRI descriptors. § Embryogenesis has been observed in three varieties (Bhaskara, Ullal-3

and Kanaka). Maturity and germination of somatic embryos resulted in differentiation of root with poor development of shoot. 55 primers have been shown to be polymorphic.

§ High density planting (354 plants/ha hedge row system) up to 14 years resulted in better yield compared to normal density of planting. This also helped in soil moisture retention and soil fertility due to leaf litter (10 tons/ha).

§ Old trees rejuvenated by limb pruning leading to yield improvement.

§ Individual tree terracing with crescent bund increased the soil moisture

significantly, reduced the peak runoff, reduced soil loss, and increased yield.

§ Beneficial effect of fertigation in terms of increased yield and reduction in

the quantity of fertiliser was demonstrated.

§ Pesticide residues in cashew kernel from treated plots were found to be below detection limits.

§ Characterization of volatiles from infested bark and healthy bark by

GCMS has been accomplished.

§ TMB could be controlled by l-cyhalothrin.

QRT-CASHEW

59

§ Safety of recommended insecticides against beneficial predatory fauna was established.

§ Phytosanitary measures were developed for checking reinfestation of

CSRB.

§ Cashew apple pomace blends with cereals / pulses flours have been developed.

§ Pectin isolation from cashew apple powder has been achieved.

§ Varietal variation was observed for antioxidant activity.

§ Processing parameters for small-scale cashew nut processing was

standardized. 5.2 AICRP on Cashew

East Coast

Bapatla

§ A total of 127 genotypes including released varieties were conserved at Cashew Research Station. The genotype T.No.268 recorded maximum cumulative yield of 27.26 kg after four harvests.

§ In the MLT-II the selections T.No. 10.19, T.NO. 30/1 and T.No. 3/33

performed well over the years and recorded highest nut yield and cumulative nut yield..

§ In the evaluation of released varieties, BPP-8 and V-5 recorded

highest yield and cumulative yield since 2001.

§ The NPK requirement of cashew seedling progenies, the treatment combination of 1000 g N, 250 g of P2O5 and 250 g of K2O recorded the highest yield over the recommended dose of 500 g N, 125 P2O5 and 125 g K2O.

§ In the cashew intercrop trial, greengram and blackgram grown as

intercrops performed well and recorded highest cost-benefit ratio.

QRT 2002-06

60

Bhubaneswar

§ Total 89 germplasm accessions consisting of both cluster bearing and boldnut types were collected and conserved in the germplasm conservation block.

§ Varieties H /16, H-1608 and V-4 were recommended for cultivation in

the state based on the performances of these at Cashew Research Station, OUAT, Bhubaneswar.

§ Fertilizer dose of 500 g N, 250 g each of P2O5 and K2O is

recommended for Orissa soil condition.

§ Pineapple, turmeric and cowpea crops are recommended to be grown as an intercrop with cashew during initial years.

§ Three round spraying of chemicals such as monocrotophos (0.05%),

Endosulfan (0.05%) and Carbaryl (0.1%) at flushing, flowering and fruiting, respectively controlled major insect pests of cashew and prevented yield reduction.

§ Extraction of grubs followed by application of chlorpyriphos (0.2%) has

been effective in controlling infestation of CSRB.

§ Prophylactic application of neem oil (5%) thrice i.e. in October, January and April has been effective in controlling the Cashew Stem and Root Borer (CSRB).

Vridhachalam

§ Raising of groundnut and black gram were proved suitable as intercrops in cashew variety VRI-3 with additional returns without any harmful effect on the growth and yield of cashew.

§ Three rounds of insecticidal sprays viz., monocrotophos 0.05% at flushing season, endosulfan 0.05% at flowering season and third spray with carbaryl 0.1% at fruiting stage was effective among the several treatments evaluated against tea mosquito bug and other foliage feeding insect pests.

Jhargram

§ Fertilizer dose of 500 g N, 250 g P2O5 and 250 g K2O per plant/year

was recommended for Jhargram-1 variety for red and laterite zone was recommended. Nitrogen is applied in two splits.

QRT-CASHEW

61

§ Intercrops namely cluster bean, pigeon pea and black gram were

identified for the first 4 years of plantations.

§ Two sprays with endosulfan 0.05% at flushing and flowering and one spray with carbaryl 0.1% provided effective protection against foliage insect pests.

§ Three sprays with profenophos 0.05% at flushing and flowering stages

provided effective protection against foliage insect pests.

§ Extraction of grubs followed by swabbing tree trunk with carbaryl 1% or chlorpyriphos 0.2% provided good protection against cashew stem and root borer.

West Coast

Vengurle

§ The spraying of dried fishes extracts at 500 g in 10 lit. of water in two sprays (first at flowering and second at 15 days after first spray) improved fruitset and yield in cashew.

§ For increasing the yield two sprays of 10 ppm Ethrel have been

recommended; first at flushing and second at flowering stages.

§ For effective control of tea mosquito bug and inflorescence thrips, Lambda Cyhalothrin (0.003%) has been recommended as an alternative insecticide for first and third spray of the existing spray scheduled.

§ The swabbing and drenching of chlorpyriphos 20 EC @10 ml/lit. (5 lit.

suspension per tree) has been recommended as curative treatment for the management of Cashew Stem and Root Borer (CSRB) grubs.

Madakkathara

§ Raghav (H-1610, ALGD-1-1 x K-30-1), a hybrid was released during 2002. The mean yield of the variety is 14.6 kg/tree/year.

§ Damodar (H-1600, BLA-139-1 x H-3-13), high yielding cashew hybrid

was released during 2002.

QRT 2002-06

62

§ Poornima, a high yielding hybrid (H-1593, BLA 139-1 x K-30-1) was released during 2006.

§ Three promising hybrids are identified.

§ A programme named “Quantitative Estimation of Fertilizer

Requirement of Cashew (QUEFC)” was developed integrating three models to estimate the fertilizer N, P and K requirement for cashew for different soil environments and yield levels.

§ The system of high density planting enhanced the nut yield of young

cashew crops four-fold on plantation level as compared to normal density planting.

§ Tapioca was the most profitable tuber crop for intercropping in young

cashew plantations in terms of net profit and C:B ratio, provided the cultivation were undertaken with due consideration for soil conservation.

§ The following pesticide application schedule for the control of

anthracnose – tea mosquito bug complex in endemic areas was recommended for crops of Kerala state.

Chemical Concentration Time/Stage

Monocrotophos 0.05% + Copper oxychloride (0.2%)

1.5 ml/l (36 EC) Flushing

Quinalphos 0.05% + Mancozeb 0.2% 2 ml/l (25 EC) Flushing Carbaryl 0.1% 2 g/l (50 WP) Nut initiation

§ Application of lamda cyhalothrin (0.003%) was found effective and

profitable for the control of Tea Mosquito Bug as compared to the common insecticides and present POP recommendation.

§ Post-extraction treatment with chlorpyriphos (0.2%) was found

effective to reduce the re-infestation of Cashew Stem and Root Borer (CSRB) as curative treatment.

§ The technology for the production of cashew apple syrup was refined

by the use of low cost sago for clarification, reducing the production cost and making the product near natural.

§ Standardized the technology for the production of Ready-To-Serve

(RTS) beverage from cashew apple.

QRT-CASHEW

63

§ Cashew apple residues after juice extraction and leaf litter from the orchard was effectively used for the production of vermicompost in 95 days.

Pilicode

§ Higher yield/ha under high density planting (5 x 4 m) was found with lower dose of fertilizer (75 g N, 25 g P, 25 g K2O)

Plains Chintamani

§ Two high yielding cashew varieties namely Dhana (H-1608) and Chintamani-3 (ME-44) were recommended for cultivation in plains of Karnataka.

§ Fertilizer dose of N (500 g), P2O5 (250 g) and K2O (250 g)/tree/year

was found optimum for realising higher yield of nuts under plains of Karnataka. Nitrogen is applied in two splits.

§ Rejuvenation of unproductive plantations of Ullal-3 was achieved

successfully by limb pruning technique.

§ Three chemical sprays namely monocrotophos 0.05% at flushing, carbaryl 0.1% at flowering and fruiting was effective against TMB. Among new insecticides, Lambda Cyhalothrin 0.003% and Profinophos 0.05% were effective in controlling TMB.

§ The curative treatments including mechanical removal of grubs and

swabbing with Carbaryl 50 g + Copper oxychloride 50 g in one litre of water for CSRB was standardized.

Jagdalpur

§ Total 61 cashew germplasm collections maintained at Regional Cashew Field Gene Bank.

§ Total 11 local germplasm were collected and conserved.

§ Variety V-4 was recommended on the basis of six years data for

cultivation in Chattisgarh state.

