Improvement of Intercropping Performance Assessment in a System with Difference of Crops’ Cycle Durations: Calculation Methods for Rice-cassava Association

Konan Kouassi Urbain^1, , Koné Brahima¹, Konan Kouamé Firmin², Keli Zagbahi Jules³, Bouet Alphonse³ and Yao-Kouamé Albert¹

¹Felix Houphouet Boigny University, Earth Sciences Unit, Soil science department, 22 BP 582 Abidjan 22, Côte d’Ivoire

²Training and Research Unit in Agroforestry, Earth Sciences Department, Jean Lorougnon Guede (UJLoG) University, 02 BP 150 Daloa 02, Côte d’Ivoire

³National Center for Agronomic Research (CNRA), 01 BP 1740 Abidjan 01 Côte d’Ivoire

Cite this paper:
Konan Kouassi Urbain, Koné Brahima, Konan Kouamé Firmin, Keli Zagbahi Jules, Bouet Alphonse and Yao-Kouamé Albert. Improvement of Intercropping Performance Assessment in a System with Difference of Crops’ Cycle Durations: Calculation Methods for Rice-cassava Association. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research. 2021; 9(5):251-257. doi: 10.12691/jfnr-9-5-2

Abstract

Crop performance evaluation in intercropping involving booth crops with different cropping cycle durations is still a concern for agronomic research while farmers already adopted this agro-system in spite of yield decreasing of one of the component. Agronomic trial involving rice-cassava intercropping with different densities of cassava planting was undertaken in western Côte d'Ivoire to determine most reliable parameters for performance index calculation comparing the conventional to new proposed methods. In a Fisher design, number of root/plant, cassava yield, cassava yield/2 rice cycles, 1000 rice grain weight, and rice grain yield were collected for exploring their reliability on global yield determination. Area Time Equivalent Ratio (ATER) and Crop Performance Ratio Time corrected were calculated as conventional method of performance index assessment while, average yield of cassava for two cycle of rice (ATER1) and the mean for both cropping cycles of rice (ATER2) were proposed as new methods. Except the variation of yield in single cropping, no significant effect of cassava planting density was recorded in global production and ATER value overlapped the threshold value of 1 in some extend. Only calculated yield were reliable for global production pointing out ATER1 as the most consistent method for rice-cassava intercropping performance determination. Rice grain yield and half of cassava yield calculated on basis of two rice cropping cycle were revealed as the most reliable parameters for ATER calculation highlighting such method viability for intercropping performance assessment when involving two crops with different cycle durations.

Keywords:
global production crop cycle duration intercropping performance Area Time Equivalent Ratio

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Fukai S. (1993). Intercropping-bases of productivity. Field Crops Research 34, pp. 239-245.
[2]	Coolman RM and Hoyt GD. (1993). Increasing sustainability by intercropping Hort Technology 3, pp. 309-311.
[3]	Zimmemann MJO. (1996). Breeding for yield, in mixture of common beans (Phaseolus Vulgaris L.) and maize (Zea mays L.). Euphytica 92, pp. 129-134.
[4]	Jarenyama P, Hesterman OB, Waddington SR and Harwood RR. (2000). Relay intercropping of Sunnhemp and cowpea into a smalholder maize system in Zimbabwe. Agronomy Journal 92, pp. 239-244.
[5]	Fukai S, Trenbath BR. (1993). Processes determining intercrop productivity and yields of component crops. Field Crops Research 34, pp. 247-271.
[6]	Azam-Ali SN, Squire GR. (2002). Principles of Tropical Agronomy. Wallingford, UK: CABI.
[7]	Azam-Ali SN. (1995). Assessing the efficiency of radiation use by intercrops. Cited in Azam-Ali SN, Squire, GR. 2002. Principles of Tropical Agronomy. CABI, Wallingford, UK.
[8]	Yahuza I. (2011). Review of some methods of calculating intercrop efficiencies with particular reference to the estimates of intercrop benefits in wheat/faba bean system. In International Journal of Biosciences (IJB) ISSN: 2220-6655 (Print) 2222-5234 (Online) Vol. 1, No. 5, pp. 18-30.
[9]	Sanchez P A. (1976). Properties and Management of Soils in the Tropics (Wiley, NY: (ISBN 0-47175200-2), IID. Pp. 478-532.
[10]	Willey RW. (1979). Intercropping –Its importance and research needs. Part 1. Competition and yield advantages. Field Crop Abstracts 32, pp. 1-10.
[11]	Hiebsch CK, Mac Collum RE. (1987). Area x Time Equivalency Ratio: a method for evaluating the productivity of intercrops. Agron. J., 79, pp. 15-22.
[12]	Bojnec S and Latruffe L. (2007). Farm size and efficiency: the case of Slovenia. 100th Jubilee Seminar of European Association of Agricultural Economists “Development of Agriculture and Rural Areas in Central and Eastern Europe”.Novi Sad, 21st-23rd June 2007.
[13]	Gorton M, Davidova S. (2004). Farm productivity and efficiency in the CEE applicant countries: a synthesis of results, Agric Econ, no. 30, pp. 1-16.
[14]	Bouharmont J. (1990). Base agronomique de la production végétale. Chap. 13: Création variétale et amélioration des plantes. Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgique, pp. 311-338.
[15]	Shanahan JF, Doerge TA, Johnson JJ and Vigil MF. (2004). Feasibility of site-specific management of corn hybrids and plant densities in the great plains. Prec. Agric. 5, pp. 207-225.
[16]	Daljeet S D, Martin M W. (2020). Understanding variability in optimum plant density and recommendation domains for crowding stress tolerant processing sweet corn. PLoS ONE 15(2): e0228809.
[17]	Dariush Mazaheri, Madani Ahad and Oveysi Meysam. (2006). Assessing the land equivalent ratio (ler) of two corn [zea mays l.] varieties intercropping at various nitrogen levels in Karaj, Iran. In Journal Central European Agriculture Volume 7 No. 2, pp. 359-364.
[18]	Aasim M, Muhammad EV and Karim A. (2008). Yield and competition indices of intercropping cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Using Different planting patterns. Ankara, Turkey. 7, pp. 327-333.
[19]	Fahey T, Bledsoe C, Day R, Ruess R and Smucker A. (1998). Fine Root Production and Demography, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
[20]	ChapinIII FS and Eviner VT. (2014). Biogeochemical interactions governing terrestrial net primary production. In: Karl, DM and WH Schlesinger, editors. Treatise on geochemistry. Volume 10: Biogeochemistry. 2nd edition. Elsevier BV. Amsterdam, Netherlands. Pp. 189-216.
[21]	Rana S S and M C Rana. (2011). Cropping System. Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, CSK Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, 80p.
[22]	Mattos P, Souza LS, Souza JS and Caldas RC. (2005). Consorciação da mandioca plantada em fileiras duplas e simples com culturas de ciclo curto. I. mandioca x caupi x milho. Revista Brasileira de Mandioca 18, pp. 25-30.
[23]	Rao M.and Morgado L. (1985). Consorciação com a cultura da mandioca no Nordeste do Brasil: Resultados atuais e perspectivas para futuras pesquisas. EMBRAPA-CPATSA. 32, 22 p.
[24]	Vandermeer J. (1989). The Ecology of intercropping. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University press.
[25]	Innis D. 1997. Intercropping and the scientific basis of traditional agriculture. London, UK: Intermediate Technology publication.
[26]	Harris D, Natarajan M, Willey RW. (1987). Physiological basis for yield advantage in a sorghum/groundnut intercrop exposed to drought 1: dry matter production, yield and light interception. Field Crops Research 17, 259-272.
[27]	Sullivan, P. (2001). Intercropping Principles and Production Practices. Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA), USDA Rural Business.
[28]	Tsay JS, Fukai S, Wilson GL. (1988). Intercropping cassava with soyabean cultivars of varying maturities. Field Crops Research 19, 211-225.