The effects of plant density and irrigation management on forage production of quinoa and forage sorghum

Document Type : Complete scientific research article

Author

Professor, Agricultural and Horticultural Research Department, Golestan Agriculture and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Promotion Organization, Gorgan, Iran

10.22069/ejcp.2024.21796.2602

Abstract

Background and objectives: It is predicted that at least 10 million people will be hungry and malnourished in the world by the end of this century. To reduce the food insecurity, crop production will have to be doubled, and produced in more environmentally sustainable ways. This can be achieved by expanding the area of crop production, increasing per hectare yield and improving crop quality. Furthermore, during the second half of the past century, rise in per hectare crop productivity was due to improved or high yield potential. The productivity of plants are strongly influenced by environmental stresses. In the water scarcity condition, using deficit irrigation and appropriate cultivar are the most strategies to improve water productivity. A new generation of dry-tolerant forage varieties would allow for landscape development in stresses environments and where fresh water is limited or not available for irrigation. Hence, the present study was to design with the following objectives: To determine yield and morphogical parameters of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) and forage sorghum) sorghum bicolor), verities at different levels of irrigation and plant densities.
Materials and methods: A field experiment was conducted during 2015 and 2016 at Aghghala salinity station. The experiment was laid out in a randomized complete block design in form of factorial split plot factorial experiment and replicated four times. At this research effects of irrigation frequency at four levels (irrigation after 5, 10, 15 and 20 days), and plant density at three levels (11.1, 16.7 and 33.3 plants per m2) on quinoa (Santa Maria and Sajama Iranshahr) and verities of KFS3 and Speed feed sorghums were investigated. Sowing date was the time of soil temperature reaching to 12 °C and the harvesting date was the time of 5% flowering of each plot. For yield estimation, after removing borders, 6 m2 harvested. Data were analyzed using SAS. Treatment means were compared using LSD at the 95%probability level.
Results: Results showed that, the difference in most treats between treatments was significant. Investigation of dry forage yield at irrigation treatment showed, irrigation every 5 days interval with dry yield of 6.01 ton ha-1 had the highest yield and yield components of dry forage. With increasing plant density and dicrasing irrigation frequency dry matter dicreased but this dicreasing mostly accurse at interaction affect of irrigation every 20 days interval and plant density of 333000 plant ha-1. Plant density of 11.12 plants per m2 with yield of 4.98 ton ha-1 had the highest yield. The suitable treatment was variety of Santa Maria at 11.1 plants per m2 with dry yield of 4.77 ton ha-1 had the highest dry yield and variety of Speedfeed sorghum at plant density of 33.3 plants per m2 with yield of 2.53 ton ha-1 had the less ranking.
Conclusions: In all, in order to high quantitative yield irrespective of variety, most frequently irrigation had higher yield than less and intermediate irrigation regime. Though, when comparing the four varieties, quinoa (Santa Maria variety (significantly with dry yield of 4.42 ton ha-1 produced higher dry forage yield. The present findings suggest that in semiarid environments (where saving water is important) it seems that incrasing irrigation frequency is effective for good stand establishment in the saline soils could be insured if proper management is applied in the farms.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Salehi, M., Kafi, M. & Kiyani, A.R. (2012). Effect of salinity on biomass of Kochia scoparia and trend of soil salinity. Seed and plant improvement journal, 27(4), 417-433. [In Persian]
  2. Saberi, A.R. (2011). Irrigation management under salinity and water stress for forage sorghum. Lambert Academic publishing. 278.
  3. Ziaei, S.M., Salimi, Kh, and Amiri S. R. (2020). Investigation of quinoa cultivation (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under different irrigation intervals and foliar application in saravan region. Journal of plant physiology, I.A.U. Ahvaz, Spring 2020, 12(45), 113-152. (In Persian)
  4. Kocheki, A. (1984). Agronomy in dry region. Mashhad university jahad publication. [In Persian]
  5. Gualtieri, M. & Rapacctni, S. (1990). Sorghum grin in poultry feeding. Journal of World's Poultry Science, 46(3), 246-254.
  6. Sepahvand, N., Tavazo, M. & Kahbazi, M. (2010). Quinoa as a valuable crop for protection food and stable agriculture in Iran. 11th congress of agronomy and plant breeding. [In Persian]
  7. Johnson , D.L. & Croissant, R.L. (1990). Alternate Crop Production in Colorado. Technical Bulletin LTB90-3, Cooperative Extension, Colorado State University.
