17.03.2015 Views

Effects of different sowing date and the combined effects of sowing date and seed rates on the performance of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)/faba bean (Vicia faba L.) intercropping system

Temporal complementarity in resource use is not well understood in wheat (Triticum aestivum) /faba bean (bean; Vicia faba) intercropping system. Results from a field experiment involving this intercrop combination indicate no benefit in resource use by delaying bean sowing date (BSD), as the total intercrop (wheat + bean) seed yields were reduced with delay in BSD. Averaged across wheat seed rate, total intercrop seed yields were 586 g/m2, 490 g/m2 and 422 g/m2 for simultaneous sowing of wheat with bean, 23 days delay in BSD and 37 days delay in BSD respectively. Although wheat seed yields were greater with delay in BSD, this had lesser effects on the overall total intercrop seed yields. Conversely, bean seed yields were greater the early the beans were sown and this had substantial impact on the total intercrop yield. This indicates that bean was the main determinant of variations in intercrop productivity. Biomass yields mainly determine seed yield variation in response to BSD for both wheat and bean.

Temporal complementarity in resource use is not well understood in wheat (Triticum aestivum) /faba bean (bean; Vicia faba) intercropping system. Results from a field experiment involving this intercrop combination indicate no benefit in resource use by delaying bean sowing date (BSD), as the total intercrop (wheat + bean) seed yields were reduced with delay in BSD. Averaged across wheat seed rate, total intercrop seed yields were 586 g/m2, 490 g/m2 and 422 g/m2 for simultaneous sowing of wheat with bean, 23 days delay in BSD and 37 days delay in BSD respectively. Although wheat seed yields were greater with delay in BSD, this had lesser effects on the overall total intercrop seed yields. Conversely, bean seed yields were greater the early the beans were sown and this had substantial impact on the total intercrop yield. This indicates that bean was the main determinant of variations in intercrop productivity. Biomass yields mainly determine seed yield variation in response to BSD for both wheat and bean.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Int. J. Agr. & Agri. R.<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>seed</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> biomass yields. iii. To<br />

determine factors resp<strong>on</strong>sible for any <str<strong>on</strong>g>seed</str<strong>on</strong>g> yield<br />

variati<strong>on</strong>s am<strong>on</strong>gst treatments. iv. To determine<br />

optimum <str<strong>on</strong>g>seed</str<strong>on</strong>g> rate to sow as affected by <str<strong>on</strong>g>different</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g>. v. To evaluate <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> adequacy <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> LER,<br />

ATER, CPR <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> CPRT in estimating <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<strong>performance</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>intercropping</strong>, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> hence to<br />

determine which treatments show advantage for<br />

<strong>intercropping</strong>. vi. To fur<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>r evaluate <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> adequacy<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> ATER <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> CPRT computed using <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>rmal time in<br />

estimating intercrop <strong>performance</strong>. vii. To determine<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> MA <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>intercropping</strong> based <strong>on</strong> LER <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> ATER<br />

estimates.<br />

Materials <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> methods<br />

Study area<br />

The experiment was carried out at <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> University <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

Reading’s Crop Research Unit, S<strong>on</strong>ning, Berkshire,<br />

(0 o 56’W, 51º27’N)). The wea<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>r data during <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

cropping seas<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> experiment was established as<br />

well as <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> l<strong>on</strong>g-term wea<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>r data for <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> site is<br />

given in Table 1. The site soil is a free-draining<br />

s<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>y-loam <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> S<strong>on</strong>ning series (Gooding et al.,<br />

2002). For <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> purpose <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> present research, soil<br />

samples were taken from 0-90 cm depth at r<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>om<br />

locati<strong>on</strong>s in <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> field using soil cor<strong>on</strong>er in February<br />

2007. The samples were <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>n bulked <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> analyzed<br />

for pH, phosphorus (P), potassium (K), magnesium<br />

(Mg), available nitrogen (N) <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> sulphate. The<br />

results from <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> soil analysis indicate <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> following<br />

values 7.1, 35 mg/I, 79 mg/I, 67 mg/I, 9.7 kg/ha<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> 33.9 mg/ha for pH, P, K, Mg, available N <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

sulphate. On 12 September 2006 Glyphosate (N-<br />

(phosph<strong>on</strong>omethyl)glycine was sprayed at 5 l/ha<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Dursban wg (chloropyriphos) for grassl<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

destructi<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>trol <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> microworm (Panagrellus<br />

redivivus). On 13 September 2006 KCl was applied<br />

by drop spreader at 225 kg per ha (135 kg K2O).<br />

Experimental design <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> treatments<br />

The experiment c<strong>on</strong>sist <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> five <strong>wheat</strong> (cv Mallaca)<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>seed</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>rates</str<strong>on</strong>g> (0, 25, 75, 150, 400 <str<strong>on</strong>g>seed</str<strong>on</strong>g>s/m 2 ) with or<br />

without 30 <str<strong>on</strong>g>seed</str<strong>on</strong>g>s/m 2 <strong>faba</strong> <strong>bean</strong> (cv Clipper)<br />

treatment as affected by three <strong>bean</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g>s.<br />

The <strong>bean</strong> treatments were simultaneous <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<strong>bean</strong>s with <strong>wheat</strong> towards <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> end <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> October<br />

(sometimes to be referred to as SSWB), delaying<br />

<strong>bean</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g> by 23 days (sometimes to be<br />

referred to as SB23DAW) <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> delaying <strong>bean</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g> by 37 days (sometimes to be referred to as<br />

SB37DAW). The experiment was laid-out in a<br />

r<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>omized complete block design replicated in 3<br />

blocks. Note that <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>bean</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g> factor was<br />

nested within <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>bean</strong> treatment (Mead et al.,<br />

2003).<br />

The experiment c<strong>on</strong>sisted <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 60 plots each with an<br />

area <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 2m x 15m. For <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> intercrop, <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>re were<br />

equidistant alternate rows between <strong>wheat</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>bean</strong>.<br />

Plot layout for this experiment comprised 8 rows <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<strong>wheat</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> 8 separate rows <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>bean</strong>s for <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

intercrop plots (i.e. not mixed toge<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g>r within a<br />

row), whereas <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> sole crop had <strong>on</strong>ly 8 rows. The<br />

first <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> (i.e. SSWB) was carried out <strong>on</strong> 30<br />

October 2006. The sec<strong>on</strong>d <strong>bean</strong> was drilled <strong>on</strong> 22<br />

November 2006 (i.e. SB23DAW). The last <strong>bean</strong><br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> was Wednesday 6 December 2006<br />

(SB37DAW). On 21 September 2006, <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

experimental area was ploughed but poor depth was<br />

achieved due to dryness <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> hardiness. Therefore,<br />

<strong>on</strong> 26 September 2006, <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> experimental area was<br />

re-ploughed after rain <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> a better depth <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

cultivati<strong>on</strong> was attained.<br />

Crop management <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> assessments<br />

For weed c<strong>on</strong>trol, n 3 November 2006 herbicide in<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> form <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> BASF ‘claymore’ (pendimethalin) was<br />

sprayed <strong>on</strong> pure <strong>wheat</strong> plots <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> plots with <strong>bean</strong><br />

sown simultaneously with <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>wheat</strong> at a rate <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 3.3<br />

l/ha in 200 litres <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> water (pre-emergence <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

<strong>bean</strong>). Similarly, pendimethalin was applied to <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

plots with <strong>bean</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g> delayed by 23 days<br />

(SB23DAW) <strong>on</strong> Wednesday 29 November 2006 at a<br />

rate <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 3.3 l/ha in 200 litres <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> water (preemergence<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>bean</strong>s). The plots with <strong>bean</strong><br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>sowing</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>date</str<strong>on</strong>g> delayed by 37 days (SB37DAW) were<br />

sprayed with pendimethalin <strong>on</strong> 8 December 2006 at<br />

a rate <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 3.3 l/ha in 200 litres <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> water (preemergence<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>the</str<strong>on</strong>g> <strong>bean</strong>). In order to manage fungal<br />

diseases, at growth stage 31 (Zadoks et al., 1974),<br />

26

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!