Determination of Stopping Irrigation Time for Canola Genotypes in North Khouzestan Conditions

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Researcher, Safiabad Agricultural Research Center of Dezful and Ph.D student of University of Mohaghegh Ardabili

2 Professor, University of Ramin Agricultural and Natural Resources

Abstract

Canola genotypes reaction to stopping irrigation was surveyed. This experiment was carried out as a split plot randomized block design whit three replications in the Safiabad Argicultural Research Center for two years. Main plot was considered of different levels of stopping  irrigation (Stopping irrigation at the ending flowering, poding, 10%  and 30% ripening of pods in main stem ) and sub plot  was included 4 canola genotypes (SG10-86369, SG19-86369, SG63-86369 and Hyola401). Combined results showed  that the effects of year, stopping irrigation, genotypes, and interaction stopping irrigation × genotypes were significant on number of pods per plant, number of grain per pod, 1000 seeds weight, harvest index and grain yield. Means of interaction stopping irrigation × genotypes showed the highest number of pods per plant (97.62) at stopping irrigation at 30% ripening of pods in main stem belonged to Hyola401 genotype and the lowest amount achieved in SG10-86369 with stopping irrigation at ending of flowering. The highest 1000 seeds weight (4.18 gr) appointed to Hyola401 genotype with stopping irrigation at 30% ripening of pods in main stem. Genotypes reaction were been different to time of stopping irrigation. The highest grain yield (2743.5 kg/ha) belonged to Hyola401 genotype with stopping irrigation at 30% ripening of pods in main stem and the lowest amount (1465.83 kg/ha) appointed to SG63-86369 genotype with stopping irrigation at the ending of flowering. By considering the same reaction of Hyola401 genotype to stopping irrigation at 10% and 30% ripening of pods in main stem, it can be noted that the stage of 10% ripening pods in main stem is optimum stage for stopping irrigation. 

Keywords

References

1-       Azizi, M., Soltani, A. & Khavari Khorasani, S. (1998). Canola. Culture and Research Mashhad. P, 230.
2-       Bengtsson, A. (1988). Current winter rape Cultivars. Aktulla hostrapssorter. Svensk Frotidning, 57, 115-117.
3-       Bilsborrow, P. E. & Norton, G. (1993). A consideration of factors affecting the yield of oilseed rape. Aspects of Applied Biology, 6, 91-99.
4-       Dogan, E., H. Kirnak, & O. Copur. 2007. Deficit irrigations during soybean reproductive stages and CROPGRO-soybean simulations under semi-arid climatic conditions. Field Crops Res. 103 (2): 154–159.
5-       Getient, A., G. Rakow., J. P. Roney & R.K. Downey. 1996. Agronomic performance and seed quality of Ethiopian mustard in Saskatchewan. Can.J. Plant Sci. 76: 387-392.
6-       Ghosh,R.K., P.Bandyopadhyay & N. Mukhopadhyay. 1994. Performance of rapeseed-mustard cultivars under various moisture regimes on the gangetic alluvial plain of west Bengal. J. Agron. and Crop Sci. 173(1): 5-10.
7-       Gunacekera, C. P, L. D. Mortin, R. J. French, K.H. M. Sidgue, & G. H. Walton. 2001. Effect of water stress on water relations and yield of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) and canola (Brassica napus L.). www. Canola Council.org.
8-       Jensen, C.R., V.O. Morgensen, G.Mortensen & J.K.Fieldsend. 1996. Seed glucosinolate, oil and protein contents of field grown rape (Brassica napus L.) affected by soil drying and evaporative demand. Field Crops Res. 47: 93-105.
9-       Kafi, M., B. Kamkar, H. Sharifi & M. Goldani. 1999. Plant Physiology. 2nd Edition, Culture and Research Mashhad. P, 379.
10-   Kalantar Ahmadi, S.A. 2007. Effect of limited irrigation on canola cultivars yield in North Khouzestan Conditions. Final Report of Research Project. Ministry of Jahad-E-Agriculture   Research and Education Organization. Seed and Plant Improvement.Register No, 87/1485. P, 1-40.
11-   Kimber, D. S., & D. L. Mc Gregor. 1995. Brassica oil seeds: production and utilization CAB international.
12-   Kolte, S.J., R.P.A. Wasthi & Vishwanath. 2000. Divya mustard: a useful source to create alternaria black spot tolerant dwarf varieties of oilseed Brassica. Plant Varieties and Seeds. 13:107-111.
13-   Mendham, N.J. & P. A. Salisbury. 1995. Physiology, crop development, growth and yield. In: Kimber., D. and McGregor, D. I. (eds). CAB International. pp: 11-64.
14-   Mendham, N.J., J. Russel & G.C.Buzza, 1984. Yhe contribution of seed survival to yield in new Australian cultivars of seed rape (Brassica napus. L). J.Agric. Sci. Camb., 103: 303-316.
15-   Mohammad, T., A. Ali, M.A. Nadeem, A. Tanveer & Q.M. Sabir. 2007. Performance of canola (Brassica napus)and Indian mustard (B. juncea) to soil water deficits: yield and yield components. Field Crops Res. 42: 1-13.
16-   Muhammad., T, A. Ali, A. Nadeem, A. Tanveer, A., & Q. M. Sabir. 2007. Performance of canola (Brassica napus L.) under different irrigation levels. Pak. J. Bot. 39: 739–746.
17-   Munir, M. & T.Mc Neilly.1992. Comparison of variation in yield and yield components in forage and winter oilseed rape. Pak.J. Agric. Res. 13:289-292.
18-   Niknam, S. R., Q.Ma & D.W. Turner. 2003. Osmatic adjustment and Seed yield of Brassica napus and B.juncea genotypes in a water-limited environment in South-Western Australia. Aus J Exp Agr. 43: 1127-1135.
19-   Norton, G. P., & E. Bilsborrow. 1991. Comparative physiology of divergent type of winter rapeseed. In: Proc. Int. Canola Conf. Saskatoon, Canada. P.180.
20-   Pazouki, A.R. 1999. Study and measurement the effect of water stress on physiological characteristics and parameters of drought tolerance in two canola cultivars. Thesis of Ph.D . Islamic Azad University Ahwaz Science and Research branch. P, 259.
21-   Poma, I., G. Venezia & L. Gristina. 1999. Rapeseed (Brassica napus L. var Oleifera D.C.) Echophysiological and Agronomical aspects as affected by soil water availability. Proceedings of the 10th Internationl Rapeseed Congress. Canberra. Australia: 8 pp.
22-   Richards, R. A. & N. Thurling. 1978. Variation between and within species of rapeseed (Brassica campestris and Brassica napus) in response to drought stress. I. Sensitivity at different stages of development. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 29: 469-477.
23-   Sana, M., A. Ali., M. Asghar Malik., M. Farrukh Saleem. & M. Rafiq. 2003. Comparative yield potential and oil contents of different canola cultivars (Brassica napus L.). Pak. J. Agron. 2(1): 1-7.
24-   Shirani Rad, A.H. 2000. Karaj Seed and Plant Improvement. Annual Report. P, 20.
25-   Wright, P.R., J.M. Morgan, R.S. Jessop, & A. Gass. 1995. Comparative adaptation of Canola (Brassica napus)and Indian mustard (B. juncea) to soil water deficits: yield and yield components. Field Crops Res. 42: 1-13.
Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science
Volume 45, Issue 3 - Serial Number 3
October 2014
Pages 355-365

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 08 August 2012
  • Revise Date: 19 May 2015
  • Accept Date: 30 January 2013
  • Publish Date: 23 September 2014

Share

How to cite

Statistics