4.7 Article

Effect of density, cultivar and irrigation on spring sown monocrops and intercrops of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and faba beans (Vicia faba L.)

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY
Volume 51, Issue -, Pages 108-116

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eja.2013.08.001

Keywords

Intercrops; Triticum aestivum L; Vicia faba L; LER RUE

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Spring-sown intercrops of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and faba beans (Vicia faba L.) were grown in three experiments at the University of Reading, UK. One wheat cultivar, Axona, and one (experiment 1) or two bean cultivars (experiments 2 and 3) Scirocco and Mans Bead, were grown as sole crops and intercrops at 50%, 75% and 100% recommended density. Experiments were rainfed but irrigation was an additional treatment in experiment 3. Biomass and seed yields of both wheat and faba beans were greater when monocropped than when intercropped. There was no evidence that radiation use efficiency (RUE) of intercrops was significantly different from sole crops. In all intercrops there was no significant effect of density on biomass, RUE or seed yield, though there were compensating changes in yield components. Seed yields of Mans Bead were significantly greater than Scirocco in experiment 3 but not experiment 2. There was no significant effect of irrigation on RUE or on wheat biomass and seed yield, but there was a trend for irrigation to increase faba bean biomass (P=0.07) and seed yield (P=0.06). With later sowing in experiments 2 and 3, time to harvest was shorter and wheat and bean biomass, seed yield and RUE were reduced. All land equivalent ratio (LER) values for both biomass (maximum 1.23) and seed yield (maximum 1.44) were greater than 1, with one exception in experiment 3, indicating that intercrops of wheat and faba beans make more effective use of land than equivalent sole crops. Partial LERs for faba beans were always lower than those of wheat. The tendency was for highest LERs to occur at 75% recommended density. (c) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available