اثر کشت مخلوط جایگزینی و افزایشی بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ذرت (Zea mays L.) و سیب‌زمینی (Solanuum tuberosum L.) در منطقه نیکشهر

نوع مقاله: علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد زاهدان

2 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد زاهدان

3 مجتمع آموزش عالی سراوان

10.22067/jag.v10i2.53841

چکیده

به‌منظور بررسی عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد دو محصول ذرت (Zea mays L.) و سیب‌زمینی (Solanuum tuberosum L.) در کشت مخلوط، در منطقه بنت شهرستان نیکشهر در بهمن ماه سال 1392 آزمایشی با 14 تیمار در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار به‌روش جایگزینی و افزایشی به اجرا در آمد. تیمارهای آزمایش شامل کشت خالص ذرت، کشت خالص سیب‌زمینی، دو ردیف ذرت + یک ردیف سیب‌زمینی، دو ردیف ذرت + دو ردیف سیب زمینی (برای هر محصول تراکم بوته 50 درصد تراکم مطلوب می‌باشد)، یک ردیف ذرت+ یک ردیف سیب زمینی، یک ردیف ذرت + دو ردیف سیب زمینی، دو ردیف ذرت + دو ردیف سیب‌زمینی (برای هر محصول تراکم بوته 100 درصد تراکم مطلوب می‌باشد)، سه ردیف ذرت + یک ردیف سیب‌زمینی، یک ردیف ذرت + سه ردیف سیب‌زمینی، سه ردیف ذرت + دو ردیف سیب‌زمینی، دو ردیف ذرت+ سه ردیف سیب‌زمینی، دو ردیف ذرت + چهار ردیف سیب‌زمینی، چهار ردیف ذرت + دو ردیف سیب‌زمینی، دو ردیف ذرت + دو ردیف سیب‌زمینی، (تراکم بوته برای ذرت 100 درصد تراکم مطلوب و برای سیب‌زمینی 50 درصد تراکم مطلوب می‌باشد) بودند. نتایج نشان داد که سیستم‌های مختلف کاشت بر ارتفاع گیاه ذرت، عملکرد زیست توده، تعداد دانه در بلال و عملکرد دانه ذرت و همچنین بر ارتفاع بوته، وزن غده و عملکرد غده سیب-زمینی تأثیر معنی‌داری داشت. بالاترین عملکرد زیست‌توده (684/30 تن در هکتار) از تیمار کشت خالص ذرت و بیشترین ارتفاع گیاه ذرت (26/133 سانتی‌متر)، تعداد دانه در بلال (33/432) و عملکرد دانه (957/8 تن در هکتار) از تیمار دو ردیف ذرت+ یک ردیف سیب‌زمینی به‌دست آمد. بالاترین ارتفاع بوته (03/45 سانتی‌متر)، بیشترین وزن غده (54/73 گرم) و عملکرد غده سیب‌زمینی (124/28 تن در هکتار) از تیمار کشت خالص سیب‌زمینی به‌دست آمد. بالاترین نسبت برابری زمین (54/1) از سیستم کشت مخلوط دو ردیف ذرت+ یک ردیف سیب‌زمینی به‌دست آمد که نشان از برتری کشت مخلوط نسبت به کشت خالص دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of replacement and additive intercropping on the yield of maize (Zea mays L.) and potatoes (Solanuum tuberosum L.) in the region of Nikshahr

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamidreza Mobasser 1
  • Shahdoost Barjasteh 2
  • Abbas Keshtehgar 3
1 Islamic Azad University, Zahedan Branch,
2 Department of Agronomy, Islamic Azad University, Zahedan Branch, Zahedan, Iran
3 Higher Educational Complex of Saravan
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Increasing agricultural production to match increasing demand of food sources is inevitable (FAO, 2006). It causes too much pressure on the agricultural resource base and threaten the sustainability of these systems. Crop mixture is an important method of high production in agriculture. This technique can affect the environmental conditions of the soil. Sustainable Agriculture, said to be the proper management of agricultural resources which in addition to changing human needs, maintaining environmental quality and capacity of soil and water resources.
Materials and Methods
In order to study the effect of intercropping on the yield of maize and potatoes an experiment as 14 treatment in a randomized complete block design with three replications as replacement and additive approach has been conducted in the region of Nikshahr in 2013. The experimental treatment consisted of sole corn (T1), sole potato (T2), two-row corn + one-row potato (T3), two-row corn + two-row potato (T4), one-row corn + one-row potato (T5), one-row corn + two-row potato (T6), two-row corn + two-row potato (T7), (The difference T7 and T4 is that in T4, for each product optimal plant population density is 50%, while in T7 for both products 100% high density will be used), three-row corn + one-row potato (T8), one-row corn + three-row potato (T9), three-row corn + two-row potato (T10), two-row corn + three-row potatoes (T11), two-row corn + four-row potatoes (T12), four-row corn + two-row potato (T13), two-row corn + two-row potato (T14), (The difference of this treatment with T4 and T7, is that in this treatment optimal plant density was 100% for corn and 50% favorable for potato was used). Traits for corn included plant height, number of ears per plant, number of grains per ear, number of grains per row, number of rows per ear, grain yield and 1000 grains weight and for potatoes, including plant height, tuber weight and the number of tubers per plant.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that, different planting systems on the number of grains per ear, number of grains per row and grain yield and plant height and size of potato tubers were significantly affected and improved the characteristics of plants have been mentioned. The highest biological yield (12.61 t.ha-1) of sole corn cropping (T1), respectively. Reduced biological function of monoculture corn compared to intercropping in this experiment can be attributed to inter-species competition of peanuts and corn. The highest grain yield (8957.3 kg.ha-1) was observed in treatment (T3). Production due to reduce competition between species, compared to the competition within the species increased. Most weight tubers of potato (73.54 g) treatment (T2), respectively. Potato tuber weight loss in the intercropping to monoculture in this experiment can due to inter-species competition potatoes and corn. The highest land equivalent ratio in one- row potato + three-row corn (T8) was obtained which shows the superiority of intercropping to monoculture.
Conclusion
The results of variance analysis showed that:
Intercropping of maize and potatoes with increasing plant density, increased the grain yield of both crops in monoculture and mixed culture which could be due to increased vegetation and it's closer to optimum density in mixed culture and better use of environmental resources.
Reduced grain weight with increased density often is the result of intensified competition intra-species over the use of existing resources. Corn in different densities is able to take advantages of photosynthetic material and grains of similar weight at different densities produce.
In monoculture of potatoes because the only governing competition is intra-species so the plant is not affected in much higher density. Reducing the height of potato plants in intercropping to monoculture in these experiments can be attributed to intr-species competition of potatoes with corns.
In monoculture because only intra-species competition is dominant so the tuber weight is not affected in higher densities. Due to fact that the monoculture system has been threated, the benefits of providing better distribution of light in the canopy, Suitable spatial distribution of shrubs and reducing competition between plants to use environmental factors to provide an appropriate manner, as a result significantly increase economic yield.
The LER in most intercropping was more than one which indicates the superiority of intercropping to monoculture.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Biomass
  • Land equivalent ratio
  • Seed number per ear
  • Seed yield
  • Tuber yield
  1. Al-Dalain, S.A. 2009. Effect of intercropping of maize with potato on potato growth and on the productivity and land equivalent ratio of potato and maize. Agricultural Journal 4(3): 164-170.
  2. Bell, M.J., Muchow, R.C., and Wilson, G.L. 1987. The effect of plant population on peanut in a monsoonal tropical environment. Field Crop Research 17: 91-107.
  3. Caballero, R.C., Alzueta, L.T., Ortiz, M.L., Rodriguez, R.T., and Barro, C. 2001. Carbohydrate and protein fractions of fresh and dried common vetch in three maturity stages. Agronomy Journal 93: 1006-1013.
  4. Dahmardeh, M., and Keshtehgar, A. 2014. Evaluating yield and yield components of maize (Zea mays L.) in intercropping with peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Agroecology 6(2): 311-323. (In Persian with English Summary)
  5. Darabi, A.S. 2008. Effect of autumn and winter planting and temperate stress on total yield, marketable yield and yield components of some potato cultivars. Iranian Journal of Seed and Plant 23(3): 373-386. (In Persian with English Summary)
  6. Fathi, G. 2006. Study of effect of pattern and plant density on light coefficient ratio, light absorption and grain yield of sweet corn (Hybrid SC402). Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 12: 13-141.)In Persian with English Summary)
  7. Francis, R., and Decoteau, D.R. 1993. Developing and effective southern pea and sweet corn intercropping system. Hort Technology 3: 178-184.
  8. Ghosh, P.K., Manna, M.C., Bandyopadhyay, K.K., Ajay Tripathi, A.K., Wanjari, R.H., Hati, K.M., Misra, A.K., Acharya, C.L., and Subba Rao, A. 2006. Inter-specific interaction and nutrient use in soybean sorghum intercropping system. Agronomy Journal 98: 1097-1108.
  9. Hanna, F.R., Salama, N.F., Adb, E.L., and Gawad, M. 1994. Effect of population density on yield of peanut. Annuals of Agricultural Science Monshtohor 32(2): 731-742.
  10. Hashemi Dezfoli, A., Koocheki, A., and Banayan, M. 1998. Maximizing crop yields. Jahad Daneshgahi Mashhad Press, Mashhad, Iran 287 pp. (In Persian)
  11. Hosseinpanahi, F., KoocheKi, A., Nassiri Mohallati, M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in potato-corn intercropping. Journal of Agroecology 2(1): 50-60. (In Persian with English Summary)
  12. Jaffar, Z., and Gardner, F.D. 1988. Canopy development, yield and market quality in peanut as affected by genotype and planting pattern. Crop Science 28: 299-305.
  13. Jamshidi, K., Mazaheri, D., and Saba, J. 2008. An evaluation of yield in intercropping of maize and potato. International Desert Research Center 12: 105-111. (In Persian with English Summary)
  14. Karlen, D.L., and Camp, C.R. 1985. Row spacing, plant population and matter management effects on corn in the Atlantic coastal plain. Agronomy Journal 77: 393-398.
  15. Khoramivafa, M. 2007. Ecology of intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and Cucurbita pepo. PhD Dissertation, Agriculture College, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran. )In Persian with English Summary)
  16. Koocheki, A., Allahgani, B., and Najibnia, S. 2010. Evalution of yield in maize and common bean intercropping. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 2: 605-611. (In Persian with English Summary)
  17. Midmore, D., Roca, J., and Bearrios, D. 1988. Potato (Solanum spp.) in the hot tropics: IV. Intercropping with maize and the influence of shade on the potato microenvironment and crop growth. Field Crops Research 18: 141-157.
  18. 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 adventages and smothering of weeds. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 91: 195-201.
  19. Moll, R.H., and Kamparth, E.J. 1997. Effect of population density up on agronomic traits associated with genetic increases in yield of Maize. Agronomy Journal 69: 81-84.
  20. Molla, A., and Tekalign, A. 2010. Potato based intercropping with sorghum in the hot to warm moist valleys of north Shewa Ethiopia. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 6(5): 485-488.
  21. Ossom, E.M. 2010. Influence of sweet potato-maize association on ecological properties and crop yield in Swaziland. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering 12-4: 481-488.
  22. Philipp, A. 2009. What is sustainable agriculture? Empirical evidence of diverging views in Switzerland and New Zealand. Journal of Ecological Economics 68(6): 1872-1882.
  23. Prakashy, E.D., Pandey, A.K., and Srivastava, A.K. 2004. Relay intercropping of potato (Solanum tuberosum) in maize (Zea mays) under mid-hill condition. Journal of Agricultural Science 74(2): 64-67.
  24. Rezaei-Chianeh, E., Mohammadi Nassab, A.D., Shakiba, M.R., Ghassemi-Golezan, K., Aharizad, S., and Shekari, F. 2011. Intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) in different plant population densities. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6(7): 1786-1793. (In Persian with English Summary)
  25. Sanjani, S., Hosseini, M.B., Chaichi M.R., and Rezvan Beidokhti, S. 2009. Effect of additive intercropping sorghum: cowpea on weed biomass and density in limited irrigation system. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 7: 85-95. (In Persian)
  26. Seran, T.H., and Brintha, I. 2010. Review on maize based intercropping. Journal of Agronomy 9(3): 135-145.
  27. Sobkowicz, P. 2006. Competition between triticale and field beans in additive intercrops. Plant, Soil and Environment 52: 42-54.
  28. Tayefe Noori, M. 2004. Intercropping of maize and cowpea. Msc Thesis, College of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary)
  29. Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Ogindo, H.O. 2005. A simulation model of cereal-legume intercropping systems for semi-arid regions. II. Model application. Field Crops Research 93: 23-33.
  30. 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 Agricultural and Biological Science 2: 14-19.
  31. Vander Zagg, P., and Demagante, A.C. 1988. Potato (Solanum spp.) in an isohyperthermi. III. Evaluation of clones. Field Crops Research 19: 167-181.
  32. Vander Zagg, P., and Demagante, A.C. 1990. Potato (Solanum spp.) in an isohyperthermic environment. V. Intercropping with maize. Field Crops Research 25: 157-170.
  33. Yang, G., Aiwang, D., Jingsheng, S., Fusheng, L., Zugui, L., Hao, L., and Zhandong, L. 2009. Crop coefficient and water-use efficiency of winter wheat/spring maize strip intercropping. Field Crops Research 111: 65-73.
  34. Yilmas, H.A. 1999. Effect of different plant densities of two groundnut genotypes on yield, yield components and oil and protein contents. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 23(3): 299-308.