Abstract
Abstract Long, warm seasons that are inadequately filled by sole crops can be more productive when more fully utilized by intercrops. The effect of plant densities and plant maturity on the magnitude of this increased productivity is not well documented. During two seasons of ≥ 190 d at 29°38′ N lat, maize ( Zea mays L.) at 12 densities (from 1.0 to 10.0 plants m −2 ) and two soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] cultivars, representing Maturity Groups VIII (Cobb) and VI (Davis), at three densities (3.0, 8.5, and 24.0 plants m −2 ) were grown in intercrop and sole crop in fan designs. Soybean was planted 56 d (1985) and 31 d (1986) after maize. Soybean density did not affect maize yield ( P ≤ 0.05). Although predicted sole‐crop Cobb and Davis seed yields were not different ( P ≤ 0.05), averaging 336 g m ‐2 , the two cultivars were differentially affected by maize density. Each unit increase in maize density (plants m ‐2 ), reduced soybean seed yield 20% for Cobb and 47% for Davis at 3.0 soybean plants m −2 and 7% for Cobb and 35% for Davis at 24.0 soybean plants m −2 . Cobb had two to three trifoliolates expand after maize removal, while Davis had all leaves fully developed at maize harvest. Land equivalency ratios (LER) were <1.1 for Davis‐maize and peaked at 1.4 for Cobb‐maize. Area‐time equivalency ratios (ATER) were <0.8 for Davis‐maize and peaked at 0.9 for Cobb‐maize. Davis‐maize was not a viable intercrop. The Cobb‐maize intercrop at 24 soybean plants m −2 over a range of maize densities utilized the long growing season more productively (LER = 1.4) than in sole crop; the increased productivity was due to increased season use (ATER < 1.0).
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean density did not affect maize yield.
- Treatment
- Soybean densitye0
- Interactor
- Soybean
Glycine maxe0other - Outcome
- maize yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Soybean‐Maize”
e0“Soybean density did not affect maize yield ( P ≤ 0.05).”
Claim · model-written summary
Predicted sole-crop Cobb and Davis seed yields were not different, averaging 336 g m ‐2.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Material
- Cobb and Davise0
- Outcome
- seed yieldse0
- Direction
- not differente0
- Value
- 336 g m ‐2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“predicted sole‐crop Cobb and Davis seed yields were not different ( P ≤ 0.05), averaging 336 g m ‐2”
Claim · model-written summary
Each extra maize plant per square metre reduced Cobb soybean yield by 20% at 3.0 soybean plants per square metre.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Each unit increase in maize density (plants m ‐2 ), reduced soybean seed yield 20% for Cobb and 47% for Davis at 3.0 soybean plants m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Each extra maize plant per square metre reduced Davis soybean yield by 47% at 3.0 soybean plants per square metre.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Each unit increase in maize density (plants m ‐2 ), reduced soybean seed yield 20% for Cobb and 47% for Davis at 3.0 soybean plants m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Each extra maize plant per square metre reduced Cobb soybean yield by 7% at 24.0 soybean plants per square metre.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Each unit increase in maize density (plants m ‐2 ), reduced soybean seed yield 20% for Cobb and 47% for Davis at 3.0 soybean plants m −2 and 7% for Cobb and 35% for Davis at 24.0 soybean plants m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Each extra maize plant per square metre reduced Davis soybean yield by 35% at 24.0 soybean plants per square metre.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Each unit increase in maize density (plants m ‐2 ), reduced soybean seed yield 20% for Cobb and 47% for Davis at 3.0 soybean plants m −2 and 7% for Cobb and 35% for Davis at 24.0 soybean plants m −2”
Claim · model-written summary
Cobb expanded two to three trifoliolates after maize removal.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Material
- Cobbe0
- Outcome
- trifoliolates expande0
- Value
- two to three trifoliolatese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Cobb had two to three trifoliolates expand after maize removal”
Claim · model-written summary
Davis had fully developed leaves at maize harvest.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Material
- Davise0
- Outcome
- all leaves fully developede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Davis had all leaves fully developed at maize harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Davis-maize LER was below 1.1.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- Land equivalency ratios (LER)e0
- Value
- <1.1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Land equivalency ratios (LER) were <1.1 for Davis‐maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cobb-maize LER peaked at 1.4.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- peakede0
- Value
- 1.4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“peaked at 1.4 for Cobb‐maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Davis-maize ATER was below 0.8.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- Area‐time equivalency ratios (ATER)e0
- Value
- <0.8e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Area‐time equivalency ratios (ATER) were <0.8 for Davis‐maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cobb-maize ATER peaked at 0.9.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- peakede0
- Value
- 0.9e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“peaked at 0.9 for Cobb‐maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors judged Davis-maize an unviable intercrop.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- Davis‐maize was not a viable intercrope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“Davis‐maize was not a viable intercrop.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cobb-maize at 24 soybean plants per square metre used the long season more productively than sole crop.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- utilized the long growing season more productivelye0
- Direction
- more productivelye0
- Value
- LER = 1.4e0
- Comparator
- sole crope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“The Cobb‐maize intercrop at 24 soybean plants m −2 over a range of maize densities utilized the long growing season more productively (LER = 1.4) than in sole crop”
Claim · model-written summary
The increased Cobb-maize productivity was attributed to increased season use despite ATER below 1.0.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- increased productivitye0
- Value
- ATER < 1.0e0
- Qualifier
- increased season usee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Plant Density and Soybean Maturity”
e0“the increased productivity was due to increased season use (ATER < 1.0).”
The same questions in other papers
Glycine max · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 155 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
176 papers more in this group
See all 180 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.