ارزیابی اثرات کاربرد سطوح نیتروژن در شرایط تنش خشکی بر خصوصیات فیزیولوژیکی و عملکرد کوشیا (Kochia scoparia) در کشاورزی شورزیست

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری فیزیولوژی گیاهان زراعی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

2 گروه اگروتکنولوژی، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

چکیده

مقاومت بالای کوشیا به شوری خاک و آب موجب شده تا کشت گیاه در مناطق شور مورد توجه قرار گیرد. برای کاهش اثرات منفی شوری و تحریک رشد گیاه کاربرد اسید هیومیک و نیتروژن می‌تواند مفید واقع گردد. از این رو آزمایشی به‌صورت کرت‌های خردشده در قالب طرح پایه بلوک‌ کامل تصادفی با سه تکرار در مزرعه تحقیقات شوری دانشگاه فردوسی در سال‌ 1394 انجام شد. کرت‌های اصلی شامل تنش خشکی به‌صورت قطع چهار هفته‌ای آبیاری در سه سطح شاهد (آبیاری تا انتهای فصل رشد)، بعد از استقرار (50 روز بعد از کشت)، آغاز گلدهی (71 روز پس از کشت) و اواخر گلدهی (82 روز پس از کشت) و کرت‌های فرعی شامل مصرف نیتروژن در سه سطح صفر، 100 و 200 کیلوگرم در هکتار از منبع کود اوره بود. سطح بهینه اسید هیومیک (2 در هزار) به‌صورت بذر مال در زمان کشت برای تمامی تیمارها انجام شد. تاثیر منفی تنش خشکی در مراحل اولیه رشد رویشی نسبت به تنش انتهای فصل بیشتر بود و از طریق کاهش غلظت کلروفیل a، غلظت کارتنوئیدها و درصد رطوبت نسبی برگ سبب کاهش عملکرد دانه کوشیا شد. تیمارهای تلفیق‌شده با سطح 100 کیلوگرم در هکتار نیتروژن از طریق افزایش غلظت فنل کل، غلظت کربوهیدرات محلول، ظرفیت مهار رادیکال آزاد DPPH سبب بهبود رنگیزه‌های فتوسنتزی و در نهایت عملکرد دانه کوشیا گردید. مناسب‌ترین تیمار برای زراعت کوشیا در شرایط تنش خشکی و منبع آب شور مورد استفاده، روش تلفیقی بذر مال اسید هیومیک با 100 کیلوگرم در هکتار کود نیتروژن بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

©2024 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.

مراجع

  1. Abe, N., Murata, T., & Hirota, A. (1998). Novel 1,1-diphenyl-2-picryhy- drazyl- radical scavengers, bisorbicillin and demethyltrichodimerol, from a fungus. Bioscience of Biotechnology and Biochemestry, 62, 661-662. https://doi.org/10.1271/bbb.62.661
  2. Alizadeh, A., Najafi, F., Hadian, J., & Salehi, P. (2018). Effect of different levels of humic-acid and vermicompost extract on growth, yield, morphological and phytochemical properties of Satureja khuzistanica. Journal of Agroecology, 10(1), 69-80. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v10i1.47161
  3. Aiken, G. R., McKnight, D. M., Wershaw, R. L., & Mac Carthy, P. (1985). Humic substances in soil, sediment, and water. New York. USA: Wiley InterScience. https://doi.org/10.1002/gj.3350210213
  4. Apel, K., & Hirt, H. (2004). Reactive oxygen species: metabolism, oxidative stress, and signal transduction. Annual Review Plant Biology, 55, 373- https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.55.031903.141701
  5. Arnon, D. (1949). Copper enzyme polyphenoloxides in isolated chloroplast in Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiology, 24, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.24.1.1
  6. Arve, L. E., Torre, S., Olsen, J. E., & Tanino, K. K. (2011). Stomatal responses to drought stress and air humidity. In: Abiotic stress in plants mechanisms and adaptations (Eds. Shanker, A. K. and Venkateswarlu, B.) 267-280. InTech, Hyderabad, India. https://doi.org/10.5772/24661
  7. Azevedo, R. A., & Lea, P. J. (2011). Research on abiotic and biotic stress what next? Annual Applied of Biology, 159, 317-319. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.2011.00500.x
  8. Bates, L. S., Waldran, R. P., & Teare, I. D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water studies. Plant and Soil, 39, 205-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060
  9. Delfine, S., Tognetti, R., Desiderio, E., & Alvino, A. (2005). Effect of foliar application of N and humic acids on growth and yield of durum wheat. Agronomy Sustainable, 25, 183-191. https://doi.org/10.1051/agro:2005017
  10. Dinha, T. H., Watanabea, K., Takaragawa, H., Nakabarua, M., & Kawamitsu, Y. (2017). Photosynthetic response and nitrogen use efficiency of sugarcane under drought stress conditions with different nitrogen application levels. Plant Production Science, 20(4), 412-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/1343943X.2017.1371570
  11. Dubois, M., Gilles, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Rebers, P. A., & Smith, F. (1956). Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 28, 350-356. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60111a017
  12. Dong, L., Córdova-Kreylos, A., Yang, J., Yuan, H., & Scow, K. M. (2009). Humic acids buffer the effects of urea on soil ammonia oxidizers and potential nitrification. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 41(8), 1612-1621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2009.04.023
  13. Gholinezad, E., Aynaband, A., Hassanzade ghorthapeh,, Noormohamadi, G., & Bernousi, I. (2009). Study of the effect of drought stress on yield, yield components and harvest index of sunflower hybrid iroflor at different levels of nitrogen and plant population. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, 37(2), 85-94.https://doi.org/10.15835/nbha3723255
  14. Hatami, H. (2017). The effect of zinc and humic acid applications on yield and yield components of sunflower in drought stress. Journal of Advanced Agricultural Technologies, 4(1), 36-39. https://doi.org/10.18178/joaat.4.1.36-39
  15. Kafi, M., Borzoei, A., Salehi, M., Kamandi, A., Masoumi, A., & Nabati, J. (2010). Physiology of environmental stresses in plants. Jahad daneshgali Mashhad press. 504 pp.
  16. Khaninejad, S. (2010). Study the effects of nitrogen and phosphorous levels on physiological, forage characteristics, grain yield and crude protein of Kochia scoparia in irrigating with two saline waters. MSc thesis. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. 115p.
  17. Kaya, C., Şenbayram, M., Akram, N. A., Ashraf, M., Alyemeni, M. N., & Ahmad, P. (2020). Sulfur-enriched leonardite and humic acid soil amendments enhance tolerance to drought and phosphorus deficiency stress in maize (Zea mays ). Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-62669-6
  18. Kaur, S., Gupta, A. K., & Kaur, N. (2002). Effect of osmo and hydropriming of chickpea seeds on seedling growth and carbohydrate metabolism under water deficit stress. Plant Growth Regulation, 37, 17-22. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020310008830
  19. Khazaei, H. R., Nezami, A., Eyshi Rezaei, E., Saeidnejad, A. H., & Pouramir, F. (2013). Evaluation of the effect of Humic substance types and concentrations on germination and seedling properties of two triticale (Triticosecale hexaploide) varieties. Journal of Agroecology, 4(4), 273-281. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v4i4.17801
  20. Khorasaninejad, S., Alizadeh Ahmadabadi, A., & Hemmati, K. (2018). The effect of humic acid on leaf morphophysiological and phytochemical properties of Echinacea purpurea under water deficit stress. Scientia Horticulturae, 239, 314-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2018.03.015
  21. Lichtenthaler, H. K., & Wellburn, A. R. (1983). Determinations of total carotenoids and chlorophylls a and b of leaf extracts in different solvents. Biochemical Society Transactions, 11, 591-592. https://doi.org/10.1042/BST0110591
  22. Mohsenzadeh, S., Malboobi, M. A., Razavi, K., & Farrahi-Aschtiani, S. (2006). Physiological and molecular responses of Aeluropus lagopoides (Poaceae) to water deficit. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 56, 314-322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2005.03.008
  23. Moosavi, G. R. (2019). Effect of humic Acid and mycorrhiza application on morphological traits and yield of cotton under drought stress. Agriculture and Sustainable Development, 30(1), 121-139. https://doi.org/10.22059/jci.2019.282993.2228
  24. Nabati, J., Kafi, M., Masoumi, A., Zare Mehrjerdi, M., & Boroumand Rezazadeh, E. (2018). Salinity stress and some physiological relationships in Kochia (Kochia scoparia). Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences, 11(2), 401-412. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22077/escs.2017.151.1036
  25. Oveysi, M., & Ghoshchi, F. (2012). Study of humic acid role on reduction of water deficit stress effects on crops. Agriculture and Sustainable Development, 43, 12-16. (in Persian with English abstract).
  26. Pizzeghello, D., Nicolini, G., & Nardi, S. (2001). Hormone-like activity of humic substances in Fagus sylvatica New Phytology, 151, 647-657. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0028-646x.2001.00223.x
  27. Rezaei Sokht-Abandani, R., Siadat, S. A., Pazoki, A., Lak, Sh., & Mojaddam, M. (2020). Effect of drought stress, different levels of nitrogen and potassium fertilizer on some physiological and agronomical traits of maize hybrid (Zea mays L) cv. single cross 704. Journal of Plant Ecophysiology, 12, 40-52. (in Persian with English abstract). https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.20085958.1399.12.40.4.9
  28. Riasi, A., Danesh Mesgaran, M., Stern, M. D., & Ruiz Moreno, M. J. (2008). Chemical composition, in situ ruminal degradability and post-ruminal disappearance of dry matter and crude protein from the halophytic plants Kochia scoparia, Atriplex dimorphostegia. Suaeda arcuata and Gamanthus gamacarpus. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 141(3), 209-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.06.014
  29. Sabzevari, S., & Khazaei, H. R. (2009). The effect of foliar application with humic acid on growth, yield and yield components of wheat (Triticum aestivum ). Journal of Agroecology, 1(2), 53-63. (in Persian with English abstract). https://doi.org/10.22067/jag.v1i2.2686
  30. Salehi, M., Kafi, M., & Kiani, A. R. (2012). Salinity and water effects on growth, seed production and oil content of Koshia scoparia. Journal of Agronomy, 11(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3923/ja.2012.1.8
  31. Saravia, D., Farfán-Vignolo, E. R., Gutiérrez, R., De Mendiburu, F., Schafleitner, R., Bonierbale, M. A., & Khan, M. (2016). Yield and physiological response of potatoes indicate different strategies to cope with drought stress and nitrogen fertilization. American Journal of Potato Research, 93, 288-295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12230-016-9505-9
  32. Saruhan, V., Kusvuran, A., & Babat, S. (2011). The effect of different humic acid fertilization on yield and yield components performances of common millet (Panicum miliaceum ). Scientific Research and Essays, 6(3), 663-669. https://doi.org/10.5897/SRE10.1153
  33. Setayesh mehr, Z., Khajeh, H., Esmaeilzadeh, B., & Sabbagh, S. K. (2012). Changes on proline, phenolic compounds and activity of antioxidant enzymes in Anethum graveolens under salt stress. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production, 3, 710-715.
  34. Shen, J., Guo, M., Wang, Y., Yuan, X., Wen, Y., Song, X., Dong, S., & Guo, (2020).Humic acid improves the physiological and photosynthetic characteristics of millet seedlings under drought stress.Plant Signaling and Behavior, 15(8), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15592324.2020.1774212
  35. Singleton, V. L., & Rossi, J. A. (1965). Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. American Journal of Ecology and Viticulture, 16, 144-158. https://doi.org/5344/ajev.1965.16.3.144
  36. Taiz, L., Zeiger, E., Møller, I. M., & Murphy, A. (2015). Plant Physiology and Development. published by Sinauer Associates. ISBN-13 978-1605353531
  37. Tran, T., Kano-Nakata, M., Takeda, M., Menge, D., Mitsuya, S., Inukai, Y., & Yamauchi, A. (2014). Nitrogen application enhanced the expression of developmental plasticity of root systems triggered by mild drought stress in rice. Plant and Soil, 378, 139-152.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-2013-5
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله
CAPTCHA Image

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 26 اسفند 1399
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 21 شهریور 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 23 شهریور 1400
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار: 23 شهریور 1400

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار