Abstract
SUMMARY Effects of rhizobial inoculation and applied nitrogen on the utilization efficiency of N, P and K were studied in relation to the yield advantage in additive maize/mungbean intercrops at Los Baños, Philippines in 1988. Inoculation increased grain yield of both maize ( Zea mays L.) and mungbean ( Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek). Yield of maize increased by 60% in the sole crop and 71% in the intercrop as the N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/ha, with a corresponding decrease of 29–35% in the yield of the associated mungbean. Intercropping reduced mungbean yield by 35–57%; maize was less affected. Inoculation also improved the land equivalent ratio (LER). The highest LER (1·49) was obtained at 30 kg N/ha with inoculation. Nutrient absorption by both maize and mungbean was reduced due to intercropping, mungbean being more affected than maize. The reductions in the N absorption efficiency of maize ranged from 4 to 37% and those of mungbean from 37 to 58%. Increases in N rate increased N absorption of maize but caused greater reductions in N absorption of mungbean. Reductions in P absorption by intercropped maize declined with increases in applied N and with inoculation. Inoculation, however, had a lesser effect on K absorption efficiency. Land equivalent ratio analysis in terms of N, P and K utilization efficiency showed that the increase in LER over unity was due largely to a higher total uptake of nutrients by the component crops in the mixture than by the sole crops. The greater efficiency of intercrops than of the sole crops in converting absorbed nutrients to grains also contributed to the yield advantage.
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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobial inoculation increased maize grain yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation increased grain yield of both maize ( Zea mays L.) and mungbean ( Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobial inoculation increased mungbean grain yield.
- Taxon
- mungbean
.jpg?width=60)
Vigna radiatae0 - Treatment
- Inoculatione0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation increased grain yield of both maize ( Zea mays L.) and mungbean ( Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek)”
Claim · model-written summary
Raising N from 0 to 90 kg/ha increased sole-crop maize yield by 60%.
- Treatment
- N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/hae0
- Outcome
- Yield of maizee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 60%e0
- Qualifier
- sole crope0
- Comparator
- 0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of maize increased by 60% in the sole crop and 71% in the intercrop as the N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
Raising N from 0 to 90 kg/ha increased intercrop maize yield by 71%.
- Treatment
- N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/hae0
- Outcome
- Yield of maizee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 71%e0
- Qualifier
- intercrope0
- Comparator
- 0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of maize increased by 60% in the sole crop and 71% in the intercrop as the N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
The higher N rate decreased associated mungbean yield by 29–35%.
- Taxon
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0
- Treatment
- N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/hae1
- Outcome
- yield of the associated mungbeane0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- 29–35%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with a corresponding decrease of 29–35% in the yield of the associated mungbean”
e1“N application rate was increased from 0 to 90 kg/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced mungbean yield by 35–57%.
- Taxon
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- mungbean yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 35–57%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping reduced mungbean yield by 35–57%”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize yield was less affected by intercropping than mungbean yield.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- maize was less affectede0
- Direction
- less affectede0
- Comparator
- mungbeane0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping reduced mungbean yield by 35–57%; maize was less affected”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation improved the land equivalent ratio.
- Taxon
- maize/mungbean
Zea maysVigna radiatat0 - Treatment
- Inoculatione0
- Outcome
- land equivalent ratio (LER)e0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize/mungbean”
e0“Inoculation also improved the land equivalent ratio (LER)”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest LER was 1·49 at 30 kg N/ha with inoculation.
- Taxon
- maize/mungbeanZea maysVigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- 30 kg N/ha with inoculatione0
- Outcome
- LERe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 1·49e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize/mungbean”
e0“The highest LER (1·49) was obtained at 30 kg N/ha with inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced nutrient absorption by maize.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nutrient absorption by both maize and mungbean was reduced due to intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced nutrient absorption by mungbean.
- Taxon
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0
- Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- Nutrient absorptione0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nutrient absorption by both maize and mungbean was reduced due to intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced maize N absorption efficiency by 4 to 37%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The reductions in the N absorption efficiency of maize ranged from 4 to 37%”
t0“maize/mungbean”
e1“Intercropping reduced mungbean yield by 35–57%”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced mungbean N absorption efficiency by 37 to 58%.
- Taxon
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge2
- Outcome
- N absorption efficiencye1
- Direction
- reductionse1
- Value
- 37 to 58%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“those of mungbean from 37 to 58%”
e1“The reductions in the N absorption efficiency of maize ranged from 4 to 37%”
t0“maize/mungbean”
e2“Intercropping reduced mungbean yield by 35–57%”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher N rates increased maize N absorption.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increases in N rate increased N absorption of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher N rates caused greater reductions in mungbean N absorption.
- Taxon
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0
- Treatment
- Increases in N ratee0
- Outcome
- N absorptione0
- Direction
- greater reductionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increases in N rate increased N absorption of maize but caused greater reductions in N absorption of mungbean”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher applied N reduced the intercropping penalty for maize P absorption.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reductions in P absorption by intercropped maize declined with increases in applied N”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation reduced the intercropping penalty for maize P absorption.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reductions in P absorption by intercropped maize declined with increases in applied N and with inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Inoculation had a lesser effect on K absorption efficiency.
- Taxon
- maize/mungbeanZea maysVigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- Inoculatione0
- Outcome
- K absorption efficiencye0
- Direction
- lesser effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize/mungbean”
e0“Inoculation, however, had a lesser effect on K absorption efficiency”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher total nutrient uptake in intercrops largely explained LER above unity.
- Taxon
- maize/mungbeanZea maysVigna radiatat0
- Outcome
- increase in LER over unitye0
- Qualifier
- higher total uptake of nutrientse0
- Comparator
- sole cropse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize/mungbean”
e0“the increase in LER over unity was due largely to a higher total uptake of nutrients by the component crops in the mixture than by the sole crops”
Claim · model-written summary
More efficient conversion of absorbed nutrients into grain also contributed to intercrop yield advantage.
- Taxon
- maize/mungbeanZea maysVigna radiatat0
- Outcome
- yield advantagee0
- Qualifier
- greater efficiency of intercrops than of the sole crops in converting absorbed nutrients to grainse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize/mungbean”
e0“The greater efficiency of intercrops than of the sole crops in converting absorbed nutrients to grains also contributed to the yield advantage”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
84 papers more in this group
See all 88 papers →intercropping · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →nitrogen · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →intercropping · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →intercropping · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 122 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
137 papers more in this group
See all 141 papers →inoculation · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
178 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
180 papers more in this group
See all 184 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
287 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
302 papers more in this group
See all 306 papers →nitrogen · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
402 papers in the same direction as this paper · 83 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
485 papers more in this group
See all 489 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.