اثر قطع آبیاری در مراحل رشد زایشی بر عملکرد و اجزای دو رقم لوبیا در شرایط اقلیمی ملارد
محورهای موضوعی : بوم شناسی گیاهان زراعی
1 - هیات علمی، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران
کلید واژه: تنش خشکی, تنش آبی, رقم اختر, رقم کوشا, لوبیا چیتی, لوبیا قرمز,
چکیده مقاله :
به منظور بررسی اثر قطع آبیاری بر عملکرد لوبیا آزمایشی در قالب طرح کرت های خردشده بر پایه بلوک های کامل تصادفی در چهار تکرار در منطقه ملارد تهران اجرا شد. تیمارهای اصلی شامل آبیاری کامل، قطع آبیاری در زمان گلدهی، قطع آبیاری در زمان غلاف‌بندی و تیمارهای فرعی لوبیا چیتی رقم کوشا و لوبیا قرمز رقم اختر بودند. قطع آبیاری بر کلیه صفات مورد بررسی در هر دو رقم تأثیر معنی داری داشت. به ویژه هر دو رقم در مرحله گلدهی نسبت به غلاف بندی به قطع آبیاری حساس تر بودند. بیشترین عملکرد دانه در آبیاری کامل در رقم کوشا مشاهده شد. در حالی که کمترین افت عملکرد در شرایط قطع آبیاری مربوط به رقم اختر بود. عملکرد دانه در رقم اختر و کوشا با قطع آبیاری در مرحله گلدهی به ترتیب ۵۴ و ۶۳% کاهش یافت. همچنین شاخص برداشت در رقم اختر و کوشا در تیمار قطع آبیاری در مرحله گلدهی به ترتیب ۲۵ و ۳۸% کاهش نشان داد. به طور کلی در شرایط قطع آبیاری، رقم اختر نسبت به کوشا متحمل تر بود و افت عملکرد کمتری داشت. بنابراین، کاشت رقم اختر در صورت کمبود آب در اواخر بهار و تابستان توصیه می شود.
To evaluate the effect of irrigation cut-off on yield and yield components of bean, an experiment was conducted in Mallard Research Farm, Tehran in 2015. This study was conducted in a split plot based on a completely randomized block design with four replications. The main treatments were full normal irrigation as control, irrigation cut-off in flowering and pod setting stages and two cultivars of bean including Kosha (pinto bean) and Akhtar (red bean) were placed in subplots. Irrigation cut-off had significant effect on both cultivars yield and yield components. Both cultivars were very sensitive to irrigation cut-off in the flowering stage than pod-setting stage. Yield of Kosha cultivar was the highest in full irrigation treatment. However, the lowest yields loss was obtained in irrigation cut-off in Akhtar cultivar. When irrigation was cut off at flowering stage, the yield loss was 54 and 63% in Akhtar and Kosha cultivars, respectively. Also, the harvest index in flowering stage irrigation cut-off in Akhtar and Kosha cultivar was reduced by 25 and 38%, respectively. In general, Akhtar cultivar was more tolerant to water cut-off and showed less yield loss in comparison to Kosha cultivar. Akhtar cultivar seems to have the potential to be planted in the areas where water deficit is more acute in summer.
1. Bayat AA, Sepehri A, Ahmad G, Dorri HR (2010) Effect of water deficit stress on yield and yield component of pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Science 12 (1): 42-54. [In Persian with English abstract]
2. Emadi N, Balouchi HR, Jahanbin SH (2013) Effect of drought stress and plant density on yield, yield components and some morphological characters of pinto bean in Yasouj region. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 3(2): 1-18. [In Persian with English abstract]
3. EmamY, Shekoofa A, Salehi F, Jalali AH (2010) Water stress effects on two common bean cultivars with contrasting growth habits. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Science 9(5): 495-49
4. Khoshvaghti H (2006) Effect of water limitation on growth rate, grain filling and yield of three pinto bean cultivars. Master Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University: Tabriz, Iran. [In Persian with English abstract]
5. Lizana C, Wenthworth M, Martinez JP, Villegas D, Meneses R (2006) Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress. I. Effect of drought on yield and photosynthesis. Journal of Experimental Botany 57: 685-697.
