واکنش عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد نخود (Cicer arietinum L.) در کشت مخلوط با تریتیکاله به کودهای زیستی و شیمیایی تحت شرایط تنش آبی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی‌ارشد بخش اگرواکولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی داراب، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز

2 استادیار بخش اگرواکولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی داراب، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز

3 دانشیار بخش اگرواکولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی داراب، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز

چکیده

به­‌منظور بررسی عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد نخود (Cicer arietinum L.) در کشت خالص و مخلوط با تریتیکاله
(X Triticosecale Wittmack) تحت شرایط تنش­ آبی، آزمایشی به­‌صورت اسپلیت فاکتوریل در قالب طرح بلوک کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در مزرعه پژوهشی دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی داراب ـ دانشگاه شیراز در سال زراعی 1399ـ1398 اجرا شد. تیمارها در دو سطح آبیاری [مطلوب: آبیاری بر اساس نیاز آبی گیاه تا مرحله­ رسیدگی فیزیولوژیک و تنش آبی: آبیاری بر اساس نیاز آبی گیاه تا مرحله­ گل­دهی] به‌­عنوان عامل اصلی و سه منبع کودی [شیمیایی (50 کیلوگرم فسفر بر هکتار + 150 کیلوگرم نیتروژن بر هکتار)، تلفیقی (25کیلوگرم فسفر بر هکتار+ 75کیلوگرم نیتروژن بر هکتار+20 تن کود گوسفندی بر هکتار+ تلقیح با باکتری­‌های سودوموناس فلورسنس و آزوسپیریلوم براسیلنس)، زیستی (40 تن کود گوسفندی بر هکتار+ تلقیح با باکتری­های سودوموناس فلورسنس (Pseudomonas fluorescens) و آزوسپیریلوم براسیلنس (Azospirillum brasilence)] و سه نوع کشت [کشت خالص نخود، کشت خالص تریتیکاله، کشت مخلوط تریتیکاله نخود (1:1)] به­عنوان عوامل فرعی بودند که به‌­صورت فاکتوریل در کرت­‌های فرعی قرار گرفتند. نتایج نشان داد در شرایط تنش آبی، عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد نخود در کشت مخلوط نسبت به کشت خالص آن کاهش کمتری نشان داد. تنش آبی در مرحله پس از گلدهی منجر به کاهش وزن دانه، تعداد غلاف در بوته، دانه در غلاف، عملکرد زیست‌توده و شاخص برداشت نخود شد. تنش آبی عملکرد دانه نخود را در همه تیمارها کاهش داد، اما این کاهش در تیمارهای مختلف متفاوت بود. کمترین کاهش عملکرد در تیمار کود زیستی به میزان 27 درصد مشاهده شد. تنش آبی همچنین عملکرد دانه نخود را در تیمار مخلوط نسبت به خالص به مقدار کمتری کاست (به‌ترتیب 24 و 55 درصد). بنابراین، استفاده از کود زیستی در شرایط کمبود آب در مرحله­ی پس از گلدهی پیشنهاد می­شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Reaction of chickpea grain yield and its components in triticale-chickpea intercropping to chemical and bio fertilizers under water stress conditions

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ida Rashidipour 1
  • Vahid Barati 2
  • Ehsan Bijanzadeh 3
1 MSc. Student, Agro-Ecology Department, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Darab, Shiraz University, Shiraz
2 Assistant Professor of Agro-Ecology Department, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Darab, Shiraz University, Shiraz
3 Associate Professor of Agro-Ecology Department, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Darab, Shiraz University, Shiraz
چکیده [English]

Introduction
Water stress and nitrogen (N) excess or defficiency are the major problems and the main cause of yield and yield components reduction as compared to other non-biological stresses (Barati & Bijanzadeh, 2020) in crop productions of arid areas. Organic farming is proposed as a solution for above problems. This farming system reduce using of chemical inputs and irrigation water use. The utilization of free aerobic bacteria, such as Azospirillum brasilense, in organic farming practices offers the potential to reduce the need for nitrogen fertilizer by harnessing the ability of these bacteria to stabilize atmospheric nitrogen (N2). Similarly, the application of Pseudomonas fluorescens can enhance the availability of soluble phosphorus in the soil, benefiting plant growth and nutrient uptake. In addition, intercropping is recommended as a strategy to enhance biodiversity in organic farming systems. This approach can alleviate water and nutrient stresses by reducing competition among plants for these resources in the soil. However, there is a lack of information regarding the interaction between organic fertilizer and the triticale-chickpea intercropping system in mitigating the detrimental effects of water stress on chickpea. To address this knowledge gap, the present study was conducted in the arid region of Darab, located in the Fars province of southern Iran. Therefore, this study was aimed to investigate the interaction effect of different fertilizer systems (chemical, Integrated and biological) and different irrigation regimes on the yield and yield components of chickpea in sole and intercropping of chickpea-triticale, in an arid area of southern Iran (Fars province - Darab).
 
Materials and Methods
This experiment was performed as a split factorial on a randomized complete block design with three replications in the research farm of Darab Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources - Shiraz University in the 2019-2020 growing season. Experimental treatments included two levels of irrigation (Ir) [Normal (IRN): irrigation based on the plant water requirement and water stress (WS): irrigation based on the plant water requirement up to the flowering stage] as the main factor. Sub-factors included three sources of fertilizer system (Fs) [Chemical: 50 kg P ha-1 +150 kg N ha-1, Integrated: 25 kg P ha-1 + 75 kg N ha-1 + 20 tons manure sheep ha-1 + inoculation with Pseudomonas fluorescens and Azospirillum brasilens, Bio: 40 tons manure sheep ha-1 + inoculation with Pseudomonas fluorescens and Azospirillum brasillens] and two types of cropping system (Cs) [monoculture of chickpea and intercropping of triticale-chickpea (1:1)]. Grain yield and its components of chickpea was measured and harvest index (%) were calculated. Data were analyzed using SAS 9.1 software and the means were separated by least significant difference (LSD) test at 5% probability level.
 
Results and Discussion
The Ir × Fs interaction showed that the water stress significantly reduced grain yield of chickpea. However, it’s the highest and lowest reduction was obtained in the chemical and bio fertilizer treatments by 68% and 27%, respectively. In a similar study, the lowest reduction in chickpea yield under water stress compared to normal irrigation was obtained in bio fertilizer treatment (Khalegh nezhad & Jabari, 2015). The Ir × Cs interaction also showed significant effect on the grain yield. The impact of water stress on grain yield varied depending on the cropping system, with the highest reduction observed in monocropped chickpea (55%) and the lowest reduction in intercropped chickpea (24%). This interaction also revealed that both intercropped and sole chickpea experienced decreases in yield and yield components under water stress, but the severity of the reduction was greater in sole cropping. Analysis of chickpea yield components, such as the number of pods per plant, biomass yield, and harvest index, showed similar trends as observed in grain yield under the Ir × Cs interaction. The Ir × Fs interaction had differing effects on the number of seeds per pod and seed weight, with water stress leading to a decrease in these traits. Similar to the behavior of grain yield, the least reduction in these traits under water stress was observed in the Bio and integrated fertilizer systems. Water stress increased the LER of pea and total LER by 65% ​​and 51%, respectively, as compared to the IRN conditions.
 
Conclusion
The results of this study showed that the water stress after flowering stage of chickpea led to a decrease in grain yield and its components that have been formed at this stage. If farmers intend to cut off irrigation after the flowering stage in chickpea due to the lack of water resources, it is suggested to use of chickpea-triticale intercropping system and the bio or integrated fertilizers that are as environmentally friendly alternatives to chemical fertilizers for increasing chickpea grain yield.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Biological yield
  • Harvest index
  • Low input
  • Sustainable agriculture

مراجع

  1. Abbasi, A.K.R, Hejazi, A.E., Akbari, G.A., Kafi, M. and Zand, E., 2006. Study on different densities in chickpea and cumin emphasized on weed control in Mashhad. Iranian journal in crop field research 4(1): 83-94. (In Persian).
  2. Ahmadvand, G., and Hajinia, S. 2016. Ecological aspects study of replacement intercropping patterns of soybean (Glycine max ) and millet (Panicum miliaceum L.). Journal of Agroecology 7(4): 485-498. (In Persian with English Summary).
  3. Alizadeh, A. 2001. Soil-water-plant relationship. Emam Reza University, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)
  4. Aloni, R.; Aloni, E.; Langhans, M.; Ullrich, C.I. 2006. Role of cytokinin and auxin in shaping root architecture: Regulating vascular differentiation, lateral root initiation, root apical dominance and root gravitropism. Annals of Botany 97: 883-893. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl027
  5. Arkhipova, T.N., Veselov, S.U., Melentiev, A.I., Martynenko, E.V., Kudoyarova, G.R. 2005. Ability of bacterium Bacillus subtilis to produce cytokinins and to influence the growth and endogenous hormone content of lettuce plants. Plant and Soil 272: 201-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-004-5047-x
  6. Asadi, G., Ahmadzadeh Ghavidel, R., Puryazdi, M. T., Ghorbani, R., and Khorramdel, S. 2018. Effect of plant density and manure application rate on yield and yield components of various common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars. Iranian Journal Pulses Research 9(1): 12-28. https://dx.doi.org/10.22067/ijpr.v9i1.50242 . (In persian with English summary)
  7. Barati, V. and Bijanzadeh, E., 2020. Triticale forage crop quality as affected by water stress and nitrogen biofertilizer in an arid climate. Iran Agricultural Research 39(2): 57-68. https://dx.doi.org/10.22099/IAR.2021.38134.1404
  8. Barati, V., and Ghadiri, H. Effects of Drought Stress and Nitrogen Fertilizer on Yield, Yield Components and Grain Protein Content of Two Barley Cultivars. Isfahan University of Technology- Journal of Crop Production and Processing 6(20): 191-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.jcpp.6.20.191. (In Persian with English Summary).
  9. Barati, V., Bijanzadeh, E., Emam, Y., and Pessarakli, M. 2022. Nitrogen nutrition effects on triticale photosynthesis and assimilate translocation under late-season water stress conditions. Journal of Plant Nutrition 45(3): 439-456. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2021.1943677
  10. Barker, A.V. 2016. Science and Technology of Organic Farming. Emam Reza University, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian).
  11. Bechtaoui, N., El Alaoui, A., Raklami, A., Benidire, L., Tahiri, A. I., and Oufdou, K. 2019. Impact of intercropping and co-inoculation with strains of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria on phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations and yield of durum wheat (Triticum durum) and faba bean (Vicia faba). Crop and Pasture Science 70(8): 649-658. https://doi.org/10.1071/CP19067
  12. Bedoussac, L., and E. Justes. 2011. A comparison of commonly used indices for evaluating species interactions and intercrop efficiency: Application to durum wheat–winter pea intercrops. Field Crops Research 124(1): 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2011.05.025
  13. Bedoussac, L., Justes, E., 2010. The efficiency of a durum wheat winter pea intercrop toimprove yield and wheat grain protein concentration depends on N availability during early Plant and Soil 330(1): 19-35.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-009-0082-2
  14. Burdman, S., Saric, S., Kigel, J., and Okon, Y. 1996. Field Inoculation of Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and Chick Pea (Cicer arietinum L.) with Azospirillum brasilense Strain Cd. Symbiosis 21: 41-48.
  15. Bybee-Finley, K.; Ryan, M. 2018. Advancing intercropping research and practices in industrialized agricultural Agriculture 8(6): 80. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8060080
  16. Carranca, C., De Varennes, A., and Rolston, D. 1999. Biological nitrogen fixation by fababean, pea and chickpea, under field conditions, estimated by the 15N isotope dilution technique. European Journal of Agronomy 10(1): 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(98)00049-5
  17. Dai, J., Qiu, W., Wang, N., Wang, T., Nakanishi, H., and Zuo, Y. 2019. From Leguminosae/Gramineae intercropping systems to see benefits of intercropping on iron nutrition. Frontiers in plant science 10: 605. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.00605
  18. Daneshvar, M.R.M., Ebrahimi, M., and Nejadsoleymani, H. 2019. An overview of climate change in Iran: facts and statistics. Environmental Systems Research 8(1): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-019-0135-3
  19. Emam, Y. 2017. Cereal production. Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran. (In Persian).
  20. Erdemci, İ. 2020. Effect of Pseudomonas Fluorescent Rhizobacteria on Growth and Seed Quality in Lentil (Lens Culinaris). Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 51(14): 1852-1858. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1798987
  21. Eskandari, H., and Kazemi, K. 2020. Response of grain yield and water use efficiency of wheat and faba bean to partial root-zone irrigation in intercropping. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences 13(3): 777-792. https://dx.doi.org/10.22077/escs.2020.2267.1579 . (In Persian with English Summary).
  22. Fetene, M. 2003. Intra-and inter-specific competition between seedlings of Acacia etbaica and a perennial grass (Hyparrenia hirta). Journal of Arid Environments 55(3): 441-451. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-1963(03)00052-1
  23. Fujita, K., Ofosu-Budu, K. G., and Ogata, S. 1992. Biological nitrogen fixation in mixed legume-cereal cropping systems. Plant and soil 141(1): 155-175. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00011315
  24. Ghasembagloo, M., Sedghi, M., Seyed Sharifi, R. and Farzaneh, S. 2021. The Effect of Biofertilizers on Grain Yield and Yield Components of Pea (Pisum sativum) under Different Levels of Irrigation. Journal of agricultural science and sustainable production 31(3):169-180. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/saps.2021.43011.2583. (In Persian with English Summary).
  25. Gliessman, S.R. 2001. Agroecology. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian).
  26. Grimes, D.W., Yamada, H., and Hughes, S.W. 1987. Climate-normalized cotton leaf water potentials for irrigation Agricultural Water Management 12(4): 293-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-3774(87)90004-7
  27. Hamaoui, B., Abbadi, J.M., Burdman, S., Rashid, A., Sarig, S. and Okon, Y. 2001. Effects of inoculation with Azospirillum brasilense on chickpeas (Cicer arietinum ) and faba beans (Vicia faba) under different growth conditions. Agronomy 21(6-7): 553-560. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00886133
  28. Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., and Jensen, E.S. 2005. Facilitative root interactions in intercrops. In Root physiology: from gene to function. Springer, Dordrecht 274: 237-250. https://doi.org/0.1007/s11104-004-1305-1
  29. Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Gooding, M., Ambus, P., Corre-Hellou, , Crozat, Y., Dahlmann, C., Dibet, A., von Fragstein, P., Pristeri, A., Monti, M., and Jensen, E.S. 2009. Pea-barley intercropping for efficient symbiotic N2 fixation, soil N acquisition and use of other nutrients in European organic cropping systems. Field Crops Research 113(1): 64-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2009.04.009
  30. Herridge, D.F., Marcellos, H., Felton, W.L., Turner, G.L., and Peoples, M.B. 1995. Chickpea increases soil-N fertility in cereal systems through nitrate sparing and N2 fixation. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 27(4-5): 545-551. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(95)98630-7
  31. Jahan, M., Aryaee, M., Amiri, M.B., and Ehyaee, H.R. 2013. The effect of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of Sesamum indicum L. with application of cover crops of Lathyrus sp. and Persian clover (Trifolium resopinatum L.). Journal of agroecology 5(1): 85. (In Persian with English Summary).
  32. Khalegh nezhad, V. and Jabari, F. 2015. Effect of Seed Inoculation with Rhizobium and Plant Growth Enhancing Rhizobacteria (PGRP) on Yield and Yield Components of Chickpea in Faryab and Rainfed Conditions. Journal crop improvment 957-972. (In Persian).
  33. Kour, D., Rana, K. L., Kaur, T., Sheikh, I., Yadav, A. N., Kumar, V., and Saxena, A. K. 2020. Microbe-mediated alleviation of drought stress and acquisition of phosphorus in great millet (Sorghum bicolour L.) by drought-adaptive and phosphorus-solubilizing microbes. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology 23: 101501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2020.101501
  34. Kumar, J., and Abbo, S. 2001. Genetics of flowering time in chickpea and its bearing on productivity in semiarid environments. Advance in agronomy 72: 107-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(01)72012-3
  35. Li, H., Ma, Q., Li, H., Zhang, F., Rengel, Z., and Shen, J. 2014. Root morphological responses to localized nutrient supply differ among crop species with contrasting root traits. Plant and Soil 376(1): 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1965-9
  36. Macik, M., Gryta, A., and Frac, M. 2020. Biofertilizers in agriculture: An overview on concepts, strategies and effects on soil microorganisms. Advances in agronomy 162: 31-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron.2020.02.001
  37. Marcellos, H., Felton, W.L., and Herridge, D.F. 1998. Chickpea in wheat-based cropping systems of northern New South Wales I. N2 fixation and influence on soil nitrate and water. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 49(3): 391-400. https://doi.org/10.1071/A97066
  38. Mariotti, M., Masoni, A., Ercoli, L., and Arduini, I. 2006. Forage potential of winter cereal/legume intercrops in organic farming. Italian Journal of Agronomy 1(3): 403-412. https://doi.org/10.4081/ija.2006.403
  39. Mazaheri, D., 1998. Intercropping. Tehran University, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian).
  40. Mead, R., Willey, R. 1980. The concept of a land equivalent ratio and advantages in yields from intercropping. Experimental Agriculture 16(3): 217-228. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0014479700010978
  41. Meier, U. 2001. Growth stages of mono-and dicotyledonous plants BBCH Monograph. Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry. 141.
  42. Mirzaei, A., Naseri, R., Torab Miri, S.M., Soleymani Fard, A. and Fathi, A. 2018. Reaspose of Yield and Yield Components of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) Cultivars to the Application of Plant Growth Promoting RhizohBacteria and Nitrogen Chemical Fertilizer under Rainfed Conditions. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology 11(4): 775-790.
  43. Mohavieh Asadi, N., Bijanzadeh, E., and Behpouri, A. 2019. Evaluation of seed yield and competitive indices in relay intercropping of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) with chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under late season low water stress. Journal of Agroecology 11(3): 1169- 1182. https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v11i3.79532 . (In persian with English Summary).
  44. Mohsen Abadi, Gh. R, Jahansooz, M., Chayichi, M., Rahmatian Mashhadi, R., Liaghat, A., and Savabeghi Firoozabadi, G. 2008. Evaluation of barley-vetch intercropping at different levels of nitrogen rates. International Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 10(1): 23-31. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.16807073.2008.10.1.3.5 .(In Persian).
  45. Mokhtari Hashi, H. and Moradi, A. 2021. Environmental Consequences of the Water Crisis in Iran. Political Spatial Planning 3(2): 117-131.
  46. Monti, M., Pellicanò, A., Santonoceto, C., Preiti, G., and Pristeri, A. 2016. Yield components and nitrogen use in cereal-pea intercrops in Mediterranean environment. Field Crops Research 196: 379-388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.07.017
  47. Moradi, M., Siadat, A., Khavazi, K., Naseri, R., Maleki, A., and Mirzaei, A. 2011. Effect of application of bio-fertilizer and phosphorous fertilizers on quantities and qualitative traits of spring wheat. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology 5(18): 51-66. (In Persian).
  48. Neugschwandtner, R.W., and Kaul, H.P. 2014. Sowing ratio and N fertilization affect yield and yield components of oat and pea in intercrops. Field Crops Research 155: 159-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.09.010
  49. Niazi Ardakani, M., Barati, V. and Bijanzadeh, E. 2020. Physiological and biochemical characteristics of barley as affected by biofertilizer, crop residues and water stress. Journal of Plant Process and Function, 9(36): 279-298. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.23222727.1399.9.36.23.6. (In Persian with English Summary)
  50. Niazi Ardakani, M., Barati, V., Bijanzadeh, E. 2021. Effect of application of nitrogen-fixing bacteria and plant residues on re-transfer of cultivated materials and barley yield under post-flowering moisture stress conditions. Environmental stresses in crop sciences 14(1): 47-62. https://dx.doi.org/10.22077/escs.2020.2500.1656 . (In Persian).
  51. Nieto, K.F.; Frankenberger Jr, W.T. 1989. Biosynthesis of cytokinins by Azotobacter chroococcum. Soil Biol. Bio chemistry 21(7): 967-972. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(89)90089-8
  52. Niggli, U., Plagge, J., Reese, S., Fertl, T., Schmid, O., Brändli, U., Bärtschi, D., Pöpsel, G., Hermanowski, R., Hohenester, H. and Grabmann, G. 2015. Towards modern sustainable agriculture with organic farming as the leading model. A discussion document on Organic 3: 36.
  53. Niksirat, H., Bijanzadeh, E., and Naderi, R. 2018. Effect of late season drought stress and different combination of intercropping with barley on yield and yield components of chickpea and faba bean. Iranian Journal Pulses Research, 9(1), pp.177-191. https://dx.doi.org/10.22067/ijpr.v9i1.56037. (In Persian with English Summary).
  54. Niksirat, S.H., Bijanzadeh, E., and Behpouri, A. 2017. Effect of cutting off irrigation on yield and advantage indices of barley intercropped with legumes. Plant Eco physiology 10(34): 46-58. https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v10i2.55828 . (In Persian with English Summary).
  55. Pelzer, E., Bazot, M., Makowski, D., Corre-Hellou, G., Naudin, C., Al Rifaï, M., Baranger, E., Bedoussac, L., Biarnès, V., Boucheny, P. and Carrouée, B., 2012. Pea–wheat intercrops in low-input conditions combine high economic performances and low environmental impacts. European Journal of Agronomy 40: 39-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2012.01.010
  56. Pelzer, E., Hombert, N., Jeuffroy, M.H., and Makowski, D. 2014. Meta‐analysis of the effect of nitrogen fertilization on annual cereal-legume intercrop production. Agronomy Journal 106(5): 1775-1786. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj13.0590
  57. Pereira, S.I.A., Abreu, D., Moreira, H., Vega, A. and Castro, P.M.L., 2020. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) improve the growth and nutrient use efficiency in maize (Zea mays L.) under water deficit conditions. Heliyon 6(10): e05106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05106
  58. Pilbeam, C.J., Wood, M., Harris, H.C., and Tuladhar, J. 1998. Productivity and nitrogen use of three different wheat-based rotations in North West Syria. Australian journal of Agricultural research 49(3): 451-458. https://doi.org/10.1071/A97015
  59. Pour Musavi, M., Ghalavi, Daneshiyan, J.M., Ghanbari, N., Basirian, A.2007. Effects of drought stress and manure on leaf relative water content, cell membrane stability and leaf chlorophyll content in soybean (Glycine max). Journal of Agricultere Science Natural Resource 14(4): 125-134. (In Persian with English Summary).
  60. Raei, Y., Sayyadi Ahmadabad, M., Ghassemi-Golezani, K., and Ghassemi, S. 2020. The effect of biological and chemical nitrogen fertilizers on pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) and black mustard (Brasassica nigra L.) intercropping. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production 30(3): 21-40. (In Persian).
  61. Rawat, P., Das, S., Shankhdhar, D. and Shankhdhar, S.C. 2021. Phosphate-solubilizing microorganisms: mechanism and their role in phosphate solubilization and uptake. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 21(1): 49-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-020-00342-7
  62. Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., Rasouli, Y., Jalilian, J., and Ghodsi, M. 2019. Evaluation of quantitative and qualitative yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum ) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in intercropping affected by biological and chemical fertilizers in supplemental irrigation condition. Journal of Agroecology 11(1): 69-85. https://doi.org/10.22067/v11i1.71201 . (In persian with English Summary).
  63. Rezaei-chiyaneh, E., Tajbakhsh, M., Ghiyasi, M., and Amirnia, R. 2015. Effect of integrated organic and chemical fertilizers on quantitative and qualitative yield of chickpea (Cicer arietinum ) under dry farming conditions. Research in Field Crops 3(1): 55-69. (In Persian).
  64. Rezapoorian, F., Galeshi, S., Zeinali, E., and Torabi, B. 2020. The effect of inoculation with Growth Promoting Bacteria, Mycorrhiza and Phosphorus on yield and yield components of Mungbean (Vigna radiata L.). Iranian Journal Pulses Research 11(1): 134-151. https://dx.doi.org/10.22067/ijpr.v11i1.73888 . (In persian with English Summary).
  65. Risse, L.M., Cabrera, M.L., Franzluebbers, A.J., Gaskin, J.W., Gilley, J.E., Killorn, R., Radcliffe, D.E., Tollner, W.E. and Zhang, H. 2006. Land application of manure for beneficial reuse. 283. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/biosysengfacpub/65
  66. Rupela, O.P., and Saxena, M.C. 1987. Nodulation and nitrogen fixation in chickpea. The chickpea 191-206.
  67. Saeidi, M.R., Raei,, Amini, R., Taghizadeh, A., and Pasban Eslam, B. 2018. Evaluation of Yield and Protein Content of Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) in Intercropping with Faba bean (Vicia faba L.) under Biological and Chemical Fertilizers. Agricultural knowledge and sustainable production 28(4): 247-260. (In Persian with English Summary).
  68. Salari, F., Khalesro, S., Heidari, G. and Ghobari, H. 2020. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative traits of safflower and chickpea in replacement and additive intercropping systems. Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science, 51(3): 129-138. https://dx.doi.org/10.22059/ijfcs.2019.269888.654549 . (In Persian with English Summary).
  69. Sandhya, V., Ali, S.K.Z., Grover, M., Reddy, G., and Venkateswarlu, B. 2010. Effect of plant growth promoting Pseudomonas on compatible solutes, antioxidant status and plant growth of maize under drought stress. Plant Growth Regulation 62(1): 21-30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-010-9479-4
  70. Siczek, A., Frac, M., Kalembasa, S., and Kalembasa, D. 2018. Soil microbial activity of faba bean (Vicia faba) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) rhizosphere during growing season. Applied Soil Ecology 130: 34-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2018.05.012
  71. Singh, J.S., Pandey, V.C., and Singh, D.P. 2011. Efficient soil microorganisms: a new dimension for sustainable agriculture and environmental development. Agriculture, ecosystems and environment 140(3-4): 339-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.017
  72. Sujatha, M.G., Lingaraju, B.S., Palled, Y.B., and Ashalath, K.V. 2008. Importance of integrated nutrient management practices in maize under rain fed condition. Karnataka Journal of agricultural science 21(3): 334-338.
  73. Thilakarathna, M.S., McElroy, M.S., Chapagain, T., Papadopoulos, Y.A., Raizada, M.N. 2016. Belowground nitrogen transfer from legumes to non-legumes under managed herbaceous cropping systems. A review. Agronomy foe Sustainable Development. 36(4): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-016-0396-4
  74. Vurukonda, S.S.K.P., Vardharajula, S., Shrivastava, M., SkZ, A. 2016. Enhancement of drought stress tolerance in crops by plant growth promoting rhizobacteria. Microbiology Research 184: 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2015.12.003
  75. Wallace, J., Frick, B.L., Telford, L., and Martens, J.T. 2017. Organic Field Crop Handbook. Canadian Organic Growers, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 422p.
  76. Wang, B., Liu, C., Zhang, D., He, C., Zhang, J., and Li, Z. 2019. Effects of maize organ-specific drought stress response on yields from transcriptome analysis. BMC Plant Biology 19(1): 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-019-1941-5
  77. Willey, R.W. 1979. Intercropping–Its importance and research needs. I. Competition and Yield Advantages. Field Crop Abstracts 32: 1-10, II. Agronomy and research approaches. In Field Crop Abstracts 32: 73-85.
  78. Yin, W., Chai, Q., Zhao, C., Yu, A., Fan, Z., Hu, F., Fan, H., Guo, Y. and Coulter, J.A. 2020. Water utilization in intercropping: A review. Agricultural Water Management 241: 106335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106335
  79. Zaidi, A., M. Saghir Khan and Amil. M. 2003. Interactive effect of rhizotrophic microorganisms on yield and nutrient uptake of chickpea (Cicer arietinum ). European Journal Agronomy 19(1): 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00015-1
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار