بررسی عملکرد و مزیت در کشت مخلوط ارزن (Panicum miliaceum L.) لوبیا (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) و ماشک (Vicia villosa L.) تحت آبیاری نرمال و مغناطیسی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه اکوفیزیولوژی گیاهی دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه تبریز تبریز ایران

2 گروه اکوفیزیولوژی گیاهی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تبریز.

3 گروه اکوفیزیولوژی گیاهی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران

4 گروه اکوفیزیولوژی گیاهی، دانشگده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تبریز

چکیده

این مطالعه به منظور بررسی اثر آب مغناطیسی و الگوی کشت مخلوط سه گیاه ارزن، لوبیا و ماشک علوفه ای بر عملکرد گونه ها انجام گردید.
انجام این پژوهش در سالهای 98 و 99 در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشکده کشاورزی تبریز،آزمایش بر پایه طرح بلوک کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار و 14 تیماراجرا شد. برای ارزیابی کشت مخلوط از شاخص های LER، AYL ، RVT و IA استفاده شد.
اثر سال برای صفات عملکرد دانه ارزن در سطح احتمال 1درصد و بیوماس ارزن در سطح 5 درصد معنی دارشد. اثر آبیاری برای تمامی صفات سه گیاه معنی دار و اثر آب مغناطیسی باعث افزایش صفات شد. اثر اصلی کشت برای همه صفات در سطح 1 درصد و اثر متقابل سال در کشت فقط برای صفت تعداد برگ در بوته ارزن در سطح 5 درصد معنی دار بود. اثر متقابل آبیاری در کشت برای صفت عملکرد دانه و بیوماس ارزن، عملکرد علوفه خشک ماشک و عملکرد دانه لوبیا در سطح 1 درصد و شاخص کلروفیل ارزن، در سطح 5درصد معنی دار گردید.
کشت مخلوط ارزن با لوبیا و ارزن با ماشک باعث افزایش عملکرد و از نظر اقتصادی باصرفه تر می باشد. کشت مخلوط ارزن- لوبیا و ارزن- ماشک با نسبت 2:1 و 4:1 نسبت به کشت‌ خالص عملکرد بهتری داشت. بیشترین مقدار LER مربوط به کشت مخلوط ارزن –ماشک با نسبت 4:1 و بیشترین میزان RVT مربوط به کشت مخلوط ارزن – لوبیا با نسبت 2:1 گردید. بنابراین عملکرد گیاهان در کشت مخلوط افزایش و نسبت به تک کشتی بهتر بودند

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of yield and Advantage intercropping of millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) with beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and vetch (Vicia villosa L.) under regular and magnetic irrigation

نویسندگان [English]

  • Behnam Omrani 1
  • Adel Dabbagh Mohammadi nassab 2
  • Mohammad Reza Shakiba 3
  • Rouhollah Amini 4
1 Department of Plant Eco-physiology.Faculty of Agriculture. University of Tabriz. Tabriz. Iran
2 Department of Eco-physiology, Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran.
3 Department of Plant Eco physiology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
چکیده [English]

This study was conducted to investigate the effect of magnetic water and mixed cultivation pattern of millet, bean and forage vetch on species yield.This study was conducted in the 2019 and 2020 cropping years. The experiment was performed based on a randomized complete block design with three replications and 14 treatments. LER, AYL RVT IA indices were used to evaluate intercropping.The effect of year was significant for millet grain yield at a probability level of one percent and millet biomass at a probability level of five percent. The effect of magnetic water increased the studied traits in three plants. The main effect of culture for all studied traits was significant at the level of 1% probability. The interaction of year in cultivation was significant only for the number of leaves per millet plant at 5% , the interaction effect of irrigation in cultivation was significant for millet grain yield, millet biomass, vetch forage yield and bean grain yield at 1% and millet chlorophyll index trait at 5% level. Intercropping of millet with beans and millet with vetch has increased the yield of plants and is more economical. Mixed culture of millet-bean and millet-vetch with 2:1 and 4:1 ratio had better performance than pure culture, The highest LER index was related to millet-vetch intercropping with a ratio of 4:1. the highest RVT index was associated with the cultivation of millet-bean mixture with a ratio of 2:1.Therefore, the yield of plants in intercropping increased and they were better than a single crop.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Intercropping
  • Magnetic irrigation
  • Millet
  • Beans
  • Vetch

مراجع

Ahmadi A, Dabbagh Mohammdi Nasab A, ZehtabSalmasi S, Amini R and Janmohammadi H. 2010. Evaluation of yield and advantage indices in barley and vetch intercropping. Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 20(2): 76-87. (In Persian).
Akunda EM. 2001. Intercropping and population density effects on yield component, seed quality and photosynthesis of sorghum and soybean. The Journal of Food Technology in Africa, 6: 96– 100.
Banik P, Midya A, Sarkar BK, Ghose SS. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy, 24(4):325-332.
Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab A, Javanmard A and Arzheh J. 2017. Forage production in different intercropping patterns of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) with hairy vetch (Vicia villosa) in nitrogen fertilizer levels. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 27(1): 63-83. (In Persian).
Fenández-Aparicio M, Sillero JC and Rubiales D. 2007. Intercropping with cereals reduces infection by Orobanche crenata in legumes. Crop protection, 26(8):1166-1172.
Ghadami- Firuzabadi A, Khoshravesh M, Shirazi P. and Zare- Abyaneh H. 2016. Effect of Irrigation with Magnetized Water on the Yield and Biomass of Soybean var. DPX under Water Deficit and Salinity Stress. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 1(1): 131-143.
Iqbal MA, Hamid A, Ahmad T, Siddiqui MH, Hussain I, Ali S, Ali A and Ahmad Z. 2019. Forage sorghum legumes intercropping: Effect on growth, yields, nutritional quality and economic returns. Bragantia, 78(1): 82-95.
Kiatgamjorn P, Khan-ngren W and Nitta S. 2002. The effect of electric field on bean sprouts growing. ICEMC, 1-4.
Kordas L. 2002. The effect of magnetic field on growth, development and the yield of spring wheat. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 11(5): 527-530.
Leather Wood W R. 2005. Influence of salt stress on germination, root elongation and carbohydrate content of five salt tolerant and sensitive taxa. MSc. Thesis, Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University.
Lithourgidis AS, Vlachostergios DN, Dordasc CA and Damalas, CA. 2011. Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea–cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 34: 287-294.
Maffei ME. 2014. Magnetic field effects on plant growth, development, and evolution. Frontiers in Plant Science, 5: 445.
Maheshwari BL, Grewal HS. 2009. Magnetic treatment of irrigation water: Its effects on vegetable crop yield and water productivity. Agricultural water management, 96(8):1229-36.
Nashir SH. 2008. The effect of magnetic water on growth of chickpea. Engineering and Technology, 26(9): 16-20.
Neugschwandtner R and Kaul PH. 2014. Sowing ratio and N fertilization affect yield and yield components of oat and pea in intercrops. Field Crops Research, 155: 159–163.
Norouzi M, masji M and Mahrani M. 1999. Use of saline and brackish waters for irrigation. Iranian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage.
Sharifi1 M, Dabbag Mohammadi Nassab A, Shakiba MR and Yarnia. M. 2020. Evaluation of Grain and Essential Oil Yield of Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) Using of Penergetic, Chemical Fertilizers and Magnetic Water. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 30(1):143-153.
Stuart PN. 1990. The Forage Book Pacific Seeds. Toowoomba, Australia Intercropping. Biaban 2: 250-263. (In Persian).
Vandermeer J. 1990. Intercropping. In Agroecology, Mc Graw – Hill publishing Co.
Willey RW. 1979. Intercropping-its importance and research needs part-1 competition and yield advantages Field Crops Res, 32: 1-10.
Willey RW. 1990. Resource use in intercropping system. Journal of Agriculture and Water Management, 17: 215-231.
دانش کشاورزی وتولید پایدار
دوره 32، شماره 3
آبان 1401
صفحه 63-78

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار