Study of morphological, phonological and seed yield treats on foxtail millet (Setaria italica L.) cultivars at different planting patterns

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Agronomy and Garden Research Department, Golestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Gorgan, Iran

2 Expert ion of Agronomy and Horticulture Department of Agricultural and Natural Recourses Research and education of Golestan, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Gorgan, Iran,

Abstract

Study of seed yield potential on foxtail millet(Setaria italica L.) cultivars at different plant density in Gonbad region Extended abstract
Background and objectives
Achievement to accumulate environments potential such as light lead to extend leaf area and increasing in yield and yield components parameters of foxtail millet lines compared to check treatment via improvement of plant height, number of leaf, number of node, panicle length and stem diameter reported by many researchers. Works in the late 1980s demonstrated that yields can be raised two to three-fold by using available improved varieties and appropriate agronomic techniques. But, these findings need to be refined, improved and tested for local climatic, soil and crop conditions.
Materials and Methods
In order to study of yield, yield component and some morphological and phonological treats of foxtail millet cultivars, a field experiment was conducted across two years at Gonbad Agricultural Research Station. This experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design in form of split split plot experiment and replicated three times. At this research effects of plant density at three levels (30, 35 and 40 plants m2), planting distance at three levels (40, 50 and 60 cm) and verities of KFM2, KFM5 and Bastan, millets were investigated. Each variety was planted in four lines, the length of planting lines were 10 meters. The seeds were planted in series, and then based of row distance treatments and plant densities of D1, D2 and D3 sparse operation done. For forage yield estimation, after removing borders, 4 m2 from middle rows of end of plot harvested. For measurements of agronomical and morphological treats, 10 bushes randomly sampled. Data were analyzed using SAS software.
Results
The results showed that; with decreasing plant density, 1000-seed weight increased from 2.68 to 3.3. Within variety KFM5 line had the most 1000-seed weight (3.29 gr). The lowest plant density had the highest panicle length. And the most number of grain at panicle (3560) and grain yield (2.78 ton ha-1) obtained from plant density of 350 plant ha-1. The 50 cm distance row had the most number of grain at panicle 3456).
Conclusion
Overall findings showed that; plant density of 350000 plant ha-1 with yield of 2.70 ton ha-1 and 7.7 percent increasing, was better than check treatment. Mean comparison of cultivars showed; KFM5 variety with 2.71 ton ha-1 and 14.02 percent increasing, was optional variety. Meanwhile, the KFM5 which is early reaching variety, because of open cluster panicle don’t effected by disease.

