تأثیر کشت مخلوط جو (Hordeum vulgare L.) و شبدر ایرانی (Trifolium resupinatum L.) بر ویژگی‌های کمی علوفه

نوع مقاله : علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• رامین نظریان
• علیرضا کوچکی
• مهدی نصیری محلاتی
• پرویز رضوانی مقدم

دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

10.22067/jag.v11i1.45221

چکیده

جهت بهینه سازی نسبت و آرایش کاشت در مخلوط جو و شبدر آزمایشی بصورت اسپلیت پلات در قالب بلوک های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار درسال زراعی 93-1392 در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد اجرا شد. آرایش کاشت در پنج سطح (مخلوط ردیفی 1:1(M1)، مخلوط ردیفی 2:2 (M2)، مخلوط نواری 3:3 (M3)، مخلوط نواری 4:4 (M4) و مخلوط درهم (M5)) بعنوان کرت اصلی و نسبت کاشت نیز در پنج سطح (مخلوط افزایشی 50% شبدر + 100% جو (R5)، مخلوط افزایشی 25% شبدر + 100% جو (R4)، مخلوط جایگزینی 50% جو + 50% شبدر(R3) همرا با جو خالص (R2) و شبدر خالص (R1)) در کرت های فرعی قرار گرفتند. نتایج آزمایش حاکی از تاثیر معنی دار (P<0.01) آرایش و نسبت کاشت بر وزن خشک علوفه وهمچنین عملکرد پروتئین بود. بیشترین وزن خشک علوفه از کشت جو خالص (14731 کیلوگرم در هکتار) و مخلوط درهم (12857.9 کیلوگرم در هکتار) بدست آمد. بیشترین عملکرد پروتئین نیز از نسبت کاشت جو خالص (1962.2 کیلوگرم در هکتار) و آرایش کاشت مخلوط درهم (1584.38 کیلوگرم در هکتار) حاصل شد. اثر آرایش کاشت بر نسبت برابری زمین معنی دار نبود ولی نسبت کاشت بر نسبت برابری زمین تاثیرمعنی دار داشت (P<0.01). بیشترین نسبت برابری زمین متعلق به نسبت کاشت R5 (1.28) و آرایش کاشت M4 (1.23) بود. تاثیر آرایش و نسبت کاشت بر ضریب ازدحام نسبی (K) معنی دار نبود ولی بیشترین مقدار ضریب ازدحام نسبی متعلق به نسبت کاشت R4 (35.33) وکمترین مقدار متعلق به R5 (23.24-) بود. اثر آرایش و نسبت کاشت بر شاخص تهاجم معنی دار بود، منفی شدن شاخص تهاجم شبدربیانگر مغلوب بودن شبدر در کشت مخلوط بوده و همانگونه که آشکار شد جو دارای قابلیت رقابتی بیشتر برای تسخیر منابع در کشت مخلوط بود. شاخص های اقتصادی کاهش عملکرد واقعی (AYL) وسودمندی اقتصادی (IA) بیانگر مزیت کشت مخلوط جو و شبدرنسبت به حالت تک کشتی بوده بطوریکه بیشترین سودمندی اقتصادی در نسبت کاشت مخلوط R4 (7262833 ریال) و آرایش کاشت مخلوط M4 (4974840 ریال) حاصل گردید.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• کشت مخلوط
• آرایش کاشت
• نسبت کاشت
• نسبت برابری زمین

20.1001.1.20087713.1398.11.1.15.0

---

عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of Barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and Persian Clover (Trifolium respinatum L.) Intercropping on Forage Quantity

نویسندگان [English]

• Ramin Nazarian
• Ali Reza Koocheki
• Mahdi nassiri mahallati
• Parwiz Rezwani moqaddam

Ferdowsi mashhad

چکیده [English]

For optimize of cropping rate and pattern in a mixture of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and persian clover (Trifolium respinatum L.) an experiment was arranged in split plot with randomized complete block design and three replications. This experiment was conducted on research farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in 2013-14. The pattern of sowing considered in five levels (row intercropping 1:1 (M1), row intercropping 2:2 (M2), strip intercropping 3:3 (M3), strip intercropping 4:4 (M4) and mixed cropping (M5)) in main plots and the cropping rate were in five levels (barley %100: %50 clover (R5), barley %100: %25 clover (R4), barley %50: %50 clover (R3),with pure barley (R2) and pure clover (R1)) in subplots. ). Results showed that the effect of cropping rate and pattern on forage dry matter (FDM) and protein yield (PY) were significant (P<0.01). The highest levels of forage dry matter were obtained in pure barley R2 (14731 kg/ha) and mixed cropping M5 (12857.9 kg/ha), respectively. The highest protein yield were also obtained in R2 (1962.2 Kg/ha) and M5 (1584.38 Kg/ha). The effect of sowing pattern on land equivalent ratio (LER) was not significant but the effect of cropping rate was significant (P <0.01). The highest levels of LER were obtained in R5 (1.28) and M4 (1.23), respectively. The effect of sowing rate and pattern on relative crowding coefficient (RCC or K) was not significant but the highest level of K was obtained in R4 (35.33) and the lowest was in R5 (-23.24). The effect of sowing rate and pattern on aggressivity (A) was significant, and the clover negative value of aggressivity (A) showed that the clover was recessive in intercrop. Economic indices such as actual yield loss (AYL) and intercropping advantage index (IA) showed that barley-clover intercropping was better than sole culture, and the highest IA was obtained in R4 (7,262,833 Rials) and M4 (4974840 Rials).

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Intercropping
• cropping pattern
• Cropping rate
• Land equivalent ratio (LER)

مراجع

Anil, L., Park, R.H., Phipps, R.H., and Miller, F.A. 1998. Temperate intercropping of cereals of cereals for forage: a review of the potential for growth and utilization with particular reference to the UK. Grass and Forage Science 53: 301–317.

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 Sciences 6(4): 577-584.

Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Gose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping system in an additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.

Benites, J.R., McCollum, R.E., and Naderman, G.C. 1993. Production efficiency of intercrops relative to sequentially planted sole crops in a humid tropical environment. Field Crops Research 31: 1-18.

Banik, P., Sasmal, T., Ghosal, P.K., and Bagchi, D.K. 2000. Evaluation of mustard (Brassica campestris var Toria) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 rowreplacement series systems. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 185: 9–14.

Banik, P. 1996. Evaluation of wheat (T. aestivum) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 row-replacement series system. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 176: 289–294.

Carr, P.M., Horsley, R.D., and Poland, W.W. 2004. Barley, oat, and cereal–pea mixtures as dryland forages in the northern great plains. Agron Jerusalem 96: 677–684.

Clements, R.O., and Donaldson, G. 1997. Clover and cereal: low input bi-cropping. Farming Conservation 3: 12–14.

Carr, P.M., Martin, G.B., Caton, J.S., and Poland, W.W. 1998. Forage and nitrogen yield of barley–pea and oat–pea intercrops. Agron Jerusalem 90: 79–84.

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: 249-256.

DeWit, C.T. 1960. On competition. Verslag Landbouw-Kundige Onderzoek 66: 1–28.

Dordas, C.A., and Lithourgidis, A.S. 2011. Growth, yield and nitrogen performance of faba bean intercrops with oat and triticale at varying seeding ratios. Grass Forage Science 66: 569–577.

Esmaeili, A., Sadeghpour, A., Hosseini, S.M.B., Jahanzad, E., Chaichi, M.R., and Hashemi, M. 2011. Evaluation of seed yield and competition indices for intercropped barley and annual medic. International Journal of Plant Production 5(4): 395-404. (In Persian with English Summery)

Exner, D.N., and Cruse, R.M. 1993. Inter seeded forage legume potential as winter ground cover, nitrogen source, and competition. Journal of Production Agriculture 6: 226-231.

Giller, K.E., and Wilson, K.J. 1991. Nitrogen fixation and tropical cropping system. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 10-120.

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.

Herbert, S.J., Putnam, D.H., Poos-Floyd, M.L., Vargas, A., and Creighton, J.F. 1984. Forage yield of intercropped corn and soybean in various planting patterns. Agron Jerusalem 76: 507–510.

Javanmard, A., Nasab, A.D.M., Javanshir, A., Moghaddam, M., AND Janmohammadi, H. 2009. Forage yield and quality in intercropping of maize with different legumes as double-cropped. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment 7: 163-166.

Jeyabal, A., and Kuppuswamy, G. 2001. Recycling of organic wastes for the production of vermin compost and its response in rice-legume cropping system and soil fertility. European Journal of Agronomy 15: 153-170.

Jones, L., and Clements, R.O. 1993. Development of a low-input system for growing wheat (Triticum vulgare) in a permanent understory of white clover (Trifolium repens). Annals of Applied Biology 123: 109–119.

Lithourgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., Dhima, K.V., Dordas, C.A., and Yiakoulaki, M.D. 2006. Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Research 99: 106–113.

Lithourgidis, A.S., Vlachostergiosb, D.N., Dordasc, C.A., and Damalasd, C.A. 2011. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea–cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy 34: 287–294.

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 advantages and smothering of weeds. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 191: 195–201.

Mohsenabadi, G.R., Jahansooz, M.R., Chaichi, M.R., Mashhadi, H.R., Liaghat, A.M., and Savaghebi, G.R. 2008. Evaluation of barley vetch intercrop at different nitrogen rates. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 10: 23–31. (In Persian with English Summery)

Ross, S.M., King, J.R., O’Donovan, J.T., and Izaurralde, R.C. 2003. Seeding rate effects in oat-berseem clover intercrops. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 83: 769–778.

Ross, S.M., King, J.R., O’Donovan, J.T., and Spaner, D. 2004a. Forage potential of intercropping berseem clover with barley, oat, or triticale. Agronomy Journal 96: 1013–1020.

Sadeghpour, A., and Jahanzad, E. 2012. Seed yield and yield components of intercropped barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and annual medic (Medicago scutellata L.). Australasian Journal of Agricultural Engineering 3: 47–50.

Sadeghpour, A., Jahanzad, E., Esmaeili, A.M., Hosseini, B., and Hashemi, M. 2013. Forage yield, quality and economic benefit of intercropped barley and annual medic in semi-arid conditions: Additive series. Field Crops Research 148: 43–48. (In Persian with English Summery)

Sharifi, Y. 2004. Evalution of sorghum/bereseem clover intercropping. M.Sc. Thesis, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian)

Sistach, M. 1990. Intercropping of forage sorghum, maize and soybean during ten establishments of different grasses in a vertisol soil. Cuban Journal of Agriculture Science 24: 123–129.

Strydhorst, S.M., King, J.R., Lopetinksy, K.J., and Harker, K.N. 2008. Forage potential of intercropping barley with faba bean, lupin, or field pea. Agronomy Journal 100: 182–190.

Thorsted, M.D., Olesen, J.E., and Weiner, J. 2006. Width of clover strips and wheat rows influence grain yield in winter wheat/white clover intercropping. Field Crops Research 95: 280–290.

Thorsted, M.D., Koefoed, N., and Olesen, J.E. 2002. Intercropping of oats (Avena sativa L.) with different white clover (Trifolium repens L.) cultivars. Effects on biomass development and oat yield. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge Core 138: 261–267.

Vasilakoglou, I., and Dhima, K. 2008. Forage yield and competition indices of berseem clover intercropped with barley Agronomy Journal 100: 1749–1756.

Weiner, J., and Von Wettberg, E.J. 2003. Larger Triticum aestivum plants do not preempt nutrient-rich patches in a glasshouse experiment. Plant Ecology 169: 85–92.

Von Wettberg, E.J., and Weiner, J. 2004. Effects of distance to crop rows and to conspecific neighbors on the size of Brassica napus and Veronica persica weeds. Basic and Applied Ecology 5: 35–41.

Willey R.W. 1979. Intercropping-its importance and research needs part-1 competition and yield advantages Field Crops Research 32: 1-10.

Willey, R.W., and Rao, M.R. 1980. A competitive ratio for quantifying competition between intercrops. Experimental Agriculture 16: 117–125.