Weed and fertility management using maize/soyabean intercropping in the north‐western Himalayas

Tripathi, B.R.; Singh, C. M.

doi:10.1080/09670878309370813

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tripathi and Singh (1983) found that growing one or two rows of soybean (Glycine max L.) as an intercrop in maize, reduced weed numbers and weight significantly and increased maize yields. Sowing two rows of soybean was more effective than one row, with maize at a constant sowing density.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Weed-suppressive effects of maize–legume intercropping in organic farming

Bilalis

Papastylianou

Konstantas

et al. 2010

International Journal of Pest Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In organic agriculture, intercropping is receiving increasing attention as it offers potential advantages for increasing sustainability in crop production. However, intercropping can increase competition between crops and weeds. In this study, we analyzed the effects of maize-legume intercrops on the weed community in an organic cropping system. We were concerned only with competition between crops and weeds for light. We recorded a statistically significant negative correlation between the fraction of photosynthetically active radiation (F int PAR) intercepted by the canopy, and both weed density and weed dry matter. Maize-legume intercropping led to a higher soil canopy cover (leaf area index) than sole crops. The lowest values for F int PAR were received in sole crops. Thus, in maize-legume intercrops the decrease in available light for weeds led to a reduction of weed density and dry matter, compared to sole crops. Intercropping maize and legumes considerably reduced the weed density in the intercrop compared with the maize pure stand. Weed suppression by crops was also greater on a low-productivity site than on a highproductivity site. Our results indicate that intercropping could be useful for weed suppression in organic row-crops such as maize and cotton.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Weed-suppressive effects of maize–legume intercropping in organic farming

Bilalis

Papastylianou

Konstantas

et al. 2010

International Journal of Pest Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results suggest that intercrops captured a greater share of available resources under the low soil fertility regime, and that increases in LER values were coupled with increased usurpation of resources from associated weeds. Tripathi and Singh (1983) measured total crop seed yield and weed mass for maize sole crops and maize/ soybean intercrops; both low and high rates of NPK fertilizer were applied to the different cropping systems. Total crop seed yield and weed growth were both increased by fertilizer application, but intercropping resulted in higher total seed yield and lower weed growth at each fertilizer level.…”

Section: Intercrop Yield and Weed Suppressionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Increased oat seeding rates resulted in decreased amounts of weed growth. Improved weed suppression with increased crop density has also been reported from experiments testing the effects of different seeding rates of egusi melon in melon/plantain intercrops (Obiefuna 1989); maize in maize/soybean intercrops (Weil and McFadden 1991 ); maize in maize/mungbean, maize/sweet potato, and maize/groundnut intercrops ; and soybean in soybean/maize intercrops (Moss andHartwig 1980, Tripathi andSingh 1983).…”

Section: Intercropsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crop Rotation and Intercropping Strategies for Weed Management

Liebman¹,

Dyck²

1993

Ecological Applications

720

524

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of a literature survey indicate that weed population density and biomass production may be markedly reduced using crop rotation (temporal diversification) and intercropping (spatial diversification) strategies. Crop rotation resulted in emerged weed densities in test crops that were lower in 21 cases, higher in 1 case, and equivalent in 5 cases in comparison to monoculture systems. In 12 cases where weed seed density was reported, seed density in crop rotation was lower in 9 cases and equivalent in 3 cases when compared to monocultures of the component crops. In intercropping systems where a main crop was intersown with a "smother" crop species, weed biomass in the intercrop was lower in 47 cases and higher in 4 cases than in the main crop grown alone (as a sole crop); a variable response was observed in 3 cases. When intercrops were composed of two or more main crops, weed biomass in the intercrop was lower than in all of the component sole crops in 12 cases, intermediate between component sole crops in 10 cases, and higher than all sole crops in 2 cases. It is unclear why crop rotation studies have focused on weed density, whereas intercropping studies have focused on weed biomass. The success of rotation systems for weed suppression appears to be based on the use of crop sequences that create varying patterns of resource competition, allelopathic interference, soil disturbance, and mechanical damage to provide an unstable and frequently inhospitable environment that prevents the proliferation of a particular weed species. The relative importance and most effective combinations of these weed control tactics have not been adequately assessed. In addition, the weed-suppressive effects of other related factors, such as manipulation of soil fertility dynamics in rotation sequences, need to be examined. Intercrops may demonstrate weed control advantages over sole crops in two ways. First, greater crop yield and less weed growth may be achieved if intercrops are more effective than sole crops in usurping resources from weeds or suppressing weed growth through allelopathy. Alternatively, intercrops may provide yield advantages without suppressing weed growth below levels observed in component sole crops if intercrops use resources that are not exploitable by weeds or convert resources to harvestable material more efficiently than sole crops. Because of the difficulty of monitoring the use of multiple resources by intercrop/weed mixtures throughout the growing season, identification of specific mechanisms of weed suppression and yield enhancement in intercrop systems has so far proven elusive. Significant advances in the design and improvement of weed-suppressive crop rotation and intercropping systems are most likely to occur if three important areas of research are addressed. First, there must be continued attention to the study of weed population dynamics and crop-weed interference in crop rotation and intercropping systems. More information is needed concerning the effects of diversification of cropping sys...

show abstract

“…Unweeded plots of cowpea or melon with maize/ cassava, produced as much yield as weed-free monocultures of each crop (Unamma et al, 1986). In India, inter-cropping has also been found to reduce weed growth in sorghum intersown with either cowpea, greengram, groundnut or soya and in maize intercropped with soyabean (Tripathi and Singh, 1983;Abraham and Singh, 1984).…”

Section: Effects Of Multiple Cropping On Weedsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Soil pests in traditional farming systems in Sub‐Saharan Africa—a review. Part 2. Management strategies

Hillocks

Logan

Riches

et al. 1996

International Journal of Pest Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this, the second of two review papers, we discuss potential management strategies for the soil pest problems encountered by smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa, and analyse the potential role for IPM in smallholder agriculture. Adopting a farming systems approach is seen as essential, given the resource constraints on smallholders: this ensures that adequate attention is given to both the agronomic and socio-economic characteristics of different farming systems. The challenges of providing recommendations for managing a range of pests in complex cropping systems are identified together with objectives for future research into soil pest problems of smallholder farmers.

show abstract

Weed and fertility management using maize/soyabean intercropping in the north‐western Himalayas

Cited by 11 publications

References 1 publication

Weed-suppressive effects of maize–legume intercropping in organic farming

Weed-suppressive effects of maize–legume intercropping in organic farming

Crop Rotation and Intercropping Strategies for Weed Management

Soil pests in traditional farming systems in Sub‐Saharan Africa—a review. Part 2. Management strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About