بررسی دریافت نور و برخی ویژگی های کانوپی درکشت های خالص و مخلوط ذرت (Zea mays L.)و باقلا L.) Vicia faba)

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• اسماعیل رضائی چیانه
• عادل دباغ محمدی نسب
• محمدرضا شکیبا
• کاظم قاسمی گلعذانی
• سعید اهری زاد

گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران

10.22067/jag.v2i3.7658

چکیده

سیستم های کشت مخلوط یکی از روش های مدیریت صحیح تو لید محصولات زراعی است که منجر به بهبود جذب و کارایی مصرف منابع توسط گیاهان می شود. با همین هدف به منظور بررسی دریافت نور و برخی ویژگی های کانوپی درکشت های خالص و مخلوط ذرت (Zea mays L.)و باقلا L.) Vicia faba) تحت شرایط آب و هوایی تبریز، آزمایشی در قالب طرح بلوک های تصادفی با سه تکرار و 15 تیمار در ایستگاه تحقیقاتی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تبریز در سال زراعی 86- 1385 اجرا گردید. تیمارها شامل سه تراکم کشت خالص ذرت (6، 7 و 8 بوته در متر مربع)، سه تراکم کشت خالص باقلا (30، 40 و 50 بوته در متر مربع) و نه ترکیب تیماری برای کشت مخلوط دو گونه به روش افزایشی بودند. نتایج نشان داد که شاخص سطح برگ، درصد نور دریافتی و شاخص کلروفیل در کشت مخلوط نسبت به تک کشتی های ذرت به ترتیب 88/2 ، 37 و 94/11 درصد و نسبت به تک کشتی های باقلا به ترتیب 63/2 ،30 و 27/9 درصد افزایش نشان داد. میانگین دمای داخل کانوپی تیمارهای کشت مخلوط نسبت به میانگین تک کشتی های ذرت و باقلا نیز به ترتیب 17/2 و 88/2 درجه سانتیگراد کمتر بود. در بین کشت های مخلوط، ترکیب تراکمی هشت بوته ذرت و 50 بوته باقلا در متر مربع بهترین تیمار از نظر دریافت نور توسط کانوپی، شاخص سطح برگ کانوپی، شاخص کلروفیل و دمای کانوپی تشخیص داده شد. ارزیابی تیمارهای مختلف کشت مخلوط با استفاده از نسبت برابری زمین (LER) نشان داد که میزان LER در تمام تیمارهای مخلوط ذرت و باقلا بزرگتر از یک بود. ترکیب تیماری 6 بوته ذرت با تراکم های 50 و 40 بوته باقلا، بالاترین نسبت برابری زمین (97/1) را به خود اختصاص داد که معادل 5/97 درصد افزایش در بهره وری استفاده از زمین نسبت به کشت خالص دو گونه بود و این نشان دهنده برتری کشت مخلوط در مقایسه با کشت خالص است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• دمای کانوپی
• شاخص سطح برگ
• کلروفیل
• نسبت برابری زمین
• نور دریافتی

---

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of light interception and canopy characteristics in mono-cropping and intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.)

نویسندگان [English]

• Esmaeil Rezaee Chiane
• Adel Dabagh Mohammadi Nasab
• Mohammad Reza Shakiba
• Kazem Ghasemi Golazani
• Saeed Aharizade

Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

چکیده [English]

Intercropping is a correct method of management for crop production and leads to improvement of resource absorption and use by plants. In order to evaluate light interception and some characteristics of canopy in monocropping and intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) under climatic conditions of Tabriz, a field experiment was conducted in 2006-2007 at the Research Station of the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Iran. The experiment was laid out as randomized complete block design with fifteen treatments and three replications. Treatments were including mono-cropping of maize densities (6, 7 and 8 plants. m-2) and faba bean densities (30, 40 and 50 plants. m-2) and 9 treatments of intercropping included combination of densities. Two plant species intercropped on the basis of additive series design. The results showed that leaf area index, light interception and chlorophyll index in intercropping were 2.88, 37 and 11.94 % more than those in monocropping of maize and 2.63, 30 and 9.27 % more than those in pure stand of faba bean, respectively. Among intercrops, combination of 8 maize plants and faba bean plants. m-2 was best intercrop regard to light interception canopy leaf area index, chlorophyll index and canopy temperature. Maximum land equivalent ratio (1.97) was attained by 6 maize plants. m-2 with 40 and 50 plants/m2 of faba bean intercropping combinations. This means that grain yield per unit area in intercropping improved by 97%, compared with monocropping, intercropping had advantage over sole crop.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Canopy temperature
• Chlorophyll index
• Land equivalent ratio
• Leaf Area Index
• Light interception

مراجع

1- Aasim, M., Umer, E.M., and Karim, A. 2008. Yield and competition indices of intercropping cotton (Gossypum hirstum L.) using different planting pattern. Journal of Tarim Bilimleri Dergis 4: 326-333.

2- Agegnehu, G., Ghizaw, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and Land – use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian high lands. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 202 –207.

3- Ahmadvand, A., Nasiri- Mahalati, M., and Koocheki, A. R. 2006. Effect of light competition and nitrogen fertilizer on canopy structure of wheat and wild oat. Journal of Agricultural Science and Natural Resourse 6: 1-12. (In Persian with English Summary)

4- Anthony, R.S., and Rene, C.V. 2008. Land equivalent ratios, Light interception, and water in annual intercrops in the presence or absence of in-crop herbicides. Agronomy Journal 100: 1145-1154.

5- Argenta, G., Silva, P.F., and Sangoi, L. 2004. Leaf relative chlorophyll content as a parameter to predict nitrogen fertilization in maize. Cienica Rural, Santa Maria 34: 1379-1387.

6- Awal, M. A., Koshi, H., and Iked, T. 2006. Radiation interception and use by maize / peanut intercrop canopy. Agricultural and forest meteorology 139: 74- 83.

7- Beyshlag, W., Barnes, P. W., Rywel, R., Caldwell, M.M., and Flint, S.D. 1990. Plant competition for light analyzed with a multispecies canopy model. II. Influence of photosynthetic characteristics on mixtures of wheat and wild oat. Ecological Journal 82: 374-380.

8- Bingcheng, X., Shan. L., Zhang, S., Deng, X., and Li, F. 2008. Evaluation of switch grass and sainfoin intercropping under 2:1 row – replacement in semiarid region northwest china African Journal Biotechnology 7: 4056-4067.

9- France, B., Urska, Z., Silva, G. M., Martina, B., and Laszlo, R. 2000. Competitive ability of maize in mixture with climbing bean in organic farming. Available at: http:// www. Organic. org.

10- Getachew, A., Ghizaw, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and Land use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian high lands. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 202 –207.

11- Ghanbari, B.A. 2000. Intercropping field bean (Vicia faba L.) and wheat (Triticume aestivume L.) as a low-input forage. PhD Thesis Wye Collage University of London UK.

12- Ghosh, P.K., Manna, M.C., Bandyopadhyay, K.K., Ajay, A.K., Tripathi, R.H., Wanjari, K. M., Hati, A. K., Misra Charya, C. L., and Subba Rao, A. 2006. Interspecific interaction and nutrient use in soybean-sorghum intercropping system. Agronomy Journal 98(4): 1097-1108.

13- Haugaard – Nielsen, H., Ambus, P., and Jensen, E. S. 2001. Inter-specific competition, N-use and interference with weed in pea – barley intercropping. Field Crop Research 70: 101 –109.

14- Haymes, R., and Lee, H.C. 1999. Competition between autumn and spring planted grain intercrops of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and field bean (Vicia faba L.). Field Crops Research 62:167-176.

15- Hemayati, S., Siadat, A., and Sadeghzade, F. 2002. Evaluation of intercropping of two corn hybrids in different densities, Iranian. Journal of Agricultural Science 25: 73-87. (In Persian with English Summary)

16- 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. Pajouhesh v Sazandegi 59: 60-67. (In Persian with English Summary)

17- Jaya, K.D., Bell, V.J., and Sale, P.W. 2008. Modification of within-canopy microclimate in maize for intercropping in the lowland tropics. Available at: http:// www.regional.org.au.

18- Kayhan, F.P., Dutilleul, P., and Smith, D. 1999. Soybean canopy development as affected by population density and intercropping with corn. Crop Science 39: 1784-1791.

19- Keating. M., and Carbery, J. 1993. Light interception and yield in legume-cereal intercropping. Field Crops Research 1: 75-79.

20- 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: 13-23. (In Persian with English Summary).

21- Li. L., Yang, S., Zhang, X., and Christie, F. 1999. Inter-specific complementary and competitive interactions between intercropped maize and faba bean. Plant and Soil 212: 105 – 114.

22- Mason, S.C., Leihner, D.E., Vorst, J.J., and Salazar, E. 1986. Cassava-cowpea and cassava-peanut intercropping. I. Leaf area index and dry matter accumulation. American Society of Agronomy Journal 78: 47-53.

23- Minale, L., Tilahun, T., and Alemayehu, A. 2001. Determination of nitrogen and phosphorus pertilizer levels in different maize-faba bean intercropping patterns in northwestern Ethiopia. Seventh Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Maize Conference pp: 513-518.

24- Nasrullahzadeh, S., Ghassemi – Golezani, K., Javanshir, A., Valizadeh M., and Shakiba, M. R. 2007. Effects of shade stress on ground cover and grain yield of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 1: 337- 340.

25- Parsa, M., and Bagheri, A. 2008. Pulses. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Press. 522 pp. (In Persian).

26- Raji, J. A. 2007.Intercropping kenaf and cow pea. African Journal of Biotechnology 6: 2807-2809.

27- Rostami, L., Mondani, F., Khuramdel, S., Koocheki, A., and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2009. Effect of various corn and bean intercropping densities on weed populations. Weed Research Journal 1(2):37-51. (In Persian with English Summary).

28- Shikata, K., Matsushita, Y., Naw, E., and Sakuratani, T. 2003. Effect of intercropping with maize on the growth and light environment of cowpea. Japanese Journal of Tropical Agriculture 47: 17-26.

29- Singer, J. W., Sauer, T. S., Blaser, B. C., and Meek, D. W. 2007. Radiation use efficiency in winter cereal forage production systems. American society of Agronomy 99: 1175-1179.

30- Tesfaye, K., Walker, S., and Tsubo, M. 2006. Radiation interception and radiation use efficiency of three grain legumes under water deficit conditions in a semi-arid environment. European Journal Agronomy 25: 60-70.

31- Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Mukhala, E. 2001. Comparisons of radiation use efficiency of mono/inter cropping systems with different orientations. Field Crops Research 71: 17 – 29.

32- Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Ogindo, H. O. 2004. A simulation model of cereal-legume intercropping systems for semiarid regions I. Model development. Field Crops Research 90: 48-61.

33- Vandermeer, J. H. 1989. The Ecology of Intercropping, Cambridge Univ. ersity Press. pp: 297.

34- Watiki, J. M., Fukai, S., Banda, J. A., and Keating, B. A. 1993. Radiation interception and growth of maize/cowpea intercrop as affected by maize plant-density and cowpea cultivar. Field Crops Research 35: 123-133.

35- Wenxue, L., Long, L., Jianhao, S., Tianwen, G., Fusuo, Z., Xingguo, B., Peng, A., and Tang, C. 2005. Effects of intercropping and nitrogen application on nitrate presentinthe profile of orthic an orthic anthrosolwest china. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 105: 483 – 491.

36- Willey, R.W. 1979. Intercropping-its importance and research needs.Part-1. Competition and yield advantages. Field Crops Research 32: 1-10.

37- Willey, R.W. 1990. Resource use in intercropping system. Journal of Agriculture Water Management 17: 215-231.