ارزیابی عوامل مدیریتی مؤثر بر خلأ عملکرد سویا در استان مازندران با روش تحلیل مقایسه کارکرد (CPA)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری زراعت، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران

2 دانشیار گروه زراعت، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران

3 استاد گروه زراعت، پژوهشکده ژنتیک و زیست‌فناوری کشاورزی طبرستان، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

4 استادیار گروه مهندسی مکانیک بیوسیستم، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

5 استادیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: از آنجایی که اختلاف بین عملکرد واقعی و عملکرد قابل دستیابی تحت شرایط مطلوب مدیریتی یکی از مشکلات اساسی تولید گیاهان زراعی در ایران و جهان می‌باشد؛ کمی‌سازی میزان خلأ عملکرد و شناسایی عوامل ایجادکننده آن می‌تواند راهبردی کلیدی و امیدوارکننده برای افزایش تولید و دستیابی به امنیت غذایی باشد. در این بین با توجه به اهمیت گیاهان دانه روغنی از جمله سویا [Glycine max (L.) Merril] در اقتصاد جهانی و نیاز ملزم به روغن‌‌های خوراکی و پروتئین‌های گیاهی، برآورد خلأ عملکرد این محصولات و شناسایی عوامل ایجادکننده آن، ضمن افزایش تولید، می‌تواند سبب بهبود کارایی استفاده از زمین و نیروی کار شده که در نتیجه آن منجر به کاهش هزینه‌ها و پایداری تولید می‌گردد. بنابراین، پژوهشی به‌صورت پیمایشی در سال 1398 به‌منظور شناخت و تعیین سهم هر یک از عوامل مدیریتی مؤثر بر خلأ عملکرد سویا در 301 مزرعه استان مازندران انجام شد.

مواد و روش‌ها: در پژوهش حاضر از روش تحلیل مقایسه کارکرد (CPA) جهت بررسی عوامل مدیریتی محدودکننده عملکرد سویا و برآورد خلأ عملکرد آن در سیزده شهرستان تحت کشت سویا استان مازندران استفاده شد. به این منظور، تمامی اطلاعات مربوط به مدیریت زراعی از مرحله تهیه بستر بذر تا برداشت محصول مانند استفاده یا عدم استفاده از شخم، تعداد دفعات شخم ثانویه، روش کاشت، مساحت مزرعه، محصول پیشین، رقم مورد استفاده، مقدار بذر مصرفی و محل تهیه آن، تلقیح یا عدم تلقیح بذور با باکتری، نوع و مقدار کودهای مصرفی، نوع، مقدار و تعداد دفعات مصرف علف‌کش، قارچ‌کش و حشره‌کش، تعداد دفعات آبیاری و میزان آب مصرفی، روش‌های آبیاری و شیوه برداشت محصول به‌صورت مراجعه حضوری و گفتگوی مستقیم با سویاکاران جمع‌آوری شد. داده‌های گردآوری شده از پایش مزارع در مجموع شامل 81 متغیر کمی و کیفی مدیریت زراعی بودند که رابطه تمامی این متغیرها و عملکرد واقعی به‌دست آمده از مزارع با استفاده از رگرسیون گام به گام در نرم‌افزار SAS نسخه 9/1 مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. در نهایت با استفاده از معادله تولید به‌دست آمده و مقادیر مؤلفه‌های مدل، سهم هر یک از عوامل محدودکننده در ایجاد خلأ عملکرد مشخص شدند.

