Home Science

 

1.ON FARM TRAIL

 

1. Name of the technology     : Assessment of Coating Formulations to improve the Shelf life of Fruits and Vegetables

2. Nature of intervention       : OFT- Kharif/ Rabi 2022-23

3. Crop & Farming Situation: Fruits and Vegetables

4. Purpose                             : To increase the shelf life

5. Number                              : Approved                 Achieved

1. Area                        : --                                  --

2. No. of farmers         :5                                 5

6 –13

 

S. no

Farmers name

Village/Mandal

Name of the Tech.

Duration (Days)

Demo

Farmer practice

1

Siridha. D

Bodebanda

Coating Formulations to improve the Shelf life

7

7

2

Shyamala.H

Kotekal

3

Veeresh.P

Kotekal

4

Diwakar

Venkatapuram

5

Bhavitha

Nandavaram

Fruits/

vegetables

T1

(CONC)

T2

(DILUTED with water )

T3

(F.P)

Qty

(no.)

Shelf life

Loss

(%)

Colour

Shelf life

Loss

(%)

Colour

Shelf life

Loss

(%)

Colour

Brinjal

5

5

25

No Change

4

25

No Change

3

75

Change

Beans

20

4

35

No

Change

3

37.5

No

Change

2

55

Change

Ridge guard

4 .

4

25

No

Change

4

25

No

Change

2

50

Change

Fruits/

vegetables

T1

(CONC)

T2

(DILUTED with water)

T3

(F.P)

Qty

(no.)

Shelf life

Loss

(%)

Colour

Shelf

life

Loss

(%)

Colour

Shelf

life

Loss

(%)

Colour

Tomato

4

5

25

No Change

7

25

No Change

2

75

Change

Bhendi

20

5

30

No

Change

3

40

No

Change

3

60

Change

 

There is an increase in shelf life of vegetables with 40 to 60 %

No change in taste after cooking

14. Farmers reaction               : Farmers expressed their willingness to adopt the technology

15. Constraints                       : Nil

16. Feed back

1. To the Scientist:

2. To the extension personnel:

17. Whether continued during : Discontinued as per the instructions given at Action Plan Review Meeting 2023-24

2023-24 or not reasons

18. Remarks                           :

 

2.ON FARM TRAIL

 

1. Name of the technology     : Assessing the performance of different hand weeder for weeding as

drudgery reducing equipments

2. Nature of intervention           : OFT- Kharif/ Rabi 2022-23

3. Crop & Farming Situation     : Vegetable crops

4. Purpose                                : To reduce drudgery during weeding

To assess the time taken for harvesting the crop by traditional method and

improved method

5. Number                              : Approved                 Achieved

1. Area                        : 5 ha                          5 ha

2. No. of farmers         : 5                                5

6 –13

 

S. no

Farmers name

 

Village/Mandal

 

Name of the Tech.

Duration (Days)

Demo

Farmer practice

1

J.P.Swamy

Kotekal

CRIDA

and

CRIJAF

wheel hoe

90 days

90 days

2

B. Chinnaeranna

Banavasi

3

E.Yogendra

Mekadona

4

Narayana.M

Chennapuram

5

P.Keshamma

Thimmapuram

Parameters

T1

T2

T3

Work done area

0.4 ha

0.4 ha

0.4ha

Labour required

6

8

14

Labour wages

Rs.900 per ha

@ 150/labour

Rs.1200 per ha

@ 150/labour

Rs.2100 per ha

@ 150/labour

Time taken for weeding

4 hr

6 hr

8hr

Drudgery index Score

35%

(Minimum)

42%

(Minimum)

68%

(Moderate)

 

It was observed that drudgery was reduced to minimum with 35% when compare to farmers practice i.e. 68 % (Moderate)

When compare to farmers practice, weeding with CRIDA wheel hoe has saved an amount of Rs. 1200/- per acre

Farm Women able to work easily with wheel hoe and accepted the technology

14. Farmers reaction             :bhendi crop without causing any health problems

15. Constraints                       : NIL

16. Feed back : Farm women accepted the technology as it is user friendly and drudgery was

reduced with the use of wheel hoe when compare to farmers practice.

1. To the Scientist :

2. To the extension personnel:

17. Whether continued during : Discontinued as per the instructions given at Action Plan Review Meeting 2023-24

2023-24 or not reasons

18. Remarks  :

                       

1.FRONT LINE DEMONSTRATIONS

 

1. Name of the technology     :Demonstration of Nutri kitchen garden

2. Nature of intervention       : FLD- Kharif/ Rabi 2022-23

3. Crop & Farming Situation: Vegetable crops

4. Purpose                             : To demonstrate the role of Nutrition garden in farmer’s house holds

Maintaining the nutritional adequacy of adopted farm family

5. Number                              : Approved                 Achieved

1. Area                        : 5 cents                      5cents

2. No. of farmers         :10                               10

6 –13

 

S. no

Farmers name

 

Village/Mandal

 

Name of the Tech.

