Dergiler / Turkish Journal Of Field Crops / 2021 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1

DETERMINATION OF THE GRASS YIELD AND GROWTH PARAMETERS OF MAIZE WITH QUINOA INTERCROPPING AT DIFFERENT PLANT MIXTURES

Sayfa
44–53
Yayın Tarihi
2021-06-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In terms of grass yield and quality, quinoa can serve as a good alternative plant in intercropping systems with maize to improve the grass quality (with higher protein yields and ash rates) without reducing the grass yield excessively.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:The aim of this study was to grow maize with quinoa plants as an alternative in an intercropping system and to determine the effects of different plant mixtures on production.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:In addition to 100% maize and 100% quinoa (monocultures), 3 different mixtures (75% maize-25% quinoa, 50% maize-50% quinoa and 25% maize-75% quinoa) were also created with the help of the row numbers in parcels.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In terms of grass yield and quality, quinoa can serve as a good alternative plant in intercropping systems with maize to improve the grass quality (with higher protein yields and ash rates) without reducing the grass yield excessively.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2020 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:maize · quinoa · intercropping

Abstract

The aim of this study was to grow maize with quinoa plants as an alternative in an intercropping system and to determine the effects of different plant mixtures on production. For this purpose, a trial was carried out in the coastal Aegean region (Aydın Province) of Turkey under Mediterranean climate conditions. In addition to 100% maize and 100% quinoa (monocultures), 3 different mixtures (75% maize-25% quinoa, 50% maize-50% quinoa and 25% maize-75% quinoa) were also created with the help of the row numbers in parcels. To determine the effects of the different plant mixtures, the ash rate, grass yield and protein yield were measured in the mid-dough stage of maize. Moreover, the dry weights of the plants and plant parts (leaf, stalk and ear) were measured on 9 different sampling dates throughout the generative period, and the relative growth rate (RGR) and crop growth rate (CGR) were calculated. As a result, some climatic factors (extreme temperatures in 2020 and extreme rainfall in June 2019) had major impacts on the RGR and CGR values. Although the amount of maize dry matter increased in almost all mixtures, quinoa performed well only in the 50% quinoa-50% maize practice. In terms of grass yield and quality, quinoa can serve as a good alternative plant in intercropping systems with maize to improve the grass quality (with higher protein yields and ash rates) without reducing the grass yield excessively.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

KOCA, O. (2021). DETERMINATION OF THE GRASS YIELD AND GROWTH PARAMETERS OF MAIZE WITH QUINOA INTERCROPPING AT DIFFERENT PLANT MIXTURES. Turkish Journal Of Field Crops, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1, 44–53. https://ajindex.com/articles/217487

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (11)

  1. Åby B.A., A.T. Randby, H. Bonesmo, L. Aass. 2019. Impact of grass silage quality on greenhouse gas emissions from dairy and beef production. Grass Forage Science, 74:525–534.
  2. Akman, Z. and Ö. Sencar. 1999. The Effect of Various Planting Patterns on Grain Yield and Agronomic Characters of Corn and Legume (Bean and Cowpea) Grown Under Intercropping. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 23 (5) 1139-1148. Anonymous. 2019. FAO data, source: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC (Accessed October 02, 2020).
  3. Armstrong K.L., K.A. Albrecht, J.G. Lauer, H. Riday. 2008. Intercropping corn with lablab bean, velvet bean, and scarlet runner bean for forage. Crop Science, 48: 371-379.
  4. Awal M.A., H. Koshi, T. Ikeda. 2006. Radiation interception and use by maize/peanut intercrop canopy. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 139: 74–83.
  5. Baributsa D.N., E.F. Foster, K.D. Thelen, A.N. Kravchenko, D.R. Mutch, M. Ngouajio. 2008. Corn and cover crop response to corn density in an interseeding system. Agronomy Journal, 100: 981–987.
  6. Bauman, D.T., L. Bastiaans, J. Goudriaan, H. H. Vanlaar and M. J. Kropft. 2002. Analysing crop yield and plant quality in an intercropping system using an ecophysiological model for interplant competition. Agricultural system, 73: 173-203.
  7. Borghi E, C. Mobricci, A.L. Pulz, E.O. Ono, C.A.C. Crusciol. 2007. Growth of Brachiaria brizantha with corn intercropping in no-tillage system. Acta Scientiarum – Agronomy, 29: 91–98.
  8. Crafts-Brandner, S.J. and E.M. Salvucci. 2002. Sensitivity of photosynthesis in a C4 plant, maize, to heat stress. American Society of Plant Physiologists, 129(4): 1773 – 1780. Echarte, L. and M. Tollenaar. 2006. Kernel set in maize hybrids and their inbred lines exposed to stress. Crop Sci., 46: 870–878. Eslami S.V., 2016. Effect of weeds control on crop growth and yield in additive quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) and potato (Solanum tubersum L.) intercropping. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 14 (1): 200-214.
  9. Ferris, R., R. H. Ellis, T. R. Wheeeler, and P. Hadley. 1998. Effect of high temperature stress at anthesis on grain yieldand biomass of field grown crops of wheat. Ann. Bot., 82: 631–639.
  10. Freitas F.C.L., M.V. Santos, A.F.L. Machado, L.R. Ferreira, M.A.M. Freitas, M.G.O. Silva. 2008. Behavior of corn cultivars intercropped with Brachiaria brizantha in the presence and absence of sprayed foramsulfuron + iodosulfuron-methyl. Planta Daninha, 26: 215–221.
  11. Geren, H. 2015. Effects of different nitrogen levels on the g