Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 643

-

XXI

. 2016
52

XXI .
. . .. ,
2016. 643 .

ISBN 978-5-9908130-3-8

,
XXI
, 25 2016 .

www.pniiaz.ru.

ISBN 978-5-9908130-3-8
, 2016.

, 2016.

1.


631.527:633.39

ATRIPLEX UNDULAT -

.., , ., .- ., ...
- , , . , uzkarakul30@mail.ru
. Atriplex undulat
-
.
- .
: , , , - .
. - , , . - ,
,
, (2040%) [2,3,4]. , -
. ,
. , .
100 . 30 3

,
15 .
, , . ,
- , .

- ,
() 14 ,
Atriplex. (25 10 -1/)
[6,7]. Atriplex
undulat,
ICBA ().
.
Atriplex undulat . :
, Atriplex undulat
- ;
;
Atriplex undulat
- ;
. - .
-,
. ,
.
. 80-133 1,18-1,35% .
0,29-12%, 36,6%. 0,30-0,79
0,81%, 0,17%. 0,09%, - 0,10%
(25) , 32,3 / .
(0-25 ) 239 /,
28 / . 1825-40 [5].
4

-160 .
- 40-450, -20300.
30%, 10-20%.
- , . 160 . 70-80 , 260 .
- -. -Artemisia diffusa
Poa bulbosa. Peganum harmala Iris songoricum.
2,0 / -
, 0,5- 3,5 /.

. 1. Atriplex undulat

,
, , .
,
25 .
, - 5

.
. . [1].
.
2011 . Atriplex undulat

, (Kochia prostrata) - (Halothamnus subaphylla) .
.
, .
, , , .
1.
1
-

, %

,


, .

, /
,
/
, /

Kochia prostrat

1-
5-
2011
2015
96,0
93,6
12,6


Halothamnus subaphylla

1-
5-
2011
2015
91,6
89,3

Atriplex undulat
1-
2011
95,5

5-
2015
94,6

75,6

23,6

73,6

32,1

93,6

32,7

3,8

36,7

3,7

83,6

3,5

21,7

4,2

27,8

4,1

44,5

1,8

13,6

2,0

14,5

2,6

24,8

0,4

2,1

0,5

3,6

0,4

5,1

4,6

, - . :
-96%, -91,6% Atriplex undulat-95,5%.
6

5 - : 93,6, 89,3 94,6%.


: -75,6
, -73,6 , Atriplex undulat - - 93,6 .
Atriplex undulat
.
21,7 /, 27,8 /, Atriplex undulat - 44,5 /, .. Atriplex undulat
22,8 / ,
16,7 / , . Atriplex undulat
(5,1 /) , - .
: Cenopodiaceae, Atriplex L.- Atriplex undulat
- , .

1.

:
.. . : , 1979.-416

.
2. ..

,
, 2005, 187-189 .
3. .. -
,

.//
. , 2013. 7-9 .
4. ..
// . 1997,
3-4. . 48-53.
5. ..
. , - , 1975.-175 .
6. bdul-Halim R.K. et al. Testing the adaptation of salt resource under suede. Proceed of the Second Inter. Rangeland Congress tolerant forage plant in Iraq //
Rangelands. Cambridge, 1986/ P. 491-496..65-74.
7. Forte M. Salt tolerant and halophytic plants in Israel and fuel production
Amsterdam, 1986.p.83-96.

332.02
, ,

. ., . . , , ,
" ",
, ,
E-mail: sold@aaanet.ru
. , , , - .
: , , , , . ,
. , , .
: ; ; ;
; ; ; ;
; ; .
, , ,

.
,
.

:
, ,
, , ,
,
, .
2016 237
. . 2007 63
8

. 2016 464
266
. ,
, ,
, ,
(. 1) [1;3].
1
( )

2010 .

2011 .

2012 .

2013 .

2014 .

- 201,8
*, .

256,9

276,2

307,1

313,8

116,7

107,5

111,2

102,2

% - 3,0

3,0

2,9

2,3

2,3

- 176,5
,
, , .
(1995 . .)

186,8

201,8

233,4

244,4

99,2

102,2

115,6

104,7

97,8

106,6

- 1,9
1,7
1,6
1,7
1,8

* , ,
. **
, .

,
, , .
15. 06. 2016 .
33 279 . , 24
111 . , 4 219 . , 4 616 . ,
- 333 . . 12% (
29 739 . ).
13 2016 .
- 17 470 ./ (+2,1%
, +6,3% ), - 13 965 ./ (+3,2%
, +20,2 % ).
- 2016
( )
9

4,2 . 2015
6,0%.
17.06.2016 199,53 . ./,
151,54 . ./, 98,87 . ./.
- 2016
8,9 .
2015 . 0,8%,
4 896,8 . (+ 3,1%).
17.06.2016
21,18 ./.
30 2016 .
2016 . - 172,9 . ( 2,4
2015 .), 169,4 . ( 1,9
2015 .). ..
2016 (. 2) [1;3].
2 , %

2010 .

2011 .

2012 .

2013 .

2014 .

3,6

4,2

3,7

3,8

4,0

9,8

9,7

9,5

9,4

9,3

3,0

3,0

2,9

3,7

3,6


3,1
2,9
2,7
2,8
2,7
* 2005 . ,
.



.

.
, ,
.

.
,
(SWOT-),
10


.
(.
3) [1; 4]
3

2010 .

2012 .

2013 .

2014.

( 2587,8
), .

3340,5

3687,0

4319,0

% ( - 88,7
)

95,2

105,8

103,7*

% 1990 . ( )

72,2

84,5

89,3

92,6*

, % 46,0

49,0

53,2

51,5

% ( - 76,2
)

88,3

111,2

105,0*

% 1990 . ( )

107,5

119,5

125,5*

, % 54,0

51,0

46,8

48,5

% ( - 100,9
)

102,8

100,6

102,1*

% 1990 . ( )

66,1

66,4

67,8*

83,0

62,9


(. 4) [1; 26].
I 2016 2,8%
2015 .

, , , , , ,
, .
,
, , .
, 2014
, , ,
, .
11


, .
.
4
,
2013 2020 .

2010 .

2011 .

2012 .

2013 .

2014.

- 88,7

(
), %

123,0

95,2

105,8

103,7

- 76,2
( ), %

146,9

88,3

111,2

105,0

- 100,9
( ), %

102,3

102,7

100,6

102,1

- 104,0
, (
), %

104,2

104,3

101,0

103,3

90,9
(
), % **

111,6

102,7

105,1

94,5

8,3
( ), %

11,8

12,1

13,0

16,2

:
1) , , ;
2) ;
3) , ,
;
4) ;
5) ,
, , ;
6)
12

, ;
7) ;
8) ,
.
, ,
, [2;41-43].
1.
1 SWOT 1
Strengths ( )

Weaknesses ( )

-
- - ;
;
;
,
: , , - ,
;
;
,
,
, , - ;

;


, .
Opportunities ()

Threats ()

: ,
, ,
, ,
;


;

;

, - 1

13

;
;
,

;
( , ..)
-
,
;


, ,
.
,

. -
,
.
, ,
,
.



,
,
- .
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
,
14

.
,
(. 5)[1; 22].
5 ,
./, 1995 . ..,

2010 .

2011 .

2012 .

2013 .

2014 .

197,6

234,69

248,47

244,55

4 272,28

198,35

210,89

220,09

214,8

272,36

105,14

103,57

117,26

107,03

136,14

235,96

270,28

288,23

302,94

310,54

239,55

256,48

260,89

308,92

357,54

72,60

76,79

78,51

75,47

78,09

, 1

31,99

32,52

33,88

38,64

43,81

263,20

273,43

272,57

326,89

388,81

, .

38,56

41,25

43,34

56,01

58,76

40,62

30,22

31,58

32,32

44,97

21,45

19,76

25,19

26,83

29,46

42,60

45,36

50,51

55,11

58,75

42,14

40,65

39,80

43,51

53,03

47,77

46,18

48,87

50,67

55,18

28,94

14,26

16,07

23,18

26,66

28,22

10,61

15,65

17,30

25,55

27,41

16,03

16,70

21,36

26,47

62,37

63,59

62,54

63,26

76,70

,
.
,
. .
, ,
, .

1.
,
, .
15

,
,


, ,
. (
, ..) -
.
2.
: ;

;
; ;

-
;
,
, -, .
3.
.


, ,
-
.
4.
:
, , , , ,
, , ..
, ,
,
.
,
.

, , ,
,
, ,
.
5.
.
16

:
, ,
,
,
; ;
,
, 15 ;
,
, . .
. .
, ,
, .
6. ,

, .

,
.

. ,
.

.
.
7.
:
;
;
;
; ;

, , -.
8.
: ;

- ;
;
17

, .
,
,
, -
:
, ;

; .

1.
. ,: , 2016;
2. 2014:
. . 2013, ,
: . : Creative Commons Attribution CC
BY 3.0, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTNWDR2013/Resources/82580241352909193861/8936935-1356011448215/89869011380730352432/RUS_StandaloneOverview.pdf;
3. : . . .:
( ), 2015;
4. . 2014-2017 2020
, , 2015;
5. .. . " :
; ; ", ,
(63), 2015;
6. .. /:
. . . 11. / . . . . ; .
. .. , .. . ., 2016. . 1. . 423-427;
7. Soldatova I., The Management of the Agriculture of Russia While Maintaining Food Security in the Globalization", China-USA Business Review, September
2011, Vol. 10, No 9, P. 785-792 (with Ovchinnikov V., Chernishev, M. N. Kuznesov
N.G.;
8. Soldatova I. "Investments in the Russian Agriculture Under the Economic,
Political Volatility", Volume 3, Number 1-2, February 2015, Serial Number 8, USA,
(with Kuznetsov N., Kuznetsov V.).

18

: 633.2.03:630.116



.., .-. , .., .-. ,
.., , .., .-.
- , .
E-mail: kormoproiz.st@mail.ru
.
.
. ,
, , .

. 2700
, 13 , 35
. 12 ,
70% .
. -,
, .
, , . -, .
- , () ().
. , ,

. , , , [3, 4, 9].
19

1,1
. , 72% . , 15-20 ,
. , 300,0 . . , 0,28-0,35 /
[1, 3, 6, 11, 12].
-
.
.

.
- , ,
.
. (185-190 ) 1,5-1,8 /, 0,16.
,
[2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 12] .


, ,
, [1, 5, 10, 11].

, .
.

.
20

,
.
2 : 2011
, 2-
-3 5-7 -3,6.
2013
-3,2 2 10-12 -3,6. : , , , . 50%
, -,
35% .

15,0 /.
1,9-2,1%.
0,35-0,38. 0,5-0,7. 350 .
- ,

, (. 1).
, ,
61,0-70,0%
19,0-22,2% , . , 2016 , , ,
2015 .
- ,
13,9-14,0 /.

21

1- (2011-2016 .)

2011

, /
..

+
()

9,2
10,0
7,3

1,3
1,5
-

+
()

11,8
11,5
9,1

1,6
1,5
-

+
()

11,9
12,1
8,7

1,8
1,9
-

2012
2013
2014
2015

, /
, /
, /
, /
..

..
..
..


13,6
8,3
10,8
6,0
9,7
4,4
11,7
4,2
16,0
10,8
10,4
5,9
11,4
5,1
11,1
4,0
5,6
4,5
3,9
7,6

16,0
10,2
13,0
7,6
14,1
7,0
14,2
4,7
18,5
12,7
12,5
7,2
13,1
6,3
13,7
4,5
8,4
7,5
8,1
9,2

14,5
9,5
11,5
7,0
11,7
5,9
12,6
4,8
17,7
12,4
11,7
7,7
11,8
6,0
11,2
4,1
7,2
5,5
5,3
8,6
-

22

2016

, /
..

13,1
12,0
8,0

2,9
2,5
-

14,4
14,8
10,3

3,0
3,1
-

10,8
10,5
8,7

2,1
2,0
-


2011 2016 , ,
, 2.
,
. ,
2,0-2,8 , 2,9-4,9
1,6-2,9 ,
.
,
31,0-34,0 / .
2 , 6-

+
()

13,1
12,0
8,0

.
.
,
.,
,
/
/
/

2,8
2080
265
2,7
2000
260
1,9
1100
110

+
()

14,4
14,8
10,3


3,5
2430
300
3,4
2590
310
2,3
1200
120

26,7
23,7
14,8

+
()

10,8
10,5
8,7

3,0
3,1
1,3


2010
320
2240
330
890
85

21,0
22,2
7,6

,
/

.
,
/
20,5
21,9
12,4

,
,
,
1,3-1,5 , 33-38% . ,
, 10-15%.
23

, (1-
) ,
70% 2- 40%.
,
(. 3).
, ,
(, ) (
). 13,6-16,2 / , 440-525 / 22,1-26,4 / , 3,34,2 , .
, ,
, ,
.
, , , , .
,
()
,
. ,

.
, ,
.

24

3 2013-2016 .

,
1. ( )
2. +
3. +
4. +
5. +
6. + +
7. + +
8. + +
9. + +
10. + + +
11. + + +
12. + + + +

,
/

,
/

,
/

.
,
/

14,7
40,5
56,5
54,4
38,7
48,3
56,5
42,0
50,0
49,0

4,3
8,7
11,5
10,6
7,6
9,4
11,2
8,1
9,2
9,1

440
850
1100
1770
1590
1390
1590
1150
1360
1690

64,8

12,9

59,2

11,2

25

25,0
70,1
76,9
88,5
73,7
80,9
89,3
67,6
83,9
84,3

.
,
/
5,2
16,9
17,9
17,8
17,5
17,2
22,8
21,6
20,3
21,1

.
.

4,8
4,1
4,3
5,0
4,2
4,7
3,9
3,1
4,1
4,0

.
,
/
19,8
53,2
59,0
70,7
56,2
63,7
66,5
46,0
62,8
63,2

2110

105,6

25,6

4,1

80,0

1770

96,6

23,9

4,0

72,7

:
1. , ..
/ .. , .. , .. // , ,
, 2016.- 1.- . 47-48.
2. , .. / .. , .. , .. , .. //
- : . . . 80- .. , 2015. - . 34-36.
3. , .. / .. , .. , .. , .. //
- , , 2015. . 2.- 8.- . 105-113.
4. , ..
/ .. , .. , ..
// -
, , 2015. . 2.- 8.- . 113-120.
5. , ..
/ .. , .. , .. // , 2014. . 1.- 7 (1). . 131-135.
6. , .. / .. , .. , .. // - . 2013. . 2. 6 (1). . 139-146.
7. , .. / .. , .. , ..
// , 2011.- 2.- . 16-17.
8. , ..
/ .. , .. , ..
// , 2010.- 7.- . 15-18.
9. , .. / .. ,
.. // , 2010. . 3.- 1.- .
68-71.
10. , ..
/
.. , .. , .. , .. , .. //
: . 26

. . - -. . . 2015. . 335339.
11. , .. / .. ., .. , .. , .. // , 2015.- . 2.- 8.- .
127-134.
12. , .. / .. , .. //
- . 2010. . 3. 1. . 72-76.

556.14/.16

.., ..-., .., ..-..


-
, . , E-mail: vlasencomarina@mail.ru
: , , ,
. .
, . (-) (-)
. - .
: , ,
, ,

, [1, 2]. - - -
27

. 30-60 : . , 3-5 .
,
. .
40-60 ,
, 2-3 . , .
- .
- . 20-30 ,
.
, ,
50-70 .
.
, ,
.
.
0,001-0,003 ( 1). (. )
0,02.
.
1,5-2 , 3-4 , 8-12 .
, , 0,05-0,3 /.
.

: 1)
, 2)
( ), . , ,
.

. , .
. . . - .
10 .
28

10 . .

. 235 . 35 (15 %),
(), . (32 ) ,
(177 ) . 2-3 .

29


1
- () - ()
(4 )
. .
: (333 357
), , .
. .
93-113
, 1,5 , . , . , 30

. 32 .
.
,
.

60 ,
. -
. ,
.
.
- 119 ,
139 .
.
- 30-66 . 333 , 186 , 50 .

630 . 3, 599 . 3
187 . 3. 1416 . 3.
. , , 5
10 . 3 ,
3000 . 40
1,2 . 3. .
(-, , )
, 2:1. , (1,027 . ) 500 .
, .
50 ,
, . (
) 250 . 3, 0,005-0,008 /. , , . , 1,666 3.
100 . 3.
. ( ) ,
175 3/ 453 . 3 .
31

22 % .

1. ..
, . . . . . . -. . : - , 2005. 25 .
2. . . . .: ,
1979. 277 .

633.2.03(213.5)
ATRIPLEX CANESCENS


., ., ..
-
, . , E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
.
triplex canescens .
. , , , , , , , ,
.
. ,
, ,
. , , . ,
.
(, ,
, ) ,
Atriplex ( ..,
.., 1989). , Atriplex .

32

Atriplex 60- (., 1967).



Atriplex.
,
Atriplex
.
, () (),
Atriplex, , .

Atriplex canescens - .

Atriplex.
.
. . (1960),
( 100 ). .

, , . 5-7 . , , 1000 . . (1963).
100 . (, , , ) ,
100 . (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ) .

5-10 0 25-30 .
. .
33

(1979).
. Atriplex A. can, .
.
(Atriplex canescens),
.
. ,
, ,

(, 1966).

- ,
.
,
(, 1981). , .
, . (Kochia prostrata L. Schrad) ,
(, ),
,
(, ) (, 1989)).

. Atriplex
canescens . (280-310 ),
(-).
:
, , .
A. anescens (
30-60 ) .
, ( 60%) - . , A. anescens
34

, -10-15 ( ).
. A.anescens
53,65,9 , 47,67,9 62,0
.
66,23,4 , 29,42,6 . ( ) 52,4 355,6 ,
180 (. 1).
1 .canescens
(n= 100) , 2008 .
-

, .
,
,
,
()
.


27-73

V,%

43,67,9

76,2

34-86

66,23,4

74,6

4,0-6,5
0,4-0,7
320-1430

5,30,7
0490,04
619,6101,3

27,3
27,7
89,6

52,4-271,6

113,427,6

79,1

2
. ( , 2008-2011
.)
,

,
/
2- (2008) 3- (2009)
4-

(2010)
Atriplex canes- 17,62,3
23,44,2
23,33,9
cens
Kochia prostra- 13,21,9
15,23,6
14,82,6
ta,
Halothamnus
14,61,7
16,23,4
18,42,9
subaphylla,

Ceratoides
12,61,9
13,32,8
15,21,7
ewersmanniana,

3,60,8
3,90,6
4,20,4

35

, /
2-
(2008)
216,77,1

3-
(2009)
326,612,1

4-
(2010)
332,39,6

111,621,3 154,631,6

172,321,6

196,414,6 212,421,6

316,431,6

96,421,3

116,423,4

119,626,3

320-1430 .,
619,6101,3 .
1, A.anescens
- , .
( 1 ), , ,
.

9-10 . . - A.anescens 2,0 / (. 2).
5-6 .

. 1. A.anescens
A.anescens . (, , ) ().
, (Atriplex hortensis) :
, ,
. :
, 1-2, ,
, , ;
, 3-4,5, ,
.
. , , .
, : 1)
, , , 3 ; 2)
, ,
36

, 3) , , , 3 , .

. 2. A.anescens.
( )
.
, .
,
. (, 1964) ( , 1988)

Atriplex ( , 1936).
3 () . canescens

1
2
3
4


10-15
8-9
6-7
4-5


14,01,8
9,01,5
6,50,5
4,50,5


2,20,3
2,21,5
1,50,3
1,30,2


10,81,2
8,00,5
6,40,7
4,60,4


5,60,9
4,40,6
3,50,5
3,00,5

3-4 14-15.
4 (. 2), 5-6 (. 3).
,

, (. 4).
2 3 ,
.
( 4) .
37

. 4, . canescens
, , . , , , ,
.
4 .canescens


, %
1000 , .
,
%
, %

10-15
1
21,3
19,3
65,6

,
8-9
6-7
2
3
36,0
22,7
13,03
7,26
60,0
53,6

4-5
4
20,0
3,51
45,0

71,0
45

63,3
45

49,0
15

62,6
25

,
,
,
(. 5).
, , : ( ),
( ) ..
5 .canescens .

20.
30.
10.
20.
30.
10.
10.
30.

10
22
9
54
8
55
8
55
7
33
5
34
4
21
5
29


%
4,0
27,2
28,6
61,2
58,6
66,0
48,6

46,6
55,0
67,7
66,0
73,2
70,0
76,0
66,0


.
. canescens .
38

, ,
. -
.
, . , 50-60 ,
20-30 . , , , , .. .
,
.
, , . .
(. 6) , , ,
. ,
. ,
( ).
6 A. canescens

40-45

, %
, %
44,0
56,0
42,0
61,0
56,0
70,4


60-65

, %
, %
44,0
62,0
36,6
59,0
56,0
69,0

75-80

, %
, %
34,0
61,2
27,2
72,0
80,0
88,0

,
.
Chenopodiaceae (Kochia prostrata, Haloxylon aphyllum, Salsola orientalis,
Halothamnus subaphylla, Camphorosma lessengii, Salsola Paletzkiana, S. Richteri
.) .
, . canescens (. 9) , 2 (
).

39

7 A. canescens

6
1
2
3


%
32,0
33,0
75,2
56,0

%
70,0
70,6
82,1
60,0

,
35
25
14
14

,
, .
, . canescens
.
, , triplex canescens
- , .
.
.canescens
- - .
. canescens. Atriplex .
Atriplex 40 , . 16 . , A. cana,
.
8 Atriplex L.
( .. . 1951)

A. dimorfotegia
A. hastata
A. hortensis
A. nitns
A. pamirica
A. pedunculata
A. verrucifera
A. cana
A. canescens

21,9
18,7
19,5
16,0
25,5
28,6
27,3
21,3
6,6

- , %

22,7
3,6
17,9
11,2
4,0
22,0
17,9
7,9
3,5
29,1
14,4
12,0
3,0
30,1
27,9
24,8
2,9
22,7
5,5
3,2
32,9
19,6
9,3
2,2
15,8
9,9
6,0
3,3
23,1
10,17
8,2
2,84
38,37
40

33,9
44,1
30,0
36,5
21,2
28,6
40,5
45,7
41,95

.. . (1951) A. cana
9,9% , 6,0% , 3,3% , 23,1% 45,7% (. 8).
A. canescens , A. cana.
A. canescens
(10,17%) (38,3%).
, , ,
A. canescens. , A.
canescens , - .
A. anescens.

. , , .
(
) .
, . A. canescens 3015 ( . 2005).
, . ,
, - .
A. canenscens 2
. ,
(12-13%). ,
(26,3%)
(32,8%) (. 9).
9 A. canescens , , 2008

Mm
23,64,2
26,31,9
32,82,1
13,43,6

%
23,6
26,3
32,8
13,4

, ,
41

. , 30% . , (
) .
,
1-2
(. 10).
28-30%. .
10 A. canenscens

, .
0
1
2
3
4
5

Mm
7,61,2
29,62,3
28,41,7
25,61,9
11,33,2
3,21,9

%
7,6
29,6
28,4
25,6
11,3
3,2


A. canenscens
25-30 , 5-10 .
100% .
,
0,5 . A. canescens , .
. A.
anenscens
:
Atriplex canescens
- . (280-310 ) ,
- .
Atriplex canescens 2,0 /, 5-6 .
- -,
26-32% .
- 1,0-3,0 .
42

, Atriplex canescens
3
.
Atriplex canescens

. -800-1000 /.
Atriplex canescens
10-120 25-30 . 100% () .
. - .
-.

1. .. // ..-.,1960.-.11.-. 333-366
2. .. . : ,1979.-416 .
3. . . Atriplex
// . , 1967 . 76-80.
4. . .
. : , 1966.-264 .
5. . ., . . ( ). : , . ., 1989. .39-50.
6. .. . .,,1963.312 .
7. . ., . .( .)
, . I, II, III, .-., 1950, 1951, 1956.- 379 .
8. . .: ,
1988.-60 .
9. . . . -: .
1981-271.
10. . . - Kochia
Prostrata (L.) Shrad . . . . . , , 1989.-200 .
11. . . 43

//
. .: , 1964. . 21-25.
12. . .-.: VI, 1936.-94 .
13. , -, . : ,
. - (
) , 2005.-4 .

581.526.534 (575.1)
(CERATOIDES EWERSMANNIANA) .
.., ..., ., ..-..
- .
E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru


(Ceratoides ewersmannina). .
: , , , , , , , .
.
, . (Ceratoides
ewersmanniana)
.
,
4-5 . (25-30 ).
.. . (1951)
. ,
: -3,3-28,1%, -9,8-25,1%, -0,8-4,8%, -22,757,6%, ()-29,5-43,5%. 44

, , .
.
. ,
,

(, 1956). , .. (1951) ,
. , .
, ,
.

.
.
(, , 1969)
. , , . 5-6 .
. 1 , .
, , , 40-50 , 17-25 . (0-25 )- 0,9-1,7%,
.
-15,70, +470 250. -160 . -. 45

Po bulbosa Artemisia diffusa. 2,5 /.


,
10,06-14,14% 0,06-0,11
. 16,5% -1937
0,11 . 2,8
4,05%. 2,1 4,01%. -1971, -1937, -1995-26,5-28,9%. , 30,5 40,8%.
, - 6,1 0,30 1 .
13-27% ( .,1980).
, 1971, -1937 -1995.
15,3-17,6 . -1978, -2037 -1886 10-10,6%
0,05 1 . , .
-1995, -1937, -1981 , 13,2-13,9% 0,53-0,67 .
18,2 -1978.
9,22-9,60 -1995 -1883,
-0,67-0,73.
.
,
: -1995, -1937, -1981, -1883.
2 , .
,
, Salsola
orientalis, - Artemisia diffusa.
, (Astragalus sp). . .

46

1 . , 2009

6
0,2
0,5
0,4
1,3
1,1
1,1
1,5
1,5
2,9
1,9
2,1
2,1
0,7
2,3
2,0
1,8
2,0
2,3
0,9
2,6

5
1,6
2,3
1,9
3,1
2,8
2,9
3,5
3,3
4,9
4,3
4,1
3,6
1,8
3,4
3,4
3,2
3,2
4,0
1,9
3,6

4
1,3
1,8
1,4
1,6
1,5
1,7
1,8
1,6
1,8
2,2
1,8
1,4
1,04
1,01
3,63
1,01
1,04
1,57
1,01
0,8

3
13,2
13,9
14,2
16,5
13,9
14,6
12,6
13,9
14,3
14,2
14,3
15,3
10,9
13,04
14,14
13,19
12,43
12,9
10,0
10,4

2
-1995
-1873
-1870
-1937
-1977
-1978
-2037
-1981
-1971
-1876
-1883
-1885
-1889
-1995
-1873
-1870
-1937
-1977
-1978
-2037

% .

7
1,84
1,76
1,78
1,99
2,16
1,91
1,74
1,70
1,39
1,67
2,99
1,99
1,55
3,3
3,2
4,0
3,4
3,9
2,1
2,8

8
15,4
18,5
15,0
18,2
17,4
16,6
11,5
16,5
18,8
14,2
15,1
14,6
23,4
10,0
9,5
13,4
9,4
12,1
4,5
8,5

9
36,05
46,7
41,6
38,1
43,3
40,5
41,1
34,9
43,5
35,7
39,3
37,7
38,02
28,9
36,5
32,7
28,0
36,3
31,3
40,8

10
33,5
19,14
27,4
25,2
23,1
26,4
32,8
27,3
22,0
34,13
28,3
30,4
26,3
44,6
36,4
36,6
46,5
34,6
51,8
37,6

11
16,9
16,6
17,1
16,7
16,8
16,9
17,6
16,8
16,4
17,1
17,3
17,2
15,3
18,06
18,04
17,3
17,6
17,4
18,2
17,9

12
7,6
6,1
7,05
7,3
6,7
7,09
7,3
7,1
6,5
7,8
7,4
7,6
6,7
9,22
8,19
8,4
9,07
7,9
9,0
7,5

13
0,47
0,30
0,39
0,42
0,35
0,40
0,42
0,40
0,34
0,48
0,43
0,46
0,36
0,67
0,53
0,56
0,60
0,50
0,60
0,45

14
0,08
0,09
0,09
0,11
0,09
0,09
0,08
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,09
0,10
0,06
0,08
0,09
0,08
0,07
0,07
0,05
0,05

47

2
-1891
-1971
-1876
-1883
-1885
-1889

3
13,01
12,7
11,3
11,8
11,3
10,6

4
0,64
0,64
0,80
0,44
0,44
0,85

5
2,9
2,8
2,8
3,0
2,6
3,4

6
2,1
2,0
1,9
2,4
2,0
2,4

7
2,7
2,7
2,4
3,3
3,2
3,5

8
7,0
18,6
9,1
9,4
8,5
10,7

9
30,5
26,2
38,6
35,3
31,6
35,6

10
46,6
34,5
38,3
40,0
45,2
34,3

11
18,1
15,05
17,7
17,8
17,9
17,5

12
9,09
7,9
9,6
7,7
8,8
8,0

13
0,66
0,55
0,73
0,47
0,60
0,50

14
0,08
0,07
0,07
0,07
0,07
0,06

2
.
, ,

:
.
.

.
:
.
.
.
:

: .
.

11,0
11,6

3,76
1,49

32,5
39,6

27,8
24,2

15,4
15,4

7,4
6,6

0,44
0,34

0,067
0,072

13,1

1,89

34,5

25,4

15,2

7,0

0,40

0,085

17,5
16,7
18,7

2,82
3,00
2,25

21,84
24,14
23,88

42,76
34,7
42,88

16,87
17,31
17,02

9,24
9,33
9,69

0,70
0,79
0,75

0,116
0,108
0,124

16,7
15,6

1,42
1,32

25,94
24,56

35,37
34,47

15,9
15,7

8,48
8,5

0,58
0,58

0,118
0,129

14,7
10,0

3,04
3,52

34,77
41,50

26,8
26,9

16,32
16,77

7,56
6,9

0,46
0,38

0,101
0,058

48

1
,

Salsola
orientalis. , 24-26%, -34-41%, -32-39%.
. .
. , ,
.
:
1. , , , .
2.
, ,
.

1. .. .
. , 1951.
2. .., .., .. . , . , , 1980-297.
3. .., .., .., .
.-.-., , 1956. .3-.474-577.
4. .., .. ,
. , , 1969.
5. .. .
.
, 1956.-152 .

52

630.161:581.5


-
.., ..-..
- ,
, . , anastasiya.vdovenko@mail.ru
.., .-..
, .
, , - .
.
.
: , , , , .
, 2014 .
3 . , - 40-45 %
, .. 1400 . -1260 ,
140 , 35 .
-
, , . .
.
: 1) ( );
2) ; 3) ; 4) . - [2].
:

50

.
: , , .
, , (2007
.),
( 2004 .), .., 1987, 2002, 2003; .., 1991,
2003; .., 1993, 1997, .., 2008, , .
, ( . ., 1984.- 77 .,
.. / 2-
.; , 1938. 208 ., 52 .; / . .. /
: , 1973. 286 . .).
, - ,

. Excel, Corel .
, . : - 50-70 %,
- 15-50 %, - 10 20 %,
- 5-10 %, - 15-20 % (,
, . .).
[1,2].
- . , , . , , [3].
.
, . ,
, (. 1).
7,7-10,0 /, 3,8-4,6 /
51

19 /.
3,4 /, 2,5 / (
70 %, 35 %, . 1). (70 %) (60 %) [4]. (45 %) (50 %). 1,7 /, 1,0 /,
1,7 /, 19,0 /. ,
2-5 , . .

1
, (. . ), 2014 .
2014 - , . 10 , 30 , 40 .
52

: ,
, , , . , ,
, , .
1 , . . , -, 2014 .
- , /

(. )

3,4
3,4

2,4
2,4
2,5
2,5
1,0
1,0

7,0

6,3

2,5

2,3

3,8

3,4

2,0

1,9

9,8

6,8

5,7

3,9

4,6

3,2

2,6

1,8

10,5

1,5

7,0

4,9

11,7

1,7

6,5

0,9

3,8

3,8

1,6

1,6

0,8

0,8

0,3

0,3

.
7 ,
4 . 5-15- 3,5-6 , 4 20
, 2.
2
, 2014 .


, ,

, ,

, ./

4-6

22-25

6-7

8,0

30

11-16

5-6

5,0-6,0

50

10-15

5-6

5,7-6,6

200-400

5-12

3-4

3,5-4,5

20-21
,
10-15

,
12-16

5-10

, %
90-95
75-80
60-70
10-15

, 53

, , 2 .

60 %, 8 %, 30 %, 4 %.

60 %, 20 %, 15 %.

50 %, 15 %.

.
8 %. , .
, ,
60 %,
12-23 % (. 2).
,
, 32-50 %.
,
, . , .

2
, 2014 .
54


-

(. 3).
(2,0 )
7 , 4,8 . . - 1,5 , 4
, .
-
. ,
, .
, , . ,
, .
3
( ., . , 2014 .)

,
,

,
,
: 0,5 ( . )

0,20

0,07

0,07

0,02
: 1,0-1,3 (, )

3,6
1,2
1,1
3-4

4,3
0,6
1,4
3-4

4,4
0,7
1,5
3-4

3,7
0,09
1,0
3-4
: 1,3-1,7 (, )

4,2
1,44
1,3
3-4

4,5
0,72
1,3
3-4

4,8
0,85
1,5
3-4

3,3
0,15
1,3
3-4

, , , , . 55

, (-), 109
/, 21-54 /,
, ,
, 5-18 /.
,
,
2 5 , , , (- , ) 30 , .
,
( - )
, , . -
, 1 . 1,8
(60 %), , 2,5 (80
%). , ,
, .
, , .
,
, , , , (. 4).
40 % , , 20
% , 10 % , , 40 % , , . (0,14-0,35 %), , , (0,3 %). 512 .
2015 ,
- .
( 2013-14 .)
- (.
) , , 40 ,
5 .
56

4 (- )

,
/
41,9
62,4

, /
58,2
88,0

,
/
4,1
5,6

, /
1,7
1,4

,
, -
[2].
. (, ) , . .
.
- : 3 , 2 , 1 (),
4 . 3, 2, 1 ,
, 10 / (
18-20 /).
, , , .
3 (
).
:
- (184 ) 100 % ;
- (238 ) 100%
;
- (380 ) 80 % , 20 %
, .
- (282 ) 80 % , 20 %
- .
57


1. [ ]. :
http://www.my-article.net/get. 26.05.2015 .
2. .., .., .. . /
// - . - 30 -1 , 2013 ., .
, . 207-213.
3. .., .., .. -
, - // : . 2012. 3(27). . 22-27
4. ..
/ // - . - ., 2005. - . 274276.

574.1


.., ..
- ,
. ,
E-mail: rayax59@mail.ru
: , ,
. ()
.
, , ,
, .
: ,
, , , , , ,
, , .
58

()
.
, , , ,
. , .

.
50-100 .
2020 . 15% .

,
, .
, :

, , - ,
,
, ;
, ,
;
, ;

, , , , , ,
, ;

, ;
; , , ;
, 59

;
. [1]
-- (1992) 179 . :
1) ; 2) ; 3) .
,
, .. , 4,5% ( 90 .)
. , , , ,
100 . . . , .
, .
: ,
. .
, .
,
. , , ?
. , , . , .
,
,
, . [2]
. ,


60

, .
. ,
( ) . , , , , .
,
, .
, ,
. [4]
- , .. , ,
, .
,
1995 .,
1998 .
, , , ,

. 15 . ,
11 . . ) 3% .
: , , ,
.

, . 27 000 .
,
.
.
, " ", 163 301,
3 000,
. 61

. 8% , ,
60 . , , . 97
, 423 , 83 58 ,
" " 17 , 29 , 6
10 . , .
196 /3 13 /3, 160 /3 15 /3.
.
2,4 . 87% . -.
25 . (1% )
.
,
"" 50% , 150 . - 46% ( ),
- 15%, - 14%, - 13%,
- 8%. . - 97-98% , , .
, ,
.
-,
( ).
, , . [5]
:
1. .., .. . .: , 2004.
2. .. . -.
2004.
3. .. . .: , 2003.
62

4. .. ,
. , 12
, 2004 .
5. . (2001). .: ENK, 2002.
6. . . -.: ,
2002.

574.1


.., ..
- ,
. ,
E-mail: rayax59@mail.ru
: , , - ,
. , ,
,
.
: , , , -, , ,
, , .

, .
? , ,
. , , , ..
, , . , , , ? 63

, , , .
? , - - . , , , , . , -,
? -, , . -, .

. , , , ..
: , . , ! ()
.
.
, . , . :
( ), ( 1 100 )
( 100 ). .
? .
. ,
() . :
, , ,
. , .[1]
. , , 20
, 80 %.
,
- , , ,
. Corenso
34 ,
, , . 60 .
64

3 . , .
, 25 / , . , .
, ,
, .[2]
. 2003
. , 1994 . -
, ;
. , 120 . , 20 . .
, , , 60 %, 50 %,
22,5 %, 15 %. 2006
. , , .
.
, , - , .[3]
,
, . . , ,
5000 , 1999
(- ).
. 1999 2001 2,44
( 1,33
6 ) 500 (, ) 1000 () .

,
. .
65

"" , , ""
. ,
, . , ""
, , .
, ,
, . , 35 ,
1997 . 37-40 . , 2002 . -
50 . . , , (0,7 . ),
(0,8 . ), (0,6 . ), (0,4 . ), (0,2 . ), (24-25 . ) 90,0 . , (7-8 ).
,
, , ,
,
.
, , . -
, , . .
800-900 / 3
,
75-84 / 3 .
() -50 900
/3 1100 /3. , 66

,
. - , ,

18-20%.
. -
. .

2%. [2]
- .

. , : ,
. ,
. , , , 40% . - , , , , - ,
. - .
, .
- , ,
"" " " . , , - . ,
, ".
, ,
.
,
, . ,
20% . 50%. , 67

, "" . , . , 70-80% , - 60-70%.


, , . : - 100 ,
- 200 . , ?
. ,
. ,
- .
:
1.
.. . , 2004.
2.
. (2001). .: ENK, 2002.
3.
. . -.: , 2002.
4.
1 .
( . ..). .: , 2003.

371.044.4:577.4



. .

E-mail: indiraxon@bk.ru

.
, .
.
: , ,
, .
68

, ,


. ,

, .. . ,
[1].

. , , ,
, , .
,
, .
. ,
.


, ,
.
.

, , , .
, , ,
, ,
69

, .
, 50, 54, 55 .
, .
, , ,
..
, , , ,
.
, . .
(, , . .), .
,
, ,
.
,
.
. , .

. .
-
, . 70

, , , , .
, ,
.
, . , .

:
- ;
- ;
- ;
- ;
- ( , : , , , , , ).
- ,
.
.
, , , , :
- , ;
- , ;
- ,
;
-
, .

, -,
. , ,
. 71

,
.
, , , . , , ,
. , , .

:
-
, ,
, ,
;
- ;
-

.
:
;
.
:
, ;
,
;

( ),
. .
, :
, 72


;
, ,
.
;
- .
, ,
, , .
.
, , , . ,
, , , , .

, ,
. , ,
- .
, , ,
,
.
,
.
:
1. . . 73

/ . . // . 2011. 3. .1.
. 147-149.
2. .. - . ... . . : 2010. -21 .
3. .. -
. ... . . : 2006. -21 .
4. .. (5-6 )
.
... . . : 2005. -21 .
5. ..
. ... . . : 2009. -20 .
6. ..
( ). ... . .
: 2001. -21 .
7. . - . ... .. - : 2006. 23 .
8. .., ... -
/ . : - , 2004. C. 211-222

574.1


.., ..
- ,
. ,
E-mail: rayax59@mail.ru
:
- ,
. , . , .
,
, ,
74

.
, .
: , , ,
, , - , , , , , .

, . ,

,
.
.

, .
, . .[1]
(- , - .),
( ,
, .). .
(1992 ) (
33).
, , ,
.
75

,
.
(. cadaste) , ,
, - . ()
, , , ..
, , , , , -, .
,
.
, , - .[2]

.
, ,
.
:
- () ;
- ;
- ;
- , ;
- (
).


( ).
( )
76

.

,
,
,
. , , .
() ,
(, , .), , .
, . .
, . , ,
.

, , , .
.
, () , ,
.
.
() , . ,
.
,
() .
, .
77

,
.
. (1992 .)
, ( )
, .
, , .
, () ,
.
, , , .
- ; ;
; ; .
-
, () -
- .

( ) .

, .
, ,
, .
, ,
, .
, , , ,
( ) .
, , ,
, , , .
, , 78

, .

,
.
. , (. 1).
: ( ), ( 35 ),
( 1015 ), ( ), ( ).
, 100120 , , 2100 2200 .
: .
: , ( ), (), (,
, , ). ,
. [3]

.1
: , , . .
:
1.
, () ,
, , .
79

2.

, , ( ).
3.
, . , .
,
.
4.

, , .
5.

(, ..).
6.

() , .
7.

, .[4]

1. .., .. . .: , 2004.
2. .. ,
. , 12
, 2004 .
3. . . -.: ,
2002.
4. (.. ..), .: , 2000.

80

630232.329


.., , .., ..., ...
-
, . .
urmonmanz@qsxv.uz, mamutovb@mail.ru

, . ,
40% , 30% 30%
.
: , , , , , , .
. ,
90%, ,
,
.
, ,
. ,
. .


.
81

, -
. 50%,
.
() () ,
.
( ) :
; , , [1].
, , , . ,
. [ 2,3].
.
().
, , , ,
, ,
, .
, ,
-
,
, . (),
[4].

( ), , , ( , , .) 1,5-2 3
[1].
. 82


.

, , , , ,
, . , ,
.
. .
,
. , [4], 70%
30% . , ,

. 30% . , .
,

, .
,
[4]: 15 20 ,
1400 3 , 15 25 1800 3 .
.
: , ;
-
( ). ( , ,
).
83

, ,
.
,
, ,
(- 1,2).
.

. , .
, .
, 95 98%.

,
, . 3.

1-.

2-.
,
,
.

.
, . ,
84

4,6 , 2,2
, 3 ,
, , 1,5 , 1,4 ,
1,5 ,
1,4 , , .

3.6 3,5 . .
, ,
,
,
. ,
, ,
.
, , .
, ,
,
.

, - .
, ,
,
,
44 , 21 .
(17 12 ),
(7,8 6,7 ).
. , 40% ,30%
30%
. 0,8 84

, .

85

-3

(Pinus pallasiana Lambl.)

1400

6,50,12

1,9

2,20,02

0,9

8,80,17

1800

3,00,10

2,6

1,30,05

3,6

(Juniperus semiglobosa Rgl


-
(Quercus castaneifolia
CAM)

(Robinia pseudacacia L)

(Crataegus korolkovii),

1400

10,00,19

1,9

3,90,06

1400

9,00,19

2,1

13,60,43


(Juniperus virginiana
L.)

(Acer saccharinum L.)

1400
1400
1800
1800
1800

1400

1400
1800

11

12

13

1,9

2,60,04

1,5

2,3

0,4

3,80,12

3,3

1,80,06

4,0

0,8

0,5

1,5

14,50,23

1,6

4,10,08

2,0

4,5

0,2

2,70,17

6,3

16,00,31

1,9

3,30,05

1,5

7,0

0,6

3,1

2,20,12

5,6

18,70,41

3,2

3,30,09

2,3

5,1

1,1

10,30,23
5,10,19
7,80,28
7,50,26
6,71,21
7,00,23

2,2
3,8
3,6
3,4
3,7
3,2

2,20,03
2,30,13
3,00,08
3,60,15
2,50,08
2,90,09

1,4
3,4
2,7
4,1
3,2
3,0

10,73,08
84,72,95
14,30,54
37,61,65
16,30,57
28,01,34

2,9
3,5
3,8
4,4
3,5
4,8

7,00,19
5,60,20
4,30,13
5,10,14
4,50,06
6,80,20

2,7
3,6
3,0
2,8
2,5
2,8

97,4
79,6
6,5
30,1
9,6
21,0

4,8
3,3
1,3
1,5
2,0
3,9

10,80,50
13,20,57
12,50,56
9,60,41
20,20,58

4,6
4,4
4,5
4,2
5,8

1,60,06
1,80,11
1,80,07
1,30,06
2,50,05

3,9
5,0
4,2
4,4
4,3

20,50,65
27,50,99
27,41,05
20,40,68
21,51,36

3,3
3,8
3,8
3,3
6,3

3,40,07
3,30,09
3,50,06
3,40,07
2,80,17

2,5
2,6
1,8
2,2
6,1

9,7
14,3
14,9
10,8
1,3

1,8
1,5
1,7
2,1
0,3

52

10

3
2

10

11

12

13


(Aesculus hippocastanum L.)

1800

15,50,42

1,5

6,80,10

1,2

16,60,28

1,7

7,80,11

1,4

1,1

1,0

1800

43,51,9

2,1

5,30,9

1,5

44,51,10

2,5

5,80,12

1,9

1,0

0,5

1800
1400
1400
1800
1800

10,60,19
4,60,27
11,40,34
4,60,12
1190,41

2,1
5,9
3,0
4,1
3,5

5,80,11
1,30,05
1,70,05
1,00,02
1,40,05

1,7
3,6
2,6
2,0
2,8

12,10,29
26,81,01
45,81,40
28,81,18
46,21,73

2,4
3,8
3,1
4,1
3,7

6,70,13
3,20,06
3,80,07
2,90,08
3,80,07

1,9
2,0
1,7
2,7
2,9

1,5
22,2
34,4
24,2
34,3

0,9
1,9
2,1
1,9
2,4


(Sophora japonica L)

(Juglans regia L.)

(Rosa canina L.)

- 87 -

:
1. .., .., .., . .,
1980, . 121.
2. .. , .., .. . . ., . 1981-144 .
3. .., ., .. . // , . 3.- ., 1985 38 .
4. .., .. . . //
, - , 1990 . 131 . . . 1988 . 26-30.

574.1


..,
- ,
. ,
E-mail: rayax59@mail.ru
..,
,
. ,
:
,
. ,
- , - . -
88

.
: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
- -
, ,
. , .
, .[1]
, ,
, , .
,
, .
, -
,
.
.
, , .[2]
, . :
1.
, , ( , ,
, , ).
2.
(89

,
).
3.
. 4 . .
, -
.
4.

.
5.
.
6.

.
) . (
, , . ,
, , , ).
) ( , , , . . , . , ).
) - ( , , , .
8-10 1..,
).
) .
) ( , , , , ).
) ( ).[3]
:
1. ,
.
.
2. 90

( ).
3. , -
- , .
4. ,
.
5. ,
.
, -.

.
,

, ,
- .
,
.
. ,

-, , - , -
.
:
1. ().
2. () , ().
, - , -
.
, .. :
1.

91


. ,
, .
2.
.
3.
, - ( , .),
.
4.

.
5.
- , .
6.

,
.[5]
:
- ;
- , , ;
- , - ;
- ;
-
, .
- .
-
92

:
(
);
( );
( ) . .

1. . . . .
.: , 1999.
2. .. . , 2004.
3. . (2001). .: ENK, 2002.
4. . . -.: ,
2002.
5. : . 21 . .: 2002.
6. 1 .
( . ..). .: , 2003.

93

631.6.02



..1, ..-.., ..2
1
-
, . , e-mail: vnialmi@bk.ru
2
, . , email: vnialmi@bk.ru
.
,
.
.

. , . ,
. , [1]. .

.
, : ; ,
; , ;
.

94


33 . , , [2].
[3] ,

. MapInfo 11.5.

- -. ,
, , , , , , , . (. 1).

1. .
, 95

(. 2).
, , , , . 0,5% .
, , , . . , ,

.

2.

, , , , 96

, (. 3). ,
. , , , . -
.
. .
- .

3

, , , , , . -
: , , , , 97

, , . , ,
, .
-, , - . ,
, , -, , (. 4) [1].

4
( : I- - , II - , III - - , IV - - , V - - )
, . - 0,5 3,0 .
98

-
, - - , (- - ). .
, , - , , ,
. , - , - - . ,
, , - , - -
. , - (. 5).

5 -

99


,
, -
, . - , .
, ,
,
.
1,3 - 5,6 16 - 18 . 0 - 1% -
5% , .



.

, . .

1.
/ , . 5-, .
. . . . . . ; .
, 2006. 746 .
2.
, .. : / .. . : -2,
2002.92 .
3.
[] /
.. , .. , .. , .. [ .]. : , 2010. 102 .

100

525.25
-

.., ..-.., .., ..-.., .., ..-..

.. , . ,
E-mail: razincova@mail.ru
.
.
, . .
, .
: , ,
, , , , .
, , [5. 6].
. ,
, [3].

. 2008 0,9% ,
8,5% -
, .
, ,
, ,
,
. 101

, ,
, , .
, .
[3].
58.


() .

, [1, 2]. 12,5 %.
198 , . ( 1).
- , , 1/3 . 4
60.
(1,3%). , , ,
,
[5, 6].
30 27,2% . . 2 , 30-60
(66,7%).
, , ( 1).

102

3
3

15

3
3

33
3
3
6

3
3

3
3
3

18

3
3

3
6
6

3
3

3
3

12

3
103

12

>60

30-60

4
<30

>60

30-60

<30

>60

30-60

<30

>60

30-60

<30

>60

30-60

<30

>60

30-60

<30

>60

30-60

<30

1 (.)



<1/3 h
1/3-2/3 h
>2/3 h
2
3
2
3
2
3

12
6

3
3

3
6

6
3

3
3

3
3

18

60

104

45

1 30,

, , - ,

[4]. , .

.
.
( 2 - I). , :
) 1/3 12,0% - 2 , 1,5% - 3 ;
) 1/3-2/3 42,5% - 2 , 3% - 3 ;
105

) 2/3 31,9% - 2 , 6,1% - 3 .


, ,
. ,
, . 4
2/3.

, , .
,
,
.

II

2 I - 3,
; II-
30 , , , , , , ( 2 - II),
.

:
1- ;
106

2-, ,
, :
) , .
) ( , ,
( 4.14));
) ( );
) ( , ,
, );
) -
( , ,
);
) - , ;
3 , ( 3);
4 , ,
.
60, (18%),
.
, , , ( 3), , , .

107

3 -
, 30- 60 , ( ), . .

: , , , ( , , , ), , ,
( 4).

108

4 1
, 12,5 %,
50,1%.
, ,
, , .
:
1.
, .. / .. . .: . , 1978. 270 .
2.
, ..
/ .., .. // :
V - 29-30 2014. :
109

, 2014. 5. . 22-24.
3. , . .: , 2007. 73.
4.
, . .
( ): . - .-. : 06.03.03 / . , 1991. 479 .
5.
, .. : [] .. - .; , 2003.-240 .
6.
, .. [] / .. ,.. , .. // : - . 2-..- : , 2008.-.2.-607 .

: 633.2/.3:636:084.22


., ..-.., ., ..-.., .., ..-.., ., ...
. . ,
E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru


: , , , , ,
.
. ,

, 80 95%,

.
, ,
110

.
, , , .


.
,

,
.
:
, ;

;
; [1]
.
. : , ,
.
100 . (50
2 ) (, ) .
-
. 3-
1 2. - .
. , 1 .
: , ,
, . 111

.
, . , :
,
, , , ,
.
, , -
. ,
.. .
, , ..
. ,
. . (5-10 ).
2
(/
). " ", 1543
. 3,0-4,0 /.

, , . - -
.
" ", 26 000 . ,
. - - ,
. 400-900 . 0,5-2,0 /.
, , ,
.
, - .
. ,
, 70 80 % / , , . ,
112

, .
, 50%
.

, .
22 . ,
13 . , 9 . . - 3150 .
, . (, , .) ,
. ,
.
. .

.
.
, 0,15 -0,35 . .,
12 -26 1 , 80-90 % . [3].
- , 79,9 % ,
2,0% 11 24%. (0,22
) .
- .
. 1
1,21 , 0,36 ..
- ,

. 100 22,75
2,91 . 1 , .

.
. ,
2015 , : 113

, ,
(
).
,
. .
.
, , , ,
.
2015 , , , 1,52,0 \, 2,5-3,5 \.
- .
, .
, , 15-20% . ,

.
, . 50%
.
(, .), -
, , . , 5
1,5-2 .
, 2016 . . . 114


,
,
(Hordeum leporinum), (Hordeum
murinum). (
) . ,
22-25 ,
(Poa bulbosa), - (Bromus tectorum), - Carex pachystulis,
(Agropyrum orientale). , , , .
(
25-30% ), - Climacoptera lanata .
2,6 / -
, (62,7%) Hordeum Leporinum
Hordeum mueinum. - , , 12-15
, 5-7 . - Alchagi
pseudalhagi, - Cousinia resinosa, - Capparis spinosa.
,
.
-Papever pavoninum, - Taraxacum officinale,
- Scandix pectin-veneris .,
, - 2016
.
. . ,
,
,
. 12-15
, 2-2,5 / - ,
(72,3%) .
.
.
, . . 115

. . -30-35 , -40-45 , 42-48 . , , .


, , ,
, , , .
, . 16-18 /
.
1
2014-2016
, /

2014

-
3,0
3,5

0,5-0,8
2,5-2,8

2,2
2,5

2015

2016

3,2

4,0

2,6

2,0

2,0-2,5

2,8

3,5

3,8

2,0

2,2

2,2-2,8

3,0

3,5

3,8

4,5

5,5

7-8

: , .
(2,5-3,2 /) . - , 40% .
, , .
116

, , , , .
[1] , 1 . 3-4 ,
,
. ,
,
.

, 3-4 ,
, .[2]

, 97 % . , ,
, ,
. .
, , .

117


1.
.., . ,
. , 1975.
2. .. .

. .: 1988.
3. .. . .: . 1977.

615.9
:
,
.., ...
,
E-mail: aakravtsov@mail.ru
..,.-.., ...
,
E-mail:balizfarm@mail.ru
. . . , .
: , , , , , .

, ,
( ,
, , , ), ,
[1].
, 118

, : 1) ; 2) ,
; 3) , [4]. , , [25]. , : 1) ,
, ; 2) , ; 3) [4]. ,
, , [5].
, , , . 34
.
, . ( 20 ) , [1].
-
, . , ,
.

, .
,
, [1-3]. , ,
, . , .
[44]. , 24 [23].
, ,
[9].
119

,

. [1].
, , IQ 8 . . [28].

, ,
, . .
, , ,
NO- [10, 39], 2+
[21].

Ca2+ [14], , [15].
, , -
NMDA- [30],
. ,
, , , ,
[35, 36].
[26]. ,
[35].

, (),
[7, 8, 39], , - [39, 42].
[19].
,
. , 120

[37, 45].
,
, , [18].

- , [20].
( ) .
, [24].
,

. .
., ,
[24]. ,
[11].
Brn-3a
21- , , , Pb [16].
[12].

. , , , . ,

[24].

. , , , . , [22].
,
. , 121

(MAPs), GAP-43, ,
(, , ) [24].
[6].
s , s
[32]. tau

[31]. GAP-43 ,
,
[13].
, [17, 29]. . , ,

.
, .
GAP-43 [33, 43],
[24]. [41].
,
. ,
[34]. PC12 [40]. ,
, ,
[24].


,
. ,
, ,
,
, .
122

,
[27]. [2]. ,

. ,
( ) ,
[2].
,
, , ,
.

,
, ,
, .
.
, ,
.
,
, . ,
, . ,
, , , .
, , , ,
.
, , ,-,
.
( -7208.2016.4).

123


1.
..
( I) / .., .. //
. 2006. 8. . 139148.
2.
..
( II) / .., .. //
. 2007. 1. . 8593.
3.
.. /
.., .., .. .// . 2002. 11. .
5053.
4.
.. : , / .. // . 2000. 5 (19). . 917.
5.
..
/ .. // . . 2004. . 5. . 191198.
6.
Abdulla E.M. Comparison of neurite outgrowth with neurofilament protein subunit levels in neuroblastoma cells following mercuric oxide exposure /
E.M.Abdulla, M.Calaminici, I.C.Campbell // Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol. 1995.
Vol. 22. P. 362363.
7.
Adonaylo V.N. Lead intoxication: antioxidant defenses and oxidative
damage in rat brain / V.N.Adonaylo, P.I. Oteiza// Toxicology. 1999. Vol.135. P. 77
85.
8.
Adonaylo V.N. Pb2+ promotes lipid oxidation and alterations in membrane physical properties / V.N.Adonaylo, P.I. Oteiza // Toxicol. 1999. Vol. 132. P.
1932.
9.
Aldridge J.E. Heterogeneity of Toxicant Response: Sources of Human
Variability / Aldridge J.E., Gibbons J.A., Flaherty M.M. et al. // Toxicol. Sci. 2003.
Vol. 76. P. 320.
10.
AnL.-M.
/ L.M.An, Y.-J.Niu, B.-H.An// J. Environ. andHealth. 2004. Vol. 21. 5. P. 296297.
11.
Bellinger D.C. Lead / D.C. Bellinger// Pediatrics. 2004. Vol. 113. P.
10161022.
12.
Bellinger D.C. Very low lead exposures and childrens neurodevelopment/ D.C. Bellinger // Current Opinion in Pediatrics. 2008. Vol. 20. P. 172177.
13.
Benowitz L.I. GAP-43: an intrinsic determinant of neuronal development and plasticity /L.I.Benowitz, A.Routtenberg// TrendsNeurosci. 1997. Vol.20.
2. P. 8491.
14.
Bressler J. Phospholipid metabolism in neural microvascular endothelial
cells after exposure to lead in vitro / J.Bressler, S.Forman, G.W. Goldstein // Toxicol.
Appl. Pharmacol. 1994. Vol. 126. 2. 352360.
124

15.
Bressler J., Goldstein G.W. Mechanisms of lead neurotoxicity
/J.Bressler, G.W. Goldstein // Biochem. Pharmacol. 1991. Vol. 41. 4. 479484.
16.
Chang W. Effect of prenatal lead exposure on the gene transcription and
protein expression level of POU-domain protein Brn-3a in different regions of
offspring rat brain / W.Chang, H.Xie, X. Chen // Wei Sheng Yan Jiu. 2008. Vol. 37.
4. P. 385389.
17.
Connor J.A. Digital imaging of free calcium changes and of spatial gradients in growing processes in single, mammalian central nervous system cells / J.A.
Connor // Proc. Nati. Acad. Sci. USA. 1986. Vol. 83. P. 61796183.
18.
Finkelstein Y. Low-level lead-induced neurotoxicity in children: an update on central nervous system effects / Y.Finkelstein, M.E.Markowitz, J.F. Rosen //
Brain Research Reviews. 1998. Vol. 27. P. 168176.
19.
Flora S.J.S. Reversal of lead-induced neuronal apoptosis by chelation
treatment in rats: role of reactive oxygen species and intracellular Ca 2+/ S.J.S.Flora,
G.Saxena, A. Mehta// J. Pharm. and Exp. Therap. 2007. Vol. 322. 1. P. 108116.
20.
Gilbert M.E. Chronic developmental lead exposure reduces neurogenesis
in adult rat hippocampus but does not impair spatial learning / M.E.Gilbert,
M.E.Kelly, T.E.Samsam, J.H. Goodman // Toxicological Sciences. 2005. Vol. 86.
2. P. 365374.
21.
Gill K.D. Ca2+/calmodulin-mediated neurotransmitter release and neurobehavioural deficits following lead exposure / K.D.Gill, V.Gupta, R. Sandhir// Cell.
Biochem. Funct. 2003. Vol. 21. P. 345353.
22.
Goslin K. Experimental observations on the development of polarity by
hippocampal neurons in culture / K.Goslin, G. Banker // The Journal of Cell Biology.
1989. Vol. 108. P. 15071516.
23.
Hu H. Fetal lead exposure at each stage of pregnancy as a predator of infant mental development / H.Hu, M.Tlez-Rojo, D.Bellinger et al.// Environ. Health
Perspect. 2006. Vol. 114. 11. P. 17301735.
24.
In Vitro Neurotoxicology. Principles and Challenges. Methods in Pharmacology and Toxicology / Series Humana Press. Totowa. New Jersey, 2003.
25.
Jedrichowski W. Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in pregnaney and lead level in maternal blood at delivery /W.Jedrychowski, E., Flak E. Mrzet
al. // J. Occup. Med. Ervion. Health. 2006. Vol. 19. 4. P. 205210.
26.
Kerper L.E. Cellular uptake of lead is activated by depletion of intracellular calcium stores / L.E.Kerper, P.M. Hinkle // The Journal of Biological Chemistry. 1997. Vol. 272. 13. P. 83468352.
27.
Lanphear B.P. The effect of soil abatement on blood lead levels in children living near a former smelting and milling operation /B.P.Lanphear, P.Succop,
S.Roda, G. Henningsen// Public Health Rep. 2003. Vol. 118. 2. P. 8391.
28.
Lead: Identification of Dangerous Levels of Lead // U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. (40 C.R.F. Part 745). Federal Register. 2001. Vol. 66. 4. P.
12051240.
29.
Mattson M.P. Calcium regulation of neurite elongation and growth cone
motility / M.P.Mattson, S.B. Kater// The Journal of Neuroscience. 1987. Vol. 7.
125

12. P. 40344043.
30.
Mazzolini . Multiple pathways of Pb2+ permeation in rat cerebellar
granule neurons / . Mazzolini// J. Neurochem. 2001 Vol. 79. P. 407416.
31.
Paglini G. Tau protein function in axonal formation / G.Paglini, L.Peris,
F. Mascottiet al. // Neurochem Res. 2000. Vol. 25. 1. P. 3742.
32.
Przyborski S.A. Developmental regulation of MAP2 variants during neuronal differentiation in vitro / S.A.Przyborski, M.A. Cambray-Deakin// Brain research. Developmental brain research. 1995. Vol. 89. 2. P. 187201.
33.
Schmitt T.J. GAP-43 mRNA expression in the developing rat brain: alterations following lead-acetate exposure / T.J.Schmitt, N.Zawia, G.J. Harry // Neurotoxicology. 1996. Vol. 17. 2. P. 407414.
34.
Schneider J.S. Effects of low-level lead exposure on cell survival and
neurite length in primary mesencephalic cultures / J.S.Schneider, F.N.Huang, M.C.
Vemuri// Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 2003. Vol. 25. P. 555559.
35.
Simons T.J.B. Cellular interactions between lead and calcium /T.J.B.
Simons // British Medical Bulletin. 1986. Vol. 42. 4. P. 431434.
36.
Simons T.J.B. Lead-calcium interactions in cellular lead toxicity/T.J.B.
Simons // Neurotoxicology. 1993. Vol. 14. 23. P. 7785.
37.
Struyska L., Dbrowska-Bouta B., Koza K., SulkowskiGrz. Inflammation-like glial response in lead-exposed immature rat brain / L.Struyska,
B.Dbrowska-Bouta, K.Koza, Grz. Sulkowski// Tox. Sci. 2007. Vol. 95. 1. P.
156162.
38.
Wang J. Oxidative Stress in Mouse Brain Exposed to Lead / J.Wang,
J.Wu., Zh. Zhang// Ann. Occup. Hyg. 2006. Vol. 50. 4. P. 405409.
39.
Wang J. One probable mechanisms of the learning-memory damage by
lead: The changes of NOS in hippocampus / J.Wang, Y.Zhao, Zh.Yang et al.// Academic Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong University. 2003. Vol. 15. 1. . 195196.
40.
Williams T.M. Lead enhances NGF-induced neurite outgrowth in PC12
cells by potentiating ERK/MAPK activation /T.M.Williams, A.M.Ndifor, J.T.Near,
R.R. Reams-Brown // Neurotoxicology. 2000. Vol.21. 6. P. 10811089.
41.
Yagminas A.P.Neuropathologic findings in young male rats in a subchronic oral toxicity study using triethyl lead /A.P.Yagminas, P.B.Little,
C.G.Rousseaux et al. // Fundamental and Applied Toxicology. 1992. Vol. 19. P. 380
387.
42.
Yin Sh.-T. Effects of Epigallocatechin-3-gallate on lead-induced oxidative damage / Sh.-T.Yin, M.-L.Tang, L. Su et al. // Toxicology. 2008. Vol. 249. P.
4554.
43.
Zawia N.H. Developmental exposure to lead interferes with glial and
neuronal differential gene expression in the rat cerebellum / N.H.Zawia, G.J. Harry //
Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 1996. Vol. 138. P. 4347.
44.
ZouSh.P./
ZouSh.-P., HuSh.-Zh., LiW.-H.etal.// J. Appl. Cln. Pediatr. 2005. Vol. 20. 11.
P. 11321133.
126

45.
Zurich M.-G. Maturation-dependent neurotoxicity of lead acetate in vitro: implication of glial reactions / Zurich M.-G., Eskes C., Honegger P. et al. // Journal of Neuroscience Research. 2002. Vol. 70. P. 108116.

: 502.7+62


. ., ...,
, .
E-mail: t_kholmurodova@mail.ru
: , ,
, .
: , , ,
, , , , , ,
, , .
- ,

,
.
-
, , ,
.
,
.
, ,
,
, , 127

.

. ,
,
.
,
,
, , , .
, ,
, , ,
.

, , , ,
. ,
. .
, 27 2013

2013 2017 .
,
, ,
, , , , ,
.
128

, , : [2].
- ,
, , - ;
- , ;
-
;
-
;
-
;
- -
;
- ;
- , , ;
-
.
- ,
. , .
, I
, .

. , , ,
.
129

,
.
, ,
.

,
. ,
, ,
. , 1997 2009
,
, ,
, , , . , 1
2013. -4512 .
. , .

,
, , 90% .
, . , . : 90%
- 70%, - 26%,
- 24% [9].
,
, .
,
:
1. ,
, .
,
130

,
.

,

, ,
.
. . , ,
,
[6].
,
.
2. .
, (), ,
. .
, . ,
, , ,
, .
S2.
.
.
(N), (N2)
[3].

, , .
, , , .
, .
131

, ,
, , , .
. ,
18 , , , [9].
, ,
. . , . , ,
.
. , , ,
, , , .

. , .
, .
40 , 300-400
.
, . , ,
,
.
- , , 19
1997 .
,
, 132

. , , [9].
3. ;
2007 ,
. ,
50, .
, 10. , .
. . . (2) , , , ,
.
, 4 . . - ; 15% - ; 14% - ; 9% - ;
8% - 4% [8].
.
, ,
.
(), ( ,
), ,
[3].
, -
.
4. ,
;
133

,
, , , .
(50),
. , , , [6].
() , .. . , ,
,
[4].
5. .


, , , .. ()
,
.
, .
- , , .
. , .
-
- . . - ,
[7].

134

8-10
- . ,
- . -
[9].

.
, , .
, .
, . , .

,
.
, ,
.

[5]. :
- ;
- ;
- ,
, , ..
,
, ,
.
, , , .

, , ,
135

. , 130 .

2020
100
[1].
, . () .
, ,
. ,
. , .. .
,
, [7]:
1. -
. .
2.
, , , - .
3. - ,
.

( 2005 .).
4. -
, , , ,
, 136

.
, ,
,
- (, , ) , , , , ,
,
.
,
.
, ,

, , .

1. .. - 2015

2016 . . 16.01.2016.
2. 2013
2017 . ( , 2013 .,
22, . 282)
3. .., .., .. . . - , 2007.
- . 21-31.
4. .., .., .. : . . . 2011. - 2/1. - . 9-13.
5. .. : / .. , .. , .. // .. - . 2007. - 8.
6. .., .., . .
. . 1 . . 2005. . 1328.
7. :
. / . . .. , .. . .: , 2001.222 .:
8. . . . .: , 2003. . 220-226.
9. ., . . . 2003. . 227- 266.
137

531:631.0.11


.., -. , ..-.., .., ..-..
" -
", . , E-mail: vnialmi@avtlg.ru
. , , , , . ,
,
() , ,

.
: , , , , , , .
. , .
, ,
.
. .
.
.
: , , , ,
[1].
, [4, 6]
(, ),
, (-)
138

. , ,
. ,
,
() , ,
.
. [4], ""
.


. .
"" .. (, ), "
" ,
" ". . . " ",
,
, , .
. (G), (), (S), .
, ,
.
, , ,
[2, 7]. ,
. S,
G ,
.
,
.
139

.
" ()", RU 2507602 [3]. () ,
.
, , .
, - [6]:
, .

()
, ,

, [6].
, .. "-", .
, , , , .
[5, 8, 9].
-
- . 40-, , ,
8-10 .
,
1,1-1,5 ,
, (). [7, 8],
40-70% ,
30-60%.
140

+1
, , 1,1-1,2.
1
+1

dS=d1S+d2S

|d1S| / |dS|

0,78=-0,18+0,96
0,79=-0,11+0,90
0,82=-0,11+0,93 1,07=0,07+1,14

0,23
0,14
0,13
0,07

53
33
31
20

II

31
0,73=-0,11+0,84
0,15

24
0,63=-0,08+0,71
0,13

27
0,69=-0,09+0,78
0,13

54
0,69=-0,18+0,87
0,26
: I - , II - ; - , /, dS - ,
/-., d1S , d2S - .

( )
, , .
. , .. , , . , ,
.
, ,
, .
1,2-1,5 ,
, ( 1).
"" , 6-20% .
. ,
, , ,
. ,
, ,
141

.
. ( ) ,
(d1S) , ,
.
(dS=0,630,69 0,73 ). ,
, .
:
1. , ..
( ) / .. // . .: , 1997. 34-50.
2. , ..
/ .. // ,
. .: , 2004. . 70-102.
3. . RU 2507602 1 , G09 29/00
(2006.01). () /
.., .., .. .; (RU) / 2012136002/12; . 21.08.2012, . 20.02.2014,
. 5; 21.08.2012. 7 .
4. , . / . ; . .. ; . . . . . .: - "", 1979. 424 .
5. , .. : . /
.. . 2- . .: - . -, 1984. . 148-154.
6. , ..
() / .. , .. // . . -. . II.
. 2015. 1(1). . 69-74.
7. , .. - , / .. ,
.. , .. // . , 2007. . 71-73.
8. , .., ..
/ .. , ..
// . :
, 2011. . 399-402.
142

9. , ..
/ .. // . . 13. 1966. . 4. . 688-694.

634.93

. ., ,
- ,
vnialmi_recephn@rambler.ru
. . .
: , , , , , , .
, , 5 . . . , ,

. , .
:
1. , . .;
2. (1200-1400 . . .);
3. XIX XX ;
4. , , , 50-80- .
,
, .
XIX . 143

40 . . : , , .
[2]. (60-80- .
XX )

.
XIX .
. . . : 1846
1861 . 130000 . . 10 . ,
, , . , , ,
, ,
[4].
1890 . . 127 . . - . , ,
. ,
,
[1].
1891-1892
. ,
.
. .
, 1913 .
18,2 . . .
- . , ,
, .

, 1948 .
-.
144

5 . . 60- , . .
, , -1.
- 200 . , 50 .
. 8-12 /, 2 .
,
. , , ,
2-3 [7].
, ,
.
, ,
50 , 200 .
. ,
. , ,
.
( ). 250
, 125 , 1250 3 1 . 1 1200 3 . , .
, ( 1-2, 2-3%)
3-5 / ( ), 6 - 8 /. .

1500-2500 3 1 . , , , , , .
, ,
. 145

100-120 . , . ,
, .
, , ,
.
[6]:
1 ,
1-2 . ( , ). 3
,
. 4 . . ,
, ,
, 100 . , ,
100 . , , 10-15 .
, 20-30
, [5].
:
. , , , .

1500-2500 3/ (, , , .).

.


[3].
146

. , 150-250 , .
. , 2-3 . .
8-10% .
.
.
. . . . 1000 2-3 .
. , , . , . .
- . . ,
.
. XX . ,
. ,
.
, 1-2 .
, ,
. 80- . ,
, 4 .
. ,
.
( , - ()
. ,
, . , , , , , .
.
147

200-400
. , ,
. , , .
- .
, .
70-80- - . . . .
. . . . , -
50 -1 . (, ) , [3].
. , . ,
. -, , .
.
. ,
. , . . 1-2 .
.
, , ( ).
, , .
2-3 1000 [3].
() .
. , . 2-3148

,
. ,
. , , , ,
, . .
. , XIX , .
, .
-1. 1,5-2,0 60 . ,
. 2-3- ,
.
. . 8-10 .
- . . ,
[7].
, .
,
50-60% ,
. () . ,
.
1000-1500 3
. -
(1000 , 50 5 ). 1% .
.
149


, .



-

()
,


:




, %

15,0
12,0

14,0
4,0

29,0
16,0

3,5

3,5

7,0

25,0
30,0
2,5

9,0
30,0
2,5

34,0
60,0
5,0

5,0

5,0

50,0
88,0
50,0
8,8

63,0
6,3

151,0
50,0
7,6

, 151 . (), 7,6% . , 8,8%, 6,3%.


()
. , - . ,
50 . 2-3 . ,
.
,
. . . , 15-20%, .
,
.
, , .
.
. , , 150

2-3 . .

, .
. 2 100 50 /
.
(, ) .
, .
, , , , , , . , , ,
.

1. . . . .:
, 1952. 213 .
2. . ., . . // . , . . 1962. 4. . 28-42.
3. . .:
, 1987. 48 .
4. . . - . ., 1868. 340 .
5. . . . : , 2004. 248 .
6. . . . .: ,
1979. 280 .
7. . . . :
, 2014. 420 .

151

629. 785: 631. 48




1 . ., . . ., , semenov4040@mail.ru
1
- . . .
, . ,
2
. ., . . - . ., ,, E-mail: muromcev 39@.ru
2
. .. ,
3 .., . . ., , http://www.soil.msu.ru
3
. .. , , -
3 .., . . ., , http://www.soil.msu.ru
3
. .. , , -
: , -

: , , ,

, , ( ) .
- (/) [8, 14] , ,
, . , , .
: -, -, - , --. -, - .
, ,
- . ,
, -- . , , 152

- ,
- .
-- [16].
, , , - - .
, ,
--- . , - . . , . . -
-- ,
-, .
, ,
. , , , , , . .
,
[15] , . ,
, ,
[19] : V = lm L : /, V , L ,
-
, l , ;
m ; ,
. ,
: T = L0 : V, L0 , V .
.
, . , , , ,
[16,(. : , 1962)] - .
, , 153

. , , . , ,
,
,
-
- . , , () , .
,
, .
, ,
-
[11] , , , .

- ( 1).
( 5 10 )
1 ,
, .
, , (, 1990, ,
, 1980 .), [16]), ()
, . . 1, , 2-, 3- . . .
(1-2 )
. (300 )
,
, 3- [6]), 3-4. (50100 ) ( 4-5 ). (20 ) .
154

1. - [11]
,
-
-;
""
-
-; ""

-95;
""

, "-"
;

650

1000 1700

1930

0,5-0,6
0,6-0,7
0,7-0,8
0,8-1,0

650

142 240

1380

0,58-0,70
0,70-1,0

0,5-0,6 ( 4)
0,6-0,7 ( 5)
930
80
185
0,7-0,8 ( 6)
0,8-1,1 ( 7)
0,397-0,627
0,508-0,586
650
80
85
0,601-0,679
0,688-0,743
0,824-0,935
;
; .

-
(). (1:40000-1:17000). ,
=1:10000-1:5000. /
. , ,
.
() .
. (
) . , . ,
.
, , "" , . "",
6
,
155

.
1:5000 1:10000.
- [16]),
- : , (, ),
, , ,
, (, ,
.), . , , () .


[1,5].
[2], , [11].

- ,

[7,9,10,12,18], .
2. [16,17]


-,
1
0,7/0,5
0,4/0,2
0,2/-

1
0,8/0,5
0.5/0,3
0,3/ ( )
1
0,9/0,5
0,7/0,2
0,4/
1
0,8/0,5
0,6/0,2
0,3/
1
0,8/0,6/0,3/
1
0,7/0,
0,4/0,2
0,2/
1
0,7/0,5
0,4/0,3
0,2/*. [16];, .
. [17]; ( - ) , . .
.
156

.
, , (
),
. , , ,
, , ,
, - () .
( , ), .
( )
, ( 2).
. [4] , .
[3].

-
( ), , . , .
.

: , , , (, , - , , ,
,
- . .

1.


.
157

. . . .: , 1964. 41.
2.
1 : 10000 1 : 25000 ,
/..-, 1978. 142 .
3. .- .- . 1977. 224.
4. , . . / . . . .:
. . 2-. .: , 1948. . 187-328.
5. , . . / . . ,
. . , . . . , 1991. 55.
6. , . . / . . . .: , 1995. 240.
7., . . / . . //
. 1983. 3. . 14-17
8. .. ./ .-.- . 1984.- . . 36 .
9., . . /
. . , . . // . 1984. 6.
. 31-40.
10., . .
/ . . // .-. .
1985. 8. . 136-140.
11. .. ./ . .: .1987.- 92 .
12., . .
// . . . . . . .. , 20-25.04. . 1998. . 46-47.
13., . .
/ . . . III . . 2000. . 3. . 231-232.
14., . . ,
" " / . . . . 2 .-. , 24-26.06.2001.:
.
. 2001. . 242-244.
15., . . / . . . . . . - : , 18-19.12.2001. .: , 2001. . 4.- . 64-69.
16. ..
158

.- .- .- .- 2007.- 470.
17., . . / . . . . . . . .
.-.: , 1948. . 1. 307.
18. . . , , / . . / / .
. . .: , 1959. . 3. . 101-124.
19., . . / . . // . 1963 . 5 (). 1.
. 23-27.

551.481.2:577



.., ..., . .-. .
, . - ., s.erozii@yandex.ru
.., . . ., . .-. .
-
, . , anastasiya-kulik@yandex.ru
, - .
, (, ), ().
: , , , , .
- , ,
, .
. , , -
159

, ,
.
, , , ,
.
,
, .
,
.
,
.

- . . .
. .

54 . 3 50 9 . 2,7%, -
4% [1].
- 25-30
. 2013
64 ,
1,5 . 3 , 12
. . .
4,1 . [4] 210
XIX-XX .
2012-13 .. [2 ]. ( 1) , () :
- 11%,
- 65,2%,
- 71,1%.
-
:
- 89%,
- 34,8%,
160

- 28,9%.
:
- 58,5%,
- 24,3%,
- 20,8% .
( 2)
. , 1 49%, 3 91,8%, 0,5-2,4% .
( 3). 10-15 . 3 48,5%, 100 . 3-3% . 7 1 . 3 (3,3%).
2014 . 10
30-80 , 3,5-7 , 0,463, ( ) 6-40 .3.
, 20 2560 , [5].
2 2013 . 986 ( ) [3].
, 15 , .
2 3 , 5
15-232 (2,4%), 6 100 . 3 (2,9%).
, ,

.
10 ( ) ,
, 195 . ( 355
. ).
,
( ) .
161

1 - 1
2013 .

:
%%

:
2012-2013 ..

. 3

41

51,8

. 3

3,9

928,7

91,5

14

20,8

396,0

6,2

28
13
25
11
29
22
8
19
210
100

157,8
18,8
29,3
15,6
134,8
16,2
25,9
264,8
735,8
100

3277,5
376,0
423,0
253,0
2463,5
368,0
119,9
5245,0
13910,6
100

5
1
2
2
2
1
2
3
23
11,0

130,6
2,0
6,5
4,0
69,0
0,6
21,0
240,7
484,5
65,2

:
,
100 . 3

3
,
.
, . 3

7
5,2
91,0
32
42,7
746,2

. 3

39

47,9

123,5

11

14,6

272,5

6,4

92,0

8,2

180,5

2846,5
40,0
168,5
53,0
1620,0
14,0
105,0
4832,0
9894,0
71,1

23
12
23
9
27
21
6
16
187
89,0

27,2
16,8
22,8
11,6
65,8
15,6
4,9
24,1
251,3
34,8

431,0
336,0
314,5
200,0
843,5
354,0
14,9
413,0
4016,6
28,9

8
6
14
8
8
4
4
64
30,5

12,1
10,4
13,9
16,3
3,4
4,1
4,2
76,0
10,5

131,0
223,0
156,0
276,0
94,5
11,1
52,0
1126,6
8,1

15
6
9
9
19
13
2
12
123
58,5

15,1
6,4
8,9
11,6
49,5
12,2
0,8
19,9
175,3
24,3

300,0
113,0
158,5
200,0
567,5
259,5
3,8
361,0
2890,0
20,8

162

837,2

2 - ().

- 0,5

11

14

10

59
%
28,0

0,6-1,0 1,1-1,5
13
4
6
2
2
2
4
7
1
3
44
21,0

7
4
8
5
4
4
4
2
6
44
21,0

1,5-2,0

2,1-3,0

3
3
2
1
1
1
4
3
1
19
9,0

7
3
1
2
2
2
5
1
4
27
12,8

3,1-4,0 4,1-5,0
1
1
2
1
5
2,4

163

2
2
4
1,9

5,1-6,0

15,0

25,0

64,0

115,0

1
1
1
3
1,4

1
1
0,5

1
1
0,5

1
1
0,5

1
1
0,5

232,0
1
1
0,5

41
14
28
13
25
11
29
22
8
19
210
100

25,1-30

30,1-40

40,1-50

50,1-60

60,1-70

70,1-80

80,1-90

100,0-150

150,1-200

10

41

14

28

13

1
-

13
2

5
4

2
-

1
1

1
1

2
-

25
11

29

22

19

7
3,3

10
4,8

45
21,4

42
20,0

13
6,2

17
8,1

16
7,6

24
11,4

12
5,7

9
4,3

4
1,9

2
1,0

3
1,3

2
1,0

1
0,5

1
0,5

1
0,5

1
0,5

210
100,0

164

20,1-25

10

4640

15,1-20

2508

10,1-15

1500

5,1-10,0

1,1- 5

1,0

3 - (. 3).

123 , 58,5% (
3), , .. 50 .
, ,

, .
(), :
1.
( ) .
2.
.
3.
() .

1. , .., , .. / ..
, .. . : - . -, 1970. 320
2. 2012-2013 ..: . - .
, 2013. - 405 .
3. 2 2013 / 986. "

"

:
http://base.garant.ru/70495114/ 10.06.2016 .
4. , .. / .. //
: . . . : , 1981. - .
144-165.
5. , .., ,.. / .. , .. // : . . . : . , 2015. . 142-144 339.132.2

165

:

.., ...
,
,
E-mail: alina24m@mail.ru
.
. ,
,
, .
: , , , .
, , ,
, , .
. , . .

. ,
. , , : (69-74%); (12-16%);
(5-12%)
.

.
. , 7000
.
VIII .
, .
166

. , ,
,
.
, , .

, ,
. 1980-
85%. 40-45% 65-70% . ,
,
, (),
.
, ,
. 1
650 , 150 200 ,
.
2014 .

3,2

6,7

0,5

0,3

0,4

1,6

,
13 . .
.
- , 50-70 .
167

.
: , , , .
,
, ,
.
, , . .
, .
. , .

. :
( , , , 1000 ; ,
, ) ( , , , , ,
, , ).
, , . , . ()
. .
. , , . , ,
.
,
.

. .
( )
, .
168

( ).
, .
, , . , ,
. ,
.
:
1. .., .., ..
// . 2000. 11. .27-29.
2. .. : . : I
- -, 25-
- .
2016. .3883-3887.
3. .. : ... : 08.00.05; [ : . . .-. . . .. ].- , 2013.- 24 .
4. -
. // . , 2015. - 89 .
5. .., .. // . 2012. 1
[ ]. URL: http://web.snauka.ru/issues/2012/01/6481 ( : 16.07.2016).

169

:634.4

-

.., , .., , .., ...,
.., ...
-
. . : urmonmanz@qsxv.uz,
mamutovb@mail.ru
,
-, Bacillusthuringiensis
.
,
2,0/ 8,0/ .
90,8-95,6%,
3,0-3,1 .
29,6%.
: , , , , , , .
. ,
, .
, . , . ,
() , , ,
. , , , , .
. , , , , ,
[1].
170

.
,
, , , ,
, ,
[2].
.
,
, . , .
2,0/ [3].
.
: 2,0/
8,0/ (-1).

-1.



3- .
23 49 .
, .
, ( 171

) ( ). - (55%) 1,0 .

,%

3 .
. . 2.
. ,
.
. ,
8,0/.

(100%).
2,0/; 4,0/; 6,0/
3 90,8-95,6%,
3,0-3,1 .
29,6%.
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

"-" /
-2. , %
, ,
- (55%) 1,0
100% .
172

. , ,
, 2,0/ 8,0/ 90,8-95,6%. 2017 2,04,0-6,0-8,0/ .
:
1. .. . .
- 1984 . 261.
2. .. . . . .. . -1960. -241.
3.
. -2013. -320.

633.2.033

-

. ., ..-.., . ,
. ., ...
-
, . , pniiaz@mail.ru
.
.
: , , , , .
,
.
, , ,
173

[1].
(Agropyron). . 13 . : [A. cristatum (L.) Beauv. subsp. pectinatum (Bieb.) Tzvel.], [A.
cristatum (L.) Gaerth.] [A. desertorum (Fisch.)
Schult] [A. fragile (Roth) Candargy].
,
, , , , . , - .
, , .
( 90% ) , .
, , , ,
, .
. .
(1896 .) , , -
.
, , 1012%. 1 53,2 . . 10 1 .
,
, , , .
- . , .
.
.
20 1 . , 56 .
-
174

. .
- .

.
Kpac 4,
, 6, .
. ,
. , .
,
. ,
- , ,
, .
, , , , , .
, . . . . ,
[2].
2016
. . -,
(0,2-0,25) 0,92-1,05 . 0,7
1,41 /3.
:
22-24 , , , .
23 2016 . ( ) 03.04 08.04. 4-5 .

:
;
175

;
I.
():
1.

2.

3.
.
II.
():
1. (, ,
);
2. 0,15 ;
3. 0,35 ;
4. 0,6 ;
5. 1,0 .
2016
(. 1).
1- 2016

III

IV

VI

VII

, 0
-, 0
,
-,
, %
min
30%

4,2
-2,3
32,2
+5,2
82
0

19,3
+10,6
12,5
-5,5
64
5

18,0
+1,3
89,8
+68,8
67
4

23,6
+2,1
3,6
-22,4
50
21

24,9
+0,6
20,2
-2,8
46
22

. .
(.
2).
2 - ,

()

15
33,6
39,0
41,5
-

,
35
60
43,3
47,0
49,3
53,1
46,5
48,6
-

100
56,4
55,8
49,3
-

62,9

, 15 41,5 , 176

39,0 , 33,6 .
35 10 ,
5 46,5 .
60 3,7 3,8 .
2,1 .
53,1 . 47,0 48,6 .
1,0
56,4 , 55,8 .
49,3 .
, .
, , 2 (15 ) 5
(100 ) 22,8 , 16,8 7,8
. 62,9 , 15 33,6 .
- .
-
.

.
:
1. .. /
.., .., .., ..// . .: , 2005. . 312-327.
2.
www.samara-gost.narod.ru/gytnyak.html
177

631.352


.., ..., , .., ...,
,
t_kholmurodova@mail.ru
. .
.
: , ,
, .
, .
- , ,
, .
c ,
.
2030 5%, 2050 7-10%; 2080 12-16%. [2]
.
, . 60 %
, , . , ,
, , 1,5 , ,
178

.
.

, 150 .. ,
210 . . ,
,
. .
.
, ,
, , , , - ,
, , , , - .
,
, , , ,
, , -
. , , ,
, .

. , 2030
, 2050 ,
2-5 %, 10-15% .
,

.
,
, , ,
, ( , ). ,
.
179

,
. 2030
2-5% .
2050
11-13% , 5-7 % ,
13-23% , 10-14% . [2]
, , .
.
. ,
, ( ,
, ). . , .
. ,
.

, .. , , .
. . .

, , .

.

, 6 .
.
180

,
. 500
2702 / .
-
.
.
,
[1]:
;
,

;
, , , - ;
.

( ) :
;
, ;
, (, , .);
, ;
.
, , , ,
.
, .

.
. 50 .
, 6 ,

, , , , .
181

,
, .
,

, , ,
.

, , , .
,
, .
.

.
. :

, , , , ..,
, .

,
- , , ,
- .
, , ,
, 182

, ..
2010 .
, . .
,
. , ,
, .

1. ., . . [] // : . . .
(. , 2015 .). - .: -, 2015. - . 52-55.
2. . ., , . . .
,
. ., 2010. - 136 .

37.048.45

.., ...

. , . .
.
. ,
. , , ,
183

, ,
.
.
.
. , , .
- , .
. .
42 . (.. ).
.
,
. ,
. 20
4 :
1. - .
2. - .
3. .
4. .
.
:
(),
- . 19 -56,85%.
:
- ;
- ;
- ;
- ;
- .
,
- : 4 -10,67%.
184

:
- ;
- ;
- ;
- ;
- .
, 10 . 21,11%
:
- ;
- ;
- ;
- ;
- .
,
. 9 11,37%.
, , ,
:
- ;
- ;
- ;
- ;
- .
, , , , , , .
.
-.
.
,
. .
,
. , 185


.

1.
.., .. //
.-2014. -10.
2.
.. :
. . . . / .. , .. . .: ,2001.-.328-366.

631.95:581.5


.., .., ..-..
, .
E-mail:kniish@ketovo.zaural.ru
.

.
, .
, .
: , , , .
. . 48 . . ,

. ,
2015 ,
. (, 186

, ) 15% [1]. ,
, 63%
[2]. 3-20 . :
,
[3]. ,
. ,
, ,
[4, 5].
: .
: , ,
.
, . 1971-1972 ---. 7

, 7 .


. , , , . 0-20 :
kcl. 6,2-6,4 5,0-5,2 , 2
6,3, 20-22 -/100 , 0,20-0,23%,
0,07%. 25 40 2 250-300 /.
: , ,
6 3,6. -2,1 .
. 270 2, 95 2.
.
.
187

. -2,1
270-350 1 2. : ,
-2,1 . ,
3-16% (. 1).
, (Setaria glauca).
20-25 . - . , .
1
, 20-25

2010 .,
W5-8 72

N40
N4020

14,8
9,0
12,5

N40
N4020
05

7,5
8,9
12,3
2,7

2011 .,
W5-8 220
, %
6,3
2,8
6,7
, /
18,3
21,2
30,6
3,2


2010 .,
2011 .,
W5-8 72
W5-8 220
7,7
16,5
6,2

9,3
9,3
8,5

6,4
7,8
9,9
2,2

22,9
24,2
28,3
2,8

. ,
-
3,5-12,3 /, 1,22,9, . , (. 2).
2
---, /, 1971-1998 .

N25
N50
N75
05

0
15,1
16,7
17,0
16,7

40
15,0
18,6
19,8
20,2

40
-0,1
1,9
2,8
3,5
1,9-3,4

188

4040
18,7
20,5
21,0

40
0,1
0,7
0,8

3 25-50-75 /, 20-40-60. ,
3 .
: . ,
.

.
- (. 3).
3 ,
1, 2009-2015 .,

,
/

9,8

7,5-18,3
N40
1,4

-0,4-2,9
N4020
5,7

2,0-12,3
* 6 .

,%
25,8
18,4-33,3
30,3
22,1-35,2
30,5
20,8-37,2


,
/
258
339
467
-

3- ,
%

,
..*

, *

71
86
86
-

235
113-435
255
162-451
264
159-558

651
445-890
716
565-865
735
450-885

(3 )
(4 ). 7 3- .
3- 30-40% . .
1978 , .
.
- .
, 6
,
5- (. 4).
, . , 2011-2014 .
189

,
(. 5).
4 0-20 , 1, %
, 1971-1998 .
(6 28 )

, %

4,49
N50
4,42
N5040
5,24

, 1999-2016 .
(5 18 )

, %

4,50
N40
4,53
N4020
4,83

5 () , 2011-2014 .

N20
N40
N60
N20P20
N40P20
N60P20


,

/
10,4
-0,37
12,3
-0,01
12,2
+0,07
11,3
-0,11
14,6
+0,31
17,0
+0,61
15,5
+0,39


,

/
11,8
-0,22
11,8
-0,15
12,6
+0,03
12,1
-0,08
14,8
+0,35
15,6
+0,38
15,8
+0,50

.
39-40 /
1 3 1971-1972 . ,
, : 25
36 /.
, ,
.
. 25
4040,
39 70-80 /. 15 . 2 250
/, .
- 15 ,
(. 6).

190

6 25 0-20

1971 .

N40
N40P20
N40

39
39
39
39

N40
N40P20
N40

39
39
39
39

2009-2010
2011-2012 2013-2014
.
.
.
, 1
58
43
43
36
41
40
75
78
88
67
62
60
, 3
54
57
53
43
43
47
64
74
90
50
64
64

2015-1016
.

2009-2016 .

43
45
85
62

47
40
82
63

54
43
74
62

54
44
76
60

60-62 /,
. ,
, .. ..
. / : 20 , 20-45 , 45-60 , 60-80 80 [6-8].
7080 /, .. 25
.
N-N3 0-60 .
, . N-N3 : ,
. ,
, (
7).
7 N-N3 0-60 , /

2010 .

2011 .

2012 .

N6020

46
174

32
79

32
75

N6020

41
107

25
44

36
59

2013 .
2014 .

52
30
102
35

62
43
133
122
191

2015 .

23
71

29
89

41
93

2015 N-N3 1 , 3 ( 8).


8 N-N3 1 0-300 , /, 2015 .
/
,
0-100
100-200
200-300
0-300

N40

N2020

N4020

N6020

35
21
26
82

73
62
38
173

38
21
21
80

71
26
28
125

110
66
47
223

, 60300 , /

N-N3 1,5-2,7 .
,
. :
N60 , N60 ,
N4020 (. 1).
132

140
120
100
80
60

84
59

94

55

40
20
0

N40P0

N20P26

N40P26

N60P26

1 N-N3, 60-300 , /,
2015
, , -
, . . , 48 / .
. 17 (1999-2015 .) 2015 (. 9, 10).
, ,
, 3. , -, 192

. 1 17 N40 N60, 3 2,1 /. .


9 ,
./, 1999-2015 .

N40
N40+20
N60+20
N40

N40
N40+20
N60+20
N40

486
486
486
486
486

193
193
193
193
193

,
,


3078
3078
2024
3078
3984
3078
4896
3078
2024

3078
3078
2024
3078
3984
3078
4896
3078
2024

1507
1507
1507
1507
1507

1400
1500
1664
1728
1664

1000
1000
1000
1000
1000

6985
9109
11233
12009
9273

1507
1507
1507
1507
1507

1400
1500
1590
1664
1664

1000
1000
1000
1000
1000

7664
9788
11838
12824
9952

2015 927-950 . 1600 ./ 2900 ./, N4020 . ,


, . (,
63%).
,
.
20 1971-1995 .
40, . . 40 / (N, NP
N+ ) .
NP N+ . 1
N40 22, 25 49%. 3 , :
- .
193

18,12 39%.
10 , 1999-2015 .

,
,
./
./
1,
8652
6985
11139
9109
13999
11233
14748
12009
13817
9273
3,
9397
7664
11630
9788
13271
11838
15364
12824
13817
9952

, /

,
./

,
./

, %

N40
N40+20
N60+20
N40

9,7
12,2
15,4
16,1
15,2

892
912
909
916
909

1667
2040
2766
2739
4544

24
22
25
23
49

N40
N40+20
N60+20
N40

10,5
12,6
14,6
16,7
15,2

895
923
909
920
909

1733
1792
1433
2540
3865

23
18
12
20
39

.
25 (40-50 /), .
2-3 .
- . N2020 ,
. N40-6020
: 1 N4020
N6020 5 17 , 3 9 , N6020 . 1971-1995 . 19 3 20 1.
25 , 1 /
.

.
N40-6020.
, .
194

.
.
17- (1999-2015) N40 (1,8-4,5 . ./) (12-49%).

NP N+ .

1.
,
2014 . , , 2015. 60 .
2.
01.01.2016
, . . . 2016. 27 .
3.
.. / .. , .. , .. , .. // . 2016. 4. . 10-17.
4.
.. . .: - , 1988. 286 .
5.
.. // . . . 1989. 9. . 74-80.
6.
.. . /. /
.. , .. , .. , .. , .. ,
.. , .. // . , 2001. .62-110.
7.
.., ..
- . : , 2010. 298 .
8.
.., ..
// . 2012. 6. . 38-44.

195

635.656:632.110


.., .., .., . .-..
- .
. , . ytjanov1974@mail.ru
: , .
, .
: , , , , , , .
,
, . ,
. .
, , .
,
. , , , .
, , .
, ,
, . , ,
.

- .
196

, . , - .
10 , 10 2 .
.
.
,
.
2 : , ( ,
, , ..); ( ,
).
, , .
, ,
.
,
. [1], ,
.
[2], , . - , ,
,
[3,4]. [5], , . ,
, .
(.),
FLIP 03-27, FLIP 06-66
197

, 17,3 15,5 /.

. , Jahangir, FLIP 03-74, FLIP 06155 FLIP 03-102 , .
, , .
.
0,707+0,139. , ,
,
.
FLIP 03-74, FLIP 06-102 FLIP 06-155
. FLIP 05-69,
FLIP 06-124, Malhotra 1000 . , .
, . , , , .

1. .. . // . , 1969, . 67.- 54.
2. .. , , . //. .
.1948. -36 .
3. .. . , //.
. ,1973. 68.
4. .. .// , 1952..4. -96.
5. ,.. //...
1977. -43.

198

:633.511:631.52

.., .., .., ..-.., ...


- , ., . ytjanov1974@mail.ru
: - . , . ,
.
: , , , , , .
, ,
, , .
,
.
,
, , .. . .
,
, .
, , , , .
,
.
, .
.
199

, .
, . .

, .
, :
- .
- , ,
- .
-
.
[1] ,
, . , , ,
[2].
,
, ,
[3].
. , .
22-25 . . , 6030-1.
2-3 , 180 . (
..) 120 ., 2 .
F1 3 , . hp
(1968).
, .
.
,
200

.
-1, 42 , 5 , 10 .
hp -1, -12/95
-1, -1 /, -1 -12/96 .
10-12 . -S--111 -1, 5-6 .
-S--2001 -1, . -1
- -1.

70-80 . -1 -12/96, 72 .
.
-1 -S--2001, -S--11
-1, - -1, -1 -12/96, 132-146 ., 107-125 .
, .

.
, . , .
, -S- -2011, -S -2001, -1, -S--111, -1 /, -1 -S--2001, -1 ., 33 633. , 20
6 . , , , , . S--2001 -1, -1, h ,
. , ,
, ,
.
, ..
.
-1 120 .,
-1, -1 /, -1 -S-2001, -12/95 -1, 120-204 .
201

3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 15. 8, 10, 11. ,


hp ,

. ,
.
, .
.

1. . .
. // . , , 1948. -57.
2. .. . // . . ,
,1975. -29-37.
3. . . .
//, ,1962.-86.

630.43

.., ..., .., ...,
,
. , ... -
E-mail: zhichkinaln@mail.ru, zskirill@mail.ru
. , . .
: , , , , .
,
, , 202

[1, 3]. , , , , - [2, 4,


5].
, . ,
, , , .
, ,
.
. , , ,
. , , , , ,
.
.
150 . , , ,
, ,
. , ,
, ,
.
, , , , , .
.
. : ( ); ; ; ; ; ;
.
, ; ; , . (, ,
). ,
203

. .
. : ,
, .
, , , ,
20132015 . , , .

. . +4,7,
470 .
,
, , -.
- - . .
12000 - [6].
- 40 . , , , , , , , : , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , .
: , , ,
. 29% (14504 )
, 33% (15109 ),
26% (12860 ), 12% (5982 ). 20,8%.
45098 ,
44322 ,
6490 , 14213 , 23619 .
204

48455 : , (1992 ); , (1921 ); (1462 );


, , (530 ); ,
(44542 ) [6].
: , ,
, ; : , , , , ; : ,
, , , , .
1 2013-2015 .

,
,
,
,
,

..
,

(2015 .)

1,1

(2014 .)
0,9

1,1

0,9

0,7

0,7

0,7

0,8

0,8

0,8

1,0

0,3

0,3

0,7

1,0

0,15

0,26

0,3
-

1,6
0,9

1,8

(2013 .)

,

0,15

0,3
0,3
0,3

0,26

(2013 .)
,

1,6
1,6
1,6

0,9
0,9

,

1,8
1,8
1,8

2,5
205

( ) 3,2 ( ).
3,0 . . ,
, .
, 2013 2015 .
(. 1).
2013-2015 . , : (2013
., 2014 . 2015 .) (2013 .).
7 : 2013 ., 2014 . 2015 .

2013 .
2013-2015 . , (2013 .) (2014 .).
2013 . , 5,01 (3,85 , 1,16 ); 2014 . 3,4 (2,5 ; 0,9 );
2015 . 1,1 ().
2013 2015 . 9 . ,
9,51 .
.
(, ) (, , ) .
(
) ( ). 77,8%
, 22,2% .
55,6% 15-18 , 13-14 22,2% , 19 24 22,2%.

166,3 3 (700,753 . .), 711,795
. .
,
(-3,0-40 (33086) ), -2,2-40 (33086)
)), -82 -70, 206

.

. , .
: 496,2 , , 137,5 , 5,5
; 6,2 .

1. , . .
/ . . , . . // . . 2016. S (4-3). .143-147.
2. , . .
/ . . , . . //
: : 3 . / XI . : , 2016. . 1.
. 209-211.
3. , . . / . . , . . // - ,
90- .-. , , .. . : . .. , 2016. . 262-268.
4. , . . / . . , . . //
: - , 100-
I. : , 2015. . 230235.
5. , . . / . . , . . // . 2016. 1. . 80-86.
6. 2010 . 218
.
207

:633.511+58.032+631.527.5
-

.., ..., ..., .., ...
,
., -, /o -,
E-mail: sanaev.nor@yandex.ru
.
-
( , , ,
) . , , - .
. .
: , , , ,
, , .

,
, ,
, ( 250 1000 ). , , [7,8].

.
, , , .
-
-

.
208


: -6, -2, -2, --2, -6,
, -2, , .
(28-29.04.15). ,
. ( 0-1-0), ( 0-2-1) ( 1-3-1).
50-60 .
[9].


Gossypium,
[1,2].
. 1 . ,
.
,
,
(
); ,
[4,5]. , ,
.
, ,
. , , : ( ), .
, ,
,
, . , , .. ,
, , 209

, [3,6].
(1 ), (2 - 3 ; , 3 - 5 ;
). 5 ,
. ,
. , .
140,0

oq

120,0

lq

a
c

lo

o
hkm

100,0
80,0

gn

pm
gk

g
b

cd

i
c

n
b

60,0
40,0
20,0
0,0

0-1-0

0-2-1

1-3-1.

. 1.
, . ( F =0,05).
- , -
210

.
,
, .
, , , .
.
.
, ,
. : - 50%
- 50% .
,
. 2 .
, 50%
. 50% 2-11 .
-
, . (0-1-0) , . -2, -2, ,
.
( 0-2-1) 2-6 . ; - 50% ,
7-12 .
,
50% , .
, 5 , 5-8 .
15-20 , . -2, -2 (. 2).
211

-6, .
(1-3-1)
. 8-11
(0-2-1).

-6
-2
-2

-2
6

,
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0
1-3-1
0-2-1
0-1-0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

.2.
,
, , , . .
, ,
.

, .

212

- ,

90,0

80,0

fi

70,0

kl de
de ac

60,0
50,0
40,0
30,0

de
c j

b
de

b
ab
kl
kj de
ac
ac
e
de
dej

f
dfkl
acde

ac

20,0
10,0
0,0

0-1-0

0-2-1

1-3-1.

.3. - , ( ). F =0,05.
. 3 -
.
, . (0-1-0) -2, -2, . -6, .

. -2 -2 37-39
/.
-2.
.
(. 3).


, .
- .
213


1.
, .. / .., .., .., .. //
. . 3-4 (49-50). 2012. .38-42.
2.
, . ,
/ .., . //, . .
.., . 24. . 1992. . 33-42.
3.
.. // : ( ). - : ,
1985. 176-182 .
4.
, .. / .., .., . // . - :
, 1982. - . 3-7.
5.
..
2 // . - .: , 1982.- . 118-129.
6.
, ..
/ ..,
.., ..// . . - ., 1998. - 4. . 6-8.
7.
Jensen, S. Environmental pollution and child health in the Aral Sea region in Kazakhstan / Mazhitova Z., Zetterstorm R.// Science of the Total Environment. Elsevier, Netherlands, 1997.- V.206. - P.187-193.
8.
Keyser, D. Research for rehabilitating the Aral Sea region
/Khabibullaev.,Moustafaev. // Nature & Resources. - 1999. - V. 35. - P. 26-37.
9.
SAS Institute Inc., Cory. NC. USA. www.statview.com

214

: 502.7


..,
, .
E-mail: t_kholmurodova@mail.ru
:
.
,
,
, ,
.
: ,
, , , ,
.

, , , , .
-
[3].

.
, , , ..
,
215

[2].
,
. ,
, .
, .
.
, - . , 9 1992
.

, . , 27 2013
2013 2017 . ,
, , , ,
,
,
[1].
,
.
, .
, ,
.
216

.
[4].
,
,
.
-, , , .

,
, , .
,
.

, , , , , ,
,
.
,
,
[5].

, ,
, . :
;
; ;
;
..
. ,
.
217


.
,
, -
, - .
, :
;

;

.
,
,
, .

: , , , ; , , ;
.

.
.
. , .
, , . , ,
. , , , 218


, , .
, ,
. . .

, , ,
.
,
.
, ,
, , ,
, , ,
.
. ,
, , .
,
- .
,
- .

219


1. 2013
2017 . ( , 2013 .,
22, . 282)
2. .., .., . .
. . 1 . . 2005. . 1328.
3. :
. / . . .. , .. . .: , 2001.222 .:
4. . . . .: , 2003. . 220-226.
5. ., . . . 2003. . 227- 266.

330.341.2


.., ..., ,
, . ,
E-mail: lora_tretyakova@mail.ru
.

.
.
, .
: , ,
, , .
220


.
, ,

,
, .
, 75%
. XXI
, , .
, .
, ,
, , .

.
,
. , . [1]
, ,
, .
,
. , , (
)
,
, , (.. ,
221

, ,
.) [2].
,
-.
, .
, , (
) .
.
, ,
- , - . ..
, ,
(
, , , ).
, , ,
, , , .
, , ,
- , ,
.
,
. [2]
, ,
, .
, ,
(Cairns Group),
222

. ,
(.. ) ,
, -
,
.
, ,
, , ,
[3].
, , ,

. ,
(, ) ,
, . 20
, . ,
, , ,
,
.
, , . [2].
, - ,
.
, -, , -
. 223

, - . -, - , ,

. -, , , , .
, , , . -, , ,
,
.
,
.

. XVIII . .. :
(1768 .), (1770 .), ...
(1770 .), (1771 .) ,
. , , ,
, ,
- .
, XIX . .. ,
, ,
, , ,
[4].
,
, . . .
224

, ,
[5].
, ,
,
. ,
.
, , 60%, - . , , .
3-4 .
10%, [6].
, , , .
,
, , ,
, , .
,

, .

.

,
, , , .

, : ;
; 225

.
- , .
,
.
,
,
, .. - , .
, , , , .
.
- . ,
,
(
). , ,
, ,
,
.
,
. ,
, .
,
, , : -
; : , , ; ,
226

; ; .
,

.

,
. ,
, , .
, , (
). ,
,
.
, -


. , , , ,
, .
,

.

, ,
. , , ,
, (
).
227

2000 2012 .,

. , , , ,
, - .
-.
.
. ,
, . ,

. , , , , ,

.
. .
, , , 35% ,
38%, - 40%, 47%, 72%, -76% [7, 8].
, ,
, :
1) 40% () , ,
;
2) , ();
3) , 228

;
4) , , ;
5) - .
, , ,
,
- ,
.

, , ,
, .
,
, .
,
, ,
, . ,
- , .

1. .., .., .. :
. .: - -, 2013. 247 .
2. , .. : .
/ .. .; . . .. . - .; , 2010. - 310 .
3. , .. : / .. // .: , 2012. 260 .
229

4. , .. :
/ .. // . .: . ..
: . - 2007. .18-20
5. , . . / .. // .: . - 2010. - 223 .
6. . /
.// : . 2010. 4(61). .
37-42
7. : [] / [. .: .. [ .] /
- . . , - . - ; . 2). .: . . , 2011 - 615 .
8. Zanoli R., Gambelli D., Vairo D. Scenarios of the Organic Food Market in
Europe // Food Policy. 2012. Vol. 37. Iss. 1. P. 4157.

504.064.36:628.113.1:543.3:582.232
-

.., ..-.., ,
, .., ..-.., .., ..., ..,
.., ..
- , .
E-mail: vniioz2009@yandex.ru

. - .
-111, .
230

: , , ,
, .
The analysis of the evolution and current status of water quality in reservoirs
in southern Russia. Predominant factor set water quality degradation of biogenic
origin - "bloom" as a result of the prevailing structure of phytoplankton in the bluegreen algae. The results of research developed by biotechnological methods to improve water quality universes strain Chlorella IGF number C-111 acts as an antagonist of blue-green algae.
Keywords: reservoirs, water quality, blue-green algae, chlorella, and biotechnology to improve water quality.

,
, .
, .
,
, [1, 2 ].
,
. :
-
;
- ;
- ,
;
- -,
;
- , .

, .
, , . 231

100 /
, , .
, [4, 3]..
, ,
H , , .
, ,
, , . .

, .
.. , .. .:
, [1, 7]. . (, ,
), ,
. (. 1).
1 ( , 2007 .)
-
Microcystis aeruginosa
Anabaena flos-aqae
Aphanizomenon flos-aqae
Oscillatoria aqardhii

,
,
.
,
, , , - . ( )
232

Chlorella vulgaris -111[2,


3]..
Chlorella vulgaris
. ,
.

. , , , .. [6].
, .
, . , .
(. 2), 62 % , 30 % , 5 %
, 3 % .
2
(/ )

51,5

9,7

12,4

61,0

14,6

70,8

29,4

10,1

2,0

3,1

8,3

4,7

18,8

13,4

2,6

1,1

14,2

7,1

24,3

7,6

18,3

26,9

39,1

6,2

8,2

8,2

20,5

9,5

8,4

8,6

42,4

9,2

19,4

12,0


(.3). , . , ,
, . , 12 , .

,
.
Chlorella
233

vulgaris
() .
3

()

1600
50
20
180
15
-

D (ME)
B1()
B2()
1000
10
300
1
2,0
100
2,5
6,0
3
10
100
0,6
1,0
4,3
0,6
46

7,5

0,5

B12 ()
240
1,0
-

(6-9 ),

.

, , ,
, .
2010 , , , . ,

8% , 12%, 9%. , [8] .
, :
-
Chlorella ;
- - ;
- ;
- ;
-
234

;
- , ,
;
-
;
- ;
-
.

1.
. ..
/.. , .. . .: , 1974. 256 .
2. .., .., ..
/.. , .. , .. [ .] //. . 9-
. . AQUATERRA 14-15 2006 . .., 2006. . 68-69.
3. .., .., .. .

//. . 7- .. -2006. ,2006.
4. .. /.. // .
. . , . . . . . 15-16 2004 . . .: .. (..) [ .].
, 2004. . 3-9.
5. .., .., . . .//. . III
. . , ,2007.
6. .. .. , .., . .
. . . , -,2006.
7. ..
/.. , .. . : , 1988.
8.
: ,

/. .. .. . , 2010. 87 .

235

2.

631.52:633.25.
(PANICUM MILICEUM)

1

., ,1 .., .-.., 1 ., .-..


1
., ,2 .,
1
, ,
E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
2
- ,

.
(panicum miliceum)

: , , , , ,
.

,
.

. 10-15
3-4 . -

5 2,4 / 1,84 /
21%.

,

.
, .

, .
236

, ,

,
.
.
[4],
, 2,3-4,3/.
, , ,
.
, -
.
50-
. , .. .
[2,11,12,13].
. -
.. [4].
. [4]

,
, , .
,
. , [6,7], , ,
[8],
, , , ,
, , , , .
.[10,14,].
.
, / , ,
.
,
.
12 ,
15-18 /. 63 . / .
.

237

.
: -15-30 , - 10-15 , - 1035 -0-30 , ,
-0-40 , 25 . , 70 180
.
40-450,
-5,-100. ,
150.
. - .
.
- . .
:
. , - , , , 0,22-0,97%, . 0,025-0,016%, 0,084-0,088%,
30,6-65,0 /.
.
1 2,95 .
2-3 .
.
, , .
100 2, 3- . .K. , .. ,
[1,3,5].
.. [3].
20 / ,
25-30 5-35,
.
.
13-18 . ,
-42 , 60 .
5-6 , 15-16
.
238

128-129 .
.

1909,0 56,32 /,
1737,0 47,6 /,
172,0 /,


.
216,947,46 , 4,370,16
.

. 225,25 /,
50,68 8,6 / ( 1.)
250

, /

200

150

100

50

. 1.
,

.
.
(Panicum miliceum)

.
239

:
1.
..
. . . - , . 1968.
2.
.. . ., , 1958.
3.
. , 1971.
4.
..
( ) , 1968.
5.
.. . , 1968.- 328 .
6.
..
. , 1973.
7.
.. . .3. , 1977.
8.
., .., ..

. , , 1999.- 8 .
9.
. , , 2000.- 122-123 .
10.
., .., .

. - 16-18 , 2000.81-82 .
11.
..
. , 3,1952.
12.
.. . .
4, 1956.
13.
..
, . 8, 1958.
14.
Sindarov K., Mukimov T., Boboeva . Intensive technology of fodder
production on irrigated, lands in the karakul sheep breed. Human and Nature working
together for substitutable Development n Dry lands Beijing, China 2006.- 42-43 .

240

: 631.535:581.526.52


1

., ..-.., 1 ., ..-.., 2 ., ...


1
., ..-..
1
- ,
. , ,E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
2
ICBA-
E-mail: k.toderich@cgiar.org
.

: , , .
. ,
, . ,
, . , , , . , .
. ,
. , . , , ,
, . ,
.
, ,


. , . , .
241

.
. , , . 30 ,
50 , , . .

.
.

, . ,
2 ( . aucheriana .
. macrocarpa) 8%. - .
hispida, . leptostachus, .
. 40-50,
15-20 .

, , .
.
.
( 40% ) . .
, ,
, . ,
,
,
.
. , , 242

, ( - ), , ,
, . , (. gallica), (. ramosissima) .
(. aphylla), . ( , , - 47-50%),

, , . ,
( - . mannifera)
, .
, , (Trabutina mannipara, Najacoceus sepentinus), .
, ,
150 (1855 , .
.

. .
, , , .
,
. :
, . , , .
, . ,
.
. , - 85-96% .
1,5-2
243

. 50
. , 7-10
. .
. - . ,
, , 3 (, , ), 85-96%.
3-4 ,
75-85 .
, 2-3 , 60-70 . 5-10 .
, , ,
100-120 .
. , . ( 96%)
.
, , : ,
,
..

244

631.8

-

.., ..., . .-. ., .., . .-. .

E-mail: mapvp@gmal.com
.
18% ( 5,1
/) . , - : Rost- + 0,7 + 1,5 0,5 + 1,0 /; Rost- +
+ 0,5 + 1,5 / + 10 /.
: , , , .
.
,
, ,
, .

. .
.
.

.


[1].

245

. , , :
- [2].
, , ,
. [3].

,
. -, .
- . , , , ,
, ; , , ;
; [3,
4].
, , ,
30-35 /, , ,
[1, 5].
, , , , .
. . , , ( ).

1000 . , [2, 4].
, , 246

.
[6].

, , .
, , .
, 10-15%, , . , , ,
. , , , .
, ... (5,0 / ) 76,0 ./, , .. (5,0
/ ) 92,8 ./ [7].
( ) ,

60,7-62,6 /. 14,422,9 /, 2,2 7,6 / [4].
-

,
.
.
. 2013-2015 .
. -
, NPK
(Rost-forte Rost-), ( ),
, .
. 247

, ,
.
,
422 , - 170 .
- ,

. , , - 4 10.
[8]. . 25 2, ( ) 0,5 .
. .
. 5-7 5,0 ../. 3,6, .
-2000.
-130.
. 20132015 . .
305 , 29 9,5% .
, , . 10-12
. . ,
.
. , ( 2, 3, 12, 13, 18, 19) Rost- + , Rost + + , NPK + (
10), Rost- + ( 7) + ( 8)
2-5 .
,
(. 1). . ( 2, 3, 12,13):
- Rost- +
248

0,7 + 1,5 / -;
- Rost- + + 0,5 + 1,5 / + 10 /
-.

36,4-37,4 /,
8,1-9,1 /.
(4, 5, 6, 7, 18, 19) 33,4-35,0 /, 5,1-6,7 / ,
.
14, 15, 16
Rost-forte + + - Rost- -
32,2-33,0 / 3,9-4,7 /.
8, 9, 10, 11, 17 (Rost-forte , 1,0 / , 10 / -, Rost-, 0,7 / -)
. ,
.
1 -
2013-2015 .

1
2

( )
Rost-
(15:7:7)+

Rost-
(15:7:7)+

4
5

8
9


Rost-
(15:7:7)+

Rost-
(15:7:7)+

Rost-forte
Rost-forte
249

,
/
-

,
/

0,7+1,5

37,2

+8,9

0,7+1,5

36,4

+8,1

2,0

35,0

+6,7

2,0

33,7

+5,4

0,5+1,0

35,8

+7,5

0,5+1,0

35,0

+6,7

1,0

29,5

+1,2

1,0

29,3

+1,0

10
11

()

10 /

29,3

+1,0

()

10 /

29,0

+0,7

12

Rost-+
+

0,5+1,5+
10 /

37,4

+9,1

13

Rost-+
+

0,5+1,5+
10 /

36,7

+8,4

14

+4,7

1,0+10/
+0,5
1,0+10/
+0,5
0,7

33,0

15

Rost-forte ++

Rost-forte ++

Rost-

32,7

+4,4

32,2

+3,9

Rost-

0,7

30,6

+2,3

3,0

34,8

+6,5

1,0

33,4

+5,1

16
17
18

19

NPK+
( 10)
ROST 5:5:5
+
+ (
7)

05, / 3,69


. 3,0-21,0 . 1000 0,6-4,4
.
2, 3, 12, 13 - 64-67 . (20,3-21,5 .) - 1,3. ,
. 2, 3, 12, 13 -
- ,
Rost- + (0,7 + 1,5 /), Rost- + + (0,5 + 1,5 / + 10 /).
. - : 18% ( 5,1 /), .
, - :
- Rost- + 0,7 + 1,5 0,5 + 1,0 /;
250

- Rost- + + 0,5 + 1,5 / + 10 /.


, .

1. /. 2011.- 4. . 19-21.
2. , .
[ ]: /. :
http://www.agrotimes.net/vpliv-pozakorenevogo.html
3. / [ . .. , ..
]. . 2001. 64 .
4. , .. / .. , .. , ..
// . - 58. 2009. .81-85.
5. , . / .
// . 2007. - 3. .60.
6. , . : / . //. 2008. - 4. .67.
7. ..
// - ( 2005-2010
.). - , 2010. - 58 .
8. , .. / .. .: . 1985. 351 .

251

633.31/37: 631.461


.., ..-.., .., .., ...
- , .
, -mail: priemnaya@niishk.ru
++
18,5% , 12,1%.

++ + + 18,8% 11,7%
.

,
, ,
.
: , , , , , , , .
, - . . ,
, , , , , .
- , ,
, .
252

,
. .

- ,
, .


.
,
,
.
, , ,

.
, --
. , ,
[1, 2].
-
, ,
, , .
2011-2013 . 3
, , :
1.
()
2.
++
3.
++
4.
++
, .
(Pisumsativum L.)
253

, (Lathyrussativus L.) ,
(LensculinarisMedik, LensesculentaMoench.) .


.
, .

( 24.1-00497360-004:2009) Paenibacillus
polymyxa KB, Achromobacteralbum 1122 ( 24.100497360-005:2009), terobacter nimipressuralis 32-3.
,
-, , .
.
, .
, Paenibacillus polymyxa.

(.
).
,
2011-2013 .
70 % ,
2-3 400-500 3/. ,
15 -10. -130.

- . 2-3 /.
. ( ) (-58 , 40 % . . 0,6-1,0 /).
,
[3, 4], 254

.. [5].
- . 11 /100 ,
(P2O5 ) 3,4-3,6 /100 ,
1,14-1,46% 25,3-42,2 /100 .
, - .
, -, .
+23-24, +35-39.
. 2013 . (. 1). ( 403 ), ,
. ,
.
1
2011-2013 . ,

1
2
3
1
2
3

2011
22,0
25,1
25,7
31,0
30,2
30,5

2012
22,4
26,1
29,0
27,3
25,6
31,0

2013
33,3
31,9
35,6
37,2
36,3
37,2

2
, 3 ++ 30,6 ./ 0,61
/ , 8,6 ./ 0,25 /
.
++

+
+ 2013 3,5 4,1 ./ .
.
255

2

( , 2011-2013 .)

++
++
++
05


./
2011
2012
2013
31,6
24,3
10,1
22,0
44,1
31,9
15,8
30,6
28,4
21,2
14,9
21,5
36,2
24,2
15,3
25,2
6,3
3,7
2,8

/
2011
0,31
0,38
0,27
0,34
0,06

2012
0,44
0,95
0,60
0,58
0,24

2013
0,33
0,49
0,25
0,37
0,09

0,36
0,61
0,37
0,43

3

( , 2011-2013 .)

++
++
++
05

2011
26,5
29,3
27,9
28,4
3,6


./
2012 2013
16,8
19,5
22,2
16,9
23,0
23,0
15,8
23,6
22,4
19,5
19,6
22,5
2,9
2,0

/
2011 2012
0,78 0,72
0,87 1,15
0,86 1,09
0,78 1,32
0,07 0,16

2013
0,81
0,91
0,90
0,88
0,06

0,77
0,85
0,95
0,99


(. 4).
++ ++
0,15 0,05 / .
,
, .
,
++, 0,35 / (14%), 0,50 / (23 %)
0,33 / (20 %) (. 5).

256

4

( , 2011-2013 .)


./
2011
2012 2013

36,2
20,6
10,3
22,3

/
2011
0,31

2012
0,39

2013
0,34

0,34

++
++

37,4
31,6

24,5
21,4

11,9
13,4

23,2
22,4

0,42
0,27

0,76
0,54

0,47
0,36

0,49
0,39

++
05

37,1
3,8

17,6
3,3

11,4
4,6

24,3

0,38
0,07

0,79
0,04

0,49
0,08

0,52

5 , /
( , 2011 - 2013 .)

, /

++
++
++
05

2011
2,52
2,87
2,59
2,54
0,20

2012
2,14
2,64
2,42
2,39
0,19

2013
1,68
2,01
1,64
1,71
0,24

2,11
2,50
2,21
2,21


++

++, 3
0,5 / (18,8 %) 0,31 / (11,7
%) (. 6).
6 , /
( , 2011 - 2013 .)

++
++
++
05

2011
2,10
2,35
2,69
2,20
0,31

2012
3,94
4,35
4,55
4,26
0,38

, /
2013
1,94
2,21
2,24
1,91
0,25

2,66
2,97
3,16
2,79

,
.
- ,
257

2013 .
. ++ 2011
- 0,32 / 15 %, 2012 0,37 / 12% (. 7).
7 , /
( , 2011 - 2013 .)

++
++
++
05

2011
2,10
2,42
2,17
2,29
0,31

2012
3,18
3,55
3,07
3,52
0,33

, /
2013
1,15
1,23
0,95
1,18
0,30

2,14
2,40
2,06
2,33


.
- . ,
, 1,9% .
2013 ,
, , , . , ,

()

316-333105 / (...),



.
. ,

.
, ()
,
258

. - , .
, ,
, , ,

. , , , 97-256105
/ ...
(696
1333102 / ...),
.

, ,
( ++) (. 1,09-2,82), . (. 0,34-0,79),

, . , ,
,
, ,


.
- , ,
.
259


1.

- , , .

++ 18,5 % , 12,1 %;
++ + + 18,8% 11,7%
.
2.

++ 6,3
./ (33 %) 0,21 / (58 %) ,
. ++ 0,22 / (28,6 %) 0,18 / (52,9 %).
3.
, ,
, .
:
1.
, .. - / .. , .. , .. //
. 2015. - 3. - . 28
30.
2.
i i ii
ii / .
., . ., I. . i. -.: , 2011. -156 .
3.
( ) / .
.. . ., 1982. 54 .
4.

( ) / . .. . .,
1987.48 .
5.
, ..
( Bdellovibrio) / .. , .. . .: , 1978.
205 .
260

633.2/3:631.559

.., . .-..
. ..,
. , , , truzina@yandex.ru
:

.
: , , , ,
, , .

.
, ,
(1015 ) [2, 3, 4, 5].
1997 .
.
.
8 . ./ (16 ), 4 . ./ (28 ), 80
. ./ (25 ). 10
12 N906090 /.
( 45 )
, . . (
). ,
, .

[1].
, 261

, /

, , . , , , .
1.

160

120
80
40
0
1

.1 (1998-2006 .)
22,5 /
, 9,9 /.
. : , , . , ,
: 32,8 46,5 / . ,
: 56,4; 55,3 5,2; 5,0 .
. , , . ,
.
, +23-26,
, . . , ,
( -3) ,
812 - , 262

: . (
), .
1:1, 1:1,5.
, ,
, ,
, (55,1 /
). 89,1 /.
,

(127,3 /).
2002 ( ) ,
.
2 101,4 /, 97,5 /, , , 5,5 / 17,7 / .
, 2003 ( ) , ,
.
16 . ,
, ,
, . 28,9%, 1,5 , .. 41,6% (
). , : 46,6 / (36,0%) 35,6 / (29,4%).
: 85,3 82,8 /.
.
(61%),
. ..
: 1,5:1, 1:1.
2004 , ,
129,2 /, 75,0 /,
..
263

2002 2003 .
139,4 146,1 /,
(2005 .) (2006 .) .
2005 31,4 / ,
5 , , 2006
.
, . 1 , . , 1
25 19,81 24,06% ,
17,06 21,75%.
, 8 .
(19 ..). , 3 ,
. ,
, +, .
:
1.
/ . .1997. . 98106.
2. .., .. / :
( 80- ). .: "". 2002. .
157170.
3. :
. . 2005. 28 .
4. .., .. .
. 1999. 10. . 9-12.
5. ..
- / : . . ., .
... .: , 2011. .
149-155.

264

633.2


.., . .-..
. ..,
. , , , truzina@yandex.ru
:
. , , .

.
: , , , ,
. (,
, , ), .
,

7275% 42%
[1].
, , . .
, ,
.

265

. , 13 ..
31,7 /, 46 .. 2,7 85,3 / 144,3 / (79 ..) 138,9 / (1012 ..). 3
8%, 21%,
36% 35%. [2, 3, 4.]
, . ,

.
. ..
3:1 , , .
6
45 / 6,56,7 /
[5].
- . 4
2647% 56% .
.
3- - . -
- [6].

-. , , , . .
, , ,
[7].

- , . 266

4 10,7 / , 7,6 .
[8].
: 2 + 1 . 2- .. 150 / 300400
/, 2040% .
23 68 [9].
-
-
. .
3 23,026,8 /
[10].
- - . ( )
, . 1,4 1,2 /
[11].
- - .
4 5,86,1 /,
0,950,96 / [12].
( )
- . 80,2 / 1,8 / [13].
. 3
21,5 / 2,0 / [14].

,
267

. 9 26,6 / ,
( ) 9,7% [15].
, (Galega orientalis) .

1. .., .., , .. .
.: , 2004. .136.
2. ..
, , // : . .-. ., .170- .. (. 27-28 2013 ).
: , 2013. . 285-287.
3. .. //
I :

(,
9-12

2012
.)
/. .-. . , 2013. .
264-267.
4. .. , . // : ..., . 4 (52) / . .-.
, . .-. .., . .-.
..; . .-. .. , ..,
..; .. / . ... .: , 2014. . 122-127.
5. .. : . . . .-. :
06.01.09 / ., 2003. 15 .
6. .. (Galega orientalis Lam.) - : . . . .-. : 06.01.09 / ., 2009.
21 .
268

7. , :
/ . -, 1988. 23 .
8. .. - :
. . . .-. : 06.01.12 / ., 2009. 18 .
9. .. . //
: VIII
. (. , 22-26 2009 .). . II. ., 2009. .
525-528.
10. .. .
//
. 2008. 3. .14-16.
11. .. .
// . 2008.
4. . 11-13.
12. .. - - - : .
. . .-. : 06.01.09 -., 2001. 20 .
13. ..
(Galega orientalis Lam.) : . . . .-. : 06.01.09 / ., 2000. 24 .
14. ..
: . . . .-. : 06.01.09.
, 2001. 23 .
15. ..
: . . . .-. : 06.01.09. ., 2004. 15.

269

631.5
(CHENOPODIUM QUINOA WILD)

1 .., .., 1 .., ..., , .2.,..,
..1
1
,
., . uzkarakul30@mail.ru.
2
, -, , .
kristina@biosaline.org.ae.
. , . ,
.
: , , , , .
. .
. -20 . 2013
.
NASA ,
. ,
.
.
, , .

.
270

- .

- , 6,0,

20 /. 60
, 25 .
15 2015 2 Q3 Q 5.
t 0
+5+6 0 . 1,5
100 . .
(, 1968; , 1965; ,
1976; , 1980).


Q3 Q5,
.
1 Q3 Q5
( )

Q3
Q5

1 m2
4,9
8,0

/m2
%
177,3
30,3
255,3
48,5

/m2
%
355
66,7
271,6
51,5

+
/m2
532,3
526,9

Q3 Q5
- , . 1,52,5 4,5-5 .
2 Q3 Q5. -
( - )

Q3
Q5

.
%
.
%
41,2
32,6
10,3
8,2
62,4
50,5
12,5
10,1
41,8
37,5

271

.
74,7
48,6
65,8

%
59,2
39,4
62,5

Q3 32,6% ;
8,2% - ; 59,2% . Q5-50,5% ; 10,1% - ; 62,5% ( 2).
, Q3 - 40,8% ,
(32,6%). Q5-
60,3%. 39,4-59,2%,
.
3.
3

, %

, %

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Q5-
Q5-
Q5-
Q3-
Q3-
Q3-
Q3-

1,3
1,6
3,2
1,2
1,12
2,8
2,11
1,4
3,12

1,76
0,28
0,22
0,96
0,28
0,22
0,5

-,
%
0,28
8,9
11,14
0,2
7,68
9,8
6,9

,
%
3,32
10,85
8,2
1,8
8,75
4,9
5,6

,
%
92,73
77,05
76,98
95,84
81,59
82,28
84,9

4348,9
4329,4
4268,7
4319,8
4353,7
4254,2
4307,5

0,32
0,28

8,2
10,02

12,95
9,1

76,05
77,48

4377,6
4298

, , 8,75-10,85% 7,688,90%. () 95,8492,73%. 4,9-8,2%,


39-59%, . , 4.
4268,7-4298,0 .
, (. 3), ,
.
3- .
,
, , 272

ICBA, . . ,
9 , .
4

Quinoa
ICBA
Q5
Quinoa
Q5
Quinoa
AM13761

, %
-

14,24
22,67
4,78 10,6

-
90,8

27,1

16

3459,5

90,4

8,18

22,55

2,92

9,01

18,2

32

3660,3

92,76

16,96

22,91

3,83

8,2

21,8

22

3635,8

5 (/100 )

4,0
6,8
5,1
4,6
3,8
2,4
2,2
3,7
1,2
4,8

3,8
6,6
2,5
4,5
3,0
2,2
1,7
2,9
1,3
4,7

4,7
7,0
6,3
4,6
3,6
1,4
1,4
3,9
1,2
4,9


5,6
9,8
8,2
4,8
5,0
0,9
2,6
4,6
1,3
6,9

Na , , Mg, K, Fe, Cu, Zn, , , (.6).


6 % m

0,19
0,08
0,07
0,05

0,47
0,42
0,36
0,36

Mg
0,26
0,12
0,14
0,16

K
0,87
0,56
0,39
0,52

273

Na
115
200
900
900

Fe
205
50
21
50

m
Cu
67
8
7

Mn
128
16
-

Zn
50
15
14


30,3 48,5 %,
66,7-51,5 %,
. ,

30-40 , ,
, . 1,5
5,0 .
, ,
. , ,
,
.
90,8-92,4 %- ; 8,8-16,9
% ; 22,5 -23,0 % ; 2,92-4,78 % ; 16,9-32,4 % .
(12-13 ) -, -, .
. ,
, , .

1.
., . . .1965 .
2.
.., . ,
. . 1976 .
3.
.., . . , 1980. 156.
4.
. . . 1968 . 335.

274

631.872: 633.17: 631.582 (470.44/47)





.., ..-..,
, .
E-mail: volgau@volgau.com
.., ...
- -
, .
E-mail: niiskh@yandex.ru
.
- , , , .
: , , , , , , , , .
. . , ,
.

,
. , 5 20-35 , 5-7 , 60-90 , 10-15 ,
4-6 , 5-8 (, , , ,
, ).
, , ,
, - .
275

,
. , , ..
. ,
. , , .
, , 2-3
75%. ,
. - .
, , , , , , [8, 11, 12, 13].
.
.

-
, , ,
, .
.
- . -
1,74%.
. 200 2.
339,7 . 75.
,
: 1) :
(); 2) : ( ) ; 3) :
() ; 4) :
276

.
.
. .

. 0,30-0,32
0,20-0,22 -5-40
( ). 10 .. 1 .

- .
.
, [1,
6]. 1.
1 1,0
( 2014-2015 .)

1()

,
0-0,3
0-1,0
0-0,3
0-1,0
0-0,3
0-1,0
0-0,3
0-1,0

()

()

()

29,5
3,6
111,0
9,9
32,5
2,0
117,8
7,1
31,5
3,3
115,5
9,1
31,0
2,4
112,4
8,3

1 ,
, 0-0,3
32,5 , 0-0,1 117,8 . ,
, 9,5 5,8%.
,

0-0,3 6,3 4,8%, 0-1,0 3,9 1,2%.

0-0,3 0-1,0 277

2,0 3,6 7,1 9,9 , .



[3, 4].
2.
2
1,0 ( 2014-2015 .)

1()
2
3
4


()
()
()

,
203,3
212,9
208,6
206,3

, /
88,4
91,4
99,3
88,2


, /
11,4
11,0
10,1
11,5

2 , , 212,9 ,
9,6 4,5%.
2,5 1,5%.

, , 88,2 /,

99,3 /.
,
3,3%.

, ,
11,5 11,4 / . ,
,
0,4 /.
10,1 /, 11,4%.
278

30-50%.

[2, 5].

(. 3).
3 ,
, , ,
22 ./2,
50,0%. ,
15,4 35,3%.
3

( 2014-2015 .)

1()

()

()

()

,
./2
7
4
11
9
4
13
11
6
17
15
7
22

-
, /2
20,1
10,3
30,4
25,3
10,7
36,0
32,2
16,0
48,2
42,5
20,9
63,4

- ,
,
63,4 /2, 52,1%.
, 15,6-36,9%.
, ,
,
,
279

[10].
(. 4).
4
, / ( 2014-2015 .)

1()
2
3
4


()
()
()

7,32
7,64
7,43
7,74

6,03
2,33
2,10
2,34

1,29
5,31
5,33
5,40

4 , ,
. ,
7,74 /, 5,4%.
- ,
4,2 1,5%.
2,10-2,34 /. , - ,
, 6,03 /.
, ,
5,40 /, 76,1%. 75,7-75,8%.
(,
..)
[9].
,
, ,
, (. 5).
5 , 280

, /
( 2014-2015 .)

1()
2
3
4

N
98,5
108,9
100,2
105,9

P 2 O5
29,2
34,0
31,2
32,1

K2O
93,9
106,0
102,2
103,2

N
85,9
49,8
42,4
48,0

P2O5
K2O
24,2
86,6
18,3
10,6
16,2
9,0
17,2
9,3

N
12,6
59,1
57,8
57,9

P2O5
5,0
15,7
15,0
14,9

K2O
7,3
95,4
93,2
93,9

5 , ,
59,1 /, 78,7%.
-
57,8 57,9 / , 78,2%.
, .. . ,
, 14,9 15,7 /.
5,0 /.
, 93,2-95,4 /.
-
7,3 /.
,
, . 0,31 / 11% [7].

(. 6).
6 ,
,
2,30 /, -
, 2,33 2,34 /.
281


, 2,10 /, 0,2 / 8,7%.
6
, / ( 2014-2015 .)

1()
2
3
4
05 0,09


()
()
()

2,30
2,33
2,10
2,34

. -
, ,
,
.

1. ..
: . . . .-. : 06.01.09
06.01.02 / . , 2009. 44 .
2. , .. - : / .. , ..
, .. . : , 2011.
104 .
3. , ..
: / .. , ..
. : , 2011. 188 .
4. , .. / .. //
. 2013. 2. . 22-26.
5. , ..
/ .. , ..
// .
2011. 4. . 31-37.
6. , .. / .. // 282

. 2013. 4. . 26-31.
7. : . / .. , .. , .. .; . .. . .: - - . .. , 2015. 302 .
8. : . / .. , .. , .. .; . .. . .: , 2008. 607 .
9. .. : . . . .. : 06.01.01 06.01.04 / . ,
2002. 44 .
10. , .. /
.. , .. , .. . .: , 2004. 632 .
11. , .. : / .. . .: - ,
- , 2004. 720.
12. , .. ,
: / .. ,
.. , .. . .: - , 2012. 357 .
13. : / .. , .. , .. .; . .. . : -
, 2007. 344 .

581.145+634.1./7 /633.2/ 4/


1

.., ...
..,
2
..,
1

2

2

.
( 48-50 ) : , , , .
: , , , .
283

, . , ,
,
, .
, , ..
.
,
( - )
.
, , 25-320
21-65% ( ), 13.
, , 52%, , , 1977; , , 1983.
, 48 50 ,
. . 220
360,

. 40 55%,

.
,
,
.
,
, .
.
.
.
3-3,5 . 18-20, .
284

75 55. . ,

: , 1000 ,
, .
. 9
2016 . 31 .
. , 2 24% ,
; 0,5 ; 1000
0,32 ; 137
; , () 1,5 ,
1,0 , , 100 , . ( ) , ,
, - 5,13 5,13,
( ) .
5,09 , 1,0 .
.
, ( ) 3929 ., -2743 . ( )
2 266 , 208.
,
48-50 , :
, 1000 , .

( , ,
), 285

, (,
, 1972).
1
, ,
( ) . ,

,
.

2,340,1
5

1,240,1

2,020,0
9

0,010,00 75763 14452, 5,10,2


5,090,9
2266
0,040,02
477271,
3
4
546
4
,
0,280,01 62021, 60976 3,60,1 4,120,4 20587,4 1,010,1 1871220,1
9
4
3

1,750,0
7

1000
,

,
.

, 48-50 . 2
2 - , 48-50 .
,

28.03. 2016
31.03.
05.04.
08.04.



( 48-50
)
26,0 + 4,8
17,7 + 1,7
29,3 + 1,0
20,0 + 1,2
29,7 + 0,7
20,7 + 1,2
31,0 + 0,6
21,0 + 1,2

. ( ) 48-50 ., .
, : , 1000 , .
10%.

286

.
1. .., . -
, , 1972, 215 .
2. .., .. - . . , . 1983 . 16-23.
3. .., ..
. , V11. -1977 .152-161.

: 631.6:581.526.52.


., ..-.., ., ..-.., ., ..-..
., -
- , .
,
E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
.
,
.
: , , , , ,
. , 3
, . 60%
, , , (1-3 / - ).
,
.
,
287

.
65 ,
15-18 /. ,
.
, , , , ,
2 .
,
-
, .
, , , .
.
70 180 .
40-450,
-5-100. ,
150.
- .
.
-.
-
: .
, 0,22-0,97%,
.

.
.[1]
, : ,
, .. ,
288

Chenopodiaceae. 15 . . Kochia prostrata


, , , , ;
Salsola orientalis , , ;
Camphorosma lessingii ; Ceratoides ewersmanniana
; Aelenia subaphylla ; Haloxylon aphyllum . [2,3,4,5].
.
.
Chenopodiaceae ,
, .
Kochia scoparia,
.
.
() ( , ) 4-8 .

, . , -, . ,
.
1

8.04

5.05

25.05

20.06

12.08

15.09

4.04

5.05

25.05

25.06

12.08

23.10

, .
. 25,7, 106,0 .
., 23,0, -104,0
289

./, .. 89,5
98,1%.
2 -

,
./
,

106,0+2,8
104,0+2,9
177,4+3,3
100
98,1
25,7+1,6
23,0+1,8
56,9+3,2
100
89,5

, /

159,7+3,9

10,1+3,2

34,0+3,1

8,0+3,2

2 ,
.
159,7 /. 10,1
/.
, (34,0 /), 8,0 /, ..
.
, (, )
47,4% (. 3).
3

, %

19,96
35,28
42,0
16,8

27,05
22,80

17,71
44,2

.
.
.
,
2 , . 3,56 4,2% . (38,0) (21,8%)
.
,
45,0%
290

4 (%) ( )

17,21

3,56

29,67

33,89

15,79

10,7

2,55

38,0

47,3

21,8

.
. 1 0,50 .
55 /,
25,0 / ().
5
-

-
17,37


44,19

43,1

8,12

, /

0,53

25,0

7,85

0,50

55,0

7,61

0,48

27,8

, , (55-77,3%)
. ,
, .. 16,0%. , 40-45% . , . ,
79,13%.
6 (%)
, -10


15

15

15

, -

,
5,3
64,67
12,6
16,0


35,3
84,0

3,13

20,87

79,13

,
291

.
, . , 34
/ , 45% , .. .

15,3 1 ,
159,7 /, 25,2
1 .
:
1.
.
2.
34 /,
160 / 1 .
3.

.
4.

15 , 25 1 .

1.
.. . ., , 1973.- 335
2.
..
.- .:
. , 1979.- .14-16.
3.
. . -
. XXII
-, , , , 2013.- . 228-232.
4.
.. .:

. , 1979.- .21-23.
5.
.. . - .,1980.- 65 .

292

633.11


.., ..,
- , ,
.
,
: , , , , .
, , ,
, . , ( , ,
).
, ,
: , , ,
, () , ,
, . , .
, , , .
, , , ,
.
. ,
, . . - - ,
293

. . , ,
.

.
, [3].
.
- .

. , . ,
,
.
.

- .
(, , , .) .
3
, .
,
, ( )
. ,
.
, , . [1].
,
30-50 .
, . , .
. .
294


. , 150-170 .
,
. , ,
. , ,
[1].
, , , - ,
, , . , ,
,
. ,
. ,
,
.
. ,
,
2-3 . - , .
, - .
, - ( , ).
. - .

. ,
, , . ,
, , [4].
. -
- , ,
. , , , ,
, .
295


.
, ,
, , , [2].
, , , ,
.
.
, -
, . ,

.
, , (, ,
- , ).


( )
. ,
, , , , , , [3].
, .
- ,
3 . ,
, ,
,
.

. 1,5-2 , . ,
296

, .
( )
. , , . .
. - .
.

.
. , , [1].

, .
-
, , - .
.
,
(, , , , .). ( ),
.
- .

[2].
: (, ),
. 297

. , ,
, .

, . ,
,
, , .

1. .. -
//
. -
, 2008.
2 ..
./ .., ..,
..// -
.-,2005.281-284
3. ..
.// . .: - , 2007. . 34-36.
4. ..,
[]./ ..
// - .- : 2005. 143-150

298

632.951.2



.., ,

., .
E-mail: Illarionov-Alexandr@yandex.ru
, ,
. -
.
: , , , .

. .

.
: Pieris brassicae L. Pieris rapae L., mestra brassicae L.,
Plufella maculipennis Curt.
,
, [13].
, ,
,
.
, , [4]. 299

. ,
.

,
- , .
- ,
.
, ,
.


, ,
[11]
. [7].
,
/
/ [1].

, ( ) , 1- [12].
,

, . , , ,
, , .
300


.
,
.
, , .
50 1,0 72 . .
, . 50 174 427 . , 50 174 .
. .
.
. : , -, -, ,
50, 20 87 /
, .
50 131 1500 /
. :
( ), .
, . ,

.
:
, ,
, .
.
50 , , / . , , , .
301

.
.
. .
,

: < = < < - =
< = - = < <
< . ,
< = , .
: , , . ,
, , .

.

, 1 (. 1).
1

, /

, /

600, (600 /)
, (600 /)
, (570 /)
, (525 /)
-500, (500 /)
, (440 /)
, (440 /)
, (2 /)
, (2 /)
, K (10 /)
, K (50 /)

1,0

0,6-1,2

0,8-1,6

0,8-1,6
0,2-0,3
0,06-0,09

302

0,6

0,342-0,684
0,315-0,630
0,3-0,6
0,352-0,704

0,0016-0,0032
0,002-0,003
0,003-0,0045

, (250 /)
, (25 /)
, (100 /)
, (50 /)
, (50 / )
, (50 / ) .
, M (100 /)
, (250 /)
, (250 /)
, (50 / )
-, (50 /)
, (240 /)
20 , (200 /)
, (200 /)
, (50 /)
, (150+50 /)

0,03
0,3
0,05-0,1
-
0,2-0,3
-
0,1

0,0075
0,0075
0,005-0,01
0,01-0,015
0,005

0,05

0,16

0,04

0,2

0,01

0,15

0,8-1,2
( )
0,1-0,2

0,2-0,3
+ -
0,1-0,14

0,036
0,16-0,24
0,02-0,04
0,01-0,015
0,02-0,028

0,015-0,021

0,005-0,007

, (106 + 141 /)

- +
0,2-0,3

0,049-0,074

, , ,

-. ,
-, .
e ,
- , (150+50 /), - , (106 + 141 /).


. ,
, .
, 303

30 50% [4] [7]. . , ,


50% , , 50%.
, 10 (. 2).
2 10

, /

0,25

0,01/

0,1425-0,2850
0,1312-0,2624
0,125-0,250
0,147-0,294

2,0/

600, (600 /)
, (600 /)

, (570 /)
, (525 /)
-500, (500 /)
, (440 /)
, (440 /)
, (2 /)
, (2 /)
, K (10 /)
, K (50 /)
, (250 /)
, (25 /)
, (100 /)
, (50 /)
, (50 / )
, (50 / ) .


0,00065-0,0013

/0,1

0,0008-0,00125
0,00125-0,001875

0,003125

0,01/

0,0021-0,0042
-
0,0042-0,00625
-
0,0021

/0,05

, (250 /)
, (250 /)

0,0167

0,02/

0,0042

/0,1

0,015

/0,2

, (50 / )
-, (50 /)

, (240 /)

20 , (200 /)
, (200 /)

0,067-0,1
( )
0,0083-0,0166
304

/0,1

, (50 /)
, (150+50 /)

-
, (106+141 /)
-


0,0042-0,00625
+ -
0,00625-0,00875
0,0021-0,0029
- +
0,0088-0,013
0,012-0,018

/0,07
0,04/
/0,05
/0,05
0,2/

,
10
, .
, , () () .
,

, , ,
/. 20
, (200 /)
10 , . 600, (600 /) , (600 /) 10
.
, ,
: ,
, , , , [4, 7, 9]. .

- .
48 190 .
10 17-35.
305


[8]. , [2, 3], [8], -, , [10], [5, 6].
.
, .
, .
,
28
. 5-7 . ,
10-15 .
,
,
[4, 7]. ,
. ,
, , .. . . ,
.
1
-,
, (150 + 50 /) (. 3).
3

, ./


,
./

600, (600 /)
, (600 /)

900
921

306

900
921

, (570 /)
, (525 /)
-500, (500 /)
, (440 /)
, (440 /)
, (2 /)
, (2 /)
, (250 /)
, (25 /)
, (100 /)
, (50 /)
, (50 / )
, (50 / )
, (50 /)
, M (100 /)
, (250 /)
, (250 /)
, (50 / )
-, (50 /)
, (240 /)
20 , (200 /)
, (200 /)
, (50 /)
, (150 + 50 /)
, (106+141 /)

661
796,5
550
740

670

4572
1122
-
-
1000

396,6-793,2
477,9-955,8
330-660
592-1184

536-1072

137,16
336,6
100

830
2981

590

1174
1123

3245

1475
( )

8791
+-
1266
-+
4062

83
149
118

234,8
224,6
486,75
1180-1770
1758,2-2637,3
126-152
812,4-1218,6

,
(150 + 50 /)

.

1.
,
307

.
2. ,
(150+50 /) .

1. .. / .. , .. // . :
- 6-10 2004 . , .
-, 2004. . 71-74.
2. .. (Apis mellifera L. Bombus terrestris L.)
/ .. // :
. , 1986. . 88-98.
3. .. / ..
//. 1992. 7. . 133-137.
4. .. :
/ .. . : , 2007. 251 .
5. ..
/ .. , .. // . 2008.
10. . 74-81.
6. .. - / .. , ..
// .
. 2 (21). 2009. . 16-24.
7. .. : / .. . : , 2014. 259 .
8. .. / .. . , 2015. 274 .
9. .. / .. . : , 1991. 128 .
10. .. : /..
, .. // . 1991. 7. . 24-25.
11. ,
308

, 2015 : [ ]. ,
2015. 720 . . 4,
2015 .
12. : : 2 . / .
.. . .2: . / ..
, [ .] : , 2001. 318 .
13.
2015
/ . .. . :
, 2015. 185 .

631.5


.., ..., , .., ..-..
, .
, .
E-mail: kna27zergut@mail.ru, lex-volkov@bk.ru
. -
. ,
,
Mini-till No-till .
: , , , , .
, , , , , ,
.
,
, ..
.
309

(, ).
: ,
[5; 9-10]. 2008 , ,
.
: , [1-4; 6-8;11].
,

.
,
. ; :
, , , -, , , .
, , .
:1) -
-4-35 22 , 4-6 -4
-1 , -3,6; 2) -
- 4-6 , Soliteir; 3)
-
- -
-11,35.
: 1) - 6-8 -3 22 -4-35, 4-6 -4 -1
-3,6; 2) - - 4-6 -6,
6-8 , Soliteir; 3) -

Sieger,
- -11,35.
310

: 560,
87, , ,
5,5; 5,0; 5,5 5,5 . (200, 180, 210
200 /) . 21 30 , 1 6 . 1,5 , ..4
.

, 2,3 / (N15P1010),
3,0 / (N30P2020). :
, . () , .

2,0 9,3 %, -
( 1).

.. , .. .. (2002), -
.
,
23 %,
25 %. ,
2 % , .
11,05 %, 10,56 %, 10,89 %, .

. 141 .. , 148 .. 149 .. .

, - ,
,
,
.

311

,
/2
405
402
398
378
374
375
452
453
452
401
397
399

-
,
/2
376
385
383
355
356
358
399
401
406
367
364
365

,
/

1000 ,
36,2
36,1
35,4
32,3
32,5
32,2
31,1
31,0
30,9
45,8
45,9
45,5

2,15
2,10
1,95
2,10
2,06
2,00
2,90
2,85
2,80
2,10
2,05
1,95

5,7
- , 3,3
.
, - . 24,5 %
-
. 7,5 %
( 1).
30

, %

24,5

23,1

25

20,4
20

17,7

17,6

15,6

14,4

15

11,3

10

10,3
8,2

7,5

7,8

5
0

1 .
312


, .


[1-4].
: 1)
; 2)
; 3) .
.
:
4-6
-6, -10-25,
-4-35 22-25 -4
4-6 -1,0, -3,6
3-6.


6-10 -6 -10-25,
8-10 -10,8 Amazone.


Amazone
Amazone.
a
107 .
. 7030 .
25 /. N90P60K60
.
1,6 /

, 10-12 2-3
, 3-5
0,8 /. 5-7
8-10 .
.
(3,45 /)
,
, , (3,01
/) ( 2).
313


-
, .
2

3,24
3,20
(/)

3,19
3,15

3,45
3,42

2,32
2,45


2,28
2,41

2,47
2,62

20,7
21,8
, %
20,4
21,4

22,0
23,3
05 0,07 ( ); 05 0,10 ()

3,15
3,01
3,31
2,50
2,39
2,63
22,3
21,3
23,5

, .

, , .

1. , .. -
/ .. , .. // XXI. 2013. 04-06. 9-10.
2. , .. /
.. , .. // . 2012. 11. . 16-18.
3. , .. - / .. , .. , .. , .. // . 2015. 1. . 3-5.
4. , .. - / .. , .. , .. , .. // , 2012. 4. . 59-66.
5. , . .
/ .. , .. //
. 2008. 4. . 30-31.
6. , .. / .. , .. , .. , .. // . 2014. 6. . 42-44.
7. , .. /
314

.. , .. , .. // . 2014. 5.
. 10-12.
8. , .. -
/ .. , .. , .. // .
2014. 11. . 42-44.
9. , .. / .. , ..
// . 2007. 6. . 14-15.
10. , .. / .. , .. // .
2008. 9. . 12-14.
11. Kulikov, L.A. Action of biostimulant and microfertilizer at cultivation of
corn on grain in agro-climatic conditions of the Chuvash Republic / L.A. Kulikov,
A.I. Volkov, N.A. Kirillov // The Fifth European Conference on Agriculture Vienna.
2015. P. 22-27.

:631:633.822(575.1)
,


.., ..., , ., ..-...,
.., ..., .., ...
, .
. .
: ,
, , , , .
. , , .
-
, .
315

. [4] 914
. 161 .
, ,
,
. (Mentha piperita), :
.
30-100 , . , . , . , , . 4- , .
. , -, - . : .
( 2,75%, 4,6%,
0,3%).
(10 20 ).
: , , , , , , , . : ( 40 %), , .
.
. ,
,
, , , ,
, , .
, - . , , .
, , .
,
, , , , . , .

( , .) .
, , 316



.
.
, . , :
1. ;
2. ;
3. : ;
4. ,
.
. , 0,01 . 2011
.
2014 , .
:
- 2014
.
;
- 1000 . , ..
[3].
- 100 . , - , , 12-220. - ;
- 2014 , 2015.
10 . 15 , -5-7 , -4- ;
- 5-7, 7-12 12-15 .
10 . , 15 . - ;
-
317

25 ;
-
;
- 500
. ;
- ( )
1 2, ;
- .. [2].
. .
. ,
, . : , .. .
. .

. 1%, -1,5-3% .
1

2013
2014 .

1000 ,
125 0 0,03
129,0 00,6

, %
24,0
45,0

, %
76,0
89,0

95%, 90%. ,
, .. 1000 -125-129 . . 45%, -24%, .
(. 1).
.
-24-11%, ..
76 89%. , , 318

. ,
.
( , , ..)
2016 .
.
.
, : ,
, . , . - 97 98% .
75% (. 2).
2
.


, 2014
, 2015 .
, 2015 .

n
10
10
10

,
Mm
9,7 0,3
9,8 0,2
7,5 0,4

%
97,0
98,0
75,0

, ,
(, ..).
, , .
. : 5-7 , 10-12
12-15 . ,
5-7 - 95% .
.
.. 10-12 -85%, 12-15 -67% (. 3). ,
5-7 .
3

,
5-7
10-12
12-15

n
10
10
10

, M m
9,5 0,3
8,4 0,2
6,7 0,4

319

%
95,0
85,0
67,0

(). , .. .
. 5, 10 15 .
,
15
16 . (. 4.). 10
-13 ., 5 - 5 . , () 15 .
60 20 , .. -60 , -20 . 1
83 . . , 249 . , 249
1 . , , 800-1000 [1].
4 ().
, (- n
),
5
10
10
10
15
10

, .
16,2 1,1
13,4 1,7
5,3 1,4

,
15 .
,
63,9 , 10 - 60, 5 - 44,1 .
-36 (. 5).

57,8 /, 5 -53,0 /, 10 -78,3
/, 15 -101,1 / (. 6). , 15 , ,
320

.
5 .


5
10
15

,
36,0 1,0
44,1 1,1
60,1 0,9
63,9 0,9

6 .



/
0,694 0,054
57,8 2,4
0,636 0,042
53,0 2,0
0,940 0,056
78,3 2,2
1,213 0,078
101,1 3,4


5
10
15

, 2015 - , -5-7 ,
()- 15 - 250 /.
:
( 1000 . -125-129 , -24-45%
-76-89%). , ;
.
98%;
5-7 .
-95%;
() 15 ,
-250 /;


321

101,1 /.

1. .., .., .. . . .
- , 1981.-432 .
2. .. . .: . 1979.- 416 .
3. . . . , . .-., 1963.- 303 .
4. . -. , , 1963.- 252 .

636.085.52: 636.085.7:631.563.8
- -

.., ..., .., . .-. ., .., ...,
, .
E-mail: n.zabashta@bk.ru
: -
.
: , , -,
, , ,
, .
. (, , ) , , [1, 2, 3].
40%
,
10-15 % . ,
50 % , 70 % , 90 %
65 % .

322

60-65%, .. .
, ( , , ,
) 2
. .
. 60%,
.
,
, : () [2].

. ,
, Clostridium, .
, 0,3% ,
. , . ,
. . ,
.
, - .
,
, . Aspergillus, Penicillium, Mucor, ,
.

, 4,0-4,6. ,
( 3,2), ,
,
.
. ,
323

, , , , .

. ,
, ,
.
. 1 .
1 - -

42

34

24

23637
-90

76
%
76%+

66%
66% +

58%
58% +

, %


,
%

,
%

6,2

1,43

1,36

0,46

44

42

14

5,2

1,80

1,30

0,26

54

39

III

5,8

1,66

1,24

0,28

52

39

III

4,7
6

1,39

0,70

0,16

63

30

II

4,8
0

2,26

1,31

0,14

61

36

II

4,5
4

2,42

0,61

0,00

80

29

324

, -
, 58%. , 4:1, ..
.
,
(66 76%), -, . ,
, , 0,14; 0,28 0,46%.
1,34:1 1,05:1 , , 66 76%.
, - 58%, . 66 76% , , 1,75 1,77 , .
, ,
.

2 - -
1

II

III
IV

,
1/20
, 20
/
,
1/20 +
20
/

NH3

N, %

, %

, %

, %

2363790

15,0

33,4

5,6

2,36

1,68

0,38

53,0

38,0

9,0

10,2

32,0

4,8

2,51

1,26

0,09

66,0

33,0

1,5

11,4

34,6

4,7

2,86

1,56

0,17

65,0

31,0

4,0

II

8,0

33,6

4,4

2,96

0,82

0,00

79,0

21,0

0,0

2 , - 4,4 . .. 325

(2006) 4,6 , ,
. 20 1
-
(30-35 %).

- ( 3) ,
, , . , , . , ,
, 49%.
-
71%. , , 4,6
, ,
.
- (. 2)
4,5 . -
. , - , ,
Mucor
(/ 102-103).
3 -
, -

1
N, %

%
% *
N, %
N, % N

2,95
2,62
89,0
1,44
49,0
: *

% N
N, %

2,00

68,0

40%,
- 21%, ..
19%.
326


, ( ), 3
4,5-4,7. 3- -
20 .
4.
4 - () 1-
3

()
-
- +

()

5,9
6,1
6,0


1
2
3

5,8
5,7
5,8

5,5
5,1
4,9

5,2
4,8
4,5

4 , 0,7 . , - - 1,3;
1,5,
.
.
1.


.
2.
-
( ) 4,8-4,5 .,
, , .
, - , 8 %, - 10
%. 75000 . 1000 .

1. .. /
327

.., . , .. // ,
3, 2006, . 31-33
2. .. / ..
, ... // . 5 2004, . 9-11
3. ., .., .., ..,
.. . /
. 4- / , .2, .114-115.
4. .., .. . // , 6,
2009 . 14-18.
5. .. / ..
// , 10, 2009, . 26-28.
6. .., .., .. .
/ .
, . 1, , 2006, . 23-26.
7. .. .
/
2007 // , , 2008, .12-18.

632.51:635.656:631.67(470.46)


. ., - .-. ., . ., ..-. .,
.., ..-. .,
-
, .
E-mail:vviridis@mail.ru
. , - 40-70%. 77,5-93,5% 59-64%
.
328

: , , , , .
- ,
. (40% ) (18-24%) [1]. ,
500-1200 ./2,
(5-10 ./2). ,
- 40-70% [2,3].
,
, , [1,2].

,
, , .
.
-, ,
- 2 . , , 25 2, 14 2. . 300 /.
,
,
,
. , 2 10-14, , , , . ,
, , .. 12-14.
.
329

10.05 10.06,
. ,
, .
, , , , .
, - . , , ,
.
2-3 : , ,
(0,4 / + 1,2 /); , (0,5 /); , (1,0 /)
45, (1,0 / 2,0 /).
, 30 , , 5-21 ./2, 77
./2. , , (0,4 / + 1,2 /), 93,5%.
45, (2,0 /) 88,3% .
, (92,7%). , (1,0 /) 45, (2,0 /) 79,0-77,5%.
,
. , , ,
.
,
, + , (0,4 / + 1,2 /) 45, (2,0 /).
, .
2,2 /, 36-64% ().
330

, + ,
0,4 / + 1,2 /
, 0,5 /
, 1,0 /
45, 1,0 /
45, 2,0 /

0,05

2012

2013

2014

,
/

3,6

3,5

3,7

3,6

164

2,9
3,2
3,3
3,6
2,4
0,5

3,2
3,0
2,9
3,3
2,0
0,8

3,0
3,4
3,1
3,6
2,2
0,6

3,0
3,2
3,1
3,5
2,2

136
145
141
159
100

, /


, + , (0,4 / + 1,2 /) 45, (2,0 /),
59-64%. , ,
, (1,0 /),
, .
, , +
, 0,4 / + 1,2 / 45, 2,0 / , 77,5-93,5% 59-64% .

1. , .. / .. , ..
// . 2006. 3. . 26-28.
2. , .. / .. , ..
// . 2013. 7. .44-46.
3. , .. / .. , .. , .. //
: , : VIII . 24-25 .
2012 . - : , 2012. .173-176.

331

634.85 (470.46)


.., .., - .-. ,

, .
-mail: vviridis@mail.ru
. ,
-
. :
, , .
: , , , ,
, , , .
. , . . 500 [4]. ,

.

. 10
3500-3600 167-207 .
.
.
2- : . , , , , , , , , ,
332

.
, , , 59, ,
, , , , , , .
. , - ,
.
, , . 23 , 1 1650 .
.

( 27198-87 ( 5622-86), 0,1
N NaOH ( 51434-99) 4 .
.. (1985).
, .
, , ,
.
[1,4].
, , [1,4]. 13,5 17,9
, , ,
, , , , ,
59, . 18,2 21,9
, , , , , ,
, , (. 1).
, . , , , ,
.
.
, , .. [2,3].
( )
, , , .
333

, 59, , , , , ,
. .
, , , 7,5-22,5%.
,
5,6-54,9%.
1

,
,

()

19,2

12,7

1,66

1,66

0,05

19,3
17,6
14,5
18,1
17,1
19,0

12,4
13,1
10,5
12,7
11,9
13,0

1,60
1,67
1,43
2,33
1,87
2,16

1,60
1,60
1,43
2,17
1,73
1,8

17,9

13,1

2,16

1,77

19,0
14,0

14,8
8,7

1,90
1,57

1,70
1,53

4,0
3,5
4,7
2,6
7,5
4,9
4,3
3,4
4,7
2,6

,
380
336
393
213
430
340
423
310
453
200
-

()

-59


0,05

20,4

14,5

2,11

1,96

13,8
17,9
18,2
17,9
18,2

8,7
12,8
11,1
11,2
12,0

2,30
2,13
2,20
2,50
2,60

1,60
1,57
1,66
1,60
1,70

19,2

14,0

2,40

1,80

19,1
17,9
20,3
13,5
21,9

10,7
11,6
10,6
8,8
11,3

2,20
2,10
2,16
1,70
2,20

1,96
1,70
1,96
1,70
1,70

7,1

550

5,7
5,3
3,2
5,1
5,2
5,9

206
416
210
226
276

5,1
3,2
5,2
4,3
6,7

347
266
310
177
440

470

, , ,
, , 319%. 200
340 . ,
334

416-470 ,
15-24%. 310 - 347 .
177-276 , , ,
59, .

.
. ,
. , ,
[1-4].
:
11,3 /, 11,2 / 10,9 /,
(10,6 /) 0,7, 0,6 0,3 /;
12,2 /,
(11,8 /) 0,4 /. 4,9 /
11,2 /.

20,6%. , , 0,3-0,9%
(19,5%). 17,9-19,5%. (19,8%) 0,2-0,8% , , 59, .
18,2-19,5% .

,
(6,4%) 0,1-1,0%.
4,9%, 6,0% 0,2-1,7%.

, 2,5.

4,1, 4,9. (3,0) 0,20,3; 0,1-0,8.
(3,3) 0,1-0,8.
335

, 10-
8,1 9,2 . 9,2
. 8,1
(. 2).
2
(2011-2013 .)

()

0,05

, %
,


10,6
19,5
6,4
8,5
19,1
5,4
9,3
19,0
4,6
6,7
20,0
5,5
11,3
19,8
6,4
7,5
19,5
5,1
11,2
20,0
6,5

3,0
3,5
4,1
3,6
3,1
3,8
3,1

8,7
8,4
8,3
8,1
8,8
8,4
8,5

5,2

3,5

8,2

17,9
6,3
20,4
7,5

19,8
6,0
19,3
7,7
20,6
4,9
18,3
6,0
20,2
6,8
20,1
6,2

2,8
2,7
-

8,5
8,2
8,7

3,3
2,5
4,2
3,1
2,9
3,2

9,2
8,4
9,2
8,5
8,4
8,6

8,0
10,9
6,9
0,3

18,1

()
11,8

8,3

12,2

4,9
-59
7,1

9,3
6,2


8,0

11,2

5,7

5,3

7,3
0,05
0,2
*

18,2

6,4

2,8

8,4

19,5
18,4
18,7
20,0
19,1
-

7,7
6,6
6,0
7,2
6,8
-

2,5
2,8
3,1
2,7
2,8

8,4
8,5
8,4
8,3
8,8

( , ) :
, ,
.
336


1. , .. /.. . .: ,1990. 174 .
2. , .. / . ,
.. // . 2010. 1. . 5-8.
3. , .. / . ,
..// , 2013. .1.- . 225-231.
4. , .. / .. , .. , .. . .: , 1991. 287 .

633.854.78:631.8

,
.., ..-.., ...

. . . ,
. , piapv.poltava@list.ru
. .
: , , ,
, .
, (, , , .)
(, , , .) , .
, , , ,
, 337

4-8 , - (1,0-1,2 /),


.
6471, 2017, 2018 , . , .
, ,
. , 3-4 5-6 (3,5 /) (1-1,5 /). ,
(30 /) , .. [1, 2].
(. . . . )
(0,5/) (0,5 /) 6471
3-4 5-6 , (1,5 /).

, , , .

. 5-6
(1,5 /) (0,5 /).
(0,5 /).
,
, , ,

.
, ,
(. 1).
3-4 5-6 (0,5 /),
(1,5 /) (12,0-12,9
), , 3,5-8,5%. ,
3-4 5-6 , (0,5 /). 338

49,4-49,6 , 45,7 .
3,46-3,47 /, 8,2-8,4% .
1 ,
6471 ( 2009-2011 .)

/
1.

1:

2.
2: 3-4


(30 /)
3.
3-4


(30 /)
(0,5 /)
4. 3 + 5-6 (1,5 /)
5. 3 + 5-6
(0,5 /)
6.
. 3 +
5-6

(0,5 /)
(1,5 /)
05, /

1000
,

,
/

11,3

55,0

45,7

3,20

11,5

54,7

46,0

3,25

12,9

55,7

49,6

3,47

12,0

56,8

47,3

3,31

12,6

56,0

48,5

3,40

12,4

56,2

49,4

3,46

0,12

,

.
(30 /) 3-4
.
, , 0,11
/, 0,06 /.
, , - , , ,
, .
3-4
339

5-6 (30 /)
, . (0,5/) (30 /), 3-4 .

1.
.
/ . , . // .
2003. 4. . 65-66.
2.
..
/ .. , .. ,
.. , .. // .
, 2005. 26-27. . 28-32.

621.44

.., 3- ,
.., ..., , .., 2- ,

E-mail: fibi_cool@list.ru
.
.
.
: , , ,
, .

50
.
,
:
,
,
;

340

, , .
.
,
(, ,
.),

.


. -

, ). 2015
35,8 ,44 %43,9 %
.
.
20% -
. (
, )
, , 0,4
1 ,
220 [1].

, (, . .)
. , , , , .
, :
C6H12O6 2C2H5OH + 2CO2
, (, ), .
. , - , .
,
[2]. .
- . -
341

- ,
[3].
, , , , 108.
. , -85 , 85% 15% . ( ),
, [4].

, , , - , , - .

1. .. / .
. . 2007.
2. WilsonR.C. UpstreamandDownstreamProcessing. New York, 1986.
3. . // . 2007. - 3. -. 15.
4., .. : . . . /
.. , .., H.H. [ .]. .: , 2006. - 96 .

342

633.2.033.2



.., ..-.., ..
-
, . , 8. E-mail: Pniiaz@mail.ru
. .
, 0,40-0,45 44,5 % (2,38 /) 0,25-0,27 .
,

11,5-19,5 %.

2- , 20%, 30%.
: , , , .
.
, , ,
. , .

.
.
343

,
. , ,
.

, ,
,
,
, ,
, ,
,
. , , ,
,
,
, , -
, - .
-
, .
, , .
, ,
, . , , ,
. ,
, , , ,
, -
. , ,
, , 344

, . - ,
, .


( - ) 8 , 45 70 .


,
2,0 / .
. - .
, . : (..) 5 , 7 ,
, 3,
4 . 5 , : ..

(1972) 6 , .. -
(1999) 1 .
(5 ). : (-4-35), =0,25-0,27 ;
, =0,30-0,35 ; ,
=0,40-0,45 . , - 500 2,
7,0 .
. , - , .
, ( 7,2-7,6).
0,25 ,
0,30-0,40 .
-
345

0,95-1,25 2 . 15-20 -. 100


. 90-92%
, 4-10% ,
.

. (0-0,25 ) 1,0-1,8%, 6-9 , 2-4
, 50-55 100 2 . .
0,08%. 1,2-1,5
0,2-0,3%. . (1,25-1,35 /3)
(0,30-0,40 /).
0,40-0,45 0,30-0,35 0,80-1,0 . 15-20 4 . 0-0,20 1,25-1,30 /3, 1,49-1,50.
2,73-2,77 /3.
. , , .
40-50% , . 50-60% . ,
28% ( 12%
45%). , ,
, ( 2011-2015
162 275 ) 9 . , ,
.
2016 . , ( 25,70
30,80 )
(60,8 ) 346

.
.
, -
, , .

144,1 .
117,5-129,0 ( 1).
160
140
120
100

80

60

40
20
0
14

18

10

25

1. ()
- , . ,
, ,
.
,
,
.
, ,
0,84-0,85 6,0-7,0 . , 1000 , . 1000
347

(29,6 ), (1,15 ) (40 .)



( 2).

- , .


1- ,

1000
,

(-4-35), =0,25-0,27
, =0,30-0,35
, =0,40-0,45

- ,
./2

2 -

84
85
85

242
312
348

6,0
6,2
7,0

34
34
40

0,93
1,04
1,15

26,8
26,8
29,6

(=0,40-0,45 ) 2,38 /, 0,53 /


,
(=0,30-0,35 ), ,
(=0,25-0,27 ).
1,32 / 1,85 /, ( 1).
1 , /
, /
1
2
3

1,12
1,34
1,50
1,32
1,76
1,87
1,92
1,85
2,23
2,25
2,66
2,38


(-4-35), =0,25-0,27
, =0,30-0,35
, =0,40-0,45
05, / 0,24 /



( 3). 299% 16052 . 2,1
, 0,25-0,27 13,8 ,
0,30-0,35 .
348

, ./

, .

,
%

(-4-35),
=0,20-0,21
, =0,30-0,35
, =0,40-0,45
- 9 ./

1
, .

, /

1,32

9679

11880

2201

21,7

1,2

1,85
2,38

6906
5368

16650
21420

9744
16052

141,1
299,0

2,4
4,0

.
,
,
. . ( 0,40-0,45 )
11,5-19,5 %,
. 2,38 /. 1,8
1,3 , .

, . , 20%,
30%.

1. , .. -
() [] / .. ,
.. , .. , .. :
, 1999. 48 .
2. 26213-84. .
349

3. 26424-85. .
4. 26427-85. .
5. , .. [] /.. - .:
, 1979. 336 .
6. , .. [] / .. , .. , ..
.: , 1980. 168 .
7.
/ . .: 1983. - 197 .
8.
, .. [ / .. , .. , ..
. / , 2012, 6. - .18
9.
, ..
- / .. , .. , .. // : , 2015,
2 (38). . 109-115

633.174


..,
,.
E-mail: evgenya.kostenkova@yandex.ru
.

. , , 2015 ,
: 53 - 3,8 / ( 2,3/), - 2,8 / ( 0,2
/). .
75 ()
16,7 /. 15 59,9 / (
350

31,1 /).
: , , , ,
.
.
[6].
.
, (171-238 ), 10 (3100-3600), (2180-2470 ), -
(2197-2383 /2).
. . ,

-
,

.
, , ..
.
, : , , , , [8]. ,
[3].
,
2015 , ,
1617,4 .
,
, ,
.

.
.

2015 . .
- , , 351

- . - 2,17% [5];
p-7,6,
25 - 4,9 /100 [7], 2-36 /100
[1]. 1,14 /2. 160-180 .
, , . 2015 ,
, .
- . [4] (1972 .) .. [2] (1985). .
. - 27,2 2, 25 2. - 2 , , .
. - ,
45 . 16 .
130 . ./. 1 . -6-10.
, 2015 8 , 4
, 2 .
: , , 20, 75.
, ,
, . , 2015 ,
53 - 117 (. 1), 4 ;
- , 3 . 15 117
, , ;
4- 109 , 1 . ,
7 ,
80- 12 . 20 ()
2 , 80.

() 2,4 2,1 (. 2).
117,5 ( 13,8
).
1 - 352

2015 .,
,

88

28
53

10
11

10
9
10
10
10
12
10
10

75

9
9

15

9
11
11
9

20
80

6
7


15
35
40
13
38
40
12
36
46
16
42
49
15
40
48
15
43
40
16
40
48
15
42
37

16
35
48
15
41
50

11
48
49
14
42
46
13
45
40
13
40
48

14
50
43
15
40
39

100
100
104
117
113
110
114
104
108
115
117
113
109
110
113
101

4 - 2,8, ( )
1,9 1,6 . 15 -186,5 ( 45 ).
20 ()
80 ( 0,3). , 80 2,8 20.

75( 1,6), ( 23,5 ).
1 28 348,5 - 16 (. 3). 1 88 84 - 50 . 1000 53 29,9 ( 2,8 ).
15.
1 500 - 256 . 1 - 69,3
- 38 . 1000 - 29,9 , 2,8
.

353

2 - , 2015
,
88

28
53

10
11

05

75
05
15

4

05
20
80
05


1,3
1,3
1,4
1,4
1,6
1,7
1,5
1,6
2,1
2,4
1,3
1,4
1,3
1,6
1,4
1,4
0,1
0,1

2,4
2,4
4,0
4,0
0,3
0,3

1,4
1,4
1,4
1,5
2,8
2,8
1,6
1,9
0,2
0,2

2,5
2,5
2,2
2,2
0,1
0,2


84
117,5
105,7
105,3
103,7
108,3
106,7
107,3
2,1
192,5
169
2,9
186,5
164,9
155,5
141,5
2,7
133,3
136,1
1,2

20 () 1
80 328 , 1 21,7 , 1000 7 .
1 460 (
140 ), 1 21,3 ( 8,8).
1000 75 - 20,5 ( 2,6 1000
).
3 - , 2015
,

1
,

1
,

1000 ,

84
64,6
76,8
67
34,6
65,4
39,6
65
2,3

29,1
27,7
25,5
29,9
27,1
28,4
18,9
29,5
0,2


88

28
53

10
11

05

225
256,5
348,5
256,5
332,5
201
248,5
311
2,8

354


75
05

460
320
2,3

15

4

05

500
393
207
244
3,1

20
80
05

620
292
2,3

21,3
12,5
1,3

17,9
20,5
0,2

69,3
45,7
20,7
31,3
1,4

21,3
18,9
20,3
17,7
0,6

67,2
45,5
1,2

30,5
23,5
0,4

(. 4), 2015 ,
53-3,8 / ( 2,3/), - 2,8 / ( 0,2 /).
.
75 () 16,7 /. 15 59,9 / ( 31,1 /).
4 - , 2015
,
/

88

28
53

10
11

05

75
05
15

4

05
20
80
05


3,2
1,7
2,5
3,8
1,5
2,8
2,1
2,7
0,4


3,1
2,8
1,9
2,6
0,4

3,3
3,2
0,7

355


55,1
38,4
7,6
59,9
46,7
25,2
28,8
3,1
-

. 1. , 2015 , : 53 - 3,8
/ ( 2,3/), - 2,8 / ( 0,2 /). . 75 () 16,7 /.
15 59,9 / ( 31,1 /).
2. ,
, .

1. , .., .. // .: , 1955.- . 195-161.
2. , . . (
). - 5- ., . . - .: , - 1985. - 351 .
3., .. //
, - 1998.- 2.- .20-22.
4.
. - ., 1972. . 281.
5. / .
, .. .- : , 1994.- 351.
6. , .. - ..? / .. ,
.. // , - 2015 (3 ).
7. , .., .. :
. .- : , 1987. 152 .
8. , .. . - : , 1994. - . 448.

356

633.34:631.67:(477.7)


.., ..-.., , .., ..-.., ,
.., ..-..

, , lso2@yandex.ru

.
,
- , .
: , , , , , .
. - ,
.


,
.
.
, .

, . 70- XX ,
30 . 200,
- 60% .
, . .
, 357

- - , . 38-42 , 18-23
, 25-30% , , , .

, .
,
,
[3].

. -
. : , ,
, , , [2].
. , 2013 2015 .
.
, ,
, [4, 5, 7].
,
. : , , , ,
, 50.

. () 10-12 , 25-27 .
5-7 (200 / ).
45 4-5 4,2. .
2500 3/, - 3000 3/.
. ,

.
.
,
358


. , 2,89 /, (st) 0,38 / 15,1%.
0,73-2,02 / .
4,53 /, 50 (st) 12,4%.
- 4,37 /.
1 - , /

2013
2015

2,47
2,55
2,84
2,94

3,98
4,07
3,57
3,67
4,46
4,59
4,32
4,42
0,14
0,19

(st)

50 (st)

05, /

2013, 2015 .
2,51
2,89
4,03
3,62
4,53
4,37

, .
, 2015 2013 3,2-3,5,
- 2,3-2,9%.
. (st) , , 21,9 ., 0,5 . .
(. 2).
2 -
2013, 2015 .


,
.

(st)

21,9
21,4

50 (st)

31,4
26,5
30,8
28,0

, .

2,9
2,4

2,7
2,6
3,0
2,8
359


,
.

1000 ,

62,6
58,4

156,3
164,1

74,6
66,5
73,0
69,1

204,9
180,3
271,1
209,5

,
, 50 (st)
31,4 ., - .
(st) (62,6 .), - 50 (st) - 74,6 .
1000 .
,
.
, 1000 80-90%
. .
, 1000 . , , , (st) 156,3 164,1 , 16,2-114,8 9,6-73,8%.
1000 - 271,1 .

[1, 6].
,
(. 3).
3
2013, 2015 .

(st)

50 (st)

, %

21,1
38,7
20,6
38,5

22,8
39,2
20,2
38,0
23,0
38,9
23,4
38,4

, /

5,3
5,9

9,7
11,1

9,2
7,3
10,4
10,2

15,8
13,8
17,6
16,8


5,9 11,1 /,
- - 10,4 17,6, 10,2 16,8 / .
. 360

, .

1. , .. , , / ..
: . . ... . . .-. :
. 06.01.09 . - , 1994.- 18 .
2. , .. / .. , . . .: ,
1981. - 197 .
3. , .. / .. . .: , 1982. - . 169.
4. , ..
: / .. . .:
, 1970. 261 .
5. , .. (
) [5 . . .] / ..
.: , 1985. 351 .
6. , .. / .. , .. // -
. . - 1987. - 12. . 22-27.
7.
. , 1985. . . 114 .

361

633.18.631.584.4 (470.47)



.., ..-.., ..

.. , .
E-mail:konieva.g@yandex.ru
. ( 0-100 280-300 ) , 4,0-4,5 /.
: , ,
, , , , .
,
(-, ,
)
[1, 2].
, : , . ,
. (
, , ) [3, 4, 5].



.
:
- 362

-10 .
- ;
- ;
-
;
-
.


,
(. 1).

280350 .

, : 1,281,60 /3, 2,502,83 /3, 19,9%; 1,17%,
, , ; (
0,0610,179%) - . 1,21,4 , 34 /.
, ,
, ,
.
-
1820 -4-35, 75. ,
.
363

1 -

- ; -, ,
; 280350 ,
1,21,4 , 34 /.
( 2-
)

II

III
1.
2.
IV

1.
V
1.
2.

VI

1820 (I-II )
1618 (I-II )
15 (-)
2,5 . ./ 30 + N70100P4060
(II-III ), 23
- ;
.

12 ( );

* 5 2;
2.
, op -

510 2 (-0,15 /, - 0,60,8 /)


VII
, 18% .
1.
1520 (I-II )
1.


.-.

: *
364

-75
-75

-4-35
-4

-10

-80

-3,6

-80

3-1,4

-80

-1,0

-80

-4

-5

, (, )
.
, .
1618
4, , .. , ,
. 1520
( 1,01,5 ) -10 - 15 / - 25 /.

.
, +0,7...+1,0..
5,0, , .
II-III 30 , 3,6, 16 ,
-80. 23 , 2,02,5 .
.

: -
98,0%, , - 720 /, .. - 400
. 1 . 85,0%.
, , .
,
.
.
- (), 3 -1,4.

, , .
, 365

, . 1,52,0 / - N70100P4060 /
.
, , , .
-1,0 12
,
.

, .
, .
- - , , ( ).

(), 5 2
10% ; , , op 35 -
510 2. : -0,60,8 /, -0,1 /, 0,10,15 /. -15, -80.
I-II . (-5 )
, , .
18% . 1520
.
, - ( -25, -4, - 40).
STATISTICA 6.0 (. 1):
366

1 -

Z= - 0,8369 + 0,0035 + 1,5831 1,8182 -62*10-6 + 10-4 0,32 2,
Z , /;
, .. ;
, . /.
,
10%, r 0,87.
. . , (040 ) 0,315,1%,
0,26,0%. (3,94,5 /)
(2,23,0 /) 10,8 / N, 9,3 / 25 78,7 /
2. , ( 2).
367

2 - ()

( 0-20 )
, /
1,281,31
, %
45,147,0
, /3
2,452,48
( 0-20 )
1,101,40
( ), %
( ), /
84,0200,0
( ), /
56,098,0
(25), /
140,0400,0

7,68,0

, ,
1,451,60
, /
3,214,24
3

1,101,16
46,548,8
2,452,50
1,201,45
98,0210,0
67,0112,8
200,0430,0
7,68,1
1,802,00
2,913,75


1,4 1,82,0 ,
.
-
.
0,400,49 /. 4,04,5 /.

, , , . 3,94,5 /
2,23,0 / . , ,
2022%.

1. , ..
. /..
, .. , .. , .. , .. / - : , 2012. 224 .
2. , .. /.. , .. 368

, .. , .. / . 2013. - 1. - . 30-32.
3. , .. - . /.. , ..
/ . . / . . .. . .:
, 2006. . 57-67.
4. , .. (
) /.. / . 5 . . .:
, 2014. 351 .
5. . /.. , .. , ..
. : , 2007 ., 38 .

635.21: 631.3 + 631.559


.., ..-.., .., ..-..,



rexham@rambler.ru

-
.
: , , ,
.

. , , 14 . . [2].
-
.
, , - 369


.
, ,
[3].

-
.
()
. , 1,4 , 0,8 .
,
10.
:

1
41 ./
1,4 0,35
2
47 ./
1,4 0,30
3
57 ./
1,4 0,25
4
71 ./
1,4 0,20
5
95 ./
1,4 0,15
6
142 ./
1,4 0,10
- .
0,911,1%.
, , [4].
, ,
, 2200
2400 . ,
, 113 /3 [1].
. 3266,7 3/.

(). ,
95 142 ./, , 370

60,9 100,5 /, 77,5


107,9, 82,1 96,3, 73,7 98,8 /,
.

. ,
41 . / 23,0 / (0,56 /); 47 .
/ 26,3 / (0,56 /); 57 . / 30,3 / (0,53
/); 71 . / 39,5 / (0,56 /); 95 . / 60,9 / (0,64 /); 142 . / 101,5 / (0,71
/). 3,6 . 71 ./
7,9 142 ./, 154,6 71 ./ 90,1
142 ./.

, /

120
100
80
60
40
20
0
41

47

57

71

95

142

, ./

-
1 0,97 47 0,76 142 ./,
41 ./ 8,1 ., 142 ./
10,1 ., 1 115,6 41 73,0 142
./.
1 , 41 . /
1,25 , 47 1,20 , 57 1,05 , 71 1,0 , 95 0,86 .,
371

142 . / 0,68 . ,
142 . / 8,7 .
13,3 . 57 . /.
115,4 41 ./
77,6 142 ./ ( .5).
0,59
57 0,70-0,78 71, 95 142 ./.
57 ./ 6,9 ., 71 ./ 5,2 .
118,8 71 ./ 84,6 57 .
/.
,

, .
, .
, 95 . , , 0,05
11,0 77,5%,
.

1.
. .: , 1974. 136 .
2.
, /
. . . . , 2013. 83 .
3.
. . // . 2011. 1 [ ]. URL:
http://www.potatosystem.ru/kartofelevodstvo-astrahanskoy-oblasti. ( : 15.03.2016).
4.
, . .
/ .. , .. , .. //
. 2014. 1(33). . 107
112.

372

631.363.7.001.6


.., ..
,
, .
e-mail: rustem-59@mail.ru
. , ,
, - , , . ,
. , ,
.
,
10%. .. [1], ,
1 , , 200...500 .
, , .
, ,
.
.. .. [2] . , , , .
, ,
. 373

, , . .
.. [3],
.
, : 1) ,
, ; 2)
; 3) ,
.
, ,
- , .
, . .
. , , :
1. , ;
2.
; ;
3. , , - ;
4. .
: . ,
.
,
, - 374


. , , (3...4 0,3...0,5 ) (1,5 . 3...12 .
) [4].
,
: ,
. , - . , , ,
[2].
,
, . : ;
, ; [2].
, ,

.
1, , 2 3 , 4 ().

5
6, 1.
6 1. 3 2
7.
2 3 8 9.
2 3
10.
. 10, 2 3
. 3
- 1 .

7. , 375

4, , ..
- . 7,
. 7 2 4.

, . , .

1. .. . . .... . .- --,
1980.- 220 .
2. .., .. - .- .: , 1976.239 .
3. .. -
. . .... . .- ., 1976.- 356 .
4. .. . .- .:
, 1984.- 157 .

376

633.39:631.5


.., . .-. ., . . .,

, . ,
E-mail: maize-technology@mail.ru

(Amaranthuspaniculatus) .
.
:, , , , , .
.
, .
. [2, 3].
(Amaranthus paniculatus), 4- ,
( ) ( 284-10/101-70 19.12.1985 .)
- 1 R-158.

(, , ) 25
,
-
.
377

, 4,0 %. . , , ,
.

1986 R-158 , 1987-1989 .
(Zea mays) (Panicum
miliaceum) .
( R-158), ( 3978) ( ). (, 17% . .
N) (NPK)60. -16 70 +14
+16. 700 ./. 2-3 .
, ( ) 1:10.
(70 ) 280 /, 3,5 / . 5-7,
4-5 . 105 2, 56 70 2 .
, 7-10
.
,
,
, 3-5 , , ,
.
, - , , , 17- ,
9- 8- .
,
378

. , 1987 . (12,6 0-10 ), 9-12-


. 1988 1989 ., -
, 7-10 , , 19-26-
. .
,
.
,
, ( 2,3 ),
( 1,3 ).
(1987 .), , ,
509 ./, 1988 1989 . 368 428 ./. , ,
.

,
( ) , , 36- 54- . 3-, 5- , 10-, 19 68- .
, ,
20-, 34 59- .

31,82 / (6,11 / ) 27,30 (1989 .)
35,0 / (1987 .),
42,33 (8,89 / )
36,40 / (7,50 / ).
( . .).
379

, 100
50,0 7,9
,
81,0 6,0 , 60,3 4,7 .
.
, . , ,
.

:
1.
, , ,
.
2. ( R-158)
.
3.
, ,
.
4.
, , 1000 . 0,6-0,8 0,50,7 /.
5. ,
, - ,
.
1993-1995 .

.

.
,
,
.
380

, , , ,
,
, , , .


R-158 (15 ) (45
70 ) 0,75; 1,0; 1,25 1,5 /. ,
( ) 1:10, -16 , ,
. N40P40K40 .
90 105 2 .
,
(-II ), (2-3 ) (
1000 0,6 ) . . 1993, 1994 1995 . 21, 16 23
22,1; 9,7 15,5 . 0-10 15,8; 12,3
13,5 . 5 13,7 21,1.
, , ,
. , 0,75 1,5 /
(15 ) 14%,
45 70 12 13%,
2,5-2,6 .
, ,
. , ,
(0,75 / )
(15 ) ,
, 43,0 %,
(45 70 ) 4,0 7,0 %. 381

,
.

, .
. , , (15 )
(0,75 /) 100%, (45
70 ) 90,1 79,9 %.

. (6,52 5,42 / )
(15 ) (45 )
0,75 1,25 / ,
( 65,2-54,2 %) . (70 ) (3,57 /) 0,75 1,0 /,

. .
, 100
12,8-13,1 1,9-2,1
. , , , 152 .
( 30,68 28,02 /)
(5,65 5,16 /) (4,07 3,72
/) (0,62 0,56 /) (15 ) (45 ) 1,25 /.
, ,
,

. , ,
, (45 ) , 382

.

,

[5].
2000-2002 .
.
( ). (45 ) .
1,25 1 .
.
.
150 2, .
- , 7
.
: 5, 15 25 .
10.
2000, 2001 2002. 21 25 . 0-10 0-100 12,4-17,2 126,8 (2002.)165,3 (2000.) . 9
( 10) 66. ,
41-, 55 67- , 414,2; 628,3 787,2.
, 2,6
45,6 119,4 . ( 3,0 ) .
( , ) .
( ) , 383

47,9-44,7 %. , . , ( 5 ) 16,6%.
( 5 25 )
, .
(39,7 . 2/) 58 .


.

. (29,6 /)
(5,41 /) 67
(5 ) ,
( 15-25 ) 3,1 6,2 /
.
(5,15 25 ) ,
. , :
.
,
( 86,1-94,1 % ).
. , (5 ) , 59,1, 42,6 28,8 % ,
.
, . (25 )

, , 26,0; 24,4 19,0 % ( 0,3-1,2 .) .
, 384


(33,9-34,4 / 5,65-5,68 /
) 5-15 , 10,
.
, 25,9-23,9 /
( 76,4-68,5% ). (
25 ) ,
, (4,9-3,0 /) .
, ( ), (29,6-23,4 /
), . ( )
,
( 9,5-6,5 /
, 1,40-0,95 / ) ,
.
, ,
15 ( ),
10.
(Poaceae):
, 4-

.
, .
, [1].
,
385

, [4].
( - ) , 2009-2011 .
(Zea mays), (Sorghum saccharatum Poiry) (Sorghum sudanense (Piper) Stapf.)
(Amaranthus paniculatus), . : 295 , 48, -
80, .
.
N60P60K40. .
(
./) : (0,28), (1,0), (1,2), (0,65). (45 )
12-14 . 2:1 79,0 + 46,0 %
. 7-10 , ,
10 .
0-10 0-100 10,0 (2010 .) 14,1 (2011 .) 113,8 (2010 .) 148,1
(2011 .),
.
( - - ) 86 (2009 .)
206 (2011 .) 72,9-174,8% .
64,8
(2011 .) 80,1 (2010 .) 71,1-87,9 % .

386

,
,
2:1 12,5 % ( 125 % )
( 24,5-50,2 %) ( 29,5-64,8 %), ( 6,928,9 3,1-31,3 %). (42,38 /)
(7,95 /)
,
-
9,7-11,0 3,9-10,2 %.
, -
54-68
.
22,5-27,5% . (51,10 /) (10,12 /) -
,
, 12,5% .
,
,
,
- .

26,6-30,3, 23,8-27,6 %.
:
1. , . . , / .
. , . . -. : - , 2014. 536 .
2. , .. . . : ,
1987. 439 .
3. , . . / . . , . . //
. : , 1975. 351 .
387

4. .. . . : , 1988. 216 .
5. , .. / ..
, .. , . . //
. , 1991. . 5660.

631.67:631.16:658.155

.., ..-.., .., ..-.., .., ..-..


.
: , , .
50
12%, ,
.
1,6 .
, 12% [5].

, .
-
.

, , ,
,
.
, ,
301 . .
, ,
139 . 301 . ,
1540 2710 3.
10
388

20% [5].

, .
, .
.
, .
. .
[4].
, - , .

, .

.
.

.
.
, , , ,
[4].
.
: (), , .
.
389


.
,
. ,
.

:
- (-
).
- .
- .
- .
- .
- .
- [4].
.
.

- .
, ,
.
.
.
1.
.
2.
,

.
3.
.

,

400-600 , .
-
,
[4].
, ,
390

, ,
[1].
(), .
. .

,
. .

; 50 %
.
. .

, , ,
.
( - ,
) .
, , ,
, .
.
. , .
- . , .
(),
391

, , , ,
, , , , . [1,2,3].


, %
()
20-35

50-75

70-80

85-98
,
, 70-80 85-98 % . ,
.

1. , .. /
.. // . 2002, 5. - . 20-22.
2. , .. / .. , .. , .., ..
, 2008 124 .
3. , .. ./ ..
, .. , .. , .. // , 4 (16), 2007. . 2-5.
4. , ..
/ .. , .. , .. , ..

[
]

:
http://www.rusnauka.com/26_WP_2012/Agricole/3_116187.doc.htm
5.
. , . (). .: - . -2012. . 21-45.
http://www.fao.org/3/a-i1688r/i1688r03.pdf

392

3.

-


..,

-
, . 40 10
$10 ., 15
(.., 2013). 25%
, .
, 50% , : ($1,6 .), ($1,5 .)
($1,4 .).
$
4 ., 60% 90% ( 1),
.
1- , %

5,0
95,0

80,0
20,0

90,0
10,0

61,0
39,0

80,0
20,0
: .., 2014.

100,0
100,0
100,0
100,0
100,0

,
30 %,
393

15-30% (,
2010).
, .
,
( 2) .
20082012 . .
40 .
6 47 - (.., 2013).
2 -

, %
- , ,
20
-
25
, ,
- 45

90
: 2011
2013

, 2014 , , 90 . (
2014 37,4 .) $ 2,4 .
10,8 . (70%)
2014 - 15,4 .
. ,
.
,
2013-2020
75 ,
.
2015 -
- ( 700
394

. . ). - ,
.
, - (75 ) 10,7
11,0 . .
2014 . 35% .
78,2% , 20,0%, () 1,8 % (.., 2015).
.
15,4%.

.
- ,
. ,

, - - (.. , 2011).
, () , .
, , . (- ,
), , .
, . 17.12.1997 149- ,
.
, 395

, ,
( 3).
3 -
/

-
; - ;

,
: .., 2014.

,
, -, , , - -
, , , .

, , - , , , . ,
, .

, . , .. , .
- ( , , , ,
.).
396


: .
, , , .
- .
(.. , .. , 2014):
- , , ;
- (,
);
- , ,
- ;
- , - , ;
- , ;
- , ,
, ;
- - - .
-
( ).
:
1) , ;
2) ,
;
3) ;
397

4) ,
(, , , ).
:
- ;
-

- ;
- -
, .

:
- ;
-
;
- ,
, .
,
( 4):
4 - ()


, %


: .


(2015-2016 .)
15%


(2017-2018 .)
30%


(2019-2020 .)
75%

20%

60%

90%

25%

70%

90%

- 75% ;
- - 398

- 90% ( 20082012 );
- 90% (
2008-2012 ).
- ,
.
, , - , .
(
2020 ):
- ;
-
;
- ;
- ;
- , ;
- ,
;
-
.
, , 20.02.2015 53-,
.

. , . ,
399

, ,
,
, .
,
,
.
,
, , .
1 2015

556 ( ,
2, -14), .
,
, .
, ,
:
- ;
- ,
;
- -
.
,
- .
- , 400

, ,
.

(), , ,
.

. , -
.
,

, ,
.
, , .
-
; ; ;

.
- - .
- , .

1.


, .. -
401

- / .. , ..
, .. /: . - . - .: -
, 2014. . 9-15.
2.
, .. /..
// . 2013. -4. . 2-4.
3.
, .. , 10.10.2014 .
[ ] / .. . : . .
4.
2011 - 2013 ,
9.06.2011 165.
5.
, .. - : . . .
: 08.00.05/ . ., 2011. 42 .
6.
2020 (). -.
2010. 33 .
7.
, .. 2014 :
2015 , 2013-2020 [ ] / .. . - : http://www.mcx.ru/

633:511:575.227

GOSSYPIUM L.
.., ..., , .., ..., ...,
.., .-., ..., .., ..., ...,
.., ..., .., .., ..,
..

. , , f_abdullaev@yahoo.com
Gossypium L., -
.
402

- .
: , , , ,
, , , .

,
.
, .


,
.

, 32580 ., ..: G.hirsutum
L.- 24571 ., G.barbadense L.- 4190 ., G.arboreum L.- 1623 .,
G.herbaceum L.- 1292 ., - 937 . [1]. Gossypium L., ,
.
. ,
, 5 :
, , , , , . ..
, 60 .
, 7500 , ,
(2n = 52) Gossypium L., ..: G.hirsutum L.4903 . ., G.barbadense L.- 970 ., (2n = 26)
G.herbaceum L. G.arboreum L.- 1404 .

1960- 403

..
..,
. G.hirsutum ssp. mexicanum,
.
, , ,
.
, - .
.
,
[1-9].

, , .

, .. .

Gossypium L.
- . Houzingenia (), Gossypium (-) Sturtia (),

.


,

. 404

, , -
, , - .

- , ,
, (F1) .
.
Gossypium, 4 (, , , F). Sturtia
3 (, G, ), a Houzingenia- D- .
( 1000) Gossypium (, , , F ) Houzingenia (D ), - 3 ( 13) (1-4)
,
100%, G.klotzschianum (D3-k) G.barbosanum (3),
13
(42,8%), - 54,3% .

G.herbaceum f. harga (A1) G.harknessii (D2-2)- 80%, 12 36 . -
0,7-15,0%, G.arboreum ssp. obtusifolium (2) G.raimondii (D5)- 25%, - 20-28%. 1 2 G.raimondii (D5) F1 [10].

( Houzingenia) ( Sturtia).
0-6%, - 21%.
D- G () G.sturtianum G.klotzschianum (D3k). (50%) (54,7%) G.klotzschianum (D ). G.thurberi (D1) G.australe (G),
G.raimondii (D5) x G. harknessii (D2-2) G.nandewarense (C1-n). ( ; G x D) ( 32) (4,5 7,5%).
405

G.nelsonii (G) G.raimondii (D5), G.bickii (G) G.laxum (D) , . (D) G.sturtianum (). , D , .
, [11].
- G.herbaceum (A1)
G.arboreum (2) (E1, 4, 1, 3, F1)
. ssp. nandewarense f harga (A1) G.barbosanum (B3)
ssp. africanum (A1) G.barbosanum ssp.
pseudoarboreum G.anomalum (B1)- .
, F1 -
20-52%. ssp. africanum (A1) G.barbosanum (B3). G.stocksii
(E1), G.incanum (E4) , (1-4) (8-12,5%) . G.incanum (4)
(1-2) , ,
G.longicalyx (F1) 1 ( 30 ) (8,3%). F1. ssp. obtusifolium (2) G.stocksii (E1). 12,5%
, 30%- . ssp.
obtusifolium (2) G.incanum (4) G.longicalyx
F1, ,
79-89%. , ssp.
obtusifolium G.anomalum (1) G.barbosanum (3).
,
, ,
, .
, - - 1, 2, 3, 1, 4, G.anomalum (B1) G.barbosanum F1 (64-80%).
1,5-2,5%, ,
. G.stocksii (E1) G.incanum (4)
18-35%; F1
406

.
,
, .
F1 .
( G) . F1, , , ,
, G.australe (G) G.nandewarense
(), . F1 (12,2-30,0%). ,
G.nandewarense - G.sturtianum
Sturtia. Houzingenia () , .
D ( Houzingenia)

, , G.armourianum G.harknessii ( Caducibracteolata), G.thurberi G.trilobum ( Houzingehia),
G.klotzschianum G.davidsonii ( Integrifolium) F1, .
,
. , ,
G.trilobum G.harknessii G.armourianum , G.harknessii G.thurberi G.raimondii.

, , , , . - , , ,
F1 D ,
. ,
, (D ).
.
- , [12]
407

, . Stewart [5]
. , , , (AD1, AD2 ); - , , D; - , , G, .
, ,
. : -2, -, -1, -6, -513, -514,
-512-, -515, , -2 . , , .

Gossypium L.
, - ,
,
, , ; , , , , , . ,
3 4 -
. .
, .

1. ., .., . . . Gossypium L.
.// , 1996.- . 619-625.
2. .. -
Gossypium L. .//. . ... . .
. , 1985. -21 .
3. .. -
G.raimondii Ulbr. .( - G.raimondii Ulbr.)//. . ... .
. .- , 2002.- 23 .
408

4. rland J.R., Wet J.M. de. Towords a rational classification of cultivated


plants.//Taxon. 1971.- # 20.- P. 509-517.
5. ..
Integrifolium Tod. D1, D2 //.
. ... . . . , 1983.- 21 .
6. .. ( ).//. ... . . .- , 1996.- 289 .
7. 3.A., .., .. ( )
().// . . , 2000.. 95.
8. ..
- .//. . ...
. . .- , 1998.- 23 .
9. Abdullaev A.A., Rizaeva S.M., Klyat V.P., Arslanov D.M. Genetic potential
of Gossypium L. genus its importance and a practical use.//Cotton Sci.- 2002.- V. 14.P. 86.
10. Persival A.E., Wendel J.F., Stewart J.M. Taxonomy and Germplasm Pesources.//Journ. Cotton.- 1999.
11. Persival .., Kochel R.J. Distribution, collection and evaluation of Gossypium.//Adv. Agron., 1990.- # 44.- P. 225-226.
12. Stewart J.M. Potential for cropimprowenment with exotic germplasm and
genetic engineering. Challengino the future.//University of Arkonsas Fayctevillo. Alt.
2701.- USA, 1994.- P. 313-327.
GENETIC POTENTIAL OF BIODIVERSITY OF GENUS GOSSYPIUM
L. AND THE POSSIBILITIES OF ITS USE
S.M.Rizaeva, Z.A.Ernazarova, D.K.Ernazarova, F.H.Abdullaev,
B.H.Amanov, D.M.Arslanov, H.A.Muminov, F.U.Rafieva, B.A.Sirozhidinov
Institute of Genetics and Plant Experimental Biology of Academy of Sciences
Tashkent, Uzbekistan, e-mail: f_abdullaev@yahoo.com
The article was given a rview of research on the biodiversity of wild species and
the establishment of the degree of phylogenetic relatedness of representatives of different taxa of the genus Gossypium L., and also the identification of opportunities
and effective involvement of their use in genetic and breeding programs. On the basis
of selected sources of valuable traits and include them in the breeding process of research institutions of the republic are all grown in the Central Asian region of cotton
cultivars.
Key words: cotton, genepool, biodiversity, wild species, hybridologic analysis,
crossability, phylogenetic relationship, traits.
409

635.152:631.544.4


.., ..-.., .., ..-..
-
, . ,
E-mail: alexboxan@rambler.ru
. : , 18 , , , , , .
: , , , , , .

. .
[1,2].
,
. [3].
, -
. .. (), - (), - ().

( , ) 2004-2013 .
.
20 5 56 . 20-25 1570 . 410

4,2 2,
10-50 .
Raphanus sarivus L. - .
16 [4].
( 1).
1 - .
()

, %

10
11-20
21-50
50
100

1
2
3
4
5
6

, 1
. (2-5 )
. (6) .
. 2.
2 -
, 2004-2013 . ( )

, , 18

, , , , , -

, , , , , , , ,
, Reber, Herlo, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , , ,
, , ,

4-6

()
1

411

, , 6//92

Gint WR-Sakyrojima Mammoth,

()
, ,

, --,

3-6


3 . :
1 , 18 1 , 1 , 1
, 1 , 1 , 1 .

1. , .. Raphanus sativus L. (, , , ) / .. , .. . .:
, 2015. 134 .
2. , .. / .. //
: . . . ., 2014. .XXXVIII.
. 40.
3. .. / .. , .. // . ., 2014. 8. . 34-35
4. , ..
/ .. , .. //
: . . . ., 2005. . 142 -145.

412

:633.511:575.1.22.2.



., , .., ..., .., ...,
.., ..., .., ..-.., ., ...,
.., . ., .., ..
, .
E-mail: ziroat64@mail.ru
. , ,
- , 1000 F2, G.darwinii Watt x -8 G.darwinii Watt x -8
1 F1 (-8 G.darwinii Watt) -8, (-8 G.darwinii
Watt) G.darwinii Watt.
G.barbadense L. G.darwinii Watt.

.
: , , , , , ,
, , , .

Gossypium L. ,
[5].
, ,
, , , , G.barbadense
L. G.darwinii Watt. ,
, G.barbadense
L., - , , G.hirsutum L.,
, , 413

95% . , , G.hirsutum L., ,


: , , , [6,7].

F1,F2,F11 G.barbadense L. G.darwinii Watt.
.
:
, G.barbadense L. G.darwinii Watt. ,
F1, F2, F1B1.
,
, ( , 1000 ), (, ). (
MS-Excel) .. [2].
: ,
. , -
.
, , . ,
,
, [3,4].
: , , , , , [1].
, .
, G. darwinii Watt.
( ), ,
. 414

F1,
G.barbadense L., 123-126 (. 1). , hp= 0,3. , . ,
(-8 G. darwinii Watt.) -8 123,3 . G. darwinii Watt. ,
160,5 .
1. F2, 1 F1.
50% - ,

V,
S
limit
%
1
2
3
4
G.barbadense L.
G. darwinii Watt.
166-170
0,8
169,0 0,44
ssp. eubarbadense ( -8)
110-113
1,0
112,0 0,37
F1
G. darwinii Watt. -8
127-134
1,4
123,0 0,47
-8 G. darwinii Watt.
129-135
1,0
126,0 0,42
F2
G. darwinii Watt. -8
149,4 0,90
126-171
9,1
-8 G. darwinii Watt.
143,4 1,03
126-171 10,4
1 F1.
(-8 G. darwinii Watt.) -8
116-130
3,8
123,3 0,32
(-8 G. darwinii Watt.) x G. darwinii Watt.
160,5 0,45
146-171
4,0

hp

0,5
-

, ,
F2, 1 F1 ,
, .
- 1000 , .
G.barbadense L., . G.
darwinii Watt. - 30,5 . 8 37,0 (. 2).

F2, -8 G. darwinii
Watt., G. darwinii Watt. x -8 1 F1 (-8 G.
415

darwinii Watt.) -8, (-8 G. darwinii Watt.) G. darwinii Watt. ( .2).


F1,(G.barbadense L.. G. darwinii
Watt.)
.
35,8-36,8 , 5,5-8,4%, hp= 2,3; 3,0.

, 21,0- 42,0 . 37,0
, F1 .
. 1 F1 (-8
G.darwinii Watt) -8
- 29,0 38,9 .
36,2 , , 2,1%.
G.darwinii Watt,
. 29,0 - 38,9 ,
34,2 .
,
F2 -8 G.darwinii Watt, G.darwinii Watt
x -8 ,
,
(35,0-42,9 ), ,
.
. F2, -8 G.darwinii Watt, G.darwinii Watt x
-8 1 F1 (-8 G.darwinii Watt) -8,
(-8 G.darwinii Watt) G.darwinii Watt ( .3).
, ssp. eubarbadense
( -8)-34,0%, G.darwinii Watt - 26,0%.(. 3).
F1 (28,1-30,16%).
31,0-31,1%. , 20,0-40,0%.
, 35,0-40,0%, . ,
416

35,0-40,0%. , F2, 35,0-40,0%


15% , 1 F1
40,0%, , 31,8%,
.
- 1000 -
-
F2, G.darwinii Watt x -8 G.darwinii
Watt x -8 1 F1 (-8 G.darwinii Watt)
-8, (-8 G.darwinii Watt) G.darwinii Watt (.11).
- F1 G.darwinii Watt x -8
, 3,0 ,
1,9-2,3 . -8 G.darwinii Watt
(.4).
F2, 2,0 . F2, 1 F1
, - 3,0-3,4.,
.

1000 F2,
G.darwinii Watt x -8 G.darwinii Watt x -8 1 F1
(-8 G.darwinii Watt) -8, (-8 G.darwinii Watt)
G.darwinii Watt. ..

(.5).


, ,
- , 1000
F2, G.darwinii Watt x -8 G.darwinii Watt x -8
1 F1 (-8 G.darwinii Watt) -8, (-8 G.darwinii
Watt) G.darwinii Watt.
G.barbadense L. G.darwinii Watt.,

.

417

27-28,9

233
100
124
100
45
100
65
100

2
1
-

89
38,1
47
37,9
22
49
10
15,3

41-42,0

47
20,1
32
26
12
26,7
22
34,0

39-40,9

7
3,0
8
6,4
6
13,3
3
20,0

37-38,9

8
3,4
2
1,6
3
6,6
13
20,0

35-36,9

8
3,4
2
1,6
2
4,4
7
10,7

33-34,9

31-32,9

n=2
29-30,9

F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt x 8) x -8


F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt 8) x G.darwinii Watt

25-26,9

F2-8 . G.darwinii Watt

23-24,9

F2G.darwinii Watt x -8

21-22,9

,. %

2. F2 , F1B1

52
22,3
25
20,1
-

20
8,7
8
6,4
-

Sx

37,30,19

2,7

V
%
7,1

37,30,15

2,1

5,8

36,20,05

0,7

2,1

34,20,16

2,3

6,9

3. F2, F1B1

F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt x -8) x -8


F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt -8) x G.darwinii
Watt

2
1
2
2
1
2
3
5

418

26
11
18
15
7
16
5
8

80
34
29
23
6
13
19
29

32-34

29-31

26-28

23-25
18
8
11
9
6
13
8
12

72
31
37
30
7
16
16
25

38-40

F2-8 G.darwinii Watt

233
100
124
100
45
100
65
100

,
35-37

F2G.darwinii Watt x -8

n=3
20-22

,
%

16
7
19
15
13
29
12
18

19
8
8
6
5
11
2
3

V%

31,1 0,2

3,6

11,7

31,0 0,2

4,0

12,9

31,8 0,3

4,4

13,9

30,7 0,3

4,4

14,3

Sx

4. - F2 , F1B1

F2G.darwinii Watt x -8
F2-8 G.darwinii Watt
F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt x -8) x -8
F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt -8) x G.darwinii
Watt

233
100
124
100
45
100
65
100

26
11
16
13
15
33,3
9
14

69
30
29
23
17
37,9
18
27,6

108
46
56
45
11
24,4
34
52,3

26
11
19
15
2
4,4
4
6,1

3,5-3,7

3,0-3,4

2,5-2,9

2,0-2,4

1,5-1,9

n=4
1,0-1,4

, %

4
2
2
2
-

2
2
-

- , .
S

V%

2,0 0,21

0,42

21,0

2,0 0,22

0,45

22,3

1,6

0,20

0,33

19,8

1,8

0,21

0,39

21,4

Sx

5. 1000 F2 , F1B1.

F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt -8) x G.darwinii


Watt

419

90-99

1
1
-

15
6,4
3
2,4
-

110-119

F1B1 (G.darwinii Watt x -8) x -8

100-109

F2-8 G.darwinii Watt

233
100
124
100
45
100
65
100

1000, .
80-89

F2G.darwinii Watt x -8

n=10

70-79

-

, %

43
18,5
28
22,5
5
11
13
20

175
75,1
92
74,1
40
89
52
80

V%

111,4 0,4

6,8

6,1

111,3 0,4

6,3

5,6

114,1 0,2

3,7

3,2

112,5 0,2

4,2

3,7

Sx


F2 -8 G.darwinii Watt, G.darwinii Watt x
-8 , ,
(35,0-42,9 ), ,
.
, 20,0-40,0%. , 35,0-40,0%, .
,
35,0-40,0%. ,
F2, 35,0-40,0% 15%
, 1 F1 40,0%, , 31,8%, . F1
-, . F2, 1 F1
,
- 3,0.

1000 F2,
G.darwinii Watt x -8 G.darwinii Watt x -8 1 F1
(-8 G.darwinii Watt) -8, (-8 G.darwinii Watt) G.darwinii
Watt. ..
.
,
,

.

1.
..
.// :
- , 95-
. ...- : , 2005.- . 5-8.
2.
.. .//: ,
420

1985.- 351 .
3.

..

..
.//: , 1967.- 292 .
4.
.. . .// 1.- , 1954.- 384 .
5.
McCarty J.C.Jr. and R.G. Percy. Genes from exotic germplasm and their
use in cultivar improvement in G.hirsutum L. and G.barbadense L. In J.N. Jenkins
and S. Saha (ed.) Emerging technologies in cotton breeding. // Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, India. 2001. pp. 65-79.
6.
Michael A. Gore et all. Linkage Map Construction and Quantitative Trait
Locus Anaysis of Agronomic and Fiber Quality Traits in Cotton./The Plant Genome,
March 2014,Vol. 7, 1.;
7.
Peng Wang et all. Genetic diversity of tetraploid cotton resistant to Verticillium wilt using interspecific chromosome segment introgression lines./The Grop
J.-2, 2014, p.278-288.

:633.511:575.
-

GOSSYPIUM L.
., , .., ..., .., ...,
.., ..., .., ..-.., ., ...,
.., . ., .., ..
, .
E-mail: ziroat64@mail.ru
,
, - , 1000 ,
G.hirsutum L. G.darwinii Watt..
.
: , , , , , , , , .
421


, , , , , . Gossypium L.
, , , , , G.hirsutum L. G.barbadense L.
, , .
. , [2].
,
F1 , , -
G.hirsutum L. G.darwinii Watt.
:
, G.hirsutum L. G.darwinii
Watt., F1.
, ( ,
1000 ), (, ).
( MS-Excel) .. [1].
, Wright, G.M.Beil
R.E.Atkins [5].
:
-
, .
.
, [3,4]

,
.
422

G.hirsutum
L. . 22,6-25,8 , 22,2-28,3 , - ssp.paniculatum 28,5 , , 35,7 ., (. 1. ).
, G.darwinii Watt.
30,5 .
, G.hirsutum L. G.darwinii Watt. ( .1.).
, , , - G.darwinii Watt.
,
.
G.hirsutum L. G.darwinii Watt.

.
hp=0,88; 1,0.
..
G.darwinii Watt.;
- G.darwinii Watt.
hp=2,11; 3,67; 7,1; 16,0.
ssp. punctatum var. java G.darwinii Watt.
(.1.).
, ,
.
- .
, G.hirsutum L. G. darwinii Watt.
, ssp.mexicanum var.microcarpum palmerii (27,2 %),
ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum (Jucatan) 15,7 %.
18,1-33,3 %. -
ssp.paniculatum 28,5 %. G. darwinii Watt. 26,0% (.2.).
F1 .
, F1, 423

G.hirsutum L. G. darwinii
Watt., , , , . .
-
G. darwinii Watt. . , ssp. pniculatum G.darwinii Watt.,
, ,
hp= -3,24. G. darwinii Watt. ssp. pniculatum ,
, hp= -2,09.
, G. darwinii Watt. ..
, , F1, G.hirsutum L. G.
darwinii Watt., , , , .
- -
G.hirsutum L. - (ssp. euhirsutum ( - 5,8 ),
- (ssp. paniculatum 3,4 ), (1,0-2,9 )
(. 3.). G. darwinii Watt. - 1,9
.
-
, G.hirsutum L. G. darwinii
Watt. , , ( .3.). F1 G.darwinii Watt ssp.
punctatum var. gambia ,
.
3,7 ,

1,5-1,9 , , hp=10,0. F1 G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum
424

var.hopi ,
. ,
hp= - 2,0.
, ,
F1 (G.hirsutum L. G.darwinii Watt.) - . , , - G.darwinii
Watt., , . ,
G.darwinii Watt.,
,
.
1000 , G.hirsutum L. , 1000 60,1 60,5 .. , 1000
(65,8-110,5). 1000
121,0. G.darwinii Watt.,
112,3 .
1000
,
G.hirsutum L.
G. darwinii Watt. ( .4).
, F1
1000 , ,
, ( .4).
1000 ,
-
G. darwinii Watt. 1000
129,3-138,8; 155,2-158,6 ,
80,4 112,3 .; 112,3-121,0 ,
, hp = 2,07-2,66; hp =8,86-9,64.
, 1000
, , , , .
425

1. F1

-
,
S
.
G.hirsutum L. ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
10
22,80,63
G.hirsutum L ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri
10
23,00,39
G.hirsutum L. ssp. punctatum
10
26,00,51
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. java
10
27,20,41
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. gambia
10
28,30,66
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. hopi
10
22,20,47
G.hirsutum L .ssp. paniculatum
10
30,00,51
G.hirsutum L. ssp. euhirsutum
10
35,70,55
G.darwinii Watt
10
30,50,60
G.darwinii Watt
ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum () G.darwinii Watt
10
27,70,70
G.darwinii Watt ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
10
30,50,95
ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri G.darwinii Watt
10
28,6 0,86
G.darwinii Watt
ssp. punctatum G.darwinii Watt
10
33,0 0,52
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum
10
36,5 0,52
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. java
10
30,5 0,68
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var.hopi
10
28,8 0,52
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. gambia
10
37,2 0,26
- G.darwinii Watt
ssp. pniculatum G.darwinii Watt
10
38,00,33
G.darwinii Watt x ssp. pniculatum
10
38,00,30
G.darwinii Watt
x G.darwinii Watt
10
37,90,21
G.darwinii Watt x
10
35,40,65

426

,
Lim
S

V%

hp

22,0-25,0
21,0-25,0
24,0-28,0
26,0-29,0
24,0-30,0
20,0-24,0
28,0-33,0
33,0-38,0
28,0-34,0

1,80
0,33
1,63
0,34
0,31
0,36
1,63
1,76
1,90

7,9
5,42
6,28
4,84
7,07
5,66
5,44
4,94
6,2

25,0-32,0
27,0-36,0
30,0 - 37,0

2,5
3,3
0,9

9,19
10,87
8,0

0,07
1,00
0,85

30,0-34,0
34,0-38,0
28,5 - 33,5
27,0 - 31,0
36,0 - 38,0

1,64
1,65
3.16
1,64
0,84

4,9
4,5
7,2
5,7
2,2

2,11
3,67
0
0,6
7,1

35,0-42,0
35,0-41,0

2,17
1,94

5,68
5,08

16,0
16,0

35,0-40,0
32,0-38,0

1,6
2,06

4,9
5,8

1,85
0,88

2. F1

-
,
S
.
G.hirsutum L. ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
10
15,20,40
G.hirsutum L ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri
10
27,20,26
G.hirsutum L. ssp. punctatum
10
26,80,39
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. java
10
22,20,35
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. gambia
10
33,30,23
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. hopi
10
18,10,17
G.hirsutum L .ssp. paniculatum
10
28,50,26
G.hirsutum L. ssp. euhirsutum
10
37,50,40
G.darwinii Watt
10
26,00,42
G.hirsutum L G.darwinii Watt
G.darwinii Watt
ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum () G.darwinii Watt
10
25,950,70
G.darwinii Watt ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
10
23,40,82
ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri G.darwinii Watt
10
27,4 1,21
G.darwinii Watt
ssp. punctatum G.darwinii Watt
10
27,6 0,56
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum
10
28,1 0,72
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. java
10
34,6 1,96
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var.hopi
10
21,4 2,43
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. gambia
10
28,7 1,10
- G.darwinii Watt
ssp. pniculatum G.darwinii Watt
10
23,20,7
G.darwinii Watt x ssp. pniculatum
10
24,640,8
G.darwinii Watt
x G.darwinii Watt
10
31,00,55
G.darwinii Watt x
10
27,10,67

427

,
Lim
S

V%

hp

13,8-16,8
25,8-28,3
25,4-28,7
20,1-23,7
31,8-34,2
17,2-18,7
26,5-29,8
36,0-39,0
24,0-28,0

1,26
1,0
1,2
0,98
1,09
1,38
1,07
1,26
1,33

8,3
3,00
4,6
4,93
2,14
3,04
3,8
3,38
5,0

23,0-29,0
20,0-27,0
20,0 - 31,5

2,2
2,6
3,81

8,6
11,2
13,9

0,99
0,51
1,00

26,0-30,0
24,0-30,0
27,7 - 41,6
15,4 - 33,3
23,8 - 33,3

1,78
2,28
6,18
7,69
3,46

6,4
8,1
16,8
35,9
12,1

3,00
4,25
5,3
-0,2
-0,3

20,0-25,7
21,6-27,7

2,34
2,61

10,09
10,6

-3,24
-2,09

28,0-33,0
24,0-30,0

1,7
2,1

5,6
7,9

-0,13
-0,81

3. - F1

-
,
S
.
G.hirsutum L. ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
10
1,160,10
G.hirsutum L ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri
10
1,00,04
G.hirsutum L. ssp. punctatum
10
2,90,14
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. java
10
1,00,04
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. gambia
10
1,50,04
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. hopi
10
1,30,06
G.hirsutum L .ssp. paniculatum
10
3,40,17
G.hirsutum L. ssp. euhirsutum
10
5,80,11
G.darwinii Watt
10
1,90,11
G.darwinii Watt
ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum () G.darwinii Watt
10
1,580,11
G.darwinii Watt ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
10
2,00,10
ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri G.darwinii Watt
10
2,3 0,10
G.darwinii Watt
ssp. punctatum G.darwinii Watt
10
3,20,16
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum
10
3,50,13
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. java
10
2,5 0,15
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var.hopi
10
1,0 0,14
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. gambia
10
3,7 0,31
- G.darwinii Watt
ssp. pniculatum G.darwinii Watt
10
4,340,21
G.darwinii Watt x ssp. pniculatum
10
3,910,18
G.darwinii Watt
x G.darwinii Watt
10
5,00,17
G.darwinii Watt x
10
4,150,13

428

-,
Lim
S

V%

hp

0,8-1,6
0,8-1,2
2,5-3,5
0,8-1,2
1,4-1,8
1,1-1,5
2,8-4,2
5,5-6,5
1,4-2,1

0,31
0,51
0,45
053
0,62
0,33
0,55
0,37
0,21

27,0
11,93
15,49
12,05
8,82
13,85
16,3
6,36
10,6

1,0-2,0
1,6-2,4
1,9 - 2,7

0,32
0,34
0,32

20,6
17,5
13,9

0,14
1,27
1,56

2,8-3,7
3,0-4,2
2,2 3,0
0,6 - 1,6
2,1 - 4,6

0,32
0,42
0,60
0,44
0,98

10,35
12,0
14,0
44,2
26,4

1,60
2,20
2,3
-2,0
10,0

3,5-5,6
3,2-4,8

0,68
0,57

15,6
14,68

2,25
1,68

3,9-5,8
3,6-4,7

0,56
0,41

11,27
9,89

0,59
0,15

4. 1000 F1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23

1000 , .

x Sx
G.hirsutum L. ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
60,5 0,6
G.hirsutum L ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri
60,1 0,28
G.hirsutum L. ssp. punctatum
102,8 0,8
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. java
65,8 0,47
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. gambia
110,5 0,49
G.hirsutum L ssp. punctatum var. hopi
84,4 0,64
G.hirsutum L .ssp. paniculatum
80,4 0,92
G.hirsutum L. ssp. euhirsutum
121,0 0,85
G.darwinii Watt
112,3 0,45
G.darwinii Watt
ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum () G.darwinii Watt
88,7 0,94
G.darwinii Watt ssp.mexicanum var.nervosum ()
92,4 1,02
ssp.mexicanum var. microcarpum palmeri G.darwinii Watt
128,1 2,06
G.darwinii Watt
ssp. punctatum G.darwinii Watt
105,5 0,37
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum
108,0 0,30
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. java
106,5 0,84
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var.hopi
105,2 5,58
G.darwinii Watt ssp. punctatum var. gambia
113,1 1,03
- G.darwinii Watt
ssp. pniculatum G.darwinii Watt
138,8 1,28
G.darwinii Watt x ssp. pniculatum
129,3 0,52
G.darwinii Watt
x G.darwinii Watt
158,6 0,81
G.darwinii Watt x
155,2 0,86

429

limit
58,4-62,5
58,6-61,5
100,0-105,0
63,8-68,2
107,0-111,8
80,5-87,0
78,0-83,0
118,0-123,0
110,0-114,0

S
1,6
1,8
1,9
2,1
1,7
2,7
2,1
1,9
1,4

V%
2,7
1,46
1,8
2,25
1,40
2,41
2,5
1,5
1,2

hp
-

86,0-91,0
90,0-95,0
120,0 - 135,0

2,1
2,3
6,51

2,37
2,49
5,0

0,09
0,23
1,6

103,0-107,0
106,0-109,0
103,0 - 110,0
85,7-120,0
110,7-117,9

1,1
0,9
2,84
17,64
3,25

1,1
0,8
2,9
16,8
2,9

-0,44
-0,08
0,75
0,5
1,9

135,0-142,0
128,0-131,0

2,86
2,67

2,06
2,07

2,66
2,07

157,0-161,0
153,0-158,0

1,8
1,9

1,14
1,23

9,64
8,86


, G.hirsutum L. G.
darwinii Watt. , , - , . , .
, , , : ,

.
,
,
.

1. .. .//: ,
1985.- 351 .
2. .., ., . ,
. - : , 1987. - C. 3-317.
3. ..
. // . . , 1979. - 8. . 66-68.
4. Abdurakhmonov I., Buriev Z., Rizaeva S., Ernazarova Z., Abdullaev . and
Abdukarimov A. Evaluation of fiber quality and other agronomic traits of G.hirsutum
accessions from Uzbek cotton germplasm. // International Cotton Genome Initiative
ICGI-2004 Workshop. Book of Abstracts. Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India. October 10-13, 2004. p.7
5. Beil G.E., Atkins R.E. Inheritance of quantitave characters sorgum // Jow
State Journal of Science. 1965. - 3. - P.35-37.

430

UDC 635.11:631.03:631.62(477.72)
DIRECT METHOD OF BEET ROOT SEED PRODUCTION ON THE CONDITIONS OF DRIP IRRGATION OF THE SOUTH OF UKRAINE
Kosenko N.P.
Institute of irrigation faming of NAAS of Ukraine
The purpose of investigations is optimization of basic elements of technology of
the direct growing of seed of beet of table at drip irrigation south of Ukraine is purpose of researches. The productivity of the seed got at sowing in the first ten-day period of September was on 189,6 % more than in the second ten-day period of September. At shelter of plants a straw the productivity makes 0,72 t/ha, by mulching
agrofiber - 0,73 t/ha, that in two times more than without shelter. Increase of density
of growing of seed plants to 300 thus./ha assists the increase of the productivity of
seed on 13,2%.
Keyword: beet root, seed, term of sowing, shelter of plants, plant density, seed
productivity
Growing of seed by a direct method in the conditions of south of Ukraine has
many advantages: weather-climatic terms are friendly to successful stability to the
winter of plants; the necessity of winter storage and planting of mother roots off, that
considerably reduces general charges on growing of seed; plants better use the spring
supplies of moisture and grow before. A sum of effective temperatures is sufficient
for the receipt of high harvests of quality seed of beet roots.
The seed of root crops grow two methods: planting of roots crops and direct.
Many scientists specify on perspective of direct method of seed-grower [1, 6]. American scientists this method is named by "seed to seed" and consists in that, plants
from the summer sowing grow and carry a winter in the field. In spring plants are
flower and form seeds [2]. However in separate years may be considerable death of
mother roots. The productivity of seed, largely, depends on the phase of development
of root crops on the end of autumn vegetation and safety of plants after winter [8]. In
the conditions of Crimea the results of researches showed, that direct growing of seed
of feed and sugar beet was successful only. On the average for three years 63-78% of
plants carried a winter period. At sowing in the third ten-day period of August and
density of plants on the end of autumn vegetation 350 thous./ha the productivity of
seed was 1,6-1,8 /ha [3]. Monitoring of survival of mother roots showed for 30years-old period, that the complete freezing through of plants had been observed in
431

the Odessa area twice, in Kherson five times. On the average for 1996-2010 safety
of seed plants in Crimea made 80%, to the Odessa area -74,8%, to the Kherson area 73,0% [4]. Five-year researches in the conditions of the Tashkent area of Uzbekistan
showed that at sowing of August, 20 and September, 10 the productivity of seed of
beet was according to 3,29 -2,71 t/ha, one plant 62,9-59,5 g [1]. A direct method
one time is applied for growing of reproduction seed. In future these seed are sown
for the receipt of commodity products [7].
The purpose of researches. Optimization of basic elements of technology of direct growing of beetroot seed to the conditions of drip irrigation on the south of
Ukraine is the purpose of researches.
Materials and methods. Researches were conducted on irrigation lands of an experimental field of Institute of irrigation faming of NAAS of Ukraine from 2013
through 2015. Soils of an experience area are dark-chestnut. For this soil is characterized by a weak salinity and the average content of clay fraction. Humus contents in
arable (0-30 cm) a layer of earth 2,3%, nitrogen - 0,18%, movable phosphorus are
490 mg/kg, exchange potassium - 320 mg/kg of absolutely dry soil, of water extraction - 7,2. The research had four time reoccurrence. The sown area was of 14 m2,
the accounted area was of 10 m2. Research was conducted with plants of sort Bordo
Kharkov. The field researches carried out and were accompanied with mathematically statistical, settlement-comparative method of analysis.
Results and discussion. Most percent of plants 17,8% that spent winter well, it is
got at sowing in the first ten-day period of September, shelter a straw, standing densities 200 thousand/ha (Fig. 1).

Figure 1 State of plants after a winter, 2013-2015


432

At sowing in the first ten-day period of September density of standing of plants


at spring averaged 26,1 thousand /ha, that in 1,3 times more, than at sowing in the
second ten-day period of September. Shelter a straw (10-12 cm) assisted the increase
of amount of plants, that spent winter well, on 15,5 thous./ha (180,2%) Under mulching material agrofiber (closeness of a 30 g/2) saved on 14,7 thous./ha (170,9%)
more, than without shelter. The most favorable terms were folded for the survival of
plants in 2015. Density of standing of plants after winter at the early sowing and
without shelter presented 20,0-30,0 thous./ha. At shelter a straw density in spring was
26,7-36,7 thous./ha, under a is 49,2-52,5 thous./ha. It is set researches, that the most
productivity of seed of 1,19 /ha and was at sowing in the first ten-day period of September, shelters and densities of standing an autumn the pressed straw 300 thous./ha
(table 1).
Table 1. The seed productivity of beetroot depending on the sowing date, shelter of
plants and density of standing of plants, 2013-2015

Sowing
date (factor )

Shelter of plants
(factor B)

1 First tenwithout shelter


2 day period
Sep3 of
shelter by straw
4 tember
5
shelter by agrofiber
6
7 Second
without shelter
8 ten-day
9 period of
shelter by straw
10 September
11
shelter by agrofiber
12
05 of private distinctions factor
05 of private distinctions factor

Plant density, thous./ha


(factor C)
200
300
200
300
200
300
200
300
200
300
200
300

05 of private distinctions factor


05 of main effects factor
05 of main effects factor
05 of main effects factor

Yield of seeds, t/ha

2013
0,19
0,22
1,17
1,03
0,44
0,63
0,05
0,06
0,18
0,19
0,11
0,17
0,15
0,12
0,11
0,06

2014
0,10
0,09
1,44
1,37
1,03
1,10
0,16
0,17
0,48
0,58
0,29
0,47
0,25
0,37
0,30
0,10

2015
0,54
0,81
0,62
0,88
1,53
1,85
0,20
0,26
0,33
0,35
0,57
0,60
0,15
0,25
0,18
0,06

0,06
0,04

0,18
0,12

0,12
0,08

2013-2015
0,28
0,37
1,08
1,09
1,00
1,19
0,14
0,16
0,33
0,37
0,32
0,41

The productivity of seed at sowing in the first ten-day period of September was
433

0,84 t/ha, that on 189% more, than at sowing in the second ten-day period of September. The productivity at shelter of plants a straw is got 0,72 t/ha, at application of
agrofiber 0,73 t/ha, that accordingly on 200,0 and 204,2% more, than without shelter. Increase of density of standing of plants from 200 to 300 thousand/ha assisted the
increase of the productivity on 13,2%. Maximal productivity of seed (1,19 t/ha) is
got at sowing in the first ten-day period of September, shelter a straw and densities of
standing of mother roots an autumn 300 thous./ha.
The number of irrigations during the growing season of seed plants in 2013
amounted to 9, irrigation norm - 1140 3/ha; in 2014 accordingly are 7 watering,
1050 3/ha; in 2015 are 5 watering, 670 3/ha.
The seed have such indexes of quality : mass 1000 things of seed - 17,9-19,9 g,
energy of germination - 68,0-75,0%, laboratory germination - 90,0-96,0%.
On the average for years researches at sowing in the first ten-day period of September mass 1000 things of seed increases on 5,5%. Shelter of plants a agrofiber increases energy of germination of seed on 3,3% by comparison to plants without shelter. The germination of seed increases at sowing in the first ten-day period of
September on 1,5%. Shelter of plants a straw assists the increase of germination of
seed on 1,5, by a agrofiber - on 2,8.
The got seed have such indexes of accordance to the sort (of high quality cleanness): in 2013 95,0%, in 2014 96,5%, in 2015 97,5%. In a standard variant indexes were accordingly 97,0%; 97,5%; 98,0%. Thus, the term of sowing, shelter
and density of standing of seed plants, does not influence on the of high quality
cleanness of seed in posterity. The high quality cleanness of seed answers the requirements of State standard 7160: 2010 [5].
Conclusions. Agroclimatic conditions of south of Ukraine are friendly to growing of seed of beetroot by a direct method. At sowing in the first ten-day period of
September density of standing of plants at spring was more, than at sowing in the
second ten-day period of September time in 1,3. Shelter a straw before a winter assisted the increase of amount of plants, that well spent winter on 180,2% and under a
agrofiber on 170,9%. The productivity of the seed got at sowing in the first ten-day
period of September was on 189,6 % more than in the second ten-day period of September. At shelter of plants a straw the productivity makes 0,72 t/ha, by mulching
material agrofiber - 0,73 t/ha, that in two times more than without shelter. Increase of
density of growing of seed plants to 300 thous./ha assists the increase of the productivity of seed on 13,2%. The elements of technology do not render substantial influence on quality of seed.

434

USEFUL SOURCES OF INFORMATION :


1. Adilov M.M. Effektivnost sposobov semenovodstva stolovoy sveklyi v Uzbekistane: Genofond i selektsiya rasteniy: materialyi I Mezhdunarodnoy nauch.prakt. konf. (9-13 aprelya 2013, Krasnoobsk): Sib. NII rastenievodstva i selektsii.
Novosibirsk, 2013. S. 78-82.
2. Ashworth S., Whealy K. Seed to Seed: Seed Saving and Growing Techniques for Vegetable Gardeners, 2-nd Edition, Seed Saver Pub., 2002, 228.
3. Balan V.N. Biologiya i agrotehnika bezvisadochnyih semennikov korneplodnyih kultur v oroshaemyih usloviyah yuga Ukrainyi / V.N. Balan, A.E. Tarabrin,
A.V. Korneychuk / red. V.N. Balan. K.: Nora-print, 2001. 350s.
4. Balan V.M. Bezvisadkoviy sposIb viroschuvannya nasInnya tsukrovih buryakIv: istoriya rozvitku, stan ta perspektivi / V. M. Balan // Tsukrovi buryaki.
2012. 4. S. 9-11.
5. DSTU 7160:2010 Nasinnya ovochevih, bashtannih, kormovih i pryanoaromatichnih kultur. Sortovi i posivni yakosti. Tehnichni umovi. K.: Derzhspozhivstandart Ukrayini, 2010, 27s.
6. Ludilov V.A. Vyiraschivanie semyan dvuletnih ovoschnyih kultur i redisa
bez peresadki matochnikov. / V.A. Ludilov, V.M. Kononyihina. M: Globus.
2001. 111s.
7. Nasinnitstvo i nasinneznavstvo ovochevih i bashtannih kultur / [T. K. Gorova, M.M. Gavrilyuk, L.P. Hodeeva ta in.]. /red. T. K. Gorova. K.: Agrarna nauka,
2003. 327s.
8. Shashlov O.P. Sovershenstvovanie elementov tehnologii vyiraschivaniya
semyan morkovi pri besperesadochnoy kulture v usloviyah Rostovskoy oblasti: avtoref. na soisk. nauchn. step. kand. s.-h. nauk: spets. 06.01.05 Selektsiya i semenovodstvo/ O.P. Shashlov. M., 2005. 24s.


..

. ,
, 189,6 % , .
0,72 /,
0,73 /, , . 300 . ./ 13,2%.
: , , , , , .

435

4.

:636.084.22:591.5 (252.34)


.., .-.., , ..,


- .
. .
E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
.
: , , , , ,
. , , , .
.
6 / - , ,
0,7-1,5 /.

30 % , 6 % - , 46 % - 18
% - .
10 %, 81 % .
436

. 34 %, - 70% [2]. ,

-,
, .
, 1
8,55-9,88 , 0,59-0,79 . . 4886 , , , 6,75-7,44; 0,36-0,44
19,8-31,9.,
, . . 30 %, 72,5 % 26,0%, .
.
.
165 . 240-360 , -.
. ,
., [2].
,
, , , .K.,
.. [1] .., .., .. [4].
, ,
[3].
. ,
.
,
, 400-500 .
, . , , , -
,
, , , ,
, .

437

, %

8,30
10,20
13,40

2,05
2,40
3,25

34,0
28,0
24,2

6,80
8,0
9,2

2,70
3,0
3,4

37,5
33,8
31,0

7,2
7,8
8,8

2,0
2,5
3,0

35,7
34,6
32,0

3,53
4,00
5,75

1,73
1,80
1,85

46,0
43,6
41,0

45,5
47,0
47,2

48,5
46,2
43,6

43,4
42,2
43,0

41,04
43
43,0

438

10,55
12,40
11,90

8,55
9,24
9,88

0,59
0,69
0,79

48,2
67,0
86,0

7,5
9,0
12,80

7,92
8,43
8,82

0,51
0,57
0,63

39,8
48,5
55,6

11,7
12,9
13,2

8,17
8,32
8,68

0,54
0,56
0,61

42,8
48,6
57,7

7,7
7,6
8,4

6,75
7,08
7,44

0,36
0,40
0,44

19,8
25,5
31,9

(5,5-6,0 ) . 1 3 .
, 1 , , 52,0
%, , - 41,0 %, 3 ,
, 18,0 29,0 % , 30,0 % 2
.
2 (
)

35-38

34-36

32-35

3,94,4

3,6-3,9

3,3-3,6

10408

100-103

96-100

1
2
3
,
44-38
42-37
40-36
,
-

, /
0,925-1,320
0,850-1,235
0,815-1,140
, /
100

1
2
3
3942

37-40

36-39

1385

1335

1285

.

. , , , , 1 2
3 .
:
1. .K., ..
// " ". -: . 1973. -380-401 .
2. .., . . : , 1975. -138 .
3. . . . 1975.- 84 .
439

4. .., .., .. . :
. 1990.- 137 .

636.084.55


.., ..., , .., ..,
.., .., ..,
- ,
., . uzkarakul30@mail.ru.

, .
: , , , , .
. 20-25 %, 70 % . , ,
,
, .

,
, , ,
. .


.
. , .
.
.
440

, , ,
,

[1;2].
. , ,
.
32,00,79 , 33,00,58 .
4 2015 .
.
1,8-2,0 /
. 0,2-0,25
. , 13-14
2,0-2,2 , 1,1-1,2
100-105 . ,
(15-17 %) ( . 1988).

. ( 1).
1.

,
, .
15 ,
,
57 ,
,
,

32,00,79
1,3
2,26
151
8,2
143,0
40,20,45

33,00,58
1,1
1,90
126
5,8
101,7
38,80,28

%
118,9
141,3
-

,
. ,
. 5-6 ( 1).
441

70
58,3

60
52,6
50

40

30

23,7

20
10

23,7

15,6
5,7

15,6

2,4

2,4

0
, %

, %

1.
2 , 15
, 0,2-,025 . ,
5,7 %, 10,3 % 35,3 , 34,9
126 151 . 57 ,
, 8,2 143,0 ,
5,8 ,
101,7 ( <0,05).
. .

; . 15
.
.
,
.
.
. .
442

60,0
52,0
50,0

45,7

45,0

40,0
40,0

30,0

20,0

10,0

6,3

5,8

3,0

2,2

0,0
, %

, %

2. ,
-
,
. , .
. . ,
.
.
. , .
, . +
( 2).

443

2.

38,70,49
37,20,27
1,70
1,65
1,19
0,91
94,8
81,0
1,33
1,30
114,0
111,0
90,0
70,2
83,2
73,4

,
,
, -.
- ,
; .
- ,
%; -.
- ,

, ,
.
90 % 83,2 % . ,
, 70,2 % 73,4 %.
, ,
.
3 . (
)

38,70,44
37,20,24
2,85
2,64
95
88
41,50,45
39,00,40
1,19
0,91
2,8
1,6
93,3
53,3
5,65
4,24
94,0
70,6
44,30,70
41,40,50

,
1 ,
,
,
, .
2- ,
,
,
,
,

95,2 88 , 2,85
2,64 . 3 ,
.
.
. 444

,
, ( 3).
44,30,70
41,40,50 .
, . ,
.
.

1. . . . ,
1992, 132 .
2. , . . ,
, 1975 , 138 .
3. .., ..
, , 1988, 227-303,

576.895.1:599.75
(SARCOPTOSIS)
..

. .
E-mail: urimbetov.axmet@inbox.ru

(sarcoptosis) Sarcoptes equi (
Acarus equi).
: , , (sarcoptosis)
, .
Sarcoptes equi (
Acarus equi).
. S. equi- .
, - . 0,27 , 0,45 .
445

. , , . , .
. , . , , 0,13 .
. , , 15 .
(40-45 ) 40-50 , 3-7 . , , .
.
14-21 .
30 .
. . , . .
. , .
.
.

, ,
, ,
.
-
.
.
, ,
. .
, , - . .
- , , .
. 14-20 , , . , , , , .
446

(
), , . ,
. , .
, .
, .
, 1-2 , - .
. , - .
,
,
. , , , .
, . , , . 0,5 3.
. , . .
,

.
)
( ).

.

. 10%- .
25-40 . 60 .
.
447

, ,
, :
1)
, ,
,
;
2)
, ;
3)
, .

, , .
,
, , .

. , ,
. 7-9 . 7-9 ,
.
( 10-15 ) 20 . ,
.
, - .
, . .
, , , , .
, ,
2% . () .
, .
. .
, , ,
448

, .
, .
:
1) ;
2) . .
, , ;
3) , ;
4) , , ;
5) .
. ,
.
,

-,
.
1. Sarcoptes equi ( Acarus equi).
2.
3. , , , ,
.
4. ,
- .
5.
, , .

1. . ., . . . . .: , 1990.
2. . ., . . . .
3. .., .., ..
449

().: , 1994.-152
4. ..
1976 314-321

633.2



.., ..-.., .., ..-..
-
E-mail: vlasencomarina@mail.ru
, , .
, .
: (), , , .

, , .
, , .
, - .
- 450


() -, - [4]. , , , , ..

,
, [1, 3].
, ,
..
, ,
, - -- ( , -35, , ,
, , ). : 1. - : + + (++); 2. : + + (++); 3. - :
+ + (++). : , , [2].
. , , ,
. ,

, . % . 0-120
: -
108 , 118 , - 113 .
: - 28 , 33 , - 33 .
, , ,
.
, . .
451

, .
.
.
.
, .
,
, , .

0,216 1,439%. . 0,009%-0,188%.
1,087% - 1,756%,
0,624% 1,008%.
0,016% - 0,478%, 0,009% - 0,277%). 0,044 0,206%. .
pH ( 6,0 7,0).
.
: , , , , , , .
:
1). 3 . (0,5-30 ) 0,2% 70,14%. < 0,001 0,2-1,78%,
0,005-0,001 0,76-1,24%. 0,01-0,005 0,05-0,01 0,4-1,36%. 0,25-0,05 70,14%. 0,25-1,0
26,78-30,99%.
30 .
,
0,05-0,25 , .
.
2). 6 . (0,5-30 )
452

1,81% 66,78%. < 0,001 4,71-7,70%, 0,0050,001 1,81-2,50%. 0,01-0,005 0,05-0,01 0,41,36%. 0,25-0,05 66,73%.
0,25-1,0 15,51-17,67%.
30
, 0,050,25 , .
3). 13, 15 . (0,5-30 ) 0,12% 59,98%. < 0,001 0,27-2,32%,
0,005-0,001 0,26-0,88%. 0,01-0,005 0,050,01 0,12-0,44 % 0,96-2,77%.
0,25-0,05, 52,82%. 0,25-1,0 42,98-59,98%.
14 .
- 15-17 , 10-15 . . 15 - ( ++)
29 32 ,
22 23 .
++ 15
30 28 , 20 .
++ 15 . : 35(40) ,
23(25) , 21(23) . ++ 15
25(30) , 20(22) .
++ .
42(50) , 30(35) . , , .

( 1).
++ (37%), ++ ++ (60%). : ++ (46%),
++ (46%), ++ (49%).
453

++ (43%), ++ (52%), ++ (51%).


,
- .
1
,

, %

37

31

32

27

13

60

28

12

60

46

20

34

21

33

46

20

31

49

43

27

30

30

18

52

19

30

51

/2
/
62,5
52,5
55,6
51,1
25,3
114,1
49,9
22,4
107,4

6,3
5,3
5,6
5,1
2,5
11,4
4,9
2,2
10,7

41,8
18,4
31,3
45,3
70,1
99,9
40,7
63,3
99,9

4,2
1,8
3,1
4,5
7,0
9,9
4,1
6,3
9,9

31,1
19,5
21,6
21,0
12,6
36,4
25,1
38,4
65,6

3,1
1,9
2,2
2,1
1,3
3,6
2,5
3,8
6,6

, (0,5-30 )
0,25-0,05 . , 3 70,14%, 6 66,73%; 13 15 52,82%.
, 13 15 0,25-1,0 0,25-0,05
454

42,98-59,98%. 3 6 0,25-1,0
26,78-30,99% 15,51-17,67% .

1. , .. / .. , .. . . . 1(57). : , 2015. . 104-110.
2. , ..
/ .. ,
.. , .. . .: , 2014.- 5. . 58-61.
3. ..
/ .. , .. . : :
, 2014. 2(34). . 79-83.
4. , ..
- / .. , .. , .. . , 2014. - 6. . 9-11.

. 636.32/.38.082.4


.. ...
, .
,
dilmurod. aliyev. 1968 @ mail.ru
.
. , .
.
. 455

. , , , , .
, , .
.

, . , . ,
.
. , , , , , , .
.
, .

. .
.

,
.
, .
. . .
.. .. [3].
. , . [4], [1]
. : , , ,
456


.

.
, . [2]
. , , [6] , .
,
,
. , ,
, [5].
, ,
.
[7] , , ,
,
. [1] ,
,
.
,
.
4,0 4,5 .
, : 3,5 5,4 , 4,2
6,0 .
, .

457

1 -

2013
2016
2013
2016
2013
2016

(.)
48
50
36
47
45
46

5,10,04
5,20,04
5,00,05
5,00,04
4,90,05
5,00,04

10,5
10,1
10,7
12,6
12,9
9,4

(.)
42
46
37
44
38
48

4,70,04
4,80,04
4,60,04
4,70,04
4,50,04
4,60,04

11,0
9,9
9,5
10,4
10,8
11,3

,
,
2,0 4,1 % 2013 4,0 % 2016. , 2,2 % 2013 2,1 %
2016 , 4,4 % 2013
4,3 % 2016 , - .
: 2,0 % 2013 2,2 % 2013 2,1 % 2016
, - .
. .
2

m
(.)
24
36,10,48

24
31,80,89

24
30,60,54

m
(.)
% (.)
6,5
21
31,30,67 9,8
45
33,70,57

%
8,1

13,7

21

29,30,46

7,3

45

30,50,67

10,5

8,7

21

27,90,48

7,9

45

29,20,51

8,3

,
458

.
,
. , 13,5 %
18,0 % .
, 31,28 0,67
. 6,8 % , 12,2 % ,
.
10,0 % 16,4 % .
.
,
.
, .
. , ,
.

1.
.., .. . //
1990. . 15. . 948 949.
2.
., .., .. . //
. ,
2015 . . 51 56.
3.
.., .. : - .: , , 1975 .126 - 130
4.
.. , , ,

... // . .: , - 1970 . 369 373.
5.
, .. . /.. . .: -, , 2001. 128 .
6.
, .. . .:
- 2005. 424 .
459

7.
..
: . .-.. 1980 ., . . 23.

636.082.14:636.22/.28(470.46)



.., - .- , .. . . ,
[ ..,] . .
,
. , E-mail:vniiob@mail.ru
: , , , .
, - .
.
: , , , , , , .


,
. .
, , ,
.
, 60% , 20 % 20 % 460

. , . - , ,
, [6,3,5,7,8].

,
, ,
.
:
1.
;
2.
;
3.
;
4.
;
5.
;
6.

7.

,

- . .


, ,
. 20 :
- : - , , , - , ;
- : -, , , - ;
- -: .
,
. , . ,
. , .. 461

.
- , . (
), (
, , ) - .
, . ,
, .. , , ,
,
.

. , .
, .
,
, [10,1,2].
:
- , , ,
, ,
2,5 .
100% 125
, , , .
, 10 %.
24 .
3,6%.
() .
,
.
, -
462

,
. 2 ()
10 . , ,
, , , ,
.


, .

.. , , , [4].
.
[9].
, , .
, ,
.
( ) .

39C. to to 15-20 C 12-14
to > 39C. n = 60 (. 1).

463

1- , n = 60

-
,

15-20 C
to

/
SVS DIA

> 39C
to

/
SVS DIA

38,5

38

169

94

71

39,8

77

103

38,9

41

166

85

72

40,2

79

105

49

176

116

68

34,1

83

98

38,6

50

165

98

71

40,0

79

92

38,7

36

154

89

76

39,9

64

183

100

105

38,3

44

160

98

85

39,4

83

196

110

99

38,7

to , . (, , ) 2 .

= (n - n) : (- )
<0,8 ,
= 0,8-1,2 , > 1,2.
, , .

464


- . . , ,
.
.
- , . .
-
10 , . 40 -1,0; 1,1;1,2; 1,3; 1,4 0,9,
1-1,1 1,3-1,4 0,9.
, 10
.
, 10 305
.
, , (r = 0,73-0,79)
.
, .

, , . ,
. ,
. .

, , , .
1963 2500
. ,
465

.
( 9867-61),
0.2388 ; 1 = 4,1868
, 2500 = 10460 10.46 . , 1976 .
, ,
10,46
10 , , 1 = 10 .

, . , . ,
/ .
. (),
() () .
, ,
.

, ,
, .
, , , , - .
- .
.

: , .
. , , , .
70-80% . (.2).
466

2 -
1
I
II
III

9,16
8,19
7,02
5,46
3,51
3,12
2,53
1,75
6,27
6,65
4,87
3,90

1
2
3

, ,
. , , . 1 5-10 0,7
, 30-35 1,2 . , : , , . ,
. 3
.
3 -

I
II
III

1,00
0,88
0,77
0,60


9,16
8,14
7,02
5,46


1,00
6,27
0,91
5,65
0,78
4,85
0,63
3,90


1,00
3,51
0,90
3,12
0,72
2,53
0,50
1,75

, , . , , ( ),
.
, .
, (, , ).
, .
467

. . 550-600 , ()
(. 4).
4 - - 550-600

2
5
20

0,88
0,50
0,20

10
20

0,88
0,12

1,67
2,50
4,00
8,17
8,80
2,40
11,2
19,37


, +
,
,

0,58
0,2
0,70
0,35
1,10
0,60
2,38
1,15
74,2
0,52
1,20
0,24
0,52
2,90

1,44
2,59

156
230

0,77

1,119
1,880


,
2,5 .
,
, , ,
, .
, : ,
, , ,
.
5.

468

5 -



, 60




< 3
-
- 120


12,5-13 .> <
< 40

,
> 14 .
> 60

> 90%

< 90%

< 1,7
65-70%

> 2,2
< 60%

50-60%

< 40%

> 90%

< 90%

85-110
< 10%

> 140
> 15%

50-60
24

<45, < 70
< 24 < 30
> 10%
> 10%

< 5%
< 10%


6.
6 -

%
82%
100%
8%
10%
82%
100%
18%


. , , 469

(53,1 - 68,3 98,9-113,6 )


.
- 2,3. , , .
. ,
. - .
, , , , , .

1)
.
2)
.
, -
, .
3) , , ,
.
4)
,
. 18 400 , 1- .
5)
.

1. ..
5-6 /
.. , .. , .. , .. , .. , ..
, .. // , 6, 2013. . 27-30.
2. .
470

/ ., .. , .. //
, 7, 2013. .28-29.
3. ..
/ .. , .. // ,
11, 2014. .22-23.
4. .. . / .. / : -, 2010. 485 .
5. .. / .. , .. / . 2008. 138 .
6. ..
/ .. , .. // , 10,
2014. . 6-8.
7. .. / .. , .. , .. // , 6,
2014. .8-9.
8. .. , , / .. // , 1, 2014.
.2-6.
9. .. - // . : - . .
, 1979. . 314.
10. ..
/ ..
// , 12, 2013. 25-26.

471

636.082.933.2


.., -
-
. , uzkarakul30@mail.ru
. : , , ,
.
. , , , , , , , , , , , .
. , , .

.
, , , , .

, , ,
[1,4,5,7,8].
, , .
, , , .
, , ,
472

.
, ,
,
, .
,
. ,
. .
, ,
, [3].
, , ,
. ,
, , ,
,
- .
2004

, , ,
, ,
.
. , , .
.
, .
(n = 200).
, , ,
, , , .
473

[2] 641-95. .. [6].




.
1.

,

50,0%, (48,0%) - . (40,0%),
(36,0%).
, , (72,4%). ,
, , .
1

42,0
48,0
50,0
-

, %


40,0
18,0
36,0
16,0
36,0
14,0
26,0
74,0

.
. , 2.
2 , %

1.
2,
3,
4,


- -

34,0
54,0
46,0
12,0

48,0
40,0
42,0
42,0

18,0
6,0
12,0
46,0




44,0
40,0
16,0
48,0
36,0
16,0
50,0
48,0
2,0
12,0
36,0
52,0

, 474

(54,0%) (46,0%) , (12,0%), -


(34,0%); , , . ,

(50,0%), (48,0%) ( 44,0%)
,
. , ,
.
, , .

, .
, .
(.3).
3 , %

50
50
50
50

40,0
36,0
38,0
32,0
48,0
30,0
58,0

24,0
28,0
22,0
42,0

38,0
36,0
46,0
-

38,0
38,0
36,0
30,0

24,0
26,0
18,0
70,0

,
(48,0%), (38,0%), (40,0%) , , .
, , ,
(46,0%) (30,0%) (38,0%)
,
. , .
, ,

. 475

, .
.
,
[4,9,10]. ,
- , , [1]. , ,
, . ,

.
, , ,
: (50,0%),
(48,0%), (42,0%)
, . 14,0 18,0 36,0 40,0 .
, , .
, , ,
, , , .
,
, .


.

:
1. ,
476

, .
2. , .
3. , , .
,
, .

1. .. .
.:, 2013, - 167 .
2. .. .
. . . . . . .-. . .: 1975, 40 .
3. .., ., .. .
.: 1978. 205 .
4. ., .., ., ., .
. .: - 2015, 32 .
5. ., ., .
. . . - .., 85- . (13-14 , 2015 ., ..) .: 2015, - .98-100.
6. .. . .:
1969, 256 .
7. . . . . . . .... - .:
2009, - 22 .
8. .. -
. .... . . .
. .: 2007, -19 .
9. .., . .: 2013, 248 .
10. .., .., .., .
. , 2010, 205 .

477

: 591.1.636.31.


.. , .. ..., . .
,
. , , E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
. , , .
, , , . 40% 17,5 . ,
.
, , , , , . .. [2] ,
.
X .
943 944 , ,
, .
. : , , , ..
. ,
,
.
, , .
478

, 1 . ,
, .
, , ,
. ,
, ,
, , .
, , , .

.

, ,
300 400 , , , ,

.
, .
, , , , , , .. .
. ,

, .
S . .. [4], ..
[3] , S , .. . , . ,

. , , 479

, ,
. , .. . . , , ..
[5], . : , , , , , , .
,

. , , .,
, , .
, , , , .
4 5 ,
,
, .
, .
: , , , , : 20 , 20
40 40 ; 4 , 5
8 8 . , ,
, , , .
,

. ,
, ,
, .
,
480

, ,
, , , , , ,
. :
1.
.
2.
, ,
.

, ,
, .. 100
. , 256 : 26,0 %, 26,0 %,
27,0 %, 1,0 %, 20,0 % .
,
. , .. , , . , 2 3 .
,
. , , , , ; , , ,
, , , , ;
, , , , ..
.
.

X X . 1/3 , , .
, .
, , , . 481

,
.
, , ..
. ..
[1] , 1043 ,
313 29,1%.
. , 63,4 % ,
, , .
, .
. (, , ) 19,40 76,7 % , 32,10 49,14 %,
34,81 49,20 %.
( , ). .
50 . ,
, , ,
. , ,
.
. .

1.

.
, .. . , 1992. . 147

156.
2.
, .. .
. . . 1933. . 13 57.
3. , .., .. . .: , 1992. 205 .
4. , .. . . . . 1950.
5.
, ..
. . . , 1956, 2.
482

. 636.32/.38.082


.. , .. ..., . .
,
. , , E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
. .

, , , () .. [2], .. - [3], ..
[1], . , ,
. .. [4], ,
.

, , ,
. , . , . 30
.
. ,
,
, .
, , , , .
483

, , .
,
, .
, ,
.
, ,
, , , , , .
, ,
.
: , , , , , ,
.
,
95 %,
45 50 %, 90 %, 45 50 %.
: ,
, .
, , , ,
, .
() , ,
.
.
, 484

,
.
, , 1 . ,
, 1
.
,
,
.

.
.
, .
, , ,
, , .
, . , .

. ,
, ,
. ,
.
, ,
. ,
. 200 300 .
,
,
. , ,
485

. .
, , .. , .
, .
, ,
.
, ,
.
:
- , ,
,
- .
,
.

,
,
, ,
. ,
,
.
,
.

. .. (1964) ,
,
. ,
, .
:
1.


486

. , , .
. ,
.
2.

,
, . .
. . .
3.
,
, . , , ,
. ,
. .
4.
1 3 , .
, , .
.
.
.
.
1. , .. . . . . , 1964. . 5 12.
2. , .. : . .. .. . .: , 2006
462 .
3. -, .. : / .. -. 2 , . . .: -, 2010. 720 .
487

4. , .. .
. 1958, . 5 36.

636.32 /. 38.


-

.. . .-.
-, .
E-mail: lena.lakota@yandex.ru
: ,
. ,
.
: ; ; ;



, - .
, , .
[1,5].
, 2007 , ,
,
[3].
2007 , , , , 488

[2].

- -
.
,
, ,
.

, .

, [4].
- - ,
, - .

.
.
, .

.
XX
. 120-140 ,
15-18 , - 64-70 - 60-65 %.

2008 , 2007 . . ,
- -1960.
489


- ,
.

,

, .
, ( 17,65 %), 4 ( 10,23 %),
13,5- ( 9,33 %) (>0,999), 13,4 8,89 % 6,9 8,50 % (. 1).
1
13,5
,

4
8
13,5
4
4-8
13,5

- -
I -1/4+3/4
,
3,40,17
4,00,15 ***
21,50,26
23,70,24 ***
35,00,39
37,00,36 ***
37,50,47
41,0 0,45 ***
,
150,80,11
164,20,14
112,50,15
110,80,13
81,20,17
88,10,20

***>0,999
, 4 8- () 1,7 1,52 %.
,
1/4+3/4- ( 13,5 ) (. 2 3).
, 2, 4-
: 2,14 %, 2,94 %, 1,87 %, 10,04 %,
3,35, 2,46 %. 13,5 .

490

(. 3).
2 ,


4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

I-C-
37,830,45
54,590,21
58,930,50
62,100,56
39,690,35
56,980,40
61,450,60
64,270,54
16,650,16
29,450,11
31,030,25
33,780,12
9,580,34
20,220,41
21,100,20
23,010,36
32,630,65
54,050,54
62,650,40
68,850,61
39,590,25
69,400,32
90,720,21
90,840,14
8,530,13
9,390,15
9,580,13
9,720,16

I -1/4+3/4
39,740,50
66,250,23*
61,520,55*
65,030,58*
41,060,43*
58,080,49
63,040,66
66,050,59*
17,000,19
30,000,17
33,020,32*
36,320,18*
12,060,31*
22,250,37*
23,090,28*
26,000,31*
34,930,60*
55,640,57
64,700,46*
70,650,55
42,000,20*
92,650,30*
96,270,16*
101,250,19*
8,740,17
9,560,16
9,770,17
10,030,22

>0,95
, 4- 38,12 % (166,52 %
128,40 %), 13,5 11,37 % (143,31 % 131,94 %).
,
.
.
, , ,
, ,
6,8 %.
491

,
-
.
3 , %

,

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

4
8
13,5

I--
55,990,16
46,050,30
47,340,14
45,600,13
86,250,46
99,010,24
106,310,42
110,870,50
57,540,11
68,660,14
68,000,17
68,120,13
121,330,12
128,400,30
144,800,45
131,940,12
22,550,30
17,200,17
16,260,25
15,650,45

I -1/4+3/4
57,220,19*
54,720,37*
46,330,11
44,150,18
87,900,52*
83,980,29
105,170,49
108,640,55
70,940,18*
74,170,20*
69,930,22*
71,590,24*
120,240,17
166,520,34*
148,790,51*
143,310,14*
21,990,36
14,430,23
15,880,35
15,420,51

>0,95

. ,
13,5- 80,0 %, - 76,6 % 3,40 %. , , - .

, , . , ,
, , ..
[6].
492

, ,
, ,
(. 4).
4 13,5-

, /
, /
, /
, 10 12 /
, /

I- -
69,800,49
39,600,09
30,200,30
7,640,58
138,741,89

II 1/4+3/4
74,82 0,40 **
41,900,04 **
32,920,34**
8,020,54
146,501,84 **

**>0,99
, 7,19 %, 5,81 %, 9,0 %, -5,59 %
-4,97 %.

,
,
, ,
- - .
:
1., .. , , :
/ .., .., .., ..,
.., .., .. , .., .. //
. . . 2010. 177 .
2., .. , /
.. , .., .., .. // , , . - 4. - 2007. - .36-39.
3., .. / .. ,
. , .. // , , . 2007. - 4. .
43-45.
493

4. , / . ., 1984.
20 .
5., ..
/ .. , .. // , , . 2010. - 1. .40-43.
6. -, .. ,
- / .. -, .. // . ., 1977. . 88-93.

636.597.034

.., ..., .. , ..-..,
.., ..., ..
,
., e-mail: golaso@rambler.ru
[2, 3].
[1, 4, 5].
,
[6, 7, 9, 10].
.
, . .
,
[11-16].

100 .
.
. I
494

50 /
5 10- ; II - 50 / 10
10- ; III - 100 / 5 10- ; IV - 100 / 10 10- . .
8- [8].
.
1

, %
: <0,05.

53,80,86

II

III

IV

61,420,75 69,720,45* 68,150,91* 70,711,12*

1 . I
14,6%, II 29,6% (<0,05), III 26,7%
(<0,05) IV 31,4% (<0,05).
.
51,451,14%, 11,0% , I ,
14,9% (<0,05) II , 18,8% (<0,05) III 20,8%
(<0,05) IV (. 2).
2

, %
: <0,05.

51,451,14

II

III

IV

57,130,82 59,160,49* 61,120,51* 62,140,31*

,
.

495

1.
.., .., .. . , 2012. . 12-19.
2.
.. // . 2012. . 2. 34-1. . 92-94.
3.
.. -
- // .
2011. 2. . 28-29.
4.
.. // . 2011. 4
(59). . 128-129.
5.
.. // . 2006. . 3. 11-1. . 55-57.
6.
.. ,
- // . 2007. . 1. 13-1. . 10-11.
7.
.. // . 2011. . 4. 321. . 315-317.
8.
.. . , 2006. . 7-12.
9.
.., .. // . 2007. 2. . 52-54.
10.
.., .. //
. 2011. . 4. 32-1. . 189-191.
11.
.., .. // . 2008. 7. . 20-22.
12.
.., .., .., .. - // . 2014. 3. .
95-97.
13.
.. // . 2005. 7. . 28-29.
14.
.. //
. 2007. 2. . 71-72.
496

15.
..
// . 2004. . 4. 4-1. . 121-122.
16.
.., .., ..
. , 2012.
. 23-27.

33 (19:77)
,

..,
,
.
, ,
;
- ; .
. , , .
.
, 40 % . ,
, , .
,
. ,
. - , ,
.
497

.
.

. , .
[1].
. [2], . [6]. [3]. ,
. . ,
. :
( ,
), - ( ).
.
:
() - , .
() ,
( ) .
. .
- . .
, 30
, 0,3 ; ( ) 10 .
-
,
. ,
0,06 0,12 .
498


, , 97%
.

- , . , : , ,
; - ; ; , .
,
40 %. 1 2012 9642,5 .
548,8 . 6 %. 114,6 . ,
( 3 %), 846,6 . ( 5,5 %), 4997,9 .
( 13,2 %). , , ,

.

93,7 %, - 5,3 %, , - 94,7 % 4,5 %, - 80,5 % 7,4 %, 79,5 % 8,5 %, - 60,3 % 11,6 %. 2015 . 1564,2
. , 14,4 % , 2012 ., 6766,2 .
( 17,1 % ) (. 1).
94,7 %, - 96,0 %.

, - , - .

- - , , ,
. , ,
, 499

.
1 2012-2015 .

2012 .

2013 .

2014 .

, .
:

, .
:

1367,7
35,4
1300,0
32,3
5779,0
176,5
5573,5
29,0

1461,4
37,8
1389,2
34,4
6169,0
205,0
5927,8
36,2

1564,2
41,0
1481,6
41,6
6766,2
230,1
6494,6
41,5

2015 .
2012 .,
%
114,4
115,8
114,0
128,8
117,1
130,4
116,5
143,1

: [4].
-
. ;
;
; ,
, ;
. 308 23 2006 .
, , , ,
, ,
.

842 21 2008 .
, .
:
; 500

; , ;
;
;
;
.
,
: , 1 2 .
5 - ,
, . , , ,
, .
Nestle 85 %
.
- 1000
. , , ,
.
: , ,
[3, . 12].
, , ,
.
.
, ,

. -

- .
. ,
501


. , .. ,
50-100 , , . 1 5-10 . ,
.
,
, ,
. .
, , . ,
, , . ,
, , .
.

1. . .
: . . . . . - .-. :
06.02.04 / . . - , 1995. - 17 .
2. . / . // . - 2012. - 1. - . 22-23.
3. . : / // . -
1(11). - 2008. - . 1-12.
4. [ ] / - :
http://www.stat.uz/upload/ iblock/503/dok ru 2015.doc.
5. .. - 502

: . . .-. .: 06.02.01 - ,
/ . . ; ,
. . . . - ., 1993. - 16 .
6. . . : , . / . . , . . - : - , 2010.
- 160 .

33 (19:78)
PROBLEMS OF FOOD SECURITY IN UZBEKISTAN
Abduvasikov A.A., PhD of economic Sciences, Vice-Rector on spirituality
Tashkent state agrarian university, Uzbekistan
Abstract.The article analyzes the results achieved in the reform of the agrarian
sector of Uzbekistan on the basis of official statistics highlights the problems of food
security. The conditions to ensure food security of the country, developed recommendations on the specific institutional arrangements aimed at improving various aspects
of food security in Uzbekistan.
Keywords: agrarian reform, market economy, food security, agriculture, agricultural production, losses in agriculture, modernization and innovative production.
Introduction. Agrarian reform in Uzbekistan has been focused on the widespread introduction of market relations. The qualitative results of the reforms in agriculture are: improving the efficiency of production - increased productivity for major
crops and livestock productivity, increase profitability of private farms and improvements in terms of sustainable food production, ensure food security of the country.
Research Methodology. The dialectical method, a systematic and comparative
analysis, induction and deduction, monographic research, surveillance and others.
Results. At the World Food Summit conference organized in 1974 by the FAO
(Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), in Rome under the food
security is understood as "presence at any time required world food supplies of basic
foodstuffs, sufficient to maintain the sustainability and expansion of consumption,
and compensation for fluctuations in production and prices "[1]. In 1986, the World
Bank report on poverty and hunger, dedicated to the issues of food security dynamics
503

emphasized the distinction between chronic food insecurity related to the problems of
poverty and low incomes, and transitory food insecurity caused by natural disasters,
economic crises or armed conflicts.
At the World Summit 2009 on Food Security, held in Rome listed food safety
basics - is: availability, access, utilization and stability, and also pointed out that "...
Food security exists when all people always have physical, social and economic
access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet
their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life ". Food
security is fundamentally estimated using four key indicators:

availability (physical presence) food;

access to food (economic and physical);

utility (nutritious) food;

the stability of food supplies.


Thus, food security - this country's ability to provide constant availability of
food for the entire population in the quantity and quality required for an active and
healthy life.
Achieving food security requires addressing such important tasks as:
conduct effective agricultural policy and the creation of a stable economic
environment with a view to achieving sustainable, intensive and diversified food production, increasing its efficiency, ensuring equal opportunities for economic entities;
investment promotion of the agrarian sector and the introduction of innovative technologies in the production, processing and storage of raw materials and food;
improvement of distribution and specialization of agriculture, aimed at selfsufficiency in raw materials and food regions, an effective policy in the field of employment and implementation of social policies aimed at eradicating poverty and inequality in terms of access to food;
an active foreign economic activity, optimization of export-import activity.
As a result of the accelerated development of industry and services in the years
of independence in Uzbekistan the share of agriculture in GDP declined from 37.4%
in 1991 to 16.8% in 2014. Currently, 99.9% of agricultural production falls on the
private sector. During the period of 2000-2014 years the average annual growth rate
of agricultural output amounted to 6%. Changed sectoral structure of gross agricultural production. The share of crop production was 58% in 2014 vs. 50% in 2000 the
share of animal husbandry,
respectively, decreased from 42% to 50%.
In the system of agricultural reform measures focusing on radical improvement
of ameliorative condition of irrigated lands. This objective has been and remains for
the future one of the major priorities, because of the state of soil fertility, their constant improvement is entirely dependent on the productivity of all agricultural
504

production, economic and food security of the country, material well-being not
only of rural workers, but also the entire population of Uzbekistan. As a result of the
measures taken ensured amelioration of 1.7 million hectares of irrigated land. The
area of land with a critical level of groundwater (up to 2 meters) decreased by almost
500 thousand hectares, or more than a third, and strongly and medium saline lands 100 thousand hectares, or 12 percent. In areas where ameliorative measures have
been carried out, cotton yields increased by an average of 2-3 quintals per hectare of
cereal crops - by 3-4 centners. Changing cropping patterns by optimizing the crop for
cotton and the increase in the area under grain crops, vegetables, horticulture and viticulture. As a result, it was released more than 30 thousand hectares of irrigated land
on which crops are available, vegetables, potatoes, orchards and vineyards. In the
years 2004-2013 the production of vegetables in the Republic in terms of price, in
dollars, increased by 7.7 times, fruits and vegetables - 5.1, melons - 7.8, grapes - in
8,7 times (Table 1).
Table-1 Dynamics of production of fruit, vegetables, potatoes and grapes per capita
in the Republic ofUzbekistan.
Years

Name

Vegetables
Melons
products
Potatoes
Fruits
Grapes

Annual production
Years1
normHuman
kg

Difference in 2013
year compared
with the norm
(+, -)

2000

2005

2010

2011

2012

2013

tonne

percent

108,0
18,4

133,1
23,6

266,6
42,2

240,2
44,5

262,8
48,0

283,1
50,8

109,2
24,8

+174,1
+26,0

259,1
204,8

29,9
32,3
25,5

35,5
36,5
24,7

60,5
61,1
35,3

64,0
64,5
37,4

69,6
69,4
40,8

76,0
76,9
43,2

54,6
65,3
13,9

+21,4
+11,6
+29,3

139,1
117,8
310,9

As a result, with a steady amount of raw cotton production in the period 20122014, the production of vegetables increased by 16.3 percent, melons - by 16.6, fruits
- by nearly 21 percent. And by 2020, the production of fruits and vegetables, grapes
and melons compared to the year 2014 is planned to increase by at least 2.3 times.
Currently, as part of the share of the consumer basket of food is less than 50
percent, indicating that the positive dynamics of growth of welfare of the population
of the Republic of Uzbekistan (Table 2).
At the same time, dangerous changes in climate, land degradation, the growing
problems associated with water supply pose a threat to the future stability of agricultural production and food security.
505

Table -2 The change in the consumption basket of the population


The Republic of Uzbekistan in 1996-2014 years (in percentage)
Indicators

1996 .

2001 .

2005 .

2010 .

2014 .

Total
including:
Food
Non-food products

100,0

100,0

100,0

100,0

100,0

73.9
17.8

72.1
18.9

63.2
21.4

58.1
24.3

49,2
31.8

Services

8.3

9.0

15.4

17.6

19.0

The widespread use of unbalanced norms of mineral fertilizers, irrigation water


and other resources, with a focus on maximizing yields without more careful consideration the characteristics of each field of natural factors and the environment, have
led to the deterioration of land reclamation, soil erosion, contamination of groundwater by chemicals, violation of environmental balance of irrigated fields and reduce
their level of fertility. . More than 3 million hectares of land are affected by wind and
water erosion - for a season average loss of topsoil for this reason reach 80 tons / ha.
Despite the fact that over the past 10-15 years, the volume of the use of pesticides and
fertilizers have decreased by 3-4 times, today about 54% of soil contaminated by pesticides, more than 80% have a high content of harmful
substances. Concentration of CO2 level in the atmosphere is now almost reached
the ecological threshold and may exceed it, if appropriate measures are not taken in
the near future.
An estimated loss of resource base for agricultural production costs the country
about $ 1 billion. Annually. Only by reducing the capacity of agricultural production
as a result of salinity and land degradation country annually loses $ 35 mln., And the
annual economic loss due to the withdrawal from the market of agricultural land is $
14 million.
By 2050, the possible reduction of water resources in the basin of the Amu
Darya River by 10-15%. According to the Syrdarya river basin may be reduced by 25%. In today's shortage of water resources in Central Asia, even a small, but steady
reduction of a serious problem.
High losses due to inefficient land and water use indicate the need for:
1) Increasing the efficiency of water resources and to prevent further salinization
and land degradation due to widespread use of water-saving technologies;
2) Modernization of water management and irrigation systems;
3) Implementation and promotion of technology of drip irrigation, which saves
up to 50% of water and increase productivity up to 20 - 40%;
506

4) Implementation of integrated water resources management by involving all


stakeholders and linking it with the management of land resources;
5) The introduction of high-yielding varieties of drought-resistant;
6) Institutional development in the field of water use and consumption;
7) support in a number of agricultural reform and strengthening of the role of
water users association;
8) The development of legal mechanisms for the regulation of land and water relations;
9) The development of regional monitoring of the state of water resources;
10) The development of socio-economic scenarios and plans for long-term development of the agricultural sector.
Under these conditions, agriculture is in dire need of modernization and innovative development, updating of fixed capital on a fundamentally new, competitive basis. Therefore, the problem of renovation of production facilities can not be solved by
using old approaches, when the economic policy carried out centrally and mainly due
to budgetary sources and funds of ministries and enterprises acted as public funds users.
Who requires the formation and development of new areas such as entrepreneurship and innovation processes, which contribute to increasing the competitiveness of
domestic producers on the domestic and international markets, addressing economic
growth, etc.
In this regard, it is evident that the development of science-based program for
the development of industries agro-industrial complex on the basis of effective use of
the country's innovation potential.
Food Program implemented in the Republic provides for the modernization of
agriculture, increase its efficiency and increase production. Therefore, currently focusing on further reform of the sector on the basis of national and international experience with the involvement of financial resources, as well as land reclamation and
irrigation, improving soil fertility, creation of the necessary infrastructure for the delivery of products to the consumer.
As the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov, no program can
not be realized without the development of the national economy as a whole. Therefore, carrying food program, it is necessary to simultaneously address many interrelated issues. First of all, create a powerful economic potential, and most importantly,
to change people's attitudes to food, which is a priceless boon, given its great difficulty and we must always appreciate. It concerns the implementation of relevant measures to increase production of food products, attraction of foreign investments in the
sector, the introduction of high-tech equipment, to increase export capacity.
This will keep high-level food security as an integral part of the socio-economic
507

development.
Conclusion. The most important direction of development of sustainable and efficient agriculture, more efficient use of water resources, preventing further deterioration of salinity and land quality is a translation of his intensive practices through the
introduction of modern agricultural technologies and equipment of high-performance
agricultural machinery. It is necessary to ensure the priority development and targeted support for agricultural sectors and industries to be competitive on the world
market for further economic growth, modernization and diversification of the economy.
Literature
1. http://www.fao.org/es/esa/
2. Statisticheskie data of Uzbekistan State Statistics Committee. - Access:
http://www.stat.uz
3. Adaptation to climate change in order to protect human health. Access: http:
//www.who.int/globalchange/projects/adaptation/ru/index.html
4. Calculated on the basis of the State Statistics Committee data
5. The Republic of Uzbekistan.
6. Calculated on the basis of the State Statistics Committee data
7. The Republic of Uzbekistan.
8. World Bank. Europe and Central Asia. Agriculture and Rural Development
Program Snapshot. March 2012. P. 38.
9. The most important provisions implementing the food program in Uzbekistan:
conference materials. - T., Uzbekistan, 2014. - S. 22.

508

: 636.5:035.574

.., ..., .
- ,
, , E-mail: uzkarakul30@mail.ru
: , ,
- , - .
: , , , , , , , , .
- , , - , , , ,
.
- - , .
, - .
.
-
. .

- .

- , , .
2014 2011 15,5 % 17717,6 . . 83,4 % 14771,6
509

. ()
, 7,4 % 1310,0 . 9,2 %
1636,0 . .
94,6 % , 95,7 % , 86,7 % , 75,5 % 54,7 % . 2014 1061307 , 831838 ,
176848
52621 .
3-4
, .
,
, .
,
38,0 . , 65,0
. ,
118,0 . , 17,0
64,0 .
() 1
683,6 , 2000,0
2780,0 . , 229,1, 985,9
1810,0 . . , 1 800,0 . ,
() 26,1 ,
3478,6 . 1735,7
.
, -
,
.

- , .
, - , - - .
.
-
(,
510

, , -, ),
, , , ,
, , ,
.
- - :

, (, ,
.) (, , ),
,
, -,
. , () , , - ;
- : ( , ) , ;
- : , . , , ,
3-4 . . ,
, , , .
, , , , (3-5 , )
;
- - :

- 511

, ;
- :
- ,

, , ;
- ; ,
- ;
- - ; ,
.
.
- , , ;
-


- ;
- - , ,
;
- , , - , - ;
- ,
-
,
;
- -
512

-,
(, , , - - ) , ,
,
, ;
.
- , , -, ,
, ,
;
, , - , ,
, , , .
. ,

, . ,
()
.
,
;

,
;
( 70-75% )
, ,
;
-
513


,
(
2-3 . ), , -
, , ,
;

-
.
. -
, , , , ;
, ,
, ;
.
, - ,
, .

1.
.. // .- 1991.- 11.
2.
. . . .: ,
1987.- . 104.
3.
.. // . 2010. 3. .79-82.

514

636.32/.38
-
.., , .., ..-..
- , . , gbulaht@mail.ru
.., . .-..
" -
.. ", . , zaganm@mail.ru
. , , .
- .
-
.
: , , , .

. 9%
, 40% - , 20%
. 1,5%. ,
- , , , 2-4 , .
,
(, ), 40%
,
. ,
. ,
, . 515

, 15-16% . , . [1]
2012-2014
2020 . ,
,
, , , .
2020 28 .
. - 2,6 . . 84
. . [2]
: 1960. - 12,3 %; 1975. - 7,0 %; 1985. - 4,1 %; 1991. - 3,7 %; 2008
. - 2,9 %; 2015. - 2,3% ,
[3].
. (1990 ) 64 .
. 20 19
. . - 24
. . , 4,6 . ( 19,0%). - 46,7 34,3% .
-
- 8934400 ., .. - 4631800 .,
- 2284900 ., - - 1239300 .;
- 5686000 ., .. - 2262800 .,
. - 1454400 ., . - 996000 ., - 3578100
., .. - 1105800 . [3]
- , , ,
, . , - ( ) , . ,
, ( 80% ) .

516

.

.
.
, 40-60%, - 10-30%
10%. , ,
8-10 , , [4].
. 76,3 .
, 36 % ,
18, 58,3 . .
(6-10 , . 30-50 ). -
. ( ) (, , .)
3-4 [5].
6,4 . ,
( 8,3 % ), : 3 .
3,4 . .
.
,
,
.
, , , . ,

,
[6].
, -
.
, ,
.
517

,
.

. - 1,5 . ,
25 . , 3,5
. .
: , , , . .
:
- ( - , , , ,
);
- ( () , () );
- ( );
- - ( ).

, .

. .. , : .
.

. [7].
XIX
(),

.
518

, -
. . ,
.
, , , .
40-45 , 12-14 ,
4 20-24 , - 3-4 . 50 - 55%.
,
. , (, )
. 2,0 - 2,5 , - 3 - 3,5 . (, , ), , .
- 100 - 110%. . 150-155 .
: , [8].

1 - ( - - , )

, .
, (.
519

1), , (.2).

2 - 1 ( - , )

I (. 1), , .
1 - ()
( - 2015 )

105
76
78
60

95

64

88

56

96

69

80

63

99

68

77

56

98

67

79

65

95
85

75
65

75
70

60
55


520

, 1999 , , ,
, , , .
, - (.2).
2 - ( - 2015 .)


-


, ..
2956
162
1325
315
8

, %
36
9,7
21,4
30
20


. , , 80%, ( 95%) ( 120%),
. ,

25% [6].
18
43,4 . .
, -, , , -2006, ,
- . .
-, (77,0%) 1 .
66,3%, 27,5%,
, 53,9 20,7%; 47,4 22,9%;
58,4 16,5%.
,
. .1.
521

, 4,5 4,9 35,4 37,8 4 . 18


. 68,5 74,6 .
3 - 1,5 .




-2006

..
.

.

-
- 4 .
4,9
37,6
4,5
35,5
4,6
35,4
4,4
37,2
4,9
37,4
4,5
36,7
4,3
37,5
4,8
37,0
4,6
36,5

18 .
79,0
67,5
65,7
68,0
68,0
65,5
66,5
70,0
68,0

-
4,5
4,3
4,7
4,0
4,0
4,4
4,2
4,5
4,3


4 .
18 .
35,0
66,5
34,1
64,0
34,5
63,5
35,5
65,6
35,2
63,0
35,2
64,5
35,0
64,6
35,3
66,0
34,0
64,5

.
18
, , ,
-2006, .
18 - 66,1,
- 65,0 , 10,6-6,4% .
, .
, , .
, .
.

( 4).

25 . 4,5 7- 3
.
, , .
522

4 -

, .
, :


()



, %:

, %



4,5
7

4,5

35,40,43
14,7 0,48
145,02,89***
3,20,25
14,850,58
18,10,67

44,30,79
18,50,63
365,052,52
4,30,49
18,870,67
23,20,41

34,50,88
14,20,29
125,02,32
3,50,39
14,330,39
17,80,46

43,60,87
18,30,52
315,061,71
4,10,56
18,620,53
22,70,85

41,90,25

42,60,25

41,50,36

42,70,36

51,10,80

52,30,81

51,50,98

52,00,77


, . , ,
,
.
, ,
4- .
, 4,5
. 7
.
4,5 14,7
0,5 3,4%. - 20
13,8%.
, 4,5 . , 3,2-3,5 .
0,3 9,3%, . , 51,1
51,5% 4,5 .
4,5 7 . 1,1 25,6%, 523

0,6 14,6%.
, (4,5 7 .),
51,1-51,5 52,3-52,0%, .

, , .
,
,
-
.

.

1 .

[
]//
^://
1./1\1<?=6%281 212 1 ]/%% ( 05.04.2016)
2.0
2012-2014 . 2020 /
[ ]: ./11/_1/7_\/16977.133. 1
26.05.2016
3. . //. - 2013. - 104 .
4. //. -2010.-91 .
5.
/
[
]:
2012//://5./ 23.05.2016
6. .., ..
/ [ ]:
11://\^^.50.1/.?11=_11&15=1\&11=8
11.05.2016
7.
[ ]: 1:://1:./
/ / ( 15.04.2016.
8. ,.. / ..,- : ,
2009.- 180.

524

636.2:577.125

. ., ..-..
, .
E-mail: o.b.dyachenko@gmail.com
.
, .
: , .
.
,
.
, , .
,
, .

.
( ),
. , [9],
[4]. ,
.
, , 525

, [3, 6-9].
[5], [4].
, , , [1, 9], .
.
.
.
- , ,
, 6 . 3850-4150 305 (), 4800-5200
().

. . . (2010), Chrom-5 ().

. .
<0,05. MS-Excel.
. , 25-30
, :
4800-5200 130,47 -3/,
3850-4150 118,91 -3/ (.).
11,56 -3/
(9,7 %), (10,4%), (9,8%)
(7,7%) .

526

, -3/ (Mm)

, 8:0
0,220,01
, 10:0
0,370,01
, 12:0
0,470,02
, 14:0
0,810,03
, 15:0
0,710,02
, 16:0
47,831,50
, 16:1
1,160,05
, 18:0
26,140,87
, 18:1
15,090,54
, 18:2
13,490,45
, 18:3
5,180,17
, 20:0
0,440,01
, 20:1
0,430,01
, 20:2
0,440,02
, 20:3
1,400,06
, 20:4
1,670,04
, 20:5
0,510,02
, 22:2
0,280,01
, 22:3
0,340,01
, 22:4
0,500,02
, 22:5
0,620,02
, 22:6
0,810,03
:
118,91
..
76,99

16,68

25,24
: * <0,05; ** <0,01; *** <0,001

-
0,250,01*
0,420,01**
0,530,02*
0,850,03
0,750,03
53,091,43*
1,280,04
28,620,74*
16,590,53
14,340,29
5,620,20
0,460,01
0,450,01
0,460,02
1,650,06*
1,690,04
0,580,02*
0,320,01*
0,390,01**
0,570,02
0,670,02
0,890,03
130,47
84,97
18,32
27,18


- , ,
, ,
(<0,05-0,01) , 12,0, 11,9, 11,3, 9,9 8,7%.

(9,4%) (9,0%) , ,
, , , 15,2, 12,1, 12,5, 12,8 12,3% (<0,050,01).
527

, .
:
1. 4800-5200 , ,
, 10,4, 9,8 7,7%,
3850-4150 .
2. ,
, , , ,
, , , , .
:
1. . / . . . : , 1985. 304 .
2. . .
/ . ; . . . . . . . .
. : , 1974. 955 .
3. . . / . . , . .
// . . . . . 2010. . 6.
. 102106.
4. . . / . . , . . .
. : , 1987. 101 .
5.
/ . . [ .] // . 1996. . 13, 1. . 7988.
6. Ansell G. B. Aggregation and Fusion of vusicles composed of n-palmitoyl derivatives of membrane phospholipids / G. B. Ansell, J. N. Hawthorne // J. Lipids.
2000. Vol. 35. P. 513524.
7. Dietschy J. M. General principles governing movement of lipids across biological membranes. In.: Disturbances of Lipid and Lipoprotein Metabolism / J. M.
Dietschy, A. M. Gotto, J. A. Ontko. Bethesda : Americ. Physiol. Soc., 1978. P.
128.
8. Hublet W. L. Transbilayer coupling mechanism for the formation of lipid
asymmetry in biological membranes / W. L. Hublet // Biophys. J. 1990. Vol. 57.
P. 98108.
528

9. Thiele O. Lipid pattern of erythrocyte membrane of calf and adult cattle / O.


Thiele, J. Plotkin, S. Imre // Zbl. Vet. Med. 1979. Vol. 26. P. 425431.

UDK. 33 (33:44)
RURAL AREA AND THE PROBLEMS OF PROVIDING SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Raximov P.K., Utelboev A.
Tashkent state agrarian university, Uzbekistan
Abstraction. It goes without saying that improving access to food resources and
increasing capacity of export for agricultural products have been widely concerned in
our country. In this respect providing sustainable agriculture, organizing necessary
infrastructure, and developing trading system are all being assigned as the issues of
the highest importance.
Agricultural area and sustainable development of agriculture - depend on storing, recycling agricultural products, developing agro tourism and agro-based clusters
services in the area. Due to its development further actions can be taken for irrigated
lands, applying new technology and increasing soil fertility on the account of agricultural income. Eventually, this can lead to the creation of more work opportunities and
improvement of peoples living conditions.
Currently the problems people are facing in rural area and agricultural system
are followings: providing the people with working ability with jobs, instructing
people how to make efficient use of natural resources and rural infrastructure, increasing profits in agriculture, providing sustainability of using fossil fuels, bringing
new, latest technology into agricultural sectors, and furthermore increasing standards
for storing and recycling the products from the agricultural sectors.
The given article looks into the problems protruding to the sustainable development of agriculture and rural areas, and propose some solutions to them.
Highlights. Improving reservation and reuse of products, recruiting people on
more work places, implementing agrotourism and agrocluster are necessary for standardizing rural areas and agricultural imbalance.
Keywords. Rural areas, making agricultural improvements. Sustainable agriculture, recycling and reserving the products, agro tourism and agro-based clusters services.
Introduction. It goes without saying that, for the past few years, under the condi529

tion when the world population has been growing rapidly in accordance with the necessity for food products (WBD, 2008), the issues of providing sustainable development of rural areas and carrying out agricultural reforms, supporting them from all
sides have been coming out as the most important issue, apart from the problem of
increasing the amount of food products steadily throughout the world.
In this case it is necessary to consider the essential conditions and requirements
in terms of developing agricultural areas, such as land, climate the lower income potential of agricultural sectors compared with other sectors, the lack of active participation of workers, the longevity of the good producing process, slow circulation of
finance, incapability of making the full and the most efficient usage of the main resources, direct interaction of the workers with the nature. (Ismoilov, Murtazaev,
2005).
In the current time the issues of creating more job opportunities in rural areas
and agricultural sectors, providing sustainability of water resources, developing infrastructural services, increasing financial interest, financial rewarding system, keeping
and circulating them, and this way meeting peoples requirements for agricultural
products, are being the main concerns which should be addressed in first lines.
Promoting agricultural system, providing peoples needs for agricultural products have been widely concerned in our country. Particularly, on the account of
shrinking cotton fields and replacing them with grain crops, vegetables, fruits, viticulture, and there has been wide consideration for taking ameliorative actions, and implementing agricultural technologies. Likewise, it is worth emphasizing the fact that
turning farms into multi-functional farming system and empowering new technology
on using water resources have been mainly challenged.
Total area of Pastargam region was 0,9 thousand km2 and the number of population 311,8 thousand people. The region is specialized in producing cotton, grain, vegetables, fruits and wine according to their geographic location. Likewise, the availability of railway system is especially supportive for the development of industry and
other fields of production in the area.
There were 976 farming system in the region in 2014, 238 or 24,4 % out of
which was multi functional farms. In 2014 41506 ha land was occupied with cotton
fields, grain fields, fruit, vegetable and forage plants raising areas, in addition, the
number of workers was 10,8 thousand, which accounted for 7,4 per cent of the people
with working ability.
Introducing the ways for storing, recycling, reusing agricultural products in rural
areas, at the same time with organizing agro tourism and agrocluster services, adds
more value on products and services respectively. In addition, most people can be occupied with work in the production and service industry, which is important the increasing the standard of peoples lifestyle.
530

Material and methods. The main purpose of this scientific article is proposing
suggestions for promoting sustainable development of agriculture. This article is
viewed the problem in the example of Samarkand city and Pastargam region. They
were examined by using statistic analysis, reviewing and literature.
Results and analysis.
The state of crop lands.
Land is the main resource in the agricultural system. Therefore, it is necessary to
put more energy into looking after fertile lands, alongside with making the most efficient use of lands and improving soil fertility. Also, exchangeable sowing of the
crops (vegetables, leguminous crops), utilizing land resources 2-3 times a year, carrying out agrotechnical measures on time increases the productiveness and fertility of
the crop lands as well as soil. Even though crop lands in Pastargam region shrank to
7,6 per cent from 2012 to 2014, total crop lands have expanded to 10,5 per cent on
the account of changes in the wine and technical crop lands and using the lands more
than once in year (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. The analysis of changed crop lands in Pastargam region, Samarkand


Certainly, the main reasons for the decrease in the productivity of the soil are the
following:
The destruction in the soil biocycle while producing agricultural products. This
is due to the fact that farmers do not provide the soil with fertilizers sufficiently, the
result of which become exhausting the soil state and decreasing its quality expeditiously, on the account of raising crops overusing the nutrition in the soil content.
The low income of agricultural sectors. The profit made in the agricultural sec531

tors is far less than the profit made from other sectors. The way forward for this problem can be increasing the productivity and efficiency, reusing and recycling the crops
and eventually increasing the price by improving service and this way adding more
value to the products.
The high cost of all the measures is connected with soil fertility. Due to the high
cost of the resources and services for carrying out these activities, agrotechnical
measures and actions are often delayed or become a rare case.
Increasing the fertility of the products means meeting people,s requirements for
food and causes rise in profits.

Figure 2. Gross product analysis in agricultural sectors of Pastargam region inSamarkand


As soon as vegetables, fruits and wine ripen, 8-10 per cent of the of the harvest
is gathered on average, the rest 9-12 percent is lost. This is mainly caused by the lack
of facilities storing, recycling products, the expensiveness of the transporting equipments and system. In addition, during the period when the products ripen, that is in
summer the price for the all the fruits and vegetables fall down rapidly, and the products are undervalued. This situation can be observed in the following graph line (Figure 3).
According to the Figure 3 the prices for vegetables and fruits decrease considerably. The proposal rates go up but consumption rates go down. Consequently, the
farmers do not make profit.
In contrast, the price for them rises in winter and spring, In contrast, the demand
increases and the proposal decreases accordingly.
532

Figure 3. The monthly change in the average cost of vegetables and grapes in 2013
Therefore keeping the balance between proposal and consumption, meeting the
peoples requirements for these products, preventing them from being lost tend to enforcing better storage and recycling system. Also, there is chance for exporting the
products.
The main sources storing and recycling agricultural products are the followings:
financing and organizing with the cooperation of farmers, financing with the governmental budget, taking a loan from the bank, and furthermore by cooperating with
foreign investors.
We can see the economic benefits of keeping agricultural products and recycling
them in the followings: in satisfying peoples daily food requirements, preventing
people from moving cities by providing people with working abilities with jobs, in
the rise of peoples income and demand for taking more advantage of better infrastructure services, and furthermore, in the rise of price and export opportunities, decrease of transport expenses and in the change of attitudes towards resources in agricultural sectors. Generally speaking in order to provide the sufficient development of
rural areas and agriculture it is necessary to promote educational system, cooperate
with developed countries and this way exchange views and experiences with them.
(Figure 4.)

533

Likewise, reserving and reusing the products are not helpful only for providing
peoples needs for food resources but for recruiting them on new work places as well.
Conclusion and suggestions. Since the official independence day sustainable development of agriculture and rural areas have been widely concerned in our country.
Particularly, the role of agricultural sectors has been noticeable in delivering people
necessary foods and resources, and further development of circulating agricultural
products, occupying people with jobs, have been the main issues, which need to be
addressed in the first place towards the prosperity of rural areas. Recycling and keeping agricultural products grown in Pastargam region is especially helpful for increasing profit in agricultural sectors, as well as in improving peoples life conditions.
Likewise, through the advancement of agro tourism and agro-based clusters services,
additional services are applied to all the sectors and new job opportunities are
created.workers who can tackle down the problems recited above. In fact, this entails
the problem of developing educational system in the country.
References.
1. Abduganiev A., Abduganiev .. Agricultural economics. - .: Uzbekistan
Writers association, literature Fund. 2004.- 304 p.
2. Ismail A., Murtazaev . "Agricultural economics" -.: 2005.
3. Umrzakov U.T, Toshbaev A. Sh., Rashidov Sh., Toshbaev A.A. "Agricultural
economics and management''-.: "Economics and finance" 2008-267.
4. Agriculture for Development. World development report. The International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank, 2008.
534

5. President of the republic of Uzbekistan the law about Organizational actions


for the reformation of fruit-vegetable and wine industry.2006. - 11 January
6. The number PF - 4053 decree of the republic of Uzbekistan about Supporting real-sector ventures of economics, providing their sustainable operation and improving export capacity, adopted on 28th November, 2008
7. The decree adopted by the president of the republic of Uzbekistan optimizing crop lands and improving their harvesting prospects. (September 20, 2008/ the
number PF-4041)
8. I.A. Karimov Reformation of agriculture. Developing new forms of agricultural cooperation
9. .: "Uzbekistan", 1995.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: REVIEW OF APPROACHES


Yangiboev D.G., Murotov Q.G., Kurganov X.
Tashkent state agrarian university, Uzbekistan
In the academic literature, sustainable development is characterized as development inwhich total welfare is not decreasing over time. Just as economic development issustainable provided economic (or man-made) capital is non-decreasing, sustainabledevelopment requires total capital - that is, economic capital, human and
social capital andenvironmental capital - to be non-decreasing. Capital in this context refers both to thestock and to the quality of the resources - for example, the
skills, health and knowledge ofthe population, and the quality of air and other natural
resources.
Sometimes discussion of sustainable development, particularly in developed
countries, has focusedmainly on environmental limits. An economy in long term recession is not stable. Nor is a situation where many peopleare denied opportunity and
face poverty and exclusion. Development which ignores the most important needs of
the poorest people, whether in this country or abroad, is not steadydevelopment at all.
We are all familiar with the idea of economic capital, and the need to conserve
it.Families save money for a rainy day; businesses invest in order to expand and
growth; localand central governments lead the way in investing in schools, hospitals
and roads.Our social capital consists of the skills and knowledge, health, self-esteem
and social networksof people and communities in the UK. The failure of urban renovation schemes of the recentpast, which concentrated on physical investment alone 535

for example some 1960s and 1970shousing estates - demonstrate the significance of
building social capital as well as bricksand mortar. Environmental capital provides
the third side of the triangle. We can't protect each bitof environment forever; in some
cases, separate development decisions will needtrade-offs among economic, social
and environmental targets. But it is important to seekoptions to achieve objectives at
the same time, and to consider the growing impact ofdecisions on overall environmental capital.
Sustainability has raised high on the political agenda in present years, yet no
agreement has been reached as to what sustainability exactly means. Judging from the
wide range of definitions (Pezzey, 1989, collected some 190 different definitions),
the answer to this question seems far from unambiguous. Probably the most widely
quoted definition of sustainability is that given by the World Commission on Environment and Development in the so-called Brundtland report: Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs This definition illustrates two
key concerns also present in many other definitions, i.e. (Heal, 1996): (1) recognition
of the long-run impact of resource and environmental constraints on patterns of development and consumption; (2) concern for the well-being of future generations,
particularly in so far as this is influenced by their access to natural resources and environmental goods. These contradictions have emerged because of two issues that obscure the sustainability debate. The first concerns still ongoing debate among economists and ecologists holding different visions about the limits of economic growth
and the carrying capacity of the Earth, which is intertwined with, and logically steers,
the discussion about sustainability. The second issue relates to the observed discrepancy between theoretical sustainability and practical sustainability.We review the
current knowledge of the interrelationships between the ecological, social, and economic systems.
In recent years, the adoption of the systems perspective in the field of ecological
economics has proven fruitful in clarifying human-nature interrelationships. Ecological economists adopt the, by now, generally accepted view that the economy, in its
physical dimensions, is an open subsystem of a finite, nongrowing, and materially
closed ecosystem (Daly, 1994). It is distinguished three hierarchically ordered systems: the ecological system, the social system and the economic system.
Each system can be characterized by three concepts: stocks, flows, and the organization of these stocks and flows (Barbier et al, 1994). Stocks are called capital
stocks. Capital is defined here as a stock that yields a flow of useful goods and services into the future (Daly, 1994:30). The capital stock of the ecological system (or
biosphere) is Total natural capital, and the flow it yields is natural income. Total
natural capital is sub-divided into renewable natural capital and nonrenewable natural
536

capital, the former being active and self-maintaining, using a flow of energy from the
sun, while the latter is more passive and analogous to inventories. Both the maintenance of the renewable capital stock and the production of ecosystem goods and services are generated by the continuous interactions between organisms, populations,
communities, and their physical and chemical environment.

Figure 1.Interactions between social, environmental and economic capital


Life-support functions classified into four main categories, i.e. regulation functions, carrier functions, production functions, and information functions. Among
these, the regulation functions are of particular relevance to the sustainability debate.
The flow of goods and services generated by these two categories of capital comprises marketable goods and services, labor services, social and juridical protection, and
further-market social services. Several functional relationships and flows of goods
and services take place across the system boundaries. Manufactured capital, renewable natural capital, and nonrenewable natural capital interact with cultural capital and
one of its specific flows, i.e. economic demand, to determine the level and structure
of economic (marketed) goods and services production. The functional relationship
537

between cultural capital and manufacturedcapital on the one hand and renewable natural capital on the other is characterized by use, while the relationship between the
first two categories and nonrenewable natural capital is featured by extraction. Collecting of renewable natural capital without exceeding regenerative volume ensures a
constant flow of material and energy without reducing capital stock. Any extraction
of nonrenewable natural capital, however, implies an equal decreasing in the available stock. Humans require a flow of natural capital goods to produce manufactured
goods, while on the other hand, an increase in the stock of manufactured capital and
improvements in its technological efficiency may ensure increased availability of
flows from the natural capital stock.
Although our current environmental problems recommend there are, no set of issues seems to be more disputably debated among economists and ecologists, as well
as among economists. In actually, the dispute emerges from their different visions of
the future. Generally, following positions may be distinguished:
Sustainability: a review of the debate and an extension called the conventional
economic optimistic view (Folke et al., 1994) or technological optimism (Costanza,
1989), is based on the neo-classical economics assumption/belief that technology is
able to solve all our problems so that economic and population growth can continue
forever (Costanza, 1995).
The opposing line of thought, called the environmental pessimist vision (Folke
et al., 1994) or technological pessimism (Costanza, 1989), assumes that technology
will not be able to circumvent fundamental energy and resource constraints and that
overexpansion of the human economy will cause collapse of the ecological lifesupport system and ultimately collapse of the economy which depends on it.
If owners of a natural resource are technological optimists, they will act in the
belief that new technologies will be developed to substitute for their decreasing resource and consequently higher future prices for that resource will not materialize. As
a result, profit- seeking resources owners will take care of to exploit their reserves at
a more quickly rate than without this belief. However, a high rate of resource exploitation today puts downward pressure on current resource prices which may undermine the very incentive for the development on new technologies on which technological optimists are relying.
The views of sustainability attributed to technological optimism and the ecological economics vision, are known in the literature as weak sustainability and strong
sustainability, respectively. Ecological sustainability, as the term indicates, refers to
abundance and genotypic diversity of individual species in ecosystems subject to human exploitation or, more generally, intervention (Gatto, 1995). Weak sustainability
and strong sustainability, on the other hand, both have their roots in economics,
which incorporates the concept of sustainability into the standard definition of in538

come as the maximum amount that a community can consume over some time period and still be as well off at the end of the period as at the beginning (Hicks, 1946
in Daly, 1994:23). Therefore, in Hicksian terms, Brundtland may be saying no more
than that we, the present generation, should consume within our income (Heal, 1996).
The Hicksian, or economic, definition of sustainability, which aims at having the
same capacity to produce the same income (or to meet the same needs) each year, requires that the capital stock be maintained intact. However, there are two ways to
maintain total capital intact, and they relate to the difference between weak and
strong sustainability. Weak sustainability refers to the maintaining intact of the sum
of Natural Capital, Manufactured Capital and Cultural Capital on aggregate. Strong
sustainability relates to the maintenance of each of the three capital stocks separately
(Costanza and Daly, 1992; Daly, 1994).
Although strong sustainability appears to have firm support from a theoretical
point of view, it suffers from a number of practical disadvantages. Technological
progress must be efficiency-increasing rather than throughput-increasing. When technology is constant, keeping capital intact is the same as keeping physical capital intact. When technology increases the productivity of capital, then it is less clear what
keeping capital complete means. It may mean maintaining a smaller capital stock sufficient to produce the income stream before the productivity increase, or it may mean
keeping the physical capital intact and enjoy a higher income.
At their famous work, Constanza et al (1997) estimated value of annual world
Natural Capital between 16-54 trillion USD, with average of 33 trillion USD for year.
For same time period, gross national product (Manufactured Capital) total was
around 18 trillion USD. We should avoid the error of consuming the benefits of increased productivity of Manufactured Capital by running down Natural Capital
stocks.
References
1. Barbier, E.B., Burgess, J.C., Folke, C.Trading with the Environment; Ecology, Economics, Institutions and Policy.Earthscan, London. 1994.
2. Costanza, R.Sustainable Development: Viable Concept and Attainable Goal?
Environmental Conservation, 21(3), 193-195. 1989.
3. Costanza, R.What is Ecological Economics? Ecological Economics, 1, 1-7.
1995.
4. Costanza, R., Daly, H.E. Economic Growth, Carrying Capacity, and the Environment.Forum.Chapter 2 28 Ecological Economics, 15, 89-90. 1992.
5. Daly, H.E.Natural Capital and Sustainable Development. Conservation
Biology, 6(1), 37-46. 1990.
6. Daly, H.E.Toward some operational principles of sustainable development.
539

Commentary. Ecological Economics, 2, 1-6. 1994.


7. Investing in Natural Capital - Why, What, and How. In: Jansson, A., Hammer, M., Folke, C., Costanza, R. (eds.). Investing in Natural Capital. The Ecological
Economics approach to Sustainability. Island Press, Washington, D.C., 1-20. Gatto,
M., 1995.
8. Heal, G.M.Environmental Functions and the Economic Value of Natural
Ecosystems. In: Jansson, A., Hammer, M., Folke, C., Costanza, R. (eds.). Investing in
Natural Capital. The Ecological Economics approach to Sustainability. Island Press,
Washington, D.C., 151-168. 1996.

636.22/.28.087.7


.., . .-. ., , .., . .-. ., ,
.., ..., , .., . .-. .,
.., . .-. ., .., ..., ..
- , , abilovbt@mail.ru
. -, ,
.
: -,
, , , , .

. () [1-4], [5-16].

-
540

.
.
()
3 15 - -
(. 1).
1 -

1-
2-
3-

n
15
15
15


() (2003).
+ (20,0 / )
+ - (10,0 / .)

, 2 45 , 30 90 .

.
.
. ,
15-18
(. 2).
2 -

1
2
3
, / (15 .)
:
291
323,32
341,2
. .:
18,1
22,52
19,10

220,5
242,4
263,8
, . /
52,4
58,4
58,3
:
5344
4987,2
5134,4
. .:
422,0
434,20
402,40

4922
4553
4732
,
18,36
15,4
15,0
45 , / (60 .)
:
265,75
265,11
273,39
. .:
1,95
0,72
0,64

253,4
263,5
272,1
, . /
10,4
0,89
0,65

541

:
. .:

5159,3
582,3
4577
19,41

7444,3
556,3
6888
28,08

8898,7
623,7
8275
32,54

45 . 28 32,5 .
205
7,06% , 10,26%
(. 3).
3 -
(n=15; *0,05)
I-
II-
:

23,280,89
22,680,93

%
100,0
97,42

174,854,53
187,26,21*
205 ()
%
100,0
107,06

739
803
205
%
100
108,7


369,14,5
392,45,2
%
15
100,0
106,3
438,04,2
467,25,6*
18 .
%
100,0
106,7

6,8 15 .

777
821
( 250 )
%
100,0
105,7
6,8 18 .

774
824
( 340 )
%
100,0
106,5

III-
23,040,69
98,96
192,87,63*
110,26
828
112,0
400,56,3
108,5
476,65,8*
108,8
831
107,0
835
107,9

15 369,1 , 6,3% 8,5% - .


18 . (515 )
6,7% - ,
8,8% .

, -. 835
61,0 7,9%. 6,5%, 50 .
542

6 2 3 , : - - 20,3% 24,9%; 13,6% 21,8%; 10,1% 10,5%


(. 4).
4

, 109/
, 1012/
, /
, 109/
, 1012/
, /

(n=15; *0,05)
I-
II-
III-
6
6,360,4
7,650,3
7,940,4
5,650,7
6,420,5
6,880,6
100,63,3
110,83,4*
111,25,3*
12
8,250,44
8,680,31
8,920,67
6,40,44
7,350,55
7,680,44
108,27,4
116,85,7*
121,78,3*

4,5-12,0
5,0-7,5
99-129
4,5-12,0
5,0-7,5
99-129

12 .
2 3 5,22% 8,13%; - 14,85%
20,0%, - 7,95% 12,5% .
6
2 3 10,2 13,0% (. 5)
29,9 39,7%, - -
22,1 27,7% .
, , .

18,4 12,8% , ,
17,2 20,8%; 11,6 16,3%
, , , ,
( ).

12 2 3 11,38 17,34% . .

26,28 33,56% 2 3 .
47,8 /,
543

2- 4,02%, 3- 9,4%.
5

, /
, /

AST, /
ALT,/
, /
/
, /
, %
, %
, %

, /

, /
, /

AST, /
ALT,/
, /
/
, /
, %
, %
, %

(n=15; *0,05)
I-
II-
III-
6
72,34,6
79,78,4
81,75,5
25,252,1
32,82,79*
35,270,6*
10,292,2
7,621,9
7,80,9
12,344,2
9,322,7
9,481,7
24,441,4
29,851,5*
31,221,1*
0,540,3
0,550,2
0,560,2
0,370,2
0,390,1
0,370,2
2,340,4
2,770,7
2,640,8
4,500,7
3,550,6
3,530,7
4,460,6
3,950,5
4,350,7
72,34,6
79,78,4
81,75,5
25,252,1
32,82,79*
35,270,6*
10,292,2
7,621,9
7,80,9
12
71,46,3
79,525,3
83,83,45*
23,62,3
29,81,7*
31,521,53*
12,32,2
10,12,4
11,251,32
9,83,3
9,082,5
9,131,4
25,72,3
30,541,5*
31,911,6*
0,480,3
0,550,2
0,560,3
0,390,2
0,350,3
0,400,3
2,450,4
2,780,8
2,820,5
4,200,5
3,800,7
3,60,6
3,940,6
3.720,7
3,750.5
4,71,12
5,532,14
5,82,3
10,50,45
11,40,4*
11,90,55*
1,720,1
1,940,51
2,10,22

70-85
18-42,5
7,2-17,0
6,0-13,6
15,0-34,0
0,62
0,42
2,22-3,33
1,6-5,0
2,8-8,8
70-85
18-42,5
7,2-17,0
70-85
18-42,5
7,2-17,0
6,0-13,6
15,0-34,0
0,62
0,42
2,22-3,33
1,6-5,0
2,8-8,8
4,5-6,0
10-12,5
1,7-2,9

2- 18,84% 3- - 24,17% .
-
7,9 7,3% 2 3 .
- 21,79 9,3%
2 3 .
, .
, 8,6 13,3% 17,7 23,4%
544

.
.
205-

.
. 15 1- 8 (53,3%), 2- 10
(66,7%) 12 (80,0 %) - 3- .

(. 6).
I 32
-44 .
6-

,
,
,


%
, ..
,

,
,

(n=15; *P 0,05)
1-
1I-
1II-
174,854,53
187,26,21
192,87,63
287,8
261
246
777
821
831
369,14,5
392,45,2*
400,56,3*
100,0
106,3
108,5
2290,9
1998,8
2050,5
6861,2
5986,2
6141,2
575,6
502,2
515,2
4989,15
4665,61*
4544,07*
-32
-44
1,47
1,33
1,20
0,13
0,27

1,47 . 2-, 3- 0,14 0,27 .


(. 7).
205
3,5%.
7,4% 9,4% .
3,46 14,3 .
545

7 -

1-

205 , :

2-

3-

152,67

167,82

171,71

130

130

130

22730,5

24336

25064

21968,6
- 150
:
205

21968,6

, . 205
761,9

21791,85
399
22190,85

21791,85
143,66
21935,51

2145,15

3128,49

, .

1383,25

2366,59

3,5

3,46
9,7

16,47
14,3

1 , .
205 , .
, .:
( , , , . .)

1 ,
.
, %

30,0 - 10,0
.
32-44 .

1. , ..
/ .. , .. , .. , ..
// . . . , .-2014.-.1.-.7. - . 72-77.
2., ..
/ .. , .. , .. , ..
// , , . 2013. .2.
. 6. . 105-108.
3. , ..
-/ .. , .. , .. ,
.. , .. // , ,
. 2013. .2. . 6. . 108-113.
4. , .. 546

/ .., ..// - .
2007. .2. 2-2. . 114-115.
5., .. /.. , .. , .. , ..
// . 2014. 1. . 23
6., ..
/ .. , .. , .. , .. // . 2014. 4 (87). . 85-89.
7. , .. /
.., .., .., .. // , , 2015. -36 .
8. , ..
/.. , .. , .. //
. 2013. 3 (11). . 21-26.
9. , .. - / .., .., ..// : ,
. 73-
- . 2009. . 19-22.
10., .. / .., .., ... // ,2015, 2, .45-47.
11. , .. /.. , .. , .. , .. //
. 2012. 2. . 52-54.
12. , .. / .., .., .., .., .,
..// . 2013. 10. . 37-39.
13., .. , /.. , .. , ..
, .. , .. // . 2013, 4. - .
23-25.
14. , .. /
.. , .. , .. , .. , .. //
. 2013, 4. - . 21-22.
15. , .. / .. , .. , .. , .. // (). XVIII ,
, 2015.-. 355-357.
547

16. , . /. , . ,
. , . //
. 2007. 6. . 42-44.
17. , .. /.. , .. , .. , .. , ..
// , 71- : . . . , 2007. .
79-82.
18. , .. - / .. , .. ,
.. , .. // . 2006. 2. . 17-20.11.

636.22/.28.087.7



.., . .-. ., , .., . .-. ., ,
.., ..., , .., . .-. .,
..
- , , abilovbt@mail.ru
. - , ,
18 , .
: , , .
, ,
. . , 548

.
-

, , .

-
.
- .

()
[1-12].

,
- , [1-4],
- [5-16].
- .
.
() 3 15 - -
:
- 1- ()
(2003);
- 2- - + (20,0 / );
- 3- - + (10,0 / ).
, 2 45 , 30 90

.

2 3
549

6 , 17,87% 23,4%;
12,5% 13,8%; - 14,8% 14,7% (. 1):
2 3 13,2 14,7% .
27,7 31,8% - 10,6 13,1% .
, .
1 6 (n=15)

, 109/
, 1012/
, /
, /
, /
, /

AST,/
ALT,/
, /
, /
, /
, %
, %
, %
*0,05

II-
9,220,5
7,060,6
119,875,2*
79,342,2*
29,71,6*
10,652,4
9,612,3
29,381,3*
0,550,3
0,340,2
2,960,8
3,900,8
4,950.6
5,82,2
12,80,3*
1,920,3

I-
7,530,3
6,140,6
105,76,5
71,64,4
25,62,2
10,312,0
9,544,1
26,152,1
0,590,3
0,350,3
2,820,5
4,400,6
4,830,6
4,11,1
10,80,3
1,690,3

III-
9,600,5
7,330,2
120,27,3*
79,644,3*
31,771,31*
10,151,3
8,41,4
29,331,5*
0,560,2
0,350,3
2,930,5
3,60,7
4,790,6
5,71,3
12,660,7*
2,250,21

4,5-12,0
5,0-7,5
99-129
70-85
18-42,5
7,2-17,0
6,0-13,6
15,0-34,0
0,62
0,42
2,22-3,33
1,6-5,0
2,8-8,8
4,5-6,0
10-12,5
1,7-2,9


, ,
, 18,5 17,2%; 41,5
39,0% .
6 .
- ,

15-18 (. 2).
45 .
550


28 32,5 .
, .
(18 .) II III 18,88 26,1 , 4,2 5,8 % (. 3).
II , -.
2 -

1
2
, / (15 .)
:
291
323,32
. .:
18,1
22,52

220,5
242,4
, . /
52,4
58,4
:
5344
4987,2
. .:
422,0
434,20

4922
4553
,
18,36
15,4
45 , / (60 .)
:
265,75
265,11
. .:
1,95
0,72

253,4
263,5
, . /
10,4
0,89
:
5159,3
7444,3
. .:
582,3
556,3

4577
6888
,
19,41
28,08

3
341,2
19,10
263,8
58,3
5134,4
402,40
4732
15,0
273,39
0,64
272,1
0,65
8898,7
623,7
8275
32,54

3 -

,
150 ,
205 ,
10, .,
12 .,
15 .,
18 .,

II-

I-

24,480,56
24,230,36
136,62,21
143,83,32
183,354,45
196,055,64*

229,83,84
247,04,72*
280,43,35
298,93,95*
361,54,82
381,755,14*
449,56,34
468,385,52*

551

III-
24,820,32
148,34,50*
201,17,65*
251,24,75*
302,64,42*
385,84,81*
475,585,53*

,
6,8 9.
10 11 .
12 14 .
15 18 .
:
* 0,05

266,15
272,33
,
469
515
843
865
901
921
978
963
780
790

274,48
506
857
924
998
800

13,0 , 5,3% (P<0,05) 22,0 9,1%


(P<0,05) (. 4).
4 -

,
,
, %
,
, %
-,
,
,
, %
,
,


*P 0,05

I-
429,3
244,22,76
56,88
232,52,43
52,75
13,20,24
230,52,45
176,72,2
76,67
43,70,22
10,10,12

II-
449,4
257,22,54*
57,23
243,42,33*
54,15
13,70,26
241,12,23*
188,51,75*
78,16
44,50,22
8,10,08

III-
459,4
266,42,74*
57,98
251,82,53*
54,82
14,20,23
249,02,53*
195,62,09*
78,55
44,90,18
8,50,07

3,29

3,59

3,67

II III 10,9
( 4,69%) 19,3 ( 8,3%) .
II III
10,6 ( 4,6%) 18,5 ( 8,30%) .
, , 11,8 6,7% (P<0,05) 18,9 10,7%; (P<0,05).

,
.

552

30,0 - 10,0

.
- , ( , , , , ,
, )
.
, , ,
18 4,2; 5,8% (0,05).
.
18 13 22 , 6,7% (11,8) 10,7%.(18,9 ).

, .

1. , ..
/ .. , .. , .. , ..
// . . . , .-2014.-.1.-.7. - . 72-77.
2., ..
/ .. , .. , .. , ..
// , , . 2013. .2.
. 6. . 105-108.
3. , ..
-/ .. , .. , .. ,
.. , .. // , ,
. 2013. .2. . 6. . 108-113.
4. , .. / .., ..// - .
2007. .2. 2-2. . 114-115.
5., .. /.. , .. , .. , ..
553

// . 2014. 1. . 23
6., ..
/ .. , .. , .. , .. // . 2014. 4 (87). . 85-89.
7. , .. /
.., .., .., .. // , , 2015. -36 .
8. , ..
/.. , .. , .. //
. 2013. 3 (11). . 21-26.
9. , .. - / .., .., ..// : ,
. 73-
- . 2009. . 19-22.
10., .. / .., .., ... // ,2015, 2, .45-47.
11. , .. /.. , .. , .. , .. //
. 2012. 2. . 52-54.
12. , .. / .., .., .., .., .,
..// . 2013. 10. . 37-39.
13., .. , /.. , .. , ..
, .. , .. // . 2013, 4. - .
23-25.
14. , .. /
.. , .. , .. , .. , .. //
. 2013, 4. - . 21-22.
15. , .. / .. , .. , .. , .. // (). XVIII ,
, 2015.-. 355-357.
16. , . /. , . ,
. , . //
. 2007. 6. . 42-44.
17. , .. /.. , .. , .. , .. , ..
554

// , 71- : . . . , 2007. .
79-82.
18. , .. - / .. , .. ,
.. , .. // . 2006. 2. . 17-20.11.

663:619:576.8
-

1

.., ..-.., , 1 .., . .-. .,


2
.., . .-. .,
1
, . , olga-sycheva@mail.ru
2
, . ,
kononova-lidij@mail.ru
. 18 2015
648 , ,
, , ,
,
, , ,
. ,
,
, , .
: , , ,
,
..
, , ,
, 555

- , .
, , .
-, , ,
. ,
- , .
, , , , , , , .
, , .

, ,
, ,

.
, , , (
).
, ,
[1-3].
.
, , . , , .
, 18 2015 648
,
13 2015 243-
.
, 1 2018 556

.

[4], ,
, . 646
18.12.2015 ., 25 2016
41210. ,
, , . ,
, , , () , , ,
, , () . ,
, ,
, ,
, , . 11 2016 .
, :
, , ,
. , , .
, , (, .) ,
, , .
,
, , ,
.
, , , , , ,
, , , , 557

,
.

1. , ..
/ .. , .. // . 2014. 4 (16). .239-242.
2. , .. - / .. // . . .-. . 85-
13-15 2014 . . 84-85.
3. , ..
/ .. , .., .. //
:
/ . -. . 2. , 2015. . 267-269.
4. . [
].

:
URLhttp://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2932703

636.082.933.2


.., ..., ., ....
-
. , uzkarakul30@mail.ru
. ,
,
, .
. , , , , ,
, .

558

, , . ,
.
, , 85-95%.
, ,
-. . , , ,
, ,
[1, 2, 3, 5, 6],
, [4, 8, 9].

25-30%.
-
.
, .
, , ,
( , 1200 ), ( , 1250
), ( , 1300 ). 1850, 1930
1948 . [7].

1. ,
45-50%.
. , 559

50%, 48%,
- 30%; 55,
50 25 ; 48, 43 28 . . , ,
,
(80,0%).
(75,0%),
(60,0%). . ,
.
,
.
, , , .
,
(42,1%).
, 36,8, 38,0 .

(47,2, 45,3, 15,6%) (40,3, 43,1,
48,3%)
(36,0, 33,0, 12,0%) , , (12,5, 11,6, 36,1%).

, , , . ,
78,3, 71,6, 60,7 , 93,7, 90,8 79,1 .

560

1. , %
-
-
-
2. , %
-
-
-
3. , %
(, , )
4. , %
-
-
-
5. , %
( 15-20 . )

75,0 1,25
80,0 1,15
60,0 1,41

70,0 1,30
75,0 1,22
55,0 1,41

50,0 1,39
50,0 1,39
35,0 1,32

50,0 1,16
55,0 1,16
48,0 1,16

48,0 1,14
50,0 1,14
43,0 1,13

30,0 1,04
25,0 0,98
28,0 1,02

47,2 1,44
40,3 1,42
12,5 0,95

45,3 1,41
43,1 1,40
11,6 0,91

15,6 1,00
48,3 1,39
36,1 1,33

36,0 1,12
36,8 1,12
15,3 0,84

33,0 1,07
38,3 1,11
16,1 0,84

12,0 0,74
42,1 1,12
38,3 1,10

93,7 0,70

90,8 0,82

79,1 1,13

78,3 0,96

71,6 1,03

60,7 1,11

18,5 1,12
83,3 1,08
3,2 0,51

11,5 0,90
82,7 1,07
4,8 0,60

4,3 0,56
49,6 1,39
46,1 1,38

16,3 0,86
73,3 1,03
10,4 0,71

9,6 0,67
72,9 1,01
17,5 0,86

3,1 0,63
42,3 1,12
54,6 1,13

80,0 1,15

72,5 1,26

56,8 1,37

71,2 1,05

65,3 1,08

43,2 1,12

561

. , . , (16,3,
9,6, 3,1%) ,
(18,5, 11,5, 4,3%). , (10,4, 17,5, 54,6%)
(3,2, 4,8, 46,1%) .
.
, ,
, .
15-20 , , (71,2%),
(65,3%) ,
(80,0, 72,5,
56,8%).

, , ,
,
. , ,
.
,

25 30% .

1. .. 15-20 .// : . , . .
.: 1984, . 17-19.
2. .. : . . -. . . - .: 1989. - 255 .
3. . . . . .- . . , 10-
- . - .: - 2001. . 39-41.
562

4. .. .
, 1976, 202 .
5, .., .- .:
, 1980. - 164 .
6. .. . - .: 1975, - 249 .
7.
( ) . .: 2015. 31 .
8. .. . ,: 2013, 248 .
9. .., .., .., . . ,: 2010, 205 .

579.8 675.03
-
.., ..., ., ....
-
. , uzkararul30@mil.ru
. , , , , , .
. , , , , , ,
, , , .
.
,
, , , . 17-18
,
[5].

, ,
- , , ,
563

. - , , .
1900
. , .
,
, .
30 20-
,
. [3].
, , , .
, 1925 - 1928 , -
. 1930
, , - ,
. .
, . ,
30-
, ,
. (, , .),
1939
. 1992 , 2000 , 2014 -
-
.
564

30- , ,
, ,
,
.
,
[3].
, , , , . , , ,
, .
1945
.. ..
. ,
- ,
.. .., .. .
,
40 , ,
10 , ,
.
,
, 2009
,
.
,
, .
, 15 , 3 , 30 , 4 , 3 .
,
,
. , ,
- .
- 30 , 9 , 5 , 12 ,
2 , 1 . 565

, .
20 ,
, 500
[7].
, [8, 9].

, , , , , , , ,
, , , .
, , , [10].

, .
, , . 3 : -
-
, . , . ,
.
, ,
, , . 4-, , , - ,
.
,
. , , , ,
,
566

, , , , .
.

, , ,
, , ,
.
- -.
, , .
,
- , - . ,
, - ,
, , , , [4, 1].
-
, ,
, - .

, [2].
, . , - ,
. -,
-, ,
. ,
( )
- - ; (
) - , () - - [4].
567

, :
-.

- , , . , .
, , , , ,
.
, .

.
, ,
, .

. .
, ,
.
, , .
,
- , ,
, , , , . , .
, .. , ,
, , . - , , -,
.
, ,
. ,
.
568

, ,
, ,
, , .
,
, [10].
, , , , , .
.
, , .
, .
, , , ,
.
, 3D ,
..
: , , , , ,
, .
, , ,
, -
, , .
, , , , , 569

,
. , , .
, , .
. (1970 . ..,
.., .., .., ..;
(1983 . .., ..) .
(), : , , ,
.
., .. .
.. .

1. .. .
.: 2013. - 165 .
2. .. . .: 1976. -191 .
3. .., .., . .
.: 1978, - 202 .
4. .. . .: 1980. 162 .
5. .. . //- . . . . .
. (20-21 2009. . ). .: 2009. - 139 149 .
6. .., . .
- . . .- . ., . 85- . .: 2015. .20-23.
7. .. . , 2013, - 248 .
8. ..
570

. - .: 2005. - 239 .
9, .., .., . . . . . . , 75- .. . 2008. . 1.
- .: - .522 527.
10. .., .., .., .
. .: 2010. - 205 .

636.4.082
-

.., . .-. ., .., . .-. ., , ..
- , .
E-mail: priemnaya@vniiok.ru
:
(F1F4) RYR-1, ESR H-FABP . .
: -, , , , , .
, ,
70-80 , , ,
.
, , [3, 4, 8].
,

, , , .
571

, [5, 9].


-1 ( ), ()
(-1). - - ,

, , [1, 2, 10].
, F4 -
RYR-1, ESR H-FABP (-1).
.
, , , , . ; -;
- : , .
. 275
13 F4 -1 (. 1)
(H-FAB) , HH 53,8%, 71,3%. () hh .
H 0,76-0,85,
(F1- F4)
(.1). () 53,3% 12,0%. ()
hh F3 F4 . [5, 7].

572

1
(H-FABP), (RYR-1) (ESR) F4
-1

H-FABP
H
F4
-1

F4
-1

F4
-1

F4
-1

HH
13
53,8
275
71,3
D
DD
13
100,0
275
60,0
RYR-1
NN
13
100,0
275
90,2
ESR
AA
13
92,3
275
83,3

Hh
46,2
28,7

hh
-

H
0,769
0,856

h
0,231
0,141

Dd
40,0

dd
-

D
1,0
0,800

d
0,200

Nn
9,8

nn
-

N
1,0
0,951

n
0,049

AB
7,7
16,7

BB
-

A
0,962
0,916

B
0,038
0,084

100

50

0
HH

Hh
2012 (F1)

hh

DD

2013 (F2)

2014 (F3)

Dd

dd

2015 (F4)

1 H-FABP 2012-2015 .
, DD ( ) 76% F 3 60%.
573

, F3 D (0,75), (0,88),
- - F2 , DD 66,6%.
120

80

40

0
NN

Nn
2012 (F1)

2013 (F2)

nn
2014 (F3)

2015 (F4)

2 RYR-1 2012-2015 .

2 F4
-1

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.

44077
47067
39217
39653
43023
42063
39311
29741
25699
30277
30165
30401
30081

RYR-1

ESR

NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN
NN

AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AB
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA
AA

H-FABP
D
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD
DD

H
HH
Hh
HH
Hh
Hh
HH
HH
HH
HH
Hh
HH
Hh
Hh

F4 RYR-1 (. 2) 574

, Nn
(9,8%), .
, Nn (nn) [6].
(13 ) F4 (.2) 7,7% (1 ). (HFAB) : 53,8%, DD 100%. , ( 42063)
NN, , DD.
, RYR-1, ESR H-FABP
F4
,
.

1.
, .. /
.. // . , 2002. 112 .
2.
, ..
/ .. , .. : .
., 2006. 329 .
3.
, .. /
.. , .. , .. , .. , .. //
. 2014. 7. . 12-15.
4.
, ..
/ .. , .. , .. .//
,
: . . .-. . / /
. , 2010. . 1. . 278-281.
5.
, .. - -
/ . , .. , .. // :
I
- -, 25-
- .
2016. . 3083-3087.
6.
, .. -
/ .. , .. , ..
, .. , .. , .. //
-
. 2014. . 1. 7 (1). . 102-105.
7.
, ..

575

/ .. , .. , .. , ..
, .. // . 2012. 4. . 12-13.
8.
, .
RYR-1 / . ,
. // . 2007. 6. . 13-15.
9.
, ..
/ .. , .. , .. ,
.. , .. // . 2014. 7. . 17-19.
10.
, ..
/ .. , .. , .. //
-
. 2011. . 1. 4-1. . 17-19.

619:636.22/.28
-


.., ..., , .., ..., .., ..-..,
.., ..-..
- , .
E-mail: priemnaya@vniiok.ru

: , , , .
,
.
: , , , ( ), , -, .

.
576


. , ().
( ), . ( ) ,
, [2]. . (
) , , [1]. ,

. , ,
.
, 60 80% [3,4]. ,
.
, ,
,
.
: ,
, ,
.

,
,
-
, .

, ; 577

. .
BLV
- ( ) ( , ) . env nested

[4].

ABI 3500 GeneticAnalyzer


(AppliedBiosystems, ).

-
3 .
, , env
444 .. ,
, , , G4 G6.
env , , Genbank
(NCBI).
-
2015 .
( 2), -
G4 .
, 30 . ( 1),
,
6- 8 , G6 .
, , ,
.
578

- x
-

- x
-
-

1 ( )
3
26598,3
9,95
3
28671,0
6,88
9
18596,5
8,90
n

20
8
55

1 ( +)
17199,7
8,18
26408,8
7,23
17244,6
8,87

2 ( )
18
11950,7
6,06
2 ( +)
119
9615,4
5,35

5,33
8,00
2,88

2671,3
4162,7
2089,5

3,50
5,66
2,50

2100,9
3647,8
1942,3

2,71

1970,5

1,98

1794,3


,
,
(. 1).
- , 1,98
3,50 , 9615,4 17199,7 ,
2,71-5,33 , 1,83-0,73 , .
8,0 , 2,34 , ,
2262,2 .


0,38 1351,9
.

.
16,5 (. 2).
, , 2,33, , . ,
, 579

25,2 , 0,77. , , - 146,1 155,5 , 1,37 1,44, .


,
.
206,3 , 17,3 ,
0,11.
2

1 ( )
-
3
155,6

3
146,1
- x
9
189,0
1 ( +)
-
20
172,1

8
155,5
- x
55
206,3
2 ( )
-
18
96,3
2 ( +)
-
119
121,5
n

2,33
1,37
2,41
2,29
1,44
2,52
2,25
3,02



env G4, G6 , . , ,
. . ,
-
.

1.
, .. , 580

( ) / .. , .. , .. , .. , .. //
. 2015. 3 (19). . 60-64.
2.
, .. /
.. , .. // . 2012. 7. . 23-26.
3.
, .., ./ .. // . 2004. 4. . 7-8.
4.
, . .
/ .. , .. // . 1997. 2. . 19-21.
5.
Beier, D. Identification of different BLV provirus isolates by PCR,
RFLPA and DNA sequencing / D. Beier, P. Blankenstein, O. Marquardt, J. Kuzmak
// Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2001. Vol. 114, 78. P. 252-256.

631.083.084



. .,
-

- , -
: , , , , ,
. .
.
, . 40 %,
60 .
581

,
. 83
( 43 ). 32 ( 13 ). . ,
60 %. ,
80 [1].

.
.
, , , 39 %. ,
. ,

, .. - . ,
, : ; ; ; ; 7080 % ; ,
, 20 %, 15 %, 5 %, 4 %; - ()
()
; , .
50 %[2].
- ,
, ,
,
.
582

: . . , .. , .. , .. , . . , . . , . , . , . .

, , ,
.
,
, , .
, , , ,

.

,

, . ,
: 20%; - 15%;
1,5 , 78 .
26 % 8
10 %.
, , ,
: : :
1012 %, 810 %,
35 ; (, - 100 583

) 22,5 %. ,
,
. :
5,2 , 15,9
2,4
; : : 1,3-1,5 , 21
13,8 %, 27,8 %,
17 %, : 23
, 57 , 45 ; : 16,2
%, ;

,
;
( ) : 15,9 ,
13,5 2,2
;
, ,
,
.
, ;
78 6,3 ; -
2225 %, [4].
.
, , , ,
584

, .

1. . .
/. // . 2005. 9. .22-25.
2. . ., . ., . . -
,
XXI ./.
. , . . , . . //
. . . 13. (38). .
2006. . 116135.
3. . /. // . 2006. 1. .110111.
4. . /. // .
2006. 8. . 3134.
5. . . /. . // .
. - .. . 296 .
6. .. /. . // .2006. 9. .22-23.

631.363.7.001



.., .., ...
, .
e-mail: rustem-59@mail.ru
-
, . .
[1].
585

.
, ,
2
.
,
. , ,
.

, . , , .
.. [2] , .
1. - .
2. - .
3. - .
4. - .
5. - .
-
, .
[3, 4] .
= f (t) .
(1)
,
[5]:
dc / dt = D (d2c / dx2) ,
(2)
c - ;
t - ;
x -
;
586

D - .
( ) [6] , :
dc / dt = Dr (d2c / dr2 + 1 / r dc / dr) ,
(3)
r - ;
Dr - .
, , [6]
dc/dt = D (d2c/dx2) + Dr (d2c/dr2 + 1/r dc/dr) .
(4)

[7] .
, .
, . ,
, .
ti t,
F(t) = f(t) dt = 1 ,
(5)
F(t) - , ,
, ti; . . F(t) ti;
f(t) - -
.
F(t) f(t)
.

= V / Q , V - ,3; Q - ,
3/. t / Q t / V , F() = f() d= 1
(.1).
"" ,
F() = f() d,
""
587

0
0

F() d= 1 - f () d .
(6)

, : F -
- . i
;
F = C d = (Ci / Co) d = 1 , C = Ci / Co = dF d , (7)
F -
, - - (.2).
, , , , . - , ,
.
, t, ,

dC / dt =
(dC / dX) .
(8)
: , . , (dC/dX)= = 0 dC / dt =
0. .2.
, ,
dC / dt = (C / C) / = (Q / V) (C / C) ,
(9)
C C -
(.2),
= - .
, m
, , .
m .
C = C / Co = (m m m-1 / (m -1)!) - m .
(10)
m S 2

S 2 = 1 / m = 2 DL /
L.
(11)
m = 1 ; m = -
.
588

, .
,
.
,
. , ,
. x(t), y(t)
y(t) = Al [x(t)] , y(t) = w(P) x(t) ,
(12)
- ;
w(P) - .
[8] :
M = Mmax (1 - e - kt) ,
(13)
t - ;
k - , -
, ,
( ).
, , .
.

1. ..
.- .: . . -, 1978.- 560 .
2. . .- , 1975.
. ./ . ...- .: , 1975.- 384 .
3. .. .- .: , 1973.- 215 .
4. L.T.Fan, S.J.Chen and C.A.Watson. Solids Mixing.- Ind. Eng. Chem., 1970,
7.
5. P.M.C.Lassy. Development in the Theory of Particle Mixing.- I. Appf.
Chem., 1954, 4.
6. .., .. 589

// . ./ C . .
23.- : , 1986.- .35-39.
7. . .-.:
, 1982.- 621 .
8. .. // . ./ . . 132.- : , 1977.- . 76-78.

636.4.085.13


.., . .-. ., , .., ..., ,
.., . .-. .
- , , abilovbt@mail.ru
: - , .
: , -- , .


, , .
,
, . , , , , ,
, [1,5,6,8,12].

, 590

[4,13,14].
, , , , , , .
, .
, ,
[2,3,10].

, . , , [7,9,11 ].
-
-- , 36 -
9- .
( 1).
. - () .
2 3.
1

I-
II-

,
12

-"-"-"-"-

12
12

()
2003
+ ( 1)
+ ( 2)

0,4 (
45%, 40%, 15%) 1,0 -.
0,85 , 89
, 10,5 . 1
104 . -- : I-
( 1) II ( 2). -
111 .
591


,
,
,
,
,


( +
+ )
, %
16,5
14,5
7,8
12,75
1,43
2,17
28,0
5,07
6,91
4,18
39,36
61,33
1
0,43
1,05
40
105
6,8
10,4
3,0
1,8
1,1
3,4
17
2

3 1


D3


1
2
16
3,7
120
47
140
175
510
30
75
10
37
2,5
350
190
900
900
60
12
9
100000
20000
20000
4000
350

, , 83,0; 86,0 83,0%. 4.

592

4 -
,

,
,
( 1),
( 2),
,
,
:

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, .
, .
,
,

0,83
0,4
8
2,5

I-
0,86
0,4
17,1
8
2,5

II-
0,83
0,4
9,6
8
2,5

0,78
9,8
1,03
116
81
3,21
2,27
1,51
1,48
55,33
1,72
20,1
0,15
24,42
0,29
0,33
47,8
14,91

0,79
10,28
1,06
120
82
3,72
2,44
1,53
1,52
0,15
56,77
1,75
35,82
0,36
40,4
1,33
1,71
0,69
54,78
15,42

0,78
9,83
1,03
116
81
3,93
2,62
1,51
1,48
55,33
1,72
20,1
0,15
24,42
0,29
0,19
0,37
47,8
14,91

4, . I 0,48 , 1,0 , 0,51 , 0,17 , -1,44


, - 15,72 , - 0,21 , - 16 , - 1,71
. , D 0,36 . , - 7,0 . , 0,51
, II- 0,72
, 0,35 , 0,35 . .
, ,
, 5.
593

5 9 12

, :
-
-
,
,

I-

II-

25,491,34
31,31,35
5,81,13
521,27

25,401,51
32,51,29
7,11,54
641,11

25,501,28
31,81,21
6,31,51
571,78

5 , , - , 1.
I-
64 , II- 52 57 ,
18,75 10,94%. ,
,
. ( 1) 20 , 16,5 /,
( 2) , 5,2 , 17,4 /.
--
, , 12 , 6.
6 , %

I-
II-

61,10
1,82
63,35
1,11
61,98
0,82

63,84
0,67
66,04
1,23
64,84
1,67

69,00
2,17
72,05
1,58
70,65
1,53

65,180,64

53,61
1,77
55,96
1,63
53,50
1,25

62,95
1,36
65,24
2,32
65,36
2,54

66,410,71
66,281,03

I- ,
; , , : 2,25; 2,20; 3,05;
1,23; 2,35; 2,29%. , , II- .
594

I-
II-

,


25,49
31,30
25,40
32,50
25,50
31,80

,
5,81
52
7,10
64
6,30
57


1 ,
. .
15,00
12,34
13,68

7 , ( 1)
17,73%, ( 2) - 8,80% .
:
( 1) :
- I- 64
, II- 18,75 10,94%,
3,83 2,20%;
- , , , , : 2,25; 2,20; 3,05; 1,23; 2,35; 2,29%;
- 17,73%.;
-
( ,
.. , 2003) :
0,6 , 0,46 , 1,44 , 15 , 0,21 , 16
, 1,71 . 7,0 .

1., ..

/ .., ..//
- . 2006. .
1. 1. . 144-147.
2. , ..
/ .., .. //
- . 2007. .
2. 2-2. . 114-115.
3. , .. / .., .., .., .. // . 2014. 1. . 23.
4. , .. 595

-
/ .., .. //
- . 2003. .
1. 1-1. . 42-46.
5. , .. / .. // / - . , 2004
6. , ..
/ .., .., .., .. //
- . 2012. . 2. -1. . 163-169.
7. , ..
/ .., .. // , , . 2010. 4. . 10.
8. , ..
/ .., .. // , , . 2009. 2.
. 1.
9. , .. . / .., .. //
, , . 2013. 2. . 61-65.
10. , ..
/ .., .., .. // , , .
2011. 1. . 41-43.
11. , ..

- / .., .. // - . 2012. . 1. 5. . 118-120.
12. , .. - / .., .., .. // : . 2004. . 66-71.
13. , ..
- // : . . . .-. ., 85-
(). . 2015. . 141-145.
14. , .. / .., ..
// - . 2010. . 3. 1. . 72-76.
596

5.

: 631.4

.., ..-.., .., ..-..
-
, E-mail: umid_ruzmetov@mail.ru

.
,
200 300 /
62,7 92,1%.
: , :
, , , .
. ,
, ,
.
: , ,
.
.
, , [1, 2, 3].
,
. .
.
597

- ,
.
. (12-15 ),
, .
50, 100, 200, 300
400 /. 16 , . , 16 .
. , (15.09.2015 ) ,
62,7% 92,1% 72,5% 88,2% (.1).
-1
, /
( )
50
100
200
300
400

%
,

52,9
80,3
74,4
70,5
62,7
68,8
82,3
72,5
92,1
88,2
78,3
84,2

200, 300 /.
, 2 3.
-2.
, /

( )
50
100
200
300
400

12,31,5

0,260,03

13,51,7
13,351,6
15,71,8
16,71,8
18,11,9

0,270,04
0,290,04
0,290,04
0,290,04
0,290,05

1,20
7,0
3,4
4,4
5,8
598

9,7
56,9
27,6
35,7
45,3

0,01
0,03
0,03
0,03
0,03

3,84
11,53
11,53
11,53
11,53

-3. ,

,
/

( )
50
100
200
300
400

6,331,3

0,130,03

8,741,4
8,271,5
13,611,5
14,561,7
18,591,8

0,220,04
0,260,04
0,280,05
0,280,05
0,310,06

2,41
1,91
7,28
8,23
12,26

38,0
30,1
115,0
130,0
193,6

0,09
0,13
0,15
0,15
0,18

69,2
100
115,3
115,3
138,4

, ,
(.4) (.5)
200 300 /.

300 400 /.
27,6
35,7 %. 11,5% (.2).
30,0; 93,6 15,3; 38,4% (.3) .
. .

. 4 ,

599

. 5
59,7 82,3%.
200 300 /, 76,5-83,3% (.6).
,
1,54 1,82 . 2 3 ., 11
39 .
150-200 /. (.7)
6

50 /
100 /
150 /
200 /
250 /
300 /

, .
34
34
34
34
34
34
34

, .
20
20
21
23
24
26
28

600

%
59,7
58,8
61,7
67,6
70,5
76,4
82,3

%
1,54
100
1,63
105,8
1,68
109,0
1,71
111,0
1,74
112,9
1,79
116,2
1,82
118,1

. 7

, ,
62,7
92,1 %. 13,5 18,1 ; 72,5 88% . 8,74 18,59 . 59,7% 82,3 %.

200 300 /.

1. . . . 2005.-392 .
2. . . , 1953.-66 .
3. . . , 1972.- 18 .

34.11:631.542


.., . .-. .,
,
. , E-mail: marina.stalnaja@yandex.ru
.
,
. , .
601

. , ,
, .

. ,
1964 . 20 ,
.
, .

.

.
, , , .
, .
.
.
, 106 .
35 %, 10, 8,
, , , , , 4-5%.
2014 . -
5751 . , , 50%.
- 35% [2,
4].

. 2013-2014
. - 2014 . . , 2012 .
1278 . , 2013 1352 . ., 2014 1040 . , .. 23% ,
[5,6].
12,9 . , . . 2,25 .
.
602



, 2013-2020 , ,
.
. .
, .
.
. 77 % . 2014 . 135,5 . 27,5 % .
, ,
.
, 30 50%. , 2008-2013
44,9 . 12,6 . ,
28%.
,
, 33%.
, , 2013 6,2 . ,
3 . . ,
460 . , 1,7 . . , .
. - , . 1990-2014 .
14%,
40 % [1].
- . . 2000-2013 . 603

,
12%. 2000 .
: 32%, -
25,2%, 30,4%, 28,4%. 2014 .
: 45,6%, - 21,8, 19,5%,
22,2%.
25,3%, 47,3%.
, 700
. .
100 .
, 2-5 ., 10 . - .
15 / , 3-4- 30-40 /, .
50-60 / 5-6- [1, 3].
.
,
800 , 200 300. , . , ,
.

.
.
, 1
1,5 . ., 50-80 . ,
15 . , , , ,
5-7 .
. .
, .

604

.
. , . . .
. . .

,
.
.
, .

1. , ..
/ .. : -
: , 2015. . 149-155.
2. , .. , / .. : - . : - ..,
2015. . 183-186.
3. , ..
/ .. , ..
. 2, . 3. ., 2015. . 339-341.
4. , .. /
.. .
4, .3. , 2015. . 56-58.
5. , .. . / ..
. . , 1982. .
127-135.
6. , .. 605

// ..
, .. , :
. VI -
: .., 2014. .134-139.

57.018.4


.., . .-. .,
,
. , E-mail: marina.stalnaja@yandex.ru
.
, .
: , , , .
- , , , ,
.
(Cornus mas L.) , . : , , ,
, (, ),
. , , , , , . ,
. ,
606

[2, 6].

. .
.
,
. . - .
, . . ,
[1, 4].

,

.
. . ,
. 100 . , 100
( ).
,
: ,
. .
.
,
, , .
, . (, , , ) .
Cornus mas L.
607

, .
, , , , , , , , , , .
, , -
. , :
( ), , , ,
, ( ).
,
2 4 , , , 5 29 , 40 . , , , .

, ( ).
-, , ,
, - .
; ;
, . 3,5 11,0 1,0 6,0 , 0,5 1,5 , ,
-, . , -.
.
, , ,
. 10 .
. , .
Cornus mas L.
.
,
, .. , , , 608

-. ,
, .
14-20 ,
.
1,5 :
[5].
, .
.
6,5-7,5 ,
88,7-89,0 %. , . , , .
. .
.
. ,

.
:
1. , .. / .. , .. //
. 2, . 3. .,
2015. . 338-339.
2. , .. , / .. // : - . : - ..,
2015. . 183-186.
3. , .. / .. // : : - /
. . , .. . : - , 2015.
. 142-147.
4. , ..
/ .. //
. V .
- , 25-
, 2016, . 760-761.
609

5. , .. / .. , .. // : :
- / . . , .. . : - , 2015. . 49-51.
6. , ..
/ .. // : . - : , 2015. . 149-150.

634.1

..
-
()
,
.
, , (Rosaceae), (Pistacia vera L.), (Amygdalus L.), , , .
. - ,
.
(Amygdalus L.) (Rosaceae) .
, : , , , , ,
(Amygdalus communis L.)
.
, 6 7 , Pistacia vera L.
610

, . , , -.
, .

, , - , .
. ,
. , ,
, .
. 4-7 , 3-4 . () 10-12 ,
12-20 .
.. (1990), 80-100 . , . 23-35,
, .
. , - .
,
.
, , , .
. , . . , , .
18-20. ,
.
1-1,5
611

. . .
0,2 1 3 8
. : 20-30 .
-
.
.. ( .).
.. (1978) .. . (1985)
, , , , .
- - , , , .

(, , .). , .. .
, ,
. .
.
. 1
. , , . ,
,
.
, , , , , .

, - , .
: 88; 86; 66;
6-8 5-6 . . 612

, .
, 3-5 .
, . , 4-5
100-150 , 50
5 20-30 /
. 250-270,
450 80-90 /.
180, 120 /.
.. (1973) - , :
-, , , .
- .
.., 30- ,

-, , , , , . , .. , , ,
350 , . - ,
, . - , ,
. , , .

, , .
. , ,
, -

613

.

1.
., .. . .: , 1985.
2.
. . . .: 1990, - 115-131.
3.
.. -.
.: , 1973.
4.
.. ,
. .: , 1978.

634.1



. ., . .
, E-mail bobomurodovich@mail.ru
.
. , , , , , ,
, , .
. , .
Pistacia L.
Pistacia vera L. . , ,
,
- , .
, 614

() ,
( ), ,
, , . , ,
, , .
. , .
, , , ,
, , .
.
. , ,
, , . , , ,
, .
90 , ,
, .
,
,
.
. ,
, . , ,
, ,
. .
615


: , , , , , , ,
.
- ,
,
, , ..
1916 :
?
, , ,
, , .
, , .. , , , , , , , .
, , .. , . ,
, .
, , ,

, , .
.

(), , , , , .

, ,
. ,
. , 616

. , , 450-650
,
, .
. , ,
. ,
, ,
, , , , .
, , .. , ,
. ,
, , .

1.
.. . .:, - .: . 1936.
2.
.., .., ..
- Pistacia vera L. . ICARDA. 1997,
122.

617

621.86

.., ..., ; .., .



E-mail: mtmurodvfarhod@yandex.com
.
.
: ; ; ;
.
. , , -,
,
. -, .
. ,
, , . ,
. .
15 [1].
, ,
, , , in vitro, - ,
. , .
.

.
. 618

- ,
5 , ,
, ", 5-14 ( -
).
, , ,
.
.
" ,
( 32%) (, .),
, , , , .
, , .., .., .., .. .

. , - - ,
, , .
,
. , 4- , , 2-
- ().
.

, , - , , .
.., .., .A., C ..,
.., .., .. . . 619

-
( ). . ;
--" , .
, , ,
-,
(). 4- ,
80...85% [2].
.
( ), . .., .., ..,
.., .. , , 3 .
,
. ,
, ,
.
() .
.. ,
. 4-5
, 620

. , .

.
. ,
:
-
;
- --" ;
- ;
- .

1. : . . http://agro.uz/ru/information/about_agriculture/ 421/5193/
2. ..
. . . . . . . . , 1998.

629.01:621.313

-

.. ...,

E-mail: mtmurodvfarhod@yandex.com
-
. () . .
: ; - ;
; () ; .
621

. , , .
, 80% , - () - 20%.
, ,
, . , , . , ,
, .
- , . , .
.
.
,
. , .
.
.
. , -
, .
,
, .
, ,

.
622

.
III
, . .
(.1). , . .
,
[1].

Maglev. , .
,
.
, . , .
, , , .

. -
. , ,
. Philae
- , .

.1.
, . . , .
623

() MAGDRIVE. 2010
. . .
. -
,
.
.
. , .
, , . , .
, . , .
,
.
,
.
, ,
.
,
.
, ,
.

624

- ().
- ,
.
, .
.
, ,
- .
- .
C
1.M

.Http://www. liveinternet.ru/users/3473355/post345443076/

338.243(477.75).



.., ...
-

E-mail: rustam9837@mail.ru
:
, , .
: , ,
, , ,
.
625

,
,
.
. ,
,

, . ,

. ,
,
. 840
, ,
[1].
.
,

.

,
,

.
, , , , , .
, , , ,
.
, -
[3-9].
, .
,

626

. , 1, ,
17 (2013 .) 3 (2000 .),
14 3 , 19
5 .
2000-2013 .
. , .
1. ,

- 2000 2013
.
.

97
95
72
71
177
165
145
132

29
22
14
19
20
50
25
17

15
16
3
5
13
30
20
3

153

29

13

2000

96
56
93
54
69
46
69
16
175
68
159
84
143
51
127
38
150

28

2013
.

53
26
19
8
65
30
22
8
7

:
http://faostat3.fao.org/download/Q/*/E

2000

153
25
136
7
113
19
119
39
168
13
171
42
160
12
141
23
151

21

2013
.

58
12
2
32
105
41
17
8

FAOSTAT. . :

, . , 5 4 .

, . , , .
2000-

. [1].
. 2014
9286,7 . , 2452,4 . , 1656,1 .
, 2490,6 . 1441,2 . .
627

,
: 7 , 3,2
, - 2,7 , - 2,2 , 1,8 (.1).
10000,0

9286,7

9000,0
8000,0
7000,0
6000,0
5000,0
4000,0

3348,0

3000,0

2490,6

2452,4
1656,1

2000,0

1441,2

926,0

1000,0

641,6

517,0

351,0

0,0

1991

2014

: .
*: 2005 .
.1.
, (. .)
()
300

270,9
253,6
223,0

250
218,5
188
189,6

200

182,1

183,8
175,2

175,1

193,8

200,9

246,4

263,7

184,6
169,1

268,3

252,5

228,4

203,1

185,7

265,6

190,9

191,0

192,6

200,3

200

201,3

187,3

178,2

157,0

150

132,4
125,4

135,6

141,4
127,1

113,0
106

109,8

108,6

98,7

100

79,4
65,1
50,9

50

63,1

49,2
34,9

57,6

60,8
51,0

85,2

77,4

85,2

90,8

116,1

120,7

97,8

64,7

41,2

34,1

0
1991 1995 1996 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

()
628

250

200

150
/

124,8
115,9 121,3
95,0
100 87,8

5036,7 43,5

43,8 39,9

184,1
170,3 175,2
152,5 157,5
143,7
131,9
129,3

76,6
62,3 73,8
57,8
58,2
56,0
56,9
52,5

213,6
210,7
203,7
194,1 198,4 194,9 195,7

82,5 87,2

92,6 97,3

112,3
104,7

116

36,5

: .
.2.
, (/)
-
. , 188,0 (1991 .) 270,9
/ (2014 .), .. 144,1 % , - 106,0 201,3 / (189,9 %),
50,9 120,7 / ( 2,4 ), 87,8 213,6
/ ( 2,4 ), 36,7 120,7 / ( 3,3 ). . 2 () ()
1991 2004 .
, ,
2004 .

.
,

. ,
- , ,
, , ,
. 2020
- 3
350 3 [10].
2
1991-2014 . 419,0 .,
629

40,4 % 30,6 % 9,8 .. ,


112,1 .,
2,6 .., 58,6
. 1,4 .., - 57,8 . 1,4 ..
2.
1991

,
.
1720,5
1017
79,9
21,7
204,1
195,6
60,9

, %

2014
,
.
1301,5
1655,6
192
80,3
261,9
128,9
51,5

, %

(+;-)
,
.
-419,0
638,6
112,1
58,6
57,8
-66,7
-9,4

40,4
30,6

23,9
38,9

1,9
4,5

0,5
1,9

4,8
6,2

4,6
3,0

1,4
1,2
957,9
22,5
325,7
7,6
-632,2

: .

,
..
-9,8
15,0
2,6
1,4
1,4
-1,6
-0,2
-14,8

,
. .3
. ,
.
(,
, ..),
.
, . ,
25 (2000 .) 58 (2013 .),
- 7 12 , - 13 32 ,
- 42 105 , 12 41 .
(
19 2 ), 23 17 , 21 8 (.
.2). ,
,
-.

630

1600
1400
1400
1200
1000
823,6
800

725,9

600

597,6

592

2013

2015

471,8

400
200
0
2007

2009

2011

2016
()

: .
.3.
(..)
-
,
,
, .
.. , 10 % .
() : - 10
, - 20 , 54 [2].
.
: 2016
4,5 .
. , [2].
. , 2020
35 , 30, 21,5.
631

-2505 5.03.2016 . 2016


10 458,0 . ( 2020 126,6
%,), 2833,0 . ( 2020 129,1 %), 1980,0 . (
2020 - 127,1 %), 2874,0 . ( 2020 128,4 %),
1601,0 . ( 2020 127,0 %) (.3).
3
2016-2020

2016.
(.)

%
2017.
2018.
2019.
2020.

2020.
2016.(%)
1.
10 458,0
105,7
105,9
106,2
106,5
126,6
2.
2 833,0
106,3
106,5
106,7
106,9
129,1
3.
1 980,0
106,1
106,2
106,2
106,3
127,1
4.
2 874,0
106,0
106,3
106,6
106,9
128,4
5.
1 601,0
105,7
106,0
106,3
106,6
127,0
: 1 -2505 5.03.2016 .

2016-2020

,

. ,

2030 5,7 [10].
, ,
,

:
-
;
-
, ,
- , ;
-
,
;
- ,
,
;
632

-,

;
-
;
- , .

-
,

;
- , ,
, ,
,
- ;
-
,

.

1. , .
, 07.06.2014. - http://uza.uz/ru/politics/vystuplenie-generalnogo-direktoraprodovolstvennoi-i-selskokhozyaistvennoi-organizatsii-oon-zhoze-gratsianu-da-silva07.06.2014-28910?sphrase_id=63769
2.
..
,
26.04.2016.
http://www.putintoday.ru/archives/7510
3. -255
11.01.2006 . - http://www.lex.uz/mobileact/967570
4. -2505
5.03.2016.

2016-2020

http://www.norma.uz/raznoe/postanovlenie_prezidenta_respubliki_uzbekistan5
5. -2515
07.04.2016 .
- http://www.lex.uz/mobileact/2930266
6. -2520
633

12.04.2016 . , http://www.lex.uz/mobileact/2986035
7. -2539
01.06.2016 .

http://www.lex.uz/Pages/GetAct.aspx?lact_id=2971974
8. 206
15.06.2016 .
, , http://online.zakon.kz/Document/?doc_id=37220615
9. 207
15.06.2016 .

http://www.lex.uz/mobileact/2985765
10. 2015
, . ..
, 2015 2016 . , 16.01.2016. http://uza.uz/ru/politics/doklad-prezidenta-respubliki-uzbekistan-islama-karimova-nar-16-01-2016
11. - www.stat.uz

634


1.

.., .,
- ATRIPLEX UNDULAT
-
. ., , ,
.., .., .., ..,

.., , ..,

., ., .,
ATRIPLEX CANESCENS

.., .,
(CERATOIDES EWERSMANNIANA)
-
.., .., -
.., ..,

.., ..,
..,
.., ..,

.., ..,

.., ..,

635

19

27
32

44

50
58
63
68

74

81
88

.., ..


.., .., .., -

., ., .., .,
.., .., : ,
. .,

.., ..,
..,
.., . ., .., ..,
.., ..,

.., :

.., .., .., ..,
-
.., ..,
.., ..,
..,

.., ..,

.., .., ..

636

94

101

110
118
127
138
143
152

159
166

170

173

178
183
186
196

.., .., ..,



.., ..,
.., .., -

..,
..,

.., .., .., ..,
.., ..,
-

199
202
208
215
220
230

2.
., .., ., ., .
(PANICUM MILICEUM)

., ., ., .,

.., ..,
-
.., ..,
..,
..,

.., .., .., ..,
(CHENOPODIUM QUINOA WILD)
.., ..,

637

236

241

245
252
261
265
270
273

.., .., ..,



., ., ., .,
.., ..,
..,

.., ..,
.., ., .., .., ,
.., .., ..,
- -

.., .., ..,



.., ..,
.., ,
.., .., ..,

.., ..,

..,
.., .., ..,

638

283
287
293
299
309

315

322

328
332
337
340

343

350
357

.., ..
.., ..,

.., ..,
..,

.., .., ..,

362
369
373
377
388

3.
.., -

.., .., .., ..,


.., .., .., .., .. GOSSYPIUM L.
.., ..,

., .., .., .., .., ., .., .., ..,
..,

., .., .., .., .., ., .., .., ..,
.., -

GOSSYPIUM L.
Kosenko N.P., DIRECT METHOD OF BEET ROOT SEED PRODUCTION
ON THE CONDITIONS OF DRIP IRRGATION OF THE SOUTH OF
UKRAINE

639

393

402

410

413

421

431

4.
.., ..,
.., .., .., ..,
.., (SARCOPTOSIS)
.., ..,
..,
.., .., [ ..],

..

.., .., .

.., .., .,

..,
-
.., .., .., ..,
.., ,
Abduvasikov A.A., PROBLEMS OF FOOD SECURITY IN UZBEKISTAN
..,
-
.., .., ..,

640

436

440
445
450
455

460

472
478
483

488

494
497
503
509

515

..,

Raximov P.K., Utelboev A., RURAL AREA AND THE PROBLEMS OF
PROVIDING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Yangiboev D.G., Murotov Q.G., Kurganov X., SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: REVIEW OF APPROACHES
.., .., ., .., .., .., ..,

.., .., .., .., ..,

., .., ..,
-
.., .,
.., ., -
.., .., ..,
-

.., .., .., .., -




..,

.., ..,

.., .., ..,

525
529
535

540

548

555
558
563
571

576

581

585

590

5.
.., ..,
597

..,
601

641

..,

..,
.., ..,


.., .., .,
..,
-
..,

642

606
610
614

618

621

625
635

XXI
XXI , 25 2016 .


www.pniiaz.ru

643

Оценить