Abstract
Abstract The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya. Oviposition was not affected by intercropping, but significantly fewer larvae and pupae were found in the intercrop. Egg parasitism was significantly higher in the intercrop reaching as high as 80% and was positively density dependent. Larval and pupal parasitism remained between 3 and 20%, but neither of these were affected by intercropping or host density. The main predators, ants and wandering spiders, were not augmented by intercropping, but an inverse relationship in abundance was found between these two predator groups. It is concluded that maize intercropped with cowpea has only limited potential as a method of controlling the key pests in maize.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping did not affect oviposition by lepidopteran stemborers on maize.
- Treatment
- intercroppinge2
- Interactor
- lepidopteran stemborerse1pest
- Outcome
- Ovipositione2
- Direction
- not affectede2
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya”
e2“Oviposition was not affected by intercropping, but significantly fewer larvae and pupae were found in the intercrop”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping significantly reduced stemborer larvae and pupae on maize.
- Treatment
- intercrope2
- Interactor
- lepidopteran stemborerse1pest
- Outcome
- larvae and pupaee2
- Direction
- significantly fewere2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya”
e2“Oviposition was not affected by intercropping, but significantly fewer larvae and pupae were found in the intercrop”
Claim · model-written summary
Egg parasitism was significantly higher in the maize intercrop, reaching up to 80%.
- Treatment
- intercrope3
- Outcome
- Egg parasitisme3
- Direction
- significantly highere3
- Value
- 80%e3
- Qualifier
- positively density dependente3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya”
e3“Egg parasitism was significantly higher in the intercrop reaching as high as 80% and was positively density dependent”
Claim · model-written summary
Larval and pupal parasitism stayed between 3 and 20% and was not affected by intercropping on maize.
- Treatment
- intercroppinge4
- Outcome
- Larval and pupal parasitisme4
- Direction
- neither of these were affectede4
- Value
- 3 and 20%e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya”
e4“Larval and pupal parasitism remained between 3 and 20%, but neither of these were affected by intercropping or host density”
Claim · model-written summary
The main predators, ants and wandering spiders, were not augmented by intercropping on maize.
- Treatment
- intercroppinge5
- Interactor
- antsFormicidaee5biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- The main predatorse5
- Direction
- not augmentede5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya”
e5“The main predators, ants and wandering spiders, were not augmented by intercropping, but an inverse relationship in abundance was found between these two predator groups”
Claim · model-written summary
Ant and wandering spider abundances showed an inverse relationship in maize intercrops.
- Interactor
- antsFormicidaee5biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- an inverse relationship in abundancee5
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The effects of maize–cowpea intercropping on three lepidopteran stemborers ( Chilo partellus (Swinhoe) C. orichalcociliellus (Strand) and Sesamia calamistis Hampson) and their natural enemies were studied in Kenya”
e5“The main predators, ants and wandering spiders, were not augmented by intercropping, but an inverse relationship in abundance was found between these two predator groups”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize intercropped with cowpea has only limited potential as a method of controlling the key pests.
- Treatment
- maize intercropped with cowpeae6
- Outcome
- only limited potential as a method of controlling the key pestse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“It is concluded that maize intercropped with cowpea has only limited potential as a method of controlling the key pests in maize”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 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.