Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the water and nitrogen use efficiency and some quantitative and qualitative characteristics of forage beet cultivars under the influence of different irrigation methods and nitrogen levels in two cropping years, 2017–18 and 2018–19, at Agricultural Research Station in Karaj, Iran. Experimental factors included the first factor with four irrigation methods (normal leakage, alternate furrow irrigation, fixed furrow irrigation, type (drip-strip)), the second factor was the amount of nitrogen fertilizer with three levels (150, 200 and 250 kg N ha−1) and the third factor included three forage beet cultivars (Sbsi052, Jamon and Kyros). Among irrigation treatments, alternate furrow irrigation and fixed furrow irrigation had the highest sugar content with 9.28% and 9.17%, respectively. The highest yield of digestible organic matter was obtained in leakage irrigation treatment, nitrogen fertilizer of 250 kg ha−1 and in Kyros at the rate of 19.45 t ha−1. The highest yield of root digestible dry matter, potassium, sodium and free nitrogen was observed in leakage irrigation treatment and consumption of 200 kg ha−1 nitrogen was observed in foreign cultivars. The highest crude protein was observed in alternate furrow irrigation conditions with a consumption of 200 kg ha−1 nitrogen in cultivar Sbsi052 at 13.08%. Leakage irrigation and type tape had the highest consumption efficiency and efficiency of nitrogen uptake with application of 150 and 200 kg ha−1 N, and the highest water use efficiency was also observed in leakage irrigation and type tape with application of 250 kg ha−1 N in domestic and foreign cultivars. The type irrigation method showed better quantitative and qualitative yield than the furrow irrigation methods.
Zusammenfassung
Ziel dieser Studie war es, die Wasser- und Stickstoffnutzungseffizienz sowie einige quantitative und qualitative Merkmale von Futterrübensorten unter dem Einfluss unterschiedlicher Bewässerungsmethoden und Stickstoffmengen in zwei Anbaujahren, 2017–18 und 2018–19, an der Agricultural Research Station in Karaj, Iran, zu bewerten. Zu den Versuchsfaktoren gehörte der erste Faktor mit vier Bewässerungsmethoden (normale Leckage, abwechselnde Furchenbewässerung, feste Furchenbewässerung, Typ (Tropfstreifen)), der zweite Faktor war die Stickstoffdüngermenge in drei Stufen (150, 200 und 250 kg N ha−1) und der dritte Faktor umfasste drei Futterrübensorten (Sbsi052, Jamon und Kyros). Unter den Bewässerungsbehandlungen wiesen die abwechselnde Furchenbewässerung und die Festfurchenbewässerung mit 9,28 % bzw. 9,17 % den höchsten Zuckergehalt auf. Der höchste Ertrag an verdaulicher organischer Substanz wurde bei der Leckagebewässerung, einer Stickstoffdüngung von 250 kg ha−1 und der Sorte Kyros mit 19,45 t ha−1 erzielt. Der höchste Ertrag an verdaulicher Wurzeltrockenmasse, Kalium, Natrium und freiem Stickstoff wurde bei der Leckagebewässerung und einem Stickstoffverbrauch von 200 kg ha−1 Stickstoff bei ausländischen Sorten beobachtet. Der höchste Rohproteingehalt wurde bei abwechselnder Furchenbewässerung mit einem Verbrauch von 200 kg ha−1 Stickstoff in der Sorte Sbsi052 mit 13,08 % beobachtet. Die höchste Verbrauchseffizienz und die höchste Effizienz der Stickstoffaufnahme wurde bei der Leckage- und der Tropfstreifenbewässerung mit 150 bzw. 200 kg ha−1 N festgestellt, und auch die höchste Wassernutzungseffizienz wurde bei der Leckage- und der Tropfstreifenbewässerung mit 250 kg ha−1 N bei in- und ausländischen Sorten beobachtet. Die Tropfstreifenbewässerung zeigte bessere quantitative und qualitative Erträge als die Furchenbewässerungsmethoden.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
A.O.A.C (1990) Official methods of analysis, 15th edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Virginia, pp 770–771
Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration-guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage, vol. 56. FAO, Rome
Allison MF, Armstrong MJ, Jaggard KW, Todd AD, Milford GFJ (1996) An analysis of the agronomic, economic and environmental effects of applying N fertilizer to sugar beet (Beta vulgaris). Agric Sci J Cambridge 127:475–486
Almodares A, Jafarinia M, Hadi MR (2009) The effect of nitrogen fertilizer on chemical compositions in corn and sweet sorghum. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci 6:441–446
Bahamin P, Kouchaki A, Nasiri Mahallati M, Beheshti SA (2019) The effect of biological and chemical fertilizers of nitrogen and phosphorus on quantitative and qualitative yield of maize under drought stress conditions. Environ Stress Agric Sci 12(1):123–139
Bahamin S, Parsa S, Ghoreishi S (2013) The examination of effects of growth stimulating and salinity bacteria on the characteristics of Mentha spicata leaves. Int J Agron Plant Prod 4(9):2119–2125
Cassel F, Sharmasarkar S, Miller D (2001) Assessment of drip and flood irrigation on water and fertilizer use for sugar beets. Agric Water Manag 46(3):241–251
Christenson DR, Butt MB (2000) Response of sugar beet to applied nitrogen following field bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and corn (Zea mays L.). J Sugar Beet Res 37(1):1–16
Coblentz WK, Akins MS, Cavadini JS, Jokela WE (2017) Net effects of nitrogen fertilization on the nutritive value and digestibility of oat forages. J Dairy Sci 100:1739–1750
Doorenbos J, Pruitt WO, Aboukhaled A, Damagnez J, Dastane NG, Van Den Berg C, Rijtema PE, Ashfor OM, Frere M (1977) Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage, vol 24. FAO, Rome
Dawoudian J, Bahamin S, Tantoh HB (2021) Environmental impact assessment of cement industries using mathematical matrix method: case of Ghayen cement, South Khorasan, Iran. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28(18):22348–22358
Ebel RC, Proebsting EL, Patterson ME (1993) Regulated deficit irrigation may alter apple maturity, quality and storage life. HortScience 28:141–143. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.28.2.141
Fan Z, Lin S, Zhang X, Jiang Z, Yang K, Jian D, Chen Y, Li J, Chen Q, Wang J (2014) Conventional flooding irrigation causes an overuse of nitrogen fertilizer and low nitrogen use efficiency in intensively used solar greenhouse vegetable production. Agric Water Manag 144:11–19
FAO (2016) Sugar beet beet white white sugarsugar. Agribusiness hanbook. European Bank and FAO, Rome
Fateh E, Chaichi MR, Sharifi Ashorabadi E, Mazaheri D, Jafari AA, Rengel Z (2009) Effects of organic and chemical fertilizers on forage yield and quality of globe artichoke (Cynara scolymus L.). Asian J Crop Sci 1:40–48
Fathi A, Bahamin S (2018) The effect of irrigation levels and foliar application (zinc, humic acid and salicylic acid) on growth characteristics, yield and yield components of roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.). Environ Stress Crop Sci 11(3):661–674. https://doi.org/10.22077/escs.2017.720.1146
Foladvand F, Khoshkhabar H, Naghdi N, Hosseinabadi M, Bahamin S, Fathi A (2017) The effect of sowing date and nitrogen on yield, and essential oil of German chamomile. Scientia 19(3):85–92
Gheysari M, Mirlatifi SM, Homaee M, Asadi ME, Hoogenboom G (2009) Nitrate leaching in a silage maize field under different irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer rates. Agric Water Manag 96(6):946–954
Giller KE (2004) Emerging technologies to increase the efficiency of use of fertilizer nitrogen. In: Mosier AR, Syers JK, Freney JR (eds) Agriculture and the nitrogen cycle. Scope 65. Island Press, Washington DC
Hanson B, May D (2004) Effect of subsurface drip irrigation on processing tomato yield, water table depth, soil salinity and profitability. Agric Water Manag 48:1–18
Institute SAS (2001) Proprietary of Software, Version 8.2, 6th edn. SAS Institute, Cary
Jahanzad E, Jorat M, Moghadam H, Sadeghpour A, Chaichi MR, Dashtaki M (2013) Response of a new and a commonly grown forage sorghum cultivar to limited irrigation and planting density. Agric Water Manag 117:62–69
Jiang Z, Hull RJ (1998) Interrelationships of nitrate uptake, nitrate reductase and nitrogen use efficiency in selected kentucky bluegrass cultivars. Crop Sci 38:1623–1632
Kang SZ, Shi P, Pan YH, Liang ZS, Hu XT (2000) Soil water distribution, uniformity and water use efficiency under alternate furrow irrigation in arid areas. Irrigation Sci 19(4):181–190
Kaya MD, Okcu G, Atak M, Cıkılı Y, Kolsarıcı O (2006) Seed treatments to overcome salt and drought stress during germination in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Eur J Agron 24:291–295
Keller J, Bliesne RD (1990) Sprinkle and trickle irrigation. AVI Book. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York
Khademi Z, Mohajermilani P, Balali MR, Dorodi MS, Shahbazi K, Malakouti MJ (2001) A comprehensive computer model for fertilizer recommendation towards sustainable agriculture. Soil and Water Research Institute, Iran, Tehran (In Persian)
Kiani S, Siadat SA, Moradi-Telavat MR, Abdali-Mashhadi AR, Sari M (2014) Effect of nitrogen fertilizer application on forage yield and quality of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) and fennel (Foeniculum vulgare L.) intercropping. Iran J Crop Sci 16(2):77–90 (In Persian)
Lithourgidis AS, Vasilakoglou IB, Dhima KV, Dordas CA, Yiakoulaki MD (2006) Forage yield and quality of common vetch mixtures with oat and triticale in two seeding ratios. Field Crop Res 99:106–113
Lopez-Bellido L, Lopez-Bellido RJ, Redondo R (2005) Nitrogen efficiency in wheat under rainfed Mediterranean conditions as affected by split nitrogen application. Field Crop Res 94:86–97
Milford GFJ, Travis KZ, Pockock TO, Jaggard KW, Day W (1988) Growth and dry matter partitioning in sugar beet. J Agric Sci 110:301–308
Mujaddam M, Yousefi B, Jamshidi S, Ghasemi Nejad M, Julie A, Bahrami S, Karami R, Azadi A (2015) Beet cultivation. Publication of Agricultural Education Research,
Oddy VU, Robards GE, low SG (1983) Predicion of In—vivo dry matter digestibility from the fibre and nitrogen content of a feed. In: Robards GE, Packham RG (eds) Feed information and animal production. Commonewealth Agricultural Bureux, Australia, pp 295–298
Orujnia S, Habibi D, Taleghani D, Safari Dolatabadi S, Pazaki AR, Moaveni P, Rahmani M, Farshidi M (2012) Evaluation of yield and yield components of different sugar beet genotypes under drought stress conditions. J Agric Plant Breed 8:144–127
Pandian BJ, Muthukrishman P, Rajasekaran S (1992) Efficiency of different irrigation methods and regimes organic matter by cellulolytic fungi. Mycologia 719:811–820
Parvizi M, Yazdi Samadi B (1993) Investigation of different lines of sugar beet in terms of drought tolerance. Abstract of Proceedings of the First Iranian Congress of Agriculture and Plant Breeding. Tehra University, Faculty of Agriculture, Karaj, p 135
Peterburgski AV (1968) Handbook of agronomic chemistry. Kolop Publishing House, Moscow
Ramroudi M, Mazaheri D, Majnon Hosseini N, Hossein Zadeh A, Hosseini M (2005) The effect of cover crops, tillage systems and nitrogen fertilizer on yield of forage sorghum (Sorgum bicolor L.). Iran J Field Crop Sci 41(4):769–763
Reinfeld E, Emmerich A, Baumgarten G, Winner C, Beiss U (1974) Zur voraussage des melassezuckers aus rubenanalysen. Zucker 27:2–15
Rezaei A, Lotfi B, Jafari M, Bahamin S (2015) Survey of effects of PGPR and salinity on the characteristics of Nigella leaves. Biol Forum Int J 7:1085–1092
Scott RK, Jaggard KW, Sylvester-Bradley R (1994) Resource capture by arable crops. In: Monteith JL, Scott RK, Unsworth MH (eds) Resource capture by crops. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, pp 279–302
Sepaskhah AR, Kamgar-Haghighi AA (1997) Water use and yields of sugar beet grown under every-other-furrow irrigation with different irrigation intervals. Agric Water Manag 34:71–79
Sharmasarkar FC, Held LJ, Miller G (2001) Agroeconomic analyses of drip irrigation for sugarbeetsugar beet production. Agron J 93:517–523
Shaw B, Thomas TH, Cooke DT (2002) Response of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) to drought and nutrient deficiency stress. Plant Growth Regul 37:77–83
Shehata MM, Azer SA, Mostafa SN (2000) The effect of soil moisture on some sugar beet varieties. Egypt J Agric Res 78:1141–1160
Smith KF, Reed KFM, Foot JZ (1997) An assessment of the relative importance of specific traits for the genetic improvement of nutritive value in dairy pasture. Grass Forage Sci 52:167–175
Tiwari K, Ajay Singh N, Mal PK (2003) Effect of drip irrigation on yield of cabbage under mulch and no-mulch condition. Agric Water Manag 58:19–28
Van Soest P (1963) Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds, II, A rapid method for the determination of fiber and lignin. J Assoc 46:829–835
Webber HA, Madramootoo CA, Bourgault M, Horst MG, Stalina G, Smith DL (2006) Water use efficiency of common bean and green gram grown using alternate furrow and deficit irrigation. Agric Water Management 86(3):259–268
Weeden BR (2000) Potential of sugar beet on the Atherton tableland. A report for the rural industries research and development crop ration (RIRDC). Publication No. 00/167, pp 2–14
Yilmaz Ş, Özel A, Atak M, Erayman M (2014) Effects of seeding rates on competition indices of barley and vetch intercropping systems in the eastern mediterranean. Turk J Agric For 39:135–143
Zabet M, Bahamin S, Ghoreishi S, Sadeghi H, Moosavi S (2015) Effect of deficit irrigation and nitrogen fertilizer on quantitative yield of aboveground part of forage pear millet (Pennisetum glaucum) in Birjand. Environ Stress Crop Sci 7(2):187–194
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
L. Hosseini, A. Maleki, A. Mozafari, M. Mirzaeiheydari, M. Sadeghi-Shoae declare that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hosseini, L., Maleki, A., Mozafari, A. et al. Evaluation of Water and Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Digestibility and Some Quantitative and Qualitative Characteristics of Forage Beet Cultivars Under Different Irrigation Methods and Nitrogen Levels. Gesunde Pflanzen 74, 177–191 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-021-00601-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-021-00601-2