Claim · model-written summary
Alternate intercropping WUE exceeded wheat monoculture by 12.0-71.4%.
Triticum aestivumNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“12.0-71.4% and 10.6-37.8% higher than that of wheat and maize monoculture,respectively”
t0“Wheat/Maize Intercropping”
e1“there was no significant change of wheat yield in the alternately irrigated intercropping treatment”
e2“The water consumption in the alternately irrigated intercropping treatment had no significant increase compared to that of the conventionally irrigated intercropping treatment”
e3“The WUE of alternatiely irrigated intercropping treatment was 0.9-22.5% higher than that of the conventionally irrigated intercropping treatment”
Title
Yang Cai ACTA AGRONOMICA SINICA 2011
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect Alternate-irrigated intercropping had higher land equivalent ratio than sole cropping.
- Intervention effect LER did not differ significantly between conventional and alternate irrigation at the same quota.
- Intervention effect Alternate irrigation did not significantly change wheat yield versus conventional irrigation.
- Intervention effect Alternate irrigation increased maize yield by 11.4-36.4%.
- Intervention effect Alternate irrigation increased combined wheat and maize yield by 12.9 on average.
- Intervention effect Alternate irrigation did not significantly increase water consumption versus conventional intercropping.
- Intervention effect Alternate intercropping used 1.2-19.4% more water than the weighted monoculture average.
- Intervention effect Alternate irrigation increased intercropping WUE by 0.9-22.5% versus conventional irrigation.
- Intervention effect Alternate intercropping WUE exceeded maize monoculture by 10.6-37.8%.