Abstract
ABSTRACT This study was carried out to determine the effect of different intercropping systems on growth, mineral contents and yield of cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. var. capitata) under field conditions in 2000, 2001 and 2002. LER (Land Equivalent Ratio) and economic net income of different cropping systems based on cabbage as an index of intercropping efficiency were also evaluated. In the study, cabbage was used as a main crop, and cos lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. longifoila), leaf lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. crispa), radish (Raphanus sativus L.), onion (Allium cepa L.) and snap bean (Phaseolus vulgarism L. var. nanus) were used as intercrops. Each of the intercrops was planted in between cabbage rows in separate plots. Cabbage and all intercrops were also grown as sole crops. There was no significant effect of different intercropping systems on growth characteristics and yield of cabbage compared with sole cabbage cropping except for radish as an intercrop, which affected adversely the yield and some growth characteristics of cabbage. Net income was increased significantly when cabbage was intercropped with cos lettuce, bean, leaf lettuce or onion. The values of LER appeared to be greater than 1 under intercropping systems. Cropping systems did not significantly affect nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and iron content of cabbage. The results obtained in this study pointed out that intercropping systems based on cabbage might increase total yield, productivity and profitability. KEYWORDS: Cabbageincomeintercroppingland equivalent ratio (LER)yield
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping systems other than radish did not significantly affect cabbage growth and yield relative to sole cropping.
- Taxon
- cabbage
Brassica oleracea var. capitatae0 - Treatment
- different intercropping systemse0
- Outcome
- growth characteristics and yield of cabbagee0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
- Comparator
- sole cabbage croppinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was no significant effect of different intercropping systems on growth characteristics and yield of cabbage compared with sole cabbage cropping except for radish as an intercrop”
Claim · model-written summary
Radish as an intercrop adversely affected cabbage yield and some growth traits.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- radish as an intercrope0
- Interactor
- radish
Raphanus sativuse0other - Outcome
- yield and some growth characteristics of cabbagee0
- Direction
- affected adverselye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“radish as an intercrop, which affected adversely the yield and some growth characteristics of cabbage”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping cabbage with cos lettuce significantly increased net income.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- intercropped with cos lettucee0
- Interactor
- cos lettucee0other
- Outcome
- Net incomee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Net income was increased significantly when cabbage was intercropped with cos lettuce, bean, leaf lettuce or onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping cabbage with bean significantly increased net income.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- intercropped with cos lettuce, beane0
- Interactor
- beane0other
- Outcome
- Net incomee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Net income was increased significantly when cabbage was intercropped with cos lettuce, bean, leaf lettuce or onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping cabbage with leaf lettuce significantly increased net income.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- leaf lettucee0
- Interactor
- leaf lettucee0other
- Outcome
- Net incomee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Net income was increased significantly when cabbage was intercropped with cos lettuce, bean, leaf lettuce or onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping cabbage with onion significantly increased net income.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- onione0
- Interactor
- onion
Allium cepae0other - Outcome
- Net incomee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Net income was increased significantly when cabbage was intercropped with cos lettuce, bean, leaf lettuce or onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Land equivalent ratios exceeded one under intercropping.
- Taxon
- CabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0t0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The values of LER appeared to be greater than 1 under intercropping systems.”
t0“Cabbage Production”
Claim · model-written summary
Cropping systems did not significantly affect cabbage nitrogen, phosphorus or potassium content.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- Cropping systemse0
- Outcome
- nitrogen, phosphorus, potassiume0
- Direction
- did not significantly affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cropping systems did not significantly affect nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and iron content of cabbage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cropping systems did not significantly affect cabbage calcium, magnesium or iron content.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- Cropping systemse0
- Outcome
- calcium, magnesium and iron content of cabbagee0
- Direction
- did not significantly affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cropping systems did not significantly affect nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium and iron content of cabbage.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors concluded cabbage intercropping might raise total yield, productivity and profitability.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Outcome
- increase total yield, productivity and profitabilitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropping systems based on cabbage might increase total yield, productivity and profitability”
The same questions in other papers
Raphanus sativus · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Allium cepa · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
cultivation system · nutrient: content · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →intercropping · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
39 papers more in this group
See all 43 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.