Competitive Relationships and Yield Advantage of Intercropping Faba Bean with Sugar Beet under Bio-Organic Additives and Mineral Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates

Full text

Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 11, 369-389
https://www.scirp.org/journal/as
ISSN Online: 2156-8561
ISSN Print: 2156-8553
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 Apr. 1, 2020 369 Agricultural Sciences
Competitive Relationships and Yield Advantage
of Intercropping Faba Bean with Sugar Beet
under Bio-Organic Additives and Mineral
Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates
Y. E. El-Ghobashi1, A. E. M. Eata2
1Crop Intensification Research Department, Field Crops Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, Egypt
2Department of Vegetable Research, Horticulture Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Giza, Egypt
Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at El-Serw Agricultural Research Station,
Damietta Governorate, Egypt during 2016/
2017 and 2017/2018 seasons to
reduce mineral N inputs of sugar beet with increased
land use efficiency and
profitability under intercropping conditions. Seven treatments included five
treatments (90 kg nitrogen “N” + 30 m3 farm yard manure “FYM”/fad,
80 kg
N +30 m3 FYM/fad, 70 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad and 400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3
FYM/fad for intercropping faba bean cultivar Spanish with sugar beet cultivar
Gloria) and two treatments (90 and 20 kg N/fad for solid culture of sugar beet
and faba bean, respectively,
as recommended mineral N fertilizer rate) were
compared in a randomiz
ed complete block design with three replications.
Solid culture of sugar beet with the application of recommended rate (90 kg
N/fad) gave the highest top, root and sugar yields/fad, as well as the percen-
tage of purity compared with the other treatments in both seasons. Inter-
cropping faba bean with sugar beet plants with application of 90 kg N + 30 m3
FYM/fad gave the highest number of leaves/plant, leaf area/plant, root length,
root diameter and root weight/plant followed by intercropped sugar beet
plants that fertilized with 80 kg N + 30 m3
FYM/fad compared with the other
treatments in both seasons. On the other hand,
intercropped sugar beet that
received 400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3
FYM/fad had the highest percentages of
T.S.S. and sucrose followed by 70 kg N + 30 m3
FYM/fad compared with the
other treatments in both seasons. Solid culture of faba bean with the applica-
tion of 20 kg N/fad gave the highest plant height,
number of seeds/pod and
seed yield/fad, meanwhile the highest number of branches/plant and p
od
length were achieved by intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with appli-
How to cite this paper:
El-Ghobashi, Y.E.
and
Eata, A.E.M. (2020) Competitive Rela-
tionships and Yield Advantage of Inte
r-
cropping Faba Bean with Sugar Beet under
Bio
-Organic Additives and Mineral Nitro-
gen Fertilizer Rates
.
Agricultural Sciences
,
11
, 369-389.
https://doi.org/10.4236/as.2020.114022
Received:
February 24, 2020
Accepted:
March 29, 2020
Published:
April 1, 2020
Copyright © 20
20 by author(s) and
Scientific
Research Publishing Inc.
This work
is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International
License (CC BY
4.0).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Open Access

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 370 Agricultural Sciences
cation of 90 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad followed by intercropped faba bean plants
that fertilized with 80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad compared with the other treat-
ments in both seasons. However,
intercropped faba bean plants that fertilized
with 70 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad gave the highest number of pods per plant,
number of seeds per pod,
seed index and seed yield per plant compared with
the other treatments in both seasons. Land equivalent ratio (LER),
land
equivalent coefficient (LEC) and relative crowding coefficient (RCC) were
high by intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with the application of 80 kg
N + 30 m3
FYM/fad indicating yield advantage was achieved. The value of
aggressivity (Agg) o
f sugar beet was negative for all combinations indicating
that sugar beet is dominated component in the present study. Intercropping
faba bean with sugar beet with the application of 80 kg N + 30 m3
FYM/fad
achieved higher total income and monetary advanta
ge index (MAI) than the
other treatments. Growing sugar beet plants in both sides of beds (1.2 m
width) with one faba bean row in middle of sugar beet beds with the applica-
tion of 80 kg N + 30 m3
FYM/fad decreased mineral N fertilizer rate by
11.11% of the recommended sugar beet mineral N fertilizer rate,
as well as
increased land usage and profitability for Egyptian farmers compared with
sugar beet solid culture.
Keywords
Intercropping, Sugar Beet, Faba Bean, Mineral N Fertilizer, FYM, Cerealine,
Competitive Relationships, Intercropping Economic Advantage
1. Introduction
Nowadays food problem is one of the most important problems in the world, at-
tributed to the drastically growing numbers of the population, limited cultivated
area and declining availability of fresh irrigation water. Thus, the challenge of
sustainable agriculture is more serious in developing countries, including Egypt.
Population growth always requires an increase in the use of available environ-
mental resources around the world. It is considerable pressure on available en-
vironmental resources especially water that is one of the major factors in arid
and semiarid regions [1]. The limited water resources in Egypt are the most
pressing factors of water issues. However, increased cropping systems to meet
world demands will require an increase of 40% in the area of harvest major crops
by 2030, and that the amount of water allocated to irrigation must increase cor-
respondingly by 14% [2]. One of the main problems associated with the Egyp-
tian agricultural system is the low size of cultivated land per farmer. On average,
42.9% of the farmers own or work in field one fad (4200 m2) or less [3]. Howev-
er, the low soil quality, such as the low hydraulic quality, high soil impedance,
salt content and organic matter scarcity, limit the soil productivity seriously [4].
Accordingly, the agriculture intensification had become an urgent necessity to

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 371 Agricultural Sciences
optimize the utilizing of limited cultivated areas and to maximize the monetary
returns of unit area [5].
Sugar beet (
Beta vulgaris
L.) is one of the most important sugar crops in the
world. It is one of the most important crops for sugar production after sugar
cane in Egypt. It has the ability to grown on newly reclaimed soils that suffer
from salinity, sodic and calcareous soils [6]. Also, faba bean (
Vicia faba
L.) is a
major leguminous crop that grown in Egypt; it is an important source of protein
for human and animal consumption and it plays a role in the crop rotation.
However, the total production of these crops is still insufficient to cover local
consumption. From the above-mentioned facts, there is a great need to minim-
ize the gap between food material production and consumption by improving
the productivity of unit area and crop quality especially in the newly reclaimed
area and raising unit area productivity simultaneously through intercropping. In
this concern, several investigators found that maximum values of land equiva-
lent ratio (LER) that recorded 1.36 and 1.38 were obtained by intercropping faba
bean with sugar beet in the first and second seasons, respectively along with the
highest values of total income [7] [8] and [9]. Moreover, the relative crowding
coefficient (RCC) in intercropping faba bean with sugar beet exceeded the unit
indicating that yield advantage of both components was higher than expected,
faba bean was the dominant crops and sugar beet was the dominated [10].
According to Sharma and Mittra [11], the use of inorganic fertilizers alone has
not been helpful under intensive agriculture because it aggravates soil degrada-
tion. It has been found that increasing mineral N fertilization rate up to 92
kg/fad had significantly increased root fresh weight, root, and sugar yield but
decreased sucrose percentage [12]. Consequently, attention is focused on using
various forms of organo-mineral fertilizer composts as partial substitutions to
mineral fertilizers. Such practices should be investigated under normal or saline
conditions in arid and semi-arid regions as sources of nutrients. Organic ma-
nure, such as farmyard manure (FYM), green manure, organic amendment and
municipal solid waste, has been used as a source of plant nutrients and organic
matter to improve fertility conditions of agricultural lands for a long time [13].
Particularly, Celik
et al
. [14] showed that the addition of organic materials of
various origins to soil has been one of the most common practices to improve
soil physical properties. Thus, FYM is a vital organic resource and their exten-
sively used in soil management for sustainable agriculture [15].
Recently, some investigators tried to utilize the FYM and bio fertilization to
decrease the cost and minimize the pollution compared to mineral fertilizers and
drainage water, where Zalat and Nemeat Alla [16] reported that manure could
be an available source of nutrients for sugar beet. Also, Javaheri
et al.
[17] found
that FYM surpassed the check treatment (without FYM) for sugar beet traits
(root diameter, root length, fresh weight of root, and root, top and sugar yield
per fad), whereas percentages of the total soluble solids and sucrose were tended
to decrease with the addition of FYM with 20 tons/fad [7]. The application of

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 372 Agricultural Sciences
manure (30 tons/ha) before planting sugar beet crop, resulted in a 17% increase
in sugar yield [18]. However, Maid and Fischbeck [19] studied the effects of
long-term organic manuring and additional doses of mineral N-fertilizer (0, 80,
160, and 240 kg N/ha) on growth and quality of sugar beet. They found that
sugar beet without manure treatment always developed higher sugar content and
lower concentrations of alpha-amino-N, sodium and, potassium (K) compared
with beet from plots with manure application. Moreover, application of FYM
with a rate of 20 tons/fad significantly increased shoot, root and sugar yields/fad
of sugar beet [20].
Obviously, there were under-ground interactions and rhizosphere effects be-
tween intercropped crops, which have an important role in the advantage effect
of intercropping [21]. On the other hand, Abdel-Wahab and Said [22] showed
that the highest plant dry matter, total N-content and yield of broad bean were
achieved when compost was combined with Serratia and applied to the soil. Or-
ganic manure gave superiority in total pods yield and its components of the
broad bean as mentioned by Mahmoud
et al
. [23]. In another study, Mohamed
and Gomaa [24] indicated that the biofertilization of faba bean with the com-
bined inoculum of
Rhizobium
and
Candida
when accompanied with either 5 m3
or 10 m3 of FYM increased each of pods number/plant, seeds number/pod and
pod weight. Certainly, microbes have a high ability to convert or mineralize or-
ganic N fertilizers to nitrate and ammonium [25]. The application of 100 kg
mineral N/fad to sugar beet produced the highest growth trait followed by 80 kg
N/fad along with bio fertilization [26]. They added that the highest root and top
yields obtained from adding 100 kg N/fad, while sugar yield was highest with the
combination of bio fertilization (
Azotobacter
or
Azosperlum
) along 60 or 80 kg
N /fad followed by 100 kg N/fad. Consequently, application of 90 or 72 kg min-
eral N in combination with biofertilizers (Cerealine or Rizobacterien) in inter-
cropping faba ben with sugar beet recorded the highest LER and net income
compared with the other treatments [27]. The objective of this research was to
reduce mineral N inputs of sugar beet with increased land use efficiency and
profitability under intercropping conditions.
2. Materials and Methods
A-two year study was carried out at EL-Serw Agricultural Experiments and Re-
search Station (Lat. 31˚24'59"N, Long. 31˚48'47"E, 16 m a.s.l.), Agricultural Re-
search Center (ARC), Damietta governorate, Egypt during two successive sea-
sons; 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 to reduce mineral N inputs of sugar beet with
increased land use efficiency and profitability under intercropping conditions.
This study included seven treatments as follows: T1: Intercropping faba bean
with sugar beet with application of 90 kg N/fad. T2: Intercropping faba bean with
sugar beet with application of 90 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad. T3: Intercropping faba
bean with sugar beet with application of 80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM /fad. T4: Inter-
cropping faba bean with sugar beet with application of 70 kg N + 30 m3 FYM

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 373 Agricultural Sciences
/fad. T5: Intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with application of 400 g of
Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM /fad. T6: Solid culture of sugar beet with application of
the recommended N fertilizer rate (90 kg N/fad). T7: Solid culture of faba bean
with application of the recommended N fertilizer rate (20 kg N/fad). Sugar beet
cultivar “Gloria” and faba bean (
Vicia faba
L. var. major) cultivar “Spanish” were
used in this study. Rice crop was the preceding crop and the furrow irrigation
was the irrigation system in the region. Physical and chemical properties of the
soil (0 - 20 cm depth) were analyzed by Chemistry and Soils Laboratory,
EL-Serw Agricultural Experiments and Research Station, ARC (Table 1) ac-
cording to Chapman and Pratt [28]. Calcium super phosphate (15.5% P2O5) was
applied at rate of 200 kg /fad during soil preparation in the two winter seasons.
Mineral N fertilizer was applied in form of urea (46% N) in two equal doses; the
first dose was applied after thinning (35 days after sowing) and the second one
was applied before the third irrigation (70 days after sowing) according to every
treatment.
Fifty kg/fad from K sulfate (48.0% K2O) was applied in two equal doses; the
first dose was applied during soil perpetration and the second one was applied
with the second dose of N fertilization. Cerialine (
Azospirillum brzsilense
and
Bacillus polymyxa
) as commercial products were produced by Bio fertilizer Unit,
Agriculture Research Center (ARC), Giza, Egypt, which included free-living bac-
teria able to fix atmospheric N in the rhizosphere of soil. FYM that included 30
m3/fad was incorporated into the soil before sowing according to each treatment.
FYM was analyzed by Chemistry and Soils Laboratory, EL-Serw Agricultural Ex-
periments and Research Station, ARC (Table 2).
Table 1. Physical and chemical properties of the soil in the experimental site in two
growing seasons (2016/2017 and 2017/2018).
Soil properties (0 - 20 cm depth)
Growing season
Physical analysis
2016/2017
2017/2018
Coarse sand (%) 1.99 1.88
Fine sand (%)
8.85
9.32
Silt (%)
22.36
22.50
Clay (%)
66.90
66.55
Texture class
Clay
Clay
Chemical analysis
pH
7.25
7.50
Organic matter, %
0.91
0.94
Available phosphorus “P” (ppm)
9.32
9.47
Available potassium “K” (ppm)
194.23
198.12
Available N (ppm)
42.34
44.52
Electrical conductivity (E.C.ds/m2)
4.92
4.37
Exchangeable sodium “Na” (%)
8.87
8.32

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 374 Agricultural Sciences
Table 2. Analysis of FYM in the two growing seasons (2016/2017 and 2017/2018).
Properties
Growing season
2016/2017
2017/2018
pH
8.04
7.51
Electrical conductivity (E.C. ds/m2)
3.27
3.12
Organic matter (%)
10.63
10.40
C/N ratio (%)
12.04
11.92
N (ppm)
0.01
0.02
P (ppm)
0.27
0.30
K (ppm)
3.96
3.74
Moisture (%)
30.0
30.00
Seeds of sugar beet and faba bean were inoculated with Cerealine at a rate of
400 g/fad and Arabic gum was used as a sticking agent at sowing. Sugar beet and
faba bean seeds were sown on 1st and 5th October in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018
seasons, respectively. Faba bean and sugar beet yields were harvested on 5th
March and 20th April in 2016/2017 and 12th March and 25th April in 2017/2018
seasons, respectively. Sugar beet (main crop) seeds were sown on both sides of
the beds (1.2 m width) with leaving one plant/hill distanced at 20 cm (35,000
plants/fad). Faba bean (intercrop) seeds were planted in two rows in the middle
of sugar beet beds with leaving two plants/hill distanced at 25 cm (56,000
plants/fad). Solid culture of sugar beet plants was conducted by growing their
seeds on both sides of the beds (1.2 m width) with leaving one plant/hill (35,000
plants/fad). Solid culture of faba bean plants was conducted by growing their
seeds in two rows on ridges (60 cm width) with leaving two plants/hill distanced
at 20 cm (140,000 plants/fad). The common agricultural practices for growing
sugar beet and faba bean were used according to the technical recommendations.
A randomized complete block design with three replicates was used. The plot
area was 10.8 m2. Each plot consisted of three beds (3.0 m long and 1.2 m wide)
under solid culture of sugar beet and intercropping. Under solid culture of faba
bean, each plot consisted of six ridges (3.0 m long and 0.6 m wide).
2.1. Data Recorded
2.1.1. Sugar Beet Traits
1) Yield and its attributes:
At harvest date (200 days from sugar beet sowing), ten plants were randomly
taken from each plot to estimate the following traits: number of leaves/plant, leaf
area/plant (cm2), root length (cm), root diameter (cm), root weight/plant (g) and
top weight/plant (g). Top and root yields/fad (ton/fad) were recorded on the ba-
sis of experimental plot area by harvesting all plants of each plot (one ha = 2.38
fad), meanwhile sugar yield/fad (ton) was calculated by root yield/fad (ton) ×
root sucrose (%).

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 375 Agricultural Sciences
2) Chemical analysis of sugar beet:
Samples of 26 g fresh root were taken for each treatment to determine:
a) Total soluble solids percentage (TSS %).
It was estimated by using refractometer set according to A.O.A.C. [29].
Sucrose percentage: It was estimated by using sucrometer set.
b) Purity percentage
It was estimated as method outlined by Carruthers and Oldfield [30] as fol-
lows:
( ) ( )
( )
Sucrose %
Purity % 100
TSS %
= ×
2.1.2. Faba Bean Traits
At harvest date, ten plants were randomly taken from each plot to estimate the
following traits: Plant height (cm), number of branches/plant, pod length (cm),
number of pods/plant, number of seeds/pod, 100-seed weight (g), seed yield/plant
(g). Seed yield/fad (ardab = 155 kg) was recorded on the basis of experimental
plot area by harvesting all plants of each plot (one ha = 2.38 fad).
2.1.3. Competitive Relationships
1) Land equivalent ratio (LER)
It was calculated as the sum of the fractions of the yields or the intercrops rel-
ative to their sole yield according to Andrews and Kassam [31].
LER
ab ba
aa bb
YY
YY
= +
where;
Yab
= Intercropped crop yield a (sugar beet),
Yba
= Intercropped crop
yield b (faba bean),
Yaa
= solid crop a (sugar beet),
Ybb
= Solid crop b (faba bean).
2) Land equivalent coefficient (LEC)
LEC is a measure of interaction concerned with the strength of relationship
[32]. It is calculated as follows: LEC =
La
×
Lb
, where:
La
= relative yield of crop
a (sugar beet) and
Lb
= relative yield of crop b (faba bean).
3) Relative crowding coefficient (RCC)
It was estimated by multiplying the coefficient (RCC) for the first crop (
Kab
)
by the coefficient of the second crop (
Kba
) as according to Banik
et al
. [33].
( ) ( )
,
ab ba ba ab
ab ba
aa ab ab bb ba ba
YZ YZ
KK
YY Z YY Z
××
= =
−× −×
where;
Zab
= the area ratio of the crop (a) when intercropping,
Zba
= the area ratio
of the crop (b) when intercropping. Then, relative crowding coefficient (RCC) was
evaluated as follows:
RCC
ab ba
KK= ×
4) Aggressivity (Agg)
It mean a comparison of how much relative yield increase for the inter-
cropped crop (a) on crop (b) with the expected crop to find out which of the two

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 376 Agricultural Sciences
crops dominated in yield according to Mc-Gilchrist [34].
For crop (a),
ab ba
ab
aa ab bb ba
YY
AYZ YZ
= −
××
and for crop (b),
ba ab
ba
bb ba aa ab
YY
AYZ YZ
= −
××
2.1.4. Intercropping Economic Advantage
1) Total income
It was calculated by determining the total income of intercropping culture as
compared to solid culture of sugar beet as follows: Total income of intercropping
cultures = Price of sugar beet yield + price of faba bean yield.
2) Monetary advantage index (MAI)
MAI suggests that the economic assessment should be in terms of the value of
land saved; this could probably be most assessed on the basis of the rentable val-
ue of this land. MAI was calculated according to the formula, suggested by Wil-
ley [35]. MAI = [Value of combined intercrops × (LER − 1)]/LER. MAI value
indicates the profit of the cropping system. The average prices of both cops were
480 L.E. per ton of sugar beet roots and 843 L.E. per ardab of faba bean seeds.
One USD = 15 Livre Egyptian (L.E.). These statistics were presented by Bulletin
of Statistical Cost Production and Net Return [36].
2.2. Statistical Analysis
All data were statistically analyzed according to the technique of analysis of va-
riance (ANOVA) for randomized complete block design by means of
“MSTAT-C” software package and least significant difference (LSD) method was
used to test the differences between treatment means at 5 % levels of probability,
as published by Gomez and Gomez [37].
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Sugar Beet Traits
Data in Table 3 show that all the studied traits of sugar beet were significantly
influenced by different N fertilizer combinations in both seasons. Data indicate
that intercropped sugar beet plants fertilized with T2 (90 kg N + 30 m3
FYM/fad) gave the highest number of leaves/plant, leaf area/plant, root length,
root diameter and root weight/plant followed by intercropped sugar beet
plants that fertilized with T3 (80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) compared with the
other treatments in both seasons. Meanwhile, the highest top weight/plant (g)
was recorded by intercropping faba bean with sugar beet that fertilized with T3
(80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) compared with the other treatments in both seasons.
Obviously, an increase in mineral N fertilizer application can stabilize organic

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 377 Agricultural Sciences
Table 3. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives and mineral N fertilizer rates on some sugar
beet traits in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons.
Treatment
No. of
leaves/
plant
Leaf area /
plant
(cm2)
Root
length
(cm)
Root
diameter
(cm)
Root
weight/
plant (g)
Top weight/
plant (g)
Yield (ton/fad)
T.S.S.
(%)
Purity
(%)
Sucrose
(%)
Top
Root
Sugar
2016/2017 season
T
1
23.67
10,821.67
23.22
10.22
718.82
560.00
27.49
30.09
5.80
22.70
84.98
19.29
T
2
35.55
13,523.33
28.67
15.55
961.70
695.43
32.43
34.33
5.93
21.42
80.86
17.32
T
3
30.89
12,588.33
27.22
14.33
875.46
681.77
28.65
32.83
5.90
21.91
82.10
17.99
T
4
29.56
11,505.67
26.22
12.26
785.41
669.10
23.47
27.04
5.29
23.80
82.35
19.60
T5
19.33
6165.00
19.56
7.40
601.30
484.67
18.70
20.77
4.21
24.32
83.35
20.27
T6
27.00
12,238.00
24.89
12.16
792.03
634.33
30.74
37.01
7.23
22.78
85.91
19.57
LSD at 5%
1.60
239.10
1.28
0.08
49.40
45.00
5.32
3.51
0.66
1.26
1.79
0.27
2017/2018 season
T
1
25.00
11,050.00
23.22
11.34
758.90
683.92
31.33
33.43
6.57
23.69
80.81
19.66
T
2
36.35
13,929.33
29.33
16.63
1092.32
800.02
33.06
35.38
6.23
22.40
80.22
17.97
T
3
33.80
12,734.33
28.22
15.34
1047.88
792.22
31.47
34.21
6.37
23.20
80.39
18.65
T
4
29.67
11,635.00
27.21
13.29
919.00
782.43
29.97
33.01
6.65
24.98
80.70
20.16
T
5
19.67
6338.33
20.67
8.49
622.67
586.67
23.48
26.25
5.48
25.85
82.99
20.89
T
6
28.33
12,473.33
25.22
13.16
819.00
737.57
34.49
37.60
7.46
23.71
83.76
19.86
LSD at 5%
1.87
287.14
1.08
0.11
49.18
47.86
0.79
1.63
0.28
0.21
2.72
0.56
matter and retard the mineralization of older soil organic matter [38].
It is important to mention that the biological N fixation by faba bean
should be considered, but in this experiment, there was no way to determine the
amount of N derived from fixation and absorption from the soil. Also, the N
percentage in FYM was neglected (Table 2) and not considered in this study be-
cause of its small value. These results may be due to FYM that contained an ac-
ceptable percentage of organic matter (Table 2) integrated positively with 90 or
even 80 kg N/fad to enhance sugar beet plants for absorbing more soil nutrients
than the application of the recommended rate of mineral N fertilizer only. Ac-
cording to Johnston
et al
. [39], soil organic matter accumulation improved soil
quality through its extensive impacts on soil physical, chemical and biological
properties. Generally, changes in soil organic matter strongly influence soil N
turnover because of the importance of available carbon for microbial immobili-
zation [40].
However, solid culture of sugar beet with the application of T1 (90 kg N/fad)
gave the highest top, root and sugar yields/fad, as well as the percentage of purity
compared with the other treatments in both seasons. These results could be at-
tributed to increase in mineral N fertilizer rate from 70 to 90 kg N/fad increased
photosynthetic activities within sugar plants which reflected on greater top, root

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 378 Agricultural Sciences
and sugar production per unit area. This was expected as a high N rate enhanced
vegetative growth and consequently the absorption of other nutrients to meet
the growth demand.
Accordingly, it is expected that the uptake of soil N by sugar beet plants in-
creased by increasing the application rate of mineral N fertilizer from 70 to 90 kg
N/fad with regardless FYM. The positive effect of N fertilizer might be due to the
increased efficiency of N-fertilization in building up metabolites translocations
from leaves to developing roots, thus increased dry matter accumulation [41] as
a result of enhancing meristematic activity, stimulation of cell elongation and
auxin production [42]. The increase in sugar beet yield/fad of solid culture was
related to the increased root yield/fad as reported by Abd-El-Kader [43].
Although N fixation by legume component in the intercrops was not neces-
sary to increase soil N stocks with increasing mineral N fertilizer level from 70 to
90 kg N/fad, intercropping faba bean with sugar beet that fertilized with 70 or 80
kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad came in the second rank for root and sugar yields/fad af-
ter T6 treatment. These results may be due to the variation between the inter-
crops in their roots changed three dimensions of the rhizosphere of sugar beet
roots (from the top to the bottom of the soil profile, from North to South and
East to West); and in turn soil N, P, K, and OM stocks were increased. Legume
component in the intercrops had an important role in the available soil contents
that could increase soil carbon which may contribute to better soil structure
[44]. Also, FYM played an important role in enhancing and restoring a range of
natural properties of the soil [45]. These results reveal that intercropping faba
bean with sugar be
et al
tered the dynamics of organic matter turnover and the
rate of nutrient cycling within the soil with decreasing mineral N fertilizer rate
from 90 to 70 kg N/fad. Intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with the appli-
cation of T5 (400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM/fad) had the highest percentages of
T.S.S. and sucrose followed by T4 (70 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) compared with the
other treatments in both seasons. These results may be due to the
Azospirillum
brzsilense
and
Bacillus polymyxa
(Cerealine) induced increases in percentages of
T.S.S. and sucrose especially at an acceptable percentage of organic matter
(Table 2) as result of modification of the structure of soil microbial communi-
ties, production of exudates by bacteria and changes in levels of available nu-
trients. Thus, it is expected that this biological positive effect was enhanced by
the high percentage of moisture in FYM (Table 2) that reflected on regulation
soil temperature and thereby enhancing chemical and biological activities of the
rhizosphere of sugar beet. In this concern, Timmusk and Wagner [46] showed
that
Paenibacillus polymyxa
belongs to the group of plant growth-promoting
rhizobacteria. Certainly, bio-fertilizers are extremely benefited in enriching soil
fertility with those micro-organisms, which fix atmospheric N and make plant
nutrients more available [47]. N-fixing bacteria play a distinct role in the plant
growth through their effect on N-element availability in the rhizosphere in
which the plant was grown [48].

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 379 Agricultural Sciences
Obviously, increasing rate of mineral N fertilizer per fad from 80 to 90 kg
N/fad was not economically efficient and reduced percentages of T.S.S. and su-
crose. Particularly, Afify
et al
. [49] reported that the inoculation of sugar beet
seed with
Bacillus megaterium
recorded the highest percentage of sucrose for
five seasons. Meanwhile, organic manure generally increased the percentage of
sucrose [50]. These results are in agreement with those obtained by Ali [51] who
showed that the percentage of T.S.S% was significantly increased when plants
inoculated by
Bacillus megaterium
. Moreover, Omar [52] found that extractable
sucrose were slightly increased as FYM increased to 15 and 25 m3/fad in two
seasons.
3.2. Faba Bean Traits
Data in Table 4 indicate that all studied traits of faba bean were significantly af-
fected by different N fertilizer combinations in both seasons. Data indicate that
solid culture of faba bean with the application of T7 (20 kg N/fad) gave the
highest plant height, number of seeds/pod and seed yield/fad compared with
the other treatments in both seasons. With regard to plant height, solid culture
of faba bean probably formed unfavorable environmental conditions for faba
bean growth and development and consequently more amounts of plant hor-
mones compared with intercropped faba bean with sugar beet. So, the observed
Table 4. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives and mineral N fertilizer rates on some faba
bean traits in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons.
Treatment
Plant height
(cm)
No. of branches
/plant
Pod length
(cm)
No. of
Pod /plant
No. of seeds
/pod
Seed index
(g)
Seed yield/plant
(g)
Seed yield
(ardab/fad)
2016/2017 seasons
T
1
66.01
5.67
13.33
8.33
4.44
85.57
70.78
6.41
T2 94.54 7.14 15.87 9.79 3.81 89.89 92.78 6.62
T3 83.00 6.42
15.04
11.00
4.23 115.67 108.78 7.41
T4 71.00 6.29 14.28 12.78 5.00 126.56 127.78 8.41
T
5
61.67
4.35
12.51
7.48
3.67
80.22
79.44
4.39
T7
109.47
5.81
14.43
10.78
4.96
86.89
87.03
14.57
LSD at 5%
5.47
0.37
0.45
1.47
0.79
31.34
13.75
0.42
2017/2018 seasons
T
1
85.23
6.11
14.57
11.56
4.33
85.22
84.22
7.07
T2
104.64
7.46
16.67
10.78
5.78
92.00
93.89
6.70
T
3
93.34
6.22
15.68
13.00
5.22
117.67
103.89
7.77
T
4
83.55
5.43
14.65
15.78
5.33
125.53
134.22
8.66
T
5
73.10
3.90
12.11
9.67
3.66
82.22
82.78
4.81
T
7
115.74
7.11
17.40
13.78
5.22
106.22
118.89
15.79
LSD at 5%
5.89
0.96
0.79
1.59
0.81
3.05
9.51
0.14

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 380 Agricultural Sciences
response in plant height of soybean may be primarily attributed to an increase
of internode elongation of faba bean plant as a result of increasing plant hor-
mones. With respect to number of seeds/pod, these data may be attributed to
intra-specific competition for basic growth resources between the same species
(faba bean) was less than inter-specific competition between the two species (fa-
ba bean + sugar beet).
On the other hand, it seems that faba bean plant density per unit area played a
major role in its productivity per unit area where it reached 40% of solid culture
under intercropping conditions. Similar results were obtained by Mohammed
et
al
. [7], El-Ghobashi [8], Abdel-Galil
et al
. [9] and El-Shamy
et al
. [27]. who in-
dicated that faba bean productivity was lower in intercropping than solid plant-
ings. On the other hand, the highest number of branches/plant and pod length
were achieved by intercropped faba bean plants that fertilized with T2 (90 kg N +
30 m3 FYM/fad) followed by intercropped faba bean plants that fertilized with T3
(80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) compared with the other treatments in both seasons.
These results could be due to the application of 90 kg N+ 30 m3 FYM/fad leng-
thened the vegetative stage and enhanced efficiency of the photosynthetic process
of faba bean which reflected on number of branches/plant and pod length.
Meanwhile, intercropped faba bean plants that fertilized with T4 (70 kg N + 30
m3 FYM/fad) gave the highest number of pods per plant, number of seeds per
pod, seed index and seed yield per plant compared with the other treatments in
both seasons. It is worthy to note that intercropping faba bean with sugar beet
that fertilized with 70 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad came in the second rank for seed
yield/fad after solid culture of faba bean that fertilized with 20 kg N/fad. These
results could be attributed to a decrease in mineral N fertilizer rate from 90 to 70
kg N/fad enhanced the efficiency of faba bean to fix more atmospheric N2 and
solubilize P as a result of the production of organic acids and enzymes [53]. It is
known that the interaction between soil type, plant species and rhizosphere loca-
lization of bacterial community affected bacterial community composition [54].
Moreover, the contents of FYM (Table 2) may be integrated positively with rhi-
zobia of faba bean plants in their rhizosphere. Adequate moisture availability in
soil increased various physiological processes, better of nutrients uptake, higher
rates of photosynthesis which might reflected on more number and area of
leaves and higher yields [55]. Thus, it is likely that the intercropping faba bean
with sugar beet that fertilized with 70 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad sustained growth
of new tillers development during pod-setting and seed filling compared with
the other treatments as a result of increasing soil N availability. These results
show that there was some degree of resource complimentarily between the two
species by decreasing mineral N fertilizer rate from 90 to 70 kg N/fad.
3.3. Competitive Relationships
3.3.1. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER)
Data in Figure 1 show that relative yield (RY) of sugar beet contributed positively

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 381 Agricultural Sciences
Figure 1. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives
and mineral N fertilizer rates on LER in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons.
in LER more than RY of faba bean in both seasons. LER values were ranged be-
tween 0.86 and 1.40 in the first season and 1.00 and 1.41 in the second season. In
general, the highest LER was achieved when faba bean intercropped with sugar
beet and fertilized by T3 (80 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad). On the other hand, the
lowest LER (0.86 and 1.00 in the first and second seasons, respectively) was
achieved by the application of T5 (400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM/fad) for in-
tercropping faba bean with sugar beet.
It is likely that that T5 (400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM/fad) increased intra
and inter-specific competition between the same and different species, respec-
tively for climatic and edaphic environmental conditions compared with the
other treatments. These results reveal that application of 80 kg N +30 m3
FYM/fad for intercropping faba bean with sugar beet caused a yield advantage
because of the component crops were differed in their utilization of growth re-
sources. Similar results were obtained by El-Shamy
et al
. [27] and Hamadany
and El-Aassar [56].
3.3.2. Land Equivalent Coefficient (LEC)
LEC is a measure of interaction concerned with the strength of relationship. LEC

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 382 Agricultural Sciences
is used for a two-crop mixture the minimum expected productivity coefficient
(PC) is 25 percent, that is, a yield advantage is obtained if LEC value was ex-
ceeded 0.25. Data in Figure 2 show that relative yield (RY) of sugar beet contri-
buted positively in LEC more than RY of faba bean in both seasons. LEC values
were ranged between 0.30 and 0.45 in the first season and 0.30 and 0.46 in the
second season. In general, the highest LEC was achieved when faba bean inter-
cropped with sugar beet and fertilized by T3 (80 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad). On the
other hand, the lowest LEC (0.30 in both seasons) was achieved by the applica-
tion of T5 (400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM/fad) for intercropping faba bean with
sugar beet.
It is likely that that T5 (400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM/fad) increased intra
and inter-specific competition between the same and different species, respec-
tively for climatic and edaphic environmental conditions compared with the
other treatments. Application of T3 (80 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad) for intercropping
faba bean with sugar beet caused a yield advantage because of the component
crops were differed in their utilization of growth resources.
3.3.3. Relative Crowding Coefficient (RCC)
Data in Figure 3 indicate that RCC was higher than the unit advantage in all
Figure 2. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives
and mineral N fertilizer rates on LEC in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons.

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 383 Agricultural Sciences
Figure 3. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives
and mineral N fertilizer rates on RCC in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons.
treatments in both seasons. The best results were obtained by application of T2
(90 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) for intercropping faba bean with sugar beet (10.68
and 11.75 in the first and second seasons, respectively) followed by T3 (80 kg N +
30 m3 FYM/fad). Meanwhile, the reverse was true for T5 (400 g of Cerealine + 30
m3 FYM/fad) in both seasons, where RCC value was 0.55 in the first season and
1.01 in the second season. These results could be due to the increase in mineral
N fertilizer rate from 70 to 90 kg N/fad integrated positively with FYM to en-
hance growth and yield components traits for both species that reflected posi-
tively on their yields. Similar results are in accordance with El-Din [10].
3.3.4. Aggressivity (Agg)
Results in Figure 4 show that faba bean was the dominant intercropped compo-
nents and sugar beet was dominated in all treatments in both seasons. These re-
sults may be due to there was higher intra-specific competition between plants of
sugar beet than faba bean plants for available environmental resources. The
present results reveal clearly that plants of faba bean had higher competitive ab-
ilities for basic growth resources than sugar beet plants. Faba bean was more ag-
gressive than that of sugar beet. Accordingly, decreasing mineral N fertilizer rate
from 90 to 70 kg N/fad generated high competition for assimilate distribution

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 384 Agricultural Sciences
Figure 4. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives
and mineral N fertilizer rates on Agg in 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 seasons.
between organs of sugar beet plant, and then affected negatively top, root and
sugar yield/fad.
3.4. Intercropping Economic Advantage
3.4.1. Total Income
Total income of intercropped faba bean with sugar beet compared with solid cul-
ture of sugar beet are shown in Table 5. Total income values were ranged between
13,561 L.E./fad and 21,907 L.E./fad in the first season, and 16,544 L.E./fad and
22,946 L.E./fad in the second season.
Intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with application of T2 (90 kg N +30
m3 FYM/fad) and T3 (80 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad) increased total income by 23.31
and 22.91%, respectively, compared with solid culture of sugar beet in the first
season. In the second season, intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with ap-
plication of T4 (70 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad) and T3 (80 kg N +30 m3 FYM/fad) in-
creased total income by 27.13 and 26.28%, respectively, compared with solid
culture of sugar beet.
3.4.2. MAI
The economic performance of the intercropping was evaluated to determine if

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 385 Agricultural Sciences
Table 5. Response of intercropping faba bean with sugar beet to bio-organic additives
and mineral N fertilizer rates on intercropping economic advantage in 2016/2017 and
2017/2018 seasons.
Treatments
Total income (L.E./fad)
MAI
2016/2017
2017/2018
2016/2017
2017/2018
T1
19,691
21,844
3938.20
5542.50
T2
21,907
22,476
6032.36
6070.16
T3
21,835
22,792
6238.57
6512.00
T4
19,867
22,946
4701.35
6672.24
T5
13,561
16,544
--
--
T6
17,765
18,048
--
--
faba bean and sugar beet combined yields are high enough for the farmers to
adopt this system. In the first season, intercropping faba bean with sugar beet
with application of T3 (80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) were higher in MAI than the
other treatments (Table 5). Meanwhile, intercropping faba bean with sugar beet
with application of T4 (70 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad) or T3 (80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM)
were higher in MAI than the other treatments in the second one. There were
gradual and consistent increases in MAI values with decreasing mineral N ferti-
lizer rate from 90 to 80 kg N/fad under intercropping conditions. These results
reveal that intercropping faba bean with sugar beet with application of 80 kg N +
30 m3 FYM/fad gave high MAI and could be recommended. Application of T5
(400 g of Cerealine + 30 m3 FYM/fad) for intercropping faba bean with sugar
beet resulted in a major economic loss as evidence of MAI demonstrated this
economic failure with application of Cerialine as a supplement to mineral nitro-
gen deficiency. Generally, these results indicate that growing faba bean with
sugar beet that fertilized by 80 kg N + 30 m3 FYM/fad is more profitable to far-
mers than solid culture of sugar beet that received 90 kg N/fad. Similar results
were obtained by Soliman
et al
. [57] and El-Shamy
et al
. [27].
4. Conclusion
According to our results, it can be concluded that the combination of mineral N
fertilizer (80 kg N/fad) with FYM (30 m3/fad) has a better impact on the soil nu-
trient availability, yields of the intercrops (faba bean and sugar beet), competi-
tive relationships and yield advantage than growing sugar beet alone that re-
ceived the recommended mineral N fertilizer rate.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
References
[1] Zadeh, M. and Mousavi, S.F. (1996) Surface Irrigation (Theory and Practice). Pub-

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 386 Agricultural Sciences
lications Dictionary Tehran, Tehran.
[2] UNESCO (2006) Water, a Shared Responsibility, Rep. 2, World Water Assess. Pro-
gramme, Berghann, New York.
[3] Ahmed, S.E., Abou-Salama, A.M., El-Naggar, G.R. and Abdel-Motagally, F.M.F.
(2009) Studies on Legume-Black Cumin Intercropping.
Egyptian Journal of Applied
Sciences
, 24, 553-563.
[4] Yao, R.J., Yang, J.S., Chen, X.B., Yu, S.P. and Li, X.M. (2009) Fuzzy Synthetic Eval-
uation of Soil Quality in Coastal Reclamation Region of North Jiangsu Province.
Scientia Agricultura Sinica
, 42, 2019-2027. (In Chinese)
[5] Kumar, B., Tiwana, U.S., Singh, A. and Ram, H. (2014) Productivity and Quality of
Intercropped Maize (
Zea mays
L.) + Cowpea [
Vigna unguiculata
(L.) Walp.] Fodder
as Influenced by Nitrogen and Phosphorus Levels.
Range Management and Agro-
forestry
, 35, 263-267.
[6] Ouda, S.M.M. (2001) Response of Sugar Beet to N and K Fertilizers Levels under
Sandy Soil Conditions.
Zagazig Journal of Agricultural Research
, 28, 275-297.
[7] Mohammed, W.Kh., El-Metwally, A. and Saleh, S.A. (2005) Intercropping Faba
Bean at Different Plant Densities with Sugar Beet.
Egyptian Journal of Agricultural
Research
, 83, 649-663.
[8] El-Ghobashi, Y.E. (2007) Studies on Intercropping Some Winter Crops on Sugar Beet
Crop in Newly Reclaimed Soils. M.Sc. Thesis, Fac. Agric., Al-Azhar Univ., Cairo.
[9] Abdel-Galil, A.M., El-Ghobashi, Y.E. and Lamlom, M.M. (2014) Sugar Beet Produc-
tivity and Profitability as Affected by Three Cropping Systems and Mineral Nitro-
gen Fertilizer Rates.
The
8
th International Conference on Technology and Sustaina-
ble Development in the Third Millennium
, Alexandria, 22-24 November 2014,
161-188.
[10] El-Dein, A.A.M.Z. (2015) Effect of Intercropping Some Winter Crops with Sugar
Beet under Different Nitrogen Fertilizer on Yield and Its Components.
Global
Journal of Agriculture and Food Safety Sciences
, 2, 303-318.
[11] Sharma, A.R. and Mittra, B.N. (1991) Effect of Different Rates of Application of
Organic and Nitrogen Fertilizers in a Rice-Based Cropping System.
The Journal of
Agricultural Science
, 117, 313-318. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600067046
[12] El-Shafai, A.M.A. (2000) Effect of Nitrogen and Potassium on Yield and Quality of
Sugar Beet in Sohag.
Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research
, 78, 759-767.
[13] Dao, T.H. and Cavigellib, M.A. (2003) Mineralizable Carbon, Nitrogen, and Wa-
ter-Extractable Phosphorus Release from Stockpiled and Composted Manure and
Manure-Amended Soils.
Agronomy Journal
, 95, 405-413.
https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2003.0405
[14] Celik, I., Ortas, I. and Kilic, S. (2004) Effects of Compost, Mycorrhiza, Manure and
Fertilizer on Some Physical Properties of a Chromoxerert Soil.
Soil & Tillage Re-
search
, 78, 59-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2004.02.012
[15] Hassanien, H.G., Abd El-mola, S.E., Amin, A.A. and El-Sayed, H.K. (2017) Effect of
Farmyard Manure and Rate of Phosphatic Fertilizer on Phosphorus Availability and
Yield of Corn.
Assiut Journal of Agricultural Sciences
, 48, 347-355.
https://doi.org/10.21608/ajas.2016.3864
[16] Zalat, S.S. and Nemeat Alla, E.A.E. (2001) Yield and Quality of Sugar Beet as Af-
fected by Inorganic and Nitrogen Fertilizer.
Minoufiya Journal of Agricultural Re-
search
,, 26, 1187-1193.

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 387 Agricultural Sciences
[17] Javaheri, M.A., Rashidi, N., Baghizadeh, A. and Gohari, J. (2005) Influence of Or-
ganic Farm Yard Manure, Potassium and Boron on Quantity and Quality of Sugar
Beet in Bardsir Region.
Sugar Beet Journal
(
Iran
), 21, 43-56.
[18] Taleghani, D.F., Hemayati, S.S., Noshad, H., Dehghanshoar, M., Tohidloo, G. and
Hamdi, F. (2006) Effects of Different Manuring Levels on Some Quantity and Qual-
ity Factors of Sugar Beet in Wheat Sugar Beet Rotation.
Sugar Beet Journal
(
Iran
),
22, 67-78.
[19] Maid, F.X. and Fischbeck, G. (2008) Effect of Long-Term Application of Farmyard
Manure on Growth and Quality of Sugar Beet.
Journal of Agronomy and Crop
Science
, 162, 248-255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.1989.tb00714.x
[20] El-Agrodi, M.W.M., El-Zehery, T.M. and Issa, H.L. (2011) Effect of Chicken Ma-
nure and Gypsum on Sugar Beet (
Betavulgaris
,
var
.
saccharifora
, L.) under Saline
Condition.
Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering
, 2, 701-716.
https://doi.org/10.21608/jssae.2011.55652
[21] Zhang, F. and Li, L. (2003) Using Competitive and Facilitative Interactions in In-
tercropping Systems Enhances Crop Productivity and Nutrient-Use Efficiency.
Plant and Soil
, 248, 305-312. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022352229863
[22] Abdel-Wahab, A.F. and Said, M.S. (2004) Response of Faba Bean to Bio and Organ-
ic Fertilization under Calcareous Soil Conditions.
Egyptian Journal of Applied
Sciences
, 19, 305-320.
[23] Mahmoud, A.R., Hafez, M.M. and Abd-Elal, F.S. (2004) Comparative Study for Us-
ing Organic Manure as Individual and/or Mixing It with Chemical Fertilizer and
Their Effects on the Productivity of
Vicia faba
Plants.
The Journal of Agricultural
Science
, 29, 1345-1354.
[24] Mohamed, H.A. and Gomaa, A.M. (2005) Faba Bean Growth and Green Yield and
Its Quality as Influenced by the Application of Bio-Organic Farming System.
Jour-
nal of Applied Sciences Research
, 1, 380-385.
[25] Moore, A., Stark, J., Brown, B. and Hopkins, B. (2009) Sugar Beets. Southern Idaho
Fertilizer Guide. University of Idaho Extension, Moscow.
[26] Mahmoud, E.A., Ramadan, B.S.H., El-Geddawy, I.H. and Korany, S.F. (2014) Effect
of Mineral and Biofertilization on Productivity of Sugar Beet.
Journal of Plant Pro-
duction
, 5, 699-710. https://doi.org/10.21608/jpp.2014.53887
[27] El-Shamy, M.A., Hamadany, M.K. and Abdel-Dayem, I.M. (2016) Effect of Faba
Bean Sowing Distance and Some Combinations of Mineral Nitrogen Levels with Bio
Fertilizers on Sugar Beet and Faba Bean Productivity under Intercropping System
Egyptian Journal of Agronomy
, 38, 489-507.
https://doi.org/10.21608/agro.2017.291.1030
[28] Chapman, H.D. and Pratt, P.E. (1961) Methods of Analysis for Soils, Plants and
Waters. Division of Agricultural Sciences, University of California, San Diego.
[29] A.O.A.C. (1990) Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Agri-
cultural Chemists. 15th Edition, Washington DC.
[30] Carruthers, A. and Oldfield, J.F.T. (1960) Methods for the Assessment of Sugar Beet
Quality.
International Sugar Journal
, 63, 72-74.
[31] Andrews, D.J. and Kassam, A.H. (1976) The Importance of Multiple Cropping in
Increasing World Food Supplies. In: Papendick, R.I., Sanchez, A. and Triplett, G.B.,
Eds.,
Multiple Cropping
, Spec. Publ. No. 27, Am. Soc. of Agron., Madison, 1-10.
https://doi.org/10.2134/asaspecpub27.c1

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 388 Agricultural Sciences
[32] Adetiloye, P.O., Ezedinma, F.O.C. and Okigbo, B.N. (1983) A Land Equivalent
Coefficient Concept for the Evaluation of Competitive and Productive Interactions
on Simple Complex Mixtures.
Ecological Modelling
, 19, 27-39.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3800(83)90068-6
[33] Banik, P., Midya, A., Sarkar, B.K. and Ghose, S.S. (2006) Wheat and Chickpea In-
tercropping Systems in an Additive Series Experiment: Advantages and Weed
Smothering.
European Journal of Agronomy
, 24, 325-332.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2005.10.010
[34] Mc-Gilchrist, C.A. (1965) Analysis of Competition on Experiments.
Biometrics
, 21,
975-985. https://doi.org/10.2307/2528258
[35] Willey, R.W. (1979) Intercropping Its Importance and Research Needs. Part I:
Competition and Yield Advantages.
Field Crops Abstract
, 32, 1-10.
[36] Bulletin of Statistical Cost Production and Net Return (2017) Winter Field Crops
and Vegetables and Fruit. Agriculture Statistics and Economic Sector, Ministry of
Egyptian Agriculture and Land Reclamation, Part (1), February 2017, Egypt.
[37] Gomez, K.N. and Gomez, A.A. (1984) Statistical Procedures for Agric. Research.
2nd Edition, J. Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 68 p.
[38] Hagedorn, F., Spinnler, D. and Siegwolf, R. (2003) Increased N Deposition Retards
Mineralization of Old Soil Organic Matter.
Soil Biology and Biochemistry
, 35,
1683-1692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2003.08.015
[39] Johnston, A.E., Poulton, P.R. and Coleman, K. (2009) Soil Organic Matter: Its Im-
portance in Sustainable Agriculture and Carbon Dioxide Fluxes.
Advances in
Agronomy
, 101, 1-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(08)00801-8
[40] Paré, M.C. and Bedard-Haughn, A. (2013) Soil Organic Matter Quality Influences
Mineralization and GHG Emissions in Cryosols: A Field-Based Study of Sub-To
High Arctic.
Global Change Biology
, 19, 1126-1140.
https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12125
[41] El-Shahawy, M.I., Abd El-Wahab, S.A., Sobh, M.M. and Nemeatalla, E.A.E. (2002)
Productivity and NPK Uptake of Sugar Beet as Influenced by N, B and Mn Fertiliza-
tion.
The Journal of Agricultural Science
, 27, 1955-1964.
[42] Ramadan, B.S.H., Hassan, H.R. and Abdou, F.A. (2003) Effect of Mineral and Bio-
fertilizers on Photosynthetic Pigments, Root Quality, Yield Components and Ana-
tomical Structure of Sugar Beet (
Beta vulgaris
L.) Plants Grown under Reclaimed
Soils.
The Journal of Agricultural Science
, 28, 5139-5160.
[43] Abd-El-Kader, E.M.A. (2011) Effect of Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates and Some Growth
Regulators Treatments on Sugar Beet.
Agricultural Science
, 2, 1693-1702.
[44] Gibson, L., Jeremy, S. and Stephen, B. (2006) Intercropping Winter Cereal Grains
and Red Clover. Univ. Extension, Iowa State University, Ames.
http://file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/PM2025%20(1).pdf
[45] Zhang, J.B., Yang, J.S., Yao, R.J., Yu, S.P., Li, F.R. and Hou, X.J. (2014) The Effects
of Farmyard Manure and Mulch on Soil Physical Properties in a Reclaimed Coastal
Tidal Flat Salt-Affected Soil.
Journal of Integrative Agriculture
, 13, 1782-1790.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(13)60530-4
[46] Timmusk, S. and Wagner, E.G.H. (1999) The Plant-Growth Promoting Rhizobacte-
rium
Paenibacillus polymyxa
Induces Changes in
Arabidopsis thaliana
Gene Ex-
pression: A Possible Connection between Biotic and Abiotic Stress Responses.
Mo-
lecular Plant
-
Microbe Interactions
, 12, 951-959.
https://doi.org/10.1094/MPMI.1999.12.11.951

Y. E. El-Ghobashi, A. E. M. Eata
DOI:
10.4236/as.2020.114022 389 Agricultural Sciences
[47] Aly, M.H.A., Zeinab, R.M. and Osman, A.M.H. (2009) Effect of Seed Inoculation
and Foliar Application with
Azospirillum brasiliense
and/or
Bacillus megatherium
on Productivity and Quality of Sugar Beet.
Egyptian Journal of Applied Sciences
,
24, 56-70.
[48] El-Fadaly, H.A., El-Geddawy, I.H., El-Hawary, F.I. and Ebrahim, A. (2013) Enume-
ration of Rhizobacteria Count and Growth Criteria of Sugar Beet Plant as Affected
by Biofertilization.
Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research
, 91, 657-673.
[49] Afify, A.H., Hammouda, F.M., Basyouny, A.M. and Hauka, F.A. (1994) Effect of
Bacterization and Mineral Fertilization on the Main Characters and Major Insect
Infestations of Sugar Beet Plants.
The Journal of Agricultural Science
, 19, 201-208.
[50] Buraczynska, D., Ceglarek, F. and Paza, A. (2001) The Influence of Different Or-
ganic Fertilization on Sugar Beet Crop in the Middle Eastern Part of Poland Part.
Technological Quality of Sugar Beet.
Roczniki Nauk. Rolniczych Seria A
,
produkcja
Roslinna
, 115, 55-65.
[51] Ali, M.H.A. (2003) Microbiological Chemical Studies on the Rhizosphere of Sugar
Beet Plants. PhD Thesis, Fac. Agric., Al Azhar Univ., Cairo.
[52] Omar, M.I. (2007) Effect of Potassium and Organic Fertilizer on the Productivity of
Some Sugar Beet Varieties under Saline Conditions. PhD Thesis, Fac. Agric., Alex-
andria Univ., Alexandria.
[53] Kumar, V. and Narula, N. (1999) Solubilization of Inorganic Phosphates and
Growth Emergance of Wheat as Affected by
Azotobacter chroococcum
.
Biology and
Fertility of Soils
, 28, 301-305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003740050497
[54] Marschner, P., Yang, C.H., Lieberei, R. and Crowley, D.E. (2001) Soil and Plant
Specific Effects on Bacterial Community Composition in the Rhizosphere.
Soil Bi-
ology and Biochemistry
, 33, 1437-1445.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(01)00052-9
[55] El-Gindy, A.M., Abdel-Aziz, A.A., El-Sabar, E.A. and Abdelghany, A.M. (2003) En-
gineering and Biological Properties of Faba Bean Seeds under Different Irrigation
Systems.
The Journal of Agricultural Science
, 28, 4325-4337.
[56] Hamadany, M.Kh. and El-Aassar, M.R. (2017) Effect of Intercropping Faba Bean
Varieties with Sugar Beet Plants on Piercing Sucking Insect Pests and Associated
Natural Enemies under Ridge Space and Seedling Rates in Relation to Crop Yield.
Egyptian Academic Journal of Biological Sciences
, 10, 57-77.
https://doi.org/10.21608/eajb.2017.12125
[57] Soliman, E.M., El-Hawary, M.A., Abdel-Aziz, M., Mazen, O.A.O. and Mohamed,
S.A. (2013) Effect of Irrigation Water Quantity, Sources and Rates of Nitrogen on
Growth and Quality of Sugar Beet.
Journal of Plant Production
, 4, 537-550.
https://doi.org/10.21608/jpp.2013.72407