مقایسه عملکرد کمی و کیفی آفتابگردان در کشت خالص و کشت مخلوط با لوبیا / سویا در شرایط اقلیمی همدان

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش‌آموخته اکولوژی گیاهان زراعی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران

2 دانشیار ، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: یکی از راهکارهای کلیدی در کشاورزی پایدار بازگرداندن تنوع به محیط‌های کشاورزی و مدیریت مؤثر آن است. کشت مخلوط عبارت است از کشت همزمان دو یا بیش از دو گونه در یک قطعه زمین در طول یک فصل زراعی، که یک روش مهم در توسعه سیستم تولید پایدار بویژه در سیستم‌هایی که هدف آن‌ها محدود ساختن مصرف نهاده‌های خارجی مانند کود و علف‌کش-های شیمیایی و ... است. در قیاس با تک کشتی، سیستم کشت مخلوط استفاده بالاتری از منابع مثل کارایی مصرف مواد غذایی، کارایی مصرف آب و کارایی مصرف زمین دارد.
مواد و روش‌ها: به منظور مقایسه عملکرد کمی و کیفی آفتابگردان در کشت خالص و کشت مخلوط با لوبیا / سویا آزمایشی در مزرعه آموزشی و پژوهشی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه بوعلی سینا همدان طی دو سال زراعی 1392 و 1393 انجام شد. آزمایش به صورت طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار اجرا گردید. تیمارهای آزمایشی الگوهای مختلف کاشت شامل کشت خالص آفتابگردان، لوبیا و سویا با و بدون وجین و کشت‌های مخلوط افزایشی 30، 60 و 90 درصد لوبیا با آفتابگردان و کشت‌های مخلوط افزایشی 30، 60 و 90 درصد سویا با آفتابگردان بودند. صفات مورد ارزیابی گیاهان شامل عملکرد دانه، درصد و عملکرد روغن و پروتئین و میزان فسفر و پتاسیم دانه بود. ارزیابی کشت مخلوط بر اساس شاخص نسبت برابری زمین صورت گرفت.
یافته‌ها: نتایج آزمایش نشان داد عملکرد دانه هر سه گونه تحت تأثیر الگوهای کشت قرار گرفتند. بیشترین میزان عملکرد دانه آفتابگردان، لوبیا و سویا (به-ترتیب 3480، 3025 و 3158 کیلوگرم در هکتار) در کشت خالص با وجین به دست آمد و کشت مخلوط عملکرد دانه را کاهش داد. همچنین بیشترین عملکرد پروتئین و روغن و عناصر فسفر و پتاسیم آفتابگردان دانه، لوبیا و سویا متعلق به کشت خالص با وجین این گیاهان بود. با این حال نسبت برابری زمین در کشت‌های مخلوط با 60 و 90 درصد لوبیا و سویا بالاتر از یک بود که نشان دهنده سودمندی سیستم کشت مخلوط است. به‌طور‌کلی بر اساس شاخص نسبت برابری زمین کشت مخلوط آفتابگردان و لگوم (لوبیا و سویا) در بیشتر تیمارها برتر از کشت خالص گیاهان بود.
نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج این مطالعه نشان داد که، سیستم‌های کشت مخلوط باعث کاهش عملکرد دانه آفتابگردان، لوبیا و سویا در مقایسه با تیمار تک کشتی با وجین می‌شوند، اما به طور کلی در اکثر تیمارها، ترکیب آفتابگردان-حبوبات (لوبیا و سویا) از لحاظ بهبود عملکرد اقتصادی و کارایی استفاده از زمین بهتر از تک کشتی آن‌ها بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison of quantity and quality sunflower yield in sole cropping and intercropping with bean / soybean in Hamedan condition

