Optimization of Irrigation and Nitrogen Levels on Yield, Water Use Efficiency, and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) by Using the Surface-Response Methodology

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 6, Volume 19, Issue 2 - Serial Number 62, July 2021, Pages 185-199   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jcesc.2021.68436.1013

Authors

P Rezvani Moghaddam^{* 1}; S Khorramdel¹; H Latifi²; M. R Farzaneh Belgerdi³; S. J Davarpanah²

¹Department of Agrotechnology, College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²PhD Student in Agroecology, Department of Agrotechnology, College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

³MSc in Agrometeorology, Deputy of Insurance Services, Bank Keshavarzi, Khorasan Razavi Province

Abstract

Introduction
 The optimum resource level in agro-ecosystems should be determined to decrease production costs, conserve resources, and mitigate environmental pollutions. Optimization is an effective and sustainable management approach to conserve resources and decline environmental pollutions. Response surface methodology (RSM) is defined as a collection of mathematical and statistical techniques used to develop, improve, or optimize a product. RSM is a statistical technique for optimization of multiple factors that determine optimum rates by combining experimental designs. Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) is a pseudocereal, seed-producing annual crop, and a staple food in South America in ancient times, indigenous to the Andean region of South America, particularly Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and parts of Chile, which has the potential to grow with low inputs, mostly water and tolerate a variety of biotic and abiotic stresses. Quinoa seed is gluten-free foods, good sources of carbohydrates, good-quality proteins, lipids, vitamins, minerals, and bioactive compounds, with all the essentials, trace elements, and many vitamins. In this work, optimization of nitrogen and water rates on quinoa was done.
Materials and Methods
 An experiment was conducted using Central Composite Design (CCD) with 13 treatments and two replications at the Research Field of the Ferdowsi University of Mashhad during the growing season of 2017-2018. The treatments were allocated based on low and high water (2500 and 7500 m³ ha^-1, respectively) and nitrogen (0 and 200 kg ha^-1, respectively) levels. Seed yield, biological yield, N recovery, N use efficiency (NUE), and water use efficiency (WUE) were calculated as dependent variables, and changes of these variables were evaluated by a regression model. A lack-of-fit test was used to evaluate the quality of the fitted model. The adequacy of the model was tested by analysis of variance. The quality of the fitted models was judged using the determination coefficient (R²). Finally, the optimum nitrogen and water rates were computed based on economic, environmental, and economic-environmental scenarios.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the effect of linear and square components was significant on all studied characteristics. The interaction effect of full quadratic was significant on NUE and WUE. Lack of fit test had no significant effect on the studied traits. The full square model for the response variables gave insignificant lack-of-fit, indicating that the data were satisfactorily explained. Surface-response results of the effect of irrigation and nitrogen levels on grain yield and biological yield showed that with increasing nitrogen consumption and irrigation, quinoa yield indices increased, but in terms of nitrogen use, with increasing nitrogen consumption more than 100 kg ha^-1, the grain yield increased with more slope. The highest value of seed yield was observed for 7500 m³ ha^-1 irrigation and 200 kg nitrogen ha^-1 with 3835.4 kg ha^-1. Optimum nitrogen and water rates were suggested to determine the target range of dependent variables based on three scenarios: economic, environmental, and eco-environmental. It is necessary to use 169.7 kg nitrogen ha^-1 and 7500 m³ ha^-1 irrigation to obtain optimum conditions under the economic scenario. The optimum nitrogen and irrigation rates based on environmental scenarios were computed from 18.18 kg nitrogen ha^-1 and 3409 m³ ha^-1 irrigation water. Application of 88.57 kg nitrogen ha^-1 and 5909 m³ ha^-1 irrigation water was found to be the optimum conditions for the eco-environmental scenario (NUE, N recovery, seed yield, and WUE were calculated with 15.93 kg seed kg^-1 N, 50.04%, 3120.76 kg ha^-1, and 0.5 kg seed m^-3 water, respectively).
Conclusions
Increasing nitrogen led to increased seed yield and decreased nitrogen use efficiency, whereas increasing irrigation caused an increase in seed yield and nitrogen use efficiency. In general, it seems that resource use based on the eco-environmental scenario may be a suitable cropping approach for the sustainable production of quinoa as a new crop.

Keywords

Central Composite Design; Economic- environmental scenario; Lack of fit; New crop; Sustainable production

References

1. Arbab Soleimani, A., and Ezzati, A. 2015. Nutritional value and functional properties of quinoa. Third National Conference on Agriculture and Sustainable Natural Resources. Tehran. (in Persian).
2. Aslan, N. 2007. Application of response surface methodology and central composite rotatable design for modeling the influence of some operating variables of a Multi-ravity Separator for coal cleaning. Fuel 86: 769-776.
3. Basra, S. M. A., Iqbal, S., and Afzal, I. 2014. Evaluating the response of nitrogen application on growth, development, and yield of quinoa genotypes. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 16 (5): 886-892.
4. Berti, M., Wilckens, R., Hevia, F., Serri, H., Vidal, I., and Mendes, C. 2000. Fertilization nitrogen ada en quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Ciencia Investigsction Agraria 27: 81-90. (in Spanish with English abstract).
5. Box, G. E. P., and Hunter, J. S. 1957. Multi-factor experimental designs for exploring response surfaces. The Institute of Mathematical Statistics. p. 195-241.
6. Box, G. E. P., and Wilson, K. B. 1951. On the experiment attainment of optimum conditions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) 13: 1-45.
7. Clarke, G. M., and Kempson, R. E. 1997. Introduction to the Design and Analysis of Experiments. Arnold, London. 334 p.
8. Dean, A., and Voss, D. 2002. Design and Analysis of Experiments. Springer Texts in Statistics. New York.
9. Eickhout, B., Bouwman, A. F., and van Zeijts, H. 2006. The role of nitrogen in world food production and environmental sustainability. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 116: 4-14.
10. Erley, G. S. A., Kaul, H., Kruse, M., and Aufhammer, W. 2005. Yield and nitrogen utilization efficiency of the pseudocereals amaranth, quinoa, and buckwheat under differing nitrogen fertilization. European Journal of Agronomy 22 (1): 95-100.
11. Geren, H. 2015. Effects of different nitrogen level on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under Mediterranean climatic conditions. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 20: 59-64.
12. Goma, E. F. 2013. Effect of nitrogen, phosphorus, and biofertilizers on quinoa plant. Journal of Applied Sciences Research 9 (8): 5210-5222.
13. Hatermink, A. E., Johnston, M. O., Sullivan, J. N., and Poloma, S. 2000. Nitrogen use efficiency of taro and sweet potato in the humid lowlands of Papua New Guinea. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 79: 271-280.
14. Heidari, N., Pouryousef, M., and Tavakoli, A. 2014. Effects of drought stress on photosynthesis, its parameters and relative water content of anise (Pimpinella anisum L.). Journal of Plant Research (Iranian Journal of Biology) 27 (5): 829-839. (in Persian with English abstract).
15. Hosseinzad, J., Kazemieh, F., Javadi, A., and Ghafouri, H. 2013. Agricultural water management basis and mechanisms in Tabriz plain. Water and Soil Science 23 (2): 85-98. (in Persian with English abstract).
16. Jacobsen S. E., Liu, F., and Jensen, C. R. 2009. Does root-sourced ABA play a role for regulation of stomata under drought in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Scientia Horticulture 122 (2): 281-287.
17. Jacobsen, S. E. 1998. Developmental stability of quinoa under European conditions. Industrial crops and products 7: 169-174.
18. Jamali, S. 2016. Investigation the effect of different salinity and deficit-irrigation levels on yield and yield components of quinoa. M.Sc. Thesis, College of agriculture, Gorgan University of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources. Gorgan. Iran. (in Persian with English abstract).
19. Jamali, S., Goldani, M., and Zeynodin, S. M. 2019. Evaluation the effects of periodic water stress on yield, yield components and water productivity on quinoa. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage 6 (13): 1687-1697. (in Persian with English abstract).
20. Jayme-Oliveira A., Ribeiro Júnior, W. Q., Ramos, M. L. G., Ziviani, A. C., and Jakelaitis, A. 2017. Amaranth, quinoa, and millet growth and development under different water regimes in the Brazilian Cerrado. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 52 (8): 561-571.
21. Kalavathy, H. M., Regupathib, I., Pillai, M. G., and Miranda, L. R. 2009. Modelling, analysis and optimization of adsorption parameters for H₃PO₄ activated rubber wood sawdust using response surface methodology (RSM). Colloids and Surfaces B: Bionterfaces 70: 35-45.
22. Kazemi, M., Alizadeh, A., and Sharifan, H. 2019. Assessing different irrigation levels on Yield and Yield components of quinoa genotypes. Fourth National Research Conference on Development and Extension in Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Environment. Jiroft, Iran. (in Persian).
23. Keshavarz, A., and Dehghani Sanij, H. 2012. Water Productivity Index and Solutions for Future Agricultural Activities in Iran. Economic Strategy 1: 199-233. (in Persian with English abstract).
24. Khajavi-Shojaei, S., Moezzi, A., Norouzi Masir, M., and Taghavi Zahedkolaei, M. 2019. Study of kinetic and Isotherm for ammonium and nitrate adsorption by common reed (Phragmites australis) biochar from aqueous solution, Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research 50 (8): 2009-2021. (in Persian with English abstract).
25. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Amiri, M. B., and Fallah Poor, F. 2019. Optimization of nitrogen fertilizer and irrigation in wheat cultivation by central composite design. Journal of Agroecology 11 (2): 515-530. (in Persian with English abstract).
26. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Khorramdel, S., and Morid Ahmadi, S. 2018 Optimization of plant density and nitrogen use in corn (Zea mays L.) by Central Composite Design. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 15 (4): 798-810. (in Persian with English abstract).
27. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Moradi, R., and Mansouri, H. 2013. Optimization of water, nitrogen, and density in canola cultivation by central composite design. Journal of Agroecology 3 (1): 1-16. (in Persian with English abstract).
28. Kwak, J. S. 2005. Application of Taguchi and response surface methodologies for geometric error in surface grinding process. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 45: 327-341.
29. Latifi, H., Khorramdel, S., Nassiri Mahallati, M., and Farzaneh Belgerdi, M. R. 2018. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer and plant density on yield and nitrogen efficiency indices of sesame using a central composite design. Journal of Plant Production Research 25 (3): 125-140. (in Persian).
30. Lilian, E. A. J. 2009. Chapter 1: Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.): Composition, Chemistry, Nutritional, and Functional Properties. Advances in Food and Nutrition Research 58: 1-3.
31. Manivannan, P., Abdul Jaleel, C., Sankar, B., Kishorekumar, A., Somasundaram, R., Lakshmanan, G. M. A., and Panneerselvam, R. 2007. Growth, biochemical modifications and proline metabolism in (Helianthus annusus L.) as induced by drought stress. Colloids and Surfaces 59: 141-149
32. Matiasevich, S. B., Castellion, M. L., Maldonado, S. B., and Buera, M. P. 2006. Water-dependent thermal transition in quinoa embroys. Thermochimica Acta 448: 117-122.
33. Montemuro, F., Maiorana, M., Ferri, D., and Convertini, G. 2006. Nitrogen indicators, uptake and utilization efficiency in a maize and barley rotation cropped at different levels and source of N fertilization. Field Crop Research 99: 114-421.
34. Montgomery, D. C. 2001. Design and Analysis of Experiments. Fifth ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York.
35. Myers, R. H., and Montgomery, D. C. 2002. Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments. 2nd Edition Wiley, New York.
36. Obeng, D. P., Morrell, S., and Napier, T. J. N. 2005. Application of central composite rotatable design to modeling the effect of some operating variables on the performance of the three-product cyclone. International Journal of Mineral Processing 769: 181-192.
37. Razzaghi, F., Bahadori-Ghasroldashti, M. R., Henriksen, S., Sepaskhah, A. R., and Jacobsen, S. E. 2020. Physiological characteristics and irrigation water productivity of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) in response to deficit irrigation imposed at different growing stages-A field study from Southern Iran. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 206 (3): 390-404.
38. Rodrigues, G. C., and Pereira, L. S. 2009. Assessing economic impacts of deficit irrigation as related to water productivity and water costs. Biosystems Engineering 103: 536-551.
39. Sepahvand, N. A., Tavazoa, M., and Kohbazi, M. 2010. Quinoa valuable plant for alimentary security and adaptation agricultural in Iran. 11^th National Iranian Congress on Crop Science. 24-26 Jul. Tehran. (in Persian with English abstract).
40. Shams, A. S. 2012. Response of quinoa to nitrogen fertilizer rates under sandy soil conditions. In Proc. 13^th International Conf. Agron., Fac. of Agric., Benha Univ., Egypt (pp. 9-10).
41. Shao, H. C., Yan, C. Y., Ning, Z., Gang, W., Yong-Bing, Y., Chang-Xing, Z., and Zan-Min, H. 2006. Investigation on the relationship of proline with wheat (Triticum spp.) anti-drought under soil water deficits. Colloids and Surfaces 53: 113-119
42. Stikic, R., Jovanovic, Z., Majanovic, M., and Dordevic, S. 2015. The effect of drought on water regime and growth of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Ratar. Povrt. 52 (2): 80-84.
43. Telahigue, D., Ben Yahia, L., Aljane, F., Belhouchett, K., and Toumi, L. 2017. Grain yield, biomass productivity and water use efficiency in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under drought stress. Journal of Scientific Agriculture 1: 222-232.
44. Yang, A., Akhtar, S. S., Amjad. M., Iqbal, S., and Jacobsen, S. E. 2016. Growth and physiological responses of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to drought and temperature stress. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 202 (6): 445-453.