Abstract
Two experiments were conducted from 2015 to 2016 at the Teaching and Research Farm of the Federal University of Agriculture, Makurdi [Latitude 07º 45' - 07º 50' N, Longtitude 08º 45'- 08º 50' E, elevation 98 m] in Benue State and the Research and Teaching Farm of the College of Agriculture, Lafia (Latitude 08.33N and Longitude 08.32E) in Nasarawa State, all located in Southern Guinea Savannah of Nigeria. The experiments sought to determine the performance of maize varieties when intercropped with cassava.The experiment was laid out as split-plot in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. The main plot treatment comprised of two cropping systems [sole cropping (maize, cassava) and row intercropping (maize + cassava)] while the sub-plot treatment was 3 maize varieties [Quality Protein Maize (QPM), Suwan 1-1 and the Local]. Each sub plot consisted of 5 ridges spaced 1m apart and 4m long and the net plot was the three middle ridges, 3m long. Intercropping severely depressed plant height at harvest, leaf area index at harvest, cob circumference, cob length, number of rows per cob, number of seeds per row, cob weight, grain yield and 100-ssed weight in Lafi and Makurdi. The highest grain yield of maize was produced when QPM was planted as a sole crop in Lafia (2.95t/ha) and Makurdi (2.99t/ha). However, values obtained from LEC and LER showed intercrop advantage. Similarly, intercropping decreased the growth and yield (plant height at harvest, root circumference, root length, number of marketable roots per plant, number of unmarketable roots per plant and root weight) of cassava in both locations. Intercropping cassava with Local maize produced the highest root weight in Lafia (8.50t/ha) and Makurdi (9.02t/ha) among the treatments intercropped. All LER and LEC values were above 1.0 and 0.25 respectively in both locations. Values obtained for competitive ratio showed that maize was mnore competitive than cassava probably due to its height advantage.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping depressed maize plant height, leaf area index and cob dimensions in both locations.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- plant height at harvest, leaf area index at harvest, cob circumferencee0
- Direction
- depressede0
- Setting
- Makurdie0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping severely depressed plant height at harvest, leaf area index at harvest, cob circumference, cob length, number of rows per cob, number of seeds per row, cob weight, grain yield and 100-ssed weight in Lafi and Makurdi.”
t0“Maize Varieties intercropped with Cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping depressed maize cob length, row count and seed count.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- cob length, number of rows per cob, number of seeds per rowe0
- Direction
- depressede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping severely depressed plant height at harvest, leaf area index at harvest, cob circumference, cob length, number of rows per cob, number of seeds per row, cob weight, grain yield and 100-ssed weight in Lafi and Makurdi.”
t0“Maize Varieties intercropped with Cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping depressed maize cob weight, grain yield and 100-seed weight.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping severely depressed plant height at harvest, leaf area index at harvest, cob circumference, cob length, number of rows per cob, number of seeds per row, cob weight, grain yield and 100-ssed weight in Lafi and Makurdi.”
t0“Maize Varieties intercropped with Cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole-cropped QPM produced the highest maize grain yield in Lafia, 2.95t/ha.
- Material
- QPMe0
- Treatment
- sole crope0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.95t/hae0
- Setting
- Lafiae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest grain yield of maize was produced when QPM was planted as a sole crop in Lafia (2.95t/ha) and Makurdi (2.99t/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole-cropped QPM produced the highest maize grain yield in Makurdi, 2.99t/ha.
- Material
- QPMe0
- Treatment
- sole crope0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.99t/hae0
- Setting
- Makurdie0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest grain yield of maize was produced when QPM was planted as a sole crop in Lafia (2.95t/ha) and Makurdi (2.99t/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
LEC and LER indicated an intercrop advantage.
- Outcome
- intercrop advantagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, values obtained from LEC and LER showed intercrop advantage.”
t0“Maize Varieties intercropped with Cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced cassava plant height, root circumference and root length in both locations.
- Taxon
- cassava
Manihot esculentae0 - Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- plant height at harvest, root circumference, root lengthe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropping decreased the growth and yield (plant height at harvest, root circumference, root length, number of marketable roots per plant, number of unmarketable roots per plant and root weight) of cassava in both locations.”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced cassava marketable-root number, unmarketable-root number and root weight.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- number of marketable roots per plant, number of unmarketable roots per plant and root weighte0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropping decreased the growth and yield (plant height at harvest, root circumference, root length, number of marketable roots per plant, number of unmarketable roots per plant and root weight) of cassava in both locations.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava intercropped with Local maize had the highest intercropped root weight in Lafia at 8.50t/ha.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- Intercropping cassava with Local maizee0
- Outcome
- root weighte0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 8.50t/hae0
- Comparator
- treatments intercroppede0
- Setting
- Lafiae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping cassava with Local maize produced the highest root weight in Lafia (8.50t/ha) and Makurdi (9.02t/ha) among the treatments intercropped.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cassava intercropped with Local maize had the highest intercropped root weight in Makurdi at 9.02t/ha.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- Intercropping cassava with Local maizee0
- Outcome
- root weighte0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 9.02t/hae0
- Comparator
- treatments intercroppede0
- Setting
- Makurdie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping cassava with Local maize produced the highest root weight in Lafia (8.50t/ha) and Makurdi (9.02t/ha) among the treatments intercropped.”
Claim · model-written summary
All LER values exceeded 1.0 in both locations.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All LER and LEC values were above 1.0 and 0.25 respectively in both locations.”
t0“Maize Varieties intercropped with Cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
All LEC values exceeded 0.25 in both locations.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All LER and LEC values were above 1.0 and 0.25 respectively in both locations.”
t0“Maize Varieties intercropped with Cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Competitive ratio showed maize was more competitive than cassava.
- Outcome
- competitive ratioe0
- Direction
- mnore competitivee0
- Qualifier
- probably due to its height advantagee0
- Comparator
- cassavae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Values obtained for competitive ratio showed that maize was mnore competitive than cassava probably due to its height advantage.”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays · growth · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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 · quality: postharvest · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
intercropping · growth · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
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.