| تعداد نشریات | 286 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 84 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 2,845 |
| تعداد مقالات | 32,299 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 41,382,618 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 18,557,296 |
بررسی عملکرد، خصوصیات مورفولوژیکی و بهره‌وری دو رقم چغندر علوفه‌ای ( BetavulgarisL.) در مزارع استان گلستان | ||
| پژوهش های کاربردی زراعی | ||
| دوره 36، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 138، تیر 1403، صفحه 1-20 اصل مقاله (523.26 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/aj.2024.359387.1613 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| علیرضا صابری* 1؛ مصطفی حسینی2 | ||
| 1- استادیار پژوهش بخش تحقیقات بخش تحقیقات زراعی و با غی مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گلستان، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش | ||
| 2کارشناس ترویج سازمان جهاد کشاورزی گلستان | ||
| چکیده | ||
| چغندر علوفه ای ( Beta vulgaris L.)برای تامین علوفه مورد نیاز دام استفاده می‌شود. به منظور بررسی عملکرد و برخی صفات مورفولوژیکی دو رقم چغندر علوفه‌ای (Timbale و Kara)، این تحقیق در سال زراعی 1401-1400 در دو آزمایش جداگانه در دو منطقه (کردکوی و بندر ترکمن) اجرا شد. ارقام با فاصله خطوط کاشت 50 سانتی‌متر رو ی پشته و تراکم 110000 بوته در هکتار اوایل آبان ماه کاشته شدند. طول خطوط کاشت 100 متر و تعداد خطوط کاشت در هر تیمار 100 پشته بود که برداشت در سطح 5000 متر مربع برای هر تیمار و جمعا 10000 متر مربع برای هر دو تیمار صورت گرفت. برای ثبت صفات هر رقم ده بار کادر اندازی شد و هر بار ده بوته بصورت تصادفی برای اندازه گیری و سپس تجزیه و تحلیل آماری (بصورت تی تست) برداشت شد. کل سطح زیر کشت نیز طبق دستورالعمل پروژه های تحقیقی و ترویجی رکورد گیری شد. نتایج بررسی دو منطقه نشان داد: تفاوت تولید علوفه تر Timbale، نسبت به رقم Kara در سطح 1 درصد معنی دار بود، عملکرد ریشه تر Timbale ، 66/153 تن در هکتار بود که 02/53 درصد نسبت به رقم Kara ، با عملکرد 18/72 تن در هکتار برتری داشت. مقایسه میانگین عملکرد علوفه خشک نیز بیانگر تفاوت معنی دار آماری است. علوفه خشک Timbale (85/18 تن در هکتار) با افزایش 28/44 درصدی نسبت به رقم Kara با عملکرد 51/10 تن در هکتار برتری نشان داد. ضمنا اختلاف ارتفاع بوته، تعداد برگ، طول و قطر ریشه ارقام هم معنی دار بود. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| بهره وری؛ چغندر علوفه ای؛ صفات مرفولوژیکی؛ کشت پاییزه؛ عملکرد | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Investigation and comparison of yield, morphological characteristics and productivity between two fodder beet(Beta vulgaris L.) in Golestan province | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Alireza Saberi1؛ MOSTAFA Hosseini2 | ||
| 1Assistant of Professors, Agronomy and Horticulture Department of Agricultural and Natural Recourses Research and education of Golestan, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Gorgan, Iran | ||
| 2Golestan agricultural e Jahad organization expert | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Investigation and comparison of yield and morphological characteristics between two fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.) in Golestan province Introduction: Fodder beet can be used as a new and valuable product to provide fodder needed by livestock. It can be used for dry forage, pasture, silage, seed production and human nutrition (Lee et al., 2004). American agricultural department also recommend different fodder beets cultivars to the farmers who seek the cultivation of forages with high economic and biological performance in dry and semi dry areas of this country (Fasahat et al., 2019) . Due to its high production potential, optimum nutritional value, and the ability to be preserved as a dry hay and silage, fodder beet can be grown in many areas of Iran with different climate conditions for forage production (Taleghani et al., 2020). But, these findings need to be refined, improved and tested for local climatic, soil and crop conditions. The aim of this experiment was to determine the best cultivar from compairing of morphological and yield of two cultivars in autumn cultivation of fodder beet in Kordkuy and Bandar Torkman regions. Materials and Methods: This research was conducted in Golestan province during the 2021-2022 growing season. This research performed in Kordkoy and Bandar-Torkeman. Experiments consisted of two fodder beet (Beta vulgaris L.), The number of planting lines was 100 with a length of 100 meters and 50 cm interval between the lines. To measure traits 10 bushes were randomly harvested by using quadrate. The total surface area under cultivation was measured. To find crop production of fodder beet cultivars the results were compared using t-test. Results and Discussion: The mean comparison of yield and morphological parameters of two new fodder beet varieties (Beta vulgaris L.) showed that Kara, new fodder beet variety in Kordkuy had a plant height of 139.94 cm, which was 51.19% taller than Timbale cultivar. Timbale produced greater root diameter (13.1 mm) root length and number of leaf (45.05) compared to Kara cultivar. The mean comparison of fresh yield of two fodder beet varieties showed significant differences among the varieties. Fresh forage production of Timbale with a yield of 182.96 ton ha-1 was 48.02% greater compared to Kara cultivar, which gave a yield of 87.86 ton ha-1. The mean comparison of dry yield showed significant differences among the varieties. Dry forage production of Timbale (22.25 ton ha-1) was 43.68% higher than the Kara cultivar, which produced a dry forage yield of 12.53 ton ha-1). Also, the fodder beet varieties of Timbale was superior in terms of morphological parameters as compared to the Kara cultivar. Forage beet cultivation in the country so far has been based on the use of seeds of local mass and only Kara cultivar has been introduced as the first forage cultivar in Iran, which needs to be improved to achieve new cultivars (Taleghani et al., 2020). It indicates that the new fodder beet plants grow better and produce higher yield components. Conclusion: Overall, the findings of the study showed that Timbale variety performed better relative to Kara. The fresh forage and dry forage production of the new variety (Timbale ) were greater than Kara cultivar. It could be concluded that, by using new fodder beet variety during autumn cropping season, higher yield per surface area might be attained. Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to Golestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, and the sugar beet seed institute (SBSI), Karaj, for their guidance. Key words: fodder beet, autumn planting, morphological traits, yield References Fasahat, P. Rezaei, J. Hasanvandi, M. S. Mirzaei, M. R. Saberi, A. R. Nadali, F. 2019. Evaluation of new fodder beet hybrids for qualitative and quantitative traits. Final report of research project sugar beet seed institute. 24 pages. . (In Persian). Lee, D.W., Hanna, G., Buntin, D., Dozier, W., Timper, P., and Wilson, J. P. 2004 . Pearl millet for grain, University of Georgia, USA. Taleghani, D., Noshad, H., Aghashahi, A. R., Mostofi, M. R. and Saberi, A. R. 2020. The effects of sowing date and variety on autumn fodder beet quantitative and qualitative yield in Mazandaran and Golestan. Final report of research project sugar beet seed institute. 47 pages. (In Persian). | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| fodder beet, autumn planting, morphological traits, productivity. yield | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abasi, S., Cordnaeich, A. and Bagheri, M. 2018. Evaluation of genetic diversity of new chenopodium quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) cultivars based on agromorphological traits. 15th National Iranian Congress Science Congress, 2-5 Sep. 2019. Karaj, Iran. (In Persian with English abstract). Afiah, S., Hassan, W. and Al Kady, A.M.A. 2018. Assessment of six qinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes for seed yield and its attributes under Toshka conditions. Zagazig Journal of Agriculture Research, 45 (6B):2281-2294. Bagheri, M., Miri, Kh., Kloshkam, S. G., Anafjeh, Z., and Keshavarz, S. 2022. Assessment of adaptability and seed yield stability of autumn sown quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes using AMMI analysis. Seed and Plant. 38: 453-472. (in Persian with English abstract). Bagheri, M., Zamani, M.R., Shouride, H., Molaei, A.R., Mansourian, A. and Heydari, F. 2018. Evaluation of compatibility of quinoa genotypes in Mashhad and Isfahan. Final Research Project Report, Agricultural Research and Information Center, Registration No. 53795. (In Persian with English abstract). Gholizadeh, A., and Dehghani, H. 2016. Graphic analysis of trait relations of Iranian bread wheat germplasm under non-saline and saline conditions using the biplot method. Genetika, 48(2): 473-486. Jacobsen, S.E., Mujica, A., Jensen, C., 2003. The resistanceof quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to adverse abiotic factors. Food Reviews International, 19: 99-109. Karahan, T., and Akgün, I. 2020. Selection of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) genotypes by GYT (genotype × yield × trait) biplot technique and its comparison with GT (genotype × trait). Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 18(1):1347-1359. Kendal, E. 2020. Evaluation of some barley genotypes with genotype by yield*trait (GYT) biplot method. Agriculture and Forestry, 66 (2): 137-150. Kendal, E., Karaman, M., Tekdal, S., and Dogan, S. 2019. Analysis of promising barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) lines performance by AMMI and GGE biplot in multiple traits and environment. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 17(2): 5219-5233. Kroonenberg, P. M. 1995. Introduction to biplots for G×E tables. Department of mathematics, research report 51. University of Queensland. Merrick, L. F., Glover, K. D., Yabwalo, D., and Byamukama, E. 2020. Use of genotype by yield*trait (GYT) Analysis to select hard red spring wheat with elevated performance for agronomic and disease resistance traits. Crop Breeding, Genetics and Genomics, 2(2): 1-18. Miri, Kh. 2017. Evaluation of compatibility of quinoa genotypes to Iranshahr region. Final Report of the Research Project. Baluchestan Agriculture and Natural Resources Research and Training Center, Iranshahr, Iran. Agricultural Research and Extension Research Organization. (In Persian with English abstract). Mohamed Al-Naggar, A. M., Mahmoud Younis, A. S., Mohamed Atta, M., Lotfy Abd El-Moneim, M. and Sabry Al-Metwally, M. 2021. Multivariate of genetic diversity among thirty-seven Chenopodium quinoa genotypes under organic and mineral fertilzation. Plant Cell Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, 23 (7&8): 72-93. Mohammadi, R., and Amri, A. 2011. Graphic analysis of trait relations and genotype evaluation in durum wheat. Journal of Crop Improvement, 25: 680-696. Pacheco, A., Rodríguez, F., Alvarado, G., and Burgueño, J. 2017. "ADEL-R. Analysis and design of experiments with R for Windows. Version 2.0", https://hdl.handle.net/11529/10857, CIMMYT Research Data & Software Repository Network, V3. Pacheco, A., Vargas, M., Alvarado, G., Rodríguez, F., Crossa, J., and Burgueño, J. 2015. "GEA-R (Genotype x Environment Analysis with R for Windows) Version 4.1", https://hdl.handle.net/11529/10203, CIMMYT Research Data & Software Repository Network, V16. Rahmati, M., Ahmadi, A., Hossein Pour, T., Hamidiyan, K., and Reisvand, M. 2021. Evaluation of yield potential of barley genotypes and identification of traits related to improving grain yield under rainfed conditions. Iranian Journal of Dryland Agriculture, 10 (1): 57-71 (In Persian). Sepahvand, N.A., Tavazoa, M. and Kohbazi, M. 2010. Quinoa valuable plant for alimentary security and adaptation agricultural in Iran. 11th National Iranian Crop Science Congress. 24-26 Jul. 2010. Tehran, Iran. (In Persian with English abstract). Taherian, M. 2023. Identification of Superior Barley Genotypes (Hordeum vulgare L.) Based on Yield Stability and Optimal Agronomic Traits in Khorasan Razavi Province. Journal of Crop Breeding, 15 (47): 174-185 (in Persian with English abstract). Taherian, M. and Nikkhah, H. R. 2022. Analysis of yield stability, heritability and characterization of barley promising lines in Nishabour. Applied Research in Field Crops, 35 (3): 28-45(in Persian with English abstract). Taherian, M. and Nikkhah, H. R. 2022. Evaluation and Characterization of Barley Inbred Lines in Temperate Regions of Country. Journal of Crop Breeding, 14 (43):105-116 (in Persian with English abstract). Tavoosi, M. and Sepahvand, N. A. 2012. Evaluation of different genotypes of quinoa for yield and other phenological characteristics in khuzestan. 12th Iranian Genetic Congress. 21-23 May, 2012. Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. (In Persian with English abstract). Thiam, E., Allaoui, A. and Benlhabib, O. 2021. Quinoa productivity and stability evaluation through varietal and environmental interaction. Plants, 10 (714): 1-14. Xu, N., Fok, M., Li, J., Yang, X., and Yan, W. 2017. Optimization of cotton variety registration criteria aided with a genotype- by-trait biplot analysis. Scientific Reports, 7: 17237. Yan, W. 2001. GGE biplot–A Windows application for graphical analysis of multi-environment trial data and other types of two-way data. Agronomy Journal, 93: 1111–1118. Yan, W., and Kang, M.S. 2003. GGE Biplot Analysis: A graphical tool for breeders, geneticists, and agronomists. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Yan, W., and Rajcan, I. 2002. Biplot analysis of sites and trait relations of soybean in Ontario. Crop Science, 42: 11-20. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 101 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 171 |
||