Claim · model-written summary
Reciprocation between uptake and utilization efficiency contributed little to advantage.
- Taxon
- peanut
Arachis hypogaeae0e1
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The reciprocation of iron uptake and utilization efficiency of crops also had little contribution to intercropping advantage”
e1“In compare with monocropping of peanut, the results showed that the iron uptake efficiency of intercropping system Ⅰ (the ratio of maize and peanut was 6∶10 ) and intercropping systemⅡ (the ratio of maize/peanut/maize was 3∶8∶3) increased by 68.72% and 97.68% respectively”
Title
Zuo Yuan ACTA AGRONOMICA SINICA 2003
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Intervention effect System I increased peanut iron uptake efficiency by 68.72% versus monocropping.
- Intervention effect System II increased peanut iron uptake efficiency by 97.68% versus monocropping.
- Intervention effect System I decreased iron utilization efficiency by 23.26%.
- Intervention effect System II decreased iron utilization efficiency by 24.09%.
- Observation System I land equivalent ratio was 1.18.
- Observation System II land equivalent ratio was 1.27.
- Mechanism Iron uptake efficiency was the main source of intercropping advantage.
- Mechanism Iron utilization efficiency did not contribute to intercropping advantage.