Open Access

Hay Yield and Quality of Rye with Hungarian Vetch and Forage Pea in Intercropping

1 Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi, Ziraat Fakültesi, Tarla Bitkileri Bölümü, Yozgat
2 Selçuk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarla Bitkileri Anabilim Dalı, Konya
3 Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi, Ziraat Fakültesi, Tarla Bitkileri Bölümü, Yozgat
4 Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi, Ziraat ve Doğa Bilimleri Fakültesi, Tarla Bitkileri Bölümü, Bilecik
5 Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi, Ziraat ve Doğa Bilimleri Fakültesi, Tarla Bitkileri Bölümü, Bilecik

Abstract

The aim of the study is to determine the forage yield and quality of Hungarian vetch/forage pea (MF/YB) and rye (C) in an intercropping system that provides maximum faulting from the field. The field experiment was conducted in 2021-2022 to examine the effects of different binary sowing ratio (20:80%C/YB, 40:60%C/YB, 60:40%C/YB; 80:20%C/YB; 20:80%C/MF, 40:60%C/MF, 60:40%C/MF; 80:20%:C/MF, 100%MF, 100%YB, 100%C) in 3 replications. Trial was harvested in July 2022 and green herbage yield, hay yield, crude protein ratio, crude protein yield, ADF, NDF and mineral substance contents were determined. All of the investigated parameters were affected by the mixing ratios. With the decrease of rye ratio in the mixture, green herbage and hay yields decreased, but crude protein ratio increased. In terms of all three yield values, treatments with the highest ratio of rye in the mixture came to the fore. While the ADF and NDF contents increased in parallel with the rye ratio in the mixture, the mineral substance contents decreased in general. As a result, the evaluation of rye in intercropping system with MF and YB in the region and similar ecologies was complementary in terms of yield and quality. According to the parameters examined, mixtures of 80:20%C/YB and 80:20%C/MF were found to be superior to the others.

Keywords

How to Cite

ÇOPUR DOĞRUSÖZ, M., HAKKOYMAZ, O., BAŞARAN, U., MUT, H., & GÜLÜMSER, E. . (2023). Hay Yield and Quality of Rye with Hungarian Vetch and Forage Pea in Intercropping. ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 7(2), 442–450. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8066271

References

📄 Afshar, I., Haghighi, A.R., Shirazi, M., 2014. Comparison the effects of spraying different amounts of nano zinc oxide and zinc oxide on, wheat. International Journal of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences, 4(3): 688.
📄 Ahemad, M., Zaidi, A., Saghir Khan, M., Oves, M., 2009. Biological importance of phosphorus and phosphate solubilizing microbes - an overview. In: M.S. Khan, A. Zaidi (Eds), Phosphate Solubilising Microbes for Crop Improvement, Nova Science Publishers, Newyork, USA, pp. 1-14.
📄 Arnoud, M.J., 2008. Update on the assessment of magnesium status. British Journal of Nutrition, 99(3): 24-36.
📄 Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K., Ghose, S.S., 2006. Wheat and chickpea intercropping systems in an additive series experiment: Advantages and weed smothering. European Journal of Agronomy, 24: 325-332.
📄 Basaran, U., Dogrusoz, M.C., Gulumser, E., Mut, H., 2017. Hay yield and quality of intercropped sorghum-sudan grass hybrid and legumes with different seed ratio. Turkish Journal of Field Crops, 22(1): 47-53.