بررسی عملکرد، اجزای عملکرد و صفات رشدی تریتیکاله در شهرستان گرگان تحت تأثیر تاریخ‌های مختلف کاشت

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد

2 هیات علمی

چکیده

مقدمه و اهداف: ارزش محصول تولیدی هر گیاه به نهاده‏های به کار رفته، نور و دمای فصل رشد، که تحت تأثیر تاریخ کاشت است، وابسته می‏باشد. کاشت گیاه در زمان مناسب به دلیل ایجاد شرایط محیطی مناسب در تمام مراحل رشد، سبب افزایش عملکرد محصول می گردد. با شناخت صحیح عوامل محیطی، نیازهای بوم شناختی رقم مورد کاشت و اثر متقابل رقم با محیط، میتوان تاریخ کاشت تقریبی رقم مورد نظر را تعیین کرد. بنابراین هدف از این اجرای این آزمایش تعیین تاریخ کاشت مناسب گیاه تریتیکاله در شهرستان گرگان و بررسی اثر تیمارهای مختلف کاشت بر عملکرد، اجزای عملکرد و صفات رشدی این گیاه می باشد.
مواد و روش ها: در این آزمایش اثر شش تیمار کاشت شامل 7 آبان، 21 آبان، 7 آذر، 21 آذر، 7 دی و 21 دی بر عملکرد، اجزای عملکرد و صفات رشدی تریتیکاله در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان بررسی شد. این آزمایش در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در سال زراعی 93-1392 به اجرا درآمد. در این مطالعه، از رقم ژوانیلو -92، استفاده شد. صفات مورد بررسی عبارت بودند از عملکرد دانه، عملکرد زیست توده، شاخص برداشت، شاخصSPAD، تعداد روز تا گلدهی کامل، طول سنبله، تعداد پنجه بارور، وزن هزار دانه، ارتفاع بوته، وزن ساقه، تعداد دانه در سنبله و درصد دانه های پر و پوک.
یافته ها: نتایج این آزمایش نشان داد که بیشترین عملکرد دانه، درص دانه پر و شاخص سبزینگی از تاریخ کاشت‌های 7 آبان، 21 آبان و 7 آذر بدست آمد. این تیمارها از نظر اجزای عملکرد (به غیر از وزن هزار دانه، شاخص برداشت و عملکرد زیست توده) تفاوت معنی‌داری نداشتند. از نتایج دیگر این پژوهش، کاهش عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد تریتیکاله با تأخیر در کاشت از 7 آبان به تاریخ 21 دی ماه می‌باشد، به‌طوری‌که این تأخیر، کاهشی به میزان 86/35، 31/34، 86/21، 20، 75/21، 75/15، 16، 15/31 و 40/21 درصد را به‌ترتیب در تعداد کل بوته، تعداد پنجه بارور، ارتفاع بوته، طول سنبله، تعداد دانه در سنبله، وزن هزار دانه، درصد دانه پر و عملکرد زیست توده به دنبال داشت. کاهش ارتفاع بوته و به‌ دنبال آن کاهش میزان عملکرد زیست توده گیاه، منجر به حصول بیشترین شاخص برداشت در تاریخ کاشت 7 آذر به میزان 15/41 درصد شد.
نتیجه‌گیری: به‌طور کلی می‌توان نتیجه گرفت که کشت رقم ژوانیلو – 92 تریتیکاله در تاریخ‌های 7 آبان تا 7 آذر در شرایط اقلیمی گرگان، می‌تواند به تولید عملکرد دانه‌ای در حدود 96/7 – 84/7 تن در هکتار و عملکرد زیست توده‌ای به میزان 80/19 -06/19 تن در هکتار منجر شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigation of yield, yield components and growth characteristics of triticale in Gorgan township influenced different planting dates

چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: In all arid and semi-arid area irrigation is necessary for crop production; salinization of soil is also unavoidable. Therefore, for sustainable crop production in such areas, growing crop species with higher threshold and lower yield reduction under saline and water shortage conditions is needed. Agriculture and animal husbandry are integrated in arid and semi-arid regions. Therefore, providing of forage for livestock in these areas is one of the main concerns of farmers. Kochia (Kochia scoparia L. syn Bassia scoparia L.) is an annual plant with high tolerance to salt and drought stress. It is capable to rapid established in saline soils, and is a ground cover plant that can introduced as an alternative fodder, in arid and semi-arid areas. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the drought tolerance of kochia in irrigation with saline water at different growth stages with emphasis on the forage characteristics.
Materials and methods: Experiment was conducted as split-plot based on randomized complete block design with three replications at the salinity research station of center of excellence for special crops of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran in 2008. In order to stimulation of drought stress at first and final growth stages drought stress was applied for four weeks. Three levels of drought stress (control, no irrigation in vegetative stage (recovery treatment) and no irrigation at reproductive stage for one month (stress treatments), and two kochia accessions (Birjand and Borujerd) were arranged as main and sub plots, respectively. Plants were irrigated with underground water with electrical conductivity (EC) of 5.2 dS m-1. Forage harvesting was carried out after the third-stress treatment, in full flowering stage.
2
Results: The results showed that plant height in vegetative growth stage was more sensitive to water stress than the reproductive stage in kochia. In all irrigation treatments at different growth stages, Borujerd accession had higher plants height than Birjand accession and the highest plant height reduction in both accessions occurred in drought stress during vegetative growth stage. Branch number and forage yield in kochia were not affected by Irrigation treatments. Total dry matter percent of drought stress treatment at both reproductive stages were eight and nine percent higher in control and vegetative stage, respectively. Stems and leaves yield of Borujerd and Birjand accessions were not significantly affected by irrigation treatments. The highest and the lowest leaf to stem ratio were obtained in drought stress at vegetative and reproductive growth stage, respectively.
Conclusion: Four weeks irrigation cuts at vegetative and reproductive stages did not affect forage yield of kochia, and showed the high capability to recover the adverse effects of drought stress in vegetative growth stage. Generally, kochia has morphological features for introduce as a forage crop in saline and arid areas. In addition, the physiological mechanisms of drought and salt tolerance of kochia may introduce it as a candidate forage species for cultivation and to help feed the livestock in areas where salinity and drought stress is dominant.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Biological yield
  • Harvest index
  • Juanillo – 92 cultivar
  • SPAD index
1. Al-Niemi, T.S., Campbell, W.F., and Rumbaush, M.D. 1992. Response of
Alfalfa cultivars to salinity during germination and post-germinatronsrowth.
Crop Sci., 32: 976-980.
2. Anagholi, A., and Hajiakhondi Mibodi, H. 2005. Investigation of inter row
distances and seed density on yield of promising and tolerant wheat lines to
saline water and soil. Register No.: 84/795. (In Persian)
3. Bandehhagh, A., Kazemi, H., Valizadeh, M., and Javanshir, A. 2004. Salt
tolerance of spring wheat (Triticumaestivum L.) cultivars during vegetative and
reproductive growth. Iran. J. Agric. Sci., 35(1): 61-71. (In Persian).
4. Botella, M.A., Cruz, C., Martins-loucao, M.A., and Cerda, A. 1993. Nitrate
reductase activity in wheat seedlings as affected by NO3/NH4 ratio and salinity.
Plant Physiol., 142: 531-536.
5. Farhoudi, R. 2014. Investigation the salinity tension effect on growth and
physiological characteristics of nine wheat cultivars at vegetative growth stage.
Crop Physiol. J., 5(20): 71-86. (In Persian)
6. Fernandez, G.C.J. 1992. Effective selection criteria for assessing plant
stresstolerance. In: Proceedings of The International Symposium on Adaptation
of Vegetables and other Food Crops in Temperature and Water Stress. Taiwan,
257-270.
7. Francois, L.E., Maas, E.V., Donovan, T.J., and Youngs, V.L. 1986. Effect of
salinity on grain yield and quality, vegetative growth, and germination of semidwarf
and durum wheat. Agron. J., 78: 1053-1058.
8. Fricke, W., and Peters, W.S. 2002. The biophysics of leaf growth in salt
stressed barley. A study at the cell level. Plant Physiol., 129: 374-388.
9. Heidari, M., and Mesri, F. 2010. Studying the effects of different salinity levels
on physiological reactions and sodium and potassium uptake in wheat. Environ.
Stresses Crop Sci., 3(1): 83-94. (In Persian)
10. Jafari-Shabestari, J., Corke, H., and Qualset, C.O. 1995. Field evaluation of
tolerance to salinity stress in Iranian hexaploid wheat landrace accessions.
Genet.Resour. Crop Evalu., 42: 147-156.
11. Lauchli, A., and Epstein, E. 1990. Plant responses to saline and sodic
conditions. Pp: 113-137. In: K.K. Tanji. Agricultural Salinity Assessment and
Management. ASCE. Publication. 619p.
12. Maas, E.V. 1990. Crop salt tolerance. In: K.K. Tanji (Ed.). Agricultural Salinity
Assessment and Management. (Pp: 262-303). New York: ASCE. Publication.
13. Mass, E.V., and Hoffman, G.J. 1977. Crop salt tolerance – current assessment.
J. Irrig. Drainage., Div. ASCE: 103: 115-134.
14. Maas, E.V., Hoffman, G.J., Chaba, G.D., Poss, J.A., and Shannon, M.C. 1983.
Saltsensitivity of corn at various growth stages. Irrig. Sci., 4: 45-57.
15. Momeni, A. 2011. Geographical distribution and salinity levels of soil resources
of Iran. Iran. J. Soil Res., 24(3): 203-215. (In Persian)
16. Munns, R. 2002. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant, Cell
Environ., 25: 239-250.
17. Munns, R., Guo, J., Passioura, J.B., and Cramer, G.R. 2000. Leaf water status
controls day time but not daily rate of leaf expansion in salt treated barley. Aust.
J. Plant Physiol., 27: 949-957.
18. Munns, R., and Tester, M. 2008. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu. Rev.
Plant Biol., 59: 651–681.
19. Munns, R., and James, R.A. 2003. Screening methods for salinity tolerance: a
case study with tetraploid wheat. Plant Soil., 253: 201–218.
20. Munns, R., James, R.A., and Lauchli, A. 2006. Approaches to increasing the
salt tolerance of wheat and other cereals. J. Exp. Bot., 57: 1025-1043.
21. Munns, R., Schachtman, D.P., and Condon, A.G. 1995. The significance of a
two-phase growth response to salinity in wheat and barley. Aust. J. Plant
Physiol., 22: 561-569.
22. Nobel, C.L. 1985. Germination and growth of secale montanum in the
presenceof sodium chloride. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 36: 385-395.
23. Pasternak, D., Twersky, M., and De Malach, Y. 1979. Salt resistance in
agricultural crops. In: Stress Physiology in Crop Plants. H. Mussel and R.C.
Staples. (eds.). John Wiley and Sons Inc. New York. Pp: 127-142.
24. Poustini, K., and Siosemardeh, A. 2004. Ion distribution in wheat cultivars in
response to salinity stress. Field Crop Res., 85: 125-133.
25. Rahnama, A., Poustini, K., Tavakkol-Afshari, R., Ahmadi, A., and Alizadeh, H.
2011. Growth Properties and Ion Distribution in Different Tissues of Bread
Wheat Genotypes (Triticum aestivum L.) Differingin Salt Tolerance. J. Agron.
crop sci., 197: 21-30.
26. Rajendran, K., Tester, M., and Roy, S. 2009. Quantifying the three main
components of salinity tolerance in cereals. Plant, Cell Environ., 32: 237-249.
27. Ranjbar, G.H., and Banakar, M.H. 2011. Salt threshold value of four
commercial wheat cultivars. Iran. J. Soil Res., 24(3): 237-242. (In Persian)
28. Ranjbar, G.H., Hajiakhondi Mibodi, H., and Khodarahmi, M. 2003. Laboratory
and field evaluation of salt-tolerance in bread wheat cultivars and lines in
germination. Register No.: 83/490. (In Persian)
29. Richards, R.A., Dennett, C.W., Qualset, C.O., Epstein, E., Norlyn, J.D., and
Winslow, M.D. 1987. Variation in yield of grain and biomass in wheat, barley
and triticale in a salt-affected field. Field Crops Res., 15: 277-287.
30. Rosielle, A.A., and Hamblin, J. 1981. Theoretical aspect of selection for yield in
stress and non-stress environment. Crop Sci., 21: 943-946.
31. Rush, D.W., and Epstein, E. 1981. Breeding and selection for salt tolerance by
the incorporation of wild germplasm into a domestic tomato. J. Amer. Soc.
Hort. Sci., 106: 699-704.
32. Steppuhn, H., van Genuchten, M. Th., and Grieve, C.M. 2005. Root-zone
salinity: II: Indices for tolerance in agricultural crops. Crop Sci., 45: 221-232.
33. Steppuhn, H., and Wall, K.G. 1997. Grain yields from spring-sown Canadian
wheats grown in saline rooting media. Can. J. Plant. Sci., 77: 63-68.

34. Syvertsen, J.P., and Yelenosky, G. 1988. Salinity can enhance freeze tolerance
of citrus rootstock seedlings by modifying growth, water relations and mineral
nutrition. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci., 113: 889-893.
35. Termaat, A., Passioura, J.B., and Munns, R. 1985. Shoot turgor does not limit
shoot growth of NaCl-affected wheat and barley. Plant Physio., 77: 869-872.
36. Van Genuchten, M.Th., and Hoffman, G.J. 1984. Analysis of crop salt tolerance
data. P: 258-271. In: Shainberg, I., and J. Shalhevet (eds.), Soil Salinity Under
Irrigation. Procces and Management. Springer-Verlag, NewYork, NY.
37. Wahid, A., Rasul, E., and Rao, A.R. 1997. Germination responses of senstitive
and tolerance sugarcane lines to sodiumchloride. Seed Sci. Technol., 25: 465-
470