<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2571-581X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsufs.2023.1194867</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Sustainable Food Systems</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Soybean crop intensification for sustainable aboveground-underground plant&#x2013;soil interactions</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Singh</surname>
<given-names>Ramesh Kumar</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref rid="aff2" ref-type="aff"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2313409/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name>
<surname>Upadhyay</surname>
<given-names>Pravin Kumar</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref rid="c001" ref-type="corresp"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1577248/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dhar</surname>
<given-names>Shiva</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref rid="c002" ref-type="corresp"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1091135/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Rajanna</surname>
<given-names>G. A.</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff3" ref-type="aff"><sup>3</sup></xref>
<xref rid="c003" ref-type="corresp"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Singh</surname>
<given-names>Vinod Kumar</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff4" ref-type="aff"><sup>4</sup></xref>
<xref rid="c004" ref-type="corresp"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1068931/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname>
<given-names>Rakesh</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff5" ref-type="aff"><sup>5</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1415403/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Singh</surname>
<given-names>Rajiv Kumar</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1548067/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Babu</surname>
<given-names>Subhash</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/960487/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Rathore</surname>
<given-names>Sanjay Singh</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1423638/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shekhawat</surname>
<given-names>Kapila</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1934299/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dass</surname>
<given-names>Anchal</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1839889/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname>
<given-names>Amit</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff6" ref-type="aff"><sup>6</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1871026/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Gupta</surname>
<given-names>Gaurendra</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff7" ref-type="aff"><sup>7</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1822269/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shukla</surname>
<given-names>Gaurav</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Rajpoot</surname>
<given-names>Sudhir</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff8" ref-type="aff"><sup>8</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Prakash</surname>
<given-names>Ved</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff8" ref-type="aff"><sup>8</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/394261/overview"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname>
<given-names>Bipin</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref rid="c005" ref-type="corresp"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sharma</surname>
<given-names>Vinod Kumar</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff1" ref-type="aff"><sup>1</sup></xref>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Barthakur</surname>
<given-names>Sharmistha</given-names>
</name>
<xref rid="aff9" ref-type="aff"><sup>9</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/361916/overview"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute</institution>, <addr-line>New Delhi</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Department of Animal Husbandry</institution>, <addr-line>Lucknow</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>ICAR-Directorate of Groundnut Research</institution>, <addr-line>Anantapur</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff4"><sup>4</sup><institution>ICAR-Central Research Institute for Dryland Agriculture</institution>, <addr-line>Hyderabad</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff5"><sup>5</sup><institution>ICAR-Research Complex for Eastern Region</institution>, <addr-line>Patna</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff6"><sup>6</sup><institution>ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region</institution>, <addr-line>Sikkim</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff7"><sup>7</sup><institution>ICAR-Indian Grassland and Fodder Research Institute</institution>, <addr-line>Jhansi</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff8"><sup>8</sup><institution>Banaras Hindu University</institution>, <addr-line>Varanasi</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<aff id="aff9"><sup>9</sup><institution>ICAR-National Institute of Plant Biotechnology</institution>, <addr-line>New Delhi</addr-line>, <country>India</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn id="fn0001" fn-type="edited-by"><p>Edited by: Arnab Majumdar, Jadavpur University, India</p></fn>
<fn id="fn0002" fn-type="edited-by"><p>Reviewed by: Mohamed Anli, Universit&#x00E9;des Comores, Comoros; Reshu Chauhan, National Botanical Research Institute (CSIR), India</p></fn>
<corresp id="c001">&#x002A;Correspondence: Pravin Kumar Upadhyay, <email>pravin.ndu@gmail.com</email></corresp>
<corresp id="c002">Shiva Dhar, <email>drsdmisra@gmail.com</email></corresp>
<corresp id="c003">G. A. Rajanna, <email>rajanna.ga6@gmail.com</email></corresp>
<corresp id="c004">Vinod Kumar Singh, <email>vkumarsingh_01@yahoo.com</email></corresp>
<corresp id="c005">Bipin Kumar, <email>bipiniari@gmail.com</email></corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>23</day>
<month>06</month>
<year>2023</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2023</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>7</volume>
<elocation-id>1194867</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>27</day>
<month>03</month>
<year>2023</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>15</day>
<month>05</month>
<year>2023</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x00A9; 2023 Singh, Dhar, Upadhyay, Rajanna, Singh, Kumar, Singh, Babu, Rathore, Shekhawat, Dass, Kumar, Gupta, Shukla, Rajpoot, Prakash, Kumar, Sharma and Barthakur.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2023</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Singh, Dhar, Upadhyay, Rajanna, Singh, Kumar, Singh, Babu, Rathore, Shekhawat, Dass, Kumar, Gupta, Shukla, Rajpoot, Prakash, Kumar, Sharma and Barthakur</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<p>The major challenge of growing soybean, other than unfavorable weather and small farm size, is the non-availability of quality inputs at the right time. Furthermore, in soybean growing regions, crop productivity and soil environment have deteriorated due to the use of traditional varieties and conventional methods of production. Soybean crop intensification or system of crop intensification in soybean (SCI) is an agricultural production system that boosts soybean yields, improves the soil environment, and maximizes the efficiency of input utilization, although the contribution of SCI to crop productivity is not well understood as different genotypes of soybean exhibit different physiological responses. Therefore, a field study was conducted in 2014&#x2013;2015 and 2015&#x2013;2016 using three crop establishment methods (SCI at a 45 cm &#x00D7; 45 cm row spacing, SCI at 30 cm &#x00D7; 30 cm, and a conventional method at 45 cm &#x00D7; 10 cm) assisted in vertical strips with four genotypes (Pusa 9,712, PS 1347, DS 12&#x2013;13, and DS 12&#x2013;5) using a strip-plot design with three replications. Compared with standard methods of cultivation, the adoption of SCI at 45 cm &#x00D7; 45 cm resulted in a significantly higher stomatal conductance (0.211 mol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), transpiration rate (7.8 mmol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and net photosynthetic rate (398 mol CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>). The implementation of an SCI at 30 cm &#x00D7; 30 cm had significantly greater intercepted photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) (1,249 mol m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the conventional method system, increasing crop yield from 9.6 to 13.3% and biomass yield from 8.2 to 10.7%. In addition, under an SCI at 30 cm &#x00D7; 30 cm, there were more nodules, significantly larger root volume and surface density, and increased NPK uptake compared with the other methods. Significantly greater soil dehydrogenase activity, alkaline phosphatase activity, acetylene-reducing assay, total polysaccharides, microbial biomass carbon, and soil chlorophyll were found with SCI at 45 cm &#x00D7; 45 cm (13.63 g TPF g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 93.2 g p-nitro phenol g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 25.5 n moles ethylene g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 443.7 mg kg<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil, 216.5 mg kg<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil, and 0.43 mg g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil, respectively). Therefore, the adoption of an SCI at 30 cm &#x00D7; 30 cm and/or 45 cm &#x00D7; 45 cm could provide the best environment for microbial activities and overall soil health, as well as the sustainable productivity of soybean aboveground.</p>
</abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="graphical">
<p><fig position="float">
<caption><p>Graphical abstract</p></caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867gr0001.tif" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
</fig></p>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>seed yield</kwd>
<kwd>soil biology</kwd>
<kwd>soybean physiology</kwd>
<kwd>soybean crop intensification</kwd>
<kwd>water productivity</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts>
<fig-count count="8"/>
<table-count count="6"/>
<equation-count count="15"/>
<ref-count count="54"/>
<page-count count="16"/>
<word-count count="10345"/>
</counts>
<custom-meta-wrap>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>section-at-acceptance</meta-name>
<meta-value>Crop Biology and Sustainability</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="sec1" sec-type="intro">
<label>1.</label>
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>The cultivation of traditional/local cultivars and conventional tillage production systems in the Western Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP) has led to decreased crop productivity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">Fatima et al., 2023</xref>), soil erosion (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">C&#x00E1;rceles Rodr&#x00ED;guez et al., 2022</xref>), nutrient depletion (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">FAO, 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">Dutta et al., 2022</xref>), and water loss (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">Jat et al., 2019</xref>), resulting in degraded soils (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref41">Radosavljevic et al., 2020</xref>) with low organic matter content (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref50">Singh et al., 2019</xref>) and a fragile physical structure (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref43">Rajanna et al., 2022</xref>). Soybean cultivation using traditional cultivars under conventional crop establishment methods have had the same impact. However, owing to soybean&#x2019;s wide range of uses and health advantages, it is the most widely cultivated oilseed crop worldwide. The production of 369.5 million tons (mt) of soybeans worldwide each year is evidence of the crop&#x2019;s importance on a global scale (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref56">USDA, 2018</xref>). Owing to its high levels of protein and edible oil content (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">Dass et al., 2018</xref>), soybean products are widely consumed in India and throughout the world. The world&#x2019;s soybean production, yield, and area were 120.4 million hectares, 313.7 million tons, and 2.67 tons ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively, in 2015&#x2013;16 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">FAO, 2021</xref>). In India, it covered an area of 11.66 million ha, and in the fiscal year 2015&#x2013;16, an average yield of 737&#x2009;kg/ha was recorded (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">Anonymous, 2017</xref>). However, soybean&#x2019;s poor average productivity (1.0&#x2009;Mg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) restricts its wider expansion in this potentially productive region (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">Dass and Bhattacharyya, 2017</xref>). The demand for locally produced soybean oilseed has decreased because of the lower productivity of these traditional production systems.</p>
<p>The System of Rice Intensification (SRI), which evolved from Madagascar (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref54">Upadhyay et al., 2022</xref>), as well as conservation agriculture (CA), integrated pest management (IPM), agroforestry, and other good combinations of practices that alter crop management, soil, water, and nutrients, are examples of agroecological management. Among other things, these modifications increase soil microbial activity (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">Adhikari et al., 2018</xref>) and abundance in the rhizosphere (root zone) and even the phyllosphere of plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref55">Uphoff et al., 2013</xref>). Soybean crop intensification or system of crop intensification (SCI) in soybean is fundamentally derived from the SRI with slight modifications (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">Araya et al., 2013</xref>). SCI is based on productive efficiencies that are derived from plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">Abraham et al., 2014</xref>) with larger more efficient longer-lived root systems (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">Adhikari et al., 2018</xref>) and their symbiotic relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref55">Uphoff et al., 2013</xref>) with more abundant (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref49">Singh et al., 2018</xref>), diverse, and active soil biota (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">Dhar et al., 2016</xref>). Crops with more proliferated root systems with profuse and healthy life inside the soil are more resilient (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref49">Singh et al., 2018</xref>) when exposed to any aberrant weather, such as drought, a sudden increase in temperature, and heavy rainfall (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">Dass et al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">Adhikari et al., 2018</xref>). Therefore, such innovative technology can boost the pace of modern agriculture practices for sustaining crop productivity even under climate change.</p>
<p>Practicing SCI can eliminate the application of agrochemicals on a wider scale and improve the quality of the soil as well as the produce (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref52">Upadhyay et al., 2018</xref>). Reducing the agrochemical load in the soil positively impacts microorganisms and root proliferation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">Gupta et al., 2022</xref>). By altering the crop geometry, the symbiotic relationship between microorganisms and the root rhizosphere (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref43">Rajanna et al., 2022</xref>) can be enhanced which constitutes the sound plants micro-biomes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">Kong and Liu, 2022</xref>). The SCI offers square planting with wider row-to-row and plant-to-plant spacing along with organic nutrient supplementation, which provides a better environment for the growth and development of above-ground-under-ground plant parts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref49">Singh et al., 2018</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">Jiang et al. (2015)</xref> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">Dass et al. (2015)</xref> reported that 45-cm row-to-row-spaced soybean sowing resulted in greater stomatal conductance, chlorophyll content, and net photosynthetic and transpiration rate, whereas narrow spacing causes a ceiling effect (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref42">Rahman et al., 2004</xref>) in the plant canopy, which leads to less growth and development of the plant above and below ground. In summary, proper crop geometry is one of the most important agronomic traits and varies with different cultivars in terms of obtaining optimal productivity with soybean. Therefore, crop intensification, including the alteration of existing crop management practices, is needed to meet the food demand of the ever-increasing population. Considering these facts, the present investigation entitled &#x201C;Soybean crop intensification for sustainable above-ground-under-ground plant&#x2013;soil interactions&#x201D; has been carried out with the following hypotheses in mind: (1) to evaluate the conventional cultivation and SCI methods of soybean genotypes for a better yield, quality, and profitability; and (2) to comparatively analyze the morphophysiological changes in soybean under conventional and SCI methods of cultivation.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec2" sec-type="materials|methods">
<label>2.</label>
<title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="sec3">
<label>2.1.</label>
<title>Experimental details and study site</title>
<p>The study was undertaken in two consecutive rainy seasons from 2014 to 2015 to 2015 to 2016 at a research farm belonging to the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (Pusa Institute), New Delhi (28.38&#x00B0; latitude and 77.09&#x00B0; longitude). The soil of the experimental unit had sandy clay loam texture in the upper 30-cm layer with a nearly level to gently sloping topography. The initial soil was slightly alkaline (pH 7.8), low in soil organic carbon (0.39%), low in available nitrogen (N) (155.4&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), high in available potassium (K) (311.4&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and had a medium level of available phosphorus (P) (14.2&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>). The climate of the study site is semi-arid to subtropical, with maximum temperatures ranging from 40 to 45&#x00B0;C during the cropping season. Rainfall of 390.8&#x2009;mm (2014&#x2013;2015) and 633.1&#x2009;mm (2015&#x2013;2016) was received during the crop growth period.</p>
<p>The study consisted of three crop establishment methods [Conventional (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm), SCI: 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm, and SCI: 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm] assisted in the horizontal strips, and four soybean varieties (Pusa-9712, PS-1347, DS-12-13, and DS-12-5) assisted in the vertical strips under a strip plot design with three replications. After obtaining a proper tilth in the soil, one plowing was carried out using a tractor-drawn double disc followed by harrowing. At the time of sowing, the recommended doses for nutrients for soybean (N, 25&#x2009;kg; P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>, 60&#x2009;kg; and K<sub>2</sub>O, 40&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), were applied through FYM (contained 0.50% N, 0.23% P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub>, and 0.56% K<sub>2</sub>O) at 5.0&#x2009;t/ha treated with <italic>Trichoderma</italic> (2.5 kg t<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and the remaining potassium and phosphorus doses were applied through muriate of potash and single super phosphate (SSP), respectively. The two sprouted seeds per hill were carefully sown at a spacing of 45&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm and 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm spacing without damaging the seed coat, and the respective seed rates of the desired row spacing were 15 and 25&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>. Seed treatment was carried out according to the SCI protocol (<xref rid="fig01" ref-type="fig">Plate 1</xref>). During both study years, the soybean crop was established using the standard agronomic practices listed in <xref rid="tab1" ref-type="table">Table 1</xref>.</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig01">
<label>Plate 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Seed treatment protocol of SCI.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab1">
<label>Table 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Agronomic management practices followed and inputs applied during the experimentation (2014&#x2013;2016).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="2">Agronomic practices</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Crop establishment methods</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Conventional method</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">SCI (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm)</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">SCI (30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Seeding rate</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">80&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup></td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">15&#x2009;kg seed ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup></td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">25&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Spacing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Planting time</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">22 and 17 July</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">22 and 17 July</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">22 and 17 July</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Plot size</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">5&#x2009;m&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;3&#x2009;m&#x2009;=&#x2009;15&#x2009;m<sup>2</sup></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">5&#x2009;m&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;3&#x2009;m&#x2009;=&#x2009;15&#x2009;m<sup>2</sup></td>
<td align="left" valign="top">5&#x2009;m&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;3&#x2009;m&#x2009;=&#x2009;15&#x2009;m<sup>2</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Fertilizers</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">25, 60 and 40&#x2009;kg&#x2009;N, P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> and K<sub>2</sub>O ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">25, 60 and 40&#x2009;kg&#x2009;N, P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> and K<sub>2</sub>O ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">25, 60 and 40&#x2009;kg&#x2009;N, P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> and K<sub>2</sub>O ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Weed management</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">One hand weeding at 10&#x2013;12 DAS and Imazethapyr 10% SL at 0.1&#x2009;kg <italic>a.i.</italic> ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> at 30 DAS</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Cono-weeder at 20 and 40 DAS</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Cono-weeder at 20 and 40 DAS</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Pest management</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Dimethoate 30 EC (Rogor) at 250&#x2009;mL <italic>a.i.</italic> ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> and Mancozeb 75% WP at 0.25%</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Dimethoate30 EC (Rogor) at 250&#x2009;mL <italic>a.i.</italic> ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> and Mancozeb 75% WP at 0.25%</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Dimethoate30 EC (Rogor) at 250&#x2009;mL <italic>a.i.</italic> ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> and Mancozeb 75% WP at 0.25%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Harvesting date</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">11 and 09 November</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">11 and 09 November</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">11 and 09 November</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>DAS, days after sowing. Cultivars were Pusa 9712, PS 1347, DS 12&#x2013;13, and DS 12&#x2013;5.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4">
<label>2.2.</label>
<title>Data collection and analysis</title>
<p>Five soybean plants were randomly selected at intervals of 30, 60, and 90&#x2009;days after planting (DAP) for the measurement of leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), and net assimilation rate (NAR) from the plant dry matter. Soybean was harvested manually using sickles during the second fortnight of October in both the years of study. After the harvesting bundles were left in the field for 2&#x2013;3&#x2009;days for drying, threshing was carried out using a Pullman thresher. Seed and straw yields were calculated from a 15.0&#x2009;m<sup>2</sup> (5.0&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;3.0&#x2009;m) plot at crop maturity. Yields were reported on a dry weight basis (12% moisture w/w), and the moisture content of the grain and straw was evaluated on an oven dry basis (70&#x00B0;C). The oil content of the soybean seed was estimated by using a grain analyzer (FOSS Infratec&#x2122; 1241) based on the technology of near-infrared transmittance using a non-destructive method of oil estimation. Leaf area (cm<sup>2</sup>) was measured with the help of a leaf area meter (LI-3100C) and was further converted into LAI using the following formula (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ1">Equation 1</xref>):</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ1"><label>(1)</label><mml:math id="M1"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Leaf area index</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LAI</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Leaf area</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Land area</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>The computation of mean growth rate was performed using <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ2">Equation 2</xref>, as provided by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref58">Watson (1952)</xref>.</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ2"><label>(2)</label><mml:math id="M2"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CGR</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">S</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Where, W<sub>1</sub> and W<sub>2</sub> are the dry weight (g) of plants at time interval T<sub>1</sub> and T<sub>2</sub>, respectively; S is land area (m<sup>2</sup>) covered by the plants.</p>
<p>The computation of the mean net assimilation rate was performed using <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ3">Equation 3</xref>, as provided by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref59">Watson (1958)</xref>:</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ3"><label>(3)</label><mml:math id="M3"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NAR</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">W</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LnLA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">LnLA</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">T</mml:mi><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Where,W<sub>1</sub> and W<sub>2</sub> are the dry weight (g) of plants at time T<sub>1</sub> and T<sub>2</sub>, respectively; Ln is the natural logarithm; T<sub>2</sub>- T<sub>1</sub> is the interval of time in days; LA<sub>1</sub> and LA<sub>2</sub> are the leaf area (m<sup>2</sup>) covered by plants at time T<sub>1</sub> and T<sub>2</sub>, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec5">
<label>2.3.</label>
<title>Root attributes</title>
<p>Three plants were selected and pulled from the soil for root nodule examination at the 50% flowering stage of the soybean crop. The rhizosphere soil was then gently shaken from the root systems into a sterilized bag. The number of nodules per plant was then determined after carefully washing the roots with distilled water. Soybean roots were sampled at the 50% flowering stage and root samples were collected from the top 15&#x2009;cm of soil using a root auger of 8.0&#x2009;cm in diameter and 15&#x2009;cm in length (core volume&#x2009;=&#x2009;754.3&#x2009;cm<sup>3</sup>). The roots were placed in a container with sieves to remove the soil debris and were then stored in a refrigerator at 4&#x00B0;C for preservation. Scanning and image analysis using the WIN-RHIZO system measured the root characteristics, such as root length and root volume (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">Costa et al., 2000</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec6">
<label>2.4.</label>
<title>Physiological indicators</title>
<p>An infrared gas analyzer (IRGA) was used to measure physiological parameters, such as photosynthetic rate (photo, mole CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), stomatal conductance (cond, mole H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), transpiration rate (Tr, m. mol, H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration (Ci, mole CO<sub>2</sub> mol<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>). The physiological indicators were measured at the flowering stage of soybean. Two CO<sub>2</sub> and H<sub>2</sub>O infrared gas analyzers each are used in the LI-COR 6400, which provide estimates using the method described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref35">Pandey et al. (2017)</xref>. Photon (quantum) flux in radiant energy between 400 and 700&#x2009;nm is used to describe photosynthetic active radiation (PAR). The PAR was determined using a LI-COR Line Quantum Sensor (1&#x2009;m long) connected to a LI-1000 data logger. PAR was recorded at 1,200- and 1,300-h standard time on a sunny day.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec7">
<label>2.5.</label>
<title>Nutrient analysis</title>
<p>Grain and straw samples were processed for nutrient analyses. First, samples were oven dried (70&#x00B0;C) until a constant weight was achieved followed by grinding using a Willey mill with stainless steel blades. A modified version of the Kjeldahl method was used to estimate nitrogen (%) in grain and straw (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref39">Prasad et al., 2006</xref>). Nitrogen (N) uptake was determined using <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ4">Equations 4</xref> and <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ5">5</xref>:</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ4"><label>(4)</label><mml:math id="M4"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>%</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>&#x00D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="EQ5"><label>(5)</label><mml:math id="M5"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Total uptake in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Grain and straw phosphorus (P) content was assessed using the vanado-molybdophosphoric acid yellow color method, as suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref39">Prasad et al. (2006)</xref>. Total P uptake (kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) was determined using the following equations:</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ6"><label>(6)</label><mml:math id="M6"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>%</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>&#x00D7;</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="EQ7"><label>(7)</label><mml:math id="M7"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Total</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">P</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in straw</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Grain and straw K content was estimated using a flame photometer (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref39">Prasad et al., 2006</xref>) and uptake (grain/straw and total) was computed using the following equations:</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ8"><label>(8)</label><mml:math id="M8"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi>%</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>&#x00D7;</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="EQ9"><label>(9)</label><mml:math id="M9"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Total</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">straw</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in grain</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">K</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">uptake in straw</mml:mi></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
</sec>
<sec id="sec8">
<label>2.6.</label>
<title>Soil microbial dynamics</title>
<p>To estimate soil microbial dynamics, soil samples obtained from a depth of 0&#x2013;15&#x2009;cm were collected from each experimental plot using a core sampler. Collected soil samples were processed (air-dried, powdered, passed through a 2&#x2009;mm mesh sieve, etc.) to estimate microbial parameters, such as soil microbial biomass carbon (MBC), enzymatic activities (dehydrogenase, alkaline phosphatase, and nitrogenase), and total polysaccharides. Soil MBC was evaluated using the method described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">Nunan et al. (1998)</xref> with 70&#x2009;mL of 0.5&#x2009;M potassium sulfate (K<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub>). Dehydrogenase enzyme activity was assessed using the processes described by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">Casida et al. (1964)</xref> and a spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 485&#x2009;nm. Alkaline phosphate activity, which represents free enzymes, was estimated using the technique suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref51">Tabatabai and Bremner (1969)</xref> and 1.0&#x2009;mL of p-ntro-phenyl phosphate disodium and 0.25&#x2009;mL of toluene. Soil nitrogenase activity was estimated using the method suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref40">Prasanna et al. (2003)</xref> and gas chromatography (GC) (Hewlett Packard 5890 series II) (using ethylene gas) and expressed as acetylene reducing activity (ARA). ARA was calculated using <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ10">Equation (10)</xref>:</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ10"><label>(10)</label><mml:math id="M10"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ARA</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Moles ethylene</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">soil</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.1653</mml:mn></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>&#x00D7;</mml:mo><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Concentartion</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">by</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">GC</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<p>Soil chlorophyll was examined using the techniques suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">Nayak et al. (2004)</xref> with pre-weighed soil-cores (0&#x2013;20&#x2009;cm soil depth) and acetone: dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) in a 1:1 ratio with 4&#x2009;m L&#x2009;g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> of soil. For soil chlorophyll determination, optical densities at 630, 645, 663, and 775&#x2009;nm were taken (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ11">Equation 11</xref>).</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ11"><label>(11)</label><mml:math id="M11"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Soil chlorophyll</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>11.64</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OD</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mn>663</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>2.16</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OD</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mn>645</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn>0.10</mml:mn><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">OD</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mn>630</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
</sec>
<sec id="sec9">
<label>2.7.</label>
<title>Water productivity</title>
<p>The depth of irrigation water from each plot was measured using a meter scale. Crop water productivity (CWP) and water use efficiency (WUE) were calculated with the help of the formula published by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref44">Rajanna et al. (2019)</xref>.</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ12"><label>(12)</label><mml:math id="M12"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Total water</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">use</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Irrigation water</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">use</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mspace width="0.25em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Effective rainfall</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="EQ13"><label>(13)</label><mml:math id="M13"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>s</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi>h</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Grain yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Evapotranspiration</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
<disp-formula id="EQ14"><label>(14)</label><mml:math id="M14"><mml:mtable columnalign="left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal"> </mml:mi><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mi>a</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>e</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal"> </mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mi>o</mml:mi><mml:mi>d</mml:mi><mml:mi>u</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>y</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi>k</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi>m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Grain yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.25em"/><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Irrigation water applied</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
</sec>
<sec id="sec10">
<label>2.8.</label>
<title>Oil productivity</title>
<p>Soybean seed oil content was estimated using a grain analyzer (FOSS Infratec&#x2122; 1241) based on near-infrared transmittance technology using a non-destructive method of oil estimation. It is expressed as a percentage. Oil yield was calculated using <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="EQ15">Equation (15)</xref>:</p>
<disp-formula id="EQ15"><label>(15)</label><mml:math id="M15"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Oil yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Oil content</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mi>%</mml:mi></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>&#x00D7;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Seed yield</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="thickmathspace"/><mml:mfenced><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg ha</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn>100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
</sec>
<sec id="sec11">
<label>2.9.</label>
<title>Statistical analysis</title>
<p>The research data recorded during the present study was evaluated using the &#x201C;analysis of variance&#x201D; (ANOVA) of the strip plot design (SPD) approach, as suggested by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref01">Gomez and Gomez (1984)</xref>. The &#x201C;F&#x201D; test was used to determine the significance of treatments (variance ratio). When the &#x201C;F&#x201D; test revealed significant differences between means, differences in the treatment means were evaluated using Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range test (DMRT) and least significant difference (LSD) at a 5% probability level. Standard error (SE) was used (in <xref rid="fig1" ref-type="fig">Figures 1</xref>&#x2013;<xref rid="fig6" ref-type="fig">6</xref>) to measure the degree of variability between the individual data values.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec12" sec-type="results">
<label>3.</label>
<title>Results</title>
<sec id="sec13">
<label>3.1.</label>
<title>Growth indices</title>
<p>Growth indices, such as LAI, CGR, and NAR, were significantly influenced by the different cultivation methods and soybean genotypes (<xref rid="tab2" ref-type="table">Table 2</xref>). At 30, 60, and 90&#x2009;days after sowing (DAS), the conventional method of soybean planting exhibited a significantly higher LAI under both systems of intensification methods (SCI). Similarly, with the conventional method of sowing at 45&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm, CGR and NAR were considerably greater than both SCI methods from the 0&#x2013;30-day period to the 30&#x2013;60-day period. However, for 60&#x2013;90&#x2009;days, CGR and NAR were significantly higher in SCI at a spacing of 30&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm compared with conventional methods and SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm. Among the genotypes, in all phases of development, DS 12&#x2013;13 had a higher LAI than all the other tested genotypes, followed by DS 12&#x2013;5 and Pusa 9712. Similarly, DS 12&#x2013;13 soybean genotypes had the highest CGR across all the time periods (0&#x2013;30, 30&#x2013;60, and 60&#x2013;90&#x2009;days), while NAR was the highest for PS 1347 and Pusa 9,712 between 30&#x2013;60 and 60&#x2013;90&#x2009;days, respectively.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab2">
<label>Table 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and cultivars on the leaf area index, crop growth rate (g&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup>), and net assimilation rate (g&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;&#x2009;m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> leaf area day<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) of soybean at different growth stages (mean of 2 &#x2009;years).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Leaf area index (LAI)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Crop growth rate (m m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Net assimilation rate (g m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> leaf area day<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th/>
<th align="center" valign="top">30 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">60 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">90 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">30 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">60 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">90 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">30 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">60 DAS</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">90 DAS</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">Crop establishment methods</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Conventional: (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.755<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.40<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.04<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.27<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.99<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">9.79<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">15.40<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.24<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7.09<sup>C</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.265<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.76<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.57<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.38<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.12<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">10.77<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">11.20<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.39<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.64<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.567<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.39<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.90<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.84<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.81<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">11.51<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">12.85<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.50<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.29<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">Genotype</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.536<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.52<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.82<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.85<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.61<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">10.45<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.35<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.35<sup>BC</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">9.06<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.502<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.32<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.73<sup>CB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.77<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.42<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">9.59<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">12.70<sup>D</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.44<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.58<sup>AB</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.542<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.65<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.93<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.86<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.78<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">11.60<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.30<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.33<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.23<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.535<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.56<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.87<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.85<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.73<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">11.11<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.25<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">4.40<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.82<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>DAS, days after sowing. The mean values followed by different capital letter(s) (based on Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range tests) within the row are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x2264;&#x2009;0.05.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec14">
<label>3.2.</label>
<title>Stomatal conductance, transpiration, and PAR</title>
<p>Cultivation methods and soybean genotypes significantly influenced flowering-stage stomatal conductance, intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration, and net photosynthetic rates during 2015&#x2013;16 (<xref rid="tab3" ref-type="table">Table 3</xref>). The highest intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration among cultivation methods was produced by SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm (260.1&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> mol<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), which was significantly greater than the conventional method of soybean cultivation. Likewise, SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm exhibited significantly higher stomatal conductance (0.211&#x2009;mol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and transpiration rate (7.8&#x2009;m&#x2009;mol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other cultivation techniques, whereas the net photosynthetic rate was substantially higher with the conventional method (398&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than with SCI techniques. Among the soybean genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 had a higher stomatal conductance (0.22&#x2009;mol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration (250.3&#x2009;&#x03BC;&#x2009;mol CO<sub>2</sub> mol<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and rate of transpiration (7.5&#x2009;mmol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other soybean genotypes. There was no significant difference between DS 12&#x2013;13 and DS 12&#x2013;5. However, the Pusa 9712 genotype had a significantly higher rate of net photosynthesis (353&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the other genotypes.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab3">
<label>Table 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and cultivars on the physiological parameters of soybean at the flowering stage (mean data of 2 &#x2009;years).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration (&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> mol<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Transpiration rate (mmol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stomatal conductance (mol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Net photosynthetic rate (&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">PAR intercepted [&#x03BC;mol (photons) m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>]</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">% PAR interception</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="7">Crop establishment methods</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Conventional: (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">232.1<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6.4<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.173<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">398<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,095<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">73.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">258.4<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7.8<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.211<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">335<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,158<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">77.6</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">260.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7.2<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.177<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">244<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,249<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">83.7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="7">Genotype</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">243.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6.6<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.180<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">353<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,140</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">76.4</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">246.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6.4<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.160<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">340<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,153</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">77.2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">250.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7.5<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.220<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">302<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,191</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">79.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">248.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">7.3<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.208<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">307<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1,186</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">79.5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>PAR, photosynthetic active radiation. Mean values followed by different capital letter(s) (based on Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range tests) within the row are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x2264;&#x2009;0.05.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) of the soybean genotypes was also significantly influenced by the cultivation method and genotype. The adoption of SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm soybean establishment resulted in a significantly higher intercepted PAR (1,249&#x2009;&#x03BC;&#x2009;mol m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other SCI methods (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm) and the conventional method of crop establishment. Increases were 14.1 and 8.5% with SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm compared with the conventional method and SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm, respectively. As a result, the PAR interception rate was 83.7% higher in SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm than the other methods. However, soybean genotypes have little impact/no significant effect on the interception of PAR. Comparatively, DS 12&#x2013;13 intercepted more PAR than DS 12&#x2013;5, PS 1347, and Pusa 9712.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec15">
<label>3.3.</label>
<title>Root attributes</title>
<p>Cultivation methods and genotypes significantly influenced nodules per plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, total nodule dry weight, and root characteristics of soybeans at the blooming stage (<xref rid="tab4" ref-type="table">Table 4</xref>). The SCI method of cultivation at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm produced significantly more nodules per plant (41.1) and higher nodule dry weight (176.5&#x2009;mg plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the conventional method of cultivation (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm); however, the SCI method at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm produced a similar number of nodules. Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 produced the maximum nodules per plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> (35.8) and nodule dry weight (179.1&#x2009;mg plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), making it substantially more productive than the PS 1347 genotype. However, it was on a par with the Pusa 9712 and DS 12&#x2013;5 genotypes. DS 12&#x2013;13 had the most characteristics with the highest values, followed by Pusa 9712 and DS 12&#x2013;5, all of which were comparable with one another.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab4">
<label>Table 4</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and cultivars on the root attributes of soybean (mean data of 2 &#x2009;years).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Nodules plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup></th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Nodule dry weight (mg plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Root length density (cm cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Root surface area density (cm<sup>2</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Root volume density (mm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Dry root mass density (mg cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="7">Crop establishment methods</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Conventional: (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">19.3<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">163.8<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.21<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.082<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">2.43<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.79<sup>C</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">41.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">176.5<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.58<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.118<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">4.07<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">2.10<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">39.4<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">175.4<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.54<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.103<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">4.02<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.90<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="7">Genotype</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">33.9<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">172.8<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.40<sup>BC</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.097<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">3.48<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.77<sup>C</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">30.5<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">162.7<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.38<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.090<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">3.07<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.65<sup>D</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">35.8<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">179.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.52<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.104<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">3.66<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">2.30<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">33.7<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">173.0<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">1.50<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">0.102<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">3.51<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="bottom">2.02<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Mean values followed by different capital letter(s) (based on Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range tests) within the row are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x2264;&#x2009;0.05.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Similarly, density of root length (1.58&#x2009;cm&#x2009;cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), root volume (4.07&#x2009;mm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), surface area (0.118&#x2009;cm<sup>2</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), and dry root mass (2.30&#x2009;mg&#x2009;cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) were significantly higher in the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm than the conventional method of cultivation. However, differences between both of the SCI methods were not significant. Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 produced a significantly higher density of root length (1.52&#x2009;cm&#x2009;cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), root volume (3.66&#x2009;mm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), surface area (0.104&#x2009;cm<sup>2</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), and dry root mass (2.30&#x2009;mg&#x2009;cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) than Pusa 9712 and PS 1347 but it was on a par with DS 12&#x2013;5.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec16">
<label>3.4.</label>
<title>Productivity</title>
<p>During the 2014&#x2013;2015 and 2015&#x2013;2016 cropping seasons, the method of cultivation and varieties had a significant effect on soybean seed yields, as well as aboveground biomass yields and harvest index (<xref rid="tab5" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>). Among the cultivation methods, SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm had a considerably greater seed yield (1.99&#x2013;2.13&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), above-ground biomass yield (5.82&#x2013;6.07&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and harvest index (34.2&#x2013;35.1%) than the conventional method of cultivation (45&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm). The magnitude of increase in seed yields ranged from 9.6 to 13.3%, and the increases in biomass yields ranged from 8.2 to 10.7%. However, compared with the conventional method of cultivation, yields from both SCI methods were almost identical. Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 produced a significantly higher seed yield (1.97&#x2013;2.15&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and aboveground biomass yield (5.86&#x2013;6.15&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the PS 1347 and Pusa 9,712 genotypes.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab5">
<label>Table 5</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and cultivars on soybean crop yields, oil yields, and water use efficiency (mean data of 2 &#x2009;years).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">Treatment</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Seed yield (Mg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Biomass yield (Mg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Harvest index (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Oil content (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Oil yield (kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Water use efficiency (kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>&#x2013;mm)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Irrigation water productivity (kg&#x2009; m<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th/>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2014&#x2013;2015</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">2015&#x2013;2016</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="15">Crop establishment methods</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Conventional: (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.98<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.78<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.89<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.42<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.7<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">32.8<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">376.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">336.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.85<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.98<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.23<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.48<sup>C</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.91<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.73<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.44<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.16<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35.2<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.4<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">368.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">332.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.75<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.89<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.60<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.92<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.13<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.99<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">6.07<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.82<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">34.2<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">413.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">384.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.06<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.34<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.77<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.22<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="15">Genotype</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Pusa 9,712</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.98<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.79<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.78<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.36<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">34.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.6<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.5<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">368.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">331.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.85<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.00<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.51<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.83<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.82<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.67<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.32<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.02<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">34.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">17.7<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">17.6<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">322.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">293.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.61<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.80<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.39<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.71<sup>C</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.15<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.97<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">6.15<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.86<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.0<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.0<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">430.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">394.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.09<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.30<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.64<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.01<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.08<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.89<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.95<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.64<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.5<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.4<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">426.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">385.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.99<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.17<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.59<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.93<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="15">Cultivation method&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;Genotype</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C1 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.97</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.73</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.91</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.26</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">32.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">364.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">314.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.83</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.90</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.22</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.44</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C1 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.77</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.60</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.27</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4.89</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">32.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">17.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">17.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">309.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">280.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.54</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.67</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.10</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C1 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.12</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.92</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">6.28</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.87</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">32.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">421.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">382.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.04</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.22</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.31</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.60</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C1 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.07</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.86</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">6.09</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.67</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">32.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">414.0</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">370.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.97</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.28</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.55</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C2 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.87</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.66</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4.92</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">36.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">349.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">312.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.69</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.78</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.56</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.85</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C2 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.70</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.56</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.08</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">32.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">17.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">17.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">304.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">276.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.44</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.61</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.42</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.73</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C2 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.09</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.89</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.84</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.67</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">420.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">372.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.01</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.17</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.74</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C2 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.99</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.79</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.67</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.30</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">33.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">20.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">409.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">370.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.86</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.99</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.66</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.99</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C3 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.98</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">6.26</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.90</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">33.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">33.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">18.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">18.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">394.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">366.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.03</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.32</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C3 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.98</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.86</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.61</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.41</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">35.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">34.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">17.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">17.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">354.4</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">331.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.84</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.12</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.65</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.07</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C3 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.24</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.10</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6.31</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6.04</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">35.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">34.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">20.1</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">20.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">450.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">426.3</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.22</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.51</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.87</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">C3 <bold>&#x00D7;</bold> DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.18</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.04</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">6.09</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.95</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">35.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">34.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">20.9</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">20.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">455.6</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">418.2</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.14</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">3.41</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.26</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">SEm&#x00B1;</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td align="center" valign="top">&#x2013;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">&#x2013;</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">LSD (<italic>P</italic>&#x2009;&#x2264;&#x2009;0.05)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.44</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">&#x2013;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">&#x2013;</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">NS</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Mean values followed by different capital letter(s) (based on Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range tests) within the row are significantly different at <italic>p</italic> &#x2264;&#x2009;0.05.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>The interaction effect of crop establishment methods and genotypes significantly influenced soybean seed and biomass yields (<xref rid="tab5" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>). The combination of the DS 12&#x2013;13 genotype with SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm produced a significantly higher seed yield (2.1&#x2013;2.24&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and aboveground biomass yield (6.04&#x2013;6.31&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other combinations. Interestingly, all the studied genotypes produced significantly higher seed and biomass yields under an SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm than other SCI methods and conventional methods of cultivation.</p>
<p>Irrigation water productivity (IWP) and water usage efficiency (WUE) were considerably influenced by the different cultivation techniques and genotypes (<xref rid="tab5" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>). SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm yielded significantly higher WUE (3.06&#x2013;3.34&#x2009;kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> mm<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and IWP (1.77&#x2013;2.22&#x2009;kg&#x2009;m<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) than conventional practice. Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 recorded significantly higher WUE (3.09&#x2013;3.30&#x2009;kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> mm<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and IWP (1.64&#x2013;2.01&#x2009;kg&#x2009;m<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) than Pusa 9,712 and PS 1347. Among the interactions, the combination of DS 12&#x2013;13 with an SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm produced significantly higher WUE (3.22&#x2013;3.51&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and IWP (1.87&#x2013;2.33&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other combinations. All genotypes produced significantly higher WUE and IWP with an SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec17">
<label>3.5.</label>
<title>Oil content and yield</title>
<p>Among the cultivation methods, an SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm had a considerably higher oil yield of 384.1&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> (2015&#x2013;2016) and 413.2&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> (2014&#x2013;2015) than the conventional method of cultivation (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm), whereas soybean genotypes significantly influenced soybean oil content and yield. Cultivation of the DS 12&#x2013;13 soybean variety resulted in a statistically higher oil yield (394&#x2013;430&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than that of PS 1347 and Pusa 9712, but it was statistically on a par with DS 12&#x2013;5, while soybean DS 12&#x2013;5 produced a significantly higher oil content (20.4&#x2013;20.5%) than other genotypes, but it was on a par with DS 12&#x2013;13.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec18">
<label>3.6.</label>
<title>Nutrient concentration and uptake</title>
<p>Perusal of data revealed that NPK concentration and their uptake in grain and straw of soybean influenced statistically due to cultivation methods during the study period (<xref rid="tab6" ref-type="table">Table 6</xref>). However, the genotypes did not have any significant effect on NPK content. Statistically higher N content in grain (5.94%) and straw (2.61%) was noted in SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm compared with other methods of cultivation. Similarly, grain, straw, and total nitrogen uptake was statistically higher with SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm (108.1, 90.59, and 198.7&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively) over the rest of the treatments. By contrast, crop establishment methods had no significant effect on P and K concentrations in soybean plant parts, whereas P and K uptake was significantly influenced by cultivation techniques and genotypes. SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm had a significantly greater P uptake in grain, straw, and total P uptake (9.38, 5.72, and 15.10&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively) and K uptake in grain, straw, and total P uptake (15.5, 70.3, and 85.8&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively) than other cultivation methods. Among the genotypes, the highest P uptake in grain and straw and total P uptake was recorded with DS 12&#x2013;13 (9.33, 5.79, and 15.12&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively), as was K uptake in grain and straw and total P uptake (15.6, 72.2, and 87.8&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, respectively) compared with the other genotypes.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab6">
<label>Table 6</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and cultivars on NPK concentration and their uptake in soybean (mean data of 2&#x2009; years).</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th/>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">N (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">P (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">K (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">N uptake (kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">P uptake (kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">K uptake (kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>)</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th/>
<th align="center" valign="top">Grain</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stover</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Grain</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stover</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Grain</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stover</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Grain</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stover</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Total</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Grain</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stover</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Total</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Grain</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Stover</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Total</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="16">Crop establishment methods</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Conventional: (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.84<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.52<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.46</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.78</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.86</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">109.8<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">94.8<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">204.6<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.56<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.56<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">14.1<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">14.6<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">69.9<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">84.5<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.94<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.61<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.46</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.84</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">108.1<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">90.6<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">198.7<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.33<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.17<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.5<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.7<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">63.9<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">77.6<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">SCI (30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.84<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.49<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.46</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.75</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.81</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">120.3<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">97.7<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">216.9<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">9.38<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.72<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">15.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">15.5<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">70.3<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">85.8<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top" colspan="16">Genotype</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Pusa 9712</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.87</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.56</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.46</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.83</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">110.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">94.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">204.9<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.65<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.44<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">14.1<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">14.4<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">67.4<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">81.8<sup>B</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">PS 1347</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.89</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.60</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.46</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.84</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">102.7</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">88.8<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">191.5<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">8.00<sup>B</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.10<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.1<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">13.3<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">62.8<sup>C</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">76.1<sup>C</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">DS 12&#x2013;13</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.87</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.50</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.45</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.83</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">120.8</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">98.4<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">219.2<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">9.33<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.79<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">15.1<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">15.6<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">72.2<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">87.8<sup>A</sup></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">DS 12&#x2013;5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.86</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">2.50</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.46</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">0.76</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">1.83</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">116.5</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">94.8<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">211.2<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">9.04<sup>A</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">5.62<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">14.7<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">15.1<sup>Ab</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">69.8<sup>AB</sup></td>
<td align="center" valign="top">84.9<sup>AB</sup></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>Mean values followed by different capital letter(s) (based on Duncan&#x2019;s multiple range tests) within the row are significantly different at <italic>p</italic>&#x2009;&#x2264;&#x2009;0.05.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec19">
<label>3.7.</label>
<title>Soil biological properties</title>
<p>Soil biological properties, such as dehydrogenase activity (DHA) (<xref rid="fig1" ref-type="fig">Figure 1</xref>), alkaline phosphatase activity (APA) (<xref rid="fig2" ref-type="fig">Figure 2</xref>), acetylene reduction assay (ARA) (<xref rid="fig3" ref-type="fig">Figure 3</xref>), total polysaccharides (<xref rid="fig4" ref-type="fig">Figure 4</xref>), microbial biomass carbon (MBC) (<xref rid="fig5" ref-type="fig">Figure 5</xref>), and soil chlorophyll (<xref rid="fig6" ref-type="fig">Figure 6</xref>), were significantly influenced by different methods of cultivation. Significantly higher soil DHA, APA, ARA, total polysaccharides, MBC, and soil chlorophyll were recorded in the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm (13.63&#x2009;&#x03BC;g TPF g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 93.2&#x2009;&#x03BC;g p&#x2013;nitro phenol g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 25.5 n moles ethylene g soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 443.7&#x2009;mg&#x2009;kg<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil, 216.5&#x2009;mg&#x2009;kg<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil, and 0.43&#x2009;mg&#x2009;g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil, respectively) compared with the conventional method. Among the genotypes, APA and ARA were considerably impacted by soybean genotypes over the study seasons. However, genotypes had no apparent impact on the levels of DHA, total polysaccharides, MBC, and soil chlorophyll. Among the soybean genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 exhibited significantly higher APA (90.0&#x2009;&#x03BC;g p&#x2013;nitro phenol g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and ARA (18.8 n moles ethylene g soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the other genotypes.</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig1">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and soybean cultivars on dehydrogenase activity (DHA) (mean data of 2&#x2009; years).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g002.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig position="float" id="fig2">
<label>Figure 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and soybean cultivars on alkaline phosphatase activity (APA) (mean data of 2&#x2009; years).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g003.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig position="float" id="fig3">
<label>Figure 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and soybean cultivars on acetylene reducing assay (ARA) (mean data of 2 &#x2009;years).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g004.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig position="float" id="fig4">
<label>Figure 4</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and soybean cultivars on total polysaccharides (mean data of 2&#x2009; years).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g005.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig position="float" id="fig5">
<label>Figure 5</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and soybean cultivars on microbial biomass carbon (mean data of 2 &#x2009;years).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g006.tif"/>
</fig>
<fig position="float" id="fig6">
<label>Figure 6</label>
<caption>
<p>Effect of crop establishment methods and soybean cultivars on soil chlorophyll (mean data of 2&#x2009; years).</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fsufs-07-1194867-g007.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec20" sec-type="discussions">
<label>4.</label>
<title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="sec21">
<label>4.1.</label>
<title>Growth indices</title>
<p>A linear increase in growth indices, such as LAI, CGR, and NAR, was observed with the advancement in the growth stage of the soybean crop under the different cultivation methods and varieties. SCI either at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm or 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm exhibited significantly higher LAI, CGR, and NAR over the conventional method (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm) due to less competition for growth factors, such as solar radiation interception, root growth, soil aeration, and microbial activity. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">Ball et al. (2000)</xref> reported that an optimum plant population is required for the maximum interception of light for a higher crop growth rate, LAI, NAR, and dry matter accumulation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">Berger-Doyle et al., 2014</xref>) in the crop.</p>
<p>In the current study, growth indices were higher with the conventional method up to 60 DAS; however, with the advancement of growth stages, LAI, CGR, and NAR increased with the SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm compared with the other cultivation methods. Greater leaf area per plant was observed due to the higher growth performance of the plants that were more widely spaced. A higher population density with the conventional method caused the ceiling effect in the plant canopy, resulting in greater stem elongation leading to increased plant height (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref42">Rahman et al., 2004</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref45">Rehman et al. (2014)</xref> concluded that narrow row spacing (30&#x2013;40&#x2009;cm) significantly increased NAR, CGR, RGR, and LAI of soybean compared with wider spacing (70&#x2009;cm). Among the genotypes, growth attributes were higher in DS 12&#x2013;13 and DS 12&#x2013;5 than in other tested cultivars. The growth attributes were significantly influenced by the genetic makeup of plants.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec22">
<label>4.2.</label>
<title>Stomatal conductance, transpiration, and photosynthetic rate</title>
<p>Leaf is the prime plant part to receive incident solar radiation (PAR) and transform it into photosynthates. Therefore, better soybean growth attributes resulted in better physiological parameters. In the current study, the highest intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration was produced by an SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm (260.1&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> mol<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm exhibited a significantly higher stomatal conductance (0.211&#x2009;mol H<sub>2</sub>Om<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and rate of transpiration (7.8&#x2009;mmol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the other cultivation techniques. The net photosynthetic rate for soybean was substantially higher with the conventional method (398&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than with the SCI techniques. A higher transpiration rate and stomatal conductance was observed in the SCI due to the greater leaf surface area and higher temperature (26&#x2013;36&#x00B0;C). An increased transpiration rate leads to high stomatal conductance, thereby increasing CO<sub>2</sub> influx into the chloroplasts, possibly leading to a higher net photosynthetic rate. These findings are corroborated by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">Moreira et al. (2015)</xref> who reported that low planting densities and N rates increased the greenness index (SPAD value), concentration of intercellular carbon dioxide (Ci), and inherent WUE.</p>
<p>Among the soybean genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 had the highest intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration (250.3&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> mol<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), rate of transpiration (7.5&#x2009;mmol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), and stomatal conductance (0.220&#x2009;mol H<sub>2</sub>O m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>). There was no significant difference between DS 12&#x2013;13 and DS 12&#x2013;5. However, the Pusa 9,712 genotype had a significantly higher rate of net photosynthesis (353&#x2009;&#x03BC;mol CO<sub>2</sub> m<sup>&#x2212;2</sup> s<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other genotypes. An increased transpiration rate leads to high stomatal conductance, thereby increasing CO<sub>2</sub> influx into the chloroplasts. A significantly higher chlorophyll content, net photosynthetic rate, and stomatal conductance in JS 95&#x2013;60 than in JS 97&#x2013;52 was also reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref57">Vyas and Khandwe (2014)</xref>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec23">
<label>4.3.</label>
<title>Photosynthetically active radiation</title>
<p>The PAR interception and transmission by soybean in SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm was 14.05 and 8.5%, respectively, and it was greater than the values obtained with the conventional method and the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm (<xref rid="tab5" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>). PAR radiation was intercepted more with the SCI due to the green leaf coverage per unit area. Thereby, SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm intercepted 83.65% of incident PAR compared with 73.35% with the conventional method. High foliage surface aids a higher transpiration rate with a high maximum temperature (22&#x2013;26&#x00B0;C) at the anthesis stage of soybean; furthermore, an increased transpiration rate leads to high stomatal conductance, thus increasing CO<sub>2</sub> entry into the chloroplasts, which might be the reason behind the higher net photosynthetic rate with the SCI method. The density of plants significantly influenced the economic yield in soybean by altering leaf area and therefore light interception and photosynthesis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref60">Wells, 1991</xref>) and increasing plant spacing and decreasing row spacing, chlorophyll content (SPAD value), LAI, and the rate of photosynthesis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">Jiang et al., 2015</xref>). With narrow plant spacing and wider row SPAD, LAI and Pn were higher. The use of wheat straw mulch and wider spacing by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">Dass and Bhattacharyya (2017)</xref> improved leaf SPAD values, PAR interception, the net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, and WUE of soybean in dryland areas. There was a non-significant variation noted among all soybean cultivars with respect to intercepted PAR.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec24">
<label>4.4.</label>
<title>Root attributes</title>
<p>Wide space sowing decreases aboveground competition and ground competitiveness between roots for the absorption of water and nutrients and provides the adequate arena for nodulation and root growth of the crop plants. Therefore, in the current study, wider spacing at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm with an SCI method of cultivation recorded statistically higher nodule counts, higher nodule dry weight (176.5&#x2009;mg plant<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>), better root length, volume, and mass density than the conventional method of cultivation (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm). Seed inoculation using <italic>Rhizobium</italic> culture might have enhanced the population of the effective and healthy <italic>Rhizobium</italic> strain in the root nodules, which had a better ability to fix atmospheric N. Improved nodulation with the SCI was due to the slow release of nitrogen from FYM, which tends to form more nodules to meet the nitrogen demand of the crop (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref47">Salvagiotti et al., 2008</xref>). <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">Mondal et al. (2014)</xref> showed that plant population had a significant effect on root length, root surface area, and the number of lateral roots/plant at a broader spacing of 20&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm followed by 15&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm.</p>
<p>Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 genotype produced a significantly higher density of root length (1.52&#x2009;cm&#x2009;cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), root volume (3.66&#x2009;mm<sup>3</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), surface area (0.104&#x2009;cm<sup>2</sup> cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>), and dry root mass (2.30&#x2009;mg&#x2009;cm<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) Pusa 9712 and PS 1347, but it was on a par with DS 12&#x2013;5. Varietal root growth performance depends upon the cultivation practice. Additionally, leaf area/plant might be due to the higher growth of individual plants at a wider arrangement than the narrow arrangement. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">Imtiyaz et al. (2014)</xref> observed that DS 9712 had a greater reduction in root dry weight and fresh weight; however, the greatest reduction in shoot fresh and dry weight was noted in PS-1347 and DS-9712, respectively.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec25">
<label>4.5.</label>
<title>Productivity</title>
<p>The above- and below-ground part of the soybean plant proliferated with the SCI because it provides broader spacing and square planting. Broader spacing leads to the improved growth of specific plants due to the availability of proper space, light, and moisture, which ultimately resulted in higher productivity of the crop (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">Dass et al., 2015</xref>). In the current study, SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm considerably increased seed yields from 9.6 to 13.3% and biomass yields from 8.2 to 10.7% compared with the conventional method of &#x2018;cultivation and the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm during 2014&#x2013;2015 and 2015&#x2013;2016. The increase in yield attributing parameters due to better plant growth and vigor brings out higher yield. More widely spaced soybean sowing resulted in higher seed and straw yield than with narrow row spacing (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref36">Pandya et al., 2005</xref>). However, compared with the conventional method of cultivation, the yields from both SCI methods were almost identical. Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 produced a significantly higher seed yield (1.97&#x2013;2.15&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and aboveground biomass yield (5.86&#x2013;6.15&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than PS 1347 and Pusa 9712 during both the study seasons. Different genotypes of soybean failed to affect the harvest index significantly during 2014&#x2013;2015 and 2015&#x2013;2016. The combination of the DS 12&#x2013;13 genotype with the SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm produced a significantly higher seed yield (2.10&#x2013;2.24&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and aboveground biomass yield (6.04&#x2013;6.31&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than other combinations. Interestingly, all the studied genotypes produced significantly higher seed and biomass yields with the SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm than other SCI methods and the conventional method of cultivation. The SCI offers wider spacing, square planting, and microbe-loaded organic sources of nutrients, which provide better options for the development of aboveground parts of plants. A similar finding was reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">Abbas et al. (1994)</xref> who reported that an optimal plant population boosts the plant to improve yield and yield-attributing characteristics in plants (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">Abbas et al., 1994</xref>).</p>
<p>The SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm yielded significantly higher WUE (3.06&#x2013;3.34&#x2009;kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> mm<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and IWP (1.77&#x2013;2.22&#x2009;kg&#x2009;m<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) than the conventional method (<xref rid="tab5" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>). Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 recorded significantly higher WUE (3.09&#x2013;3.30&#x2009;kg ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> mm<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and IWP (1.64&#x2013;2.01&#x2009;kg&#x2009;m<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>) than Pusa 9712 and PS 1347. Among the interactions, the combination of DS 12&#x2013;13 with the SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm produced significantly higher WUE (3.22&#x2013;3.51&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and IWP (1.87&#x2013;2.33&#x2009;t&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the other combinations.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec26">
<label>4.6.</label>
<title>Oil yield</title>
<p>Oil yield is the function of its content and seed production. Among the cultivation methods, SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm had a considerably higher oil yield than the conventional method of cultivation (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm) and the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm. Relatively higher oil yields of 19.38 and 19.27% were obtained with the SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm, followed by the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm with 19.29 and 19.21%, compared with the conventional method during 2014 and 2015, respectively (<xref rid="tab5" ref-type="table">Table 5</xref>). Improvements in oil content and oil yields with the SCI might be due to increased N and S content in grain on account of enhanced soil nitrogen and S through FYM and single super phosphate. Significantly higher oil content and yield were recorded in DS 12&#x2013;5 (20.5 and 20.4%) and DS 12&#x2013;13 (431 and 394&#x2009;kg/ha) compared with other varieties in both years. A similar finding was reported by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">Moreira et al. (2015)</xref> who reported that plant population, row spacing, and nitrogen rates did not influence oil content in soybean seeds. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">Diep et al. (2016)</xref> reported that biofertilizer application in soybean significantly increased seed oil content and oil yield compared with the control, but remained on a par with 400&#x2009;kg&#x2009;ha<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> NPK 15-15-15.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec27">
<label>4.7.</label>
<title>Nutrient concentration and uptake</title>
<p>Cultivation methods and genotypes significantly affected NPK content in grain and straw, and NPK uptake. Statistically higher NPK content in grain and straw was reported in SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm compared with other methods of cultivation. Similarly, NPK grain and straw and total uptake was statistically higher with SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm. The higher concentration of nutrients in SCI might be due to the microbial breakdown of organic manures, resulting in a release of nutrients into the soil (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref37">Prajapati et al., 2014</xref>) and, therefore, faster absorption and translocation into plants. Nutrient uptake is a function of nutrient concentration and biomass, and an increase in yield coupled with increased nutrient content resulted in a higher total uptake (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref53">Upadhyay et al., 2019</xref>) of nutrients with SCI at 30&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm. The greater microbial and enzymatic activities observed in the present investigation (<xref rid="tab6" ref-type="table">Table 6</xref>) might also be responsible for the release of nutrients, ensuring an adequate supply to the plants. Among the genotypes, DS 12&#x2013;13 had the highest NPK uptake in grain and straw and total P.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec28">
<label>4.8.</label>
<title>Soil biological properties</title>
<p>Soil biological properties, such as dehydrogenase activity (DHA) (<xref rid="fig1" ref-type="fig">Figure 1</xref>), alkaline phosphatase activity (APA) (<xref rid="fig2" ref-type="fig">Figure 2</xref>), ARA (<xref rid="fig3" ref-type="fig">Figure 3</xref>), total polysaccharides (<xref rid="fig4" ref-type="fig">Figure 4</xref>), MBC (<xref rid="fig5" ref-type="fig">Figure 5</xref>), and soil chlorophyll (<xref rid="fig6" ref-type="fig">Figure 6</xref>), were significantly higher with the SCI at 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm than with the conventional method of cultivation. Improved soil biological properties with the SCI might be due to the application of FYM and split application of vermicompost, which increased soil moisture availability, and the addition of nutrient and organic carbon through the decomposition of organic residue. The availability of easily decomposable carbon (C) sources in soil allows a significant relationship between microbial and enzyme activity and improves the soil water status (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref48">Shen et al., 2016</xref>). However, carbon is positively correlated with the microbial biomass carbon (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">Almeida et al., 2011</xref>). Hoeing practice in the SCI created a soil mulch, which reduced evaporation and improved soil moisture and, thus, enhanced soil enzymatic activities compared with the conventional method. Among the genotypes, APA and ARA were considerably impacted by soybean genotype. However, genotypes had no apparent impact on the levels of DHA, total polysaccharides, MBC, or soil chlorophyll. Thus, DS12-13 exhibited significantly higher APA (90.0&#x2009;&#x03BC;g p&#x2013;nitro phenol g<sup>&#x2212;1</sup> soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) and ARA (18.8 n moles ethylene g soil hr.<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>) than the other genotypes.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec29" sec-type="conclusions">
<label>5.</label>
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>From the present study, the following conclusions have been drawn for the farming community, research planners, and policy makers:<list list-type="bullet">
<list-item>
<p>In soybean growing regions, soybean crop intensification (SCI) exhibits higher growth and physiological attributes, such as stomatal conductance, intercellular CO<sub>2</sub> concentration, and net photosynthetic rates, than conventional methods of cultivation.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>Thus, enhanced physiological attributes increased soybean seed yields from 9.6 to 13.3% and biomass yields from 8.2 to 10.7% through the adoption of SCI at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm over the conventional method of cultivation (45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;10&#x2009;cm).</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>Concurrently, intercoalition operation using a hand hoe in SCI plots resulted in reduced weed infestation, thereby increasing the number of root nodules and improving root attributes and crop water productivity.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>Wider spacing at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm or 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm with SCI exhibited higher photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) interception and transmittance by soybean genotypes than with the conventional method.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>Soybean genotypes DS 12&#x2013;13 and DS 12&#x2013;5 were superior in increasing soybean yields than the other genotypes.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>Concurrently, soil biological properties, such as dehydrogenase activity (DHA), alkaline phosphatase activity (APA), acetylene reduction assay (ARA), total polysaccharides, microbial biomass carbon (MBC), and soil chlorophyll, were also significantly enhanced with SCI compared with the conventional method of soybean establishment.</p>
</list-item>
<list-item>
<p>Therefore, the adoption of SCI either at 30&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;30&#x2009;cm and/or 45&#x2009;cm&#x2009;&#x00D7;&#x2009;45&#x2009;cm could provide the best environment for microbial activities beneath the soil and sustainable productivity of the soybean aboveground.&#x2019;</p>
</list-item>
</list></p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec30" sec-type="data-availability">
<title>Data availability statement</title>
<p>The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/<xref rid="sec34" ref-type="sec">Supplementary material</xref>, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec31">
<title>Author contributions</title>
<p>RamS: methodology, statistical analysis, investigation, writing&#x2014;original draft. SD and VSi: conceptualization, supervision, writing&#x2014;review and editing, funding acquisition. PU, GR, and RajS: statistical analysis and writing&#x2014;original draft. RK and KS: writing&#x2014;review and editing. SuB: investigation, formal analysis and writing&#x2014;original draft. SSR: editing final manuscript. AD and SR: data tabulation and statistical analysis. AK: investigation, writing&#x2014;original draft. GG: statistical analysis of data. GS: statistical analysis and tabulation. VP: statistical analysis. BK and ShB: manuscript editing. VSh: soil analysis. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec32" sec-type="funding-information">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>This study was undertaken by inhouse project of ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="conf1" sec-type="COI-statement">
<title>Conflict of interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec100" sec-type="disclaimer">
<title>Publisher&#x2019;s note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec id="sec34" sec-type="supplementary-material">
<title>Supplementary material</title>
<p>The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: <ext-link xlink:href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1194867/full#supplementary-material" ext-link-type="uri">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1194867/full#supplementary-material</ext-link></p>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Image_1.pdf" id="SM1" mimetype="application/pdf" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="ref1"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Abbas</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>H. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nigam</surname> <given-names>K. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kandalkar</surname> <given-names>V. S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1994</year>). <article-title>Effect of phosphorus, plant density and plant type on different growth and physiological characters of soybean [<italic>Glycine max</italic> (L.) Merrill]</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agron.</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>1407</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1412</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.56093/ijas.v88i9.83500</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref2"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Abraham</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Araya</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Berhe</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Edwards</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gujja</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khadka</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>The system of crop intensification: reports from the field on improving agricultural production, food security, and resilience to climate change for multiple crops</article-title>. <source>Agric. Food Secur.</source> <volume>3</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>12</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/2048-7010-3-4</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref3"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Adhikari</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Araya</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Aruna</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Balamatti</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Banerjee</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Baskaran</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>System of crop intensification for more productive, resource-conserving, climate-resilient, and sustainable agriculture: experience with diverse crops in varying agroecologies</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Agric. Sustain.</source> <volume>16</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>28</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/14735903.2017.1402504</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref4"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Almeida</surname> <given-names>D. D. O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Klauberg Filho</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Almeida</surname> <given-names>H. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gebler</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Felipe</surname> <given-names>A. F.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Soil microbial biomass under mulch types in an integrated apple orchard from southern Brazil</article-title>. <source>Sci. Agric.</source> <volume>68</volume>, <fpage>217</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>222</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/S0103-90162011000200012</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref6"><citation citation-type="other"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab id="coll1">Anonymous</collab></person-group> (<year>2017</year>). Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of Agriculture, and Farmers Welfare. (<volume>2017</volume>).</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref7"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Araya</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Edwards</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Asmelash</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Legesse</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zibelo</surname> <given-names>G. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Assefa</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>SCI: planting with space</article-title>. <source>Farm. Matt.</source> <volume>29</volume>, <fpage>34</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>37</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref8"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ball</surname> <given-names>R. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Purcell</surname> <given-names>L. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vories</surname> <given-names>E. D.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Short-season soybean yield compensation in response to population and water regime</article-title>. <source>Crop Sci.</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>1070</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1078</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2135/cropsci2000.4041070x</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref9"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Berger-Doyle</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>S. F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Planting date, irrigation, and row spacing effects on agronomic traits of food-grade soybean</article-title>. <source>Adv. Crop. Sci. Technol.</source> <volume>2</volume>:<fpage>149</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4172/2329-8863.1000149</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref10"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>C&#x00E1;rceles Rodr&#x00ED;guez</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dur&#x00E1;n-Zuazo</surname> <given-names>V. H.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Soriano Rodr&#x00ED;guez</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Garc&#x00ED;a-Tejero</surname> <given-names>I. F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>G&#x00E1;lvez Ruiz</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cuadros Tavira</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Conservation agriculture as a sustainable system for soil health: a review</article-title>. <source>Soil Syst.</source> <volume>6</volume>:<fpage>87</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/soilsystems6040087</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref11"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Casida</surname> <given-names>L. E. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Klein</surname> <given-names>D. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Santoro</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1964</year>). <article-title>Soil dehydrogenase activity</article-title>. <source>Soil Sci.</source> <volume>98</volume>, <fpage>371</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>376</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/00010694-196412000-00004</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref13"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Costa</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dwyer</surname> <given-names>L. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hamilton</surname> <given-names>R. I.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hamel</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nantais</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>D. L.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>A sampling method for measurement of large root systems with scanner-based image analysis</article-title>. <source>Agron. J.</source> <volume>92</volume>, <fpage>621</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>627</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2134/agronj2000.924621x</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref14"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bhattacharyya</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Wheat residue mulch and anti-transpirants improve productivity and quality of rainfed soybean in semi-arid north-Indian plains</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>210</volume>, <fpage>9</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>19</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.011</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref15"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chandra</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sudhishri</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Influence of field re-ponding pattern and plant spacing on rice root-shoot characteristics, yield and water productivity of two modern cultivars under SRI management in Indian Mollisols</article-title>. <source>Paddy Water Environ.</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>45</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>59</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s10333-015-0477-z</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref16"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dey</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lal</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Tank-mix insecticide and herbicide application effects on weeds, insect-pest menace and soybean productivity in semi-arid Northern Plains of India</article-title>. <source>Legum. Res.</source> <volume>42</volume>, <fpage>385</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>391</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18805/LR-3855</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref17"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dhar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Barah</surname> <given-names>B. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vyas</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Uphoff</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Comparing system of wheat intensification (SWI) with standard recommended practices in the north-western plain zone of India</article-title>. <source>Arch. Agron. Soil Sci.</source> <volume>62</volume>, <fpage>994</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1006</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03650340.2015.1101518</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref18"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Diep</surname> <given-names>C. N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Duong</surname> <given-names>B. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nguyen</surname> <given-names>P. V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Effects of rhizobia and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria on soybean (<italic>Glycine max</italic> L.) cultivated on ferralsols of daklak province, Vietnam</article-title>. <source>World J. Phar. Pharm. Sci.</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>318</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>333</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref19"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dutta</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Upadhyay</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mishra</surname> <given-names>R. P.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Long-term impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers on soil organic carbon dynamics in a rice-wheat system</article-title>. <source>Land Degrad. Dev.</source> <volume>33</volume>, <fpage>1862</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1877</lpage>. <comment>https://doi:10.1002/ldr.4267</comment>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/ldr.4267</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref20"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab id="coll2">FAO</collab></person-group>. (<year>2017</year>). <source>World food and agriculture - statistical yearbook</source>. <publisher-loc>Rome</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>FAO</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref21"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab id="coll3">FAO</collab></person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <source>World food and agriculture - statistical yearbook</source>. <publisher-loc>Rome</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>FAO</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref23"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fatima</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Babu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Upadhyay</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rathore</surname> <given-names>S. S.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Food production potential and environmental sustainability of different integrated farming system models in Northwest India</article-title>. <source>Front. Sustain. Food Syst.</source> <volume>7</volume>:<fpage>959464</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fsufs.2023.959464</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref01"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gomez</surname> <given-names>K. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gomez</surname> <given-names>A. A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1984</year>). <source>Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Edition</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>John Wiley and Sons</publisher-name>, <fpage>680</fpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref25"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dhar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Choudhary</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Microbes-mediated integrated nutrient management for improved rhizo-modulation, pigeonpea productivity, and soil bio-fertility in a semi-arid agro-ecology</article-title>. <source>Front. Microbiol.</source> <volume>13</volume>:<fpage>924407</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fmicb.2022.924407</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36187978</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref26"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Imtiyaz</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Agnihotri</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmad</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Effect of cobalt and lead induced heavy metal stress on some physiological parameters in <italic>Glycine max</italic></article-title>. <source>Int. J. Agric. Crop Sci.</source> <volume>7</volume>, <fpage>26</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>34</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref27"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jat</surname> <given-names>S. L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Parihar</surname> <given-names>C. M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nayak</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Meena</surname> <given-names>B. R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Differential response from nitrogen sources with and without residue management under conservation agriculture on crop yields, water-use and economics in maize-based rotations</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>236</volume>, <fpage>96</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>110</lpage>. <comment>https://doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2019.03.017</comment>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2019.03.017</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref28"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Jiang</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Su</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Catalytic effects of inherent alkali and alkaline earth metallic species on steam gasification of biomass</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Hydrog. Energy</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>15460</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>15469</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.08.111</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref30"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kong</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Modification of rhizosphere microbial communities: a possible mechanism of plant growth promoting Rhizobacteria enhancing plant growth and fitness</article-title>. <source>Front. Plant Sci.</source> <volume>13</volume>:<fpage>920813</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fpls.2022.920813</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35720594</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref31"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mondal</surname> <given-names>M. M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Puteh</surname> <given-names>A. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kashem</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hasan</surname> <given-names>M. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Effect of plant density on canopy structure and dry matter partitioning into plant parts of soybean (<italic>Glycin max</italic>)</article-title>. <source>Life Sci. J.</source> <volume>11</volume>, <fpage>67</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>74</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref32"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Moreira</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moraes</surname> <given-names>L. A. C.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schroth</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mandarino</surname> <given-names>J. M. G.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Effect of nitrogen, row spacing, and plant density on yield, yield components, and plant physiology in soybean-wheat intercropping</article-title>. <source>Agron. J.</source> <volume>107</volume>, <fpage>2162</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2170</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2134/AGRONJ15.0121</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref33"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nayak</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Prasanna</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pabby</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dominic</surname> <given-names>T. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Effect of urea, blue green algae and Azolla on nitrogen fixation and chlorophyll accumulation in soil under rice</article-title>. <source>Biol. Fertil. Soils</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>67</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>72</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00374-004-0738-2</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref34"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Nunan</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Morgan</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Herlihy</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Ultraviolet absorbance (280 nm) of compounds released from soil during chloroform fumigation as an estimate of the microbial biomass</article-title>. <source>Soil Biol. Biochem.</source> <volume>30</volume>, <fpage>1599</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1603</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0038-0717(97)00226-5</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref35"><citation citation-type="other"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pandey</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Paul</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>M. P.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <source>Measurement of photosynthesis using infrared gas analyzer. Manual of ICAR sponsored training programme for technical staff of ICAR Institutes on physiological techniques to analyze the impact of climate change on crop plants</source>. IIFSR. <fpage>19</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>22</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref36"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pandya</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chouhan</surname> <given-names>G. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Nepalia</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Effect of varieties, crop geometries and weed management on nutrient uptake by soybean [<italic>Glycine max</italic> (L.) Merrill] and associated weeds</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agron.</source> <volume>50</volume>, <fpage>218</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>220</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref37"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Prajapati</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vyas</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dhar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Productivity, profitability and land-use efficiency of soybean (<italic>Glycine max</italic>)-based cropping systems under different nutrient-management practices</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agron.</source> <volume>59</volume>, <fpage>229</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>234</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref39"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Prasad</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shivay</surname> <given-names>Y. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>S. N.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <source>Learning by doing exercises in soil fertility (a practical manual for soil fertility)</source>. <publisher-name>Indian Agricultural Research Institute</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>New Delhi</publisher-loc>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref40"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Prasanna</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tripathi</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dominic</surname> <given-names>T. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yadav</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>An improvized technique for measurement of nitrogen fixation by blue green algae and Azolla using moist soil cores from rice fields</article-title>. <source>Exp. Agric.</source> <volume>39</volume>, <fpage>145</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>150</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S0014479702001187</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref41"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Radosavljevic</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Haider</surname> <given-names>L. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lade</surname> <given-names>S. J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Schl&#x00FC;ter</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Effective alleviation of rural poverty depends on the interplay between productivity, nutrients, water and soil quality</article-title>. <source>Ecol. Econ.</source> <volume>169</volume>:<fpage>106494</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106494</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref42"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rahman</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gul</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmad</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Effects of water stress on growth and photosynthetic pigments of corn (<italic>Zea mays</italic> L.) cultivars</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Agric. Biol.</source> <volume>6</volume>, <fpage>652</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>655</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref43"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Suman</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Babu</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Paramesh</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Co-implementation of tillage, irrigation, and fertilizers in soybean: impact on crop productivity, soil moisture, and soil microbial dynamics</article-title>. <source>Field Crop Res.</source> <volume>288</volume>:<fpage>108672</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108672</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref44"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rajanna</surname> <given-names>G. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dhindwal</surname> <given-names>A. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rawal</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Pooniya</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Energetics, water and crop productivity of wheat (<italic>Triticum aestivum</italic>)&#x2013;cluster bean (<italic>Cyamopsis tetragonoloba</italic>) sequence under land configuration and irrigation regime in semi-arid agro-ecosystem</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agron.</source> <volume>64</volume>, <fpage>450</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>457</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref45"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rehman</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khaliq</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ahmad</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wajid</surname> <given-names>S. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rasul</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hussain</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Effect of planting time and cultivar on soybean performance</article-title>. <source>Acad. J. Agric. Res.</source> <volume>2</volume>, <fpage>134</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>138</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref47"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Salvagiotti</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cassman</surname> <given-names>K. G.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Specht</surname> <given-names>J. E.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Walters</surname> <given-names>D. T.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Weiss</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dobermann</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Nitrogen uptake, fixation and response to fertilizer N in soybeans: a review</article-title>. <source>Field Crops Res.</source> <volume>108</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>13</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.fcr.2008.03.001</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref48"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shen</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Microbial functional diversity, biomass and activity as affected by soil surface mulching in a semiarid farmland</article-title>. <source>PLoS One</source> <volume>11</volume>:<fpage>e0159144</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0159144</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27414400</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref49"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dhar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dass</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sharma</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gupta</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Productivity and profitability of soybean (<italic>Glycine max</italic>) and wheat (<italic>Triticum aestivum</italic>) genotypes grown in sequence under system of crop intensification</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agric. Sci.</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>1407</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1412</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.56093/ijas.v88i9.83500</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref50"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>V. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dwivedi</surname> <given-names>B. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mishra</surname> <given-names>R. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shukla</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Timsina</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Upadhyay</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Yields, soil health and farm profits under a rice-wheat system: long-term effect of fertilizers and organic manures applied alone and in combination</article-title>. <source>Agronomy</source> <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>22</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/agronomy9010001</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref51"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tabatabai</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bremner</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1969</year>). <article-title>Use of p-nitrophenyl phosphate for assay of soil phosphatase activity</article-title>. <source>Soil Biol. Biochem.</source> <volume>1</volume>, <fpage>301</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>307</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0038-0717(69)90012-1</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref52"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Upadhyay</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sen</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Prasad</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Srivastava</surname> <given-names>J. P.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>S. P.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Effect of panchagavya and recommended dose of fertilizers on growth, nutrient content and productivity of transplanted rice (<italic>Oryza sativa</italic>) under middle Gangetic plain of India</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Agric. Sci.</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>931</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>936</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.56093/ijas.v88i6.80650</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref53"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Upadhyay</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sen</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rathore</surname> <given-names>S. S.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Prasad</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2019</year>). <article-title>Scientific validation of indigenous organic formulation-panchagavya for sustaining rice productivity and residual effect in rice-lentil system under hot semi-arid eco-region of middle indo-gangetic plains</article-title>. <source>Indian J. Trad. Knowl.</source> <volume>18</volume>, <fpage>104</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>113</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref54"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Upadhyay</surname> <given-names>P. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sen</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Singh</surname> <given-names>R. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Prasad</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sankar</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. (<year>2022</year>). <article-title>Soil health, energy budget, and rice productivity as influenced by cow products application with fertilizers under south Asian eastern indo-gangetic plains zone</article-title>. <source>Front. Agron.</source> <volume>3</volume>:<fpage>758572</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fagro.2021.758572</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref55"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Uphoff</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chi</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Dazzo</surname> <given-names>F. B.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rodriguez</surname> <given-names>R. J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2013</year>). &#x201C;<article-title>Soil fertility as a contingent rather than inherent characteristic: considering the contributions of crop-symbiotic soil biota</article-title>&#x201D; in <source>Principles of sustainable soil management in agroecosystems</source>. eds. <person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Lal</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Stewart</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group> (<publisher-loc>Boca Raton FL</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Taylor &#x0026; Francis</publisher-name>), <fpage>141</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>166</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref56"><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab id="coll5">USDA</collab></person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <source>World agricultural outlook report</source> <publisher-name>United States Department of Agriculture</publisher-name>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref57"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Vyas</surname> <given-names>M. D.</given-names></name> <name><surname>Khandwe</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Effect of row spacing and seed rate on morphophysiological parameters, yield attributes and productivity of soybean [<italic>Glycine max</italic> (L.) Merrill] cultivars under rainfed condition of Vindhyan plateau of Madhya Pradesh</article-title>. <source>Soybean Res.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>82</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>91</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref58"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Watson</surname> <given-names>D. J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1952</year>). <article-title>The physiological basis of variation in yield</article-title>. <source>Adv. Agron.</source> <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>101</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>145</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0065-2113(08)60307-7</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref59"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Watson</surname> <given-names>D. J.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1958</year>). <article-title>The dependence of net assimilation rate on leaf-area index</article-title>. <source>Ann. Bot.</source> <volume>22</volume>, <fpage>37</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>54</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a083596</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref60"><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wells</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group> (<year>1991</year>). <article-title>Soybean growth response to plant density: relationships among canopy photosynthesis, leaf area, and light interception</article-title>. <source>Crop Sci.</source> <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>755</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>761</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2135/cropsci1991.0011183X003100030044x82-91</pub-id></citation></ref></ref-list>
</back>
</article>