QRT 2002-06

64

§ Fertilizer dose of 1000 g N, 250 g each of P2O5 and K2O was

recommended.

Details of Research papers / popular articles published by NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew are furnished in Annexure-5.2

QRT-CASHEW

65

CHAPTER-6

TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY

6.1 Modus of operandi

NRC Cashew envisages one of the important objectives of TOT generated by the research. ICAR has formulated strong chain involving KVKs and SAUs, State Department Officers training programmes in consultation with the Production Commissioner of the Agriculture and Horticultural Departments of the States. Moreover, ICAR institute, Project Directorate, NRC are arranging special trainings on various aspects. The NRC Cashew scientists are also participating in the training programmes, group discussions and demonstrations arranged by the State Department. NRC Cashew scientists have close contacts and co-ordination with progressive farmers and their association and advise farmers directly or indirectly.

Similarly, SAUs has got its own TOT mechanism. The mandate of Extension Education has been assigned to all SAUs as per Agricultural University Act. Trained personnel in the departments are responsible for extension activities through Village Extension Workers (VEW). However, University scientists are also involved directly with the Growers Association / NGO related to Agricultural Development activities. Agricultural knowledge has been disseminated through exhibition, seminar, farmers mela / rallies.

6.2 Knowledge technology transfer ways and means

6.2.1 NRC-Cashew i) Research-cum-demonstration plots

Regular monitoring of demonstration plots for advisory is done regularly. Thirty seven new demonstration plots have been laid out and monitored with the financial assistance for DCCD, Kochi and later under NHM programme.

‘Annual cashew’ days were organized and nine thematic

campaigns on cashew were organized in different areas of cashew cultivation.

Yearly training programmes on Vegetative Propagation of

Cashew and Nursery Management, Cashew Production Technology,

QRT 2002-06

66

Training and Pruning of Cashew, and Composting of Cashew Biomass were organized.

ii) Socio-economic impact of cashew cultivation – an analysis

In the survey conducted in Kerala and Maharashtra the socio-economic impact of cashew cultivation was assessed. The training needs of the cashew growers were documented. The constraints in cashew cultivation were assessed and the strategies to overcome the constraints were suggested. The correlation analysis between profile of the farmers and their adoption behaviour was utilized to draw implications for transfer of technology efforts.

Table 6.1: Thematic campaigns conducted during 2002-2006 Year Soil & Water Conservation Campaigns Plant Protection Campaigns

No. of programmes

No. of participants

No. of programmes

No. of participants

2002 1 69 - - 2003 - - 1 76 2004 2 192 2 281 2005 1 73 - - 2006 1 42 1 68 Total 5 376 4 425 iii) Choudhury Charan Singh birth centenary celebrations

As part of the birth centenary celebrations of Shri Choudhury Charan Singh, former Prime Minster and farmers Leader, a special seminar was organized at NRCC Puttur on 23.12.2002. On this occasion progressive cashew farmers and all the cashew demonstration farmers participated in the special seminar. On this occasion 2 women cashew demonstration farmers awarded for their active role in demonstrating cashew technologies. About 54 farmers participated in the seminar.

iv) Annual cashew day

Five Annual cashew days were conducted during 2002-2006, at NRCC. A total of 918 farmers from Karnataka and Kerala States have participated in these field days.

QRT-CASHEW

67

Table 6.2: Annual cashew field days conducted during 2002-2006

Date No. of participants 14.3.2002 120 4.3. 2003 150 19.3.2004 198 24.2.2005 200 4.3.2006 250

Total 918

Table 6.3: Training programmes conducted during 2002-2006

Training Programme No. of trainings

Duration (Days)

No. of participants

Cashew Production Technology (Refresher Course) 5 3 106 Cashew Production Technology (Special Course) 7 5 93 Vegetative Propagation in Cashew and Nursery Management in Cashew

9 2 91

Pruning in cashew and composting of cashew biomass 7 3 132 Training on Preparation of Compost from Cashew Biomass

1 1 11

Total 29 14 433

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Gra

fts s

old

Fig.6.1: Cashew grafts sold under ICAR Revolving Fund during 2002 to2006

QRT 2002-06

68

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

Gra

fts

sold

Fig.6.2: Cashew grafts sold under DCCD Regional Nursery Scheme during 2002

to 2006. Short duration training for farmers, practical technology training for field workers and advanced training for the officers have been considered most important. Details of the training types, no. of participants and its impact etc. are reported (Table 6.4).

QRT-CASHEW

69

Table 6.4: Details of training imparted by NRC-Cashew during 2002-06 Sl. No.

Title Year No. of courses

conducted

Total no. of participants

Remarks

1. Cashew Production Technology (Duration – 5 days, Refresher course – 3 days)

2002 4 36 Post evaluation has

indicated improvement in their knowledge on

CPT

2003 4 38 2004 4 47 2005 1 17 2006 2 39 Total 15 177 2. Vegetative

Propagation in Cashew (Duration – 2 to 3 days)

2002 1 34 Post evaluation has

indicated greater perception of the

technique

2003 2 37 2004 2 19 2005 2 48 2006 1 12 Total 8 150 3. Pruning in Cashew 2002 1 70

2003 2 60 2004 1 19 2005 1 17 2006 1 24 Total 6 190 4. Plant Protection

Measures in Cashew 2002 - -

2003 1 76 2004 2 281 2005 - - 2006 1 68 Total 4 425 5. Soil and Water

Conservation in Cashew

2002 1 69

2003 - - 2004 2 192 2005 1 73 2006 1 42 Total 5 376 6. Cashew apple

utilization 2002 - -

2003 - - 2004 1 50 2005 1 24 2006 - - Total 2 74

QRT 2002-06

70

6.2.2 AICRP on Cashew

AICRP scientists are involved in transfer of technology to the extent of 20% to 33% in addition to research mandate assigned to them. These scientists are mostly involved in transferring of technology by way of adaptive research and demonstration at farmers field and farmers rallies. They are also associated with TOT programmes organized by universities through Director of Extension. Visit of farmers to the AICRP Cashew centres is one of the significant ay of TOT, where scientist and farmers meet face to face. Details of TOT activities centre wise are given in Table 6.5. Scientists are also getting excellent feedback from the farmers which is utmost for formulating research programmes.

Table 6.5: Details of training imparted by AICRP on Cashew centres during 2002-06

Centre Title Year No. of courses

conducted

Total no. of participants

Remarks

Madakkathara 1) Recent trends in cashew nut production and processing

2002 1 22 --

Recent trends in cashew nut production and processing

2006 1 10 --

2) Cashew graft production

2004 2 40 --

3) Recent advances in plantation management

2005 1 21 --

4) Cashew Day 2005 1 250 -- 5) Cashing on cashew

apple processing 2005 3 61 --

6) Crop management, processing, varieties and plant protection

2006 1 80 --

Vengurle Training programme on

Cashew

2002 15 -- -- 2003 10 -- -- 2004 16 -- -- 2005 12 -- -- 2006 13 -- --

Vridhachalam Training programme on

Cashew

2002 16 800 2003 12 600 -- 2004 10 500 -- 2005 14 1400 -- 2006 8 900 --

Details of the publications referred while preparing the QRT report are furnished in the Annexure-6.1

QRT-CASHEW

71

CHAPTER-7

INTERACTION AND LINKAGES

7.1 Need

Cashew industry is witnessing faster changes and cause for concerted effort to meet the increasing changing needs. To copeup these may be of developmental nature or specific research needs. It is imperative to have wide scale interaction / linkage with various national, international, private, commercial, non-government organization and universities.

7.2 Existing interaction 7.2.1 NRC-Cashew

The Research Centre has established linkages with various government organizations and NGOs for disseminating technologies developed to farmers and other end users. i) Agricultural Universities including AICRP on Cashew

The linkage is mainly through AICRP on Cashew centres attached to universities for effective implementation of technical programmes of AICRP on Cashew. Besides this the centre also interacted in conducting training programmes on various aspects of cashew. Scientists from the centre visit the AICRP on Cashew centres.

ii) ICAR institutes

a) CPCRI, Kasaragod – The centre has got strong links with CPCRI, Kasaragod. Scientists from Kasaragod and its Regional Stations are invited to attend centres IRC meetings regularly. Further, scientists from Microbiology, Statistics, Entomology, Pathology and Social Sciences divisions are being consulted regularly as the centre does not have scientists in these divisions.

b) PDBC, Bangalore - The interaction is mainly for work on

biological control particularly rearing nematodes and pheromones / volatiles from healthy and infested bark and characterization of volatiles collected from CSRB and TMB by GCMS.

QRT 2002-06

72

c) NBPGR, New Delhi – The interaction is mainly for registration of germplasm to get IC numbers for the germplasm conserved and introduction of desirable exotic planting material particularly dwarf genotype from Brazil which will be useful for high density planting.

iii) CSIR Institute

a) CFTRI, Mysore – The interaction is mainly for development of

value added products from cashew. A collaborative project funded by DBT on nutraceuticals in cashew was in operation. It is proposed to have linkage for production of industrial alcohol from cashew apple.

b) IICT, Hyderabad – The centre had interaction mainly for

development of pheromones for CSRB and TMB. The interaction needs to be strengthened.

iv) Development Departments

a) State Department of Horticulture – The interaction is mainly for planting material distribution, conducting training programmes for disseminating technologies developed.

b) Cashew Development Corporation – The linkage is mainly for

demonstration of proven technologies in corporation plot, technical guidance for maintenance of cashew plots, training personnel on cashew graft production, planting and other production practices.

c) DCCD, Kochi – The interaction is mainly for establishment of

demonstration plots, conducting training programmes, thematic campaigns, cashew apple utilization, annual kisan mela and publication of technical literature in regional languages.

d) CEPCI, Kochi – The centre has interaction regarding training

programmes, establishment of demonstration plots and pesticide residue analysis.

QRT-CASHEW

73

v) NGOs (SKDRPD, Dharmasthala)

The centre has established strong linkage in organizing training programme on cashew apple utilization for farm women of Self Help Groups. The NGO identifies beneficiaries and depute them for the training programmes conducted at the Research Centre.

vi) Cashew Processors and KCMA, Mangalore

The Research Centre ahs established linkage with cashew processors and KCMA, Mangalore regarding development of value added products from cashew kernel rejects, cashew shell, testa and also in assessing the processing quality of released varieties in terms of recovery and other parameters. Strong linkage is there in the area of yield forecasting with KCMA.

Table 7.1: Details of organization and area of collaboration

Sl. No.

Name of the organization Area of collaboration

1. State Agricultural Universities including AICRP on Cashew Centres

Project implementation

2. ICAR institutes a) CPCRI, Kasaragod Training programme, Plant Pathology

aspects b) PDBC, Bangalore Pheromone work c) NBPGR, New Delhi Germplasm registration and introduction 3) CSIR institutes a) CFTRI, Mysore Nutraceuticals from cashew apple b) IICT, Hyderabad Pheromone work 4) Development agencies a) State Dept. of Horticulture Training b) Cashew Development Corporation Training and on-farm trials c) DCCD, Kochi Demonstration plots, Training,

Campaigns d) CEPCI, Kochi Demonstration plots, Training,

Campaigns e) CEPCI Analytical Laboratory,

Kollam Residue analysis and validation

5) NGOs (SKDRDP, Dharmasthala) Training 6) Processing Industry (Karnataka Cashew

Industry, Puttur and Achal Industries, Mangalore)

R & D on industry related problems

7) KCMA, Mangalore Yield forecasting 8) Nursery men Graft production and training

QRT 2002-06

74

7.2.2 AICRP on Cashew Centres

a) Linkage with Headquarters

AICRP on Cashew have strong linkage with Headquarters regarding implementation of technical programme. Newly joined scientists are sent to headquarters for orientation training programme.

b) DCCD, Kochi

The centres conducted training programme, publish technical literature in regional language, conducting annual kisan mela and production and distribution of grafts of high yielding varieties of cashew in collaboration and financial support from DCCD.

c) State Department of Horticulture

The linkage is mainly for production and supply of planting material, conducting training programmes, and providing technical knowledge to the farmers.

d) KVKs / SHGs / NGOs

The centres have been conducting training programmes and cashew production technology in collaboration with KVKs / SHGs and NGOs

Table 7.2: Details of organization and area of collaboration

Sl. No.

Name of the organization Area of collaboration

1) NRC-Cashew Implementation of project

2) DCCD, Kochi Demonstration plots, Training, Campaigns

3) State Dept. of Horticulture Training

4) KVKs Training

5) SHGs Training

6) NGOs Training

7) CEPCI, Kochi Demonstration plots, Training, Campaigns

8) Nursery men Graft production and training

QRT-CASHEW

75

7.3 Analysis of present linkages

Both NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew Centres have strong linkages with State Horticulture Departments, KVKs, NGOs, ICAR and CSIR institutes and cashew processing industries. The linkage should be strengthened to meet the growing challenges in the domestic and international market. The linkage with international agencies appears to be very weak which needs to be strengthened interms of exchange programme, training in advanced areas relevant to enhancement of production and productivity of cashew and short study visits of scientists.

There should be a strong linkage between government statistical department for getting required data on area, production, export and import of cashew.

QRT 2002-06

76

CHAPTER-8

FUTURE PROJECTIONS AND PROGRAMMES

8.1 Institutional upscaling 8.1.1 Upgradation of NRC-Cashew to the level of Project Directorate

In order to meet the growing demand of 1.9 million tons of raw cashewnuts by 2020, the current area of 0.85 million ha need to be increased to 1.5 million ha. Cashew apple to the tune of 12 million tons will be available from 1.9 million tons of raw nuts. Effective technology for utilization of cashew apple with concerted efforts of scientists of Processing, Biochemistry and Microbiology need to be developed. Project Directorate shall have a major role to play both nationally and internationally with broadened mandate.

8.1.2 New research centres

Considering the vast scope for cashew in the international market, available natural resources, favourable climatic factors and biodiversity the following Cashew Research Centres are recommended for establishment.

Full fledged research centres


b) South Gujarat Region - Paria under Navasari Agricultural University c) South Bihar Region - Rajendra Agricultural University (RAU), Pusa,

Samastipur

Co-operting research centres

a) Kolhapur – (Shendapark), NARP, MPKV – District Kolhapur, MS

b) Sindewahi (NARP, PDKV – District Chandrapur, MS





g) Barapani, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Meghalaya

QRT-CASHEW

77

8.2 Strengthening of Human Resources

In view of the widened mandate and the current thrust areas for cashew research in India as a whole, strengthening of scientific manpower in the following disciplines are projected.

§ Plant Pathology

In NRC-Cashew and certain centres of AICRP on Cashew, some of the pathological problems such as yellow leaf spot, inflorescence drying, twig blight and anthracnose have been observed leading to yield loss. As such, there is a need for addressing the pathological problems by a pathologist. At present, neither at NRC-Cashew nor at any centres of AICRP on Cashew, there are any posts of plant pathologists to look into the problem.

§ Biotechnology

Studies are being conducted at NRC-Cashew on micropropagation and molecular characterization of varieties / germplasm accessions. In order to pursue the work on DNA finger printing and identification of markers for economic and other traits, the biotechnology work at NRC-Cashew should be strengthened with manpower.

§ Microbiology

At present cashew apple produced in the country to the tune of around 50 to 60 lakh tons is not completely exploited. There is a ample scope for producing wine and industrial alcohol from cashew apple. In order to pursue this work, Microbiologist post needs to be created at NRC-Cashew.

§ Statistics

In view of the growing demand for cashew in the domestic and international market, collection of statistical data and its analysis, estimation future requirement of raw nuts and market survey have become highly essential as such there is a need for statistics scientist at NRC-Cashew.

QRT 2002-06

78

§ Social Sciences

The technology transferred to farmers and development department are meaningful provided the socio-economic impact of these are analysed. This needs to be looked into by Social Scientist at NRC-Cashew and AICRP-Cashew.

8.3 Research Programmes

i) Establishment of gene banks

It is proposed to collect diverse genotypes within India and abroad particularly and conserve these germplasm collections in gene banks both at NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew.

ii) Finger printing of cashew germplasm

The ongoing programme at NRC-Cashew will be intensified in order to characterize germplasm accessions and to eliminate duplicate. Further, it is contemplated to identify molecular markers for economic characters.

iii) Biochemical characterization of released varieties

Released varieties have been biochemically characterized. There is a need for characterising the released and to be released varieties for antinutritional factors such as proteolytic enzymes inhibitors.

iv) Micropropagation of cashew

Protocols for multiplication of cashew from juvenile tissue has been standardized. Multiplication from mature explants is yet to be achieved.

v) Biocontrol of major pests

Although biochemical agents from major pests such as TMB and CSRB have been identified, its multiplication for conrolling major pests of cashew needs to be done.

QRT-CASHEW

79

vi) Standardization of high density planting

High density planting in cashew under unirrigated condition has been standardized. Technology for high density planting of cashew under irrigated condition and different agro-climatic conditions need to be developed.

vii) Microirrigation studies

Cashew responds to irrigation during summer months. In view of scarce availability of water to conserve precious natural resource, studies are to contemplated to develop technologies for micro irrigation in cashew.

viii) Organic cashew production

In view of the growing demand for organically produce produce, the ongoing studies on organic farming in cashew needs to be pursued further.

ix) Integrated plant nutrient management

In order to integrate the efficient utilization of natural resources like water, soil, nutrients, soil microflora, an effective technology for integrated plant nutrient management needs to be worked out for cashew.

x) Marginal intervention for increasing the productivity

Ongoing research programmes needs to be intensified for enhancing the productivity of cashew from existing plantations through soil and water conservation, canopy management, effective control of major pets of cashew and prevention of post harvest losses.

xi) Development of low cost on-farm machinery for processing

The ongoing research on refining low cost on farm machinery for cashew processing needs to be intensified and there is also a need for popularizing the on-farm processing of cashew among cashew growers.

QRT 2002-06

80

Success story for on-farm processing in Maharashtra has shown pathway.

xii) Cashew apple pomace / powder utilization

It has been shown that cashew apple pomace / powder could be blended with cereals upto 20% without affecting nutritional quality. Further, research in this regard needs to be conducted regarding development of cashew apple pomace / powder based food formulation with better nutritional quality.

xiii) Production of wine and ethanol The research work is being contemplated in this area.

xiv) Analysis of socio-economic impact

It is proposed to analyse the socio economic impact of technologies transferred to farmers through TOT programmes.

QRT-CASHEW

81

CHAPTER-9

RECOMMENDATIONS The critical review of research, infrastructure facilities including liabilities and assets and human resources for the period January 2002 to December 2006 was done through region-wise visits, discussions with scientists and interaction with Vice-Chancellors, Directors of Research, Cashew Growers and Processors. Recommendations emerged out of this are summarized below: 9.1 Policy Issues

The policy issues, which need the consideration of the competent authority are given below.

9.1.1 Upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate on Cashew

Research

Cashew is one of the important plantation crops earning annually a foreign exchange of about Rs.2500 crores. NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew, since their inception, have made significant impact through development of technologies and TOT. Presently NRC-Cashew has a sanctioned limited cadre strength of 18 scientists. In view of the growing demand for cashew kernels in the International and also in domestic market and widened responsibilities in the changing scenario in the international market and competitiveness especially amidst competition from countries such as Vietnam and Brazil, there is a strong need to strengthen the NRC Cashew to meet the challenges in terms of manpower and infrastructural development. Earlier QRTs also recommended the upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate.

QRT strongly recommends the upgradation of NRC-Cashew to

Project Directorate.

9.1.2 Establishment of Cashew Research Centres in North Eastern Hilly Region, Gujarat and Bihar

In North Eastern Region, cashew is being grown in Meghalaya, Assam, Tripura and Manipur. Survey conducted by NRC Cashew for collection of germplasm indicated the vast scope for area expansion in the states of Tripura, Manipur and Meghalaya. As no systematic studies were conducted

QRT 2002-06

82

for identifying varieties suitable to this region, there is a strong need for taking up of such studies. As there are already ICAR Research Centres, Central Agricultural University, KVKs under ICAR Research Complex and Agricultural University, AICRP on Cashew Centres could be established at Tripura, The agroclimatic conditions for cashew cultivation are also suitable in South Gujarat and South Bihar. The regions and location details are as follows:


b) South Gujarat Region - Paria, Valsad Dist., Navsari under Navasari Agricultural University

c) South Bihar Region - Rajendra Agricultural University (RAU), Pusa, Samastipur

9.1.3 Establishment of co-operating centres

Presently AICRP on Cashew has eight centres and one sub-centre. Cashew needs to be introduced to non-traditional area and plain region. In this regard, QRT recommends for establishment co-operating centres. The proposed co-operating centres are as follows.

a) Kolhapur – (Shendapark), NARP, MPKV – District Kolhapur, MS b) Sindewahi (NARP, PDKV – District Chandrapur, MS c) Koraput (RRTTS, OUAT), Orissa d) Arabhavi (UAS-Dharwad), District Belgaum, Karnataka e) Jamshedpur (NARP), Birsa Agricultural University, Jharkand f) Ela, Old Goa, ICAR Research Complex for Goa, Goa g) Barapani, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Meghalaya

Existing research centres and the above recommended full fledged and co-operating centres are depicted in Fig.9.1.

9.1.4 Creation of independent post of Project Coordinator (Cashew)

Project Coordinator post for Cashew was existing earlier. However, as NRC Cashew & AICRP cashew are dealing with a single crop, it was thought by ICAR to abolish the post of Project Coordinator and entrusting the job of coordinator to Director, NRC Cashew itself. In the current scenario, the responsibility of the Director has enhanced so much and that too with limited scientific staff available at Headquarters, it has become difficult for the Director of NRC Cashew to look after the duties of Project Coordinator (Cashew), effectively. Further the post of Technical Information Officer of AICRP Cashew has been abolished. As such, it is recommended that ICAR should consider sanctioning Project Coordinator’s post for AICRP on Cashew.

QRT-CASHEW

83

Fig.9.1 Existing (5), recommended fullfledged centres (<) and co-operarting

research centres (·)

QRT 2002-06

84

9.1.5 Additional scientific manpower requirement for NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew

In NRC-Cashew and certain centres of AICRP on Cashew, some of the pathological problems such as yellow leaf spot, inflorescence drying, twig blight and anthracnose have been observed leading to yield loss. As such, there is a need for addressing the pathological problems by a pathologist. At present, neither at NRC-Cashew nor at any centres of AICRP on Cashew, there are any posts of plant pathologists to look into the problem. Hence QRT recommends that a plant pathologist post each be created at NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew at Madakkathara and Vengurle.

Work on development of value added products has been going on at two centres of AICRP on Cashew, namely, Madakkathara and Vengurle. Madakkathara centre has established a plant which can produce about 500 bottles of cashew apple syrup. Similarly, Dr. BSSKKV at Vengurle and Dapoli has developed number of products from cashew apple. In order to strengthen these two centers and to develop alternate technologies for cashew apple, testa, and cashew shell, there is a need for Biochemist / Post Harvest Technologist. QRT recommends providing of one post of Microbiologist at NRC-Cashew and one post each of Biochemist at Madakkathara and Vengurla centre of AICRP on Cashew.

9.1.6 Frequent transfers of scientific personnel

The research work at some of the centres of AICRP on Cashew is adversely affected by frequent transfers of trained scientific personnel by the State Agricultural University concerned. This may be avoided. In the case of inevitable transfer, immediate posting of a suitable substitute must be done.

9.1.7 General recommendation a. Shantigodu NRC-Cashew Experimental farm land under lease from

State Forest Department should be permanently transferred to NRC-Cashew (ICAR) to achieve and fulfil the mandate. Alternately, the lease of the said land may be extended for a period of 99 years.

b. Emphasis on development of water resources at NRC-Cashew at Puttur

and AICRP on Cashew should be given on priority by implementing principles of micro-watershed techniques. Such costly water resources be utilized by micro-irrigation. AICRP on Cashew Centres at Vengurle, Chintamani and Jhargram. Special funds for construction of WHS should be provided.

QRT-CASHEW

85

c. Research on organic farming of cashew should be intensified. Strong

linkages need to be established with IFOAM, APEDA and CEPCI. d. NRC-Cashew should develop strong knowledge database in digital

format on integrated natural resources, HRD and R&D. This will help in identification of hot spots for R&D and working on remedies.

e. Active participation in Public Private Partnership (PPP) to join the R&D

particularly in post-harvest technology, processing and global marketing of cashew should be promoted.

f. Present programme of NRC-Cashew should be strengthened by

incorporating research component of semi-auto processing, packing and market intelligence.

g. A high tech technology park where all visible technology showcased

needs to be established in NRC-Cashew, Puttur. h. Remote sensing technique should be utilized for cashew area and

production estimation. i. Nursery act be enacted at national level to prevent spurious planting

material being sold to the farmers. 9.2 Scientific Recommendations 9.2.1 NRC-Cashew 9.2.1.1 Crop improvement

1. There is a need for standardization of top working technology which

could be advocated for rejuvenation for large scale plantation, particularly Forest Corporations and Cashew Development Corporations.

2. In micro-propagation studies, it was suggested that cashew trees

may be severely pruned and explants from these pruned trees be collected and multiplication be attempted. Regeneration from explants from mature trees should receive more attention and protocol for multiplication be standardized which could be employed for multiplication on a large scale

QRT 2002-06

86

3. Work on molecular characterization of varieties for economic traits using molecular markers and marker assisted selection at early stage be continued.

4. As high-density planting in cashew is being advocated, there is a

strong need for identification of suitable dwarf genotypes. Efforts for identification in this direction are to be intensified.

5. Optimum density for cashew in high density planting need to be

standardized. 6. Although reports from NRC Cashew and AICRP on cashew are

available on root-stock interaction, there are no standard root stocks identified / available for commercial multiplication of cashew by softwood grafting. As such efforts are to be intensified for coming out with a recommendation of a standard root stock.

7. As cashew was introduced into this country through limited material,

the genetic variability available within the country could be low. As such efforts are to be intensified to introduce / collect cashew germplasm from Brazil and other African countries, particularly dwarf genotypes.

8. Attempts should be made to survey Andaman and Nicobar islands

for collection of germplasm and the collected germplasm be conserved and evaluated at NRC Cashew.

9.2.1.2 Crop management

1. Recommendation of fertilizer dose should include the component of

organic matter also. 2. As high density planting trials are conducted under rainfed condition,

trials are to be initiated for developing suitable technology for high density planting under irrigated condition also.

3. Canopy management techniques may be standardized with

reference to branches to be pruned, its severity, canopy height and spread.

9.2.1.3 Crop protection

1. Development of IPM module for cashew stem and root borer needs to be given priority.

QRT-CASHEW

87

2. In the IPM components of CSRB, besides prophylactic and curative

chemical components, crop habitat management, identification of pheromones / kairomones and then evaluation under field condition and synthesis need to be taken up on priority basis. Finally, it should be validated at farmers plantation.

3. A technical bulletin on the IPM for cashew stem and root borer may

be brought out.

4. Regarding work on TMB, peak emergence and prediction model for incidence / forecasting be developed.

5. Under organic farming in cashew, control of TMB without any

pesticides needs to be looked into and suitable bio-control measures be worked out.

6. The current minor pests of cashew, which are likely to become

major pests particularly blossom feeders be identified and suitable management strategy be developed.

7. Residual toxicity of the chemicals used for controlling these minor

pests be determined.

8. Studies on shoot tip caterpillar, and apple and nut borer are to be intensified.

9. Methylbutyrate has been identified in volatiles / extracts of TMB

collected in dichloromethane. This chemical needs to be tested against TMB for its antennal response using EAG.

9.2.1.4 Post harvest technology

1. Value addition in cashew needs concerted efforts. Work on

exploring the possibilities of production of industrial alcohol from cashew apple, high calorific briquettes from cashew shell needs to be taken up.

2. Present research work on nutraceuticals from cashew apple are to

be strengthened and continued.

3. Suitable packing methods for on-farm processed kernels may be developed.

QRT 2002-06

88

4. Development of suitable mechanical unit for removal of testa may be

developed.

5. Work on cashew apple wine, juice and syrup at NRC-Cashew, Madakkathara and Vengurle centres of AICRP on Cashew be strengthened.

9.2.4.5 Transfer of technology and database

1. Transfer of Technology efforts are to be continued and intensified. 2. Socio-economic impact analysis of technologies transferred should

be done. 9.3 AICRP on Cashew

9.3.1 General Recommendations

9.3.1.1 Enhancement of research contingency

The existing contingency fund of Rs. 80,000/scientist/year should be enhanced to Rs. 1 lakh/scientist/year in view of increased input and labour cost.

9.3.1.2 Grafts as planting material

Planting only grafted plants of cashew to enhance the productivity. No seedling should be planted henceforth.

9.3.1.3 Establishment of demonstration plots

NRC Cashew and all centres of AICRP Cashew should establish atleast 1 ha / acre cashew demonstration orchard.

9.3.1.4 Screening for dwarf root stock

Work on screening for dwarf root stock for high density planting should be taken up on priority basis at both NRC Cashew and AICRP Cashew centres.

QRT-CASHEW

89

9.3.1.5 Life table studies

Life stable studies for major pest like TMB and CSRB for key mortality factor must be initiated. This was the recommendation of earlier QRT also.

9.3.1.6 Establishment of on-farm processing unit

One unit of the on-farm processing unit need to be installed at all the AICRP Cashew Centres for demonstration and imparting training to farmers.

The centre-wise specific recommendations are given below: 9.3.2.1 Bapatla

1. Promising types identified during survey of AP by scientists of NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew need to be observed for three to four years.

2. Due to frequent transfers of scientists, two posts of scientists of

horticulture are lying vacant. As such it has become difficult to implement the previous QRT’s recommendation of training for newly joined scientists at NRC Cashew. Efforts should be made to post the scientists without further delay.

3. Regarding previous QRT’s recommendation, on shifting of Bapatla

Centre to an alternate place in Srikakulam, things have not materialized. This needs immediate attention from the University authorities.

4. Studies on the new minor pest of cashew observed at Bapatla need to be initiated.

5. Graft production programme should be strengthened.

9.3.2.2 Bhubaneswar

1. Infrastructure development work at Ranasingpur farm needs to be taken up on priority basis by the university.

2. There is a strong need for training the tribal population in cashew

cultivation practices including soft wood graft production.

QRT 2002-06

90

3. While releasing varieties, all quality parameters need to be considered.

4. Thrips damage, if any, to be reported when chilies are grown as an

intercrop. 9.3.2.3 Chintamani

1. As Chintamani centre falls under plains of Karnataka, and due to higher productivity of raw nuts (3 ton / ha) compared to the rest of cashew growing tracts of India, there is a need for focused attention for area expansion in the plains / non-traditional tracts of Karnataka.

2. Water harvesting structures be undertaken in micro watershed of farm

area and precious water resources needs to be utilized by microirrigation.

3. Rejuvenation of cashew trees which were non-flowering and non-

productive by limb pruning was appreciated by the team and it was recommended that detailed package of practice for this technology be brought out by the Centre.

4. The centre should concentrate on developing rainfed cashew based

cropping system. 5. Biocontrol research should be strengthened. 6. The production of cashew grafts should be enhanced.

9.3.2.4 Jagdalpur

1. Scientists of AICRP Cashew centre from Jagadalpur need to survey

the areas of Maharashtra adjoining Chattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh for collection of germplasm.

2. As the experiment on MLT has been planted in water logged area,

conclusions cannot be drawn. As such alternate site for laying our new trials need to be identified.

3. The effect of providing sub soil drainage for the water logged plot

needs to be investigated.

4. The cold / frost tolerant accession should be observed for two to three years for further exploitation.

QRT-CASHEW

91

5. The nursery activity should be expanded to meet the growing demand for grafts.

6. Scion bank for the varieties that are produced and distributed is to be

established. 7. Infrastructure development like polyhouse, shade net, nursery shed

and irrigation facilities need to be developed.

9.3.2.5 Jhargram

1. Production of softwood grafts of recommended varieties / hybrids should be increased for distribution for area expansion through strengthening of nursery activity.

2. Maintenance of experimental plots are to be taken up on priority and

funds required may be requested from university.

9.3.2.6 Madakkathara

1. Reasons for drying of branches, dieback, twig blight noticed in some of the experimental plants need to be assessed and suitable remedial measures be taken.

2. Attempts should be made to characterize the promising accessions by

linking economic characters to DNA finger printing.

9.3.2.7 Pilicode

1. Previous QRT had suggested that additional land to the tune of 15 ha are to be provided for laying out trials on cashew. In this regard QRT was informed that attempts are underway to get the land for experimental purpose surrounding the Pilicode centre. QRT felt that this needs to be done on priority and all the experiments be laid out without further delay.

2. As large area is under cashew in the northern part of Kerala

particularly Kasaragod, Kannur and Malapuram districts, QRT felt that the sub-centre at Pilicode be upgraded to a regular centre besides Madakkathara for addressing the problems of cashew in a better way. For this additional land as committed by the university need to be made available.

QRT 2002-06

92

3. The germplasm accessions are to be characterized after 6 years of planting as per IPGRI descriptors.

9.3.2.8 Vengurle

1. Recommendation for control of TMB and CSRB by ג-cyhalothrin and chlorpyriphos respectively should be validated at farmers field.

2. Blossom blight observed at Vengurle centre needs to be critically

studied. 3. Water harvesting structures should be constructed in micro watershed

of experimental area in view of severe water shortage.

9.3.2.9 Vridhachalam

1. Standard nursery procedures of NRC-Cashew should be followed for maximization of production of grafts.

2. Drying of branches due to twig blight / dieback noticed during the field

visit need to be addressed from the point of pathology.

3. Optimum plant density required for economic viability needs to be worked out.

4. On-farm processing of cashew needs to be demonstrated in Panruti area where raw cashew nuts are shelled with mallet without any processing.

5. The biology of new pest observed at Vridhachalam (Cluster bug, Agonoscelus nubila) needs to be studied in detail.

9.4 Interaction with IMC and Director, NRC-Cashew

As per the guidelines of ICAR, the recommendations of QRT has to be presented before IMC for obtaining its comments. Accordingly the IMC meeting was convened under the chairmanship of Director, NRC-Cashew on 30th January 2008. The Secretary of QRT presented the gist of QRT report and also the recommendations of QRT. The IMC offered its comments on recommendations of QRT after considering the Director’s comments. Out of 83 recommendations made by QRT, IMC agreed with recommendations of QRT with most of the recommendations. However, for some of the recommendations IMC offered its critical comments. The details of those QRT recommendations with critical comments of IMC are furnished below.

