Abstract
Where a substantial portion of the growing season is too cool for corn ( Zea mays L.) growth in areas such as the Puget Sound region of Washington, increased production might be achieved by intercropping corn with temperate forage legumes. A paired‐row arrangement of silage corn for intercropping was tested on a Sultan silt loam (fine silty, mixed, mesic, Aquic Xerofluvent). The paired‐row pattern, with 12 in. between the two rows of the pair and 60 in. between pairs, was compared in monoculture with a conventional 30‐in. single‐row pattern. Fertilizer treatments ranged from 0 to 180 lb N/acre; and 0, 26, and 39 lb P/acre. Dry matter yields and tissue concentrations of N, P, and K varied among years and fertility levels, but were not significantly different between the two corn row patterns ( P < 0.05). This suggests that paired rows are a viable alternative to single rows for intercropping. In companion studies, paired‐row corn was intercropped with either ‘Saranac’ alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.) or ‘Kenland’ red clover ( Trifolium pratense L.). The corn was no‐till planted in paired rows on 5‐, 7.5‐, and 13‐ft centers and monocropped in the same spacing and density using conventional tillage. The 5‐ft spacing of the intercrops was the most promising overall compromise for the production of quality dairy fodder with regards to the balance of biomass and crude protein. Higher N and K rates were required for intercropped than for monocropped corn, judging from their concentrations in the ear leaf.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Dry matter yields and tissue N, P and K concentrations did not differ significantly between the two corn row patterns.
- Taxon
- Corn
Zea mays subsp. mayst0 - Treatment
- corn row patternse1
- Outcome
- Dry matter yields and tissue concentrations of N, P, and Ke1
- Direction
- not significantly differente1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effects of Corn Row Pattern”
e1“Dry matter yields and tissue concentrations of N, P, and K varied among years and fertility levels, but were not significantly different between the two corn row patterns”
Claim · model-written summary
Paired rows are a viable alternative to single rows for intercropping corn.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Outcome
- viable alternative to single rowse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effects of Corn Row Pattern”
e2“This suggests that paired rows are a viable alternative to single rows for intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
The 5-ft intercrop spacing was the most promising overall compromise for quality dairy fodder.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Outcome
- most promising overall compromise for the production of quality dairy foddere3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effects of Corn Row Pattern”
e3“was the most promising overall compromise for the production of quality dairy fodder”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped corn required higher N and K rates than monocropped corn, judging from ear-leaf concentrations.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Organ / stage
- ear leafe4
- Treatment
- intercroppede4
- Outcome
- N and K ratese4
- Direction
- Highere4
- Comparator
- monocropped corne4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Effects of Corn Row Pattern”
e4“Higher N and K rates were required for intercropped than for monocropped corn, judging from their concentrations in the ear leaf”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays subsp. mays · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
95 papers in the same direction as this paper · 196 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
288 papers more in this group
See all 292 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.