Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia

Molla Abate; Getachew Alemayehu

doi:doi:10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

| Peer-Reviewed

Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia

Molla Abate, Getachew Alemayehu

Published in Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Volume 7, Issue 1)

Received: 5 August 2017 Accepted: 25 August 2017 Published: 5 February 2018

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

An on-farm experiment was conducted in the dry season of 2012/2013under irrigation at Jigna rural village of Dera District, South Gonder Zone/Ethiopia. The experiment was conducted to assess the biological benefits of intercropping maize with fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean. A field have a total of 7 treatments, namely three intercropping of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean with maize and their four sole cropping, were laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Gross plot size of each treatment was 3m × 2.7m (8.1m²), but net plot size varied up on the crop types. Spacing between adjacent replications and plots was 1.5m and 1.0m, respectively. Fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean as sole crops were planted at inter-row and intra-row spacing of 20cm × 5cm, 20cm × 5cm and 40cm × 10cm, respectively. In both intercropping and sole cropping maize was planted at 75cm× 30cm inter- and intra- row spacing, while fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean were intercropped in the middle of two maize rows at their recommended intra-spacing. Varieties used for the present study were BH-540 maize hybrid, "Challa” fenugreek, "Burkitu" field pea and "Awash Melkassa" haricot bean. Data of phenological, vegetative growth and, yield related crop parameters were timely collected following their respective standard methods and procedures, and further subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SAS version 9.2. Whenever the ANOVA result showed significant difference among treatments for a parameter mean separation was further done using Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DNMRT). Intercropping didn’t show any significant effect statistically (p<0.05) on phenological, vegetative growth and yield related parameters of the component crops. However, concerning biomass of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean, the analysis of variance showed that there has significant difference (p≤0.05) between intercropping and sole cropping. On the contrary, intercropped field pea produced higher pod per plant, plant height and seed per pod than that of sole field pea. Intercropped Haricot bean was also produced slightly higher plant height, seed per pod and thousand grain weights than its sole crops. Therefore, in the present study area during dry season under irrigation, maize intercropping with haricot bean and field pea was more advantageous than their respective sole crops.

Published in	Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Volume 7, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
Page(s)	19-35
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2018. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Intercropping, Sole Cropping, Biomass, Yield

References

[1]	Adeniyan ON, Akande SR, Baloyum O, Saka JO, 2007. Evaluation of crop yield of AfricanYam bean Maize and Kenaf under intercropping system. American-Eurasian J. Agric. Environ. Sci., 2: 99-102.
[2]	Ahmed, S., H. P. M. Gunasena and Y. H. Yang, 1979. Proc. Final Inputs Rev. Meet. 20-24 Aug, Honolulu, 251P
[3]	Aleman, F., 2000. Intercropping of Common Bean and Maize with different Plant Proportions, Effects on Land Equivalent Ratio, Competitive Ratio and Monetary Return. In: studies on Bean/Maize Production Systems in Nicaragua. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. PP. 3-97.
[4]	Aleman, Z. F and L. Ohlander, 2000. Intercropping of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaries (L) and Maize at different Densities. Effects on Yield, Land Equivalent Ratio, and Net Income. In: Studies on Bean/Maize Production Systems in Nicaragua. Doctorial Thesis, Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Uppsala. Sweden. PP. 76.79.
[5]	Allen, J. R and R. K. Obura. 1983. The Science of Sustainable Agriculture. 2nd. West view Press II Publication. United Kingdom. Agronomy Journal. 75, 1005-1009.
[6]	Amare, B, 1992. Effect of Maize (Zea mays) and Bean (Phaseolus vulgaries) intercropping and Yield Components of the Companion Crops. M.Sc. Thesis, AUA. PP. 24-27.
[7]	Andrews, D. J and A. H. Kassam. 1976. The importance of Multiple Cropping in increasing World Food Supplies. In: R. I. Papendic, P. A. Sanchez, and G. B. Triplett (Ed.). Multiple Cropping. Sp. pub. No. 27. American Society of Agronomy Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
[8]	Andrew, D. J and A. H. Kassam. 1983. The importance of multiple cropping in increasing world food supply. In: Papendic, R. I. (ed.) Multiple Cropping. American Society of Agronomy, 677 South Segoe Road Madison, Wisconsin 53711. PP. 7-32.
[9]	Azam –Ali, S. N., R. B. Mathews., J. H. Williams and J. M. Pealock, 1990. Lifgt Use, Watre Uptake and Performance of Individual Components of Sorghum/Groundnut Intercrop. Experimental Agriculture. 26: 413-427.
[10]	Balearic, S. S and U. C. Pathway. 1981. Crop geometry Studies in Sorghum in Association with Pigeon pea varieties. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science. V. 51 (11). P. 77.
[11]	Bandyopadhay, S. K and R. De. 1986. Nitrogen Relationship and Residual Effects of intercropping with Legumes. Journal of Agricultural Science 107, 629-632.
[12]	Beets, W. C. 1982. Multiple cropping and tropical farming systems, west views Press, Colorado, and USA. PP. 35-36.
[13]	Bell, M. J., R. C. Muchow and G. L. Wilson. 1994. The Effect of Plant Population on Peanuts (Arachis hypogaea) in a Monsoonal Tropical Environment. Field Crops Research, 17: 91-107.
[14]	Bergersen, F. J., G. L. Turner., M. B. Gault., R. R. Peoples., L. J. Morthorpeand J. Brockwell. 1992. Contribution of nitrogen in soybean crop residues to subsequent crops and to soils. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 43, 155-169.
[15]	Besong, M. T., S. W. Almy and B. Bakia. 1993. The Land productivity of the Small Farm holders in southwest Province of Cameroon. International Journal of Tropical Agriculture. 11 (2): 81-87.
[16]	Bulson, H. A. J., R. W. Snaydon and C. E. Stopes. 1996. Effects of Plant Density on intercropped wheat and Field beans (Vica faba) in an Organic Farming System. Journal of Agricultural Science. 128: 69-73.
[17]	Carr, P. M., B. G. Schatz., J. C. Gander and S. F. Zwinger. 1992. Intercropping Sorghum and Pintio bean in a cool Semi-Arid Region. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy. 84 (5): 810-812.
[18]	Cenpukdee, U and S. Fukai. 1991. Effect of nitrogen supply on Cassava /pigeon pea intercropping with three contrasting Cassava cultivars. Fert. Res. 29: 275-280.
[19]	Chang, J. F and R. M. Shibles, 1985b. An Analysis of Competition between intercropped Cowpea and Maize. II. The Effect of Fertilization and Population Density. Field Crops Res. 12, 145-152.
[20]	Chang, J. F and R. M. Shibles. 1985a. An analysis of Competition between intercropped Cowpea and Maize. I. Soil N and P Levels and Their Relationships with Dry matter and Seed Productivity. Field crops Re. 12: 133-143.
[21]	Chetty C. K. R and M. N. Reddy. 1984. Analysis of intercropping Experiments in Dry land Agriculture. Experimental Agriculture 20: 31-40.
[22]	Chittapur, B. M., S. M. Hiremath., H. B. Babalad and G. S. Patil. 1993. Intercropping of Forage Legume in Maize. Farming Systems. 9 (3&4): 108-110.
[23]	Chowachury, M. K. 1989. Utilization Efficiency of Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium as related to Yield Advantage in Corn and Mung bean intercrops. College Laguna, Philippines. P. 236.
[24]	Chowdhury, M. K and E. L. Rosario. 1994. Comparison of Nitrogen, Phosphorous and Potassium Utilization Efficiency in Maize /Mung bean intercropping. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge. 122 (2): 193-199.
[25]	Cotteinie, A. 1980. Soil and Plant Testing as a Base of Fertilizer Recommendations. Soils Bulletins, No. 38, FAO, Rome. P. 22.3, 389-399.
[26]	Dakora, F. D., R. A. Aboyinga., Y. Mohama and J. Apaseku. 1987. Assessment of N2 fixation in groundnut (Arachis haypogaea) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. walp) and their relative N contribution to a succeeding major crop in Northern Ghana. MIRCEN Journal 3, 389-399.
[27]	Davis, J. H. C and S. Garcia, 1987. The effect of Plant arrangement Density on Intercropped Bean (Phaselous vulgaries and Maize. 1. Traits related to dry matter and seed Productivity. Field Crops Research. 12 (2): 105-115.
[28]	Demesew, M. 2002. Effect of Plant Density of Haricot bean and Nitrogen Fertilization on Productivity of Maize and Haricot Bean Additive Inter Crop System. MSc. Thesis, Alemaya University. P. 45-50.
[29]	Enyi, B. A. C. 1973. Effects of intercropping Maize or Sorghum with Cowpea, Pigeon pea or Beans. Experimental Agriculture 9, 83-90.
[30]	Fawusi, B. A. C., S. B. C. Wanki and D. Nangju, 1982. Pod and Grain Yield from intercroppedmMaize and Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp. Journal of Agricultural Science 99: 13-17.
[31]	Fisher, N. M. 1977. Studies in Mixed Cropping. I. Seasonal Differences in Relative Productivity of Crop Mixtures and Pure Stands in the Kenya Highlands. Exp. Agric. 13: 177-184.
[32]	Francis, C. A. 1986a. Distribution and Importance of Multiplying Cropping. In: Francis, C. A (ed.), 1986. Multiple Cropping. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. PP. 1-19.
[33]	Francis, C. A, 1986b. Perspectives for the Future of Multiple Cropping. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. PP. 351-370.
