تحقیقات علوم زراعی در مناطق خشک

تحقیقات علوم زراعی در مناطق خشک

اثرات روش کشت، کم آبیاری، مالچ و کود نیتروژن بر جمعیت علف هرز و ناخالصی‎های ریشه چغندرقند

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری آبیاری و زهکشی، گروه مهندسی آب، دانشکده آب و خاک، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران
2 گروه مهندسی آب، دانشکده آب و خاک، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران
3 مؤسسه تحقیقات فنی و مهندسی کشاورزی، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران
4 موسسه تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه بذر چغندرقند، کرج، ایران
چکیده
در این پژوهش اثرات آرایش و روش کشت، مالچ، رژیم آبیاری و کود نیتروژن در آبیاری نواری تیپ بر جمعیت علف هرز و عناصر ریشه چغندرقند بررسی شد. آزمایش به‎صورت فاکتوریل بر پایه طرح بلوک‎های کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار در مزرعه‎ای در حوضه آبریز دریاچه ارومیه طی دو فصل زراعی 1397 و 1398 انجام شد. عامل اول شامل کاربرد یا عدم کاربرد مالچ و عامل دوم شامل دو روش کشت (نشائی و بذری)، چهار آرایش کشت نشائی، دو رژیم آبیاری و سه سطح کود نیتروژن بود. براساس نتایج، اثر روش کشت بر جمعیت علف هرز در سطح پنج درصد در هر دو سال معنی‎دار بود. میانگین جمعیت علف هرز در آرایش تک ردیفه (50*50*50) در سال اول و دوم به‎ترتیب 86 و 77 درصد نسبت به میانگین آرایش‎های دو ردیفه (40*50، 40*60 و 50*50) بیشتر بود. اثر مالچ در کشت نشائی و بذری و رژیم آبیاری و کود نیتروژن در کشت نشائی بر جمعیت علف هرز در هر دو سال معنی‎دار نبود. جمعیت علف هرز در تیمار مالچ‎دار در سال اول و دوم به‎ترتیب 11 و 6 درصد بیشتر از تیمار بدون مالچ بود. اثر روش کشت بر مقدار نیتروژن مضره و سدیم ریشه چغندرقند در هر دو سال در سطح پنج درصد، معنی‎دار بود. با افزایش مقدار کود نیتروژن، نیتروژن مضره، سدیم، پتاسیم و ملاس در ریشه چغندرقند در هر دو سال افزایش یافت. بنابراین با تغییر روش کشت از بذری به نشائی و آرایش کشت می‎توان جمعیت علف هرز را بیش از 50 درصد کاهش داد.
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Effects of planting method, deficit irrigation, mulching and nitrogen on weed populations and root impurities of sugar beet

نویسندگان English

Karim Rahmani 1
Masoomeh Delbari 2
Peyman Afrasiab 2
Fariborz Abbasi 3
Vali allah Yusufabadi 4
1 Ph.D Student of Irrigation and Drainage, Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of Water and Soil, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
2 Department of Water Engineering, Faculty of Water and Soil, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
3 Agricultural Engineering and Technical Research Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran
4 Seed Breeding and Preparation Research Institute, Karaj, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction: The occurrence of continuous drought and water crises in arid and semi-arid regions of Iran, including the Lake Urmia catchment area, has necessitated changes in the agricultural system to cope with the water scarcity. Any modification in the agricultural system can impact all the ecosystem components, including weeds. Weeds grow at the same time as sugar beet and accompany it during its growth period. Sugar beet is one of the crops that suffers the most damage from the presence of weeds in the fields. Weeds can significantly reduce sugar beet yield and efficiency. Nitrogen fertilizer can be an effective way to decompose plant residues. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the effects of cultivation arrangement, planting method, irrigation regime, and nitrogen fertilizer with and without mulch in tape irrigation on weed populations and different elements of sugar beet roots in the catchment area of Lake Urmia, which has the largest area under sugar beet cultivation in Iran.
Materials and Methods: The study area is located 7 km south of Bukan city, which is part of the catchment area of Lake Urmia. The experiment was conducted during the 2018-2019 cropping season as a factorial design based on a randomized complete block with three replicates. The first factor was the use or non-use of mulch, and the second factor included different types of tape arrangements and cultivation rows (50x50, 40x50, 40x60, 50x50x50), different cultivation techniques (seedling planting and an arrangement of direct seeding (50x50x50)), irrigation regimes (75% and 100% full coverage irrigation in the 40x50 arrangement), and the use of nitrogen fertilizer (at three levels in the 40x50 arrangement). At the end of the growth period, the crops from each plot were harvested and screened. After washing, 150 grams of root pulp were prepared, frozen, and sent to the laboratory to determine some quality characteristics. Weed control in seed cultivation was carried out in two stages during the growth period and in both years, with the first stage taking place 45 days after planting, simultaneously with planting, and the second stage 30 days after planting by hand weeding. The first round of manual weeding of weeds in the plantation was done at the same time.
Results and Discussion: The results indicate that mulch did not have a significant effect on weed populations at a 5% level of significance. However, the planting method, either direct sowing or seedling transplantation, had a significant effect on weed populations at a 5% level of significance in both years. The average number of weeds in seed cultivation was 55% higher in the first year and 54% higher in the second year compared to seedling cultivation, even though seed cultivation was performed 45 days later than the area cultivation time. The amount of Alpha-Amino-Nitrogen and sodium in sugar beet roots was 2.1 and 2.5 times higher in seed culture in the first year, and 2.1 and 3 times higher in the second year, respectively. In the case of 25% reduced irrigation, the average Alpha-Amino-Nitrogen and sodium in sugar beet roots increased by 8.6% and 39% in the first year and 8.5% and 35% in the second year, respectively, compared to full irrigation.
Conclusion: Considering the environmental and economic benefits of reducing weeds in sugar beet cultivation, using the two-row arrangement method (40x50, 40x60, and 50x50) is recommended as an effective alternative to direct sowing. This method was found to significantly reduce weed populations compared to direct sowing, leading to reduced use of harmful pesticides and lower labor costs in organic production. Additionally, the two-row arrangement method may offer other benefits such as improved water and nutrient management, although it may require more precise planting and irrigation practices. Further research could investigate the potential drawbacks and benefits of this method in different soil and climate conditions.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Alpha-Amino-Nitrogen
Direct sowing
Plant residues
Seedling transplantation
Ahmadi, M., Mohammadian, R., Hosseinpour, A. and Khayamim, S. 2015. Guidance on sugar beet (planting, growing and harvesting). Agricultural Education and Extension Research Organization, Research Institute for Breeding and Preparation of Sugar Beet Seeds. First Edition. [In Persian].
Bandegi, M.R. and Armin, M. 2014. Effect of weed interference with sugar beet under different nitrogen amounts. Plant Ecophysiology Journal, 6(19), pp.45-57. [In Persian].
Bayat, M., Kavhiza, N., Orujov, E., Zargar, M., Akhrarov, A. and Temewei, A. G. 2019. Integrated weed control methods utilizing planting patterns in sugar beet. Research on Crops, 20(2), pp.413-418. https://doi.org/10.31830/2348-7542.2019.060
Draycott, A.P. 2006. Sugar beet. Blackwell Publishing. pp.476.
Fernandez, J.E., Alcon, F., Diaz-Espejo, A., Hernandez-Santana, V. and Cuevas, M.V. 2020. Water use indicators and economic analysis for on-farm irrigation decision: A case study of a super high-density olive tree orchard. Agricultural Water Management.237, p.106074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106074
Gobarah, M.E., Hussein, M.M., Tawfik, M.M., Ahmed, A.G. and Mohamed, M.F. 2019. Effect of different sowing dates on quantity and quality of some promising sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) Varieties under North Delta, Condition. Egyptian Journal of Agronomy, 41(3), pp.343-354. https://doi.org/10.21608/agro.2019.20126.1197
Gohari, J., Taheri, K., Rouhi, A. and Ghalibi, S. 1997. Determination of quantitative and qualitative response of sugar beet crop to nitrogen fertilizer, irrigation and plant density. Research report. Sugar beet institute. Karaj. [In Persian].
Jihad Akbar, M.R., Tabatabai Namvard, R. and Ebrahimian, M.R. 2004. Critical period of weed competition with sugar beet in Kabotarabad-Esfahan. Journal of Sugar Beet, 2(1), pp.73-92. [In Persian]. https://doi/org/10.22092/jsb.2004.6827
Jursík, M., Holec, J., Soukup, J. and Venclová, V. 2008. Competitive relationships between sugar beet and weeds in dependence on time of weed control. Plant Soil and Environment, 54(3), pp.108–116. https://doi.org/10.17221/2687-pse
Keller, J. and Blisner, R.D. 1992. Sprinkler and trickle Irrigation. Avi Book. Van No strand Reinhold, New York.
Khaembah, E.N. and Nelson., W.R. 2016. Transplanting as a means to enhance crop security of fodder beet. BioRxiv, p. 056408. https://doi.org/10.1101/056408
Khayamim, S., Mazaheri, D., Nabayan Aul, M., Gohari, J. and Jahansoz, M.R. 2003. Assessment of sugar beet physiologic and technologic characteristics at different plant density and nitrogen use levels. Pajouhesh- va-sazandegi Journal, 16(3), pp.21-29. [In Persian].
Monthly statistics of the National Meteorological Organization. 2018. https://data.irimo.ir
Sadeghi, H. and Bahrani, M.J. 2009. Effects of crop residue and nitrogen rates on yield and yield components of two dryland wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. Plant Production Science, 12(4), pp.497-502. https://doi.org/10.1626/pps.12.497
Sahabi, H., Sefidi Mahalati, M. and Kochaki, A.R. 2010. Investigating the role of nitrogen partitioning on the allocation pattern of sugar beet dry matter. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 8(4), pp.569-576. [In Persian].
Sharifi Ziveh, P., Fadakar, F. and Mahdavi, V. 2013. Chemical control of dodder (Cuscuta spp.) in the sugar beet fields. Technical Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 3(24), pp.3502-3505.
Sheikholeslami, R. 1997. Sugar and optimizing sugar beet quality determination formulas. Journal of Sugar Beet, 12(1-2), pp.72-82. [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.1997.116488
Singh, S.P., Mahapatra, B.S., Pramanick, B. and Yadav, V.R. 2021. Effect of irrigation levels, planting methods and mulching on nutrient uptake, yield, quality, water and fertilizer productivity of field mustard (Brassica rapa L.) under sandy loam soil. Agricultural Water Management, 244, 106539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106539
Soltani, N., Dille, J.A., Robinson, D.E., Sprague, C.L., Morishita, D.W., Lawrence, N.C., Kniss, A.R., Jha, P., Felix, J., Nurse, R.E. and Sikkema, P.H. 2018. Potential yield loss in sugar beet due to weed interference in the United States and Canada. Weed Technology, 32(6), pp.749-753. https://doi.org/10.1017/wet.2018.88
Tharp, B.E. and Kells, J.J., 2001. Effect of glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) population and row spacing on light interception, corn yield, and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) growth. Weed Technology15(3), pp.413-418. https://doi.org/10.1614/0890-037x(2001)015[0413:eogrcz]2.0.CO;2
Topak, R., Acara, B., Uyanözb, R. and Ceyhan, E. 2016. Performance of partial root-zone drip irrigation for sugar beet production in a semi-arid area. Agricultural Water Management, 176, 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.06.004
Yousefabadi, V. 2017. Technical report of sugar beet seedling transplantation using paper pot and potless methods. Agricultural Education Press. 26 p., Karaj, Iran. [In Persian].
Yousefabadi, V.A., Alebrahim, M.T., Tuobe, A., Zand, E. and Abdollahian-Noghabi, M., 2017. Effect of seedling transplantation and post-emergence herbicides application on field dodder (Cuscuta campestris) control in sugar beet. Romanian Agricultural Research, (34).
Zargar, M., Astarkhanova, T.S., Pakina, E.N., Astarkhanov, I.R., Rimikhanov, A.A., Gyul'magomedova, S.A., Ramazanova, Z.M. and Rebouh, N.Y., 2017. Survey of biological components efficiency on safety and productivity of different tomato cultivars. Research on Crops, 18(2), pp.279-288.
https:/doi.org/10.5958/2348-7542.2017.00048.1
دوره 7، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 17
تابستان 1404
صفحه 397-410

  • تاریخ دریافت 12 بهمن 1401
  • تاریخ بازنگری 15 مهر 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش 18 مهر 1402