Abstract
Field experiment was conducted at Instructional Farm, Jaguli (Mohanpur), Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, West Bengal, India during two consecutive summer seasons of 2010-11, and 2011-12. The experiment was laid out in split-plot design having 4 levels of irrigation rainfed without mulch, rainfed with mulch, irrigation at IW (depth of irrigation water) / CPE (Cumulative pan evaporation) ratios of 0.5 and 0.75 in main-plot and 4 inter cropping systems, sole maize, sole mungbean, maize + mungbean (1:1 row ratio) and maize + mungbean (3:2 row ratio) considered as sub-plot treatments replicated thrice. Results revealed that application of irrigation and intercropping systems markedly influenced the growth, yield and yield components (number of cobs/plant, number of grains/cob in case of maize and number of pods/plant and number of seeds/pod in case of mungbean) where the maximum value of these components were recorded with the application of irrigation at IW/CPE ratio 0.75 in sole crop. Maize-mungbean in 3:2 row ratio yielded higher than that of 1:1 intercropping system which might be due to less light interception and more competition for water and nutrition between both the crops. CU of water increased with the increasing levels of irrigation and the maximum value (17.75 kg ha-1 mm- 1) of WUE (water use efficiency) was observed with irrigation at IW: CPE ratio 0.75 under intercropping system of maize : mungbean in 3:2 row ratio followed by IW: CPE ratio 0.50. Among the sole crop, maximum WUE was with IW/CPE ratio 0.75 might be due to more consumption of water corresponding to production potential of maize, while, it was more under rainfed with mulch in mungbean. The relative crowding coefficient (RCC) also revealed both the intercropping systems were advantageous and the land equivalent ratio (LER) increased with the level of irrigation.Thus, maize grown in association with mungbean (3:2 row ratio) were found to be more profitable (B:C ratio of 2.58) with higher monetary advantage as compared to sole crop of maize (B:C ratio of 1.98) with the application of irrigation at IW: CPE ratio of 0.75 in new alluvial zone of West Bengal.SAARC J. Agri., 13(2): 94-107 (2015)
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Maize growth, yield and yield components were highest under 0.75 IW/CPE irrigation in sole crop.
- Treatment
- irrigation at IW/CPE ratio 0.75e0
- Outcome
- growth, yield and yield componentse1
- Direction
- maximume0
- Comparator
- sole crope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum value of these components were recorded with the application of irrigation at IW/CPE ratio 0.75 in sole crop.”
e1“growth, yield and yield components (number of cobs/plant, number of grains/cob in case of maize and number of pods/plant and number of seeds/pod in case of mungbean)”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mungbean growth, yield and yield components were highest under 0.75 IW/CPE irrigation in sole crop.
- Taxon
- mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)
.jpg?width=60)
Vigna radiatat0 - Treatment
- irrigation at IW/CPE ratio 0.75e0
- Outcome
- growth, yield and yield componentse1
- Direction
- maximume0
- Comparator
- sole crope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“the maximum value of these components were recorded with the application of irrigation at IW/CPE ratio 0.75 in sole crop.”
e1“growth, yield and yield components (number of cobs/plant, number of grains/cob in case of maize and number of pods/plant and number of seeds/pod in case of mungbean)”
t0“mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 3:2 maize-mungbean intercrop yielded more than the 1:1 intercrop.
- Taxon
- Maize-mungbeane0
- Treatment
- 3:2 row ratioe0
- Interactor
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0other
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- 1:1 intercropping systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize-mungbean in 3:2 row ratio yielded higher than that of 1:1 intercropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Consumptive water use rose as irrigation level rose.
- Taxon
- maize (Zea mays L.) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)
Zea maysVigna radiatat0 - Treatment
- increasing levels of irrigatione0
- Outcome
- CU of watere0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CU of water increased with the increasing levels of irrigation”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 3:2 intercrop with 0.75 IW:CPE irrigation had maximum water use efficiency of 17.75 kg ha-1 mm- 1.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum value (17.75 kg ha-1 mm- 1) of WUE (water use efficiency) was observed with irrigation at IW: CPE ratio 0.75 under intercropping system of maize : mungbean in 3:2 row ratio followed by IW: CPE ratio 0.50.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole maize attained maximum WUE at 0.75 IW/CPE irrigation.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Among the sole crop, maximum WUE was with IW/CPE ratio 0.75 might be due to more consumption of water corresponding to production potential of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole mungbean attained higher WUE under rainfed mulch.
- Taxon
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0
- Treatment
- rainfed with mulche0
- Outcome
- moree0
- Direction
- moree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it was more under rainfed with mulch in mungbean.”
Claim · model-written summary
Relative crowding coefficients indicated that both intercropping systems were advantageous.
- Outcome
- both the intercropping systems were advantageouse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“The relative crowding coefficient (RCC) also revealed both the intercropping systems were advantageous”
Claim · model-written summary
Land equivalent ratio increased with irrigation level.
- Taxon
- maize (Zea mays L.) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)Zea maysVigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- level of irrigatione0
- Outcome
- land equivalent ratio (LER)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the land equivalent ratio (LER) increased with the level of irrigation.”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.) and mungbean (Vigna radiata L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 3:2 maize-mungbean intercrop at 0.75 IW:CPE was more profitable than sole maize, with B:C ratios of 2.58 and 1.98.
- Treatment
- maize grown in association with mungbean (3:2 row ratio)e0
- Interactor
- mungbeanVigna radiatae0other
- Outcome
- B:C ratioe0
- Direction
- more profitablee0
- Value
- 2.58e0
- Qualifier
- B:C ratio of 1.98e0
- Comparator
- sole crop of maizee0
- Setting
- West Bengale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize grown in association with mungbean (3:2 row ratio) were found to be more profitable (B:C ratio of 2.58) with higher monetary advantage as compared to sole crop of maize (B:C ratio of 1.98) with the application of irrigation at IW: CPE ratio of 0.75 in new alluvial zone of West Bengal.”
The same questions in other papers
Vigna radiata · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →irrigation · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
71 papers more in this group
See all 75 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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.