Effects of Intercropping and Fertilizer Types on DM Yield and Medicinal Metabolites of Chicory and Fenugreek

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Agrotechnology, Department of Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

2 Faculty of Agriculture, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran

3 Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Pharmacognosy and Pharmacy, Institute of Medicinal Plants, ACECR, Karaj, Iran

Abstract

Intercropping of medicinal plant can increase the diversity of farming systems. It also protects the environment, water, soil and plays an important role in healthy agricultural production and human consumption. In order to investigate the effect of intercropping and fertilizer types on dry matter (DM) yield and medicinal metabolites of chicory and fenugreek, a factorial experimentwas carried out based on a randomized complete block design with three replications in an experimental farm located at Behbahan, Khuzestan province, Iran, during 2019-2020. The first factor was different fertilizer sources (Chemical, Organic and Integrated (in three levels; chemical fertilizer )urea + triple super phosphate),Vermicompost, and integrated fertilizer (50% chemical fertilizer+nitroxinbiofertilizer + fertile phosphate 2); while, the second factor was five levels of intercropping patterns, including: sole chicory (SC), sole fenugreek (ST), one row of chicory plus one row of fenugreek (C1T1), one row of chicory plus two rows of fenugreek (C1T2) and two rows of chicory plus one row of fenugreek (C2T1). The highest root dry weight (487 Kg/h), inulin content (1%) and inulin yield (4.87 Kg/h) of chicory root was obtained in the sole cultivation of chicory coupled with integrated fertilizer. The highest trigonelline content (0.48%) of fenugreek was obtained in C2T1 pattern coupled with chemical fertilizer application; while, the highest trigonelline yield (13.14 Kg/h) were obtained in sole cultivation of this plant. Considering the total DM yield of the two plants, the extent of medicinal actives in both plants and land equality ratio (LER) higher than one, intercropping patterns of C1T2, C1T1 treated with combined fertilizer andvermicompost were more beneficial than the sole cropping.

Keywords

References

  1. Raseduzzaman M.D., Jensen E.S. Does intercropping enhance yield stability in arable crop production? A meta-analysis. Eur J Agron. 2017; 91: 25-33.
  2. Brooker R.W., Bennett A.E., Cong W.F., Daniell T.J., George T.S., Hallett P., Li L. Improving intercropping: A synthesis of research in agronomy, plant physiology and ecology. New Phytologist. 2015; 206 (1):107-117.
  3. Chandrashekara K., Somashekarappa H.M. Estimation of radionuclides concentration and average annual committed effective dose due to ingestion for some selected medicinal plants of South India. Radiat Res Appl Sci J. 2016; 9: 68–77.
  4. Atta A.H., Elkoly T.A., Mouneir S.M., Kamel G., Alwabel N.A., Zaher S. Hepatoprotective effect of methanolic extracts of Zingiber officinale and Cichorium intybus. Indian J. Pharm. Sci. 2010; 72(5), 564–570.
  5. Shoaib M., Shehzad A., Omar M., Rakha A., Raza H., Sharif HR, Niazi S. Inulin: Properties, health benefits and food applications. Carbohydrate Polymer. 2016; 20 (147): 444-454.
  6. Niderkorn C., Martin M., Bernard A., Le Morvan Y., Rochette R., Baumont. Effect of increasing the proportion of chicory in forage-based diets on intake and digestion by sheep. Animal. 2019; 13(4):718-726.
  7. Li G., Kemp P.D. Forage chicory (Cichorium intybus L.): A review of its agronomy and animal production. Advances in Agronomy. 2005; 88: 187-222.
  8. Mandegary A., Pournamdari M., Sharififar F., Pournourmohammadi SH., Fardiar R., Shooli S. Alkaloid and flavonoid rich fractions of fenugreek seeds (Trigonella foenum-graecumL.) with antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory effects. Food & Chem Toxicology J. 2012; 50: 2503-2507.
  9. Salehi Surmaghi M.H. Medicinal Plants and Herbal Therapy. 2008; 1: 253-4.
  10. KaramiChame S., Khalil-Tahmasbi B., ShahMahmoodi P, Abdollahi A, Fathi A, Seyed Mousavi SJ, Bahamin S. Effects of salinity stress, salicylic acidand Pseudomonas on the physiological characteristics and yield of seed beans (Phaseolusvulgaris). Sci Agric. 2016; 14(2): 234-23.
  11. Wu S.C., Cao ZH., Li ZG., Cheung K.C., Wong M.H. Effects of bio fertilizers containing Nfixer, P and K solubilizer and AM fungi on maize growth: a greenhouse trail. Geoderma. 2005; 125:155-166.
  12. Fathi A. Effect of phosphate solubilization microorganisms and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria on yield and yield components of corn. Sci Agric. 2017; 18 (3): 66-69.
  13. Zaidi A., Ahmad E, Khan MS, Saif S, Rizvi A. Role of plant growth promoting rhizobacteria in sustainable production of vegetables: Current perspective. Sci Hortic. 2015; 193:231-239.
  14. Muyayabantu G.M., Kadiata BD, Nkongolo KK. Assessing the effects of integrated soil fertility management on biological efficiency and economic advantages of intercropped maize (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max L.) in DR Congo. American Experimental Agric J. 2013; 3 (3): 520-541.
  15. Ravindran B., Dinesh S.L., Kennedy L., Sekaran G. Vermicomposting of solid waste generated from leather industries using epigeic earthworm Eiseniafetida. Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2008; 151: 480-488.
  16. Mao L., Zhang L., Li W., vanderWerf W, Sun J, Spiertz, H, Li L. Yield advantage and water saving in maize/pea intercrop. Field Crops Res. 2012; 138: 11–20.
  17. Saengkanuk A., Nuchadomrong S, Jogloy S. A simplified spectrophotometric method for the determination of inulin in Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) tubers. Eur Food Res Technol. 2011; 233: 609.
  18. Puangbut D., Jogloy S., Srijaranai S., Vorasoot N., Kesmala T., Patanothai A. Rapid assessment of inulin content in Helianthus tuberosus L. tubers. SABRAO J. Breed. Genet. 2011; 43:188-200.
  19. Hassanzadeh E., Chaichi M.R., Mazaheri D., Rezazadeh S., NaghdiBadi H.A. Physical and chemical variability among domestic Iranian fenugreek (Trigonella foenum- graecum L) seeds. Asia J Plant Sci. 2011; 10 (6): 323–330.
  20. Javanmard A., Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab A., Nasiri Y., Shekari F. Evaluation of Forage Yield and some Advantage Indices in Intercropping Corn with Different Legume as Double Cropped. J Crop Production & Processing Isfahan University of Technology JCPP. 2014; 4 (12):39-52.
  21. Ross S.M., King J.R., Donovan JTO, Spaner D. The productivity of oats and berseem clover intercrops. I. Primary growth characteristics and forage quality at four densities of oats. Grass and Forage Sci. 2005; 60: 74-86.
  22. Strydhorst S.M., King J.R., Lopetinsky K.J., Neil Harker K. The forage potential of intercropping barley with Faba bean, lupin, or field pea. Agronomy J. 2008; 100: 182-190.
  23. Yilmaz S., Ozel A., Atak M., Erayman M. Effects of seeding rates on competition indices of barley and vetch intercropping systems in the eastern Mediterranean. Turkish Agric and Forestry J. 2015; 39: 135-143.
  24. Monti M., Pellicanò A., Santonoceto C., Preiti G., Pristeri A. Yield components and nitrogen use in cereal-pea intercrops in Mediterranean environment. Field Crops Res. 2016; 196: 379-388.
  25. Laurent B., Hauggaard Nielsen H., Naudin C., CorreHellou G. Ecological principles underlying the increase of productivity achieved by cereal-grain legume intercrops in organic farming. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development. 2015; 35(3): 911–935.
  26. Banik P., Midya A., Sarkar B.K., Ghose S.S. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive experiment. European J Agronomy. 2006; 24: 325-332.
  27. Berta G., Fusconi A., Hooker J.E. In: S. Gianinazzi, H. Schuepp, J. M. Barea and K. Haselwandter (Eds). Arbuscular mycorrhizal modifications to plant root systems: scale, mechanisms and consequences. Mycorrhiza Technology in Agriculture, from Genes to Bioproducts. Basel, Switzerland, BirkhauserVerlag p. 2002; 71-85.
  28. Turan M., Ataoglu N., Sahin F. Effect of Bacilluse FS-3 on growth of tomato (Lycopersico nesculentumL.) plants and availability of phosphorus in soils. Plant Soil Environment. 2007; 53(2): 58-64.
  29. Aracon N.Q., Edward C.A., Bierman P. Influences of vermicompost on field strawberries, Part2. Effects on soil microbiological and chemical properties. Biore-source Technolgy.2006; 93: 145–153.
  30. Powers L., Finkner R.E. Genetic improvement of processing quality in sugar beet. AM. Soc Sugar Beet Technology J. 1959; 5(7): 578-593.
  31. Heba S.A., Salama D., El-Karamity E.S., Nawar A.I. Additive intercropping of wheat, barley and Faba bean with sugar beet: Impact on yield, quality and land use efficiency. Egyptian J Agronomy. 2016; 38(3): 413-430.
  32. AbouKhadra SH., Shaimaa A.A.B., Salah E.A.T., Dina E.E.E. Effect of intercropping Wheat with Sugar beet on their Productivity and Land use. Agriculture ResearchKafr El-sheikh University. 2013; 39(1): 37-54.
  33. Khazaie M. The study of maize and Sugar beet intercropping. 2015; 16(4): 987-997.
  34. Ayanoglu F., Mert A., Aslan N., Gurbuz B. Seed yields, yield components and essential oil of selectedcoriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) lines. Herbs Spices Medicinal Plants J. 2012; 9:71 -77.
  35. Attala E, Amal S, El-seginy M, Eliwa GI. Response of Leconte pear trees to foliar application with active dry yeasts. Agric Sci J. 2000; 25: 7701-7707.
  36. Marschner P., Rengel Z. Nutrient availability in soils. In: Marschner's mineral nutrition of higher plants (Ed. Marschner, P.) 315-330. Academic Press. London. 2012
  37. El-Gamal Sabah MA, HammadSalwa A. Response of Helianthus tuberosus L to organic and bio-organic fertilizers. Arab University J. 2005. 13(3), 609-623.
  38. Rezaienia N., Ramroudi M., Galav M., Forouzandeh M. Effects of Bio-fertilizers on Physiological Traits and Absorption of Some Nutrientsof Chicory (Cichorium intybus L.) in Response to Drought Stress. Iranian Field Crops Res. 2018; 15(4): 925-938.
  39. Abo Mostafa R.R.I., El-Abbas E.l., Rabie E.M., Aboshady KhA. Agronomic and economic evaluation for some patterns of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet under tow sowing dates. Agriculture ResercheKafr El-sheikh University. 2012; 38(4): 443-457.
  40. Leithy S., El-Meseiry T.A., Abdallah E.F. Effect of biofertilizer, cell stabilizer and irrigation regime on Rosemary herbage oil quality. Applied Sci Res J. 2006; 2:773-779.
  41. Alami-Milani M., Amini R., Bandehagh A. Effect of bio-fertilizers and combination with chemical fertilizers on grain yield and yieldcomponents of pinto bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Agric Sci & Sustainable Production J. 2013; 15-29
  42. Grageda-Cabrera O.A., González-Figueroa S.S., Vera-Nuñez J.A., Aguirre-Medina J.F., Peña-Cabriales J.J. Effect of biofertilizers on the assimilation of nitrogen by the wheat crop. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas. 2018; 9: 281-289.
  43. Kramer A.W., Timothy A.D., Horwath W.R., Kessel C.V. Combining fertilizer and organic input to synchronize N supply inalternativecroppingsystems in California. Agric Ecosystem and Environment. 2002; 91: 233-243.
  44. Rezaeichiyaneh E., Pirzad A. Evaluation of yield and advantages of row intercropping of Bean (Phaseolus vulgarisL.) and Moldavian Balm (Dracocephalum moldavica L.) at low input conditions. Res In Crop Ecosystems. 2015; 2: 37-5.
  45. RezaeiChiyaneh E., Gholinezhad E. Agronomic characteristics ofintercropping of additive series of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) and black cumin (Nigella sativa L.). Agroecology J. 2015; 7: 381-396.
  46. Auerbach C. Chemicals and their effects. Proc. Symp. on Mutation and Plant Breeding, Cornell, Nov.-Dec. 1961; 25: 585 - 621.
  47. Rosser A. The day of the yam. Nurs. Times. 1985; 81: 47-8.
  48. Rezaeichiyaneh E., Tajbakhsh M., Jamali M., Ghiyasi M. Evaluation of Yield and Indices Advantages at DifferentIntercropping Patterns of Dill (Anethun graveolens L.) and Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum L.). Plant production Technol J. 2016; 8(1): 15-27.
  49. Facchini P.J. Alkaloid biosynthesis in plants: biochemistry, cell biology, molecular regulation, and metabolic engineering applications. –Ann. Rev.Plant Physiol. Plant Mol Biol. 2001; 52: 29-6.
  50. Hasanzadeh, E., 2012. Evaluation of seed yield and medicinal metabolites in different native fenugreek ecotypes. PhD. Thesis. University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
  51. Dadresan M, Chaichi MR, Hosseini MB, Pourbabaei AA, Yazdani D. Effects of different fertilizing systems (chemical, biological and integrated) and irrigation regimes on the qualitative characteristics of forage and trigonelline content in fenugreek (Trigonella foenum- graecum L.). Agroecology J. 2017; 7(1): 33- 49.
  52. Salehi A., Fallah S., Zitterl-Eglseer K., Kaul H.P.., AbbasiSurki A., Mehdi B. Effect of organic fertilizers on antioxidant activity and bioactive compounds of Fenugreek seeds in intercropped systems with Buckwheat. Agronomy. 2019; 9(7): 367.
  53. Afshar R.K., Chaichi M.R., AnsariJovini M., Jahanzad E, Hashemi M. Accumulation of phenolic compounds in milk thistle seeds under drought stress. Planta. 2015; 242(3), 2265–2269.
Journal of Medicinal plants and By-Products
Volume 12, Issue 1
March 2023
Pages 57-68

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics