Claim · model-written summary
Rice, finger millet, and pigeonpea intercrops increased sweet potato border-row root number, length, and diameter over monoculture.
- Taxon
- sweet potato
_Flower.jpg?width=60)
Ipomoea batatase0 - Treatment
- rice ( Oryza sativa L.), finger millet ( Eleusine coracana L.) and pigeonpeae0
- Outcome
- number of roots/plant, root length and root diametere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- monoculture sweet potatoe0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Flower.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“the number of roots/plant, root length and root diameter were significantly higher in border rows when rice ( Oryza sativa L.), finger millet ( Eleusine coracana L.) and pigeonpea were used as intercrop compared to monoculture sweet potato”
Title
M. Nedunchezhiyan; K. Laxminarayana; K. Rajasekhara Rao; et al. Acta Agronomica Hungarica 2011. doi:10.1556/aagr.59.2011.2.4
Other claims from this paper (10)
- Intervention effect Pigeonpea intercropping significantly raised sweet potato border-row yield.
- Intervention effect Maize intercropping reduced sweet potato border-row tuber number.
- Intervention effect Maize intercropping increased sweet potato root length and diameter versus sole cropping.
- Intervention effect Inside-row yields of rice, finger millet, maize, and pigeonpea were slightly above monoculture yields.
- Mechanism The inside-row yield gain was mainly attributable to more seeds per panicle or cob.
- Observation Sweet potato dominated rice and finger millet intercrops.
- Observation Sweet potato was subordinate with maize or pigeonpea.
- Intervention effect Equal-area sweet potato yield was consistently higher under strip intercropping than monoculture.
- Observation Sweet potato–pigeonpea strips had a higher land equivalent ratio of 1.31 than other systems.
- Observation Sweet potato–pigeonpea strips had a higher net return of $623.9 than other systems.