Download Complete Issue - Academic Journals

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Seed yield(days after planting) 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 planting) bc Irrigated Rainfed bc ab Amoghein et al. 2501 c c c c 30 40 50 60 Plant density ( plant . m - 2 ) Figure 5. Diagram of seed yield (days after planting) as affected by plant density and planting system. a function of plant biomass and the number of bolls per plant (Omidi, 2009). Drought stress significantly decreased oil yield and percentage (Kafi and Rostami, 2007). The table of correlation for oil yield (Table 6) showed that this trait had positive, significant correlation with the number of seeds per m 2 and harvest index. Seed yield (kg.ha -1 ) As the results of analysis of variance showed (Table 4), there was significant difference in seed yield between planting systems at 1% probability level. Means comparison for this trait (Table 5) showed that seed yield was higher under irrigated system than under rainfed system and the density had no effect on increasing or decreasing seed yield under both planting systems. Figure 5 shows the interactions of planting systems and plant density on this trait which indicates that the highest seed yield was obtained from the density of 60 plants.m -2 under rainfed system which was ranked in the same group with the density of 50 plants.m -2 under irrigated system. The lowest seed yield was obtained from different planting densities (30, 40, 50 and 60 plants.m -2 ) under rainfed system which was ranked in the same group with the densities of 40 and 30 plants.m -2 under irrigated system. Ranjbar et al. (2004) found that the decrease in seed yield per plant did not make significant differences in seed yield vs. different seeding rates, mainly because of the increase in the number of plants per m 2 . Therefore, 30 seeds.m -2 with the row spacing of 30 cm produced the highest yield and 50 seeds.m -2 with the row spacing of 40 cm produced the lowest one which is not in agreement with the results of the current study, while Azari and Khajehpour (2003) reported that as the plant density was increased, the plant size and yield components was decreased, but the increase in the number of plants per unit area usually compensated the decrease in total yield. Istanbulluoglu (2009) reported that the highest safflower seed yield was obtained from control treatment (full irrigation) which was 40.5 and 3.74 t.ha -1 for summer and winter treatments, respectively. Hayashi and Hanada (1985) concluded that the decrease in seed yield was brought about by the decrease in the number of bolls per plant which was in turn caused by the decrease in the number of branches per plant. Tavakoli (2002) showed that irrigation withdrawal at flowering stage reduced the yield which was the result of the decrease in the number of heads per plant and the number of seeds per head. Also, Bouchereau et al. (1996) revealed that plants exposed to moderate moisture stress during their vegetative growth produced higher seed yield. This yield was significantly decreased under severe stress applied during both vegetative and reproductive stages. Stern and Beech (1965) showed that the highest safflower seed yield was produced at the density of 610000 plants.ha -1 and it was decreased at densities of less than 288000 plants.ha -1 . According to the table of final traits correlation (Table 6), yield had very significant, negative relation with a
2502 J. Med. Plants Res. harvest index and very significant, positive relation with oil percentage and yield. Conclusion According to the results of the current study, it can be concluded about oil percentage and yield that the former was increased with the decrease in density, but the latter was a function of seed yield.ha -1 , so that the highest oil yield was produced at the highest density (60 plants.m -2 ). Also, it can be said that drought stress (rainfed system) impacted oil yield and percentage, so that both were decreased under rainfed system. In the case of oil percentage, it can be drawn that despite being very slight, but the differences of planting systems were statistically significant. Therefore, it can be recommended to cultivate safflower in Ardabil, Iran under rainfed system with the density of 50 plants.m -2 . Also, safflower is harvested earlier under rainfed system than under irrigated system owing to well-ripening and the opening of the heads and the resulting fall of the seeds as well as late-season precipitations. REFERENCES Abddollahi A, Zarrinjoob H (2001). Safflower cultivation. Department of Extension and Public Contributions, Organization of Jahad-e Agriculture, Province of Ilam, Ilam, Iran. Aliari H, Shekari F, Shekari F (2000). Oilseeds: cultivation and physiology. Tabriz University Press, Tabriz, Iran. Azari A, Khajehpour MR (2003). Effects of planting pattern on growth, development, yield components and seed yield of safflower, local variety of Isfahan, Koseh, in spring planting. J. Agric. Nat. Resour. Sci. Technol., 7(1): 155-167. Bagheri M (1995). Effect of sowing date on yield and yield components of safflower cultivars. M.Sc. Thesis on Agriculture, Department of Agronomy, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran. Bouchereau A, Clossais-Besnard N, Bensaoud A, Leport RM (1996). Water stress effects on rape seed quality. Eur. J. Agro, 5(1-2): 19-30. Chen Z, Yang ZY, Yao HE (2004). Effects of Chinese herhal for invigorating kidney on metaholism of free radical in testes of rat's with exercise induced fatigue. J. Clin. Rehabil. Tissue Eng. Res., 8: 5898- 5900. Fazeli F, Sadrabadi R, Zare FA, Ezat AM (2007). The effect of sowing date and plant density on yield and yield components of safflower (Carthamus tinctorious L.) in Rokh plateau. Iran. J. Agric. Sci., 5(2): 327-332. Francaneto JB (1993). Soybean seed quality as affected by shriveling due to heat and drought stresses during seed filling. Seed Sci. Technol., 21: 107-111. Gao BL, Chen HW (2003). The outlook research of anti-sport fatigue with Chinese drugs, J. Clin. Rehabil. Tissue Eng. Res., 7: 3018-3019. Ghasemi S, Bahrani MJ, Kheradnam M, Matlabipoor S (2006). Effect of row and plant spacing on yield and yield components of two spring safflower cultivars. Iranian. J. Agric. Sci., 1-37(3): 585-591. Ghassemi-Golezani K, Soltani A, Atlashi A (1997). The effect of water limitation in the field on seed quality of maize and sorghum. Iran. J. Agric. Sci., 25(2): 321-323. Guan ZX, Zhang HZ, Wang JL (1999). Production technology of functional food. Light industry press, Beijing, Pp. 50-52. Hashemi DA, Marashi A (1995). Variations of assimilates level during flowering and their effect on growth of seed, yield and yield components of wheat. J. Agric. Sci. Indust., 9: 16-32. Hatamzadeh H, Eskandary M, Beyg A (2003). Comparision of seed, oil yield and Agronomic Traits of winter Rapaseed varietieties under Rainfeed conditions, Dryland Agric. Res. Institute, Khorasan. Hayashi H, Hanada K (1985). Effects of soil water deficit on seed yield and yield components of safflower. Jpn. J. Crop Sci., 54: 346-352. Heidari SH, Asad MT (1998). Effect of irrigation regimes, N fertilization and plant density on yield of safflower cv. Zargan in Arsanjan, Province of Fars, Iran. Proceedings of Conference on Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Karaj, Iran. Istanbulluoglu A (2009). Effects of irrigation regimes on yield and water productivity of safflower under Mediterranean climatic conditions, Agric. Water Manag., 96: 1792-1798. Jin M, Li JR, Wu W (2004). Study on the antioxidative effect of Safflor Yellow. China. J. Chin. Mater. Med., 29(5): 447-449. Jin M, Piao YZ, Wu W (2005). The study of safflower yellow pigment on the functinsto relieve myocardial ischemia of mice. J. Beijing Univ. Chin. Med., 2: 65-69. Kafi M, Rostami M (2007). Yield characteristics and oil content of three safflower (Cathamus tinctorius) cultivars under drought in reproductive stage and irrigation with saline water. Iran. J. Agric. Res., 5(6): 121-130. Koocheki A (1997). Agriculture and breeding in dry-farming. Jahade Daneshghahi Press of Mashad, Iran, P. 302. Li RW, Wei CL (2005). Experiment of Chinese herbal jian li fang on antikinetic fatigue. Chin. J. Clin. Rehabil., 9: 236-238. Ling G (2002). Handbook of Health Food Ingredients. Chemical Industry Press, Beijing. Pp. 608-609. Majd NB, Karimi M, Noormohammadi G, Ahmadi MR (2003). Evaluation of yield, yield components and physiological traits of five safflower genotypes sown in spring and summer. Sci-Res. J. Agric. Sci., 3-18. Mohammadi NAR (1995). Study of effects of sowing date and plant density on yield and yield components of safflower in Mashad, Iran. M.Sc. Thesis on Agriculture, Department of Agronomy, Ferdowsi University, Mashad, Iran. Mundel HRJ‚ Morrison RE‚ Blackshaw TE‚ Roth BT‚ Giudie R‚ Kiehn F (1994). Seeding-data effects on yield‚ quality and maturity of safflower. Can. J. Plant. Sci., 74: 561-266. Nejad SAR (1996). Study of morphological and physiological traits and yield of spring safflower cultivars in Isfahan, Iran. M.Sc. Thesis on Agriculture, Department of Agronomy, Islamic Azad University, Khorasgan Branch, Isfahan, Iran. Nobakht M, Fattahi M, Hoormand M, Milanian I, Rahbar N, Mahmoudian M (2000). A study on the teratogenic and cytotoxic effects of safflower extract. J. Ethnopharmacol., 73(3): 453-459. Omidi AH (2009). Effect of drought stress at different growth stages on seed yield and some agro- physiological traits of three spring safflower cultivars. Seed Plant Prod. J., 25(1): 15-31. Patel N (1993). Performance of safflower under different irrigation scheduling in sought Gujarat. Ann. Agric. Res., 14: 109-110. Patel PG, Patel ZG (1996). Effect of irrigation methods and levels on seed yield and quality of safflower. J. Oilseed Res., 13: 53-55. Poordad S (2006). Safflower. Sepehr Pub., Tehran, Iran. Rahman MM, Mwakangwale MO, Hampton JG, Hill MJ (2005). Plant density affects soybean seed quality, Seed. Sci. Technol., 33(2): 521- 525. Ranjbar F, Hatamzadeh H, Beig A (2004). Determination of optimum seed rate (Row space and plant space on rows) for safflower. Dryland Agricultural Research Institute, Kermanshah (Iran). Rostami M (2004). Effect of late-season drought stress on yield and physiological traits of wheat cultivars and determination of optimum drought resistance index. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Agronomy, Ferdowsi University, Mashad, Iran. Sharikian MA, Babayian JN (2000). Effect of plant population on yield, yield components and seed quality of soybean cultivars. J. Agric. Sci. Nat. Resour., 7(3): 3-12. Shaw RW‚ loomis WE (1950). Bases for the prediction of corn yields. Plant. Physiol., 25: 225-244. Shenhua C, Huanping S, Weibing W, Jingrong D, Ramesh P (2009). Evaluation of anti-athletic fatigue activity of Schizandra chinensis aqueous extracts in mice. Afr. J. Pharm. Pharmacol., 3(11): 593-597.
Page 1 and 2:
Journal of Medicinal Plants Researc
Page 3 and 4:
Editors Prof. Akah Peter Achunike E
Page 5 and 6:
Electronic submission of manuscript
Page 7 and 8:
Fees and Charges: Authors are requi
Page 9 and 10:
Table of Contents: Volume 6 Number
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 1. Chuanxiong Rhizoma (http:
Page 17 and 18:
Table 1. Identification of main pea
Page 19 and 20:
Table 3. Pharmacokinetic parameters
Page 21 and 22:
active component study, many invest
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
and 1185 kg ha -1 in the first site
Page 27 and 28:
Table 1. Recommendation for use fer
Page 29 and 30:
Sadanandan AK, Hamza S (1996c). Stu
Page 31 and 32:
and it has been traced to South Ame
Page 33 and 34:
Table 3. Results of phytochemical a
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
(a) (b) (c) Figure 1. (a) Normal ce
Page 39 and 40:
emedies in the south of Brazil. J.
Page 41 and 42:
known fatty acids and terpenoids we
Page 43 and 44:
Table 1. Renal function tests of ra
Page 45 and 46:
Al-Radahe et al. 2271 Figure 3.nnnn
Page 47 and 48:
namely disruption of the vascular e
Page 49 and 50:
Zayachkivska OS, Konturek SJ, Drozd
Page 51 and 52:
β-carotene were purchased from Sig
Page 53 and 54:
Figure 1. Effect of ethanol concent
Page 55 and 56:
Table 3. Climatic and soil factors
Page 57 and 58:
content of polysaccharides. Phospha
Page 59 and 60:
Serge et al. 2285 Table 1. Relative
Page 61 and 62:
Percentage inhibition % of inhibiti
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Table 1. Result of phytochemical sc
Page 67 and 68:
Table 3. Result of thin layer chrom
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Table 2. MIC of a compound 1 from c
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Zirihi et al. 2301 Figure 2. Termin
Page 77 and 78:
Figure 5. T. catappa Linn. (Combret
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 8. A. fumigatus: Aspect of c
Page 81 and 82:
Figure 12. Sensitivity of A. fumiga
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Noormi et al. 2311 Table 1. Callus
Page 87 and 88:
Table 2. Contd. NoC=No callus. 4.0
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 2. Contd. at 2.0 mg/L yellow
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Table 1. Biochemical parameters in
Page 95 and 96:
Figure 3. Bcl-xL reactions in inter
Page 97 and 98:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would l
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 1. The first page of the boo
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 3. The most widely included
Page 103 and 104:
Figure 4. Lithographic print “St.
Page 105 and 106:
Table 1. List of plants included in
Page 107 and 108:
Table 1. Contd. Nedelcheva 2333 Cin
Page 109 and 110:
Table 1. Contd. Nedelcheva 2335 Rhe
Page 111 and 112:
14 7 1 15 1 35 17 16 Imported plant
Page 113 and 114:
Academy of Science Publishing House
Page 115 and 116:
et al., 1996; van Wyk and Gericke,
Page 117 and 118:
DPPH inhibition (%) DPPH % inhibiti
Page 119 and 120:
% Mortality Concentration (µg/ml)
Page 121 and 122:
information on plants used for the
Page 123 and 124:
Table 1. Levels of independent vari
Page 125 and 126:
Arbutin (mg/g) Co-solvent Figure 1.
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Arbutin (mg/g) Extraction pressure
Page 131 and 132:
Table 3. Arbuitn content of Asian p
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Arbutin (mg/g) Extraction pressure
Page 137 and 138:
Arbutin (mg/g) Extraction temperatu
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Table 1. Chemical composition of es
Page 143 and 144:
Darjazi 2369 Table 2. Statistical a
Page 145 and 146:
Table 3. Correlation matrix (number
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Table 1. Precision test. extraction
Page 151 and 152:
Figure 2. Effect of different alcoh
Page 153 and 154:
Table 6. Results of ANOVA. Nie et a
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Table 2. Plant data and MIC values
Page 159 and 160:
exhibiting the polar extracts of P.
Page 161 and 162:
Table 3. Contd. AcOEt ++ ++ ++ - Me
Page 163 and 164:
Figure 1. Map of Ladakh region of I
Page 165 and 166:
Warghat et al. 2391 Table 3. Summar
Page 167 and 168:
Table 5. Inter-Population genetic i
Page 169 and 170:
Excoffier L, Smouse PE, Quattro JM
Page 171 and 172:
ice residue is an ideal raw materia
Page 173 and 174:
DPPH• scavenging ratio(%) OD valu
Page 175 and 176:
scavenging effect on free radical a
Page 177 and 178:
our new CL system. Fenton reaction
Page 179 and 180:
1 2 Time (s) Figure 2. Kinetic curv
Page 181 and 182:
Wong et al., 2006). It can be seen
Page 183 and 184:
Pan YM, Liang Y, Wang HS, Liang M (
Page 185 and 186:
2422 J. Med. Plants Res. close cano
Page 187 and 188:
2424 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. M
Page 189 and 190:
2426 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. C
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
2432 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 2. D
Page 197 and 198:
2434 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 6. T
Page 199 and 200:
2436 J. Med. Plants Res. budget dur
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
2440 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. R
Page 205 and 206:
2442 J. Med. Plants Res. Stability
Page 207 and 208:
2444 J. Med. Plants Res. production
Page 209 and 210:
2446 J. Med. Plants Res. Figure 2.
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214: 2450 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 2. A
Page 215 and 216: 2452 J. Med. Plants Res. Ghasemi Pi
Page 217 and 218: 2454 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. I
Page 219 and 220: 2456 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. M
Page 221 and 222: Journal of Medicinal Plants Researc
Page 223 and 224: 2460 J. Med. Plants Res. Department
Page 225 and 226: 2462 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. E
Page 229 and 230: 2466 J. Med. Plants Res. AOAC (2000
Page 233 and 234: 2470 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. F
Page 235 and 236: 2472 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. S
Page 239 and 240: 2476 J. Med. Plants Res. Figure 1.
Page 243 and 244: 2480 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. W
Page 245 and 246: 2482 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 2. C
Page 247 and 248: 2484 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 3. C
Page 249 and 250: 2486 J. Med. Plants Res. components
Page 253 and 254: 2490 J. Med. Plants Res. Inhibition
Page 257 and 258: 2494 J. Med. Plants Res. can increa
Page 263: 2500 J. Med. Plants Res. Flowering
Page 275 and 276: 2512 J. Med. Plants Res. over-expre
Page 279 and 280: 2516 J. Med. Plants Res. Table 1. P
Page 287 and 288: 2524 J. Med. Plants Res. ACKNOWLEDG
Page 289 and 290: UPCOMING CONFERENCES 15th European
Page 291: Journal of Medicinal Plants Researc
show all

Download Complete Issue - Academic Journals

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?