Paper · 2019 · Experimental Agriculture

Effects of rehabilitation pruning and agroforestry on cacao tree development and yield in an older full-sun plantation

Judith Riedel; Nora Kägi; Laura Armengot; et al.

15
claims
20
verbatim quotes
29
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Overaged full-sun cacao plantations and the need for sustainable production systems call for combining rehabilitation of plantations with the establishment of agroforestry. We tested the effect of drastic rehabilitation pruning of old cacao tree stock and the introduction of both high- and low-diversity agroforestry on survival, growth and yield of T. cacao in a commercial plantation in peninsular Malaysia over a period of 5 years. We further determined the incidence of pests and diseases of cacao pods and assessed the performance of the whole system for smallholder farmers, including yields of by-crops. Rehabilitation pruning negatively affected cacao tree development and short-term yield. No more effects of pruning on cacao yield were observed starting in the third year on in the monoculture and starting in the fourth year on in low-diversity agroforestry. We found similar cacao tree development and yield in the low-diversity agroforestry and a common practice monoculture, suggesting that the implementation of agroforestry is a commercially feasible strategy, due to additional income generated through timber production. Reduced cacao tree development and yield in the high-diversity agroforestry were compensated by additional harvests of cassava and banana compared to monoculture. Incidence of cocoa pod borer ( Conopomorpha cramerella ) was lower in the agroforestry systems, especially the high-diversity system, while the incidence of black pod disease ( Phytophthora spp.) did not differ between agroforestry and monoculture. The findings highlight the potential of agroforestry to reconcile ecologically sustainable land use with natural, cost-effective pest management. While pruning needs to be done with timing and disease pressure in mind to minimize short-term yield losses, this measure proved to be a feasible strategy for establishing agroforestry on extant plantations.

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 15

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rehabilitation pruning reduced cacao tree development.

Treatment
Rehabilitation pruninge0
Outcome
cacao tree developmente0
Direction
negatively affectede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Rehabilitation pruning negatively affected cacao tree development and short-term yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 621–708 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rehabilitation pruning reduced short-term cacao yield.

Treatment
Rehabilitation pruninge0
Outcome
short-term yielde0
Direction
negatively affectede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Rehabilitation pruning negatively affected cacao tree development and short-term yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 621–708 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pruning effects on monoculture cacao yield ceased from year three.

Outcome
effects of pruning on cacao yielde0
Direction
No more effectse0
Qualifier
starting in the third yeare0
Setting
monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No more effects of pruning on cacao yield were observed starting in the third year on in the monoculture and starting in the fourth year on in low-diversity agroforestry.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 709–879 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pruning effects on low-diversity agroforestry cacao yield ceased from year four.

Outcome
effects of pruning on cacao yielde0
Direction
No more effectse0
Qualifier
starting in the fourth yeare0
Setting
low-diversity agroforestrye0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No more effects of pruning on cacao yield were observed starting in the third year on in the monoculture and starting in the fourth year on in low-diversity agroforestry.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 709–879 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cacao tree development was similar under low-diversity agroforestry and monoculture.

Treatment
low-diversity agroforestrye0
Outcome
cacao tree developmente0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
a common practice monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“We found similar cacao tree development and yield in the low-diversity agroforestry and a common practice monoculture, suggesting that the implementation of agroforestry is a commercially feasible strategy, due to additional income generated through timber production.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 880–1148 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cacao yield was similar under low-diversity agroforestry and monoculture.

Treatment
low-diversity agroforestrye0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
a common practice monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“We found similar cacao tree development and yield in the low-diversity agroforestry and a common practice monoculture, suggesting that the implementation of agroforestry is a commercially feasible strategy, due to additional income generated through timber production.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 880–1148 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Timber production provided additional income in agroforestry.

Outcome
additional income generated through timber productione0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“due to additional income generated through timber production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1087–1147 · show in text ↑
e4

“Rehabilitation pruning negatively affected cacao tree development and short-term yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 621–708 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High-diversity agroforestry reduced cacao tree development.

Treatment
high-diversity agroforestrye0
Outcome
cacao tree developmente0
Direction
Reducede0
Comparator
monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Reduced cacao tree development and yield in the high-diversity agroforestry were compensated by additional harvests of cassava and banana compared to monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1149–1311 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High-diversity agroforestry reduced cacao yield.

Treatment
high-diversity agroforestrye0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
Reducede0
Comparator
monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Reduced cacao tree development and yield in the high-diversity agroforestry were compensated by additional harvests of cassava and banana compared to monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1149–1311 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High-diversity agroforestry yielded additional cassava harvests.

Treatment
high-diversity agroforestrye0
Outcome
additional harvests of cassavae0
Direction
additionale0
Comparator
monoculturee0

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Reduced cacao tree development and yield in the high-diversity agroforestry were compensated by additional harvests of cassava and banana compared to monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1149–1311 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High-diversity agroforestry yielded additional banana harvests.

Taxon
bananae0
Treatment
high-diversity agroforestrye0
Outcome
additional harvests of cassava and bananae0
Direction
additionale0
Comparator
monoculturee0

Verbatim

e0

“Reduced cacao tree development and yield in the high-diversity agroforestry were compensated by additional harvests of cassava and banana compared to monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1149–1311 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Agroforestry reduced cocoa pod borer incidence, especially with high diversity.

Treatment
agroforestry systemse0
Interactor
Conopomorpha cramerellaConopomorpha cramerellae0pest
Outcome
Incidence of cocoa pod borere0
Direction
lowere0
Qualifier
especially the high-diversity systeme0
Comparator
monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Conopomorpha cramerella
Conopomorpha cramerella · InteractorTiouraren (Y.-C. Tsai) · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Incidence of cocoa pod borer ( Conopomorpha cramerella ) was lower in the agroforestry systems, especially the high-diversity system, while the incidence of black pod disease ( Phytophthora spp.) did not differ between agroforestry and monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1312–1560 · show in text ↑
t0

“cacao”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–59 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Black pod disease incidence did not differ between agroforestry and monoculture.

Treatment
agroforestrye0
Interactor
Phytophthora spp.Phytophthorae0pathogen
Outcome
incidence of black pod diseasee0
Direction
did not differe0
Comparator
monoculturee0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Phytophthora
Phytophthora · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Rasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Incidence of cocoa pod borer ( Conopomorpha cramerella ) was lower in the agroforestry systems, especially the high-diversity system, while the incidence of black pod disease ( Phytophthora spp.) did not differ between agroforestry and monoculture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1312–1560 · show in text ↑
t0

“cacao”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–59 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors consider agroforestry commercially feasible because of timber income.

Outcome
implementation of agroforestry is a commercially feasible strategye0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“suggesting that the implementation of agroforestry is a commercially feasible strategy, due to additional income generated through timber production.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1148 · show in text ↑
t0

“cacao”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–59 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Pruning timing and disease pressure should be considered to limit short-term yield losses.

Outcome
pruning needs to be done with timing and disease pressure in minde0
Qualifier
to minimize short-term yield lossese0

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

Theobroma cacao
Theobroma cacao · TaxonLuisovalles · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“While pruning needs to be done with timing and disease pressure in mind to minimize short-term yield losses, this measure proved to be a feasible strategy for establishing agroforestry on extant plantations.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1707–1914 · show in text ↑
t0

“cacao”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 54–59 · show in text ↑

intercropping · organism · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

intercropping · growth · Theobroma cacao (cocoa)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 2 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

pruning · growth · Theobroma cacao (cocoa)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

intercropping · yield · Theobroma cacao (cocoa)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 8 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

pruning · yield · Theobroma cacao (cocoa)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 11 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 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.