Effect of intercropping with barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) on dryland chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) yield, land use efficiency and weed control

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 expert/ Jahad Keshavarzi Markazi Province

3 1. Crop and Horticultural Science Research Department, Markazi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center Research and Education Center (AREEO), Arak, Iran.

Abstract

Background and objectives: Intercropping is an important strategy for enhancing the sustainability of agriculture in the world by increasing food production and land use per unit area. Intercropping, which is defined as growing two or more species simultaneously in the same field during a growing season, is considered as an important strategy in developing sustainable production systems. In most cases, one of the plants introduced in intercropping is a plant from the legumes family. Chickpea is a plant that plays an important role in sustainable agriculture and soil fertility.
Materials and methods: In order to evaluation effect of chickpea-barley intercropping on component yield, grain yield and weed control, an experiment was conducted at the Jahad Keshavarzi Shazand Research Station during 2019-2020 growing season. Experiment was conducted as a randomized complete block design with three replications. Different experimental treatment were: 1- chickpea sole cropping without weeding, 2- chickpea sole cropping with weeding, 3- barley sole cropping (normal weed control by farmers), 4- additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 15% barley, 5- additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 30% barley, 6- additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 45% barley, 7- additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 60% barley and 8- additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 75% barley. Intercropping systems was evaluated by using land equivalent ratio (LER) index.
Results: The results showed that most of the evaluated properties were affected by experimental treatments. The highest chickpea biological yield and grain yield (334 and 99 g m-2, respectively) belonged to the chickpea sole cropping with weeding treatment. Also, the highest barley biological yield and grain yield (423 and 195 g m-2, respectively) were obtained in its sole cropping treatment. In intercropping treatments, the highest grain yield of chickpea and barley (94 and 190 g m-2, respectively) were obtained in additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 15% barley and additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 75% barley treatments, respectively. Also, intercropping treatments significantly reduced the weed density and total dry weight. Thus, all intercropping treatments had less weed density and biomass in comparison to chickpea sole cropping without weeding. The lowest weed density and biomass (7.3 plant per m2 and 60 g m-2, respectively) belonged to the additive intercropping of 100% chickpea + 75% barley treatment. In addition, in all intercropping treatments, the land equivalent ratio and relative value indices were higher than one, which indicates the usefulness of intercropping.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that, chickpea-barley intercropping systems decreased chickpea grain yield in comparison with sole cropping with weeding treatment but, in general, in the most of the intercropping treatments, was better than their sole cropping and associated with improving economic yield and land use efficiency. In general, it can be said that chickpea and barley intercropping, while better controlling chickpea weeds, has a higher total yield than sole cropping of both chickpea and barley species and increases land use efficiency.

Keywords

References

1.Mazaheri, D. 2008. Intercropping. 2nd Ed. Tehran, Iran. 262 p. (In Persian)
2.Crusciol, C.A.C., Momesso, L., Portugal, J.R., Costa, C.H.M., Bossolani, J.W., Costa, N.R., Pariz, C.M., Castilhos, A.M., Rodrigues, V.A., Costa, C., Franzluebbers, A.J. and Cantarella, H. 2021. Upland rice intercropped with forage grasses in an integrated crop-livestock system: Optimizing nitrogen management and food production. Field Crop Res. 261: 108008.
3.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 advantageand nitrogen fate in an additive maize-soybean relay intercropping system. Sci. Total Environ. 657: 987-999.
4.Gitari, H.I., Nyawade, S.O., Kamau, S., Karanja, N.N., Gachene, C.K.K., Raza, M.A., Maitra, S. and Schulte-Geldermann, E. 2020. Revisiting intercropping indices with respect to potato-legume intercropping systems. Field Crop Res. 258: 107957.
5.Javanmard, A., Amani Machiani, M., Lithourgidis, A., Morshedloo, M.R. and Ostadi, A. 2020. Intercropping of maize with legumes: A cleaner strategy for improving the quantity and quality of forage. Cleaner Engin. Technol. 100003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2020.100003.
6.Madembo, C., Mhlanga, B. and Thierfelder, C. 2020. Productivity or stability? Exploring maize-legume intercropping strategies for smallholder conservation Agriculture farmers in Zimbabwe. Agri. Syst. 185: 102921.
7.Momeni, F. 2015. Effect of different cultivation ratios of spring barley and chickpea on yield and weed control. MSc Thesis. University of Maragheh.77 p.
8.Thobatsi, T. 2009. Growth and yield responses of maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) in an intercropping system. MSc Thesis. University of Pretoria.149 p.
9.Cheriere, T., Lorin, M. and Corre-Hellou, G. 2020. Species choice and spatial arrangement in soybean-based intercropping: Levers that drive yield and weed control. Field Crop Res. 256: 107923.
10.Kaur, N., Bhullara, M.S. and Gill, G. 2016. Weed management in sugarcane-canola intercropping systems in northern India. Field Crop Res. 188: 1-9.
11.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.
12.Soleimanpur, L., Naderi, R., Bijanzadeh, E. and Emam, Y. 2017. Response of faba bean and pea yield and yield components to cereal-legume intercropping under weed competitions. J. Puls. Res. 8.1: 150-163. (In Persian)
13.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.
14.Shaygan, M., Mazaheri, D., Rahimian Mashhadi, H. and Peyghambari, S.A. 2008. Effect of planting date and intercropping maize and foxtail millet on their grain yield and weeds control. J Crop Sci. 10: 1. 31-46. (In Persian)
15.Sanjani, S., Hosseini, M.B., Chaichi, M.R. and Rezvan Beidokhti, S. 2009. Effect of additive intercropping sorghum: cowpea on weed biomass and density in limited irrigation system. Iran J. Agron. Res. 7: 1. 85-95. (In Persian)
16.Weisany, W., Zehtab-Salmasia, S., Raeia, Y., Sohrabib, Y. and Ghassemi-Golezani, K. 2016. Can arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi improve competitive ability ofdill + common bean intercrops against weeds? Eur. J. Agron. 75: 60-71.
17.Amossé, C., Jeuffroy, M.H., Celette, F. and David, C. 2013. Relay-intercropped forage legumes help to control weeds in organic grain production. Eur. J. Agron. 49: 158-167.
18.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.
19.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)
20.Alizadeh, Y., Koocheki, A. and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2009. Yield, yield components and potential weed control of intercropping bean with sweet basil. J. Agron. Res. 7: 2. 541-553. (In Persian)
21.Hamzei, J. and Seyedi, S. M. 2015. 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)
22.Poor Amir, F., Koochaki, A.R., Nasiri Mahallati, M. and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Assessment of sesame and chickpea yield and yield components in the replacement series intercropping. Iran J. Agron. Res. 8: 5. 747-757. (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.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.
25.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 Iran. J. Cleaner Prod. 106: 343-350.
26.Samadani, B. and H. Rahimian Mashhadi. 2007. Effects of mono and polyculture of cover crops on weed control and yield in tomato fields. Plant Pathog. Dis. 75: 2. 128-144.
27.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.
28.Chapagain, T. and Riseman, A. 2014. Barley–pea intercropping: Effects on land productivity, carbon and nitrogen transformations. Field Crop Res. 166: 18-25.
29.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.
30.Ghanbari, A., Ghadiri, H., GhafariMoghadam, M. and Safari, M. 2010. Evaluation of intercropping of maize and cucurbit and effect on weed control. Iran J. Field Crop Sci. 41: 1. 43- 55. (In Persian)
31.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.
32.Mardani, F. and Balouchi, H. 2015. Effect of intercropping on the yield and some quantitative and qualitative traits of fenugreek and anise. Sustain. Agric. Prod. Sci. 25: 2. 1-16. (In Persian)
33.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. Iran J. Crop Sci. 17: 2. 139-152. (In Persian)
34.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.
35.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.
36.Rezaei-chianeh, E., Khorramdel, S. and Garachali, P. 2015. Evaluation of relay intercropping of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) on their yield and land use efficiency. Agric. Crop Manag. 17: 1. 183-196. (In Persian)
37.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.
38.Kouchaki, A.R., Laleghani, B. and Najibnia, S. 2009. Evaluation of intercropping of bean and corn. Agron. Res. 7: 2. 605-614. (In Persian)
Journal of Crop Production
Volume 15, Issue 1
March 2022
Pages 1-18

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics