Abstract
Strip intercropping maize [Zea mays L.] and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr] is increasingly popular because of its relatively easy implementation, potential for environmental protection and improved yields. The objectives of these studies were to determine the effects of plant density and environment on yield and yield components of maize and soybean in monoculture and at the interface in strip intercropping. Maize and soybean were grown in 8-row strips in six environments from 1991–1993 on a Sharpsburg silty clay loam soil. Maize and soybean yields responded similarly to density in monoculture and in the strip interface. As density increased plant height and grain and stover yields on an area basis increased and harvest index decreased. On a per plant basis, grain and stover yields decreased as density increased. Averaged across densities, maize grain yield was 17% higher but soybean was 20% lower at the interface compared to monoculture. To determine complementation or competition in resource use at the interface, additional calculations were made to estimate expected grain and stover yield based on actual monoculture data and the geometric land surface areas surrounding each plant in each crop. Actual per plant maize grain yields were 4–21% higher and stover yields 1–8% higher than expected at the maize/soybean interface, indicating a competitive advantage by maize above what was expected. Actual per plant soybean yields at the interface were higher than expected for grain (5–6%) and stover (7–8%), but only when maize density was low. Medium or high level maize density caused a competitive disadvantage for soybean represented by lower than expected soybean grain (−3–12%) and stover (1–10%) yields. In a supplemental observational study of competition at the interface, similar data and conclusions on maize/soybean strip intercropping were found in plots using natural field variation without the substantial efforts necessary for the conventional RCBD experimental study. Further research is needed to determine if observational studies could play a useful role in collecting preliminary data to help with farm management decisions.
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
Maize and soybean yields responded similarly to plant density in monoculture and in the strip interface.
- Taxon
- Maize and soybean
Glycine max
Zea mayse0 - Treatment
- densitye0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Setting
- strip interfacee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize and soybean yields responded similarly to density in monoculture and in the strip interface”
Claim · model-written summary
As plant density increased, plant height and grain and stover yields per unit area increased.
- Taxon
- Maize/soybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- densitye0
- Outcome
- plant height and grain and stover yields on an area basise1
- Direction
- increasede1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize/soybean”
e0“As density increased”
e1“plant height and grain and stover yields on an area basis increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Harvest index decreased as plant density increased.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize/soybean”
e0“As density increased”
e1“harvest index decreased”
Claim · model-written summary
On a per plant basis, grain and stover yields decreased as plant density increased.
- Taxon
- Maize/soybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- densitye0
- Outcome
- grain and stover yieldse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- On a per plant basise0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize/soybean”
e0“On a per plant basis, grain and stover yields decreased as density increased”
Claim · model-written summary
Averaged across densities, maize grain yield at the strip interface was 17% higher than in monoculture.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Averaged across densities, maize grain yield was 17% higher but soybean was 20% lower at the interface compared to monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Averaged across densities, soybean yield at the strip interface was 20% lower than in monoculture.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- at the interfacee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 20%e0
- Comparator
- monoculturee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Averaged across densities, maize grain yield was 17% higher but soybean was 20% lower at the interface compared to monoculture”
Claim · model-written summary
Actual per plant maize grain yields were 4-21% higher than expected at the maize/soybean interface.
- Treatment
- at the maize/soybean interfacee0
- Outcome
- per plant maize grain yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4–21%e0
- Comparator
- expectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual per plant maize grain yields were 4–21% higher and stover yields 1–8% higher than expected at the maize/soybean interface”
Claim · model-written summary
Actual per plant maize stover yields were 1-8% higher than expected at the maize/soybean interface.
- Treatment
- at the maize/soybean interfacee0
- Outcome
- stover yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1–8%e0
- Comparator
- expectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual per plant maize grain yields were 4–21% higher and stover yields 1–8% higher than expected at the maize/soybean interface”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that maize had a competitive advantage at the interface beyond what was expected.
- Outcome
- competitive advantagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“indicating a competitive advantage by maize above what was expected”
Claim · model-written summary
Actual per plant soybean grain yields at the interface were 5-6% higher than expected, but only when maize density was low.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- at the interfacee0
- Outcome
- graine0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5–6%e0
- Qualifier
- only when maize density was lowe0
- Comparator
- expectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual per plant soybean yields at the interface were higher than expected for grain (5–6%) and stover (7–8%), but only when maize density was low”
Claim · model-written summary
Actual per plant soybean stover yields at the interface were 7-8% higher than expected, but only when maize density was low.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- at the interfacee0
- Outcome
- stovere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 7–8%e0
- Qualifier
- only when maize density was lowe0
- Comparator
- expectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Actual per plant soybean yields at the interface were higher than expected for grain (5–6%) and stover (7–8%), but only when maize density was low”
Claim · model-written summary
Medium or high maize density caused a competitive disadvantage for soybean, with grain yield lower than expected by -3 to 12%.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Medium or high level maize densitye0
- Outcome
- soybean graine0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- −3–12%e0
- Comparator
- expectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Medium or high level maize density caused a competitive disadvantage for soybean represented by lower than expected soybean grain (−3–12%) and stover (1–10%) yields”
Claim · model-written summary
Medium or high maize density caused a competitive disadvantage for soybean, with stover yield lower than expected by 1-10%.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Medium or high level maize densitye0
- Outcome
- stovere0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 1–10%e0
- Comparator
- expectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Medium or high level maize density caused a competitive disadvantage for soybean represented by lower than expected soybean grain (−3–12%) and stover (1–10%) yields”
Claim · model-written summary
A supplemental observational study using natural field variation found similar data and conclusions on maize/soybean strip intercropping.
- Taxon
- maize/soybeanGlycine maxZea mayse0
- Outcome
- similar data and conclusionse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“similar data and conclusions on maize/soybean strip intercropping were found in plots using natural field variation”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays · organism · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Zea mays · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 58 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
75 papers more in this group
See all 79 papers →Glycine max · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
154 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
176 papers more in this group
See all 180 papers →in vitro · organism · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
in vitro · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- 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.