Paper · 2011 · Journal of Agricultural Science

Agronomic Performance of Collards under Two Intercrops and Varying Nitrogen Application Levels as Assessed Using Land Equivalent Ratios

Samuel Kilonzo Mutiga; Linnet S. Gohole; Elmada. O. Auma

8
claims
18
verbatim quotes
4
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Sustainable utilization of the limited land parcels is an important element in resource poor countries whosepopulations depend on agriculture for sustenance. In East Africa, collard vegetable production has been a venturefor many small-scale farmers. Since no approaches are possible in expanding the land resource, improved cropproduction techniques and management promise better yields. We report a potential and sustainable approach forcollard production. We compared the productivity of growing collards in an intercrop with chilli or spring onions,and varying nitrogen levels in each cropping system in terms of land equivalent ratios (LER). Our two - seasondata show that farmers can obtain higher yield in a unit of land when they intercrop collards with spring onionsas indicated by a LER of 1.06, and that growing collards in an intercrop with Chilli leads to a 14% wastage ofland resource compared to growing the crop as a monoculture. Further, we reveal that application of nitrogenousfertilizer might lead to increase in yield but it does not have a statistically significant benefit on the land resourceuse.There were no statistically significant relationship between the yield of collards and their heights in all croppingsystems, but a non-significant(r=-0.29, p=0.164) decline of yield was observed under collard + chilli intercrop.The number of collard leaves was significantly negatively correlated (r=- 0.456, p=0.0249) with yield LER undercollard + chilli intercrop but it did not influence the LER under collard + spring onion intercrop. These findingsdemonstrate the need for proper resource application, and that collard + spring onion intercrop has a potential toimprove collard yield per unit piece of cultivated land without a need for increasing the rate of nitrogenousfertilizer application.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Collards intercropped with spring onions gave higher yield per unit of land (LER 1.06).

Treatment
intercrop collards with spring onionse1
Outcome
yield in a unit of lande1
Direction
highere1
Value
1.06e1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e1

“farmers can obtain higher yield in a unit of land when they intercrop collards with spring onionsas indicated by a LER of 1.06”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 678–804 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Collards intercropped with chilli wasted 14% of land resource compared with monoculture.

Treatment
growing collards in an intercrop with Chillie2
Outcome
wastage of land resourcee2
Direction
increaseinferrede2
Value
14%e2
Comparator
growing the crop as a monoculturee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e2

“growing collards in an intercrop with Chilli leads to a 14% wastage ofland resource compared to growing the crop as a monoculture”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 815–944 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen fertilizer might increase collard yield.

Treatment
application of nitrogenous fertilizere3
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
increasee3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e3

“application of nitrogenousfertilizer might lead to increase in yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1038 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen fertilizer did not have a statistically significant benefit on land resource use.

Treatment
application of nitrogenous fertilizere3
Outcome
land resource usee4
Direction
no_changeinferrede4

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e3

“application of nitrogenousfertilizer might lead to increase in yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1038 · show in text ↑
e4

“it does not have a statistically significant benefit on the land resourceuse”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1043–1119 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The number of collard leaves was negatively correlated with yield LER under collard + chilli intercrop.

Treatment
collard + chilli intercrope5
Outcome
yield LERe5
Direction
negatively correlatede5
Value
r=- 0.456e5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e5

“The number of collard leaves was significantly negatively correlated (r=- 0.456, p=0.0249) with yield LER undercollard + chilli intercrop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1348–1485 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The number of collard leaves did not influence LER under collard + spring onion intercrop.

Treatment
collard + spring onion intercrope6
Outcome
LERe6
Direction
no_changeinferrede6

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e6

“but it did not influence the LER under collard + spring onion intercrop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1486–1557 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No statistically significant relationship between collard yield and plant height in all cropping systems.

Treatment
cropping systemse1
Outcome
yield of collards and their heightse7
Direction
no_changeinferrede7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e7

“There were no statistically significant relationship between the yield of collards and their heights”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1120–1220 · show in text ↑
e1

“in all croppingsystems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1221–1243 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield of collards tended to decline under collard + chilli intercrop, though not significantly.

Treatment
collard + chilli intercrope1
Outcome
yielde1
Direction
declinee1
Value
r=-0.29e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Brassica oleracea var. viridis
Brassica oleracea var. viridis · TaxonAnn Perry · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Collards”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–33 · show in text ↑
e1

“a non-significant(r=-0.29, p=0.164) decline of yield was observed under collard + chilli intercrop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1249–1347 · show in text ↑

Brassica oleracea var. viridis · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

intercropping · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

43 papers: 35 positive, 8 negative or no effect

34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative

39 papers more in this group

See all 43 papers →

fertilization · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

496 papers: 445 positive, 51 negative or no effect

444 papers in the same direction as this paper · 43 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

492 papers more in this group

See all 496 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.