Journals / Turkish Journal Of Field Crops / 2020 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 1

THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SOWING TIME AND HARVESTING STAGES ON THE HERBAGE YIELD AND QUALITY OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)

Pages
41–49
Publication Date
2020-06-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result, crude protein and digestibility values were generally increased while dry matter and crude protein yields were decreased with late sowing and harvesting.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Knowing the proper sowing and harvesting periods in plants cultivated as roughage resource is very important for achieving high yield and quality performance.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the effects of different sowing (middle of March, end of March, beginning of April and middle of April) and harvesting (the end of vegetative stage, beginning of the flowering and the full flowering) periods on herbage yield and quality performance of quinoa’s Mint Vanilla variety were investigated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, crude protein and digestibility values were generally increased while dry matter and crude protein yields were decreased with late sowing and harvesting.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017-2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Development periods · Igdir · Irrigated conditions

Abstract

Knowing the proper sowing and harvesting periods in plants cultivated as roughage resource is very important for achieving high yield and quality performance. However, studies on sowing and harvesting times in quinoa grown for hay production are almost non-existent. In this study, the effects of different sowing (middle of March, end of March, beginning of April and middle of April) and harvesting (the end of vegetative stage, beginning of the flowering and the full flowering) periods on herbage yield and quality performance of quinoa’s Mint Vanilla variety were investigated. Research was conducted under irrigated conditions of Igdir during 2017-2018. The experimental design was split plot design with three replications. According to statistical analysis, higher plant height, dry matter and crude protein yields were obtained from plants sown at the end of March and harvested at full flowering. The highest crude protein ratio, dry matter digestible and relative feed value with the lowest neutral detergent fibre and acid detergent fibre ratios were observed in plants sown in the late period and harvested at the early period. As a result, crude protein and digestibility values were generally increased while dry matter and crude protein yields were decreased with late sowing and harvesting.

🔖

Cite This Article

TEMEL, S., YOLCU, S. (2020). THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SOWING TIME AND HARVESTING STAGES ON THE HERBAGE YIELD AND QUALITY OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Turkish Journal Of Field Crops, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 1, 41–49. https://ajindex.com/articles/180712

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Aguilar, P.C. and S.E. Jacobsen. 2003. Cultivation of quinoa on the peruvian altiplano. Food Rev. Int. 19: 31-41. Anonymous. 2019. Igdir provincial directorate of meteorology. Igdir, Turkey. AOAC. 1997. Official Methods of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 16. ed. 3. revision. Arlington, VA, USA. Bazile, D. and F. Baudron. 2015. The dynamics of the global expansion of quinoa growing in view of its high biodiversity. In: State of the Art Report of Quinoa in the World in 2013, ed. Bazile, D., D. Bertero and C. Nieto, 42-55, FAO & CIRAD, Rome. Bertero, H.D. and R.A. Ruiz. 2010. Reproductive partitioning in sea level quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) cultivars. Field Crops Res. 118: 94-101.
  2. Bhargava, A., S. Shukla and D. Ohri. 2006. Chenopodium quinoa. An Indian perspective. Ind Crops Prod. 23: 73-87.
  3. Buxton, D.R. 1996. Quality related characteristics of forages as influenced by plant environment and agronomic factors. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 40: 109-119.
  4. Cakmakci, S. and S. Temel. 2019. Selection studies for the development of seed type quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) lines. Int. J. Agric. Wildlife Sci. 5: 335-345.
  5. Casini, P. 2019. Seed yield of two new quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) breeding lines as affected by sowing date in Central Italy. Acta Agric Slov. 113: 51-62.
  6. Cusack, D.F. 1984. Quinoa: grain of the incas. The Ecologist. 14: 21-30. FAO. 1994. Plant production and protection series. In: Neglected crops from a different perspective, ed. Hernandez, J.E. and J. Leon, No. 26, http://www.fao.org/ docrep/T0646E/T0646E00.htm, (Accessed 04, 2018).
  7. Fernando, S.V., S.V. Edmar, G.B. Marcelo and S. Lucas. 2012. Development and productivity of quinoa sown on different dates during off-season. Rev Cienc Agron. 43: 510-515.
  8. Galwey, N.W. 1989. Exploited plants - quinoa. Biologist. 36: 267-274.
  9. Geren, H. 2015. Effect of different nitrogen levels on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) under Mediterranean climatic conditions. Turkish J. Field Crops. 20: 59-64.
  10. Geren, H. and O. Alan. 2012. Effects of different sowing dates on the herbage yield and some other yield characteristics of two pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars. ANADOLU J. of AARI. 22: 37-47.
  11. Geren, H., Y.T. Kavut, G.D. Topcu, S. Ekren and D. Istipliler. 2014. Effects of different sowing dates on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) grown under Mediterranean climatic conditions J. Ege University