THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT SOWING TIME AND HARVESTING STAGES ON THE HERBAGE YIELD AND QUALITY OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)

Year 2020, , 41 - 49, 11.06.2020

Suleyman Temel Savas Yolcu

https://doi.org/10.17557/tjfc.737503

Cited By: 20

Abstract

Knowing the proper sowing and harvesting periods in plants cultivated as roughage resource is very important for achieving high yield and quality performance. However, studies on sowing and harvesting times in quinoa grown for hay production are almost non-existent. In this study, the effects of different sowing (middle of March, end of March, beginning of April and middle of April) and harvesting (the end of vegetative stage, beginning of the flowering and the full flowering) periods on herbage yield and quality performance of quinoa’s Mint Vanilla variety were investigated. Research was conducted under irrigated conditions of Igdir during 2017-2018. The experimental design was split plot design with three replications. According to statistical analysis, higher plant height, dry matter and crude protein yields were obtained from plants sown at the end of March and harvested at full flowering. The highest crude protein ratio, dry matter digestible and relative feed value with the lowest neutral detergent fibre and acid detergent fibre ratios were observed in plants sown in the late period and harvested at the early period. As a result, crude protein and digestibility values were generally increased while dry matter and crude protein yields were decreased with late sowing and harvesting.

Keywords

Development periods, Igdir, Irrigated conditions, Mint Vanilla, Nutritional values

