Abstract
Multi-trophic level interactions in a mixed crop, involving cassava and maize, were studied in derived-savanna in Benin, West Africa. Two trials were planted, one during the short rainy season two months before onset of the dry season and one during the long rainy season in spring. Key pests under study on maize were the noctuid Sesamia calamistis Hampson and the pyralids Eldana saccharina Walker and Mussidia nigrivenella Ragonot, and on cassava, the exotic mealybug, Phenacoccus manihoti Matile-Ferrero and its encyrtid parasitoid Apoanagyrus lopezi De Santis. Both crops received insecticide treatments to assess the crop loss by a pest species. On maize, intercropping with cassava reduced egg and immature numbers of S. calamistis by 67 and 83%, respectively, as a result of reduced host finding by the ovipositing adult moth and of higher egg parasitism by Telenomus spp. Both trials showed similar effects on maize yields: on insecticide-treated maize, intercropping with cassava reduced maize yields by 9-16%, while on untreated maize the net effect of reduced pest density and increased plant competition resulted in zero yield differences; yield losses were lower in inter- compared to monocropped maize. For cassava, cropping system had no effect on parasitism by A. lopezi. Yield differences between mono- and intercropped cassava depended on time of harvest: they were large at the beginning and zero at final harvest. Land equivalent ratios were mostly > 1.5 indicating that a maize/cassava mixed crop, protected or unprotected, considerably increased the productivity per unit area of land.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava intercropping reduced S. calamistis egg numbers on maize by 67%.
- Treatment
- intercropping with cassavae0
- Interactor
- S. calamistisSesamia calamistise0pest
- Outcome
- egge0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 67e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On maize, intercropping with cassava reduced egg and immature numbers of S. calamistis by 67 and 83%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava intercropping reduced S. calamistis immature numbers on maize by 83%.
- Treatment
- intercropping with cassavae0
- Interactor
- S. calamistisSesamia calamistise0pest
- Outcome
- immature numbers of S. calamistise0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 83%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On maize, intercropping with cassava reduced egg and immature numbers of S. calamistis by 67 and 83%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced moth host finding contributed to fewer S. calamistis on intercropped maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“as a result of reduced host finding by the ovipositing adult moth”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher egg parasitism by Telenomus contributed to reduced pest numbers on intercropped maize.
- Outcome
- higher egg parasitisme0
_Figure_2d.png?width=60){kind=small}
TelenomusOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Figure_2d.png?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“higher egg parasitism by Telenomus spp.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava intercropping reduced insecticide-treated maize yield by 9-16%.
- Treatment
- intercropping with cassavae0
- Outcome
- maize yieldse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 9-16%e0
- Qualifier
- insecticide-treated maizee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“on insecticide-treated maize, intercropping with cassava reduced maize yields by 9-16%”
Claim · model-written summary
Untreated maize had zero yield difference between intercropping and monocropping.
- Treatment
- intercropping with cassavae0
- Outcome
- yield differencese0
- Direction
- zeroe0
- Qualifier
- untreated maizee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“on insecticide-treated maize, intercropping with cassava reduced maize yields by 9-16%, while on untreated maize the net effect of reduced pest density and increased plant competition resulted in zero yield differences”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield losses were lower in intercropped than monocropped maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield losses were lower in inter- compared to monocropped maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava cropping system had no effect on parasitism by A. lopezi.
- Taxon
- cassava
Manihot esculentae0 - Treatment
- cropping systeme0
- Interactor
- A. lopezi
Anagyrus lopezie0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- parasitism by A. lopezie0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For cassava, cropping system had no effect on parasitism by A. lopezi”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava yield differences between monocropping and intercropping were large at early harvest.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- intercropped cassavae0
- Outcome
- Yield differencese0
- Direction
- largee0
- Qualifier
- at the beginninge0
- Comparator
- mono-e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield differences between mono- and intercropped cassava depended on time of harvest: they were large at the beginning”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava yield differences between monocropping and intercropping were zero at final harvest.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- intercropped cassavae0
- Outcome
- Yield differencese0
- Direction
- zeroe0
- Qualifier
- final harveste0
- Comparator
- mono-e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield differences between mono- and intercropped cassava depended on time of harvest: they were large at the beginning and zero at final harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize and cassava mixed cropping mostly had land equivalent ratios above 1.5.
- Taxon
- maize/cassavaManihot esculenta
Zea mayse0 - Outcome
- Land equivalent ratiose0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- > 1.5e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Land equivalent ratios were mostly > 1.5 indicating that a maize/cassava mixed crop, protected or unprotected, considerably increased the productivity per unit area of land”
The same questions in other papers
Manihot esculenta · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →intercropping · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results differ
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 48 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
220 papers in the same direction as this paper · 613 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- 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.