اثر محرکهای رشد گیاهی بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد کلزا در شرایط تنش خشکی | ||
| خشک بوم | ||
| دوره 13، شماره 1، اردیبهشت 1402، صفحه 123-138 اصل مقاله (1.02 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.29252/aridbiom.2024.20363.1945 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| رضا سلیمانی* 1؛ مجید رجایی2 | ||
| 1استادیار پژوهشی، بخش تحقیقات خاک و آب، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان ایلام، سازمان تحقیقات، اموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، ایلام، ایران | ||
| 2دانشیار پژوهشی، بخش تحقیقات خاک و آب، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی فارس، سازمان تحقیقات، اموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، داراب، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| هدف از این تحقیق، تعیین اثرات کاربرد ترکیبات محرک رشد بر عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد کلزا در یک منطقه نیمهخشک بر اساس طبقهبندی آمبرژه در استان ایلام بود. آزمایش به صورت کرتهای خردشده در قالب طرح بلوکهای کامل تصادفی در سه تکرار اجرا گردید. کرتهای اصلی شامل دو رژیم آبیاری پس از 80 و 140 میلیمتر تبخیر از تشتک تبخیر کلاس A و جبران رطوبت خاک تا حد ظرفیت زراعی در بافت خاک لوم رسی سلیتی بود. کرتهای فرعی شامل: 1) شاهد (کاربرد کودهای شیمیایی مطابق آزمون خاک)؛ 2) ترکیب 1 و محلولپاشی L-اسید آمینه (گلایسین، بتایین و پرولین)؛ 3) ترکیب 1 و کود آبیاری 5 کیلوگرم در هکتار هیومیک اسید در دو مرحله (پس از آبیاری دوم و ابتدای ساقهروی)؛ 4) ترکیب 1 و محلولپاشی فولویک اسید؛ 5) ترکیب 1 و محلولپاشی عصاره جلبک دریایی؛ و 6) ترکیب 1 و کاربرد توأم تیمارهای 2، 3 و5 بود. محلولپاشی در کل تیمارها با غلظت 5 در هزار در مراحل خروج از روزت و شروع گلدهی انجام شد. صفات کمّی اندازهگیریشده شامل عملکرد دانه، تعداد دانه در خورجین، تعداد خورجین در متر مربع، وزن هزار دانه و غلظت عناصر غذایی بود. تجزیه آماری دادهها با نرمافزار SAS و مقایسه میانگینها با آزمون دانکن انجام گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که هرچند تنش خشکی سبب کاهش معنیدار عملکرد و اجزای عملکرد شد اما کاربرد توأم محرکهای رشد باعث افزایش معنیدار عملکرد دانه نسبت به شاهد گردید. مقدار افزایش عملکرد دانه در شرایط بدون تنش خشکی و با تنش خشکی به ترتیب 2/16 و 1/21 درصد بود که این دادهها بیانگر اثر بیشتر مواد محرک رشد بر افزایش عملکرد دانه در شرایط تنش خشکی نسبت به شرایط بدون تنش خشکی بود. در شرایط بدون تنش خشکی، کاربرد اسید آمینه عملکرد دانه را به طور معنیداری و به مقدار 4/14 درصد نسبت به شاهد افزایش داد. در شرایط تنش خشکی، بهترین نتیجه با کاربرد توأم محرکهای رشد بدست آمد. کاربرد محرکهای رشد سبب بهبود جذب عناصر غذایی در شرایط تنش خشکی گردید. به طوری که در مورد پتاسیم که عنصری شاخص در بهبود شرایط حاکم بر گیاه در شرایط تنش خشکی است با کاربرد فولویک اسید اثر معنیداری بر افزایش غلظت پتاسیم نسبت به شاهد داشت و از 9/2 درصد به 8/3 درصد افزایش یافت. همچنین کاربرد توأم محرکهای رشد سبب افزایش غلظت پتاسیم به 6/3 درصد شد. ﻧﺘﺎﯾﺞ اﯾﻦ ﺗﺤﻘﯿﻖ ﺑﯿﺎنگر اﻓﺰاﯾﺶ ﺗﻮان تحمل ﺑﻪ ﺗﻨﺶ خشکی و ﺑﻬﺒﻮد ﻋﻤلکرد گیاه کلزا ﺑﺎ کاربرد توأم مواد محرک رشد بود. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| اسید آمینه؛ تنش خشکی؛ عصاره جلبک؛ فولویک اسید؛ کلزا؛ هیومیک اسید | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| The effect of plant growth stimulants on yield and yield components of canola (Brassica napus L.) under drought stress | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Reza Soleimani1؛ Majid Rajaei2 | ||
| 1Soil and Water Research Department, Ilam Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Research Center, AREEO, Ilam, Iran | ||
| 2Soil and Water Research Department, Fars Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Research Center, AREEO, Darab, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| The purpose of this research was to determine the effects of biostimulats application on the yield and yield components of canola (Brassica napus L.) in a semi-arid region based on Amberje classification in Ilam province. The experiment was carried out as split plots arrangement based on randomized complete block design with three replications. The main plots were two irrigation regimes after evaporation of 80 and 140 mm from class-A evaporation pan and soil moisture compensation to the extent of field capacity in silty clay loam soil texture. The sub-plots were as 1- control (application of chemical fertilizers according to soil test), 2- compound 1 and L-amino acid (glycine, betaine and proline) spraying, 3- compound 1 and fertigation of 5 kg per hectare of humic acid in two stages (after the second irrigation and the beginning of shoot elongation) 4-compound 1 and spraying fulvic acid 5-compound 1 and spraying seaweed extract, 6-compound 1 and the co-application of treatments 2, 3 and 5. In all treatments, foliar spraying was done with a concentration of 5 per thousand at the late rosette stage and the beginning of flowering. Quantitative traits measured were seed yield, number of seeds per pod, number of pods per square meter, thousand grain weight and concentration of nutrient elements. Statistical analysis of data was done with SAS software and mean comparison was done with Duncan's test. The results showed that drought stress caused a significant decrease in yield and yield components, but the combined application of growth stimulants caused a significant increase in grain yield compared to the control. The amount of increase of grain yield without drought stress and under drought stress were 16.2% and 21.1%, respectively. These data indicated the greater effect of growth stimulants on increasing grain yield under drought stress than without drought stress. In normal condition, the application of amino acid significantly increased the grain yield by 14.4% compared to the control. In the condition of drought stress, the best results were obtained by combined application of growth stimulants. The application of growth stimulants improved the absorption of nutrient elements under drought stress. So, in the case of potassium, which is an important element in improving plant growth under drought stress, the application of fulvic acid had a significant effect on the increase of potassium concentration compared to the control, and its concentration increased from 2.9% to 3.8%. Also, the combined application of growth stimulants increased potassium concentration up to 3.6%. The results of this research showed the increase of drought tolerance and the improvement of canola growth with the combined application of growth stimulants. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Amino Acid, Canola, Drought stress, Fulvic Acid, Humic Acid, Seaweed Extract | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
[1]. Ahmad, Z., Barutçular, C., Zia Ur Rehman, M., Sabir Tariq, R. M., Afzal, M., Waraich, E. A., & Nawaz, H. (2022). Pod shattering in canola reduced by mitigating drought stress through silicon application and molecular approaches-A review. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 46(1), 101-128. doi: 10.1080/01904167.2022.2027972
[2]. Akram, N. A., Saleem, M. H., Shafiq, S., Naz, H., Farid-ul-Haq, M., Ali, B., & Qureshi, K. A. (2022). Phytoextracts as crop biostimulants and natural protective agents—a critical review. Sustainability, 14(4), 14498. doi: 10.3390/su142114498
[3]. Anli, M., Boutasknit, A., Ben-Laoaune, R., Ait-El-Mokhtar, M., Fakhech, A., El Modafar, C., & Meddich, A. (2022). Use of Biostimulants to Improve Drought Tolerance in Cereals. In Sustainable Remedies for Abiotic Stress in Cereals (pp. 519-555). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
[4]. Borhannuddin Bhuyan, M. H. M., Mohsin, S. M., Mahmud, J. A., & Hasanuzzaman, M. (2020). Use of biostimulants for improving abiotic stress tolerance in Brassicaceae plants. The Plant Family Brassicaceae: Biology and Physiological Responses to Environmental Stresses, 21(3), 497-531. doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-6345-4_19
[5]. Bozhinova, R. (2023). Yield and chemical composition of oriental tobacco as affected by biostimulant application. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 29(1), 89-96.
[6]. Cooper, M., & Messina, C. D. (2023). Breeding crops for drought-affected environments and improved climate resilience. The Plant Cell, 35(1), 162-186. doi: 10.1093/plcell/koac321
[7]. Dewis, J., & Freitas, F. (1970). Physical and chemical methods of soil and water analysis. FAO soils Bulletin.
[8]. Ehyaei, A., & Behbehani Zade, A.A. (1993). Methods of Soil Chemical analysis. Technical Publication, No. 893. Soil and Water Research Institute of Agricultural Extension and Education, Tehran, Iran. [in Farsi]
[9]. Esringu, A., Kaynar, D., Turan, M., & Ercisli, S. (2016). Ameliorative effect of humic acid and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on Hungarian vetch plants under salinity stress. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 47(4), 602-618. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2016.1141922
[10]. Grammenou, A., Petropoulos, S. A., Thalassinos, G., Rinklebe, J., Shaheen, S. M., & Antoniadis, V. (2023). Biostimulants in the Soil–Plant Interface: Agro-environmental Implications—A Review. Earth Systems and Environment, 7(3), 583–600.
[11]. Haska, O. J. A., Soylemez, S., & Sarhan, T. Z. (2022). Effect of different organic growing mediums and application of biofertilizer in organic seedling production. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 13(2), 252-263.
[12]. Hernandez Jimenez, J. E., Nyiraneza, J., Fraser, T. D., Peach Brown, H. C., Lopez-Sanchez, I. J., & Botero-Botero, L.R. (2020). Enhancing phosphorus release from struvite with biostimulants. Canadian Journal of Soil Science, 101(1), 22-32. doi: 10.1139/cjss-2019-0147
[13]. Kang, H., Zhang, M., Zhou, S., Guo, Q., Chen, F., Wu, J., & Wang, W. (2016). Overexpression of wheat ubiquitin gene, Ta-Ub2, improves abiotic stress tolerance of Brachypodium distachyon. Plant Science, 248(3), 102-115.
[14]. Lamlom, S. F., Irshad, A., & Mosa, W.F. (2023). The biological and biochemical composition of wheat (Triticum aestivum) as affected by the bio and organic fertilizers. BMC Plant Biology, 23(1), 111.
[15]. Liu, Y., Zhang, K., Zhang, H., Zhou, K., Chang, Y., Zhan, Y., Pan, C., Shi, X., Zuo, H., Li, J., & Wei, Y. (2023). Humic acid and phosphorus fractions transformation regulated by carbon-based materials in composting steered its potential for phosphorus mobilization in soil. Journal of Environmental Management, 325, 116553.
[16]. Lotfi, R., Pessarakli, M., Gharavi-Kouchebagh, P., & Khoshvaghti, H. (2015). Physiological responses of Brassica napus to fulvic acid under water stress: Chlorophyll a fluorescence and antioxidant enzyme activity. The Crop Journal, 3(2), 434-439.
[17]. Mahmoudi Nezhad, S.H., & Mosrashari, M. (2022). Evaluation of Nutritional Status and Priority of Nutrients Requirement of Canola by Compositional Nutrient Diagnosis (CND) and Deviation from Optimum Percentage (DOP) Methods in North of Khuzestan. Soil Research Journal, 36(1), 1-14. [in Farsi]
[18]. Mansour, E., El-Sobky, E. S. E., Abdul-Hamid, M. I., Abdallah, E., Zedan, A. M., Serag, A. M., & Desoky, E. S. M. (2023). Enhancing drought tolerance and water productivity of diverse maize hybrids (Zea mays) using exogenously applied biostimulants under varying irrigation levels. Agronomy, 13(5), 1320.
[19]. Mohamed, M. H., Sami, R., Al-Mushhin, A. A., Ali, M. M. E., El-Desouky, H. S., Ismail, K. A., & Zewail, R. M. (2021). Impacts of effective microorganisms, compost tea, fulvic acid, yeast extract& foliar spray with seaweed extract on sweet pepper plants under greenhouse conditions. Plants, 10(9), 1927.
[20]. Mostafa, M. M., Hammad, D. M., Reda, M. M., & El-Sayed, A.E.K.B. (2023). Water extracts of Spirulina platensis and Chlorella vulgaris enhance tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L) tolerance against saline water irrigation. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 1-10.
[21]. Musa, J. J., Akpoebidmiyen, O., Musa, M., Dada, P., Obasa, P., & Guilo, S. (2020). Analysis of Soil Water Characteristic and Water Stress Estimates using the Soil-Plant-Air-Water (SPAW) Model. African Journal of Agriculture, Technology and Environment. 9(1), 97-106.
[22]. Navarro‐Leon, E., Lopez‐Moreno, F. J., Borda, E., Marin, C., Sierras, N., Blasco, B., & Ruiz, J. M. (2022). Effect of l‐amino acid‐based biostimulants on nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) in lettuce plants. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 102(15), 7098-7106.
[23]. Pande, A.M., Kulkarni, N.S., & Bodhankar, M.G. (2016). Effect of PGPR with ACC-Deaminase activity on growth performance of wheat cultivated under stress conditions. IJAR, 2(4), 723-726.
[24]. Pranckietienė, I., Mazuolytė-Miskine, E., Pranckietis, V., Dromantiene, R., Sidlauskas, G., & Vaisvalavicius, R. (2015). The effect of amino acids on nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium changes in spring barley under the conditions of water deficit. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture, 102(3), 265–272
[25]. Puthur, J.T. (2016). Antioxidants and cellular antioxidation mechanism in plants. South Indian Journal of Biological Science, 21(1), 9-13.
[26]. Rafie, M. R., Sohi, M., & Javadzadeh, M. (2021). Evaluation the effect of amini acid, fulvic acid and seaweed extract application in normal and drought stress conditions on quantitative and qualitative characteristics of wheat in Behbahan region. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences, 14(1), 131-141.
[27]. Rakkammal, K., Maharajan, T., Ceasar, S. A., & Ramesh, M. (2023). Biostimulants and their role in improving plant growth under drought and salinity. Cereal Research Communications, 51(1), 61-74.
[28]. Ren, M., Mao, G., Zheng, H., Wang, W., & Tang, Q. (2023). Growth changes of tomato seedlings responding to sodium salt of α-naphthalene acetic acid and potassium salt of fulvic acid. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 4024.
[29]. Sharma, S., Chen, C., Khatri, K., Rathore, M.S. & Pandey, S.P., 2019. Gracilaria dura extract confers drought tolerance in wheat by modulating abscisic acid homeostasis. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 136(3), 143-154.
[30]. Sowmya, R. S., Warke, V. G., Mahajan, G. B., & Annapure, U. S. (2023). Effect of amino acids on growth, elemental content, functional groups& essential oils composition on hydroponically cultivated coriander under different conditions. Industrial Crops and Products, 197, 116577.
[31]. Van Oosten, M.J., Pepe, O., De Pascale, S., Silletti, S& Maggio, A. (2017). The role of biostimulants and bioeffectors as alleviators of abiotic stress in crop plants. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 4(1), 5-12. doi: 10.1186/s40538-017-0089-5
[32]. Wolf, B. (1982). A comprehensive system of leaf analyses and its use for diagnosing crop nutrient status. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 13(6), 1035-1059.
[33]. Wu, W., & Ma, B. L. (2022). Understanding the trade–off between lodging resistance and seed yield& developing some non–destructive methods for predicting crop lodging risk in canola production. Field Crops Research, 288, 108691.
[34]. Yang, W., Li, P., Guo, S., Song, R., & Yu, J. (2019). Co-application of soil superabsorbent polymer and foliar fulvic acid to increase tolerance to water deficit maize: photosynthesis, water parameters& proline. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 79(3), 435-446. dx.doi: 10.4067/S0718-58392019000300435
[35]. Zanin, L., Tomasi, N., Cesco, S., Varanini, Z& Pinton, R. (2019). Humic substances contribute to plant iron nutrition acting as chelators and biostimulants. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10, 675.
[36]. Zhang, C., Xie, Z. A., Shang, J., Liu, J., Dong, T., Tang, M., & Cai, H. (2022). Detecting winter canola (Brassica napus) phenological stages using an improved shape-model method based on time-series UAV spectral data. The Crop Journal, 10(5), 1353-1362. doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2022.03.001 | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 637 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 329 |
||