Effects of Deficit Irrigation and Wild Oat (Avena ludoviciana) Density on Yield and Yield Components of Wheat

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 1, Volume 17, Issue 1 - Serial Number 53, April 2019, Pages 1-14   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/gsc.v17i1.57485

Authors

A. R Barjasteh¹; A Nezami^{* 1}; H. R Khazaei¹; E Zand²

¹Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization

Abstract

Introduction: Water stress is one of the most important abiotic factors that restrict the growth and production of plants in the world, especially in arid and semi-arid regions. In Iran, a majority of wheat are located in arid and semi-arid regions. In these regions, drought stress occurs due to the lack of water which causes a considerable decrease in the yield of wheat. A suitable strategy to achieve satisfactory production in these areas is to apply deficient irrigation systems with the aim of improving water use efficiency and acceptable yield. Weed competition is another factor which decreases the wheat yield. Wild oat, due to its high compatibility and different ecological conditions, is one of the most important weed in wheat in most areas of Iran. Therefore, it is necessary to understand their behavior in the field, if we plan to apply appropriate weed management methods. Because any management change in the field may change weed behavior, and since the drip irrigation is spreading and the merits of deficit irrigation is known, it is necessary to evaluate their behavior at these conditions. Thus, the aim of this study was to study the wheat response to the interference of wild oat under deficit irrigation conditions.
Materials and Methods: An experiment as split plot in randomized complete block design was conducted to evaluate the effects of deficit irrigation in three levels (supply of 100, 80 and 60 percent of crop water requirement as main plot) and wild oat density in four levels (0, 20, 40 and 80 plant m-2) on wheat yield in Shahrood agricultural research center. Wild oat seed was collected from wheat field around Shahrood and was planted with wheat. Crop water requirements calculated by Penman-Monteith equation amended by FAO. Irrigation treatments was applied at the beginning of jointing stage and continued during the growing season. At the end of experiment, two square meters of each plot harvested to measure the grain yield and biological yield. At this time 0.25 square meters of each plot harvested and yield components were measured. Data were analyzed in SAS software (version 9.1). Slicing method was used for interaction mean comparison.
Results and Discussion: The effects of irrigation regime and wild oat density were significant on the number of spikes, the number of grains at spike, infertile tiller ratio, spike length, plant height, biological yield, grain yield, harvest index and water productivity. Decreasing the water usage to 60% of the water requirement decreased the grain yield and biological yield of wheat by 38.59 and 11.64%, respectively at the density of 80 bushes m2. Increasing the wild oat density up to 20 plants per m2 had no significant effect on the grain and biological yield of wheat, while increasing it up to 80 plants in the deficient irrigation regime with 60% of water requirement, decreased the grain and biological yield of wheat to 52.3 and 26.2%, respectively, compared with the control (100% of the water requirement) and zero density of wild oat treatment. Spike numbers per unit area showed a significant and positive correlation (r=0.97**) with yield. Moreover, the results showed that deficient irrigation regime with supplying 80% of the water requirement reduced the grain yield and water usage by 9 and 12%, respectively and it improved the water productivity by 4.6% compared with the optimum water conditions. Whereas, reducing the amount of irrigation water to 60% of the required water, decreased the water productivity by 13.6% compared with the optimum water conditions.
Conclusions: Results showed that the deficit irrigation decreases the yield and yield components. Reducing water usage to 80% of water requirement reduced the water usage to 12%, consequently, although the water productivity increased, the yield decreased by 9%. Thus, it could be a suitable approach for regions with low water reservoirs. In the other words, in low water regions, the best choice to manage optimum irrigation to achieve constant production and increasing usable water is “the lower water-the higher productivity” strategy. Increasing wild oat density up to 20 plants m-2 had no significant effect on the grain and biological yield of wheat. However, increasing wild oat density up to 80 plants m2 decreased these properties under all irrigation regimes. The insensitivity of wheat to wild oat competition in lower densities is due to the growth characteristics and competitive ability of Alvand variety.

Keywords

Height; Water Productivity; Number of spike; Drought stress; Weed

References

1. Abrahimpour Noorabady, F., Ayneband, A., Nour Mohammadi, G., Moosavinia, H. and Mesgarbashi, M. 2005. Study of some wheat ecophysiologic indices as influenced by wild oat interaction. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 73: 117-125. (in Persian).

2. Ahmadvand, G., Naseri-Mahalati, M., and Kocheki, A. R. 2006. Effect of light competition and nitrogen fertilizer on canopy structure of wheat and wild oat. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 12 (6): 100-112. (in Persian).

3. Amiri, R., Bahraminejad, S., and Jalali-Honarmand, S. 2013. Effect of terminal drought stress on grain yield and some morphological traits in 80 bread wheat genotypes. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences 5 (10): 1145-1153.

4. Anafjeh, Z., Fathi, G., Ebrahimpour, F., Zand, E., and Chaab, A. 2008. Study on Competitiveness of Wild oat (Avena fatua L.) with Wheat (Triticum aesativum L.) Chamran Cultivar. Iranian Journal of Weed Science 8: 35-46. (in Persian with English abstract).

5. Armin, M., Noormohammadi, Gh., Zand, E., Baghestani, M. A., and Darvishi, F. 2007. Competition effect of wild oat (Avena ludoviciana L.) on two wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes contrasting in their competitive ability. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 5 (1): 9-18. (in Persian with English abstract).

6. Attarian, A. M., and Rashed Mohasel, M. H. 2002. Competitive effects of wild oat (Avena ludoviciana) on yield and yield components of three winter wheat varieties. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 2 (1): 25-32. (in Persian with English abstract).

7. Bazrafshan, F., Moosavinia, H., Moezi, A., Siadat, A., and Hamidi, R. 2010. Influence of wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.) different densities on yield and yield component of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Weed Research Journal 2:15-28. (in Persian).

8. Balyan, R. S., Mlik, R. K., Panvvar, R. S., and Singh, S. 1991. Competitive ability of winter cultivars with wild oat (Avena ludoviciana). Weed Science 39: 154-158.

9. Blakshaw, R. E., Molnar, L. J., and Janzen, H. H. 2004. Nitrogen fertilizer timing and application method affect weed growth and competition with spring wheat. Weed Science 52 (4): 614-622.

10. Chauhan, B. S., and Preston, D. E. 2010. Growth and reproduction of Jungle rice (Echinochloa colona) in response to water stress. Weed Science 58 (2): 132-135.

11. Cousens, R. D., Weaver, S. E., Martin, T. D., Blair, A. M., and Wilson, J. 1991. Dynamics of competition between wild oat (Avena fatua) and winter cereals. Weed Research 37 (4): 203-210.

12. Delmer, D. P. 2005. Agriculture in the developing world: connecting innovations in plant research to downstream applications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102: 15739 -15746.

13. Das, T. K., and Yaduraju, N. T. 1999. Effect of weed competition on growth, nutrient uptake and yield of wheat as affected by irrigation and fertilizers. Journal of Agricultural Science 133 (1): 45-51.

14. Eslami, S. V., Gill, G. S., Bellotti, B., and McDonald, G. 2006. Wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum) interference in wheat. Weed Science 54 (4): 749-756.

15. Fabeiro, C., Martin de Santa Olalla, F., and De Juan, J. A. 2002. Production of muskmelon (Cucumis melo L.) under controlled deficit irrigation in a semi-arid climate. Agricultural Water Management 54 (2): 93-105.

16. Gherekhloo, J., Mazaheri, D., Ghanbari, A., and Ghannadha, M. R. 2004. Mutispecies competition effects of weeds on yield and yield components of wheat. Desert 9 (2): 197-206. (in Persian with English abstract).

17. Ghiglione, H., Gonzalez, F., Serrago, R., Maldonado, S., Chilcott, C., Cura, J., Miralles, D. J., Zhu, T., and Casal, J. 2008. Autophagy regulated by day length sets the number of fertile florets in wheat. the Plant Journal 55 (6): 1010-1024.

18. Gooding, M. J., Ellis, R. H., Shewry, P. R., and Schofield, J. D. 2003. Effects of restricted water availability and increased temperature on the grain filling, drying and quality of winter wheat. Journal of Cereal Science 37 (3): 295-309.

19. Hossein Panahi, F., Kafi, M., Parsa, M., Nasiri Mahallati, M., and Banayan, M. 2011. Evaluation of yield and yield components of resistant to drought cultivars of wheat under moisture stress, using Penman-Muntis FAO model. Journal of Environmental Stress in Crop Science 5 (1): 47-63. (in Persian).

20. Huel, D. G., and Hucl, P. 1996. Genotypic variation for competitive ability in spring wheat. Plant Breeding 115 (5): 325-329.

21. Kang, S., Zhang, L., Ling, Y., Hu, X., Cai, H., and Gu, B. 2002. Effects of limited irrigation on yield and water use efficiency of winter wheat in the Loess Plateau of China. Agricultural Water Management 55 (3): 203-216.

22. Leilah, A. A., and Al-Khateeb, S. 2005. Statistical analysis of wheat yield under drought conditions. Journal of Arid Environments 61 (3): 483-496.

23. Mirzakhani, M., Hemmati, Z., and Sajedi, N. A. 2015. Response of wheat physiological and agronomic traits to water Stress and zeolite Application. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 13 (1):173-183. (in Persian with English abstract).

24. Mohammadi, S. 2014. Evolution of grain yield and its components relationships in bread wheat genotypes under full irrigation and terminal water stress condition using multivariate statistical analysis. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 12 (1): 99-109. (in Persian).

25. Montazeri, M. E., Zand, E., and Baghestani. M. A. 2005. Weeds and their control in wheat fields in Iran. Advances in Agronomy 58: 57-93.

26. Montazeri, M. 2007. Influence of winter wild oat (Avena ludoviciana), annual canary grass (Phalaris minor) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis) at different density on yield and yield component of wheat. Pajouhesh and Sazandegi 74: 72-78. (in Persian).

27. Paknejad, F., Majidi, E., Noormohammadi, G., Seadat, A., and Vazan, S. 2007. Evaluation of drought stress on effective traits at accumulative assimilate of grain in different cultivars of wheat. Journal of Agricultural Sciences 13 (1): 137- 149. (in Persian).

28. Pester, T. A., Westra, P., Anderson, R. L., Lyon, D. L., Miller, S. D., Stahlman, P. W., Northam, F. E., and Wicks, G. A. 2000. Secale cereale interference and economic thresholds in winter Triticum aestivum. Weed Science 48 (6): 720-727.

29. Rajala, A., Hakala, K., Makela, P., Muurinen, S., and Peltonen-Sainio, P. 2009. Spring wheat response to timing of water deficit through sink and grain filling capacity. Field Crop Research 114 (2): 263-271.

30. Reddy, A. R., Chaitanya, K. V., and Vivekanandan, M. 2004. Drought induced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants. Journal of Plant Physiology 161 (11):1189-1202.

31. Rezvani1, H., Asghari, J., Ehteshami, S. M. R., and Kamkar, B. 2013. Study the response of yield and component yield of wheat cultivars in competition with wild mustard in Gorgan Electronic Journal of Crop Production 6 (4): 187-214. (in Persian with English abstract).

32. Ruf-Pachta, E. K., Rule, D. M., and Dille, J. A. 2013. Corn and palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) interactions with nitrogen in dryland and irrigated environments. Weed Science 61 (2): 249-258.

33. Saadatian, B., Ahmadvand, G., and Soleymani, F. 2012. Study of canopy structure and growth characters role of two wheat cultivars in competition, on economic threshold and yield of rye and wild mustard. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 9 (3): 494-504. (in Persian).

34. Salimi, H. 1996. Biology review competition and damage rate of wild oat densities in Irrigated wheat. Twelfth congress of Iranian Plant Protection. Karaj, Iran.

35. Siani, H. S. and Aspinall, D. 1981. Effects of water deficit on sporogensis in wheat. Annuals of Botany 48 (5): 623-633.

36. Wang, H., Zhang, L., Dawes, W. R., and Liu, C. 2001. Improving water use efficiency of irrigated crops in North China plain measurements and modeling. Agricultural Water Management 48 (2): 151-167.

37. Wang, W., Vinocur, B., and Altman, A. 2003. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures: towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta 218 (1):1-14.

38. Westgate, M. E., Passioura, J. B., and Munns, R. 1996. Water status and ABA content of floral organs in drought-stressed wheat. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 23 (6): 763-772.

39. Zamani, G. R., Rahimian, H., Kafi, M., and Bagheri, A. R. 2005. Effects of salinity and wild oat (Avena ludoviciana) densities on yield and yield components of wheat (Triticumm aestivum L.). Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources 11 (4): 35-45. (in Persian with English abstract).

40. Zand, E., Koochaki, A., Rahimiyan mashhadi, H., Deyhim fard, R., Soofi zade, S., and Nassiri mahalati, M. 2005. Studies on some ecophysiological traits associated with competitiveness of old and new Iranian bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars against wild oat (Avena ludoviciana L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 2 (2): 160-174. (in Persian with English abstract).

41. Zhang, B. C., Li, F. M., Huang, G. B., Gan, Y., Liu, P. H., and Heng, Z. Y. C. 2005. Effects of regulated deficit irrigation on grain yield and water use efficiency of spring wheat in an arid environment. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 85 (4): 829-837.