Paper · 2020 · Biological Agriculture & Horticulture

Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system

Rouhollah Amini; Bahram Choubforoush Khoei; Adel Dabbagh Mohammadi Nasab; et al.

10
claims
30
verbatim quotes
11
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

To study the effects of intercropping different sugar beet cultivars with soybean, Moldavian balm and proso millet in an organic production system on the yield and quality of sugar beet, a factorial experiment was conducted in 2016 and 2017 in West Azarbayjan, Iran. In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively), but in 2017 the concentrations of these compounds were not significantly different between the intercropping patterns. For all intercropping patterns the land equivalent ratio (LER) was greater than one. In 2016, the highest LERT, based on white sugar yield, was obtained in the sugar beet–soybean intercropping system (1.27 for cv. Vaclav), but in 2017 the highest LERT based on white sugar yield, was obtained in sugar beet–Moldavian balm intercropping (1.24 for cv. Vaclav). Among the sugar beet cultivars, Ghazira had the highest sugar concentration and white sugar yield. It was concluded that the sugar beet–Moldavian balm intercropping system could be used in organic production systems to achieve high land productivity.

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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar beet-soybean intercropping had the highest sugar beet Na concentration in 2016.

Treatment
sugar beet-soybean intercroppinge0
Outcome
Nae0
Direction
higheste0
Value
2.384e0
Qualifier
2016e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar beet-soybean intercropping had the highest sugar beet α-amino-N concentration in 2016.

Treatment
sugar beet-soybean intercroppinge0
Outcome
α-amino-N concentrationse0
Direction
higheste0
Value
2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beete0
Qualifier
2016e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2017, Na concentrations did not differ significantly among intercropping patterns.

Treatment
intercropping patternse0
Outcome
Nat0
Direction
not significantly differente0
Qualifier
2017e0
Comparator
intercropping patternse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but in 2017 the concentrations of these compounds were not significantly different between the intercropping patterns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 437–554 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2017, α-amino-N concentrations did not differ significantly among intercropping patterns.

Treatment
intercropping patternse0
Outcome
α-amino-Ne1
Direction
not significantly differente0
Qualifier
2017e0
Comparator
intercropping patternse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but in 2017 the concentrations of these compounds were not significantly different between the intercropping patterns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 437–554 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All intercropping patterns had land equivalent ratios above one.

Treatment
intercropping patternse0
Outcome
land equivalent ratio (LER)e0
Direction
greater thane0
Value
onee0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For all intercropping patterns the land equivalent ratio (LER) was greater than one.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 556–640 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2016, sugar beet-soybean intercropping with Vaclav had the highest white-sugar-yield LERT, 1.27.

Material
cv. Vaclave0
Treatment
sugar beet–soybean intercropping systeme0
Outcome
LERT, based on white sugar yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1.27e0
Qualifier
2016e0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2016, the highest LERT, based on white sugar yield, was obtained in the sugar beet–soybean intercropping system (1.27 for cv. Vaclav)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 641–777 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2017, sugar beet-Moldavian balm intercropping with Vaclav had the highest white-sugar-yield LERT, 1.24.

Material
cv. Vaclave0
Treatment
sugar beet–Moldavian balm intercroppinge0
Outcome
LERT based on white sugar yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1.24e0
Qualifier
2017e0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but in 2017 the highest LERT based on white sugar yield, was obtained in sugar beet–Moldavian balm intercropping (1.24 for cv. Vaclav)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 779–913 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ghazira had the highest sugar concentration among sugar beet cultivars.

Material
Ghazirae0
Outcome
sugar concentratione0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
sugar beet cultivarse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Among the sugar beet cultivars, Ghazira had the highest sugar concentration and white sugar yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1013 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ghazira had the highest white sugar yield among sugar beet cultivars.

Material
Ghazirae0
Outcome
white sugar yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
sugar beet cultivarse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Among the sugar beet cultivars, Ghazira had the highest sugar concentration and white sugar yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1013 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend sugar beet-Moldavian balm intercropping for high land productivity in organic production.

Treatment
sugar beet–Moldavian balm intercropping systeme0
Outcome
high land productivitye0
Setting
organic production systemse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“It was concluded that the sugar beet–Moldavian balm intercropping system could be used in organic production systems to achieve high land productivity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1014–1165 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effects of intercropping sugar beet (Beta vulgarisL.) with millet, soybean and Moldavian balm on yield and quality in an organic production system”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–146 · show in text ↑
e1

“In 2016, the sugar beet-soybean intercropping resulted in the highest Na and α-amino-N concentrations in the sugar beet (2.384 and 2.879 meq. 100 g−1 beet respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 267–435 · show in text ↑

intercropping · nutrient: content · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.