ارزیابی اثر نظام‌های خاک‌ورزی برجنبه‌های زراعی کشت مخلوط تأخیری چای ترش (Hibiscus Subdariffa L.) و سویا (L. Glycine max)

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه زراعت، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران

2 گروه زراعت، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران

3 گروه شیمی، دانشکده علوم، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران

چکیده

به‌منظور ارزیابی اثر نظام­های خاک­ورزی بر جنبه­های زراعی کشت مخلوط تأخیری چای ترش (Hibiscus Subdariffa L.) و سویا (Glycine max L.) آزمایشی در مزرعه آموزشی و تحقیقاتی مرکز تحقیقات جنوب استان کرمان واقع در شهرستان جیرفت در سال زراعی 1395، به‌صورت اسپلیت پلات در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار اجرا شد. عامل اصلی در سه سطح شامل خاک‌ورزی بدون شخم، شخم حداقل (دیسک) و شخم رایج (گاوآهن و دیسک) و عامل فرعی نسبت‌های افزایشی و جایگزینی کشت مخلوط چای ترش و سویا در هشت سطح شامل:کشت خالص چای ترش، کشت خالص سویا، 50 درصد چای ترش + 50 درصد سویا، 75 درصد چای ترش + 25 درصد سویا، 25 درصد چای ترش + 75 درصد سویا، 100 درصد چای ترش + 50 درصد سویا، 100 درصد سویا + 50 درصد چای ترش، 100 درصد چای ترش + 100 درصد سویا، در نظر گرفته شد (تراکم پایه دو گیاه در کشت خالص 20000 بوته در هکتار می­باشد). نتایج نشان داد تأثیر نظام‌های شخم و نسبت‌های مختلف کاشت بر تعداد غوزه در بوته، وزن هزار دانه، عملکرد زیست‌توده، عملکرد کاسبرگ خشک، شاخص کلروفیل برگ، آنتوسیانین کاسبرگ چای ترش و پروتئین سویا معنی‌دار بود. مقایسه میانگین نشان داد که خاک‌ورزی بدون شخم در صفات تعداد غوزه (8/271 عدد در بوته)، عملکرد زیست‌توده (1/20 تن در هکتار)؛ عملکرد کاسبرگ خشک (16/1 تن در هکتار) و میزان آنتوسیانین در گیاه چای ترش (7/4 میکرومول بر گرم) نسبت به شخم رایج برتر بود. بیش‌ترین نسبت برابری زمین (78/3) از نسبت کشت 100درصد سویا +50 درصد چای ترش به‌دست آمد. هم‌چنین کشت مخلوط و خاک‌ورزی بدون شخم و شخم حداقل باعث افزایش عملکرد کاسبرگ چای ترش (51/1 تن در هکتار) و دانه سویا (98/2 تن در هکتار) شد، لذا با اجرای آن می‌توان باعث پایداری اکوسیستم زراعی گردید.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Tillage Systems on Agronomic Aspect of Soybean (Glycine max L.) and Roselle (Hibiscus subdariffa L.) Relay Intercropping

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fariba Sabeghynezhad 1
  • Mehdi Dahmardeh 1
  • Mohammad Reza Asgharipour 2
  • Issa Khammari 1
  • Ziba Sori Nezami 3
1 Agronomyy Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University, Zabol, Iran
2 Agronomyy Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University, Zabol, Iran
3 Department of Chemistry, College of Science, Zabol University, Zabol, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
With the ever-increasing world population, over-exploitation of natural resources and the limited availability of arable land, followed by the urgent need to increase food production, which is one of the world's challenges, it is essential to increase crop yield to meet demand and find a solution to more sustainable agricultural ecosystems. Sustainable agriculture is a kind of agriculture that increases the efficiency of resource use that is in balance with the environment. The components of sustainable agriculture are conservation tillage and intercropping. Intercropping is one of the common methods of multi-systems that it is widely used to diversify cultivation in spatial and temporal. One of the most important benefits of crop cultivation is the increase in production per unit of area relative to sole crop due to better use of environmental factors such as water, light, and nutrients in the soil. Soil conservation tillage has been researchers' interest by reducing energy consumption and soil fertility, as well as increasing soil and water production potential. The aim of this research was to study the soil tillage systems on the ecological aspects of crop mixing of soybean and Roselle.
Materials and Methods
This research was conducted in the research farm of Agriculture and Natural resources of Jiroft, in southern Kerman, Iran during 2016. The experiment was conducted as a split-plot in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The main factor included three levels: no-tillage, reduced tillage, conventional tillage and the sub-factor of different ratios and replacement of mixed soybean and Roselle in eight levels of: sole Roselle, sole soybean culture, 50% Roselle+ 50% Soybean, 75% Roselle+25% soybean, 25% Roselle+ 75% soybean, 100% Roselle+ 50% soybean, 100% soybean+50% Roselle, 100% Roselle+ 100% soybean. Each experimental unit has a length of 4 meters and a width of 3 meters and spaced two rows of one meter. Each plot consisted of 4 rows of planting (all treatments were a row of Roselle and a row of soybeans). The measured traits were the number of boll per plant, 1000-seed weight, biological yield, sepal yield, chlorophyll index of Roselle and soybean, and the amount of anthocyanin of Roselle and protein content in 100% Roselle+ 50% soybean, the soil ratio of land parity (LER). Data analysis was performed with SAS software version 1.9 and comparison of means was made using Duncan test at a 5% probability level.
Results and Discussion
The effect of tillage systems and different ratios of planting on the number of boll per plant, thousand seed weight, biological yield, sepal yield, leaf chlorophyll content anthocyanin level in roselle and protein content in soybeans was statistically significant. The comparison of the means showed that conservation tillage provides better results than conventional tillage in terms of number of bolls per plant of Roselle (271.77) and soybean (13.77), biological yield in Roselle (20.1 t.ha-1) and soybean (6.85 t.ha-1), sepal yield (16.1 t.ha-1), leaf chlorophyll content (33.24), anthocyanin (4.7 μmol.g-1) in Roselle and protein content in soybean (37.51 mg). Moreover, the maximum utilization of LER was due to no-tillage (2.86). The highest ratio of land parity was obtained from 100% soybean 50% Roselle (3.78).
Conclusion
The highest proportion of LER was obtained from 100% soybean 50% Roselle, which indicated superior cropping compared to sole crop. Also, in most of the studied traits, the conservation tillage system compared with conventional tillage resulted in higher value. In general, based on the results of this study, systems with no-tillage and also 100% Roselle+50% soybean be recommended.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Anthocyanin
  • Conventional tillage
  • Intercropping
  • Minimum tillage
Abdel- Kader, M.A.I. 2012. Effect of intercropping and fertilization some medicinal Plants. A thesis Submitted Partial Fulfillment of the requires for Philosophy in Agriculture Sciences (Horticulture- Floriclture), Department of Horticulture Faculty of Agriculture Zagazig University.
Agegnehu, G., Ghizan, A., and Sinebo, W. 2007. Yield Performance and land-use efficiency of barley and Faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian high lands. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 202-207.
Asghari, G., Karimi, A., and Pourmohammad, A.R. 2013. The effect of different effects of tillage planting on soil moisture and safflower efficiency in alternate with dry wheat. Knowledge of Water and Damage 23(1): 237-245.
Azad shahraki, F., Naghavi, H., and Najafi Nejad, H. 2010. Effects of tillage systems and wheat residue management on Soil characteristics and yield of maize in Kerman. Journal of Modern Agriculture 8(19): 2-9. (In Persian with English Summary)
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.
Bradford, M.M.A. 1976. Rapid and sensitive method for quantitation of microgram of protein utilizing the principle of protein– dye binding. Analytical Biochemistry Quantities 72: 248-254
Cook, R.J., and Hauguland, W.A. 1991. Wheat yield depressing associated with conservation tillage Caused by root Pathogens in the Soil, hot Phytotoxins from the Straw. Biology and Biochemistry 23: 1125-1133.
Dahmardeh, M. 2010. The effect of ecophysiological aspects of intercropping of maize and cowpea on quantity and quality of forage maize K.S.C 704. Ph.D. thesis of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran. (in Persian with English Summary).
Danaefar, A., Kashani, A., Normohamadi, G.H., Nabati Ahmai, D., and Syadat, A. 2001. Effect of density and planting pattern on quantity and quality of forage in Ahvaz condition. Pajohesh and Sazandegi 15: 50- 53. (In Persian with English Summary)
Doran, J.W. 1980. Soil microbial and biochemical changes associated with reduced tillage. Soil Science Society of America Journal 44: 765-777.
Emam, Y., Kheradnam, M., Bahrani, M.J., Asas, M.T., and Ghadiri, H. 2000. The effect of residus management on the grain yield and its components of winter wheat in continuous irrigated wheat cropping. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science 31: 839-850. ((In Persian with English Summary).
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. Agroecology 8(2):227-240. (In Persian with English Summary)
Ghahramanyan, G.R., Ayvazi, A.R., and Noorjo, A. 2010. Effects of tillage systems and wheat residue management on the impact on water, Soil Physical characteristics, quality and quantity of Sugar beet. Journal of Engineering Research Agriculture 11(1): 35-48.
Ghanbari, A. 2000. Intercropped wheat (Triticum aestivum) and bean (Vicia faba) as a low– input forage. PhD thesis. Why Collage University of London.
Ghanbaryan Alavijeh, H. Z., Chenarbon, H.A., Zand, B., and Hamidi, M. 2014. Effects of different tillage methods on Soil Physical Properties, grain and forage yield of two cultivars maize. Academia Journal of Agricultural Research 2(1):008-015.
Ghosh, P. K., Manna, M.C., Bandyopadhyay, K.K., Ajay, A.K., Tripathi, R.H., Wanjari, K.M., Hati, A.K., Misra Charya, C.L., and Subba Rao, A. 2006. Inter specific interaction and nutrient use in soybean- sorghum intercropping system. Agronomy Journal 98 (4): 1097-1108.
Gill, K., and Aulakh, B. 1990. Wheat yield and soil bulk density response to some tillage systems on onoxi soil. Soil and Tillage Research 18: 37–45.
Gliessman, S.R. 1997. Agroecology: Ecological Processes in Sustainable Agriculture. Arbor Press 357 pp.
Goulding, E., Ekanem, E., and Muhammad, S. 2008. Sustainability assessment for a group of farmers in the Brazilian amazon. The Ecology of in Sustainable Food Systems 10.1007/S10479-008-0390-6.
Gursoy, S., Sessiz, A., and Malhi, S.S. 2010. Short- term effects of tillage and residue management following cotton on grain yield and quality of wheat. Field Crops Research 119: 260-268.
Hamzai, J., and Babaei, M. 2016. Study of quality and quantity of yield and land equivalent ratio of sunflower in intercropping series with bean. Journal of Agroecology 8(4): 490-504. (In Persian with English Summary).
Javanshir, A. Dabagh Mohamadi nasab, A., Hamidi, A. and Gholipoor, M. 2000. Ecology intercropping (Translation). First Edition. Jihad University of Mashhad Press 222p. (In Persian).
Julian McClements, D. 2007. Analysis of proteins. University of Massachusetts Amherst. Retrieved. Food Science. 581P.
Karadag, Y., and Buyukburc, U. 2004. Forage qualities, forage yields and seed yields of some legume- triticale mixtures under rain fed conditions. Acta Agriculture. Soil and Plant Science 54: 140- 148.
Katsvario, T.W., and cox, W.J. 2000. Tillage × rotation × management interactions in corn. Agronomy Journal 90: 493-500.
Kazemi, H., Alizadeh, P., and Nehbandani, A. 2016. Assessing energy flow in rainfed and irrigated wheat fields of Shahrekord township under two tillage systems. Journal of Agroecology 8(2): 281-295. (In Persian with English Summary).
Koocheki, A., Najebnia, R., and Lellgani, B. 2009. Evaluation of saffron performance in mixed cultivars of cultivars and medicinal plants. Iranian Journal of Crop Research 7(1):163-172. (In Persian with English Summary).
Koocheki, A., Hosseni, M., and Hashemi Dezfooli, A. 2007. Sustainable agriculture (translation and editing). Jihad University of Mashhad Press 340 p. (In Persian)
LaI, R., and Bruce, J.P. 1999. The potential of world cropland soils to sequester C and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Environmental Science and Policy 2: 177-185.
Larson, W.E., Pierce, F.J., and Dowdy, R.H. 1983. The threat of soil erosion to long-term, Crop production Science 219: 458- 465.
Latifi, N. 1993. Soybean cultivation. Jihad University of Mashhad Press 243 p. (In Persian).
Li, L., Sun, j., Zhang, F., Li, X., Yang, S., and Rengel, Z. 2001.Wheat/maize or Wheat/soybean strip intercropping: 1. Yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrient. Field Crops Research 71(2):123-137.
Mbah, E.V., Muoneke, C.O., and Okpara, D.A. 2008. Evaluation of Cassava (Manihot esculenta) Planting methods and Soybean (Glycine max) Sowing dates on the yield performance of the Component Species in cassava/soybean intercrop under the humid tropical lowlands of south eastern Nigeria. African Journal of Biotechnology 8(1): 42-47.
Mohammdi, K., Nabiolahi, K., Alikhani, M., and Kharmali, F. 2009. Effects of tillage systems on soil physical properties and yield and yield components of wheat. Journal of Plant Production 16 (4): 77-91. (In Persian with English Summary)
Narimatsu, K.C.P., De- Mello, L.M., Domingues, L.S., chioderoli, C., and Lima, R. 2014. Corn productiuity in function of surface application of lime in different management Systems and Cultural Preparation. Engenharia and Agricultural Jaboticabal 34(2): 254-262.
Nasiri Mohallati, M., Koocheki, A., Rezvani Moghaddam, P., and Beheshti, A.R. 2011. Agroecology. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Press, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)
Nazari, S., Zand, A., Asadi, S., and Golzardi, F. 2012. Effect of replacing and additive methods of corn intercropping of green gram on yield, yield Components and weed biomass. Journal of Weed 4 (2): 97-109. (In Persian with English Summary)
Nielson, H.H., Ambus. P., and Jensen, E.S. 2003. The comparison of nitrogen use and leaching in sole cropped. Versus intercropped pea and barley. Nutritive Cycle Agroecosystem 65: 289-300.
Nelson, A.K., Meinhardt, C.G., and Smoot, R.S. 2010. Wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivar selection affects double- crop and relay-intercrop soybean (Glycine max). Agronomy 10:1-8.
Safari, A., Asoder, M., Ghaseminejad, M., and Ebdali Mashhadi, A. 2013. The effect of redidus, various methods of tillage System and pon soil characteristics and yield of wheat. Journal of Agricultural Knowledge Sustainable Production 23(2):50-59.
Strydhorst, S.M., king, J.R., Lopetinsky, K.J., and Harker, K.N. 2008. Forage potential of inter cropping barley with faba bean, Iupine, or field pea. Agronomy Journal 100: 182- 190.
Tobeh, A. 1999. The effect of winter covers crops on agricultural preserve and enhances soil, yield and some aspects of maize. Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, University of tarbiat Modares, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Ogindo, H.O. 2004. A Simulation model of cereal-legume intercropping Systems for semi –arid regions I. Model development. Field Crops Research 90: 48-61.
Wagner, G.J. 1979.Content and vacuole/extra vacuole distribution of neutral sugars. Free amino acids and anthocyanin in protoplast. Plant Physiology 68: 88-93
Wazan, S. 1997.The reaction of mixed maize and bean seedlings to plant density and planting. M.Sc. Department of Agriculture. Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
Xiang, D.B., Yong, T.W., Wen, Y.Y., Yan, W., and Gong, W.Z. 2012. Effect of phosphorus and potassium nutrition on growth and yield of soybean in relay strip intercropping system. Scientific Research and Essays 7:342-351.
Zakeri, H., and Kazemi, N. 2006. Tillage Systems in Sustainable agriculture (Translation). University of Ilam Press, Ilam, Iran 243p. (In Persian)
Zand, B., and Ghafari Khaligh, H. 2002. The Possibility of inter cropping cowpea grain Sorghum under different cropping Patterns. Absteract 7th Congress of crop Sciences, September Karaj, Karaj, Iran. (In Persian)
Zhang, L., Vanderwerf, W., Zhang, S., Li, B., and Spiertz, J.H.J. 2007. Growth yield and quality of wheat and cotton in relay strip intercropping systems. Field Crops Research 103: 178-188.
Zhang, B., Huang, G., and Li, F. 2007. Effect of limited single irrigation on yield of winter wheat and spring maize relay intercropping. Pedosphere 17: 529-537.
CAPTCHA Image