تأثیر الگوی کاشت و کاربرد کود نیتروژن بر عملکرد و شاخص‌های رقابت نخود فرنگی (Pisum sativum L.) و کاهو (Lactuca sativa L.)

نوع مقاله: علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

دانشگاه گنبد کاووس

10.22067/jag.v10i2.61305

چکیده

به‌منظور بررسی اثر الگوی کاشت و نیتروژن مصرفی بر عملکرد و شاخص‌های رقابت نخود فرنگی (Pisum sativum L.) و کاهو (Lactuca sativa L.)، آزمایشی به‌صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در مزرعه دانشگاه گنبدکاووس در سال زراعی 94-1393 اجرا گردید. عامل‌ الگوی کاشت در نه سطح شامل کشت خالص نخود فرنگی، کشت مخلوط جایگزین 33، 50 و 67 درصد کاهو به‌جای نخود فرنگی، کشت مخلوط افزایش 33، 50، 67 و 100 کاهو به نخود فرنگی و کشت خالص کاهو و عامل نیتروژن در سه سطح شامل عدم مصرف و مصرف 25 و 50 کیلوگرم نیتروژن خالص در هکتار بود. نتایج نشان داد که اثر الگوی کاشت و نیتروژن بر عملکرد در سطح یک درصد معنی‌دار بود. صفات مورد بررسی شامل عملکردکل و شاخص‌های رقابت و سودمندی اقتصادی کشت مخلوط یعنی عملکرد معادل، نسبت برابری زمین، ضریب نسبی تراکم، شاخص غالبیت، نسبت رقابتی، کاهش واقعی عملکرد، سودمندی کشت مخلوط و بهره‌وری سیستم بود. تیمار کشت مخلوط افزایش 100 درصد کاهو به نخود فرنگی و کشت خالص کاهو به‌ترتیب با 61565 و 61473 کیلوگرم در هکتار حداکثر عملکرد و تیمار کشت خالص نخود فرنگی با 11759 کیلوگرم در هکتار حداقل عملکرد را تولید کردند. با افزایش مصرف کود نیتروژن، عملکرد در هر دو گیاه افزایش یافت. کم‌ترین عملکرد معادل نخود فرنگی با 11759 کیلوگرم در هکتار از تیمار کشت خالص نخود فرنگی و بیش‌ترین آن با 25159 کیلوگرم در هکتار از کشت مخلوط افزایش 100 درصد کاهو به نخود فرنگی به‌دست آمد. بیش‌ترین و کم‌ترین عملکرد معادل نخود فرنگی به‌ترتیب از تیمارهای مصرف 50 کیلوگرم در هکتار و عدم کاربرد کود نیتروژن به‌ترتیب با 20669 و 16689 کیلوگرم در هکتار به‌دست آمد. نسبت برابری زمین در تیمار‌های کشت مخلوط بیش از تیمار‍‌های کشت خالص بود. حداکثر نسبت برابری زمین متعلق به تیمار کشت مخلوط افزایش 100 درصد کاهو به نخود فرنگی با 48/1 بود. ضریب نسبی تراکم در تمام تیمارها بیش از یک بود. بررسی شاخص غالبیت نشان داد که نخود فرنگی در تیمارهای کشت مخلوط افزایشی و تیمار کشت مخلوط جایگزین 33 درصد کاهو به جای نخود فرنگی گیاه غالب بود. در نتیجه، علامت چیرگی نخود فرنگی با وجود مطلوب بودن عملکرد هر دو گیاه مثبت شد. در کلیه تیمارها و به‌خصوص تیمارهای کشت مخلوط افزایشی، افزایش عملکرد کل مشاهده شد. در مجموع، کشت مخلوط نخود فرنگی و کاهو باعث افزایش سودمندی اقتصادی کشت مخلوط گردید. بیش‌ترین سودمندی اقتصادی کشت مخلوط مربوط به گیاه نخود فرنگی و کم‌ترین آن مربوط به گیاه کاهو که از تیمار کشت مخلوط جایگزین 33 درصد نخود فرنگی + 67 درصد کاهو حاصل شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer and Planting Pattern on Yield and Competition Indices of Pea (Pisum sativum L.) and Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.)

نویسندگان [English]

  • elham raftari
  • Ali Nakhzari Moghaddam
  • Mehdi Mollashahi
  • Hossein Hosseini Moghaddam
Gonbad Kavous University
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Intercropping, the agricultural practice of cultivating two or more crops in the same space at the same time, is an old and commonly used cropping practice which aims to match efficiently crop demands to the available growth resources. Intercropping of chickpea with linseed reduced the chickpea yield by 60.3%, although linseed occupied only 33% of the total area. The loss of chickpea yield was compensated by the additional yield of linseed, and thus the system productivity of chickpea + linseed intercropping was increased by 43.4% compared to the sole chickpea. Of this increase in system productivity, 65.3 and 34.7% were contributed by higher seed yield and higher minimum support prices of linseed, respectively, as compared to chickpea. The objectives of the present study were to study the competition indices of Pea and Lettuce intercropping, such as land equivalent ratio, relative crowding coefficient, aggressivity, pea equivalent yield and effects of nitrogen and different intercropping arrangements on the yield of sole pea, sole lettuce and intercropping yield of two plants.
Materials and Methods
In order to study the effect of planting pattern and nitrogen application on yield and competitive indicators of pea and lettuce, a factorial experiment based on Randomized Complete Block Design was conducted with three replications at research farm of Gonbad Kavous University during the growing season of 2014-2015. The treatments of the planting pattern were included 9 levels of sole pea, 67% pea + 33% lettuce, 50% pea + 50% lettuce, 33% pea + 67% lettuce, 100% pea + 33% lettuce, 100% pea + 50 % lettuce, 100% pea + 67% lettuce, 100% pea + 100% lettuce and sole lettuce and the nitrogen factor was included three levels of non-application and application of 25 and 50 kg N.ha-1. Row spacing was 30cm. Density of pea and lettuce was 33.3 and 16.7 plants.m-2, respectively.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the effect of planting pattern and nitrogen application on the yield was significant on the confidence level of 99%. Additive treatment of 100% lettuce + 100% pea and lettuce sole cropping with 61565 and 61473 kg.ha-1 were produced the maximum yields and pea sole cropping with 11759 kg.ha-1 produced the minimum yield. Total yield was increased with increasing nitrogen fertilizer application. The maximum and minimum equivalent yield was achieved in additive treatment of 100% lettuce + 100% pea and sole cropping of pea, respectively. The most and the least pea equivalent yield were obtained from treatments of 50 kg nitrogen/ha and non-application of nitrogen with 20669 and 16689 kg.ha-1, respectively. Land equivalent ratio in intercropping treatments was greater than sole cropping. The maximum land equivalent ratio with 1.48 belonged to additive intercropping of 100% pea + 100% lettuce. Therefore, intercropping of pea and lettuce, especially in additive series was appropriate. Relative crowding coefficient in all traits was more than 1. Aggressivity index showed that pea in additive treatments and replacement of 33% lettuce instead of pea was the dominant plant. Increasing of actual yield was observed in all treatments, especially in additive series. Intercropping advantage and system productivity index in all treatments of additive and replacement treatments was greater than 1, therefore Intercropping had sufficient economic benefits in this mixture.
Conclusion
Of the two plants of pea and lettuce, lettuce produced more yield than pea in all treatments. Additive treatment of 100% lettuce to pea and lettuce sole crop with 61565 and 61473 kg.ha-1 produced the maximum yield and pea sole crop with 11759 kg.ha-1 produced the minimum total yield. With increasing of nitrogen fertilizer consumption, yield was increased. According to the results, it seems that obtaining the maximum yield in the intercropping system required increasing plant density.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Aggessivity
  • Intercropping
  • Land equivalent ratio
  • Pea equivalent yield
  1. Achakzai, A.K.K., and Bangulzai, M.I. 2006. Effect of various levels of nitrogen fertilizer on the yield and yield attributes of pea (Pisium sativum L.) cultivars. Pakistan Journal of Botany 38(2): 331-340.
  2. Agegnehu, G., Ghizaw, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and land-use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. European Journal of Agronomy 25(3): 202-207.
  3. Ahmad, F., Gaur, P., and Croser, J. 2005. Pea (Pisum sativum L.). In: Singh, R.J., Jauhar, P.P. Genetic Resources, Chromosome Engineering and Crop Improvement-Grain Legumes 1: 185-214.
  4. Ahmadi, A., Dabbagh Mohammdi Nasab, A., Zehtab Salmasi, S., Amini, R., and Janmohammadi, H. 2010. Evaluation of yield and advantage indices in barley and vetch intercropping. Journal of Agricultural and Sustainable Production 20(4): 77-87. (In Persian with English Summary)
  5. Atis, I., Kotgen, K., Hatipoglu, R., Yilmaz, S., Atak, M., and Can, E. 2012. Plant density and mixture ratio effects the competition between vetch and wheat. Australian Journal of Crop Science 6(3): 498-505.
  6. Awal, M.A., Pramanik, M.H.R., and Hossen, M.A. 2007. Interspecies competition growth and yield in barley peanut intercropping. Asian Journal of Plant Science 6(4): 577-584.
  7. Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghosh, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: Advantages and weeds mothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.
  8. Baser Kouchebagh, S., Mirshekari, B., and Farahvash, F. 2012. Improvement of corn yield by seed biofertilization and urea application. World Applied Sciences Journal 16(9): 1239-1242.
  9. Bedoussac, L., and Justes, E. 2010. Dynamic analysis of competition and complementarity for light and N use to understand the yield and the protein content of a durum wheat–winter pea intercrop. Plant and Soil 330: 37-54.
  10. Choi, W.J., Han, G.H., Lee, S.M., Lee, G.T., Yoon, K.S., Choi, S.M., and Ro, H.M. 2007. Impact of land-use types on nitrate concentration and N15 in unconfined groundwater in rural areas of Korea. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 120(2-4): 259-268.
  11. Dhima, K.V., Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., and Dordas, C.A. 2007. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Research 100(2-3): 249-256.
  12. Fakharian, N., Hassanpour Asil, M., and Samizadeh Lahiji, H. 2008. Effects of temperature, thickness of polypropylene shrink wrapping and modified atmosphere packaging on storage longevity of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.). Journal of Horticultural Science and Technology 22(2): 135-145.
  13. Fallah, S.A. 2011. Recovery of nitrogen residue by the canola (Brassica napus) in rotation forage maize–canola. Journal of Agroecology 1(2):83-75. (In Persian with English Summary)
  14. Fallah, S.A., Baharlouie, S., and Abbasi Suraki, A. 2014. Evaluation of competitive and economic indices in canola and pea intercropping at different rates of nitrogen fertilizer. Journal of Agroecology 6(3): 571-581. (In Persian with English Summary)
  15. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2013. The FAOSTAT Database. Available at: http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx.
  16. Gao, Y., Duan, A., Sun, J., Li, F., Liu, H., and Liu, Z. 2009. Crop coefficient and water-use efficiency of winter wheat/spring maize strip intercropping. Field Crops Research 111(1-2): 65-73.
  17. 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.
  18. Hosseini, S.M.B., Mazaheri, D., Jahansouz, M.R., and Yazdi Samadi, B. 2003. The effects of nitrogen levels on yield and yield components of forage millet (Pennisetum americanum) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) in intercropping system. Journal of Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 16(2): 60-67. (In Persian with English Summary)
  19. Lamei Heravani, J. 2012. Technical and economical evaluation of mixed cropping Lathyrus with barley and triticale under dryland conditions in Zanjan province. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 2(4): 93-103.
  20. Lamei Heravani, J. 2013. Assessment of dry forage and crude protein yields, competition and advantage indices in mixed cropping of annual forage legume crops with barley in rainfed conditions of Zanjan. Seed and Plant Production Journal 29(2): 169-184. (In Persian with English Summary)
  21. Lithourgidis, A.S., Vlachostergios, D.N., Dordasc, C.A., and Damalas, C.A. 2011. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea–cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy 34(4): 287-294.
  22. Mazaheri, D. 1998. Intercropping (2nd Eds.). Tehran University Press, Tehran, Iran 262 pp. (In Persian)
  23. Morgado, L., and Willey, R.W. 2003. Effects of plant population and nitrogen fertillizer on yield and efficiency of maize-bean intercropping. Pesquisa Agropecuaria Brasileira 38(11): 1257-1264.
  24. Najafi, S., and Keshtehgar, A. 2014. Effect of intercropping on increase yield. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences 8(5): 549-552.
  25. Nakhzari Moghaddam, A., Dehghanpour Inchehbron, O., and Rahemi Karizaki, A. 2016. The effects of nitrogen levels and intercropping pattern on forage yield and competition indices of barley and pea. Electronic Journal of Crop Production 9(1): 199-214. (In Persian with English Summary)
  26. Nakhzari Moghaddam, A., Chaeichi, M.R., Mazaheri, D., Rahimian Mashhsdi, H., Majnoon Hoseini, N., and Noorinia, A.A. 2009. The effects of corn (Zea mays L.) and green gram (Vigna radiata L.) intercropping on yield, LER and some quality characteristics of forage. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science 40(4): 151-159. (In Persian with English Summary)
  27. Rastgoo, S., Aynehband, A., and Fateh, E. 2015. Competitiveness of sesame and mung bean crops in both monocropping and intercropping systems. Journal of Agroecology 7(3): 356-367. (In Persian with English Summary)
  28. Sanjani, S., Hosseini, M.B., Chaichi, M.R., and Rezvan Beidokhti, S. 2011. Evaluation of yield and yield components in additive intercropping of grain sorghm (Sorghum bicolor L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) under complete and limited irrigation conditions. Journal of Agroecology 3(1): 25-35. (In Persian with English Summary)
  29. Singh, R., and Pandey, M.D. 2002. Studies on integrated pest management in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Field Crops Research 3(3): 662-664.
  30. Willey, R.M. 1979. Intercropping, its importance and research needs, competition and yield advantages. Journal of Crop Science 32: 1-10.
  31. Yilmaz, S., Atak, M., and Erayman, M. 2008. Identification of advantages of maize legume intercropping over solitary cropping through competition incides in the east Mediterranean region. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 32: 111-119.