Document Type : Research Article

Authors

• Gh. Asadi ¹
• R. Gorbani ¹
• E. Azizi ²

¹ Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

² Payame Noor University

10.22067/jpp.v28i3.43563

Abstract

In order to investigate effect of manure rates on diversity and density of weeds in different cropping pattern of spinach and garlic, an experiment was conducted as split plot based on completely randomized block design with three replications at the Agricultural Research Station, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, during growing season of 2011-2012. Treatment were 3 cow manure rates (0, 10 and 20 ton.ha-1) in main plots and 6 cropping systems (garlic and spinach monocultures and garlic-spinach intercropping with 1:1, 2:2, 3:3 and 4:4 ratio) in sub plots. The results indicated that in 3 weed sampling stages, the effect of different levels of manure on weed density in second and third sampling and weed dry weight in third sampling was significant, statistically. In the second sampling, the highest weed density was obtained in non-application of manure condition that wasn’t different with 10 ton.ha-1.in the third sampling, this parameter did not follow a same trend with the second stage. In the third sampling, the highest weed dry weight was obtained in non-application of manure condition (189.50 g.m-2). at total stages, the highest weed density and dry weight, with the exception of weed density in third sampling, was observed in garlic monoculture. The intraction effect of manure and cropping pattern treatments showed that at the first stage, the hieghest and lowest total weed density was observed in garlic monoculture with 10 ton per hectare of manure and spinach monoculture under non application and 10 ton per hectare of manure, respectively. Also, at the second and third sampling stages, the lowest total weed density was obtained in garlic-spinach intercropping with 3:3 ratio under 20 ton per hectare of manure treatment and garlic monoculture under 10 ton per hectare of manure treatment, respectively. The negative correlation was observed between total dry weight of crops and weed density and dry weight. At all stages, the highest Shannon and Simpson diversity were observed in spinach monoculture under 10 ton per hectare of manure treatment. In general, at completed canopy period (the third sampling), among studied intercropping, the lowest dry weight and density of weed per square meter was observed in garlic-spinach intercropping with 4:4 ratio under 10 ton per hectare of manure treatment, but the lowest Shannon, Margalof and Simpson diversity index was obtained in garlic-spinach intercropping with 3:3 ratio under 20 ton per hectare of manure treatment.

Keywords

• Density
• Dry weight
• Shannon index
• Margalef index
• Simpson index

20.1001.1.20084749.1393.28.3.6.6

---

References

1- عزیزی گ.، کوچکی ع.، نصیری محلاتی م.، و رضوانی مقدم پ. 1388. اثر تنوع گیاهی و نوع منبع تغذیه‌ای بر ترکیب و تراکم علف‌های هرز در الگوهای مختلف کشت. مجله پژوهش‌های زراعی ایران، 7: 115- 125.

2- کوچکی ع.، نصیری محلاتی م.، و زارع فیض آبادی، ا. 1383. تنوع زیستی کشاورزی در ایران: تنوع واریته‌های گیاهان زراعی. بیابان. ج. 9، ش. 1، ص.67-49.

3- کوچکی ع.، ظریف کتابی ح. و نخ‌فروش ع. 1380. رهیافت‌های اکولوژیکی مدیریت علف‌های‌هرز. انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.

4- نصیری محلاتی م.، کوچکی ع.، رضوانی مقدم، پ.، و بهشتی، ع. 1380. اگرواکولوژی. انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.

5- Abraham C.T., and Singh P. 1984. Weed management in sorghum- legume intercropping systems. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 103: 103-115.

6- Azim Khan M., Kawsar A., Zahid H., and Riaz A.A. 2012. Impact of maize- legume intercropping weeds and maize crop. pakistan Journal of weed science research, 18: 127-136.

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

8- Baumann D.T., Bastiaans L., and Kropff, M.J. 2001. Effects of intercropping on growth and reproductive capacity of late- emerging Senecio vulgaris L., with spatial reference to competition for light. Annals of Botany, 87:209-217.

9- Bellon M.R. 1996. The dynamics of crop infraspecific diversity: a conceptual framework at the farmer level. Economic Botany, 50: 26-39.

10- Buadry J. 1989. Interactions between agricultural and ecological systems at landscape level. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 27: 119-130.

11- Corre-Hellou G. , Dibet A., Hauggaard-Nielsen H., Crozat Y., Gooding M., Ambus P., Dahlmann C., von Fragstein P., Pristeri A., Monti M., and Jensen E.S.2011. The competitive ability of pea–barley intercrops against weeds and the interactions with crop productivity and soil N availability. Field Crops Research. 122(3): 264-272.

12- Gharineh M.H., and Moosavi S.A. 2010. Effects of intercropping (canola-faba bean) on density and diversity of weeds. Notulae. Scientia Biologicae. 2: 109-112.

13- Glliessman S.R. 1995. Sustainable agriculture: an agroecological perspective. Advances in Plant Pathology, 11: 45-57.

14- Gomez P., and Gurevitch J. 1998. Weed community responses in a corn-soybean intercrop. Applied Vegetation Science, 1: 281-288.

15- Koocheki A., Nassiri Mahalati M., Sanjani S., Beidokhti S.R., and Anvarkhah S. 2010. Evaluation of weed density and biomass in intercropping millet (Setaria italica L,) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Proceedings of 3rd Iranian Weed Science Congress, Volume 1: Weed biology and ecophysiology, Babolsar, Iran, 17-18 February 2010 , pp. 457-460.

16- Lithourgidis A.C., Dordas C.A., Damalas C.A., and Vlachostergios D.N. 2011. Annual intercrops: an alternative pathway sustainable agriculture. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 5: 398-410.

17- Long J., Cromwell E., and Gold K. 2000. On-farm management of crop diversity: an introductory bibliography. The Schumacher Centre for Technology and Development. www.oneworld.org/odi/

18- Mailes C., Cheekeeke T., and Flores T. 1999. From end to beginning. Available at http://agsyst.wsu.edu/manure.htm.

19- Piri I., Abrahimpour F., Tavassoli A., Amiri E., and Rastegaripour F. 2011. Effect of fertilizer in controlling weeds under intercropping of pearl millet and red bean in Sistan region, Iran. African Journal of Biotechnology,10: 7397-7403.

20- Poggio S.L. 2005. Structure of weed communities occurring in monoculture and intercropping of field pea and barley. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 109: 48-58.

21- Salas M.L., Hickman M.V., Huber D.M., and Schreiber M.M. 1997. Influence of nitrate and ammonium nutrition on the growth of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi). Weed Science, 45: 664 - 669.

22- Saudi H., and El-Metwally I. 2009. Weed management under different patterns of sunflower-soybean intercropping. Journal of European Agriculture, 10: 41-51.

23- Schreiber M.M. 1992. Influence of tillage, crop rotation and weed management on giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) population dynamics and crop yield. Weed Science, 40: 645-653.

24- Shah S.N., Shroff J.C., Patel R.H., and Usadadiya V.P. 2011. Influenceof intercropping and weed management practices on weed and yields of maize. International Journal of Science and Nature, 2: 47-50.

25- Szumigalski A., and Van Acker R. 2005. Weed suppression and crop production in annual intercrops. Weed Science, 53: 813-825.

26- Takim F.O. 2012. Advantages of maize- cowpea intercropping over sole cropping through competition indices. Journal of Agricultural and Biodiversity Research, 1: 53-59.

27- Tengberg A., Ellis-Jones J., Kiome R., and Stocking M. 1998. Applying the concept of agrodiversity to indigenous soil and water conservation practices in eastern Kenya. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 70: 259-272.

28- Yin L., Cai Z., and Zhong W. 2006. Changes in weed community diversity of maize crops due to long-term fertilization. Crop Protection, 25:910-914.