Correct Option (C)
Inference 2: The passage indicates that Arhar straw decomposes rapidly when ploughed back into the soil, thereby eliminating the need for stubble burning. In contrast, paddy straw's high silica content hinders decomposition, leading farmers to burn it, which causes pollution. Therefore, pulse cultivation, as described for 'Pusa Arhar 16', results in less pollution.
Inference 3: The passage explicitly states that Arhar straw is green and can be ploughed back into the soil, where it decomposes quickly. This process enriches the soil, indicating an improvement in soil quality.
Incorrect Options:
Inference 1: While the passage highlights a significantly higher yield potential for 'Pusa Arhar 16' compared to existing pulse varieties, it does not provide a direct comparison of farmer income between pulse and paddy cultivation. Income is influenced by multiple factors such as market prices, input costs, and demand, which are not discussed. Thus, a definitive inference about higher income cannot be made solely from the passage.
Inference 4: The passage details the challenges associated with paddy straw, specifically its high silica content hindering decomposition and making it difficult to plough back. However, it does not assert that paddy straw possesses no usefulness whatsoever. Its utility in other applications like fodder, biofuel production, or composting is not addressed, and the passage focuses only on the difficulty of its management in the field.
Inference 5: The passage mentions that farmers in northern India use mechanized harvesting for paddy. However, it attributes stubble burning primarily to the difficulty in managing leftover paddy stalks due to their high silica content, which impedes easy decomposition. Mechanized harvesting might leave stubble, but the fundamental reason for burning is the inherent characteristic of paddy straw and the difficulty of its decomposition, not merely the use of machinery.