مقایسه عملکرد ماش (Vigna radiate L.) در شرایط تغذیه شیمیایی، زیستی و تلفیقی در نظام های خاک ورزی

نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 باشگاه پژوهشگران جوان و نخبگان، واحد اهواز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، اهواز، ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری آگرواکولوژی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

3 دکتری علوم علف‌های هرز، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران

4 دانش آموخته‌ی کارشناسی ارشد آبیاری و زهکشی، واحد فردوس، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، فردوس، ایران

5 مربی گروه کشاورزی دانشگاه پیام نور واحد مریوان، ایران

چکیده

به­منظور ارزیابی اثر روش­های خاک­ورزی و مصرف تلفیقی کود زیستی و شیمیایی بر عملکرد ماش، آزمایشی به صورت اسپلیت پلات در قالب طرح پایه بلوک­های کامل تصادفی با 4 تکرار در بهار 1394 در منطقه سرابله کرمانشــاه انجــام شد. تیمارهای آزمایش شـامل سه سطح خاک­ورزی (بدون خاک­ورزی، خاک­ورزی حفاظتی و خاک­ورزی مرسوم) و چهار سطح کودی شامل تلقیح بذر با مایکوریزا+50% نیتروژن، بدون تلقیح مایکوریزا +50 % نیتروژن، مایکوریزا+100% نیتروژن و عدم تلقیح با مایکوریزا+100% نیتروژن بودند. نتایج نشان داد که اثر متقابل تیمارهای کودی و خاک­ورزی بر عملکرد دانه معنی­دار بود، به­طوری­که بیشترین عملکرد دانه در تیمار خاک­ورزی حفاظتی به همراه مصرف 50% کود نیتروژن همراه با تلقیح بذور با مایکوریزا به میزان 1510 کیلوگرم در هکتار به­دست آمد. این مقدار بیشتر از تیمار خاک­ورزی مرسوم به همراه مصرف 50 % کود نیتروژن و بدون تلقیح مایکوریزا به میزان 1/934 کیلوگرم در هکتار بود. همچنین، بیشترین عملکرد پروتئین دانه در تیمار خاک­ورزی مرسوم به همراه مصرف 50 % کود نیتروژن و تلقیح با مایکوریزا به میـزان 99/24 کیلوگرم در هکتار به­دست آمد که 33/13 کیلوگرم در هکتار بیشتر از تیمار خاک­ورزی مرسوم به همراه مصرف 50 % کود نیتروژن و عدم تلقیح مایکوریزا بود. به­طورکلی، نتایج نشان داد که اعمال خاک­ورزی بر اکثر صفات مورد بررسی تاثیر معنی­داری نداشت. شاید دلیل این باشد که برای رسیدن به تاثیر مطلوب خاک­ورزی بر عملکرد، نیاز به استفاده مداوم از این شیوه به جای استفاده یک­ساله آن باشد. نتایج تحقیق همچنین نشان داد که تلقیح بذر با مایکوریزا موجب کاهش نیاز به مصرف کود نیتروژن شده و از این طریق عملکرد گیاه نیز افزایش یافته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Yield Comparisons of Mung-bean as Affected by Its Different Nutritions (Chemical, Biological and Integration) under Tillage Systems

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fakher Kardoni 1
  • Sadegh Bahamin 2
  • Behroz Khalil Tahmasebi 3
  • Seyed-Hossein Ghavim-Sadati 4
  • Seyyed Esmaeil Vahdani 5
1 Young Researchers and Elite Club, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran
2 Ph.D. Student of Agroecology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
3 Ph.D. of Weed Science, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
4 Graduate Student of Irrigation and Drainage, Ferdows Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ferdows, Iran
5 Staff Member of Department of Agriculture, Payam Noor University of Marivan. Iran
چکیده [English]

To compare yields of mung bean under different nutrition (Chemical, Biological and Integrated) and tillage systems a split plot experiment based on a randomized complete block design with three replications was conducted in 2015. Treatments consisted of 3 levels of tillage systems (no-tillage, conservation tillage and conventional tillage) and 4 levels of plant nutritions (inoculated with mycorrhiza + 50% nitrogen, 50% nitrogen without mycorrhizal inoculation, mycorrhizal inoculation +100 percent nitrogen, without inoculation with mycorrhiza + 50% nitrogen). The results showed that plant nutrient sources affected yield significantly. The highest grain yield (1510.03 kg.ha-1) was obtaind by using conservation tillage, 50% nitrogen and mycorhizal seed inoculation. This yield was 50% more than conventional tillage and nitrogen fertilizer and mycorrhizal seed inoculation which was 934.1 kg.ha-1. The highest protein yield (24.99 kg.ha-1) belonged to conventional tillage, 50 percent of nitrogen use and mycorrhizal inoculation, which is 100% (13.33 kg.ha-1) more than conventional tillage and nitrogen fertilizer with 50 percent of mycorrhizal inoculation. In general, the results showed that the use of tillage did not have significant effect on most of the traits. This result could be different if this experiment would be continued for several years. These results indicated that mycorrhizal seed inoculation reduced the need for nitrogen fertilizer, while increased seed yield.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Yield Comparisons of Mung-bean as Affected by Its Different Nutritions (Chemical
  • Biological and Integration) under Tillage Systems
· Alguacil, M.M., E. Lumini, A. Roldan, J.R. Salinas-Garcia, P. Bonfante, and V. Bianciotto. 2008. The impact of tillage practices on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungal diversity in subtropical crops. Ecological Applications. 18: 527–536.
· Alvarez, R., and H.S. Steinbach. 2009. A review of the effects of tillage systems on some‏ soil physical properties, water content, nitrate availability and crops yield in the Argentine Pampas. Soil and Tillage Research. 104: 1–15.
· Ardakani, M.R., F. Majd, and G. Noormohammadi. 2006. Evaluating the efficiency of mycorrhiza and esterpetomysis in phosphorous different levels and effect of their utiliz on wheat yield. Iranian Journal of Agronomy Sciences. 2(2): 17-27. (In Persian)
· Avian Petrody, M.A., A. Ali Cherati, A.R. Safahani, and G.R. Alizadeh. 2011. The impact of crop residue management, tillage and nitrogen fertilizer on some qualitative and quantitative traits of soybean. 3th International Conference Oilseeds and Edible Oils. Tehran. Oilseeds Coordination Center of Science and Industry. (In Persian).
· Ball, B.C., A. Scott, and J.P. Parker. 1999. Field N2O, CO2 and CH4 fluxes in relation to tillage, compaction and soil quality in Scotland. Soil and Tillage Research. 53: 29-39.
· Barzali, M., A. Javanshir, M.R. Shakiba, M. Moghadam, and A. Nourinia. 2003. Effect of different methods of tillage on yield and yield components of soybean in Gorgan region. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal. 19(2): 173-189. (In Persian).
· Beauregard, M.S., C. Hamel, N. Atul, M. St-Arnaud. 2010. Long term phosphorus fertilization impacts soil fungal and bacterial diversity but not AM fungal community in alfalfa. Microbial Ecology. 59: 379–389.
· Cheraghi, S., and M. Pezeshkpour. 2013. Comparison of different ways of tillage and foliar nitrogen application on yield machine. Journal of Crop Physiology. 5(19): 85-97.
· De Gryze, S., J. Six, C. Brits, and R. Merckx. 2005. A quantification of short-term macro aggregate dynamics: Influences of wheat residue input and texture. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 37: 55-66.
· Duan, T., Y. Shen, E. Facelli, S.E. Smith, and Z. Nan. 2010. New agricultural practices in the Loess Plateau of China do not reduce colonisation by arbuscular mycorrhizal or root invading fungi and do not carry a yield penalty. Plant and Soil. 331: 265–275.
· El Titi, A. 2010. Soil tillage in agroecosystems. Taylor and Francis, Nature 384 pp.
· Fathi, A. 2017. Effect of phosphate solubilization microorganisms and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on yield and yield components of corn. Scientia Agriculturae. 18(3): 66-69.
· Ghuman, B.S., and H.S. Sur. 2001. Tillage and residue management effects on soil properties in a direct drill tillage system. Soil and Tillage Research. 42: 209-219.
· Jackson, M.C. 1964. Soil chemical analysis. Constable and Co. Ltd. London. pp: 183-192.
· Jansa, J., A. Mozafar, T. Anken, R. Ruh, I.R. Sanders, and E. Frossard. 2002. Diversity and structure of AMF communities as affected by tillage in a temperate soil. Mycorrhiza. 12: 225–234.
· Jansa, J., A. Mozafar, G. Kuhn, T. Anken, R. Ruh, I.R. Sanders, and E. Frossard. 2003. Soil tillage affects the community structure of mycorrhizal fungi in maize roots. Ecological Applications. 13: 1164–1176.
· Karami Chame, S., B. Khalil-Tahmasbi, P. ShahMahmoodi, A. Abdollahi, A. Fathi, S.J. Seyed Mousavi, and S. Bahamin. 2016. Effects of salinity stress, salicylic acid and pseudomonas on the physiological characteristics and yield of seed beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Scientia. 14(2): 234-238. ‏
· Khorramian, M., S. Boroumand Nasab, and S.R. Ashrafzadeh. 2015. Effect of tillage, water stress and nitrogen on nitrate transport in soil and corn yield in the north of Khuzestan. Water in Agricultural Research Journal. 28(1): 11-23.
· Lal, R. 2015. Restoring soil quality to mitigate soil degradation. Sustainability. 7(5): 5875-5895. ‏
· Lapen, D.R., G. Topp, E. Gregorich, and E. Curnoe. 2004. Least limiting water range indicators of soil quality and corn production, eastern Ontario. Canada Soil and Tillage Research. 78: 151-170.
· Liu, X., S.J. Herbert, A.M. Hashemi, X. Zhang, and G. Ding. 2006. Effects of agricultural management on soil organic matter and carbon transformation: A review. Plant and Soil, Environment. 52: 531-543.
· Maleck, I., and A. Blecharczyk. 2011. Effect of tillage system, mulches and nitrogen fertihzation on spring barely (Hordeum vulgare L.). Agronomy Research. 6(2): 517-529.
· Monzon, J.P., V.O. Sadras, and F.H. Andrade. 2006. Fallow soil evaporation and water storage as affected by stubble in sub-humid (Argentina) and semi-arid (Australia) environments. Field Crops Research. 98: 83-90.
· Mozaffarian, V.A. 2002. Dictionary of plants in Iran. Tehran University Press. 677p.
· Muñoz-Romero, V., L. Lopez-Bellido, and R.J. Lopez-Bellido. 2015. Effect of tillage system on soil temperature in a rainfed Mediterranean Vertisol. International Agrophysics. 29(4): 467-473. ‏
· Mutegi, J.K., J. Lars, B.M. Petersen, E.M. Hansen, and S.O. Petersen. 2010. Nitrous oxide emissions and controls as influenced by tillage and crop residue management strategy. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 42: 1701-1711.
· Nezarat, S., and A. Gholami. 2009. The effect of co-inoculation of azospirillum and psedomonas rhizobacteria on nutrient of maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of Agronomy. 1(1): 25-32. (In Persian).
· Panwar, J.D.S. 1993. Response of VAM and azospirillum inoculation to water status and grain yield in wheat under water stress condition. Indian Journal of Physiology. 36: 37- 43.
· Parsa Motlagh, B. 2011. The effect of the interaction of salinity, mycorrhizal fungi and phosphorus on growth and yield characteristics of the beans (Phaseseolus vulgaris L.). Master's Thesis. University of Birjand. 138 pp. (In Persian).
· Rahimi, M.M., and A.R. Hashemi. 2016. Yield and yield components of vetch (Vigna radiata) as affected by the use of vermicomposting and phosphate bio-fertilizer. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology. 10(38): 529-540. (In Persian).
· Rezvani Moghaddam, P., A. Koocheki, A. Molafilabi, and S.M. Seyyedi. 2013. The effects of different levels of applied wheat straw in different dates on saffron (Crocus sativus L.) daughter corms and flower initiation criteria in the second year. Saffron Agronomy and Technology 1: 55-70. (In Persian).
· Rial-Lovera, K., W.P. Davies, N.D. Cannon, and J.S. Conway. 2016. Influence of tillage systems and nitrogen management on grain yield, grain protein and nitrogen-use efficiency in UK spring wheat. The Journal of Agricultural Science. 1-16.‏
· Roldan, A., J.R. Salinas-Garcia, M.M. Alguacil, and F. Caravaca. 2007. Soil sustainability indicators following conservation tillage practices under subtropical maize and bean crops. Soil Tillage Research. 93: 273–282.
· Sadeghi, H., and A.R. Kazemeini. 2011. Effect of crop residue management and nitrogen fertilizer on grain yield and yield components of two barley cultivars under dry land conditions. Iranian Journal of Crop Science. 13(3): 436-451. (In Persian).
· Sepidehdam, S., and M. Ramroudi. 2015. Effect of tillage and nitrogen fertilizer on yield, yield components and protein content of wheat. Applied Research Ecophysiology. 2(2): 33-46. (In Persian).
· Singh, B.R., and M. Haile. 2007. Impact of tillage and nitrogen fertilization on yield, nitrogen use efficiency of tef (Eragrostistef (Zucc.) Trotter) and soil properties. Soil and Tillage Research. 94: 55-63.
· Taheri Oshtrinani, F., and A. Fathi. 2016. The impacts of mycorrhiza and phsphorus along with the use of salicylic acid on maize seed yield. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology. 10(39): 657-668. (In Persian).
Wasaya, A., M. Tahir, H. Ali, M. Hussain, T.A. Yasir, A. Sher, and M. Ijaz. 2017. Influence of varying tillage systems and nitrogen application on crop allometry, chlorophyll contents, biomass production and net returns of maize (Zea mays L.). Soil and Tillage Research. 170: 18-26.‏