مقایسه راندمان انرژی تولید سیب‌زمینی (Solanum tuberosum L.)در روش‌های مختلف آبیاری در منطقه جلگه رخ تربت حیدریه

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد مشهد

2 واحد کاشمر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی

3 واحد مشهد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی

چکیده

به‌منظور ارزیابی و مقایسه کارایی مصرف انرژی در تولید سیب‌زمینی (Solanum tuberosum L.) براساس روش‌های آبیاری نشتی و تحت فشار مطالعه‌ای در سطح 11 مزرعه منطقه جلگه رخ شهرستان تربت حیدریه در سال 93-1392 اجرا شد. مقایسه با استفاده از طرح کاملاً تصادفی نامتعادل انجام شد که در آن نوع سیستم آبیاری به‌عنوان تیمار و مزارعی که با هر سیستم آبیاری مطابقت داشت، به‌عنوان تکرار در نظر گرفته شد. بر اساس نتایج تحقیق بیش‌ترین مقدار مصرفی انرژی برای نیروی کارگری مربوط به آبیاری نشتی بود. بیش‌ترین میانگین سوخت فسیلی انرژی‌های مصرفی مربوط به روش آبیاری نشتی و پس از آن به‌ترتیب آبیاری‌های بارانی و قطره‌ای بود. میزان مصرف الکتریسیته در روش آبیاری قطره‌ای بیش‌ترین مقدار را نسبت به دو روش دیگر داشت. بیش‌ترین انرژی مصرفی کودهای نیتروژنه مربوط به روش آبیاری نشتی بود. میزان انرژی مصرفی کودهای فسفره در آبیاری قطره‌ای کم‌ترین مقدار و انرژی استفاده از کودهای پتاسه در سیستم آبیاری قطره‌ای بالاترین بود. انرژی مصرفی ناشی از مصرف علف‌کش‌ها در روش قطره‌ای بیش‌ترین و آبیاری نشتی در رده بعدی قرار گرفت. انرژی مصرفی ماشین‌آلات در روش آبیاری بارانی بیش‌ترین بود. در روش اخیر انرژی مصرفی ماشین‌آلات تقریباً نیمی از سهم انرژی مصرفی ورودی‌های کل بود. میزان انرژی مصرفی غیرمستقیم برای سیستم آبیاری قطره‌ای 6868 مگاژول بر هکتار و در آبیاری بارانی 2756 مگاژول بر هکتار بود. انرژی ناشی از بذر مصرفی در روش آبیاری قطره‌ای بالاترین و در آبیاری بارانی کم‌ترین مقدار بود. میزان کل انرژی‌های ورودی و خروجی در روش آبیاری بارانی بیش‌ترین مقدار (24/106674 و 162000 مگاژول بر هکتار) بود و پس از آن روش‌های آبیاری قطره‌ای (82/97807 و 151000 مگاژول بر هکتار) و آبیاری نشتی (61/92539 و 139000 مگاژول بر هکتار) در رده‌های بعد قرار گرفتند. بازده انرژی روش آبیاری قطره‌ای 6/1 بیش‌تر از سایر روش‌های آبیاری بود. میزان بهره‌وری انرژی از نظر مقدار در آبیاری قطره‌ای و نشتی بیش‌ترین 44/0 و در آبیاری بارانی 41/0 کم‌ترین بود. انرژی خالص در آبیاری بارانی بیش‌ترین (18/ 53392 مگاژول بر هکتار) و در آبیاری نشتی (38/46660 مگاژول بر هکتار) کم‌ترین میزان بود. میزان بهره‌وری انرژی از نظر مقدار در آبیاری قطره‌ای و نشتی (44/0 و 43/0) بیش‌ترین و در آبیاری بارانی کم‌ترین (41/0) بود. میزان انرژی ویژه در آبیاری نشتی (36/2) بیش‌تر از سایر روش‌ها و در آبیاری قطره‌ای کم‌ترین (32/2) بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Energy Efficiency Comparison of Potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) Production in Different Irrigation Methods in Jolgeh Rokh Torbat Heidarieh Region

نویسندگان [English]

  • Vahid Karimi 1
  • Reza Sadrabadi Haghighi 1
  • Amir Behzad Bazregar 2
  • Mohsen Dargahi 3
1 Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University
2 Neyshabur Branch, Islamic Azad University
3 Mashhad Branch, Islamic Azad University
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Energy flow is one of the most important issues in agroecology. The amount of energy that is consumed in different agroecosystems not only depends on the type of crop but also on the material and methods that is used in its production. Potato plants are one of the most important crops that is produced in Torbat Heidarieh region, Khorasan Razavi Province of Iran. Different irrigation methods influence the energy consumption and production. Thus, the aim of this study is to compare energy efficiency of potato with different irrigation methods.
Material and Methods
In order to evaluate and compare the efficiency of energy consumption in potato production based furrow,  sprinkle and drip irrigation methods, a study was carried out at 11 fields in the Jolgeh Rokh Torbat Heidarieh region in 2013- 2014 . The comparison was performed using a completel randomized, unbalanced design. In which the type of irrigation system was considered as the treatment and fields that were matched to each irrigation system as a replication. The studied traits included the amount of input and output energy, the equivalent energy of all inputs, and energy use efficiency, net energy, energy production and specific energy.                                                                                                                                          
Result and Discussion
The largest amount of energy consumed by the human labor was due to furrow irrigation. The highest average of fossil fuel consumption was due to furrow irrigation method followed by sprinkle and drip irrigation. The amount of electricity consumed in the drip irrigation method had the highest amount compared to the other two methods. The most energy consumed by nitrogen fertilizers was related to furrow irrigation method, and the methods of irrigation of droplets and sprinklers in this regard were ranked in the following order, respectively. The amount of energy consumed by phosphorus fertilizers in irrigation was the least amount of droplets. This amount was in sprinkler irrigation and furrow irrigation respectively, although there was no significant difference between the two methods. The energy of using potassium fertilizers in the highest irrigation system was similar to the other irrigation systems. The energy consumption of herbicides was highest in drip methods and furrow irrigation was in the next category. Energy consumption of machinery was highest in sprinkler irrigation method. In the recent method, energy consumption of machinery was about half of the energy consumption of the total inputs. Indirect energy consumption for drip irrigation system was 6868 MJ.ha-1 and in sprinkle irrigation 2756 MJ.ha-1. Energy produced by seed was highest in drip irrigation method and the lowest in sprinkle irrigation. The total amount of input and output energy in sprinkler irrigation method was the highest (106674.24 and 162000 MJ.ha-1), followed by drip irrigation (97807.82 and 151000 MJ.ha-1) and furrow irrigation (92539.61 and 139000 MJ.ha-1) were placed in the following categories. The energy use efficiency of the drip irrigation method 1.6 was more than other irrigation methods. Production energy in terms of amount of drip and furrow irrigation was the highest 0.44 and in sprinkle irrigation 0.41. Net energy was the highest in sprinkler irrigation (53392.18 MJ.ha-1) and the lowest in furrow irrigation (46660.38 MJ.ha-1). Production energy was highest in drip and furrow irrigation (0.44 and 0.43) and lowest in sprinkle irrigation (0.41). The specific energy in furrow irrigation (2.36) was higher than the other methods and in the drip irrigation with the lowest (2.32).                                                                                
Conclusion
According to the results of the present research, in spite of higher yield of potatoes under sprinkle and drip irrigation systems, there were not significant differences among the energy indices; energy efficiency, energy productivity, and special energy; of three systems. This was due to more total input energy in the sprinkle and drip systems. Because the machinery and installations energy input in furrow irrigation system were lower than two other systems.   

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Drip irrigation
  • furrow irrigation
  • Indirect Energy
  • Special energy
  • Sprinkle irrigation
Arjmand, A., and Hasanzadeh Ghourtapeh, A. 2004. Evaluation of energy consumption in potato cultivation case study, Eastern Azarbayejan. 8th Agronomy and plant Breeding Conference. Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz: 26-34. (In Persian with English Summery)
Bazobandi, A., Bakhtiari, S., and Barzegar, B. 2013. Evaluation of energy efficiency in nutrition systems in Forage corn growth in Neishabour City. 1st National Congress on Sustainable Environment and Development, Arak, Iran. (In Persian with English Summery)
Canakci, M., Topakci, M., Akinc, I., and Ozmerzi, A. 2005. Energy use pattern of some field crops and vegetable production: case study for Antalya region, Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management 46:655–66.
Cecconc, C., and Giovanardi, R. 2002. Energy balance of four systems in north eastern Italy. Italy Journal of Agronomy 6: 73-78.
Erdal, G., Esengun, K., Erdal, H. and Gunduz, O. 2007. Energy use and economical analysis of sugar beet production in Tokat province of Turkey. Energy 32:35–41.
Esengun, K., Gunduz, O., and Erdal, G. 2007. Input –output energy analysis in dry apricot production of Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management 48:592 –598.
Faraji, Y. 2005. Reviewing the current status of energy and energy indicators in agriculture in Abbas plain and providing appropriate development strategies. Master's thesis on Agricultural Mechanization. Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University. (In Persian with English Summery)
Ghahridjani, M., Kayhani, A.R., Tabatabayefar, A., and Omid, M. 2009. Investigation and determination of anger rate for potato production at different levels of cultivation in west of Isfahan. Journal of Agricultural and Natural Resources 16(1): 193-183. (In Persian with English Summery)
Gillard, C.L. 1993. A comparison of high input low input and organic cash cropping system. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Guelph. Guelph Ont.
Haj Seyed Hadi, M.R. 2006. Energy efficiency and ecological sustainability in conventional and integrated potato production. system.www.actapress.comPaperInfo.AspxPaperID=23135.
Hasanzadeh Ghourtapeh, A., and Mazaheri, D. 1991. Estimation of energy balance in three wheat, potato and rice fields in Falavarjan region of Isfahan. Fourth Iranian Congress of Agriculture and Plant Nutrition. Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan. Pp. 309-310. (In Persian)
Hoeppner, J., Hentz, M., McConkey, B., Zentner, R., and Nagy, C. 2005. Energy use and efficiency in two Canadian organic and conventional crop production systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21: 60-67.
Hossein Panahi, F., and Kafi, M. 2012. Evaluation of energy budeget and productivity of potato farm of Kurdistan province, case study; dehgolanplain. Agroecology 4(2): 169-159. (In Persian with English Summery)
Izadkhah, M., Tajbakhsh, M., and Hassanzadeh, A. 2010. Evaluation of energy efficiency of conventional and mechanized farming system on potato production in East Azarbyjan province. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. 8(2): 284-297
Kazemi, H., Kamkar, B., Lakzaei, S., Badsar, M., and Shahbyki, M. 2015. Energy flow analysis for rice production in different geographical regions of Iran. Energy 84: 390-396.
Kizilaslan, H. 2009. Input–output energy analysis of cherries production in Tokat Province of Turkey. Applied Energy.86:1354–1358.
Koocheki, A., and Hoseini, M. 1994. Energy Performance in Agricultural Eco-systems. Ferdowsi University of Mashahd Press, Mashhad, Iran. P. 65-72. (In Persian)
Mohammadi, A., and Omid, M. 2010. Economical analysis and relation between energy inputs and yield of greenhouse cucumber production in Iran. Applied Energy 87: 191-196.
Mohammadi, A., Tabatabaeefar, A., ShahinRafiee, S., and Keyhani, A. 2008. Energy use and economical analysis of potato production in Iran a case study: Ardabil province. Energy Conversion and Management 49:3566–3570.
Pimentel, D., Berardi, G., and Fast, S. 1983 Energy efficiency of farming systems: Organic and conventional Agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 9: 359-372.
Soltani, A., Rajabi, M.H., Zeinali, E., and Soltani, E. 2013. Energy inputs and greenhouse gases emissions in wheat production in Gorgan, Iran. Energy 50: 54-61.
Zahedi, M., Mondani, F., and Eshghizadeh, H.R. 2015. Analyzing the energy balances of double-cropped cereals in an arid region. Energy Report 1: 49-43.