Author
Listed:
- Jacques Fils Pierre
(Division of Postgraduate Studies and Research, Tecnológico Nacional de México—Campus Conkal, Conkal 97345, Mexico)
- Luis Latournerie-Moreno
(Division of Postgraduate Studies and Research, Tecnológico Nacional de México—Campus Conkal, Conkal 97345, Mexico)
- René Garruña
(National Council of Science and Technology, Tecnologico Nacional de Mexico—Campus Conkal, Conkal 97345, Mexico)
- Krista L. Jacobsen
(Department of Horticulture, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546, USA)
- Carrie A. M. Laboski
(Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, University Park, PA 16802, USA)
- Roberth Us-Santamaría
(Centro de Investigación Científica de Yucatán, Merida 97205, Mexico)
- Esaú Ruiz-Sánchez
(Division of Postgraduate Studies and Research, Tecnológico Nacional de México—Campus Conkal, Conkal 97345, Mexico)
Abstract
In developing countries, intercropping is commonly used to boost land productivity and agricultural benefits. However, in the Yucatan region of Mexico, maize ( Zea mays L.) yields remain low, despite consistent fertilizer and pesticide inputs in traditional intercropping systems. Furthermore, little is known about the photosynthetic mechanisms that occur when maize plants interact with legumes, and there is a lack of understanding of how intercropping systems affect other organisms in the system, such as beneficial and insect pest population dynamics. A field experiment was carried out on the Yucatan Peninsula in 2021 to assess the impact of maize–legume intercropping systems on maize yield, physiological characteristics as evaluated by gas exchange measurements, and the abundance of beneficial insects in traditional and novel maize intercropping systems. The experiment was carried out with a randomized complete block design with three replicates. Treatments included maize intercropped with a novel legume, crotalaria ( Crotalaria juncea L.), maize intercropped with a traditional legume, cowpea ( Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.), and sole maize as a control. Significant differences in plant height were shown at growth stages V12 (45 days after sowing) and VT (60 days after sowing). No differences were observed in stem diameter, leaf area index, or chlorophyll content. The maize/cowpea intercrop increased the photosynthesis rate by 12.9% and 9.84% in the maize/crotalaria and sole maize, respectively ( p < 0.001), and transpiration rate by 6.5% and 8.5% in the maize intercropped with crotalaria and sole maize treatments, respectively ( p < 0.001), of maize plants. No significant effects on stomatal conductance or water use efficiency were observed, but the carbon intercellular rate was reduced by 9.74% and 9.15 when compared to the maize/crotalaria and the sole maize treatments, respectively. Overall, intercropping treatments attracted more beneficial insects than sole maize. For predators, the families that stood out were Coccinelidae, Formicidae, Araneidae, Thomisidae, Syrphidae, Chrysomelidae, Oxypidae, Vespidae, Reduviidae, Carabidae, Asilidae, Salthicidae, Dolichopodidae, while among parasitoids, the most frequent families were Eurytomydae, Braconidae, Tachinidae, Pteromalidae, Scelionidae, and Figitidae. In comparison to the maize/cowpea and maize/crotalaria treatments, the sole maize treatment resulted in a grain yield increase of 24.5% and 32%, respectively. However, sole maize was not statistically different to that of maize/cowpea intercropping. In conclusion, our findings suggest that maize/cowpea intercropping could be a viable alternative to sole maize cropping systems for enhancing maize yield and the abundance of beneficial insects, without increasing interspecific competition with the maize crop. Therefore, the maize/cowpea intercropping system represents a sustainable planting alternative for promoting maize grain yield and also promoting edible legume production within the system. Furthermore, the outcomes of this study can serve as a theoretical framework for increasing maize–legume intercropping profitability under growing conditions on the Yucatan Peninsula.
Suggested Citation
Jacques Fils Pierre & Luis Latournerie-Moreno & René Garruña & Krista L. Jacobsen & Carrie A. M. Laboski & Roberth Us-Santamaría & Esaú Ruiz-Sánchez, 2022.
"Effect of Maize–Legume Intercropping on Maize Physio-Agronomic Parameters and Beneficial Insect Abundance,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-15, September.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12385-:d:928810
Download full text from publisher
References listed on IDEAS
- Nicolas Carton & Christophe Naudin & Guillaume Piva & Guénaëlle Corre-Hellou, 2020.
"Intercropping Winter Lupin and Triticale Increases Weed Suppression and Total Yield,"
Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, August.
- Z. R. Khan & K. Ampong-Nyarko & P. Chiliswa & A. Hassanali & S. Kimani & W. Lwande & W. A. Overholt & W. A. Overholt & J. A. Picketta & L. E. Smart & C. M. Woodcock, 1997.
"Intercropping increases parasitism of pests,"
Nature, Nature, vol. 388(6643), pages 631-632, August.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
- Claudia Di Bene & Rosa Francaviglia & Roberta Farina & Jorge Álvaro-Fuentes & Raúl Zornoza, 2022.
"Agricultural Diversification,"
Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-6, March.
- Anamarija Jagodič & Stanislav Trdan & Žiga Laznik, 2019.
"Entomopathogenic nematodes: can we use the current knowledge on belowground multitrophic interactions in future plant protection programmes? - Review,"
Plant Protection Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(4), pages 243-254.
- Lech Gałęzewski & Iwona Jaskulska & Dariusz Jaskulski & Edward Wilczewski & Marek Kościński, 2022.
"Strip Intercrop of Barley, Wheat, Triticale, Oat, Pea and Yellow Lupine—A Meta-Analysis,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-21, November.
- Lauren C. Ponisio & Paul R. Ehrlich, 2016.
"Diversification, Yield and a New Agricultural Revolution: Problems and Prospects,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:19:p:12385-:d:928810. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.