Abstract
In the face of climate pressure and threats to biodiversity, intercropping cereals with legumes and using biostimulants can increase feed yield and quality. This research evaluated a two-year intercropping system of maize and climbing beans for silage in central Poland, comparing four sowing schemes 90,000 ha−1 maize with 90,000 (90 + 90); 45,000 (90 + 45) or 27,500 (90 + 27.5) climbing beans ha−1 and sole maize, as well as five biostimulant application: control object, liquid microelement fertilizer (Zn-8.0%) containing zinc acetate, liquid extract from Ecklonia maxima algae, Methylobacterium symbioticum bacteria, Bacillus halotolerans bacteria. The aim of the field research was to evaluate the biomass components, yields, and crude protein content in silage. The intercropping pattern and biostimulants had a significant effect on dry matter and yields, with limited interactions. Single maize plant weight and yield were highest in the single crop and 90 + 27.5 treatments, while total intercrop yield peaked at 90 + 45, exceeding single maize by 14%. Biostimulants increased maize yields by 3–8% and intercrop yields by up to 6%, but reduced bean yields compared to controls. The crude protein content of silage was lowest for maize alone and highest for 90 + 45; biostimulants increased protein content by 5–9%, mainly for Methylobacterium symbioticum. Overall, the combination of 90 + 45 with Ecklonia maxima or Methylobacterium symbioticum optimized silage biomass and protein. The presented research is the first to evaluate the intercropping of maize with runner beans in orderly sowing and under the influence of biostimulants. It may constitute an important step in improving the efficiency of intercropping for implementation in agricultural practice. Further research should evaluate reduced mineral fertilization in this system.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping pattern and biostimulants significantly affected dry matter and yields, with limited interactions.
- Treatment
- intercropping pattern and biostimulantse0
- Outcome
- dry matter and yieldse0
- Qualifier
- limited interactionse0
Not reportedTaxonDirection
Verbatim
e0“The intercropping pattern and biostimulants had a significant effect on dry matter and yields, with limited interactions.”
Claim · model-written summary
Single maize plant weight and yield were highest under sole cropping and the 90 + 27.5 pattern.
- Treatment
- single crop and 90 + 27.5 treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Single maize plant weight and yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Single maize plant weight and yield were highest in the single crop and 90 + 27.5 treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
The 90 + 45 pattern produced the highest total intercrop yield, 14% above sole maize.
Verbatim
e0“while total intercrop yield peaked at 90 + 45, exceeding single maize by 14%.”
t0“Maize–Climbing Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants raised maize yields by 3–8%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biostimulants increased maize yields by 3–8% and intercrop yields by up to 6%, but reduced bean yields compared to controls.”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants raised intercrop yields by up to 6%.
Verbatim
e0“Biostimulants increased maize yields by 3–8% and intercrop yields by up to 6%, but reduced bean yields compared to controls.”
t0“Maize–Climbing Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants reduced bean yields relative to controls.
Verbatim
e0“Biostimulants increased maize yields by 3–8% and intercrop yields by up to 6%, but reduced bean yields compared to controls.”
Claim · model-written summary
Silage crude protein was lowest with sole maize and highest with the 90 + 45 pattern.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The crude protein content of silage was lowest for maize alone and highest for 90 + 45”
Claim · model-written summary
Biostimulants increased silage protein by 5–9%, chiefly with Methylobacterium symbioticum.
- Taxon
- Maize–Climbing Beant0
- Treatment
- biostimulantse0
- Interactor
- Methylobacterium symbioticum
Methylobacterium symbioticume0symbiont - Outcome
- protein contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 5–9%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“biostimulants increased protein content by 5–9%, mainly for Methylobacterium symbioticum.”
t0“Maize–Climbing Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors judged 90 + 45 with Ecklonia maxima to optimize silage biomass and protein.
Verbatim
e0“Overall, the combination of 90 + 45 with Ecklonia maxima or Methylobacterium symbioticum optimized silage biomass and protein.”
t0“Maize–Climbing Bean”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors judged 90 + 45 with Methylobacterium symbioticum to optimize silage biomass and protein.
- Taxon
- Maize–Climbing Beant0
- Treatment
- Methylobacterium symbioticume0
- Interactor
- Methylobacterium symbioticumMethylobacterium symbioticume0symbiont
- Outcome
- silage biomass and proteine0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Overall, the combination of 90 + 45 with Ecklonia maxima or Methylobacterium symbioticum optimized silage biomass and protein.”
t0“Maize–Climbing Bean”
The same questions in other papers
other · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results differ
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →other · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
220 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
249 papers more in this group
See all 253 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.