Document Type : Original Article
Abstract
Highlights
-
|
RESPONSE OF PEA VEGETATIVE GROWTH TRAITS TO PLANTINGSPACES, SOWING DATE, AND GENOTYPES UNDER DIFFERENT LOCATIONS CONDITIONS
Zein El-Din* M. G. ; G. A. Zayed*** ; G. H. AbdEl-Raheem*
and M. A. Wally*
*Horticulture (Vegetable) Dep., Assiut Agric. Fac., Al-Azhar University
**Horticulture (Vegetable) Dep., Cairo Agric. Fac., Al-Azhar University
***Vegetable Dep., Horticulture Res. Institute, Agric. Res. Centre, Giza
ABSTRACT
Field experiments were conducted during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons, in two locations of Upper Egypt Governorates. The investigation includes 30 treatments, which were the combination between 5 genotypes, 2 sowing dates and 3 plant spacing treatments. It is obvious from results that sowing pea on 15th September (D1) generally gave the Values significantly equal or better than the October sowing date (D2) for most the vegetative growth traits in all seasons and locations. The plants attained 50% flowering earlier in the wider spacing (S3) in Qena, than the narrower spacing (S1, denser plant population) of pea plants which hastened the days to flowering in Assiut. Therefore, it seemed that the influence of plant population on days to flower initiation varies from crop to crop as well as the prevailing environmental conditions under which the crops are grown. Genotypes G3 attained 50% flowering at 35 days in Qena followed by genotypes G1 and G4; the remaining genotypes were late in flowering in both seasons of this location. Significant interaction effects of sowing dates on the performance of studied genotypes were found for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height and number of branches (both seasons) in both Qena and Assiut regions as well as number of leaves at both seasons in Qena and only 2nd one in Assiut region. It is clearly from the data that the effects of the D×S×G interaction was significant in days to flowering, plant height, branches/plant and number of leaves/plant in both regions and seasons, except in the 1st season of Qena region for days to flowering. In general, the best interaction in days to flowering (D1×S3×G3& D1×S1×G3) inQena region. While, Assiut region, (D1×S1×G3& D2×S3×G3) in the 1st season and (D1×S3×G3) in the 2nd one.
INTRODUCTION
Peas (Pisum sativum L.) is the most important legume crop in Egypt, since it is a basic staple and an important source of protein to rural and urban communities. Ministry of Agriculture and the Agricultural Researches Center developed adaptation measures to cope with the negative impacts, such as: Changing sowing dates for each crop to cope with warmer climatic conditions as well as enhance programs of producing plants varieties and add new plant species together with programs to preserve biodiversity systems. The peas produced by these resource-poor farmers are more vulnerable to biotic and to abiotic stresses. As peas in Upper Egypt stabilize, greater production should come from higher yields. In an attempt to increase the yield and efficiency of producers, a couple cultivation practices were examined: planting date and plant spacing. Thus, a number of factors; cultivars, plant density, sowing time, nutrients and water management practices are involved in pea yield. Therefore, a better crop growth ensures with the appropriate coordination of different agronomic practices and judicious use of various inputs and among these, planting date is important to explore the potential of a cultivar in the region (Knott and Belcher 1998). The cultivar selection is also a key management component in any system even more critical in plant spacing and sowing date for pea production, although high yield potential is a predominant consideration however, earliness, vegetative growth and quality characteristics are also major factor to consider. Many Egyptian authors, i.e.,Amer et al. (1992), Zayed (1998), Zayed and Faris (1998), Zayed and Rayan (1998), Abdou et al. (1999), Zayed et al (1999a&b), El-Dakkak (2005), Zayed et al. (2005), Zayed et al. (2010), El-Dakkak et al. (2014), Baghdady et al. (2015) and El-Dakkak et al. (2015a&b) studied the genetics performance of pea under Upper Egypt conditions. On the other hand, Agronomists have also developed new cultivation practices adapted to accelerate the crop cycle, while reducing the vegetative vigor, thus, agronomic management does not promote excessive crop growth that delay maturity. The trend in optimum crop production is for early sowing to optimise yield (Barrett and Witt, 1987, McDonald et al., 2007) because yield is increased when crops have a longer growing season resulting in increased intercepted radiation. Therefore, optimum sowing date for a cultivar in a region is considered to be the most important manageable factor in pea crop. The aim of this research was to address differences in reported planting date yield responses, and to see if plant spacing interacts with planting date. Generally the study intended to evaluate growth performance of some pea's genotypes in some different environments in two different locations in Upper Egypt.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Five peas genotypes obtained from Horticulture Research Institute, ARC, Giza, Egypt were used. The peas were both New lines Sh/H1/2008 (G1) and Sh/L18/2009 (G2), (El-Dakkak et al. (2015b); Master-B (G3, the old local cv.) and both Entsar-1 (G4) and Entsar-2 (G5). Field experiments were conducted for two seasons, 2017/2018 and 2018/2019, in two locations of Upper Egypt Governorates. Locations included two private farms in both Qift (a city found in Qena governorate, Egypt. It is located 26.16 latitude and 32.73 longitude and it is situated at elevation 80 meters above sea level) and Assiut (a city found in Assiut governorate, Egypt. It is located 27° 10' 48.4824'' N and 31° 11' 21.4188'' E. and it is situated at elevation 56 meters above sea level). The physical and chemical analysis of soils are shown in Table (1).
|
Table (1) some initial physical and chemical soil properties of the studied soil in Qena (L1) and Assiut (L2) locations.
|
Environments |
L1 |
L2 |
||||
|
1st year |
2nd year |
1st year |
2nd year |
|||
|
Physical properties |
Organic matter (%) |
1.5 |
1.8 |
1.88 |
1.94 |
|
|
Textural class |
Clay loam |
Clay loam |
Silt loam |
Silt loam |
||
|
Chemical properties |
|
|
||||
|
pH |
7.89 |
7.68 |
8.31 |
8.28 |
||
|
Electric conductivity E.C. (ds/m) |
0.7 |
0.5 |
0.187 |
0.336 |
||
|
CaCO3 |
2.18 |
2.2 |
0.64 |
0.695 |
||
|
CEC (meq/100g) soil |
37.62 |
29.86 |
8.65 |
13.90 |
||
|
Soluble ions, meq / L |
Soluble anions, meq / L |
HCO3- |
1.3 |
1.4 |
2.54 |
5.87 |
|
CL- |
2.48 |
2.36 |
5.75 |
10.825 |
||
|
SO4-2 |
7.9 |
7.2 |
1.17 |
1.325 |
||
|
Soluble cations, meq / L |
Ca+2 |
2.9 |
2.6 |
2.77 |
3.945 |
|
|
K+ |
1.09 |
1.15 |
1.32 |
2.82 |
||
|
Na+ |
9.93 |
8.96 |
12.72 |
21.07 |
||
The experimental design was a randomized complete block design (RCBD), with three replications at each location. This investigation includes 30 treatments, which were the combination between 5 genotypes, 2 sowing dates and 3 plant spacing treatments, these treatments were arranged in split – split plot design with three replicates in both seasons. Sowing date treatments were assigned randomly in the main plots, while sub plots were devoted to genotypes. Moreover, the plant spacing treatments were allotted in the sub-sub plots. The two sowing dates were set as weeklong target windows of 7 to 14 September and 15 to 22 October. The three plant spacings compared were 5, 15 and 20 cm. The plots were 3.0 meters wide which consisted of five rows for the 60 cm row spacing. The plots were a minimum of 5.0 meters long.The normal agricultural practices of pea production were followed according to the recommendations of Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture.
Data Collected: Flowering date (measured as the number of days after planting to thetime when 50% of the plants had one or more flowers), Plant height (from the base to the tip of the main shoot), Number of leaves/plant and Number of branches/plant.
|
Data analysis: The data collected were analyzed using ASSISTAT Version 7.7 en (2017), UFCG-Brazil (Silva and Azevedo 2016 a&b) computer program package. The data were first subjected to analysis of variance for each location using the procedure illustrated by Gomez and Gomez (1984) for a complete randomized block design (CRBD). A combined analysis of variance was computed using the same software as for the single site analysis (ASSISTAT) in order to study the interaction effects
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Sowing dates:
In both regions, the main effect of sowing dates (Tables 2&3) was significant in both regions and seasons for days to 50% flowering, plant height in the 1st season of Qena and both plant height and number of leaves in the 2nd season of Assiut region in which D1 (15th September) resulted the best value for the traits. Days to flowering was significantly decreased from (45.8 & 45.82) in the 2nd date (15th October) to (44.9 &45.1) days in Qena region at the earlier sowing (15th September) and from (46.66 & 46.74) to (46.32 &46.12) days in Assiut one in the 1st and 2nd season, respectively.
Table (2):Flowering dates and plant height of pea plants as affected by sowing date, plant spacing and genotypes during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||
|
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
|
Sowing dates: |
||||||||
|
D1 |
44.9 |
45.1 |
46.32 |
46.12 |
56.96 |
56.97 |
59.17 |
59.31 |
|
D2 |
45.8 |
45.82 |
46.66 |
46.74 |
56.83 |
56.89 |
59.08 |
59.15 |
|
LSD |
0.547 |
0.116 |
0.080 |
0.068 |
0.111 |
NS |
NS |
0.025 |
|
Plant spacing: |
||||||||
|
S1 |
46.19 |
46.16 |
45.37 |
45.03 |
60.325 |
60.36 |
62.92 |
63.09 |
|
S2 |
45.95 |
45.99 |
46.60 |
46.73 |
56.14 |
56.24 |
59.85 |
59.74 |
|
S3 |
43.95 |
44.25 |
47.53 |
47.54 |
54.22 |
54.19 |
54.61 |
54.87 |
|
LSD |
0.514 |
0.095 |
0.155 |
0.051 |
0.090 |
0.255 |
0.121 |
0.026 |
|
Genotypes: |
||||||||
|
G1 |
38.25 |
38.25 |
37.9 |
37.6 |
74.915 |
74.96 |
75.37 |
75.39 |
|
G2 |
54.1 |
54.3 |
60.5 |
60.5 |
59.41 |
59.4 |
58.71 |
58.63 |
|
G3 |
35.5 |
35.75 |
36.25 |
36.35 |
47.19 |
47.27 |
50.15 |
50.29 |
|
G4 |
38.9 |
39.11 |
39.05 |
39.05 |
41.90 |
41.88 |
45.87 |
46.04 |
|
G5 |
60 |
59.9 |
58.75 |
58.65 |
61.06 |
61.14 |
65.54 |
65.83 |
|
LSD |
0.477 |
0.101 |
0.249 |
0.075 |
0.116 |
0.252 |
0.155 |
0.022 |
|
Table (3): Number of both branches and leaves per pea plants as affected by sowing date, plant spacing and genotypes during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||
|
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
|
Sowing dates: |
||||||||
|
D1 |
3.40 |
3.41 |
3.63 |
3.57 |
37.38 |
37.32 |
37.56 |
37.61 |
|
D2 |
3.41 |
3.43 |
3.58 |
3.54 |
37.37 |
37.3 |
37.58 |
37.44 |
|
LSD |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
0.029 |
|
Plant spacing: |
||||||||
|
S1 |
3.203 |
3.252 |
3.356 |
3.479 |
34.665 |
34.715 |
34.95 |
34.915 |
|
S2 |
3.362 |
3.374 |
3.702 |
3.575 |
36.855 |
36.865 |
36.925 |
36.89 |
|
S3 |
3.657 |
3.634 |
3.756 |
3.61 |
40.61 |
40.355 |
40.835 |
40.78 |
|
LSD |
0.323 |
0.061 |
0.160 |
0.031 |
0.349 |
0.163 |
0.309 |
0.023 |
|
Genotypes: |
||||||||
|
G1 |
3.792 |
3.785 |
4.867 |
4.755 |
41.845 |
41.775 |
42.41 |
42.28 |
|
G2 |
4.140 |
4.08 |
4.578 |
4.535 |
38.66 |
38.64 |
38.785 |
38.775 |
|
G3 |
2.855 |
2.935 |
2.665 |
2.715 |
35.65 |
35.545 |
36.11 |
35.975 |
|
G4 |
2.995 |
2.995 |
2.842 |
2.765 |
34.815 |
34.865 |
34.745 |
34.81 |
|
G5 |
3.255 |
3.31 |
3.072 |
3.005 |
35.915 |
35.735 |
35.8 |
35.805 |
|
LSD |
0.207 |
0.078 |
0.1336 |
0.040 |
0.222 |
0.110 |
0.260 |
0.030 |
It is obvious from data that sowing pea on 15th September (1st sowing date) generally gave the Values significantly equal or better than the 2nd sowing date for most the vegetative growth traits in all seasons and locations.
These results are in agreement with those reported by Muhammad et al. (2001) and Sirwaiya and Kushwah (2018) and don’t, relatively, agree with Shokr (2000) and Mansour (2006). They concluded that plant height, number of leaves and branches per plant of pea plants were increased with sowing seeds at October.
Intra-row spacing:
The main effect of plant spacing was significant on the all studied vegetative growth traits in both seasons (Tables 2&3). Days to flowering was significantly decreased from (45.95 & 45.99 days) to (43.95 & 44.25 days) as the intra-row spacing increased from 15cm (S2) to 20cm (S3).
In contrast of Qena region, Days to flowering in Assiut region was significantly increased from (45.37 & 45.03 days) to (46.60 & 46.73 days) as the intra-row spacing increased from 5cm (S1) to 15 cm (S2) and from (46.60 & 46.73 days) to (47.53 & 47.54 days) with increasing plant spacing from 15 cm (S2) to 20 cm (S3). Turk et al, (2003) and Idris (2008) in common bean and Oad et al., (2002) in safflower found no significant effect of plant population on days to flowering.
|
Plant height was significantly decreased as the intra-row spacing increased from 5 cm(S1) to 15 cm(S2) to 20 cm(S3) resulted in significantly shortest plants in the wider plant spacing (20 cm). While, the tallest plant achieved with S1 plant spacing. On the other hand, both number of branches/plant and leaves/plant were in reverse trend of plant height, in both Qena and Assiut regions, both traits was significantly increased as the intra-row spacing increased from S1 to (S2) to (S3). It is obvious from such results that the plants attained 50% flowering earlier in the wider spacing in Qena, than the narrower spacing (denser plant population) of pea plants which hastened the days to flowering in Assiut. Therefore, it seemed that the influence of plant population on days to flower initiation varies from crop to crop as well as the prevailing environmental conditions under which the crops are grown. These results might be due to the fact that as the spacing among plants decreased the interplant competition for light increased while sparsely populated plants intercepted sufficient sunlight that enhanced the lateral growth and resulting in less number of days to flower as pea needs direct sunlight coverage for its various physiological processes (Agajie, 2018). In agreement to this, the wide plant spacing reduced number of days to flower in broad bean than narrow plant spacing (Farag and El-Shamm, 1994). Shamsi and Kobraee(2009) and Tuarira and Moses (2014) stated that plant height was taller in higher plant population (narrow spacing) treatments due to more competition for light, while Turk et al., (2003) found that light distribution was normal at wider spacing. In contrast with this, plant height was not affected by increasing plant density of faba bean reported by Shahein et al., (1995). However, the increased number of both branches and leaves under lower plant densities (wider spacing) could be attributed to more sunlight interception for photosynthesis, which may have resulted in production of more assimilate for partitioning towards the development of more branches (Mehmet, 2008). These results are in agreement with the finding reported by Al-Abdul-Salam and Abdul-Salam (1995), Aydogdu and Acikgoz (1995) and Loss et al., (1998) in Viciasp.
Performance of genotypes:
Tables (2&3) show performance of genotypes under Qena and Assiut conditions. The analysis of variance revealed highly significant difference for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height, number of branches and number of leaves among genotypes. Genotypes G3 attained 50% flowering at 35 days in Qena followed by genotypes G1 and G4; the remaining genotypes were late in flowering in both seasons of this location. On the other hand, the genotypes performance in Assiut region was true as in Qena one. Data in Tables (2&3) indicate that the highest values of plant height and number of leaves were recorded with genotype G1 at the two regions (Qena and Assiut) in both seasons, while the highest one of branches per plant was recorded with G2 followed by G1 in Qena and G1 followed by G2 in Assiut region in both seasons. The difference between cultivars may be due to there variations in nutrient use efficiency habits. Another explanation is that the different behavior observed in these characters might reflect the differential expressivity of certain genes during ontogenetic processes, which may interact with the developmental and environmental factors in relation to water relationships, and indicated that genes responsible for the biosynthesis of such characters might be varied in their action (Yarnell, 1962, Arisha, 1982 and Helmy, 2008 on pea). The obtained results agree with those reported by Shokr (2000) and Muhammad et al. (2001)on pea plants.
|
Effect of interactions:
Sowing dates and genotypes (D×G):
Results in Table (4) show the effect of interaction between sowing dates and genotypes on vegetative characters of pea plants.
Significant interaction effects of sowing dates on the performance of studied genotypes viz., ‘G1, G2, G3, G4 and G5’ were found for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height and number of branches (both seasons) in both Qena and Assiut regions as well as number of leaves at both seasons in Qena and only 2nd one in Assiut region (Table 4).
For mean performance, G3 was significantly earlier in flowering than the other genotypes by about 1-24 days within both D1 and D2 sowing dates. All studied genotypes flowered earlier at D1 (15th September) than the other sowing date (15th October) by about 1-3 days in both regions. For Plant height, (G1& G3) and (G1 & G5) in Qena and Assiut, respectively at both season as well as G2& G4 (1st and 2nd season, respectively) in Qena and G5 (2nd season) in Assiut (2nd season), respectively exhibited significantly comparable or decreasing Plant height at D2 (15th October) sowing date.
Accordingly, Plant height of all genotypes gradually increased with early sowing date (15th September) except G2 and G3 in the 2nd season of Qena and Assiut, respectively and G4 in the 1st season of Assiut region increased with D2 (15th October) sowing date (exhibited reverse trend). It is noticeable that the maturity rate of the early and the late sowings run almost parallel to each other and the greater final height of the early crop was due to its larger growing period.
|
Table (4): Vegetative characters of pea plants as affected by the dual interaction (D×G) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
||||||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||||||
|
Sowing dates |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|||
|
D1 |
G1 |
37.1 |
37.2 |
37.8 |
37 |
75.26 |
75.25 |
75.37 |
75.53 |
|||
|
G2 |
54.1 |
54.5 |
60.6 |
60.3 |
59.42 |
59.22 |
58.82 |
58.61 |
||||
|
G3 |
35 |
35.4 |
36.1 |
36.3 |
47.2 |
47.34 |
50.12 |
50.24 |
||||
|
G4 |
38.6 |
38.71 |
38.7 |
38.7 |
41.89 |
41.76 |
45.74 |
46.11 |
||||
|
G5 |
59.6 |
59.69 |
58.4 |
58.3 |
61.02 |
61.28 |
65.81 |
66.07 |
||||
|
D2 |
G1 |
39.4 |
39.3 |
38 |
38.2 |
74.57 |
74.67 |
75.36 |
75.25 |
|||
|
G2 |
54.1 |
54.1 |
60.4 |
60.7 |
59.4 |
59.58 |
58.6 |
58.64 |
||||
|
G3 |
36 |
36.1 |
36.4 |
36.4 |
47.18 |
47.19 |
50.17 |
50.34 |
||||
|
G4 |
39.2 |
39.5 |
39.4 |
39.4 |
41.9 |
42 |
46 |
45.97 |
||||
|
G5 |
60.4 |
60.1 |
59.1 |
59 |
61.1 |
61 |
65.27 |
65.58 |
||||
|
LSD |
0.675 |
0.143 |
0.352 |
0.106 |
0.164 |
0.356 |
0.220 |
0.032 |
||||
|
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
|||||||||||
|
D1 |
G1 |
3.82 |
3.73 |
4.90 |
4.84 |
41.95 |
41.93 |
42.52 |
42.25 |
|||
|
G2 |
4.12 |
4.06 |
4.58 |
4.52 |
38.52 |
38.53 |
38.87 |
38.82 |
||||
|
G3 |
2.80 |
2.97 |
2.67 |
2.8 |
35.81 |
35.43 |
36 |
36.13 |
||||
|
G4 |
3.00 |
3.01 |
2.85 |
2.76 |
34.73 |
34.72 |
34.69 |
34.9 |
||||
|
G5 |
3.27 |
3.3 |
3.13 |
2.94 |
35.9 |
36 |
35.73 |
35.97 |
||||
|
D2 |
G1 |
3.76 |
3.84 |
4.83 |
4.67 |
41.74 |
41.62 |
42.3 |
42.31 |
|||
|
G2 |
4.16 |
4.1 |
4.58 |
4.55 |
38.8 |
38.75 |
38.7 |
38.73 |
||||
|
G3 |
2.91 |
2.9 |
2.66 |
2.63 |
35.49 |
35.66 |
36.22 |
35.82 |
||||
|
G4 |
2.99 |
2.98 |
2.84 |
2.77 |
34.9 |
35.01 |
34.8 |
34.72 |
||||
|
G5 |
3.24 |
3.32 |
3.01 |
3.07 |
35.93 |
35.47 |
35.87 |
35.64 |
||||
|
LSD |
0.292 |
0.110 |
0.189 |
0.056 |
0.314 |
0.155 |
NS |
0.042 |
||||
Similarly, both number of branches and leaves per plant of all genotypes (Table 4) significantly increased with early sowing date (15th September) except the 2nd season of G1 for number of branches and (G2, G3 and G4) for number of leaves/plant in Qena region as well as both G1 and G5 for number of leaves and branches/plant, respectively in Assiut region. Early sowing on 15st September resulted in significantly maximum values in new line G1 for number of branches/plant and number of leaves in Assiut and Qena regions, respectively at both seasons as well as for number of leaves at 1st season in Assiut one. These results are in agreement with the results of Mohamed (2001), Khalil et al., 2010, and Sirwaiya and Kushwah (2018).
Sowing dates and plant spacing (D×S):
Results in Table (5) show the effect of interaction between sowing dates and plant spacing on vegetative characters of pea plants.
|
It is obvious from the results that sowing pea on 15th September in the wider spacing (S3) gave the earlier flowering in Qena region and in the narrow spacing (S1) in Assiut at both seasons.
Table (5): Vegetative characters of pea plants as affected by the dual interaction (D×S) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
|||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
|||||
|
Sowing dates |
Plant spacing |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
D1 |
S1 |
45.68 |
45.66 |
45.07 |
44.41 |
60.33 |
60.35 |
62.90 |
63.01 |
|
S2 |
45.49 |
45.59 |
46.39 |
46.5 |
56.32 |
56.36 |
59.85 |
59.82 |
|
|
S3 |
43.57 |
44.08 |
47.52 |
47.48 |
54.22 |
54.2 |
54.76 |
55.1 |
|
|
D2 |
S1 |
46.7 |
46.65 |
45.67 |
45.64 |
60.32 |
60.37 |
62.93 |
63.17 |
|
S2 |
46.4 |
46.40 |
46.8 |
46.96 |
55.96 |
56.12 |
59.84 |
59.66 |
|
|
S3 |
44.33 |
44.42 |
47.53 |
47.59 |
54.21 |
54.18 |
54.47 |
54.64 |
|
|
LSD |
NS |
0.134 |
0.219 |
0.072 |
0.128 |
NS |
0.171 |
0.037 |
|
|
|
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
|||||||
|
D1 |
S1 |
3.19 |
3.29 |
3.40 |
3.52 |
34.52 |
34.56 |
34.82 |
35.15 |
|
S2 |
3.38 |
3.39 |
3.71 |
3.58 |
36.79 |
36.82 |
36.99 |
37.08 |
|
|
S3 |
3.65 |
3.56 |
3.77 |
3.62 |
40.84 |
40.59 |
40.88 |
40.61 |
|
|
D2 |
S1 |
3.22 |
3.21 |
3.31 |
3.44 |
34.81 |
34.87 |
35.08 |
34.68 |
|
S2 |
3.35 |
3.36 |
3.69 |
3.57 |
36.92 |
36.91 |
36.86 |
36.7 |
|
|
S3 |
3.67 |
3.71 |
3.75 |
3.6 |
40.38 |
40.12 |
40.79 |
40.95 |
|
|
LSD |
NS |
0.086 |
0.226 |
0.044 |
0.494 |
0.230 |
NS |
0.033 |
|
On the contrary, the latest flowering belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of October 15 and both narrow (S1) and wide (S3) spacing in Qena and Assiut, respectively. Respecting plant height, the highest plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of October 15 and narrow spacing of S1 and the shortest plants belonged to the same sowing date of October 15 and wider spacing of S3 in both regions at both seasons. It is noticed that, no significant differences between D1× S1 and D2× S1 at both seasons in Qena and only 1st season in Assiut region as well as between D1× S3 and D2× S3 in Qena at both seasons for plant height. However, The highest number of branches/plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of D2 × S3 in Qena region and D1 × S3 in Assiut one (with no significant differences between D2 × S3 and D1 × S3 in Assiut) at both seasons and the lowest number belonged to sowing date of October 15 and narrow spacing of S1 (D2 × S1) in most environments. Moreover, The highest number of leaves/plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of D1 × S3 in Qena region at both seasons and in Assiut at the 1st season. The lowest number belonged to sowing date of September 15 and narrow spacing of S1 (D1 × S1) in most environments.
|
Plant spacing and genotypes (S×G):
Results in Table (6) show the effect of interaction between plant spacing and genotypes on vegetative characters of pea plants. Significant interaction effects of plant spacing on the performance of studied genotypes were found for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height, number of branches and number of leaves/plant in both Qena and Assiut regions at both seasons.
Table (6): Vegetative characters of pea plants as affected by the dual interaction (S×G) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
|||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
|||||
|
Plant spacing |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
S1 |
G1 |
36.85 |
36.8 |
39 |
37.71 |
83.69 |
83.95 |
79.84 |
80.19 |
|
G2 |
58.52 |
58.45 |
59.7 |
59.49 |
61.64 |
61.455 |
59.7 |
59.42 |
|
|
G3 |
35.46 |
35.46 |
36.19 |
36 |
50.32 |
50.34 |
53.44 |
53.86 |
|
|
G4 |
40.08 |
39.96 |
37.6 |
37.35 |
42.69 |
42.85 |
49.74 |
50.19 |
|
|
G5 |
60.05 |
60.11 |
54.37 |
54.59 |
63.32 |
63.2 |
71.88 |
71.79 |
|
|
S2 |
G1 |
37.26 |
37.11 |
37.23 |
37.22 |
70.9 |
71.03 |
78.47 |
78.36 |
|
G2 |
58.17 |
57.77 |
56.53 |
57.07 |
59.64 |
59.73 |
60.48 |
60.35 |
|
|
G3 |
36 |
36.46 |
36.64 |
37.26 |
46.34 |
46.31 |
50.05 |
49.92 |
|
|
G4 |
39.24 |
39.79 |
40.82 |
40.62 |
42.85 |
42.93 |
44.98 |
44.93 |
|
|
G5 |
59.06 |
58.87 |
61.75 |
61.5 |
60.99 |
61.21 |
65.28 |
65.16 |
|
|
S3 |
G1 |
40.65 |
40.93 |
37.51 |
37.91 |
70.15 |
69.9 |
67.8 |
67.63 |
|
G2 |
45.67 |
46.71 |
65.35 |
65 |
56.96 |
57.02 |
55.95 |
56.1 |
|
|
G3 |
35.07 |
35.41 |
35.85 |
35.81 |
44.93 |
45.15 |
46.95 |
47.1 |
|
|
G4 |
37.38 |
37.53 |
38.75 |
39.15 |
40.15 |
39.87 |
42.9 |
43.01 |
|
|
G5 |
60.98 |
60.69 |
60.17 |
59.82 |
58.89 |
59.02 |
59.47 |
60.52 |
|
|
LSD |
0.826 |
0.175 |
0.431 |
0.129 |
0.200 |
0.437 |
0.269 |
0.039 |
|
|
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
||||||||
|
S1 |
G1 |
3.52 |
3.5 |
4.2 |
4.4 |
37.735 |
37.975 |
38.63 |
38.43 |
|
G2 |
4.05 |
4.05 |
4.21 |
4.35 |
35.61 |
35.75 |
35.41 |
35.61 |
|
|
G3 |
2.7 |
2.9 |
2.68 |
2.81 |
33.80 |
33.54 |
34.5 |
34.19 |
|
|
G4 |
2.8 |
2.83 |
2.69 |
2.7 |
32.15 |
32.26 |
32.15 |
32.32 |
|
|
G5 |
2.95 |
2.99 |
3.02 |
3.15 |
34.05 |
34.05 |
34.05 |
34.05 |
|
|
S2 |
G1 |
3.81 |
3.76 |
5.20 |
4.92 |
42.1 |
41.85 |
42.15 |
41.96 |
|
G2 |
4.01 |
4.02 |
4.80 |
4.63 |
37.52 |
37.13 |
37.35 |
37.54 |
|
|
G3 |
2.82 |
2.85 |
2.72 |
2.75 |
35 |
35.1 |
35.9 |
35.45 |
|
|
G4 |
2.92 |
2.9 |
2.74 |
2.69 |
34.8 |
35.25 |
35.035 |
35.11 |
|
|
G5 |
3.27 |
3.35 |
3.05 |
2.9 |
34.85 |
35.00 |
34.2 |
34.4 |
|
|
S3 |
G1 |
4.05 |
4.1 |
5.20 |
4.95 |
45.7 |
45.51 |
46.45 |
46.45 |
|
G2 |
4.37 |
4.17 |
4.73 |
4.64 |
42.85 |
43.05 |
43.6 |
43.18 |
|
|
G3 |
3.05 |
3.05 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
38.16 |
38 |
37.94 |
38.3 |
|
|
G4 |
3.27 |
3.26 |
3.1 |
2.91 |
37.5 |
37.08 |
37.06 |
37.01 |
|
|
G5 |
3.55 |
3.6 |
3.15 |
2.96 |
38.85 |
38.15 |
39.14 |
38.97 |
|
|
LSD |
0.358 |
0.135 |
0.232 |
0.069 |
0.384 |
0.190 |
0.451 |
0.052 |
|
Table (7) shows number of early days for each genotype flowered earlier than others between plants spacing and number of days for G3 genotype flowered earlier than others within specific plant spacing during two seasons in both locations. In Qena region, it was observed that (G1), (G5) and (G2& G3 & G4) genotypes flowered earlier under narrow (S1), medium (S2) and wider (S3) spacing, respectively than other plant spacing by about (1-13) days (Tables 6&7). In Assiut region, (G4& G5), (G1 & G2) and (G3) genotypes flowered earlier under narrow (S1), medium (S2) and wider (S3) spacing, respectively than other plant spacing by about (1-9) days (Tables 6&7).
