Abstract
Abstract Intercropping, the growing of more than one crop at the same time within the same land area, could be a sustainable method of crop production in semiarid regions, which could increase biodiversity, and productivity and quality of crops compared to monocultures. This may be of significance under limited N, such as in organic agriculture, and could be an alternative to green manure. An organic study was conducted in the semiarid Canadian Prairie in drier than average years (2017–2018) to determine if intercropping legumes with non‐legumes could reduce weeds and increase grain yield and quality of crops at different seeding rate ratios. Intercrops examined were lentil ( Lens culinaris Medik.)–yellow mustard ( Sinapis alba L.), and field pea ( Pisum sativum L.)–oat ( Avena sativa L.), at three seeding rate ratios, and their respective monocultures. Weed density was lower in the pea–oat intercrop than the pea monoculture, while weed biomass was lower in the lentil–mustard intercrop than the lentil monoculture. Legumes, when intercropped even at monoculture ratios, had lower aboveground biomass and grain yield than their monocultures, with pea showing higher tolerance than lentil to competition with its companion. Total biomass and grain yield were accounted for mostly by the non‐legumes, which performed better than expected based on their seeding ratios. Mustard grown with lentil appeared to be more competitive than oat grown with pea. Grain weight of oat was higher in all intercrops with pea than in its monoculture, while grain protein of pea was higher when intercropped with oat than in its monoculture.
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
Pea–oat intercropping lowered weed density compared with pea monoculture.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceuse0 - Treatment
- pea–oat intercrope0
- Interactor
- Weede0weed
- Outcome
- Weed densitye0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- pea monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed density was lower in the pea–oat intercrop than the pea monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Lentil–mustard intercropping lowered weed biomass compared with lentil monoculture.
- Taxon
- lentil
Lens culinarise0 - Treatment
- lentil–mustard intercrope0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- lentil monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weed biomass was lower in the lentil–mustard intercrop than the lentil monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped legumes had less aboveground biomass than monocultures.
Verbatim
e0“Legumes, when intercropped even at monoculture ratios, had lower aboveground biomass and grain yield than their monocultures”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropped legumes had lower grain yield than monocultures.
Verbatim
e0“Legumes, when intercropped even at monoculture ratios, had lower aboveground biomass and grain yield than their monocultures”
Claim · model-written summary
Pea tolerated companion competition better than lentil.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Outcome
- tolerancee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- lentile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pea showing higher tolerance than lentil to competition with its companion”
Claim · model-written summary
Nonlegumes accounted for most total biomass and grain yield and exceeded seeding-ratio expectations.
Verbatim
e0“Total biomass and grain yield were accounted for mostly by the non‐legumes, which performed better than expected based on their seeding ratios.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mustard with lentil appeared more competitive than oat with pea.
Verbatim
e0“Mustard grown with lentil appeared to be more competitive than oat grown with pea.”
Claim · model-written summary
Oat grain weight was higher in pea intercrops than oat monoculture.
- Taxon
- oat
Avena sativae0 - Treatment
- intercrops with peae0
- Outcome
- Grain weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- its monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Grain weight of oat was higher in all intercrops with pea than in its monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Pea grain protein was higher with oat intercropping than in monoculture.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceuse0
- Treatment
- intercropped with oate0
- Outcome
- grain proteine0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- its monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain protein of pea was higher when intercropped with oat than in its monoculture”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · weed · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →intercropping · quality: protein · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →intercropping · weed · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →intercropping · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 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.