Abstract
The highlands of Ethiopia are characterized by shrinking cultivated areas per household and scarcity of livestock feed resulting from a rapid increase in human population and expansion of arable land. Integrating forage legumes with food crops has been shown to be a useful alternative for increasing crop productivity. However, due to small land holdings, farmers are reluctant to intercrop forage legumes with food crops for fear of compromising grain yields. Therefore, a field experiment was conducted at Kombolcha Agricultural, Technical, and Vocational Education Training College located in Eastern Hararghe Zone during the 2009 cropping season. The objective of the study was to identify suitable forage legume, its optimum seed rate and sowing methods for intercropping with maize and to evaluate the effect of intercropping on system productivity, crude protein content of the maize stover, and the forage legumes. Forage legumes, vetch and lablab were row-intercropped with maize and broadcast at 25, 50, and 75% of the recommended seed rates with the recommended maize population of 44,444 plants ha-1. Sole maize and forage legumes were used as control treatments. The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) in a factorial arrangement with three replications. The results showed higher mean 1000 kernel weight of maize in maize/vetch than in maize/lablab intercropping. Intercropping significantly reduced the final stand count of maize by 3.2% and that of the legumes by 10.6% compared to the sole crops. The highest dry biomass of the forage (2485 kg ha-1) was obtained from row intercropped vetch at 50% of the recommended seed rate. The highest fodder crude protein yield (849.4 kg ha-1) was obtained from row-intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate. Intercropping significantly enhanced stover crude protein content, crude protein yield and total fodder protein yield by 20, 18 and 39%, respectively as compared to the sole cropping. In conclusion, the results indicated that row intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate was more advantageous than maize-lablab intercrop.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Maize with vetch had higher 1000 kernel weight than maize with lablab.
- Treatment
- maize/vetche0
- Outcome
- 1000 kernel weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- maize/lablab intercroppinge0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher mean 1000 kernel weight of maize in maize/vetch than in maize/lablab intercropping.”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced maize final stand count by 3.2% versus sole crop.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- final stand count of maizee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 3.2%e0
- Comparator
- sole cropse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping significantly reduced the final stand count of maize by 3.2% and that of the legumes by 10.6% compared to the sole crops.”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping reduced legume final stand count by 10.6% versus sole crop.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping significantly reduced the final stand count of maize by 3.2% and that of the legumes by 10.6% compared to the sole crops.”
t0“Forage Legumes”
Claim · model-written summary
Row-intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate gave maximum forage dry biomass of 2485 kg ha-1.
Verbatim
e0“The highest dry biomass of the forage (2485 kg ha-1) was obtained from row intercropped vetch at 50% of the recommended seed rate.”
Claim · model-written summary
Row-intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate gave maximum fodder crude protein yield of 849.4 kg ha-1.
Verbatim
e0“The highest fodder crude protein yield (849.4 kg ha-1) was obtained from row-intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate.”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping enhanced stover crude protein content by 20% versus sole cropping.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- stover crude protein contente0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Value
- 20e0
- Comparator
- sole croppinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping significantly enhanced stover crude protein content, crude protein yield and total fodder protein yield by 20, 18 and 39%, respectively as compared to the sole cropping.”
e1“maize stover”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping enhanced crude protein yield by 18% versus sole cropping.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- crude protein yielde0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Value
- 18e0
- Comparator
- sole croppinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping significantly enhanced stover crude protein content, crude protein yield and total fodder protein yield by 20, 18 and 39%, respectively as compared to the sole cropping.”
e1“maize stover”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping enhanced total fodder protein yield by 39% versus sole cropping.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge0
- Outcome
- total fodder protein yielde0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Value
- 39%e0
- Comparator
- sole croppinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Intercropping significantly enhanced stover crude protein content, crude protein yield and total fodder protein yield by 20, 18 and 39%, respectively as compared to the sole cropping.”
e1“maize stover”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors considered row-intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate more advantageous than maize-lablab.
Verbatim
e0“row intercropped vetch at 50% seed rate was more advantageous than maize-lablab intercrop.”
The same questions in other papers
intercropping · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 138 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
180 papers more in this group
See all 184 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
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
46 papers more in this group
See all 50 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.