[34]	Francis, C. A, 1990. Sustainability Issues with Intercrops. In: Wadding ton, S. R. (Ed.). Centro International de mejoramien to de Maize Trigo, Mexico, DF (Mexico. Research Methods for Cereal Legume Intercropping: Proceedings of a Workshop. Mexico, DF (Mexico). CIMMYT. 1990. PP. 194-199.
[35]	Fukai, S. and B. R. Trenbath. 1993. Presses of Determining Intercrop Productivity and Yield of Component Crops. Field Crops Research, 34: 247-271.
[36]	Fukai, S., J. S. Tsay., G. L. Wilson., U. Cenpukdee and D. P. C. Grady. 1990. Cassava legume intercropping in the sub tropics. In: R. H. Howeler (Editor), Proceedings 8th Symposium of the International Society for Tropical Root Crops. ISTRC, Bangkok, Thailand, pp. 293-300.
[37]	Gangwar, B and G. S. Kalra. 1988. Influence of Maize Legume Associations and Nitrogen Levels on Maturity, Grain quality and Protein Productivity. Legume Research 11 (1): 6-10.
[38]	Gobeze L, 1999. Effect of Spatial Arrangement and Nitrogen Fertilizer Application onSorghum (sorghum bicolor (L) Moench) and Groundnut (Arachi hypogea L.) intercrop System in Eastern Ethiopia. M.Sc. Alemaya University. PP. 50-52.
[39]	Gomez, A. K and A. A. Gomez. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. Second Edition. John Wiley and Sons Inc. Inter-Science Publications. New York. PP. 180-225.
[40]	Ghosh PK, Manna MC, Bandyopadhyay KK, Ajay TAK, Wanjari RH, Hati KM, Misra AK, Acharya CL, Subba RA (2006). Inter-specific interaction and nutrient use in soybean sorghum intercropping system. Agro. J., 98: 1097-1108.
[41]	Hall, R. C. 1974a. Analysis of Nature of Interference between Plants of Different Species. Concepts and Extension of the Dewitt Analysis to Explain Effects. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 25: 739-747.
[42]	Hoshikawa, K., 1991. Significance of Legumes Crops in intercropping, the Productivity and Stability of Cropping System. In: Johanson, C., K. K. Lee and K. L. Saharawat, (Ed.). Phosphorus Nutrition of Grain Legume in the Semi Arid Tropics. ICRISAT. PP. 173-176.
[43]	Hunshal, C. S and D. S. Malik. 1985. Intercropping in Sorghum with Special Reference to Plant Population. Journal of Farming Systems. 1 (3/4): 73 79.
[44]	IAEA. 1980. Nuclear Techniques in the Development of Management Practice for MultipleCropping Systems. Vienna, P. 154.
[45]	Ibrahim, Y. M., M. O. Gaffar and D. A. A. Wahab. 1993. Intercropping of Pioneer Sorghum with Lablab purpureus (L) under Irrigation at Shambat. Annals of Arid Zone. 32 (3): 157-159.
[46]	IRRI. 1974. Annual Report for 1973. International Rice Research Institute. Los Bonos, Philippines. P. 25.
[47]	Karikari, S. K., O. Chaba., B. Molosiwa. 1999. Effects of intercropping Bambara Groundnut on Pearl Millet, Sorghum and Maize in Botswana. African Crop Science Journal, 7 (2): 143-152.
[48]	Kasasa, P., S. M. Pepereki., K. Musiyiwa., F. Makonese and K. E. Giller. 1999. ResidualNitrogen Benefits of Promiscuous Soybean to Maize under Field Conditions. African Crop Science Journal 7, 375-382.
[49]	Kassu K, 1993. Studies on Plant Population and Spatial Arrangements on Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) Intercropping as Influenced by NP Application in Eastern Ethiopia. M.Sc Thesis, Alemaya University of Agriculture. PP. 40-45.
[50]	Keating, B. A. and P. S. Carberry. 1993. Resource Capture and Use in intercropping –Solar Radiation. Field Crops Research. 34: 273-301.
[51]	Khola, O. P. S and D. P. Singh. 1996. Comparative Performance of Swedge rape (Brassica napus) and Ethiopian mustard (Brassica carinata) in intercropping with French bean (Phaseolus vulgaries). Indian Journal of Soil Conservation. 24 (1). 68-73.
[52]	Kumar Rao, J. V. D. K., C. Johansen., T. Yonegama., S. Tobita, and O. Ito. 1996b. Estimation of Nitrogen Fixation by the 15 N Abundance Techniques and Nitrogen Uptake by Rigengeo Genotypes of Different Maturity Groups Grown in an Inceptisol. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 177, 129-138.
