Abstract
The effects of intercropping on weed dry matter, soil C and N, sugar quality and sugarcane productivity were investigated at Badeggi, Nigeria in 2016 and 2017. The results revealed that application of Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping produced lower weed dry matter comparable to Sugarcane + Soybean intercropping which significantly increased growth and yield attributes of sugarcane. Application of Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping, resulted in a comparable germination count, Tiller count, plant and stalk height to Soybean intercropping. Similarly, Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping and Soybean intercropping produced comparable stalk height and brix content. Also, Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping generated more millable canes and stools per plot. Application of Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping proved equally effective as Soybean intercropping in contributing the highest soil C and N and cane yield. In the same way, Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping and Soybean intercropping produced comparable sucrose and glucose content. Lower weed dry matter was found in Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping, and taller plant and stalks, girth, brix content, millable cane, stools, sucrose, glucose content. and cane yield were observed in Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping. In conclusion, application of Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping or Soybean intercropping effectively controlled weeds, increased Soil C and N, plant and stalk height, girth, brix content, millable cane, stools and cane yield of sugarcane.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping produced lower weed dry matter, comparable to Sugarcane + Soybean intercropping.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping produced lower weed dry matter comparable to Sugarcane + Soybean intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping gave germination count and tiller count comparable to Soybean intercropping.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping, resulted in a comparable germination count, Tiller count, plant and stalk height to Soybean intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping gave plant height and stalk height comparable to Soybean intercropping.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping, resulted in a comparable germination count, Tiller count, plant and stalk height to Soybean intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping and Soybean intercropping produced comparable brix content.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping and Soybean intercropping produced comparable stalk height and brix content”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping generated more millable canes and stools per plot.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanee0
- Treatment
- Sugarcane + Groundnut intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- millable canes and stools per plote0
- Direction
- moree0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping generated more millable canes and stools per plot”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping was equally effective as Soybean intercropping in giving the highest soil C and N and cane yield.
Verbatim
e0“Application of Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping proved equally effective as Soybean intercropping in contributing the highest soil C and N and cane yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping and Soybean intercropping produced comparable sucrose and glucose content.
Verbatim
e0“Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping and Soybean intercropping produced comparable sucrose and glucose content”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping or Soybean intercropping effectively controlled weeds in sugarcane.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanee0
- Treatment
- Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping or Soybean intercroppinge0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- weedse0
- Direction
- controllede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“application of Sugarcane + Groundnut intercropping or Soybean intercropping effectively controlled weeds”
The same questions in other papers
Arachis hypogaea · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Arachis hypogaea · molecular: metabolites · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
Glycine max · weed · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
Arachis hypogaea · quality: sugar starch · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- negative
- no effect
Arachis hypogaea · weed · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →intercropping · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results differ
66 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
84 papers more in this group
See all 88 papers →intercropping · molecular: metabolites · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →intercropping · quality: sugar starch · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.