ارزیابی عملکرد، اجزاء عملکرد و شاخص‌های سودمندی کشت مخلوط لوبیا (Phaseolus vulgaris) () و ذرت (Zea mays) تحت تلقیح با باکتری Rhizobium phaseoli

بوم شناسی کشاورزی

مقاله 5، دوره 16، شماره 4 - شماره پیاپی 62، دی 1404، صفحه 661-681   

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22067/agry.2024.86727.1191

نویسندگان

ابراهیم ذوالفقاری خطبه سرا؛ پیمان شریفی^* ؛ محمدحسین انصاری

گروه زراعت و اصلاح نباتات، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران

چکیده

کشت مخلوط، به‌عنوان روشی مؤثر برای استفاده از منابع، سبب افزایش عملکرد و پایداری محصول در مقایسه با کشت خالص می‌شود. مطالعه حاضر به‌صورت کرت‌های خرد شده در قالب طرح پایه بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار انجام شد. فاکتور اصلی در دو سطح (تلقیح و عدم تلقیح با باکتری) و فاکتور فرعی، نسبت کشت مخلوط ذرت (Zea mays)- لوبیا (Phaseolus vulgaris) (کشت خالص ذرت و لوبیا، نسبت‌های 25 درصد لوبیا + 75 درصد ذرت، 50 درصد لوبیا + 50 درصد ذرت و 25 درصد ذرت + 75 درصد لوبیا) بود. بیشترین نسبت برابری زمین (LER) و ضریب ازدحام نسبی (RCC) در نسبت 25 درصد ذرت + 75 درصد لوبیا در شرایط تلقیح با باکتری به‎دست آمد، که نشانگر این است که تلقیح با باکتری، سبب افزایش عملکرد هر دو گونه گیاهی در مقایسه با شرایط عدم تلقیح شد. در شرایط تلقیح با باکتری، شاخص نسبت رقابت (CR) در تمام نسبت‌های کشت مخلوط، برای لوبیا بالاتر از یک و برای ذرت کمتر از یک بود. کمتر بودن این شاخص برای ذرت نسبت به لوبیا نشان می‌دهد که در این شرایط، ذرت در کشت مخلوط، توانایی رقابت کمتری نسبت به لوبیا داشت. در شرایط تلقیح با باکتری، شاخص قابلیت تهاجم برای لوبیا مثبت بود. مجموع ارزش نسبی (RVT) برای دو گونه گیاهی، در کلیه نسبت‌های کشت مخلوط، بالاتر از یک بود که نشان‌دهنده سودمندی اقتصادی کشت مخلوط نسبت به کشت خالص دو گونه بود. در مجموع، این نتایج نشان داد که کشت مخلوط لوبیا و ذرت تحت تلقیح با باکتری ریزوبیوم، می‌تواند راهکاری مناسب برای دسترسی به عملکرد مطلوب باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

باکتری محرک رشد؛ تثبیت زیستی نیتروژن؛ کشاورزی پایدار؛ نسبت برابری زمین؛ همزیستی ریزوبیومی

مراجع

1. Aguilar-Jiménez, C.E., Galdámez-Gadámez, J., Martínez-Aguilar, F.B., Guevara-Hernández, F., & Vázquez-Solis, H. (2019). Eficiencia del policultivo maízfrijol-calabaza bajo manejo orgánico en la Frailesca, Chiapas, México. RevistaCientífica Agroecosistemas, 7, 64–72.
2. Aguirre-Noyola, J.L., Rosenblueth, M., Santiago-Martínez, M.G., & Martínez-Romero, E. (2021). Transcriptomic responses of rhizobium phaseoli to root exudates reflect its capacity to colonize maize and common bean in an intercropping system. Frontiers in Microbiology, 12, 740818. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.740818
3. Aguirre-von-Wobeser, E., Rocha-Estrada, J., Shapiro, L.R., & de la Torre, M. (2018). Enrichment of verrucomicrobia, actinobacteria and burkholderiales drives selection of bacterial community from soil by maize roots in a traditional milpa agroecosystem. PLoS One, 13, e0208852. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0208852
4. Alexander, M.W., & Genter, C.F. (1962). Production of corn and soybean in alternate pairs of rows. Agronomy Journal, 54, 233-234.
5. Ardalani, S., Saeidi, M., Jalali-Honarmand, S., Ghobadi, M., & Abdoli, M. (2014). Evaluation of grain yield and its relationship with remobilization of dry matter in bread wheat cultivars under water deficit stress at the post anthesis. Iranian Journal of Dryland Agronomy, 3(2), 173-195. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22092/idaj.2015.101297
6. Banik, P., Midya, A. Sarkar, B.K., & Ghose, S.S. (2006). Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in additive series experiment: Advantages and smothering. European Journal Agronomy, 24, 324-332. https://doi.org/1016/j.eja.2005.10.010
7. Bhattacharjee, R.B., Singh, A., & Mukhopadhyay, S.N. (2008). Use of nitrogen-fixing bacteria as biofertilizer for non-legumes: Prospects and challenges. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 80(2), 199-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-008-1567-2
8. Charani, E., Sharifi, P., & Aminpanah, H. (2017). Evaluation of grain yield and yield components in intercropping of maize and bean. Biharean Biologist, 11(1), 37-42.
9. Charani, E., Sharifi, P., & Aminpanah, H. (2018). The competitive ability of maize (Zea mays )- common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) intercrops against weeds. Revista de la Facultad de Agronomia, 35, 40-62.
10. Chen, N., Li, X., Shi, H., Hu, Q., Zhang, Y., Hou, C., & Liu, Y. (2022). Modeling evapotranspiration and evaporation in corn/tomato intercropping ecosystem using a modified ERIN model considering plastic film mulching. Agricultural Water Management, 260, 107286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2021.107286
11. Dabbagh Mohammadi-Nassab, A., Amini, R., & Tamari, E. (2015). Evaluation of maize and three cultivars of common bean intercropping with application of biofertilizers and chemical fertilizers. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science, 25, 99-113. (In Persian with English abstract).
12. Dahmardeh, M., & Keshtegar, A. (2014). Evaluation of yield and yield components of maize (Zea mays) in intercropping with peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.). Journal of Agroecology, 6(2), 311-323. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v6i2.39371
13. Dhima, K., Lithourgidis, A., Vasilakoglou, I., & Dordas, C. (2007). Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrops in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Research, 100(2-3), 249-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.07.008
14. Farahvash, F., Rahmati, A., Jafari, F., & Amir Hallaji, H. (2012). Effect of number of planting rows in strip intercropping of maize, pintobean and soybean and their sole cropping on seed yield. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 5(20), 27-42. (In Persian with English abstract).
15. Fatemi Devin, R., Hosseini, S.B., Moghadam, H., & Motesharezadeh, B. (2020). Effect of organic and bio-fertilizers and additive and replacement intercropping systems on corn (Zea maize) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) yields. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 51(4), 133-145. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/ijfcs.2020.286433.654634
16. Fotohi-Chianeh, S., Javanshir, A., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nassab, A., Zande, E., Razavi, F., & Rezaei-Chianeh, E. (2012). Effect of various corn (Zea mays) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) intercropping densities on crop yield and weed biomass. Journal of Agroecology, 4(2), 131-143. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v4i2.14966
17. Gastélum, G., & Rocha, J. (2020). Milpas as a model for studying microbiodiversity and plant-microbe interactions. TIP Revista Especializada en Ciencias Químico-Biológicas, 23, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.22201/fesz.23958723e.2020.0.254
18. Gebyehu, S., & Simane, B. (2006). Genotype × cropping systems interaction in climbing bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) grown as sole crop and in association with maize (Zea mays L.). European Journal of Agronomy, 24, 396-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2006.01.005
19. Gómez-Godínez, L.J., Fernandez-Valverde, S.L., Martínez Romero, J.C., & Martínez-Romero, E. (2019). Metatranscriptomics and nitrogen fixation from the rhizoplane of maize plantlets inoculated with a group of PGPRs. Systematic and Applied Microbiology, 42, 517–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.syapm.2019.05.003
20. Hamzei, J., & Ghamari Rahim, N. (2014). Evaluation of corn-soybean intercropping advantages using agronomic and weed control efficiency indices. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 24(3), 61-74. (In Persian with English abstract)
21. Hassan, M., & Bin Sahid, I. (2016). Evaluation of rhizobium inoculation in combination with phosphorus and nitrogen fertilization on groundnut growth and yield. Journal of Agronomy, 15(3), 142-146. https://doi.org/3923/ja.2016.142.146
22. Jose´-Miguel, B., Mar ´a, J.P., Rosario, A., & Concepcio´n, A. (2005). Microbial co-operation in the rhizosphere. Journal of Experimental Botany, 56(417), 1761-78. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eri197
23. Khan, M., Khan, R.U., Wahab, A., & Rashid, A. (2005). Yield and yield components of wheat as influenced by intercropping of chickpea, lentil and rapeseed in different proportions. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 42, 1-3.
24. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Feizi, H., Amirmoradi, S., & Mondani, F. (2010). Effect of strip intercropping of maize (Zea mays) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) on yield and land equivalent ratio in weedy and weed free conditions. Journal of Agroecology, 2(2), 225-235. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v2i2.7627
25. Latati, M., Pansu, M., Drevon, J.J., & Ounane, S.M. (2013). Advantage of intercropping maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) on yield and nitrogen uptake in Northeast Algeria. International Journal of Research in Applied Sciences, 1, 1–7.
26. Li, B., Li, Y.Y., Wu, H.M., Zhang, F.F., Li, C.J., & Li, X.X. (2016). Root exudates drive interspecific facilitation by enhancing nodulation and N₂ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 6496–6501. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1523580113
27. McGilchrist, C.A. (1965). Analysis of competition experiments. Biometrics, 21, 975–985. https://doi.org/10.2307/2528258
28. Mommer, L., Kirkegaard, J., & van Ruijven, J. (2016). Root–root interactions: Towards a rhizosphere framework. Trends Plant Science, 21, 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2016.01.009
29. Moradi, P., Asghari, J., Mohsen Abadi, G., & Samiezadeh, H. (2016). Evaluation of the beneficial effects of triple intercropping of maize (Zea mays), pinto been (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Journal of Crop Production and Processing, 6(19), 177-189. (In Persian with English abstract). URL: http://jcpp.iut.ac.ir/article-1-2521-fa.html"
30. Nachigera, G.M., Ledent, J.F., & Draye, X. (2008). Shoot and root competition in potato/maize intercropping: Effects on growth and yield. Environmental and Experimenttal Botany, 64(2), 180-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2008.05.008
31. Nasrollahzadeh Asl, A., & Talebi, M. (2016). Evaluation of sunflower (Heliantus annus L.) and corn (Zea mays L.) intercropping based on replacement method in Khoy region. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 8(27), 204-215. (In Persian with English abstract).
32. Nyoki, D., & Ndakidemi, P.A. (2018). Root length, nodulation and biological nitrogen fixation of rhizobium inoculated soybean (Glycine max [L.] Merr.) grown under maize (Zea mays) intercropping systems and P and K fertilization. Advances in Bioresearch, 9, 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2018.1455846
33. Piroozi, B., Hosseini, S.M.B., Mazaheri, D., & Heidari, H. (2014). Evaluation of sowing time and intercropping on vegetative and reproductive traits of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and biological yield of forage maize (Zea mays) Agronomy Journal (Pajouhesh and Sazandegi), 104, 62-68. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/22092/AJ.2014.101646
34. Raei, Y., Ahmadabad, M.S., Ghassemi-Golezani, K., & Ghassemi, S. (2020). Pinto bean and black mustard responses to bio-fertilizers under intercropping system. Advances in Horticultural Science, 34(2), 175-182. https://doi.org/10.13128/ahsc-7407.
35. Rebollar, E.A., Sandoval-Castellanos, E., Roessler, K., Gaut, B.S., Alcaraz, L.D., & Benítez, M. (2017). Seasonal changes in a maize-based polyculture of central Mexico reshape the co-occurrence networks of soil bacterial communities. Frontiers in Microbiology, 8, 2478. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.02478
36. Rezaei-Chianeh, E., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nassab, A., Shakiba, M.R., Ghassemi-Golezani, K., & Aharizad, S. (2011). Intercropping of maize (Zea mays ) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) at different plant population densities. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 7, 1786-1793.
37. Rosenblueth, M., & Martínez-Romero, E. (2004). Rhizobium etli maize populations and their competitiveness for root colonization. Archives of Microbiology, 181, 337–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-004-0661-9
38. Rostami, L., Koocheki, A., & Nassiri Mahallati, M. (2011). The effect of different crop plant densities on radiation absorption and use efficiency by corn (Zea mays) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) intercropped canopy. Journal Of Agroecology, 3(3), 290-297. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v3i3.13554
39. Sarlak, Sh., & Aghaalikhani, M. (2009). Effect of pant dnsity and mxing rtio on cop yeld in sweet corn (Zea mays var Saccharata) and mngbean (Vigna radiata L.) intercropping. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 11(4), 367-380. (In Persian with English abstract). URL: http://agrobreedjournal.ir/article-1-197-en.html
40. Sharma, K., & Garg, V.K. (2018). Comparative analysis of vermicompost quality produced from rice straw and paper waste employing earthworm Eisenia fetida (Sav.). Bioresource Technology, 250, 708–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.11.101
41. Singh, R.K., Malik, N., & Singh, S. (2013). Impact of rhizobial inoculation and nitrogen utilization in plant growth promotion of maize (Zea mays). Nusantara Bioscience, 5, 8-14. https://doi.org/10.13057/nusbiosci/n050102
42. Tsubo, M., Walker, S., & Mukhala, E. (2001). Comparisons of radiation use efficiency of mono-/inter-cropping systems with different row orientations. Field Crops Research, 71, 17-29. https://doi.org/1016/S0378-4290(01)00142-3
43. Vandermeer, J. (1990). Intercropping. In Agroecology, Mc Graw – Hill publishing Co.
44. Vora, S.M., Joshi, P., Belwalkar, M., & Archana, G. (2021). Root exudates influence chemotaxis and colonization of diverse plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in the pigeon pea–maize intercropping system. Rhizosphere, 18, 100331. https://doi.org/1016/j.rhisph.2021.100331
45. Willey, R.W., & Rao, M.R. (1980). A competitive ratio for quantifying competition between intercrops. Experimental Agriculture, 16(2), 117–125.
46. Zhao, C., Fan, Z., Coulter, J.A., Yin, W., Hu, F., & Yu, A. (2020). High maize density alleviates the inhibitory effect of soil nitrogen on intercropped pea. Agronomy, 10, 248. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10020248