Duration (Days)

Demo

Farmer practice

1

N.Maheshwari

Mugathi

Nutri kitchen garden kits

90 days

90 days

2

P.Keshamma

Thimmapuram

3

K.Umamaheswari

Adoni

4

Chandrakala

Adini

5

Sridevi

Gajuladenne

6

Madamma

Gajuladenne

7

Suvarnamma

Mugathi

8

Bhavitha

Nandavaram

9

J.P.Swamy

Kotekal

10

Dastagiri

Bichigeri

 

 

Particulars

Expenditure incurred(Rs)

Vegetable Gross yield (Kg)

Household consumption

(4 no.) in Kg

Total

(Rs)

Amount saved(Rs)

Kg-Rs 15 (Appox)

Additional Income generated (Rs)

1 Month

150

60

35

900

575

375

6 Months

-

360

210

5400

3150

2250

 

40 per cent increase in consumption of vegetables was observed with the nutri kitchen garden

Saved and amount of Rs.375 /- with sales of vegetables after consumption

14. Farmers reaction         : Establishment of a nutri-kitchen garden has reduced nutritional deficiencies and also providing a source of Supplementary income

15. Constraints:

16. Feed back

1. To the Scientist:

2. To the extension personnel:

17. Whether continued during

2019-20 or not reasons           : Continued

18. Remarks                           :

 

2.Front line Demonstrations

 

1. Name of the technology     : Demonstration on value addition to tomato

2. Nature of intervention        : FLD -Kharif-2023-24

3. Crop           & Farming Situation   : Tomatoes

4. Purpose                              : Value addition to tomato

5. Numbered                          :   Approved                Achieved

1. Area                        :   --                              --

2. No. of farmers         :   10                            10

 6. –13

 

S. no

Farmers name

 

Village/Mandal

 

Crop

Name of the Tech.

 
 

1.

Sravani

Venkatapuram

Tomato

Tomato value addition

 

2.

Adilakshmi

Venkatapuram

 

3.

Vasavi

Kurnool

 

4.

N. Sekhar

Kurnool

 

5.

Md. Althaf

Kurnool

 

6.

Diwakar

Venkatapuram

 

7.

HB.Goverdhanreddy

Pedda Harivanam

 

8.

K.Gopi

Pedda Harivanam

 

9.

U.Venkatesh

Kadivella

 

10.

G.Suresh

Chilakadona

 

 

 

Previous results:

1. Total Antioxidants

S.No

Name of the test

Results(mg/100g)

1.

Sun dried

0.181

2.

Dehydrator

0.192

 

2. Lycopene content

S.No

Name of the test

Results (mg/100g)

1.

Sun dried

17.72

2.

Dehydrator

17.84

 

 

3.Ascorbic acid (Vitamin C)

S.No

Name of the test

Results (mg/100g)

1.

Sun dried

0.0064

2.

Dehydrator

0.0077

It was observed that total antioxidants, lycopene and ascorbic acid content was found to be high in dehydrated dried powder compare to the sun dried powder.These observations   may serve as guidance on selection of dehydrated tomato powder that can be consumed to meet the daily requirements.

Demonstrations on value-added products with tomato like tomato jam, toffee, Candies and ketchup   were given to farmers, farm women, and rural youth.

14.  Farmers reaction      :Accepted the technology and interested to take up as an entrepreneur activity

15.  Constraints           :

16. Feed back

1. To the Scientist             :

2. To the extension personnel:

17.  Whether continued during

2023-24 not reasons         :  Continued under OFT on Assessment of capacity of drying equipment for fruits & vegetables 2023-24

18.  Remarks               :

 

3. Front line Demonstrations

 

1.  Name of the technology     :  Demonstration on value addition to pulses

2.  Nature of intervention        :  FLD-2023-24

3.  Crop           & Farming Situation   : Red gram

4.  Purpose                              :  Value addition

5.  Numbered                          :   Approved                Achieved

1. No. of farmers         :   10                            10

6. –13

 

S. no

Farmers name

 

Village/Mandal

 

Crop

Name of the technology

 
 

1

E.Rangaswamy

Arekal

Red gram

Dall mill

 

2

C. Ravi kumar

Arekal

 

3

J.Parameshwara swamy

Arekal

 

4

A.Sharamma

Arekal

 

5

S.hanthi bai

Bichegeri

 

6

B.Jakkapa

Bichegeri

 

7

Basavaraju

Chennapuram

 

8

Diwakar

Venkatapuram

 

9

S.Gowsia begum

Yemmiganur

 

10

M.Satish Chandra

Kurnool

 

 

Previous results

Cost estimates of Red gram Dal for 1 Quintal

 

Redgram

Rs. 7000/-

Processing charges

Rs. 500/-

Labour charges

Rs. 500/-

Packing and labelling charges

Rs. 400/-

Total

Rs. 8400/-

Quantity of dal obtained after processing

80 kg

Cost of 1 kg dal

130/-

Total Income

Rs. 10,400/-

Value addition to red gram to toor dal has increased the farmer's income by   Rs. 2000.

Converting surplus production to value added product has increased the income of the farmer

14.  Farmers reaction              : Expressed interest in the establishment of the dall mill under entrepreneurship development

15.  Constraints                                   :

16. Feed back

1. To the Scientist             :   Converting surplus production to value added product has increased the income of the farmer

2. To the extension personnel:

17.  Whether continued during

2019-20or not reasons      : Discontinued and changed to method demonstration as per the instructions given at Action Plan Review Meeting 2023-24

18.  Remarks   : --