Intervention effectmodel-written summary

pigeonpea yield declined under intercropping relative to monocropping in the LD-MD trial.

A claim from Maize and Pigeonpea Intercropping Systems in Mpumalanga, South Africa · 2001

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

pigeonpea yield declined under intercropping relative to monocropping in the LD-MD trial.

Taxon
pigeonpeaCajanus cajant0e0
Treatment
intercropping systemst0e0e1
Outcome
yield reductione0
Direction
reductione0
Value
7.4-31.0%e0
Comparator
monocropping systemse1
Setting
South Africat0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cajanus cajan
Cajanus cajan · TaxonFilo gèn' · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize and Pigeonpea Intercropping Systems in Mpumalanga, South Africa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–69
e0

“The yield reduction in intercropping systems for LD and MD pigeon pea cultivars was in the range 7.4-31.0%, while that of maize ranged from 8.7 to 38.6%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 580–733
e1

“Yields of both crops in intercropping systems were generally lower than in monocropping systems.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 483–579

Title

Maize and Pigeonpea Intercropping Systems in Mpumalanga, South Africa

C. Mathews; R. B. Jones; K. B. Saxena Open Access Repository of ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics) 2001

Other claims from this paper (7)

Record rev-fc51938c945413996d60eda3d75c3895d81d003386e74439893e4eea4a1e1a19 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

intercropping · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Results differ

117 papers: 94 positive, 23 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this claim · 94 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

108 papers more in this group

See all 117 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.