Abstract
Abstract Crop management to improve water use is a well‐established strategy for the effective use of limited natural resources in intercropping systems. Here, maize ( Zea mays L.)– pea ( Pisum sativum L.) strip intercropping with three maize densities (D1: 45,000, D2: 52,500, and D3: 60,000 plants ha −1 ) was compared to sole maize with three maize densities and sole pea. Soil water extraction and water difference were determined through soil water content over depth and across rows in intercropping, measured six times during the growing season. Land equivalent ratio (LER), radiation use efficiency (RUE GY for grain yield, and RUE BM for biomass), and water use efficiency (WUE) were calculated to compare intercropping with sole cropping. A soil water supplement potential from intercropped maize strips to intercropped pea was observed during the pea independent growth and co‐growth with maize periods, which declined as the growing season progressed and with increased maize density. After pea harvest, the potential of compensatory soil water for maize existed from the pea strips, which was greater with increased maize density. Maize–pea intercropping produced 23–38% greater total yield than corresponding sole crops, as the LER ranged from 1.23 to 1.38. Maize–pea intercropping with D3 attained the greatest grain yield, RUE GY , RUE BM , and WUE among three maize density treatments, and was 10, 9, 17, and 14% greater than that of corresponding sole maize. Increasing maize density increased grain yield, radiation and water use efficiency, and LER, indicating that the intercropping advantage was improved with increased maize density.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
A soil water supplement potential from intercropped maize strips to intercropped pea was observed.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“A soil water supplement potential from intercropped maize strips to intercropped pea was observed”
Claim · model-written summary
The soil water supplement potential from maize strips declined as the growing season progressed and with increased maize density.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“which declined as the growing season progressed and with increased maize density”
Claim · model-written summary
After pea harvest, compensatory soil water for maize from the pea strips existed and was greater with increased maize density.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“After pea harvest, the potential of compensatory soil water for maize existed from the pea strips, which was greater with increased maize density”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize-pea intercropping produced 23-38% greater total yield than corresponding sole crops.
- Taxon
- Maize–pea
Lathyrus oleraceus
Zea mayse1 - Treatment
- Maize–pea intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- total yielde1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Value
- 23–38%e1
- Comparator
- corresponding sole cropse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize–pea intercropping produced 23–38% greater total yield than corresponding sole crops, as the LER ranged from 1.23 to 1.38”
Claim · model-written summary
The land equivalent ratio of maize-pea intercropping ranged from 1.23 to 1.38.
- Taxon
- Maize–peaLathyrus oleraceusZea mayse1
- Outcome
- LERe1
- Value
- 1.23 to 1.38e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize–pea intercropping produced 23–38% greater total yield than corresponding sole crops, as the LER ranged from 1.23 to 1.38”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize-pea intercropping with D3 gave greater grain yield than corresponding sole maize, by 10.
- Taxon
- Maize–peaLathyrus oleraceusZea mayse1
- Treatment
- D3e1
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Value
- 10e1
- Comparator
- corresponding sole maizee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize–pea intercropping with D3 attained the greatest grain yield, RUE GY , RUE BM , and WUE among three maize density treatments, and was 10, 9, 17, and 14% greater than that of corresponding sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize-pea intercropping with D3 gave greater RUE GY than corresponding sole maize, by 9.
- Taxon
- Maize–peaLathyrus oleraceusZea mayse1
- Treatment
- D3e1
- Outcome
- RUE GYe1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Value
- 9e1
- Comparator
- corresponding sole maizee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize–pea intercropping with D3 attained the greatest grain yield, RUE GY , RUE BM , and WUE among three maize density treatments, and was 10, 9, 17, and 14% greater than that of corresponding sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize-pea intercropping with D3 gave greater RUE BM than corresponding sole maize, by 17.
- Taxon
- Maize–peaLathyrus oleraceusZea mayse1
- Treatment
- D3e1
- Outcome
- RUE BMe1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Value
- 17e1
- Comparator
- corresponding sole maizee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize–pea intercropping with D3 attained the greatest grain yield, RUE GY , RUE BM , and WUE among three maize density treatments, and was 10, 9, 17, and 14% greater than that of corresponding sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize-pea intercropping with D3 gave greater WUE than corresponding sole maize, by 14%.
- Taxon
- Maize–peaLathyrus oleraceusZea mayse1
- Treatment
- D3e1
- Outcome
- WUEe1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Value
- 14%e1
- Comparator
- corresponding sole maizee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize–pea intercropping with D3 attained the greatest grain yield, RUE GY , RUE BM , and WUE among three maize density treatments, and was 10, 9, 17, and 14% greater than that of corresponding sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing maize density increased grain yield and radiation and water use efficiency.
- Treatment
- Increasing maize densitye1
- Outcome
- grain yield, radiation and water use efficiencye1
- Direction
- increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Increasing maize density increased grain yield, radiation and water use efficiency, and LER”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing maize density increased the land equivalent ratio.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Increasing maize density increased grain yield, radiation and water use efficiency, and LER”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
39 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
50 papers more in this group
See all 54 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
- positive
- 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.