Abstract
Mono-cropping systems are prone to increasing climate variability leading to biotic and abiotic pressure, which results in a risk of failure. Therefore, a diversified pecan-based agroforestry experiment was conducted (2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016) with an aim to enhance productivity, profitability and resilience over sole cropping (without pecan) in the rainfed ecosystem of the Indian Himalaya. It was hypothesized that integration of seasonal crops in the alleys of pecan trees will improve production, livelihood and returns due to diversified output. Four cropping systems, viz. FM-L, FM-W, S-L and S-W were evaluated under pecan and sole cropping. Between two situations, wheat equivalent grain yield (WEGY) and production efficiency (PE) were significantly higher in sole cropping (15.06 & 16.3%) as compared to under pecan. Among cropping systems WEGY was significantly higher in S-W ranging between 4.9 and 51.4% compared to other cropping systems. S-W system was also significantly more productive. In 2016 fruit, wood, litter fall and C stock were recorded as 1.11, 21.31, 8.44 and 46.50 t ha -1 for pecan, respectively. The grain productivity of crops was positively correlated with rainfall. The gross returns was threefold with pecan as compared to sole cropping (1345.9 $ ha -1 ) concerning 2016. Irrespective of growing situations S-W (3629.2 $ ha -1 ) cropping system provided maximum gross returns in year 2016. Hence, it is concluded that pecan-based agroforestry is more profitable in terms of economics, diversified output and ecological balance.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat equivalent grain yield was 15.06% higher in sole cropping than under pecan.
- Taxon
- PECAN
_1_(24790682337).jpg?width=60)
Carya illinoinensist0 - Treatment
- sole croppinge0
- Outcome
- wheat equivalent grain yield (WEGY)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 15.06e0
- Comparator
- under pecane0
- Setting
- INDIAN HIMALAYAt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_1_(24790682337).jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“wheat equivalent grain yield (WEGY) and production efficiency (PE) were significantly higher in sole cropping (15.06 & 16.3%) as compared to under pecan.”
t0“PECAN (CARYA ILLINOINENSIS (WANGENH.) K. KOCH) BASED SUSTAINABLE AGROFORESTRY IMPROVES LIVELIHOOD AND RETURNS IN INDIAN HIMALAYA”
Claim · model-written summary
Production efficiency was 16.3% higher in sole cropping than under pecan.
- Taxon
- PECANCarya illinoinensist0
- Treatment
- sole croppinge0
- Outcome
- production efficiency (PE)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 16.3%e0
- Comparator
- under pecane0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wheat equivalent grain yield (WEGY) and production efficiency (PE) were significantly higher in sole cropping (15.06 & 16.3%) as compared to under pecan.”
t0“PECAN (CARYA ILLINOINENSIS (WANGENH.) K. KOCH) BASED SUSTAINABLE AGROFORESTRY IMPROVES LIVELIHOOD AND RETURNS IN INDIAN HIMALAYA”
Claim · model-written summary
S-W had significantly higher WEGY than other cropping systems by 4.9 to 51.4%.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensist0
- Treatment
- S-We0
- Outcome
- WEGYe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4.9 and 51.4%e0
- Comparator
- other cropping systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Among cropping systems WEGY was significantly higher in S-W ranging between 4.9 and 51.4% compared to other cropping systems.”
t0“pecan”
Claim · model-written summary
S-W was significantly more productive.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensist0
- Material
- S-W systeme0
- Outcome
- more productivee0
- Direction
- more productivee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“S-W system was also significantly more productive.”
t0“pecan”
Claim · model-written summary
Pecan fruit yield in 2016 was 1.11 t ha -1.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensise0
- Outcome
- fruite0
- Value
- 1.11e0
- Qualifier
- In 2016e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2016 fruit, wood, litter fall and C stock were recorded as 1.11, 21.31, 8.44 and 46.50 t ha -1 for pecan, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Pecan wood in 2016 was 21.31 t ha -1.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensise0
- Outcome
- woode0
- Value
- 21.31e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2016 fruit, wood, litter fall and C stock were recorded as 1.11, 21.31, 8.44 and 46.50 t ha -1 for pecan, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Pecan litter fall in 2016 was 8.44 t ha -1.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensise0
- Outcome
- litter falle0
- Value
- 8.44e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2016 fruit, wood, litter fall and C stock were recorded as 1.11, 21.31, 8.44 and 46.50 t ha -1 for pecan, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Pecan C stock in 2016 was 46.50 t ha -1.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensise0
- Outcome
- C stocke0
- Value
- 46.50e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2016 fruit, wood, litter fall and C stock were recorded as 1.11, 21.31, 8.44 and 46.50 t ha -1 for pecan, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop grain productivity positively correlated with rainfall.
Not reportedSetting
Verbatim
e0“The grain productivity of crops was positively correlated with rainfall.”
Claim · model-written summary
Gross returns were threefold higher under pecan than sole cropping in 2016.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensise0
- Treatment
- with pecane0
- Outcome
- gross returnse0
- Value
- threefolde0
- Qualifier
- 1345.9 $ ha -1e0
- Comparator
- sole croppinge0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The gross returns was threefold with pecan as compared to sole cropping (1345.9 $ ha -1 ) concerning 2016.”
Claim · model-written summary
S-W provided maximum gross returns in 2016.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensist0
- Material
- S-We0
- Outcome
- maximum gross returnse0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 3629.2 $ ha -1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“S-W (3629.2 $ ha -1 ) cropping system provided maximum gross returns in year 2016.”
t0“pecan”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors concluded pecan agroforestry was more profitable and diversified.
- Taxon
- pecanCarya illinoinensise0
- Outcome
- more profitablee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pecan-based agroforestry is more profitable in terms of economics, diversified output and ecological balance.”