یافته‌ها: نتایج پژوهش حاضر نشان داد که از 81 متغیر مدیریت زراعی مورد بررسی در این مزارع، مدل نهایی تولید با ده متغیر مستقل رقم ساری، محصول قبلی باقلا، کاشت بذر با ردیف‌کار، شمار شخم ثانویه، مقدار گوگرد مصرفی، کاربرد کود پتاسیم کلرید، کود دی‌آمونیوم فسفات، کاربرد علف‌کش، سیستم آبیاری بارانی متحرک و آبیاری سطحی به‌عنوان عوامل اصلی محدودکننده عملکرد سویا در مازندران انتخاب شدند. میزان خلأ عملکرد به‌دست آمده بر پایه اختلاف بین متوسط عملکرد واقعی ثبت شده از مزارع و عملکرد مطلوب (به‌ترتیب 2464/97 و 6028/66 کیلوگرم در هکتار) برآورد شده با مدل (عملکرد قابل‌حصول) 3563/70 کیلوگرم در هکتار بود که سه عامل مقدار گوگرد مصرفی، محصول قبلی باقلا و سیستم آبیاری بارانی متحرک به‌ترتیب با مقادیر 873/87، 620/49 و 546/33 کیلوگرم در هکتار بیش‌ترین سهم (به‌ترتیب 24/52، 17/41 و 15/33 درصد) را در خلأ عملکرد به‌وجود آمده داشتند.

نتیجه‌گیری: با توجه به برآورد عملکرد قابل‌حصول از داده‌های مشاهده شده مزارع، به‌نظر می‌رسد که با اعمال مدیریت صحیح زراعی نظیر استفاده از منابع کود گوگردی متناسب با نیاز گیاه، برقراری تناوب صحیح زراعی و وارد نمودن گیاهان مناسب در تناوب، ارائه تسهیلات و نوسازی ماشین‌‌آلات کشاورزی، توسعه و ترویج روش‌های نوین آبیاری بتوان این خلأ به‌وجود آمده (59 درصد) را کاهش و میزان عملکرد سویا را به‌طور قابل‌توجهی بهبود بخشید.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of management factors affecting soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merril] yield gap in Mazandaran province using comparative performance analysis (CPA)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Faezeh Mohammadi Kashka 1
  • Zeinolabedin Tahmasebi Sarvestani 2
  • Hemmatollah Pirdashti 3
  • Ali Motevali 4
  • Mehdi Nadi 5
1 Ph.D. Student of Agronomy, Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Professor, Genetics and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute of Tabarestan, Department of Agronomy, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University, Sari, Iran.
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Biosystem Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University, Sari, Iran.
5 Assistant Professor, Department of Water Engineering, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University, Sari, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives
Closing the gap between actual yields which are currently obtained from the fields (actual field yields) and the maximum yields that can be achieved under favorable management conditions (attainable yield) is one of the most critical problems in crop production in Iran and the world. Quantifying the yield gap and identifying its primary causes for this purpose can be a key and promising strategy to increase production per unit area and to achieve food security. Meanwhile, considering the importance of oilseeds like soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merril] in the global economy and the need for edible oils and vegetable proteins, estimating and identifying the causes of the yield gap, while increasing production, it can improve land use and labor efficiency, and leads to costs saving and sustainable production. In this way, a survey study was conducted in 2019 to identify and determine the share of each of the managerial factors affecting the soybean yield gap in 301 farms in Mazandaran province.

Materials and Methods
In the present survey, CPA method was used to investigate the decision-making factors which limit soybean yield and to estimate its yield gap in 13 soybean cultivated cities of Mazandaran province. For this purpose, all information relevant to crop management, from seedbed preparation to harvesting, was gathered through interviews with 301 soybean producers. These management factors included items such as use or non-use of a plow, number of secondary tillage, planting method, field area, previous crop, the used cultivar, seed rate and its preparation site, inoculation/non-inoculation of seeds with N-fixing bacteria, type and the amount of fertilizers, type, amount, and number of herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides usages, number of irrigations and the amount of used water, irrigation type and harvesting methods. Field monitoring data included 81 quantitative and qualitative crop management variables that the relationship between all these variables and actual field yields was analyzed using stepwise regression in SAS (v9.1) software. In the end, the contribution of each limiting factor to the creation of a yield gap was determined using the resulting production function and management parameters values.

Results
The findings of this study revealed that of the 81 studied management variables, the final production function with 10 independent variables was selected. These variables included the sari variety (J.K-695), previous crop (faba bean), use the row planter, number of secondary tillage, sulfur rate, application of herbicide, KCl, and (NH4)2HPO4 fertilizers, sprinkler irrigation system, and surface irrigation, which were identified as the main limiting factors for soybean yield in Mazandaran province. Based on the difference between the average actual yield recorded on farms (2464.97 kg ha-1) and the maximum attainable yield (6028.66 kg ha-1) predicted by the production function, the yield gap was 3563.70 kg ha-1, which is three factors including sulfur rate, previous crop (faba bean) and sprinkler irrigation system with the values of 873.87, 620.49 and 546.33 kg ha-1, respectively, had the highest share (24.52, 17.41 and 15.33%, respectively) in of the soybean yield gap.

Conclusion
According to the predicted attainable yield which derived from actual farm data it seems that adoption of proper crop managements such as using sulfur fertilizer resources appropriate to plant needs, an appropriate crop rotation and selection of plants suitable for rotation, providing facilities and modernization of agricultural machinery, and develop and promote new irrigation can reduce this gap (59%) and significantly improve soybean yield in Mazandaran province.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Attainable yield
  • Crop management
  • Comparative performance analysis (CPA)
  • Food security
  • Sulfur

مراجع

1.Hochman, Z., Gobbett, D., Horan, H. and Garcia, J.N. 2016. Data rich yield gap analysis of wheat in Australia. Field Crops Res. 197: 97-106. ‏
2.Havas, K. and Salman, M. 2011. Food security: its components and challenges. Int. J. Food Saf. Nutr. Publ. Health. 4: 1. 4-11. ‏
3.Skaf, L., Buonocore, E., Dumontet, S., Capone, R. and Franzese, P.P. 2019. Food security and sustainable agriculture in Lebanon: an environmental accounting framework. J. Cleaner Prod. 209: 1025-1032. ‏
4.Van Ittersum, M.K., Cassman, K.G., Grassini, P., Wolf, J., Tittonell, P. and Hochman, Z. 2013. Yield gap analysis with local to global relevance-a review. Field Crops Res. 143: 4-17. ‏
5.Foley, J.A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K.A., Cassidy, E.S., Gerber, J.S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N.D., O’Connell, C., Ray, D.K., West, P.C., Balzer, C., Bennett, E.M., Carpenter, S.R., Hill, J., Monfreda, C., Polasky, S., Rockström, J., Sheehan, J., Siebert, S., Tilman, D. and Zaks, D.P.M. 2011. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature. 478: 7369. 337-342. ‏
6.Van Wart, J., Kersebaum, K.C., Peng, S., Milner, M. and Cassman, K.G. 2013. Estimating crop yield potential at regional to national scales. Field Crops Res. 143: 34-43.
07.Rong, L.B., Gong, K.Y., Duan, F.Y., Li, S.K., Zhao, M., He, J., Zhou, W.B. and Yu, Q. 2021. Yield gap and resource utilization efficiency of three major food crops in the world–a review. J. Integr. Agric. 20: 2. 349-362. ‏
8.Beza, E., Silva, J.V., Kooistra, L. and Reidsma, P. 2017. Review of yield gap explaining factors and opportunities for alternative data collection approaches. Eur. J. Agron. 82: 206-222. ‏
9.De Bie, C.A.J.M. 2000. Comparative performance analysis of agro-ecosystems. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University and Research Centre. Enschede, Netherlands. 232 p.
10.Rajapakse, D.C. 2003. Biophysical factors defining rice yield gaps. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede (ITC). Netherlands. 100 p.
11.Alberda, T.H. 1962. Actual and potential production of agricultural crops. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 10: 5. 325-333. ‏
12.Van Ittersum, M.K. and Cassman, K.G. 2013. Yield gap analysis-rationale, methods and applications-introduction to the special issue. Field Crops Res. 143: 1-3.
13.Egli, D.B. and Hatfield, J.L. 2014. Yield gaps and yield relationships in central U.S. soybean production systems. Agron. J. 106: 2. 560-566. ‏
14.Grassini, P., Torrion, J.A., Yang, H.S., Rees, J., Andersen, D., Cassman, K.G. and Specht, J.E. 2015. Soybean yield gaps and water productivity in the western US Corn Belt. Field Crops Res. 179: 150-163. ‏
15.Battisti, R., Sentelhas, P.C., Pascoalino, J.A.L., Sako, H., de Sá Dantas, J.P. and Moraes, M.F. 2018. Soybean yield gap in the areas of yield contest in Brazil. Int. J. Plant Prod. 12: 3. 159-168. ‏
16.Sentelhas, P.C., Battisti, R., Câmara, G.M.S., Farias, J.R.B., Hampf, A.C. and Nendel, C. 2015. The soybean yield gap in Brazil–magnitude, causes and possible solutions for sustainable production. J. Agric. Sci. 153: 8. 1394-1411. ‏
17.Gorjizad, A., Soltani, A., Dastan, S. and Ajam Norouzi, H. 2019. Evaluation of potential yield and yield gap associated with crop management in improved rice cultivars in Neka region. J. Agroecol. 11: 1. 277-294. (In Persian)
17.Merlos, F.A., Monzon, J.P., Mercau, J.L., Taboada, M., Andrade, F.H., Hall, A.J., Jobbagy, E., Cassman K.G. and Grassini, P. 2015. Potential for crop production increase in Argentina through closure of existing yield gaps. Field Crops Res. 184: 145-154. ‏
19.Hajjarpour, A., Soltani, A., Zeinali, E., Kashiri, H. and Aynehband, A. 2017. Evaluation of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) yield gap in Golestan province of Iran using comparative performance analysis (CPA) method. Iran. J. Crop Sci. 19: 2. 86-101. (In Persian)
