Evaluation of the effect of Nanobiomic fertilizer on yield and some traits of Hibiscus sabdariffa in intercropping with Vigna unguiculata

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Department of Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University, Zabol, Iran.

Abstract

Background and objectives:
Today, the growing trend of degradation of water, soil and environmental resources due to the indiscriminate use of chemicals in agriculture and common methods of food production, has attracted the attention and encouragement of agricultural researchers to sustainable agriculture. Mixed cultivation is of particular importance for the variety of crops, their benefits, and the increase in profits per unit area and time. The aim of this study was to investigate the synergistic effect of sour tea mixed culture as a medicinal plant and compatible with the conditions of the region with cowpea and the effect of nanobiotic fertilizer in mixed culture.
Materials and Methods:
To investigate the effect of Nanobiomic fertilizer application on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of sour tea in mixed cultivation with blueberry beans, an experiment in the form of split plots in a randomized complete block design with three replications, in Zabol University research farm located in the new site. It was implemented in 2015-2016. Factors studied include nanobiomic biofertilizer as the main factor in two levels of use and non-use of biofertilizer and different levels of intercropping in five levels including pure Hibiscus sabdariffa, pure Vigna unguiculata, 50% Hibiscus sabdariffa + 50% Vigna unguiculata, 75% Hibiscus sabdariffa +25% of Vigna unguiculata and 25% of Hibiscus sabdariffa + 75% of Vigna unguiculata were a by-product. Nanobiomic biofertilizer was applied in three stages (three-leaf, stem and before flowering) and in each stage at the rate of one liter per hectare.
Results:
Comparison of the mean of interactions showed that the highest amount of chlorophyll a was obtained from nanobium application treatment in 75% Hibiscus sabdariffa + 25% Vigna unguiculata. Also, the highest total chlorophyll was obtained in 75% Hibiscus sabdariffa + 25% Vigna unguiculata. Vigna unguiculata was obtained. Land parity ratio in mixed cropping systems was higher than one, which indicates the advantage of mixed crops compared to pure crops. Intercropping of 50% Hibiscus sabdariffa + 50% Vigna unguiculata had the highest land parity ratio. The highest economic yield of Hibiscus sabdariffa was obtained from nanobiomic application treatment. Comparison of the means of effect of different intercropping systems showed that the highest amount of economic yield (11125.6 kg / ha) was obtained from the pure culture of Hibiscus sabdariffa.
Conclusion:
Based on the results, the highest biological yield and economic yield of sour tea were obtained from the application of nanobiomics in the conditions of pure planting system of sour tea. In general, it can be said that a mixed culture of 50% sour tea + 50% cowpea with suitable economic yield is suitable for cultivation in the region.

