AASCIT - Journal - All Issues

ISSN: 2375-3773

International Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources

The Journal

Manuscript Information

Canola Yield and Yield Components as Affected by Different Tillage Practices in Paddy Fields

International Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
Vol.2 , No. 3, Publication Date: Apr. 21, 2015, Page: 46-51

1733 Views Since April 21, 2015, 1242 Downloads Since Apr. 21, 2015

Paper in PDF (295K)

Follow on

Authors

[1]	Mohammad Reza Alizadeh, Department of Agricultural Engineering, Rice Research Institute of Iran (RRII), Rasht, Iran.
[2]	Alireza Allameh, Department of Agricultural Engineering, Rice Research Institute of Iran (RRII), Rasht, Iran.

Abstract

The effects of different seedbed preparation practices in canola planting as a second crop after rice harvest was scrutinized. Experimental treatments included (i) rotivator, once to 10-15 cm deep (T1), (ii) rotivator, twice to 10-15 cm deep (T2), (iii) mouldboard plow to 25 cm deep + rotivator, once to 10-15 cm deep (T3), (iv) no-till planting through removing rice stubbles from plots (T4), and (v) no-till planting without removing rice stubbles from plots (T5). The experiments were laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with five treatments and in three replications. The results revealed that grain yield and yield components (except number of grain per pod and number of branch per plant) were significantly influenced by different tillage practices. The biennial means comparison showed that the maximum and minimum grain yield were associated to T3 (1571 kg ha-1), T2 (1537 kg ha-1) and T4 (1389 kg ha-1) and T5 (1339 kg ha-1), respectively. The average grain yield for T1 was 1432 kg ha-1. In primary tillage through moldboard plow, soil sticking to plow and tractor rear wheel slippage made a great deal of rugged surface across the field so that it took much time for land leveling. Therefore, rotivator application (once or twice) had acceptable outcomes in such soil moisture contents.

Keywords

Canola, Tillage Practices, Yield, Rice Harvest

Reference

[01]	Barzali, M., Javanshir, A., Shakiba, M., Moghadam, M., Nourinia, A., 2003. The effect of different tillage methods on yield and yield components of soybean in Gorgan. Seed and Scion. 19(2): 173-189 (in Persian).
[02]	Bonari, E., Mazzoncini, M., Peruzzi, A., 1995. Effects of conventional and minimum tillage on winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) in a sandy soil. Soil and Tillage Research. 33(2): 91-108.
[03]	Chay, P., Thurling N., 1989. Variation in pod length in spring rape (Brassica napus L.) and its effects on seed yield and yield components. The Journal of Agricultural Science. 113(2): 139-147.
[04]	Chiriac, G., Raus, L., Coroi, I.G., Gales, D.C., Jitareanu, G., 2013. Effect of tillage and cultivar on winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) yield and economic efficiency in Suceava plateau. ProEnvironment. 6: 130-135.
[05]	Chiriac, G., Raus, L., Jitareanu, G., 2012. Effect of tillage and cultivar on oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) yield in the northern area of Moldavian plateau. Lucrari Stiintifice (Seria Agronomie). 55(2): 159-163.
[06]	Farooq, M., Flower, K.C., Jabran, K., Wahid, A., Siddique, K.H.M., 2011. Crop yield and weed management in rainfed conservation agriculture. Soil and Tillage Research. 117: 172-183.
[07]	Fooladi Vand, S., Aynehband, A., Naraki, F., 2009. Effects of tillage method, seed rate and microelement spraying time on grain yield and yield components of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) in warm dryland condition. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment. 7(3-4): 627-633.
[08]	Heikkinen, M.K., Auld, D.L. 1991. Harvest index and yield of winter rapeseed grown at different plant populations. Proceedings of International Canola Conference, Saskatoon, Canada, p: 1229-1231.
[09]	Ilkaee, M.N., Imam, Y., 2003. The effect of plant intensity on yield and yield components of two winter varieties of canola. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 34(3): 509-515 (in Persian).
[10]	Jamshidian, R., Khajepoor, M., 1998. The effect of different seedbed preparation methods on vegetative growth, yield and yield components of mung bean. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences and Technology. 3(1): 9-20 (in Persian).
[11]	Kosutic, S., Filipovic, D., Ivancon, S., Aktualniu, Z., 1995. Experience with different tillage methods in wheat, oilseed rape and maize production. Current problem in Agricultural Engineering. 115-121.
[12]	Majnoun Hosseini, N., Alizadeh, H.M., Malek Ahmadi, H., 2006. Effects of plant density and nitrogen rates on the competitive ability of canola (Brassica napus L.) against weeds. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Technology. 8: 281-291.
[13]	Rabiee, M., Karimi, M., Safa, F., 2004. The effect of planting date on yield and agronomic traits of canola as a second crop after rice in Kouchesfahan region. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 35(1): 177-187 (in Persian).
[14]	Sarkees, N.A. 2013. Response of growth, yield and oil of rapeseed to sowing method and seeding rate. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science. 3(1): 1-6.
[15]	Tayo, T.O., Morgan, D.G., 1979. Factors influencing flower and pod development in oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). The Journal of Agricultural Science. 92(2): 363-373.
[16]	Torabi, H., Naghdibadi, H.A., Omidi, H., Amirshekari, H., Miransari, M., 2008. Effects of soil tillage, canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars and planting date on canola yield, and oil and some biological and physical properties of soil. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science. 54:175-188.
[17]	Yazdifar, S., Ramea, V., 2009. Effects of row spacing and seeding rates on some agronomical traits of spring canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Journal of Central European Agriculture. 10(1): 115-122.
[18]	Yusuf, R.I., Bullock, D.G., 1993. Effect of several production factors on two varieties of rapeseed in the central of United States. Journal of Plant Nutrition. 16(7): 1279-1288.