برآورد عملکرد و شاخص‌های کشت مخلوط سیر (Allium sativum L.) و نخود فرنگی (Pisum sativum L.) در مناطق ساری و گنبد کاووس

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری

2 دانشگاه گنبد کاووس

چکیده

به‌منظور ارزیابی کشت مخلوط سیر و نخود فرنگی آزمایشی در سال زراعی 93-1392 در دو منطقه ساری و گنبد کاووس در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار اجرا شد. تیمارها شامل ترکیب­های مختلف کشت مخلوط در نه سطح شامل کشت خالص سیر، کشت خالص نخود فرنگی، مخلوط جایگزینی 25 : 75، 50 :50، 75 : 25 درصد، مخلوط افزایشی 25 + 100، 50 +100، 75 + 100، 100 + 100 درصد نخود­فرنگی و سیر در نظر گرفته شدند. نتایج نشان داد که عملکرد محصول (سیر و نخود فرنگی) در اغلب تیمارهای آزمایشی واقع در شهرستان ساری (استان مازندران) نسبت به شهرستان گنبد کاووس (استان گلستان) برتری داشت. اغلب شاخص­های کشت مخلوط تیمارهای افزایشی در مقایسه با تیمارهای جایگزینی واقع در هر دو استان از مزیت بالاتری برخوردار بود. حداکثر سودمندی کل (38/0) در شهرستان ساری و در تیمار جایگزینی 25 درصد نخود فرنگی + 75 درصد سیر مشاهده شد که نسبت به منطقه گنبد کاووس 15 درصد افزایش نشان داد. در مجموع، عملکرد کل و اغلب شاخص‌های مورد ارزیابی مخلوط در تیمارهای افزایشی در مقایسه با تیمارهای جایگزینی در هردو منطقه از مزیت بالاتری برخودار بود. هر چند عملکرد و شاخص‌های ارزیابی مخلوط در منطقه ساری بیش‌تر از گنبد کاووس بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Estimation the Yield and Intercropping Indices of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) and Peas (Pisum sativum L.) in two Regions of Sari and Gonbad Kavoos

نویسندگان [English]

  • arastoo abbasian 1
  • Ali Nakhzari Moghadam 2
  • Hemmatolla Pirdashti 1
  • Ebrahim Gholamaliopur Alamdari 2
1 Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University Sari University
2 Goonbad Kavoos
چکیده [English]

Introduction
In intercropping systems, inputs in a unit area have been reduced but use of available resources is optimized, leading to increased production and promotion of evaluation indices. In a study on maize and peanut intercropping, the highest index of land equivalent ratio (LER=1.04) was obtained in 100% corn + 100% peanut. In addition, barley and peas as well as garlic and chickpea intercropping, improved the LER and the other intercropping indices. Therefore, the main objective of this research was the estimation of the yield and intercropping indices of garlic (Allium sativum L.) and peas (Pisum sativum L.) in two regions of Sari and Gonbad Kavoos.
Materials and Methods
The present research was conducted at research farms of Gonbad Kavoos University and Sari region during 2013-2014. The experiment was arranged based on randomized complete block design with three replications. Treatments were nine levels including sole cropping of garlic and pea, beside replacement series of 25:75, 50:50 and 75%:25% pea: garlic as well as additive series of 25, 50, 75 and 100% pea +100% garlic. Plot size was 1.8 × 6m with six rows of cultivation. Plant densities in the control treatment were the same for both garlic and peas, with a 30 × 10 cm square and rectangular plant arrangement with six lines of six meters long and 360 plants per plot. In the incremental mix of 25% pea + 100% garlic, 50% pea + 100% garlic, 75% pea + 100% and 100% pea + 100% garlic 90, 180, 270 and 360 plants of peas were added to each plot of garlic, respectively.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the highest garlic yield (9800 kg.ha-1) was obtained in pure cropping in Sari region, which increased 14% as compared to the Gonbad Kavoos region. The yield of pods (1060 kg.ha-1) and seed (348.3 kg.ha-1) decreased (up to 64 and 61%, respectively) in pure cropping of peas in the Gonbad Kavoos region. In additive series, LER and relative crowding coefficient in100% of garlic + 100% peas was 1.33 and 1.49 as well as 1.1 and 2.54 in Sari and Gonbad Kavoos, respectively. Actual yield loss (AYL=-0.15 and -0.20) were observed only in Sari and in additive series of 75% peas + 100% garlic and 100% of peas + 100% garlic, respectively. In contrast, the intercropping advantage (0.38) was observed in Sari where the 25% of peas intercropped with 75% of garlic, increasing up to 15% as compared to the Gonbad Kavoos region. Furthermore, partial competitive ratio (CRa) for pea and garlic was affected by different planting arrangements. The highest CR value for garlic (1.55) was recorded when 25% pea was added to 100% garlic. The higher root system and leaf area of pea helps to its advantage in intercropping system. The partial advantage of intercropping for garlic was affected by planting arrangement. The maximum partial advantage was obtained in replacement series of 755 garlic +25% pea.
Conclusion
In general, results of the present research clearly showed that intercropping of garlic and peas improved yield performance and intercropping evaluation indices. In additive series, a mixture of 100% pea + 100% garlic with relative crowding coefficient of 5.17 was the best combination of intercropping in terms of yield improvement in both regions. The presence of garlic in the mixture, particularly in the Gonbad Kavoos region, dramatically reduced the adverse effect of cold temperature on seed yield of peas and prevented the severe reduction of yield. Therefore, in each region where it is possible to cultivate these two plants, it is recommended that garlic considered as the main plant and peas with a density of 75% or more could add to the mixture.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to the University of Gonbad Kavoos for its contribution to the implementation of the project as well as Sari Agricultural Science
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Actual yield
  • Garlic
  • Land equivalent ratio
  • Peas
  • Relative crowding coefficient
References
Abbasi, R. 2010. Interaction of reduced doses of herbicides and nitrogen fertilizer on the competition between dandelion and corn. PhdDissertation of Weed Science. Campus of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Tehran University, Iran. (In Persian)
Ahmadi, A., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab, A., Zhtab Salmasi, S., Amini, R., Jan Mohammadi, H., and Nami, F. 2010. Investigation of light condition in pure culture and mixture of barley and cluster vetch and its relation with forage yield. Journal of Agricultural Knowledge and Sustainable Production 20(2): 53-65. (In Persian with English Summary)
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: 577-584.
Baharloei, S., and Fallah, S. 2015. Optimization of nitrogen use for growth and yield of rapeseed and flour cultivars in mixed cropping. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 6(5): 31-41. (In Persian with English Summary)
Banik P, Midya A, Sarkar B.K., and Ghose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive experiment. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.
Chapagain, T., and Riseman, A. 2014. Barley–pea intercropping: effects on land productivity, carbon and nitrogen transformations. Field Crops Research 166: 18-25.
Chetty, C.K., and Reddy, M.N. 1987. A general proposal for ranking intercrop treatments. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 57: 64–65.
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): 249-256.
Eskandari, H., and Alizadeh- Amraie, A. 2016. Evalotion of growth and species composition of weed in maize cowpea intercropping based on additive serios under organic farming condition. Journal of Agroecology 8(2): 227-240. (In Persian with English Summary)
Fan, Z., An, T., Wu, K., Zhou, F., Zi, S., Yang, Y., and Wu, B. 2016. Effects of intercropping of maize and potato on sloping land on the water balance and surface runoff. Agricultural Water Management 166: 9-16.
Gou, F., van Ittersum, M. K., Simon, E., Leffelaar, P.A., van der Putten, P.E., Zhang, L., and van der Werf, W. 2017. Intercropping wheat and maize increases total radiation interception and wheat RUE but lowers maize RUE. European Journal of Agronomy 84: 125-139.
Hu, F., Gan, Y., Hongyan Cui, H., Zhao, C., Feng, F., Yin, W., and Qiang Chai, Q. 2016. Intercropping maize and wheat with conservation agriculture principles improves water harvesting and reduces carbon emissions in dry areas. European Journal of Agronomy 74:9-17.
Javanmard, Rostami, A., Nouraein, M., Gharekhany, G.H. 2016.Agronomical, ecological and economical evaluation of wheat- chickpea intercropping under rainfed condition of Maragheh. Journal of Agricultural Knowledge and Sustainable Production 1(26): 19-37. (In Persian with English Summary)
Khatamipour, M., Asgharipour, M.R., and Sirousmehr, A. 2014. Intercropping benefits of foxtail millet (Setaria italica) with mungbean (Vignaradiata) as influenced by application of different manure levels. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 24(3): 75-86. (In Persian with English Summary)
Koochecki, A., and Nasiri Mahallati, M. 2016. The effect of climate change on agriculture: crop production forecast and a solution compatible. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Resarch 14(1): 1-20. (In Persian with English Summary)
Lal, B., Rana, K.S., Rana, D.S., Shivay, Y.S., Sharma, D.K., Meena, B.P., and Gautam, P. 2017. Biomass, yield, quality and moisture use of Brassica carinata as influenced by intercropping with chickpea under semiarid tropics. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences 18(1): 61-71.
Lamai Hervani, J. 2013. Assessment of dry forage and crude protein yeilds, competition and advantage indices in mixed cropping of annual forage legume crops with barley in rainfed comditions of Zanjan province in Iran. Journal of Planting Seeds and Seeds 2(29): 169-183. (In Persian with English Summary)
Li, L., Sun, J.H., Zhang, F.S., Li, X.L., Yang, S.C., and Rengel, Z. 2002. Wheat/maize or wheat/soybean strip intercropping I. Yield advantage and interspecific interactions on nutrients. Field Crops Research 71: 123–137.
Liu, T., Cheng, Z., Meng, H., Ahmad, I. and Zhao, H. 2014. Growth, yield and quality of spring tomato and physicochemical properties of medium in a tomato/garlic intercropping system under plastic tunnel organic medium cultivation. Journal of Science Horticulture 170:159-168.
Mead, R., and Willey, R.W. 1980. The concept of a land equivalent ratio and advantages in yields for intercropping. Experimental in Agriculture 16: 217–228.
Momen Keykha, M., Khammari, I., Dahmardeh, M., and Forouzandeh, M. 2018. Assessing yield and physiological aspects of guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba L.) and sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) intercropping under different levels of nitrogen. Journal of Agroecology 9(4): 1050-1069. (In Persian with English Summary)
Namdari, M., and Mahmoudi, 2012. Evaluation of yield and productivity indices in planting ratios of intercropping of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and Canola (Brassica napus L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Science 14(4): 346-357. (In Persian with English Summary)
Noghani, M., Mashayekhi, K., Shakouri, M.J., and Mousavizadeh, S.J. 2013. The study the usefulness production garlic, in intercropping with the pea in Gorgan Region. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences 6(11): 1761-1763.
Piri, I., Zendehdel, B., and Tavassoli, A. 2017. Study of agronomical and ecological parameters of additive and replacement intercropping systems of corn (Zea maize L.) and soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Journal of Agroecology 9(3): 705-721. (In Persian with English Summary)
Poggio, S.L. 2005. Structure of weed communities occurring in monoculture andintercropping of field pea and barley. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 109: 48-58.
Radosevich, S., Holt, J., and Ghersa, C., 2007. Ecology of weeds and invasive plants (3rd Edition). John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, NY. Pp, 558.
Sanjani, S., Hosseini, M.B., Chaichi, M., and Rezvan Bidokhodi, R. 2011. Evaluation of yield and yield components in mixed cultivation of increasing sorghum and bean hares in full irrigation and irrigation conditions. Journal of Agricultural Ecology 7(1): 85-95. In Persian with English Summary)
Saseendran, S.A., Ahuja, L.R., Ma, L., Trout, T.J., McMaster, G.S., Nielsen, D.C., Ham, J.M., Andales, A.A., Halvorson, A.D., Chavez, J.L., and Fang, Q.X., 2015. Developing and normalizing average corn crop water production functions across years and locations using a system model. Agricultural Water Management 157: (31):65-77.
Saucke, H., and Ackarmann, K. 2006. Weed suppression in mixed cropped grain peas and false flax. Weed Research 46:453-461.
Scott, J.K., Yeoh, P.B., and Michael, P.J. 2016. Methods to select areas to survey for biological control agents: An example based on growth in relation to temperature and distribution of the weed Conyza bonariensis. Biological Control 97: 21-30.
Singh Rajesh K., Kumar, H., and Singh Amitesh, K. 2010. Brassica based intercropping systems: A review. Agricultural Science Journal 31(4): 6- 11.
Ullah, A., Bhatti, M.A., Gurmani, Z.A., and Imran, M. 2007. Studies on planting patterns of maize (Zea mays L.) facilitating legumes intercropping. Journal of Agricultural Research 45: 113–118.
Vandermeer, J.H. 1990.Intercropping. Agroecology (Eds. C.R. Carrol, J.H. Vandermeer and P.M. Rosset), pp. 481–516. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.
Wang, Z., Zhao, X., Wu, P., Gao, Y., Yang, Q., and Shen, Y. 2017. Border row effects on light interception in wheat/maize strip intercropping systems. Field Crops Research 214: 1-13.
Willey, R.W., and Rao, M.R. 1980. A competitive ratio for quantifying competition between intercrops. Explanation of Agriculture 16: 105–117.
Zhang, L., Vanderwerf, W., Bastiaans, L., Zhang, S., and Spiertz, J.H. 2008. Light interception and utilization in relay intercrops of wheat and cotton. Field Crops Research 107: 29-42.
Zhou, X., Yu, G., and Wu, F. 2011. Effects of intercropping cucumber with onion or garlic on soil enzyme activities, microbial communities and cucumber yield. European Journal of Soil Biology 47: 279-287.