Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:51:03.229Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A STAGGERED MAIZE–LEGUME INTERCROP ARRANGEMENT INFLUENCES YIELD, WEED SMOTHERING AND NUTRIENT BALANCE IN THE EASTERN HIMALAYAN REGION OF INDIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

V. K. CHOUDHARY  and
B. U. CHOUDHURY
V. K. CHOUDHARY*
Affiliation:
Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Research Complex for North Eastern Hilly Region, Arunachal Pradesh Centre, Basar-791101, India National Institute of Biotic Stress Management, Raipur-493225, Chhattisgarh, India
B. U. CHOUDHURY
Affiliation:
ICAR, Research Complex for North Eastern Hilly Region, Umiam-793103, Meghalaya, India
*
‡Corresponding author. Email: ind_vc@rediffmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The effects of sole and intercropping of rainfed maize (Zea mays L.) were evaluated with soybean (Glycine max L.) and groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) on crop yield, weed smothering efficiency (WSE) and nutrient (NPK) balance at Eastern Himalayan Region (EHR), India. Grain yield of maize was highest (3886 to 4110 kg ha−1) in the solitary system followed by maize-soybean intercrops at 1:2 rows. However, system productivity as well as production efficiency was higher by 47.3-63.3% and 39.5-58.4%, respectively in intercropping with groundnut at 1:5 rows compared to solitary maize. WSE was relatively higher to solitary soybean and was comparable to maize-groundnut intercropping at 1:5 row proportions. Similarly, NPK uptake was higher in intercropping of maize-soybean systems at 1:5 row proportions. Inclusion of legumes as intercrops in predominantly solitary rainfed maize may improve the system productivity while sustaining the nutrient availability in the vast uplands of the EHR and other similar rainfed hilly ecosystems.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 181 - 200
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agegnehu, G., Ghizam, A. and Sinebo, W. (2006). Yield performance and land use efficiency of barley and faba bean mixed cropping in Ethiopian highlands. European Journal of Agronomy 25:202–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amossé, C., Jeuffroy, M. H., Mary, B. and David, C. (2014). Contribution of relay intercropping with legume cover crops on nitrogen dynamics in organic grain systems. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 98 (1):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaise, D., Bonde, A. N. and Chaudhary, R. S. (2005). Nutrient uptake and balance of cotton + pigeonpea strip intercropping on rainfed Vertisols of central India. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 73:135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, H. D. and Pratta, P. F. (1961). Methods of analysis for soils, plants and water. Oakland, CA: Univ. of California.Google Scholar
Chen, C., Westcott, M., Neill, K., Wichman, D. and Knox, M. (2004). Row configuration and nitrogen application for barley–pea intercropping in Montana. Agronomy Journal 96:1730–1738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhary, V. K. and Kumar, P. S. (2013). Crop and water productivity, profitability and energy consumption pattern of a maize-based crop sequence in the North Eastern Himalayan Region, India. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 59 (5):653–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhary, V. K., Anil, Dixit, Kumar, P. S. and Chauhan, B. S. (2014). Productivity, weed dynamics, nutrient mining, and monetary advantage of maize-legume intercropping in the eastern Himalayan region of India. Plant Production Science 17 (4):342–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhary, V. K., Kumar, P. S. and Bhagawati, R. (2012). Production potential, soil moisture and temperature as influenced by maize- legume intercropping. International Journal of Science & Nature 3 (1):41–46.Google Scholar
Choudhury, B. U., Mohapatra, K. P., Das, A., Das, P. T., Nongkhlaw, L., Fiyaz, A. R., Ngachan, S. V., Hazarika, S., Rajkhowa, D. J. and Munda, G. C. (2013). Spatial variability in distribution of organic carbon stocks in the soils of North East India. Current Science 104 (5): 604–614.Google Scholar
de Wit, C. T. (1960). On competition. Verslag Landbouwkundige Onderzock, 66:1–82.Google Scholar
Esmaeil, R. C., Dabbagh, A., Mohammadi, N., Shakiba, M. R., Ghassemi-Golezani, K., Aharizad, S. and Shekari, F. (2010). Intercropping of maize (Zea mays L.) and faba bean (Vicia faba L.) at different plant population densities. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6 (7):1786–1793.Google Scholar
Fan, F., Zhang, F., Song, Y., Sun, J., Bao, X., Guo, T. and Li, L. (2006). Nitrogen fixation of faba bean (Vicia faba L.) interacting with a non-legume in two contrasting intercropping systems. Plant & Soil 283:275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentry, L. E., David, M. B., Below, F. E., Royer, T. V. and Mclsaac, G. F. (2009). Nitrogen mass balance of a tile drainage agricultural watershed in East-Central Illinois. Journal of Environmental Quality 38:1841–1847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haque, M., Sharma, R. P. and Prasad, S. (2008). Weed control in maize based intercropping system under rainfed condition. ISWS Biennial Conference on Weed Management in Modern Agriculture, February 27–28, 2008, Pusa, Bihar. p. 118.Google Scholar
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Ambus, H. and Jensen, E. S. (2001). Temporal and spatial distribution of roots and competition for nitrogen in pea-barley intercrops; a field study employing 32P technique. Plant & Soil 236:63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauser, S. (1987). Schatzung der symbotisch fixierten Stickstoffmenge von Ackerbohne (Vicia faba L.) mit erweiterten Differenzmethoden. Dissertation, Georg- August- Universitat, Gottingen.Google Scholar
Hayder, G. S., Mumtaz, S., Khan, A. and Khan, S. (2003). Maize and soybean intercropping under various levels of soybean seed rates. Asian Journal of Plant Science 2 (3):339–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussain, N., Shamsi, I. H., Khan, S., Akbar, H. and Shah, W. A. (2003). Effect of legume intercrops and nitrogen levels on the yield performance of maize. Asian Journal of Plant Science 2 (2):242–246.Google Scholar
John, S. A. and Mini, C. 2005. Biological efficiency of intercropping in okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench). Journal of Tropical Agriculture 43 (1-2):33–36.Google Scholar
Li, H., Shen, J., Zhang, F., Marschner, P., Cawthray, G. and Rengel, Z. (2010). Phosphorus uptake and rhizosphere properties of intercropped and monocropped maize, faba bean, and white lupin in acidic soil. Biological Fertilizer Soil 46:79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L., Li, S., Sun, J., Zhou, L., Bao, X., Gang, H. and Zhang, F. (2007). Diversity enhances agricultural productivity via rhizosphere phosphorus facilitation on phosphorus deficient soils. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences 104 (27):11192–11196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, L., Sun, J. H., Zhang, F.S., Li, X. L., Rengel, Z., Yang, S. C. and Tang, C. X. (2001). Wheat/maize or soybean strip intercropping. I. Yield advantage and inter-specific interactions on nutrients. Field Crops Research 71:123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, L., Zhang, F. S., Li, X. L., Christie, P., Sun, J. H., Yang, S. C. and Tang, C. X. (2003). Inter specific facilitation of nutrient uptake by intercropped maize and faba bean. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 65:61–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lithourgidis, A. S., Dordas, C. A., Damalas, C. A. and Vlachostergios, D. N. (2011). Annual intercrops: an alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture. Australian Journal of Crop Science 5:396–410.Google Scholar
Mandal, M. K., Banerjee, M., Banerjee, H., Alipatra, A. and Malik, G. C. (2014). Productivity of maize (Zea mays) based intercropping system during kharif season under red and lateritic tract of West Bangal. The Bioscan 9 (1):31–35.Google Scholar
Marer, S. B., Lingaraju, B. S. and Shashidhara, G. B. (2007). Productivity and economics of maize and pigeonpea intercropping under rainfed condition in northern transitional zone of Karnataka. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences 20 (1):1–3.Google Scholar
Mucheru-Muna, M., Pypers, P., Mugendi, D., Kunngu, J., Mugwe, J., Merckx, R. and Vanlauwe, B. (2010). A staggered maize–legume intercrop arrangement robustly increases crop yields and economic returns in the highlands of Central Kenya. Field Crops Research 115:132–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munda, G. C., Das, A. and Patel, D. P. (2009). Evaluation of transplanted and ratoon crop for double cropping of rice (Oryza sativa L.) under organic input management in mid altitude sub tropical Meghalaya. Current Science 96 (12):1620–1627.Google Scholar
Murtem, G., Sinha, G. N. and Dopum, J. (2008). Jhumias view on shifting cultivation in Arunachal Pradesh. Bulletin of Arunachal Forest Research 24 (1&2):35–40.Google Scholar
Ncube, B., Twomlow, S. J., Van Wijk, M. T., Dimes, J. P. and Giller, K. E. (2007). Productivity and residual benefits of grain legumes to sorghum under semi-arid condition in south western Zimbabwe. Plant & Soil 229:1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NEH (2005). Vision 2020. Meghalaya: ICAR Research Complex for NEH region, Umiam.Google Scholar
Prasad, R. B. and Brook, R. M. (2005). Effect of varying maize densities on intercropped maize and soybean in Nepal. Experimental Agriculture 41:365–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, L. A. (1968). Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. Handbook No. 60. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Pub. Co.Google Scholar
Sanginga, N. (2003). Role of biological nitrogen fixation in legume based cropping systems; a case study of West Africa farming systems. Plant & Soil 252:25–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sani, B. M., Oluwasemire, K. O. and Mohammed, H. I. (2008). Effect of irrigation and plant density on the growty, yield and water use efficiency of early maize in the Nigerian Savanna. Journal of Agriculture & Biological Sciences 3:33–39.Google Scholar
Shah, S. N., Shroff, J. C., Patel, R. H. and Usadadiya, V. P. (2011). Influence of intercropping and weed management practices on weed and yields of maize. International Journal of Science & Nature 2 (1):47–50.Google Scholar
Singh, M., Prabhukumar, S., Sairam, C. V. and Kumar, A. (2009). Evaluation of different weed management practices in rainfed maize of farmers fields. Pakistan Journal of Weed Science Research 15 (2-3):183–189.Google Scholar
Singh, U., Saad, A. A. and Singh, S. R. (2008). Production potential, biological feasibility and economic viability of maize (Zea mays)-based intercropping system under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 78 (12):1023–1027.Google Scholar
Srinivasarao, C., Kundu, S., Venkateshwarulu, B., Lal, R., Singh, A. K., Balaguravaiah, G., Vijaysankarbabu, M., Vittal, K. P. R., Reddy, S. and Manideep, V. R. (2013). Long term effects of fertilization and manuring on groundnut yield and nutrient balance of alfisols under rainfed farming in India. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 96:29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tripathi, A. K., Kumar, A., Nath, S. and Yadav, R. A. (2008). Weed dynamics, productivity and net monetary returns as influenced by winter maize based intercropping systems in central U.P. ISWS Biennial Conference on Weed Management in Modern Agriculture, February 27–28, 2008, Pusa, Bihar. p. 120.Google Scholar
Ullah, A., Bhatti, M. A., Gurmani, Z. A. and Imran, M. (2007). Studies on planting patterns of maize (Zea mays l.) facilitating legumes intercropping. Journal of Agricultural Research 45 (2):1–6.Google Scholar
Vestrager, J. M., Nielsen, N. E. and Jensen, H. (2008). Effects of cropping history and phosphorus on yield and nitrogen fixation in sole and intercropped cowpea-maize systems. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 80 (1):61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, R. W. 1979. Intercropping its importance and research needs. Part 1. Competition and yield advantage. Field Crops Research Abst. 32:1–30.Google Scholar
Woomer, P. L., Langat, M. and Tungani, J. O. (2004). Innovative maize–legume intercropping results in above- and below-ground competitive advantages for understorey legumes. West African Journal of Applied Ecology 6:85–94.Google Scholar