  8. Kafi M. Asadi H. & Ganjeali A. (2010). Possible utilization of high-salinity waters and application of low amounts of water for production of the halophyte Kochia scoparia as alternative fodder in saline agroecosystems. Agricultural water management, 97(2), 139-147.
  9. Solimani, M.R., Shabahang, J., Khazaiy, H.R., Kafi, M. & Ziyaiy, S.M.S. (2012). Effect of of plant density and number of cutting on yield and yield components of grain and forage of Kochia scoparia under irrigation with saline water conditions. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 6(2), 335-342. [In Persian]
  10. Abdolahpour, H., Tohidi Nejad, E. & Pasandi Pour, A. (2021). Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilizers on morpho-physiological characteristics and seed yield of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 15(57), 57-72. [In Persian]
  11. Dao, A., Alvar-BeltrÃ, J., Gnanda, A., Guira, A., Nebie, L. & Sanou, J. (2020). Effect of different planting techniques and sowing density rates on the development of quinoa. African journal of agricultural research, 16(9), 1325-1333.
  12. Eisa, S.S., Abd El Samad, E.H., Hussin, S.A., Ali, E.A., Ebrahim, M., González, J.A. & Abdel-Ati, A.A. (2018). Quinoa in Egypt-plant density effects on seed yield and nutritional quality in marginal regions. Middle East. Journal of applied science, 2(8), 515-522.
  13. Sepahvand, N.A. & Shikh, F. (2012). Adaptation study on Quinoa as a new crop in Golestan province. National congress on medical crop and natural production. University of Khorasan Shomali, Bojnord. [In Persian]
  14. Kakabouki, I.P., Roussis, I., Hela, D., Papastylianou, P., Folina, A. & Bilalis, D. (2019). Root growth dynamics and productivity of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) in response to fertilization and soil tillage. Folia Horticulture, 31(2), 285-299.
  15. Karami, R., Farajee, H., Movahedi Dehnavi, M. & Khoshroo, A. (2020). Interaction of nitrogen and plant density on growth and yield of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Journal of crop production, 13(1), 111-124. [In Persian]
  16. Altuner, F., Oral, E., & Kulaz, H.( 2019). The impact of different sowing times of the quinoa (chenopodium quinoa Willd) and its varieties on the yield and yield components in TurkeyMardin ecology condition.  Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 17(4), 10105-10117.
  17. Mohammadi, F., Maleki, A. and Fathi, A. (2021). Effects of drought stress and humic acid on plant growth, yield quality and its components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Journal of Crop Nutrition Science, 7(3), 11-23.
  18. Mostafaei, M., Jami Al-Ahmadi, M., Salehi, M. & Shahidi, A. (2018). Effect of different irrigation and density levels on functional properties of quinoa plant. 1st National Congress on the new Opportunities for Production and Employment in Agriculture Sector of Eastern Iran. 14 Feb, Birjand, Iran, pp: 153. [In Persian]
  19. Salek Mearaji, H., Tavakoli, A. & Sepahvand, N. (2021). Evaluating the effect of cytokinin foliar application on morphological traits and yield of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under optimal irrigation and drought stress conditions. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 14(4), 479-498. [In Persian]
  20. Samadzadeh, A.R., Zamani, GH.R. & Fallahi, H.R. (2020). Possibility of quinoa production under South-Khorasan climatic condition as affected by planting densities and sowing dates. Applied Research in Field Crops, 33(1), 82-104. [In Persian]
  21. Taheri, F., Maleki, A. & Fathi, A. (2021). Study of different levels of nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of quinoa grain yield. Journal of plant physiology, 13(50), 135-149. [In Persian]
  22. Kiani, A.R., & Salehi, M. (2016). The experiences of wheat and kochia production using saline water and soil resources in Golestan province2016. Journal of Water and Sustainable Development, 2(2), 59-66. [In Persian]
  23. Shalhevet, J. & Hsiao, T.C. (1986). Salinity and drought. A comparison of their effects on osmotic adjustment, assimilation, transportation and growth. Irrigation science, 3(7), 249-264.
  24. Khani Nejhad, S., Nabati, G., Kafi, M. & Ghorbani, S. (2012). Study of nutrition value of Kochia scoparia forage. At salinity conditions. First national desert congress, Tehran. Desert International research center of Tehran University.
  25. Mosabeygi, H.,  Zeidali, E. & Fathi, A. (2023). The effect of tillage systems and plant density on element concentration, yield, yield components, density, and weed biomass in quinoa. Journal of Crop Science Research in Arid Regions, 5(1), 147-164. [In Persian]
  26. Najafinezhad, H. Shakeri, P.  & Amirpour Robat, M.   (2023). Effect of Planting Date and Plant Density on Forage Yield and Quality of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) Varieties in Cold Temperate Region of Kerman Province in Iran. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 1(17), 439-460. [In Persian]