Paper · 2010 · Acta Agrestia Sinica

Influence of different grain-grass intercropping system on yield and soil water use efficiency on sloping lands in dryland areas of south Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region.

Lu Haidong; Zhikuan Jia; Baoping Yang; et al.

6
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The productivity,soil moisture,and soil and water erosion characteristics of six grain-grass intercropping modes of foxtail millet(Setaria italica(L.) Beauv.) or broomcorn millet(Panicum miliaceum L.)+alfalfa(Medicago sativa L.) and grain monoculture mode as control were studied by a field trial on 5° slopes in south region of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region from May 2007 to October 2008.The results show that the soil moisture content was significantly increased,the water use efficiency of food crops improved 0.41-2.15 kg/m3,grain yield increased 2.13-23.88%,surface runoff reduced 18.58-74.90%,and sediment runoff decreased 30.14-100% under six grain+alfalfa intercropping modes(02∶04,04∶08,06∶06A,04∶02,08∶04,and 06∶06B) in comparison with the monoculture of grain crops.Among the different grain-grass intercropping modes,the integrated effect of productivity increment of 02:04 mode with alfalfa as the starting crop at top of the slope was the best.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain–alfalfa intercropping significantly increased soil moisture content against grain monoculture.

Taxon
graint0
Treatment
grain-grass intercroppingt0
Outcome
soil moisture contente0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“soil moisture content was significantly increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 415–464 · show in text ↑
t0

“grain-grass intercropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–48 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping improved crop water use efficiency by 0.41-2.15 kg/m3 over grain monoculture.

Taxon
graint0
Treatment
grain-grass intercroppingt0
Outcome
water use efficiency of food cropse0
Direction
improvede0
Value
0.41-2.15 kg/m3e0
Comparator
monoculture of grain cropse1

Verbatim

t0

“grain-grass intercropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–48 · show in text ↑
e0

“the water use efficiency of food crops improved 0.41-2.15 kg/m3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 465–528 · show in text ↑
e1

“in comparison with the monoculture of grain crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 727–776 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping increased grain yield by 2.13-23.88% over grain monoculture.

Taxon
graint0
Treatment
grain-grass intercroppingt0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
2.13-23.88%e0
Comparator
monoculture of grain cropse1

Verbatim

t0

“grain-grass intercropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–48 · show in text ↑
e0

“grain yield increased 2.13-23.88%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 529–562 · show in text ↑
e1

“in comparison with the monoculture of grain crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 727–776 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping reduced surface runoff by 18.58-74.90% over grain monoculture.

Taxon
graint0
Treatment
grain-grass intercroppingt0
Outcome
surface runoffe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
18.58-74.90%e0
Comparator
monoculture of grain cropse1

Verbatim

t0

“grain-grass intercropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–48 · show in text ↑
e0

“surface runoff reduced 18.58-74.90%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 563–598 · show in text ↑
e1

“in comparison with the monoculture of grain crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 727–776 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping decreased sediment runoff by 30.14-100% over grain monoculture.

Taxon
graint0
Treatment
grain-grass intercroppingt0
Outcome
sediment runoffe0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
30.14-100%e0
Comparator
monoculture of grain cropse1

Verbatim

t0

“grain-grass intercropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–48 · show in text ↑
e0

“sediment runoff decreased 30.14-100%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 603–639 · show in text ↑
e1

“in comparison with the monoculture of grain crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 727–776 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 02:04 mode with alfalfa starting at the top of the slope had the best integrated productivity effect.

Taxon
alfalfaMedicago sativae0
Treatment
02:04 mode with alfalfa as the starting crop at top of the slopee0
Outcome
integrated effect of productivity incremente0
Direction
beste0

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

Medicago sativa
Medicago sativa · TaxonDrepanostoma · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“grain-grass intercropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 23–48 · show in text ↑
e0

“the integrated effect of productivity increment of 02:04 mode with alfalfa as the starting crop at top of the slope was the best”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 829–957 · show in text ↑