| تعداد نشریات | 285 |
| تعداد نشریات سازمان | 83 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 3,110 |
| تعداد مقالات | 34,668 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 49,849,340 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 80,186,161 |
بررسی جمعیت و میزان آلودگی آفات اول فصل در کشت نشایی و بذری چغندرقند | ||
| چغندرقند | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 40، شماره 2، مهر 1403، صفحه 199-210 اصل مقاله (745.1 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: کامل علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22092/jsb.2025.368065.1380 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| محمد جواد ارده* 1؛ سمیه اله ویسی2؛ مریم فروزان3؛ محمدتقی توحیدی4؛ ولی اله یوسف آبادی5؛ حیدر عزیزی6 | ||
| 1دانشیار پژوهش: موسسه تحقیقات گیاه پزشکی، سازمان تحقیقات آموزش و ترویج کشارزی و منابع طبیعی، تهران، ایران | ||
| 2استادیار پژوهش مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان همدان، سازمان تحقیقات آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی همدان، ایران همدان | ||
| 3محقق/ مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی آذربایجان غربی؛ سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی؛ ارومیه؛ ایران | ||
| 4بخش تحقیقات گیاهپزشکی، مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی استان کرمانشاه، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرمانشاه، | ||
| 5استادیار پژوهشی مؤسسه تحقیقات اصلاح و تهیه بذر چغندرقند- سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران | ||
| 6استادیار مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی آذربایجانغربی، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، ارومیه، ایران. | ||
| چکیده | ||
| در راستای مصرف بهینه آب در ابتدای فصل کشت، استفاده از نشاکاری چغندرقند میتواند راهگشا باشد. این تغییر الگوی کشت میتواند بر تراکم جمعیت، میزان آلودگی و خسارت آفات در ابتدای فصل مؤثر باشد. در این تحقیق، مقایسه جمعیت و خسارت کک و طوقهبر چغندرقند، در دو روش کاشت (بذری و نشایی) در سه استان آذربایجان غربی، کرمانشاه و همدان مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. از هر یک از مزارع 10 نقطه بهصورت تصادفی انتخاب و وجود این آفات و شاخص آلودگی به آنها بر روی بوتهها در یک مترمربع بهطور هفتگی در طی هشت هفته، ثبت شد. از آنجایی که دامنه تغییرات دادههای جمعآوریشده بسیار زیاد بود نرمال کردن آنها برای تجزیهوتحلیل آماری، حتی با تبدیل دادهها میسر نشد. بر این اساس مقایسهها با روش غیر پارامتری (کروسکال والیس) و مقایسه توصیفی صورت گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که میزان آلودگی کک در کشت بذری با کشت نشایی در استانهای همدان و کرمانشاه باهم اختلاف معنیداری داشتند(P≤ 0.01)، اما در استان آذربایجان غربی اختلافی مشاهده نشد (P≥ 0.05). در مقابل خسارت طوقهبرها فقط در مزارع استان همدان (با اختلاف(X2(3)=7.055 و P=0.008) و در کشت بذری سال اول استان آذربایجان غربی مشاهده شد. از طرف دیگر میانگین تراکم کک در نمونهبرداری هشت هفته اول در مزارع بذری در هر سه استان بیشتر از مزارع نشایی بود. وجود طوقهبرها، با تراکم کم، فقط در مزارع بذری استان همدان مشاهده شد و تیمارها در سطح پنج درصد اختلاف داشتند. بر اساس این نتایج خسارت آفات اول فصل در روش کشت نشایی بسیار ناچیز بوده و احتمالاً نوعی فرار میزبان گیاهی از خسارت آفات در کشت نشایی چغندرقند اتفاق میافتد. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| چغندرقند؛ خسارت آفات؛ کشت نشایی؛ مدیریت آفات | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Investigation of pest population dynamics and infestation index in sugar beet during the early growing season under direct seeding and transplanting seedling cultivation | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| mohammad javad ardeh1؛ somaye allahvaisi2؛ Maryam Forouzan3؛ Mohammad Taghi Tohidi4؛ V.A. Yousefabadi5؛ Heydar Azizi6 | ||
| 1Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection No. 1, Yaman (Tabnak) St., Chamran Highway, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Assistant professor Plant Protection Research Department, Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, (AREEOA), Hamedan, Iran | ||
| 3researcher/ 3- Plant Protection Research Department, West Azarbaijan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center, Agricultural Research, -Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Urmia, Iran | ||
| 42- Plant Protection Research Department, Kermanshah Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Kermanshah, Iran | ||
| 5assistant Professor of Sugar Beet Seed Institute (SBSI) - Assistant professor of Sugar Beet seed Institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran. | ||
| 6Assistant Professor of Sugar Beet Research Department, West Azarbayjan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (ARREO). Urmia, Iran. | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| Extended Abstract Introduction Sugar beet seeds are typically sown directly in the spring across most regions of Iran. However, climate change has led to water shortages and making the first and second irrigations increasingly challenging. As an alternative, sugar beet seedling cultivation has been proposed as a potential solution. Various aspects of seedling cultivation have demonstrated benefits for sugar production. However, there is still a need to investigate pest population density, infestation levels, and the extent of pest damage under seedling cultivation. These factors has been shown to be less influenced by the selection of seed or seedling cultivation method for pests that are active throughout the growing season. This study focuses on evaluating these aspects in relation to two early-season sugar beet pests including the flea beetle "Chaetocnema tibialis (Illiger) (Col. Chrysomelidae)" and the cutworm "Agrotis segetum Denis and Schiffermaller (Lep. Noctuidae)". Materials and Methods This study conducted in sugar beet fields across three provinces of West Azerbaijan, Kermanshah and Hamedan. One field was selected from each province and two plots (each one hectare) were designed per field to compare two cultivation methods (direct seeding or transplanting seedlings). In the first plot, Shokofa sugar beet seeds (produced by Filed Crops Development Company) were directly sown using conventional methods in April. In the second plot, sugar beet seeds were initially sown at high density in a prepared nursery section of the field in mid-April. Once the seedlings reached the 6-8 leaf stage, with a root diameter of approximately 1 cm, they were transplanted into the second plot. Sampling of flea beetles and cutworms was carried out weekly under both cultivation methods (direct seeding and transplanting seedlings) during the 2010 and 2011 growing se asons. In each plot, ten points were randomly selected, and population density and infestation levels were recorded within one-square-meter quadrats. For the sugar beet flea beetle (Chaetocnema tibialis), the number of adults and infestation severity (rated on a scale from 1 to 7 based on feeding symptoms) were recorded. For the cutworm (Agrotis segetum), the number of damaged plants (plants cut off from the crown) and the number of larvae present around the damaged plants were counted. Due to the wide variation in the collected data, normalization was not achievable, even after attempted data transformation. Therefore, non-parametric statistical analysis (Kruskal–Wallis test) and descriptive comparisons were used for data interpretation. Results and Discussion The results showed a significant difference in the flea beetle infestation index between direct seeding and transplanting seedling cultivation methods in Hamedan and Kermanshah provinces (X2(3)=8.695; P=0.003 and X2(3)=27.068; P=0.000 respectively), However, no significant difference was observed in West Azarbaijan province (X2(3)=2.669; P=0.1). Cutworm damage was recorded only in Hamedan province (X2(3) =7.055; P=0.008), while in West Azerbaijan province, it was observed exclusively in seed cultivation plots. Furthermore, the average density of flea beetle during the first eight weeks of sampling was consistently higher in direct seeding cultivation compared with transplanting seedling cultivation across all three provinces (Hamedan, (X2(3)=24.816; P=0.000), West Azerbaijan (X2(3)=8.266; P=0.041) and Kermanshah (X2(3)=14.497; P=0.002)). The weekly trends of total flea beetle counts and contamination index under direct seeding and transplanting seedling cultivation methods across three provinces were illustrated. The results indicate that although the sugar beet flea beetle is present in both direct seeding and transplanting seedling cultivation methods, the infestation index is consistently higher in direct seeding fields. This trend was particularly evident in Hamedan province, where simultaneous sampling was conducted. It appears that during the sampling period, the sugar beet plants had reached a growth stage sufficient to tolerate flea beetle feeding. It is important to note that flea beetle damage is considered economically significant only up to the eight-leaf stage. In contrast, cutworm infestation was observed only in certain fields. This variation is primarily associated with the biological characteristics and life cycle of the cutworm. Since the cutworms overwinter as larvae, their population density and resulting damage are affected by several factors, including the type of crop grown in the previous season, overwintering conditions, and tillage practices. As a result, the presence and damage of this pest tend to occur sporadically and unpredictably. In this study, cutworm larvae were observed at low density only in direct seeding cultivation plots in Hamedan province, with a recorded difference of 5% (X2(3)=10.510 and P=0.015). Based on these findings, pest-related damage during the early season under transplanting seedling cultivation was low which suggests that transplanting seedling cultivation in sugar beet may contribute to a form of host plant escape. Conclusion The seedling cultivation technique is effective in reducing the need for early irrigation and minimizing the use of chemical pesticides. With regard to early-season pest control-particularly of the flea beetle and cutworm, which are among the most significant pests in sugar beet cultivation-this method offers a more controlled approach as the initial stages of plant growth occur under greenhouse conditions, pest exposure is limited, and the need for pesticide application is considerably reduced. Furthermore, in the context of rising global temperatures due to climate change, which is leading to earlier and more intense pest outbreaks in the field, seedling cultivation presents a valuable non-chemical management strategy. By accelerating the early growth stages of the crop, this method allows for a form of host plant escape, thereby reducing pest impact during the most vulnerable periods of plant development. Consequently, transplanting seedling cultivation can be considered a sustainable and environmentally friendly approach to managing early-season pests in sugar beet farming. | ||
| کلیدواژهها [English] | ||
| Pest damage, Pest management, Seedling cultivation, Sugar beet | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Abdullahi SA, Hatami A, Yusufabadi V, Mehrabi A. The effect of transplanting, sowing and harvesting date on yield and water use efficiency of autumn-sown sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2020; 35(2): 175-191.(In Persion with English abstract). Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/JSB.2020.125719.1215. Allahvaisi S, Ardeh MJ. Investigating on the effect of thiamethoxam in seed disinfection for controlling sugar beet fleas in the first season in Hamadan province. 25th Iranian Plant Protection Congress; 2024 Sep. 7-10; Tehran Iran. P 1707. Anonymous. Agricultural Census, Vol (1) Crops. Vice President Agricultural Census, Information and Communication Technology Center, Ministry of Agricultural Jihad, 2022.93 p. (In Persian). https://www.maj.ir/Dorsapax/userfiles/Sub65/amar99-1400.pdf. Ardeh MJ, Allahvaisi S, Fourouzan M, Yosefabadi V, Tohidi MT, Azizi H. Comparison of population density of "Spodoptera exigua (Hübner)" and "Lixus incanescens Boh." in seed and seedling cultivation of sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2024; 39 (2): 223-232. .(In Persion with English abstract). Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.2024.365239.1350 Ardeh MJ, Sugar beet pests. pp. 5-31. In: Pourrahim et al. (Eds.) Sugar Beet Plant Protection. Iraninan Research Plant Protection Institute. 2015. (In Persian). Azizi A. Mehrabi-Boshrabadi H, Zare-Mehrjerdi MR. Evaluating water policies under the changing conditions of climatic variables in North Khorasan Province, Iran. Water Policy. 2023; 25 (9): 851–868. Doi:https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2023.122. Behdad A. The main pests of agricultural plants in Iran, Yabod publishing center, third edition, 1991; pp. 615. (In Persian). Ghadiry V. Development and food preference of sugar beet flea- beetle on different host plants in Kermanshah province. Journal of Sugar Beet. 1995; 10(1); 43-50. (In Persion with English abstract) Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.1995.117701. Ghadiry V. Investigation of growth and food preference of sugar beet flea betel Chaeetocnema tibilis on host plants in Kermanshah region. Sugar beet scientific and research magazine. 2004; 20(1): 43-50. (In Persian). Ghadiry V. Arjmand MN. Effect of seed treatment on reduction of damage caused by sugar beet harmful moths (Spodoptera exigua Hbn, Agrotis spp.). 2005; 20(2), 127-132. (In Persion with English abstract). Doi:https://doi.org/ 10.22092/jsb.2005.6870. Gohari J, Rouhi A, Talai A, Qolizadeh R. Economic analysis of the two methods of paper pot and direct sowing of sugar beet crop in Iran. Journal of Sugar Beet. 1996; 11(1): 30-40. (In Persion with English abstract). Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.1996.116527. Khairy M. The main pests of Iranian sugar beet and their control methods. The Publication of the company for the improvement and production of sugar beet seeds. 1966; pp. 68 (In Persian) Khozaei M, Kamgar HAA, Zand PS, Sepaskhah AR, Razzaghi F, Yousefabadi V, Emam Y. Evaluation of direct seeding and transplanting in sugar beet for water productivity, yield and quality under different irrigation regimes and planting densities. Agricultural Water Management. 2020; 238: 106230. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2020.106230. Moursy M, El-Kady MS. Study Planting Methods to Improve Water Use Efficiency and Productivity of Sugar Beet in a Newly Reclaimed Area. Life Science Journal. 2019; 16(12): 11-19. Doi:https://doi.org/10.7537/marslsj161219.02 Nauen RI, Denholm T. Dennehy, Nichols R. News from the front line: reports from the global workshop on the stewardship on neonicotinoid insecticides, Honolulu, Hawaii, 5-6 June 2008. Pest Management Science. 64:1082-1083. Noori H, Forouzan M, Marzban R, Mohseni-Amin A. Biological control of the turnip moth, Agrotis segetum Denis and Schiffermüller (Lep. Noctuidae) by Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) semisolid bait on sugar beet. Journal of Sugar Beet. 2019; 35 (1): 81-89. (In Persion with English abstract). Doi:https://doi.org/10.22092/jsb.2019.121862.1195. Yousefabadi V, Ardeh MJ, Mahmoudi B, Noori H. The importance of transplanting sugar beet from pest management of sugar beet point of view. Publication of Agricultural Education Research Organization, 2019. pp. 24 (In Persian). Yusufabadi V. Cultivation of sugar beet. Publication of Agricultural Education Research Organization of Iran, 2016. pp. 25. (In Persian). Zhu X, Han B, Song B. Effect of Extending Seedling-raising Period on Yield of Transplanting Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris) in Black Soil Area of Northeast China. Sugar Technology. 2020; 22: 1103–1109. Doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-020-00862-7. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 252 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 138 |
||