|
Table (7): Number of early days between and within plant spacing in which the genotype flowered earlier than others during two seasons in both locations
|
Genotypes |
Item |
Qena |
Assiut |
||
|
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
||
|
Between Plant spacing |
|||||
|
G1 |
Plant spacing |
S1 |
S1 |
S2 |
S2 |
|
No. of early days |
1-4 |
1-4 |
1-2 |
1 |
|
|
G2 |
Plant spacing |
S3 |
S3 |
S2 |
S2 |
|
No. of early days |
1-13 |
1-11 |
3-9 |
2-8 |
|
|
G3 |
Plant spacing |
S3 |
S3 |
S3 |
S3 |
|
No. of early days |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
G4 |
Plant spacing |
S3 |
S3 |
S1 |
S1 |
|
No. of early days |
1-3 |
1-2 |
1-3 |
1-3 |
|
|
G5 |
Plant spacing |
S2 |
S2 |
S1 |
S1 |
|
No. of early days |
1-2 |
1-2 |
1-7 |
2-7 |
|
|
Days which G3 was significantly earlier than the other genotypes within Plant spacing |
|||||
|
S1 |
G1 |
1.4 |
1.3 |
2.8 |
1.7 |
|
G2 |
23.1 |
23.0 |
23.5 |
23.5 |
|
|
G3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
G4 |
4.6 |
4.5 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
|
|
G5 |
24.6 |
24.7 |
18.2 |
18.6 |
|
|
S2 |
G1 |
1.3 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
-0.04 |
|
G2 |
22.2 |
21.3 |
19.9 |
19.8 |
|
|
G3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
G4 |
3.2 |
3.3 |
4.2 |
3.4 |
|
|
G5 |
23.1 |
22.4 |
25.1 |
24.2 |
|
|
S3 |
G1 |
5.6 |
5.5 |
1.7 |
2.1 |
|
G2 |
10.6 |
11.3 |
29.5 |
29.2 |
|
|
G3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
G4 |
2.3 |
2.1 |
2.9 |
3.3 |
|
|
G5 |
25.9 |
25.3 |
24.3 |
24.0 |
|
|
Rang of early days in S1 |
1-25 |
1-25 |
1-24 |
1-24 |
|
|
Rang of early days in S2 |
1-23 |
1-22 |
1-25 |
1-24 |
|
|
Rang of early days in S3 |
2-26 |
2-25 |
2-30 |
2-29 |
|
For plant height, all studied genotypes (Table 6) exhibited significantly comparable or decreasing plant height with low plant density (i.e. with increased spacing between them). Accordingly, G1 × S1 exhibited the highest pea plants followed by G1 × S2 and G1 × S3 in descending order in both regions and at both seasons. On the contrary, G4 × S3, G4 × S2 and G4 × S1 in ascending order exhibited the shortest pea plants in both regions and at both seasons.
|
Respecting number of branches in Qena region, the highest number per plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of S3×G2 followed by S3×G1 and S1×G2, respectively without any significant between them in both seasons and the lowest number belonged to S1×G3, S1×G4, S1×G5, S2×G3, S2×G4 and S3×G3 in the 1st season and S1×G4 followed by S2×G3, S2×G4 and S1×G3, respectively without any significant between them in the 2nd one. In Assiut region, the highest number of branches per plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of S3×G1 followed by S2×G1 without any significant between them in both seasons and the lowest number belonged to S3×G3, S1×G3, S1×G4, S2×G3 and S2×G4 in the 1st season and S3×G3 in the 2nd one.
Concerning number of leaves/plant, the results in the same Table (6) show that the highest number per plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of S3×G1 followed by S3×G2 and the lowest number belonged to S1×G4 in all environments (regions and seasons).Similar results were obtained by Bakry et al. (2011) on fababean, they found that the interaction between varieties and plant density had significant effect on plant height and number of branches/plant in both seasons.
Sowing dates, plant spacing and genotypes (D×S×G):
Data in Tables (8 and 9) show the effect of the triple interactions on days to flowering, plant height, branches/plant and number of leaves/plant of pea. It is clearly from the data that the effects of the D×S×G interaction was significant in days to flowering, plant height, branches/plant and number of leaves/plant in both regions and seasons, except in the 1st season of Qena region for days to flowering.
In general, the best interaction in days to flowering (D1×S3×G3& D1×S1×G3) in the 1st season and (D1×S1×G3& D1×S3×G3) in the 2nd one of Qena region. While, the lowest interactive effect was (D2×S3×G5) in both seasons of this region.
Concerning Assiut region, (D1×S1×G3& D2×S3×G3) in the 1st season and (D1×S3×G3) in the 2nd one.While, the lowest interactive effect was (D1×S3×G2) in the 1st season and (D2×S3×G2& D1×S3×G2) in the 2nd one.
For plant height, both (D2×S1×G1& D1×S1×G1) were the best interaction and the lowest was (D2×S3×G4& D1×S3×G4) in both regions at both seasons.
|
Number of branches in Qena region, (D2×S3×G2& D1×S3×G2 & D2×S1×G2 & D1×S3×G1& D1×S1×G2 and D2×S3×G1) without significant between them were the best interactive effects at 1st season and each of D2×S3×G1& D2×S3×G2& D1×S3×G2) at the 2nd season of this region. While, the lowest interactive effect was G3 and G4 with interaction of any sowing dates and any of S1 or S2 plants spacing in both seasons.
Table (8):Flowering dates and plant height of pea plants as affected by the triple interaction (D×S×Y) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
||||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||||
|
Sowing dates |
Plant spacing |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
D1 |
S1 |
G1 |
35.7 |
35.4 |
39 |
36.2 |
83.67 |
83.9 |
79.67 |
80.17 |
|
G2 |
58.37 |
58.19 |
59.4 |
58.8 |
61.67 |
61.37 |
60 |
59.4 |
||
|
G3 |
35.11 |
35 |
35.7 |
36.1 |
50.33 |
50.38 |
53.37 |
53.42 |
||
|
G4 |
39.83 |
40 |
37.2 |
36.8 |
42.67 |
42.7 |
49.47 |
50.17 |
||
|
G5 |
59.4 |
59.7 |
54.07 |
54.17 |
63.33 |
63.4 |
72 |
71.89 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
36.4 |
36.31 |
37.13 |
36.8 |
72 |
72.05 |
78.45 |
78.32 |
|
|
G2 |
58 |
57.3 |
56.73 |
57.3 |
59.67 |
59.46 |
60.45 |
60.23 |
||
|
G3 |
35.55 |
36.25 |
36.61 |
37.2 |
46.27 |
46.34 |
49.99 |
50.2 |
||
|
G4 |
38.59 |
39.19 |
40.3 |
40.4 |
42.7 |
42.75 |
44.95 |
45.05 |
||
|
G5 |
58.89 |
58.91 |
61.16 |
60.8 |
60.97 |
61.21 |
65.43 |
65.31 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
39.3 |
40 |
37.4 |
38.1 |
70.1 |
69.8 |
68 |
68.1 |
|
|
G2 |
46 |
48 |
65.7 |
64.9 |
56.91 |
56.84 |
56 |
56.2 |
||
|
G3 |
34.47 |
35.01 |
36 |
35.7 |
45 |
45.3 |
47 |
47.1 |
||
|
G4 |
37.43 |
36.93 |
38.5 |
38.9 |
40.3 |
39.83 |
42.8 |
43.11 |
||
|
G5 |
60.63 |
60.47 |
60 |
59.8 |
58.77 |
59.23 |
60 |
61 |
||
|
D2 |
S1 |
G1 |
38 |
38.2 |
39 |
39.21 |
83.7 |
84 |
80 |
80.2 |
|
G2 |
58.67 |
58.7 |
60 |
60.17 |
61.6 |
61.54 |
59.4 |
59.44 |
||
|
G3 |
35.8 |
35.91 |
36.67 |
35.9 |
50.3 |
50.29 |
53.5 |
54.3 |
||
|
G4 |
40.33 |
39.93 |
38 |
37.9 |
42.7 |
43 |
50 |
50.2 |
||
|
G5 |
60.7 |
60.52 |
54.67 |
55 |
63.3 |
63 |
71.75 |
71.69 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
38.11 |
37.91 |
37.33 |
37.63 |
69.8 |
70 |
78.48 |
78.39 |
|
|
G2 |
58.33 |
58.24 |
56.33 |
56.83 |
59.6 |
60 |
60.51 |
60.47 |
||
|
G3 |
36.45 |
36.66 |
36.67 |
37.31 |
46.4 |
46.27 |
50.1 |
49.63 |
||
|
G4 |
39.89 |
40.39 |
41.33 |
40.83 |
43 |
43.11 |
45 |
44.8 |
||
|
G5 |
59.22 |
58.82 |
62.33 |
62.2 |
61 |
61.2 |
65.13 |
65 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
42 |
41.86 |
37.61 |
37.71 |
70.2 |
70 |
67.6 |
67.16 |
|
|
G2 |
45.33 |
45.41 |
65 |
65.1 |
57 |
57.2 |
55.9 |
56 |
||
|
G3 |
35.67 |
35.8 |
35.7 |
35.92 |
44.85 |
45 |
46.9 |
47.1 |
||
|
G4 |
37.33 |
38.13 |
39 |
39.4 |
40 |
39.9 |
43 |
42.9 |
||
|
G5 |
61.33 |
60.9 |
60.33 |
59.83 |
59 |
58.8 |
58.94 |
60.04 |
||
|
LSD |
NS |
0.247 |
0.610 |
0.183 |
0.283 |
0.617 |
0.380 |
0.055 |
||
|
Table (9): Number of both branches and leaves per pea plants as affected by the triple interaction (D×S×Y) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
||||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||||
|
Sowing dates |
Plant spacing |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
D1 |
S1 |
G1 |
3.53 |
3.49 |
4.3 |
4.6 |
37.66 |
38 |
38.26 |
37.96 |
|
G2 |
4.00 |
4.1 |
4.21 |
4.4 |
35.12 |
35.2 |
35.62 |
36.2 |
||
|
G3 |
2.60 |
2.9 |
2.70 |
2.9 |
33.83 |
33.39 |
34.3 |
34.4 |
||
|
G4 |
2.80 |
2.88 |
2.70 |
2.69 |
32 |
32.1 |
32 |
32.3 |
||
|
G5 |
3.00 |
3.1 |
3.10 |
3 |
34 |
34.1 |
33.9 |
34.9 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
3.84 |
3.8 |
5.2 |
4.91 |
42 |
41.7 |
42.3 |
42 |
|
|
G2 |
4.04 |
3.94 |
4.8 |
4.6 |
37.43 |
37.3 |
37.5 |
38.1 |
||
|
G3 |
2.8 |
2.9 |
2.72 |
2.8 |
35.2 |
35 |
35.7 |
36.1 |
||
|
G4 |
2.91 |
2.9 |
2.74 |
2.69 |
34.6 |
35.1 |
35.16 |
35.21 |
||
|
G5 |
3.3 |
3.4 |
3.10 |
2.9 |
34.7 |
35 |
34.3 |
34 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
4.10 |
3.9 |
5.20 |
5 |
46.2 |
46.1 |
47 |
46.79 |
|
|
G2 |
4.33 |
4.13 |
4.73 |
4.57 |
43 |
43.1 |
43.5 |
42.15 |
||
|
G3 |
3.00 |
3.1 |
2.6 |
2.7 |
38.4 |
37.9 |
38 |
37.9 |
||
|
G4 |
3.3 |
3.26 |
3.1 |
2.91 |
37.6 |
36.96 |
36.92 |
37.2 |
||
|
G5 |
3.5 |
3.4 |
3.2 |
2.92 |
39 |
38.9 |
38.98 |
39 |
||
|
D2 |
S1 |
G1 |
3.5 |
3.51 |
4.10 |
4.2 |
37.81 |
37.95 |
39 |
38.9 |
|
G2 |
4.10 |
4 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
36.1 |
36.3 |
35.2 |
35.02 |
||
|
G3 |
2.80 |
2.9 |
2.65 |
2.71 |
33.76 |
33.68 |
34.7 |
33.97 |
||
|
G4 |
2.80 |
2.78 |
2.67 |
2.71 |
32.3 |
32.42 |
32.3 |
32.33 |
||
|
G5 |
2.90 |
2.87 |
2.93 |
3.3 |
34.1 |
34 |
34.2 |
33.2 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
3.78 |
3.71 |
5.2 |
4.92 |
42.2 |
42 |
42 |
41.92 |
|
|
G2 |
3.97 |
4.1 |
4.80 |
4.65 |
37.61 |
36.96 |
37.2 |
36.97 |
||
|
G3 |
2.83 |
2.8 |
2.72 |
2.69 |
34.8 |
35.2 |
36.1 |
34.8 |
||
|
G4 |
2.92 |
2.9 |
2.74 |
2.69 |
35 |
35.4 |
34.91 |
35.01 |
||
|
G5 |
3.23 |
3.3 |
3.00 |
2.9 |
35 |
35 |
34.1 |
34.8 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
4.00 |
4.3 |
5.2 |
4.89 |
45.2 |
44.92 |
45.9 |
46.1 |
|
|
G2 |
4.40 |
4.2 |
4.73 |
4.7 |
42.7 |
43 |
43.7 |
44.2 |
||
|
G3 |
3.10 |
3 |
2.6 |
2.5 |
37.91 |
38.1 |
37.87 |
38.7 |
||
|
G4 |
3.24 |
3.26 |
3.1 |
2.91 |
37.4 |
37.2 |
37.2 |
36.82 |
||
|
G5 |
3.60 |
3.8 |
3.1 |
3 |
38.7 |
37.4 |
39.3 |
38.93 |
||
|
LSD |
0.506 |
0.190 |
0.327 |
0.098 |
0.544 |
0.269 |
0.637 |
0.073 |
||
For Assiut region, (D1×S3×G1& D2×S2×G1& D1×S2×G1) were the best interactions without any significant between them in both seasons as well as D2×S3×G1 in the 1st one. While, the lowest interactive effect was D2×S3×G3 for number of branches in both seasons. Respecting Number of leaves per plant, the highest number belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of D1×S3×G1 , i.e., new line G1 sown on September 15 under wider plant spacing (S3) in both Qena and Assiut regions at both seasons. The lowest number belonged to G4 in both sowing dates of September or October 15 under narrow spacing of S1 (Table 9) in both seasons and regions.
|
REFERENCES
Abdou, A.A. ; M.F. Mohamed and N.M. Kandeel (1999).Breeding implications on cultivar selection in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) Towards enhancing earliness and pod-yield. Assiut J. Agric. Sci., 30 (3): 117-132.
Agajie, M. (2018). Effect of Spacing on Yield Components and Yield of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) at Assosa, Western Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; 7(2): 39-51.
Al-Abdul-Salam, M. A. and K. S. Abdul-Salam (1995).Effect of plant density and certain pesticides on growth, yield and rhizobial nodulation of faba bean. King Saudi University, Agricultural Science Journal, 7 (2): 249-257.
Amer, M. I.; M. A. El-Borai and M. M. Radi (1992).Response of 3 faba bean cultivars to three sowing dates under different plant densities in North Delta. J. Agric. Res., Fac. Agric. Tanta Univ., 18(4): 591-599.
Arisha, H. M. (1982). Comparative study of varieties and fertilization on the productivity of pea M. Sc. Thesis, Fac. Agric. Zagazig Univ., Egypt.
Aydogdu, L. and E. Acikgoz (1995).Effect of seeding rate on seed and hay yield in common vetch (Vicia sativa L.).Agronomy and Crop Science Journal, 174: 181-187.
Baghdady, G.A. ; G.A. Zayed ; H.A.O. Ali and A.M. Damarany (2015).Pedigree selection for earliness and yield in pea (Pisum sativum L.) Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 30(1): 24-33.
Bakry, B.A. ; T.A. Elewa ; M.F. El Karamany ; M.S. Zeidan and M.M. Tawfik (2011). Effect of row spacing on yield and its components of some faba bean varieties under newly reclaimed sandy soil condition. World J. Agric. Sci., 7(1): 68-72.
Barrett M. and W.W. Witt (1987). Alternative pest management practices. In: Helsel Z R (ed) Energy in Plant Nutrition and Pest Control., Vol. 2, pp.197-234 Elsevier Press, Netherlands
El-Dakkak, A.A.A. (2005). Estimation of the components of the genetic variation using triple test cross analysis in peas (Pisum sativum L.) under Upper Egypt conditions. Ph.D. Thesis, Assiut University., pp146.
El-Dakkak, A.A.A. ; G.A. Zayed and M.A.H. Abd El-Hady (2014). Improving productivity and earliness for pea by selection under Sohag conditions. Egypt J. Appl. Sci., 29(11): 523-533.
|
El-Dakkak,A.A.A.; G.A.Zayed ; M.A.H.AbdEl-HadyandA.H. Hussein (2015a). Development of new promising pea lines (Pisum sativum L.). Egypt . J. of Appl. Sci., 30 (7): 455-465.
El-Dakkak, A.A.A. ; A.H. Hussein and A.M.A. Rashwan (2015b). Phenotypic stability analysis in some new lines of pea under variable location conditions. Egypt J. plant Breed., 19(4):1199-1206.
Farag, S. A. and H. A. El-Shamm (1994).Effect of irrigation intervals and plant distances on the growth and seed yield of broad bean plants. Annual Agricultural Science, Moshtohor, 32(4): 2071-2081.
Gomez K.A. and A.A. Gomez (1984).Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research.2nd Ed. John Wiely & Sons. New-York. USA .
Helmy M. M. (2008). Water requirement of some pea cultivars planted at different sowing dates under drip irrigation system. M. Sci Thesis, Fac. Agric., Mansoura University.
Idris A. L. Y. (2008). Effect of seed size and plant spacing on yield and yield components of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Research Journal of Agriculture Biological Science, 4(2): 146-148.
Khalil, S.K. ; A. Wahab ; A. Rehman ; F. Muhammad ; S. Wahab ; A.Z. Khan ; M. Zubair ; M.K. Shah ; I.H. Khalil and R. Amin (2010). Density and planting date influence phonological development assimilate partitioning and dry matter production of faba bean. Pak.J.Bot., 42(6): 3831-3838.
Knott, C. M. and S. J.Belcher (1998) Optimum sowing date and plant populations for winter peas (Pisum sativum, L.) . J. of Agric. Sci., 131 (4): 449 – 454 .
Loss, S. ; M.K.L. Siddique and A. Crombie (1998). Response of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) to sowing rate in southwestern Australia, II: Canopy development, radiation absorption and dry matter partitioning. Australian Agriculture Research Journal, 49(6): 999-1008.
Mansour, N. T. S. (2006). Response Of Pea Plants To Biofertilization And Plant Density With Different Sowing Dates Under Sandy Soil Conditions. Ph.D. Thesis,. Fac. of Agric. Suez Canal University.
|
McDonald G.K., K. L.Hollaway, and L. McMurray (2007). Increasing plant density improves weed competition in lentils (Lens culinaris). Aust J Exp Agric. 47: 48-56
Mehmet, O. Z. (2008). Nitrogen rate and plant population effects on yield and yield components in soybean. African Biotechnology Journal, 7(24): 4464-4470.
Mohamed, H. (2001). The effect of planting date, density and cultivar on productivity and quality of pole beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown in cold plastic house.Egyptian Journal of Horticulture. National Information and Documentation Centre (NIDOC), 28: 2, 197-206. 14.
Muhammad, I. ; N. Ara and A. Rashid (2001). Response of different pea cultivars to various planting dates under the agroclimatic conditions of Swat. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture. NWFP Agricultural University, Peshawar, Pakistan., 17 (2): 189-194.
Oad, F.C. ; M.A. Samo ; S.M. Qayylan and N.L. Oad (2002). Inter and intra row spacing effect on the growth, seed yield and oil continent of safflower. Asian Plant Science Journal, 1: 18-19.
Shahein, A.H. ; E.M.R Agwah and H.A. El-Shamma (1995). Effect of plan density as well as nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer rate on growth green pods and dry seed yield and quantity of broad bean. Moshtohor Annual Agricultural Science, 33(1): 371-88.
Shamsi, K. and S. Kobraee(2009). Effect of plant density on the growth, yield and yield components of three soybean varieties under climatic conditions of Kermanshah, Iran. Animal and Plant Sciences Journal, 2(2): 96 - 99.
Shokr. M. M. B (2000). Response of pea (Pisum sativum) to planting dates and N P K fertilizing. Ph.D. Thesis,. Fac. of Agric. Mansuora Univ.
Silva F. A. S. and C. A. V. Azevedo (2016a).Comparison of means of agricultural experimentation data through different tests using the software Assistat. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 11(37), pp. 3527-3531.
Silva F. A. S. and C. A. V. Azevedo (2016b).The Assistat Software Version 7.7 and its use in the analysis of experimental data. Afr. J. Agric. Res., 11(39): 3733-3740.
Sirwaiya, S. and S.S. Kushwah (2018).Assessment of Different Sowing Dates and Varieties on Growth, Yield and Quality of Seed in Garden Pea (Pisum sativum L.). Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 7(3): 1387-1396.
Tuarira M. and M. Moses (2014).Effects of Plant Density and Planting Arrangement in Green Bean Seed Production. Journal of Global Innovative Agriculture and SC. Sciences., 2(4): 152-157.
|
Turk, M.A. ; A.M. Tawaha and M.K.J. El-Shatnawi (2003). Response of lentil (Lens Culinaris Medk) to plant density, sowing date, phosphorus fertilization and ethephon application in the absence of moisture stress. Agriculture Crop Science Journal, 189: 1-6.
Yarnell, S. H. (1962). Cytogenetics of the vegetable crops. III. Legumes, A. Garden pea (Pisum sativum, L.) Botanical Review , 28 (4): 465-537 (C. A. Computer search).
Zayed, G.A. (1998). Inheritance of some quantitative characters in peas. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 13 (3): 242-253.
Zayed, G.A. and F.S. Faris (1998). Estimates of heterosis and relative potence of gene set in pea (Pisum sativum L.) at Upper Egypt. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci.; 13(6): 187-200.
Zayed, G. A. and A. A. Rayan (1998).Response of some cowpea cultivars to different irregation regimes in relation to drought tolerance indices. J. Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ., 23(11):5051- 5065.
Zayed, G.A.; F.S. Faris and A.H. Amer (1999a).Performance of some pea cultivars under the conditions of Upper Egypt. Egypt. J. Agric. Res., 77(4): 1687-1706.
Zayed, G.A.; A.H. Amer and Horeya M. Hassan (1999b).Combining ability and path coefficient analysis in pea under Southern Egypt conditions.Zagazig. J. Agric. Res., 26 (3A): 611-621.
Zayed, G.A. ; Fawzia A. Helal and S.T. Farag (2005).The genetic performance of some continuously variable characteristics of pea under different locations. Annals Agric. Sci., Moshtohor, 43: 337-346.
Zayed G.A.; M.N. M. Hasan; Y.Y. Abd El-Aty and Hala S. Abd El-Lah (2010). Graphical reading for gene action in Pisum sativum L. Minia 2nd Conf. Agric.Environ. Sci.: Agriculture and Development Scopes, 22-24 March 2010, Minia Univ., Egypt.
استجابة صفات النمو الخضری للبسلة لمسافات ومواعید
الزراعة والأصناف فى مناطق مختلفة
ممدوح جابر زین الدین*، جمال ابوسته زاید*** ، جمال حسین عبد الرحیم*, ماهر امین والی**
*قسم البساتین کلیة الزراعة بأسیوط - جامعة الأزهر
** قسم البساتین کلیة الزراعة القاهرة - جامعة الأزهر
***اقسام بحوثالخضر– معهد بحوث البساتین – مرکز البحوث الزراعیة - الجیزة
أجریت هذه الدراسة خلال موسمی 2017/2018 و 2018/2019 فی موقعین مختلفین بمحافظات صعید مصر. واستخدم فیها 5 تراکیب وراثیة مختلفة، ومیعادین زراعة و 3 مسافات (5، 15، 20 سم) بین النباتات
|
اظهرت النتائج أن زراعة البسلة فی الخامس عشر من سبتمبر (D1) أعطت القیم بشکل عام مساویة أو أفضل من تاریخ زراعة أکتوبر (D2) لمعظم صفات النمو الخضری فی جمیع المواسم والمواقع.
الإزهار المبکر کان فی مسافات الزراعة الأوسع (S3) فی قنا اکثر تبکیرا من التباعد الضیق )الکثافة النباتیة الاعلى) لنباتات البسلة والتی اظهرت تبکیرا فی أسیوط. لذلک یبدو أن تأثیر عدد الایام للازهاریختلف من محصول إلى آخر وکذلک الظروف البیئیة السائدة التی تزرع فیها المحاصیل.
اظهر الصنف G3) ) الإزهار فی 35 یومًا فی قنا ، تلیها التراکیب الوراثیةG1, G4 ؛ کما اظهرت باقى التراکیب الوراثیة المتبقیة تأخیرا فی الإزهار فی کل من مواسمقنا.
کان التفاعل بینمواعید الزراعة والتراکیب الوراثیة معنویا لعدد الأیام إلى 50٪ من الإزهار وارتفاع النبات وعدد الفروع (کلا الموسمین) فی منطقتی قنا وأسیوط وکذلک عدد الأوراق فی کلا الموسمین فی قنا والموسم الثانی فقط فی منطقة أسیوط.
من الواضح من البیانات أن تأثیرات تفاعل D × S × G کانت کبیرة فی أیام الإزهار وارتفاع النبات والفروع / النبات وعدد الأوراق / النبات فی کل من المناطق والمواسم ، باستثناء الموسم الأول من منطقة قنا لأیام الإزهار.
