بررسی جنبه‌های اکوفیزیولوژیک و شاخص‌های کیفیت علوفه در کشت مخلوط ذرت (‏Zea mays L.) و لوبیا چشم‌بلبلی (‏Vigna unguiculata L.)

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

دانشگاه زابل

چکیده

به منظور بررسی جنبه‌های اکوفیزیولوژیک و کیفیت علوفه کشت مخلوط ذرت (Zea mays L.) و لوبیا چشم‌بلبلی (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.)، آزمایشی در قالب طرح بلوک‏های کامل تصادفی با شش تیمار و سه تکرار در پژوهشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه زابل، در سال زراعی 94-1393 انجام شد. تیمارها شامل؛کاشت خالص ذرت، 100% ذرت + 15% لوبیا، 100% ذرت + 30% لوبیا، 100% ذرت + 45% لوبیا، 100% ذرت + 60% لوبیا و کشت خالص لوبیا چشم‏بلبلی بود. نتایج نشان داد که جذب نور، رطوبت خاک و دمای خاک سیستم‏های کاشت در سطح احتمال پنج درصد معنی‏دار بود. کشت‏های مخلوط، میزان تابش جذب شده و رطوبت بیشتری را در طول فصل رشد کسب نمودند و دمای کمتری نیز نسبت به تک‏کشتی خود داشتند. همچنین نتایج نشان داد، شاخص‏های کیفی علوفه، غلظت پروتئین خام (CP) و میزان خاکستر ذرت در کشت مخلوط لوبیا چشم بلبلی افزایش یافت و غلظت دیواره سلولی (NDF)، فیبرهای نامحلول در شوینده‌های اسیدی (ADF) ذرت کاهش یافت، به‏نحوی‌که بیشترین میزان پروتئین خام ( 41/9 درصد)، خاکستر (‏16/12 درصد) و قابلیت هضم ماده خشک ذرت (77/72 درصد) از نسبت کاشت 100% ذرت+ 60% لوبیا چشم بلبلی و بیشترین میزان NDF (66/46 درصد)، ADF (66/26 درصد) از کشت خالص ذرت به‏دست آمد. به‏دلیل همبستگی منفی بین ADFو قابلیت هضم ماده خشک (DMD) با کاهش یافتن غلظت ADF‏ قابلیت هضم علوفه افزایش پیدا کرد. بیشترین عملکرد علوفه خشک از کشت مخلوط 100% ذرت + 60% لوبیا ( t.h-161/14) در حالی که کمترین عملکرد از کشت خالص لوبیا ( t.ha-193/0) به‏دست آمد. به‏طور کلی،کشت مخلوط به لحاظ تولید کمی و کیفی علوفه نسبت به کشت‏های خالص برتری نشان داد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of the Ecophysiological Aspects and Forage Quality Indices in the Intercropping of Maize (Zea mays L.) and Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.)

نویسندگان [English]

  • mehdi sharifi nejad
  • Ahmad Ghanbari
  • alireza sirousmehr
university zabol
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Intercropping is a crop management system involving two or more crop species grown together for at least portion of their respective productive cycle and planted sufficiently close to each other so that inter specific competitions occurs. The reason of yield advantage of intercropping are mainly that environmental resources such as water, light and nutrients can be utilized more efficiently in intercropping than in the respective sole cropping systems. Intercropping system is one the efficient crop production managements with minimum adverse effects on the environment, using the principles of ecological agriculture.
Materials and Methods
In order to study the ecophysiological aspects and forage quality intercropping maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.), an experiment was conducted based on a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications at the Research Farm, University of Zabol in 2015. The experimental treatments were: sole cropping of maize, 100% maize + 15% cowpea, 100% maize + 30% cowpea, 100% maize + 45% cowpea, 100% maize + 60% cowpea and sole cropping of cowpea. Each plot consisted of five rows planting, with a distance of 60 cm length was formed five meters. Maize and cowpea seeds were simultaneously sown. Photosynthesis active radiation (PAR) was measured between 12-13 hours on occasions. Mean values for each plot were then used to calculate the percentage of PAR interception by plant canopy as follows:
%PARi = [1- (PARb / PARa)] × 100
Where the subscript i designates intercepted PAR, a and b subscripts designate PAR above and below the plant canopy, respectively. Corn in the dough stage of grain and cowpea were at physiological maturity stage, harvest was carried out simultaneously. Samples dried at 70°C for 48 h and weighed.
The crude protein content was calculated by multiplying the Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration by 6.25. ADF (acid detergent fiber) and NDF (neutral detergent fiber) concentrations were measured. Digestible dry matter (DDM) were estimated .DDM = 88.9-(0.779 x ADF % dry matter basis)
Intercropping advantage and competition between maize and cowpea in intercrops were calculated LER was used to quantify the efficiency of the intercropping treatments: LER = Ymm/ Ybb + Ymb/ Ycc where Ymm and Ycc are yields of pure stands of maize and cowpea, Ymc and Ycm are yields of maize and cowpea in the intercropping system, respectively (Willey, 1979). Statistical computations using SAS software and comparison of means were tested by LSD at P

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cropping systems
  • Crude protein
  • Dry matter production
  • Soil temperature
  • Sources growth
Ahmadvand, G., and Hajinia, S. 2016. Ecological aspects study of replacement intercropping patterns of soybean (Glycine max L.) and millet (Panicum miliaceum L.). Journal of Agroecology 7(4): 485-498. (In Persian with English Summary)
Albayrak, S., Turk, M., Yukel, O., and Yilmaz, M. 2011. Forage yield and quality of perennial legume – grass mixtures under rainfed conditions. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici 39(1): 114-118.
Anil, L., Park, J. and Phipps, R.H. 2000. The potential of forage- maize intercrops in ruminant nutrition. Animal Feed Science and Technology 85: 157-164.
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.
Aydın, N., Mut, Z., Mut, H., and Ayan, I. 2010. Effect of autumn and spring sowing dates on hay yield and quality of oat (Avena sativa L.) genotypes. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 9(10): 1539-1545.
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(2): 227-240. (In Persian with English Summary)
Eskandari, H., and Javanmard, A. 2013. Evaluation of forage yield and quality in intercropping patterns of maize (Zea mays) and cow pea (Vigna sinensis). Journal of Agricultural Science 23(4): 102-110.
Frankow-Lindberg, B.E., and Dahlin, A.S. 2013. N2 fixation, N transfer, and yield in grassland communities including a deep-rooted legume or non-legume species. Plant and Soil 370: 567-581.
Ghanbari, S., Moradi Telavat, M.R., and Siadat, S.A. 2016. Effect of manure application on forage yield and quality of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) in intercropping. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 17(4): 315-328. (In Persian with English Summary)
Ghanbari-Bonjar, A. 2000. Intercropped wheat (Triticum aestivum) and bean as a low-input forage. Wye College. University of London. PhD dissertation, London, England.
Ghanbari-Bonjar, A., and Lee, H.‌C. 2003. Intercropped field beans (Vicia faba) and wheat (Triticum aestivum) for whole crop forage: effect of nitrogen on forage yield and quality. Journal of Agricultural Science 138: 311-314.
Haruna, M., Aliyu, L., and Maunde, S.M. 2013. Competitive behavior of groundnut in sesame/groundnut intercropping system under varying poultry manure rates and planting arrangement. Sustainable Agricultural Research 2(3): 22-26.
Javanmard, A., and Eskandari, H. 2014. Investigation of some competition and forage quality indices in different intercropping patterns of maize with vetch, common bean, bitter vetch and berseem clover. Journal of Crop Production 7(3): 89-108. (In Persian with English Summary)
Jensen, E.S. 1996. Grain yield, symbiotic N2 fixation and interspecific competition for inorganic N in pea of barley intercrops. Plant and Soil 182: 25-38.
Karimi, H. 1996. Forage Crops Breeding and Cultivation. Tehran University Publications, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
Khatamipour, M., Asgharipour, M.R, and Sirousmehr, A. 2014. Intercropping benefits of foxtail millet (Setaria italica) with Mungbean (Vigna radiata) as influenced by application of different manure levels. Journal of Agricultural Science 24(3): 76-90.
Kiani, S., Siadat, S.‌A., Moradi-Telavat, M.‌R., Abdali-Mashhadi., A.‌R., and Sari, M. 2014. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer application on forege yield and of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and fennel (Foeniculum vulgare L.) intercropping. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 16(2): 77-90. (In Persian with English Summary)
Kirksey, R.‌E., and Laurialt, L.‌M. 2004. Yield and nutritive value of irrigated winter cereal forage grass-legume intercrops in the southern high plains, USA. Journal of American Society of Agronomy 96: 352-358.
Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Mondani, F., Feizi, H., and Amirmoradi, S. 2009. Evaluation of radiation interception and use by maize and bean intercropping canopy. Journal of Agroecology 1(1): 13-23. (In Persian with English Summary)
Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Solouki, H., and Karbor, S. 2016 .Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in substitution intercropping of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and bean (Vigna radiata L.). Advances in Plants and Agriculture Research 3(5): 109-124.
Latati, M., Blavet, D., Alkama, N., Laoufi, H., Drevon, J.J., Gerard, F., Pansu, M., and Ounane, S.M. 2014. The intercropping cowpea–maize improves soil phosphorus availability and maize yields in an alkaline soil. Plant and Soil 85: 181-191.
Lemlem, A. 2013. The effect of intercropping maize with cowpea and lablab on crop yield. Herald International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 2(5): 156-170.
Li, L., Zhang, F., Li, X., Christie, P., Sun, J., Yang, S., and Tang, C. 2003. Interspecific facilitation of nutrient uptake by intercropped maize and faba bean. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 65(1): 61-71.
Majnoon Hoseini, N. 2008. Culture and Production Leguminous, Tehran University Publication Jahad, Tehran. Iran. (In Persian)
Maurice, G., Albert, N., and Isidore, T. 2010. Altering time of intercropping cow pea (Vigna unguinculata L.) relative to maize (Zea mays L.): A food Production strategy to increase crop yield attributes in Adamawa-Cameroon. Journal of Agricultural Science 6: 437-458.
Mazaheri, D. 1998. Intercropping. Press of Tehran University. Tehran, Iran 160 pp. (In Persian)
Mazaheri, D., Madani, A., and Oveysi, M. 2006. Assessing the land equivalent ratio (LER) of two corn (Zea mays L.) varieties intercropping at various nitrogen levels in Karaj, Iran. European Journal of Agriculture 7(2): 359-364.
Mehmet, S.O., Sezgin, U., and Ali, G. 2007. The effect of light interception and light use efficiency with different sowing time of bean (Vicia faba). International Journal and Engineering Sciences 2(1): 87-91.
Nabati Nasaz, M., Gholipouri, A., and Mostafavi Rad, M. 2016. Evaluation of forage yield and important agronomic indices of corn as affected by intercropping systems with peanut and nitrogen rates. Journal of Agroecology 8(1): 70-81. (In Persian with English Summary)
Najafi, N., Mostafaei, M., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab, A., and Oustan, S. 2012. Effect of intercropping and farmyard manure on the growth, yield and protein concentration of corn, bean and bitter vetch. Journal of Crop Production 23(1): 101-113. (In Persian with English Summary)
Nour Mohammadi, G., Siadat, A., and Kashani, A. 2007. Cereal Production: Ahvaz Shahid Chamran University Press, Ahvaz, Iran. (In Persian)
Raei, Y., Bolandnazar, S.A., and Dameghsi, N. 2011. Evaluation of common bean and potato densities effects on potato tuber yield in mono-cropping and intercropping systems. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 21(2): 131-142.
Rajaii, M., Dahmardeh, M., Khammari, I., and Mousavi Nik, S.M. 2014. Evaluation of the effects of density and weeds control on corn (Zea mays L.) and peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) intercropping by competition indices. Journal of Agroecology 7(4): 473-487. (In Persian with English Summary)
Singh, B., and Usha, K. 2003. Nodulation and symbiotic nitrogen fixation of cowpea genotypes as affected by fertilizer nitrogen. Jorurnal of Plant Nutrition 26(2): 463-473.
Stoltz, E., and Nadeau, E. 2014. Effects of intercropping on yield, weed incidence, forage quality and soil residual N in organically grown forage maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) Field Crops Research 169: 21-29.
Tsubo, M., and Walker, S. 2005. A model of radiation interception and use by a maize /bean intercrop canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 110: 203-215.
Van Soest, P.‌J. 1991. Methods of fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3583-3597.
Vander Meer, J.H. 1992. The Ecology of Intercropping. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.
Vander Meer, J.‌H. 1989. The Ecology of Intercropping. Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK.
Walker, S., and Ogindo, H.O. 2003. The water budget of rainfed maize and bean intercrop. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 28: 919-926.
Wang, Z., Bao, X., Li, X., Jin, X., Zhao, J., Sun, J., Christie P., and Li, L. 2015. Intercropping maintains soil fertility in terms of chemical properties and enzyme activities on a timescale of one decade. Plant and Soil 391: 265-282.
Willey, R.W. 1979. Intercropping: its importance and research needs. Competition and yield advantages. Journal of Crop Science 32: 1-10.
Yahuza, I. 2011. Wheat /faba bean intercropping system in perspective. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences 6(1): 62-69.
Young, M.A., Dake, B.S., Sonon, R.N., Holthaus, D.L. and Bolsen, K.K. 1996. Effect of grain content on the nutritive value of whole–plant grain sorghum silage.Rep. Prog.756. Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station. Kansans State University, Manhattan, KS.