بررسی وضعیت تغذیه باغات فندق (Corylus avellana L.) استان گیلان با روش انحراف از درصد بهینه (DOP)

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسنده

مرکز تحقیقات و آموزش کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گیلان، سازمان تحقیقات،آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی،رشت

چکیده

استان گیلان با حدود 18000 هکتار باغات فندق که 85 درصد سطح زیر کشت باغات فندق کشور را به خود اختصاص داده به عنوان بزرگترین قطب فندق‌کاری ایران محسوب می­گردد. شناخت وضعیت تغذیه­ای یک باغ از اولویت­های اولیه تغذیه محصولات باغی می­باشد که به روش­های مختلفی انجام می­گردد. یکی از این روش­ها، روش انحراف از درصد بهینه 2(DOP) می­باشد. به منظور بررسی و شناخت ناهنجاری­های تغذیه­ای و تعیین حد مطلوب غلظت عناصر غذایی از روش انحراف از درصد بهینه استفاده شد. بدین منظور در سه شهرستان عمده تولید کننده فندق (رودسر، سیاهکل و املش) از32 باغ فندق از برگ­های شاخه­های یکساله در مرداد ماه نمونه برداری و میزان عناصر غذایی نیتروژن، فسفر، پتاسیم، منگنز، مس،آهن و روی در آن­ها تعیین شد. باغات به دو گروه عملکرد بالا و پایین تعیین گردید، غلظت مطلوب در برگ برای عناصر نیتروژن، فسفر، پتاسیم ،آهن، منگنز، روی، مس به ترتیب 08/3  درصد،16/0 درصد،80/0 درصد،   38/570 پی.پی.ام، 26/175 پی.پی.ام، 93/42 پی.پی.ام، 09/17 پی.پی.ام بدست آمد .نتایج نشان داد در بین عناصر پرمصرف نیتروژن در 65 درصد باغات دارای شاخص منفی و در بین عناصر کم مصرف منگنز با 78 درصد بیشترین شاخص منفی را داشتند. براساس محاسبات روش DOP نتایج زیر برای اولویت تغذیه باغات بدست آمد: >Fe>P>Zn>K>Cu Mn>N

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Study of Nutritional Status of Hazelnut Orchards of (Corylus avellana L.) Guilan Province by Using with Deviation of Optimum Percent (DOP)

نویسنده [English]

  • A. Ajili Lahiji
Faculty Member of Soil and Water Department of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center of Guilan Province, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Rasht, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction: The study of the nutritional status of orchards is one of the primary priorities for the nutrition of crops and orchards, which is done in different methods. One of these methods is the deviation from the optimum percentage (DOP). Hazelnut is one of the species of the family (Betulaceae) which is the fifth most produced nut in the world after cashews, almonds, walnuts, and oaks. Turkey is the world's largest producer with about 70.3% of the total world production of hazelnuts and Italy with 11.9%, the United States with 4.5%, and Azerbaijan with 4.2%, Georgia with 3.8%, Spain with 2.5% of world production, respectively. Other hazelnut producing countries account for 2.8% of the world production and the world hazelnut production in 2018 was about 888,000 tons. In 2018, Iran was the eighth largest producer in the world with a production of 16,000 tons. Guilan province has 18,000 hectares of hazelnut orchards, which constitute 85% of the cultivated area of hazelnut orchards in the country. Since the leaf is the most important part of plant metabolism and the concentration of nutrients in the leaf at certain stages of plant growth and development has a great relationship with yield. Therefore, leaf analysis and interpretation of the results, provided that according to standard methods, can provide good information about the nutritional status of the plant and be used to recommend the appropriate fertilizer.
Materials and Methods: The optimal Deviation (DOP) method was used to investigate and identify nutritional deficiency and determine the optimal concentration of nutrients. For this purpose, the number of nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, manganese, copper, iron, and zinc were determined in 32 hazelnut orchards with growth of the following year branches in the three major hazelnut production cities (Rudsar, Siahkal, and Amlash), in July. To implement this project, 32 orchards over 10 years old were sampled from the dominant cultivars of the region (Gerd cultivar), so that they are different in terms of management and yield. Seventeen orchards in Eshkavrat region of Rudsar, seven orchards in Hazelnut areas of Siahkal, and eight orchards in the Eshkvarat region of Amlash city were selected for sampling. The orchards that had the best yield due to the great management were randomly selected to determine the standard concentration (Cref) and other low-yield and medium-sized orchards were randomly selected to determine the nutritional status. The orchards were divided into low and high-yield groups in August. When the concentration of nutrients in the leaves was relatively constant, about 50 healthy young leaves were sampling in different directions and 10 trees in each orchard. Pest-free samples were transferred to the laboratory and leaf samples were first washed in water and then washed with distilled water. The samples were placed into the oven at 65 °C for drying. The dried samples were completely powdered and passed through a sieve with half a millimeter holes. In leaf analysis, nitrogen nutrients was measured in a more digestible manner by Kjeltec device, phosphorus by spectrophotometry, potassium by flame photometric, manganese, copper, iron, and zinc by dry ash method and atomic absorption spectrometry.
Results and Discussion: The results showed that the average concentrations of N, P, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu in high-yield orchards were higher than the concentration of nutrients in low-yield orchards. The deviation index was calculated from the optimal percentage and the priority of the nutritional needs of hazelnut trees in each garden was determined. Indicators are positive, negative or zero numbers, zero indicates the optimal statue of concentration, a positive value indicates excess nutrient and a negative number indicates nutrient deficiency. According to the indexes of deviation from the optimal percentage, among the elements manganese, nitrogen and iron had the highest negative index, respectively, so that manganese had negative indexes in 78% of orchards and nitrogen had negative indexes in 65% of orchards, and then Iron had negative indexes in 60% of the orchards and phosphorus in 56% of the orchards, zinc in 53% of the orchards and potassium in 50% of the orchards and finally copper in 46% of the orchards had negative indexes, respectively.
Conclusion: Optimal concentrations were determined for nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, iron, manganese, zinc, copper, 3.08%, 0.16%, 0.80%, 570.38 ppm, 175.26 ppm, 42.93 ppm, ppm 17.09 in the leaves. Based on the calculations of the DOP method, the following results were obtained for the priority of feeding the orchards.
Mn>N>Fe>P>Zn> K>Cu                    

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Hazelnuts
  • Nutrients
  • Nutritional status assessment
  • Optimal deviation index
 
1-         Adiloglu A., and Adiloglu S .2005. An investigation on nutritional problems of hazelnut grown on acid soils. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 36: 2219-2226.
2-         Alasvar C., Pelvan E., and Amarovicz R. 2010. Effects of roasting on taste-active compounds of Turkish hazelnut varieties (Corylus avellana L.). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 58: 8674-8679.
3-         Alvarez-Fernandez A., Garcıa-Lavina P., Fidalgo C., Abadıa J., and Abadıa A. 2004. Foliar fertilization to control iron chlorosis in pear (Pyrus communis L.) trees. Plant and Soil 262: 5-15.
4-         Anonymous. 2018. Ministry of Agricultural Jihad, Statistics of Guilan Agricultural Jihad Organization (In Persian).
5-         Basirat M., Haghighatnia H., and Mousavi S.M. 2018. Evaluation and Determination of the Nutritional Status of Valencia Orange Orchards in South of Fars. Journal of Water and Soil 32(1): 143-154 (In Persian with English abstract)
6-         Bernal M., Cases R., Picorel R., and Yruela I. 2007. Foliar and root Cu supply affect differently Fe and Zn-uptake and photosynthetic activity in soybean plants. Environmental and Experimental Botany 60:145–150.
7-         Blakrishman K. 2000. Peroxidase activity as an indicator of the iron deficiency banana. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology 5: 389-391.
8-         Brække F.H., and Salih N. 2002. Reliability of Foliar Analysis of Norway spruce stands in Nordic gradient. Silva Fennica 36(2): 489-504.
9-         Canali S., Nardi P., Neri U., and Gentili A. 2005. Leaf analysis as a tool for evaluating nutritional status of hazelnut orchards in Central Italy. Acta Hort., 686: 291-296.
10-     Chaplin M.H. 1981. Intervalos Criticos de Nutrientes en Avellano. Referred as Personal Communication in Lopez-Acevedo.
11-     Chen Y., and Break P. 1982. Iron nutrition of plant in calcareous soil. Advance in Agronomy 35: 217-240.
12-     Childers N.F. 1973. Modern fruit science. (5th Ed) Somerset Press, Inc., Somerville, N.J., 960 p.
13-     Dordipour E., Emami P., and Daryashenas A.M .2012. Evaluation of nutritional balance in peach orchards through deviation from optimum percentage (DOP) method. Journal of Soil Management and Sustainable Production 2(1): 2012. (In Persian with English abstract)
14-     FAOStat. 2007. Agriculture data [online]. 26 Feb. 2008.Available from: http://faostat.fao. org/site/567/ default.aspx>.
15-     FAOStat. 2012. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. Production, Crops. http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/default.aspx#ancor (accessed 20.02.12).
16-     Gargouri K., Sarbeji M., and Barone E. 2006. Assessment of Soil Fertility Variation in an Olive Orchard and its influence on Olive Tree Nutrition. 2nd International Seminar on "biotechnology and quality of olive tree products around the mediterranean basin". Marsala- Mazara del Vallo, Italy Hort., 351: 395-418.
17-     Hart J. 1986. Soil acidity, liming and nitrogen fertilization. In: Growers handbook. Nut GrowersSociety of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia.
18-     Horuz A., and Korkmaz A. 2008. Determination of nutrient status in hazelnut leaves sampled fromTerme and Unye regions. pp. 1-5. http://www.toprak.org.tr/isd/isd_84.htm.
19-     Hoseini Y. 2016. Application of deviation from optimum percentage (DOP) to determine the nutritional balance of sour lemon gardens in Hormozgan province. Water and Soil Science 26(3-2): 243-255 (In Persian with English abstract)
20-     Jiménez S., Garín A., Gogorcena Y., Betrán J.A., and Moreno M.A. 2004. Flower and foliar analysis for prognosis of sweet cherry nutrition. Influence of different rootstocks. Journal of Plant Nutrition 27(4):701-712
21-     Jones Jr B.J. 1993. Modern interpretation systems for soil and plant analyses in the United States of America. Aust. J. Exp. Agr., 33: 1039-1043.
22-     Kabata-pendias A., and Pendias H. 1999. Biogeochemistry of trace elements, Second Edition, Wyd. PWN, Warsaw, Poland.
23-     KhalidBrin B., and Islamzadeh T. 2001. Mineral nutrition of higher plants. Shiraz University Press. 495 pages.
24-     Kowalenko C.G. 1984. Derivation of nutrient requirements of filberts using orchard surveys. Can.J. Soil Sci., 64: 115-123.
25-     Kowalenko C.G. 1996. Interpretation of autumn soil tests for hazelnut. Can. J. Soil Sci., 76: 195-202.
26-     Lopez-Acevedo M. 1983. Estudio de la Fertilizacion del Avellano Mediante Diagnostico Foliar. Memoria Correspondiente al Convenion entre la Diputacion de Tarragona y la Universidat Politecnica de Barcelona.
27-     Malakouti M.J. 2008. The effect of micronutrients in ensuring efficient use of macronutrients. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Forestry 32: 215-220.
28-     Malakouti M.J., and Gheibi M.N. 1999. Determination of critical levels of nutrients in soil, plant, and fruit for the quality and yield improvements in strategic crops of Iran. High Concoil for Appropriate Use of Pesticides and Chemical Fertilizers, Ministry of Agriculture, Karaj, Iran, pp. 92. (In Persian)
29-     Malakouti M.J., Keshavarz P., and Karimian N.A. 2008. A comprehensive approach towards identification of nutrients deficiencies and optimal fertilization for sustainable agriculture. 7th Ed. Tarbiat Modars University Press, Tehran, Iran, p. 755.
30-     Malakouti M.J.1996. Recognition of nutritional abnormalities in fruit trees and providing executive solutions to increase fruit production and quality improvement to the ISO global standard. Technical Magazine No. 13, Agricultural Education Publishing House, affiliated to the Deputy Minister of Education and Human Resources Equipment of the TAT Organization, Ministry of Agricultural Jihad, and Karaj, Iran. (In Persian)
31-     Manouchehri S. 2005. Symptoms of deficiency and abundance of nutrients in horticultural plants. Publication of Agricultural Education, Agricultural Research and Training Organization, Deputy Minister of Education and Human Resources Equipment (In Persian).
32-      Marschner H. 1995. Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. Second edition, Academic Press Limited. Harcourt Brace and Company, Publishers, London pp. 347-364.
33-     Mengel D.B., W.Segars, and Reham G.W. 1987. Soil Fertility and limiting. p. 462-489.In:J.R.Wilcox. Soybean: Improvement, Production and uses. No. 16.Aner. Soc.Agr. Medison. WI.USA.
34-     Miletic R., Maric M., and Mitrovic M. 2001. Comparative studies of soil fertility, macro element content and water regime in Corylus. Acta Hort 556: 343-348.
35-     Milošević T., and Milošević T. 2011. Diagnose apricot nutritional status according to foliar analysis. Plant Soil Environ. 57(7): 301-306.
36-     Milosevic T., Milosevic N., Glisic I., and Paunovic G. 2009. Leaf nutritional status and macronutrient dynamics in European hazelnut (Corylus avellana L.) under western Serbian conditions. Pak. J. Bot., 41(6): 3169-3178.
37-     Mohses Mostashari M., and Golmohammadi M. 2011. Recognition of nutritional disorders and determination of the optimum concentration of nutrients in trees. Final report of soil and water section of Agricultural Research Center and Natural Resources of Qazvin Province. (In Persian)
38-     Mohses Mostashari M., Khosrovinejad A., and Basirat M. 2018. Study of Nutrient Status in Olive Orchards of Qazvin Province using Nutritional Indices. Journal of Soil Research (Soil and Water Sciences), A / Volume 33, No. 3/2018. (In Persian with English abstract)
39-     Molne R. 1976. Observaciones Para Una Racionalizaion y Economia en el Abonado de losavellanos. I Congreso International de Almendra y Avellana. Memoria, Reus, Spain, pp. 191-210.
40-     Monge E., Montañés L., Val J., and Sanz M. 1995. A comparative study of the DOP and DRIS methods, for evaluating the nutritional status of peach trees.ISHS Acta Horticulturae 383: 191-199.
41-     Montanes L., Heras J. Abadia and Sanz M. 1993. Plont analysis interpretation based on a new Index: Deviation from optimum percentage (DOP) y.Plawt Nutr. 16: 1289-1308
42-     Mostashari M., Khosravinejad A., and Golmohamadi M. 2018. Comparative Study of DOP and CND Methods for Leaf Nutritional Diagnosis of Vitis Vinifera in Iran. Journal of the Communications In Soil Science And Plant Analysis 49(5): 576-584.
43-     Olsen J., Extension horticulturist, Willamette Valley, Oregon State University.2013. Growing Hazelnuts in the Pacific Northwest Orchard Nutrition. EM 9080 November .2013 http://extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog.
44-     Painter J.H. 1963. A Recent Leaf Analysis Service Development of Importance to Nut Growers in Oregon. Nut Growers Assoc. Washington Proc. 496-8.
45-     R J Hill Laboratories Limited, Crop Guide Hazelnut.KB Item: 8259v3.Private Bag 3205, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand. Ph: +64 7 858 2000, Fax: +64 7 858 2001, mail@hill-labs.co.nz, www.hill-laboratories.com.
46-     Ravi S., Channal H.T., Hebsur N.S., Patil B.N., and Dharmatti P.R .2008. Effect of sulphur, zinc and iron nutrition on growth, yield, nutrient uptake and quality of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.). Karnataka Journal Agriculture Science 32: 382-385.
47-     Romisondo P., Me G., and Manzo P. 1983. Cultivar choice. Aspects and cultural practices and their effects on the quality of crops. Convegno International Sul Nocciolo, Avellino 61-75.
48-     Romisondo P., Manzo P., and Tombesi A. 1983. Scelta delle Cultivar. Aspetti della Tecnica Colyurale e Loro Riflessi Sulla Cualita delle Produzioni. Atti del Cunvegno Internazionale sul Nocciuolo. Avellino, Italia, pp. 395-405
49-     Samadi A., and Majidi A. 2010. Determining the reference numbers of the DRIS combination method and comparing it with the optimal deviation method (DOP) in white grapes. Journal of Soil Research (Soil and Water Sciences), A, Volume 24, Number 2. (In Persian with English abstract)
50-     Shaer C.B., and Faust M. 1980. Nutritional Ranges in Deciduous Tree Fruits and Nuts. Hort. Rev., 2: 142-163.Statistica 6.0. 2001. StatSoft® software for Windows. StatSoft Inc.
51-     Sohrabi O., Taheri M., Khoshzaman T., and Piri S. 2011. Investigation of nutritional balance status of vineyards in Khodabandeh using the optimal deviation method. Proceedings of the 7th National Horticultural Congress. Isfahan University of Technology, Iran.
52-     Soltanpour P.N., Malakouti M.J., and Ronaghi A. 1995. Comparison of diagnosis and recommendation in integrated system and nutrient sufficiency range for corn. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.59: 10. 133-139.
53-     Sumner M.E. 1979. Interprctation of foliar analysis for diagnostic purposes. Agro. J.71:343-348.
54-     Taheri M. 2009. Study of nitrogen absorption and metabolism and its effect on vegetative growth of some olive cultivate. Ph.D Thesis, Tehran University, 140p.
55-     Tarakcioglu C., Yalcin S.R., Bayrak A., Kucuk M., and Karabacak H. 2003. Evaluation of nutritional status of hazelnut Corylus avellana grown in Ordu district by soil and plant analysis. Ankara Univ. J. Agric. Fac., 9: 13-22.
56-     Tekin H., and Guzel N. 1992. Influence of manure and inorganic fertilizers on growth, yield and quality of pistachio in the South-eastern Turkey. Univ. of Cuk. Fac. of Agr. No. 182. Adana.
57-     Thompson M.M., Lagerstedt H.B., and Mehlenbacher S.A. 1996. Hazelnuts. In: Janick J, Moore JN (eds). Fruit breeding, Vol. 3, Nuts. Wiley, New York. pp 125-184.
58-     Tous J., Girona J., and Tasias J. 1994. Cultural practices and costs in hazelnut production. Acta
59-     Tous J., Rovira M., and Plana J. 1987. Cultivo del Avellano. Fruticul. Profess., 11: 115-123
60-     Valentini N., Rolle L., Stévigny C., and Zeppa G. 2006. Mechanical behaviour of hazelnuts used for table consumption under compression loading. J. Sci. Food. Agric. 86: 1257–1262.