Paper · 2002 · The Journal of Agricultural Science

The effect of planting combinations and weeding on the growth and yield of component crops of maize/bean and maize/pumpkin intercrops

T. TEMBAKAZI SILWANA; E. O. LUCAS

9
claims
12
verbatim quotes
53
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A diagnostic survey carried out in 1997 to obtain baseline information on the farming situation in Transkei area of South Africa, showed that agriculture in this area was characterized by low technological inputs which invariably led to low agricultural outputs. The main farming system of the majority of the farmers (98%) was based on intercropping involving maize, beans and pumpkin combined in an haphazard fashion. Based on the above findings, two field experiments were set up in 1998 designed to bring out the best planting combinations for maize/beans and maize/pumpkin intercrops which could be introduced to the farmers. Effect of weeding on the intercrops was also investigated. In both intercrops, intercropping adversely affected the plant heights and circumferences of the component crops. Also, the yield of the individual crop in each intercrop was depressed by intercropping compared with its sole yield. In maize/beans intercrop, the yield of maize was depressed by 15% and that of beans by 13%. However in both intercrops, productivity as measured by Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) was the highest with maize at 10000 plants/ha combined with beans at 150000 plants/ha (2·60) with weeding while the combination with the best LER (1·50) in maize/pumpkin intercrop was at 30000 plants/ha of maize combined with pumpkin at 2500 plants/ha, with weeding. However, before any final recommendation is made, the profitability of each combination has to be considered. Weeding was found to enhance intercrop yields in maize/bean combination by 35% and by 30% in maize/pumpkin combination.

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 9

Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping adversely affected plant heights and circumferences of the component crops.

Taxon
component cropse1
Treatment
intercroppinge1
Outcome
plant heights and circumferencese1
Direction
adversely affectede1

Verbatim

e1

“intercropping adversely affected the plant heights and circumferences of the component crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–802 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping depressed the yield of each individual crop compared with its sole yield.

Taxon
component cropse1
Treatment
intercroppinge2
Outcome
yield of the individual crope2
Direction
depressede2
Comparator
its sole yielde2

Verbatim

e1

“intercropping adversely affected the plant heights and circumferences of the component crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–802 · show in text ↑
e2

“the yield of the individual crop in each intercrop was depressed by intercropping compared with its sole yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 810–920 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In maize/beans intercrop, maize yield was depressed by 15% compared with sole maize.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse3
Treatment
maize/beans intercrope3
Outcome
yield of maizee3
Direction
depressede3
Value
15%e3
Comparator
its sole yielde2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“the yield of the individual crop in each intercrop was depressed by intercropping compared with its sole yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 810–920 · show in text ↑
e3

“In maize/beans intercrop, the yield of maize was depressed by 15% and that of beans by 13%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 922–1012 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In maize/beans intercrop, bean yield was depressed by 13% compared with sole beans.

Taxon
beanse3
Treatment
maize/beans intercrope3
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
depressede3
Value
13%e3
Comparator
its sole yielde2

Verbatim

e2

“the yield of the individual crop in each intercrop was depressed by intercropping compared with its sole yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 810–920 · show in text ↑
e3

“In maize/beans intercrop, the yield of maize was depressed by 15% and that of beans by 13%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 922–1012 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Land Equivalent Ratio was highest for maize at 10000 plants/ha combined with beans at 150000 plants/ha with weeding (2.60).

Taxon
maizeZea mayse4
Treatment
maize at 10000 plants/ha combined with beans at 150000 plants/hae4
Outcome
Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)e4
Direction
higheste4
Value
2·60e4
Qualifier
with weedinge4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“productivity as measured by Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) was the highest with maize at 10000 plants/ha combined with beans at 150000 plants/ha (2·60) with weeding”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1042–1203 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The best Land Equivalent Ratio in maize/pumpkin intercrop (1.50) was at 30000 plants/ha of maize with pumpkin at 2500 plants/ha, with weeding.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse5
Treatment
30000 plants/ha of maize combined with pumpkin at 2500 plants/hae5
Outcome
LERe5
Direction
beste5
Value
1·50e5
Qualifier
with weedinge5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e5

“the combination with the best LER (1·50) in maize/pumpkin intercrop was at 30000 plants/ha of maize combined with pumpkin at 2500 plants/ha, with weeding”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1210–1363 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weeding enhanced intercrop yields in the maize/bean combination by 35%.

Taxon
maize/beane6
Treatment
Weedinge6
Outcome
intercrop yieldse6
Direction
enhancee6
Value
35%e6

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e6

“Weeding was found to enhance intercrop yields in maize/bean combination by 35% and by 30% in maize/pumpkin combination”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1475–1593 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weeding enhanced intercrop yields in the maize/pumpkin combination by 30%.

Taxon
maize/pumpkine6
Treatment
Weedinge6
Outcome
intercrop yieldse6
Direction
enhancee6
Value
30%e6

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e6

“Weeding was found to enhance intercrop yields in maize/bean combination by 35% and by 30% in maize/pumpkin combination”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1475–1593 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

About 98% of surveyed farmers in Transkei followed a maize, bean and pumpkin intercropping system.

Taxon
maize, beans and pumpkine7
Outcome
main farming systeme7
Value
98%e7

Verbatim

e7

“The main farming system of the majority of the farmers (98%) was based on intercropping involving maize, beans and pumpkin combined in an haphazard fashion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 263–418 · show in text ↑

Zea mays · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results

28 papers: 16 positive, 12 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

24 papers more in this group

See all 28 papers →

intercropping · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ

67 papers: 37 positive, 30 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 37 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

63 papers more in this group

See all 67 papers →

herbicide · yield · Cucurbita (pumpkins)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 4 positive, 8 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

herbicide · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results

63 papers: 42 positive, 21 negative or no effect

41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

59 papers more in this group

See all 63 papers →

herbicide · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

651 papers: 500 positive, 151 negative or no effect

499 papers in the same direction as this paper · 127 in the opposite direction · 24 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

647 papers more in this group

See all 651 papers →

intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

834 papers: 613 positive, 221 negative or no effect

220 papers in the same direction as this paper · 613 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

830 papers more in this group

See all 834 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.