Evaluation of Quantitative and Qualitative Characteristics of Corn and Grass pea as Affected by Organic, Chemical and Bio Fertilizers
Subject Areas :
Journal of Crop Ecophysiology
Mohammad Shahbaghi
1
,
Alireza Valadabadi
2
,
Jahanfar Daneshiyan
3
,
Amir Hossein ShiraniRad
4
,
Saeid Seyfzadeh
5
1 - Ph.D. Graduated of Agronomy, Takestan Branch, Azad Islamic University, Takestan, Iran
2 - Associate Professor, Department of Agronomy, Takestan Branch, Azad Islamic University, Takestan, Iran
3 - Professor, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII), Tehran, Iran
4 - Professor, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute (SPII), Tehran, Iran
5 - Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy, Takestan Branch, Azad Islamic University, Takestan, Iran
Received: 2016-08-18
Accepted : 2017-05-15
Published : 2017-07-23
Keywords:
Forage quality,
yield,
Fertilizer,
corn,
Intercropping,
grass pea,
Abstract :
Intercropping of forage cropsand the combined use of organic, chemical,and biofertilizers is of great importance. To evaluate quantitative and qualitative characteristics of corn and grass pea intercropping under organic and chemical fertilizers factorial experiments in a randomized complete block design with three replications were conducted in Yalian Farm of Qazvin, Iran, in 2013 and 2014. Levels of intercropping consisted of: corn sole croppings, intercropping of maize and 25% grass pea, intercropping corn and 50% grass pea, and grass pea sole cropping. Fertilizer levels were chemicals (base and top dress), cow manure (base) and avian manure top dress, cow manure (base) and chemical top dress, and cow manure (base) and chemical (top dress and spraying). In the last three treatments corn and grass pea seed inoculated with Azotobacter and mycorrhiza. The results showed that the highest corn forage yield with 84230 kg/ha produced from grass pea corn treated with 50% chemical manure. Intercropping is a suitable method for crop production and increasing quantity of crop as compared with sole croppings. The highest forage with 46020 kg/ha was produced by grass pea chemical manure treatment because of more light penetration to the canopy and the lack of competition with corn. Highest carbohydrates %30.5 belonged to the use of chemical fertilizer in sole cropping of corn and the highest crude protein with %24.75 is produced from chemical fertilizer in pure grass pea sole cropping and the highest dry matter digestibility and higher quality forage with %68.08 from the use of manure %25 grass pea/corn intercropping. Intercropping and mixed application of chemical and organic fertilizers improve the quality and quantity of forage yield.
References:
· Anonymous. 2002. FAOSTAT Agriculture Data. http: //apps. fao. org. Available.
· Armstrong, K.L., K.A. Albrecht, J.G. Lauer, and H .Riady. 2008. Intercropping corn with lablab bean, velvet bean, and scarlet runner bean for forage. Crop Science. 48: 371-739.
· Arzani, H. 2009. Forage quality and daily need of animal from pasture. Tehran University Publications. 354 pp. (In Persian).
· Backiyavathy, M.R., and G. Vijayakumar. 2006. Effect of vermicompost, inorganic and bio fertilizer applicationon fodder yield and quality in maize + cowpea intercropping system. 18th World Congress of Soil Science. July 9-15. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA.
· Barzegari, M. 2002. Evaluation of different combinations of bean and popcorn intercropping. Seventh Sciences of Iran Agronomy and Plant Breeding Congress. Karaj. (In Persian).
· Carruthers, K., J.B. Prithvira Cloutierd, R.C. Martin, and D.L. Smith. 2000. Intercropping corn with soybean, lupin and forages: yield component respose. European Journal of Agronomy. 12: 103-115
· Chaichi, M.R., and A. Gahanian. 2005. Agroecologhic characteristic presentation of some suitable forage new plants for Iran. First National Congress of Country Forage Plants. Karaj. (In Persian).
· Cocks, P., K. Siddique, and C. Hambury.2000. Lathryrus a new grain legume. A report for the rural industries research and development corporation. Rural Industries Research & Development Corporation. No. 99/150.
· Contreras-Govea, R.E., K. Muckb, L. Armstronga, and K.A. Albrecht. 2009. Nutritive value of corn silage in mixture with climbing beans. Animal Feed Science and Technology Journal. 150: 1-8.
· Dawo, M.I., J.M. Wilkinson, F.E.T. Sanders, and D.J. Pilbeam. 2007. The yield and quality of fresh and ensiled plant material from intercropping maize and beans. Journal of Science Food Agriculture. 87: 1391-1399.
· Eshgizadeh, H.R., M.R. Chaichi, A. Galavand, G. Shabani, K. Azizi, H. Raeisi, and A. Papizadeh. 2008. Evaluation of annual medic and barley intercropping on forage yield and protein content in dry farming system. Iranian Journal of Pajouhesh and Sazandegi. 75: 102-112. (In Persian).
· Esmaily, A. 2011. Evaluation of intercropping alfalfa (Medicago scutellata L.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). M.Sc. Thesis, University of Tehran. (In Persian).
· Geren, H., R. Avcioglu, H. Soya, and B. Kir. 2008. Intercropping of corn with cowpea and bean: Biomass yield and silage quality. African Journal of Biotechnology 22: 4100-4104.
· Hail, Y., M. Daci, and M. Tan. 2009. Evaluation of annual legumes and barley as sole crops and intercrop inspring frost conditions for animal feeding yield and quality. Journal Animal Advance. 8(7): 1337- 1342.
· Jurik, T.W., and K .Van. 2004. Microenvironment of a corn – soybean – oat strip intercrop system. Field Crops Research. 90: 335-349.
· Liebman, M., and A.S. Davis. 2000. Integration of siol, crop and weed management in Low- input farming systems. Weed Research. 40: 27-47.
· Mohammad Abadi, A.A., P. Rezvani Moghaddam, J. Fallahi, and Z. Bromand Rezazadeh. 2012. Effect ofchemical and organic fertilizers on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of fenugreek (Trigonella foenumgraecum L.) forage. Agroecology. 3(4): 491-499. (In Persian).
· Nakhzari-Moghadam, A., M.R. Chaichi D. Mazaheri, H. Rahimian Mashhadi, N. Majnoon hoseini, and A.A. Noorinia. 2009. The effects of corn and green gram intercropping on yield, LER and some qualitycharacteristics of forage. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Reaserch. 40(4): 151-159. (In Persian).
· Normohammadi, Gh., A. Seeyadat, and A. Kashani. 2002. Cereals agronomy. Ahvaz Shahid Chamran University Publication.
· Ogindo, H.O. 2003. Comparing the precipitation use efficiency of maize-bean intercropping with sole cropping in a semi-arid ecotope. PhD thesis. Department of Soi, Crop and Climate Sciences. University of the Free State, South Africa. 186 p.
· Rajeswara Rao, B.R. 2002. Biomass yield, essential oil yield and essential oil composition of rosescented geranium (Pelargonium species) as influenced by row spacing and intercropping with corn mint (Mentha arvensis L.). Industrial Crops and Product. 16: 133.144.
· Reta Sanchez, D.G., J.T. Espinosa Silva, A. Palomo Gil, J.S. Serrato Corona, J.A. Cueto Wong, and A. Gaytan Mascorro. 2010. Forage yield and quality of intercropped corn and soybean in narrow strips. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research. 8(3): 713-721.
· Rokhzadi, A., A. Asgharzadeh, and F. Drrish. 2004. Influnce of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on dry matter accumulation and yield of chikpea. American Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ Sci. 3: 253-257.
· Saleem, R., Z.I. Ahmed, M. Ashraf, M. Arif, M. Azim malik, M. Munir, and M. Azeem khan. 2011. Response of maize- legume intercropping system to different fertility sources under rainfed conditions. Sarhad J. Agric. 27(4): 503-511
· Samarbakhsh, S., F. Rejali, M.R. Ardakani, F. PakNejad, and M. Miransari. 2009. The combined effectof fungicides and arbuscularmycorrhiza on corn (Zea mays L.) growth and yield under field conditions. J. Biol. Sci. 9: 372- 76 (In Persian).
· Sharma, A.K. 2002. Biofertilaizers for sustainable agriculture. 1sd edition. Jodhpur: Agrobios, India, 456 p.
· Vessey, J.K. 2003. Plant growth promoting rhizobateria as biofertilizer. Plant and soil. 255: 571-586.
· Villegas, J., and J.A. Fortin. 2002. Phosphourus solubilization and pH changes as result of the interactions between soil bacteria and arbuscular mycorrizal fungi on mediam containing NO3 as nitrogen source. Canadian Journal of Botany. 80: 571-576.
_||_
