نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانش آموخته گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تهران
2 دانشیار گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تهران
3 استاد گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Conservation of production resources and sustainable agriculture is one of the principles desired by scientists at current period, and intercropping that sustains the production factors and resources can foster the future of agricultural production. This experiment was conducted as a randomized complete block design with four replications at the Agricultural Research Station of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran during the growing season of 2014-2015. The intercropping system was a replacement type. The proposed cultivars were fodder sorghum (Pegah cultivar) and corn (ksc600). Replacement treatments factors included pure maize cultivation, 75% corn + 25% sorghum, 50% corn + 50% sorghum, 75% corn sorghum + 25% corn and pure sorghum culture. The results showed that the Planting pattern of single cropping sorghum, 75% sorghum + 25% corn and 50% sorghum + 50% corn with 61, 60 and 45 t/ ha yield, respectively, produced greatest sorghum forage yield., and in corn, the single cropping of corn, 75% corn + 25% sorghum and 50% corn + 50% sorghum had the highest grain yield with 8.7, 8.6 and 8.4 t/ ha yield, respectively, but decreased the number of plants per hectare does not follow yield reduction and the yield (gram per plant) reveals this share.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
References:
10. Nyambo, D. B., Komba, A. L., Matimati, T. & Jana, R. K. (1982). Influence of plant combinations and planting on figurations on three cereals (maize, sorghum, millet) intercropped with two legumes (soybean, green gram). In Intercropping: proceedings of the Second Symposium on Intercropping in Semi-Arid Areas, held at Morogoro, Tanzania, 4-7 Aug. 1980. IDRC, Ottawa, ON, CA.
11. Pooryousof Miyandoab. M, Sharifi, Sh. & Hasanzadeh Ghourt Tappeh. A, (2010). the consideration of mixed sorghum planting impacs on maize Eco-physiological characteristics in two planting patterns, National Conference on Biodiversity and its impact on agriculture and the environment, Urmia, National Plant Gene Bank of Iran. (In Farsi)
12. Ra’ee. Y. (2008). impact of plant density on Soybean and sorghum planting. Msc. thesis, faculty of agriculture, University of Tabriz. (In Farsi).
13. Sani, B.M., Danmowa, N.M., Sani, Y.A. & Jaliya, M.M. (2011). Growth, yield and water use efficiency of maize-sorghum intercrop at samaru, northern guinea savannah, nigeria. 19 (2): 253-259.
14.Singh, N.B. (1986).Intercropping of legumes in maize under varying nitrogen levels and maizes population-Annals of Agricultural Research. 7(1):37-43.
15. Sistachs, M., Padilla, C., Gomez, I. & Barrientos, A. (1991). Intercropping of forage sorghum, maize and soybean during establishment of different grasses in a montmorillonitic soil. II. Guinea grass (P. maximum Jacq.). Cuban Journal of Agricultural Science, 25(1), 83-87.
16. Umata, H. B. & Debelo, A. H. (2017). Determination of Plant Density on Yield of Sorghum Intercropping with Haricot Bean at Fadis and Babile. ABC Journal of Advanced Research, 6(2), 113-120.
17. Vandermeer, J. H. (1992). The ecology of intercropping. Cambridge University Press.
18. Vandermeer, J., Van Noordwijk, M., Anderson, J., Ong, C. & Perfecto, I. (1998). Global change and multi-species agroecosystems: concepts and issues. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 67(1), 1-22.
19. Weil, R. R. & McFadden, M. E. (1991). Fertility and weed stress effects on performance of maize/soybean intercrop. Agronomy Journal, 83(4), 717-721.
20. Willey, R. W. (1990). Resource use in intercropping systems. Agricultural water management, 17(1-3), 215-231.
21. Zhao, J., Sun, J., Li, L. & Li, W. (2017). Effects of maize row spacing on system productivity and the growth of intercropped maize in intercropping system. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 34(2), 189-196.
)
