Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-68ccn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T02:32:34.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of planting density and plant arrangement pattern on growth and yields of maize (Zea mays L.) and soya bean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) grown in mixtures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

I. A. M. Yunusa
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Ahmadu Bello University, Samaru, Zaria, Nigeria

Summary

The growth and development of maize and soya bean when grown in mixtures in different proportions and arrangements were studied at Samaru (11° 11' N, 38° E) and Yandev (07° 23' N, 09° 10' E) in the savannah belts of Nigeria. The crops were sown in both pure and mixed stands. The pure-stand densities were 513 plants/m2 for maize and 20·15 plants/m2 for soya bean. Mixtures were made in three proportions: additive (100:100), containing 100% of the sole crop population of each crop; semi-additive (67:67), containing 67% of each crop's sole population; and replacement (67:33 and 33:67), containing 67% of one crop's population to the other's 33%. The mixtures were formed either on the same ridge (in-ridge) or on different ridges (alternate ridge).

Maize grain yield at Samuru was not significantly reduced in mixtures except where its proportion was reduced to 33% of its sole crop density. Seed yields in soya bean were significantly reduced in all mixtures, and when associated with maize density of not greater than 67%, soya bean was capable of 50% of its sole crop yield. At Yandev, late planting coupled with inadequate rainfall in the month following planting depressed seed yields in both crops, the sole crop yields being only 1·53 t/ha in maize and 0·24 t/ha in soya bean. Also maize appeared to be adversely affected in the mixtures at this location, the yields being significantly reduced in the mixtures irrespective of planting ratios.

All mixtures, except 100:100 at Yandev, proved beneficial by producing land equivalent ratio (LER) values greater than one, while 67:67 proportions made higher gross returns than any of the sole crops at Samaru. In this experiment moderately high populations of each crop were found to be necessary to obtain beneficial yields from the mixtures. In this regard semi-additive mixtures, with 67% of each crop's pure stand population, appeared most appropriate.

Incidence of maize streak was significantly lower in alternate ridge mixtures; otherwise the crop in the mixtures seemed to be little affected by pattern of plant arrangement; while soya bean was quite sensitive, its flowering and podding being significantly delayed in in-ridge mixtures at Yandev. The legume yields in this mixture were also slightly, though not significantly, adversely affected. Thus alternate ridge arrangement was more favourable.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, E. F. I. (1979). Population, time and crop mixtures. Proceedings of an International Workshop on Intercropping, ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India, 10–13 01 1979, pp. 3260.Google Scholar
Beets, W. C. (1975). Multiple cropping practices in Asia and the Far East. Agriculture and Environment 2, 219228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalal, R. C. (1977). Effects of intercropping of maize with soya bean on grain yield. Tropical Agriculture 54, 189191.Google Scholar
Duncan, W. G. & Hesketh, J. D. (1968). Net photosynthetic rates, relative leaf growth rates, and leaf numbers of 22 races of maize grown at eight temperatures. Crop Science 8, 670674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, N. M. (1977). Studies in mixed cropping II. Population pressures in maize-bean mixtures. Experimental Agriculture 13, 185191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, N. M. (1982). Methods for cropping systems research in experiments sited at Research Stations. Training Workshop on Farming System Research. Nigerian Institute for Oil-palm Research, Benin City, Nigeria, 07/08 1982.Google Scholar
Fisher, N. M., Raheja, A. K. & Elemo, K. A. (1987). Insect pest control for cowpea in crop mixtures. Experimental Agriculture 23, 920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kass, D. C. (1978). Polyculture cropping system: review and analysis. Cornell International Agricultural Bulletin No. 32. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Kowal, J. M. & Knabe, D. T. (1972). An Agroclimatological Atlas of Northern States of Nigeria. Samaru, Nigeria: Ahmadu Bello University Press.Google Scholar
Kurtz, T., Melsted, S. W. & Bray, R. H. (1952). The importance of nitrogen and water in reducing competition between intercrops and corn. Agronomy Journal 44, 1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathew, I. P. (1977). Evaluation of growth, yield and general performance of four varieties of soya bean at different populations. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Agronomy, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Mead, R. & Willey, R. W. (1980). The concept of LER and advantages in yield from intercropping. Experimental Agriculture 16, 8690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montha, N. K. & De, R. (1980). Intercropping maize and sorghum with soya beans. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 95, 117122.Google Scholar
Nicou, R. (1981). [Maize cultivation methods in West Africa]. Agronomie Tropicale 36, 356363. In Field Crops Abstracts 36, 24.Google Scholar
Norman, D. W. (1972). An economic survey of three villages in Zaria Province II. Input–output study. Samaru Miscellaneous Papers No. 37. Institute for Agricultural Research, Samaru, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Norman, D. W. (1974). Crop mixtures under indigenous conditions in the northern parts of Nigeria. Samaru Research Bulletin No. 205, pp. 130144. Institute for Agricultural Research, Samaru, Nigeria.Google Scholar
Remison, S. U. (1980). Interaction between maize and cowpea at various frequencies. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 94, 617621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trenbath, B. P. (1976). Plant interaction in mixed communities. In Multiple Cropping: Proceedings of a Symposium (ed. Papendick, R. I., Sanchez, P. A. and Triplett, G. B.), pp. 76102. Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Watson, D. J. (1958). The dependence of net assimilation rate on leaf area index. Annals of Botany 22, 3754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, R. W. (1979). Intercropping: its importance and research needs. Part 1: Competition and yield advantages. Field Crops Abstracts 32, 210.Google Scholar