Processes determining intercrop productivity and yields of component crops

Abstract This review examines how intercrop productivity is determined, by analysing several key physiological processes which affect yields of component crops. Availability of environmental resources to each of the component crops is important in determining combined intercrop productivity, and hence the analysis is based on capture of environmental resources and efficiency of conversion of captured resources into growth of harvested organs of the component crops. It is emphasized that the competitive abilities of component crops, which determine their biomass production and often yields, vary greatly according to growth environment, and hence cultural manipulation can adjust the balance of their yields. Intercrops are most productive when their component crops differ greatly in growth duration so that their maximum requirements for growth resources occur at different times. For high intercrop productivity, plants of the early-maturing component should grow with little interference from the late-maturing crop. The latter may be affected somewhat by the associated crop, but a long time period for further growth after the harvest of the first crop should ensure good recovery and full use of available resources. Compared with a sole crop, the reduced size of non-harvested organs of the late-maturing crop can result in improved assimilate partitioning to the harvested organ during the later part of the growth period and consequently a higher harvest index. Because of the differences in growth rhythm between component crops, there tends to be little interaction between relative performance of component crops and growth environment and hence productivity of this type of intercrop is often insensitive to management interventions. In contrast, when growth durations of component crops are similar the crops compete more intensely for available resources. Their relative performances can then be greatly affected by small changes in growth environment. ‘Additive’ intercrops of this type may nevertheless be productive, particularly where growth resources are more completely captured than in corresponding sole crops. However, if non-replenished growth resources are utilized too rapidly, the less-competitive component may suffer greatly. ‘Replacement’ intercrops of this type are not so productive in high-yielding environments. When the growth environment is not favourable however, their total lower plant populations compared to additive intercrops may allow yields of replacement intercrops to be less depressed. Where similar-duration crops are grown in variable environments, replacement intercrops may therefore be preferred due to their greater yield stability. Where a dominant crop uses available resources excessively and inefficiently, agronomic manipulation in favour of the usually suppressed component seems most likely to improve the productivity of the whole intercrop. Intercrop productivity depends on the genetic constitution of component crops, growth environment (atmospheric and soil) and agronomic manipulations of microenvironment. The interaction of these factors should be optimized so that the limiting resource is utilized most effectively in the intercrop. An understanding of the sharing of resources among component crops will help identify more appropriate agronomic manipulations and cultivars for intercrops.

[1]  R. W. Willey,et al.  Effects of pigeonpea plant population and row arrangement in sorghum/pigeonpea intercropping , 1983 .

[2]  W. R. Stern,et al.  Cereal–Legume Intercropping Systems , 1987 .

[3]  B. Trenbath Plant Interactions in Mixed Crop Communities , 1976 .

[4]  J. Harper,et al.  Neighbour Effects in the Genus Avena. II. Comparison of Weed Species , 1973 .

[5]  S. Fukai,et al.  Effects of relative sowing time of soybean on growth and yield of cassava in cassava/soybean intercropping , 1988 .

[6]  C. Donald,et al.  The interaction of competition for light and for nutrients , 1958 .

[7]  A. Carson Effect of intercropping sorghum and groundnuts on density of Striga hermonthica in The Gambia , 1989 .

[8]  C. Francis,et al.  Multiple cropping with legumes and starchy roots. , 1986 .

[9]  W. R. Stern,et al.  Maize/cowpea intercrop system: effect of nitrogen fertilizer on productivity and efficiency , 1986 .

[10]  C. Francis,et al.  Cereals in multiple cropping. , 1986 .

[11]  S. Fukai,et al.  Growth and yield of cassava as influenced by intercropped soybean and by nitrogen application , 1989 .

[12]  B. Trenbath Neighbour Effects in the Genus Avena. III. A Diallel Approach , 1975 .

[13]  D. Midmore,et al.  Potato (Solanum spp.) in the hot tropics V. Intercropping with maize and the influence of shade on tuber yields , 1988 .

[14]  M. S. Reddy,et al.  Groundnut in intercropping systems. , 1980 .

[15]  R. Mccollum,et al.  Yield Potential of Interplanted Annual Food Crops in Southeastern U. S. 1 , 1979 .

[16]  P. Walker,et al.  Maize-cowpea intercropping as affected by nitrogen fertilization , 1987 .

[17]  P. Zaag,et al.  Potato (Solanum spp.) in an isohyperthermic environment V. Intercropping with maize , 1990 .

[18]  D. Midmore,et al.  Potato (Solanum spp.) in the hot tropics: IV. Intercropping with maize and the influence of shade on potato microenvironment and crop growth , 1988 .

[19]  Jhc Davis,et al.  The effects of plant arrangement and density on intercropped beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) and maize II. Comparison of relay intercropping and simultaneous planting , 1987 .

[20]  S. Fukai,et al.  Effects of solar radiation on growth of cassava (Manihot esculenta crantz.). I. Canopy development and dry matter growth , 1984 .

[21]  S. Singh,et al.  Sorghum-Legume Intercropping and the Effects of Nitrogen Fertilization. I. Yield and Nitrogen Uptake by Crops , 1984, Experimental Agriculture.

[22]  T. Wahua,et al.  Productivity of species in cassava/maize/okra/ egusi melon complex mixtures in Nigeria , 1989 .

[23]  P. V. Reddy,et al.  Row arrangement in groundnut/pigeonpea intercropping , 1989 .

[24]  S. Fukai,et al.  The response of cassava (Manihot esculenta) to spatial arrangement and to soybean intercrop , 1987 .

[25]  C. A. Francis,et al.  Resource use by intercrops. , 1986 .

[26]  P. P. Singh,et al.  Effect of Legume Intercropping on Enrichment of Soil Nitrogen, Bacterial Activity and Productivity of Associated Maize Crops , 1986, Experimental Agriculture.

[27]  D. Rees Crop Growth, Development and Yield in Semi-arid Conditions in Botswana. II. The Effects of Intercropping Sorghum Bicolor with Vigna Unguiculata , 1986, Experimental Agriculture.

[28]  N. Hulugalle,et al.  Effects of cassava-based cropping systems on physico-chemical properties of soil and earthworm casts in a tropical Alfisol , 1991 .

[29]  R. A. Morris,et al.  Resource capture and utilization in intercropping; non-nitrogen nutrients , 1993 .

[30]  C. Donald,et al.  Competition Among Crop and Pasture Plants , 1963 .

[31]  M. Natarajan,et al.  Sorghum-pigeonpea intercropping and the effects of plant population density , 1980, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[32]  F. O. Olasantan The Effects on Soil Temperature and Moisture Content and Crop Growth and Yield of Intercropping Maize with Melon (Colocynthis vulgaris) , 1988, Experimental Agriculture.

[33]  R. W. Willey,et al.  Preliminary Studies of Intercropping Combinations Based on Pigeonpea or Sorghum , 1980, Experimental Agriculture.

[34]  J. Cock,et al.  Response of cassava to water shortage I. Growth and yield , 1981 .

[35]  S. Fukai,et al.  Agronomic modification of competition between cassava and pigeonpea in intercropping , 1992 .

[36]  R. Shibles,et al.  Influence of spatial arrangements of maize on performance of an associated soybean intercrop , 1984 .

[37]  R. W. Willey,et al.  Effects of Genotype in Cereal/Pigeonpea Intercropping on the Alfisols of the Semi-Arid Tropics of India , 1983, Experimental Agriculture.

[38]  W. R. Stern,et al.  The combined effects of nitrogen fertilizer and density of the legume component on production efficiency in a maize/cowpea intercrop system , 1987 .

[39]  R. W. Willey,et al.  The effects of water stress on yield advantages of intercropping systems , 1986 .

[40]  R. W. Willey,et al.  Physiological basis for yield advantage in a sorghum/groundnut intercrop exposed to drought. 1. Dry-matter production, yield, and light interception , 1987 .

[41]  N. Fisher Studies in Mixed Cropping. I. Seasonal Differences in Relative Productivity of Crop Mixtures and Pure Stands in the Kenya Highlands , 1977, Experimental Agriculture.

[42]  R. W. Willey,et al.  Effect of row arrangement on light interception and yield in sorghum-pigeonpea intercropping , 1985, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[43]  M. S. Reddy,et al.  Growth and resource use studies in an intercrop of pearl millet/groundnut , 1981 .

[44]  C. Ssekabembe The importance of differences in maturity periods and stature in sorghum/finger millet intercrops , 1986 .

[45]  S. Fukai Intercropping — bases of productivity , 1993 .

[46]  Jonathan H. Williams,et al.  Intercropping Short and Long Duration Groundnut (Arachis Hypogaea) Genotypes to Increase Productivity in Environments Prone to End-of-season Droughts , 1990, Experimental Agriculture.

[47]  S. Fukai,et al.  Cassava/legume intercropping with contrasting cassava cultivars. 2. Selection criteria for cassava genotypes in intercropping with two contrasting legume crops , 1992 .

[48]  W. R. Stern Nitrogen Fixation and Transfer in Intercrop Systems , 1993 .

[49]  L. V. Beuningen,et al.  Effect of Growth Habit of Beans on Tolerance to Competition from Maize When Intercropped 1 , 1984 .

[50]  C. Misra,et al.  Effect of Crop Geometry (Row Proportions) on the Water Balance of the Root Zone of a Pigeonpea and Rice Intercropping System , 1988, Experimental Agriculture.

[51]  D. Harris,et al.  Physiological basis for yield advantage in a sorghum/groundnut intercrop exposed to drought. 2. Plant Temperature, water status, and components of yield , 1987 .

[52]  W. R. Stern,et al.  Relative Sowing Time and Density of Component Crops in a Maize/Cowpea Intercrop System , 1987, Experimental Agriculture.

[53]  T. Wahua Rhizosphere bacterial counts for intercropped maize (Zea mays L.), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) and ‘egusi’ melon (Colosynthis vulgaris L.) , 1984 .

[54]  B. Trenbath,et al.  Biomass Productivity of Mixtures , 1974 .

[55]  R. A. Morris,et al.  Effects of crop proportion on intercropped upland rice and cowpea 1. Grain yields , 1990 .

[56]  F. O. Olasantan Intercropping of cassava (Manihot esculenta) with maize or cowpea under different row arrangements , 1988 .

[57]  J. Harper,et al.  A comparative study of the distribution of the roots of Avena fatua and A. strigosa in mixed stands using a 14C-Iabelling technique. , 1970 .

[58]  C. Hiebsch,et al.  Area‐×‐Time Equivalency Ratio: A Method For Evaluating The Productivity Of Intercrops1 , 1987 .

[59]  S. Fukai,et al.  Cassava/legume intercropping with contrasting cassava cultivars. 1. Competition between component crops under three intercropping conditions , 1992 .

[60]  M. S. Reddy,et al.  A Field Technique for Separating Above- and Below-Ground Interactions in Intercropping: an Experiment With Pearl Millet/Groundnut , 1981, Experimental Agriculture.

[61]  Jhc Davis,et al.  Competitive ability and growth habit of indeterminate beans and maize for intercropping , 1983 .

[62]  M. Sivakumar,et al.  Growth and Resource Use of Maize, Pigeonpea and Maize/Pigeonpea Intercrop in an Operational Research Watershed , 1980, Experimental Agriculture.

[63]  Adaptive research for intercropping: steps towards the transfer of intercrop research findings to farmers' fields , 1993 .

[64]  B. Trenbath Intercropping for the management of pests and diseases , 1993 .

[65]  James R. Allen,et al.  Yield of Corn, Cowpea, and Soybean Under Different Intercropping Systems1 , 1983 .

[66]  R. W. Willey,et al.  Sorghum-pigeonpea intercropping and the effects of plant population density , 1980, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[67]  S. Fukai,et al.  Intercropping cassava with soybean cultivars of varying maturities , 1988 .