Evaluation of Yield, Yield Components, and Forage Quality in the Intercropping of Kochia (Kochia scoparia L.) and Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata)

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 7, Volume 22, Issue 2 - Serial Number 74, July 2024, Pages 227-242   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jcesc.2024.86148.1292

Authors

E Mishmast; M Dahmardeh^* ; M Galavi; I Khamari

Department of Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Zabol University, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
The agricultural systems are facing numerous challenges in maintaining and providing food security. Achieving this goal, considering the growing global population is possible through the application of sustainable agricultural principles to increase crop yield and reduce environmental costs. The widespread use of chemical inputs, particularly nitrogen fertilizers, by farmers globally to enhance yields has resulted in numerous environmental hazards, including soil and groundwater pollution. Intercropping systems emerge as a viable strategy to augment yield, curtail reliance on chemical fertilizers, and safeguard the environment. Enhancing the yield and quality of forage has become a paramount concern in the agricultural sector in recent times. Various approaches exist to achieve this objective, among which intercropping cereals and legumes stands out as a promising solution. One of the most sustainable farming methods in saline and arid lands is drying livestock products using salt-tolerant plants, which can also be beneficial for farmers.
Materials and Methods
This experiment was conducted at the Agricultural Research Institute of Zabol University using a randomized complete block design with three replications. The experimental treatments include different patterns of intercropping kochia and cowpea, namely: 100% Kochia (K100), 50% kochia: 50% cowpea (K50:C50), 75% kochia: 25% cowpea (K75:C25), 25% kochia: 75% cowpea (K25:C75), 100% kochia: 50% cowpea (K100:C50), 50% kochia: 100% cowpea (K50:C100), 100% kochia:100% cowpea (K100:C100), and 100% cowpea (C100). Dry forage yield, yield components, percentage of crude protein (CP), ash, acid detergent fiber (ADF), and dry matter digestibility (DMD) were measured in Kochia plants. Additionally, in cowpea, economic and biological yield, the number of pods per plant, and the 1000-grain weight were measured. To assess the profitability of intercropping, the land equivalent ratio (LER) was utilized.
Results and Discussion
According to the obtained results, the planting pattern had a significant effect on the yield of kochia and cowpea, as well as the morphological characteristics of cowpea, including height, lateral branch, stem weight, and leaf weight. Additionally, the planting pattern had a significant effect on the quality parameters of forage, including the percentage of protein, ash, ADF, and DMD of Kochia. The highest yield was obtained for kochia (22,788 kg.ha^-1) in the cropping pattern of K100:C100, and for cowpea (3590.3 kg.ha^-1) in pure cowpea. The highest percentages of protein (19.90) and ash (14.83) were achieved in the additive intercropping pattern of K100:C100. It also achieved the highest and lowest percentage of DMD (41%) and, ADF (41.30%), respectively, in the pattern of K100:C50. The research results indicated that the highest LER (1.80) was achieved from the treatment of K50:C50.
Conclusion
The yield and quality of forage in dry areas have significant importance, considering the prevailing climatic conditions. Therefore, intercropping is considered a practical solution to achieve the mentioned goals. or Despite the numerous benefits of intercropping, the selection of compatible forage and companion plants that are suitable for specific regional conditions, combined with the design of an appropriate cropping pattern, can greatly enhance the yield and efficiency of this cultivation system. According to the results, intercropping demonstrates higher forage quality compared to the sole crop of Kochia. High-quality forage has higher percentages of CP, ash, and DMD while having lower levels of ADF. Based on these findings, the additive patterns K100:C100 and K100:C50 are recommended. The research results indicate an increase in the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of both kochia and cowpea in intercropping. The LER in all replacement patterns was greater than one, indicating an increase in land efficiency compared to the sole crop. As a result, the natural potential of Kochia, a salt-tolerant plant, can be used as a suitable strategy for using saline soil and water resources and feeding livestock in the Zabol region.

Keywords

Ash; Crude protein; Dry mater digestibility; Land equivalent ratio

References

1. intercropped sorghum bicolor and lablab purpureus forages grown under saline conditions. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 23(1), 271-276.‏ https://doi.org/10.5897/AJMR12.007
2. Akbari, F., Dahmardeh, M., Morshedi, A., Ganbari, A., & Khorramdel, S. (2019). Evaluation of some agroecosystem services in intercropping of corn and bean affected by wheat residues and tillage management systems. Ph.D dissertation of Agroecology, Zabol University, Zabol, Iran. 264 Pp. (in Persian).
3. Aynehband, A., Hosaini, S., & Farzaneh, M. (2020). Effect of different forage crops and cultivation method on quantity and quality of forage in intercropping. Journal of Crops Improvement, 22(2), 295-305. (in Persian with English abstract).‏ https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2020.284842.2240
4. Badakhshan, S., Amiri-Nejad, M., Tohidi-Nejad, E. A., & Parsamotlagh, B. (2021). Evaluation of yield and quality forage in Intercropping Tepary Bean (Phaseolus acutifolus Gray) and Millet Cultivars. Journal of Agroecology, 13(2), 291-305. (in Persian with English abstract).‏ https://doi.org/10.22067/JAG.V13I2.83847
5. Baghdadi, A., Halim, R. A., Ghasemzadeh, A., Ebrahimi, M., Othman, R., & Yusof, M. M. (2016). Effect of intercropping of corn and soybean on dry matter yield and nutritive value of forage corn. Legume Research-An International Journal, 39(6), 976-981.‏ https://doi.org/10.18805/lr.v39i6.6643
6. Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B. K., & Ghose, S. S. (2006). Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy, 24(4), 325-332.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2005.10.010
7. Belel, M. D., Halim, R. A., Rafii, M. Y., & Saud, H. M. (2014). Intercropping of corn with some selected legumes for improved forage production: A review. Journal of Agricultural Science, 6(3), 48.‏ https://doi.org/10.5539/jas.v6n3p48
8. BenYoussef, S., Kachout, S. S., Abidi, S., Saddem, B., Ismail, J., & Salem, B. H. (2019). Effect of different levels of nitrogen fertilization on forage yields and quality of hairy vetch (Vicia villosa, Roth) triticale (X Tritcosecale, Wittmack) mixtures. The Open Agriculture Journal, 13(1).‏ https://doi.org/10.2174/1874331501913010090
9. Dahmardeh, M., Ghanbari, A., Syahsar, B. A., & Ramroudi, M. (2010). The effect of planting time and the quality of forage maize in intercropping with cowpea. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 41(3): 633-642. (in Persian).
10. Dusa, E. M., & Stan, V. (2013). The effect of intercropping on crop productivity and yield quality of oat (Avena sativa)/grain leguminous species (pea–Pissum sativum L., lentil–Lens culinaris L.) cultivated in pure stand and mixtures, in the organic agriculture system. European Scientific Journal, 9(21),‏ 69-78.
11. Egbe, O. M. (2010). Effects of plant density of intercropped soybean with tall sorghum on competitive ability of soybean and economic yield at Otobi, Benue State, Nigeria. Journal of Cereals and Oilseeds, 1(1), 1-10.‏ https://doi.org/10.5897/JCO.9000005
12. Farajain, M. M., Kafi, M., & Nezami, A. (2013).‏ Intercropping of kochia (Kochia scoparia) with blue panic grass (Panicum antidotale Retz.) under irrigation with saline water. Agroecology, 5, 153-160. (in Persian).
13. Fazeli Kakhki, S. F., Goldani, M., & Jolaini, M. (2020). Investigation of changes in some morphophysiological traits, yield and quality indices of two Kochia ecotype (Kochia scoparia) in drought stress under field conditions. Iranian Journal of Irrigation & Drainage, 13(6), 1783-1793.‏ (in Persian with English abstract).
14. Friesen, L. F., Beckie, H. J., Warwick, S. I., & Van Acker, R. C. (2009). The biology of Canadian weeds. 138. Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 89(1), 141-167.‏ https://doi.org/10.4141/CJPS08057
15. Faramarzi, F., Hosseini, S. M. B., Mansory, H., Fangueiro, D., & Alizadeh, H. (2023). Effect of the Ammonium Nitrate Levels on Intercropped Barley (Hordeum Vulgare ) and Vetch (Vicia Villosa) under Weed Competition Management. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 20(4), 481-500. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jcesc.2022.75859.1154
16. Ghafarian, M. R., Yadavi, A. R., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab, A., Salehi, M., & Movahedi Dehnavi, M. (2021). Advantage of Forage Production in Kochia (Kochia scoparia), Sesbania (Sesbania aculeata) and Guar (Cyamopsis tetragonoliba) intercropping under irrigation water salinity. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 31(1), 71-86.‏
17. Guerrero-Rodriguez, J. D. D. (2006). Growth and nutritive value of lucerne (Medicago sativa) and Melilotus (Melilotus albus Medik.) under saline conditions.‏ Thesis (Ph.D.). School of Agriculture, Food and Wine.
18. Gul, B., Ansari, R., Aziz, I. R. F. A. N., & Khan, M. A. (2010). Salt tolerance of Kochia scoparia: A new fodder crop for highly saline arid regions. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 42(4), 2479-2487.‏
19. Hamzei, (2012). Evaluation of Yield, SPAD Index, Landuse Efficiency and System Productivity Index of Barley (Hordeum vulgare) Intercropped with Bitter Vetch (Vicia ervilia). Journal of Crop Production and Processing, 2(4), 79-92. (in Persian with English abstract).
20. Hamzei, J., & Davoudian, R. (2019). Evaluarion of Agrophysiological Indices and Yield Performance in anola/Chickpea Intercropping. Journal of Agroecology, 11(1), 245-259. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v11i1.65192
21. Hedayati Firoozabadi, A., Kazemeini, S. A., & Pirasteh Anooshe, H. (2017). Evaluation of different planting ratio of sorghum-kochia intercropping in varied salinity conditions.‏ Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 24(3): 685-698. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22092/ijrdr.2017.114014
22. Hedayati-Firoozabadi, A., Kazemeini, S. A., Pirasteh-Anosheh, H., Ghadiri, H., & Pessarakli, M. (2020). Forage yield and quality as affected by salt stress in different ratios of Sorghum bicolor-Bassia indica intercropping. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 43(17), 2579-2589.‏ https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2020.1783301
23. Iptas, S., & Yavuz, M. (2008). Effect of pollination levels on yield and quality of maize grown for silage. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 32(1), 41-48.‏
24. Jami Al-Ahmadi, M. (2005). Study some properties of ecophysiologicy kochia scoparia. Ph.D. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (in Persian).
25. Jami Al Ahmadi, M., & Kafi, M. (2008). Kochia (Kochia scoparia): To be or not to be. Crop and Forage Production Using Saline Waters. M. Kafi and MA Khan, eds. NAM S & T Centre. Daya Publisher, New Delhi.‏
26. Jamshidi, K., Mazaheri, D., Hosseini, N. M., Mashhadi, H. R., & Peyghambari, S. A. (2011). Investigation of corn/cowpea intercropping effect on suppresing the weeds. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 42(2), 233-241.‏ (in Persian with English abstract).
27. Javanmard, A., Machiani, M. A., Lithourgidis, A., Morshedloo, M. R., & Ostadi, A. (2020). Intercropping of maize with legumes: A cleaner strategy for improving the quantity and quality of forage. Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 1, 100003.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2020.100003
28. Kafi, M., Asadi, H., & Ganjeali, A. (2010). Possible utilization of high-salinity waters and application of low amounts of water for production of the halophyte Kochia scoparia as alternative fodder in saline agroecosystems. Agricultural Water Management, 97(1), 139-147.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.08.022
29. Kafi, M., Nabati, J., Khaninejad, S., Masomi, A., & Zare, M. M. (2011). Evaluation of characteristics forage in different Kochia (Kochia scoparia) ecotypes in tow salinity levels irrigation.‏ Electronic Journal of Crop Production, 4, 229-238. (in Persian with English abstract).
30. Kheradmand, S., Mahmodib, S., & Ahmadi, E. (2014). Quantitative and qualitative performance evaluation of green pea and barley forage intercropping. Applied Field Crops Research, 27(105), 111-118.‏ (in Persian with English abstract).
31. Klimek-Kopyra, A., Skowera, B., Zając, T., & Kulig, B. (2017). Mixed cropping of linseed and legumes as an ecological way to effectively increase oil quality. Romanian Agricultural Research, 34, 217-224.‏
32. Koochaki, A., Nasiri Mahalati, M., Khorram Del, S., Anwarkhah, S., Timuri, M., & Sanjani, S. (2010). Evaluation of growth indices of hemp (Cannabis sativa) and sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) in intercropping with replacement and additive series. Journal of Agroecology, 2(1), 27-36. (in Persian).
33. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Hatefi Farajian, M. H., & Hooshmand, M. (2023). Effect of relay triple intercropping arrangements of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), and mung bean (Vigna radiate L.) on yield and yield components. Journal of Agroecology, 15(1), 153-168. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/agry.2022.20158.0
34. Kurdali, F. (2010). Growth and N₂ fixation in mixed cropping of Medicago arborea and Atriplex halimus grown on a salt-affected soil using a 15N tracer technique. Journal of Plant Interactions, 5(1), 37-44.‏ https://doi.org/10.1080/17429140903151265
35. Lewis, D. C., & McFarlane, J. D. (1986). Effect of foliar applied manganese on the growth of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius) and the diagnosis of manganese deficiency by plant tissue and seed analysis. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 37(6), 567-572.‏ https://doi.org/10.1071/AR9860567
36. Lithourgidis, A. S., Vasilakoglou, I. B., Dhima, K. V., Dordas, C. A., & Yiakoulaki, M. D. (2006). Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crops Research, 99(2-3), 106-113.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.03.008
37. Masoumi, A., Kafi, M., Nabati, J., & Zare Mehrjerdi, M. (2016). The possibility of forage production in two Kochia (Kochia scoparia) ecotypes by application of low amounts of water in saline conditions. Crop Production Journal, 10(1): 1-19. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22069/EJCP.2017.10053.1791
38. McDonald, P., Edwards, R. A., Greenhalgh, J. F. D., Morgan, C. A., Sinclair, L. A., & Wilkinson, R. G. (2011). Animal nutrition, 7th (ed.), Longman Group UK, Harlow, UK, 693 pp.
39. Moosavifar, B. E., Khazaie, H., & Kafi, M. (2019). The determine of nutrition value of Kochia (Kochia Scoparia) forage under salinity and deficit irrigation conditions. Journal of Agroecology, 11(2), 619-634.‏ (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v11i2.75545
40. Mortada, S., Abou Najm, M., Yassine, A., El Fadel, M., & Alamiddine, I. (2018). Towards sustainable water-food nexus: an optimization approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 178, 408-418.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.020
41. Nabati, J., Kafi, M., Nezami, A., Rezvani Moghadam, P., Masoumi, A., & Zaremehrjerdi, M. (2012). Effect of salinity stress on yield, component yeild of forage and morphological characteristics of Kochia (Kochia scoparia). Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 42(4): 735-743. (in Persian).
42. Namdari, M., Abbasi, R., Pirdashti, H., & Zaefarian, F. (2023). Effect of competition on morphological, physiological, and productivity characteristics in soybean (Glycine max (L) Merrill) and millet (Panicum miliaceum) intercropping. Journal of Agroecology, 15(2), 337-357. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/agry.2021.71312.1056
43. Nazari, S., Zaefrian, F., Farahmandfar, E., Zand, E., & Azimi Sooran, S. (2014). Effect of harvest time on forage yield and quality maize under intercropping with legume plants. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 12(2), 237-245.‏ (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/GSC.V12I2.39155
44. Oddy, V. H., Robards, G. E., & Low, S. G. (1983). Prediction of in vivo dry matter digestibility from the fibre and nitrogen content of a feed. In Feed information and animal production: proceedings of the second symposium of the International Network of Feed Information Centres/edited by GE Robards and RG Packham. Farnham Royal, Slough [Buckingham]: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, c1983.
45. Riasi, A., Mesgaran, M. D., Stern, M. D., & Moreno, M. R. (2008). Chemical composition, in situ ruminal degradability and post-ruminal disappearance of dry matter and crude protein from the halophytic plants Kochia scoparia, Atriplex dimorphostegia, Suaeda arcuata and Gamanthus gamacarpus. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 141(3-4), 209-219.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.06.014
46. Ross, S. M., King, J. R., O'Donovan, J. T., & Spaner, D. (2005). The productivity of oats and berseem clover intercrops. I. Primary growth characteristics and forage quality at four densities of oats. Grass and forage Science, 60(1), 74-86.‏ https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.2005.00455.x
47. Sabeghynezhad, F., Dahmardeh, M., Asgharipour, M. R., Khammari, I., & Sori Nezami, Z. (2019). Evaluation of tillage systems on agronomic aspect of soybean (Glycine max) and roselle (Hibiscus subdariffa L.) Relay Intercropping. Journal of Agroecology, 11(3), 1085-1104.‏ (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v11i3.68442
48. Salehi, Z., Amirnia, R., Rezaeichiyaneh, E., & Khalilvandi Behrozyar, H. (2018). Evaluation of yield and some qualitative traits of forage in intercropping of triticale with annual legumes. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 28(4), 59-76.‏ (in Persian).
49. Sharafi, S. (2022). Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative yield of forage from additive series of snail medic in intercropping with sorghum under low irrigation condition. Journal of Crops Improvement, 24(1), 15-29.‏ (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2021.312749.2470
50. Sherrod, L. B. (1971). Nutritive Value of Kochia scoparia I. Yield and Chemical Composition at Three Stages of Maturity 1. Agronomy Journal, 63(2), 343-344.‏ https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1971.00021962006300020049x
51. Sherrod, L. B. (1973). Nutritive value of Kochia scoparia. III. Digestibility of kochia hay compared with alfalfa hay. Journal of Dairy Science, 56(7), 923-926.‏ https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(73)85278-6
52. Smith, K. F., Reed, K. F. M., & Foot, J. Z. (2008). An assessment of the relative importance of specific traits for the genetic improvement of nutritive value in dairy pasture. Grass and Forage Science, 52(2), 167-175.‏ https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1997.tb02347.x
53. Soleymani, M. R., Kafi, M., Ziaei, M., & Shabahang, J. (2008). Effect of limited irrigation with saline water on forage of two local populations of Kochia scoparia Schrad. Journal of Soil and Water (Agricultural Science and Technology), 22(2): 307-317. (in Persian with English abstract).‏ https://doi.org/10.22067/JSW.V0I22.1028
54. Stoltz, E., & Nadeau, E. (2014). Effects of intercropping on yield, weed incidence, forage quality and soil residual N in organically grown forage maize (Zea mays) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Field Crops Research, 169, 21-29.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2014.09.004
55. Tang, C., Yang, X., Chen, X., Ameen, A., & Xie, G. (2018). Sorghum biomass and quality and soil nitrogen balance response to nitrogen rate on semiarid marginal land. Field Crops Research, 215, 12-22.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.09.031
56. Tawfik, M. M., Thalooth, A. T., Nabila, M. Z., Hassanein, M. S., Amany, A. B., & Amal, G. A. (2013). Sustainable production of Kochia indica grown in saline habitat. Environment Treat Technology, 1(1), 56-61.‏
57. Tsubo, M., Mukhala, E., Ogindo, H. O., & Walker, S. (2003). Productivity of maize-bean intercropping in a semi-arid region of South Africa. Water Salinity, 29(4), 381-388.‏ https://doi.org/10.4314/wsa.v29i4.5038
58. Tosti, G., Benincasa, P., Farneselli, M., Tei, F., & Guiducci, M. (2014). Barley–hairy vetch mixture as cover crop for green manuring and the mitigation of N leaching risk. European Journal of Agronomy, 54, 34-39.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2013.11.012
59. Tribouillois, H., Cruz, P., Cohan, J. P., & Justes, É. (2015). Modelling agroecosystem nitrogen functions provided by cover crop species in bispecific mixtures using functional traits and environmental factors. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 207, 218-228.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2015.04.016
60. Valizdeh, R., Mahmoudi-Abyane, M., & Ganjavi, R. (2016). Chemical composition, in vitro digestibility and fermentative gas production of Kochia scoparia irrigated by water containing different level of salinity. Iranian Journal of Animal Science Research, 8(2), 238-247.‏ (in Persian with English abstract).‏ https://doi.org/10.22067/IJASR.V8I2.27715
61. Van Soest, P. J. (1994). Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY. 476 Pp.
62. Waldron, B. L., ZoBell, D. R., Olson, K. C., Jensen, K. B., & Snyder, D. L. (2006). Stockpiled forage kochia to maintain beef cows during winter. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 59(3), 275-284.‏ https://doi.org/10.2111/05-121R1.1.
63. Xie, Y., & Kristensen, H. L. (2017). Intercropping leek (Allium porrum) with dyer’s woad (Isatis tinctoria L.) increases rooted zone and agro-ecosystem retention of nitrogen. European Journal of Agronomy, 82, 21-32.‏ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2016.09.017
64. Yilmaz, Ş., Özel, A., Atak, M., & Erayman, M. (2015). Effects of seeding rates on competition indices of barley and vetch intercropping systems in the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 39(1), 135-143.‏ https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1406-155
65. Yolcu, H., Gunes, A., & Turan, M. (2009). Evaluation of annual legumes and barley as sole crops and intercrop in spring frost conditions for animal feeding II. Mineral Composition. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 7, 1343-1348.‏