Search claims · PlantClaims

Recommendationauthor interpretationreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend assessing intercrop performance agronomically, economically and environmentally.

Taxon: Intercrope0
Outcome: agronomically, economically and environmentally assessede0

Verbatim

e0
“Intercrop performance should be agronomically, economically and environmentally assessed.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1193–1282

t0
“Intercropping and soil health”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–29

Title

Intercropping and soil health

Angeletti, Francesco G. S.; di Gregorio, Milos; Saia, Sergio; et al. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) 2026. doi:10.5281/zenodo.19351319

Other claims from this paper (8)

Observation Intercropping interactions enhance yield, profit, sustainability and soil health.
Observation Intercropping improves nutrient uptake and availability, especially with legumes.
Observation Intercropping increases below ground biodiversity and biological activity.
Observation Intercropping improves soil infiltration, water retention, aeration and organic matter formation.
Observation Intercropping suppresses pests and pathogens.
Observation Intercrops reduce pesticide and fertiliser dependence.
Recommendation The authors recommend adjusting species selection, density, spatial arrangement and nutrition and protection.
Recommendation Dedicated soil health monitoring tools for intercrops are needed.

Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Coconut age significantly influenced food intercrop performance.

Taxon: coconute0
Organ / stage: coconut agee0
Outcome: food intercrop performancee0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“This was an indication of coconut age being a significant factor in food intercrop performance.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1818–1913

Title

Food crop intercropping alternatives for replanting coconut farms destroyed by lethal yellowing disease

Stella Ama Ennin; B. Banful; E. Andoh-Mensah; et al. International journal of food, agriculture and environment 2009

Other claims from this paper (10)

Recommendation The authors recommend this food crop intercrop for young coconut plantings.
Recommendation The authors recommend this food crop intercrop for young coconut plantings.
Intervention effect Intercropping produced the reported vegetative development result.
Intervention effect Intercropping produced the reported cassava yield result.
Intervention effect Intercropping produced the reported plantain yield result.
Intervention effect Intercropping produced the reported major diseases and pests result.
Intervention effect Intercropping produced the reported value cost ratio result.
Observation Cassava yield in mature coconut plantings averaged 11.6 t ha -1.
Observation Plantain could not thrive in mature coconut plantings, attributed to light and possible root competition.
Recommendation Authors recommend plantain or cassava intercropping to support coconut replanting.

Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Genetic correlation between monocrop and intercrop performance is the primary driver of breeding scheme optimization.

Taxon: intercropst0
Material: monocrop and intercrop trait performancee0
Outcome: intercrop breeding scheme optimization processe0
Qualifier: primary drivere0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“the genetic correlation between the monocrop and intercrop trait performance is the primary driver of the intercrop breeding scheme optimization process.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1624–1777

t0
“intercrops”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 44–54

Title

Harnessing monocrop breeding strategies for intercrops

Reena Dubey; Riccardo Zustovi; Sofie Landschoot; et al. Frontiers in Plant Science 2024. doi:10.3389/fpls.2024.1394413

Other claims from this paper (1)

Association The optimal stage to switch from monocrop to intercrop testing depends on crop specificity and trait heritability.

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercrop performance ratio depended on the number and identity of crop components.

Taxon: intercropt0
Material: intercrop compositione0
Outcome: CPRe0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0
“CPR also depended on intercrop composition (number and identity of components)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1278–1356

t0
“intercrop”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 20–29

Title

Positive effects of intercrop yields in farms from across Europe depend on rainfall, crop composition, and management

Rob W. Brooker; Robin J. Pakeman; Eveline Adam; et al. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 2024. doi:10.1007/s13593-024-00968-2

Other claims from this paper (6)

Intervention effect Cereal-legume intercrops gained roughly 30% yield relative to monoculture expectations across sites.
Association Direct drilling reduced intercrop crop performance ratio.
Association Organic fertilizer addition increased intercrop crop performance ratio.
Association Other management factors did not strongly affect intercrop performance ratio.
Association Intercrop performance ratio was highest where background yields were lower.
Association Intercrop performance ratio was higher with higher rainfall.

Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Choice of roselle accession did not affect intercrop performance.

Taxon: roselleHibiscus sabdariffat0
Material: accessione0
Outcome: intercrop performancee0
Direction: did not affecte0

Verbatim

e0
“the choice of accession did not affect the intercrop performance”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1582–1646

t0
“roselle”
✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 32–39

Title

Growth and Yield Performance of Roselle Accessions as Influenced by Intercropping with Maize in the Guinea Savannah Ecology of Ghana

Emmanuel Ayipio; Moomin Abu; Richard Yaw Agyare; et al. International Journal of Agronomy 2018. doi:10.1155/2018/9821825

Other claims from this paper (13)

Association Roselle accessions differed significantly in growth and yield performance.
Association Local outperformed the other roselle accessions in growth and yield attributes.
Intervention effect Intercropped roselle had significantly higher calyx yield than sole roselle.
Intervention effect Intercropped roselle had significantly higher shoot yield than sole roselle.
Intervention effect Intercropping with roselle did not significantly affect maize growth or yield.
Association Maize yield attributes differed between seasons.
Observation Samadah intercrops had an ATER of 1.99.
Observation Bissap intercrops had an ATER of 2.18.
Observation Local intercrops had an ATER of 2.49.
Observation Competitive ratio for stem diameter ranged from 1.03 to 1.17.
Observation Competitive ratio for leaf number ranged from 0.96 to 1.09.
Observation Competitive ratio for plant height ranged from 1.12 to 1.25.
Recommendation The authors conclude that intercropping benefits roselle without compromising maize yield.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Barley seeding density had a small effect on intercrop performance.

Taxon: Poppyt0
Treatment: barley seeding densitiese0
Interactor: barleyHordeum vulgaree0other
Outcome: intercrop performancee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0
“The effect of barley seeding densities on the intercrop performance was small”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1156–1233

t0
“Poppy”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–5

Title

Poppy (Papaver somniferum L.) Intercropping with Spring Barley and with White Clover: Benefits and Competitive Effects

Katharina Luhmer; Hanna Blum; Thorsten Kraska; et al. Agronomy 2021. doi:10.3390/agronomy11050948

Other claims from this paper (11)

Observation Poppy yield ranged from 798.7 to 1293.1 kg ha−1.
Intervention effect White clover intercropping had no significant effect on poppy yield versus sole cropping.
Intervention effect White clover intercropping did not significantly change poppy dry matter, height or leaf area index.
Intervention effect White clover intercropping did not significantly change poppy C/N ratio.
Observation Poppy-barley intercrop yields were higher in 2018 and 2020 than 2019.
Observation The poppy-barley intercrop had higher land equivalent ratios in 2018 and 2020 than 2019.
Mechanism Differences in seeding dates, precipitation and nutrients chiefly explained year differences.
Intervention effect Intercropping had a small effect on weed cover, number and biomass.
Recommendation The authors advise seeding poppy before barley to limit competition.
Recommendation The authors conclude poppy and white clover can be sown together.
Recommendation The authors consider carefully managed poppy intercropping promising for reducing total yield-loss risk.

Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Practices that improve intercropped soybean performance raise intercrop productivity relative to sole crops.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe0
Outcome: agronomic practices that promote intercropped soybean performancee0

Verbatim

e0
“agronomic practices that promote intercropped soybean performance increase intercrop productivity relative to the sole crops of their component species”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1600–1751

Title

Sunflower–Soybean Intercrop Productivity under Different Water Conditions and Sowing Managements

José F. Andrade; Anibal Cerrudo; Roberto H. Rizzalli; et al. Agronomy Journal 2012. doi:10.2134/agronj2012.0051

Other claims from this paper (5)

Association Intercrop grain yield tended to exceed the sole crops.
Association Intercrop yield advantage increased with water availability.
Observation Greater intercropped soybean productivity was associated with the yield advantage.
Intervention effect Sowing management did not affect total intercrop grain yield.
Intervention effect Simultaneous sowing increased soybean contribution to intercrop yield.

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Simpler models required extensive intercrop-specific calibration to achieve better prediction performance.

Outcome: extensive intercrop-specific calibratione6
Qualifier: to achieve better prediction performancee6

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e6
“whereas simpler models require extensive intercrop-specific calibration to achieve better prediction performance”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2430–2542

Title

The ongoing journey of modelling intercropping systems: A conceptual resource sharing intercomparison from model developers and expert users

Adam Muhammad Adam; Myriam Adam; Folkard Asch; et al. Field Crops Research 2026. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2026.110491

Other claims from this paper (8)

Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercrop performance declined in the second year as Gmelina trees aged.

Taxon: Arhare1
Outcome: intercrop performancee0
Direction: declinee0
Setting: second yeare0

Verbatim

e0
“A general decline in intercrop performance was observed in the second year when Gmelina trees were older”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1534–1638

e1
“Cajanus cajan (Arhar), Vigna unguiculata (Cowpea), and Brassica juncea (Mustard)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 219–299

Title

Growth Behavior and Productivity of Intercrops under Gmelina arborea Based Agroforestry Systems

Rajendra Prasad Dongre; R. Bajpai; Vishnu Solanki; et al. Archives of Current Research International 2025. doi:10.9734/acri/2025/v25i51184

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Sole cropping maintained higher Arhar plant populations per meter row than intercropping under Gmelina.
Intervention effect Sole cropping maintained higher Cowpea plant populations per meter row than intercropping under Gmelina.
Intervention effect Sole cropping maintained higher Mustard plant populations per meter row than intercropping under Gmelina.
Intervention effect Gmelina with Arhar gave the highest crop height and branches per plant across years.
Intervention effect Gmelina with Arhar produced the most pods per plant and significantly surpassed most other treatments.
Observation Gmelina with Mustard showed high grain and biological yield, especially in the first year.
Observation Sole Arhar performed well for yield components.
Recommendation The authors conclude that Gmelina agroforestry can support diverse crop production, particularly Gmelina–Arhar and Gmelina–Mustard combinations.

Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Drilling soybean in wheat at heading can give optimum intercrop performance when mechanical damage to wheat is minimized.

Taxon: soybeanGlycine maxe1
Treatment: drilling soybean in wheat at headinge1
Outcome: optimum intercrop performancee1

Verbatim

e1
“Where mechanical damage to wheat can be minimized, drilling soybean in wheat at heading can result in optimum intercrop performance”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1626–1757

Title

Intercropping Soybean into Standing Green Wheat¹

T. M. Reinbott; Z. R. Helsel; D. G. Helsel; et al. Agronomy Journal 1987. doi:10.2134/agronj1987.00021962007900050026x

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Wheat yield was reduced by 23 and 16% when soybean was intercropped in the drilled and skiprow patterns, respectively.
Intervention effect The date of planting did not significantly influence wheat yield in the skiprow patterns.
Intervention effect Wheat yield decreased significantly as planting date was delayed in the drilled pattern, because of mechanical damage.
Intervention effect Intercropped soybean yielded 27% less than conventional soybean over all years and treatments.
Intervention effect Intercropped soybean yielded 28% more than doublecropped soybean over all years and treatments.
Intervention effect Drilling soybean at the heading stage of wheat gave the greatest yields.
Intervention effect Nitrogen above 56 kg/ha caused excessive wheat growth and a reduction in drilled intercropped soybean yield through competition for light.

“intercrop performance”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics