Abstract
Abstract Intercropping banana and shorter annual crops in small holder systems is inevitable despite shade being a limitation. Current production is also limited to the wet seasons. Strategies to exploit the spaces under banana shade and drier seasons are crucial for optimal production of these systems. We determined the performance of two legume cover crops, Mucuna pruriens and Crotalaria juncea , and chickpea ( Cicer arietinum ), a grain legume, under different banana shade levels and over the wet and dry seasons in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Banana and legume monocrops served as controls. Shade reduced weed biomass and legume root nodulation, biomass, and grain yields. Chickpea root nodulation had a lower sensitivity to shade (3–9% reduction) compared with mucuna (30–60%) and crotalaria (31–71%). Legume biomass yield declines varied from 37–83%, 56–93%, and 80–98% for mucuna, crotalaria, and chickpea, respectively. Higher nodulation occurred in the rainy compared with the dry season. Biomass yield declines, albeit low occurred in the dry season for mucuna (15%) and crotalaria (30%). In contrast, chickpea biomass and grain yields increased by 394% and 4487%, respectively, in the dry season. A higher banana vegetative growth occurred in the intercropped plots. Land equivalent ratios of 1.15–1.34 under dense shading for mucuna and crotalaria and 1.10–1.62 for chickpea occurred irrespective of the seasons. These findings suggest that these cover crops and chickpea could be exploited to enhance biomass (for fodder, mulch, or manure) and grain yields under banana shade and over the drier seasons.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Banana shade reduced weed biomass.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Shade reduced weed biomass and legume root nodulation, biomass, and grain yields”
t0“banana‐based systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Banana shade reduced legume root nodulation, biomass, and grain yields.
- Taxon
- Mucuna pruriens
.jpg?width=60)
Mucuna prurienst0 - Treatment
- Shadee0
- Outcome
- legume root nodulation, biomass, and grain yieldse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Shade reduced weed biomass and legume root nodulation, biomass, and grain yields”
t0“Mucuna pruriens, Crotalaria juncea, and chickpea (Cicer arietinum)”
Claim · model-written summary
Chickpea nodulation declined 3–9% under shade.
- Taxon
- Chickpea
Cicer arietinume0 - Treatment
- shadee0
- Outcome
- root nodulatione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 3–9%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Chickpea root nodulation had a lower sensitivity to shade (3–9% reduction) compared with mucuna (30–60%) and crotalaria (31–71%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mucuna nodulation declined 30–60% under shade.
MucunaNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Chickpea root nodulation had a lower sensitivity to shade (3–9% reduction) compared with mucuna (30–60%) and crotalaria (31–71%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Crotalaria nodulation declined 31–71% under shade.
- Taxon
- crotalaria
Crotalariae0 - Treatment
- shadee0
- Outcome
- root nodulatione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 31–71%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Chickpea root nodulation had a lower sensitivity to shade (3–9% reduction) compared with mucuna (30–60%) and crotalaria (31–71%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mucuna biomass yield declined 37–83% under shade.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Legume biomass yield declines varied from 37–83%, 56–93%, and 80–98% for mucuna, crotalaria, and chickpea, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Crotalaria biomass yield declined 56–93% under shade.
- Taxon
- crotalariaCrotalariae0
- Outcome
- biomass yielde0
- Direction
- declinese0
- Value
- 56–93%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Legume biomass yield declines varied from 37–83%, 56–93%, and 80–98% for mucuna, crotalaria, and chickpea, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Chickpea biomass yield declined 80–98% under shade.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- biomass yielde0
- Direction
- declinese0
- Value
- 80–98%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Legume biomass yield declines varied from 37–83%, 56–93%, and 80–98% for mucuna, crotalaria, and chickpea, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Root nodulation was higher in the rainy season than in the dry season.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
- Outcome
- nodulatione0
- Direction
- Highere0
- Comparator
- the dry seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher nodulation occurred in the rainy compared with the dry season”
t0“chickpea (Cicer arietinum)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mucuna biomass yield declined 15% in the dry season.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biomass yield declines, albeit low occurred in the dry season for mucuna (15%) and crotalaria (30%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Crotalaria biomass yield declined 30% in the dry season.
- Taxon
- crotalariaCrotalariae0
- Outcome
- Biomass yielde0
- Direction
- declinese0
- Value
- 30%e0
- Setting
- the dry seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biomass yield declines, albeit low occurred in the dry season for mucuna (15%) and crotalaria (30%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Chickpea biomass yield increased 394% in the dry season.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 394%e0
- Setting
- the dry seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“chickpea biomass and grain yields increased by 394% and 4487%, respectively, in the dry season”
Claim · model-written summary
Chickpea grain yield increased 4487% in the dry season.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- grain yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4487%e0
- Setting
- the dry seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“chickpea biomass and grain yields increased by 394% and 4487%, respectively, in the dry season”
Claim · model-written summary
Banana vegetative growth was higher in intercropped plots.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“A higher banana vegetative growth occurred in the intercropped plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Land equivalent ratios under dense shading were 1.15–1.34 for mucuna and crotalaria.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Land equivalent ratios of 1.15–1.34 under dense shading for mucuna and crotalaria”
Claim · model-written summary
Land equivalent ratios under dense shading were 1.10–1.62 for chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- Land equivalent ratiose0
- Value
- 1.10–1.62e0
- Qualifier
- dense shadinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Land equivalent ratios of 1.15–1.34 under dense shading for mucuna and crotalaria and 1.10–1.62 for chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest cover crops and chickpea can enhance biomass and grain yields under banana shade and in drier seasons.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Outcome
- enhance biomass (for fodder, mulch, or manure) and grain yieldse0
- Qualifier
- under banana shade and over the drier seasonse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“these cover crops and chickpea could be exploited to enhance biomass (for fodder, mulch, or manure) and grain yields under banana shade and over the drier seasons”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · growth · MusaPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 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.