Evaluation of yield, yield components and different intercropping indices in mixed and row intercropping of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

• Faranak Nurbakhsh
• Alireza Koocheki
• Mahdi Nassiri Mahallati

Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

10.22067/ijpr.v1394i2.30942

Abstract

Introduction
Intercropping as a common method in sustainable agricultural systems, plays an important role in increasing productivity and yield stability to improve utilization of resources )Alizadeh et al., 2010). Studies in different countries showed that intercropping causes increase in diversity, production and more efficient use of water resources, land, labor and nutrients and also reduces problems caused by pests, diseases and weeds (Awal et al., 2006) and improves environmental conditions for plant growth )Alizadeh et al., 2010). One the most important benefits of intercropping is increasing production per unit area compared with sole cropping (Banik et al., 2006(.The reason for increasing the yield in the intercropping is the better use of environmental factors such as water, nutrient and light )Alizadeh et al., 2010). TohidiNejad et al, (2004) evaluated the intercropping of corn (Zeamayz) and sunflower (Helianthus annuus( and reported that intercropping, due to more efficient use of light, improved the yield of both plants. Pouramir et al, (2010) investigated the intercropping of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum) and concluded that yield of chickpea was significantly affected by intercropping with sesame and the highest yield of chickpea was obtained in monoculture. Beheshti (Beheshti et al., 2010) evaluated the intercropping of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and soybean (Glaycin max) and stated that in all the intercropping treatments, land equivalent ratio was increased. The present study was designed to investigate the effects of mixed and row intercropping on yield of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.).
Matrials and Methods
In order to study the effects of mixed and row intercropping of sesame and bean on yield and yield components in two species of sesame and bean, a split-plot experiment based on randomized complete blocks design with three replicates was performed in research farm of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in 2011-2012. Cropping pattern (mixed or row intercropping) was allocated to the main plots and different planting ratios (25% bean +75% sesame, 25% sesame +75% bean, 50% sesame +50% bean, sole cropping of sesame, sole cropping of bean) were assigned to the sub-plots. Density of planting for sesame and beans were 40 and 20 plants per square meters respectively.
Crop combination in row intercropping was as follows:
75% sesame + 25% bean: planting three rows of sesame and one row of bean.
25% sesame + 75% bean: planting three rows of bean and one row of sesame.
50% sesame and 50% bean: planting two rows of sesame and two rows of beans.
Indices such as Land Equivalent Ratio (LER), Aggressively index (AG) and Relative Crowding Coefficient index (RCC) were used (Vandermeer, 1989). For analyzing data, SAS ver.9.1 was used and mean comparison was performed based on Duncan test and for drawing charts Excel was used.
Results and Discussion
Results indicated that yield and yield components of sesame and bean were affected by different treatments. In all cases, row intercropping showed superior compared with mixed intercropping. The highest sesame yield (3128.93 kg/ha) was obtained with 50% sesame and 50% bean treatment and the highest bean yield (1087.76 kg/ha) was obtained with sole cropping. The highest amount of LER (land equivalent ratio) (1.59) was obtained with 50% sesame and 50% bean. LER values in all different treatments of multiple cropping were more than 1 and this shows superiority of multiple cropping compared with sole cropping of sesame and bean. This can be caused by biological nitrogen fixing by bean (Tavasoli et al., 2010). The highest value of Relative Crowding Coefficient (RCC) (2.19) was obtained with the50% sesame and 50% bean treatment. Based on Aggressively index (AG), bean was the dominant species.
Conclusions
Bean (as a nitrogen-fixing species) and sesame (as an oil crop) are different groups of plants with various functions. The presence of these two species in the intercropping increased diversity and optimal yield was obtained when the appropriate ratio (Balance between inter specific and intra specific competition) was used.

Keywords

• AG (Aggrssivity index)
• LER (land equivalent ratio)
• RCC (Relative Crowding Coefficient)

---

References

1. Adeniyan, O.N., Akande, S.R., Balogun, M.O., and Saka, J.O. 2007. Evaluation of crop yield of African yam bean, maize and kenaf under intercropping systems. America-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environment Science 2: 99-102.

2. Alizadeh, Y., Koocheki, A., and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2010. Yield, yield components and potential weed control of intercropping bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) with sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum L.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 7(2): 541-553. (In Persian with English Summary).

3. Awal, M.A., Koshi, H., and Ikeda, T. 2006. Radiation interception and use by maize/peanut intercrop canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 139: 74-83.

4. Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., and Ghose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive experiment. European Journal of Agronomy 24: 325-332.

5. Bhatti, I.H., Ahmad, R., Jabbar, A., Nazir, M.S., and Mahmood. T. 2006. Competitive behavior of component crops in different sesame – legume intercropping systems. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 165-167.

6. Beheshti, A.R., Soltanian, B., and Sadrabadi, R. 2010. Investigation of density and different crop rates on grain and biological yield in intercropping of grain sorghum and bean. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8: 1-11. (In Persian with English Summary).

7. Elmor, R.W., and Jockobs, H.A. 1986. Yield and nitrogen yield of sorghum intercropped with nodulating and non- nodulating soybeans. Agronomy Journal 78: 780-789.

8. Ghaderi, G.R., Gazanchian, A., and Yousefi, M. 2008. The forage production comparison of alfalfa and wheatgrass as affected by seeding rate on mixed and pure cropping. Iranian journal of Range and Desert Research 15(2): 256-268.

9. Hasan Zade Aval, F., Koochaki, A., Khazaei, H., and Nasiri Mahalati, M. 2011. Effect of density on agronomic characteristics and yield of savory and Iranian clover in intercropping. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8(6): 920-929.

10. Jahani, M., Koocheki, A., and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2008. Comparison of different intercropping arrangements of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) and lentil

(Lens culinaris M.). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 6(1): 67-78. (In Persian with English Summary).

11. Jamshidi, K.H., Mazaheri, D., Majnoun Hosseini, N., Rahimian, H., and Peyghambari, A. 2008. Evaluation of yield in intercropping of maize (Zea mays) and cow pea (Vigna unguiculata). Pajouhsh & Sazandegi 80: 110-118.

12. Koocheki, A., Nassiri Mahallati, M., Mondani, F., Feizi, H., and Amirmoradi, S. 2009. Evaluation of radiation interception and use by maize and bean intercropping canopy. Journal of Agroecology 1: 13- 23. (In Persian with English Summary).

13. Mazaheri, D. 1998. Intercropping (Second Edition). University of Tehran, 262p.

(In Persian).

14. Pouramir, F., Koocheki, A., Nassiri M., and Ghorbani, R. 2010. Evaluation the effect of different planting combinations on yield and yield components of intercropping sesame and chickpea in additive series. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. In Press. (In Persian with English Summary).

15. Raei, Y., Ghasemi, K., Javanshir, A., Alyari, H., Mohammadi, S.A., and Nasrolah zade, S. 2007. Assessment of soybean (Glycine max) and sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) intercropping by using reciprocal model of yield. Iranian Journal of Crop Science 8(1): 1-13.

16. Rahimy, M.M., Mazaheri, D., Khodabandeh, N., and Heidari, H. 2003. Assessment of product in corn and soybean intercropping in Arsanjan region. Agricultural Science 9: 109-126. (In Persian with English Summary).

17. Rezvan Beydokhti, Sh. 2005. Comparison of different intercropping arrangement of corn and bean. MSc. Thesis, College of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian with English Summary).

18. Sarlak, Sh., and Aghaalikhani, M. 2009. Effect of pant density and mixing ratio on crop yield in sweet corn (Zea mays L. var Saccharata) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) intercropping. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 11(4): 367-380. (In Persian).

19. Sullivan, P. 2003. Intercropping principles and production practices ATTRA, Available Online (October 2006): Http://www.attra.ncat.org.

20. Tavasoli, A., Ghanbari, A., Ahmadi, M.M., and Heydari, M. 2010. Effect of manual and chemical fertilizer on Yield of intercropping (Panicum miliaceum) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research 8(2): 203-212.

21. Tayefe Noori, M. 2004. Study of intercropping of maize and cow pea. MSc. Thesis,

College of Agriculture, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran. (In Persian with English

Summary).

22. Tohidi Nejad, A., Mazaheri, D., and Koochaki, A. 2004. Study of maize and

sunflower intercropping. Pajouhesh & Sazandegi 64: 39-45. (In Persian with English Summary).

23. Tsubo, M., Walker, S., and Mukhala, E. 2001. Comparisons of radiation use

efficiency of mono/intercropping system with different row orientation. Field Crops Research 71: 17-29.

24. Vandermeer, J.H. 1989. The Ecology of Intercropping, Cambridge. University Press. 297 pp.