Effect of supplemental irrigation and plant density ... - Academic Journals

African Journal of Agricultural Research Vol. 7(15), pp. 2353-2358, 19 April, 2012 Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJAR DOI: 10.5897/AJAR11.1559 ISSN 1991-637X ©2012 Academic Journals

Full Length Research Paper

Effect of supplemental irrigation and plant density on yield and yield components of peas (Pisum sativum L.) in Kermanshah region Ali Rasaei1*, Mohammad-Eghbal Ghobadi1 and Mokhtar Ghobadi2 1

Department of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Campus of Agriculture, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran. Department of Biotechnology for Drought Resistance, Campus of Agriculture, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

2

Accepted 12 December, 2011

In order to determine the appropriate planting density and effect of supplemental irrigation on yield and yield components of peas (Pisum sativum L.), a field study was conducted at the experimental farm at the Faculty of Agriculture, Razi University in 2010. The experiment was carried out in a split-plot based on a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The main plot consisted of supplemental irrigation (Rain fed (control), irrigation at flowering, poding and flowering + poding -2 stages), and sub plot was including densities (30, 50, 70 and 90 plants m ). The results showed that the effects of supplemental irrigation and density on the green pods yield and biological yield, and the interaction of supplemental irrigation and density with the green pods yield and biological yield were -1 significant. The highest green pods yield and biological yield (9,100 and 5,326 kgha respectively) was -2 obtained at a density of 70 plants m and irrigation at the flowering + poding stages. The lowest green -1 -2 pods yield of 4300 kgha was obtained at a density of 90 plants m + rain-fed, while the lowest -1 -2 biological yield of 3471 kgha was obtained at a density of 30 plants m + rain fed. The results also showed that the traits such as pods per plant and grains per pod have a positive correlation with green -2 pods yield. Finally, the density of 70 plants m with two-stage supplemental irrigation (flowering + poding) was considered as the condition that enhanced high yield production and as such was recommended for the region. Key words: Peas, plant density, supplemental irrigation, yield and yield components.

INTRODUCTION Pulses with high rates of protein are the most important sources of food, and the plant nitrogen stabilizers play an important role in crop rotation (Nikolopoulou et al., 2007; Motanez, 2000). Peas or green pea (Pisum sativum L.), is a crop that is usually cultivated in areas that have cold climate and are relatively humid (Summerfield and Roberts, 1985). Also, it can be planted in autumn and spring seasons. The results showed that the long period of sowing to flowering in the spring sowing is shorter than that of the autumn sowing (Peksen et al., 2004). In the tropical areas, it is planted in the winter. In Iran, the peas

*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected].

have the lowest cropping areas and percentage of production. Due to the richness of protein, lysine, an essential amino acid and contained levels of starch, this product has suitable nutritional value (Valencia et al., 2008; AlMarzooqi and Wiseman, 2009; Saharan and Khetarpaul, 1994). The pea’s plant does not tolerate water-logged conditions (Cannell et al., 1979), and on the other side, reacts to the irrigation. During growth and development, especially, in the flowering and pod formation stages, drought losing of flowers and aborting pods, following by decreasing yield and yield components. Also, decreasing of the quality of the product can be observed. Since the cultivating of peas is usually rain fed in Iran, performing of one or two supplemental irrigation can be effective in

2354

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Figure 1. Monthly average temperature (°C) in year of 2010 and over the long term.

Figure 2. Monthly total rainfall (mm) in year of 2010 and over the long term.

reducing water stress during plant growth and development. Numerous experiments show that the supplemental irrigation is effective in producing the stable pulses. Pezeshkpour et al. (2008), in the assessment of the single irrigation and the plant density on peas produced showed that supplemental irrigation has increased the seed yield and the biological yield of peas (678 and 303 -1 kgha respectively), but the grain protein has reduced. Oweis et al. (2004b) studied the water use efficiency in the winter of chickpea grown under the supplemental irrigation and different planting dates, and showed that the pea yield per unit area with the increasing supplemental irrigation and early planting date has been increased, but the water use efficiency has decreased. Also, in other experiments, grain yield and biomass of lentil from 1.04 and 4.27 tons per hectare in rain-fed conditions (rainfall), respectively, has increased to 1.81

and 6.2 tons per hectare under the supplemental irrigation (Oweis et al., 2004a). In the low seeding, the supplemental irrigation has been increased the yield of the three chickpea cultivars to rain-fed conditions (Fallah et al., 2005). Also, the average of biomass and grain yield of cowpea under the rain-fed conditions, respectively, were 3.26 and 1.13 while under the supplemental irrigation they were 4.87 and 1.89 tons per hectare (Oweis et al., 2005). Also, germination of different genotypes of the peas under the salt and the drought stress condition was differed (Okcu et al., 2005). The plant density also is one of the factors having a high yield per unit area (Long et al., 2001). The length of the growth, time and planting method, weeds, available water, soil fertility, solar radiation, plant size and some effective factors are appropriate in choosing the planting density (Shirtliffe and Johnston, 2002). In fact, the yield of the plant is as a result of the competition within and outside of the plant on the environmental factors, and the maximum yield will be obtained when this competition has decreased and the plant has a maximum use of these environmental factors. Increasing the excessive density prevents the light from penetrating into the canopy and increases competition. The different plant densities, number of grains per plant, 100-grain weight and the yield was affected the spotted bean (Ghanbari and Taheri, 2005). Several reports indicated that yield and yield components of soybean and lentil change under the effect of the different densities of planting (KhademHamzeh et al., 2004; Yazdi and Peighambari, 2000). Therefore, identifying the suitable planting density is the first and most essential strategies considered for achieving high yield in a region. The purpose of this experiment were to determine the appropriate planting density of peas in the region of Kermanshah and comparing the yield and yield components under the supplemental irrigation in the critical growth stages (flowering and poding) as compared to the rain-fed conditions. MATERIALS AND METHODS This experiment was conducted at the research farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Razi University with longitude 34°21΄ N and 47°9΄ E and an elevation of 1, 319 m above the sea. The soil texture was silt-clay with a pH of 7.8. The rates of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in the soil before the experiment were 0.012%, 8 and 400 ppm respectively. The experiment was carried out in a split-plot based on a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications. The seeds were native cultivar. Monthly average temperature (°C) and total rainfall (mm) in year of the experiment, and the long term period (from 2005 to 2010) are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Monthly total rainfall for year of experiment was highest from that for the long term period (Figure 2). The factors consisted of different levels of supplemental irrigation (Rain-fed (control), irrigation at the flowering stage, poding and flowering + poding stages) in main plots and different planting of the density levels were 30, 50, 70 and 90 plants per square meter in sub plots. The space between planting rows was 25 cm. The

Rasaei et al.

2355

Table 1. Analysis of Variance for yield and yield components and harvest index (F value).

S.O.V

df

Irrigation (I) Density (D) Interaction (I×D) C.V%

3 3 9 -

Green pods yield ** 66.6 ** 7.1 ** 4.1 10.3

Biological yield **

Dry grain yield **

42.8 ** 10.5 * 2.3 6.8

6.2 ** 4.2 ns 1.1 14.4

Number of pods -1 plant ** 24.4 ** 6.3 ns 1.4 12.2

Number of grains -1 pod **

Harvest index **

22.9 ns 2.1 ns 0.4 14.2

27.9 ** 7.6 ns 1.4 17.7

ns, * and ** not significant and significant at the 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively.

Table 2. Mean comparisons traits at different levels of supplementary irrigation.

Supplemental Irrigation (stages) Control Flowering Poding Flowering + Poding

Green pods yield -1 (kg ha ) d 5067.3 c 5890.0 b 7812.4 a 8686.9

Biological yield -1 (kg ha ) c 3540.3 b 3979.0 a 4485.5 a 4753.5

Dry grain yield -1 (kg ha ) c 1005.2 c 1110.2 b 1968.0 a 2160.5

Number of pods -1 plant c

12.5 c 13.7 b 16.0 a 18.5

Number of grains -1 pod c

5.6 c 5.8 b 7.3 a 8.5

Harvest index (%) b 28.4 b 27.9 a 44.1 a 46.5

Means at least one common letter in each column, based on Duncan test at 5 percent level are not significantly different.

Table 3. Mean comparisons traits at different levels of density.

Density -2 (plant m ) 30 50 70 90

Green pods yield -1 (kg ha ) bc 6540.4 ab 7086.8 a 7525.3 c 6303.5

Biological yield -1 (kg ha ) b 3559.3 b 3559.3 a 4455.3 a 4384.5

Dry grain yield -1 (kg ha ) b 1529.2 ab 1633.2 a 1784.5 c 1297.0

Number of pods -1 plant bc 14.7 ab 16.0 a 16.5 c 13.5

Number of grains -1 pod ab

6.5 b 6.4 a 7.3 ab 7.0

Harvest index (%) a 37.9 a 40.5 a 39.3 a 29.1


seeding was performed manually in March 16, 2010. The traits of the supplemental irrigation were applied during the season of the planting growth and development in times of 50% of the flowering and poding. Harvesting was done manually in May 25, 2010, in all treatment when, the light green pods and contained soft grains and fresh. At the harvesting time a square meter separated from the soil surface of each plot and green pods yield, dry grain yield, biological yield were obtained. The numbers of pods per plant, grains per pod counted of ten plants of each plot were obtained. The harvesting index was calculated by dividing the grain yield on the biological yield as a percentage. The normal test of data, data analysis, mean comparisons and diagrams drawing were conducted with the softwares: SPSS, SAS 9.1, MSTAT-c and Excel.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Green pods yield The effect of the supplemental irrigation on green pods yield was significant (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The highest and

lowest of green pods yield, were related to irrigation at the flowering and the poding stages and rain fed conditions, respectively (Table 2). Due to the decreasing of rainfall in the late season plant growth (Figure 2) and decreasing in the soil moisture, irrigation in two phasesensitive growths caused the reduction of the green pods yield loss comparing to the rain fed conditions. The effect of planting density on the green pods yield was completely significant (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The highest and the lowest green pods yield were achieved in -2 densities of 70 and 90 plants m (Table 3). In the -2 densities of less than 70 plants m , the surface of field was thin and there was no appropriate density for having high yield (field observations). On the other hand, the -2 decreasing of the yield in 90 plants m , can be related to the increasing of the competition within the plant on the environmental factors. The interaction of the supplemental irrigation and density was completely significant (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The highest of the green pods yield -2 was obtained in the density of 70 plants m and the

2356

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Table 4. Mean comparisons traits of green yield and biological yield at different levels of supplementary irrigation and density.

Supplemental irrigation (stages)

Density -2 (plant m ) 30 50 70 90

Green pods yield -1 (kg ha ) def 5791 efg 5075 efg 5100 g 4300 efg

Flowering

30 50 70 90

5487 de 6283 cd 6900 fg 4890

3885 def 3885 cde 4157 def 3989

def

Poding

30 50 70 90

5974 abc 7951 ab 9001 ab 8324

4271 bcd 4271 b 4710 bc 4690

ab

Flowering + Poding

30 50 70 90

8910 ab 9035 a 9100 bc 7700

4210 bcd 4210 a 5326 a 5268

Control

Biological yield -1 (kg ha ) f 3471 f 3471 ef 3628 f 3591 def

bcd

bcd


irrigation at the flowering and poding stages and the lowest green pods yield was obtained in the density of 90 -2 plants m at the rain fed conditions (Table 4).

Biological yield The biological yield of peas was significantly affected by irrigation (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The effect of supplemental irrigation on increasing of biological yield of peas, also, reported by Pezeshkpour et al. (2008). The highest biological yield was obtained in irrigated at the flowering and poding stages (Table 2). However, Fallah et al. (2005), in an experiment, the biological yield of chickpea under the rain fed condition with the supplemental irrigation did not obtain any differences with the dry conditions. The biological yield was, also, affected by the density (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The interaction of the irrigation and the density on the biological yield was significant (P < 0.05) (Table 1). The highest biological yield was related to the density of 70 -2 plants m , in the irrigated conditions of the flowering and poding stages (Table 4). Pezeshkpour et al. (2008), obtained similar results in their research, the interaction of the supplemental irrigation and the density on the biological yield of peas. The green pods yield and the biological yield had a 2 direct relationship on each other (R = 0.56) (Figure 3c).

Dry grain yield The effect of the supplemental irrigation on grain yield was significant (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The highest grain yield was obtained in irrigating at flowering and poding stages (Table 2). The increasing of grain yield of chickpea by supplemental irrigation, also were reported, by Mousavi and Shakarami (2010), and Taliei and Sayadian (2001). The effect of density on the grain yield was completely significant (P < 0.01) (Table 1). The highest and lowest grain yield was obtained, with the -1 means of 1784.5 and 1297 kg ha in the densities of 70 -2 and 90 plants m , respectively (Table 3). The effect of high density on decreasing of grain yield of soybean was reported, by Kashiri et al. (2007). Very few studies of the effect of the density on peas yield, than for lentil (Mahmoudi 2006), and for spotted bean (Ghanbari and Taheri Mazandarani 2005), have been reported. The interaction of the irrigation × density was not significant (Table 1).

Number of pods per plant The effects of the supplemental irrigation and the density on pods per plant were significant (P < 0.01), but their interaction was not significant for this trait (Table 1). Jalilian et al. (2005), also, with study of density and

Rasaei et al.

2357

Figure 3. Relationships between green pods yield and pods plant -1 (a), green pods yield and grains pod-1 (b), and green pods yield and biological yield (c).

supplemental irrigation on chickpea, founds, the supplemental irrigation increased of the pods per plant. Relationship between the number of the pods per plant 2 and the green pods yield was positive (R = 0.80) (Figure 3a). The number of pods is one of the most important yield components that can have much influence on the yield. Biabani (2010), and Khandan Bejandi et al. (2010), reported, influence the density (in different planting pattern), on the number of pods per plant, was significant on chickpea While, in an experiment on peas, Biabani (2008) found, the effect of density on the pods per plant was not significant.

Number of grains per pod The effect of the irrigation on the number of grains per pod was significant (P < 0.01), but the effects of the density and their interaction were not significant (Table 1). The highest number of the grains per pod (8.5 grains per pod) was related to the irrigation at the flowering and poding Stages (Table 2). The grain number had a direct

2

relationship with the green pods yield (R = 0.63) (Figure 3b). The grain number is one of the yield components that has the more variability to the grain weigh and it can affect the yield (Dore et al., 1998).

Harvest index The simple effects of the irrigation and the density on the harvesting index were completely significant (P < 0.01) but their interaction on the harvest index wasn’t significant (Table 1). The highest harvest index was obtained in the irrigation at flowering and poding stages (Table 2). For the density was the highest at the density -2 of 50 plants m (Table 3). In an experiment was conducted in the Hamadan climate conditions, the peas harvest index with the supplemental irrigation has increased to 14 percent (Pezeshkpoure et al. 2008). Raey et al. (2008), in their research studies on the harvest index of chickpea reached similar conclusions about the usefulness of the supplemental irrigation and the density.

2358

Afr. J. Agric. Res.

Conclusion In general irrigation at the critical stages of peas growth (flowering and poding), cause the reduced of the yield loss. So by having a proper planting density, the rain fed farming of peas with the supplemental irrigation in the region of Kermanshah is possible (now, there is no cropping areas in the Kermanshah temperate region), and can produce significant economic yield.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We have thanks for the cooperation of dear Abdi-nia and Ali-bakhshi in performing this experiment. REFERENCES Al-Marzooqi M, Wiseman J (2009). Effect of extrusion under controlled temperature and moisture conditions on ileal apparent amino acid and starch digestibility in peas determined with young broilers. Animal Feed Sci.Technolo., 153: 113-130. Biabani A (2008). Effect of planting patterns (row spacing and plant in row) on the green yield pea garden (Pisum sativum var shamshiri). J. Agric. Sci. Natur. Resour., 15 (5): 39-43 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Biabani A (2010). The effect of planting arrangements on yield, yield components and some agronomic characteristics in chickpea. EJCP 2 (2): 15-24 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Cannell RQ, Gakes K, Snaydon RW, Suhail B A (1979). Effects of shortterm waterlogging on the growth and yield of peas (pisum sativum). Ann. Apple Biol., 93: 327-335. Dore T, Meynard MJ, Sebillotte M (1998). The role of grain number, nitrogen nutrition and stem number in limiting pea crop (Pisum sativum) yield under agricultural conditions. Euro. J. Agron., 8: 29-37. Fallah S, EhsanZadeh P, Daneshvar M (2005). Grain yield and yield components in three chickpea genotypes under dry land conditions with and without supplementary irrigation at different plant density in Khoram-Abad, Lorestan. Iranian J. Agric. Sci., 36(3): 719-731 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Ghanbari AA, Taheri Mazandarani M (2005). Effects of sowing date and plant density on yield of spotted bean. Seed and Plant 19(4): 483-496 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Jalilian J, Modarres Sanavy SAM, Sabaghpour SH (2005). Effect of plant density and supplemental irrigation on yield, yield components and protein content of four chickpea (Cicer arietinum) cultivars under dryland condition. J Agric Sci Natur Resour 12(5): 1-9. (Text in Persian with English abstract). Kashiri H, Kashiri M, Zeinali E, Bagheri M (2007). Investigating effects of row-spacing and plant density on yield and yield components of three soybean cultivars in summer cultivation. J. Agric. Sci. Natur. Resour. Special issue 13 (2): 147-156 (Text in Persian with English abstract). KhademHamzeh HR, Karimie M, Rezaie A, Ahmadie M (2004). Effect of plant density and planting date on agronomic characteristics, yield and yield components in soybean. Iranian J. Agric. Sci., 35(2): 357367 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Khandan Bejandi T, Seyed Sharifi R, Sedghi M, AsgariZakaria R, Namvar A, Jafari Moghadam M (2010). Effect of plant density, rhizobia and microelements on yield and some of physiological characteristics of pea. EJCP, 3(1): 139-157 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Long M, Field B, Diepenbrock W (2001). Effects of plant density, row spacing and row orientation on yield and achene quality in rain fed sunflower Acta Agronomica Hungarica 49(4): 397-407.

Mahmoudi AA (2006). Effect of sowing season and seeding density on grain yield lentil (Local var. Robat) under dryland conditions of Nothern Khorasan. Iranian J. Crop Sci., 8(3): 232-240. (Text in Persian with English abstract). Montanez A (2000). Overview and case studies on biological nitrogen fixation; perspectives and limitations. FAO case study B2: 1-10. Mousavi SK, Shakarami G (2010). Effects of supplemental irrigation on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) yield in low rain condition. EJCP 1(4): 99-113 (Text in Persian with English abstract). Nikolopoulou N, Grigorakis K, Stasini M, Alexis MN, Iliadis K (2007). Differnces in chemical composition of field pea (pisum sativum) cultivars: effects of cultivation area and year. Food Chem. 103: 847852. Okcu G, Demir Kaya M, Atak M (2005). Effects of salt and drought stress on germination and seedling growth of pea (Pisum sativum L.). Turk. J. Agric. For., 29: 237-242. Oweis T, Hachum A, Pala M (2004a). Lentil production under supplemental irrigation in a Mediterranean environment. Agri Water Manage 68: 251-265. Oweis T, Hachum A, Pala M (2004b). Water use efficiency of wintersown chickpea under supplemental irrigation in a Mediterranean environment. Agric. Water Manage., 66: 163-179. Oweis T, Hachum A, Pala M (2005). Faba bean productivity under rainfed and supplemental irrigation in Northern Syria. Agri. Water Manage., 73: 57-72. Peksen E, Peksen A, Bozoglu H, Gulumser A (2004). Comparison of fresh pod yield and pod related characteristics in pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars sown in autumn and spring under samssun ecological conditions. Turk. J. Agric. For., 28: 363-370. Pezeshkpour P, Mousavi SK, Shahabu SH, Kalhor M, Khourgami A (2008). Effects of supplemental irrigation and crop density on dryland pea (Pisum sativum L.) production, Hamadan province. Iranian J. Agric., 39(2): 389-397. (Text in Persian with English abstract). Raey Y, Demaghsi N, Seied Sharifi R (2008). Effect of different levels of irrigation and plant density on grain yield and its components in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Deci type cv. Kaka. Iranian J Agric Sci 9 (4): 371-381. (Text in Persian with English abstract). Saharan K, Khetarpaul N (1994). Protein quality traits of vegetable and field peas: varietal differences. Plant Foods Hum.Nutr., 45: 11-22. Shirtliffe SJ, Johnston AM (2002). Yield density relationship and optimum plant population in two cultivars of solid-seeding dry bean grown Saskatchewan. Can. J. Plant Sci., 89: 521-529. Summerfield R, Roberts EH (1985). Grain legume crops. Mackays of Chatham. Kent. London. p. 480. Taliei AA, Sayadian K (2001). Effect of supplementary irrigation and nutrition requirement of chickpea in dryland conditions. Iranian J. Crop Sci., 9(4): 371-381. (Text in Persian with English abstract). Valencia DG, Serrano MP, Centeno C, Lazaro R, Mateos GG (2008). Pea protein as a substitute of soya bean protein in diets for young pigs: Effects on productivity and digestive traits. Livest. Sci., 118: 110. Yazdi SB, Peighambari SA (2000). Effect of sowing dates and seeding rate on agronomic characteristics of lentil (Lens culinaris) in Karaj. Iranian J. Agric. Sci., 31(4): 667-675. (Text in Persian with English abstract).