Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:35:50.173Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Intercropping Young Plants of the Compact Arabica Coffee Hybrid Cultivar Ruiru 11 with Potatoes, Tomatoes, Beans and Maize on Coffee Yields and Economic Returns in Kenya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

J. M. Njoroge ,
K. Waithaka  and
J. A. Chweya
J. M. Njoroge
Affiliation:
Coffee Research Foundation, PO Box 4, Ruiru, Kenya
K. Waithaka
Affiliation:
University of Nairobi, PO Box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya
J. A. Chweya
Affiliation:
University of Nairobi, PO Box 30197, Nairobi, Kenya
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The effects of intercropping young plants of the compact arabica coffee hybrid cultivar Ruiru 11 with potatoes, tomatoes, maize and Phaseolus (dry) beans were studied between 1987 and 1989 at Ruiru in Kenya. Yields of clean (hulled) coffee were reduced by the maize intercrop by 59–100%. Coffee bean size, and raw, roast and liquor quality were not significantly affected by the potato, tomato and bean intercrops, which gave positive net economic benefits. Potatoes planted between all the coffee rows gave the largest marginal rate of economic return, followed by tomatoes in combination with beans. The technically and economically viable intercrops for coffee were potatoes, tomatoes, beans, and tomatoes in combination with beans.

Siembra simultánea de café Araébica y cultivos para la alimentatión

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , July 1993 , pp. 373 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Chaves, J. C. D. & Guerreiro, E. (1990). Intercropping in coffee plantations. Pesquisa Agropecuaria, Brasileira 24(2):177–190.Google Scholar
Devonshire, C. R. (1956). Explanation of the Coffee Report Forms. Coffee Board of Kenya, Monthly Bulletin 21:186.Google Scholar
Hardwood, R. R. & Price, E. C. (1976). Multiple cropping in tropical Asia. In Multiple Cropping, ASA Special Publication No. 27, 11–40 (Eds Papendick, R. F. et al. ). Madison, Wisconsin, USA: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Jackson, J. E. (1983). Light, climate and crop-tree mixtures. In Plant Research and Agroforestety, 365–378 (Ed. Huxley, P. A.). Nairobi, Kenya: International Council for Research in Agroforestry.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture (1981). Major Crops. Technical Handbook. Nairobi, Kenya: Agricultural Information Centre, Ministry of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Mukunya, D. M. & Keya, S. O. (1975). Phaseolus bean production in East Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: Faculty of Agriculture, University of Nairobi. (Mimeograph.)Google Scholar
Mwangi, C. N. (1983). Coffee Growers Handbook. Ruiru, Kenya: Coffee Research Foundation.Google Scholar
Perrin, R. K., Winkelmann, D. L., Moscardi, E. R. & Anderson, J. R. (1976) From Agronomic Data to Farmer Recommendations-An Economics Training Manual. Information Bulletin 27. Mexico: CIMMYT.Google Scholar
Rajput, M. S., Biswa, P. P., Joshi, P. P. & Srivastava, K. C. (1989). Mango (Mangifera indica) based cereal-pulse cropping systems. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 59(3):149–153.Google Scholar