Legume Research

  • Chief EditorJ. S. Sandhu

  • Print ISSN 0250-5371

  • Online ISSN 0976-0571

  • NAAS Rating 6.80

  • SJR 0.391

  • Impact Factor 0.8 (2024)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Legume Research, volume 44 issue 11 (november 2021) : 1343-1347

Evaluation of Maize (Zea mays L.) + Legume Intercropping System for Productivity, Profitability, Energy Budgeting and Soil Health in Hill Terraces of Eastern Himalayan Region

L.K. Baishya1, Temjenna Jamir1,*, N. Walling1, D.J. Rajkhowa1
1ICAR-Research Complex for NEH Region, Manipur Centre, Lamphelpat-795 004, Imphal, Manipur, India.

  • Submitted04-07-2019|

  • Accepted21-01-2020|

  • First Online 18-03-2020|

  • doi 10.18805/LR-4190

Cite article:- Baishya L.K., Jamir Temjenna, Walling N., Rajkhowa D.J. (2021). Evaluation of Maize (Zea mays L.) + Legume Intercropping System for Productivity, Profitability, Energy Budgeting and Soil Health in Hill Terraces of Eastern Himalayan Region . Legume Research. 44(11): 1343-1347. doi: 10.18805/LR-4190.

ABSTRACT

Three-year (2014-2016) field experiment was conducted for evaluation of maize (Zea mays L.) based intercropping system for productivity, profitability, energy budgeting and soil health in Eastern Himalayan region. The treatments consisted of four sole crop viz. maize, soybean, groundnut, cowpea and six intercropping treatments viz. maize + groundnut (1:1), maize + soybean (1:1), maize + cowpea (1:1) and  strip cropping of maize + groundnut (4:4), maize + soybean (4:4), maize + cowpea (4:4). The highest maize equivalent yield (10.2 t ha-1) was recorded in maize + groundnut cropping system (1:1) followed by maize + soybean (1:1) with 8.9 t ha-1. The highest SNBC (soil microbial biomass carbon) (66.2 mg g-1) and organic carbon (1.3%) were recorded with the cultivation of cowpea as a sole or intercrop. Strip cropping system, maize + cowpea (4:4) recorded the highest soil available N, P2O5 and K2O kg ha-1, highest energy efficiency (12.53) and energy productivity (955.01 g MJ-1). 

INTRODUCTION

With shrinkage of resources like arable land, irrigation water and energy, there is a dire need to design and develop new methods and techniques of crop production to meet the increasing demand for food, feed and forage through effective utilization of available agricultural input resources. Intercropping could be a viable agronomic means for risk minimizing farmers’ profit and subsistence-oriented, energy-efficient and sustainable venture (Faroda et al., 2007). Since maize (Zea mays L.) is a widely spaced crop, inter-row space could profitably be utilized for legumes in the interspaces. Maize is one of the important crops occupying third position next to wheat and rice in cereal production in the world. Maize has been recognized as a common component in most intercropping system. It seems to lead as the cereal constituent of intercrop and is regularly combined with dissimilar legumes (Maluleke et al., 2005). Maize yield is generally higher in high solar intensities, lower night temperatures and lower incidence of pest and diseases (Adesoji et al., 2013). Maize-legume intercropping system, besides increasing productivity and profitability also improves soil health, conserves soil moisture and increases total out turn (Ummed et al., 2008). Spatial arrangement and plant population in an intercropping system have important effects on the balance of competition between component crops and their overall productivity. Under the present system of sole cropping, small farmers are unable to address their diversified domestic needs to sustain normal livings from their limited land, water and economic resources. This necessitates going for appropriate alternative and more efficient production systems such as multi-cropping (inter/relay cropping) which can ensure proper utilization of resources to obtain increased production per unit area and time on a sustainable basis (Trenbath, 1986). Intercropping being a unique property of tropical and subtropical areas is becoming popular day by day among small farmers as it offers the possibility of yield advantage relative to sole cropping through yield stability and improved yield (Bhatti et al., 2006).  The relative yield stability of farming practices without giving due considerations to spatial arrangements is at low levels with a high probability of crop failures. Therefore, the present investigation was undertaken.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The field experiment was conducted at the Research Farm (Langol) of ICAR Research Complex for North Eastern Hill Region (NEHR), Manipur Centre, Lamphelpat during kharif season of 2013, 2014 and 2015. The farm is located at 24.49°N latitude, 93.55°E longitude with an altitude of 760 m above mean sea level. The experimental area falls under the monsoon belt of Eastern Himalayan region with an average annual rainfall of 1450-2000 mm. Due to varied level of altitude and slopes the climatic situation of the region varies from subtropical to semi-temperate condition (prevailing at higher altitudes). The winter season (November to February) can be characterized by low temperature, heavy dew fall and occurrence of frost. The temperature varies from 0°C in winter to 36°C in summer months. The soil type ranges from heavy (valley region) to light (hill slopes) in texture. In general, the soil of the experimental sites were sandy loam in texture, acidic in reaction (pH 5.3), medium to low in nitrogen (175.30±12.44 kg ha-1), low in phosphorus (12.44±0.86 kg ha-1) and medium in potassium (270.50±17.5 kg ha-1). The experiment comprising of 10 treatments were laid out in RCBD with three replications. The treatments consisted of four sole crop treatments viz. (i) sole maize (ii) sole soybean (iii) sole groundnut (iv) sole cowpea  and six intercropping treatments viz. (v) maize + groundnut (1:1) (additive series) (vi) maize + soybean (1:1) (additive series) (vii) maize + cowpea (1:1) (additive series) (viii) strip cropping of maize + groundnut (4:4) (ix) strip cropping of maize + soybean (x) strip cropping of maize + cowpea (4:4). The population density of maize, groundnut, soybean and cowpea remained same as sole crop in case of 1:1 intercropping treatments, but it was reduced to 50% for strip cropping system. The fertilizer schedule was 80-60-40 kg N-P2O5-K2O ha-1 was applied sole as well as intercropped maize. However, the dose of N, P2O5 and K2O ha-1 was reduced to half in case of groundnut, soybean and cowpea and no additional nutrients were applied to intercrops. The net plot size of the experimental plot was 4 m × 3 m. The crops were shown in line with recommended seed rate, maize @ 25kg ha-1 with spacing 60 cm × 20 cm, soybean @ 60 kg ha-1 40 cm × 20 cm, groundnut @ 120 kg ha-1 40 cm ± 20 cm and cowpea 30 kg ha-1 was 40 cm × 20 cm during 2nd week of May in each year. The crop management practices, weeding was done at 30-45 days. Maize and cowpea were harvested as green cob and as vegetables respectively and sold at local market rate. However, other crops were harvested at maturity. The economic yield of different crops were converted into maize equivalent yield (MEY) based on the price. The price of different commodities was considered as per MSP and prevailing market rate for green cob and cowpea as vegetables. The system production efficiency was calculated (kg ha-1day-1). Economics of different treatments were worked out by taking into account the cost of inputs and income obtained from output (grain and stover yield).
 
Net returns (₹ ha-1) calculated by using formula:
 
Net returns = Gross returns - Cost of cultivation
 
Benefit: cost (B: C) ratio calculated by the formula:
 
Benefit : Cost ratio= Gross returns/Cost of cultivation
 
Energy indices were calculated as following (Mandal et al., 2005) :

Energy efficiency = Total energy output (MJ ha-1)/Total energy  intput (MJ ha-1)
Energy productivity = Output (grain + by-product) (kg ha-1)/ Total energy intput (MJ ha-1)
Specific energy = Total energy input (MJ ha-1)/Grain yield (kg ha-1)
Net energy = Energy output (MJ ha-1) - Energy input (MJ ha-1)
        
The other parameters on growth, yield and yield attributes and of soil fertility status were analysis in randomized block  design (RBD) with three replications.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Maize equivalent yield (MEY)
 
The result revealed that the average yield of sole crops i.e. maize, soybean, groundnut and cowpea were 11.5 t ha-1 (green cob), 2.0 t ha-1, 2.25 t ha-1 and 2.2 t ha-1 (as vegetables)  respectively (Table 1). The yields of respective crops were converted into maize equivalent yield (MEY). The result revealed that the green cob yield of sole maize was found to be highest (7.1 t ha-1) which was followed by groundnut (6.9 t ha-1), cowpea (5.0 t ha-1) and soybean (4.0 t ha-1).
 

Table 1: Evaluation of diversified maize based cropping pattern in hill Terrace.


        
However, among the different maize based intercropping cropping system (additive series)   the highest maize equivalent (10.2 t ha-1) was recorded in maize + groundnut cropping system (1:1) which was followed by maize + soybean (1:1) 8.9 t ha-1  and maize + cowpea (1:1) 8.4 t ha-1. This result was in conformity with the experiment conducted at the Indian Agric. Research Institute revealed a significant dry matter accumulation of maize and groundnut intercropped in 1:1 row ratio arrangement (Aravindkumar et al., 2004). On the other hand, among the different strip cropping (intercropping) system, maize + groundnut cropping system (4:4) recorded 7.4 t ha-1  which was followed by maize + cowpea (4:4) 7.3 t ha-1 and maize + soybean (4:4) 7.2 t ha-1.
        
The system production efficiency were also studied under different cropping system and the result reveals that the highest system production efficiency was found in maize + groundnut (1:1) (additive series)  cropping system (27.95 kg ha-1 day-1) which  was followed by maize + soybean (1:1) cropping system (24.38 kg ha-1 day-1). On the other hand, among the strip cropping system, maize + groundnut (4:4) recorded the highest system production efficiency (20.27 kg ha-1 day-1) as compared to other strip cropping system.  The advantage of intercropping with more efficient utilization of all available resources and increased productivity compared with each sole crop of the mixture (Mucheru-Muna et al., 2009).
 
Soil fertility status
 
The soil fertility status for organic carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium were studied after harvest of the crops and the result revealed that growing of sole  soybean, groundnut and cowpea or  inclusion of the said crops in maize based cropping system enhanced the fertility status of soil (Table 2). The highest SMBC and organic carbon (66.20±5.65 mg g-1; 1.26±0.09%) were recorded with the cultivation of cowpea as a sole or intercrop,  which was found to be significantly superior over other sole and intercropping system under the study followed by soybean (46.35±3.96 mg g-1; 1.23±0.09%). Among the intercropping system maize + cowpea (1:1) recorded the highest SMBC and organic carbon (31.85±2.72 mg g-1; 1.07±0.07%). The same trend of results were also recorded in strip (intercropping) cropping of maize + cowpea (4:4) which was found to be significantly superior over maize + groundnut (4:4). This was in conformity with a study by Vesterager et al., (2008). The available soil nitrogen, P2O5 and K2O were also found to be the highest after harvest of the crops where cowpea was cultivated as sole, intercrop or strip cropping system. The highest N, P2O5 and K2O recorded for cowpea when grown as sole crop was 414.48±17.98 kg ha-1, 21.30±1.54 kg ha-1 and 407.68±23.54 kg ha-1 respectively. In the intercropping system (additive series), maize + cowpea (1:1) recorded the highest N, P2O5 and K2O kg ha-1 as 350.71±15.21 kg ha-1, 18.89±1.37 kg ha-1 and 394.24±22.76 kg ha-1 respectively which was found to significantly superior over the other intercropping system. On the other hand, among the entire strip cropping system, maize + cowpea (4:4) recorded the highest soil available N, P2O5 and K2O kg ha-1 as compared to other strip cropping system under the study. This was in conformity with the study by Vesterager et al. (2008). They found that maize and cowpea intercropping was beneficial on nitrogen poor soil. Maize and cowpea intercropping increases the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents associated to monocrop of maize (Dahmardeh et al., 2010). Degraded and infertile soils were realized as a result of continuous monocropping and insufficient organic matter reprocessing coupled with occurrence of rainfall variability marked by common dry spells accounting for low crop yield (Amos et al., 2012). Adeleke and Haruna (2012) also in their findings revealed an increase in total nitrogen after cropping any of  the four legumes (soybean, cowpea, lablab and groundnut) and when the land was left fallow.
 

Table 2: Soil fertility status after harvest of the crops.


 
Economics
 
The economics of different cropping systems for cost of cultivation, gross return, net return, return per ₹ invested, cost benefit ratio and system profitability were also studied (Table 3). The result revealed that among different sole crops maize was found to be the most profitable crop having cost of cultivation (₹ 21.64 × 103), gross return (₹ 93.16 × 103), net return (₹ 71.52 ×103), return per ₹  invested (4.31), B:C ratio (3.31) and system profitability (₹ 255.23 ha-1 day‑1) which was closely followed by groundnut. Among the intercropping system (additive series), maize + groundnut (1:1) was found to be the most profitable with cost of cultivation (₹ 29.64 × 103), gross return (133.12 × 103), net return (103.48 × 103), return per ₹ invested (4.49), B:C ratio (3.49) and system profitability (₹ 364.71 ha-1 day-1). On the other hand, among the strip cropping system maize + cowpea (4:4) was recorded to be the most profitable with cost of cultivation (₹ 20.17 × 103), gross return (₹ 95.58 × 103), net return (₹ 75.41 × 103), return per ₹ invested (4.74), B:C ratio (3.74) and system profitability (₹ 261.86 ha-1 day-1). This was in conformity with Seran and Brintha (2010), Segun-Olasanmi and Bamire (2010), they reported that the intercropping system gave higher cash return to smallholder farmers than growing as mono crops.
 

Table 4: Energy use efficiency of different intercropping system.


 
Energy budget
 
The energy budget for different maize based cropping system were also evaluated (Table 4) and the result revealed that among the sole cropping the lowest energy input was with the sole cropping of cowpea (7.75 × 103 MJ ha-1). However, the highest output energy, net energy, energy efficiency and energy productivity was found with the cultivation of maize as 103.44 × 103 MJ ha-1, 94.22 × 103 MJ ha-1, 11.22 and 769.83 g MJ-1 respectively. The result revealed that among the intercropping system (additive series) maize + cowpea (1:1) recorded the lowest energy input (9.52 × 103 MJ ha-1) and maize + groundnut (1:1) recorded the highest output energy, net energy, energy efficiency and energy productivity 148.61 × 103 MJ ha-1, 137.93 × 103 MJ ha-1, 13.91 and 955.01 g MJ-1 respectively.  On the other hand, among the strip cropping system, maize + cowpea (4:4) recorded the lowest energy input (8.49 × 103 MJ ha-1), highest energy efficiency (12.53) and productivity (955.01 g MJ-1).
 

Table 4: Energy use efficiency of different intercropping system.

CONCLUSION

Research on maize+legume intercropping systems has shown advantage in both soil fertility and crop yields, particularly for maize which is the staple food crop for smallholder farmers, besides its other advantages for soil conservation and insurance against crop failure.

REFERENCES


  1. Adeleke M A and Haruna I M. (2012). Residual nitrogen contribution from grain legume to the growth and development of succeeding maize crop. International Scholarly Research Notices (ISRN): Agronomy. 

  2. Adesoji A G, Abubakar I U, Tanimu B and Labe D A. (2013). Influence of incorporated short duration legume fallow and nitrogen on maize (Zea mays L.) growth and development in northern guinea savannah of Nigeria. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science. 13(1): 58–67.

  3. Amos R N, Jens B A and Symon M. (2012). On farm evaluation of yield and economic benefits of short term maize legume intercropping systems under conservation Agriculture in Malawi. Field Crops Research. 132: 149–157.

  4. Aravindkumar Singh, S N and Gajendra G. (2004). Influence of planting ratio and fertilizer application on dry matter production LAI and nutrient content and uptake by maize and groundnut in intercropping. Annals of Agricultural Research. 25(2): 283–288.

  5. Bhatti I H, Ahmad R, Jabbar A, Nazir M S and Mahmood T. (2006). Competitive behavior of component crops in different sesame-legume intercropping systems. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology. 8(2): 165–167.

  6. Dahmardeh M, Ghanbari A, Syahsar B A and Ramrodi M. (2010). The role of intercropping maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.) on yield and soil chemical properties. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 5: 631–636.

  7. Faroda A S, Joshi N L, Singh R and Saxena A. (2007). Resource management for sustainable crop production in arid zone-    A review. Indian Journal of Agronomy. 52(3): 181–193. 

  8. Mandal K G, Saha K P, Hati K M, Singh V V, Misra A K, Ghosh P K. and Bandyopadhyay K K. (2005). Cropping Systems of Central India: An Energy and Economic Analysis. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. 25(3): 117–140. 

  9. Maluleke M H, Bediako A A and Ayisi K K. (2005). Influence of maize-lablab intercropping on lepidopterous stem borer infestation in maize. Journal of Economic Entomology. 98(2): 384–388.

  10. Mucheru-Muna M, Pypers P, Mugendi D, Kung’u J and Mugwe J. (2009). Staggered maize-legume intercrop arrangement robustly increases crop yields and economic returns in the highlands of Central Kenya. Field Crops Research. 115: 132–139.

  11. Segun-Olasanmi A O and Bamire A S. (2010). Analysis of costs and returns to maize-cowpea intercrop production in Oyo State, Nigeria, Poster presented at the Joint 3rd African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE) and 481th Agricultural Economists Association of South Africa (AEASA) Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, September 19–23, 2010.

  12. Seran T H and Brintha I. (2010). Review on maize based intercropping. Journal of Agronomy. 9(3): 135–145.

  13. Trenbath B R. (1986). Resource use efficiency by intercrops. In: Multiple Cropping System. Franic Ed, C.A. Mac Millan Pub. Co. New York pp. 57–81.

  14. Ummed S, Saad A A and Singh S R. (2008). Production potential, biological feasibility and economic viability of maize (Zea mays)-based intercropping systems under rainfed conditions. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 78(12): 1023–1027.

  15. Vesterager J M, Nielsen N E and Hogh-Jensen H. (2008). Effects of cropping history and phosphorus source on yield and nitrogen fixation in sole and intercropped cowpea- maize systems. Nutrients Cycling Agrosystems. 80(1): 61–73.  
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)