Effect of cover crop mulch and weed management on weed biomass, yield and quality of sugar beet | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| Article 5, Volume 33, Issue 1, June 2017, Pages 74-65 PDF (138.46 K) | ||
| Document Type: Scientific - Research | ||
| DOI: 10.22092/jsb.2017.20739.1072 | ||
| Authors | ||
| K. Khaksar1; M. Abdollahian-Noghabi* 2; H. Sharif Abadi1; E. Majidi1; Gh. Nour Mohamadi1 | ||
| 1Azad | ||
| 2SBSI, AREEO | ||
| Abstract | ||
| In order to evaluate the role of mulch of cover crop (barley) in two systems of, seedbed preparation in autumn and in spring, on weed biomass and qualitative and quantitative yield of sugar beet, a strip split plot experiment based on randomized complete block design with four replications was conducted in Karaj (2012-13 & 2013-14). The treatments consisted of five different seedbed preparation and barley mulch including sole cropping in autumn (b1), barley mulch applied in furrow in autumn-sowing (b2) and both in furrow and hill (b3), sole cropping in spring (b4), and barley mulch applied in furrow in spring-sown sugar beet cropping. Individual plots included 8 rows with a length and width of 25 and 4 m, respectively. Each row was divided into three parts comprising sole cropping at the beginning (hand weeding, w1), weed infested control at the middle (no weed control over the growing season, w2), and chemical control at the end (using selective herbicides). Green and cover crop biomass in autumn seedbed preparation were immediately dried by Paraquat herbicide application and were incorporated to the soil, but for spring seedbed treatments, selective herbicide was used. The results of combined analysis traits showed that the competition of natural weeds of the field significantly affected root yield, sugar yield and white sugar yield. The reduction of more than 50% of root yield (32.12 t/ha), sugar yield (4.75 t/ha) and white sugar yield (3.63 t/ha) in the infested weed control treatment compared to the weed free showed a high potential damage of weeds in sugar beet fields. In the seedbed system in autumn, which sugar beet seed was drilled directly in spring, the addition of barley to become mulch reduced root yield by 13% in the fall row method and 19% in the fall method compared to the control treatment preparation of seed bed in autumn without barley (with root yield 57.55 t / ha). Considering no significant difference between sole cropping in spring (spring control) with low tillage of sole cropping in autumn (autumn control) for quantitive and qualitative yield of sugar beet suggests that by preparing the seedbed in the autumn, it is possible for early drilling sugar beet and make optimal use of the potential of the area. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Barley mulch; seedbed; Weed Competition; Root yield; sugar beet and weed | ||
| References | ||
|
Abdollahian-Noghabi M. Weeds. Standards and assessments to determine the potential for damage to the separation of management and supervision in various stages of development in sugar beet fields. Compilation faculty Sugar Research Institute. Publications, Education and Agricultural Extension. 2013. (in Persian)
Abdollahian-Noghabi M. Sheikholeslami R, Babaee B. Technical terms of sugar beet quantity and quality. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2005; 21 (1): 101-104. (in Persian, abstract in English)
Abdollahian-Noghabi M. Ecophysiology of sugar beet cultivars and weed species subjected to water deficiency stress. Ph. D. Thesis, The University of Reading, 1999; P 227.
Cock DA, Scott RK. The Sugar Beet Crop. First edition: Chapman and Hall. 1993. P 675.
Fadaei-Shahri MR, Najafi H, Abdollahian-Noghabi M. Mirhadi MJ. Effect of winter cereal cover crop mulches and preparation time on sugar beet yield and dry matter weeds. Proceedings of the 3rd Iranian Weed Science Congress, 17 & 18 February, Babolsar. 2010. 213-215. (in Persian, abstract in English)
Fisk JW, Heesterman OB, Shrestha A, Kells JJ, Harwood RR, Squire JM, Sheaffer CC. Weed suppression by annual legume cover crops in no-tillage corn. Agron. J. 2001; 93: 319- 325.
Hiltbrunner J., M. Liedgens, L. Bloch, P. Stamp and B. Streit. Legume cover crops as living mulches for winter wheat: Components of biomass and the control of weeds. Europ. J. Agron. 2007; 26: 21–29.
Khodadadi1 M, Kashani A, Abdollahian-Noghabi M. Vazan S. Effect of seedbed preparation time and plant density on the weed density and sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) yield. J. of Weed Sci. 2009; 5(1): 31-42. (in Persian, abstract in English)
Kropff MJ, Spitters CJT. An eco-physiological model for interspecific competition, applied to the influence of Chenopodium album L. on sugar beet. I. Model cdescription and parameterization. Weed Res. 1992; 32, 437-450.
Mousavi M R. Integrated weed management. Miaad Press, Tehran. 2001. (in Persian)
Najafi H. Non-Chemical Weed Management, Pak Pendar Publications. 2014; pp. 317. (in Persian)
Rahbari A, Abdollahian M, Khalghani J, Rahimian H. Integrated weed control methods influence on the yield and quality of sugar beet seed bed preparation system in the fall. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 1997; 38(1): 15-23. (in Persian, abstract in English)
Samedani B, Montazeri M. The use of cover crops in sustainable agriculture. Research Institute of Plant Protection. 2009; P 186.
Vasilakoglou I, Dhima K, Eleftherohorinos I, Lithourgidis A. Winter cereal cover crop mulches and inter-row cultivation effects on cotton development and grass weed suppression. Agronomy Journal. 2006.98: 1290-1297.
Wilson RG, Smith JA, Miller SD, Fornstrom KJ. Wind Reosion control. In: Sugar beet production guide, (Eds) R. G. Wilson, J. A. Smith and S. D. Miller, 2001; pp 37-42. University of Nebraska Publications. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 896 PDF Download: 598 |
||
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb