Analysing crop yield and plant quality in an intercropping system using an eco-physiological model for interplant competition

Baumann, D.T.; Bastiaans, L.; Goudriaan, J.; Laar, H.H. van; Kropff, M.J.

doi:10.1016/s0308-521x(01)00084-1

Cited by 64 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common designs are additive or replacement series, although response model designs are increasingly used (Baumann et al 2001;Connolly et al 2001). With the development of ecophysiological models for many crops, both mechanistic and descriptive models are being used to optimize intercrops for yield and crop quality (Baumann et al 2002b). It is not always clear, however, exactly what intercrops are being compared against and why.…”

Section: Intercropping and Residue Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotic interactions, ecological knowledge and agriculture

Shennan

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

179

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses biotic interactions in agroecosystems and how they may be manipulated to support crop productivity and environmental health by provision of ecosystem services such as weed, pest and disease management, nutrient cycling and biodiversity conservation. Important elements for understanding biotic interactions include consideration of the effects of diversity, species composition and food web structure on ecosystem processes; the impacts of timing, frequency and intensity of disturbance; and the importance of multitrophic interactions. All of these elements need to be considered at multiple scales that depend in part on the range of the movement of the organisms involved. These issues are first discussed in general, followed by an examination of the application of these concepts in agricultural management. The potential for a greater use of ecological management approaches is high; however, owing to the nature of complex interactions in ecosystems, there is some inherent unpredictability about responses to management interventions under different conditions. Such uncertainty needs to be accommodated in the development of recommendations for farm management. This requires an increased emphasis on the effective synthesis of complex and often apparently contradictory information and on field-based adaptive research, monitoring and social learning by farmer/researcher collaborations.

show abstract

Section: Intercropping and Residue Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotic interactions, ecological knowledge and agriculture

Shennan

2007

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

179

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When resources are limited or when the individuals are unevenly distributed within a low-density plant stand, interplant competition for available resources can be severe as the number and size of nearby plants increase (Baumann et al 2002). Canola plant performance is a function of available resources (Gan et al 2012).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Canola seed yield and phenological responses to plant density

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Optimal plant density is required to improve plant phenological traits and maximize seed yield in field crops. In this study, we determined the effect of plant density on duration of flowering, post-flowering phase, and seed yield of canola in diverse environments. The field study was conducted at 16 site-years across the major canola growing area of western Canada from 2010 to 2012. The cultivar InVigor® 5440, a glufosinate-resistant hybrid, was grown at five plant densities (20, 40, 60, 80, and 100 plants m −2 ) in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Canola seed yield had a linear relationship with plant density at 8 of the 16 site-years, a quadratic relationship at 4 site-years, and there was no correlation between the two variables in the remaining 4 site-years. At site-years with low to medium productivity, canola seed yield increased by 10.2 to 14.7 kg ha −1 for every additional plant per square metre. Averaged across the 16 diverse environments, canola plants spent an average of 22% of their life cycle flowering and another 27% of the time filling seed post-flowering. Canola seed yield had a negative association with duration of flowering and a positive association with the days post-flowering but was not associated with number of days to maturity. The post-flowering period was 12.7, 14.7, and 12.6 d (or 55, 68, and 58%) longer in high-yield experiments than in low-yield experiments in 2010, 2011, and 2012, respectively. We conclude that optimization of plant density for canola seed yield varies with environment and that a longer post-flowering period is critical for increasing canola yield in western Canada.Key words: flowering duration, reproductive phase, diverse environments, seeding rates, pod to flower ratio.Résumé : Les plantes doivent avoir une densité optimale pour qu'il y ait amélioration de leurs caractères phéno-logiques et pour que le rendement grainier atteigne son maximum. Dans le cadre de cette étude, les auteurs ont déterminé les effets de la densité du peuplement sur la durée de la floraison, la phase post-floraison et le rendement grainier du canola dans diverses conditions. L'étude sur le terrain, qui portait sur 16 sites-années dans la principale zone de culture du canola de l'Ouest canadien, a duré de 2010 à 2012. Le cultivar InVigor® 5440, hybride résistant au glufosinate, a été cultivé à cinq densités (20, 40, 60, 80 et 100 plants m-2 ) dans le cadre d'une étude en blocs aléatoires complets avec quatre répétitions. Le rendement grainier du canola présentait une relation linéaire avec la densité de peuplement à 8 sur 16 sites-années et une relation quadratique à 4 sites-années, mais aucune corrélation n'associait ces deux variables aux quatre autres sites-années. Aux sites-années se caractérisant par une productivité faible à moyenne, le rendement grainier du canola a augmenté de 10,2 à 14,7 kg ha -1 pour chaque plant supplémentaire par mètre carré. Lorsqu'on calcule la moyenne pour les 16 environnements, on constate que les plants de canola consacrent...

show abstract

“…In this thesis, I call this the horizontally homogenous canopy model (HHC). Many intercrop models have applied this method to simulate the light distribution between species in intercrops, for example: crop−weed competition model INTERCOM (Kropff and van Laar, 1993), celery−leek intercrop (Baumann et al, 2002), pea−barley intercrop (Brisson et al, 2004;Corre-Hellou et al, 2009) and cereal−legume mixture (Tsubo et al, 2005). These models, however, are not suitable to simulate the light competition in relay−strip intercrops, where the border row effect plays an important role in productivity (Zhu et al, 2015;Zhu et al, 2016) and the strength of competition for light depends on the planting configuration (row spacing, sowing density and dates).…”

Section: A New Intercrop Model Is Required To Explore Yield Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the crop−weed competition model INTERCOM (Kropff and van Laar, 1993) assumed horizontally homogeneous canopy for crop and weed and is used in celery−leek intercrop (Baumann et al, 2002). A homogeneous mixing was also used to simulate pea−barley intercrop (Brisson et al, 2004;Corre-Hellou et al, 2009) and cereal−legume mixture (Tsubo et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These different RUEs are not captured in crop growth models. Often, intercrop models are parameterised based on characteristics of sole crops and then used for intercrops, e.g., celery−leek intercrop (Baumann et al, 2002) and pea−barley intercrop (Corre-Hellou et al, 2009). While similarity of RUE in sole crops and intercrops is a useful null hypothesis and starting point for intercrop modelling, it may not be realistic for asymmetric competitive relationships in intercrops that affect radiation use efficiencies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On yield gains and yield gaps in wheat-maize intercropping : opportunities for sustainable increases in grain production

Gou¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intercropping is the cultivation of two or more crop species simultaneously in the same field, while relay intercropping means that the growing periods of the crop species are only partially overlapping. Intercropping has advantages with respect to productivity, resource capture, build-up of soil organic matter, and pest and disease suppression. This thesis aims to quantify and explain the yield advantages in wheat-maize relay intercropping and to assess the importance of intercropping for food production and land use efficiency.Wheat-maize intercropping had land equivalent ratios around or above one in two experiments in the Netherlands. Wheat in border rows showed major yield increases, and this yield increase was due to increases in the number of tillers per plant and the number of kernels per ear. The yield advantage of intercropped wheat was associated with a high radiation interception and radiation use efficiency (RUE). Under Dutch growing conditions, maize performance in the intercrop was constrained. Intercropping had a negative effect on the yield per plant and radiation use efficiency of maize. A strip intercrop model was developed, parameterized and tested with data on wheat-maize intercropping in the Netherlands. The model simulates radiation interception and growth in relay-strip intercrops with two species in different planting configurations. The model also allows simulating the consequences of border row effects for total system productivity. Bayesian analysis was applied to calibrate radiation use efficiency of wheat and maize in sole crops and intercrop.Intercropped wheat had higher a RUE than sole wheat, while intercropped maize had a lower RUE than sole maize. Intercropped maize had less favourable leaf traits (e.g. nitrogen content) during the flowering stage than sole maize in 2014, but the leaves in the intercrop had a higher photosynthetic rate than those in the sole crop. Possible explanations for this finding include differences between sole and mixed crops in water acquisition from soil, light distribution in the canopy, nitrogen distribution within the leaf and the contribution of the ear leaf to the growth of the cob. The low radiation use efficiency in intercropped maize may relate to nitrogen deficiency during grain filling. New concepts for potential yield, yield gain and yield gap in intercropping were developed in this thesis. Using crop model simulations and farm survey data, those concepts were operationalized in the context of wheat and maize production in an oasis area (Zhangye city) in northwest China. Wheat-maize intercropping resulted in substantial yield gains under potential and actual growing conditions. A comparison of potential and actual yields indicated a yield gap of 33% for sole wheat, 49% for sole maize, 15% for intercropped wheat, and 51% for intercropped maize. The land use analysis showed that discontinuing the use of intercropping in this region will decrease grain production substantially.Overall, this thesis studied the growth and productivity of ...

show abstract

Analysing crop yield and plant quality in an intercropping system using an eco-physiological model for interplant competition

Cited by 64 publications

References 29 publications

Biotic interactions, ecological knowledge and agriculture

Biotic interactions, ecological knowledge and agriculture

Canola seed yield and phenological responses to plant density

On yield gains and yield gaps in wheat-maize intercropping : opportunities for sustainable increases in grain production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About