Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T06:18:38.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intercropped Corn-Soyabean Density Studies. II. Yield Composition and Protein†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

D. H. Putnam ,
S. J. Herbert  and
A. Vargas
D. H. Putnam
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
S. J. Herbert
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
A. Vargas
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

If corn-soyabean intercrops are to replace corn grown alone, maintenance of yield and improvements in forage quality are important. Total yields and inter-crop competition in corn-soyabean intercropping experiments have been discussed previously (Putnam et al., 1985). In Part II yield composition, components and protein content are presented for intercrops of varying planting patterns and corn densities. Most intercrop patterns produced more forage than sole crops compared at the same yield ratio of corn-soyabean as in the intercrop harvested mixture. At high plant density ear yields in the intercrop were increased while in sole crops they were reduced or unaffected. The increase was a result of an increased number of ears, weight per ear and kernel, and number of kernels per row in the intercrops. Increases in crude protein content over sole crop corn of 11–51% were shown for the various intercrop treatments. Crude protein yields in the intercrops were greater than either sole crop in 1981 and greater than corn and similar to soyabean in 1982, and greater than the crude protein yields expected from an equal planted area of sole crop corn and soyabean in both years. Intercrop forage quality was improved over sole corn both by the addition of protein from soyabean pods and an increased ear: stover ratio of the intercropped corn.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , October 1986 , pp. 373 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Bartle, E. & Voelker, H. (1968). Soybeans in corn silage look promising. Hoards Dairyman 113:172.Google Scholar
Bryant, H. T. & Blaser, R. E. (1968). Plant constituents of an early and a late corn hybrid as affected by row spacing and plant population. Agronomy Journal 60:557–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, W. G. (1958). The relationship between corn population and yield. Agronomy Journal 50:82–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbert, S. J., Putnam, D. H., Poos-Floyd, M. I., Vargas, A. & Creighton, J. F. (1984). Forage yield of intercropped corn and soyabean in various planting patterns. Agronomy Journal 76:507–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J. D. (1980). Yield response of corn when strip intercropped with soyabeans. MSc Thesis, Iowa State University.Google Scholar
Mead, R. & Willey, R. W. (1980). The concept of a Land Equivalent Ratio and advantages in yields from intercropping. Experimental Agriculture 16:217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mead, R. & Riley, J. (1981). A review of statistical ideas relevant to intercropping research. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (Series A) 144:462–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pendleton, J. W., Bolen, C. D. & Seif, R. D. (1963). Alternating strips of corn and soybeans vs. solid plantings. Agronomy Journal 55:293–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pogue, D. E. & Arnold, B. L. (1979). Corn-soyabean silage compared with corn silage for milk production. Research Report, 05 1979, Vol 4 No. 17. Mississippi: Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station.Google Scholar
Putnam, D. H., Herbert, S. J. & Vargas, A. (1985). Intercropped corn: soyabean density studies. I. Yield complimentarity. Experimental Agriculture 21:41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reddy, M. N. & Ramanatha Chetty, C. K. (1984). Staple Land Equivalent Ratio for assessing yield advantage from intercropping. Experimental Agriculture 20:171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutger, J. N. & Crowder, L. V. (1967). Effect of population and row width on corn silage yields. Agronomy Journal 59:475–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slate, W. L. Jr & Brown, B. A. (1925). Corn and soyabeans as a combination crop for silage. Experiment Station Bulletin 133. Storrs, Connecticut.Google Scholar
Smith, S. F. (1981). Dairy Farm Management Business Summary. New York 1980, 81–110. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Stickler, F. C. (1964). Row width and plant population studies with corn. Agronomy Journal 56:438–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willey, R. W. (1979). Intercropping – Its importance and research needs. Part 2. Competition and yield advantages. Field Crop Abstracts 32:1–10.Google Scholar
Willey, R. W. & Osiru, D. S. O. (1972). Studies on mixtures of maize and beans (Phaseolus vulgaris) with particular reference to plant population. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 79:517–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, D. J. & Rossman, E. U. (1957). Mechanical harvest of corn at different plant populations. Agronomy Journal 48:394–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar