Response of a maize or dry bean intercrop to maize density and dry bean arrangement under rainfed conditions
Abstract An experiment was conducted under dryland conditions at the University of Limpopo experimental farm, Syferkuil, in Capricorn district in 2009/10 and 2010/11 growing seasons to determine the effect of maize density and dry bean arrangement on performance of a maize/bean intercrop. The trial was a 2 x 3 factorial arrangement consisting of ten treatments: three maize densities (18500, 24700 and 37000 plants/ha), and two dry bean arrangements (single and double row arrangement). Sole treatments were added to enable comparison of the performance of sole crops and intercrops. Maize density of 18500 plant/ha achieved significantly (P<0.05) lower maize yield than 24700 and 37000 plants/ha in both seasons. Intercropping with double rows of dry bean resulted in higher maize yield in both seasons. The Combination of 37000 plants/ha with double arrangement achieved highest maize yield in both seasons. Maize density of 24700 plants/ha produced higher dry bean yield than 18500 and 37000 plants/ha. The double row bean arrangement resulted in higher dry bean grain yield in both seasons. The combination of 24700 plants/ha and double row arrangement attained the highest dry bean yield in both seasons. Intercropping achieved LER values greater that one. Maize density of 37000 plants/ha with double row of dry bean gave the highest LER value of 1.76 in 2009/10 season while in 2010/11 maize density of 18500 plants/ha with double row of dry bean arrangement achieved the highest LER value of 1.92. Maize/bean combination of 37000 plants/ha maize with double row arrangement of dry bean is recommended.
Abstract
An experiment was conducted under dryland conditions at the University of Limpopo experimental farm, Syferkuil, in Capricorn district in 2009/10 and 2010/11 growing seasons to determine the effect of maize density and dry bean arrangement on performance of a maize/bean intercrop. The trial was a 2 x 3 factorial arrangement consisting of ten treatments: three maize densities (18500, 24700 and 37000 plants/ha), and two dry bean arrangements (single and double row arrangement). Sole treatments were added to enable comparison of the performance of sole crops and intercrops. Maize density of 18500 plant/ha achieved significantly (P<0.05) lower maize yield than 24700 and 37000 plants/ha in both seasons. Intercropping with double rows of dry bean resulted in higher maize yield in both seasons. The Combination of 37000 plants/ha with double arrangement achieved highest maize yield in both seasons. Maize density of 24700 plants/ha produced higher dry bean yield
than 18500 and 37000 plants/ha. The double row bean arrangement resulted in higher dry bean grain yield in
both seasons. The combination of 24700 plants/ha and double row arrangement attained the highest dry bean
yield in both seasons. Intercropping achieved LER values greater that one. Maize density of 37000 plants/ha with
double row of dry bean gave the highest LER value of 1.76 in 2009/10 season while in 2010/11 maize density of
18500 plants/ha with double row of dry bean arrangement achieved the highest LER value of 1.92. Maize/bean
combination of 37000 plants/ha maize with double row arrangement of dry bean is recommended.
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>arrangement</strong> on <strong>intercrop</strong> perf<strong>or</strong>mance. African<br />
CropScience Journal 9, 487- 497.<br />
Ndung’u KW, Kwambai T, Barkutwo J,<br />
Wanjekeche E, Mulati J, Nyambati E, Mu<strong>to</strong>ko<br />
M, Wanyonyi M, Kifuko M. 2006. Effect <strong>of</strong><br />
different spatial <strong>arrangement</strong>s on yield <strong>of</strong> <strong>maize</strong> <strong>and</strong><br />
different <strong>bean</strong> varieties in N<strong>or</strong>th Rift Kenya.<br />
admin/publications/10 th proc.February 2010.<br />
www.kari.<strong>or</strong>g/file<br />
Of<strong>or</strong>i F, Stern WR. 1987. Cereal-legume<br />
<strong>intercrop</strong>ping systems. Advanced Agronomy 41, 41-<br />
90.<br />
Scott TW, Pleasant J, Burt RF, Otis DJ. 1987.<br />
Contributions <strong>of</strong> ground cover, <strong>dry</strong> matter <strong>and</strong><br />
nitrogen from <strong>intercrop</strong>s <strong>and</strong> cover crops in a c<strong>or</strong>n<br />
polyculture system. Agronomic Journal 79, 792- 798.<br />
Sedaghatho<strong>or</strong> S, Janatpo<strong>or</strong> G. 2012. Study on<br />
effect <strong>of</strong> soy<strong>bean</strong> <strong>and</strong> tea <strong>intercrop</strong>ping on yield <strong>and</strong><br />
yield components <strong>of</strong> soy<strong>bean</strong> <strong>and</strong> tea. Journal <strong>of</strong><br />
Agricultural <strong>and</strong> Biological Science 7, 664- 671.<br />
Tsubo M, Walker S, Ogindo HO. 2005. A<br />
simulation model <strong>of</strong> cereal–legume <strong>intercrop</strong>ping<br />
systems f<strong>or</strong> semi-arid regions II. Model application.<br />
Field Crops Research 24, 23- 33.<br />
P<strong>and</strong>ey S. 2000. Maize Research Highlights.<br />
Bulletin: Mexico.<br />
Prasad RB, Brook RM. 2005. Effect <strong>of</strong> varying<br />
<strong>maize</strong> densities on <strong>intercrop</strong>ped <strong>maize</strong> <strong>and</strong> soy<strong>bean</strong> in<br />
Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 41, 365- 382.<br />
Safex. November 2011.<br />
www.farmwise.co.za/trading-safex<br />
Undie UL, Uwah DF, At<strong>to</strong>e EE. 2012. Effect <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>intercrop</strong>ping <strong>and</strong> crop <strong>arrangement</strong> on yield <strong>and</strong><br />
productivity <strong>of</strong> late season <strong>maize</strong>/soy<strong>bean</strong> mixtures in<br />
the humid environment <strong>of</strong> Southern Nigeria. Journal<br />
<strong>of</strong> Agricultural Science 4, 37- 50.<br />
Yilmaz Ş, Atak M, Erayman M. 2008.<br />
Identification <strong>of</strong> advantage <strong>of</strong> <strong>maize</strong>- legume<br />
<strong>intercrop</strong>ping over solitary cropping through<br />
competition indices in the East Mediterranean region.<br />
Journal <strong>of</strong> Agriculture 32, 111- 119.<br />
Nthabiseng et al.<br />
Page 29
![Review on: impact of seed rates and method of sowing on yield and yield related traits of Teff [Eragrostis teff (Zucc.) Trotter] | IJAAR @yumpu](https://documents.yumpu.com/000/066/025/853/c0a2f1eefa2ed71422e741fbc2b37a5fd6200cb1/6b7767675149533469736965546e4c6a4e57325054773d3d/4f6e6531383245617a537a49397878747846574858513d3d.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAICNEWSPSEKTJ5M3Q&Expires=1716814800&Signature=yMric74KppGX2RsUg02nJmwvX%2Bw%3D)
Change language