• citations in SCIndeks: 0
  • citations in CrossRef:0
  • citations in Google Scholar:[]
  • visits in previous 30 days:9
  • full-text downloads in 30 days:2


article: 6 from 17  
Back back to result list
2019, vol. 23, iss. 1, pp. 38-40
Intercropping of soybean and proso millet for biomass production
aMaize Research Institute 'Zemun Polje', Belgrade-Zemun
bUniversity of Belgrade, Faculty of Chemistry
Integrated field crop production: conservation of biodiversity and soil fertility (MESTD - 31037)

Keywords: intercropping; biomass; land equivalent ratio (LER); leaf area index (LAI)
Sustainable agriculture considers production of high quality food and feed with minimal impact on environment. Intercropping is one of the most efficient ways to produce valuable biomass for animal feed rich in nutrients. Intercrop combinations: alternating rows of soybean and proso millet (S-M), alternating strips with 2 rows of soybean and 2 rows of millet (SS-MM-SS) and alternating strips with 2 rows of soybean and 4 rows of millet (SS-MMMM-SS); single crop of soybean and single crop of proso millet were tested. The effect of bio-fertilizer Coveron was also followed. Aboveground biomass was harvested and land equivalent ratio (LER), as well as leaf area index (LAI) was determined. All intercropping combinations increased LAI of soybean when compared to monocrop, to 43% and 84% in SS-MM-SS combination with and without Coveron, respectively. Coveron slightly increased LAI. The highest values of biomass yield were obtained in S-M intercrop for soybean (39% and 42% higher in relation to monocrop, in combination with and without Coveron, respectively) and in monocrop for proso millet. Nevertheless, the highest LER value was obtained for SS-MM-SS combination without Coveron (1.12). In intercrops treated with Coveron slightly lower LER values were obtained for S-M and SS-MMMM-SS combination (0.97 and 0.98, respectively). Irrespective to sowing way, results indicate that 1:1 ratio of soybean and proso millet in intercrop (S-M and SS-MM-SS combinations) is the most promising way to achieve high biomass yield.
Amanullah,, Khan, F., Muhammad, H., Jan, A.U., Ali, G. (2016) Land equivalent ratio, growth, yield and yield components response of mono-cropped vs. inter-cropped common bean and maize with and without compost application. Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America, 7 (2): 40-49
Baghdadi, A., Halim, R.A., Ghasemzadeh, A., Ramlan, M.F., Sakimin, S.Z. (2018) Impact of organic and inorganic fertilizers on yield and quality of silage corn in intercropped system with soybean. PeerJ
Du, J., Han, T., Gai, J., Yong, T., Sun, X., Wang, X., Yang, F., Liu, J., Shu, K., Liu, W., Yang, W. (2018) Maize-soybean strip intercropping: Achieved a balance between high productivity and sustainability. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 17(4): 747-754
Duchene, O., Vian, J., Celette, F. (2017) Intercropping with legume for agroecological cropping systems: Complementarity and facilitation processes and the importance of soil microorganisms. A review. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 240: 148-161
Eskandari, H., Ghanbari, A., Javanmard, A. (2009) Intercropping of Cereals and Legumes for Forage Production. Notulae Scientia Biologicae, 1(1): 07
Esmaeili, A., Sadeghpour, A., Hosseini, S.M.B., Jahanzad, E., Chaichi, M.R., Hashemi, M. (2011) Evaluation of seed yield and competition indices for intercropped barley (Hordeum vulgare) and annual medic (Medicago scutellata). International Journal of Plant Production, 5 (4): 395-404
Gong, X.W., Li, J., Ma, H.C., Chen, G.H., Wang, M., Yang, P., Gao, J.F., Feng, B.L. (2018) Field microclimate and yield for proso millet intercropping with mung bean in the dryland of Loess Plateau, Northwest China. Journal of Applied Ecology, 29 (10): 3256-3266
Habiyaremye, C., Matanguihan, J.B., D’Alpoim, G.J., Ganjyal, G.M., Whiteman, M.R., Kidwell, K.K., Murphy, K.M. (2017) Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) and Its Potential for Cultivation in the Pacific Northwest, U.S.: A Review. Frontiers in Plant Science, 7
Iqbal, M.A., Hamid, A., Ahmad, T., Siddiqui, M.H., Hussain, I., Ali, S., Ali, A., Ahmad, Z. (2018) Forage sorghum-legumes intercropping: effect on growth, yields, nutritional quality and economic returns. Bragantia, 78(1): 82-95
Jahanzad, E., Sadeghpour, A., Hoseini, M.B., Barker, A.V., Hashemi, M., Keshavarz, A.R. (2015) Competition, Nitrogen Use Efficiency, and Productivity of Millet-Soybean Intercropping in Semiarid Conditions. Crop Science, 55(6): 2842
Kalinová, J. (2007) Nutritionally important components of proso millet (Panicum Miliaceum L.). Czech Republic: Faculty of Agriculture, South Bohemia
Malézieux, E., Crozat, Y., Dupraz, C., Laurans, M., Makowski, D., Ozier-Lafontaine, H., Rapidel, B., Tourdonnet, S., Valantin-Morison, M. (2009) Mixing plant species in cropping systems: concepts, tools and models. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 29(1): 43-62
Manjunath, M.G., Salakinkop, S.R. (2017) Growth and yield of soybean and millets in intercropping systems. Journal of Farm Sciences, 30 (3): 349-353
Mead, R., Willey, R. W. (1980) The Concept of a ‘Land Equivalent Ratio’ and Advantages in Yields from Intercropping. Experimental Agriculture, 16(3): 217-228
Mousavi, S.R., Eskandari, H. (2011) A general overview on intercropping and its advantages in sustainable agriculture. Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences, 1 (11): 482-486
Nelson, S. C., Robichaux, R. H. (1997) Identifying plant architectural traits associated with yield under intercropping: Implications of genotype-cropping system interactions. Plant Breeding, 116(2): 163-170


article language: English
document type: unclassified
DOI: 10.5937/jpea1901038M
published in SCIndeks: 03/05/2019

Related records

Pesticidi i fitomedicina (2014)
Control of winter forage pea diseases by pea-oat intercropping under field conditions
Živanov Dalibor, et al.