Comparing the quantitative, qualitative and economic yield of sugar beet planting by root transplanting method with direct seeding in Hamedan region | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| Article 5, Volume 37, Issue 1, November 2021, Pages 49-60 PDF (720.42 K) | ||
| Document Type: Research Paper | ||
| DOI: 10.22092/jsb.2022.353748.1268 | ||
| Authors | ||
| H. Mansouri* 1; M. Hassani1; H. Hamze1; A.M. Jafari2; V.A. Yosefabadi3; M. Chaharmahali4 | ||
| 1Assistant professor of Sugar Beet Research Department, Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Hamedan, Iran. | ||
| 2Assistant professor of Economic, Social and Extension Research Department, Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Hamedan, Iran | ||
| 3Assistant Professor of Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) - Agricultural Research Education and Extension, Karaj,Iran | ||
| 4Expert of Sugar Beet Research Department, Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Hamedan, Iran. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Decreasing of water consumption, chemical inputs, production cost and risk are among the most important advantages of transplanting method. The aim of this study was to compare the transplanting and direct seeding methods in sugar beet. For this purpose, root transplanting along with direct seeding were performed in the farmer’s field in Hamedan in 2018. Sugar beet transplants were prepared in planting stock in April and transplanted to the main field in June. Direct seeding of sugar beet was performed in the main field in mid of May. During the growing season, necessary notes were taken and at the end of the season, root sampling was performed. After harvest, two planting systems were evaluated in terms of quantitative, qualitative and economic characteristics. Root transplanting system caused an increase in root yield and sugar yield by 15 and 47%, respectively compared with direct seeding system. Water consumption under root transplanting was 10080 m3 ha-1 which was about 18% less than direct seeding. In terms of water use efficiency, root transplanting method with an efficiency of 9.66 kg root m-3 was about 40% more than direct seeding method (6.90 kg root m-3). The economic evaluation of two planting methods also showed that the increase in net income by changing planting pattern from conventional to root transplanting system was higher. In general, results showed that root transplanting system had higher quantitative and qualitative yield and economical income compared with direct seeding method. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Direct seeding; Gross income; Production cost; Transplanting; Water use efficiency | ||
| References | ||
|
Agriculture Organization of Hamedan Province. Crop income-cost plan. Deputy of Planning and Economic Affairs, Statistics and Information Office. 2018. (in Persian) Abdollahi SAA, Hatami A, Yousefabadi V, Ashraf Mehrabi A. The effect of transplanting, sowing and harvesting date on yield and water use efficiency of autumn-sown sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2019; 35 (2): 175-191. (in Persian, abstract in English) Gohari J, Tohidloo Gh. Saving water, pesticides and fertilizers by sugar beet transplanting method. Journal of Sugar Beet. 1997; 12: 30-39. (in Persian, abstract in English) Gohari J, Rohi A, Sabzehee Gh. Effect of transplanting on quality and yield of sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 1994; 9(1): 23-33. (in Persian, abstract in English) Gohari J, Rouhi A, Talaee A, Gholizadeh R. Economic analysis of two methods of paper pot and direct sowing of sugar beet crop in Iran. Journal of Sugar Beet. 1996; 11: 30-40. (in Persian, abstract in English) Khozaei M, Kamgar Haghighi AA, Zand Parsa Sh, Sepaskhah AR, Razzaghi F, Yousef abadi V, Emam Y. Evaluation of direct seedling and transplanting in sugar beet for water productivity, yield and quality under different irrigation regimes and planting densities. Agricultural Water Management. 2020; 238: 106230. Norouzi A. Evaluation of direct sowing and paper pot planting in sprinkler irrigation system. Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI); 2007. 45 p. Report. No. 2406. (in Persian, abstract in English) Reinefeld E, Emmerich B, Baumgarten G, Winner C, Beiss U. Zur voraussage des melassezuckers aus rubenanalysen. Zucker. 1974; 27: 2-15. Yousef abadi V. Effect of steckling size (transplant) and time of transplanting on root yield and quality of sugar beet in small farm. Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI); 2014. 47 p. Report. No. 93/44990. (in Persian, abstract in English) Yousef abadi V. Sugar beet transplanting by two methods: paper pot and without pot (root transplantation). Sugar beet Seed Institute (SBSI)., 2017; pp. 32. (in Persian) Yousef abadi V. The effect of combining the Autumn cultivation and transplanting method on water use efficiency in sugar beet. Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI); 2021. 44 p. Report. No. 59225. (in Persian, abstract in English) Zhang L, Yan C, Guo Q, Zhang J, Ruiz- Menjivar J. The impact of agricultural chemical inputs on environment: global evidence from informatics analysis and visualization. International Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies. 2018; 13(4): 338–352. Zolfagharan A, Alizadeh A, Khavari S, Bannayan M, Ansari H. Investigation and Comparison of Water Productivity in Direct and Transplant Seeding of Corn in Different Irrigation Regimes. Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 829 PDF Download: 723 |
||
Journal management system. designed by sinaweb