The Effects of Different Types of Mulch on Water use Efficiency of SC 704 Corn Growth Indexes

آب و خاک

Article 4, Volume 31, Issue 3 - Serial Number 53, July 2018, Pages 727-737   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v31i3.57266

Authors

shekoofe najafabadi¹; mohammad reza Nori Emamzadeie^{* 2}; Mehdi Ghobadinia¹; Abdolrazagh Danesh shahraki¹

¹Shahrekord University

²shahrekord

Abstract

Introduction: Water scarcity is the most important limiting factor in the production of crops in arid and semi-arid regions. Thus, actions for increasing the efficiency and productivity of farm water is inevitable. A large proportion of the water, used in irrigation, evaporates, so an effective solution for conserving water is to control the evaporation on arable lands. Nowadays using mulch or plastic mulch is common and it makes efficient use of water in furrow irrigation possible by conserving and storing soil moisture. Mulch does not let dry air contact topsoil and it also prevents topsoil from solar irradiance and reduces evaporation and maintain soil moisture. Recent research in order to economize on water use and irrigation efficiency and water use efficiency has led. Thus, regarding the problem of water scarcity, the objective of this research is to investigate the effects of evaporation suppressing monolayers on the efficiency of water consumption and growth indices of seed corn single cross SC 704 in an arid and semi-arid region.
Materials and Methods: This research was conducted in Shahrekord University during 2015. The experimental design was randomized complete block design with 6 treatments and 3 replications. The treatments include control treatment (uncovering) and transparent plastic wrap, black plastic, cotton gunny and white and blue pp woven fabric. Planting and growing operations were conducted due to agronomic principles. Changes in soil moisture within the root-zone during the season were measured by using thetaprobe and all operations by measuring the amount of irrigation water used in all experimental plots of each treatment were applied separately using flow measurement and the amount and time of each irrigation was determined and applied based on MAD=50 by supplying required water.
Results and Discussion: The measurement results showed that variance analysis of relative water content (RWC) and water efficiency under the impact of different coverings had a significance difference with p-value of 0.01. Also the amount of the dry matter and harvest index of corn showed significance with p-value of 0.05. Results showed that mulch at all stages of measuring the impact of increasing the leaf relative water content it could originate from growing trend of air temperature during the period. Under these treatments the plants are expected to experience more desirable conditions regarding maintaining and distributing of soil moisture in comparison with other treatments and the indicator. The highest amount of dry matter calculated is for the blue pp woven fabric treatment that shows the ideal growth conditions and appropriate performance of the plant under the impact of this covering and the lowest amount is for the cotton gunny treatment. Leaf area index (LAI) is one of the important growth indices. In flowering (anthesis) stage, the maximum amount of LAI is 5.08 for the blue pp woven fabric treatment. The minimum amount of LAI is 2.5 for the cotton gunny treatment and it is because of There macroporous coating that weed growth has been hindering plant growth. On the basis of the hundred seed weight, the heaviest weight is 18.18 for the white plastic treatment and the lowest weight is 13.46 for the indicator treatment. The highest amount of harvesting index (HI) is 53.97 for the transparent plastic treatment and the lowest amount is 41.12 for the black plastic treatment.The corresponding amount is an increase of 32 percent compared to control treatment. The reason of reduction of HI is the reduction of seed performance than biological performance in water scarcity. One of the indices for evaluating irrigation management is water efficiency. The highest amount of water efficiency is 2.6 and 2.7 kg/m3for the blue pp woven fabric and white pp woven fabric covering and it reduces water wastage in form of evaporation and causes water conservation. And it protects the top soil from solar irradiance.
Conclusion: This research was conducted at Shahrekord University to investigate the effects of various coverings on water efficiency and corn seed performance. Using covering causes temperature growth in the soil under the covering and it also causes further and fast plant growth. It reduces evaporation from topsoil. As a result, it causes soil moisture to be invariable and because of lack of light under the coverings, photosynthesis is impossible, thus, weeds could not grow. Blue pp woven fabric of mulch to mulch increased 42% dry matter was cotton sack. Mulches effect of the corn harvest index showed a clear plastic mulch to increase 32 percent harvest index compared to the control. Mulches blue pp woven fabric, white pp woven fabric, cotton gunny, black plastic and transparent plastic, respectively, increases of 92, 85, 28, 14 and 78 percent of water use efficiency were compared to control.Therefore, plants under the impact of blue pp woven fabric and white pp woven fabric coverings access more water and nutrients than the indicator treatment, so water efficiency increases. Using coverings has conserved moisture more in the top layers of soil by reducing evaporation form topsoil.

Keywords

Relative water content; Surface coating; Leaf Area Index; Water use efficiency; Reduce evaporation

References

1-Alavifazel M. 2010.The effect of Non-irrigation in some development stages on yield-related Agro physiological properties of maize (SC- 704hybrid) under several planting density and croppingpatternin Ahwaz weather conditions. Crop Physiology PhD thesis.Islamic Azad University.Science and Research Branch of Khuzestan.Iran. (Inpersian with English abstract).

2-Burt C.M., Mutziger A., Howes D.J., and Solomon K.H. 2002.The effect of stubble and mulch on soil evaporation. Irrigation training and research center BioResource and Agricultural engineering Dept. California polytechnic state university san Luis obis., 93407-805-756-2433.

3- Cakir R. 2004.Effect of water stress at different development stage on vegetative and reproductive growth of corn.Field Crop Research, 86: 95-113.

4-Esitken A., Yildiz H.E., Ercisli S., FigenDonmez M.,Turan M., and Gunes A. 2010. Effects of plant growth promoting bacteria (PGPB) on yield; growth and nutrient contents of organically grown strawberry.ScientiaHorticulturae, 124: 62-66.

5-Farahdeher f., Daneshyan J., and Amiri A. 2011.Irrigashon management and compostiong effect of Azolla on rice grain yield and it components. Journal of crop production Research, 3: 153-165.

6- Gardner B. R., Blad B.L.,Garrity D.P., and Watts D.G. 1981. Relationships between crop temperature, grainyield, evapotranspiration and phonological development in two hybrids of moisture stressed sorghum. Irrigation Science, 2: 213-224.

7-Heydary N., and Ahmadi M. 2001.Use of plastic cover in farmingvegetable in order to savingwater.Direct of vegetableoffice, Ministry ofAgriculture. (in Persian)

8-Howell T. A.,Musick J. T., and Tolk J. A. 1984. Canopy of irrigated winter wheat Transactions of the ASAE,29 : 1692-1706.

9-Ibavva-Jimenez L., and Quezada-Martin M.R. 1992.Response of mulching in the development and yield of tomato cultivation in the greenhousetunnel and open air.XIIcongressof international deplastic in agriculture.

10-Jalota, S. K. 1993. Evaporation Through soil mulch in relation to characteristics and evaporativity.Australian Journal Soil Research, 31(2): 131-136.

11- Ji S., Unger P.W., and Ji S.N. 2001. Soil water accumulation under different precipitation potential evaporation; and straw mulch conditions. Soil Science Society of America, 65: 442-448.

12- Kamkar-Haghighi A. 2002. The study on increasing approachofwater use efficiency in agriculture.P. 33. Iran. Proceedings of the workshop of practical approach subjected to irrigation management in drought conditions.Iranian National Committee on Irrigation and Drainage.(in Persian)

13- KHazaiy H., Mohamadabadi A., and Borzoyi A. 2005.Study ofthemorphological and physiological properties of millets under severalirrigationstrategies. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 3(1): 35-44. (in Persian with English abstract.)

14-Lafitte R. 2002.Relationship between leaf relative water content during reproductive stage water deficit and grain formation in rice.Field Crops Research, 76: 165-174.

15- Machado S. 2007. Allelopathic potential of various plant specie on downy brome: Implications for weed control in wheat production. Agronomy Journal, 99: 127-132.

16- Maged A.E. 2006.Effect of mulch types on soil environmental conditions and their effect on the growth and yield of cucumber plants.Applied Sciences Research, 2: 67-73.

17-Majd M. 2006.The effects of drought stress and nitrogen use management on Agro physiological properties and yield of corn(SC- 704hybrid) under Khuzestan weather conditionsCrop.Physiology PhD thesis.Islamic Azad University.Science and Research Branch of Khuzestan. Iran. (Inpersian with English abstract)

18-Mansouri Far C., ModarresS. A. M.,andSaberali S. F. 2010. Maize yield response to deficit irrigation during low-sensitive growth stages and nitrogen rate under semi-arid climatic conditions. Agricultural Water Management, 97: 12–22.

19- Mirzayi L., and Yadolahi A. 2013. Water crisis management by reducing used water portion in agriculture. P. 1-13. Tehran. The first international conference.Inpersian with English abstract. Iran. (In Persian)

20- OsborneS. L., Scheppers J. S., Francis D.D., and Schlemmer M.R. 2002. Use of spectral adiationseason biomass and grain yield in nitrogen and water–stressed corn.CropSciences, 42:165-171.

21- Richards R.A., Rebetzke G.J., Condon A.G., and Herwaarden A.F. 2002. Breeding opportunities for increasing the efficiency of water use and crop yield in temperate cereals. Crop Sciences, 42: 111–121.

22-Salehi M.H., EsfandiarBorojeni A., Mohajer R., and BagheriBadaghabadi. 2011. Additional Soil and Water Conservation. Payam Noor University Publishers. (in persian).

23-Sanchez-Rodrıguez E.M., Rubio-Wilhelmi L. M., Cervilla B., Blasco J. J., Rios M. A., Rosales L., and Ruiz Romero J. M. 2010. Genotypic differences in some physiological parameters symptomatic for oxidative stress under moderate drought in tomato plants. Plant Science, 178: 30–40.

24-Setter T. L. 1990. Transport harvest index: photosynthetic partitioning in stressed plants, 17-36.

25-Siddique M. R. B., Hamid A., and Islam M. S.1999.Drought stress effects on photosynthetic rate and leaf gas exchange of wheat. Botany Bulletin AcademicSciences, 40: 141-145.

26- YuanC. P., Lei T. W., Mao L. L., Liu. H., and Wu Y. 2009. Soil surface evaporation processes under mulches of different sized gravel. Catena, 78:117-121.