[53]	Kumar Rao, J. V. D. K., P. J Dart and P. V. S. S. Sastry. 1983. Residual Effects of Pigeon pea (Cajanus Cajan) on Yield and Nitrogen Response of Maize. Experimental Agriculture 19, 131-141.
[54]	Mandal, B. K., C. D. Madhab., B. M. Barrid., K. D. Swapanand. 1990. Rice, Soybean, Peanut, Rice Bean, and Black gram Yields under Different Intercropping Systems. Agronomy Journal, 82: 1063-1066.
[55]	Marcellos, H., W. L. Felton and D. F. Herridge. 1997. Rotational Benefits of Chickpea in Cereal based Cropping Systems of the Northern New South Wales Regions of Australia. In: Rupela, O. P., Johanen, C. and Herridge, D. F. (Eds.) Extending Nitrogen Fixation Research to Farmers Fields. Proceedings of an International Workshop on Managing Legume Nitrogen Fixation in Cropping Systems of Asia. ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India, PP. 117-126.
[56]	Mason, S. C., D. E. Leihner and J. J. Vort. 1986. Cassava/cowpea and Cassava Peanut intercropping. III. Nutrient concentration and removal. Agronomy Journal 78, 441-444.
[57]	Matthews P, Harry T (2003). Faba bean Res. Agro. Aust., pp. 1-23.
[58]	Mbah EU, Muoneke CO, Dkpara DA (2007). Effect of compound fertilizer on the yield and productivity of soybean maize intercrop in south eastern Nigeria. Trop. Subtrop. Agro. Ecos., 7: 87-95.
[59]	McCollum, R. E. 1982. Expert Consults. Fertilizer Use in Multiple Crops. Syst. FAO, 1-6 Feb., New Delhi. P. 35.
[60]	Midmore, D. J., J. Roca and D. Berrios. 1988a. Potato (Solanum spp.) in the Hot Tropics. IV. Intercropping with Maize and the Influence of Shade on Potato Microenvironment and Crop Growth. Field crops Res., 18: 145-157.
[61]	Minale L, Tilahun T, Alemayehu A (2001). Determination of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer levels in different maize-faba bean intercropping patterns in northwestern Ethiopia. Seventh Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Maize Conference, pp. 513-518.
[62]	Moris, R. A and D. P. Garrrity. 1993a. Resource Capture and Utilization in intercropping: Water. Field Crops Research, 34 (3): 303-317.
[63]	Morris, R. A. and D. P. Garrity. 1993b. Resource Capture and Utilization in intercropping: Non Nitrogen Nutrients. Field Crops Research 34, 319-334.
[64]	Nambiar, P. T. C., M. R. Rao., M. S. Reddy., C. N. Floyd., P. J. Dart and R. W. Willey. 1983a. Effect of intercropping on Nodulation and N2 Fixation by Groundnut. Experimental Agriculture 19, 79-86.
[65]	Nasrullahzadeh S, Ghassemi – Golezani K, Javanshir A, Valizadeh M, Shakiba MR (2007). Effects of shade stress on ground cover and grain yield of faba bean (Vicia faba). J. Food Agric. Environ., 1: 337-340.
[66]	Natarajan, M., and R. W. Willey. 1980. Sorghum/Pigeon pea intercropping and the Effect of Plant Population Density. II. Resource Use. Journal of Agricultural Science 95, 51-58.
[67]	Njoroge, J. M. and J. K. Kimemia. 1995. Economic Benefits of Intercropping Young Arabica and Robusta coffee with Food Crops in Kenya. Out look on Agriculture. 24 (1): 27-34.
[68]	Odoemana, C. S. 1997. Yield and Yield Component Responses of Intercropping Yam (Dioscorea rotundata) and Melon (Colocyntris Vulgaries) in South and Eastern Nigeria. Tropical Agriculture. 74 (3): 192-196.
[69]	Ofori, F and W. R. Stern. 1987b. The Combined Effects of Nitrogen Fertilizer and Density of the Legume Component on Production Efficiency in a Maize /Cowpea Intercrop System. Field Crops Res., 16: 43-52.
[70]	Ofori, F., and W. R. Stern. 1987a. Evaluation of N2 Fixation and Nitrogen Economy of a Maize Cowpea intercropping system using 15N Dilution Methods. Plant and Soil 102, 149-160.
[71]	Olasantan, F. O., 1991. Repone of Tomato and Okra to Nitrogen Fertilizer in Sole cropping and intercropping with Cowpea. J. Hortic. Sci. 66: 1191-199.
[72]	Olsen, S. R., C. V. Cole., F. S. Watanabe and L. A. Dean. 1954. Estimation of Available Phosphorus in Soils by Extraction with Sodium Bicarbonate. USDA Circular 939: 1-19.
[73]	Ong, C. K., C. R. Black., F. M. Marhall and J. E. Corlett. 1996. Principles of Resource Capture and Utilization of Light and Water. In: Ong, C. K. and Huxley, P. (Eds) Tree-Crop Interaction: a Physiological Approach. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, PP. 73-158.
[74]	Pal, U. R and Y. Shehu. 2001. Direct and Residual Contribution of Symbiotic Nitrogen Fixation by Legume to the Yield and Nitrogen Uptake of Maize (Zea mays L.) in the Nigerian Savannah. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Sciences, 187: 53-58.
[75]	Pal, U. R., A. R. Rao., R. Singh and S. S. Verma. 1981. Intercropping with Grain Sorghum: Compatible Intercrops and Spatial Arrangements. Indian Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding. 40: 44-50.
[76]	Pal, U. R., T. O. Oseni and J. C. Norman. 1993. Effect of Component Densities on the Productivity of Soybean /Maize and Soybean /Sorghum Intercrop Journal of Agronomy and Crop Sciences, 170: 66-70.
[77]	Palaniapan, S. P., 1985. Cropping Systems in the Tropics, Principles and Management. Wiley Eastern Limited. Tamil Nadu Agricultural University. PP. 75-80.
[78]	Papendic, R. I., P. A. Sanchez and G. B. Triplett. 1976. Multiple Cropping. Am. Soc. of Agron. Madison, Wisconsin 27. 378P.
[79]	Papendic, R. I. 1983. Multiple Cropping. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Sciences Society of America, Soil Science Society of America. 677 South Segoe Road, Madison, Wisconsin. PP. 7-32.
[80]	Poggio SL (2005). Structure of weed communities occurring in monoculture and intercropping of field pea and barley. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 109: 48-58.
[81]	Ramakrishna, A and C. K. Ong. 1994. Productivity and Light Interception in Up Land Rice /Legume intercropping Systems. Tropical Agriculture. 71 (1): 5-11.
[82]	Rao, A. V and B. Venkateswarlu. 1987. Nitrogen Fixation as Influenced by Water Stress in Selected Crop Legumes of the Indian Arid Zone. Arid Soil Research and Rehabilitations 1, 89-96.
[83]	Rao, M. R. and R. W. Willey. 1980. Evaluation of Yield Stability in Intercropping Studies on Sorghum /Pigeon pea. Experimental Agriculture. 16 (2): 105-116.
[84]	Reddy, M. S., Nigusse. T., Kidane, G. and Chanyalew. T, 1994. Developing Improved Cropping Systems for Dry Land Areas of Ethiopia. PP. 116-129. In: Procedings of the First National work shop on Dry Land Farming Research in Ethiopia.
[85]	Rees, D. J. 1986. Crop Growth, Development and Yield in Semi Arid Conditions in Botswana, The Effect of intercropping sorghum bicolor with Vina unguiculata. Experimental Agriculture 22, 169-177.
[86]	Rego, T. J. and V. N. Rao. 2000. Long-term Effects of Grain legumes on Rainy Season Sorghum Productivity in a Semi arid Tropical Vertisol. Experimental Agriculture 36, 205-221.
[87]	Russell, J. T and R. M. Caldwell. 1989. Effects of Component Densities and Nitrogen Fertilizations on Efficiency and Yield of Maize /Soybean intercrop. Exp. Agric, 25: 529-540.
[88]	Sakala, W., G. Cadisch and K. E. Giller. 2000. Interactions between Residues of Maize and Pigeon pea and Mineral Fertilizers during Decomposition and N Mineralization. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 32, 699-706.
[89]	Sakala, W. D., G. Cadisch and K. E. Giller. 2001. Productivity, Nitrogen Fixation and Nitrogen balances in Pigeon pea –Maize intercrops in Malawi. Plant and Soil, in Press. P. 15.
[90]	Searle, P. G. E., Y. Comandom, D. C. Shedden and R. A. Nance. 1981. Effect of Maize Legume Intercropping System and Fertilizer Nitrogen on Crop Yields and Residual Nitrogen. Field Crops Research. 4: 133-145.
[91]	Senaratne, R., N. D. L. Liyanage and R. J. Soper. 1995. Nitrogen Fixation and N Transfer from Cowpea, Mung bean and Groundnut when Intercropped with Maize. Fertilizer Research. 40 (1): 41-48.
[92]	Shehu, Y., W. S. Alhasan., U. R. Pal and C. J. C. Phillips. 1999. The Effect of intercropping Lablab purpureus L. with Sorghum on Yield and Chemical Composition of Fodder. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 183: 73-79.
[93]	Shumba, E. M., H. H. Dhiwayo and O. Z. Mukoko. 1990. The Potential of Maize /Cowpea intercropping in low Rain fall Areas of Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe Journal of Agricultural Research 28, 33-38.
[94]	Singh, R. P. 1990. Research Efforts to Mitigate the Adverse Effects of drought. Dry land resources and Technology 5, 117-136.
[95]	Sisay, T, 2004. Effects of Planting Pattern and Proportions of Green gram (Vigna radiata (L) on Productivity of Sorghum/Green gram Intercropping System in Kewet Woreda, Amhara Region. MSc. Thesis, Alemaya University. PP. 25-40.
[96]	Siva Kumar, M. V. K. 1993. Growth and Yield of Millet and Cowpea in Rely and intercrop Systems in the Sahelian Zones in Years when the On Set of the Rainy Season is Early. Experimental Agriculture. 29 (4): 417-427.
[97]	Struif, B. T. E. 1986. Sorghum/Rice intercropping, a security System for Poorly Drained Soils of Southern Sudan. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science. 34 (2): 193-198.
[98]	Tamado, T and Eshetu. M. 2000. Evaluation of Sorghum, Maize and Common Bean cropping Systems in East Hararge, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Agricultural Science. 17: 33-45.
[99]	Tarhalkar, P. P. and N. G. P. Rao, 1981. Genotype-Plant Density Considerations in the Development of an Efficient intercropping System for Sorghum. In: Proceeding of International Workshop on Intercropping 10-13 January 1979. ICRISAT, Hydra bad, India. PP. 35-40.
[100]	Tilahun T, 2002. Effect of plant density and arrangement of component crops on productivity of maize /faba bean intercropping system. MSc. Thesis. Alemaya University. PP. 30-40.
[101]	Tobita, S., O. Ito., R. Matsunaga., T. P. Rao., T. J. Rego., C. Johansen, and T. Yoneyama. 1994. Field Evaluation of Nitrogen Fixation and Use of Nitrogen Fertilizer by Sorghum/pigeon pea intercropping on an Alfisole in the Indian Semi-arid Tropics. Biology and Fertility of soils 17, 241-248.
[102]	Trenbath, B. R. 1976. Plant interactions in Mixed Crop Communities. PP. In: Papendic, R. I., P. A. Sanchez and G. B. Triplet (eds.), Multiple Cropping. ASA Special Publication No. 27. Am. Soc. Agron. Madison, WI, USA. PP. 129-170.
[103]	Trenbath, B. R., 1986. Resource Use by Intercrops. In: C. A. Francis. (Ed.), Multiple Cropping. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. PP. 57-81.
[104]	Tsubo M, walker S, Ogindo HOA (2005). Simulation model of cereallegume intercropping systems for semi-arid regions II Model application. Field Crops Res., 93: 23-33.
[105]	Umrani, N. K., S. H. Shinde and P. M. Dhonde. 1984. Studies on Intercropping of Pulses in Kharif Sorghum. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 29 (1): 27-30.
[106]	Waghmare, A. B. and S. P. Singh. 1982. Total Productivity and Net Returns of Different Sorghum/legume intercropping systems under varying Nitrogen Levels. Indian Journal of Agronomy, 27 (4): 423-428.
[107]	Wahua, T. A. 1983. Nutrient up take by intercropped Maize and Cowpea and concept of Nutrient Supplementation Index (NSI). Experimental Agriculture, 191: 263-275.
[108]	Wahua, T. A. T and D. A. Miller. 1978. Effect of intercropping on Soybean N2 Fixation and Plant Composition on Associated Sorghum and Soybeans. Agronomy Journal 70, 292-295.
[109]	Wanki, S. B. C and M. O. A. Fuwusi. 1982. Pod and Grain Yields from Intercropping Maize and Bean (Vigna ungiculata (L) walp) in Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, (Cambridge) 99: 13-17.
[110]	Wenxue Li, Long L, Jianhao S, Tianwen G, Fusuo Z, Xingguo B, Peng A, Tang C (2005). Effects of inter cropping and nitrogen application on nitrate presentin the profile of orthicanorthicanthrosol west China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 105: 483-491.
[111]	Willem, C. 1990. Raising and sustaining productivity of smallholder farming systems in the tropics. AgBe publishing, Alkamar, Holland. PP. 90-117.
[112]	Willey, R. W, 1979. Intercropping –its importance and research needs. Part I. Competition and yield advantages. Field Crops Abstr. 32, 1-10.
[113]	Willey, R. W. 1985. Evaluation and Presentation of intercropping Advantages. Experimental Agriculture 21, 119-133.
[114]	Willey, R. W. and D. S Osiru. 1972. Studies on Mixtures of Maize and Beans (Phaseolus vulgaries with Particular Reference to Plant Population. J. Agric. Sci. Caamb. 79, 517-529.
[115]	Willey, R. W, 1991. Evaluation and Presentation of Intercropping Advantages. Experimental Agriculture, 21: 119-123.
[116]	Yesuf, M, 2003. Effects of Plant Arrangement and Population Densities of Haricot bean on Productivity of Sorghum/Haricot bean Additive mixtures. MSc. Thesis in Agriculture (Agronomy). Alemaya University.
[117]	Zewdu, Y, 2002. Effect of Cropping System, Nitrogen Levels, and Bacteria Fertilization on Yield and Quality of Fodder Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Ph.D Thesis, Rajas than College of Agriculture, Uduipus, India.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Molla Abate, Getachew Alemayehu. (2018). Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 7(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Molla Abate; Getachew Alemayehu. Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia. Agric. For. Fish. 2018, 7(1), 19-35. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Molla Abate, Getachew Alemayehu. Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia. Agric For Fish. 2018;7(1):19-35. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14,
  author = {Molla Abate and Getachew Alemayehu},
  title = {Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia},
  journal = {Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries},
  volume = {7},
  number = {1},
  pages = {19-35},
  doi = {10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.aff.20180701.14},
  abstract = {An on-farm experiment was conducted in the dry season of 2012/2013under irrigation at Jigna rural village of Dera District, South Gonder Zone/Ethiopia. The experiment was conducted to assess the biological benefits of intercropping maize with fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean. A field have a total of 7 treatments, namely three intercropping of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean with maize and their four sole cropping, were laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Gross plot size of each treatment was 3m × 2.7m (8.1m2), but net plot size varied up on the crop types. Spacing between adjacent replications and plots was 1.5m and 1.0m, respectively. Fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean as sole crops were planted at inter-row and intra-row spacing of 20cm × 5cm, 20cm × 5cm and 40cm × 10cm, respectively. In both intercropping and sole cropping  maize  was planted at 75cm× 30cm inter- and intra- row spacing, while fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean were intercropped in the middle of two maize rows at their recommended intra-spacing. Varieties used for the present study were BH-540 maize hybrid, "Challa” fenugreek, "Burkitu" field pea and "Awash Melkassa" haricot bean. Data of phenological, vegetative growth and, yield related crop parameters were timely collected following their respective standard methods and procedures, and further subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SAS version 9.2. Whenever the ANOVA result showed significant difference among treatments for a parameter   mean separation was further done using Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DNMRT). Intercropping didn’t show any significant effect statistically (p<0.05) on phenological, vegetative growth and yield related parameters of the component crops. However, concerning biomass of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean, the analysis of variance showed that there has significant difference (p≤0.05) between intercropping and sole cropping. On the contrary, intercropped field pea produced higher pod per plant, plant height and seed per pod than that of sole field pea. Intercropped Haricot bean was also produced slightly higher plant height, seed per pod and thousand grain weights than its sole crops. Therefore, in the present study area during dry season under irrigation, maize intercropping with haricot bean and field pea was more advantageous than their respective sole crops.},
 year = {2018}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia
AU  - Molla Abate
AU  - Getachew Alemayehu
Y1  - 2018/02/05
PY  - 2018
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
T2  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JF  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JO  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
SP  - 19
EP  - 35
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5648
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
AB  - An on-farm experiment was conducted in the dry season of 2012/2013under irrigation at Jigna rural village of Dera District, South Gonder Zone/Ethiopia. The experiment was conducted to assess the biological benefits of intercropping maize with fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean. A field have a total of 7 treatments, namely three intercropping of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean with maize and their four sole cropping, were laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Gross plot size of each treatment was 3m × 2.7m (8.1m2), but net plot size varied up on the crop types. Spacing between adjacent replications and plots was 1.5m and 1.0m, respectively. Fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean as sole crops were planted at inter-row and intra-row spacing of 20cm × 5cm, 20cm × 5cm and 40cm × 10cm, respectively. In both intercropping and sole cropping  maize  was planted at 75cm× 30cm inter- and intra- row spacing, while fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean were intercropped in the middle of two maize rows at their recommended intra-spacing. Varieties used for the present study were BH-540 maize hybrid, "Challa” fenugreek, "Burkitu" field pea and "Awash Melkassa" haricot bean. Data of phenological, vegetative growth and, yield related crop parameters were timely collected following their respective standard methods and procedures, and further subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SAS version 9.2. Whenever the ANOVA result showed significant difference among treatments for a parameter   mean separation was further done using Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DNMRT). Intercropping didn’t show any significant effect statistically (p<0.05) on phenological, vegetative growth and yield related parameters of the component crops. However, concerning biomass of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean, the analysis of variance showed that there has significant difference (p≤0.05) between intercropping and sole cropping. On the contrary, intercropped field pea produced higher pod per plant, plant height and seed per pod than that of sole field pea. Intercropped Haricot bean was also produced slightly higher plant height, seed per pod and thousand grain weights than its sole crops. Therefore, in the present study area during dry season under irrigation, maize intercropping with haricot bean and field pea was more advantageous than their respective sole crops.
VL  - 7
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Molla Abate

Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute, Bahir Dar Center, Bahir Dar City, Ethiopia
Getachew Alemayehu

Department of Plant Sciences, Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar City, Ethiopia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Molla Abate, Getachew Alemayehu. (2018). Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 7(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Molla Abate; Getachew Alemayehu. Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia. Agric. For. Fish. 2018, 7(1), 19-35. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Molla Abate, Getachew Alemayehu. Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia. Agric For Fish. 2018;7(1):19-35. doi: 10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14,
  author = {Molla Abate and Getachew Alemayehu},
  title = {Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia},
  journal = {Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries},
  volume = {7},
  number = {1},
  pages = {19-35},
  doi = {10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.aff.20180701.14},
  abstract = {An on-farm experiment was conducted in the dry season of 2012/2013under irrigation at Jigna rural village of Dera District, South Gonder Zone/Ethiopia. The experiment was conducted to assess the biological benefits of intercropping maize with fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean. A field have a total of 7 treatments, namely three intercropping of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean with maize and their four sole cropping, were laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Gross plot size of each treatment was 3m × 2.7m (8.1m2), but net plot size varied up on the crop types. Spacing between adjacent replications and plots was 1.5m and 1.0m, respectively. Fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean as sole crops were planted at inter-row and intra-row spacing of 20cm × 5cm, 20cm × 5cm and 40cm × 10cm, respectively. In both intercropping and sole cropping  maize  was planted at 75cm× 30cm inter- and intra- row spacing, while fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean were intercropped in the middle of two maize rows at their recommended intra-spacing. Varieties used for the present study were BH-540 maize hybrid, "Challa” fenugreek, "Burkitu" field pea and "Awash Melkassa" haricot bean. Data of phenological, vegetative growth and, yield related crop parameters were timely collected following their respective standard methods and procedures, and further subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SAS version 9.2. Whenever the ANOVA result showed significant difference among treatments for a parameter   mean separation was further done using Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DNMRT). Intercropping didn’t show any significant effect statistically (p<0.05) on phenological, vegetative growth and yield related parameters of the component crops. However, concerning biomass of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean, the analysis of variance showed that there has significant difference (p≤0.05) between intercropping and sole cropping. On the contrary, intercropped field pea produced higher pod per plant, plant height and seed per pod than that of sole field pea. Intercropped Haricot bean was also produced slightly higher plant height, seed per pod and thousand grain weights than its sole crops. Therefore, in the present study area during dry season under irrigation, maize intercropping with haricot bean and field pea was more advantageous than their respective sole crops.},
 year = {2018}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Biological Benefits of Intercropping Maize (Zea mays L) with Fenugreek, Field Pea and Haricot Bean Under Irrigation in Fogera Plain, South Gonder Zone, Ethiopia
AU  - Molla Abate
AU  - Getachew Alemayehu
Y1  - 2018/02/05
PY  - 2018
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
T2  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JF  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
JO  - Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
SP  - 19
EP  - 35
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5648
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.aff.20180701.14
AB  - An on-farm experiment was conducted in the dry season of 2012/2013under irrigation at Jigna rural village of Dera District, South Gonder Zone/Ethiopia. The experiment was conducted to assess the biological benefits of intercropping maize with fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean. A field have a total of 7 treatments, namely three intercropping of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean with maize and their four sole cropping, were laid out in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Gross plot size of each treatment was 3m × 2.7m (8.1m2), but net plot size varied up on the crop types. Spacing between adjacent replications and plots was 1.5m and 1.0m, respectively. Fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean as sole crops were planted at inter-row and intra-row spacing of 20cm × 5cm, 20cm × 5cm and 40cm × 10cm, respectively. In both intercropping and sole cropping  maize  was planted at 75cm× 30cm inter- and intra- row spacing, while fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean were intercropped in the middle of two maize rows at their recommended intra-spacing. Varieties used for the present study were BH-540 maize hybrid, "Challa” fenugreek, "Burkitu" field pea and "Awash Melkassa" haricot bean. Data of phenological, vegetative growth and, yield related crop parameters were timely collected following their respective standard methods and procedures, and further subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SAS version 9.2. Whenever the ANOVA result showed significant difference among treatments for a parameter   mean separation was further done using Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test (DNMRT). Intercropping didn’t show any significant effect statistically (p<0.05) on phenological, vegetative growth and yield related parameters of the component crops. However, concerning biomass of fenugreek, field pea and haricot bean, the analysis of variance showed that there has significant difference (p≤0.05) between intercropping and sole cropping. On the contrary, intercropped field pea produced higher pod per plant, plant height and seed per pod than that of sole field pea. Intercropped Haricot bean was also produced slightly higher plant height, seed per pod and thousand grain weights than its sole crops. Therefore, in the present study area during dry season under irrigation, maize intercropping with haricot bean and field pea was more advantageous than their respective sole crops.
VL  - 7
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download