Effect of Planting Pattern and Density on Control of Weeds and Yield of Red Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Varieties in the Presence of Bentazon Herbicide

پژوهش های حفاظت گیاهان ایران

Article 11, Volume 34, Issue 2 - Serial Number 48, June 2020, Pages 273-285   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jpp.vi0.84843

Authors

P. Yadegar¹; R. Ghorbani^{* 1}; A. Ghanbari¹; Hamid Rahimiyan mashhadi²

¹Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²-

Abstract

 
Introduction: Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) is so sensitive to intercompetition especially with weed species. Weed management is an essential factor for the success of an agricultural production system. The use of high competitiveness figures is one of these approaches. Another way to manage properly is just to reduce herbicide dose using through the mixed herbicides in crops. By intercropping, filling the empty space prevents weed development in the area. Mixing or simultaneous cultivation of two or more species in one plot of land is one of the oldest agricultural systems in the world. Planting density is another important factor in determining plant yield. Planting density not only determines competition for light and nutrients, but also controls the distribution and allocation of dry matter between plant organs. The studies showed that by increasing bean planting density from 20 to 30 and 40 plants m2, yield increased by 15.4% and 24.7%, respectively, and the weed biomass also increased by a density of 20 to 40 by 30 percent. The use of high competitive cultivars and increasing planting density are the main strategies to increase the competitive ability of beans against weeds. This study was carried out to investigate the methods of pure and mixed cultivation of bean cultivars with different densities for their effect on reduction of bentazone herbicide dose, weed control and crop yield.
Materials and Methods: In order to investigate the effect of planting density and reducing herbicide doses on weeds biomass and crop yield in pure and mixed cultivation of red bean cultivars, a field experiment was carried out at Agronomy Research Field of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad during 2013 - 2014. A factorial experiment (with three factors) was conducted in a completely randomized block design with 4 replications. Experimental treatments including bean planting densities in three levels consisting of optimum density (Goli 40 and Akhtar 50 /m2), 20 and 40 % higher than the optimum density of both Akhtar and Goli cultivars, and Bentazone herbicide concentrations (0, 50 and 100 %) based on the recommended dose (2.5 liters per hectare), and separate and mixed cultivation of Akhtar (standing) and Goli (ascending) cultivars were performed in rows (1:1). Weed biomass was evaluated every two weeks after spraying by 100*25 cm2 cadaver from two middle rows. At the end of the growing season, a 1*1 m2 staff was used to determine the performance. Data were analyzed by SAS 9.1 software and averages were compared with the LSD test at 5% probability level and the graphs were analyzed using SigmaPlot 12.0 software.
Results and Discussion: The results showed that for the weed biomass, the mixed cultivation of Akhtar and Goli cultivars was more than pure cultivation due to its success in suppressing high competitive weeds through rapid space cover, which can be attributed to this feature. It was used to reduce the herbicide dose. Also, the highest and lowest grain yield (respectively 463 and 132 g/m2) were found for the pure cultivation of Akhtar cultivar at concentration of 100 and 0 % herbicide, respectively. However, in flowering and mixed cultivars, the highest grain yield was observed at 372.2 and 341.3 g/m2, at 50% herbicide concentration, which was also observed in biological yield. Results of interaction effect showed that the highest biological yield in intercropping (1166 g/m2) was observed for 50% herbicide concentration and 40% planting density. It can be, therefore, concluded that reduced doses of herbicides can only be used if the crop has high competitive ability and planting density is increased, which can reduce the competitive ability of weeds. The use of high competitive crops and increased density of crops have the greatest potential in suppressing weeds and reducing herbicide dosage. The previous studies also showed that limiting bean growth leads to a decrease in leaf area index and bean growth rate, which in turn reduces its competitiveness against weeds.
Conclusion: The use of high-strength cultivars in mixed cultivation due to their overlap, space conquest, and ability to compete with weeds along with increased plant density has a high potential for weed suppression and can be used in other ways to reduce herbicide dose. The results of this experiment showed that there was no significant difference between biological yield at 50% and 100% herbicide concentrations in the mixed cultivation and the highest biological yield was observed in the mixed cultivation.

Keywords

herbicide reduced dose; Intercropping; Planting density; Integrated Weed Management

References

1- Amini R.A., and Fateh E. 2011. Effect of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) on growth indices and yield of red Kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars. Journal of Agricultural and Sustainable 20(2): 4.

2- Anis R., Wells R., and Thomas G. 2001. Reproductive allocation of virginia-type peanut cultivars bred for yieldin North Carolina. Crop Science 41: 72-77.

3- Awal M.A., Koshi H., and Iked T. 2006. Radiation interception and use by maize / peanut intercrop canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 139: 74- 83.

4- Azim Khan M., and Marwat K.B. 2006. Impact of crop and weed densities on competition between wheat and Silybum marianum gaertn. Pakistan Journal Biological Science 38(4): 1205- 1215.

5- Bagheri A., Rahimian H., and Oveisi M. 2018. Interaction of Imazethaper herbicide dose and bean cultivars (Phaseolus vulgaris) on weed control. Journal of Plant Protection 32(1): 1-9. (In Persian with English abstract).

6- Bastiaans L., Kropff M.J., Goudriaan J., and Van Laar H.H. 2000. Design of weed management systems with a reduced reliance on herbicides poses new challenges and prerequisites for modeling crop±weed interactions. Field Crop Research 67: 161-179.

7- Boroomandan P., Khoramivafa M., Hafhi Y., and Ebrahimi A. 2009. The effect of Nitrogen starter fertilizer and plant density on yield, yield components and oil and protein content of Soybean (Glycine max L.). Pakistan Journal of Biological Science 12(4): 378-382.

8- Coble H.D., and Mortensen D.A. 1992. The threshold concept and application to weed science. Weed- Technology-J-Weed-Science-Soc-Am 6(1): 191-195.

9- Conley P.S., Binning L.K., Boerboom C.M., and Stoltenberg D.E. 2002. Estimating giant foxtail cohort productivity in soybean based on weed density, leaf area, or volume. Weed Science 50: 72-78.

10- Dabaghzadeh M., Fathi Gh., Bakhshandeh A., and Almi-Said Kh. 2016. Effect of weed interference times on Faba Bean (Vicia faba L.) growth indices in different plant. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 14(2): 215-225. (In Persian with English abstract).

11- Fageria N.K., Baligar V.C., and Zobel R.W. 2007. Yield,nutrient uptake, and soil chemical properties as influenced by liming and boron application in common bean in a No-Tillage system. Communications in soil science and plant analysis 38:1637-1653.

12- FAO. 2010. Food and agriculture organization of the united nation quaterlybulletion of statistucs. rome, italy: FAO.

13- Farbodnia A., Baghestani M. A., Zand E., and NurMohammadi A.H. 2009. Evaluation of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Cultivars against Flixweed (Descurainia sophia). Plant Protect 23:74-81. (In Persian with English abstract)

14- Gathu W.E., and Njage P.M.K. 2012. Physical characterization of new advanced drought tolerant common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) lines for canning quality. American Journal of Food Technology, Nairob 7(2): 22-28.

15- Hamzei J., and Seyedi M. 2015. Evaluation of Barley (Hordeum vulgare) and Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) intercropping systems using advantageous indices of intercropping under weed interference condition.jdas 5(9):1-12.

16- Harker K.N., Clayton G.W., Blackshaw R. E., O Donovan J.T., and Stevenson F. C. 2004. Seeding rate, herbicide timing and competitive hybrids contribute to integrated weed management in canola (Brassica napus). Canadian Journal of Plant Science 83(2): 433-440.

17- Hauggaard-Nielsen H., Andersen M.K., Jornsgaard B., and Jensen E.S. 2006. Density and relative frequency effects on competitive interactions and resource use in pea–barley intercrops. Field Crops Research 95: 256-267.

18- Hibberd J.M., Sheehy J.E., and Langdale A. 2008. Using C4 photosynthesis to increase the yield of rice-rationale and feasibility. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 11: 228-231.

19- Kavurmaci Z., Karadavut U., kokten K., and Bakoglu A. 2010. Determination critical period of weed-crop competition in Faba bean (Vicia faba L.). International Journal of Agriculture & Biology 12(2): 318-320.

20- Lack M.R., Dori H.R., Ramezani M.K., and Hadizadeh M.H. 2006. Determine the critical period of weed control bean. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources 3.

21- Parvizi S., Amirnia R., Bernosy I., Paseban Islam B., Hasanzadeh Ghorttapeh A., and Raeii Y. 2011. Evaluation of different plant densities effects on rate and process of grain filling, yield and yield components in varieties of dry bean. Journal of Plant Production 18(1): 69-87. (In Persian with English abstract).

22- Poggio S.L. 2005. Structure of weed communities occurring in monoculture and intercropping of field pea and barley. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 109: 48-58.

23- Rastegar A. 2005. Weed and their control methods. Tehran University Press. 413 pp.

24- Rosales-Robles E., Sanchez-de-la-Cruz R., Salinas-Garcia J., and Pecina- Quintero V. 2005. Broadleaf weed management in grain Sorghum with reduced rates of postemergence herbicides. Weed Technology 19(2):358-390.

25- Rowe E.C., Noordwijk M.V., Suprayogo D., and Cadisch G. 2005. Nitrogen use efficiency of monoculture and hedgerow intercropping in the humid tropics. Plant and Soil 268: 61–74.

26- Wang Y., Yang W.Y., Zhang X., Yong T.W., Liu W.G. Ben-Ying SU. 2006. Effects of shading at different growth stages on different traits and yield of Soybean. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2013; 39: 1871. [Google Scholar]

27- Zand E., Bena Kashani F., Alizadeh H. M., Soufizadeh S., Ramezani K., Maknali A., and Fereidounpoor M. 2006. Resistance to Aryloxyphenoxypropionate herbicides in wild oat (Avena ludoviciana). Iranian Journal of Weed Science 2: 17-31.