Keywords

References

1.Shekari, A. 2011. Effect of plant density and planting date on forage yield and yield component of foxtail millet. M.Sc thesis of Azad University, Varamin Branch. 98 p. (In Persian)
3.Agha Ali Khani, M., Eshagh Ahmadi, M. and Modarres sanavi, A.M.  2007. Effect of plant density and nitrogen amounts on yield and forage quality of per millet. Pazhoh Sazand J. 77: 4. 19-27. (In Persian)
4.Dewet, J. 1986. Origin, evaluation and systematic of minor cereals. P 19-30. In small millet agriculture. OXFORD and IBH. Publishing Co. PVT. LTD.
5.Khajehpour, M.R. 2005. Industrial plants. Jahad-e- Daneshgahi Press of Isfahan University of Technology. (In Persian)
6.Liu, Y. and Labuschagne, M. 2009. The influence of environment and season on stalk yield in kenaf. Ind Crops Prod. 29: 2. 377-380.
7.Singh, AK., Singh, R., Subramani, R., Kumar, R. and Wankhede, D.P. 2016. Molecular approaches to understand nutritional potential of coarse cereals. Cur. Genomics. 17: 3. 177-192.
8.Imran, M., Ashiq, H., Rizwan, K., Sartaj, K., Zahid, M., Ali. G.Z. and Daulat. B. 2010. Study of correlation among yield contributing and quality parameters in different millet varieties grown under and HWAR conditions. Sarhad J. Agri. 26: 365-368.
9.Muhammed, B. and Shib, K.H. 2004. Genetic variability and correlation studies in foxtail millet (Staria italica). AICSIP Regional Agricultural Research Station, Palem 509215, Mahbubnegar District (Andhra Prandesh), India. Crop Res. 28: 1-3. 94-97.
10.Simmonds, N.W. 1981. Genotype (G), environment (E) and GE components of crop yields. Exp Agric.17: 4. 355-362.
11.Bai, Q., Fan, G., Gu, Z., Cao, X. and Gu, F. 2008. Effects of culture conditions on γ-aminobutyric acid accumulation during germination of foxtail millet (Setaria italica L.). Eur. Food Res. Technol. 228: 2. 169-175.
12.Khajehpour, M.R. 2009. Principles and fundamentals of crop production. Third edition, Jahad-e- Daneshgahi Press of Isfahan University of Technology. (In Persian)
13.Gubbels, G.H. and Dedio, W.E. 1986. Effect of plant density and soil fertility on the performance of nonoil sunflower. Can. J. Plant Sci. 66: 801-804.
14.Koocheki, A. and Sarmadnia, Gh.H. 1999. Physiology of crop plants. Jahad-e- Daneshgahi Press of Mashhad University. (In Persian)
15.Mehrani, A., Azari, A., Zand, B., Saberi, A.R., Tabatbaie, A., Miri, Kh., Abadooz, M. and Chabook. Kh. 2017. Quantitative and qualitative yield comparison of Pearl millet lines (Pennisetum americanum). Final Report of Seed and Plant Improvement Institute. (In Persian)
16.De Leon, N., Jannink, J.-L., Edwards, J.W. and Kaeppler, S.M. 2016. Introduction to especial issue on genotype by environment interaction. Crop Sci. 56: 5. 2081-2089.
17.Shinde, S., Sonone, A. and Gaikwad, A. 2010. Association of characters and path coefficient analysis for forage and related traits in bajra × napier grass hybrids. Int. J. Plant Sci. 5: 1. 188-191.
18.Kumar, S., Babu, C., Revathi, S. and Iyanar, K. 2017. Estimation of genetic variability,Heritability and association of green fodder yield with contributing traits in Napiergrass (Pennisetum purpureum Schum.). Int. J. Plant Res. 30: 463-468.
19.Koch, D.W. 2002. Foxtail millet- management for supplemental emergency forage. Extension Center of University of Wyoming.
2.Suma, P.F. and Urooj, A. 2012. Antioxidant activity of extracts from foxtail millet (Setaria italica). J. Food Sci Technol. 49: 4. 500-504.
20.Dawson, J.C., Rivière, P., BerthellotJ.-F., Mercier, F., Kochko, P.D., Galic, N., Pin, S., Serpolay, E., Thomas, M. and Giuliano, S. 2011. Collaborative plant breeding for organic Agricultural systems in developed countries. Sustainability. 3: 8. 1206-1223.
21.Bhoite, K., Pardeshi, S., Mhaske, B. and Wagh, M. 2008. Study of genetic variability in pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.). Agric. Sci. Dig. 28: 2. 115-117.
22.SAS Institute. 2004. SAS/STAT user's guide. release. Release 9.0. 4th ed. Statistical Analysis Institute, Cary, NC.
23.Mehrani, A., Azari, A., Zand, B., Saberi, A.R., Tabatbaie, A., Miri, Kh., Abadooz, M. and Chabook. Kh.  2015. Quantitative and qualitative yield comparison of foxtail millet lines (Staria italica). Final Report of Seed and Plant Improvement Institute. (In Persian)
24.Dezfouli, A. and Mehrani, A. 2010. A study of the relationships between yield and yield components in promising cultivars of foxtail millet (Setaria italica). IJFCS. 41: 2. 413-421.
25.Shi, Y., Ma, Y., Zhang, R., Ma, H. and Liu. B. 2015. Preparation and characterization of foxtail millet bran oil using subcritical propane and supercritical carbon dioxide extraction. J Food Sci. Technol. 52: 5. 3099-3104.
26.Zhang, G., Liu, X., Quan, Z., Cheng, S., Xu, X., Pan, S., Xie, M., Zeng, P., Yue, Z. and Wang, W. 2012. Genome sequence of foxtail millet (Setaria italica) provides insights into grass evolution and biofuel potential. Nat. Biotechnol. 30: 6. 549-554.
27.Assaeed, A. 1994. Evaluation of some forage sorghum varieties under the condition of central region, Saudi Arabia. An. Agric. Sci. 39: 2. 649-653.
28.Chabook, K.H. and Pakzad Ghadikolaiy, A. 2017. Effect of plant density and planting pattern on growth and qualitative and quantitative forage yield of new foxtail millet and common millet in Mazandaran Province.  Final report of seed and plant improvement institute. (In Persian)
29.Aazari Nasrabaad, A. and Mirzaiy, M.R.  2012. Effect of sowing date on yield and yield components of foxtail millet (Staria italica) lines. Seed Plant Improve J. 28: 1. 95-105. (In Persian)
31.Neville, B.W., Lardy, G.P.,  Nyren P. and Sedvies, K.K.  2005. Evaluating beef cow performance: Comparing cresed wheat grass/legume, big bluesem and foxtail millet in Swath Grazing. NDSU. 57: 238-241.
33.Douglas, G.F., Lyon, D.J. and Nielsen, D.C. 2006. Evaluating crops for a flexible summer fallow cropping system. Agron. J. 96: 1510-1517.
34.Duvick, D.N. 1996. Plant breeding, an evolutionary concept. Crop Sci. 36: 3. 539-548.
35.Fikere, M., Tadesse, T. and Letta, T. 2008. Genotype - environment interactions and stability parameters for grain yield of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) genotypes grown in South Eastern Ethiopia. Int. J. Sustain. Crop Prod. 3: 6. 80-87.
Journal of Crop Production
Volume 15, Issue 1
March 2022
Pages 19-36

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics