بررسی رقابت و عملکرد کمی و کیفی در کشت مخلوط سویا (Glycine max (L.) Merrill.) و همیشه بهار (Calendula officinalis L.)

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تبریز

چکیده

به منظور بررسی رقابت بین دو گونه سویا (Glycine max L. Merrill.) و همیشه بهار(Calendula officinalis L.)، آزمایشی در قالب طرح بلوک های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار و هفت تیمار در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تبریز در سال 1388 اجرا شد. تیمارها شامل کشت های خالص سویا و همیشه‌بهار، کشت مخلوط با پنج آرایش کشت به صورت 1:1، 2:2، 4:2، 4:4 و 6:4 به ترتیب همیشه‌بهار و سویا بودند. اثر آرایش کشت روی تعداد نیام در بوته، تعداد دانه در بوته، وزن هزار دانه و عملکرد دانه سویا در واحد سطح و درصد روغن و پروتئین دانه سویا معنی-دار نبود. تأثیر آرایش کشت بر روی عملکرد خشک گل‌آذین و گلبرگ همیشه‌بهار در واحد سطح و تعداد گل در بوته همیشه‌بهار معنی دار بود. بیش‌ترین عملکرد خشک گل‌آذین و گلبرگ به آرایش کشت 1:1 (63/87، 75/30) و 6:4 (75/41، 68/22) مربوط بود. براساس نتایج حاصله در آرایش کشت 1:1، 2:2 و 4:4 ضریب ازدحام نسبی همیشه‌بهار (76/0، 46/0 و 46/0) بیشتر از سویا بود این امر از نظر رقابتی، برتری همیشه‌بهار را در مقابل سویا اثبات می کند. در آرایش کشت 6:4 و 4:2 به ترتیب غالبیت سویا (43/1، 98/0) بزرگتر از همیشه‌بهار بود که نشان دهنده بیشتر بودن عملکرد نسبی سویا در مقایسه با همیشه‌بهار است. بر عکس کمتر شدن غالبیت همیشه‌بهار (19/1، 93/0) در این تیمارها نشان می‌دهد که عملکرد نسبی آن کمتر از سویا است. مقدار افت واقعی عملکرد در کلیه تیمارها مثبت به دست آمد که نشان دهنده افزایش عملکرد است. در آرایش کشت 1:1، 2:2 و 4:4 نسبت رقابتی همیشه‌بهار (06/2، 25/1، 13/1) بیشتر از یک بود و در آرایش کشت 6:4 و 4:2 نسبت رقابتی سویا (2/1، 07/1) بیشتر از یک بود که برتری عملکرد را نسبت به تک کشتی نشان می‌دهد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Interaction of nutrient resource and crop diversity on resource use efficiency in different cropping systems

نویسندگان [English]

  • M Allahdadi
  • A Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab
  • M.R Shakiba
  • R Amini
چکیده [English]

Introduction
With the continuous growth of world population, degradation and ecological imbalance throughout the world, there is a need to increase agricultural production and environmental protection measures. In this respect, efforts to supply nutrients to the environment are at the head of the programs. One of the ways to approach this goal is the use of intercropping systems (Najafi & Mohammadi, 2005(. Suitable performance in intercropping systems may be achieved by selecting genotypes possessing traits consistent with and appropriate for establishing minimum and maximum synergy and competition employing proper agronomic practices such as density and planting pattern (Mutungamiri et al., 2001). In this context, selected plants should be less competitive in terms of environmental impact. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of different planting patterns on the competition between the two species of Calendula and soybean and to evaluate the yield and quality of an intercropping system compared with a mono-cropping system.

Materials and Methods
In order to evaluate the competition between soybean and calendula, a field experiment was conducted based on randomized complete block design with 7 treatments and 3 replications in the research farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, the University of Tabriz in 2009. The treatments included pure stands for both species, 1:1, 2:2, 4:2, 4:4 and 6:4 for soybean and calendula number of rows per strip, respectively. Before planting, soybean seeds were inoculated with Bradyrhyzobium japonicum. Before harvesting, the number of pods per plant, seeds per plant, 1000- grain weight, grain yield, percentage of oil and protein of soybean grain were measured in 10 randomly selected plants. The number of flowers per plant, dry inflorescence weight and dry petal weight of Calendula were recorded. The harvest of flowers of calendula began on July 30 and harvesting was done every 15 days in six steps. It was continued to mid-October. Total dry petals and sepals of 6 withdrawals flower per plot were considered as inflorescence dry weight. The land equivalent ratio (LER), actual yield loss (AYL), relative crowding coefficient (RCC), aggressivity (A) and competitive ratio (CR) were determined at the end of the growing season. For statistical analysis, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) were performed using MSTAT-C.

Results and Discussion
The results showed that the effect of planting pattern on the number of pods per plant, seeds per plant, 1000-grain weight, grain yield of soybean, percentage of oil and protein contents of soybean was not significant. The effect of planting pattern on inflorescence dry weight and dry petal weight of calendula was significant. Row and strip intercropping 6:4 produced greater dry inflorescence weight and dry petal weight than calendula monoculture. The highest petal and inflorescence yield was achieved by 1:1 (87.63, 30.75) and 6:4 (41.75, 22.68) intercrops, respectively. The effect of planting pattern on the number of flowers per plant was significant at 1% level. The number of flowers per plant for row intercropping and strip intercropping of 1:1 and 6:4 were greater than calendula monoculture. The highest flowers per plant was achieved by 1:1 and 6:4 intercrops, respectively. The land equivalent ratio was greatest for 6:4 and 1:1 intercrops equal 1.34 and 1.13, respectively and the lowest land equivalent ratio was achieved by 2:2 intercrops. The actual yield loss value of all treatments were positive that indicated increased yield. In row intercropping and strip intercropping 4:4 and 2:2 competitive ratio of calendula (1.13, 1.25, 2.06) was>0 and the competitive ratio of soybean (1.07, 1.2) was>1 that show that yield advantage was greater than mono-cropping system. The relative crowding coefficient (RCC) of calendula (0.46, 0.46, 0.76) was greater than that of soybean that proves the competitive advantage of calendula against soybean. In strip intercropping, 6:4 and 4:2 aggressivity of soybean (0.98, 1.43) was>0, that indicates the relative yield of soybean is greater than calendula. The negative aggressivity of calendula (0.93, 1.19) in this treatment shows that the relative yield of calendula is less than soybean. In row intercropping and strip intercropping 4:4 and 2:2 competitive ratio of calendula (1.13, 1.25, 2.06) was>0 and competitive ratio of soybean (1.07, 1.2) was >1 that shows that yield advantage was greater than mono-cropping system.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Aggressivity
  • Competitive ratio
  • Planting pattern
  • Relative crowding coefficient
Agegnehu, G., Ghizam, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and land efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopia highlands. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 202-207.
Alizadeh, Y., Koocheki, A.R., and Nasiri Mahalati, M. 2009. Yield, yield components and potential weed control of intercropping bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) with sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum). Iranian Journal of Crop Research 7(2): 541-553.
Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghose, S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in additive series experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 324-332.
Banik, P., Sasmal, T., Ghosal, P.K., and Bagchi, D.K. 2000. Evaluation of mustard (Brassica competris Var. Toria) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 row-replacement series system. Journal of Agronomy 185: 9-14.
Connolly, J., Wayne, P., and Bazzaz, F.A. 2001. Interspecific competition in plants: how well do current methods answer fundamental questions? American National 157: 107-125.
Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab, A., Shakiba, M.R., Javanshir, A., Zehtab salmasi, S., and Cyrusmehr, A.R. 2006. Review aspects of entrepreneurship maize, soybean, calendula, and vetch. The research report of an approved project in the University of Tabriz. (In Persian)
Dhima, K.V., Lithourgidis, A.A., 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.
Ebrahimi, A., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab, A., Javanshir, A., and Mirshekari, B. 2007. Review the performance of some agronomic traits of maize in strip intercropping and monoculture. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Islamic Azad University of Tabriz 3: 25-37. (In Persian with English Summary)
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.
Ghosh, P.K., Manna, M.C., Bandyopadhyay, K., Ajay, K., Tripathi, A.K., Wanjari, R.H., Hati, K.M., Mirsa, A.K., Acharya, C.L., and Subba Rao, A. 2006. Interspecific interaction and nutrient use in soybean/sorghum intercropping systems. Agronomy Journal 98(4): 1097-1108.
- Hashemi Dezfuli, A., Abdali, A., and Siadat, S.A. 2000. Study of corn-sunflower intercropping ratios in different dates of planting affecting on quantitative and qualitative forage kernel yields in Ahvaz region. Iranian Journal of Crop Science 2(2): 1-18. (In Persian with English Summary)
Jafarzadeh, A. 2009. Detailed studies of 26 acres of land and soil, Agricultural Research Station, University of Tabriz, Faculty of Humanities and Social Science 4: 16-29. (In Persian)
Jahani, M., Koocheki, A.R., and Nasiri Mahalati, M. 2008. Comparsion of different intercropping arrangements of cumin (Cuminum cyminum) and lentil (Lens culinaris). Journal of Agricultural Researchof Iran 6(1): 67-78. (In Persian with English Summary)
Jensen, E.S. 1996. Grain yield, symbiotic N2 fixation and interspecific competition for inorganic N in pea-barley intercrop. Plant and Soil 182: 25-38.
Joshi, N.C. 2001. Weed Control Manual. 5th Edition. Ed. Delhi Research Station, Delhi. p. 538.
Jurik, T.W., and Van, K. 2004. Micro-environment of a corn-soybean-oat strip intercropping system. Field Crops Research 90: 335-349.
Jeyabal, A., and Kuppuswami, G. 2001. Recycling of organic wastes for the production of vermicompost and its response in rice-legume cropping system and soil fertility. European Journal of Agronomy 15: 153-170.
Koocheki, A., Najibnia, S., and Lalehgani, B. 2009. Evaluation of saffron (Crocus sativus L.) yield in intercropping with cereals, pulses and medicinal plants 7(1): 163-172. (In Persian with English Summary)
Maffi, M., and Mucciarelli, M. 2003. Essential oil yield in peppermint/soybean strip intercropping. Field Crops Research 84: 229-240.
-Martin, J.S., Harry, T.C., Chandle, J.M., Rodney, W.B., and Carson, K.A. 1998. Above and below ground interference of wheat by Italian ryegrass. Weed Science 46: 438-441.
Mazaheri, D. 1998. Intercropping. Tehran University Press, Tehran, Iran 262 pp. (In Persian)
Miller, K., Gibson, D.J., Young, B.G., and Wood, A.J. 2007. Impect of interspecific competition on seed development and quality of five soybean cultivars. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47(12): 1455-1459.
Mutungamiri, A., Margia, I.K., and Chivinge, O.A. 2001. Evaluation of maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars and density for dryland maize-bean intercropping. Tropical Agriculture 78(1): 8-12.
Naderi Darbaghshahi, M.R., Madani, H., Bani Teba, A., and Jalali Zand, A. 2009. Evaluation of agronomic and economic aspects of intercropping saffron and chamomile in Isfahan. Research report in the Azad University of khorasgan. (In Persian with English Summary)
Najafi, A., and Mohammadi, J. 2005. Study of yield components in intercropping of sweet corn and green beans. First National Conference on Pulses Articles 29 and 30 Octobr, Institute of Plant Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. (In Persian with English Summary)
Ocallaghan, J.R. 2003. Modeling the intercropping of maize and beans in Kenya. Computer and Electronics in Agriculture 11: 351-365.
Omidbeigi, R. 2000. Approaches to Processing Plants. Published Designers of Astane Ghods. Press, 420 pp. (In Persian)
Ram, S.N. 2009. Effect of row ratios and fertility levels on performance of Guinea grass+Stylosanthes hamata intercropping system under rained conditions. Rnge Management and Agroforestry 30(2): 130-135.
Rahetlah, V.B., Randrianaivoarivony, J.M., Razafimpamoa, L.H., and Ramalanjaona, V.L. 2010. Effects of seeding rates on forage yield and quality of oat (Avena sativa L.) vetch (Vicia sativa L.) mixtures under irrigated conditions of Madagascar. African Journal of Food Agriculture Nutrition and Development 10(10): 4257-4267.
Saudy, H.I., and El-Metwally, M.I. 2009. Weed management under different patterns of sunflower-soybean intercropping. Journal Central European of Agriculture 10: 41-52.
Schoeny, A., Jumel, S., Rouault, F., Lemarchand, E., and Tivolier, B. 2010. Effect and underlying mechanisms of pea-cereal intercropping on the epidemic development of ascochyta blight. European Journal of Plant Pathology 126: 317-331.
Singh, B., Singh, K., Dhukia, R.S. 2008. Assessment of yield advantage of different fodder crops in intercropping systems. Annuals of Botany 24(2):149-152.
Snaydon, R.W. 1991. Replacement andadditive design for competition studies. Journal of Applied Ecology 28: 930-946.
Thorsted, M.D., Weiner, J., and Olesen, J.E. 2006. Above- and below-ground competition between intercropped winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) and white clover (Trifolium repens). Journal of Application Ecology 43: 237-245.
Touzi, S.H., De Tourdonnet, S., Launay, M., and Dore, T. 2010. Does intercropping winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) with red fescue (Festuca rubra) as a cover crop improve agronomic and environmental performance? Amodeling approach. Field Crops Research 116: 218-229.
Xu, J. 2007. Scientists find why intercropping of faba bean with maize increase yields, www. Horizoninter national tv. Org. p. 12-19.
Xu, B.C., Li, F.M., and Shan, L. 2008. Switchgrass and milkvetch intercropping under 2:1 row replacement insemiarid region, northwest China: Aboveground biomass and water use efficiency. European Journal ofAgronomy 28: 485-492.
Yilmaz, S., Atak, M., and Erayman, M. 2008. Identification of advantages of maize legume intercropping over solitary cropping through competition indices in the east Mediterranean region. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 32: 111-119.
Zaman, Q.U., and Asgharmalik, M. 2000. Ricebean (Vigna umbellata) productivity under various maize- ricebean intercropping systems. International Journal of Agriculture and Botany 2: 255-257.
Zardari, S. 2011. Effect of intercropping pattern on growth and yield of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and dill (Anethum graveolens). MSc dissertation, Faculty ofAgriculture, University of Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)