Paper · 2012 · Journal of Crop Ecophysiology

EVALUTION OF POTATO AND PINTO BEAN INTERCROPPING

A Nasrollah Zadeh Asl; A Dabagh Mohammadinasab; سعید زهتاب سلماسی; et al.

8
claims
13
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

To evaluate beneficial effect of intercropping based on replacement and additive methods to sustainable agriculture, two experiments were conducted at the Agricultural Research Station of University of Tabriz in 2005 and 2006, to study the effect of intercropping potato and pinto bean by using these two methods. The experiments carried out using randomized complete block design with three replications and 16 treatments. The treatments, consisted of: eight treatments of replacement intercropping with 2:1 and 3:1 proportions of potato and pinto bean (with densities of 4.7 and 5.3 plants m-2 for potato and 45 and 55 plants m-2 for pinto bean), four treatments of additive intercropping (with densities of 4.7 and 5.3 plants m-2 for potato and 5.3 and 10.6 plants m-2 for pinto bean), two sole croppings of potato (4.7 and 5.3 plants m-2) and two sole croppings of pinto bean (45 and 55 plants m-2). Maximum tuber yield per plant, tuber yield of potato per unit area, tuber size, mean tuber weight, number of leaves and branches per plant were obtained from replacement intercropping treatments. Maximum grain yield of pinto bean per unit area was obtained from the replacement intercropping treatments; Maximum grain yield per plant, number of pods per plant, number of leaves and branches, plant height, dates of emergence, flowering, poding and ripening were obtained from the additive intercropping treatments. To evaluate the beneficial effect of intercropping, land equivalent ratio (LER) was more than one, and the maximum amounts for two years (1.25 and 1.27, respectively) belonged to replacement intercropping of 1:2 treatment (66% potato with 5.3 plants per m2 + 34%pinto bean with 55 plants per m2). This treatment, therefore, can be recommended to be the best intercropping pattern for sustainable agriculture.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Replacement intercropping maximized potato tuber yield per plant, area yield, and tuber size.

Treatment
replacement intercropping treatmentse0
Outcome
tuber yield per plant, tuber yield of potato per unit area, tuber sizee0
Direction
Maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Maximum tuber yield per plant, tuber yield of potato per unit area, tuber size, mean tuber weight, number of leaves and branches per plant were obtained from replacement intercropping treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 904–1098 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Replacement intercropping maximized potato mean tuber weight and leaves and branches per plant.

Treatment
replacement intercropping treatmentse0
Outcome
mean tuber weight, number of leaves and branches per plante0
Direction
Maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Solanum tuberosum
Solanum tuberosum · TaxonScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Maximum tuber yield per plant, tuber yield of potato per unit area, tuber size, mean tuber weight, number of leaves and branches per plant were obtained from replacement intercropping treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 904–1098 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Replacement intercropping maximized pinto bean grain yield per area.

Taxon
pinto beane0
Treatment
replacement intercropping treatmentse0
Outcome
grain yield of pinto bean per unit areae0
Direction
Maximume0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Maximum grain yield of pinto bean per unit area was obtained from the replacement intercropping treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1100–1206 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Additive intercropping maximized pinto bean grain yield per plant, pods per plant, and leaves and branches.

Taxon
pinto beant0
Treatment
additive intercropping treatmentse0
Outcome
grain yield per plant, number of pods per plant, number of leaves and branchese0
Direction
Maximume0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Maximum grain yield per plant, number of pods per plant, number of leaves and branches, plant height, dates of emergence, flowering, poding and ripening were obtained from the additive intercropping treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1208–1417 · show in text ↑
t0

“PINTO BEAN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Additive intercropping maximized pinto bean height and emergence, flowering, podding and ripening dates.

Taxon
PINTO BEANt0
Treatment
additive intercropping treatmentse0
Outcome
plant height, dates of emergence, floweringe0
Direction
Maximume0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Maximum grain yield per plant, number of pods per plant, number of leaves and branches, plant height, dates of emergence, flowering, poding and ripening were obtained from the additive intercropping treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1208–1417 · show in text ↑
t0

“PINTO BEAN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 24–34 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping land equivalent ratios exceeded one.

Taxon
POTATO AND PINTO BEANt0
Outcome
land equivalent ratio (LER)e0
Direction
more thane0
Value
onee0

Verbatim

e0

“land equivalent ratio (LER) was more than one”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1471–1516 · show in text ↑
t0

“POTATO AND PINTO BEAN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–34 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Replacement 1:2 intercropping had maximum land equivalent ratios of 1.25 and 1.27 over two years.

Taxon
POTATO AND PINTO BEANt0
Treatment
replacement intercropping of 1:2 treatmente0
Outcome
maximum amountse0
Direction
maximume0
Value
1.25 and 1.27e0

Verbatim

e0

“maximum amounts for two years (1.25 and 1.27, respectively) belonged to replacement intercropping of 1:2 treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1526–1640 · show in text ↑
t0

“POTATO AND PINTO BEAN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–34 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommended replacement 1:2 intercropping for sustainable agriculture.

Taxon
POTATO AND PINTO BEANt0
Outcome
best intercropping pattern for sustainable agriculturee0

Verbatim

e0

“This treatment, therefore, can be recommended to be the best intercropping pattern for sustainable agriculture”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1716–1826 · show in text ↑
t0

“POTATO AND PINTO BEAN”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 13–34 · show in text ↑

intercropping · yield · Solanum tuberosum (potato)Positive and negative results

54 papers: 41 positive, 13 negative or no effect

40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

50 papers more in this group

See all 54 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.