ارزیابی جذب و کارایی مصرف نور در کشت مخلوط سری های جایگزینی نخود (Cicer arietinum L.) و کنجد (Sesamum indicum L.)

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

چکیده

این مطالعه با هدف ارزیابی جذب و کارایی مصرف نور در کشت مخلوط سری های جایگزینی نخود (Cicer arietinum L.) و کنجد (Sesamum indicum L.) انجام گرفت. آزمایش در قالب طرح کرت های خرد شده بر پایة بلوک کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار اجرا شد که دارای دو عامل بود. عامل اول (روش کاشت) در دو سطح ردیفی و درهم در کرت های اصلی و عامل دوم (الگوی کاشت جایگزینی) در پنج سطح b1 (تک کشتی نخود)، b2 (75% نخود +25% کنجد)، b3 (50% نخود +50% کنجد)، b4 (25% نخود +75% کنجد)، b5 (تک کشتی کنجد) در کرت های فرعی قرار گرفتند. نتایج نشان داد که کارایی مصرف نور کنجد در اغلب تیمارها بیشتر از نخود بود. مقادیر کارایی مصرف نور کنجد در طول فصل رشد از 33/1 تا 07/2 گرم بر مگاژول تشعشعات فعال فتوسنتزی (PAR ) در روش کشت ردیفی، و از 27/1 تا 66/1 گرم بر مگاژول PAR در روش کشت درهم متغیر بود. همچنین مقادیر کارایی مصرف نور نخود در طول فصل رشد از 86/0 تا 14/1 گرم بر مگاژول PAR در روش کشت ردیفی و از 48/0 تا 99/0 گرم بر مگاژول PAR در روش کشت درهم متغیر بود. همچنین نتایج نشان داد که کارایی مصرف نور کنجد و نخود در تمام تیمارهای مخلوط نسبت به تک کشتی افزایش پیدا کرد. به طور کلی، مقادیر کارایی مصرف نور هر دو گیاه چه در شرایط تک کشتی و چه در شرایط مخلوط، در روش کشت ردیفی بالاتر از روش کشت درهم بود. بر این اساس بهترین تیمار قابل توصیه برای کشت مخلوط کنجد و نخود تیمار 75% نخود و 25% کنجد به شکل ردیفی می باشد که در آن میزان کارایی مصرف نور نخود در بالاترین حد ممکن (14/1 گرم بر مگاژول) بوده و کارایی مصرف نور کنجد نیز در این تیمار بیشتر از مقدار تک کشتی شده است (89/1 گرم بر مگاژول در این تیمار نسبت به 84/1 در تک کشتی). نتایج جذب نور نیز نشان داد که در تیمارهای مخلوط ردیفی میزان جذب نور به طور میانگین 36 درصد بالاتر از تک کشتی کنجد بود اما با تک کشتی نخود اختلاف چندانی نداشت. میزان جذب نور در روش کشت درهم بین 20 تا 25 درصد کمتر از روش کشت ردیفی بود. به علاوه در این روش کشت اختلاف جذب نور در تیمارهای مخلوط با تیمارهای تک کشتی به اندازه روش کشت ردیفی نبود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in replacement series intercropping of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and sesame (Sesamum indicum L.)

نویسندگان [English]

  • F Hosseinpanahi
  • F Pouramir
  • A Koocheki
  • M Nassiri
  • R Ghorbani
چکیده [English]

The present study was carried out to evaluate radiation absorption and use efficiency (RUE) in replacement series intercropping of chickpea and sesame. The Experiment included main factor A (planting methods) with two levels a1 (row planting) and a2 (mixed planting) and factor B (replacement planting pattern) consisting of five levels b1 (chickpea monoculture), b2 (75% chickpea+25% sesame), b3 (50% chickpea+50% sesame), b4 (25% chickpea+75% sesame) and b5 (sesame monoculture). The experiment was arranged in a split plots based on randomized complete blocks design with three replications. Results showed that sesame RUE was higher than chickpea RUE in all treatments. The amount of sesame RUE varied from 1.33 up to 2.07 g.MJ-1 PAR and from 1.27 up to 1.66 g.MJ-1 PAR in row planting and mixed planting, respectively. RUE chickpea, also varied from 0.86 up to 1.14 g.MJ-1 PAR and from 0.48 up to 0.99 g.MJ-1 PAR in row planting and mixed planting, respectively. The results also showed that sesame and chickpea RUE of intercropping treatments was higher than monocrop. In general, the amount of RUE of both crops in row planting was higher than mixed planting either in intercrop or monocrop treatments. On the basis of these results the best recommendable treatment for intercropping is 75% chickpea+25% sesame based on row planting. The chickpea RUE of this treatment was highest level (1.14 g.MJ-1) among the other treatments and the sesame RUE of this treatment was higher than sesame monocrop RUE. The results of radiation absorption showed that in row intercropping treatments the amount of radiation absorption was higher than sesame monocrop but had not significant differences with chickpea monocrop. The amount of radiation absorption of mixed planting was lower than row planting. Furthermore, the differences between radiation absorption of mixed intercropping treatments and monocrop were not equal to the differences between radiation absorption of row intercropping treatments and monocrop.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Mixed intercropping
  • Photosynthetic active radiation
  • Row intercropping
  • Shading
1- Akmal, M., and Janssens, M.J.J. 2004. Productivity and light use efficiency of perennial ryegrass with contrasting water and nitrogen supplies. Field Crops Research 88: 143-155.
2- Awal, M.A., Koshi, H., and Ikeda, T. 2006. Radiation interception and use by maize/peanut intercrop canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 139: 74-83.
3- Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-333.
4- Bell, M.J., Muchow, R.C., and Wilson, G.L. 1987. The effect of plant population on peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) in a monsoonal tropical environment. Field Crops Research 17: 91–107.
5- Boons-prinz, E.R., De Koning, G.H.J., Van Diepen, C.D., and Penning De Vries, F.W.T. 1993. Crop specific simulation parameters for yield forecasting across the European Community. Simulation Reports, CABO-TT, N: 32.
6- Ceotto, E., and Castelli, F. 2002. Radiation use efficiency in flue-cured tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.): response to nitrogen supply, climatic variability and sink limitation. Field Crops Research 74: 117-130.
7- Chen, C., Westcot, M., Neill, K., Wichaman, D., and Knox, M. 2004. Row configuration and nitrogen application for barley-pea intercropping in Montana. Agronomy Journal 96: 1730-1738.
8- Faurie, O., Soussana, J.F., and Sinoquet, H. 1996. Radiation interception, partitioning and use in gross-clover mixtures. Annals of Botany 77: 35-45.
9- Fukai, S. 1993. Intercropping-base of productivity. Field Crops Research 34: 239–245.
10- Gosse, G., Varlet-Grancher, C., Bonhomme, R., Chartier, M., Allirand, J.M., and Lemaire, G. 1986. Maximum dry matter production and solar radiation intercepted by a canopy. Agronomie 6: 47–56.
11- Goudriaan, J., and Van Laar, H.H. 1993. Modelling Potential Crop Growth Processes. Kluwer Academic Press. Pp: 236.
12- Hosseinpanahi, F. 2008. Evaluation of yield, yield component and radiation use efficiency in corn/potato intercropping. MSc Thesis. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. (In Persian with English Summary)
13- Hosseinpanahi, F., Koocheki, A., Nassiri M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in potato/corn intercropping. Agroecology 2(1): 45-54. (In Persian with English Summary)
14- Hughes, G., Keatinge, J.D.H., Scott, Cooper, J.B.M., and Dee, N.F. 1987. Solar radiation interception and utilization by chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) crops in northern Syria. Journal of Agricultural Science 108: 419–424.
15- Jahad-Agriculture Ministry. 2009. Office of Statistic and Information Technology. Agricultural Statistic. First Issue (Crops of 2008). Jihad-Agriculture Ministry Press. (In Persian)
16- Javanshir, A., Dabagh, A., Hamidi, A., and Gholipour, M. 2000. Ecology of intercropping. First Edition. Jihad-Daneshgahi of Mashhad Press. (In Persian)
17- Jeuffroy, M.H., and Ney, B. 1997. Crop physiology and productivity. Field Crops Research 53: 3–16.
18- John, L.L., Timothy, J.A., Daniel, T.W., Kenneth, G.C., and Achim, D. 2005. Maize radiation use efficiency under optimal growth conditions. Agronomy Journal 97: 72-78.
19- Khorasan Razavi Meteorological Organization. 2007. Statistics Report database. Available at Web site http://www.razavimet.gov.ir/pages.aspx?pageID=95 (verified 10 may 2007)
20- Kiniry, J.R., Landivar, J.A., Witt, M., Gerik, T.J., and Wade, L.J. 1998. Radiation use efficiency response to vapor pressure deficit for maize and sorghum. Field Crops Research 56: 265-270.
21- Leach, G.J., and Beech, D.F. 1988. Response of chickpea accessions to row spacing and plant density on a vertisol on the Darling Downs, Southeastern Queensland. II. Radiation interception and water use. Australian Journal of Experiment Agriculture 28: 377–383.
22- Marshall, B., and Willey, R.W. 1983. Radiation interception and growth in intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut. Field Crops Research 7: 141–160.
23- Midmore, D.J. 1993. Agronomic modification of resource use and intercrop productivity. Field Crops Research 34: 358–380.
24- Midmore, D.J., Roca, J., and Berrios, D. 1988a. Potato (Solanum spp.) in the hot tropics. ΙV. Intercropping with maize and the influence of shade on potato microenvironment and crop growth. Field Crops Research 18: 141-157.
25- Monteith, J.L. 1977. Solar radiation and productivity in tropical ecosystems. Journal of Applied Ecology 9: 747-766.
26- Penning de Vries, F.W.T., Brunsting, A.H.M., and Van Laar, H.H. 1974. Products, requirements and efficiency of biosynthesis: a quantitative approach. Journal of Theoretical Biology 45: 339-377.
27- Pouramir, F. 2009. Evaluating of the effect of different planting combinations in the replacement and additive series multiple cropping on yield and yield components of sesame and chickpea. MSc Thesis. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. (In Persian with English Summary)
28- Pouramir, F., Koocheki, A., Nassiri M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Evaluation the effect of different planting combinations on yield and yield components of intercropping sesame and chickpea in additive series. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. In Press. (In Persian with English Summary)
29- Rahimi Karizaki, A., Soltani, A., Pourreza, J., and Zeynali, E. 2007. Estimation of extinction coefficient and radiation use efficiency in field growth chickpea. Journal of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources 14(5): 211-221.
30- Rosati, A., Metcalf, S.G., and Lampinen, B.D. 2004. A simple method to estimate photosynthetic radiation use efficiency of canopies. Annals of Botany 93: 567-574.
31- Sinclair, T.R., and Muchow, R.C. 1999. Radiation use efficiency. Advances in Agronomy 65: 215–265.
32- Singh, P., and Sri Rama, Y.V. 1989. Influence of water deficit on transpiration and radiation use efficiency of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Agricultural Forest and Meteorology 48: 317–330.
33- Stewart, D.W., Costa, C., Dwyer, D.L., Smith, R.I., and Hamliton, B.L. 2003. Canopy structure, light interception and photosynthesis in maize. Agronomy Journal 95: 1465-1474.
34- Tesfaye, K., Walker, S., and Tsubo, 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.
35- Trenbath, B.R. 1974. Biomass productivity of mixtures. Advances in Agronomy 26: 177–210.
36- Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Mukhalam, E. 2001. Comparison of variation use efficiency of mono/inter-cropping systems with different row orientations. Field Crops Research 71: 17-29.
37- 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.
38- Watiki, J.M., Fukai, S., Banda, J.A., and Keating, B.A. 1993. Radiation interception and growth of maize/cowpea intercrop as affected by maize plant density and cowpea cultivar. Field Crops Research 35: 123–133.
39- Zhang, L., Vander Werf, W., Bastiaans, L., Zhang, S., Li, B., and Spiertz, J.H. 2008. Light interception and utilization in relay intercrops of wheat and cotton. Field Crops Research 107: 29-42.