Abstract
Mixtures of cereals and legumes are used extensively for forage production. Maize (Zea mays) and cowpea (Vigna sinensis) monocultures as well as their mixture in three planting patterns (M1: alternate-row intercrop, M2: within-row intercrop, M3: mixed intercrop) were used to investigate on forage yield as well as the effect of intercropping on maize forage quality. The experiment was carried out as randomized complete block design with three replications. The results showed that intercropping systems had a significant effect on forage dry weight, where dry matter yield was increased by intercropping as compared with maize and cowpea sole crops. It was related with a higher consumption consumption of environmental resources, such as photosynthetically active radiation and soil moisture, by intercropping. Maize forage quality in terms of crude protein was improved by intercropping. It was because of more nitrogen availability for maize in intercropping compared with its sole crop.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping increased forage dry matter yield relative to maize sole cropping.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dry matter yield was increased by intercropping as compared with maize and cowpea sole crops”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping increased forage dry matter yield relative to cowpea sole cropping.
- Taxon
- cowpea (Vigna sinensis)
Vigna unguiculata subsp. unguiculatat0 - Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- dry matter yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- cowpea sole cropse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dry matter yield was increased by intercropping as compared with maize and cowpea sole crops”
t0“cowpea (Vigna sinensis)”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping improved maize forage crude protein quality.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize forage quality in terms of crude protein was improved by intercropping.”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping consumed more photosynthetically active radiation and soil moisture.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a higher consumption consumption of environmental resources, such as photosynthetically active radiation and soil moisture, by intercropping”
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen availability for maize was greater under intercropping than sole cropping.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more nitrogen availability for maize in intercropping compared with its sole crop”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →intercropping · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
830 papers more in this group
See all 834 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.