Abstract
Abstract Intercropping of legumes in cereals and manuring are important measures to sustain soil fertility and enhance crop productivity in general and under organic and limited moisture conditions in particular. This study evaluated different wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) + chickpea ( Cicer arietinum L.) row ratios as intercrops under organic and limited moisture conditions in Northwest India with an aim to find out the suitable row ratio to get higher system productivity under these conditions. Chickpea, being a legume, produces nitrogen compounds that help the plant to grow itself and also makes them available to the companion wheat plants and thus helps in wheat nutrition, which otherwise becomes limited due to less mineralization of nitrogen under organic and cold weather conditions. The primary aim of the study was to get better productivity of wheat crop as this is an assured crop of this region. The intercropping system was evaluated in a randomized complete block design with four replications at Ludhiana, Punjab in Northwest India during 2013–2014 and 2014–2015. Effective tillers m −1 row length, number of grains spike −1 and 1000-grain weight of wheat were higher in wheat + chickpea (2:1) intercropping system as compared with sole wheat. This intercropping system produced significantly higher wheat grain yield, wheat equivalent yield and land equivalent ratio than sole wheat. Wheat + chickpea (2:1) and wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systems gave higher water-use efficiency than sole wheat. However, chickpea gave higher yield attributes and seed yield as sole crop than that in different intercropping systems. Wheat + chickpea (2:1) and wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systems produced mean wheat grain yields of 5.11 and 4.79 Mg ha −1 , respectively, along with additional mean chickpea seed yields of 0.28 and 0.24 Mg ha −1 , respectively.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
The 2:1 intercrop increased wheat tillers, grains per spike, and grain weight relative to sole wheat.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- wheat + chickpea (2:1) intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- Effective tillers m −1 row length, number of grains spike −1 and 1000-grain weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- sole wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effective tillers m −1 row length, number of grains spike −1 and 1000-grain weight of wheat were higher in wheat + chickpea (2:1) intercropping system as compared with sole wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The 2:1 intercrop increased wheat grain yield, wheat equivalent yield, and land equivalent ratio versus sole wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- This intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- wheat grain yield, wheat equivalent yield and land equivalent ratioe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- sole wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This intercropping system produced significantly higher wheat grain yield, wheat equivalent yield and land equivalent ratio than sole wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The 2:1 intercrop increased water-use efficiency versus sole wheat.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Wheat + chickpea (2:1)e0
- Outcome
- water-use efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- sole wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat + chickpea (2:1) and wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systems gave higher water-use efficiency than sole wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The 3:1 intercrop increased water-use efficiency versus sole wheat.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systemse0
- Outcome
- water-use efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- sole wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat + chickpea (2:1) and wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systems gave higher water-use efficiency than sole wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole chickpea had higher yield attributes and seed yield than intercropped chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinume0 - Treatment
- sole crope0
- Outcome
- yield attributes and seed yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- different intercropping systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“chickpea gave higher yield attributes and seed yield as sole crop than that in different intercropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
The 2:1 intercrop yielded 5.11 Mg ha −1 wheat grain.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Wheat + chickpea (2:1)e0
- Outcome
- wheat grain yieldse0
- Value
- 5.11e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat + chickpea (2:1) and wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systems produced mean wheat grain yields of 5.11 and 4.79 Mg ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
The 3:1 intercrop yielded 4.79 Mg ha −1 wheat grain.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- wheat + chickpea (3:1)e0
- Outcome
- wheat grain yieldse0
- Value
- 4.79 Mg ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat + chickpea (2:1) and wheat + chickpea (3:1) intercropping systems produced mean wheat grain yields of 5.11 and 4.79 Mg ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
The 2:1 intercrop yielded 0.28 Mg ha −1 additional chickpea seed.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- chickpea seed yieldse0
- Value
- 0.28e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“additional mean chickpea seed yields of 0.28 and 0.24 Mg ha −1”
Claim · model-written summary
The 3:1 intercrop yielded 0.24 Mg ha −1 additional chickpea seed.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- chickpea seed yieldse0
- Value
- 0.24 Mg ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“additional mean chickpea seed yields of 0.28 and 0.24 Mg ha −1”
The same questions in other papers
Cicer arietinum · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
Cicer arietinum · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →intercropping · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
130 papers in the same direction as this paper · 51 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
185 papers more in this group
See all 189 papers →intercropping · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →intercropping · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
47 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 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.