Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013; pp.

(1063-1066)
Copyright@ EM International
ISSN 0971765X

Ecology of chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana WALL) in

dry temperate forests of North West Himalaya
Raj Kumar, G.S. Shamet*, O.P. Chaturvedi, R.K. Avasthe and Charan Singh

CSWCRTI, 218, Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun-248195, U.K.

* Department of SIF, Dr YSP UHF, Nauni, Solan-173230, H.P., India
(Received 19 January 2013; accepted 2 March, 2013)

ABSTRACT
Chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana Wall.) is an important ecological and economic species having a restricted
distribution in India. It is very much restricted in dry temperate region of North-Western Himalaya. There
are large numbers of biotic and abiotic factors affecting it and lack of regeneration in this pine may result in
the extinction of the species. Young/middle age classes are scarce or entirely lacking, the mature and over
mature trees predominate in its natural zones. Phytosociological study shows the high endemism of the
Pinus gerardiana species in its natural zone. Overall more than 60% of the area was covered by this species
and rest by other species. Therefore, the productivity and sustainability of chilgoza pine has to be ensured.

Key words : Chilgoza pine, Pinus gerardiana, North-western Himalaya

Introduction

Distribution

Pinus gerardiana Wall commonly and commercially

known as chilgoza and/ or neoza pine. It was discovered by a British officer in India, Captain
Gerard in the year 1932 (Farjon, 1984), a small to
medium sized evergreen tree of 17 to 27 m in height
and 2-4 m in girth (Bhattacharrya et al., 1988). Its
branches are short and horizontal, forming compact
habit, while bark is thin, glabrous, silver grey, having mottled appearance and exfoliating irregular,
thin scales (Gupta and Sharma, 1975). Cones are
oblong, ovoid and glaucous when mature while
scales are thick, woody and reflexed (Gamble, 1902).
Chilgoza pine is the only conifer, which provides
edible kernels/ nuts being rich source in carbohydrates (21.6 %), proteins (15.9 %), fats (49.9 %), moisture content (7.5 %), fiber (2.2 %) and mineral matter (2.90 %) (Anonymous, 1969). In this article, literature on chilgoza pine are depicted while challenges
are highlighted with a view of understanding underlying causes and hopefully draw lessons for future.

Chilgoza pine is an important ecological and economic species having a restricted distribution in India. It is very much restricted in dry temperate region of North-Western Himalayas between altitudes
of 1600 m to 3000 m above mean sea level (Dogra,
1964). It is common in Afghanisthan and parts of
Pakistan, i.e. Baluchistan. In India, it is found in the
upper parts of Sutlej, Ravi and Chenab valley but
not in the Jhelum and Kangan valley. In Himachal
Pradesh, it mainly occurs in Kinnaur and Pangi divisions and Threta range of Chamba division. Out of
total 2060 ha in Himachal Pradesh, about 2040 ha
falls in Kinnaur divison and a small portion (20 ha)
in Chamba district (Troup, 1921), which is the main
source of chilgoza fruit in the country. It is further
extending westwards to Kishtwar and Astor in
Jammu and Kashmir (Dogra, 1964; Critchfield &
Little, 1966). Chilgoza assumes a great role in the
local economy of the people in Kinnaur and Pangi
areas of Chamba district. Accordingly, the species
ranges have been divided as monsoon fed greenery
of lower dry temperate, semi-arid belt and aridity

1064
belt of upper Kinnuar (Anonymous, 2000). The species was subsequently (1839) introduced to England,
where it was found to be frost-sensitive (Farjon,
1984).
Regeneration problems
A survey of the regeneration was conducted in
Kalpa, Kilba, Moorang and Pooh ranges of Kinnaur
distt. H.P. The regeneration success was ranged
from 8-15% recorded in these ranges. Natural regeneration of chilgoza pine is very poor or entirely
lacking in its zone. The most important factor responsible for this of course is the collection of cones
by the locals/right holders. (Tandon, 1963; Singh et
al., 1973). Due to collection of edible seed by human
beings, practically no natural regeneration can be
expected and is limited to cliff rocks and areas
where there are plenty of bushes to protect young
seedlings from birds and rodents (Chandra &
Kushdil, 1977). If by chance the seeds are able to
germinate the birds nibble away the young seedling
because of their fleshy and tasty cotyledons (Singh et
al., 1973). Two other biotic factors are added to these
anthropic factors: (1) two parasitic insects, Dioryctria

Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013

abietivorella (Grote), the Fir cone-worm (Sehgal and
Sharma, 1989), and Euzophera cedrela, the Cedar
cone-moth (Beeson, 1941), lay in the cones and their
larvae consume seeds rich in proteins. Similarly,
goat grazing is also very inimical to natural reproduction, although some seedlings may appear under the protection of thorny bushes (Luna, 2008).
The seedling, which manages to escape the above
inimical biotic factors, has to face the inhospitable
climate of the tract. Intense heat of the sun, desiccating winds and shortage of soil moisture account for
heavy mortality of seedlings. Sandy, shallow and
dry with low water retentive capacity of soil is responsible for high mortality of seedlings during dry
periods (Singh et al., 1973). Beside these, species has
erractic and infrequent seed year and dormancy related problems which also reduces its regeneration
in natural habitats (Malik & Shamet, 2008). So severe biotic interference and lack of regeneration in
this pine may result in the extinction of the species
(Kumar, 1986; Sehgal and Chauhan, 1989).
Phytosociological study
Phytosociological study was conducted in Kalpa,

Fig. 1. Bar-diagrams showing comparison of importance index values (IVI) of Pinus gerardiana, Cedrus deodara, Pinus
wallichiana and Quercus ilex in different ranges of chilgoza pine forests

KUMAR ET AL
Kilba, Moorang and Pooh ranges of distt. Kinnaur of
H.P., India. Pinus gerardiana was found to be the
dominant species in all the sites and was followed
by Cedrus deodara, Pinus wallichiana and Quercus
ilex in different proportions. The phytosociological
study shows the high endemism of the Pinus
gerardiana species in its natural zone. This is evident
by the fact that while young/middle age classes are
scarce or entirely lacking, the mature and over mature trees predominate in its natural zones. The
presence of mature and over mature trees (Sharma
et al., 2010) is due to the fact that previously chilgoza
forests of Kinnaur were not so intensively exploited
for seed because of the inaccessibility of these areas
and also because the chilgoza forests of Baluchistan
met most of the country requirement before partition (Tandon,1963). Similarly, because of heavy biotic pressure, old tree are usually hard to get and
there exist a fair possibility of getting older trees of
this species, in the interior areas where human pressure is low (Yadav, 2009). Chilgoza pine (Pinus
gerardianana) was found associated with deodar
(Cedrus deodara) and blue pine (Pinus willichiana) at

1065
higher elevation and oak (Quercus ilex) at lower elevation (Ahmed and Latif, 2007). In Kinnaur district,
the chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardianana) replaces chir
pine (Pinus roxburghii) near Wangtu and continoues
along the Satluj upto Dubling, nearly pure crops and
sometimes mixed with deodar (Singh and Singh,
1995). Overall the diversity of tree species is low;
this may be due to fact that the xericity peculiar to
the high mountain and the low temperatures give
rise to a forest of Pinus gerardiana. In areas where
Chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana) is dominant, 96.46
% niche was occupied by it alone, while rest of the
space was shared by deodar (Cedrus deodara). Overall more than 80% of the area was covered by this
species and less than 20% by other species in distt
Kinnaur of Himachal Pradesh (Sharma et al., 2010).
The density of chilgoza pine trees were ranged from
24 to 930 trees / ha with a mean of 266 individuals
/ ha; the average basal area was 25.5 m2 ha-1. The
average radial growth rate was estimated at 0.08
cm/yr. However, trees on high elevations and
cooler slopes grow faster (Ahmed et al., 1991). The
associated species particularly deodar is regenerat-

Fig. 2. Line-diagram showing comparison of average diameter, basal area per hectare, number of trees per hectare and
volume per hectare of trees in different ranges of Pinus gerardiana forests

1066
ing and growing faster than chilgoza pine, so it may
invade the areas dominated by chilgoza pine in future course of time.
Relationship with climate
Chilgoza pine tree growth has direct relationship
with environment conditions and it indicated that
precipitation, except for the months of January, February and October, has a direct relationship with
growth of chilgoza pine. So the longevity and climate sensitivity of this species shows its potential in
developing millennium long climatic reconstructions needed for understanding the long-term climate variability in the Himalayan region (Singh &
Yadav, 2007). This ring-width chronology of this
species in Kinnaur, Himachal Pradesh extends from
AD 919-2005. This chronology was found to have
direct relationship with precipitation of March-July
and negative with premonsoon temperature (Singh
& Yadav, 2007; Singh et al., 2009). Similarly, the possible impact of climate change on growth and
sustainability of chilgoza pine forests in near future
has also been indicated (Baba et al., 2005). Therefore,
adeptability of chligoza pine to these conditions is
required.
Future strategy
Enlightenment campaigns to educate the populace
on the values of the chilgoza pine and intensified
effort on tree planting as a should be a regular event.
Furthermore, very serious commitment on the part
of government to ensure adequate funds for forest
regeneration, abrogation of forest dereservation, increase reservation and Sustainable management of
the chilgoza forests.

References
Farjon, A. 1984. Pines: drawings and descriptions of the genus
Pinus. Antiquarian Booksellers Association of
America Pub, New York, 220.
Bhattacharya, A. Lamarche, V.C. and Telewski, F.W. 1988.
Dendrochronological reconnaissance of the conifers
of northwest India. Tree Ring Bulletin. 48 : 21-30.
Gupta, B.N. and Sharma, K.K. 1975. The chilgoza pine, an
important nut pine of Himalayas. Wans Year book, 1,
21-32.
Gamble, J.S. 1902. A manual of Indian Timbers, 709.
Anonymous 1969. Wealth of India-raw materials, 8, 65-66
Dogra, P. D. 1964. Gymnosperms of IndiaII. Chilgoza
pine (Pinus gerardiana Wall.). Bulletin of the National
Botanic Gardon No. 109.
Troup, R.S. 1921. Silviculture of Indian Trees. Vo. III.
Clarendon Press, Oxford University. 1090-1093
Critchfield, W. B. & Little, Jr.E.L. 1966. Geographic distribution of the pinus of the world, USDA Forest Service
Anonymous 2000. Sharing common pool resources: The

Eco. Env. & Cons. 19 (4) : 2013

case of neoza forests in Kinnaur.State Environmental Report, Department of Scientific Technology and
Environment, 34-SDA Complex Shimla. 156-170
Sharma, P., Sehgal, R.N. and Anup, R. 2010. Natural regeneration of Pinus gerardiana in dry temperate forests
of Kinnaur (Himachal Pradesh). Indian journal of forestry 33(4) : 511-518.
Singh, R. V. Khanduri, D.C. and Lal, K. 1973. Chilgoza pine
(Pinus gerardiana) regeneration in Himachal
Pradesh. The Indian forester 126-133
Luna, R.K. 2008. Plantations forestry in India. International
book distributors, Dehradun. 920-922
Tandon, J.C. 1963. Revised working plan for the Kinnaur and
Kochi forests (upper Sultej valley), Himachal Pradesh.
1961-62 to 1975-76.
Chandra, J.P. and Khushdil, M.M. 1977. Rooting of Spiraea
sorbifolia l.stem cutting. Indian forester 103 (2) :154155.
Sehgal, R.N. and Sharma, P.K. 1989. Chilgoza, the endangered social forestry pine of Kinnaur, Tech. Bull.
FBTI. [6]
Beeson, C. E. C. 1941. The ecology and control of forest insects
of India and the neighbouring countries, Vasant Press,
Dehra Dun, India, 1007
Kumar, P. 1986. Studies on phenotypic variations in natural stands of Pinus gerardiana Wall. in Kinnaur, H.P.
M.Sc. Dissertation submitted to Dept. of Forestry,
Dr. Y. S. Parmar University of Horticulture and
Forestry, Solan, H. P. 20-40
Malik, A.R. and Shamet, G.S. 2008. Germination and biochemical changes in the seeds of chilgoza pine (Pinus
gerardiana Wall) by stratification: An endangered
conifer species of the North west Himalayas. Indian
journal of Plant physiology 13 : 278-283
Sehgal, R.N. & Chauhan, V. 1989. Pinus gerardiana the
threatened pine of India; life support species, biological diversity and genetic resources news, Commonwealth Science Council.
Yadav, R.R. 2009. Tree rings imprints of long-term changes
in western Himalayas, Indian journal of biosciences 34,
699-707.
Singh, P. and Singh, A.P. 1995. Pinus gerardiana (chilgoza)
cone borer of Kinnaur District in Himachal Pradesh.
The Indian Forester 121(8) : 728-734.
Ahmed, M., Ashfaq, M., Amjad, M. and Saeed, M. 1991.
Vegetation structure and dynamics of Pinus
gerardiana forests in Balouchistan, Pakistan journal
of Vegetation Science. 2(1) : 119124.
Singh, J. and Yadav, R.R. 2007. Dendroclimatic potential
of millennium-long ring-width chronology of Pinus
gerardiana from Himachal Pradesh, India, Current
Science 93 : 833836.
Singh, J., Yadav, R. R. and Wilmking, M. 2009. A 694-year
tree-ring based rainfall reconstruction from
Himachal Pradesh, India. Clim. Dyn. doi, 10.1007/
s00382-009-0528-5
Baba, R. Sankhyan, H.P. and Sharma, S. S. 2005. Is climate
change endangering the endangered Pinus
gerardiana: Matter of concern? In: National symposium on changing concepts of forestry in 21st century, Oct, 21-22, 2005: 31p.

Influence of gibberellic acid and

temperature on seed germination in
Chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana Wall.)
Raj Kumar, G.S.Shamet, Harsh
Mehta, N.M.Alam, J.M.S.Tomar,
O.P.Chaturvedi & Neetan Khajuria
Indian Journal of Plant Physiology
An International Journal of Plant
Physiology
ISSN 0019-5502
Volume 19
Number 4
Ind J Plant Physiol. (2014) 19:363-367
DOI 10.1007/s40502-014-0119-2

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all

rights are held exclusively by Indian Society
for Plant Physiology. This e-offprint is for
personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com.

1 23

Author's personal copy

Ind J Plant Physiol. (OctoberDecember 2014) 19(4):363367
DOI 10.1007/s40502-014-0119-2

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Influence of gibberellic acid and temperature on seed germination

in Chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana Wall.)
Raj Kumar G. S. Shamet Harsh Mehta
N. M. Alam J. M. S. Tomar O. P. Chaturvedi
Neetan Khajuria

Received: 2 June 2014 / Accepted: 27 September 2014 / Published online: 4 November 2014
Indian Society for Plant Physiology 2014

Abstract Pinus gerardiana Wall. is an important ecological and economic forestry species having restricted
distribution in India. It has been observed that natural
regeneration of the species is extremely poor or entirely
lacking. This species has erratic and infrequent seed years
and dormancy related problems that also reduce regeneration process in natural habitats. Therefore, different treatments of gibberellic acid and temperature were tried to
enhance the germination in the species by subjecting seeds
to two gibberellic acid concentrations (75 and 150 ppm)
along with control, following four soaking periods (Control,
8, 16 and 24 h) and two incubation temperatures (15 and
25 C) for assessing their impact on seed germination. It
was observed that among different gibberellic acid concentrations highest germinability parameters were
observed, when seeds were treated with 75 ppm GA3.
Among different soaking periods highest germination was
observed when seed were soaked for 24 h. The incubation
temperature showed better results at 15 C in comparison to
25 C. The present study identied gibberellic acid treatment of 75 ppm, seed soaking for 24 h at 15 C incubation
temperature best treatment for enhancing germination.
R. Kumar
H. Mehta
N. M. Alam
J. M. S. Tomar

O. P. Chaturvedi
Central Soil and Water Conservation Research & Training
Institute, 218, Kulagarh Road, Dehradun 248195, Uttarakhand,
India
R. Kumar (&)
CSWCRTI, Research Center, Vasad, Anand 388308, Gujarat,
India
e-mail: rajcswcrti@gmail.com
G. S. Shamet
N. Khajuria
Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar University of Horticulture and
Forestry, Nauni, Solan 173230, H.P, India

Keywords Pinus gerardiana
Gibberellic acid

Soaking
Temperature
Seed germination
Pinus gerardiana Wall. (Family Pinaceae), commonly/
commercially known as chilgoza/neoza pine, was rst
discovered by a British ofcer in India, Captain Gerard in
the year 1932 (Kumar et al. 2013). It is a small to medium
sized evergreen tree, varying from 17 to 27 m in height and
2 to 4 m in girth (Bhattacharrya et al. 1988). Chilgoza pine
is an important ecological and economic social forestry
species having restricted distribution in India. It is conned
to hilly tracts in dry temperate region of North-Western
Himalayas between 1,600 and 3,000 m above mean sea
level (Luna 2008).
It has been observed that natural regeneration in the
species is very poor or entirely lacking. The most important
factor responsible for this is collection of cones by local
people (Malik and Shamet 2008). Severe biotic interference and lack of regeneration resulted in the disappearing
of this valuable species in Kinnaur (Kumar 1986; Sehgal
and Chauhan 1989). It is important to devise strategies to
regenerate the species to prevent it from disappearing. For
increasing the regeneration in a species it is important to
enhance the germination process (Monica et al. 2012).
Germination is a complex process that is controlled by
several biological and environment factors (Holl 1999;
Daniel and Aldicir 2006; Singh et al. 2010). Chilgoza has
erratic and infrequent seed years and dormancy related
problems that reduce regeneration process in natural habitats (Malik and Shamet 2008). It is, therefore, important to
determine specic conditions, which may facilitate germination and seedling growth of chilgoza pine. So far very
little attempt has been made to develop suitable regeneration techniques for large scale production of Chilgoza
species, which are under the threat of extinction. Therefore,

123

Author's personal copy

364

Ind J Plant Physiol. (OctoberDecember 2014) 19(4):363367

an attempt was made to enhance germination in the species

by subjecting seeds to different gibberellic acid concentrations, soaking periods and temperature conditions.
Cones of Chilgoza pine Wall. were collected in October
2008 in Kinnaur located in North-west of Himachal
0
0
0
0
(3155 3205 North latitude and 7745 7935 East longitude with an elevation 2,450 m msl). Cones were collected after climbing on the trees, packed in gunny bags
and transported to laboratory. Immediately after collection,
cones were dried in sunlight for 1 week, and then seeds
were extracted from it and stored in plastic bags at 4 C in
deep freezer. The moisture content recorded in seeds was
21 %, before storage in deep freezer.
The viability test was conducted using tetrazolium
chloride (Peters 2000). Seed viability was observed
immediately at the time of collection and after each
germination test. To test germination, seeds were disinfected with 0.05 % aqueous solution of HgCl2 for 2 min,
washed thoroughly with double distilled water. Seeds
were subjected to three pre-treatment solutions of gibberellic acid (GA), viz., Control, 75, and 150 ppm for
three different periods viz., 8, 16 and 24 h. For determining the effect of different temperatures, the seeds were
incubated at 25 and 15 C constant temperatures under
darkness.
The germination test was carried out by placing the seed
on moist lter paper in germination trays kept in germinator. A sample of 300 seed divided into three replications
of 100 seed each was taken for the germination tests.
Germinator was tted with specially designed chamber
with the control of temperature, humidity and light. Seeds
from different treatments were kept in different trays in the
chamber. The humidity was set at 95 %, at 25 and 15 C in
two different chambers. Germination was monitored daily
and seeds showing signs of decay were removed immediately from the trays in a testing period of 28 days. The seed

counted as germinated when radical emerged and attained a

length of 2 mm. The observation recorded were germination per cent (GP), germination capacity (GC), germination
energy (GE) and germination value (GV).
All treatments were examined daily and their germination was recorded daily. Seeds were considered germinated
when the radicle was 5 mm long (Sosa et al. 2005). Germination percentage (GP) (Eq. 1) GC (Eq. 2) and mean
daily germination (MDG) (Eq. 3) were calculated (Hossain
et al. 2005; Li et al. 2006).
Germination percentage GP n=N  100

Germination capacity GC n v=N  100

Mean daily germination MDG N=D  100

where, n is the number of germinated seeds, N is the total

number of seeds, v is the number of viable seeds recorded
after conducting viability test using tetrazolium chloride
(Peters 2000) and D is the number of days to nal
germination.
Germination energy (GE) (Eq. 4) was determined using
the following formula:
Germination energy GE M=N  100

where, M is cumulative germination up to time of maximum MDG reached at any time during the period of the
test. The germination value (GV) (Eq. 5) was calculated, as
per the formula given by Czabator (1962).
Germination value GV PV  MDG

where, PV is the peak value of maximum means daily

germination reached at any time during the period of the
test.
The experiment was replicated thrice in completely
randomized design (factorial), so total treatment combination was eighteen. Standard error of mean and least

Table 1 Effect of gibberellic acid, soaking period and temperature on germination (%) of chilgoza pine seeds
Gibberellic acid (ppm)
Control

75

150

Temperature (C) ?
Soaking period (h) ;

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

Grand mean

34.67

39.33

37.00

55.50

62.84

59.17

43.47

53.57

48.52

48.23

16

48.33

54.15

51.24

63.45

73.54

68.50

58.67

65.00

61.84

60.53

24

54.21

57.00

55.61

73.84

77.33

75.59

62.71

73.86

68.29

66.50

Mean

51.27

50.16

47.95

64.26

71.24

67.75

54.95

64.14

59.55

Grand mean

47.95

67.75

59.55

LSD (p B 0.05)
Period (P)

NS

3.70

5.98

Temperature (T)

NS

4.87

NS

P9T

5.02

6.86

4.78

123

58.42

Author's personal copy

Ind J Plant Physiol. (OctoberDecember 2014) 19(4):363367

365

germination over 8 h soaking irrespective of GA and

temperature treatments (Table 1). The interaction of temperature and soaking period on GP was signicant for all
GA level.
Germination capacity (GC) (%) of seeds treated with
gibberellic acid (75 and 150 ppm) was signicantly greater
with than control (Table 2). Several studies have shown
gibberellins to be an effective germination stimulator
(Roos and Bradbeer 1971; So 2005; Lavania et al. 2006).
GC of seeds soaked for 16 and 24 h was higher than 8 h
soaked seeds (Table 2). An increase in germination of
chilgoza pine seeds by increasing soaking periods was
probably attributed to enhancement of hydrolase (especially amylase) synthesis, as reported by Bewley and Black
(1994) and Chen et al. (2008). Effect of temperature on GC
was found to be non-signicant (Table 2), but the interaction of temperature and soaking period was signicant
for control and 150 ppm gibberellic acid level. GC was

signicant difference (LSD) at P \ 0.05 level was calculated. The analysis was done using SAS 9.3 software.
The effect of different gibberellic acid (GA) concentrations, viz., 75 and 150 ppm on signicantly enhanced
GP over control. Application of 75 ppm GA resulted in
higher seed germination than 150 ppm GA and lowest
germination (%) was registered in control (Table 1). The
GP in control was 40.94 %, which increased to 67.75 %
after 75 ppm gibberellic acid treatment to seeds. Greater
germination of seeds treated with 75 ppm GA was probably due to greater mobility of soluble sugars for radicle
emergence.
Temperature signicantly affected GP at 75 ppm gibberellic acid concentration level and highest value was
recorded at 15 C than 25 C. A further increase or
decrease in concentrations of gibberellic acid at both
temperatures resulted in decline in germination parameters.
Seeds soaking for 16 and 24 h resulted in greater seed

Table 2 Effect of gibberellic acid, soaking period and temperature on germination capacity (%) of chilgoza pine seeds
Gibberellic acid (ppm)
Control

75

150

Temperature (C) ?
Soaking period (h) ;

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

Grand mean

45.03

61.04

53.035

65.08

86.55

75.815

65.53

82.53

74.03

67.63

16

52.05

68.75

60.4

78.56

82.30

80.43

72.05

81.04

76.545

72.46

24

65.74

72.03

68.885

84.04

91.25

87.645

82.80

89.31

86.055

80.86

Mean

54.27

Grand mean

67.27

75.89

86.70

73.46

84.29

60.77

81.30

78.88

Period (P)

5.10

6.10

9.49

Temperature (T)

NS

NS

NS

P9T

10.47

NS

10.88

73.65

LSD (p B 0.05)

Table 3 Effect of gibberellic acid, soaking period and temperature on germination energy (%) of chilgoza pine
Gibberellic acid (ppm)
Control

75

150

Temperature (C) ?
Soaking period (h) ;

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

Grand mean

2.84

5.21

4.03

5.87

7.11

6.49

5.67

7.46

6.57

5.69

16

3.93

7.91

5.92

8.48

9.03

8.76

5.77

7.98

6.88

7.18

24

6.57

8.46

7.52

9.14

9.13

9.14

9.30

8.61

8.96

8.54

Mean

4.45

Grand mean

7.19
5.82

7.83

8.42
8.13

6.91

8.02
7.47

LSD (p B 0.05)
Period (P)

0.70

1.20

1.34

Temperature (T)

NS

NS

NS

P9T

0.70

0.82

0.69

7.14

123

Author's personal copy

366

Ind J Plant Physiol. (OctoberDecember 2014) 19(4):363367

Table 4 Effect of gibberellic acid, soaking period and temperature on germination value of chilgoza pine
Gibberellic acid (ppm)
Control

75

150

Temperature (C) ?
Soaking period (h) ;

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

25

15

Mean

Grand mean

18.00

29.33

23.67

31.67

41.17

36.42

30.50

38.50

34.50

31.53

16

32.00

41.17

36.59

40.67

44.00

42.34

33.00

40.00

36.50

38.47

24

35.17

43.67

39.42

43.00

48.17

45.59

40.15

46.83

43.49

42.83

Mean

28.39

38.06

38.45

44.45

34.55

41.78

Grand mean

33.22

41.45

38.16

Period (P)

8.01

5.21

6.55

Temperature (T)

NS

NS

NS

P9T

6.39

4.26

6.66

37.61

LSD (p B 0.05)

signicantly higher at 15 than 25 C at different soaking

period, because at high temperature growth potential of
embryo decreases and therefore, embryo cannot overcome
the existing barrier at high temperature as reported by
Barbour et al. (2001). Other reason could be its adaption to
cold temperate climate, which might have promoted germination at lower temperature.
Germination energy (GE) (%) of seeds treated with
gibberellic acid (75 and 150 ppm) was greater than control
(Table 3). High germination with 75 ppm gibberellic acid
treatment might be attributed to increase in gibberellins in
seeds during germination (Cetinbas and Koyuncu 2006;
Chen et al. 2008; Dhoran and Gudadhe 2012). Among
soaking periods, GE (%) differed signicantly between 8,
16 and 24 h (Table 3). It might also be due to initiation of
embryo growth, as a result of which more growth hormone
was synthesized by the growing embryo, which induced
hydrolase synthesis (Chen et al. 2008). Between two temperatures, GE (%) was higher at 15 C in comparison to
25 C, but it was non-signicant on GE. While, interaction
effect of temperature and soaking period was signicant for
all gibberellic acid concentrations.
Germination value (GV) of seeds treated with gibberellic acid was signicantly higher than control (Table 4).
Germination value was signicantly affected by 16 and
24 h soaking in comparison to 8 h soaking (Table 4). The
combined effect of 75 ppm GA and 24 h soaking resulted
in signicant increase in GV of seeds than other treatment
combinations. Other combinations of GA and soaking
periods showed lower GV in the species. Gibberellic acid
treated seeds began germinating sooner and completed
germination faster. It could probably be due to facilitation
of cytokinin penetration in the testa and neutralization of
inhibitors present in the embryo, thus enabling the embryo
to rupture the seed coats (Cetinbas and Koyuncu 2006).

123

Germination value (GV) did not vary signicantly with

temperature but the interaction effect of soaking periods
and temperature was found signicant, and higher GV was
observed in 24 h soaking at 15 C incubation temperature
(Table 4). Several other studies have shown that low
temperature (15 C) improved total germination and speed
of germination as compared to warm temperature
(2030 C) (Tanaka et al. 1991; Chien et al. 1998; Barbour
et al. 2001; Singh et al. 2010).
Conclusion
From the presents study it can be recommended that a
combination of 75 ppm gibberellic acid, 24 h soaking and
15 C incubation temperature are best for enhancing germination of Chilgoza pine.
Acknowledgments Authors wish to thank the Associate Director,
Regional Horticulture research station, Sharboo, Reckong Peo, for his
constant encouragement and help during the study period. Author
would also like to thank Kesar Chand, eld assistant and Brig. Mohan
Negi, Junior research fellow for the help during eld survey.

References
Barbour, J., Holston, K., Eckhart, R., & Parresol, B. R. (2001).
Temperature effect on long leaf pine seed germination at
container nursery. USDA Forest service, 2035 pp.
Bewley, J. D., & Black, M. (1994). Seeds: Physiology of development
and germination. New York: Plenum.
Bhattacharrya, A., Lamarche, V. C., & Telewski, F. W. (1988).
Dendrochronological reconnaissance of the conifers of northwest
India. Tree Ring Bulletin, 48, 2130.
Cetinbas, M., & Koyuncu, F. (2006). Improving germination
responses of three congeneric cactus germination of Prunusavium L. seeds by gibberellic acid, potassium nitrate and thiourea.rarity. Horticultural Science, 3, 119123.

Author's personal copy

Ind J Plant Physiol. (OctoberDecember 2014) 19(4):363367
Chen, S. Y., Kuo, S. R., & Chien, C. T. (2008). Roles of gibberellins
and abscisic acid in dormancy and germination of red bayberry
(Myricarubra) seeds. Tree Physiology, 28(9), 14311439.
Chien, C., Hung, K. L., & Tsanpiao, L. (1998). Change in ultra
structure and abscisic acid level, and response to applied
gibberellins in Taxus mairei seeds treated with warm and cold
stratication. Annals of Botany, 81(1), 4147.
Czabator, F. J. (1962). Germination value: An index of combining
speed and completeness of pine seed germination. Forest
Science, 8, 386396.
Daniel, L. M. V., & Aldicir, S. (2006). Principles of natural
regeneration of tropical dry forests for restoration. Restoration
Ecology, 14(1), 1120.
Dhoran, V. S., & Gudadhe, S. P. (2012). Effect of plant growth
regulators on seed germination and seedling vigour in Asparagus
sprengeri Rege lin. International Research Journal of Biological
Sciences, 1(7), 610.
Holl, K. D. (1999). Factors limiting tropical rain forest regeneration in
abandoned pasture: Seed rain, seed Germination, microclimate,
and soil. Biotropica, 31(2), 229242.
Hossain, M. A., Aren, M. K., Khan, B. M., & Rahman, M. A.
(2005). Effects of seed treatments on germination and seedling
growth attributes of Horitaki (Terminalia chebula Retz.) in the
nursery. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological
Sciences, 1(2), 135141.
Kumar, P. (1986). Studies on phenotypic variations in natural stands
of Pinus gerardiana Wall. In Kinnaur, H.P. M.Sc. Dissertation
submitted to Dept. of Forestry, Dr. YSP UHF, Nauni-Solan, H.
P., 2040 pp.
Kumar, R., Shamet, G. S., Avasthe, R. K., & Singh, C. (2013).
Ecology of chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana Wall) in dry
temperate forests of North West Himalaya. Ecology, environment and conservation, 19(4), 10631066.
Lavania, S. K., Singh, R. P., & Singh, V. (2006). Effect of gibberellic
acid and pH on seed germination in blue pine (Pinus wallichiana). The Indian Forester, 132(8), 10241028.
Li, L., Zhang, X., Michael, R., Li, X., & He, X. (2006). Responses of
germination and radicle growth of two Populus species to water
potential and salinity. Forestry Studies in China, 8(1), 1015.

367
Luna, R. K. (2008). Plantations forestry in India (pp. 920922).
Dehradun: International book distributors.
Malik, A. R., & Shamet, G. S. (2008). Germination and biochemical
changes in the seeds of chilgoza pine (Pinus gerardiana Wall.)
by stratication: An endangered conifer species of the Northwest Himalaya. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 13,
278283.
Monica, Ruiz B., Susana, P., & Parera, C. A. (2012). Germination
response of three Argentinian Prosopis species to osmotic
priming. International Research Journal of Plant Science, 3(9),
200207.
Peters, P. (2000). Tetrazolium testing handbook. Contribution No. 29.
The hand book on seed testing. Prepared by tetrazolium
subcommittee of the association of ofcial seed analysis. Part
2. Lincoln, Nebraska.
Roos, J. D., & Bradbeer, J. W. (1971). Studies in seed dormancy. The
content of endogenous gibberellins in seeds of Corylus avellana
L. Physiology Plantarum, 100, 288302.
Sehgal, R. N., & Chauhan, V. (1989). Pinus gerardiana the
threatened pine of India; life support species, biological diversity
and genetic resources news. Commonwealth Science Council,
45p.
Singh, K. K., Bhusan, G., Rai, L. K., & Nepal, L. H. (2010). The
Inuence of temperature, light and pre-treatment on the seed
germination of critically endangered Sikkim Himalayan rhododendron (R. niveum Hook f.). Journal of American Science, 6(8),
173177.
So, P. A. (2005). Standardization of nursery technology of Cedrus
deodara. Ph.D. Thesis. Dr YSP UHE, Nauni-Solan, (H.P.), 176
p.
Sosa, L., Llanes, A., Reinoso, H., Reginato, M., & Luna, V. (2005).
Osmotic and specic ion effects on the germination of Prosopis
strombulifera. Annals of Botany, 96, 261267.
Tanaka, Y., Brotherton, P. J., Dobkowski, A., & Camfron, P. C.
(1991). Germination of stratied and non-stratied seeds of red
alder at two germination temperatures. New Forests, 5, 6775.

123

(U.K.)

Vo l. 9(46), p p . 3411-3417, 13 No ve mb e r, 2014

DO I: 10.5897/ AJAR2013.8378
Artic le Numb e r:63F68EA48516
ISSN 1991-637X
C o p yrig ht 2014
Autho r(s) re ta in the c o p yrig ht o f this a rtic le
http :/ / www.a c a d e mic jo urna ls.o rg / AJAR

African Journal of Agricultural

Research

Full Length Research Paper

Technical efficiency of fenugreek production in the

semi arid region of Rajasthan, India: A stochastic
frontier approach
S. Kumar1*, A. Raizada1, H. Biswas1 and R. Kumar2
1

Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and Training Institute Research Centre Bellary (KA)-583104, India.
2
Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and Training Institute (UK)-248195, India.
Received 12 December, 2013; Accepted 10 October, 2014

This paper examines the technical efficiency of fenugreek production in Rajasthan and also identifies
key variables affecting technical efficiency using primary data collected from 120 randomly selected
fenugreek cultivating farmers by applying a stochastic frontier analysis (SFA). The results obtained in
an empirical model indicated that mean technical efficiency of all categories of farmers was 70%. This
suggests that still there is scope for increasing the output by 30% with the same level of input uses.
Small farmers were found to be more efficient in terms of judicious and timely application of irrigation
and fertilizers as well as reaping more yields. Around 50% of the farmers attained a technical efficiency
more than 80% because of employing the uniform cultivation practices. The results of the technical
inefficiency effects model suggest that age, education and contact with extension agencies positively
influenced technical efficiency of fenugreek cultivation.
Key words: Cobb-Douglas production function, fenugreek cultivation, semi-arid region, stochastic frontier
analysis (SFA), technical efficiency.

INTRODUCTION
Seed spices constitute an important group of agricultural
commodities and play a significant role in our national
economy. Historically, India has always been recognized
as a land of spices. Major seed spices are coriander,
cumin, fennel and fenugreek (NRCSS, 2007). Among
these spices, fenugreek (Trigonella foenum graecum)
commonly known as methi, in Hindi has been used as a
culinary spice, a flavoring agent and as a medicinal plant
for centuries (Mathur and Choudhry, 2009). It is cultivated
abundantly in India and the country contributes around 70
to 80% of the worlds export share of fenugreek (Pruthi,
2001; Agarwal et al., 2001). Presently, Rajasthan,

Gujarat, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh are the leading

states for fenugreek production. Rajasthan accounts for
around 87% of the total area and 75% of the total
production of fenugreek in the country (Indiastat, 2012).
In spite of significant progress achieved during the last
two decades in seed spices production in India, the
average productivity of these crops is still low as
compared to the best yields at the national and global
level, indicating that there is a scope to enhance yields of
different seed spice crops and their quality. More
specifically, in case of fenugreek, the leading state in
productivity is Uttarakhand (6525 kg ha-1), followed by

*C o rre sp o nd ing a utho r. E-ma il: skd c swc rti@ g ma il.c o m, Fa x: 08392-242665.
Autho r(s) a g re e tha t this a rtic le re ma in p e rma ne ntly o p e n a c c e ss und e r the te rms o f the C re a tive C o mmo ns Attrib utio n
Lic e nse 4.0 Inte rna tio na l Lic e nse

3412

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Gujarat (2654 kg ha-1). However, in terms of productivity,

even after having the highest area under fenugreek in the
country, Rajasthan occupies the fourth rank with a
productivity of 1061 kg ha-1 only which is below the
national average (1239 kg ha-1). This is basically because
of a significant gap between actual and potential yield of
crop which is still grown by the traditional system of
cultivation (Singh and Singh, 2013). There is, therefore, a
need for minimizing the yield gap by enhancing the
technical efficiency of the producers. The motivation for
undertaking the study stemmed from the hypothesis that
there exists an immense scope for improving the
productivity of fenugreek production by technological
advancement or by enhancing the technical efficiency
that is, getting maximum yield from given level of inputs.
In this regard, it is necessary to quantify current levels of
technical efficiency so as to estimate losses in production
that could be attributed to inefficiencies in production
process due to differences in socio-economic
characteristics and management practices. There is a
plethora of empirical work on the efficiency of seed
spices production in India. This paper deals with
estimation of technical efficiency of fenugreek production
and also identifies the key variables determining
inefficiency. This study will contribute to the technical
efficiency literature, especially for spices in general and
seed spices in particular.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Data and sampling framework
The Sikar district of Rajasthan State, which is located in the semiarid part of the state was selected purposively for the study on the
account of being one of the leading districts in fenugreek production
in the state. Out of seven tehsils, two viz. Sikar and Sri Madhopur
were selected randomly and from each of them, two villages
chosen for the study. Finally, from all the four villages, 40 farmers
from each category that is, small, medium and large were selected.
Thus, the final data set encompasses a total of 120 observations.
The data was collected by personal interview of the selected
respondents using a pre-tested schedule designed particularly for
this study.

identify the difference between technical inefficiency and random

error (Admassie and Matambalya, 2002; Vu, 2003; Coelli et al.,
2005). On the other hand SFA is a parametric approach, where the
form of the production function is assumed to be known or is
estimated statistically. It also allows other parameters of the
production technology to be explored (Coelli, 1996a; Greene, 2003;
Coelli et al., 2005). The advantages of this approach are that
hypotheses can be tested with statistical rigour, and that
relationships between input and output follow known functional
forms. SFA enables the simultaneous estimation of technical
efficiency and a technical inefficiency effects model (Admassie and
Matambalya, 2002; Coelli et al., 2005). The technical efficiency of a
farm is a comparative measure of how well it actually processes
inputs to achieve its outputs, as compared to its maximum potential
for doing so, as represented by its production possibility frontier.
Thus, technical efficiency of the farm is its ability to transform
multiple resources into output. A farm is said to be technically
inefficient if it operates below the frontier. The coefficients of the
production frontier and technical inefficiency effects model can be
measured using the maximum likelihood method under the
(Coelli et al., 2005; Tran
assumption of a normal distribution for
et al., 2008). The appropriateness of the stochastic frontier
approach can be tested by calculating the value of the parameter
which contains a value between 0 and 1 and depends on two
variance parameters of the stochastic frontier function. This is
defined as follows (Battese and Corra, 1977; Coelli et al., 2005):

, where
and are variances of the noise
Where,
and inefficiency effects. If the value is close to zero deviations
from the frontier are attributed to noise, whereas a value close to
unity indicates that deviations are ascribed to technical inefficiency
(Coelli et al., 2005; Tran et al., 2008).
Model
A Cob-Douglas production function using the cross-sectional data
may be expressed as follows (Coelli 1996a):

, ,

Yield (kg ha-1),

Seed rate (kg ha-1),
(Man-days ha-1),
Human labour (hour ha-1),
1
),
DAP (kg ha-1a).

Machinery use
Urea (kg ha-

Technical inefficiency model

Analytical tool
The two most commonly used techniques for estimating a
production frontier and predicting maximum possible farm output
are data envelopment analysis (DEA) and stochastic frontier
analysis (SFA) (Coelli, 1996a, 1996b; Kontodimopoulos et al.,
2010). Stochastic production frontiers were first developed by
Aigner et al. (1977) and Meeusen and van den (1977). The
specification allows for a non-negative random component in the
error term to generate a measure of technical inefficiency, or the
ratio of actual to expected maximum output, given inputs and the
existing technology. DEA is a non-parametric approach that
involves the use of linear programming to construct a frontier. It
does not require assumptions concerning the form of the production
function (Coelli, 1996b). The best practice production function is
created empirically from observed input and output. It does not

=Age of the household head (years), = Education level of the

household head (average number of schooling years), = Family
size (number of family member who are more 14 and less than 60
years), =Farm size (ha) , = Dummy variable (1, if contact with
extension worker, otherwise zero),
= Dummy variable (1, if
resides at farm, otherwise zero).
The parameters of the stochastic frontier production function
model were estimated by the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)
method using FRONTIER Version 4.1 (Coelli, 1996a).

Hypothesis tests
The estimation of a stochastic frontier production function can be
used to test the validation of three hypotheses as follows: (1)

Kumar et al.

3413

Table 1. Summary statistics of variables of stochastic frontier product (per ha).

Variable

Units

Output
Human labour
Machine use
Irrigation
Seed
Urea
DAP

kg
Man-days
hour
hour
kg
kg
kg

Small

Medium

Large

Overall

mean

SD

mean

SD

mean

SD

mean

SD

1888
70.52
23.81
69.74
26.04
38.84
29.98

7.75
11.04
19.29
7.92
10.05
11.35
7.67

1560
67.54
21.33
48.74
28.84
26.78
27.99

7.87
12.36
3.00
22.19
9.10
9.35
8.7

1272
59.70
20.95
43.05
22.66
25.71
26.02

6.67
10.12
3.42
8.69
4.01
9.27
8.41

1576
65.97
22.04
53.84
25.87
30.44
28.00

7.81
12.03
11.46
18.6
8.5
10.66
8.36

Source: field survey.

adequacy of the Cobb-Douglas production functional form; (2)

absence of technical inefficiency effects; and (3) insignificance of
joint inefficiency variables. Formal hypotheses tests associated with
the stochastic production function and technical inefficiency effects
models are presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Three
hypothesis tests are conducted by using the generalised likelihoodratio test (LR test), which can be defined as (Coelli et al., 2005;
Tran et al., 2008; Amornkitvikai and Harvie, 2011):

Where, L
and
are the values of a log-likelihood function
for the frontier model under the null hypothesis
and the
alternative hypothesis
. The LR test statistic contains an
asymptotic chi-square (
) distribution with parameters equal to
the number of restricted parameters imposed under the null
hypothesis
, except hypotheses (2) and (3) which contain a
mixture of a chi-square ( ) distribution (Kodde and Palm, 1986).
Hypotheses (2) and (3) involve the restriction that is equal to zero
which defines a value on the boundary of the parameter space
(Coelli, 1996a). The paper estimates technical efficiency of
fenugreek farming in the arid zone of Rajasthan, with the following
hypotheses: The technical efficiency of fenugreek cultivating farms
is invariant to farm-size; and technical inefficiency is dominated by
random factors beyond the control of farmers.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The mean level of output and input usages are presented
in Table 1. The mean use of human labour, machinery
and irrigation use were 66 man-days, 22 and 54 h per ha,
respectively. Similarly, average amount of seed, urea and
DAP applied were 26, 30 and 28 kg per ha, respectively.
Highest level of output (1888 kg) was obtained at small
farms and declines with increasing in farm sizes with
average output of 1576 kg ha-1. Analysis of socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents revealed
that the average farm size of small, medium and large
farmer was to the extent of 1.17, 2.93 and 6.06 ha,
respectively with overall size of 3.36 ha in the study area.
The education level was observed to be 6.3 (Table 2).
Overall, around 60% of the farmers were in regular
contact with extension personnel or agency. Among
different categories, around 72% of the large farmers,
highest among the three, had contact with an extension

personnel or agency. About 37% of the farmers had their

residence at the farm itself (Dhani* - a local word which
means dwelling at the farm).

Testing hypotheses
The first null hypothesis explores H0: =0, which
specifies that the technical inefficiency effects are not
present in the model that is, fenugreek producing farms
are perfectly efficient and have no room for efficiency
improvement. The resulting likelihood ratio test of 54.84
leads to rejection of the null hypotheses in favour of the
presence of inefficiency effects in the model at 5% level
of significance (Table 3). Thus, the traditional average
response function is not an adequate representation of
the data and inclusion of the technical inefficiency term is
a significant addition to the model. The second null
hypothesis is regarding the distribution assumption that
the inefficiency component of the random error term
follows. H0: = 0, specifies that a simpler half-normal
distribution is an adequate representation of the data,
given the specifications of the generalized truncatednormal distribution. The test statistic of 6.19 leads to
rejection of the null hypothesis at 1% level of significance
and therefore truncated normal distribution is more
appropriate for the fenugreek producing farmers. The
third
null
hypothesis
which
was
tested
is;
H 0 : 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 implying that the
farm-level technical inefficiencies are not affected by the
farm-oriented variables included in the inefficiency model.
This hypothesis is also rejected, implying the variables
present in the inefficiency model have collectively
significant contribution in explaining technical inefficiency
effects. However, it has expected sign that is, negative,
but it was statistically insignificant. The high value of
gamma (0.915) indicated the presence of inefficiency in
the production of crop. This significance higher value of
gamma indicates the appropriateness of applying SFA
model. If the coefficient of gamma was not significant, an
OLS function would have been sufficient, as the

3414

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Table 2. Socio-economic variables of the sample farmers.

Particulars
Age
Education
Extension
Family size
Farm size
Residence

Units
Number of years
Average number of schooling years
% farm having contact to extension personnel/agency
Number of working persons in family
ha
% farmers living at farm

Small

Medium

Large

Overall

46.5
5.6
53
4.00
1.17
46

48.5
5.6
56
5.00
2.93
30

48.7
7.6
72
4.00
6.06
34

47.9
6.3
60
4.00
3.36
37

Source: field survey.

Table 3. Different hypotheses, respective decisions and their implications.

Null hypothesis

Test statistic

Decision

H o : =0

54.84**

Rejected

Ho : 0

6.19***

Rejected

Assume truncated normal distribution

251.90***

Rejected

Include
joint
variables

H 0 : 1 2 3 4 5 6 0

component technical inefficiency is small (Battese and

Coelli, 1995). About 92% of the difference between the
observed and the frontier value productivity was due to
the presence of inefficiency, mainly through the nonjudicious use of resources, which was under the control
of sample farmers.

Parameter estimates of stochastic production frontier

The maximum likelihood estimates of stochastic
production frontier for Cobb-Douglas form under
truncated-normal distribution of ui have been presented in
Table 4. The variables having positive and significant
coefficients were irrigation, DAP and urea use. This
implies that there is potential for increasing fenugreek
production by raising the quantity of some inputs.
Irrigation, particularly, is an important input which
enhances the fertilizer use efficiency. More precisely, one
per cent increase in the use of irrigation, urea and DAP
will result into 0.14, 0.01 and 0.26% increase in the
output.
Thus, it seems that irrigation-fertilizer interaction has a
positive impact on the yield. The variable seed was
observed to be with a negative coefficient (but statistically
insignificant) which shows that seeds are being overutilized. The summation of the coefficients is less than
one which indicates that at present, in general, farmers
were observed to be working at decreasing returns to
scale which amounts to saying that use of some inputs
exceeded scale efficient level of quantities for the existing
technology.

Implication
Use stochastic frontier model instead of
ordinary least square model

inefficiency

determining

Determinants of inefficiency
Age of the farmer exhibited a negative coefficient which is
significant at 1% level (Table 4). This implies that with an
increase in age the technical inefficiency declines. The
results of this study support the findings of Bravo-Ureta
and Pinheiro (1997); Abdulai and Eberlin (2001) and
Mondal et al. (2012). It further reveals that experienced
farmers are relatively more efficient or had a better
understanding of resource uses with respect to amount
and combination of inputs along with timing of their
application. Education also was found to have a negative
effect on the technical inefficiency which means
schooling has a positive bearing on the technical
efficiency, since education enhances the decision making
capability and understating about the technical know-how
(Kaura et al, 2010). The education not only helps in better
crop management decisions but also facilitate in availing
better agricultural related services (Tilak, 1993). Similarly,
contact with an extension person/agency had a positive
impact on the technical efficiency and farmers get to
know about the suitable variety, pest and disease control
measures and agronomic practices etc. Coefficient
associated with the farm size had a positive sign which
shows that large farms are technically inefficient than
their smaller counterparts. This is mainly attributed to
non-uniform and insufficient application of irrigation water
given the same duration of electricity supply to farms.
Therefore, large farmers with a single tube-well are
forced to prioritize irrigation to wheat, which occupies a
large area in cropping pattern of large farmers as
compared to smaller farms. Therefore, timely availability

Kumar et al.

3415

Table 4. Maximum likelihood estimates of stochastic frontier model.

Parameter
Stochastic production frontier
Intercept
Seed
Human labour
Irrigation
Machinery use
Urea
DAP

Coefficient

Standard error

1.203
-0.046
0.051
0.137**
0.041
0.091*
0.261***

0.349
0.043
0.063
0.056
0.043
0.055
0.050

Inefficiency effects
Intercept
Age
Education
Extension contact
Family size
Farm size
Residence status

1.197
-0.202***
-0.009*
-0.215***
0.199***
0.007*
-0.007

0.346
0.031
0.005
0.020
0.118
0.013
0.013

Variance parameter
Sigma-squared
Gamma

0.064**
0.915***

0.013
0.022

***, ** and * indicate the level of significance at 1, 5 and 10%.

Table 5. Descriptive statistics of technical efficiency.

Particular
Mean
Standard deviation
Minimum
Maximum

Small
0.78
0.28
0.17
0.98

Medium
0.69
0.30
0.17
0.98

Large
0.63
0.26
0.15
0.99

Overall
0.70
0.28
0.15
0.99

The null hypothesis, H 0 : X s X m X l , which was rejected at 5% level of significance. This null
hypothesis suggests that mean technical efficiency scores are same for all farm categories. X s , X m
and X stand for the mean technical efficiency scores for small, medium and large farmers,
l

respectively.

of water also provides incentive, especially to smaller

farms, to apply fertilizers for fenugreek production, which
in turn results in higher yield/ higher technical efficiency.
In case of variable residence at farm, it was expected
that farmer dwelling in a Dhani would be more efficient as
they can start their farm work early in the morning and
also can do the same late in the evening, since the
farmers residing in village have to travel to their farm
every day.

78, 69 and 63% for the small, medium and large farmers,
respectively (Table 5). The mean technical efficiency
scores were also different from each other at five percent
level of significance. The overall average technical efficiency
score was found to be 70% in the study area. This shows
that there still exists a scope for increasing the output by

30% with the same levels of input. The minimum and

maximum technical efficiency score were 15 and 99%,
respectively.
Table 6 presents the distribution of farmers in different

Mean technical efficiency and frequency distribution

of farmers

groups of technical efficiency ranges. Overall, in the region,

around 52% fall in the higher efficiency range which
indicates that farmers are following uniform practices for

The mean technical efficiency score was estimated to be

fenugreek cultivation. Further, about 72.5, 50.0 and

32.5% of small, medium and large farmers, respectively

3416

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Table 6. Distribution of farmers in different ranges of technical efficiencies (% farmers).

Particular
0-20
20-40
40-60
60-80
>80
Total
The null hypothesis, H 0

Small
5.0
17.5
2.5
2.5
72.5
100

: F(S)=F(M)=F(L),

Medium
12.5
12.5
10.0
15.0
50.0
100

Large
10.0
17.5
20.0
20.0
32.5
100

Overall
9.2
15.8
10.8
12.5
51.7
100.0

which was rejected at 5% level of significance. This null hypothesis suggests that

frequency distribution of all the farm categories is same. F(S), F (M) and F (L) stand for the frequency distribution of farmers
belonging small, medium and large farmers.

were observed to be in a more than 80% of technical

efficiency range. The F-test showed that the distribution
of farmers in defined ranges is significantly different
among one another at five percent level of significance.

Conclusions
The average technical efficiency in fenugreek production
was observed to be 70%. This implies that there is scope
for increasing the output by 30% with the same level of
input uses. Further, smaller farmers were observed to be
more efficient than the larger famers. The higher
technical efficiency is mainly attributable to irrigation
which in turn enhances fertilizer use efficiency. In
general, farmers were found to be working at decreasing
returns to scale which implies that quantities of some
inputs exceeded scale efficient level of input uses as for
the existing technology. This provides scope for optimal
use of some inputs that would lead towards minimizing
the cost of production and hence enhance efficiency.
Experienced, educated farmers and those in contact with
extension worker/agency are more efficient. There is a
need to speed up extension programmes for the better
production and use of scarce inputs. Since irrigation has
a positive impact on the production, use of microirrigation, since the state is facing ever depleting level of
groundwater, will ensure better utilization of scarce
groundwater resources as well as sustainable production
of crop.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have not declared any conflict of interest.
REFERENCES

Abdulai A, Eberlin R (2001). Technical efficiency during economic

reform in Nicaragua: Evidence from farm household survey data.
Econ.
Syst.
25(2):113-125.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S09393625(01)00010-3

Admassie A, Matambalya F (2002). Technical efficiency of small-and

medium-scale enterprises: evidence from a survey of enterprises in
Tanzania. Eastern Afr. Soc. Sci. Res. Rev. 18(2):1-29.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/eas.2002.0007
Agarwal S, Sastry EVD, Sharma RK (2001). Seed spices production,
quality, export. Jaipur: Pointer Publishers.
Aigner DJ, Lovell CAK, Schmidt P (1977). Formation and estimation of
stochastic frontier production function models. J. Econ. 6:21-37.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(77)90052-5
Amornkitvikai Y, Harvie C (2011). Finance, ownership, executive
remuneration, and technical efficiency: a stochastic frontier analysis
(SFA) of Thai listed manufacturing enterprises. Austr. Acc. Bus.
Finan. J. 5(1):35-55.
Battese GE, Coelli TJ (1995). A model for technical inefficiency effects
in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Empir.
Econ. 20:325-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01205442
Battese GE, Corra GS (1977). Estimation of a production frontier model:
with application to the pastoral zone of eastern australia. Austr. J.
Agric.
Econ.
2:169-179.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.14678489.1977.tb00204.x
Bravo-Ureta BE, Pinheiro AE (1997) Technical, economic, and
allocative efficiency in peasant farming: evidence from the Dominican
Republic.
Develop.
Econ.
35(1):48-67
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1049.1997.tb01186.x
Coelli TJ (1996a). A Guide to FRONTIER Version 4.1: a computer
program for stochastic frontier production and cost function
estimation, Working paper 96/07, Centre for Efficiency and
Productivity Analysis, Armidale, University of New England.
Coelli TJ (1996b). A Guide to DEAP Version 2.1: a data envelopment
analysis (Computer) Program, Working paper 96/08, Centre for
Efficiency and Productivity Analysis, Armidale, University of New
England.
Coelli TJ, Rao DSP, O'Donnell CJ, Battese GE (2005). An introduction
to efficiency and productivity analysis, 2nd edn. Springer, New York.
Greene W (2003). Simulated likelihood estimation of the normal-gamma
stochastic frontier function. J. Prod. Anal. 19:179-190.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022853416499
Indiastat
(2012)
http://www.indiastat.com/agriculture/2/spices/262/fenugreek/20663/st
ats.aspx
Kaura M, Mahal AK, Sekhon MK, Kingra HS (2010). Technical
Efficiency of Wheat Production in Punjab: A Regional Analysis. Agric.
Econ. Res. Rev. 23:173-179
Kodde DA, Palm FC (1986). Wald criteria for jointly testing equality and
inequality restrictions. Econometrica, 54(5):1243-1248.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1912331
Kontodimopoulos N, Papathanasiou ND, Flokou A, Tountas Y, Niakas D
(2010). The impact of non-discretionary factors on DEA and SFA
technical efficiency differences. J. Med. Syst.
Mathur P, Choudhry M (2009). Consumption pattern of fenugreek seeds
in Rajasthani families. J. Hum Ecol. 25(1):9-12.
Meeusen WJ, van den B (1977). Efficiency estimation from Cobb-

Kumar et al.

Douglas production functions with composed error. Int. Econ. Rev.

18:435-444. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2525757
Mondal B, Singh A, Jha GK (2012) Impact of watershed development
programmes on farm-specific technical efficiency: A study in
Bundelkhand region of Madhya Pradesh Agric. Econ. Res. Rev.
25(2):299-308.
Pruthi JJ (2001). Minor spices and condiments crop management and
post harvest technology. Directorate of Information and Publication of
Agriculture. New Delhi: ICAR.
Singh R, Singh B (2013). Precision farming technologies for vegetables
and seed spices crops for enhancing yield and quality, paper
presented at National Symposium on Abiotic and Biotic Stress
Management in Vegetable Crops, Indian Society of Vegetable
Science January, 10.

3417

Tilak TBG (1993). Education and agricultural productivity in Asia: A

review. Indian J. Agric. Econ. 48(2):187-200.
Tran TB, Grafton RQ, Kompas T (2008). Firm efficiency in a transitional
economy: Evidence from Vietnam. Asian Econ. J. 22:(1)47-66.
Vu QN (2003). Technical efficiency of industrial state-owned enterprises
in vietnam. Asian. Econ. J. 17(1):87-101.

Int. J. Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 7, Nos. 1/2, 2014

15

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

Harsh Mehta*, Mohd. Ayoub Dar, Raj Kumar
and O.P. Chaturvedi
Division of Plant Sciences,
Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and
Training Institute,
218 Kaulagarh Road, Dehradun 248195 Uttarakhand, India
E-mail: harshmehta41ddn@gmail.com
E-mail: ayoubfri9@gmail.com
E-mail: rajcswcrti@gmail.com
E-mail: chaturvediopc@gmail.com
*Corresponding author
Abstract: The study was conducted to monitor the trend of patenting activity in
agriculture sector during 2005 to 2012 in India based on 3,718 published patent
applications and 1,041 granted patents of the Indian Patent Office weblink,
IPAIRS Version 2.0. There was gradual increase in patenting activity during
2005 to 2012 in different sectors of agriculture. Maximum percentage of patent
applications were filed in biocides, pest repellants or attractants and plant
growth regulators (60%), followed by new plants or processes for obtaining
them (9.35%), animal husbandry, silk rearing or breeding new animal breeds
(7.48%) and horticulture, cultivation, forestry (5.91%). Diversification in
Indian agriculture was also noticeable during the period 2005 to 2012 as dairy
products and animal husbandry registered 19.0 and 5.78 times increase in
patenting activity over the period 19952004 besides development of new
plants and processes (10.87 times) and horticulture and cultivation forestry
rising (5.87 times). Public sector organisations and companies sector must
forge public-private partnerships to address the R&D gaps and generate
technologies at affordable prices in the field of agriculture to the stakeholders
in the developing countries in the backdrop of product patent regime.
Keywords: agriculture; India; patent activity; patent analysis; product
patenting; assignees.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Mehta, H., Dar, M.A.,
Kumar, R. and Chaturvedi, O.P. (2014) Agricultural patent analysis during
20052012 in India, Int. J. Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 7,
Nos. 1/2, pp.1532.
Biographical notes: Harsh Mehta is Principal Scientist (Plant Breeding and
Genetics) and Nodal Officer of IPR protection, commercialisation and transfer
of technology at the Central Soil and Water Conservation Research and
Training Institute at the Dehradun. He was awarded Sriniwas Ramanujam
Award of the Indian Society of Genetics and Plant Breeding for the Biermium
19911993. He also obtained commonwealth fellowship to pursue
postdoctoral studies on Molecular tagging of leaf rust resistant gene Lr 28 in
bread wheat at the John Inns Centre, Norwich, UK during 19981999.
Currently, he is working on agroforestry and genetic improvement of
multipurpose trees (MPTs) for the conservation of natural resources. He has
more than 60 publications in refereed national and international journals of

Copyright 2014 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

16

H. Mehta et al.
repute, besides book chapters, review papers, reports and 40 symposia
abstracts. He has handled six institute and externally funded projects on tree
improvement, in vitro micropropagation of MPTs (DBT funded), multi location
evaluation of MPTs, tree x crop interactions and traditional minor millet-based
cropping systems.
Mohd. Ayoub Dar has done PhD in Forestry from Forest Research Institute
University, Dehradun (2012) and a post-graduate diploma in IPR from the
Indira Gandhi National Open University, New Delhi India (2013). Currently,
he is working as a Research Associate under scheme Intellectual Property
Management and Transfer/Commercialization of Agricultural Technology
Scheme [up-scaling of existing component, i.e., intellectual property rights
(IPR)] under ICAR headquarters scheme on Management and Information
Services Division (Plant Sciences) at the CSWCRTI, Dehradun since 2010. He
has more than four years of research experience in the area of forestry,
agroforestry and intellectual property rights assets. He has more than 16
publications in refereed journals of national.
Raj Kumar currently is a Scientist at the CSWCRTI, Dehradun. His primary
research is ecology, agriculture and other natural resource projects. His recent
research activities involve quality planting material production, agroforestry,
soil conservation and watershed management. His efforts in tree improvement
involve collection, propagation and multiplication of quality planting of
different tree species of Himalaya. He obtained his PhD in Forestry from
Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Solan,
Himachal Pradesh, India.
O.P. Chaturvedi currently he is the Head of Division (Plant Sciences) at the
CSWCRTI, Dehradun since 2009. He is having more than 25 years of teaching
and research experiences in the area of forestry, agroforestry, quality plant
production, growth and production modelling of trees, wasteland reclamation
and development, watershed management and development. He is recipient of
many prestigious awards. To site a few are: Forestry Teacher Education Award,
UK, Overseas Technical Trainers Award, UK, Personal Academic promotion
Award, Dr. K.G. Tejwani Award in Agroforestry, Recognition Award of
NAAS and Fellowship Award of NIE, RMSI and NAAS. He is a member of
several national and state level committees and has more than 200 publications
in refereed journals of national and international repute including books,
bulletins, manuals, book chapters, reports, review papers, etc., to his credit.

Introduction

Agriculture in developing countries is now evolving into a commercial venture and a

knowledge-based industry from an occupation of subsistence, therefore, there is need to
improve to quality of research and faster technology transfer (ICAR, 2006). Integral to
this development is Sustainability which has been defined by the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) (2013) as the management and conservation of the natural resource
base, and the orientation of technological and institutional changes in such a manner as to
ensure the attainment and continued satisfaction of human needs for present and future
generations. Sustainable agriculture includes practices such as crop diversification,
biological pest control, and genetic improvements in crops to resist pests, diseases, and

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

17

drought and to use nutrients more efficiently. In the light of climate change and its
ecological implications, there is need to generate locally and nationally relevant databases
and technologies in agriculture (Chopra, 2013). Paroda (2003) emphasised the systems
approach for sustained productivity and environment safety in terms of integrated
nutrient management, integrated pest management and transfer for technologies. Building
up of complementarities among agriculture, biodiversity and conservation of genetic
resources for sound and sustainable research and development (R&D), land use and
breeding approaches has been highlighted in recent decades (Sharma and Rana, 2013).
Worlds rapid transition to globalisation, spurred by the international integration of
production of quality goods and services, fast flow of technology and information giant
leap of communications, protectionist trade policies and strident calls for fair trade are
going to impact the agricultural economy of the developing countries (Dutfield, 2005).
In the past two decades, intellectual property rights (IPRs) are the focal point of
discussions on public health, food security, education, trade, environment, traditional
knowledge, biotechnology, the internet and media industries. Agricultural policy in
different countries therefore, seeks to locate IPRs within the framework of agricultural
policy and, and the framework of sustainable agriculture (Janis, 2001).
The TRIPS agreement and regulations have resulted in far reaching impact on the
direction of R&D in agriculture and opened up vast market for this sector. The role of
IPRs in strengthening knowledge-based global economy is increasing after the agreement
on TRIPS and being used as a driving force for both public and private institutions to
boost performance levels and maintain a distinct competitive edge (Mehta, 2010; Heisey
et al., 2006).
Payumo et al. (2012) studied the importance of strengthened IPRs policies on
agricultural development and observed that strengthened IPR systems and agricultural
gross domestic product were linked for the developed and developing countries. The
WTO regime in India has led to a trend wherein users-including farmers-now are willing
to pay for the value added technology including new varieties and germplasm. IPRs in
relation to agriculture in India have been used sparingly as Patent Act of 1970 and its
amendments with effect from 5.5.2006 have precluded inventions in method of
agriculture or horticulture as non-patentable (Chapter II, 3 h) [The Patent Act (Act
No. 39 of 1970), 1970].

1.1 Product patent regime (2005): chemicals and food sectors

The TRIPS agreement (Article) had allowed a total transitional period of ten years
(January 1995December 2004) to the developing country members for extending
product patent protection in respective territory to the areas of technology that were not
patentable earlier. During this transition period, the member countries provided a mail
box arrangement for receiving patent applications filed by foreign nationals for such
product. A number of issues were raised for product patent regime in agricultural sector
for the developing countries (Balaji, 2003) Further, worldwide patent distributions and
trends showed that inventions in agricultural biotechnology increased sharply in 2000
especially from year 2005 (Wang, 2011). The present study therefore, is an attempt to
analyse patents granted and patenting activities in the field of agriculture in India from
January 2005, (when India entered into the product patent regime) to 2012. Analysis of
patenting activity gives a good account of trends in Intellectual Property Generation,

18

H. Mehta et al.

amount of innovations and technological developments taking place in different sectors

of agriculture.

1.1.1 Objectives
The objectives of the study are to:

To observe the trend of patenting activities in different areas of agriculture in India

after the post TRIPS era from 1995 to 2012 in India.

Examine the growth of Indian patenting activity in agriculture (especially chemicals

and food sectors) in the backdrop of product patent regime invoked in 2005.

Collection of patent data and methodology

The database of 3,718 published applications and 1,041 granted patents

of the Indian Patent Office Weblink (http://ipindia.nic.in/ipirsi/patentsearch.htm),
http://www.patentoffice.nic.in (January 1, 2013), IPAIRS Version 2.0 during 20052012
was investigated. International patent classification (IPC) (http://www.wips.int/
classificatons/en/ipc/intro.htm) is used primarily in all countries for classifying patent
specifications. The search by IPC code A01 for agriculture was made for all Indian
patents issued since January 1, 1995 to December 31, 2012.
IPC established by the Strasbourg Agreement 1971 provided a hierarchical system of
language independent symbols for the classification of patents and utility models to the
different areas of technology to which they pertain. IPC code A01 is quite useful in
classifying patent applications under the different agricultural fields. From the assignee
wise statistics, the percentage of institutions, company and individuals was worked out.

Results and analysis

Agricultural patenting activity in respect of published applications from 2005 to 2012 in

different agricultural sectors is presented in Table 1. The total patenting activity has
increased from 2005 to 2010, though some decline was observed in 2011. Likewise
agricultural patenting activity in respect of published application increased from 248 in
the year 2005 to 703 in 2010. The percentage of agricultural patenting was 1.49% in 2005
which increased over years to 2.88% (Table 1).
The percentage of total granted patents in agriculture was only 0.671 in 20052006,
while in 20082009 it was 2.135. Other growing fields of inventions like
computer/electronics, mechanical and chemical technology have registered as high as
9,594, 7,782 and 6,911 patents respectively out of 39,400 patents granted in all fields in
the year 20102011 (Anonymous, 2011). The total number of granted patents in
20052006 was 4,320 which rose to 16,061 in 20082009 (Table 2), while the number of
patent applications filed in 20052006 was 24,505 which increased to 34,287 in
20092010, primarily due to the leading fields of engineering and computers, chemicals
and biotechnology (Nair et al., 2012).

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

19

Gupta et al. (2011) have also shown that drug and pharmaceutical sector, followed by
computers, electronics and chemicals were the major sectors followed by molecular
biology and agriculture, in which patents have been issued to Indians by the USPTO.
Kiran (2009) in their comparative study in the pre and post TRIPS period have
concluded that the new patent regime has encouraged innovation and greater investment
in R&D. Gupta et al. (2011) reported that patents granted to Indians at US Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) increased significantly (trebling in every five years block)
after 1995 to 2010. The distribution of 6,729 patents granted to Indians in USPTO
indicated that the role of public sector in India was most pronounced and the rate of
patent filling and grant has increased significantly since 1995.
Table 1
Year

Year wise patenting activity in agriculture vis--vis total patenting scenario

Total patenting activity

Agricultural patenting activity

Percentage of
agricultural patenting
activity

2005

16,547

248

1.49

2006

22,022

440

2.0

2007

28,435

458

1.61

2008

34,356

553

1.61

2009

28,257

638

2.26

2010

31,308

703

2.24

2011

26,144

578

2.21

2012

3,467

100

2.88

190,536

3,718

1.951

8 years

Source: http://www.ipindia.nic.in
Table 2

Year wise total patents granted in India and the share of agricultural patents

Year
20052006

Total number of granted

patents

Total number of patents

in agriculture

Percentage of
agriculture related
patents

4,320

29

0.671

20062007

7,539

33

0.438

20072008

15,316

244

1.593

20082009

16,061

343

2.135

20092010

6,168

111

1.799

20102011

7,509

150

1.997

20112012

4,280

74

1.728

Total

61,193

984

1.611

Source: Annual Report 20102011 of the Office of the Controller General of

patents, designs, trade marks and geographical indication

20

H. Mehta et al.

3.1 Focus of patenting activity in agricultural research during 20052012

Agricultural sector encompasses wide range of subjects comprising soil working,
agricultural implements, dairy, animal husbandry and biocides. The new IPR regime in
India in 2005 has extended patent protection to drugs, food and chemical sectors besides
increasing the patent regime to 20 years.
During the period 20052012, 3,718 patent applications were filed in different sectors
of agriculture under study, out of which 2,229, (59.95%) belonged to the category of
preparation of biocides comprising insecticides, weedicides and fungicides, etc., (A01N)
(Table 3). In the first decade of post TRIPs era from 19952004, 482 applications under
(A01N) were filed out of 728 patent applications (66.2%). It showed a decline of 6.4% on
comparative terms, however, in absolute terms it increased to 4.62 times (from 482 to
2229) during 20052012 (Figure 1), in comparison to 19952004.
Figure 1

Patenting activity of filed applications from 1995 to 2012 in agriculture chemicals

(A01N)

Patenting activity in different areas of agriculture during the post TRIPs period from
1995 to 2004 and 2005 to 2012 is presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2

Patenting activity of filed applications from 1995 to 2012 in different areas of

agriculture

The second most active area of research in agriculture was New plants or processes for
obtaining them and plant reproduction (A01H). It showed an increase of 10.87 times
from the preceding decade of 19952004 (32 patent applications) to 338 patent
applications in 20052012. It comprised 9.09% of the total published patent applications
filed in the latter period. Animal husbandry, silk rearing or breeding animals, new breeds

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

21

(A01K) registered only 41 applications during 19952012 which rose to 278 during
20052012 leading to 5.78 times increase. Horticulture, cultivation, forestry (A01G)
recorded only 32 applications during 19952004 which increased to 220 during
20052012 leading to 5.87 times increase. During this period the National Horticulture
Mission (NHM) was also launched in 20052006 by the Government of India to provide
a thrust to the development of horticulture in the country with an integrated approach
covering production, post-harvest management, processing and marketing.
The most rapid sectors of growth in agriculture were manufacture of dairy products
(A01J) which recorded spectacular rise in patenting activity from 6 to 120 (19 times)
during the period under study. This development coincides with time when the National
Dairy Development Board (NDDB) had drawn up an outline of a National Dairy Plan to
accelerate milk production in 2008.
Harvesting and mowing (A01D) area also registered the increase of 10.37 times
(Figure 2). Similarly, other sectors of agriculture viz., soil working in agriculture or
forestry, agricultural machines or implements A01B, processing of harvested produce for
storing A01F, planting, sowing, fertilising A01C, catching, trapping, apparatus for
destruction of noxious animals A01M, veterinary instruments, implements, tools and
methods A61D, medicinal preparation containing materials from plants A61K35/78, have
also shown rise in patenting activity from 19952004 to 20052012 to the extent of 5.08,
3.85, 3.83, 2.9, 2.78 and 0.36 times respectively in descending order (Figure 2).
Catching, trapping, apparatus for destruction of noxious animals (A01M),
manufacture of dairy products (A01J), harvesting and mowing (A01D), planting, sowing
and fertilisation (A01C), soil working in agriculture or forestry, agricultural machines or
implements (A01B), comprised 5.91, 4.06, 3.22, 2.44, 2.33% of patenting activity
respectively in descending order. A61K35/78 consisting of medicinal preparations
containing materials from plants recorded 1.53% of total published patent applications.
Processing of harvested produce and devices for storing (A01F) and veterinary
instruments, implements, tools and method (A61D) recorded an identical value of patent
publication activity of 0.91% (Table 3).
Table 3

Area wise patenting activity in agriculture of published applications from 20052012

as per IPC in Indian Patent Office
Year

Area

IPC code

200
5

200
6

200
7

200
8

200
9

201
0

201
1

201 Total
2

Soil working in
agriculture or
forestry, agricultural
machines or
implements

A01B

08

08

03

16

13

14

16

01

79

Planting, sowing,
fertilising

A01C

10

06

07

11

21

17

13

02

87

Harvesting, mowing

A01D

02

05

13

11

24

17

10

09

91

Processing of
harvested produce
for storing

A01F

04

05

06

03

04

08

02

02

34

22
Table 3

H. Mehta et al.
Area wise patenting activity in agriculture of published applications from 20052012
as per IPC in Indian Patent Office (continued)
Year

Area

IPC code

200
5

200
6

200
7

200
8

200
9

201
0

201
1

201 Total
2

Horticulture,
cultivation, forestry

A01G

11

26

25

32

39

40

38

09

220

New plants or
processes for
obtaining them plant
reproduction

A01H

12

40

52

57

49

59

65

04

338

Manufacture of dairy
products

A01J

04

03

11

29

52

12

120

Animal husbandry,
silk rearing or
breeding animals,
new breeds

A01K

22

20

27

33

37

93

41

278

Veterinary
instruments,
implements, tools
and methods

A61D

04

03

02

06

12

03

04

34

Catching, trapping,
apparatus for
destruction of
noxious animals

A01M

04

25

20

27

31

24

15

05

151

Biocides, pest
repellants or
attractants, plant
growth regulators

A01N

150

285

286

342

397

397

320

52

2,229

A61K35/78

14

14

17

07

01

02

02

57

248

440

458

554

639

703

578

101

3,718

Medicinal
preparation
containing materials
from plants
Total

3.2 Process/product patenting in different sectors of Indian agriculture

The number of patents granted in A01N during the period 2005 to 2012 was segregated
into process and product patents. It was revealed that that the number of product patents
was 544 in comparison to process patenting with 196 granted patents (1.77 times higher),
which was the impact of product patent regime ushered in India.
The number of granted patents for process and product patents obtained by the
foreign companies were higher than those of Indian companies starting from 2006 and
this trend was continuous till 2012 (Figure 4). The product patent number was higher
than the process patents 11 from 2006 to 2012. The highest number of product patents
140, 99, 82, 68, 40, 31 and 9 were granted in 2008, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2010 and
2006 respectively in descending order. Indian companies were far behind the foreign
companies in respect of granted product patents in the field of biocides. Product patents
for biocides, pest repellants or attractants, plant growth regulators (A01N) for Indian

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

23

companies were only marginally higher than the process patents. This reflects that the
domestic companies have to put in more efforts towards R&D for products if they have to
remain in competition with foreign companies in India.
Figure 3

Comparison of process and product patents in A01N during the product patent regime
from 20052012

Figure 4

Comparison of process and product patents in A01N from 20052012 obtained by

Indian and foreign companies (see online version for colours)

Figure 5

Comparative process and product patents of Indian companies from 20052012

(see online version for colours)

24

H. Mehta et al.

Comparison of number of process/product patents obtained by different Indian companies

(Figure 5) indicated that Indophil Chemical Limited, Mumbai obtained ten patents, out of
which eight were, product patents. The number of process and product patents filed by
United Phosphorus Ltd. Mumbai, and Godrej Agrovet Ltd. Mumbai were identical at five
and two respectively. There were 23 Indian companies registering one process and
product patent each in others category (Figure 5).
Figure 6

Comparison of process and product patents during the product patent regime from
20052012 in other sectors of agriculture (see online version for colours)

The fields of horticulture, cultivation, forestry (A01G), new plants or processes for
obtaining them plant reproduction (A01H) and medicinal preparation containing
materials from plants A61K35/78, new plants or processes for obtaining them plant
reproduction A01H, animal husbandry, silk rearing or breeding animals, new breeds
(A01K), processing of harvested produce for storing (A01F) and manufacture of dairy
products (A01J) recorded 34, 22, 17, 17 and 5 product patent respectively while the
number of process patents in these fields were 14, 18, 32, 3 and 1 respectively Figure 6.
The largest number of product patents during 20052012 was obtained in catching,
trapping, apparatus for destruction of noxious animals, A01M (48).

3.3 Trend analysis of agricultural patent activities in India

A01B: There has been an increase in the innovations in machinery in the pre harvest
and post harvest operations (Padmavati and Sengupta, 2011). In the field of
agricultural machines or implements and soil working in agriculture or forestry, the
number of published patent applications during the period 20052012 was 79,
Table 3. The number of applications was eight in 2005 and 2006 and increased up to
16 in 2008 and 2011. The number of granted patents was 16 (Table 4), wherein six
patents were granted in 20082009 only.

A01C: In the field of planting, sowing and fertilising, the number of published patent
applications were 87 during 2005 to 2012 (Table 3). In the year 2005, ten patent
applications were published, reaching as high as 21 published patent applications in

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

25

2009 and in subsequent years 2010 and 2011 the number was 17 and 13 respectively.
Thirty patents were granted in 2005 to 2012 (Table 4).

A01D: In the field of harvesting and mowing 91 patent applications were published
during the period 2005 to 2012. In the year 2005, only two patent applications were
published which reached as high as 24 published patent applications in the year
2009. The number decreased in subsequent years of 2010, 2011 and 2012 to 17, 10
and 9 respectively, Table 3. Only 17 patents were granted in the field from 2005 to
2012 (Table 4).

A01F: In the field of processing of harvested produce and devices for storing, the
number of published patent applications was 34 during 20052012, Table 3. The
highest number of eight published patent applications was recorded in 2010. The
number of granted patents was 17 wherein maximum number of ten patents was
granted in 20072008.

A01G: A total of 220 patent applications were filed in the area of horticulture,
cultivation and forestry between 2005 to 2012. In the year 2005, 11 patent
applications were filed which increased to 40 in 2010 with gradual increase over
years, however it decreased marginally to 38 in 2011. The total numbers of granted
patents during the period 20052012 were 47. The highest numbers of 16 patents
were granted in 20082009 while nine patents each were granted in the years
20072008 and 20102011. A gradual increase of patenting activity for horticulture,
cultivation and forestry could be attributed to the government support in these
critical areas. A NHM was launched in 20052006 as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme
to promote holistic growth of the horticulture sector through an area-based regionally
differentiated strategies and its success could be reflected in terms of patenting
activities in this sector.

A01H: In the field of new plants or processes for obtaining them and plant
reproduction, 338 patent applications were filed out of the database of 3,718 patent
applications (Table 3). In the year 2005, the number of published patent applications
was 12 which showed an increasing trend up to 2011 when it reached to the
maximum of 65, except 2009 (where it was 49).

A01J: In the year 2005, four patent applications were filed in Manufacture of dairy
products which increased markedly to nine (2008) and 29 (2010) and 52 in 2011.

A01K: In this field, 278 patent applications were filed. In the year 2005, the number
of applications was 22, which increased to 93 in 2010, however it decreased to 41 in
2011. The numbers of granted patents were 48 during the period. In the year
20072008 the number of granted patents was the highest at 15, while in the years
each 20082009 and 20102011, 12 patents were granted.
Maximum number of patents were granted to foreign companies (20), followed by
public sector Indian institutions (7), foreign institutes/universities and Indian
companies (four each) in descending order. The numbers of patents granted to
individuals were 13.

26

H. Mehta et al.

A01M: In the field of catching, trapping, apparatus for destruction of noxious weeds,
151 patent applications were filed during the period. In the year 2005, four patent
applications were filed, while in the years 2006 to 2010, the patent application
ranged from 20 to 30. It showed a slight decrease in 2011 with 15 patent
applications. The total number of patent granted were 51, out of which maximum
number of patents were granted in 20082009 (15) followed by 20072008 (10).

A01N: A total of 707 patents were granted during the period out of 1041 (68.01%).
An almost similar trend was reported in previous study from 19952004 where
60.24% of the total patents were in the area of biocides (Mittal and Singh, 2006).
Highest number of granted patents was 252, 176, 92, 70, 53, 37, and 20 in
20082009, 20072008, 20092010, 20102011 and 20122013 respectively.

A61K35178: In the field of medicinal preparations containing materials from plants,

the total number of published patent applications was 57, out of which 17 were
published in 2007 followed by 14 in 2005 and 2006 each. The number of granted
patents was 40, while the maximum number of patents was granted in
20082009 (15) followed by subsequent years in 20092010 (7), 20102011 (6) and
20112012 (5). This area of agriculture was dominated by the Indian companies.
Indian companies with 19 patents were at the top, followed by foreign companies
nine patents, 11 patents were awarded to individuals. One patent each was obtained
by:
1

Charak Pharma Private Limited, Mumbai.

Piramal Life Sciences Limited, Mumbai.

Indus Biotech Private Limited, Pune.

Advanced Enzyme Technologies Limited, Thane.

Laila Neutraceuticals, Vijayawada.

Venkatesware Ayurveda Nilayam Limited.

A61D: In the field of veterinary instruments, implements, tools and methods, the
numbers of published patent applications were 34 during 20052012. The highest
number of patent applications were published in 2009, 2008 and 2005 and 2011 (four
each) at 12, 6, 4 and 4 respectively. The number of granted patents was ten, wherein
maximum number of four patents was granted in 20082009.

Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in most active areas of agriculture:

Biocides pest repellants or attractants, plant growth regulators; new plants or
processes for obtaining them, plant reproduction; animal husbandry, silk rearing or
breeding animals, new breeds and catching, trapping, apparatus for destruction of
noxious animals were the most active areas, where patenting activity was
substantially ahead of other sectors. The assignee wise distribution of patents was
segregated into foreign companies, foreign institutes, Indian companies, Indian
public sector organisations and others (individuals).

A01G
A01H

A01J
A0IK

A61D

A01M

A01N

A61K 35/78

Horticulture, cultivation,
forestry

New plants or processes

for obtaining them plant
reproduction

Manufacture of dairy
products

Animal husbandry, silk

rearing or breeding
animals, new breeds

Veterinary instruments,
implements, tools and
methods

Catching, trapping,
apparatus for destruction
of noxious animals

Biocides, pest repellents or

attractants, plant growth
regulators

Medicinal preparation
containing materials from
plants

Total

A0ID
A01F

Processing of harvested
produce for storing

A0IC

Planting, sowing,
fertilising

Harvesting, mowing

A01B

IPC code

29

20052006

33

20

20062007

244

176

10

15

10

10

20072008

343

15

252

15

12

12

16

111

70

20092010

Year
20082009

150

92

12

13

20102011

74

53

20112012

57

37

2012

1,041

40

707

51

10

48

53

47

17

17

30

16

Total

Table 4

Soil working in agriculture

or forestry, agricultural
machines or implements

Area

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

27

Area wise granted patents in agriculture from 20052012 as per IPC in Indian Patent
Office

28

H. Mehta et al.

Figure 7

Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in biocides, pest repellants or attractants,

plant growth regulators A01N (see online version for colours)

Figure 8

Leading multinational companies in the area of biocides, pest repellants or attractants,

plant growth regulators

Figure 9

Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in new plants or processes for obtaining
them, plant reproduction A01H (see online version for colours)

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

29

Figure 10

Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in horticulture, cultivation and forestry

A01G (see online version for colours)

Figure 11

Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in animal husbandry, silk rearing or

breeding animals, new breeds A01K (see online version for colours)

Figure 12

Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in catching, trapping, apparatus for

destruction of noxious animals A01M (see online version for colours)

In the field of biocides pest repellants or attractants, plant growth regulators, foreign
companies accounted for 78% of the total granted patents, followed by Indian companies
(9%), Indian organisations (7%), foreign institutes 2% and others 4% (Figure 7).
Six top most players accounting for 59% of granted patents in this area are Bayer
Groups of Companies (Bayer Crop Science Ag. GMBH, Germany, Bayer
Aktiengesellschaft, Germany and Bayer Healthcare AG), BASF Aktiengesellschaft
Germany, Syngenta Group (Syngenta Participations AG Based Switzerland, USA,
Syngenta Limited England), Sumimoto Chemical Co. Ltd., Monsanto Technology LLC
USA and Reckitt Benkieser Group [Reckitt Benkieser (Australia) Pty. Ltd., Reckitt
Benkieser UK Ltd.] with a share of 21, 19, 11,4, 2 and 2% each respectively (Figure 8).

30

H. Mehta et al.

The remaining 41% of patents were acquired by 62 other companies operative in this
area.
Assignee wise distribution of granted patents in new plants or processes for obtaining
them AO1H (Figure 9) indicated the top position of foreign companies (43%) while
Indian companies and the Indian Institutes had the respective share of 17% each. Foreign
institutes and others accounted for 19 and 4% of the granted patents. In the field of
horticulture, cultivation and forestry (Figure 10) foreign companies registered 51% of
granted patents share followed by others (30%). Indian public sector organisation and
foreign organisation had the share of 13 and 4% respectively.
In the field of animal husbandry, silk rearing or breeding animals, new breeds (A01K)
the foreign companies, others, Indian organisations, foreign institutes and Indian
companies had the respective share of 42, 27, 15, 8 and 8% each (Figure 11). Almost
similar trend was noticed for catching, trapping, and apparatus for destruction of noxious
animals (A01M) Figure 12.

Conclusions and policy implications

The broad objective of the study was to analyse the post TRIPS scenario in agricultural
sector by analysing the patent activity and granted patents in respect of different areas of
agriculture and the major players operating for process and product patenting. Patenting
activity during 2005 to 2012 in different sectors of agriculture was increasing. The major
areas of patenting were biocides, pest repellants or attractants, plant growth regulators.
Diversification of Indian agriculture was evident with the spectacular rise in patenting
activities in the fields of manufacture of dairy products, development of new plants or
process, horticulture, cultivation and foresdtry. An analysis of assignee status of patents
has revealed that the share of foreign companies was 78, 43, 51 and 42% for biocides,
new plants or processes, horticulture and cultivation forestry, animal husbandry or silk
rearing respectively. The study therefore, highlights the necessity of public-private
partnerships in these sectors of agriculture in India to generate IPRs of significant market
value. In the area Medicinal preparations containing materials from plants Indian
companies showed significant hold. The penetration of the domestic sector companies in
respect of chemical products patents was low vis--vis process patents and it is time that
the Indian entrepreneurs devote significant amount of funds for R&D of new products
like pharmaceutical industry. Comparison of process and product patents in the field of
biocides has revealed the dominant position of foreign companies for product patents,
which should motivate the domestic companies and organisations to strengthen their
R&D through public-private partnership mode. Public Institutions and universities in
developing countries must come up with innovative R&D to be globally competitive,
including a new approach to capture the added value through IPR protection and its
subsequent transfer to commercial application through partnerships with industry and
government agencies. Thus, public-private partnership will play will play an increasing
role in the advancement of agricultural under the IPR regime. The new patent regime of
2005 has generated an atmosphere of IP awareness, encouraged innovation and
investment in R&D for agricultural sector in India. The transfer of IPR enabled
agricultural technologies through commercial route will gain greater importance in the
competitive environment in the developing countries in the years to come.

Agricultural patent analysis during 20052012 in India

31

Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support for this work under the XI Plan
Scheme Intellectual Property Management and Transfer/Commercialization of
Agricultural Technology Scheme by ICAR, New Delhi, India. Grateful thanks are also
expressed to Dr. P.K. Mishra, Director (CSWCRTI, Dehradun) and Dr. S. Mauria, ADG
(IP&TM, ICAR, New Delhi) for constant support and encouragement. The authors are
also grateful to Dr. C.M. Gaind Visiting Professor, Consultant (IPR), Advocate, Patent &
Trademark Attorney at Freelancer/IP Consultancy & Management, New Delhi for his
critical suggestions while preparing the manuscript. The contribution number of this
publication from the authors institute is 106/1/2013-14.

References
Anonymous (2011) Annual Report of the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs,
Trade Marks and Geographical Indication, 88pp, Ministry of Commerce, GOI, New Delhi,
India.
Balaji, J. (2003) Product patents in the content of pharmaceutical and agricultural sectors, Project
assignment (Module II) P.G. Diploma in Patent Law, id No. PLH86/02, 20022003 NALSAR
Proximate Education, NALSAR University of Law, Hydrabad.
Chopra, V.L. (2013) Climate Change and Its Ecological Implications for the Western Himalaya,
404pp, Scientific Pub., Jodhpur, India.
Dutfield, G. (2005) Intellectual Property Rights, Trade and Biodiversity, p.238, Earthscan, IUCN,
London, Sterling, VA.
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2013) [online] http://www.fao.org/docrep/u8480e/
u8480e0l.htm (accessed 6 September 2013).
Gupta, A.K., Bishnoi, S., Prateek, G., Mahana, R, Choksi, M., Dey, A. and Karmakar, A. (2011)
Understanding Indian performance on IPR front: towards an inclusive innovation system,
Management and Development Programme for Harnessing Intellectual Property for
Strategic Competitive and Collaborative Advantage, 810 February, IMDC, IIM, Ahmedabad.
Heisey, P.W., Rubenstein, K.D., King, J.L. and Shoemaker, R. (2006) Government Patenting and
Technology Transfer: A Report from the Economic Research Service, Economic Research
Report No. 15, 52pp, US Department of Agriculture (USDA).
ICAR (2006) Guidelines for Intellectual Property Management and Technology Transfer/
Commercialization, 122pp, ICAR, New Delhi.
Janis, M.D. (2001) Sustainable agriculture, patent rights, and plant innovation, Indiana Journal of
Global Legal Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.91117.
Kiran, R. (2009) Changing pragmatics of the Indian pharmaceutical industry in the pre and post
trips period, International Journal of Business Management, Vol. 4, No. 9, pp.206220.
Mehta, H. (2010) Intellectual property (IP) management and protection in Indian agriculture,
Knowledge Sharing and Intellectual Property Management Status and Strategies, pp.216225,
Lap Lambert Academic Publishers, Saarbrucken Germany.
Mittal, R. and Singh, G. (2006) Patenting scenario in agriculture: Indian perspective, Current
Science, Vol. 90, No. 3, pp.296300.
Nair, G.G., Fernandez, A. and Parmar, K.R. (2012) Post TRIPS thrust triggers for Indian
pharmaceuticals in the IP context, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vol. 17, No. 2,
pp.273283.
Padmavati, M. and Sengupta, M. (2011) Agricultural machinery in India: IPR perspective,
Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.163169.

32

H. Mehta et al.

Paroda, R.S. (2003) Sustaining Our Food Security, 775pp, Konark Publishers Ltd., New Delhi,
India.
Payumo J., Grimes, H. and Wand Schneider, P. (2012) Status of national intellectual property
rights (IPRs) systems and its impact to agricultural development: a time series cross section
data analysis of TRIPS member countries, Int. J. Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 5,
No. 1, pp.8299.
Sharma, S.K. and Rana, J.C. (2013) Biodiversity (plants/animals/microbes/birds) status,
endemism, threatened species, in Chopra, V.L. (Ed.): Climate Change and Its Ecological
Implications for the Western Himalaya, pp.180216, 404pp, Scientific Pub., CSIR Institute of
Himalayan Bioresource Technology, Palampur H.P., India.
The Patent Act (Act No. 39 of 1970) (1970) As amended by the patent (amendment) act, 2005
along with the patent rules, 2003 as amended by the patent (amendment) rules, 2006, w.e.f.
5-5-2006 Commercial Law Publishers (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
Wang, X. (2011) Agricultural biotechnology worldwide patent analysis and mapping, African
Journal of Biotechnology, Vol. 10, No. 10, pp.19361944.