o : ; : j g h f : k b - agriculture.uz 1-2 2011.pdf · 2014. 2. 20. · ( a ; ? d b k l h g : = j :...
TRANSCRIPT
1-2 (43-44) 2011
1
1-2 (43-44) – 2011
1-2 (43-44) – 2011
– 2011
1-2 (43-44) 2011
2
: :
:
:
:
:
. – , . - , . – , . – , . – ,
. – , . – , . – , . – , . – , . – , . – , . – , . – , . – ,
– , . – , . – ,
. – , . - , . -
: + = ,
, , = = ,
= =
“ ”, 2011, 1-2 (43-44)
1-2 (43-44) 2011
3
2000 4
2011. 1-2 (43-44)
. .................................................................7
. ............................9
Aphrophoridae Cixiidae .....................................................................................................14
. .....................................17
., ., . , ……………………..……………21
. ( ) .................................................................................................................26
., .
..............................................................................................................................................................................….…29 . (Matricaria L.) (Calendula officinalisl) ,
…………………………………………………………32
. ............................................37
., ., . –
..........................................................................................................................................................................................40
. ......................................................................43
., . ….…...47
., .
NDVI ................................................................................52 . .........................................................57
., ., . in vitro ............................................................................................61
. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….…………66
., . ......................................................................................68
., .
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………71
. . . ................74 ., .
…………………….………….………….………….………….………….…………………………………….……….81 ., .
...........................................................................................................………….………….…….…………..85
1-2 (43-44) 2011
4
. ……….89
., .
…………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………94
.
……………….…...……….………….…………........……….............100 ., . ....................................................................................................................................................................102 ., . …........................104
. .............................106 .
....................................................................................................................................................107 ., ., .
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…..110 . ........................................................................................113
., ., ., . ..........114 ., ., ., ., .
...........................................………………………………….....…….................….116 ., . ………….117
., ., . …….120
.................................................................................................................................................122 – .............................................................................................................................125
1-2 (43-44) 2011
5
2000 . 4
1-2 (43-44) 2011
. ..............................................................7
. .....................9
. Aphrophoridae Cixiidae –
……………………………………………………………………………… .14 . …………….…....17
., ., .
……………….………..21 .
……………………………………………………………………………………………..26
., . ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….29
. , (Matricaria L.) (Calendula officinalisl)………………………………………………………………….32
………………………………….…….37
., ., .
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………..40
. ……………………………..………..43
., . ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..........….47
., . NDVI
……………………………………………………………..52 . ………………………….….….….57
., ., . In vitro , ……………………………………………………………………………….…..61
. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……....66
., . ……………………68
., . ………………………71
. . . …………….…..74
., . , - ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….….….81
., . ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….85
. …………………..89
1-2 (43-44) 2011
6
., . ,
……………………………………………………………………………………………....…………94
. -……………………………………………………………………………………………………..……..100
., . ......………………………………………………………………………………………….……102
., . ……………….104 . …….……….…...….…106
. , ………………………………………………………………………….. ……...…….…107
., ., . ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……….110
. ….……………………………………………………….113 ., ., , . – …….114
., ., ., ., . …………………………………………………………………………………………… ...116
., . ( ) ……………….………...117 ., ., . ...………...…….120
…..………………………………………………………………………………………………...122
, .………………………………………………………………………...125 ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
7
1-2(43-44) 2011
.633.174.
. 15-18 %,
5-6 % . 2-2,4 .
: , , , , ,
, ,
. (Sorghum Cernuum Host..)
.
,
. 30-40 , 400
. 68-82% , 8-15% , 3-5% , 1,5-3%
1-3% .
,
.
, .
,
. 15-18% ,
.
,
.
( ) .
. ,
, ,
,
. ,
15-16% ,
16-18% , 8-10% .
,
1100-1200
.
24, 48 96 ,
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
8
, 48
,
6-7 % .
1-2 % , .
. 400
, 5-6 %
2-2,4 .
.
.
,
.
, .
. ,
.
. , ,
. ,
.
, ,
.
.
. ,
, ,
. -
.
,
.
+ = = 7 2011
1. . = `
\\ -
, 2007 . 17 .
2. ., . . ,
2008 . 17-18 . 3. . -
, Agroilm, 2009. 1.
.
. 15-18%, - 5-6 %. 2-2,4
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
9
T.TOPVOLDIEV Study of sugar contents in sorgo
The quantitative contents of soluble sugar in vegetative parts of sorgo was studied. In the phase of maturing the quantity of soluble sugars achieved 15-18 %, and in total mass 5-6 %. In industrial conditions 2-2.4 tons per hectare of raw sugar can be obtained.
____________________
. 634.58
.
“ – 4” “ ” : ,
. , “ ”
“ – 4” (5,1 – 11,4 ). ,
“ – 4” (2,8 – 12,4 )
. , ” (0,2 – 0,5 )
.
: , , , , , , , , – 50”
–
,
.
. – , .
“ –
. , -
, –
”. ,
– ,
( . – ,
” 2009).
.
.
(52 – 60 %), (22 – 26 %), , , 1, 2, D
. 21
. , .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
10
,
.
-
15 – 20 .
. – ,
– ,
.
, .
, 0 0 – 29 0 .
. 261 – 316
366 – 435 , 700 – 895
.
2007 .
: 1)
;
2) , 1 2 3 ,
;
3) – , , ,
; 4) 20
: (
); ; ; ; ; 1000 ; ; ; ;
5) 20
,
; 6) .
– 4”, “ ” 6 “ 50”
, 4 .
« – 4» : – 1772 )
. : . , . , .
, . , . . .
. , . ,
, , , – , , . ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
11
– . 1000 750 – 800 . , ,
.
26,4 . , 138 – 145 .
. – 5,0 , 82,0 %. 48,5 %,
21,0%. « » : 008418
. : ,
, . , , .
: . . ,
, , – , ,
3 – 3 4 , , . ,
. , 135 – 140 . 1000 540,0 .
, . .
. 5,0 , 85,0 %.
50,0%, 17,0%. .
50” 50 % . ( ) , ” ,
2007 . 31.12. ,
. 2 – 3
. ,
(1 - ).
15 .
.
1 –
1 – 4” 70 5-1 47,9 12,4 84,3 17,9
2 – 4” 70 10-1 48,1 12,8 87,1 19,3
3 – 4” 70 15-1 50,0 13,2 89,3 20,3
4 – 4” 70 20-1 51,1 13,6 92,0 20,6
5 – 4” 70 25-1 52,2 13,9 103,8 22,5
6 – 4” 70 30-1 53,8 14,4 124,0 23,7
7 ” 70 5-1 53,2 9,4 64,4 18,1
8 ” 70 10-1 56,1 10,2 67,6 19,5
9 ” 70 15-1 58,4 10,6 73,5 20,4
10 ” 70 20-1 59,2 11,0 82,4 23,5
11 ” 70 25-1 60,0 11,3 95,0 23,8
12 ” 70 30-1 65,2 11,6 101,6 24,2
,
« – 4» 1 – 70 5 – 1 47,9
; 2 – 70 10 – 1 48,1 ; 3 – 70
15 – 1 50,0 ; 4 – 70 20 – 1 51,1 ; 5 –
1-2 (43-44) 2011
12
70 25 – 1 52,2 ; 6 – 70 30 – 1 53,8
. “ ”
– 53,2 – 56,1 – 58,4 – 59,2 – 60,0 – 65,2. ,
“ – 4” “ ”
. – 4”
1 – 12,4; 2 – 12,8; 3 – 13,2; 4 –
13,6; 5 – 13,9; 6 – 14,4 , “ ”
: 7 – 3,0
, 8–9–10–11– 2,6 , 12 – 2,8
. , “ ”
.
“ – 4” 1 – 70 5 – 1 84,3 , “ ”
64,4 . 2 – 8 – 19,5 ; 3 – 9 – 15,8 ; 4 – 10 – 9,6 ; 11 – 5 – 8,8 6
– 12 – 22,4 .
“ ” . ,
. “ ”
7 – 70 5 – 1 18,1
; 8 – 70 10 – 1 19,5 ; 9 –
70 15 – 1 20,4 ; 10 – 70 20 – 1 23,5
; 11 – 70 25 – 1 23,8 ; 12 –
70 30 – 1 24,2 , “ – 4”
– 17,9–19,3–20,3–20,6–
22,5–23,7 .
70 5 – 1 1 7 – (17,9; 18,1 ) ,
6 12 – 70 30 – 1 (23,7; 24,2 )
. 2–3–4–5– 8–9–10–11– 0,2–0,1–2,9–1,3
.
: « »
, , , ,
– , -, )
« – 4» ;
. , .
“ ” 70 30 – 1
(65,2 ); 7 “ – 4” “ ”
, 14,4 ;
– 4”
(124,0 ).
“ ” “ – 4”
, 70 30 – 1 (24,2 ).
10 2011
1. .
. 1998 – 2000, . - 1998, 21 – 35 .
2. . – ,
. . , 2009, 22, 23 .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
13
3. ., ., . ,
. 2000, 241 – 243 . 4. ., .
, , 2008, 195 . 5. ., ., .
«Groundnut production in Central Asia and Caucasus Countries: Outluok for the future», 1999, - p.40.
6. . //
. – . 2011, 1, 16 . 7. www. FAO STAT, cooking club.ru…- 17k. 8. www.greeninfo.ru/siter/page=4754 - 49k. 9. FAO. 2003. C .
http//www.FAO.ORJ. 10. www.floranimal.ru/pages/flora/n/6083.html -
14k.
– 4» « » : , , .
, « » « – 4» (5,1 – 11,4 ). , « – 4»
, , , , – 4» (2,8 – 12,4 ) – .
, « » (0,2 – 0,5 ) .
F.S. ACHILOV
Influence of area of feeding of local peanuts on biometric factors In the article data on influence of area of feeding of local peanuts "Kibray - 4" and "Salomat" on biometric
factors, such as plants height, number of branches, leaves and tubers are given. This information shows that "Salomat" variety differs from "Kibray – 4" variety by height of bush (5.1 – 11.4
cm). On the basis of biological characteristics it is proved that "Kibray – 4" variety grows straight, bush availability not quite enough, leaves dimensions are large, quantity of leaves and branches of "Kibray – 4" in difference of the studied variety is lower (2.8 – 12.4 pieces/bush).
It is necessary to emphasize that "Salomat" variety has in root number of branches is higher in comparison with the studied variety (0.2 – 0.5 pieces/bush).
_______________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
14
1-2(43-44) 2011
632.7.753
APHROPHORIDAE CIXIIDAE –
, . ,
. , .
: , , Aphrophoridae Amyot et Serville, Lepyronia Amyot et Serville, Lepyronia coleoptrata L., Philaenus Stal., Philaenus spumarius L., Cixiidae Spinola, Reptalus Emeljanov, Reptalus rufocarinatus, Reptalus nigronervosus, Pentastiridius Kirschbaum, Pentastiridius leporinus, Pentastiridius pallens, Hyalesthes Signoret, Hyalesthes obsoletus
, 1960-1970 -
.
. ,
, -, , , -
. -
, .
. ,
, ,
, -, -
.
. , -
. , -
.
, , ,
, -
. .
. ,
, .
. ,
, , [7, 8], [4, 5], [3],
[1, 2], [9, 10].
,
[1] [6] . - 20
, --
: , -, .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
15
Aphrophoridae Amyot et Serville,
1843, . ,
. , .
, . ,
. ,
. ,
. . , ,
2 : Lepyronia Amyot et Serville, 1843 Philaenus Stal., 1864.
Lepyronia Amyot et Serville , . -,
. .
, ,
. . ,
. . ,
, , .
, , , , ,
; - -.
. , -.
Cicada coleoptrata Linnaeus, 1758. Lepyronia
coleoptrata L. , ,
, . . ,
. 6,0-6,2 , 7,5-8,0 . -
. .
, , .
, -
. . -.
Philaenus Stal., 1864. , .
, ,
. , . -
, . , .
. . ,
. ; , ;
. .
, . . Cicada spumarius
Linnaeus, 1758. Philaenus spumarius
L. , -
. ,
.
. , .
5,3-5,6 , 6,4-6,6 .
. -, , .
. .
, , , .
Cixiidae Spinola, 1839, , -
, , .
, . , ,
. , .
. , 2
. 3 : Reptalus Emeljanov,
Pentastiridius Kirschbaum Hyalesthes Signoret. Cixiidae Spinola
. Reptalus Emeljanov,1971 -
. 2 , .
, . .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
16
. 8 .
,
. .
. Cixius quinquecostatus Dufour, 1833. 2
: Reptalus rufocarinatus Reptalus nigronervosus.
Reptalus rufocarinatus – , ,
5,1-6,7 . , , ,
. , , .
, . , ,
, , , . Reptalus nigronervosus –
. 4,7-5,8 . .
, , -
. .
Pentastiridius Kirschbaum, 1868 – ,
. , .
, ,
.
, . , , ,
, .
.
. , .
Pentastiridius leporinus – , ,
, , . 6,1-6,6 .
, ,
, , . Pentastiridius pallens – -
, . , ,
. 5,5-6,7 . , , . Hyalesthes Signoret, 1865 –
. ,
, .
.
, . , ,
. . Hyalesthes obsoletus Signoret, 1865.
Hyalesthes obsoletus - , . ,
, , . ,
. 3,4-3,6 , 3,6-4 .
. , ,
, , , , , , , .
, , , .
,
, ,
.
12 2010
1. . (Auchen-
norhyncha) , ., , 1966, .152-153.
2. . , , .- .
, 1988, .25-28.
3. . Eupterygidae (Homoptera, Cicadinea) , ., .
. , 1953, .23. 4. .
Orgenaria, Homoptera, ., , 2, 1933, .145-152.
5. . Adoratura (Homoptera, Jassidae), ., -
, 3-4, 1938, .219-222.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
17
6. . (Homoptera, Auchennorhyncha)
, , , 1990, .36-39.
7. . Cicadidae (Hemiptera-Homoptera), .,
, 3 - 4, 1906, .161-163.
8. .) Oshanin V. . Katalog der palaarktischen Hemipteren, , -
, 1912, .187-188.
9. . ,
., , 1, 1988, .53-57.
10. . (Homoptera, Auchennorhyncha) -
, -, 2010, 2, .49-53.
phrophoridae ixiidae
. , .
, .
A.G.KOZHEVNIKOVA
Monitoring the modern condition of Cicadinea family Aphrophoridae and Sixiidae - pests of agricultural plants
In the article results of study of Cicadinea, as pest of agricultural crops are presented, the classification, morphological and bioecological pecularities are given, the most harmful species, their food relationship and carriers of viral diseases of agricultural plants are revealed.
___________________
632.7.635.
. . ,
.
: , , , ,
1973 , 5 , , ,
( )
.
. ,
. ,
, , :
, ,
, ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
18
,
. , . ,
. ,
.
,
.
,
.
, .
,
2 .
( ) ,
, ( ) ,
. ,
,
1:10 (1-).
,
. 60-70% .
.
.
( ) .
,
.
0246
810
12141618
20
,
1- .
( ) . 2-
, - 2- ,
, .
(6 )
. ,
.
-,
.
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
19
.
. , ,
,
.
02468
101214161820
,
2 - .
.
7-8 .
, 1 10 2
( , )
, ,
.
,
.
+ = = 10 2011
1. ., .,
. . / . – . 1986, - 20 .
2. . .
// : . , 1976,
. 128-131. 3. .
Aphidoletes aphidimysa . //
, 1974 .239, .13-15. 4. ., .
Aphidoletes aphidimysa Rond. //
, 1975.- .270, .29-33. 5. . – -
//
. “ ” – . . . . . 24.11.-
, 2008, . 66-68. 6. .
//
. “ – . . . . . 24.11.-
, 2008. . 24-25. 7. ., .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
20
//
. “ –
. . . . . 24.11.- . 2008, .73-75.
8. http://ravnovesie.biz/economy/economy3.html ,
2009. 9. http://kmk.molbiol.ru/agro.html .
- . 10. http://www.greenhouses.ru/zashita_rasteny
.
. , , , .
, ,
.
S RASHIDOVA Control of the quantity of whiteflies on cucumler crops in the condition of green - houses
The article presents data on the species composition of pests of cucumber in the greenhouse in autumn-winter and winter-spring period and use of enkarzia against them. Against pests of cucumbers grown in greenhouses pesticides are used, that results in the contamination of cucumber.
Based on these results it was established that the use of enkarzia against whiteflies on cucumber crops gave positive results, i.e. cucumbers were environmentally friendly, pesticide-free.
_______________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
21
1-2(43-44) 2011
.633.511.58.631.523.
. , . , .
, , , .
( ). , ( ),
1,4 – 12,8 %, 6,3 – 13,9 %. :
– 5,9 – 13,6 %, – 3,6 – 13,8 %, 4,1 – 10,6 3,2 – 6,0 %, – 1,8 – 4,0 1,7 – 3,9 %.
,
.
: , , , , , , , , , ,
,
, -
. -
, ,
– .
, .
, -
.
-. -
[2,7, 12, 13,14].
,
.
, ---
. , ,
[4]. ,
, ,
[11].
. [4], –
, . -
1-2 (43-44) 2011
22
. -
[3]. [8],
-
, .
, .
[6] -
. , -, . ,
.
,
[5, 9, 10, 15]. --
-.
– . –
, ,
, , [4]. ,
,
, .
. . ,
, - [15],
.
, .
( )
.
, ,
. ,
.
( )
,
- ( . 1). ,
. – . -
-
. ,
100 . ( 4 25
).
,
,
– ).
. 1, (2008-2011 .)
1,9 – 5,2 % , .
2,1 – 14,7 %, : – 1,0 – 10,5 12,1 – 16,7, – 0
– 8,9 2,0 – 14,3 % . .
( )
,
. , ,
, , [1].
1-2 (43-44) 2011
23
1 , %
2008 2009 2010
. . . . . . . .
-77 + . - - 83,0 17,0 100 - 91,5 8,5 .
. 97,1 85,3
2,9 14,7
94,8 94,5
5,2 5,5
98,1 97,9
1,9 2,1
96,7 92,6
3,3 7,4
. .
89,5 83,3
10,5 16,7
97,0 87,2
3,0 12,8
98,5 87,9
1,5 12,1
95,0 86,1
5,0 13,9
.
97,4 85,7
2,6 14,3
100 97,4
0 2,6
91,1 98,0
8,9 2,0
96,2 93,7
3,8 6,3
.
97,5 88,6
2,5 11,4
97,9 90,0
2,1 10,0
97,4 89,2
2,6 10,8
97,6 89,3
2,4 10,7
-2 . 74,1 25,9 90,5 9,5 97,1 2,9 87,2 12,8 -3 . 93,3 6,7 94,6 5,4 95,6 4,4 94,5 5,5
-6 . 82,6 17,4 91,7 8,3 97,2 2,8 90,5 9,5 -70 . 92,3 7,7 94,6 5,4 100 - 95,6 4,4 -75 . 97,5 2,5 97,6 2,4 100 - 98,4 1,6
-90 . 91,5 8,5 94,9 5,1 93,7 6,3 93,4 6,6 . - - 97,1 2,9 97,3 2,7 97,2 2,8 . - - 97,2 2,8 100 - 98,6 1,4
. - - 87,8 12,2 93,7 6,3 90,8 9,2 . - - 92,3 7,7 92,8 7,2 92,5 7,5
: 2009
,
.
. , 2008 , , ,
. -,
- -,
( ) 2,5 25,9 %.
: - – 3,3 – 7,4, – 5,0 – 13,9, – 6 – 9,5, -2 – 12,8 % . -
,
- (
.), ( 25 )
. – 2 2009-2010
160 ., 2011 - 170 . ., - 50 . .
,
, ,
, - [4].
,
, ,
, .
-
0,5 12,0 . . 2,
.
6,4 ± 0,4, 5,6 ± 0,12, – 6,0 ± 0,2 6,6 ± 0,5,
– 6,2 ± 0,4 6,4 ± 0,3 .
. , -
. -
–
1-2 (43-44) 2011
24
( ).
3,6 13,8 %.
2 –
(2008-2010 .)
1 , . , % , .
M ± V M ± V M ± V -77 6,0 ± 0,4 10,7 35,9 ± 1,4 7,5 32,0 ± 0,6 4,0
+ 6,7 ± 0,9 5,6 ± 0,1
9,6 3,6
35,9 ± 0,8 36,7 ± 1,0
8,1 6,0
32,3 ± 0,5 33,2 ± 0,9
2,6 3,9
+ 6,0 ± 0,2 6,6 ± 0,5
5,9 13,8
39,0 ± 2,4 37,7 ± 1,0
10,6 5,2
32,8 ± 0,6 32,7 ± 0,4
3,0 2,7
+ 6,2 ± 0,4 6,4 ± 0,3
12,8 10,9
39,0 ± 1,2 38,0 ± 0,6
7,8 3,2
33,6 ± 0,4 32,6 ± 0,3
1,8 1,7
+ 5,8 ± 0,2 7,0 ± 0,8
7,5 11,8
37,3 ± 1,2 38,1 ± 2,4
6,8 5,5
32,3 ± 0,5 32,5 ± 0,5
3,5 3,0
2 6,8 ± 0,3 10,0 36,2 ± 0,7 4,1 32,3 ± 0,4 2,0 -3 7,4 ± 0,4 10,1 36,8 ± 2,2 7,0 32,9 ± 0,6 4,0
- 6 -5,9 ± 0,4 11,0 37,7 ± 2,0 5,0 32,8 ± 0,5 2,7 – 70 6,5 ± 0,6 13,6 37,7 ± 1,3 6,6 -31,4± 0,5 3,1 -75 6,4 ±0,4 11,5 37,4 ± 1,1 5,0 33,0 ± 0,4 2,7
-90 8,0 ± 0,5 13,5 37,5 ± 0,8 4,2 33,2 ± 0,4 2,0 7,4 ± 0,4 9,9 - 34,5 ± 1,4 6,8 32,7 ± 0,6 3,2 6,9 ± 0,6 12,8 36,9 ± 1,6 8,3 32,8 ± 0,5 2,9
7,0 ±0,5 13,6 39,2 ± 2,2 10,0 32,7 ± 0,6 4,0 6,8 ± 0,3 9,7 37,3 ± 0,8 4,5 32,3 ± 0,4 2,7
: 1) – , – 2) .
-.
.
3,2 – 10,6 %. ,
, ,
(37,3 – 39,2 %). ,
. -
.
, .
31,4 33,6 . 0,3 – 1,2 .
– 70). ,
1,7 – 4,0 %. , ,
( – ). ,
- –
( ) , , .
–
.
–
,
.
. --
,
.
11 2011
1-2 (43-44) 2011
25
1. .
. . . , . 1963.
2. . .
. . . . , 3, 1981. 3. . . //
, . . 3, 1969. 4. . – ., , 1986. 5. .
. , , 1989. 6. .
. .- ., - , 1935. 7. . .
. . « ,
». , , 1991. 8. .
. , , 1988. 9. . -
. , . , 1970.
10. .
. // , . VI, 9, 1970.
11. ., . -. . , ., 1942.
12. . -
. . « .- .
, . ». ., 1983.
13. . . . « ».
4. , 1962. 14. . .
-. .
, ». , , 1981.
15. . . , . . ,
1968.
, ,
,
, ,
.
. 1,4 – 12,8
, ( ) 6,3 – 13,9 . ( ) 5,9 –
13,6 , 3,6 – 13,8 , , – 4,1 – 10,6 3,2 – 6,0 1,8 – 4,0 1,7 – 3,9 .
( ) ,
.
S.ODILOV, S.NABIEV, KH.JUMABEKOV
Intersort phenotypic in homogeneity in ontogenesis raises the improvement and adaptive potential of populations of synthetic cotton grades
The new and zoned cotton grades on modifies change of fruit branches, on the character of branching, on weight of raw cotton ball, on length and output of fiber have been studied by the authors during many years. The grades studied were divided into typical and seasonal (modified binds) at the end of vegetation.
At the posterity of typical plants were reproduced 1,4 -12,8 % of seasonal kinds in average (at all grades); at modifiers (similar to themselves) it mode up 6,3 – 13,9 %.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
26
The coefficient of modified change at the posterity of typical plants made up: on the weight of one raw cotton ball – 5,9 – 13,6 %; at modifiers – 3,6 – 13,8 %; on the output of fiber accordingly – 4,1 – 10,6 % and 3,2 – 6,0 %; on the length of fiber – 1,8 -4,0 % and 1,7 – 3,9 %.
The reproduction of seasonal kinds is a natural and biological regularity to widen the range of changes and to increase the adaptation of grades in different conditions of agrarian environment.
__________________
: 625.62:635.527
.
, 42 12 . 7
, , , , .
: - ; - ; - ; - . : ms s, Bottner ( ) Great Lakes
), .
: , , , , ,
, -,
. ,
, , .
, , .
- .
. , ,
3-4 ,
.
, 42 12 . 27-30 .
1,5-2,0 . -
(1987).
.
7 – ,
, , , 1).
(4,5 ) : R ms s, –
Ostinata Winter Lake. – 30-38
: ms s, Bottner Ostinata. -
. ,
9 17 .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
27
, (215,0-250,0 ) ,
10,0 25,0 1,0 27,0 . Lepperman,
,
(100 ). 3,0-4,5 , (4,5 ) -
Ostinata Great Lakes. 1,5 , -
Lepperman.
1
-
- ,
. -,
,
- ,
-,
,
,
- ,
2
-
. 3,0 40 205,0 3,0 3,0 0,5 1,87
Winter Lake -1425 4,0 46 215,0 4,0 3,5 1,0 2,34 ms s -1216 4,5 30 243,0 4,0 2,0 0,5 2,74
Bottner -1158 4,5 32 230,0 4,0 2,0 1,0 2,68 Ostinata -1647 4,0 38 230,0 4,5 2,0 1,0 2,42
Lepperman -1237 3,0 40 100,0 3,0 1,5 0,0 1,15 Great Lakes -1322 4,0 42 250,0 4,5 3,0 2,5 2,90
Grand Rapids -405 4,0 44 242,0 4,0 2,0 2,0 2,82
0,5-2,5 . Great Lakes,
. Lepperman.
,
Lepperman, 0,72 2 . ,
( , , )
. R ms s, Grand
Rapids (2,82 2) Great Lakes (2,90 2). ,
:
- (4,5 .) – R ms s Bottner; (30-38
) – R ms s, Bottner, Ostinata;
(14-17 ) - Grand Rapids, Ostinata, Great Lakes;
242,0-250,0 ) -Grand Rapids, R ms s Great Lakes;
(0,0 . ) – Lepperman; (2,34-2,90 2) – Winter Lake, Ramcec, Ostinata, Great Lakes Grand Rapids.
: ms s,
Bottner ( ) Great Lakes ( ),
.
12 2011
1. . -
. // .
., . . .45. .I. 1971, – . 216 – 227.
2. ., . . – .
, 1987,- . 45-47.
3. . . // . ,
1972, – . 45-46. 4. .
// . , 1996, 2, - . 23.
5. . - // - ., 1998, - 3,
. 66-67.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
28
6. . -
. // , - . 101,- , 1980,- .14-18.
7. . .
// . . – . 120,- , 1982, - . 33-37. 8. ., .
. // -. – , 1982, - .38-42.
9. . . //
, : , 1980,- . 98-102. 10. .
. // . . .
, ., 1979, - . 160-161.
.
( )
12 42 . , , ,
, 7 . –
, , . : ses, Bottner (Germany) Great Lakes (Canada)
.
Z.T.BUSTANOV Economic and biological estimation of foreign
varieties od salad at winter sowing in conditions of Andijan region In conditions of Andijan region at winter sowing the collection , including 42 samples from 12 countries of
the world was studied. As a result of study 7 most cold-resistant forms of the foreign origin from Australia, Danmark, Holland, Germany, Canada and USA were selected.
From studied variety samples of salad at pre-winter sowing of initial forms for breeding in conditions of Andijan region were chosen: - for cold-resistant; - for fast-ripeness; - for long period of the conservation to marketability of cabbage; - on productivity. As to the complex of studied economic features the best are varieties:
ses, Bottner (Germany) and Great Lakes (Canada) , which can serve as the source material in breeding of salad varieties for winter sowing in conditions of the Republic.
_____________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
29
1-2(43-44) 2011
:641.46 . , . .
( , ,
, ) , .
: , , , , , ,
.
.
, ,
. ,
.
, . ,
,
. .
.
. .
, . , ,
. ,
, .
, . ,
, ,
. , ,
. ,
30-40 . 50-70
[6,7]
, . -
. , . ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
30
, ,
.
.
(
1999, 2002).
,
.
, : , , -
, , .
.
( , 1988). , ,
, .
. ,
.
, .
.
, , -
0-30 30-50
. - – , -
( ) , – , -
.
1
.
, , ,
, ( )
.
.
,
. (1973) .
. , -
.
.
,
, ( ) -
106,5-169,0
. :
( , , )
,
(1- ).
, -
. --
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
31
(C:N) . .
, 15 .
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
0
50
100
150
200
250
1- .
,
.
375 . 450 ,
690 ,
.
. ,
.
-.
,
.
1 -
150-690 , 75-450 ,
60-375 . ,
2 .
-. -
.
, -,
, .
0-15 ,
.
( ) .
Penicillium, Trichoderma, Aspergillius Rhizopus
. Penicillium , ,
.
.
.
. 45-150
, 75-255 , 2 .
, 90-255
. 75-210 .
, .
3- , .
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
32
. .
, . , ,
=
.
. ,
-,
, -
.
, .
+ = = 12 2011
1. .
. . «
-», . . 1972, 7-20 .
2. . . .: , 1987, 256 .
3. . -. .: , 1991, 303 .
4. .
. , . 6. 1930. 5. .
, . , 1956.
6. . -. .
1957. 7. . -
. : , . . , 1957.
. , . .
,
, .
, .
I.TURAPOV, D.U.BURKHONOVA
The influence of some agro-technicians on microflore of the soil The materials taken on the data of some physiological grops of microorganisms accured in
irrigating typical serozem soil of inguil district, Tashkent region are analysed in this article. In the result of these anylyses are revealed that microorganismes increasing takes place in the experimental variant of seed bed soil gattering where less waste of nitrogen noticed which plays important role at the exchange of v substances and increasing of stuch and aminnoarid compounds.
____________
633.51
(MATRICARIA L.) (CALENDULA OFFICINALISL) , -
(Matricaria L.) (Calendula officinalisl) ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
33
, , ,
.
: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
,
. ,
, ,
, ,
. , -
, 42 .
, , ,
. (1930, 1937) , (1936)
(1939) , (1982) . , (1992-1999) .
(2005), , (1993) , . (2007) .
.(1990-2001) ,
, - .
(Matricaria L.) . , ,
, . ,
, , , ( ,
).
.
. (Calendula
officinalisl .
, , , ,
, .
. ,
.
2008
.
. ,
4 . -16 ,
– 22,5 , – 360 2 . – 120 2.
:
(45%), (20% 2 5 ), (50-60% 2 ).
0-30, 30-50 50-70
: - ; - , .
; - ; - - ;
- ; - ;
- ; NPK - ,
-.
(Matricaria resutita L).
1-2 (43-44) 2011
34
, , ,
(1981 ) .
, (0-30 ) – 1,38%,
– 0,110%, – 0,185% 2,30% .
,
29,5 , 30,5 310 (1- ).
1-
(2009 , )
, % , , , %
N P K N-NO3 P2O5 K2O CaCO3
0-30 1,38 0,110 0,185 2,30 29,5 30,5 310 8,5 30-50 1,01 0,085 0,163 2,10 18,2 18,5 320 8,5 50-70 0,65 0,050 0,090 2,20 12,5 13,0 290 8,3
70-100 0,43 0,083 0,080 1,85 7,8 9,2 285 8,7
,
.
20 70% ,
25-30 . 15-
170 60 , 2-3 .
7-8 .
, .
30
. ,
. 35-40 25-
30 .
7-8 . ,
8 .
2- 2009 Matricaria L.
( )
I II III IV V VI VII VIII ,
75 110 200 310 450 380 300 150 1975 N70, P50, K30 110 200 300 300 350 390 320 200 2170 N70, P50, K- 130 220 310 360 390 400 340 260 2410 N70, P50, K30 110 180 250 310 350 360 290 210 2060 N70, P50, K30 140 250 330 370 410 450 400 320 2670 N100, P70, K50 150 200 290 360 440 490 420 360 2720 N150, P105, K75 180 280 370 440 490 520 460 410 3150 N100, P70, K50,
20 160 270 350 400 440 480 440 400 2930
,
, .
alendulla officinalis L.) - – Asteraceae
) ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
35
. .
(3% ) , 10% –
. ,
, , , , , ,
. , , ,
. ,
(0-30 ) – 1,34%, – 0,120%, – 0,19% 2,40%
.
,
28 , 30,3 315
(3- ). ,
.
20 70%
, 25-30 . 15-17
0 60 . 2-3 10 .
8-9 .
.
3-
(2009 , )
, % , ,
, % N P K N-NO3 P2O5 K2O CaCO3
0-30 1,34 0,120 0,19 2,40 28 30,3 315 8,3 30-50 1,03 0,101 0,17 2,20 21 20,1 319 8,0 50-70 0,71 0,070 0,09 2,10 16 15,4 290 8,1 70-100 0,47 0,035 0,07 1,85 12 9,2 282 8,6
30
. ,
. 40 30
.
7-8
.
10-12 (4- ).
,
,
. 4-
2009 alendulla officinalis L. ( )
I II III IV V VI VII VIII
,
200 350 400 700 1000 900 750 400 4700 N70, P50, K30 330 450 600 600 950 1200 850 500 5480 N70, P50, K- 380 570 710 850 1150 1270 920 600 6400 N70, P50, K30 290 420 680 770 1050 1090 870 620 5790 N70, P50, K30 400 560 760 850 1210 1180 1020 900 6880 N100, P70, K50 450 580 800 1000 1250 1110 1000 900 7090 N150, P105, K75 500 720 110 1350 1580 1420 1300 1100 9070 N100, P70, K50,
20 460 610 890 1170 1380 1250 1150 1000 7910
1-2 (43-44) 2011
36
.
1. ,
,
. 2. , -
150 , 105
75
( .
3. 20 -
, .
+ = = 25 2011
1. ., . -
, : 1976. 2. ., .
, : 1982. 3. .
, . 1987. 4. ., .
. 1992. 5. ., .
, . 1994.
6. . , . 1993.
7. . , . 1998.
8. . , -.1999. 9. . , . 2001. 10. .
, . 2005. 11. ., . -
, . 2007.
,
(Matricaria L.) (Calendula officinalisl) , (Matricaria L.)
(Calendula officinalisl), , ,
, .
A.A. RUSTAMOV Effect of mineral fertilizers on growth, development
and quality of medicinal plants camomile (Matricaria L.) and marigold (Calendula officinalisl) The article provides the information on the cultivation and development of camomile (Matricaria L.) and
marigold (Calendula officinalis L.), as well as the impact of organic and mineral fertilizers on the quality of their raw material, agrochemical properties of studied soil, the order of irrigation and fertilizer use, and their phenological observations.
____________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
37
1-2(43-44) 2011
: 636.085+591.1
.
, )
( , .) ,
.
: , , , , , , , , , ,
, , ,
,
70-80 % ( 100 % ) ,
. ,
42-47 % [2,3]
,
,
[2,5].
, 1,5
– 2.0 [4,5].
,
.
, ( ,
– )
, -
.
,
,
« » (31 )
, (30 ) , (31 )
. .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
38
.
10 – 12 ,
. 17 – 20
20
20 0.4 .
1-
I II III
70 50 50 30 30 30
- 20 20 - - 2 %
2-
1 - 2 – 3 – 0,53 0,55 0,55
, 40 40 40 ( ) 7,1 7,2 7,2 ( ) 3,6 4,0 4,0
( ) 1,74 1,82 1,82 ( ) 13 19 19
2 –
.
-.
(1968, 1986)
, I – II –
, 72,3 77,6 % ,
18,8 13,4 % .
,
,
. 2 – ,
,
. ,
12 – 15 % .
3 – , %
I 60,3 62,3 54,4 62,1 43,4 67,4 36,4 II 62,2 64,4 55,2 66,0 55,0 68,7 49,5 III 64,3 66,6 56,4 73,0 57,7 68,2 48,4
,
III –
1-2 (43-44) 2011
39
. II –
N, Ca, P S
-.
, III – .
,
(1 20 ,
– )
-.
+ = = 11 2011
1. ., .
. . , 2008, 6, 24 .
2. . -
. / . 45 .3. 1991, - . 243-246.
3. , ., , .// .
. . . 1986. 4. . -
. . , 10, 1989, 42-45 .
5. . -
. / 35. 2. 1975, - 45-51.
6. . . -. . .1986.
7. . -. . . 1953.
8. . -. . 1987.
9. ., . . ,
. 1967. . .
.
,
, , ( 20 1 ).
.
M. S. KYZIEV
Effect of chemical processing of roughage by means of reagents In order to supply the organism of goats with essential nourishing substances during winter periods of the
year, it is necessary to carry out thermic processing of the roughage, included in daily diet contents, by ammonia water (at the rate of 20 kg per 1 ton of straw) since chemical processing of roughage makes it possible to increase the amount of eaten forage and the number of nourishing substances in daily diet contents of the animals
_______________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
40
1-2(43-44) 2011
: 636.144.5
, ,
, , .
.
: , , , , , ,
–
,
. 0,1 )
, .
, ,
. -
. -
. ,
.
, 0,036-
0,116 .
. ,
, , , - 50 . -
. , ,
, -
, .
, ,
, .
,
, .
-
[2],
« » [1].
», : - ( ) – 10 ;
( )- 40 ; )- 100 – 50 ,
,
« ».
1-2 (43-44) 2011
41
2011
, 5 ; .
– I 50 %-
« » 0,2 II
- 50 %-
» 0,4 . ( 0,5 ) ,
. 26 19 . , ,
. 50%-
. ( , )
,
, II- ,
35,0%.
II- , « » . ,
104,4 , - 1252,8 ,
- 75,7 908,0 .
, ,
12 .
1.
1
n
, )
, )
, )
( 1 )
5 6,4±0,09 105,8±0,18 1269,6±0,053
I- ( » 0,2
)
5 7,0±0,10 117,2±0,15 1406,4±0,043
II- ( » 0,4
)
5 8,8±0,16 142,2±0,059 1706,4±0,034
1 ,
,
34,4 %,
. « »
II 0,4 1
.
II ,
35,0% ( < 0,001). , ,
« » ,
, -
,
. ,
. , - 240,9 %, 51,2 %, – 24,1%, - 40,4 %,
– 27,0 % - 202,9%. 2 ,
.
- 0,62 %, - 0,08, -
0,94 < 0,001, - 3,44 - 3,1 % <
0,05.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
42
2
%
% 2,44 5,88 240,0 % 1,91 2,53 51,2
% 1,00 1,08 27,0 % 3,91 0,94 24,1
% 7,35 2,97 40,4 % 3,01 6,11 202,9
,
, 0,4
, , -,
-
.
, 2 2011
1. ., . -
. . , 2007, 11, - . 10-14.
2. ., . -.
. , 2009, 9, - .17-18.
, ,
– , ,
. , .
.
O.S.TURAEV, A.P.BEZVERXOV, G.B.KOSHPAEVA
Organic selen for feeding the honey – bu in the condition Tashkent The influence of organic selen scientific – on growth, development, substance exchange and family
productivity of honey – bee has been studied in the scientific – experimental farm. The experiments shewed the efficiency of honey – bee nutriment as organic selen on various growing periads. At the stages of experiments were studied the influence of organic selen on the whole development indicators of honey – bee families.
_____________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
43
1-2(43-44) 2011
632.6.22
. . ,
18,5 % 16,3 %.
: , , , , , ,
,
. [1,2,3]
, -
,
. ,
-
, , -
, -.
- 40 . , -
23-43%, 27-34%,
14-31%, - 37%, - 29-38% [4,5,6,7,8,9].
,
, -
-.
.
, -
.
-.
, ,
. , ( . 1).
1-2 (43-44) 2011
44
.1. ) ; ) ; ) (F)
. Tst 63.03.2001 «
.
» (5).
- R=200 .
. 2.
) )
.2. ) ; )
, . 3. ,
,
. 0,085-0,115 .,
.
, ,
,
.
.
, .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
45
.3.
-
,
, .
, ,
. ,
, .
, ,
. ,
(t) . 5) :
cos2
2(*2 tgkhbt p , (1)
b ;
pk ;
, ;
, .
,
75 , ,
, .
okpk AhbMnBkhkfGF ))(1(41)( 2
. , (2)
f .
k , ; ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
46
, ,
4 ; ;
h , ;
pk ;
kB , 3 ; – , ;
oh , ;
A -
, 2 .
.
2(kAfG
, (3)
, 2 . , (3)
, 50-52 .
,
: R- , L- , b
, V- , /c.
,
4 --
,
: R` =0,230 ; L=0,210 ; b 0,15 =0,25 .
-,
. --2-50
, .
«Magnum».
,
18,5 % 16,3 %.
-
. -
18,5 % 16,3 %.
6 2011
1. ., .,
. .
. // /.
, 1991, 70-75 . 2. ., .
.
. // /. , 1991, 64-70 . 3. .
.
. . . , 1993, - .27.
4. .
. . . . . , 2000, -. .103.
5. . -
. .
2010, 4, - . 130-134. 6. ., . .
.
. 2007. 12. - .8-9. 7. .
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
47
. 2006. 2, - .35-36.
8. ., . .
. .2007, - . 37-38.
9. . . - ,
. . 2007, - . 37-38.
10. .
( ). .
. . . . . . . 2010, - .22.
= - -
, .
18,5 % 16,3 % .
F.Y. JYRAEV The chisel – crumbler for loosing of the gypsum soil
In this article results of the research on the basis parameters of the labor organs of the chisel-crumblier for the concentrating the gypsum layers of the soil in the condition of irrigated agriculture and test results of its experimental example are given. It is established that using of the offered chisel-crumblier with optimum parameters allows to bring down direct exploitation expenditure to 18,5% and increases unit productivity to 16,3%.
______________
631.348.44.02
,
.
.
h . : , , –
, , ,
[1], ( ,
) : – , –
, – -.
, -,
, .
,
: – 30 ,
– 350 - 400 .
, ,
. , , .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
48
, .
. , ,
,
1062,0
32,050,012,048,0
rQrA
(1)
= 0,86 ; - , -1;
- , ;
- , 2 ; - , 3;
r - , ; Q - ,
; - , 2.
1Q ,
62,0/132,05,012,048,062,01 / rArQr
:
, (2) , .
q )
, q ( )
qWq
W - , .
W 1,0 ,
- ) ( ) .
bn ,
n - ,
; b - , .
q ( ) -
mqq ,
m - . q
nqq
., (3)
n . - ) .
-
1Qq
(3) n . , .
11.
1,0Qm
qQqn , (4)
(4) , ( )
-.
( ) :
dtddj /)6/( 3 ,
22 )4/(dk
l .
, PPj
.
)/1(fd , .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
49
,
.
: - -
, . . -
. k = = R ,
R/ .
( , )
d
6/12/12 )(sin)/(3,2 Rd
, ,
3/12
22
)(sin3,2dR , (5)
3/1
22
)(sin38,0p
dD . (6)
, )
h .
.1)
2/tgh , (7)
2/)(2/ tghRtgh , (8)
(7) (8) ( )
2/)(2/ tghRtgh
)/()2/(2/ hRtghtg
)/()2/(2 hRtgharctg
l
h
k
Rp
Z Rb
0
Db Dp
. 1
t A C
1-2 (43-44) 2011
50
)1//()2/(2 hRtgarctg , (9)
,
sinsinRt
t
sinsinRt
2180 ;
2/902
180
)1//()2/(cos)1//()2/(2sin
hRtgarctghRtgarctgRt (10)
N ( ) ( , )
p tDN / (11)
(6)
.
N t , (11)
/tND (12)
N ( )
, (9)
N /360 (13)
, .
1. ( , )
q ) ,
. 2.
h ,
.
, 20 2011
1. . .
. – .: , 1975, –191 .
2. ., ., . . – .: , 1982, 287 .
,
. ( , )
. .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
51
E.I. IBRAGIMOV, Z.U. USYPOV
The design of monodisperse spray for huge outlet of liqnids
In clause the design procedure of a spray for monodisperse spray liquids on greater charges is developed. Thus the quantity of gear elements in a spray is established in view of norm of the charge of a liquid and the critical charge for monodisperse spray liquids. The quantity tooth on a gear element of a spray is defined at the set height h and a corner at top of a tooth.
____________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
52
1-2(43-44) 2011
: 502+504.064.37:528.8+631.4
,
NDVI
NDVI, LANDSAT ,
, .
: , , , , LANDSAT, NDVI, , , ,
–
. ,
. ,
. , ,
, .
, , , ,
, -
. ,
.
( ), .
,
, :
, -, ;
, -
. «
» , ,
. - ,
.
-
, ,
, .
- .
,
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
53
: . (1984), , -
(1986), . (1983), , (1993),
(1986) . ,
, ,
,
, .
, ,
, .
. (1967), ,
. ,
. .
( , , .).
LANDSAT (1980, 1989, 2000, 2009 .).
.
, LANDSAT
100 , 17 , ,
. , LANDSAT,
,
.
,
. -
, ,
. . ,
400-800 , ,
, .
LANDSAT
. , ,
( , , , Landsat, SPOT, IRS, Ikonos,
QuickBird .), .
, , ( , . , 2003).
( )
. , , - ( )
. ,
10- - ,
10 10 . , ( )
, . ,
.
1 . ,
30 .
. ,
) .
:
, );
-; ; ; .
, ,
( . ),
1-2 (43-44) 2011
54
. .
,
, .
( ,
)
, .
. , -
.
. , ,
, , , -
.
) .
, ( .1).
NDVI (normalized difference vegetation index – )
– , ,
.
.
. NDVI=(NIR-Red)/(NIR+Red)
NIR, Red – - -
. NDVI
. NDVI (
)
. (0,6-0,7 )
, (0,7-1,0 )
.
( , , )
.
,
, ,
, , , .
. , NDVI,
« » , ,
, NDVI -
, -
, , ( -
) , ), ,
,
. NDVI, ,
, -
. ,
NDVI. -
ERDAS : ,
(Supervised classification), -
(Unsupervised classification). , ( ) – -
.
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
55
. 1. LANDSAT
1980 ., 1989 ., 2000 ., 2009 .
( ) , .
,
.
( ). -,
, ( - convergence
threshold).
.
, , -
. , - ( -
1-2 (43-44) 2011
56
) )
(DN - digital numbers). -
, , .
, 1980 , -
.
,
: ( -
); ,
;
, .
,
, -
, .
.
, , ,
, -
, -
-, -
.
10 2011
1. ., .
, // 100
. .: , 1986. 2. . -
. .: , 1984. 3. . .
// , 1980. 4.
4. ., . - //
, 1983. 5. ., .
// 100 . .: , 1986.
6. ., . //
// .: , 2003, - 168 .
7. ., . .
: . – .: , 2001. – .264.
8. ., . -
// : . . . .
. ., 2000. - .144-155. 9. http://gis-lab.info/qa/ndvi.html NDVI -
] . 10. http://mapexpert.com.ua/index_ru.php?id=4&t
able=news ., ., ., ., .
.
,
NDVI
LANDSAT NDVI .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
57
V.X.SHERIMBETOV, L.A.GAFUROVA
Using the index NDVI on the basis of processing of remote material with purpose of monitoring of desertification processes
In this article the material on index of the difference of vegetation NDVI got after processing of remote picture LANDSAT on the basis of GIS technology with purpose of ecological monitoring of degradation process, occurred on soils of Djizak steppe is given.
_____________
631.354:633.1
, .
. ,
. : , , , ,
,
-, -
,
.
,
[1]. ,
.
( .1).
. 1.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
58
-
-.
, ,
.
2
.
. 2 ( )
,
.
[2,3]
. -
-
,
, , ,
.
-
: - -
, ;
- V W –
, ;
-
, -
. , -
,
, -.
. ,
,
, ( )
, (
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
59
, .).
, -
, . ,
Qp
. .
-.
-
, .
, ( ), Vk ), Qp (
), ( ) .
.
V1 , - qp (t) -
Qp . ,
Q , ( Gn ),
. qp (t)
. ,
Q (L) L .
[Z (t), (t)],
.
R (t) [4].
, .
,
, f1 f2,
. N4
.
(
) , ,
.
.
.
, -,
, , , -
, ; ,
.
,
, =1 .
,
, 0.
-
( .3).
, . ,
.
– -
. , ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
60
1 2 .
,
.
. 3. :
- ; - ; - .
S1 - ; S2 - ; (S1 - S2) = - , .
,
. , -
, , . ,
( ), .
-
, .
.
.
10 2010
1.
2010/0231.1 KZ.
// ., ., ., ., .
2. 2010/0599.1 KZ. -
// ., ., . .
3. 2010/0465.1 KZ.
// ., ., . .
4. . . //
. – , 2003, 3, – . 83-88.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
61
, . ,
.
.
M.S.AGZAMOV Influence of accelerator of bio-mass on oil-seed quality
The measures on productivety increase, oil-seed waste decreasing in the process of harvest are discussed in this article. The main part of these wastes, according to the authors’ conclusions, is the result of crushing and insufficient breaking the oil-seeds. The researches directed on improvement of the crushing quality indexes of oil-seed and output of combine-machines are important for plant-oil production and are actual.
__________________
577.857.7:581.143.5.633.511
. , . ,
IN VITRO ,
in vitro NaCl , .
NaCl .
100 , 150 NaCl. , , ,
, . NaCl
: , .
: , , in vitro, , , NaCl, , , ,
2008 50%
[3]. -
, -
, -. , -
, ,
, -
, -
, , [8].
, -, -
,
[8, 18].
NaCl
, , -
1-2 (43-44) 2011
62
, .
, , Solanum tuberosum
L., , , NaCl
[8, 18]. in vitro [5, 9,
12]. , NaCl 100 ,
, Solanum tuberosum L. -
, 200 ,
[1, 2, 11].
, -,
, , .
.
, .
, [6, 13, 15, 16]. , ,
,
. ,
, [4, 19].
P. euphratica Olive P. talassica Kom. X (P. Euphratica + Salix alba L).
[7]. 50- -
, -,
, . [17].
;
, .
in vitro.
in vitro.
: -46,
(Solanum tuberosum L. Solanum tuberosum L.), -73 (Solanum tuberosum L. Solanum andigena) -55 (Solanum andigena Solanum tuberosum L.),
-17 (LR 93.221 x C 93.154). Populus uzbekistanica
Kom., P.alba L. Dorskamps Beoupre.
NaCl
, - [10], – 4%,
– 100 , – 100 . –
0,01 – 10 . 20, 50, 100, 150
200 NaCl. : 16:8,
2000 , 20-230 . , NaCl
, , .
28- -.
50 20 .
. , ,
Solanum tuberosum L., NaCl 15 30 [16].
, .
20 200 . ,
NaCl,
.
NaCl . 1 . 2.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
63
1 NaCl in vitro ( )
20mM NaCl 50mM NaCl
100mM NaCl
150mM NaCl 200mM NaCl
1. C-17 3,58 3,57 3,34 2,00 1,5 2. C-46 2.55 2,53 1.79 1.40 3. C-55 2,30 2,22 1,80 0,70 4. C-73 3,35 3,32 3,20 1,70 1,1
5. P. uzbekistanica Kom. 4,6 4,5 4,1 3,8 2,5 1,6 6. P.alba L. 4,8 4,8 4,6 4,1 2,8 1,9 7. Dorskamps 5,5 5,3 4,8 2,8 1,0
8. Beoupre 5,7 5,3 4,9 2,7 0,9
, 1, NaCl 20
in vitro , .
NaCl 50 , .
-17 -73,
. 100 NaCl
. .
-17 -73 P. uzbekistanica Kom. P.alba L.
, ,
.
150 NaCl
-46 -55, -17 -73
Dorskamps Beoupre -.
, P.alba L. P.
uzbekistanica Kom. 200 NaCl
.
NaCl in vitro ,
. NaCl
. 2.
2 NaCl in vitro
20 50 100 150Mm NaCl 200mM NaCl
/
/
1. C-17 4,4 4,8 4,3 4,8 4,0 3,9 2,1 1,9 1,1 0,8 2. C-46 4,4 4,1 4,2 3,9 2,7 2,3 1,2 0,8 3. C-55 3,4 2,7 3,4 2,6 3,3 3,8 1,1 0,7 4. C-73 4,2 3,1 4,1 3,1 4,1 3,8 1,8 1,7 1,1 0,9
5. P.uzb* 3,6 3,7 3,5 3,5 3,4 3,3 2,6 2,1 1,2 1,0 1,0 0,5 6. P.alba 3,8 4,1 3,6 4,0 3,5 3,8 2,8 2,6 1,3 1,2 1,1 0,7 7. D * 4,2 4,1 4,0 3,9 3,6 3,4 1,8 2,1 1,0 0,3 8. B * 3,9 3,8 3,9 3,6 3,6 3,2 2,1 1,9 1,1 0,2
* P.uzb - P. uzbekistanica Kom ; D – Dorskamps; - Beoupre
1-2 (43-44) 2011
64
, - NaCl -
.
, NaCl
, . 20
,
. 50
. .
NaCl 100
. 150 ,
200 . , ,
NaCl
,
, .
,
,
. ,
. ,
-17 -73 P. alba L. ,
, ,
100 , 150 . ,
, ,
, .
. 10 2010
1. ., . -
in vitro , .
« -
», , 11-12 2008 ., . 74-77.
2. ., ., ., ., .,* .. “ in
vitro ”.
. -, ,
. , 18-19 , 2009 , -186 .
3. , -, 2008, -
«
», -88 . 4. Aurore Caruso, Domenico Morabito, Francis
Delmotte, Guy Kahlem, Sabine Carpin. Dehydrin
induction during drought and osmotic stress in Populus.- Plant Physiol. Biochem. 40 (2002) 1033–1042 p.
5. Farhatullah, Rashid Mahmood and Raziuddin. In vitro Effect of Salt on the Vigor of Potato (Solanum tuberosm L.) Plantlets.// Biotechnology, Volume 1 Number 2-4: 73-77 p. 2002.
6. Hausman J.F., Kevers C., Gaspar T. Auxin-polyamine interaction in the control of the rooting inductive phase of poplar shoots in vitro. – Plant Science 110 (1995) 63-71 p.
7. Huan_cheng Ma, Lindsay Fung, Sha-Sheng Wang, Arie Altman, Aloys Huttermann. Photosyn-thetic response of Populus euphratica to salt stress. – Forest Ecology and Management 93 (1997) 55-61 p.
8. Javad Shateriana, Doug Waterera, Hielke De Jongb, Karen K. Tanino. Differential stress responses to NaCl salt application in early- and late-maturing diploid potato (Solanum sp.) clones.// Environmental and Experimental Botany, 54 (2005) 202–212 p.
9. Judit Dobranszki, Katalin Magyar-Tabori and Agnes Takacs-Hudak. Growth and developmental responses of potato to osmotic snress under in vitro conditions/ Acta Biologica Hungarica. 2003. 54 13 4. 365-372 p.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
65
10. Murashige T., Skoog F. A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures // J.: Physiol. Plant., 1962.- 15,- p. 473-497.
11. Nasirova G.B., Abdurakhmanov T.R., Mikhalchik V., Kholmuratov E.G. “Influence of NaCl increased concentrations on growth and development of potato shoots in vitro”. International Scientific-Applied Conference: Present State of Potato Production and Truck Gardening and Their Scientific Support. Alma-Ata. 2006, -p. 103-108.
12. Ochatt S.J., Marconi P.L., Radice S., Arnozis P.A., Caso O.H.. In vitro recurrent selection of potato: production and characterization of salt tolerant cell lines and plants.// Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ culture. 1999. 55: -p.1-8.
13. Paula Madejon, Teodoro Maranon, Jose M. Murillo, Brett Robinson. White poplar (Populus alba) as a biomonitor of trace elements in contaminated riparian forests. - Environmental Pollution 132 (2004) 145-155 p.
14. Rahman M.H., Islam R., Hassain M., Haider S.A. Differential response of potato under sodium chloride stress conditions in vitro. J. Bio-Sci. 16, 2008, -p. 79-83
15. Rumiana Djingova, Gerard Wagner, Danielo Peshev. Heavy metal distribution in Bulgaria using Populus nigra ‘Italica’ as a biomonitor. – The Science of the Total Environment 172 (1995) 151-158 p.
16. Shaterian J., Waterer D. R., Jong H. de, Tanino K. K.. Methodologies and Traits for Evaluating the Salt Tolerance in Diploid Potato Clones.// Published online: 11 March 2008. Potato Association of America 2007.
17. Singh M., Jain M., Pant R.C. Clonal variability in photosynthetic and growth characteristics of Populus deltoids under saline irrigation // J.: Photosynthetica., 1999. - 36 (4), - p. 605-609.
18. Watanabe S., Kojima K., Ide Y., Sasaki S. Effects of saline and osmotic stress on proline and sugar accumulation in Populus euphratica in vitro // J.: Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture, 2000. - 63, – p. 199–206.
19. Zhang X., Zang R., Li C. Population differences in physiological and morphological adaptations of Populus davidiana seedlings in response to progressive drought stress // J.: Plant Science, 2004. - 166, - p. 791–797.
. , . ,
in vitro
NaCl in vitro . NaCl
. NaCl
100 , 150 .
. , NaCl
.
E.G.HOLMURATOV, G.B.HASIROVA, G.V.VILDANOVA Selective method in vitro for determination
of genotypes of various plant species tolerant to salinity The influence of increased concentrations NaCl on growth and development in vitro of potato clones of
different origin and poplar species and hybrids was studied. The heterospecificity of potato and poplar response to different concentrations of NaCl in the medium is shown. The most optimal concentration for the selection for the tolerance to salinity for potato was 100 , and for poplar 150 . It is defined that such morphological parameters as shoot height as well as root length and quantity can be indicators for the determination of genotypes tolerant to salinity. The correlation between increase of NaCl concentration in the medium and plant growth and development inhibition on parameters: shoot height and length and quantity - was revealed.
______________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
66
577.353.4
. ,
, 2- 0,5 .
, .
: , , , , , , , ,
, ,
,
, ,
[4,7,10]. ,
,
, [1,2,3,4,5].
.
,
.
.
.
, , , - 6, - 4. -
, – 10-15 . , -
50-55 . ,
. , - 70-80 %, , - 35-40 . - 6, - 4
. , - 20-25 %, , - 35-40 .
, .
.
.
,
-
. .
, ( . 1)
( 1).
. 1.
: 1- 2 ; 2- 1
1-2 (43-44) 2011
67
.
( 2). -4, -6
. 2, ,
. ,
, .
, [8,9]
,
.
. 2. -4 –6
: 1 - , 2 ; 2- , 1
1 . 3,
.
: 2 -2-3 2 -20-30 .
.3.
: 1 - ; 2 - ;
3 - 2 ; 4 - 3 . 1
2 - 0,5 , ,
. ,
, , , , 2 . -
,
. ( . 1-3)
20% .
, .
15 2011
1. .
. 1990. . , , 2004.
2. .
. , 1997 , . 922-924.
3. ., .
. , 1996, 33/1, .150-158.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
68
4. ., . . , 2008.
5. ., , .
. , 2001, . 48 3, .375-383.
6. ., ., ., .
.
. -. . 2000, 7, .126-130.
7. .
.
. , 2009. 8. .
. , 1996. 9. .
. . . , 1998. 10. ., ., .
. . , 1991,
.146-160.
. , –4, -6 ` ` ,
2-0,5 . ,
.
SH. M. SHAYMANOV Study of water condition in wheat seeds at their maturing by YAMR spectroscopy method
In this article it was studied the condition wheat seeds at their maturing by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy method.
Researches showed that losses of weight of seeds of Sanzar-4, Sanzar-6 variety differs from Ununmli bugdoy variety after drying seeds to air dry condition, there is fast recession back ECHO 2-0,5 .
Results obtained by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy method prove the heterogenic distribution of water in seeds.
_____________
34.231.1.
,
0,5 -110
20-750 .
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
69
: , , , , ,
– [1].
, [2],
.
–
. ,
[3].
. ,
- . -
f=0,5-110 . 1,44 ,
– . 20-75 0 .
)
. 2/ f
171035 -
1 2 [4].
. ,
])/(1/[/ 22
pffABf (1) f . (A,B,fp)
.
( ) ( )
.
( 1). A,B fp ,
.
1 -
NaSCN KSCN
, , 0 1710A
21
1710 21
510pf 1c
410 310
3 1
210
NaSCN 0,27 20
35 50
116 83 73
40 36 34
3,6 4,4 4,7
4,4 3,0 -
1,1089 1,0954 1,087
1525 1500 1438
2,419 1,751 1,209
1,11 20 35 50
190 153 119
58 49 40
4,2 4,8 6,0
6,4 5,6 4,4
1,1313 1,1165 1.1094
1556 1522 1455
3,979 2,272 1,514
1,98 20 35 50
287 197 163
102 76 59
4,8 6,0 6,8
11,1 9,5 7,7
1,1512 1,1390 1,1237
1585 1543 1497
6,104 3,444 2,045
KSCN 0,24 20
35 65
1479 1000 748
850 427 109
2,5 2,8 4,0
29 21 14
1,1258 1,1116 1,0848
1550 1507 1424
3,060 1,955 0,988
0,6 20 35
1791 1280
1628 876
4,1 4,7
59 46
1,1553 1,1417
1588 1543
6,126 3,452
1-2 (43-44) 2011
70
65 1131 300 5,2 40 1,1149 1449 1,524 1,04 20
35 65
2240 1877 1249
1600 1100 450
4,8 5,1 6,2
88 60 58
1,1871 1,1747 1,1518
1632 1593 1504
16,055 8,709 3,122
[2]
:
LM e ],[ LMe MeL (2) [Me, L] – ,
, MeL- , 12 21 -
, , 23 32 –
.
LMe MeL (3)
= 12 23 /( 21 23), r 21 23/ ( 21 23) (4)
–
SCN- ,
, [3].
, ,
. -.
,
, .
, , .
, -.
10 2011
1. Delsignore M., Maser H.E., Petrucci S.
//J.Phus. Chem. 1984. V.88. P.2405. 2. Eigen M.// Z.Elektrochem. 1960. B. 64. S.115
3. ., . // . 1985. .26. .93.
4. Irish D.E., Chang T.G., Tang S.Y.//J.Phys. Chem. 1981. V. 85. P.1686.
. ,
0,5-110
20-750 . .
.
A. PARPIEV, K. ABDIRAXMONOV Study of kinetics of diionic complex formation in dimetilsulfoxide solutions of potassium and sodium
tyocynate by methodof acoustical relaxation The experimental data on study of acoustical relaxation in demetilsulfoxide solutions of potassium and
sodium tyocynate in 0.5-110 MHz frequence range and temperature interval of 20-700C are given in the article. The single line of accuctical swallow found in each concentration was interpreted according to Aygen
scheme by many gradation process of diionic complex formation, and it was confirmed that swallow line related to the process of contact ionic pairs formation.
______________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
71
1-2(43-44) 2011
: 65.5: 433+339+65.6
. , .
, ,
. .
: , , , , , , , ,
,
-.
2006 17 «
2006-2010 -325- , 2007 21
2010 --
-640- . ,
2010 --
: - -
;
- 2010 49 ;
-
; -
– , , , , ,
; -
; -
;
, 2006-2010
.
== -
, ,
, .
60%
1-2 (43-44) 2011
72
, .
, .
,
, ,
,
.
–
. ,
. ,
, ,
-.
,
, , -, , ,
,
,
.
,
. ,
. ,
.
.
.
. ,
.
.
, .
- , ,
, , , , , ,
, , ,
.
. 3 – . 5
: ,
.
2 , 100 ,
. 80-
2- . 226 3000 . 18
3,5 , 59% .
.
,
, . 2009
. 2008
191,0 % .
- .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
73
,
.
, . ,
,
. 2009 1903,8 .
. 2008
, 148,8% . 1139 .
. , , ,
.
.
, , ,
.
. ,
.
. ,
. ( ,
. ,
. ,
, -.
.
-
, -
.
+ = = 15 2011
1.
.- 2009
2010
. // , 1, 30.01.2010.
2. ,
. , 16, 22.01.2011. 3. . :
.- .: , 2003-304 . 4. . ||
. . 2001. 5.
.
. , .
, . ,
.
R. PULATOVA, O. ACHILOV Importance of tourism development in the condition of economic modernization
The service, especially tourism is of a great importantance and is considered as one of the main factors in developing of the economy of the country. In this article the attention is given to tourism and to problems of further development of tourism in the example of Tashkent region.
____________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
74
1-2(43-44) 2011
. .
599.923.4-542.231.2-591.
.
, . ,
6 . .
, 12 .
,
, , .
: , , , , , ,
.
[1].
[2]. , .
-.
[3,4,5]
. , ,
.
,
.
, .
65
,
, 6, 11, 16 22- , 3- ., 6 ., 12 ., 24 . .
.
. 8–12
, , .
, .
- -
. . -
-
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
75
. -
.
. ),
.
.
- 1625,6±35,3 .
16 16,0%. 22
- 13,0%. 3
- 3242,6+31,3 . 6
11,0%, 12 - 9,0% 24 - 4,0%.
12
13,0%, 14,0%. 24
11,0%, - 9,0%.
,
11 16 ,
.
3 . ,
, .
. .
, ,
, .
- 720,7±25,0 . 6
25,0%. 22
19,0%. 3
- 1759,9±10,6 . 12
12,0%. 24
9,0%. -
- 68,2±3,3 ,
- 91,4±3,3 . 6
45,0% . 16
29,0% . 22
37,0% . 3
- 282,6±7,1 ,
- 323,2±5,3 . 6
21,0% . 12
14,0% . 24
9,0%.
. ,
. ( )
.
.
, -.
[6, 7, 8].
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
76
[9].
[10].
- 36,3±3,3 . 6
34,0%. 16
31,0%. 22
27,0%.
3 -
123,5±3,5 . 6
16,0%. 12
12,0%. 24
8,0%.
.
. (
) –.
.
. 3
2,0-1,5 . -
.
- .
.
- 30 [11, 12, 13, 14]. ,
.
,
, .
,
.
- 6,0 3,5 22 . ,
,
, .
- 49,8±2,4 ,
- 7,9±0,7 . 6
40,0% ( 1). 11
13,0%. 22
15,0% . 3
- 86,1±2,5 ,
- 26,5±1,1 .
6
17,0%. 12
13,0%. 24
9,0%.
- 38,0±1,4 . 6
22,0%. 22
17,0%. 3
- 92,2±2,3 . 6
13,0%.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
77
1
( )
609-913,5 720,7±25,0
60,9-101,5 68,2±3,3
81,2-121,8 91,4±3,3
6 812,0-1015 901,0±17,7*
81,2-121,8 95,3±3,5*
101,5-162,4 132,7±5,3*
11 1035,3-1218 1121,6±16,8*
121,8-162,4 137,0±3,7*
142,1-203,0 164,1±5,6*
16 1238,3-1481,9 1344,5±21,2*
162,4-223,3 176,5±5,3*
182,7-223,3 198,3±3,5*
22 1502,2-1725,5 1595,9±19,4*
203,0-284,2 231,1±7,1*
223,3-324,8 271,7±8,8*
3 . 1705-1827,0 1759,9±10,6*
243,6-324,8 282,6±7,1*
284,2-345,1 323,2±5,3*
6 . 1786,4-1989,4 1912,9±17,7*
284,2-385,7 342,0±8,8*
304,5-426,3 374,8±10,6*
12 . 2030,0-2273,6 2134,6±21,2*
324,8-426,3 390,4±8,8*
345,1-466,9 415,4±10,6
24 . 2233,0-2476,6 2332,9±21,2
365,4-466,9 429,4±8,8*
385,7-507,5 452,8±10,6
*
12
16,0%. 24
7,0%. ,
, :
, . 1).
,
, -.
,
. ,
, ,
.
[15, 16], , .
[17, 18, 19, 20, 21].
. 1.
3 . 1. . 2.
. 3. -. .
. 60 . 7.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
78
.
, .
. 22
.
, ,
[18]. [22] ,
,
.
II-III [23].
-
137,8±6,7 . 6
46,0%. 6
34,0%. 22
33,0%. 3
- 626,2±15,9 . 6
17,0%. 6
17,0%.
12
15,0% 24
13,0%.
- 324,8±13,3 . 6
29,0%. 11
33,0%, 22 45,0%.
3 1218,0 1421,0 ,
1264,8±17,7 . 6 12
16,0%. 24
11,0%.
.
22 26,0%,
. , ,
.
- 62,4±3,3 ,
- 78,3±3,3 . 6
28,0% . 11 32,0% . 16
27,0% .
22 - 23,0%
( 2). 3
- 184,3±5,3 ,
- 249,8±7,1 .
6 25,0% ,
- 17,0%. 12
18,0%, - 14,0%. 24
13,0%, – 9,0%.
( . 2).
. , ,
, .
- 26,1±1,7 . 6 38,0%.
16 29,0%. 22
40,0%. 3
1-2 (43-44) 2011
79
- 98,4±3,5 . 6
17,0%.
12
11,0%.
2
( )
243,6-406,0 324,8±13,3
40,6-81,2 62,4±3,3
60,9-101,5 78,3±3,3
6 365,4-487,2 420,1±10,6*
60,9-101,5 79,6±3,5
81,2-121,8 99,9±3,5*
11 507,5-609,0 558,3±9,3*
81,2-121,8 103,2±3,7*
101,5-162,4 132,0±5,6*
16 609-893,2 726,1±24,7*
101,5-162,4 131,2±5,3*
142,1-223,3 173,3±7,1*
22 913,5-1319,5 1055,6±35,3*
121,8-182,7 156,2±5,3
162,4-263,9 212,4±8,8*
3 . 1218,0-1421,0 1264,8±17,7*
162,4-223,3 184,3±5,3*
203,0-284,2 249,8±7,1
6 . 1624,0-1928,5 1709,9±26,5*
182,7-263,9 229,5±7,1*
223,3-324,8 292,0±8,8*
12 . 1624,0-1928,5 1709,9±26,5*
203,0-304,5 270,1±8,8*
284,2-365,4 334,2±7,1
24 . 1725,5-2030,0 1897,3±26,5*
223,3-345,1 306,1±10,6
304,5-385,7 363,8±7,1
*
13,0% , 22 . , -
,
, .
. 24
9,0%.
.
.
, , ,
.
.
. 2.
22 . 1.
. 2. . 3. .
. . 10 . 7
1-2 (43-44) 2011
80
, ,
.
,
, 6 .
.
. 12
.
-,
-,
.
12 2010
1. Slauf P., Antos F., Serclova Z. Initial experience with anorectal manometry with the PC Polygraf apparatus in surgery //Rozhl Chir. 1997 Mar; 76(3). – . 151-155.
2. . -. - ., 2001.
3. . -
// 100- . . .
. - . . . – ., 1999. – . 183-184. 4. .
// . 2001. - 3. - . 18-21.
5. .
.: . ... . . . - , 2001. - 19 .
6. ., ., .
. -. – : . ,
1994. – . 152 – 163. 7. Christensen J.
- // . – .:
, .1. 1988. – . 232-257. 8. Waldeck F.
// . – .: , 1986. . 4. – . 109-144.
9. ., .
// "SonoAce-International". 1998. - 2. - C. 16-19.
10. ., ., ., .
// . 2008. . 133, - 2. - . 30.
11. Stonesifer G.L., Murphy G.P., Lombardo C.R. The anatomy of the anorectum // Americ. Journ. f Surgery. 1960. - . 666-671.
12. Lawson J. Structure and functions of the internal anal sphincter //Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine. 1970. – Vol. 63. – P. 84-89.
13. Henry M.M., Thomson J.P.S. //
. – .: , 1989. – . 409-414.
14. Thomson W.H. The nature of haemmorrhosis //British J. of Surgery. 1975. – Vol. 62. – P. 542-552.
15. . . - .: -
. 1988. – .112. 16. Todd I.P.
// . . – .: , 1988.
– . 255-231. 17. . . -. .1. - , 1965. – . 520.
18. ., . -
// . - : . , 1994. - .174-181.
19. . //« ». - ., 2008. - .151.
20. Fritsch H., Breanner E.,Lienemann A, Ludwikowski B. Anal sphincter complex: reinterpreted morphology and its clinical relevance // Dis Colon rectum. 2002, Feb; 45(2). – . 184-194.
21. Bollard R.C., Gardiner A., Lindow S., Phillips K., Duthle G.S. Normal female sphincter: difficulties in interpretation exphai ned. Dis Colon rectum, 2002, Feb; 45(2) 171-175.
22. Shafik A. A new concept of the anatomy of the anal sphincter mechanism and the physiology of
1-2 (43-44) 2011
81
defecation //The external anal sphincter: a triple-loop system / Invest. Urol., 1975, 2, - . 412-419.
23. ., ., .
// -
. – : . , 1994. - . 193-201.
.
, .
. 6
. .
. 12 . =
, .
A.S.ILYASOV
Development and structure of inner and outer sphincteres of the rectum in rats
The investigations showed that formation of structural components in the inner sphincter occurs in the same way. Beginning from the period of breast feeding muscular membrane in its proximal part spreads more in the distal direction by the 6 month. In the process of development the muscular membrane of the outer sphincter is formed in various ways.
In the lactation period the increase of thickness of outer sphincter muscular membrane is more marked in the distal part and by the 12 month the muscular membrane is thicker in the proximal part. Longitudinal muscular layer and the muscle levator ani together with fiber structures of the connective tissue was allocating between the inner and outer sphincters of the rectum, interlacing with them, from interconnected structural formations.
_______________
631.3
,
, -
,
. .
.
: , , , , ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
82
, ,
-
, (
, -, -
), , -
. -
,
) , .)
, ,
, ,
.) . ,
--
). ( )
: = Q2 (1)
- , -
; - ,
( )
, Q - . (1),
,
.
,
, -
, ,
( ) .
,
, -
, 1.
1 , « - I», « »
0,72 - 6,53%
, , « - 2», «
- - 2», , , 0,321 - 1,67%.
« - 1», »
,
, ,
. « - 2», « - - 2», « »
-,
. , »,
, ,
. « » 3
0,15%, -
( ),
,
, -
. ,
( ),
0,32 - 1,67%. ,
[2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10],
,
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
83
, - .
, 3 - « »
, , (21.05.2008 .)
1, (1.06.2010 .) 2 3,
, , ) .
-
,
. 2009 2 I
3 ., .
,
.
-, ,
. ,
,
,
. ,
( ) , , .
,
,
.
,
,
, -
.
,
2, 2009 0,5 - 0,6 .,
.
,
. , ,
50 1,5 ,
- 1» 2 - 3 3 . - 10 - 20 3 ,
-
, ,
. ,
- -
, .
, ,
, .
, - -
,
. , -
,
,
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
84
1
1
2 3 4
5
Q,
3 /
,
,
Q,
3 /
,
,
1
.
%
Q,
3 /
,
,
1
.
%
Q,
3 /
,
,
1
.
%
Q,
3 /
,
,
1
.
%
- 1 9,0 45 5155 17,0 48 10385 5192,5 +0,7% 24,6 51 15968 5322,7 +3,25 31,2 54,0 21443 5360,75 +3,99 - - - - - - 2 17,5 49 10914 34,0 50 21636 10818 -0,88% 49,5 51,5 32445 10815 -0,91 63,5 53,5 43238 10809,5 -0,97 76,5 55 53550 10710 - 1,9
4,9 71,5 4459 9,7 72 8889 4444,5 -0,32% 14 75 13364 4459,7 +0,15 17,9 77 17542 4385,5 -1,67 - - - - - - - 2 17,4 49 10851 33,0 51,5 21630 10815 -0,32% - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7,0 78 6946 13,8 80 14051 7025,5 +1,10% 20,2 81 20824 6941,3 -0,11 25 82 26091 6522,75 +6,53 - - - - -
1-2 (43-44) 2011 84
1-2 (43-44) 2011
85
11 2010
1. .
. - : , 1991,- . 144.
2. . . . , .
. . . . , , 2006, - . 40-44. 3. ., ., . -
. . , , 2008, - . 453.
4. ., . -
. . -, 9, 2002, - .28-30.
5. ., . .
, . . , 2005, 2, - . 56-59.
6. .,. ., ,. .
-
. 15 “
”
,
, II , . 2006, - .294-297
7. . , --
. , , .2007, - . 158-
162. 8. ., . -
. , , . - , 2007, 425-426 . 9. .,. .
. , . , .2007,
426-430 . 10. ., . . ( )
18/2010 - – -. - :
, . 3.7.
, =
, ,
, .
T.N. TURSUNOV, I. M. IKRAMOV Factors influencing operating -power regime of pumping stations
The article considers factors affecting the operating-power regime of pumping stations, constructive and operational factors-influencing their mode, which allows properly evaluate the operation of pumping stations and power consumption. Data given in the article has scientific and practical interest.
_____________
581.58:582(575.15)
. ,
« » .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
86
12 , 5 , , , .
: , , , , , ,
, , -
.
, ,
. - -
,
. -
,
. .
50 ,
. - 175 2 .
,
, ,
[1-8].
)
.
, ,
, ,
2008-2010 . -
« »
: Landsat . 1989, 2001, Resus 2001, NOAA 2000, Terra Modis 2003, 2005 .
4 : ,
, ),
. ,
( ) ,
. -
, .
-, -
.
, , ,
, ( )
-, ( , ).
,
.
, , ,
, , , , .,
.
,
, .
« » 327
, 178 , 48 .
[1] 406
, 67
1-2 (43-44) 2011
87
, ,
: Mallhiola bucharica, Allium baissunense, Astragalus cottonianus, A. oldenburgii, Eremurus alberti, Cleome noeana, Zigophyllum bucharkum, Halimiphyllum eurypterum, Ajiga turkestanica, Hammada leptoclada, Otostegia bucharica. Salvia bucharica, Hedysarum magnificum .
, , -
, ,
,
.
,
.
-,
, , . » -
, : - - 20-25%; - - 30-40%; -
70 (75)%.
. , .
, , , , -, , -
) ,
,
. « »,
-
12 ( , , ) ,
5 ( 1).
1
1 (23) - (Artemisia sogdiana, A. turanica, Poa bulbosa, Carex pachystylis, Anisanlha tectorum, Alyssum deserlorum, Amberboa bucharica, Salsola arbusculiformis, Matthiola bucharica, Hammada leptoclada, Salvia bucharica, Cleome noeana, Atriplex moneta)
. 2 (25) - (Artemisia serotina,
A. sogdiana, A. turanica, Carex pachystylis, Poa bulbosa, Astragalus cottonianus, Hedysarum magniftcum, Ajuga turkestanica, Salvia bucharica, Pistacia vera, Amygdalus spinosissima, Zygophyllum bucharicum)
. 3 (26) - (Artemisia leucodes, A. scotina, Cleome
noeana, Eremostachys leriocalyx, Hedysarum fedtschenkoanum, Salvia bucharica, Astragalus cottonianus, Agropyron trichophorum, Amygdalus spinosissima, Atrophaxis spinosa) .
4 (27) - (Amygdalus spinosissima, Halimiphyllum eurypterum, Hammada leptoclada, Otostegia bucharica, Atrahaxis spinosa, Acer xerophilum, Atriplex monta, Yamanthus gamocarpus, Halamocnemis longifoUa, Salsola sclerantha, Ladyginia bucharica) ,
. 5 (32) -
(Diospyros lotus, Crategus pontica, Rosa kokanica, Lonicera nummulariifolia, Acer regelii, Cotoneaster racemiflora, Celtis caucasica, Agropyron trichophorum) .
6 (35) - (Juniperus seravshanica, Agropyron trichophorum, Lonicera nummulariifolia, Rosa kokanica, Atraphaxis spinosa, Ampelopsis aegyrophylla) .
7 (38) - (Juniperus seravshanica, Agropyron trichophorum, Artemisia tenuisecta) .
8 (42) - (Lonicera nummulariifolia, Crategus turkestanica, C. pontica, Acer regelii, Prunus sogdiana, Celtis caucasica, Rosa kokanica, R. hissarica, Juniperus seravshanica)
. 9 (44) - (Festuca valesiaca, Artemisia lehmanniana, A. tenuisecta. A-
dracuncuius, Agropyron trichophrum, Scorzonera acathoclada, Acantholimon alatavicum)
1-2 (43-44) 2011
88
. 10 (45) - (Festuca valesiaca, Onobrichis echidna,
Cousinia verticillaris, C. allolepis, Acantholimon alatavicum) . 11 (47) - (Festuca valesiaca,
Adonisturkestanica, Acantholimon alatavicum, A. korolkovii, Cousinia verticillaris, allolepis) (Cousinia allolepis, .
macilenta, . verticillaris. Astragalus lasiosemius, Acantholimon alalavicum. Polygonum hissaricum, Artemisia lehmanniana, Scorzonera acathoclada, Adonis turkestpnica, Festuca valesiaca) -
. 12 (46) - (Acantholimon alalavicum, A. utkovii,Astragalus
lasiosemus, Onobrichis echidna, Ceraslium ceraslioides) .
(23- ).
« »
, ( , ) -
.
, - ( ),
, ,
.
1.
(50 ) .
2. - «
» .
3. 12 , 5
,
, , . 4. -
, , -,
,
.
« » . 30 2011
1. ., ., . -
Oreogypsophyta // . 3 . - : , 1976,- . 227-272.
2. X. : .
. – , 1968, - . 3-19. 3. . -
. . . –, 1938,- . 3-47.
4. . .
. . , . 21.
1957,.- . 51-55. 5. ., ., .
//
. – : , 1965,. – . 193-273. 6. ., .
// . –
: , 1965, - . 193-273. 7. ., .
-// .
2006. - 2, - . 100-103. 8. . -
. – : , 1974, - . 3-134.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
89
. ,
. 12 , 3
5 , , , .
M.A.XOLMURATOV, YU.S.VAXIDOV
The antropogene of crop cultural layer on the besin of the Machay – river On the besin of sabilate was formed the great measure inventarisational map of “Map of crop wored on the
basin of the Muchay – river”. 12 specially distinguashed places involving into 3 top direction belts combining of 5 antropogens modificational types with accuracy according to A, and B indexes were given.
________________
: 502.631.581.1
,
. =
. , = = = , ,
= = . . -
= ,
, = - = .
: , , , , , , , , , ,
= = . ,
= -
. = -
.
.
,
[1].
[3,4] . , -
-
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
90
, .
= , -
. =
, ,
.
50 .
1 2
.
300-400 .
. -
,
10 90-1000 =
= = . , , -
, = -= , -= .
=7
.
0,1 Lice
. 1/2= -1,76 .
.
.
-161- . 50 0,0625; 0,125;
0,25; 0,5; 1,0; 1,5; 2,0; 2,5; 3,0; 3,5; 4,0
. 0 .
== , . 4-5 .
. (1-
), 150-200
. - 500-700
1000-1400 9-15
. 1800-2200 1-
.
