The impact of different methods of planting and cutting the quantity and quality of forage sorghum time in the city of Iranshahr

Subject Areas : New Finding in Agriculture

A. Mehraban ^{1 *} , A. Kamali Deljoo ² , O. Azizian Shermeh ³

1 - Assistant Professor of AgronomyFaculty of AgricultureIslamic Azad University,ZahedanBranchZahedan, Iran
2 - MSc graduated of AgronomyYoung Researchers and Elite ClubI,Zahedanbranch,IslamicAzad University,Zahedan ,Iran
3 - MSc graduated of phytochemistryYoung Researchers and Elite ClubI,Zahedan branch,IslamicAzad University, Zahedan ,Iran3

Received: 2017-08-11 Accepted : 2017-08-11 Published : 2016-04-20

Keywords: forage sorghum, Morphological, Harvest time, culture methods, functional,

Abstract :

In order to evaluate the most appropriate method of planting and harvest times of forage sorghum Speedfeed, Strip plot in the form of randomized complete block design experiment with three replications in 1394-1393 at the ResearchCenter for Agriculture and Natural Resources Balochistan is located in the city of Iranshahr. Two different methods of planting furrow cultivation, napa, row, and different harvesting times Different harvesting times of 50, 60 and 70 days after planting, respectively, in the main plots and sub-groups. Traits such as growth habit, leaf and shoot dry weight, nitrogen, and protein content was measured Fsfrvptasym. The results showed that the effect of different planting methods on fresh and dry weight, shoot dry weight was statistically significant, but no significant difference in the percentage of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and protein was observed. Harvest time is also significantly more weight and leaves, fresh weight and dry, nitrogen and protein impressed. According to test results, treatment, planting furrow, row, and 70 days after planting harvest time to increase the quality and quantity of forage sorghum recommended Speedfeed Iranshahr conditions.

References:

1-Afzal, M., Ahmad, A. U. H., Zamir, S. I., Khalid, F., Mohsin, A. U. and Aillanis, M. W. 2013. Almodares, A. and M. R. Hadi (2009). Production ofbioethanol from sweet sorghum: A review. Afr.J. Agric. Res. 4(9): 772-780.

2-Ayub, M., AtherNadeem, M., Tanveer, A. and Hussain, A. 2012. the growth, yield and quality of sorghum fodder. Asian gournal of Plant Sainses.4: 304-307.

3-Ball, D., Collins, M., Lacefield. G., Martin, N., Mertens, D. A., Olson, K., putnam, D., Undersander, D. and Wolf, M. 2001. Undrestanding Forage Quality. Amrrican Farm Bureau FederationPublication 1-10, Park RidgeIllinois, USA.

4-Bosch, L., Casanas, F., Sanchez, E., Almirall, A. and Nuez, F.  2010. Performance of five generations ofselection for increased stalk diameter in theLancaster variety of maize (Zea mays L.),crossed with B73 inbred.Maydica. 46(4):221-226

5-Brawand, M. J. and Faci, J. M. 2008. Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L) yield compensation processes under different plant densities and variable water supply. Eur. J. Agron. 15: 43-55.

6- Brawand, H. and Hossner, L. 1976. Nutrient content of sorghum leaves and grain as influenced by long-term crop rotation and fertilizer treatment. Agronomy.68: 227-280.

7-Bullok, D. G., Niclson, R. L. and Nyquist, W, E. 2010. A growth analysis comparison of corn in convertional and equidtant plant spacing. Crop Sci. 28: 254-258.

8-Cecelia, L., Amigot, S., Gaggiotti, M., Rumero, L. and Basilico, J. 2007. Global science, forage quality: Techniques for testing. 123 p.

9-Duraisami, V. D., Raniperumal and Mani, A. K. 2012. Grain quality as influenced by fertilizernitrogen, coirpith and biofertilizer in sole andintercropped sorghum maize soybean sequence.Mysore J. Agric. Sci., 36(2): 97-103.

10-Edalat, M., Ghadiri ,H., Hamzehzarghani, H. and Kazemeini S. A. 2011. Prediction of corn yield loss due to different redroot pigweed density and irrigation level using empirical models. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 5 (2): 187-196.

11-Fahong, W., Xuqing, W. and Sayre, K. D. 2004. Comparison of conventional, flood irrigation, flat planting with furrow irrigated, raised bed planting for winter wheat in China. Field Crops Research, 87: 35-42.

12-Gozubenli, H. 2010. Influence of planting patterns and plant density on the performance of maize hybrids in the eastern Mediterranean conditions. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 12: 556-560.

13-Jafari Bilesuar, R., Sayed Sharifi, R. and Imani, A., et. 2012. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on efficiency of harvesting time and yield and quality of forage sorghum. Journal of Crops, Volume 14, Number 2, Winter 1391 S30-17.

14-Kochaki, A. 2006. agriculture in arid, publications SID Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.

15-Lapts, R. 2008. conservation tillage for sustainable agriculture: tropics versus temperate environments. Adv. Agron.42:85-197.

16-Marsalis, M., Angadi, S. and Govea, F. C. 2010. Effectof seeding and nitrogen rates on limited irrigated corn and forage sorghum yield and nutritivevalue. In Abstracts: Annual meeting, WesternSociety of Crop Sci. Ft. Collins, Co.Performance of multicalforoglThegournal of Animal do Plant Science: 23CD: 232-239.

17-Rahman, M. M., Fukai, S. and Blamey, F. P. C. 2008. Effects of cutting and sowing date on biomass production and nitrogen content of forage sorghum. Proceeding of II Australian Agronomy Cinferene,. Gealong Victoria.

18-Siddigue, M., Bajawa, M. S. and Makhdoom, M. I. 2008. Yield and quality of maize fodder as influenced by different stages of harvesting and nitrogen rates. Pak. J. Sci. and Lnd. Res. 33: 54-58.

19-Tariq , M., Ayub, M., Elahi, H., Ahmad, M., Chaudhary, N. and Nadeem, M. 2011. Forage yield and some quality attributes of millet (Pennisetum americannum L.) hybrid under various regimes of nitrogen fertilization and harvesting dates. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 6 (16): 3883-3890.

20-Tolera, A. and Sundstol, F. 2012. Morphological fractions of maize stover harvested at different stages of grain maturity and nutritive value of different fractions of the stover. Animal Feed Science Technology, 81:1-16.

21-Zerbini, E. and  Thomas, D. 2003. Opportunities for improvement of nutritive value in sorghum and pearl millet residues in south Asia throrgh genetic enhancement. Field Crop Res. 84: 3-15.

22-Zerbini, E. and  Thomas, D. 2003. Opportunities for improvement of nutritive value in sorghum and pearl millet residues in south Asia throrgh genetic enhancement. Field Crop Res. 84: 3-15.