Effect of weather conditions, productive moisture, soil macronutrients and weeds on pea yield

Solving the problem of increasing pea yield is one of the main tasks of crop production in the arid conditions of the Orenburg-Cis-Ural region. The most optimal solution is to use pea crops after applying ammophoska for fall plowing in grain-fallow crop rotations and to identify the effect of factors on grain yield. Adding chopped straw and green manure to the soil of pea predecessors without mineral fertilizers does not solve the problem. Conducting field experiments and statistical analysis (regression) of the results obtained is timely and relevant. The aim of the study is to determine the effect of weather conditions, soil productive moisture and nutrients, weeds and precursors of crop rotation on pea yield by nutritional backgrounds in the arid conditions of the Orenburg Region. On the territory of the experimental production farm named after Kuybyshev, Orenburg Region, pea crops (2002–2022) are being studied in 6-field and 2-field crop rotations on a longterm stationary experimental plot established in 1990. The repetition of the two-factor experiment is fourfold in the area and twentyfold in time. Factor A is backgrounds: fertilized (ammophoska – N₄₀P₄₀K₄₀ kg/ha) and unfertilized (control). Factor B is options: five pea predecessors (two durum and three soft wheat) of crop rotations. Average data were obtained: air temperature for May-August is +16.2…+22.8°C; precipitation – 21.7–42.7 mm; number of dry days – 14–18; hydrothermal coefficient (HTC) – 0.09–0.19; productive moisture content after sowing – 126.9–137.9 mm, before harvesting – 32.2–51.2 mm, consumption – 170.7–179.6 mm; N-NO₃ on a fertilized nutritional background – 84–101, 55–86, 9–30 mg and on an unfertilized background – 66–76, 45–74, 1–25 mg; P2O5–58–63, 52–60, 0–7 mg and 43–46, 37–45, 0–7 mg; K₂O – 423–500, 367–454, 42–56 mg and 382–425, 329–404, 13–53 mg/kg; the number of weeds in the germination phase – 91–139 and 84–109 pcs., in the ripening phase – 40–58 and 37–49 pcs./m2; the mass of weeds – 35.8–47.1 and 33.8–42, 2 g/m²; yield – 0.65–0.87 and 0.60–0.83 t/ha; increase in pea grain – 0.01–0.06 t. The observations revealed an increase in pea yield by nutritional backgrounds in a six-field crop rotation with summer sowing of Sudan grass, depending on the effect of June precipitation, ammophoska and the precursor of soft wheat. Lack of precipitation in June, spent moisture, nitrate nitrogen and weeds significantly reduced pea yield after durum wheat in a two-field crop rotation. The experimental variants revealed a significant effect of dry weather conditions, use of productive moisture, soil nutrient imbalance and weed infestation on pea yield reduction in grainfallow and green manure rotations. The effect of other factors combined was insignificant.

1. Bukin O.V., Bochkarev D.V., Nikol'skii A.N., Smolin N.V. Vliyanie priemov osnovnoi obrabotki pochvy na dinamiku zapasov vlagi i urozhainost' gorokha posevnogo v usloviyakh lesostepi Evropeiskoi chasti Rossii. Agrarnaya nauka. 2020; 6: 58–61. (In Russ.).

2. Voskobulova N.I., Vereshchagina A.S., Uraskulov R.Sh. Vliyanie srokov poseva gorokha na ispol'zovanie produktivnoi vlagi. Izvestiya Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2020; 2 (82): 72–75. (In Russ.).

3. Gulyanov Yu.A., Yartsev G.F., Mordvintsev M.P. Vido- i sortoizuchenie zernobobovykh kul'tur v usloviyakh stepnoi zony Orenburgskogo Predural'ya i organizatsiya ikh semenovodstva. Izvestiya Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2017; 1 (63): 186–189. (In Russ.).

4. Dospekhov B.A. Metodika polevogo opyta (s osnovami statisticheskoi obrabotki rezul'tatov issledovanii). Moskva: Al'yans, 2011: 350. (In Russ.).

5. Kislov A.V., Glinushkin A.P., Kashcheev A.V. Agroekologicheskie osnovy povysheniya ustoichivosti zemledeliya v stepnoi zone. Dostizheniya nauki i tekhniki APK. 2018; 32; 7: 9–13. (In Russ.).

6. Kotlyarova O.G., Kotlyarova E.G., Lubentsov S.M. Dinamika sornoi rastitel'nosti v posevakh gorokha v zavisimosti ot intensivnosti obrabotki pochvy i mineral'nogo pitaniya. Vestnik Kurskoi gosudarstvennoi sel'skokhozyaistvennoi akademii. 2012; 7: 51–53. (In Russ.).

7. Kulikova A.Kh., Saidyasheva G.V., Lashchenkov A.N. Sravnitel'naya effektivnost' intensivnoi i biologizirovannoi tekhnologii vozdelyvaniya v formirovanii zapasov produktivnoi vlagi pod posevami i urozhainosti gorokha. Vestnik Ul'yanovskoi gosudarstvennoi sel'skokhozyaistvennoi akademii. 2022; 4 (60): 45–52. (In Russ.).

8. Mitrofanov D.V. Vliyanie elementov pogody i zapasov pochvennoi vlagi na urozhainost' gorokha v sevooborotakh na chernozemakh yuzhnykh Orenburgskogo Predural'ya. Izvestiya Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2019; 3 (77): 98–102. (In Russ.).

9. Mitrofanov D.V. Vliyanie makroelementov pitaniya na produktivnost' zerna gorokha v razlichnykh sevooborotakh na territorii stepnoi zony Yuzhnogo Urala. Izvestiya Orenburgskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2019; 4 (78): 80–84. (In Russ.).

10. Mitrofanov D.V., Kaftan Yu.V. Vliyanie sornykh rastenii i ammofosa na vykhod zerna gorokha v stepnoi zone Yuzhnogo Urala. Vestnik Novosibirskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2020; 4 (57): 35–45. (In Russ.).

11. Nuzhnaya N.A. Osobennosti formirovaniya i razvitiya sornogo komponenta polevogo fitotsenoza. Dostizheniya nauki i tekhniki APK. 2013; 7: 55–57. (In Russ.).

12. Postnikov P.A. Meteorologicheskie usloviya i urozhainost' gorokha v sevooborotakh. Dostizheniya nauki i tekhniki APK. 2018; 32; 10: 57–60. (In Russ.).

13. Statisticheskii ezhegodnik Orenburgskoi oblasti. 2022: Statisticheskii sbornik. Orenburgstat, pod obshch. red. T.V. Solomko. Orenburg, 2022: 482. (In Russ.).

14. Stolyarov O.V., Mikhalev I.V. Vliyanie inokulyatsii semyan, makro- i mikroudobrenii na azotfiksiruyushchuyu deyatel'nost' i urozhainost' gorokha. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta. 2013; 3 (38): 22–25. (In Russ.).

15. Turusov V.I., Kornilov I.M., Nuzhnaya N.A. Zasorennost' posevov v razlichnykh usloviyakh agrolandshafta. Zashchita i karantin rastenii. 2014; 4: 15–16. (In Russ.).

16. Anitha P., Hanumantharaya B.G. Assessment of yield and quality attributes of garden pea (Pisum sativum. L) varieties under shade house condition. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change. 2022; 12 (12): 274–282.

17. Singhal N., Sharma P., Sharda R., Siag M. Assessment of growth parameters and yield of pea (Pisum sativum) under different irrigation methods. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 2021; 91 (9): 1378–1381.

18. Faligowska A., Kalembasa S., Kalembasa D., Panasiewicz K., Szymanska G., Ratajczak K., Skrzypczak G. The nitrogen fixation and yielding of pea in different soil tillage systems. Agronomy. 2022; 12 (2): 352–365.

19. Iglesias-García R., Prats E., Flores F., Amri M., Mikić A., Rubiales D. Rubiales Assessment of field pea (Pisum sativum L.) grain yield, aerial biomass and flowering date stability in Mediterranean environments. Crop and Pasture Science. 2017; 68 (11): 915–923.

20. Sarfraz M., Hussain K., Nawaz K., Yasin G., Geng Z., Sajjad M., Parveen S. Determination of effective method of NPK fertilization in pea (Pisum sativum L.) cultivars grown in Pakistan. Legume Research. 2020; 44 (4): 431–438.