Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science

Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science

The pattern of intercropping and monoculture of maize (Zea mays L.) and peanuts (Arachishypogaea L.) on weed properties

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Abbas Keshtegar 1
Mahdi Dahmardeh 2
Mohammad Galavi 3
Isa Khammari 4
1 M.Sc. Student of Agronomy, Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran
2 Assistant Professor of Agronomy (Crop Ecology), Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran
3 Associate Professor Agronomy (Crop Physiology), Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran
4 Assistant Professor of Agronomy (Crop Physiology), Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran
10.22059/ijfcs.2015.56805
Abstract
In order to evaluate the effects of intercropping of maize- peanut, weeding and their planting design on weed population dynamics, an experiment was conducted as a factorial experiment in the form of RCBD with three replications at the Research Farm of Agriculture Center of Zabol University (Iran) in 2012. The treatments including sowing system in four levels as first factor  (sole maize, sole peanut, 50% maize + 50% peanut, 100% maize + 100% peanut) and row spacing as the second factor in two levels (40 and 50 cm) and weeding as third factor in three levels (non-weeding, once weeding, twice weeding). The results showed that 100% corn +100% peanut intercropping patterns had the lowest weed density and dry weight compared to intercropping of 50% corn +50% of the peanuts. The peanut monoculture compared to other intercropping patterns had the highest density and dry weight of weeds. With the increasing number of weeding, the number and dry weight of weeds decreased. Among the different row spacing, the density and weight of weeds between rows of 40 cm was less than 50 cm. It seems various features of crops such as height and canopy closure will have the most effect on weed control. The results of this experiment showed that the highest weed controlling was obtained from 100% maize + 100% peanut, density of 50 cm and twice weeding.
Keywords
intercropping
maize
Peanut
Row spacing
weeding
  1. Agboola, A. & Fayami, A. (1998). Fixation and excretion of nitrogen by tropical legumes. Agronomy Journal, 64, 409-412.
  2. Aliyu, B.S. & Emechebe, A.M. (2006). Effect inter-row mixing of sorghum with two varieties of cowpea on host crop yield in a Striga hermonthica infested field. African Journal Agriculture Research, 1, 24-26.
  3. Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K. & Ghose, S.S. (2006). Wheat and chickpea intercropping, systems in an additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal Agronomy, 24, 325-332.
  4. Boquet, D. J., Koohce, K. L. & Walker, D.M. (2003). Selected determinate soybean cultivar yield responses to row spacings and planating dates. Agronomy Journal, 74, 136- 138.
  5. Bulson, H.A.J., Snaydon, R.W. & Stopes, C.E. (1997). Effect of plant density on intercropped wheat and field beans in on orgonic farming system. Journal of Agricultural Science Cambridge, 128, 59-71.
  6. Dunan, C.M., Westra, P., Moore, F. & Chapman, P. (1996). Modelling the effect of duration of weed competition, weed density and weed competitiveness on seeded, irrigated onion. Weed Res, 36, 1259- 1269.
  7. Fallah, S. & Nemati, A.R. (2007). Effects of planting density and weeding time on weeds and autumn chickpea dry matter. Agriculture Research: Water, Soil and Plant in agriculture, 7(3), 165-176.
  8. Francis, R. & Decoteau, D.R. (1993). Developing and effective southern pea and sweet corn intercropping system. Hort. Technology, 3, 178- 184.
  9. Ghanbari-Bonjar, A. (2000). Wheat-bean intercropping as alow-input forage. Ph.D. Thesis University of London.
  10. Hemayati, S., Siadat, A. & Sadeghzade, F. (2002). Evaluation of intercropping of two corn hybrids in differentdensities, Iranian Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 25, 73-87.
  11. Hiebisch, C., Teiokagho, F., Chirembo, A.M. & Gerdner, F.P. (1995). Plant density and soybean maturety in soybean-maize intercropping. Agron J, 87, 965-989.
  12. Hikam, S., Poneleit, C.G., Mackown, C.T. & Hildebrand, D.F. (1992). Intercropping of maize and winged bean. Crop Sci, 32, 195- 198.
  13. Jokar, M., Ghanbari, A. & Ghadiri, H. (2005). Study of intercropping of maize and cucumber and effect of it’s on controlling weeds. M.Sc. dissertation, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran. (in Persian with English Summary).
  14. KHalghani, J. & Koocheki, A. (1996). Understanding the basics of crop production (Eco-physiological approach). Ferdowsi University ofMashhadPress. 369 p.
  15. Koocheki, A., Allahgani, B. & Najibnia, S. (2009). Evalution of yield in maize and common bean intercropping. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 2, 605-611.
  16. Koocheki, A., Zarif ketabi, H. & Nakh foroosh, A. (2001). Approaches toecologicalweed management (Translation). Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Press.
  17. Liebman, M. & Davis, A.S. (2000). Integration of soil, crop and weed management in Low- input farming systems. Weed Research, 40, 27-47.
  18. Lotz, L.A., Christensen, S., Clutier, D., Quiwanilie, C.F., Legere, A., Lemiex, C., Iglesias, A.P., Solanen, J., Sattin, M., Stiglini, L. & Tei, F. (1996). Prediction of competitive effects of weed on yield based on relative leaf area of weeds. Weed Res, 36, 93-101.
  19. Mazaheri, D., Movahedi dehnavi, M., Bankesaz, A., hosseinzade, A. & Ghanadha, M. (1998). Study of intercropping of maize and common bean. Research and Manufacturing, 47, 47-51.
  20. Mclachlan, S.M., Tollenaar, M., Swanton, C.J. & Wiese, S.F. (1993). Effect of corn-induced shading on dry matter accumulation, distribution and architecture of redroot pigweed. Weed Science, 41, 568-573.
  21. Nakhzari moghadam, A., Chaeichi, M., Mazaheri, D., Rahimian mashhadi, H., majnoon hosseini, N. & Noorinia, A. (2010). Effect of intercropping of maize with mungbean on yield and Land Equivalent Ratio and some characteristics of forage quality. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 40(4), 151-159.
  22. Nielson, E., Hauggaard, H., Jornsgaard, B. & Steen, J. (2003). Legume-Cereal intercropping system as a weed management tool. In: Proceeding of the 4th Eur .Weed Res .Soc .Workshop: Crop weed competition interaction. Universita Tusca, Viterbro, Italy, 10-12th April.
  23. Poggio, S.L. (2005). Structure of weed communities occurring monoculture and intercropping of field pea and barley. Agricultural, Ecosystem Environment, 109, 48-58.
  24. Rezvan bidokhti, SH. (2004). Compare various combinations cultivation in mixed Maize and Beans. M.Sc. thesis, Department of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
  25. Safari, M. (2006). Study of intercropping of maize and cucurbit and effect of it’s on controlling weeds. M.Sc. dissertation, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Zabol, Iran. (on Persian with English Summary).
  26. Shetty, S.V.R. & Rao, A.N. (1981). Weed management studies in sorghum/pigeonpea and pearl millet/grandunt intercrop systems. Some observations, in Proc, Lnt, Workshop intercropping. ICRISAT. Hydarabad, India. Pp: 238-248.
  27. Sistachs, M., Crespo, R. & Padilla, G.C. (1993). Effects of seed dosage and time of seasonal culture intercropping guinea grass (Panicum maximum) establishment with maize. Cub J Agric Sci, 27, 97- 100.
  28. Stoller, E.W., Harrison, S.K., Wax, L.W., Regnier, E.E. & Nafziger, E.D. (1987). Weed interference in soybean (Glycine max L.). Review Weed Science, 3, 155-181.
  29. Tollenar, M., Dibo, A.A., Aguilera, A., Weise, S.F. & Swanton, C.J. (1994). Effect of crop density and weed interference in maize. Agronomy Journal, 86, 591-595.
  30. Van Acker, R.C., Weise, S.F. & Sowanton, C.J. (1993). The critical period of weed control in soybean and sunflower cropping systems. Weed Sci, 41, 107-113.
  31. Vasilakoglou, I.B., Lithourgidis, A.S. & Dhima, K.V. (2005). Assessing common vetch: cereal intercrops for suppression of wild oat. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium, Session S5, European Weed Research Society, Bari, Italy.
Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science
Volume 46, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
Winter 2016
Pages 547-558

  • Receive Date 13 October 2013
  • Revise Date 13 July 2015
  • Accept Date 03 August 2015
  • Publish Date 22 December 2015