6. Majnoun Hossini N (2008) Grain Legume Production. Jahad Daneshgahi Publication: Tehran 283 pp. [In Persian]
7. Mohammadi A, Bihamta MR, Soluoki M, Dorii H R (2008) Study of quantitative and qualitative traits and their relationships with grain yield in white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) under optimum and limited irrigation condition. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 10(3): 231-243. [In Persian with English abstract]
8. Mouhouche B, Ruget F, Delecolle R (1998) Effects of water stress applied at different Phenological phases on yield components of dwarf bean. Agronomie 18(3): 197-205.
9. Nielsen DC, Nelson NO (1998) Black bean sensitivity to water stress at various growth stages. CropScience 38(2): 422-427.
10. Shenkut A, Brick MA (2003) Traits associated with dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) productivity under diverse soil moisture environments. Euphytica 133: 339-347.
11. Singh SP (2007) Drought resistance in the race durango dry bean landraces and cultivars. Agronomy Journal 99(4): 1219-1225.
12. Teran H, Singh SP (2002) Comparison of sources and lines selected for drought resistance in common bean. Crop Science 42: 64-70.
13. White JW, Ochoa RM, Ibarra FP, Singh SP (1994) Inheritance of seed yield, maturity and seed weight of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) under semiarid rainfed conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science 122(6): 265-273.
_||_1. Bayat AA, Sepehri A, Ahmad G, Dorri HR (2010) Effect of water deficit stress on yield and yield component of pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Science 12 (1): 42-54. [In Persian with English abstract]
2. Emadi N, Balouchi HR, Jahanbin SH (2013) Effect of drought stress and plant density on yield, yield components and some morphological characters of pinto bean in Yasouj region. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 3(2): 1-18. [In Persian with English abstract]
3. EmamY, Shekoofa A, Salehi F, Jalali AH (2010) Water stress effects on two common bean cultivars with contrasting growth habits. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Science 9(5): 495-49
4. Khoshvaghti H (2006) Effect of water limitation on growth rate, grain filling and yield of three pinto bean cultivars. Master Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Tabriz University: Tabriz, Iran. [In Persian with English abstract]
5. Lizana C, Wenthworth M, Martinez JP, Villegas D, Meneses R (2006) Differential adaptation of two varieties of common bean to abiotic stress. I. Effect of drought on yield and photosynthesis. Journal of Experimental Botany 57: 685-697.
6. Majnoun Hossini N (2008) Grain Legume Production. Jahad Daneshgahi Publication: Tehran 283 pp. [In Persian]
7. Mohammadi A, Bihamta MR, Soluoki M, Dorii H R (2008) Study of quantitative and qualitative traits and their relationships with grain yield in white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) under optimum and limited irrigation condition. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 10(3): 231-243. [In Persian with English abstract]
8. Mouhouche B, Ruget F, Delecolle R (1998) Effects of water stress applied at different Phenological phases on yield components of dwarf bean. Agronomie 18(3): 197-205.
9. Nielsen DC, Nelson NO (1998) Black bean sensitivity to water stress at various growth stages. CropScience 38(2): 422-427.
10. Shenkut A, Brick MA (2003) Traits associated with dry edible bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) productivity under diverse soil moisture environments. Euphytica 133: 339-347.
11. Singh SP (2007) Drought resistance in the race durango dry bean landraces and cultivars. Agronomy Journal 99(4): 1219-1225.
12. Teran H, Singh SP (2002) Comparison of sources and lines selected for drought resistance in common bean. Crop Science 42: 64-70.
13. White JW, Ochoa RM, Ibarra FP, Singh SP (1994) Inheritance of seed yield, maturity and seed weight of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) under semiarid rainfed conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science 122(6): 265-273.