اثر برهمکنش رقم و مالچ زنده بر عملکرد آفتابگردان و کنترل علف‌های هرز

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناس ارشد، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران

2 استادیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران

3 دانشیار، گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه زنجان، زنجان، ایران

چکیده

به‌منظور بررسی تأثیر رقم و مالچ زندهبر عملکرد دانۀ آفتابگردان و کنترل علف‌های هرز، آزمایشی به‌صورت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار، در مزرعۀ تحقیقاتی دانشکدۀ کشاورزی دانشگاه زنجان در سال زراعی 1392 انجام گرفت. فاکتور­ها شامل رقم­های ’فرخ‘، ’آلستار‘ و ’آذرگل‘ و کنترل علف‌های هرز (وجین در تمام فصل، حضور علف هرز در تمام طول فصل رشد و کشت گیاهان پوششی گندم سیاه، یونجۀ یکساله، ماشک گل‌خوشه‌ای به‌عنوان مالچ زنده به‌تنهایی و در تلفیق با یک بار وجین) بود. در حضور گیاهان پوششی گندم سیاه، یونجۀ یکساله و ماشک گل‌خوشه‌ای به‌ترتیب 7/43، 8/33 و 25 درصد وزن خشک و 1/57، 1/38 و 29 درصد تراکم مجموع علف‌های هرز نسبت به شاهد (حضور علف هرز در تمام طول فصل رشد) کاهش یافت. همچنین تلفیق گیاهان پوششی با یک بار وجین به‌طور معناداری کنترل علف‌های هرز را بهبود بخشید. کمترین مقدار وزن خشک و تراکم علف‌های هرز در رقم ’آذرگل‘ دیده شد. بیشترین شاخص سطح برگ آفتابگردان در رقم ’آذرگل‘ و در شرایط وجین تمام فصل به‌دست آمد. تداخل علف‌های هرز، عملکرد دانۀ رقم‌های ’آذرگل‘، ’آلستار‘ و ’فرخ‘ را به‌ترتیب 6/18، 1/22 و 4/33 درصد نسبت به شاهد بدون علف هرز کاهش داد. به­طور کلی، بیشترین عملکرد دانه در رقم ’آذرگل‘ دیده شد. همچنین گیاه پوششی یونجۀ یکساله در تلفیق با یک بار وجین عملکرد دانۀ مشابه وجین تمام فصل ایجاد کرد. در مجموع، یونجۀ یکساله به‌صورت مالچ زنده و ’آذرگل‘ به‌عنوان رقمی با توان رقابت زیاد می‌تواند به‌عنوان بخشی از مدیریت تلفیقی علف‌های هرز در تولید پایدار آفتابگردان استفاده شود.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Interaction effect of cultivar and living mulch on sunflower yield and weed control

نویسندگان [English]

  • sediqe latifi 1
  • alireza yousefi 2
  • khalil jamshidi 3
1 M.Sc. Student, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Zanjan University, Zanjan – Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Zanjan University, Zanjan – Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture, Zanjan University, Zanjan – Iran
چکیده [English]

In order to evaluate the effects of crop cultivars and living mulchon sunflower yield and weed control, a field experiment was carried out as factorial arrangement based on a randomized complete block design with three replications in 2013. Treatements were sunflower cultivars (‘Azargol’, ‘Allstar’, ‘Farokh’) and weed control treatments (weed-free, weed-infestation and intercropping of Fagopyrum esculentum, Medicago scutellata, Vicia villosa as living mulch alone and in combination with one hand-weeding).In comparison to weedy treatement, F. esculentum, M. scutellataand V.villosa cover crops were reduced total weed biomass 43.7, 33.8 and 25 percent, and weed density 57.1, 38.1 and 29, respectively. Weed control was improved significantly when cover crops used in combination with one hand-weeding. The lowest weed biomass and density were recorded in the ‘Azargol’ cultivar. The highest Sunflower leaf area index (LAI) was obtained in ‘Azargol’ cultivar under weed-free condition. Weed interference decreased grain yield of ‘Azargol’, ‘Allstar’ and ‘Farokh’ by 18.6, 22.1 and 33.4 percent, respectively compared to weed-free plots. The highest grain yield was obtained in ‘Azargol’ cultivar. Medicago scutellataas cover crop in combination with one hand weeding resulted in yields similar to the weed-free treatment. Overall, the results of this study revealed that the use of M. scutellataas living mulch and ‘Azargol’ as competitor cultivar can be used as part of an integrated weed management for sustainable sunflower production.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Ecological weed management
  • Living mulch
  • Sunflower grain yield
  • Weed interference
  • weeding

مراجع

 

            1.       میرشکاری ب (1387) تأثیرپذیری برخی از صفات فیزیولوژیک آفتابگردان در تداخل با تاج‌خروس. یافته­های نوین کشاورزی. 7(3): 312-297.

  1. Ateh CM and Doll JD (1996) Spring-planted winter rye (Secale cereale) as a living mulch to control weeds in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technology. 10: 347–353.
          3.          Berglund DR (1995) Buckwheat production. North Dakota State University. Publication A-687 [Online]. Available at http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/plantsci/crops/a687w.htm. (modified 8 May. 2014; accessed 13 Jun 2014). North Dakota State University, NDSU Extension Service, Fargo, ND. USA.

  1. Borowy A (2012) Growth and yield of stake tomato under no-tillage cultivation using hairy vetch as living mulch. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Horticulture. 11(2): 229–252.
  2. Bradow JM and Connick WJ (1990) Volatile seed germination inhibitors from plant residues. Journal of Chemical Ecology. 16: 645–666.
          6.  Blackshshaw RE, lemerle D, Mailer R and Young KR (2002) Influence of wild radish on yield and quality of canola. Weed Science. 50: 344-349.

  1. Batlla D, Kruk BC and Beneach-Arnold RL (2000) Very early detection of canopy presence by seed through perception of subtle modifications in red: far red signals. Functional Ecology. 14: 195–202.
  2. Brainard DC, Bellinder RR and DiTommaso A (2005) Effects of canopy shade on the morphology, phenology, and seed characteristics of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powelli). Weed Science. 53: 175–186.
  3. Caamal-Maldonado JA, Jime´nez-Osornio JJ, Torres-Barraga´n A and Anaya AL (2001) The use of allelopathic legume cover and mulch species for weed control in cropping systems. Agronomy. 93: 27–36.
  4. Challaiah O, Burnside C, Wicks GA and Johanson VA (1986) Competition between winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) cultivars and downy brome (Bromus tectorum). Weed Science. 34: 689-693.
        11.        Cox JW, Hahn RR and Stachowski JP (2006) Time of weed removal with glyphosate affects corn growth and yield components. Agronomy. 98: 349-353.

        12.        Cirujeda A, Anzalone A, Aibar J, Moreno MM and Zaragoza C (2012) Purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control with paper mulch in processing tomato. Crop Protection. 39: 66-71.

        13.        Chauhan BS (2013) Effect of tillage systems, seeding rates and herbicides on weed growth and grain yield in dry-seeded rice systems in the Philippines Crop Protection. 54: 244-250.

        14.        Daugovish O, Lyon DJ and Baltensperger DD (1999) Cropping systems to control winter annual grasses in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technology. 13: 120-126.

  1. De Haan RL, Sheaffer CC and Barnes DK (1997) Effect of annual medic smother plants on weed control and yield in corn. Agronomy. 89: 813-821.
  2. Davis JHC and Garcia S (1983) Competitive ability and growth habit of intermediate beans and maize for intercropping. Field Crop Research. 6: 59-75.
  3. Eskelsen SR and Crabtree GD (1995) The role of allelopathy in buckwheat (Fagopyrum sagittatum) inhibition of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Science. 43: 70-74.
  4. Finch S (1993) Integrated pest management of the cabbage root fly and carrot fly. Crop Protection. 12(6): 423-430.
  5. Guldan SJ, Martin CA, Cueto-Wong J and Steiner RL (1996) Interseeding legumes into chile: Legume productivity and effect in chile yield. Horticultural Science. 31: 1126-1128.
        20.        Hall MR, Swanton CJ and Anderson GW (1992) The critical period of weed control in grain corn (Zea mays). Weed Science. 40: 441-447.

  1. Hutchinson CM and McGiffen ME (2000) Cowpea cover crop mulch for weed control in desert pepper production. Horticultural Science. 35: 196-198.
  2. Hoffman ML, Regnier EE and Cardina J (1993) Weed and corn (Zea mays) responses to a hairy vetch (Vicia villosa) cover crop. Weed Technology. 7: 594-599.
  3. Infante ML and Morse RD (1996) Integration of no tillage and over seeded legume living mulches for transplanted broccoli production. Horticultural Science. 31: 376-380.
  4. Ilnicki RD and Enache AJ (1992) Subterranean clover living mulch, an alternative method of weed control. Agriculture Ecosystrm and Environment. 40: 249-264.
  5. Kropff MJ and Van Laar HH (1993) Modelling crop-weed Interactions. 1th Ed. Cab International Publishers, Wallingford, UK, 274 p.
  6. Lindquist JL and Mortensen DA (1999) Ecophysiological characteristics of four maize hybrids and Abutilon theophrasti. Weed Research. 39: 271-285.
  7. Liebman M and Dyck E (1993) Crop rotation and intercropping strategies for weed management. Applied Ecology. 3: 92–122.
  8. Liebman M and Staver CP (2001) Crop diversification for weed management. In:Liebman M, Mohler CL and Staver CP (Eds.), Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 322–374.
        29.        Mohammadi GR (2012) Living mulch as a tool to control weeds in agroecosystems: A review. In: Price A (Ed.), Weed control. In Tech. pp. 76-100.

  1. Moore MJ, Gillespie TJ and Swanton CJ (1994) Effect of cover crop mulch on weed emergence, weed biomass and soybean (Glycine max) development. Weed Technology. 8: 512-518.
  2. Moynihan JM, Simmons SR and Sheaffer CC (1996) Intercropping annual medic with conventional height and semidwarf barley grown for grain. Agronomy Journal. 88: 823-828.
  3. Monaco TJ, Weller SC and Ashton FM (2002) Weed Science: principles and practices. 4th Ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc, New York, 672 p.
  4. Milberg P and Anderson L (1997) Seasonal variation in dormancy and light sensitivity in buried seeds of eight annual weed species. Canadian Journal of Botany. 75: 1998-2004.
  5. Milberg P (1997) Weed seed germination after short-term light exposure: germination rate, photon fluence response and interaction with nitrate. Weed Research. 37: 157-164.
  6. Norsworthy JK (2004) Soybean canopy formation effects on pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia) emergence. Weed Science. 52: 954-960.
  7. Orcutt DM and Nilson ET (2001) The physiology of plants under stress. soil and biotic factors. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. 684 p.
  8. Rajcan I and Swanton CJ (2001) Understanding maize-weed competition: resource competition, light quality and the whole plant. Field Crop Research.71: 139-150.
  9. Rejmank M, Robinson GR and Rejmankova E (1989) Weed-crop competition: experimental designs and models for data analysis. Weed Science. 37: 276-284.
  10. Stoller EW and Myers RA (1989) Response of soybean and four broadleaf weeds to reduce irradiance. Weed Science. 37: 570-574.
  11. Sarrantonio M (1994) Northeast cover crop handbook. Soil Health Series. Rodale Institute, Kutztown, PA. 118 p.
  12. Sheaffer CC, Gunsolus JR, Grimsbo Jewett J and Lee SH (2002) Annual Medicago as a smother crop in soybean. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science. 188: 408-416.
  13. Tsuzuki E, Yamamoto Y and Shimizu T (1987) Fattyacids in buckwheat are growth inhibitors, Ann. Rot. (London) 60: 69-70.
  14. Tominaga T and Uezu T (1995) Weed suppression by Buckwheat, Current Advances in Buckwheat Research. Pp. 693-697.
  15. Uchino H, Iwama K, Jitsuyama Y, Yudate T and Nakamura S (2009) Yield losses of soybean and maize by competition with interseeded cover crops and weeds in organic-based cropping systems. Field Crop Research. 113: 342-351.
 

 

 

 

به زراعی کشاورزی

دوره 17، شماره 2
تابستان 1394
صفحه 415-430

فایل ها

اشتراک گذاری

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار