Abstract
Abstract Intercropping is being adopted as a method of crop production throughout the developing tropics. The objective of this experiment was to assess how the productivity of intercrops was affected by the interaction of irrigation levels and mulches, compared to monocrops. Six‐rowed barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) was intercropped with lentil ( Lens culinaris Medik) and flax ( Linum usitatissimum L.) with two levels of irrigations [(i) zero and (ii) one irrigation applied 35 d after planting] and two levels of mulch [(i) no mulch and (ii) rice straw mulch at the rate of approximately 7 Mg/ha −1 ]. Monocrop of each species were also grown. Seed yield of the monocrops were higher than their intercrop yields. Intercropped barley yielded 73 to 81% of the yield to monoculture. Intercropped lentil yielded 30 to 34% of the yield of monoculture, whereas intercropped seed yield of flax ranged from 27 to 31% of monoculture. Yield increased from one application of irrigation ranged from 12 to 21% of zero irrigation. The increase in yield due to straw mulch was 11 to 17% higher over no mulch. The barley‐lentil intercrop recorded higher values of land equivalent ratio (LER) and monetary advantage (MA), and had higher intercropping advantage of area time equivalent ratio (ATER) than the barley‐flax intercrop.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Barley seed yield under intercropping was 73 to 81% of monoculture yield.
- Taxon
- barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaree0 - Treatment
- Intercroppede0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 73 to 81%e0
- Comparator
- monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Intercropped barley yielded 73 to 81% of the yield to monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Lentil seed yield under intercropping was 30 to 34% of monoculture yield.
- Taxon
- lentil
Lens culinarise0 - Treatment
- Intercroppede0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 30 to 34%e0
- Comparator
- monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropped lentil yielded 30 to 34% of the yield of monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Flax seed yield under intercropping was 27 to 31% of monoculture yield.
- Taxon
- flax
Linum usitatissimume0 - Treatment
- intercroppede0
- Outcome
- seed yielde0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 27 to 31%e0
- Comparator
- monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropped seed yield of flax ranged from 27 to 31% of monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
One irrigation increased yield by 12 to 21% over zero irrigation.
- Taxon
- Barley, Lentil, and FlaxLens culinarisLinum usitatissimumHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- one application of irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 12 to 21%e0
- Comparator
- zero irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield increased from one application of irrigation ranged from 12 to 21% of zero irrigation”
t0“Barley, Lentil, and Flax”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw mulch increased yield by 11 to 17% over no mulch.
- Taxon
- Barley, Lentil, and FlaxLens culinarisLinum usitatissimumHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- straw mulche0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 11 to 17%e0
- Comparator
- no mulche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The increase in yield due to straw mulch was 11 to 17% higher over no mulch”
t0“Barley, Lentil, and Flax”
Claim · model-written summary
The barley-lentil intercrop had a higher land equivalent ratio than the barley-flax intercrop.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Treatment
- barley‐lentil intercrope0
- Outcome
- land equivalent ratio (LER)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- barley‐flax intercrope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The barley‐lentil intercrop recorded higher values of land equivalent ratio (LER) and monetary advantage (MA), and had higher intercropping advantage of area time equivalent ratio (ATER) than the barley‐flax intercrop”
Claim · model-written summary
The barley-lentil intercrop had a higher monetary advantage than barley-flax.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Treatment
- barley‐lentil intercrope0
- Outcome
- monetary advantage (MA)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- barley‐flax intercrope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The barley‐lentil intercrop recorded higher values of land equivalent ratio (LER) and monetary advantage (MA), and had higher intercropping advantage of area time equivalent ratio (ATER) than the barley‐flax intercrop”
Claim · model-written summary
The barley-lentil intercrop had a higher area time equivalent ratio than barley-flax.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Treatment
- barley‐lentil intercrope0
- Outcome
- area time equivalent ratio (ATER)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- barley‐flax intercrope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The barley‐lentil intercrop recorded higher values of land equivalent ratio (LER) and monetary advantage (MA), and had higher intercropping advantage of area time equivalent ratio (ATER) than the barley‐flax intercrop”
The same questions in other papers
organic · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results differ
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →irrigation · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results differ
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →intercropping · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results differ
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →irrigation · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results differ
82 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
105 papers more in this group
See all 109 papers →intercropping · yield · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →irrigation · yield · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →intercropping · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →organic · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.