- Page 1 and 2:
MEKELLE UNIVERSITYCoDANRYield and E
- Page 3 and 4:
ABSTRACTA field experiment was cond
- Page 5 and 6:
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHThe author, Omar
- Page 7 and 8:
TABLE OF CONTENTSDECLARATION.......
- Page 9 and 10:
4.1.2 Soil analysis after Harvestin
- Page 11 and 12:
LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1.Ethio-maize
- Page 13 and 14:
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMSA
- Page 15 and 16:
Cowpea is tolerant to a wide range
- Page 17 and 18:
1.3.2 Specific objectives1. To eval
- Page 19 and 20:
around the world are planted under
- Page 21 and 22:
2.3. Maize Production in EthiopiaEt
- Page 23 and 24:
Food products, like corn meal, corn
- Page 25 and 26:
2.6. Origin, Distribution and World
- Page 27 and 28:
2.8. Importance of IntercroppingCer
- Page 29 and 30:
(Rusinamhodzi et al., 2012). Simila
- Page 31 and 32:
Photo synthetically active radiatio
- Page 33 and 34:
usually reduces weed occurrence (Zu
- Page 35 and 36:
Ayisi, 2005). Higher plant densitie
- Page 37 and 38:
The Somali Regional State has a bim
- Page 39 and 40:
maize. The treatments combinations
- Page 41 and 42:
using a spectrophotometer (Olsen et
- Page 43 and 44:
For cowpeaNumber of pods per plant:
- Page 45 and 46:
Net benefit (NB): was calculated by
- Page 47 and 48:
Moreover, the pH value was 7.71, wh
- Page 49 and 50:
2002). In addition to that, the dif
- Page 51 and 52: allows sole crops to extend its veg
- Page 53 and 54: cowpea increased, the height of the
- Page 55 and 56: of ears per plant in intercropped m
- Page 57 and 58: variety. This result was in conform
- Page 59 and 60: The highest HI (47.86%) was recorde
- Page 61 and 62: Table 10.Effects of densities and v
- Page 63 and 64: Table 11.Interaction effect of the
- Page 65 and 66: Table 12.Effects of component densi
- Page 67 and 68: Significantly higher number of pods
- Page 69 and 70: density of cowpea to 50%. This decr
- Page 71 and 72: Harvest Index (%)Harvest index of c
- Page 73 and 74: Tauro et al. (2013) showed that whe
- Page 75 and 76: The highest net benefit (69,264.81
- Page 77 and 78: varieties and planting density of c
- Page 79 and 80: Altieri, M.A., Glaser, D.L. & Schmi
- Page 81 and 82: Chemeda F, 1996, Effect of bean and
- Page 83 and 84: Demessew Mengesha,2002. Effect of p
- Page 85 and 86: Florentine, S.K. & Fox, J.E.D., 200
- Page 87 and 88: IPS (Industrial Project Service), 2
- Page 89 and 90: Li L, Sun JH, Zhang FS, Li XL, Yang
- Page 91 and 92: Africa and Australia. Eds: Whitebre
- Page 93 and 94: Raji, J.A. (2007). Intercropping so
- Page 95 and 96: Sisay, T., (2004).Effect of plantin
- Page 97 and 98: USDA, 2016. United States Departmen
- Page 99 and 100: APPENDIXESAppendix Table 1.Mean squ
- Page 101: Appendix Table 5.Mean square values
- Page 105: 92