QRT-CASHEW

93

Sl. No.

Recommendations made by the QRT

Comments of Director

Comments of IMC

POLICY ISSUES 1. Upgradation of NRC-Cashew to

Project Directorate on Cashew Research

Cashew is one of the important plantation crops earning annually a foreign exchange of about Rs.2500 crores. NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew, since their inception, have made significant impact through development of technologies and TOT. Presently NRC-Cashew has a sanctioned limited cadre strength of 18 scientists. In view of the growing demand for cashew kernels in the International and also in domestic market and widened responsibilities in the changing scenario in the international market and competitiveness especially amidst competition from countries such as Vietnam and Brazil, there is a strong need to strengthen the NRC Cashew to meet the challenges in terms of manpower and infrastructural development. Earlier QRTs also recommended the upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate. QRT strongly recommends the upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate.

Council may consider to upgrade NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate of Cashew Research along with increased manpower and infrastructural facilities in order to strengthen the cashew research setup in the country.

Considering the export earning, increased demand in the international market, potential employment generation especially among women, ICAR should reconsider the recommendation of upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate on Cashew. In view of the recommendations at 2 and 3, the responsibility of NRC-Cashew will be increased. As such IMC also endorses the upgradation of NRC-Cashew to Project Directorate on Cashew.

QRT 2002-06

94

Sl. No.



Comments of IMC

2. Establishment of Cashew Research Centres in North Eastern Hilly Region, Gujarat and Bihar

In North Eastern Region, cashew is being grown in Meghalaya, Assam, Tripura and Manipur. Survey conducted by NRC Cashew for collection of germplasm indicated the vast scope for area expansion in the states of Tripura, Manipur and Meghalaya. As no systematic studies were conducted for identifying varieties suitable to this region, there is a strong need for taking up of such studies. As there are already ICAR Research Centres, Central Agricultural University, KVKs under ICAR Research Complex and Agricultural University, AICRP on Cashew Centres could be established at Tripura. The agroclimatic conditions for cashew cultivation are also suitable in South Gujarat and South Bihar. The regions and location details are as follows:

There is need to take up cashew cultivation in non- traditional areas in order to increase production of raw cashewnuts in the country. Council may consider sanctioning of three research centres under AICRP-Cashew as mentioned for developing suitable agro-techniques in order to spread cashew area in potential regions.

In view of the growing demand for raw nut from the processing sector there is a strong need for area expansion in non traditional areas identified by the QRT in its recommendation. IMC also agreed with the recommendation of establishment of research centres in these areas for developing agro-techniques suitable to these regions leading to area expansion as well as increased production.

a) West Tripura

- ICAR Research Complex for NEH, Tripura Centre, Lembucherra

b) South Gujarat Region

- Paria, Valsad dist. under Navasari Agricultural University

c) South Bihar Region

- Rajendra Agricultural University (RAU), Pusa, Samastipur

QRT-CASHEW

95

Sl. No.



Comments of IMC

3. Establishment of co-operating centres

Presently AICRP on Cashew has eight centres and one sub-centre. Cashew needs to be introduced to non-traditional area and plain region. In this regard, QRT recommends for establishment co-operating centres. The proposed co-operating centres are as follows.

a) Kolhapur – (Shendapark),

NARP, MPKV – District Kolhapur, MS

b) Sindewahi (NARP, PDKV – District Chandrapur, MS





g) Baparani, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Meghalaya

In other non-traditional areas also there is need to increase production of raw cashewnuts. ICAR may consider approve co-operating centres of AICRP-Cashew in the seven locations as mentioned.

Considering the vast potential in the areas identified by QRT for both area expansion as well as increased production, IMC also endorsed the establishment of research centres as recommended by QRT.

QRT 2002-06

96

Sl. No.



Comments of IMC

4. Creation of independent post of Project Coordinator (Cashew)

Project Coordinator post for Cashew was existing earlier. However, as NRC Cashew & AICRP cashew are dealing with a single crop, it was thought by ICAR to abolish the post of Project Coordinator and entrusting the job of coordinator to Director, NRC Cashew itself. In the current scenario, the responsibility of the Director has enhanced so much and that too with limited scientific staff available at Headquarters, it has become difficult for the Director of NRC Cashew to look after the duties of Project Coordinator (Cashew), effectively. Further the post of Technical Information Officer of AICRP Cashew has been abolished. As such, it is recommended that ICAR should consider sanctioning Project Coordinator’s post for AICRP on Cashew.

Council may consider sanction / creation of an independent post of Project Coordinator (Cashew) for effective monitoring of AICRP-Cashew programmes.

In view of the proposed three independent research centres of cashew and seven co-operating centres, IMC also strongly recommended for the creation of independent post of Project Coordinator to meet the enhanced work load.

QRT-CASHEW

97

Sl. No.



Comments of IMC

5. Additional scientific manpower requirement for NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew

In NRC-Cashew and certain centres of AICRP on Cashew, some of the pathological problems such as yellow leaf spot, inflorescence drying, twig blight and anthracnose have been observed leading to yield loss. As such, there is a need for addressing the pathological problems by a pathologist. At present, neither at NRC-Cashew nor at any centres of AICRP on Cashew, there are any posts of plant pathology to look into the problem. Hence QRT recommends that a plant pathologist post each be created at NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew at Madakkathara and Vengurle.

Work on development of value added products has been going on at two centres of AICRP on Cashew, namely, Madakkathara and Vengurle. Madakkathara centre has established a plant which can produce about 500 bottles of cashew apple syrup. Similarly, Dr. BSSKKV at Vengurle and Dapoli has developed number of products from cashew apple. In order to strengthen these two centers and to develop alternate technologies for cashew apple, testa, and cashew shell, there is a need for Biochemist / Post Harvest Technologist. QRT recommends providing of one post of Microbiologist at NRC-Cashew and one post each of Biochemist at Madakkathara and Vengurla centre of AICRP on Cashew.

As cashew suffers from disease problems, council may consider providing the one post of Plant Pathologist at NRC-Cashew and also at each of 2 centres of AICRP-Cashew (Madakkathara and Vengurla). Council may also consider providing the one post of Microbiologist at NRC-Cashew and one post of Biochemist at each of 2 centres of AICRP-Cashew (Madakkathara and Vengurla) in order to conduct research on utilization of cashew apple and other by-products and also to take up studies on value addition.

IMC agreed with the QRT recommendations. However, besides these additional posts, IMC recommended creation of one more post of Food Technologist to address the problems of value addition in cashew.

QRT 2002-06

98

Sl. No.



Comments of IMC

SCIENTIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS NRC Cashew Crop Protection

1. Under organic farming in cashew, control of TMB without any pesticides needs to be looked into and suitable bio-control measures be worked out.

Suitable organic formulations will further be evaluated for the management of tea mosquito bug.

Agreed. Bio-control measures may be worked out.

Transfer of Technology and Database 1. Transfer of Technology efforts are to

be continued and intensified Yes. It shall be taken care.

Varieties, irrigation, soil and water conservation techniques need to be transferred on priority basis under TOT programme.

AICRP on Cashew General Recommendations

1. Establishment of demonstration plots

NRC-Cashew and all centres of AICRP Cashew should establish atleast 1 ha / acre cashew demonstration orchard.

Possibility will be explored for implementing this recommendation.

IMC agreed for establishment of atleast one acre of cashew demonstration plot.

2. Life table studies Life stable studies for major pest like

TMB and CSRB for key mortality factor must be initiated. This was the recommendation of earlier QRT also.

These studies already have been done at NRC-Cashew for CSRB and is being continued for identifying key mortality factors. Previous QRT had given recommendation only for CSRB. However, Dr. D. Sundararaju had already done life table studies for TMB in the year 2000.

Competent centres of AICRP on Cashew can take up the work on life table studies.

QRT-CASHEW

99

Sl. No.



Comments of IMC

Centre-wise recommendations Bapatla

1. Due to frequent transfers of scientists, two posts of scientists of horticulture are lying vacant. As such it has become difficult to implement the previous QRT’s recommendation of training for newly joined scientists at NRC Cashew. Efforts should be made to post the scientists without further delay.

SAU is being pursued to fill up the vacant scientific posts.

The university authorities have to look into the matter.

2. Regarding previous QRT’s recommendation, on shifting of Bapatla Centre to an alternate place in Srikakulam, things have not materialized. This needs immediate attention from the University authorities.

University authorities are being pursued for expedite action in this regard.

Suitable location in Northern Coastal belt of AP be identified and AICRP on Cashew centre at Bapatla should be shifted.

Chintamani 1. Bio-control research should be

strengthened. Biocontrol research done in the past in NRC-Cashew has not given any important lead for management of insect pests of cashew. Further work shall be attempted by the Chintamani centre.

This shall be implemented in collaboration with PDBC, Bangalore.

Vengurle 1. Water harvesting structures should

be constructed in micro watershed of experimental area in view of severe water shortage

Dr. BSKKV shall be pursued to create this facility.

Uniform national policy by ICAR be implemented.

QRT 2002-06

100

ANNEXURE-1.1

GLOBAL PRODUCTION OF CASHEW FOR THE YEAR 2005

Country Area

(ha) Production (MT) Productivity

(Kg/ha) Benin 1,85,000 40,000 216.22 Brazil 6,88,831 2,51,268 364.77 Burkina Faso 9,000 3,500 388.89 Ivory Coast 1,25,000 90,000 720.00 Ghana 13,000 7,500 576.92 Guinea Bissau 2,12,000 81,000 382.08 India 8,37,000 5,73,000 684.59 Indonesia 2,68,000 1,22,000 455.22 Kenya 2,000 10,000 5000.00 Madagascar 16,000 6,500 406.25 Malaysia 7,000 13,000 1857.14 Mozambique 50,000 58,000 1160.00 Nigeria 3,24,000 2,16,000 666.67 Philippines 17,000 7,000 411.76 Senegal 16,000 4,500 281.25 Sri Lanka 23,000 6,200 2695.65 Tanzania 80,000 1,00,000 1250.00 Thailand 24,000 24,000 1000.00 Vietnam 2,85,000 3,00,000 1052.63 Others 31,485 23,090 733.37

Total 32,04,816 19,26,358 601.08

QRT-CASHEW

101

ANNEXURE-1.2

CASHEW IN INDIA

Year Area (million

ha.)

Production (1000 xt)

Productivity* (kg/ha.)

Import of raw nuts (x 1000

t)

Export of cashew

kernels (x 1000 t)

Export earnings (Million

Rs.) 1955-56 0.110 79.0 720 63 31 12.9 1960-61 0.176 111.0 630 118 44 18.9 1965-66 0.241 103.0 427 161 51 27.4 1970-71 0.303 127.0 419 169 50 52.0 1975-76 0.375 162.0 432 137 54 96.1 1980-81 0.464 185.0 400 16 32 140.0 1985-86 0.518 234.0 452 23 35 215.0 1990-91 0.532 295.0 550 833 49 4422.4 1995-96 0.635 418.0 660 222 68.0 12829.5 2000-01 0.720 450.0 625 249 81.7 18785.0 2001-02 0.770 470.0 610 355 97.6 17768.0 2002-03 0.770 506.0 657 401 127.2 20064.0 2003-04 0.780 535.0 686 452 100.8 18546.0 2004-05 0.820 539.0 657 578 127.0 27092.0 2005-06 0.855 573.0 670** 565 114.1 25149.0

* Productivity on total area basis ** Productivity is 815 kg/ha on productive area basis

Source : CEPCI, Kochi, Kerala; DCCD, Kochi

QRT 2002-06

102

ANNEXURE-1.3

PROCEEDINGS OF THE PRELIMINARY MEETING OF QRT HELD ON 25.4.2007 IN THE CHAMBER OF DDG (HORT), ICAR, KAB – II, PUSA,

NEW DELHI

Background information on NRCC and AICRP Cashew were given to DDG (H) and QRT Members in the forenoon of 25.4.2007. The preliminary meeting of Quinquennial Review Team [QRT] with Deputy Director General (Hort) was held under the Chairmanship of Dr. H.P. Singh, DDG (Hort), ICAR in his Chamber in KAB-II, Pusa, New Delhi at 2.00 PM on 25th April 2007.

The Chairman of QRT, Dr. S.S. Magar and all members, namely, Dr. LV Kulwal, Dr. PC Lenka, Dr. PL Tandon, Dr. CT Devadas and Dr. CK Nair and the undersigned on behalf of the Secretary of QRT and as Director, NRC Cashew and Dr. K.V. Ramana, ADG (Hort.II) participated in the preliminary meeting.

The DDG (H) and Chairman and members of QRT and ADG (H-II) were

welcomed by the undersigned. Dr. HP Singh, DDG (H) suggested that QRT Report should be written after a lot of discussion and by analyzing the situation. DDG (H) invited suggestions from each participant of the meeting. He was of the opinion that lot of investment has been made in cashew development. Now there is more domestic market for cashew kernels as purchasing power of Indian public has improved. He suggested that it is advisable to upgrade NRC Cashew to the level of Project Directorate of Cashew Research. Cashew was introduced as a soil conservation crop and later elevated to the status of Horticulture Crop. Proper justification is needed to upgrade NRCC into Project Directorate, Dr. HP Singh said. If the level of NRCC is upgraded into Project Directorate there is provision and scope for improving the scientific staff cadre strength, laboratory and farm facilities. Cashew Nut Shell Liquid (CNSL) utilization is important. During the review of work of NRCC and AICRP Cashew, it is desirable for the QRT to have interaction with Directorate of Cashewnut and Cocoa Development (DCCD) and also with cashew industry, Dr. HP Singh suggested. Dr. SS Magar mentioned that as there is good scope to expand cashew cultivation in Andaman and Nicobar Islands, it is better to invite Dr. RC Srivastava, Director, CARI, Port Blair to one of the review meetings of QRT. It was felt that all members of QRT need not visit all Centres of AICRP Cashew so that the QRT Report can be brought out early. DDG (H) gave a few very important points for the QRT to discuss in detail such as seedling selection from seedlings grown from good varieties, water harvesting, cashew based farming system including with animal component in it, root stock selection for cashew, drought resistant root stock, intensive survey for collection of germplasm, exploring the possibility of Cashew Export Promotion Council of India (CEPC) sponsoring research projects as per the need of the industry. Dr. SS Magar suggested that a Questionnaire be prepared and sent to all Centres of AICRP Cashew and get the information from the Centres before making the visit to those Centres. He also

QRT-CASHEW

103

suggested that increasing productivity of cashew is more important than the area expansion under cashew. However, a few members felt that there is also good scope to expand cashew area in Orissa and non traditional areas of Maharashtra and Karnataka. The preliminary meeting came to an end at 4.45 PM with a Vote of Thanks by the undersigned.

After the meeting, the Chairman of QRT convened a meeting of all the members of QRT in the Guest House in the night of 25.4.2007 where the modalities of visit to NRCC and Centres of AICRP Cashew were discussed in the light of the Preliminary Meeting held with Deputy Director General (Hort) in the afternoon of 25.4.2007. The responsibility of developing a questionnaire to obtain information from Centres of AICRP Cashew was entrusted to Dr. PC Lenka, Member, QRT.

[ M.G. BHAT ] Director &

Project Coordinator (Cashew)

QRT 2002-06

104

ANNEXURE-2.1

NAMES OF SCIENTISTS AND TECHNICAL STAFF OF NRC-CASHEW AS ON 31.12.2007

Category Name Designation

RMP

MG Bhat Director

Scientific KV Nagaraja Principal Scientist N Yadukumar Principal Scientist Thimmappaiah Principal Scientist D Sundararaju Principal Scientist MG Nayak Principal Scientist PS Bhat Senior Scientist TN Raviprasad Senior Scientist D Balasubramanian Senior Scientist JD Adiga Senior Scientist Mrs. R. Rejani Scientist (SS) PD Sreekanth

Scientist

Technical K Muralikrishna Farm Superintendent (T7-8) P Abdulla Farm Superintendent (T7-8) R Arulmony Technical Officer (T-6) PG Bhat Technical Officer (T-6) AP Hebbar Technical Officer (T-5) N Manikandan Technical Officer (T-5) R Muthuraju Technical Officer (T-5) K Seetharama Technical Officer (T-5) Lakshmipathi Technical Assistant (T-4) R Lakshmisha Technical Assistant (T-4) KV Ramesh Babu Technical Assistant (T-4) A Poovappa Gowda Technical Assistant (T-3) K Babu Poojary Technical Assistant (T-2) Ravishankar Prasad Technical Assistant (T-2) Bejmi Veigus Technical Assistant (T-2) KK Madhavan Technical Assistant (T-2) K Umanath Technical Assistant (T-2)

QRT-CASHEW

105

ANNEXURE-2.2

EQUIPMENTS PURCHASED DURING 2002-2006

S.No. Name of the equipments Section Firm Supplied Cost (Rs)

1. Runoff recorders costing Rs.1.6 lakhs.

Agronomy - -

2. Master cycler Gradient(PCR machine)-M/s Eppendorf

Biotech Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

3,62,676

3. Fluorometer – M/s Pharmacia Biosciences.

Biotech Amersham Bio-Sciences Ltd.,

Hong kong

1,75,122

4. Refrigerated centrifuge-table top model-Ms/s.Harrier

Biotech Sanyo Gallen Kamp, PLC,

Monarch Way Leies, U.K.

