Evaluation of advantageous of sunflower-grain legume intercropping

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Crop and Horticultural Science Research Department, Markazi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center Research and Education Center (AREEO), Arak, Iran. Email: m.seyedi98@areeo.ac.ir

2 basu university

Abstract

Abstract
Background and objectives: One of the key strategies in sustainable agriculture is diversity restoration to agricultural environments and effective management it. Intercropping, which is defined as growing two or more species simultaneously in the same field during a growing season, is considered one important strategy in developing sustainable production systems, particularly systems that aim to limit external inputs such as chemical fertilizer and herbicide etc. Compared to sole crops, intercropping system have higher utilization of resource i.e., nutrient use efficiency, water use efficiency, and land use efficiency. This research was done to evaluation advantageous of sunflower-legume intercropping systems,
Materials and methods: The experiment was conducted as randomized complete block design with three replications at the Agricultural Research Station, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, during 2013 and 2014 growing seasons. Experimental treatments were different planting patterns including sunflower, bean and soybean sole cropping, and additive intercropping of 30, 60 and 90% bean, as well as 30, 60 and 90% soybean with sunflower. Intercropping systems were evaluated by using indices of land equivalent ratio (LER), system productivity index (SPI), total relative value (RTV), area-time equivalent ratio (ATER), aggressivity index (AI), competition index (CI) and relative crowding coefficient (RCC).
Results: Results showed that crops grain yield and sunflower equivalent yield affected by planting patterns. The highest sunflower, bean and soybean grain yields were achieved at sole cropping and intercropping decreased grain yield of these crops. However, sunflower equivalent yield at intercropping patterns of 60 and 90% bean and soybean were more than sole cropping. At this treatments, indices of land equivalent ratio, total relative value, area-time equivalent ratio and relative crowding coefficient were more than 1 and competition index was less than 1 that showed intercropping is advantageous. In this study pay attention to aggressivity index, sunflower was aggressive in comparison to bean and soybean.
Conclusion: The results of this present showed that, intercropping systems increased sunflower equal grain yield in comparison with sunflower sole cropping. In general, in the most of the treatments, sunflower-legume (bean and soybean) intercropping was better than their sole cropping and associated with improving economic yield and land use efficiency.
The results of this present showed that, intercropping systems increased sunflower equal grain yield in comparison with sunflower sole cropping. In general, in the most of the treatments, sunflower-legume (bean and soybean) intercropping was better than their sole cropping and associated with improving economic yield and land use efficiency.

Keywords

References

  1. Agegnehu, G., Ghizaw, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and land use efficiency of barley and fababean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. Europ. J. Agron. 25: 3. 202-207.
  2. Amani Machiani, M., Javanmard, A., Morshedloo, M.R., and Maggi, F. 2018. Evaluation of competition, essential oil quality and quantity of peppermint intercropped with soybean. Ind. Crop Prod. 111: 743-754.
  3. Bagheri Shirvan, M., Zaefarian, F., Akbarpour, V., and Asadi, G. 2012. Evaluation of yield advantage and economic productivity of soybean intercropping with sweet basil and borage. Agroecol. 2: 2. 42-57. (In Persian).
  4. Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. Europ. J. Agron. 24: 4. 325-332.
  5. Campiglia, E., Mancinelli, R., Radicetti, E., and Baresel. J.P. 2014. Evaluating spatial arrangement for durum wheat and sub clover intercropping systems. Field Crop Res. 169: 49-57.
  6. Chapagain, T., and Riseman, A. 2014. Barley–pea intercropping: Effects on land productivity, carbon and nitrogen transformations. Field Crop Res. 166: 18-25.
  7. Chimonyo, V.G.P., Modi, A.T., and Mabhaudhi T. 2016. Water use and productivity of a sorghum–cowpea–bottle gourdintercrop system. Agric. Water Manag. 165: 82-96.
  8. Crusciol, C.A.C., Nascente, A.S., Mateus, G.P., Pariz, C.M., Martins, P.O., and Borghi E. 2014. Intercropping soybean and palisade grass for enhanced land use efficiency and revenue in a no till system. Europ. J. Agron. 58: 53-62.
  9. Daryaei, F., Agha Alikhani, M., and Chaichi, M.R. 2008. Comparison advantage index of intercropping chickpea and barley in forage manufacture. Agric. Nat. Resour. Syst. 6: 21. 35-40. (In Persian).
  10. Egbe, O.M., Alibo, S.E., and Nwueze, I. 2010. Evaluation of some extra-early-and early-maturing cowpea varieties for intercropping with maize in southern Guinea Savanna of Nigeria. Agric. Biol. J. North Am. 1: 5. 845-858.
  11. Fan, Z., An, T., Wu, K., Zhou, F., Zi, S., Yang, Y., Xue, G., and Wu. B. 2016. Effects of intercropping of maize and potato on sloping land on the water balance and surface runoff. Agric. Water Manag. 166: 9-16.
  12. Franco, J.G., King, S.R., Masabni, J.G., and Volder, A. 2015. Plant functional diversity improves short-term yields in a low-input intercropping system. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 203: 1-10.
  13. Franco, J.G., King, S.R., and Volder, A. 2018. Component crop physiology and water use efficiency in response to intercropping. Europ. J. Agron. 93: 27-39.
  14. Fuente, E.B., Suárez, S.A., Lenardis, A.E., and Poggio, S.L. 2014. Intercropping sunflower and soybean in intensive farming systems: Evaluating yield advantage and effect on weed and insect assemblages. NJAS – Wagen. J. Life Sci. 70: 47-52.
  15. Ghanbari, A., Ghadiri, H., Ghafari Moghadam, M., and Safari, M. 2010. Evaluation of intercropping of maize and cucurbit and effect on weed control. Iranian J. Field Crop Sci. 41: 1. 43- 55. (In Persian).
  16. Gronle, A., Lux, G., Böhm, H., Schmidtke, K., Wild, M., Demmel, M., Brandhuber, R., Wilbois, K., and Heb, J. 2015. Effect of ploughing depth and mechanical soil loading on soil physical properties, weed infestation, yield performance and grain quality in sole and intercrops of pea and oat in organic farming. Soil Till. Res. 148: 59-73.
  17. Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, S.M. 2014b. Study of canopy growth indices in mono and intercropping of chickpea and barley under weed competition. J. Agric. Sci. Sustain. Prod. 24: 4. 75-90. (In Persian).
  18. Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, S.M. 2012. Determination of the best intercropping combination of wheat and rapeseed based on agronomic indices, total yield and land use equivalent ratio. Crop Prod. Process. 2: 5. 109-119. (In Persian).
  19. Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, S.M. 2014a. Soil physicochemical characteristics and land use efficiency in cereal-legume intercropping systems. Water Soil. 24: 4. 261-271. (In Persian).
  20. Inal, A., Gunes, A., Zhang, F., and Cakmak, I. 2007. Peanut/maize intercropping induced changes in rhizosphere and nutrient concentrations in shoots. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 45: 5. 350-356.
  21. Khajehpour, M.R. 2009. Principles and Fundamentals of Crop Production. Third edition, Jahad-e- Daneshgahi. Press of Isfahan University of Technology. 636 p. (In Persian).
  22. Lal, B., Rana, K.S., Rana, D.S., Shivay, Y.S., Sharma, D.K., Meena, B.P., and Gautam, P. 2019. Biomass, yield, quality and moisture use of Brassica carinata as influenced by intercropping with chickpea under semiarid tropics. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 18: 1. 61-71.
  23. Lithourgidis, A.S., Vlachostergios, D.N., Dordas, C.A., and Damalas, C.A. 2011. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content competition in pea-cereal intercropping systems. Europ. J. Agron. 34: 4. 287-294.
  24. Mansouri, L., Jamshidi, K., Rastgoo, M., Saba, J., and Mansouri, H. 2013. The effect of additive maize-bean intercropping on yield, yield components and weeds control in Zanjan climate Conditions. Iranian J. Field Crop Res. 11: 3. 483- 492. (In Persian).
  25. Mashhadi, T., Nakhzari Moghaddam, A., and Sabouri, H. 2015. Investigation of competition indices in intercropping of wheat and chickpea under nitrogen consumption. J. Agroecol. 7: 3. 344-355. (In Persian).
  26. Mazaheri, D. 2008. Intercropping. 2nd Tehran, Iran. 262 p. (In Persian).
  27. Midega, C.A. O., Salifu, D., Bruce, T.J., Pittchar, J., Pickett, J.A., and Khan, Z.R. 2014. Cumulative effects and economic benefits of intercropping maize with food legumes on Striga hermonthica Field Crop Res. 155: 144-152.
  28. Mohsen Abadi, G.R., Jahansuz, M.R., Chaichi, M.R., Rahimian Mashhadi, R., Liaghat, A., and Savaghebi Firuzabadi, G.R. 2007. Intercropping of barley - vetch at different levels of nitrogen. Agric. Sci. Technol. 10: 1. 23-31. (In Persian).
  29. Mosapour, H., Ghanbari, A., Sirousmehr, A.R., and Asgharipour, M.R. 2015. Effect of sowing time on seed yield, advantage and competitive indices in ajwain and isabgol intercropping. Iranian J. Crop Sci. 17: 2. 139-152. (In Persian).
  30. Nakhzari Moghaddam, A., Dehghanpour Inchehbron, O., and Rahemi Karizaki, A. 2016. The effects of nitrogen levels and intercropping pattern on forage yield and competition indices of barley and pea. Elec. J. Crop Prod. 9: 1. 199-214. (In Persian).
  31. Nassiri Mahallati, M., Koocheki, A., Mondani, F., Feizi, H., and Amirmoradi, S. 2015. Determination of optimal strip width in strip intercropping of maize and bean in Northeast. J. Clean. Prod. 106: 343-350.
  32. Nyawade, S.O., Karanja, N.N., Gachene, C.K.K., Gitari, H.I., Schulte-Geldermann, E., and Parker, M.L. 2019. Short-term dynamics of soil organic matter fractions and microbial activity in smallholder potato-legume intercropping systems. Appl. Soil Ecol. 142: 123-135.
  33. Pötzsch, F., Lux, G., Lewandowska, S., Bellingrath - Kimurac, S.D., and Schmidtke, K. 2019. Optimizing relative seed frequency of intercropped pea and spring barley .Europ. J. Agron. 105: 32-40.
  34. Ren, Y., Liuc, J., Wangd, Z., and Zhanga, S. 2016. Planting density and sowing proportions of maize–soybean intercrops affected competitive interactions and water-use efficiencies on the Loess Plateau, China. Europ. J. Agron. 72: 70-79.
  35. Rezaei-Chianeh, E., Khorramdel, S., and Garachali, P. 2015. Evaluation of relay intercropping of sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) on their yield and land use efficiency. Agric. Crop Manag. 17: 1. 183-196. (In Persian).
  36. Sadri, S., Pouryousef, M., and Soleimani, A. 2014. Evaluation of yield, essential oil and productivity indices in fennel and fenugreek intercropping. Agric. Crop Manag. 16: 4. 921-932. (In Persian).
  37. Scalise, A., Tortorella, D., Pristeri, A., Petrovicova, B., Gelsomino, A., Lindstrom, K., and Monti, M. 2015. Legume-barley intercropping stimulates soil N supply and crop yield in the succeeding durum wheat in a rotation under rainfed conditions. Soil Biol., Biochem. 89: 150-161.
  38. Sherma, A.R., and Behera, U.K. 2009. Recycling of legume residues for nitrogen economy and higher productivity in maize (Zea mays) – wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Nutr. Cycling Agroecosyst. 83: 3. 197-210.
  39. Valizadegan, A. 2015. Study of yield quality and quantiting in pot marigold (Calendula officinalis) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and species diversity and relative abundance of insects in row and strip intercropping. J. Sustain. Agric. Prod. Sci. 25: 3. 15-30. (In Persian).
  40. Wahla, I.H., Ahmad, R., Ehsanullah Ahmad, A., and Jabbar, A. 2009. Competitive functions of components crops in some barley based intercropping systems. Inter. J. Agric. Biol. 11: 1. 69-72.
Journal of Crop Production
Volume 13, Issue 1
May 2020
Pages 85-98

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics