Effect of late season drought stress and different combination of intercropping with barley on yield and yield components of chickpea and faba bean

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

• Hesam Niksirat
• Ehsan Bijanzadeh
• Roholah Naderi

College of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Darab, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

10.22067/ijpr.v9i1.56037

Abstract

Introduction
A growing interest in intercropping systems has been initiated in developed countries due to the increasing awareness of environmental degradation arising from the heavy use of non-renewable resources such as water. Cereal-legume intercropping are common in natural ecosystems, but now are rarely used in developed countries, except for certain intercropping systems used for animal feed. A renewed interest in intercropping and particularly in intercropping of cereals with legumes has risen again lately. Intercropping can use the available environmental resources more efficiently and thus result in higher yields than monocropping. The reasons for the higher yield in such systems is that the intercropped species do not compete for exactly the same growth resource niche and thereby tend to use the available resources in a complementary way. Izaurralde et al, (1990) used chickpea intercropped with barley in different planting densities and found that grain, straw, and dry matter yields of the mixtures increased with increasing chickpea planting density. With respect to drought stress in late season of Sothern Iran because of cutting off rainfall in this area, and the importance of intercropping to reach stability and sustainability in production, the aim of this study was to assess the changes in yield and yield components of chickpea and faba bean intercropped with barley under late season drought stress.
 
Material & Methods
To evaluate the yield and yield components of intercropping chickpea and faba bean with barley cultivars under different irrigation regimes, a field experiment was conducted at College of Agriculture and Natural Resources of Darab, Shiraz University during 2014 growing season. Treatments were included two levels of irrigation regimes (full irrigation and cutting off irrigation at milk development of barley) and 8 cropping treatments consisted of monoculture of Nimroz tow-rowed barley, Zehak six-rowed barley, pea and faba bean and intercropping of Nimroz+pea, Nimroz+faba bean, Zehak+pea and Zehak+faba bean with a ratio of 1:1 which laid out as split plot arrangement in randomized complete block design with three replicates. At crop maturity, plants were hand harvested to measure yield and biological yield and yield components including number of pods/plant, number of seed/plant, and 100-kernel weight. Also, land equivalent ratio (LER) was calculated. LER is the most popular index for expressing the yield advantage of intercropping systems and defined as the relative land area that is required for monocrops to produce the same yields as intercrops. Finally, analysis of variance (ANOWA) was performed using MSTATC ver. 2.1 software (1991) and the means compared by LSD test at 5% probability level.
 
Results & Discussion
Analysis of variance showed that main effects of irrigation regime and cropping treatments had significant effect on number of pods/plant in chickpea while these treatments had no significant effect on number of pods/plant of faba bean. Under drought stress, number of seeds/plant, 100-kernel weight, grain yield of pea decreased 40, 16, and 57% while in faba bean decreased 32, 18, and 40%, respectively. Interaction effect of irrigation regime and cropping treatment had significant effect on grain yield and harvest index of chickpea and faba bean while this interaction effect had no significant effect on biological yield of two legumes. In chickpea, the highest biological yield (9916 kg/ha) and grain yield (1630 kg/ha) were obtained in monoculture of chickpea and the highest 100-seed weight (25.5 g) and harvest index (%29.85) were obtained in Nimroz+pea intercropping. Also, in faba bean, the highest biological yield (11960 kg/ha) and grain yield (5175 kg/ha) were observed in monoculture of faba bean. Maximum harvest index (%45.58) was obtained in Zehak+faba bean intercropping. Interaction effect of irrigation regime and cropping treatment had significant effect on LER_legumes and LER_total. Under drought stress, LER in legumes in all of the intercropping treatments increased from 13 to 80%. Likewise, the highest LER_cereals (0.57), LER_legumes (0.83), and LER_total (1.4) was obtained in Zehak+pea intercropping.
 
Conclusion
It is concluded that intercropping of six-rowed Zehak barley cultivar with pea was advantageous system of each legumes in monoculture especially under drought stress condition because of better land use efficiency than sole cropping and the other mixtures. This intercropping system can be adopted by farmers for maximization of yield especially under late season drought stress in Southern Iran.

Keywords

• Biological yield
• Cutting off irrigation
• Land equivalent ratio
• Six-rowed barley

---

References

1. Abdulahi, A., Nasrollahzadeh, S., Dabbagh Mohamadi Nasab, A., Zehtab Salmasi, S., and Pourdad, S.S. 2013. Study on effect of weed interference and nitrogen fertilizer on performance of chickpea in intercropping with wheat. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Production Science. 23: 85-100. (In Persian).
2. Amiri Deh Ahmadi, S.R., Parsa, M., and Ganjeali, A. 2010. The effects of drought stress at different phenology stage on morphological traits and yield components of a chickpea (Cicer arietinum) under greenhouse conditions. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8: 301-317. (In Persian with English Summary).
3. Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghase, S.S. 2006. Wheat and Chickpea intercropping systems in additive series experiment: advantages and smothering. Agronomy Journal 24: 324-332.
4. Brooker, R.W., Bennett, A.E., Cong, W., Daniell, T.J., George, T.S., Hallett, D.D., Hawes, C.,. Lanneta, P.P.M., Jones, H.G., Karley, A.J., Li, L., McKenzie, B.M., Pakeman, R.J., Paterson, E., Schob, C., Shen, J., Squire, G., Watson, C.A., Zhang, C., Zhang, F., Zhang, J., and White, P.J. 2015. Improving intercropping: a synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. New Phytologist 206: 107-117.
5. Daneshnia, F., Amini, A., and Chaichi, M.R. 2015. Surfactant effect on forage yield and water use efficiency for berseem clover and basil in intercropping and limited irrigation treatments. Agricultural Water Management 160: 57-63.
6. Dhima, K.V., Lithorgidis, A.S., Vasilakoglou, I.B., and Dordas, C.A. 2007. Competition indices of common vetch and cereal intercrop in two seeding ratio. Field Crops Research 100: 249-256.
7. Diallo, A.T., Samb, P.I., and RoyMacauley, H. 2001. Water status and stomatal behaviour of cowpea, Vigna unguicalata (L.) Walp plants inoculated with two Glomus species at low soil moisture levels. European Journal of soil Biology 37: 187-
8. El-Sherif, A., and Ali, M.M. 2015. Effect of deficit irrigation and soybean/maize intercropping on yield and water use efficiency. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 44: 777-
9. Emam, Y. 2007. Cereal Production.3^rd Shiraz University Press. Shiraz. Pp:190. (In Persian).
10. Fischer, R.A. 1999. Irrigated spring wheat and timing and amount of nitrogen fertilizer. Field Crops Research 33: 57-80.
11. Foulkes, M.J., and Sylvester-Bradley, S.R. 2002. The ability of wheat cultivars to withstand drought in UK conditions: formation of grain yield. Journal of Agricultural Science 138: 153-
12. Ganjali, A., and Nezami, A. 2008. Ecophysiology and Yield Barriers in Pulse Crops. In: Parsa and A. Bagheri (Eds.). Pulses. Jehad University of Mashhad Publisher. pp: 522. (In Persian).
13. Getachew, A., Ghizaw, A., and Sinebo, W. 2006. Yield performance and land-use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian high lands. European Journal of Agronomy 25:202-
14. Gholinezhad, E., and Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E. 2014. Evaluation of grain yield and quality of black cuimin (Neglla sativa) in intercropping with chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Iranian Journal of Crop Science 16: 236-249. (In Persian with English Summary).
15. Ghosh, P.K. 2004. Growth, yield, competition and economics of groundnut-cereal fodder intercropping system in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research 88: 227-237.
16. Gregory, P.J., Simmonds, L.P., and Pilbeam, C.J. 2000. Soil type, climatic regime and the response of water use efficiency to crop management. Agronomy Journal 928: 14-820.
17. Hamzei, J., Seyedi, M., Ahmadvand, G., and Abutalebian, M.A. 2012. The effect of additive intercropping on weed suppression, yield and yield components of chickpea and barley. Journal of Crop Production and Processing 2: 43-56. (In Persian).
18. Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, M. 2013. Evaluation of barley (Hordeum vulgare ) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) intercropping systems using advantageous indices of interference conditions. Journal of Agriculture Science 6: 1-12. (In Persian with English Summary).
19. Hamzei, J., and Seyedi, M. 2014. Study of canopy growth indices in mono and intercropping of chickpea and barley under weed competition. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Production 24: 75-90. (In Persian).
20. Javanmard, A., Dabbagh Mohamadi Nasab, A., Javanshir, A., Moghaddam, M., and Janmohammadi, H. 2009. Forage yield and quality in intercropping of maze with different legumes as double-cropped. Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment 7: 163-166.
21. Javanshir, A., DabbaghMohammadiNasab, A., Hamidi, A., and Gholipour, M. 2000. Ecology of I Jehad University of Mashhad Publisher. pp. 217. (In Persian).
22. Jenani Oskoii, F., Nasrollahzadeh, S., and Shakiba, M.R. 2015. Effect of different intercropping patterns on yield and yield components of maize (Zea mays) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Biological Forume-An International Journal 7: 854-858.
23. Koocheki, A., Hosseini, M., and Nassirri Mahallati, M. 1997. Crop Water R Jehad University of Mashhad Publisher. pp: 558. (In Persian).
24. Lithourgidis, A.S., Dhima, K.V., Vasilakouglou, I.B., Dordas, C.A., and Yiakoulaki, M.D. 2007. Sustainable production of barley and wheat by intercropping common vetch. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 27: 95-99.
25. Mazaheri, D. 1998. Intercropping. University of Tehran Press (Second Edition). Pp: 262. (In Persian).
26. Morris, R.A., and Garrity, D.P. 1993. Resource capture and utilization in intercropping: water. Field Crops Research 34: 303-317.
27. Rezvani Moghadam, P., and Moradi, R. 2013. Evaluating of planting date, biological fertilizer and intercropping on yield essence quantity of cumin (Cuminum cyminum) and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crop Science. 43: 217-230. (In Persian with English Summary).
28. Saman, M., Sepehri, A., Ahmadvand, G., and Sabaghpour, H. 2010. The effect of terminal drought on yield and yield components of five chickpea genotypes. Journal of Crop Science 41: 259-269. (In Persian).
29. Tesfaye, K., Walker, S., and Tsubo, M. 2006. Radiation interception and radiation use effiiency of three grain legumes under water deficit conditions in a semi-arid environment. European Journal of Agronomy 25: 60-
30. Tsubo, M., Mukhala, E., Ogindo, H.O., and Walker, S. 2003. Productivity of maize- bean intercropping in a semi-arid region of south Africa. Available on website http://www.worg.za
31. Ullah, A., Bakht, J., Shafi, M., and Islam, W.A. 2002. Effect of various irrigation levels on different chickpea varieties. Asian Journal of Plant Science 4: 355-357.
32. Undie, U.L., Uwah D.F., and Attoe, E.E. 2012. Effect of intercropping and crop arrangment on yield and productivity of late season maize/soybean mixtures in the humid environment of south southern Nigeria. Journal of Agriculture Science 4: 37-
33. Vasilakouglou, I., Dhima, K., Lithorgidis, A., and Eleftherohorinos, I. 2008. Competitive ability of winter cereal common vetch intercrops against sterile oat. Experimental Agriculture 44: 509-520.
34. Wang, Z., Jin, X., Bao, X., Zhao, J., Sun, J., Christie, P., and L. LI. 2014. Intercropping enhances productivity and maintains the most soil fertility properties relative to sole cropping. PLoS One. 9: e113984.
35. Zhu, J.K. 2002. Salt and drought stress signal transduction in plants. Annual Reviews Plant Biology. 53: 247-316.