INFLUENCES OF SOWING DATE AND HARVEST STAGE ON DRY MATTER YIELD AND FORAGE QUALITY OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)

Year 2023, , 26 - 36, 21.06.2023

Emine Budaklı Çarpıcı , Sebiha Erol , Barış Bülent Aşık , Ömer Arslan

https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.1226196

Abstract

Sowing dates and harvest stages are very important to obtained better forage yield and quality. The goal of the study was to ascertain how the quinoa growing conditions in Marmara will be affected by the sowing dates and harvest stages. In 2018 and 2019, the experiment was conducted in an experimental field in the Agricultural Application and Research Area of Bursa Uludag University's Agriculture Faculty. The field experiment was set up using three replicates of a split-plot randomized complete blocks design. Titicaca variety of quinoa was used as a plant material in the study. Four different sowing dates (15 April, 1 May, 15 May and 1 June) were considered in the main plot and three different harvest stages (beginning of flowering, full flowering and seed setting) in the sub-plot. In this study, plant height, dry matter yield, crude protein, crude protein yield, neutral detergent fiber, acid detergent fiber, the relative feed value, and macro and micro elements were examined. The two-year findings show that sowing on May 1 produced the maximum dry matter yield (2798 kg ha-1) and crude protein yield (584 kg ha-1). In terms of harvest stages, seed setting stage came to the fore in terms of high forage (4001 kg ha-1) and crude protein yield (746 kg ha-1).

Keywords

Dry matter yield, harvesting period, quality, quinoa, silage, sowing time

Supporting Institution

BURSA ULUDAĞ ÜNİVERSİTESİ BAPB

Project Number

OUAP(Z)-2018-6

Thanks

This research was supported by the Unit of Scientific Research Projects, Bursa Uludag University (OUAP(Z)-2018-6). We thank the BAP council for their contribution to this study.

References

• AOAC International. 1997. Official methods of analysis of AOAC international, 16th ed., 3rd rev. Method 955.04. The Association, Gaithersburg, MD.
• Bazile, D., D. Bertero and C. Nieto. 2015. State of the art report on kinoa around the world in 2013, Oficina Regional De La Fao Para América Latina Y El Caribe, 250-266
• Bertero, H.D., R.W. Kingand and A.J. Hall. 2000. Photoperiod and temperature effects on the rate of leaf appearance in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa). Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 27: 349–356.
• Bhargava, A., S. Shukla and D. Ohri. 2007. Genetic variability and interrelationship among various morphological and quality traits in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Field Crops Research 101: 104-116.
• FAO 1994. Plant production and protection series. In J. E. Hernandez and J. Leon (Eds.), Neglected Crops 1492 from a Different Perspective. No. 26, Available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/T0646E/T0646E00.htm (Access date: March 01, 2021).
• Fernando, S.V., S.V. Edmar, G.B. Marcelo and S. Lucas. 2012. Development and productivity of quinoa sown on different dates during off-season. Rev Cienc Agron. 43: 510-515.
• Geren, H., 2015. Effects of different nitrogen levels on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under Mediterranean climatic conditions. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 20(1): 59–64.
• Hirich, A., R. Choukr-Allah and S.E. Jacobsen. 2014. Quinoa in morocco–effect of sowing dates on development and yield. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 200: 371-377.
• Iliadis, C., T. Karyotis, S.E. Jacobsen. 1999. Effect of sowing date on seed quality and yield of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) in Greece, in crop development for the cool and wet regions of Europe. Workshop on Alternative Crops for Sustainable Agriculture of the COST Action 814, BioCity, Turku, Finland, 226-231.
• Jacobsen, S.E. and O. Stolen. 1996. Temperature and light requirements for the germination of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa). COST 814, February 1996, Workshop held in Copenhagen, Denmark. European Commission, pp.87-102.
• Kacar, B. 2014. Soil analysis, Nobel Academic Publications (3rd Edition).
• Kakabouki, I., D. Bilalis, A. Karkanis, G. Zervas, E. Tsiplakou, D. Hela. 2014. Effects of fertilization and tillage system on growth and crude protein content of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.): An alternative forage crop. Emir. J. Food Agric. 2014. 26(1): 18–24.
• Kaoutar, F., H. Abdelaziz, B. Ouafae, C. Redouane, R. Ragab. 2017. Yield and dry matter simulation using the saltmed model for five quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) accessions under deficit irrigation in South Morocco. Irrigation and Drainage, http:// onlinelibrary. wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ird.2116/epdf
• Muftuoglu, M., Y. Cikili and C. Turkmen. 2014. Soil and plant fertility analysis, Nobel Academic Publishing, p. 236.
• Oktem, A., A.G. Oktem and O.F. Birden. 2021. Impact of sowing dates on forage value of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) under semi-arid conditions. International Journal of Innovative Approaches in Agricultural Research 5 (2): 172- 183.
• Peiretti, P.G., F. Gai and S. Tassone. 2013. Fatty acid profile and nutritive value of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) seeds and plants at different growth stages. Animal Feed Science and Technology 183: 56-61.
• Peterson, A.J. and K.M. Murphy. 2015. Quinoa cultivation for temperate North America: considerations and areas for investigation. quinoa: Improvement and Sustainable Production, First Edition. Edited by Kevin Murphy and Janet Matanguihan, pp.173-192.
• Ramesh, K. 2016. Evaluation of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) at different dates of sowing and varied crop geometry in semi-arid regions of Telangana. College of Agrıculture Rajendranagar, Hyderabad-500 030 Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University. Master of Science in Agriculture.
• Shah, S.S., L. Shi, Z. Li, G. Ren, B. Zhou and P. Qin. 2020. Yield, agronomic and forage quality traits of different quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes in Northeast China. Agronomy 10: 1908.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2017. Determination of dry matter yield and some properties of different quinoa genotypes grown in Erzurum and Iğdır conditions. Iğdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech. 7(4): 257-263.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2018. Performance of some quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes grown in different climate conditions. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 23(2): 180- 186.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2020. Determination of roughage production of different quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) varieties in dry conditions of Eastern Anatolia. International Journal of Agriculture and Wildlife Science (IJAWS) 6(3): 554-561.
• Tan, M. and Yondem, Z. 2013. A New Crop for Human and Animal Nutrition: Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd). Alinteri 25:62–66.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2019. Quinoa in Every Aspect: Importance, Use and Cultivation. Ankara, Turkey: IKSAD Publishing House.
• Temel, I. and B. Keskin. 2019. The effects of different row spacing and intra-row spacing on hay yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 9(1): 522-532.
• Temel, S. and S. Yolcu. 2020. The effect of different sowing time and harvesting stages on the herbage yield and quality of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Turkish Journal of Field Crops 25(1):41-49.
• Temel, S. and N. Surgun. 2019. The effect of different nitrogen and phosphorus doses on hay yield and quality of quinoa. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology 9(3): 1785- 1796.
• Temel, S. and S. Yolcu. 2020. The effect of different sowing time and harvesting stages on the herbage yield and quality of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Turkish Journal of Field Crops 25(1):41-49.
• Uke, O., H. Kale, M. Kaplan, A. Kamalak. 2017. Effects of maturity stages on hay yield and quality, gas and methane production of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). KSU J. Nat. Sci. 20(1): 42-46.
• Uke, O. 2016. Effects of harvest times on herbage yield and quality of quinoa and teff plants. Erciyes University Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences Graduate Thesis, Kayseri.
• Van Dyke, N.J. and P. M. Anderson. 2000. Interpreting a forage analysis. Alabama cooperative extension. Circular ANR-890.
• Van Schooten, H.A. and J.B. Pinxterhuis. 2003. Quinoa as an alternative forage crop in organic dairy farming. Optimal Forage Systems for Animal Production and the Environment Grassland Science in Europe, 26-28 May 2003, Pleven, Bulgaria, 8: 445–448.
• Van Soest, P.J., J.B. Robertson and B.A. Lewis. 1991. Method for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nostarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74: 3583-3597.
• Yilmaz, S., I. Ertekin and I. Atis, 2021. Forage yield and quality of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes harvested at different cutting stages under mediterranean conditions. Turk J Field Crops 26(2): 202-209.
• Yolcu, S. 2018. Determination of sowing and harvest times on hay yield and quality of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) plant grown under irrigated conditions in Igdır. Igdır University Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences Graduate Thesis, Igdır.