ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effects of Plant Density and Leaf Spraying o Growth, Yield and Yield Components of Flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) as a Medicinal Plant
Introduction
Biodiversity of medicinal and aromatic plants contributes significantly towards human livelihood and development and thus plays a predominant role in the wellbeing of the global population. According to WHO reports, around 80 % of the global population still relies on traditional medicines and natural substances. Descurainia sophia L. seed, also known as flixweed, a commonly used herbal medicine in Iranian folk medicine is one of those medicinal herbs with prevalent use. Agronomic practices are required to be standardized for realizing yield potential. Among the different agronomic practices, foliar spray of macronutrients is most important factor in determining the yield. Plant density is another important agronomic factor that manipulates micro- environment and affects growth, development and yield of plants. Within certain limits, increase of plant population density declines the growth and yield per plant but the reverse occurs for yield per unit area. The optimum plant density to attain highest yield may vary with the genotype and agronomic factor. Hence the purpose of this study was to determine the effects of plant density and leaf spraying on growth, yield and yield components of flixweed under Torbat-e Jam climatic conditions.
Materials and methods
In order to study the effects of plant density and leaf spraying of growth, biological yield, seed yield, yield components and harvest index of flixweed, an experiment was conducted as factorial layout based on a randomized complete block design with three replications at the Agricultural Research Station, Azad University of Torbt-e Jam, Khorasan-e Razavi during growing season of 2016-2017. Treatments included four plant densities (10, 20 and 40 plants.m-2) and leaf straying at three plant stages (such as emergence, before flowering and early seed formation stages) and control (without spraying). Leaf spraying was done using complete fertilizer (5:1000). Studied traits were plant height, number of branches per plant, 1000- seed weight, seed yield, biological yield, dry weight of shoot, fresh weight of shoot and harvest index. The treatments were run as an analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine if significant differences existed among treatments means. Multiple comparison tests were conducted for significant effects using the Duncan’s test.
Results and discussion
The results showed that the simple effect of plant density was significant (p≤0.05) on number of branches per plant and harvest index of flixweed. The simple effect of foliar spraying was significant (p≤0.05) on number of branches per plant and 1000-seed weight of flixweed. The interaction effect between plant density and foliar spraying had significant effect on number of branches per plant, dry weight of shoot, seed yield, biological yield and harvest index of flixweed. The highest seed yield, biological yield and dry weight of shoot were recorded in 40 plants.m-2+ foliar spraying at early seed formation with 99, 495 and 396 g.m-2, respectively. The minimum seed yield was observed in 10 plants.m-2+ without spraying with 35 g.m-2. The lowest biological yield and dry weight were obtained in 20 plants.m-2+ foliar spraying at early seed formation with 168 and 126 g.m-2, respectively. The results for correlation coefficients between yield and yield components revealed that the highest coefficient was calculated for biological yield and dry weight of shoot (r=0.97**).
Conclusion
Agronomic management strategies had significantly effect on growth, yield, and yield components of flixweed. Generally, plant density and nutrient management are two effective techniques for agronomic management of medicinal plants such as flixweed that may decline the necessity for chemical and intensive approaches to the plant. The findings of the present study indicate that foliar spraying would be an advisable treatment that produces higher seed yield. In total, according to the results, the plant density of 40 plants.m-2+ foliar spraying at early seed formation is recommended to realize maximum seed yield flixweed cultivation in Torbat-e Jam region, Iran.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36793_49b94565a572f0e5c6803e4b3be36bef.pdf
2019-03-21
1
15
10.22067/jag.v11i1.75552
Seed yield
Complete fertilizer
Early seed formation
Dry weight of shoot
Abdollah
Mollafilabi
a.filabi@rifst.ac.ir
1
Research Institute of Food Science and Technology, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
M.R.
Gazikinejad
gazikinejad@yahoo.com
2
Department of Horticultural Sciences, Iran
AUTHOR
Adedrian, J., Taiwo, L.B., Akande, M.O., Sobulo, R.A., and Idowu, O.J. 2004. Application of organic and inorganic fertilizer for sustainable maize and cowpea yields in Nigeria. Journal of Plant Nutrition 27: 1163-1181.
1
Adriana, M., Chamorro, L., Tamagno, N., Bezus, R., and Santiago, J. 2002. Nitrogen accumulation partition and nitrogen use efficiency in canola under different nitrogen availabilities. Soil Science Plant Analysis 33: 493-504.
2
Arasteh, E., and Farnia, A. 2013. Investigation the effect of drought tension and plant density on quality and quantity characteristics of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars in Lorestan climate conditions. Crop Physiology 5(19): 99-111. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
Baskin, P., Milberg, L., Andersson, J., and Baskin, M. 2004. Germination ecology of seeds of the annual weeds Capsella bursa-pastoris and Descurainia sophia originating from high northern latitudes. Weed Research 44(1): 60-68.
4
Danesh-Shahraki, A., Kashani, A., Mesgarbashi, M., Nabipour, M., and Koohi-Dehkordi, M. 2008. The effect of plant densities and time of nitrogen application on some agronomic characteristic of rapeseed. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 79: 10-17. (In Persian with English Summary)
5
Darzi, M., and Akhani, A. 2016. Effects of biofertilizer and plant density on yield and essential oil of Coriandrum sativum L. Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 31(6): 1086-1095. (In Persian with English Summary)
6
Darzi, M., and Nadeali, A. 2015. Study of the Effect of nitroxin nitrogen fertilizer and plant density on yield, yield components and essential oil of Anisum pimpinella L. in Firoozkooh region. Eco-phytochemical Journal of Medicinal Plants 3(1): 63-72. (In Persian with English Summary)
7
Donald, C.M., and Hamblin, J. 1976. The biological yield and harvest and cereal as aronomic and plant breeding criteria. Advances in Agronomy 28: 361-405.
8
Efeoğlu, B., Ekmekçi, Y., and Çiçek, N. 2009. Physiological responses of three maize cultivars to drought stress and recovery. South African Journal of Botany 75: 34–42.
9
Eilkaee, M.N., and Emam, Y. 2003. Effect of plant density on yield and yield components in two winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 3(34): 509-515. (In Persian with English Summary)
10
Gardner, F.P., Pearce, B., and Mitchell, R. 2010. Physiology of Crop Plants. Scientific Publishers. Crops 327 pp.
11
Ghasemi, S., Sharifi Ashoorabadi, E. 2014. Effects of density and intercropping of safflower (Carthamus tinctorious L.) and rocket sativa (Eruca sativa L.) on yield and land equivalent ratio. Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 30(2): 342-352. (In Persian with English Summary)
12
Ghobadi, M., Jahanbin, S., Motalebi Fard, R., and Parvizi, K. 2011. The effect of biological phosphate fertilizers to yield and yield components of potato. Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science 21(2): 117-130. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Heidari, F., Zehtab Salmasi, S., Javanshir, A., Aliari, H., and Dadpoor, M.R. 2008. The effects of application of microelements and plant density on yield and essential oil of peppermint (Mentha piperita L.). Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 24: 1-9. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Hosseinpour, M., Habibi, H., and Fotokian, M. 2012. Effect of chemical and biological nitrogen on quality and quantity of anise (Pimpinella anisum L.). Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 28(3): 551-566. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Huang, M., Liang, T., Ou-Yang, Z., Wang, L., Zhang, C., and Zhou, C. 2011. Leaching losses of nitrate nitrogen and dissolved organic nitrogen from a yearly two crops system, wheat-maize, under monsoon situations. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 91: 77-89.
16
ISTA. 2010. International rules for seed testing. Glattbrugg, Switzerland. 290 p.
17
Jones, C., Olson- Rutz, K., and Pariera Dinkins, C. 2011. Nutrient uptake timing by crop: to assist with fertilizing decisions. Report of Project in Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences p. 1-8.
18
Kandil, A.A., El-Mahands, S.I., and Mahrous, N.M. 1996. Genotypic and phenotypic variety heritability and inter relationships of some characters in oil seed rape. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 65: 275-284.
19
Karimi Afshar, A., Baghizadeh, A., and Mohammadi-Nejad, G. 2016. Evaluation of relationships between morphological traits and grain yield in cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) under normal and drought conditions. Journal of Crop Breeding 8(18): 159-165. (In Persian with English Summary)
20
Lebaschy, M.H., and Sharifi, E. 2004. Application of physiological growth indices for suitable harvesting of Hypericum perforatum. Pajouhesh v Sazandegi (65): 65-75. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Mae, T., Inaba, A., Kaneta, Y., Masaki, S., Sasaki, M., Aizawa, M., Okawa, S., Hasegawa, S., and Makino, A. 2008. A large -grain rice cultivar, Akita 63, exhibits high yield with high physiological nitrogen use efficiency. Field Crops Research 34(4): 123-139.
22
Malakouti, M.J., Keshavarz, P., and Karimian, N. 2008. A comprehensive approach towards identification of nutrients deficiencies and optimal fertilization for sustainable agriculture. Tarbiat Modarres University Press, Tehran, Iran. 755 p. (In Persian)
23
Marroti, M., Piccaglia, R., and Giovanelli, E. 1996. Differences in essential composition of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) Italian cultivars related to morphological characteristics. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 44: 3926-3929.
24
Mostafavi, M.J. 2014. The effect of chemical and biological fertilizers on quantitative and qualitative yield of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in Mashhad climate condition. MS.c. Thesis. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
25
Najafpour Navaei, M., Golipour, M., and Parsa, E. 2008. The effects of densities and planting dates on seed yield of Agrimonia eupatoria L. Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 24(2): 198-206. (In Persian with English Summary)
26
Norouzi, A., and Shahbazi, I. 2011. The role of extension education in development of organic agriculture in Iranian villages. Community Development (Rural and Urban Communities) 2(2): 1-22.
27
Ozgüven, M., Muzaffer, K., Şener, B., Orhan, I., Şeeroğlu, N., Kartal, M., and Kaya, Z. 2008. Effects of varying nitrogen doses on yield, yield Components and artemisinin content of Artemissia annua L. Industrial Crops and Products 27: 60-64.
28
Rassam, G.A., Naddaf, M., and Sephidkon, F. 2007. Effects of sowing time and plant density on yield and yield components of seed in Anise (Pimpinella anisum). Pajouhesh v Sazandegi 75: 127-132. (In Persian with English Summary)
29
Rezvani Moghaddam, P., Mohammadabadi, A., and Moradi, R. 2011. The effect of application of chemical and organic fertilizers on yield and yield components of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in different plant densities. Journal of Agroecology 2(2): 256-265. (In Persian with English Summary)
30
Roose, T. 2000. Mathematical model of plant nutrient uptake. PhD. Thesis. University of Oxford, UK.
31
Tosi Kehal, P., Esfahani, M., Rabiei, M., and Rabiei, B. 2011. Effect of concentration and time of supplementary nitrogen fertilizer application on yield and NUE of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) as a second crop in paddy field. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science 42(2): 387-396. (In Persian with English Summary)
32
Yates, D.J., and Steven, M.D. 1987. Reflection and absorption of solar radiation by flowering canopies of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). The Journal of Agricultural Science 109: 495-502.
33
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effects of Leaf Spraying with Different Concentrations of Aa40 and Humus-S Biofertilizers on Flower Yield and Corm Yield of Saffron (Crocus sativus L.)
Introduction
Saffron (Crocus sativa L.) is the most expensive spice. Better farming and improvement agronomic operations are process of production for qualitative and quantitative improvement of the product as a result of research, education and promotion of new methods of planting, growing and harvesting product. Application of new techniques to saffron could help to compete in global markets with saffron produced in other countries. The researches that have been conducted about the influence of nutrients on saffron quality and quantity, have shown that flower yield and stigma yield stigma were affected by nutrient positively. In this paper we aimed to study the effects of two types of bio-fertilizers (Humus-s and Aa40) and different concentrations on the flower yield, daughter corm yield, stigma yield, leaf weight and leaf length of saffron under the climatic conditions of Kardeh, Iran.
Materials and methods
In order to study the effects of two types of bio-fertilizers and their concentrations on flower yield, stigma yield and daughter corm yield of saffron, a field experiment was performed in a 4-year field at Kardeh dam during 2016-2017. This experiment was carried out as two-factorial based on a randomized complete block design with three replications. The first factor comprised of two types of bio-fertilizers (such as Humus-s and Aa40) and the second factor included concentrations of 0, 1, 1.5, 2 and 2.5 per 1000 as leaf spraying in two times. Fresh weight of flower, dry weight of stigma, fresh weight of stigma, dry weight of flower without stigma, fresh weight of flower without stigma, fresh weight of leaf, dry weight of leaf, weight of daughter corms, number of daughter corms, fresh weight of stigma, fresh weight of flower without stigma, flower number, number of daughter corm in different weight groups such as 0.1-5, 5.1-10, 10.1-15, and >15 g and leaf length of saffron were studied traits. The treatments were run as an analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine if significant differences existed among treatments means. Multiple comparison tests were conducted for significant effects using the Duncan’s test.
Results and discussion
The results indicated that the fertilizers had not significantly effect on none of studied traits. The effect of different concentrations was significant on fresh weight of flower, dry weight of stigma, dry weight of flower without stigma, fresh weight of leaf, weight of daughter corms, fresh weight of stigma, fresh weight of flower without stigma, number of flower, number of daughter corms with >15 g weight and leaf length of saffron. The interaction effect between fertilizer type and concentrations had significantly effect on fresh weight of leaf. The highest dry weight of stigma and dry weight of daughter corms were observed in 2.5 per 1000 with 1239.98 and 4955 g.m-2, respectively. The lowest for the traits were related to control with 930.56 and 4085 g.m-2, respectively. The maximum and the minimum number of daughter corms were obtained in 2 per 1000 and control with 415 and 380.33 No.m-2, respectively.
Conclusion
It seems that foliar spraying had positive effects on growth and yield of flower, stigma and daughter corm of saffron. So, it is recommended that foliar spraying is used in the production of saffron and besides reducing use of other common fertilizers, other benefits of this fertilizers are enjoyed. Foliar spraying in order to accurate control of releasing nutrients can be an effective step towards achieving sustainable agriculture and compatible with the environment. Using foliar spraying as a substitute for conventional iron chelate fertilizers, element of iron fertilizer is released gradually and in a controlled way and as a result provides nutrient to plant more effectively.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36800_96c867e9a4054ab38c295afc6ff498aa.pdf
2019-03-21
17
31
10.22067/jag.v11i1.75839
Biofertilizer
Humus
Nutrient management
Environmental pollutions
Reza
Sadr Abadi Haghighi
rezasadrabadi@gmail.com
1
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad Branch, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Habib
Sheikh
2
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Islamic Azad University, Mashhad Branch, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Abdollah
Filabi
a.filabi@rifst.ac.ir
3
Department of Food Biotechnology, Research Institute of Food Science and Technology, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Akbarian, M.M., Heidari Sharifabad, H., Noormohammadi, G.H., and Darvish Kojouri, F. 2012. The effect of potassium, zinc and iron foliar application on the production of saffron (Crocus sativa). Annals of Biological Research 3(12): 5651-5658.
1
Asadi, G.A., Parviz Rezvani Moghaddam, P., and Hassanzadeh Aval, F. 2014. Effects of soil and foliar applications of nutrients on corm growth and flower yield of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) in six year-old farm. Journal of Saffron Agronomy and Technology 2(1): 31-44. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Behnia, M.R., Estilai, A., and Ehdaie, B. 1999. Application of fertilizers for increased saffron yield. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 182: 9-15. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
Caballero-Ortega, H., Pereda-Miranda, R., Riveron-Negrete, L., Hernandez, J.M., Medecigo-Rios, M., Castillo-Villanueva, A., and Abdullaev, F.I. 2004. Chemical composition of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) from four countries. Acta Horticulturae 650: 321-326.
4
Glick, B.R. 1995. The enhancement of plant growth by free-living bacteria. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 41(2): 109-117.
5
Hagin, J., and Tucker, B. 1982. Fertilization of Dryland and Irrigated Soils. Springer- Verlag, Berlin.
6
Hassanzadeh Aval, F., and Mahlouji Rad, M. 2013. Effect of foliar applications of iron and manganese on vegetative growth and production of replacement corms of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) in Qom conditions. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on the Newest Scientific and Research Findings on Saffron. 30 October, Torbat-e- Heydarieh, Iran. (In Persian)
7
Hassanzadeh Aval, F., Rezvani Moghaddam, P., Bannayan Aval, M., and Khorasani, R. 2013. Effects of maternal corm weight and different levels of cow manure on corm and flower yield of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Journal of Saffron Agronomy and Technology 1(1): 22-39. (In Persian with English Summary)
8
Hosseini M., Sadeghi, B., and Aghamiri, S.A. 2004. Influence of foliar fertilization on yield of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Acta Horticulturae (ISHS) 650: 207-209.
9
Hosseini, M. 2003. Effect of foliar nutrition on yield of saffron. 3rd National Symposium on Saffron. 2-3 Dec, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)
10
Hosseini, M., Sadeghiand, B., and Aghamiri, S.A. 2004. Influence of foliar fertilization on yield of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). In: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Saffron Biology and Biotechnology. Acta Horticulturae (ISHS) 650: 207-209.
11
Kafi, M., Rashed Mohasel, M.H., Koocheki, A., and Mollafilabi, A. 2002. Saffron, Production and Processing. Zaban va Adab Press, Iran. 276 pp. (In Persian)
12
Khorasani, R., Rezvani Moghaddam, P., and Hassanzadeh Aval, F. 2013. Effect of concentration, time and frequency of foliar applications on vegetative growth and production of replacement corms of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) by using a complete nutrient solution. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on the Newest Scientific and Research Findings on Saffron. 30 October, Torbat-e- Heydarieh, Iran, 40 p. (In Persian)
13
Khorasani, R., Rezvani Moghaddam, P., and Hassanzadeh Aval, F. 2013. Effect of concentration, time and frequency of foliar applications on vegetative growth and production of replacement corms of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) by using a complete nutrient solution. In: Proceedings of the 2nd National Conference on the Newest Scientific and Research Findings on Saffron. 30 October, Torbat-e- Heydarieh, Iran. (In Persian)
14
Khorasani, R., Rezvani Moghaddam, P., and Hassanzadeh Aval, F. 2015. Effect of nutrient solution concentration, time and frequency of foliar application on growth of leaf and daughter corms of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 13(1): 193-202. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Koocheki, A. 2004. Indigenous knowledge in agriculture with particular reference to saffron production in Iran. Acta Horticulturae (ISHS) 650: 175-182.
16
Koocheki, A. 2013. Agronomic research saffron in Iran: the past and look to the future. Saffron Agronomy and Technology 1(1): 3-21. (In Persian with English Summary)
17
Koocheki, A., Jahani, M., Tabrizi, L., and Mohammad Abadi, A.A. 2011. Investigation of the effect of biological and chemical fertilizers and density on flower yield and characteristics of saffron boletus. Water and Soil Journal 1(25): 196-206. (In Persian with English Summary)
18
Koocheki, A., Tabrizi, L., Jahani, M., and Mohammadabadi, A.A. 2012. An evaluation of the effect of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) corm planting rate and pattern on the crop’s performance. Iranian Journal of Horticulture 42(4): 379-391. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Koocheki, A., Najibnia, S., and Lalehgani, B. 2009. Evaluation of saffron yield Crocus sativus L. in intercropping with cereals, pulses and medicinal plants. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 7: 173-182. (In Persian with English Summary)
20
Koocheki, A., Seyyedi, M.S., Azizi, H., and Shahriyari, R. 2014. The effects of mother corm size, organic fertilizers and micronutrient foliar application on corm yield and phosphorus uptake of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Saffron Agronomy and Technology 2(1): 3-16. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Molina, R.V., Valero1, M., Navarro1, Y., Guardiola, J.L., and Garcia-Luis, A. 2005.Temperature effects on flower formation in saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Scientia Horticulturae 103: 361–379.
22
Agricultural Jihad Organization of Khorasan-e Razavi. 2017. Agricultural Statistics. 420 pp. (In Persian)
23
Omidi, H., Naghdibadi, H.A., Golzad, A., Torabi, H., and Fotoukian, M.H. 2009. The effect of chemical and bio-fertilizer source of nitrogen on qualitative and quantitative yield of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 8: 98–109. (In Persian with English Summary)
24
Parray, J.A., Kamili1, A.N., Reshi, Z.A., Hamid, R., and Qadri, R.A. 2013. Screening of beneficial properties of rhizobacteria isolated from Saffron (Crocus sativus L.) rhizosphere. African Journal of Microbiology Research 7(23): 2905-2910.
25
Rezvani Moghaddam, P., Koocheki, A., Molafilabi, A., and Seyyedi, S.M. 2013. Effect of biological and chemical fertilizers on replacement corm and flower yield of saffron (Crocus sativus L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Science 15(3): 234-246. (In Persian with English Summary)
26
Sadeghi, B. 2012. Effect of corm weight on saffron flowering. Proceedings of the 4th International Saffron Symposium. Kashmir, India.
27
Starck, Z. 2005. Growing assistant. Application of growth regulators and biostimulators in modern plant cultivation. Rolnik Dzierawca. 2: 74-76.
28
Thomas, J., Mandal, A.K.A., Raj Kumar, R., and Chordia, A. 2009. Role of biologically active amino acid formulations on quality and crop productivity of Tea (Camellia sp.). International Journal of Agricultural Research 4: 228-36.
29
Zabihi, H., Rezayain, S., Ghasemzadeh-Ghanji, M., and Passban, M. 2011. Tempeoral changes of nutrient element in leaf saffron. 12th Iranian Soil Science Congress, Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian)
30
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Economic Evaluation of Crop Rotations in Conservation Agriculture System in Temperate-cold Climatic Zone of Mashhad
Introduction
Tillage and preparation of soil, alone account for a significant part of the crop production costs, which according to statistic of Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture in 2015, about 9% of the total cost per hectare of wheat (28 million Riyal) has been allocated to plowing and discs. Therefore, in order to reduce costs, energy consumption, equipment depreciation, saving during operation, maintaining the environment and sustainability of the production system, the approach to low tillage and no tillage has grown further. However, the development of these methods is accompanied by barriers that can be largely categorized into three broad categories: access to machinery, social barriers and economic issues. Farmers are worried that reducing the income resulting from the elimination of some inputs, especially tillage is more than reducing its costs. Here are two points that affect farmers' decision-making: One is which crop rotation is sustainable for sustainable farming? And the other is which sustainable crop rotation, can serve the economic interests of farmers? The past studies have shown that in agronomic rotations, because of the variety of products, it is necessary to evaluate the treatments in order to select the best alternatives. In addition, in conservation methods, reducing production costs cannot be a reason for the superiority of treatments with minimum tillage and it is necessary to evaluate these treatments economically.
Material and methods
This research was carried out with the aim of evaluating the economic efficiency of conservation agricultural system and comparing it with conventional agricultural practice in two crop rotations include conventional and sustainable systems. Experiments were conducted using a split-plot design based on randomized complete block with three replications in research station of Torogh Mashhad during 2011-16 growing seasons. Main factor was three tillage methods include 1-Conventional Tillage: Plow + Disc + Leveling + Faro + Seed planter, (CT), 2-Reduced Tillage : Disc +Faro + Seed planter, (RT) and 3-No Tillage: direct plant by Seed planter (NT)) were allocated in main plots and three residue management (Zero (R0), 30% (R1) and 60% (R2) of residue retention) were assigned in sub plots. Experimental treatments were compared and valuated by using partial budgeting method.
Results and discussion
Results showed that sustainable crop rotation, SCR, has a higher overall production value than conventional crop rotation, CCR,. The ratio of the production value of SCR to CCR is between 1.64 to 2.1 and 1.8 on average, and the ratio of costs is almost 1.08, but the net profit ratio of SCR to CCR is from 1.9 to 2.6 and 2.1on average. However, the difference between cost of two crop rotation is almost 8%, but the difference in their water consumption is 3% (71400 cubic meters in the CCR versus 73695 cubic meters in the SCR), in other words, in the SCR The value of production per cubic meter is 56159 Rials, in the event that in the CCR is 27157 Rials. Increasing tillage, increase the benefit of treatments. Nevertheless, increasing in residue retention in NT, decrease benefit. Although, in RT and CT increasing in residue retention to R1 increase and to R2 decrease benefit. Therefore, in RT and CT, economical treatment is R1. In the CCR, the highest net income and rate of return treatment was CT + R1. In the event that in SCR, the highest income and the lowest cost treatment was NT + R0. In the CCR, the treatment of CT + R1, with the net benefit of 246371580 Rials and a rate of return, ROR, 437%, had the highest net benefit and ROR. In the event that in the SCR, the treatment of NT + R0, with the net benefit of 450020790 Rials had the highest income and the lowest cost. These results indicate that applying conservation agriculture in the CCR isn’t economical. But if the crop rotation changes, then the conservation agriculture in the field of no tillage is economical, and isn’t for residue retention. ConclusionResults showed that SCR has a higher overall production value than CCR. In the CCR, the highest net income and rate of return treatment was CT + R1. In the event that in SCR, the highest income and the lowest cost treatment was NT + R0.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36806_d02422016d5c7569eed86a6eed4f38c8.pdf
2019-03-21
33
51
10.22067/jag.v11i1.79348
Net benefit
Partial budgeting
rapeseed
Rate of return
wheat
Shojaat
Zare
shojaat168@gmail.com
1
Economic, Social and Extension Research Department, Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Ali Akbar
Moayyedi
moayediali@gmail.com
2
Seed and Plant Improvement Research Department, Khorasan Razavi Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Abedi, S., Yazdani, S., and Salami, H. 2018. Financial Evaluation of Conservation Agriculture Technology in Wheat Production of Fars Province: Translog cost function approach. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research 48: 573-584. (In Persian with English Summery)
1
Chaudhary, V., Gangwar, B., and Pandey, D. 2006. Auditing of energy use and output of different cropping systems in India. Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal 8: 1-13.
2
Hansen, B., and Krause, M. 1989. Impact of agronomic and economic factors on farm profitability. Agricultural Systems 30: 369-390.
3
Hughes, D., Butcher, W., Jaradat, A., and Penaranda, W. 1995. Economic analysis of the long-term consequences of farming practices in the barley cropping area of Jordan. Agricultural Systems 47: 39-58.
4
Jamshidi, A., Nouri, S.H., Jamshidi, M., and Jamini, D. 2014. Investigation of social factors affecting the use of tillage conservation practices: A case study of Shabab county farmers in Ilam province. Journal of Rural Development Strategies 1: 99-117. (In Persian with English Summery)
5
Latifi, S., Raheli, H., Yadavar, H., and Saadi, H.A. 2017a. Identification and analysis of driving factors of conservation agriculture development in Iran. Iranian Agricultural Extension and Education Journal 13: 105-125.
6
Latifi, S, Raheli, H., Yadavar, H., and Saadi, H. 2017b. Analysis of the barriers to development of conservation agriculture in Iran. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 26: 167-184. (In Persian with English Summery)
7
McKinney, D.C., and Savitsky, A.G. 2006. Basic Optimization Models for Water and Energy Management. Thechnical report from the University of Texas at Austin. Available at (accessed 22 February 2019).
8
Perrin, R., Anderson, J., Winkelmann, D., and Moscardi, E. 1988. From Agronomic Data to Farmer Recommendations: An Economics Training Manual. CIMMYT,Economics Program International Maize Wheat Improvement Center.
9
Rani, P.L., and Yakadri, M. 2017. Economic evaluation of rice-maize-green manure cropping system under different tillage and weed management practices in conservation agriculture. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 6: 2363-2368.
10
Rustamova, I. 2016. Evaluation of economic efficiency of using resource saving technologies (Conservation Agriculture) in irrigated lands. Journal of Global Economics 4: 197.
11
Shafiq, M., Azeem, M., and Longmire, J. 1993. Diagnosing alternatives in conventional crop rotations: sunflowers as an alternative to wheat in the cotton-based cropping systems of Pakistan's Punjab. Agricultural Systems 42: 245-264.
12
Zare Fizabadi, A. 1998. Evalovation on efficiency of energy and economical output of conventional and ecological agronomic systems in different crop rotations based on wheat. PhD Dissertation, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Zare, S., and Shahbazi, H.A. 2006. Economic analysis of water allocation in Khorasan sugar beet crop systems. Journal of Sugar Beet 22: 91-108. (In Persian with English Summery)
14
Zare, S., Zare Fizabadi, A., and Sabouhi, M. 2014. Investigation of yield and economic analysis of wheat- based crop rotation systems. Seed and Plant Production Journal 30-2: 19-33. (In Persian with English Summery)
15
Zentner, R., Brandt, S., Kirkland, K., Campbell, C., and Sonntag, G. 1992. Economics of rotation and tillage systems for the Dark Brown soil zone of the Canadian Prairies. Soil and Tillage Research 24: 271-284.
16
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluation of energy indices and its impact on global warming potential for potato production: a case study, Golestan province
Introduction
Nowadays, the agricultural sector is largely dependent on energy consumption due to response to increasing food requirements for the growing population of the earth and providing adequate and appropriate foods. Recently evaluation of input, output and global warming potential (GWP) have been applied in sciences of agriculture. Although, further crops production without considering the environmental issues and lack of evaluation the energy indices, do not seem logical. On the other hand, high price and limitation of energy resources used in the agricultural products is also other important reasons for energy analysis in agricultural ecosystems. Energy shortage and importance of agriculture in feeding the world oriented many studies to evaluating the quantities of fuel and energy in different products and different sites. Different quantities of energy are consumed per each hectare of potato production based on different inputs such as fertilizers, fossil fuels, electricity, seeds, pesticides and machinery that will lead to greenhouse gases emission including CO2, N2O and CH4. Increasing the concentration of such gases in the atmosphere can cause global warming. So serious attention to reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions seems to be necessary. For this purpose, fuel and energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions were investigated in all potato fields in Golestan province. Finally, some strategies were presented for their consumption reduction.
Materials and Methods
In order to determine the fuel and energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions and how to reduce it, 95 potato fields in Golestan province were investigated through systematic random sampling. The amount of inputs, including fossil fuels was recorded and energy analysis was done based on the consumed inputs. Also, the greenhouse gases emission of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane derived from energy consumption for agricultural inputs and agronomic operations was calculated. Finally, energy efficiency, energy productivity, specific energy, net energy and total GWP, GWP in area unit, product weights, input energy and output energy were also calculated.
Results and Discussion
Results showed that total input and output energy were 30.8 and 79.2 GJ per hectare, respectively. In a study, the total input energy in potato fields in Ardabil province was 81.6 and 102.4 GJ.ha-1, respectively (Mohammadi et al., 2008). Also the most direct input energy from fuel in potato farms was 14.1 percent and the highest indirect input energy farms was 27 percent that related to fertilizers. The ratio of output to input energy, energy productivity and specific energy in potato farms were calculated 2.5, 0.71 and 1.4 respectively. Energy productivity in potato fields in Kurdistan province for commercial and traditional fields were calculated 0.38 and 0.39 respectively, which shows that energy productivity in Golestan province is higher than Kurdistan province.
The GWP observed in potato farms was 1350.2 (kg CO2.ha-1). For potato farms the highest GWP was related to nitrogen fertilizer and fuel consumption. Results indicated that consumption of fuel and fertilizers constitute the high percent of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.
Conclusions
Based on this study results, the use of devices that reduce fuel consumption is recommended, also need for research on crop rotation and nitrogen fixation plants in rotation were revealed. The use of Rhizobia bacteria and biological nitrogen fixation in rotation and organic fertilizers can be effective in reducing the use of nitrogen fertilizers and consequently, energy consumption and GHG emission. On the other hand, it can be said that increasing the yield along with reducing inputs consumption, especially fossil fuels and nitrogen fertilizer, can be effective in increasing energy efficiency.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36815_d019d4766a421a58e424d0e4ea2ee4c4.pdf
2019-03-21
53
68
10.22067/jag.v12i3.73855
Specific Energy
Indirect Energy
Fuel
Field operations
Mohammad Taghi
Feyz Bakhsh
feyz_54@yahoo.com
1
Department of Agricultural and Horticultural Research, Center for Research and Education of Agriculture and Resources Golestan Province Natural, Agricultural Research, Education and Promotion Organization, Gorgan, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohammad Ali
Dorri
mohamaddori@yahoo.com
2
Department of Forest and Pasture Research, Center for Research and Education of Agriculture and Resources Golestan Province Natural, Agricultural Research, Education and Promotion Organization, Gorgan, Iran
AUTHOR
Nasibe
Rezvan Talab
na_rezvan@yahoo.com
3
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Crop Production, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran
AUTHOR
Abdollahpour, S.H., and Zaree, S. 2009. Evaluation of wheat energy balance under rain fed farming in Kermanshah. Sustainable Agriculture Science 20: 97-106. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Ahmadi, M., and Aghaalikhani, M. 2012. Analysis of energy use in cotton cropping in Golestan province in order to represent a strategy for increase of resources productivity. Journal of Agroecology 4: 151-158. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Akcaoz, H., Ozcatalbas, O., and Kizilay, H. 2009. Analysis of energy use for pomegranate production in Turkey. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 7: 475-480.
3
Alimagham S.M., Soltani A., Zeinali E., and Kazemi, H. 2017. Energy flow analysis and estimation of greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions in different scenarios of soybean production (Case study: Gorgan region, Iran). Journal of Cleaner Production 149: 621-648.
4
Alimagham, S.M., Soltani A., and Zeinali, E. 2013. Fuel consumption, energy use and GHG emissions from field operations in soybean production. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 7: 1-23. (In Persian with English Summary)
5
Alipoor, A., Keshavarz-Afshar, R., Ghaleh Golab Behbahani A., Karimi Nejad M., and Mohammadi, V. 2014. Evaluation of energy flow in irrigated wheat agroecosystems. A case study: Shahr-e-Rey City. Journal of Agriculture Science and Sustainable Production 23: 59-69. (In Persian with English Summary)
6
Bonari, E., Mazzoncini, M., and Peruzzi, A. 1995. Effect of conservation and minimum tillage on winter oilseed rape in a sand soil. Soil and Tillage Research 33: 91-108.
7
Canakci, M., Topakci, M., Akinci, I., and Ozmerzi, A. 2005. Energy use pattern of some field crops and vegetable production: case study for Antalya region, Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management 46: 655–666.
8
Darlington, D. 1997. What is efficient agriculture? Available at URL: http:// www.veganorganic.net/agri.htm.
9
Erdal, G., Esengun, K.H., Erdal, H., and Gunduz, O. 2007. Energy use and economic analysis of sugar beet production in Tokat province of Turkey. Energy 32: 35–41.
10
Esengun, K., Erdal, G., Gunduz, O., and Erdal, H. 2007. An economic analysis and energy use in stake-tomato production in Tokat province of Turkey. Renewable Energy 32: 1873-81.
11
Feyzbakhsh, M.T., and Soltani, A. 2013. Energy flow and global warming potential of corn farm. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 6(2): 89-107. (In Persian with English Summary)
12
Ghahderijani, M., Keyhani, A.R., Tabatabaeefar, S.A., and Omid, N. 2009. Evaluation and determination of energy ratio for potato production in different level of cultivated area in the western Isfahan. Case study: Fereydoon-Shahr. Journal of Agriculture Sciences and Natural Resources 16: 183-193. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Haj Seyed Hadi, M.R. 2006. Energy efficiency and ecological sustainability in conventional and integrated potato production. Advanced Technology in the Environmental Field 501-534. Available at: .
14
Hatirli, S.A., Ozkan, B., and Fert, C. 2006. Energy inputs and crop yield relationship in greenhouse tomato production. Renewable Energy 31: 427-438.
15
Hossein Panahei, F., and Kafi, M. 2013. Evaluation of energy budget and its productivity in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) production farms of Kurdistan Province, Case study: Dahgalahn plain. Journal of Agroecology 4: 159-169.
16
IIES, Institute for International Energy Studies. 2007. Iran Hydrocarbons Energy Balance, Ministry of oil and gas.
17
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1996. Revised Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Cambridge University Press, UK.
18
Kaltsas, A.M., Mamolos, A, P., Tsatsasarelis, C.A., Nanos, G.D., and Kalburtji, K.L. 2007. Energy budget in organic and conventional olive groves. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 122: 243-251.
19
Karkacıer, O., and Goktolga, Z. 2005. Input-output analysis of energy use in agriculture. Energy Conversion and Management 46(9-10): 1513-1521.
20
Khoshnevisan, B., Rafiee, S., Omid, M., Mousazadeh, H., and Rajaeifar, M.A. 2014. Application of artificial neural networks for prediction of output energy and GHG emissions in potato production in Iran. Agricultural Systems 123: 120-127.
21
Kitani, O. 1998. CIGR, Handbook of agricultural engineering volume 5, Energy & Biomass Engineering. ASAE publication.
22
Koga, N. 2008. An energy balance under a conventional crop rotation system in northern Japon: Perspectives on fuel ethanol production from sugerbeet. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 125: 101-11.
23
Koochecki, A., and Hosseini, M. 1999. Energy Productivity in Agricultural Ecosystems. Mashad University Press. 317 pp.
24
Kramer, K.J., Moll, H.C., and Nonhebel, S. 1999. Total greenhouse gas emissions related to the Dutch crop production system. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 72: 9-16.
25
Manos, B., Begum, M.A., Kamruzzaman, M., Nakou, I., and Papathanasiou, J. 2007. Fertilizer price policy, the environment and farms behavior. Journal of Policy Modelling 29: 87-97.
26
Mc Laughlin, N.B., Grant, B.A., King, D.J., and Wall, G.J. 1997. Energy inputs for a combined tillage and liquid manure injection system. Can. Agr. Eng. 39: 289-295.
27
Mohammadi, A., Tabatabaeefar, A., Shahin, Sh., Rafiee, Sh., and Keyhani, A. 2008. Energy use and economic analysis of potato production in Iran a case study: Ardabile province. Energy Conversion and Management 49: 3566-3570.
28
Nasiri Mahallati, M., Koocheki, A., Kamali, G., and Marashi, H. 2006. Investigating the climate change effects on agricultural climate indicators, Iran. Journal of Agriculture Sciences and Technology 20: 71-82. (In Persian with English Summary)
29
Ozkan, B., Akcaoz, H., and Fert, C. 2004. Energy input–output analysis in Turkish Agriculture. Renewable Energy 29: 39–51.
30
Pimental, D., and Pimental, M.H. 2008. Food, Energy and Society. Taylor & Francis. 266 Pp.
31
Pishgar-Komleh, S.H., Ghahderijani, M., and Sefeedpari, P. Energy consumption and CO2 emissions analysis of potato production based on different farm size levels in Iran. Journal of Cleaner Production 33: 183-191.
32
Rajabi Hamedani, S., Shabani, Z., and Rafiee, S. 2011. Energy inputs and crop yield relationship in potato production in Hamadan province of Iran. Energy 36: 2367-2371.
33
Rathke, G.W., and Diepenbrock, W. 2006. Energy balance of winter oil seed rape cropping as related to nitrogen supply and preceding crop. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 35- 44.
34
Rezvantalab, N., Soltani, A., Zeinali, E., and Daylam Salehi, R. 2015. Evaluation of Fuel and Energy Use and Greenhouse Gases Emissions in Wheat and Soybean Production in Golestan Province. PhD thesis, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. Gorgan, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
35
Safa, M., Samarasinghe, S., and Mohsen, M. 2011. A field study of energy consumption in wheat production in Canterbury, New Zealand. Energy Conversation Management 52: 2526-2532.
36
Sayin, C., Mencet, M.N., and Ozkan, B. 2005. Assessing of energy policies based on Turkish agriculture: current status and some implications. Energy Policy 33: 2361-2373.
37
Shahan, S., Jafari, A., Mobli, H., Rafiee, S., and Karimi, M. 2008. Energy use and economic analysis of production in Iran: A case study from Ardabial province. Journal of Agricultural Technology 4: 77-88.
38
Singh G., Singh S., Singh J. 2004. Optimization of energy inputs for wheat crop in Punjab. Energy Conversation Management 45: 453-465.
39
Singh, J. 2002. On farm energy use pattern in different cropping systems in Haryana, India. In: International Institute of Management, University of Flensburg, Sustainable Energy System and Management, Master of Science, Germany.
40
Snyder, C.S., Bruulsema, T.W., Jensen, T.L., and Fixen, P.E. 2009. Review of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 133: 247-266.
41
Soltani, A., Rajabi, M.H., Zeinali, E., and Soltani, E. 2009. Evaluation of environmental impact of crop production using LCA: wheat in Gorgan. Electronic Journal of Crop Production, 3: 201-218. (In Persian with English Summary)
42
Soltani, A., Rajabi, M.H., Zeinali, E., and Soltani, E. 2013. Energy inputs and greenhouse gases emissions in wheat production in Gorgan, Iran. Energy 50: 54-61.
43
Soltani, A. Maleki, M.H.M., and Zeinali, E. 2014. Optimal crop management can reduce energy use and greenhouse gases emissions in rainfed canola production. International Journal of Plant Production 8: 587-604.
44
Strapatsa, A.V., Nanos, G.D., and Tsatsarelis, C.A. 2006. Energy flow for integrated apple production in Greece. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 116: 176-180.
45
Tabatabaeefar, A., Emamzadeh, H., Ghasemi Varnamkhasti, M., Rahimizadeh, R., and Karimi, M. 2009. Comparison of energy of tillage systems in wheat production. Energy 34: 41-45. (In Persian with English Summery)
46
Tipi, T., Cetin, B., and Vardar, A. 2009. An analysis of energy use and input costs for wheat production in Turkey. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental 7: 352-356.
47
Turhan, S., Cananozbag, B., and Rehber, E. 2008. A comparison of energy use in organic and conventional tomato production. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment 6: 318-321.
48
Tzilivakis, J., Warner, D.J., May, M., Lewis, K.A., and Jaggard, K. 2005. An assessment of the energy inputs and greenhouse gas emissions in sugar beet Beta vulgaris production in the UK. Agricultural Systems 85: 101-119.
49
Valadiani, A., Hasanzadeh-Ghourtapeh, A., and Valadiani, R. 2005. Study of energy balance in dryland wheat seed cultivars in seed reproduction fields and its effect on the environment in East Azerbaijan province. Agriculture Sciences Journal 15: 1-12. (In Persian with English Summary)
50
Zahedi, M., and Eshghizadeh, H.R. 2014. Energy use efficiency and economic analysis in cotton production system in an arid region: a case study for Isfahan province, Iran. International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 4(1): 43-52.
51
Zangeneh, M., Omid, M., and Akram, A. 2010. A comparative study on energy use and cost analysis of potato production under different farming technologies in Hamadan province of Iran. Energy 35: 2927-2933.
52
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in intercropping affected by biological and chemical fertilizers in supplemental irrigation condition
Introduction
Intercropping as a method of sustainable agriculture is defined as the simultaneous growing of two or more crops during the same season on the same area of land. Intercropping compared with monoculture has many advantages including the more efficient use of resources (water, nitrogen, and radiation), enhances yield quality, prevention of soil erosion, and reduced incidence of insects, diseases, and weeds. Javanmard et al. (2012) studied the agronomical, ecological and economic evaluation of wheat- chickpea intercropping under rainfed condition of Maragheh reported that the highest pods number per plant, seed number per plant, seed yield of chickpea and spikelet number per spike, grain number per spike, grain yield, protein content, and protein yield were obtained in the sole crops. This research aimed to study the effects of different fertilizers (biological, chemical, integrative) and intercropping of barley with chickpea on their yield and qualitative traits.
Materials and methods
This study was carried out with a factorial design based on Randomized Complete Block Design with three replications and 24 treatments in Naqadeh, Iran during the growing season of 2014-2015. The first factor included six intercropping patterns consist of 1-row chickpea + 1-row barley, 2-row chickpea + 2-row barley, 4-row chickpea + 2-row barley and 2-row chickpea + 4-row barley and monocropping of each crop and the second factor was included control (no fertilizer), 100% chemical fertilizers (NP), biofertilizers and biofertilizers +50% chemical fertilizers.
Barley was harvested when spike turned brown and chickpea was harvested when the first pod of the plants fully matured. Field data were collected by cutting 10 plants randomly from each plot and yield component of each plant was considered as the average for each plot.
Analysis of variance had been done by using SAS 9.4 software was performed for studied parameters. Means were compared with LSD at 5% probability level (P < 0.05).
Results and discussion
Results showed that intercropping patterns had a significant effect on all of the mentioned traits except the number of seeds per pod of chickpea pea. There was no significant interaction effect between intercropping pattern and fertilizer. The maximum and the minimum grain yield and biological yield of chickpea were obtained at monocropping and row intercropping (1-row chickpea + 1-row barley), respectively. In addition, the highest and the lowest grain yield and biological yield of barley were obtained from monocropping and 1-row chickpea + 1-row barley, respectively. Also, the effect of fertilizer was significant on all traits of both crops. The highest seed yield and biological yield of chickpea were achieved in the combined usage of fertilizers with 104.60 and 339.53 g.m-2 and the maximum grain yield and biological yield of barley were obtained in use of integrated application fertilizers with 215.90 and 1187.53 g.m-2, respectively. The highest and the lowest grain protein of barley and chickpea were obtained in the combined usage of fertilizers and control (no fertilizer), respectively.
Calculation of LER revealed that the maximum LER (1.34) was obtained for intercropping (2-row of barley + 2-row of chickpea) with biochemical fertilizer, respectively. This means that intercropping improved land use efficiency by 34%, compared with monocropping.
Conclusion
According to the results of this experiment, the highest grain yield for both plants (chickpeas and barley) were achieved in monocropping. However, the lowest grain yield of chickpeas and barley were obtained in intercropping patterns with ratios of 1:1, respectively. The higher grain yield of mono-cropped may be due to the fewer disturbances in the habitat in a homogeneous environment under monocropping systems. In the condition of application biofertilizer, more nutrient accessibility led to an improvement in the yield of chickpeas and barley. Results indicated that application of biofertilizers enhanced the grain and yield components. Among treatments, the combined usage of fertilizers (%50 chemical fertilizers+ biofertilizer) showed a greater increase in studied traits than individual consumption. The positive effect of biofertilizer may result from its ability to improve the availability of nitrogen, phosphorus and other nutrients especially under limited irrigation of the soil which causes decreasing on the nutrient's availability.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36824_51aa606eee0d98f444de877697eba427.pdf
2019-03-21
69
85
10.22067/jag.v11i1.71201
Azotobacter
Land equivalent ratio
Planting pattern
Pseudomonas
Sustainable agriculture
Esmaeil
Rezaei-Chiyaneh
e.rezaeichiyaneh@urmia.ac.ir
1
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Yahia
Rasouli
yahiarasouli@gmail.com
2
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Iran
AUTHOR
Jalal
Jalilian
j.jalilian@urmia.ac.ir
3
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Urmia University, Iran
AUTHOR
Masoud
Ghodsi
ghodsimasoud@yahoo.com
4
Agricultural and Horticultural Research Department of Khorasan Razavi Research Center, Mashhad Agricultural Education and Extension Research Organization, Iran
AUTHOR
Amraei, B., Ardakani, M.R., Rafiei, M., Paknejad, F., and Rejali, F. 2017. Effect of Mycorrhizal symbiosis and Azotobacter application on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) qualitative traits under dry condition of Khorramabad. Journal of Agroecology 3(9): 722-733. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Bakheit, B.R., and Glala, A.Y. 2002. Intercropping fababean with some legumes crops for control (Orobanch crenata L.). Acta Agronomica Hungarica 50: 1-60.
2
Borghi, E., Crusciol, C.A.C., Nascente, A.S., Sousa, V.V., Martins, P.O., Mateus, G.P., and Costa, C. 2013. Sorghum grain yield, forage biomass production and revenue as affected by intercropping time. European Journal of Agronomy 51: 130-139.
3
Chapagain, T., and Riseman, A. 2014. Barley–pea intercropping: Effects on land productivity, carbon and nitrogen transformations. Journal of Field Crops Research 166: 18-25.
4
Daraei Mofrad, A.R., Azizi, K., Heidari, S., and Ahmadi, A.R. 2008. Evaluating the effects of mono- and intercropping of barley with narbon vetch on barley grain yield and weeds growth. Magazine of Daneshvar 1: 35-44. (In Persian)
5
Gholinezhad, E., and Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E. 2014. Evaluation of grain yield of black cumin (Nigella sativa L.) in intercropping whit chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Iranian Journal of Sciences 16: 236-249. (In Persian with English Summary)
6
Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, M. 2013. Evaluation of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) intercropping systems using advantageous indices of intercropping under weed interference conditions. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 5: 1-12.
7
Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, M. 2015. Study of canopy growth indices in mono and intercropping of chickpea and barley under weed competition. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 24(4.1): 75-90. (In Persian with English Summary)
8
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Gooding, M., Ambus, P., Corre-Hellou, G., Crozat, Y., Dahlmann, C., Dibet, A., VonFragstein, P., Pristeri, A., Monti, M., and Jensen, E. S. 2009. Pea–barley intercropping for efficient symbioticN2-fixation, soil N acquisition and use of other nutrients in European organic cropping systems. Journal of Field Crops Research 113: 64-71.
9
Inanloofar, M., Omidi, H., and Pazoki, A. 2013. Morphological, agronomical changes and oil content in purslane (Portulaca oleracea L.) under drought stress and biological/chemical fertilizer of nitrogen. Journal of Medicinal Plants 4: 170-184.
10
Jahan, M., and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2012. Soil fertility and biofertilizers. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Press P: 250.
11
Jahan, M., Aryaee, M., Amiri, M.B., and Ehyaee, H.R. 2013. The effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of Sesamum indicum L. with application of cover crops of Lathyrus sp. and Persian clover (Trifolium resopinatum L.). Agronomy Journal 1: 1-15. (In Farsi with English Summary)
12
Jalali, A.H. 2005. Problems and solutions to optimize nitrogen fixation in soybean. Zeitun 162: 25-29. (In Persian)
13
Javanmard, A., Rostami, A., Nouraein, M., and Gharekhani, Gh. 2016. Agronomical, ecological and economical evaluation of wheat- chickpea intercropping under rainfed condition of Maragheh. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 26 (1): 19-37. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Koocheki, A., Fallahpour, F., Khorramdel, S., and L. Jafari. 2014a. Intercropping wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with canola (Brassica napus L.) and their effects on yield, yield components, weed density and diversity. Journal of Agroecology 1: 11-20. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Koocheki, A., Nasiri Mahallati, M., Borumand Rezazadeh, Z., Jahani. M., and Jafari, L. 2014b. Yield responses of black cumin (Nigella sativa L.) to intercropping with chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and bean (Phaseoluse vulgaris L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 12(1): 1-8 (In Persian with English Summary)
16
Lafond, G.P. 1994. Effects of row spacing, seeding rate and nitrogen on yield of barley and wheat under zero- till management. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 74: 703-711.
17
Mahdavi Maraj, T., Ghanbari, A., and Asghari Pour, M.R. 2015. Intercropping of barley and ajwain under different of manure and chemical fertilizers. Journal of Applied Research of Plant Ecophysiology 1: 63-78. (In Persian with English Summary)
18
Majnoun Hosseini, N. 2008. Grain Legume Production. Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
19
Mardani, F., Balouchi, H.R., Yadavi, A., and Salehi, A. 2015. Effect of row intercropping patterns on yield, yield components, and weed control of fenugreek (Trigonella foenumgreacum L.) and anise (Pimpinella aanisum L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 3: 626-636.
20
Mashhadi, T., Nakhzari Moghaddam, A., and Sabouri, H. 2015. Investigation of competition indices in intercropping of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under nitrogen consumption. Journal of Agroecology 3: 344-355. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Mirzakhani1, M., and Davari, M.R. 2017. The Effect of inoculation with Azotobacter and nitrogen levels on grain and corn (Zea mays L.) yield components at simultaneous cropping system with legumes. Journal of Agroecology 9: 63-75. (In Persian with English Summary)
22
Mohammadi, S., Khalil Agdam, N., Khoshnejad, A., Pour Yousef, M., and Jalilnejad, N. 2013. Mixed-cropping and its effects on yield and agronomical traits of barley (Hordeum vulgar L.) and bersim clover (Trifolium alexanderium L.). Journal of Crop Ecophysiology 7: 229-239. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Namvar, A., and Khandan, T. 2013. Response of wheat to mineral nitrogen fertilizer and biofertilizer (Azotobacter sp. and Azospirillum sp.) inoculation under different levels of weed interference. Journal of Ekologija 2: 85-94.
24
Naseri, R., and Mirzaei, A. 2010. Response of yield and yield components of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) to seed inoculation with Azotobacter and Azospirillum and different nitrogen levels under dry land condition. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences 9: 445-449.
25
Nazeri, P., Kashani, A., Khavazi, K., Ardakani, M. R., Mirakhori, M., and Pour Siah Bidi, M. 2010. The effect of biofertilizer and phosphorus fertilizer banding with Zinc on white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Agronomy Journal 2: 175-185. (In Farsi with English Summary)
26
Neugschwandtner, R., and Kaul, P.H. 2014. Sowing ratio and N fertilization affect yield and yield components ofoat and pea in intercrops. Journal of Field Crops Research 155: 159-163.
27
Piri, I., Zendehdel, B., and Tavassoli, A. 2017. Study of Agronomical and ecological parameters of additive and replacement intercropping systems of corn (Zea maize L.) and soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Journal of Agroecology 9(1): 705-721. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Pouramir, F., Koocheki, A., Nasiri Mahalati, M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Evaluation of yield and yield components of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in intercropping of replacement method. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8(5): 747-757. (In Persian with English Summary)
29
Prin, S.U., and Dwit, J. 2005. Intercropping cereal and grain legumes, A Farmers Perspective, Research at the Louis Bolk inStitute live Stock Department W.W.W.agric.nsw.gov.au.
30
Rezaei- Chiyaneh, E. 2017. Intercropping of flax Seed (Linum usitatissimum L.) and pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) under foliar application of iron nano chelated and zinc. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 29: 39-56. (In Persian with English Summary)
31
Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., and Gholinezhad, E. 2015. Agronomic characteristics of intercropping of additive series of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and black cumin (Nigella sativa L.). Journal of Agroecology 7: 381-396. (In Persian with English Summary)
32
Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Tajbakhsh, M., and Fotohi Chiyaneh, S. 2015. Yield and yield components of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) in strip intercropping with ajowan (Carum copticum L.) influenced by bio and chemical fertilizer. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 24: 1-15. (In Persian with English Summary)
33
Sengul, S. 2003. Performance of some forage grasses or legumes and their mixtures under dry land condition. European Journal of Agronomy 19: 401-409.
34
Sing, S., and Kapoor, K.K. 1998. Inoculation whit phosphate solubilizing microorganisms and a vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus improves dry matter yield and nutrient uptake by wheat grown in a sandy soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils 28: 139-44.
35
Sobkowicz, P. 2006. Competition between triticale and field beans in additive intercrops. Plant and Soil Environment 52: 42-54.
36
Soleimani Fard, A., Naseri Rad, H., Naseri, R., and Piri, E. 2013. Effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on phenological traits, grain yield and yield components of three maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars. Journal of Crop Ecophysiologhy 7(1): 71-90. (In Farsi with English Summary)
37
Sujatha, M.G., Lingaraju, B.S., Palled, Y.B., and Ashalath, K.V. 2008. Importance of integrated nutrient management practices in maize under rain fed condition. Journal Agriculture Sciences 21: 334-338.
38
Tavakoli, M., and Jalali, A.H. 2016. Effect of different biofertilizers and nitrogen fertilizer levels on yield and yield components of wheat. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 6(21): 33-45. (In Persian with English Summary)
39
Thorsted, M.D., Olesen, J.E., and Weiner, S. 2006. Width of clover strips and wheat rows influence grain yield in winter wheat/white clover intercropping. Journal of Field Crops Research 95: 280-290.
40
Tohidinia, M.A., Mazaheri, D., Bagher-Hosseini, S.M., and Madani, H. 2014. Effect of biofertilizer Barvar-2 and chemical phosphorus fertilizer application on kernel yield components of maize (Zea mays cv. Sc704). Iranian Journal of Crops Sciences 15: 295-307. (In Persian with English Summary)
41
Tuna, C., and Orak, A. 2007. The role of intercropping on yield potential of common vetch/oat cultivated in pure stand and mixtures. Journal of Agriculture Biological Science 2: 14-19.
42
Undie, U.L., Uwah, D.F., and Attoe, E.E. 2012. Effect of intercropping and crop arrangement on yield and productivity of late season maize/soybean mixtures in the humid environment of South Southern Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science 4: 37-50.
43
Valizadegan, A. 2015. Study of yield quality and quantity in pot marigold (Calendula officinalis L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and species diversity and relative abundance of insects in row and strip intercropping. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 25(3): 15-30. (In Persian with English Summary)
44
Yang, F., Huang, S., Gao, R., Liu, W., Yong, T., Wang, X., Wu, X., and Yang, W. 2014. Growth of soybean seedling in relay strip intercropping systems in relation to light quantity and red: far- red ratio. Journal of Field Crops Research 155: 245-253.
45
Yousef Nia, M., Banayan Aval, M., and Khorramdel, S. 2015. Evaluation of radiation use and interception of fenugreek (Trigonella foenumgraecum L.) and dill (Anethum graveolens L.) intercropping canopy. Journal of Agroecology 7: 381-396. (In Persian with English Summary)
46
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluation of nitrogen uptake and use efficiency in wheat cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.) under Kermanshah weather conditions
Introduction
Nitrogen is the most important mineral nutrient for crop growth and development that improve quality and quantity of yield. It is used in modern agroecosystems to maximize yields. In harvest time, about 40 to 60% of applied nitrogen to the fields must be compensated by different fertilizers. Nevertheless, only 30 to 50% of consumed nitrogen is taken up by the crops and high amount of it is lost. Improved economic cost and environmental concerns augmented managing use of fertilizers. Improvement of nitrogen use efficiency has become an urgent target in crop production for efficient nitrogen utilization, maximum energy saving and productivity. In the sustainable agriculture approaches, there are several ways for increasing nitrogen use efficiency such as selection of suitable varieties. There is about six million hectare of wheat in Iran. Kermanshah Province with 6.4% of cultivation area and 6.6% of wheat production is the fifth place in Iran. In this province consumes large amounts of N fertilizers annually in the wheat agroecosystem. Therefore, the aims of this study were evaluating nitrogen uptake and utilization efficiency, and final nitrogen use efficiency in the wheat production system under Kermanshah weather condition.
Materials and methods
A split-plot experiment based on the randomized complete block design with three replications was conducted in the Campus of Agriculture and Natural Resources Field at Razi University under Kermanshah weather condition during 2015-2016. The experiment treatments were four levels of nitrogen fertilizer rate (90, 180, 300, 360 kg ha-1 of urea) as main-plot and four wheat varieties (Parsi, Zare, Pishgam and Orum) as sub-plot. The evaluated traits were included total dry weight yield, grain yield, biomass nitrogen content, nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUpE), nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUtE) and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE). Data analysis was done by SAS software (Ver 9.4) and means comparison by LSD tests were also carried out at the level of 5%.
Results and discussion
The results showed that under nitrogen fertilizer rate treatments, Pishgam variety in comparison with other varieties had the most satisfying ecophysiological characteristics. Regardless of studied varieties, by increasing the rate of urea fertilizer from 90 to 360 kg ha-1 total dry weight yield (65.9%) and grain yield (73.1%) were improved. In this situation, Pishgam variety had the highest grain yield (37.4%) compared to other varieties. The highest and the lowest grain yield were related to Pishgam variety (8950 kg ha-1) in 360 kgurea ha-1 treatment and Orum variety (1264 kg ha-1) in 90 kgurea ha-1 treatment, respectively. The results also showed that the highest NUpE observed in the lowest level of fertilizer rate for Zare variety (0.7 kg Nuptake/kg Nsoil+applied) and the lowest NUpE observed in the highest level of fertilizer rate for Orum variety (0.26 kg Nuptake/kg Nsoil+applied). The greatest and the lowest NUtE were for Pishgam variety (59 kg grain/kg Nuptake) in 90 kgurea ha-1 treatment and Orum variety (37 kg grain/kg Nuptake) in 360 kgurea ha-1 treatment, respectively. In relation to NUE, Pishgam variety had the highest value (36 kg grain/kg Nsoil+applied) under 90 kgurea ha-1 treatment and Orum variety had the lowest value (10 kg grain/kg Nsoil+applied) under 36090 kgurea ha-1 treatment. Our results also indicated that grain yield had a significant positive correlation with nitrogen content at anthesis and maturity while there was a significant negative correlation with NUpE and NUE. The relation of grain yield with NUtE was positive and no significant.
Conclusion
The results showed that most of traits of wheat varieties such as grain yield and total dry weight yield were improved by increased nitrogen fertilizer rate. But, evaluation of traits related to nitrogen efficiency showed that NUE reduced by increasing of nitrogen fertilizer rate for all wheat varieties. The NUpE compare to NUtE had more effect on NUE. The grain yield had a significant negative correlation with NUpE and NUE but it had a positive correlation with NUtE. Although, breeding of varieties with higher NUtE can be cooperate an effective role in improvement of NUE but it seems that emphasis on nitrogen management consumption methods can be more effective.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36833_2fa63ee5397a20960f07f3b955b84cda.pdf
2019-03-21
87
102
10.22067/jag.v11i1.65109
Biomass nitrogen content
Nitrogen uptake efficiency
Nitrogen utilization efficiency
Nitrogen use efficiency
Wheat varieties
Farzad
Mondani
f.mondani@razi.ac.ir
1
Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Ali
Bozorgi Hossein Abad
alibozorgi916@gmail.com
2
Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
AUTHOR
Mohsen
Saeedi
msaeidi@razi.ac.ir
3
Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
AUTHOR
Alireza
Bagheri
a.bagheri@razi.ac.ir
4
Department of Plant production and Genetics, Razi University, Kermanshah, Kermanshah, Iran
AUTHOR
Hassan
Heidari
h.heidari@razi.ac.ir
5
Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
AUTHOR
Ahmadi, M. 2015. Evaluation of resource absorption and use efficiency in corn cultivars (Zea mays) under Kermanshah weather conditions. M.Sc. Thesis, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Ahmadi, M., Mondani, F., Khoramivafa, M., Mohammadi, G., and Shirkhani, A. 2017. Evaluation of nitrogen efficiency in maize cultivars (Zea mays L.) under Kermanshah climate condition. Journal of Agroecology 10: 234-247. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Alfred, E.H., Johnston, M., Sullivanc, J.N.O., and Polomad, S. 2000. Nitrogen use efficiency of taro and sweet potato in the humid lowlands of Papua New Guinea. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 79: 271-280.
3
Ahmadinezhad, R., Najafi, N., Aliasgharzad, N., and Oustan, S. 2013. Effects of Organic and Nitrogen Fertilizers on Water Use Efficiency, Yield and the Growth Characteristics of Wheat (Triticum aestivum cv. Alvand). Water and Soil Science 23: 177-194. (In Persian with English Summary)
4
Asadi, G.A., Momen, A., Nurzadeh Namaghi, M., and Khorramdel, S. 2014. Effects of organic and chemical fertilizer rates on nitrogen efficiency indices of isabgol (Plantago ovata Forsk.). Journal of Agroecology 5: 373-382. (In Persian with English Summary)
5
Cerrato, M.E., and Blackmer, A.M. 1990. Relationship between grain nitrogen concentration and the nitrogen status of corn. Agronomy Journal 82: 744-749.
6
Emam, Y., Salimi Koochi, S., and Shekoofa, A. 2009. Effect of nitrogen levels on grain yield and yield components of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under irrigation and rainfed conditions. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 7: 321-332. (In Persian with English Summary)
7
Ehdaie, B., and Waines, J.G. 2001. Sowing date and nitrogen rate effects on dry matter and nitrogen partitioning in bread and durum wheat. Field Crop Research 73: 47-61.
8
FAOSTAT (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistical Database). 2014. FAOSTAT Production Statistics of Crops. Available: http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/QC/E.
9
Garrido-Lestache, E., Lopez-Bellido, R.J., and Lopez-Bellido, L. 2005. Durum wheat quality under Mediterranean conditions as affected by N rate, timing and splitting, N form and S fertilization. European Journal of Agronomy 23: 265-278.
10
Guarda, G., Padovan, S., and Delogu, G. 2004. Grain yield, nitrogen-use efficiency and baking quality of old and modern Italian bread-wheat cultivars grown at different nitrogen levels. European Journal of Agronomy 21: 181-192.
11
Halvarson, A.D., Schweissing, F.C., and Reule, M.E. 2005. Corn response to nitrogen fertilization in a soil with high residual nitrogen. Agronomy Journal 97: 1222-1229.
12
Hosseini, R., Galeshi, S., Soltani, A., Kalateh, M., and Zahed, M. 2013. The effect of nitrogen rate on nitrogen use efficiency index in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 11: 300-306. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Khdemi, Z., Malakoti, M.G., and Lotfolahi, M.A. 1999. Optimal management of nitrogen in the wheat field to enhance performance and improve product quality. Journal of Soil and Water, especially a wheat, Institute of Soil and Water Research 12: 1-6.
14
Khan, A., Khan, A., Li, J., Ahmad, M.I., Sher, A., Rashid, A., and Ali, W. 2017. Evaluation of wheat varietal performance under different nitrogen sources. American Journal of Plant Sciences 8: 561-573.
15
Koocheki, A., Nasiri Mahallati, M., Moradi, R., and Alizadeh, Y. 2015. Evaluation of yield and nitrogen use efficiency of maize and cotton intercropping under different nitrogen levels. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 13: 1-13. (In Persian with English Summary)
16
MJA. 2014. Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture of Iran. Iran annual agricultural statistics; www.maj.ir.
17
Moles, D.J., Rangai, S.S., Bourkeard, R.M., and Kasamani, C.T. 1984. Fertilizer responses of taro in Papua New Guinea In: S. Chandra (Ed), Edible Aroids Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 64-71.
18
Muurinen, S., Kleemola, J., and Peltonen-Sainio, P. 2007. Accumulation and translocation of nitrogen in spring cereal cultivars differing in nitrogen use efficiency. Agronomy Journal 99: 441-447.
19
Jafariani, M., Beheshti, A.R., and Taheri, G. 2010. Evaluation of nitrogen efficiency on grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) genotypes. Journal of Agroecology 2: 502-511. (In Persian with English Summary)
20
Ting, L.Z., Yang, J.Y., Drury, C.F., and Hoogenboom, G. 2015. Evaluation of the DSSAT-CSM for simulating yield and soil organic C and N of a long-term maize and wheat rotation experiment in the Loess Plateau of Northwestern China. Agricultural Systems 135: 90-104.
21
Sepehr, E., Malakouti, M.J., Kholdebarin, A., and Karimian, N. 2009. Genotypic variation in P efficiency of selected Iranian cereals in greenhouse experiment. International Journal of Plant Production 3: 17-28.
22
Sardana, V., and Sheoran, P. 2011. Production potential of canola oilseed rape (Brassica napus) cultivars in response to nitrogen and Sulphur nutrition. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 81: 280-282.
23
Sheoran, P., Sardana, V., Singh, Sh., Kumar, A., Mann, A., and Sharma, P. 2016. Agronomic and physiological assessment of nitrogen use, uptake and acquisition in sunflower. International Journal of Plant Production 10: 110-121.
24
Timsina, T., Singh, U., Badaruddin, M., Meisner, C., and Amin, M.R. 2001. Cultivar, nitrogen, and water effects on productivity, and nitrogen-use efficiency and balance for rice–wheat sequences of Bangladesh. Field Crop Research 72: 143-161.
25
Zebarth, B.J., and Shcard, R.W. 1992. Influence of rate and timing of nitrogen fertilization application on yield and quality of hard red winter wheat. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 72: 13-19.
26
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Estimation of Carbon Sequestration in Iran Agroecosystems using Empirical Models
Introduction:
Carbon sequestration is defined as the permanent gain of carbon by soil, plant or water. Soil as the largest terrestrial carbon pool plays an important role in the global carbon cycle. Due to the role of agricultural systems in CO2 emission, attention to the carbon cycle in agricultural systems is of prime importance. So, the interest in agricultural soils and plant biomass as a carbon sink and an operational mechanism for reducing the atmospheric CO2 level, is increasing. It is estimated that world’s crop-based agriculture occupies 1.7 billion hectares, which can store up to 170 Pg carbon. Thus, the aims of this study were to simulate the relationship between crop residue decomposition rate with carbon to nitrogen ration (C:N) (an index of residue quality) as well as soil moisture regimes (the most important factors in residue decomposition) and also estimation of the attainable carbon sequestration in irrigated systems of five major crops in Iran based on the simulated model.
Materials and methods:
Residue decomposition rate of wheat, maize, rapeseed, cotton and soybean (with C:N ratios of 131, 69.7, 87.1, 57.8 and 95.9 , respectively) in different soil moisture regimes (100, 60 and 30 percentage of field capacity) was studied in a 390-day incubation experiment. Study data was used for simulation of residue decomposition and relative decomposition rate was defined as a function of moisture (fm), C:N (fC:N) and temperature (ftemp). The simulated model was used to evaluate attainable carbon sequestration of the studied crops in five years from 2002-2003 to 2006-2007 based on yield, harvest index and shoot to root ratio in three scenarios of residue retention (100, 50 and 0 percentage of total residue produced) as well as three scenarios of soil moisture regimes of 100, 60 and 30 percentage of field capacity for different provinces of Iran. In this step, residue decomposition during one year after harvest was calculated using fm, fC:N and ft. The difference between proportions of the residue returned to the soil and decomposed residues were considered as un-decomposed residue which was multiplied by 0.45 to gain attainable carbon sequestration. Data of attainable carbon sequestration was analyzed as factorial experiment based on completely randomized design.
Results and discussion:
Results indicated that higher C:N and therefore lower residue quality caused lower residue decomposition rate. This parameter was also decreased in soils with lower moisture. Effects of soil moisture on reside decomposition was more pronounced than residue quality. comparison of attainable carbon sequestration in Iran’s provinces revealed that in wheat cropping systems: Kermanshah and Sistan and Balouchestan, in maize: Qazvin and Southern Khorasan, in rapeseed: Isfahan and Boushehr, in cotton: Eastern Azarbaijan and Hormozgan and in soybean cropping system: Ardebil and Eastern Azarbaijan provinces had the highest and lowest attainable carbon sequestration, respectively. Attainable carbon sequestration in all crops was decreased with increasing soil moisture from 30 to 60 and 100% of FC and decreasing residue retention from 100 to 50 and 0 % of total crop residue production. Maize and soybean showed the highest and lowest capability of carbon sequestration, respectively.
Conclusion
Results of the present study highlight the effects of environmental factors such as soil moisture as well as inherent properties of plant residues on residue decomposition. Climate and residue quality are the main determining factors of soil microorganisms activity and residue decomposition and therefore soil attainable carbon sequestration. Better soil moisture condition and temperature, also higher residue quality increases microorganisms activity resulting in more residue decomposition. Furthermore, plant biomass and residue management affects attainable carbon sequestration. Resultant of the mentioned factors determines attainable carbon sequestration in soils of agroecosystems. Regarding to the total carbon sequestration of afore-mentioned crops, Ardebil and Sistan and Balouchestan provinces showed the highest and lowest carbon sequestration, respectively.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36839_7ccb508c562aff13d3a5fd3d8205211a.pdf
2019-03-21
103
122
10.22067/jag.v11i1.50344
Air Temperature
residue decomposition
residue retention
Soil Moisture
Elaheh
Boroumand Rezazadeh
e_1095@yahoo.com
1
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi Uinversity of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Alireza
Koocheki
akooch@um.ac.ir
2
Department of Agroecology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi Uinversity of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Parviz
Rezvani Moghaddam
rezvani@um.ac.ir
3
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Mahdi
Nasiri Mahalati
mnassiri@um.ac.ir
4
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi Uinversity of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Amir
Lakzian
lakzian@um.ac.ir
5
Department of Soil Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi Uinversity of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Aerts, R. 1997. Climate, leaf litter chemistry and leaf litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: a triangular relationship. Oikos 79: 439–449.
1
Belay-Tedla, A., Zhou, X., Su, B., Shiqiang Wan, S., and Luo, Y. 2009. Labile, recalcitrant, and microbial carbon and nitrogen pools of a tallgrass prairie soil in the US Great Plains subjected to experimental warming and clipping. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 41: 110–116.
2
Berg, B., Berg, M.P., Bottner, P., Box, E., Breymeyer, A., Calvan De Anta, R., Couteaux, M.M., Esudero, A., Gallardo, A., Kratz, W., Madeira, M., Malkonen, E., McClaugherty, C.A., Meentemeyer, V., Munoz, F., Piussi, P., Remacle, J., and Virzo de Santo, A. 1993. Litter mass loss in pine forests of Europe and Eastern United States as compared to actual evapotranspiration on a European scale. Biogeochemistry 20: 127–153.
3
Bolinder, M.A., Janzen, H.H., Gregorich, E.G., Angers, D.A., and VandenBygaart, A.J. 2007. An approach for estimating net primary productivity and annual carbon inputs to soil for common agricultural crops in Canada. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 118: 29–42.
4
Bremner, J.M. 1970. Nitrogen total, regular kjeldahl method, In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd ed. Agronomy 9(1). A.S.A. Ins., S.S.S.A. Inc., Madison Publisher, Wisconsin., USA, pp. 610-616.
5
Bunnell, F.L., Tait, D.E.N., Flanagan, P.W., and Van Cleve, K. 1977. Microbial respiration and substrate weight loss. I. A general model of the influences of abiotic variables. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 9: 33–40.
6
Buyanovsky, G.A., and Wagner, G.H. 1986. Post-harvest residue input to cropland. Plant and Soil 93: 57-65.
7
Chen, H., Billen, N., Stahr, K., and Kuzyakov, Y. 2007. Effects of nitrogen and intensive mixing on decomposition of 14C-labelled maize (Zea mays L.) residue in soils of different land use types. Soil and Tillage Research 96: 114–123.
8
Couteautx, M., Bottner, P., and Berg, B. 1995. Litter decomposition, climate and litter quality. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10: 63-66.
9
Crohn, D.M., and Valenzuela-Solano, C. 2003. Modeling temperature effects on decomposition. Journal of Environmental Engineering 129: 1149-1156.
10
Dijkstra, F.A., and Cheng, W. 2007. Moisture modulates rhizosphere effects on C decomposition in two different soil types. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 39: 2264–2274.
11
Dou, F. 2005. Long-term tillage, cropping sequence, and nitrogen fertilization effects on soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics. PhD thesis. Texas A & M University.
12
Fishman, J. 2003. Overview: Atmospheric Chemistry. In: Potter, T.D. and Colman, B.R. (Eds.), Handbook of Weather, Climate and Water, Atmospheric Chemistry, Hydrology and Social Impacts. A John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Publication. pp: 966.
13
Hansen, E.M., Christensen, B.T., Jensen, L.S., and Kristensen, K. 2004. Carbon sequestration in soil beneath long-term Miscanthus plantations as determined by 13C abundance. Biomass and Bioenergy 26: 97-105.
14
Hardy, J.T. 2003. Climate Change, Causes Effects and Solutions. John Wiley and Sons Ltd. pp. 247.
15
Haynes, R.J. 1986. Mineral nitrogen in the plant-soil system. Academic Press, Toronto.
16
Hemwong, S., Cadisch, G., Toomsan, B., Limpinuntana, V., Vityakon, P., and Patanothai, A. 2008. Dynamics of residue decomposition and N2 fixation of grain legumes upon sugarcane residue retention as an alternative to burning. Soil and Tillage Research 99: 84–97.
17
Hobbie, S.E. 1996. Temperature and plant species control over litter decomposition in Alaskan tundra. Ecological Monographs 66: 503–522.
18
Howard, D.M., and Howard, P.J.A. 1993. Relationships between CO2 evolution, moisture content and temperature for a range of soil types. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 25: 1537–1546.
19
Jenkinson, D.S., Adams, D.E., and Wild, A. 1991. Model estimates of CO2 emissions from soil in response to global warming. Nature 351: 304–306.
20
Kabba, B.S., and Aulakh, M.S. 2004. Climatic conditions and crop residue quality differentially affect N, P, and S mineralization in soils with contrasting P status. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 167: 596–601.
21
Kätterer, T., Reichstein, M., Andre, O., and Lomander, A. 1998. Temperature dependence of organic matter decomposition: a critical review using literature data analyzed with different models. Biology and Fertility of Soils 27: 258–262.
22
Kirschbaum, M.U.F. 1995. The temperature dependence of soil organic matter decomposition, and the effect of global warming on soil organic C storage. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 27: 753–760.
23
Lal, R. 2002. Soil carbon dynamics in cropland and rangeland. Environmental Pollution 116: 353–362.
24
Lal, R., and Kimble, J.M. 1997. Conservation tillage for carbon sequestration. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 49: 243-253.
25
Larson, W.E., Clapp, C.E., Pierre, W.H., and Morachan, Y.B. 1972. Effects of increasing amounts of organic residues on continuous corn: II. Organic carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur. Agronomy Journal 64: 204-208.
26
Lavelle, P., Blanchart, E., Martin, A., Martin, S., Spain, A., Toutan, F., Barois, I., and Schaefer, R. 1993. A hierarchical model for decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: application to soils of the humid tropics. Biotropica 25: 130–150.
27
Li, C., Frolking, S., and Harriss, R.C. 1994. Modeling carbon biogeochemistry in agricultural soils. Global Biochemistry Cycles 8: 237-254.
28
Luna-Orea, P., Wagger, M.G., and Gumpertz, L.M. 1996. Decomposition and nutrient release dynamics of two tropical legume cover crops. Agronomy Journal 88: 758–764.
29
Lupwayi, N.Z., Clayton, G.W., O’Donovan, J.T., Harker, K.N., Turkington, T.K., and Soon, Y.K. 2007. Phosphorus release during decomposition of crop residues under conventional and zero tillage. Soil and Tillage Research 95: 231–239.
30
Meentemeyer, V. 1978. Macroclimatic and lignin control of litter decomposition rates. Ecology 59: 465–472.
31
Menzel, A. and Fabian, P. 1999. Growing season extended in Europe. Nature. 397: 659.
32
Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Koocheki, A. 2006. Analysis of agroclimatic indices of Iran under future climate change scenarios. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 4: 169-182. (In Persian with English Summary)
33
Parshotam, A., Saggar, S., Tate, K. and Parfitt, R. 2001. Modelling organic matter dynamics in New Zealand soils. Environment International 27: 111 –119.
34
Paul, E.A., and Clark, F.E. 1996. Soil Microbiology and Biochemistry. Academic Press, San Diego.
35
Paustian, K., Collins, H.P., and Paul, E.A. 1997. Management controls on soil carbon. In: Paul, E.A., Paustian, K., Elliot, E.T., Cole, C.V. (Eds) Soil Organic Matter in Temperate Agroecosystems: Long-term Experiments in North America. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.
36
Paustian, K., Six, J., Elliott, E.T., and Hunt, H.W. 2000. Management options for reducing CO2 emissions from agricultural soils. Biogeochemistry 48(1): 147–163.
37
PeterJohn, W.T., Melillo, J.M., Bowles, F.P., and Steudler, P.A. 1993. Soil warming and trace gas fluxes: experimental design and preliminary flux results. Oecologia 93: 18–24.
38
Rosenzweig, C., and Parry, M.L. 1994. Potential Impacts of climate change on world food supply. Nature 367: 133-138.
39
Scorer, R.S. 2002. Air Pollution Meteorology. Horwood Publishing. pp. 150.
40
Swift, M.J., Heal, O.W., and Anderson, J.M. 1979. Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems. Blackwell, Oxford.
41
Thorburn, P.J., Probert, M.E., and Robertson, F.A. 2001. Modelling decomposition of sugar cane surface residues with APSIM-Residue. Field Crops Research 70: 223-232.
42
Vazquez, R.I., Stinner, B.R., and McCartney, D.A. 2003. Corn and weed residue decomposition in northeast Ohio organic and conventional dairy farms. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 95: 559–565.
43
Verma, S.B., Dobermann, A., Cassman, K.G., Walters, D.T., Knops, J.M., Arkebauer, T.J., Suyker, A.E., Burba, G.G., Amos, B., Yang, H., Ginting, D., Hubbard, K.G., Gitelson, A.A., and Walter-Shea, E.A. 2005. Annual carbon dioxide exchange in irrigated and rainfed-based agroecosystems. Agriculture and Forest Meteorology 131: 77-96.
44
Vitousek, P.M., Turner, D.R., Parton, W.J., and Sanford, R.L. 1994. Litter decomposition on the Mauna Loa environmental matrix, Hawai’i: patterns, mechanisms, and models. Ecology 75: 418–429.
45
Walkley, A., and Black, I.A. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining organic carbon in soils: Effect of variations in digestion conditions and of inorganic soil constituents. Soil Science 63: 251-263.
46
Winkler, J.P., Cherry, R.S., and Schelsinger, W.H. 1996. The Q10 relationship of microbial respiration in a temperate forest soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 28: 1067–1072.
47
Yan, H., Cao, M., Liu, J., and Tao, B. 2007. Potential and sustainability for carbon sequestration with improved soil management in agricultural soils of China. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 121: 325-335.
48
Yang, L., Pan, J., Shao, Y., Chen, J.M., Ju, W.M., Shi, X., and Yuan, S. 2007. Soil organic carbon decomposition and carbon pools in temperate and sub-tropical forests in China. Journal of Environmental Management 85: 690–695.
49
Zhou, X., Wan, S., and Luo, Y. 2007. Source components and interannual variability of soil CO2 efflux under experimental warming and clipping in a grassland ecosystem. Global Change Biology 13: 761–775.
50
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Investigation of Growth Indices, Grain yield and Yield Components of Canary seed (Phalaris canariensis) in Response to the Different Levels of Irrigation, Organic and Chemical
Introduction
Canary seed (Phalaris canariensis L.) from poaceae family is a drought tolerant plant. Canary seed originally is native to Mediterranean region, and can be grown commercially in several parts of the world.
Evaluation of different systems of plant feeding to achieve a high yield and desirable quality is one of the important requirements in agricultural planning . Therefore, gradually replacing chemical fertilizers with biological and organic fertilizers will result in providing nutrient requirements of plants, improvement of physical, chemical and biological conditions of soil and reduction of adverse environmental effects. Therefore, the aim of this research is to study the effect of deficit irrigation and managing the use of chemical and organic fertilizers individually or combined on yield and yield components of canary seed.
Materials and methods
To investigate the effects of different levels of irrigation water and integrated management of chemical and organic fertilizers on growth indices, yield and yield components of Canary seed plant, an experiment was conducted as split plot based on a randomized complete block design with three replications at Agricultural Research Station, College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran during growing season of 2013-2014.
Main plots considered different irrigation regimes with three levels (60, 80 and 100 percent of water requirement) and sub-plots considered for fertilizer treatments in six levels (chemical fertilizer, vermicompost fertilizer, manure, chemical fertilizer + vermicompost fertilizer, chemical fertilizer + manure and control). The amounts of treatment of nitrogen chemical fertilizer (200 kg ha-1 of urea source and 150 kg ha-1 of triple super phosphate) were applied in related plots. The amounts of manure fertilizers (30 t ha-1) and vermicompost (6 t ha-1) were determined and applied based on recommended amount of nitrogen. Water requirement of Canary seed was estimated by the OPTIWAT software under general condition of Mashhad
Before final harvest of the grain, 10 bushes were randomly chosen from each plot and traits such as bush height, the number of tillers per bush, the number of prolific tillers in each bush, the number of spikes in each bush, the number of grains in each spike, the grain weight in each spike and bush, 1000 grain weight and harvest index were determined. Then, considering margin from a surface equivalent to 1.4 m2, plants were harvested from the height 3-5 cm and the produced biomass in each plot was recorded. Then, grains were separated from straw and the grain yield was determined in each plot.
Finally, recorded data were analyzed by SAS software ver. 9.1 and mean comparison based on Duncan multiple-range test was conducted by MSTAT-C software in the probability level of 5 percent. Result and Discussion
This study results indicated that different levels of water irrigation had significant impact on all studied traits except harvest index. All studied traits except harvest index and 1000-grain weight had been significantly influenced by fertilizer treatments. Interaction of different irrigation regimes and fertilizer treatments had significant effect on the traits including plant height, the number of tillers per plant. The maximum height of plant was observed in irrigation treatment of 80 percent of water requirement and the maximum number of tillers per plant was observed in irrigation treatment of 100 percent of water requirement. In addition, under the irrigation treatment of 100 percent water requirement and 100 percent water requirement, the maximum number of grains per plant and the maximum biological yield was observed. The maximum grains per plant and biological yield was observed under animal manure and vermicompost treatments. Animal manure and vermicompost treatments had higher yield than control and chemical fertilizer treatments. In most of the studied traits, irrigation treatment of 100 percent water requirement was not significantly different from 80 percent water requirement irrigation.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the financial support of the project (grant number 31441, 09 July 2014) Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36847_32952ac9ab8d4ddbc8116b06e8a4303c.pdf
2019-03-21
123
135
10.22067/jag.v11i1.45399
Vermicompost
Cow manure
Organic fertilizers of integrated management
Growth indices
Vida
Varnaseri Ghandali
vidavarnaseri@gmail.com
1
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
AUTHOR
Parviz
Rezvani Moghaddam
rezvani@um.ac.ir
2
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
LEAD_AUTHOR
Surur
Khorramdel
su.khorramdel@yahoo.com
3
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
AUTHOR
Ahmadinezhad, R., Najafi, N., Aliasgharzad, N., and Oustan, S. 2012. Effects of organic and nitrogen fertilizers on water use efficiency, yield and the growth characteristics of wheat (Triticum aestivum cv. Alvand). Journal Water and Soil Science 23(2): 177-194.(In Persian With English Summary)
1
Alizadeh, A., and Kamali, G. 2007. Water Use of Plants in Iran. Astan Qods Publication, Mashhad, Iran. 228 pp. (In Persian)
2
Kanaani Alvar, A., Raei, Y., Zehtab Salmasi, S., and Nasrollazadeh, 2012. Study the effects of biological and nitrogen fertilizers on yield and some morphological traits of two spring barley (Hodeum vulgare L.) varieties under rainfed conditions. Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science 23(1): 20-29. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
AOAC. 2000. Official Methods of Analysis, 17th Ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.
4
Arancon, N., Edwards, C. A. Bierman, P., Welch, C., and Metzger, J.D. 2004. Influence of vermicompost on field strawberries. I: Effects on Growth and Yields. Bioresearch Technology 93: 145-153.
5
Arazmjoo, E. 2008. Effect of drought stress and different fertilizers on quantitative and qualitative yield of chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla L.) case study: Sistan. MSc dissertation, Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
6
Chatterjee, S.K. 2002. Cultivation of medicinal and aromatic plants in India a commercial approach. Proceedings of an International Conference on MAP. Acta Horticulture (ISHS) 576: 191-202.
7
Dursun, A., Guvenc, I., and Turan, M. 2002. Effect of different levels of humic acid on seedling growth and macro and micronutrient contents of tomato and eggplant. ACTA Agrobotanical 56: 81-88.
8
Fischer, R.A., Rees, D., Sayre, K.D., Lu, Z.M., Candon, A.G., and Saavedra, A.L. 1998. Wheat yield progress associated with higher stomatal conductance and photosynthetic rate, and cooler canopies. Crop Science 38: 1467-1475.
9
Gavloski, J.E., Whitfield, G.H., and Ellis, C.R. 1992. Effect of restricted watering on sap flow and growth in corn (Zea mays L.). Canadian Journal of Plant Science 72: 361–368.
10
Ghosh, A., and Sharma, A.R. 1999. Effect of combined use of organic manure and nitrogen fertilizer on the performance of rice under flood-prone lowland condition. Journal of Agricultural Science 132: 461-465.
11
Gilesm, J. 2004. Is organic food better for us? Nature 428: 796-797.
12
Greenway, H., and Munns, R. 1980. Mechanisms of salt tolerance in nonhalophytes. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 31: 149-190.
13
Gusta, L.V., and Chen, T.H.H. 1987. The physiology of water and temperature stress. In: E. G. Heyne (Ed.) Wheat and Wheat Improvement. Agronomy Monograph 13, p. 115-150. ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Madison, WI 53711, USA.
14
Hodson, M.J., Smith, R.J., Van Blaaderen, A., Crafton, T., and O'neill, C.H. 1994. Detecting plant silica fibres in animal tissue by confocal fluorescence microscopy. Annals of Occupational Hygiene 38(2): 149-160.
15
Howell, T.A., Evett, S.R., Tolk, J.A., and Schneider, A.D. 2004. Evapotranspiration of full and deficit-irrigated, and dryland cotton on the Northern Texas High Plains. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering 130(4): 277-285.
16
Hsiao, T.C. 1973. Plant responses to water stress. Annual Review of Plant Physiology 24: 519-570.
17
Ibrahim, M., Hassan, A.U., Arshad, M., and Tanveer, A. 2010. Variation in root growth and nutrient element concentration in wheat and rice: effect of rate and type of organic materials. Soil and Environment 29: 47–52.
18
Jalilian, A., Ghobadi, R., and Farnia, A. 2010. The effect of different levels of drought stress and nitrogen fertilizer on quality of grain traits of corn [hybrid 704]. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage 8(4): 747-756. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Johnston, A.M., and Fowler, D.B. 1992. Response of no till winter wheat to nitrogen fertilization and drought stress. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 72: 1075-1089.
20
Kitterer, T., Andrn, O., and Pettersson, R. 1997. Growth and nitrogen dynamics of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) subjected to daily fertilization and irrigation in the field. Field Crops Research 55: 153-164.
21
Kramer, A.W., Doane, T.A., Horwath, W.R., and Van Kessel, C. 2002. Combining fertilizer and organic inputs to synchronize N supply in alternative cropping system in California. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 91: 233-243.
22
Macilwain, C. 2004. Is organic farming better for the environment? Nature 428: 797-798.
23
Majidian, M., Ghalavand, A., Kamgar haghighi, A.A., and Karimian, N. 2006. Effects of water stress, nitrogen fertilizer and manure in during different growth stages on agronomic characteristics of corn (Zea mays L.). Electronic Journal of Crop Production 1(2): 67-85. (In Persian with English Summary)
24
Mallanagouda, B. 1995. Effects of N, P, K and FMY on growth parameters of onion, garlic and coriander. Journal of Medic and Aromatic Plant Science 4: 916-918.
25
Marcote, I., Hernandez, T., Garcia, C., and Polo, A. 2001. Influence of one or two successive annual applications of organic fertilizers on the enzyme activity of a soil under barley cultivation. Bioresource Technology 79(2): 147-151.
26
Mendal, K.G., Hati, K.M., Misra, A.K., and Bandyopadhyay, K.K. 2006. Assessment of (Brasscia juncea) in central irrigation and nutrient effects on growth, yield and water use efficiency of Indian mustard India. Agricultural Water Management 85: 276-286.
27
S.H. Mousavi Fazl, S.H., Alizadeh, A., Ansari, N., and Rezvani Moghaddam, P. 2014. Effect of different levels of irrigation water and potassium fertilizer on root and shoot growth of forage sorghum. Iranian Journal of Irrigation Drainage 4(8): 747-756. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Oehl, F., Sieverding, E., Mäder, P., Dubois, D., Ineichen, K., Boller, T., and Wiemken, A. 2004. Impact of long-term conventional and organic farming on the diversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Oecologia 138: 574-583.
29
Ofosu-Anim, J., and Leitch, M. 2009. Relative efficacy of organic manures in spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) production. Australian Journal of Crop Science 3(1): 13-19.
30
Olesen, J.E., Askegaard, M., and Rasmussen, I.A. 2009. Winter cereal yields as affected by animal manure and green manure in organic arable farming. European Journal of Agronomy 30: 119-128.
31
Osborne, S.L., Scheppers, J.S., Francis, D.D., and Schlemmer, M.R. 2002. Use of spectral radiance to in – season biomass and grain yield in nitrogen and water stressed corn. Crop Science 42: 165-171.
32
Patra, D.D., Anwar, M., Singh, S., Prasad, A., and Singh, D.V. 1999. Aromatic and medicinal plants for salt and moisture stress condition. Recent Advances in management of arid ecosystem. Proceeding of Symposium Held in Indian, March 1997. pp. 347-350.
33
Peng, S., Buresh, R. J., Huang, J., Yang, J., Zou, Y., Zhong, X., Wang, G., and Zhang, F. 2006. Strategies for overcoming low agronomic nitrogen use efficiency in irrigated rice system in China. Field Crops Research 96: 37-47.
34
Pinamonti, F. 1998. Compost mulch effects on soil fertility, nutritional status and performance of grapevine. Nutrition Cycling Agro-ecosystem 51: 239-248.
35
Pulleman, M.A., Jongmans, J., and Bouma, J. 2003. Effects of organic versus conventional arable farming on soil structure and organic matter dynamics in a marine loam in the Netherlands. Soil Use and Management 19: 157-165.
36
Ramazani, S.H.R., and Taghi Assad, M. 2002. Genetic changes in grain yield and associated traits in improved barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 79: 2-9. (In Persian with English Summary)
37
Rezadost, S., and Roshdi, M. 2003. New cultivar wheat reactions towards insufficient irrigation systems. Journal of Agricultural Sciences Islamic Azad University 12(1): 124-131. (In Persian with English Summary)
38
Rezaei Nejad, Y., and Afyoni, M. 1999. Effect of organic manure on soil chemical characters, nutrient uptake and yield in corn. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources 4(4): 19-27. (In Persian with English Summary)
39
Sachdev, P., and Deb, D.L. 1990. Influence of gypsum and farmyard manure on fertilizer zinc uptake by wheat and its residual effect on succeeding rice and wheat crops in sodic soil. Journal of Nuclear Agriculture and Biology 9: 173-178.
40
Satorre, E.H., and Slafer, G.A. 1999. Wheat, Ecology and Physiology of Yield Determination. Food Product Press, New York ISBN: 1-56022-874-1, p. 503.
41
Schnyder, H. 1993. The role of carbohydrate and redistribution in the source-sink relation of wheat and barley during grain filling- a review. New Phytologist 123: 233–245.
42
Sharma, RK, Agrawal, M., and Marshall, FM. 2006. Heavy metal contamination in vegetables grown in wastewater irrigated areas of Varanasi, India. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 77: 312–318.
43
Shata, S.M., Mahmoud, A., and Siam, S. 2007. Improving calcareous soil productivity by integrated effect of intercropping and fertilizer. Research Journal Agriculture and Biological Science 3(6): 733-739.
44
Taleei, A., and Bahram-Nejad, B. 2003. A study of relationship between yield and its components in landrace populations of wheat from western parts of Iran using multivariate analysis. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 34(4): 949-959. (In Persian with English Summary)
45
Traore, S.B., Carlson, R.E., Pilcher, C.D., and Rice, M.E. 2000. Bt and Non-Bt maize growth and development as affected by temperature and drought stress. Agronomy Journal 92: 1027–1035.
46
Turgut, I., Bilgili, U., Duman, A., and Acikgoz, E. 2005. Effect of green manuring on the yield of sweet corn. Agronomy Sustainable Development 25: 1-5.
47
Zhang, Y.J., Zhou, Y.R., Du, B., and Yang, J.C. 2008. Effects of nitrogen nutrition on grain yield of upland and paddy rice under different cultivation methods. Acta Agronomica Sinica 34: 1005-1013.
48
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Contribution of Genetic and Agronomic Measures to Yield Gain of Wheat in Iran
Introduction
World population will be increased up to 9 billion and food demand up to 50 percent by 2050. This exponential increase in population, without an associated increase in arable land, in recent years, significantly threaten crop production. Therefore, engineering crop plants in order to achieve greater yields has been a major focus of plant biologists and breeders with a view to ensuring food availability for an increasing world population under changing environmental conditions. Plant performance is strongly associated with, and dependent on, plant development and growth. Several developmental features of plants, such as overall plant architecture, leaf features and vasculature architecture, are major traits that determine the overall performance of crop plants. The importance of plant developmental features in increasing crop yield potential became evident during the ‘green revolution’, when an unprecedented increase in yield was achieved by breeding for semi-dwarf varieties of rice and wheat. Furthermore, due to rapid global environmental changes, restricted land and water resources, increasing food production particularly for wheat should be achieved mainly by increased crop yield (Koning & van Ittersum, 2009). Yield could be increased by genetic or agronomic measures and understanding the share of each component is of great importance for designing future cropping systems. However, these issues are not fully studied and quantified. Therefore, in this research yield trend of irrigated wheat at national level is analyzed for 1971-2011 period and contribution of cultivar improvement and agronomic management to yield increment have been estimated.
Material and Methods
Trends of total production, cultivated area and yield of irrigated wheat were analyzed for the country for 40 years (1971-2011) using linear regression with slope as annual increment rate of each variable. Weather-adjusted yield trend was also estimated based on residuals of regression as described by Nassiri Mahallati & Koocheki (2014a). Share of cultivated area and yield in total production was calculated by using component analysis. Annual changes in yield of irrigated wheat (dY, kg ha-1 yr-1 i.e. the slope of yield trend model) described by Equ.(1):
dY = dG + dN + dP + dO (1)
where dG, dN, dP and dO (all in kg ha-1 yr-1) are annual yield increment due to genetic, N-fertilizers, P-fertilizers and Other agronomic factors. Contribution of genetic factors (dG) was estimated based on the cultivar improvement index (Silvey, 1981). Share of chemical fertilizers (dN and dP) in remaining yield increase (dY - dG) was calculated for each year during the study period. Finally, contribution of other agronomic measures (dO) to yield was estimated by subtracting right hand terms of Equ. (1) from dY.
Results and Discussion
Wheat production and yield was increased by 3.2 and 1.4 times over the studied period, respectively. However, cultivated area after a sharp increase at 2.8% per year until 2000 was decreased in the last decade by 1% per year. Annual weather variation showed significant effect on irrigated wheat yield so that averaged over the 40 years, estimated rate of yield increment was 24% lower than weather adjusted yield. During the 4 decades mean contribution of cultivated area and yield on total wheat production were 44 and 56%, respectively and it was estimated that share of yield will be increased up to 70% in the present decade. Genetic yield potential of irrigated wheat cultivars has increased at 57 kg ha-1 yr-1 (1.18% per year) for the period 1968-2011. During the studied period wheat cultivar improvement contributed to annual rate of yield increment by 34.8% while in the same period average contribution of N and P fertilizers were estimated as 25.4 and 8.8%, respectively leaving 31% for the other agronomic measures.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36854_df8e3bb347d6472af88603ba768a80e2.pdf
2019-03-21
137
153
10.22067/jag.v11i1.48702
Trend analysis
Genetic potential
Genetic gain
Cultivar improvement index
Alireza
Koocheki
akooch@um.ac.ir
1
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mehdi
Nassiri Mahallati
mnassiri@um.ac.ir
2
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Afsaneh
Amin Ghafoori
a.aminghafori@gmail.com
3
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Mansooreh
Mahlouji Rad
soory_76@yahoo.com
4
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Austin, R.B., Bingham, J., Blackwell, R.D., Evans, L.T., Ford, M.A., Morgan, C.L., and Taylor, M. 1980. Genetic improvements in winter wheat yield since 1900 and associated physiological changes. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge Core 94: 675-689.
1
Bell, M.A., and Fischer, R.A. 1994. Using yield prediction models to assess yield gains: a case study for wheat. Journal Field Crop Research 36: 161-166.
2
Bell, M.A., Fischer, R.A., Byerlee, D., and Sayre, K. 1995. Genetic and agronomic contributions to yield gains: a case study for wheat. Field Crops Research 44: 55–65.
3
Brancourt-Hulmel, M., Doussinault, G., Lecomte, C., Be´rard, P., Le Buanec, B., and Trottet, M. 2003. Genetic improvement of agronomic traits of winter wheat cultivars released in France from 1946 to 1992. Crop Science 43: 37–45.
4
Brennan, J.P., and Byerlee, D. 1991. The rate of crop varietal replacement on farms: measures and empirical results for wheat. Plant Varieties Seeds 4: 99-106.
5
Brisson, N., Gate, P., Couache, D., Charmet, G., Oury, F.-X., and Huard, F. 2010. Why are wheat yields stagnating in Europe? A comprehensive data analysis for France. Field Crops Research 119: 201–212.
6
Bruinsma, J. 2009. The resource outlook to 2050: by how much do land, water, and crop yields need to increase by 2050? In: Expert Meeting on How to Feed the World in 2050, FAO, Rome, Available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/expert paper/05-Bruinsma ResourceOutlookto2050.pdf (verified 19.10.09) [Online]
7
Calderini, D.F., and Slafer, G.A. 1998. Changes in yield and yield stability in wheat during the 20th century. Field Crops Research 57: 335–347.
8
Cassman, K.G., Dobermann, A., Walters, D.T., and Yang, H. 2003. Meeting cereal demand while protecting natural resources and improving environmental quality. Annual Reviews Journal of Environmental Resource Economics 28 10.1–10.44.
9
CAWMA (Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture). 2007. Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture. Earthscan/International Water Management Institute, London/Colombo.
10
Esmaeilzadeh Moghaddam, M., Jalal Kamali, M.R., Anet, Z., Roshani M., and Ghodsi, M. 2014. Temporal variation in phenological characteristics, grain yield, and yield components of spring bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars released in Iran between 1952 and 2009. Crop Breeding Journal 4(1): 57-64.
11
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 2011. FAOSTAT. FAO, Rome, Available at http://faostat.fao.org/ (verified 16.07.11) [Online].
12
FAO.2009. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/Issues_papers/HLEF2050_Global_Agriculture.pdf.
13
Feyerherm, A.M. and Paulsen, G.M., 1981. An analysis of temporal and regional variation in wheat yields. Agronomy Journal 73: 863-867.
14
Feyerherm, A.M., Kemp, K.E., and Paulsen, G.M. 1988. Wheat yield analysis in relation to advancing technology in the Midwest United States. Agronomy Journal 80: 998-1001.
15
Firozjaee, A. 2015. Designing wheat ideotype for low input cropping systems: radiation, nitrogen and water use efficiency and the related traits in Iranian wheat cultivars released during 1948-2012. PhD thesis, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
16
Fischer, R.A., Byerlee, D., and Edmeades, G.O. 2009. Can technology deliver on the yield challenge to 2050? In: Expert Meeting on How to Feed the World in 2050, FAO, Rome, Available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/expertpaper/11-Fischer-etalTechnology-Challenge.pdf (verified 13.10.09) [Online].
17
Fischer, R.A., and Edmeades, G.O. 2010. Breeding and cereal yield progress. Crop Science 50: 85–98.
18
Gooding, M.J., Ellis, R.H., Shewry, P.R., and Schafield, J.D. 2003. Effects of restricted water availability and increased temperature on the grain filling, drying and quality of winter wheat. Journal of Cereal Science 37: 295–309.
19
Graybosch, R.A., and Peterson, C.J. 2010. Genetic improvement in winter wheat yields in the Great Plains of North America, 1959–2008. Crop Science, 50: 1882–1890.
20
Hafner, S. 2003. Trends in maize, rice and wheat yields for 188 nations over the past 40 years: a prevalence of linear growth. Agric. Ecosyst. Journal Environmental Science 97: 275–283.
21
Hall, A.J., and Richards, R.A. 2014. Prognosis for genetic improvement of yield potential and water-limited yield of major grain crops. Field Crops Research 143: 18-33.
22
Jaggard, K.W., Qi, A., and Ober, E.S. 2010. Possible changes to arable crop yields by 2050. Philosophical. Transaetions.of the Royal Society Biolological Sceince, 365: 2835–2851.
23
Jensen, N.F. 1978. Limits to growth in world food production. Ceilings for wheat yields are coming in developed countries. Science 201: 317-320.
24
Kalra, N., Chakraborty, D., Sharma, A., Rai, H.K., Jolly, M., Chander, S., Ramesh Kumar, P., Bhadraray, S., Barman, D., Mittal, R.B., Lal, M., and Sehgal, M. 2008. Effect of increasing temperature on yield of some winter crops in northwest India. Current Science 94: 82–88.
25
Khodarahmi, M., and Vazan, S. 2010. Trends in morphological and quantitative traits in bread wheat using introduced varieties during the last six decades in Iran. Journal of Agronomy and Plant Breeding 6(1): 29-42.
26
Koning, N., and Van Ittersum, M.K. 2009. Will the world have enough to eat? Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 1: 77–82.
27
Lobell, D.B., Cassman, K.G., and Field, C.B. 2009. Crop yield gaps: their importance, magnitudes, and causes. Annual Review Environmental Journal Resource Economics 34: 179–204.
28
Mackay, I.A., Horwell, J., Garner, J., White J., McKee and Philpott, H. 2011. Reanalyses of the historical series of UK variety trials to quantify the contributions of genetic and environmental factors to trends and variability in yield over time. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 122: 225–238.
29
MAJ. 2013. Ministry of Jehad-e-Keshavarzi of Iran, statistical database. Crop production statistics, available at: www.maj.ir/portal/Home/Default.aspx (In Persian)
30
Moll, R.H., Kamprath, E.J., and Jackson, W.A. 1982. Analysis and interpretation of factors which contribute to efficiency of nitrogen utilization. Agronomy Journal 74: 562-564.
31
Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Koocheki, A. 2014a. Long term evaluation of yield stability trend for cereal crops in Iran. Journal of Agroecology 6(3): 607-621. (In Persian with English Summary)
32
Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Koocheki, A. 2014b. Trend analysis of nitrogen use and productivity in cereal production systems of Iran. Journal of Agroecology, In Press. (In Persian)
33
O' Brien, L. 1982. Victorian wheat yield trends, 1898-1977. The Journal of.the Australian. Institute.of Agricultural. Science., 48: 163-167.
34
Sadras, V.O., and Lawson, C. 2011. Genetic gain in yield and associated changes in phenotype, trait plasticity and competitive ability of South Australian wheat varieties released between 1958 and 2007. Crop and Pasture Sci., 62: 533-549.
35
Sanchez-Garcia, M., Royo, C., Aparicio, N.J.A., and Álvaro, F. 2012. Genetic improvement of bread wheat yield and associated traits in Spain during the 20th century. Journal of Agricultural Science 151(1): 105–118.
36
Silvey, V. 1981. The contribution of new wheat, barley and oat varieties to increasing yield in England and Wales 1947-1978. Journal of the National Institute of Agricultural Botany 15: 399-412.
37
Sinclair, T.R., and Jamieson, P.D. 2006. Grain number, wheat yield and bottling beer: an analysis. Field Crops Research 98: 60–67.
38
Slafer, G.A., Satorre, E.H., and Andrade, F.H. 1993. Increases in grain yield in bread wheat from breeding and associated physiological changes. In: G.A. Slafer (Editor), Genetic Improvement of Field Crops. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 1-8.
39
Smil, V. 2005. Do we need higher farm yields during the first half of the 21st century? In Yields of farmed species. (eds R. Sylvester-Bradley and J. Wiseman), pp. 1–14. Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press.
40
Wang, F., He, Z., Sayre, K., Li, S., Si, J., Feng, B., and Kong, L. 2009. Wheat cropping systems and technologies in China. Field Crops Research 111: 181-188.
41
Zhang, X., Wang, S., Sun, H., Chen, S., Shao, L., and Liu, X. 2013. Contribution of cultivar, fertilizer and weather to yield variation of winter wheat over three decades: A case study in the North China Plain. European Journal of Agronomy 50: 52–59.
42
Zhou, Y., He, Z.H., Sui, X.X., Xia, X.C., Zhang, K., and Zhang, G.S. 2007. Genetic improve-ment of grain yield and associated traits in the Northern China winter wheat region from 1960 to 2000. Crop Science 47: 245–253.
43
Zare, A., Koocheki, A., and Nassiri, M. 2006. Trend analysis of yield, production and cultivated area of cereal in Iran during the last 50 years and prediction of future situation. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 4(1): 49-71. (In Persian with English Summary)
44
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluation of Long Term changes of Crop Species Diversity in Agro-ecosystems of North, Central (Razavi) and South Khorasan provinces (Iran)
Introduction[1]
Biodiversity is a network of all living organisms, including plants, animals, fungi and other living organisms. In fact, biodiversity refers to the diversity of life and the interactions between living organisms. Agricultural biodiversity as a subset of biodiversity refers to the part of biodiversity used by farmers to produce food. It is well documented that conservation of agricultural biodiversity is crucial for maintaining multifunctional characteristics of agroecosystem as a basis for sustainable crop production. Quantification and monitoring the spatio-temporal variations of crop biodiversity are essential elements for the purpose of biodiversity conservation. Such studies, however, with focusing on spatial variability and temporal changes of crop diversity is largely overlooked. On the other hand, recent studies have shown that merely use of traditional measures such as Shannon and Simpson diversity indices may cause misinterpretation of the results. Therefore, using new measures such as species intactness indices would help to find out the amount of intactness in individual or a number of species over a long period of time. Therefore, the main objective of this study was evaluation of changes over time in crop species diversity at regional scale. Furthermore, two new groups of biodiversity indices for quantification of temporal variation of biodiversity are compared with the common diversity indices.
Materials and Methods
In this study, crop diversity intactness and traditional diversity indices were investigated for North, Central (Razavi) and South Khorasan provinces (located at Northeast of Iran). Long‑term data (1983-2008) regarding cultivated area of different crop species within selected cities across three studied provinces were collected from official databases. Time course of crop species diversity was quantified using 3 groups of indices.
- Traditional indices i.e. species richness and Shannon species diversity index (H'), where H' was calculated on the basis of relative cultivated area of species.
- Species intactness indices based on occurrence, calculated by the difference between crop species diversity at the reference time (reference diversity) and observed species diversity at any given time.
- Species intactness indices based on abundance, estimated from the difference between cultivated area (frequency) of crop species at reference time and any given time during the study period.
Finally, time trend of each group of indices was evaluated using regression analysis.
Results and Discussion
Results showed that in three studied provinces both species richness which demonstrates the number of cultivated crop species and Shannon divesity index were increased during the period of 1983-2008. However, Shannon index for Torbate Heydariye, Farooj, Jajarm was decreased over the study period. Although traditional indices showed an improvement of crop diversity over time, they are not able to distinguish the structural changes in the crop species composition. For example if new exotic crop species were introduced, Shannon index would show higher diversity because of higher richness. Intactness indeices of crop species indicated a decreasing trend compare with reference years (i.e. 1983 to 1988), showing changes in crop species composition over the studied period which is in contrast with the results of traditional indices. It is supposed that this discrepancy is due to the crucial change of crop diversity pattern and substitution of some local crops by exotic species and vast expansion of intensive cropping systems across three studied provinces. In fact, in the studied regions, introduction of new exotic crops is led to neglection of some indigenes species.
Conclusion
The results of this study indicated that using diversity intactness indices are superior over traditional diversity measures when the objective of the study is evaluation of structural changes in crop species diversity over time . Overall, intactness of crop diversity in three studied provinces was decreased which is seemingly the results of introduction of new crop species and intensification of production systems.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36861_adef95292f7bb3bf56771cc5ac7ab1a7.pdf
2019-03-21
155
170
10.22067/jag.v11i1.32433
Keywords: Conventional biodiversity indices
Intactness indices
Monitoring
Species diversity
Intensive agriculture
Mehdi
Nassiri Mahallati
mnassiri@um.ac.ir
1
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Alireza
Koocheki
akooch@um.ac.ir
2
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Arash
Ghale Golab Behbahani
ar_gh663@stu-mail.um.ac.ir
3
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Agrin
Davari
agrin.davari@yahoo.com
4
Department of Pland and Soil Science, University of Vermont, Burlington Vermont, USA
AUTHOR
Seyed Shahab Aldin
Moein Aldini
shahab.moin@hotmail.com
5
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
1. Alain, R., Paula, F., Jacques, A., and Robert, H. 2012. Plant species diversity for sustainable management of crop pests and diseases in agroecosystems: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 32(1): 273-303.
1
2. Altieri, M.A. 1999. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 74: 19-31
2
3. Asman, K., Ekbom, B., and Ramert, B. 2001. Effect of intercropping on oviposition and emigration of the leek moth (Lepidoptera: Acroplepiidae) and the diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Environmental Entomology 30: 288–294.
3
4. Altieri, M.A. 1999. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 74: 19-31.
4
5. Bajwa, M.A. 1995. wheat research and production in Pakistan. In: Wheat for more tropical environments. Villarel, L. (Ed.). Proceedings of an International symposium CIMMIT, Mexico, pp. 68-72.
5
6. Brookfield, H., and Stocking, M. 1999. Agro diversity: definition, description and design. Journal of Global Environmental Change 9: 77-80.
6
7. Buckland, S.T., Magurran, A.E., Green, R.E., and Fewster, R.M. 2005. Monitoring change in biodiversity through composite indices. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 360: 243–254.
7
8. DiFalco, S., and Perrings, C. 2003. Crop genetic diversity, productivity and stability of agroecosystems. A theoretical and empirical investigation. Scottish Journal of Political Economy 50: 207–216.
8
9. Di Falco, S., and Chavas, J. 2008. Rainfall shocks, resilience and the effects of crop biodiversity on agroecosystem productivity. Land Economics 84(1): 83–96.
9
10. Lamb, E.G., Bayne, E., Holloway, G., Schieck, J., Boutin, S., Herbers, J., and Haughland, D.L. 2009. Indices for monitoring biodiversity change: Are some more effective than others? Ecological Indicators 9: 432–444.
10
11. Finckh, M.T., and darpenstein-Machan, M. 2002. Intercropping for Pest Management Encyclopedia of Pest Management. http:// www. Informaworld.com
11
12. Griffiths-GJK, Holland, J.M., Bailey, A., and Thomas, M.B. 2008. Efficacy and economics of shelter habitats for conservation biological control. Biological Control 45: 200–209.
12
13. Helenius, J. 1998. Enhancement of predation through within-field diversification. In: Pickett, E., and Bugg, R.L. (Eds.). Enhancing biological control. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, USA, pp. 121–160.
13
14. Jackson, L.E., Pascual, U., and hodgkin, T. 2007. Utilizing and conserving agrobiodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 121: 196.
14
15. Jones, G., and Sieving, K.E. 2006. Intercropping sunflower in organic vegetables to augment bird predatorsn of arthropods. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 117:171–177.
15
16. Kirit, K.P. 2008. Cultivating diversity on farm: agrobiodiversity in a tribal region of western India. PhD Thesis, India. 446 pp.
16
17. Koocheki, A. Nassiri Mahllati, M.R., Asgharipoor, M., and Khodashenas, A. 2003. Biodiversity of fruits and vegetables in Iran. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 2: 80-86. (In Persian woth English Summary)
17
18. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahllati, M., Zarea Fizabadi, A., and Jahanbin, G. 2004. Diversity of cropping systems in Iran. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 63: 70-83. (In Persian woth English Summary)
18
19. Koocheki, A., Nassiri, M., Glissman, S.R., and Zarea, A. 2008. Agrobiodiversity of field crops: A case study for Iran. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 32(1): 95-122.
19
20. Long, J., Cromwell, E., and Gold, K. 2000. On-farm management of crop diversity: an introductory bibliography. The Schumacher Center for Technology and Development. Http:// www.oneworld.org/odi/
20
21. Lopez, B., Montes, C., and Benayas, J. 2007. The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation 139: 67–82.
21
22. Loreau, M., Naeem, S., Inchausti, P., Bengtsson, J., Grime, J.P., Hector, A., Hooper, D.U., Huston, M.A., Raffaeli, D., Schmid, B., Tilman, D., and Wardle, D.A. 2002. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294: 804–808.
22
23. Malezieux, E., Crozat, Y., Dupraz, C., Laurans, M., Makowski, D., Ozier-Lafontaine, H., Rapidel, B., de Tourdonnet, S., and Valantin-Morison, M. 2009. Mixing plant species in cropping systems: concepts, tools and models: a review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 29: 43–62.
23
24. Margalef, R.D. 1958. Information theory in ecology. General Systems 3: 36–71.
24
25. Nassiri, M., Koocheki, A., and Mazaheri, D. 2005. Diversity of crop species in Iran. Desert 10(1): 33-50. Nielsen, S.E., Bayne, E.M., Schieck, J., Herbers, J., and Boutin, S. 2007. A new method to estimate species and biodiversity intactness using empirically derived reference conditions. Biological Conservation 137: 403–414.
25
26. Omer, A., Pascual, U., and Russell, N.P. 2007. Biodiversity conservation and productivity in intensive agricultural systems. Journal of Agricultural Economics 58: 308–329.
26
27. Pimentel, D.A., Stachow, U., Takacs, D.A., Brubaker, H.W., Dumas, A.R., Meaney, J.J., Oneil., J.A.S., Onsi., D.E., and Corzilius, D.B. 1992. Conserving biological diversity in agricultural and forestry systems. Journal of BioScience 42: 354-364.
27
28. Pimentel, D., Wilson, C., Maccullum, C., Huang, R., Dwen, P., Flack, J., Tran, Q., Saltman, T., and Cliff, B. 1997. Economic and environmental benefits of biodiversity. Journal of Bioscience 47: 747-757.
28
29. Smale, M., Hartell, J., Heisey, P.W., and Senauer, B. 1998. The contribution of geneticresources and diversity to wheat production in the Punjab of Pakistan. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80(3): 482-493.
29
30. Smith, J., Potts, S.G., Woodcock, B.A., and Eggleton, P. 2008. Can arable field argins be managed to enhance their biodiversity, conservation and functional value for soil macrofauna? Journal of Applied Ecology 45: 269-278.
30
31. Smith, A.K., Chewings, V.H., Bastin, G.N., Ferrier, S., Manion, G., and Clifford, B. 2004. Integrating historical datasets to priorities areas for biodiversity monitoring? In: Australian Rangelands Society 13th Biennial Conference: “Living in the outback”, Alice Springs, Northern Territory.
31
32. Vandermeer, J., Van Noordwijk, M., Anderson, J., and Ong, C. 1998. Global change and multi-species agroecosystems: Concepts and issues. Journal of Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 67: 1-22.
32
33. Vandermeer, J., Perfecto, I., and Liere, H. 2009. Evidence for hyperparasitism of coffee rust (Hemileia vastatrix) by the entomogenous fungus, Lecanicillium lecanii, through a complex ecological web. Plant Pathology 58: 636–641.
33
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effect of Cereals Intercropping Systems and Application of Nitrogen Fertilizer on Nitrogen and Micronutrients Content of Weeds Shoot and Grain Yield
Introduction[1]
Weed management is a key issue in ecological management of agroecosystems, and weed control should be tackled primarily by altering the competitive balance between crop and weeds. This can be through measures such as the correct choice of rotation, the choice of crop species and cultivars with more competitive ability and precision nutrient management. The infestation of weeds may also be significantly reduced by crop species diversification in cropping systems. Therefore, intercropping system is one of the ways to diversity. It is likely that intercrops promote the use of the available resources by crops, thus, leaving less opportunity for the establishment and growth of weeds. In addition to cropping system components, the absorption of nutrients may be affected and in some cases be increased by nitrogen. Reduction of available nutrients to weeds is one of the ecological approaches for to weaken weeds and to increase crop yield. This experiment was conducted to investigate the effects of cereals intercropping systems and nitrogen levels on nitrogen and micro-nutrients (Fe, Zn, Cu and Mn) content of weeds shoot and crop grain yield.
Materials and Methods
This experiment was carried out at the Darab faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Shiraz University, Iran during 2013-14 cropping season. Treatments were arranged in a factorial experiment based on randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replicates. Treatments were five different sowing ratios of wheat: triticale consisted of 100: 0, 75: 25, 50: 50, 25: 75, 0: 100, four different sowing ratios of barley: triticale consisted of 100: 0, 75: 25, 50: 50, 25: 75 and two nitrogen levels (100 and 200 kg N ha-1). Nitrogen and micro-nutrients (Fe, Zn, Cu and Mn) content of weeds shoot and grain yield were measured and compared statistically.
Results and Discussion
The lowest and the highest nitrogen content of weeds shoot was observed in the monoculture of triticale with 200 kg N ha-1 and in the monoculture of wheat with 200 kg N ha-1 respectively. The interaction of intercropping systems and nitrogen levels led to decrease of nitrogen content in weeds tissue. There were the lowest Fe and Mn content of weeds shoot in W50T50 and B50T5050 intercropping systems with 200 kg N ha-1. The W25T75 and monoculture of barley (B100) showed the lowest Zn content for weeds shoot and increasing nitrogen fertilizer resulted in an increase in Zn content of weeds. The Cu content of weed shoot was higher in monocultures than that in intercropping systems. The lowest Cu content in weeds shoot was observed in W50T50 and B75T25 where 100 kg N ha-1 applied to the experimental plots. Furthermore, grain yield in wheat: triticale intercropping was greater than that in monoculture of wheat. In this study, B50T50 cropping system with 200 kg N ha-1 showed the highest grain yield. Generally, grain yield of crops increased with rising nitrogen amount in intercropping systems.
Conclusion
The results of this study showed that nitrogen, Fe and Mn content of weeds shoot decreased where they grew in intercropping systems with the highest nitrogen fertilizer level. However, Cu content of weeds shoot decreased in intercropping systems and lower nitrogen fertilizer level. Furthermore, Zn content of weeds shoot decreased in intercropping systems and high amount of nitrogen fertilizer increased this micro-nutrient in weeds shoot. According to the results, crop grain yield increased significantly (P≤0.01) where a higher amount of nitrogen fertilizer applied to cereal intercropping systems. These findings have implications for ecological management of weeds in cropping systems and increasing crop yield through increasing cereal crop diversity and management of nitrogen and micro-nutrients (Fe, Zn, Cu and Mn).
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36871_f2cbbc4ab710c38a2f8cd0b5267f43e0.pdf
2019-03-21
171
184
10.22067/jag.v11i1.60035
copper
Iron
Manganese
Triticale
wheat
Zinc
farzaneh
faramarzi
farzane.faramarzi@yahoo.com
1
Shiraz
AUTHOR
Mohammad Sadegh
Taghizadeh
mtaghizadehs@gmail.com
2
shiraz
LEAD_AUTHOR
Ali
behpoori
behpoori@shirazu.ac.ir
3
Assistant Professor of Agroecology, Darab Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Shiraz University, Darab, Iran
AUTHOR
Sahar
Afzali Harsini
afzali.1391@yahoo.com
4
College of Agricultural and Natural Resources, Tehran University,Tehran, Iran
AUTHOR
Abadian, H., Yarnia, M., Pirdashti, H.A., Abasi, R., and Farahvash, F. 2015. Effect of intercropping pattern and nitrogen fertilizer on basil (Ocimum basiilicum L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) yield under weed competitive conditions. Journal of Crop Production 3: 1-18. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Ahmadvand, G., and Hajinia, S. 2016. Ecological aspects of replacement intercropping patterns of soybean (Glycine max L.) and millet (Panicum miliaceum L.). Journal of Agroecology 4: 485-498. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Alizadeh, A., Majidi, A., and Normohamadi, G. 2008. Effect drought stress and soil nitrogen on nutrient uptake in maize (704cv). Journal of research in Agricultural Science 4: 51- 59. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
Ariel, C.E., Eduardo, O.A., Benito, G.E., and Lidia, G. 2013. Effects of two plant arrangements in corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill) intercropping on soil nitrogen and phosphorus status and growth of component crops at an Argentinean Argiudoll. American Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 2: 22-31.
4
Awal, M. A., Koshi, H., and Ikeda, T. 2006. Radiation interception and use by maize/peanut intercrop canopy. Journal of Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 139: 74-83.
5
Baumann, D.T., Kropff, M.J., and Bastiaans, L. 2000. Intercropping leeks to suppress weeds. Journal of Weed Research 40: 359–374.
6
Corre-Hellou, G., Fustec, J., and Crozat, Y. 2006. Interspecific competition for soil N and its interactions with N2 fixation, leaf expansion and crop growth in pea–barley intercrops. Journal of Plant and Soil 282:195–208.
7
Corre-Hellou, G., Dibet, A., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Crozat, Y., Gooding, M., Ambus, P., Dahlmann, C., von Fragstein, P., Pristeri, A., Monti, M., and Jensen, E.S. 2011.The competitive ability of pea–barley intercrops against weeds and the interactions with crop productivity and soil N availability. Journal of Field Crops Research 122: 264–272.
8
Eskandari, H., and Alizadeh-Amraie, A. 2016. Evaluation of growth and species composition of weeds in maize-cowpea intercropping based on additive series under organic farming condition. Journal of Agroecology 2: 227-240. (In Persian with English Summary)
9
Estrada-Campuzano, G., Slafer, G.A., and Miralles, D.J. 2012. Differences in yield, biomass and their components between triticale and wheat grown under contrasting water and nitrogen environments. Journal of Field Crops Research 128: 167–179.
10
Fallah, S., Baharlui, S., and Abasi Soraki, A. 2014. Evaluation of competitive and economic indices of canola (Brassica napus L.) and pea (Pisum sativum L.) intercropping under different amounts of nitrogen fertilizer. Journal of Agroecology 3: 571-581. (In Persian with English Summary)
11
Głowacka, A. 2012. Content and uptake of micro elements (Cu, Zn, Mn, Fe) by maize (Zea mays L.) and accompanying weeds. Acta Agrobotanica 65: 179–188.
12
Gunes, A., Inal, A., Adak, M.S., Alpaslan, M., Bagci, E.G., Erol, T., and Pilbeam, D.J. 2007. Mineral nutrition of wheat, chickpea and lentil as affected by intercropped cropping and soil moisture. Journal of Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 78: 83–96.
13
Hao, H., Wei, Y., Yang, X., Feng, Y., and Wu, C. 2007. Effects of different nitrogen fertilizer levels on Fe, Mn, Cu and Zn concentrations in shoot and grain quality in rice (Oryza sativa). Journal of Rice Science 14: 289–294.
14
Hatcher, P.E., and Melander, B. 2003. Combining physical, cultural and biological methods prospects for integrated non-chemical weed management strategies. Journal of Weed Research 43: 303-322.
15
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Ambus, P., and Jensen, E.S. 2001. Interspecific competition, N use and interference with weeds in pea–barley intercropping. Journal of Field Crops Research 70: 101–109.
16
Inal, A., Gunes, A., Zhang, F., and Cakmak, I. 2007. Peanut/maize intercropping induced changes in rhizosphere andnutrient concentrations in shoots. Journal of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry 45: 350-356.
17
Karadag, Y., 2004. Forage yields, seed yields and botanical compositions of some legume-barely mixtures under rainfed condition in semi-arid regions of Turkey. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 3: 295-299.
18
Khamadi, F., Mesgarbashi, M., Hasibi, P., Farzaneh, M., and Enayatzamir, N. 2014. Influence of crop residue and nitrogen levels on nutrient content in grain wheat. Journal of Agronomy (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi) 108: 158-166. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Khan, M.I., and Shah, F. 2011. Effect of potassium nitrate and thiourea on seed germination of crops and weeds. In Tenth ACSS Conference on Crop production for improved African livelihoods and a better environment for future generations, Maputo, Eduardo-Mondlane University, Mozambique, 10 - 13 October 2011, p. 461–463.
20
Lamei Harvani, J. 2012. Technical and economical evaluation of lathyrus intercropping with barley and triticale in Zanjan Province dry condition. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 4: 9-102. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Lindsay, W.L., and Norvell, W.A. 1978. Development of a DTPA soil test for Zn, Fe, Mn, and Cu. American Journal of Soil Science Society 42: 421–428.
22
Makvandi, M.A., Latifian, M., and Soleymannejadian, A. 2007. Investigate the Competitive model of wheat and ryegrass in different nutritional conditions. Journal of New Findings in Agriculture 2: 175-188. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Malicki, L., and Berbeciowa, C.Z. 1986. Uptake of more important mineral components by common field weeds on loess soil. Acta Agrobotanica 39: 129–141.
24
Manasek, J., Losak, T., Prokes, K., Hlusek, J., Vitezova, M., Skarpa, P., and Filipcik, R. 2013.Effect of nitrogen and potassium fertilization on micronutrient content in grain maize (Zea mays L.). Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis 1:123–128.
25
Mennan, H., and Zandstra, B.H. 2005. Effect of wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars and seeding rate on yield loss from Galium aparine (cleavers). Short communication. Journal of Crop Protection 24: 1061-1067.
26
Muurinen, S., and Peltonen-Sainio, P. 2006. Radiation-use efficiency of modern and old spring cereal cultivars and its response to nitrogen in northern growing conditions. Journal of Field Crops Research 96: 363–373.
27
Nabati Nasaz, M., Gholipouri, A., and Mostafavi Rad, M. 2016. Evaluation of forage yield and important agronomic indices of corn affected by intercropping systems with peanut and nitrogen rates. Journal of Agroecology 1: 70-81. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Soleymanpoor, L., Naderi, R., and Najafi, M. 2016. Evaluation of metal micronutrients uptake in pure culture and intercropping of certain cereal with pea and faba bean under weeds management. Journal of Crop Improvement 4: 1017-1031. (In Persian)
29
Nour Mohamadi, G., Siadat, A., and Kashani, A. 2010. Cereal crops. Shahid Chamran University Publications, Ahwaz, Iran. 468 pp. (In Persian)
30
Park, S.E., Benjamin, L.R., and Watkinson, A.R. 2002. Comparing biological productivity in cropping system a competition approach. Journal of Applied Ecology 39: 416-426.
31
Ramirez-Garcia, J., Martens, H.J., Quemada, M., and Thorup-Kristensen, K. 2014. Intercropping effect on root growth and nitrogen uptake at different nitrogen levels. Journal of Plant Ecology 1–10. Access online at www.jpe.oxfordjournals.org (October 30).
32
Rowe, E.C., Noordwijk, M.V., Suprayogo, D., and Cadisch, G. 2005. Nitrogen use efficiency of monoculture and hedgerow intercropping in the humid tropics. Journal of Plant and Soil 268: 61-74.
33
Salem, H.M., and El-Gizawy, N.K.B. 2012. Importance of micronutrients and its application methods for improving maiz (Zea mays L.) yield grown in clay soil. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences 12: 954-959.
34
Shi, R., Zhang, Y., Chen, X., Sun, Q., Zhang, F., Rcemheld, V., and Zou, C. 2010. Influence oflong-term nitrogen fertilization on micronutrient density in grain of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Cereal Science 51: 165–170.
35
Staal, M.F., Maatheusis, J.M., and Elzennga, T.M. 1991. Na+/K+ antiport activity in tonoplast vesicles from roots of the salt tolerant plantago maritina and the salt sensitive plantago media. Plant Physiology 82: 164-179.
36
Sutton, B.G., and Dubbelde, E.A. 1980. Effects of water deficit on yield of wheat and triticale. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 20: 594–598.
37
Tedesco, M.J., Gianello, O.C., Bissani, C.A., Bohnen, H., and Volkweiss, S.J. 1995. Analysis of soil, plants and other materials. Porto Alegre: Soil Department, Federal University Rio Grande.
38
Traore, S., Mason, S.C., Martin, A. R., Mortensen, D.A., and Spotanski, J.J. 2003. Velvetleaf interference effects on yield and growth of grain sorghum. Journal of Agronomy 95: 1602-1607.
39
Von Wiren, N., Klair, S., Bansal, S., Briat, J.F., and Khord, H. 1999. Nicotianamine chelates both Fe III and Fe II implications for metal transport in plants. Journal of Plant Physiology 119: 1107-1114.
40
Wasaki, J., Yamamura, T., Shinano, T., and Osaki, M. 2003. Secreted acid phosphatase is expressed in cluster lupin in response to phosphorus deficiency. Journal of Plant and Soil 248: 129-136.
41
Wilson, J.B. 1988. Shoot competition and root competition. Journal of Applied Ecology 25: 279–296.
42
Yadollahi, P., Asgharipour, M.R., Ghanbari, A., and Galavi, M. 2015. The evaluation of light interception and weed control at wild oat (Avena fatua) - wheat (Triticum aestivum) intercropping. Journal of Crop Science Research in the Dry Areas 1:19-34. (In Persian with English Summary)
43
Younie, D., and Litterick, A. 2002. Crop protection in organic farming. Journal of Pest Outlook 13: 158–159.
44
Zare Feizabadi, A., and Emanverdian, A. 2012. Evaluation of wheat cultivars intercropping effect on agronomic properties and grain yield. Journal of Agroecology 2: 144-150. (In Persian with English Summary)
45
Zhang, X., Huang, G., Bian, X., and Zhao, Q. 2013. Effects of root interaction and nitrogen fertilization on the chlorophyll content, root activity, photosynthetic characteristics of intercropped soybean and microbial quantity in the rhizosphere. Journal of Plant, Soil and Environment 59: 80–88.
46
Zuo, Y., Zhang, F., Li, X., and Cao, Y. 2000. Studies on the improvement in iron nutrition of peanut by intercropping with maize on a calcareous soil. Journal of Plant and Soil 220: 13–25.
47
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Influence of Drought Stress and Humic Acid on Growth, Yield and Sugar Production of Sugar Beet
Introduction[1]
Most of the food for the world comes from some 150 plant species cultivated as crops. Sugar (the common name for sucrose) is obtained from only two crops, cane and beet. Sugar cane has been produced in large quantities in tropical regions for many centuries and continues to dominate the world supply of sugar. In contrast, sugar beet is a relatively new crop, appearing in temperate regions in the nineteenth century and spreading widely only in the twentieth century. Sugar beet is now grown in some 50 countries and provides about a quarter of the 140 Mt sugar currently used each year. In a world with increasing demand for water, and where agriculture consumes most of the available fresh water, the problem of how to maintain or increase agricultural productivity with sustainable use of water resources is an enormous challenge. Drought is a major limitation and the most significant environmental stress to crop productivity worldwide. This stress is the most important and common abiotic factor that limits sugar beet production in semi-arid regions and also in some parts of Europe. Due to putting Iran in the arid and semi-arid and climate, it is essential to study the effects of water stress on plant growth. In the last decade, the impact of drought has been recognized as a major cause of yield losses in sugar beet. Humic substances play a vital role in soil fertility and plant nutrition. Plants grown on soils which contain adequate humic acid are less subject to stress, are healthier, produce higher yields; and the nutritional quality of harvested foods and feeds are superior. Humic acid can be directly, have positive effects on plant growth. Shoots and roots growth is stimulated by the humic acid, but its effect on the roots, is more prominent, root volume and the effectiveness of its root system will increase by humic acid.
Materials and Methods
In order to study the effect of drought stress and humic acid on sugar beet an experiment was conducted as split plot in randomized complete block design (RCBD) base at Research Station of Shahrekord University in 2013. The main factor including: irrigation treatments (100%, 85%, 70% and 45% FC) and sub factors were humic acid at four levels (0, 2, 4 and 6 kg ha-1). Before planting seeds were disinfected with benomyl fungicide. Then planting was conducted in 10 plants m-2 density. Irrigation treatments was applied 40 days after sowing (unfolding of third trifoliate leaf) and continued in the growing season. Humic acid application was performed at three stages inclusive 4th, 8th and 16th leaf formation. Shoot dry weight, leaf area index, root diameter, root yield, sugar content, pure sugar percentage and molasses percentage was recorded. Data from these experiments were analyzed by analysis of variance using t-Student test for LSD calculation and are described as significant at the P < 0.05 level.
Results and Discussion
Shoots weight showed increasing trend at all treatments, but application of water restriction treatments reduced shoot weight. At all levels of irrigation and concentrations of humic acid, leaf area index showed an increasing trend until mid-season and then a gentler slope than the first half of the growing season began to fall. Deficit irrigation reduced root diameter but humic acid application increased it. Humic acid application increased root yield and increase the amount of humic acid, also increased the root yield. So that, highest root yield was recorded from of six kg.ha-1 humic acid treatment and the lowest root yield was obtained from the treatment of not using of humic acid application at each level of irrigation. Root yield in 85%, 70% and 45% of field capacity decreased by 4.2%, 11.3% and 18.2% respectively, while application of 2, 4 and 6 kg.ha-1 humic acid increased root yield by 416%, 84.8% and 110 % respectively. Application of 2, 4 and 6 kg.ha-1 humic acid reduced molasses percentage by 2.9%, 1.4% and 12.9% respectively.
Conclusion
Application of humic acid enhances the root yield so that treatments 2, 4 and 6 kg per hectare humic acid, increased root yield by 41.6, 84.8 and 110.5 percent respectively.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36878_6df887613f35f5a41e8806bdede1b8b6.pdf
2019-03-21
185
198
10.22067/jag.v11i1.62811
Leaf Area Index
Root yield
Pure sugar content
Amrolah
Esmaili
esmaili54am@gmail.com
1
Agronomyy Department, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Shahrekord, Iran
AUTHOR
Mahmoud Reza
Tadayon
mrtadayon@yahoo.com
2
Agronomyy Department, College of Agriculture, University of Shahrekord, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Albayrak, S., and Camas, N. 2005. Effect of different levels and application times of humic acid on root and leaf yield and yield component of forage turnip. Journal of Agronomy 42: 130-133.
1
Bazza, M. 1993. Effect of drought stress and the time of its occurrence in the cycle on sugar beet yield and technological quality. Pp. 119-130. In: Proceedings of the 56th IIRB Winter Congress, Brussels, Belgium.
2
Cangi, R., Tarakcioglu, C., and Yasar, H. 2006. Effect of humic acid applications on yield, fruit characteristics and nutrient uptake in Ercis grape (V. vinifera L.) cultivar. Asian Journal of Chemistry 18: 1493-1499.
3
Delfine, S., Tognetti, R., Desiderio, E., and Alvino, A. 2005. Effect of foliar application of N and humic acids on growth and yield of durum wheat. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 25: 183-191.
4
Earl, H.J., and Davis, R.F. 2003. Effect of drought stress on leaf and whole canopy radiation use efficiency and yield of maize. Agronomy Journal 95: 688-696.
5
Firoozabadi, M., Abdollahian-Noghabi, M., Rahimzadeh, F., Moghadam, M., Fisher, R.A., and Wood, J.T. 1979. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. III, Yield associations with morpho-physiological traits. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 30.
6
Gardner, F., Brentpearce, R., and Mitchell, R. 1985. Lowa States University Press.404 pp.
7
Harper, S.M., Kerven, G.L., Edwards, D.G., and Ostatek-Boczynski, Z. 2000. Characterisation of fulvic and humic acids from leaves of Eucalyptus camaldulesis and from decomposed hay. Soil Biochemistry 32: 1331-1336.
8
Jaggard, KW., Dewar, A.M., and Pidgeon, J.D. 1998. The relative effects of drought stress and virus yellows on the yield of sugar beet in the UK, 1980–1995. Journal of Agricultural Science 130: 337-343.
9
Jovzi, M., and Zare Abyaneh, H. 2016. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer and deficit irrigation on quantitative and qualitative traits of sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet 31: 156-141.
10
Khajepoor, M.R. 2007. Cultivation of Industrial Crops. Jihad Daneshgahi, Isfahan, Iran. 564 pp. (In Persian)
11
Mohammadian, R., Moghaddam, M., Rahimian, H., and Sadeghian, S.Y. 2005. Effect of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 29(5): 357-368.
12
Nadali, I.M.A.N., Paknejad, F.A.R.Z.A.D., Moradi, F.O.U.A.D., and Vazan, S.A.E.I.D. 2010. Effects of methanol on yield and some quality characteristics of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) cv. Rasoul in drought and non-drought stress conditions. Seed and Plant Production Journal 26(1): 95-108.
13
Nikbakht, A., and Kafi, M. 2008. Effect of humic acid on plant growth. Journal of Plant Nutrition 31: 2155-2167.
14
Ober, E. 2001. The search for drought tolerance in sugar beet. British Sugar Beet 69(1): 40-43.
15
Ober, E.S., Clark, C.J.A., Jaggard, K.W., and Pidgeon, J.D. 2004. Progress towards improving the drought tolerance of sugar beet. Zuckerindustrie 129(2): 101–104.
16
Ourcut, D., and Nilsen, E.T. 2009. Salinity and drought stress. In: Physiology of Plants under Stress 177-235.
17
Pidgeon, J.D., Werker, A.R., Jaggard, K.W., Richter, G.M., Lister, D.H., and Jones, P.D. 2001. Climatic impact on the productivity of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) in Europe 1961–1995. Agricultural for Meteorology 109: 27–37.
18
Prasad, P.V.V., Pisipati, S.R., Mutava, R.N., and Tuinstra, M.R. 2008. Sensitivity of grain sorghum to high temperature stress during reproductive development. Crop Science 48(5): 1911-1917.
19
Rahi, A., Davoodifar, M., Azizi, F., and Habibi, D. 2012. Evaluation of humic acid and graph trends in Dactylis glomerata, Gronomy and Plant breeding 8(3): 15-28.
20
Sabzevari, S., and Khazaie, H.R. 2010. The effect of foliar application with humic acid on growth, yield and yield components of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Agroecology 1(2): 53-63. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Sanjarimijani, M., Sirousmehr, A.R., and Fakheri, B. 2016. The effects of drought stress and humic acid on morphological traits, yield and anthocyanin of roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.). Journal of Agroecology 8(3): 346-358. (In Persian with English Summary)
22
Sardashti, A., and Alidoost, M. 2007. Evaluation of humic acid compounds in north forest soil of Iran. 15th congress of Crystal. Iran. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. 361pp. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Scott, R.K., and Jaggard, K.W. 1993. Crop Physiology and Agronomy. In: D. A. Cooke and R. K. Scott (Eds.). The Sugar Beet Crop. pp. 179-237. Londan, Champan and Hall.
24
Shabala, S. 2011. Plant Stress Physiology. Cabi Press, 329 pp.
25
Sharif, M., Khattak, R.A., and Sarir, M.S. 2002. Effect of different levels of lignitic coal derived humic acid on growth of maize plants. Plant Analysis 33: 3567–3580.
26
Sharifi, M., and Dehghanian, E. 2014. Evaluation of root yield and sugar content of new sugar beet hybrid to deficit and optimum irrigation. Sugar Beet 30(2): 193-205.(In Persian with English Summary)
27
Souza Claudia, R., de, Maroco João, P., Santos Tiago, P., dos, Rodrigues, M., Lucilia, Lopes Carlos, M., Pereira João, S. Chaves, M., Manuela. 2003. Partial root zone drying: regulation of stomatal aperture and carbon assimilation in field-grown grapevines (Vitis vinifera cv. Moscatel). Functional Plant Biology 30: 653-662.
28
Tan, K.H. 2003. Humic Matter in Soil and the Environment. Marcel Dekker, New York.
29
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
The Effects of Piriformospora indica Inoculation on the Seed Yield, Light Absorption and Radiation Use Efficiency of Soybean (Glycine max) Under Water Stress Conditions
Introduction[1]
Water stress is one of the most important limiting factors in crop production, especially in arid and semi-arid regions. More than 45% of agricultural land on earth is subjected to continuous or frequent water deficiency, and it can cause ~50% loss of grain yield, on average. Soybean growth is affected by drought stress. Drought stress has been estimated to reduce seed yield of soybean by 24 to 50 percent. Improvement the light absorption in the crop plant increase the crop yield. All plants, at least during their vegetative growing period, produce and store dry matters using sunlight. One of the most important strategies to increase tolerance to dehydration and improve the growth performance in crops is to establish associations with the beneficial of fungal symbiosis. Piriformospora indica is one of the cultivable root-colonizing endophytic fungi that has a symbiotic relationship with the roots of most crops and improves the growth and yield of plants by increasing the absorption of nutrients such as phosphorus and some micro- elements and can enhance the resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses (Oelmuller et al., 2009). The aim of the present investigation was to study the impact of P. indica on the light absorption, radiation use efficiency and grain yield of soybean under different levels of irrigation.
Materials and Methods
Two field experiments were carried out at the Agricultural Faculty, University of Bu-Ali Sina, Hamedan, Iran (35º1ʹN, 48 º31ʹE; 1690 m a.m.s.l.) in 2014 and 2015. This region has a cold and semi-dry climate. The experiments were carried out as split-plot based on a randomized complete block design with three replications. The Main factors consisted of three irrigation treatments (irrigation after 60 (well-watered), 90 (mild stress) and 120 (severe stress) mm cumulative evaporation from pan class A) and sub plots included of two levels of fungus P. indica (inoculated and non-inoculated). All main plots were irrigated immediately after sowing. Water-stress treatments as described above were applied after seedling establishment. Irrigation was performed via polyethylene pipes, and a water meter was used to measure the volume of irrigation water in each main plot. In order to maintain the specified soil-moisture regimes, the amount of used water was calculated by using crop water requirement as described by Doorenbos and Pruitt (1992).
Results and Discussion
In both years, drought stress decreased leaf area and dry matter of soybean. Inoculation with fungus, increased leaf area and dry matter of soybean plants in different irrigation levels. Daneshian et al. (2011) studied the effect of drought stress on dry matter and soybean growth indices. Due to the decrease in leaf area, drought stress reduced the amount of dry matter accumulation in the soybean plants. The highest radiation use efficiency (1.75 and 1.85 g MJ-1 in 1st and 2nd year, respectively) was obtained from inoculated soybean plant under well-watered, and the lowest one (1.10 and 1.15 g MJ-1 in 1st and 2nd year, respectively) was observed in control plant (non-inoculated) under severe drought stress. Drought stress reduces the amount of radiation use efficiency by reducing photosynthetic rates and decreasing leaf area index. Severe drought stress significantly decreased grain yield of soybean by about 57.20 percent. Application of P. indica caused an increase in grain yield of soybean by about 13.67, 22.85 and 22.14 percent under well-watered, mild and severe drought stress, respectively, compared to control (non-inoculate). Inoculation with P. indica fungus increases the light absorption and radiation use efficiency by increasing the amount of vegetative growth, leaf area index and photosynthetic material production, which improves the yield of soybean.
Conclusion
The results showed P. indica fungus had a positive effect on absorption and radiation use efficiency of soybean in different irrigation levels, so that the application of fungus mitigated the effects of drought stress and improved the yield of soybean under drought stress.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36883_1bfe7522228ea26f1166d62242470d8d.pdf
2019-03-21
199
215
10.22067/jag.v11i1.66827
Irrigation
Absorption radiation
Soybean
Endophytic fungus
Radiation Use Efficiency
Goudarz
ahmadvand
gahmadvand@basu.ac.ir
1
University of Bu Ali Sina hamaden
LEAD_AUTHOR
Somayeh
hajinia
hajinia.2010@gmail.com
2
Unversity Bu Ali Sina Hamaden
AUTHOR
Aboutalebian, M.A., and Khalili, M. 2014. Effect of arbuscular mycorrhiza and Bradyrhizobium japonicum on soybean yield and yield components under water stress. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science 45: 169-181. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Aboutalebian, M.A., Ahmadvand, G., and Khalili, M. 2016. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizae and Bradyrhizobium on some growth indices of soybean under water stress. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 5:367-382. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Adeboye, O.B., Schultz, B., Adekalu, K.O., and Prasad, K. 2016. Impact of water stress on radiation interception and radiation use efficiency of soybeans (Glycine max L. Merr.) in Nigeria. Brazilian Journal of Science and Technology 15: 2-21.
3
Aliasgharzad, N., Neyshabouri, M.R., and Salimi, G. 2006. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and Bradyrhizobium japonicum on drought stress of soybean. Biologia Bratislava 61: 324-328.
4
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., and Smith, M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration-Guidelines for computing crop water requirements-FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. FAO, Rome, 300, D05109.
5
Anjum, S.A., Xie, X., Wang, L., Saleem, M.F., Man, C., and Lei, W. 2011. Morphological, physiological and biochemical responses of plants to drought stress. African Journal Agriculture Research 6: 2026-2032.
6
Ashraf, M., and Foolad, M.R. 2007. Roles of glycine betaine and proline in improving plant abiotic stress resistance. Environmental and Experimental Botany 59: 206-216.
7
Arvin, P., and Vafabakhsh, J. 2016. Study of drought and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on radiation use efficiency and dry matter partitioning into pod in different cultivars of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Iranian Journal of Journal of Agroecology 8: 134-152. (In Persian with English Summary)
8
Bat-Oyun, T.M., Shinoda, M., and Tsubo, M. 2011. Effects of water and temperature stresses on radiation use efficiency in a semi-arid grassland. Journal Plant Interaction 7: 214-224.
9
Daneshian, J., Jonoubi, P., and Barari Tari, D. 2011. Investigation of water deficit stress on agronomical traits of soybean in temperate climate. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 75: 778-785.
10
Demirtas, C., Yazgan, S., Candogan, B.N., Sincik, M., Buyukcangaz, H., and Goksoy, A.T. 2010. Quality and yield response of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) to drought stress in sub-humid environment. African Journal of Biotechnology 9: 6873-6881.
11
Doorenbos, J., and Kassam, A. 1979. Yield response to water. Irrigation and Drainage Paper 33: 257.
12
Ezzat Ahmadi, M., Noor Mohammadi, G., Moghaddasi, M., and Kafi, M. 2012. Evaluation of radiation and water use efficiency in bread wheat genotypes in condition of different photosynthetic and moisture stress. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 10(1): 225-239. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Garofalo, P., and Rinaldi, M. 2015. Leaf as exchange and radiation use efficiency of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) in response to different deficit irrigation strategies: From solar radiation to plant growth analysis. European Journal of Agronomy 64: 88-97.
14
Ghabooli, M., Shahriari, F., Sepehri, M., Marashi, H., and Hosseini Salekdeh, G.H. 2011. An Evaluation of the impact of the endophyte fungus Piriformospora indica on some traits of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in drought stress. Journal of Agroecology 3(3): 328-336. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Ghosh, D.C. 2004. Growth and productivity of sesame (Sesamum indicum) as influenced by biofertilizer and growth-regulator. Indian Journal of Agronomy 45(2): 389-394.
16
Goudriaan, J., and Van Laar, H.H. 1994. Modelling Potential Crop Growth Processes. Kluwer Academic Press.
17
Han, H., Li, Z., Ning, T., Zhang, X., Shan, Y., and Bai, M. 2008. Radiation use efficiency and yield of winter wheat under deficit irrigation in North China. Plant Soil and Environment 54: 313-319.
18
Hill, T.W., and Kafer, E. 2001. Improved protocols for Aspergillus minimal medium: trace element and minimal medium salt stock solutions. Fungal Genetics and Newsl 48: 20-21.
19
Hosseinpanahi, F., Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in potato/corn intercropping. Iranian Journal of Agroecology 2: 45-54. (In Persian with English Summary)
20
Hu, Y., Zhang, Y.L., Yix, P., Zhan, D.X., Luo, H.H., Chow, W.S., and Zhang, W.F. 2014. The relative contribution of non-foliar organs of cotton to yield and related physiological characteristics under water deficit. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 13: 975-989.
21
Khajehpour, M. 2007. Principle of Agronomy. Industrial University of Esfahan Publication, Isfahan, Iran. 387pp. (In Persian).
22
Michal Johnson, J., Lee, Y.C., Camehl, I., Sun, C., Yeh, K.W., and Oelmuller, R. 2013. Piriformospora indica promotes growth of Chinese cabbage by manipulating auxin homeostasis- role of auxin in symbiosis. In: A. Varma (Eds.). Piriformospora indica, soil biology. Springer Verlag, Berlin. p. 139-147.
23
Muchow, R.C. 1985. An analysis of the efects of water deicits on grain legumes grown in a semi‑arid tropical environ‑ment in terms of radiation interception and its eiciency of use. Field Crops Research 11: 309-323.
24
Ngugi, K., Collins, J.O., and Muchira, S. 2013. Combining, earliness, short anthesis to silking interval and yield based selection indices under intermittent water stress to select for drought tolerant maize. Australian Journal of Crop Science 7: 2014-2020.
25
Oelmuller, R., Sherameti, I., Tripathi, S., and Varma, A. 2009. Piriformospora indica, a cultivable root endophyte with multiple biotechnological applications. Symbiosis 49: 1-17.
26
Osborne, S.L., Scheppers, J.S. Francis, D.D., and Schlemmer, M.R. 2002. Use of spectral radiance to in-season biomass and grain yield in nitrogen and water-stressed corn. Crop Science 42: 165-171.
27
Pazoki, A.R., and Kariminejad, M. 2010. Effect of zeolit amounts and drought stress on light extinction coefficientof rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Journal of Crop Production Research 2(2): 175-189. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Sadeghipour, O., and Abbasi, S. 2012. Soybean response to drought and seed inoculation. World Applied Science Journal 17: 55-60.
29
Sarmadnia, G.H., and Koocheki, A. 1989. Crop Plant Physiology. University of Mashhad Publicatio, Mashhad, Iran. 400pp. (In Persian).
30
Shariatmadari, M.H., Zemani, G.R., and Sayari, M.H. 2011. Effect of salinity and foliar spraying with Fe on leaf area index, absorption radiation and relation with grain yield of sunflower. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 9: 285-293. (In Persian with English Summary)
31
Singer, J.W., Meek, D.W., Sauer, T.J., Prueger, J.H., and Hatield, J.L. 2011. Variability of light interception and radiation use eiciency in maize and soybean. Field Crops Research 121: 147-152.
32
Tabarzad, A., Ghaemi, A.A., and Zand Parsa, S. 2016. Extinction coefficients and radiation use efficiency of barley under different, irrigation regimes and sowing dates. Agricultural Water Management 178: 126-136.
33
Tesfaye, K., Walkerb, S., and Tsubob, M. 2006. Radiation interception and radiation use efficiency of three grain legumes under water deficit conditions in a semi-arid environment. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 60-70.
34
Tripathi, S., Das, A., Chandra, A., and Varma, A. 2015. Development of carrier-based formulation of root endophyte Piriformospora indica and its evaluation on Phaseolus vulgaris L. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 31(2): 337-344. DOI 10.1007/s11274-014-1785-y.
35
Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Ogindo, H.O. 2005. A simulation model of cereal legume intercropping systems for semi-arid regions I. Model development. Field Crops Research 93: 10-22.
36
Xu, L., Wang, A., Wei, Q., and Zhang, W. 2017. Piriformospora indica confers drought tolerance on Zea mays L. through enhancement of antioxidant activity and expression of drought-related genes. The Crop Journal 5: 251-258.
37
Yaghoubian, Y., Mohammadi Goltapeh, E., Pirdashti, H., Esfandiari, E., Feiziasl , V., Kari Dolatabadi, H., and Varma, A. 2014. Effect of Glomus mosseae and Piriformospora indica on growth and antioxidant defense responses of wheat plants under drought stress. Agriculture Research 3: 239-245.
38
Yousef Nia, M., Banayan Aval, M., and Khorramdel, S. 2015. Evaluation of radiation use and interception of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) and dill (Anethum graveolens L.) intercropping canopy. Journal of Agroecology 7(3): 412-424. (In Persian with English Summary)
39
Zare Abyaneh, H., Gasemi, A., Marofi, S., and Bayat Varkeshi, M. 2010. Determination of water requirement, single and dual crop coefficients of garlic in cold semi-arid climate. Water and Soil Science 20: 111-122.
40
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Determination and Zoning of Suitable Planting Date of Rainfed Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Golestan Province based on Different Levels of Occurrence Probability of Autumn Rainfall
Introduction[1]
Wheat has strategic importance in Iran and Golestan province is one of the major regions of wheat production in the country. Province has the third place among all provinces of the country in term of wheat cultivated lands (about 400 thousand hectares) and grain production (more than one million tons). The optimal planting date for any crop normally occur within a sowing window. It is defined as beginning and end of the planting period which guarantee the achievement of reasonable yield. In rainfed farming, farmers face a decision of whether or not to plant when sufficient rainfall accumulates to increase soil moisture content. If the average meteorological data is used to design a farming system, such as planting date, its probability will be 50 percent. Average rainfall data (50 percent probability level) are quite unreliable for cropping planning. Usually, risk levels of 60 to 80 percent are recommended depending on the sensitivity of the crop to water stress, acceptable risk by farmer and soil. Therefore, it can be stated that in rainfed cultivation, farmers choose their risk based on the selection of the planting date. Considering the importance of predicting the appropriate planting date in optimizing farm management in rainfed farming and its dependence on the occurrence of autumn rainfall on the one hand and the stochastic nature of rainfall, on the other hand, the present study was conducted to determine the sowing window of wheat in the Golestan province at different occurrence probability levels.
Materials and Methods
Initially, by reviewing the geographic distribution of meteorological stations in Golestan province and their statistical period, daily rainfall data of 58 meteorological stations in the 1991- 2016 period (26 years) were gathered. Then, suitable planting date of wheat in each station and year was determined based on the first rainfall date equal to or more than 25 mm over a period of 10 consecutive days in October. In the next step, suitable planting date for each station was calculated by the occurrence probability level 25, 50, 75, 85 and 95 percent based on statistical analysis and choose the best probability function using the software SMADA. Verification of zoning maps was done based on findings of field scale researches. Finally, in the meantime of statistical analyzing the results, zoning maps of suitable planting date of rainfed wheat were prepared using ArcGIS software by Inverse Distance Weighting (IDW).
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the suitable planting date of rainfed wheat in the southern half of the Golestan province was earlier than the northern part. The occurrence probability level had a significant effect on suitable planting date but the effect of the station was not significant. The statistical difference between all occurrence probability levels was significant, so that the occurrence probability level of 25 and 95 percent indicated the earliest and bottommost suitable planting date of rainfed wheat in Golestan province, respectively. Within different stations of the province, the suitable planting dates of rainfed wheat for 25, 50, 75, 85 and 95 percent occurrence probability were between 22 November to 1 December, 22 November to 13 December, 24 November to 3 January, 2 December to 15 January and 12 December to 20 January, respectively. Increasing the occurrence probability levels prolonged the sowing window so that the difference between suitable planting dates in different stations was 10 and 40 days for 25 and 95 probability level, respectively. According to the results, a small reduction in the risk of farming (an increase in the occurrence probability level of suitable rainfall from 25 to 50 percent) is possible with a delay in planting date for a few days, while a greater reduction in the risk (an increase in the occurrence probability level of suitable rainfall to 75, 85 and 95 percent) will be possible through a delay of the planting date for several decades. Verification and validation of the results of this study based on findings of field scale researches confirmed the accuracy of predicting the suitable planting date by autumn rainfall.
Conclusion
The results showed that the farmers of the Golestan province with the correct understanding of the role of autumn rainfall in crop growth and yield and based on their experimental knowledge, selected the appropriate planting date of rainfed wheat with a high probability level.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36888_9e2a082ddd593bcde485774ff1d31ced.pdf
2019-03-21
217
229
10.22067/jag.v11i1.72873
Delayed Planting
Risk
Sowing Window
kami
kaboosi
kkaboosi@yahoo.com
1
Gorgan branch, Islamic Azad University
LEAD_AUTHOR
Osman
Majidi
g_gonbad@yahoo.com
2
Golestan Meteorological Administration
AUTHOR
Abbasi, F., Ehteramian, K., Khazanedari, L., Mohammadnia Gharaei, Sh., and Asmari, M. 2015. Locating the most suitable dry land wheat areas (case study: North Khorasan province). Journal of Climate Research 4: 57-72. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Ahmadali, K., Hosseini Pajouh, N., and Liaghat, A.M. 2016. Determination of optimal planting date of rainfed wheat in Kurdistan Province, Iran. Agronomy Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi) 108: 9-18. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Ahmadamini, T., Kamkar, B., and Soltani, A. 2011. The effect of planting date on partitoning coefficient in some species of wheat. Crop Production 4: 131-150. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
Ahmadi, M., Fallahi Khoshji, M., and Mafakheri, O. 2017. Predicting changes of rainfed Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) farming calendar using downscaling LARS-WG and HadCM3 models in Lorestan province in 2011-2030 periods. Journal of Agroecology 9: 475-489. (In Persian with English Summary)
4
Alizadeh, A., Sayari, N., Ahmadian, J., and Mohamadian, A. 2009. Study for zoning the most appropriate time of irrigation of saffron in Khorasan Razavi, northern and southern provinces. Journal of Water and Soil 23: 109-118. (In Persian with English Summary)
5
Andarzian, B., Hoogenboom, G., Bannayan, M., Shirali, M., and Andarzian, B. 2015. Determining optimum sowing date of wheat using CSM-CERES-Wheat model. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences 14: 189-199.
6
Anonymous. 2016. Agricultural Statistical Book (2014-2015). Available online at: www.maj.ir.
7
Ashofteh, P.S., and Massah, A.R. 2010. Impact of climate change uncertainty on temperature and precipitation of Aidoghmoush basin in 2040-2069 periods. Soil and Water Science 19.1: 85-98. (In Persian with English Summary)
8
Bannayan, M., Eyshi Rezaei, E., and Hoogenboom, G. 2013. Determining optimum planting dates for rainfed wheat using the precipitation uncertainty model and adjusted crop evapotranspiration. Agricultural Water Management 126: 56-63.
9
Bussmann, A., Elagib, N.A., Fayyad, M., and Ribbe, L. 2016. Sowing date determinants for Sahelian rainfed agriculture in the context of agricultural policies and water management. Land Use Policy 52: 316-328.
10
Cheraghi, R., Ramroudi, M., Taee Semiroumi, J., and Lorzadeh, S. 2018. Geographical distribution of rainfall and temperature optimum at sowing to emergence canola using GIS in Khuzestan province. Journal of Agroecology 9: 1007-1019. (In Persian with English Summary)
11
Dobor, L., Barcza, Z., Hlasny, T., Arendas, T., Spitko, T., and Fodor, N. 2016. Crop planting date matters: Estimation methods and effect on future yields. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 223: 103-115.
12
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2018. The FAOSTAT Database. Available at Website http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx.
13
Fooladmand, H.R. 2010. Estimation of sugarbeet irrigation requirement in different regions of Fars province in critical conditions and definite probability levels. Journal of Sugar Beet 25: 162-153. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Fooladmand, H.R. 2011. Estimation of irrigation requirement for important agricultural crops at the different probability levels for the province of Fars. Water Engineering 4: 65-73. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Hundal, S.S., Singh, R., and Dhaliwal, L.K. 1997. Agro-climatic indices for predicting phenology of wheat (Triticum aestivum) in Punjab. The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 67: 265-286.
16
Kaboosi, K., and Majidi, O. 2017a. Agro-ecological zoning of rainfed wheat in Golestan province based on meteorology, agronomy, soil and land properties. Journal of Agroecology 7: 134-154. (In Persian with English Summary)
17
Kaboosi, K., and Majidi, O. 2017b. Zoning of planting and harvesting dates and length of growth stages of rainfed wheat based on precipitation and temperature data in Golestan province. Iranian Journal of Dryland Agriculture 6(1): 103-120. (In Persian with English Summary)
18
Kamali, G., Mollaei, P., and Behyar, M.B. 2010. Development of Zanjan province dry land wheat atlas by using climatic data and GIS. Journal of Water and Soil 24: 894-907. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Kamali, G., Sadaghiani Poor, A., and Sedaghatkerdar, A. 2008. The climatic zoning of dryland wheat in Eastern Azerbaijan. Journal of Water and Soil 22: 467-483. (In Persian with English Summary)
20
Kaviani, M.R., Hosseini Abri, S.H., and Asadi Broujeny, E. 2002. Probability of occurrence and return period of minimal temperature in almond orchards at Semnan region during March, April and May. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 9: 49-57. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Khoshal Dastjerdi, J., Nazari, A., Ghangharmeh, A., and Fallahi, H.A. 2015. Predicting isometropia- rainfall in dry wheat implantation and cultivation in Gonbad Kavoos province. Geographical Planning of Space 5: 169-184. (In Persian with English Summary)
22
Mehdizadeh, S., Behmanesh, J., and Nikbakht, J. 2011. Estimation of reference evapotranspiration with various occurrence probability levels (Case study: Urmia). Water and Soil Science 20: 171-183. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Mianabadi, A., Mousavi Baygi, M., Sanai Nejad, H., and Nezami, A. 2009. Assessment and mapping of early autumn, late spring and winter freezing in Khorasan Razavi province using GIS. Journal of Water and Soil 23: 79-90. (In Persian with English Summary)
24
Mohammadi, H. 2005. The determining suitable dry farming wheat time in Ilam provience. Geographical Research 37: 15-31. (In Persian with English Summary)
25
Naderi, A. 2014. Analysis the effect of planting date on wheat genotypes grain yield by using regression methods. Crop Physiology Journal 5: 5-14. (In Persian with English Summary)
26
Nekahi, M.Z., Soltani, A., Siahmarguee, A., and Bagherani, N. 2014a. Yield gap associated with crop management in wheat (Case study: Golestan province -Bandargaz). Crop Production 7: 135-156. (In Persian with English Summary)
27
Nekahi, M.Z., Soltani, A., Siahmarguee, A., and Bagherani, N. 2014b. Factors affecting the population density of weeds and yield loss of them in wheat: a case study in Golestan province- Bandargaz. Journal of Agroecology 6: 393-405. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Nikbakht, J., and Mir Latifi, S.M. 2002. Effects of ET0 computing method, probability level and length of peak water requirement period on daily reference evapotranspiration. Iranian Journal of Soil and Waters Sciences 16: 222-230. (In Persian with English Summary)
29
Noohi, K. 2005. Rainfall analysis of Karaj for determination of rainfed wheat sowing date. Nivar 58: 95-103. (In Persian with English Summary)
30
Nouri, M., Homaee, M., Bannayan, M., and Hoogenboom, G. 2017. Towards shifting planting date as an adaptation practice for rainfed wheat response to climate change. Agricultural Water Management 186: 108-119.
31
Rezvantalab, N., Soltani, A., Zeinalee, A., and Deilam Salehi, R. 2017. Documenting the process of wheat production in Golestan province. Research Achievement for Improvement Crop Production 2: 1-16. (In Persian with English Summary)
32
Sobhani, B., Ganji, M., and Goldoust, A. 2017. Determination and investigation about beginning and end dates of early and late freezes and possibility of its continuity, intensity and succession in Ardabil province. Physical Geography Research Quarterly 49: 39-53. (In Persian with English Summary)
33
Sys, I.C., Van Ranst, E., and Debaveye, J. 1991. Land evaluation- Part I: Principle in land evaluation and crop production calculations. General Administration for Development Cooperation, Agricultural Publication No. 7, Brussels, Belgium, 274 pp.
34
Tavakoli, A.R. 2014. Effects of sowing date and single irrigation on yield and yield components of rainfed barley cultivars. Iranian Dryland Agronomy Journal 2: 53-68. (In Persian with English Summary)
35
Torabi, B., Soltani, A., Galeshi, S., and Zeinali, E. 2012. Documenting the process of wheat production in Gorgan. Journal of Plant Production 19: 19-42. (In Persian with English Summary)
36
Yasari, T. 2014. Determining planting dates for spring safflower by temperature and digital elevation model in Esfahan province. Physical Geography Research Quarterly 46: 389-405. (In Persian with English Summary)
37
Zheng, Z., Cai, H., Yu, L., and Hoogenboom, G. 2017. Application of the CSM-CERES-Wheat model for yield prediction and planting date evaluation at Guanzhong plain in Northwest China. Agronomy Journal 109: 204-217.
38
Ziaee, A.R., Kamgar-Haghighi, A.A., Sepaskhah, A.R., and Ranjbar S. 2006. Development of Fars province probable minimum temperature atlas using meteorological data. Journal of Water and Soil Science (Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources) 10: 13-27. (In Persian with English Summary)
39
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effect of Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and Persian Clover (Trifolium respinatum L.) Intercropping on Forage Quantity
For optimize of cropping rate and pattern in a mixture of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and persian clover (Trifolium respinatum L.) an experiment was arranged in split plot with randomized complete block design and three replications. This experiment was conducted on research farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in 2013-14. The pattern of sowing considered in five levels (row intercropping 1:1 (M1), row intercropping 2:2 (M2), strip intercropping 3:3 (M3), strip intercropping 4:4 (M4) and mixed cropping (M5)) in main plots and the cropping rate were in five levels (barley %100: %50 clover (R5), barley %100: %25 clover (R4), barley %50: %50 clover (R3),with pure barley (R2) and pure clover (R1)) in subplots. ). Results showed that the effect of cropping rate and pattern on forage dry matter (FDM) and protein yield (PY) were significant (P<0.01). The highest levels of forage dry matter were obtained in pure barley R2 (14731 kg/ha) and mixed cropping M5 (12857.9 kg/ha), respectively. The highest protein yield were also obtained in R2 (1962.2 Kg/ha) and M5 (1584.38 Kg/ha). The effect of sowing pattern on land equivalent ratio (LER) was not significant but the effect of cropping rate was significant (P <0.01). The highest levels of LER were obtained in R5 (1.28) and M4 (1.23), respectively. The effect of sowing rate and pattern on relative crowding coefficient (RCC or K) was not significant but the highest level of K was obtained in R4 (35.33) and the lowest was in R5 (-23.24). The effect of sowing rate and pattern on aggressivity (A) was significant, and the clover negative value of aggressivity (A) showed that the clover was recessive in intercrop. Economic indices such as actual yield loss (AYL) and intercropping advantage index (IA) showed that barley-clover intercropping was better than sole culture, and the highest IA was obtained in R4 (7,262,833 Rials) and M4 (4974840 Rials).
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36897_db133b7f98560611f55fb220e981f6ec.pdf
2019-03-21
231
243
10.22067/jag.v11i1.45221
Intercropping
cropping pattern
Cropping rate
Land equivalent ratio (LER)
Ramin
Nazarian
ra_nazarian@yahoo.com
1
Ferdowsi mashhad
AUTHOR
Ali Reza
Koocheki
akooch@um.ac.ir
2
Ferdowsi mashhad
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mahdi
nassiri mahallati
mnassiri@um.ac.ir
3
ferdowsi mashhad
AUTHOR
Parwiz
Rezwani moqaddam
rezvani@um.ac.ir
4
ferdowsi mashhad
AUTHOR
Anil, L., Park, R.H., Phipps, R.H., and Miller, F.A. 1998. Temperate intercropping of cereals of cereals for forage: a review of the potential for growth and utilization with particular reference to the UK. Grass and Forage Science 53: 301–317.
1
Awal, M.A., Pramanik, M.H.R., and Hossen, M.A. 2007. Interspecies competition, growth and yield in barley-peanut intercropping. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences 6(4): 577-584.
2
Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Gose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping system in an additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.
3
Benites, J.R., McCollum, R.E., and Naderman, G.C. 1993. Production efficiency of intercrops relative to sequentially planted sole crops in a humid tropical environment. Field Crops Research 31: 1-18.
4
Banik, P., Sasmal, T., Ghosal, P.K., and Bagchi, D.K. 2000. Evaluation of mustard (Brassica campestris var Toria) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 rowreplacement series systems. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 185: 9–14.
5
Banik, P. 1996. Evaluation of wheat (T. aestivum) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 row-replacement series system. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 176: 289–294.
6
Carr, P.M., Horsley, R.D., and Poland, W.W. 2004. Barley, oat, and cereal–pea mixtures as dryland forages in the northern great plains. Agron Jerusalem 96: 677–684.
7
Clements, R.O., and Donaldson, G. 1997. Clover and cereal: low input bi-cropping. Farming Conservation 3: 12–14.
8
Carr, P.M., Martin, G.B., Caton, J.S., and Poland, W.W. 1998. Forage and nitrogen yield of barley–pea and oat–pea intercrops. Agron Jerusalem 90: 79–84.
9
Dhima, K.V., Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., and Dordas, C.A. 2007. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Research 100: 249-256.
10
DeWit, C.T. 1960. On competition. Verslag Landbouw-Kundige Onderzoek 66: 1–28.
11
Dordas, C.A., and Lithourgidis, A.S. 2011. Growth, yield and nitrogen performance of faba bean intercrops with oat and triticale at varying seeding ratios. Grass Forage Science 66: 569–577.
12
Esmaeili, A., Sadeghpour, A., Hosseini, S.M.B., Jahanzad, E., Chaichi, M.R., and Hashemi, M. 2011. Evaluation of seed yield and competition indices for intercropped barley and annual medic. International Journal of Plant Production 5(4): 395-404. (In Persian with English Summery)
13
Exner, D.N., and Cruse, R.M. 1993. Inter seeded forage legume potential as winter ground cover, nitrogen source, and competition. Journal of Production Agriculture 6: 226-231.
14
Giller, K.E., and Wilson, K.J. 1991. Nitrogen fixation and tropical cropping system. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 10-120.
15
Ghosh, P.K. 2004. Growth, yield, competition and economics of groundnut/cereal fodder intercropping systems in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research 88: 227–237.
16
Herbert, S.J., Putnam, D.H., Poos-Floyd, M.L., Vargas, A., and Creighton, J.F. 1984. Forage yield of intercropped corn and soybean in various planting patterns. Agron Jerusalem 76: 507–510.
17
Javanmard, A., Nasab, A.D.M., Javanshir, A., Moghaddam, M., AND Janmohammadi, H. 2009. Forage yield and quality in intercropping of maize with different legumes as double-cropped. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 7: 163-166.
18
Jeyabal, A., and Kuppuswamy, G. 2001. Recycling of organic wastes for the production of vermin compost and its response in rice-legume cropping system and soil fertility. European Journal of Agronomy 15: 153-170.
19
Jones, L., and Clements, R.O. 1993. Development of a low-input system for growing wheat (Triticum vulgare) in a permanent understory of white clover (Trifolium repens). Annals of Applied Biology 123: 109–119.
20
Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., Dhima, K.V., Dordas, C.A., and Yiakoulaki, M.D. 2006. Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Research 99: 106–113.
21
Lithourgidis, A.S., Vlachostergiosb, D.N., Dordasc, C.A., and Damalasd, C.A. 2011. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea–cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy 34: 287–294.
22
Midya, A., Bhattacharjee, K., Ghose, S.S., and Banik, P. 2005. Deferred seeding of blackgram (Phaseolus mungo L.) in rice (Oryza sativa L.) field on yield advantages and smothering of weeds. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 191: 195–201.
23
Mohsenabadi, G.R., Jahansooz, M.R., Chaichi, M.R., Mashhadi, H.R., Liaghat, A.M., and Savaghebi, G.R. 2008. Evaluation of barley vetch intercrop at different nitrogen rates. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 10: 23–31. (In Persian with English Summery)
24
Ross, S.M., King, J.R., O’Donovan, J.T., and Izaurralde, R.C. 2003. Seeding rate effects in oat-berseem clover intercrops. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 83: 769–778.
25
Ross, S.M., King, J.R., O’Donovan, J.T., and Spaner, D. 2004a. Forage potential of intercropping berseem clover with barley, oat, or triticale. Agronomy Journal 96: 1013–1020.
26
Sadeghpour, A., and Jahanzad, E. 2012. Seed yield and yield components of intercropped barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and annual medic (Medicago scutellata L.). Australasian Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3: 47–50.
27
Sadeghpour, A., Jahanzad, E., Esmaeili, A.M., Hosseini, B., and Hashemi, M. 2013. Forage yield, quality and economic benefit of intercropped barley and annual medic in semi-arid conditions: Additive series. Field Crops Research 148: 43–48. (In Persian with English Summery)
28
Sharifi, Y. 2004. Evalution of sorghum/bereseem clover intercropping. M.Sc. Thesis, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian)
29
Sistach, M. 1990. Intercropping of forage sorghum, maize and soybean during ten establishments of different grasses in a vertisol soil. Cuban Journal of Agriculture Science 24: 123–129.
30
Strydhorst, S.M., King, J.R., Lopetinksy, K.J., and Harker, K.N. 2008. Forage potential of intercropping barley with faba bean, lupin, or field pea. Agronomy Journal 100: 182–190.
31
Thorsted, M.D., Olesen, J.E., and Weiner, J. 2006. Width of clover strips and wheat rows influence grain yield in winter wheat/white clover intercropping. Field Crops Research 95: 280–290.
32
Thorsted, M.D., Koefoed, N., and Olesen, J.E. 2002. Intercropping of oats (Avena sativa L.) with different white clover (Trifolium repens L.) cultivars. Effects on biomass development and oat yield. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge Core 138: 261–267.
33
Vasilakoglou, I., and Dhima, K. 2008. Forage yield and competition indices of berseem clover intercropped with barley Agronomy Journal 100: 1749–1756.
34
Weiner, J., and Von Wettberg, E.J. 2003. Larger Triticum aestivum plants do not preempt nutrient-rich patches in a glasshouse experiment. Plant Ecology 169: 85–92.
35
Von Wettberg, E.J., and Weiner, J. 2004. Effects of distance to crop rows and to conspecific neighbors on the size of Brassica napus and Veronica persica weeds. Basic and Applied Ecology 5: 35–41.
36
Willey R.W. 1979. Intercropping-its importance and research needs part-1 competition and yield advantages Field Crops Research 32: 1-10.
37
Willey, R.W., and Rao, M.R. 1980. A competitive ratio for quantifying competition between intercrops. Experimental Agriculture 16: 117–125.
38
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluarion of Agrophysiological Indices and Yield Performance in Canola/Chickpea Intercropping
Introduction:
One of the ecological strategies for increasing of stability is diversity creation by multiple cropping. So, intercropping is an advantage approach for utilization from environmental resource in comparison with monoculture. Intercropping, which is defined as growing two or more species simultaneously in the same field during a growing season, has been considered as an important strategy to develop sustainable production systems, particularly those which aim to limit external inputs such as chemical fertilizer and herbicide. Intercropping is a sustainable cropping practice that has been successfully implemented in agroecosystems. In 79% of biodiversity experiments, biomass production in species diverse systems was on average, 1.7 times higher than in monoculture. Biodiversity enhancement can increase productivity and other ecosystem functions through replacement and complementarity effects. Complementarity effects occur when intercropped plants with complementary traits interact positively to increase productivity, and here genuine yield gains are possible. Thus, it was aimed to evaluate the agrophysiological traits, and yield of canola intercropped with chickpea in different plant densities.
Materials and methods:
Ecophysiological aspects of chickpea-canola intercropping were assessed at the Agricultural Research Station, Faculty of Agriculture (latitude 35◦34'N, longitude 50◦57'E), University of Tehran, during 2014 growing season. The area lies at an altitude of 2010 m.a.s.l. The mean annual rainfall was 256 mm. The mean maximum and minimum temperatures were 27.5°C and 8°C, correspondingly. The soil type of the experimental site was clay loam with pH of 7.78. Irrigation of the entire experiment was done with an overhead sprinkler system on a weekly basis until soil had reached field capacity. Experiment was done as factorial layout bases on a randomized complete block design with three replications and eight treatments. Treatments were sole cropping of rapeseed (60 and 80 plants m-2; 60R and 80R), sole cropping of chickpea (30 and 40 plants m-2; 30C and 40C) and additive intercropping based on combination of the two species (30C+60R, 30C+80R, 40C+60R, 40C+80R). The crops' seeds were sown simultaneously. Leaf chlorophyll reading was measured in the youngest expanded leafs using an SPAD-502 (Minolta). The Photosynthetic CO2 assimilation was measured with a portable leaf chamber and an open-system infrared gas analyzer (IRGA). At the final harvest, plants were cut at ground level and seeds were separated by manual threshing. Grain productivity was used to calculate land equivalent ratio (LER). LER was calculated to measure efficiency of intercropping compared to pure cropping (Banik et al., 2006). SAS vs. 9.1 procedures and programs were used for analysis of variance (ANOVA) calculations. Least significant differences (LSD) test was use for means comparison at 5% probability level.
Results and discussion:
Results indicated that chlorophyll reading and protein percentage for canola in intercropping treatment with chickpea were more than its sole cropping. However, photosynthetic rate for both species in sole cropping was more than intercropping. The highest canola grain yield (370.7 g m-2) was achieved at sole cropping with 80 plants m-2 but this treatment had not significant difference with canola sole cropping with 60 plants m-2. Also, chickpea sole cropping in comparison with intercropping treatments had higher grain yield. Although, grain yields of canola and chickpea at sole cropping treatments decreased in comparison with intercropping, but evaluation of land equivalent ratio (LER) confirmed higher advantage of intercropping. At all of the intercropping treatments, LER was higher than one and the highest value for LER (1.46) was revealed at ‘30 plants m-2 chickpea+60 plants m-2 canola’ treatment. In fact, when the value of land equivalent ratio is less than 1, the intercropping affects the growth negatively and yield of crops grown in mixtures but when the value of LER is more than 1, the intercropping favors the growth and yield of the crops. Moreover, the total land equivalent ratio was higher in intercropping system compared to the sole cropping system, indicating the advantage of intercropping over sole cropping in utilizing environmental resources for crop growth.
Conclusion; In general, chickpea/canola intercropping had relative advantage in comparison with sole cropping and increased land use efficiency. So that, results indicated that intercropping of medium density of chickpea (30 plants m-2) with medium density of canola (60 plants m-2) may give better overall yield and income than sole cropping of canola and chickpea.
Acknowledgments:
We would like to thank the funding from Faculty of Agriculture, Tehran University, Iran.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36904_297e844d6db11ba8bc9c991621b3696e.pdf
2019-03-21
245
259
10.22067/jag.v11i1.65192
Canola
Chickpea
grain yield
Intercropping
Land equivalent ratio
Javad
Hamzei
j.hamzei@basu.ac.ir
1
Bu-Ali Sina University
LEAD_AUTHOR
Rahman
Davoudian
j.hamzei@basu.ac.ir
2
Bu-Ali Sina University
AUTHOR
Agegnehu, G., Ghizaw, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and land use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 202–207.
1
Agricultural Statistics. 2017. Report on the production of crops in the 2016–2017 growing seasons. Ministry of Agriculture – Jahad, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
2
Aminifar, J., Ramroudi, M., Galavi, M., and Mohsenabadi, G.R. 2016. Assessment of cotton (Gossypium spp.) productivity in rotation with intercropping of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 18(2): 120-134. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
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. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.
4
Bedoussac, L., and Justes, E. 2010. Dynamic analysis of competition and complementarityfor light and N use to understand the yield and the protein content of a durum wheat–winter pea intercrop. Plant and Soil 330: 37-54.
5
Brooker, R.W., Bennett, A.E., Cong, W.F., and Daniell, T.J. 2015. Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. New Phytologist 206: 107–117.
6
Campiglia, E., Mancinelli, R., Radicetti, E., and Baresel, J.P. 2014. Evaluating spatial arrangement for durum wheat (Triticum durum Desf.) and sub clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) intercropping systems. Field Crops Research 169: 49–57.
7
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. European Journal of Agronomy 58: 53–62.
8
Dutra, W.F., Melo, A.S., and Durta, A.F. 2017. Photosynthetic efficiency, gas exchange and yield of castor bean intercropped with peanut in semiarid Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agricola e Ambiental 21: 106-110.
9
Dusa, E.M., and Stan, V. 2013. The effect of intercropping on crop productivity and yield quality of oat grain leguminous species pea and lentil cultivated in pure stand and mixtures in the organic agriculture system. European Scientific Journal 21: 69-78.
10
Ekram, A.M., Sharaan, A.N., and EL-Sherif, A.M. 2010. Effect of intercropping patterns on yield and its components of barley, lupin or chickpea grown in newly reclaimed soil. Egyptian Journal of Applied Science 25: 437-452.
11
Ehrmann, J., and Ritz, K. 2014. Plant: soil interactions in temperate multi-cropping production systems. Plant and Soil 376: 1–29.
12
Eskandari, H., and Alizadeh-Amraie, A. 2016. Evaluation of growth and species composition of weeds in maize-cowpea intercropping based on additive series under organic farming condition. Journal of Agroecology 8: 227-240. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Eslamizadeh, A., Kashani, A., Siyadat, S.A., Modhej, A., and Lak, S. 2015. Study of soybean forage at different planting dates intercropped with corn. Walia Journal 31: 108-112.
14
Fatahi Nazad, A., Siadat, A., Esfandiari, M., Moghadasi, R., and Moazi, A. 2013. Effect of phosphorus fertilizer on yield, oil and protein in canola in dryland under soil phosphorus fertility groups. Crop Physiology 18: 83-100.
15
Franco, J.G., King, S.R., Masabni, J.G., and Volder, A. 2015. Plant functional diversity improves short-term yields in a low-input intercropping system. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 203: 1–10.
16
Fuente, E.B., Suarez, 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- Wageningen Journal of Life Science 165: 1–6.
17
Gao, Y., Duan, A., Qiu, X., Liu, Z., Suna, J., Zhang, J., and Wang, H. 2010. Distribution of roots and root length density in a maize/soybean strip intercropping system. Agricultural Water Management 98: 199–212.
18
Geren, H., Avcioglu, R., Soya, H., and Kir, B. 2008. Intercropping of corn with cowpea and bean: Biomass yield and silage quality. Biotechnology 22: 4100–4104.
19
Genard, T., Etienne, P., Diquelou, S., Yvin, J.-C., Revellin, C., and Laîne, P. 2017. Rapeseed-legume intercrops: plant growth and nitrogen balance in early stages of growth and development. Heliyon 3: 1-20.
20
Ghosh, P.K., Manna, M.C., Bandyopadhyay Ajay, K.K., Tripathi, A.K., Wanjari, R.H., Hati, K.M., Misra, A.K., Acharya, C.L., and Subba Rao, A. 2006. Interspecific interaction and nutrient use in soybean/sorghum intercropping system. Agronomy Journal 98: 1097–1108.
21
Hamzei, J. 2011. Seed, oil, and protein yields of canola under combinations of irrigation and nitrogen application. Agronomy Journal 103: 1152–1158.
22
Hamzei, J. 2012. Evaluation of yield, SPAD index, landuse efficiency and system productivity index of barley (Hordeum vulgare) intercropped with bitter vetch (Vicia ervilia). Journal of Crop Production and Processing 2(4):79-92. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Hamzei, J., and Babaei, M. 2017. Study of quality and quantity of yield and land equivalent ratio of sunflower in intercropping series with bean. Journal of Agroecology 8: 490-504. (In Persian with English Summary)
24
Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, M. 2016. Energy use and input–output costs for sunflower production in sole and intercropping with soybean under different tillage systems. Soil and Tillage Research 157: 73–82.
25
Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, M. 2015. Evaluation of the effects of intercropping systems on yield performance, land equivalent ratio and weed control efficiency. Agriculture Research 4: 202–207.
26
Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, S.M. 2014. Soil physicochemical characteristics and land use efficiency in cereal-legume intercropping systems. Water and Soil 24: 261-271. (In Persian with English Summary)
27
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 Production and Processing 2: 109-119. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Hamzei, J., Seyedi, M., Ahmadvand, G., and Aboutalebian, M.A. 2012.Effect of additive intercropping on weed suppression, yield and component yield of chickpea and barley. Crop Production and Processing 3: 43-56. (In Persian with English Summary)
29
Jalilian, J., Modarres Sanavy, S.A.M., and Sabaghpour, S.H. 2005. Effect of plant density and supplemental irrigation on yield, yield components and protein content of four chickpea (Cicer arietinum) cultivars under dry land condition. Journal of Agricultural Science and Natural Resource 12(5): 1-9. (In Persian with English Summary)
30
Li, L., Tilman, D., Lambers, H., and Zhang, F.S. 2014. Biodiversity and overyielding: insights from below-ground facilitation of intercropping in agriculture. New Phytologist 203: 63–69.
31
Lin, C.W., Chen, Y.B., Huang, J.J., and Tu, S.H. 2007. Temporal variation of plant height, plant cover and leaf area index in intercropped area of Sichuan, China. Chinese Journal of Ecology 26: 989- 994.
32
Majnoun Hosseini, N. 2008. Agronomy and Production of Legume. Jihad Daneshgahi Press. Tehran, Iran. 284 pp. (In Persian)
33
Ngwira, A.R., Aune, J.B., and Mkwinda, S. 2012. On-farm evaluation of yield and economic benefit of short term maize legume intercropping systems under conservation agriculture in Malawi. Field Crops Research 132: 149–157.
34
Pooramir, F., Koocheki, A.R., Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Assessment of sesame and chickpea yield and yield components in the replacement series intercropping. Iranian Journal of Fied Crops Research 8: 747-757. (In Persian with English Summary)
35
Ren, Y., Liuc, J., Wangd, Z., and Zhanga, S. 2016. Planting density and sowing proportions of maize–soybean intercropsaffected competitive interactions and water-use efficiencies on theLoess Plateau, China. European Journal of Agronomy 72: 70–79.
36
Sarhaddi, M., Zand, E., Baghestani, M.A., and Mohtasebi, R. 2010. Investigating on the effect of different corn planting method on weed management, corn growth indices and yield. Agronomy Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi) 88: 78-86. (In Persian with English Summary)
37
Vaziri Kateshori, S., Daneshvar, M., Sohrabi, A., and Nazarian Firoz Abadi F. 2014. Effects of foliar application of P, Zn and Fe on grain yield and yield components of chick pea. Journal of Crop Inprovement 15(2): 17-30. (In Persian with English Summary)
38
Weisany, W., Zehtab-Salmasia, S., Raeia, Y., Sohrabib, Y., and Ghassemi-Golezani, K. 2016. Can arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi improve competitive ability of dill + common bean intercrops against weeds? European Journal of Agronomy 75: 60–71.
39
Yan, S., Du, X., Wu, F., Li, L., Li, C., and Meng, Z. 2014. Proteomics insights into the basis of interspecific facilitation for maize (Zea mays) in faba bean (Vicia faba)/ maize intercropping. Journal of Proteomics 109: 111-124.
40
Zhang, J., Blackmer, A.M., Ellsworth, J.W., and Koehler, K.J. 2008. Sensitivity of chlorophyll meters for diagnosing nitrogen deficiencies of corn in production agriculture. Agronomy Journal 100: 543–550.
41
Zhang, F., Shen, J., Zhang, J., Zuo, Y., Li, L., and Chen, X. 2010. Rhizosphere processes and management for improving nutrient use efficiency and crop productivity:implications for China. Advances in Agronomy 107: 1–32.
42
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
The Effect of Planting Date and Late Season Drought Stress on Eco-Physiological Characteristics of the New Varieties of Canola (Brassica napus L.)
Introduction
Development of new canola (Brassica napus L.) varieties need effective tools to monitor characterizes association in yield and its components. Although, determination of the response of canola cultivars to environmental variables is one of the principal of agriculture planning to achieve maximum qualitative and quantitative yield. Drought stress and planting date are the most important factor which limit yield production in arid and semiarid regions. Iran is considered as the arid and semiarid with average rainfall of 250 mm. On the other hand, 33% of agricultural land is devoted to dry cultivation. Changing plant date will change yield and product quality by affecting on vegetative and reproductive growth period and balance between them.
Materials and Methods
In order to study the responses of four winter canola cultivars to late season drought stress and different planting dates on physiological, morphology characteristics and yield, a split factorial experiment was carried out in Randomized Complete Block Design with three replication in 2011-2012 in Karaj province. Planting date in two levels, normally sowing dates and delayed planting date and irrigation in two levels, normal and cutting off irrigation from pod stage to next, both in main plot and four cultivars included (Trapper, Makro, Smilla and Agamax) in sub plot. Drought stress was applied by control of irrigation during the pod lengthening stage. Thus, drought was applied by withholding water when the first pod appeared at the beginning of pod filling (April 27th). At this stage, chlorophyll and total sugar solution content was measured as index of drought stress damage. Eleven traits were measured on 10 random plant/plot at physiological maturity stage (June 24th). The traits were plant height, no. of branches/plot, number of pods /plant, pod length, number of seeds/plant,1000-seed weight, seed yield, biomass yield, oil percentage, oil yield and harvest index.
Results and Discussion
The results showed all characteristics except harvest index, significantly (p≥0.05) were influenced by planting date, drought and cultivars. Interaction of sowing date in irrigated was significant in attributes of soluble carbohydrates, plant height, number of pods per plant and oil content. The triple effect was significant only in the concentration of soluble carbohydrates. Due to late planting and irrigation disruption, increasing in soluble carbohydrates and reducing the concentration of chlorophyll was occurred. The yield components of canola decreased because of delays in planting and irrigation disruption which leads to lower grain and canola oil yield. Among cultivars, two cultivars Trapper and Agamax narrowly to each other had better outperformed comparing to Smilla and Marko. Using different sowing dates can change the time of plant growth and development, helping the plant to survive better, under the stress of heat and drought. Water stress along with end of the season delayed planting, reduces yield components and increasing concentrations of soluble carbohydrates. Non-significant interaction effects of planting dates and cultivars for seed and oil yield indicated that yield reduction of the cultivars in late planting dates had similar trend. Drought not only causes dramatic loss of pigments but also leads to disorganization of thylakoid membranes. Therefore reduction in chlorophyll contents is expected. The sowing date may influence plant growth that can be attributed to the favorable climatic conditions (rain and temperature).
Conclusion
Correlation between drought tolerance and yield in all cultivars, identify the most suitable indicators for monitoring drought tolerance cultivars. According to these results, Trapper and Agamax can be recommended for semiarid regions due to maximum seed and oil yield among the stress and non-stress condition. Delayed planting decrease seed oil percent, grain and oil yield of Smilla and Makro than the other cultivars.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36912_7e3fbdf7620497f84a7f228a228f9187.pdf
2019-03-21
261
276
10.22067/jag.v11i1.67311
Canola
Chloropyll
Delayed Planting
Yield and component yield
Water deficit
Parisa
Nazeri
1
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Islami Azad University, Takestan Branch, Iran
AUTHOR
Amir Hossein
Shirani Rad
shirani.rad@gmail.com
2
Seed and Plant Improvement Institue, Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization, Karaj, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Seyed Alireza
Valadabadi
dr.valadabady@yahoo.com
3
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Islami Azad University, Takestan Branch, Iran
AUTHOR
Mojtaba
Mirakhori
mojtaba.mirakhori@yahoo.com
4
Department of Agronomy, Islami Azad University, Tabriz Branch, Iran
AUTHOR
Esmaeil
Hadidi Masoule
hadidimasoule@yahoo.com
5
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Islami Azad University, Takestan Branch, Iran
AUTHOR
Adamsen, F.J., and Coffelt, T.A. 2005. Planting date effects on flowering, seed yield and oil content of rape and crambe cultivars. Industrial Crops and Products 21(3): 293-307.
1
Aein, A. 2011. Changes in the amount of proline, carbohydrate solution and potassium, zinc and calcium absorption in sesame genotypes. (Sesamum indicum L.) under drought stress. Crop Production under Environmental Stress Conditions 4(3): 39-48. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Arnon D.I. 1949. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts, polyphenoxidase in beta vulgaris. Plant Physiology 24: 1-15.
3
Bai, J., Liu, J., Zhang, N., Sa, R., and Jiang, L. 2013. Effect of salt stress on antioxidant enzymes, soluble sugar and yield of oat. Advance Journal of Food Science and Technology 5(3): 303-309.
4
Delkhosh, B., Shirani Rad, A.H., Noor Mohammadi, G., and Darvish, F. 2005. Study of drought stress effects on yield and some agronomic and physiological characteristic in rapeseed. Journal of Agricultural Science 11(2): 165-176. )In Persian with English Summary(
5
Diepenbrock, W. 2000. Yield components of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.): A review. Field crops Research 67: 35-49.
6
Din, J., Khan, S.U., Ali, I., and Gurmani, A.R. 2011. Physiological and agronomic response of canola varieties to drought stress. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 21(1): 78-82.
7
Dubiso, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton J.K., Rebers P.A., and Smith, F. 1965. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Annual Chemical 28: 350-356.
8
Ehteshami, S.M., Tehrani Aref, A., and Samadi, B. 2014. Effect of planting date on some phenological and morphological characteristics, yield and yield components of five rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Agronomy Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi) 109(4): 111-120. (In Persian with English Summary)
9
El-Din, H., El-Beltagi, S., and Mohamed, A.A. 2010. Variations in fatty acid composition, glucosinolate profile and some phytochemical contents in selected oil seed rape (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. 61(2): 141-150.
10
Fallah Haki, M.H., Yadavi, A.R., Movahedi Dehnavi, M., and Bonyadi, M. 2012. Effect of planting date on physiologic and morphologic characteristics of four canola cultivars in Yasooj. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 2(4): 53-65. (In Persian with English Summary
11
Fallah Heki, M.H., Yadavi, A.R., and Movahhedi Dehnavi, M. 2010. Evaluation of oil, protein and grain yield of canola cultivars in different planting date in Yasouj region. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 4(2): 207-222. (In Persian with English Summary)
12
Fanaei, H.R., Galavi, M., Ghanbari Bongar, A., Solouki, M., and Naruoei-Rad, M.R. 2008. Effect of planting date and seeding rate on grain yield and yield components in two rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars under Sistan conditions. Iranian J ournal Crop Science 10(2): 15-30. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Gholipoor, A., Latifi, N., Ghasemi Golezani, K., Aliary, H. and Moghaddam, M. 2004. Comparison of growth and grain yield of rapeseed cultivars under rainfed conditions. Agricultural Journal of Science, Nature Resource 11(1): 5- 13. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Hassan-Zade, M., Naderi Darbaghshahi, M.R., and Shirani Rad, A.H. 2005. Evaluation of drought stress effects on yield and yield components of autumn rapeseed varieties in Isfahan region. Iranian Journal of Research in Agriculture 2(2): 51- 62. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Jamshidi, N., Shirani rad, A.H., Takhtchin, F., Nazeri, P., and Ghaffari, M. 2012. Evaluation of rapeseed genotypes under drought stress condition. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology 6(3): 323-339. (In Persian with English Summary)
16
Kauseri, R.H., Athar, U.R., and Ashraf, M. 2006. Chlorophyll fluorescence: A potential indicator for rapid assessment of water stress tolerance in Canola. Pakistan Journal of Botany 38: 1501-1509.
17
Keerthi, P., Pannu, R.K., Dhaka, A.K. 2017. Effect of sowing dates and nitrogen levels on total dry matter and its partitioning at different growth stages and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Agricultural Science Digest 37(1): 27-31.
18
Khajepour, M.R. 2001. Industrial plants. Publications Unit, University Jihad of Isfahan, Iran. 571 pages. (In Persion)
19
Khalili, M., Naghavi, M.R., Aboughadareh, A., and Talebzadeh, S.J. 2012. Evaluating of drought stress tolerance based on selection indices in spring canola cultivars (Brassica napus L.). Journal of Agricultural Science 4(11): 78-85.
20
Khan, F.A., Ali, S., Shakeel, A., Saeed, A., and Abbas, G. 2006. Correlation analysis of some quantitative characters in Brassica napus L. Journal of Agriculture Research 44:7-14.
21
Khan, M.A., Ashraf, M.Y., Mujtaba, S.M., Shirazi, M.U., Khan, M.A., Shereen, A., Mumtaz, S., Aqil Siddiqui, M., and Murtaza Kaleri, G. 2010. Evaluation of high yielding canola type Brassica genotypes/mutants for drought tolerance using physiological indices as screening tool. Pakestan Journal of Botany 42(6): 3807-3816.
22
Kirkegaard, J.A., Sprague, S.J., Dove, H., Kelman, W.M., Marcroft, S.J., Lieschke, A., Howe, G.N., and Graham, J.M. 2008. Dual-purpose canola-A new opportunity in mixed farming systems. Journal Australian of Agriculture Research 59: 291-302.
23
Kirkegaard, J.A., Sprague, S.J., Lilley, J.M., McCormick, J.I., Virgona, J.M., and Morrison, M.J. 2012. Physiological response of spring canola (Brassica napus) to defoliation in diverse environments. Field Crops Research 125: 61-68.
24
Molazem, D., Azimi, J., Ghasemi, M., Hanifi, M., and Khatami, A. 2013. Correlation analysis in different planting dates and plant density of canola (Brassica napus L.) varieties in Astara Region. Life Science Journal 10(1): 26-31.
25
Naderi, M.R., Nourmohammadi, G., Majidi, A., Darvish, F., and ShiraniRad, A.M. 2004. Evaluation of the response of three summer safflower varieties to drought stress. Journal of Agriculture Science 4: 14-3. )In Persian with English Summary)
26
Ozer, H. 2003. Sowing date and nitrogen rate effects on growth yield and yield components of two summer rapeseed cultivars. European Journal of Agronomy 19: 453-463.
27
Parida, A.K., Dagaonkar, V.S., Phalak M.S., and Aurangabadkar, L.P. 2008. Differential response of the enzymes involved in proline biosynthesis and degradation in drought tolerant and sensitive cotton genotypes during drought stress and recovery. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 30: 619-627.
28
Pavlista, A.D., Isbell, T.A., Baltensperger, D.D., and Hergert, G.W. 2011. Planting date and development of spring-seeded irrigated canola, brown mustard and camelina. Industrial Crops and Products 33: 451-456.
29
Pirdashti, H., Tahmasebi Sarvestani Z., and Bahmanyar, M.A. 2009. Comparison of physiological response among four contrast rice cultivars under drought stress conditions. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 49: 52-53.
30
Rameeh, V. 2014. Evaluation of planting dates effects on growth, phenology and seed yield of spring rapeseed varieties. Oil Plant Production 1(1): 79-89. (In Persian with English Summary)
31
Sabaghnia, N., Dehghani, H., Alizadeh, B., and Mohghaddam, M. 2010. Interrelationships between seed yield and 20 related traits of 49 canola (Brassica napus L.) genotypes in non-stressed and water-stressed environments. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 8(2): 356-370.
32
SAS Institute Inc. 2002. The SAS System for Windows, Release 9.0. Cary, NC, USA: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.
33
Sepehri, A., and Golparvar, AR. 2011. The effect of drought stress on water relations, chlorophyll content and leaf area in canola cultivars (Brassica napus L.). Electronic Journal of Biology 7(3): 49-53.
34
Sieling, K., Böttcher, U., and Kage, H. 2017. Sowing date and N application effects on tape root and above-ground dry matter of winter oilseed rape in autumn. European Journal of Agriculture 83:40-46.
35
Tobe, A., Hokmalipour, S., Jafarzadeh, B., and Hamele Darbandi, M. 2013. Effect of sowing date on some phenological stages and oil contents in spring canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 13 (9): 1202-1212.
36
Zhang, H., Berger, J.D., and Milroy, S.P. 2013. Genotype × environment interaction studies highlight the role of phenology in specific adaptation of canola (Brassica napus) to contrasting Mediterranean climates. Field Crops Research 144: 77-88.
37
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluation of Potential Yield and Yield Gap Associated with Crop Management in Improved Rice Cultivars in Neka Region
Introduction[
Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is the staple food of more than half of the world’s population and has an obvious effect in feeding, income and job creation of people in the world especially, Iran. The rice cultivation area in the world during the past years has been from 145 million hectares to over 160 million hectares. The last global statistics showed that paddy yield and white rice production were 742 and 492.2 million tons respectively in 2014. The same amount is predicted for 2016. Yield gap analysis is providing a little estimation of increased production capacity which is one important component in designing food providing strategy in regional, national scale and world-wide surface. Due to the existing anxiety about discussions of food security, studies are also increasing globally and in Iran is necessary to estimate the quantity of yield gap and the reasons behind it by appropriate statistical methods, or in other words, detecting the restricting parameters of potential yield. As it was mentioned several factors prevent farmers to reach attainable yield in many crops. It seemed that by defining the effectiveness of each management parameters on the amount of presented yield gap and consequently farmer’s knowledge on that matter, the distance between actual yield and attainable yield can be reduced. In this research estimation of potential yield, yield gap and determining yield restricting factors and each of their portions in creating yield gap is investigated.
Material and Methods
The research was done in 100 paddy fields between the Alborz Mountains range and the Caspian Sea in 2016. In this research, all managerial operations from nursery preparation to harvest for modified rice cultivars were recorded through field studies in Neka, Mazandaran, Iran from 2015-2016. All farm cases are pertaining to improved cultivars. The improved rice cultivars were Shiroodi, Neda, Fajr, Ghaem, Khazar, and Nemat, respectively.
Field identifications were done in a way that includes all main production procedure in a specific region with variation in management viewpoint. For defining the yield model (production model), the relationship between all measured variables and the final model was designed by controlled trial and error method. The final model was obtained through the controlled trial and error method, which can quantify the effect of yield limitations. The average paddy yield was calculated by the model by placing the observed average variables (Xs) in the fields under study in the yield model. Thereafter, by putting the best-observed value of the variables in the yield model, the maximum obtainable yield was calculated. The difference between these two has been considered as yield gap. Different procedures of the software SAS version 9.1 were used for analysis.
Results and Discussion
Data analysis revealed that seed consumption was varied from 30 to 120 kg.ha-1. The range of seedling age variable was from 20 to 60 days old. In 100 paddy fields planting density were 16 to 40 plants per m2. Nitrogen usage by 26% of farmers was among 69 to 92 kg.ha-1 and 16% of the farmers consumed 92 to 115 kg N per hectare. Potassium application was varied from 0 to 100 kg K ha-1 which within 60% of the field’s potassium usage was less than 35 kg K ha-1. The range of paddy yield in 100 paddy fields was varied from 6100 to 8200 kg.ha-1 that in 40% of the studied fields, the paddy yield was from 7000 to 7600 kg.ha-1. In the CPA model, the paddy yield increasing related to the effect of N top dressing, K usage and N usage after flowering was 327, 674 and 324 kg.ha-1.
Conclusion
Therefore, the actual yield and yield potential were estimated to be 7194 and 9241 kg.ha-1, respectively and the yield gap was 2047 kg.ha-1. Therefore, regarding the fact that calculated potential yield was reached through actual data in each paddy field, it has been stated that this yield potential is attainable.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36919_2f9d9c2470d922487e97a0f600d08fc9.pdf
2019-03-21
277
294
10.22067/jag.v11i1.67430
Attainable yield
cpa
documentation
Management factors
Rice
Ahmad
Gorjizad
grjzd@yahoo.com
1
Department of Agronomy, Islamic Azad University, Gorgan Branch, Gorgan, Iran
AUTHOR
Afshin
Soltani
afshin.soltani@gmail.com
2
Department of Plant Production, Gorgan Agricultural and Natural Science University, Gorgan, Gorgan, Iran
AUTHOR
Salman
Dastan
salmandastan@ymail.com
3
Department of Agronomy, Islamic Azad University, Gorgan Branch, Gorgan, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Hosein
Ajam Norouzi
ajamnorozei@yahoo.com
4
Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran, Karaj, Iran
AUTHOR
Aghagolzadeh, H. 2010. Rice guide (Harvesting and Post-harvest). Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO). Staff Training Office (STO), Agricultural Education Publisher 220 pp. (In Persian)
1
Amiri Larijani, B. 2010. Rice guide (Land Preparation and Planting). Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO). Staff Training Office (STO), Agricultural Education Publisher 1: 179. (In Persian)
2
Amiri Larijani, B., Aghagolzadeh, H., and Ramzanpour, Y. 2010. Rice guide (Land Preparation and Planting). Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO). Staff Training Office (STO), Agricultural Education Publisher 2: 170. (In Persian)
3
Bruinsma, J. 2009. The resource outlook to 2050: by how much do lamd, water and crop yields meed to increase by 2050? FAO Expert Meeting on How to Feed the World in 2050. Rome.
4
Dastan, S., Noormohamadi, G., Madani, H., and Soltani, A. 2015. Analysis of Energy Indices in Rice Production Systems in the Neka Region. Journal of Environmental Sciences 13(1): 53-66. (In Persian with English Summary)
5
Dastan, S., Soltani, A., and Alimagham, M. 2017. Documenting the process of local rice cultivars production in two conventional and semi-mechanized planting methods in Mazandaran province. Cereal Research 7(4): 485-502. (In Persian with English summary)
6
De Bie, C.A.J.M. 2000. Yield gap studies through comparative performance analysis of agro-ecosystems. International Institute for Aerospace and Earth Science (ITC), Enschede. The Netherlands, 234 p.
7
Delmotte, S., Tittonell, P., Moureta, J.C., Hammonda, R., and Lopez-Ridaura, S. 2011. On farm assessment of rice yield variability and productivity gaps between organic and conventional cropping systems under Mediterranean climate. European Journal of Agronomy 35: 223-236.
8
Espe, M.B., Yang, H., Cassman, K.G., Guilpart, N., Sharifi, H., and Linquist, B.A. 2016a. Estimating yield potential in temperate high-yielding, direct-seeded US rice production systems. Field Crops Research 193: 123-132.
9
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. 2016b. Yield gap analysis of US rice production systems shows opportunitiesfor improvementMatthew. Field Crops Research 196: 276-283.
10
Habibi, E., Niknejad, Y., Fallah, H., Dastan, S., and Barari, D. 2019a. Estimation of yield gap of rice by comparative performance analysis (CPA) in the Amol and Rasht regions. Journal of Plant Production. In Pess (In Persian with English Summary)
11
Habibi, E., Niknejad, Y., Fallah, H., Dastan, S., and Barari, D. 2019b. Life cycle assessment of rice production systems in different paddy field size levels in north of Iran. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 191:202.
12
Haghshenas, H., Soltani, A., Ghanbari, A., Ajamnoroozi, H., and Dastan, S. 2018. Identification of effective agronomic traits on yield of local rice cultivars using multiple regression models. Journal of Agroecology 8(2): 13-28. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Hajarpoor, A., SoltanI, A., and Torabi, B. 2015. Using boundary line analysis in yield gap studies: Case study of wheat in Gorgan. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 8(4): 183-201. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Halalkhor, S., Dastan, S., Soltani, A., and Ajam Norouzi, H. 2018. Documenting the process of rice production and yield gap associated with crop management in local cultivars of rice production (case study: Mazandaran province, Babol region). Agricultural Crop Management 19(3): 397-414. (In Persian with English summary)
15
Hochman, Z., Gobbett, D., Holzworth, D., McClelland, T., van Rees, H., Marinoni, O., Garcia, K.N., and Horan, H. 2013. Reprint of Quantifying yield gaps in rain-fed cropping systems: A case study of wheat in Australia. Field Crops Research 143: 65-75.
16
Kayiranga, D. 2006. The effects of land factors and management practices on rice yields. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enscheda (ITC).The Netherlands.72 p.
17
Kamkar, B., Koochaki, A., Nasiri Mahalati, M., and Rezvani Moghaddam P. 2007. Yield gap analysis of cumin in nine regions of Khorasan province using modeling approach. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 5(2): 333-341. (In Persian with English Summary)
18
Lobell, D.B., Cassman, K.G., and Field, C.B. 2009. Crop yield gaps: their importance, magnitudes, and causes. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 34: 179-204.
19
Majidi, F., and Padasht, F. 2010. Rice guide (Pests and Diseases). Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO). Staff Training Office (STO), Agricultural Education Publisher 150p. (In Persian)
20
Mirkamali, H. 2010. Guide to weeds in rice fields and the control methods. Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO). Staff Training Office (STO), Agricultural Education Publisher 214p. (In Persian)
21
Mueller, N.D., Gerber, J.S., Johnston, M., Ray, D.K., Ramankutty, N., and Foley, J.A. 2012. Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management. Nature 490: 254-257.
22
Nezamzadeh, E., Dastan, S., Soltani, A., 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. Applied Field Crops Research. In Press. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Rajapakse, D.C., 2003. Biophysical factors defining rice yield gaps. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede (ITC).The Netherlands. 80 p.
24
Silva, J.V., Reidsma, P., Laborte, A.G., and van Ittersum, M.K. 2017. Explaining rice yields and yield gaps in Central Luzon, Philippines: An application of stochastic frontier analysis and crop modeling. European Journal of Agronomy 82: 223-241.
25
Soltani, A., and Maddah, V. 2010. Simple applications for agriculture education and research. Agroecology Association, University of Shahid Beheshti, Tehan, Iran 80 p. (In Persian)
26
Soltani, A., Hajjarpoor, A., and Vadez, V. 2016. Analysis of chickpea yield gap and water-limited potential yield in Iran. Field Crops Research 185: 21-30.
27
Tanaka, A., Diagne, M., and Saito, K. 2015. Causes of yield stagnation in irrigated lowland rice systems in the Senegal River Valley: Application of dichotomous decision tree analysis. Field Crops Research 176: 99-107.
28
Tanaka, A., Saito, K., Azoma, K., and Kobayashi, K. 2013. Factors affecting variation in farm yields of irrigated lowland rice in southern-central Benin. European Journal of Agronomy 44: 46-53.
29
Torabi, B., Soltani, A., Galeshi, S., and Soltani, E. 2012. Documenting the process of wheat production in Gorgan. Journal of Plant Production 19(4): 19-42. (In Persian with English Summary)
30
Torabi, B., Soltani, A., Galeshi, S., Zeinali, E., and Kazemi Korgehei, M, 2013. Ranking factors causing the wheat yield gap in Gorgan. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 6(1): 171-189. (In Persian with English Summary)
31
Torabi, M.H., Soltani, A., Dastan, S. and Ajam Norouzi, H. 2019. Assessment of energy flow, carbon saving, and greenhouse gas emission in rice production scenarios. Environmental Sciences 16(4): 187-212. (In Persian with English Summary)
32
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 Research 143: 4-17.
33
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 Research 143: 34-43.
34
Xu, X., He, P., Zhaoa, S., Qiua, S., Johnstond, A.M., and Zhou, W. 2016. Quantification of yield gap and nutrient use efficiency of irrigated rice in China. Field Crops Research 186: 58-65.
35
Yousefian, M., Dastan, S., Soltani, A., and Ajam Norouzi, H. 2018. Estimation of yield gap in local rice cultivars by using CPA and BLF Methods (case study: Mazandaran province, Sari region). Journal of Crop Management 10(3): 265-288. (In Persian with English Summary)
36
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effect of Nutrient Management on Yield and Yield Components of Maize (Zea mays L.) influenced by Different Tillage Systems
Introduction[1]
Conventional tillage systems disturb the soil in the long term and obstruct farmland sustainability. Hence, adoption of conservation tillage systems, for example no tillage and reduced tillage has been widely accepted in the last two decades.
The use of chemical fertilizers has increased in intensive farming systems, but this brings with environmental problems. Nowadays, due to the problems of chemical fertilizers, the use of organic fertilizers such as manure and biochar has been more prevalent in agriculture. Biochar is the product of incomplete combustion of biomass in the absence of oxygen. Its presence in the soil is reported to improve physical and chemical properties and crop yield.
Materials and Methods
In order to evaluate the effect of nutrition management on yield and yield components of corn (Zea mays L.) under different tillage systems, a field experiment was carried out at research farm of Shahrood University of Technology in 2015. The experiment was conducted as a split plot arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The main plots were tillage systems (conventional tillage and reduced tillage) and subplots were control, chemical fertilizer (300 kg.ha-1 urea and 100 kg.ha-1 triple superphosphate), manure (20 t.ha-1), biochar (20 t.ha-1), chemical fertilizer + manure (150 kg.ha-1 urea and 50 kg.ha-1 triple superphosphate and 10 t.ha-1 of manure), chemical fertilizer + biochar (150 kg.ha-1 urea and 50 kg.ha-1 triple superphosphate and 20 t.ha-1 biochar) and manure + biochar (20 t.ha-1 biochar and 10 t.ha-1 of manure). After adding manure, biochar and triple superphosphate, corn was planted on 10 days and urea was used in stages three. At full maturity 10 plants were randomly selected and the biological yield, grain yield, 100-grain weight, ear weight, number of row per ear, number of grains per row, ear length, ear diameter, height and stem diameter were measured.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the effect of tillage systems and the interaction of tillage systems and nutrient management were not significant on any of the measured traits. Tillage systems affect yield mainly by altering water and nitrate content in soil. The water content and nitrate concentration in the soil had no significant difference between tillage systems (data not shown). As well as tillage systems are site-specific, so the degree of their success depends on soil, climate and management practices. The nutrition management had significant effect on grain nutrients, grain protein, ear characteristics, 100-grain weight, biological yield, grain yield and harvest index. The highest and lowest grain nitrogen, ear weight, biological yield and grain yield were obtained in chemical fertilizer and control, respectively. The chemical fertilizer + manure increased grain nitrogen, ear weight, biological yield and grain yield 13.89, 56.19, 47.04 and 60.41 percent compared to the control, respectively. As well as chemical fertilizer + biochar increased grain nitrogen, ear weight, biological yield and grain yield compared to control 14.81, 52.78, 42.69 and 56.32 percent, respectively. Crops respond to nitrogen fertilization mainly by increasing aboveground and root biomass production. As a result of increasing nitrogen doses, the photosynthetic activity, leaf area index (LAI) and leaf area density (LAD) increase. Providing organic matter and nutrients create better conditions for photosynthesis and plant growth. The increased maize yield in biochar amended soil could be attributed to increased nutrient availability and to improved soil physical properties indicated by decreased soil bulk density.
Conclusion
Based on results, the effect of nutrition management was significant on height, stem diameter, grain nutrients, grain protein, ear characteristics, 100-grain weight, biological yield, grain yield and harvest index. Maximum and minimum of stem diameter, grain nitrogen, grain protein, ear characteristics, 100-grain weight, biological yield, grain yield and harvest index were obtained in chemical and control, respectively. Although using of chemical fertilizer had the highest amount of traits, it had no significant difference with chemical fertilizer + manure and chemical fertilizer + biochar. Also, there were no significant effect between conventional tillage and reduced tillage. Therefore, due to the excessive use of nitrogen fertilizer and also due to the negative effects of conventional tillage on the physical, chemical and biological properties of soil, it can be concluded that use of reduced tillage and chemical fertilizer + manure and chemical fertilizer + biochar for corn production is recommended for similar conditions with the study area to reduce both chemical fertilizer and environmental pollution.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36927_d878bc77c8e3695e5b720761a00adedd.pdf
2019-03-21
295
307
10.22067/jag.v11i1.65869
Biochar
Conventional tillage
Grain protein
grain yield
Manure
reduced tillage
Esmat
Mohammadi
esmat.mohammadi63@yahoo.com
1
Agronomy Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran
AUTHOR
Hamid Reza
Asghari
hamidasghari@gmail.com
2
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Ahmad
Gholami
gholami@shahroodut.ac.ir
3
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran
AUTHOR
Surur
Khorramdel
khorramdel@um.ac.ir
4
Department of Agrotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
AUTHOR
Afzali Gorouh, H., Asoodar M.A., and Khodarahmpoor, Z. 2012. Effect of irrigation method and tillage level on water use efficiency and corn grain yield (Zea mays L.) in Kerman. Water and Soil Science 22: 47-58. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Agegnehu, G., Nelson, P.N., and Bird, M.I. 2016. Crop yield, plant nutrient uptake and soil physicochemical properties under organic soil amendments and nitrogen fertilization on Nitisols. Soil and Tillage Research 160: 1-13.
2
Alvarez, R., and Steinbach, H.S. 2009. A review of the effects of tillage systems on some soil physical properties, water content, nitrate availability and crops yield in the Argentine Pampas. Soil and Tillage Research 104: 1-15.
3
Amirabadi, M., Seifi, M., Rejali, F., and Ardakani, M.R. 2012. Study the concentration of macroelements in forage mays (Zea mays L.) (SC 704) as effected by inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi and Azotobacter chroococcum under different levels of nitrogen. Journal of Agroecology 4: 33-40. (In Persian with English Summary)
4
Bouwman, A.F., Boumans, L.J.M., and Batjes, N.H. 2002. Emissions of N2O and NO from fertilized fields: Summary of available measurement data. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 16: 1-13.
5
Chen, Y., Liu, S., Li, H., Li, X.F., Song, C.Y., Cruse, R.M., and Zhang, X.Y. 2011. Effects of conservation tillage on corn and soybean yield in the humid continental climate region of Northeast China. Soil and Tillage Research 115: 56-61.
6
Emami, A. 1996. Methods of plant analysis. Publication No. 982, Soil and Water Research Institute. (In Persian)
7
Fernandez-Ugalde, O., Virto, I., Bescansa, P., Imaz, M.J., Enrique, A., and Karlen, D.L. 2009. No-tillage improvement of soil physical quality in calcareous, degradation-prone, semiarid soils. Soil and Tillage Research 106: 29-35.
8
Jagadamma, S., Lal, R., Hoeft, R.G., Nafziger, E.D., and Adee, E.A. 2008. Nitrogen fertilization and cropping system impacts on soil properties and their relationship to crop yield in the central Corn Belt, USA. Soil and Tillage Research 98: 120-129.
9
Khadem, A., Golchin, A., Shafiei, S., and Zaree, E. 2014. Effects of manure and sulfur on nutrients uptake by corn (Zea mays L.). Agronomy Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi) 103: 2-11. (In Persian with English Summary)
10
Khavari Khorasani,S., Golbashy, M., Azizi, F., Ashofteh Beiragi M., and Fatemi, R. 2010.Evaluation of growth traits and yield of new forage corn (Zea mays L.) single cross combinations. Journal of Agroecology 2: 335-342. (In Persian with English Summary)
11
Lal, R. 2006. Enhancing crop yields in the developing countries through restoration of the soil organic carbon pool in agricultural lands. Land Degradation and Development 17: 197-209.
12
Lehmann, J. 2007. A handful of carbon. Nature 447: 143-144.
13
Liu, X., Ye, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, A., Zhang, X., Li, L., Pan, G., Kibue, G.W., Zheng, J., and Zheng, J. 2014. Sustainable biochar effects for low carbon crop production: A 5-crop season field experiment on a low fertility soil from Central China. Agricultural Systems 129: 22-29.
14
Majidian, M., Ghalavand, A., Karimian, N.A., and Kamgar Haghighi, A.A. 2008. Effects of moisture stress, nitrogen fertilizer, manure and integrated nitrogen and manure fertilizer on yield, yield components and water use efficiency of SC 704 corn. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources 12: 417-432. (In Persian with English Summary)
15
Major, J., Rondon, M., Molina, D., Riha, S.J., and Lehmann, J. 2010. Maize yield and nutrition during 4 years after biochar application to a Colombian savanna oxisol. Plant and Soil 333: 117-128.
16
Maltas, A., Charles, R., Jeangros, B., and Sinaj, S. 2013. Effect of organic fertilizers and reduced-tillage on soil properties, crop nitrogen response and crop yield: Results of a 12-year experiment in Changins, Switzerland. Soil and Tillage Research 126: 11-18.
17
Mijangos, I., Perez, R., Albizu, I., and Garbisu, C. 2006. Effects of fertilization and tillage on soil biological parameters. Enzyme and Microbial Technology 40: 100-106.
18
Mohammadi, E., Asghari, H.R., Gholami, A., and Khorramdel, S. 2017. Evaluation of soil carbon management index and belowground net primary productivity of maize in different tillage and nutrient management systems. In 15th Iranian Soil Science Congress, Isfahan, Iran, 28-30 August 2017, p. 1-7. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Mojab Ghasrodashti, A., Balouchi, H.R., Yadavi, A., and Ghobadi, M. 2014. Effect of different levels of municipal solid waste compost and nitrogen on some grain elements concentration of sweet corn (Zea mays L. Saccharata) and some soil properties under Marvdasht conditions. Journal of Agroecology 6: 118-129. (In Persian with English Summary)
20
Peng, X., Ye, L.L., Wang, C.H., Zhou, H., and Sun, B. 2011. Temperature-and duration-dependent rice straw-derived biochar: Characteristics and its effects on soil properties of an Ultisol in southern China. Soil and Tillage Research 112: 159-166.
21
Rasool, R., Kukal, S.S., and Hira, G.S. 2008. Soil organic carbon and physical properties as affected by long-term application of FYM and inorganic fertilizers in maize–wheat system. Soil and Tillage Research 101: 31-36.
22
Sadeghi, H., and Bahrani, M.J. 2002. Effects of plant density and nitrogen rates on morphological characteristics and kernel protein contents of corn (Zea mays L.). Iranian Agriculture Science 33: 403-412. (In Persian with English Summary)
23
Sainju, U.M., Senwo, Z.N., Nyakatawa, E.Z., Tazisong, I.A., and Reddy, K.C. 2008. Soil carbon and nitrogen sequestration as affected by long-term tillage, cropping systems, and nitrogen fertilizer sources. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 127: 234-240.
24
Six, J., Elliott, E.T., and Paustian, K. 1999. Aggregate and soil organic matter dynamics under conventional and no-tillage systems. Soil Science Society of America Journal 63: 1350-1358.
25
Sukartono, W.H.U., Kusuma, Z., and Nugroho, W.H. 2011. Soil fertility status, nutrient uptake, and maize (Zea mays L.) yield following biochar and cattle manure application on sandy soils of Lombok, Indonesia. Journal of Tropical Agriculture 49: 47-52.
26
Tabatabaei, S.A., Shakeri, E., and Nasiri, H. 2014. Effect of different method irrigation and manure on reduce water use in the planting grain maize cv. KSC704. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 12: 766-775. (In Persian with English Summary)
27
Tammeorg, P., Simojoki, A., Mäkelä, P., Stoddard, F.L., Alakukku, L., and Helenius, J. 2014. Short-term effects of biochar on soil properties and wheat yield formation with meat bone meal and inorganic fertilizer on a boreal loamy sand. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 191: 108-116.
28
Triplett, G., and Dick, W.A. 2008. No-tillage crop production: a revolution in agriculture! Agronomy Journal 100: 153-165.
29
Turner, D.A., Edis, R.B., Chen, D., Freney, J.R., Denmead, O.T., and Christie, R. 2010. Determination and mitigation of ammonia loss from urea applied to winter wheat with N-(n-butyl) thiophosphorictriamide. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 137: 261-266.
30
Vaccari, F.P., Baronti, S., Lugato, E., Genesio, L., Castaldi, S., Fornasier, F., and Miglietta, F. 2011. Biochar as a strategy to sequester carbon and increase yield in durum wheat. European Journal of Agronomy 34: 231-238.
31
Van Zwieten, L., Kimber, S., Downie, A., Morris, S., Petty, S., Rust, J., and Chan, K.Y. 2010. A glasshouse study on the interaction of low mineral ash biochar with nitrogen in a sandy soil. Australian Journal of Soil Research 48: 569-576.
32
Vogeler, I., Rogasik, J., Funder, U., Panten, K., and Schnug, E. 2009. Effect of tillage systems and P-fertilization on soil physical and chemical properties, crop yield and nutrient uptake. Soil and Tillage Research 103: 137-143.
33
Zamani Babgohari, J., Afyuni, M., Khoshgoftarmanesh, A.H., and Eshghizadeh, H.R. 2011. Effect of Polyacryl sewage sludge, municipal compost and cow manure on soil properties and maize yield. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources (Journal of Water and Soil Science) 14: 153-166 (In Persian with English Summary).
34
Zhang, A., Liu, Y., Pan, G., Hussain, Q., Li, L., Zheng, J., and Zhang, X. 2012. Effect of biochar amendment on maize yield and greenhouse gas emissions from a soil organic carbon poor calcareous loamy soil from Central China Plain. Plant and Soil 351: 263-275.
35
Zheng, H., Wang, Z., Deng, X., Herbert, S., and Xing, B. 2013. Impacts of adding biochar on nitrogen retention and bioavailability in agricultural soil. Geoderma 206: 32-39.
36
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Effects of Bio-Regulators on Morphological and Physiological Traits and Essential Oil of Ammi visnaga (L.) Lam
Introduction[1]
Ammi visnaga (L.) Lam is a herbaceous medicinal plant and belongs to Umbelliferae family. It is native to the Mediterranean region. A. visnagais well known as a source of essential oil and is especially cultivated for it therapeutic properties (diaphoretic, carminative, antispasmodic, antiseptic, tonic,) being used in traditional medicine systems in many countries. Essential oil of A. visnaga is known for its proprieties against coronary diseases and bronchial asthma. Phenolic compounds considered as a kind of bio-regulators which are synthesized in the environmental conditions in plant cells. These compounds are involved in various processes of plant growth and reproduction as well as a defense mechanism against biotic and abiotic stresses. Amino acids as bio-regulators have been identified as an alternative to chemical fertilizer to increase soil fertility and crop production in sustainable farming. Therefore, the main objective of the present field experiment was to investigate the effects of bio-regulators on morphological and physiological traits and essential oil of A. visnaga.
Materials and Methods
A factorial experiment was performed based on a randomized complete block design (RCBD) at Agricultural Research Institute of Zabol University in 2014-15. The experiment was conducted in pots with a height of 20 cm and a diameter of 33 cm. The treatments used in this study consisted phenolic compounds (salicylic acid, trans-cinnamic acid and benzoic acid with three levels of 5, 10 and 20 mg l-1) and amino acids (phenylalanine and tyrosine with three levels of 50, 100 and 200 mg l-1). Distilled water was used as control. All treatments were applied by foliar application and spraying was done 30 days after planting. Measurement was performed at maturity stage (210 days after planting) and fruiting (180 days after planting). The measured traits include vegetative growth characteristics (plant height, branch number, umbel number, fresh weight of herb and dry weight of herb), relative water content (RWC), photosynthetic pigments (Chl a, Chl b, carotinoids, Chl a+Chl b and (Chl a+Chl b)/carotinoids), carbohydrate (total carbohydrates, soluble carbohydrate, insoluble carbohydrate), Fruit yield, essential oil content and yield. For identifying the essential oil components, essential oil fraction was collected and subjected to GC/MS (Gas Chromatography-Mass spectrometry) analysis. Analysis of variance by using SAS software and mean comparisons by Duncan’s multiple range test (at the 5% probability level) was done.
Results and Discussion
The results indicated that bio-regulators significantly affected on all of the traits. In addition, benzoic acid 20 mg l-1 had the greatest impact compared to other treatments so that, vegetative growth characteristics 46.2 percent, RWC 60.2 percent, photosynthetic pigments include Chl a 77.6, Chl b 60.6, carotinoids 66. 7, Chla+Chl b 73.3 and Chl a+Chl b/carotinoids 19.1percent were increased compared to control treatment. After extraction type and amount of volatile compounds were determined in the aerial part of A. visnaga with GC-MS. Dominant compounds of essential oil in this plant were included 2, 2-dimethylbutanoic acid, isobutyl isobutyrate, thymol and croweacin. In this study, all treatments on the green tissues of A. visnaga were increased the essential oil content. The results of this study demonstrated that, the use of bio-regulators, with aimed at reducing the use of chemical fertilizers, had a positive effect to increase the quality and quantity of A. visnaga and also, sustainable production and environmental protection.
Conclusion
The results of this study demonstrated that, the use of bio-regulators, with aimed at reducing the use of chemical fertilizers, had a positive effect to increase the quality and quantity of A. visnaga and also, sustainable production and environmental protection. Considering the importance of the production of medicinal plants in farming systems, bio-regulators such as phenolic compounds seem to be a viable alternative to chemical fertilizers in the production of these plants.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36935_24f59e7c159d52642080e4f925f77f0b.pdf
2019-03-21
309
320
10.22067/jag.v11i1.61527
Amino acids
Bio-regulators
Essential oil
Phenolic compounds
Diako
Rasouli
rasoolidiako@gmail.com
1
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Roghayeh
Mohammadpour Vashvaei
ro_mohammadpour@yahoo.com
2
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
AUTHOR
Barat Ali
Fakheri
bsiasar@uoz.ac.ir
3
Department of Plant Breeding and Biotechnology , Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University, Zabol, Iran
AUTHOR
Adams, R.P. 2001. Identification of Essential Oil Components by Gas Chromatography/ uadrupole Mass Spectroscopy. Allured: Carol Stream. USA.
1
Adisakwattana, S., Sompong, W., Meeprom, A., Ngamukote, S., and Yibchok-Anun, S. 2012. Cinnamic acid and its derivatives inhibit fructose-mediated protein glycation. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 13: 1778-1789.
2
Astarai, A., and Koocheki, A. 1997. The Use of Biological Fertilizers in Sustainable Agriculture. Mashhad ID Press, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)
3
Belde, M., Matteis, A., Sprengle, B., Albrecht, B., and Hurle, H. 2000. Long- term development of yield affecting weeds after the change from conventional to integrated and organic farming. In: proceeding 20 German Conference on weed Biology and Weed Control 17: 291-301.
4
Bown, D. 1995. Encyclopaedia of Herbs and their Uses. Dorling Kindersley, London, ISBN 0-7513-020-31.
5
Charles, D.J., Joly, R.J., and Simon, J.E. 1990. Effect of osmotic stress on the essential oil content and composition of peppermint. Photochemistry 29(9): 2837–2840.
6
Ghasemzadeh, A., and Jaafar, H. 2012. Effect of salicylic acid application on biochemical changes in ginger (Zingiber officinale Roscoe). Journal of Medicinal Plants Research 6: 790–795.
7
Chevalier, A. 1996. The Encycclopedia of Medicinal Plants. Dorling Kindersley, London. ISBN 9-780751-303148.
8
Cohen, S., and Kennedy, J. 2010. Plant metabolism and the environment: Implications for managing phenolics. Food Science and Nutrition 50: 620–643.
9
Erisman, J.W. 2004. The Nanjing declaration on management of reactive nitrogen. Bioscience 54: 4286-4287.
10
Garde-Cerdan, T., Lopez, R., Portu, J., Gonzalez-Arenzana, L., Lopez-Alfaro, I., and Santamaria, P. 2014. Study of the effects of proline, phenylalanine, and urea foliar application to Tempranillo vineyards on grape amino acid content. Comparison with commercial nitrogen fertilizers. Food Chemistry 163: 136-141.
11
Hamidi, A., Ghalavand, A., Dehghan, M., Malakuti, M.J., Asgharzade, A., and Chokan, R. 2005. The effect of application of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on the yield of fodder maize (Zea mays L.). Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 70: 16-22. (In Persian with English Summary)
12
Ibrahim, M., and Jaafar, H. 2011. Involvement of carbohydrate, protein and phenylanine ammonialyase in up-regulation of secondary metabolites in Labisia pumila under various CO2 and N2 levels. Molecules 16: 4172–4190.
13
Jamshidi, M., Ahmadi, H.R., Rezazadeh, S.h., Fathi, F., and Mazanderani, M. 2010. Study on phenolicd and anioxidant activity of some selected plant of Mazandaran province. Journal of Medical Planats 9(34): 177-183. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Jiang, Y., and Huang, N. 2001. Drought and heat stress injury to two cool-season turfgrasses in relation to antioxidant metabolism and lipid peroxidation. Crop Science 41: 436-442.
15
Kang, C., and Wang, C.H. 2003. Salicylic acid changes activities of H2O2 metabolizing enzymes and increases the chilling tolerance of banana seedlings. Environment and Experimental Botany 9-15.
16
Khadhri, A., El Mokni, R., Mguis, K., Ouerfelli, I., and Eduarda, M.M.A. 2011. Variability of two essential oils of Ammi visnaga (L) Lam. a traditional Tunisian medicinal plant. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research 5(20): 5079–5082.
17
Lichtenthaler, H.K. 1987. Chlorophylls and carotenoids: Pigments of photosynthetic biomembranes. Methods in Enzymology 148: 350-382.
18
Lrigoyen, J.J., and Emerich, D.W. 1992. Water stress induced changes in concentration of praline and total soluble sugars in modulates alfalfa (Medicago satire) plants. Physiologic Planetarium 84: 55-60.
19
Myung-Min, H., Trick, H.N., and Rajasheka, E.B. 2009. Secondary metabolism and antioxidant are involved in environmental adaptation and stress tolerance in lettuce. Journal of Plant Physiology 166: 180-191.
20
Nagarja, G., Gowda J., and Farooqi, A. 1999. Effect of growth regulators on growth and flowering of Tuberose cv. Single. Karantaka Journal of Agriculture Science 12: 234-238.
21
Nardi, S., Pizzeghello, D., Muscolo, A., and Vianello, A. 2002. Physiological effects of humic substances on higher plants. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 34: 1527-1536.
22
Nosengo, N. 2003. Fertilized to death. Nature 425: 894.895.
23
Ozturk, A., Unlukara, A., Ipek, A., and Gurbuz, B. 2004. Effects of Salt Stress and Water Deficit on Plant Growth and Essential oil Content of Lemon Balm (Melissa officialis L.). Pakistan Journal of Botany 36(4): 787-792.
24
Perez, M.G.F., Rocha-Guzman, N.E., Mercado-Silva, E., Loarca-Piña, G., and Reynoso-Camacho, R. 2014. Effect of chemical elicitors on peppermint (Mentha piperita) plants and their impact on the metabolite profile and antioxidant capacity of resulting infusions. Food Chemistry 156: 273-278.
25
Pessarakli, M. 1999. Handbook of Plant and Crop Stress. Marcel Dekker Inc.
26
Preeti, H., and Gogoi, S. 1997. Effects of preplant chemical treatment of bulbs on growth and flowering of Polianthes tuberosa cv. Single. Annuals Biology 13: 145-149.
27
Rezvani Moghaddam, P., Raoofi, M.R., Rashed Mohassel, M.H., and Moradi, R. 2009. Evaluation of sowing patterns and weed control on mung bean (Vigna radiate L. Wilczek)- black cumin (Nigella sativa L.) intercropping system. Journal of Agroecology 1(1): 65-79. (In Persian with English Summary)
28
Rice-Evans, C.A., Miller, N.J., and Paganga, G. 1997. Antioxidant properties of phenolic compounds. Trends Plant Science 2: 152-159.
29
Rose, J., and Hulburd, J. 1992. The Aromatherapy Book Applications and Inhalations. North Atlantic Books, Health & Fitness 375 pp.
30
Sajjadi Niaki, H., Darzi, M.T., and Haj Seyed Hadi, M.R. 2016. Effects of vermicompst and nitroxin biofertilizer on quantity and quality of essential oil of dragonhead (Dracocephalum moldavica L.). Journal of Agroecology 8(2): 241-250. (In Persian with English Summary)
31
Satrani, B., Farah, A., Fechtal, M., Talbi, M., and Bouamri, M.L. 2004. Chemical composition and antimicrobial and antifungal activities of the essential oil of Ammi visnaga (L.) Lam from Marocco. Acta Botanica Gallica 151 (1): 65–71.
32
Taguchi, G., Yazawa, T., Hayashida, N., and Okazaki, M. 2001. Molecular cloning and heterologous expression of novel glucosyltransferases from tobacco cultured cells that have broad substrate specificity and are induced by salicylic acid and auxin. European Journal of Biochemistry 268(14): 4086-4094.
33
Uphof, J.C.T. 1959. Dictionary of Economic Plants. Science 890 pp.
34
Wu, S.C., Caob, Z.H., Lib, Z.G., Cheunga, K.C., and Wong, M.H. 2005. Effects of biofertilizer containing N-fixer, P and K solubilizers and AM fungi on maize growth: A greenhouse trial. Geoderma 125: 155–166.
35
Yang, R.X., Gao, Z.G., Liu, X., Yao, Y., Cheng, Y., Huang, J., and McDermott, M.I. 2015. Effects of phenolic compounds of muskmelon root exudates on growth and pathogenic gene expression of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. melonis. Allelopathy Journal 35(2): 175-186.
36
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Determination of Appropriate Model for Yield Gap Analysis of Rice in Guilan Province using Boundary Line Analysis Method
Introduction[1]
Nowadays, identification of the yield limiting factors in the field particularly the various yield components including number of panicle per unit area, number of seeds per panicle and seed weight) is one of the most important methods to increase the production of rice. The yield gap (YG) analysis can be performed by measuring the yield related characteristics. Yield gap was estimated as the difference between actual and potential yield that has been used in various studies as an important indicator to increase the yield in crops and different areas. One of the most powerful methods to evaluate the reasons of yield potential and yield gap is boundary line analysis. The purpose of this research was to select an appropriate function for describing the relationship between yield and yield components in the Fumann plain of Guilan province. Furthermore, after selecting the superior function, the parameters of the yield and yield components were estimated to calculate the yield gap in the region.
Materials and Methods
The present study was carried out during two cropping seasons: 2012-13 and 2013-14 in Foumanat plain (cv. ‘Tarom Hashemi’). We recorded the geographic coordinates of 53 fields. At the end of growing season (harvesting time), paddy yield and yield components (panicle number, filled grain number and 100- grain weight) were calculated in each field. The correlation coefficients between yield components and yield were studied. Segmented, quadratic and dent-like models were applied to describe the relationship between yield and yield components. Root mean square error (RMSE), determination coefficient (R2), regression simple coefficients (a & b) and coefficient of variation (CV) were used to identify the appropriate model. After selecting a superior model, the boundary line method was used to calculate yield gap and its percentage, optimum yield and optimum amount of yield components for each field.
Results and Discussion
According to the results, a positive and significant correlation was existed between paddy yield with panicle number and filled grain number with 100- grain weight and a negative and significant correlation was existed between 100- grain weights with panicle number. Linear regression simple coefficients for all traits studied in the quadratic function and for two traits of panicles number per square meter and of filled grains number in the panicle in the segmented model were significant. Among the fitted models, segmented model has the lowest RMSE (respectively equal to 0.082 and 0.472) and coefficient of variation (equal to 1.26 and 6.39, respectively) in terms of two characteristics of panicle number and 100- grain weight and was able to describe the trend of the experimental data. In addition, dent-like model with the lowest RMSE (equal to 0.484) and coefficient of variation (equal to 6.60) used to describe the changes of filled grain number. In Foumanat plain, YG was recorded 3.63 t.ha-1with the average optimum yield and actual yield of 8.44 and 4.81 t.ha-1, respectively (40% reduction in yield). Also, the optimum amount of panicle number, filled grain number and 100- grain weight were 560, 47-83.9, and 2.18 g, respectively.
Conclusion
Although, the area of Foumanat plain in the west of Guilan province has low actual yield, there is a good potential to increase the current yield. In this study, two segmented and dent-like models were identified as superior models. The highest YG in this study was related to the number of panicles per square meter followed by the number of filled grains and the 100- grain weight. Therefore, proper crop management for improving the yield components could be an important step towards reducing the YG and increasing the yield potential in the studied area.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36944_cb498d0a6ebd705f61a3c0f81b92eb27.pdf
2019-03-21
321
334
10.22067/jag.v11i1.66914
Coefficient of variation
dent-like model
Grain weight
non linear regression
panicle number
segmented model
Niloofar
Aghaeipour
n_aghaeipour@yahoo.com
1
Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University
AUTHOR
Hemmatollah
Pirdashti
pirdasht@yahoo.com
2
Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Genetic and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute of Tabarestan, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University, Sari
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohsen
Zavareh
mzavareh@guilan.ac.ir
3
Guilan University
AUTHOR
Hossein
Asadi
ho.asadi@ut.ac.ir
4
Tehran University
AUTHOR
Mohammad ali
Bahmanyar
mali.bahmanyar@gmail.com
5
Department of Soil Sciences, Sari University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Sari, Iran.
AUTHOR
Adibnia, M., Torabi, B., Rahimi, A., and Azari, A. 2015. Quantifying response of safflower seedling emergence to temperature. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 8: 161-177. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Ahmadi, M., Kamkar, B., Soltani, A., and Zeinali, E. 2010. Evaluation of non-linear regression models to predict stem elongation rate of wheat ((Tajan cultivar) in response to temperature and Photoperiod. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 2: 39-54. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Ajam Norouzi, H., Soltani, A., Majidi, E., and Homaei, M. 2007. Modelling response of emergence to temperature in faba bean under field condition. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 14: 100-111. (In Persian with English Summary)
3
Amiri Deh Ahmadi, S.R., Parsa, M., Bannayan Aval, M., and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2015. Yield gap analysis of chickpea under semi-arid conditions: A simulation study. Journal of Agroecology 7: 84-98. (In Persian with English Summary)
4
Banneheka, B.M.S.G., Dhanushika, M.P., Wijesuriya, W., and Herath, K. 2013. A linear programming approach to fitting an upper quadratic boundary line to natural rubber data. Journal of the National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka 41.
5
Bouman, B.A.M., Peng, S., Castaneda, A.R., and Visperas, R.M. 2005. Yield and water use of irrigated tropical aerobic rice systems. Agricultural Water Management 74: 87-105.
6
Brancourt-Hulmel, M., Lecomte, C., and Meynard, J.M. 1999. A diagnosis of yield-limiting factors on Probe genotypes for characterizing environments in winter wheat trials. Crop Science 39: 1798-1808.
7
Casanova, D., Goudriaan, J., Forner, M.M.C., and Withagen, J.C.M. 2002. Rice yield prediction from yield components and limiting factors. European Journal of Agronomy 17: 41-61.
8
Dore, T., Meynard, J.M., and Sebillotte, M. 1998. The role of grain number, nitrogen nutrition and stem number in limiting pea crop (Pisum sativum) yields under agricultural conditions. European Journal of Agronomy 8: 29-37.
9
Espe, M.B., Cassman, K.G., Yang, H.W., 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 Research 196: 276-283.
10
Gharavi Baigi, M., Pirdashti, H., Abbasian, A., and Aghajaniye Mazandarani, G. 2014. Response of yield and yield components of rice (Oryza sativa L. cv. Tarom Hashemi) in rice, duck and Azolla (Azolla sp.) farming. Journal of Agroecology 6: 477-487. (In Persian with English Summary)
11
Hajarpoor, A., Soltani, A., and Torabi, B. 2015. Using boundary line analysis in yield gap studies: Case study of wheat in Gorgan. Scientific Journal Management System 8: 183-201. (In Persian with English Summary)
12
Hatami, H., Mohsenabadi, G., Esfahani, M., Amiri Garijani, B., and Aalami, A. 2016. Effect of transplanting time on grain yield and physiological traits in grain filling period in rice cultivars. Journal of Crops Improvement 18: 655-671. (In Persian with English Summary)
13
Huang, M., Zou, Y.b., Jiang, P., Xia, B., Md, I., and Ao, H.J. 2011. Relationship Between Grain Yield and Yield Components in Super Hybrid Rice. Agricultural Sciences in China 10: 1537-1544.
14
Inusah, B.I.Y., Dogbe, W., Abdulai, A.L., Yirzagla, J., Mawunya, M., and Issahak, A.S. 2015. Yield gap survey in sudanno-guinea savanna agro-ecological zones of ghana. Sustainable Agriculture Research 4: 127-137.
15
Kazemi Poshtmassari, H., Pirdashti, H., Bahmanyar, M.A., and Nassiri, M. 2007. Study the effects of nitrogen fertilizer rates and split application on yield and yield components of different rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 75: 68-77. (In Persian with English Summary)
16
Khalili, N., Kamkar, B., and Khodabakhshi, A.H. 2015. Quantifying and analysis of germination responses of annual savory (Satureja hortensis L.) to temperature and salinity stress. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences 8: 83-92. (In Persian with English Summary)
17
Kundu, S., and Kundagrami, S. 2015. Estimation of path coefficient analysis to identify the yield contributing traits in rice (Oryza sativa L.) under saline and non-saline coastal regions of West Bengal. Journal of Advances in Biology 8: 1433-1438.
18
Mahdavi, F., Esmaeili, M.A., Fallah, A., and Pirdashti, H. 2006. Study of morphological characteristics, physiological indices, grain yield and its components in rice (Oryza sativa L.) Landraces and Improved Cultivars 27: 280-297. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Makowski, D., Dore, T., and Monod, H. 2007. A new method to analyse relationships between yield components with boundary lines. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 27: 119-128.
20
Meier, U. 1997. Growth stages of mono-and dicotyledonous plants: BBCH-Monograph. Blackwell wissenschafts-verlag, Berlin and Braunschweig.
21
Milne, A.E., Ferguson, R.B., and Lark, R.M. 2006a. Estimating a boundary line model for a biological response by maximum likelihood. Annals of Applied Biology 149: 223-234.
22
Mohandass, S., Natarajaratnam, N., and Kailasam, C. 1988. A new hybrid model for panicle growth in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 161: 207-209.
23
Mojtabaie Zamani, M., Esfahany, M., Honarnejad, R., and Alahgholipour, M. 2007. Relationship between grain filling rate, grain filling duration, yield components and other physiological traits in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Journal of Water and Soil Science 10: 213-225. (In Persian with English Summary)
24
Mustafavi Rad, M., and Tahmasbi Sarvestani, Z.A.A. 2003. Evaluation of nitrogen fertilizer effects on yield, yield components and dry matter remobilization of three rice genotype. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 2: 21-31. (In Persian with English Summary)
25
Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Koocheki, A.R. 2014. Long term evaluation of yield stability trend for cereal crops in Iran. Agroecology 6: 607-621. (In Persian with English Summary)
26
Nassiri Mahallati, M., Koocheki, A., and Jahani, M. 2016. Estimating Within Field Variability of Wheat Yield Using Spatial Variables: An Approach to Precision Agriculture. Journal of Agroecology 8: 329-345. (In Persian with English Summary)
27
Nhamo, N., Rodenburg, J., Zenna, N., Makombe, G., and Luzi-Kihupi, A. 2014. Narrowing the rice yield gap in East and Southern Africa: Using and adapting existing technologies. Agricultural Systems 131: 45-55.
28
Rajeshwari, S., and Nadarajan, N. 2004. Correlation between yield and yield components in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Agricultural Science Digest 24: 280-282.
29
Sabouri, H., Sabouri, A., and Dadras, A.R. 2012. Modeling the response of germination rate of different rice genotypes to temperature. Cereal Research 2: 123-135. (In Persian with English Summary)
30
Safae Chaykar, S., Samie zade, H., Esfahani, M., and Rabiei, B. 2009. Correlation of agronomic traits under favorable irrigation and water stress conditions in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Journal of Water and Soil Science 13: 91-105. (In Persian with English Summary)
31
Selvaraj, C.I., Nagarajan, P., Thiyagarajan, K., Bharathi, M., and Rabindran, R. 2011. Genetic parameters of variability, correlation and path coefficient studies for grain yield and other yield attributes among rice blast disease resistant genotypes of rice (Oryza sativa L.). African Journal of Biotechnology 10: 3322-3334.
32
Shokri, S., Siadat, S.A., Fathi, G., Abdali Mashhadi, A.R., Gilani, A.A., and Maadi, B. 2012. Evalution of nitrogen fertilizer effects on paddy yield, yield components and dry matter remobilization of three rice genotype. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 3: 73-87. (In Persian with English Summary)
33
Soltani, A., Hajjarpour, A., and Vadez, V. 2016. Analysis of chickpea yield gap and water-limited potential yield in Iran. Field Crops Research 185: 21-30.
34
Soltani, A., Hammer, G.L., Torabi, B., Robertson, M.J., and Zeinali, E. 2006a. Modeling chickpea growth and development: Phenological development. Field Crops Research 99: 1-13.
35
Souroush, H.R., Mesbah, M., and Hossian Zadeh, A.H. 2004. A study of relationship between grain yield and yield components in rice. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 35: 983-993.
36
Tarang, A., Hossieni Chaleshtary, M., Tolghilani, A., and Esfahani, M. 2013. Evaluation of grain yield stability of pure lines of rice in Guilan province. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 2: 24-34. (In Persian with English Summary)
37
Xu, X., He, P., Zhao, S., Qiu, S., Johnstond, A.M., and Zhou, W. 2016. Quantification of yield gap and nutrient use efficiency of irrigated rice in China. Field Crops Research 186: 58-65.
38
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Evaluation of Ecological and Morphological Traits and Essential Oil Productivity of Mentha longifolia L. in Fars and Khorasan Razavi Provinces
Introduction[1]
The basis for plant breeding research is genetic variability. In fact, without access to such variety, plant breeders to create and deliver new varieties will not have much success. Mirzaee Nadushan (2001) evaluated different species of mint and its morphologic features. In this study, between different species, a significant difference in terms of characters such as plant height, stem diameter, number of branches, leaf length and width were observed. Horse Mint (Mentha longifolia syn. Mentha sylvestris) is a valuable medicinal and aromatic plant belong to Lamiaceae family. The aim of this study was to identify areas of distribution, determine the ecological and morphological assessment of various climates and yield valuable medicinal oil is such that it provides a basis for investigating the genetic diversity of germplasm.
Materials and Methods
In order to study morphological characteristics of Mentha longifolia in 10 regions of Fars and Khorasan Razavi Province, sampling was done at flowering stage in summer 2015. In order to study morphological diversity of wild landraces in Fars and Khorasan Razavi by referring to reliable sources, including Flora Iranica area distribution and habitats of this plant was found in two Provinces. The study area includes five sites in Fars Province (Sepidan, Bavanat, Fasa, Kovar, Kazeroon) and five regions in Khorasan Razavi Province (Torbat Heydarieh, Mashhad, Nishabur, Kashmar and Chenaran). Given that most of the active ingredients of the plant at the time of flowering is reported, plant samples in full bloom in ten regions in Fars and Khorasan were taken. Some samples were selected from each region and 19 quantitative and qualitative characteristics were determined for each ecotype. For accurate identification and diagnosis of morphological Horse mint herbarium specimens were collected and identified samples was done by qualified personnel. For extract the essential oil by water distillation by Clevenger apparatus according to the Pharmacopoeia Great Britain for three hours were done.
The samples based on all the characteristics of using the SPSS software and Ward methods were grouped. All correlation coefficients of traits in populations that were collected were analyzed by Pierson method using SPSS software. Cluster analysis was performed using JMP software.
Results and Discussion
The results showed considerable diversity in terms of morphological characteristics among ecotypes. Most of the side branch was observed in Mashhad and Kashmar populations. Correlation analysis showed significant positive association between some important characteristics. The correlation coefficients showed a positive association between the length of flower and length and width of leaf. Principal components analysis showed that traits like leaf length, width and blade tip were placed in first factor and had the most allotment in describing changes among collected data. Cluster analysis divided the subjects into four distinct groups. Mentha average production efficiency review showed that the highest essential oil yields was in Mashhad sites (1.8) and site of Kashmar (1.8) and the lowest amount of oil from the habitat Chenaran (0.9). Due to the high yields of essentials in samples collected from Mashhad district, it can be considered it is a good place prone to extraction of essential oils among studied areas.
Conclusion
The correlation coefficients showed a positive correlation between the length of flower and length and width of leaf. The shortest length of flowering branch inflorescence and the status of being in the seventh factor 46.5% of the change can be justified. The highest essential oil yields in Mashhad (1.8) and site of Kashmar (1.8) and the lowest amount of oil from the habitat Chenaran (0.9) was shown. Finally Mashhad landrace suggested for selection in domestication and cultivation of this plant.
Acknowledgment
The study was sponsored by the University of TorbatHeydarieh which thereby is appreciated
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36955_19b67dbef3583ed8bea490d7c79e6250.pdf
2019-03-21
335
347
10.22067/jag.v11i1.64179
Diversity
morphological traits
Cluster analysis
Medicinal plants
Seyedeh Zohre
Hosseini
zohrehoseini15@yahoo.com
1
Department of plant Production, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Torbat Heydarieh, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran
AUTHOR
Hassan
Feizi
h.feizi@torbath.ac.ir
2
Department of plant Production, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Torbat Heydarieh, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Safiyeh
Vatandoost Jertoodeh
vatandoost@yahoo.com
3
Department of Horticultural Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Torbat Heydarieh, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran
AUTHOR
Masoud
Alipanah
alipanah.masoud@gmail.com
4
Department of plant Production, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Torbat Heydarieh, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran
AUTHOR
Arnold, M.L. 1997. Natural Hybridization and Evolution. Oxford University Press, New York.
1
Azadbakht, M. 2008. Categorize of medicinal plants. First press, Cultural Institute Publishing Teymoorzadeh (Tabib), Tehran. (In Persian)
2
Bernath, J. 1996. Conventional breeding methods and their effectiveness in selection of medicinal and aromatic plants. 1st Int. symposium, Breeding Research on Medicinal and aromatic plants, Quedlinburg, Proceedings. Pp: 154-161.
3
Bernath, J. 2002. Strategies and recent achievements in selection of medicinal and aromatic plants. Acta Horticalturae 576: 233-238.
4
British pharmacopoeia. 1993. British Pharmacopoeia Commission, HMSO: London.
5
Babalar, M., Khoshsokhan, F., Fatahi Moghaddam, M., and Poormeidani, A. 2011. Evaluation of morphological diversity and essential oil productivity of some population Thymus kotschyanus Boiss. & Hohen. Journal of Horticultural Sciences 44: 119-128.
6
D’Andrea, L. 2002. Variation of morphology yield and essential oil components in common chamomile (Chamomilla recutita) cultivation grown in southern Italy. Journal of Herbs, Spices and Medicinal Plants 9: 359-359
7
Davazdahemami, S., and Majnoonhosini, N. 2008. Cultivation and Production of Certain Herbs and Species. Tehran University Press, Tehran, Iran. 300 pp. (In Persian)
8
Franz, C. 1986. Actual problems on the quality of medicinal and aromatic plants. Acta Horticulturae 188: 21-34.
9
Ghanbari, M., Souri, M.K., Omidbaigi, R., and Hadavandi Mirzaei, H. 2014. Evaluation of some ecological factors, morphological traits and essential oil productivity of Achillea millefolium L. Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 30: 692-701. (In Persian with English Summary)
10
Habibi, H., Mazaheri, D., Majnoonhoseini, N., Chaeichi, M.R., Tabatabaei, M.F., and Bigdeli, M. 2006. The effect of altitude compounds of medicinal plant (Thymus kotschyanusBoiss) in region Taleghan. Research and Construction in Cultivation and Horticulture 19: 2-10.
11
Mathe, A. 1986. An ecological approach to medicinal plant introduction. In: Herbs, Spices and Medicinal Plant. Oxy Press, Arizona 3: 175-205.
12
Mirzaie-Nodoushan, H. Rezaie, M., and Jaimand, K. 2001. Path analysis of essential oil-related characters in Mentha spp. Flavor and Fragrance Journal 16: 340-343.
13
Moghaddam, M., Omidbeygi, R., Salimi, A., and Naghavi, M.R. 2014. Investigation of morphological diversity of native Ocimum spp lots of Iran. Iranian Horticultural Science Journal 44:227-243. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Mozaffarian, V.A. 2013. Dictionary of Iranian plant Name. Farhang Moaser Press, Iran. Tehran. (In Persian)
15
Omidbeaigi, R. 2005.Production and Processing of Medicinal Plants. Behnashr Press. Mashhad, Iran. 347 pp. (In Persian)
16
Saber Amoli, S., Noroozi, S., Shekarchian, A., Akbarzadeh, M., and Kodoori, M. 2008. Investigation of ecological factors of essential oil of Labiatae species in Kerman province.Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 23: 4. (In Persian with English Summary)
17
Stanisavljevic, D.M., Dordevic, S., Ristic, M., Velickovic, D., and Randelovic, N.V. 2010. Effects of different drying methods on the compsitial oil from herb Mentha longifolia (L.) Hudson 1(1-2): 89-93.
18
Yavari, A.R., Nazeri, V., Sefidkon F and Hassani, M.E. 2010. Evaluation of some ecological factors, morphological traits and essential oil productivity of Thymus migricus Klokov & Desj. Shost. Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, 26: 227-238. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Zargari, A. 1997. Pharmaceutical plant (Fourth Ed), Tehran University Press, Tehran, Iran. 969. (In Persian)
20
Zeinali, H., Arzani, A., and Razmjo, K. 2004. Morphological and essential oil content diversity of Iranian mints (Mentha spp). Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transaction 28: 1-9. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
ORIGINAL_ARTICLE
Study on cold tolerance of tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea L.) ecotypes under field and controlled conditions
Introduction[1]
Tall festuca (Festuca arundinacea) belongs to Poaceae family and is a cool-season perennial plant native to Europe. Festuca species are broadly adapted to different climate conditions. To date, 9 different species of Festuca have been identified in Iran. These species are growing naturally in different regions of Iran such as Golestan, Mazandaran, Lorestan, Khorasan, Fars, Isfahan, Karaj, Dorood, Damaneh, Alvand and Firoozkooh. Festuca reduces soil erosion due to its fibrous, thick and deep roots. Such roots reduce soil density and improve soil structure and reduce soil erosion, and thus, this plant plays a crucial role in reducing water and wind erosion. Tall fescue is a long-lived perennial species with medium to large leaves. The plant is grown as turf and is considered as an important animal fodder, thus is widely grown in pastures and grasslands. Tall festuca is among the 27 identified species of festuca in Iran. The species is well spread across Iran and has a high potential for growth and production in pastures or mountainous areas, especially in the central, western and northern regions of the country. Tall festuca is a perennial plant, so it is often exposed to cold and freezing stress. Therefore, the successful production of this plant requires the use of cold-tolerant varieties. According to previous studies, although tall festuca has good tolerance to a wide range of environmental stresses (cold and drought), different ecotypes show different cold tolerance, accordingly further studies on growth characteristics and cold tolerance of this plant is necessary, especially in winter type varieties.
Materials and methods
The field experiment was carried out in Parks and Green Space Organization, Mashhad Municipality located in the Islamic Republic of Iran Blvd., and Crop Physiology Laboratory, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran in 2013- 2014. The experimental design was a randomized complete block design arranged in a split plot with three replicates. In order to expose the tall festuca plants to winter cold stress, 23 ecotypes were sown on the 7th of October and 6th of November. Dimensions of each plot were 100 × 150 cm and after seed sowing, seeds were covered with composted cattle manure and then irrigated. After emerging the seedlings, the plots were thinned to reach final plant density of 400 plants per square meter. Weeds were manually controlled and irrigation was carried out according to the need of the plants. The data were analyzed using MSTAT-C. The comparison of means was performed through the LSD test at 5% probability level.
Results and discussion
The results showed that the effects of sowing date and ecotype were significant on a number of days until emergence, survival percentage, plant dry weight, seed yield, and total dry weight. The phenological investigations and plant height measurement indicated that there was a genetic difference between the ecotypes. In all studied ecotypes, the survival percentage in the second sowing date was higher than that in the first sowing date. However, a number of days until emergence, plant dry weight, seed yield and total dry weight in the first sowing date were found to be higher in comparison to tens second sowing date. In addition, among the studied ecotypes, the highest traits stability with an emphasis on survival percentage and yield components were observed in Isfahan, Boroujen, Daran, Daran-Damaneh, Gandoman, Sanaajan, Mashhad, Sari, Golestan, and Quchan-Seyyed Abad ecotypes. Therefore, these ecotypes were selected as genetic reserves for future studies.
Conclusion
In general, the effect of sowing date and ecotype was significant on most of the studied traits such as a number of days until seedling emergence, survival percentage, plant dry weight, seed yield, and total dry weight. In addition, in phenology related traits such as a number of days from flowering to maturity, total growing period length and plant height genetic difference between ecotypes was investigated. Although in most of the traits such as a number of days until seedlings emergence, plant dry weight, seed yield, and total dry weight, the obtained values were higher in the first sowing date compared with the second sowing date, survival percentage showed unlike results so that late sowing increased this index.
https://agry.um.ac.ir/article_36959_8598fb718bbe435576548fc17a57585c.pdf
2019-03-21
349
364
10.22067/jag.v11i1.73193
Keywords: Green area
Height
Planting date
Survival percentage
yield
Abdolah
Soltan Ahmadi
abdolahsoltanahmadi@gmail.com
1
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Ahmad
Nezami
nezami@um.ac.ir
2
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran
LEAD_AUTHOR
Mohammad
Kafi
m.kafi@um.ac.ir
3
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Hamid Reza
Khazae
h.khazaie@um.ac.ir
4
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
AUTHOR
Alizadeh, M.A. 2010. Evaluation of seed germination characteristics and seedling growth on five ecotypes of (Festuca arundinacea) in response to cold treatment. Iranian Journal of Rangelands and Forests Plant Breeding and Genetic Research 18(1): 133-142. (In Persian with English Summary)
1
Azizi, H., Nezami, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Hamidreza Khazai, H.R. 2007. Evaluation of cold tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 5(1): 5-11. (In Persian with English Summary)
2
Cardona, C.A., Duncan, R.R., and Lindstorm, O. 1997. Low temperature tolerance assessment in Paspalum. Crop Science 37: 1283-1291.
3
Coventry, D.R., Reeves, T.G., Brooke, H.D., and Cann, K. 2003. Influence of genotype, sowing date, and seeding rate on wheat development and yield. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 33: 751-757.
4
Dokuyucu, T., and Akkaya, A. 2004. The effect of different sowing dates on growing periods, yield and yieldcomponents of some bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars grown in the east-Mediterranean region ofTurkey. Journal of Agronomy 3(2): 126-130.
5
Ebrahimian, M., Majidi, M.M., and Mirlohi, A.F. 2012. Clonal evaluation and estimation of genetic similarity of tall fescue genotypes (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.). Journal of Plant Production 19(3): 2012 14-27. (In Persian with English Summary)
6
Eugenia, M., Nunes, S., and Ray Smith, G. 2003. Electrolyte leakage assay capable of quantifying freezing resistance in rose clover. Crop Science 43: 1349–1357.
7
Farhad, I.S.M., Bhowmik, S.K., and Amir Faisal, A.H.M. 2015. Effect of variety and planting time on the productivity of fenugreek in coastal area. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 11(3): 164-168.
8
Grace, M.P., Anderson, N.O., and Li, P.H., 2009. Cold tolerance and short day acclimation perennial Guara coccinea and G. drummondii. Scientia Horticulturae 120: 418-425.
9
Kafi, M., Borzoee, A., Salehi, M., Kamandi, A., Masoumi, A., and Nabati, J. 2009. Physiology of Environmental Stresses in Plants. Jihad-e Daneshgahi of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)
10
Kheirkhah,T., Nezami, A., Kafi, M., and Asadi, G.A., 2015. Evaluation of cold tolerance in field grown mentha (Mentha piperita L.) under laboratory conditions. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 13(2): 269-277. (In Persian with English Summary)
11
Larsen, R.J. 2013. Understanding the basics of cold tolerance and its basis in agronomic decisions for winter cereals on the Canadian prairies. Prairie Soils and Crops Journal 6: 87-98.
12
Li, W., Wang, R., Li, M., Li, L., Wang, C., Welti, R., and Wang, X. 2008. Differential degradation of extraplastidic and plastidic lipids during freezing and post-freezing recovery in Arabidopsis thaliana. Biological Chemistry 283: 461–468.
13
Majidi, M.M. 2010. Evaluation of seed yield and yield components in Iranian landraces and foreign varieties of tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.). Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science 41(1): 32-47. (In Persian with English Summary)
14
Maletic, R., and Jevdjovic, R. 2007. Sowing date- the factor of yield and quality of fenugreek seed (Trigonella foenum-gracum L.). Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Belgrade 52(1): 1-8.
15
Nayyar, H., Bains, T.S., and Kumar, S. 2005. Chilling stressed chickpea seedlings: effect of cold acclimation, calcium and abscisic acid on cryoprotective solutes and oxidative damage. Environmental and Experimental Botany 54: 275-285.
16
Nezami, A., and Bagheri, A.R. 2005. Responsiveness of cold tolerant chickpea characteristics in fall and spring planting: I- Phenology and morphology. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 3(1): 43-55. (In Persian with English Summary)
17
Nezami, A., Bandara, M., and Gusta, L. 2012. An evaluation of freezing tolerance of winter chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) using controlled freeze tests. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 92: 155-161.
18
Seghatoleslami, M.J., and Ahmadi Bonakdar, K. 2010. The effect of sowing date and plant density on yield and yield components of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-gracum L.). Iranian Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants 26(2): 265-274. (In Persian with English Summary)
19
Siddique, A.B., Wright, D., and Mahbub Ali, S.M., 2002. Effects of sowing dates on the phenology, seed yield and yield components of peas. Journal of Biological Science 2(5): 300-303.
20
Soheyli, R., Nezami, A., Khazaie, H.R., and Nassiri Mahallati, M., 2010. Effects of planting dates on yield and yield components of four cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) landraces. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8(5): 772-783. (In Persian with English Summary)
21
Thapa, B., Arora, R., Knapp, A., and Brummer, E.C. 2008. Applying freezing test to quantify cold acclimation in Medicago truncatula. Horticultural Science 133(5): 684–691.
22
Xuan, J., Liu, J., Gao, H., Huaguabghu, H., and Cheng, X. 2009. Evaluation of low-temperature tolerance of Zoysia grass. Tropical Grasslands 43: 118–124.
23