دوماهنامه

مقایسه اثرآبیاری قطره‌ای پیوسته و پالسی بر عملکرد، اجزای عملکرد و پارامترهای کیفی کینوای علوفه‌ای در شرایط تنش شوری و آبی

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

گروه مهندسی آب، دانشکده آب و خاک، دانشگاه زابل، زابل، ایران

چکیده
کینوا یکی از گیاهان زراعی علوفه­ای برای تأمین امنیت غذایی در جهان معرفی شده است که شرایط تنش آبی و خشکی را تا حدودی می­تواند تحمل کند. لیکن، توسعه کشت آن در شرایط تنش آبی و خشکی در استان خوزستان می­بایست براساس تعیین حدود مقادیر آب آبیاری و تعیین تحمل آن به مقدار شوری باشد. پژوهش حاضر به­منظور بررسی اثر مقادیر مختلف آب آبیاری و سطوح مختلف شوری بر پارامترهای کمی و کیفی گیاه کینوا، انجام شد. برای انجام کار، گیاه کینوا تحت آبیاری قطره­ای و به‌صورت پالسی کشت گردید. تیمارهای مورد پژوهش شامل مقدار آب آبیاری (I1: 60، I2: 80 و I3: 100 درصد ظرفیت زراعی)، کیفیت آب (F (شیرین): 5/0 و S (شور): 6 دسی­زیمنس بر متر) و دو مدیریت آبیاری قطره­ای پیوسته (C) و قطره­ای پالسی (P) بود. در پایان فصل رشد به­منظور تعیین خصوصیات کمی گیاه همچون ارتفاع، قطر ساقه، شاخص سطح برگ، طول ریشه، حجم ریشه، وزن تر و خشک ریشه و عملکرد تر و خشک علوفه نمونه­برداری انجام شد. همچنین جهت بررسی تأثیر تیمارها بر کیفیت علوفه‌ی کینوا، پارامترهای کیفی شامل مقدار کلروفیل a و b برگ، محتوای پرولین برگ، کل مواد مغذی قابل هضم (TDN)، درصد پروتئین خام (CP)، درصد دیواره سلولی (همی‌سلولز و لیگینین) (NDF) و درصد دیواره سلولی عاری از همی‌سلولز (ADF) اندازه‌گیری شد. نتایج نشان داد تیمارهای آبیاری قطره­ای پیوسته با آب شیرین و عمق 100 درصد، آبیاری قطره­ای پالسی و عمق 100 درصد (پالس اول آب شیرین، پالس دوم آب شیرین، پالس سوم آب شیرین)، آبیاری قطره­ای پیوسته با آب شیرین و عمق 80 درصد و آبیاری قطره­ای پالسی و عمق 80 درصد (پالس اول آب شیرین، پالس دوم آب شیرین، پالس سوم آب شیرین) بالاترین صفات کمی را داشتند. بیشترین مقدار ارتفاع، قطر ساقه، شاخص سطح برگ، وزن علوفه تر و خشک به‌ترتیب 94 سانتی­متر، 1/10 میلی­متر، 23/152 سانتی­متر مربع، 25/31420 و 14/8256 کیلوگرم در هکتار از تیمار آبیاری قطره‌ای پیوسته با 100 درصد نیاز آبی گیاه و آبیاری با آب شیرین به­دست آمد. در این تیمارها، شوری نهایی خاک نزدیک به شوری اولیه در زمان آزمایش بود و بیشترین مقدار کلروفیل a و b و کارتنوئید نیز مشاهده گردید. مقدار TDN و ADF در دو تیمار آبیاری قطره­ای پیوسته با آب شیرین و عمق 100 درصد، آبیاری قطره­ای پالسی و عمق 100 درصد (پالس اول آب شیرین، پالس دوم آب شیرین، پالس سوم آب شیرین) دارای مقادیر بالایی بود. با این وجود این تیمارها میزان قند محلول، پرولین و پروتئین پایینی داشتند. اعمال آب شور به تنهایی یا ترکیب با پالس­های شیرین و تنش آبی در تیمارهای شماره 2، 4 و 12 الی 30 سبب افزایش کیفیت علوفه تولیدی (به‌دلیل قند محلول، پرولین و پروتئین بالا) شد. بالاترین مقدار بهره­وری مصرف آب از تیمار 26 که شامل آبیاری قطره­ای پالسی و عمق 60 درصد (پالس اول آب شیرین، پالس دوم آب شور، پالس سوم آب شیرین) به­دست آمد. همچنین با توجه به اعمال آب شور در این تیمار کیفیت علوفه نیز بالا بود. لذا با توجه به این­که در تولید محصولات علوفه­ای هم بهره­وری مصرف آب و هم کیفیت مورد توجه است، توصیه می­شود در شرایط استفاده از آب شور و آبیاری قطره­ای پالسی از این تیمار استفاده شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Comparison of Continuous and Pulsed Drip Irrigation Effects on the Quantitative and Qualitative Yield of Forage Quinoa under Salinity and Water Stress Conditions

نویسندگان English

H. Piri
J. Gharibvandnotorki
P. Haghighatjoo
Department of Water Engineering, College of Water and Soil, University of Zabol, Zabol, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction
Due to Iran's geographical location and climatic conditions, the quantity and quality of water resources are considered one of the limiting factors for agriculture in this country. Droughts in the last two decades, on the one hand, and lack of attention to the optimal use and proper exploitation of water, on the other hand, have exacerbated the water crisis in Iran. For this reason, the agricultural sector has witnessed serious developments and new perspectives on the rational exploitation of water resources, limited irrigation shortages, the use of saline water resources in agriculture, changing irrigation systems, and cultivating water-intensive plants over the same period. Quinoa has been introduced as a forage crop for ensuring food security in the world, which can tolerate drought stress conditions to some extent. However, the development of its cultivation under drought stress conditions in Khuzestan Province should be based on determining the limits of irrigation water quantities and determining its tolerance to salinity.
 
Material and Methods
The present study was conducted to investigate the effect of different amounts of irrigation water and different levels of salinity on quantitative and qualitative parameters of quinoa. To carry out the work, quinoa was cultivated under drip and pulsed drip irrigation. The treatments studied included irrigation water quantity (I1: 60, I2: 80 and I3: 100% of field capacity), water quality (F (fresh): 0.5 and S (saline): 6 dS/m), and two irrigation managements: continuous drip (C) and pulsed drip (P). At the end of the growing season, sampling was performed to determine quantitative plant characteristics such as height, stem diameter, leaf area index, root length, root volume, fresh and dry root weight, and fresh and dry forage yield. Also, to investigate the effect of treatments on quinoa forage quality, qualitative parameters including leaf chlorophyll a and b content, leaf proline content, total digestible nutrients (TDN), crude protein (CP), Neutral detergent fiber (hemicellulose and lignin) (NDF), and Acid detergent fiber (hemicellulose-free cell wall) (ADF) percentage were measured. To investigate the distribution of salinity in the soil profile during and at the end of the growing season compared to its beginning, soil samples were taken from dug profiles in the center of all experimental plots at depths of 0-30 cm and 30-60 cm. These samples were transferred to the laboratory and saturated extraction was prepared from them. Then, the electrical conductivity of these samples was determined using an EC meter. All data collected from the experiment were entered into EXCEL 2019 software. After categorizing the data, SAS 9.1 software was used to analyze them. Data analysis of variance was performed at the 5% and 1% significance levels, and then means were compared using Duncan's multiple range test.
 
Result
The results showed that the treatments of continuous drip irrigation with fresh water at 100% depth, and pulsed drip irrigation at 100% depth (first, second and, third pulses of fresh water) had the highest quantitative traits. Continuous drip irrigation with fresh water at 80% depth, and pulsed drip irrigation at 80% depth (first, second and, third pulses of fresh water) also had high quantitative traits. The highest values of plant height, stem diameter, leaf area index, fresh biomass, and dry biomass were 94 cm, 1.10 mm, 23.152 cm², 25.31420, and 14.8256 tons per hectare, respectively, which were obtained from the continuous drip irrigation treatment at 100% of the plant's water requirement using fresh water. In these treatments, the final soil salinity was close to the initial salinity at the time of the experiment, and the highest amounts of chlorophyll a and b and carotenoids were also observed. The TDN and ADF values were high in two treatments: continuous drip irrigation with fresh water and 100% depth, and pulsed drip irrigation and 100% depth (first, second and, third pulse of fresh water). However, these treatments had low soluble sugar, proline, and protein levels. Applying saline water alone or in combination with sweet pulses and water stress in treatments 2, 4, and 12- 30 increased the quality of the produced forage (due to high soluble sugar, proline, and protein). The highest water use efficiency was obtained from treatment 26, which included pulsed drip irrigation and a depth of 60% (first pulse of fresh water, second pulse of salin water, third pulse of fresh water).
 
Conclusion
Therefore, considering that both water use efficiency and quality are important in forage production, it is recommended to use this treatment under conditions of saline water and pulsed drip irrigation.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Chlorophyll a and b
Crude protein
Total digestible nutrients
Water priductivity

Authors retain the copyright. This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)

  1. Afsharmanesh, R., Rahimi, A., Sahafi, S.R., & Salehi, M. (2020). Physiological responses of quinoa plant to nitrogen application under saline conditions. Journal of Crop and Horticultural Crop Production and Processing, 11(4), 129-143. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.47176/jcpp.11.4.20089
  2. Afzalinejad, F., Ghasemi, S., Seifati, S.A., & Shahbazi Manshadi, Sh. (2019). The effect of sewage sludge on the growth and some nutrients of three quinoa genotypes in a calcareous and saline soil. Soil and Water Sciences, 24(4), 127-139. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.47176/jwss.24.4.42021
  3. Almeida, W.F.D., Paz, V.P.D.S., de Jesus, A.P., Silva, J.S.D., Gonçalves, K.S., & Oliveira, A.S.D. (2018). Yield of green beans subjected to continuous and pulse drip irrigation with saline water. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental, 22(7), 476-481. https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v22n7p476-481
  4. Aly, A.A., Al-Barakah, F.N., & El-Mahrouky, M.A. (2018). Salinity stress promote drought tolerance of Chenopodium quinoa Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 49(11): 1331-1343. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2018.1457160
  5. Arabfard, M., Shahnazari, A., & Zia Tbar Ahmadi, M. (2019). Comparison of efficiency and productivity index of pulse irrigation with gravity pressures in sandy soil under watermelon cultivation. Water and Soil, 33(2), 216-205. https://doi.org/22067/jsw.v33i2.70933
  6. Arnon, D.I. (1949). Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts.Polyphenoloxidase in beta vulgaris. Plant Physiology, 24, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.24.1.1
  7. Association of Official Analytic Chemists (AOAC).(1990). 15th, Ed, Washington. D.C.
  8. Awa, M., Zhao, J., & Tumaerbai, H. (2024). Deficit irrigation-based improvement in gowth and yield of quinoa in the northwestern arid region in China. Sustainability, 16(10), 4136. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104136
  9. Bagheri, M. (2018). Quinoa Cultivation Handbook, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization, Institute for Research on Breeding and Seed Preparation. 56 pages. (In Persian)
  10. Bates, L., Waldren, R., & Teare, I. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil, 39, 205-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00018060
  11. Carroll, J.L., Orr, S.T., Benedict, C.A., DeVetter, L.W., & Bryla, D.R. (2024). Feasibility of using pulse drip irrigation for increasing growth, yield, and water productivity of red raspberry. HortScience59(3), 332–339. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI17467-23
  12. Derbali, I., Gharred, W., Manaa, J., Slama, I., & Koyro, H.-W. (2023). Mitigating salinity stress in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) with biochar and superabsorber polymer amendments. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 209(6), 687–699. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13010092
  13. Dubois, D., Gilleres, K.A., & Hamilton, J.K. (1956). Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 350-356. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60111a017
  14. Ghaedi, S., Afrasiab, P., & Liaqat, A. (2015). Studying the effect of combining salt and fresh water in the Sistan region. Iranian Soil and Water Research, 46(3), 463-455. (In Persian with English abstract)
  15. Ghorbani, Kh., & Jamali, P. (2021). Studying the effect of irrigation with a mixture of Caspian Sea and well water on the yield of Sajama quinoa cultivar under greenhouse conditions. Soil and Water Conservation Research, 28(2), 81-63. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22069/jwsc.2021.18372.3397
  16. Jamali, S., & Ansari, H. (2019). The effect of water quality and irrigation management on the growth and yield of quinoa. Water Research in Agriculture, 33(3), 352-339. (In Persian with English abstract)
  17. Jamali, S., Ansari, H., & Zeinuddin, S.M. (2020). Evaluation of the effect of nitrogen fertilizer and alternate furrow irrigation methods on water use efficiency in quinoa cultivation. Water Management and Irrigation, 11(2), 112-92. (In Persian with English abstract)
  18. Jamali, S., Zein al-Din, S.M., & Kolahi, M. (2019). The effect of combined treatments of treated urban wastewater on the yield and yield components of quinoa plant. Soil and Water Conservation Research, 27(1), 181-195. (In Persian with English abstract)
  19. Kafi, M.A., Borzoi, Salehi, M., Kamandi, A., Masoumi, A., & Nabati, J. (2009). Physiology of environmental stresses in plants, Jihad University of Mashhad Publications, Mashhad, 502 pages. (In Persian with English abstract)
  20. Karimi, B., & Karimi, N. (2019). Simulation of wetted area of onion moisture in pulsed drip irrigation system. Water and Soil, 34(2), 349-364. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.v34i2.82228
  21. Karmeli, D., & Peri, G. (1974). Basic principles of pulse irrigation. Journal of the Irrigation and Drainage Division, 100(3), 309-319. https://doi.org/10.1061/jrcea4.0000988
  22. Kohi-Cheleh-Karan, N., Alizadeh, A., & Davari, K. (2015). The effect of different irrigation rates on root length density and grain yield of corn under drip irrigation. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 29(3), 331-340. (In Persian with English abstract)
  23. Levin, I., Van Rooyen, P.C., & Van Rooyen, F.C. (1979). The effect of discharge rate and intermittent water application by point source irrigation on the soil moisture distribution pattern. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 43, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1979.03615995004300010002x
  24. Lichtenthaler, H.K., & Welburn, A.R. (1983). Determination of total carotenoids and chlorophylls a and b of leaf extracts in different solvents. Biochemical Society Transactions, 11, 591-592. https://doi.org/10.1042/bst0110591
  25. Linn, J.G., & Martin, N.P. (1999). Forage quality test and interpretations. Minnesota Extension service AG, FO.2637. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-0720(15)30790-8
  26. Madane, D.A., Mane, M.S., Kadam, U.S., Thokal, R.T., Patil, S.T., Nandgude, S.B., & Dhekale, J.S. (2018). Effect of pulse irrigation (drip) influencing different irrigation levels on growth and yield parameters of white onion (Allium cepa). Advanced Agricultural Research & Technology Journal, 2(2), 228-234. https://doi.org/10.15740/has/ijae/11.1/128-134
  27. Maestro-Gaitán, I., Granado-Rodríguez, S., Orús, M.I., Matías, J., Cruz, V., Bolaños, L., & Reguera, M. (2022). Genotype-dependent responses to long-term water stress reveal different water-saving strategies in Chenopodium quinoa Environmental and Experimental Botany, 201, 104976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot. 2022.104976
  28. Meskini Vishkaei, F., Tafteh, A., Jafarnejadi, A., & Gosheh, M. (2021). Investigating the effect of periodic water deficit stress on quinoa plant yield and determining its water use-yield production function in saline soil (Case study: Khuzestan province). Iranian Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 16(6), 1255-1265. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.47176/jwss.28.4.62741
  29. Mohammadi, S., Mirlatifi, M., Dehghanisanich, H., & Homaei, M. (2019). The effect of pulse management in drip irrigation system on yield, yield components and water efficiency of forage corn, Iranian Soil and Water Research, 51(12): 3135-3145. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/ijswr.2020.309258.668726
  30. Payero, J.O., Melvin, S.R., Irmak, S., & Tarkalson, D. (2009). Yield response of corn to deficit irrigation in a semiarid climate. Agricultural Water Management, 84, 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2006.01.009
  31. Piri, H., Ansari, H., & Parsa, M. (2018). The interaction effect of salinity, drought and harvesting dates on yield, quality and efficiency of forage sorghum in subsurface drip irrigation (Case study: Sistan plain). Irrigation Sciences and Engineering, 41(1), 99-114.
  32. Phogat, V., Skewes, M.A., Mahadevan, M., & Cox, J.W. (2013). Evaluation of soil plant system response to pulsed drip irrigation of an almond tree under sustained stress conditions. Agricultural Water Management, 118, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2012.11.015
  33. Rashki, P., Piri, H., & Khamari, E. (2022). Effect of potassium fertilization on roselle yield and yield components as well as IWUE under deficit irrigation regime. South African Journal of Botany, 148, 1-12. https://doi.org/ 1016/j.sajb.2022.03.048
  34. Razzaghi, F., Jacobsen, SE., Jensen, CR., & Andersen, MN. (2015). Ionic and photosynthetic homeostasis in quinoa challenged by salinity and drought- mechanisms of tolerance. Functional Plant Biology, 42(2), 136-148. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP14132. PMID: 32480660
  35. Saberi, A.R. (2024). The effects of plant density and irrigation management on forage production of quinoa and forage sorghum. Crop Production Journal, 17(1), 81-98. (In Persian with English abstract)
  36. Sheikhi-Sanandji, D., Heydari, G., Fathi, P., Sharifi, Z., & Khodaverdiloo, H. (2022). Studying the effect of different levels of vermicompost and irrigation on the yield and quality of quinoa forage. Crop Plant Sciences, 54(2), 15-29. (In Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4963152/v1
  37. Stone, S.L., & Gifford, D.J. (1997). Structural and biochemical changes in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) seeds during germination and early seedling growth: I storage protein reserves. International Journal Plant Science, 158, 727-737. https://doi.org/10.1086/297484
  38. Telahigue, D., Yahia, L.B., Aljane, F., Belhouchett, K., & Toumi, L. (2017). Grain yield, biomass productivity and water use efficiency in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) under drought stress. Science of Food and Agriculture, 1, 222-232. https://doi.org/10.25081/jsa.2017.v1.67
  39. Tourajzadeh, O., Piri, H., Naserin, A., & Chari, M.M. (2024). Effect of nano biochar addition and deficit irrigation on growth, physiology and water productivity of quinoa plants under salinity conditions. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 217, 105564. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2023.105564
  40. Van Soest, P.J., Robertson, B., & Lewis, B.A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal Dairy Science, 74, 3583-3597. https://doi.org/ 3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  41. Vennam, RR., Ramamoorthy, P., Poudel, S., Reddy, KR., Henry, WB., & Bheemanahalli, R. (2023). Developing functional relationships between soil moisture content and corn early-season physiology, growth, and development. Plants (Basel), 28, 12(13), 2471. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12132471. PMID: 37447032; PMCID: PMC10346487
  42. Wang, J., & Zheng, H. (2017). Experimental study on the effect of temperature and flux conditions on moisture distribution in vadose zone soil. Water Science Technology, 75(3-4), 881-889. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2016.569. PMID: 28234288

Yan, H., & Nelson, B.Jr. (2022). Effects of soil type, temperature, and moisture on development of Fusarium root rot of soybean by Fusarium solani (FSSC 11) and Fusarium tricinctum. Plant Disease, 106(11), 2974-2983. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-12-21-2738-RE

ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
نام را وارد کنید.
نشانی پست الکترونیکی را به درستی وارد کنید.
وابستگی سازمانی را به درستی وارد کنید.
توضیحات را وارد کنید (حداقل 50 حرف)
CAPTCHA Image
شناسه امنیتی را به درستی وارد کنید.

  • تاریخ دریافت 28 اردیبهشت 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 10 آبان 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 20 آبان 1404
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار 20 آبان 1404