Effect of seeding rates and weed management on growth, yield and yield components of Mungbean (Vigna radiate L.)

پژوهش‌های حبوبات ایران

Article 11, Volume 9, Issue 1, June 2019, Pages 152-164   

Document Type: Original Articles

DOI: 10.22067/ijpr.v9i1.58059

Authors

Abdolreza Ahmadi^{* 1}; Omid Ali Akbarpour²; Mojgan Beiranvandi²

¹Department of Plant Protection, Lorestan University of Khorramabad, Iran

²Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Agriculutural College, Lorestan University of Khorramabad, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Mungbean [Vigna radiata (L.)Wilczek] is the most important source of protein in south and southeast Asia. This plant, have the most important sources of protein in arid and semiarid regions and played a major role in the economy of the regions. Seed mung bean has 51% carbohydrate, 26% protein, 10% moisture, 4% mineral and 3% vitamin. This crop can be successfully grown on marginal lands where other crops perform poorly. Legumes, have mainly poor competition against weeds. Yield decrease in crops due to the presence of weed, depending on the area and specific weed species its area. Raman & Krishnamoorthy (2005) reported that mungbean yield decreased in infested treatment to weeds to 35 percent. Optimum plant population density is an important factor to realize the potential yields as it directly affects plant growth and development. The sowing rate of 20 kg h^-1 usually recommended for small to medium seed varieties might be too low to obtain optimal yield. Barary et al. (2002) observed the effect of row and plant spacing on seed yield but it was not significant. Among the yield components, number of pods plant^-1 and number of grains pod^-1 and 1000 seed weight decreased with increasing seed rate. Determining the optimum plant density is very important to obtain maximum quantity and quality of economic yield. Reports show that the suitable density range of mung bean depends on the distance between plants. This study was conducted to investigate the effect of density on the morpho-physiologic traits and seed yield of the mung bean and to determine the optimum planting density on weed management in the Khorramabad.
 
Materials & Methods 
Field experiments were conducted at Lorestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, Khorramabad, Iran (48.36° E, 33.48° N, altitude), 1,125 m above the sea level with annual average precipitation and temperature of 471.5 mm and 17.7 C˚, respectively. The fields were in fallow in the preceding year of the experiments. The soil at the test sites were a clay-silt with a pH of 7.7 and organic matter of 1.0% in 2014. Prato cultivar has a 1000-seed weight of approximately 25 g. Layout system was randomized complete block design (RCBD) with factorial arrangements, with 8 treatments in 3 replications. Weed factor with two levels (controlled and uncontrolled) and seed rate per unit area (25, 50, 75 and 100 kg. h^-1) equivalent (6, 12, 18 and 24 plant m^-2) was calculated for each plot. In this experiment, after sowing mapping, evaluated treatments were randomly assigned to experimental plots and any density considered on the 6 lines with 6 meters length, rows spacing of 60 cm and 5 cm sowing depth. Seeds planting was done by hand in June 12, 2014. Irrigation was done immediately after planting. Due to climatic conditions, farm irrigation was carried out flooding until the end of the growing season (every 10 days). In the plots of interference treatment no operations performed against the weed control. Assessing the density and weeds biomass were randomly at flowering time of crop with samples of the two frame 0.5× 0.5m per plot. Density and dry matter of weeds were counted and measured. At the end of the growing season after physiological maturity with marginal effects deletion (half a meter from the beginning and end of each row) area of 6 m^-2 from 4 central rows of each plot was measured to estimate biomass, yield and seed yield by 14% seed moisture. Determining of morphological traits and yield components was selected 10 plants from each plot at final harvest. The traits measured, including biological and seed yield, plant density, pod number per plant, seed number per plant and seed weight per plant. Analysis was done by analysis variance and by using SAS 9.1. For comparing regression coefficient and latitude of origin two treatments consisting weed free and weed infested in level of seed amount was used.
 
Results & Discussion
The experimental maximum yield (2011 kg. h^-1) was achieved for weed control treatment with crop density of 25 kg. h^-1, while, the lowest yield (672.7 kg. h^-1) was related to weedy plots with crop density of 100 kg. h^-1. The study revealed that crop density of 25 kg. h^-1 mung bean (Vigna radiate) (equivalent to 60 plant. m^-2) is optimum to obtain maximum mung‌ bean yield. Results also indicated mung‌ bean yield increased by 82.7 by weed control, the importance of weed interference in reducing mung‌ bean yield and necessity of weed control to achieve higher yields. Among the yield components, number of pods plant^-1 and number of grains pod^-1 and 1000 seed weight decreased with increasing seeding rate. It seems that seeding rate of 25 kg.h^-1 reduced mung bean density in area unit, and increased weed growth probably due to abundance of resources. However, seed rate of 100 kg. h^-1, the
 
Conclusion
Generally, the results of this research showed that selecting mung bean varieties with runner type and optimum density performance used against weeds can increase competitive pressure. Weeds management by weeding out, not only makes more seed yield but also prevented environmental damage and will help environmental sustainability.

Keywords

Competition; Khoramabad; Plant density; Weed infested; Weeding

References

1. Ahmadi, A. RashedMohasel, M.H., Khazaei, H.R., Ghanbari, A., Ghorbani, R., and Mousavi, S.K. 2013. Weed floristic composition in lentil (Lens culinaris) farms in Khorramabad. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 11)1): 45-53. (In Persian with English Summary).
2. Board, J.E., and Harville, B.G. 1996. Branch dry weight in relation to ield increases in narrow-row soybean. Journal of Agronomy 82(3): 540-544.
3. De Costa, W.A.T.M., Shanmugathsan, K.N., and Joseph,D.M. 1999. Physiology of yield determination of mung bean (Vigna radiata (L.)Wilczek) under various irrigation regimes in the dry and intermediate zones of Srilanka. Field Crops Research 61(1): 1-12.
4. Erman, M.,,Tepe, I., Bükün, B., Yergin, R., and Kesen, M. 2008. Critical period of weed control in winter lentil under non-irrigated conditions in Turkey. African Journal of Agricultural Research 3(8): 523-530.
5. Ezueh, M.I. 1982. Effects of planting dates on pest infestation, yield and harvest quality of cowpea (Vigna unguliculata) . Experimental Agricultura1 8(3): 311-318.
6. Fathi, G. 2005. Effects of planting density on growth, yield components and seed yield of mangbean cultivars in spring planting. National Conference on Legumes, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. (Abstract).
7. George, D.L., and Barnes, M. 1997. Row spacing effects on two cultivars of mung bean (Vigna radiata) at gatton. Proceedings of the 9^th Australian Agronomy Conference, 20-23 July 1998, Charles Sturt University, WaggaWagga, NSW. (Abstract).
8. Ghanbari,A., and Taheri-Mazandarani, M. 2003. Effects of sowing date and plant density on yield of spotted bean. Seed and Plant Journal 19(4): 384-496. (In Persian with English Summary).
9. Golchin, A., Mousavi, S.F. GhasemiGolezani, K., and Saba, J. 2008. Relationship between plant density and grain yield of three pinto bean cultivars at different sowing dates. Journal of Agricultural Science 18(1): 101-117. (In Persian with English Summary).
10. Graham, D.L. Steiner, J.L., and Wicse, A.F. 1988. Light absorption and competition in mix sorghum-pig weed communities. Agronomy Journal 80(3):415-418.
11. Habibzadeh, Y. Mameghani, R., and Kasani, A. 2008. Effect of plant density on yield, yield component and protein in 3 mungbean (Vigna radiata) genotypes in Ahwaz area. Journalof Agricultural Science 30: 1-13. (In Persian).
12. Habibzadeh, Y., Mameghani, R., Kasani, A., and Mesgharbashi, M. 2006. Effect of density on yield and some vegetative and reproductive chcacters of 3 mung bean genotypes in Ahwaz area. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science 37: 227-335. (In Persian).
13. Hall, J.C., Vaneerd, L.L., Miller, S.D., Owen, M.D.K., Prather, T.S., Shaner, D.L., Singh, M., Vaughn, K.C., and Weller, S.C. 2000. Future research direction for weed science. Weed Technology 8(2): 410-412.
14. Haqqani, A.M., and Pandey, R.K. 1994. Response mung bean to water stress and irrigation at various growth stage and plant densities, yield and yield component. Tropical Agriculture 71(4): 289-294. (in Persian).
15. Harries, M., and White, P. 2007. Integrated weed management in Western Australia^,s fight against herbicide resistant weed. 6^th European Conference on Grain L Lisbon Congress Center, Portugal. (Abstract).
16. Kumar, A., and Sharma, B.B. 1989. Effect of row spacing and seed rate on root growth nodulation and yield of blackgram. Indian Journal of Agronomy 56: 728-729.
17. Legere, A., and Schreiber, M. 1989. Competition and canopy architecture as affected by soybean (Glycine max) row width and density of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Science 37: 84- 92.
18. Lopez Bellido, F.J., Lopez Belido, L., and Lopez Belido, R.J. 2005. Competition, growth and yield of faba bean (Vicia faba). European Journal of Agronomy 23(4): 359-378.
19. Majnoun-Hoseini, N. 2008. Grain Legume Production. Tehran Jahad-Daneshgahi P 283 pp. (In Persian).
20. MalekMaleki, F.N., Majnonhoseini, N., and Alizade, H. 2013. A survey on the effects of weed control treatments and plant density on lentil growth and yield.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 6(2): 135-148. (In Persian).
21. Maron, J.L. 1997. Interspecific competition and insect herbivory reduce bush lapine (Lapinus arboreus) seedling survival. Oecologia 110: 284-290.
22. Mimbar, J.C. 1993. Influence of plant density and plant number per hill on growth and yield of mung bean, Walet. Agrivita 16: 78-82.
23. Minbashi Moeini, M., Baghestani, M.A., and Rahimian, H. 2008. Introducing abundance index for assessing weed flora in survey studies. Weed Biology & Manage 8: 172- (In Persian).
24. Mousavi, S.K., Ahmadi, A., and Ghorbani, 2010. Evaluation the effects of sowing date and plant population on morphological characteristics and yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and its weed population under dry land condition of Lorestan province. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research7(1): 241-255. (In Persian).
25. Prakit, S., Prathet, P., Kongjaimun, A., and Srinives, P. Dissecting quantitative trait loci for agronomic traits responding to iron deficiency in mungebean [Vigna radiata (L.)Wilczek]. Agrivita 36(2): 64-71.
26. Raman, R., and Krishnamoorthy, R. 2005. Nodulation and yield of mung bean (Vigna radiate) influenced by integrated weed management practices. Legume Research 28(2): 128-130.
27. Rezai, A., and Hasanzahed, A. 1995. Effects of planting date and density on yield, yield components and vertical distribution of 3 mungbean cultivars. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science 26: 19-30. (In Persian).
28. Sandha, T., Bhllav, H., Chema, S., and Gill, A. 1997. Variability and interrelationship among grain protein yield and yield components in mungbeen. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research 30: 871-882.
29. Sehrawat, N., Jaiwal, P.K., Yadav, M., Bhat, K.V., and Sairam, R.K. 2013. Salinity stress restraining mungbean (Vigna radiate (L.) Wilczek) production: gateway for genetic improvement. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Science 6(2): 505-509.
30. Shukla, K.N., and Dixit, R.S. 2000. Nutient and plant population management in summer green gram. Indian Journal of Agronomy 41: 78-83.
31. Singh, K.N., Bulis, A.S., Shah, M.H., and Khanday, B.A. 1991. Effect of spacing and seed rate on yield of green gram (Vigna radiate ) in Khashmirvally. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 61: 326-327.
32. Teasdal, J.R., and Frank, R. 1983. Effect of row spacing on weed competition with Snap beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Weed Science 31:81-85.
33. Tesfaye, K., Walker, S., and Tsubo, M. Radiation interception and radiation use efficiency of three grain legumes under deficit conditions in semi-arid conditions. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 60-70.
34. Tofighiyan, M., Noroozi, H., and NakhriziMoghaddam, A. 2013. The Effect of microelements nutrition and plant density on mung bean var (Vigna radiata L.) yield and yield component. Journal of Field Crops Research 11: 60-71. (In Persian).
35. Van Acker, R.C. Weise, S.F., and Swanton, C.J. 1993. Influence of interference from a mixed weed species stand on soybean (Glycine max) growth. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 73(4): 1293-1304.
36. Wanchi, C., Kaewpichit, S., and Chareonpanit, S. 1993. Effect of plant density on yield and seed quality of mungbean. Kasetsart University Research and Development Institute. Bankok, Thailand pp: 46-53.
37. Woolley, B.L., Swanton, C.J., Hall, M.R., and Michaels, T.E. 1993. The critical period of weed control in white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris ). Weed Science 41: 180-184.
38. Young, F.L., Matthewes, J., Sauerborn, J., Pierterse, A.H., and Kantar, M. 2000. Integrated weed management for food legumes and lupine. In: Linking Research and Marketing Opportunities for Pulses in the 21^st Century. pp: 481-490.