Abstract
Ipil-ipil intercrop significantly enhanced the maturity of corn plants and increased ear length, ear diameter, and grain yield per plant. However, tasseling, plant height, ear height, number of ears per plant, and shelling percentage were not significantly affected. Corn plots intercropped with 10, 15, and 20 ipil-ipil plants per linear meter (T1, T2, and T3) gave computed yields of 69.9, 73.4, and 7.0 g/plant, all of which were significantly higher than the control plot (To) which yielded 48.5 g/plant. This indicated that grain yield per plant was improved by the ipil-ipil intercrop. In terms of total grain yield, however, no marked differences were observed between the intercropped corn and control plots due to the differences in plant population. The smaller and shorter ears obtained in the control plot (To) were compensated by the number of plants which was twice as many as in T1, T2, and T3. However, the yields in T2 and T3 exceeded slightly that of To. The average yield obtained was 49.52 cavans or 2.77 t/ha. Hill erosion during heavy rains was greater in To than in T1, T2, and T3.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Ipil-ipil intercropping significantly advanced corn maturity.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- Ipil-ipil intercrope0
- Interactor
- Ipil-ipil
Leucaena leucocephalae0other - Outcome
- maturitye0
- Direction
- enhancede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ipil-ipil intercrop significantly enhanced the maturity of corn plants”
t0“corn intercropped with giant ipil-ipil”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping increased corn ear length and diameter.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- Ipil-ipil intercrope0
- Interactor
- Ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae0other
- Outcome
- ear length, ear diametere0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ipil-ipil intercrop significantly enhanced the maturity of corn plants and increased ear length, ear diameter, and grain yield per plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping increased corn grain yield per plant.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- Ipil-ipil intercrope0
- Interactor
- Ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae0other
- Outcome
- grain yield per plante0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ipil-ipil intercrop significantly enhanced the maturity of corn plants and increased ear length, ear diameter, and grain yield per plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping did not significantly affect corn tasseling, height or ear height.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- Ipil-ipil intercrope1
- Interactor
- Ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae1other
- Outcome
- tasseling, plant height, ear heighte0
- Direction
- not significantly affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tasseling, plant height, ear height, number of ears per plant, and shelling percentage were not significantly affected”
e1“Ipil-ipil intercrop significantly enhanced the maturity of corn plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping did not significantly affect ears per plant or shelling percentage.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- Ipil-ipil intercrope1
- Interactor
- Ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae1other
- Outcome
- number of ears per plant, and shelling percentagee0
- Direction
- not significantly affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tasseling, plant height, ear height, number of ears per plant, and shelling percentage were not significantly affected”
e1“Ipil-ipil intercrop significantly enhanced the maturity of corn plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Ten ipil-ipil plants per meter yielded 69.9 g of corn per plant, significantly above control.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- 10e0
- Interactor
- ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae0other
- Outcome
- computed yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 69.9e0
- Qualifier
- 48.5 g/plante0
- Comparator
- control plot (To)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn plots intercropped with 10, 15, and 20 ipil-ipil plants per linear meter (T1, T2, and T3) gave computed yields of 69.9, 73.4, and 7.0 g/plant, all of which were significantly higher than the control plot (To) which yielded 48.5 g/plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Fifteen ipil-ipil plants per meter yielded 73.4 g of corn per plant, significantly above control.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- 15e0
- Interactor
- ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae0other
- Outcome
- computed yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 73.4, and 7.0 g/plante0
- Comparator
- control plot (To)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn plots intercropped with 10, 15, and 20 ipil-ipil plants per linear meter (T1, T2, and T3) gave computed yields of 69.9, 73.4, and 7.0 g/plant, all of which were significantly higher than the control plot (To) which yielded 48.5 g/plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Twenty ipil-ipil plants per meter yielded 7.0 g of corn per plant, which the abstract describes as significantly above control.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- 20 ipil-ipil plants per linear metere0
- Interactor
- ipil-ipilLeucaena leucocephalae0other
- Outcome
- computed yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 7.0 g/plante0
- Comparator
- control plot (To)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn plots intercropped with 10, 15, and 20 ipil-ipil plants per linear meter (T1, T2, and T3) gave computed yields of 69.9, 73.4, and 7.0 g/plant, all of which were significantly higher than the control plot (To) which yielded 48.5 g/plant”
Claim · model-written summary
Total grain yield showed no marked difference between intercropped and control corn plots.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- intercropped corne1
- Outcome
- total grain yielde1
- Direction
- no marked differencese1
- Comparator
- control plotse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no marked differences were observed between the intercropped corn and control plots”
e1“In terms of total grain yield, however, no marked differences were observed between the intercropped corn and control plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Control corn ears were smaller and shorter than intercropped ears.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- intercroppede1
- Outcome
- earse0
- Direction
- smaller and shortere0
- Comparator
- control plot (To)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The smaller and shorter ears obtained in the control plot (To) were compensated by the number of plants which was twice as many as in T1, T2, and T3”
e1“intercropped corn and control plots”
Claim · model-written summary
The control had twice the corn plant count of the intercropped plots.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Outcome
- number of plantse0
- Direction
- twice as manye0
- Comparator
- T1, T2, and T3e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the number of plants which was twice as many as in T1, T2, and T3”
e1“intercropped corn and control plots”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors report that T2 and T3 yields slightly exceeded control.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- T2 and T3e0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- exceeded slightlye0
- Comparator
- Toe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the yields in T2 and T3 exceeded slightly that of To”
e1“intercropped corn and control plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Average corn yield was 49.52 cavans or 2.77 t/ha.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Outcome
- average yielde0
- Value
- 49.52 cavans or 2.77 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average yield obtained was 49.52 cavans or 2.77 t/ha”
e1“intercropped corn and control plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Control plots had more hillside erosion during heavy rain than intercropped plots.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- intercropped with giant ipil-ipilt0
- Interactor
- giant ipil-ipilt0other
- Outcome
- Hill erosione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- heavy rainse0
- Comparator
- Toe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Hill erosion during heavy rains was greater in To than in T1, T2, and T3”
t0“corn intercropped with giant ipil-ipil”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays subsp. mays · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
95 papers in the same direction as this paper · 196 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
288 papers more in this group
See all 292 papers →Leucaena leucocephala · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Leucaena leucocephala · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →intercropping · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 138 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
180 papers more in this group
See all 184 papers →intercropping · phenology · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
830 papers more in this group
See all 834 papers →intercropping · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
25 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 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.