Improving Water Use Efficiency and Economic Benefits of Cropping System Through Intercropping in an Arid Climate

Year 2024, Volume: 30 Issue: 2, 293 - 303, 26.03.2024

Mohammad Reza Ramazani Moghaddam Yaser Esmaeilian

Abstract

The sustainable increase of total productivity by improving resources use efficiency in arid agricultural farming areas is crucial, and intercropping may be a good practice to be implemented in these arid regions. For this purpose, a three-year field experiment was conducted as a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications at the research farm of the Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station of Gonabad, Gonabad, Iran to assess the agronomic and economic indices of intercropping patterns. The experiment treatments included C1: sole cotton, C2: sole sesame, and intercropping ratios (C3: 20:80, C4: 40:60, C5: 50:50, C6: 60:40, and C7: 80:20 cotton-sesame ratio). The results showed that the leaf chlorophyll content and leaf area index were significantly higher in the intercropped plants compared to the sole cropped plants. The yield components of both crops (such as branches per plant, capsules per plant, seeds per capsule, and 1000-seed weight for sesame, and opened bolls per plant, closed boll per plant, and seed cotton per boll for cotton) significantly improved under intercropping. However, the highest sesame seed yield (2703, 1979, and 1358 kg ha-1, respectively) and seed cotton yield (3749, 2179, and 3426 kg ha-1, respectively) in the three experiment years were observed in the sole cropping treatment. The implementation of intercropping significantly improved the water use efficiency of the cropping system, so that the highest values in the first to third year (0.67, 0.51, and 0.41 kg m-3, respectively) were recorded in the C4, C3, and C7 treatments. The intercropping evaluation indices revealed the advantage of intercropping compared to the sole cropping. The highest value of the land equivalent ration in the first year (1.28) belonged to the C4 treatment, while in the second and third years, belonged to the C7 treatment (1.40 and 1.10, respectively). The calculation of the aggressivity index revealed that in most of the intercropping patterns, especially in the first and second years, cotton showed greater competitive ability than sesame. The highest actual yield loss value in the first year (0.64) belonged to the C3 treatment, while in the second and third years, belonged to the C7 treatment (1.42 and 0.34, respectively). The highest economic advantage in terms of the monetary advantage index in the first year was obtained by the C4 treatment (1140.5), and in the second and third years, was observed in the C7 treatment (940.6 and 265.5, respectively). The intercropping advantage index in the three experiment years was highest (1.41, 3.38, and 0.80, respectively) for the C7 treatment. Eventually, the results of this research show that cotton and sesame are able to adapt well to the intercropping and this cropping system can significantly improve the resources use efficiency (especially water and land) in an arid area enjoying greater economic benefit than sole cropping

Keywords

Land equivalent ratio, Economic evaluation, Plant competition, Environmental resources, Yield

Supporting Institution

Cotton Research Institute of Iran

Project Number

89023

Thanks

We sincerely thank the Cotton Research Institute of Iran for the financial support of the project (Project No. 89023). Also, we would like to thank the Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Station of Gonabad for providing the land and equipment.

References

• Alabi R A, & Esobhawan A O (2006). Relative economic value of maize-okra intercrops in rainforest zone. Journal of Central European Agriculture 7(3): 433-438
• Bai W, Sun Z, Zheng J, Du G, Feng L, Cai Q, Yang N, Feng C, Zhang Z, Evers J B, van der Werf W & Zhang L (2016). Mixing trees and crops increase land and water use efficiency in a semi-arid area. Agricultural Water Management 178: 281-290
• Banik P (1996). Evaluation of wheat (T. aestivum) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 row-replacement series system. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 176: 289-294
• Banik P, Sasmal T, Ghosal P K & Bagchi D K (2000). Evaluation of mustard (Brassica campestris var Toria) and legume intercropping under 1:1 and 2:1 row replacement series systems. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 185: 9-14
• Basaran U, Copur Dogrusoz M, Gulumser E & Mut H (2017). Hay yield and quality of intercropped sorghum-sudangrass hybrid and legumes with different seed ratio. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 22(1): 47-53
• Cassman K G (1999). Ecological intensification of cereal production systems: yield potential, soil quality, and precision agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96(11): 5952-5959
• Chimonyo V G P, Modi A T & Mabhaudhi T (2016). Water use and productivity of a sorghum-cowpea-bottle gourd intercrop system. Agricultural Water Management 165: 82-96
• Cook R J (2006). Toward cropping systems that enhance productivity and sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103: 18389-18394
• Cruz P A & Sinoquet H (2003). Competition for light and nitrogen during a regrowth cycle in a tropical forage mixture. Field Crops Research 36: 21-30
• de Araújo A C, Magali A I A, Apolino J N S, Walter E P & Jalade O (2013). Relative planting times on the production components in sesame/cowpea bean intercropping in organic system. Ciência e Agrotecnologia 37(6): 531-537
• de Barros I, Gaiser T, Lange F M & Römheld V (2007). Mineral nutrition and water use patterns of a maize/cowpea intercrop on a highly acidic soil of the tropic semiarid. Field Crops Research 101: 26-36
• Dong N, Tang M, Zhang W, Bao X, Wang Y, Christie P & Li L (2018). Temporal differentiation of crop growth as one of the drivers of intercropping yield advantage. Scientific Reports 8: 1-11
• Ghosh P K (2004). Growth, yield, competition and economics of groundnut/cereal fodder intercropping systems in the semi-arid tropics of India. Field Crops Research 88: 227-237
• Ghosh P K., Manna M C, Bandyopadhyay K K, Ajay T A K, Wanjari R H, Hati K M, Misra A K, Acharya C L & Subba R A (2006). Inter-specific interaction and nutrient use in soybean-sorghum intercropping system. Agronomy Journal 98: 1097-1108
• Hadejia I B (2011). Performance of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp) varieties intercropped into maize (Zea mays) under different planting patterns. Research Project, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
• Ibrahim A & Acikalin S (2020). Yield, quality and competition properties of grass pea and wheat grown as pure and binary mixture in different plant densities. Turkish Journal of Field Crops 25(1): 18-25
• Innis D Q (1997). Intercropping and the Scientific Basis of Traditional Agriculture. Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd, London.
• Iqbal J, Cheema Z A & An M (2007). Intercropping of field crops in cotton for the management of purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus L.). Plant and Soil 300: 163-171
• IRIMO (2018). I. R. of Iran Meteorological Organization. Official home page: http://www.irimo.ir/eng/.
• Jahansooz M R, YunusaI A M., Coventry D R, Palmer A R & Eamus D (2007). Radiation- and water-use associated with growth and yields of wheat and chickpea in sole and mixed crops. European Journal of Agronomy 26: 275-282
• Kang S Z, Shi P, Pan Y H, Liang Z S, Hu X T & Zhang J (2000). Soil water distribution, uniformity and water-use efficiency under alternate furrow irrigation in arid areas. Irrigation Science 19: 181-190
• Khan M A H, Sultana N, Akhtae S, Akter A & Zaman M S (2017). Performance of intercropping groundnut with sesame. Bangladesh Agronomy Journal 20(1): 99-105
• Li Y Y, Hu H S, Cheng X, Sun J H & Li L (2011). Effects of interspecific interactions and nitrogen fertilization rates on above-and below-growth in faba bean/maize intercropping system. Acta EcologicaSinica 31(6): 1617-1630
• Li Y, Ma L, Wu, Zhao X, Chen X & Gao X (2020). Yield, yield attributes and photosynthetic physiological characteristics of dryland wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)/maize (Zea mays L.) strip intercropping. Field Crops Research 248: 107656
• Lithourgidis A S, Vlachostergios D N, Dordas C A & Damalas C A (2011). Dry matter yield, nitrogen content and competition in pea-cereal intercropping system. European Journal of Agronomy 34: 287-294
• Liu X H (1994). Farming System. China Agriculture Press, Beijing.
• Liu T, Cheng Z, Meng H, Ahmad I & Zhao H (2014). Growth, yield and quality of spring tomato and physicochemical properties of medium in a tomato/garlic intercropping system under plastic tunnel organic medium cultivation. Scientia Horticulturae 170: 159-168
• Mao L, Zhang L, Zhang S, Evers J B, van der Werf W, Wang J, Sun H, Su Z & Spiertz H (2012). Resource use efficiency, ecological intensification and sustainability of intercropping systems. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 14(8): 1542-1550
• Matusso J M M, Mugwe J N & Mucheru-Muna M (2014). Effects of different maize (Zea mays L.)-soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merill) intercropping patterns on yields, light interception and leaf area index in Embu West and Tigania East sub counties, Kenya. Academic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Research 2: 6-21
• Momirović N, Oljača S, Dolijanović Z, Simić M, Oljača M & Janošević B (2015). Productivity of intercropping maize (Zea mays L.) and pumpkins (Cucurbita maxima Duch.) under conventional vs. conservation farming system. Turkish journal of Field Crops 20(1): 92-98.
• Mushagalusa G N, Ledent J F & Draye X (2008). Shoot and root competition in potato/maize intercropping: effects on growth and yield. Environmental and Experimental Botany 64: 180-188
• Nandini S & Chellamuthu V (2004). Relative performance of cotton cultivars under sole and intercropping situation in the coastal region of Karaikal. In: International Symposium on Strategies for Sustainable Cotton Production-A Global Vision. 2. Crop Production, 23-25 November, Dharwad, Karnataka, India, pp. 235-238
• Nasar J, Shao Z, Gao Q, Zhou X, Fahad S, Liu S, Li C, Banda J S K, Kgorutla L E & Dawar K M (2022). Maize-alfalfa intercropping induced changes in plant and soil nutrient status under nitrogen application. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 68(2): 151-165
• Ning C, Qu J, He L, Yang R, Chen Q, Luo S & Cai K (2017). Improvement of yield, pest control and Si nutrition of rice by rice-water spinach intercropping. Field Crops Research 208: 34-43
• Reddy P R R & Mohammad S (2009). Evaluation of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)-based intercropping system through different approaches under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 79(3): 210-214
• Rostaei M, Fallah S, Lorigooini Z & Abbasi Surki A (2018). Crop productivity and chemical compositions of black cumin essential oil in sole crop and intercropped with soybean under contrasting fertilization. Industrial Crops and Products 125: 622-629
• Schneider U A, Havlík P, Schmid E, Valin H, Mosnier A, Obersteiner M, Böttcher H, Skalsky´ R, Balkovicˇ J, Sauer T & Fritz S (2011). Impacts of population growth, economic development, and technical change on global food production and consumption. Agricultural Systems 104: 204-215
• Taranenko A, Kulyk M, Galytska M, Taranenko S & Rozhko I (2021). Dynamics of soil organic matter in Panicum virgatum sole crops and intercrops. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture 108(3): 255-262
• Vandermeer J (1990). The Ecology of Intercropping. Cambridge University Press, London. Velmurgan R & Ravinder N V (2012). Cotton-cluster bean intercropping system for better farming. Bioinfolet 10(1): 33-34
• Verma R K, Chauhan A, Verma R S, Rahman L U & Bisht A (2013). Improving production potential and resources use efficiency of peppermint (Mentha piperita L.) intercropped with geranium (Pelargonium graveolens L. Herit ex Ait) under different plant density. Industrial Crops and Products 44: 577-582
• Wang G, Feng L, Liu L, Zhang Y, Li A, Wang Z, Han Y, Li Y, Li C & Dong H (2021). Early relay intercropping of short-season cotton increases lint yield and earliness by improving the yield components and boll distribution under wheat-cotton double cropping. Agriculture 11(12): 1294
• Wang R, Sun Z, Bai W, Wang E, Wang Q, Zhang D, Zhang Y, Yang N, Liu Y, Nie J, Chen Y, Duan L & Zhang L (2021). Canopy heterogeneity with border-row proportion affects light interception and use efficiency in maize/peanut strip intercropping. Field Crops Research 271: 108239
• Wang G, Wang D, Zhou X, Shah S, Wang L, Ahmed M, Sayyed R Z & Fahad S (2022). Effects of cotton-peanut intercropping patterns on cotton yield formation and economic benefits. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 6: 900230
• Weekley J, Gabbard J & Nowak J (2012). Micro-level management of agricultural inputs: emerging approaches. Agronomy 2: 321-357
• Weisany W, Raei Y & Pertot I (2015). Changes in the essential oil yield and composition of dill (Anethum graveolens L.) as response to arbuscular mycorrhiza colonization and cropping system. Industrial Crops and Products 77: 295-306
• Willey RW (1990). Resources use in intercropping system. Agricultural Water Management 17: 215-231 Willey R W & Rao M R (1980). A competitive ratio for quantifying competition between intercrops. Experimental Agriculture 16: 117-125
• Xu B C, Li F M & Shan L (2008). Switch grass and milk vetch intercropping under 2:1 row-replacement in semiarid region, northwest China: aboveground biomass and water use efficiency. European Journal of Agronomy 28(3): 485-492
• Yilmaz S, Ozel A, Atak M & Erayman M (2015). Effects of seeding rates on competition indices of barley and vetch intercropping systems in the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 39: 135-143
• Živanov D, Savić A, Katanski S, Karagić Đ, Milošević B, Milić D, Đorđević V, Vujić S, Krstić Đ & Ćupina B (2018). Intercropping of field pea with annual legumes for increasing grain yield production. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture 105(3): 235-242