2,30,757

5. -80 ◌ْ◌ْ°C ultra centrifuge-M/s.Sanyo

Biotech Sanyo Gallen Kamp, PLC,

Monarch Way Leies, U.K.

2,71,735

6. MilliQ Gradient water purification system-M/s.Millipore

Biotech Millipore SAS, BP 116, 67124,

Molsheim, Cedex, France

1,68,560

7. AlphaImager Gel documentation system-M/s JH Bio

Biotech Alpha Innotech Corp., San

Leandro, USA

3,74,588

8. Floor model medium capacity lathe with accessories

PHT Sharada Ind. Corp., Delhi

1,77,656

9. Motorized Guilitone shear machine with under crank

PHT Sharada Ind. Corp., Delhi

1,96,560

10. Twin bottle type steam boiling unit for Cashewnut processing

PHT ESJI Company. Bondel, Mangalore

1,09,125

11. Digital Overhead Projector EXTN Trade Link Agencies, Ernakulam

1,28,718

12. Digital Camera EXTN SUP Marketing Agency, Bangalore

99,800

13. Handicam (Sony) EXTN Ferari Video, Bangalore

50,190

14. Dissection Stero Microscope with photography attachment

ENT Olympus Singapore Pvt. Ltd.

4,11,592

15 Power Tiller with Trailor FARM (S) SKADS Ltd, Mangalore

1,27,012

16. Tractor, Trailor and Tractor drawn implements

FARM (S) Prem Traders, Mangalore

5,61,647

QRT 2002-06

106

ANNEXURE-2.3 LIST OF NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL JOURNALS SUBSCRIBED DURING

2002-2006

Sl. No.

National International

1. Agricultural Reviews Agricultural Mechanization of Asia 2. Agricultural News Hort Science 3. Cashew Bulletin Hort Technology 4. Current Science New Scientist 5. Entomon Biocontrol News & Information 6. Indian Farming J. Hort Science & Biotechnology 7. Indian Forester Scientia Horticulturae 8. Indian Food Packer Tropical Agriculture 9. Indian J. Agril Research Soil Science & Plant Nutrition

10. Indian J. Biochem & Biophysics J. Food Agriculture & Environment 11. Indian J. Experimental Biology Horticultural Abstracts 12. Indian J. Entomology National Geographic 13. Indian J. Gene. & Plant Breeding Information Today 14. Indian J. Plant Physiology 15. Indian J. Agril Sciences 16. Indian J. Horticulture 17. Indian Horticulture 18. Journal of Bioscience 19. Journal of Biol. Control 20. Journal of Entomol Research 21. Journal of Food Sci. & Tech. 22. Journal of Plantation Crops 23. Pestology 24. Pc Quest 25. South Indian Horticulture 26. Swamy’s News 27. The Cashew 28. Khathi (Hindi) 29. Phal Phool (Hindi 30. Krishi Chanakya (Hindi) 31. University News 32. Down to Earth

QRT-CASHEW

107

ANNEXURE-5.1

LIST OF CONCLUDED AND ON-GOING RESEARCH PROJECTS A) Concluded Projects

Project No. Project Title Project Duration

Ad-hoc Scheme Network programme on hybridisation in cashew.

2000 – 2003

1.4 Regeneration of cashew through somatic embryogenesis and evaluation of micropropagated plants.

2003 – 2007

2.2 (a) Planting systems and spacings trials in cashew. 1999 – 2005 2.7 Integrated nutrient management for sustainable

production of cashew. 1996 – 2000

2.10 Crop regulation in cashew through growth regulators.

2001 – 2003

Ad-hoc Scheme Influence of fertigation on yield and quality of cashew.

2001 – 2005

NATP

Developing integrated production package for enhancing productivity of cashew. – Agronomical aspects.

2001 – 2004

3.4 Integrated pest management of cashew stem and root borer (CSRB).

1998 – 2003

NATP Developing integrated production packages for enhancing productivity of cashew – Entomological and Biochemistry aspects.

2001 – 2004

3.5 Integrated pest management of tea mosquito bug (TMB).

1998 – 2003

3.6 Studies on determination on insecticide residues in cashew kernels.

2000 – 2006

Ad-hoc Scheme Value addition in cashew. 1999 – 2002 4.6 Standardisation of protocol for cashew apple

utilization. 2001 – 2004

4.8 Mineral composition of cashew kernel, testa and apple pomace of released varieties

2003 – 2006

5.2

Impact of transfer of technology in cashew cultivation.

2001 – 2004

6.1 Computer information management system for cashew

2001 – 2004

QRT 2002-06

108

B) On-going Projects

Crop Improvement

1.1 Collection, conservation, cataloguing and evaluation of cashew gemrpalsm. 1.2 Varietal improvement of cashew. 1.5 Micropropagation for clonal root stocks, somatic embryogenesis and

rooting in cashew 1.6 Molecular characterization of cashew using RAPD and Isozyme

markers. Crop Management 2.2(b) Fertilizer application and pruing trials in high density plantation 2.3 Canopy management studies in cashew. 2.8 Efficacy of soil and water conservation with organic manuring in cashew

garden grown in slopy areas. 2.11 Performance of high yielding varieties of cashew in different high density

planting 2.12 Rejuvenation of trees of high density cashew orchard through canopy

management Crop Protection 3.7 Studies on sex pheromone of tea mosquito bug. 3.8 Integrated pest management of cashew stem and root borer (CSRB) –

Phase - II 3.9 Bioecology and management of lepidopteran flower and fruit pests of

cashew 3.10 Foraging behaviour of pollinators of cashew 3.11 Investigations on insect fauna associated with stored cashewnut / kernels Paid-up Evaluation of newer insecticides against tea mosquito bug Helopeltis

antonii Sig. 3.12 Role of pollinators in improving productivity of cashew. Post-Harvest Technology 4.7 Developing economically viable on-farm cashew nut processing 4.9 Studies on preparation of nutraceuticals from cashew apple (to be

concluded in March 2007) DBT Nutraceuticals for health and speciality foods through biotechnology

approach Transfer of Technology

5.1 Transfer of technology programmes in cashew. 5.3 Socio-economic impact of cashew cultivation – An analysis. Revolving Fund Scheme

ICAR Revolving Fund Scheme for cashew grafts production from AP Cess Fund.

QRT-CASHEW

109

ANNEXURE-5.2 PUBLICATIONS OF NRC CASHEW AND AICRP CASHEW (2002-2006) Centre Book

Chapters Research

Papers Symposium papers / P.

Articles

Technical Bulletin

Annual Report

Total

NRC Cashew 6 39 (0.71) 35 (0.64) 29 5 114

AICRP Cashew

Bapatla - 5 (0.3) - - - 5

Bhubaneswar 1 11 (0.73) - 5 - 17

Chintamani - 8 (0.53) 2 (0.13) 5 - 15

Jagdalpur - 1 (0.10) - 4 - 5

Jhargram - 3 (0.2) 2 (0.13) 7 - 12

Madakkathara 8 23 (1.53) 10 (0.67) 19 - 60

Pilicode 1 5 (1.0) 3 (0.6) 3 - 12

Vengurle - 21 (1.4) 32 (2.13) 19 - 72

Vridhachalam 10 8 (0.53) 10 (0.67) 2 - 30

Total 26 124 94 93 5 342

Figures in parantheses indicate the number of research articles published / scientist / year

QRT 2002-06

110

ANNEXURE-6.1 PUBLICATIONS REFERRED DURING PREPARATION OF QRT REPORT § Annual Reports of NRC-Cashew and AICRP on Cashew for the period 2002-03,

2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. § Technical Bulletins / Publications / Reports § Cashew Production Technology § Previous QRT Report for the period 1997-2001 § Proceedings of Group meeting of Scientists of AICRP on Cashew held during

2004 and 2005. § NRC-Cashew Perspective Plan Vision-2025

{ÉÆSÉ´ÉÉÌ¹ÉEò ºÉ¨ÉÒIÉÉ ]õÒ¨É EòÒ Ê®ú{ÉÉä]Çõ · Executive Summary...

Documents

Transcript of {ÉÆSÉ´ÉÉÌ¹ÉEò ºÉ¨ÉÒIÉÉ ]õÒ¨É EòÒ Ê®ú{ÉÉä]Çõ · Executive Summary...