به زراعی کشاورزی

به زراعی کشاورزی

تعیین آستانه خسارت اقتصادی خردل ‌وحشی در رقابت با چهار رقم گندم در منطقه گرگان

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
حسین رضوانی 1
جعفر اصغری 2
سید محمدرضا احتشامی 3
بهنام کامکار 4
1 دانشجوی دکترای زراعت، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانَشکده علوم کشاورزی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران
2 استاد گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده علوم کشاورزی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران
3 استادیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده علوم کشاورزی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران
4 دانشیار، گروه زراعت، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران
10.22059/jci.2015.54785
چکیده
به‌­منظور تعیین آستانۀ خسارت اقتصادی چهار رقم گندم در تراکم­های مختلف خردل ­وحشی، آزمایش به‌صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح پایة بلوک­های کامل تصادفی در چهار تکرار و در دو سال زراعی (90-1389 و 91-1390) در مزرعة تحقیقاتی ایستگاه تحقیقات کشاورزی گرگان وابسته به مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان گلستان اجرا شد. فاکتورهای آزمایش شامل ارقام گندم (‘آرتا’، ‘تجن’، ‘مغان’ و ‘مروارید’) و تراکم خردل ­وحشی (صفر، 4، 8، 16 و 32 بوته در متر مربع) بود. برای توصیف کاهش عملکرد ناشی از رقابت خردل ­وحشی از معادلة هذلولی کازنس استفاده شد. حداکثر تلفات عملکرد مربوط به تراکم­های بالای خردل ­وحشی بود و در بین ارقام، رقم ‘آرتا’ بیشترین و رقم ‘مروارید’ کمترین تلفات عملکرد را داشتند. شاخص‏های رقابتی محاسبه‌شده نشان داد که رقم ‘مروارید’ در شرایط رقابت با خردل وحشی، توانایی زیادی در جلوگیری از کاهش عملکرد خود داشت (تحمل زیاد) و از طرف دیگر، وزن خشک و مقدار بذر علف‏ هرز را نیز تا حد زیادی کاهش داد. با استفاده از مدل بسط‌داد‌‌ه‌شدة هذلولی کازنس و فرمول ادونوان، آستانۀ خسارت اقتصادی در دو سال زراعی برای ارقام گندم تراکم‌های 11/4، 68/3، 33/2 و 11/2 بوته در متر مربع به‌ترتیب در ارقام ‘مروارید’، ‘مغان’، ‘تجن’ و ‘آرتا’ در شرایط آب‌وهوایی گرگان تعیین شد.
 
کلیدواژه‌ها
آستانه خسارت
توابع کاهش عملکرد
خردل ‌وحشی
رقابت
گندم

عنوان مقاله English

Determination of economic damage threshold of wild mustard in competition with four wheat cultivars at Gorgan

نویسندگان English

Hossein Rezvani 1
Jafar Asghari 2
Seyed MohammadReza Ehteshami 3
Behnam Kamkar 4
1 Ph.D. Student, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rahst, Iran
2 Professor respectively, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rahst, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, respectively, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rahst, Iran
4 Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran
چکیده English

For determination of economic damage threshold of four wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars in different densities of wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.), experiments were conducted at Agricultural Research Station Gorgan during 2010-2012. The experimental design consisted of four randomized complete blocks in a factorial arrangement. The treatments comprised of factorial combination of wild mustard densities and wheat cultivars. Five different densities of wild mustard (zero, four, eight, 16 and 32 plants.m-2) and four wheat cultivars (‘Arta’, ‘Tajan’, ‘Mogan’ and ‘Morvarid’) were considered in all the replications. Cousens hyperbolic equation was used to describe the yield reduction due to wild mustard competition. The maximum yield reduction was associated with high densities of wild mustard and among the cultivars, ‘Arta’ and ‘Morvarid’ had the maximum and minimum yield reductions, respectively. Calculated competitive indexes indicated that ‘Morvarid’ cultivar in competition with wild mustard had a high capacity to prevent yield loss (high tolerance) and on the other hand, dry weight and seed amount of weed was also greatly reduced. Using extended Cousens hyperbolic model and Odonovan formula, economic damage threshold for wheat in two years determined in densities of 4.11, 3.68, 2.33 and 2.11 plant/m2 for ‘Morvarid’, ‘Moghan’, ‘Tajan’ and ‘Arta’ cultivars in climatic conditions of Gorgan.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Competition
Economic threshold
Wheat
Wild mustard
Yield loss functions

  1.  

    1. Anonymous (2005) http://www.Council.org / weed problem. Aspx (accessed Oct., 30th).
    2. Bhaskar A and Vyas KG (1988) Studies on competition between wheat and Chenopodium album L. Weed Research. 26: 53-5.
    3. Bagherani N and Ghadiri H (1995) Effect of chemical and mechanical scarification, giberellic acid and temperature on wild mustard germination (Abs). The 12st Plant Protection Congress. Karaj. Iran. Pp. 14. (In Persian)
    4. Beckie HJ, Johnson EN and Blackshaw RE (2008) Weed suppression by canola and mustard cultivars. Weed Technology. 22: 182-185.
    5. Blakshaw RE, Molnar LJ and Janzen HH (2004) Nitrogen fertilizer timing and application method affect weed growth and competition with spring wheat. Weed Science. 52: 614-622.  
    6. Buchow RC, Robertson MJ and Pengelly BC (1993) Radiation use efficiency of soybean, mung bean and cowpea under different environmental conditions. Field Crops Research. 32: 1-16.
    7. Buhler DD (2002) Challenges and opportunities for integrated weed management. Weed Science. 50: 273-280.
    8. Burgos NR, Norman RJ, Gealy DR and Black H (2006) Competitive N uptake between rice and weedy rice. Field Crops Research. 99: 96-105.
    9. Cathcart RJ and Swanton CJ (2003) Nitrogen management will influence threshold values of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) in Corn. Weed Science. 51: 975-986.
    10. Chandler JM and Mrerdith WR (1983) Yields of three cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) cultivars as influenced by sprured anoda (Anoda cristata) competition. Weed Science. 31: 303-307.
    11. Cousens R (1985) A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Annual Applied Biology. 107:239-252.
    12. Cousens RD, Barnett AG and Barry GC (2003) Dynamics of competition between wheat and oats. I. Effects of changing the timing of phenological events. Agronomy. 95: 1295-1304.
    13. Deihimfar R (2005) Evaluation of the morphophysiological characteristics effects on yield increase of some Triticum asetivum L. cultivars in competition with Eruca sativa Mill. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Tehran, Abooreihan campus. 135p.
    14. Dhima K and Eleftherohorinos I (2005) Wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) competition with three winter cereals as affected by nitrogen supply. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 191: 241-248.
    15. Dianat M, Rahimian Mashhadi H, Baghestani MA, Alizadeh HM and Zand E (2007) Evaluation of Iranian cultivars of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) for competitive ability against rye (Secale cereale). Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. 23: 267-280. (In Persian).
    16. Ghadiri H, Ebrahimi M and Zand E (2008) Effect of Wild Oat (Avena fatua L.) densities and nitrogen on morphophysiological traits of several Iranian wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars. In Proceeding of the 5International Weed Science Congress. Vancouver, Canada, 189P.
    17. Gupta OP (2006) Modern weed management. Agrobios Publication, India, 339p.
    18. Gherekhloo J, Mazaheri D, Ghanbari A and Ghannadha MR (2005) Economic threshold valuation of weeds in wheat in Mashhad. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 36(6): 1429-1435. (In Persian).
    19. Khan IJ, Ihsanullah G and Khatak IA (2007) Effect of wild oats (Avena fatua)densities and proportions on yield and yield components of wheat. Journal of Agricaltural and Biological Sciences. 1: 26-31.
    20. Kim DS, Marshall EJP, Brain P and Caseley JC (2011) Effects of crop canopy structure on herbicide deposition and performance. Weed Research. 51: 310-320.
    21. Kristensen L, Olsen J and Winer J (2008) Crop density, sowing pattern, and nitrogen fertilization effects on weed suppression and yield in spring wheat. Weed Science. 56: 97-102.
    22. Lindquist JL (2001) Mechanisms of crop loss due to weed competition. CRC Press. Pp. 233.
    23. Mennan H (2003) Economic thresholds of wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) in winter wheat field. Pakistan Journal of Agronomy. 2: 34-39.
    24. Moradi Telavat MR, Siadat SA and Fathi G (2009) Effect of nitrogen and herbicide levels on wheat (Triticum aestivum) competition ability against wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis). Electronic Journal of Crop Production. 2: 135-150. (In Persian)
    25. Moosavi H, Moradi-Telavat MR, Fathi G and Alamisaeid K (2008) Rice and barnyard grass responses to herbicide and planting density in direct seeding in Ahwaz region. 10th Iranian Congrees in Agronomy and Plant Breeding, 24-26 Aug. Karaj. Iran. (In Persian)
    26. O’Donovan JT (1984) Influence of various densities of green foxtail (Setaria viridis) on yield of barley, wheat and canola. Research Report of Expert Committee on Weeds Western Canada. 3: 248-250.
    27. O’Donovan JT (1991) Quack grass (Elytrigia repens) interference in canola (Brassica compestris). Weed Science. 39: 397-401.
    28. Odonovan JT, Harker KN, Clayton GW and Hall LM (2000) Wild oat (Avena fatua) interference in barley (Hordum vulgare) is influenced by barley variety and seeding rate. Weed Technology. 14: 624-629.
    29. Olsen J, Kristensen L and Weiner J (2005) Effects of density and spatial pattern, of winter wheat on     suppression of different weed species. Weed Science. 14: 690-694.
    30. Pester TA, Westra P, Anderson RL, Lyon DL, Miller SD, Stahlman PW, Northam FE and Wicks GA (2000) Secale cereale interference and economic thresholds in winter Triticum aestivum. Weed Science. 48: 720-727.
    31. Rahemi A, Galeshi S, Soltani A and Kamkar B (2010) Variation of nitrogen use efficiency, grain protein concentration and yield in wheat cultivars in temperate sub-humid. American–Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. 9(1): 8-15.
    32. Rastgoo M, Ghanbari A, Banayan M and Rahimiyan H (2005) Effects of amount and timing of nitrogen application and weed density on wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) seed - production in winter wheat. Iranian Journal of Agronomy Research. 3(1): 45-56. (in Persian)
    33. Saadatian B, Ahmadvand G and Soleymani F (2011) Evaluation empirical models of feral rye and wild mustard to predict yield loss of two winter wheat cultivars. Iranian Journal of Agronomy Research. 4(4): 157-175. (in Persian).
    34. Safahani Langrodi AS, Kamkar B, Zand E and Baghestani MA (2008) Evaluation of ability tolerance competition of canola cultivars to wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) using some empirical models in Golestan province. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. 15(5): 101-111. (In Persian)
    35. Watson PR, Derksen DA, Van Acker RC and Blrvine MC (2002) The contribution of seed, seedling, and mature plant traits to barley cultivar competitiveness against weeds. In: Proceedings of the National Meeting. Canadian Weed Science Society. Pp. 49-57.
    36. Warwick SI, Beckie HJ, Thomas AG and Mcdonald T (2005) The biology of Canadian Weeds. 8. Sinapis arvensis L. (updated). Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 55: 171-18.
    37. Van Acker RC, Weise SF and Swanton CJ (1993) Influence of interference from a mixed weed species stand on soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) growth. Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 73: 1293-1304.
    38. Zand E and Beckie HJ (2002) Competitive ability of hybrid and open pollinated canola (Brassica napus) with wild oat (Avena fatua). Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 82: 473-480.
    39. Zimdahl R (2004) Weed crop competition, a review. A review Corvallis, OR: Int. Plant Protection Center. Oregon State University.