بررسی مدیریت‏های مختلف خاک‏ ورزی بر عملکرد و اجزاء عملکرد ذرت علوف ه‏ای

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 مرکز تحقیقات کشاورزی گرگان

2 محقق مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان گلستان

3 محقق مرکز تحقیقات و اموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان گلستان

چکیده

چکیده
سابقه و هدف: امروزه تقریبا در هر کشوری برخی فعالیتها در زمینه بی خاک ورزی یا در بخش های تحقیقاتی و یا کاربرد در سطح مزارع در شرف انجام است. برخی محققان اظهار کرده اند که سوزاندن پیوسته بقایای گیاه قبلی موجب کاهش حاصلخیزی خاک و همچنین میزان مواد آلی خاک در دراز مدت می شود. با توجه به اهمیت راهبردی ذرت و نقش بسیار مهم مدیریت روشهای خاک ورزی و بقایای گیاهی بر میزان تولید آن، همچنین محدودیت منابع آب قابل دسترس استان، این پژوهش با هدف تعیین عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد ذرت علوفه ای رقم SC704 تحت مدیریتهای مختلف خاک ورزی به اجرا درآمد.
مواد و روش‌ها: این آزمایش، تحت مدیریت‌های مختلف میزان بقایا و روش‌های خاک ورزی به صورت استریپ پلات در قالب طرح بلوکهای کامل تصادفی در 3 تکرار در سال‏های 1389 و 1390 در منطقه دشت کمالان شهرستان علی آباد واقع در شرق استان گلستان (ایران) اجرا شد. تیمارهای اصلی (افقی) در 3 سطح مدیریت بقایا، شامل آتش زدن بقایا(R1)، کشت در 50 درصد بقایا(R2) و کشت در 100 درصد بقایا (R3) و تیمارهای فرعی (عمودی) نیز در 3 سطح روش‏های خاک‏ورزی، شامل خاک‏ورزی مرسوم (شخم تا عمق 25 تا 30 سانتیمتری+ دیسک + کاشت)(T1)، کم‏خاک‏ورزی (شخم با خاک‏ورز مرکب + کاشت)(T2) وکشت مستقیم در بقایای گیاهی(T3) بود. آبیاری در کلیه کرت‏ها به روش سطحی و از نوع نواری انجام گرفت. طی دو سال آزمایش و در پایان آن، عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد، میزان آب مصرفی و نهایتا کارآیی مصرف آب آبیاری اندازه گیری و تعیین شدند.
یافته‌ها: مقایسه میانگین عملکرد علوفه تر در تیمارهای مختلف بقایا نشان داد که عملکرد علوفه در تیمار 100 درصد بقایابا تولید 6/29655 کیلوگرم در هکتار نسبت به دو تیمار دیگر بیشتر بوده و دارای اختلاف معنی داری در سطح 5 درصد با آنها می باشد. همچنین مقایسه میانگین عملکرددر تیمارهای مختلف خاک‏ورزی نشان داد که تیمارهای خاک‏ورزی مرسوم و کم‏خاک‏ورزی از نظر عملکرد تفاوت معنی‏داری ندارند. مقایسه میانگین‌ها همچنین نشان دهنده اختلاف معنی‌دار تیمارهای بقایا و تیمارهای خاک ورزی در سطح 5 درصد از نظر کارآیی مصرف آب آبیاری می-باشد. تیمارسوزاندن بقایا و تیمار 100 درصد بقایا به ترتیب با مقدار 2/7 و 2/10 کیلوگرم بر مترمکعب دارای کمترین و بیشترین مقدار بوده به نحوی که تیمار سوزاندن بقایا به ترتیب 4/29 و 7/21 درصد کمتر از تیمار 100 و 50 درصد بقایا کارآیی مصرف آب داشته است.
نتیجه‌گیری: در مرحله نخست می‏توان نسبت به تغییر سیستم خاک‏ورزی مرسوم به کم خاک‏ورزی همراه با حفظ تمامی بقایای کشت قبلی اقدام نمود. با توجه به نتایج حاصله می‌توان تیمار حفظ و نگهداری بقایا را موثرترین عامل در افزایش کارآیی مصرف آب دانست. با استناد به این نتایج، حفظ بقایا برای افزایش کارآیی مصرف آبیاری اکیدا توصیه می گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Study of silage maize yield and yield components under different managements of tillage

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Esmaeil Asadi 1
  • Mohammad Taghi Feyzbakhsh 2
  • Mohammad Hossein Razzaghi 3
1 Facaulty member of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Golestan Province
چکیده [English]

Study of silage maize yield and yield components under different managements of tillage


Abstract
Background and Objectives: Today, almost every country has some activities in the field of no-tillage or in research or application-level fields. Some researchers have declared that continuous burning residues of the previous crop reduce soil fertility and soil organic matter levels in the long term. Given the strategic importance of maize and the significant role of tillage practices and crop residue management in its production, also limited availability of water, a field experiment was conducted to determine of silage maize yield and yield components and water use efficiency (WUE), variety SC704, under different tillage management where wheat had been grown.
Materials and Methods: The experiment was laid out under different wheat residue amounts and different tillage managements in a randomized complete block design with strip plot arrangement, where each treatment was replicated three times, in Kamalan plain of Aliabad city which is situated in east of Golestan Province (Iran) in 2010 and 2011. Wheat residual (stalk) treatments were kept as main plots and tillage treatments as sub plots. Wheat residue treatments were as follows: burning the residue as R1, 50% residue (R2), and 100% residue (R3). Tillage treatments were as follows: conventional tillage (T1) (moldboard plough with depth of 25-30 cm, three times of disk harrow+sowing), reduced tillage (T2) (application of mixed tillage equipment+sowing), and no tillage (T3) (planting with no-till planter). For all experimental plots, surface irrigation method (strip border irrigation) was used. During two years experiment and at the end, maize aboveground mass fresh yield and yield components, water consumption and finally WUE of irrigation water were measured and determined for each plot separately.
Results: The trial results showed that there were significant differences in terms of all surveying parameters. Comparison of fresh silage yield means between different treatments showed that the aboveground mass production in R3 was 29655.6 kg ha-1 and significantly (p>0.05) higher than in R2 and R1.Also comparison of yield means between different sub plot treatments of T showed no significant difference between T1 and T2. Comparison of WUE means between different treatments of T and R showed significant difference (p>0.05). The lowest and the highest value of WUE were R1 as7.2 and R3 as10.2 kg m-3 respectively. So that WUE values in R1 treatment was 29.4 and 21.7 percent lower than R3 and R2 treatments respectively.
Conclusion: In the first phase, it can be replaced T1 with T2 along with the preservation of all residues of previous crops. According to the results it can be stated that the residue keeping treatment is the most effective factor in terms of water use efficiency. Therefore keeping crop residues for increasing WUE of irrigation water is strongly recommended.

Key words: maize, water use efficiency, fresh silage yield, Wheat residue, tillage

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Key words: maize
  • Water use efficiency
  • fresh silage yield
  • Wheat residue
  • tillage
1.Alizadeh, O., Majede, E., Nadian, H.A., Normohamade, G.H., and American, M.R. 2008. Effect of water stress and different nitrogen rates on phenology, growth and development of corn. J. Agric. Sci. Natur. Resour. 14: 101-115.
2.Awe, G.O., and Abegunrin, T.P. 2009. Effect of low input tillage and amaranth intercropping system on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.). Afric. J. Agri Res. 4: 7. 578-583.
3.Azadshahraki, F., Naghavi, H., and Najafinejad, H. 2010. Effect of tillage and different tillage systems affect plant emergence, stand establishment and yield in wheat-corn rotation. The Philippine Agricultural Scientist. 93: 4. 392-398.
4.Barut, Z.B., and Celik, I. 2010. Different tillage systems affect plant emergence, stand establishment and yield in wheat-corn rotation. The Philippine Agri Sci. 93: 4. 392-398.
5.Baumhardt, R.L., and Jones, O.R. 2002. Residue management and tillage effects on soil-water storage and grain yield of dryland wheat and sorghum for a clay loam in Texas. Soil Till. Res. 68: 71-82.
6.Bayhan, Y., Kayisoglu, B., Gonulol, E., Yalcin, H., and Sungur, N. 2006. Possibilities of direct drilling and reduced tillage in second crop silage corn. Soil Till. Res. 88: 1-7.
7.Benjamin, J.G., Mikha, M.M., and Merle, F.R. 2008. Organic carbon effects on soil physical and hydraulic properties in a semiarid climate. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 72: 1357-1362.
8.Biaf, E.F. 2003. Effect of tillage methods and varying planting densities on Maize performance: J. Sust. Agric. 4: 2. 99-104.
9.Biederbeck, V.O., Campbel, C.A., Bowren, K.E., Schnitzer, M. and Mclver, R.N. 1980. Effect of burning cereal straw on soil properties and grain yields in Saskatchewan. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 44: 1. 103-111.
10.Bond, J.J., and Willis, W.O. 1969. Soil water evaporation: Surface residue rate and placement effects. Soil Sci. Soc. American Proc. 33: 445–448.
11.Boomsma, C.R., Santini, J.B., West, T.D., Brewer, J.C., McIntyre, L.M., and Vyn, T.J. 2010. Maize grain yield responses to plant height variability resulting from crop rotation and tillage system in long-term experiment. Soil Till. Res. 106: 227-240.
12.Byron, J.H., Bryn, G.Y., and She, K.C. 2004. Weed management in strip tillage corn. Agronomy J. 96: 229-235.
13.Dahiya, R., Ingwersenb, J., and Streckb, T. 2007. The effect of mulching and tillage on the water and temperature regimes of a loess soil: Experimental findings and modeling. Soil Till. Res. 96: 1-2. 52-63.
14.FAO. 2008. An International Technical Workshop on Investing in Sustainable Crop Intensification: The Case for Improving Soil Health. In: Proceedings of FAO, Rome. 22-24 July 2008.
15.FAO. 2012. FAOSTAT, Statistical databases and data sets of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org/default.aspx (Accessed on April 2012).
16.Fawcett, R., and Towery, D. 2002. Conservation tillage and plant biotechnology: how new technologies can improve the environment by reducing the need to plow. Conservation technology information center, West Lafayette, IN.
17.Friedrich, T., Kassam, A.H., and Shaxson, F. 2009. Conservation Agriculture. In: Agriculture for Developing Countries. Science and Technology Options Assessment (STOA) project. European Technology Assessment Group, Karlsruhe, Germany.
18.Gajri, P.R., Arora, V.K., and Chaudhary, M.R. 1994. Maize growth response to deep tillage, straw mulching and farmyard manure in coarse textured soils of N.W. India. Soil Use Manag. 10: 15-20.
19.Gill, K.S., Gajri, P.R., Chaudhary, M.R., and Baldev, S. 1996. Tillage, mulch and irrigation effects on corn (Zea mays L.) in relation to evaporative demand. Soil Till. Res. 39: 213-227.
20.Gruber, S., Pekrun, C., Mohring, J., and Claupein, W. 2012. Long-term yield and weed response to conservation and stubble tillage in SW Germany. Soil Till. Res. 121: 49-56.
21.Halvorson, A.D., Mosier, A.R., Reule, C.A., and Bausch, W.C. 2006. Nitrogen and tillage effects on irrigated continuous corn yields. Agronomy J. 98: 63-71.
22.Heidari, A. 2004. Effect of residual management and tillage depth on wheat yield and soil organic matter in corn-wheat rotation. Agric. Eng. Res. J. 19: 81-93. (In Persian) 
23.Howell, T.A. 2008. Irrigation efficiency. P 640-645, In: S.W. Trimble (Ed.), Encyclopedia of water science. CRC Press. Taylor & Francis Group. Boca Raton, FL.
24.Jin, H., Qingjie, W., Hongwen, L., Lijin, L., and Huanwen, G. 2007. Effect of alternative tillage and residue cover on yield and water use efficiency in annual double cropping system in North China Plain. Soil Till. Res. 104: 198-205.
25.Karlen, D.L., Kovar, J.L., Cambardella, C.A., and Colvin, T.S. 2013. Thirty-year tillage effects on crop yield and soil fertility indicators. Soil Till. Res. 130: 24-41.
26.Kaulen, B.T. 2005. Effect of tillage, NPK fertilization and time of sowing on the yield of Maize. J. Appl. Sci. 3: 2. 222-227.
27.Kosutic, S., Fiillpovic, D., Gospodaric, Z., Husnjak, S., Kovacev, I., and Copec, K. 2005. Effect of different tillage system on yield of maize, winter wheat and soybean on Albic-Luvisol in North-West Slavonia. J. Central Euro. Agric. 6. 3. 241-248.
28.Lal, R., Mahboubi, A., and Fausey, N.R. 1994. Long-term tillage and rotation effects on properties of central Ohio soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 58: 517-522.
29.Li, S.X., Wang, Z.H., Li, S.Q., Gao. Y.J., and Tian, S.H. 2013. Effect of plastic sheet mulch, wheat straw mulch, and maize growth on water loss by evaporation in dryland areas of China. Agricultural Water Management. 116: 39-49.
30.Limon-Ortega, A., Sayre, K.D., Drijber, R.A., and Francis, C.A. 2002. Soil attributes in a furrow-irrigated bed planting system in northwest Mexico. Soil Till. Res. 63: 123-132.
31.Najafinejad, H., Javaheri, M.A., Gheibi, M., and Rostami, M.A. 2007. Influence of tillage practices on the grain yield of maize and some soil properties in maize-wheat cropping system of Iran. J. Agric. Soc. Sci. 3: 3. 87-90.
32.Powlson, D.S., and Brookes, P.C. 1987. Measurements of soil microbial biomass provide an early indication of changes in total soil organic matter due to straw incorporation. Soil Biol. Biochem. 19: 159-164.
33.Raimboult, B.A., and Vyn, T.J. 1991. Crop rotation and tillage effects on corn growth and soil structural stability. Agron. J. 83: 979-985.
34.Rosegrant, M.W., Msangi, S., Ringler, C., Sulser, T.B., Zhu, T., and Cline, S.A. 2008. International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model Description. International Food Policy Research Institute: Washington, D.C. http://www.ifpri.org/themes/impact/impactwater.pdf (Accessed on March 10, 2010).
35.Sessiz, A., Alp, A., and Gursoy, S. 2010. Conservation and conventional tillage methods on selected soil physical properties and corn yield and quality under cropping system in Turkey. Bulgari. J. Agric. Sci. 16: 5. 597-608.
36.Sims, A.L., Schepers, J.S., Olson, R.A., and Power, J.F. 1998. Irrigated corn yield and nitrogen accumulation response in a comparison of no-till and conventional till: Tillage and surface-residue variables. Agron. J. 90: 630-637.
37.So, H.B., Grabski, A., and Desborough, P. 2009. The impact of 14 years conventional and no-till cultivation on the physical properties and crop yield of a loam soil at Grafton NSW, Australia. Soil Till. Res. 104: 180-184.
38.Soane, B.D., Ball, B.C., Arvidsson, J., Basch, G., Moreno, F., and Roger-Estrade, J. 2012. No-till in northern, western and south-western Europe: A review of problems and opportunities for crop production and the environment. Soil Till. Res. 118: 66-87. 
39.Sohrabi, B. 2001. The effect of furrower irrigation with one and two rows on water use efficiency and quality and quantity of cotton. Final report. Agriculture Extension, Education and Research Organization, 52p.
40.Soltani, A. 1998. Application of SAS in Statistical Analyses. JDM press, Mashhad, Iran, 166p. (In Persian)
41.Tarkalson, D.D., Hergert, G., and Cassman, K.G. 2006. Long-Term effect of tillage on soil chemical properties and grain yields of a dry land winter wheat- sorghum/corn- fallow rotation in the Great Plains. Agron. J. 98: 26-33.
42.Vetsch, J.A., Randall, G.W., and Lamb, J.A. 2002. Corn and soybean production as affected by tillage systems. Agron. J. 99: 952-959.
43.Videnovic, Z., Simic, M., Srdic, J., and Dumanovic, Z. 2011. Long term effects of different soil tillage systems on maize (Zea mays L.) yields. Plant Soil Environ. 57: 4. 186-192.
44.Von Braun, J., Byerlee, D., Chartres, C., Lumpkin, T., Olembo, N., and Waage, J. 2010. A Draft Strategy and Results Framework for the CGIAR. 20 March 2010. CGIAR, the World Bank, WashingtonD.C.
45.Wilhelm, W.W., and Wortmann, C.S. 2004. Tillage and rotation interactions for corn and soybean grain yield as affected by precipitation and air temperature. Agron. J. 96: 425-432.
46.Wilhelm, W.W.J., Doran, W., and Power, J.F. 1986. Corn and soybean yield response to crop residue management under no tillage production systems. Agron. J. 78: 184-189.