Content uploaded by Hosam Mohamed Khlil Hammam El-Gepaly
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hosam Mohamed Khlil Hammam El-Gepaly on Mar 13, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
J. of Plant Production, Mansoura Univ., Vol. 12 (2): 179 - 186, 2021
Journal of Plant Production
Journal homepage: www.jpp.mans.edu.eg
Available online at: www.jpp.journals.ekb.eg
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: elgepaly@gmail.com
DOI:
Effect of Peas and Garlic Intercropping on Population Density of Some
Pests in Sohag Governorate
Mohamed, H. E.1; A. S. Badawy1; Safaa M. Abdel-Aziz2 and H. M. K. H. El-Gepaly2*
1Hort. Res. Inst., Agric. Res. Center, Giza, Egypt
2PPRI, Agric. Res. Center, Giza, Egypt
Cross Mark
ABSTRACT
Two field trials were carried out in Shandweel Agriculture Research Station, Sohag, Governorate
during 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 seasons. This study aimed to investigate the effect of intercropping some
garlic varieties in pea varieties field under different garlic planting densities in relation to yield and yield
components of both crops.The treatments in which the two varieties of peas and garlic were grown alone
individually gave the highest values obtained for most of the vegetative characters, yield and its components.
during the two seasons. Intercropping with density of two rows of garlic significantly exceeded the treatments
in which garlic was intercropping with a density of one row. Land equivalent ratio (LER) values were greater
than one by all intercropping treatments of pea with garlic, in both seasons. Pea2+two rows garlic2 gave the
highest values of relative crowding coefficient, while pea1+one row garlic1 gave the lowest values. The
intercropping of garlic on the peas led to a decrease in the number of pods infected with E. zinckenella
compared to the solo peas plantation for both seasons of agriculture for all varieties. While, the intercropping
led to increase the count of thrips on garlic during the intercropping period, the numbers decreased after the
peas were removed. Through this study it can be recommended to intercropping garlic, variety Sids-40, at a
density of two rows cultivation on the pea of cultivar Intsar 2, to obtain the highest yield compared to other
treatments of intercropping.
Keywords: garlic, peas, intercropping and thrips, Shandweel Agriculture Research Station.
INTRODUCTION
Garlic (Allium sativum L.) and Pea (Pisum sativum
L.) are two of the most important vegetable crops in Egypt.
They are grown for local and export markets, garlic blubs
and pea green pods or/and dry seeds. Since the cultivated
land in Egypt is limited, the agriculture intensification had
become urgent necessity to optimize the beneficial of unit
area. Intercropping systems are the most utilizing to small
farmers as they maximize the production of the unit, and
these systems are spread in third world countries as well as
intercropping with legumes crops is an excellent practice for
controlling soil erosion and sustaining crop productivity
(kanwar, 1980, El-Swaify et al., 1988, Agegnehu et al.,
2008, Launay et al., 2009, Fustec et al., 2010, Lithourgidis et
al., 2011, and Mao et al., 2012). Shahien (1987) found that,
intercropping the peas and garlic did not affect the
productivity and growth of either of them. Toaima (2001)
showed that the intercropping pattern of 120 cm width gave
the pest results for land equivalent ration, relative crowding
coefficient and aggressivity. El-Shaikh and Bekheet (2006),
found that, the sole of sugar bean significantly surpassed in
vegetative growth, sugar yield and quality at all
intercropping systems with faba bean or garlic. Xingang
Zhoua et al., (2011) noted that increasing in productivity of
cucumber when intercropped with onion or garlic, moreover
improved soil environment at different levels and these
impacts still existed in the second and third growing seasons.
On the other hand, growing snap been plants on ridges of
garlic decrease plant height and dry matter of garlic plants,
while bulb diameter of garlic was not affected. Abou-
Keriasha et al., (1991) mentioned that the yield and yield
components of fodder beat grown on the same ridge with
faba been ware comparatively less than those grown on sole
ridges. Ghobashi and El-Aweal (1999) found that faba been
seed yield was significantly reduced, when intercropped
decreased significantly by intercropping with garlic. El-
Moursi (1999) studied that, intercropping garlic with snap
bean reduced plant height, bulb weight, total yield and
cloves/bulb did not affect. Many Researchers were interested
with garlic intercropping on some vegetables crops i.e.,
Zhou, et al.,(2011) on cucumber,Amoli,(2012) on lettuce,
Syed et al., (2012) on pea, turnip and cauliflower, Xiao et
al.,(2013) on cucumber, Wang et al., (2015) on eggplant.
Onion thrips is a key insect pest in most onion and garlic
production regions of the world. They are cosmopolitan in
nature and can feed on broad host range. Both Immature and
adult thrips feed by piercing surface tissues and suck the
exuded plant juices. They cause direct damage to leave and
bulbs and also act as vector for viral diseases. A better use of
resources may be achieved by intercropping garlic on pea in
suitable intercropping system In many cases, the use of
intercropping has resulted in less severe pest outbreaks and
increased diversity of natural enemies compared to
monoculture systems (Mcsorley, 2008). Garlic is one of the
potential plant that could be inserted in crops to decrease the
pests in neighboring crop plots, these results founded by
Hai-bo et al., (2013), they found that, both intercropping and
application of volatile chemicals emitted by garlic could
Mohamed, H. E. et al.
180
improve the population densities of natural enemies of cereal
aphid, including ladybeetles and mummified aphids.
Intercropping of pea with tansy phacelia and white mustard
had significant effect of decreasing the pea thrips population
(Wnuk, 1998). Intercropped of mustard (Brassica napus)
with onion (Allium cepa L.) and garlic (Allium sativum L.) as
well as spice crops reduced the aphid population
significantly (Sarker et al., 2007). Garlic, and pea are main
winter vegetables of Egypt.
Therefore, the aim of this work was to study the
effect of intercropping two cultivars of garlic in different
planting densities on two pea cultivars to find out the best
one which gives the highest production per unit area and
lowest pest infestations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two field experiments were carried out in
Shandaweel Research Station, Sohag Governorate (Upper
Egypt) during 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 seasons, to study
the effect of intercropping some pea cultivars on garlic
cultivars). Treatments were arranged in randomized
complete block design with three replications design with
three replicates were used. Each plot (10.5 m2) consisted of
five ridges, 3.5 m length and 60 cm apart. Garlic and pea
were planted on 14 October in the two seasons. The soil of
the experiment was clay loam, superphosphate (15.5% P2
O5) at the rate of 150 Kg/fed and potassium sulphate (48%
K2O) at the rate of 48 kg /fed were applied during soil
preparation. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied at the rate of 80
kg N/fed in the form of ammonium nitrate (33.5% N) in
two equal doses at 30 and 60 days after planting date.
Intercropping system:
T1- Pure stand of pea Entsar 1 cv. (Pea1) was grown in
hills, 10 cm apart in the one side of ridge one plant/hill.
T2- Pure stand of pea Entsar 2 cv. (Pea2) was grown in
hills, 15 cm apart in the one side of ridge one plant/hill.
T3- Pure stand of garlic Balady cv. (Garlic1) was grown in
hills, 10 cm apart in the two sides of ridge one
plant/hill.
T4- Pure stand of garlic Sids-40 cv. (Garlic2) was grown in
hills, 10 cm apart in the two sides of ridge one
plant/hill.
T5- Pea1+one row garlic1.
T6- Pea1+one row garlic2.
T7- Pea1+two rows garlic1.
T8- Pea1+two rows garlic2.
T9- Pea2+one row garlic1.
T10- Pea2+one row garlic2.
T11- Pea2+two rows garlic1.
T12- Pea2+two rows garlic2.
All pea treatments were planted under 100% of
pure stand. The other normal practices of both pea and
garlic were maintained at the recommended level to assure
optimum production garlic was harvested in the 8 April in
both seasons. Pea was harvested when the marketable
green pods reached maturity.
At harvest, a sample of ten plants was taken at
random, from the pure stand and from intercropped plots of
pea and garlic. The following data were recorded:
A- pea: growth and productivity characteristics:
1-Plant height (cm) average of measurements taken from
cotyledonary node to the top of the main stem of the
plant, 2- Number of branches/plant, 3- Number of
pods/plant, 4- Pod length (cm), 5- Number of seeds/pods
and 6-Green yield (ton/fed.).
B- Garlic: growth and productivity characteristics.
1- Plant height (cm), 2-Number of leaves/plant., 3- Dry
matter of blub% , 4-Bulb diameter (cm), 4- Average
weight of bulb (gm), 6-Number of cloves/bulb, 7-
Average weight of clove (gm), and 8- Total fresh yield
ton/fed. was determined on the basis of fresh yield for
the experimental unit (kg) related to feddan (ton).
C- Competitive relationships and yield advantages:
C.1Land equivalent ratio (LER): was determined as the
sum of the fractions of the yield of intercrops relative
to their sole crop yield (Willey and Osiru 1972). Land
equivalent ration LER was determined according to
the following formula:
Where: Ypp is pure stand yield of pea, Ygg is pure stand yield of
garlic, Ypg is mixture yield of pea (when combined with
garlic) and Ygp is mixture yield of garlic (when combined
with pea).
C.2.Relative crowding coefficient (K): was calculated as
described by Hall (1974).
Where: Zpg and Zgp are sown proportion of pea and garlic,
respectively.
C.3Aggressivity (A): was proposed by Mc-Gilichrist
(1965) and was determined according to the following
formula:
Where: Apg and Agp are aggressivity values for pea and garlic,
respectively.
D- insect infestations:
The cultivation of both crops took place on October
14 for the two seasons, while the harvest of the peas ended
for both vars by mid-February. On this basis the average
incidence of Thrips tabaci was calculated during the period
of the presence of both crops (from planting date to the end
of the peas harvest) and the average incidence was
calculated for the remainder until the garlic harvest on
April 8th. Where the number of Thrips on 5 garlic plants of
each replicate was estimated three times a month.
The average pods infected with E. zinckenella in
peas crop were calculated at harvest. The sample was 100
green pods collected randomly from the diagonal of each
plot, kept in a paper bag and directly transferred to the
laboratory to count the larvae.
Statistical analysis:
Data were statistically analyzed according to the
procedure outlined by Snedecor and Cochran (1980).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A-Pea characters:
Effect of intercropping systems of pea on its
vegetative and productively characterizes are presented in
Table (2).
J. of Plant Production, Mansoura Univ., Vol. 12 (2), February, 2021
181
Plant height: Intercropping systems significantly affected
on these traits in two seasons. Plant height was at
maximum with the solid planting of T1 (Pea1) in both
seasons. While the lowest of this character was when T7
(Pea1+two rows garlic1) in two seasons. This result could
be attributed to the reduction in light intensity caused by
high plant population, encourage IAA synthesis, which
caused cell enlargement and hence plant. This result is in
agreement with those found by Amer et al., (1997), Abd
EL-All (2002) and Abd El-Hady et al., (2009).
Number of branches/plant: Number of branches/plant
significantly affected by intercropping system in two
seasons. The pea Entsar2 (T2) recorded the highest values
of this characters (2.67and 3.17) in both seasons,
respectively, concerning to the intercropping systems, the
lowest values results from planting of T8 (Pea1+two rows
garlic2) was (1.30 and1.50) in the first and second seasons,
respectively These results are in agreements with those
reported by Abd El-Hady et al., (2009).
Number of pods/plant: Number of pea pods/plant
significantly affected by intercropping system in both
seasons. The pure stand of pea Entsar2 recorded the highest
values of this characters (15.00 and 16.23) in both seasons,
respectively, concerning to the intercropping systems, the
lowest values results from planting of T7 (Pea1+two rows
garlic1) was (6.30 and 6.60) in the first and second seasons,
respectively These results are in agreements with those
reported by Abd El-Hady et al., (2009).
Pod length: Pod length of pea significantly affected by
intercropping system in two seasons. The heights values of
this character were recorded of pea Entsar1cv. when planting
pure stand compared the other intercropping system. In same
time the lowest values of this character were resulted from
planting T11(Pea2+two rows garlic1) in both seasons.
Number of seeds/pod: The pure stand planting of pea
Entsar 2cv. produced the highest number of seed/pod
(7.70 and 8.00) in the first and second seasons respectively.
One the other hand T7 (Pea1+two rows garlic1) gave the
lowest of this character (6.43 and 6.70 ) in both seasons,
respectively. The effect of intercropping on number of
seeds per pod approved by many investigators (EL-Shaikh
and Bekheet, 2006, and Abd El-Hady et al., 2009)
Green yield (ton/fed.). Green yield (ton/fed) of pea was
significantly affected by intercropping in both seasons.
Planting pea in solid planting increased green yield as
compared to other intercropping treatments. While, the
highest values (6.551 and 6.791 ton/fed) were recorded by
pea2 in the first and second seasons, respectively as
compared to T7 (Pea1+two rows garlic1) was (2.447 and
2.750 ton/fed) in both seasons, respectively. The superiority
of pure stand of pea may be attributed to the better
distribution of pea plants and less competition for light,
nutrition and other environmental factors. Regarding to
intercropping systems, total seed yield was significantly
affected by intercropping systems These results are in line
with those reported by EL-Hawary, et al. (1991); Amer et al.
(1997), Abd EL-All (2002) and Abd El-Hady et al, (2009).
Table 1. Effect of intercropping systems on growth and productivity of pea during 2015/2016 and 2016/2017
seasons.
Traits
Plant height
(cm)
No. of branches
/plant
No. of pods
/plant
pod
length (cm)
Numbers of
seeds/pod
Total seed
yield ton/fed
Treatments
Season 2015-2016
1-pea1
41.20
1.58
7.13
10.60
7.00
4.157
2-pea2
63.30
2.67
15.00
10.10
7.70
6.551
5- Pea1+one row garlic1
35.70
1.43
6.53
10.27
6.53
2.675
6- Pea1+one row garlic2
36.57
1.47
6.73
10.38
6.93
3.123
7- Pea1+two rows garlic1
32.77
1.37
6.30
10.10
6.43
2.447
8- Pea1+two rows garlic2
34.37
1.30
6.57
10.20
7.03
2.776
9- Pea2+one row garlic1
60.43
2.53
14.73
9.67
7.43
4.923
10- Pea2+one row garlic2
62.83
2.57
14.47
9.97
7.57
5.450
11-Pea2+two rows garlic1
55.53
2.50
13.50
9.23
7.20
4.633
12-Pea2+two rows garlic2
57.50
2.47
13.20
9.80
7.40
5.083
LSD 0.05
3.21
0.51
1.12
0.20
0.21
0.211
Season 2016-2017
1-pea1
43.47
1.87
7.37
10.87
7.23
4.453
2-pea2
65.53
3.17
16.23
10.30
8.00
6.971
5- Pea1+one row garlic1
35.90
1.57
6.90
10.44
6.77
2.960
6- Pea1+one row garlic2
37.87
1.63
7.00
10.61
7.23
3.387
7- Pea1+two rows garlic1
32.97
1.53
6.60
10.40
6.70
2.750
8- Pea1+two rows garlic2
35.83
1.50
6.87
10.10
6.90
3.080
9- Pea2+one row garlic1
60.77
3.03
16.00
9.93
7.73
5.137
10- Pea2+one row garlic2
63.07
2.93
15.73
10.00
7.90
5.783
11-Pea2+two rows garlic1
57.80
2.57
15.17
9.53
7.43
4.860
12-Pea2+two rows garlic2
60.83
2.63
15.43
9.97
7.57
5.337
LSD 0.05
2.01
0.40
1.34
0.19
0.35
0.219
B- Garlic characters: Effect of intercropping systems of
garlic on its vegetative and productively characterizes
are presented in Table (2).
1. Plant height: Data indicated that intercropping patterns
significantly affect this trait in both seasons. The tallest
plants (88.23) and 90.57cm) were results from the solid
plainly of garlic Balady cv. (T3) compared to the T12
(Pea2+two rows garlic2), achieved the lowest values of
trait (43.90 and 47.43 cm) in first and second seasons,
respectively. These results may be ascribed to the more
competition between plant for light (El-Hawary 1991),
Ghobashi and El-Aweel, 1999) and El-Shaikh and
Bekheet, 2006).
2. Number of leaves /plant: The solid plant of garlic
increased number of leaves per plant, an compared to
intercropping system, but this increment failed to be
Mohamed, H. E. et al.
182
significant from the statistical point of view in the first
season. However, T4 (Pure stand of garlic Sids-40 cv.)
produced highest number of leaves per plant in two
study seasons. The same general trend was reported by
Toaima (2001) and El-Shaikh and Bakheet (2006).
3. Dry matter of blubs%: Data concerning to garlic dry
matter % of blub parameter the pure stand of garlic
sids40 cv gave the highest values for this parameter
quality compared to all intercropping systems, in both
seasons. Intercropping garlic cultivars on pea cultivars
significant effect on dry matter% of blub parameter in
both seasons. T6 (Pea1+one row garlic2) surpassed all
studied intercropping treatments of dry matter % of
blub of in both seasons.
4. Bulb diameter: Pure stand of garlic significantly
increases of compared to different intercropping
systems. Treatment 4 (Pure stand of garlic Sids-40 cv.)
gave the highest of values of bulb diameter as
compared to T11 (pea2+two rows garlic1) in both
seasons. Similar results in this respect were reported by
El Moursi (1999), Toaima (2001) El-Sheikh and
Bekheet (2006) and Syed et al., (2012).
5. Average weight of bulb: The pure stand of garlic (T4)
significantly increased the average weight of bulb as
compared to the other treatments in both seasons.
Garlic Sids40 recorded the heaviest values (71.37 and
73.57 gm) in the first and second seasons, respectively.
Concerning to the to the all intercropping systems the
data revealed that the Balady cv. recorded the
decreasing of this character lowest of values when
garlic Balady cv. planted at two rows and on pea (53.63
and 46.97 gm) in the first and the second seasons,
respectively. These resulted are in line with those
reported by EL-Moursi (1999), and Syed et al., (2012)
6. Number of clovers/bub: The pure stand of garlic Belady
cv. (T3) significantly increased number of cloves/bulb as
compared to intercropping system in two seasons.
Treatment 3 achieved the highest number of cloves/bulb
(43.47 and 45.00) in both seasons respectively. While,
the lowest values of this trait were T12 (13.13 and14.17)
as compared to other treatment in both seasons. These
results are in harmony with those found by El-Moursi
(1999) and El-Shiakh and Bekheet (2006).
7. Average weight of cloves: Solid plant of garlic2 (T4)
increased average weight of cloves a significant from
the statistical point of view in both seasons. However,
the pure stand planting of garlic Sids-40 cv. gave
highest values of this character (4.30 and 4.50 gm)
while the lowest values (1.17 and 1.19) compared to
other intercropping systems in two seasons
respectively. El-Moursi (1999) El-Shaikh and Bekheet
(2006) came to the same general conclusion.
8. Total yield (ton/fed): Intercropping garlic on pea was
significantly affected on this trait in two seasons. The
solid planting of garlic (Sids-40 cv.) T4 yielded the
highest values (13.432 and14.631ton/fed) in first and
second seasons, respectively. On the other hand, T9
(Pea2+one row garlic1) gave the lowest values of total
yield (4.743 and 4.803 ton/fed) in both seasons,
respectively. A significant decrease occurred in bulb
yield when garlic was intercropped in pea probably due
to decrease in bulb size and weight in this intercropping
treatment as there was an active competition between
two crops for attaining essential nutrients for their
growth. Similar results were concluded when chilies
intercropped in garlic These results are in accordance
with those found by Mallanagouda et al., (1995) , El-
Hawary et al., (1991), EL-Moursi (1999), Toamia et
al., (2001), El-Shaikh and Bekheet (2006), and Syed et
al., (2012).
Table 2. Effect of intercropping systems on growth and productivity of garlic during 2015/2016 and 2016/2017
seasons.
Traits
Plant
height
No. of
leaves/plants
Dry matter
bulb%
Yield
Ton/fed
Blub diameter
(cm)
Bulb weight
(gm)
No. Cloves
/blub
Cloves
weight (gm)
Treatments
Season 2015-2016
3-Garlic1
88.23
10.93
22.23
11.716
4.80
63.93
43.37
1.60
4-Garlic2
63.73
13.27
24.50
13.432
5.63
71.30
15.40
4.30
5- Pea1+one row garlic1
70.30
10.27
18.60
5.183
3.93
57.93
39.23
1.40
6- Pea1+one row garlic2
57.83
12.90
24.70
6.113
5.30
64.63
14.97
3.53
7- Pea1+two rows garlic1
55.37
7.97
16.47
8.886
3.57
54.67
38.73
1.28
8- Pea1+two rows garlic2
46.73
12.30
22.57
9.543
4.60
60.57
13.57
3.40
9- Pea2+one row garlic1
58.47
8.07
16.77
4.743
3.60
56.87
38.73
1.30
10- Pea2+one row garlic2
51.20
12.50
23.20
5.553
4.93
62.00
14.50
3.73
11-Pea2+two rows garlic1
52.50
7.90
16.27
8.331
3.20
53.63
37.67
1.19
12-Pea2+two rows garlic2
43.90
11.63
22.23
8.932
4.43
57.40
13.13
2.93
LSD 0.05
3.17
NS
1.09
0.213
0.33
2.01
2.03
0.29
Season 2016-2017
3-Garlic1
90.57
11.20
22.67
12.993
5.13
66.47
45.00
1.37
4-Garlic2
66.73
14.67
25.47
14.631
5.97
73.57
15.63
4.50
5- Pea1+one row garlic1
63.73
13.27
24.50
5.731
5.63
58.30
42.40
1.30
6- Pea1+one row garlic2
61.17
13.87
24.90
6.636
5.60
61.93
15.20
3.80
7- Pea1+two rows garlic1
54.40
8.33
17.20
9.346
3.63
54.67
39.97
1.27
8- Pea1+two rows garlic2
55.90
13.17
22.70
9.935
4.93
60.83
14.20
3.60
9- Pea2+one row garlic1
60.70
8.33
17.97
4.803
3.77
51.53
39.07
1.17
10- Pea2+one row garlic2
59.27
13.40
23.87
5.936
5.40
54.23
14.73
3.50
11-Pea2+two rows garlic1
54.27
8.20
17.27
8.897
3.40
46.97
38.07
1.13
12-Pea2+two rows garlic2
47.43
13.13
22.47
9.423
4.60
50.20
14.17
3.27
LSD 0.05
3.07
2.11
1.13
0.323
0.30
2.33
1.97
0.32
J. of Plant Production, Mansoura Univ., Vol. 12 (2), February, 2021
183
C-Competitive relationships and yield advantages of
intercropping:
1. Land Equivalent Ratio (LER):
Data in Table (3) cleared that Land equivalent ratio
(LER) values were greater than one by all intercropping
treatments of pea with garlic, this clear that the actual
productivity was higher than the expected productivity
when pea was intercropped with garlic. Intercropping of
pea with garlic increased land usage by 9, 21, 35, 38, 16,
25, 42 and 44% in the first season; and by 11, 21, 34, 37,
14, 24, 38 and 41% in the second seasons; for T5
(pea1+one row garlic1), T6, (pea1+one row garlic2) T7
(pea1+two rows garlic1), T8(pea1+two rows garlic2), T9
(pea2+one row garlic1), T10 (pea2+one row garlic2),
T11(pea2+two rows garlic1) and T12 (pea2+two rows
garlic2), respectively. The highest LER values were
observed under T12, while the lowest values were obtained
under T5 in both seasons. These results were in accordance
with that found by El-Kalla et al (1999) who reported that
Land equivalent ratio was greater than 1 in all
intercropping systems, and was highest (1.52) in the 2:4
faba bean : onion system, and by Banful and Mochiah
(2012) who found that intercropped okra with onion at
system of two rows of okra to one row of onion produced
the highest agronomic productivity with a land equivalent
ratio of 1.36.
2. Relative Crowding Coefficient (K):
If a species has a Relative Crowding Coefficient
(K) less than, equal to or greater than one, this means that it
produces less yield, the same yield or more yield than
expected, respectively. If K>1 there ere is no difference
and if K<1 there is a yield disadvantage. The results in
Table (3) indicate that T12 (pea2+two rows garlic2) gave
the highest values of relative crowding coefficient followed
by T11 (pea2+ two rows garlic1) and T8 (pea2+one row
garlic2), while T5 (pea1+one row garlic1) gave the lowest
values. These results were true in both seasons.
3. Aggressivity (A):
An aggressivity value of zero indicates that the
components of species are equally competitive. For any
other situation, both species will have the same numerical
values, but the sign of the dominant crops will be positive
and that of the dominated will be negative. The greater the
numerical values the bigger the difference in competitive
abilities and the bigger the difference between actual and
expected yields. Data in Table (3) revealed that, the highest
values of aggressivity were reported under T5 (pea1+one
row garlic1), in both seasons. While, lowest values of
aggressivity were reported under T11 (pea2+ two rows
garlic1) in the first seasons, and under T11or T8 (pea1+one
row garlic2) in the second seasons. In the first season pea
crop under T10 (pea2+one row garlic2) and T12(pea2+two
rows garlic2) was the dominant crop (positive values),
whereas garlic crop was the dominated crop (negative
values), under T11the two crops are equally competitive
and under the rest treatments garlic crop was the dominant
crop, whereas pea crop was the dominated crop. In the
second season, pea crop was the dominant crop under T8,
T10, T11, T12, whereas garlic crop was the dominant crop
in the rest of treatments. Table (3) Effect of intercropping
systems on competitive relationship on 2015/2016 and
2016/2017 seasons.
Table 3. Effect of intercropping systems on competitive relationship on 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 seasons.
Traits
Relative Yield
LER
Relative Crowding Coefficient
Aggressivity
Treatments
pea
garlic
K pea
K garlic
K
pea
garlic
Season 2015-2016
5- Pea1+one row garlic1
0.64
0.44
1.08
0.90
1.59
1.43
-0.24
0.24
6- Pea1+one row garlic2
0.75
0.46
1.21
1.51
1.67
2.52
-0.16
0.16
7- Pea1+two rows garlic1
0.59
0.76
1.35
1.43
3.14
4.49
-0.17
0.17
8- Pea1+two rows garlic2
0.67
0.71
1.38
2.01
2.45
4.93
-0.04
0.04
9- Pea2+one row garlic1
0.75
0.40
1.15
1.51
1.36
2.06
-0.06
0.06
10- Pea2+one row garlic2
0.83
0.41
1.25
2.48
1.41
3.49
0.01
-0.01
11-Pea2+two rows garlic1
0.71
0.71
1.42
2.42
2.46
5.95
0.00
0.00
12-Pea2+two rows garlic2
0.78
0.66
1.44
3.46
1.98
6.87
0.11
-0.11
Season 2016-2017
5- Pea1+one row garlic1
0.66
0.44
1.10
0.99
1.58
1.56
-0.22
0.22
6- Pea1+one row garlic2
0.76
0.45
1.21
1.59
1.66
2.64
-0.15
0.15
7- Pea1+two rows garlic1
0.62
0.72
1.34
1.61
2.56
4.14
-0.10
0.10
8- Pea1+two rows garlic2
0.69
0.68
1.37
2.24
2.12
4.75
0.01
-0.01
9- Pea2+one row garlic1
0.74
0.40
1.14
1.40
1.34
1.88
-0.07
0.07
10- Pea2+one row garlic2
0.83
0.41
1.24
2.43
1.37
3.32
0.02
-0.02
11-Pea2+two rows garlic1
0.70
0.68
1.38
2.30
2.17
5.00
0.01
-0.01
12-Pea2+two rows garlic2
0.77
0.64
1.41
3.27
1.81
5.91
0.12
-0.12
D- Insect infestations
1- Effect of intercropping pattern on Thrips tabaci
infestation on garlic varieties.
The data presented in Fig. (1) showed that, the
average number of thrips on garlic varieties before the pea
varieties are harvested and after harvest for the first season.
The data indicate that the number of thrips/plant of garlic
increased in the second part of the examination (after
February 15 and until harvest) where temperatures were
suitable for the growth of the thrips population, where the
average census was 112.23 and 98.34 thrips/plant at the
end of the season compared to the average of 73.78 and
79.09 thrips/plant at early season (from planting to 15 Feb.)
for Balady and Sids40 vars. respectively. The Balady var.
harbored more infestation at the beginning of the season
than Sids40 var. and vice versa at the end of the season
where the var. Sids-40 injuries higher than Balady var. at
the end of the season. In the case ofintercropping, the
average number of thrips on garlic was higher before the
removal of the peas plants where the numbers decreased
significantly after harvest despite the favorable weather
conditions for the spread of thrips as in the garlic planted
Mohamed, H. E. et al.
184
sole. It is noticeable that the decrease in the number of
thrips was greater in the case of growing two rows of garlic with peas compared to the cultivation of one row of garlic
with peas.
Fig. 1. Effect of intercropping systems on garlic infestation with T. tabaci on 2015/2016 season.
The results in Fig. (2), demonstrated the average
count of thrips/garlic on all intercropping blends peas and
garlic, moreover sole garlic vars. for the second season.
The data indicate rise in the mean numbers of thrips on
solo plantation of Balady variety in the first period (102.58
individual/plant) compared with the second period (97.34
individual/plant), while infestation of thrips in solo
plantation of Sids-40 for second period (99.12
individual/plant) was higher than infestation during the first
period (88.64 individual/plant). In the case of the
intercropping of garlic on the peas at the rate of one row,
the average number of thrips on Balady variety was higher
than the Sids-40 variety in the intercropping period at the
rate of 107.11 and 111.23 insects/plant for Entsar-1 and
Entsar-2 peas varieties respectively. While the average
population of thrips on Sids-40 variety was relatively
higher than the Balady variety during the post-harvest
period of the peas at a rate of 121.11 and 97.67
insects/plant for Entsar-1 and Entsar-2 peas varieties
respectively. In the case of the cultivation of garlic at the
rate of two rows with peas, the average population of thrips
in the period of the presence of the two crops together was
higher than the average population for the period after the
harvest of the peas except in the case of the var. Entsar-2
with var. Seds-40, where the insect population was higher
during the post-harvest period.
Fig. 2. Effect of intercropping systems on garlic infestation with T. tabaci on 2016/2017 season.
2- Effect of intercropping pattern on E. zinckenella
infestation on peas varieties.
In general, the injuries of the E. zinckenella were
higher in the second season of the first season of all
treatments, as well as solo peas plantations suffered higher
injuries of the intercropping systems. It seems through the
average infestation of peas that the intercroped of garlic in
all cases led to a decrease in injury, especially in the case
of the cultivation of two lines of garlic of the variety of
Balady with the peas variety Entsr-1 at the rate of 12.33
and 11.67% and with the peas variety Entsr-2 at the rate of
11.67 and 10.67% for the two planting seasons respectively
(Fig. 3).
Garlic is one of the potential plant that could be
inserted in crops to decrease the pests in neighboring crop
plots, this results founded by Hai-bo et al., (2013), they
found that, both intercropping and application of volatile
chemicals emitted by garlic could improve the population
densities of natural enemies. Also, Suresh et al. (2010) and
Vaiyapuri et al. (2010) indicated the role of intercropping
in controlling pests and protecting beneficial insects
relevant to enhancing biodiversity in an agroecosystem.
J. of Plant Production, Mansoura Univ., Vol. 12 (2), February, 2021
185
Fig. 3. Effect of intercropping systems on peas infestation with E. zinckenella on 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 seasons.
REFERENCES
Abd EL-All, A.M. (2002). Weed control treatments
intercropped systems of sugar beet and faba bean. J.
Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ., 27 (12): 8081-8092.
Abd El-Hady, M.A.1, R.A. Marey, M.A. Bekheet and A.A.
El-Dakkak (2009). Effect of intercropping pea in
sugar beet filed under upper Egypt conditions.
Egypt. J. of appl. Sci., 24 (2B): 476-494.
Abou-Keriasha, M.A.; M.M. EL-Masry and A.S. Kamel
(1991). Varietal response of fodder beet
intercropped with faba bean to different patterns of
intercropping. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 6 (8): 225-232.
Agegnehu, G., A. Ghizaw and W. Sinebo. (2008). Yield
potential and land-use efficiency of wheat and faba
bean mixed intercropping. Agron. Sust. Dev.
28:257-263.
Amer, M.I.; M.M. Radi; K.A. Ali and S.S. Zalat (1997).
Intercropping faba bean with sugar beet under
different plant densities. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 21 (1):
155-161.
Amoli, N. (2012). Investigation on yield of lettuce and
garlic intercropping in rice harvested lands.
International Journal of Agriculture and Crop
Sciences (IJACS) 2012 Vol.4 No.9 pp.573-577.
Banful, B. and M.B. Mochiah (2012). Biologically
efficient and productive okra intercropped system
in a tropical environment. Trend in Horticultural
Research 2 (1): 1-7.
EL-Hawary, N.A.M.; M.M. EL-Mihi; I.O. Metwelly; M.A.
EL-Masry and A.S. Kamel (1991). Influence of
intercropping and foliar spray with microelements
on growth and yield of faba bean and onion. Annals
of Agric. Sci. Moshtohor, 29(2): 669-679.
El-Kalla, S. E.; A. K. Mostafa; A. A. Leilah and A. A.
Rokia (1999). Mineral and bio-phosphatic
fertilization for intercropped faba bean and onion.
Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 77 (1):
253-271. 24 ref.
EL-Moursi, A.H. (1999). Effect of some intercropping
systems and nitrogen levals on growth, yield and
yield componts in garlic. Ph.D, Monsoura Univ.
Fac. Of Agric. Veget & Flor. Dept.
El-Shaikh, K.A.A. and M.A. Bekheet (2006). Effect of
intercropping faba bean and garlic on sugar beet
under south valley conditions. Assiut J. Agric. Sic.,
35 (4): 187-204.
El-Swaify, S.A., A. Lo, R. Joy, L. Shinshiro and R.S. Yost
(1988). Achieving conservation effectiveness in the
tropics using legume-intercrops. Soil Technol. 1:1-
12.
Fustec, J., F. Lesuffleur, S. Mahieu and J.B. Cliquet
(2010). Nitrogen rhizodeposition of legumes: A
review. Agron. Sust. Dev. 30:57-66.
Ghobashi, A.A and M.A.T. EL-Aweel (1999). Productivity
of local onion and garlic cultivates grown in
monoculture and association with faba bean and
chick pea in onion. Assiut J. Agric. Sci.; 30(3): 47-
64.
Hai-bo, Zhou, C. Ju-lian, L. Yong, F. Francis, E.
Haubruge, C. Bragard, S. Jing-rui and C. Deng-fa
(2013). Influence of Garlic Intercropping or Active
Emitted Volatiles in Releasers on Aphid and
Related Beneficial in Wheat Fields in China.
Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 12(3): 467-473
Hall, R.L. (1974). Analysis of the nature of interference
between plants of different species. Aut. J. Agric.
Res., 25: 749-756. (C.F. Moursi et al.,1983, P.11).
Kanwar, J.S. (1980). Crop of the arid and semi-arid areas
of India problems. Arid Zome Res. and
development (H.S. Mann, Editor): 199-204
Launay, M., N. Brisson, S. Satger, H. Hauggaard-Nielsen,
G. Corre-Hellou, E. Kasynova, R. Ruske, E.S.
Jensen and M.J. Gooding (2009). Exploring options
for managing strategies for pea-barley
intercropping using a modeling approach. Eur. J.
Agron. 31:85-98.
Lithourgidis, A.S., C.A. Dordas, C.A. Damalas and D.N.
Vlachostergios. (2011). Annual intercrops: an
alternative pathway for sustainable agriculture.
Aust. J. Crop Sci. 5:396-410.
Mallanagouda, B., G.S. Sulikeri, B.G. Murthy and N.C.
Prathibha. (1995). Performance of chili (Capsicum
annuum) under different intercropping systems and
fertility levels. Ind. J. Agron. 40:277-279.
Mao, L., L. Zang, W. Li, W. van der Werf, J. Sun, H.
Spiertz and L. Li. (2012). Yield advantage and
water saving in maize/pea intercrop. Field Crops
Res. 138:11-20.
Mc. Gilichrist, C.A. (1965). Analysis of competition
experiments. Biometrics, 21: 975-985.
Mohamed, H. E. et al.
186
Mcsorley, R. (2008) Agroecology. In: Capinera, J.L. (ed)
(2008) Encyclopedia of Entomology, 2nd Edition.
Springer reference Vol. 4(S_Z): pp 82
Sarker, P.K., M.M. Rahman and B.C. Das (2007) Effect of
intercropping of Mustard with Onion andGarlic on
Aphid population and yield. J. bio-sci. 15: 35-40
Shahien, A.H. (1987). Effect of some agricultural
treatments on garlic yield. M.sc. Fac. Of Agric;
Zagazig Univ., Egypt.
Snedecor, G.W. and W. C. Cochran (1980). Statistical
Methods. 7 th ed. Iowa State University press,
Ames.,Iowa, U.S.A.
Suresh R, S. Sunder, M. Pramod (2010) Effect of
intercrops on the temporal parasitization of
Helicoverpa armigera (Hub.) by larval parasitoid,
Campoletis chlorideae Uchida in tomato.
Environment and Ecology, 28, 2485- 2489.
Syed A.Q.M, Muhammad A. Anjum, Sajjad H. and
Shakee (2012). effect of pea intercropping on
biological efficiencies and economics of some non-
legume winter vegetables. Pak. J. Agri. Sci., Vol.
50(3): 399-406.
Toaima, S.E.A., K.A. EL-Douby and A.I. Naffi (2001).
Effect of different in intercropping system of onion
chemical analysis. Egypt J. Agric. Res. 79 (3): 983-
1004.
Vaiyapuri, K., MAmanullah K. Rajendran, K.
Sathyamoorthi (2010) Intercropping
unconventional green manures in cotton: An
organic approach for multiple benefits: a review.
Asian Journal of Plant Sciences, 9, 223-226.
Wang, MY; Wu C.N; Cheng Z.H; Meng H.W. (2015).
Growth and physiological changes in continuously
cropped eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) upon
relay intercropping with garlic (Allium sativum L.)
Frontiers in Plant Science 6:1-11
Willey, R.W. and S.O. Osiru (1972). Studies on mixture of
maize and beams (Phasealus vulgaris) with
particular reference to plant population. J. Agric.
Sci. Cambridge, 79: 519-529. (C.F. Moursi et al;
1983, P.11).
Wnuk, A. (1998) Effect of intercropping of pea with tansy
phacelia and white mustard on occurrence of pests.
Folia Horticulture, 10(1): 67-74.
Xiao XM, Cheng ZH, Meng HW, Khan MA, Li HZ, Dong
YX. ( 2013). Intercropping of green garlic (Allium
sativum L.) induces nutrient concentration changes
in the soil and plants in continuously cropped
cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) in a plastic tunnel.
PLOS ONE 8(4): e62173
Xingang, Z.,Y. Gaobo, and W. Fengzhi (2011). Effects of
intercropping cucumber with onion or garlic on soil
enzyme activities, microbial communities and
cucumber yield. European Journal of Soil Biology -
EUR J SOIL BIOL 01/2011; 47(5):279-287.o plant
population. J. Agric. Sci. Cambridge, 79: 519-529.
(C.F. Moursi et al; 1983, P.11).
Zhou, X.G., Yu, G.B. and Wu, F.Z. (2011). Effects of
intercropping cucumber with onion or garlic on soil
enzyme activities, microbial communities and
cucumber yield Eur. J. Soil Biol. 47 279 287
.
