Evaluation of an Intercropping System: Lettuce and Radish Growing in Fruit Sapling Production

Year 2022, Volume: 5 Issue: 3, 220 - 226, 01.07.2022

Hüseyin Karlıdağ , İbrahim Kutalmış Kutsal , Fırat Karaat , Rabia Küçük , Tuncay Kan

https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1056280

Abstract

Agricultural production is one of the most negatively affected sectors from increasing population and global warming. Increasing food demand along with narrowing agricultural production areas increased the need for sustainable agricultural approaches where the unit area is better utilized. Intercropping systems are of those approaches based on the principle of growing more than one crop in the same area. In this study, it was aimed to analyze the opportunities of increasing land-use efficiency in open field fruit sapling production. For this aim, lettuce and radish were grown on the inter-rows of almond, apple, apricot, cherry, and pear sapling growing lines. When compared with control plants, results indicated a slight negative effect of intercropping systems on sapling quality. Yield and growth characteristics were lower in the vegetables subjected to intercropping. On the other hand, Land Equivalent Ratio (LER) and Net Economic Profit (NEP) were higher in intercropping systems. LER value varied between 1.86 and 1.97, and NEP value between 3328 and 6962 USD/da. These results indicated that land-use efficiency was increased with the examined intercropping systems. As a result of the study notwithstanding the quality and yield loses, it was concluded that intercropping of lettuce and radish in fruit sapling production is a beneficial growing application for the mentioned aims.

Keywords

Sapling growing, Intercropping, Land use, Sustainable agriculture, Vegetable growing

References

• Baumann DT, Bastiaans L, Kropff MJ. 2001. Competition and crop performance in a leek-celery intercropping system. Crop Sci, 41: 764-774.
• Chifflot V, Bertoni G, Cabanettes A, Gavaland A. 2006. Beneficial effects of intercropping on the growth and nitrogen status of young wild cherry and hybrid walnut trees. Agroforestry Sys, 66: 13-21.
• Davis JHC, Wolley JN. 1993. Genotypic requirement for intercropping. Field Crops Res, 34: 407-430.
• Francis CA. 1989. Biological efficiences in multiplecropping systems. Adv Agron, 42: 1-42.
• Fukai S, Trenbath BR. 1993. Processes determining intercrop productivity and yields of component crops. Field Crops Res, 34: 247-271.
• Günay A. 1992. Özel sebze yetiştiriciliği. Cilt I. Çağ Matbaası, Ankara, Türkiye, pp: 377.
• Günay A. 1993. Özel Sebze Yetiştiriciliği. Cilt II. Çağ Matbaası, Ankara, Türkiye, pp: 243.
• Haffner K, Vestreheim S. 1997. Fruit quality of strawberry cultivars. Acta Hortic, 439(1): 325-332.
• Hauggaard-Nielsen H, Jensen ES. 2001. Evaluating pea and barley cultivars for complemantarity in intercropping at different levels of soil N availability. Field Crops Res, 72: 185-196.
• Karagölge C. 1996. Tarımsal işletmecilik. tarım işletmelerinin analizi ve planlanması. Atatürk Üniversitesi Yayın No: 827, Ziraat Fakültesi Yayın No: 326, Erzurum, Türkiye, pp. 127.
• Karlidag H, Yildirim E. 2007. The effects of nitrogen fertilization on intercropped strawberry and broad bean. J Sustain Agri, 29(4): 61-74.
• Karlıdağ H, Yıldırım E. 2009a. The effect of vegetable intercropping on plant growth, yield, land equivalent ratio and economic income in sapling growing. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniv Tarım Bil Derg, 19(2): 71-77.
• Karlidag H, Yildirim E. 2009b. Strawberry intercropping with vegetables for proper utilization of space and resources. J Sustain Agri, 33(1): 107-116.
• Ledbetter C, Peterson S, Jenner J. 2006. Modification of sugar profiles in California adapted apricots (Prunus armeniaca L.) through breeding with Central Asian germplasm. Euphytica, 148: 251-259.
• Li L, Yang S, Li X, Zhang F, Christie P. 1999. Interspecific complementary and competetive interactions between intercropped maize and faba bean. Plant and Soil, 212: 105-114.
• MGM. 2020. Resmi İstatistikler, T.C. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı, Meteoroloji Genel Müdürlüğü (Cities & Holiday Resorts, Turkish State Meteorological Service).
• Midmore DJ. 1993. Agronomic modification of resource use and intercrop productivity. Field Crops Res, 34: 357-380.
• Miller RL. 1982. Economics today the micro view. Fourth Edition. Harper and Row Publishers, NewYork, US, pp. 147.
• Morris RA. Garrity DP. 1993. Resource capture and utilization in intercropping: non-nitrogen nutrients. Field Crops Res, 34: 319-334.
• Nissen TM, Midmore DJ, Keeler AG. 2001. Biophysical and economic tradeo€s of intercropping timber with food crops in the Philippine uplands. Agri Sys, 67: 49-69.
• Ojeifo IM, Jolaoso MA, Aiyelaagbe IOO. 2007a. Intercropping citrus rootstock seedlings with watermelon in the nursery. Agri J, 2(1): 55-59.
• Ojeifo IM, Jolaoso MA, Aiyelaagbe IOO. 2007b. Intercropping citrus rootstock seedlings with seed melon in the nursery. Agri J, 2(1): 60-63.
• Song D, Tariq A, Pan K, Khan SU, Saleh TA, Gong S, Zhang A, Wu X. 2020. Influence of planting distance and density on the yield and photosynthetic traits of sweet potato (Ipomoea balatas L.) under an intercropping system with walnut (Juglans regia) saplings. Soil and Tillage Res, 196: 104484.
• Theunnissien J. 1997. Intercropping in field vegetables as an approach to sustainable horticulture. Outlook Agri, 26(2): 95-99.
• Tripathi P, Shah S, Kashyap SD, Tripathi A. 2019. Fruit yield and quality characteristics of high density Prunus persica (L.) Batsch plantation intercropped with medicinal and aromatic plants in the Indian Western Himalayas. Agroforestry Sys, 93(5): 1717-1728.
• Vandermeer J. 1989. The ecology of intercropping. Cambridge Universty Press, Cambridge, UK, pp: 237.
• Wolley J, Davis JHC. 1991. The agronomy of intercropping with beans. In: Schoonhoven, A and Oyset M (eds). Common beans: research for crop improvement. CAB Intternational, CIAT, Colombia, pp: 980.
• Zimmermann MJO. 1996. Breeding for yield, in mixtures of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and maize (Zea mays L.). Euphytica, 92: 129-134.