بشکل عام ، أفضل تفاعل فی الأیام مع الإزهار (D1 × S3 × G3 و D1 × S1 × G3) فى منطقة قنا. بینما کانت أسیوط (D1 × S1 × G3 و D2 × S3 × G3) فی الموسم الأول و (D1 × S3 × G3) فی الموسم الثانی.
|
RESPONSE OF PEA VEGETATIVE GROWTH TRAITS TO PLANTINGSPACES, SOWING DATE, AND GENOTYPES UNDER DIFFERENT LOCATIONS CONDITIONS
Zein El-Din* M. G. ; G. A. Zayed*** ; G. H. AbdEl-Raheem*
and M. A. Wally*
*Horticulture (Vegetable) Dep., Assiut Agric. Fac., Al-Azhar University
**Horticulture (Vegetable) Dep., Cairo Agric. Fac., Al-Azhar University
***Vegetable Dep., Horticulture Res. Institute, Agric. Res. Centre, Giza
ABSTRACT
Field experiments were conducted during 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 seasons, in two locations of Upper Egypt Governorates. The investigation includes 30 treatments, which were the combination between 5 genotypes, 2 sowing dates and 3 plant spacing treatments. It is obvious from results that sowing pea on 15th September (D1) generally gave the Values significantly equal or better than the October sowing date (D2) for most the vegetative growth traits in all seasons and locations. The plants attained 50% flowering earlier in the wider spacing (S3) in Qena, than the narrower spacing (S1, denser plant population) of pea plants which hastened the days to flowering in Assiut. Therefore, it seemed that the influence of plant population on days to flower initiation varies from crop to crop as well as the prevailing environmental conditions under which the crops are grown. Genotypes G3 attained 50% flowering at 35 days in Qena followed by genotypes G1 and G4; the remaining genotypes were late in flowering in both seasons of this location. Significant interaction effects of sowing dates on the performance of studied genotypes were found for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height and number of branches (both seasons) in both Qena and Assiut regions as well as number of leaves at both seasons in Qena and only 2nd one in Assiut region. It is clearly from the data that the effects of the D×S×G interaction was significant in days to flowering, plant height, branches/plant and number of leaves/plant in both regions and seasons, except in the 1st season of Qena region for days to flowering. In general, the best interaction in days to flowering (D1×S3×G3& D1×S1×G3) inQena region. While, Assiut region, (D1×S1×G3& D2×S3×G3) in the 1st season and (D1×S3×G3) in the 2nd one.
INTRODUCTION
Peas (Pisum sativum L.) is the most important legume crop in Egypt, since it is a basic staple and an important source of protein to rural and urban communities. Ministry of Agriculture and the Agricultural Researches Center developed adaptation measures to cope with the negative impacts, such as: Changing sowing dates for each crop to cope with warmer climatic conditions as well as enhance programs of producing plants varieties and add new plant species together with programs to preserve biodiversity systems. The peas produced by these resource-poor farmers are more vulnerable to biotic and to abiotic stresses. As peas in Upper Egypt stabilize, greater production should come from higher yields. In an attempt to increase the yield and efficiency of producers, a couple cultivation practices were examined: planting date and plant spacing. Thus, a number of factors; cultivars, plant density, sowing time, nutrients and water management practices are involved in pea yield. Therefore, a better crop growth ensures with the appropriate coordination of different agronomic practices and judicious use of various inputs and among these, planting date is important to explore the potential of a cultivar in the region (Knott and Belcher 1998). The cultivar selection is also a key management component in any system even more critical in plant spacing and sowing date for pea production, although high yield potential is a predominant consideration however, earliness, vegetative growth and quality characteristics are also major factor to consider. Many Egyptian authors, i.e.,Amer et al. (1992), Zayed (1998), Zayed and Faris (1998), Zayed and Rayan (1998), Abdou et al. (1999), Zayed et al (1999a&b), El-Dakkak (2005), Zayed et al. (2005), Zayed et al. (2010), El-Dakkak et al. (2014), Baghdady et al. (2015) and El-Dakkak et al. (2015a&b) studied the genetics performance of pea under Upper Egypt conditions. On the other hand, Agronomists have also developed new cultivation practices adapted to accelerate the crop cycle, while reducing the vegetative vigor, thus, agronomic management does not promote excessive crop growth that delay maturity. The trend in optimum crop production is for early sowing to optimise yield (Barrett and Witt, 1987, McDonald et al., 2007) because yield is increased when crops have a longer growing season resulting in increased intercepted radiation. Therefore, optimum sowing date for a cultivar in a region is considered to be the most important manageable factor in pea crop. The aim of this research was to address differences in reported planting date yield responses, and to see if plant spacing interacts with planting date. Generally the study intended to evaluate growth performance of some pea's genotypes in some different environments in two different locations in Upper Egypt.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Five peas genotypes obtained from Horticulture Research Institute, ARC, Giza, Egypt were used. The peas were both New lines Sh/H1/2008 (G1) and Sh/L18/2009 (G2), (El-Dakkak et al. (2015b); Master-B (G3, the old local cv.) and both Entsar-1 (G4) and Entsar-2 (G5). Field experiments were conducted for two seasons, 2017/2018 and 2018/2019, in two locations of Upper Egypt Governorates. Locations included two private farms in both Qift (a city found in Qena governorate, Egypt. It is located 26.16 latitude and 32.73 longitude and it is situated at elevation 80 meters above sea level) and Assiut (a city found in Assiut governorate, Egypt. It is located 27° 10' 48.4824'' N and 31° 11' 21.4188'' E. and it is situated at elevation 56 meters above sea level). The physical and chemical analysis of soils are shown in Table (1).
|
Table (1) some initial physical and chemical soil properties of the studied soil in Qena (L1) and Assiut (L2) locations.
|
Environments |
L1 |
L2 |
||||
|
1st year |
2nd year |
1st year |
2nd year |
|||
|
Physical properties |
Organic matter (%) |
1.5 |
1.8 |
1.88 |
1.94 |
|
|
Textural class |
Clay loam |
Clay loam |
Silt loam |
Silt loam |
||
|
Chemical properties |
|
|
||||
|
pH |
7.89 |
7.68 |
8.31 |
8.28 |
||
|
Electric conductivity E.C. (ds/m) |
0.7 |
0.5 |
0.187 |
0.336 |
||
|
CaCO3 |
2.18 |
2.2 |
0.64 |
0.695 |
||
|
CEC (meq/100g) soil |
37.62 |
29.86 |
8.65 |
13.90 |
||
|
Soluble ions, meq / L |
Soluble anions, meq / L |
HCO3- |
1.3 |
1.4 |
2.54 |
5.87 |
|
CL- |
2.48 |
2.36 |
5.75 |
10.825 |
||
|
SO4-2 |
7.9 |
7.2 |
1.17 |
1.325 |
||
|
Soluble cations, meq / L |
Ca+2 |
2.9 |
2.6 |
2.77 |
3.945 |
|
|
K+ |
1.09 |
1.15 |
1.32 |
2.82 |
||
|
Na+ |
9.93 |
8.96 |
12.72 |
21.07 |
||
The experimental design was a randomized complete block design (RCBD), with three replications at each location. This investigation includes 30 treatments, which were the combination between 5 genotypes, 2 sowing dates and 3 plant spacing treatments, these treatments were arranged in split – split plot design with three replicates in both seasons. Sowing date treatments were assigned randomly in the main plots, while sub plots were devoted to genotypes. Moreover, the plant spacing treatments were allotted in the sub-sub plots. The two sowing dates were set as weeklong target windows of 7 to 14 September and 15 to 22 October. The three plant spacings compared were 5, 15 and 20 cm. The plots were 3.0 meters wide which consisted of five rows for the 60 cm row spacing. The plots were a minimum of 5.0 meters long.The normal agricultural practices of pea production were followed according to the recommendations of Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture.
Data Collected: Flowering date (measured as the number of days after planting to thetime when 50% of the plants had one or more flowers), Plant height (from the base to the tip of the main shoot), Number of leaves/plant and Number of branches/plant.
|
Data analysis: The data collected were analyzed using ASSISTAT Version 7.7 en (2017), UFCG-Brazil (Silva and Azevedo 2016 a&b) computer program package. The data were first subjected to analysis of variance for each location using the procedure illustrated by Gomez and Gomez (1984) for a complete randomized block design (CRBD). A combined analysis of variance was computed using the same software as for the single site analysis (ASSISTAT) in order to study the interaction effects
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Sowing dates:
In both regions, the main effect of sowing dates (Tables 2&3) was significant in both regions and seasons for days to 50% flowering, plant height in the 1st season of Qena and both plant height and number of leaves in the 2nd season of Assiut region in which D1 (15th September) resulted the best value for the traits. Days to flowering was significantly decreased from (45.8 & 45.82) in the 2nd date (15th October) to (44.9 &45.1) days in Qena region at the earlier sowing (15th September) and from (46.66 & 46.74) to (46.32 &46.12) days in Assiut one in the 1st and 2nd season, respectively.
Table (2):Flowering dates and plant height of pea plants as affected by sowing date, plant spacing and genotypes during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||
|
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
|
Sowing dates: |
||||||||
|
D1 |
44.9 |
45.1 |
46.32 |
46.12 |
56.96 |
56.97 |
59.17 |
59.31 |
|
D2 |
45.8 |
45.82 |
46.66 |
46.74 |
56.83 |
56.89 |
59.08 |
59.15 |
|
LSD |
0.547 |
0.116 |
0.080 |
0.068 |
0.111 |
NS |
NS |
0.025 |
|
Plant spacing: |
||||||||
|
S1 |
46.19 |
46.16 |
45.37 |
45.03 |
60.325 |
60.36 |
62.92 |
63.09 |
|
S2 |
45.95 |
45.99 |
46.60 |
46.73 |
56.14 |
56.24 |
59.85 |
59.74 |
|
S3 |
43.95 |
44.25 |
47.53 |
47.54 |
54.22 |
54.19 |
54.61 |
54.87 |
|
LSD |
0.514 |
0.095 |
0.155 |
0.051 |
0.090 |
0.255 |
0.121 |
0.026 |
|
Genotypes: |
||||||||
|
G1 |
38.25 |
38.25 |
37.9 |
37.6 |
74.915 |
74.96 |
75.37 |
75.39 |
|
G2 |
54.1 |
54.3 |
60.5 |
60.5 |
59.41 |
59.4 |
58.71 |
58.63 |
|
G3 |
35.5 |
35.75 |
36.25 |
36.35 |
47.19 |
47.27 |
50.15 |
50.29 |
|
G4 |
38.9 |
39.11 |
39.05 |
39.05 |
41.90 |
41.88 |
45.87 |
46.04 |
|
G5 |
60 |
59.9 |
58.75 |
58.65 |
61.06 |
61.14 |
65.54 |
65.83 |
|
LSD |
0.477 |
0.101 |
0.249 |
0.075 |
0.116 |
0.252 |
0.155 |
0.022 |
|
Table (3): Number of both branches and leaves per pea plants as affected by sowing date, plant spacing and genotypes during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||
|
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
|
Sowing dates: |
||||||||
|
D1 |
3.40 |
3.41 |
3.63 |
3.57 |
37.38 |
37.32 |
37.56 |
37.61 |
|
D2 |
3.41 |
3.43 |
3.58 |
3.54 |
37.37 |
37.3 |
37.58 |
37.44 |
|
LSD |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
0.029 |
|
Plant spacing: |
||||||||
|
S1 |
3.203 |
3.252 |
3.356 |
3.479 |
34.665 |
34.715 |
34.95 |
34.915 |
|
S2 |
3.362 |
3.374 |
3.702 |
3.575 |
36.855 |
36.865 |
36.925 |
36.89 |
|
S3 |
3.657 |
3.634 |
3.756 |
3.61 |
40.61 |
40.355 |
40.835 |
40.78 |
|
LSD |
0.323 |
0.061 |
0.160 |
0.031 |
0.349 |
0.163 |
0.309 |
0.023 |
|
Genotypes: |
||||||||
|
G1 |
3.792 |
3.785 |
4.867 |
4.755 |
41.845 |
41.775 |
42.41 |
42.28 |
|
G2 |
4.140 |
4.08 |
4.578 |
4.535 |
38.66 |
38.64 |
38.785 |
38.775 |
|
G3 |
2.855 |
2.935 |
2.665 |
2.715 |
35.65 |
35.545 |
36.11 |
35.975 |
|
G4 |
2.995 |
2.995 |
2.842 |
2.765 |
34.815 |
34.865 |
34.745 |
34.81 |
|
G5 |
3.255 |
3.31 |
3.072 |
3.005 |
35.915 |
35.735 |
35.8 |
35.805 |
|
LSD |
0.207 |
0.078 |
0.1336 |
0.040 |
0.222 |
0.110 |
0.260 |
0.030 |
It is obvious from data that sowing pea on 15th September (1st sowing date) generally gave the Values significantly equal or better than the 2nd sowing date for most the vegetative growth traits in all seasons and locations.
These results are in agreement with those reported by Muhammad et al. (2001) and Sirwaiya and Kushwah (2018) and don’t, relatively, agree with Shokr (2000) and Mansour (2006). They concluded that plant height, number of leaves and branches per plant of pea plants were increased with sowing seeds at October.
Intra-row spacing:
The main effect of plant spacing was significant on the all studied vegetative growth traits in both seasons (Tables 2&3). Days to flowering was significantly decreased from (45.95 & 45.99 days) to (43.95 & 44.25 days) as the intra-row spacing increased from 15cm (S2) to 20cm (S3).
In contrast of Qena region, Days to flowering in Assiut region was significantly increased from (45.37 & 45.03 days) to (46.60 & 46.73 days) as the intra-row spacing increased from 5cm (S1) to 15 cm (S2) and from (46.60 & 46.73 days) to (47.53 & 47.54 days) with increasing plant spacing from 15 cm (S2) to 20 cm (S3). Turk et al, (2003) and Idris (2008) in common bean and Oad et al., (2002) in safflower found no significant effect of plant population on days to flowering.
|
Plant height was significantly decreased as the intra-row spacing increased from 5 cm(S1) to 15 cm(S2) to 20 cm(S3) resulted in significantly shortest plants in the wider plant spacing (20 cm). While, the tallest plant achieved with S1 plant spacing. On the other hand, both number of branches/plant and leaves/plant were in reverse trend of plant height, in both Qena and Assiut regions, both traits was significantly increased as the intra-row spacing increased from S1 to (S2) to (S3). It is obvious from such results that the plants attained 50% flowering earlier in the wider spacing in Qena, than the narrower spacing (denser plant population) of pea plants which hastened the days to flowering in Assiut. Therefore, it seemed that the influence of plant population on days to flower initiation varies from crop to crop as well as the prevailing environmental conditions under which the crops are grown. These results might be due to the fact that as the spacing among plants decreased the interplant competition for light increased while sparsely populated plants intercepted sufficient sunlight that enhanced the lateral growth and resulting in less number of days to flower as pea needs direct sunlight coverage for its various physiological processes (Agajie, 2018). In agreement to this, the wide plant spacing reduced number of days to flower in broad bean than narrow plant spacing (Farag and El-Shamm, 1994). Shamsi and Kobraee(2009) and Tuarira and Moses (2014) stated that plant height was taller in higher plant population (narrow spacing) treatments due to more competition for light, while Turk et al., (2003) found that light distribution was normal at wider spacing. In contrast with this, plant height was not affected by increasing plant density of faba bean reported by Shahein et al., (1995). However, the increased number of both branches and leaves under lower plant densities (wider spacing) could be attributed to more sunlight interception for photosynthesis, which may have resulted in production of more assimilate for partitioning towards the development of more branches (Mehmet, 2008). These results are in agreement with the finding reported by Al-Abdul-Salam and Abdul-Salam (1995), Aydogdu and Acikgoz (1995) and Loss et al., (1998) in Viciasp.
Performance of genotypes:
Tables (2&3) show performance of genotypes under Qena and Assiut conditions. The analysis of variance revealed highly significant difference for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height, number of branches and number of leaves among genotypes. Genotypes G3 attained 50% flowering at 35 days in Qena followed by genotypes G1 and G4; the remaining genotypes were late in flowering in both seasons of this location. On the other hand, the genotypes performance in Assiut region was true as in Qena one. Data in Tables (2&3) indicate that the highest values of plant height and number of leaves were recorded with genotype G1 at the two regions (Qena and Assiut) in both seasons, while the highest one of branches per plant was recorded with G2 followed by G1 in Qena and G1 followed by G2 in Assiut region in both seasons. The difference between cultivars may be due to there variations in nutrient use efficiency habits. Another explanation is that the different behavior observed in these characters might reflect the differential expressivity of certain genes during ontogenetic processes, which may interact with the developmental and environmental factors in relation to water relationships, and indicated that genes responsible for the biosynthesis of such characters might be varied in their action (Yarnell, 1962, Arisha, 1982 and Helmy, 2008 on pea). The obtained results agree with those reported by Shokr (2000) and Muhammad et al. (2001)on pea plants.
|
Effect of interactions:
Sowing dates and genotypes (D×G):
Results in Table (4) show the effect of interaction between sowing dates and genotypes on vegetative characters of pea plants.
Significant interaction effects of sowing dates on the performance of studied genotypes viz., ‘G1, G2, G3, G4 and G5’ were found for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height and number of branches (both seasons) in both Qena and Assiut regions as well as number of leaves at both seasons in Qena and only 2nd one in Assiut region (Table 4).
For mean performance, G3 was significantly earlier in flowering than the other genotypes by about 1-24 days within both D1 and D2 sowing dates. All studied genotypes flowered earlier at D1 (15th September) than the other sowing date (15th October) by about 1-3 days in both regions. For Plant height, (G1& G3) and (G1 & G5) in Qena and Assiut, respectively at both season as well as G2& G4 (1st and 2nd season, respectively) in Qena and G5 (2nd season) in Assiut (2nd season), respectively exhibited significantly comparable or decreasing Plant height at D2 (15th October) sowing date.
Accordingly, Plant height of all genotypes gradually increased with early sowing date (15th September) except G2 and G3 in the 2nd season of Qena and Assiut, respectively and G4 in the 1st season of Assiut region increased with D2 (15th October) sowing date (exhibited reverse trend). It is noticeable that the maturity rate of the early and the late sowings run almost parallel to each other and the greater final height of the early crop was due to its larger growing period.
|
Table (4): Vegetative characters of pea plants as affected by the dual interaction (D×G) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
||||||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||||||
|
Sowing dates |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|||
|
D1 |
G1 |
37.1 |
37.2 |
37.8 |
37 |
75.26 |
75.25 |
75.37 |
75.53 |
|||
|
G2 |
54.1 |
54.5 |
60.6 |
60.3 |
59.42 |
59.22 |
58.82 |
58.61 |
||||
|
G3 |
35 |
35.4 |
36.1 |
36.3 |
47.2 |
47.34 |
50.12 |
50.24 |
||||
|
G4 |
38.6 |
38.71 |
38.7 |
38.7 |
41.89 |
41.76 |
45.74 |
46.11 |
||||
|
G5 |
59.6 |
59.69 |
58.4 |
58.3 |
61.02 |
61.28 |
65.81 |
66.07 |
||||
|
D2 |
G1 |
39.4 |
39.3 |
38 |
38.2 |
74.57 |
74.67 |
75.36 |
75.25 |
|||
|
G2 |
54.1 |
54.1 |
60.4 |
60.7 |
59.4 |
59.58 |
58.6 |
58.64 |
||||
|
G3 |
36 |
36.1 |
36.4 |
36.4 |
47.18 |
47.19 |
50.17 |
50.34 |
||||
|
G4 |
39.2 |
39.5 |
39.4 |
39.4 |
41.9 |
42 |
46 |
45.97 |
||||
|
G5 |
60.4 |
60.1 |
59.1 |
59 |
61.1 |
61 |
65.27 |
65.58 |
||||
|
LSD |
0.675 |
0.143 |
0.352 |
0.106 |
0.164 |
0.356 |
0.220 |
0.032 |
||||
|
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
|||||||||||
|
D1 |
G1 |
3.82 |
3.73 |
4.90 |
4.84 |
41.95 |
41.93 |
42.52 |
42.25 |
|||
|
G2 |
4.12 |
4.06 |
4.58 |
4.52 |
38.52 |
38.53 |
38.87 |
38.82 |
||||
|
G3 |
2.80 |
2.97 |
2.67 |
2.8 |
35.81 |
35.43 |
36 |
36.13 |
||||
|
G4 |
3.00 |
3.01 |
2.85 |
2.76 |
34.73 |
34.72 |
34.69 |
34.9 |
||||
|
G5 |
3.27 |
3.3 |
3.13 |
2.94 |
35.9 |
36 |
35.73 |
35.97 |
||||
|
D2 |
G1 |
3.76 |
3.84 |
4.83 |
4.67 |
41.74 |
41.62 |
42.3 |
42.31 |
|||
|
G2 |
4.16 |
4.1 |
4.58 |
4.55 |
38.8 |
38.75 |
38.7 |
38.73 |
||||
|
G3 |
2.91 |
2.9 |
2.66 |
2.63 |
35.49 |
35.66 |
36.22 |
35.82 |
||||
|
G4 |
2.99 |
2.98 |
2.84 |
2.77 |
34.9 |
35.01 |
34.8 |
34.72 |
||||
|
G5 |
3.24 |
3.32 |
3.01 |
3.07 |
35.93 |
35.47 |
35.87 |
35.64 |
||||
|
LSD |
0.292 |
0.110 |
0.189 |
0.056 |
0.314 |
0.155 |
NS |
0.042 |
||||
Similarly, both number of branches and leaves per plant of all genotypes (Table 4) significantly increased with early sowing date (15th September) except the 2nd season of G1 for number of branches and (G2, G3 and G4) for number of leaves/plant in Qena region as well as both G1 and G5 for number of leaves and branches/plant, respectively in Assiut region. Early sowing on 15st September resulted in significantly maximum values in new line G1 for number of branches/plant and number of leaves in Assiut and Qena regions, respectively at both seasons as well as for number of leaves at 1st season in Assiut one. These results are in agreement with the results of Mohamed (2001), Khalil et al., 2010, and Sirwaiya and Kushwah (2018).
Sowing dates and plant spacing (D×S):
Results in Table (5) show the effect of interaction between sowing dates and plant spacing on vegetative characters of pea plants.
|
It is obvious from the results that sowing pea on 15th September in the wider spacing (S3) gave the earlier flowering in Qena region and in the narrow spacing (S1) in Assiut at both seasons.
Table (5): Vegetative characters of pea plants as affected by the dual interaction (D×S) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
|||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
|||||
|
Sowing dates |
Plant spacing |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
D1 |
S1 |
45.68 |
45.66 |
45.07 |
44.41 |
60.33 |
60.35 |
62.90 |
63.01 |
|
S2 |
45.49 |
45.59 |
46.39 |
46.5 |
56.32 |
56.36 |
59.85 |
59.82 |
|
|
S3 |
43.57 |
44.08 |
47.52 |
47.48 |
54.22 |
54.2 |
54.76 |
55.1 |
|
|
D2 |
S1 |
46.7 |
46.65 |
45.67 |
45.64 |
60.32 |
60.37 |
62.93 |
63.17 |
|
S2 |
46.4 |
46.40 |
46.8 |
46.96 |
55.96 |
56.12 |
59.84 |
59.66 |
|
|
S3 |
44.33 |
44.42 |
47.53 |
47.59 |
54.21 |
54.18 |
54.47 |
54.64 |
|
|
LSD |
NS |
0.134 |
0.219 |
0.072 |
0.128 |
NS |
0.171 |
0.037 |
|
|
|
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
|||||||
|
D1 |
S1 |
3.19 |
3.29 |
3.40 |
3.52 |
34.52 |
34.56 |
34.82 |
35.15 |
|
S2 |
3.38 |
3.39 |
3.71 |
3.58 |
36.79 |
36.82 |
36.99 |
37.08 |
|
|
S3 |
3.65 |
3.56 |
3.77 |
3.62 |
40.84 |
40.59 |
40.88 |
40.61 |
|
|
D2 |
S1 |
3.22 |
3.21 |
3.31 |
3.44 |
34.81 |
34.87 |
35.08 |
34.68 |
|
S2 |
3.35 |
3.36 |
3.69 |
3.57 |
36.92 |
36.91 |
36.86 |
36.7 |
|
|
S3 |
3.67 |
3.71 |
3.75 |
3.6 |
40.38 |
40.12 |
40.79 |
40.95 |
|
|
LSD |
NS |
0.086 |
0.226 |
0.044 |
0.494 |
0.230 |
NS |
0.033 |
|
On the contrary, the latest flowering belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of October 15 and both narrow (S1) and wide (S3) spacing in Qena and Assiut, respectively. Respecting plant height, the highest plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of October 15 and narrow spacing of S1 and the shortest plants belonged to the same sowing date of October 15 and wider spacing of S3 in both regions at both seasons. It is noticed that, no significant differences between D1× S1 and D2× S1 at both seasons in Qena and only 1st season in Assiut region as well as between D1× S3 and D2× S3 in Qena at both seasons for plant height. However, The highest number of branches/plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of D2 × S3 in Qena region and D1 × S3 in Assiut one (with no significant differences between D2 × S3 and D1 × S3 in Assiut) at both seasons and the lowest number belonged to sowing date of October 15 and narrow spacing of S1 (D2 × S1) in most environments. Moreover, The highest number of leaves/plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of sowing date of D1 × S3 in Qena region at both seasons and in Assiut at the 1st season. The lowest number belonged to sowing date of September 15 and narrow spacing of S1 (D1 × S1) in most environments.
|
Plant spacing and genotypes (S×G):
Results in Table (6) show the effect of interaction between plant spacing and genotypes on vegetative characters of pea plants. Significant interaction effects of plant spacing on the performance of studied genotypes were found for number of days to 50% flowering, plant height, number of branches and number of leaves/plant in both Qena and Assiut regions at both seasons.
Table (6): Vegetative characters of pea plants as affected by the dual interaction (S×G) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
|||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
|||||
|
Plant spacing |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
S1 |
G1 |
36.85 |
36.8 |
39 |
37.71 |
83.69 |
83.95 |
79.84 |
80.19 |
|
G2 |
58.52 |
58.45 |
59.7 |
59.49 |
61.64 |
61.455 |
59.7 |
59.42 |
|
|
G3 |
35.46 |
35.46 |
36.19 |
36 |
50.32 |
50.34 |
53.44 |
53.86 |
|
|
G4 |
40.08 |
39.96 |
37.6 |
37.35 |
42.69 |
42.85 |
49.74 |
50.19 |
|
|
G5 |
60.05 |
60.11 |
54.37 |
54.59 |
63.32 |
63.2 |
71.88 |
71.79 |
|
|
S2 |
G1 |
37.26 |
37.11 |
37.23 |
37.22 |
70.9 |
71.03 |
78.47 |
78.36 |
|
G2 |
58.17 |
57.77 |
56.53 |
57.07 |
59.64 |
59.73 |
60.48 |
60.35 |
|
|
G3 |
36 |
36.46 |
36.64 |
37.26 |
46.34 |
46.31 |
50.05 |
49.92 |
|
|
G4 |
39.24 |
39.79 |
40.82 |
40.62 |
42.85 |
42.93 |
44.98 |
44.93 |
|
|
G5 |
59.06 |
58.87 |
61.75 |
61.5 |
60.99 |
61.21 |
65.28 |
65.16 |
|
|
S3 |
G1 |
40.65 |
40.93 |
37.51 |
37.91 |
70.15 |
69.9 |
67.8 |
67.63 |
|
G2 |
45.67 |
46.71 |
65.35 |
65 |
56.96 |
57.02 |
55.95 |
56.1 |
|
|
G3 |
35.07 |
35.41 |
35.85 |
35.81 |
44.93 |
45.15 |
46.95 |
47.1 |
|
|
G4 |
37.38 |
37.53 |
38.75 |
39.15 |
40.15 |
39.87 |
42.9 |
43.01 |
|
|
G5 |
60.98 |
60.69 |
60.17 |
59.82 |
58.89 |
59.02 |
59.47 |
60.52 |
|
|
LSD |
0.826 |
0.175 |
0.431 |
0.129 |
0.200 |
0.437 |
0.269 |
0.039 |
|
|
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
||||||||
|
S1 |
G1 |
3.52 |
3.5 |
4.2 |
4.4 |
37.735 |
37.975 |
38.63 |
38.43 |
|
G2 |
4.05 |
4.05 |
4.21 |
4.35 |
35.61 |
35.75 |
35.41 |
35.61 |
|
|
G3 |
2.7 |
2.9 |
2.68 |
2.81 |
33.80 |
33.54 |
34.5 |
34.19 |
|
|
G4 |
2.8 |
2.83 |
2.69 |
2.7 |
32.15 |
32.26 |
32.15 |
32.32 |
|
|
G5 |
2.95 |
2.99 |
3.02 |
3.15 |
34.05 |
34.05 |
34.05 |
34.05 |
|
|
S2 |
G1 |
3.81 |
3.76 |
5.20 |
4.92 |
42.1 |
41.85 |
42.15 |
41.96 |
|
G2 |
4.01 |
4.02 |
4.80 |
4.63 |
37.52 |
37.13 |
37.35 |
37.54 |
|
|
G3 |
2.82 |
2.85 |
2.72 |
2.75 |
35 |
35.1 |
35.9 |
35.45 |
|
|
G4 |
2.92 |
2.9 |
2.74 |
2.69 |
34.8 |
35.25 |
35.035 |
35.11 |
|
|
G5 |
3.27 |
3.35 |
3.05 |
2.9 |
34.85 |
35.00 |
34.2 |
34.4 |
|
|
S3 |
G1 |
4.05 |
4.1 |
5.20 |
4.95 |
45.7 |
45.51 |
46.45 |
46.45 |
|
G2 |
4.37 |
4.17 |
4.73 |
4.64 |
42.85 |
43.05 |
43.6 |
43.18 |
|
|
G3 |
3.05 |
3.05 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
38.16 |
38 |
37.94 |
38.3 |
|
|
G4 |
3.27 |
3.26 |
3.1 |
2.91 |
37.5 |
37.08 |
37.06 |
37.01 |
|
|
G5 |
3.55 |
3.6 |
3.15 |
2.96 |
38.85 |
38.15 |
39.14 |
38.97 |
|
|
LSD |
0.358 |
0.135 |
0.232 |
0.069 |
0.384 |
0.190 |
0.451 |
0.052 |
|
Table (7) shows number of early days for each genotype flowered earlier than others between plants spacing and number of days for G3 genotype flowered earlier than others within specific plant spacing during two seasons in both locations. In Qena region, it was observed that (G1), (G5) and (G2& G3 & G4) genotypes flowered earlier under narrow (S1), medium (S2) and wider (S3) spacing, respectively than other plant spacing by about (1-13) days (Tables 6&7). In Assiut region, (G4& G5), (G1 & G2) and (G3) genotypes flowered earlier under narrow (S1), medium (S2) and wider (S3) spacing, respectively than other plant spacing by about (1-9) days (Tables 6&7).
|
Table (7): Number of early days between and within plant spacing in which the genotype flowered earlier than others during two seasons in both locations
|
Genotypes |
Item |
Qena |
Assiut |
||
|
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
||
|
Between Plant spacing |
|||||
|
G1 |
Plant spacing |
S1 |
S1 |
S2 |
S2 |
|
No. of early days |
1-4 |
1-4 |
1-2 |
1 |
|
|
G2 |
Plant spacing |
S3 |
S3 |
S2 |
S2 |
|
No. of early days |
1-13 |
1-11 |
3-9 |
2-8 |
|
|
G3 |
Plant spacing |
S3 |
S3 |
S3 |
S3 |
|
No. of early days |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
G4 |
Plant spacing |
S3 |
S3 |
S1 |
S1 |
|
No. of early days |
1-3 |
1-2 |
1-3 |
1-3 |
|
|
G5 |
Plant spacing |
S2 |
S2 |
S1 |
S1 |
|
No. of early days |
1-2 |
1-2 |
1-7 |
2-7 |
|
|
Days which G3 was significantly earlier than the other genotypes within Plant spacing |
|||||
|
S1 |
G1 |
1.4 |
1.3 |
2.8 |
1.7 |
|
G2 |
23.1 |
23.0 |
23.5 |
23.5 |
|
|
G3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
G4 |
4.6 |
4.5 |
1.4 |
1.4 |
|
|
G5 |
24.6 |
24.7 |
18.2 |
18.6 |
|
|
S2 |
G1 |
1.3 |
0.7 |
0.6 |
-0.04 |
|
G2 |
22.2 |
21.3 |
19.9 |
19.8 |
|
|
G3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
G4 |
3.2 |
3.3 |
4.2 |
3.4 |
|
|
G5 |
23.1 |
22.4 |
25.1 |
24.2 |
|
|
S3 |
G1 |
5.6 |
5.5 |
1.7 |
2.1 |
|
G2 |
10.6 |
11.3 |
29.5 |
29.2 |
|
|
G3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
|
G4 |
2.3 |
2.1 |
2.9 |
3.3 |
|
|
G5 |
25.9 |
25.3 |
24.3 |
24.0 |
|
|
Rang of early days in S1 |
1-25 |
1-25 |
1-24 |
1-24 |
|
|
Rang of early days in S2 |
1-23 |
1-22 |
1-25 |
1-24 |
|
|
Rang of early days in S3 |
2-26 |
2-25 |
2-30 |
2-29 |
|
For plant height, all studied genotypes (Table 6) exhibited significantly comparable or decreasing plant height with low plant density (i.e. with increased spacing between them). Accordingly, G1 × S1 exhibited the highest pea plants followed by G1 × S2 and G1 × S3 in descending order in both regions and at both seasons. On the contrary, G4 × S3, G4 × S2 and G4 × S1 in ascending order exhibited the shortest pea plants in both regions and at both seasons.
|
Respecting number of branches in Qena region, the highest number per plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of S3×G2 followed by S3×G1 and S1×G2, respectively without any significant between them in both seasons and the lowest number belonged to S1×G3, S1×G4, S1×G5, S2×G3, S2×G4 and S3×G3 in the 1st season and S1×G4 followed by S2×G3, S2×G4 and S1×G3, respectively without any significant between them in the 2nd one. In Assiut region, the highest number of branches per plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of S3×G1 followed by S2×G1 without any significant between them in both seasons and the lowest number belonged to S3×G3, S1×G3, S1×G4, S2×G3 and S2×G4 in the 1st season and S3×G3 in the 2nd one.
Concerning number of leaves/plant, the results in the same Table (6) show that the highest number per plant belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of S3×G1 followed by S3×G2 and the lowest number belonged to S1×G4 in all environments (regions and seasons).Similar results were obtained by Bakry et al. (2011) on fababean, they found that the interaction between varieties and plant density had significant effect on plant height and number of branches/plant in both seasons.
Sowing dates, plant spacing and genotypes (D×S×G):
Data in Tables (8 and 9) show the effect of the triple interactions on days to flowering, plant height, branches/plant and number of leaves/plant of pea. It is clearly from the data that the effects of the D×S×G interaction was significant in days to flowering, plant height, branches/plant and number of leaves/plant in both regions and seasons, except in the 1st season of Qena region for days to flowering.
In general, the best interaction in days to flowering (D1×S3×G3& D1×S1×G3) in the 1st season and (D1×S1×G3& D1×S3×G3) in the 2nd one of Qena region. While, the lowest interactive effect was (D2×S3×G5) in both seasons of this region.
Concerning Assiut region, (D1×S1×G3& D2×S3×G3) in the 1st season and (D1×S3×G3) in the 2nd one.While, the lowest interactive effect was (D1×S3×G2) in the 1st season and (D2×S3×G2& D1×S3×G2) in the 2nd one.
For plant height, both (D2×S1×G1& D1×S1×G1) were the best interaction and the lowest was (D2×S3×G4& D1×S3×G4) in both regions at both seasons.
|
Number of branches in Qena region, (D2×S3×G2& D1×S3×G2 & D2×S1×G2 & D1×S3×G1& D1×S1×G2 and D2×S3×G1) without significant between them were the best interactive effects at 1st season and each of D2×S3×G1& D2×S3×G2& D1×S3×G2) at the 2nd season of this region. While, the lowest interactive effect was G3 and G4 with interaction of any sowing dates and any of S1 or S2 plants spacing in both seasons.
Table (8):Flowering dates and plant height of pea plants as affected by the triple interaction (D×S×Y) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Flowering dates |
Plant height |
||||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||||
|
Sowing dates |
Plant spacing |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
D1 |
S1 |
G1 |
35.7 |
35.4 |
39 |
36.2 |
83.67 |
83.9 |
79.67 |
80.17 |
|
G2 |
58.37 |
58.19 |
59.4 |
58.8 |
61.67 |
61.37 |
60 |
59.4 |
||
|
G3 |
35.11 |
35 |
35.7 |
36.1 |
50.33 |
50.38 |
53.37 |
53.42 |
||
|
G4 |
39.83 |
40 |
37.2 |
36.8 |
42.67 |
42.7 |
49.47 |
50.17 |
||
|
G5 |
59.4 |
59.7 |
54.07 |
54.17 |
63.33 |
63.4 |
72 |
71.89 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
36.4 |
36.31 |
37.13 |
36.8 |
72 |
72.05 |
78.45 |
78.32 |
|
|
G2 |
58 |
57.3 |
56.73 |
57.3 |
59.67 |
59.46 |
60.45 |
60.23 |
||
|
G3 |
35.55 |
36.25 |
36.61 |
37.2 |
46.27 |
46.34 |
49.99 |
50.2 |
||
|
G4 |
38.59 |
39.19 |
40.3 |
40.4 |
42.7 |
42.75 |
44.95 |
45.05 |
||
|
G5 |
58.89 |
58.91 |
61.16 |
60.8 |
60.97 |
61.21 |
65.43 |
65.31 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
39.3 |
40 |
37.4 |
38.1 |
70.1 |
69.8 |
68 |
68.1 |
|
|
G2 |
46 |
48 |
65.7 |
64.9 |
56.91 |
56.84 |
56 |
56.2 |
||
|
G3 |
34.47 |
35.01 |
36 |
35.7 |
45 |
45.3 |
47 |
47.1 |
||
|
G4 |
37.43 |
36.93 |
38.5 |
38.9 |
40.3 |
39.83 |
42.8 |
43.11 |
||
|
G5 |
60.63 |
60.47 |
60 |
59.8 |
58.77 |
59.23 |
60 |
61 |
||
|
D2 |
S1 |
G1 |
38 |
38.2 |
39 |
39.21 |
83.7 |
84 |
80 |
80.2 |
|
G2 |
58.67 |
58.7 |
60 |
60.17 |
61.6 |
61.54 |
59.4 |
59.44 |
||
|
G3 |
35.8 |
35.91 |
36.67 |
35.9 |
50.3 |
50.29 |
53.5 |
54.3 |
||
|
G4 |
40.33 |
39.93 |
38 |
37.9 |
42.7 |
43 |
50 |
50.2 |
||
|
G5 |
60.7 |
60.52 |
54.67 |
55 |
63.3 |
63 |
71.75 |
71.69 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
38.11 |
37.91 |
37.33 |
37.63 |
69.8 |
70 |
78.48 |
78.39 |
|
|
G2 |
58.33 |
58.24 |
56.33 |
56.83 |
59.6 |
60 |
60.51 |
60.47 |
||
|
G3 |
36.45 |
36.66 |
36.67 |
37.31 |
46.4 |
46.27 |
50.1 |
49.63 |
||
|
G4 |
39.89 |
40.39 |
41.33 |
40.83 |
43 |
43.11 |
45 |
44.8 |
||
|
G5 |
59.22 |
58.82 |
62.33 |
62.2 |
61 |
61.2 |
65.13 |
65 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
42 |
41.86 |
37.61 |
37.71 |
70.2 |
70 |
67.6 |
67.16 |
|
|
G2 |
45.33 |
45.41 |
65 |
65.1 |
57 |
57.2 |
55.9 |
56 |
||
|
G3 |
35.67 |
35.8 |
35.7 |
35.92 |
44.85 |
45 |
46.9 |
47.1 |
||
|
G4 |
37.33 |
38.13 |
39 |
39.4 |
40 |
39.9 |
43 |
42.9 |
||
|
G5 |
61.33 |
60.9 |
60.33 |
59.83 |
59 |
58.8 |
58.94 |
60.04 |
||
|
LSD |
NS |
0.247 |
0.610 |
0.183 |
0.283 |
0.617 |
0.380 |
0.055 |
||
|
Table (9): Number of both branches and leaves per pea plants as affected by the triple interaction (D×S×Y) during the two studied years in both locations
|
Traits |
Number of branches per plant |
Number of leaves per plant |
||||||||
|
Treatments |
Qena |
Assiut |
Qena |
Assiut |
||||||
|
Sowing dates |
Plant spacing |
Genotypes |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y1 |
Y2 |
|
D1 |
S1 |
G1 |
3.53 |
3.49 |
4.3 |
4.6 |
37.66 |
38 |
38.26 |
37.96 |
|
G2 |
4.00 |
4.1 |
4.21 |
4.4 |
35.12 |
35.2 |
35.62 |
36.2 |
||
|
G3 |
2.60 |
2.9 |
2.70 |
2.9 |
33.83 |
33.39 |
34.3 |
34.4 |
||
|
G4 |
2.80 |
2.88 |
2.70 |
2.69 |
32 |
32.1 |
32 |
32.3 |
||
|
G5 |
3.00 |
3.1 |
3.10 |
3 |
34 |
34.1 |
33.9 |
34.9 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
3.84 |
3.8 |
5.2 |
4.91 |
42 |
41.7 |
42.3 |
42 |
|
|
G2 |
4.04 |
3.94 |
4.8 |
4.6 |
37.43 |
37.3 |
37.5 |
38.1 |
||
|
G3 |
2.8 |
2.9 |
2.72 |
2.8 |
35.2 |
35 |
35.7 |
36.1 |
||
|
G4 |
2.91 |
2.9 |
2.74 |
2.69 |
34.6 |
35.1 |
35.16 |
35.21 |
||
|
G5 |
3.3 |
3.4 |
3.10 |
2.9 |
34.7 |
35 |
34.3 |
34 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
4.10 |
3.9 |
5.20 |
5 |
46.2 |
46.1 |
47 |
46.79 |
|
|
G2 |
4.33 |
4.13 |
4.73 |
4.57 |
43 |
43.1 |
43.5 |
42.15 |
||
|
G3 |
3.00 |
3.1 |
2.6 |
2.7 |
38.4 |
37.9 |
38 |
37.9 |
||
|
G4 |
3.3 |
3.26 |
3.1 |
2.91 |
37.6 |
36.96 |
36.92 |
37.2 |
||
|
G5 |
3.5 |
3.4 |
3.2 |
2.92 |
39 |
38.9 |
38.98 |
39 |
||
|
D2 |
S1 |
G1 |
3.5 |
3.51 |
4.10 |
4.2 |
37.81 |
37.95 |
39 |
38.9 |
|
G2 |
4.10 |
4 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
36.1 |
36.3 |
35.2 |
35.02 |
||
|
G3 |
2.80 |
2.9 |
2.65 |
2.71 |
33.76 |
33.68 |
34.7 |
33.97 |
||
|
G4 |
2.80 |
2.78 |
2.67 |
2.71 |
32.3 |
32.42 |
32.3 |
32.33 |
||
|
G5 |
2.90 |
2.87 |
2.93 |
3.3 |
34.1 |
34 |
34.2 |
33.2 |
||
|
S2 |
G1 |
3.78 |
3.71 |
5.2 |
4.92 |
42.2 |
42 |
42 |
41.92 |
|
|
G2 |
3.97 |
4.1 |
4.80 |
4.65 |
37.61 |
36.96 |
37.2 |
36.97 |
||
|
G3 |
2.83 |
2.8 |
2.72 |
2.69 |
34.8 |
35.2 |
36.1 |
34.8 |
||
|
G4 |
2.92 |
2.9 |
2.74 |
2.69 |
35 |
35.4 |
34.91 |
35.01 |
||
|
G5 |
3.23 |
3.3 |
3.00 |
2.9 |
35 |
35 |
34.1 |
34.8 |
||
|
S3 |
G1 |
4.00 |
4.3 |
5.2 |
4.89 |
45.2 |
44.92 |
45.9 |
46.1 |
|
|
G2 |
4.40 |
4.2 |
4.73 |
4.7 |
42.7 |
43 |
43.7 |
44.2 |
||
|
G3 |
3.10 |
3 |
2.6 |
2.5 |
37.91 |
38.1 |
37.87 |
38.7 |
||
|
G4 |
3.24 |
3.26 |
3.1 |
2.91 |
37.4 |
37.2 |
37.2 |
36.82 |
||
|
G5 |
3.60 |
3.8 |
3.1 |
3 |
38.7 |
37.4 |
39.3 |
38.93 |
||
|
LSD |
0.506 |
0.190 |
0.327 |
0.098 |
0.544 |
0.269 |
0.637 |
0.073 |
||
For Assiut region, (D1×S3×G1& D2×S2×G1& D1×S2×G1) were the best interactions without any significant between them in both seasons as well as D2×S3×G1 in the 1st one. While, the lowest interactive effect was D2×S3×G3 for number of branches in both seasons. Respecting Number of leaves per plant, the highest number belonged to the treatment under the interactive effects of D1×S3×G1 , i.e., new line G1 sown on September 15 under wider plant spacing (S3) in both Qena and Assiut regions at both seasons. The lowest number belonged to G4 in both sowing dates of September or October 15 under narrow spacing of S1 (Table 9) in both seasons and regions.
|
REFERENCES
Abdou, A.A. ; M.F. Mohamed and N.M. Kandeel (1999).Breeding implications on cultivar selection in garden pea (Pisum sativum L.) Towards enhancing earliness and pod-yield. Assiut J. Agric. Sci., 30 (3): 117-132.
Agajie, M. (2018). Effect of Spacing on Yield Components and Yield of Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) at Assosa, Western Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; 7(2): 39-51.
Al-Abdul-Salam, M. A. and K. S. Abdul-Salam (1995).Effect of plant density and certain pesticides on growth, yield and rhizobial nodulation of faba bean. King Saudi University, Agricultural Science Journal, 7 (2): 249-257.
Amer, M. I.; M. A. El-Borai and M. M. Radi (1992).Response of 3 faba bean cultivars to three sowing dates under different plant densities in North Delta. J. Agric. Res., Fac. Agric. Tanta Univ., 18(4): 591-599.
Arisha, H. M. (1982). Comparative study of varieties and fertilization on the productivity of pea M. Sc. Thesis, Fac. Agric. Zagazig Univ., Egypt.
Aydogdu, L. and E. Acikgoz (1995).Effect of seeding rate on seed and hay yield in common vetch (Vicia sativa L.).Agronomy and Crop Science Journal, 174: 181-187.
Baghdady, G.A. ; G.A. Zayed ; H.A.O. Ali and A.M. Damarany (2015).Pedigree selection for earliness and yield in pea (Pisum sativum L.) Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 30(1): 24-33.
Bakry, B.A. ; T.A. Elewa ; M.F. El Karamany ; M.S. Zeidan and M.M. Tawfik (2011). Effect of row spacing on yield and its components of some faba bean varieties under newly reclaimed sandy soil condition. World J. Agric. Sci., 7(1): 68-72.
Barrett M. and W.W. Witt (1987). Alternative pest management practices. In: Helsel Z R (ed) Energy in Plant Nutrition and Pest Control., Vol. 2, pp.197-234 Elsevier Press, Netherlands
El-Dakkak, A.A.A. (2005). Estimation of the components of the genetic variation using triple test cross analysis in peas (Pisum sativum L.) under Upper Egypt conditions. Ph.D. Thesis, Assiut University., pp146.
El-Dakkak, A.A.A. ; G.A. Zayed and M.A.H. Abd El-Hady (2014). Improving productivity and earliness for pea by selection under Sohag conditions. Egypt J. Appl. Sci., 29(11): 523-533.
|
El-Dakkak,A.A.A.; G.A.Zayed ; M.A.H.AbdEl-HadyandA.H. Hussein (2015a). Development of new promising pea lines (Pisum sativum L.). Egypt . J. of Appl. Sci., 30 (7): 455-465.
El-Dakkak, A.A.A. ; A.H. Hussein and A.M.A. Rashwan (2015b). Phenotypic stability analysis in some new lines of pea under variable location conditions. Egypt J. plant Breed., 19(4):1199-1206.
Farag, S. A. and H. A. El-Shamm (1994).Effect of irrigation intervals and plant distances on the growth and seed yield of broad bean plants. Annual Agricultural Science, Moshtohor, 32(4): 2071-2081.
Gomez K.A. and A.A. Gomez (1984).Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research.2nd Ed. John Wiely & Sons. New-York. USA .
Helmy M. M. (2008). Water requirement of some pea cultivars planted at different sowing dates under drip irrigation system. M. Sci Thesis, Fac. Agric., Mansoura University.
Idris A. L. Y. (2008). Effect of seed size and plant spacing on yield and yield components of faba bean (Vicia faba L.). Research Journal of Agriculture Biological Science, 4(2): 146-148.
Khalil, S.K. ; A. Wahab ; A. Rehman ; F. Muhammad ; S. Wahab ; A.Z. Khan ; M. Zubair ; M.K. Shah ; I.H. Khalil and R. Amin (2010). Density and planting date influence phonological development assimilate partitioning and dry matter production of faba bean. Pak.J.Bot., 42(6): 3831-3838.
Knott, C. M. and S. J.Belcher (1998) Optimum sowing date and plant populations for winter peas (Pisum sativum, L.) . J. of Agric. Sci., 131 (4): 449 – 454 .
Loss, S. ; M.K.L. Siddique and A. Crombie (1998). Response of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) to sowing rate in southwestern Australia, II: Canopy development, radiation absorption and dry matter partitioning. Australian Agriculture Research Journal, 49(6): 999-1008.
Mansour, N. T. S. (2006). Response Of Pea Plants To Biofertilization And Plant Density With Different Sowing Dates Under Sandy Soil Conditions. Ph.D. Thesis,. Fac. of Agric. Suez Canal University.
|
McDonald G.K., K. L.Hollaway, and L. McMurray (2007). Increasing plant density improves weed competition in lentils (Lens culinaris). Aust J Exp Agric. 47: 48-56
Mehmet, O. Z. (2008). Nitrogen rate and plant population effects on yield and yield components in soybean. African Biotechnology Journal, 7(24): 4464-4470.
Mohamed, H. (2001). The effect of planting date, density and cultivar on productivity and quality of pole beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown in cold plastic house.Egyptian Journal of Horticulture. National Information and Documentation Centre (NIDOC), 28: 2, 197-206. 14.
Muhammad, I. ; N. Ara and A. Rashid (2001). Response of different pea cultivars to various planting dates under the agroclimatic conditions of Swat. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture. NWFP Agricultural University, Peshawar, Pakistan., 17 (2): 189-194.
Oad, F.C. ; M.A. Samo ; S.M. Qayylan and N.L. Oad (2002). Inter and intra row spacing effect on the growth, seed yield and oil continent of safflower. Asian Plant Science Journal, 1: 18-19.
Shahein, A.H. ; E.M.R Agwah and H.A. El-Shamma (1995). Effect of plan density as well as nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer rate on growth green pods and dry seed yield and quantity of broad bean. Moshtohor Annual Agricultural Science, 33(1): 371-88.
Shamsi, K. and S. Kobraee(2009). Effect of plant density on the growth, yield and yield components of three soybean varieties under climatic conditions of Kermanshah, Iran. Animal and Plant Sciences Journal, 2(2): 96 - 99.
Shokr. M. M. B (2000). Response of pea (Pisum sativum) to planting dates and N P K fertilizing. Ph.D. Thesis,. Fac. of Agric. Mansuora Univ.
Silva F. A. S. and C. A. V. Azevedo (2016a).Comparison of means of agricultural experimentation data through different tests using the software Assistat. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 11(37), pp. 3527-3531.
Silva F. A. S. and C. A. V. Azevedo (2016b).The Assistat Software Version 7.7 and its use in the analysis of experimental data. Afr. J. Agric. Res., 11(39): 3733-3740.
Sirwaiya, S. and S.S. Kushwah (2018).Assessment of Different Sowing Dates and Varieties on Growth, Yield and Quality of Seed in Garden Pea (Pisum sativum L.). Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 7(3): 1387-1396.
Tuarira M. and M. Moses (2014).Effects of Plant Density and Planting Arrangement in Green Bean Seed Production. Journal of Global Innovative Agriculture and SC. Sciences., 2(4): 152-157.
|
Turk, M.A. ; A.M. Tawaha and M.K.J. El-Shatnawi (2003). Response of lentil (Lens Culinaris Medk) to plant density, sowing date, phosphorus fertilization and ethephon application in the absence of moisture stress. Agriculture Crop Science Journal, 189: 1-6.
Yarnell, S. H. (1962). Cytogenetics of the vegetable crops. III. Legumes, A. Garden pea (Pisum sativum, L.) Botanical Review , 28 (4): 465-537 (C. A. Computer search).
Zayed, G.A. (1998). Inheritance of some quantitative characters in peas. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 13 (3): 242-253.
Zayed, G.A. and F.S. Faris (1998). Estimates of heterosis and relative potence of gene set in pea (Pisum sativum L.) at Upper Egypt. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci.; 13(6): 187-200.
Zayed, G. A. and A. A. Rayan (1998).Response of some cowpea cultivars to different irregation regimes in relation to drought tolerance indices. J. Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ., 23(11):5051- 5065.
Zayed, G.A.; F.S. Faris and A.H. Amer (1999a).Performance of some pea cultivars under the conditions of Upper Egypt. Egypt. J. Agric. Res., 77(4): 1687-1706.
Zayed, G.A.; A.H. Amer and Horeya M. Hassan (1999b).Combining ability and path coefficient analysis in pea under Southern Egypt conditions.Zagazig. J. Agric. Res., 26 (3A): 611-621.
Zayed, G.A. ; Fawzia A. Helal and S.T. Farag (2005).The genetic performance of some continuously variable characteristics of pea under different locations. Annals Agric. Sci., Moshtohor, 43: 337-346.
Zayed G.A.; M.N. M. Hasan; Y.Y. Abd El-Aty and Hala S. Abd El-Lah (2010). Graphical reading for gene action in Pisum sativum L. Minia 2nd Conf. Agric.Environ. Sci.: Agriculture and Development Scopes, 22-24 March 2010, Minia Univ., Egypt.
استجابة صفات النمو الخضری للبسلة لمسافات ومواعید
الزراعة والأصناف فى مناطق مختلفة
ممدوح جابر زین الدین*، جمال ابوسته زاید*** ، جمال حسین عبد الرحیم*, ماهر امین والی**
*قسم البساتین کلیة الزراعة بأسیوط - جامعة الأزهر
** قسم البساتین کلیة الزراعة القاهرة - جامعة الأزهر
***اقسام بحوثالخضر– معهد بحوث البساتین – مرکز البحوث الزراعیة - الجیزة
أجریت هذه الدراسة خلال موسمی 2017/2018 و 2018/2019 فی موقعین مختلفین بمحافظات صعید مصر. واستخدم فیها 5 تراکیب وراثیة مختلفة، ومیعادین زراعة و 3 مسافات (5، 15، 20 سم) بین النباتات
|
اظهرت النتائج أن زراعة البسلة فی الخامس عشر من سبتمبر (D1) أعطت القیم بشکل عام مساویة أو أفضل من تاریخ زراعة أکتوبر (D2) لمعظم صفات النمو الخضری فی جمیع المواسم والمواقع.
الإزهار المبکر کان فی مسافات الزراعة الأوسع (S3) فی قنا اکثر تبکیرا من التباعد الضیق )الکثافة النباتیة الاعلى) لنباتات البسلة والتی اظهرت تبکیرا فی أسیوط. لذلک یبدو أن تأثیر عدد الایام للازهاریختلف من محصول إلى آخر وکذلک الظروف البیئیة السائدة التی تزرع فیها المحاصیل.
اظهر الصنف G3) ) الإزهار فی 35 یومًا فی قنا ، تلیها التراکیب الوراثیةG1, G4 ؛ کما اظهرت باقى التراکیب الوراثیة المتبقیة تأخیرا فی الإزهار فی کل من مواسمقنا.
کان التفاعل بینمواعید الزراعة والتراکیب الوراثیة معنویا لعدد الأیام إلى 50٪ من الإزهار وارتفاع النبات وعدد الفروع (کلا الموسمین) فی منطقتی قنا وأسیوط وکذلک عدد الأوراق فی کلا الموسمین فی قنا والموسم الثانی فقط فی منطقة أسیوط.
من الواضح من البیانات أن تأثیرات تفاعل D × S × G کانت کبیرة فی أیام الإزهار وارتفاع النبات والفروع / النبات وعدد الأوراق / النبات فی کل من المناطق والمواسم ، باستثناء الموسم الأول من منطقة قنا لأیام الإزهار.
بشکل عام ، أفضل تفاعل فی الأیام مع الإزهار (D1 × S3 × G3 و D1 × S1 × G3) فى منطقة قنا. بینما کانت أسیوط (D1 × S1 × G3 و D2 × S3 × G3) فی الموسم الأول و (D1 × S3 × G3) فی الموسم الثانی.
|
|
|
)
View on SCiNiTO