تأثیر سیستم کشت مخلوط افزایشی بر عملکرد، اجزای عملکرد و شاخص‌های سودمندی زوفا (Hyssopus officinalis) و اسفرزه (Plantago ovate Forsk)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه اگرواکولوژی، دانشگاه جیرفت

2 گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه جیرفت

3 دانشکده کشاورزی، آموزشکده فنی کشاورزی فسا، دانشگاه فنی و حرفه ای، استان فارس

چکیده

اهداف: این پژوهش به‌منظور بررسی عملکرد، اجزای عملکرد و برخی شاخص­های ارزیابی کشت مخلوط زوفا و اسفرزه و تعیین بهترین نسبت کشت مخلوط این دو گونه انجام شد.
مواد و روش ها:  آزمایش به صورت طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با هفت تیمار و سه تکرار در سال زراعی 97-1396 در مزرعه پژوهشی دانشکده‌ی کشاورزی دانشگاه جیرفت اجرا شد. تیمارهای آزمایش شامل 20% اسفرزه+ 100 % زوفا ، 40 % اسفرزه+ 100 % زوفا، 60% اسفرزه+ 100 % زوفا، 80% اسفرزه+ 100 % زوفا، 100% اسفرزه+ 100 % زوفا و کشت خالص دو گونه بود. صفات مورد مطالعه شامل ارتفاع بوته، تعداد شاخه‌فرعی، عملکرد زیست‌توده و عملکرداسانس گیاه زوفا و ارتفاع بوته، تعداد سنبله در بوته، وزن صددانه، عملکرد دانه، عملکرد زیست‌توده و شاخص برداشت گیاه اسفرزه بود. برای ارزیابی کارایی و سودمندی کشت مخلوط نسبت به کشت خالص از شاخص نسبت برابری زمین (LER) و شاخص بهره وری سیستم  (SPI) استفاده شد.
یافته ها: نتایج آزمایش نشان داد کلیه‌ی صفات مورد بررسی به استثنای عملکرد زیست‌توده زوفا به‌طور معنی‌داری تحت تأثیر نسبت‌های مختلف کشت مخلوط قرار گرفتند. بالاترین عملکرد دانه و عملکرد بیولوژیک اسفرزه به ترتیب 3/3393 و 6/4286 کیلوگرم در هکتار در کشت خالص حاصل شد. بیشترین عملکرد اسانس از کشت خالص زوفا حاصل شد  که با نسبت کشت  100 % زوفا +  20 % اسفرزه اختلاف معنی‌داری نداشت (7/161 و 8/135کیلوگرم در هکتار[pl1] ). حداکثر نسبت برابری زمین (41/1) و شاخص بهره‌وری (21998) در تیمار 100 % زوفا + 80 % اسفرزه به‌دست آمد.
نتیجه گیری کلی: نسبت برابری زمین در همه تیمارهای کشت مخلوط بزرگتر از یک به دست آمد که نشان دهنده برتری کشت مخلوط نسبت به کشت خالص می باشد. بر اساس نتایج حاصله، تیمار 100 % زوفا + 80 % اسفرزه به عنوان بهترین الگوی کشت در منطقه پیشنهاد می گردد.



 [pl1]عملکرد اسانس با واحد کیلوگرم در هکتار تصحیح گردید.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effect of Additive Intercropping System on Yield, Yield Components and Efficiency Indices of Hyssopus officinalis and Plantago ovate Forsk

نویسندگان [English]

  • Zeinab Roozpeikar 1
  • Mehrangiz Jowkar 2
  • Javad Taei-Semiromi 2
  • Bahare Parsa Motlagh 3
چکیده [English]

Background and Objective: This research was conducted in order to measure of yield, yield components and some indices of intercropping and determination of the best intercropping ration in two medicinal plants Hyssopus officinalis and Plantago ovate.
 
Materials and Methods: The experiment was carried out as a randomized complete block design with seven treatments and three replications in the field of research of Jiroft University. The treatments including 100% H. officinalis + 20% P. ovata (H100: P20), 100% H. officinalis + 40% P. ovata (H100: P40), 100% H. officinalis + 60% P. ovata (H100: P60), 100% H. officinalis + 80% P. ovata (H100: P80), 100% H. officinalis + 100% P. ovata (H100: P100) and single crop of two species (H100) and (P100). The studied characteristics including plant height, number of branches, biomass yield, essence percentage in H. officinalis and plant height, number of spikes per plant, 100-seed weight, grain yield and harvesting index in P. ovate. Evaluation of efficiency and usefulness intercropping by Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) and system productivity index (SPI) were used.
 
Results: The results showed that all the studied traits except biomass yield of Hyssopus officinalis were significantly affected by different intercropping ratios in this study. The highest seed yield and biological yield in P. ovate were obtained in single crop 3393.3 and 4286.6 kg.ha-1, respectively. The highest essence percentage was obtained from single crop of H. officinalis that no significant difference with H100:P20 (161773 and 135842 g.ha-1). Maximum LER (1.41) and SPI (21998) were obtained in H100: P80.
 
Conclusion: The LER for all intercropping treatments was greater than one which indicates that intercropping had advantage over sole crop. According to the results of the study H100: P80 can be suggested as the best cropping pattern in region.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Biomass Yield
  • Essential Yield
  • Hyssopus officinalis
  • Land Equivalent Ratio
  • Plantago ovate
  • System Productivity Index
Ahmad WR, Hassan FH, Ansar M, Manaf A and Sher A, 2013. Enhancing crop productivity through wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) fenugreek intercropping system. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 23 (1): 210-215.
Aladakatti YR, Hallikeri SS, Nandagavi RA, Hugar RA and Naveen NE, 2011. Effect intercropping of oilseed crops on growth, yield and economics of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) under rainfed conditions. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 24 (3): 280 – 282.
Alizade Y, Koocheki A and Nassiri Mahallati M, 2010. Investigating of growth characteristics, yield, yield components and potential weed control in intercropping of bean and vegetative sweet basil. Journal of Agroecology. 2: 383-397.
Ayneband A and Behrooz M, 2011. Evaluation of cereal- legume and cereal-pseudocereal intercropping systems through forage productivity and competition ability. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science, 10 (4): 675-683.
Banik B, Midya A, Sarkar BK and Ghose SS, 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy. (24): 325-332.
Bigonah R, Rezvani Moghaddam P and Jahan M, 2014. Effects of intercropping on biological yield, percentage of nitrogen and morphological characteristics of coriander and fenugreek. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 12 (3): 369-377. (In Persian).
Daneshnia F, Amini A and Chaichi MR 2015. Berseem clover quality and basil essential oil yield in intercropping system under limited irrigation treatments with surfactant. Agricultural Water Management, 164: 331-339.
De la Fuentea EB, Suarezb SA, Lenardisa AE and Poggioc SL, 2014. Intercropping sunflower and soybean in intensive farming systems: Evaluating yield advantage and effect on weed and insect assemblages. NJAS - Wageningen Journal Life Science, 165:42-52.
De Pauw E, Mirghasemi A, Ghaffari and Nseir B, 2008. Agro ecological zones of Karkheh River Basin: A reconnaissance assessment of climatic and edaphic patterns and their similarity to areas inside and outside the basin.Technical Report, ICARDA, 96pp.
De Wit CT and Vanden Bergh JP, 1965. Competition between herbage plants. Journal of Agricultural Science. 13: 212-221.
Ghasemi Maham S, Fallah S and Tadayyon MR, 2015. Variation in Root and Shoot Growth, Rhizobium Nodules of Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum gracum) Under Fertilizer Treatments and Intercropping with Isabgol (Plantago ovate). Journal of Plant Productions, 39(1): 35-45. (In Persian).
HabibzadehF, HazratiS, AsghariB, GholamhoseiniM, Nikjouyan MJ, 2018. Evaluation of of yield, essential oil and productivity indices in different planting combinations in the intercropping of hyssop (Hyssopus officinalis) and lentil (Lens culinaris). Journal of Plant Production Research, 25(3): 83-99. (In Persian).
Khoramdel S, Siahmarguee A and Mahmudi Gh, 2016.Effect of replacement and additive intercropping series of ajowan with bean on yield and yield components. Journal of Crop Production, 9(1): 1-24. (In Persian).
Koocheki A, Nassiri Mahallati M, Feizi H, Amirmoradi S and Mondani F, 2010. Effect of strip intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) on yield and land equivalent ratio in weedy and weed free conditions. Agroecology, 2: 225-235.
Koocheki A, Nassiri Mahallati M, Solouki H and Karbor S, 2016. Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in substitution intercropping of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and bean (Vigna radiata L.). Advances in Plants and Agriculture Research 3(5): 109-124.
Koocheki A, Shabahang J, Khorramdel S and Amin Ghafouri A, 2012.Row intercropping of borage (Borago officinalis L.) with bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) on possible evaluating of the best strip width and assessing of its ecological characteristics. Journal of Agroecology. 4(1):1-11. (In Persian).
Kremer RJ and Kussman RJ, 2011. Soil quality in a pecan-kura clover alley cropping system in the Midwestern USA. Agroforest System. 93: 213-223.
Mahdavi Marj T, Ghanbari A and Asgharipour MR, 2014. Effects manure and chemical fertilizers application on weed control and yield in ajowan-barley intercropping. Journal of Crop Production Research, 6(1):19-30. (In Persian).
Maoa L, Zhang L, Zhaoc X, Liuc S, Werfd WV, Zhangc S, Spiertzd H and Lia Z, 2014. Crop growth, light utilization and yield of relay intercropped cotton as affected by plant density and a plant growth regulator. Field Crops Research, 5: 67–76.
Mikic A, Cupinax B, Rubiales D, Mihailovi V, Sarunaitek L, Fustec J, Antanasovicx S, Krsticx D, Bedoussac L, Zoricx L, DorCevic V, Peric V and Srebri M, 2014. Models, Developments, and Perspectives of Mutual Legume Intercropping. Journal Advances Agronomy, 130: 1-83.
Mirhashemi SM, Koocheki A, Parsa M and Nassiri Mahallati M, 2010. Evaluation of growth indices of ajowan and fenugreek in pure culture and intercropping based on organic agriculture. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 7(2): 685-694.
MousapourH, GhanbariA, and Asghari pour MR, 2017. Effect of sowing date on yield, yield components, secondary metabolites content and weed control in ajwain and isabgol intercropping. Journal of Crops Improvement, 18(4):835-850. (In Persian).
Mousapour H, Ghanbari A, Sirousmehr AR and Asgharipour MR, 2015. Effect of sowing time on seed yield, advantage and competitive indices in ajwain (Carum copticum L.) and isabgol (Plantago ovate Forsk.) intercropping. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 17(2): 139-152. (In Persian).
Mozaffarian V, 2012. A dictionary of Iranin plant, Names. Latin, English, Persian. Tehran. Farhang Moaser Publishers. 740 Pp.
 Nakh Zari Moghaddam A, Dehghan Por A and Rahmi Karyzki A, 2016. The effects of nitrogen levels and intercropping pattern on forage yield and competition indices of barley (Hordeum vulgare) and pea (Pisum sativum). Journal of Crop Production, 9(1):199-214. (In Persian).
Noman MS, Maleque MA, Alam MZ, Afroz S and Ishii HT, 2013. Intercropping mustard with four spice crops suppresses mustard aphid abundance, and increases both crop yield and farm profitability in central Bangladesh. International Journal of Pest Management, 59(4): 306-313.
Odo PE, 1991. Evaluation of short and tall sorghum varieties in mixtures with cowpea in the Sudan savanna of Nigeria: land equivalent ratio, grain yield and system productivity index. Experimental Agriculture, 27: 435–441.
Omidbeigi R. 2011. Production and Processing of Medicinal Plants. Astaneh Ghods-e-Razavi Publications, Mashhad. (In Persian).
Oseni TO, 2010. Evaluation of sorghum-cowpea intercrop productivity in savanna agro-ecology using competition indices. Journal of Agricultural Science, 2(3), 229-234.
Pour yousef M, Yousefi AL, Oveisi M and Asadi F, 2015. Intercropping of fenugreek as living mulch at different densities for weed suppression in coriander. Journal Crop Protection, 69: 60-64.
Raei Y, Bolandnazar SA and Dameghsi N, 2011. Evaluation of common bean and potato densities effects on potato tuber yield in mono-cropping and intercropping systems. Journal Agricultural Sciences and Sustainable Production,.21(2): 131-142.
Rezaei-Chiyaneh E, Dabbagh Mohammadi Nassab A, Shakiba MR, Ghassemi-Golezani K and Aharizad S, 2011. Intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) at different plant population densities. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 21(1): 1-16. (In Persian).
Rezaei-Chiyaneh E, Tajbakhsh M, Valizadegan O and Banaei- Asl F, 2014. Evaluation of different intercropping patterns of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris L.) In Double Crop. Agroecology, 5(4): 462-473. (In Persian)
Rezaei-Chiyaneh R and Gholinezhad E, 2015. Agronomic characteristics of intercropping of additive series of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and black cumin (Nigella sativa L.). Journal of Agroecology, 7(3): 381-396. (In Persian)
Rezvani moghadam P and Moradi R, 2012. Assessment of Planting Date, Biological Fertilizer and Intercropping on Yield and Essential Oil of Cumin and Fenugreek. Iranian Journal of Crops Sciences, 43(2): 217-230. (In Persian)
Shirzadi MH, Rezaei S, Hemayati SS and Abedid M, 2011. Evaluation of fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.) and lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) intercropping. Plant Ecophysiology, 3: 53-58.
Singh B and Usha K, 2003. Nodulation and symbiotic nitrogen fixation of cowpea genotypes as affected by fertilizer nitrogen. Journal Plant Nutrition. 26(2): 463-473.
Taei-Semiromi, J., Mirbagheri. V and Amiri, A. 2015. Agroclimatic zoning of Kerman province for production potato. Research report. 120 Pp.
Tarieghi sh, Fateh A and Aynehband A, 2018. The effect of different barley (Hordeum vulgare) and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum- graecum) intercropping planting ratio under nitrogen fertilizer on dry matter quality and quantity. Journal of Crop Production, 11(5):23-35. (In Persian).
Tuna C and Orak A, 2007. The role of intercropping on yield potential of common vetch (Vicia sativa L.) and (Avena sativa L.) cultivated in pure stand and mixtures. Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science. 2(2): 14-19.
Vandermeer JH, 1989. The Ecology of Intercropping, Cambridge, University Press, 297 p.
Vojodi Mehrabani L and Azimi S, 2017. Evaluation of Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum graecum) and Florists Daisy (Chrysanthemum morifolium) Intercropping and Its Effects on Insect Population. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Prodction, 27(4): 247-259.
Vrignon-Brenasa S, Celettea F, Amosséc C and David C, 2015. Effect of spring fertilization on ecosystem services of organic wheat and clover relay intercrops. European Journal of Agronomy, 73: 73-82.
Wang Z, Zhao X, Wu P, He J, Chen X, Gao Y and Cao X, 2015. Radiation interception and utilization by wheat/maize strip intercropping systems. Journal AgriculturalForest Meteor, 204: 58-66.
Zarifpour N, Naseri Poor Yazdi MT and Nassiri Mahallati M, 2014. Effect of different intercropping arrangements of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) on quantity and quality characteristic of species. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 12(1): 34-43.