سودمندی الگوهای مختلف کشت مخلوط نواری ارزن (Panicum miliaceum L.) و سویا (max Glycine) در شرایط عاری و آلوده به علف‌هرز

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه مهندسی تولید گیاهی و ژنتیک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا

2 دانشجوی دکتری گروه مهندسی تولید گیاهی و ژنتیک. دانشکده کشاورزی . دانشگاه بوعلی سینا

3 استاد دانشگاه تبریز

10.22034/saps.2025.63168.3279

چکیده

مقدمه و اهداف: هدف از این تحقیق، بررسی سودمندی کشت مخلوط نواری ارزن و سویا در جهت افزایش عملکرد و استفاده مفید از منابع محیطی در شرایط آلوده و عاری از علف­هرز بود.
 
مواد و روش­ها: به منظور بررسی سودمندی کشت مخلوط نواری ارزن و سویا در شرایط آلوده و عاری از علف­هرز، آزمایشی به صورت اسپلیت پلات در قالب طرح بلوک­های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در دو سال 1400 و 1401 اجرا گردید. در کرت­های­ اصلی دو تیمار کنترل و عدم کنترل علف­های هرز و در کرت­های­ فرعی شش الگوی مختلف کشت مخلوط نواری ارزن (M)و سویا (S)و کشت خالص آن­ها در نظر گرفته شد و صفت عملکرد اقتصادی (دانه) ارزن و سویا و شاخص LER، AYL، K، CAI،  IA مورد بررسی قرار گرفت.
 
یافته­ها: بر اساس نتایج حاصل از تجزیه واریانس کرت­های خرد شده، اثر اصلی عامل علف­هرز و عامل الگوی کشت مخلوط و نیز اثر متقابل آن­ها بر عملکرد اقتصادی در هر دو گونه گیاهی ارزن و سویا در سطح احتمال یک درصد معنی­دار شد. بیشترین عملکرد اقتصادی دو گونه ارزن و سویا به ترتیب معادل 83/1134 و 83/1832 کیلوگرم در هکتار در تیمار کشت خالص عاری از علف­هرز هر دو گونه بدست آمد و کمترین عملکرد اقتصادی دو گونه ارزن و سویا به ترتیب معادل 16/355 و 22/440 کیلوگرم در هکتار در تیمار 2M2S در شرایط آلوده به علف­هرز در گیاه ارزن و در تیمار 2S4M در شرایط آلوده به علف­هرز در گیاه سویا مشاهده شد. بیشترین میزان LER در تیمار کشت مخلوط 2M4S در شرایط آلوده به علف­هرز به میزان 85/1 در میانگین داده­های دو سال حاصل شد و بیشترین CAI در میانگین داده­های دو سال مربوط به تیمار کشت مخلوط 2M4S عاری از علف­هرز بود و نیز بیشترین شاخص سودمندی کشت مخلوط محاسبه شده متعلق به کشت مخلوط 2M4S در شرایط آلوده به علف­هرز بود که این امر ناشی از استفاده بهتر گیاهان از منابع غذایی موجود در این تیمار می­باشد.
 
نتیجه­گیری: نسبت برابری زمین و شاخص سطح کانوپی در همه الگوهای کشت مخلوط بیشتر از یک بود که نشان دهنده برتری کشت مخلوط دو گونه ارزن و سویا نسبت به کشت خالص آن­ها می­باشد. مثبت بودن شاخص سودمندی اقتصادی کشت مخلوط و افت عملکرد واقعی در همه الگو­های کشت بیانگر تاثیر مفید گیاهان برروی همدیگر و سودمندی کشت مخلوط آن­ها در شرایط آلوده و عاری از علف­هرز می­باشد. تیمار کشت مخلوط 2M4S در شرایط عدم کنترل علف­هرز در هر دو گیاه ارزن و سویا در واحد سطح اشغالی بترتیب 20% و 7/9% افزایش در عملکرد را نسبت به تیمار خالص هر دو گونه در شرایط کنترل علف­هرز داشت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Advantages of millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) and soybean (max Glycine) strip intercropping under weed-free and weed-infested conditions.

نویسندگان [English]

  • Goudarz Ahmadvand 1
  • Behzad Sharib 2
  • Adel Dabbaq Mohammadi Nasab 3
1 Department of Crop Production and Genetics,, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, I.R. Iran
2 PhD Student , Department of Crop Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University
3 prof. Tabriz University
چکیده [English]

Background and Objectives: The purpose of this research was millet and soybean yield evaluation in monoculture and strip intercropping under weed-free and weed-infested conditions.
 
Materials and Methods: Split-plot experiment based on randomized complete block design with three replications was conducted in 2021 and 2022. The main plots included weed-free and weed-infested treatments, and the subplots included six different patterns of millet (M) and soybean (S) strip intercropping, sole cropping of millet and sole cropping of soybean. Millet and soybean seed yield traits and LER, AYL, K, IA, CAI indices were investigated.
 
Results: The results of variance analysis showed that the effect of weed-infested, cropping system and interaction on grain yield of millet (p< 0.01) and soybean (p< 0.01) were significant. The highest grain yield of millet (1134/83 kg/ha) and soybean (1832/83 kg/ha) was obtained in the weed-free sole cropping treatment, and the lowest one in millet (355/16 kg/ha) was observed in the 2M2S intercropping weed-infested treatment and in soybean (440/22 kg/ha) was observed in the 2S4M intercropping under weed-infested treatment. The highest LER in the 2M4S intercropping under weed-infested condition was 1.85 in the average of two years. The maximum CAI in the average data of two years related to 2M4S intercropping in weed-free treatment. Also, the maximum IA was related to 2M4S intercropping in weed-infested condition.
 
Conclusion: LER and CAI was greater than 1 in all intercropping patterns, which indicates the superiority of millet and soybean intercropping, compared to their sole cropping. The positive value of IA and AYL in all intercropping patterns indicated the beneficial effect of plants on each other and the advantage of their intercropping in weed-free and weed-infested conditions. 2M4S intercropping in weed-infested treatment increased millet and soybean grain yield per occupied area by 20% and 9.7% compared to the sole cropping of both plants in weed-free conditions, respectively.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • AYL
  • Canopy Area Index
  • Grain Yield
  • Millet
  • LER
  • Intercropping Advantage
  • Soybean

مراجع

Abdulahi A, Dabbagh Mohammadi-Nasab A, Nasrolahzadeh S, Zehtab-Salmasi S and Pordad S. 2012. Evaluation of wheat (Triticum aestivum)-chickpea intercrop as influenced by nitrogen and weed management. Amercain Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, 7(4): 447-460. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajabssp.2012.447.460
Agegnehu G, Ghizaw A and Sinebo W. 2006. Yield performance and land use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. Europ. J. Agron, 25: 3. 202-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2006.05.002
Ahmadi A, Rashid Mohasel MH, Baghestani Meybodi MA and Rostami M. 2004. Investigation of the effect of the critical period of weed competition on the yield, yield components and morphophysiological characteristics of the brilliant bean variety,12: 31-50. ‎
Atai R, Gholamhosseini M and Shiri MR. 2020.Evaluation of stability of fodder yield of promising common millet lines using graphical analysis method. Iranian Plant Sciences, 51: 165-176. https://doi.org/10.22059/ijfcs.2019.261371.654495 ‎
Banik P, Miyda A, Sarkar BK and Ghose SS. 2006. Wheat (Triticum aestivum) and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. European J. Agron, 24: 325-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2005.10.010
Banik P.1996. Evaluation of wheat (Triticum aestivum) and legume. J. Agron. Crop. Sci, 176:289-294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.1996.tb00473.x
Benesh SN. Morak MJ and Peterson D. 2003. Interference of red root pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), Plamer amaranth and common water hemp in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sciences, 51:37-43. https://doi.org/10.1614/0043-1745(2003)051[0037:IORPAR]2.0.CO;2
Carvalho SJP and Christoffoleti PJ. 2008. Competition of Amaranthus species with dry bean plants. Agriculture Science, 65: 239-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90162008000300003
Dabbagh Mohammadi-Nasab A, Amon T and Kaul H. 2011. Competition and yield in intercropping of maize (Zea mays) - sunflower for biogas. Industrial Crops and Products, 34:1203-1211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2011.04.015
Dhima KV, Lithourgidis AA, Vasilakoglou IB, Dordas CA. 2007. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Res, 100: 249-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.07.008
Fernandez-Aparicio M, Sillero JC and Rubials D. 2007. Intercropping with cereals reduces infection by Orobanche crenata in legumes. Crop Protection, 26:1166-1172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2006.10.012
Gholinezhad E and Rezaei- Chiyaneh E. 2014. Evaluation of grain yield and quality of black cumin in intercropping with chickpea. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 16:236-249 (In Persian).
Gooding MJ, Murdoch AJ and Ellis RH. 2000. The value of seeds. In: Black and J. D. Bewley (eds). Seed technology and its biological basis. CRC Press. LLC, 3-29. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0028-646x.2001.00165.x
Heidarian H, Haj Seyed Hadi MR, Shamsi Mahmoodabadi H and Nabavi Kalateh M. 2012. Competitive effect of redroot pig weed on three sunflower cultivars. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production, 3:84-88.
Holman J D, Bussan A J, Maxwell B D, Miller PR and Mickelson JA. 2004. Spring wheat (Triticum aestivum), canola and sunflower response to Persian darnel (Lotium persicum) interferences. Weed Technology, 18:509-520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT-03-056R
Kavaliauskiate D and Bobinas C. 2006. Determination of weed completion critical period in red beet. Agronomy Research, 4: 217-220.
Kavurmaci Z, Karadavut U, Kokten K and Bakoglu A. 2010. Determining critical period of weed – crop competition in faba bean. Agriculture Biology, 12:318-320.
Koocheki A, Nassiri Mahallati M, Solouki H and Karbor S. 2016. Evaluation of radiation absorption and use efficiency in substitution intercropping of sesame and bean. Advances in plants and Agriculture Research, 5:109-124. https://doi.org/10.15406/apar.2016.03.00109
Latati M, Aouiche A, Tellah S, Laribi A, Benlahrech S, Kaci, G, Ouarem F and Mohamed Ounane S. 2018. Intercropping maize (Zea mays) and common bean enhances microbial carbon and nitrogen availability in low phosphorus soil under Mediterranean conditions. European Journal of soil Biology, 80:9-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2312-797X-2018-13-3-177-184
Lithourgidis AS, Dhima KV, Vasilakoglou IB, Dordas CA and Yiakoulaki MD. 2007. Sustainable production of Barley and wheat (Triticum aestivum) by intercropping common vetch, 27: 95-99. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:2006033
Mazaheri D. 2008. Intercropping. 2nd Ed. Tehran, Iran. 262 p. (In Persian).
Menana A and Zandstra BH. 2005. Effect of wheat cultivars and seeding rate yield loss from Galium aparine.  Crop Protection, 24: 1061-1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2005.02.012
Mohammadi GR. 2007. Growth parameters enhancing the competitive ability of corn against weed. Weed Biology and Management, 7: 232-236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-6664.2007.00261.x
Mohammed IB, Olufajo O, Singh B, Miko S and Mohammed SG. 2008. Growth and development of components of millet/cowpea intercrop in northern Nigeria. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science, 3: 7-13.
Paolini R, Faustini F, Saccardo F and Crino P. 2006. Competitive interaction between chickpea genotypes and weed. Weed Research, 46:335-344. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.2006.00513.x
Poggio SL. 2005. Structure of weed communities occurring in monoculture and intercropping of field pea and barley. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 109:48-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2005.02.019
Sadri S, Pouryousef M and Soleimani A. 2014. Evaluation of yield, essential oil and productivity indices in fennel and fenugreek intercropping. Agric. Crop Manag, 16: 4. 921-932. (In Persian). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2015.53586
Samai M, Akbari Gh and Zand I. 2006. Investigating the effects of density and competition of Amaranthus retroflexus on morphological characteristics, yield and yield components of soybean cultivars (Glycine max). 4: 41-55, (In Persian). ‎
Saudy HI and EL-Metawally MI. 2009. Weed management under different patterns of sunflower-soybean (Glycine max) intercropping. Journal of central European Agriculture, 10:41-52.
Shafagh-Kolvanagh J, Zehtab Salmasi S, Javanshir A, Mogadam M and Dabagh Mohammadi Nasab A. 2009. The effect of different levels of nitrogen and weed interference on yield, yield components and leaf chlorophyll content in soybean. Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 1(19): 113-125. (In Persian).
Shahmoradi S. 2003. Effects of drought stress on the quantity and quality of soybean cultivars and advanced lines. MSc dissertation, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tehran, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary).
Shakrami GhE, Rahimzadeh Khoei R, Mirshkari R and Verhram R. 2019. Evaluation of fodder quality in mixed cultivation of corn and cowpea under the influence of vermicompost application and foliar application of urea fertilizer. Scientific-Research Journal of Plant Ecophysiology, 36: 137-151. ‎(In Persian).
Sharifi Y, Agha Alikhani M, Seinari AMM, Mohammad Modares A and Soroushzadeh B. 2006. Effect of mixing ratio and plant density on fodder production in intercropping of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) with cowpea (Vigna). Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 1(3):236.245. (In Persian).
Vasilakoglou IB, Lithourgidis AS and Dhima KV. 2005. Assessing common vetch Cereal intercrops for suppression of wild oat. Proceedings of the 13th International symposium, Session S5, European Weed Research Society, Bari, Italy.
Yang F, Huang S, Gao R, liu W, Yong T, Wang X, Wu X and Yang W. 2014. Growth of soybean (Glycine max) seedling in relay strip intercropping system in relation to light quantity and red: far-red ratio. Field Crops Research, 155:245-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.08.011
Yassein M, Singh M and Ram D. 2014. Growth, yield and economics of vetiver under intercropping system. Industrial Crops and Products, 61:417-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2014.07.033
Yilmaz F, Atak M and Erayman MN. 2008. Identification of advantages of maize (Zea mays) -legume intercropping over solitary cropping through competition indices in the east mediterranean region. Turkish J. Agric. For, 32: 111-119.
Zhao JH, Sun JH and Li WQ. 2018. Effect of maize (Zea mays) sowing date on yield and interspecific competition in soybean (Glycine max)/ maize intercropping system. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 26:1634-1642. https://dx.doi.org/10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.180132
دانش کشاورزی وتولید پایدار
دوره 36، شماره 1
1405
صفحه 257-273

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار