ارزیابی عملکرد، اسانس و شاخص های سودمندی کشت مخلوط افزایشی گیاه دارویی زوفا (Hyssopus Officinalis) و عدس (Lens culinaris)

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه ژنتیک و به نژادی گیاهی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی (ره)، قزوین، ایران

2 استادیار گروه زراعت و گیاهان دارویی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه شهید مدنی آذربایجان، تبریز، ایران

3 استادیار گروه مهندسی باغبانی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی (ره)، قزوین، ایران

4 استادیار موسسه تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه نهال و بذر، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، تهران، ایران

5 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد رشته سیستماتیک - اکولوژی گیاهی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

سابقه و هدف: کشت مخلوط می‌تواند به‌عنوان یکی از راه‌های افزایش عملکرد و پایداری تولید در واحد سطح مطرح باشد. همچنین، گیاهان دارویی نقش بسیار مهمی در سلامت انسان دارند. بسیاری از مردم در کشورهای مختلف جهان به سمت مصرف این داروها گرایش پیدا کرده‌اند. نیاز برای این گیاهان به دلیل تولید داروهای گیاهی، محصولات آرایشی و بهداشتی در بازارهای ملی و بین‌المللی رو به افزایش است. بنابراین بهبود کیفیت فرآورده‌های طبیعی از گیاهان دارویی ضروری به‌نظر می‌رسد. به‌منظور بهبود کیفیت گیاه دارویی زوفا (Hyssopus officinalis) و حاصلخیزی خاک به‌وسیله تثبیت زیستی نیتروژن با باکتری‌ها توسط عدس (Lens culinaris)، آزمایشی به‌صورت ترکیب‌های مختلف کشت مخلوط زوفا و عدس انجام گردید.
مواد و روش‌ها: آزمایش در سال 1395 در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در مزرعه تحقیقاتی دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی (ره) اجرا شد. تیمارهای آزمایش شامل کشت خالص زوفا (A)، کشت خالص عدس (B)، 100% زوفا + 25% عدس(C)، 100% زوفا + 50% عدس (D)، 100% عدس+ 25% زوفا (E) و 100% عدس+ 50% زوفا (F) بودند.
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد که بیشترین میزان وزن تر و خشک زوفا در واحد سطح، از کشت خالص آن (A) و کشت مخلوط 100% زوفا + 25% عدس ( C) به‌دست آمد. بیشترین میزان اسانس زوفا در حالت کشت مخلوط 100% زوفا + 25% عدس (C) و کشت مخلوط 100% زوفا + 50% عدس (D) حاصل گردید که از نظر آماری تفاوت معنی‌داری با هم نداشتند. مقایسه میانگین عملکرد اسانس زوفا در واحد سطح نشان داد که کشت خالص زوفا (A) و کشت مخلوط 100% زوفا + 25% عدس (C) بیشترین مقدار را نشان داده و از لحاظ آماری با هم تفاوت معنی‌داری نداشتند. بیشترین مقدار عملکرد عدس در کشت خالص آن به دست آمد که باحالت‌های مختلف کشت مخلوط تفاوت معنی‌داری نشان داد. کم‌ترین عملکرد عدس در واحد سطح از تیمار C (100% زوفا + 25% عدس) به دست آمد. همچنین نتایج مقایسات میانگین نشان داد که تیمار D (100% زوفا + 50% عدس) بالاترین میزان وزن هزار دانه را به خود اختصاص داد که با تیمارهای B (کشت خالص عدس) و C (100% زوفا + 25% عدس) در یک گروه آماری قرار گرفت. علاوه بر این مقایسه میانگین‌ها نشان داد که کشت خالص زوفا (تیمار A) و 100% عدس+ 25% زوفا (تیمار E) بالاترین میزان نیتروژن برگ زوفا و کشت خالص عدس (تیمار B) بالاترین میزان نیتروژن دانه عدس را به همراه داشت. تمام نسبت‌های اختلاط زوفا و عدس (به‌استثنای کشت مخلوط 100% عدس+ 50% زوفا – تیمار F)، LER بزرگ‌تر از یک داشتند که برتری کشت مخلوط نسبت به تک‌کشتی را نشان می‌دهد. لازم به ذکر است که تیمارهای C (100% زوفا + 25% عدس) و D (100% زوفا + 50% عدس) بالاترین میزان LER را به خود اختصاص دادند.
نتیجه‌گیری: به‌طورکلی نتایج نشان داد که کشت مخلوط زوفا و عدس می‌تواند با بهبود استفاده از منابع، موجب ثبات در تولید گردد. همچنین از طریق کاهش مصرف نهاده‌های شیمیایی با تثبیت نیتروژن در جهت تولید اکولوژیک گیاهان دارویی به‌طور قابل‌ملاحظه‌ای مؤثر باشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluation of of yield, essential oil and productivity indices in different planting combinations in the intercropping of hyssop (Hyssopus officinalis) and lentil (Lens culinaris)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Farhad Habibzadeh 1
  • Saeid Hazrati 2
  • Behvar Asghari 3
  • Majid Gholamhoseini 4
  • Mohammad Javad Nikjouyan 5
1 Departmet of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Agronomy and Medicinal Plants, Faculty of Agriculture, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran.
3 Departmet of Horticultural engineering, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran.
4 Seed and Plant Improvement Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran,Iran.
5 MSc Student of Plant Systematic and Ecology, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Background and objectives: Intercropping can be considered as one of the ways to increase yield and sustainability of production per unit area. Also, medicinal plants play an important role in human health in the world. Many people in different countries of the world tend to use these drugs. The need for these plants is increasing due to the production of herbal medicines and cosmetics in the national and international markets. Therefore, improve quality of natural medicinal plants is an absolute necessity. In order to improvement of soil fertility and hyssop (Hyssopus Officinalis) guality by biological nitrogen fixation with bacteria is known by lentil (Lens culinaris), the experiment was conducted to evaluate the different combinations of intercropping hyssop and lentil.
Materials and methods: The experiment was performed in 2016, based on randomized complete block design with three replications in the Research Field of Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran. The experimental treatments includes: pure culture of hyssop (A), pure culture of lentil (B), 100% hyssop + 25% lentil (C), 100% hyssop + 50% lentil (D), 100% lentil + 25% hyssop (E) and 100% lentil + 50% hyssop (F).
Results: The results of this study showed that the highest dry weight of hyssop per unit area was obtained from its pure culture (A) and 100% hyssop + 25% lentil (C). The highest content of hyssop essential oil (without statistical difference) was obtained from 100% hyssop + 25% lentil (C) and 100% hyssop + 50% lentil (D). Means comparison of hyssop essential oil yield per unit area showed that the pure culture of hyssop (A) and 100% hyssop + 25% lentil (C) had the maximum amounts without statistical difference. The yield of lentil in its solecropping treatment showed the highest value, which showed a significant difference with different intercropping treatment. The lowest yield of lentil per unit area was obtained from treatment C (25% lentil + 100% hyssop), which showed a significant difference with other treatments. Also, the results of mean comparisons showed that D treatment (100%hyssop + 50%lentil) had the highest 1000-grain weight, which was subjected to B (sole cropping of lentil) and C (25% lentil + 100% hyssop) treatments in the same statistical group. Comparison of mean values showed that sole cropping (A) and 100% lentils + 25% hyssop (E) had the highest leaf nitrogen content and lentil solecropping (B) had the highest nitrogen content in lentil seed.The comparison of Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) showed that all mixing ratios of hyssop and lentil (with the exception of 100% lentil + 50% hyssop - F) had the LER>1 which shows the lead of intercropping to pure culture. It should be noted that treatments C (100% hyssop + 25% lentil) and D (100% hyssop + 50% lentil) had the highest LER.
Conclusion: Overall, the results showed that the intercropping of hyssop and lentil could stabilize the production by improving the use of resources. Also it could be significantly effective by reducing the consumption of chemical inputs with nitrogen fixation towards the ecological production of medicinal plants.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Essential oil yield
  • Intercropping
  • Hyssop
  • Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)

مراجع

 1.Alizadeh, Y., Koocheki, A. and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2010. Yield, yield components and potential weed control of intercropping bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) with sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum). Iran. J. Field Crop Res. 7: 2. 541-553. (In Persian)
2.Allen, J.R. and Obura, R.K. 1983. Yield of corn, cowpea and soybean under different intercropping systems. Agron. J. 75: 6. 1005-1009.
3.Andersen, M.K., Haugard, K., Weiner, J. and Jensen, E.S. 2007. Competitive dynamics in two-and three-component intercrops. J. Appl. Ecol. 44: 3. 545-551.
4.Asseng, S., Fillery, I.R.P. and Gregory, P.J. 1998. Wheat response to alternative crops on a duplex soil. Aust. J. Exp. Agr. 38: 5. 481-488.
5.Banik, B., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K. and Ghose, S.S. 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. Eur. J. Agron. 24: 325-332.
6.Banisadr, N. and Bazgosha, F. 1997. Investigation of intercropping between Trifolium alexandrinum and Lolium multiflorum. Seed. Plant. Prod. J. 13: 1-13. (In Persian)
7.Bedoussac, L., Journet, E.P., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Naudin, C., Corre-Hellou, G., Prieur, L. and Justes, E. 2014. Eco-functional intensification by cereal-grain legume intercropping in organic farming systems for increased yields, reduced weeds and improved grain protein concentration. In: Bellon S, Penvern S (eds.) Organic farming, Prototype for sustainable agricultures. Springer Science, Dordrecht, Pp: 47-63.
8.Bukovinszky, T., Van Lenteren, J.C. and Vet, L.E.M. 2005. Functioning of natural enemies in mixed cropping systems. Encyclopedia of Pest Management. www.Informaworld.com.
9.Delonge, M.S., Miles, A. and Carlisle, L. 2016. Investing in the transition to sustainable agriculture. Environ. Sci. Policy. 55: 266-273.
10.Duchene, O., Vian, J.F. and Celette, F. 2017. Intercropping with legume for agroecological cropping systems: Complementarity and facilitation processes and the importance of soil microorganisms. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 240: 148-161.
 11.Fernández-Aparicio, M., Emeran, A.A. and Rubiales, D. 2008. Control of Orobanche crenata in legumes intercropped with fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum). Crop Prot. 27: 3. 653-659.
12.German, R.N., Thompson, C.E. and Benton, T.G. 2017. Relationships among multiple aspects of agriculture's environmental impact and productivity: a meta-analysis to guide sustainable agriculture. Biol Rev. 92: 2. 716-738.
13.Ghanbari-Bonjar, A. and Lee, H.C. 2003. Intercropped wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and bean (Vicia faba L.) as whole-crop forage: effect of harvest time on forage yield and quality. Grass Forage Sci. 58: 28-36.
14.Goh, C.H., Nicotra, A.B. and Mathesius, U. 2016. The presence of nodules on legume root systems can alter phenotypic plasticity in response to internal nitrogen independent of nitrogen fixation. Plant Cell Environ. 39: 4. 883-896.
15.Hassanzadeh Aval, F., Koocheki, A., Khazaie, H.R. and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2010. Effect of plant density on growth characteristics and yield of summer savory (Satureja hortensis L.) and Persian clover (Trifolium resupinatum L.) Intercropping. Iran. J. Field Crop Res. 8: 920-929. (In Persian)
16.Hauggard-Nielson, H., Ambus, P., and Jensen, E.S. 2001. Interspecific competition, N use and interference with weeds in pea-barley intercropping. Field Crop Res. 70: 101-109.
17.Hemayati, S., Siadat, A. and Sadeghzade, F. 2002. Evaluation of intercropping of two corn hybrids in different densities. Iran. J. Agri. Sci. 25: 73-87. (In Persian)
18.Iijima, M., Awala, S.K., Watanabe, Y., Kawato, Y., Fujioka, Y., Yamane, K. and Wada, K.C. 2016. Mixed cropping has the potential to enhance flood tolerance of drought-adapted grain crops. J. Plant Physiol. 192: 21-25.
19.Jahan, M. 2004. Study of ecological aspects intercropping of chamomile (Matricaria chamomile) and ever green (Calendula officinalis) with manure. MSc Thesis Faculty of Agriculture Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran. (In Persian)
20.Jahani, M., Koocheki, A. and Nassiri Mahallati, M. 2008. Comparison of different intercropping arrangements of cumin (Cuminum cyminum) and lentil (Lens culinaris). Iran. J. Field Crop Res. 6: 1. 67-78. (In Persian)
21.Jones, J.B. 2001. Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis. CRC press.
22.Karpenstein-Machan, M. and Stuelpnagel, R. 2000. Biomass yield and nitrogen fixation of legumes monocropped and intercropped with rye and rotation effects on a subsequent maize crop. Plant Soil. 218: 1. 215-232.
23.Kermah, M., Franke, A.C., Adjei-Nsiah, S., Ahiabor, B.D., Abaidoo, R.C. and Giller, K.E. 2017. Maize-grain legume intercropping for enhanced resource use efficiency and crop productivity in the Guinea savanna of northern Ghana. Field Crop Res. 213: 38-50.
24.Khorrami Vafa, M., Eftekharnasab, N., Saeidian, K. and Najafi, A. 2011. Water use efficiency in Cucurbita pepo L., Cicer arietinum L. and Lens esculenta intercropping in relation with different nitrogen levels. J. Agroecol. 3: 2. 245-253. (In Persian)
25.Koocheki, A., Shabahang, J., Khorramdel, S. and Amin Ghafouri, A. 2012. Row intercropping of borage (Borago officinalis L.) with bean (Phaseolusvulgaris L.) on possible evaluating of the best strip width and assessing of its ecological characteristics. J. Agroecol. 4: 1. 1-11. (In Persian)
26.Koocheki, A., Shabahang, J., Khorramdel, S. and Azimi, R. 2013. The effect of irrigation intervals and intecropped marjoram (Origanum vulgare) with saffron (Crocus sativus) on possible cooling effect of corms for climate change adaptation. Iran. J. Field Crop Res. 11: 3. 390-400. (In Persian)
27.Kostal, V. and Finch, S. 1994. Influence of background on host-plant selection and subsequent oviposition by the cabbage root fly (Delia radicum). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 70: 153-163.
28.Maffei, M. and Mucciarelli, M. 2003. Essential oil yield in peppermint/ soybean strip intercropping. Field Crop Res. 84: 3. 229-240.
29.Mardani, F. and Balouchi, H. 2015. Effect of intercropping on the yield and some quantitative and qualitative traits of fenugreek and anise. J. Agric. Know. Sust. Prod. 25: 1-16. (In Persian)
30.Ormeno, E. and Fernandez, C. 2012. Effect of soil nutrient on production and diversity of volatile terpenoids from plants. Curr. Bioact. Compd. 8: 1. 71-79.
31.Rajsawara, R.B.R. 2002. Biomass yield, essential oil yield and essential oil composition of rose-scented geranium (Pelargonium species) as influenced by row Spacing and intercropping with cornmint (Mentha arvensis). Ind. Crop Prod. 16: 133-144.
32.Rao, B.R. 2002. Biomass yield, essential oil yield and essential oil composition of rose-scented geranium (Pelargonium species) as influenced by row spacing’s and intercropping with cornmint. Ind. Crop Prod. 16: 2. 133-144.
33.Rezaei Chianeh, E., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nassab, A., Shakiba, M.R., Ghassemi-Golezani, K. and Aharizad, S. 2010. Evaluation of light interception and canopy characteristics in mono-cropping and intercropping of maize (Zeamays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L). J. Agroecol. 2: 437-447. (In Persian)
34.Rezvani Moghaddam, P. and Moradi, R. 2012. Assessment of planting date, biological fertilizer and intercropping on yield and essential oil of cumin and fenugreek. Iran. J. Field Crop Sci. 2: 217-230. (In Persian)
35.Schulz, G. and Stahl-Biskup, E. 1991. Essential oils and glycosidic bound volatiles from leaves, stems, flowers and roots of Hyssopus officinalis L. (Lamiaceae). Flavour Frag. J. 6: 1. 69-73.
36.Thamo, T., Addai, D., Pannell, D.J., Robertson, M.J., Thomas, D.T. and Young, J.M. 2017. Climate change impacts and farm-level adaptation: economic analysis of a mixed cropping-livestock system. Agric. Syst. 150: 99-108.
37.Umesh, M.R., Chittapur, B.M. and Jagadeesha, N. 2017. Solar radiation utilization efficiency in cereal-legume intercropping systems. Agric. Rev. 38: 1. 72-75.
38.Vandermeer, J.H. 1989. The ecology of intercropping Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. 237p.
39.Weston, E.J., King, A.J., Strong, W.M., Lehane, K.J., Cooper, J.E. and Holmes, C.J. 2002. Sustaining productivity of a vertisoil at warra. Queens land, with fertilizers, no tillage or legumes. Production and nitrogen benefits from annual medic in rotation with wheat. Aust. J. Exp. Agri. 42: 961-969.
40.Wezel, A., Casagrande, M., Celette, F., Vian, J.F., Ferrer, A. and Peigné, J. 2014. Agroecological practices for sustainable agriculture. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 34: 1. 1-20.
41.Zhao, M., Jones, C.M., Meijer, J., Lundquist, P.O., Fransson, P., Carlsson, G. and Hallin, S. 2017. Intercropping affects genetic potential for inorganic nitrogen cycling by root-associated microorganisms in Medicago sativa and Dactylis glomerata. Appl. Soil Ecol. 119: 260-266.
پژوهش‌های تولید گیاهی
دوره 25، شماره 3
آذر 1397
صفحه 83-99

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار