ArticlePDF Available

Effect of cowpea (Vigna sinensis L.) with maize (Zea mays L.) intercropping on yield and its components

Authors:
  • Field Crops Research Institute

Abstract and Figures

A field experiment was carried out at Arab El-Awammer Research Station, Agric. Res. Center. Assiut Governorate during summer seasons of 2013 and 2014. The present study assessed the effect of cowpea with maize intercropping on yield and its components. The experiment comprised of three treatments (sole cowpea, sole maize and cowpea-maize intercrop). The experimental design was a randomized complete block with four replications. Results indicated that intercropped maize plants with cowpea, exhibited greater potentiality and resulted in higher values of most of the studied criteria viz., plant height, number of ears/plant, number of rows/ear, number of grains/row, grains weight/ear, 100-grain weight and straw and grain yields. Fresh and dry forage yields of cowpea were lower in intercropping with maize than sole. Furthermore, the combined of the two seasons revealed that the total Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) between cowpea and maize was 1.65. The Aggressivity (A) maize was 0.45 and cowpea was-0.45. This showed that maize was the dominant crop, whereas cowpea was the dominated. The Competitive Ratio (CR) indicated that maize more competitive than cowpea, maize was 1.75 and cowpea was 0.57. The Actual Yield Loss (AYL) maize was 0.05 and cowpea was-0.40. The Monetary Advantage Index (MAI) was 2360.80.
Content may be subject to copyright.
AbstractA field experiment was carried out at Arab El-
Awammer Research Station, Agric. Res. Center. Assiut Governorate
during summer seasons of 2013 and 2014. The present study assessed
the effect of cowpea with maize intercropping on yield and its
components. The experiment comprised of three treatments (sole
cowpea, sole maize and cowpea-maize intercrop). The experimental
design was a randomized complete block with four replications.
Results indicated that intercropped maize plants with cowpea,
exhibited greater potentiality and resulted in higher values of most of
the studied criteria viz., plant height, number of ears/plant, number of
rows/ear, number of grains/row, grains weight/ear, 100–grain weight
and straw and grain yields. Fresh and dry forage yields of cowpea
were lower in intercropping with maize than sole. Furthermore, the
combined of the two seasons revealed that the total Land Equivalent
Ratio (LER) between cowpea and maize was 1.65. The Aggressivity
(A) maize was 0.45 and cowpea was -0.45. This showed that maize
was the dominant crop, whereas cowpea was the dominated. The
Competitive Ratio (CR) indicated that maize more competitive than
cowpea, maize was 1.75 and cowpea was 0.57. The Actual Yield
Loss (AYL) maize was 0.05 and cowpea was -0.40. The Monetary
Advantage Index (MAI) was 2360.80.
KeywordsIntercropping, cowpea, maize, land equivalent ratio
(LER).
I. INTRODUCTION
NTERCROPPING is a type of mixed cropping and defined
as agricultural practice of cultivating two or more crops in
the same space at the same time. The important reason to grow
two or more crops together may be increase of productivity
per unit of land. In intercropping system, all the environmental
resources utilized to maximize crop production per unit area
and per unit time. Thus, intercropping systems can provide
many benefits through increased efficiency of land use,
enhancing the capture and use of light, water and nutrients,
controlling weeds, insects, diseases and increasing the length
of production cycles. Other benefits of intercropping may be
improve quality of the seed, and better control of water quality
through minimizing the use of inorganic N fertilizers,
replacing them by the use of legumes [1].

W. A. Hamd Alla is with the Crop Intensification Research Department,
Field Crops Research Institute, Agriculture
Research Centre, Giza, Egypt
(phone: +201094290163; fax: +20889230055; e-mail: bwael20@yahoo.com).
A. A. Zohry is with the Crop Intensification Research Department, Field
Crops Research Institute, Agriculture Research Centre, Giza, Egypt (e-mail:
abdelhafeezzohry@yahoo.com).
E. M. Shalaby and R. A. Dawood are with Department of Agronomy, Fac.
of Agriculture, Assiut University, Cairo, Egypt (e- mail: eshalaby55
@yahoo.com, ragabdawood@yahoo.com).
There is a shortage of summer forage crops production in
Egypt. Defoliation of maize is commonly used to feed
animals. This resulted in decreasing maize yield. Hence,
intercropping of forage crops with cereal crops, e.g. maize,
sorghum and millet reduce the green fodder gab during
summer season.
Maize is ranked third after wheat and rice among the most
important cereal crops. In the USA maize is considered the
king of cereal crops [2]. In Egypt, maize is essential for human
and live-stocks consumption as a major source of
carbohydrates, oil, as well as a minor source of protein. It is
required for several industrial purposes such as starch and oil.
At the same time, cowpea is an important legume crop. It is a
primary source of plant protein for humans and animals.
Cowpea can be used as a cover crop and to fix nitrogen in the
soil [3].
Therefore, the main target of this research was to study the
effect of cowpea with maize intercropping on yield and its
components. Previous studies indicated thatintercropping
cowpea with maize significantly increased plant height in both
crops and grain yield of maize in the first season and reduced
it in the second season, but cowpea yield was reduced in the
both seasons [4]. Grain yield of cowpea was reduced by 43%
and 33% in intercropping and relay cropping, respectively [5].
Intercropping maize with runner bean (Phaseolus vulgaris)
gave the highest-equivalent yield productive efficiency, land
equivalent ratio, net returns and monetary advantage index [6].
Yield increased in a maize/soybean strip intercropping
arrangement were primarily due to the upsurge in the boarder
rows of maize together to soybeans [7]. Land equivalent ratio,
Aggressivity, Competitive ratio and Actual yield loss were
higher, in addition, there was a significant economic benefit
expressed with higher Monetary advantage index values have
been used to describe competition between component crops
of intercropping systems [8]. Maize intercropped with cowpea
produced the highest grain yield and the lowest values of
associated weeds [9]. Grain yield of maize was observed the
highest when maize intercropping with cowpea cultures. In
monoculture the yield of cowpea was higher than yield of
cowpea, while the lowest yield was obtained when cowpea
sown with maize. The highest land equivalent ratio was
obtained from corn with cowpea [10]. Maize, sorghum or
millet grain yields were increased, or slightly affected by
intercropping system compared with the sole crop, but that of
legume crop yields (cowpea, bean) showed decrement of 50%
[11]. The combined yield from the intercropping system was
Effect of Cowpea (Vigna sinensis
L.) with Maize
(Zea mays L.) Intercropping on Yield and Its
Components
W. A. Hamd Alla, E. M. Shalaby, R. A. Dawood, A. A. Zohry
I
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1170International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
h
i
T
h
1
5
r
a
p
u
i
n
s
o
p
l
p
l
m
c
r
h
a
be
c
a
I
n
l
a
S
o
g
r
st
u
H
p
a
si
g
i
n
s
o
i
n
p
a
t
h
r
o
p
e
[
2
m
y
i
i
n
c
r
s
u
t
o
m
i
n
m
m
I
n
o
f
p
r
r
a
c
o
d
r
[
2
i
n
i
n
s
h
[
2
a
f
o
b
o
b
e
q
[
3
i
gher than th
e
h
e reduction
i
5
% of the p
u
a
nging from
4
u
re stand yie
l
n
tercrops wer
e
o
le crops [13]
l
ant height
e
l
anted at the
s
m
aize either in
t
r
op, moreove
r
a
d the highes
e
used as a
a
nopy with
n
tercropping
a
nd equivale
n
o
rghu
m
plan
t
r
eater potenti
a
u
died crite
r
i
a
H
owever, Grai
n
a
ttern than
g
nificantly i
n
n
tercropping r
o
le crops. T
n
tercropping
h
a
rticularly, w
h
h
e same basi
n
o
w arrangeme
n
e
r hectare, w
h
2
0]. Cowpea
m
aize in the i
i
elds and soy
b
n
tercropping
r
ops helps m
a
u
ch as cowpe
a
o
350 kg N/h
a
m
ore efficient
n
creased prod
u
m
ixture [23].
O
m
aize due to i
n
n
tercropping
m
f
the indivi
d
r
oductivity o
f
a
ther than
m
o
wpea was se
r
y ear weigh
t
2
6]. The plan
t
n
crease the yi
e
The vegetat
i
n
tercroppe
d
w
h
owed advan
t
2
9]. The vege
t
f
fected by in
t
b
tained from
b
tained wh
e
q
uivalent rati
o
3
1]. Maize/be
e
total yieldi
n
i
n intercropp
e
u
re stand co
4
5 to 67 % in
l
ds [12]. For
a
e
greater tha
n
. Intercroppi
n
e
specially w
h
s
ame of maiz
e
t
ercropped wi
r
, 100% mai
z
t land equiv
a
tool to impr
o
good su
p
w
as advantag
n
t ratio valu
e
t
s, when inte
r
a
lity and reco
a
including p
l
n
yield per h
e
solid patter
n
n
creased on t
h
esulting in hi
he land eq
u
h
ad a majo
r
h
en the maiz
n
[19]. Cowp
e
n
t recorded t
h
h
ich were sig
n
yield was lo
w
ntercropping
b
ean yield w
e
[
22]. Intercr
o
a
intain and i
m
a
, mung bean
a
. The main
utilization o
f
u
ctivity com
p
O
n the other
h
n
tercropping
m
ay result in
d
ual crops i
n
f
a unit land
a
m
onocultures
en to be sign
i
t
, dry grain
y
t
ing pattern
o
e
ld of maize [
2
i
ve biomass
w
ith maize
[
t
ages in land
t
ative growth
t
ercropping [
3
sole croppi
n
e
n intercrop
p
o
s were hig
h
an intercrop
n
g of any the
e
d maize yiel
mpared with
legume crop
s
a
ge dry wei
g
n
those by eit
h
n
g resulted in
h
en the inter
c
e
planting da
t
th legume w
e
z
e + 100% c
o
a
lent ratio [1
5
o
ve the com
p
p
pressive c
h
eous relative
e
s were mo
r
r
cropped wit
h
o
rded higher
v
l
ant height a
n
e
ctare was lo
w
n
[18]. Inte
r
h
e maize and
gher Straw y
i
u
ivalent rati
o
r
advantage
o
e and cowpe
a
e
a intercropp
e
h
e highest gra
i
n
ificantly diff
e
w
er due to
c
syste
m
[21].
e
re significa
n
o
pping cerea
l
m
prove soil fe
r
and soybean
advantage of
f
the availab
l
p
ared with e
a
h
and, there w
a
of legumes
n
decreases in
n
a mixtur
e
a
rea is impro
v
[25]. Interc
r
i
ficantly decr
y
ield and dry
o
f the maize
2
7].
legume cro
p
[
28]. Mixtur
e
use efficienc
y
of componen
t
3
0]. The hig
h
n
g, while th
e
p
ed maize-
c
h
er than one
system, the
b
crops in pur
e
d ranged fro
m
a higher re
s
(cowpea an
d
g
hts achieved
h
er maize or
c
an increase i
n
c
ropped cro
p
t
e [14]. Yiel
d
e
re the highes
t
o
wpea planti
n
5
]. Intercropp
i
p
etitive abili
t
h
aracteristics
to sole crop
p
r
e than unit
y
h
cowpea, e
x
v
alues of mos
n
d grain yiel
w
er in interc
r
r
cropping al
s
cowpea Stov
e
i
el
d
compare
d
o
also show
e
o
ver sole cr
o
a
are plante
d
e
d with maiz
e
i
n yield per p
l
e
rent from so
l
c
ompetitive e
f
Maize stra
w
n
tly increased
l
and grain
r
tility, becau
s
accumulate
f
intercroppin
g
l
e resources
a
a
ch sole cro
p
a
s decreased
y
n
amely cowp
e
yield of one
e
. Neverthele
v
ed by interc
r
r
opping mai
z
eased the ear
total plant
b
and legume
p
s the highes
e
s of maize-
y
expressed
a
t
crop in a mi
h
est grain yi
e
e
lowest yi
e
c
owpea. Th
e
in all interc
r
b
ean compo
n
e
stand.
m
10 to
duction
d
bean)
by the
c
owpea
n
maize
p
s were
d
and of
t
as sole
n
g ratio
i
ng can
t
y of a
[16].
p
ing as
y
[17].
x
hibited
t of the
d/plant.
r
opping
s
o had
er
, with
d
to the
e
d that
o
pping;
d
within
e
at 1:1
l
ant and
l
e crops
f
fect of
w
, grain
by the
legume
s
e crops
f
rom 80
g
is the
a
nd the
p
of the
y
ield of
e
a [24].
or both
ss, the
r
opping
z
e with
length,
b
iomass
did not
t when
legume
a
s LER
xture is
e
ld was
e
ld was
e
land
r
opping
n
ent did
n
o
co
A
w
G
o
2
0
lo
n
ca
l
U
n
co
a
r
A
o
t significan
t
mponents [3
2
The current
s
w
ammer Re
s
o
vernorate,
E
0
14. The fiel
d
n
gitude 31
°
6
l
careous as p
r
P
HY
Chemi
p
Ec
CaC
O
O.
M
Tota
Av.
P
K
O.M: organic m
a
* Agricultural
R
n
it of Analysis &
The current
wpea, sole m
a
r
andomized c
o
Fig. 1 Crop
p
A
C
t
ly affect
m
2
].
II.
M
ATERIA
L
s
tudy was co
n
s
earch Statio
E
gyp
t
during
d
site is loca
t
6
4
׳
. The soil
r
esented in T
a
T
A
SICAL
-C
HEMICA
cal soil propertie
p
H 8.3
7
dsm -1 0.3
3
O
3 (%) 30.
9
M
. (%) 0.1
9
l N (%) 0.0
0
P
(ppm) 8.3
1
K
+ 0.7
5
a
tter and Av. P:
A
R
esearch Center
S
Studies
study includ
e
a
ize and the i
n
o
mplete bloc
k
p
ing systems; (
A
(C)
I
m
aize grain
L
S AND
M
ETH
O
n
ducted in res
e
n, Agric.
R
the summer
t
ed between
l
of such ex
p
a
ble І.
A
BLE І
A
L
P
ROPERTIES O
F
s
Mechanica
l
7
Sand (%)
3
Clay (%)
9
Silt (%)
9
Class
0
3
1
5
A
vailable Phosph
S
oil, Water & E
n
e
d three trea
t
n
tercrop of c
o
k
design with
f
A
) Sole cowpe
a
I
ntercrop
yield and
O
DS
e
arch field, A
r
R
es. Center.
seasons 20
1
l
atitude 27
°
0
p
eriment was
F
THE
S
OIL
l
properties
89.9
3.0
7.1
Sandy
orus in ppm.
n
vironment Res.
t
ments
name
l
o
wpea with m
a
f
our replicati
o
a
; (B) Sole mai
z
yield
r
ab El-
Assiut
1
3 and
0
5
׳
and
sandy
Institute
l
y sole
a
ize, in
o
ns.
z
e;
B
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1171International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
All other normal cultural practices of growing crops at
Assiut Governorate were applied and dates of these practices
are present in Table II.
TABLE II
APPLICATION DATES OF SOME CULTURAL PRACTICES OF GROWING CROPS IN
THE FIRST AND THE SECOND AT ASSIUT GOVERNORATE
Cultural practices 2013 2014
Sowing of maize and cowpea 12/5/2013 5/5/2014
First cut of cowpea 12/7/2013 5/7/2014
Second cut of cowpea 22/8/2013 15/8/2014
Harvest of maize 2/9/2013 25/8/2014
Each block with sole cowpea, sole maize and cowpea+ maize
intercrop was 4.20 m x 5 m (21 m2). Cowpea seeds variety (cv.
Cream) and maize seeds variety (cv. Single cross 130) was
sown at 25 cm within a row and 70 cm between rows. Cowpea+
maize intercrops planting both crops on same row (100%
cowpea + 100% maize).
The plots were irrigated by sprinkler irrigation. Weeds
control and other agricultural practices were performed as
recommended.
The fertilization requirements ware calculated based on area of
feddan, this is 4200 m2. The feddan fertilization requirements
were 150 kg N fed-1, P2O5 (200 kg fed-1) and K2O (50 kg fed-1).
Nitrogen of ammonium nitrate in five equal doses, after 15-
25- 35- 45 and 55 days from sowing for maize. Cowpea was
fertilized with 40 kg N fed., ammonium nitrate after thinning.
Studied Traits
A. For Maize
The plants of each plot were harvested at the end of the
growing season (110 days from planting) and the ears were
separated, air dried for 2 weeks, then total weight of ears/plot
and ten plants were chosen at random from each plot at
harvest to determine
1- Plant height (cm)
2- Number of ears/plant
3- Ear length (cm)
4- Ear diameter (cm)
5- Number of rows/ear
6- Number of grains/row
7- Grains weight/ear (g)
8- 100–grain weight (g)
9- Grain yield (kg/fed.)
10- Straw yield (kg/fed.)
B. For Cowpea
Two cuts of cowpea were harvested (either sole or
intercropping). Traits studied over all cuts
1- Plant height (cm)
2- Number of branches /m2
3- Fresh forage yield (ton/fed.)
4- Dry forage yield (ton/fed.)
C. Competitive Relationships
1. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) which verifies the
effectiveness of intercropping for using the resources of the
environment compared to sole cropping as indicated by [33].
The LER values were calculated as: LER = (LERM + LERC ),
where LERM = YIM/YM and LERC = YIC/YC, where YM
and YC are the yields of maize and cowpea as sole while YIM
and YIC are the yields of maize and cowpea as intercrops,
respectively.
2. Aggressivity (A) was used to determine the competitive
relationship between two crops in a mixture as indicated by
[34]. The Aggressivity was calculated as: AM = (YIM/YM x
ZIM) – (YIC/YC x ZIC), and AC = (YIC/YC x ZIC) –
(YIM/YM x ZIM) where: ZIM = sown proportion of crop
maize (in maize intercropping with cowpea); ZIC = sown
proportion of crop cowpea (in cowpea intercropping with
maize)
3. Competitive Ratio (CR) gives more desirable competitive
ability for the crops. The CR represents simply the ratio of
individual LERs of the two component crops and takes into
account the proportion of the crops on which they are initially
sown as indicated by [35] The CR index was calculated using
the following formula: CRM = (LERM / LERC) (ZIC / ZIM)
while CRC = (LERC / LERM) (ZIM / ZIC).
4. Actual Yield Loss (AYL), which gave more accurate
information about the competition than the other indices
between components of intercropping system. The AYL is the
proportionate yield loss or gain of intercrops compared to sole
crop as indicated by [36]. The AYL was calculated as: AYL =
AYLM + AYLC, where AYLM = {(YIM/XIM) / (YM /XM)}
– 1 and AYLC = {(YIC/XIC) / (YC/XC)} -1, where X is the
sown proportion of intercrop maize and cowpea.
5.
Monetary Advantage Index (MAI) Suggests that the
economic assessment should be terms of the value of land
saved; this could probably be most assessed on the basis of the
rentable value of this land. The MAI was calculated according
to the formula, as indicated by [37].
With Egyptian currency (LE), maize Price was 2 LE/kg for
grain yield and cowpea was 120 LE/ton for fresh forage yield
of the two seasons.
Statistical Analysis
The obtained data in each season were statistically analyzed
of a randomized complete blocks design according to
procedures outlined as indicated by [38].
III. RESULTS
A. Effect of Cowpea with Maize Intercropping on Maize
Characters
Data in Table III revealed that the cowpea with maize
intercropping had significantly effect on the plant height and
number of ears/plant in both seasons, as well as number of
rows/ear and 100-grain weight in the second season only. The
other studied traits either in the 1st season or in the 2nd season
did not differ significantly affected by the cowpea with maize
intercropping. Moreover, the combined intercropping had a
highly significantly or significantly effect on the most of the
Value of combined intercrops x LER - 1
MAI LE
R
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1172International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
above studied traits except ear length, number grains/row,
grains weight/ear and grain yield/fed. Here, the results
indicated that the intercropping significantly increased plant
height, number of ears/plant, number of rows/ear, 100-grain
weight, ear diameter and straw yield/fed., in the either 1st
season and 2nd season and its combined over sole.
TABLE III
EFFECT OF COWPEA WITH MAIZE INTERCROPPING ON THE PLANT HEIGHT, YIELD AND ITS COMPONENTS OF MAIZE IN 2013 AND 2014 SEASONS AND ITS
COMBINED
Season 2013
Characters
Treatments
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
ears/plant
Ear
length
(cm)
Ear
diameter
(cm)
No.of
rows/ear
No. of
grains/
row
Grains
weight/
ear (g)
100-grain
weight
(g)
Grain
yield
(kg/fed.)
Straw
yield
(kg/fed.)
Sole maize 232.64 1.03 19.04 3.92 14.40 39.15 122.20 31.05 2246 2636
Intercropping cowpea + maize 235.47 1.05 19.70 4.03 15.00 40.85 140.40 32.20 2340 2721
F-test ** * NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
Season 2014
Characters
Treatments
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
ears/plant
Ear
length
(cm)
Ear
diameter
(cm)
No.of
rows/ear
No. of
grains/
row
Grains
weight/
ear (g)
100-grain
weight
(g)
Grain
yield
(kg/fed.)
Straw
yield
(kg/fed.)
Sole maize 229.63 1.09 19.91 4.23 15.00 41.22 138.12 33.43 2420 2926
Intercropping cowpea + maize 233.98 1.10 20.36 4.41 15.60 42.62 155.99 35.07 2550 3004
F-test ** ** NS NS ** NS NS * NS NS
Combined of the two seasons
Characters
Treatments
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
ears/plant
Ear
length
(cm)
Ear
diameter
(cm)
No.of
rows/ear
No. of
grains/
row
Grains
weight/
ear (g)
100-grain
weight
(g)
Grain
yield
(kg/fed.)
Straw
yield
(kg/fed.)
Sole maize 231.14 1.06 19.47 3.98 14.70 40.18 130.16 32.24 2333 3706
Intercropping cowpea + maize 234.73 1.08 20.03 4.21 15.30 41.73 148.19 33.64 2445 3834
F-test ** ** NS * ** NS NS ** NS *
*, **: indicated the significantly and highly significantly at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively
NS: non-significant difference
B. Effect of Cowpea with Maize Intercropping on Cowpea
Characters
Data in Table IV showed that the plant height and number
of branches/plant had a highly significantly affected by the
intercropping either in the 1st cut or in the 2nd cut in both
seasons. Moreover, the fresh forage yield and dry forage yield
had significantly either in the 1st cut or in the 2nd cut in the
both seasons. The results indicated that the cowpea plant
height (cm) surpassed in the intercropping either in the 1st cut
or in the 2nd cut over the sole cowpea in both seasons.
However, the cowpeas number of branches/plant, fresh forage
yield and dry forage yield (ton/ fed.) surpassed in either 1st cut
or in the 2nd cut over the cowpea with maize intercropping in
both seasons.
C. Effect of Cowpea with Maize Intercropping on
Competitive Relationships and Yield Advantages in 2013 and
2014 Seasons and Its Combined
1. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)
Results in Table V showed that LER values were greater
(1.59, 1.70 and 1.65) than one in the both seasons and the
combined analysis. The results, also showed that maize was
superior in the intercrop system where the relative yield was
increased (1.04, 1.05 and 1.05) of the sole in the both seasons
and the combined analysis. Cowpea was inferior companion
crop where the relative yield was decreased (0.55. 0.65 and
0.60) of the sole in the both seasons.
2. Aggressivity (A)
The data of Aggressivity revealed that values of (A) of
maize was (0.49, 0.40 and 0.45) of the sole in both seasons
and the combined analysis. Cowpea was (-0.49, -0.40 and -
0.45) of the sole in the both seasons and the combined
analysis.
3. Competitive Ratio (CR)
The CR of maize was greater (1.89, 1.61 and 1.75) while
the CR of cowpea which was less than one (0.52, 0.62 and
0.57).
4. Actual Yield Loss (AYL)
The AYL values of maize were positive, (+0.04, +0.05 and
+0.05) indicating that there was increase in yield (4.0, 5.0 and
5.0%) when intercropping with cowpea in both seasons and
the combined seasons were analyzed. Actual Yield Loss
values of cowpea were negative (-0.45, -0.35 and -0.40)
indicating that there was a decrease in yield (45, 35 and 40%
of sole).
5. Monetary Advantage Index (MAI)
The MAI is an indicator of the economic feasibility of
intercropping systems. These values of MAI were 2097.28,
2607.95 and 2360.80 in both seasons and the combined
analyses.
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1173International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
TABLE IV
EFFECT OF COWPEA WITH MAIZE INTERCROPPING ON PLANT HEIGHT, NUMBER OF BRANCHES/PLANT, FRESH FORAGE YIELD AND DRY FORAGE YIELD OF
COWPEA 2013 AND 2014 SEASONS
Traits
Treatments
Season 2013 Season 2014
First cut Second cut Mean cuts First cut Second cut Mean cuts
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches/
plant
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches/
plant
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches/
plant
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches/
plant
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches/
Plant
Plant
height
(cm)
No. of
branches/
plant
Sole cowpea 83.75 5.42 76.33 3.31 80.04 4.37 78.52 5.45 71.48 3.66 75.00 4.56
Intercropping
cowpea + maize
127.68 2.75 96.51 1.53 112.10 2.14 106.96 2.90 92.78 1.94 99.87 2.42
F-test ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Traits
Treatments
First cut Second cut Total cut First cut Second cut Total cut
Fresh
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Dry
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Fresh
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Dry
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Fresh
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Dry
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Fresh
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Dry
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Fresh
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Dry
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Fresh
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Dry
forage
yield
(ton/fed.)
Sole cowpea 9.37 1.81 5.27 1.16 14.64 2.97 10.33 2.21 5.57 1.34 15.90 3.56
Intercropping
cowpea + maize
5.69 1.13 2.41 0.60 8.10 1.72 7.12 1.54 3.17 0.80 10.28 2.34
F-test * * * * * * * ** ** ** ** **
*, **: indicated the significantly and highly significantly at 0.05 and 0.01 levels of probability, respectively
NS: non-significant difference
TABLE V
EFFECT OF COWPEA WITH MAIZE INTERCROPPING ON COMPETITIVE RELATIONSHIPS AND YIELD ADVANTAGES IN 2013 AND 2014 SEASONS AND ITS COMBINED

Characters
Treatments
Season 2013
Yield/fed. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)
Aggressivity
(A)
Competitive Ratio
(CR)
Actual Yield Loss (AYL) Monetary
Advantage
Index
(MAI)
maize
kg/fed.
cowpea
ton/fed. LERM LERC total AM AC CRM CRC AYLM AYLC total
Sole 2246 14.64
2097.28
Intercropping
cowpea + maize
2340 8.10 1.04 0.55 1.59 0.49 -0.49 1.89 0.52 0.04 -0.45 -0.41
Season 2014
Sole 2420 15.90
2607.95
Intercropping
cowpea + maize
2550 10.28 1.05 0.65 1.70 0.40 -0.40 1.61 0.62 0.05 -0.35 -0.30
Combined of the two seasons
Sole 2333 15.27
2360.80
Intercropping
cowpea + maize
2445 9.19 1.05 0.60 1.65 0.45 -0.45 1.75 0.57 0.05 -0.40 -0.35
IV. DISCUSSION
The height of maize plant under intercropping system was
more than that in the sole maize may be due to competition of
associated crops for intercepted the light intensity,Therefore,
its lead to the increase in maize plant. Moreover, the highest
grain yield of intercropped maize may be due to the highest
values for number of ears/plant, ear length, number of
rows/ear, number of grains/row and 100-grain weight, since an
important yield components caused in increasing the grain
yield/fed at compared the sole maize. Moreover, cowpea
plantation in such agro-ecosystem can be played as a reservoir
for the naturally occurring biological control agents (As in
Fig. 2). Intercropping is the best cropping system, because at
this system light interception, soil moisture, soil temperature
and yield were higher compared to sole crops. Microclimatic
variation in intercropping system have caused favorable
environmental conditions, ready for growth and high yield
compared to sole crops [15]. Also, [18] mentioned that
sorghum intercropped with cowpea exhibited greater
potentiality and recorded higher values of plant height and
grain yield/plant. However, Grain yield per hectare was lower
in intercropping pattern than solid pattern. Moreover, [23]
found that intercropping cereal and grain legume crops helps
maintain and improve soil fertility, because crops such as
cowpea, mung bean and soybean accumulate from 80 to 350
kg N/ha. The main advantage of intercropping is the more
efficient utilization of the available resources and the
increased productivity compared with each sole crop of the
mixture. These results are conformity to those reported by [4],
[7], [9], [11], [14], [16], [19], [20]. They mentioned that
cowpea intercropped with maize at 1:1 row arrangement
recorded the highest grain yield per plant and per hectare,
which were significantly different from sole crops. However,
[27], [32] found that in a maize/bean intercrop system the bean
component does not significantly affect maize grain yield and
yield components. On the other hand, [24], [26] reported that
intercropping maize with cowpea was seen to significantly
decrease ear length, dry ear weight and dry grain yield at the
same of maize planting date.
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1174International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
s
o
i
n
i
n
a
s
c
o
r
e
t
h
T
h
c
o
c
o
p
e
o
f
c
o
r
e
o
b
w
c
r
by
f
o
t
h
r
e
s
o
r
e
v
a
o
n
p
r
A
w
t
h
bo
t
h
c
o
o
b
w
Fig. 2 Spotted
l
The cowpea
o
le cowpea.
T
n
te
r
-and intr
a
n
tercropping.
I
s
sociated cr
o
o
nsequently i
t
e
duction in g
r
h
an in the firs
t
h
e large red
u
o
mpetition o
f
o
mponent m
a
e
netrating int
o
f
young maiz
e
o
mpetitions
e
duction. The
b
served in si
n
w
eight reduce
d
r
opping [5].
T
y
[11], [12],
o
rage dry we
i
h
an those by
e
e
ported that t
h
o
le crop at
c
e
sults were al
s
Data in Tab
l
a
ried conside
r
n
maize. T
h
r
oductivity
A
ggressivity r
e
w
hereas it was
h
e dominant c
o
th seasons
a
h
at the maize
o
wpea. Simil
a
b
served for
A
w
as positive v
a
l
adybird on m
a
plant height
w
T
his finding i
s
a
-plants of
I
t is clear tha
t
o
ps amplifi
e
t
s large sha
d
r
een forage y
i
t
cut compare
d
u
ction in th
e
f
maize wi
t
a
ize, which
o
the lower c
o
e
plants on co
w
and in co
n
maximum
g
n
gle croppin
g
d
by 52% in i
n
T
hese results
a
[21]. On the
i
ghts achieve
e
ither maize
h
e highest st
r
c
ompared by
s
o reported b
y
l
e V indicate
d
r
ably due to t
h
h
e LER it
c
was highe
r
e
vealed that
negative for
c
rop and cow
p
a
nd the com
b
was domina
n
a
r trend to t
h
A
YL in Table
a
lue in both s
e
a
ize plants inter
c
w
as higher in
s
logic, since
t
cowpea and
t
the competit
i
e
d by mai
z
d
ing on cow
p
i
eld was hig
h
d with solid
p
e
second cut
t
h shading
e
obstructed s
o
wpea canop
y
w
pea accomp
a
n
sequence l
o
g
rowth and y
g
. They add
e
n
tercropping
a
a
re consisten
t
other hand,
d by the int
e
or cowpea s
o
r
aw yield wa
s
the intercro
p
y
[19], [28], [
3
d
that LER, A
,
h
e effect of i
n
c
ould be co
n
r
the exp
e
values of
m
c
owpea. It sh
o
p
ea was the d
o
b
ined analyse
s
n
t crop and m
h
at of LER,
A
V. In partic
u
e
asons and th
e
c
ropped with c
o
intercrop tha
n
t
he light com
p
the maize
i
on between t
h
z
e elongati
o
p
ea. In addit
i
h
er in the sec
o
p
lant in both
s
due to the
e
ffect of th
e
olar radiatio
n
y
, the lowest
s
a
nies with th
e
o
west forag
e
ield of cow
p
e
d that the st
a
s compared t
o
t
with those
o
[13] mentio
n
e
rcrops were
o
le crops. Al
s
s
obtained u
n
p
ping crops.
3
0].
,
CR, AYL a
n
n
tercropping
c
n
cluded that
e
cted prod
u
m
aize were
p
o
wed that ma
o
minated cro
p
s
. The CR i
n
ore competiti
A
and CR
w
u
lar, AYL fo
r
e
combined a
n
o
wpea
n
that in
p
etition
under
h
e two-
o
n and
i
on, the
o
nd cut
s
easons.
highest
e
taller
n
from
s
hading
e
lowest
e
yield
p
ea was
em dry
o
single
o
btained
n
ed that
greater
s
o, [22]
n
der the
Similar
n
d MAI
c
owpea
actual
u
ctivity.
p
ositive,
ize was
p
in the
n
dicated
ve than
w
as also
r
maize
n
alysis.
W
h
ad
v
co
w
va
w
h
p
o
re
s
[2
9
i
m
In
t
ab
R
e
gr
e
th
a
pa
r
th
e
m
a
in
t
R.
A
g
pr
o
C
r
E
g
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[1
0
hen intercro
p
vantage for
m
wpea on ma
i
lues of cowp
e
h
ich indicate
d
o
sitive due to
s
ulted were o
b
9
], [31].
In conclusio
m
proved by
t
ercropping c
ility of a c
a
e
sults indicat
e
e
ater grain yi
e
a
t intercroppi
n
rticularly wh
e
e
same basin.
a
ize mixture
s
t
ercrop on the
The author t
h
A. Dawo
o
g
riculture, A
s
o
fessor of Cr
o
r
ops Researc
h
g
ypt.
KU. Dhima,
Competition i
n
seeding ratio.
F
M. Dahmard
e
intercropping
evaluation. A
s
J. A. N. Asi
w
b
reeding line
Potchefstroo
m
on Biological
N
D. A. Okpar
a
influenced
b
y
tropics. J. Sus
t
Polthanee A
n
cropping, inte
rained conditi
o
vol., 6. pp.1-1
2
A. K. Padh
i
economics an
d
46. pp. 204-2
1
L. Li, J. Sun,
wheat/soybea
n
interaction on
P. K. Ghosh.
cereal fodder
Field Crops R
e
A. A. Zohry.
yield, yield
c
Agric. Sc., M
o
0
]
S. M. Shata,
calcareous so
i
p
ping with c
o
m
aize probabl
y
i
ze when gr
o
e
a was negat
i
d
a yield adva
n
LER and C
R
b
served by [
6
V.
C
O
n, the prod
u
intercroppi
n
an be used
a
a
nopy with
g
e
d that cowp
e
e
ld than maiz
e
n
g had a ma
j
e
n the maize
We recomm
e
s
hould be 10
0
other side of
A
CKNO
W
h
anks to Prof.
o
d professo
r
s
siut Univers
o
p Intensific
a
h
Institute, A
g
R
EF
E
AA. Lithourgi
d
n
dices of comm
o
F
ield Crops Res.
e
h, A. Ghanbari,
maize with co
w
s
ian J. Plant Sci.
v
w
e, D. Belane,
a
s for nitrogen
m
, South Africa.
A
N
itrogen Fixatio
n
a
. Growth and
y
intercropping an
d
t
ainable Agric. a
n
n
an and Surac
h
rcropping and r
e
o
ns in an upland
2
. 2000.
i
. Effect of v
e
d
energetics of
m
1
0. 2001.
F. Zhang, X. Li
,
n
strip intercrop
p
nutrients. Field
C
Growth, yield c
intercropping s
y
e
s. vol., 88. pp.2
2
Effect of prec
e
c
omponents and
o
shtohor, vol., 43
Safaa, A. Ma
h
i
l productivity
b
owpea, whic
h
y
because of
t
o
wn in asso
c
i
ve when inte
r
n
tage. These
v
R
was great
e
6
], [8], [10], [
O
NCLUSION
u
ctivity of a
n
g rather t
h
a
s a tool to i
m
g
ood suppres
e
a with maiz
e
e
sole crop. T
h
j
or advantage
and cowpea
w
e
nd that plan
t
0
% cowpea: 1
0
maize rows).
W
LEDGMENT
Dr. E. M. S
h
r
s of Agro
n
ity and Pro
f
a
tion Researc
h
g
riculture Re
s
E
RENCES
d
is, IB. Vasilak
o
o
n vetch and cer
e
vol., 100. pp. 24
B. Syasar and
w
pea on green
fo
v
ol., 8. pp. 235-2
a
nd F. D. Dakor
a
fixation at AR
C
A
bstract of the 1
6
n
, Montana, US
A
y
ield of maize
a
d nitrogen fertili
z
n
d the Environ.
V
h
et Butchareon.
e
lay cropping o
f
area of northeas
t
e
getable intercr
o
m
aize (
zea mays
,
S. Yang and Z.
p
ing I yield ad
v
C
rop Res., vol., 7
ompetition and
e
y
stems in the se
2
7-237. 2004.
e
ding winter cro
p
associated We
e
. pp. 139-148. 2
0
h
moud and Han
a
b
y integrated ef
fe
h
indicates
a
t
he positive e
f
c
iation. Whil
e
r
cropping on
v
alues of M
A
e
r than one.
S
14], [15], [17
]
unit land
a
h
an monoc
u
m
prove com
p
sive charact
e
e
intercrop pr
o
h
e LER also
s
over sole cr
w
ere planted
t
ing of cowp
e
0
0% maize (
c
h
alaby and P
r
n
omy, Facu
l
f
. Dr. A. A.
h
Departmen
t
s
earch Centre
o
qlou, and CA.
e
als intercroppin
9-258. 2007.
M. Ramroudi.
E
fo
rage yields an
d
39. 2009.
a
. Evaluation o
f
C
Grain crops
i
6
th
International
C
A
pp. 14-19. 200
9
a
nd vegetable co
z
er in the low la
n
V
ol., 2. pp.188-1
9
Comparison o
corn with cowp
e
t
ern Thailand. J.
o
pping on pro
d
). Indian J. Agr
o
Rengel. Wheat/
m
v
antage and inte
1. pp. 123-137.
2
e
conomics of gr
o
mi-arid tropics
o
p
s and Intercro
p
e
ds in maize. A
n
0
05.
a
n, S. Siam. I
m
fe
ct of intercrop
p
a
yield
f
fect of
e
AYL
maize,
A
I were
S
imilar
]
, [19],
a
rea is
u
ltures.
p
etitive
e
ristics.
o
duced
s
howed
opping
within
e
a with
c
owpea
r
of. Dr.
l
ty of
Zohry
t
, Field
, Giza,
Dordas.
g in two
E
ffect of
d
quality
f
cowpea
i
nstitute,
C
ongress
9
.
wpea as
n
d humid
9
4. 2000.
f single
e
a under
ISSAAS
d
uctivity,
o
n. Vol.,
m
aize or
r
specific
2
001.
o
undnut/
o
f India.
p
ping on
n
nals of
m
proving
p
ing and
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1175International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
fertilizer dorycnium rectum. Res. J. of Agri. and Biolo. Sciences, vol., 3.
pp.733-739. 2007.
[11] F. Yilmaz, M. Atak and M. Erayman. Identification of advantages of
maize- legume intercropping over stocy cropping through competition
indices in the East Mediterranean Region. Turk. J. Agric. Vol., 32.
pp.111-119. 2007.
[12] M. A. Abou-Keriasha, M.A. Abd EI-Hady and F.R. Nawar. Response of
some cowpea varieties to intercropping with maize under upper Egypt
condition. Egypt. J. App. Sci. vol., 24. pp. 495-514. 2009.
[13] Hamdollah Eskandari and Ahmad Ghanbari. Intercropping of Maize
(Zea mays) and Cowpea (Vigna sinensis) as Whole-Crop Forage: Effect
of Different Planting Pattern on Total Dry Matter Production and Maize
Forage Quality. Not. Bot. Hort. Agrobot. Cluj. Vol., 37. pp.152-155.
2009.
[14] M. A. Abou-Keriasha, A. Sahar Sherif and KH. Wafaa Mohamed. Maize
grain yield response to intercropping with three legume fodder crops.
Egypt. J. Agric. Res. vol., 88. pp.1259-1276. 2010.
[15] Ahmed Ghanbari, Mehdi Dahmardeh, Barat Ali Siahsar and Mahmoud
Ramroudi. Effect of maize (Zea mays L.) - cowpea (Vigna unguiculata
L.) intercropping on light distribution, soil temperature and soil moisture
in arid environment. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment. Vol.,
8. pp. 102-108. 2010.
[16] M. Rezvani, F. Zaefarian, M. Aghaalikhani, H. Rahimian Mashhadi and
E. Zand. Investigation Corn and Soybean intercropping advantages in
competition with redroot pigweed and jimsonweed. World Academy of
Science, Engineering and Technology, vol., 5. pp.327-329. 2011.
[17] J. Sarkodie-Addo and Abdul-Rahaman. Spatial arrangements and time of
introducing an intercrop on the productivity of component crops in
maize (Zea mays L.) – soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill) intercropping
systems. Inter. J.of Sci. and Adva. Tech. vol., 2. pp.103-107. 2012.
[18] Y. A. Refay, A. A. Alderfasi, M. M. Selim and k. Awad. Evaluation of
variety, cropping pattern and plant density on growth and yield
production of grain sorghum-cowpea under limited water supply
condition growth, yield and yield component characters of sorghum. J.
of Agric. and Veterinary Science, vol., 2. pp.24-29. 2013.
[19] E. D. N. Dube, T. Madanzi1, A. Kapenzi and E. Masvaya. Root length
density in maize/cowpea intercropping under a basin tillage system in a
semi-arid area of zimbabwe. American Journal of Plant Sciences. vol., 5.
pp. 1499-1507. 2014.
[20] Iderawumi abdulraheem mukhtar. Effect of cowpea on growth and yield
parameter in a maize-cowpea intercrop. Journal of Management and
Science. Vol., 4. pp. 37-42. 2014.
[21] ET. Sebetha, AT. Modi and LG. Owoeye. Maize-cowpea rotation and
intercropping effects on cowpea yield. Ph. D. Thesis, University of
KwaZulu- Natal. 2014.
[22] J. M. M. Matusso, J. N. Mugwe and M. Mucheru-Muna. Effects of
different maize (Zea mays L.)–Soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill)
intercropping patterns on yields and its economics. Academia Journal of
Agricultural Research. Vol., 2. pp.159-166. 2014.
[23] Hamid Reza Mobasser, Mohammad Reza Vazirimehr and Khashayar
Rigi. Effect of intercropping on resources use, weed management and
forage quality. Inter. J. of Plant, Animal and Environmental Sciences,
vol., 4. pp.707-713. 2014.
[24] K. S. Gangwar, and S. K. Sharma. Fodder legume intercropping in
maize (Zea mays) and its effect on succeeding wheat (Triticum
aestivum). Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, vol., 64. pp.38-40.
1994.
[25] Y. A. Abayomi. Influence of height of maize variety on the productivity
of intercropped maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.
Walp). Ghana Jnl arie. Vol., 33. pp. 199-206. 2000.
[26] O. M. Egbe, S. E. Alibo, and I. Nwueze. Evaluation of some extra-early-
and early- maturing cowpea varieties for intercropping with maize in
southern guinea savannah of Nigeria. Agriculture and Biology Journal of
North America. http://dx.doi.org/10.5251/abjna.2010.1.5.845.858. 2010.
[27] Thayamini H. S. and I. Brintha. Review on maize based intercropping. J.
of Agro. Vol., 9. pp.135-145. 2010.
[28] R. N. Amos, B. A. Jens and M. Symon. On farm evaluation of yield and
economic benefits of short term maize legume intercropping systems
under conservation Agriculture in Malawi. Field crop research, vol., 132.
pp.149-157. 2012.
[29] Hamdollah Eskandari. Intercropping of maize (zea mays) with cowpea
(vigna sinensis) and mungbean (vigna radiata): effect of
complementarity of intercrop components on resource consumption, dry
matter production and legumes forage quality. J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res.,
vol., 2. pp. 355-360. 2012.
[30] K. Mangasini, L. M. Mwanahawa, G. M. Arbogast and P. K.
Neema.Agronomic factors limiting groundnut production: A case of
smallholder farming in Taboraregion. 17th Annual Research Workshop
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, pp. 28-29. 2012.
[31] F. O. Takim. Advantages of maize-cowpea intercropping over sole
cropping through competition indices. Journal of Agriculture and
Biodiversity Research, vol., 1. pp. 53-59. 2012.
[32] O. M. Kitonyo, G.N. Chemining’wa and J.W. Muthomi. Productivity of
farmer-preferred maize varieties intercropped with beans in semi-arid
Kenya. International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Research.
Vol., 3. pp.6-16. 2013.
[33] R. W. Willey and S.O. Osiru. Studies on mixture of maize and beans
(Phaseolus vulgaris) with particular reference to plant populations. J.
Agric. Sci. Camb. Vol., 79. pp. 519-529. 1972.
[34] C. A. Mc-Gillichrist. Analysis and competition experiments. Biometrics,
Vol., 21. pp. 975- 985. 1960.
[35] R. W. Willey and M. R. Rao. Competitive ratio for quantifying
competition between intercrops. Exp. Agric. f6. pp.117-125. 1980.
[36] P. Banik. Evaluation of wheat (Triticum aestivum) and legume
intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 row replacement series system. J.
Agron. & Crop Sci. vol., 176. pp. 289-294. 1996.
[37] R.W. Willey. Intercropping its importance and research needs. Part I:
Competition and yield advantages. Field Crop Abst. Vol., 32. pp.1-10.
1979.
[38] K. A. Gomez and A. A. Gomez. Statistical procedures for agriculture
research 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons. New York, pp. 317-333. 1984.
World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Biological, Veterinary, Agricultural and Food Engineering Vol:8 No:11, 2014
1176International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 8(11) 2014
International Science Index Vol:8, No:11, 2014 waset.org/Publication/10000250
... In intercropping pattern, all the environmental resources are utilized to maximize crop production per unit of area and time. Thus, intercropping pattern has several benefits to the farmers such as, flexibility, profit maximization, risk minimization against total crop failure or disease, weed control, increase land use efficiency, soil conservation, improvement of soil fertility using legumes, enhancing the capture and use of light and water [2,3]. Intercropping pattern enhanced water, land and soil nutrients use efficiency, as well as light use by 10-50 % compared to sole crop that grown on the same area [4]. ...
... Data presented in Table 5 shows the effect of intercropping treatments on plant height, number of branches per plant, number of pods per plant, number of seeds per pod, number of seeds per plant, seed yield per plant straw yield per plant, 100 seeds weight, seeds yield (t ha ) and protein percentage of faba bean were taken the descending order: faba bean with fennouil > faba bean with red radish > faba bean with brassica in the two studied seasons, these results are agreed with those obtained by [3]. Grain yield and straw yield were reduced by 10.75% and 8.2%, 12.0% and 10.25, and 12.5% and 11.5 % respectively after faba bean with fennouil, faba bean with red radish and faba bean with brassica intercropping treatments respectively compared to sole faba bean as mean of 1 st and 2 nd seasons, this may be due to the beneficial of intercropping on weed control, increase land use efficiency, improvement of soil fertility, enhancing the capture and use of light and water [26,12] as shown in Table 5. Fennouil crop had less impact on growth, yield, and yield components of faba bean, when it was intercropped with faba bean than brassica crop [12,3]. ...
... Data presented in Table 5 shows the effect of intercropping treatments on plant height, number of branches per plant, number of pods per plant, number of seeds per pod, number of seeds per plant, seed yield per plant straw yield per plant, 100 seeds weight, seeds yield (t ha ) and protein percentage of faba bean were taken the descending order: faba bean with fennouil > faba bean with red radish > faba bean with brassica in the two studied seasons, these results are agreed with those obtained by [3]. Grain yield and straw yield were reduced by 10.75% and 8.2%, 12.0% and 10.25, and 12.5% and 11.5 % respectively after faba bean with fennouil, faba bean with red radish and faba bean with brassica intercropping treatments respectively compared to sole faba bean as mean of 1 st and 2 nd seasons, this may be due to the beneficial of intercropping on weed control, increase land use efficiency, improvement of soil fertility, enhancing the capture and use of light and water [26,12] as shown in Table 5. Fennouil crop had less impact on growth, yield, and yield components of faba bean, when it was intercropped with faba bean than brassica crop [12,3]. ...
Article
Irrigation with intensive intercropping, in water scarce region is evaluated and optimized. Water productivity (WP) is taken as an indicator and quantified. A field experiment was carried out in Sakha Agricultural Research Station in Egypt during 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 seasons. A split plot design was applied, main plots were devoted for irrigation treatments of two (I1), three (I2) and four (I3) irrigations. Whereas fennouil, red radish and brassica crops were intercropped with faba bean in the sub-plots. Results showed that the highest yield and yield attributes of faba bean were obtained from irrigation treatment of I3, faba bean with fennouil intercropping and the interaction between faba bean intercropping with fennouil and irrigation treatment of I3 in both seasons. Water consumptive use was increased by 17% and 24% after irrigation treatment of I2 and I3 compared to I1. Applied water were reduced by 21.6% and 8.2% for I1 and I2 compared to I3. The highest value of WP was obtained from the interaction between irrigation treatment I3 and faba bean with fennouil intercropping. It could be concluded that applying the interaction of I1 and faba bean with fennouil intercropping, because it saved significant amount of irrigation water and enhanced water productivity.
... In the intercropping, two or more crops are sown in the same area at the same time, with this, it is possible to increase the productivity per unit area (Hamd et al., 2014). In addition, it has the benefit of improving soils and it is feasible to control pests or diseases (Torres et Introducción El maíz fue domesticado en México hace aproximadamente 9 000 años (Ortíz et al., 2013), y es la especie más importante y diversa. ...
... The experiment was carried out on the trial fields of the Unidad Académica de Agricultura of the UAN, located in Xalisco, Nayarit, during spring-summer 2019-2020. Its geographic location is 21° 25' 44.84'' north latitude and 104° 53' 24.53'' west longitude with altitude of permite incrementar la productividad por unidad de área (Hamd et al., 2014). Además, se tiene la ventaja de mejorar los suelos y es posible controlar plagas o enfermedades (Torres et al., 2018) y se optimiza el control de malezas (Charani y Sharif, 2018). ...
Article
Full-text available
México se ha convertido en el principal importador de maíz; los pequeños productores utilizan sistemas de producción basados en policultivos con rendimientos bajos. Con el objetivo de desarrollar tecnologías para el cultivo de maíz y frijol se estableció el siguiente experimento. Se probaron tres arreglos topológicos, cultivo simple de maíz y frijol, intercalado de maíz y frijol a una y dos hileras. Se utilizó un diseño completamente al azar, con tres repeticiones por tratamiento. Las variables evaluadas fueron biomasa aérea, rendimiento de grano, índice de cosecha y eficiencia relativa de la tierra (ERT) y, eficiencia relativa de la ganancia (ERG). No fue posible la producción de frijol en este sistema. Los tratamientos de intercalado a dos hileras presentaron los mejores valores para las variables, excepto índice de cosecha. La variedad V-526 tuvo el mayor índice. En el segundo año no se encontraron diferencias entre arreglos topológicos, probablemente debido a la disminución en la precipitación. En ese año el índice de cosecha fue mayor en la variedad VETX-200 UAN. Al igual que en la primera evaluación, la eficiencia relativa de la tierra, el ingreso neto y la eficiencia relativa de la ganancia fue similar en ambas variedades. Para realizar el cultivo intercalado de maíz y frijol es necesario probar otras variedades de frijol. Es posible obtener buenos rendimientos, eficiencia relativa de la tierra y de la ganancia en sistemas intercalados de maíz a doble hilera.
... The highest MAI was observed under 2:1 row ratio of cowpea and baby corn being (8855) significantly higher than that observed under 3:1 and 4:1 row ratios. Our results are in close conformity with the findings ofAlla et al. (2014) andAmira et al. (2017).Economics: Among the different intercropping systems the highest gross returns (`58667/ha), net returns (`31025/ EFFECT OF NP AND STRESS-MITIGATING CHEMICALS ON COWPEA + BABY CORN INTERCROPPING ...
Article
Full-text available
A field study was carried out during the summer seasons of 2019 and 2020 at research farm of Agriculture University, Kota, Rajasthan, to study the effect of NP fertilization and stress mitigating chemicals on productivity and profitability of summer cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) and baby corn (Zea mays L.) intercropping system. The experiment was conducted in a split-split plot design with 5 intercropping systems [sole cowpea, sole baby corn, cowpea + baby corn (2: 1), (3: 1) and (4: 1)] in main plot; 3 fertility levels (100, 125 and 150% RDF) in sub-plot and 2 stress-mitigating chemicals (0.5% CaCl2 and 1.0% KNO3 at flowering and pod development stage of cowpea) in sub-subplot, replicated 4 times. Intercropping in 2:1 row ratio of cowpea and baby corn significantly increased the cowpea equivalent-yield, monetary advantage index, land equivalent ratio and economics of intercropping system while the yield of cowpea and baby corn was significantly higher under their sole crops. In sub-plots cowpea-equivalent yield, land-equivalent ratio, monetary advantage index, profitability, seed and cob yield of cowpea, and baby corn were higher with the fertility level of 150% over lower levels. Our results further indicated that 0.5% of CaCl2 significantly enhanced the cowpea-equivalent yield, monetary advantage index and economics of intercropping system and yield of cowpea and baby corn over 1% KNO3. Cowpea should be intercropped as 2:1 row ratio with fertilization of 150% RDF and foliar application of CaCl2 @0.5% at flowering and pod development stage of cowpea is recommended to achieve significantly higher productivity and profitability.
... In addition to sole cropping of cowpea, farmers with limited cropland prefers the intercropping systems [18] . Most studies indicated that forage legumes did not appear to reduce cereal yield when intercropped [6,19,20] . However, due to high competition and shading effect, intercropping may result in decrease in yield of one or both of the individual crops in the mixture unless appropriate seed ratios and planting time is followed. ...
Article
Full-text available
The study was conducted at Adami Tulu and Dugda districts of Oromia regional state, Ethiopia to determine the optimum level of seeding ratio and planting time of cowpea under maize for optimum forage biomass production and maize grain yield. Combinations of four levels of cowpea seeding ratios and four different cowpea planting dates were laid out in a randomized complete block design in factorial arrangement with three replications. The levels of seeding ratios were 100%, 75%, 50%, 25%, 0% (sole maize) for the two districts. The four planting dates for cowpea were simultaneously planting with maize, 10 days after maize planting (DAMP), 20 DAMP and 30 DAMP. The results indicated that increasing seeding ratio of cowpea from 25% to the highest level (100%) resulted in significantly increased cowpea forage biomass yield. Time of cowpea planting in maize also influenced the plant height and biomass yield of cowpea. The highest forage biomass yield was recorded from simultaneously planting of the two crops. On the other hand, seeding ratio of cowpea has significantly influenced the grain yield of maize. It was also indicated that the time of cowpea planting in maize have significantly affected the grain yield of maize with simultaneously planting resulting in the lowest grain yield. The total LER in most of the intercropping system was more than one showing that intercropping of forage legumes with maize is more advantageous than sole cropping of maize. The optimum forage legume biomass yield (1.78 t/ha) was obtained from the combination of seeding ratio of 75% with 10 DAMP without significantly (p>0.05) reducing the grain yield of maize. Hence this combination was recommended for production of cowpea forage and maize grain from intercropping of the two crops in the study areas. From these results, it can be concluded that additional forage can be produced by intercropping cowpea with maize at their appropriate seeding ratio and planting time with a little or no sacrifice in maize grain yield. Moreover, it is important to further demonstrate and promote the recommended maize-cowpea intercropping practices for the end users of the study areas and similar agro-ecologies.
... This could be attributed by the interspecific competition with associated crops for getting more intercepted light. Same findings also recorded by Alla et al. (2014). W hereas, rest of the growth parameters like number of leaves (57.73 and 81.97), leaf area index (LAI) (3.19 and 3.66) at different growth stages (50 DAS and harvest) and number of branches (5.82) at harvest gave better result in solid culture (C2) than intercropping, respectively. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Inclusion of legume with cereal as an intercrop ensure crop nutrition and enhanced soil quality. Combine application of organic manure with inorganic fertilizer minimizes the soil hazard and improves crop productivity in a significant manner. Methods: The experiment on Kharif maize +cowpea intercropping system was carried out at 'Jaguli Instructional Farm' of Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Nadia, under the New Alluvial Zone of West Bengal in 2019-2020 to investigate the influence of crop geometry and nutrient management practices on growth and yield responses of legume (cowpea). The experiment was laid out with a split-plot design. The main plot had five crop geometry and a sub plot comprised five nutrient management practices, which were replicated thrice. Result: From the pooled data of two years experiment, the intercropping system of 1M:1C (Maize: Cowpea) (C3) perform better in respect of growth attributes, viz., leaves plant-1 , LAI, branches plant-1 and CGR; yield reflecting attributes viz., pods plant-1 , pod length, pod and forage yield of cowpea (1.30 and 5.49 t ha-1) and crop (maize) equivalent yield of cowpea (1.76 t ha-1) although the maximum values were attained from sole cowpea treatment (C2). Nutrient management practices with the application of 75% N as chemical + 25% N as organic with seaweed application (N2) recorded greater growth and yield viz., pod, forage and crop (maize) equivalent yield (1.51, 6 and 2.01 t ha-1), respectively. Total nodules plant-1 were significantly influenced by crop geometry and nutrient management, whereas the total chlorophyll content of cowpea was significantly varied with nutrient management. Regression studies depicted the negative functional relationship between pod yield and canopy temperature, whereas the relationship between intercepted photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) and pod yield was positive.
... L'augmentation de la productivité par unité de surface peut constituer une raison importante pour cultiver deux ou plusieurs cultures ensemble ou en des périodes successives échelonnées (Hamd-Alla et al., 2014). Dans les pays du Sud, la gestion des terres est un problème complexe pour l'agriculture et pose des problèmes spécifiques d'environnement (érosion, effet de serre, séquestration du carbone, protection de la biodiversité, etc.). ...
Thesis
En agriculture de conservation, le système de semis direct sous couvert végétal mort ou vif (SCV), qui est une nouvelle approche de l’agriculture qui s’inspire de l’écosystème forestier, assure une bonne productivité des surfaces cultivées et donne beaucoup d’avantages dans la gestion du sol. Cette thèse se propose d’accroître les connaissances scientifiques sur le fonctionnement des systèmes de culture d’association et de rotation dans un sol non travaillé, des cultures de rente prise en compte qui sont le maïs comme céréale ainsi que le niébé et le soja comme légumineuses en zone tropicale dans la savane du sud-ouest de la RD Congo, précisément à l’INERA/Mvuazi. Le travail repose sur une série d’expérimentations sur les SCV proposant de nouveaux systèmes de culture pouvant répondre à une triple attente : la productivité agricole, la rentabilité économique et le respect de l’environnement.Nos résultats ont confirmé l’intérêt de ces systèmes pour améliorer le rendement des cultures de maïs en association et en rotation avec des légumineuses sur la base des principes de fonctionnement des SCV par la détermination de la combinaison optimisant la production en grains et la biomasse totale du système. Les rendements élevés de chaque culture enregistrée au cours de cette étude ont occasionné des bénéfices importants en augmentant leurs ratios que se soit en culture d’association ou en rotation. Grâce aux indices de compatibilité, une sélection plus avancée des variétés est possible, afin d’identifier les variétés compatibles au système de culture intercalaire et qui sont observés comme les plus rentables. La valeur économique d’une association est plus élevée par rapport à la monoculture du fait que les légumineuses sont plus chères sur le marché, permettant à l’association maïs-légumineuse d'atteindre un niveau de productivité plus élevé par rapport à la monoculture.Ce travail a aussi contribué au développement d’outils méthodologiques pour étudier le fonctionnement des associations par les rapports des approches mathématiques ou modèles simulant la plantation pour la culture d’association céréale-légumineuse. Montrant ainsi que la compétition qui existe dans la culture mixte pourrait être l'aspect principal affectant le rendement par rapport à l'implantation des monocultures des céréales. La modification de l’arrangement spatial du système de culture d’association en intercalaire vers l’association en bande a permis de réduire la perte de rendement qui était de 78,06% pour l’association en intercalaire à 43,59% pour l’association en bande. Cela démontre que la meilleure combinaison d’espacement des lignes et de densité pour les légumineuses correspond à un indice de surface foliaire (LAI) qui intercepte au moins 95% du rayonnement actif du point de vue de la photosynthèse au début de la phase de remplissage des graines.
Article
Background: The intercropping of maize with legumes is beneficial in multifaceted aspects. Advantages of maize-legume intercropping is pronounced in the form of higher yield and greater utilization of available resources, benefits in weeds, pests and disease management, fixation of biological nitrogen by legumes and transfer of nitrogen to associated maize and control of erosion by covering a large extent of ground area. The current investigation aimed to study the effect of maize-French bean and maize-soybean intercropping on growth and yield of maize under rainfed condition of Namsai district of Arunachal Pradesh. Methods: The field experiment was conducted during 2021 in randomized block design consisting of 3 treatments i.e. T1- sole maize, T2- maize + French bean and T3- maize + soybean with four replications. Observations on growth and yield parameters and yield of maize were recorded on harvesting of the crop. The results were analysed using standard statistical procedures of ANOVA. Result: In maize + French bean and maize + soybean intercropping, the growth and yield parameters as well as yield of maize was higher in maize + soybean intercropping as compared to maize + French bean system. The grain yield of maize under maize + soybean intercropping was 5541.67 kg ha-1. From this study, it can be concluded that the intercropping of maize with soybean would be profitable due to higher yield of maize (2 rows of maize and 2 rows of soybean) under farmer’s field condition of Namsai district of Arunachal Pradesh.
Article
An experiment was conducted to evaluate the performance of ginger-based intercropping systems under organic management conditions in the mid-hills of Sikkim Himalayas during the kharif and rabi season of 2021-22. The experiment was laid out in a randomized block design with three replications.The experiment comprised seven ginger-based intercropping treatmentsviz.,T 1-Sole ginger; T 2-Ginger + Fenugreek (Grow ginger and fenugreek in 2:2 ratio Grow fenugreeks in Kharif and Rabi); T 3-Ginger + Coriander + leafy vegetables (Grow ginger and coriander in 2:2 ratio, after harvesting of coriander, grow leafy vegetables in place of coriander); T 4-Ginger + Maize (2:1 or 2:2) (Grow sweet corn in Kharif, Rabi and Summer-3 times); T 5-Ginger + French Bean (2:2) (Grow French bean in Kharif, Rabi and Summer-3 times); T 6-Ginger + Arhar (3:1) (Grow arhar in Kharif) and T 7-Ginger + Taro (2:2). Among all the treatments, T3 showed the maximum ginger equivalent yield. However, significantly higher system productivity, system gross returns, system net returns and system B: C ratio was recorded in T3 as compared to other intercropping systems.Induction of coriander in sole ginger system under rainfed condition of Sikkim Himalayas, India not only enhances the system productivity and system profitability but also sustain the soil health on long term basis. Thus, ginger + coriander based production systemsunder organic management hold great promises for sustaining livelihood of organic growers of Sikkim Himalayas and similar agro ecoregions.
Chapter
This chapter presented an integration of water-smart and soil-smart practices to sustainably increase crops production. The first part of the chapter discussed the benefits of partial or full replacement of irrigation water and fertilizer with fish farms effluents applied to winter and summer crops interplanted between orange trees in four crop sequences. This part was implemented in a field experiments. The second part of the chapter used modeling to determine the possibility of using the effluents of several fish farms exerted from one area in Egypt to expend on cultivating new areas and increase food availability. This chapter could provide a work plan to sustain soil and water resources through the cultivation of different crop sequences and irrigation with fish farms effluents. Doing that could improve soil quality, reduce environmental pollution by fish farms wastes, reduce fertilizer usage and groundwater contamination, reduce weeds spread and usage of pesticides, thus reducing production costs.
Chapter
To sustainably increase food production, crop-smart, water-smart and soil-smart practices should be integrated. Implementing intercropping systems can attain the integration of the three practices because it have many advantages. It attains higher crops productivity and increase water productivity. It can attain soil conservation, as well as control the insects, diseases and weeds. It can also modify the microclimate of the intercrops to increase its yield. Other crop-smart practices are the cultivating three crops in one year and implementing crop rotations. Crop rotation also integrates the crop-smart, water-smart and soil-smart practices. Examples of crop rotations implemented in Egypt under rain-fed conditions and irrigated agriculture were reviewed, namely cotton rotation, cereal crops rotations, intensive-cropping rotations, crop rotations to defeat diseases and weeds and water saving crop rotations.
Article
Full-text available
An experiment was carried out during the raining season of the year 2011 at the Teaching and Research Farm of Oyo State College of Education (Now Emmanuel Alayande College of Education, Oyo), Lanlate Campus, to investigate the effect of geometric row arrangement on the growth and yield of cowpea in a maize-cowpea intercrop. There were 1:1, 1:2 and 2:1 maize/cowpea row arrangement with a sole crop of cowpea as control. The experiment was laid on out in a Random Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replicates, No significant difference among the growth parameter (plant height, number of leaves and number of branches) intercropped and the sole cowpea plants (p<0.05). However cowpea intercropped with maize at 1:1 row arrangement recorded highestgrain yield per plant and consequently per hectare than those of 1:2 and 2:1 row arrangement, through not significantly difference from them. It is hereby recommend that cowpea and maize should be planted at 1:1 row arrangement.
Article
Full-text available
The spatial variation in plant species associated with intercropping is intended to reduce resource competition between species and increase yield potential. A field experiment was carried out on corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean (Glycine max L.) intercropping in a replacement series experiment with weed contamination consist of: weed free, infestation of redroot pigweed, infestation of jimsonweed and simultaneous infestation of redroot pigweed and jimsonweed in Karaj, Iran during 2007 growing season. The experimental design was a randomized complete block in factorial experiment with replicated thrice. Significant (P≤0.05) differences were observed in yield in intercropping. Corn yield was higher in intercropping, but soybean yield was significantly reduced by corn when intercropped. However, total productivity and land use efficiency were high under the intercropping system even in contamination of either species of weeds. Aggressivity of corn relative to soybean revealed the greater competitive ability of corn than soybean. Land equivalent ratio (LER) more than 1 in all treatments attributed to intercropping advantages and was highest in 50: 50 (corn/soybean) in weed free. These findings suggest that intercropping corn and soybean increase total productivity per unit area and improve land use efficiency. Considering the experimental findings, corn-soybean intercropping (50:50) may be recommended for yield advantage, more efficient utilization of resources, and weed suppression as a biological control.
Article
Full-text available
An intercropping experiment of sorghum/cowpea intercrops was carried out in summer season of 2009 and 2010 at Agricultural and Research Station, College of Food Science and Agriculture, King Saud University. The main objective of the study was to evaluate the growth and yield potential of sorghum/cowpea intercrops over sole cropping pattern. The experiments included 18 treatments three sorghum varieties, i.e., two semi dwarfs (Pioneer and S-1007) and a tall one local variety (Shahlaa), theses varieties were planted in two cropping patterns as solid culture at the densities of 200, 300 and 400 10 3 plants/hectare for semi dwarfs varieties, whereas tall variety at 160,240 and 320 10 3 plants/hectare. These densities for the three varieties are equal to 100, 150 and 200 % of the solid recommended culture .The intercropping was alternating two rows of grain sorghum with other rows of cowpea (2 & 2) pattern. The data obtained indicated that sorghum plants, when intercropped with cowpea, exhibited greater potentiality and recorded higher values of most of the studied criteria viz., plant height, number of leaves per plant, stem diameter, leaf area, dry matter accumulation and grain yield /plant .Grain yield per hectare was lower in intercropping pattern than solid pattern. The increase in grain yield per plant and plant density could not compensate the decrease of the area occupied by the crop under solid culture.
Article
Farmers in the semi-arid regions grow drought tolerant maize varieties and practice maize-legume intercropping. A study was conducted in Machakos, Mwea and Waruhiu in 2008 short rains and 2009 long rains to determine the performance of maize varieties currently grown in semi-arid regions and their compatibility with beans. Sixteen maize varieties were grown as sole crops or intercropped with beans. The experiments were laid out in randomized complete block design with split plot arrangement and replicated three times. Maize variety and maize plus beans intercrop system were assigned to main and sub-plots, respectively. Using land equivalent ratio (LER) and monetary advantage (MA) indices, productivity of intercropping was evaluated. Results indicated that varieties KCB, Katumani, DHO 1, DHO 2, DK 8031 and Duma 43 were suitable for Mwea and Waruhiu. They tolerated or escaped drought by maturing early. Further, these varieties were compatible with beans in an intercrop system. However, bean yield was significantly affected by maize component in intercrop system and declines of 52% to 59% were observed. Despite the yield reduction of beans in intercropping, this system was shown to be economically viable according to LER and MA indices. All maize varieties failed to produce a crop in Machakos in two seasons. Increased food production in semi-arid areas requires adoption of drought escaping and tolerant varieties and maize-bean intercropping systems. However, areas with severe droughts like Machakos and adjoining regions of south-eastern Kenya require alternative maize varieties or crop species that are more drought tolerant than those currently recommended.