Abstract
Florida vegetable growers are facing high production costs due to high input costs, lower profitability, and competition from foreign markets. Multi/intercropping allows growers to increase the yields and profits per unit area by producing multiple crops on the same beds. Experiments determining the effects of intercropping and plant spacing was conducted in Fall 2018 and 2019 at Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Balm. Tomato and bell pepper were intercropped at low and high planting density on plastic-covered beds. Bell pepper shoot biomass was significantly ( P < 0.001) reduced when intercropped with tomato, compared with monocropped bell pepper. However, tomato shoot biomass was significantly reduced when tomato plant density increased, but it was unaffected by bell pepper intercropping. Biomass of both crops was unaffected by relay cropping. Bell pepper yields when intercropped with tomato at low density (60 cm tomato-tomato and 38 cm pepper-pepper) had similar yields to bell pepper planted alone in low and high planting density. We concluded that bell pepper plants were more sensitive to interspecific competition, whereas tomato plants were more sensitive to intraspecific competition. Intercropping may be a viable option for growers at recommended plant densities used for monocrops. However, high plant density is not recommended.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with tomato significantly reduced bell pepper shoot biomass relative to monocropping.
Verbatim
e0“Bell pepper shoot biomass was significantly ( P < 0.001) reduced when intercropped with tomato, compared with monocropped bell pepper”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing tomato density significantly reduced tomato shoot biomass.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Treatment
- tomato plant density increasede0
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tomato shoot biomass was significantly reduced when tomato plant density increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Bell pepper intercropping did not affect tomato shoot biomass.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- bell pepper intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tomato shoot biomass was significantly reduced when tomato plant density increased, but it was unaffected by bell pepper intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Relay cropping did not affect biomass of either crop.
- Taxon
- Tomatoes and Peppers
CapsicumSolanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- relay croppinge0
- Outcome
- Biomasse0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biomass of both crops was unaffected by relay cropping”
t0“Tomatoes and Peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Low-density intercropped bell pepper had yields similar to bell pepper monocrops at low and high densities.
Verbatim
e0“Bell pepper yields when intercropped with tomato at low density (60 cm tomato-tomato and 38 cm pepper-pepper) had similar yields to bell pepper planted alone in low and high planting density”
Claim · model-written summary
Bell pepper was more sensitive to interspecific competition.
Verbatim
e0“bell pepper plants were more sensitive to interspecific competition”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato was more sensitive to intraspecific competition.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Outcome
- more sensitive to intraspecific competitione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tomato plants were more sensitive to intraspecific competition”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping may be viable at recommended monocrop densities.
- Taxon
- Tomatoes and PeppersCapsicumSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- Intercropping may be a viable option for growers at recommended plant densities used for monocropse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping may be a viable option for growers at recommended plant densities used for monocrops”
t0“Tomatoes and Peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
High plant density is not recommended.
- Taxon
- Tomatoes and PeppersCapsicumSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- high plant density is not recommendede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“high plant density is not recommended”
t0“Tomatoes and Peppers”
The same questions in other papers
Solanum lycopersicum · growth · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
Solanum lycopersicum · yield · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
intercropping · growth · Capsicum (peppers)Results differ
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
intercropping · yield · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
density · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →intercropping · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 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.