20.Nezamzadeh, S.E., Soltani, A., Dastan, S. and Ajam Norouzi, H. 2019. Evaluation of yield gap associated with crop management in rapeseed production using comparative performance analysis (CPA) and boundary-line analysis (BLA) methods in Neka region. Appl. Res. Field Crops. 32: 2. 76-107. (In Persian)
21.Soltani, A., Hajjarpour, A. and Vadez, V. 2016. Analysis of chickpea yield gap and water-limited potential yield in Iran. Field Crops Res. 185: 21-30. ‏
22.Fischer, R.A. 2015. Definitions and determination of crop yield, yield gaps, and of rates of change. Field Crops Res. 182: 9-18. ‏
23.Agricultural Planning, Economics, and Rural Development Research Institute (APERDRI). 2018. Investigating the challenges and strategies for developing the value chain of oilseeds production. Iranian's Ministry of Agriculture-Jahad. Available at Web site www.agri-peri.ac.ir (In Persian)
24.Siahmarguee, A., Torabi, B., Sohrabi Rad, E.M. and Alimagham, S.M. 2018. Effect of weeds and management factors on soybean yield gap in Kalaleh region. J. Crops Improv. 20: 2. 563-576. (In Persian)
25.Nehbandani, A., Soltani, A., Zeinali, E. and Hoseini, F. 2017. Analyzing soybean yield constraints in Gorgan and Aliabad katul using CPA method. J. Agroecol. 7: 1. 109-123. (In Persian)
26.Jha, G.K., Burman, R.R., Dubey, S.K. and Singh, G. 2011. Yield gap analysis of major oilseeds in India. J. Community Mobil. Sustain. Dev. 6: 2. 209-216. ‏
27.Ministry of Agriculture-Jahad. 2020. Annual agricultural statistics, Vol. 1. Ministry of Agriculture Planning and Economic Deputy, Iranian's Ministry of Agriculture-Jahad. Available at Web site www.maj.ir. (In Persian)
28Management and Planning Organization of Mazandaran province. 2020. Mazandaran Statistical Yearbook 2018. Deputy of Statistics and Information, Management and Planning Organization of Mazandaran province. Available at Web site: mazandaran.mporg.ir. (In Persian)
29.Cochran, W.G. 1977. Sampling Techniques (3rd Edition). John Wiley and Sons: New York. USA, 442 p.
30.Kalantari, KH. 2017. Data processing and analysis in socio-economic research. Farhang Saba. Tehran, 402 p. (In Persian)
31.Torabi, B., Soltani, A., Galeshi, S. and Zeinali, E. 2012. Analyzing wheat yield constraints in Gorgan. J. Crop Prod. 4: 4. 1-17. (In Persian)
32.Rezaei, A. and Soltani, A. 2013. An introduction to applied regression analysis. Isfahan University of Technology Publication Center. Isfahan. 294 p. (In Persian)
33.Abravan, P., Soltani, A., Majidian, M. and Mohsenabadi, Gh. 2017. Study of field management factors and underlying reasons limiting yield of oilseed rape in east of Golestan province using CPA method. J. Agroecol. 7: 2. 46-60. (In Persian)
34.Nehbandani, A., Soltani, A., Rahemi-Karizaki, A., Dadrasi, A. and Noubakhsh, F. 2021. Determination of soybean yield gap and potential production in Iran using modeling approach and GIS. J. Integr. Agric. 20: 2. 395-407. ‏
35.Bhatia, V.S., Singh, P., Wani, S.P., Chauhan, G.S., Rao, A.V.R.K., Mishra, A.K. and Srinivas, K. 2008. Analysis of potential yields and yield gaps of rainfed soybean in India using CROPGRO-soybean model. Agric. For. Meteorol. 148: 8-9. 1252-1265. ‏
36.Henderson, B., Godde, C., Medina-Hidalgo, D., Van Wijk, M., Silvestri, S., Douxchamps, S., Stephenson, E., Power, B., Rigolot, C., Cacho, O. and Herrero, M. 2016. Closing system-wide yield gaps to increase food production and mitigate GHGs among mixed crop–livestock smallholders in Sub-Saharan Africa. Agric. Syst. 143: 106-113. ‏
37.Dobermann, A.R., Arkebauer, T.J., Cassman, K.G., Drijber, R.A., Lindquist, J.L., Specht, J.E., Walters, D.T., Yang, H., Miller, D.N., Binder, D.L., Teichmeier, G.J., Ferguson, R.B. and Wortmann, C.S. 2003. Understanding corn yield potential in different environments. Agronomy and Horticulture - Faculty Publications, University of Nebraska – Lincoln. 16 p.
38.Espe, M.B., Cassman, K.G., Yang, H., Guilpart, N., Grassini, P., van Wart, J., Anders, M., Beighley, D., Harrell, D., Linscombe, S., McKenzie, K., Mutters, R., Wilson, L.T. and Linquist, B.A. 2016. Yield gap analysis of US rice production systems shows opportunities for improvement. Field Crops Res. 196: 276-283. ‏
39.Zhang, W., Cao, G., Li, X., Zhang, H., Wang, C., Liu, Q., Chen, X., Cui, Z., Shen, J., Jiang, R., Mi, G., Miao, Y., Zhang, F. and Dou, Z. 2016. Closing yield gaps in China by empowering smallholder farmers. Nature. 537: 671-674. ‏
40.Chapagain, T. and Good, A. 2015. Yield and production gaps in rainfed wheat, barley, and canola in Alberta. Front. Plant Sci. 6: 990. ‏
41.Nemecek, T., von Richthofen, J.S., Dubois, G., Casta, P., Charles, R. and Pahl, H. 2008. Environmental impacts of introducing grain legumes into European crop rotations. Eur. J. Agron. 28: 3. 380-393. ‏
42.Ouda, S., Zohry, A. E.H., and Noreldin, T. 2018. Crop rotation: an approach to secure future food. Springer. Switzerland. 194 p.
43.De Ron, A.M. 2015. Grain legumes (Volume 10 of handbook of plant breeding). Springer. New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London, 438 p.‏
44.Etemadi, F., Hashemi, M., Barker, A.V., Zandvakili, O.R. and Liu, X. 2019. Agronomy, nutritional value, and medicinal application of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Hortic. Plant J. 5: 4. 170-182. ‏
45.Mahdi, S.S., Hassan, G.I., Samoon, S.A., Rather, H.A., Dar, S.A. and Zehra, B. 2010. Bio-fertilizers in organic agriculture. J. Phytol. 2: 10. 42-54.
46.Siadat, S.A., Bahrami, S., Pourhadian, H., and Moshatati, A. 2012. Effects of intra row space on yield and yield components of soybean cultivars in summer cultivation in Khormabad. Crop Physiol. J. 4: 15. 5-15. (In Persian)
47.Ebone, L.A., Caverzan, A., Tagliari, A., Chiomento, J.L.T., Silveira, D.C. and Chavarria, G. 2020. Soybean seed vigor: uniformity and growth as key factors to improve yield. Agron. 10: 4. 545. ‏
49.Jahad Agricultural Organization of Ardabil Province. 2015. Planting pattern of two rows soybeans on ridge planting. Agricultural Extension Coordination Management, Jahad Agricultural Organization of Ardabil Province. (In Persian)
49.Ng, T.B. 2011. Soybean: applications and technology. IntechOpen Press, India. 412 p.
50.Mansouri rad, A., Nakhzari Moghadam, A., Soltani, A., Rahemi Karizaki, A. and Torabi B. 2018. Identifying soybean yield-limiting factors by using comparative performance analysis (case study: Golestan province – Kalaleh). J. Crops Improv. 19: 4. 1033-1046. (In Persian)
51.Liu, W., Tollenaar, M., Stewart, G. and Deen, W. 2004. Impact of planter type, planting speed, and tillage on stand uniformity and yield of corn. Agron. J. 96: 6. 1668-1672.
52.Cao, W., Huang, H. and Yang, M. 2014. The effect of agricultural mechanization on food yield in China. P 141900127, In 2014 Montreal, Quebec Canada July 13–July 16, 2014. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan.
53.Burkitbayev, M., Bachilova, N., Kurmanbayeva, M., Tolenova, K., Yerezhepova, N., Zhumagul, M., Mamurova, A., Turysbek, B. and Demeu, G. 2021. Effect of sulfur-containing agrochemicals on growth, yield, and protein content of soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr). Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 28: 1. 891-900.
54.Gutierrez Boem, F.H., Prystupa, P. and Ferraris, G. 2007. Seed number and yield determination in sulfur deficient soybean crops. J. Plant Nutr. 30: 1. 93-104. ‏
55.Mirza, IAB., Sirsath, M.K. and Khazi, GS. 2018. Production and productivity of soybean as influenced by integrated sulphur management. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 7: 1S. 2469-2471.
56.Ansori, A. and Gholami, A. 2015. Improved nutrient uptake and growth of maize in response to inoculation with Thiobacillus and Mycorrhiza on an alkaline soil. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 46: 17. 2111-2126.
57.Capaldi, F.R., Gratão, P.L., Reis, A.R., Lima, L.W. and Azevedo, R.A. 2015. Sulfur metabolism and stress defense responses in plants. Trop. Plant Biol. 8: 60-73.