References

• Aguilar, P.C. and S.E. Jacobsen. 2003. Cultivation of quinoa on the peruvian altiplano. Food Rev. Int. 19: 31-41.
• Anonymous. 2019. Igdir provincial directorate of meteorology. Igdir, Turkey.
• AOAC. 1997. Official Methods of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 16. ed. 3. revision. Arlington, VA, USA.
• Bazile, D. and F. Baudron. 2015. The dynamics of the global expansion of quinoa growing in view of its high biodiversity. In: State of the Art Report of Quinoa in the World in 2013, ed. Bazile, D., D. Bertero and C. Nieto, 42-55, FAO & CIRAD, Rome.
• Bertero, H.D. and R.A. Ruiz. 2010. Reproductive partitioning in sea level quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) cultivars. Field Crops Res. 118: 94-101.
• Bhargava, A., S. Shukla and D. Ohri. 2006. Chenopodium quinoa. An Indian perspective. Ind Crops Prod. 23: 73-87.
• Buxton, D.R. 1996. Quality related characteristics of forages as influenced by plant environment and agronomic factors. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 40: 109-119.
• Cakmakci, S. and S. Temel. 2019. Selection studies for the development of seed type quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) lines. Int. J. Agric. Wildlife Sci. 5: 335-345.
• Casini, P. 2019. Seed yield of two new quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) breeding lines as affected by sowing date in Central Italy. Acta Agric Slov. 113: 51-62.
• Cusack, D.F. 1984. Quinoa: grain of the incas. The Ecologist. 14: 21-30.
• FAO. 1994. Plant production and protection series. In: Neglected crops from a different perspective, ed. Hernandez, J.E. and J. Leon, No. 26, http://www.fao.org/ docrep/T0646E/T0646E00.htm, (Accessed 04, 2018).
• 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.
• Galwey, N.W. 1989. Exploited plants - quinoa. Biologist. 36: 267-274.
• Geren, H. 2015. Effect of different nitrogen levels on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) under Mediterranean climatic conditions. Turkish J. Field Crops. 20: 59-64.
• Geren, H. and O. Alan. 2012. Effects of different sowing dates on the herbage yield and some other yield characteristics of two pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars. ANADOLU J. of AARI. 22: 37-47.
• Geren, H., Y.T. Kavut, G.D. Topcu, S. Ekren and D. Istipliler. 2014. Effects of different sowing dates on the grain yield and some yield components of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) grown under Mediterranean climatic conditions J. Ege University Faculty of Agriculture 51: 297-305.
• Gokkus, A. 2009. Ecology and physiology of forage crops. In: Forage Crops, ed. Avcioglu, R., R. Hatipoglu and Y. Karadag. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs Puplications. 1(3):65-119, Ankara.
• González, J.A., M. Gallardo, M. Hilal, M. Rosa and F.E. Prado. 2009. Physiological responses of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) to drought and waterlogging stresses: dry matter partitioning. Bot Stud. 50: 35-42.
• Gulsen, N., B. Coskun, H.D. Umucalılar and H. Dural. 2004. Prediction of nutritive value of a native forage, prangos uechritzii, using of in situ and in vitro measurements. J. Arid Environ. 56: 167-179.
• Hirich, A., R. Choukr-Allah and S.E. Jacobsen. 2014. Quinoa in Morocco - Effect of sowing dates on development and yield. J Agron Crop Sci. 200:371-377.
• Jacobsen, S.E., A. Mujica and R.C. Jensen. 2003. The resistance of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to adverse abiotic factors. Food Rev. Int. 19: 99-109.
• Jacobsen, S.E., B. Jørnsgård, J.L. Christiansen and O. Stølen. 1999. Effect of harvest time, drying technique, temperature and light on the germination of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa). Seed Sci. Technol. 27: 937-944.
• Jacobsen, S.E. and O. Stolen. 1993. Quinoa- morphology, phenology and prospects for its production as a new crop in Europe. Eur J Agron. 2: 19-29.
• Kacar, B. 2012. Soil Analysis. Ankara: Nobel Publication Distribution.
• Kacar, B., A.V. Katkat and S. Ozturk. 2006. Plant Physiology. 2. ed. Ankara: Nobel Publication Distribution.
• Kir, A.E. and S. Temel. 2016. Determination of seed yield and some agronomical characteristics of different quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) variety and populations under dry conditions of Igdir Plain. Igdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech. 4: 145-154.
• Kir, A.E. and S. Temel. 2017. Determination of seed yield and some agronomical characteristics of different quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes under irrigated conditions. Igdir Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech. 7: 353-361.
• Krivonos, E. 2013. Food Outlook: Biannual Report on Global Food Markets, FAO. Trade and Markets Division, Rome, Italy.
• Kutlu, H.R. 2008. Feed Evaluation and analysis methods. Lecture notes. http://www.zootekni.org.tr/upload/File/sunular/tm.pdf, (Accessed June 20, 2017).
• Martínez, E.A. 2015. Quinoa: Nutritional Aspects of the Rice of the Incas. Section 3. Nutritional and technical aspects In: Bazile D, Bertero D and Nieto C (Eds.). FAO and CIRAD, Rome. State of the Art Report of Quinoa in the World in 2013, pp. 278-285.
• Munir, H. 2011. Introduction and Assessment for Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as a Potential Climate Proof Grain Crop. Ph D thesis, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad.
• Onal Ascı, O. and Z. Acar. 2018. Quality of Roughage. Yenimahalle/Ankara: Positive Printing and Packaging Industry Trade Company.
• Pearsall, D.M. 1992. The origins of plant cultivation in South America. In: The Origins of Agriculture, ed. C.W. Cowan, P.J. Watson, 73-205, Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, DC.
• Ramesah, K. 2016. Evaluation of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.) at Different Dates of Sowing and Varied Crop Geometry in Semi-arid Regions of Telangana. Professor Jayashankar Telangana State Agricultural University. Master of Science in Agriculture, Telangana, India.
• Risi, J.C. and N.W. Galwey. 1991. Effects of sowing date and sowing rate on plant development and grain yield of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) in a temperate environment. J Agri. Sci. 117: 325-332.
• Rohweder, D.A., R.F. Barnes and N. Jorgensen. 1978. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. J Anim Sci. 47: 747-759.
• Sanchez, H.B., R. Lemeur, P. Van Damme and S.E. Jacobsen. 2003. Ecophysiological analysis of drought and salinity stress of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.). Food Rev. Int. 19: 111-119.
• Sheaffer, C.C., M.A. Peterson, M. Mccalin, J.J. Volene, J.H. Cherney, K.D. Johnson, W.T. Woodward and D.R. Viands. 1995. Acide detergent fiber, neutral detergent fiber concentration and relative feed value. North American Alfalfa Improvemnt Conference, Minneapolis.
• Sigsgaard, L., S.E. Jacobsen and J.L. Christiansen. 2008. Quinoa, Chenopodium quinoa, provides a new host for native herbivores in northern Europe: Case studies of the moth, Scrobipalpa atriplicella, and the tortoise beetle, Cassida nebulosa. J. Insect Sci. 8: 1-4.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2017a. Studies on the adaptation of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to Eastern Anatolia Region of Turkey. Agrofor Int. J. 2: 33-39.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2017b. Determination of dry matter yield and some properties of different quinoa genotypes grown in Erzurum and Igdir conditions. Igdir Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech. 7: 257-263.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2018. Performance of some quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) genotypes grown in different climate conditions. Turkish J. Field Crops. 23:180-186.
• Tan, M. and S. Temel. 2019. Quinoa in Every Aspect: Importance, Use and Cultivation. Ankara, Turkey: IKSAD Publishing House.
• Temel, S. and M. Tan. 2002. A research on determination of seeding and cutting time in common vetch (Vicia sativa L.) under Erzurum conditions. Ataturk Univ. J. of the Agricultural Faculty. 33: 363-368.
• Temel, S. and N. Surgun. 2019. The Effect of different nitrogen and phosphorus doses on hay yield and quality of quinoa. Igdir Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech. 9: 1785-1796.
• 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, Department of Field Crop, Graduate Thesis, Kayseri.
• 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, Vol: 8.
• Van Soest, P.J., J.D. Robertson and B.A. Lewis. 1991. Methods for diatery fibre, neutral detergent fibre and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animals nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74: 3583-3597.