| تعداد نشریات | 282 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 80 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 3,251 |
| تعداد مقالات | 35,918 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 54,585,064 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 93,700,309 |
بررسی اثر تاریخ کاشت بر عملکرد کمی و کیفی ارقام چغندرقند پاییزه در منطقه گنبدکاووس | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| مقاله 11، دوره 40، شماره 2، اسفند 1403، صفحه 285-298 اصل مقاله (693.81 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله کوتاه | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/jsb.2025.365172.1348 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| سعید یاراحمدی* 1؛ علیرضا صابری2؛ مصطفی حسین پور3؛ داریوش طالقانی4؛ سید محمد علوی سینی5؛ آتنا بیاری6 | ||
| 1بخش تحقیقات علوم زراعی-باغی، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان گلستان، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، گرگان، | ||
| 2عضو علمی تحقیقات گلستان | ||
| 3استادیار مؤسسه تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه بذر چغندرقند سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران. | ||
| 4مؤسسه تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه بذر چغندرقند- سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران | ||
| 5بخش تحقیقات علوم زراعی-باغی، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی جنوب استان کرمان، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، | ||
| 6سازمان جهاد کشاورزی، دامغان، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| به منظور بررسی صفات مقاومت به ساقه‌روی و عملکرد کمی و کیفی ارقام چغندرقند پاییزه این پژوهش در سال زراعی 1401-1402 در منطقه گنبد کاووس انجام شد. در این پژوهش دو تاریخ کاشت20 مهر و 25 آبان و 13 رقم خارجی و یک هیبرید جدید به همراه دو رقم شاهد خارجی مقاوم به ساقه‌روی (موناتونو و رزاگلد) در قالب طرح بلوک‌های کامل تصادفی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. صفات مورد بررسی در این مطالعه شامل عملکرد ریشه، عملکرد شکر سفید، درصد قند، میزان ناخالصی‌های ریشه شامل سدیم، پتاسیم، نیتروژن مضره، درصد قند قابل استحصال و ضریب استحصال شکر بودند. تاریخ کاشت بر صفات ساقه‌روی، عملکرد ریشه و عملکرد قند خالص تأثیر معنی‌داری داشت. اثر متقابل تاریخ کاشت و رقم بر عملکرد ریشه معنی‌دار بود. در تاریخ کاشت 20 مهرماه میانگین عملکرد ریشه ارقام 1/66 تن در هکتار بود. با 35 روز تأخیر در کاشت (کاشت در 25 آبان ماه) 5/51 درصد از عملکرد ریشه کاسته شد. اثر متقابل تاریخ کاشت و رقم بر عملکرد ریشه معنی‌دار بود. در تاریخ کاشت 20 مهر ماه ارقام رزاگلد، موناتونو، شانون و گراناته به ترتیب با 95، 5/82، 1/79 و 78 تن در هکتار بیشترین عملکرد ریشه را داشتند و در یک گروه آماری قرار گرفتند. در تاریخ کاشت دوم، ارقام شانون، آرمسا، تیکال و رزاگلد به ترتیب با 43، 9/40، 8/40 و 3/38 تن در هکتار بیشترین عملکرد ریشه را داشتند. عملکرد قند خالص بطور معنی‌داری تحت تأثیر تاریخ کاشت بود. 35 روز تأخیر در کاشت موجب 44 درصد کاهش در عملکرد قند خالص شد. همچنین تأثیر رقم بر صفت عملکرد قند خالص در سطح احتمال 5% درصد معنی‌دار بود. بیشترین عملکرد قند خالص را ارقام رزاگلد و شانون به ترتیب با مقدار 2/9 و 8/7 تن در هکتار در مقایسه با سایر ارقام داشتند. رقم رزاگلد در تاریخ کاشت 20 مهر با عملکردی برابر با 2/9 تن در هکتار بیشترین عملکرد قند خالص را داشت. ارقام موناتونو، سمپر، کویانا و رزاگلد در تاریخ کاشت 20 مهر ساقه‌روی نداشتند و مقاوم‌ترین ارقام به ساقه‌روی بودند. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| تاریخ کاشت؛ چغندرقند؛ عملکرد قند؛ کشت پاییزه | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Study the effects of planting date on quantitative and qualitative performance of autumn sugar beet varieties in the Gonbad Kavus region, Iran | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| saeed Yarahmadi1؛ Alireza Saberi2؛ M. Hosseinpour3؛ Daryush Taleghani4؛ Seyed Mohammad Alavi Siney5؛ Atena Biari6 | ||
| 1Horticulture-Crops Research Department, Golestan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Gorgan, Iran | ||
| 2agricultural reserch center of golestan | ||
| 3Assistant Professor of Sugar Beet Seed Institute(SBSI), Agricultural Research, Education, and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran. | ||
| 4Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) - Agricultural Research Education and Extension, Karaj,Iran | ||
| 5Department of Crop and Horticultural Science Research, South of Kerman Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Jiroft, Iran | ||
| 6Organization of Agriculture-Jahad, Damghan, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Extended Abstract Introduction Sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L) is an important crop and the main source of sugar in temperate regions. The key advantage of autumn planting over spring planting is its enhanced water use efficiency. Water scarcity in the country is one of the most important limitations in the agricultural sector. Considering the limited water resources available, promoting autumn planting is the most effective strategy to conserve water for sugar production. Considering the importance of bolting in selecting suitable cultivars for autumn planting and the influence of planting dates on bolting occurrence, an appropriate planting date can be determined for each cultivar based on its bolting resistance. The present study evaluated the effect of different planting dates on bolting, and qualitative and quantitative yield of new sugar beet cultivars. Materials and Methods Thirteen foreign cultivars along with two foreign control cultivars resistant to bolting (Monatunno and Rosagold), which are sown in Golestan province, and one Iranian hybrid (061) were evaluated in split plot based on randomized complete block design at Gonbad-e Kavus Agricultural Research Station (55°12' E and 37°16' N, 45 m above sea level) during 2022-23 crop season. The planting date was assigned to the main plots at two levels including 12th October and 16th November, in order to evaluate the response of cultivars to the early and late planting. Cultivars were arranged in subplots. Each cultivar was sown in three rows with 8 m length and 50 cm space between rows and 20 cm distance between plants. Bolting was recorded at four stages (17th April, 30th April, 20th May, and 10th June). Harvest performed on 17th June. Evaluated traits included root yield (t. ha-1), white sugar yield (t. ha-1), sugar content (%), root impurities including sodium, potassium, harmful nitrogen (meq/100 g root pulp), white sugar content (%), and extraction coefficient of sugar (%). Results and Discussion Planting date had a significant effect on root and white sugar yield. With a planting date of 12th October, the average root yield was 66.1 t ha-1. A 35-day delay in planting led to a 51.5% decrease in root yield. The interaction between planting date and cultivar on root yield was significant. On 12th October, cultivars Rosagold, Monatunno, Shannon, and Granate achieved the highest root yields of 95, 82.5, 79.1, and 78 t. ha-1, respectively. On the second planting date, Shannon, Armesa, Tikal, and Rosagold had the highest root yields of 43, 40.9, 40.8, and 38.3 t. ha-1, r espectively. White sugar yield was significantly influenced by planting date. A 35-day delay in planting caused a 44% reduction in white sugar yield. The effect of cultivar on white sugar yield was also significant (P < 0.05). Rosagold and Shannon showed the highest white sugar yields of 9.2 and 7.8 t ha-1, respectively. The interaction between planting date and cultivar on sugar content was significant. On 20th October, Klara, Vanila, Nero, and Castellar obtained the highest sugar content of 20.1, 19.1, 18.8, and 18.7%, respectively. On 16th November, the highest sugar content was achieved by Klara, Castellar, Vanila, Rosagold, Nero, Tikal, Souani, Algar, Shannon, and Granate. The extraction coefficient of sugar was significantly influenced by the cultivar. Planting date and cultivar significantly affected bolting. Monatunno, Semper, Quiana, and Rosagold showed no bolting and were the most resistant cultivars. By the third count of bolting (up to November 16th), none of the cultivars showed bolting. Only in the fourth count (10th June) cultivar Armesa displayed 6% bolting. Conclusion In autumn cultivation, the selection of cultivars is initially based on resistance to bolting, and then the final selection is made based on white sugar yield among resistant cultivars. Cultivars Monatunno, Semper, Quiana, and Rosagold exhibited no bolting and demonstrated the highest resistance. Monatunno is recommended to be planted early in the optimal planting period in Golestan Province (second decade of October) due to its high resistance to bolting and white sugar yield of 9 t ha-1, while Rosagold, with the highest white sugar yield (12.5 t ha-1) and slightly less resistance to bolting than Monatunno, is recommended for planting with a bit delay. Cultivars Semper and Quiana which also showed no bolting and had white sugar yields of 8.5 and 7.8 t ha-1, respectively, can be recommended for planting in the optimal sowing period suggested by the Sugar Beet Seed Institute, which is from the second decade of October to the first decade of November. In the first decade of November in Golestan province, cultivars Tikal, Anoure, and Granate with 4.5%, 2.3%, and 2.7% bolting, respectively, and optimum white sugar yields can also be recommended. Due to the lack of bolting in cultivars sown on 16th November, selection can be made solely based on white sugar yield, and bolting is not a limiting factor. Therefore, for planting at the end of the optimal sowing period, cultivars Shannon and Castellar, with white sugar yields of 6.5 and 5.7 t ha-1, respectively may be recommended. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Autumn planting, Planting date, Sugar beet, Sugar yield | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Al-Jbawi E, Sabsabi W, Gharibo G, Omar AE. Effect of sowing date and plant density on bolting of four sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) varieties. International Journal of Environment. 2015; 4(2): 256-70. Arduini I, Ercoli L, Mariotti M, Masoni A. Sowing date affect spikelet number and grain yield of durum wheat. Cereal Research Communications. 2009; 37: 469-478. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1556/crc.37.2009.3.1 Azizpour MH, Taleghani D, Aghai zadeh M, Hossien pour M. Evaluation of bolting, quantitative and qualitative traits of triploid hybrids in autumn- sowing sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2017; 32(2): 99-106. Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/JSB.2016.107218 Çakmakçi R, Oral E. Root yield and quality of sugar beet in relation to sowing date, plant population and harvesting date interactions. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry. 2002; 26(3): 133-139. Chaharmahali M, Sohrabi Y, Koulaee HE, Hassani M, Mansouri H, Hamze H. The effect of planting date and irrigation levels on enzymatic properties, yield and yield components of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) cultivars. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences. 2023; 15( 4): 893-906. Doi:https://doi.org/10.22077/escs.2021.4110.1973 Cooke DA. Scott JE. The Sugar Beet Crop. Springer, Netherlands. 1993; 429-483. Fasahat P, Aghaeezadeh M, Jabbari L, Sadeghzadeh Hemayati S, Townson P. Sucrose accumulation in sugar beet: From fodder beet selection to genomic selection. Sugar Tech. 2018; 20: 635-44. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-018-0617-z Ghasemi S, Hemayati SS, Taleghani D, Siavashi K, Hosseinpour M. Determination of the proper planting date and harvest of commercial sugar beet cultivars in autumn cultivation in Ilam province. Journal of Sugar beet. 2020; 36(1): 15-25. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/JSB.2021.343129.1240 Hasanvandi MS, Hossinpour M, Rajabi A, Mohamoudi SB, Taleghani D, Hemayati SS, Parmoon Gh. Evaluation of new autumn sown sugar beet cultivars for quantitative and qualitative traits in Khuzestan province. Journal of Crops Improvement. 2022; 24(4): 1117-1132. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2022.329580.2606 Hatami A, Determining the best date for planting and harvesting new sugar beet monogamous cultivars (Master Thesis). University of Tehran; 2003. (In persion with English abstract) Hosseinian SH, Abdollahian Noghabi M, Majnoon Hosseini N. Effect of bolting on the yield and quality of two sugar beet varieties in autumn sowing area in Dezful region of Iran. Iranian Society of Crops and Plant Breeding Sciences. 2015; 16(4): 265-277. (In persian, abstract in English) QR Code: 20.1001.1.15625540.1393.16.4.1.2 Jahani Moghadam E, Parsa S, Mahmoudi S, Ahmadi M. The Effects of planting date and cultivar on yield and the early flowering in autumn sowing of sugar beet varieties. Journal of Agronomy and Plant Breeding. 2017; 13(2): 57-43. (In persion with English abstract) Javaheri MA, Najafinejad H, Azad Shahraki F. Investigating the possibility of autumn beet cultivation in Arzooieh region (Kerman province). Journal of Pajhouhesh and Sazandegi. 2006; 71: 93-85. (In persian, abstract in English) Kandil AA, Bandawi MA, El-Moursy SA, Abdou UMA. Effect of planting dates, nitrogen levels and biofertilization treatments on growth attributes of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Science Journal of King Faisal University. 2004; 5(2): 227-237. Kumar D, Lamani A, Halikatti SI. Performance of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) to different dates of sowing under temperature regime. International Journal of Plant and Soil Science. 2019; 27(1): 1-12. Doi:https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2019/v27i130067 McKenzie BA, Kemp PD, Moot DJ, Matthew C, Lucas, RJ. Environmental effects on plant growth and development. 2008; pp. 29-44. In: White J, Hodgson J. (Eds). New Zealand Pasture and Crop Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Nabipour Z, Habibi D, Ahmadi M, Taleghani D, Kashani A. Study of climatic suitability for autumn sugar beet planting in North- and South Khorasan as well as Khorasan-e Razavi provinces using Geographic Information System (GIS). Journal of Sugar Beet. 2019; 34(2): 165-179. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.2019.116149.1168 Nikpanah H, Seifzadeh S, Hemayati SS, Shiranirad A, Taleghani DF. Effects of management of agronomical factors on sugar beet stickling production and growth. Biological Forum – An International Journal. 2015; 7(2): 959-964. Nikpanah H, Taleghani DF, Noormohammadi G, Khodadadi S. Study of effects of planting and harvesting dates on quantity and quality of monogerm sugar beet seed in Firoozkooh, Iran. Journal of Plant Ecophysiology. 2010; 2(7): 37-45. (In persion with English abstract) Ranji Z, Sharifi H, Kazemikhah K. Effect of seed production environmental conditions on bolting of sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2001; 17(1): 57- 66. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/JSB.2001.11756 Reinsdorf E, Koch H. Modeling crown temperature of winter sugar beet and its application in risk assessment for frost killing in central Europe. Journal of Agriculture Forest Meteorology. 2013; 182-183: 21-30. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.08.001 Rinaldi M, Vonella AV. The response of autumn and spring sown sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) to irrigation in Southern Italy: Water and radiation use efficiency. Field Crops Research. 2006; 95(2-3): 103-114. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2004.12.004 Sadeghian Mottahar SY. The use of annual gene (B) for screening bolting resistant inbred lines in sugar beet. Journal of sugar beet. 1995; 10(1): 1-7. Sadeghzadeh Hemayati S, Shirzadi MH, Aghaei Zadeh M, Fatollah Taleghani D, Javaheri A, Asgari A. Evaluation of sowing and harvesting date effects on yield and quality of five sugar beet cultivars in Jiroft region (autumn planting). Journal of Sugar Beet. 2012; 28: 25-42. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/JSB.2012.659 Shafapour H, Jahan M, Bannayan Aval, Nassiri-Mahallati M. Investigating the possibility of autumn-sown and determining the most suitable planting date and the best bolt-resistant cultivar of sugar beet in Khorasan region. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research. 2023; 20(4): 381-400. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22067/jcesc.2022.74131.1127 Smit AL. Influence of external factors on growth and development of sugar-beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Wageningen University and Research; 1983. Stibbe C, Marlander B. Field emergence dynamics significance to intraspecific competition and growth efficiency in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). European Journal of Agronomy. 2002; 17: 161- 171. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00005-9 Stocker N, Saldias B, Brosnahan R, Donnelly L, Gibbs SJ. Effect of sowing date on plant count, true-leaf growth stage and vernalisation of fodder beet and sugar beet. Agronomy New Zealand. 2016; 46: 59-70. Taleghani DF, Moharamzadeh M, Hemayati SS. Autumn sugar beet guide. Agricultural education and extension institute, 2017; pp 92. (In persion with English abstract) Vahidi H, Mirshekari B, Sadeghzade Hemayati S, Rajabi A, Yarnia M. Response of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of sugar beet genotypes to different sowing and harvesting dates. Suger Beet Journal. 2018; 34(1): 1-15. (In persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/JSB.2018.120304.1175
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 425 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 430 |
||