LIMA, A. F.

LOPES, L. H. O.

English

In Northeast Brazil the peasant farmer use to raise their cropa in mixture, and the intercropping of maise and beans is very frequent.Paper for International Intercropping Workshop at ICRISAT, Hydederabad, India, from jannuary 10 at 13, 1979

LOPES, L. H. de O.

Infoteca-e

PLANT POPULATION ANO SPATlAL ARRANGEMENTSTUDIES IN THE INTERCROPPING OF MAIZE ANDBEANS IN NORTHEAST BRAZILA.F. LimaL .H.O •. Lopes~MBRAPA/cpATSAPETROLINA, PE (BRAZIL) - 1978Plant populstion and spstia! ""~:'"1978 FL - 01215 i11111'•• 11 \\._-------~------').~PLANT POPULATION AND SPATIAL ARRANGEMENTSTUDIES IN THE INTERCROPPING OF MAIZE ANDBEANS IN NORTHEASTBRAZILAldrovile Ferreira LimaLuiz Henrique de Oliveira LopesCropping Sys tems Agronomis ts of EMBRAPA/CPATSAPETROLINA-PE (BRAZIL)1978We are indebted to Mr. M. B. Coelho, Mr. C. M. B. Farias,Mr. S.G. Albuquerque, Mr. G.J. Moraes and Dr. P. A. A. Aguiar membersof the Farming Systems Research Programme of EMBRAPA/CPATSA, for theirassistance with the statistical analysis, english and technical review.Mias M. C. P. Luz and Mrs. A. M. Ciarlo for their assistance with thepaper standardization, and Mr. M. A. Queiroz, Associate Director ofEMBRAPA/CPATSA, for his advice during the planning of the experimentoPOPULATION ANO SPATIAL ARRANGEMENT STUDIES ON 'mE INTERCROPPING OF- 1/AND BEANS ~Phaseo1us vu1garis L.) IN NORTHEAST BRAZI~A.F. LIMA'!:...!L.H.O. LOPESf:../In Northeast Brazi1 the peasant farmers use to raise theirin mixture, and the intercropping of maize and beans (Phaseo1usL.) is very frequento----In order to examine plant popu1ations and spatia1 arrange-maize and beans intercropped, an experiment was carried out atBrazil,. located at 10045' of south latitude and 40007' oflongitude at 550 m altitude. The average annua1 rainfal1 of thearea811 1DD1.The statistica1 design was a randomized complete b10ck with asp1it-p1ot arrangement, with four rep1icates. Four popu1ation 1eve1s ofmaize (25000, 50000,75000 and 100000 p1ants/ha) and beans (150000,200000, 250000 and 300000 p1ants/ha) formed the main p1ots. The sub-p10tscomposed of five spatial arragements (pure maize, 1 M : 2 B, 1 M:3 B, 1 M; 4 B and pure beans).It was conc1uded that the best spatia1 arrangement was 1 : 3,comprising 12,500 plants/ha of maize and 150.000 p1ants/ha of beans.1/ Paper prepared for the International Intercropping Workshop to be heldat ICRISAT, Hyderabad, India, from January 10 to 13, 1979.II Cropping Systems Agronomists of EMBRAPA/CPATSA (Brazi1ian Agricu1tureResearcn Corporation/Agriculture Research Center for Semi-Arid Tropics),Cx. P. 23, 56.300 - Petro1ina, Pernambuco, Brazi1.according to HARGREAVES (1974), half of this land isas semi-arid tropics. The brazilian semi-arid tropics arebetween 30 and 180 south latitude and 350 and 460 west longitude,ing an area of around 1,000,000 Km2 including parts of the statesMaranhio, Piauí, Ceará, Rio Grande do Norte, Paraíba, Pernambuco, Ala-Bahia and Minas Gerais.According to BRASIL. SUDENE (1975), 73% of the holdings inBrazil have less than 50 ha and occupy 12% of the total area ofthe region. As shown in a survey carried out in the first 20 nuclei of"Sertanejo" project.!.!by BRASIL. SUDENE (1977), the farmers can be classi-fied as fol10ws:40% - Farmers without land56% - Farmers having sma11 properties4% - Farmers having medium and large propertiesAt the present time, the cultivated land accounts foron1y1/6 of the total area of the agricultural holdings (FRANCO, 1977).In the northeastern region the small farmers normallymanage a farming system involving small areas planted with food cropssuch as