Abstract
Crop row spacing in intercropping systems affects interactions of crop species and subsequent crop yields.In a field experiment,the response of crop yield to different maize row spacing(0~80 cm) in pea/maize intercropping system was investigated.The results showed that land equivalent ratio(LER) of each treatment exceeded 1,indicating a significant yield advantage.When maize row spacing changed from 0 cm to 80 cm,the system yield first increased to a threshold and then declined.Positive quadratic relations between maize row spacing and yields of intercropping system or intercropped maize were observed in the field experiment.The highest yield occurred when maize row spacing was 40 cm and intercropped maize yield reached 10 118 kg.hm 2.Since intercropped pea yield never changed significantly,yield of the intercropped pea/maize system was dependent on maize yield.The change in maize row spacing significantly influenced maize yield components and especially grain number per spike.Grain number per spike(549 grains per spike) was highest when maize row spacing was 60 cm.Maize aggressive dominance over pea in terms of yield gradually strengthened with increasing maize row spacing.When maize row spacing was within 60 cm,its aggressive dominance over pea was below zero.This indicated that maize had a stronger competitiveness than peas.However,when maize row spacing was 80 cm,its relative aggressive dominance was 0.14 — which suggested that pea was more competitive than maize.Hence adjustment of maize row spacing effectively enhanced maize yield in pea/maize intercropping system.This increased production output of pea/maize intercropping system.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Every row-spacing treatment had land equivalent ratio above 1.
- Taxon
- pea/maize
Lathyrus oleraceus
Zea mayst0 - Outcome
- land equivalent ratio(LER)e0
- Direction
- exceedede0
- Value
- 1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“land equivalent ratio(LER) of each treatment exceeded 1”
t0“pea/maize”
Claim · model-written summary
System yield first increased and then declined as spacing changed from 0 to 80 cm.
- Taxon
- pea/maizeLathyrus oleraceusZea mayst0
- Treatment
- maize row spacinge0
- Outcome
- system yielde0
- Direction
- first increased to a threshold and then declinede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When maize row spacing changed from 0 cm to 80 cm,the system yield first increased to a threshold and then declined”
t0“pea/maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize spacing had a positive quadratic relation with system yield.
- Taxon
- pea/maizeLathyrus oleraceusZea mayst0
- Treatment
- maize row spacinge0
- Outcome
- yields of intercropping systeme0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Positive quadratic relations between maize row spacing and yields of intercropping system”
t0“pea/maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize spacing had a positive quadratic relation with intercropped maize yield.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Positive quadratic relations between maize row spacing and yields of intercropping system or intercropped maize”
Claim · model-written summary
At 40 cm spacing, intercropped maize yield reached 10 118 kg.hm 2, the highest yield.
- Treatment
- maize row spacing was 40 cme0
- Outcome
- intercropped maize yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 10 118 kg.hm 2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest yield occurred when maize row spacing was 40 cm and intercropped maize yield reached 10 118 kg.hm 2”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped pea yield did not change significantly.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Outcome
- intercropped pea yielde0
- Direction
- never changede0
- Qualifier
- significantlye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropped pea yield never changed significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
System yield depended on maize yield.
- Taxon
- pea/maizeLathyrus oleraceusZea mayst0
- Treatment
- maize yielde0
- Outcome
- yield of the intercropped pea/maize systeme0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield of the intercropped pea/maize system was dependent on maize yield”
t0“pea/maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Spacing significantly influenced maize yield components, especially grain number per spike.
- Treatment
- change in maize row spacinge0
- Outcome
- maize yield components and especially grain number per spikee0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The change in maize row spacing significantly influenced maize yield components and especially grain number per spike”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain number per spike was highest at 60 cm, at 549 grains per spike.
- Treatment
- maize row spacing was 60 cme0
- Outcome
- Grain number per spikee0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 549 grains per spikee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Grain number per spike(549 grains per spike) was highest when maize row spacing was 60 cm”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize aggressive dominance over pea strengthened with increasing spacing.
- Treatment
- increasing maize row spacinge0
- Outcome
- Maize aggressive dominance over pea in terms of yielde0
- Direction
- strengthenede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize aggressive dominance over pea in terms of yield gradually strengthened with increasing maize row spacing”
Claim · model-written summary
At spacings within 60 cm, maize aggressive dominance over pea was below zero.
- Treatment
- maize row spacing was within 60 cme0
- Outcome
- aggressive dominance over peae0
- Direction
- belowe0
- Value
- zeroe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When maize row spacing was within 60 cm,its aggressive dominance over pea was below zero”
Claim · model-written summary
At 80 cm, relative aggressive dominance was 0.14, suggesting pea was more competitive.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“when maize row spacing was 80 cm,its relative aggressive dominance was 0.14 — which suggested that pea was more competitive than maize”