58.Cazzato, E., Tufarelli, V., Ceci, E., Stellacci, A.M. and Laudadio, V. 2012. Quality, yield and nitrogen fixation of faba bean seeds as affected by sulphur fertilization. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. B Soil Plant Sci. 62: 8. 732-738.
59.Fazili, I.S., Jamal, A., Ahmad, S., Masoodi, M., Khan, J.S. and Abdin, M.Z. 2008. Interactive effect of sulfur and nitrogen on nitrogen accumulation and harvest in oilseed crops differing in nitrogen assimilation potential. J. Plant Nutr. 31: 7. 1203-1220.
60.Malakouti, M.J. 2018. The role of optimal fertilizer consumption in increasing yield and production of healthy agricultural products. Moballeghan. Tehran, 480 p. (In Persian)
61.Itelima, J.U., Bang, W.J., Onyimba, I.A., Sila, M.D. and Egbere, O.J. 2018. Bio-fertilizers as key player in enhancing soil fertility and crop productivity: a review. Dir. Res. J. Agric. Food Sci. 6: 3. 73-83.
62.Pereira, D.G.C., Santana, I.A., Megda, M.M. and Megda, M.X.V. 2019. Potassium chloride: impacts on soil microbial activity and nitrogen mineralization. Cienc. Rural. 49: 5. 1-9.
63.Kurniadie, D. and Redmann, R.E. 1999. Growth and chloride accumulation in soybean cultivars treated with excess KCl in solution culture. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 30: 5-6. 699-709.
64.Hollander, N.G.D. 2012. Growth characteristics of several clover species and their suitability for weed suppression in a mixed cropping design. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University. Wageningen, Netherlands, 132 p.
65.Naylor, R.E.L. 2002. Weed management handbook, 9th ed. Blackwell Science Ltd. Oxford, UK, 432 p.‏
66.Vollmann, J., Wagentristl, H. and Hartl, W. 2010. The effects of simulated weed pressure on early maturity soybeans. Eur. J. Agron. 32: 4. 243-248.
67.Gibson, D.J., Millar, K., Delong, M., Connolly, J., Kirwan, L., Wood, A.J. and Young, B.G. 2008. The weed community affects yield and quality of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). J. Sci. Food Agric. 88: 3. 371-381.
68.Da Silva, A.F., Galon, L., Aspiazú, I., Ferreira, E.A., Concenço, G., Júnior, E.U.R. and Rocha, P.R.R. 2013. Weed management in the soybean crop. P 85-112, In: H.A. El-Shemy (eds), Soybean: pest resistance, IntechOpen, London, UK.‏
69.Bakhsh, K., Hassan, I. and Maqbool, A. 2005. Factors affecting cotton yield: a case study of Sargodha (Pakistan). J. Agri. Soc. Sci. 1: 4. 332-334.
70.Ziska, L.H. 2016. The role of climate change and increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide on weed management: herbicide efficacy. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 231: 304-309.
71.Norsworthy, J.K. 2003. Use of soybean production surveys to determine weed management needs of south carolina farmers. Weed Technol. 17: 1. 195-201.
72.Harker, K.N., and O'Donovan, J.T. 2013. Recent weed control, weed management, and integrated weed management. Weed Technol. 27: 1. 1-11. ‏
73.Vivian, R., Reis, A., Kálnay, P.A., Vargas, L., Ferreira, A.C.C. and Mariani, F. 2013. Weed management in soybean-issues and practices. P 47-84, In: H.A. El-Shemy (eds), Soybean: pest resistance, IntechOpen, London, UK.
74.Hassanli, A.M., Ebrahimizadeh, M.A. and Beecham, S. 2009. The effects of irrigation methods with effluent and irrigation scheduling on water use efficiency and corn yields in an arid region. Agric. Water Manag. 96: 1. 93-99.
75.Koech, R. and Langat, P. 2018. Improving irrigation water use efficiency: a review of advances, challenges and opportunities in the Australian context. Water. 10: 12. 1771.
76.Garcia y Garcia, A., Persson, T., Guerra, L.C. and Hoogenboom, G. 2010. Response of soybean genotypes to different irrigation regimes in a humid region of the southeastern USA. Agric. Water Manag. 97: 7. 981-987.
مجله تولید گیاهان زراعی
دوره 15، شماره 1
فروردین 1401
صفحه 73-100

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار