AGRONOMIC AND PRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF SUNFLOWER INTERCROPPED WITH FORAGE IN A CROP-LIVESTOCK INTEGRATION SYSTEM

SANTOS, JAMILE MARIA DA SILVA DOS; PEIXOTO, CLOVIS PEREIRA; SILVA, MARCOS ROBERTO DA; ALMEIDA, ADEMIR TRINDADE; CASTRO, ANA MARIA PEREIRA BISPO DE

doi:10.1590/1983-21252019v32n224rc

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Zootecnia • Rev. Caatinga 32 (2) • Apr-Jun 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21252019v32n224rc copy

AGRONOMIC AND PRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF SUNFLOWER INTERCROPPED WITH FORAGE IN A CROP-LIVESTOCK INTEGRATION SYSTEM¹ 1 Paper extracted from the doctoral thesis of the first author.

CARACTERÍSTICAS AGRONÔMICAS E PRODUTIVAS DE GIRASSOL CONSORCIADO COM FORRAGEIRAS NO SISTEMA INTEGRAÇÃO LAVOURA-PECUÁRIA

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study was to evaluate the agronomic characteristics and yield of a sunflower crop grown together with forages in a crop-livestock integration system. The experiment was carried out in a randomized complete block design, in a 3×3 + 1 factorial scheme. Three sunflower intercropping with forage plants [sunflower + Urochloa ruziziensis (SB); sunflower + Panicum maximum cv. Tanzania (SP); sunflower + Urochloa ruziziensis + Cajanus cajan (SBGu)], sown in three ways [simultaneous sowing (SS), delayed sowing (DS), and simultaneous sowing with herbicide/graminicide (SSH) application], with the monocroped sunflower as a control, with three years of cultivation (2013, 2014, and 2015). The following characteristics were evaluated: plant height, stalk diameter, head diameter, number of achenes per heads, the mass of thousand achenes, harvest index, and the productivity of achenes. Data were submitted to analysis of variance, and the means were compared by the Tukey and Dunnett tests at 5% probability. The SB and SBGu intercropped promote greater sunflower productivity. The forage Panicum maximum cv. Tanzania in intercropped with sunflower reduces plant production components and productivity. Lapsed sowing delayed and simultaneous sowing with herbicide/graminicide application promote higher productivity of sunflower.

Keywords:
Helianthus annuus L; Intercropping; Forage plants; Grass

Year	pH	P	B	Ca⁺²	Mg⁺²	Al⁺³	H⁺	K⁺	CTC	MO	V
	(water)	mg dm^-3		----------cmol_cdm^-3----------						---%---
2013	6.00	6.12	0.1	0.93	0.53	0.12	1.52	0.11	3.21	0.75	48.44
2014	5.16	10.2	0.25	1.1	0.39	0.12	2.08	0.08	3.77	0.8	41.48
2015	4.70	35.0	0.47	2.5	1.06	0.10	1.83	0.26	5.75	1.6	67.31

Source of variation		MS
	DF	PH	SD	HD	NAH	M1000	PA	HI
Blok (Year)	9	687.189**	0.10**	5.77**	1563209.51^ns	6.78^ns	17498.88^ns	0.01^ns
SF	2	210.79^ns	0.21^ns**	5.88^ns	1139414.38^ns	0.22^ns	132075.24*	0.13**
Int	2	48.04^ns	0.02^ns	1.44^ns	2461789.24^ns	5.80^ns	5429944.9**	0.07**
SF x Int	4	49.04^ns	0.06^ns	2.33^ns	3075507.34^ns	15.50^ns	141974.08*	0.009^ns
Treat vs. Wit	1	471.65*	0.07^ns	9.51*	848726.10^ns	42.11*	456336.35**	0.0001^ns
Year	2	50294.07**	10.60**	258.89**	25579556.3**	1561.65**	4707176.5**	0.002^ns
SF x Year	4	188.57^ns	0.04^ns	4.40^ns	1251038.37^ns	21.16*	178350.88**	0.01^ns
Int x Year	4	75.99^ns	0.05^ns	0.92^ns	558379.22*	43.25**	1202640.82**	0.017*
SF x Int x Year	8	182.91^ns	0.02^ns	1.72^ns	3463869.91^ns	25.26**	222359.27**	0.03**
Error	81	121.16	0.035	2.31	2210102.6	9.67	40446.06	0.006
Mean		147.05	1.90	18.08	2200	39.03	2066	0.42
CV (%)		7.48	9.95	8.42	67.56	7.96	9.73	18.62

Year	Intercropped
	SB	SP	SBGu
2013	2213.33 bA	1698.55 bAB	1425.43 bB
2014	3024.01 aA	2810.66 aA	3277.09 aA
2015	1582.64 cA	1332.69 bA	1463.66 bA

Contrast (Treat vs. Wit)	NAH
	2013	2014	2015
SB.SS - MS	-8.0	271.0	780.53*
SP.SS - MS	274.0	-320.8	402.43*
SBGu.SS - MS	-570.0	720.9	430.34*
SB.DS - MS	1046.0	-112.7	234.23
SP.DS - MS	-142.0	69.60	252.63
SBGu.DS - MS	-451.0	228.0	138.83
SB.SSH - MS	-18.0	720.90	443.16*
SP.SSH - MS	-657.0	60.80	53.01
SBGu.SSH - MS	3359.0	260.0	531.81*

Forms of sowing	Intercropped
	Year 2013
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	36.76 aA	39.00 aA	37.32 aA
Delayed (SD)	34.92 aA	37.70 aA	37.14 aA
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	38.60 aA	38.25 aA	37.82 aA
	Year 2014
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	33.42 aA	35.45 aA	33.93 aA
Delayed (SD)	31.74 aA	34.28 aA	33.76 aA
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	35.09 aA	34.77 aA	34.38 aA
	Year 2015
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	49.78 aA	39.89 aB	48.33 aA
Delayed (SD)	50.67 aA	44.75 aA	47.55 aA
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	46.27 aA	47.01 aA	40.65 aA

Contrast (Treat vs. Wit)	M1000 (g)
	2013	2014	2015
SB.SS - MS	0.293	2.539	5.354
SP.SS - MS	2.532	4.575*	-4.53
SBGu.SS - MS	0.856	3.051	3.911
SB.DS - MS	-1.548	0.865	6.251
SP.DS - MS	1.239	3.399	0.324
SBGu.DS - MS	0.673	2.885	3.128
SB.SSH - MS	2.132	4.211	1.850
SP.SSH - MS	1.780	3.891	2.581
SBGu.SSH - MS	1.350	3.500	-3.77

Forms of sowing	Intercropped
	Year 2013
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	2522.69 aA	1487.18 aB	2104.20 bA
Delayed (DS)	2446.50 aA	1645.96 aB	2042.25 bAB
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	2468.22 aB	1595.50 aC	3011.67 aA
	Year 2014
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	1701.00 aB	1560.88 bC	1870.79 aA
Delayed (DS)	1665.80 aA	1744.79 aA	1718.59 bA
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	1786.08 aA	1769.83 aA	1774.92 abA
	Year 2015
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	2593.44 bA	1547.32 aB	2918.07 aA
Delayed (DS)	3021.54 aA	1711.99 aC	2667.36 abB
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	2728.80 abA	1685.83 aB	2555.80 bA

Contrast (Treat vs. Wit)	PA (kg ha^-1)
	2013	2014	2015
SB.SS - MS	254.1	429.2*	489.6*
SP.SS - MS	-781.4*	289.1*	-556.0*
SBGu.SS - MS	-164.4	599.0*	814.3*
SB.DS - MS	178.0	394.0*	917.7*
SP.DS - MS	-622.6*	473.0*	-391.0*
SBGu.DS - MS	-226.3	446.8*	563.6*
SB.SSH - MS	199.7	514.3*	625.0*
SP.SSH - MS	-673.0*	498.0*	-418.0*
SBGu.SSH - MS	743.1*	503.1*	452.0*

Forms of sowing	Intercropped
	Year 2013
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	0.46 aA	0.41 aA	0.24 bB
Delayed (DS)	0.53 aA	0.41 aA	0.49 aA
simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	0.46 aAB	0.33 aB	0.50 aA
	Year 2014
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	0.41 aA	0.33 aA	0.39 bA
Delayed (DS)	0.45 aB	0.42 aB	0.62 aA
simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	0.42 aA	0.33 aA	0.32 bA
	Year 2015
	SB	SP	SBGu
Simultaneous (SS)	0.32 bB	0.34 aB	0.53 aA
Delayed (DS)	0.55 aA	0.41 aB	0.53 aA
Simultaneous with herbicide (SSH)	0.37 bA	0.33 aA	0.40 bA

Contrast (Treat vs. Wit)	HI
	2013	2014	2015
SB.SS - MS	0.046	0.028	5.354
SP.SS - MS	-0.003	-0.054	-4.531
SBGu.SS - MS	-0.170*	0.001	3.911*
SB.DS - MS	0.118	0.058	6.251*
SP.DS - MS	-0.002	0.033	0.324
SBGu.DS - MS	0.082	0.237*	3.128*
SB.SSH - MS	0.050	0.031	1.850
SP.SSH - MS	-0.083	-0.055	2.581
SBGu.SSH - MS	0.087	-0.070	-3.770

Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido Avenida Francisco Mota, número 572, Bairro Presidente Costa e Silva, Cep: 5962-5900, Telefone: 55 (84) 3317-8297 - Mossoró - RN - Brazil
E-mail: caatinga@ufersa.edu.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] ^* Corresponding author: jmariasantos7@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

AGRONOMIC AND PRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF SUNFLOWER INTERCROPPED WITH FORAGE IN A CROP-LIVESTOCK INTEGRATION SYSTEM1 1 Paper extracted from the doctoral thesis of the first author.

CARACTERÍSTICAS AGRONÔMICAS E PRODUTIVAS DE GIRASSOL CONSORCIADO COM FORRAGEIRAS NO SISTEMA INTEGRAÇÃO LAVOURA-PECUÁRIA

ABSTRACT

AGRONOMIC AND PRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF SUNFLOWER INTERCROPPED WITH FORAGE IN A CROP-LIVESTOCK INTEGRATION SYSTEM¹ 1 Paper extracted from the doctoral thesis of the first author.