Keywords

References

  1. Abou Mostafa, R.R.I., El-Abbas, E.l., Rabie, E.M. and Aboshady, K.A. 2012. Agronomic and economic evaluation for some patterns of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet under tow sowing dates. Agric Res Kafrelsheikh Univ. 38: 4. 443-457.
  2. Amani Machiani, M., Javanmard, A., Morshedloo, M.R. and Maggi, F. 2018. Evaluation of yield, essential oil content and compositions of peppermint (Mentha piperita) intercropped with faba bean (Vicia faba L.). J. Clean. Prod. 171: 529-537.
  3. Amani Machiani, M., Javanmard, A., Morshedloo, M.R. and Maggi, F. 2018. Evaluation of competition, essential oil quality and quantity of peppermint intercropped with Ind. Crops Prod. 111: 743-754.
  4. Amani Machiani, M., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Javanmard, A., Maggi, F. and Morshedloo, M.R. Evaluation of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) seed yield and quali-quantitative production of the essential oils from fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) and dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica) in intercropping system under humic acid application. J. Clean. Prod. 235: 112-122.
  5. Anil, L., Park, J., Phipps, R.H. and Miller, F.A. 1998. Temperate intercropping ofcereals for forage a review of the potential for growth and utilization with particular reference to the UK. Grass Forage Sci, 53: 4. 301-317.
  6. Arnon, A.N. 1965. Method of extraction of chlorophyll in the plants. Agron J. 23: 112-121.
  7. Bedoussac, L., Journet, E.P., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Naudin, C., Corre-Hellou, G., Jensen, S., Prieur, L. and Justes, E. 2015. Ecological principles underlying the increase of productivity achieved by cereal-grain legume intercrops in organic farming. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 35: 911-935.
  8. Beers, G.R. and Sizer, I.W. 1952. A spectrophotometric method for measuring the breakdown of hydrogen peroxide by catalase. Chem Biol. 195: 1. 133-140.
  9. Carruthers, K., Prithiviraj, B., Fe, Q., Cloutier, D., Martin, R.C. and Smith, D.L. 2000. Intercropping corn with soybean, lupin and forages: yield component responses. Eur. J. Agron. 12: 2. 103-115.
  10. Chen, P., Song, C., Liu, X.M., Zhou, L., Yang, H., Zhang, X., Zhou, X., Du, Q., Pang, T., Fu, D., Wang, X.C., Liu, W.G., 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.
  11. Dahmarde, M. 2010. Ecophysiological aspects of mixed cultivation of maize and cowpea on the quantity and quality of single grass maize forage 704. PhD thesis in agrionomy. Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University. 196 p. (In Persian)
  12. Das, K., Dang, R. and Shivananda, V. 2008. Influence of biofertilizers on the availability of nutriens (N, P and K) in soil in relation to growth and yield of Stevia rebaudiana grown in South India. Int. j. appl. res. nat. prod. 1: 20-24.
  13. Duke, A.J. 1983. Hibiscus sabdariffa Available online: http://www.hort./Purdue.edu/newcrop/duke-energy/hisbiscus-sabdariffa.html.
  14. Ghanbari, A. 2000. Intercropped Wheat (Triticum aestivum) and bean (Vicia faba) as a low-input forage. PhD thesis. Wye Collage University of London.
  15. Ghosh, P.K., Manna, M., Bandyopadhyay, K., Ajay, A., Tripathi, A., Wanjari, R.H., Hati, K.M., Misra, A.K., Acharya, C.L. and Subba Rao, A. 2016. Interspecific interaction and nutrient use in (soybean/sorghum) intercropping system. Agron J. 98: 4. 1097-1108.
  16. Gustave, N.M., Jean, F., Ois, L. and Xavier, D. 2008. Shoot and root competition in potato/maize intercropping, Effects on growth and yield. Environ. Exp. Bot. 64: 180-188.
  17. Hamzei, J. and Babaei, M. 2017. Study of quality and quantity of yield and land equivalent ratio of sunflower in intercropping series with bean. J. Agroecol. 8: 4. 490-504. (In Persian)
  18. Han, H.S., Supanjani, D. and Lee, K.D. 2006. Effect of coin co-inoculation with phosphate and potassium solubilizing bacteria on mineral uptake and growth of pepper and cucumber. Plant Soil Environ. 52: 130-136.
  19. Inal, A., Gunes, A., Zhang, F. and Cakmak, I. 2017. Peanut/ maize intercropping induced changes in rhizosphere and nutrient concentrations in shoots. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 45: 5. 350-356.
  20. Kolawale, G.O., Tian, G. and Singh, B.B., 2000. Differential response of cowpea varieties to aluminum and phosphorus application. J. Plant. Nutr. Soil Sci. 23: 6. 731-740.
  21. Koocheki, A., Nasiri Mohalati, M. and Zarea-Feizabadi, A., and Jahanbin, G. 2004. Evaluation of variability indifferent cropping systems of Iran. Pajouh Sazand 63. 70-81. (In Persian)
  22. Lingaraju, B.S., Marer, B.S.S. and Chandrashekar, S.S. 2008. Studies on intercropping of maize and pigeon pea under rain fed conditions in northern transitional zone of Karnataka. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 21: 1. 1-3.
  23. Liu, Y.C., Qin, M.X., Jing, J.X., Tang, L., Wei, Z. and Wei, J.J., Zheng, Y. 2017. Intercropping influences component and content change of flavonoids in root exudates and nodulation of Faba bean. J. Plant Interact. 12: 1. 187-192.
  24. Mbah, E.U., Muoneke, C.O. and Okpara, D.A. 2008. Evaluation of cassava (Manihot esculenta) planting methods and soybean (Glycine max) sowing dates on the yield performance of the component species in cassava/soybean intercrop under the humid tropical lowlands of southeastern Nigeria. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 8: 1. 42-47.
  25. Mirzaei, A., Vazan, S. and Naseri, R. 2010. Response of yield and yield camponents of Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius) to seed inoculation With Azotobacter and Azospirillum and different Nitrogen Levels under dry land condition. World Appl Sci J. 11: 10. 1287-1291.
  26. Monti, M., Pellicano, A., Santonoceto, C., Preiti, G. and Pristeri, A. 2016. Yield components and nitrogen use in cereal-pea intercrops in Mediterranean environment. Field Crops Res. 196: 379-388.
  27. Moradi, P., Asghari, J., Mohsenabadi, G.R. and Samizadeh, H.A. 2012. Role of triple intercropping system in weeds control and naked-pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo ) yield. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 24: 4. 17-31. (In Persian)
  28. Nakhzari Moghadam, A., Chaich, M.R., Mazaheri, D., Rahimian Mashhadi, H., Majnoon Hosseini, N. and Noriani, A.A. 2009. The Effects of Corn (Zea mays) and Green Gram (Vigna radiata) Intercropping on some quantity characteristics of forage and weed biomass. Iran j field crop sci. 40: 4. 113-121. (In Persian)
  29. Nasiri, R., Nor-Mohammadi, Q., Delkhosh, B. and Mobaser, R. 2011. Study of sweet corn planting arrangement in pure and mixed cultivation with clover on yield and yield components. Plant Physiol. 3: 12. 85-102.
  30. Peixoto, P.H.P., Cambraia, J., Sant’Anna, R., Mosquim, P.R. and Moreira, M.A. 1999. Aluminum effects on lipid peroxidation and on the activities of enzymes of oxidative metabolismin sorghum. Rev. Bras. Fisiol. Veg. 11: 3. 137-143.
  31. Qamar, I.A., Keatinge, J.D.H., Noor mohammad, T., Ali, A. and Ajmal Khan, M. 1999. Interduction and management of vetch/barley forage mixtures in the rainfed areas of Pakistan. Forage Yield. J. Agric. Res. 50: 1. 1-9.
  32. Rahimian, H., Salahi Moghadam, M. and Golvi, M. 1992. Potato intercropping with corn and sunflower. Collect J Agric Sci Ind 6: 45-85. (In Persian)
  33. Rajsawara, R.B.R. 2002. Biomass yield, essential oil yield and essential oil composition of rose-scented geranium (Pelargonium species) as influenced by row spacing and intercropping with cornmint (Mentha arvensisf. piperascens Malin. ex Holmes). Ind Crops Prod. 16: 133-144.
  34. Rezaei-Chianeh, E., Dabbagh-Mohammadi-Nasab, A., Shakiba, MR., Ghassemi-Golezani, K. and Aharizad, S. 2011. Intercropping of maize and faba bean at different plant population densities. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 6: 7.1786-1793. (In Persian)
  35. Rostaei, M. and Fallah, S. 2016. Assessment of canopy characteristics and essential oil yield of fenugreek and black cumin in intercropping under application of organic and chemical fertilizer. J Sustain Agric Prod Sci. 25: 4. 1-23. (In Persian)
  36. Salehi, A., Mehdi, B., Fallah, S., Kaul, H.P. and Neugschwandtner, R.W. 2018. Productivity and nutrient use efficiency with integrated fertilization of buckwheat–fenugreek intercrops. Productivity and nutrient use efficiency with integrated fertilization of buckwheat–fenugreek intercrops. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 110: 407-425.
  37. Sandoqdaran, M.H. 2000. Report on the cultivation of Maki tea (sour tea) in Chah-nime Zabol. Deputy of Education and Research of Natural Resources and Livestock Research Center of Sistan and Baluchestan Province. (In Persian)
  38. Shaalan, M.N. 2005. Influence of biofertilizers and chicken manure on growth, yield and seeds quality of Nigellas sativa plants. Egypt. J. Agric. Res. 83: 2. 811-825.
  39. Sharifi, Y., Aqa-Khani, M., Modares-Sanavi, A.M. and Sorosh-zade, A. 2006. The effect of mixing ratio and plant density on forage production in sorghum mixed culture with cowpea. J. Agric. Sci. 1: 2. 363-370.
  40. Strydhorst, S.M., King, J.R., Lopetinsky, K.J. and Neil-Harker, K. 2008. Forage potential of intercropping barley with faba bean, lupin, or field pea. J. Agric. Sci. 100: 1. 182-190.
  41. Tsuob, M., Mukhala, E., Ogindo, H. and Walker, S. 2004. Productivity of maize bean intercropping in a semi-arid region of South Africa. Water SA. 29: 4. 381-388.
  42. Van Loon, L.C. 2007. Plant response to plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 119: 243-254.
  43. Vandermeer, J.H. 1989. The Ecology of intercropping. Cambridge University Press.
  44. Vessy, K. 2003. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria as biofertilizer. Plant Soil. 255: 571-586.
  45. Wang, Z., Zhao, X., Wu, P., Gao, Y., Yang, Q. and Shen, Y. 2017. Border row effects on light Sinterception in wheat/maize strip intercropping systems. F. Crop. Res. 214: 1-13.
  46. Yaseen, M., Singh, M. and Ram, D. 2014. Growth, yield and economics of vetiver (Vetiveria zizanioides Nash) under intercropping system. Ind Crops Prod. 61: 417-421.
  47. Zand, B. and Ghaffari-Khaliq, H. 2002. Evaluation of grain sorghum-cowpea intercropping under different planting patterns. Proceeding of the 7th Iranian Congress of Crop Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 24-26 Aug. 2001. (In Persian)
  48. Zhang, F.S. and Li, L. 2003. Using competitive and facilitative interactions in intercropping system enhance crop productivity and nutrient use efficiency. Plant Soil. 248: 305-312.
Journal of Crop Production
Volume 14, Issue 4
January 2022
Pages 105-122

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics