سودمندی کشت مخلوط باقلا (.Vicia faba L.) و نعناع فلفلی (.Mentha piperita L.) در الگوهای مختلف کشت

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 آگرواکولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه مراغه

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

3 گروه باغبانی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه مراغه

چکیده

     به‌منظور ارزیابی کشت مخلوط نعناع‌فلفلی و باقلا، آزمایشی به صورت طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با نه تیمار و سه تکرار در دانشکده کشاورزی دانشگاه مراغه در سال زراعی 1394 اجرا شد. تیمارها شامل کشت خالص دو گونه نعناع‌فلفلی و باقلا، 1 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 1ردیف باقلا، 1 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 2 ردیف باقلا، 2 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 1 ردیف باقلا، 2 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 3 ردیف باقلا، 3 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 2 ردیف باقلا، 1 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 3 ردیف باقلا و 3 ردیف نعناع‌فلفلی+ 1 ردیف باقلا بودند. الگوهای مختلف کشت مخلوط بر اساس شاخص‌های نسبت برابری زمین (LER)، نسبت برابری زمین استاندارد (LERS)، نسبت معادل سطح زیر کشت و زمان (ATER)، نسبت معادل سطح برداشت (AHER)، کارایی استفاده از زمین (LUE)، معادل عملکرد نعناع فلفلی (EYP)، ضریب ازدحام نسبی (K)، غالبیت (A)، نسبت رقابت (CR)، افت واقعی عملکرد (AYL)، برتری مالی (IA)، سودمندی کشت مخلوط (MAI)، شاخص بهره‌وری سیستم (SPI) و مجموع ارزش نسبی (RVT) ارزیابی شدند. نتایج نشان داد که عملکرد دانه باقلا در واحد سطح اشغالی و مخلوط تحت تأثیر الگوهای مختلف کشت قرار گرفت، به‌طوری‌که بیشترین عملکرد دانه باقلا در واحد سطح اشغالی به تیمارهای 2:3 و 1:3 تعلق داشت. همچنین بیشترین عملکرد دانه در واحد سطح مخلوط به کشت خالص باقلا و بعد از آن به تیمار 2:3 مربوط بود. بیشترین مقادیر LER معمولی و استاندارد، ATER، AHER، LUE، IA، MAI، RVT و معادل عملکرد نعناع فلفلی در تیمارهای 2:3، 3:2 و 1:3 مشاهده شد که بیانگر سودمندی این تیمارها از لحاظ زراعی و اقتصادی می‌باشد. مقادیر A، CR و AYL نعناع فلفلی بیشتر از باقلا بود که نشان‌دهنده توانایی رقابتی بیشتر و غالبیت نعناع فلفلی نسبت به باقلا می‌باشد. در کل با توجه به بیشتر بودن شاخص‌های زراعی و اقتصادی در الگوی کشت 2:3، این الگوی کشت برتر از سایر تیمارها بود. 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Advantage of Peppermint (Mentha piperita L.) and Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) Intercropping in Different Cropping Patterns

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mostafa Amani Machiani 1
  • Abdollah Javanmard 2
  • Yousef Nasiri 2
  • Mohammad reza Morshedloo 3
چکیده [English]

In order to evaluate of peppermint and faba bean intercropping, a field experiment was carried out as a randomized complete blocks design (RCBD) with eight treatment and three replication at the faculty of Agriculture, University of Maragheh during 2015 growing season. Treatments were included sole planting of peppermint and faba bean, 1 row peppermint+ 1 row faba bean, 1 row peppermint+ 2 rows faba bean, 2 rows peppermint+ 1 row faba bean, 2 rows peppermint+ 3 rows faba bean, 3 rows peppermint+ 2 rows faba bean, 1 row peppermint+ 3 rows bean and 3 rows peppermint+ 1 row bean. Intercropping different patterns were calculated by means of land equivalent ratio (LER), standard  land equivalent ratio (LERS), area time equivalent ratio (ATER), area harvest equivalent ratio (AHER), land use efficiency (LUE), peppermint equivalent yield (EYP), relative crowding coefficient (RCC or K), aggressivity (A), competitive ratio (CR), actual yield loss (AYL), monetary advantage index (MAI), intercropping advantage (IA), system productivity index (SPI) and relative value total (RVT). Results showed that seed yield of faba bean per occupied unit area and per intercropped unit area were affected significantly by intercropping patterns. The highest seed yield of faba bean per occupied unit was obtained in the 2:3 and 1:3 treatments. In addition, the highest seed yield of faba bean per intercropped unit area observed in faba bean sole crop. The highest values of LER, LERS, ATER, AHER, LUE, EYP, IA, MAI and SPI obtained in 2:3, 3:2 and 1:3 intercropping patterns, indicating that the intercropping systems were the most profitable on basis of agronomical and economical. Generally, the A, CR and AYL values in peppermint were higher than bean, indicating that peppermint was more competitive and dominant than faba bean. Generalley, in basis of more agronomy and economic indices in 2:3 cropping pattern, this cropping pattern was superier than other treatments.  
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Aggressivity
  • Land use efficiency
  • Relative Crowding Coefficient
  • Seed Yield
  • System Productivity Index

مراجع

Agegnehu G, Ghizam A and Sinebo W, 2006. Yield performance and land-use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. European Journal of Agronomy, 25: 202-207.
Allahdadi M, Shakiba MR, Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab A and Amini R, 2013. Evaluation of yield and advantages of soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill.) and calendula (Calendula officinalis L.) intercropping systems. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science, 23(3): 47-58. (In Persian).
Amirmardfar R, Dabbagh Mohammadi Nassab A, Raei Y, Khaghaninia S, Amini R and Tabataba Vakili SH, 2015. Evaluation of yield and yield components of oilseed rape in the wheat-oilseed rape strip intercropping influenced by chemical and biological fertilizers. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 8(4): 437-450. (In Persian).
Bahador M, Abdali-Mashhadi A, Koochekzade A, Lotfi A and Yousefian H, 2014. Evaluation of intercropping of garlic (Allium sativum L.) with some medicinal plants in Ahvaz climatic conditions. Journal of Agroecology, 6(3): 488-494. (In Persian).
Banik P, Midya A, Sarkar B K 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.
Bargaz A, Isaac ME, Jensen ES and Carlsson G, 2015. Intercropping of faba bean with wheat under low water availability promotes faba bean nodulation and root growth in deeper soil layers. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 29:111 – 112.
Barker S and Dennett M D, 2013. Effect of density, cultivar and irrigation on spring-sown monocrops and intercrops of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and faba beans (Vicia faba L.). European Journal of Agronomy, 51: 108– 116.
Cao S, Luo H, Jin M, Jin S, Duan X, Zhou Y, Chen W, Liu T, Jia Q, Zhang B, Huang J, Wang X, Shang X and Sun Z, 2015. Intercropping influenced the occurrence of stripe rust and powdery mildew in wheat. Crop Protection, 70: 40-46.
Chapagain T and Riseman A, 2014. Barley–pea intercropping: Effects on land productivity, carbon and nitrogen transformations. Field Crops Research, 166: 18–25.
Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab A, Amon T and Kaul HP, 2011. Competition and yield in intercrops maize and sunflower for biogas. Industrial Crops and Products, 34: 1203-1211.
Hamzei J, Seyedi M, Ahmadvand G and Abutalebian MA, 2012. The effect of additive intercropping on weed suppression, yield and yield component of chickpea and barley. Journal of Crop Production and Processing, 2: 43- 55.
Gao Y, Duana A, Qiua X, Liua Z, Suna J, Zhang J and Wanga H, 2010. Distribution of roots and root length density in a maize/soybean strip intercropping system. Agricultural Water Management, 98: 199-212.
Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Gooding M, Ambus P, Corre-Hellou G, Crozat Y, Dahlmann C, Dibet A, Von Fragstein P, Pristeri A, Monti M and Jensen ES, 2009. Pea–barley intercropping for efficient symbiotic N2-fixation, soil N acquisition and use of other nutrients in European organic cropping systems. Field Crops Research, 113: 64–71.
Ibrahim M, Ayub M, Maqbool MM, Nadeem SM, Haq T, Hussain S, Ali A, Lauriault LM, 2014. Forage yield components of irrigated maize-legume mixtures at varied seed ratios. Field Crops Research, 169: 140-144.
Jahansooz MR, Yunusa IAM, Coventry DR, Palmer AR, Eamus D, 2007. Radiation and water-use associated with growth and yields of wheat and chickpea in sole and mixed crops. European Journal of Agronomy, 26: 275-282.
Jensen ES, Peoples Mb and Hauggaard-Nielsen H, 2010. Faba bean in intercropping systems. Field Crop Research, 115: 203-216.
Koocheki A, Shabahang J, Khorramdel S and Amin G, 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).
Latati M, Bargaz A, Belarbi B, Lazali M, Benlahrech S, Siham T, Kaci G and Jean JD, 2016. The intercropping common bean with maize improves the rhizobial efficiency, resource use and grain yield under low phosphorus availability. European Journal of Agronomy, 72: 80-90.
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.
Maffi M and Mucciarelli M, 2003. Essential oil yield in peppermint/soybean strip intercropping. Field Crops Research, 84: 229 – 240.
Marcum DB and Hanson BR, 2006. Effect of irrigation and harvest timing on peppermint oil yield in California. Agricultural Water Management, 82: 118-128.
Monti M, Pellicanò A, Santonoceto C, Preiti G and Pristeri A, 2016. Yield components and nitrogen use in cereal-pea intercrops in Mediterranean environment. Field Crops Research, 196: 379-388.
Motaghian A, Pirdashti H, Akbarpour V, Sarajpour G, Yaghoubi Khanghahi M and Shariatnejad S, 2013. Evaluation of basil (Ocimum basiilicum L.) and sesame (sesamum indicum L.) yield in different intercropping mixtures via competition indices. Journal of Agroecology, 5(3): 243-254. (In Persian).
Nasiri Mahallati M, Koocheki A, Mondani F, Amirmoradi Sh and Feizi H, 2015. Evaluation of Maize (Zea mays L.) and Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Growth Indices in Strip Intercropping. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 13(1): 14-23. (In Persian).
Rao BR, 2002. Biomass yield, essential oil yield and essential oil composition of rose-scented geranium (Pelargonium species) as influenced by row spacings and intercropping with cornmint (Mentha arvensis L.f. piperascens Malinv. Ex Holmes). Industrial Crops and Products, 16: 133-144.
Rezvani Moghadam P and Moradi R, 2013. Evaluation of planting date, biological fertilizer and intercropping on yield and essence quantity of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 43(2): 217-230. (In Persian).
Rezaei-Chiyaneh E and Gholinezhad E, 2015. Study of agronomic characteristics and advantage indices in intercropping of additive series of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and Black Cumin (Nigella sativa L.). Agroecology, 7 (3): 381-396. (In Persian).
Sadeghpour A, Jahanzad E, Esmaeili A, Hosseini MB, Hashemi M, 2013. Forage yield, quality and economic benefit of intercropped barley andannual medic in semi-arid conditions: Additive series. Field Crops Research, 148: 43–48.
Sadri S, Poor Yousef M and Soleimani A, 2014. Evaluation of yield, essential oil and productivity indices in fennel and fenugreek intercropping. Agricultural Crop Management, 16 (4):921-932. 
Shen QR and Chu GX, 2004. Bi-directional nitrogen transfers in an intercropping system of peanut with rice cultivated in aerobic soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 40: 81-87.
Singh M, Singh UB, Ram M, Yadav A and Chanotiya CS, 2013. Biomass yield, essential oil yield and quality of geranium (Pelargonium graveolens L.) as influenced by intercropping with garlic (Allium sativum L.) under subtropical and temperate climate of India. Industrial Crops and Products, 46: 234-237.
Verma RK, Chauhan A, Verma RS, Rahman L and Bisht A, 2013. Improving production potential and resources use efficiency of peppermint (Mentha piperita L.) intercropped with geranium (Pelargonium graveolens L. Herit ex Ait) under different plant density. Industrial Crops and Products, 44: 577-582.
Willey RW, Rao MR, 1980. A competitive ratio for quantifying competition between intercrops. Experimental Agriculture, 16:117–125.
Willey RW, 1979. Intercropping its importance and research needs: Part I. Competition and yield advantage. Field Crop Abstracts, 32:1–10.
Xu BC, Li FM and Shan L, 2008. Switch grass and milk vetch intercropping under 2:1 row replacement in semiarid region, northwest China: Aboveground biomass and water use efficiency. European Journal of Agronomy, 228: 485-492.
Yaseen M, Singh M and Ram D, 2014. Growth, yield and economics of vetiver (Vetiveria zizanioides L. Nash) under intercropping system. Industrial Crops and Products, 61: 417-421.
Yilmaz S, Ozel A, Atak M and Erayman M, 2015. 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.
Zhang G, Yang Z and Dong S, 2011. Interspecific competitiveness affects the total biomass yield in an alfalfa and corn intercropping system. Field Crops Research, 124: 66-73.
دانش کشاورزی وتولید پایدار
دوره 27، شماره 3
مهر 1396
صفحه 45-62

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار