Comparison of Yield and Quality of Forage in the Intercropping of Rye (Secale cereale L.) and Vetch (Vicia villosa Roth.) under Different Tillage Systems

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Department of Plant Production and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran

2 Agricultural Jihad Organization of Kurdistan Province, Sanandaj, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Conservation tillage systems are a key component of sustainable agricultural management, significantly contributing to the improvement of soil’s physical, biological, and chemical properties. One of effective factors in increasing sustainable production is the intercropping of crops and fodder. In addition to increasing the diversity of economic resources of the farm, intercropping increases the yield per unit area, biodiversity and efficient use of resources and reduces possible damage from pests and diseases. One of the common types of forage intercropping is the mixed crop of legumes and cereals. Cereals are at a high level in terms of dry matter, but they are poor in terms of protein, and on the other hand, legumes are at a high level in terms of protein. Therefore, the mixture of cereals and legumes will lead to the production of high-quality forage. Since the effects of the combined use of mixed cropping and conservation tillage on fodder production have been less evaluated, and considering the importance of vetch and rye crops in fodder production and livestock feeding, improving soil fertility and production stability in agroecosystems, it seems necessary to evaluate the effect of mixed cultivation of these plants in different tillage systems.
Materials and Methods
In order to investigate the effect of different tillage systems on intercropping of rye (Secale cereale L.) and vetch (Vicia villosa Roth), an experiment was carried out in the cropping year of 2018-2019 in the Gariza Agricultural Research Station of Sanandaj. The experiment was carried out as a split plot based on a randomized complete block design in three replications. Tillage methods include no tillage, reduced tillage and conventional tillage as the main factor and rye and vetch intercropping system in 5 levels including 100% vetch, 75% vetch + 25% rye, 50% vetch + 50% rye, 25% vetch + 75% rye and 100% rye were considered as secondary factor. In conventional tillage system, reversible plow and disk were used, and in reduced tillage system, goose claw was used for plowing. In all three tillage systems, sowing of two crops was done simultaneously and manually on 15th of October. The studied traits included the number of nodes in the hairy vetch root, dry forage yield of hairy vetch and rye, land equivalent ratio, neutral and acid detergent insoluble fiber, digestible dry matter, and ash percentage. SAS 9.1 software was used to analyze the data and LSD test was used to compare the average of the treatments. Graphs were also drawn using Excel.
Results and Discussion
The results of analysis of variance showed that dry forage yield of rye and hairy vetch was influenced by the intercropping pattern and tillage systems. Among the mixed cropping combinations, the highest dry forage yield of rye (1625 kg ha-1) was achieved in the treatment of 75% rye + 25% hairy vetch under conventional tillage, which did not show a significant difference compared to the treatment of 75% rye + 25% hairy vetch under reduced tillage. In all studied tillage systems, the 50% vetch and 50% rye intercropping pattern had a higher land equivalent ratio (LER). The lowest total LER was related to the conventional tillage system and the treatment of 75% vetch + 25% rye. Assessment of the forage quality showed that the insoluble fibers in acidic (ADF) and neutral (NDF) detergent in conventional tillage and rye monoculture were more than other treatments. The amounts of ADF and NDF were reduced in low tillage and no tillage systems. Also, by increasing the proportion of vetch in intercropping treatments, the amount of insoluble fibers in acidic (ADF) and neutral (NDF) detergents decreased. The highest digestible dry matter (DMD) was in the reduced tillage treatment. The percentage of forage ash in the mixed cropping treatment with the combination of 75% vetch and 25% rye was higher than other ratios of mixed cropping.
Conclusion
According to the results of the present experiment, the high value of land equivalent ratio (LER) in intercropping patterns indicates a better utilization of the unit of land area in intercropping. Overall, to maximize forage yield and enhance forage quality, the findings clearly demonstrate that intercropping outperforms monoculture for the crops studied.

Keywords

Main Subjects

©2025 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source.

References

  1. Afzalinia, S., & Karami, A. (2018). Effect of conservation tillage on soil properties and corn yield in the corn-wheat rotation. Iranian Journal of Biosystem Engineering, 49(1), 129-137. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/ijbse.2017.243058.664995
  2. Ahmadi, S., Fateh, E., & Aynehband, A. (2019). The effect of different barley and hairy vetch row intercropping sowing pattern and phosphorus fertilizer on dry matter production and forage quality. Electronic Journal of Crop Production, 11(4), 89-102. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22069/ejcp.2019.14529.2098
  3. Akhtar, M. F. U. Z., Jamil, M., Ahamd, M., & Abbasi, G. H. (2017). Evaluation of biofertilizer in combination with organic amendments and rock phosphate enriched compost for improving productivity of chickpea and maize. Soil and Environment, 36(1), 59-69.
  4. Amori, A., Roshanfekr, H., & Hasibi, P. (2017). The study of mixcropping on row of oat and vetch in Ahvaz. Journal of Crops Improvement, 19(2), 303-317. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2017.60414
  5. Ansar, M., Ahmed, Z. I., Malik, M. A., Nadeem, M., Majeed, A., & Rischkowsky, B. A. (2010). Forage yield and quality potential of winter cereal-vetch mixtures under rainfed conditions. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture, 22(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.9755/ejfa.v22i1.4904
  6. AOAC. (1990). Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. AOAC International.
  7. Asadi, , Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., & Amirnia, R. (2019). Effect of planting pattern and fertilizer source on agronomic characteristics of linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.) and chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in intercroppng under rainfed conditions. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 21(1), 16-30. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.29252/abj.21.1.16
  8. Ashoori, N., Abdi, M., Golzardi, F., Ajali, J., & Ilkaee, M. N. (2021). Forage potential of sorghum-clover intercropping systems in semi-arid conditions. Bragantia, 80, e1421. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4499.20200423
  9. Awal, M. A., Pramanik, M. H. R., & Hossen, M. A. (2007). Interspecies competition, growth and yield in barley-peanut intercropping. Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 6(4), 577-584. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajps.2007.577.584
  10. Baghdadi, A., Halim. R. A, Ghasemzadeh, A., & Ebrahimi, M. (2016). Effect of intercropping of corn and soyabean on dry matter yield and nutritive value of forage corn. Legume Research, 39(6), 976-981. https://doi.org/10.18805/lr.v39i6.6643
  11. Bagnall, D. K., Jones, E. J., Balke, S., Morgan, C. L., & McBratney, A. B. (2020). An in situ method for quantifying tillage effects on soil structure using multistripe laser triangulation. Geoderma, 380, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2020.114642
  12. Bakhtiyari, F., Zamanian, M., & Golzardi, F. (2020). Effect of mixed intercropping of clover on forage yield and quality. South-Western Journal of Horticulture, Biology and Environment, 11(1), 49-65.
  13. Budakli Carpici, E., & Celik, N. (2014). Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with triticale and annual ryegrass. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 19(1), 66-69.
  14. Chaghazardi, H., Jahansuz, M. R., Ahmadi, A., & Gorji, M. (2016). Study of different tillage methods on some soil properties, seed yield and morphological traits of wheat and chickpea under rainfed conditions of Sarpolezahab region. Journal of Crops Improvement, 18(3), 581-594. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2016.56622
  15. Contreras‐Govea, F. E., Albrecht, K. A., & Muck, R. E. (2006). Spring yield and silage characteristics of kura clover, winter wheat, and in mixtures. Agronomy Journal, 98(3), 781-787.
  16. Dehghanian, H., Barmaki, M., Dabbagh Mohamadi Nasab, A., & Seifdavati, J. (2020). Grass pea (Lathyrus sativus)-cereal intercropping: Evaluation of productivity and some indices of forage quality. Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 30(3), 61-76. (in Persian with English abstract). https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.24764310.1399.30.3.4.9
  17. Ditsch, D. D., & Bitzer, M. J. (2005). Managing small grains for livestock forage. Department of Agronomy. University of Kent. Available at: https://forages.ca.uky.edu/files/small_grains_for_forage_agr160.pdf.
  18. Du, J. B., Han, T. F., Gai, J. Y., Yong, T. W., Xin, S. U. N., Wang, X. C., & Yang, W. Y. (2018). Maize-soybean strip intercropping: Achieved a balance between high productivity and sustainability. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 17(4), 747-754. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61789-1
  19. Ehsanifar, A. R., Dahmardeh, M., & Khammari, I. (2015). Effect of different tillage systems on yield and yield components in cowpea-millet intercropping. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 8(11), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i11/71779
  20. Fateh, E., Tarighi, S., & Aynehband, A. (2018). The effect of different barley (Hordeum vulgare) and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum- graecum) intercropping planting ratio under nitrogen fertilizer on dry matter quality and quantity. Crop Production, 11(1), 23-35. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22069/ejcp.2018.12601.1982
  21. Favre, J. R., Castiblanco, T. M., Combs, D. K., Wattiaux, M. A., & Picasso, V.D. (2019). Forage nutritive value and predicted fiber digestibility of Kernza intermediate wheatgrass in monoculture and in mixture with red clover during the first production year. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 258, 114-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2019.114298
  22. Gozubuyuk, Z., Sahin, U., Ozturk, I., Celik, A., & Adiguzel, M.C. (2014). Tillage effects on certain physical and hydraulic properties of a loamy soil under a crop rotation in a semi-arid region with a cool climate. Catena, 118, 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.01.006
  23. Heidari, G., Mohammadi, K., & Sohrabi, Y. (2016). Responses of soil microbial biomass and enzyme activities to tillage and fertilization systems in soybean (Glycine max) production. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7, 17-30. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01730
  24. Heydarpour, N., Namdari, A., & Baghbani-Arani, A. (2018). Evaluation of quantitative yield and some physical properties of soil in three years mixed barley (Khorram)-vetch forage (Vicia sativa) cropping system under rain-fed conditions. Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 28(4), 1-14. (in Persian with English abstract).
  25. Idowu, O. J., Sultana, S., Darapuneni, M., Beck, L., & Steiner, R. (2019). Short-term conservation tillage effects on corn silage yield and soil quality in an irrigated, arid agroecosystem. Agronomy, 9(8), 455. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9080455
  26. Indoria, A. K., Srinivasa-Rao, C., Sharma, K. L., & Sammi-Reddy, K. (2017). Conservation agriculture–A panacea to improve soil physical health. Current Science, 112(52), 52-61.
  27. Issaka, F., Zhang, Z., Zhao, Z.Q., Asenso, E., Li, J. H., Li, Y. T., & Wang, J. J. (2019). Sustainable conservation tillage improves soil nutrients and reduces nitrogen and phosphorous losses in maize farmland in Southern China. Sustainability, 11(8), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082397
  28. Javanmard, A., Dabbagh-Mohammadi-Nasab, A., Javanshir, A., Moghaddam, M., & Janmohammadi, H. (2009). Forage yield and quality in intercropping of maize with different legumes as double-cropped. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 7(1), 163-166.
  29. Javanmard, A., Nouri, M., Ostadi, A., Rebati, J., Nouraein, M., & Shabahang J. (2022). The effects of different tillage systems and fertilizer resources on the growth, yield component, and economic efficiency of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) under rainfed condition. Journal of Agroecology, 14(2), 251-274. https://doi.org/10.22067/agry.2021.20326.0
  30. Javanmard, A., Rostami, A., Nouraein, M., & Gharekhany, G. (2016). Agronomical, ecological and economical evaluation of wheat-chickpea intercropping under rainfed condition of Maragheh. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 26(1), 19-37. (In Persian with English Summary).
  31. Khan, R., Biswas, S., Kundu, C. K., Jana, K., & Bandopadhyay, R. R. P. (2021). Effect of conservation tillage practices on growth attributes of different fodder crops and soil moisture depletion. International Journal of Chemical Studies, 9(1), 1846-1852. https://doi.org/10.22271/chemi.2021.v9.i1z.11494
  32. Lamei Hervani, J. (2013). Assessment of dry forage and crude protein yeilds, competition and advantage indices in mixed cropping of annual forage legume crops with barley in rainfed comditions of Zanjan province in Iran. Seed and Plant Production Journal, 29(2), 169-183. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22092/sppj.2017.110508
  33. Lithourgidis, A. S., Vlachostergios, D. N., Dordas, C. A., & Damalas, C. A. (2021). Dry matter yield, nitrogen content, and competition in pea–cereal intercropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 34(4), 287-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2011.02.007
  34. Metwally, A. A., Safina, S. A., & Noaman, A. H. (2015). Yield and land equivalent ratio of intercropping maize with Egyptian cotton. Journal of Agri-Food and Applied Sciences, 3(4), 85-93.
  35. Mohavieh Asadi, N., Bijanzadeh, E., Behpouri, A., & Barati, V. (2020). Effect of relay intercropping of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) with barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) on biochemical traits and yield under late season drought stress. Iranian Journal Pulses Research, 11(2), 164-182. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/ijpr.v11i2.78361
  36. Moradi, P., Asghari, J., Mohsen-Abadi, G.R., & Samiezadeh, H. (2015). Evaluation of forage quantity and quality in intercropping maize with pinto bean and naked pumpkin. Journal of Crops Improvement, 17(3), 683-699. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2015.54379
  37. Nakhzari Moghaddam, A. (2014). The yield and forage quality of intercropping barley and mustard in different planting dates. Journal of Crop Production, 5(4), 173-190. (in Persian with English abstract). https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.2008739.1391.5.4.10.5
  38. Nakhzari Moghaddam, A. (2016). Effects of nitrogen and different intercropping arrangements of barley (Hordeum vulgare) and pea (Pisum sativum L.) on forage yield and competitive indices. Journal of Agroecology, 8(1), 47-58. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v8i1.12534
  39. Neugschwandtner, R. W., & Kaul, H. P. (2015). Nitrogen uptake, use and utilization efficiency by oat–pea intercrops. Field Crops Research, 179, 113-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2015.04.018
  40. Nurjaya, I. G. M. O., & Agung, I. G. A. M. S. (2012). Effects of tillage on forage legumes growth and subsequent dry matter yields of corn planted for livestock feeding. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 2(4), 616-625. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEA/2012/1660
  41. Oddy, V. H., Robards, G. E., & Low, S. G. (1983). Prediction of in vivo dry matter digestibility from the fibre and nitrogen content of a feed. In ‘Feed Information and Animal Production’. G. E. Robards, & R. G. Packham (Eds). pp. 395–398.
  42. Oehl, F., & Koch, B. (2018). Diversity of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in no-till and conventionally tilled vineyards. Journal of Applied Botany and Food Quality, 91, 56–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.5073/JABFQ.2018.091.008
  43. Pakgohar, N., Ghanbari, A., & Farahbakhsh, A. (2014). Investigation of quantitative and qualitative characteristics of green pea (Lathyrus sativus) and nutrifed millet (Pennisetum sp.) forage in different cultivation patterns. Agroecology, 6(1), 108-117. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v6i1.35678
  44. Pinnamaneni, S. R., Mubvumba, P., Anapalli, S., & Reddy, K. N. (2022). Cereal rye cover crop impacts on soybean (Glycine max) root growth and soil properties. Frontiers in Soil Science, 2, 970380. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoil.2022.970380
  45. Pooryousef, M., & Alizadeh, K. (2018). Evaluation of different smooth vetch and winter type barley mix cropping systems under Mahabad cold dryland conditions. Iranian Journal of Dryland Agriculture, 7(1), 1-13. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22092/idaj.2018.115759.183
  46. Rabiee, M., & Farahdahr, F. (2020). Evaluation of yield and advantages of forage legumes with cereals intercropping as second crop in paddy fields. Plant Productions, 43(3), 363-374. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22055/ppd.2019.27838.1689
  47. Rashidi, M., & Keshavarzpour, F. (2007). Effect of different tillage methods on soil physical properties and crop yield of watermelon (Citrullus vulgaris). Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 2, 1-16.
  48. Renzi, J. P., Chantre, G. R., & Cantamutto, M. A. (2016). Self-regeneration of hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth) as affected by seedling density and soil tillage method in a semi-arid agroecosystem. Grass and Forage Science, 72(3), 524-533. https://doi.org/10.1111/gfs.12255
  49. Saha, S., Chakraborty, D., Sharma, A. R., & Kalra, N. (2010). Effect of tillage and residue management on soil Physical-Indian mustard system. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science, 80(8), 679-685.
  50. Salehi, Z., Amirnia, R., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., & Khalilvandi-Behrozyar, H. (2018). Evaluation of yield and some qualitative traits of forage in intercropping of triticale with annual legumes. Journal of Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production, 28(4), 59-76. (in Persian with English abstract).
  51. Schillinger, W. F., Young, D. L., Kennedy, A. C., & Paulitz, T. C. 2010. Diverse no-till irrigated crop rotations instead of burning and plowing continuous wheat. Field Crops Research, 115(1), 39-49. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2009.10.001
  52. Schlegel, H. J. (2013) Rye: Genetics, Breeding, and Cultivation. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis. 359 pp. https://doi.org/10.1201/b15553
  53. Shahbazi, S., Jalilian, J., Alizadeh, K., & Javanmard, A. (2022). Evaluation of chemical and organic-biofertilizer treatments on yield and forage quality of triticale and Maragheh Smoth vetch under sole and intercropping systems in rainfed condition. Iranian Dryland Agronomy Journal, 10(2), 199-226. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22092/idaj.2022.356297.352
  54. Simmons, B. L., & Coleman, D. C. (2008). Microbial community response to transition from conventional to conservation tillage in cotton fields. Applied Soil Ecology, 40, 518-528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2008.08.003
  55. Sori, S., Amirnia, R., Rezaei-Chiyaneh, E., & Sheikh, F. (2020). Evaluation of yield and yield components of different faba bean (Vicia faba) varieties in intercropping with triticale (Tritico secale). Journal of Agroecology, 12(1), 143-159. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v12i1.81918
  56. Stagnari, F., Maggio, A., Galieni, A., & Pisante, M. (2017). Multiple benefits of legumes for agriculture sustainability: an overview. Chemical and Biological Technologies in Agriculture, 4(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-016-0085-1
  57. Toreifi, S. H., Fateh, E., & Aynehband, A. (2018). Effect of different barley (Hordeum vulgare) and fenugreek (Trigonella foenum- graecum) intercropping planting ratio and nitrogen fertilizer on dry matter quality and quantity. Journal of Crop Production, 11(1), 23-35. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22069/ejcp.2018.12601.1982
  58. Van der Werf, W., Zhang, L., Li, C., Chen, P., Feng, C., Xu, Z., Zhang, C., Gu, C., Bastiaans, L., Makowski, D., & Stomph, T. J. (2021). Comparing performance of crop species mixtures and pure stands. Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering, 8, 481–489. https://doi.org/10.15302/J-FASE-2021413
  59. Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991). Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science, 74(10), 3583-3597. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2
  60. Xiao, J. X., Yin, X. H., Ren, J. B., Zhang, M., Tang, L., & Zheng, Y. (2018). Complementation drives higher growth rate and yield of wheat and savesnitrogen fertilizer in wheat and faba bean intercropping. Field Crops Research, 221, 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.009
  61. Yilmaz, S., Atak, M., & Erayman, M. (2008). Identification of advantages of maize – legume intercropping over solitary cropping through competition indices in the east Mediterranean region. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 32(2), 111-119.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 13 May 2024
  • Revise Date: 02 October 2024
  • Accept Date: 07 October 2024
  • First Publish Date: 11 March 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics