Abstract
With increasing global attention toward the need for mitigating climate change, the transition to sustainable energy sources has become an essential priority. Introducing alternative oilseed crops, such as camelina (Camelina sativa L.), into intercropping systems with staple food crops can mitigate ILUC (indirect land use change) and their negative impact on biofuel production. The present study compared camelina + field pea intercropping (ICw + IP, winter sowing) and camelina + lentil intercropping (ICs + IL, spring sowing) with their respective single crops regarding weed control, soil coverage, yields, and camelina seed quality (1000-seed weight, oil, and fatty acid composition). The comparison between different cropping systems was conducted using a one-way ANOVA. Both intercropping improved weed control at an early stage but no differences in soil coverage were found. Camelina seed yield was negatively affected by the presence of peas, whereas the pulse was unaffected. Conversely, camelina seed yield was not affected when intercropped with lentils while lentils reduced their yield in the intercropping. Furthermore, when camelina was intercropped with lentils, a significant increase was reported in 1000-seed weight and α -linolenic acid (C18:3) compared with the sole-camelina. However, both intercropping systems had a land equivalent ratio (LER, based on total seed yield at maturity) higher than one. Defining the best combination of crops and the optimal sowing and harvesting settings remain key to increasing the adoption of intercropping systems by farmers.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Both intercropping systems improved early weed control.
CamelinaNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both intercropping improved weed control at an early stage”
t0“Camelina Intercropping with Pulses a Sustainable Approach for Land Competition between Food and Non-Food Crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping did not change soil coverage.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no differences in soil coverage were found”
t0“Camelina Intercropping with Pulses a Sustainable Approach for Land Competition between Food and Non-Food Crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Pea intercropping reduced camelina seed yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Camelina seed yield was negatively affected by the presence of peas”
Claim · model-written summary
Pea yield was unaffected in its intercropping system.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“whereas the pulse was unaffected”
t0“Camelina Intercropping with Pulses a Sustainable Approach for Land Competition between Food and Non-Food Crops”
e1“camelina + field pea intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Lentil intercropping did not affect camelina seed yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“camelina seed yield was not affected when intercropped with lentils”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced lentil yield.
- Taxon
- lentils
Lens culinarise0 - Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“lentils reduced their yield in the intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Lentil intercropping significantly increased camelina thousand seed weight.
- Treatment
- intercropped with lentilse0
- Outcome
- 1000-seed weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- sole-camelinae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“when camelina was intercropped with lentils, a significant increase was reported in 1000-seed weight and α -linolenic acid (C18:3) compared with the sole-camelina”
Claim · model-written summary
Lentil intercropping significantly increased camelina alpha-linolenic acid.
- Treatment
- intercropped with lentilse0
- Outcome
- α -linolenic acid (C18:3)e0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Comparator
- sole-camelinae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“when camelina was intercropped with lentils, a significant increase was reported in 1000-seed weight and α -linolenic acid (C18:3) compared with the sole-camelina”
Claim · model-written summary
Both intercropping systems had land equivalent ratios above one.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both intercropping systems had a land equivalent ratio (LER, based on total seed yield at maturity) higher than one”
t0“Camelina Intercropping with Pulses a Sustainable Approach for Land Competition between Food and Non-Food Crops”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 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.