Abstract
Intercropping studies with arhar (Cajanus cajan) var. T21 were conducted under irrigated conditions during 1972 and 1973 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The planting of one row of either mash (Phaseolus mungo) or mutig (Phaseolus sureus) in between two rows of arharh spaced 75 cm. apart, increased the yield of arhar, whereas a sllght reduction in its yield was recorded with groundnut and soybean. Intercropping with maize reduced the arhar yield by 101 per cent. The maximum cash returns (%) over arhar grown alone was recorded from intercropping with a short-duration variety T9 of mash, followed by groundnut and mung. The intercropping of maize and soybean proved to be a losing proposition.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Planting one row of mash or mung between two rows of arhar increased arhar yield
- Taxon
- arhar (Cajanus cajan)
Cajanus cajane0 - Treatment
- planting of one row of either mash (Phaseolus mungo) or mutig (Phaseolus sureus) in between two rows of arharhe1
- Outcome
- yield of arhare1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Setting
- irrigated conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping studies with arhar (Cajanus cajan) var. T21 were conducted under irrigated conditions during 1972 and 1973 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana”
e1“The planting of one row of either mash (Phaseolus mungo) or mutig (Phaseolus sureus) in between two rows of arharh spaced 75 cm. apart, increased the yield of arhar”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with groundnut and soybean slightly reduced arhar yield
- Taxon
- arhar (Cajanus cajan)Cajanus cajane0
- Treatment
- groundnut and soybeane2
- Outcome
- its yielde2
- Direction
- reductione2
- Qualifier
- sllght reductione2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping studies with arhar (Cajanus cajan) var. T21 were conducted under irrigated conditions during 1972 and 1973 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana”
e2“whereas a sllght reduction in its yield was recorded with groundnut and soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with maize reduced arhar yield by 101 per cent
- Taxon
- arhar (Cajanus cajan)Cajanus cajane0
- Treatment
- Intercropping with maizee3
- Outcome
- arhar yielde3
- Direction
- reducede3
- Value
- 101 per cente3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping studies with arhar (Cajanus cajan) var. T21 were conducted under irrigated conditions during 1972 and 1973 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana”
e3“Intercropping with maize reduced the arhar yield by 101 per cent”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping arhar with the short-duration mash variety T9 gave the maximum cash returns over arhar grown alone
- Taxon
- arhar (Cajanus cajan)Cajanus cajane0
- Material
- variety T9e4
- Treatment
- intercropping with a short-duration variety T9 of mashe4
- Outcome
- cash returnse4
- Direction
- maximume4
- Qualifier
- followed by groundnut and munge4
- Comparator
- arhar grown alonee4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping studies with arhar (Cajanus cajan) var. T21 were conducted under irrigated conditions during 1972 and 1973 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana”
e4“The maximum cash returns (%) over arhar grown alone was recorded from intercropping with a short-duration variety T9 of mash, followed by groundnut and mung”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping maize and soybean was a losing proposition
- Taxon
- arhar (Cajanus cajan)Cajanus cajane0
- Outcome
- intercropping of maize and soybeane5
- Qualifier
- losing propositione5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping studies with arhar (Cajanus cajan) var. T21 were conducted under irrigated conditions during 1972 and 1973 at the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana”
e5“The intercropping of maize and soybean proved to be a losing proposition”
The same questions in other papers
Arachis hypogaea · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →Zea mays · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →Glycine max · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Positive and negative results
15 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →Vigna mungo · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Positive and negative results
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →intercropping · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Results differ
93 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
113 papers more in this group
See all 117 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.