1 -
, )
,
20-25 150-200 500-700 1000-1400 1800-2000
156,4 ± 3,1 158,2 ± 4,5 169,5 ± 4,6 179,5 ± 4,9 186,3 ± 4,2 170,2 ± 3,6 173,5 ± 4,0 185,6 ± 3,7 194,5 ± 5,1 198,2 ± 4,2 162,0 ± 3,1 164,5 ± 3,6 176,4 ± 4,0 186,7 ± 5,3
(1-),
150-200 .
500-700 1000-1400
9-15
. 14-19% .
-
(2 ),
1-2 (43-44) 2011
91
. , ,
, ,
20 .
. 2 -
) 100
,
20-25
150-200 500-700 1000-1400 1800-2000
100 104,5 109,7 114,5 118,8 100 105,6 113,2 116,2 116,0 100 104,8 110,6 115,5 -
,
. --
(2- ),
. 500-700 10-14
1000-1400 1800-2200 15-16
. = =
. , -
,
1800-2000 .
.
.
.
. -
.
. (3-
),
(500-700 , 1000-1400 , 1800-2200 ) 10-36 -
3-
(1 )
.
20-25 27,5 100 33,8 100 30,0 100
150-200 27,8 101 35,9 106,2 31,4 104,6 500-700 30,4 110,5 39,7 117,4 34,2 114,0 1000-1400 32,8 119,2 44,6 131,9 36,7 122,3 1800-2200 34,3 124,7 46,2 138,6 - -
-
(4- )
(500-700 , 1000-1400 , 1800-2200 ) 14-34
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
92
4-
(1 )
.
20-25 3,6 100 4,1 100 3,8 100
150-200 3,8 105,5 4,3 104,8 - - 500-700 4,3 114,4 4,8 117,0 4,4 115,7 1000-1400 4,5 125,0 5,3 129,2 4,8 - 1800-2200 4,6 127,7 5,5 134,1 - 126,3
,
. , 200 , 2000
, [2,3,4].
= ,
(3,4- ) -.
( 1986, 2006).
= ,
- -
. , .
12 2010
1. ., .
. . , , 1987.
2. . – . ,. 1986, 338-345 .
3. . . , 1984. 4. ., ., .
– -
. -2006.
5. . . .
. . -2009, 6. 6. ., .
.
. , 2004, 131-134 .
7. . . . , 2008-2009.
8. ., ., ., .
-. . -
. , 1991, . 20-23.
9. . . -
. . 2002. 111-113 . 10. . .
, . V1 -
. . 1989, . 14.
11. . .
. -
. , 1991.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
93
.
.
. .
A.J. CHORIEV
Studying carbohydrate in the seeds of plants growing in uranium containing soils The study of carbohydrate contents in the seeds of plants growing in uranium containing soils showed the
increase of sugar with the raise of soil radioactivity. Results of the experiments showed the increase of reducing and unreducing carbonhydrate. Increase of sugar is connected with stimulating effects of radioactive radiation.
_______________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
94
1-2(43-44) 2011
37
,
,
, .
, , .
: , , , , , , , ,
.
, ,
.
. , ,
-.
, I
29 1997 . « »
».
« - —
» [1,2,3]. ,
.
- [7].
,
, 20 2011 .
« ---
»
, .
, 60% .
5 , . — 4,3 .
8%.
4- , 2-
. 37 56
[8]. ,
, -, -
. -
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
95
.
3 2004 . 2 415 « -
».
« -
» « »; ,
.
« »,
. ,
.
,
,
. , ,
. ,
.
, , ,
.
5 -05-2005 «
» (DESTAN) «
» 2007— 2011 . [6]
« » -,
,
. ,
, , , -
, , , -
, , -, , -
, . , - -
.
-
. 1. -
( ). ( )
( ), , -
, ,
.
,
, , , .
.
2. -. -
, -.
,
; ; ,
, -; -
.
.
, ,
, .
-
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
96
, .
. .
.
:
• ;
• -
-;
• ,
, ;
• ;
• ;
•
, ,
, ,
, ,
.
:
• ; • -
;
• ;
• -, ;
• -
: • ; •
;
• .
. ,
, , , .
. , -
, , ( , -
.), -
.
, ,
On-line Internet,
.
, -, -
.
-. -
.
-:
• , , , -
, , .; • -
, ;
• , -
, -;
•
-;
• ;
.
( ) — .
-;
1-2 (43-44) 2011
97
; -
;
. -
:
. , :
• ,
; •
; •
; •
; •
; •
.
-.
.
: •
; ;
• ;
• ;
• , ;
• , ;
• , ; •
; • , ,
-;
• ;
• , -
; •
; •
. -
.
, -,
, , .
. :
, -, ,
, ,
.
, ,
, ;
, -
. ,
.
,
.
. , -
, , :
1. — -
, . , ,
, . ,
-, -
-,
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
98
, ,
, , ,
.
. 2. -
, -
, -, ,
, .
, ,
: -,
; -
, .
. —
, -.
: -
; -
;
, ; -
.
4. -
-,
, : -
, ;
; -.
5. . : ,
;
;
; ,
. 6. .
,
, . .
, , ,
,
.
, ,
. -
), -
,
. -
. , -
,
. , , , -
.
.
20 2011
1-2 (43-44) 2011
99
1. . . —
— .
29 1997 . . — —
». . . 1997, .4-19.
2. « »
29 1997 . . — « —
». . . 1997, .20-30.
3. « ,
29 1997 . . — — -
». . . 1997, .32-63. 4.
3 2004 . «
».
5. -I :
. 5-9 , 1998. .
6. 2007-2011
. // : , — . 2006, .20-
47. 7. ., . —
—
// : — . 2006, . 8-19.
8. . —
. // : ,
— . 2006, . 48-52.
,
. .
L.A.GAFUROVA, V.I.ZUEV
The prioriteties providing the quality of high agrarian education and factors of it’s existence Agrocultiral field is the main brauch in the economy of Uzbekistan that’s why the importance of agrarian
education is inlightining out in this article by it’s anthories. The basic prioriteties for supplying the quality of agrarian education and important factors of them also have been revieved.
________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
100
1-2(43-44) 2011
: 634.1.
.
. ,
. ,
, , : -
,
[1, 2, 3, 4].
-
,
,
.
- ,
, -
.
.
. 2008-2010
V, M VII M IX
, .
100 . .
,
. ,
.
V VII
25.07 15.08, IX - 15.07 15.08.
33952 41741
. 1).
1
, 2008-2010 .
./ % ./ % ./ %
V 1.07-24.07 47766 83,8 36681 76,7 29454 80,3
25.07-15.08 53865 94,5 49875 87,5 43491 87,2
1-2 (43-44) 2011
101
16.08-30.09 45999 80,7 33863 73,5 25194 74,4 VII
1.07-24.07 46512 81,6 34790 74,8 27101 77,9 25.07-15.08 50217 88,1 39772 83,5 33952 85,3 16.08-30.09 44061 77,3 30886 70,1 22779 73,8
IX 1.07-14.07 47424 83,2 30351 76,4 24796 81,7
15.07-15.08 53010 93,0 46901 88,7 41741 89,0 16.08-30.09 46170 81,0 33257 71,9 25474 76,6
0,5 706,0 , % 2,3
1,4-1,5 .
– 83,6-85,0%
V VII 25 30
, IX- 15 25 .
35910 40891 .
- 20172 ./
. 2).
2
, 2008-2010 .
./ % ./ % ./ % V
1.07-24.07 45315 79,5 31851 70,6 24748 77,7 25.07-30.08 52383 91,5 48108 84,4 40891 85,0 1.09-30.09 42408 74,4 27150 63,9 19873 73,2
VII 1.07-24.07 45372 79,6 33053 72,8 25153 76,1
25.07-30.08 50958 89,4 42955 84,2 35910 83,6 1.09-30.09 42237 74,1 28057 66,4 20172 71,9
IX 1.07-14.07 45657 80,1 33512 73,4 26575 79,3
15.07-25.08 51984 91,2 44821 86,1 38291 85,5 26.08-30.09 43890 77,0 30598 69,6 23652 77,3
0,5 608,0 , % 2,1
V 25 25 , VII - 25 15 ,
IX - 25 25 .
9,8-12,9% . 3).
3
, 2008-2010 .
./ % ./ % ./ %
V 1.07-24.07 43149 75,7 27611 63,9 22751 82,4
25.07-25.09 52098 91,4 40065 83,8 34576 86,3 26.09-30.09 40812 71,6 20705 50,7 15839 76,5
VII 1.07-24.07 40527 71,1 34274 74,1 27042 78,9
1-2 (43-44) 2011
102
25.07-15.09 50844 89,2 42482 83,4 36322 85,5 16.09-30.09 37620 66,0 22578 55,7 16391 72,6
IX 1.07-24.07 42693 74,9 35079 75,1 27712 79,0
25.07-25.08 50901 89,3 42807 84,1 36343 84,9 26.08-30.09 39538 69,3 23880 60,4 17599 73,7
0,5 706,0 , % 2,3
1.
V VII 25 15 , IX - 15 15
33952 41741
, 1,5 , -
. 2.
– 83,6-85,0% ( 35910-40891 ./ )
V VII 25 30 , IX - 15 25 .
3.
V 25 25 , VII - 25 15 , IX - 25 25
.
15 2010
1. P.P.
. - . . . 1968. –
19 . 2. O.K.
. – , . –
1978.-103 . 3. ., .
. – , 2005. – 10 .
4. ., . -. – , , 1972. -
.91-95.
_____________
: 65. 321. 4
. , .
,
– [1].
, ,
, .
,
.
. , , , ,
,
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
103
.
-,
.
.
.
. qr ,
max111
qr
k
qrr
qm
jjj xZYPF ,
:
1.k
r
q
qj
qr
qrj YXM
1 1
mj ,1
2. jjj DYD
3.r
r
q
q
qr
qri LeeGexG
r
1
)1(
4.rq
q
qrX
11
5.01q
rX
Dj - j- ;
Dj - j ;
Pj - j ; Yj - j ;
qrG - r q
;
eG - qrjM - r q j
; q
rr q
rq
r q .
, ,
. , [1]
, [2] - , [3] -
, [4] -
, [5] -
. –
.
,
.
+ = = 11 2011
1. . -
2002. 2. .
. – .: 2003. 3. . - .
», 1989.
4. --
. 5. , .
. - .1997.
_______________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
104
. 633.51..631.582
,
, ,
- .
[2,3,4,5,7] .
[1,6]. ,
. , -
,
( -1). ,
, , .
1- 8,9,10
, 2- ( ), 3- ,
. ,
100 . ,
, , (2007) (1973)
.
. , 3
. ,
0,91 , 1,13 , 1,22
. ,
, , .
, 1- ,
, , ,
.
, 1-
.
,
. ,
. ,
, , .
, .
,
. , 1 2
3- .
81,3 , 2- 83,4 , 3- 84,3 . ,
.
. ,
. , 2 3
.
2- 0,3 , 3- 0,6 .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
105
1-
, ,
1 1
,
, 1.06
,
,
,
,
,
,
1 4,9 81,3 14,1 3,2 10,7 3,6 32,3
2
5,2
83,4
15,0
3,9
12,2
4,4
34,8
3
,
6,5
84,3
15,5
4,4
14,3
5,0
37,2
05= + 2,6
, , -
.
.
. , 3- 1,2
. -.
, 10,7 ,
12,2 14,2 .
,
. , 2-
3,3 ,
4,8 .
.
,
, . 32,3
. – 2,5
. –
4,9 .
, ,
.
, + = = 7 2011
1. .
. . , 2008, 250 – .
2. . . .1979, 239 .
3. . . .1954 ., 152 .
4. .
. .1981, 214 .
5. . . .1972.
256 . 6. ., .
. .
, 2005, 21-24 . 7. .
. . 2010, 120 .
_____________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
106
. 633.1.
.
,
,
.
, , ,
, , . ,
, ,
.
,
.
2003-2006
. 4 4
. 720 2, 360 2 .
-1981,
« » -2007)
.
0-15, 15-30, 30-50
(1- ) .
1 ,
,
0-15 11,8 39,0 32,2 25,5 45,4 15-30 - 6,0 3,6 7,8 4,5 4,6 30-50 - 1,5 2,9 2,4 2,9 2,2
15,5 19,3 45,5 42,4 32,9 52,2
, 15,5 ,
0-50 19,3 .
: 0-50 52,2 , 32,9
, 45,5 42,4 .
N ; 0,58 %, 0,89 %,
1,10 %, 1,66 %, 1,25 % 0,51 % (2- )
. 2
N , %
N N
1 0,890 0,650 1,200 0,580 0,250 0,090 2 1,66 1,20 1,25 3 1,25 0.43 0,70 4 1,10 0,40 0,65 5 0,51 0,21 0,31
1-2 (43-44) 2011
107
, , ,
. , 1 0-50
71 , 45,7 , 30,7 , 20,8 , 25
. , ,
.
. ,
1,320-1,322 3 ,
1,33 3 .
,
, ,
. ,
, ,
.
+ = = 3 2011
1 . . .
, , 1985, 317 . 2 . . ` -
. .1973, 40- .
3. . = . « = = » .
2008, 8.
________________
581.1+577
.
,
[1,3,4,5,6]
, ,
. , ,
Mn3+ - .
, , [2].
, ,
, , CO2,
, ,
.
, ,
, -
. , -
.
. , ,
. , ,
, , , , - - 250-300
1-2 (43-44) 2011
108
, 1
(MnS 4) (MnCl2).
: 1,0 %, 0,75 %, 0,50 %, 0,25 %, 0,125 %, 0,05%.
1 , .
, .
, , , ,
( , ).
,
. 7, 10 15 .
( 1), 0,50 %, 0,25 %
, 10-
, , ,
. ( 1),
0,50 %, 0,25 % 13-15
, . ,
. -
, - .
, ,
.
1
, ( 1 )
, , %
-
-
1,0 0,75 0,50 0,25 0,125 0,05
(Lycopersicon esculen-tum,
-142) 2,33 1,13 1,26 1,54 1,63 1,56 1,42 1,21
(Citrullus vulgaris, )
3,90 2,38 2,54 2,75 2,81 2,73 2,62 2,50
(Zea mays, -100)
2,72 2,06 2,34 2,49 2,60 2,54 2,47 2,31
(Cucurbita pepo, )
3,74 2,38 2,46 2,58 2,64 2,50 2,42 2,32
(Asteraceae (compositae))
3,30 2,52 2,58 2,66 2,74 2,58 2,44 2,31
(Lycopersicon esculen-tum,
-142) 2,36 1,21 1,24 1,56 1,85 1,89 1,45 1,24
(Citrullus vulgaris, )
3,98 2,43 2,50 2,75 3,20 3,0 2,65 2,55
(Zea mays, -100)
2,85 2,14 2,19 2,30 2,57 2,59 2,21 2,13
(Cucurbita pepo, )
3,88 2,45 2,51 2,68 3,06 3,04 2,56 2,46
(Asteraceae (compositae))
3,38 2,56 2,60 2,76 2,89 2,85 2,67 2,58
HCP05 ( – 1,19) 6.08 E-02 ( 2.74 %
1-2 (43-44) 2011
109
-
. -
. -, -
-
. , .
, -
. .
, 7
10 15 ( 2).
2
, %
Na~
,
-
1,0 0,75 0,50 0,25 0,125 0,05
3 2,70 2,78 2,87 2,93 2,70 2,45 2,06
0,0001 2,74 2,70 2,73 2,69 2,70 2,61 2,54 0,001 2,60 2,62 2,63 2,64 2,61 2,58 2,52 0,01 2,58 2,40 2,41 2,43 2,42 2,40 2,34 0,1 2,56 2,00 2,13 2,15 2,14 2,12 2,08
7 2,78 2,80 2,86 2,98 2,90 2,70 2,61
0,0001 2,70 2,83 2,85 2,94 2,90 2,72 2,60 0,001 2,60 2,76 2,80 2,86 2,89 2,80 2,73 0,01 2,51 2,52 2,60 2,68 2,63 2,51 2,43 0,1 1,60 1,60 1,69 1,74 1,73 1,58 1,40
12 2,86 2,85 2,93 2,97 3,12 2,90 2,72
0,0001 2,80 2,88 2,95 2,98 2,86 2,76 2,72 0,001 2,52 2,50 2,63 2,64 2,60 2,50 2,88 0,01 1,1 2,20 2,28 2,34 2,30 2,11 1,97 0,1 - - 1,10 1,74 1,08 - -
HCP05 ( – 1,20) 3.43 E-02 (1.82 %)
( 2),
0,0001, 0,001-
. 7
, 0,001, 0,01
. , 0,50 %, 0,25 %
. ,
. 12
, 0,001, 0,01 1,5-2
. - 0,50 %, 0,25 %
, . .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
110
, ,
.
. ,
, , .
12 2011
1. .
. // II- .
12-13 1990 . . 8-11. , – . 8-13. 2. ., .
. . , 1987.
3. ., ., ., ., ., ., .
-
. //
“
”. . . -1991,- . 47-
54. 4. .
.
// . . : - 1999, - 21 . 5. ., .
. //
. –. -, 2002, - 8,- .39-40.
6. ., ., ., .
. « - »
- V . . 2006 , 12-13 , -465 .
___________________
:63.54 + 631.4
, ,
-. .
, , .
, ,
. -
, .
( )
. , ,
.
,
[1].
,
.
839,6 , 525,2 278,9
[2,3]. -
. (
), , - ( )
. ,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
111
2 5 . -
( , , , ( ),
( , ) .
,
, ,
.
.
. 11 4
. 216 2, 108 2.
.
(NH4NO3-34,6% N), (KCl–60% K2O),
(NH4H2PO4 10 % N, 46 % 2 5), – ( – 10 % N, 10 % 2 5), ( - 6 % N, 16 % 2 5) .
70 % 50 % ,
60 3-4 ,
50 % , 30 % .
( , , «
» 2006;
» 1981; « », 2007)
. (1985) .
« ,
», 1963, « -
» 1980, « » 1980, «
» 1990 .
, 0-30
,
20,5-21,2 . 3-4 –
20,4 , 175
50 , 175 51 175 51,6
.
,
.
.
–
19,4 ,
– 28,1 ; 29,0 29,6
.
0,9-1,5 .
, 125
40,2 , 200
50,7 , 125 40,2 , 200 53
.
–
. - 30
% , –
15,2 , 30-33,4
,
.
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
112
175-200
.
–
, NK ( 3-4 )
, .
, .
,
. -
< .
-,
, ,
.
,
. , ,
. 2007 1
125 –
4,5 , 200 9 .
. , 1
125 13,0 , 200
16,1 .
, ,
, .
+ = = 21 2011
, 0-30 ( )
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
)
N250 K125 –
+ 175
+ 125
+ 150
+ 175
+ 200
+ 125
+ 150
+ 175
+ 200
3-4
1-2 (43-44) 2011
113
1. .
// . 2002. 1, - . 78-86.
2. ., ., ., .
. //
. . 2010, 247-249 .
3. ., ., ., ., .
. //
. . 2010, 252-255 .
4. ., ., .
. //
V . 2010, 195-199 .
__________________ . 582.635.3.632.
.
, (Tetranychus urticae Koch.) , 200
[1,2,3,4]. ,
( , , , ) . . , -
. ,
. ,
,
.
, , , . ,
. ,
, ,
.
3-4
.
, 11-13
. , .
, , ,
.
( , , )
, .
-.
. , 2008-2010-
,
.
, .
, 250-300
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
114
(1- ).
1-
1 ,
, %
: 3 7 10 15
,
-
3 7 10 15 S ±m S ±m S ±m S ±m 1. ,
55% . 1,5 91,4 1,2 3,2 14,1 20,6 98,6 0,7 96,6 1,1 86,6 3,7 84,1 4,2
2. , 5% .
0,5 101,4 7,3 11,4 45,7 75,4 92,5 0,9 89,3 3,7 78,5 5,2 47,7 5,3
3. , 10% .
0,5 63,5 1,2 0 24,2 34,3 98,0 0,5 100 - 66,8 4,4 62,0 5,6
4. , 570 EW
1,5 76,1 2,6 0 8,7 23,3 96,4 0,6 100 - 90,0 3,3 78,5 4,3
5. )
- 144,0 138,3 151,4 165,4 204,7 - - - -
,
.
144 . , 15-
204 42% . 100%
( – 7- ). ,
,
– 1,5 , – 0,5 , – 0,5 , – 1,5 )
. 90%
( , 2001). ,
.
+ = = 8 2011
1. ., .
. – , , 1991, – 195 .
2. . (Tetranychus telarius L.)
. – , 1964, – 115 .
3. .
. – , , 1970, – 307 . 4. . -
// . . – 2001. - 4, – . 31-32.
_______________
633.2. 631.1
. , . , . , .
-
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
115
.
, , -
,
.
, ,
, . ,
,
.
-.
. ,
= , ,
, « », « »
« » . 3 , 4
. 108
2 (3,6 30 ), 54 2 .
15 . .
.
1 –
23.X. 16.XI 18.03 17.04 22.04 2.06
23.X. 18.XI 23.03 24.04 29.04 14.06
23.X. 19.XI 24.03 26.04 30.04 16.06
,
. « »
2 .
5 ,
6 .
7 , 9 .
12 , 14 .
,
.
. ,
, ,
.
1 2
« » .
« »
.
2 –
1 2 3 4
,
56,4 58,2 55,6 57,5 56,9 61,2 63,4 62,6 64,2 62,8
59,2 61,3 60,7 62,2 60,8
1-2 (43-44) 2011
116
» 56,9, « »
62,8, « » 60,8, . « »
, 12-14 .
,
.
, -
« » « », « »
.
-.
+ = = 12 2011
1. ., . ,
2008. 2. .
; »
, , 2002, 106 .
3. ., .
. . 2008. 2- .
4. ., . . , ,.
2009, 2- . 5. ., . “ ”
) “ ” , . 2009. 6. ., .
«
; »
. , 2002.
_________________ . 636.51
, . , , ,
.
, , ,
.
, .
,
.
, .
,
-
. , , ,
- ,
.
220-240 , 55-56 . 2,5-3
, .
, .
. ,
, 1,7-1,9 . 260-
1-2 (43-44) 2011
117
265 60-61 , .
, , . [2,3] ,
,
. ,
.
, .
5 1,8-2,7 .
, , 200-250 , – 57-
59 . ,
,
, ,
.
20 2011
1. “ ”
, 1998. 2. ., .
. “
”. . . , 1984, . 120-122
3. ., ., . .
“ ”, .1989, - .15-19.
_________________
: 631. 3
,
,
47 %
. -
.
. , .
.
( ) , ,
, .
, 8 - 10 , 4 - 5, 2-3 .
.
2 . .
1-.
.
, -
: -101 5,44 -150 0,88 . -701 -75
– 16 , -150 -82 –4 .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
118
1
,
)
( )
-
,
.
,
-701 1,28* 0,54* 4 0,5** 6,32 0,34 16 -150 1,17 0,80 2 0,5 4,47 0,22 4 -75 0,60 0,80 2 0,5 3,90 0,29 16
-82 0,47 0,72 2 0,5 3,69 0,64 4 *- ;
**-
-
= .
(1- ).
1. ):
; ; ; ; ; ;
;
.
. ( )
( ) . ( ) ( )
) ( )
. ,
.
, , , , ,
.
, .
.
-
. , ,
.
, . 0,02 3
1\2 .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
119
= , , .
, .
. 3
. ,
. . ,
, 100 , .
–1,75 , –1,55 , 1,65 .
:
Q=qV /V Q- , ; q-
, ; V , 3; V -
, 3. -701
. :
V = 0, 16 3, V = 0,01 3, q =1,65 . 1,65 . 0,16
q = ---------------- = 26,4 0,01
( )
. ,
, .
. , 1
118 .
( 2..3% ).
,
. 50% .
, -
. .
) 2 :
-
.
. ,
, .
: 3,5
. 10 .
. . ,
.
, .
. 2 : ,
-.
.
, ,
.
2 . ,
(2- ). (1)
(2), (3) (4).
- (5), (6),
1-2 (43-44) 2011
120
2. : 1- ; 2- ; 3-
; 4- ; 5- ; 6-.
( ). .
, .
. .
(3- ).
3. . 1- ; 2- ; 3- ; 4- ; 5- .
,
, .
, .
, 7 2011
___________________
: 333
. , . , .
,
,
- -
. --
, , -
. -
- -
. , , ,
,
. -
, , ,
,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
121
,
-
. ,
,
, -
-
, , ,
.
-
-,
, ,
- ,
, ,
, ,
-
. ,
, .
+ = = 12 2011
1.
, . ,
, 2011. 2. . -
– , « », ., 2008.
3.
” -1046- ,
, ., 2009, 5, 33- . 4. . ,
”, 11,2006.
________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
122
1-2(43-44) 2011
~
-75
, ,
,
75 . 75 – ,
. , “ ,
” . , 75
. – :
, , ,
, .
. ,
. , – ,
, , .
. 1936 15
-.
, 1954-1959
( )
.
1959-1960 -
.
,
. , -
, .
. 1960-1962
.
,
. ,
, , ,
( ) ,
1962-1965
.
: “ ” ,
: “ ,
”,
.
, .
1965-1967
1968 -.
1967-1987
1-2 (43-44) 2011
123
. .
,
,
.
.
1987-2002
, . .
1992 “
”
,
. .
. . 1999-2004
2004
. . . .
.
,
,
– .
, 200
(33-35 ) (36-43 ) ,
.
,
.
. ,
. , .
. . 50 -
, -
, . -
, ,
, ,
, ,
:
,
. : 1 ,
, , 2 3
, ,
, . -
6 .
.
32 (1-2 , )
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
124
, : -401, -402, -403, -405,
-407 -408 -414
-. , -402
(1978 )
. ,
1,8 . ,
, 20-25
) , –
, ( ) .
,
, (µ)
.
. , ,
, .
.
, (6-7 .) -1 .
8 – ( ) -401
.
, . ,
“ ” ,
IV-V , 2003-2006 -
, 2011
5000 .
, .
- 105
, 2 ,
-402 , “ ”
. , , -
- I-III
2010 . ( )
( ., , ) (Heredity)
. “ -
”
. , .
. – 2
-.
. ,
,
.
. 1978-1980
( , ) .
. 1970 - 1982 “
” . ,
, ,
, .
, .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
125
40-45 . -
,
,
)
, -,
.
,
________________
–
. . -60
1951 10
. 1969 , 1976
, 1980-
84 , 1993
,
” ,
. . . 1972
,
. 1975 1979 , 1979 1995 ,
1995 .
. . -
-
. -
, , ,
, , -, , ,
, ,
.
,
,
. . .
, -
,
«
, -
» .
. . - -
, .
, -,
1-2 (43-44) 2011
126
.
" ", " -
", " ", "
, “ ”, “
, ”, ”
.
. . ,
, ,
.
, .
. . 35 60 , , 4 , 8 -
. - 1
, 8 , 20
. . .
, « » .
. . -
, 1993 “
”
, .
( , )
.
, ,
. .
.
.
, “
” ,
, ” ,
“ ,
100 ,
.
32
. “ ”,
” .
. ,
, ,
. . . ,
. ,
, ,
.
, .
. . -
. . .
.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
127
, . . , , ,
.
_______________________________
1-2 (43-44) 2011
128
1020
1-2 (43-44) 2011
: ,
, ,
, .
: . : .
: 700140, – 140,
1, : 260-48-00, 260-50-59.
00278 10.IV.2000 . 25.06.11.
84 1081/16. « » . . 13. 12,8. 300 . .
RISOGRAPH .
1-2 (43-44) 2011
: ,
, , ,
.
.
: 700140, – 140,
, 1. , : 260-48-00, 260-50-59.
, 00278 10.IV.2000 .
25.06.11. 84 1081/16. « ». . 13. 12,8.
300 . .
RISOGRAP.
1-2 (43-44) 2011
129