مطالعه فراتحلیلی تاثیر تنش خشکی بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد پنبه در ایران

محورهای موضوعی : اکوفیزیولوژی گیاهان زراعی

آزاده رزجی ¹ (دانشجوی دکتری زراعت، واحد کرج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرج، ایران)
فرزاد پاک‌نژاد ² (استاد گروه زراعت، واحد کرج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرج، ایران.)
مریم معرفی ³ (استادیار گروه زراعت، واحد کرج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرج، ایران)
عبدالمجید مهدوی دامغانی ⁴ (دانشیار اگرواکولوژی، پژوهشکده علوم محیطی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، ایران)
محمدنبی ایلکایی ⁵ (دانشیار گروه زراعت، واحد کرج، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، کرج، ایران)

تاریخ دریافت : 1398/04/20 تاریخ پذیرش : 1399/02/06 تاریخ انتشار : 1399/06/01

کلید واژه: جوانه‌زنی, ارتفاع و تعداد غوزه, نمودار انباشت, نمودار قیفی,

چکیده مقاله :

پژوهش‌های مربوط به ارزیابی تاثیر نهاده‌ها روی پنبه در کشور سابقه‌ای طولانی دارد با این حال، به دلیل پراکندگی و تنوع موجود در نتایج آزمایشات مختلف دستیابی به نتیجه کلی دشوار می‌باشد. در این مطالعه جهت حل این مشکل از رهیافت فراتحلیل استفاده شده است تا از این طریق بتوان با تلفیق و آنالیز مجدد یافته‌های آزمایشات مستقل به نتیجه‌ای واحد دست یافت. برای این منظور مقالات علمی پژوهشی منتشر شده توسط محققین از سال 1996 تا 2017 در داخل کشور در خصوص اثر تنش خشکی بر عملکرد، ارتفاع و تعداد غوزه در پنبه مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. اندازه اثر برای هر صفت اختلاف میانگین تیمار تنش خشکی با شاهد می‌باشد. بررسی نتایج نمودار اندازه اثر تنش خشکی و عملکرد نشان داد همه سطوح تنش نسبت به شاهد تفاوت ‌معنی‌داری را نشان دادند (001/0>p). همچنین با بررسی نمودار اندازه اثر ارتفاع و تنش خشکی و تعداد غوزه و تنش خشکی مشخص شد تیمار شاهد در مقابل میانگین کل، شاهد در مقابل 55-41 درصد ظرفیت زراعی و شاهد در مقابل 40-25درصد ظرفیت زراعی تفاوت معنی‌داری نسبت به شاهد نشان دادند. نتایج نمودار انباشت تاثیر تنش خشکی بر عملکرد، ارتفاع و تعداد غوزه در پنبه نشان داد اکثر مطالعات در سمت چپ نمودار قرار گرفته‌اند که حاکی از تاثیر منفی تنش خشکی بر صفات مربوطه می‌باشد. همچنین، نتایج نمودار قیفی نشان داد مطالعاتی که در زمینه پنبه و تنش خشکی در ایران انجام شده به دلیل سوگیری و حجم کم نمونه مطالعاتی با دقت کافی نبوده است.

چکیده انگلیسی:

Researches related to the evaluation of the effect of the inputs dates back to long ago in Iran. However, due to the diversity and scattering of the various experimental results, it is difficult to reach to a general conclusion. The present study has made use of meta-analysis to overcome such a problem thereby to blend and reanalyze the findings of independent experiments for achieving a single result. To do so, the scientific-research articles published by the researchers from 1996 up to 2017 inside the country concerning the effect of drought stress on the performance, height and number of bolls in cotton were explored. The extend impact of an each trait is the mean difference of the drought stress results compared with control. The diagrammatic results of the drought stress and performance impact sizes showed that all of the stress levels make significant differences in contrast to the evidence treatment (p < 0.001). Moreover, it was made clear in a contrastive investigation of the diagrammatic results of the height and drought stress impact size and the number of the bolls and drought stress impact sizes that there is a significant difference between the evidence treatment and the total mean, the evidence treatment and 41%-55% of the cultivation capacity and the evidence treatment and 25%-40% of the cultivation capacity. The results of the cumulative diagram of the effect of drought stress on performance, height and number of bolls indicated that the majority of the studies fall on the left side of the diagram which is indicative of the adverse effect of the drought stress on the related traits. In addition, the results of the funnel chart demonstrated that the studies performed in Iran on cotton and drought stress are not much precise (bias and low sample volume).

منابع و مأخذ:

• · Ahmadi, K., H. R. Ebadzadeh, H. Abdoshah, A. Kazemi, and M. Rafie. 2017. Agricultural Statistics. 1: 34-35. (In Persian)


• · Ahmadi, A., A. Nader Arefi, A.R. Tavakoli, M.R. Vafaietabar, and M. Sabokdast. 2012. Effect of water stress on physiological characteristics of leaves and drought resistance od different cotton genotypes. Crop Improvement Journal. 18(4): 987-999. (In Persian).


• · Ahmadi, S.M.R., B. Sohrabi, and H. Aminpanah. 2014. Reducing the effect of drought stress on cotton yield and yield components using superabsorbent. Iranian Cotton Research Journal. 2(2): 107-117. (In Persian).


• · Anonymous. 2017. Agricultural statistics. Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture. (In Persian).


• · Akbari Nodehi, D. 2010. Effect of drought sress in different stages of growth on yield and water use efficiencyof cotton seed. Journal of Water Management and Irrigation. 7(2): 305-318. (In Persian).


• · Akbari Nodehi, D., H. Poormotaleb, and A.R. Birzad. 2013. Effect of different water levels on yield, water efficiency and determination of cotton function in mazandaran province. Journal of Agricultural Knowledge and Sustainable Production. 2: 21(1): 103-111. (In Persian).


• · Alikhah, H.R., and M.R. Ahmadikhah. 2009. Evaluation of morphological characteristics of cotton cultivars under stress of water deficit in seedling stage. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Researches. 14(3): 403-414. (In Persian).


• · Behnamnia, M., Kh.M. Kalantari, and F. Rezanejad. 2009. Exogenous application of brassinosteroid alleviates drought-induced oxidative stress in Lycopersicom esculentum L. General and Applied Plant Physiolgy. 35(1-2): 22-34.


• · Carig, D.A., K. Macalady, and H. Chenchouni. 2009. Aglobal overview of drought and heat-induced tree morality reveals emerging climate change risk for forests. Forest Ecology and Management. doi: 10.1016/j-foreco.2009.09.001.


• · Copas, J., and J. Qing Shin. 2000. Meta-analysis, funnel plots and sensivityanalysis. Biostatistics. 1(3): 247-262.


• · Deeba, F., A.K. Pandey, S. Ranjan, A. Mishra, R. Singh, Y.K. Sharma, P.A. Shirke, and V. Pandey. 2012. Physiologicaland proteomic responses of cotton to drought stress. Plant Phsiology and Biochemistry. 53: 6-18.


• · Eslami, A.R., M. Armin, and M. Heidari. 2009. Effect of different amounts of potassium on yield and yield components of cotton in early drought stress condition. Crop Improvement Journal. 8(2): 15-22. (In Persian).


• · Farzaneh, S., R. Seyed Sharifi, and F. Akram Ghaderi. 2001. Effect of drought stress and seedling growth of cotton cultivars under laboratory conditions. Joural of Agricultural Science. 43: 81-93. (In Persian).


• · Glass,G.V. 1976.Primary,secondryand meta-analysis. Educational Research. 5:10-24.


• · Grimes, D.W., W.L. Dickens, and H. Yamada. 1978. Early season water managementfor cotton. Agronomy and Crop Science. 70:1009-1012.


• · Gurevitch, J., and L.V. Hedges. 1999. Statistical issues in ecological meta-analysis. Ecology. 80: 1142–1149.


• · Hand, F., and R. Zeghimigol. 2009. Optimizing water use for cotton irrigation in Gorgan region. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 36: 5-12. (In Persian).


• · Karimi, M., A. Hezarjaribi, Gh. Ghorbani Nasrabad, and M. Hesam. 2015. Effect of different levels of irrigation on cotton yield of Golestan cultivar and determination of its production function Golestan provinc. 12^th Ntional Conference on Irrigation and Evaporation Reduction. 5^th and 6^th of September 2015.


• · Karimi Goghkari, Sh., R. Asadi, and M.R. Khani. 2013. Impact of irrigation on the use of pipe-laying methods to increase the productivity and consumption of cotton. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture. 27(2): 1-9. (In Persian).


• · Linquist, B.A., L. Liu, C. van Kassel, and K. van Groenigen. 2013. Enhanced efficiency uptake. Field Crop Research. 154: 246-254.


• · Miri, H.R. 2001. Physiology and yield of crops under drought stress conditions. First Edition. 176 p. (In Persian).


• · Murungu, F.S., P. Nyamuga, C. Chiduza, L.J. Clarck, and W.R. Whalley. 2003. Fffects of seed priming. Aggregate size and matric potential on emergence of cotton and maize. Soil and Tillage Research. 47(2): 161-168.


• · Prisco, J.T., C.R.B. Haddad, and J.L.P. Bastos. 1992. Hydration-dehydration seed pre-treatment and its effect on seed germination under water stress condition. Revista Brasil De Botan. 15: 31-50.


• · Radin, J.W., L.L. Reaves, J.R. Mauney, and O.F. French. 1992. Irrigation during fruiting. Agronomy Journal. 84: 551-557.


• · Rahimian Mashhadi, H., A. Bagheri Kazemabadi, and A. Payab. 1991. The effect of different potentials of polyethylene glycol and sodium chloride with temperature on germination of rainbow wheat. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Technology. 50: 37-47. (In Persian)


• · Rezaie Tolaei, M., M.H. Najafi Mood, and M.R. Ramezani Moghaddam. 2014. Effect of drought stress on yield and yield components of four cotton cultivars (case study: Kashmar plain). Iranian Cotton Research Journal. 2(5): 104-115. (In Persian).


• · Seraj, R., and T.R. Sinclair. 2002. Osmolyte accumulation. Its really help increase crop yield under drought conditions. Plant, Cell and Environment. 25: 333-341.


• · Tamadon Rasegar, M., H. Gharineh, A. Ebdali Mashadi, and S.A. Siyadat. 2014. The effect of moisture stress on seedling growth characteristics of cotton cultivars. International Journal of Advanced and Innovative Research. 3(4): 20-35).


• White, S.C., and S.R. Raine. 2004. Identifying the potential to apply deficit irrigation strategies in cotton using large mobile irrigation machins. Proceeding of the 4^th.