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Mohsen Seyedi 1
  • Javad Hamzei 2
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 Bu Ali Sina University
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: Sustainable agriculture is the act of farming based on an understanding of ecosystem services, the study of relationships between organisms and their environment. One of the key strategies in sustainable agriculture is diversity restoration to agricultural environments and its effective management. Intercropping is an effective way of sustainable agriculture. Intercropping, which is defined as growing two or more species simultaneously in the same field during a growing season, is considered as one important strategy in developing sustainable production systems, particularly systems that aim to limit external inputs such as chemical fertilizer and herbicide. Compared to sole crops, intercropping system have higher utilization of resource i.e., nutrient use efficiency, water use efficiency, and land use efficiency.
Materials and methods: In order to comparison of quantity and quality of sunflower yield in sole cropping and intercropping with bean / soybean, an experiment was conducted at the Agricultural Research Station, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Bu-Ali Sina, during 2013 and 2014 growing seasons. Experiment was conducted as randomized complete block design with three replications. Experimental treatment were different planting patterns including sunflower, bean and soybean sole cropping with and without weeding, additive intercropping of 30, 60 and 90% bean, as well as 30, 60 and 90% soybean with sunflower. Evaluated traits of crops including grain yield, protein and oil percent and yield and grain phosphor and potassium. Intercropping systems was evaluated by using land equivalent ratio (LER) index.
Results: Experimental results showed that all three crops' grain yield has were affected by planting patterns. The highest sunflower, bean and soybean grain yield (3480, 3025 and 3158 Kg Ha-1, respectively) was achieved at sole cropping with weeding. Results also indicated that intercropping decreased grain yield. Moreover, the highest sunflower, bean and soybean protein and oil yield and grain phosphor and potassium were belonged to sole cropping with weeding of this crops. However, land equivalent ratio at intercropping patterns with 60 and 90% bean and soybean were more than 1 that showed advantage of intercropping. Totally, the findings of this study demonstrated that according to land equivalent ratio index, intercropping of sunflower and legumes (bean and soybean) in most treatments were more beneficial than sole cropping.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that, intercropping systems decreased sunflower, bean and soybean grain yield in comparison with sole cropping with weeding treatment but, 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.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Competition
  • Land equivalent ratio
  • Oil seed
  • Oil yield
  • Protein yield

مراجع

  1. Akbarloo, H., Dehrooieh, A.R., and Arshi, Y. 2013. Sunflower cropping. Iran Textbook Publishing Company. 153p. (In Persian).
  2. Amossé, C., Jeuffroy, M.H., Celette, F., and David, C. 2013. Relay-intercropped forage legumes help to control weeds in organic grain production. J. Agron. 49: 158-167.
  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. J. 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. Eur. J. Agron. 24: 4. 325-332.
  5. Beigi, S. 2014. Effect of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum) intercropping on grain yield and weed control in Hamedan. Thesis submitted for Master of Science in field of Agronomy. Agriculture Faculty, Bu-Ali Sina Hamedan University. (In Persian).
  6. Campiglia, E., Mancinelli, R., De Stefanis, E., Pucciarmati, S., and Radicetti, E. 2015. The long-term effects of conventional and organic cropping systems, tillage managements and weather conditions on yield and grain quality of durum wheat (Triticum durum) in the Mediterranean environment of Central Italy. Field Crop Res. 176: 34-44.
  7. 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.
  8. Chen, P., Song, C., Liu, X., Zhou, L., Yang, H., Zhang, X., Zhou, Y., Du, Q., Pang, T., Fu, Z., Wang, X., Liu, W., Yang, F., Shu, K., Du, J., Liu, J., Yang, W., and Yong, T. 2019. Yield advantage and nitrogen fate in an additive maize-soybean relay intercropping system. Sci. Total Environ. 657: 987-999.
  9. 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. Eur. J. Agron. 58: 53-62.
  10. 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).
  11. Doroodian, H. M., and Fateh, E. 2012. Effect of different planting patterns on LER, yield and yield components of peanut and two corn hybrids in intercropping system. J. Plant Prod. 35: 3. 69-80. (In Persian).
  12. 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 America. 1: 5. 845-858.
  13. Eskandari, H., and Javanmard, A. 2013. Evaluation of Forage Yield and Quality in Intercropping Patterns of Maize and Cow pea. Sci. Sustain. Prod. 23: 4. 101-110. (In Persian).
  14. 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 Manage. 166: 9-16.
  15. 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. Ecosyst. Environ. 203: 1-10.
  16. 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.
  17. 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).
  18. Ghosh, P.K., Manna, M.C., Bandyopadhyay Ajay, K.K., Tripathi, A.K., Wanjari, R.H., Hati, K.M., Misra, A.K., Acharya, C.L., and Subba Rao, A. 2006. Interspecific interaction and nutrient use in soybean/sorghum intercropping system. Agron. J. 98: 4. 1097-1108.
  19. 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.
  20. 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: 4-1. 75-90. (In Persian).
  21. 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).
  22. 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).
  23. Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Gooding, M., Ambus, P., Corre-Hellou, G., Crozat, Y., Dahlmann, C., Dibet, A., von Fragstein, P., Pristeri, A., Monti, M., and Jensen, E.S. 2009. Pea–barley intercropping for efficient symbiotic N2-fixation, soil N acquisition and use of other nutrients in European organic cropping systems. Field Crop Res. 113: 1. 64-71.
  24. Hussein, A.H.A. 2009. Phosphorus use efficiency by two varieties of corn at different phosphorus fertilizer application rates. Res. J. Appl. Sci. 4: 2. 85-93.
  25. Javanshir, A., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab, A., Hamidi, A., and Gholipour, M. 2000. Intercropping ecology. Mashhad, Jahad Daneshgahi. 222p. (In Persian)
  26. 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.
  27. Li, L., Sun, J., Zhang, F., Li, X., Yang, S., and Rengel, Z. 2001. Wheat - maize or wheat-soybean strip intercropping I. Yield advantage and interspecific interaction on nutrients. Field Crop Res. 71: 2. 123- 137.
  28. Li, W., Li, L., Sun, J., Gua, T., Zhang, F., Bao, X., Peng, A., and Tang, C. 2004. Effects of inter cropping and nitrogen application on nitrate presentinthe profile of orthic an orthic anthrosolwest china. Agric. Ecosys. Environ. 105: 483- 491.
  29. Mafakheri, S. 2017. Effect of Some Organic and Chemical Fertilizers on Morphological and Biochemical Factors of Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum). J. Plant Prod. 40: 3. 27-40. (In Persian).
  30. Magomya, A.M., Kubmarawa, D., Ndahi, J.A., and Yebpella, G.G. 2014. Determination of Plant Proteins via the Kjeldahl Method and Amino Acid Analysis: A Comparative Study. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 3: 4. 68-72.
  31. Majnoun Hosseini, N. 2008. Agronomy and production of legume. Jahad Daneshgahi Press. Tehran, Iran. 284p. (In Persian).
  32. 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).
  33. Mazaheri, D. 2008. Intercropping. 2nd Ed. Tehran, Iran. 262p. (In Persian).
  34. 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 infestation. Field Crop Res. 155: 144-152.
  35. 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).
  36. Oelbermann, M., Regehr, A., and Echarte, L. 2015. Changes in soil characteristics after six seasons of cereal–legume intercropping in the Southern Pampa. Geoderma Region. 4: 100-107.
  37. Parsa, M., and Bagheri, A. 2013. Pulses. Publications by Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran. 528p. (In Persian).
  38. Prin, S.U., and Dwit, J. 2005. Intercropping cereal and grain legumes. A Farmers Perspective, Research at the Louis Bolk inStitute live Stock Department, w.w.w.ggric.nsw.gov.au.
  39. Pritchard, F.M., Eagles, H.A., Norton, R.M., Salisbury. P.A., and Nicolas. M. 2000. Environmental effects on seed composition of Victorian canola. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 40: 5. 679-685.
  40. Rayan, J.R., Estefan, G., and Rashid, A. 2007. Soil and plant analysis laboratory manual. ICARDA.
  41. 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. Eur. J. Agron. 72: 70-79.
  42. 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.
  43. Sherma, A.R., and Behera, U.K. 2009. Recycling of legume residues for nitrogen economy and higher productivity in maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system. Nutr. Cycling Agroecosyst. 83: 3. 197-210.
  44. Sorkhy, F., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nassab, A., and Javanshir, A. 2008. Assessment of Leaf Characteristics and Root to Shoot Ratio in Above and Below Ground Interference of Wheat (Triticum aestivum) and Different Densities of Wild Oat (Avena fatua). J. Sci. Technol. Agric. Nat. Resour. 12: 45. 435-446. (In Persian).
  45. Stoltz, E., and Nadeau, E. 2014. Effects of intercropping on yield, weed incidence, forage quality and soil residual N in organically grown forage maize and faba bean. Field Crop Res. 169: 21-29.
  46. Thobatsi, T. 2009. Growth and yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculatea) in a intercropping system. MSc Thesis. University of Pretoria.149p.
  47. Tsubo, M., Mukhala, E., Ogindo, H., and Walker, S. 2005. Productivity of maize-bean intercropping in a semi-arid region of South Africa. Water Res. Comm. 29: 4. 381-388.
  48. 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).
  49. Yan, S., Du, X., Wu, F., Li, L., Li, C., and Meng, Z. 2014. Proteomics insights into the basis of interspecific facilitation for maize (Zea mays) in faba bean (Vicia faba)/ maize intercropping. J Proteomics. 109: 111-124.
مجله تولید گیاهان زراعی
دوره 13، شماره 4
اسفند 1399
صفحه 57-74

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار