ارزیابی عملکرد کمی و برخی خصوصیات فیزیکی خاک در تناوب سه ساله کشت مخلوط ماشک علوفه‌ای (Vicia sativa) – جو خرم در شرایط دیم

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار و عضو هیأت علمی موسسه تحقیقات کشاورزی دیم، سازمان تحقیقات اموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، گچساران، ایران

2 عضو هیات علمی گروه کشاورزی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

چکیده

چکیده
     به منظور تعیین ترکیب مناسب کشت مخلوط ماشک علوفه‌ای و جو از نظر حصول عملکرد کمی و نیز تاثیر بر متغیرهای فیزیکی خاک، پژوهشی سه ساله (1390-1393) در قالب طرح بلوک­های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار، در ایستگاه تحقیقات کشاورزی دیم گچساران انجام شد. تیمارها شامل نسبت‌های مختلف کشت مخلوط ماشک و جو شامل 75 درصد ماشک + 25 درصد جو، 50 درصد ماشک + 50 درصد جو، 25 درصد ماشک + 75 درصد جو و کشت خالص هر یک از دو گونه بودند. نتایج نشان داد که بیشترین عملکرد علوفه‌تر، علوفه خشک و عملکرد دانه از تیمار کشت خالص جو و پس از آن، کشت مخلوط 25 درصد ماشک + 75 درصد جو به‌دست آمدند. به طوری که این مقادیر برای کشت خالص جو، به‌ترتیب برابر با 2/17، 9/5 و 5/3 تن در هکتار و برای تیمار کشت مخلوط 25 درصد ماشک + 75 درصد جو 5/15، 9/4 و 5/2 تن در هکتار بودند. بالاترین نسبت برابری زمین نیز از کشت مخلوط 25 درصد ماشک + 75 درصد جو با 03/1 به‌دست آمد که نشانگر افزایش سه درصدی عملکرد کشت مخلوط ماشک و جو نسبت به کشت خالص آن‌هاست. از لحاظ درصد رطوبت وزنی خاک، اختلاف معنی‌داری بین تیمارها وجود نداشت. در حالی که الگوهای مختلف کشت مخلوط به سبب وجود تناوب جو و علوفه و بهبود شرایط خاک در هر سه عمق نمونه‌برداری (10-0، 20-10 و 30-20 سانتی‌متر)، جرم مخصوص ظاهری خاک را نسبت به قبل از اجرای تحقیق، کاهش دادند. در مجموع، کشت مخلوط جو و ماشک با نسبت 75 به 25 درصد به دلیل تاثیر مثبت بر کاهش وزن مخصوص ظاهری خاک در بلندمدت و نیز حصول عملکرد علوفه مشابه با کشت خالص جو و متنوع نمودن تولیدات کشاورزی، برای منطقه گچساران قابل توصیه می­باشد. 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of Quantitative Yield and Some Physical Properties of Soil in Three Years Mixed Barley (Khorram)-Vetch Forage (Vicia sativa) Cropping System under Rain-Fed Conditions

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nosratollah Heydarpour 1
  • Amin Namdari 1
  • Abolfazl Baghbani-Arani 2
چکیده [English]

Abstract
     The current investigation was carried out in order to compare the different ratio combinations of intercropping vetch, barley regarding forage quantitative yield and soil physical properties. The study was conducted in Gachsaran dryland research station from 2010 for 3 growing seasons based on a randomized complete block design with three replications. The treatments included different intercropping combinations of vetch and barley: 75% + 25%, 50% + 50%, 25% + 75% and sole culture of each plant species. The results showed that the highest forage fresh yield, forage dry yield and grain yield were obtained from barley monoculture (17.2, 5.9 and 3.5 t.ha-1 , respectively) and 25% vetch + 75% barley (15.5, 4.9 and 2.5 t.ha-1, respectively). Maximum land equivalent ratio (LER) was achieved from 25% vetch + 75% barley intercropping treatment with 1.03 which exhibits a slight improvement in forage production compared with monoculture system. Intercropping ratios didn’t affect soil moisture content within soil 0-30 cm depth. Intercropping of barley and vetch improved soil bulk density within three depths of sampling (0-10, 10-20 and 20-30 cm) as soil bulk density after study decreased compared with before the start of experiment. The 10-20 cm layer of soil had the highest bulk density and intercropping treatments particularly with 75% barley + 25% vetch caused significant decline in bulk density in this layer compared with mono-culture (either barley or vetch) treatments. In general, intercropping barley and vetch with combination of 75%:25% is recommended for Gachsaran region due to the positive effect on soil bulk density in long term, producing a yield similar to barley monoculture and increasing variety in agricultural productions. .
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Bulk Density
  • Dry-Land Farming
  • Forage Yield
  • Land Equivalent Ratio
  • Soil Moisture
Alizadeh KH, 2011. Evaluation of some legume crops intercropping with barley under rain fed conditions. Dry land agricultural research institute. Code: 88/1079.
Asghari- Meidani J, 2010. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative yield of Vetch and Barley mono culture and their mixed in cereal and forage rotation. Final report, Dry land agricultural research institute. Code: 87/215.
Atis I, Kokten K Hatipoglu R, Yilmaz S, Atak M and Can E, 2012. Plant density and mixture ratio effects on the competition between common vetch and wheat. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 6: 498–505.
Blake GR, and Hartge KH, 1986. Bulk density. Pp. 363-375. In: Klute A (Ed). Methods of Soil Analysis Part 1, Physical and Mineralogical Methods. 2nd ed. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.
Boudreau MA, 2013. Diseases in intercropping systems. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 51: 499-519.
Bremmer JM and Mulvancey CS, 1982. Total nitrogen. Pp. 599-622. In: Page AL, Miller RH and Keeney DR (ed.). Method of Soil Analysis. Part II. Aragon Monogram, 9, ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
Caballero R, Goicoechea EL, Hernaiz PJ, 1995. Forage yields and quality of common vetch and oat sown at varying seeding ratios and seeding rates of common vetch. Field Crops Research, 41: 135–140.
Çhelik  I, 2011. Effects of tillage methods on penetration resistance, bulk density and saturated hydraulic conductivity in a clayey soil conditions. Journal of Agriculture Science, 17: 143–156.
Chen C, Westcott M, Nrill K, Wichman D and Knox M, 2004. Row configuration and nitrogen application for barley-pea intercropping in Montana. Agronomy Journal, 96: 1730-1738.
Cho B and Daimon H, 2008. Effect of hairy vetch incorporated as green manure on growth and N uptake of sorghum crop. Plant Production Science. 11: 211-216.
Contreras- Govea FE, Muck RE, Armstrong KL and Albrecht KA, 2009. Nutritive value of corn silage in mixture with climbing beans. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 53: 37-49.
Eskandari H and Javanmard A, 2014.  Evaluation of forage yield and quality in intercropping patterns of Maize (Zea mays) and Cow pea (Vigna sinensis). Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 23: 101-110.
Hesse PR, 1971. A text book of soil chemical analysis. John Murray, London.
Idaresit A, Ernest E and Etebom W, 2016.Assessment of groundnut/maize intercropping system on soil bulk density and volumetric moisture content grown in typic paleudult soils of Southeastern
Nigeria. Direct Research Journal of Agriculture and Food Science, 4: 228-232.
Kadziuliene Z, Sarunaite L and Deveikyte I, 2011. Effect of pea and spring cereals intercrop in the organic farming systems. Agronomy Research, 7 (2): 606-611.
Karagic D, Vasiljevic, S, Katic S, Mikic A, Milic D, Milosevic B and Dusanic N, 2011. Yield and quality of winter common vetch (Vicia sativa L.) haylage depending on sowing method.
Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry, 27: 1585–1594.
Karuma A, Mtakwa P, Amuri, N Gachene C and Gicheru P, 2014 .Tillage effects on selected soil physical properties in a maize-bean intercropping system in Mwala district, Kenya. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2014: 1-12.
Kursuvan A, Kaplan M and Nazli A, 2014. Intercropping of hungarian vetch and barley under different plant varieties and mixture rates. Legume Researches, 37: 590-599.
Lameie hervani G, 2012. Evaluation of mono culturing and intercropping three annual forage legumes with barley under rain fed conditions. Final report, Dry land agricultural research institute. Code: 89/664.
Li Y, Ran W, Zhang R, Sun S and Xu G.       2009. Facilitated legume nodulation, phosphate uptake and nitrogen transfer by arbuscular inoculation in an upland rice and mango bean intercropping system. Plant and Soil, 315: 285-296.
Lithourgidis AS, Dhima KV, Vasilakoglou IB, Dordas CA and Yiakoulaki MD, 2007. Sustainable production of barley and wheat by intercropping common vetch. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 27: 95-99.
Lithourgidis AS, Vlachostergios DN, Dordas CA and Damalas CA, 2011. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea-cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 34: 287-294.
Mohanty A, Mishra KN, Roul PK, Dash SN and Panigrahi A, 2015. Influence of conservation agriculture production system on soil organic carbon, bulk density and water stable aggregates in a tropical rainfed agro ecosystem. Environmental and Engineering Consultants, 21(4): 111-114.
Nakhzari-Moghaddam A, 2013. The yield and forage quality of intercropping barley and mustard in different planting dates. Electronic Journal of Crop Production, 5 (4): 173-189.
Nelson DW and Sommers LE, 1982. Total carbon, organic carbon and organic matter. Pp. 539-579. In: Page AL (Ed). Method of Soil Analysis, Chemical and Microbiological Methods, Part 2. ASA and SSSA, Madison, WI.
Olsen SR and Sommers LE, 1982. Phosphorus. In: Methods of Soil Analysis, part 2, page. A.L., R.H. Miller and R.D. Keeney. Soil Science Society of American Journal. pp. 404.
Pelzer E, Bazot M, Makowski D, Corre- Hellou G, Naudin C, Al rifai M, Baranger E, Bedoussac L, Biarnes V, Boucheny P, Carrouee B, Dorvillez D, Foissy D, Gailard B, Gouchard L, Mansard MC and Oman B, 2012. Pea- wheat intercrops in low- input conditions combine high economic performances and low environmental impacts. European Journal of Agronomy, 40: 39-53.
Regehr A. 2014. Evaluation of maize and soybean intercropping on soil quality and nitrogen transformations in the Argentine Pampa. A thesis presented to the University of Waterloo in fulfillment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Master of Environmental Studies in Environment and Resource Studies. Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Sadeghpour A and Jahanzad E, 2012. Seed yield and yield components of intercropped barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and annual medic (Medicago scutellata L.). Australian Journal of Agriculture Engineering, 3: 47–50.
Sadeghpour A, Jahanzad E, Esmaeili A, Hosseini MB and Hashemi M, 2013. Forage yield, quality and economic benefit of intercropped barley and annual medic in semi-arid conditions: Additive series. Field Crop Research, 148: 43-48.
Sarunaite L, Deveikyte I, Semaskiene R and Kadziuliene Z, 2009. The influence of grain legumes on spring wheat yield formation and phytosanitary state. Agronomy Research, 7(1): 465-470.
Strydhorst SM, King JR, Lopetinsky KJ and Neil Harker K, 2008. Forage potential of intercropping barley with faba bean, lupin, or field pea. Agronomy Journal, 100: 182-190.
Yilmaz S, Ozel A, Atak M and Erayman M, 2014. Effects of seeding rates on competition indices of barley and vetch intercropping systems in the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 39: 135-143.