Claim · model-written summary
The control intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut gave a yield advantage of 22% compared with sole cropping.
- Taxon
- pearl millet/groundnut
Arachis hypogaea
Cenchrus americanuse0 - Treatment
- control intercrope0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- advantagee0
- Value
- 22%e0
- Comparator
- sole croppinge0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With pearl millet/groundnut the control intercrop (i.e. not dug out) gave a yield advantage of 22% compared with sole cropping”
Title
R. W. Willey; M. S. Reddy Experimental Agriculture 1981. doi:10.1017/s0014479700011613
Other claims from this paper (7)
- Intervention effect The treatment dug out but refilled without polythene partitions was very similar to the control intercrop, so digging per se had little effect on growth.
- Intervention effect The intercrop with below-ground partitions gave a yield advantage of 19% over sole cropping.
- Intervention effect Partitioning decreased millet yield.
- Intervention effect Partitioning increased groundnut yield.
- Mechanism The authors suggest the main determinant of the intercrop yield advantage was an above-ground interaction between the canopies.
- Mechanism Below-ground interactions were important in determining the competitive balance of the two crops.
- Recommendation The authors conclude that the partitioning technique is promising.