Banner

Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.32, CiteScore: 0.906

  • Impact Factor 0.8 (2024)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Legume Research, volume 40 issue 5 (october 2017) : 872-877

Productivity of white lupin (Lupinus albus L.) as an effect of diversified farming systems

Agnieszka Faligowska, Katarzyna Panasiewicz, Grazyna Szymañska, Jerzy Szukala, Wieslaw Koziara, Agnieszka Pszczólkowska.
1<p>Department of Agronomy, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60637 Pozna&ntilde;, Poland</p>
Cite article:- Faligowska Agnieszka, Panasiewicz Katarzyna, Szyma&ntilde;ska Grazyna, Szukala Jerzy, Koziara Wieslaw, Pszcz&oacute;lkowska. Agnieszka (2017). Productivity of white lupin (Lupinus albus L.) as an effect of diversified farming systems . Legume Research. 40(5): 872-877. doi: 10.18805/lr.v0i0.8400.

ABSTRACT

A one–factor field experiment with white lupin cv. Butan was conducted in the years 2011–2015 in Gorzyñ (52°33’53 N, 15°53’42 E; Poland). The factor consisted of farming systems: low-input (LI), medium-input (MI) and high-input (conventional-CONV). The lowest weed density and biomass were found in CONV and the highest in LI. The weather conditions significantly influenced yielding. Each year the highest yield was found in CONV and significantly lowest in LI. On an average, the highest increase in the seed yield was obtained following increasing intensity of cultivation from LI to MI (20.3%). Farming systems did not influence the chemical composition of seeds. The highest protein yield was found in CONV (804 kg ha-1) and significantly lower – by about 6% in MI and about 19% in LI. The highest income and the lowest cost of production for 1 t of seeds and protein were recorded for LI.

REFERENCES


  1. Annicchiarico, P., N. Harzic and A.M. Carroni. (2010). Adaptation, diversity, and exploitation of global white lupin (Lupinus albus L.) landrace genetic resources. Field Crops Res. 119: 114-124. 

  2. AOAC. (1975). Official Methods of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists.

  3. Atkins, C.A. and P.M. Smith. (2004). Regulation of pod set and seed development in lupin. In: E. van Santen and G.D. Hill (eds.). Proc.10th Int. Lupin Conf. New Zealand 19-24.VI.2002, 275-278.

  4. Bhardwaj, H.L., Hamama A.A.and Van Santen.E. (2004). White lupin performance and nutritional value as affected by planting date and row spacing. Agron. J. 96: 580-583. 

  5. Borowska, M., J. Prusinski and E. Kaszkowiak. (2015). Production results of intensification of cultivation technologies in three lupin (Lupinus L.) species. Plant Soil Environ. 61: 426-431. 

  6. Czerwiñska-Kayzer, D. and J. Florek. (2012). Op³acalnoœæ wybranych upraw roœlin str¹czkowych, [Profitability of selected legumes]. Fragm. Agron. 29: 36-44 [in Polish]. 

  7. Erbas, M., M. Certel and Uslu M.K. (2005). Some chemical properties of white lupin seeds (Lupinus albus L.). Food Chem. 89: 341-345.

  8. Faligowska, A. and Szukala. J. (2015). The effect of various long-term tillage systems on yield and yield component of yellow and narrow-leaved lupin. Turk. J. Field Crops 20: 188-193. 

  9. Faluyi, M.A., Zhou, X.M., Zhang, F., Leibovitch, S., Migner P. and Smith.D.L. (2000). Seed quality of sweet white lupin (Lupinus albus)and management practice in eastern Canada. Europ. J. Agronomy 13: 27-37. 

  10. Fess, T.L., Kotcon J.B. and Benedito V.A. (2011). Crop breeding for low input agriculture: a sustainable response to feed a growing world population. Sustain. 3: 1742-1772.

  11. Huyghe, Ch. 1997. White lupin (Lupinus albus L.). Field Crops Res. 53: 147-160.

  12. Poudel, D.D., Horwath, W.R., Lanini, W.T. S.R. Temple and Van Bruggen. A.H.C. (2002). Comparison of soil N availability and leaching potential, crop yields and weeds in organic, low-input and conventional farming systems in northern California. Agric. Ecosyst.Environ. 90: 125-137. 

  13. Rutkowski, A., Hejdysz M., Kaczmarek S., Miku³a R., Kasprowicz-Potocka M. and Zaworska.A. (2014). Mozliwoœci wykorzystania roslin straczkowych wzywieniu zwierzat monogastrycznych, [Potential use of legumes in feeding monogastric animals]. FAPA [in Polish]. 

  14. Sujak, A., Kotlarz A. and W. Strobel. (2006). Compositional and nutritional evaluation of several lupin seeds. Food Chem. 98:711-    719. 

  15. Van Soest, P.J. (1963). Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. II. A rapid method of determination of fibre and lignin. Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (JAOAC), 4.6, 82.

  16. Vollmann, J., Fritz Ch.N., Wagentristl H. and Ruckenbauer P. (2000). Environmental and genetic variation of soybean seed protein content under Central European growing conditions. J. Sci. Food Agric. 80:1300-1306. 
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)