Abstract
Abstract Food and nutrition insecurity in southern Africa call for improvements in traditional agriculture systems. Conservation Agriculture (CA) based on minimum soil disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop diversification has been implemented as a strategy to maintain yields while safeguarding the environment. However, less focus has been placed on potential synergistic benefits on nutrition security. Maize-based systems may increase household income through selling but may not lead to proportionate reduction in malnutrition. Crop diversification in CA systems can have a direct impact on the nutritional status of farm households due to improved dietary diversity. Here we assess how the integration of grain legumes, cowpeas and soybeans, in maize-based CA systems either as intercrops or rotational crops affects maize grain yield and stability, total energy yield, protein yield and surplus calories after satisfying the daily requirement per household. The experiments were carried out from 2012 to 2020 (nine consecutive cropping seasons) in six eastern Zambian on-farm communities using 966 observations. Results show that intercropping compromises maize yields with marginal yield penalties of −5% compared to no-till monocropping. However, intercropped yields were more stable across environments. Total system caloric energy and protein yield were highest in intercropping systems due to higher productivity per unit land area owing to the additive contribution of both maize and legumes. Total system caloric energy and protein yield reached yearly averages of 60 GJ ha −1 and 517 kg ha −1 , respectively, for the intercropping system as compared to 48 GJ ha −1 and 263 kg ha −1 in monocropped maize systems. Tillage-based monocrop resulted in the least stable yields. Our results suggest that intercropping maize with grain legumes in CA systems is a promising option for smallholder farming households to improve dietary diversity, dietary quality and stability of yields thus contributing to sustainable agriculture intensification while maintaining food and nutrition security.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced maize yield by 5% against no-till monocropping.
- Treatment
- intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- maize yieldse0
- Direction
- compromisese0
- Value
- −5%e0
- Comparator
- no-till monocroppinge0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropping compromises maize yields with marginal yield penalties of −5% compared to no-till monocropping.”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping had the highest Total system caloric energy, averaging 60 GJ ha −1 versus 48 GJ ha −1 in monocropped maize.
- Treatment
- intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- Total system caloric energye0
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 60 GJ ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- 48 GJ ha −1e0
- Comparator
- monocropped maize systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total system caloric energy and protein yield reached yearly averages of 60 GJ ha −1 and 517 kg ha −1 , respectively, for the intercropping system as compared to 48 GJ ha −1 and 263 kg ha −1 in monocropped maize systems.”
e1“Total system caloric energy and protein yield were highest in intercropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping had the highest protein yield, averaging 517 kg ha −1 versus 263 kg ha −1 in monocropped maize.
- Treatment
- intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- protein yielde0
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 517 kg ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- 263 kg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- monocropped maize systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total system caloric energy and protein yield reached yearly averages of 60 GJ ha −1 and 517 kg ha −1 , respectively, for the intercropping system as compared to 48 GJ ha −1 and 263 kg ha −1 in monocropped maize systems.”
e1“Total system caloric energy and protein yield were highest in intercropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest intercropping maize with legumes to improve dietary diversity, dietary quality and yield stability.
- Outcome
- intercropping maize with grain legumes in CA systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“intercropping maize with grain legumes in CA systems is a promising option for smallholder farming households to improve dietary diversity, dietary quality and stability of yields”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
220 papers in the same direction as this paper · 613 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
830 papers more in this group
See all 834 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.