Paper · 2024 · Field Crops Research

Inter-cropping patterns and nutrient management effects on maize growth, yield and quality

Ankita Begam; Mahadev Pramanick; Susanta Dutta; et al.

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
35
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Intercropping, a sustainable agricultural practice, is pivotal in enhancing land use efficiency, soil fertility, and overall crop productivity. This study zeroes in on the dynamics of Maize-Cowpea intercropping in the Alluvial Zone of West Bengal, a region characterized by its fertile soil and diverse agro-ecological conditions. The practice of intercropping, particularly in regions like West Bengal, holds immense potential in revolutionizing traditional farming methods by maximizing yield per unit area while ensuring sustainability. The study aims to unravel the complexities and benefits of this practice, especially in the context of the monsoon dependent Kharif season, which is crucial for agricultural productivity in the region. The study aims to evaluate the effects of various Maize-Cowpea intercropping patterns and nutrient management strategies on maize growth, yield, and quality during the Kharif seasons of 2019 and 2020. It hypothesizes that intercropping, combined with optimal nutrient management, can significantly enhance maize performance. Employing a split-plot design, the study analysed 25 treatment combinations of intercropping and nitrogen fertilization under sub-tropical sub-humid conditions. Advanced quantitative methods, including regression analysis and principal component analysis (PCA), were used to assess the interactions between intercropping systems and nutrient management practices. The findings revealed that while sole maize cultivation showed better growth and yield, Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratio, significantly increased the total system yield by 13.6%. This method also improved grain quality, notably enhancing crude protein content and nutrient percentage. A combination of 75% recommended dose of nitrogen (RDN) through chemical means with 25% RDN through organic sources, including seaweed, was particularly effective in boosting maize performance. The study confirms the superior performance of Kharif maize in an intercropping setup, particularly when integrated with cowpea. It demonstrates the effectiveness of specific nutrient management strategies in enhancing both quantitative and qualitative traits of maize. This research significantly contributes to the field of sustainable agriculture, particularly in the context of field crops research and practice. The findings offer valuable insights for enhancing crop productivity and sustainability in similar agro-ecological regions globally. The study underscores the benefits of integrating legumes with cereals in intercropping systems, paving the way for innovative agricultural practices that can meet the dual challenges of food security and environmental sustainability. The implications of this research are far-reaching, providing a robust framework for future agricultural strategies in regions facing similar climatic and soil conditions.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sole maize cultivation showed better growth.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
sole maize cultivatione0
Outcome
growthe0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
Maize-Cowpea intercroppinge0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The findings revealed that while sole maize cultivation showed better growth and yield, Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratio, significantly increased the total system yield by 13.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1431–1633 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sole maize cultivation showed better yield.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
sole maize cultivatione0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
Maize-Cowpea intercroppinge0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The findings revealed that while sole maize cultivation showed better growth and yield, Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratio, significantly increased the total system yield by 13.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1431–1633 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping at 1:1 increased system yield by 13.6%.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayse0
Treatment
Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratioe0
Outcome
total system yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
13.6%e0
Comparator
sole maize cultivatione0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The findings revealed that while sole maize cultivation showed better growth and yield, Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratio, significantly increased the total system yield by 13.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1431–1633 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping enhanced crude protein content.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
Maize-Cowpea intercroppinge1
Outcome
crude protein contente0
Direction
enhancinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“This method also improved grain quality, notably enhancing crude protein content and nutrient percentage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1635–1739 · show in text ↑
e1

“The findings revealed that while sole maize cultivation showed better growth and yield, Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratio, significantly increased the total system yield by 13.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1431–1633 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping enhanced nutrient percentage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
Maize-Cowpea intercroppinge1
Outcome
nutrient percentagee0
Direction
enhancinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“This method also improved grain quality, notably enhancing crude protein content and nutrient percentage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1635–1739 · show in text ↑
e1

“The findings revealed that while sole maize cultivation showed better growth and yield, Maize-Cowpea intercropping, especially in a 1:1 row ratio, significantly increased the total system yield by 13.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1431–1633 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined chemical and organic nitrogen boosted maize performance.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
75% recommended dose of nitrogen (RDN) through chemical means with 25% RDN through organic sources, including seaweede0
Outcome
maize performancee0
Direction
boostinge0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A combination of 75% recommended dose of nitrogen (RDN) through chemical means with 25% RDN through organic sources, including seaweed, was particularly effective in boosting maize performance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1741–1933 · show in text ↑

other · organism · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 10 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

intercropping · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

50 papers: 47 positive, 3 negative or no effect

46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

46 papers more in this group

See all 50 papers →

nitrogen · organism · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

63 papers: 46 positive, 17 negative or no effect

45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

59 papers more in this group

See all 63 papers →

intercropping · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

141 papers: 122 positive, 19 negative or no effect

121 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

137 papers more in this group

See all 141 papers →

intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

834 papers: 613 positive, 221 negative or no effect

612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

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.