maize, beans,cassava, squash and fruits (banana or mango) andcashcrops such as cotton and castor beans. Crop combinations vary with theregion. Moreover, to complement their food or cash needs, they raisechickens, pigs, and goats. Until recently the research progrannnes devotedto the semi-arid tropics had not considered sufficiently the farmingsystems, and most research objectives had been to improve productiontecbniques only for single crops or animal species, independently ofeachother (DILLON, 1978). Thus, it is an urgent need to spread the use of newtecbnology emphasizing farming systems as a who1e, and there is nobodybetter than the farmers- themselves to provide the basis for this goal.KRANTZ (1974) reported that two important factors, namely!I Government project to promote the development of typical holdings in theSemi-Arid Tropics of North~ast Brazi1, leading to the minimization ofdrought effects.and soils, have influenced farmers in developing their croppingtérns in the semi-arid tropics. The rainfall is erratic and undependable,,:4~~,'::r'\'::?':::','"lna single eropping season it is possible to have excessive rainfall and,i",)~;y":,;',:::,:;;,_,O~ght8 of short duration. The soils have a very low content of organic-\~';r,\:\:\\,,:tter .and native fertility. These factors connected with erratic and un-pendable rainfall pattern make crop production is semi-arid tropics a,bazardous enterprise.W Limited capital resources and risk aversion of small farmers;\','> ;;:~assoeiated with other eharaeteristies caused the early farmers in the semi-~idtropies to develop special eropping patterns based ori multipleroppings, where more than one erop is grown on the same land in one year.n .Northeast Brazil the most eoumon si tuation is intercropping, where twosimultaneously on the same land in rows withln tetmS of cropping combinations there are two clearsituations in the semi-arid tropies of Northeast Brazil related to therainfall regime. ln regions with toa erratic rainfall and limitedsuitabilityfor rainfed agriculture, the most common combination is maize x beans (Vignaunguieulata (L.) Walp) x perennial eotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. varo''Maria Ga1ante" Huteh.), with some var~ations for cassava, castor beans orpalma (eaetus for forage) (Opuntia cochinellifera Mill.). ln regions withless erratie rainfa11 and a higher moisture availibility index (MAl)(HARGREAVES, 1974), there is a predominance of the combination maize xbeans(Phaseolus vulgaris L.), with variations for cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)cassava or palma.ln Northeast Brazil some studies have been carried out onintereropping involving cereals and legumes (FAR1S, 1976; ARAUJO, 1976 andLOPES, 1977), where the advantage of intercropping in relation to pureero~s ean be seen. However, in these studies the different aspects ofplantpopulation, proportional population and spatial arrangement have not beenelearly distinguished.This experiment was planned with the objective of studyingthese aspects in details.The exper~ent was carried out at Filadelfia county (State of BA-10cated at 10945' south latitude and 40907' west longitude, at 550 mThe soils of the areaare deep eutrofic red yellow lateri-.the fo11owing characteristics:6.55.5 ppm0.2 meq/100 g0.8%0.05 meq/lOO gpHP205:K20 :The average annual rainfal1 is 811 mm, concentrated from Novemberrain gauge, set up at the exper~ental site recorded 212.1 mmgrowing season (Figure 1).The exper~enta1 area has an average slope of 8%. A system offurrows of 150 cm was prepared with three rows on the bed.statistica1 design was a randomized complete b ],oçkwith a, with fourrep1icates. Four population levels of maizemain p1ots. Each main plot was divided into 5 sub-plotsdifferent spatia1 arrangements of maize and beans, pureThe populations were distributed as foHows:Popu1ation Maize Beans1 25,000 150,0002 50,000 200,0003 75,000 250,0004 100,000 300,000These popu1ations wer e comb ined with the following spatial arrange-Pure maize (100%)1:2 - 1.row of maize (33%) 2 rows of beans (67%)1:3 - 1 row of maize (25%) 3 rows of beans (75%)1:4 - 1 row of maize (20%) 4 rows of beans (80%)Pure beans (100%)b;t if••E ••••r- I) •o ê VIVI)- 20 o o tIi:lN ' H t'D- ~) t1l t1lO.-l ." ••• •••...• O ~ :::rtU •... 1C l»I: ~ ~ I'D I'D "c:: " " <- -ri rt to'. I'DZ til to'. to'- ~ Ul- ~ ~ .~ l"! I•-t 10••,1 1 1 I:11-o I·a 5 .1~ ! 111~ lIifi) I;li;--o 15 31 15 30 15 31 15 31 15 30 15 31cr•••C MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT:v)oFigu~e 1. Phenological cyc1e oi maize and beans intercropped, and rainfall díslributionduring the growing season. Filade1fia (Brazil), 1978.<'lbe dütaQ.Ce.between rows was .soem, exeept for pure maize where it wasThe different plant populations were obtained by using the row spa-80, 40, 26 and 20 em for maize and 13, 10, 8 and 6,5 em for beans,;~tivelY. Fo; pure maize the spaeings were 40,20, 13 and 10em.~t the planting time 20 kg/ha of N, 60 kg/ha of P205 and 30 kg/ha ofbanded near the seeds. Fourty five days after planting 40 kg/ha of N (;as top dressing to maize.fie experiment was sown on May 19. Three seeds were placed in eaeh plan',hole, and plants were thinned to one plant per hill, 18 days after pla~,'··R"The variety of maize utilized was Centralmex, and the variety ofIPA74-19, with a cycle of 150 days and 90 days, respeetively.;.~~ing· the growing period the crops were kept weed free and regular~5"'li~P)j~;';;:':,:> ::~~Y{'h;.; ;',;cal,;BFlly~gs were applied to contro1 Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith,!' : '>',Jlt: ,'.•....':",:'.>r'.'·:,","'!';,\;':'!-j}':'} "i<'7)"and BelÍGthiszea (Boddie, 1850) on maize, and Empoasca kraemeri Ross1957;0'~'beans •Eachsub-plot of pure maize was p1anted with 5 rows, and the sub-[F'pure beans or maize x beans were p1anted with 9 rows, giving thenumber of harvest rows for each crop:maize - Three central rows1 M . 2 B - 1 row of maize. and 2 rows of beans•1 M 3 B - 1 row of maize and 3. rows of beans1 M 4 B - 1 row of maize and 4 rows of beansPure h~ns ....-.thr:ee central rowsThe moisture content of the seeds was determined at harvest timefor 13%on beans and 15.5% on maize on a wet basis.plants of each crop was counted within the harvest area.The bean crop was harvested on August 22 and the maize erop, on23, 1978.Table 1 shows the grain yie1ds in kg/ha for mixtures and pure '.'!i._~ifferent popu1ations 1eve1s. This is graphically shown in Figure 2.{~-iati~tica1 ana1ysis indicated significant difference for spatialFapsement. There was significant difference for p1ant population in pureizeand mixture 1:3. There was no significant difference for population inother mixtures.The best yie1d advantages occurred at higher plant population(Tab1e 1), which is in agreement with WILLEY (1972). According to(1960), this situation takes p1ace when the individual species't!lJ~e slightly different parts of the environment. For popu1ation 3 the~t~rain yie1ds occurred in mixture 1:2, without significant differencer tbe mixture 1:3. In regard to popu1ation 4, the best grain yieldin mixture 1:2 differing statistica11y from other combinations.It can be observed in Tab1e 1 that the yie1d of pure maizethe increase of p1ant popu1ation. The difference between~~P~l~tion 1 and popu1ation 4 reached 46.2%. This fact i5 justified byighcompetition within the same species, causing a reduction of the cobdex wíth an increase of the maize p1ant popu1ation, varying from 1.1 inpop~lation of 25,000 p1ants/ha to 0.4 in a population of 100,000 plants/~'88 ~hownin Tab1e 2. Table 2 a180 shows that the highest cob indexJ~~u~redat lower popu1ation 1eve1s and in spatia1 arrangements with lowerpr~portion of maize.':~:<;,~x'~:,_. Pure: beans showed. a stab1e. yie1d with maximum variation of 7.8%'~-;;;(Tabl~1). This situation cou1d be due to the use of high p1ant population('nl::t~:::t'v,~~~h>J,: . ! , .-~)j;ü-;leve18maintaining all grain yie1d at a population p1ateau. This resu1t can-t;J"-~~ explained by the. significant compensation effect of the number of pods,f:{hW-'r" 'per plant. That is, the 10wer popu1ation treatments produced in average_~2.5%more pods per plant than the higher p1ant popu1ation (Tab1e 3). It canbe also seen in Table 3 that there was no significant difference for number:tFJ ~f pods per p1ant among spatial arrangements.'::::'"'j(,\";"Tab1e 4 shows the 1and equiva1ent ratio (LER) and percentage of.-.' lodging in maize. Comparing yie1d data of Tab1e 1 with LER and 10dging aff- maize contained in Tab1e 4, it can be seen that the LER of mixture 1:2 inir·; ~opulation 4 presents a yield advantage of 28%, with a 10dging in maize of,1:2 1:3~;2';·1940 13.61 9661344 1449 ·15763284 Aab 2810 Bbc 2572 AcdMaize 3494 2250 2184 1698,Popu1ation 2 Beans 1083 1421 1536~ Total 3494 ABa 3333 Aa 3605 Aa 3234 Aa..:.e~ã Maize 2904 2768 2473 1527o Population 3 "tl Beans 1060 1233 1294:.:. Total 2904 Bb 3828 As 3706 As 2821 Aba:t(Sc: Maize 2021 2852 1852 1384r-..;.-:: Popu1ation 4:%l Beans 1051 1220 1286,Total 2021 Bcd 3903 Aa 3073 Ab 2670 Abc18901890 Ad20192019 Ab18621862 Ac18811881 AdWithin each column means not followed by the same capital 1etter, and within eachrow, means not fo11owed by the same sma11 1etter, are significantIy different at 5%leveI of probabi1ity as determinined by TUKEY testo.o, 1:2",'"-'o 1:3~ 1:4_ •• •• "o M0--.' - ..~ .. ._....0 Bcompared with grain yie1dspopulation 1eve1s. (TUKEY at682 kg/ha, C.V'{a):16.1%,intercropped with Phaseo1us vu1garis L. Fi-(Bl'azil),1978.1:2 1:3 1:4 Mean1.1 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.4 a0.8 1.2 1.4 1.5 l.2b0.7 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.0b0.4 0.8 1.0 l.1 0.8 c0.7 c 1.,1b 1.3 a 1.3 a,1tguresfô11owed by the same 1etters are not significantly different:;10>·· ~tit~~at 5% probability leveI by TUKEY testoof pods per p1ant on Phaseolus vulgaris L. intercroppedwith maize. Fi1adelfia (Brazil), 1978.1:2 1:3 1:417 15 1511 13 1212 11 1110 1012 a 12 a'TABLE 4. Land equiva1ent ratio (LER) andcropping of maize x beans. Fi1adelfia<i -Pure maize 1:2 1:3 1:4 ·Pure Beansr: Popu1ationcr- LE~ Lodging LER Lodging LER Lodging LER Lodging LER>c>->o!z 1 1.00 12 L18 3 1.02 2 1.04 17 1.00·fÃ""i:•..oti2 1.00 56 1.14 10 1.28 12 1.21' 4 1.00>>a~nc:r- 3 1.00 65 1..27 23 1.27 16 1.05 15 1.00..,c::::ll>4 1.00 97 1.28 45 1.09 25 1.01 21 1.00p~~~iati:on 2, of special note is the combination 1:3 where the~,.:,f<>y:·s~,·,:Fr";':;;,', ',' -'.''''1.: .,' ,','.'.C8tes8,yte1d advantage of 28% with a lodging in maize of 12%. ln"-:~~}";<i_r*.,,_/,,'~,':".;-,:''\,;",r '::i·, '.,', '~~~ ..percentage of lodging rose with the increase of plantb#;~flllaize, especial1y in puré maize treatments, reaching 97% at~~41at:ionllavel ' This resu1t is in accordance with FRANC1S andtf,,:;":;,,'l::~·:1~':::";,:i..,<r:/":;- ,:,',~ ..;, '·n~?6) ,in severa1 experiments carried oot at CIAT."_1'-"" ';_;2:{;i;~':'; ~~:;;:'~t!',;M~"::',:"';';.:\4~,,;'r;#vAâ,fJhownin Tab1e 1, in, alI population levels the bean yield)g';., "~ii,:{"':"':'~-'l~t~,:;:}f;:·<\,.:',:' " ','\t~sD~~~';;:~,fportionin the apatial arrangement increased. ln the;~í~h;t~i~~âtion was the opposite. ln regard to the different<:,;~J~%'t~f:~J,t;~:l~~>;:);,':;:,:;''; ~" • •l.s,with~n each spat~a1 arrangement the results show that':~~~~';i::':;:f;\L(~··~'iJ.ncreasing1ycompetitive as population increased. These·}~:f;',,;(]).~":';,~F:>:, '\::- '.: •Vlgreement w~th those found by WILLEY (1972) and AIDAR (1978).i ,,,\.'.".;,~\Çonsidering the conditions at which the experiment was carried~'!~oncluded that:"Grain yie1d of pure maize decreased with the increment afHowever" bean yie1d remained unchanged with the incrementgrain yie1ds in mixtures gave better advantage at1eve1s, especially in the spatial arrangement of 1:23. Considering the LER and percentage of lodging in maize thearrangement was 1:3, corresponding to 1 row of maize to 3 rowscomprinsing 12.500 plants/ha of maize and 150.000 plants/ha ofAIDAR, H. Estudo sobre popu1a~ões de plantas em dois sistemas de culturas., 'áSsoéiadas 'de milho e feiiao. Viçosa, MG, Universidad~ Federal de Vi-ços~, 1978. 130 p. (Tese de Doutorado).~Al1AtJJO,A.C.; FRElBE FILHO, F.R. e RIBEIRO, V.Q. Avalia ão técnico-econô;",',,'"mica do sistema consorciado milho x fei"ão (Vi a no Estado do Piau~.Terezina, EMBRAPA UEPAE, 1976. 15 p.• BRASIL/SUDENE. 11 Plano Nacional de Desenvolvimento; programa de ação dogoverno para o ~ordeste 1975-79. Recife, 1975. 171 p .• BRASIL/SUDENE. Pro'eto Sertane"o· ro ramavimento regional da Reg~ao Se~- rida.Recife, 1977. 69 p.ao desenvo1-trabalho.,DE WIT, C.T. On competition. Vers1. Landbouwk Onderz, 66: 8, 1960.DILLON, J.; PLUCKNET, D.L. and VALLAEYS, G. The review of farming systemsresearch at the International ricu1tura1 Research Centers CIAT IITA,ICRISAT and IRRI. Roma, FAO,'197. 57 p.FARIS, M.A.; MAFRA, R.G.; VENTURA, C.A. e ARAOJO, M.R. Estudos prelimina-res de consórcio de milho e sorgo, com duas leguminosas do Nordeste do 'Brasil. In: IPA - Programa de sorgo e milheto. Recife, 1976. p. 153-161. (Boletim, 3).tFRANCIS, C.A.; FLOR C.A. Y PRAGER, M. Contrastes Agroeconomicos entre e1,'monocultivo de maiz y Ia associaciân maiz-frijol. Cali, CIAT, 1976.,\,~6 p.,FRANCO, J.A.A. O Nordeste e a agricultura. Petrolina, 1977. (Palestra realizada na CODEVASF em maio de 1977, por ocasião da visita do ICRISAT):10'.::HARGREAVES,G.H. Precipitation dependability and potencia1s for agricul-~."'tura1production in Northeast Brazil. Logan, Utah State University,1974.213 p.KRANTZ, B.4. Cropping patterns for increasing and stabi1izing agricu1tura1production in the Semi-Arid Tropics. In: ICRISAT - Internationa1 work-shopon fa~ng systems. Hyderabad, 1974. p. 217-248.LOPES, L.H.O.; NASPOLINI FILHO, V. e QUEIROZ, M.A. Avalia5ão preliminar doconsórcio milho x fei 'ão macassar (Vi na un uicu1ata (L Wa1) em areade b81xa prec1p1taçao. Petrolina, EMBRAPA CPATSA, 1976. 12 p.WILLEY, R.W. Some priority, problema and possible approaches in inter-cropping research. Hyderabad, ICRISAT, 1977. 13 p•• & OSIRU, D.S.O. Studies on mixtures of maize and beans (Phaseo1us---vulgaris) with particular reference to plant population. J. Agric. Sei.Camb., 79: 517-529, 1972.

Plant population and spatial arrangement studies in the intercropping of maize and beans in Northeast Brazil.

http://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/handle/doc/156598

Plant population and spatial arrangement studies in the intercropping of maize and beans in Northeast Brazil.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Infoteca-e